1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:09,840 Good afternoon and welcome to the planning and zoning work session at 5 o 2 p.m. Wednesday 2 00:00:09,840 --> 00:00:17,660 April 9th. Our first item on our work session business is any citizen comments on the consent 3 00:00:17,660 --> 00:00:26,440 agenda items. So this is items under number three under agenda on the third page. I'm 4 00:00:26,440 --> 00:00:37,200 looking. I don't see any. Okay. Any the next item is clarification for items on the agenda 5 00:00:37,200 --> 00:00:45,240 for the meeting. So any consent agenda questions on those three plots from the commission? 6 00:00:45,240 --> 00:00:49,760 Any questions? Chair did just want to make sure the commission saw the updated corrected 7 00:00:49,760 --> 00:00:58,840 plot that had been distributed to the commission. Part of the meeting. Yeah. Okay. Then we've 8 00:00:58,840 --> 00:01:03,880 got a full work session. So let's move to the consent agenda. I'm sorry to the individual 9 00:01:03,880 --> 00:01:09,620 consideration items. First thing is chair and vice chair. Were you going to speak to 10 00:01:09,620 --> 00:01:18,440 that? I was just going to give an overview. It's a new commission. So we'll since Commissioner 11 00:01:18,440 --> 00:01:23,480 Villarreal had to step down. We need a vice chair because I actually know that I will 12 00:01:23,480 --> 00:01:32,200 be absent on our first meeting in June. So it comes with responsibility this year. So 13 00:01:32,200 --> 00:01:37,840 but yeah. So we'll when we get into the session, we'll have have nominations and work through 14 00:01:37,840 --> 00:01:49,320 that. Any questions procedurally on that? Okay. Item B for be FP 25 0011A. Sorry, Julie 15 00:01:49,320 --> 00:01:55,160 to get you jumping and then sitting down. Good evening, Julie Wyatt, principal planner. 16 00:01:55,160 --> 00:02:09,600 Let me pull up the presentation. Okay, this is a final plot for a zero lot line single 17 00:02:09,600 --> 00:02:15,640 family residential development. The zoning was approved for this property at last fall. 18 00:02:15,640 --> 00:02:19,520 They are now moving forward with the development process and that includes civil engineering 19 00:02:19,520 --> 00:02:25,720 plans and plotting. They do still have some items that they do need to correct on the 20 00:02:25,720 --> 00:02:29,880 civil engineering plans as well as the final plot. So staff is recommending denial. However, 21 00:02:29,880 --> 00:02:37,280 we have no we have no objection to the extension to the April 23rd planning and zoning commission 22 00:02:37,280 --> 00:02:45,880 meeting. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Seeing none. Thank you, Julie. Thank you. Next 23 00:02:45,880 --> 00:02:56,760 for see FP 250014. Good evening, Commission. Bryce in Arsdale assistant planner. This is 24 00:02:56,760 --> 00:03:03,900 the final plot for approximately 19 acres, just about 300 feet east of country club lane. 25 00:03:03,900 --> 00:03:07,800 And this is a development that will be single family homes. The zoning was approved just 26 00:03:07,800 --> 00:03:11,200 about a year ago in May of last year. While there are still some comments to work through 27 00:03:11,200 --> 00:03:15,560 both on the final plot as well as civil engineering plans, staff has no objection to the requested 28 00:03:15,560 --> 00:03:23,960 extension to date certain April 23rd. Any questions? Seeing none. Thank you, Bryce. Thank you. Next 29 00:03:23,960 --> 00:03:32,720 item for D. Cameron Robertson, principal planner. This is a final plot for approximately 20 30 00:03:32,720 --> 00:03:40,440 acre parcel. Northwest corner of Robson Ranch Road and I 35 West corridor. They still have 31 00:03:40,440 --> 00:03:44,400 some civil engineering plan comments that they're working through as well as some comments 32 00:03:44,400 --> 00:03:48,320 they're working through on their final plot. But stuff has no objection to their second 33 00:03:48,320 --> 00:03:55,360 extension request to an April 23rd date. And I can stand for any questions. Seeing none. 34 00:03:55,360 --> 00:04:07,600 Thank you. We'll see you at the meeting. And then for E. FP 25009A. Aaron. Good evening. 35 00:04:07,600 --> 00:04:13,000 Aaron Stanley assistant planner. This is a final plot for three lots in the extraterritorial 36 00:04:13,000 --> 00:04:19,880 jurisdiction just east of Hilltop Road and north of Hickory Hill Road. At this time, 37 00:04:19,880 --> 00:04:23,200 they have not met criteria for approval and staff is recommending denial. But we have 38 00:04:23,200 --> 00:04:31,160 no objection to their second extension request to a date certain April 23rd 2025. Any questions? 39 00:04:31,160 --> 00:04:42,920 None. Okay. Thank you. And last but not least for F. FP 250015. Good evening, Chair. Member 40 00:04:42,920 --> 00:04:47,880 of the Commission Angie Manglars development review manager. This is a final plot for D.C. 41 00:04:47,880 --> 00:04:53,360 townhomes. It is a 3.8 acre tract of land generally situated north of East McKinney 42 00:04:53,360 --> 00:04:58,560 Street. It is split zoned. There is some residential seven on the property as well as mixed use 43 00:04:58,560 --> 00:05:04,760 neighborhood for the development of approximately 14 townhomes and a multifamily project. At 44 00:05:04,760 --> 00:05:08,680 this time, they are not meeting our criteria for approval. But staff has no objection to 45 00:05:08,680 --> 00:05:14,840 the first requested extension to a date certain of April 23rd. Happy to answer any questions. 46 00:05:14,840 --> 00:05:20,680 And this one is the first extension? Yes. This is the first extension. Just out of curiosity, 47 00:05:20,680 --> 00:05:26,040 you know, there were either two or three that were on their second extension this time. 48 00:05:26,040 --> 00:05:31,120 If I don't ask, I'll feel bad for Jordan. That seems a little bit odd. Was there a strange 49 00:05:31,120 --> 00:05:38,560 thing in the scheduling or less time or holidays or something? Or was it just how the applicants 50 00:05:38,560 --> 00:05:43,160 didn't quite get everything in this time? It could be a combination of a few things. 51 00:05:43,160 --> 00:05:46,440 In these cases tonight, you'll see that a lot of these plots are being requested to 52 00:05:46,440 --> 00:05:50,040 our second meeting in April, which is a little out of the norm. Typically, it would be the 53 00:05:50,040 --> 00:05:54,080 first meeting of the next month. But because of calendaring, it's not going to fall within 54 00:05:54,080 --> 00:05:58,800 that 30 day. So it could be likely that you'll see another second or third extension just 55 00:05:58,800 --> 00:06:03,880 because as Tina loves to say, quality engineering doesn't happen in 30 days. Okay. Thank you. 56 00:06:03,880 --> 00:06:11,980 Thanks. All right. That brings us to our public hearings. 57 00:06:11,980 --> 00:06:21,440 Item 5A will be withdrawn from a staff request and we'll hold that at a later meeting. So 58 00:06:21,440 --> 00:06:45,320 that's item 5B is Z25-0003A. Erin. Good evening, Chair and members of the commission. 59 00:06:45,320 --> 00:06:53,560 Okay. This is a rezoning request for Wild Haven Woods from residential, rural residential 60 00:06:53,560 --> 00:07:02,480 to R7 district. This is a request to rezone approximately 4.9 acres from RR to R7. This 61 00:07:02,480 --> 00:07:08,520 site is generally located north of Pokers Page Road and approximately 325 feet west 62 00:07:08,520 --> 00:07:15,400 of Swisher Road. This is a bit of an unusual rezoning request. So the site is currently 63 00:07:15,400 --> 00:07:20,960 developed with a mix of single family detached dwellings, triplexes and accessory buildings 64 00:07:20,960 --> 00:07:26,960 on the site today. And the applicant is not currently planning to redevelop the site. The 65 00:07:26,960 --> 00:07:33,480 purpose of this rezoning is to plot the property in accordance with R7 in order to make utility 66 00:07:33,480 --> 00:07:40,960 improvements to the existing residential uses on the site today. Some of the considerations 67 00:07:40,960 --> 00:07:46,680 that staff looked at when evaluating the rezoning request was the current RR zoning district 68 00:07:46,680 --> 00:07:51,600 does require a minimum of five acres in order to plot. And with this being 4.9, they could 69 00:07:51,600 --> 00:07:56,720 not plot under their current district today. In the R7 district, they would be allowed 70 00:07:56,720 --> 00:08:02,280 to plot 4,000 square foot lots and it would allow the current uses on the site today, 71 00:08:02,280 --> 00:08:08,600 including those triplexes, to be plotted on one lot as they're used today. What this staff 72 00:08:08,600 --> 00:08:13,520 is recommending approval as they meet all of the other rezoning criteria as well and 73 00:08:13,520 --> 00:08:19,400 I'll have a more detailed presentation in the main session, but I'll stand for any questions. 74 00:08:19,400 --> 00:08:25,360 Sure. Go ahead. Erin, this is probably in your more detailed presentation later, but 75 00:08:25,360 --> 00:08:29,640 I think it would be important to inform the commission of the situation regarding the 76 00:08:29,640 --> 00:08:34,320 utilities, particularly with, I believe it was these, yeah, the septic system and then 77 00:08:34,320 --> 00:08:39,360 being able to connect to city water. Yes. So those are the specific utility improvements 78 00:08:39,360 --> 00:08:44,600 that they are trying to make. So in this graphic or the aerial image on the right, the star 79 00:08:44,600 --> 00:08:50,000 in the rear of the site next to triplex C is the septic system that the applicant is 80 00:08:50,000 --> 00:08:55,080 having issues with right now. It is failing. It just needs some regular maintenance or 81 00:08:55,080 --> 00:09:00,920 to be replaced. But they cannot do that because the DDC requires that to install a new septic 82 00:09:00,920 --> 00:09:08,680 system, you do need to plot the property. Another improvement is the parcel here with 83 00:09:08,680 --> 00:09:14,360 this single family home. At least this parcel, the applicant wants to extend public water 84 00:09:14,360 --> 00:09:20,440 to this property. She hasn't decided if she would extend it further, but at least to that 85 00:09:20,440 --> 00:09:30,480 property and that would also trigger the requirement to plot. Commissioner Riggs. Thank you. That 86 00:09:30,480 --> 00:09:34,640 actually answered most of my question, but it did bring up another question. So they're 87 00:09:34,640 --> 00:09:40,440 going to go back with the septic system instead of tying on to sewer. Yeah, it is served by 88 00:09:40,440 --> 00:09:46,060 existing septic today. And so she doesn't plan at this time to extend sewer line, does 89 00:09:46,060 --> 00:09:53,080 not run adjacent to this property. So you'll see that dashed pink line, that is a gravity 90 00:09:53,080 --> 00:10:02,920 line. So it just would take sewage waste away from a site. But I in talking with utilities, 91 00:10:02,920 --> 00:10:06,960 that is not a line that they could tie into today. They would have to extend from further 92 00:10:06,960 --> 00:10:13,320 from that neighborhood to the south. And that is not in her intentions today. Okay, thank 93 00:10:13,320 --> 00:10:41,960 you. Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you. And then 5C PD 23 0001 C. 94 00:10:41,960 --> 00:10:49,760 Good evening again, Angie Manglaris. This is PD 23 0001. This is an overlay plan development 95 00:10:49,760 --> 00:10:56,840 for Denton 195. So a little bit of background on this request. This is a overlay plan development 96 00:10:56,840 --> 00:11:01,880 request for a rezoning from residential two to an overlay plan development district with 97 00:11:01,880 --> 00:11:07,080 base zonings of mixed use neighborhood and public facilities. The overall tract of land 98 00:11:07,080 --> 00:11:12,680 is approximately 195 acres and is situated at the southeast corner of Corbin Road and 99 00:11:12,680 --> 00:11:19,400 I 35 W. The purpose of this overlay plan development is to facilitate the development of a multifamily 100 00:11:19,400 --> 00:11:25,360 and townhome project with parkland dedication or easement for publicly accessible open space. 101 00:11:25,360 --> 00:11:29,940 The comprehensive plan designates this area as moderate residential. It is consistent 102 00:11:29,940 --> 00:11:34,920 with our housing population projections, our preferred land preservation plan, our parks, 103 00:11:34,920 --> 00:11:40,020 conservation and environment goals of the comprehensive plan and staff is recommending 104 00:11:40,020 --> 00:11:44,240 approval of the request. I do want to go a little bit deeper than we typically do just 105 00:11:44,240 --> 00:11:49,280 to help kind of explain how this tract works. And so you'll see that you have a general 106 00:11:49,280 --> 00:11:55,480 zoning exhibit here outlining the three tracts A, B and C totaling approximately 58 acres 107 00:11:55,480 --> 00:12:03,040 of land to be rezoned plan development mixed use neighborhood. Tracts A and B take access 108 00:12:03,040 --> 00:12:08,880 are situated along Corbin Road. Tract B does have overlay conditions to limit the allowable 109 00:12:08,880 --> 00:12:15,560 uses to townhome and single family only. Tracts A and C do not have those use limitations. 110 00:12:15,560 --> 00:12:24,360 Any use in MN could be permitted. The remaining 137 acres is proposed to be plan development 111 00:12:24,360 --> 00:12:29,160 public facilities with an intent to either dedicate the land area or an easement for 112 00:12:29,160 --> 00:12:37,120 public open space uses. A little bit more about that parkland development 113 00:12:37,120 --> 00:12:40,960 and just kind of help explain since this is not something you all typically see how these 114 00:12:40,960 --> 00:12:47,200 requests kind of work with each other. So this is a very simplified developers agreement 115 00:12:47,200 --> 00:12:54,120 process map. So we are here. This is our little arrow and my apologies the text is a little 116 00:12:54,120 --> 00:13:00,300 small but we're considering tonight an overlay plan development rezoning. So we're in the 117 00:13:00,300 --> 00:13:06,040 entitlement phases. Planning and zoning commission you all serve in a recommending capacity to 118 00:13:06,040 --> 00:13:11,520 city council. After this the project will go to city council who has the final vote 119 00:13:11,520 --> 00:13:15,720 on the project. Should that project be approved the parkland 120 00:13:15,720 --> 00:13:21,400 developers agreement scoping begins where the developer and the city would work to scope 121 00:13:21,400 --> 00:13:27,280 the project, define its terms including access points, easements, trails, what all of that 122 00:13:27,280 --> 00:13:32,160 would look like as well as receiving public input meetings from the public to get an ultimate 123 00:13:32,160 --> 00:13:37,720 idea of what this land could look like. Once all that's kind of been worked through then 124 00:13:37,720 --> 00:13:42,240 the developers agreement goes to the parks board who much like you all serves in a recommending 125 00:13:42,240 --> 00:13:46,760 capacity they would review that developers agreement, make a recommendation and that 126 00:13:46,760 --> 00:13:51,360 would eventually go to city council who has the final say of approval or denial of that 127 00:13:51,360 --> 00:13:56,440 agreement. All of that works together as part of this overlay condition in that we specify 128 00:13:56,440 --> 00:14:01,640 that that process needs to be worked out prior to the submittal of a final plot for tracks 129 00:14:01,640 --> 00:14:09,920 A, B or C. So I just kind of wanted to help maybe put into place where we are in the process 130 00:14:09,920 --> 00:14:14,600 what happens if this is approved how that parkland or open space easement ultimately 131 00:14:14,600 --> 00:14:20,020 gets configured. Angie can you just give a quick recap of what 132 00:14:20,020 --> 00:14:27,800 types of activities from a civil engineering plan construction you know COO type process 133 00:14:27,800 --> 00:14:34,320 requires that final plot and what of those types of activities could occur before it? 134 00:14:34,320 --> 00:14:41,440 Sure so we require civil engineering plans to be approved before final plot approval 135 00:14:41,440 --> 00:14:47,080 but we do require final plan approval for building permit, for grading, for activity 136 00:14:47,080 --> 00:14:56,160 on that property. Okay any any this is kind of a weird thing 137 00:14:56,160 --> 00:15:00,720 so I just want to make sure we follow and track this. Do you have a question Commissioner 138 00:15:00,720 --> 00:15:09,120 Dyer? I do. I know that in tracks B and C they're 139 00:15:09,120 --> 00:15:17,560 talking about potentially either apartments or the type of housing where it's like commercial 140 00:15:17,560 --> 00:15:25,800 retail on the bottom and then housing above. How is Denton sitting on their number of apartments 141 00:15:25,800 --> 00:15:32,760 like are we seeing where we have vacancies in the existing apartments that we do have? 142 00:15:32,760 --> 00:15:41,200 How many other developments are there going to be apartments that are in the works but 143 00:15:41,200 --> 00:15:49,760 aren't built yet? Like kind of are we going to have too many of these types of structures? 144 00:15:49,760 --> 00:15:53,640 Are we going to over develop the apartment world in Denton? I guess is what I'm trying 145 00:15:53,640 --> 00:15:56,120 to get at. Sure so there's there's two points that I 146 00:15:56,120 --> 00:16:02,840 want to to clarify just to make sure that make sure we keep our tracks straight and my help so 147 00:16:02,840 --> 00:16:09,960 actually I may give you a preview of my presentation. Yeah sorry Commissioner Dyer I think it'll 148 00:16:09,960 --> 00:16:14,400 maybe make more sense if we just hold that question until after we get a little bit more 149 00:16:14,400 --> 00:16:20,520 clarity from the overall application. I do have one question specifically on the Parkland 150 00:16:20,520 --> 00:16:31,040 dedication and how that process works. I don't recall seeing a PD which was a single PD application 151 00:16:31,040 --> 00:16:38,000 and a single you know border outline that we knew was going to have separated ownership 152 00:16:38,000 --> 00:16:45,960 in the future. It's probably less risk because it's parks and the city controls that versus 153 00:16:45,960 --> 00:16:56,000 two individual landowners but can you help me understand the thinking behind why have 154 00:16:56,000 --> 00:17:05,560 the PD include the the the PF areas as opposed to just rezoning the other three areas and 155 00:17:05,560 --> 00:17:13,240 then have a you know have the the developers agreement and the agreement to dedicate the 156 00:17:13,240 --> 00:17:18,360 land and then come back and rezone that to PF later. Does that make sense? Like what's 157 00:17:18,360 --> 00:17:25,280 the planning rationale for lumping them together? Sure it does. It might help to give a bit of 158 00:17:25,280 --> 00:17:32,760 history on the project. This project has been been going on in some form or another I believe 159 00:17:32,760 --> 00:17:41,240 prior to my start but it did come in as a pack in the summer of 2022 and at that time 160 00:17:41,240 --> 00:17:47,180 it was believed and possibly intended that this overall Parkland area would be something 161 00:17:47,180 --> 00:17:53,040 that UNT would actually be assuming and that they would want. Used for intramural fields 162 00:17:53,040 --> 00:17:58,520 or anything that generally doesn't affect the floodplain. You know after further discussions 163 00:17:58,520 --> 00:18:02,680 that that wasn't the case. UNT was no longer interested. We were already kind of in this 164 00:18:02,680 --> 00:18:08,720 process and it is one one tract of land or ownership and it was moving forward as as 165 00:18:08,720 --> 00:18:16,080 two applications. One that had this PD for for tract B to address resident concerns and 166 00:18:16,080 --> 00:18:22,600 then this remainder was more of a straight zoning case. It's gone through a couple iterations. 167 00:18:22,600 --> 00:18:26,960 The city has has stepped into the picture as an interested party either as an ultimate 168 00:18:26,960 --> 00:18:30,640 landowner of the Parkland or receiving you know the the easement that would allow for 169 00:18:30,640 --> 00:18:34,800 public access. The terms of the maintenance and the ownership would be worked out through 170 00:18:34,800 --> 00:18:40,920 that developers agreement but this is not I guess our typical project so it's evolved 171 00:18:40,920 --> 00:18:46,360 kind of differently and felt it best to keep it as one project and move it forward rather 172 00:18:46,360 --> 00:18:52,680 than trying to continue to piecemeal and go back and rezone and address the project while 173 00:18:52,680 --> 00:19:02,960 we're here. Okay yeah that helps. The only thing I would add is while this commission 174 00:19:02,960 --> 00:19:08,500 this may be the first zoning case of this nature that this group has received keep in 175 00:19:08,500 --> 00:19:13,960 mind while most of our plan development district requests might be associated with one property 176 00:19:13,960 --> 00:19:17,860 owner it's also not uncommon to have a plan development district request that might have 177 00:19:17,860 --> 00:19:24,060 multiple property owners involved so I would say don't don't let that influence your decision 178 00:19:24,060 --> 00:19:29,720 because it you can have multiple landowners involved or one it makes no difference. Yeah 179 00:19:29,720 --> 00:19:36,440 certainly in a subdivision. Exactly. Yeah okay okay thank you. And I before I forget 180 00:19:36,440 --> 00:19:42,720 I did want to just address one component of the overlay so tract B is the one closest 181 00:19:42,720 --> 00:19:49,180 to the residential uses it does have a base zoning district of MN which does allow multifamily 182 00:19:49,180 --> 00:19:54,680 but the conditions would only allow single family and town homes. Tract A and C are the 183 00:19:54,680 --> 00:19:59,880 ones that are left a little more open-ended. There's there's a lot of tracks to keep track 184 00:19:59,880 --> 00:20:05,760 of so wanted to make sure we're on the same page. Thank you yeah we'll we'll let you go 185 00:20:05,760 --> 00:20:10,280 on through and then I want to make sure that we we talk to Lisa's question first once we 186 00:20:10,280 --> 00:20:19,280 get some more background on the on the park stuff okay yeah go ahead Commissioner Dyer. 187 00:20:19,280 --> 00:20:26,000 Okay so going back to the parkland is it an absolute that the city of Denton will be receiving 188 00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:32,340 that if this were if we recommended it to move forward to City Council and City Council 189 00:20:32,340 --> 00:20:39,920 approved it or is it not a given that the city is going to get the parkland like what 190 00:20:39,920 --> 00:20:48,260 happens if the zoning all gets approved and the current owner sells it like does that 191 00:20:48,260 --> 00:20:58,880 bound the new owner to have to give the parkland. Yes so it it's written to be one one of two 192 00:20:58,880 --> 00:21:04,960 ways one of two options could happen and the city is is dedicated that parkland for public 193 00:21:04,960 --> 00:21:11,120 facilities or for parks and open space or through the process of the developers agreement 194 00:21:11,120 --> 00:21:16,800 and easement is granted which provides for that public space open access and addresses 195 00:21:16,800 --> 00:21:22,800 the maintenance issues. The PD is binding those overlay conditions they don't change 196 00:21:22,800 --> 00:21:28,120 with the ownership of the land. If in the future this property were to sell and somebody 197 00:21:28,120 --> 00:21:32,560 was no longer interested in those conditions this same process that we're going through 198 00:21:32,560 --> 00:21:39,760 today would have to be followed to amend that PD. So it's built to sustain owners but those 199 00:21:39,760 --> 00:21:49,000 conditions don't change unless they come back requesting it. This is it for my work session 200 00:21:49,000 --> 00:21:59,400 presentation so okay I'm sorry I yeah okay so you're yeah I have a couple of questions 201 00:21:59,400 --> 00:22:04,720 so so to the parkland dedication is this something that the city actually wants do we want flood 202 00:22:04,720 --> 00:22:13,280 plan for parkland dedication. So the area that is proposed to be dedicated as as parkland 203 00:22:13,280 --> 00:22:17,880 or that open space does assist in achieving the city's overall goals in the comprehensive 204 00:22:17,880 --> 00:22:24,280 plan and the parks master plans for overall trail connectivity. More specifically access 205 00:22:24,280 --> 00:22:29,280 through this property could provide ultimate linkages to the other side of 35 where we 206 00:22:29,280 --> 00:22:34,400 do have a similar interconnected trail system throughout the hunter excuse me landmark and 207 00:22:34,400 --> 00:22:39,280 coal developments and so this is something the city has been in discussions with since 208 00:22:39,280 --> 00:22:45,840 UNT determined they didn't want the property we are able to utilize things like like trails 209 00:22:45,840 --> 00:22:52,920 or other uses that don't generate rise like a disc golf course. So yes it has been discussed 210 00:22:52,920 --> 00:22:57,680 and there is interest does seem kind of like UNT maybe had it right and then there's not 211 00:22:57,680 --> 00:23:02,200 much you can do with it. So I believe they were eyeing it for intramural fields but I 212 00:23:02,200 --> 00:23:06,680 don't want to put words in their mouth. Right and then the other question I have so I looked 213 00:23:06,680 --> 00:23:14,760 at the at the exhibit in the developer agreement or I guess the PD and so for track B it looks 214 00:23:14,760 --> 00:23:21,120 like they plan on doing basically 105 tone town homes and nothing else and I know we 215 00:23:21,120 --> 00:23:24,740 said single family and town homes but pretty much just looks like it's gonna be town homes. 216 00:23:24,740 --> 00:23:29,800 So it's important to keep in mind with PD overlays we're adopting the conditions and 217 00:23:29,800 --> 00:23:34,160 that the concept plan is still subject to some change as you get into the final zoning 218 00:23:34,160 --> 00:23:39,720 compliance plan and civil engineering plans provided they fit within the bounds of the 219 00:23:39,720 --> 00:23:45,360 overlay development. So no more than 150 units on track to be adhering to those additional 220 00:23:45,360 --> 00:23:54,760 setbacks height requirements and those two uses that are allowed for. Okay thanks. And 221 00:23:54,760 --> 00:24:00,200 do we have information on housing need and that sort of thing that Commissioner Dyer 222 00:24:00,200 --> 00:24:04,600 asked? I have some general it looks like Tina is ready to speak I was I'll just let you 223 00:24:04,600 --> 00:24:09,080 speak. Okay well I was gonna say if you recall Haley had given a presentation gosh what about 224 00:24:09,080 --> 00:24:15,840 a month or so ago with respect to our multifamily numbers. So with our and Haley correct me 225 00:24:15,840 --> 00:24:20,240 if I get this wrong but with our growth assumption that we originally had in the comprehensive 226 00:24:20,240 --> 00:24:26,960 plan of 3% for population growth and then looking at our what portion of our housing 227 00:24:26,960 --> 00:24:34,400 numbers would be associated with multifamily we have exceeded the number that was anticipated. 228 00:24:34,400 --> 00:24:39,640 What we're seeing actually is a little over a 4% growth rate since we've done the comprehensive 229 00:24:39,640 --> 00:24:45,040 plan and so we would be below those numbers. If you recall in that presentation you know 230 00:24:45,040 --> 00:24:50,600 we had some recommendations regarding still continuing to monitor where multifamily housing 231 00:24:50,600 --> 00:24:55,360 is being proposed. We know that there is a housing crisis that is happening within within 232 00:24:55,360 --> 00:25:00,280 our country. We know that multifamily is one form of housing that is able to also help 233 00:25:00,280 --> 00:25:05,560 satisfy housing needs in addition to single-family detached single-family attached triplexes 234 00:25:05,560 --> 00:25:10,760 duplexes fourplexes things of that nature. So I think with with respect to multifamily 235 00:25:10,760 --> 00:25:14,280 you know we need to evaluate the location where it's being proposed to determine is 236 00:25:14,280 --> 00:25:19,440 it appropriate in that location. Do we have the opportunity to create a further neighborhood 237 00:25:19,440 --> 00:25:25,320 within that area. So I would ask you keep that an advisement when you consider the multifamily 238 00:25:25,320 --> 00:25:30,940 did I get that correct. Okay. I got a thumbs up. So that's good. 239 00:25:30,940 --> 00:25:35,940 Commissioner product real 240 00:25:35,940 --> 00:25:42,360 putting there's no more than 150 right and track me on track to be right now as it's 241 00:25:42,360 --> 00:25:48,040 down with our two. Do you have an idea of how many would fit. I could do some quick 242 00:25:48,040 --> 00:25:54,520 math and have that for your regular session. Okay. It's it's also it'll it'll be a pretty 243 00:25:54,520 --> 00:25:59,160 rough estimate. Track to be does have a little bit of floodplain on it. So I'll just look 244 00:25:59,160 --> 00:26:06,120 at the total land area and do some simple math just an idea. Sure. Okay. Commissioner 245 00:26:06,120 --> 00:26:12,840 Riggs sorry I have other questions too. So so Corbin Road currently does not connect 246 00:26:12,840 --> 00:26:22,040 to 35 correct and there's not a service road on 35 either. So if tract a comes in as proposed 247 00:26:22,040 --> 00:26:27,240 and it's basically just apartments then all those apartments will be essentially using 248 00:26:27,240 --> 00:26:34,880 Corbin Road headed headed east in order to access and then come back. There's not there's 249 00:26:34,880 --> 00:26:42,400 not any intention of making the connection of Corbin Road to 35. No. So it the answer 250 00:26:42,400 --> 00:26:52,640 is complex. So I'm going to pull up an exhibit here. And so tracks a and b have the same 251 00:26:52,640 --> 00:27:01,320 access conditions in that one half the full width of Corbin Road shall be approved and 252 00:27:01,320 --> 00:27:07,460 extended to either the new Bonnie Bray constructed as part of the capital project that's currently 253 00:27:07,460 --> 00:27:16,240 ongoing or 35 w frontage roads whichever comes first. So no building permits may be issued 254 00:27:16,240 --> 00:27:22,880 to go vertical on tracks a or b until that connection is made either extending the approximate 255 00:27:22,880 --> 00:27:31,440 900 feet east to new Bonnie Bray or to tee into this 35 intersection. Once that 35 improvement 256 00:27:31,440 --> 00:27:37,120 does come along that full connection could conceivably be made so that everybody's not 257 00:27:37,120 --> 00:27:42,200 turning east to head to new Bonnie Bray but both of those tracks are contingent upon one 258 00:27:42,200 --> 00:27:49,900 of those improvements being made whichever comes first. Could you address the two points 259 00:27:49,900 --> 00:27:57,760 of access requirement and remoteness. Sure. So in addition DDC requirements do require 260 00:27:57,760 --> 00:28:03,000 that all multifamily developments are able to achieve two points of access as well as 261 00:28:03,000 --> 00:28:11,960 a remoteness which would come into play more specifically with tracks a and tracks a fire 262 00:28:11,960 --> 00:28:16,240 fire remoteness. I'm sorry to ensure that there's adequate fire access. So in order 263 00:28:16,240 --> 00:28:22,120 for track a to develop multifamily they'd need to have access from Corbin Road and from 264 00:28:22,120 --> 00:28:29,040 35. Is that is that what I'm hearing two points of access from those two roads. They could 265 00:28:29,040 --> 00:28:33,760 have two points of access onto Corbin Correct Chandra. Yes based on how the development 266 00:28:33,760 --> 00:28:42,120 code is applied. Well I think the exhibit you had up kind of showed it really yeah that 267 00:28:42,120 --> 00:28:47,840 one right there because essentially it seems like is if we have really large single family 268 00:28:47,840 --> 00:28:54,080 lots and then right next to them if we approve this it could be nothing but townhomes and 269 00:28:54,080 --> 00:28:59,840 then essentially multifamily apartments and it just seems kind of like the feel like there 270 00:28:59,840 --> 00:29:04,920 should be more of a buffer. It's just kind of I'm not opposed to multifamily at all but 271 00:29:04,920 --> 00:29:13,680 it seems like to me it seems like a lot. So I think Commissioner Padron did you have a 272 00:29:13,680 --> 00:29:19,360 question earlier. So Angie some of the public comments centered around flooding and the 273 00:29:19,360 --> 00:29:24,400 impact of flooding with the new development. Was there a study that was conducted that 274 00:29:24,400 --> 00:29:29,200 could potentially determine if there are any additional impacts as a result of flooding. 275 00:29:29,200 --> 00:29:34,160 Not at this time similar to many of the zoning cases that we see where we're in the entitlement 276 00:29:34,160 --> 00:29:40,600 stages still downstream assessments civil engineering additional floodplain studies 277 00:29:40,600 --> 00:29:46,240 all come at the time of zoning compliance and civil engineering plans. You can't increase 278 00:29:46,240 --> 00:29:51,360 the flow of water that you currently release onto neighboring properties when you when 279 00:29:51,360 --> 00:29:56,080 you develop. So all of that does need to be accounted for when we get to the civil engineering 280 00:29:56,080 --> 00:30:09,320 stages. Commissioner. So none of the current flooding that may or may not be happening 281 00:30:09,320 --> 00:30:15,000 on this property has really been looked at for the zoning change is that is that what 282 00:30:15,000 --> 00:30:20,960 I just heard. So we understand that there are areas of water and riparian ESA which 283 00:30:20,960 --> 00:30:25,600 have been confirmed as part of the ESA field assessment. There's also some floodplain 284 00:30:25,600 --> 00:30:32,280 and some floodway that are FEMA identified. By and large those areas are on the potential 285 00:30:32,280 --> 00:30:37,960 public facilities based zoning. But at the time of civil engineering plans that is what 286 00:30:37,960 --> 00:30:44,000 it is typical to request your downstream assessments and your more detailed studies. So we're really 287 00:30:44,000 --> 00:30:53,720 kind of walking in the dark on how tracks A B and C would affect future flooding or 288 00:30:53,720 --> 00:31:02,000 non flooding of this area because we would potentially be giving the stamp of approval 289 00:31:02,000 --> 00:31:08,280 on the rezoning and then all of the other things for the environment and for the flood 290 00:31:08,280 --> 00:31:14,440 zones and the habitats. All of that's going to come later. So that that is our typical 291 00:31:14,440 --> 00:31:19,840 development process. Right. So all of those additional studies that are done they typically 292 00:31:19,840 --> 00:31:25,280 follow that zoning entitlement process. Zoning is the first step to determine the whether 293 00:31:25,280 --> 00:31:30,960 or not the land uses are appropriate in that location. Once the zoning is acted upon whether 294 00:31:30,960 --> 00:31:35,560 it's keeping the existing zoning in place or changing the zoning those subsequent development 295 00:31:35,560 --> 00:31:39,440 applications would come in and they would submit all of those studies based upon what 296 00:31:39,440 --> 00:31:43,480 the applicant has prepared for us. They have reason to believe that tracks A B and C are 297 00:31:43,480 --> 00:31:49,920 developable. So that's the information that we work from. Even under today's zoning. Right. 