WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:08.480
 Good evening ladies and gentlemen this is the planning and zoning work session

00:00:08.480 --> 00:00:14.840
 meeting for Wednesday August 7th 2019. It is 437. I'll call the meeting to order

00:00:14.840 --> 00:00:17.640
 seeing that we have a quorum and let the record show at the opening

00:00:17.640 --> 00:00:21.920
 Commissioner Pernetta is absent. The first thing on our agenda this evening

00:00:21.920 --> 00:00:26.040
 is to get an update from the Parks Master Plan and Urban Forestry

00:00:26.040 --> 00:00:37.200
 Master Plan. I invite Gary Packin for presentation. Thank you for the

00:00:37.200 --> 00:00:40.880
 opportunity to come and speak with you. I've been with the city since I guess was

00:00:40.880 --> 00:00:44.960
 March of last year so I'm still kind of learning a lot of things. It's the first

00:00:44.960 --> 00:00:47.440
 time I've been the planning and zoning so I appreciate the opportunity to come

00:00:47.440 --> 00:00:51.700
 and speak. I was just gonna I just have a couple brief slides that I wanted to

00:00:51.700 --> 00:00:55.720
 share with you on some of the things that we're doing as an organization in

00:00:55.720 --> 00:01:01.200
 2009 the department completed a new Parks and Recreation Master Plan and

00:01:01.200 --> 00:01:05.960
 typically every 10 years those are done every five years there's an update. We

00:01:05.960 --> 00:01:09.560
 did not have a five-year update done so we were really due for a complete

00:01:09.560 --> 00:01:15.760
 overhaul. So really starting last December but officially January at the

00:01:15.760 --> 00:01:19.960
 state of the city we kicked off our master plan redevelopment. We are doing

00:01:19.960 --> 00:01:24.560
 it a hundred percent in-house for the most part. We are hiring we did hire some

00:01:24.560 --> 00:01:28.560
 subject matter experts instead of hiring one consultant that kind of does a

00:01:28.560 --> 00:01:32.880
 little bit of everything we went and found about 15 different groups that

00:01:32.880 --> 00:01:37.840
 could evaluate what we do from state associations that are in our industry to

00:01:37.840 --> 00:01:43.240
 private consultants to give us feedback on a specific area. So we're taking all

00:01:43.240 --> 00:01:48.320
 that information and getting that feedback as well as we've conducted

00:01:48.320 --> 00:01:53.480
 approximately 30 public meetings so far with the community focus groups

00:01:53.480 --> 00:01:58.600
 everything from a mountain bike group to we're having a rec center meeting at the

00:01:58.600 --> 00:02:02.160
 end of this month to talk about people that use our rec centers to get feedback

00:02:02.160 --> 00:02:07.960
 on those facilities. So it's been a it's been a pretty long process so far and

00:02:07.960 --> 00:02:11.720
 we're trying to collect as much data as we can and get a lot of feedback from

00:02:11.720 --> 00:02:16.280
 everybody on every aspect of the organization and we may have missed a

00:02:16.280 --> 00:02:22.880
 place or two but we'll find that out and get that solved as well. We had a public

00:02:22.880 --> 00:02:28.760
 survey needs assessment that started on January 17th we just closed it on July

00:02:28.760 --> 00:02:33.200
 31st so we're waiting for all that data to come back. We do have some online

00:02:33.200 --> 00:02:37.520
 pick-and-click type surveys that we're pushing out right now to additional

00:02:37.520 --> 00:02:43.240
 focus groups to get some additional information from them and then we are

00:02:43.240 --> 00:02:50.400
 also concurrently with this working on our urban forest master plan and we had

00:02:50.400 --> 00:02:54.720
 our public meeting our first one on August 1st last Thursday evening here at

00:02:54.720 --> 00:02:59.760
 City Hall we had a little over 40 people attend that meeting and we had really

00:02:59.760 --> 00:03:04.360
 good conversation about where we need to plant trees how we need to spend the

00:03:04.360 --> 00:03:08.960
 tree mitigation fund what the priorities are in the community and really just

00:03:08.960 --> 00:03:14.320
 gathering that feedback and using it as a sounding board for the residents to to

00:03:14.320 --> 00:03:20.720
 give their input on what we should be doing with our urban forest forest as

00:03:20.720 --> 00:03:26.600
 part of the master plan process. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair. Gary you mentioned

00:03:26.600 --> 00:03:31.720
 that focus group earlier in that where did you get that the for which how did

00:03:31.720 --> 00:03:38.560
 you pick it the focus group well the the for the one that's coming up in August

00:03:38.560 --> 00:03:44.200
 22nd for the rec centers they're reaching out to specific users to come

00:03:44.200 --> 00:03:47.560
 in and then they're also opening it to the public too so it's a little bit of

00:03:47.560 --> 00:03:51.120
 kind of a hybrid type of earlier in a few statements ago you said something

00:03:51.120 --> 00:03:55.480
 about surveys going out to just certain oh yeah where did you just where'd you

00:03:55.480 --> 00:03:59.920
 get so we had our community survey went out to everybody that was a general we

00:03:59.920 --> 00:04:05.000
 we did a mailer to every household so you should have gotten a postcard last

00:04:05.000 --> 00:04:12.040
 spring and then we also did email blasts and social media campaigns for an online

00:04:12.040 --> 00:04:18.880
 versions of that and then we have specific users so city staff is getting

00:04:18.880 --> 00:04:25.720
 one baseball groups softball groups all those sports are also getting ones that

00:04:25.720 --> 00:04:30.360
 give specific information from them those are more of a pick click and choose

00:04:30.360 --> 00:04:33.760
 type thing where there's options you can pick and say hey here's some priorities

00:04:33.760 --> 00:04:37.280
 that we're interested in and then also here's some general boxes you can just

00:04:37.280 --> 00:04:43.280
 fill in open comments yeah so we have structured surveys and then we have

00:04:43.280 --> 00:04:49.100
 open-ended surveys as well that we're that we're working from the mobility

00:04:49.100 --> 00:04:53.080
 plan just had two public meetings last week as well we were there collecting

00:04:53.080 --> 00:04:58.520
 information in regards to trails so we're trying to plan out an entire trail

00:04:58.520 --> 00:05:04.200
 system throughout Denton you know retroactively obviously since those

00:05:04.200 --> 00:05:06.860
 weren't in place years ago would have been the best time to do it but we're

00:05:06.860 --> 00:05:12.600
 trying to identify whether they're floodplain areas along creeks we might

00:05:12.600 --> 00:05:16.480
 be able to get easements or purchase some of that floodplain working with

00:05:16.480 --> 00:05:21.200
 developments as they occur in the city and trying to get some ways through

00:05:21.200 --> 00:05:25.720
 their process whether it's through the land dedication and development ordinance

00:05:25.720 --> 00:05:30.140
 or it's just an outright purchase or a lease agreement where we could get a

00:05:30.140 --> 00:05:32.760
 right-of-way through there and eventually put a trail that would

00:05:32.760 --> 00:05:39.520
 connect city assets as well as you know from downtown to the lake or from

00:05:39.520 --> 00:05:46.040
 downtown all the way down to Argyle or across 35 and working with developments

00:05:46.040 --> 00:05:50.820
 as they occur and trying to get some access through and connecting their

00:05:50.820 --> 00:05:55.400
 property and their development to our neighborhood parks so that's been a

00:05:55.400 --> 00:06:01.880
 major process and then last spring we put together a land acquisition process

00:06:01.880 --> 00:06:08.960
 we really didn't have a way to identify what land was available for purchase

00:06:08.960 --> 00:06:12.280
 that we could look to buy in the future as Denton continues to grow and trying

00:06:12.280 --> 00:06:18.640
 to buy that land or property now for residents 20 years from now how we could

00:06:18.640 --> 00:06:23.440
 go about doing that and prioritizing evaluating that land based on

00:06:23.440 --> 00:06:30.480
 considerations whether it's topography unique amenities a lake those types of

00:06:30.480 --> 00:06:35.840
 things unique tree species a percentage of tree canopy its connectivity to other

00:06:35.840 --> 00:06:40.080
 city assets or schools so we looked at all those types things and put together

00:06:40.080 --> 00:06:44.320
 kind of an almost an evaluation form that we could fill out and score so we

00:06:44.320 --> 00:06:49.360
 could kind of prioritize in some form or fashion so we created that last spring

00:06:49.360 --> 00:06:53.560
 and we had a presentation to City Council an executive session to talk

00:06:53.560 --> 00:06:57.920
 about that so we're using that to try to prioritize and look and see where we buy

00:06:57.920 --> 00:07:02.600
 future parkland we have a million dollars in the 2014 bond program that

00:07:02.600 --> 00:07:06.520
 we're looking to utilize and then we have a little over two million dollars

00:07:06.520 --> 00:07:10.600
 in the tree mitigation fund that could be used for land purchase or tree

00:07:10.600 --> 00:07:16.280
 planting as well so we're looking at where we need to buy land in regards to

00:07:16.280 --> 00:07:23.360
 future development what large parcels are available for larger city parks and

00:07:23.360 --> 00:07:27.320
 then also neighborhood parks we're looking at but we're kind of considering

00:07:27.320 --> 00:07:30.440
 that the developments that are happening through the city through the land

00:07:30.440 --> 00:07:34.400
 vacation we can work with them to identify those smaller parcels that are

00:07:34.400 --> 00:07:38.680
 more geared towards that specific neighborhood so all of those are kind of

00:07:38.680 --> 00:07:43.760
 being laid out in a GIS process right now with with city staff so how we can

00:07:43.760 --> 00:07:47.200
 look at those different layers and the connectivity opportunities the

00:07:47.200 --> 00:07:52.440
 developments that are happening through development services relationship to

00:07:52.440 --> 00:07:57.400
 other city land that's available that could be used for park spaces so that's

00:07:57.400 --> 00:08:02.880
 it's really a dynamic process that we're working through with all the exciting

00:08:02.880 --> 00:08:06.480
 things that are happening in the city and making sure that we try to cover all

00:08:06.480 --> 00:08:11.920
 aspects of today's recreational needs and then anticipate recreational needs

00:08:11.920 --> 00:08:17.400
 for 10-20 years from now we also have a department strategic plan that was

00:08:17.400 --> 00:08:22.960
 started back in 2017 those are all being rolled into the master plan as well as

00:08:22.960 --> 00:08:27.560
 well as the city's strategic plan and then jumping back to the urban forestry

00:08:27.560 --> 00:08:31.880
 plan we anticipate that concluding probably by the end of this year that

00:08:31.880 --> 00:08:36.840
 will also be a component of our parks master plan as well because that's all

00:08:36.840 --> 00:08:41.200
 connected to our park spaces obviously and then an additional plan that we're

00:08:41.200 --> 00:08:44.280
 working on is our cost recovery plan just from an operating standpoint for

00:08:44.280 --> 00:08:48.840
 the department so we can identify our revenues and expenses for all of our

00:08:48.840 --> 00:08:53.760
 programs and anticipate how we can improve where areas we may need to

00:08:53.760 --> 00:09:00.360
 eliminate programs and where we're maybe not charging the right amount or we're

00:09:00.360 --> 00:09:04.960
 charging too much so we're going through that process right now is in cooperation

00:09:04.960 --> 00:09:10.600
 with the city's budget some up from a park project standpoint just a couple

00:09:10.600 --> 00:09:16.200
 projects we're working on right now North Lakes dog park this project started

00:09:16.200 --> 00:09:20.600
 back in really in 2014 is when the thought process originally started and

00:09:20.600 --> 00:09:25.720
 some of the planning efforts it really didn't start until about last May we put

00:09:25.720 --> 00:09:30.400
 together internally we designed this we put together seven different options for

00:09:30.400 --> 00:09:35.160
 the park board and City Council to consider and we came in City Council and

00:09:35.160 --> 00:09:41.040
 Park Board both decided on option three this is immediately adjacent to the

00:09:41.040 --> 00:09:46.880
 Animal Services Center on 77 so it has a really good neighbor where they can

00:09:46.880 --> 00:09:50.680
 bring their dogs over and volunteers could take them for a walk families

00:09:50.680 --> 00:09:55.200
 could test run the dog to see if it's compatible with their family and see how

00:09:55.200 --> 00:10:00.440
 it interacts with other dogs in this park this this development is really

00:10:00.440 --> 00:10:04.000
 utilizing the existing airfield parking lot so that allowed us to save some

00:10:04.000 --> 00:10:09.400
 initial funding for construction but we did leave space right in this area that

00:10:09.400 --> 00:10:12.820
 we could add a parking lot if it's a very popular location

00:10:12.820 --> 00:10:20.040
 Commissioner Beck thanks chair passed by this almost today I do that bike ride

00:10:20.040 --> 00:10:24.440
 that brings that drill around there so I'm watching it is this going to be

00:10:24.440 --> 00:10:32.640
 accessible only from the facility or is the public going to be able to access it

00:10:32.640 --> 00:10:37.040
 outside of that well another trails run along there but is there going to be a

00:10:37.040 --> 00:10:42.280
 fence where that trail is well there's my trail so what you see right now out

00:10:42.280 --> 00:10:48.560
 there are just some square kind of areas and those are the entry gates so we're

00:10:48.560 --> 00:10:53.200
 going to be putting in the concrete circles in the fencing around each one

00:10:53.200 --> 00:10:58.720
 of these areas so each each one of these is a dog run so there's three large dog

00:10:58.720 --> 00:11:03.480
 runs and then a smaller one here and they will be closed at various times select

00:11:03.480 --> 00:11:07.240
 because the dogs I mean they tear the turf apart so we'll be shutting ones

00:11:07.240 --> 00:11:11.680
 down periodically especially in the larger dog area to give that area an

00:11:11.680 --> 00:11:16.680
 opportunity to rest we'll aerate fertilize it so that grass can only

00:11:16.680 --> 00:11:22.400
 accessible from no no actually the parking lot is down here from the

00:11:22.400 --> 00:11:27.740
 airfield yeah off of Windsor okay technically you can walk in here if you

00:11:27.740 --> 00:11:31.800
 want if parking if a lot of people park up here that might be a challenge for

00:11:31.800 --> 00:11:35.240
 us because we don't want we don't want people to overtake their parking lot

00:11:35.240 --> 00:11:39.800
 that's why we left some space here if we need to we can come in back in and put a

00:11:39.800 --> 00:11:43.640
 parking lot in here so we've actually designed a parking lot to accommodate

00:11:43.640 --> 00:11:49.160
 that if needed and we're hoping a lot of people walk to the facility as well we

00:11:49.160 --> 00:11:54.520
 just put a long trail that goes all the way up along 77 and goes north of 77

00:11:54.520 --> 00:12:01.320
 that connects up the North Park 10 foot 10 foot trail goes to North Point and

00:12:01.320 --> 00:12:05.600
 then all the way over to Evers Park so we're trying to enhance connectability

00:12:05.600 --> 00:12:09.640
 and then also provide for opportunities for people who want to drive there as

00:12:09.640 --> 00:12:14.640
 well great and that's expected to be completed we're there's going to be a

00:12:14.640 --> 00:12:19.000
 lot of activity over the next three weeks and then we're gonna probably let

00:12:19.000 --> 00:12:22.480
 it sit for a little bit and let the turf mature because we're gonna saw it let

00:12:22.480 --> 00:12:27.440
 that grow in and then looking to have it open probably in mid-october okay

00:12:27.440 --> 00:12:31.760
 great thanks original projection was by the end of the end of the calendar year

00:12:31.760 --> 00:12:36.480
 but we're gonna be ahead of that and adjacent to the dog park just to the

00:12:36.480 --> 00:12:42.480
 southeast is gonna be a new North Lakes tennis center we had funding in the 2014

00:12:42.480 --> 00:12:47.880
 bond program to redevelop and relocate the existing tennis center that's over

00:12:47.880 --> 00:12:52.640
 next to North Lake Trek Center so we're getting really close to getting that out

00:12:52.640 --> 00:12:57.440
 to bid we're splitting the project up into one of our cost savings initiative

00:12:57.440 --> 00:13:01.880
 is to try to bundle some projects so we're gonna bundle the pro shop which is

00:13:01.880 --> 00:13:06.200
 that the old YMCA building is going to be the main entry point to the facility

00:13:06.200 --> 00:13:11.840
 with American Legion Hall which will be a new senior center renovated facility

00:13:11.840 --> 00:13:15.240
 we're bundling both of those projects together because they're very similar in

00:13:15.240 --> 00:13:21.360
 size to see if we can't achieve some savings from that aspect and then from

00:13:21.360 --> 00:13:26.680
 the the grounds of the tennis courts the tennis center those we bundled with

00:13:26.680 --> 00:13:31.480
 another 2014 bond program which was South Lakes Park tennis court so there's

00:13:31.480 --> 00:13:36.080
 two new courts there and lights being added to that park and if we have enough

00:13:36.080 --> 00:13:40.680
 funding we'll put lights on the existing courts that don't have lights so we're

00:13:40.680 --> 00:13:44.520
 trying to bundle that together because it's similar construction with tennis

00:13:44.520 --> 00:13:49.640
 court companies so we're hoping to get that out to bid probably early fall and

00:13:49.640 --> 00:13:56.440
 start construction you know probably no later than early 2020 and then the

00:13:56.440 --> 00:14:02.120
 playgrounds we did three playgrounds last year were slated to do another five

00:14:02.120 --> 00:14:08.680
 to six this year as well we are those a lot of that was again 2014 bond program

00:14:08.680 --> 00:14:14.280
 so we're trying to get a lot of the 2014 bond programs completed and a number of

00:14:14.280 --> 00:14:18.080
 those playgrounds were outdated a typical lifespan of a playground a play

00:14:18.080 --> 00:14:22.600
 structure is about 15 years there are some variations if it's if it's under

00:14:22.600 --> 00:14:27.000
 shade or if it's under trees that does extend the life span of a play

00:14:27.000 --> 00:14:32.640
 structure as well as vandalism obviously shortens play structure

00:14:32.640 --> 00:14:38.320
 lifespans so we have a number of play structures that are outdated that are

00:14:38.320 --> 00:14:42.560
 20 20 years old so we're trying to get that caught up so we can get into a

00:14:42.560 --> 00:14:47.080
 regular rotation to make sure that we have play structures that are safe we do

00:14:47.080 --> 00:14:51.300
 inspect them on a regular basis to assure that if there's issues we'll take

00:14:51.300 --> 00:14:55.480
 things out of Commission or order replacement parts as needed as well and

00:14:55.480 --> 00:15:00.880
 then from a beautification standpoint we have a number of meeting improvement

00:15:00.880 --> 00:15:06.680
 initiatives that we're doing the islands at Eagle and Elm and Dallas Teasley and

00:15:06.680 --> 00:15:10.600
 Dallas and Teasley are very similar there's old right away that was going

00:15:10.600 --> 00:15:14.800
 through that's been abandoned and just kind of sitting there used for parking

00:15:14.800 --> 00:15:20.160
 lots used for recycling centers and we're trying to clean that up and add

00:15:20.160 --> 00:15:24.880
 more beautification to that so Dallas and Teasley you'll see some activity here

00:15:24.880 --> 00:15:29.040
 as soon as the concrete company leaves the dog park so we're kind of having a

00:15:29.040 --> 00:15:32.480
 multiple places they're gonna put some curbing in there and we're gonna do some

00:15:32.480 --> 00:15:36.720
 beautification efforts there plant some additional trees and landscaping and

00:15:36.720 --> 00:15:39.880
 then the same thing with the Eagle and Elm and we're looking to put maybe even

00:15:39.880 --> 00:15:46.000
 like a welcome to downtown Denton type of signage there and then last year last

00:15:46.000 --> 00:15:52.840
 summer we received a 650,000 plus or minus grant from tex dot a green ribbon

00:15:52.840 --> 00:15:58.480
 grant for University from Elm to Mosh Branch will be improving those medians

00:15:58.480 --> 00:16:01.880
 there are some trees and some of that right now but we're gonna be running

00:16:01.880 --> 00:16:05.600
 irrigation all the way down to Mosh Branch and adding trees and landscaping

00:16:05.600 --> 00:16:11.080
 on though on that thoroughfare and then this summer we applied for another green

00:16:11.080 --> 00:16:14.880
 ribbon grant for 2499 and we haven't heard from that yet so our fingers are

00:16:14.880 --> 00:16:20.800
 crossed on that to run trees all the way up from the border all the way up north

00:16:20.800 --> 00:16:26.280
 so we're looking at how we can improve our affairs from beautification as well

00:16:26.280 --> 00:16:31.880
 as help the environment as well at the same time American Legion Hall I talked

00:16:31.880 --> 00:16:35.640
 a little bit about as part of our bundling project we have two buildings

00:16:35.640 --> 00:16:40.920
 at that location they are detached from each other and they're just basically

00:16:40.920 --> 00:16:46.540
 open free span buildings there's not a really a lot of structure and process to

00:16:46.540 --> 00:16:52.640
 the inside of how that's used the oldest structure has some integrity issues with

00:16:52.640 --> 00:16:58.280
 settling in the foundation that's going to be cleared and wiped off and then a

00:16:58.280 --> 00:17:01.880
 new structure will be built in this place and actually be connected to the the

00:17:01.880 --> 00:17:06.880
 newer structure is built in I think the early 90s so that'll be one entire

00:17:06.880 --> 00:17:11.240
 facility when that's done and that'll serve primarily for our senior

00:17:11.240 --> 00:17:16.640
 citizens and industrial park was a small project that we completed just a few we

00:17:16.640 --> 00:17:20.960
 did a lot of the work last year or earlier this year and we did some

00:17:20.960 --> 00:17:25.080
 additional work with cooperation of some Boy Scouts came in and helped us put

00:17:25.080 --> 00:17:30.040
 down some new sod and we put some plague some concrete pads for picnic tables so

00:17:30.040 --> 00:17:35.240
 that's that's kind of done at this point in time and that's just a little asset

00:17:35.240 --> 00:17:41.600
 for downtown so that's kind of real brief summary of what's going on from a

00:17:41.600 --> 00:17:46.560
 planning standpoint as well as for a park construction Chris Ross thank you

00:17:46.560 --> 00:17:50.560
 Jim Gary it seems I remember a week or two ago there was a South Lakes Park

00:17:50.560 --> 00:17:55.880
 meeting or something can you tell me about that so the reason we had that was

00:17:55.880 --> 00:18:00.400
 primarily for a couple things one was a master plan just to get some feedback

00:18:00.400 --> 00:18:04.680
 from the community itself and then for two construction projects that are going

00:18:04.680 --> 00:18:08.240
 on there one is the South Lakes Park tennis courts we wanted to let them know

00:18:08.240 --> 00:18:10.880
 hey this is a bond program initiative and this is going to be starting up

00:18:10.880 --> 00:18:14.760
 pretty soon do you have any concerns you know any lighting issues or concerns

00:18:14.760 --> 00:18:19.360
 that the neighborhood might have as well as we're looking at putting in a small

00:18:19.360 --> 00:18:24.240
 parking lot of probably 10 to 15 spaces in the northeast corner off Teasley

00:18:24.240 --> 00:18:29.840
 there's a playground right there kind of behind the chiropractor office we put

00:18:29.840 --> 00:18:34.120
 that playground in 2017 and it's created some challenges for those businesses

00:18:34.120 --> 00:18:37.800
 people park in their parking lot and they don't have a lot of parking spaces

00:18:37.800 --> 00:18:41.600
 to begin with and it's created some challenges for them so we're trying to

00:18:41.600 --> 00:18:45.680
 leave that issue by putting in a small kind of trailhead parking lot that

00:18:45.680 --> 00:18:50.840
 people that want to go use that could use that the discussion at the meeting

00:18:50.840 --> 00:18:54.680
 we did talk about that and they wanted to make sure that we had the ability to

00:18:54.680 --> 00:18:59.320
 expand that lot if it was a popular location for people just come and use for

00:18:59.320 --> 00:19:05.600
 the trail itself which is popular that we don't take up all the spaces and then

00:19:05.600 --> 00:19:09.640
 we still kind of just have the same problem so we're going to design it so

00:19:09.640 --> 00:19:16.440
 it can be expanded if needed what where's access for that then that would

00:19:16.440 --> 00:19:21.520
 be off Teasley we had a traffic study engineering helped us get that process

00:19:21.520 --> 00:19:26.340
 going through and they want an additional turning lane heading north so

00:19:26.340 --> 00:19:30.440
 we're gonna have to cut back that median a little bit I'm not real excited about

00:19:30.440 --> 00:19:34.920
 that because that meetings beautiful so we're gonna need a hundred foot stacking

00:19:34.920 --> 00:19:39.920
 opportunity there for people to make that left turn into the park that's the

00:19:39.920 --> 00:19:47.240
 downside of it we're hoping that it could be just a heading south right turn

00:19:47.240 --> 00:19:51.560
 in right turn out and you have to kind of do the loop that but based on the

00:19:51.560 --> 00:19:58.240
 analysis that they want that turning lane Chris you're back thank you chair

00:19:58.240 --> 00:20:03.360
 there was talk it's been a couple years ago there's a little green belt a little

00:20:03.360 --> 00:20:11.120
 but there's a green area that exists between Moore Street where it connects

00:20:11.120 --> 00:20:17.520
 with Luke 288 to the south and then Dutchess Parkway and then that extends

00:20:17.520 --> 00:20:22.640
 across Luke 288 and connects that's an area East McKinney and all that we're

00:20:22.640 --> 00:20:26.560
 starting to develop that is there any plans for any parks over there because

00:20:26.560 --> 00:20:30.640
 it really isn't anything there's a small park over off Mockenburg but other than

00:20:30.640 --> 00:20:39.440
 that there's not much Parkland over in that general area great question so what

00:20:39.440 --> 00:20:45.480
 we've what we've done is with the assistance of our GIS team in tech tech

00:20:45.480 --> 00:20:50.800
 services we've gone through the city adopted in February a philosophy a 10

00:20:50.800 --> 00:20:54.680
 minute walk so what that means is a 10 minute walk for every resident in the

00:20:54.680 --> 00:21:00.680
 city and that's a half mile radius so we've gone through all of our park

00:21:00.680 --> 00:21:05.400
 spaces and plotted basically circles around the edges of all of our parks and

00:21:05.400 --> 00:21:10.760
 that's given us a quick snapshot that how we can see where we're not achieving

00:21:10.760 --> 00:21:13.920
 that goal we could see where the houses are and we could see where the schools

00:21:13.920 --> 00:21:18.280
 are and where we're deficient in parkland so we're using that as our

00:21:18.280 --> 00:21:23.900
 primary opportunity to identify where parklanding to go that doesn't mean that

00:21:23.900 --> 00:21:28.320
 we won't look at parkland that's within that five that ten minute walk radius

00:21:28.320 --> 00:21:32.880
 but that just gives us a higher priority to make sure that we're meeting that so

00:21:32.880 --> 00:21:36.960
 the goal was a hundred percent connectivity right now we're at 41% the

00:21:36.960 --> 00:21:42.800
 national average is 55% there are cities that are 100% but like New York City or

00:21:42.800 --> 00:21:47.640
 something like that's a very dense it can do that but we're being spread out

00:21:47.640 --> 00:21:53.400
 and 90 square miles it's tough to achieve that pretty quickly so it's a

00:21:53.400 --> 00:21:59.480
 long-term objective we also use that GIS to layer where the developments are

00:21:59.480 --> 00:22:03.200
 happening in the city so we could see where we potential may have neighborhood

00:22:03.200 --> 00:22:07.880
 parks that will be in the future by working with developments so that's

00:22:07.880 --> 00:22:12.720
 another way for us to look at land that's coming down the road for future

00:22:12.720 --> 00:22:16.000
 park space well that area seems like it'd be prime for something like that

00:22:16.000 --> 00:22:20.880
 because the connectivity would take you all the way up to Woodrow and beyond

