Jun 26, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2024-06-26 5:00 PM

Good afternoon and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for Wednesday, June 26, 2024. This is our work session and with the quorum present, I will call us to order at 5.04 p.m. Let the record show that Commissioners Thaggard and Padrone are absent at this time. First item on our work session is the citizen comment for consent agenda items. I don't see anyone here for that. So we will move on to our clarification of agenda items for tonight's meeting. First being the minutes for June 12. Any questions, comments? Okay. Next, we have one item on consent agenda. Is there any questions there? No? I thank you, Barnes, for being available. Okay. Next move on to our items for individual consideration we've had. We had quite a few emails that some of them came pretty late, so we'll go through these. First one is 4AFP24002 format is here for presentation of that item. Good evening. No, no, it's afternoon. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. All right. Here we go. This is not the right one. Here we go. All right. Good afternoon. Matt Bodine, assistant planner, presenting this plaque on behalf of Sean Jacobson. So this is a final plaque or here to consider a quest of a final plaque of Sage Creek. No, this is not the right one. Never mind. Yes, this is not Sean's one though. Here we go. Sage Creek. All right. Here we go. Now we're ready. All right. So this is a request of the final plot of Sage Creek townhomes in approximately 24 acre site located at the intersection of Audreau Lane and Lattimore Street. This applies to establish 163 residential townhome lots, nine common area lots and the necessary easements and right away. Staff is recommending denial of this plot as is because it does not meet their criteria for approval. We have no objection to the requested extension to a date of July 24th and this would be the first extension request. Thank you, Matt. Any questions? Okay. Appreciate it. Thank you very much. The next several items B through F, we do have a commissioner wanting to recuse on those items, but if we do that, we will lose the quorum. So we are going to move right on through and go on to 4G, FP240021. Matt is back up for that one. This is one that was emailed to us very early in the week. We had a change on that, so Matt will walk us through that. Here we go. Yeah, so this is a final plot of lots 1 and 2, block A, force crossing, phase two addition. Is approximately 20 acre track, generally located on the west side of North Mayhill Road, approximately 1,000 feet north of North McKinney Street. Is to create two lots, one of them is a multifamily development, which was approved, which has an approved specific use permit that was approved by City Council on February 7th. And then also part of this plot is dedicating part of a new Collector Street Hummingbird Lane. At the time the report came out on Friday, this plot was seeking an extension, but over the weekend they were able to meet the last few criterias, clear the last few comments, and so an updated plot was sent on Monday. And so they now meet the criteria for approval and staff is recommending approval. Excellent. Thank you. Questions for Matt? Thank you very much. Oh, Matt, you're up for the next one, 24HFP240023. It's your show tonight. Yes. So this is a final plot of lot 1, block A, Riviera addition. That's about a 15 acre track on the north side of Fishtrap Road. On the east side of the town is to create a lot of record from a previously unplotted tract, the property owner had been using a private water well for water services but that water well has failed and so they have recently submitted for civil engineering plans to access city water and as part of that they need to final plot and hence we are here. At this time it does not meet the criteria for approval, however, staff has no objection to the requested extension to July 24th and this would be their first extension. Great. Questions? Thank you, Matt. All right. Appreciate it. Next on our items for individual consideration is for IPD240005. That's Mia's item. This was our public hearing item from last meeting that we tabled till today. Hello, Mia. Good evening, Chair, members of the commission, Mia Hines, senior planner. This item, like you said, is the PD overlay with a light industrial based zoning district that was continued at the last meeting. Just a reminder, it's located north of Black Road, it includes just under 53 acres and the request is again for an overlay PD with a light industrial based zoning and some additional conditions that would allow for some protections for the adjacent residential areas. Some of the things that we added since that last meeting to the PD development regulations are use restrictions, specifically those related to automobile services, travel plaza, hotel, motel, parking lot as the principal use and then we've also added the building height restriction of 55 feet. One of the other things that was discussed during the public hearing was removing the ability for an alternative ESA compliance review. After discussing that with our technical staff who reviews ESA, they did acknowledge that an alternative ESA could potentially lead to better drainage conditions for the residents in that area so they wouldn't want to remove that flexibility at this stage. We heard the residents and then the applicant has agreed to add these additional restrictions to their regulations. So we're back with that with the recommendation of approval and I will happily take any questions or comments. Thank you. I know we had a lot of discussion about the wall the last time as well. So I think in our red line, it had new verbiage in it. Yeah, the consensus we realized was that where a wall could go for security purposes, the residents would like to see that there but their main priority or their main focus was the preservation of the existing tree canopy and so what we tried to add in these PD regulations is that, like I said, in areas where it can go, it should go but we encourage the preservation of the tree canopy within that 50 foot buffer and actually we've added the requirement to require all healthy trees be preserved within that 50 foot buffer. I know we went back and forth about the wall being required, not required and so now it says if provided so giving the flexibility that if it's going to go in, it should have these parameters. Correct. Well done. Questions for Mia or anybody else? Thank you very much. That will take us to two public hearings for tonight. First is 5AZ240008. Erin is here for presentation of that item. Hello. Good evening, Chair, members of commission, Erin Stanley, Assistant Planner. This is Z24-0008, Crowe Billingsley of Denton Rezoning. So this is going to be a rezoning on approximately 7.8 acres, generally south of US 380 and west of Mosh Branch Road, rezoning from rural residential to light industrial zoning district and the property was annexed in 2010. Currently it is undeveloped and surrounded primarily by other undeveloped property and gas wells and staff is recommending approval tonight. I'll have a more detailed presentation in the main session but I'll happily answer any questions. Thanks, Erin. Any questions for Erin? Okay. Thank you. Second public hearing tonight is 5BDC240004. Haley is here for a summary of that item. Good evening, Chair, members of the commission. Haley Zagorski, Assistant Planning Director. If you'll recall in April we had a work session regarding razor ranch and kind of the history that's led us to where we are today of needing to adopt appendix A into the DDC formally. So that's what's before you this evening is that consolidation of those 20 plus razor ranch ordinances that have been developed since approximately 2007. This placeholder has been in the code since we adopted it in 2019. It's just taken us some time to get to the point where we have all of those in a format that we could bring before you all. There is one change that I would consider substantive from what has been in the razor ranch overlay for all this time and that is that they are asking for an additional 250 multifamily units to be allowed on the south campus. If you recall in 2021 we had a similar request where they were getting close to the threshold that had been set at seven, I believe it was 1,750 units and so we upped that at that time to 2,000. Now that they're nearing build out of the project they are needing a slight increase in that and so we've baked in a little bit of flexibility there to give them the ability to finish out those projects hopefully if you all in council are to approve of that increase. But staff is recommending approval of this and I'm happy to go over any additional details that you may have questions on at this time. Thanks Hayman. Questions? Concerns? It's a big undertaking, I'm glad it's been done finally. It's been quite the effort so we're glad to be here. Thank you, appreciate it. Now that Commissioner Perderone has joined us I'm going to go ahead and backtrack. We're accusing Commissioner Cole of our items for individual consideration B through F and I'm going to go ahead and invite Julie up for 4B FP 240022. Hi Julie. Hello. Good evening, Julie Wyatt. Ah here we are, sorry about that. All right. This is a final plat for unit 40 of Robeson Ranch, it's a single family residential development. It's consistent with the plan development that was detailed planned out in 2011. They do have to work through their civil plan still and some items that they needed to correct on the final plat. So staff is recommending denial, however we have no objection to the extension to July 24th and I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thanks Julie. Commissioner O'Rourke. How many extensions have they had at this point? Sorry I apologize, this would be the first extension, yes sir. Great. Thanks Julie. Thank you. Okay and the next items which are 4C through F, Erin is going to present those. We got a few emails on those during the week, just want to make sure everybody understands the changes from the original backup. Yeah that's the first one. Okay. Erin Stanley, assistant planner, I'm presenting these for, no not that one, for Cameron Robertson on that. So this is Hunter Ranch Phase 1A. This is a final plat request and we are recommending approval. In your backup we originally did say that this was going to be an extension request. They've since satisfied all the outstanding comments in their CEP so they can move forward with approval for the final plat. There also was a change since it got sent out with the name. So they have sold off not instead of Hunter Ranch Land LLC, it is now Landmark Phase 1 LLC and all the plots have been updated to reflect that. And they also changed a couple notes. So the notes previously on the plat there was one that total summarized the HOA's responsibility to maintain open space as well as the drainage areas and we separated those out into two comments now or to two notes and so that is reflected on all of these plots as well. So this is the first plat and I can move on to the second if there's any questions. Okay, please do. So this one, all the same comments apply to this. This would just be Phase 1B of the Hunter Ranch development and we are also recommending approval. I'm sorry, okay, and then this is Phase 1C also recommending approval. And Phase 1D also recommending approval. Okay, thank you very much. Appreciate that. Thank you. Going through that. I think, yep, that takes us through our agenda. We will get Commissioner Cole back in here and we've got two work session reports. Our first one is 3APZ24130. I'm not exactly sure who's presenting that, Mia? Okay. Mia and Julie. Very good. Set up team here. Okay, good evening, Chair, members of the commission, again, Mia Hines, Senior Planner here to talk action items for the Southeast Denton Area Plan. So just to remind you guys, the area that we're talking about, well, first I want to say that we've done a lot of work on this project. It's been a long time coming to get to this point and we're