>> Good afternoon and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting for Wednesday, October 23rd, 2024.
With the quorum present, I'll call us to order at 5.30 p.m.
This is our work session.
We don't have any work session reports.
We've just got clarification on tonight's agenda.
So with that, our first item on our agenda are the minutes from October 9th.
Any questions, comments, issues with the minutes?
Okay.
How about for the proposed calendar for next year?
All good with that?
Okie dokie.
Next would be 3B, FP240038.
Sean, are you going to be -- Cameron?
>> Yes, ma'am.
>> Okay.
Thank you.
>> Good.
Good evening, Chair and members of the Commission.
This is the Home Zone Denton edition.
It is a final plat for approximately two and a half acre, almost two and a half acre property
at the corner of West University and Ector.
It has not yet met our criteria for approval, so we are recommending denial, but have no
objection to a first extension to November 13th.
Happy to answer any questions.
>> Great.
Questions for Sean?
Thank you very much.
Next on the agenda would be 3C, V240111.
Erin is here to give us the summary of that item and answer any questions for us.
Hi.
>> Hello.
>> Hi.
>> Let's see.
Okay.
This is V24, Josh 01111.
This is a variance request for the Titan edition.
The request is a variance from DDC subsection 8.32E3 to increase the maximum length of the
flagpole portion of the lot from 300 feet to 1,538 feet, and this is associated with
a minor plat that is under review right now and would be staff approved if this variance
passes and is a 21-acre lot generally located on the north side of FM 2449, just about a
mile -- or half a mile east of Florence Road out near Ponder, and this request is in compliance
with the DDC, and staff is recommending approval.
I'll have a longer presentation for the main session, but I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> Great.
Thank you.
Questions at all?
Okay.
Appreciate it.
Thank you very much.
Next is 3D, PP240006.
We had a very late email on this one about half an hour ago.
>> Yes.
>> That is actually me.
>> Okay.
So -- all right.
Yes, so PP240006A, and yes, we were working pretty hard to get through this one, but they
-- we got everything done, and so the -- I'm sorry, it is the RM squared addition, about
363 acres out north of Hampton Road, and we are now recommending approval because they
have addressed all of our concerns.
I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> Great.
Questions?
Okay.
Thank you very much.
I've got a few public hearings tonight.
First was -- is 4A, Z240014.
Matt is here.
Hello there.
>> Hello.
All right.
Matt Bodine, assistant planner, here to present a rezoning case requested by city staff for
city property.
This is to rezone approximately 40 acres from RR to PF district.
The property in question is just south of the Denton energy center and a little bit
west of the airport.
It is consistent.
This is to develop a solid waste transfer station and data center expansion on the property.
It is consistent with the zoning district and the Denton 2040 plan, and staff is recommending
approval of the zoning change request.
I have a much longer presentation for the main session, but here to answer any questions.
>> Great.
Thank you.
Questions from that?
Matt, I know initially this land was acquired on purpose for the solid waste transfer, correct?
>> So when the city was negotiating with the property owner, it was expressed with them
the purpose was for a solid waste transfer station.
The data center expansion has been a recent development.
It would be kind of like a secondary accessory use on the property, only expected to take
up a small portion.
That is moving forward quicker than the solid waste transfer station, hence the rezoning
at this time.
But it would allow for both uses.
>> Okay.
And that was my question, is that it would still allow for what originally it was purchased
for?
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
Any other questions?
Okay.
Thank you very much.
Next public hearing is for MPA 240002.
Hello.
>> Hi.
>> I don't think you've presented for us before.
Hello.
>> Okay.
Good evening, chair and commissioners.
My name is Sahar Smandieri.
I'm a senior transportation planner with transportation services division.
This is MPA 240002B mobility plan amendment for Underwood and Amix Road.
This mobility plan amendment has two components.
One Underwood Road and second Amix Road.
The reason that we have both of these roads in one case today is that they are both located
in the vicinity of Hunter Coral Ranch development.
For the Underwood Road, the proposed amendment is about downgrading the functional classification
of Underwood Road from a primary arterial to a secondary arterial.
If you can follow the cursor here, the Underwood located, the final configuration of Underwood
in the mobility plan 2022 is going to be about, starts from the airport road to the north
here or FM 1515 and goes all the way to the south to the future extension of H lively
road.
The reason behind this request is first by reclassification or downgrading the Underwood
road to the secondary arterial, we are going to provide more efficient access to the surrounding
developments.
Also, this road located between future loop 288 West and I-35 West freeways.
Both of these freeways are better alternative for north-south traffic navigation with higher
speed limit and more road capacity.
Second is the Amix Road.
The proposed amendment is about removing an eastern portion of future Amix Road to the
future loop of 288 West, which is highlighted here in green and red.
The reason behind this request is there is a soil conservation lake located in the south
of the target road in a very close distance to this road and by removing this portion
of Amix Road, we are going to prevent any environmental adverse impact.
Also, the Tonko Road is located to the north side of this target road.
The Tonko Road is going to be improved and create more capacity for future traffic generated
in this development for the east-west traffic navigation.
After comments, approval as it complies with the following criteria for approval.
It is consistent with Denton 24, the comprehensive plan.
It further aligns with mobility plan goals and also coordinates with text out plans and
improves safety.