00:22:20.880 --> 00:22:28.760
 into that whole area and then getting across 288 is they could probably work a

00:22:28.760 --> 00:22:34.120
 little underpass for that connectivity too but there's a lot of trees in there

00:22:34.120 --> 00:22:41.560
 so there's room for developing that as parkland I believe it's a floodplain too

00:22:41.560 --> 00:22:46.840
 so good use of that land would be be a part but so there's nothing specific for

00:22:46.840 --> 00:22:53.080
 that right now you're just we have identified a number of parcels that are

00:22:53.080 --> 00:22:59.760
 kind of various sizes more or less the larger pieces as part of the master plan

00:22:59.760 --> 00:23:04.360
 we're looking at you know currently we have you know two or three city parks

00:23:04.360 --> 00:23:08.840
 at North Lakes South Lakes City parks and eventually Southwest Park those

00:23:08.840 --> 00:23:12.620
 larger parcels that can be more of a destination location with more

00:23:12.620 --> 00:23:18.200
 amenities we need to have so many of those when we're at 207,000 people so

00:23:18.200 --> 00:23:23.720
 we're using that standard and NRPA or national standards to determine how many

00:23:23.720 --> 00:23:28.000
 parks we need and what size those parks need to be to give us some direction as

00:23:28.000 --> 00:23:32.960
 well as a 10-minute walk so we know we need an East Lakes Park we know we need

00:23:32.960 --> 00:23:38.000
 a West Lakes Park and maybe even a Northeast Lakes Park somewhere in that

00:23:38.000 --> 00:23:42.920
 aspect so that helps us identify where these parcels need to go and it gives us

00:23:42.920 --> 00:23:50.320
 some direction thank you I did not see any other questions thanks Gary thank

00:23:50.320 --> 00:23:54.480
 you appreciate it next item for business is to receive a report and hold a

00:23:54.480 --> 00:23:59.580
 discussion about the 2019 Denton development code I'll invite Ron

00:23:59.580 --> 00:24:13.280
 Manguita for presentation thank you chair members of the Commission just an

00:24:13.280 --> 00:24:18.040
 update it's been a busy couple weeks trying to figure out what we're going to

00:24:18.040 --> 00:24:23.920
 be doing with regards to the house bills that were passed 2439 3167 just want to

00:24:23.920 --> 00:24:29.280
 let you know that the code amendments that we were hoping to bring forward we

00:24:29.280 --> 00:24:34.260
 are going to be postponing that to a later date no date yet has been

00:24:34.260 --> 00:24:41.920
 identified in our attempt to get it all done before September 1st we sent out

00:24:41.920 --> 00:24:47.760
 notices for the public hearing so one of those items was to change the effective

00:24:47.760 --> 00:24:52.720
 date of the 2019 code which obviously we're not going to do now so we're going

00:24:52.720 --> 00:24:59.560
 to withdraw that the actual 2019 development code amendments which includes

00:24:59.560 --> 00:25:07.620
 identifying the materials provisions and amending those to comply with the house

00:25:07.620 --> 00:25:11.840
 bills as well as any cleanups and corrections that we had identified

00:25:11.840 --> 00:25:17.680
 through the review process between April and today we are going to continue to

00:25:17.680 --> 00:25:22.360
 collect those continue to prepare those and bring those forward again at a later

00:25:22.360 --> 00:25:27.040
 time so those those items will be withdrawn and we will not be hearing

00:25:27.040 --> 00:25:35.640
 those on August 14th what we will be hearing is two items and they are items

00:25:35.640 --> 00:25:41.440
 related to the code amendments in that these items are ordinances we're calling

00:25:41.440 --> 00:25:46.800
 them the stopgap ordinances which basically allows staff to comply with

00:25:46.800 --> 00:25:52.240
 the house bills while still working on the code amendments after September 1st

00:25:52.240 --> 00:25:58.320
 so legal has been preparing those in the last week and we hope to get those

00:25:58.320 --> 00:26:04.760
 prepared ready to send out next or this Friday so that we can consider those for

00:26:04.760 --> 00:26:10.440
 recommending to the council on Wednesday August 14th so those again

00:26:10.440 --> 00:26:15.800
 refer to the two house bills and again the purpose is to allow staff the

00:26:15.800 --> 00:26:21.120
 appropriate time to draft and prepare the code amendments that address those

00:26:21.120 --> 00:26:25.560
 two house bills but also those code amendments that we've been working on

00:26:25.560 --> 00:26:32.720
 since April to again to help clarify to add corrections to the 2019 code what

00:26:32.720 --> 00:26:37.680
 that looks like is a quick one for the house bill ordinances is what we're

00:26:37.680 --> 00:26:42.480
 referring to them we will again on August 14th bring that to the Planning

00:26:42.480 --> 00:26:46.320
 Zoning Commission for Council I mean for your consideration and then ultimately

00:26:46.320 --> 00:26:52.680
 August 20th for City Council of course August 20th is important because in

00:26:52.680 --> 00:26:57.280
 order for that to take an effect by September 1st we need to have that in

00:26:57.280 --> 00:27:02.680
 advance at least 14 days so any questions I know this was supposed to

00:27:02.680 --> 00:27:06.920
 cover a lot of code amendments but that will not happen today but it will come

00:27:06.920 --> 00:27:16.240
 at a later time any questions thank you chair so the date for our

00:27:16.240 --> 00:27:19.240
 new development code though is still October then at the correct that's going

00:27:19.240 --> 00:27:27.720
 to remain over first Jerry if did you have me on the orange I know you guys

00:27:27.720 --> 00:27:31.960
 been working on it do you want to add anything related to the two ordinances

00:27:31.960 --> 00:27:42.080
 or not really it's a the I think it's fair to say that these two house bills

00:27:42.080 --> 00:27:48.480
 took a lot of us by surprise all of a sudden we have them we've got them with

00:27:48.480 --> 00:27:53.760
 an implementation date of September 1st and with these top cap ordinances all

00:27:53.760 --> 00:27:59.600
 we're doing is having an order says don't do any of the things that the that

00:27:59.600 --> 00:28:07.400
 the house bills say we can't do and that will give us time to make the the code

00:28:07.400 --> 00:28:11.960
 a little bit more user-friendly where say for example it may call out building

00:28:11.960 --> 00:28:18.400
 materials will ultimately remove building materials where we can to comply with

00:28:18.400 --> 00:28:23.800
 the law but it's it doesn't need to happen any time real soon

00:28:23.800 --> 00:28:29.480
 Christian back thank you let me go ahead and bring out something I communicate

00:28:29.480 --> 00:28:33.160
 with Richard on this and we'd just like to get it out there in the open be a

00:28:33.160 --> 00:28:38.840
 little bit more settled on this we've gonna bring this up when we got to that

00:28:38.840 --> 00:28:49.720
 alternate Esau but evidently I was under I wasn't under the impression that since

00:28:49.720 --> 00:28:54.080
 these laws are going into effect September 1st I was only the impression

00:28:54.080 --> 00:28:57.440
 that anything that was already that had already been submitted was kind of

00:28:57.440 --> 00:29:03.280
 locked in to the way we've been doing business but Richard explained to me

00:29:03.280 --> 00:29:08.600
 that no that's not the case when we deal with the Fire Creek issue later you

00:29:08.600 --> 00:29:13.120
 know we're not even consider building materials and that's that's part of the

00:29:13.120 --> 00:29:21.600
 law the law that's correct if it's a building material that's allowed by any

00:29:21.600 --> 00:29:26.520
 internet or what do they call it a nationally recognized code which the

00:29:26.520 --> 00:29:29.520
 titles are international building code I think I think it's probably

00:29:29.520 --> 00:29:34.920
 international because US and Canada but there they are nationally recognized

00:29:34.920 --> 00:29:39.840
 codes and it's not only the current code that you have to consider if it's

00:29:39.840 --> 00:29:45.280
 legal but for three code cycles and typically I believe a code cycles about

00:29:45.280 --> 00:29:54.960
 two years three years okay three years so yeah you can go back to any material

00:29:54.960 --> 00:30:02.000
 that was allowed at some prior time we can't prohibit it so we have to go

00:30:02.000 --> 00:30:06.480
 through our building codes we're gonna have to go through our development code

00:30:06.480 --> 00:30:13.600
 and and make some changes there okay I think what when we dealt with this last

00:30:13.600 --> 00:30:18.880
 time the last P&Z that it were going to hopefully rely upon staff to see if

00:30:18.880 --> 00:30:22.160
 there was anything in the ordinances that could help us work around that I'm

00:30:22.160 --> 00:30:27.880
 assuming that dealing with this alternate ESOL that we're not going to

00:30:27.880 --> 00:30:34.200
 be able to have anything that's on the books that allows us to work around as

00:30:34.200 --> 00:30:38.560
 far as concerning building materials it's like Scott might want to weigh in on

00:30:38.560 --> 00:30:50.160
 this okay so I'm hearing you say alt ESA well it's the fire Creek okay so and and

00:30:50.160 --> 00:30:56.120
 so what first I think going overly okay so there are there are certain

00:30:56.120 --> 00:31:03.940
 components within that that may still be at play so ie fences right anything that

00:31:03.940 --> 00:31:08.520
 is not part of that primary structure and accessory structure wouldn't be

00:31:08.520 --> 00:31:13.320
 regulated by about co limiters where we were requiring 70% brick or stone

00:31:13.320 --> 00:31:18.220
 correct elevations correct and now that's not even that is a moot that is a

00:31:18.220 --> 00:31:23.280
 moot point okay okay yes well you're up there I have two questions that maybe

00:31:23.280 --> 00:31:28.200
 you can provide insight on one's more speculative one's more internal policy

00:31:28.200 --> 00:31:35.680
 driven one has there been any potential momentum towards anyone taking

00:31:35.680 --> 00:31:41.280
 advantage of either of these rules that you've seen or is that so we just have

00:31:41.280 --> 00:31:46.040
 to wait so it's effective and see who who comes in it's like for like a better

00:31:46.040 --> 00:31:52.800
 term like a shady operator I mean do we is there a legitimate fear of this being

00:31:52.800 --> 00:31:57.400
 taken advantage of and is there any early momentum in that direction that

00:31:57.400 --> 00:32:04.080
 you've seen no and no okay so I think I think what you'll see I don't think the

00:32:04.080 --> 00:32:09.540
 residential market will really change and I think so for that concern of what

00:32:09.540 --> 00:32:14.840
 that might look like the markets going to drive that so people people have an

00:32:14.840 --> 00:32:17.840
 expectation of having brick on their homes and the quality that they're gonna

00:32:17.840 --> 00:32:22.160
 that they expect so I don't think one and two family dwellings will be

00:32:22.160 --> 00:32:26.640
 affected greatly I think you'll see more of it probably on the commercial sector

00:32:26.640 --> 00:32:33.720
 and I would think probably on our highways our corridors those buildings

00:32:33.720 --> 00:32:38.960
 that could be built out of a reflective metal you may see more of that rather

00:32:38.960 --> 00:32:44.320
 than having a requirement for where we want some stone or non reflective and

00:32:44.320 --> 00:32:51.400
 some some difference in that so the second question I had is I know well it

00:32:51.400 --> 00:32:56.480
 seems to to still be up in the air but what P&Z can arbitrarily decide I don't

00:32:56.480 --> 00:33:01.080
 know if there's been any momentum in determining how us as fellow citizens

00:33:01.080 --> 00:33:06.000
 can implement decisions based on our discretion when it comes to build

00:33:06.000 --> 00:33:10.080
 material but what is the obligation of the city when you're going through the

00:33:10.080 --> 00:33:16.520
 meeting process what's the obligation or the internal policy to bring up this

00:33:16.520 --> 00:33:22.160
 freedom that they have are you as a city staff able to remain silent and only

00:33:22.160 --> 00:33:25.680
 answer questions when it's brought forth or is there an obligation that when

00:33:25.680 --> 00:33:28.920
 then someone comes through with a plan you have said you can build out of

00:33:28.920 --> 00:33:32.280
 anything that meets an international standard what what's the internal policy

00:33:32.280 --> 00:33:39.920
 and discussing these two bills I don't know that there's an internal policy per

00:33:39.920 --> 00:33:45.720
 say I would say that your your professional planning staff has a great

00:33:45.720 --> 00:33:49.840
 desire for quality community so I don't think that they're going to be carrying

00:33:49.840 --> 00:33:56.120
 a banner saying build as inexpensively as you can so I don't think you'll see

00:33:56.120 --> 00:34:02.400
 that I think that as my personal opinion is we have to be as transparent as

00:34:02.400 --> 00:34:07.520
 possible on both sides of this so whether that's that's pro or con to

00:34:07.520 --> 00:34:15.080
 whomever's position it is when asked will provide the information I think

00:34:15.080 --> 00:34:18.920
 that's going to be one of the very challenges for us because effective

00:34:18.920 --> 00:34:23.600
 October 1st we have an updated development code that has standards that

00:34:23.600 --> 00:34:28.800
 we will not be enforcing so we'll have some confusion right in that and and so

00:34:28.800 --> 00:34:34.280
 we'll have to articulate that we're we're gonna take submittals as they come

00:34:34.280 --> 00:34:39.640
 in and and we'll make certain that they meet our minimum standards so if

00:34:39.640 --> 00:34:43.200
 somebody comes in with 25 percent brick and a residential structure and our

00:34:43.200 --> 00:34:48.800
 requirement is 40% brick we'll accept the 25 percent brick and that'll be the

00:34:48.800 --> 00:34:54.200
 end of the conversation okay now if somebody comes in and you know ask the

00:34:54.200 --> 00:34:57.620
 question about what those requirements are we'll go there and we'll be

00:34:57.620 --> 00:35:02.160
 providing the the draft ordinances on our website and I mean we'll make that

00:35:02.160 --> 00:35:06.540
 abundantly clear that you know there's been changes in law that we really have

00:35:06.540 --> 00:35:10.600
 to disclaim that there are certain provisions of our code that are not

00:35:10.600 --> 00:35:14.000
 enforceable gotcha if that makes sense that's very helpful thank you

00:35:14.000 --> 00:35:18.200
 Christian Ellis thank you chair I'm going back to earlier conversation so

00:35:18.200 --> 00:35:24.160
 any overlays in place are out if it calls out regulating building material is

00:35:24.160 --> 00:35:28.200
 that what I heard that would be that would be accurate okay so the only but

00:35:28.200 --> 00:35:33.360
 let me let me let me know let me retract that so if we use razor ranch as an

00:35:33.360 --> 00:35:38.320
 example right there's an approval process for anybody that's going to do

00:35:38.320 --> 00:35:42.880
 any development within there they enforce those rules so if they're

00:35:42.880 --> 00:35:47.780
 enforcing the rules it's a non-issue it is the municipality the city may not

00:35:47.780 --> 00:35:54.440
 enforce a rule law ordinance it's really right so it's really a privately so

00:35:54.440 --> 00:35:59.240
 basically with an HOA okay so it's just a zoning overlay and we have many

00:35:59.240 --> 00:36:03.400
 correct and a lot of them regulate building materials that correct do we

00:36:03.400 --> 00:36:08.000
 have to repeal those or they're just not enforceable I think our ordinance I

00:36:08.000 --> 00:36:11.920
 think our ordinance will address the fact that we won't be enforcing anything

00:36:11.920 --> 00:36:15.880
 that is going to violate that house bill okay thank you

00:36:15.880 --> 00:36:20.960
 Christian back thank you chair regarding a choice I discussed this with Jerry a

00:36:20.960 --> 00:36:28.400
 couple weeks ago HOA is again have some control the problem with HOA is is they

00:36:28.400 --> 00:36:32.000
 don't come into existence where the homeowners actually are in charge pretty

00:36:32.000 --> 00:36:39.480
 much until that developments through so is there anything is there anything the

00:36:39.480 --> 00:36:46.320
 city can do to initiate and I don't see how but I'm gonna ask it anyway where

00:36:46.320 --> 00:36:51.440
 HOA can get involved a lot earlier before the developments completely

00:36:51.440 --> 00:36:56.840
 through is that is that thought process cross jaws line because otherwise HOA is

00:36:56.840 --> 00:37:01.460
 being able to affect what materials are used are just not going to be existed

00:37:01.460 --> 00:37:08.440
 because the development will be through time we are absolutely going to

00:37:08.440 --> 00:37:13.700
 encourage that that folks take that into consideration and then that's going to

00:37:13.700 --> 00:37:18.200
 be the best planning tool going forward to maintain the integrity of what that

00:37:18.200 --> 00:37:20.880
 community character might look like when I say community whether it's a

00:37:20.880 --> 00:37:25.800
 neighborhood or whatever that the scale of the development is that's going to

00:37:25.800 --> 00:37:29.120
 be their primary planning tool so we're going to encourage that as a best

00:37:29.120 --> 00:37:35.960
 practice to your point is that the HOA is created the HOA board of directors is

00:37:35.960 --> 00:37:41.320
 typically the builder developer the property owner whomever it is and they'll

00:37:41.320 --> 00:37:47.080
 do as they see fit again I think for the most part and maybe to the chairs

00:37:47.080 --> 00:37:51.140
 question I don't know that we're gonna have anybody that's going to come in

00:37:51.140 --> 00:37:57.320
 deliberately and be deceitful or devious I think that most of the people that

00:37:57.320 --> 00:38:00.920
 develop when they're within our community choose to develop in our

00:38:00.920 --> 00:38:04.400
 community because they see the opportunity and I think that they want

00:38:04.400 --> 00:38:10.260
 to come back and have credibility within our community so I I don't know that

00:38:10.260 --> 00:38:12.880
 we're gonna see anything malicious I think it'll be pretty much

00:38:12.880 --> 00:38:17.720
 straightforward somebody come in and say I'm not I'm not required to do that I'm

00:38:17.720 --> 00:38:20.080
 not going to do that I don't think they'll go through the efforts of

00:38:20.080 --> 00:38:25.320
 creating an HOA I'm creating those HOA rules and then turn around and changing

00:38:25.320 --> 00:38:31.560
 the bylaws the next day so I think there's some fear to that that may not

00:38:31.560 --> 00:38:36.600
 be real I think the real piece to this is and you know I've said it before and

00:38:36.600 --> 00:38:40.080
 I'll continue to say it is is that we really need to speak to our state

00:38:40.080 --> 00:38:45.520
 legislators to say you know I live in a community which I really choose to what

00:38:45.520 --> 00:38:52.920
 it is it that I live next to or I don't and and that may be the case but from a

00:38:52.920 --> 00:38:57.240
 legislative level level is just needs to be corrected so that we don't have to be

00:38:57.240 --> 00:39:00.200
 concerned with whether it's a song and dance and people are able to be

00:39:00.200 --> 00:39:05.480
 deceitful or not but I don't think we have that fear it's just the ability for

00:39:05.480 --> 00:39:12.760
 people to do what it is that maybe the community to direction isn't any other

00:39:12.760 --> 00:39:20.040
 questions great thank you for the opportunity thank you Scott the next

00:39:20.040 --> 00:39:24.160
 item of business is to hop into our agenda and I just wanted to let the

00:39:24.160 --> 00:39:28.160
 record and minutes show that Commissioner Pernetta has joined us so we

00:39:28.160 --> 00:39:35.120
 can move on to the consent agenda item 3b has been pulled this evening so that

00:39:35.120 --> 00:39:41.680
 won't be considered and the vote will not include item 3b so if there's a

00:39:41.680 --> 00:39:46.520
 motion for approval if we could just call out it'll be AC D&E that'd be

00:39:46.520 --> 00:39:51.340
 helpful for the record in the vote is there any questions on any of these that

00:39:51.340 --> 00:39:54.640
 we need to pull up

00:39:54.640 --> 00:40:06.720
 fantastic that'll move us to individual consideration first item is for a and I

00:40:06.720 --> 00:40:11.000
 just want to have Richard speak to the context and what will happen in the

00:40:11.000 --> 00:40:22.480
 public session regarding this which is a first for this commission yeah we really

00:40:22.480 --> 00:40:27.720
 don't have any presentation prepared for this item this is this is something that

00:40:27.720 --> 00:40:34.040
 that Commissioner Ellis had requested if you recall we had discussed this I want

00:40:34.040 --> 00:40:38.680
 to say I don't remember his last meeting or the meeting before regarding excused

00:40:38.680 --> 00:40:46.560
 absences the under the city code section 2 - 8 3 there is the ability for the

00:40:46.560 --> 00:40:52.800
 Commission to excuse any matter that they they didn't fit if you will and so

00:40:52.800 --> 00:40:56.040
 really that's that's all this is is whether or not that that her absence on

00:40:56.040 --> 00:41:03.160
 June 5th qualified as a excused absence and then in public session is just a

00:41:03.160 --> 00:41:08.520
 matter of someone motioning for a vote to reconsider the classification of the

00:41:08.520 --> 00:41:15.600
 absence okay Koshelis thank you and to do I leave while you discuss this I mean

00:41:15.600 --> 00:41:19.720
 what is the protocol for this I would recommend probably that you should

00:41:19.720 --> 00:41:23.360
 because it's a matter that that that concerns and interest that you have

00:41:23.360 --> 00:41:30.320
 apart from the city as a whole and so I think that your discretion leaving would

00:41:30.320 --> 00:41:36.520
 be consistent with our rules and try to see if somebody could prepare a recusal

00:41:36.520 --> 00:41:42.840
 form for you okay to that end what is the obligation of Christian Ellis to

00:41:42.840 --> 00:41:48.480
 disclose the reason for absence I don't feel compelled to have her personal or

00:41:48.480 --> 00:41:53.680
 her matter necessarily be publicly aired but we also are as Commission trying to

00:41:53.680 --> 00:41:58.400
 determine if it is excused or not if she recuses she wouldn't be there to

00:41:58.400 --> 00:42:03.480
 disclose is that someone the staff can present she could certainly come to the

00:42:03.480 --> 00:42:08.400
 Dyson you know we've had situations before where we've had a member of P&Z

00:42:08.400 --> 00:42:14.040
 who had a project that came before the Commission they could come to the to the

00:42:14.040 --> 00:42:21.200
 lectern and present the evidence in support of other requests and then leave

00:42:21.200 --> 00:42:29.320
 during the deliberation Koshelis thank you on the agenda information sheet it

00:42:29.320 --> 00:42:34.880
 does explain exactly the situation so I don't know that I have more to add to

00:42:34.880 --> 00:42:40.920
 that I guess I'll leave that up to you if you would like you know talk more about

00:42:40.920 --> 00:42:47.000
 it but Richard are you presenting this is what I assume to to the rest of the

00:42:47.000 --> 00:42:52.160
 Commission very I mean I wasn't planning on getting into too much too much detail

00:42:52.160 --> 00:42:57.640
 other than what's in in in the AIS and really whether we we discussed it in full

00:42:57.640 --> 00:43:03.760
 detail or just say for a family commitment perfect so if it's okay with

00:43:03.760 --> 00:43:07.440
 the Commission if there's no objection I think in public hearing we'll just have

00:43:07.440 --> 00:43:11.880
 Koshelis recuse yourself and be available if a commissioner would like

00:43:11.880 --> 00:43:16.680
 to ask you questions at the lectern if it's agreeable we'll vote and then

00:43:16.680 --> 00:43:20.720
 welcome you back is there any objections to that

00:43:20.720 --> 00:43:24.920
 Christian back just so I'm clear though she was absent one time and it was

00:43:24.920 --> 00:43:30.760
 considered unexcused so we're trying to okay yes sir

00:43:30.760 --> 00:43:35.520
 Koshelis thank you sir and I'm happy to answer any questions right now if anyone

00:43:35.520 --> 00:43:39.080
 would like to know anything

00:43:39.080 --> 00:43:48.240
 see see or foresee questions but I appreciate you availing yourself to

00:43:48.240 --> 00:43:54.640
 that next item of business is item 4b presented by Haley

00:43:54.920 --> 00:44:01.280
 it's item sp 19 - 13 a

00:44:19.720 --> 00:44:26.680
 good evening this is a site plan within razor ranch specifically for a senior

00:44:26.680 --> 00:44:31.760
 living facility so the request before you is to consider approval of the site

00:44:31.760 --> 00:44:35.640
 plan for an age-restricted multifamily use on just over seven acres of land

00:44:35.640 --> 00:44:41.280
 this property will be bordered by future extension of Linden Street west of where

00:44:41.280 --> 00:44:45.280
 it currently is as well as a future a road within razor that's called East

00:44:45.280 --> 00:44:48.320
 Park Boulevard that will run north and south and then on the south side it's

00:44:48.320 --> 00:44:54.760
 word by panhandle Street as most of you should be aware I think any development

00:44:54.760 --> 00:44:58.200
 within razor ranch is typically required a site plan everything within the south

00:44:58.200 --> 00:45:02.200
 campus requires the site plan come before PNZ on the north side there are

00:45:02.200 --> 00:45:06.040
 some parcels left to develop may not have to come to PNZ for approval it did

00:45:06.040 --> 00:45:10.200
 allow for some staff approval of site plans on the north side the site plans

00:45:10.200 --> 00:45:13.240
 that come before you all are to include on three essential elements the site

00:45:13.240 --> 00:45:17.320
 plan the landscape plan and the building elevations and just before the meeting I

00:45:17.320 --> 00:45:20.920
 did pass out a full-size copy of their landscape plan the one that got

00:45:20.920 --> 00:45:26.840
 uploaded was only for part of the property so my apologies on that the

00:45:26.840 --> 00:45:30.720
 razor range overlay district does outline four criteria for approval of a

00:45:30.720 --> 00:45:34.440
 site plan the first is that it substantially comply with the concept

00:45:34.440 --> 00:45:37.120
 and schematic plan that was approved by City Council and we'll look at that

00:45:37.120 --> 00:45:41.440
 momentarily the second is that the site plan provide for a compatible arrangement

00:45:41.440 --> 00:45:44.320
 of buildings and land uses that wouldn't adversely affect adjoining

00:45:44.320 --> 00:45:48.120
 neighborhoods or properties third is that the site plan provide for adequate

00:45:48.120 --> 00:45:51.840
 and safe vehicular circulation and then finally that the plan comply with all

00:45:51.840 --> 00:45:57.920
 other sections of the overlay district so this is the the concept or schematic

00:45:57.920 --> 00:46:02.320
 zoning plan included in the razor ranch overlay this property is in what's

00:46:02.320 --> 00:46:06.320
 called the south mixed-use district so it's essentially everything south of

00:46:06.320 --> 00:46:11.620
 380 that's not yellow or red on the map is the south mixed-use district the

00:46:11.620 --> 00:46:16.440
 areas here in purple and blue permit multifamily so the overlay district

00:46:16.440 --> 00:46:19.720
 defines senior living and age-restricted multifamily as being part of that

00:46:19.720 --> 00:46:24.720
 broader category of multifamily and if you all remember earlier this year I

00:46:24.720 --> 00:46:29.680
 believe in May the development standards for multifamily uses within this

00:46:29.680 --> 00:46:35.440
 district came before you all and those were approved by council in May of 2019

00:46:35.440 --> 00:46:42.800
 so looking at their site plan so the the building it's or the site plan itself it

00:46:42.800 --> 00:46:47.440
 looks like the building is divided here but this is all one large C shape

00:46:47.440 --> 00:46:51.760
 building I apologize things have shifted on the map we'll fix that before the

00:46:51.760 --> 00:46:55.480
 regular meeting but the building itself is just under five hundred and twenty

00:46:55.480 --> 00:47:00.880
 thousand square feet it does have a drive under lane here on the first story

00:47:00.880 --> 00:47:04.160
 that allows for ingress and egress here near the office portion of the building

00:47:04.160 --> 00:47:08.240
 it would have two hundred and twelve dwelling units and the there are