very excited about where we are and how we can move forward. We hope to get you all this backup information a week in advance, but we wanted to take the time to discuss the action items with our steering committee meeting, our team. We did have like a three and a half hour long conversation with them over all of the action items. We got their feedback and their input and we'll talk through some of that when we go through those items. And then within this presentation, we're going to hit some highlights for you guys and get your feedback on those items. But of course, any detailed or any additional comments and feedback you got, we will gladly take that. So again, just reminding you guys where we're talking about, this is the Southeast Denton Area, generally includes 600 acres bounded by McKinney Street to the north, Bell Avenue and Dallas Drive to the west. That's Teasley Lane and Shady Oaks to the south and Woodrow Lane to the east. And this area does include a little bit of a transition on the north side of McKinney, on the east side of Woodrow and then the south side of Shady Oaks and Teasley as well, where we consider the land uses in this area as they might potentially impact the core southeastern residential neighborhoods and areas. So we've done a lot of, like I said, public engagement throughout this process. And what we've learned from the community, or I'm sorry, through those public engagement avenues that we've taken up our listening sessions, where we've gone out to the community, we've held meetings where they were to come in to speak with us, to go through, be very candid, have open, honest conversations about what they dislike and dislike about their area, what they would like to see for their areas, where the city has fallen short in some instances, a very open and honest conversation that we had with them during the listening sessions. And then we realized that we wanted to make sure that we were touching a different crowd, the crowd that generally does not show up at our events. And so we did pop-up events at local functions that were going on within the area as well as local restaurants and things like that, trying to meet people where they were. At those pop-up, I'm sorry, those were the intercept surveys. And then we did pop-up events at like Juneteenth and events and festivals and stuff like that where we ran those intercept surveys. We've done some online surveys via Discuss Denton. We've done some visioning workshop, again, inviting people to come in and have some conversations about their vision for the area. We've also done some visual preference surveys where we ask the people specifically what would you like to see as far as the development, what do you think that the architectural style of the area is, what would you like to see as far as commercial goes and things like that. And the key things that we learned from these events were that the area would like to see improved communication between the city and the neighborhood. They want to see a standard for housing, ensuring the long-term affordability, limiting displacement. They want to see the community assets maintained and cherished. They want to see improved infrastructure, preserve Denton's history and remember the lessons of Quaker Town so that we don't repeat the mistakes of the past. And then also in the pattern of perceived neglect and begin to heal that area as a result or following the historic trauma that they've received. And so we built on those key points, we built some desired outcomes, what we surmise. That includes a fair share of political and economic and social investment, the celebration of the black cultural roots within this area, wanting to obtain a variety of housing types and pricing options for the area to diversify the housing options for this area, creating a safe and accessible connected network. And then also improvements to public amenities, their parks, Carl Young, Fred Moore are very cherished assets within their areas and they would like to see some improvements to those. With that we pulled in some visions and goals, building trust, honoring the culture and heritage, investing in economic prosperity, strengthening those neighborhoods and housing affordability, elevating the quality of public infrastructure and then also creating again a safe and connected multimodal travel system. With that we came up with our recommended or from that we came up with our recommended strategies which we have brought to this body to talk through some of those. And those have been also reviewed and validated by our steering committee and city council as well. So after taking on the existing conditions, giving us the desired outcomes, community vision and goals, taking the recommended strategies, now we are at those proposed implementation and action steps and now we are trying to get your feedback on the things that we are hoping to implement, staff is hoping to do, where we're hoping to partner with other organizations and actually make these things happen, make these things that the community wants come true. So with that I will just briefly go over the basically table of continent for our action matrix that we have. This table over here identifies city of Denton partners to your left there, identifies city of Denton partners and agencies. Keep in mind those acronyms because you'll see those throughout the matrix. As far as time frame goes we've broken each action step into short term, mid term, long term time frames where short term is hoping to have done in one to two years, mid term is hoping to have done in three to five and then long term is six to ten. And then also we've categorized the types of actions that we're going to discuss and go through also. And with that I will hand it over to Julie to get us going. >> All right, so there's 53 action steps, so we won't go over every single one line-by-line. We did do that with our steering committee last week, it took a lot of time but it was a really important conversation that we had with the group to get their feedback, to validate the findings and to make sure that we, that this plan is reflective of the community's desires. >> I also wanted to note that we did bring these actions to the community also at the Juneteenth Festival last weekend, so we've gotten community feedback as well as steering committee feedback on these action items. >> Yes, thank you Mia, that was an important point because we really, we wanted to make sure that we got this information to the community as well. So I wanted to just set the table a little bit, these action steps are intended for us to achieve those strategies and ultimately the goal and vision of Southeast Denton. So these are going to be really those work-a-day tasks that staff is going to be doing, taking the lead on, but also partnering with those other agencies. So they really are intended to reflect back to those strategies. So we're going to talk about just a few of them that are probably most significant, particularly to the Planning and Zoning Commission. And how we're going to do it is talk about the goals, so the first ones we're going to talk about are related to goal two, which is honor the culture and heritage of Southeast Denton. To set the table a little bit for you, we heard from the community about the importance of the culture of Southeast Denton. This has been a prominent home to Denton's black American residents for decades, and the churches and homes and businesses and streets and all of that created this fabric of a community that is so important to the residents, however, the demographics have changed recently, and that it is now a more diverse population. So we've got roughly a third and a third of a third, not exactly, but that it would of black, Hispanic, and then white. So those demographics are changing, but we want to make sure that we keep in mind the history of Southeast Denton, and that all future residents understand the importance of Southeast Denton. And so with that, we have this first summary of action steps, I'm not going to read all of them to you, but I just want to talk about a summary, to honor that heritage and culture. And first is to survey it, so to look at the historic resources, those architectural resources, maybe notable cultural areas, to educate the residents and property owners of the value of preservation, to let them know what preservation means, what it could mean in terms of potentially grant funding or impacts to the community. We want to coordinate with property owners to designate individual structures and districts. This was an important one to Mitchell, to create a cultural district, to acknowledge Southeast Denton places and families who created it. And you could do that in a variety of ways. And what we want to make sure in these action steps is not to tie it down necessarily to a specific thing, but to keep it a little bit broad so that we can make changes. So thinking of things like murals or the sign toppers are a great way to honor the culture. You could have festivals, you could have wayfinding signs, all of those things could honor that culture of Southeast Denton, both physical items, but also maybe things like tours. And use these districts to honor those past residents and cultures who call Southeast Denton home. So it would not only be that historic black culture, but also adding in those new cultures, the Hispanic culture. And that was something that the steering committee brought up, that we want to make sure that we honor all the cultures that call Southeast Denton home. These are short-term and mid-term tasks, so that one to two or three to five years, they're going to require coordination with external partners. You know, in thinking about funding, maybe grants would be a good source of funding for this. And then also, as with anything, public outreach, communication is going to be needed. This is how the matrix looks. So unless you want to talk through these, we could go on to the next group of items or I could be happy to answer any questions related to goal two, the history and culture. Questions? No? Yep. Keep going. All right. All right. The next goal I want to talk about and the action items that relate to it are goal four, strengthen neighborhoods. So at our visioning workshop last August, we talked to the community about areas that they want to see that they would be open to change and areas that they would like to preserve. And this is the map that resulted from that conversation. So the area in orange are areas that we really want to maintain, and that is those residential neighborhoods. Those are really important to the community. The areas that are in blue are the ones that the community's open to some change in that area. And so with that, we also did a visual preference survey. So we went back to the community and said, okay, in those areas of change or in the community, what kind of housing types of commercial development would you like to see? The community was open to that middle housing, so things like duplexes or maybe some fourplexes or triplexes, but they really also wanted to maintain those single family homes, especially in the core neighborhoods. They weren't really open to multifamily development, especially within the core, but they understand in those areas in blue that a lot of that zoning has been in place for a long time, and those are the areas that they would be open to more of that multifamily development. We've also heard from the community that they do want that commercial, particularly we hear like a grocery store or a pharmacy someplace to shop. We asked them what kind of commercial spaces that they would like to see. They liked that sort of maybe small grocery or pharmacy, but they also liked maybe converting some houses in some specific areas to allow for commercial development in those houses, something that could be nested inside the neighborhood and would be compatible with the surrounding development. So based upon the areas of change of stability and this, we are proposing some modifications to the land use. So this map here on the left, that is our current land use map