298 00:31:49,920 --> 00:31:53,680 There are land use entitlements that are there. If somebody wanted to develop the tracks A 299 00:31:53,680 --> 00:31:57,960 B and C under today's zoning then they would have the responsibility of submitting the 300 00:31:57,960 --> 00:32:02,800 various or the various studies that would be required. If we determined a downstream 301 00:32:02,800 --> 00:32:06,720 assessment was required for being able to do single family residential development on 302 00:32:06,720 --> 00:32:11,000 tracks A B and C they would be responsible for submitting that in addition to zoning 303 00:32:11,000 --> 00:32:16,520 compliance plans there any traffic impact analysis that would be associated with it 304 00:32:16,520 --> 00:32:21,720 in addition to any plats downstream assessments any additional ESA studies that would be needed. 305 00:32:21,720 --> 00:32:26,920 So what you're seeing today in the process the developer would have today is no different 306 00:32:26,920 --> 00:32:30,240 than if the property were developed under their existing zoning this there. So that 307 00:32:30,240 --> 00:32:36,440 includes like traffic studies. So like Commissioner Riggs talked about you know the traffic on 308 00:32:36,440 --> 00:32:43,080 Corbin and while yes this is supposed to wait until like the frontage roads go up but people 309 00:32:43,080 --> 00:32:47,800 that want to go south they'd have to go all the way north and catch you know a U-turn 310 00:32:47,800 --> 00:32:53,120 and go that way. So people that want to be south on 35 they're most likely going to go 311 00:32:53,120 --> 00:33:01,680 east on Corbin and then south on Bonnie Bray Road. So we did have a traffic impact analysis 312 00:33:01,680 --> 00:33:05,080 that was submitted part of this request and we do have staff here that are subject matter 313 00:33:05,080 --> 00:33:13,200 experts from our transportation services team. I think I'd like to hear more about the TIA 314 00:33:13,200 --> 00:33:22,360 then kind of chip generation. Sure. While you come up I'll just mention that while it may 315 00:33:22,360 --> 00:33:27,740 seem backwards that we approve zoning and then we figure out how to handle the drainage 316 00:33:27,740 --> 00:33:34,240 and that sort of thing that engineering analysis you can't do until you know how much impervious 317 00:33:34,240 --> 00:33:42,100 area you're adding. You don't know how much retention you need to add etc. So our code 318 00:33:42,100 --> 00:33:48,280 right even independent of whether this had a zoning change or not is set up to be reviewed 319 00:33:48,280 --> 00:33:57,760 by staff for any development applications and make sure that as they said the downstream 320 00:33:57,760 --> 00:34:04,360 impacts of water falling on the developed land versus the undeveloped land is no worse 321 00:34:04,360 --> 00:34:11,160 than it was before it was developed. Before we go there I just want to follow up on that 322 00:34:11,160 --> 00:34:15,920 and make sure that I understand that right because most of the time when a development 323 00:34:15,920 --> 00:34:21,200 comes in they have to basically do detention to go back to pre-existing conditions. With 324 00:34:21,200 --> 00:34:27,680 this being directly connected to the floodplain is that still a condition? Yes that is. So 325 00:34:27,680 --> 00:34:31,920 that's typical associated with any development process that we have. Okay. I know some places 326 00:34:31,920 --> 00:34:36,120 say if you're connected to the floodplain then you don't have to worry about it so I 327 00:34:36,120 --> 00:34:43,080 just want to make sure. Okay. So Chandra I'll let you speak to TIA and the impacts there. 328 00:34:43,080 --> 00:34:53,020 We'll probably get into it more in open session but I was also curious whether the future 329 00:34:53,020 --> 00:34:58,800 of this road along track C would have enough frontage difference to satisfy that two points 330 00:34:58,800 --> 00:35:05,320 of access only to this frontage road or whether they would have to cross the property somewhere 331 00:35:05,320 --> 00:35:10,440 since it's kind of this island. Does that make sense? Good evening Chair and Commission. 332 00:35:10,440 --> 00:35:16,040 Chandra Muruganandam, City Traffic Engineer. So as of now the tech start is in schematic 333 00:35:16,040 --> 00:35:24,280 stage on the planning. So the plans show as of now it's only one connection with the 425 334 00:35:24,280 --> 00:35:32,080 feet spacing criteria but at the time of full design we will be able to see if we can get 335 00:35:32,080 --> 00:35:39,160 one additional connection. The reasoning is if tech start would not buy the access denial 336 00:35:39,160 --> 00:35:45,280 then we could have one more connection. Sorry I didn't hear. If tech start would not like 337 00:35:45,280 --> 00:35:50,080 the access. Usually they buy access denials so whether they will restrain the access for 338 00:35:50,080 --> 00:35:57,000 only one point or something with bridge structure being so close. So if there is no restrictions 339 00:35:57,000 --> 00:36:01,840 then we could get another additional one. Okay so TBD as far as whether there could 340 00:36:01,840 --> 00:36:08,720 be a second one. That's correct. And then can you speak to the process of the TIA and 341 00:36:08,720 --> 00:36:13,400 I'm sure we'll want to ask some more details about the numbers in the open session the 342 00:36:13,400 --> 00:36:16,460 public is really going to want to hear that. But I want to make sure you understand the 343 00:36:16,460 --> 00:36:22,440 process now so that we're not fighting two confusing battles at the same time once we 344 00:36:22,440 --> 00:36:31,960 get in there. So as an overall traffic impact study the developers engineers went and counted 345 00:36:31,960 --> 00:36:39,480 the traffic counts on existing intersections as south as Vintage, 35, Rose Lawn, Bonnie 346 00:36:39,480 --> 00:36:45,200 Bray all the intersections and they added the development generated traffic on top of 347 00:36:45,200 --> 00:36:53,880 those trips that already being used on those roadways and do the analysis that is the typical 348 00:36:53,880 --> 00:37:02,400 industry standard and based on the analysis with site A, site B and site C traffic they 349 00:37:02,400 --> 00:37:07,640 use the software models and provide us the results on how much the impact will be on 350 00:37:07,640 --> 00:37:14,160 the neighborhood streets and based on the outcome of those they have to do some mitigations 351 00:37:14,160 --> 00:37:19,360 to bring it up to the city standard which is a level of service D or better. Level of 352 00:37:19,360 --> 00:37:25,720 service D is a condition where there is a slight amount of delays during the peak hours 353 00:37:25,720 --> 00:37:33,400 but it's a free flow condition during the other peak hours. Level of service A is the 354 00:37:33,400 --> 00:37:41,520 low traffic at all which we don't see it anywhere. Level of service B is minimal traffic, C is 355 00:37:41,520 --> 00:37:50,600 really good and D is like slightly determined to C, E is really congested like US 380 and 356 00:37:50,600 --> 00:37:56,200 level of service F is like during a major incident crash it's like gridlocked you're 357 00:37:56,200 --> 00:38:03,000 not moving at all so and the study outcome was level of service B and C which is really 358 00:38:03,000 --> 00:38:12,040 good with some improvements and with the proposed connections to new Barney Bray and with 35W 359 00:38:12,040 --> 00:38:19,920 frontage roads it has no impacts with minimal to the carbon at Barney Bray which could be 360 00:38:19,920 --> 00:38:27,520 mitigated with additional traffic control measures. 361 00:38:27,520 --> 00:38:38,000 I heard from the development conditions that Corbin would have to be extended east until 362 00:38:38,000 --> 00:38:46,200 it connected to new Barney Bray. Would the entire section between new Barney Bray then 363 00:38:46,200 --> 00:38:51,880 and track to A have to be upgraded to that amended cross section that's shown in backup? 364 00:38:51,880 --> 00:38:59,040 Is that the requirement? Any other questions? I'm sure we'll have a lot more information 365 00:38:59,040 --> 00:39:03,960 out there but it's a few new things here and I just want to make sure everybody understands 366 00:39:03,960 --> 00:39:11,120 what the processes are and what things we're going to be considering. 367 00:39:11,120 --> 00:39:16,760 I think one of the things that might be helpful particularly for track B and I know this doesn't 368 00:39:16,760 --> 00:39:21,840 necessarily question for you is right now the current zoning would be large estate lots 369 00:39:21,840 --> 00:39:26,960 and that's essentially the only thing that would be allowed and now with this we're basically 370 00:39:26,960 --> 00:39:34,880 saying town homes and apartments not on track B but apartments on A and C essentially so 371 00:39:34,880 --> 00:39:42,600 that's kind of in a nutshell what we're considering right? 372 00:39:42,600 --> 00:39:48,840 Did you have anything else to add Angie? I think our questions are starting to dry up. 373 00:39:48,840 --> 00:39:52,400 No nothing for now. I have a much more detailed presentation and we'll go through an open 374 00:39:52,400 --> 00:40:01,880 session. Okay. I think we're good. We're going to have 375 00:40:01,880 --> 00:40:08,560 a work session next on some one of a boot camp things given that that will be a lot 376 00:40:08,560 --> 00:40:14,560 of content and dinners here I'm going to say let's let's take five minutes and grab dinner 377 00:40:14,560 --> 00:40:22,400 and then have a working work session as we learn about some of those zoning processes 378 00:40:22,400 --> 00:40:32,600 and so at 542 we will take a five minute recess and be back at 547. 379 00:40:32,600 --> 00:40:40,200 Good afternoon at 549 p.m. we will resume our planning and zoning work session this 380 00:40:40,200 --> 00:40:51,760 afternoon the next item is item 3a work session regarding zoning changes plan developments 381 00:40:51,760 --> 00:40:58,240 and specific use permits so come on up. Thank you good evening chair and members of 382 00:40:58,240 --> 00:41:04,040 the commission Sean Jacobson and Ashley will be presenting your zoning changes plan development 383 00:41:04,040 --> 00:41:09,080 and specific use permits boot camp for many of y'all this will probably be somewhat familiar 384 00:41:09,080 --> 00:41:12,560 information but hopefully you can draw some things from it get some refreshers maybe catch 385 00:41:12,560 --> 00:41:15,680 some things you didn't last time you went through it. 386 00:41:15,680 --> 00:41:19,960 So hopefully you can see that I'm sorry it's a little bit white there but just that reminder 387 00:41:19,960 --> 00:41:25,360 where we are in the process so when you set out to develop a property one of the first 388 00:41:25,360 --> 00:41:30,040 questions you're going to ask is is this use allowed can I do that on this property if 389 00:41:30,040 --> 00:41:35,360 not then you're going to go into one or more of the what we call the entitlement categories 390 00:41:35,360 --> 00:41:41,080 that would be zoning plan development specific use permit in between there we recommend strongly 391 00:41:41,080 --> 00:41:44,280 neighborhood engagement really important we encourage that heavily that you have those 392 00:41:44,280 --> 00:41:48,040 neighborhood meetings to find out how those around where you want to develop feel about 393 00:41:48,040 --> 00:41:51,980 your proposed changes but once you go through the entitlement process then moving on from 394 00:41:51,980 --> 00:41:55,960 there as we've learned tonight we have the zoning compliance plan civil plan reviews 395 00:41:55,960 --> 00:42:00,400 there's various studies and then on the final plat building permit and any development contracts 396 00:42:00,400 --> 00:42:04,120 or public improvements but we're going to focus on that entitlement section what can 397 00:42:04,120 --> 00:42:09,880 you do on your property and how do we know that so kind of those brief categories standard 398 00:42:09,880 --> 00:42:16,920 zoning so that's what it's your basic zoning category so r1 r2 mn that establishes your 399 00:42:16,920 --> 00:42:21,960 dimensional use and development regulations what you can do where on your lot so it guides 400 00:42:21,960 --> 00:42:26,960 the impact that your lot has on the lots around you and protects each lot owners right to 401 00:42:26,960 --> 00:42:32,000 a reasonable use and enjoyment of their lot it's one of our main tools for regulating 402 00:42:32,000 --> 00:42:38,240 uses and development specific use permit is within a zoning district a use may be allowed 403 00:42:38,240 --> 00:42:42,940 but it requires some extra scrutiny and so we have the specific use permit to give the 404 00:42:42,940 --> 00:42:47,200 opportunity to look at what additional protections or mitigation might be needed for this use 405 00:42:47,200 --> 00:42:52,440 to occur here plan development is a special type of zoning sort of a custom zoning for 406 00:42:52,440 --> 00:42:57,600 very specific site situations where existing standards might not be fully appropriate for 407 00:42:57,600 --> 00:43:02,920 that lot to customize zoning provide some greater flexibility and the goal is to encourage 408 00:43:02,920 --> 00:43:07,120 unique or innovative land use concepts we don't just use this for anything it really 409 00:43:07,120 --> 00:43:11,320 does need to be out of the box if zoning or scp can do it we shouldn't be using your plan 410 00:43:11,320 --> 00:43:16,840 development to do it so taking a step back with any entitlement case we're looking at 411 00:43:16,840 --> 00:43:22,320 our main key approval criteria in the ddc things like does it line up with the comprehensive 412 00:43:22,320 --> 00:43:27,520 plan does it line up with the purpose of that zoning district are we minimizing adverse 413 00:43:27,520 --> 00:43:32,680 impacts on surrounding properties minimizing adverse fiscal impacts and do we have adequate 414 00:43:32,680 --> 00:43:36,680 public facilities available so with any form of entitlement we're going to be looking at 415 00:43:36,680 --> 00:43:41,960 some variation of those questions zooming in on zoning a little bit remember this is 416 00:43:41,960 --> 00:43:47,080 the division of the city into a variety of districts or zones with compatible land uses 417 00:43:47,080 --> 00:43:52,000 it's also the establishment of development standards for each particular district or 418 00:43:52,000 --> 00:43:55,400 zone so within each district or zone there will be a set of standards that apply there 419 00:43:55,400 --> 00:43:59,680 it'll be a little different than every other district state law gives cities authorities 420 00:43:59,680 --> 00:44:06,080 to regulate this our zoning ordinance is what sets out what is allowed in each one of those 421 00:44:06,080 --> 00:44:10,520 zoning districts that describes those zoning districts for us now remember zoning only 422 00:44:10,520 --> 00:44:16,400 applies to properties within denton city limits not out in the extraterritorial jurisdiction 423 00:44:16,400 --> 00:44:19,560 if you wanted to learn more about each of our zoning districts you could find that in 424 00:44:19,560 --> 00:44:24,960 sub chapter three the zoning ordinance as you can see here i provide a kind of example 425 00:44:24,960 --> 00:44:31,800 from our code there that is one of our zoning districts and you can see we have dimensional 426 00:44:31,800 --> 00:44:35,960 standards that govern where on the lot you can put the building how large the yard needs 427 00:44:35,960 --> 00:44:40,960 to be so that's we talk about setbacks front rear side how tall the building can be essentially 428 00:44:40,960 --> 00:44:45,920 the bulk of that building we also as you can see there there's a snip from our table of 429 00:44:45,920 --> 00:44:50,880 allowed uses for each zoning district there are uses that are permitted or not permitted 430 00:44:50,880 --> 00:44:54,040 and then there's uses that are permitted with the specific use permit that's where you see 431 00:44:54,040 --> 00:44:59,200 the s so p is permitted as a specific use permit blank means you can't do it there there's 432 00:44:59,200 --> 00:45:04,200 also the supplementary regulations things that y'all are familiar with so parking open storage 433 00:45:04,200 --> 00:45:09,000 tree preservation those things can vary between zoning districts so each zoning district will 434 00:45:09,000 --> 00:45:14,800 have some supplementary regulations that are different there than they are in other districts 435 00:45:14,800 --> 00:45:18,940 let's apply that to the real world so looking at what we call the zoning atlas or zoning 436 00:45:18,940 --> 00:45:24,600 map those fancy colors and letters each one of those is one of our zoning districts where 437 00:45:24,600 --> 00:45:31,680 those zoning standards apply so pf public facilities r2 residential 2 sc suburban corridor 438 00:45:31,680 --> 00:45:35,440 each one of those if you look that up you can find out what you're allowed to do there 439 00:45:35,440 --> 00:45:40,160 and how you have to build it what those zoning dimensions are you'll also see that some of 440 00:45:40,160 --> 00:45:44,440 them have some extra indicators so that pf and then an s that means there's a specific 441 00:45:44,440 --> 00:45:51,240 use permit on that property similarly you might see pdr6 that means that's mostly an 442 00:45:51,240 --> 00:45:56,760 r6 district but it has some additional plan development standards that apply there we'll 443 00:45:56,760 --> 00:46:00,120 also talk about overlays zoning districts a minute you can spot those because they start 444 00:46:00,120 --> 00:46:06,280 with an o and then the zoning district under them so key types of zoning actions we have 445 00:46:06,280 --> 00:46:09,800 our standard zoning districts which we've talked about our plan development districts 446 00:46:09,800 --> 00:46:14,360 which are more customized overlay districts we'll get into a minute and then those specific 447 00:46:14,360 --> 00:46:20,240 use permits that's what affects zoning on land now there's also our zoning tech sometimes 448 00:46:20,240 --> 00:46:25,160 we're amending is actually what the zoning ordinance says and you will likely be seeing 449 00:46:25,160 --> 00:46:31,080 that a number of times this year so just be prepared at that point we're deciding how 450 00:46:31,080 --> 00:46:35,320 the zoning is impacted for potentially every property within a zoning district or even 451 00:46:35,320 --> 00:46:40,680 every property depending on how that's written so a little bit different we have 16 of those 452 00:46:40,680 --> 00:46:45,560 standard zoning districts we discussed each one has their allowed uses and standards and 453 00:46:45,560 --> 00:46:52,280 here's a key point you can vary between zoning districts in what is allowed there but zoning 454 00:46:52,280 --> 00:46:56,200 districts one zoning district across the city has to be treated the same no matter where 455 00:46:56,200 --> 00:47:02,400 it's located so r3 is r3 is r3 you don't have r3 you can do this here but on that street 456 00:47:02,400 --> 00:47:09,360 r3 you can do something different r3 is r3 across the board moving on to plan developments 457 00:47:09,360 --> 00:47:13,600 as i said this is something of a customized zoning so usually it's either the site has 458 00:47:13,600 --> 00:47:17,800 unique characteristics or it's a unique type of development maybe something we haven't 459 00:47:17,800 --> 00:47:22,840 seen before it's been crafted in a certain way gives reason for why we'd use a custom 460 00:47:22,840 --> 00:47:28,120 zoning it doesn't fit quite into our normal zoning boxes the pd process is exactly the 461 00:47:28,120 --> 00:47:33,600 same as rezoning so you go to you all plan planning zoning commission go city council 462 00:47:33,600 --> 00:47:38,920 have neighborhood meetings but you have additional standards that could be what we call pd development 463 00:47:38,920 --> 00:47:43,160 plan a site plan that goes with it there could be additional standards or restrictions what 464 00:47:43,160 --> 00:47:49,680 uses are allowed or are not allowed there are two types of pd's overlay and standard 465 00:47:49,680 --> 00:47:55,640 take a look at that so your overlay zonings and that's actually what we've been talking 466 00:47:55,640 --> 00:48:00,040 about tonight those are to modify the effect of the base zoning district so you're not 467 00:48:00,040 --> 00:48:03,640 getting a full site plan of everything that's going to be done and where it goes you're 468 00:48:03,640 --> 00:48:07,280 saying all right there's specific changes we need to make here to address neighborhood 469 00:48:07,280 --> 00:48:11,600 concerns promote compatibility with surrounding properties so we're going to have some additional 470 00:48:11,600 --> 00:48:16,740 rules that go with this so for instance you might have certain uses that are added or 471 00:48:16,740 --> 00:48:21,240 removed from that base zoning district you might have additional standards for how it's 472 00:48:21,240 --> 00:48:25,120 built and there might be additional requirements for landscape or screening around it but again 473 00:48:25,120 --> 00:48:29,120 you're not getting a fully developed site plan you're getting additional rules that 474 00:48:29,120 --> 00:48:35,040 go with the zoning by contrast standard pd you are getting a fully customized site plan 475 00:48:35,040 --> 00:48:37,880 so when you're looking at that you're going to basically know where things are going to 476 00:48:37,880 --> 00:48:43,560 be in some cases you may be creating a new use there's going to be potentially detailed 477 00:48:43,560 --> 00:48:47,880 landscape and facade plans that go with that so it's going to be much more detailed much 478 00:48:47,880 --> 00:48:51,800 more drilled in and it's going to be for very specific circumstance you want to use that 479 00:48:51,800 --> 00:48:57,440 again very carefully so when should we use a pd sparingly it's the exception not the 480 00:48:57,440 --> 00:49:02,120 rule if you're continually needing pd's that means you probably need to update the code 481 00:49:02,120 --> 00:49:06,600 because you have a use that's coming in frequently we've done that with horizontal multifamily 482 00:49:06,600 --> 00:49:09,960 with that used to require a pd we realized we were getting a lot of it we wrote it into 483 00:49:09,960 --> 00:49:14,440 the code now we don't need to use pd's for that it's often more appropriate on small 484 00:49:14,440 --> 00:49:18,600 infill lots and again we never want to use it we're straight zoning or a specific use 485 00:49:18,600 --> 00:49:23,200 permit to get us there and we always want to be looking forward do we need to just change 486 00:49:23,200 --> 00:49:28,640 our code if we're getting this many pd's keep in mind we don't want to use a pd for 487 00:49:28,640 --> 00:49:33,000 instance to require construction of public improvements or reservation or dedication 488 00:49:33,000 --> 00:49:36,620 of land where it's not going to primarily benefit the actual area where we're doing 489 00:49:36,620 --> 00:49:40,320 the pd so we're not going to say within this pd by the way you have to do this thing over 490 00:49:40,320 --> 00:49:45,440 here needs to be directly benefited working in that area where the pd is located we don't 491 00:49:45,440 --> 00:49:49,680 want to use it to secure third-party agreements with property owners we're not going to use 492 00:49:49,680 --> 00:49:53,360 it to enforce someone's deed restrictions we don't get involved in that and there are 493 00:49:53,360 --> 00:49:57,800 certain parts of the code that we can't touch with pd's so environmentally sensitive areas 494 00:49:57,800 --> 00:50:01,520 tree preservation gas well requirements we don't mess with those in the pd those remain 495 00:50:01,520 --> 00:50:07,280 the same just to give you an example one of the first pd's i was getting this was a full 496 00:50:07,280 --> 00:50:12,720 pd this was the very first horizontal multifamily development in the city it was a new use so 497 00:50:12,720 --> 00:50:17,000 justified using a pd we've never seen this before you can see you've got that fully laid 498 00:50:17,000 --> 00:50:22,420 out site plan had full facade plans landscape very detailed and we were using that also 499 00:50:22,420 --> 00:50:26,920 to adapt to a very uniquely shaped lot as well as there were some concerns the neighborhood 500 00:50:26,920 --> 00:50:31,040 had that were able to be addressed through the pd that we couldn't have addressed otherwise 501 00:50:31,040 --> 00:50:36,040 by contrast denton west was an overlay pd there's no site plan that goes with this there's 502 00:50:36,040 --> 00:50:40,300 some additional rules some use regulations some things you can't do there because of 503 00:50:40,300 --> 00:50:44,560 concerns the neighbors as well as some additional screening that was required to address concerns 504 00:50:44,560 --> 00:50:51,840 surrounding properties so standard overlay pd and then briefly and this we'll try not 505 00:50:51,840 --> 00:50:55,840 to get confused here but overlay districts separate from the overlay pd that is when 506 00:50:55,840 --> 00:51:00,720 we add an additional special layer of protection for certain areas that could be your historic 507 00:51:00,720 --> 00:51:04,800 districts that could be if you're familiar with the fry street overlay in the fry street 508 00:51:04,800 --> 00:51:09,240 area or a denton square district where there's some additional regulations or design standards 509 00:51:09,240 --> 00:51:14,200 that we want in that area to achieve a certain public purpose and that's put on the map through 510 00:51:14,200 --> 00:51:18,080 the same process planning zoning commission city council and again as i mentioned that 511 00:51:18,080 --> 00:51:22,060 shows up on the map it's just an o and then the underlying district some additional rules 512 00:51:22,060 --> 00:51:27,760 to achieve a certain purpose in a specific area so with that i'm going to hand it off 513 00:51:27,760 --> 00:51:34,360 to ashley good evening chair members of the commission ashley x dead associate planner 514 00:51:34,360 --> 00:51:38,200 tonight i'm going to go over specific use permits and also the commission's role in 515 00:51:38,200 --> 00:51:43,360 zoning actions generally so just to give a broad overview of specific use permits we 516 00:51:43,360 --> 00:51:47,680 use an sup when a use is appropriate in that zoning district but not appropriate for all 517 00:51:47,680 --> 00:51:52,280 properties in that district it is a rezoning action however the underlying zoning will 518 00:51:52,280 --> 00:51:58,080 stay the same it does require approval by p and z and council and once an sup is approved 519 00:51:58,080 --> 00:52:05,100 it does expire within 24 months if substantial construction is not underway review timelines 520 00:52:05,100 --> 00:52:09,880 for sup generally vary between three to six months depending on the intensity of the project 521 00:52:09,880 --> 00:52:14,760 we do review the approval criteria that sean covered the general approval criteria as well 522 00:52:14,760 --> 00:52:20,040 as approval criteria specific to sup which i'll go over on a future slide at the time 523 00:52:20,040 --> 00:52:24,240 of the first submittal a zoning compliance plan or a site plan is required and if the 524 00:52:24,240 --> 00:52:29,840 sup is approved that will be adopted as part of the ordinance and this is our table of 525 00:52:29,840 --> 00:52:34,040 allowed uses and on this table if there's a use within a zoning district with an s that 526 00:52:34,040 --> 00:52:38,320 does show that a specific use permit is required in that zoning district the table also calls 527 00:52:38,320 --> 00:52:42,800 out any additional use specific standards that are required and the sup gives us the 528 00:52:42,800 --> 00:52:47,360 ability to evaluate a development and land uses that have unique characteristics and 529 00:52:47,360 --> 00:52:51,440 ensure compatibility with the surrounding area and also that the applicant has provided 530 00:52:51,440 --> 00:52:58,600 for any mitigation of those anticipated impacts so the specific approval criteria for sup 531 00:52:58,600 --> 00:53:02,640 and again these are in addition to the general approval criteria that sean covered we'll 532 00:53:02,640 --> 00:53:07,380 look at whether it's compatible with existing development it does not adversely impact future 533 00:53:07,380 --> 00:53:12,320 development and any impact associated with traffic access noise odor and light has been 534 00:53:12,320 --> 00:53:19,120 mitigated and to give a few examples of a few sup that we saw last year this was a request 535 00:53:19,120 --> 00:53:23,980 for a multifamily use the property was zoned r7 with a neighborhood mixed use future land 536 00:53:23,980 --> 00:53:28,680 use that future land use does include a diverse mix of housing types and densities and the 537 00:53:28,680 --> 00:53:32,560 surrounding neighborhood did already include that mix of housing types including four plexes 538 00:53:32,560 --> 00:53:37,080 single family and multifamily the buildings were appropriately scaled with the maximum 539 00:53:37,080 --> 00:53:41,280 height of 40 feet which is the maximum height in most of our residential zoning districts 540 00:53:41,280 --> 00:53:45,480 and this use is appropriate along a primary arterial which in this case was north elm 541 00:53:45,480 --> 00:53:51,680 street the second example was a request for a vet clinic use and this the zoning on this 542 00:53:51,680 --> 00:53:56,540 property was r2 with the low residential future land use that future land use does include 543 00:53:56,540 --> 00:54:00,720 appropriately scaled commercial and as you can see in this drawing the building was appropriately 544 00:54:00,720 --> 00:54:06,040 scaled with residentially designed architecture and as far as mitigating any potential impacts 545 00:54:06,040 --> 00:54:10,160 all of their parking spaces were over 200 feet from the nearest single family lot which 546 00:54:10,160 --> 00:54:14,520 would reduce any potential noise or lighting impacts and they also dedicated right away 547 00:54:14,520 --> 00:54:20,980 to potentially improve a known mobility issue in this area in the future. 548 00:54:20,980 --> 00:54:24,880 So once the sup has been approved the landscape plan and the site plan are adopted as part 549 00:54:24,880 --> 00:54:28,960 of the ordinance the ordinance will generally call out any minor amendments that can be 550 00:54:28,960 --> 00:54:33,640 approved by staff and this is usually a small increase or decrease in landscape area or 551 00:54:33,640 --> 00:54:38,880 parking and this is just to give the applicant more flexibility as they work through their 552 00:54:38,880 --> 00:54:43,520 final civil engineering plans however any expansions or enlargement of the sup will 553 00:54:43,520 --> 00:54:50,680 require a new application and a new public hearing at planning and zoning and city council. 554 00:54:50,680 --> 00:54:54,700 So to go over the commission's role in zoning actions generally it's to make a recommendation 555 00:54:54,700 --> 00:54:59,360 to city council and these are legislative actions and not ministerial the commission 556 00:54:59,360 --> 00:55:02,920 does have some discretion in making these decisions which I'll go over on the next 557 00:55:02,920 --> 00:55:07,080 slide and you may consider the testimony of the public and facts presented during the 558 00:55:07,080 --> 00:55:12,440 public hearing and just to note zoning regulations must rationally and reasonably advance a legitimate 559 00:55:12,440 --> 00:55:16,120 government purpose. 560 00:55:16,120 --> 00:55:20,440 So what to consider when evaluating zoning actions is the future land use and whether 561 00:55:20,440 --> 00:55:24,640 it's consistent with the plan recommendations whether it's compatible with the surrounding 562 00:55:24,640 --> 00:55:29,400 land uses whether it's consistent with the policies in the comprehensive plan and any 563 00:55:29,400 --> 00:55:34,740 impact on city services such as infrastructure and public safety and just something to remember 564 00:55:34,740 --> 00:55:38,600 is that zoning districts allow a wide range of uses so you'll want to consider that the 565 00:55:38,600 --> 00:55:43,160 zoning applicant may not be the one who ultimately develops the property and you'll want to look 566 00:55:43,160 --> 00:55:47,720 beyond the individual applicant and their specific business especially with sup requests 567 00:55:47,720 --> 00:55:53,860 as the sup does run with the land and don't be influenced by the pretty pictures. 568 00:55:53,860 --> 00:55:57,880 So zoning protest procedures before every public hearing will send notifications out 569 00:55:57,880 --> 00:56:02,200 to everyone within 500 feet and this is in compliance with state law you'll see these 570 00:56:02,200 --> 00:56:07,040 notification maps in your backup and in all of our presentations property owners within 571 00:56:07,040 --> 00:56:11,840 200 feet of the rezoning are able to file a written protest if we receive those written 572 00:56:11,840 --> 00:56:17,160 protests from landowners of more than 20 percent of the area within 200 feet a super majority 573 00:56:17,160 --> 00:56:21,720 vote of council will be required and then just to note in that instance a super majority 574 00:56:21,720 --> 00:56:25,880 vote of this commission is not required. 575 00:56:25,880 --> 00:56:33,080 Happy to stand for any questions. 