00:47:08.240 --> 00:47:11.000
 multiple amenities on site so there's a pool area that would be here at the

00:47:11.000 --> 00:47:14.720
 corner there are three dog parks a larger one in the center and then two

00:47:14.720 --> 00:47:18.520
 at either end of the building and then also in the central portion of the site

00:47:18.520 --> 00:47:22.440
 they have amenities such as a bachi ball pickleball there's raised garden beds as

00:47:22.440 --> 00:47:26.720
 well as a pavilion area for the residents as you can see in the table it

00:47:26.720 --> 00:47:30.840
 does meet all of the standards in terms of lot coverage open space building

00:47:30.840 --> 00:47:35.600
 height and parking it does exceed the maximum parking fairly substantially but

00:47:35.600 --> 00:47:41.160
 that is allowed within the razor overlay district then looking at their landscape

00:47:41.160 --> 00:47:44.680
 plan they again meet the minimum requirements so they exceed the minimum

00:47:44.680 --> 00:47:50.080
 10% landscaping and 20% tree canopy they are planting in excess of the minimum

00:47:50.080 --> 00:47:54.880
 number of street trees on all of their street frontages there are providing a

00:47:54.880 --> 00:47:59.480
 buffer here on the east side of the property because on the concept plan the

00:47:59.480 --> 00:48:02.600
 land adjacent to them to the east is called for single-family development and

00:48:02.600 --> 00:48:07.400
 then in the yellow or orange color here is the perimeter fencing that would

00:48:07.400 --> 00:48:12.280
 surround this so it does have a wrought iron fence there is a retaining wall that

00:48:12.280 --> 00:48:16.360
 will that the fence will be on top of here at the hard corner because the site

00:48:16.360 --> 00:48:20.280
 does have some some grade differences here but the pool area would be screened

00:48:20.280 --> 00:48:24.800
 with enhanced landscaping here at this corner so the the rock residents will be

00:48:24.800 --> 00:48:27.400
 able to see in and out but it will still have some element of privacy there as

00:48:27.400 --> 00:48:33.480
 well and one minor correction in your AIS it mentioned a six-foot sidewalk on

00:48:33.480 --> 00:48:37.440
 Linden that's actually a five-foot sidewalk this was postponed from the

00:48:37.440 --> 00:48:40.120
 previous meeting because there were some negotiations that had to be made with

00:48:40.120 --> 00:48:45.160
 Denton municipal electric about their electric line coinciding in this small

00:48:45.160 --> 00:48:48.400
 area with the sidewalk and the landscaping as well as that retaining

00:48:48.400 --> 00:48:53.000
 wall and fence so that was all worked out and resulted in a semi meandering

00:48:53.000 --> 00:48:58.560
 five-foot sidewalk along along Linden Street so looking out the building

00:48:58.560 --> 00:49:02.400
 elevations this does meet the standards for razor-wrench in terms of

00:49:02.400 --> 00:49:06.000
 architecture and building materials so this on the top is what you would see

00:49:06.000 --> 00:49:09.000
 from Linden and there's that drive-through that I mentioned here

00:49:09.000 --> 00:49:13.620
 where the ingress and egress primary point would be this is the side along

00:49:13.620 --> 00:49:19.800
 East Park Boulevard - Charles thank you Jim Haley with regard to that in and out

00:49:19.800 --> 00:49:23.420
 on Linden that is the only main entrance right it's the primary there

00:49:23.420 --> 00:49:28.920
 would be a gated controlled kind of primarily residents only entrance here

00:49:28.920 --> 00:49:34.240
 on yeah any any other traffic deliveries of visitors and things like that would

00:49:34.240 --> 00:49:41.680
 come through this entry thanks so again just looking from the south here along

00:49:41.680 --> 00:49:44.760
 Panhandle Street this would be the view and then this is kind of what it would

00:49:44.760 --> 00:49:48.360
 look like from the inside so those amenities would be here within the

00:49:48.360 --> 00:49:54.480
 central area of the parking there's a an awning here for a drop-offs and then the

00:49:54.480 --> 00:49:58.320
 materials again as I mentioned brick stone fiber cement siding are all within

00:49:58.320 --> 00:50:03.280
 the permitted materials for the razor-wrench overlay so staff is

00:50:03.280 --> 00:50:06.160
 recommending approval of the site plan request we found it to be compliant

00:50:06.160 --> 00:50:09.640
 with all of the elements of the razor-wrench overlay district and to

00:50:09.640 --> 00:50:14.640
 meet the four criteria for approval so mr. Beck thank you chair just curious

00:50:14.640 --> 00:50:21.440
 that this one large really they have elevators I believe they do

00:50:21.440 --> 00:50:28.880
 considering with it being four stories I believe it's required by five

00:50:28.880 --> 00:50:38.600
 elevators yeah yeah five elevators is been confirmed allow that any other

00:50:38.600 --> 00:50:52.100
 questions for Haley thank you Haley the next item for business is item 4c it is

00:50:52.100 --> 00:51:02.200
 ADP 19 - 0 0 0 2 and I'll invite Julie Wyatt for presentation good evening

00:51:02.200 --> 00:51:08.520
 evening alright I'm presenting I'm Julie Wyatt I'm presenting ADP 19 to forest

00:51:08.520 --> 00:51:13.320
 crossing the request before you is for an alternative development plan for a

00:51:13.320 --> 00:51:18.560
 multifamily development on about 15 acres the purpose is to deviate from the

00:51:18.560 --> 00:51:23.880
 multifamily standards within sub chapter 13 of the 2002 Denton development code

00:51:23.880 --> 00:51:29.040
 the subject property is located north of McKinney and adjacent to Mayhill just

00:51:29.040 --> 00:51:34.320
 west of it a little bit of background on this site you probably you might

00:51:34.320 --> 00:51:40.360
 remember the zoning that the property was rezoned to CMG in 2017 and there was

00:51:40.360 --> 00:51:45.680
 a specific use permit that recently came before you it came before you in June of

00:51:45.680 --> 00:51:50.720
 this year and it was approved by City Council in July that approval included a

00:51:50.720 --> 00:51:56.160
 site plan landscape plan and elevations as part of that part of that

00:51:56.160 --> 00:52:01.640
 presentation and backup material we talked about that ADP would be coming

00:52:01.640 --> 00:52:06.920
 forward after that SUP was approved so so that's why we're here today so this

00:52:06.920 --> 00:52:17.660
 this chart outlines what those thank you chair Julie that said 2016 is that I was

00:52:17.660 --> 00:52:23.240
 yes it's 2019 I'm sorry I was time travel back in time when I did this

00:52:23.240 --> 00:52:31.000
 presentation yes 2019 thank you so this is an outline of those deviations that

00:52:31.000 --> 00:52:35.000
 they're requesting from sub chapter 13 so they're requesting three the first

00:52:35.000 --> 00:52:39.280
 that at least 50% of the front yard frontage shall have buildings within 20

00:52:39.280 --> 00:52:45.080
 feet of the front property line due to the to due to the the unique property

00:52:45.080 --> 00:52:52.040
 boundary where this this site is located on a larger tract it's surrounded by

00:52:52.040 --> 00:52:57.160
 undeveloped commercial property which is two narrow strips that that connect it

00:52:57.160 --> 00:53:01.280
 to the right of way so really this requirement would be almost impossible to

00:53:01.280 --> 00:53:06.760
 meet given the property boundaries and then the next one is that parking areas

00:53:06.760 --> 00:53:10.320
 are not permitted between buildings in the street they have to be located in

00:53:10.320 --> 00:53:14.320
 the rear of the side once again due to the site's configuration and those

00:53:14.320 --> 00:53:19.280
 undeveloped commercial tracks between the subject property and and the right

00:53:19.280 --> 00:53:23.840
 of way this part the parking areas will be screened you know once those areas

00:53:23.840 --> 00:53:29.400
 are developed and then there's additional six faces on the south access

00:53:29.400 --> 00:53:32.680
 point that are for guest parking and those will be screened with landscaping

00:53:32.680 --> 00:53:36.320
 so so they'll meet the intent of that requirement with the screening and then

00:53:36.320 --> 00:53:40.840
 finally that adjacent building should have different elevations the applicant

00:53:40.840 --> 00:53:46.200
 is proposing consistent architectural details among the among the buildings but

00:53:46.200 --> 00:53:51.480
 with a variety of color schemes in order to differentiate them so I know you've

00:53:51.480 --> 00:53:55.200
 seen the site being planned before we'll go over it briefly the part in the blue

00:53:55.200 --> 00:54:00.560
 is that is that donut area those commercial out parcels that will

00:54:00.560 --> 00:54:05.160
 eventually be developed that are adjacent to the to the right of way the

00:54:05.160 --> 00:54:10.560
 the purple areas those are the 12 multifamily buildings the orange area is

00:54:10.560 --> 00:54:14.840
 the are the parking areas that are between the buildings and and the right

00:54:14.840 --> 00:54:20.000
 of way so they do this proposal does meet all zoning requirements landscaping

00:54:20.000 --> 00:54:25.040
 tree preservation so it does meet those requirements they're just asking for

00:54:25.040 --> 00:54:31.360
 those three deviations and then also as part of the SUP deliberation at City

00:54:31.360 --> 00:54:35.120
 Council they did request that the applicant try to preserve more existing

00:54:35.120 --> 00:54:41.240
 trees the the didn't development code sub chapter 13 does allow applicants who

00:54:41.240 --> 00:54:46.760
 can preserve more trees to to reduce their parking requirements so staff is

00:54:46.760 --> 00:54:50.880
 actually recommending a condition as part of this ADP to allow them to try to

00:54:50.880 --> 00:54:57.360
 explore those possibilities to preserve more trees on site and then this is a

00:54:57.360 --> 00:55:00.480
 portion of the landscape plan that really has to deal with where you see

00:55:00.480 --> 00:55:04.200
 generally that parking and then though that access you see there's going to be

00:55:04.200 --> 00:55:08.400
 trees they'll be screening from the you know that parking from the right of way

00:55:08.400 --> 00:55:12.280
 and then eventually from that that come or those commercial pieces Mr. Beck

00:55:12.280 --> 00:55:15.840
 thank you chair screening though in landscape only we're not putting fences

00:55:15.840 --> 00:55:21.240
 there there will be a a wooden fence so there will be additional screening from

00:55:21.240 --> 00:55:25.360
 the fence but yes there will also be from the McKinney side in the Mayhill

00:55:25.360 --> 00:55:29.560
 side I'm on that between the the residential portion in the commercial

00:55:29.560 --> 00:55:33.080
 portion they are intending some fencing there I'm not sure how much that's

00:55:33.080 --> 00:55:35.880
 needed anyway especially that commercial development gets up there it's gonna

00:55:35.880 --> 00:55:40.600
 block the whole thing anyway but right okay thanks and then here are the

00:55:40.600 --> 00:55:44.920
 elevations that you've seen once again the architectural details are consistent

00:55:44.920 --> 00:55:48.240
 throughout the buildings but what they do have are the those pops of color

00:55:48.240 --> 00:55:57.920
 you've got the burgundy the yellow and then the orange Julie on the ADP do they

00:55:57.920 --> 00:56:04.440
 if they're presenting those different colors they're required to actually have

00:56:04.440 --> 00:56:13.360
 a different colors like we can hold them to the different color scheme because

00:56:13.360 --> 00:56:17.280
 one of the it seems like the consideration is instead of varying

00:56:17.280 --> 00:56:24.160
 height they're gonna vary color is that something that's even like so within our

00:56:24.160 --> 00:56:32.160
 purview and not even enlightened of HP 2439 just in general well it could be

00:56:32.160 --> 00:56:37.320
 you know previous without the House bill yes that could be something that you

00:56:37.320 --> 00:56:53.640
 could regulate as part of an ADP or an SUP but I'm thinking it's not a material

00:56:53.640 --> 00:57:00.680
 that we're talking about and this is you know aesthetic elements of of their

00:57:00.680 --> 00:57:06.380
 design their site plan that they're laying out here and so it's they're

00:57:06.380 --> 00:57:10.520
 doing it with eyes open okay okay thanks for the clarification

00:57:10.520 --> 00:57:15.720
 it's a question else thank you chair a real quick on that is it part of the SUP

00:57:15.720 --> 00:57:21.880
 that was approved anyway didn't we approve the yes yes those elevations

00:57:21.880 --> 00:57:26.520
 were approved as part of the yeah so I think it would have to be it's already

00:57:26.520 --> 00:57:33.920
 part of that so the criteria for approval are in sub chapter 13 there

00:57:33.920 --> 00:57:38.840
 were five criteria first is it preserve existing neighborhoods does the request

00:57:38.840 --> 00:57:43.480
 this is a multifamily development in an emergent and an emerging mixed use area

00:57:43.480 --> 00:57:47.280
 multifamily as a use is essential in these types of areas because you want

00:57:47.280 --> 00:57:51.720
 that critical mass of people to support the commercial and employment uses with

00:57:51.720 --> 00:57:56.320
 the request assure quality development it's not to this request is not to lower

00:57:56.320 --> 00:57:59.440
 design standards but it would facilitate development of the site

00:57:59.440 --> 00:58:04.780
 particularly in light of the the the the property boundaries and how how that

00:58:04.780 --> 00:58:10.920
 building that site is oriented and additionally there was a there was more

00:58:10.920 --> 00:58:14.440
 scrutiny on this project because it wasn't it was an SUP so it had to go

00:58:14.440 --> 00:58:17.600
 through that SUP process and it has been before you before as well as City

00:58:17.600 --> 00:58:22.360
 Council and focus new development to activity centers there you know we've

00:58:22.360 --> 00:58:26.840
 got two roads in that area McKinney and Mayhill are either under construction or

00:58:26.840 --> 00:58:30.040
 about to be under construction so there's been a lot of investment in these

00:58:30.040 --> 00:58:33.760
 corridors and so this really is that natural conclusion that logical

00:58:33.760 --> 00:58:38.560
 conclusion to that investment that the development would come here ensure

00:58:38.560 --> 00:58:41.920
 infrastructure can accommodate the development that necessary

00:58:41.920 --> 00:58:46.600
 infrastructure is is under construction and is moving forward and the results in

00:58:46.600 --> 00:58:50.160
 a high quality development meeting the intent of the standards once again that

00:58:50.160 --> 00:58:54.160
 doughnut configuration restricts the ability to meet requirements but it does

00:58:54.160 --> 00:58:58.040
 result in an appropriate design for a mixed-use area because it does separate

00:58:58.040 --> 00:59:03.000
 that residential piece from what are going to be higher traffic roads so it

00:59:03.000 --> 00:59:08.040
 provides that buffer in that transition area parking areas as as proposed or

00:59:08.040 --> 00:59:11.480
 dispersed throughout the development so you don't have large parking areas and

00:59:11.480 --> 00:59:16.360
 those visual impacts for large surface parking they're sort of interspersed and

00:59:16.360 --> 00:59:20.600
 it allows that those drive aisles and and the buildings to create a grid really

00:59:20.600 --> 00:59:25.320
 adding more connectivity to the site and then the consistent architectural design

00:59:25.320 --> 00:59:30.080
 throughout the subject site one sure a cohesive appearance for this single use

00:59:30.080 --> 00:59:34.360
 so as this area develops with all the commercial pieces and employment pieces

00:59:34.360 --> 00:59:38.040
 there will potentially be additional architectural styles and building

00:59:38.040 --> 00:59:42.960
 materials and so this will just allow this one use to to be more cohesive as

00:59:42.960 --> 00:59:48.440
 as it moves forward with development so based upon the criteria for approval

00:59:48.440 --> 00:59:54.200
 staff recommends approval of the request because it does meet the criteria with

00:59:54.200 --> 00:59:59.120
 that caveat and that that recommendation for to encourage additional tree

00:59:59.120 --> 01:00:04.160
 preservation in accordance with sub chapter 13 requirements and I will stand

01:00:04.160 --> 01:00:10.800
 for any questions mr. Beck will the owner applicant be here

01:00:10.800 --> 01:00:15.440
 tonight she is supposed to be here she okay thank you

01:00:15.440 --> 01:00:23.080
 Kirsten Sanchez okay as far as the so how many parking areas are we looking to

01:00:23.080 --> 01:00:29.400
 reduce and I guess my concern is your each apartment has a requirement of so

01:00:29.400 --> 01:00:33.520
 many parking spots I would I would imagine so what you will be will be

01:00:33.520 --> 01:00:40.400
 doing is reducing the number or because you do have a requirement right the code

01:00:40.400 --> 01:00:47.800
 does allow for a I believe up to 15 percent reduction if they can preserve a

01:00:47.800 --> 01:00:51.680
 certain amount of quality trees so it would have to be 12 inches of quality

01:00:51.680 --> 01:00:57.240
 trees and that could reduce each 12 inches reduces one parking space so it's

01:00:57.240 --> 01:01:02.120
 it's a pretty high bar that they have to meet it really does sort of you know try

01:01:02.120 --> 01:01:08.480
 to get more trees to be preserved in order to allow for that that parking

01:01:08.480 --> 01:01:16.960
 reduction I guess my concern is yeah I mean I can see that but then in in in a

01:01:16.960 --> 01:01:22.240
 apartment situation where you have people coming in parking places are very

01:01:22.240 --> 01:01:27.400
 important you know I mean I see that I have some sure and I see that parking

01:01:27.400 --> 01:01:35.640
 spots are always full are we sacrificing I mean I have a real issue with where

01:01:35.640 --> 01:01:39.200
 they're gonna park if you're reducing those parking places where are those

01:01:39.200 --> 01:01:44.640
 people gonna park well and and remember we upped our parking standards for

01:01:44.640 --> 01:01:49.640
 multifamily last year so in addition to parking for each unit they also have to

01:01:49.640 --> 01:01:54.320
 provide 10 percent of the required parking for guest parking so so there is

01:01:54.320 --> 01:01:58.360
 some flexibility there is additional parking that the city of Denton does

01:01:58.360 --> 01:02:05.080
 require for multifamily and then and and it really depends on what kind of trees

01:02:05.080 --> 01:02:09.920
 that they could that they could preserve to get there

01:02:09.920 --> 01:02:21.240
 any other questions

01:02:21.240 --> 01:02:30.160
 thank you very much I was just gonna add a little clarification to that if you

01:02:30.160 --> 01:02:34.120
 look at just sort of playing with the maximum so if the maximum decrease is

01:02:34.120 --> 01:02:40.360
 15% I think that 515 spaces is just kind of using the total number of units I

01:02:40.360 --> 01:02:47.920
 think it would it would equate to about 1.5 1.5 spaces per bedroom or per unit I

01:02:47.920 --> 01:02:52.200
 think I want to check the math but okay I can do it I can also see how many

01:02:52.200 --> 01:02:55.680
 inches of trees they would have to preserve in order to max that out it

01:02:55.680 --> 01:03:03.680
 would be a pretty substantial amount of trees great thank you the next time a

01:03:03.680 --> 01:03:08.800
 business is 5a there's not a presentation for this but just to prize

01:03:08.800 --> 01:03:14.640
 you we will open the public hearing for this and then call for a motion to have

01:03:14.640 --> 01:03:18.280
 this postponed to a date certain of August 21st but that'll leave the public

01:03:18.280 --> 01:03:24.760
 hearing open for the two weeks until we meet so the next presenting item is 5b

01:03:24.760 --> 01:03:39.560
 and it is Julie again for z 19 - 0 0 0 6a so this is z 19 0 0 0 6a fireside park

01:03:39.560 --> 01:03:45.760
 so the request before you is to amend ordinance 2015 2 1 7 to revise the

01:03:45.760 --> 01:03:51.440
 overlay conditions on about 30 30 acres the property is zoned in our three

01:03:51.440 --> 01:03:57.880
 and it is located at the corner of West Windsor and Hinkle it's the properties

01:03:57.880 --> 01:04:02.240
 they're outlined in yellow so some background there's been quite a few

01:04:02.240 --> 01:04:07.360
 zoning cases that affected this property so in 2002 it was zoned in our two

01:04:07.360 --> 01:04:14.040
 through the citywide rezoning in 2007 a an applicant a developer came in and

01:04:14.040 --> 01:04:20.040
 requested a rezoning from NR 2 to NR 3 he had a very specific site plan

01:04:20.040 --> 01:04:25.560
 associated with that and so as part of that there were there were quite a few

01:04:25.560 --> 01:04:31.820
 overlay conditions put on the property to design considerations that didn't

01:04:31.820 --> 01:04:37.880
 develop so a new developer came in in 2015 and he wanted he was hoping to

01:04:37.880 --> 01:04:42.560
 develop a age-restricted single-family neighborhood once again with a pretty

01:04:42.560 --> 01:04:47.880
 specific site plan which included some smaller lots with more open space and

01:04:47.880 --> 01:04:54.560
 included sort of in a perimeter common area he plotted but but the the plots

01:04:54.560 --> 01:05:01.000
 expired and it never it didn't develop and so a new property owner came in and

01:05:01.000 --> 01:05:05.960
 and plotted the property a final plot was approved in 2018 and they're

01:05:05.960 --> 01:05:09.400
 actually under construction they're they're laying the streets out there and

01:05:09.400 --> 01:05:15.080
 and putting in all of the public facilities but some of those overlay

01:05:15.080 --> 01:05:20.360
 conditions are really because of those specific designs that were that were

01:05:20.360 --> 01:05:25.700
 approved or that were associated with those previous approvals he's he's

01:05:25.700 --> 01:05:30.640
 feeling they don't meet the the current design so one of those is a perimeter

01:05:30.640 --> 01:05:36.240
 fence with a wrought iron appearance a 50-foot setback from the existing curb

01:05:36.240 --> 01:05:43.360
 and then 100% masonry there are additional a 100% masonry on on the

01:05:43.360 --> 01:05:48.520
 homes there are two other additional conditions that three-car garages shall

01:05:48.520 --> 01:05:53.000
 not face the public street and that any ingress or egress would not remove the

01:05:53.000 --> 01:05:57.600
 on-street bike lane on Hankel Drive he is not requesting any changes to those

01:05:57.600 --> 01:06:03.880
 conditions the only changes he is requesting are to the areas in that are

01:06:03.880 --> 01:06:10.720
 in bold Krister back chair let me ask something at this point the previous

01:06:10.720 --> 01:06:15.560
 developer that sold it to the current developer where he was gonna have the

01:06:15.560 --> 01:06:21.800
 wrought iron fence where it was he gonna have houses the backside of the houses

01:06:21.800 --> 01:06:27.640
 facing Windsor or no sir there was going to be a a sort of walking trail around

01:06:27.640 --> 01:06:33.320
 there okay that would conceal the houses except that okay I see okay so now he's

01:06:33.320 --> 01:06:39.120
 the new developers gonna be building houses that will expose the backside of

01:06:39.120 --> 01:06:43.880
 the houses unless we put the privacy fix in there correct correct so yes the

01:06:43.880 --> 01:06:49.640
 plot in 2018 really was more of a typical single-family neighborhood

01:06:49.640 --> 01:06:54.080
 development where you have the the rear yards adjacent to those arterial roads

01:06:54.080 --> 01:06:59.160
 and so because of that because of his concerns about privacy for future

01:06:59.160 --> 01:07:05.040
 homeowners um he's requesting some changes to those overlay so the same

01:07:05.040 --> 01:07:09.880
 would apply to Hinkle to the back of the houses are gonna be exposed there yes

01:07:09.880 --> 01:07:15.760
 yes if it if it develops as proposed then then Windsor and Hinkle would

01:07:15.760 --> 01:07:21.120
 require that wrought iron fence so but he is requesting to put an opaque fence

01:07:21.120 --> 01:07:27.160
 in to reduce that that 50 foot setback to 40 feet and then also to provide more

01:07:27.160 --> 01:07:33.160
 varied building materials his request would not modify the underlying zoning

01:07:33.160 --> 01:07:39.520
 wouldn't increase the density or introduce new uses so here's his

01:07:39.520 --> 01:07:44.640
 request he's he's proposing a six foot tall board on board cedar fence with a

01:07:44.640 --> 01:07:49.800
 top rail and cap a taller stone and brick columns topped with a cast stone

01:07:49.800 --> 01:07:56.640
 column every 100 feet and at any corners and any terminus also a vertical

01:07:56.640 --> 01:08:01.760
 landscape element would be placed at the midpoint between those columns as well

01:08:01.760 --> 01:08:06.520
 as street trees would be planted if approved along Hinkle Drive and Windsor

01:08:06.520 --> 01:08:11.200
 Drive and the design of those street trees would be one planted every 20 feet

01:08:11.200 --> 01:08:17.360
 but they would be alternating shade and ornamental he is also requesting to

01:08:17.360 --> 01:08:23.800
 reduce the building materials from the 100% masonry to 70% masonry and I've

01:08:23.800 --> 01:08:28.560
 added what his request is in but I've also marked it out because due to the

01:08:28.560 --> 01:08:33.440
 due to the new house bill because it's not something that we can enforce we're

01:08:33.440 --> 01:08:37.920
 recommending that it just be removed from from the overlay conditions we've

01:08:37.920 --> 01:08:42.880
 added here though that the proposed setback would be 40 feet from the

01:08:42.880 --> 01:08:47.080
 existing curb on Windsor and Hinkle and then once again those two other

01:08:47.080 --> 01:08:53.520
 conditions would remain in place so here is a thank you chair Julie can you go

01:08:53.520 --> 01:09:00.480
 back to that for a minute so with the first the first detail there can we put

01:09:00.480 --> 01:09:03.560
 something you have maintenance and irrigation of all open spaces and site

01:09:03.560 --> 01:09:09.680
 amenities can you make sure that includes fence I know we we had some of

01:09:09.680 --> 01:09:16.720
 the responses includes they don't want the fence not looking so good after a

01:09:16.720 --> 01:09:21.280
 while so maybe if we can take an effort and make sure that's included in that

01:09:21.280 --> 01:09:28.980
 thank you correct right right and I think that was the intent of probably

01:09:28.980 --> 01:09:32.840
 the developer later HOA taking responsibility for this you probably

01:09:32.840 --> 01:09:37.160
 mean for them to take care of that particular fence but maybe we need to

01:09:37.160 --> 01:09:47.620
 call yep I agree I'll add that and so here here's a diagram of what they're

01:09:47.620 --> 01:09:51.640
 proposing you see the fence here you've got your vertical landscape element in

01:09:51.640 --> 01:09:58.120
 between the posts and then and then the the ornamental trees and and shade trees

01:09:58.120 --> 01:10:05.080
 alternating and then here's a little diagram of what the the setbacks look

01:10:05.080 --> 01:10:08.840
 like and what they're proposing and then versus what the Denton development code

01:10:08.840 --> 01:10:16.920
 requires so this is Hinkle and then here is the fireside park development the

01:10:16.920 --> 01:10:25.280
 the box in in yellow that is the 50 foot setback from the curb in red it is 40

01:10:25.280 --> 01:10:29.720
 feet and then this is this little greenish is is what the Denton

01:10:29.720 --> 01:10:33.800
 development code requires so the Denton development code requires a 10-foot rear

01:10:33.800 --> 01:10:37.920
 setback so that's just to let you see how kind of what those look like in real

01:10:37.920 --> 01:10:42.320
 life that's on Hinkle on Windsor it's a little different because the curb is so

01:10:42.320 --> 01:10:46.640
 far away from the residential property lines that it doesn't have as much of an

01:10:46.640 --> 01:10:53.400
 effect so the criteria for approval in any rezoning case is in sub chapter 3

01:10:53.400 --> 01:10:57.280
 of the Denton development code does it comply with the future land use and then

01:10:57.280 --> 01:11:03.000
 does it does it provide for adequate public facilities so first dent plan 2030

01:11:03.000 --> 01:11:08.100
 the future land use it is low residential and this includes single

01:11:08.100 --> 01:11:13.000
 family neighborhoods up to four dwelling units per acre the the existing zoning