and in the comprehensive plan that was adopted in 2022. The areas I want to call your attention to are the ones outlined in blue. Those under the current future land use, these right here are that downtown future land use. This relates to the county facilities, and then this has low residential. We are proposing to make some modifications to that to shift some of that downtown area to more neighborhood serving. So take it out of that downtown future land use, shift it down to that neighborhood serving so that any future development, any development area would be compatible with those adjacent neighborhoods, provide that transition. We're also proposing to create kind of a new symbology here for our future land use, that is the county property and it's developed as such. But we wanted to imagine what would happen in that corner if and when the county did decide to move their facilities. So we created this symbology to mix community mixed use with that public facilities so that we can imagine what types of uses we would want to see on that corner if and when that time to redevelop ever came. And then finally, this corner here at Morse and Woodrow, it's kind of a good corner, we've got an arterial there on Woodrow and then at some point in the future it will be signalized. So we think that might be a good opportunity for some neighborhoods serving commercial development. I would also point out that we talked about last week with the steering committee, the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan did classify the area kind of south of or off of Shady Oaks, kind of south of Duncan as community mixed use. This plan kind of reaffirmed that. Once again, that was in that area of change. It is currently developed with some industrial uses or heavy commercial uses. And we foresee that if and when it redevelops to be more consistent with something you would see adjacent to a neighborhood commercial type uses. In addition to the future land use, we're also proposing overlay districts. So there are four proposed overlay districts. Residential overlay, that's that area in yellow. Just wanting to make sure that we protect that residential, particularly in terms of scale and architectural theming. Also height overlay, that's kind of consistent with that area that we sort of took down from downtown to provide that transition to those residential areas. We understand that that likely will develop with commercial uses or some more intense uses. We want to make sure the scale is appropriate next to residential. The one that we talked about a lot last week with our steering committee is live work. I think Tina reminded us today, we talked for about 30 minutes on this overlay. So there's a lot of discussion. So Prairie Street is actually historically a main street for Southeast Denton. It was a commercial corridor. It had retail, movie theater, barbershops, restaurants. And that's something we've talked a lot about in our steering committee. Now that street has changed since that historic main street, but there's been some interest to kind of bring that back a little bit, but keeping in mind that there is adjacent residential next to it. And so that's where we struck upon this live work overlay to create space for that small scale retail or maybe office uses or something like a hair salon or barbershop, coffee shop. But make sure it's combined with residential. And that allows us to kind of blend the best of both worlds and to make sure that anything that develops is compatible. Now one thing we did talk about with the steering committee is, well, what's the next step or where does it go or how intense does it get? This is an area that we're really going to need to monitor. We want to make sure that we keep in mind the residential, make sure that it blends nicely and that their impacts to those residential areas are minimized, but continue to keep monitoring it to see how it's working and see if any tweaks need to be made. So it will be an ongoing iterative process. And then finally, a commercial overlay, and that's that area in red. Of course, I did talk about that we anticipate that we'd like for that area off of Shady Oaks to redevelop out of those industrial uses to something that's more compatible with the residential. But we also want to make sure that any commercial uses still also don't create negative impacts for the residential. So we're proposing to add a commercial overlay to ensure that it is consistent with what the community's vision is. These are some short-term but also long-term tasks. There's quite a bit of zoning involved in this, and we want to make sure that it's done correctly and that we keep the property owners and the community involved in this process. So public outreach and communication are going to be absolutely key in these action items. So here's what they look like in your matrix. Did y'all have any questions on any of those slides? Questions about? Commissioner Perot. Thank you, Chair. Great work, but I want to understand a little bit better what the vision is for achieving some of those diversity of housing options that we talked to and the goals. As I'm looking at this, and don't let me put words in your mouth, it looks like there are specific things the neighborhood has said, "We don't want to lose X, Y, and Z." And so the direction is, let's put some controls in it for that and then come in either simultaneous or after the fact to allow some of that more housing diversity within that area, but not sacrificing those things the community expressed. Is that... That really is, and if I heard something different, let me know, but really that is the intent. So the residential overlay would potentially see where we can do to encourage infill in those lots that probably could allow for another home on them, but make sure that anything is developed is consistent with the scale and the architecture. I mean, Southeast Denton has this... The way it developed was over different time periods, so you've got some craftsman areas and you have some ranch-style home areas, and we want to make sure that any development within those streets and those neighborhoods fit and that they work, and that's where it's gonna come in in coming in with those residential overlays to make sure we get it right. Okay, thank you. And just a comment, I think it wasn't apparent to me when reading through the backup material, but seeing you explain sort of how the desire for perhaps some small commercial uses in certain places and that sort of thing in existing buildings, I wonder if the tool of using what I've seen called accessory commercial units ever came up where someone would build a different structure in front of a house that maybe had a very large setback to be able to hold that use up front, but then still have residential in the back. Was that discussed or...? We didn't talk about that specific, but like I said, and Tina may want to jump in here, these are written to be somewhat broad so that there can be reevaluation and to make sure that we get it right once we get to that, pass the policy and into the regulatory document, so I don't know if you want to add anything to that. Yeah, I would agree. The action items provide the idea of these are the steps that we need to take, but how the sausage is made on those action items is not fleshed out in the document at this time because that's not what the purpose of the document is at this point in our efforts, but to that point, and Julie's point about the flexibility, depending upon the time period in which we are implementing something that we have to take into consideration, what are the facts on the ground at that time, right? So it could be that next year we're working on establishing a conservation district or looking to allow for the live work units to come into play, but to your point, there's additional ways to achieve kind of a live work concept, so maybe the two uses don't necessarily have to be integrated in the same structure, but somebody can build that accessory commercial structure on the front and still achieve the same objective. So does that help address your question? Absolutely, thank you. Okay. Anybody else at this moment? Okay. All right. We'll keep going. All right. And then finally, I want to talk about Goal 6, and that is create a safe and connected multimodal travel system. So on your screen is the current mobility plan. You could see there's a variety of arterials and collectors that impact Southeast Denton. We've also got some pictures on the existing streets. The city has done some improvements to the streets within Southeast Denton in terms of that kind of between the curbs, but we've used this plan and this opportunity to reimagine some of these areas to see where we want to go next. We also looked at the roadway conditions. We looked at where those sidewalks were, where they weren't. We also pulled that traffic crash injury map from the mobility plan. As you could see, the majority of crashes with injuries are along the perimeter on those arterials, but there are some areas within Southeast Denton, particularly along this lakey spine, which do have some concerns about safety. This was backed up by the discussion that we had with the community at the visioning workshop and that there were concerns about safety, particularly at those intersections. So we have some recommendations and some action steps associated with that. They include creating multimodal streets, and that is consistent with the mobility plan, with kind of the direction that we have within the city. And we want to make those intersections safer for all users. And we should have said at the outset, before we went to Juneteenth and before we went to the steering committee, the project team talked to internal staff to make sure that anything we proposed as an action step, we could actually achieve. And so we actually talked, we sat down with our transportation folks to talk through this, talk through some of those things that we would like to do as far as to make these intersections safer and to make sure we were on the right track. So we have talked with them. One of the ideas is to create a colorful crosswalks, particularly along those more dangerous intersections to alert drivers that pedestrians are there and to make it more visible. We're also proposing to imagine additional connectivity. So you could see the dash lines here. Once again, we're kind of thinking through if the county ever were to leave that area, what would the connections be? So that would be a really great opportunity to add some east-west connections in the future. We also added, before I go to this, just want to, a little bit, the streets that we were looking primarily at the multimodal are these in blue here. So it's really looking at particularly Prairie, Lakey, Morse, Robertson, those streets. Also the orange circles, those are those intersections that we would like to see some additional treatment to make sure that they are safer. And then finally, these orange circles here along Bell Avenue, those are intended to create, to work on that, that strengthened of the connectivity between southeast end and downtown. So with that, now we'll talk about the street sections. So we also had as part of the plan, the project team create some conceptual street sections, thinking in terms of that multimodal. So we're going to want to get car travel lanes, obviously, but also bicycle, pedestrian, street trees, and then in some areas we need on-street parking because this is an area where people live and they have these travel patterns, so we want to make sure that we are consistent with the travel patterns and what the community currently has and what they need. We also looked at these and how can we work within our existing right-of-way when possible. Because parts of town that are already developed are always challenging, they're good challenges, right, to try to figure out what we can fit within that right-of-way, but once again, we want to make sure we minimize disruption for residents. The steering committee emphasized the need for shade. And then one idea or action step is