576 00:56:33,080 --> 00:56:37,400 Great job Ashley and Sean I wanted to touch base on something related to zoning requests 577 00:56:37,400 --> 00:56:42,960 and in kind of as a follow up to the public notifications aspect so as Ashley pointed 578 00:56:42,960 --> 00:56:47,960 out that we do notify property owners within 200 feet that's a requirement of state law 579 00:56:47,960 --> 00:56:55,600 we also send out a courtesy notice to residents that are within 500 feet so when we also require 580 00:56:55,600 --> 00:56:59,820 our applicants to post a zoning sign on the property and correct me if I'm wrong Ashley 581 00:56:59,820 --> 00:57:03,680 I believe we also even run a notice in the newspaper prior to PNC as well. 582 00:57:03,680 --> 00:57:08,000 So we try to put out a variety of different forms of notification to property owners we 583 00:57:08,000 --> 00:57:16,680 even have tools on our website where people can request to receive various updates or 584 00:57:16,680 --> 00:57:20,360 notifications regarding projects that are within a certain distance that they can set 585 00:57:20,360 --> 00:57:25,760 on that website but I share all that because eventually some of those property owners that 586 00:57:25,760 --> 00:57:30,680 get notified or residents they learn of the project maybe they attended a public meeting 587 00:57:30,680 --> 00:57:36,200 or excuse me a meeting that was hosted by the applicant and then in turn you all start 588 00:57:36,200 --> 00:57:42,120 getting contacted right people wanting to be able to engage with you as commissioners 589 00:57:42,120 --> 00:57:47,480 and so I wanted just to touch base on a couple of things that as commissioners since you're 590 00:57:47,480 --> 00:57:52,200 appointed and you're not elected as appointed members to the planning and zoning commission 591 00:57:52,200 --> 00:57:57,280 it is up to you to decide as to what level you choose to engage with people that reach 592 00:57:57,280 --> 00:58:00,720 out to you it could be residents that reach out to you it could also be the developers 593 00:58:00,720 --> 00:58:05,600 representative also wanting to reach out to you if you are to ask staff our recommendation 594 00:58:05,600 --> 00:58:10,920 is that we recommend that you avoid ex parte communication and I know you heard me say 595 00:58:10,920 --> 00:58:16,040 that in when we did our commissioner training reason for that is from staff's perspective 596 00:58:16,040 --> 00:58:20,300 we are interested in protecting what I call the sanctity of the public hearing right the 597 00:58:20,300 --> 00:58:24,760 public hearing the goal of the public hearing is for all commissioners to receive the same 598 00:58:24,760 --> 00:58:31,120 information for when you are deliberating a proposed zoning request so that that's why 599 00:58:31,120 --> 00:58:36,440 from that staff perspective we're always we're careful about protecting that public hearing 600 00:58:36,440 --> 00:58:43,720 now that being said I think it's fair to say that residents within communities regardless 601 00:58:43,720 --> 00:58:46,880 if you're in Denton or somewhere else feel the need that they want to make sure that 602 00:58:46,880 --> 00:58:51,440 their their concerns are heard and expressed to members of the commission and understandably 603 00:58:51,440 --> 00:58:58,120 so you're more than welcome to listen and receive that feedback from residents or the 604 00:58:58,120 --> 00:59:02,320 developers applicant but I would encourage you especially if those meetings are happening 605 00:59:02,320 --> 00:59:07,160 before you have your formal planning and zoning commission meeting I would encourage you to 606 00:59:07,160 --> 00:59:11,880 listen right not formulate a formal position or state what your formal position is until 607 00:59:11,880 --> 00:59:16,960 you receive all the technical materials that we've provided you the reason being is because 608 00:59:16,960 --> 00:59:22,020 as Ashley pointed out or I'm sorry with Sean on the on consideration of zoning requests 609 00:59:22,020 --> 00:59:27,520 it's also evaluating those consistency with our adopted policies that we have in our regulations 610 00:59:27,520 --> 00:59:31,680 that we put forth also it's fair for you as commissioners to want to be able to actually 611 00:59:31,680 --> 00:59:37,620 see the actual development application materials in your packet that are being presented to 612 00:59:37,620 --> 00:59:43,120 you so that's why I encourage you to listen if you attend those public meetings you're 613 00:59:43,120 --> 00:59:46,640 more than welcome to sit in and listen but you also had to figure out what your comfort 614 00:59:46,640 --> 00:59:53,400 level is for engaging with the community if you do decide to engage with members outside 615 00:59:53,400 --> 00:59:57,960 the public hearing process then staff does recommend that during your deliberations or 616 00:59:57,960 --> 01:00:02,000 during the public hearing that you put on public record hey I had the opportunity to 617 01:00:02,000 --> 01:00:06,360 meet with the developer on this project they reached out to me and so I obliged and had 618 01:00:06,360 --> 01:00:10,800 a conversation with them here's a summary of the conversation that we had it's always 619 01:00:10,800 --> 01:00:16,200 important to get that on public record right and again it goes back to you might have learned 620 01:00:16,200 --> 01:00:21,000 something during that conversation whether with the developer or maybe it was a resident 621 01:00:21,000 --> 01:00:25,520 that would be important for all members of the commission to be able to have access to 622 01:00:25,520 --> 01:00:31,660 that information as part of their deliberation the other thing I would offer up is because 623 01:00:31,660 --> 01:00:35,980 you are appointed members of the commission you're welcome to reach out to the council 624 01:00:35,980 --> 01:00:40,160 member who appointed you and I realize some of you may have been appointed by a council 625 01:00:40,160 --> 01:00:45,720 member who's no longer serving on the council so whatever position on council aligns with 626 01:00:45,720 --> 01:00:49,480 your position on the commission you're always welcome to reach out to that council member 627 01:00:49,480 --> 01:00:53,080 to get their expert to find out from them you know hey as as your appointee what's your 628 01:00:53,080 --> 01:00:58,160 expectation of me in terms of any communication outside the public hearing because they may 629 01:00:58,160 --> 01:01:02,940 have some words of wisdom for you from that perspective but I go back to ultimately it's 630 01:01:02,940 --> 01:01:07,520 your desire it is for you to determine what your comfort level is again staff we will 631 01:01:07,520 --> 01:01:10,400 take a more conservative approach because we're all concerned about the production that 632 01:01:10,400 --> 01:01:14,920 public hearing such that you know hence why from time to time a great example is a case 633 01:01:14,920 --> 01:01:18,560 on your agenda this evening where we were asking you to withdraw it because we realized 634 01:01:18,560 --> 01:01:23,400 that there was an error in our public notification process so so we are all about trying to protect 635 01:01:23,400 --> 01:01:27,800 that public hearing as much as we can but more importantly so that you all have the same 636 01:01:27,800 --> 01:01:32,760 information for your deliberation and consideration so just wanted to add that I thought they've 637 01:01:32,760 --> 01:01:37,040 done a great job with the presentation but I'll allow you all to ask any questions if 638 01:01:37,040 --> 01:01:43,080 the chair is willing thank you Tina I guess I have a question about the boot camps coming 639 01:01:43,080 --> 01:01:50,400 forward I recall when in the previous iteration of the boot camps the one of the presentations 640 01:01:50,400 --> 01:01:55,880 that included some zoning information included some historical information is that plan to 641 01:01:55,880 --> 01:02:03,560 be as part of a future or is this the opportunity to ask about the history of zoning so when 642 01:02:03,560 --> 01:02:08,440 you say historical information you're talking about why zoning exists or are you interested 643 01:02:08,440 --> 01:02:13,600 in more historical information in terms of how is it Denton zoning ordinance has evolved 644 01:02:13,600 --> 01:02:18,160 both of that yeah do you guys have anything in your presentation any backup materials 645 01:02:18,160 --> 01:02:24,520 that can address the history of Denton we do well Sean's pulling that up you know zoning 646 01:02:24,520 --> 01:02:33,200 dates back to oh gosh what early 1900s when it was established you know a lot of it is 647 01:02:33,200 --> 01:02:38,840 is somewhat rooted in in case law from the past but really zoning has come about in terms 648 01:02:38,840 --> 01:02:44,480 of being able to segregate certain land uses you know with the thinking of grouping like 649 01:02:44,480 --> 01:02:50,560 uses that have live like operational characteristics and intensity of operations together in in 650 01:02:50,560 --> 01:02:55,120 zoning districts so that's why as Sean shared you know we have our Denton development code 651 01:02:55,120 --> 01:02:59,320 we have our various zoning districts and then we have the uses that are allowed within the 652 01:02:59,320 --> 01:03:04,440 district when you look at the uses that are within a district again it goes back to uses 653 01:03:04,440 --> 01:03:08,160 that are compatible with deemed compatible with each other that have similar operational 654 01:03:08,160 --> 01:03:13,680 considerations associated with it that's why you know more intensive uses that have noise 655 01:03:13,680 --> 01:03:18,640 odor maybe air emissions that are associated with industrial type uses that's why we keep 656 01:03:18,640 --> 01:03:23,240 them separate from say residential uses or even retail commercial uses because of the 657 01:03:23,240 --> 01:03:28,240 difference in the operations but that's that's generally how zoning has come about there's 658 01:03:28,240 --> 01:03:33,360 been more and more a trend to be able to allow for a mix of uses having residential uses 659 01:03:33,360 --> 01:03:37,640 with other commercial uses that are happening but again it's viewed more from a perspective 660 01:03:37,640 --> 01:03:43,280 of uses that could coexist and that are more compatible with each other so hence why you'll 661 01:03:43,280 --> 01:03:47,480 find some areas and communities developing more as mixed use centers where maybe they 662 01:03:47,480 --> 01:03:51,940 have those retail or office uses on the ground floor level and then residential above but 663 01:03:51,940 --> 01:03:54,600 I'll turn it over to Sean and Ashley regarding the history of Denton. 664 01:03:54,600 --> 01:04:01,920 Lovely thank you so we we certainly had zoning prior to 1941 but the very first zoning map 665 01:04:01,920 --> 01:04:06,840 we have that we can point to is from 1941 as you can see on the left there provided for 666 01:04:06,840 --> 01:04:14,320 three main zoning districts business manufacturing and dwelling in 1957 similarly we had business 667 01:04:14,320 --> 01:04:20,360 manufacturing and dwelling moving forward into 1969 as we saw a greater number of lot sizes 668 01:04:20,360 --> 01:04:25,260 the city was growing you had different uses coming in there was potentially uses that 669 01:04:25,260 --> 01:04:31,520 needed to be more separated from one another we saw an expansion to 18 districts 1991 moving 670 01:04:31,520 --> 01:04:38,240 up to 19 districts so similar differentiation there we had a bit more of a jump up in 2002 671 01:04:38,240 --> 01:04:42,120 to 23 because mixed use districts came in we hadn't had that beforehand so we wanted 672 01:04:42,120 --> 01:04:46,480 to provide for some areas that were specifically designed to have that mix of uses the same 673 01:04:46,480 --> 01:04:52,280 time the planned development district the option to create that was eliminated in the 674 01:04:52,280 --> 01:04:58,360 2002 DDC and around that time at some point we did also bring in the MPC as you recall 675 01:04:58,360 --> 01:05:04,480 as sort of a replacement but for a while there we didn't see any new PDs and then more recently 676 01:05:04,480 --> 01:05:09,380 in 2019 we actually significantly reduced the number of districts we had 17 back down to 677 01:05:09,380 --> 01:05:13,840 about what we were in the 60s or 70s because we realized we had a number of districts that 678 01:05:13,840 --> 01:05:17,680 really overlapped with one another we didn't really need employment center industrial and 679 01:05:17,680 --> 01:05:25,200 industrial center employment figured we could do with just one district for that but the 680 01:05:25,200 --> 01:05:30,000 other thing is we brought back the PD districts you see we do now have that ability now whereas 681 01:05:30,000 --> 01:05:34,980 for about 17 years there you didn't see new PDs we had to find other ways to deal with 682 01:05:34,980 --> 01:05:39,860 unique situations but overall we have had expansions and contractions of the number 683 01:05:39,860 --> 01:05:45,640 of districts based on changes in lot sizes the expansion of the city the concerns of 684 01:05:45,640 --> 01:05:51,040 the residents at the time and as well as the opportunity to take advantage of new opportunities 685 01:05:51,040 --> 01:05:56,600 and trends in planning like plan developments and mixed use districts so short and sweet 686 01:05:56,600 --> 01:06:03,680 but hopefully it's helpful I just like maps I got them it occurs to me that 687 01:06:03,680 --> 01:06:10,740 you know if we were to plot out sort of the number of zoning districts over time that 688 01:06:10,740 --> 01:06:16,600 meandered a little bit but it was a very very large discontinuity between I think you had 689 01:06:16,600 --> 01:06:30,640 a 50 54 19 sorry roughly 57 and 69 could you explain I mean what I heard was we had some 690 01:06:30,640 --> 01:06:39,600 new uses there was it truly like were we having like launch pads in the city of Denton or 691 01:06:39,600 --> 01:06:46,320 missile silos or I'm just trying to think historically what what occurred during that 692 01:06:46,320 --> 01:06:52,880 decade and a half that resulted in areas like Denton creating a lot of new zoning districts 693 01:06:52,880 --> 01:06:58,680 for what purpose does that make sense so I will admit that I'm definitely not the expert 694 01:06:58,680 --> 01:07:03,360 on the history of Denton's development at that time but I would say that it's it's not 695 01:07:03,360 --> 01:07:07,760 unlikely that there were new uses things that may not have been new to everyone but because 696 01:07:07,760 --> 01:07:11,480 our city was growing we had things coming that we potentially hadn't seen before needed 697 01:07:11,480 --> 01:07:16,040 to find ways to regulate as well you just have more people living there and so greater 698 01:07:16,040 --> 01:07:20,640 variety of lot sizes people have different incomes you're growing but I can't speak 699 01:07:20,640 --> 01:07:25,520 directly to exactly what might have been happening that particular period in terms of use I mean 700 01:07:25,520 --> 01:07:30,160 if I'm recalling my history class and I know Commissioner Prado Carrillo is going to correct 701 01:07:30,160 --> 01:07:36,680 me if I'm I missed up here but that that was the period of time where a lot of civil rights 702 01:07:36,680 --> 01:07:43,820 legislation was passed a lot of regulation around banking on who you could give loans 703 01:07:43,820 --> 01:07:48,480 to and who you couldn't or rather who you could deny to and who you could no longer 704 01:07:48,480 --> 01:07:59,280 deny to and that seems to be corollary to me is is that a fair statement I really don't 705 01:07:59,280 --> 01:08:05,760 think I can address how that may have related but I'll be happy to defer to Tina so I was 706 01:08:05,760 --> 01:08:12,280 actually in a session of last week on at the American Planning Association conference but 707 01:08:12,280 --> 01:08:16,760 one of the presenters did talk about particularly coming out of World War I think it was after 708 01:08:16,760 --> 01:08:23,720 World War II when soldiers were coming home and wanting to purchase housing the country 709 01:08:23,720 --> 01:08:28,160 was actually in a housing crisis at that time and so developers were wanting to bring on 710 01:08:28,160 --> 01:08:33,520 additional housing units and they cited an example and I forget where it was but a developer 711 01:08:33,520 --> 01:08:39,520 who was interested in building a single family residential subdivision and but one of the 712 01:08:39,520 --> 01:08:43,360 conditions associated with the financing at that time was certain restrictions being placed 713 01:08:43,360 --> 01:08:49,140 on it where the homes would not be sold to persons of color and so you know some of the 714 01:08:49,140 --> 01:08:55,120 zoning that exists today would not surprise me in some communities if it does reach back 715 01:08:55,120 --> 01:09:01,680 to days of redlining redlining is now an illegal process and rightfully so people also cannot 716 01:09:01,680 --> 01:09:06,000 discriminate amongst others when it comes to housing opportunities due to federal laws 717 01:09:06,000 --> 01:09:12,240 that have been passed so zoning's history is is somewhat complicated I would say I think 718 01:09:12,240 --> 01:09:18,680 if anything but it also goes back to you know to Sean's point is as uses evolve and come 719 01:09:18,680 --> 01:09:25,040 about there was a tendency to group like uses into certain zoning districts I can think 720 01:09:25,040 --> 01:09:28,800 of a time early in my career when I worked for the city of McKinney and McKinney was 721 01:09:28,800 --> 01:09:34,360 maybe roughly 20,000 people believe it or not and you know back in the day it was we 722 01:09:34,360 --> 01:09:38,280 got requests for self storage facilities because they were sort of the latest and greatest 723 01:09:38,280 --> 01:09:42,000 new upcoming use and we struggled with how do we classify those and what zoning districts 724 01:09:42,000 --> 01:09:46,320 we put them in and then the other one was assisted living facilities because that that 725 01:09:46,320 --> 01:09:49,960 was a new evolving land use that was happening at that time and again we struggled with what 726 01:09:49,960 --> 01:09:53,480 zoning districts were appropriate that they should be located in but it's because of those 727 01:09:53,480 --> 01:09:57,280 new uses you know with the entrepreneurial spirit within our community and people coming 728 01:09:57,280 --> 01:10:02,160 up with new business types or business uses then it's you know with zoning then we're 729 01:10:02,160 --> 01:10:06,240 trying to figure out okay where can we put those uses in those particular districts and 730 01:10:06,240 --> 01:10:11,880 if in sometimes our districts also need to be further modified as Sean pointed out with 731 01:10:11,880 --> 01:10:17,360 that in industrial employment and industrial center employment and employment center industrial 732 01:10:17,360 --> 01:10:22,520 so yeah not not sure what all that glad I wasn't here for that so but but but you know 733 01:10:22,520 --> 01:10:26,320 but I make that point from a standpoint of you know as our uses have evolved we go back 734 01:10:26,320 --> 01:10:30,880 and we look at our zoning districts and to see if they're still relevant and current 735 01:10:30,880 --> 01:10:35,720 with the needs of our community today no I thank you for that you know there's there's 736 01:10:35,720 --> 01:10:40,120 a lot of history and and terminology here last question then I want to hear from the 737 01:10:40,120 --> 01:10:47,440 rest of the commission I've I've heard a term and and I never know if I'm reading canonical 738 01:10:47,440 --> 01:10:54,920 sources or not so I wonder if you could help define kind of what this this term is it's 739 01:10:54,920 --> 01:11:02,640 I think it's exclusionary zoning can you just explain what that is and and how that has 740 01:11:02,640 --> 01:11:08,280 taken shape in the in the planning profession over the last couple decades wow that would 741 01:11:08,280 --> 01:11:16,560 been great if you could give me a heads up before but I mean exclusionary zoning is is 742 01:11:16,560 --> 01:11:22,960 pretty literal from the term right it it exclude certain uses or practices that were in place 743 01:11:22,960 --> 01:11:39,480 at that time well so again please correct me but what I've read is that along with you 744 01:11:39,480 --> 01:11:46,220 know separating residential uses into a greater number of zoning districts that there's a 745 01:11:46,220 --> 01:11:52,680 a filtering of you know certain lot sizes or or regulations of what types of structures 746 01:11:52,680 --> 01:12:01,240 you can put on a lot tend to require a higher priced home to be built in those areas leading 747 01:12:01,240 --> 01:12:08,080 to differentiation from a zoning perspective as opposed to from a lending redlining perspective 748 01:12:08,080 --> 01:12:14,260 is that does that fit under that category well I think zoning in general is exclusionary 749 01:12:14,260 --> 01:12:18,360 when you look at any of the zoning districts right because in a certain zoning district 750 01:12:18,360 --> 01:12:22,220 there's a list of uses that are allowed but if you're not on the list of being allowed 751 01:12:22,220 --> 01:12:27,040 then it's going to exclude others you know how that might impact housing prices I think 752 01:12:27,040 --> 01:12:32,040 is based upon one's perspective as to how that might be viewed in residential zoning 753 01:12:32,040 --> 01:12:38,720 districts you know for example our rural residential district has a minimum lot size of five acres 754 01:12:38,720 --> 01:12:45,360 compared to so someone might be able to afford a five acre lot but some may not be able to 755 01:12:45,360 --> 01:12:50,280 afford that so you know the the various different zoning districts that we have on the residential 756 01:12:50,280 --> 01:12:55,460 side allow for a variety of different lot sizes and in some cases some land use types 757 01:12:55,460 --> 01:13:05,640 within them okay thank you questions I'm done sorry I just want to say very well explained 758 01:13:05,640 --> 01:13:10,840 thank you thank you I was just gonna follow up on the question what you just said so it's 759 01:13:10,840 --> 01:13:17,420 a fight on the RR it's five acres but there's not specifications as to the actual structure 760 01:13:17,420 --> 01:13:23,440 of the home right because the zoning is only telling you the amount of space so the actual 761 01:13:23,440 --> 01:13:28,800 structure there's not other than as it may have to do with height but yes I can choose 762 01:13:28,800 --> 01:13:32,280 many different types of structures as long as you're meeting the other standards development 763 01:13:32,280 --> 01:13:38,180 code yeah so I can have a tiny home on a five acre lot and still be okay on our right absolutely 764 01:13:38,180 --> 01:13:50,620 thank you I'm not seeing any other questions thank you for such a good overview with that 765 01:13:50,620 --> 01:14:03,400 we will break at 6 23 p.m. and reconvene at 6 30 in council chambers thank you good evening 766 01:14:03,400 --> 01:14:11,620 at 6 36 we will call our regular meeting of the plant and planning and zoning commission 767 01:14:11,620 --> 01:14:20,000 to order our on April 9th the first order of business is to stand for the pledge of 768 01:14:20,000 --> 01:14:34,240 allegiance to the U.S. and Texas Flags I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States 769 01:14:34,240 --> 01:14:46,120 of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with 770 01:14:46,120 --> 01:15:01,880 liberty and justice for all. I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God one indivisible. 771 01:15:01,880 --> 01:15:07,400 Our next order of business is item 2a consider approval of March 19th planning and zoning 772 01:15:07,400 --> 01:15:19,520 meeting minutes open for a motion Commissioner Padron move approval and Commissioner Riggs 773 01:15:19,520 --> 01:15:44,240 second okay let's vote on the board please 774 01:15:44,240 --> 01:15:54,840 and that item passes 5-0 brings us to our consent agenda and I will take a motion or 775 01:15:54,840 --> 01:16:02,560 discussion from the Commission Commissioner Riggs I'll make a motion to approve and Commissioner 776 01:16:02,560 --> 01:16:20,120 Padron second with no discussion seeing I will call for a vote on the board 777 01:16:20,120 --> 01:16:26,240 that item passes 5-0 as well brings us to our items for individual consideration item 778 01:16:26,240 --> 01:16:33,600 4a PZ 25088 elect a vice chair to the planning and zoning Commission this is coming before 779 01:16:33,600 --> 01:16:42,520 us because our previous vice chair Commissioner Villarreal had to resign so any discussion 780 01:16:42,520 --> 01:16:58,400 or motions Commissioner product Rio say everyone knows we're pretty new board so I think the 781 01:16:58,400 --> 01:17:02,640 next person up with most seniority would be Desiree Padron so I'd like to make a motion 782 01:17:02,640 --> 01:17:14,280 that she would be the vice chair and Commissioner Dyer I second that it's it will be an honor 783 01:17:14,280 --> 01:17:20,800 to have such a good backup so thank you any other discussion questions seeing none let's 784 01:17:20,800 --> 01:17:37,600 vote on the board that item passes 5-0 congratulations vice chair but wrong the next item is item 785 01:17:37,600 --> 01:17:54,200 4b FP 250011a good evening Julie Wyatt principal planner with the city of Denton the item before 786 01:17:54,200 --> 01:18:02,160 you is a final plat for a property located on the north side of McKinney Street just 787 01:18:02,160 --> 01:18:09,680 west of Spring Tree Street the final plat is for a single-family development it is for 788 01:18:09,680 --> 01:18:14,840 zero lot line homes that the zoning was approved last year they do have some items that they 789 01:18:14,840 --> 01:18:19,840 need to work through for the final plat so staff is recommending denial however we have 790 01:18:19,840 --> 01:18:25,120 no objection to the requested extension to the April 23rd planning and zoning Commission 791 01:18:25,120 --> 01:18:29,840 meeting it is the second request for an extension and I will be happy to answer any questions 792 01:18:29,840 --> 01:18:41,440 any questions or emotion Commissioner Padron move to grant the extension to a date certain 793 01:18:41,440 --> 01:18:49,720 of April 23rd and Commissioner Riggs second seeing no discussion I'll call for a vote 794 01:18:49,720 --> 01:19:04,280 on the board that item passes 5-0 brings us to 4c FP 250014 good evening Commission Bryce 795 01:19:04,280 --> 01:19:10,940 Van Arsdale assistant planner this is FP 2514 this is an approximately 19 acre track about 796 01:19:10,940 --> 01:19:17,120 321 feet east of Country Club Road on the north side of Hobson Lane while staff is recommending 797 01:19:17,120 --> 01:19:20,920 denial due to a few comments left on both the final plat as well as the civil engineering 798 01:19:20,920 --> 01:19:26,920 plans staff has no objection to the requested extension to a date certain of April 23rd 799 01:19:26,920 --> 01:19:37,000 2025 I'll stand for any questions any questions or motion on the Commission Commissioner Dyer 800 01:19:37,000 --> 01:19:46,360 I make a motion that we allow for an extension to a date certain oh I'm sorry to the date 801 01:19:46,360 --> 01:19:54,060 of was it April 23rd yes okay sorry yeah thank you Commissioner Padron I second seeing no 802 01:19:54,060 --> 01:20:10,400 discussion let's vote on the board it brings us to item 4d PZ 25 sorry FP 250013 a good 803 01:20:10,400 --> 01:20:15,920 evening chair and Commissioners Cameron Robertson principal planner this is for a final plot 804 01:20:15,920 --> 01:20:22,000 of approximately 20 acres located on the northwest corner of Robson Ranch Road and I 35 West 805 01:20:22,000 --> 01:20:26,280 frontage road they still have some comments that they need work through both on their 806 01:20:26,280 --> 01:20:30,440 final plot as well as their civil engineering plans but staff has no objection to their 807 01:20:30,440 --> 01:20:34,840 second extension to a date certain of April 23rd and I can stand for any questions thank 808 01:20:34,840 --> 01:20:40,960 you I do have a card on this item from a Joe LaCroix if I'm pronouncing that right would 809 01:20:40,960 --> 01:20:50,160 you like to speak okay I'm assuming you're the applicant okay any questions from the 810 01:20:50,160 --> 01:20:58,520 board no okay thank you Commissioner Padron move approval to grant the extension to a 811 01:20:58,520 --> 01:21:04,440 date certain of April 23rd and Commissioner Dyer I second that motion seeing no discussion 812 01:21:04,440 --> 01:21:23,400 let's vote on the board that item passes 5-0 which brings us to item 4e FP 25009 a good 813 01:21:23,400 --> 01:21:27,920 evening chair and members of the Commission Aaron Stanley assistant planner this is a 814 01:21:27,920 --> 01:21:33,320 final plot for hilltop village addition this is located east of hilltop Road and north 815 01:21:33,320 --> 01:21:39,800 of East Hickory Hill Road at this time staff are at this time staff is recommending denial 816 01:21:39,800 --> 01:21:43,280 as the plot does not meet our criteria for approval but we have no objection to the second 817 01:21:43,280 --> 01:21:54,960 extension request to date certain of April 23rd 2025 thank you any questions or motion 818 01:21:54,960 --> 01:21:59,880 Commissioner Padron move to grant the extension to a date certain of April 23rd Commissioner 819 01:21:59,880 --> 01:22:14,960 Riggs second seeing no discussion we'll vote on the board that item passes 5-0 that brings 820 01:22:14,960 --> 01:22:30,440 us to item 4f FP 250015 good evening chair and members of the Commission Angie Manglars 821 01:22:30,440 --> 01:22:32,400 development review manager this is a final plot for DC townhomes it's a 3.8 acre tract 822 01:22:32,400 --> 01:22:37,840 of land located north of East McKinney Street and west of Springtree Street this lot is 823 01:22:37,840 --> 01:22:43,440 split zone between R7 and MN for townhome and multifamily development at this time the 824 01:22:43,440 --> 01:22:47,720 final plot does not meet our criteria for approval staff is recommending denial however 825 01:22:47,720 --> 01:22:51,580 we have no objection to the requested first extension which could be granted till April 826 01:22:51,580 --> 01:23:03,000 23rd happy to answer any questions any questions or emotion Commissioner Dyer I make a motion 827 01:23:03,000 --> 01:23:11,120 that we grant the extension to April 23rd and Commissioner Prado Korea I second seeing 828 01:23:11,120 --> 01:23:27,280 no discussion let's vote on the board that item passes 5-0 if you're following on your 829 01:23:27,280 --> 01:23:35,720 agenda the first public hearing 5a has been requested to be withdrawn and we noticed so 830 01:23:35,720 --> 01:23:50,080 that will bring us to item 5b which is z25 0003 a and I'll open the public hearing at 831 01:23:50,080 --> 01:23:56,720 this time good evening Aaron Stanley assistant planner this is a rezoning request for Wild 832 01:23:56,720 --> 01:24:05,760 Haven woods from rr to r7 so this request is to rezone approximately 4.9 acres generally 833 01:24:05,760 --> 01:24:12,380 located north of pockers page road and 350 325 feet west of swisher road within the city 834 01:24:12,380 --> 01:24:18,000 of Denton the property is currently developed with a mix of single-family detached dwellings 835 01:24:18,000 --> 01:24:23,840 triplexes and accessory buildings on site the applicant is requesting this rezoning 836 01:24:23,840 --> 01:24:29,640 in order to plot in accordance with r7 standards to facilitate utility improvements on site 837 01:24:29,640 --> 01:24:35,160 these include servicing existing failing septic system that is shown with a star and connecting 838 01:24:35,160 --> 01:24:43,600 at least one lot to city water so while the applicant is not has not indicated to staff 839 01:24:43,600 --> 01:24:49,120 any intent to redevelop this is a straight rezoning case and so any use that is permitted 840 01:24:49,120 --> 01:24:55,640 within r7 wood could be permitted in the future if this is approved by right today single 841 01:24:55,640 --> 01:25:01,880 family detached is the only residential use that is allowed but then agriculture and animal 842 01:25:01,880 --> 01:25:08,080 uses such as a veterinary clinic or a kennel could be permitted on the lot today and a 843 01:25:08,080 --> 01:25:16,080 minimum of five acres would be required under the rr zoning today in the r7 district a few 844 01:25:16,080 --> 01:25:21,440 additional residential uses would be allowed by right including townhomes duplexes triplexes 845 01:25:21,440 --> 01:25:26,240 and fourplexes as well as medical office and administrative office could be permitted by 846 01:25:26,240 --> 01:25:31,600 right in r7 with a specific use permit that would come back before this body and be approved 847 01:25:31,600 --> 01:25:36,240 by city council multifamily could be considered as well as manufactured home developments 848 01:25:36,240 --> 01:25:41,240 elderly housing bank and general retail that's not the complete list but those would be the 849 01:25:41,240 --> 01:25:49,200 main highlights as well as a minimum 4,000 square foot lot size the request does meet 850 01:25:49,200 --> 01:25:53,520 the criteria for approval which we'll get into in a bit more detail it is consistent 851 01:25:53,520 --> 01:25:58,560 with the r7 purpose statement and is generally consistent with the goals and policies of 852 01:25:58,560 --> 01:26:04,680 the future land use map and the 2040 comprehensive plan development plans if this were to come 853 01:26:04,680 --> 01:26:10,060 forward for redevelopment would be required to comply with all ddc and other criteria 854 01:26:10,060 --> 01:26:15,920 standards and the zoning is not expected to generate adverse significant environmental 855 01:26:15,920 --> 01:26:24,760 infrastructure or fiscal impacts the purpose statement for r7 zoning district does say 856 01:26:24,760 --> 01:26:30,880 that the r7 district shall accommodate a variety of housing types encourage walking to neighborhood 857 01:26:30,880 --> 01:26:35,520 amenities such as parks and schools ensure existing characters maintained while also 858 01:26:35,520 --> 01:26:41,240 contributing to a pedestrian atmosphere and serve to support compatibility between single 859 01:26:41,240 --> 01:26:48,520 family neighborhoods and adjacent mixed use or non-residential development this location 860 01:26:48,520 --> 01:26:54,440 for this site is adjacent to future post oak road which is a primary arterial on the city's 861 01:26:54,440 --> 01:27:01,600 mobility plan it is additionally 400 feet from pecan creek elementary school and about 862 01:27:01,600 --> 01:27:07,760 2200 feet to the north is villages of caramel park so this is within the park school of 863 01:27:07,760 --> 01:27:14,100 a 10 minute walk and any of the higher intensity uses such as multifamily and some of those 864 01:27:14,100 --> 01:27:19,960 other commercial uses would require the specific use permit to just to to show how they are 865 01:27:19,960 --> 01:27:25,440 compatible with the adjacent neighbors neighborhood development and with that location being next 866 01:27:25,440 --> 01:27:31,320 to a primary arterial this develop an r7 zoning district here would buffer the adjacent residential 867 01:27:31,320 --> 01:27:39,460 from that primary arterial roadway this is also consistent with the future land use map 868 01:27:39,460 --> 01:27:45,080 the site is designated as neighborhood mixed use which is intended primarily for residential 869 01:27:45,080 --> 01:27:50,840 development and a mix of housing types as well as non-residential neighborhood serving 870 01:27:50,840 --> 01:27:55,680 amenities it's typically found in an established part of the city established neighborhoods 871 01:27:55,680 --> 01:28:02,780 within the city and where neighborhoods serving retail could be appropriate to be accessible 872 01:28:02,780 --> 01:28:08,160 to the neighborhoods buildings should also be appropriately scaled and have an intensity 873 01:28:08,160 --> 01:28:15,760 that is complements the surrounding neighborhood staff believes this is appropriate as it would 874 01:28:15,760 --> 01:28:26,000 be a residential zoning district and it is in a in a developed neighborhood area notifications 875 01:28:26,000 --> 01:28:34,200 were completed per the DDC and state law and property and notices were mailed within two 876 01:28:34,200 --> 01:28:39,320 hundred and five hundred feet we did receive one letter in opposition from the adjacent 877 01:28:39,320 --> 01:28:44,600 property bringing the opposition to four point seven percent and the applicant did not conduct 878 01:28:44,600 --> 01:28:48,880 a neighborhood meeting but did reach out to her neighbors including the adjacent property 879 01:28:48,880 --> 01:28:54,200 and I believe she is here to speak if you have questions staff is recommending approval 880 01:28:54,200 --> 01:28:59,200 of the rezoning request to r7 as it complies with all criteria and I'll be happy to answer 881 01:28:59,200 --> 01:29:07,160 any questions any questions for staff commissioner riggs yeah so Aaron just to confirm that the 882 01:29:07,160 --> 01:29:11,400 reason for this rezoning is basically just so that they can essentially get their permit 883 01:29:11,400 --> 01:29:16,840 which triggered them meeting the plat and even if say they were to redevelop they couldn't 884 01:29:16,840 --> 01:29:21,320 just come in and put apartments up they need a specific use permit for that correct okay 885 01:29:21,320 --> 01:29:30,120 thank you commissioner dire you said there you received one letter of opposition did 886 01:29:30,120 --> 01:29:35,720 they state any reasons why they were opposing this the letter did just say that they wanted 887 01:29:35,720 --> 01:29:43,720 to stay how it is and that was emailed to you earlier today I don't know anything I'll 888 01:29:43,720 --> 01:29:54,760 be on that any further questions you said the applicant is here to speak I believe so 889 01:29:54,760 --> 01:30:00,600 so this is a public hearing you're welcome to come come speak if you'd like or or just 890 01:30:00,600 --> 01:30:13,880 stay for questions if you want it's up to you okay I will say I'm I hope the process 891 01:30:13,880 --> 01:30:22,060 has been relatively speedy and and easy yeah sorry if if you want to talk you need to come 892 01:30:22,060 --> 01:30:36,520 to the podium so it can be on on the record sure sure if you can state your name and address 893 01:30:36,520 --> 01:30:47,120 for the record okay and the address of oh 6287 and 6289 poppers patriot thank you yeah 894 01:30:47,120 --> 01:30:52,920 really my only question I know that we as a city see lots of different types of applications 895 01:30:52,920 --> 01:30:58,760 everything from hey we want to be able to fix our septic tank to we want to to be able 896 01:30:58,760 --> 01:31:07,480 to build you know three million square feet of industrial space and I understand my question 897 01:31:07,480 --> 01:31:12,560 is just has your experience been good with staff to be able to to move through this process 898 01:31:12,560 --> 01:31:17,600 and understand what is required it's been great and I mean it's just so many different 899 01:31:17,600 --> 01:31:24,800 components of having to you know talk to the city sewer guy and city water guy and you 900 01:31:24,800 --> 01:31:29,800 know the planning and zoning and so I've learned a lot I mean it's definitely you know everything's 901 01:31:29,800 --> 01:31:40,000 in education well I hope that you can learn a lot with a new septic system soon any other 902 01:31:40,000 --> 01:31:50,040 questions okay thank you yeah my whole plan I led my land I'm going to keep it the way 903 01:31:50,040 --> 01:31:58,880 it is not yeah I mean so yeah definitely don't want apartments entertain a motion or discussion 904 01:31:58,880 --> 01:32:08,440 Commissioner Riggs I'll make a motion to approve Commissioner Dyer I'll second that motion 905 01:32:08,440 --> 01:32:14,600 and seeing no questions or discussion let's call for a vote on the board I will close 906 01:32:14,600 --> 01:32:27,720 the public hearing and seeing no discussion I will call for a vote on the board 907 01:32:27,720 --> 01:32:35,520 that item passes five zero thank you thank you that brings us to our other public hearing 908 01:32:35,520 --> 01:32:57,400 of the night item 5c pd 23 - 0001 c 909 01:32:57,400 --> 01:33:10,480 it's not what I wanted to display okay good evening Angie man glares development review 910 01:33:10,480 --> 01:33:19,880 manager here to present PD 23 0001 this is Denton 195 so a bit of background about this 911 01:33:19,880 --> 01:33:25,360 request this is a hundred and ninety five acre site generally situated at the southeast 912 01:33:25,360 --> 01:33:31,760 intersection of I 35 W and Corbin Road this is a rezoning request from residential to 913 01:33:31,760 --> 01:33:37,760 to an overlay plan development district with MN mixed-use neighborhood and public facilities 914 01:33:37,760 --> 01:33:43,000 based zoning districts the intent of this overlay plan development district is to facilitate 915 01:33:43,000 --> 01:33:48,440 a multifamily townhome and parkland development as it exists today the site is predominantly 916 01:33:48,440 --> 01:33:53,480 undeveloped there are cluster of mature trees scattered throughout the site confirmed areas 917 01:33:53,480 --> 01:33:59,520 of water related and riparian environmentally sensitive areas those exist around undeveloped 918 01:33:59,520 --> 01:34:06,040 floodplain and floodway the future land use is moderate residential it is surrounded by 919 01:34:06,040 --> 01:34:10,120 existing r2 to the north and the east of the subject property those are developed with 920 01:34:10,120 --> 01:34:16,240 single-family homes to the southeast is ETJ division 1 also single-family residential 921 01:34:16,240 --> 01:34:20,920 further south is the vintage development it is a planned development district it is single-family 922 01:34:20,920 --> 01:34:28,120 and then to the west is I 35 W a little bit about the area roadway systems Corbin Road 923 01:34:28,120 --> 01:34:34,480 is a east west roadway it is designated as a secondary arterial on the mobility plan is 924 01:34:34,480 --> 01:34:40,360 currently an unimproved gravel roadway it does have variable right-of-way width 35 feet 925 01:34:40,360 --> 01:34:45,600 at its most narrow approximately and 51 feet at its most wide it is only accessible from 926 01:34:45,600 --> 01:34:53,560 the east it has been closed by city ordinance at the underpass of I 35 W I 35 W is designated 927 01:34:53,560 --> 01:34:58,000 as a freeway and the city's mobility plan and it traverses north-south it's part of 928 01:34:58,000 --> 01:35:03,960 the I 35 expansion project which is in schematic designs it will be improved upon further east 929 01:35:03,960 --> 01:35:09,440 approximately 900 feet is the newly constructed and partially underway construction of Bonnie 930 01:35:09,440 --> 01:35:17,760 Bray it is a north-south secondary arterial on the mobility plan a little bit more about 931 01:35:17,760 --> 01:35:23,080 this request specifically as stated this is an overlay plan development request and it 932 01:35:23,080 --> 01:35:28,040 has a couple of components to it which we are going to walk through but at a very high 933 01:35:28,040 --> 01:35:34,280 level there are three tracks a B and C that are proposed to be rezoned to overlay plan 934 01:35:34,280 --> 01:35:39,880 development with a mixed-use neighborhood base those tracks are in the orange ish color 935 01:35:39,880 --> 01:35:45,640 the remaining hundred and thirty seven acres are proposed to be dedicated to the city or 936 01:35:45,640 --> 01:35:52,080 an easement utilized for public open space uses those parcels can be seen on the lighter 937 01:35:52,080 --> 01:35:56,960 blue shading on your map each of these tracks have different overlay conditions associated 938 01:35:56,960 --> 01:36:04,160 with them so we're going to walk through them tracked by tracked so tracked a as you see 939 01:36:04,160 --> 01:36:10,740 here outlined in pink is proposed to have a base zoning district of mixed-use neighborhood 940 01:36:10,740 --> 01:36:16,600 there are no use restrictions on this particular tract meaning any use that is allowed in the 941 01:36:16,600 --> 01:36:22,400 MN district could be permitted on tract a as part of the overlay conditions the applicant 942 01:36:22,400 --> 01:36:27,920 is required to provide a 10-foot landscape buffer alongside the future northbound I 35 943 01:36:27,920 --> 01:36:34,560 W frontage road as well as a 30-foot wide landscape buffer along the future Corbin road 944 01:36:34,560 --> 01:36:39,440 as a condition of the overlay plan development no building permits shall be issued for tract 945 01:36:39,440 --> 01:36:45,160 a until either one half of the full required width of Corbin road has been constructed 946 01:36:45,160 --> 01:36:51,680 to extend with the newly constructed Bonnie Bray or one half the required width of Corbin 947 01:36:51,680 --> 01:36:59,040 road is constructed to intersect with a future I 35 W northbound frontage road to help conceptualize 948 01:36:59,040 --> 01:37:04,440 that a little bit I have this exhibit showing where those improvements would ultimately 949 01:37:04,440 --> 01:37:11,480 need to be made to either connecting to the newly constructed Bonnie Bray or to tee into 950 01:37:11,480 --> 01:37:23,120 the future I 35 W frontage roads went backwards I'm stuck in I'm sorry got stuck there specific 951 01:37:23,120 --> 01:37:31,240 to tract B again outlined in pink this also proposes a base zoning district of MN with 952 01:37:31,240 --> 01:37:36,880 use restrictions on it particular to this tract the only allowable use would be town 953 01:37:36,880 --> 01:37:43,160 homes or single family residential it has the same as tract a meaning no building permits 954 01:37:43,160 --> 01:37:48,260 shall be issued until either one half of Corbin road is constructed and extended to either 955 01:37:48,260 --> 01:37:55,720 new Bonnie Bray or the I 35 W frontage road a maximum of 150 units is also proposed as 956 01:37:55,720 --> 01:38:01,560 part of that overlay condition along with a maximum building height of 40 feet in addition 957 01:38:01,560 --> 01:38:06,880 there are some higher level of compatibility buffer points required than we would require 958 01:38:06,880 --> 01:38:11,840 by the DDC as it relates to the developing use and the existing single family to the 959 01:38:11,840 --> 01:38:17,040 east and a 50 foot setback from the eastern and southern property lines which would be 960 01:38:17,040 --> 01:38:25,960 this line and this line respectively specific to track C which is our last MN base zoning 961 01:38:25,960 --> 01:38:32,760 district tract this again would permit all land uses in the MN zoning district building 962 01:38:32,760 --> 01:38:38,360 permits shall not be issued until the completion of the future northbound I 35 frontage road 963 01:38:38,360 --> 01:38:42,360 and that 10 foot landscape buffer outside of future text that right away in public utility 964 01:38:42,360 --> 01:38:50,520 easements would also be required moving on to tracks D and E again outlined in the pink 965 01:38:50,520 --> 01:38:55,940 the base zoning here would be public facilities this does have use restrictions the only allowable 966 01:38:55,940 --> 01:39:01,460 uses would be park playground or open space the property owners shall either dedicate 967 01:39:01,460 --> 01:39:08,400 parkland or an easement for public open space a developers agreement for the terms and conditions 968 01:39:08,400 --> 01:39:13,760 of that parkland or open space is required and needs to be approved prior to the submittal 969 01:39:13,760 --> 01:39:20,280 of a final plot for any of the three tracks we just spoke about that's a very high level 970 01:39:20,280 --> 01:39:26,200 overview of the plan development overlay and the various conditions associated with each 971 01:39:26,200 --> 01:39:30,720 tract this was reviewed in accordance with the general criteria for approval as well 972 01:39:30,720 --> 01:39:34,760 as the criteria for approval in the comprehensive plan it's consistent with the comprehensive 973 01:39:34,760 --> 01:39:39,040 plan it does comply with the DDC except for those sections that we have specifically noted 974 01:39:39,040 --> 01:39:45,720 here in MN is designed to minimize adverse impacts the 2040 plan does designate this 975 01:39:45,720 --> 01:39:50,000 as moderate residential it is predominantly designed to accommodate single family detached 976 01:39:50,000 --> 01:39:57,320 housing as well as some low-rise multifamily and town homes it contemplates a density between 977 01:39:57,320 --> 01:40:03,640 five and twelve dwelling units per acre the gross approximate dwelling units per acre 978 01:40:03,640 --> 01:40:10,080 for this development comes out to around four the PD limiting the maximum number of units 979 01:40:10,080 --> 01:40:15,560 allowed on tract B as well as the types of development that could occur on there do help 980 01:40:15,560 --> 01:40:23,220 to ensure some of that density this is consistent with goal HN 1 to develop and maintain a diverse 981 01:40:23,220 --> 01:40:29,320 housing stock with a variety of price points and choices the proposed rezoning of approximately 982 01:40:29,320 --> 01:40:34,320 a hundred and thirty seven acres to be placed into public facilities for public open space 983 01:40:34,320 --> 01:40:40,320 use is consistent with our goals of our preferred land preservation plan the existing eases 984 01:40:40,320 --> 01:40:45,560 on site are predominantly within tracks D&E and by maintaining them for public open space 985 01:40:45,560 --> 01:40:52,600 we're able to achieve the goals of our preferred land preservation plan the parks conservation 986 01:40:52,600 --> 01:40:56,600 and environment section of the comprehensive plan also calls for the creation of cohesive 987 01:40:56,600 --> 01:41:02,560 green infrastructure throughout the city the dedication or easement use of the hundred 988 01:41:02,560 --> 01:41:07,240 and thirty seven acres is consistent with goal PCE one to unite Denton through a framework 989 01:41:07,240 --> 01:41:13,960 of parks and open space as well as action 544 to encourage the dedication of eases such 990 01:41:13,960 --> 01:41:20,880 as floodplains and open spaces for community recreation uses we've talked through most 991 01:41:20,880 --> 01:41:24,480 of the conditions and they're also included in your backup as well as the the PD overlay 992 01:41:24,480 --> 01:41:29,840 and they've been derived to help ensure some compatibility and enforce design standards 993 01:41:29,840 --> 01:41:34,520 to ease transition from the more intensive uses you would see along the 35 corridor to 994 01:41:34,520 --> 01:41:39,760 the single family uses situated to the east but just specifically I'll remind you of a 995 01:41:39,760 --> 01:41:44,960 few the restriction of allowable uses on track to be to townhomes and single family only 996 01:41:44,960 --> 01:41:50,240 along with the imposition of the maximum hundred and fifty units and forty foot building height 997 01:41:50,240 --> 01:41:54,760 there's an additional ten buffer points required along that eastern property line where existing 998 01:41:54,760 --> 01:42:01,000 single family residential is the development on tracks D&E is restricted to parks playground 999 01:42:01,000 --> 01:42:06,320 and open space and the PD as a whole proposes a series of access conditions that are designed 1000 01:42:06,320 --> 01:42:11,200 to ensure that adequate roadway facilities are in place prior to the construction of 1001 01:42:11,200 --> 01:42:16,560 any dwelling units public outreach was conducted in accordance with state law and the development 1002 01:42:16,560 --> 01:42:21,560 code I have received another response or two since this slide was last updated they have 1003 01:42:21,560 --> 01:42:27,800 been forwarded to you as of about five o'clock this evening it did account for approximately 1004 01:42:27,800 --> 01:42:33,000 twenty percent of the land area in opposition so this would require a supermajority vote 1005 01:42:33,000 --> 01:42:37,640 at City Council the neighborhood I'm sorry the applicant has conducted several neighborhood 1006 01:42:37,640 --> 01:42:44,280 meetings I'll leave them to speak more specifically to that with that staff is recommending approval 1007 01:42:44,280 --> 01:42:50,320 of this request it is tentatively scheduled for City Council on May 6th and I'm happy 1008 01:42:50,320 --> 01:42:54,840 to answer any questions the developer is here and is also able to answer any questions you 1009 01:42:54,840 --> 01:43:03,680 may have of them thank you Angie I will open the public hearing at this time questions 1010 01:43:03,680 --> 01:43:16,720 for staff commissioner product area Angie were you able to get those numbers that I 1011 01:43:16,720 --> 01:43:25,360 asked for yes so track to be proposes no more than 150 units combined of townhomes or single 1012 01:43:25,360 --> 01:43:30,480 family the question that was asked in work session was how many units could be developed 1013 01:43:30,480 --> 01:43:35,240 under the zoning today given the minimum lot size of 16,000 square feet in residential 1014 01:43:35,240 --> 01:43:41,520 tube that tract is approximately 26.1 acres so keep in mind this is this is very rough 1015 01:43:41,520 --> 01:43:48,480 math it does not assume any ESA or floodplain or future right of way dedication at the maximum 1016 01:43:48,480 --> 01:43:57,360 it would be 70 units taking the math at just face value thank you other questions of staff 1017 01:43:57,360 --> 01:44:06,880 at this time Commissioner Dyer you talked about right now with the future land use that's 1018 01:44:06,880 --> 01:44:15,440 moderate housing and that there's about five to twelve homes per acre in that does the 1019 01:44:15,440 --> 01:44:24,640 townhouses in track B or do the potential apartments in a and C align with the five 1020 01:44:24,640 --> 01:44:31,480 to twelve homes per acre so our standard practice has been to look at gross acreage which would 1021 01:44:31,480 --> 01:44:37,840 assume the 195 acres when reviewing density and again please keep in mind that when reviewing 1022 01:44:37,840 --> 01:44:43,080 PD overlays the conceptual plan is conceptual and subject to change so based on the math 1023 01:44:43,080 --> 01:44:53,200 that we we had it worked out to about 4.08 units per acre at the gross density so including 1024 01:44:53,200 --> 01:44:59,480 the unusable floodplain area it would include yes the entire 195 acres and then all the 1025 01:44:59,480 --> 01:45:09,080 trees in sections D and E will they be protected well in the proposed overlay are there is 1026 01:45:09,080 --> 01:45:13,080 it written in there because I didn't see it so I and I was reading through it a couple 1027 01:45:13,080 --> 01:45:17,480 of times and I could have missed it because there's a lot in there are the trees protected 1028 01:45:17,480 --> 01:45:23,480 where in D and E the developer can't cut down the trees so it's not a blanket statement 1029 01:45:23,480 --> 01:45:29,440 that the developer cannot cut down any trees the debt and development code requires a minimum 1030 01:45:29,440 --> 01:45:35,200 30 percent preservation of all heritage and quality trees on site or a reduction to 20 1031 01:45:35,200 --> 01:45:41,200 percent if using secondary trees as part of overlay plan developments or plan developments 1032 01:45:41,200 --> 01:45:45,800 in general we don't allow for a reduction in the minimum preservation so they're not 1033 01:45:45,800 --> 01:45:50,520 requesting that that wouldn't be allowable they'd be required to meet the minimum preservation 1034 01:45:50,520 --> 01:45:59,160 but that would also be for all areas outside of the ESA. 1035 01:45:59,160 --> 01:46:03,680 Just to make a point and Angie kind of touched on it at the end on tracks D and E given the 1036 01:46:03,680 --> 01:46:08,360 fact that there is so much ESA that encumbers the property the the trees in all likelihood 1037 01:46:08,360 --> 01:46:12,440 would be remaining right so trees within ESA they don't necessarily work for developer 1038 01:46:12,440 --> 01:46:15,760 or against I should say work for a property owner against a property owner when it comes 1039 01:46:15,760 --> 01:46:20,720 to tree preservation but but given that they're in that ESA they would be protected. 1040 01:46:20,720 --> 01:46:25,280 Yeah I was just more kind of concerned about D and E since that's supposed to be parkland 1041 01:46:25,280 --> 01:46:29,640 playground like is there a reason why those trees would need to be touched if they're 1042 01:46:29,640 --> 01:46:34,240 not if they're only developing A B and C. Angie correct me if I'm wrong but I believe 1043 01:46:34,240 --> 01:46:38,860 we amended our debt and development code about three years ago to at least allow for construction 1044 01:46:38,860 --> 01:46:46,400 of trails and but know that any project that that we do we typically are very cognizant 1045 01:46:46,400 --> 01:46:50,960 about what trees would have to be removed in order to be able to accommodate trail improvements 1046 01:46:50,960 --> 01:46:51,960 and similar. 1047 01:46:51,960 --> 01:46:56,880 Yeah that's a good point there are very few things that could be done in floodplain and 1048 01:46:56,880 --> 01:47:02,680 floodway predominantly things that don't allow for any sort of rise so we're talking about 1049 01:47:02,680 --> 01:47:08,360 like disc golf courses or or trails in that potential parkland area but to Tina's point 1050 01:47:08,360 --> 01:47:12,840 earlier that the ESA regulations are pretty stringent and we don't allow for the removal 1051 01:47:12,840 --> 01:47:14,600 of those those trees. 1052 01:47:14,600 --> 01:47:22,600 So I can't say that no tree will come out but that that area is pretty protected. 1053 01:47:22,600 --> 01:47:28,680 And I have lots of other questions but I'll let my fellow colleagues here talk. 1054 01:47:28,680 --> 01:47:29,680 Commissioner Riggs. 1055 01:47:29,680 --> 01:47:34,360 Yeah so we kind of talked about this a little bit in work session but essentially out of 1056 01:47:34,360 --> 01:47:42,480 the entire the entire property that's being rezoned more than half of it is floodplain 1057 01:47:42,480 --> 01:47:47,720 to be dedicated to the city and we just said that you really can't do much with it except 1058 01:47:47,720 --> 01:47:52,760 for golf course but we're also allowing that to be added to the density so essentially 1059 01:47:52,760 --> 01:47:58,080 more than half of the property is going to be dedicated to the city but we're adding 1060 01:47:58,080 --> 01:48:04,480 that into the density that they can build on in their lots like I said I kind of have 1061 01:48:04,480 --> 01:48:09,960 a hard time with that yes so I'd love to hear from that. 1062 01:48:09,960 --> 01:48:14,800 I don't know that I have much to add add to that other than the standard practice has 1063 01:48:14,800 --> 01:48:19,640 been for for zoning changes to take in that that gross density now we do require with 1064 01:48:19,640 --> 01:48:25,080 development parkland dedication fees and so this would offset some of that and to touch 1065 01:48:25,080 --> 01:48:30,280 on your your gifting of the city but in terms of how that net density is calculated I don't 1066 01:48:30,280 --> 01:48:32,040 have much to add to you know. 1067 01:48:32,040 --> 01:48:34,920 Yeah the only thing I would add is you know one of the things we take into consideration 1068 01:48:34,920 --> 01:48:40,400 is knowing that especially if land is encumbered by floodplain that that's land that's not 1069 01:48:40,400 --> 01:48:50,880 going to be developed right so then it essentially diffuses the the density otherwise within 1070 01:48:50,880 --> 01:48:54,760 the area if you will so you know that that's one of the reasons why we take into consideration 1071 01:48:54,760 --> 01:48:59,040 we look at the gross acres of the tract in and how that relates to the Conference of 1072 01:48:59,040 --> 01:49:04,560 Plan land use policies because if we know that land is not going to be able to be developed 1073 01:49:04,560 --> 01:49:08,320 with like in this case for residential purposes right given that's what they're looking at 1074 01:49:08,320 --> 01:49:15,320 doing on the other tracks then then by allowing for that open space land to help be factored 1075 01:49:15,320 --> 01:49:19,760 into that density calculation overall the number of people within the area or the number 1076 01:49:19,760 --> 01:49:23,680 dwelling units within the area is still going to be low because we're basically giving them 1077 01:49:23,680 --> 01:49:27,600 the benefit of that floodplain land. 1078 01:49:27,600 --> 01:49:32,160 And I guess that goes to my next question so to for parkland dedication floodplain is 1079 01:49:32,160 --> 01:49:38,520 just accepted as any other type of property that's not encumbered with floodplain. 1080 01:49:38,520 --> 01:49:44,400 So we we touched on this a little bit in in work session the parks department to my understanding 1081 01:49:44,400 --> 01:49:50,420 part looks at every case case by case conversations relating to this land have been in process 1082 01:49:50,420 --> 01:49:57,200 for some time we're in the entitlement stages whether that land is dedicated to the city 1083 01:49:57,200 --> 01:50:05,800 or an easement is utilized for perpetual open space uses we consider that a case by case 1084 01:50:05,800 --> 01:50:11,080 basis those terms will be worked out through the developer agreement but the project does 1085 01:50:11,080 --> 01:50:18,320 help achieve the the inner trail connectivity on this side of 35 as well as more towards 1086 01:50:18,320 --> 01:50:23,240 the Hunter and Cole area. 1087 01:50:23,240 --> 01:50:24,680 Thank you. 1088 01:50:24,680 --> 01:50:30,160 Commissioner Dyer sorry. 1089 01:50:30,160 --> 01:50:36,600 So just for full disclosure I did attend the neighborhood meeting that McAdams had put 1090 01:50:36,600 --> 01:50:41,560 on a couple weeks ago just because I wanted to have a clear understanding of this project 1091 01:50:41,560 --> 01:50:46,720 since this is only my third planning and zoning meeting and so I know there's been a lot of 1092 01:50:46,720 --> 01:50:54,400 background with some past presentations in the past couple of years so I did go to that 1093 01:50:54,400 --> 01:51:03,160 I have received emails from Doug Henry Nancy Condon and Kyle Eden all neighbors in that 1094 01:51:03,160 --> 01:51:11,840 area and all against this as well as I took Miss Fergens advice about because some of 1095 01:51:11,840 --> 01:51:18,880 these people wanted to meet with me and so she suggested to reach out to my councilman 1096 01:51:18,880 --> 01:51:23,920 so I reached out to Councilman Holland and he said you know go for it like if somebody 1097 01:51:23,920 --> 01:51:27,420 wants to meet with you he said take every advantage to talk to them. 1098 01:51:27,420 --> 01:51:32,240 So I did meet with Margie Ellis and Patty Haywood who also live in the area to give 1099 01:51:32,240 --> 01:51:39,320 concerns and really when you go out there and I and I did go out there a lot of those 1100 01:51:39,320 --> 01:51:46,480 houses are on you know an acre or multiple acres of land and so there's just a lot of 1101 01:51:46,480 --> 01:51:54,480 concern that this is not going to be compatible with the community and it was interesting 1102 01:51:54,480 --> 01:52:03,720 because when I was driving down the road that there is a big gate from like a railroad crossing 1103 01:52:03,720 --> 01:52:07,600 and I thought well that was very interesting I'm like did this used to be a railroad back 1104 01:52:07,600 --> 01:52:14,400 here well no it's the city has an arm there so if it does flood the arm can go down so 1105 01:52:14,400 --> 01:52:21,200 nobody can pass through the road and so Margie and Patty were telling me that it does flood 1106 01:52:21,200 --> 01:52:24,820 you know pretty consistently back there. 1107 01:52:24,820 --> 01:52:30,240 So I just kind of wanted to you know share all of that with you all just on that extra 1108 01:52:30,240 --> 01:52:38,440 you know piece of information and in the emails Mr. Henry and Mr. Eaton specifically referenced 1109 01:52:38,440 --> 01:52:44,680 a lot on the Denton 2040 plan and how they felt like there were several parts in there 1110 01:52:44,680 --> 01:52:54,700 that this project just does not align with and their concerns in regards to that. 1111 01:52:54,700 --> 01:53:01,880 Any other questions for staff just so we can get kind of the factual information out there 1112 01:53:01,880 --> 01:53:07,240 for Commissioner Pradoquio oh sorry yeah. 1113 01:53:07,240 --> 01:53:13,480 I just wanted based on what I've learned right and I also did speak to some of the community 1114 01:53:13,480 --> 01:53:18,400 members I also spoke with Doug Henry on the phone and I walked the property with Mr. Eaton 1115 01:53:18,400 --> 01:53:22,760 as well I spoke to Ms. Ellis as well and anyone else that emailed thank you for doing that 1116 01:53:22,760 --> 01:53:26,160 even if I didn't get a chance to respond to your email but I've read all of it. 1117 01:53:26,160 --> 01:53:34,400 I just want to ask based on how the land is zoned right now the land can still be dedicated 1118 01:53:34,400 --> 01:53:41,720 as it's zoned now to the city right so the rezoning doesn't have to happen if the owner 1119 01:53:41,720 --> 01:53:48,400 wants to gift the property right track D&E to the city they're able to do that right 1120 01:53:48,400 --> 01:53:50,320 now. 1121 01:53:50,320 --> 01:53:58,720 We do allow parks and open land to be situated in the residential two zoning district going 1122 01:53:58,720 --> 01:54:03,600 back through some of the history of this case when it initially came in it was it was planned 1123 01:54:03,600 --> 01:54:10,960 to possibly go to UNT when that didn't work out the city expressed interest it is a standard 1124 01:54:10,960 --> 01:54:16,520 practice for when a public or semi-public entity does have interest in that property to put 1125 01:54:16,520 --> 01:54:25,840 it into that PF zoning okay but it doesn't have to be it's not a requirement okay I just 1126 01:54:25,840 --> 01:54:30,200 want to understand that because because we allow public parks by right in all zoning 1127 01:54:30,200 --> 01:54:36,040 districts so that's why okay just so that I understand so really all of the concerns 1128 01:54:36,040 --> 01:54:42,880 that were expressed to me and I can go through them afterwards after we do the public hearing 1129 01:54:42,880 --> 01:54:46,900 that kind of is that kind of is null and void then because it could be they can be gifted 1130 01:54:46,900 --> 01:54:53,840 at any zoning right am I correct and to say that parkland yes okay it's allowed in all 1131 01:54:53,840 --> 01:55:00,520 of our okay so really what we're what we're talking about is tracked A B and C is what 1132 01:55:00,520 --> 01:55:06,160 I'm understanding where the major opposition might be from the neighboring from people 1133 01:55:06,160 --> 01:55:12,000 that are the neighbors sure they're the only clarifying statement or just yes statement 1134 01:55:12,000 --> 01:55:17,720 that I would like to make is that keep in mind because this is an overlay PD those conditions 1135 01:55:17,720 --> 01:55:24,640 do get attached as a function of the zoning and our binding on that property and so while 1136 01:55:24,640 --> 01:55:29,680 parkland could be developed in R2 those the zoning conditions that we're talking about 1137 01:55:29,680 --> 01:55:33,840 today those are specific to this request I just want to make sure we have that distinction 1138 01:55:33,840 --> 01:55:39,000 yeah but I don't disagree that the the other tracks are the the ones were more of a change 1139 01:55:39,000 --> 01:55:44,800 we'll be seeing okay thank you I'll reserve the rest for later sure yeah yeah I mean just 1140 01:55:44,800 --> 01:55:51,120 to take Angie's point so keep in mind to your question yes the the park property could occur 1141 01:55:51,120 --> 01:55:58,460 under the R2 zoning but given how the conditions are worded as such in the proposed plan development 1142 01:55:58,460 --> 01:56:04,040 district it does limit it to park dedication or an open space easement and then there are 1143 01:56:04,040 --> 01:56:09,320 also certain conditions that are included in the proposed PD that outline obligations 1144 01:56:09,320 --> 01:56:13,560 associated with a development agreement being approved by City Council as it relates to 1145 01:56:13,560 --> 01:56:18,840 that property and it's tied to prior to plats being submitted for any development on tracks 1146 01:56:18,840 --> 01:56:25,040 a b and c because keep in mind with development of tracks on a b and c particular for residential 1147 01:56:25,040 --> 01:56:30,560 uses there are parkland dedication requirements that come into play with that so if the property 1148 01:56:30,560 --> 01:56:35,640 is dedicated to the city that is able to assist with meeting some of their parkland dedication 1149 01:56:35,640 --> 01:56:40,580 requirements I'm looking to Gary so correct me if I'm wrong on that but but also the other 1150 01:56:40,580 --> 01:56:43,920 thing I wanted to point out to kind of follow up to Commissioner Riggs question the park 1151 01:56:43,920 --> 01:56:49,200 ordinance does require more land to be dedicated if it is floodplain versus non-floodplain land 1152 01:56:49,200 --> 01:56:53,800 right because non-floodplain land has a greater value and I believe the ratio is three to 1153 01:56:53,800 --> 01:56:59,800 one Gary Gary's giving me hand signals in the back so so because we realize that floodplain 1154 01:56:59,800 --> 01:57:05,200 land has very limited opportunities associated with our base but but it also serves can serve 1155 01:57:05,200 --> 01:57:11,120 as as valuable parkland for us so it just helps but again hence why part of this parkland 1156 01:57:11,120 --> 01:57:15,260 conversation is included with this zoning request because there's a component associated 1157 01:57:15,260 --> 01:57:19,720 with it that could help with meeting some parkland dedication requirements for any residential 1158 01:57:19,720 --> 01:57:24,360 development that would happen on tracks a b and c and and lastly one of the thing you 1159 01:57:24,360 --> 01:57:29,080 know Angie was talking about the the comprehensive plan you may recall a zoning case that we 1160 01:57:29,080 --> 01:57:33,540 had not too long ago where we had a property that had a significant growth of trees on 1161 01:57:33,540 --> 