01:11:13.000 --> 01:11:16.760
 of nr3 which isn't proposed to be changed is consistent with the future

01:11:16.760 --> 01:11:21.960
 land use map because it it permits three and a half dwelling units per acre we

01:11:21.960 --> 01:11:25.720
 also looked at element four of the Denton plan just because that addresses

01:11:25.720 --> 01:11:30.760
 more of that site design and and and urban design community community

01:11:30.760 --> 01:11:34.800
 character our findings when we looked at that is that the opaque cedar fence

01:11:34.800 --> 01:11:38.400
 would provide backyard privacy and screening for future homeowners adjacent

01:11:38.400 --> 01:11:42.400
 to the street the brick columns landscaping and street trees would

01:11:42.400 --> 01:11:46.360
 provide visual consistency and rhythm along the rights of way it would create

01:11:46.360 --> 01:11:50.520
 a sense of arrival for those future homeowners as well as enhance those

01:11:50.520 --> 01:11:55.560
 existing corridors of Hinkle and Windsor fence that fence line as well as the

01:11:55.560 --> 01:11:59.760
 street trees would provide that that well-defined neighborhood edge and also

01:11:59.760 --> 01:12:03.680
 add that that landscaping at the right of way which is something that the that

01:12:03.680 --> 01:12:07.680
 this part of our community vision and and and how we're moving forward with

01:12:07.680 --> 01:12:13.320
 development what they're proposing exceeds the 2002 and 2019 didn't of

01:12:13.320 --> 01:12:17.760
 development code requirements and once again that seventy percent masonry

01:12:17.760 --> 01:12:22.760
 exceeds the requirements but it's it's it's not something that we can enforce

01:12:22.760 --> 01:12:29.080
 criterion to adequate public improvements transportation because

01:12:29.080 --> 01:12:34.160
 this request didn't increase any density or intensity on the site a TIA was not

01:12:34.160 --> 01:12:39.000
 required and as a result of the development of five-foot sidewalk must

01:12:39.000 --> 01:12:43.160
 be constructed on Hinkle and an eight-foot on Windsor and that's the

01:12:43.160 --> 01:12:48.360
 developer has to has to construct that capital improvement projects if you've

01:12:48.360 --> 01:12:52.640
 been near Hinkle recently it's a little hard to get down these days and that's

01:12:52.640 --> 01:12:57.000
 because they're doing the Magnolia Drive drainage project they're installing new

01:12:57.000 --> 01:13:01.520
 box culverts that's going to carry that storm water south to pecan Creek once

01:13:01.520 --> 01:13:07.640
 those are installed the asphalt will be re rebuilt it just between those

01:13:07.640 --> 01:13:12.080
 existing curb lines on Hinkle it's not going to expand Hinkle and those bike

01:13:12.080 --> 01:13:16.920
 lanes will also be restored due to resident safety concerns that we heard

01:13:16.920 --> 01:13:21.360
 at the neighborhood meeting earlier this year two stop signs were installed on

01:13:21.360 --> 01:13:26.560
 West Windsor it creates that three-way stop and it gives it gives drivers coming

01:13:26.560 --> 01:13:31.840
 turning on to Windsor a little more surety that that those driving on on

01:13:31.840 --> 01:13:37.200
 Windsor actually see them and then also allows pedestrians a little safer route

01:13:37.200 --> 01:13:40.080
 into the park that's a pretty big park right there and there's a lot of

01:13:40.080 --> 01:13:44.360
 residential so we want to make sure those pedestrians were safe there will

01:13:44.360 --> 01:13:49.400
 be roadway impact fees paid when this when the building permits are pulled

01:13:49.400 --> 01:13:54.880
 about $2,000 per dwelling unit is a good shorthand and then there's also the park

01:13:54.880 --> 01:14:00.080
 dedication fee that happened with the plat last year and then the park

01:14:00.080 --> 01:14:04.080
 development fee of 291 for each house that will be paid with each building

01:14:04.080 --> 01:14:09.680
 permit there's water and wastewater not only taken to the site but also being

01:14:09.680 --> 01:14:13.640
 constructed throughout the site I'm in accordance with this schematic right

01:14:13.640 --> 01:14:20.440
 here and then schools there per the 107 houses on the side it's expected to

01:14:20.440 --> 01:14:24.440
 generate 24 elementary students 12 middle school students and 16 high

01:14:24.440 --> 01:14:28.480
 school students and then there's a fire station within that eight eight minute

01:14:28.480 --> 01:14:35.080
 or less time boundary that they like to me so public notices were sent out we've

01:14:35.080 --> 01:14:39.960
 received foreign opposition that there's only one however within that 200 foot

01:14:39.960 --> 01:14:44.640
 boundary so we get that 1.29 percent five signs were posted on the site and

01:14:44.640 --> 01:14:49.280
 they did have a neighborhood meeting so staff does recommend approval of the

01:14:49.280 --> 01:15:04.320
 modified overlay conditions with the with the addition of the oh okay so yes

01:15:04.320 --> 01:15:09.640
 the HOA will maintain that that fence if approved so and that includes that

01:15:09.640 --> 01:15:14.360
 board-on-board cedar with the masonry columns and and that landscaping at the

01:15:14.360 --> 01:15:21.000
 right-of-way the reduced setback of 40 feet and then those those garages and and

01:15:21.000 --> 01:15:25.640
 then that that bike lane to remain on Hinkle and I will stand for any question

01:15:25.640 --> 01:15:30.640
 mr. Beck thank you chair Julie do you know what the frontage is for this

01:15:30.640 --> 01:15:35.000
 development on Hinkle land Windsor it looks like Windsor's got a little bit

01:15:35.000 --> 01:15:42.840
 less than ankle but do we know the actual in terms of footage maybe this in

01:15:42.840 --> 01:15:47.420
 between the right-of-way and or just the frontage for the development on Hinkle

01:15:47.420 --> 01:15:58.200
 what is the my concern and I think it's probably gonna be brought up by the

01:15:58.200 --> 01:16:02.920
 public a little bit is Windsor is a secondary arterial right yes Hinkle say

01:16:02.920 --> 01:16:09.240
 connector don't have a problem with and a board on board with cedar fence with a

01:16:09.240 --> 01:16:17.440
 cap on it's a nice sense but Windsor being a secondary arterial I think we

01:16:17.440 --> 01:16:21.240
 had a conversation in one of our DC RC meetings and Richard might want to jump

01:16:21.240 --> 01:16:28.440
 in here about how major arterial secondary arterials how those and we

01:16:28.440 --> 01:16:33.480
 were talking about Teasley specifically how those fences look over time yes if

01:16:33.480 --> 01:16:37.400
 we can get the HOA to stay on top of this and keep it looking nice but

01:16:37.400 --> 01:16:41.520
 wouldn't fences will look raggedy and on a major arterial that's always a little

01:16:41.520 --> 01:16:49.120
 bit it's an embarrassment for the city so what is the possibility of discussing

01:16:49.120 --> 01:16:55.080
 with the applicant at least on the Windsor side doing something a little bit

01:16:55.080 --> 01:17:02.960
 more expensive but be looking at a stonewall a masonry wall is that that

01:17:02.960 --> 01:17:07.040
 was not something that they were prepared to do during our discussions but

01:17:07.040 --> 01:17:10.040
 it is certainly something that you could bring up as part of the as part of the

01:17:10.040 --> 01:17:15.440
 public hearing okay would it be if I wanted to could I make an amendment to

01:17:15.440 --> 01:17:22.760
 this approving it with the exception that masonry fence would be preferred on

01:17:22.760 --> 01:17:28.720
 the Windsor elevation I believe you can do that in public hearing you can

01:17:28.720 --> 01:17:43.040
 certainly put that in your motion okay okay I guess my concern is putting all

01:17:43.040 --> 01:17:48.720
 these requirements on builders I mean the city has a responsibility when they

01:17:48.720 --> 01:17:55.840
 see bad fences to to have them fix them so that's court enforcement is that what

01:17:55.840 --> 01:18:00.720
 we're talking about if the fence looks kind of bad okay let's go ahead and

01:18:00.720 --> 01:18:05.960
 have it who's responsible for that the city could cite them cities not

01:18:05.960 --> 01:18:10.800
 responsible for repairing them no no the city's responsible for going over and

01:18:10.800 --> 01:18:15.040
 talking to the HOA and saying code enforcement saying hey these fences

01:18:15.040 --> 01:18:22.120
 don't look you know are falling apart or need to be repaired so for us to start

01:18:22.120 --> 01:18:26.560
 making your promise make it a break a brick wall it seems to me where we're

01:18:26.560 --> 01:18:32.720
 putting a lot of requirements just our personal opinion when the builder has

01:18:32.720 --> 01:18:37.600
 already agreed to something or he's willing to do some now we're saying okay

01:18:37.600 --> 01:18:46.200
 we want you to do this just because am I off somewhere that's certainly your

01:18:46.200 --> 01:18:52.480
 opinion I mean so you're not off and your beliefs about that but my question

01:18:52.480 --> 01:18:57.160
 is the city already yeah I mean that's what they do they go out and if your

01:18:57.160 --> 01:19:02.160
 fences aren't looking good and the HOA it's also has a responsibility to do

01:19:02.160 --> 01:19:06.840
 that for us he's all of a sudden okay because in five or ten years his fence

01:19:06.840 --> 01:19:13.200
 because it's what it's gonna get carried faster than a brick it seems like we're

01:19:13.200 --> 01:19:18.360
 putting requirements on people just because code enforcement doesn't

01:19:18.360 --> 01:19:25.720
 typically enforce aesthetics if it's falling down or it's dilapidated or

01:19:25.720 --> 01:19:31.360
 something of that nature they can certainly enforce by citation against

01:19:31.360 --> 01:19:37.200
 whoever's responsible for maintaining the fence but in terms of you know going

01:19:37.200 --> 01:19:44.400
 over and having a conversation with members of the HOA or the adjacent

01:19:44.400 --> 01:19:51.120
 property owner that's not something that's charged to the city as a duty

01:19:51.120 --> 01:19:56.320
 and push back real fast I just want to note for the commission part of this

01:19:56.320 --> 01:20:00.800
 work sessions to gather information if there's discussion to be had about the

01:20:00.800 --> 01:20:04.860
 merits of a wood over a brick I think that would be best had in a public

01:20:04.860 --> 01:20:08.520
 session and work out once there's a motion on the table I think it's just a

01:20:08.520 --> 01:20:14.520
 matter of convincing or putting forth your position yeah yeah I just want to

01:20:14.520 --> 01:20:20.600
 utilize this time appropriately kushel us thank you and if I could just add a

01:20:20.600 --> 01:20:23.840
 little bit to that I know what we're considering there's an overlay right now

01:20:23.840 --> 01:20:29.480
 that requires a wrought iron fence to be on this property so that is what he is

01:20:29.480 --> 01:20:33.280
 requesting be removed and by removing the wrought iron requirement which is

01:20:33.280 --> 01:20:39.400
 already in place he's offering what Julie presented right just to clarify

01:20:39.400 --> 01:20:43.280
 Richard correct I was just gonna add the the landscaping or that they are

01:20:43.280 --> 01:20:50.000
 including is beyond the so Julie I have a couple questions for you if you are

01:20:50.000 --> 01:20:54.880
 pulling out your measuring tool for Christian back can I ask for two

01:20:54.880 --> 01:21:00.960
 measurements you bet can I have you look at the setbacks of the homes on Windsor

01:21:00.960 --> 01:21:06.320
 west of this property there's a half a dozen or so that back up the rear

01:21:06.320 --> 01:21:13.720
 property backs up to Windsor to the west and then can you look at the setbacks to

01:21:13.720 --> 01:21:19.880
 the east of Hinkle on Windsor there's some homes there that front face Windsor

01:21:19.880 --> 01:21:24.600
 and I don't know how far they're back so does that make sense absolutely I just

01:21:24.600 --> 01:21:29.560
 like to know when you're just driving on Windsor what do the houses look like the

01:21:29.560 --> 01:21:32.720
 second question I have is could you go back is there a hundred and seven

01:21:32.720 --> 01:21:39.780
 perspective units being built yes sir this might be a question for DISD or

01:21:39.780 --> 01:21:48.760
 maybe my poor speculation a hundred and seven houses and 52 kids it seems low

01:21:48.760 --> 01:21:52.920
 it seems like a lot of families would live here so it seems like the number

01:21:52.920 --> 01:21:57.680
 would be a hundred kids what they have like an algorithm for this they have a

01:21:57.680 --> 01:22:04.600
 formula yes okay and it's a reliable one I assume yeah it's I don't know how they

01:22:04.600 --> 01:22:08.520
 base that on I don't know what research they've based it on but it's a formula

01:22:08.520 --> 01:22:11.640
 they've shared with us that they get that that's how they sort of plan for

01:22:11.640 --> 01:22:17.880
 their schools okay any other questions Krishna Alice thank you chair just real

01:22:17.880 --> 01:22:23.560
 quick Julie it's just one way in and one way out on right in this development no

01:22:23.560 --> 01:22:28.760
 ma'am it's okay it's actually there there's one time here okay some

01:22:28.760 --> 01:22:41.240
 remote will be tied in okay and then fireside gotcha correct yes there's a

01:22:41.240 --> 01:22:44.200
 previous applicant those age-restricted this one is not an age-restricted this

01:22:44.200 --> 01:22:49.080
 one is not okay I misunderstood Mr. Pernetta yeah I just wanted to clarify so

01:22:49.080 --> 01:22:54.640
 the entrance on from Windsor is that for emergency vehicles or is that is that

01:22:54.640 --> 01:23:02.800
 it's full access yes okay and just to again to clarify this has been approved

01:23:02.800 --> 01:23:08.240
 they're under plats approved they're grading they're under construction good

01:23:08.240 --> 01:23:15.720
 point any other questions for Julie seen none thank you Julie I will close the

01:23:15.720 --> 01:23:27.840
 work session at 6 p.m. we will meet again in council chambers at 630 good

01:23:27.840 --> 01:23:30.320
 evening ladies and gentlemen welcome to the planning and zoning Commission

01:23:30.320 --> 01:23:37.000
 meeting for Wednesday August 7th 2019 I'll call the meeting to order at 634

01:23:37.000 --> 01:23:40.440
 seeing that we do have a quorum the first item of business is to stand and

01:23:40.440 --> 01:23:47.400
 provide the alleged allegiance to the US and Texas flag if able.

01:24:10.720 --> 01:24:15.000
 The next item of business is to consider the planning and zoning Commission

01:24:15.000 --> 01:24:25.200
 minutes for July 17th 2019. Commissioner Ellis. I move approval. We have a first

01:24:25.200 --> 01:24:28.800
 Commissioner Pernetta. Second. We have a first and a second for approval of the

01:24:28.800 --> 01:24:34.440
 minutes any discussion? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on the board.

01:24:41.280 --> 01:24:46.680
 Motion carries six zero with one recuse. Next item of business is the consent

01:24:46.680 --> 01:24:53.800
 agenda consent agenda it's item three and noted that item three B is being

01:24:53.800 --> 01:24:59.720
 pulled so the consent agenda only includes A C D and E. Commissioner Beck.

01:24:59.720 --> 01:25:07.920
 Move to approve consent agenda. Yes we do have a first and just for

01:25:07.920 --> 01:25:10.880
 clarification it's not being pulled from the consent to individual it's being

01:25:10.880 --> 01:25:14.320
 pulled from the agenda completely it's not gonna be heard this evening.

01:25:14.320 --> 01:25:17.960
 Commissioner Smith. Second the motion. We have a first and a second for the

01:25:17.960 --> 01:25:26.440
 consent for a item A C D and E not B. Any discussion? Seeing none I call for a

01:25:26.440 --> 01:25:28.840
 vote on the board.

01:25:33.160 --> 01:25:38.280
 Motion carries seven zero that brings us to our items for individual consideration

01:25:38.280 --> 01:25:42.720
 the first item for a consider request by Commissioner Ellis to reclassify her

01:25:42.720 --> 01:25:52.280
 absence on June 5th 2019. Commissioner Smith. Motion to approve. For

01:25:52.280 --> 01:25:55.960
 clarification. Motion to approve to reclassify her absence as an excused

01:25:55.960 --> 01:26:01.800
 absence. Perfect. Commissioner Pernetta. Second. We have a first and a second for

01:26:01.800 --> 01:26:06.320
 reclassification of the unexcused absence to an excused absence. Any

01:26:06.320 --> 01:26:12.320
 discussion? Seeing none I call for a vote on the board.

01:26:12.320 --> 01:26:22.040
 Motion carries six zero with one recuse and Commissioner Ellis is welcome to

01:26:22.040 --> 01:26:32.720
 come back. The next item for business is item 4B SP 19-003 13A. I'll

01:26:32.720 --> 01:26:36.600
 invite Haley Zygursky for presentation.

01:26:36.600 --> 01:26:44.240
 Good evening this is a request for approval of a site plan within Razor

01:26:44.240 --> 01:26:49.680
 Ranch. The request before you is to consider approval of a site plan for an

01:26:49.680 --> 01:26:53.480
 age-restricted multifamily use on a property that is just over seven acres

01:26:53.480 --> 01:26:58.080
 in size. The property is located south of the future extension of Linden Street

01:26:58.080 --> 01:27:01.520
 east of East Park Boulevard which is a future north-south road through Razor

01:27:01.520 --> 01:27:07.720
 Ranch and north of Panhandle Drive. It's outlined in yellow on the map. Within

01:27:07.720 --> 01:27:12.360
 Razor Ranch all developments on the south campus so everything south of 380 does

01:27:12.360 --> 01:27:14.960
 require that a site plan come through the Planning and Zoning Commission for

01:27:14.960 --> 01:27:19.440
 approval. That site plan is to contain the site plan itself as well as the

01:27:19.440 --> 01:27:25.000
 landscape plan and the building elevations. There are four criteria for

01:27:25.000 --> 01:27:28.440
 approval outlined within the Razor Ranch overlay district. The first being that

01:27:28.440 --> 01:27:31.760
 the site plan substantially comply with the concept or schematic plan approved

01:27:31.760 --> 01:27:35.720
 by the City Council. We'll look at that in just a moment. The second is that the

01:27:35.720 --> 01:27:38.560
 site plan provide for compatible arrangement of buildings and land uses

01:27:38.560 --> 01:27:41.760
 that wouldn't adversely affect any adjoining properties or neighborhoods.

01:27:41.760 --> 01:27:45.600
 Third that the site plan provide for adequate and safe circulation of

01:27:45.600 --> 01:27:49.440
 vehicular traffic and then fourth that the site plan fully comply with all

01:27:49.440 --> 01:27:54.520
 other sections of the overlay district. The base zoning for this property is

01:27:54.520 --> 01:27:58.920
 neighborhood residential mixed-use. It is a part of the Razor Ranch overlay as I

01:27:58.920 --> 01:28:02.040
 mentioned and specifically it's part of what's called the south mixed-use

01:28:02.040 --> 01:28:07.080
 district. So this is the concept plan within the Razor overlay district and

01:28:07.080 --> 01:28:11.320
 everything south of 380 that is not either yellow or red on the map so all

01:28:11.320 --> 01:28:15.200
 of the blues greens and purples are what makes up the south mixed-use district.

01:28:15.200 --> 01:28:19.960
 Multifamily and even specifically age restricted multifamily is a permitted

01:28:19.960 --> 01:28:25.120
 use in this area and if you all remember back in May the development standards

01:28:25.120 --> 01:28:28.960
 for architecture and landscaping came before you all for multifamily uses

01:28:28.960 --> 01:28:34.720
 within this district and those became exhibit C2A of the overlay. So looking

01:28:34.720 --> 01:28:39.080
 at the site plan outline in blue is the rough location of the building. It is one

01:28:39.080 --> 01:28:45.480
 large kind of L or C shaped building. It's just under 520,000 square feet

01:28:45.480 --> 01:28:50.800
 total and would have 212 dwelling units. In the purple or dark blue color on the

01:28:50.800 --> 01:28:55.400
 map are the on-site amenities that are offered. So there are three dog parks one

01:28:55.400 --> 01:28:59.680
 here and then one at either end of the building. There is a large pool amenity

01:28:59.680 --> 01:29:02.880
 here in the corner of the site and then also in the center of the site are

01:29:02.880 --> 01:29:07.320
 things such as bocce ball, pickle ball and raised garden beds. The site is in

01:29:07.320 --> 01:29:11.240
 compliance with all of the DDC requirements for lot coverage, open space,

01:29:11.240 --> 01:29:17.480
 building height and parking. This is the landscape plan for the site. It does

01:29:17.480 --> 01:29:21.200
 exceed the minimum requirements again exceeds the minimum 10% and 20%

01:29:21.200 --> 01:29:24.960
 landscape and tree canopy. Also exceeds the minimum number of street tree

01:29:24.960 --> 01:29:29.160
 plantings. Some of the specific features I wanted to point out or that they are

01:29:29.160 --> 01:29:33.360
 providing a buffer here on the east side as is required between multifamily and

01:29:33.360 --> 01:29:38.240
 single-family because the the portion of razor that's east of this is designated

01:29:38.240 --> 01:29:42.760
 on that concept plan for single-family development. And then outlined in orange

01:29:42.760 --> 01:29:47.480
 here is the perimeter screening fence. So the site will be surrounded by a wrought

01:29:47.480 --> 01:29:52.000
 iron fence with masonry columns. Here at the corner of East Park and Linden that

01:29:52.000 --> 01:29:55.440
 fence will be situated on top of a retaining wall because there is a

01:29:55.440 --> 01:30:01.120
 gradual grade off in either direction on the site. The areas that are circled here

01:30:01.120 --> 01:30:05.480
 on the map are the gates so there is controlled access to the site. This will

01:30:05.480 --> 01:30:10.040
 be the primary entry point off of Linden Street for residential traffic as well

01:30:10.040 --> 01:30:14.560
 as visitors or delivery trucks things of that nature. This would be a resident

01:30:14.560 --> 01:30:19.440
 only gate. So the primary flow of traffic would be in off of Linden Street through

01:30:19.440 --> 01:30:25.160
 the site and then residents could exit either north or south. So looking at the

01:30:25.160 --> 01:30:28.720
 building elevations this would be the view on the top of your screen from

01:30:28.720 --> 01:30:31.920
 Linden Street. What's shown on the bottom is what would be visible from East Park

01:30:31.920 --> 01:30:35.360
 Boulevard. So you can see here that that drive-through feature on the ground

01:30:35.360 --> 01:30:41.120
 floor here is the primary entry point. Looking at a different view of the site

01:30:41.120 --> 01:30:44.560
 this would be the view from Panhandle and then on the bottom side is the view

01:30:44.560 --> 01:30:49.080
 kind of an internal view from within the parking lot. The building materials that

01:30:49.080 --> 01:30:52.520
 have been proposed are a mixture of brick stone and wood look fiber cement

01:30:52.520 --> 01:30:56.520
 siding board as well as some stucco and metal accent elements. All of those are

01:30:56.520 --> 01:31:01.320
 permitted within the razor overlay. So with that staff is recommending approval

01:31:01.320 --> 01:31:04.720
 of the site plan request. It's compliant with all the applicable regulations of

01:31:04.720 --> 01:31:07.760
 the razor range overlay district and meets the four criteria for approval.

01:31:07.760 --> 01:31:12.720
 Happy to stand for any questions. Thank you Haley. I don't see any questions this

01:31:12.720 --> 01:31:22.880
 time. Thank you. Since this isn't a public hearing there's there's not an open

01:31:22.880 --> 01:31:26.660
 meeting or an open call for anyone who wants to speak but I'll open to anyone

01:31:26.660 --> 01:31:31.520
 who wants to speak on the item. You'd have three minutes to speak if

01:31:31.520 --> 01:31:38.040
 wanting and then commissioners yep nevermind. Commissioner Smith. Motion to

01:31:38.040 --> 01:31:42.040
 approve the staff recommendations. We have a first. Commissioner Preneta. Second the

01:31:42.040 --> 01:31:47.480
 motion. We have a first and a second for approval. Any discussion? Seeing none I

01:31:47.480 --> 01:31:59.520
 call for a vote on the board. Motion carries 7-0. Next item for business is

01:31:59.520 --> 01:32:07.440
 item 4C ADP 19-0002 and I'll invite Julie Wyatt for discussion.