tactical urbanism. That's a great way to try out ideas that are low cost, that are reversible, so that if we do add some sort of intervention, say on Moore Street, to figure out how to slow the traffic on Moore Street, if one solution doesn't work, then we can try another solution. But it allows us to test before we spend a lot of dollars on that. So that will be, I think, a good opportunity for us. These are mid and short-term tasks. We want to get moving on these. They're going to require coordination with a lot of city departments. Urban funding will be needed, bond funds, maybe TIF funds, and then once again, public outreach and communication to make sure that we are coordinating particularly with the people most affected by any changes to these streets. Any questions on that? All right. And now I'm going to bring me up. If there are no other questions about the plan, we want to talk about next steps, what we have coming up. There is a special call, planning and zoning meeting, on July 17th to talk about the final draft of the plan, and then the following week, we will be bringing it to City Council for final adoption, and that is July 23rd. As far as implementation, we want to get started as soon as possible, right of way. So we would be looking to start those short-term tasks following adoption. We will continue public outreach. We want to stay involved, and the joke is that the SetApp area knows our faces and they know our names now, so we can't go away, and they can't get away from us. So we want to stay involved and make sure that throughout implementation, and just in the regular development review projects that we have that are around the area that we're communicating with them, any capital improvement projects that we have going on, making sure that we're communicating the timeline and being involved in that. And then, I believe that's it, unless we have any other items to discuss. Yep. Commissioner Perot. Thank you, Chair. Amazing job. Have we applied to APA Texas yet for the award? I'm serious. No, I'm just -- Not done yet. Not done yet. We'll get there. That's a good point. It would be amazing to see, and it might be a first, it might not, I don't know, to see this plan with the community members from the steering committee go to receive an award. So just an idea. Commissioner Perot. We can apply for national. I second. I think that's been a really impressive project and outcomes. I do have one question. Looking at the graphics that you provided regarding, like, just improving the safety at intersections, was there a type of study that was done that reflects the train? So, for example, when the train is stopped in McKinney, a lot of traffic is diverted through southeast Denton because, in particular, the intersection that's Robertson and Bell is the only outfeeder to get back into Bell. So, going through southeast Denton from McKinney, the traffic goes through the neighborhood, and it's already a little complex to navigate. And so one of the things I would also ask for you to consider is when that happens -- and it will happen because it's happened every year -- if maybe there could be special consideration that's taken for the pathways that our residents may take through southeast Denton to try to get from McKinney around to cross over to Bell, if that makes any sense? Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I think our priority or our goal of -- that feeds into our goal of creating those connections or improving those connections between southeast Denton and downtown, but also southeast Denton and the north side of McKinney and things like that. Commissioner Billy Rayl. Yeah, I guess third on, this is fantastic, you know, very much appreciate all the work y'all have put into this, and it's a long time coming. You know, I know we've been talking about, you know, southeast Denton Small Area Plan for many years now, so thanks for putting this together and bringing it to fruition. Just going back to the overlays, if we could -- I'm sorry, I meant to ask this earlier. For the live/work overlay, what is that zoned as currently? Is it community mixed use or -- Do we have a current zoning map up here? I anticipated such a question. We have a zoning map, but I will also say that -- and I did not point it out, but there is -- we are proposing, I don't know if you saw the orange, to moderate density residential in this location here, too. So right now, that's neighborhood mixed use. We've got R7 along Prairie, and then we have R4, and then R4 along with some small neighborhood mixed use here. Got it. Mixed use neighborhood, sorry, neighborhood mixed use. For any commercial in the scope that y'all were discussing, that would require an SEP in the R7, correct? Or rezoning? Yeah, it would require -- and once again, these are sort of broad policy decisions. We're going to have to look at that zoning and then what those overlays are going to look like. And we're going to want to do that in concert with the community. And then also, of course, talk to the planning and zoning and the decision makers to make sure that it addresses those needs. Awesome. Thank you, Beth. Thank you. Commissioner Cole. Thank you, Chair. Awesome job. Thank you. You guys have done amazing. You've done a great job building trust in the community, and we sure do appreciate it. And it's incredible. Anybody else? And I will echo all of that, my colleagues here. Yeah, from how we got started with this to wondering if we were going to be able to get a steering committee and get that involvement, I mean, yeah, the outreach has been just really tremendous. And clearly, it's here before us. So that's exciting. See you on July 17th for a more in-depth discussion and some action. Awesome. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we've got a final work session report, which is 3B-PZ2409-0. Receive a report, hold a discussion regarding amending the Denton Development Code related to establishing agenda item consideration process within the Planning and Zoning Operational Procedures. Hello. Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. Keisha Seriano, Assistant Planning Director. Come on. Okay, so we first discussed this item at the June 12th meeting. We heard your comments, and we went back to the office and made some changes, so presented to you tonight to gather more comments and feedback before we bring it back later for public hearing. But just a reminder, this is an item that is dash initiated based on process that happened last August and just confirmed that we needed to create a planning and zoning reconsideration for you all in our current code. Currently you do follow City Council's process if it's an item that is not currently already advertised for City Council, you go through the process that they do and you can bring it back as an item consideration to follow, meaning that's those same notes that you need to make to our director. But if it is an item that's already been advertised, currently you have to go to City Council and make their request for the item to be reconsidered, and they would have to say, "Yes, we'll send it back," or "No." So we wanted to create a process for you to be able to reconsider items that have already been publicly noticed for City Council. So here's the recommended process, and so this has been adjusted from our conversations we had last month. So for items that are not publicly noticed for City Council consideration the following week, so this is your normal process that you will follow, is you will let us know by 10 o'clock a.m. prior to that next following meeting as if an item needed to be, you requested a reconsideration. If it's an item that has been publicly noticed and is on the agenda for City Council the following week of that planning zoning commission during that week, you need to let us know by 10 o'clock a.m. the following Friday. So that's one and a half days, the other one is about one and a half weeks. So I'll have a calendar at the end and you can see what that looks like. So again, as I just said, if you want an item to be reconsidered, you would bring it, it will come as an item of consideration first, and depending on how the vote went, it will be back on the following meeting for a public hearing. However, if it doesn't, then we'll go through the proper protocols to get it publicly noticed again to go to City Council. So here's the calendars. So the calendar on my left, it's the calendar showing for items not publicly noticed for City Council consideration. So you see that following Thursday, 10 a.m., before your next meeting, you need to let us know if you want an item to be reconsidered. If it's an item that has already been publicly noticed for City Council the following week from your meeting, that's the calendar on the right, then we need to know the Friday. So if you look April 16th, excuse me, August 16th, we need to know based on your August 14th original vote that was made, we need to know by that following Friday at 10 a.m. Are there any questions or comments? Commissioner Perot? Looks good. I just want to check -- sorry, I don't have chapter and verse from the backup, but when you just said by the -- sorry. The situation I'm trying to make sure we have covered is if the City Council meeting, just because of schedule offsets, is 13 days from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting instead of six days, right? So like on the left, if the City Council meeting is on the 27th instead of the 20th, then since the City Council meeting would be before the next Planning and Zoning meeting, I'm assuming that the purple asterisk would still apply, but I'm not sure whether it would apply on the 16th or the 23rd. Does that make sense? Yes. Okay. Dana, you have an answer for that. So we tried to address the normal council schedules. If we had a situation where the council meeting was a little bit larger gap between what it would normally be and where that meeting was scheduled, my recommendation would be we'd still follow the process on the left because we have not been publicly noticed to be able to provide for some continuity. We actually went down that rabbit hole with staff trying to work through that and seeing we could come up with something else and it did not result in any good solutions being proposed. And so therefore, we think the process that's on the left is generally what you're more accustomed to. We tried to maximize the amount of time for the commission, but also know that if we get a request for reconsideration, keep in mind, there's administrative work we've got to do where we've got to pull together that report and be able to get that on your agendas in a timely manner where we can get it posted. So we tried to maximize the time there, but if the council meeting ended up being farther out, then I would say we would still stick with the normal process because it's very difficult to codify any potential scenario when it comes to scheduling. So we opted for continuity and some consistency. Yeah, and if I could just jump in, because it really doesn't matter necessarily when the meeting is. It matters when the item is on their agenda. That's really what the issue is, right? Not when their meeting is going to be, whether it's a week after or 13 days after, right? So not when it's on the agenda, but when it's already been noticed as a released public agenda. Got it. Yeah, that's what's trying to be done here. Thank you for helping me with that. Sure. Anybody else? No? Okay. Yeah, thank you. I think with our discussion last time, I think this solves the issue that we were all having with it being that fast track date. So thank you for the extra work. Okay. Thank you. I was just going to show you the tentative schedule. So tentatively, we'll come back July 17th for a public hearing and then August 6th is tentatively for City Council. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. That is the last thing in our work session. So I'll go ahead and close our work session at 6 p.m. and we will reconvene in council chambers at 630. Thank you. Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for Wednesday, June 26th, 2024. With the quorum present, I'll call us to order at 632 p.m. Let the record show that Commissioner Thaggard is absent this evening. First item is Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas Flags. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Honored Texas Flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one State, under God, one Nation, indivisible. Thank you, our first order of business is the approval of our minutes from our meeting for June 12th. Commissioner Villarreal. Move approval. Commissioner Cole. Second. Got a first and a second for approval. Any discussion? Okay, let's go ahead and vote, please. That motion carries 5-0. That will take us to our consent agenda for this evening. Commissioner Villarreal. Move approval. Okay, I'm going to wait for, okay, Commissioner Cole. Second. Okay, we've got a first and a second for approval of our consent agenda. Discussion? Okay, let's vote, please. That motion carries 5-0. That will take us to our items for individual consideration. That first being 4A, FP240024. Matt is here for presentation of that item. Hello? Good evening, Commission, Matt Bourdine, Assistant Planner, presenting FP240024 on behalf of Sean Jacobson. This is to consider a quest of a final plot of Sage Creek townhomes located at the intersection of Audre Lane and Lattimore Street. The purpose of this plot is to establish 163 residential townhome lots, nine common area lots, as well as easements and right-of-way necessary for development. This plot, as it is right now, does not meet the criteria for approval, so staff is recommending denial. However, staff has no objection to the submitted request for an extension, and this would be the first extension request. Great. Thank you, Matt. Discussion? Okay. Thank you very much. Commissioner Villarreal. I move approval of the extension request to a date certain of July 24th, 2024. All right. Commissioner Pruitt? Second. Okay. We've got a first and a second to grant the extension request to a date certain of July 24th, 2024. Any discussion? Okay. Let's go ahead and vote, please. That motion carries 5-0. Before we move to 4-B, Commissioner Cole is going to abstain from items 4-B through F. So, we'll let him move. Okay. And then I'll go ahead and invite Julie up. Oh, Mia is presenting this one. I'm sorry. It's 4-B, FP240022. That's cool. Good evening, Chair, members of the commission, Mia Hine, Senior Planner, standing in for Julie Wyatt, who's the planner on this project, presenting to you Robson Ranch Unit 40, the final plat, FP240022. The site is 54 acres located just east of Ed Robson Boulevard and approximately 650 feet north of Goodland Drive. At this time, the plat is not ready for approval, so we are recommending denial. However, we have no objection to the first requested extension, which could be granted to July 24, 2024. With that, I'll take any questions you have. Thanks, Mia. Thank you very much. Commissioner Pruitt? Yeah. I'll move approval for the requested extension to a date certain of July 24, 2024. Thank you. Commissioner Villanueva? Second. Okay, we've got a first and a second to grant the extension request to a date certain of July 24, 2024. Discussion? Okay. Let's go ahead and vote, please. That motion carries 4-0. That will take us to 4C, FP240012B, and Erin is here for presentation. Yes. Good evening, Chair. Members of the Commission. Erin Stanley, Assistant Planner, presenting this for Cameron Robertson. This is phase one of the Hunter Ranch development. This is generally located north of Robson Ranch Road and west of I-35W. This is a 53-acre site for 95 single-family lots and 10 HOA lots, and staff is recommending approval as they've met all of the criteria. Thanks, Erin. I'll go ahead and make a motion for approval of this item, Commissioner Villareal. Second. Okay. We've got a first and a second for approval discussion. Okay. Let's go ahead and vote, please. Motion carries 4-0. That will take us to 4D, FP240013B. Sorry, Margie, just for the record, I think that last vote went through as a continue to a date certain, as opposed to approval. On the board? Yeah. I didn't know. I'm not sure what we need to do there. Did we have a technical difficulty there? Nope. This was item 4C. Do we need to read? We're okay? Okay. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Go ahead, Erin. Thank you. Are we good? Good? Yeah, we're good. Okay. Yeah. So, the next one is Hunter Ranch Phase 1B. This is approximately 53 acres for 180 single family lots and eight HOA lots, and staff is recommending approval as it meets all criteria. Thanks, Erin. Commissioner Villareal? Move approval. Commissioner Pruitt? Second. We've got a first and a second for approval of item 4D. Any discussion? Okay. Let's go ahead and vote, please. That motion carries 4-0. That will take us to 4E, FP240014B. This is Hunter Ranch Phase 1C. This is 67 acres for 287 single family lots and 10 HOA lots, and staff is also recommending approval. Thank you. Commissioner Pruitt? Move approval. Commissioner Villareal? Second. Okay. We've got a first and a second for 4E, FP240014B discussion. Okay, let's vote, please. That motion carries 4-0, taking us to 4F, FP240015. This is Hunter Ranch Phase 1D on 56 acres for 185 single family lots and 8 HOA lots, and staff is also recommending approval. Great. Thank you, Erin. Commissioner Pruitt? Move approval. Commissioner Padrone? Second. Okay. We've got a first and a second for approval discussion. Okay, let's vote, please. That motion carries 4-0. That will take us to item 4G, FP240021. Give Commissioner Cole a moment to join us. Thank you. Hi, Matt. Good evening. Matt Bodean, Assistant Planner, here to consider a final plot of forest crossing Phase 2 addition and approximately 20-acre track on May Hill Road north of McKinney Street. This final plot creates two lots in the easements for development to construct a multi-family development that received approval of a specific use permit by City Council on February 7, 2023, as well as dedicate right away for a new collector's street. An updated version of this plot was sent to the commission on Monday. That plot meets the criteria for approval, so staff is recommending approval of the plot. Thank you very much. Okay. Commissioner Villarreal. Move approval. Commissioner Pruitt. Second. We've got a first and a second for approval of 4G. Any discussion? Okay, let's vote, please. That motion carries 5-0. Access to 4HFP240023. This is a final plot of Riviera addition, an approximately 15-acre tract on the north side of Fishtrap Road. This is to create a lot of record from a previously unplotted tract of land. The staff is recommending a denial at this time because the plot doesn't quite meet the criteria for approval. However, we do not object to the requested extension to date certain of July 24, 2024. Great. Thanks, ma'am. Commissioner Villarreal. Move approval of the extension request to date certain of July 24, 2024. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Cole. Second. We've got a first and a second to grant the extension request to date certain of July 24, 2024. Seeing no discussion, let's go ahead and vote, please. That motion carries 5-0. We'll take us to 4I PD240005, and that is Mia's item here this evening. Hi. Hello. Good evening again. Chair, members of the commission, Mia Hines, senior planner. Yes, so this item, PD240005, this is the second time you are receiving a presentation on this item. As it was, the public hearing was continued to this date at the last meeting. Just a brief overview, a reminder of the site and the case at hand. This is a request to rezone property from R6 to PD with a light industrial-based zoning district, and that's a PD overlay. The site itself is just under 53 acres, located north of Black Road, approximately 800 feet east of Giesling Road, and it's a part of a larger 86.07-acre tract, which is outlined there in yellow. The request itself would establish light industrial-based zoning on this site. It also would require ESA compliance and zoning compliance plan review. It establishes a 250-foot building setback, requires a 50-foot wide landscape buffer with 50 points adjacent to the residential properties to the east and south of the subject property. In addition to the restrictions that we had initially published for the first meeting that this public hearing was at, there were some additional concessions that the applicant agreed to after hearing the neighboring residents' feedback at the last meeting. Specifically, they are proposing to add in the condition to the land use compatibility buffer area that allows for a masonry wall to be placed and counted towards their landscape buffer points, but to be placed in a way that basically preserves the existing tree canopy within the 50-foot buffer that they are proposing between their subject site and the residential zone properties adjacent to it. Additionally, they are proposing to restrict uses that would otherwise be permitted under the base light industrial zoning district. Specifically, those uses are major and minor automotive repair, auto fuel sales, travel plaza, hotel, motel, and parking lot as a principal use. Finally, they are proposing to cap the maximum building height within this area to 55 feet, whereas the base light industrial zoning district would allow for that to go up to 75 feet. With that, staff is recommending approval of this request as it meets our criteria for approval, and that concludes my presentation this evening for you. I do have the applicant here who would like to speak as well. Sure. Thank you. Any questions for me at this time? Okay. Thank you very much. And yes, I'll go ahead and invite Amy Bissett up for discussion. Hello. Good evening, commissioners. Hello. Amy Bissett, 109 North Elm, 76201. I brought some slides, but I'm not going to share them unless you ask some specific questions where we might need to go into detail. I just wanted to share that since we were here two weeks ago, we did work through the language for the PD standards, specifically to ... I spent some time with the neighbors after the last meeting, and we talked through what their real objectives were between preservation of tree canopy and natural area versus the masonry wall and how that could cause the killing of the trees that they're trying to save. And ultimately, they ranked preservation of trees and natural area above the masonry wall, which is why the PD standards are written the way they are today, so that they reflect the desire of the neighborhood in order of importance. And we do have a few neighbors here this evening, and I just want to say again that it's been a pleasure to work with them. And I feel like the conditions that are before you tonight accurately reflect the desires of the neighborhood to the greatest extent possible, reflecting my applicant's wish to rezone. So thank you. Great. Thank you. Any questions for Ms. Bissett? All right. Thank you. Okay. Appreciate it. You're welcome to ask me, but if there is anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this item, you are welcome to do so. Hi. Good evening. Good evening. Jonathan Brooks, 5579 Black Road in Texas, 76208. I spoke to you guys last time about this. I did meet with Amy after the meeting and then again a few times in between these two meetings. And I was very happy with what I understand the proposal to be, as Amy has explained it to me, with specifically the tree canopy not being disturbed. If I'm looking to you as the experts in this area, and I'm asking really, is the new proposal that has been put forth concerning the 50 points, which I'm not exactly sure exactly what that means. I know it has to do with trees and shrubs and things like that. And the setting of where the wall doesn't necessarily have to be. But if the new buyer, whoever buys it, wants to put it there, does it seem to you that it will preserve, it won't kill those trees that are along the border in that 50 foot buffer zone? So that's a question I'm asking. Yes. And Mia, do you have that verbiage that we can put up that's in front of us? Do you have it to read? Yep. That would be great. I think that will answer your question. That's really it? Yes. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Brooks. And thank you, Amy, for that. You bet. Oh, I do also want to say that one of you asked for the alignment of Giesling Road and text on improvements. And I do have a slide on that as well, if you'd like to review that. Here is the verbiage, a minimum 50 foot wide landscape buffer shall be required as illustrated in Figure 1, which is included in your backup, all of the buffer areas we discussed. It has to contain 50 points of buffer planting or screening elements. And the eight foot tall masonry screening wall, if provided, may receive credit for buffer points, even if it is located further than 50 feet from the buffer area. If the wall is located to provide screening between the development on the subject property and those residential properties, any screening wall constructed shall be outside of any environmentally sensitive areas and the wall shall be located far enough from all healthy trees located within the 50 foot buffer, such that the wall footing and construction do not impact the critical root zone of all healthy trees within the buffer being preserved. Excellent. Thank you for reading that. Do you want to see the alignment at Giesling? The neighbors might be curious about this as well, so this was just recently released by TextDOT right after the last PNZ meeting, and this is preliminary at this point in time. Construction would not occur until 2028 or '29 at the earliest. But as of right now, what TextDOT is proposing is just east of Giesling here, the main land lanes of 380 would become a bridge over Giesling, and there would be both an exit and an entrance off of the main lanes to be able to access Giesling, which would be a signalized intersection going forward. So I do think that improves the traffic conditions for traffic coming in and out of that location going forward. Great. Thank you. Thank you for providing that. Appreciate it. Thank you. Yep, come on down. Sure. My name is Eric Janssen. I reside at 3617 Falcon Court in South Denton, but I have property nearby here, and I would invite Amy to come back up and confirm what I heard at the TextDOT meeting is if you look at that schematic, and this is in the context of the conversation two weeks ago about access to the property, what I understood from that TextDOT is there will be no ingress or egress allowed from the subject property to university. The only ingress and egress from the subject property will be via Giesling, and we were under the impression that there would be Giesling and university, and so there really wouldn't be much need for much traffic to go in and out of Black Road. That green on the south side of the red, the green that goes east from Giesling and goes past the flea market is an enclosed ramp that feeds onto the continuation of eastbound 380. What TextDOT explained to me was that there will be a wall there that encloses the lane. The subject property, light industrial, whether it develops in a year, whether it develops in five years or whenever, there will be no ingress or egress northbound to the 380 as they currently have. There will be no ingress or egress until such time as frontage roads are built, and the TextDOT planners at the meeting a week ago said there's no telling when that would be. Perhaps Amy can elaborate because I think she may have had some other conversations with them about the subject in the past week or so, but it's just important for the planners to understand and for neighbors to understand that all ingress and egress will essentially be Giesling until such time that frontage roads are constructed because the way TextDOT currently has their plan, there will be a wall and there will be no way to get in or out from the north side of the property. Is that pretty much? Thank you very much. [inaudible] Sure. Amy, yeah. Come on up. Yeah. If you want to ... So what has been previously proposed in terms of access to 380 from Giesling would be limited at maximum to ride in, ride out, and we were under the impression under previous zoning changes related to this property that that would be a challenging ask to begin with. What we like about this plan is that it does give a protected right-hand turn and left-hand turn for all truck traffic onto 380s so that it would actually, in my non-expert traffic opinion, alleviate any pressure off of black because truck traffic is going to go straight out to 380 and they'll be able to turn left or right, they wouldn't have to take black east or west to find a signalized intersection. We always assumed that any entrance or exit off of 380 would be restricted to ride in, ride out, and would not solve that issue, so we feel that this is an improvement to that that would prevent the truck traffic from using black to get to a different intersection, if that makes sense. That does. And at this point, these plans could change, this is very early for TxDOT, and it would be constructed six or seven years from now where, with any luck, this project will be developed by then. Thank you. Thank you very much. Commissioner Pedro, was that question, is that question for Amy or? I'm actually just curious if we could go through the remainder of her slides that she created. Just as it's here, I would like to see what other slides are presented. Most of them are what I went through two weeks ago, but I think you may have missed that meeting. No, you were here? Okay. So just as a quick recap, this property has been before you all before. In 2021, the northwest portion of it was rezoned to light industrial to facilitate a project that didn't materialize at that time. The current property owners own the entire tract outlined in red here. They're marketing the property for sale and are seeking... Oh, sure thing, yes, thank you. They're seeking consistent zoning. Right now, it's a split zoning on one tract. So that's the purpose of coming before you now rather than waiting until there is a developer. And there are significant in conferences on the site that make it unsuitable for residential development, including electric transmission lines, a gas pipeline, and it's adjacent to an electric substation. The future land use plan does show a transition area between low residential and light industrial along the borders of all the residentially zoned properties or homes that are in the DJ today, and in respect of that transition area, that is why we have proposed the increased setback to 250 feet and the increased landscape buffer to 50 feet. And we did initially propose those conditions to only be along the east property line and had two neighborhood meetings with the neighbors in May. And after hearing from them, we increased the proposed buffer area to include the properties to the south as well. And this is a slide showing the property owners that we know that we have spoken with over the months. And we've covered the additional requests and conditions already this evening, and that's really everything. Thank you. Any questions from that? Okay. Questions? No. Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else who's here that would be wanting to speak? Yeah, come on down. Okay, thanks. Tom Brooks, 6801 Appaloosa Court, 76208. I spoke with you guys previously and really wanted to address two concerns. And we've talked a little bit about this last time, I think, and it's been discussed a little bit earlier today regarding the traffic issue along Blag. Certainly appreciate all of the information regarding the developments along 380 and the bypass and all that, but it still doesn't address anything that may come down May Hill onto Blag and then down Giesling. I mean, I'm not sure if the city's considered anything to prevent potential truck traffic coming down Blag from May Hill. That's a bigger issue too, because as I mentioned before, Blag Road barely can sustain two vehicles going in each direction as opposed to one single large truck, so serious safety concerns there. The other one is, we've discussed this, I live on the east side of the proposed rezoning piece of property, it is a good portion of that ESA, that creek that runs through there. I think for me, there's concern to rezone this piece of property without knowing what would be developed on that in any future time and what implications that would have on that ESA from a drainage perspective. So I think it's a little premature to be making decisions, but I can understand their concerns to try and zone it consistently across the board, and certainly the concessions they've made on that property, but the one thing it doesn't address is any of the drainage issues. I know that there's language in the DDC regarding ESAs and drainage about that'll be looked at when the time comes, but I think it should be looked at now. I live on that east side of the property where all that drainage comes to, and I have concerns of any flooding, that's what I wanted to show you here. Part of my concerns is this is a video of one of the property owners in Lakeview where this creek runs through, and this is a typical rainfall, so there's a detention pond on a person's property adjacent to this guy's property, and you can see this. This is the issue that we're running into when this creek floods. That's significant runoff from a detention pond into this person's property, and this is what I see on my property anytime there's a significant rainfall. Now if we build something on that property in question, there's issues. My house is probably going to get flooded if not taken care of properly, so I have huge concerns regarding this. Not just me, but everyone that lives in Lakeview Ranch that this creek comes through, and so I think that needs to be considered. Certainly I've read through a lot of the guidelines, the ESA and the drainage guidelines in the DDC. You guys say that you'll make the right decisions, right research and planning, do the analysis, but that's not going to prevent anything. What are the repercussions if something does happen? Who's going to take care of my house if it does flood? I'm asking you guys, right? I'll let Steph answer that question. Yeah, so those are my concerns, right? Sure. Any questions for me? Yeah, I definitely, certainly understand your questions. When we consider what we consider up here, which in this case is the zoning case, that's what's before us today, we're not engineers up here, so a lot of the things that you're asking for absolutely have to come when engineering and their crew are looking at something specific that's being built here. Yeah. It can't really be looked at ahead of time. But you're making decisions before those decisions are here, right? Well, we're making a zoning decision. Correct. That's going to affect this property or all of these properties in the future to come, right? That's what we are, and we're going to hope that perhaps with the parameters and the communication and the discussion that's been done. Given the certain guidelines, and there's a lot of good language in those guidelines. I read through a lot of it, right? But what's to come of it if something does happen and it's not taken care of properly and properties do flood, right? Again, I'll let Steph answer that question, yes. Well the other part of that question is, okay, so this is a picture of a detention pond and the overflow from that detention pond. So there's plans to potentially put a detention pond on this property that's being rezoned. Where is that going to be? How is it going to be located? So when your engineers go to do the study, are any of the adjacent property owners notified or anyone downstream of this creek notified of the study, the analysis, and the outcome? That's a question. Right. You're going to have to let me bring staff up here and have them answer that. Being a property owner that's going to be affected, I would like to know that once the study is done, what the outcome of it is, what are the decisions being made that's going to potentially affect my property? Sure. And I understand that. Many of your questions may