Thank you.
>> Thank you.
Questions for us here?
Commissioner Perot.
>> Thank you, Chair.
Just a couple of quick ones.
First, thank you for bringing this.
I'm always happy to build fewer lanes that we don't need so taxpayers aren't on the hook
to maintain them for centuries.
Sorry, just trying to pick the right word there.
The Amix Road portion there, I'm not an expert here with environmental impacts of roads based
on the type of road or the size or that sort of thing.
It strikes me that since that is a collector west of the Seawolf Road, why not just downgrade
that one in a similar way to a collector so that it doesn't carry as much traffic near
to an environmental area?
Why is it better to remove it?
>> Because the construction road over this lake or soil conservation lake is a problem.
But I can refer to my colleague to have a better answer for this question.
>> So it's just the fact that you're constructing anything there is a disruption?
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> So I think by -- and also because Tom Cole Road is also located in a very close distance
up to the north and it is in parallel with the target road and it also moves the traffic
from east to west.
Tom Cole Road would be a primary arterial with four lanes going each -- three lanes each way
and it can provide enough road capacity for the traffic generated here in future.
>> Okay.
>> The Amix Road right now is not existed, it's the planned road.
>> Yeah, understood.
Most of these roads don't exist, so yeah.
>> Yeah, and I think to add to that, I mean, the developer would have to do that.
That's cost prohibitive.
I'm certain to build a road over a -- I mean, that's part of this whole consideration, I
would assume.
>> Yes.
>> Because of the hardship it would pose to --
>> They have to build a bridge over the -- but because of the steep and like other configuration
--
>> Yeah, and as I recall, the planned future land use in that area and the zoning that Hunter
Cole has is kind of industrial northeast of the loop and then it's more highway corridor
west of it, is that correct?
>> Generally that's correct.
I believe this area is a mix of currently light industrial, MN, their development, they're
just trying to get ahead of the mobility plan hurdles with their land planning, but generally
it's a mix of like higher intensity residential mixed use districts and industrial in this
area.
>> Okay.
Thanks.
Other questions?
>> Yeah, and I assume Tom Cole will be hopefully in and running as a -- you said it's going
to be a primary --
>> Primary arterial.
>> Yeah, because I mean, it's -- when you look at that, there's not a whole lot of east-west
options as we, you know, if we eliminate Amix Road, then that limits options greatly east-west.
It's part of the coal range development agreement that they are going to improve the road and
build extra capacity for these east-west traffic movements.
>> And I would just add to that, as they're getting more to the fine-grained land planning,
we also have the flexibility within the mobility plan to request other collector roadways be
added as determined once we get down to that level of detail in their plans.
>> Okay.
Anything else?
>> Thank you very much.
>> Although I think you're up here for the next one, too, because we've got 4C MPA 240004B.
>> Again, good evening, Chair and Commissioners, Saharis Van Yeri, Senior Transportation Planner,
Transportation Services Division.
This is MPA 240004B mobility plan amendment for Hummingbird Lane.
This proposed amendment is about downgrading the functional classification of a future
Hummingbird Lane section from a secondary arterial to a collector.
As you can see in this map, the Hummingbird Lane is located here in this pink road I'm
showing.
A mobility plan 2022, this road is a planned road and it is designated as a secondary arterial.
The eastern extension of these roads is Mills Road and it goes all the way to Trinity Road.
South of this road, we have McKinney Street and at the north, we have Russell Newman.
The reason behind this request is first, by downgrading the Hummingbird Lane from a secondary
arterial to a collector, we are going to provide a safer road for all road users such as pedestrians,
cyclists, and vehicle users.
Also Hummingbird Lane, as a collector, can provide better access for developments that
are coming around this road to the north and south.
Another main reason is that there is sufficient roadway capacity by parallel existing roads
such as McKinney, Mills, and Russell Newman.
They all have more capacity to move the traffic from east-west and better navigate the traffic
from, for example, downtown Denton to the eastern part of the town.
Therefore, it is recommended to downgrade the Hummingbird Lane to the collector road classification.
Staff recommends approval as it complies with the following criteria for approval.
It is consistent with Denton 2040 Comprehensive Plan and further aligns with mobility plan
goals and also improves safety.
Questions?
Okay.
Very good.
Thank you.
We'll see your presentation in the meeting.
Okay.
That gets us through our agenda.
So with that, I'll go ahead and adjourn our work session at 547 p.m. and we will reconvene
at 630 in council chambers.
Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for
Wednesday, October 23rd, 2024.
With the quorum present, I'll call us to order at 630 p.m.
First item on our agenda is the 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.
Honor the Texas flag.
I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible.
Thank you.
Next item on our agenda is the approval of minutes for October 9th.
I guess before I say that we are having technology problems, so we are going to do hand raises
and roll call votes.
Look over here to Commissioner Villarreal.
Move approval.
Thank you, Commissioner Thaggard.
Okay.
We've got a first and a second to approve our minutes for October 9th.
Any discussion?
Okay.
Let's go ahead and roll call vote.
Commissioner Thaggard.
Sorry?
Voting.
Aye.
Thank you.
At least it's that.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Aye.
Commissioner Pedro.
Aye.
Commissioner Pruitt.
Aye.
Chair is also an aye.