01:32:14.000 --> 01:32:22.280
 Good evening I'm Julie Wyatt and I am presenting ADP 19-2 forest crossing to

01:32:22.280 --> 01:32:27.600
 you. So the request before you is an alternative development plan for a

01:32:27.600 --> 01:32:32.600
 multifamily development on about 15 acres. The purpose of this alternative

01:32:32.600 --> 01:32:37.280
 development plan is so that they can deviate from three provisions within

01:32:37.280 --> 01:32:42.240
 subchapter 13 of the Denton Development Code. The subject property is

01:32:42.240 --> 01:32:47.520
 located north of McKinney and west of Mayhill. Here the property is

01:32:47.520 --> 01:32:55.560
 outlined in yellow. Some background on the site it was rezoned in 2017 to CMG

01:32:55.560 --> 01:33:02.440
 and then I do have a wrong incorrect date on this. The SUP was approved last

01:33:02.440 --> 01:33:08.840
 last month in 2019 a specific use permit for multifamily development. So this came

01:33:08.840 --> 01:33:14.440
 before you a month before in June and that approval included the site plan, a

01:33:14.440 --> 01:33:21.360
 landscape plan and elevations. So the provisions within or the the proposal

01:33:21.360 --> 01:33:26.560
 within the ADP includes three three provisions. The first being at least 50%

01:33:26.560 --> 01:33:30.360
 of the front yard frontage shall have buildings within 20 feet of the front

01:33:30.360 --> 01:33:36.040
 property line or within 30 feet of the curb line of a private street. Due to the

01:33:36.040 --> 01:33:41.160
 the unique property boundary of the site it's it's it's kind of within the

01:33:41.160 --> 01:33:45.200
 middle of a doughnut where there's where there's undeveloped commercial property

01:33:45.200 --> 01:33:49.280
 between the subject property and the rights of way and then it's accessed by

01:33:49.280 --> 01:33:53.640
 some narrow strips of land where it's just really to accommodate a driveway. So

01:33:53.640 --> 01:33:57.400
 based upon the site configuration it really is impossible for them to meet

01:33:57.400 --> 01:34:02.160
 this requirement. The second would be the parking areas are not permitted between

01:34:02.160 --> 01:34:05.440
 the buildings in the street that they would need to be toward the side or the

01:34:05.440 --> 01:34:10.000
 rear. Once again due to the site configuration and they're going to be

01:34:10.000 --> 01:34:13.920
 commercial properties or commercial development between the subject property

01:34:13.920 --> 01:34:18.600
 and the right of way and so so once this mixed-use area has fully developed

01:34:18.600 --> 01:34:23.360
 those parking areas will be screened from the right of way and in addition

01:34:23.360 --> 01:34:28.400
 there's also landscaping in the area. There are also six faces near that south

01:34:28.400 --> 01:34:32.240
 entrance that's for guest parking and that is screened with landscaping and

01:34:32.240 --> 01:34:35.920
 then finally that adjacent building shall have different elevations. The

01:34:35.920 --> 01:34:40.120
 applicant is proposing elevations or architectural details that are

01:34:40.120 --> 01:34:45.280
 consistent among the among all of the buildings but with a variety of colors

01:34:45.280 --> 01:34:50.000
 to differentiate the buildings. So the site plan is something you've seen

01:34:50.000 --> 01:34:54.680
 before the the blue area being that that doughnut that that future commercial

01:34:54.680 --> 01:34:59.720
 piece of that this mixed-use area. The subject property it doesn't have any any

01:34:59.720 --> 01:35:04.560
 color on it but it does have the buildings outlined in purple. Those

01:35:04.560 --> 01:35:09.240
 parking areas between the buildings and the right of way are are outlined in

01:35:09.240 --> 01:35:16.000
 that orange color. There are 12 multifamily buildings and and as part of

01:35:16.000 --> 01:35:19.960
 the SUP and as part of the deliberation by council council asked that the

01:35:19.960 --> 01:35:26.600
 applicant look for opportunities to to increase the tree canopy on the site and

01:35:26.600 --> 01:35:31.080
 to preserve some of those existing trees. So so as part of staff's

01:35:31.080 --> 01:35:35.480
 recommendation we're just adding a condition that they could if they if

01:35:35.480 --> 01:35:40.160
 they wanted to be able to comply with the provision in sub chapter 13 of the

01:35:40.160 --> 01:35:45.120
 Denton Development Code that you can decrease parking if you increase your

01:35:45.120 --> 01:35:53.320
 tree tree preservation. This is a portion of the landscape plan just showing kind

01:35:53.320 --> 01:35:56.440
 of where those parking areas are in relation to the tree plantings that

01:35:56.440 --> 01:36:00.440
 they're proposing. Here's that arm going out toward May Hill and then the arm

01:36:00.440 --> 01:36:03.440
 going to McKinney and you can see those parking areas really are going to be

01:36:03.440 --> 01:36:08.320
 pretty screened from that from the the landscaping. And then here are the

01:36:08.320 --> 01:36:13.960
 elevations once again consistent architectural themes throughout but with

01:36:13.960 --> 01:36:20.040
 those pops of color of the burgundy the yellow and then the orange. The criteria

01:36:20.040 --> 01:36:24.780
 for approval for alternative development plans is in sub chapter 13 of the Denton

01:36:24.780 --> 01:36:30.680
 Development Code. There's five. First is it preserve existing neighborhoods. This

01:36:30.680 --> 01:36:35.160
 is an emerging multi or a mixed-use area and that multifamily is a component of

01:36:35.160 --> 01:36:39.000
 that is essential because it does provide that critical mass of people for

01:36:39.000 --> 01:36:44.200
 to support commercial and retail and employment uses. So it meets that

01:36:44.200 --> 01:36:49.640
 criteria to assure quality development. The intent of this is not to lower

01:36:49.640 --> 01:36:53.360
 design standards but just to facilitate the development of the site particularly

01:36:53.360 --> 01:36:57.800
 with that unique property boundary. This property has also had additional

01:36:57.800 --> 01:37:01.600
 scrutiny in that it went through that SUP process. So this site plan has been to

01:37:01.600 --> 01:37:05.920
 you and it's also been approved by City Council to focus new development to

01:37:05.920 --> 01:37:10.660
 activity center centers. May Hill is currently under construction and

01:37:10.660 --> 01:37:14.760
 McKinney is about to be and and so there's been a lot of investment in the

01:37:14.760 --> 01:37:17.840
 corridors in this area and so the development of the site really is a

01:37:17.840 --> 01:37:22.960
 logical conclusion of that investment. Ensure infrastructure can accommodate

01:37:22.960 --> 01:37:26.600
 development that those corridors are being constructed and will be able to

01:37:26.600 --> 01:37:31.560
 handle any additional capacity. And then finally that results in a high quality

01:37:31.560 --> 01:37:35.480
 development meeting the intent of the standards. Due to the doughnut

01:37:35.480 --> 01:37:40.360
 configuration there is a restriction of the ability to meet the requirements but

01:37:40.360 --> 01:37:43.600
 it actually does result in a design that's appropriate for mixed use because

01:37:43.600 --> 01:37:48.760
 it does separate the residential portion from those high capacity roads and

01:37:48.760 --> 01:37:53.000
 provides that buffer and transition area. The parking areas are dispersed

01:37:53.000 --> 01:37:56.400
 throughout the site allowing the buildings in the parking areas and dry

01:37:56.400 --> 01:38:01.600
 valves to really create a grid, create more connectivity within the site and

01:38:01.600 --> 01:38:06.280
 then that consistent architectural design will will allow for a cohesive

01:38:06.280 --> 01:38:11.320
 appearance as this area develops. So based upon the criteria for approval

01:38:11.320 --> 01:38:15.200
 staff recommends approval of the request and I know there was a question

01:38:15.200 --> 01:38:19.720
 regarding the trees and work session and I just wanted to follow up so if so the

01:38:19.720 --> 01:38:24.520
 code allows for a 15% reduction if additional trees are saved. That would be

01:38:24.520 --> 01:38:32.560
 77 spaces out of the 515 and then which would require an additional 925 inches

01:38:32.560 --> 01:38:37.560
 of quality trees be be saved on site. It's a pretty tall order. I've talked

01:38:37.560 --> 01:38:40.960
 with the applicant and I think she can talk more to how many parking spaces

01:38:40.960 --> 01:38:46.120
 they really could reduce in order to save additional trees. And I'll stand for

01:38:46.120 --> 01:38:51.600
 any questions. Thank you Julie. I don't see any. I know the applicant is here and

01:38:51.600 --> 01:38:58.000
 so I'll invite Amy Bissett. I think she has some clarifying points to make.

01:38:58.000 --> 01:39:06.600
 Good evening Commissioners. Amy Bissett, 212 South Elm, Denton 76201 and I do have

01:39:06.600 --> 01:39:10.480
 a couple of slides but I just want to start by addressing the there are a

01:39:10.480 --> 01:39:16.000
 couple of questions in the work session about the building elevations and the

01:39:16.000 --> 01:39:22.600
 proposed variation in colors and the applicants or the developers commitment

01:39:22.600 --> 01:39:28.320
 to those colors and how the city will be able to hold them responsible for

01:39:28.320 --> 01:39:32.460
 actually building what they have proposed. I can tell you that the

01:39:32.460 --> 01:39:37.680
 building permit is in second review with the city and is consistent with the

01:39:37.680 --> 01:39:42.080
 elevations that you see tonight. There are very few comments left to

01:39:42.080 --> 01:39:48.280
 address before the building permit is ready for approval. However I would

01:39:48.280 --> 01:39:54.960
 offer and and would be comfortable committing to the developer to this that

01:39:54.960 --> 01:39:59.200
 and that building permit set can be routed for review back to Julie to make

01:39:59.200 --> 01:40:04.280
 sure that it's consistent with what's being proposed here and and that the

01:40:04.280 --> 01:40:09.720
 permit approval would be conditioned upon actually implementing what was

01:40:09.720 --> 01:40:15.680
 proposed and approved as a part of the SUP. As it relates to tree preservation

01:40:15.680 --> 01:40:20.000
 versus parking and I want to give you a little bit of history here when we first

01:40:20.000 --> 01:40:28.360
 started the site plan for this project we had roughly 458 spaces and it was

01:40:28.360 --> 01:40:33.320
 that site plan was originally created before the new parking code was adopted

01:40:33.320 --> 01:40:37.120
 but it hadn't been submitted yet so we had to we had to scrounge together

01:40:37.120 --> 01:40:43.440
 another 50 plus spaces to be able to comply with the new parking code so what

01:40:43.440 --> 01:40:48.200
 I've done is I've broken out for you on a slide here how we've met that parking

01:40:48.200 --> 01:40:53.120
 code so each one bedroom unit requires one and a quarter spaces each two

01:40:53.120 --> 01:40:57.260
 bedroom unit requires two spaces and then above and beyond that is in another

01:40:57.260 --> 01:41:04.120
 ten percent that's required for guest parking and we after the the City

01:41:04.120 --> 01:41:08.880
 Council meeting and last month there were some some council members who

01:41:08.880 --> 01:41:12.280
 specifically said we'd really like to see you go back and revisit the site

01:41:12.280 --> 01:41:17.560
 plan and try to preserve more trees and you know trade-off parking for trees and

01:41:17.560 --> 01:41:22.480
 so I had a conversation with the property developer and at that point in

01:41:22.480 --> 01:41:26.640
 time we there's the time constraints with trying to close on the property and

01:41:26.640 --> 01:41:31.440
 develop the property we couldn't amend the site plan and bring it to to you

01:41:31.440 --> 01:41:35.240
 with an ADP there were just too many moving pieces from a design standpoint

01:41:35.240 --> 01:41:42.400
 with the full civil set and the building plans and so so what we what we told the

01:41:42.400 --> 01:41:46.080
 city that we would do is you know if we get through the approval process and we

01:41:46.080 --> 01:41:49.140
 have building permits and there's an opportunity to have a conversation with

01:41:49.140 --> 01:41:55.480
 the city about reducing parking and saving some trees we're open to that but

01:41:55.480 --> 01:42:02.560
 I can tell you that it's it's gonna be challenging to reduce by very many and

01:42:02.560 --> 01:42:05.600
 the reason for that is you know we're already if you look at our tree

01:42:05.600 --> 01:42:10.720
 preservation and mitigation table we've really already gone through and counted

01:42:10.720 --> 01:42:15.020
 every tree possible to preserve even those with within the construction

01:42:15.020 --> 01:42:18.760
 envelope that are gonna be challenging to preserve is that is there an

01:42:18.760 --> 01:42:22.600
 opportunity to have some conversation about you know five or six spaces may be

01:42:22.600 --> 01:42:27.400
 that are in an area that's heavily treed absolutely but the developers gonna want

01:42:27.400 --> 01:42:34.280
 to park to market demand and and not want to significantly change the site in

01:42:34.280 --> 01:42:40.120
 such a way that it would affect drainage plans and civil plans that would take us

01:42:40.120 --> 01:42:43.840
 back to the drawing board so we certainly want to make an effort for tree

01:42:43.840 --> 01:42:48.360
 preservation and we appreciate it being added to the ADP and we've already made

01:42:48.360 --> 01:42:54.080
 quite a bit of effort for tree preservation and leading up up to tonight

01:42:54.080 --> 01:43:00.920
 but to Commissioner Prenada's concerns about eliminating too many parking

01:43:00.920 --> 01:43:05.400
 spaces I there's no way that we could eliminate eliminate more than a handful

01:43:05.400 --> 01:43:14.600
 so so and we appreciate you being here for clarification you said you created a

01:43:14.600 --> 01:43:19.880
 plan under one parking requirement and then you had to come back with an

01:43:19.880 --> 01:43:25.240
 additional 47 so it seems like you had a plan with 47 less parking spaces but now

01:43:25.240 --> 01:43:30.240
 you're saying that only a handful can be removed we did sure so our original

01:43:30.240 --> 01:43:35.680
 plan you know it was created early on but not submitted to the city because we

01:43:35.680 --> 01:43:41.720
 were still in the process of getting all the building footprints solidified and by

01:43:41.720 --> 01:43:44.920
 the time we got ready to submit to the city the parking code had changed

01:43:44.920 --> 01:43:49.000
 requiring the additional ten percent guest parking so and we went in and

01:43:49.000 --> 01:43:53.320
 added that in the reason that it would be challenging to eliminate all of that

01:43:53.320 --> 01:43:59.520
 is it would significantly change the civil plans at this point which are about

01:43:59.520 --> 01:44:04.960
 ninety nine percent of the way approved so we want to we want to certainly want

01:44:04.960 --> 01:44:09.760
 to do what we can to to preserve more trees but we're gonna have to find a

01:44:09.760 --> 01:44:15.040
 balance with also being able to meet the financing deadlines and timelines to get

01:44:15.040 --> 01:44:19.560
 the project under construction so really significant changes to the civil plans

01:44:19.560 --> 01:44:24.560
 at this point would be problematic sir I certainly appreciate it and for the

01:44:24.560 --> 01:44:29.280
 record I I was against increasing the parking to begin with for multifamily so

01:44:29.280 --> 01:44:33.720
 I totally understand this is one reason or evidence that by not increasing the

01:44:33.720 --> 01:44:37.320
 parking when we did we wouldn't by nature we probably have more trees in

01:44:37.320 --> 01:44:42.960
 this property we're requiring you to do more parking so I certainly appreciate

01:44:42.960 --> 01:44:48.800
 and you being here to respond to that question and to clarify the where there's

01:44:48.800 --> 01:44:52.080
 some question about whether or not we could actually reduce parking at all to

01:44:52.080 --> 01:44:57.640
 preserve trees because I think the way that the that the relief for parking is

01:44:57.640 --> 01:45:03.320
 written first we would have to eliminate the 774 inches that we're mitigating for

01:45:03.320 --> 01:45:08.280
 and then reduce beyond that I'm not certain about that but that is a

01:45:08.280 --> 01:45:14.600
 question as well where even if we made heroic efforts to read to preserve the

01:45:14.600 --> 01:45:17.960
 trees that we're already having to mitigate for we'd have to go above and

01:45:17.960 --> 01:45:22.440
 beyond that to decrease parking and the way the codes written today I believe

01:45:22.440 --> 01:45:35.160
 Commissioner Sanchez so I guess my understanding is would you prefer not to

01:45:35.160 --> 01:45:41.080
 reduce of parking spaces because of the current the way it's already been

01:45:41.080 --> 01:45:45.880
 created the plants has been created is that your preference the preference and

01:45:45.880 --> 01:45:50.600
 from a timing standpoint is we need to be under construction as quickly as

01:45:50.600 --> 01:45:56.060
 possible and so the more significant changes that would be made the slower

01:45:56.060 --> 01:46:03.360
 that would be so from from a from a we wanted we want to do the best for this

01:46:03.360 --> 01:46:09.080
 project we'd love to preserve more trees but we have to balance that with speed

01:46:09.080 --> 01:46:12.360
 to construction at this point and being this late in the game it would be

01:46:12.360 --> 01:46:17.200
 difficult to eliminate more than just a handful of parking spaces that were very

01:46:17.200 --> 01:46:22.120
 like low-hanging fruit easy we can do this without it changing the full set of

01:46:22.120 --> 01:46:31.560
 civil plans so so you stated that just a handful of parking spaces and we're

01:46:31.560 --> 01:46:36.040
 talking about trees over 12 inch inches in diameter right and you you've already

01:46:36.040 --> 01:46:41.160
 surveyed the area and determined which trees you can save and have you have you

01:46:41.160 --> 01:46:46.200
 any idea of how many trees over 12 inches are still out there that you would

01:46:46.200 --> 01:46:50.480
 cut is there any kind of record I don't know I don't know that off the top of my

01:46:50.480 --> 01:46:54.640
 head we do have a full comprehensive tree survey with every tree identified

01:46:54.640 --> 01:46:58.880
 whether it's a quality tree what species it is and how big it is so

01:46:58.880 --> 01:47:03.160
 overlaying that with you know the parking or the paving plan and being able

01:47:03.160 --> 01:47:10.120
 to say okay there might be you know a handful here is a reasonable exercise but

01:47:10.120 --> 01:47:13.880
 frankly it would be after we get building permit and get moving so it

01:47:13.880 --> 01:47:19.520
 would not it would not we couldn't do it to the extent that we could cut out 50

01:47:19.520 --> 01:47:25.640
 spaces and have to to re-engineer the site plan does that adequately answer

01:47:25.640 --> 01:47:31.000
 your question yeah I guess I have one more question is if is there any other

01:47:31.000 --> 01:47:35.600
 you talked about eliminating parking spaces is there any kind of other

01:47:35.600 --> 01:47:41.480
 discussion you had that you could do something in addition to to the area say

01:47:41.480 --> 01:47:48.040
 removing some other kind of landscaping area that you could do to mitigate those

01:47:48.040 --> 01:47:52.640
 if those trees are found in an area that you can do that without have you talked

01:47:52.640 --> 01:47:57.440
 about that at all yes so we went through a lengthy and significant exercise where

01:47:57.440 --> 01:48:03.080
 I can attest that I personally went through every tree by hand to look at

01:48:03.080 --> 01:48:07.480
 where it is on the site plan and whether there's any opportunity to preserve it

01:48:07.480 --> 01:48:12.580
 to increase our preservation to the maximum extent possible and without

01:48:12.580 --> 01:48:18.000
 losing buildings or you having to alter the site plan to the point of starting

01:48:18.000 --> 01:48:22.120
 over in the design process so we have looked at and literally I've gone with

01:48:22.120 --> 01:48:27.400
 our landscape architect tree by tree to talk about whether or not there's a way

01:48:27.400 --> 01:48:33.680
 to preserve it when it might have not originally been intended to be

01:48:33.680 --> 01:48:40.480
 preserved and if you did that what did you come up with if you went if you

01:48:40.480 --> 01:48:47.040
 already did that evaluation and came by tree to tree what did you come up with

01:48:47.040 --> 01:48:50.960
 any kind of about you know not not just say okay it's there was 13 trees five

01:48:50.960 --> 01:48:54.920
 trees that we can actually keep and that's going to eliminate for parking

01:48:54.920 --> 01:48:58.520
 places well I'm sorry I think I misunderstood your question we did that

01:48:58.520 --> 01:49:03.160
 leading up to the tree preservation table that's displayed right now as a

01:49:03.160 --> 01:49:06.760
 part of our specific use permit where we wanted to demonstrate that we had

01:49:06.760 --> 01:49:12.000
 preserved as many trees as we could and complied with code so and had we had

01:49:12.000 --> 01:49:17.000
 this conversation several months ago when we had the site plan drawn at 400

01:49:17.000 --> 01:49:21.440
 and some odd spaces you bet the tree preservation would be higher today but

01:49:21.440 --> 01:49:26.200
 at this point with the current site plan we've made a significant effort to try

01:49:26.200 --> 01:49:29.920
 to preserve as many trees as we can and and while we're willing to have a

01:49:29.920 --> 01:49:33.880
 conversation about a trade-off for some parking for trees if it doesn't

01:49:33.880 --> 01:49:38.200
 significantly change plans it would be after building permit and it would not

01:49:38.200 --> 01:49:43.120
 be a significant number we have not been through the exercise of how many could

01:49:43.120 --> 01:49:48.920
 how many could we save versus how many parking spaces I can tell you that you

01:49:48.920 --> 01:49:55.000
 know at 12 DB each per parking space that's a lot of trees to just for a

01:49:55.000 --> 01:50:00.640
 handful of parking spaces you know so it's going to be challenging to to

01:50:00.640 --> 01:50:06.400
 eliminate very many parking spaces even if we wanted to which we don't thank

01:50:06.400 --> 01:50:14.440
 you a real fast just to clarify the the city has asked you to put new parking

01:50:14.440 --> 01:50:19.200
 spaces in by code you did that brought it back to this city and they said

01:50:19.200 --> 01:50:23.400
 reduce the number of parking spaces or try your best to reduce them after they

01:50:23.400 --> 01:50:31.840
 voted for code that made you put more in I don't see any other questions so I

01:50:31.840 --> 01:50:36.400
 appreciate you being here and oh Christian back thank you chair thank you

01:50:36.400 --> 01:50:40.680
 Amy for your presentation I remembered what it was I was going to ask you I

01:50:40.680 --> 01:50:43.920
 actually I'm excited about this development I'm not going to have any

01:50:43.920 --> 01:50:51.280
 problem approving the ADP what I really like about this development is that it's

01:50:51.280 --> 01:50:56.920
 bordered by primary and secondary arterial which accommodates public

01:50:56.920 --> 01:51:00.200
 transportation and that's important because this is an area where you got a

01:51:00.200 --> 01:51:06.960
 large contingent low and middle income working families over there so just a

01:51:06.960 --> 01:51:12.680
 question for you based on that does the applicant have any intent of setting

01:51:12.680 --> 01:51:17.040
 aside a certain percentage of the apartments that would accommodate low

01:51:17.040 --> 01:51:21.200
 income families my understanding from the developer at this point in time is

01:51:21.200 --> 01:51:28.280
 that it will be market rate okay all right thank you thank you thank you this

01:51:28.280 --> 01:51:31.240
 is not a public hearing but if anyone is wanting to speak on this item we can

01:51:31.240 --> 01:51:38.680
 certainly listen if you can just state your name and address for the record

01:51:38.680 --> 01:51:44.840
 you have three minutes to speak my name is Rebecca Dick Stein I live at 2224

01:51:44.840 --> 01:51:54.160
 Northlake Trail in Denton 76201 and I want to point out that trees benefit

01:51:54.160 --> 01:52:03.560
 everybody they mitigate air quality in our city and they also provide shade

01:52:03.560 --> 01:52:08.720
 they lower costs for buildings and cooling and I would urge you to vote

01:52:08.720 --> 01:52:16.760
 for the trees thank you thank you anyone else want to speak on this item I'll

01:52:16.760 --> 01:52:20.680
 turn to the dais for discussion or motion Christopher Smith motion to

01:52:20.680 --> 01:52:26.840
 prove ADP 19-0002 is there a condition there's a one condition with staff

01:52:26.840 --> 01:52:34.200
 recommendations okay perfect okay Commissioner Beck second we have a first

01:52:34.200 --> 01:52:39.440
 and a second for approval with staff recommendations any discussion see none

01:52:39.440 --> 01:52:46.920
 I'll call for vote on the board okay so the recommendation is that we approve

01:52:46.920 --> 01:52:55.640
 it with this consideration of the parking lots right okay I just wanted to

01:52:55.640 --> 01:53:01.640
 say that listening to to the representative here I mean they've done

01:53:01.640 --> 01:53:06.600
 everything that they were asked to do we all understand that trees are very

01:53:06.600 --> 01:53:10.320
 important but they've already met that that minimum requirement or that

01:53:10.320 --> 01:53:15.440
 requirement that the city has so it's my it's hard for me you know we give them

01:53:15.440 --> 01:53:20.440
 standards to to how they should build and then we come back and say okay now

01:53:20.440 --> 01:53:26.240
 we want you to do some more more work because we decided we want more trees

01:53:26.240 --> 01:53:29.840
 I'm not against trees I'm all for trees but at the same time we have to

01:53:29.840 --> 01:53:35.960
 understand that I believe we have to look at what we required from them at

01:53:35.960 --> 01:53:40.560
 the beginning and not change our mind as we as we go on and we made this

01:53:40.560 --> 01:53:44.280
 requirement that we would require a certain amount of parking spaces they

01:53:44.280 --> 01:53:48.120
 met that and they've worked real hard to do that so I would have to vote against

01:53:48.120 --> 01:53:56.040
 it simply because it has that additional recommendation there I just want to

01:53:56.040 --> 01:54:03.200
 state that thank you Mr. Christopher back if I may to address Commissioner

01:54:03.200 --> 01:54:08.600
 Sanchez's concern again this isn't going to force them to lose I mean it's not an

01:54:08.600 --> 01:54:11.960
 absolute they have to meet a certain criteria which will probably be

01:54:11.960 --> 01:54:20.600
 difficult to me I can't I can barely hear you I'm speaking right this this

01:54:20.600 --> 01:54:27.080
 recommendation is not something that's going to absolutely reduce the number of

01:54:27.080 --> 01:54:30.680
 parkings there it's just a recommendation that if you find certain

01:54:30.680 --> 01:54:35.640
 trees that meet certain dimensions consider saving them at a loss of

01:54:35.640 --> 01:54:40.800
 parking but there's not a an iron-fisted demand here that they reduce it any more

01:54:40.800 --> 01:54:45.480
 than that so it's just it's just a suggestion to try and find room to

01:54:45.480 --> 01:54:49.920
 preserve more trees if they can but looking at the criteria that's going to

01:54:49.920 --> 01:54:53.760
 be pretty difficult in my opinion so for what it's worth

01:54:53.760 --> 01:54:59.160
 pressure Sanchez I understand that but at the same time we did we have them

01:54:59.160 --> 01:55:02.640
 they already went through that effort we discussed that I mean they followed what

01:55:02.640 --> 01:55:07.680
 we asked them now we're going back and say okay go it's still time money that

01:55:07.680 --> 01:55:12.000
 you know and are they gonna find them she said based on what they did they

01:55:12.000 --> 01:55:17.840
 pretty much there's not gonna be maybe one or two parking spots if maybe that

01:55:17.840 --> 01:55:22.520
 that's my understanding there's not not gonna be that many parking spots and it

01:55:22.520 --> 01:55:27.120
 takes quite a few trees even to cover one spot are they gonna have that many

01:55:27.120 --> 01:55:34.280
 trees it it's money that they've already going to have to invest and they on

01:55:34.280 --> 01:55:38.560
 something that we should have had that from the beginning we we made the

01:55:38.560 --> 01:55:42.480
 decision a long time ago or the city made that these are the number of parking

01:55:42.480 --> 01:55:47.880
 spots we need and I believe it was based on the fact that a lot of these

01:55:47.880 --> 01:55:52.080
 apartment complexes don't have enough parking spots so are we gonna go back up

01:55:52.080 --> 01:55:56.440
 now and say okay we're gonna make an exception here are we gonna start doing

01:55:56.440 --> 01:56:04.640
 that in every apartment complex we need to treat them all the same

01:56:04.640 --> 01:56:11.280
 seeing no other discussion we do have a first and a second from Commissioner

01:56:11.280 --> 01:56:16.640
 Smith and Commissioner Beck for approval I'll call for a vote on the board

01:56:16.640 --> 01:56:27.040
 motion carries six one next item of business is our public hearings first

01:56:27.040 --> 01:56:36.280
 one is item 5a AESA 19 - 0 0 0 1 B this item was previously opened to the

01:56:36.280 --> 01:56:42.160
 public hearing I believe last meeting and so at this point since the item has

01:56:42.160 --> 01:56:46.320
 already been open we're seeking a motion to postpone this item to a date certain

01:56:46.320 --> 01:56:53.680
 of August 21st Christian Smith motion to postpone to date certain of August 21st

01:56:53.680 --> 01:56:58.440
 second emotion we have a first and a second to postpone to a date certain of

01:56:58.440 --> 01:57:06.760
 August 21st any discussion seeing none I call for a vote on the board

01:57:06.760 --> 01:57:19.880
 motion carries six zero with one recuse I'll invite Commissioner Cole back to

01:57:19.880 --> 01:57:28.920
 the dais move us to the next item 5b z 19 - 0 0 0 6 a I'll invite Julie Wyatt for

01:57:28.920 --> 01:57:31.360
 presentation

01:57:31.360 --> 01:57:43.280
 all right good evening this is z 19 6a fireside park so the request before you

01:57:43.280 --> 01:57:49.240
 is to amend ordinance 2 0 1 5 - 2 1 7 to revise overlay conditions on

01:57:49.240 --> 01:57:55.000
 approximately 30 acres of land-zoned neighborhood residential 3 the subject

01:57:55.000 --> 01:57:59.680
 property is outlined in yellow on your screen and it is at the corner of Windsor

01:57:59.680 --> 01:58:07.660
 and Hinkle some background on the site in 2002 it was zoned in our - during the

01:58:07.660 --> 01:58:14.600
 citywide rezoning there was subject of a rezoning case in 2007 at that time it

01:58:14.600 --> 01:58:20.240
 was rezoned from NR 2 to NR 3 with overlay conditions this project was part

01:58:20.240 --> 01:58:25.720
 of a very specific concept plan and as part of that there were those overlay

01:58:25.720 --> 01:58:30.720
 conditions directing how the site would be designed were were put on the

01:58:30.720 --> 01:58:37.400
 property in 2015 that that project was was not developed so a new developer

01:58:37.400 --> 01:58:42.640
 came in in 2015 at that time he was wanting to develop a age-restricted

01:58:42.640 --> 01:58:47.720
 property single-family neighborhood once again also a part of it a pretty

01:58:47.720 --> 01:58:52.800
 specific concept plan that included smaller lots with a lot of common open

01:58:52.800 --> 01:58:57.560
 space particularly around the perimeter of the site that was approved with

01:58:57.560 --> 01:59:01.920
 overlay conditions those overlay conditions are on your screen they were

01:59:01.920 --> 01:59:04.920
 there were four of them and these what kind of related to the overlay