not be able to be answered at this time. What is the problem with making a zoning decision before you know what's going to be built? Okay. I appreciate it. Thank you for sharing your comments. I'll see what kind of questions I can get answered for you. Mia, do you want to handle that or Haley wants to handle that? Yeah. I'll answer to drainage concerns just a little bit. Thank you. Part of the study of the ESA is knowing what's going to be there and how the potential developments might impact the ESA and might impact the areas around it. One of the things that was talked about in the last meeting was possibly preventing or prohibiting the opportunity for an alternative environmentally sensitive area plan. But we did not go with that concept because in the end, once we have an idea of the development, how much non-permeable surfaces are going to be established on this site and how that might impact the area around it, an alternative plan might actually lend itself to improved conditions for the drainage and things like that in this area. So I hope that speaks to it a little bit is that we'll assess it when we have the development plan because we'll have the numbers to be able to assess exactly the impact that this property would have on the drainage deal. And then as far as just the existing environmentally sensitive area, any property owner at any time can assess that and have a consultant help them with those existing conditions. Okay. Go ahead and see. Regarding the drainage, just to add to Mia's comment. So first of all, I am not a drainage engineer. I'm not an engineer. I'm a planner. But I work with many drainage engineers and have a basic understanding of also the state statute when it comes to runoff. So we work with the development community and do a thorough evaluation of the civil engineering plans that are submitted, including if there's any need for any downstream assessments and specialized drainage studies. The city has adopted criteria that we evaluate all developments based upon. State law says that when properties are developed, the end result cannot be more water runoff than the pre-developed condition. So in looking at this, I'm not familiar with your property and there's much of a natural area that's there right now. I don't know the rain event that transpired, so I can't speak to this detailed situation that you're presenting. But what I can share with you is that we have folks that are trained on our team in the profession. We have a gentleman on our staff that understands drainage and implications associated with it, as well as a whole team of reviewers that we have access to specialized reviews if need be. So we take every development series that is built within our community. We work very diligently to try and ensure that there are no increased impacts on adjoining properties as a result of properties being developed. In many instances, throughout the course of my career and working with civil engineers, that when properties are developed, many times it results in improved drainage conditions. Because right now the property is in its native state, there are no improvements on the property to slow down any water that's coming off of it in its current state. But when properties are developed, then there are mechanisms and designs put in place to slow the water down, and to be able to collect water if need be before it's discharged in any downstream situations or on adjoining properties. So again, we're also making sure that we're compliant with state statute, that we're not allowing for any increased runoff that is higher than would have been the pre-developed conditions. Chair Ellis is correct, right now it's a zoning decision to determine the appropriateness of the land use, just like with any requests that they have come before them. The following steps, should zoning get approved, then is the applicant moving forward with submitting zoning compliance plans, and then ultimately submitting their civil engineering plans associated with that. We also have some challenges associated with state law, in that we cannot require certain development applications or certain studies to be submitted, even with the initial plat that we have to follow, despite sometimes wanting to have those answers earlier on in that approval sequence. So I don't know if that gives you any level of assurance, but we appreciate you bringing this concern to our attention. Thank you. Commissioner Pruitt, you are? Thank you, Chair. Yeah, just a couple process procedure questions, so that everybody in the room understands going forward what could happen if the site develops. I think I heard from Tina that the drainage assessment would be done at the time of the civil engineering plans, is that correct? Yeah, we're requiring the ESA field assessment to be done with the zoning compliance plan, so if there are downstream calculations needed for that, that will be done at that time, but I believe the broader answers will be there at civil engineering plans. Okay, and I'm assuming the reason for that is that those civil engineering plans and the ESA assessment is what defines where new impervious area is, and that sort of thing, is that correct? Correct. At what time once you receive that civil engineering plan application, does the zoning on the property have any bearing on the drainage assessment and what's done for the drainage, or is it purely from a here's what we're building here perspective? Good question. The zoning does not, like Tina was saying, any development that comes in, whether it stays in its current zoning or it moves to a light industrial, they will have to adhere to those same state requirements as it relates to drainage. Okay, thank you. And lastly, going back to previous question of trees and everything, there's some terminology we use that may not be common language, so can you describe the process between the tree assessment to identifying the root ... Critical. Zoning zone that I can't remember the term for right now, just describe the general flow of how those trees are protected during the permitting process, if you would. Gotcha. Yeah, so we'll require a tree preservation plan submitted with that zoning compliance plan, and in that we require that the applicants go out and license, or they hire a licensed arborist or landscape architect, go out, survey the trees that are on site, and that's taking down the type of tree, the inches of the tree trunk, and the condition that the tree is in, so healthy. And then at that point, what we would do if the applicant is proposing a masonry wall, we would ensure that it is located beyond what is labeled as healthy in the 50 feet buffer. And then also, that 50 feet buffer, even if they are not marked as healthy necessarily, because that 50 foot buffer is their landscape buffer, the tree canopy would most likely still remain because they'd have to ... They get points for preserving trees, but it'd have to be landscape, basically. Thank you. Thank you, Mio, appreciate it. Is there anyone else wishing to speak? Yep, come on down. Glenn Mark Graff, 1800 Lakeview. That video was my backyard. Just want to give you one thing to think about. I realize everybody does their best to plan and engineer all these things, but 20 years ago, somebody got approval to rezone this for development, and this is the results of their drainage planning. So it doesn't always work, does it? That's all I got to say. Okay. Thank you, appreciate it. Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this? Okay. I'm going to go ahead and open the floor for discussion or motion. Commissioner Cole? I'll make a motion to approve. Okay. Commissioner Pruitt? Yeah, I'll second. I'm just sensitive to the concerns over drainage and that sort of thing, sensitive to the traffic concerns. In my opinion, the zoning here doesn't really change how much the drainage gets improved or unimproved. I think honestly what has caused it to be increased drainage runoff is that we've expanded 380 from two lanes to it's about to be 12. So that's a lot more impervious surface. The other thing is as we look at truck traffic and that sort of thing, certainly I think we need to consider that at the same time as access to 380 off of Lakeview Boulevard changes. I think that has a much greater potential to change the traffic on Black Road than what this property does. So those are my thoughts. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Billy Rail? Thank you, Chair. I want to thank the applicant and their team for doing the work to make sure they hear the concerns from the community. However, with that being said, due to environmental traffic and drainage concerns, I'll be voting no. Thank you. Thanks. Any other discussion? Okay, we've got a first and a second for approval. I'll just thank everybody for being involved in this, thanking Amy and her team for engaging. I think it's been difficult, but there have been compromises. There's been a lot of really good discussion in research for this. Before us is a zoning case, as Commissioner Pruitt pointed out, the area where this is located. We have to think about what makes sense for development of this. We may not have all of the answers for current problems in the area, which aren't necessarily related to this particular piece of land or what's before us. Hopefully, if this land, if this gets approved, if this moves forward through city council, if down the road this site does develop, hopefully it does make improvements as often does, as Tina mentioned with drainage in the area. I guess with that, I'll call for any more discussion. If not, let's go ahead and vote. That motion will carry for one, and we'll move on next to city council. What is the date on that, please? Yes. This is scheduled for the July 16th city council date. July 16th? If that's a Tuesday, I believe that is correct. Okay. Yes. July 16th. Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. That will move us to our public hearings for this evening. That is 5AZ240008. I will invite Erin up for presentation and open the public hearing. Erin Stanley, assistant planner. This is Z24-0008 Crow Billingsley Denton rezoning. This is a request to rezone approximately 7.8 acres located south of US 380 and west of North Mosh Branch Road from rural residential to light industrial. The property is currently undeveloped and surrounded primarily by undeveloped property and gas wells. There is a small portion, I'll note, in the eastern section of the property that is unassessed ESA right now and once it's developed, they would have to comply with all ESA regulations. This request is consistent with the future land use map designating the area as light industrial and industrial commerce. The light industrial designation is primarily for light industrial land uses such as manufacturing, assembling and warehousing and its associated supporting uses. The industrial commerce designation is for both light industrial and heavy industrial uses. This is also consistent with the intent of the LI zoning district which would serve a variety of light industrial and employment uses and supporting commercial uses and activities. This request is consistent with the Denton Development Code criteria for approval as well as the zoning specific criteria for approval. It is also consistent with the future land use map and 2040 comprehensive plan and the proposal would be consistent with the light industrial zoning district purpose and the zoning is not expected to generate any significant adverse environmental infrastructure or fiscal impacts. Notifications were sent out. They were posted online and in the newspaper and signs were posted on the property or along US 380 just north of the subject property on June 7th and notices were mailed within 200 feet to the surrounding property owners and 500 feet to residents. We received responses in favor from the surrounding property totaling 76% in favor and the applicant did make attempts to contact the adjacent property owners immediately surrounding the property with no success and he is here to speak to that if you have any questions. With that staff is