That motion will carry one, two, three, five, zero.
That will take us to items for individual consideration.
The first being 3A, PZ 24214.
That's the approval of the 2025 P&Z Commission meeting schedule for next week.
Angie is here, I think, to put it on the board for us.
I have one in there.
It's on this screen.
Oh, there it is.
And there it is.
Yeah, we're happy to receive any feedback from the commission.
Generally, we kept the theme of second and fourth Wednesdays of each month with adjustments, I believe, in January due to holidays and then March, July, November, December, just due to spring break and the typical holidays.
All right, questions?
And you're looking for a movement on approving that, correct?
Okay, sounds great.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Move approval.
Do we have a second?
Commissioner Pedro.
Second.
We've got a first and a second to approve the 2025 P&Z Commission calendar discussion.
Okay, we'll go ahead and vote by a roll call.
Commissioner Thaggards.
Aye.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Aye.
Commissioner Brown.
Aye.
Commissioner Pruitt.
Aye.
Chair is an aye.
That motion carries 5-0.
That will take us to 3B, FP240038.
Sean is here for presentation of this item for us.
Good evening.
Hi, Sean.
Good evening, Chair and members of the commission.
Let me get this pulled up.
Okay.
So this item, FP240038, is a proposed final plaque for the Home Zone Denton addition, an
approximately two and a half acre property at the corner of University and Ector.
It does not currently meet our criteria for approval.
Therefore, staff is recommending denial.
But staff has no objection to the request for a first extension, which could be granted
to a date certain of November 13th, 2024.
Happy to answer any questions.
Great.
Thank you, Sean.
Any questions for Sean?
Okay.
Thank you very much.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Move approval of the extension request to a date certain of November 13th, 2024.
Great.
Thank you.
Commissioner Pruitt.
Second.
Okay.
We've got a first and a second to approve the extension request to a date certain of
November 13th, 2024 discussion.
Okay.
Let's vote via roll call.
Commissioner Thaggard.
Aye.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Aye.
Commissioner Pedrone.
Aye.
Commissioner Pruitt.
Aye.
Chair is also an aye.
That will carry 5-0.
That will take us to 3C, V240111.
Erin is here for presentation.
This item tonight.
Hello.
Erin Stanley, Assistant Planner.
This is V24-000111, the Titan edition variance request.
So this site is generally located on FM 2449, about half a mile east of Florence Road, just
east of Ponder, in the city of Denton's ETJ Division 1.
The applicant is proposing to create one lot on approximately 21 acres, and this is associated
with a minor plot that is under review by staff currently, and can be approved if this
variance is approved.
And the lot is proposed to take access off FM 2449 by a 1,538-foot-long flag drive.
So some site details.
As you can see here on the right, the flag drive measured from the edge of the right-of-way
to the southern boundary of their main portion of the property is just over 1,500 feet long.
And I do want to point out in this middle picture some of the existing conditions around
the site or around the property.
So you see the two existing gas well pad sites circled here, and the arrow pointing, there's
an adjacent road just to the west of the subject property as well.
And the applicant is requesting the variance from the DDC requirement that the flagpole
portion of the lot cannot be more than 300 feet long.
So some considerations that staff takes into consideration.
There are four approval criteria items, the first being that if granted, the variance
will not be detrimental to the public safety, health, or welfare of the property or adjacent
properties.
This is not approved, this is not expected to be detrimental to public safety.
And the county has reviewed the request and has no objection to the length of the flagpole
drive.
And the second criteria is if there are any physical surroundings that result in a hardship
that could warrant this variance request.
And like I pointed out in the previous slide, the bordering gas well pad sites do limit
the property from purchasing adjacent land on either side to eliminate the flag-shaped
lot or the flagpole-shaped lot, and strict application of the subdivision regulation
would prevent the property from becoming developed.
The third criteria has to do with compliance with city codes, and if approved, the variance
does not vary the provisions in the 2040 comprehensive plan, the DDC, or the mobility plan, except
for the flagpole length that we are talking about right now.
And then the fourth criteria requires that the conditions did not result from any owner
action, and the current configuration of the site has been this way since the 1960s with
a long drive to a home that was there at that time, and the gas well pad sites were developed
prior to 2004.
So with that, staff recommends approval of this request as it complies with the criteria
for the variance approval and the debt and development code, and I'll stand for any
questions.
Thank you.
Any questions?
Erin, you did mention that there's that secondary drive off the flagpole.
Is that just for access for the gas wells?
Correct.
Yeah.
Okay.
That's what I thought.
Okay.
Thank you.
See any other questions?
Great.
Okay, we'll entertain a motion or discussion on this item.
Commissioner Perut.
I'll move approval.
Okay.
Move a second.
Commissioner Perot.
Second.
Okay.
We've got a first and a second for approval.
Any discussion?
Okay.
Let's go ahead and vote via roll call.
Commissioner Thaggart.
Aye.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Aye.
Commissioner Perot.
Aye.
Commissioner Perut.
Aye.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Aye.
We'll pass that motion 5-0.
That will take us to 3-D, PP240006.
Sean is here for presentation.
Good evening again, Chair and members of the commission.
Get the presentation pulled up here.
Okay.
Sean Jacobson, Associate Planner, here to present PP24-0006A, the RM squared addition.