01:59:04.920 --> 01:59:09.560
 conditions from 2007 first that a perimeter fence with a wrought-iron fence

01:59:09.560 --> 01:59:16.320
 would be installed and that the setback of the homes from the existing curb

01:59:16.320 --> 01:59:23.480
 would be 50 foot minimum so that would be from Windsor and Hinkle the and the

01:59:23.480 --> 01:59:31.400
 HOA would maintain the the open spaces it also required 100% masonry for for

01:59:31.400 --> 01:59:36.240
 the single-family homes on the site three car garages could not face the

01:59:36.240 --> 01:59:41.520
 public or private right of way and then any ingress or egress could not remove

01:59:41.520 --> 01:59:46.480
 any bike lanes on Hinkle so that was a part of that that specific site design

01:59:46.480 --> 01:59:52.360
 that was not developed however a new developer came in and in 2018 a plot was

01:59:52.360 --> 01:59:55.880
 a final plot was approved and it was filed of record and it's currently under

01:59:55.880 --> 02:00:02.480
 construction they're putting in the the water and sewer in streets and and as

02:00:02.480 --> 02:00:07.280
 part of his development he is requesting a modification of those overlay

02:00:07.280 --> 02:00:12.420
 restrictions so those those previous concept plans that were specific to

02:00:12.420 --> 02:00:17.360
 those those specific projects were not developed and he's developed it in more

02:00:17.360 --> 02:00:24.340
 of a typical single-family neighborhood pattern with houses backing Windsor and

02:00:24.340 --> 02:00:28.680
 Hinkle so that their backyards would be on those arterial Hinkle's a collector

02:00:28.680 --> 02:00:34.680
 and then and then Windsor is an arterial so he is requesting to modify that

02:00:34.680 --> 02:00:39.680
 perimeter fencing to allow opaque fencing for privacy for homeowners along

02:00:39.680 --> 02:00:45.720
 those rights of way and to reduce the setback those that 50 foot to 40 feet

02:00:45.720 --> 02:00:50.600
 and then that varied exterior building materials he's requesting that instead

02:00:50.600 --> 02:00:57.160
 of that 100% masonry to reduce that to 70% masonry his request would not modify

02:00:57.160 --> 02:01:00.800
 the underlying zoning so it would not increase the density or introduce new

02:01:00.800 --> 02:01:07.120
 uses in fact they're already platted lots so here's here's the the language

02:01:07.120 --> 02:01:11.280
 that he is requesting that that perimeter fence be constructed of a six

02:01:11.280 --> 02:01:15.600
 foot tall board on board cedar fence with a top railing cap that there would

02:01:15.600 --> 02:01:21.700
 be stone and or brick columns constructed every 100 linear feet along

02:01:21.700 --> 02:01:26.360
 the street perimeter and at any corners in any terminus that there would be a

02:01:26.360 --> 02:01:29.920
 vertical landscape element between those 100 feet columns so there would be

02:01:29.920 --> 02:01:34.120
 something every 50 feet and then also street trees would be planted along

02:01:34.120 --> 02:01:38.320
 Windsor and Hinkle they would be alternating shade and ornamental trees

02:01:38.320 --> 02:01:44.600
 and they would be planted every 20 feet on center the HOA would maintain that

02:01:44.600 --> 02:01:49.280
 that perimeter fence if this is approved as well as that landscaping along Windsor

02:01:49.280 --> 02:01:54.720
 and Hinkle as I said he's requested a reduction in that minimum masonry from

02:01:54.720 --> 02:02:01.480
 100% to 70% but as we've discussed many times that due to a recent House bill

02:02:01.480 --> 02:02:06.920
 and a new state of Texas laws we are no longer as the city of Denton we can't

02:02:06.920 --> 02:02:12.480
 enforce that minimum masonry so staff has actually requested that that just be

02:02:12.480 --> 02:02:16.060
 removed just to prevent confusion in the past because it's just not something we

02:02:16.060 --> 02:02:22.360
 can enforce he's also requesting to reduce that set back from 40 50 feet to

02:02:22.360 --> 02:02:26.920
 40 feet and then leaving the the provision about cars and ingress and

02:02:26.920 --> 02:02:34.560
 ingress in place so here is a depiction of what if approved the the fencing and

02:02:34.560 --> 02:02:38.400
 the landscaping along Windsor and Hinkle would look like once again the

02:02:38.400 --> 02:02:44.240
 alternating shade trees the cedar board on board fence with the masonry columns

02:02:44.240 --> 02:02:50.080
 and then the landscaping element in the center here's a depiction of what that

02:02:50.080 --> 02:02:57.520
 what the the setbacks look like so so here is here's Hinkle and just as an

02:02:57.520 --> 02:03:02.520
 example I've chosen a lot that that yellow box that represents 50 feet from

02:03:02.520 --> 02:03:07.520
 the curb so that's that would be that rear yard setback if 50 feet stays in

02:03:07.520 --> 02:03:12.480
 place he is requesting a reduction to 40 feet so you can see that that 40 feet is

02:03:12.480 --> 02:03:17.200
 that red and then that's kind of that this hatch line is sort of the depiction

02:03:17.200 --> 02:03:21.480
 of what that would look down the street the current development code only

02:03:21.480 --> 02:03:25.560
 requires a 10-foot rear setback so this portion in green is actually if it was

02:03:25.560 --> 02:03:29.880
 just base minimum code what the minimum rear setback would be so that's on

02:03:29.880 --> 02:03:33.960
 Hinkle on Windsor is a little different because the property lines start very

02:03:33.960 --> 02:03:40.600
 far from that existing curb so the yellow really really wouldn't impact the

02:03:40.600 --> 02:03:46.640
 that 50 feet really wouldn't impact those properties very much and then and

02:03:46.640 --> 02:03:50.680
 then you can see how the other so so that doesn't come into play as much as

02:03:50.680 --> 02:03:54.120
 it does on Hinkle there was a question in work session about what that looks

02:03:54.120 --> 02:03:58.400
 like on the street and so I just added this and just so you can kind of see how

02:03:58.400 --> 02:04:05.160
 Windsor looks up and down the street so these houses are set back about 45 43 to

02:04:05.160 --> 02:04:10.680
 45 feet that front yard setback this has bowling green park so it has a much

02:04:10.680 --> 02:04:17.120
 larger setback for these houses so so if and I don't have it depicted on here but

02:04:17.120 --> 02:04:22.920
 but that that 40 foot setback would would sort of maintain that line along

02:04:22.920 --> 02:04:26.520
 Windsor except for obviously here because of that park that's separating

02:04:26.520 --> 02:04:33.360
 the Windsor from the residential lots the criteria for approval is in sub

02:04:33.360 --> 02:04:36.600
 chapter 3 of the debt and development code first is it meet the future land

02:04:36.600 --> 02:04:41.080
 use and then second does it provide for adequate public infrastructure so first

02:04:41.080 --> 02:04:45.160
 we look at the future land use element of Denton plan 2030 this is a low

02:04:45.160 --> 02:04:49.160
 residential designation and that is single-family neighborhoods up to four

02:04:49.160 --> 02:04:53.200
 dwelling units per acre the existing zoning of nr3 is consistent with that

02:04:53.200 --> 02:04:57.160
 because it allows three and a half dwelling units per acre and is it is one

02:04:57.160 --> 02:05:02.280
 of our single-family zoning districts we also looked at element 4 which is our

02:05:02.280 --> 02:05:07.440
 urban design portion of our dent plan 2030 and we had some findings based upon

02:05:07.440 --> 02:05:11.720
 that first of all that opaque cedar fence would provide backyard privacy and

02:05:11.720 --> 02:05:15.360
 screening for future homeowners adjacent to the streets so that you people

02:05:15.360 --> 02:05:19.960
 wouldn't be seeing in their backyards those brick columns landscaping and

02:05:19.960 --> 02:05:24.440
 street trees provide visual consistency and rhythm along the rights of way so it

02:05:24.440 --> 02:05:29.140
 creates not only a sense of arrival for the future homeowners within the

02:05:29.140 --> 02:05:34.000
 fireside park development but also would enhance those existing corridors as the

02:05:34.000 --> 02:05:39.760
 overlay is written today street trees aren't required along Windsor and

02:05:39.760 --> 02:05:44.620
 Hinkle so this this would would actually enhance that by adding those street

02:05:44.620 --> 02:05:50.240
 trees along those corridors it provides that it would those street trees would

02:05:50.240 --> 02:05:56.040
 also provide that name that well-defined neighborhood edge and and and enhance

02:05:56.040 --> 02:06:01.200
 those those rights of way the rear setback of 40 feet is not anticipated to

02:06:01.200 --> 02:06:04.360
 reduce the neighborhood quality because it's it's in excess of what the

02:06:04.360 --> 02:06:09.120
 development code requires so it's it's greater than what are any any new

02:06:09.120 --> 02:06:14.720
 subdivision under just standard zoning would be required to put in and that 70%

02:06:14.720 --> 02:06:21.800
 masonry exceeds not only a 2002 and 2019 DDC requirements but once again it's

02:06:21.800 --> 02:06:26.240
 just not something we can enforce anymore we looked at the public

02:06:26.240 --> 02:06:30.520
 improvements because this request would not increase the density or in intensity

02:06:30.520 --> 02:06:35.680
 any new uses on the side a TIA wasn't required as as a result of the

02:06:35.680 --> 02:06:39.020
 development of the site they are required to construct a five foot

02:06:39.020 --> 02:06:43.880
 sidewalk on Hinkle and an eight foot sidewalk on heat on Windsor as part of

02:06:43.880 --> 02:06:47.960
 that the development of the site there are capital improvement projects in the

02:06:47.960 --> 02:06:53.560
 area one of them being the Magnolia Drive drainage which which is is really

02:06:53.560 --> 02:06:58.400
 affecting Hinkle right now they are installing box culverts on Hinkle and

02:06:58.400 --> 02:07:03.000
 West Windsor that's going to carry that stormwater to the south once installed

02:07:03.000 --> 02:07:09.080
 the pavement will be replaced in its current between the the current curb and

02:07:09.080 --> 02:07:13.880
 gutter and then that bike lane will be in restored as well due to resident

02:07:13.880 --> 02:07:18.280
 safety concerns that were discussed at the neighborhood meeting they had the

02:07:18.280 --> 02:07:23.200
 city has installed two stop signs on West Windsor at Hinkle creating a

02:07:23.200 --> 02:07:28.240
 three-way stop there it's intended to calm a traffic on West Windsor also

02:07:28.240 --> 02:07:34.960
 create a safer intersection for for residents pedestrians going to North

02:07:34.960 --> 02:07:39.720
 Lakes Park as well as for vehicles when when you're on Hinkle and trying to turn

02:07:39.720 --> 02:07:43.600
 on Windsor that's not a right angle intersection you almost have to look

02:07:43.600 --> 02:07:48.000
 behind you so that that stop sign gives them a little extra a little a little

02:07:48.000 --> 02:07:54.800
 extra traffic calming there will be impact fees paid with with the building

02:07:54.800 --> 02:07:59.680
 permits about $2,000 per dwelling unit and that's for to provide funding for

02:07:59.680 --> 02:08:05.240
 transportation improvements for the with that for the benefit of the city and to

02:08:05.240 --> 02:08:14.640
 and to implement our mobility plan and they also had to to do dedicate their

02:08:14.640 --> 02:08:20.420
 park requirements at platting and then also at building permit they'll have to

02:08:20.420 --> 02:08:25.840
 pay a park development fee per single-family home water and wastewater is

02:08:25.840 --> 02:08:30.080
 available to the side and is being constructed on the future streets as

02:08:30.080 --> 02:08:39.200
 shown on the on the the aerial here there are schools they the 107 homes on

02:08:39.200 --> 02:08:44.040
 the side is expected to generate 24 elementary students 12 middle school

02:08:44.040 --> 02:08:50.200
 students and 16 high school students this is based on a formula by DISD and

02:08:50.200 --> 02:08:54.240
 so so that is what their anticipated enrollment will be and then there is a

02:08:54.240 --> 02:08:58.000
 fire station nearby it's within their eight minute or minute or less response

02:08:58.000 --> 02:09:02.400
 time boundary public notification was sent out we've received some in

02:09:02.400 --> 02:09:07.760
 opposition only one within that 200 foot boundary as of now and we haven't

02:09:07.760 --> 02:09:11.640
 received any in favor signs were posted on the site and they did hold a

02:09:11.640 --> 02:09:16.240
 neighborhood meeting staff does recommend it recommend approval of the

02:09:16.240 --> 02:09:20.280
 requirement because it does meet the criteria or they recommend approval of

02:09:20.280 --> 02:09:25.720
 the request because it does meet the criteria for approval with the the

02:09:25.720 --> 02:09:30.800
 conditions that I discussed before regarding the six foot tall board on

02:09:30.800 --> 02:09:35.600
 board cedar fence with that top railing cap the brick columns every 100 linear

02:09:35.600 --> 02:09:41.040
 feet with the additional landscaping of street trees one every 20 feet with the

02:09:41.040 --> 02:09:45.560
 alternating shade and ornamental and then that additional landscaping element

02:09:45.560 --> 02:09:50.280
 to be maintained by the homeowners Association the setback would be

02:09:50.280 --> 02:09:55.840
 reduced would be reduced from that 50 feet to 40 feet the three-car garages

02:09:55.840 --> 02:09:59.720
 wouldn't face the street and then any ingress or egress would not remove the

02:09:59.720 --> 02:10:04.400
 on-street bike lane on Hinkle Drive the applicant is here and I will stand for

02:10:04.400 --> 02:10:08.680
 any questions we do have a couple Julie first is Christian back thank you chair

02:10:08.680 --> 02:10:13.560
 thanks Julie just did you get a chance to find out what the linear footage for

02:10:13.560 --> 02:10:26.760
 frontage on both Windsor Hinkle is so this is 1250 feet along here yes and along

02:10:26.760 --> 02:10:32.280
 Hinkle it is 1400 feet okay great thank you Julie have a couple questions for

02:10:32.280 --> 02:10:41.160
 you the I appreciate you pulling yardage or the footage from the street that 40

02:10:41.160 --> 02:10:47.320
 feet setback that's to the property line not to the house correct for this new

02:10:47.320 --> 02:10:51.280
 development well this development the way the overlay conditions were written

02:10:51.280 --> 02:10:56.760
 is that it's 50 feet from the curb to the house to those structures the way we

02:10:56.760 --> 02:11:01.080
 typically and that's from the existing curb line typically we we see a rear

02:11:01.080 --> 02:11:06.760
 setback from the property line to the house but you're correct that 40 feet

02:11:06.760 --> 02:11:11.840
 would not be to the property line it would be to any structures okay and then

02:11:11.840 --> 02:11:18.040
 how close can and that the backyard faces the collector Street of the

02:11:18.040 --> 02:11:24.920
 secondary is here right yes sir how close can that fence be to Windsor that

02:11:24.920 --> 02:11:31.000
 fence it that's fine it would be on the property line because this would this is

02:11:31.000 --> 02:11:35.840
 then right-of-way and do you know the distance we that that right-of-way is so

02:11:35.840 --> 02:11:42.160
 it looks like from Windsor to the property line where the fence would be I

02:11:42.160 --> 02:11:47.240
 mean it kind of looks like almost 40 feet the right-of-way is much larger than

02:11:47.240 --> 02:11:54.080
 the actual street width is today so it's and they're not required to expand that

02:11:54.080 --> 02:11:58.200
 street as a result of this so so you know I don't know what the future plans

02:11:58.200 --> 02:12:03.000
 are for Windsor in this location but right now it would not expand this is

02:12:03.000 --> 02:12:09.980
 that right-of-way but but yeah there is there's quite a big gap there okay and

02:12:09.980 --> 02:12:13.800
 then the other question I had is is not to oversimplify the request but to

02:12:13.800 --> 02:12:22.320
 hopefully direct the conversation this request ultimately changes two things

02:12:22.320 --> 02:12:28.520
 about the already approved zoning there being the one being a change from a

02:12:28.520 --> 02:12:33.480
 wrought-iron fence to the fence described in your presentation the board

02:12:33.480 --> 02:12:40.280
 on board with 100 foot stone structures and then the other is changing it from

02:12:40.280 --> 02:12:44.200
 50 feet to 40 feet correct the other conditions are remaining unchanged

02:12:44.200 --> 02:12:48.040
 correct so for discussion purposes tonight this commission is considering

02:12:48.040 --> 02:12:55.200
 should the fence be a wrought-iron or upgraded to a wood or or and should the

02:12:55.200 --> 02:12:59.520
 setback move from 50 feet to 40 feet those that's the two kind of cruxes of

02:12:59.520 --> 02:13:03.680
 the issue that's my understanding correctly yes sir and the landscaping

02:13:03.680 --> 02:13:09.280
 associated with the the tree the fence perfect I see no other questions thank

02:13:09.280 --> 02:13:14.320
 you this is a public hearing anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so I

02:13:14.320 --> 02:13:18.600
 only have one card but everyone here is more than welcome to speak if you have a

02:13:18.600 --> 02:13:21.560
 card will you bring it up when you come down but the first person that had a

02:13:21.560 --> 02:13:27.600
 card is Gail Garber and if you just state your name and address for the

02:13:27.600 --> 02:13:31.520
 record you'll have four minutes to speak and then we'll progress through okay my

02:13:31.520 --> 02:13:36.720
 name is Gail Garber I live at 1200 Meadow Ridge Drive Denton Texas 76201

02:13:36.720 --> 02:13:41.640
 I've lived in the area for 35 years we've dealt with this piece of property

02:13:41.640 --> 02:13:47.040
 for at least the last 20 having changes done to it originally I don't know if

02:13:47.040 --> 02:13:51.840
 y'all can see this or not yeah we can see that let me just turn the camera on

02:13:51.840 --> 02:14:00.080
 upstairs when this property was first set to change the from NR 2 to NR 3

02:14:00.080 --> 02:14:06.080
 code originally this was a treed lot area with quite a few trees on it we

02:14:06.080 --> 02:14:11.200
 went to NR 3 the developer started all the trees went away the developer was

02:14:11.200 --> 02:14:16.600
 fine $2,500 for the removal of all the trees we went from what should have been

02:14:16.600 --> 02:14:22.160
 around 72 homes we're now up to 107 homes which the neighborhood was talked

02:14:22.160 --> 02:14:25.480
 you know they couldn't develop it with just two houses per acre they needed

02:14:25.480 --> 02:14:29.400
 more density to make it economically feasible for the developers so that's

02:14:29.400 --> 02:14:34.120
 why the zone changed at the time in the last several divisions when different

02:14:34.120 --> 02:14:38.200
 developers have come in this planning and zoning Commission Julie Wyatt was on

02:14:38.200 --> 02:14:42.580
 part of it the City Council has approved the changes that are on the overlay

02:14:42.580 --> 02:14:46.400
 district when this gentleman bought the property with the overlay district he

02:14:46.400 --> 02:14:49.800
 knew it was there did not ask for a change till six months into the

02:14:49.800 --> 02:14:58.800
 development he advised us at the meeting with the area when they were talking

02:14:58.800 --> 02:15:03.520
 about making these changes one of the home developers is Gann Homes but I

02:15:03.520 --> 02:15:07.160
 think they have over half the lots the other builder were unaware who that was

02:15:07.160 --> 02:15:12.560
 I went home did research on Gann Homes I have printouts if y'all would like off

02:15:12.560 --> 02:15:17.200
 the internet of the shoddy construction and the different complaints from people

02:15:17.200 --> 02:15:21.360
 on their building process how the homes have turned out they do not honor their

02:15:21.360 --> 02:15:26.560
 warranties paint is poorly done the siding is falling off houses now they

02:15:26.560 --> 02:15:31.080
 also have some good comments on here as well but going to the construction in

02:15:31.080 --> 02:15:35.040
 the area it doesn't look very nice for what he's fixing to bring into the

02:15:35.040 --> 02:15:40.360
 neighborhood he complained at our thing that the wrought-iron fence would allow

02:15:40.360 --> 02:15:45.240
 homeowners dogs to bite people as they walked along the track well you know what

02:15:45.240 --> 02:15:48.560
 their homeowners insurance should cover that or they can put their own shrubbery

02:15:48.560 --> 02:15:54.440
 and greenery against the wrought-iron fence to help mitigate some of that he

02:15:54.440 --> 02:15:58.520
 also addressed that the backyards could become sloppy we'd have to look at it

02:15:58.520 --> 02:16:02.200
 through the wrought-iron fence well what's the homeowners Association for

02:16:02.200 --> 02:16:05.600
 it's there to keep the people to maintain their homes so I don't

02:16:05.600 --> 02:16:10.280
 understand why that would be a problem I'm against the fence our neighborhood

02:16:10.280 --> 02:16:14.780
 is not fenced off from others I'd like to see the wrought-iron fence go in to

02:16:14.780 --> 02:16:18.760
 continue the continuity I'd like to see the hundred percent brick stay and I

02:16:18.760 --> 02:16:22.480
 understand why that can't be enforced and I don't understand all the legal

02:16:22.480 --> 02:16:25.920
 ramifications but if the overlay district were already on there if we

02:16:25.920 --> 02:16:29.160
 don't remove it I don't understand why he can't build a hundred percent brick

02:16:29.160 --> 02:16:33.200
 the majority of the homes in the area are already a hundred percent brick very

02:16:33.200 --> 02:16:39.080
 few of them have siding if they do it's on a gable and it's not much just

02:16:39.080 --> 02:16:43.780
 making it conducive to the current neighborhood his comment at our meeting

02:16:43.780 --> 02:16:48.520
 was well I'm gonna meet Denton's minimum code well that sounds pretty yucky to me

02:16:48.520 --> 02:16:52.480
 I'd like to see a developer come in and go above the minimum code the

02:16:52.480 --> 02:16:56.640
 neighborhood it's not at a minimum code it's maintained it's been maintained for

02:16:56.640 --> 02:17:00.600
 40 and 50 years you bring someone that wants to do minimum code you're gonna

02:17:00.600 --> 02:17:05.400
 have a neighborhood in the donut it's not being kept up and that's exactly what

02:17:05.400 --> 02:17:16.200
 we're fixing to look at we've gone through the neighborhoods been through

02:17:16.200 --> 02:17:20.280
 the density thing we understand there's a cost to develop it but he's trying to

02:17:20.280 --> 02:17:24.280
 bring in someone that wants to do it at the cost to our neighborhood they're

02:17:24.280 --> 02:17:28.840
 gonna be in they're gonna be out they're not gonna be the ones living here they

02:17:28.840 --> 02:17:32.120
 have put in the stop sign to help with the traffic but we're not seeing the

02:17:32.120 --> 02:17:35.400
 full impact of it yet because our streets are shut down so we don't have

02:17:35.400 --> 02:17:38.600
 the neighborhood bill and we don't have the traffic going up to North Lakes Park

02:17:38.600 --> 02:17:42.120
 yet so we have no idea how that's gonna stop our fire and police protection

02:17:42.120 --> 02:17:46.440
 getting down to us on Hinkle plus I don't think that Hinkle's wide enough for

02:17:46.440 --> 02:17:52.720
 these trees and a sidewalk according to their plot plan thank you I appreciate

02:17:52.720 --> 02:18:00.200
 you being here thank you I think it's worth noting because this might be an

02:18:00.200 --> 02:18:07.560
 ongoing point for the citizens this city of Denton no longer can enforce

02:18:07.560 --> 02:18:14.040
 building materials so not to get into legalese of it but our representatives

02:18:14.040 --> 02:18:20.440
 at the state level voted to remove that authority from city ordinances so I

02:18:20.440 --> 02:18:25.800
 think all your points are valid unfortunately of all of those we cannot

02:18:25.800 --> 02:18:29.880
 do anything about enforcing brick the state legislation took that power away

02:18:29.880 --> 02:18:36.160
 from us the defense and stuff back is on the table for discussion this evening

02:18:36.160 --> 02:18:41.360
 the brick unfortunately is not Christian Ellis thank you chair and to that point

02:18:41.360 --> 02:18:46.080
 I did ask in our work session with pre-existing overlay conditions if these

02:18:46.080 --> 02:18:50.640
 this new legislation which takes effect September 1st if that removes the

02:18:50.640 --> 02:18:55.640
 overlay and and the city's ability to enforce that and unfortunately it does

02:18:55.640 --> 02:19:01.560
 Christian back thank you chair I'm hoping the applicant is here that we can

02:19:01.560 --> 02:19:07.640
 address some questions to state your name and address please

02:19:07.640 --> 02:19:14.840
 McGinnis I reside in Frisco Texas okay Casey thank you the one big concern I

02:19:14.840 --> 02:19:19.080
 have I'm a little disappointed too we're gonna lose the wrought iron fence or

02:19:19.080 --> 02:19:28.560
 it's being recommended to this area over there it's not so much that the cedar

02:19:28.560 --> 02:19:33.360
 board-on-board fence that you're recommending is cheap as far as wood

02:19:33.360 --> 02:19:37.840
 fences goes it's probably the line but it takes something away my main concern

02:19:37.840 --> 02:19:44.000
 especially on Windsor it's a secondary arterial it sees a lot of traffic and I

02:19:44.000 --> 02:19:48.840
 understand that the way that you're developing this you are gonna have a lot

02:19:48.840 --> 02:19:52.200
 of backyards facing out there and I can understand the need for privacy I

02:19:52.200 --> 02:19:58.880
 understand Gail's concern too about how that could be dealt with otherwise but I

02:19:58.880 --> 02:20:03.520
 wonder if it wouldn't be amenable to you you wouldn't see value in to

02:20:03.520 --> 02:20:10.840
 accommodate these concerns to at least a long winter consider a masonry wall on

02:20:10.840 --> 02:20:15.280
 that 1250 foot frontage up there I realize it's at a cost that would be

02:20:15.280 --> 02:20:21.520
 added to the to each house but over the long haul if HOA is responsible for this

02:20:21.520 --> 02:20:26.160
 I'm thinking maintenance it's gonna offset maintenance costs down the road

02:20:26.160 --> 02:20:33.720
 plus it's gonna give a more appealing look at least on Windsor I can live

02:20:33.720 --> 02:20:40.920
 with the board on board on ankle because it's a connector Street but is it

02:20:40.920 --> 02:20:46.080
 possible that you would take a serious look at that and give some value to a

02:20:46.080 --> 02:20:52.520
 masonry fence along Windsor yeah mr. Beck I appreciate your opinion when we

02:20:52.520 --> 02:20:57.320
 purchased the property like I said the the overlay was a wrought iron fence and

02:20:57.320 --> 02:21:03.560
 just because of the nature of this property with the drainage requirements

02:21:03.560 --> 02:21:08.080
 that we have you know we've had we've had to add two detention ponds to the

02:21:08.080 --> 02:21:12.480
 site to take off the drainage from the adjacent creeks and from the storm

02:21:12.480 --> 02:21:18.120
 drains in that area that were at the time already taxed so there's additional

02:21:18.120 --> 02:21:23.460
 cost associated with that I will say when we had the neighborhood meeting miss

02:21:23.460 --> 02:21:26.880
 Wyatt after I went if we had the neighborhood meeting and then went met

02:21:26.880 --> 02:21:31.760
 with staff miss Wyatt took meticulous notes on all the concerns from the

02:21:31.760 --> 02:21:37.000
 community and so when we got together we went through these line item by line

02:21:37.000 --> 02:21:42.120
 item by line item to address those legitimate concerns by the community one

02:21:42.120 --> 02:21:46.880
 by one and and that's how you see the the book of work that you saw today with

02:21:46.880 --> 02:21:51.080
 the fence the columns the additional landscaping things that things of that

02:21:51.080 --> 02:21:54.920
 nature and so from a budget perspective and I know people don't like to talk

02:21:54.920 --> 02:21:59.320
 about budgets or hear about them but it was a step up from what we originally