01:57:39,440 that western portion and we worked to be able to assist with preservation of those trees 1162 01:57:39,440 --> 01:57:43,360 in order to be able to make meet some of the community's desires there so we were able 1163 01:57:43,360 --> 01:57:48,180 to cluster the development predominantly on the eastern portion this proposed PD before 1164 01:57:48,180 --> 01:57:53,080 you also allows for that clustered type of development that the comprehensive plan also 1165 01:57:53,080 --> 01:57:58,480 supports so you know for tracks a b and c that's why the development is being clustered 1166 01:57:58,480 --> 01:58:05,640 in and concentrated in those areas so just wanted to be able to share that as well. 1167 01:58:05,640 --> 01:58:09,800 Commissioner riggs yeah I think just just follow up on that and thank you for looking 1168 01:58:09,800 --> 01:58:15,960 that up I appreciate that but I guess no matter what the zoning is they would have to do parkland 1169 01:58:15,960 --> 01:58:20,960 dedication as they developed and since it's all floodplain that they're wanting to donate 1170 01:58:20,960 --> 01:58:26,920 or they get park laying for they can't do anything with it anyway so for them that just 1171 01:58:26,920 --> 01:58:31,160 means they don't somebody doesn't have to pay taxes on it and now the city base essentially 1172 01:58:31,160 --> 01:58:37,320 has to take care of it and so I don't know I just kind of it's kind of like okay well 1173 01:58:37,320 --> 01:58:41,400 it's floodplain and can't be used for anything but we'll we'll take it and we'll put a trail 1174 01:58:41,400 --> 01:58:45,800 on it and that's about the only use we can have for it so all of the PD requirements 1175 01:58:45,800 --> 01:58:50,960 for restrictions I kind of don't don't really matter a whole lot because it's going to be 1176 01:58:50,960 --> 01:58:57,160 owned by the city so it can't be developed no matter what especially when it's developed 1177 01:58:57,160 --> 01:59:02,320 when it's donated but I guess and we'll probably get into it more but one of the other concerns 1178 01:59:02,320 --> 01:59:06,400 and I and I received several emails and I read them and I talked to one of the residents 1179 01:59:06,400 --> 01:59:14,400 as well but Corbin Road currently does not connect to 35 so where it's essentially what 1180 01:59:14,400 --> 01:59:20,320 this zoning would allow is two apartment complexes to basically go right there Corbin or along 1181 01:59:20,320 --> 01:59:25,120 thirty five and it seems like I don't know when that might actually happen but it seems 1182 01:59:25,120 --> 01:59:28,760 like all that traffic is going to end up on Corbin Road or they're then going to have 1183 01:59:28,760 --> 01:59:34,560 to just basically travel north to Airport Road and then turn around and we kind of talked 1184 01:59:34,560 --> 01:59:38,760 about the trip generation but maybe if we just go into just for the sake of this open 1185 01:59:38,760 --> 01:59:44,040 hearing kind of go into some of the details on that you're wanting some of the like the 1186 01:59:44,040 --> 01:59:48,160 more specific TIA details and how that traffic pattern would work yeah kind of kind of what 1187 01:59:48,160 --> 01:59:53,160 did the TIA show as far as trip generation and sure I'm going to ask Chandra to speak 1188 01:59:53,160 --> 02:00:05,120 to that he's far more better explaining it than I am good evening chair and commissioners 1189 02:00:05,120 --> 02:00:13,200 Chandra Muruganandam city traffic engineer so specific to your request on traffic impact 1190 02:00:13,200 --> 02:00:25,680 on the trip generation the site a generates with the 450 units multifamily total of 162 1191 02:00:25,680 --> 02:00:37,840 AM trips and the PM of 214 trips and the site be with the multifamily or 150 town homes 1192 02:00:37,840 --> 02:00:43,560 it would generate approximately hundred trips during the AMP cover and hundred trips during 1193 02:00:43,560 --> 02:00:49,320 the PMP cover with site see with two hundred and eighty nine units it would generate approximately 1194 02:00:49,320 --> 02:00:53,480 hundred and twelve trips in the AMP cover and hundred and forty five trips during the 1195 02:00:53,480 --> 02:00:59,360 PMP cover and I think during the work session you said that this would essentially you evaluate 1196 02:00:59,360 --> 02:01:05,000 some of the intersections and it would be a level service D or better yes with all the 1197 02:01:05,000 --> 02:01:12,540 sites what they data collected they added to the existing network and analyzed the impact 1198 02:01:12,540 --> 02:01:18,640 their impact came out to be B or C C is the worst case with the level of service D being 1199 02:01:18,640 --> 02:01:26,600 acceptable to the city of Denton level of service D is like stop and go E is congested 1200 02:01:26,600 --> 02:01:34,960 F is like it's stopped traffic so A being the best and F being the worst this TIA projects 1201 02:01:34,960 --> 02:01:49,000 to be B and C are better thank you I got a couple questions for staff just to to make 1202 02:01:49,000 --> 02:01:58,240 sure I'm aligned on the Corbin Road right now when I look at our traffic impacts or 1203 02:01:58,240 --> 02:02:08,440 trade the the two thousand twenty two study that was done for the purpose of roadway impact 1204 02:02:08,440 --> 02:02:17,160 fees shows that that road has a peak our usage of nine vehicles does that sound about right 1205 02:02:17,160 --> 02:02:26,600 that's correct right now and I'm not an expert in current quality of a road in a future case 1206 02:02:26,600 --> 02:02:35,880 where the development opted to connect to the thirty five W access road instead of reconstructing 1207 02:02:35,880 --> 02:02:49,000 the entire way over to the new Bonnie Bray Road it sounds like the peak our usage for 1208 02:02:49,000 --> 02:02:54,440 that to lane road would be sufficient do we know anything about the condition of the pavement 1209 02:02:54,440 --> 02:03:01,640 how you know how much that increased traffic would impact the stability of the area given 1210 02:03:01,640 --> 02:03:07,600 the lack of drainage control that sort of thing has that been factored in yes so as 1211 02:03:07,600 --> 02:03:15,040 of right now it's a dirt road with not a good condition to drive and when the road is built 1212 02:03:15,040 --> 02:03:20,440 they will have carbon gutter and it will bring about the floodplain level and they will have 1213 02:03:20,440 --> 02:03:26,760 drainage components to drain the water what might be happening out there right now so 1214 02:03:26,760 --> 02:03:32,920 they will have all the components to have a good roadway okay and just to make sure 1215 02:03:32,920 --> 02:03:43,220 that my ballpark estimator is calibrated if you can follow me on the math here a similar 1216 02:03:43,220 --> 02:03:49,400 proposed roadway reconstruction maybe in a slightly different initial condition when 1217 02:03:49,400 --> 02:03:54,080 we were going through the twenty nineteen bond process Robertson Road the section that's 1218 02:03:54,080 --> 02:04:04,240 only two lanes if you're familiar kind of east of Teasley west of post oak right doesn't 1219 02:04:04,240 --> 02:04:10,180 have underground drainage it's two lanes right now and at the time because I was on that 1220 02:04:10,180 --> 02:04:17,040 committee the city engineer said that they hadn't really priced it out by then against 1221 02:04:17,040 --> 02:04:22,920 this was twenty nineteen before all the construction inflation but he imagined it could be up to 1222 02:04:22,920 --> 02:04:28,040 fifteen million dollars for that half mile of roadway primarily because of the expense 1223 02:04:28,040 --> 02:04:37,040 of drainage right and then when I look in the in that twenty twenty two roadway impact 1224 02:04:37,040 --> 02:04:43,240 fee study it shows that a future Corbin Road project just the roadway I think would be 1225 02:04:43,240 --> 02:04:50,680 about ten million and and I'm assuming that doesn't include drainage canals under all 1226 02:04:50,680 --> 02:04:55,440 that kind of stuff so it would be above that for the total project cost is that correct 1227 02:04:55,440 --> 02:05:02,800 okay and just one other question to make sure that we're clear on the the trail right of 1228 02:05:02,800 --> 02:05:11,080 ways and what could or must happen maybe this is more of an Angie question my my understanding 1229 02:05:11,080 --> 02:05:18,000 is that because a trail connection is shown on our mobility plan any development that 1230 02:05:18,000 --> 02:05:23,600 would take place including this land would have to provide an access easement for that 1231 02:05:23,600 --> 02:05:31,160 at the minimum but our development code would not require them to dedicate that land if 1232 02:05:31,160 --> 02:05:39,520 they didn't want to for parks is that an accurate statement yes that's an accurate statement 1233 02:05:39,520 --> 02:05:49,440 does that clarify and then I just because it's been such a long process several other 1234 02:05:49,440 --> 02:05:57,440 applications that we've seen with ESAs have included remediation proposals for the ESA 1235 02:05:57,440 --> 02:06:02,040 in order to to bring them back to a more healthy state there's a lot of privet in a lot of 1236 02:06:02,040 --> 02:06:09,960 these areas etc I didn't see anything within the proposed PD overlay stipulating remediation 1237 02:06:09,960 --> 02:06:13,900 of privet and and that sort of thing in the ESA is that something that was considered 1238 02:06:13,900 --> 02:06:19,120 or not present because it's not here for some reason every even though it's other places 1239 02:06:19,120 --> 02:06:26,740 in the city help me understand that sure great question and it's not in this PD remediation 1240 02:06:26,740 --> 02:06:34,180 efforts reason being as kind of as we discussed in work session still working through those 1241 02:06:34,180 --> 02:06:39,720 entitlement phases knowing that environmentally sensitive field assessment has been done confirming 1242 02:06:39,720 --> 02:06:45,320 the areas where we know we do have ESA and we don't that next step would be the more 1243 02:06:45,320 --> 02:06:50,720 fine-grained site planning where we would know if there are going to be encroachments 1244 02:06:50,720 --> 02:06:55,920 into the ESA requiring that they go through that that all all ESA plan which is where 1245 02:06:55,920 --> 02:07:02,800 you see those remediation plans come forth so as we work through you know various agreements 1246 02:07:02,800 --> 02:07:09,360 or site plans or civil engineering plans the ESA requirements need to be adhered to and 1247 02:07:09,360 --> 02:07:13,720 then if there's a need for an old ESA plan and that's when you would typically through 1248 02:07:13,720 --> 02:07:19,400 that separate process see your remediation plans calling for removal of privet or enhancement 1249 02:07:19,400 --> 02:07:24,600 of a certain section okay thank you any other staff questions because I know there's lots 1250 02:07:24,600 --> 02:07:31,560 of complicated things sorry sorry I just wanted to follow up to that so the the ESA remediation 1251 02:07:31,560 --> 02:07:37,760 is only triggered if they're getting into the ESA as part of the alternative ESA plan 1252 02:07:37,760 --> 02:07:43,920 and approval process there is a separate remediation plan that needs to offset the encroachments 1253 02:07:43,920 --> 02:07:50,760 into that ESA but since it's all being dedicated to the city that there wouldn't be any encroachment 1254 02:07:50,760 --> 02:07:55,160 into that with the development so anything that's dedicated to the city the city would 1255 02:07:55,160 --> 02:08:00,120 need to do the remediation in the future that would all still need to be worked out through 1256 02:08:00,120 --> 02:08:06,100 that developers agreement including who ultimately maintains and manages either that that open 1257 02:08:06,100 --> 02:08:11,240 space or if it's an easement that's dedicated the terms of agreement of that easement okay 1258 02:08:11,240 --> 02:08:17,840 thank you Commissioner Perrone for Angie going back to the tracks just so I understand completely 1259 02:08:17,840 --> 02:08:22,840 track a is they're just proposals right now of plans but track a is proposed to be single 1260 02:08:22,840 --> 02:08:32,280 family homes correct it is tracked be tracked it does help when you can see them all I want 1261 02:08:32,280 --> 02:08:37,800 to blanket okay so just as quick refresher before we get to public comment sure tracked 1262 02:08:37,800 --> 02:08:44,720 be is the one closest to existing single-family and furthest from the highway this is the 1263 02:08:44,720 --> 02:08:51,280 one with the use restrictions so only townhomes and single-family would be allowable and a 1264 02:08:51,280 --> 02:08:56,880 and C have a base zoning district of mixed-use neighborhood with the intent of developing 1265 02:08:56,880 --> 02:09:02,640 as multifamily but there is not a use condition that restricts the property to that only meaning 1266 02:09:02,640 --> 02:09:08,160 any of the allowable uses in MN in the future if deemed appropriate could go there so for 1267 02:09:08,160 --> 02:09:14,600 example if it's a project proposal and let's say either townhomes or multifamily it's still 1268 02:09:14,600 --> 02:09:20,000 unknown what the result would be it's like oh as far as like what type of development 1269 02:09:20,000 --> 02:09:25,240 would be choosing whether it would be a mixture of both or solely townhomes or solely multifamily 1270 02:09:25,240 --> 02:09:34,380 for tracked be tracked not the one for a yeah the intent is is for multifamily development 1271 02:09:34,380 --> 02:09:39,000 however I just want to make it clear that because it's an overlay PD and we're pretty 1272 02:09:39,000 --> 02:09:43,960 we're adopting a base zoning with no restrictions that that could change to an allowable use 1273 02:09:43,960 --> 02:09:49,040 in the MN zoning district okay because the concept plan that is you know used to talk 1274 02:09:49,040 --> 02:09:56,720 through is not is not finalized like it would be in a standard PD sure thank you. 1275 02:09:56,720 --> 02:09:57,720 Commissioner Dyer. 1276 02:09:57,720 --> 02:10:05,480 I'm just a couple more questions so the developers agreement that you're talking about the zoning 1277 02:10:05,480 --> 02:10:12,840 if the current owner were to sell the property does all of that convey and carry over to 1278 02:10:12,840 --> 02:10:15,440 the new owner. 1279 02:10:15,440 --> 02:10:19,800 Yes overlay plan development conditions run with the land not with the owner so if the 1280 02:10:19,800 --> 02:10:25,000 property were to be sold by a new individual they're subject to the same terms and conditions 1281 02:10:25,000 --> 02:10:30,600 as outlined in the overlay PD the only way for that to change or be amended is by going 1282 02:10:30,600 --> 02:10:35,160 back through this process with a amending overlay plan development. 1283 02:10:35,160 --> 02:10:42,040 And would you have to do a new developers agreement with a new developer. 1284 02:10:42,040 --> 02:10:45,600 That I think that would also transfer but if terms are altered or if conditions are 1285 02:10:45,600 --> 02:10:49,760 wanting to be modified we'd be back in much the same situation. 1286 02:10:49,760 --> 02:10:59,560 Okay and then the other question I have is Corbin's going to get expanded because right 1287 02:10:59,560 --> 02:11:04,680 now it's just a very narrow dirt road so you're going to have a grassy media and you're going 1288 02:11:04,680 --> 02:11:08,920 to have lanes on each side you're going to have some landscaping so you're going to take 1289 02:11:08,920 --> 02:11:17,920 not only the southern property that this current owner has but also as you move east you're 1290 02:11:17,920 --> 02:11:23,860 going to take those other homeowners part of their property and then all the property 1291 02:11:23,860 --> 02:11:32,340 owners on the north eminent domain are we trying to work out a deal and also when Corbin 1292 02:11:32,340 --> 02:11:39,300 gets extended east to connect to the new Bonnie Bray I'm assuming you're going to have to 1293 02:11:39,300 --> 02:11:46,040 try to acquire those properties as well like is there a plan. 1294 02:11:46,040 --> 02:11:51,480 Sure and I see Chandra standing I'll let him jump in in a minute to address some more of 1295 02:11:51,480 --> 02:11:59,960 the details for clarification as part of this project and what's required to be constructed 1296 02:11:59,960 --> 02:12:06,960 there would be no right of way taken from northern property owners that at this time 1297 02:12:06,960 --> 02:12:13,040 for the improvements of the two lanes to serve the development is not needed. 1298 02:12:13,040 --> 02:12:15,560 So it's all coming from the southern. 1299 02:12:15,560 --> 02:12:19,680 It comes from the southern portions so you are correct there is land area to the east 1300 02:12:19,680 --> 02:12:26,360 that is not under this owners ownership as well as some parcels needed to make that connection 1301 02:12:26,360 --> 02:12:32,480 to the new Bonnie Bray but the dedication is coming from the southern side to make that 1302 02:12:32,480 --> 02:12:36,280 improvement to make it two lanes essentially one lane each way. 1303 02:12:36,280 --> 02:12:38,640 Did I leave anything out Chandra? 1304 02:12:38,640 --> 02:12:43,680 Because that kind of has to happen in order because that part of the overlay is A and 1305 02:12:43,680 --> 02:12:50,320 C can't be developed until that extension is done correct? 1306 02:12:50,320 --> 02:12:56,000 Yes the improvements need to be made to connect fully connect to either the new Bonnie Bray 1307 02:12:56,000 --> 02:13:01,360 or 35 whichever comes first with this right of way section that you see here. 1308 02:13:01,360 --> 02:13:10,640 We know how fast text that works so I would think that the city of Denton could work faster. 1309 02:13:10,640 --> 02:13:15,440 Sorry just to follow up to that but it in order to extend it further east past this 1310 02:13:15,440 --> 02:13:20,120 property then the city would need to purchase that right of way and build that portion of 1311 02:13:20,120 --> 02:13:21,120 the road. 1312 02:13:21,120 --> 02:13:23,560 Additional right of way is required yes. 1313 02:13:23,560 --> 02:13:29,860 Okay so in order to for this development to happen the city has basically skin in the 1314 02:13:29,860 --> 02:13:32,840 game and they have to build part of the roadway. 1315 02:13:32,840 --> 02:13:39,240 The only I guess what I would add to that is the making that connection to new Bonnie 1316 02:13:39,240 --> 02:13:44,600 Bray has been something our transportation team has been working on and investigating 1317 02:13:44,600 --> 02:13:50,760 after having held a neighborhood meeting in this area in the summer of 2024 which really 1318 02:13:50,760 --> 02:13:54,720 highlighted some of the access challenges that individuals situated north of the subject 1319 02:13:54,720 --> 02:13:55,720 property have. 1320 02:13:55,720 --> 02:13:59,840 Okay I guess if I could add a follow-up comment to your point regarding the city having skin 1321 02:13:59,840 --> 02:14:04,460 in the game the city has skin in the game regarding Corbin Road regardless and the reason 1322 02:14:04,460 --> 02:14:11,880 why I say that with with tracks A and B if they were to develop the developer is going 1323 02:14:11,880 --> 02:14:15,760 to build the southern portion of the roadway but the northern portion of the roadway eventually 1324 02:14:15,760 --> 02:14:20,440 is going to have to be built at some point in time so if this zoning were to be approved 1325 02:14:20,440 --> 02:14:25,120 then it's really a shared responsibility of constructing the roadway because the developer 1326 02:14:25,120 --> 02:14:29,240 will have their portions part of their development obligations but given conditions that are 1327 02:14:29,240 --> 02:14:33,920 on the north side particularly where the existing single-family residential lots are the city 1328 02:14:33,920 --> 02:14:36,880 would likely be then building the roadway as part of the capital improvements within 1329 02:14:36,880 --> 02:14:39,200 the existing right of way that's there. 1330 02:14:39,200 --> 02:14:44,700 Any property on the north side of Corbin if it had the opportunity to be developed then 1331 02:14:44,700 --> 02:14:48,600 at such point in time when the property is developed that developer would have the obligation 1332 02:14:48,600 --> 02:14:55,280 for those roadway roadway improvements adjacent to their property so but we we still have 1333 02:14:55,280 --> 02:14:59,960 a commitment in this and and I think one of the things that you know regardless of what 1334 02:14:59,960 --> 02:15:04,240 happens with this development one of the things that we the city are working on is trying 1335 02:15:04,240 --> 02:15:08,480 to help assist with that connection to new Bonnie Bray one of the things that was very 1336 02:15:08,480 --> 02:15:13,880 evident in a meeting that we hosted last summer I think it was late summer was that given the 1337 02:15:13,880 --> 02:15:19,280 existing access considerations within the area we know we have some challenges and so 1338 02:15:19,280 --> 02:15:23,360 our commitment was to be able to look further to see what kind of improvements we could 1339 02:15:23,360 --> 02:15:29,040 make for trying to secure that connection to the new Bonnie Bray I know many residents 1340 02:15:29,040 --> 02:15:32,640 at that time had expressed concern regarding when there's incidents in the area that they 1341 02:15:32,640 --> 02:15:37,200 have not been able to get to their homes and and we heard that loud and clear and so that's 1342 02:15:37,200 --> 02:15:42,120 why from that point on we've been in discussions with okay how can we work to at least try 1343 02:15:42,120 --> 02:15:49,680 and secure that connection to new Bonnie Bray thank you yeah and obviously the city has 1344 02:15:49,680 --> 02:15:54,680 skin in the game anytime there's a roadway but thank you yeah so where was this I guess 1345 02:15:54,680 --> 02:16:00,960 on the CIP priority list is it was it I mean they'll just move this up on the CIP list 1346 02:16:00,960 --> 02:16:08,720 I assume so this carbon road section is on the service area B and on the priority list 1347 02:16:08,720 --> 02:16:15,320 first and second. 1348 02:16:15,320 --> 02:16:20,000 Commissioner Perodrone you're still on the board did you have a question okay just one 1349 02:16:20,000 --> 02:16:29,600 final one from me thank you everybody for being patient this is just a complex application 1350 02:16:29,600 --> 02:16:38,080 I've heard before that notwithstanding all these issues right the for instance the reason 1351 02:16:38,080 --> 02:16:43,180 I'm asking this is that the the conceptual plan which just so everybody understands it's 1352 02:16:43,180 --> 02:16:49,400 it's conceptual it's a drawing that shows what staff and the applicant believe would 1353 02:16:49,400 --> 02:16:56,000 be possible under the proposed zoning but it's not anything beyond that but it did show 1354 02:16:56,000 --> 02:17:03,360 a roadway connection across the ESA my understanding is that when you cross a floodway you're not 1355 02:17:03,360 --> 02:17:07,520 allowed to put any vertical support elements actually within the floodway and it has to 1356 02:17:07,520 --> 02:17:14,360 span that distance is that a fair statement for roadways it's not the case this is a carbon 1357 02:17:14,360 --> 02:17:22,440 is a mobility plan roadway sorry not not for Corbin Road for the internal connection if 1358 02:17:22,440 --> 02:17:28,820 if there was a desire to have an internal roadway across that floodplain you mean connecting 1359 02:17:28,820 --> 02:17:34,440 the sitey C to sitey exactly that's right yeah there are some restrictions on ESA that 1360 02:17:34,440 --> 02:17:39,900 needs to be mitigated yes so notwithstanding the ESA restrictions assuming those would 1361 02:17:39,900 --> 02:17:48,760 would be amenable to council the physical construction of a roadway crossing a floodway 1362 02:17:48,760 --> 02:17:56,400 my understanding is that the deck has to span between supports on on the extents other sides 1363 02:17:56,400 --> 02:18:00,440 of the floodway that's correct but it can go in the floodplain area beyond that that's 1364 02:18:00,440 --> 02:18:10,360 not correct okay thank you any other questions before we get to public's comments okay not 1365 02:18:10,360 --> 02:18:21,880 seeing any thank you Angie thank you Chandra I already opened the public hearing the the 1366 02:18:21,880 --> 02:18:30,420 applicant per our rules gets to to speak first so I will invite Randy Rivera up to speak 1367 02:18:30,420 --> 02:18:42,840 so I'm clear on the time is there a drive o'clock yes as the applicant you get 10 minutes 1368 02:18:42,840 --> 02:18:51,400 is there a clock up here there should be I don't see it yet it should appear once it's 1369 02:18:51,400 --> 02:18:59,320 usually there okay it will appear momentarily so please state your your name and address 1370 02:18:59,320 --> 02:19:05,320 for the record and then you will have 10 minutes right and then I need to share my presentation 1371 02:19:05,320 --> 02:19:15,280 when will that come up do I need to do that there's probably a yeah there's there's a 1372 02:19:15,280 --> 02:19:24,400 couple screens on there okay okay thank you all right thank you all right my name is Randy 1373 02:19:24,400 --> 02:19:30,880 Rivera I am a land planner with McAdams located at 4400 State Highway 121 in Louisville thank 1374 02:19:30,880 --> 02:19:36,920 you for the opportunity to present tonight I want to go through some of the slides and 1375 02:19:36,920 --> 02:19:40,160 a little bit more detail I'm not trying to cover the things that Angie and staff have 1376 02:19:40,160 --> 02:19:44,360 already covered in great detail and I appreciate that here's a timeline of events that we did 1377 02:19:44,360 --> 02:19:50,840 submit first thing early and mid 2022 been through this for four years the ownership 1378 02:19:50,840 --> 02:19:56,000 I'm representing here on behalf of the property owner Denton 195 Partners LLC and they've 1379 02:19:56,000 --> 02:20:00,840 owned the land for about a decade or so and so the green I've highlighted those those 1380 02:20:00,840 --> 02:20:05,840 are our neighborhood outreach meetings and then there was one in July that was referenced 1381 02:20:05,840 --> 02:20:12,200 about the city led that one about mobility and the Corbin Road improvements all right 1382 02:20:12,200 --> 02:20:16,800 here the site conditions it is unique we've talked about that I'm not going to belabor 1383 02:20:16,800 --> 02:20:24,120 it but there is about seventy five percent of the property is floodplain and about eighty 1384 02:20:24,120 --> 02:20:29,200 percent of the property is E ESA's so those do overlap okay so I'm not trying to duplicate 1385 02:20:29,200 --> 02:20:33,560 those and then the the topo the high point of the property is on the east side if you 1386 02:20:33,560 --> 02:20:38,320 see my mouse and then it dips down into this floodplain and then it comes back up so altogether 1387 02:20:38,320 --> 02:20:43,200 it's about twenty five feet of fall a text that has acquired the right away for the thirty 1388 02:20:43,200 --> 02:20:50,280 five expansion for the frontage roads all right here's some aerial views of the property 1389 02:20:50,280 --> 02:20:54,800 looking in these different directions the total tree coverage is at about thirty two 1390 02:20:54,800 --> 02:21:00,800 percent of the property and you can see there's a lot of pasture land and it's used right 1391 02:21:00,800 --> 02:21:07,440 now for grazing we spent a lot of time talking about the moderate residential and it is a 1392 02:21:07,440 --> 02:21:11,680 large this is one of the largest orange kind of polygons for this moderate residential 1393 02:21:11,680 --> 02:21:19,120 on the city's land use map I think it's located in a very strategic place along 35 typically 1394 02:21:19,120 --> 02:21:23,880 you want to have some higher intensity uses along your major corridors it's not ideal 1395 02:21:23,880 --> 02:21:29,440 really for large lot single family to want to live along the highway it's not as desirable 1396 02:21:29,440 --> 02:21:33,800 so you can see that throughout the land use plan and it's also in a key location it's 1397 02:21:33,800 --> 02:21:39,240 close proximity to a major employment center the airport and again just close to the highway 1398 02:21:39,240 --> 02:21:46,880 and good mobility it does allow for a variety of housing types and it does encourage a transition 1399 02:21:46,880 --> 02:21:52,000 which is what we are proposing and the overall density about five to twelve units an acre 1400 02:21:52,000 --> 02:21:56,980 the zoning of our two has been in place since two thousand two the land this comprehensive 1401 02:21:56,980 --> 02:22:02,360 plan has been updated since then and that are two is three units an acre there about 1402 02:22:02,360 --> 02:22:06,420 but the land use plan indicates five to twelve and so this is what we've been working with 1403 02:22:06,420 --> 02:22:13,840 since we started this application are the open space and parks and you talked about 1404 02:22:13,840 --> 02:22:19,800 that property strategically located to provide an extension of the Hickory Creek trail system 1405 02:22:19,800 --> 02:22:24,520 and there's a lot of encouragement through the city's planning documents to preserve 1406 02:22:24,520 --> 02:22:29,240 open space to preserve these preservation areas wildlife corridors and things like that 1407 02:22:29,240 --> 02:22:32,800 there are two wildlife quarters coming through the property one to the northwest and one 1408 02:22:32,800 --> 02:22:41,360 directly to the east I'm sorry to the west all right this concept plan I'm sorry the 1409 02:22:41,360 --> 02:22:45,680 zoning exhibit that Angie pointed out just a reminder that the zoning conditions in this 1410 02:22:45,680 --> 02:22:51,120 PD are binding they are regulatory they're enforceable by the city whoever is to take 1411 02:22:51,120 --> 02:22:55,560 ownership to develop it will still be held to those same standards still accountable 1412 02:22:55,560 --> 02:23:02,160 to the commitments and timing and restrictions in those standards just like any other zoning 1413 02:23:02,160 --> 02:23:07,200 district throughout the city the overall concept plan this shows basically you know there's 1414 02:23:07,200 --> 02:23:11,840 a lot of land that's floodplain and ESA so we're only really left with about forty four 1415 02:23:11,840 --> 02:23:16,400 acres of developable property on a hundred and ninety five acres and so we looked at 1416 02:23:16,400 --> 02:23:21,280 and from the beginning looking at clustering and compact development design since it's 1417 02:23:21,280 --> 02:23:27,800 along the highway urban residential multifamily was suitable for that and then as we transition 1418 02:23:27,800 --> 02:23:34,440 over to the east adjacent to the single family to change it to a single family use altogether 1419 02:23:34,440 --> 02:23:40,160 on this plan just shy of eight hundred units so about four dwelling units per acre and 1420 02:23:40,160 --> 02:23:45,320 then there is internal and external access to the site to your point we were proposing 1421 02:23:45,320 --> 02:23:49,800 a street right here to connect track a to track see all sites have to have two points 1422 02:23:49,800 --> 02:23:54,000 of access we'll work through those in more detail when we get to the civil engineering 1423 02:23:54,000 --> 02:23:59,480 design phase and working with text dot we may be able to let them have let have them 1424 02:23:59,480 --> 02:24:03,880 approve two points of access here for track to see but that is something that we'll have 1425 02:24:03,880 --> 02:24:08,160 to work through when we do the final when we work through design in the detail of that 1426 02:24:08,160 --> 02:24:12,480 the orange corridors are indicating twelve foot trails aligning through the property 1427 02:24:12,480 --> 02:24:17,200 we'll work closely with the city on how those trails should be aligned this feedback that 1428 02:24:17,200 --> 02:24:21,120 we show here something that we've worked on a few years ago with city staff about that 1429 02:24:21,120 --> 02:24:26,520 I wanted to spend a little bit of time talking about the input over the last four years with 1430 02:24:26,520 --> 02:24:30,040 the four neighborhood meetings we had and then the community meeting the first concept 1431 02:24:30,040 --> 02:24:35,720 plan we showed had more multifamily five hundred eighty two units on site B then we came in 1432 02:24:35,720 --> 02:24:40,600 we listened to them these buildings that were running alongside Corbin road they would rather 1433 02:24:40,600 --> 02:24:45,800 see them be oriented where they're not as obtrusive so we rotated those and provided 1434 02:24:45,800 --> 02:24:50,800 a condition and the PD overlay that the building orientation be perpendicular to Corbin and 1435 02:24:50,800 --> 02:24:54,320 then that we also provided for more of a setback to the east to protect the property owners 1436 02:24:54,320 --> 02:24:59,540 over there reduce the density by sixty units then we met again a third time in twenty twenty 1437 02:24:59,540 --> 02:25:07,840 three reduce the units again to three hundred and fifty instead of the five twenty and based 1438 02:25:07,840 --> 02:25:11,520 on neighborhood input that we received from the twenty twenty earlier twenty twenty three 1439 02:25:11,520 --> 02:25:16,240 meeting you'll see more of a significant buffer and setback we still keep the same building 1440 02:25:16,240 --> 02:25:20,880 orientation we limit the height of forty feet then we had this fourth meeting this past 1441 02:25:20,880 --> 02:25:26,680 March and this meeting was about presenting the conditions to the public to the community 1442 02:25:26,680 --> 02:25:31,960 and here is where we heard them loud and clear from the meeting in July about mobility infrastructure 1443 02:25:31,960 --> 02:25:37,040 for Corbin and the improvements needed therein and so what we propose is that we would link 1444 02:25:37,040 --> 02:25:41,680 the development to the infrastructure and restrict ourselves from getting any building 1445 02:25:41,680 --> 02:25:46,440 permits until Corbin road was improved and it was the either option to to new body break 1446 02:25:46,440 --> 02:25:51,640 or to thirty five and then from that neighborhood meeting in March we also heard them loud and 1447 02:25:51,640 --> 02:25:55,760 clear about they felt like the multifamily was not a good transition to the single family 1448 02:25:55,760 --> 02:26:01,200 to the east therefore we updated the plan to do single family townhomes and that's consistent 1449 02:26:01,200 --> 02:26:05,160 with the town on regulations of the city of Denton's code about a hundred and fifty townhomes 1450 02:26:05,160 --> 02:26:11,360 is what we are requesting we're prohibiting multifamily on tract B and then we're adding 1451 02:26:11,360 --> 02:26:16,360 a fifty foot setback max height of three stories and continuing to link the building permits 1452 02:26:16,360 --> 02:26:21,360 to infrastructure