This is a preliminary platform, approximately 363 acre property.
They have met all of the criteria for approval and staff is recommending approval.
Happy to answer any questions.
Great.
Thank you, Sean.
Questions for Sean on this item?
Okay.
Thank you very much.
Any more in motion?
Commissioner Perut.
I'll move approval.
Commissioner Thaggart.
Second.
Okay.
We've got a first and a second for approval of this plat.
Any discussion?
Okay.
We'll vote via roll call.
Commissioner Thaggart.
Aye.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Aye.
Commissioner Perot.
Aye.
Commissioner Perut.
Aye.
Chair is an aye.
That will pass 5-0.
That will take us to our first public hearing item this evening.
That's 4AZ240014.
That is here for presentation.
I will open the public hearing.
Good evening, Commission.
Matt Bodine, Assistant Planner, here to present Zoning Change Case Z24-3014 Denton Energy
Center.
This is a request to rezone approximately 40 acres from the Rural Residential RR District
to Public Facilities PF District.
This piece of property is immediately south of the Denton Energy Center and west of the
airport, specifically about 3,000 feet south of Jim Crystal Road and 850 feet west of Tom
Cole Road.
This piece of property was purchased by the city in December of 2022 for the purpose of
developing a solid waste transfer station.
If this request is approved, it would allow for the development of said transfer station
and the expansion of the data center on the city owned property immediately north of the
subject property.
So listed here on the right is the general criteria for approval as well as the zoning
criteria for approval.
As part of this presentation, we'll just highlight how this request is consistent with the proposed
district, the Denton 2040 Comprehensive Plan, will not have any adverse impacts on the surrounding
area and is due to expected change in the area as well.
So the proposed Zoning District Public Facilities is intended to provide adequate lands for public
and quasi-public community uses and services such as utilities.
The proposed uses on this property do meet the intent of this zoning district and both
uses the transfer station and the data center are permitted within the zoning district.
The future land use map designates this area as industrial commerce.
This area is intended for primarily west of I-35 and is expected to have predominant uses
including light and heavy industrial uses.
This proposed zoning change and development would allow uses that are more intensive in
nature and seen as compatible with the uses intended and preferred for this area and thus
compatible with the future land use map.
The proposed zoning case does advance two goals of the Denton 2040 plan.
The first being the land use goal to grow resourcefully, particularly through contiguous
and compatible development.
The zoning change would be contiguous with PF zoning in the general area, as shown on
earlier, and said uses would be compatible with the intensive uses in the area as well
as uses that are preferred to come in based on the future land use map.
The second goal of this zoning case advances is the infrastructure and utilities goal to
protect public and environmental health and conserve natural resources, enhance community
appearance and control costs.
The Denton 2040 plan does acknowledge that Denton is expected to see significant growth
over the next 20 years and as such the solid waste department and in addition future freeway
loop 288 is expected to bring growth, particularly in this area where this zoning case is located.
The solid waste department did note that having a transfer station in this area of West Denton
would allow them to manage waste material closer to its point of generation, maximize
fleet utilization, minimize costs and provide safe and cost effective diversion and disposal
of waste and thus advance city services in this area.
This zoning change request was notified according to city standards.
Staff did not receive any written responses from neighboring property owners.
Staff does recommend approval of the zoning case as it complies with the criteria in the
Denton development code, but here to answer any questions.
Thank you, Matt.
Any questions at the moment?
Commissioner Fagerd.
Thank you, Chair.
Just a quick question, it's really in close vicinity to what it looks like to some university
land.
Have we reached out?
I know that we had reached out to folks in the area, but have we reached out to the university
to see if they have any plans for their land there?
We did not reach out to UNT University.
That is a field research station, so intent is used.
Okay.
Anything else for Matt?
Okay.
This is a public hearing.
I don't have any cards in front of me on this item, but is there anyone here wishing to
speak and you can fill a card out later?
Okay.
Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and open the floor for motion or discussion.
Commissioner Villarreal.
I'll move approval.
Okay.
Got a first for approval.
Commissioner Pruitt.
Okay, we've got a first and a second.
Second.
Sorry.
Yeah.
Got a first and a second for approval.
Is there any discussion?
Okay.
Before, I'm just going to give a few thoughts just before we vote just because I have a
few thoughts.
Just for the reason that this is coming forward so quick, and I totally understand the request
and I'm totally in agreement with the request and why we're doing it, but why we're doing
it as for the expansion of the data warehouse and eventually the solid waste component.
I had thoughts on data warehouses when we discussed it years ago at DCRC when we were
first coming up with the definition and putting it as a use.
I just want to put some thoughts out there mainly for council, but also for staff, particularly
economic development.
It's just knowing that there's huge energy sucks, huge consumers of energy.
Knowing that the industry is doing nothing but growing, AI is not going anywhere.
We know that there's just going to be more and more of these requests going forward.
I just want to make sure that we have some policy in place as these come forward and
we can get some focus because we want to make sure that as we're making these decisions
that seem really, really good on one end, that we're not circumventing something else
that is policy focus for our city.
I just want to put that food for thought out there because I think it's important.
I think this is just, I'm sure, one of many that we're going to continue to see out here.
I think we just need to think about it so that we've got some clarity on it as we revisit
these future requests.