02:21:59.320 --> 02:22:07.560
 were planning to do the the brick thin wall is a cost that's three times what

02:22:07.560 --> 02:22:11.440
 the wrought iron fence is what the wood fences and it just wasn't part of the

02:22:11.440 --> 02:22:15.680
 cost estimates when we purchased the property so unfortunately my answer is

02:22:15.680 --> 02:22:18.840
 it's just it's just not financially feasible for us to do that at this time

02:22:18.840 --> 02:22:24.200
 okay and I do understand that again I was trying to indicate though in the

02:22:24.200 --> 02:22:28.840
 long haul the the maintenance of it that might all set that original cost each

02:22:28.840 --> 02:22:35.880
 homeowner is going to incur that cost up front but down the road maintaining a

02:22:35.880 --> 02:22:42.820
 masonry wall would be a lot less than fences we've seen these areas Teasley

02:22:42.820 --> 02:22:47.640
 Lane comes to mind that stretch from 35 all the way where it loops around hits

02:22:47.640 --> 02:22:52.800
 Lillian Miller is a lot of wood fences some of them board on board some of them

02:22:52.800 --> 02:22:57.960
 are not and they're poorly maintained in time wood fences as good as this one is

02:22:57.960 --> 02:23:05.640
 will deteriorate unless the HOA is on top of this it's going to just look bad

02:23:05.640 --> 02:23:15.640
 on the main arterial so again just I'm probably going to try and see if I can

02:23:15.640 --> 02:23:20.640
 add an amendment to this and see if we can get a masonry wall up there that

02:23:20.640 --> 02:23:26.080
 would be my suggestion otherwise I'm having a hard time approving this loose

02:23:26.080 --> 02:23:29.240
 fence I don't have a problem with the setbacks I think we can live with that

02:23:29.240 --> 02:23:35.200
 but the appearance of a fence long winters important to me and I think in

02:23:35.200 --> 02:23:39.440
 the long run it'll be important to the city and I can't help but feel it would

02:23:39.440 --> 02:23:43.160
 add value to your development too but that's my opinion so but thank you

02:23:43.160 --> 02:23:47.240
 anyway all right well I know when we when we submit the HOA documents we have

02:23:47.240 --> 02:23:51.280
 to do that to the city for their approval for just those types of purposes

02:23:51.280 --> 02:23:56.480
 to make sure that it is positioned and run adequately to take care of those

02:23:56.480 --> 02:24:00.680
 maintenance type items it was approved by the city and so I think from a code

02:24:00.680 --> 02:24:06.240
 enforcement perspective that the city can watchdog those elements about

02:24:06.240 --> 02:24:10.440
 maintenance about the way it looks things of that nature okay thank you sir

02:24:10.440 --> 02:24:18.280
 another question Commissioner Sanchez I just want to say I'm glad you're honest

02:24:18.280 --> 02:24:25.120
 about you know increasing costs I know a lot of times you know I feel that we

02:24:25.120 --> 02:24:29.620
 make recommendations without since it doesn't come out of our pockets it's a

02:24:29.620 --> 02:24:35.200
 lot easier to make recommendations then so I appreciate you recognizing or

02:24:35.200 --> 02:24:41.760
 telling us that you know you didn't make what do you call it you didn't make a

02:24:41.760 --> 02:24:47.800
 considerate you didn't consider that a brick wall and that should have been

02:24:47.800 --> 02:24:51.480
 discussed previously so you wouldn't get caught here trying to make a quick

02:24:51.480 --> 02:24:56.240
 decision so I just want to appreciate what you stated well I appreciate that

02:24:56.240 --> 02:24:59.880
 too and I did want to state you know we have been working with the city on

02:24:59.880 --> 02:25:04.920
 numerous types of items that we have come to the table financially for one of

02:25:04.920 --> 02:25:08.920
 them is with the water system you know we currently were going to bring help to

02:25:08.920 --> 02:25:14.360
 help the city connect their main water system down Windsor we ran into an issue

02:25:14.360 --> 02:25:18.320
 in the right of way because of the trees that were planted in front of the park

02:25:18.320 --> 02:25:23.280
 it just made that unfeasible to take that down Windsor we stepped up and

02:25:23.280 --> 02:25:27.480
 purchased the right of way through the park to take that around through the

02:25:27.480 --> 02:25:30.960
 back we purchased that right away we're going to pay for the installation of

02:25:30.960 --> 02:25:34.920
 that water line that will help feed the rest of the town so there have been

02:25:34.920 --> 02:25:39.000
 instances where we have stepped up financially and I'd like to just you

02:25:39.000 --> 02:25:43.360
 know with that in mind with the detention ponds it really has put a

02:25:43.360 --> 02:25:46.800
 strain on the budget I'd love to put in the brick-thin wall and adhere to your

02:25:46.800 --> 02:25:52.680
 request but it's just not feasible at this time Christian Perdetta you know I

02:25:52.680 --> 02:25:58.520
 understand the the costs and involved in everything and you know you obviously

02:25:58.520 --> 02:26:02.200
 have investments to make and you have to try and make a good return on that

02:26:02.200 --> 02:26:08.600
 investment I I tend to side with Larry on this one and I tend to side with most

02:26:08.600 --> 02:26:12.480
 the people in the room and I do have to admit that I live close to North Lakes

02:26:12.480 --> 02:26:18.880
 Park so we go on on lots of walks along there and you know they made some great

02:26:18.880 --> 02:26:23.000
 progress in terms of the park right now where they're letting natural grasses and

02:26:23.000 --> 02:26:27.520
 things grow and lateral flowers grow to bring in more butterflies to become

02:26:27.520 --> 02:26:33.800
 you because we are a monarch city along those lines I would prefer to see

02:26:33.800 --> 02:26:39.400
 something at least along the road where Windsor is that that seems to be more

02:26:39.400 --> 02:26:44.200
 ornate and in keeping with you know the drive that we have to beautify that area

02:26:44.200 --> 02:26:50.680
 and to make it significantly more more natural we do know that even well

02:26:50.680 --> 02:26:55.920
 constructed wood fences start to look worn down after just a few years and as

02:26:55.920 --> 02:27:01.160
 you know Commissioner Sanchez I think mentioned or not actually it was Larry

02:27:01.160 --> 02:27:05.560
 I think mentioned you know yes this would be a cost it would be born at the

02:27:05.560 --> 02:27:10.960
 very beginning but I think you know homeowners would understand particularly

02:27:10.960 --> 02:27:14.200
 if they were paying into an HOA that this is a cost that they'll wind up

02:27:14.200 --> 02:27:18.400
 saving money on because they won't have you have to keep repairing fences every

02:27:18.400 --> 02:27:24.600
 few years if we have something significantly more stable but I do back

02:27:24.600 --> 02:27:29.520
 Commissioner Beck's you know request to find something that's more in keeping

02:27:29.520 --> 02:27:35.600
 with the aesthetic along North Lakes Park it's it's you know it's a park that a

02:27:35.600 --> 02:27:41.040
 lot of people go to walk along we have our trails there and you know quite

02:27:41.040 --> 02:27:46.560
 frankly I miss the grass field but anyway I'm so toss that out there yeah I

02:27:46.560 --> 02:27:50.760
 will say to you to just comment on you're talking about the aesthetics we

02:27:50.760 --> 02:27:57.680
 are adding over 300 trees to the site 150 of those are in that right way that

02:27:57.680 --> 02:28:02.900
 you just discussed there's not a there's not a tree on the property today that's

02:28:02.900 --> 02:28:09.160
 how we purchased it when we're adding I think 329 trees you know out of our

02:28:09.160 --> 02:28:13.520
 pocket to make that that drive and that aesthetics more of what you're talking

02:28:13.520 --> 02:28:19.000
 about in line with you know the park atmosphere so there has been a dramatic

02:28:19.000 --> 02:28:27.760
 effort to to adhere to that park that park atmosphere that you're describing

02:28:27.760 --> 02:28:32.860
 so I have a quick question for you one I wholeheartedly agree with tree

02:28:32.860 --> 02:28:36.840
 canopies if you look at satellite views over the decades and didn't all new tree

02:28:36.840 --> 02:28:42.640
 growth in the city has come from development so I 100% agree that just

02:28:42.640 --> 02:28:46.720
 looking at satellite imagery of canopy canopy grows where development happens

02:28:46.720 --> 02:28:52.120
 by developers going into planting trees that are diverse and healthy and stable

02:28:52.120 --> 02:28:57.280
 so I appreciate that that that point I do have a question you initially before

02:28:57.280 --> 02:29:02.600
 all this state legislation came in or suggests that we move the brick from a

02:29:02.600 --> 02:29:06.800
 hundred percent to seventy percent is that correct yes obviously we can't do

02:29:06.800 --> 02:29:10.900
 anything about that right is it your intent and your develop your builders

02:29:10.900 --> 02:29:16.720
 intent to not go under seventy percent brick is that going is the intent to

02:29:16.720 --> 02:29:20.440
 stay at that seventy percent I can commit to that yes absolutely so

02:29:20.440 --> 02:29:26.080
 obviously we can enforce that right so just as a citizen and as the chair of

02:29:26.080 --> 02:29:29.680
 this commission I would strongly encourage you to amend your HOA because

02:29:29.680 --> 02:29:33.480
 the HOA can protect that sure so if you were to put in the seventy percent brick

02:29:33.480 --> 02:29:38.480
 requirement into the HOA then it's enforceable from the HOA perspective not

02:29:38.480 --> 02:29:45.560
 the cities sure and so if if you are committed to that I think everyone

02:29:45.560 --> 02:29:49.840
 would appreciate at least that being codified in the HOA so future development

02:29:49.840 --> 02:29:55.440
 that areas is not a 50% break or a hundred percent siding so that's just a

02:29:55.440 --> 02:29:59.840
 suggestion above anything else right right and I could absolutely commit to

02:29:59.840 --> 02:30:03.440
 doing that okay I don't see any other questions we have other people oh never

02:30:03.440 --> 02:30:09.240
 right cuz you're back thank you chair Julie this might be for you but mr.

02:30:09.240 --> 02:30:15.160
 Guinness you'll hang on a second to you let me ask Julie a question we're

02:30:15.160 --> 02:30:20.120
 dealing with cost here if we consider masonry wall the trees he's putting in

02:30:20.120 --> 02:30:25.200
 is that above and beyond what the city would require yes sir so he could remove

02:30:25.200 --> 02:30:32.280
 some of those trees and still meet city minimums with and would all sit in my

02:30:32.280 --> 02:30:36.400
 thinking here is that would help offset the cost of the masonry wall it's

02:30:36.400 --> 02:30:40.640
 developing under the 2002 didn't development code which did not require

02:30:40.640 --> 02:30:49.840
 any street trees along arterials okay so I'd hate to see no trees there but you

02:30:49.840 --> 02:30:55.160
 said all right mr. McGinnis you say you put about 150 trees along the Windsor

02:30:55.160 --> 02:31:01.160
 frontage that's right what at what cost do you know what that is I don't I don't

02:31:01.160 --> 02:31:05.840
 know it's over a thousand caliber inches in all the builder will put in all the

02:31:05.840 --> 02:31:10.320
 trees on the interior as they develop out the property but at 20 feet at

02:31:10.320 --> 02:31:15.800
 roughly we're talking about 3,000 feet so we're you know we're right at 150

02:31:15.800 --> 02:31:23.520
 trees along Hinkle and Windsor so say we cut that in half though with that

02:31:23.520 --> 02:31:29.000
 suitor budget a little bit at least if we put that masonry I'm trying to work

02:31:29.000 --> 02:31:33.720
 with you and unfortunately unfortunately not we had we had this

02:31:33.720 --> 02:31:38.040
 discussion as we did you this negotiation and I will tell you this was

02:31:38.040 --> 02:31:43.040
 not a one-time sit-down between myself and staff this is a negotiation that

02:31:43.040 --> 02:31:47.640
 went on for several months back and forth on how to accommodate the concerns

02:31:47.640 --> 02:31:55.600
 of the of the adjacent communities as well as the city and this is kind of how

02:31:55.600 --> 02:31:59.880
 we got to this point so it was a step by step by step process we push the

02:31:59.880 --> 02:32:03.200
 envelope push the envelope push the envelope and that's where we are to

02:32:03.200 --> 02:32:07.080
 trust me I appreciate everything you've done I don't mean any disrespect it's

02:32:07.080 --> 02:32:10.960
 just that this is something I'd like to see and if it can't be done it can't be

02:32:10.960 --> 02:32:17.320
 done but I do recognize that you guys have done an awful lot in addition to

02:32:17.320 --> 02:32:22.960
 what we expected first time around so thank you for that sure I appreciate it

02:32:22.960 --> 02:32:26.720
 I do have a couple extra cards that we'll get to and then we have questions

02:32:26.720 --> 02:32:30.280
 we'll call you back out thank you mr. McGinnis the first card or second card I

02:32:30.280 --> 02:32:38.000
 have for this evening is Rebecca Dick Stein and if you could state your name

02:32:38.000 --> 02:32:43.160
 and address for the record you have four minutes I will be quick my name is

02:32:43.160 --> 02:32:49.880
 Rebecca Dick Stein I live at 2224 North Lake Trail Denton Texas 76201 I'm

02:32:49.880 --> 02:32:55.240
 actually not in the zone where we live is not in the zone where we get the

02:32:55.240 --> 02:33:00.480
 notifications about this development but we're real close and I use the park at

02:33:00.480 --> 02:33:13.280
 least weekly sometimes daily and I want to reiterate I very much feel like you

02:33:13.280 --> 02:33:18.480
 know cedar wood fencing breaks down very quickly but I'm also here to bring up

02:33:18.480 --> 02:33:23.580
 another issue that I think is really important until I came here I did not

02:33:23.580 --> 02:33:28.960
 know it was over 200 houses because I don't get the notifications although

02:33:28.960 --> 02:33:35.040
 I've been to some of the neighborhood meetings where I enter the park is

02:33:35.040 --> 02:33:43.520
 Parkside Drive and Windsor and that is in between two stop signs I have already

02:33:43.520 --> 02:33:51.440
 put this request into Julie and writing we need a three-way stop sign at

02:33:51.440 --> 02:33:58.040
 Parkside and Windsor in addition the three-way stop sign at Hinkle and

02:33:58.040 --> 02:34:05.640
 Windsor is great but with now this egress on Windsor Drive we're gonna have

02:34:05.640 --> 02:34:10.760
 a lot more traffic there it's already people are speeding down that road and

02:34:10.760 --> 02:34:15.920
 it's only a matter of time before somebody gets hurt thank you thank you

02:34:15.920 --> 02:34:25.120
 point of clarification it's a hundred and seven homes Craig understood not

02:34:25.120 --> 02:34:27.160
 questioning that I just want to make sure I knew the number right because I

02:34:27.160 --> 02:34:36.440
 was starting to question myself the next card I have is Kirk Pierce and again if

02:34:36.440 --> 02:34:38.920
 you just state your name and now just for the record you got four minutes to

02:34:38.920 --> 02:34:43.480
 speak I'm Kirk Pierce I live at 500 mimosa I did not get a notification

02:34:43.480 --> 02:34:48.120
 either my first of all thank you miss Wyatt for bringing in the stop signs

02:34:48.120 --> 02:34:54.160
 everybody does appreciate that immensely but in regards of traffic that's the one

02:34:54.160 --> 02:34:59.120
 thing I haven't heard and I'm still trying to understand what is going to

02:34:59.120 --> 02:35:04.040
 happen to mimosa drive from that increase because there's it's pretty

02:35:04.040 --> 02:35:07.960
 much a thoroughfare and there is there gonna be any slowdowns and I know that I

02:35:07.960 --> 02:35:12.600
 believe and you can correct me miss Wyatt is we did do a traffic study or

02:35:12.600 --> 02:35:19.400
 something like that or did we not you can correct me what's that you did it I

02:35:19.400 --> 02:35:26.160
 guess you did a traffic study on one day so if we if we get for the audience is

02:35:26.160 --> 02:35:32.200
 keep it that's okay so my question is what we've all talking about the housing

02:35:32.200 --> 02:35:36.120
 but what is how are we solving the increased traffic on the most drive

02:35:36.120 --> 02:35:39.320
 because that's the entrance so that it's more of a question that's what I'm

02:35:39.320 --> 02:35:46.080
 asking for appreciate to be in here Christopher data actually my my statement

02:35:46.080 --> 02:35:50.240
 was going to be to the previous speaker about requesting the the stop sign on

02:35:50.240 --> 02:35:54.280
 arm Parkside and Windsor that that's actually out of our purview but I would

02:35:54.280 --> 02:35:59.760
 recommend you know submitting a request to staff to look into that

02:36:06.120 --> 02:36:20.840
 okay and it's mr. Pierce's question the the the traffic that was studied was for

02:36:20.840 --> 02:36:25.760
 the initial zoning and overlay because we're not changing the density that the

02:36:25.760 --> 02:36:29.160
 houses that are already been plotted and are under construction they're happening

02:36:29.160 --> 02:36:32.280
 we're not changing any of that this evening so under the purview of this

02:36:32.280 --> 02:36:35.640
 evening we haven't looked at the traffic impact on any of the streets that was

02:36:35.640 --> 02:36:40.380
 looked at on a previous vote so we're simply looking at landscape fencing and

02:36:40.380 --> 02:36:44.720
 then the setback so that's kind of what we're focused on this evening but

02:36:44.720 --> 02:36:49.840
 certainly I understand your point and and it's what's well taken the next card

02:36:49.840 --> 02:36:57.280
 I have is for Barbara Lightfoot and if you just take your name and address for

02:36:57.280 --> 02:37:08.000
 the record four minutes Barbara Lightfoot I live at 422 mimosa and I was involved

02:37:08.000 --> 02:37:13.720
 in the earlier stages whenever this development was for senior living we had

02:37:13.720 --> 02:37:18.360
 the alignment still didn't know if it was going to go for the exit from the

02:37:18.360 --> 02:37:25.240
 development into Magnolia probably not North North Ridge but Magnolia or

02:37:25.240 --> 02:37:31.320
 mimosa it ended up being mimosa or Headley either way I live on mimosa I too

02:37:31.320 --> 02:37:35.040
 agree that there should be an additional study and I wanted to state that as

02:37:35.040 --> 02:37:40.520
 well for how many additional cars are going to be going for all of the

02:37:40.520 --> 02:37:45.440
 distance from where you enter on Hinkle until you get down to Carroll there are

02:37:45.440 --> 02:37:52.480
 no stop signs for mimosa so that's an issue the other with the raw down fence

02:37:52.480 --> 02:37:57.800
 there is a really good example of one that has been maintained at the

02:37:57.800 --> 02:38:05.360
 apartment complex that is north of locust north of Windsor on locust

02:38:05.360 --> 02:38:12.360
 wrought-iron fence shrubbery on the inside it's maintained it looks good

02:38:12.360 --> 02:38:19.240
 there is a buffer between people driving up and down the North Locust before you

02:38:19.240 --> 02:38:25.880
 get on to 288 and I think that's the appearance is better we have a lot of

02:38:25.880 --> 02:38:32.900
 chain-link fences open fencing in our neighborhood and that's the appearance I

02:38:32.900 --> 02:38:39.640
 think that would be important as well as that appearance upon driving down Windsor

02:38:39.640 --> 02:38:43.760
 so that you can actually see the park and you're not looking on the other side

02:38:43.760 --> 02:38:52.720
 to just a wooden fence my other concern is the enforcement of the detention ponds

02:38:52.720 --> 02:38:57.760
 or retention ponds whatever they're called as well as any other maintenance

02:38:57.760 --> 02:39:02.480
 issues for the development with the HOA that needs to be stressed those are very

02:39:02.480 --> 02:39:08.760
 I'm very concerned about access so close to the road for those ponds especially

02:39:08.760 --> 02:39:13.280
 the ones that are the one that is right off Hinkle it is full every time it

02:39:13.280 --> 02:39:18.800
 rains I know the feeling my backyard gets that way as well it doesn't drain

02:39:18.800 --> 02:39:22.720
 well in the whole neighborhood and so I'm very concerned about that so the

02:39:22.720 --> 02:39:30.360
 setback could be impacting some of the homes that are along Hinkle once they're

02:39:30.360 --> 02:39:35.680
 constructed and there is a problem with that pond and drainage and that's all I

02:39:35.680 --> 02:39:43.960
 have thank you thank you mr. Beck miss like question for you you and a couple

02:39:43.960 --> 02:39:50.440
 other people from your community keep mentioning the wrought-iron fence and

02:39:50.440 --> 02:39:54.280
 again I'd like to see that too and it would have worked well and we had the

02:39:54.280 --> 02:39:58.840
 development remain the same but I personally have a problem of houses now

02:39:58.840 --> 02:40:03.640
 that are going to back up to Windsor and that privacy is lost and that's why I'm

02:40:03.640 --> 02:40:09.520
 kind of pushing for a masonry fence to you know keep some elegance there and at

02:40:09.520 --> 02:40:15.500
 the same time for the privacy these people would expect I'm just curious do

02:40:15.500 --> 02:40:22.240
 you have a problem with us I have I have masonry on the front of my home part of

02:40:22.240 --> 02:40:26.680
 the fence is masonry the rest is chain link with my neighbor who just left I

02:40:26.680 --> 02:40:31.680
 think a few months ago so okay so if we could get an amendment to this that pass

02:40:31.680 --> 02:40:36.640
 with the masonry fence at least along Windsor that you'd be okay with it what

02:40:36.640 --> 02:40:40.880
 would be the fence then along Hinkle well because that's where the neighborhood

02:40:40.880 --> 02:40:48.640
 is yeah well the main reason I'm arguing for Windsor and I don't disagree with

02:40:48.640 --> 02:40:55.840
 what you're saying it's it's it's it's easier to argue for a masonry fence along

02:40:55.840 --> 02:41:01.440
 what's considered a secondary arterial which is a high traffic area the reason

02:41:01.440 --> 02:41:07.280
 being is so many people pass by there they're going to see that and as opposed

02:41:07.280 --> 02:41:10.680
 to the connector Street to think Liz not that there isn't a lot of traffic that

02:41:10.680 --> 02:41:17.700
 doesn't go up and down there it's a busy connector Street but what I'm doing what

02:41:17.700 --> 02:41:22.680
 I'm going to try to do is going to impose a cost to the developer which

02:41:22.680 --> 02:41:26.300
 actually he can pass on to the individual homeowners that will get

02:41:26.300 --> 02:41:29.400
 assimilated in price which I don't think is going to be that much and will be a

02:41:29.400 --> 02:41:35.720
 volume to them down the road asking for it on Hinkle is probably pushing the

02:41:35.720 --> 02:41:41.740
 envelope okay so my question is on Hinkle or on Windsor wherever the wooden

02:41:41.740 --> 02:41:46.860
 fences is that attached to the responsibility of the individual

02:41:46.860 --> 02:41:53.080
 homeowner if you after the recent winds when you drive down loop 288 towards

02:41:53.080 --> 02:41:58.580
 Collins arena whatever it's called all of the fences along there which were

02:41:58.580 --> 02:42:03.360
 backyard fences were blown over by a recent gust of wind and that's a

02:42:03.360 --> 02:42:08.000
 legitimate concern and again wood fences I think we all agree they don't last as

02:42:08.000 --> 02:42:14.960
 long but as was mentioned the Homeowner Association will be responsible for that

02:42:14.960 --> 02:42:21.560
 the city will enforce that provided that somebody submits a request to have it

02:42:21.560 --> 02:42:27.840
 done but that's something yeah if it is codified within the HOA and the HOA must

02:42:27.840 --> 02:42:32.880
 maintain right right and that's that's effectiveness of an HOA that shouldn't

02:42:32.880 --> 02:42:43.720
 be a problem right if that's part of it right great thank you thank you that's

02:42:43.720 --> 02:42:47.520
 the only cards I have but I welcome any other speaker that wants to come from

02:42:47.520 --> 02:43:03.320
 please sir I'll take it thank you

02:43:03.320 --> 02:43:12.800
 my name is Jeff Pablo I went 2028 Ford and Blaine and Denton I already have

02:43:12.800 --> 02:43:18.000
 concerns the construction that's going on never in my life have I seen drainage

02:43:18.000 --> 02:43:28.640
 pipe installed and taken out four times never in my life have I seen temporary

02:43:28.640 --> 02:43:35.920
 batch plants be shuttled back and forth has anyone from the city paid any

02:43:35.920 --> 02:43:43.760
 attention to what paving is currently happening on that property at the moment

02:43:43.760 --> 02:43:52.000
 is he using fibercrete fibercrete is garbage all you need to do is take a

02:43:52.000 --> 02:43:58.520
 ride around Denton County MHMR property that was entirely fibercrete it broke

02:43:58.520 --> 02:44:07.000
 apart in less than one year especially without reinforcement there are too many

02:44:07.000 --> 02:44:14.840
 other things the already brought up was the retention pond at the southeast

02:44:14.840 --> 02:44:20.960
 corner I have seen that thing overflowing into the adjacent property

02:44:20.960 --> 02:44:27.680
 numerous times already it proves to me that he doesn't know how to build a

02:44:27.680 --> 02:44:33.040
 retention bond he doesn't know who to get there are just too many things along

02:44:33.040 --> 02:44:39.240
 this line what are the widths of the streets are the streets going to be wide

02:44:39.240 --> 02:44:46.320
 enough so that once everything is developed and people have landscapers in

02:44:46.320 --> 02:44:52.680
 place doing work and an emergency vehicle needs to come down through there

02:44:52.680 --> 02:45:01.680
 is there going to be room from what I have seen not so far can consult the NFPA

02:45:01.680 --> 02:45:07.200
 ask the fire department what the requirements are for emergency vehicle

02:45:07.200 --> 02:45:13.400
 access right now I'm not seeing that any accommodation for emergency vehicles is

02:45:13.400 --> 02:45:20.960
 showing up in this development just room for thought thank you I appreciate

02:45:20.960 --> 02:45:25.120
 being here and we can confirm that city compliance and ordinances are being

02:45:25.120 --> 02:45:27.520
 followed

02:45:27.520 --> 02:45:36.040
 engineering plans were approved as part of their final plat in 2018 so it met

02:45:36.040 --> 02:45:42.400
 all city standards and that includes fire access street wits fire access

02:45:42.400 --> 02:45:49.440
 details as far as pavement thickness and the requirements okay thank you Julie

02:45:49.440 --> 02:45:55.240
 this is a public hearing anyone else wishing to speak you can typically we

02:45:55.240 --> 02:46:01.800
 would just allow one time but when you're talking about at our community

02:46:01.800 --> 02:46:05.160
 meeting he informed us that he would be putting up wrought iron around the

02:46:05.160 --> 02:46:09.720
 retention ponds so if the wrought irons already going up around that area I would

02:46:09.720 --> 02:46:15.480
 urge you to please make him continue the wrought iron at least along Hinkle what's

02:46:15.480 --> 02:46:17.700
 good for the goose is good for the gander if you're gonna make him put up

02:46:17.700 --> 02:46:20.400
 masonry make him do it around the whole development or make him do the wrought

02:46:20.400 --> 02:46:24.240
 iron around the whole development and let the neighborhood or the neighbors

02:46:24.240 --> 02:46:28.240
 use like 14 years or something fast-growing to partition their backyard

02:46:28.240 --> 02:46:34.640
 from the street traffic and beautify thank you if you're just speaking we

02:46:34.640 --> 02:46:37.560
 certainly come down to the mic

02:46:40.600 --> 02:46:47.600
 if you just state your name and address you have four minutes I'm Shirley Brown

02:46:47.600 --> 02:46:55.600
 I live at 2304 Vanderbilt Court and I agree with you that I walk my dogs daily

02:46:55.600 --> 02:47:03.320
 from through Bowling Green Park which also have a garden thank the city I want