recommending approval of the zoning change as it meets all of our criteria and I will stand for any questions. Thank you Erin. Any questions for Erin? No? Okay. Thank you. This is a public hearing. I don't have any cards in front of me for this item but is there anyone wishing to speak on this item? Okay. I will go ahead and close the public hearing and open the floor for motion or discussion. Well, I will go ahead and make a motion for approval. I'll Commissioner approve it? Second. Okay. We've got a first and a second for approval. Any discussion? Okay. Let's go ahead and vote please. That motion carries 5-0. That will bring us to our next public hearing item for this evening, it's 5B, DCA 240004. Haley is here for presentation and I will open the public hearing. Good evening Chair, members of the commission. This is Gershki, Assistant Planning Director. The item before you is Code Amendment DCA 24-4 for the Razor Ranch Overlay District Ordinance Consolidation. The request before you this evening is an amendment to the Denton Development Code to provide for the uses and development standards of Appendix A, which is a placeholder that's been in the code since 2019 for the Razor Ranch Overlay District. Just a brief history, the district does encompass approximately 406 acres of land, you can see it outlined in the two maps on your screen. Covers land area north and south of Highway 380 between I-35 and Bonnie Bray. The district as it is in its current state is based on the 2002 Denton Development Code, makes references all throughout to various base zoning districts and standards within the older version of our development code. There are provisions for architecture, landscaping and signage contained within the district as well as use provisions to ensure that it is a compatible mixed use development across the 400 acre property. As it is today, the land area is roughly 85 to 90% developed, but there are some remaining parcels that could benefit from this consolidation. Again, some brief history that we covered in work session, so I'll just run through this quickly. The Razor Ranch Overlay District did begin in the early 2000s. It was first a set of deed restrictions that the property owners created, a version of those were then adopted by the city as a zoning ordinance in 2007. The text of that code was housed, the regulatory text rather was housed within the 2002 code itself, but there were multiple exhibits referenced throughout, exhibits A through H that covered the architecture, landscaping, signage and various other standards that were actually never housed within the code, so it was a very difficult ordinance for anyone to follow if they were trying to inquire about developing property in Razor Ranch because they could not locate the standards without contacting staff and being sent a list of ordinances. There have been over 20 ordinances adopted for Razor Ranch since it was first created. Those often just built upon each other, kind of band-aid fashion, never fully repealing and replacing one another, just kind of cobbling things together and referring back to the old ordinances as we went along so that many of those are still required to fully interpret the district today, and many of those ordinances are only for certain sub-areas or even lots within the development. So in 2019 we anticipated this challenge, we left a placeholder in the code to someday come back and adopt all of Razor Ranch into the 2019 Denton Development Code and bring it up to our current standards as best we could while still honoring all of those use permissions and development regulations that had been created over time. So you can see on the screen there those placeholders if you were to look in the code today. So as I've mentioned, the intent of this is to adopt those regulations so that moving forward we have one consolidated ordinance rather than 20 in place for Razor Ranch. We have brought forward portions of the 2002 code that are relied upon by the Razor Ranch district. So for example, if there's a land use definition that slightly differed between the 02 code in 2019, we brought forward that old definition to ensure that nothing was lost for the district and the uses that are there today. And then everywhere possible we've clarified what from the 2019 DDC would apply. So if you read through the text today you'd see anything not explicitly written in Appendix A will defer to the standards of the 2019 DDC moving forward. So just running through some of the changes that are in your backup, the majority of the regulations, as I've mentioned, are not changing for anyone in Razor Ranch. Our goal was not to change any use permissions or any development standards that have been working effectively in place in Razor Ranch for almost 20 years. It's mostly reformatting. If you look through it you'll see we've formatted it very similarly to the rest of the code. So for example, rather than having each sub-district having a list of permitted uses, we now have one permitted use table that mirrors what we have in the rest of the code. Some of the sub-areas were renamed because they have acronyms attached to them that are never defined within the overlay district itself. So the South RR1 district will become the town center because that's what everyone knows it as. In the South RR2 we're renaming the South Commercial District, and that's primarily to avoid confusion because currently there's RR1 and RR2, both North and South of 380. So it gets a little confusing. So we've renamed all of those for clarity to help identify where they are and what their intent is. With that, all of the maps have been updated. So you can see on the screen the map on the top is the new, cleaner version of the zoning map for Razor Ranch. The one on the bottom of your screen is the older one that just had a lot of extraneous information that wasn't necessary for the enforcement of the ordinance. So we're trying to clean all those things up moving forward. One change that has come about as a result of state legislation is that building materials that were previously able to be strictly enforced within Razor Ranch, we've now just termed as preferences. So it will list throughout the architectural standards these are the preferred materials for Razor Ranch to help encourage that consistency moving forward, but since we can no longer regulate that, we struck the strict language that was previously there. And then for things that have been completed, such as infrastructure that was called out in there, we've just noted that that work has been completed moving forward so that it's no longer listed as something that needs to be done. As I mentioned in work session, there is one substantive change to the content of the district and that is that the owners of the South Campus have requested an increase in the allowed multifamily units. So rather than adopting this and then promptly amending it, we agree to staff, yes, we think this is a logical request, we'll roll this in to this effort moving forward. So that change would be from a total of 2,000 multifamily units to 2,250. When the district was first adopted, they were allocated 1,750 units on the South Campus. Over time, as it has developed, there's been identified a need for more density on that campus to truly support the commercial development with an ample number of residents in the area. So where it stands today, we've made one increase back in 2021, they're asking for a second increase. In reality, I don't anticipate that with the available lots, they'll use all of those units, but we wanted to allow them some flexibility moving forward in case plans change, they're able to fit more units on some of the remaining parcels than what they anticipate. Staff is recommending approval of this. I know I didn't go into a whole lot of detail on a lot of this, but I think you all are relatively familiar with Razor Ranch, but I do have the standards handy if we need to look at anything more in more detail. Great. Thank you, Haley. Any questions at the moment? Okay. Thank you. This is a public hearing. I don't have any cards in front of me, but is there anyone wishing to speak on this item? Okay. With that, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and open the floor for motion or discussion. Commissioner Villarreal. Move approval of the recommendation of the city council. Commissioner Cole. Second. Okay. We've got a first and a second for approval. Any discussion? Okay. Let's go ahead and vote, please. I'll just say I'm so glad to see this. It has been a long time coming, and this is going to make it just so much prettier in the development code. Oh, my gosh. It's -- yeah. Well done. I know you had to help, I think, with some consultants on this, but, yeah. So thank them, too, because, yeah, it's good, yeah. Very happy to see it. Okay. We've got a first and a second for approval. Any discussion? Okay. Let's go ahead and vote, please. That motion carries 5-0. That'll take us to our planning and zoning matrix, and Tina, you have the floor. Thank you. I can assure you probably nobody is more happy than the staff is on that razor-range consolidation, especially Mia. So with respect to the matrix, there were no changes made to that, so -- and nothing requested from the previous planning and zoning commission meeting. Items that went to council since your last meeting, if you recall, the vet clinic that was at Teasley in Pennsylvania, zoning case study had come forth -- or, excuse me, a specific use permit. So that was approved by city council, and then also there was a plan development amendment. Mia worked on this for a gas station convenience store, and I think Best Barbecue, if members searched me correctly, from the applicant at Vintage and 35W. That PD amendment for the development plan, that was also approved by city council. And then lastly, we also had the mobility plan amendment related to the Windsor extension, and that was also approved by council. Given our great conversation that we had this evening with respect to the southeast area plan, we are moving forward with the adoption on that, and I know Mia and Julie spoke to those dates. For your special called meeting on the 17th, our plan is to have a 5 o'clock start. However, if we do need to have an earlier start, we will definitely let you know. We're still pulling together materials related to that, and so -- but we'll try to make -- we'll try to make sure we respect that 5 o'clock start time in case there needs to be any discussion in the work session. Don't forget, also, we still have your regular called meeting on the 24th as well, so make sure you keep that one on your calendar. Otherwise, that -- oh, if I could, back to that PD amendment. Since there was some discussion regarding the access, following the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation for approval on that particular project, the applicant requested to have a little more relief, really, associated with one of the conditions that we had with respect to the access, the emergency access connection. He still wanted to have an opportunity to potentially have further discussion with TxDOT, possibly modifying the timing of when a full directional access could occur for that property. Should TxDOT allow for it prior to the frontage roads being constructed? And so we were in agreement with it, so we did modify that condition. We felt that it did not affect the commission's recommendation, but if you were following that case and you happened to notice, hey, that condition was worded slightly different, there's a reason why. So at the end of the day, it's -- whatever connections happen to any future frontage roads or the existing ramp that's there today all require TxDOT approval. Nothing moves forward with connections to their roadways without having their approval. So that part remains unchanged. It helps give some flexibility associated with timing. And that concludes my report. >> Okay. Thank you. Is there anything to add to the matrix? Okay. Any concluding items? Okay. With that, I'll go ahead and adjourn us at 7.32 p.m. Thank you very much, everyone.