With that being said, is there any other discussion, thoughts?
Okay, let's go ahead and vote.
Commissioner Thaggard.
Aye.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Aye.
Commissioner Fadrone.
Aye.
Commissioner Pruitt.
Aye.
Chair, is an aye.
That will carry 5-0.
That will take us to public hearing 4B, MPA 240002.
That public hearing was opened at our meeting on October 9th and left open.
So with that, I'll go ahead and invite Sahar here for presentation.
Good evening, Chairs and Commissioners.
This is Sahar Svahn-Yuri, Senior Transportation Planner, Transportation Services Division.
This is MPA 24-0002B Mobility Plan Amendment for Underwood and AMEX Road.
This Mobility Plan Amendment has two components, first Underwood Road and then AMEX Road.
The reason that we have these roads together in one case today is that they are both located
in the vicinity of Hunter Coe Ranch development.
So first Underwood Road.
The proposed amendment is to downgrade the functional classification of Underwood Road
from a primary arterial to a secondary arterial.
Second is the AMEX Road.
The proposed amendment is to remove an eastern portion of a future AMEX Road to the future
loop 288 West.
So I will start with the Underwood Road.
As you can see in the map, the Underwood Road, the final configuration in the Mobility Plan
2022 is located within this pink loop.
The current Hummingbird Lane, the current Underwood is located between Springside and
the intersection of John Payne and 2449 into the south.
The final configuration of the Underwood Road will be Airport Road or FM 1515 on the north
side and it goes all the way down to the intersection of the road and the future H
Lively Road.
The future Underwood Road will be located between future loop 288 West and I-35 West.
The proposal is to downgrade the roadway classification from a primary arterial to the secondary arterial.
As you can see in this chart, there is a comparison between the primary arterial and secondary
arterial.
The most important aspect of it is a secondary arterial, we are going to have a typical speed
of 35 to 40 miles per hour and it will also have a narrower width of the road.
By downgrading the road to the secondary arterial, the road will provide better access to the
surrounding area and it will be more suitable for the moderate traffic volume generated
in this area and also we are going to provide safer road for all road users.
Another main reason for this request is that the future loop 288 and I-30 West are freeways
and there are better alternatives to navigate the north-south traffic with higher speed
limits and more road capacity.
This proposed amendment has met all approval criteria.
Referring to the future land use and mobility plan, there is going to be the future loop
288 West soon in the area and it's going to carry out the north-south traffic with
more capacity and higher speed.
Also the mixed use neighbourhoods in the area can have a better access.
This downgrading classification to the secondary arterial will provide sufficient service to
medium-sized trip generators.
Also it will distribute travel to small geographic areas.
Now I'm going to talk about AMEX Road.
As you can see in this map, the target road is located within the teal loop.
Based on the mobility plan 2022, the future AMEX Road will be located on the terminus
of Seawolf Road and loop 288.
Also there is a soil conservation lake located at a short distance of the road.
There is a Tom Cole Road located just north of the target road and it is also navigate
the east-west traffic in the area.
The reason behind this proposal is first prevent any adverse environmental impact.
This soil conservation lake is identified as a female floodplain and environmental sensitive
area that are associated with this lake.
Also co-range development will increase the Tom Cole Road capacity to offset the removal
of a portion of the AMEX Road and provide efficient east-west traffic movement.
This proposed amendment has met all the approval criteria and referring to the future land
use and mobility plan, removing this portion of AMEX Road will prevent any future adverse
environmental impact and will provide safe traffic by avoiding the floodplain area.
Also it will avoid any unnecessary road construction in the area.
Tom Cole Road will be provide sufficient capacity and safer traffic flow for all road users.
According to the DDC regulation, the public outreach requirement has been met.
We had newspaper ad, website announcement and property signs.
And also we have mailed public notices and courtesy notices to the property owners in
200 feet and 500 feet buffer around the roads, the target roads.
We have not received any responses in opposition or in favor of this request.
We have received one question from adjacent property owner by email that has been responded
by staff.
Also today we have received a phone call from a resident that has some concerns about the
underwood road and she mentioned that she is going to be here today to express her concerns
about this road.
African-Americans approval of the proposal as it complies with the criteria in section
two of the DDC for approval of a comprehensive plan amendment.
Next steps will be a public hearing at City Council on November 19, 2024.
Thank you.
Do we have questions for Sahar at this time?
Commission approved.
Thank you, Chair.
I wonder just sometimes we get layered in terminology here and as the public comes and some of the
newer members on this commission are here, could you explain briefly the trade-off and
difference between you mentioned access and better access versus higher speed and throughput
and why those goals are not achievable simultaneously?
Does that make sense?
Sure.
I'm referring to my colleague to answer this question.
Okay.
Thank you.
Good evening, Commission, Chandra, City Traffic Engineer, Transportation Services.
So when you have a primary arterial, the spacing criteria per hour transportation is 400 feet.
When you have a secondary arterial, it shrinks to 200 feet, so when you reduce the designation,
you could provide more access for the adjacent land users.
So in that way, if any developments come in, we would be able to permit driveways without
any variances.
And this specific development, now with Loop 288 West, will be built with frontage roads
and the 35W on the eastern side also will have frontage roads in the future.
And Loop 288, although it's been there for 40 years, but now it has legs.