improvements we want to make sure the infrastructure is in place before 1453 02:26:21,360 --> 02:26:27,200 people are living in these homes that was a commitment that we made earlier this year 1454 02:26:27,200 --> 02:26:33,440 so overall that was a reduction in about seventy five percent of the density for tract B throughout 1455 02:26:33,440 --> 02:26:37,440 the course of these neighborhood engagement meetings them additionally the conditions 1456 02:26:37,440 --> 02:26:42,520 of tract B Angie did a great job of pointing those out I'm not going to belabor those again 1457 02:26:42,520 --> 02:26:48,960 but again these are consistent with the city's code on what those townhomes can be only townhomes 1458 02:26:48,960 --> 02:26:54,000 and only single family no multifamilies allowed there the closest multifamily to any existing 1459 02:26:54,000 --> 02:27:00,760 residence is over nine hundred feet away and the overlay for sorry the conditions for tracks 1460 02:27:00,760 --> 02:27:06,480 A and B consistent with what and you pointed out that either one either of Corbin's improved 1461 02:27:06,480 --> 02:27:11,440 to talk to to go to thirty five or to go to new Bonnie Bray we talked to text out today 1462 02:27:11,440 --> 02:27:15,200 they have no they see no issue with connecting Corbin Road to text out right there it is 1463 02:27:15,200 --> 02:27:21,960 at grade at this location and they gave us a timeline of construction starting in twenty 1464 02:27:21,960 --> 02:27:28,780 thirty and then construction commencing in twenty thirty four so that's nine years from 1465 02:27:28,780 --> 02:27:34,280 now that that would be able to happen and the developers making a commitment to work 1466 02:27:34,280 --> 02:27:38,400 with the city through a developer's agreement on the improvements to Corbin Road to get 1467 02:27:38,400 --> 02:27:42,160 it over to Bonnie Bray to be able to develop tract A and B sooner than nine years from 1468 02:27:42,160 --> 02:27:47,440 now all right and then here's the street section and he showed this is Angie showed this as 1469 02:27:47,440 --> 02:27:52,600 well the road is being pushed to the south it's extended to the south it's encumbering 1470 02:27:52,600 --> 02:27:57,680 more this property as it goes over to new Bonnie Bray the reason for that is throughout 1471 02:27:57,680 --> 02:28:01,840 the duration of this four year period Atmos or in link came in and put a four inch gas 1472 02:28:01,840 --> 02:28:05,720 line you see that in the middle right here they went ten feet off the edge of the existing 1473 02:28:05,720 --> 02:28:10,360 roadway of Corbin we have to continue to stay ten feet away from that gas line and so we're 1474 02:28:10,360 --> 02:28:14,600 proposing to travel lanes one in each direction there are twelve feet there will still be 1475 02:28:14,600 --> 02:28:18,760 seventeen feet of the right away and then again a thirty foot buffer is in the conditions 1476 02:28:18,760 --> 02:28:24,560 Mr. very sorry just to interrupt you the timer doesn't seem to be working so about two or 1477 02:28:24,560 --> 02:28:30,120 three minutes thank you yeah I could not see I appreciate you give me the warning and then 1478 02:28:30,120 --> 02:28:34,240 a track C is totally contingent on the frontage roads being built we'll work with text out 1479 02:28:34,240 --> 02:28:38,920 to see how we can get two points of access if it's not viable to construct an access 1480 02:28:38,920 --> 02:28:44,240 point and then the park and open space area we will work with a city if it's whether it's 1481 02:28:44,240 --> 02:28:48,640 dedicated whether it is an an access easement I will point out there are parks and floodplains 1482 02:28:48,640 --> 02:28:53,640 throughout DFW Lewisville Railroad Park is an example of fields and things like that 1483 02:28:53,640 --> 02:29:00,840 and the open space and I this is one package deal and the zoning is tied to this the agreement 1484 02:29:00,840 --> 02:29:05,280 that we would work through with the city at a future date to do the dedication or the 1485 02:29:05,280 --> 02:29:10,240 easement so if that weren't able to happen I don't foresee this being able to be dedicated 1486 02:29:10,240 --> 02:29:13,960 and then all these other agreements you know the access routes will be worked through and 1487 02:29:13,960 --> 02:29:17,960 everything like that and then we would comply with ESA standards TIA said there had to be 1488 02:29:17,960 --> 02:29:22,600 two left turn lanes one at driveway one one at driveway four and then just an overview 1489 02:29:22,600 --> 02:29:27,480 of the mobility of the area and improvements that are underway I know South State Loop 1490 02:29:27,480 --> 02:29:31,760 288 will be starting you know in the next year and then Bonnie Bray being open very 1491 02:29:31,760 --> 02:29:36,040 soon but there is great mobility in the area once these improvements are made so thank 1492 02:29:36,040 --> 02:29:48,960 you and I'll stand for any questions thank you any questions from Commission Commissioner 1493 02:29:48,960 --> 02:29:56,360 Riggs Randy thank you so you mentioned that y'all I know this is a difficult site obviously 1494 02:29:56,360 --> 02:29:59,880 and you mentioned that you reduced the number of units that you all wanted particularly 1495 02:29:59,880 --> 02:30:08,140 on track I believe it's B yes by about 75 percent did y'all I guess for me it is so 1496 02:30:08,140 --> 02:30:16,400 close to other large residential lots did y'all look at possibly doing anything less 1497 02:30:16,400 --> 02:30:22,080 dense than the townhomes and then maybe creating more of a buffer did y'all look at that well 1498 02:30:22,080 --> 02:30:27,440 with the multifamily we were able to provide more of a buffer and that's what we had proposed 1499 02:30:27,440 --> 02:30:34,520 for the last year and the feedback was that there the majority of the conversation at 1500 02:30:34,520 --> 02:30:39,520 that March meeting was they didn't see how that was compatible in any way shape or form 1501 02:30:39,520 --> 02:30:46,120 as much as I try to explain the separation the distance and the sight lines and they 1502 02:30:46,120 --> 02:30:55,000 would prefer a single family and use on track B and so our proposal is the townhomes and 1503 02:30:55,000 --> 02:31:00,840 we wanted to keep in mind that we're restricted to only 44 acres of developable area and the 1504 02:31:00,840 --> 02:31:06,160 improvements to Corbin Road are expensive and there you know if I know if you know it's 1505 02:31:06,160 --> 02:31:12,040 on the CIP developers are able to build these roads a lot faster than cities and if our 1506 02:31:12,040 --> 02:31:19,440 client the property owner is willing to come in and improve Corbin quicker than a certain 1507 02:31:19,440 --> 02:31:23,440 number of units as needed to be able to be achieved to offset that because that's quite 1508 02:31:23,440 --> 02:31:36,600 an expense there's a lot of infrastructure obligation with a property commissioner there 1509 02:31:36,600 --> 02:31:41,560 I had a very similar question to Commissioner Riggs is when you're looking at tracks A and 1510 02:31:41,560 --> 02:31:48,480 B was there any discussion to do like half acre lots and then maybe as you got closer 1511 02:31:48,480 --> 02:31:54,760 west to 35 West where you could do more of your traditional smaller single single family 1512 02:31:54,760 --> 02:31:59,800 lots and then that would leave see either up to the apartments or even up to townhouses 1513 02:31:59,800 --> 02:32:04,880 so you're still getting some multifamily but it's not up against this community that's 1514 02:32:04,880 --> 02:32:11,920 already R2 like going from R2 and then having this and then you know designation just it 1515 02:32:11,920 --> 02:32:18,960 doesn't seem very compatible of the town homes next to R2 you're saying we you know we the 1516 02:32:18,960 --> 02:32:23,160 track area being multifamily there's a lot of restrictions just working with the eases 1517 02:32:23,160 --> 02:32:29,680 and we're trying to not encroach in those areas so the developable land is you know 1518 02:32:29,680 --> 02:32:34,080 it's not it's not very much any at all to get enough yield out of there this is highway 1519 02:32:34,080 --> 02:32:40,440 property and so there is a certain kind of reality that's expected for the property and 1520 02:32:40,440 --> 02:32:44,960 the the amount of units that we're proposing I believe it's only four to five acres of 1521 02:32:44,960 --> 02:32:49,160 land that's required to be dedicated for the park dedication ordinance and so that was 1522 02:32:49,160 --> 02:32:55,560 all kind of package deal of to do this to be able to get these uses that the 137 acres 1523 02:32:55,560 --> 02:32:59,880 would be opened up for public access so no discussion with your client the owner of this 1524 02:32:59,880 --> 02:33:05,320 property or with the city about trying to keep it closer to R2 and doing like half acre 1525 02:33:05,320 --> 02:33:11,800 lots the numbers don't make it the amount of infrastructure needed it would not work 1526 02:33:11,800 --> 02:33:16,520 and there wouldn't be maybe less infrastructure on what you have to do to Corbin because it 1527 02:33:16,520 --> 02:33:28,560 would be a it would be less traffic no ma'am Corbin would still need two lanes okay any 1528 02:33:28,560 --> 02:33:38,480 other questions for the applicant okay thank you very much thank you so much I'll call 1529 02:33:38,480 --> 02:33:45,640 the the group representative first for the Denia neighborhood association Kyle Eaton 1530 02:33:45,640 --> 02:33:56,600 if you can come forward and state your name and address we're working on an alternative 1531 02:33:56,600 --> 02:34:02,120 timer solution but in the meantime I'll just give you fingers once you get down to five 1532 02:34:02,120 --> 02:34:07,040 my name is Kyle Eaton I am on Corbin Road and I'm representing the Denia neighborhood 1533 02:34:07,040 --> 02:34:17,800 association sorry yeah thank you and I don't know how do I show this is this the DTV cam 1534 02:34:17,800 --> 02:34:23,200 yeah it should come on over I was gonna say are you wanting to show the the paper that 1535 02:34:23,200 --> 02:34:27,520 you just handed out they can do the overhead camera right fantastic thank you I actually 1536 02:34:27,520 --> 02:34:34,680 live on Corbin Road I have a driveway on Corbin Road which is scheduled to be secondary arterial 1537 02:34:34,680 --> 02:34:40,160 which I will be out of code so no one has explained to me how that's going to be handled 1538 02:34:40,160 --> 02:34:43,840 as there's gonna be a two lane road and I'm gonna have driveway access there's gonna be 1539 02:34:43,840 --> 02:34:49,240 a couple of us that have driving access no one's told that to us yet but what I wanted 1540 02:34:49,240 --> 02:34:55,920 to focus on today was I'm a numbers guy by business and so reading through the numbers 1541 02:34:55,920 --> 02:35:01,760 on the staff approval I don't know that I necessarily agree with the the four units 1542 02:35:01,760 --> 02:35:06,200 and what I want to do is I wanted to go back to one of the concept plans that that they 1543 02:35:06,200 --> 02:35:13,840 provided and I know concept plans are not binding right and so the concept plan that 1544 02:35:13,840 --> 02:35:17,360 the reason the reason why I use the one idea is because it's not binding it's it's actually 1545 02:35:17,360 --> 02:35:21,440 the fifth iteration right I think we're on the ninth iteration right now of the concept 1546 02:35:21,440 --> 02:35:27,560 plan but I just wanted to demonstrate that on certain parts of this property there are 1547 02:35:27,560 --> 02:35:35,400 not limitations specifically with regards to how many units are being built okay now 1548 02:35:35,400 --> 02:35:39,200 if we look at the restrictions let's let's let's look at the restrictions here site B 1549 02:35:39,200 --> 02:35:46,240 yeah site B they changed it we're going to be going down to 150 units from the original 1550 02:35:46,240 --> 02:35:52,400 what is that 319 so that's going to be lower but I want you to take notice on side a side 1551 02:35:52,400 --> 02:35:57,440 a has 450 units and so that's pretty close to what's being proposed right now but if 1552 02:35:57,440 --> 02:36:03,200 you look at site C site C actually has closer to 290 units there right now they're showing 1553 02:36:03,200 --> 02:36:08,920 it as 220 and so my point in this is saying we're basing recommendations we're basing 1554 02:36:08,920 --> 02:36:13,200 numbers based on concept plans that are not binding there's nothing to stop these individuals 1555 02:36:13,200 --> 02:36:18,000 from going back the developer going back and putting more there not only that since we're 1556 02:36:18,000 --> 02:36:26,160 on the topic of constraints in order for them to be able to develop it they have to donate 1557 02:36:26,160 --> 02:36:32,720 the land that's a hundred a hundred and thirty four acres I believe so they donate a hundred 1558 02:36:32,720 --> 02:36:39,480 and thirty four acres once that hundred and thirty four acres is out why aren't we basing 1559 02:36:39,480 --> 02:36:46,120 density on that right I don't understand that because what's really left is fifty eight 1560 02:36:46,120 --> 02:36:55,080 is it fifty eight acres I believe fifty eight acres are no well there's forty forty one 1561 02:36:55,080 --> 02:37:00,040 point forty one point five acres that are are developable I believe I'm just going by 1562 02:37:00,040 --> 02:37:05,720 numbers on here okay so I'm looking at about eight hundred and ninety nine units total 1563 02:37:05,720 --> 02:37:10,680 and that includes the hundred and fifty townhomes and if I divide that by forty one and a half 1564 02:37:10,680 --> 02:37:21,320 I come up with about twenty one units per per acre moderate residence is five to twelve 1565 02:37:21,320 --> 02:37:26,760 and I will tell you I am I am these numbers are generous for two reasons on here you will 1566 02:37:26,760 --> 02:37:32,960 you will notice that the right away has not been moved south on this so whenever they 1567 02:37:32,960 --> 02:37:38,480 move the right of way south they're actually taking more of the buildable land away so 1568 02:37:38,480 --> 02:37:43,080 that's going to drive density up in addition to that there's parts of the land that they 1569 02:37:43,080 --> 02:37:49,920 can't build we've already discussed that flood land right there's also a two acres of pond 1570 02:37:49,920 --> 02:37:55,640 there so we're counting that in the mix too so my point is once you start really looking 1571 02:37:55,640 --> 02:38:02,320 at what is actually buildable the rate is much much higher than that the other thing 1572 02:38:02,320 --> 02:38:07,720 that that I want to mention that I don't think we touched a little bit on the twenty forty 1573 02:38:07,720 --> 02:38:13,200 plan the way that I view the twenty forty plan the twenty forty plan was was supposed 1574 02:38:13,200 --> 02:38:17,680 to be forward looking we had all this r2 here and so what we're going to do is we're going 1575 02:38:17,680 --> 02:38:21,000 to look and we're going to say what can we put here what can we build here in the future 1576 02:38:21,000 --> 02:38:25,400 and so the city decided we're going to do moderate moderate density here right and they 1577 02:38:25,400 --> 02:38:29,960 set that as a standard what what we're proposing now is we're proposing that we move the goal 1578 02:38:29,960 --> 02:38:35,520 post there's there's commercial on the other side supposedly commercial on the other side 1579 02:38:35,520 --> 02:38:43,240 what hasn't been mentioned is that it's a federal highway there there is no way to get 1580 02:38:43,240 --> 02:38:47,560 across the road there used to be a way meaning that you could walk across the road but you 1581 02:38:47,560 --> 02:38:50,800 can't even walk across the road because there's a bridge that's broken down there and the 1582 02:38:50,800 --> 02:38:57,200 bridge is out so there's no way to get to the other side at all right so I don't understand 1583 02:38:57,200 --> 02:39:01,800 how we're saying commercial and then this is a buffer and this is a buffer between r2 1584 02:39:01,800 --> 02:39:07,400 that doesn't make sense that is not that is not transition that's transformation okay 1585 02:39:07,400 --> 02:39:12,520 those are two very different things the other thing that I want to point out that I don't 1586 02:39:12,520 --> 02:39:17,840 understand and we haven't had a point our time to discuss this is that my understanding 1587 02:39:17,840 --> 02:39:26,440 of the overlay is that in order to build track a the development has to connect either right 1588 02:39:26,440 --> 02:39:36,760 here to bonnie bray or it has to connect from right here to 35 same thing holds true I'm 1589 02:39:36,760 --> 02:39:41,920 sorry I said a I should have said the track day same thing it has to go here or it has 1590 02:39:41,920 --> 02:39:48,400 to go here so my question is if they go they run into problems with getting land right 1591 02:39:48,400 --> 02:39:56,080 here and they decide to go this way all this is able to be developed that leaves an area 1592 02:39:56,080 --> 02:40:02,100 right here that's single lane gravel road and not only is it single lane gravel road 1593 02:40:02,100 --> 02:40:07,280 but it's a residential area that you have to go down on bonnie bray which is a residence 1594 02:40:07,280 --> 02:40:13,120 you'll have to hit rose lawn and that's the problem that we talked about with the city 1595 02:40:13,120 --> 02:40:18,440 last July the solution that first proposed does not address that whatsoever we still 1596 02:40:18,440 --> 02:40:24,280 have that same issue what should even be more important to the city is a scenario where 1597 02:40:24,280 --> 02:40:30,680 both of these get built out my question is what is to stop the developer from building 1598 02:40:30,680 --> 02:40:39,040 out both ways and not building in the floodplain if the floodplain is is the four minutes left 1599 02:40:39,040 --> 02:40:45,200 if the floodplain is the most costly place to build I'm going to build out and so part 1600 02:40:45,200 --> 02:40:50,400 of the reason that I have concern about that is because we are talking about putting 800 1601 02:40:50,400 --> 02:40:57,040 units total in this area we're taking land that was once permeable turning it non-permeable 1602 02:40:57,040 --> 02:41:03,960 and we're forcing it all into a floodplain and then in addition to that further up on 1603 02:41:03,960 --> 02:41:10,480 bonnie bray right by UNT we've just improved drainage huge culverts going in further south 1604 02:41:10,480 --> 02:41:14,320 by carbon we're doing more drainage and so that's going to increase the water flow that's 1605 02:41:14,320 --> 02:41:22,200 going through my question is if we don't have full development of all the road are we not 1606 02:41:22,200 --> 02:41:26,820 going to end up with a choke point right there and I can tell you June 2nd of last year we 1607 02:41:26,820 --> 02:41:33,880 got an inch and a half of rain I went out there was 10 inches of water on Corbin Road 1608 02:41:33,880 --> 02:41:39,080 in a place that was not marked on the floodplain and I was in the meeting with the developer 1609 02:41:39,080 --> 02:41:44,680 and I said you have to understand these floodplains are not currently accurate you are planning 1610 02:41:44,680 --> 02:41:49,940 on building in areas that are flooding right now and nobody responded nobody listened to 1611 02:41:49,940 --> 02:41:54,840 me and I still haven't got I haven't got any indication from the city as to how much 1612 02:41:54,840 --> 02:42:00,280 it's going to cost to actually build the infrastructure and I brought that up to the developer said 1613 02:42:00,280 --> 02:42:04,080 you have to build infrastructure there you have to build infrastructure like it's the 1614 02:42:04,080 --> 02:42:10,540 maximum amount and I got looked at like I had two heads that has to be done otherwise 1615 02:42:10,540 --> 02:42:15,920 once again land is going to be taken away from people this time not from roads but because 1616 02:42:15,920 --> 02:42:21,240 the floodplain is going to expand on all of us that are upstream so thank you for your 1617 02:42:21,240 --> 02:42:33,760 time and that's all I had thank you any questions just for decorum reasons we prefer not to 1618 02:42:33,760 --> 02:42:39,940 to clap I understand everybody's excited we'll get through this process together I promise 1619 02:42:39,940 --> 02:42:50,040 any questions for the speaker okay sure I don't know if it was inadvertent or not but 1620 02:42:50,040 --> 02:42:57,240 it does relate to what was talked about before looking at the agenda agenda item nine look 1621 02:42:57,240 --> 02:43:04,800 like it was left off the agenda it's the suitable uses form and I think that's important because 1622 02:43:04,800 --> 02:43:10,680 A and C have no restrictions on them so commercial and other things could technically go in there 1623 02:43:10,680 --> 02:43:17,280 yeah Angie can you go ahead and and pull up that my apologies that was inadvertently left 1624 02:43:17,280 --> 02:43:26,120 off of the the digital copy link but we do have that to show here on a slide yes don't 1625 02:43:26,120 --> 02:43:35,840 know the ins and outs of I can leave it over we can do we can reference it as we need but 1626 02:43:35,840 --> 02:43:39,880 this is the table of allowed uses as found in the DDC it was intended to be in the packet 1627 02:43:39,880 --> 02:43:56,400 I'm unsure what happened sorry about that okay okay thank you Angie next I have a card 1628 02:43:56,400 --> 02:44:07,040 for Rebecca Biggie if that's correct Bray I'm sorry I I now see the extra part of the 1629 02:44:07,040 --> 02:44:14,500 R I apologize please come in and share your name your correct name and your address and 1630 02:44:14,500 --> 02:44:22,760 we're talking about Rebecca Bray address traffic engineer I did the TIA with Langan engineering 1631 02:44:22,760 --> 02:44:29,280 out of Austin Texas nine nine zero six north Mopac Expressway so I'm just here to answer 1632 02:44:29,280 --> 02:44:35,400 any questions you might have let me know and I will be happy to to address them so thank 1633 02:44:35,400 --> 02:44:42,120 you any questions from the Commission Commission rigs I guess I just have one when you when 1634 02:44:42,120 --> 02:44:48,720 you're doing the TIA I guess you did not take into account Corbin being connected to 35 1635 02:44:48,720 --> 02:44:53,160 we did in the TA we did multiple iterations one with it connection one with it connecting 1636 02:44:53,160 --> 02:44:58,760 to one with it not connecting it just connecting over to what I call old Bonnie Bray and then 1637 02:44:58,760 --> 02:45:06,000 in June or June or July I think it was Chandra asked us to also look at the extension of 1638 02:45:06,000 --> 02:45:11,240 Corbin over to new Bonnie Bray so we did a multiple multiple scenarios and I think we 1639 02:45:11,240 --> 02:45:17,400 even went up to 2050 okay so the TIA you're operating off of then it assumes that Corbin 1640 02:45:17,400 --> 02:45:22,240 will be connected to 35 that assumption is in there yes okay I say that assumption because 1641 02:45:22,240 --> 02:45:29,560 there's other excuse me there's other assumptions as well okay perfect thank you I don't see 1642 02:45:29,560 --> 02:45:38,280 any other questions next I have a card from Patricia Patricia Sherman if you'd like to 1643 02:45:38,280 --> 02:45:47,680 speak go ahead and come up and state your name and address and you'll have four minutes 1644 02:45:47,680 --> 02:45:57,920 I am Patricia Sherman my address is twenty twenty five Tremont Circle in Denton Texas 1645 02:45:57,920 --> 02:46:06,000 as a resident of the area of the Denia neighborhood we are concerned particularly with getting 1646 02:46:06,000 --> 02:46:12,480 ahead of ourselves and I think that there is just so much contingent in this plan that 1647 02:46:12,480 --> 02:46:19,440 so much has to be done by the city that I think that adoption of the zoning change is 1648 02:46:19,440 --> 02:46:27,520 a bit premature with what we have at this point the traffic is a concern but we've we've 1649 02:46:27,520 --> 02:46:38,080 heard those studies even the the overlays I think don't extend to the part on 35 but 1650 02:46:38,080 --> 02:46:49,000 particularly then the inability to access southbound 35 is a significant concern that 1651 02:46:49,000 --> 02:46:55,960 that will be a lot more through the neighborhoods etc. but any out egress from that then to 1652 02:46:55,960 --> 02:47:01,680 go south would be would be problematic and I think a lot has been covered already that 1653 02:47:01,680 --> 02:47:08,120 I was going to say and probably will be by others so I'll end with that thank you any 1654 02:47:08,120 --> 02:47:22,880 questions seeing none I have a card for Chris Watts if you could come and state your name 1655 02:47:22,880 --> 02:47:34,920 and address evening please stay healthy on the way down Chris Watts Bonnie Bray Street 1656 02:47:34,920 --> 02:47:40,780 excuse my voice I've got a little allergies honorable chair members of the planning zoning 1657 02:47:40,780 --> 02:47:48,000 commission this project I'm not here supporting or opposing it's not right it's premature 1658 02:47:48,000 --> 02:47:53,520 and I'm going to tell you why it's got a condition in the overlay conditions that could 1659 02:47:53,520 --> 02:47:59,560 blow the whole thing up it's all predicated upon the city of Denton accepting 130 acres 1660 02:47:59,560 --> 02:48:05,440 of floodplain for park dedication when there may have been some informal discussions but 1661 02:48:05,440 --> 02:48:09,880 the whole thing is predicated on that and I believe that it's premature to consider 1662 02:48:09,880 --> 02:48:15,320 that this this zoning request until there's some kind of official either memorandum of 1663 02:48:15,320 --> 02:48:20,280 understanding a draft development agreement that you can contract around for contingency 1664 02:48:20,280 --> 02:48:24,400 upon if it gets rezoned this thing comes into effect but I believe one of the conditions 1665 02:48:24,400 --> 02:48:32,360 was you cannot do any final planning until those things have occurred as a negotiation 1666 02:48:32,360 --> 02:48:36,760 coach at the law school one thing I was always told my students that always in my personal 1667 02:48:36,760 --> 02:48:42,600 and professional if you have a non-negotiable or a potential deal-killer you really want 1668 02:48:42,600 --> 02:48:47,860 to resolve that first because if you don't you're going to waste a lot of time looking 1669 02:48:47,860 --> 02:48:55,320 at a lot of things that in the end can just sort of vanish and this is a very complicated 1670 02:48:55,320 --> 02:49:00,040 complicated project and I understand if I was standing in the property owner's shoes 1671 02:49:00,040 --> 02:49:06,120 I would be doing the same thing because the filet mignon of this project is track B because 1672 02:49:06,120 --> 02:49:10,360 it's the highest point it's the point that can be developed probably pretty much immediately 1673 02:49:10,360 --> 02:49:14,640 they can build Corbin road out to old Bonnie Bray depending on how they get the connection 1674 02:49:14,640 --> 02:49:21,360 to the new Bonnie Bray and I need to say as a policymaker for over 14 years I've never 1675 02:49:21,360 --> 02:49:27,480 agreed with the density transfers and especially in this kind of situation where you have a 1676 02:49:27,480 --> 02:49:31,960 hundred and thirty acres that you're going to say we've got density of four units per 1677 02:49:31,960 --> 02:49:36,800 acre on this whole track but you're including a hundred and thirty acres that cannot be 1678 02:49:36,800 --> 02:49:41,860 developed and Commissioner Riggs I really agree with your statement that we were taking 1679 02:49:41,860 --> 02:49:47,840 it out and I'm not saying that they shouldn't have some density but to say that there's 1680 02:49:47,840 --> 02:49:52,480 four units per acre on this just understand it's including a hundred and thirty acres 1681 02:49:52,480 --> 02:49:58,960 so I would I would recommend that you postpone this to an event certain and that event certain 1682 02:49:58,960 --> 02:50:05,200 is that there be some kind of excuse me draft memorandum of understanding or letter of intent 1683 02:50:05,200 --> 02:50:10,800 or something that says that the city is willing to accept this floodplain because I will tell 1684 02:50:10,800 --> 02:50:16,240 you based upon my own experience that there's not as much of an appetite for that right 1685 02:50:16,240 --> 02:50:22,840 now because it's expensive you have liability and it's not cheap to develop parkland and 1686 02:50:22,840 --> 02:50:27,520 right now we do have a lot of parkland this land banked and right now we don't have the 1687 02:50:27,520 --> 02:50:31,720 money to even develop them and that's no slight against staff it's no slight against city 1688 02:50:31,720 --> 02:50:37,580 management it's those are just the facts so I think at the least there needs to be some 1689 02:50:37,580 --> 02:50:42,960 more of an indication if the city is going to be okay with this because you're going 1690 02:50:42,960 --> 02:50:46,400 to spend a lot of time trying to figure this out it's going to go to council it's going 1691 02:50:46,400 --> 02:50:51,960 to require 20% majority if the opposition holds up and then what happens if the city 1692 02:50:51,960 --> 02:50:57,240 looks at it either now or five years from now and says we don't want this where does 1693 02:50:57,240 --> 02:51:01,680 it leave you it leaves a land with an entitlement that can't be done we wasted all this time 1694 02:51:01,680 --> 02:51:08,360 I would just simply say try to get some indication have city staff put something together where 1695 02:51:08,360 --> 02:51:12,680 the developers can come staff can come here and say we are willing to do this city is 1696 02:51:12,680 --> 02:51:17,840 willing to do this because if you don't have that you really don't have much because at 1697 02:51:17,840 --> 02:51:22,440 any moment the whole thing could just sort of vanish into thin air so thank you so much 1698 02:51:22,440 --> 02:51:30,320 for your time and thank you for your service to our community thank you. 1699 02:51:30,320 --> 02:51:37,560 Next I have a card from Jack Howell please come forward state your name and address for 1700 02:51:37,560 --> 02:51:43,940 the record and you'll have four minutes and I'll give you a 2-1. 