02:47:03.320 --> 02:47:07.800
 to speak to the width I would like it kept at 50 foot it's just because

02:47:07.800 --> 02:47:13.820
 there's the other part that's very wide I think putting it at 40 is just going to

02:47:13.820 --> 02:47:20.160
 break it up I I would like it kept at 50 some they're all talking about the fences

02:47:20.160 --> 02:47:27.480
 and I know it's I don't like it either we also have so much construction going

02:47:27.480 --> 02:47:35.160
 on in our area Rainy Road behind us Denton High School coming to Bonnie Bray

02:47:35.160 --> 02:47:41.640
 Windsor is a racetrack it really is I had every once in a while I will have

02:47:41.640 --> 02:47:47.400
 some nice person stop and let me and the two dogs run across the across the

02:47:47.400 --> 02:47:52.600
 street but the Denton parks are awesome they do a great job I love living in

02:47:52.600 --> 02:47:59.200
 that area we're an old neighborhood although I only came back in 2000 so

02:47:59.200 --> 02:48:05.080
 anyway I would like to see a little less construction thank you thank you

02:48:05.080 --> 02:48:12.280
 anyone else wish to speak I certainly do so state your name and address for the

02:48:12.280 --> 02:48:21.640
 record I did receive the notification I just didn't quite hear what you said

02:48:21.640 --> 02:48:26.440
 earlier about the overlays do you say they're going away September 1st

02:48:26.440 --> 02:48:32.320
 okay Charles thank you chair they're not going away they're not enforceable with

02:48:32.320 --> 02:48:37.000
 the new state legislation it's what we learned beginning September 1st so

02:48:37.000 --> 02:48:41.920
 though there's an overlay in place that speaks to masonry we were informed today

02:48:41.920 --> 02:48:47.280
 that the city could not enforce that and longer just be more clear that's for

02:48:47.280 --> 02:48:51.240
 building materials only correct any other overlay standard would still be

02:48:51.240 --> 02:48:56.800
 there correct I was confused the only time I hear overlays brought up is when

02:48:56.800 --> 02:49:02.200
 they are being disrespected and I don't know why they exist just to pacify us I

02:49:02.200 --> 02:49:06.960
 guess and they're just turned over and I don't like the fence or the setback

02:49:06.960 --> 02:49:10.360
 amount I think it should be respected because that's why it's there thank you

02:49:10.360 --> 02:49:17.160
 very much anyone else wants to speak they certainly do so

02:49:17.160 --> 02:49:24.480
 seeing that I'll close the public hearing turns the days for discussion or

02:49:24.480 --> 02:49:36.000
 motion Christian Beck thank you chair I want to move to approve the agenda item

02:49:36.000 --> 02:49:46.200
 with an amendment to the fence on Windsor recommending that a masonry wall

02:49:46.200 --> 02:49:55.320
 run along Windsor instead of the wood fence in so doing I would like to

02:49:55.320 --> 02:50:02.040
 comment you know I understand that you'd love to have the masonry fence along

02:50:02.040 --> 02:50:10.160
 Hinkle - and the feeling that the privacy loss of those people it's really up to

02:50:10.160 --> 02:50:14.160
 them to put things in and do if they will if they do they don't you know you

02:50:14.160 --> 02:50:19.640
 could have people in those houses that don't keep their backyards up nice and

02:50:19.640 --> 02:50:23.760
 then you would have a distracted visual there so that's that's a possibility too

02:50:23.760 --> 02:50:30.000
 that's why it's important probably to have a privacy fence it's easier for me

02:50:30.000 --> 02:50:34.960
 to ask for one on a secondary arterial like Windsor than it is on a connector

02:50:34.960 --> 02:50:40.820
 street like Hinkle but so anyway my motion is to approve allowing the

02:50:40.820 --> 02:50:49.480
 setbacks but with replacing the wrought iron fence on Windsor with a masonry

02:50:49.480 --> 02:50:58.000
 fence allowing the board on board cedar fence on Hinkle so we have a first if I

02:50:58.000 --> 02:51:02.240
 understand this correctly out of the four conditions you were just making a

02:51:02.240 --> 02:51:08.640
 change to one to require a mason fence on the Windsor section of the property

02:51:08.640 --> 02:51:12.800
 perimeter correct okay I don't know if the screens are working I don't see a

02:51:12.800 --> 02:51:17.320
 second but I can by a show of hands is there a second

02:51:17.320 --> 02:51:23.960
 seeing none the motion fails Commissioner Smith did you have yeah you

02:51:23.960 --> 02:51:36.120
 were on the board and I had a question for for staff Julie so let's say that we

02:51:36.120 --> 02:51:41.240
 don't we don't vote to approve to change the overlay stays the same wrought iron

02:51:41.240 --> 02:51:47.000
 fencing is what the developer can put up instead the wrought iron fencing what

02:51:47.000 --> 02:51:52.120
 prevents a person who buys a home in the neighborhood what prevents them from

02:51:52.120 --> 02:51:55.280
 tearing that wrought iron fencing down and building a privacy fence around

02:51:55.280 --> 02:51:59.040
 their property or not tearing it down but building a privacy fence behind it

02:51:59.040 --> 02:52:02.520
 if they're if they don't want people seeing back in their backyard and their

02:52:02.520 --> 02:52:05.600
 backyard faces Windsor they don't want people walking by be able to see back

02:52:05.600 --> 02:52:08.760
 there what prevents the private property owner from putting up a privacy fence

02:52:08.760 --> 02:52:12.040
 it's my understanding there would be nothing preventing them so there could

02:52:12.040 --> 02:52:15.880
 be a scenario in which we had we would have a privacy fence on one lot and the

02:52:15.880 --> 02:52:19.480
 next door is another wrought iron fence then another privacy fence in the next

02:52:19.480 --> 02:52:22.760
 lot essentially we could end up with private property owners making the

02:52:22.760 --> 02:52:26.440
 decisions rather than having uniformity along the line correct of the street of

02:52:26.440 --> 02:52:32.680
 Windsor okay thank you Commissioner Sanchez Julie how familiar are you with

02:52:32.680 --> 02:52:40.920
 HOA's they're pretty restrictive when it comes to what they read once some is

02:52:40.920 --> 02:52:46.120
 built it's gonna stay that way is that correct they don't they don't pretty

02:52:46.120 --> 02:52:52.000
 much want everything to be look alike I would imagine it depends on how that

02:52:52.000 --> 02:52:56.880
 HOA structure HOA's works okay I would think it would depend on an each

02:52:56.880 --> 02:53:02.240
 individual HOA how their how their rules are set forth all right I know they're

02:53:02.240 --> 02:53:06.280
 pretty the ones I've been familiar with are pretty restrictive you can't plant a

02:53:06.280 --> 02:53:10.840
 tree unless you get permission from HOA you can't do certain things so it would

02:53:10.840 --> 02:53:17.200
 be hard for me to see everybody doing a different yeah you know putting different

02:53:17.200 --> 02:53:25.440
 items or material in the backyard along Hinkle and even Windsor I would I'm just

02:53:25.440 --> 02:53:37.240
 wondering are you familiar can I speak to the developer following along this

02:53:37.240 --> 02:53:44.800
 this question on a choice if it's gonna be an HOA right yes okay is I my

02:53:44.800 --> 02:53:49.160
 understanding or my experience with a choice they're pretty strict they don't

02:53:49.160 --> 02:53:53.440
 allow you to do on the backyard nobody would be able to do whatever they

02:53:53.440 --> 02:54:00.600
 wanted as a fence along Hinkle and there's no there's no there's not a

02:54:00.600 --> 02:54:05.440
 current restrictive covenant in the HOA that would prevent that and that was I'm

02:54:05.440 --> 02:54:09.600
 glad that was brought up because that was one of the other main reasons for the

02:54:09.600 --> 02:54:14.880
 opaque fence and not having the transparent fence okay there would not

02:54:14.880 --> 02:54:24.240
 be any way to prevent that unfortunately all right just for that and my question

02:54:24.240 --> 02:54:28.120
 to be along the lines of what Commissioner Sanchez was saying so based

02:54:28.120 --> 02:54:35.240
 on what we're talking about right now in theory if we voted against the the

02:54:35.240 --> 02:54:40.680
 changes we would end up with a with a wrought iron fence as it normally would

02:54:40.680 --> 02:54:45.520
 be in theory people purchasing their houses could put up a privacy fence

02:54:45.520 --> 02:54:51.680
 along the back line and along the back and as we don't have HOA guidelines right

02:54:51.680 --> 02:54:55.440
 now we can't say that there's anything that would be restricting people from

02:54:55.440 --> 02:55:03.080
 doing that from from adding on a privacy fence in the future right so I guess so

02:55:03.080 --> 02:55:08.280
 the question on your part was whether or not you believed that it would be

02:55:08.280 --> 02:55:15.320
 restrictive to allow people to add a privacy fence at a future time or well my

02:55:15.320 --> 02:55:21.280
 understanding of an HOA once the houses get developed the HOA is developed okay

02:55:21.280 --> 02:55:25.520
 and they set up their guidelines with that neighborhood all right now you move

02:55:25.520 --> 02:55:30.200
 into that neighborhood and you decide hey I don't like people looking through

02:55:30.200 --> 02:55:33.880
 my backyard I want to do something different the HOA has already been

02:55:33.880 --> 02:55:38.520
 established and they have their rules and you're not going to be able to change

02:55:38.520 --> 02:55:41.920
 do what you want because they already have their rules now if they say you can

02:55:41.920 --> 02:55:50.480
 do whatever you want along Hinkle or along Windsor along that fence you can

02:55:50.480 --> 02:55:54.120
 do whatever you want but the the rules are usually established before the

02:55:54.120 --> 02:55:57.640
 houses are sold so neighbors don't move in there and start doing whatever they

02:55:57.640 --> 02:56:02.560
 want okay when you buy that house you belong to an HOA and that each of those

02:56:02.560 --> 02:56:09.040
 guidelines are set okay and I understand that I guess and I guess this would be

02:56:09.040 --> 02:56:12.840
 something that the developer would have to explore in terms of whether or not

02:56:12.840 --> 02:56:17.360
 people would make those purchases with with this in mind I would imagine that

02:56:17.360 --> 02:56:24.720
 people purchasing a house with a back fence facing Hinkle or Windsor would

02:56:24.720 --> 02:56:28.840
 eventually would actually want a privacy fence and that would be and you know

02:56:28.840 --> 02:56:33.640
 value added on thing at the time of the purchase so most likely I wouldn't

02:56:33.640 --> 02:56:37.000
 imagine that that would be restrictive in terms of us saying let's let's vote

02:56:37.000 --> 02:56:41.280
 for the wrought iron fence knowing that this is something that could possibly be

02:56:41.280 --> 02:56:47.440
 added on at a future time so thanks I just wanted to clarify where we're going

02:56:47.440 --> 02:56:56.160
 on on that one Christian Smith nature I'm gonna make a motion to approve with

02:56:56.160 --> 02:57:02.280
 staff recommendations as they sat the presentation I actually would have liked

02:57:02.280 --> 02:57:08.180
 to see this be a masonry wall all the way around I don't know if I feel

02:57:08.180 --> 02:57:13.680
 comfortable whenever we include Hinkle and Windsor in that making the the

02:57:13.680 --> 02:57:16.280
 developer have to eat that cost even though they could pass it along in the

02:57:16.280 --> 02:57:21.600
 valley of the home but I can't can't sit here and say that I support leaving it

02:57:21.600 --> 02:57:25.720
 as is and then having the developer have to put a wrought iron knowing that then

02:57:25.720 --> 02:57:30.480
 you would then have this inconsistency over time that private property owners

02:57:30.480 --> 02:57:35.440
 will at some point in time not want to have people looking in their backyard

02:57:35.440 --> 02:57:39.280
 you can't you can't depict about what the what the character of the

02:57:39.280 --> 02:57:43.440
 neighborhood is now and how people like it in that neighborhood but people

02:57:43.440 --> 02:57:46.920
 moving into there they're bound to be somebody who's not gonna want it and

02:57:46.920 --> 02:57:51.160
 we'll put up a privacy fence eventually and so the inconsistency is something

02:57:51.160 --> 02:57:54.440
 that I'm just saying going down the line in the future that I'd like to take out

02:57:54.440 --> 02:58:01.640
 of the equation so make a motion to approve. We have a motion to approve with

02:58:01.640 --> 02:58:07.800
 staff recommendations. Commissioner Sanchez. Yeah I would like to second

02:58:07.800 --> 02:58:13.400
 that I also agree with you I think the people are gonna move in there they want

02:58:13.400 --> 02:58:17.040
 it they're they're gonna want privacy in their backyard I know most people do in

02:58:17.040 --> 02:58:21.000
 most neighborhoods that where the backyard does face the street you see

02:58:21.000 --> 02:58:26.920
 you see some type of wall because I think I just I agree with you in the

02:58:26.920 --> 02:58:32.840
 sense that people just don't want people looking in their backyard. So a first and

02:58:32.840 --> 02:58:37.640
 a second any discussion? Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair I just want to make a

02:58:37.640 --> 02:58:41.280
 couple comments thanks for sharing all your concerns and I understand the

02:58:41.280 --> 02:58:45.280
 frustration with this property clearly when you look at the history of it back

02:58:45.280 --> 02:58:50.960
 in 2002 I'm sure there was concern when the original zoning change was made from

02:58:50.960 --> 02:58:55.440
 NR 2 to NR 3 and there was a great deal of overlay restrictions put on it I'm

02:58:55.440 --> 02:59:01.400
 sure because of that concern however in 2015 most of those restrictions were

02:59:01.400 --> 02:59:08.440
 removed some of the restrictions that remain right now honestly don't make

02:59:08.440 --> 02:59:13.160
 sense for the way this is developed a wrought iron fence along Windsor Drive

02:59:13.160 --> 02:59:17.760
 is not what any homeowner wants right there Windsor Drive is only going to get

02:59:17.760 --> 02:59:22.080
 busier someone called it a thoroughfare now it will get widened it will have

02:59:22.080 --> 02:59:27.960
 more traffic on it a wrought iron fence and again with the concerns brought up

02:59:27.960 --> 02:59:32.560
 that possibly homeowners putting up various other fencing to hide the fact

02:59:32.560 --> 02:59:36.840
 that Windsor is behind them on a wrought iron fence just doesn't make sense so

02:59:36.840 --> 02:59:45.320
 while I understand the frustration because of the past what we're left with

02:59:45.320 --> 02:59:51.480
 right now to consider is we can't go back to 2002 unfortunately we can't go

02:59:51.480 --> 02:59:55.920
 back to 2015 when those overlay restrictions were changed so what we're

02:59:55.920 --> 03:00:01.920
 forced with what is the decision to that we have before us today which is the

03:00:01.920 --> 03:00:09.040
 couple of conditions that is on the board now to vote on thank you Mr.

03:00:09.040 --> 03:00:15.620
 Commissioner Beck thank you chair just want to make some comments to explain my

03:00:15.620 --> 03:00:21.440
 vote considering everything I've said Commissioner Smith makes sense here as

03:00:21.440 --> 03:00:27.520
 much as I'd like to see a masonry wall go up there one thing that's that is

03:00:27.520 --> 03:00:31.360
 going to affect not only the people that live there but the people live around

03:00:31.360 --> 03:00:36.120
 them is the fact that wrought iron fence would expose a lot of things and create

03:00:36.120 --> 03:00:41.640
 conditions that might make it worse than they think I don't like seeing a wooden

03:00:41.640 --> 03:00:49.280
 fence go up there I'm glad it is it's the value of the fences is a high value

03:00:49.280 --> 03:00:55.680
 wood fence the cedar fence with the top rail board on board but down the road

03:00:55.680 --> 03:00:59.360
 we're gonna have to deal with that and I hope it is dealt with with an efficient

03:00:59.360 --> 03:01:06.920
 HOA so I'll be voting along with Commissioner Smith's motion to approve

03:01:06.920 --> 03:01:12.240
 thank you Mr. before we vote I just wanted to thank everyone for coming out

03:01:12.240 --> 03:01:19.360
 and speaking your thoughts and helping us contextualize I don't happen to live

03:01:19.360 --> 03:01:21.880
 in the neighborhood so other Commissioners do and so just having a

03:01:21.880 --> 03:01:26.880
 holistic viewpoint is helpful to kind of walk through this process we don't take

03:01:26.880 --> 03:01:30.640
 any decisions up here lightly it's being on behalf the Commission for that and so

03:01:30.640 --> 03:01:34.400
 I appreciate you'd spend in your Wednesday evening with us I'm gonna be

03:01:34.400 --> 03:01:39.720
 in support of this and just for context Commissioner Beck there's a recent

03:01:39.720 --> 03:01:43.560
 situation in the neighborhood where they had an HOA and a masonry fence along an

03:01:43.560 --> 03:01:52.240
 arterial and the cost to repair the masonry fence was substantial enough

03:01:52.240 --> 03:01:56.440
 that the residents and the HOA are now enrolled in a lawsuit about who pays for

03:01:56.440 --> 03:02:00.420
 that and so I know you mentioned that a masonry fence provides a value long-term

03:02:00.420 --> 03:02:04.360
 except when it goes really bad they're really expensive to fix a cedar board

03:02:04.360 --> 03:02:09.960
 on board is a little bit more accessible to fix and so I would probably push back

03:02:09.960 --> 03:02:13.720
 on you respectfully about the value of a masonry fence when that starts to break

03:02:13.720 --> 03:02:17.840
 who pays for that and how that gets worked out I've seen personally through

03:02:17.840 --> 03:02:22.280
 family members to be a kind of a sticky situation to to go through and so I

03:02:22.280 --> 03:02:26.600
 agree with Commissioner Ellis about the wrought iron I think a uniform privacy

03:02:26.600 --> 03:02:31.040
 fence that's just like the properties to the West when I leave the tennis courts

03:02:31.040 --> 03:02:34.480
 or the driving range and drive down Windsor right when you pass Parkside

03:02:34.480 --> 03:02:38.120
 there's several homes that have the wooden fence and so I don't think it'll

03:02:38.120 --> 03:02:42.760
 be a discrepancy to go for a wooden fence they have a patch of trees back to

03:02:42.760 --> 03:02:46.960
 wooden fences the only thing that I would reiterate to the developer is is

03:02:46.960 --> 03:02:52.560
 to look at the HOA there's a lot of ability to standardize future

03:02:52.560 --> 03:02:57.440
 development and the current development to really make it a high standard someone

03:02:57.440 --> 03:03:03.520
 mentioned quality of the product and I think having a a strong HOA can push

03:03:03.520 --> 03:03:09.960
 back on some of the potential commentary about what's going in in the

03:03:09.960 --> 03:03:12.520
 neighborhood so I think it's a really unique opportunity you have especially

03:03:12.520 --> 03:03:16.840
 with the state legislation to take control of the narrative that you want

03:03:16.840 --> 03:03:20.440
 provides that neighborhood so I would encourage you to look at HOA and amend

03:03:20.440 --> 03:03:24.980
 where needed with the building materials or other opportunities you have and with

03:03:24.980 --> 03:03:30.300
 that I would strongly encourage you within the budget to buy and plant the

03:03:30.300 --> 03:03:35.520
 biggest trees possible initially I know we talked about canopy at growth I just

03:03:35.520 --> 03:03:39.440
 think it'd be a benefit to the parks in Denton that when you're in North Lakes

03:03:39.440 --> 03:03:42.920
 Park and running those trails or at the airfield and you look across and and you

03:03:42.920 --> 03:03:46.640
 have big trees earlier and so we're not waiting a decade to get some good

03:03:46.640 --> 03:03:51.520
 coverage there and that that pathway so again those aren't conditions at all but

03:03:51.520 --> 03:03:55.280
 rather just suggestions for the beautification of Denton and the quality

03:03:55.280 --> 03:03:58.920
 of the development you're putting in but with that I don't see any other

03:03:58.920 --> 03:04:02.760
 discussion so we'll call for a vote on the board

03:04:02.760 --> 03:04:14.960
 motion carries six one congratulations that moves us to the last item of

03:04:14.960 --> 03:04:21.080
 business item 6 P&Z matrix I will let Richard begin and open it up for

03:04:21.080 --> 03:04:28.800
 additions or comments I don't have much to add on to the to the matrix this

03:04:28.800 --> 03:04:33.480
 evening just wanted to highlight a couple items again that the upland

03:04:33.480 --> 03:04:38.640
 habitat that will be coming coming forward when the criteria manual for the

03:04:38.640 --> 03:04:42.680
 ESA is brought forth so that that is still going through through committee I

03:04:42.680 --> 03:04:46.760
 did still leave on and if you've noticed it it will continue to stay on sort of

03:04:46.760 --> 03:04:54.000
 the draft policies and procedures I think as we finalize the the ordinance is

03:04:54.000 --> 03:04:58.360
 related to these bills and in light of the item tonight regarding the

03:04:58.360 --> 03:05:04.680
 attendance just coming back and looking at that in in in totality we did hit the

03:05:04.680 --> 03:05:09.720
 the urban forestry master plan tree fund finally I think I think Gary did a great

03:05:09.720 --> 03:05:14.040
 job sort of going through all the items that they're they're working on and then

03:05:14.040 --> 03:05:18.040
 the staff analysis update I initially was anticipating bringing that actually

03:05:18.040 --> 03:05:25.400
 today as we finalize the ordinances that will be brought forth next week after

03:05:25.400 --> 03:05:30.320
 that you'll see it sort of in all in one so rather than give it to you piece bill

03:05:30.320 --> 03:05:34.200
 you can kind of see how it all how it all fits together but but really it's

03:05:34.200 --> 03:05:43.080
 just simplifying how we how we create our our staff analysis primarily for for

03:05:43.080 --> 03:05:48.760
 plats so I think you'll see a much more one robust but but a little more a

03:05:48.760 --> 03:05:53.600
 little more detail in just what we are what we are looking at inciting for

03:05:53.600 --> 03:05:58.500
 those plat reports that was all ahead thanks for the update Mr. Smith thank

03:05:58.500 --> 03:06:02.340
 you I think we talked a little about today dear to work session but I think

03:06:02.340 --> 03:06:06.660
 as soon as legal and city gets a chance to really look over those those house

03:06:06.660 --> 03:06:11.960
 bills getting up getting a really fully fledged good work session report just

03:06:11.960 --> 03:06:16.380
 on what that is how it's gonna impact us what you know we want to keep on having

03:06:16.380 --> 03:06:20.240
 to ask every single time we get a presentation of Kim can we can we vote

03:06:20.240 --> 03:06:24.320
 on this can we enforce this anymore what kind of things change and specifically

03:06:24.320 --> 03:06:26.760
 the reason I wanted to speak up because I'm sure that the city was good we were

03:06:26.760 --> 03:06:30.760
 gonna go ahead and do that anyways but I would like to see some specific examples

03:06:30.760 --> 03:06:37.400
 if Jerry or planning department can come back and say remember this case you guys

03:06:37.400 --> 03:06:41.200
 voted this way and we did it this way with this stack recommendation this is

03:06:41.200 --> 03:06:46.320
 no longer allowed okay thank you we need just saying the law and and and

03:06:46.320 --> 03:06:50.680
 expounding upon the law is great and all but the Jerry you're a smart guy I'm not

03:06:50.680 --> 03:06:55.160
 so I need you to do it give it to me in the picture book form okay well I need

03:06:55.160 --> 03:07:01.040
 appreciate it Cynthia's even smarter if she's ever joining us she have their

03:07:01.040 --> 03:07:04.920
 license gets down here apparently that mail that mail route from from Minnesota

03:07:04.920 --> 03:07:12.680
 to here is pretty long commissioner Ellis thank you chair I'd like to thank all my

03:07:12.680 --> 03:07:17.360
 fellow commissioners for reconsidering my absence requests so thank you very much

03:07:17.360 --> 03:07:23.920
 for your support in that I definitely would like to discuss that policy as we

03:07:23.920 --> 03:07:27.520
 sent that back before and bring that back before us so we can have some

03:07:27.520 --> 03:07:31.320
 further discussion and how that is poorly written and what needs to happen

03:07:31.320 --> 03:07:36.360
 there so thank you for that also Richard is there any city council updates that

03:07:36.360 --> 03:07:41.680
 we need to know with regard to any recent votes there there was the my

03:07:41.680 --> 03:07:46.200
 apologies because I did take a little vacation so I missed the last council

03:07:46.200 --> 03:07:53.320
 meeting but they did approve the on the 23rd the group two amendments map

03:07:53.320 --> 03:07:58.440
 amendments with the exception of I believe it was area 40 that was a

03:07:58.440 --> 03:08:02.360
 request if you recall I believe that was around loop 288 the property owner I

03:08:02.360 --> 03:08:10.320
 believe did not want that rezoning and I also believe the the item that that the

03:08:10.320 --> 03:08:14.400
 Commission recommended denial of them I believe that also was was not approved

03:08:14.400 --> 03:08:19.120
 by by City Council I will confirm that but I do believe those two were not

03:08:19.120 --> 03:08:26.220
 brought forward Mr. Prunetta and kind of building on what Commissioner Smith said

03:08:26.220 --> 03:08:30.360
 a second ago with the discussion on the the various house bills and particularly

03:08:30.360 --> 03:08:35.200
 how they hobble what we traditionally are allowed to review and discuss with

03:08:35.200 --> 03:08:39.360
 you know the public I just wanted to make sure that when you know we're kind

03:08:39.360 --> 03:08:43.040
 of putting those things together and the impact it's going to have that you know

03:08:43.040 --> 03:08:47.800
 we provide in some way information to disseminate at you know public meetings

03:08:47.800 --> 03:08:51.080
 you know neighborhood meetings on you know future developments coming up so

03:08:51.080 --> 03:08:54.560
 that way you know neighbors people who are concerned about things going up in

03:08:54.560 --> 03:08:59.120
 in you know areas close to them kind of understand that there are restrictions

03:08:59.120 --> 03:09:03.960
 that we have going forward and that they know what the restrictions the city has

03:09:03.960 --> 03:09:08.200
 going forward in terms of you know the things they can oppose the things they

03:09:08.200 --> 03:09:14.440
 can ask for and what's being put in there you know the home is close to them

03:09:14.440 --> 03:09:19.240
 certainly it might even be we can probably put together a even just a

03:09:19.240 --> 03:09:24.600
 simple like FAQ or simple what what can and what can't we do as a as a community

03:09:24.600 --> 03:09:32.840
 yeah Richard I only have one thing I know that does it wasn't pertinent to any

03:09:32.840 --> 03:09:39.640
 of the discussion items today but we we started implementing financial economic

03:09:39.640 --> 03:09:44.200
 consequences and benefits to projects and again it wasn't pertinent tonight and

03:09:44.200 --> 03:09:48.120
 I do realize that there's a former chair of P&Z that would probably prefer to

03:09:48.120 --> 03:09:52.680
 know like every cost developer made to get to that point I don't know if that

03:09:52.680 --> 03:09:55.880
 context is needed but if there's situations where developers doing a

03:09:55.880 --> 03:09:59.160
 quid pro quo with the city that is helpful to know because there is a

03:09:59.160 --> 03:10:05.080
 developer tonight who bought right away and rerouted a city line that type of

03:10:05.080 --> 03:10:11.320
 stuff if there if a developer is helping our city there's a project over by Bill

03:10:11.320 --> 03:10:16.360
 letter forward south of town where they were also helping connectivity if it's

03:10:16.360 --> 03:10:20.520
 possible to include that in the assessment just to understand the

03:10:20.520 --> 03:10:25.720
 willingness of that negotiation that goes on that would be helpful if if it's

03:10:25.720 --> 03:10:34.920
 applicable any other items for the matrix or questions seeing none I'll call this

03:10:34.920 --> 03:10:39.640
 meeting to close at 821