Finally, TechStart is building it soon, so this will carry a lot more traffic and reducing
this primary arterial to secondary will not affect any capacity issues.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chandra.
Any other questions for staff at this time?
Okay.
This is a public hearing.
I do have one card in front of me at the moment.
It's Kelly Holtzclaw, if you'll come up here and give us your name, your time will begin.
It says here you're speaking for a group.
Yes, ma'am.
Okay.
All of my neighbors that have been my neighbors for pretty much my entire life because I've
lived down under Wood Road my entire life.
I have lots of questions because it's my road, so Kelly Holtzclaw.
So will the road still be two lanes is one question.
Will there be a sidewalk?
Is it going to encroach on any of our properties because if the road's going to get bigger
or there's going to be a sidewalk, I would assume that it's going to either encroach
on our property or to the west and curious about that.
And then with Underwood Road coming from Airport Road all the way down.
So there's lots of trees in that field and I see deer all the time and stuff like that.
Are the trees going to get replaced?
Are more trees planted because I'm sure that all the trees on the other side of our road,
it's going to be torn down.
So that concerns me because trees are important.
Is one of the reasons why it's being extended from Airport Road all the way down instead
of just using West Court because of all the trucks that block all the traffic every single
day that I call the city about because you have to try to sneak around them without getting
hit.
And the city or the cops say they can't do anything because all they can do is a warning.
Sorry, that's a whole nother issue.
And I'm still not sure what a secondary arterial road is.
If it's going to increase to 35 to 40 miles an hour because currently it's 30 miles an
hour, I mean, cars already hauled butt down that road, are 18-wheelers going to be allowed
to go down that road because right now they're not, or they're not supposed to, they do anyway.
That's my questions.
Do you all have anything else to ask?
Oh yeah, and the timeline on it, that would be helpful.
And I did not respond to the letter, well, I came to the meeting last week but read on
the paper that said it was going to be postponed until today.
So that's why I'm back today.
I did not email because I'd rather just come here and talk about it.
I think the letters are just, whoever it affected on Underwood, since you guys are on Springside
Corbin, then it's further back than the recommended.
Yeah, it has to do with proximity to what we're talking about.
And since Corbin is closed, they have to come down through that way anyway.
And why not reopen Corbin?
That would make a lot of sense because it's already a road and you don't have to turn
on all the trees.
That's my questions.
Thank you.
We'll see what we can clarify for you, Kelly.
Thank you very much for coming out to speak.
Okay, so let's see who wants to take, I guess, some of these questions that I will put out
so that I can get Ms. Kelly's questions answered.
So maybe a little more explanation, again, of what this road is going to be.
So Underwood Road as such, with the 2022 mobility plan, it was upgraded to a primary arterial.
That used to be a secondary arterial back from the 2015 mobility plan, but we are trying
to lower it back to the secondary arterial due to loop 288 widening and 35W widening
with frontage roads.
So we see the capacities are well balanced with the new roadways.
So with the secondary arterial designation, if approved tonight, it will reduce from 135
feet right of way to 110 feet right of way, which is a smaller section than what it is
currently approved for.
And eventually, these roads are built by the development as it happens, and it will have
sidewalks.
It will be a four-lane roadway, currently it's a two-lane, and it will have sidewalks
on both sides.
And the speeds would be 35 miles, and depending on the geometry conditions, how it's built,
it could go as high as 40, but 35 is the ideal we try to target it for.
And then the timeline on it, you said, is going to go as development happens, correct?
As development happens.
Because, yeah, then developers will be in charge of?
Building their portions as a perimeter improvement.
As it happens, okay, okay, future timeline, okay.
And then I would probably ask that if you haven't already, well, you already have an
email and communication, so maybe to be able to answer more specific questions you could
get with Kelly and be able to answer more specific to her property and her property
needs.
Sure.
That would be awesome.
Chandra, thank you.
Okay.
This is a public hearing.
I don't have any other cards in front of me.
Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item?
I have a question, but I don't know how to ask it.
You can come on up.
It's a public hearing.
You're welcome to ask it.
We'll see if we can get you an answer.
Will you give us your name, please?
Can you go -- Barbara Whitworth.
Thank you, Barbara.
Could you go back to the picture?
Which one?
The one of Corbin Road and Underwood.
Like this one?
Yes.
Okay.
There's a green line.
I'm on Corbin Road at the very -- right there is where I am.
There's a green dotted line that's going to cross there.
What is that?
Here.
This green dotted line right here.
Right there.
This is -- you're referring to this future land?
Yes.
So dotted green line, which means this is a planned road and it has not existed yet.
No, I know it's not because I live there and there's no road there.
Okay.
And that's going through --
To the properties?
Through our properties, yes.
So is -- will we be notified when that's going to happen or are we going to be notified at
all?
Okay.
I'm going to refer to my colleague.
Okay.
And I think Haley has some information as well.
Yes.
So I think there may be some general confusion.
So the map that we're looking at here on the screen is the city's long-term mobility plan.
So we're talking 20-, 30-year timeframe.
These roads that are shown on here as future roadways get built as development occurs.
So it's not that these are roads the city's planning to come acquire your property and
build tomorrow.
It's -- if you were to sell your property --
But there's flags out there already.