1701 02:51:43,940 --> 02:51:50,120 I'm Jack Howell I live at 3198 South Bonnie Bray Street so you see where I'm going to 1702 02:51:50,120 --> 02:52:00,680 be impacted quite a bit if this is rezoned a multiple family my property joins this 195 1703 02:52:00,680 --> 02:52:12,200 acres on the north and west so that's my property line all the way it joins and a lot of things 1704 02:52:12,200 --> 02:52:17,160 have already been addressed so I won't take me just a minute but that's that's the reason 1705 02:52:17,160 --> 02:52:25,040 I oppose it because I don't there's a lot of questions out there that I haven't heard 1706 02:52:25,040 --> 02:52:37,360 being answered and a big concern is that that's proposed for park area and if city takes that 1707 02:52:37,360 --> 02:52:44,680 on just you know if you're going to develop that and maintain it it's going to be a lot 1708 02:52:44,680 --> 02:52:52,920 of money in it and I've lived on that property 43 plus years and that when Hickory Creek 1709 02:52:52,920 --> 02:53:03,240 gets out of bank it's way over my head and all the pasture fences I have it's over them 1710 02:53:03,240 --> 02:53:11,000 and I don't think Kyle even realized the magnitude of what a lot of rain coming down through 1711 02:53:11,000 --> 02:53:18,280 that one day and it's a lot of scrub brush on that open land and now cattle graze it 1712 02:53:18,280 --> 02:53:26,680 so they keep it grazed down pretty well but if it's not kept it's going to be a fire hazard 1713 02:53:26,680 --> 02:53:36,520 and most of the scrub brush on there is locust bushes and mesquite trees and and Chinese 1714 02:53:36,520 --> 02:53:45,080 privet and all those are hard to control and if you're in a floodplain it just you cut 1715 02:53:45,080 --> 02:53:54,920 it down and it comes back up so it's just a problem and then where I live there I'm 1716 02:53:54,920 --> 02:54:00,040 concerned with the buffer there between and and what is it what is it going to amount 1717 02:54:00,040 --> 02:54:08,680 to my as far as my property is concerned and how is the city gonna are they gonna infringe 1718 02:54:08,680 --> 02:54:19,320 on the property that I own and I appreciate your time and and thank you. 1719 02:54:19,320 --> 02:54:44,320 Thank you. Next I have a card for John Brown if you'd like to come forward. Sorry we just 1720 02:54:44,320 --> 02:54:52,200 had an update on the group speaking we've had a request that that that's well it's 1721 02:54:52,200 --> 02:54:57,360 for the Denia neighborhood association that's intended to be used with four people who are 1722 02:54:57,360 --> 02:55:04,560 present from that neighborhood association who opt to not speak so just need to to confirm 1723 02:55:04,560 --> 02:55:10,720 if there are four other people in the room who are planning to not speak that okay thank 1724 02:55:10,720 --> 02:55:19,480 you carry on John good evening I'm John Brown I live at 206 Goodson Way so my backyard butts 1725 02:55:19,480 --> 02:55:26,640 up against Corbin my family owned the property owned by 195 land from about 1980 to about 1726 02:55:26,640 --> 02:55:32,380 2002 so I grew up on that land I'm very familiar with it my concerns about this proposed rezoning 1727 02:55:32,380 --> 02:55:37,680 are several one is it's incompatible with the character of the neighborhood you mentioned 1728 02:55:37,680 --> 02:55:43,520 single-family residents but along the western side of the old Bonnie Bray between Parvin 1729 02:55:43,520 --> 02:55:49,200 and Hickory all of those are 0.6 acres per home or higher and when you go on to Sola 1730 02:55:49,200 --> 02:55:54,000 Way or Goodson Way the two cul-de-sacs there are acre lots and then as you move from Corbin 1731 02:55:54,000 --> 02:55:59,880 towards Hickory Creek the property gets even larger so from Corbin Road to Hickory Creek 1732 02:55:59,880 --> 02:56:07,000 there's four families residing in a quarter mile Mr. Barber Mr. Howe Mr. Barber's parents 1733 02:56:07,000 --> 02:56:13,400 and then a gentleman who lives right on Hickory Creek this is rural fringe area there's grazing 1734 02:56:13,400 --> 02:56:19,540 in our backyard we see bobcats foxes there's deer it's used for cows as my wife and I were 1735 02:56:19,540 --> 02:56:24,000 coming this evening we saw horses going down Corbin Road that's back where Estes stables 1736 02:56:24,000 --> 02:56:28,420 used to go on the trails for those of you a long time didn't nights this is rural fringe 1737 02:56:28,420 --> 02:56:34,560 area and according to the comprehensive 2040 didn't plan in that rural fringe area we will 1738 02:56:34,560 --> 02:56:40,320 discourage premature development and we will try to retain rural character and I don't 1739 02:56:40,320 --> 02:56:45,640 think that this rezoning and this proposed project does either of those additionally 1740 02:56:45,640 --> 02:56:51,520 Corbin Road is a bigger issue even has been mentioned so far not only is it dirt and undeveloped 1741 02:56:51,520 --> 02:56:55,560 and not only does it flood regularly I was there when they put in the railroad guard 1742 02:56:55,560 --> 02:57:01,240 to keep people from growing through but it's also very uneven so don't imagine a quarter 1743 02:57:01,240 --> 02:57:05,260 mile of dirt thing that's just going to be expanded there's a sharp hill that goes up 1744 02:57:05,260 --> 02:57:09,840 and then back and then again it's blocked off through 35 you can no longer pass through 1745 02:57:09,840 --> 02:57:15,240 flooding is a significant issue and Mr. Howell is right that's not merely along Corbin that's 1746 02:57:15,240 --> 02:57:20,000 also all over that property and so Hickory Creek when it rises all of our back pasture 1747 02:57:20,000 --> 02:57:24,520 would turn into a lake and so that's going to be a significant issue and like Kyle said 1748 02:57:24,520 --> 02:57:30,680 with the additional concrete and impermeable surfaces that's only going to get worse and 1749 02:57:30,680 --> 02:57:36,200 then there's just the idea of a park we're less than two miles from Dina Park which is 1750 02:57:36,200 --> 02:57:41,080 currently being expanded and improved we're less than two and a half miles from Southwest 1751 02:57:41,080 --> 02:57:45,560 Park the 190 acres that's going to be a significant development as a father of two children that 1752 02:57:45,560 --> 02:57:50,480 appreciates parkland we don't need additional park there it's going to be very expensive 1753 02:57:50,480 --> 02:57:55,320 to develop very expensive to maintain and it's unnecessary given the adequate park areas 1754 02:57:55,320 --> 02:58:00,760 that the city's investing into the south of us and to the east of us and the old Bonnie 1755 02:58:00,760 --> 02:58:05,640 Bray with the new Bonnie Bray expansion it's going to be cul-de-sac off near Parvin near 1756 02:58:05,640 --> 02:58:11,080 Chris Watts property and so now that's going to be we'll be cul-de-sacs on a cul-de-sac 1757 02:58:11,080 --> 02:58:15,520 and when you put the amount of traffic that's going to come in on the carbon Corbin and 1758 02:58:15,520 --> 02:58:21,720 then turning on to Bonnie Bray to try to access 35 or if waves directs the semi-traffics if 1759 02:58:21,720 --> 02:58:27,040 there's a blockage on 35 right now they turn off vintage all come down old Bonnie Bray that's 1760 02:58:27,040 --> 02:58:31,600 now going to be coming down Corbin there's a significant impact on the traffic that we're 1761 02:58:31,600 --> 02:58:36,000 already feeling and roads that used to be populated by moms with strollers and joggers 1762 02:58:36,000 --> 02:58:40,600 and walkers and bicyclist groups already a hazard with the amount of traffic we have 1763 02:58:40,600 --> 02:58:44,760 with the amount of traffic that's being proposed on Corbin on an old Bonnie Bray it's really 1764 02:58:44,760 --> 02:58:49,520 going to be a hazard and a danger and it's just not sufficient for what's being proposed 1765 02:58:49,520 --> 02:58:53,760 so at the very least I would request a postponement until there is an agreement on what's going 1766 02:58:53,760 --> 02:58:58,960 to be done with the land you know it not ought to be either we connected 35 with textile 1767 02:58:58,960 --> 02:59:03,840 or the new Bonnie Bray that should be a both and not an either or but when you actually 1768 02:59:03,840 --> 02:59:06,760 go and look at the neighborhood even that's going to be inadequate for what's being a 1769 02:59:06,760 --> 02:59:15,520 proposed for that property thank you all very much for your time thank you. 1770 02:59:15,520 --> 02:59:22,500 Next I have a card from Lisa Henry you're welcome to come up and say your name and address 1771 02:59:22,500 --> 02:59:27,360 for the record and you'll have four minutes and I'll give you some fingers thank you I'm 1772 02:59:27,360 --> 02:59:32,680 Lisa Henry I live at 212 Goodson way thank you all for this very thoughtful discussion 1773 02:59:32,680 --> 02:59:38,200 and all your questions John just said pretty much everything I was going to say but I will 1774 02:59:38,200 --> 02:59:43,160 I do want to reiterate then about the density issue and even if you take that there are 1775 02:59:43,160 --> 02:59:49,440 26 acres on track B with 150 units even track B has floodplain on it so they're all being 1776 02:59:49,440 --> 02:59:56,680 pushed to one side that is also the closest to where to where all the current houses are 1777 02:59:56,680 --> 03:00:02,560 the other thing that I wanted to say is that again the neighborhood does not have the infrastructure 1778 03:00:02,560 --> 03:00:11,160 the road infrastructure for this development and in order to go east to new Bonnie Bray 1779 03:00:11,160 --> 03:00:18,760 you somebody has to acquire land and houses and I don't I haven't heard a plan for that 1780 03:00:18,760 --> 03:00:26,520 and so that seems like it's a very long you know it seems like it's very far away also 1781 03:00:26,520 --> 03:00:34,040 to go west the frontage road has to be developed nine to I don't know fifteen twenty years 1782 03:00:34,040 --> 03:00:39,380 from now tech stop might develop the frontage road so it just seems like now is not the 1783 03:00:39,380 --> 03:00:45,880 time to be rezoning this land we don't have the infrastructure in the road system to accommodate 1784 03:00:45,880 --> 03:00:51,260 it also I do want to point out that in the original traffic report the neighbors had 1785 03:00:51,260 --> 03:00:58,640 to point out number of errors in that traffic report so there's that and also when the bar 1786 03:00:58,640 --> 03:01:04,000 was put down on Corbin Road that was because there was a death on that road in terms of 1787 03:01:04,000 --> 03:01:13,240 the flooding that happens thank you Miss Henry I have one little question just since you 1788 03:01:13,240 --> 03:01:19,040 mentioned that it's obviously been a long process that you mentioned that there had 1789 03:01:19,040 --> 03:01:26,360 been some misconstrued things errors in the traffic report that you had seen from what 1790 03:01:26,360 --> 03:01:33,500 you've seen now do you see any existing discrepancies that I haven't looked at the current traffic 1791 03:01:33,500 --> 03:01:38,640 report only what I heard today so the original traffic report was conflating old Bonnie Bray 1792 03:01:38,640 --> 03:01:42,640 and new Bonnie Bray and not talking about that there was the new construction going 1793 03:01:42,640 --> 03:01:47,480 on and they were talking about how Corbin was going to intersect with Bonnie Bray and 1794 03:01:47,480 --> 03:01:52,760 talking about how Bonnie Bray was this nice new four-lane road and it just isn't it's 1795 03:01:52,760 --> 03:01:59,000 a 22-foot golf cart path as far as I'm concerned and so we were talking about the traffic flow 1796 03:01:59,000 --> 03:02:03,840 having to go around to new Bonnie Bray and that being very problematic but that wasn't 1797 03:02:03,840 --> 03:02:08,640 on the original plan that the traffic would and there was a stop sign missing okay thank 1798 03:02:08,640 --> 03:02:15,720 you for that it just helps me understand the history next I have a card from Doug Henry 1799 03:02:15,720 --> 03:02:28,360 welcome to come down state your name and address and you'll have four minutes hi I'm Doug Henry 1800 03:02:28,360 --> 03:02:36,440 at 212 Goodson Way my property backs up to this from Corbin Road I am thrilled most of 1801 03:02:36,440 --> 03:02:42,160 you read my email which never happens for my students so yay so in fact I've been deleting 1802 03:02:42,160 --> 03:02:47,960 most of what I had originally proposed to say yeah and most of what I'll talk about 1803 03:02:47,960 --> 03:02:55,440 is really site B which is and sort of the magic math of density calculations that seems 1804 03:02:55,440 --> 03:03:03,680 to be going on yeah I will also point out one thing Jackson Chang whose property would 1805 03:03:03,680 --> 03:03:10,040 have to be taken along the south group on the wrong the south side of Corbin Road just 1806 03:03:10,040 --> 03:03:14,560 last night the Chang family said they really do not want to sell and no one has even approached 1807 03:03:14,560 --> 03:03:20,040 them and so I do want to point out that this zoning change is predicated on the city acquiring 1808 03:03:20,040 --> 03:03:27,600 land to the south that the property owners of that land are rejecting right so I think 1809 03:03:27,600 --> 03:03:32,400 the one thing I will add to the discussions that have already happened is to call attention 1810 03:03:32,400 --> 03:03:38,740 to in the 2040 plan what's called the preferred growth concept and the future land use map 1811 03:03:38,740 --> 03:03:46,440 the flume that calls for compact growth in some areas and single-family housing and bigger 1812 03:03:46,440 --> 03:03:51,880 density in others and I'm not going to try to put this up but this was in an email that 1813 03:03:51,880 --> 03:03:56,920 I had sent you all I just want to point out our neighborhood is really far outside of 1814 03:03:56,920 --> 03:04:04,720 any of the areas that are designated for compact development we support you know smart high 1815 03:04:04,720 --> 03:04:10,560 density housing in Denton's urban core please put that there in the designated focus areas 1816 03:04:10,560 --> 03:04:17,560 that have infrastructure to support it you know high density housing great idea in areas 1817 03:04:17,560 --> 03:04:21,720 where people can park their cars and walk to shops or restaurants where they can access 1818 03:04:21,720 --> 03:04:26,720 public transportation I just want to point out our neighborhood is far outside of any 1819 03:04:26,720 --> 03:04:33,360 of that yeah we are not on any bus line there's no grocery store at all in southwest Denton 1820 03:04:33,360 --> 03:04:37,480 so these are not people that would be able to bike or walk to work we're talking about 1821 03:04:37,480 --> 03:04:44,240 creating 800 to 1000 units of commuters right of car commuters in the middle of a low density 1822 03:04:44,240 --> 03:04:49,400 suburban neighborhood and so we just simply don't have the infrastructure to support this 1823 03:04:49,400 --> 03:04:54,760 so please you know our reading of the Denton development codes and the 2040 plan is that 1824 03:04:54,760 --> 03:05:00,640 these are meant to protect neighborhoods like ours because we are all on one to seven acre 1825 03:05:00,640 --> 03:05:06,520 lots we have been blessed to be on one to seven acre lots it's just very difficult to 1826 03:05:06,520 --> 03:05:12,280 see how an 800 or 1000 unit apartment complex in the middle of this can sort of complement 1827 03:05:12,280 --> 03:05:22,880 the existing prevailing prevailing character of our neighborhood so thank you thank you 1828 03:05:22,880 --> 03:05:29,560 that is the last card that I had to speak but this is a public hearing so if you would 1829 03:05:29,560 --> 03:05:34,000 like to speak and you're not one of the four volunteers from the denier neighborhood association 1830 03:05:34,000 --> 03:05:40,400 that that Kyle spoke for you're welcome to share any additional thoughts or different 1831 03:05:40,400 --> 03:05:53,220 thoughts than what you've heard if you if you would like to yeah I see one okay come 1832 03:05:53,220 --> 03:06:19,560 on down just my name is Bennett Jenkins Tanner and I live on Westridge Street in Denton Texas 1833 03:06:19,560 --> 03:06:26,720 and I have been following along with the Corbin gone to the meetings listened never really 1834 03:06:26,720 --> 03:06:35,160 said anything but I do know about floodplains and I own property indicator that sets on 1835 03:06:35,160 --> 03:06:42,400 floodplains you cannot do anything with those floodplains you can try to put a road through 1836 03:06:42,400 --> 03:06:49,240 there but the first really big flood you have is going to take that road with it and we've 1837 03:06:49,240 --> 03:06:55,680 had this problem because it took out a bridge on one of the roads because I live on one 1838 03:06:55,680 --> 03:07:03,880 way in one way out at one time there was no way out because both ends of the roads were 1839 03:07:03,880 --> 03:07:13,680 taken out so you know to to jump ahead and say hey we'll just go ahead and buy this property 1840 03:07:13,680 --> 03:07:19,880 will allow this development and I'm not against development but not in an area where it doesn't 1841 03:07:19,880 --> 03:07:26,640 work and it doesn't work over where these guys live on Corbin Road it's going to be 1842 03:07:26,640 --> 03:07:36,280 such an out of it'll be an eyesore my neighborhood Dina is going to be going through the same 1843 03:07:36,280 --> 03:07:45,720 problem with a developer who wants to build directly behind my home in a historic area 1844 03:07:45,720 --> 03:07:52,400 with what he calls affordable living homes so these people can buy these homes for two 1845 03:07:52,400 --> 03:08:01,120 hundred fifty thousand dollars and then eventually live there amongst all these historic homes 1846 03:08:01,120 --> 03:08:07,480 and these homes are historic too they've been there a long time but to put something that 1847 03:08:07,480 --> 03:08:16,680 I call an eyesore in the middle of these communities isn't doing Denton a very good you know it's 1848 03:08:16,680 --> 03:08:21,800 just not making them look like they're working with the communities I don't want to become 1849 03:08:21,800 --> 03:08:29,320 a Dallas and I feel since I've lived here Denton is slowly becoming a Dallas it's build 1850 03:08:29,320 --> 03:08:36,520 build build let's see how many people we can cram into excuse me into 1600 square feet 1851 03:08:36,520 --> 03:08:43,080 into less than a quarter of an acre this development would be better off with a bigger acreage 1852 03:08:43,080 --> 03:08:52,160 with a home that fits into their community rather than townhouses apartment complexes 1853 03:08:52,160 --> 03:08:57,440 that are going to become an eyesore and they're going to be flooded out big time thank you 1854 03:08:57,440 --> 03:09:12,120 not seeing anyone else making any sudden movements I will note that our hearing process offers 1855 03:09:12,120 --> 03:09:21,040 the opportunity if the applicant wishes to give a rebuttal I think it's up to two minutes 1856 03:09:21,040 --> 03:09:27,640 I believe I think it's a two minute limit and the stipulation though is that if you do take that 1857 03:09:27,640 --> 03:09:33,840 opportunity then members of the public who did speak in the public hearing prior can 1858 03:09:33,840 --> 03:09:39,520 have one minute to speak just on the rebuttal items not on rehashing everything so but it's 1859 03:09:39,520 --> 03:09:54,960 up to you whether you'd like to take that opportunity or not two minutes yes you'll 1860 03:09:54,960 --> 03:10:04,320 have two minutes starting okay all right so some of the comments that were made density 1861 03:10:04,320 --> 03:10:09,240 is higher than what was shown and I just just looking at that again just if you look at 1862 03:10:09,240 --> 03:10:13,200 each of those different parcels some of them if you look at them from net or grow some 1863 03:10:13,200 --> 03:10:19,180 of them range from 18 units an acre down to 12 units an acre maybe up to 20 if you look 1864 03:10:19,180 --> 03:10:24,080 down that way but the land use plan has it moderate residential and when they're making 1865 03:10:24,080 --> 03:10:28,040 land use assumptions for all their planning purposes they're looking at that entire polygon 1866 03:10:28,040 --> 03:10:32,160 at five to twelve units an acre so they use that for their cities use that for their planning 1867 03:10:32,160 --> 03:10:36,560 tools I don't think we're getting ahead I think there's still a lot of work that has 1868 03:10:36,560 --> 03:10:41,280 to be done after zoning and there's a significant investment of resources made to be able to 1869 03:10:41,280 --> 03:10:45,760 answer the questions that come after zoning when it comes to design we look at grading 1870 03:10:45,760 --> 03:10:51,700 we look at the you know the how large the utilities need to be how elevated Corbin Road 1871 03:10:51,700 --> 03:10:55,600 needs to be to cross the floodplain so that it doesn't drain us out we also have to do 1872 03:10:55,600 --> 03:10:59,800 a downstream assessment so when we're looking at the flooding conditions we might even have 1873 03:10:59,800 --> 03:11:03,640 to have detention on these properties which would also reduce the density there's a lot 1874 03:11:03,640 --> 03:11:07,440 more engineering work that has to happen but zoning is the first step it's the first step 1875 03:11:07,440 --> 03:11:13,280 to be able to say to the development community or to our client rather that okay I will go 1876 03:11:13,280 --> 03:11:18,000 ahead and invest this amount of you know resources into this to be able to look at this in more 1877 03:11:18,000 --> 03:11:22,100 detail to be work work through that with the city in no way are we binding the city to 1878 03:11:22,100 --> 03:11:27,040 any agreement in the zoning condition or the zoning request what we are doing is saying 1879 03:11:27,040 --> 03:11:32,160 we're going to work together in a in collaborative spirit of who's participating in one will 1880 03:11:32,160 --> 03:11:37,440 we maintain it maybe we will could be likely but both parties will have to agree to work 1881 03:11:37,440 --> 03:11:41,720 on those the parks agreement the developers agreement for the roadway so a lot of that 1882 03:11:41,720 --> 03:11:44,920 still has to be done and we can't do that until we do our engineering and we're not 1883 03:11:44,920 --> 03:11:48,680 going to our engineering until we get zoning so all of that to be said it's done prematurely 1884 03:11:48,680 --> 03:11:53,720 is incorrect it is just the first step into doing that this is a long road it'll be probably 1885 03:11:53,720 --> 03:12:00,640 three years before we're doing any breaking of ground okay thank you thank you now the 1886 03:12:00,640 --> 03:12:06,160 members of the public who had spoken previously you don't have to come down again if you heard 1887 03:12:06,160 --> 03:12:10,160 something that you would like to respond to you would have a one minute time limit and 1888 03:12:10,160 --> 03:12:16,980 I ask that you keep your comments focused on the subject matter that was in the rebuttal 1889 03:12:16,980 --> 03:12:24,960 so the phasing of the process as well as the density and the infrastructure regarding the 1890 03:12:24,960 --> 03:12:28,840 infrastructure again part of my concern is the widening of Corbin whether that's part 1891 03:12:28,840 --> 03:12:34,560 city part developer whomever that's going to either imminent domain mr. Chang's property 1892 03:12:34,560 --> 03:12:38,960 on the south or several of our properties on the north or perhaps both because they 1893 03:12:38,960 --> 03:12:44,960 have to remove the property lines so I don't have a comment but a question but can are 1894 03:12:44,960 --> 03:12:49,680 there certain guidelines for the city imminent domaining to aid a private development project 1895 03:12:49,680 --> 03:12:55,040 to give access to their community because I know that's a concern for several of us 1896 03:12:55,040 --> 03:12:59,280 is we're going to lose 35 feet of our backyard is what we've heard or mr. Chang will lose 1897 03:12:59,280 --> 03:13:03,480 more or we'll both lose a big chunk and that's significant to us so how does that relate 1898 03:13:03,480 --> 03:13:06,880 to this I don't understand that portion of it yeah thank you I think we'll make sure 1899 03:13:06,880 --> 03:13:13,140 to get an answer to that from staff after after the public hearing thank you anybody 1900 03:13:13,140 --> 03:13:25,520 else I see I see too it's good sorry I just I want to address the timeline so I actually 1901 03:13:25,520 --> 03:13:32,440 I didn't move into my my residence until January of 2023 but I attended the first meeting on 1902 03:13:32,440 --> 03:13:37,160 the 17th and if I recall looking at some of the documents the original plan to break ground 1903 03:13:37,160 --> 03:13:41,840 was 2025 that's whenever they were wanting to start to say that is something that's new 1904 03:13:41,840 --> 03:13:46,400 on that's not the case and the other reason why I say that is because I've read through 1905 03:13:46,400 --> 03:13:52,440 every single document this is a nice middle I've read through the comments if you look 1906 03:13:52,440 --> 03:13:56,320 at the document in front of you that I provided you'll see that there's a right of way that 1907 03:13:56,320 --> 03:14:01,680 is incorrect the right of way should be 110 feet it's not a hundred and forty feet so 1908 03:14:01,680 --> 03:14:07,200 throughout this process it's my opinion it has been very sloppy not attention to details 1909 03:14:07,200 --> 03:14:12,440 and that's one of the things that's concerning is that that's what will continue forward 1910 03:14:12,440 --> 03:14:28,640 thank you mr. Watts you can have one minute thank you excuse me and I agree with the applicant 1911 03:14:28,640 --> 03:14:33,720 there are many many things that have to be done after zoning is achieved you've got plotting 1912 03:14:33,720 --> 03:14:37,520 and they all happened before plotting because you have to get your civils in you have to 1913 03:14:37,520 --> 03:14:42,640 get all those things in that's why I made the recommendation about having the agreement 1914 03:14:42,640 --> 03:14:47,960 of the dedication and the development agreement because they have to have that before final 1915 03:14:47,960 --> 03:14:53,040 plat and before final plat you have to have a lot of those engineering civil plans done 1916 03:14:53,040 --> 03:14:57,600 and a lot of the infrastructure and all that so it would only make sense that why would 1917 03:14:57,600 --> 03:15:03,480 you spend money moving forward you have to have that agreement first and I don't think 1918 03:15:03,480 --> 03:15:09,160 it's going to take that long to get that or somebody just says well we're not ready to 1919 03:15:09,160 --> 03:15:14,160 negotiate with that right now so it's not being about anti applicant or anything like 1920 03:15:14,160 --> 03:15:19,560 that it's just make sure that everything done is done in an orderly process so that maximizes 1921 03:15:19,560 --> 03:15:24,040 the expenses in the time of everybody involved the applicant and city staff and y'all's 1922 03:15:24,040 --> 03:15:35,240 time as well thank you okay seeing nobody else interested on on the rebuttal I will 1923 03:15:35,240 --> 03:15:49,560 close the public hearing at this time and Commissioner Dyer am I allowed to ask Mr. 1924 03:15:49,560 --> 03:15:55,280 Eaton a question yeah yeah that's fine Mr. Eaton I have a question since you're kind 1925 03:15:55,280 --> 03:16:05,400 of the spokesperson for the community looking at their plan if track B remained are two 1926 03:16:05,400 --> 03:16:14,120 and A and C remain or got approved for the proposed of PDMN like would that be acceptable 1927 03:16:14,120 --> 03:16:19,520 to your community if you're putting like let's say half acre lots on track B where at least 1928 03:16:19,520 --> 03:16:26,680 there's a more sensible flow from your one to seven acres to half acres to then as you 1929 03:16:26,680 --> 03:16:31,440 get closer to 35 that gets us closer so if I can speak to that point and I think it's 1930 03:16:31,440 --> 03:16:36,160 the the document that I provided you is very important there are no overlays as to what 1931 03:16:36,160 --> 03:16:41,380 can be put on ANC so that's why I wanted to point out the acceptable uses are not there 1932 03:16:41,380 --> 03:16:47,120 so it is possible that the developer the owner can sell the property the next owner is not 1933 03:16:47,120 --> 03:16:52,920 they're not held to the promises and so retail can go there and my question is looking at 1934 03:16:52,920 --> 03:17:00,280 the schematics of I-35 unless they have changed the schematics of I-35 recently the way that 1935 03:17:00,280 --> 03:17:05,400 you get to Corbin Road is you actually exit vintage you exit vintage you're gonna have 1936 03:17:05,400 --> 03:17:08,880 to go through whatever intersection they have there then you can hit the frontage road and 1937 03:17:08,880 --> 03:17:14,680 go to Corbin the way you leave Corbin is you turn onto the frontage road and then you get 1938 03:17:14,680 --> 03:17:19,100 on the interstate somewhere closer that's next to the gas well that's on the road the 1939 03:17:19,100 --> 03:17:24,480 gas well the trailer that's how you get on that's how you get on to northbound there 1940 03:17:24,480 --> 03:17:30,480 is not a way to go south on Corbin Road it the city go back to February I believe it's 1941 03:17:30,480 --> 03:17:36,160 February 10th of 2011 City Council had a meeting and they brought Teague nail and Perkins in 1942 03:17:36,160 --> 03:17:40,960 they did a research and they said can we get across and they said unfortunately can't 1943 03:17:40,960 --> 03:17:46,680 because 35 is too low we'd have to raise Corbin out of a floodplain if we did that trucks 1944 03:17:46,680 --> 03:17:51,200 could not go underneath not possible only way we can do that was we have to go over 1945 03:17:51,200 --> 03:17:56,360 Corbin Road or we have to go over the interstate so my point being if commercial is put there 1946 03:17:56,360 --> 03:18:03,120 it's gonna force commercial back either into the Dean neighborhood to go north or south 1947 03:18:03,120 --> 03:18:08,480 on Bonnie Bray either the airport road or to vintage road or they're gonna have to go 1948 03:18:08,480 --> 03:18:16,040 down 35 and make a u-turn and turn around there's there's no it's either all or nothing 1949 03:18:16,040 --> 03:18:20,400 I'm saying that if that's going to be a case there needs to be some other overlay that 1950 03:18:20,400 --> 03:18:25,560 limits the amount that is on A and C have you guys have has your community spoken with 1951 03:18:25,560 --> 03:18:37,920 tax dot on the proposed frontage roads we have not no okay thank you any other questions 1952 03:18:37,920 --> 03:18:45,680 with staff discussion or we can have a motion and then discuss it's the more typical way 1953 03:18:45,680 --> 03:18:54,960 but it hasn't been how we did it in the past I guess I have a question so I know so there 1954 03:18:54,960 --> 03:19:00,480 was some discussion about tabling this what so we can table this we can make a motion 1955 03:19:00,480 --> 03:19:07,720 to approve deny so as noted in your staff write-up and has the options if the commission 1956 03:19:07,720 --> 03:19:14,120 were desiring to continue this item to a date certain in the future then staff would ask 1957 03:19:14,120 --> 03:19:18,040 that you let us know what additional information you believe that you need in order to be able 1958 03:19:18,040 --> 03:19:30,320 to render a decision I have a question probably for Gary if he's still here on the parks maintenance 1959 03:19:30,320 --> 03:19:41,360 and that whole thing you know if I if I jump in my DeLorean and go forward sixty years 1960 03:19:41,360 --> 03:19:49,640 into the future I can imagine that a large you know confluence stream park with all of 1961 03:19:49,640 --> 03:19:55,200 hunter coal development and that sort of thing around would have some value I don't understand 1962 03:19:55,200 --> 03:20:01,320 what sort of maintenance has to happen in a floodplain like this if you did get it in 1963 03:20:01,320 --> 03:20:06,640 the next two years but there wasn't funding to develop it what kind of strain that puts 1964 03:20:06,640 --> 03:20:12,040 on the budget and capacity of staff can you speak to that sure Gary pack and director 1965 03:20:12,040 --> 03:20:16,440 parks and recreation so regarding the floodplain maintenance we have a lot of properties in 1966 03:20:16,440 --> 03:20:23,680 a floodplain some flood often some not as much clear is in the floodplain if it gets a lot 1967 03:20:23,680 --> 03:20:28,040 of rain we shut down just because it doesn't dry quick enough in regards to something like 1968 03:20:28,040 --> 03:20:32,120 this it would be minimal development we can't put structures in there so there wouldn't 1969 03:20:32,120 --> 03:20:38,520 be a playground restrooms any type of building structure it would be general open space so 1970 03:20:38,520 --> 03:20:46,760 at best a trail wildlife area viewing maybe this golf course something of that nature 1971 03:20:46,760 --> 03:20:53,040 it could be just left to preserve as a preserve and do very little maybe just mowing it once 1972 03:20:53,040 --> 03:20:59,040 or twice a year just to keep it down keep it low obviously we work around trees from 1973 03:20:59,040 --> 03:21:03,200 that perspective I know that was mentioned earlier when we're putting in trails so we 1974 03:21:03,200 --> 03:21:09,960 try not to disturb that privet is a challenge throughout the entire area we've tried to 1975 03:21:09,960 --> 03:21:15,000 eradicate it in a few areas that we've been working on a couple years it is very hardy 1976 03:21:15,000 --> 03:21:20,200 and very challenging and very time consuming so that's a that's a general challenge as 1977 03:21:20,200 --> 03:21:26,520 a whole generally we don't get a lot into the planning process because if we do a lot 1978 03:21:26,520 --> 03:21:31,280 of planning and then the project doesn't move forward then we're kind of you know using 1979 03:21:31,280 --> 03:21:36,320 city resources that that's not very about not successful at that point in time so we 1980 03:21:36,320 --> 03:21:40,880 typically handle that after the next phase through a developer agreement and then have 1981 03:21:40,880 --> 03:21:45,760 our public engagement and discussions at that point okay thank you commissioner Petrone 1982 03:21:45,760 --> 03:21:58,800 I'm not sure if it's permissible but there's a mention of conversations with text dot Mr. 1983 03:21:58,800 --> 03:22:03,240 Henry I believe I saw you raise your hand I didn't know if you had additional information 1984 03:22:03,240 --> 03:22:11,800 that you wanted to share sorry just for the the posterity of the video you can imagine 1985 03:22:11,800 --> 03:22:18,440 that your your grandchildren in 50 years will come back and watch this the question was 1986 03:22:18,440 --> 03:22:26,240 have any of us talk to text dot and yeah I had a conversation with text dot about a year 1987 03:22:26,240 --> 03:22:31,120 that was part of the time when we found out because the city's initial plat of this are 1988 03:22:31,120 --> 03:22:36,720 the developers concept plan of this showed that Corbin Road would go through and it looked 1989 03:22:36,720 --> 03:22:43,080 like it could be even southbound access to I-35W and that was when we found out no it 1990 03:22:43,080 --> 03:22:47,840 essentially was going to be a T in the road and that's at the same time that the city 1991 03:22:47,840 --> 03:22:53,400 we we all found out that the city had Angie is going to yell at me for not getting the 1992 03:22:53,400 --> 03:23:00,120 words correctly that the city had sort of replatted or rezoned Corbin Road and none 1993 03:23:00,120 --> 03:23:05,480 of us knew about it right it sort of caught all all of us off guard at the time and so 1994 03:23:05,480 --> 03:23:10,920 the city's initial plan for redoing Corbin Road showed that it would go through to I-35 1995 03:23:10,920 --> 03:23:15,760 south and so it was a conversation with text dot that showed no in fact we're talking about 1996 03:23:15,760 --> 03:23:28,800 a T in the road to the to the northbound frontage road any other questions okay I have one more 1997 03:23:28,800 --> 03:23:46,200 question for staff it almost has escaped my brain so I'm grabbing it ah yes thank you 1998 03:23:46,200 --> 03:23:51,400 Angie I recall and I think it was myself although it may have been somebody else on the commission 1999 03:23:51,400 --> 03:23:58,960 at the time when we went through the 2040 plan adoption process we we noted the change 2000 03:23:58,960 --> 03:24:05,560 of this area from I don't remember exactly what the the previous future land use was 2001 03:24:05,560 --> 03:24:15,320 in the 2030 map up to this moderate residential my recollection is that when we asked that 2002 03:24:15,320 --> 03:24:20,800 the the response was something like well with the infrastructure improvements along Bonnie 2003 03:24:20,800 --> 03:24:27,480 Bray we think that in the longer term future development of this area would make sense 2004 03:24:27,480 --> 03:24:34,560 toward that can you help remind me of that process and and what staff's thinking was 2005 03:24:34,560 --> 03:24:43,200 when we changed this to moderate residential I can only speak very generally to it and 2006 03:24:43,200 --> 03:24:49,120 the reason being is I happen to join right after the new comprehensive plan was adopted 2007 03:24:49,120 --> 03:24:56,440 so I wasn't fortunate to sit on those conversations Tina was and she looks like she has some thoughts 2008 03:24:56,440 --> 03:25:02,960 thanks Angie yes I was trying to think back to that time period so I do remember us making 2009 03:25:02,960 --> 03:25:08,800 changes to the future land use map in this area I'm trying to think back to the impetus 2010 03:25:08,800 --> 03:25:13,720 for that other than probably notice knowing some of the other changes that were happening 2011 03:25:13,720 --> 03:25:20,560 within the area knowing that there could potentially be development interest for this property 2012 03:25:20,560 --> 03:25:25,120 because there were there were a few different areas within the comp plan that I know we 2013 03:25:25,120 --> 03:25:30,600 had made some changes to recognizing where we were anticipating additional development 2014 03:25:30,600 --> 03:25:34,100 potentially occurring in the northeast Denton was one area where we made that change but 2015 03:25:34,100 --> 03:25:38,000 but I believe that was some of the reasoning also in this area because the other thing 2016 03:25:38,000 --> 03:25:45,000 we know is as the southwest part of the city continues to evolve and develop particularly 2017 03:25:45,000 --> 03:25:49,560 given with the development interest happening with the hunter landmark development and also 2018 03:25:49,560 --> 03:25:55,160 the coal development there will continue to be interest within this area couple that also 2019 03:25:55,160 --> 03:26:02,560 with plan text out improvements that we know are happening so you know all of those findings 2020 03:26:02,560 --> 03:26:06,920 or or conversations related to what's all happening in the area and where we're seeing 2021 03:26:06,920 --> 03:26:11,240 the trends in the development have a tendency to influence decisions that we make regarding 2022 03:26:11,240 --> 03:26:25,400 updates to the plan thank you Commissioner product career thank you because there's a 2023 03:26:25,400 --> 03:26:32,160 lot of information here and I keep going back and forth and trying to understand what everybody's 2024 03:26:32,160 --> 03:26:38,400 you know what you all are explaining I'm listening to the applicant based on what I know of my 2025 03:26:38,400 --> 03:26:45,880 role as a commissioner for PNZ is to look at the appropriateness of land use that's 2026 03:26:45,880 --> 03:26:52,860 what I was trained on that's what I'm trying to do here without without putting too much 2027 03:26:52,860 --> 03:27:01,440 emphasis on other external factors I did like I said I walked the property with Mr. Eaton 2028 03:27:01,440 --> 03:27:06,080 if it floods with one and a half inches of rain I think that's a big concern but everything 2029 03:27:06,080 --> 03:27:09,680 that I'm listening to is and I think part of the reason why it's so hard at least for 2030 03:27:09,680 --> 03:27:15,600 me I won't speak for everyone else is that everything seems to not follow a progression 2031 03:27:15,600 --> 03:27:20,680 that is likely in my mind right that we think that so many other things have to be fall 2032 03:27:20,680 --> 03:27:24,840 in order first we should know how much to raise and who's going to pay for what and 2033 03:27:24,840 --> 03:27:28,640 who's going to keep the maintenance of what and you know are we going to accept the land 2034 03:27:28,640 --> 03:27:36,200 how's council going to vote like there's so many things that are basically pending right 2035 03:27:36,200 --> 03:27:43,720 what I keep going back to is I don't necessarily think that that the gift to the city with 2036 03:27:43,720 --> 03:27:49,480 the land is a big deal if council later on wants to deny it they can vote against it 2037 03:27:49,480 --> 03:27:56,240 they don't have to accept it they don't have to allocate money to keep it right but the 2038 03:27:56,240 --> 03:28:00,300 applicant does have the ownership of the land so if they want to develop it what I'm looking 2039 03:28:00,300 --> 03:28:06,040 at is tracked track a b and c you know d and e I'm going to put to the side but a b and 2040 03:28:06,040 --> 03:28:12,180 c I see the biggest concern being with b right and that you know and I and what I'm listening 2041 03:28:12,180 --> 03:28:19,320 to on the applicant side is man we went from 400 to 300 we've reduced it now we're at 75% 2042 03:28:19,320 --> 03:28:24,400 you know of units that we've taken away and so now we're at 150 and even that is too dense 2043 03:28:24,400 --> 03:28:30,440 to what the neighbors want which completely understandable. 2044 03:28:30,440 --> 03:28:35,440 I think because there are so many other questions that I have I think someone else listed it 2045 03:28:35,440 --> 03:28:42,360 before they said you know a lot of what's not considered floodplain is floodplain because 2046 03:28:42,360 --> 03:28:46,560 I see it you know it's it's flooding it's flooding my yard it's flooding when it rains 2047 03:28:46,560 --> 03:28:52,400 an inch and a half and so I think for me where I'm where I'm at right now I don't I don't 2048 03:28:52,400 --> 03:28:58,600 know that I have enough information to make an educated decision right now to move forward 2049 03:28:58,600 --> 03:29:06,100 with this I would like to see a more current floodplain map that would include a more recent 2050 03:29:06,100 --> 03:29:13,960 assessment of what land is is what I would like to see the actual land that is going 2051 03:29:13,960 --> 03:29:18,960 to be used where all of this is going to be developed and not considered like you like 2052 03:29:18,960 --> 03:29:23,880 you all said all 196 you know however many acres but just the ones that are going to 2053 03:29:23,880 --> 03:29:28,320 be developed to see how much density is there because I'm all for affordable housing I'm 2054 03:29:28,320 --> 03:29:36,840 all for bringing in diversified housing options to the city of Denton but that doesn't always 2055 03:29:36,840 --> 03:29:44,080 mean super high dense for anyone it's not it's not appropriate for it for everyone because 2056 03:29:44,080 --> 03:29:48,160 I think the roads will come I think all of that will like you said you know you are much 2057 03:29:48,160 --> 03:29:52,360 smarter than I am you'll have a process of how this is supposed to work but I think where 2058 03:29:52,360 --> 03:29:58,720 I'm at right now I just don't have enough information although I do want to say like 2059 03:29:58,720 --> 03:30:02,280 I said to the applicant I see that you're moving forward and trying to listen to the 2060 03:30:02,280 --> 03:30:06,560 neighbors and so I think that maybe after a couple more meetings you know if we can 2061 03:30:06,560 --> 03:30:13,200 come back we can listen and see what else can happen but I think right now that's what 2062 03:30:13,200 --> 03:30:19,560 I'm trying to that's what I'm trying to understand but definitely density based on only the places 2063 03:30:19,560 --> 03:30:26,240 that are going to get developed a better understanding of the floodplains you know and possibly maybe 2064 03:30:26,240 --> 03:30:32,480 other options maybe not 150 units maybe you know that's twice as many as what's supposed 2065 03:30:32,480 --> 03:30:37,840 to be on there right now as its zone as as r2 they said approximately 70 units if you're 2066 03:30:37,840 --> 03:30:41,920 saying 150 that's twice as many and so maybe we can meet somewhere in the middle or y'all 2067 03:30:41,920 --> 03:30:46,080 can be somewhere in the middle not me but I think that that's where I'm at I do appreciate 2068 03:30:46,080 --> 03:30:55,360 all of the information like I said I think track A and C I'm not against what's being 2069 03:30:55,360 --> 03:31:00,880 proposed there I think that it makes a lot of sense because it's on I-35 especially if 2070 03:31:00,880 --> 03:31:04,040 text dot is gonna come and they're gonna have that frontage road and it's gonna tee up so 2071 03:31:04,040 --> 03:31:07,920 you don't even have to go down to where that bridge is because that would be very scary 2072 03:31:07,920 --> 03:31:11,480 you know so I think that there's a lot of potential here I just think that we're just 2073 03:31:11,480 --> 03:31:18,240 I am not personally ready to move forward and to approve this right now thank you thank 2074 03:31:18,240 --> 03:31:26,120 you before I call you Commissioner Dyer I'm just gonna ask for Mr. Rivera if you would 2075 03:31:26,120 --> 03:31:32,640 come down and there's been some discussion around the possibility of continuing or the 2076 03:31:32,640 --> 03:31:39,600 possibility of of reducing density just from a where you are in the process perspective 2077 03:31:39,600 --> 03:31:47,160 would you prefer a delay or rather have an up-down vote what's what's your your readiness 2078 03:31:47,160 --> 03:31:54,360 at this point well I appreciate the feedback so far and we've been very patient for four 2079 03:31:54,360 --> 03:31:59,680 years reducing density throughout that four-year period the floodplain maps are current the 2080 03:31:59,680 --> 03:32:06,280 ones we're showing those are the current ones on FEMA and you know downstream assessment 2081 03:32:06,280 --> 03:32:12,040 and all that would have to be studied and analyzed further but all that to be said we 2082 03:32:12,040 --> 03:32:17,200 have we feel like we have been accommodating throughout this four-year period and we would 2083 03:32:17,200 --> 03:32:25,720 appreciate a vote tonight okay thank you thank you Commissioner Dyer well first off I would 2084 03:32:25,720 --> 03:32:32,360 like to thank you can tell all the work that was put into this by city staff by McAdams 2085 03:32:32,360 --> 03:32:39,440 as a representative for the owner and by the citizens so I want to thank you all because 2086 03:32:39,440 --> 03:32:48,700 yes you provided us with a ton of information but how I look at this is it's a very clear 2087 03:32:48,700 --> 03:32:54,960 balance between an owner's property rights and the neighboring property rights as well 2088 03:32:54,960 --> 03:33:01,880 and it was very interesting to have in our workshop today talking about zoning regulations 2089 03:33:01,880 --> 03:33:08,640 and having a little background on voting and there was a few phrases in our in the presentation 2090 03:33:08,640 --> 03:33:14,600 that kind of struck with me that while you do owners have a right to do to the property 2091 03:33:14,600 --> 03:33:23,040 with what they want we as P&Z also have a right to and I wrote this down protect each 2092 03:33:23,040 --> 03:33:30,160 lot owners right to the reasonable use and enjoyment of their lot and I feel that right 2093 03:33:30,160 --> 03:33:39,520 now how this is when you're looking at in the future land use map that was supposed 2094 03:33:39,520 --> 03:33:46,800 to be moderate housing and this is not moderating moderate housing and there's usually a progression 2095 03:33:46,800 --> 03:33:55,400 and you don't necessarily have houses that are sitting on one to seven acres of land 2096 03:33:55,400 --> 03:34:03,520 up against townhouses even small single-family that could be you know five to six thousand 2097 03:34:03,520 --> 03:34:08,880 square foot lots and in the training they also talked about how these zones should be 2098 03:34:08,880 --> 03:34:17,600 compatible which is why I asked the question of Mr. Eaton if you left track B as the R2 2099 03:34:17,600 --> 03:34:23,560 where you can have a larger lot like at least a half an acre lot that's that would be a 2100 03:34:23,560 --> 03:34:33,400 nice transition you can build some nice houses on those lots and then I totally get and I'm 2101 03:34:33,400 --> 03:34:38,840 sorry I forgot your name from McAdams I apologize but when you talked about you know butting 2102 03:34:38,840 --> 03:34:46,200 up against the interstate there is a certain expectation of land use when you're up against 2103 03:34:46,200 --> 03:34:54,120 the interstate so maybe leaving that as you know what is proposed right now and trying 2104 03:34:54,120 --> 03:35:01,720 to find that balance between the property owners rights and the neighbors rights and 2105 03:35:01,720 --> 03:35:08,040 it also talked about the impact on public safety that was also addressed and I'm looking 2106 03:35:08,040 --> 03:35:17,200 at the road conditions and I understand that you know there's in what's proposed in the 2107 03:35:17,200 --> 03:35:24,600 overlays there are certain stipulations that A and C cannot be built and even B until you 2108 03:35:24,600 --> 03:35:32,160 know Corbin is extended to the east or the frontage roads are put in by TxDOT but you 2109 03:35:32,160 --> 03:35:41,880 still have to think about you know the access to that area you know we just had a major 2110 03:35:41,880 --> 03:35:47,640 traffic accident and all of those people had to get off at vintage what if that happens 2111 03:35:47,640 --> 03:35:51,540 later are they all going to be getting off now on Corbin if that happens on the north 2112 03:35:51,540 --> 03:35:57,360 bound and so you do kind of have to think about that stuff and then I also think about 2113 03:35:57,360 --> 03:36:03,760 the large financial investment by the city you know the financial investment in expanding 2114 03:36:03,760 --> 03:36:13,640 Corbin Road but also this donated land and what that financial investment so as the request 2115 03:36:13,640 --> 03:36:26,120 as the agenda item stands I think I will be a no vote on this one. 2116 03:36:26,120 --> 03:36:34,520 Yeah so I agree with everything both of you all said I do know that I have I have a lot 2117 03:36:34,520 --> 03:36:40,240 of trust and support that I know that staff whenever this road has to be built it's not 2118 03:36:40,240 --> 03:36:44,040 going to be a road that's going to flood out you know they'll build it the correct way 2119 03:36:44,040 --> 03:36:49,680 and make sure it's designed the correct way and the floodplain to reanalyze the floodplain 2120 03:36:49,680 --> 03:36:54,400 is a big engineering feat and costs a lot of money which is why you come and you talk 2121 03:36:54,400 --> 03:37:00,200 about zoning before before an applicant gets into all that so I don't really have issues 2122 03:37:00,200 --> 03:37:04,840 with that I know that staff will make sure it's it's designed and the way it should 2123 03:37:04,840 --> 03:37:12,440 be but I to your point I think it just doesn't seem like a good transition you have large 2124 03:37:12,440 --> 03:37:17,560 estate lots and then you're going to have town homes and an apartment complex and so 2125 03:37:17,560 --> 03:37:24,920 I could see something significantly less dense on track B and track A track C it seems like 2126 03:37:24,920 --> 03:37:28,940 that would be kind of reasonable to be be what's proposed because it is right there 2127 03:37:28,940 --> 03:37:35,840 on the highway but yeah I couldn't support this zoning change. 2128 03:37:35,840 --> 03:37:37,320 Commissioner Pedro. 2129 03:37:37,320 --> 03:37:42,920 Yes thank you and I also want to thank everyone for your presentation and addressing your 2130 03:37:42,920 --> 03:37:49,000 concerns with this proposal I too want to echo the statements that were given today 2131 03:37:49,000 --> 03:37:55,440 by the fellow commissioners I am definitely a champion of diversified housing I strongly 2132 03:37:55,440 --> 03:38:01,560 believe in the opportunity for somebody to enter into homeownership to build equity to 2133 03:38:01,560 --> 03:38:08,840 create that system of change I also believe that I do have some concerns regarding flooding 2134 03:38:08,840 --> 03:38:15,360 accessibility safety of the proposal as it's been presented. 2135 03:38:15,360 --> 03:38:19,760 With that being said I think it's been a really good idea to see if it would be an opportunity 2136 03:38:19,760 --> 03:38:26,460 to meet in the middle specifically with site B with site C and site A again their proximity 2137 03:38:26,460 --> 03:38:32,320 to I-35 I think that that would be appropriate as it's proposed but I still think that there 2138 03:38:32,320 --> 03:38:37,560 may be some opportunity to go back to the drawing board perhaps to see if there any 2139 03:38:37,560 --> 03:38:44,740 other plans any other concepts that we can consider for that I will be voting no. 2140 03:38:44,740 --> 03:38:53,160 Thank you I'll just offer a few thoughts and we'll see where this goes you know we on this 2141 03:38:53,160 --> 03:39:01,840 commission as I see it have a duty to assure our residents from where we are now to where 2142 03:39:01,840 --> 03:39:10,400 we will be right that means explaining when change is inevitable and how to direct it 2143 03:39:10,400 --> 03:39:15,400 that means explaining the tradeoffs and the choices that we realistically have with economic 2144 03:39:15,400 --> 03:39:22,760 pressures the way they are and that means also considering the needs of the future residents 2145 03:39:22,760 --> 03:39:30,120 who will shop at the at the you know commercial areas that we zone and live in the homes that 2146 03:39:30,120 --> 03:39:39,880 we allow to be built you know we need more of this sort of transfer of development rights 2147 03:39:39,880 --> 03:39:44,440 I know it sounds weird and it's this crazy term and you say well they're getting something 2148 03:39:44,440 --> 03:39:55,620 for free but we need it if our goal as a city is to preserve more land and have plentiful 2149 03:39:55,620 --> 03:40:02,360 green spaces that are easily accessible to our residents right but we don't need it in 2150 03:40:02,360 --> 03:40:09,960 a place that doesn't have any infrastructure right my my back of the napkin math as I look 2151 03:40:09,960 --> 03:40:14,840 here says okay this this project's probably about a 300 million project dollar project 2152 03:40:14,840 --> 03:40:22,960 as it's proposed if you allocated the entire portion of the property taxes from a project 2153 03:40:22,960 --> 03:40:28,500 like that that was built here that isn't already spoken for to pay for existing debt that we've 2154 03:40:28,500 --> 03:40:34,560 already borrowed then it would take over 30 years for it to pay back the cost to rebuild 2155 03:40:34,560 --> 03:40:40,080 Corbin Road right that doesn't pay for any of the police doesn't pay for any fire doesn't 2156 03:40:40,080 --> 03:40:50,380 pay for a new fire station down in this area etc. you know so but there are some real concerns 2157 03:40:50,380 --> 03:40:55,360 about the residents down in this area right it's it's a real problem to either get stuck 2158 03:40:55,360 --> 03:41:02,960 in your house or not be able to get home in a rainstorm fixing that however I'm not a 2159 03:41:02,960 --> 03:41:07,580 not a traffic engineer but I have a really hard time believing that the cheapest way 2160 03:41:07,580 --> 03:41:13,220 to fix that is a 20 million dollar road project right a gravel world works fine for the number 2161 03:41:13,220 --> 03:41:18,680 of people who are using this we need some culverts and some dump trucks of gravel to 2162 03:41:18,680 --> 03:41:24,960 raise it up a few feet in key locations right we got to go from people being stuck to be 2163 03:41:24,960 --> 03:41:30,420 people being able to get home when they have an emergency it's it's there's no near-term 2164 03:41:30,420 --> 03:41:40,100 need to shuffle 20,000 cars a day across this road you know if you haven't seen me before 2165 03:41:40,100 --> 03:41:48,680 I've made the the the foible in many people's minds of not being afraid to offend everybody 2166 03:41:48,680 --> 03:41:58,280 in the room but I try to do it nicely I have a great respect for our planning staff I do 2167 03:41:58,280 --> 03:42:06,360 not understand this recommendation at all I don't understand what changed obviously 2168 03:42:06,360 --> 03:42:14,200 there were it took a long time took four years so there was concern and then somehow that 2169 03:42:14,200 --> 03:42:23,880 went away when we see applications like this with a recommendation of approval it looks 2170 03:42:23,880 --> 03:42:35,360 to me like approval inflation I guess that's the current term de jour right and it starts 2171 03:42:35,360 --> 03:42:43,360 to look like the recommendation is does it satisfy these eight boxes on this checklist 2172 03:42:43,360 --> 03:42:52,880 as opposed to do we as planners professional opinion think that this is the optimal location 2173 03:42:52,880 --> 03:43:02,120 and time for this type of development in Denton and and I'll just point out that we've lost 2174 03:43:02,120 --> 03:43:07,840 a lot of trust from the public when they see staff recommends approval staff recommends 2175 03:43:07,840 --> 03:43:13,480 approval staff recommends approval I understand why the vast majority of projects that come 2176 03:43:13,480 --> 03:43:18,280 have an approval recommendation because most applicants won't come until they get that 2177 03:43:18,280 --> 03:43:29,680 right but this one just seems seems really weird I can't I can't understand why it's 2178 03:43:29,680 --> 03:43:37,000 that way because there are a dozen places I can think of near other floodplains where 2179 03:43:37,000 --> 03:43:46,920 this type of thing makes a ton more sense right so with that anybody have a motion or 2180 03:43:46,920 --> 03:43:55,660 other discussion commissioner Dyer I make a motion that we vote to deny the request 2181 03:43:55,660 --> 03:44:07,840 for this zoning change thank you commissioner Riggs second any other discussion or questions 2182 03:44:07,840 --> 03:44:12,360 can I just say something I I keep going back because I'm hearing what everybody's saying 2183 03:44:12,360 --> 03:44:20,880 and those are all the initial thoughts that I had as well but as as as P and Z commissioners 2184 03:44:20,880 --> 03:44:25,760 are we supposed to look at all of that or are we supposed to concentrate on the appropriateness 2185 03:44:25,760 --> 03:44:33,720 of land use and so if it's just the appropriateness of land use you know then including what you 2186 03:44:33,720 --> 03:44:41,320 said right then I tend to understand staffs recommendation a little bit better not to 2187 03:44:41,320 --> 03:44:47,440 say that I have all the information that I have to vote in favor of this but I keep going 2188 03:44:47,440 --> 03:44:51,760 back and so I think you know I for me I'm gonna request a little bit more guidance from 2189 03:44:51,760 --> 03:44:58,320 staff and to what the role is of this body because if it's taken into consideration all 2190 03:44:58,320 --> 03:45:02,680 of those things that that makes things a lot harder if we're looking at one thing and that's 2191 03:45:02,680 --> 03:45:09,760 the appropriateness of land use can this be you know rezoned to this you know especially 2192 03:45:09,760 --> 03:45:14,640 with all the conditions that were made then then I think we need to to be very clear on 2193 03:45:14,640 --> 03:45:19,600 that because it just seems like everybody's taking a lot more into consideration than 2194 03:45:19,600 --> 03:45:24,560 than what we're supposed to I would imagine that if we voted to deny and this is where 2195 03:45:24,560 --> 03:45:29,720 staff can give us guidance that the applicant could always come back with some more changes 2196 03:45:29,720 --> 03:45:39,960 or things so is there there are some timeline limitations in different different conditions 2197 03:45:39,960 --> 03:45:46,480 however the since we're a recommended recommending body ultimately those timelines are decided 2198 03:45:46,480 --> 03:45:52,560 by council's action on this and I guess I will point out also that depending on how 2199 03:45:52,560 --> 03:46:03,120 the percent opposition lines up at a council hearing whether we deny or not there may still 2200 03:46:03,120 --> 03:46:07,680 be a super majority requirement right I think they they announced that there was a super 2201 03:46:07,680 --> 03:46:13,640 majority requirement from this one for yeah for today I think it gets remeasured at the 2202 03:46:13,640 --> 03:46:18,640 date of the public hearing for council is that correct we will keep monitoring that 2203 03:46:18,640 --> 03:46:22,680 and we provide the most update information that we have based upon the written opposition 2204 03:46:22,680 --> 03:46:28,880 received prior to council thank you did you want me to address yeah if you could speak 2205 03:46:28,880 --> 03:46:38,040 to Commissioner product of Rio's concerns sure thing so with respect to the staff recommendation 2206 03:46:38,040 --> 03:46:43,480 keep in mind the Denton Development Code has a series of criteria that we factor into our 2207 03:46:43,480 --> 03:46:47,960 recommendations so that way we have consistency and application of all zoning requests that 2208 03:46:47,960 --> 03:46:57,480 are received and it's it tries to make a zoning process more objective in instead of subjective 2209 03:46:57,480 --> 03:47:02,500 if that makes sense so we have a series of criteria for general approval of all zoning 2210 03:47:02,500 --> 03:47:07,640 applications and then we also have another set of approval criteria for plan development 2211 03:47:07,640 --> 03:47:13,820 districts so that's what we use to base our recommendation on we have the Denton twenty 2212 03:47:13,820 --> 03:47:18,920 forty comprehensive plan as you know it's it's a thick document it has a wide variety 2213 03:47:18,920 --> 03:47:22,480 of recommendations that are in there tries to address a variety of different aspects 2214 03:47:22,480 --> 03:47:28,920 associated with the city how the city grows in and evolves over time and so that's factored 2215 03:47:28,920 --> 03:47:35,040 into our recommendation all of the technical information that's been spoken to this evening 2216 03:47:35,040 --> 03:47:39,640 regarding how roadways may be engineered how the floodplain is addressed what are the impacts 2217 03:47:39,640 --> 03:47:45,680 from a flooding standpoint as it's been discussed this evening those are all technical items 2218 03:47:45,680 --> 03:47:52,520 that are reviewed following consideration of zoning if a zoning request gets approved 2219 03:47:52,520 --> 03:47:56,960 then that tells the applicant okay here are the development rights that I have from a 2220 03:47:56,960 --> 03:48:00,680 land use standpoint and then they're able to design all of their construction plans 2221 03:48:00,680 --> 03:48:05,520 accordingly based upon the use that they're going to develop if their rezoning request 2222 03:48:05,520 --> 03:48:09,320 is not approved then ultimately you know that they're still left with the existing zoning 2223 03:48:09,320 --> 03:48:12,520 that's on the property they could choose to attempt to develop the property in accordance 2224 03:48:12,520 --> 03:48:16,600 with the existing zoning again designing all of their various technical documents associated 2225 03:48:16,600 --> 03:48:23,360 with whatever land use they pursue under the existing zoning so I realize it's a struggle 2226 03:48:23,360 --> 03:48:28,840 at times with a rezoning request because people are interested in having more of that technical 2227 03:48:28,840 --> 03:48:33,720 information that's available but this is when we talk about trusting our process that we 2228 03:48:33,720 --> 03:48:38,040 have in place based upon the development codes and the criteria manuals that we the city 2229 03:48:38,040 --> 03:48:42,960 of Denton have determined for doing quality development so that's a little bit more with 2230 03:48:42,960 --> 03:48:46,920 respect to the development process but just to circle back to our recommendation know 2231 03:48:46,920 --> 03:48:50,640 that our recommendation is based upon those approval criteria that are provided for in 2232 03:48:50,640 --> 03:48:57,120 the Denton development code in addition to any adopted policies that we the city have 2233 03:48:57,120 --> 03:49:01,160 not just the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan but also the parks master plan that's been 2234 03:49:01,160 --> 03:49:06,880 referred to this evening we also have an affordable housing toolkit policy that sometimes comes 2235 03:49:06,880 --> 03:49:13,520 into play with respect to of those policies we have a lot of things that we have to evaluate 2236 03:49:13,520 --> 03:49:18,800 what requests associated with as this as this group is well aware of so but hopefully that 2237 03:49:18,800 --> 03:49:24,380 helps address your question you know in terms of timelines for development applications 2238 03:49:24,380 --> 03:49:29,660 the planning and zoning commission is a recommending body so if a vote manages to transpire this 2239 03:49:29,660 --> 03:49:36,560 evening from this body then this zoning request would move forward to City Council and I forget 2240 03:49:36,560 --> 03:49:42,800 what what the date is May 6th so it would go to City Council on May 6th ultimately City 2241 03:49:42,800 --> 03:49:50,240 Council has the final decision authority on all zoning matters thank you Tina and I just 2242 03:49:50,240 --> 03:49:54,060 I want to clarify because I don't think I was very specific when I talked about sort 2243 03:49:54,060 --> 03:50:03,080 of this doesn't seem the right place my chief concern for that is actually that it doesn't 2244 03:50:03,080 --> 03:50:12,040 seem a particularly beneficial location for future residents to live at right if the choice 2245 03:50:12,040 --> 03:50:17,280 is here or nowhere because we have no new housing in the city then that's a completely 2246 03:50:17,280 --> 03:50:23,640 different problem right but but when I look at the the trade-offs that we ask people to 2247 03:50:23,640 --> 03:50:33,120 make as we transition from a smaller Denton to a bigger Denton and we get hopefully into 2248 03:50:33,120 --> 03:50:39,440 a better fiscally balanced situation where we can afford to repave our roads etc. part 2249 03:50:39,440 --> 03:50:44,640 of that trade-off that we're asking existing and future residents for is to understand 2250 03:50:44,640 --> 03:50:51,700 that allowing some people even if it's somebody else to live in higher density areas helps 2251 03:50:51,700 --> 03:50:57,820 keep all of our taxes low but to make that trade-off people need to see positive ends 2252 03:50:57,820 --> 03:51:02,160 of it as well they need to see that they're they're living near a neighborhood or in a 2253 03:51:02,160 --> 03:51:08,680 neighborhood they need to see that they're close by to amenities and shops and things 2254 03:51:08,680 --> 03:51:14,280 they want to go to places for their kids to play etc. and so that's really my my chief 2255 03:51:14,280 --> 03:51:24,320 concern from a location perspective is that I you know people would live here yes but 2256 03:51:24,320 --> 03:51:29,080 I trust that we have a lot of other develop a land that would have development interests 2257 03:51:29,080 --> 03:51:37,020 over the next 10 years between now and when 35 W frontage roads get finished so any other 2258 03:51:37,020 --> 03:51:45,400 comments I just want to follow up on that so my decision you know to your point it wasn't 2259 03:51:45,400 --> 03:51:50,160 based on the roadway needing to be widened or the for the floodplain it was strictly 2260 03:51:50,160 --> 03:51:55,760 just does this seem like compatible uses you know because that's essentially what we're 2261 03:51:55,760 --> 03:52:02,480 doing to Tina's point is we're just saying is this a use that is compatible and then 2262 03:52:02,480 --> 03:52:05,320 then they'll go through all of the engineering and they'll go through all the review and 2263 03:52:05,320 --> 03:52:10,640 they'll do all that and they may the applicant may decide it's it's too expensive to actually 2264 03:52:10,640 --> 03:52:14,440 go forward with it but you can't make that decision until you know whether or not you 2265 03:52:14,440 --> 03:52:21,280 have the zoning and so that's where I made my decision thank you and I just want to thank 2266 03:52:21,280 --> 03:52:29,360 the public you've been very patient after my initial asking you to not clap I understand 2267 03:52:29,360 --> 03:52:34,760 this takes a lot of time out of time you could otherwise spend with your families and friends 2268 03:52:34,760 --> 03:52:39,840 and I appreciate that you're you're doing this for the future of your city so thank 2269 03:52:39,840 --> 03:52:53,480 you with that I will call for a vote on the board this is a motion to deny 2270 03:52:53,480 --> 03:53:04,800 that motion passes five zero so we just have a couple closing matters but I'll give everyone 2271 03:53:04,800 --> 03:53:10,080 a couple minutes to filter out if you're not interested in the closing matters because 2272 03:53:10,080 --> 03:53:24,360 it creates some noise yeah yeah so just so everybody understands the process the recommendation 2273 03:53:24,360 --> 03:53:31,640 of a denial passed so that means that it will go forward to City Council on May 7th 6th 2274 03:53:31,640 --> 03:53:48,560 thank you so so stay stay aware and thank you 2275 03:53:48,560 --> 03:53:52,440 okay thank you all for all your hard work like this committee looks like a lot of not 2276 03:53:52,440 --> 03:54:03,600 fun and so I'm so impressed and proud thank you thank you okay that brings us to item 2277 03:54:03,600 --> 03:54:10,640 6a the planning and zoning committing Commission project matrix so I'll give the people an 2278 03:54:10,640 --> 03:54:20,160 opportunity to move down doesn't start getting loud until 80% of people okay I think I do 2279 03:54:20,160 --> 03:54:24,880 this good news is my report short compared to some evening so so no changes to the matrix 2280 03:54:24,880 --> 03:54:29,640 remain there were no additional requests from our last meeting so we left everything as 2281 03:54:29,640 --> 03:54:33,560 is I know we had the boot camp presentation this evening but we just have that general 2282 03:54:33,560 --> 03:54:38,760 placeholder item so be on the lookout for future boot camp presentations since your 2283 03:54:38,760 --> 03:54:43,760 last planning and zoning Commission meeting council has not taken action on any development 2284 03:54:43,760 --> 03:54:48,440 applications that you might have seen come through I will though bring to your attention 2285 03:54:48,440 --> 03:54:53,680 back on April 1st we did have a work session discussion with City Council regarding food 2286 03:54:53,680 --> 03:54:58,480 trucks and we will be bringing back some future zoning amendments related to that particular 2287 03:54:58,480 --> 03:55:04,760 as it relates to how we've been allowing them to operate as accessory use within the city 2288 03:55:04,760 --> 03:55:09,640 so this item has not been calendared just yet but know that that is on our work program 2289 03:55:09,640 --> 03:55:13,480 and so we'll be working on that I believe Council did not give direction on whether 2290 03:55:13,480 --> 03:55:18,720 it's a high medium or low priority but given that we have received direction from City 2291 03:55:18,720 --> 03:55:21,840 Council we will initiate a public hearing and bring that forth directly to the planning 2292 03:55:21,840 --> 03:55:25,800 and zoning Commission it is not something that would be going through the DC RC since 2293 03:55:25,800 --> 03:55:31,400 we have that direction and that concludes my report thank you okay any commissioners 2294 03:55:31,400 --> 03:55:43,040 have anything to put on the matrix no okay any concluding items item seven sorry Tina 2295 03:55:43,040 --> 03:55:49,840 for for the matrix no for concluding items concluding items yes I just want to compliment 2296 03:55:49,840 --> 03:55:54,320 the planning and zoning Commission regarding your consideration of this zoning case that 2297 03:55:54,320 --> 03:55:59,120 we had this evening that it was a challenging request and I know the comment was made previously 2298 03:55:59,120 --> 03:56:03,840 that that we're a new bot we're a new body or a new board the Commission itself is not 2299 03:56:03,840 --> 03:56:08,480 new from the Commission's been around for many many decades but I understand the people 2300 03:56:08,480 --> 03:56:13,680 on our Commission we've had some turnover and so you all some are relatively new to 2301 03:56:13,680 --> 03:56:17,800 your seats and your responsibilities but I want to commend you for your thoughtfulness 2302 03:56:17,800 --> 03:56:22,400 your consideration you asked some really good questions I also appreciate the fact that 2303 03:56:22,400 --> 03:56:27,520 you provided your remarks on the public record that is beneficial for us when we are communicating 2304 03:56:27,520 --> 03:56:33,160 to staff what you all were thinking behind your motion but also it's very beneficial 2305 03:56:33,160 --> 03:56:39,720 for the audience and the applicant to hear so just wanted to say thank you for that yeah 2306 03:56:39,720 --> 03:56:47,760 and thank you for me as well I know you know the the city is better because of all of you 2307 03:56:47,760 --> 03:56:52,440 and I just thank you for for bringing your your full attention and mind and reviewing 2308 03:56:52,440 --> 03:57:00,460 the content it really shows so thank you I would like to thank the city staff because 2309 03:57:00,460 --> 03:57:07,080 I you know I felt like I did a lot of planning just to understand this particular one and 2310 03:57:07,080 --> 03:57:12,880 I can't even imagine how many hours you guys put into getting everything ready so so thank 2311 03:57:12,880 --> 03:57:25,420 you I for one really appreciate that okay with no objection then I will adjourn our 2312 03:57:25,420 --> 03:57:30,720 meeting at 9 19 p.m.