We're seeing flags on --
It's possible for survey work that's being done or something of that sort.
The city has no imminent plans to construct any of these roadways.
So underwood, the portion that is possibly going to be built in the near future is what
would be within the coal ranch development, not the portion that goes all the way up to
Airport Road or Springside Road where you all are living.
That would be -- in the future, if you sell your property and someone comes to develop
it, they would be responsible for then extending the roadway up as far as that property goes.
So the proposal before you today is not affecting your property in any way.
If enough pieces of it got built that the city needed to someday come in and connect
the missing links, that would have to be approved through a bond as a capital project or something
of that nature for the city to even fund that.
And you all would be engaged in that discussion at that time for the city to pay you the appropriate
amount for your land for that to occur.
If that was even quite clear.
Yes, if that were to occur.
Currently, to my knowledge, there's no capital plans for any of these roadways in this area.
Okay.
Yeah.
Well, we heard this several years ago, and then I'm seeing the map with the broken lines.
Yes, ma'am.
This is just an amendment to that plan that was adopted in 2022.
So every few years we go through updates and just assess what future plans we might need
to change.
Okay.
Just checking to make for sure.
Absolutely.
Cutting my property back.
Of course.
Yes, ma'am.
Happy to help.
Okay.
Thank you.
Yeah.
And no, people here in the city are happy to help with any specific questions too as it
relates to you.
Yeah.
So I know this can get very confusing when you look at it.
It's just the city has to have a plan.
It has to have an idea of how roads are going to get connected.
It doesn't mean that this is actually going to happen or even when it's going to happen,
but it has to be on some kind of a guiding document so as things happen, as property
sells, as development occurs, there is the plan of what the roadway connection will be.
So again, a public hearing is still open.
Is there anyone else wishing to speak?
Who hasn't already?
Okay.
I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and I'll open the floor for a motion or discussion.
Questions?
Commissioner Pedro?
I just have a question for the member of public that spoke first regarding your understanding
of a primary arterial or secondary arterial road.
I just want to make sure that the definition provided is something that you understood.
Okay.
So my request is that in the communication with the public that that's also included
for the definition so it is understood.
I think sometimes we use very technical and heavy language and it's difficult sometimes
to understand.
You're making decisions or you're trying to process information with limited understanding.
So if we can include that in the communication as well that would be helpful.
Commissioner Villarreal, I think I saw your hand up.
Did you have a question?
Yes, Chair.
Thank you.
Just for the community group here, did those answers help alleviate concerns about this
vote specifically at the very least or how are y'all feeling now?
I still don't know if the road's going to encroach on my property or if they're going
to reach me.
Yeah, we can't have discussion back and forth without a microphone or anything like that.
So better not to engage like as a group out there.
But if you want to have some thoughts that'd be fine.
No, it's all good.
Call one up.
Okay.
Commissioner Prud?
Thank you, Chair.
Yeah.
I'll move approval.
I have a couple of thoughts and thanks to staff on this.
These amendments are always very confusing.
Trust me, we took what, eight or nine months going through this mobility plan update in
2022.
And at various stages we had, you know, a collation of dozens of questions from us and
from council members during that process.
I'll let staff correct me if I'm wrong, I just want to make sure we're all on the same
page.
That the current mobility plan calls for these two roadways to be potentially wider than
four lanes.
And so this amendment says we actually don't need them that wide.
And so I'm happy to move approval for this because I'm told there are things I can say
that staff can't say.
My opinion is that the drawing of primary arterials on the mobility plan in some cases
can be a desire to put things on the 10 year CIP so that the, and I'm sorry, this is going
to get terminology wise but essentially put things in a plan so that fees that we collect
from development are higher and therefore it doesn't immediately impact the tax burden
for bonds and other ways of building these roads in the near term future.
However, if we forget to go back and reassess as staff is doing here, we end up building
miles of lanes of concrete that we don't really need.
And then that causes the entire city to have to maintain and rebuild those when they fail,
which is much more expensive in the long term.
So I'm happy to move approval and just thank staff for continuing to look at this plan
as we go forward.
Thank you, Commissioner Pruitt.
We've got a first for approval.
Commissioner Thaggard?
I second.
Okay.
We've got a first and a second for approval.
Any discussion?
Yeah.
And I'll just echo a few thoughts from Commissioner Pruitt.
Yeah, this is actually a really, a great look at this plan as we had.
It downgrades Underwood as it was originally planned.
It removes Amex Road altogether from that not happening in that environmentally sensitive
area being touched.
So it's very, it was a good thought for staff to have this amendment.
Yes, it gets confusing.
Yes, it's hard to understand when these things are way out before us in the future with truly
no plan for it to, any kind of timeline for it to happen.
But can't plan a city going forward without having a plan and mobility plan is definitely
part of that.
So very important and I think the amendment is certainly worthy of support.
Any other discussion?
Okay.
We'll go ahead and take a roll call vote then.
Commissioner Thaggard?
Aye.
Commissioner Villarreal?
Aye.
Commissioner Pedrone?
Aye.
Commissioner Pruitt?
Aye.
Chair is an aye.
That will carry five zero.
That will take us to item 4C, MPA 240004.
Sahar is here for presentation of that item as well.
That also was opened at our 10/9 meeting.
That public hearing was opened and it was left open.
So I'll go ahead and turn it over to you for presentation.
Good evening chair and commissioners, Sahar Svendiri, senior transportation planner, transportation
services division.
This is MPA 24-0004B mobility plan amendment for Hummingbird Lane.
The proposed amendment for this case is to downgrade the roadway classification of Hummingbird
Lane from a secondary arterial to a collector.
So some background about what's happening in this area and I'm trying to use some, not
use very technical words here.
So it's kind of related some of the wording to my other amendment.
So currently, today, the Hummingbird Lane is existed on the west side of the loop 288
and it is identified as a residential road.
For mobility plan 2022, the Hummingbird Lane is identified as a secondary arterial that
extend across loop 288 and goes all the way to the Mehe Road.
And also it will continue to the Mills Road and the Mills Road goes all the way to the
Trinity.
Also we have McKinney Street here south of the Hummingbird Lane and we have Russell Newman
Road and Prominence Road as parallel roads on north side of the Hummingbird Lane.
So the proposed amendment is to downgrade the Hummingbird Lane classification.
In the chart here, you can see the comparison between a collector road and a secondary arterial.
The most important aspect of it is that with the collector, we are going to have a typical
speed limits of 30 to 35 miles per hour.
And we are going to have a narrower width of the road which is going to be 65 feet whereas
it's going to be 110 in a secondary arterial.
By reducing the roadway classification of Hummingbird Lane to a collector, we are going
to provide a safer road for all road users with lower speed limit and also because it's
going through the community mixed use development, we are going to have a safer passage for everybody.
Also because of the short length of the road which is about 0.3 miles, it can better function
as a transition road between the local roads to the adjacent secondary and primary arterial.
I am referring to the McKinney Street as a secondary arterial and Loop 288 and May Hill
as a primary.
Also by reducing the road classification, the Hummingbird Lane will provide more access
to the businesses and other land uses in the surrounding area.
The shaded pink area here is identified as a community mixed use land use.
Therefore, it can provide better access to these upcoming developments here.
Another main reason for this reclassification is the McKinney Street.
McKinney Street is a better alternative due to the proximity of this road to the Hummingbird
Lane and the length of the road and also the width of the road which is currently four
lanes with one central lane for turns.
It can better navigate the traffic from east to west and for example, it can collect the
traffic from downtown Denton and move it to the eastern side of the city.
This request has met all the approval criteria.
Referring to the future land use and the mobility plan, this reduction in the road classification
will allow a lower speed limit for short distance trip generators and it will provide safer
access opportunities for all roadway users.
Also downgrading the roadway classification aligns with the multimodal and Vision Zero
plans and also the context sensitive design.
In accordance to the DDC regulation, the public outreach requirement has been met.
We had news prepare advertisement, website announcement and property signs.
We have also sent mail for the public notices and courtesy notices to the all property owners
in 200 feet and 500 feet buffer around the target road.
We have received no responses in opposition or in favor of these requests.
Staff recommends approval of the proposal as it complies with the criteria in Section
2 of the DDC for approval of a comprehensive plan amendment.
Next step will be a public hearing at City Council on November 19, 2024.
Thank you.
Any questions?
Thank you very much.
I don't have any cards in front of me on this item.
This is a public hearing.
Is there anyone wishing to speak on this item?
Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and open the floor for a motion
or discussion.
Commissioner Pruitt.
Thank you, Chair.
I'll move approval for the same reasons of fiscal responsibility and safety in the previous
item.
Thank you.
Commissioner Padrone.
I second.
Okay.
We've got a first and a second for approval.
Any discussion?
Okay.
Let's take roll call vote.
Commissioner Thaggart.
Aye.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Aye.
Commissioner Padrone.
Aye.
Commissioner Pruitt.
Aye.
Chair is also an aye.
That motion carries 5-0.
That will take us to our Planning and Zoning Commission matrix and I will turn that over
to Haley.
Good evening.
Yes, related to the matrix, we did add the request from the previous meeting regarding
trail connectivity.
So please let us know if we didn't capture that in summary correctly.
And we do have several items, just so you all know, looking forward at our next meeting
that will hopefully be addressed related to parks as well as multifamily data.
So we'll expect all of those work session items at our next meeting.
With respect to recent council items, at the October 15th meeting we had a handful of items
that you all had previously seen that were approved.
We had the PD for the Villages of McKinney that was approved as well as the Jefferson
North Elm, the multifamily at the Evers property also approved as well as the code amendments
related to housing incentives.
Those three items seem to all pair well in discussion and kind of carried each other
across the finish line it seemed.
And then recently, just at last night's meeting, if you were watching, we finally had success
with our short-term rental code amendments after almost two years of work on Angie's
part.
So kudos to her for carrying that one across the finish line last night.
And then the two alternative ESAs that you all saw recently were also approved at last
night's meeting and happy to add anything else that you all may have to the matrix.
Any additions to matrix?
Okay, thank you.
Any concluding items?
Commissioner Villarreal.
Early voting continues tomorrow through November 1st.
You can vote anywhere in Denton County during early voting, not on election day, so go out
and vote early so you can go vote anywhere in the county.
Thank you.
Any other concluding items?
Okay.
With that, I'll go ahead and close our meeting at 722 p.m.
Thank you very much, everyone.