Good afternoon and welcome to the planning and zoning work session at 5 o 2 p.m. Wednesday
April 9th. Our first item on our work session business is any citizen comments on the consent
agenda items. So this is items under number three under agenda on the third page. I'm
looking. I don't see any. Okay. Any the next item is clarification for items on the agenda
for the meeting. So any consent agenda questions on those three plots from the commission?
Any questions? Chair did just want to make sure the commission saw the updated corrected
plot that had been distributed to the commission. Part of the meeting. Yeah. Okay. Then we've
got a full work session. So let's move to the consent agenda. I'm sorry to the individual
consideration items. First thing is chair and vice chair. Were you going to speak to
that? I was just going to give an overview. It's a new commission. So we'll since Commissioner
Villarreal had to step down. We need a vice chair because I actually know that I will
be absent on our first meeting in June. So it comes with responsibility this year. So
but yeah. So we'll when we get into the session, we'll have have nominations and work through
that. Any questions procedurally on that? Okay. Item B for be FP 25 0011A. Sorry, Julie
to get you jumping and then sitting down. Good evening, Julie Wyatt, principal planner.
Let me pull up the presentation. Okay, this is a final plot for a zero lot line single
family residential development. The zoning was approved for this property at last fall.
They are now moving forward with the development process and that includes civil engineering
plans and plotting. They do still have some items that they do need to correct on the
civil engineering plans as well as the final plot. So staff is recommending denial. However,
we have no we have no objection to the extension to the April 23rd planning and zoning commission
meeting. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Seeing none. Thank you, Julie. Thank you. Next
for see FP 250014. Good evening, Commission. Bryce in Arsdale assistant planner. This is
the final plot for approximately 19 acres, just about 300 feet east of country club lane.
And this is a development that will be single family homes. The zoning was approved just
about a year ago in May of last year. While there are still some comments to work through
both on the final plot as well as civil engineering plans, staff has no objection to the requested
extension to date certain April 23rd. Any questions? Seeing none. Thank you, Bryce. Thank you. Next
item for D. Cameron Robertson, principal planner. This is a final plot for approximately 20
acre parcel. Northwest corner of Robson Ranch Road and I 35 West corridor. They still have
some civil engineering plan comments that they're working through as well as some comments
they're working through on their final plot. But stuff has no objection to their second
extension request to an April 23rd date. And I can stand for any questions. Seeing none.
Thank you. We'll see you at the meeting. And then for E. FP 25009A. Aaron. Good evening.
Aaron Stanley assistant planner. This is a final plot for three lots in the extraterritorial
jurisdiction just east of Hilltop Road and north of Hickory Hill Road. At this time,
they have not met criteria for approval and staff is recommending denial. But we have
no objection to their second extension request to a date certain April 23rd 2025. Any questions?
None. Okay. Thank you. And last but not least for F. FP 250015. Good evening, Chair. Member
of the Commission Angie Manglars development review manager. This is a final plot for D.C.
townhomes. It is a 3.8 acre tract of land generally situated north of East McKinney
Street. It is split zoned. There is some residential seven on the property as well as mixed use
neighborhood for the development of approximately 14 townhomes and a multifamily project. At
this time, they are not meeting our criteria for approval. But staff has no objection to
the first requested extension to a date certain of April 23rd. Happy to answer any questions.
And this one is the first extension? Yes. This is the first extension. Just out of curiosity,
you know, there were either two or three that were on their second extension this time.
If I don't ask, I'll feel bad for Jordan. That seems a little bit odd. Was there a strange
thing in the scheduling or less time or holidays or something? Or was it just how the applicants
didn't quite get everything in this time? It could be a combination of a few things.
In these cases tonight, you'll see that a lot of these plots are being requested to
our second meeting in April, which is a little out of the norm. Typically, it would be the
first meeting of the next month. But because of calendaring, it's not going to fall within
that 30 day. So it could be likely that you'll see another second or third extension just
because as Tina loves to say, quality engineering doesn't happen in 30 days. Okay. Thank you.
Thanks. All right. That brings us to our public hearings.
Item 5A will be withdrawn from a staff request and we'll hold that at a later meeting. So
that's item 5B is Z25-0003A. Erin. Good evening, Chair and members of the commission.
Okay. This is a rezoning request for Wild Haven Woods from residential, rural residential
to R7 district. This is a request to rezone approximately 4.9 acres from RR to R7. This
site is generally located north of Pokers Page Road and approximately 325 feet west
of Swisher Road. This is a bit of an unusual rezoning request. So the site is currently
developed with a mix of single family detached dwellings, triplexes and accessory buildings
on the site today. And the applicant is not currently planning to redevelop the site. The
purpose of this rezoning is to plot the property in accordance with R7 in order to make utility
improvements to the existing residential uses on the site today. Some of the considerations
that staff looked at when evaluating the rezoning request was the current RR zoning district
does require a minimum of five acres in order to plot. And with this being 4.9, they could
not plot under their current district today. In the R7 district, they would be allowed
to plot 4,000 square foot lots and it would allow the current uses on the site today,
including those triplexes, to be plotted on one lot as they're used today. What this staff
is recommending approval as they meet all of the other rezoning criteria as well and
I'll have a more detailed presentation in the main session, but I'll stand for any questions.
Sure. Go ahead. Erin, this is probably in your more detailed presentation later, but
I think it would be important to inform the commission of the situation regarding the
utilities, particularly with, I believe it was these, yeah, the septic system and then
being able to connect to city water. Yes. So those are the specific utility improvements
that they are trying to make. So in this graphic or the aerial image on the right, the star
in the rear of the site next to triplex C is the septic system that the applicant is
having issues with right now. It is failing. It just needs some regular maintenance or
to be replaced. But they cannot do that because the DDC requires that to install a new septic
system, you do need to plot the property. Another improvement is the parcel here with
this single family home. At least this parcel, the applicant wants to extend public water
to this property. She hasn't decided if she would extend it further, but at least to that
property and that would also trigger the requirement to plot. Commissioner Riggs. Thank you. That
actually answered most of my question, but it did bring up another question. So they're
going to go back with the septic system instead of tying on to sewer. Yeah, it is served by
existing septic today. And so she doesn't plan at this time to extend sewer line, does
not run adjacent to this property. So you'll see that dashed pink line, that is a gravity
line. So it just would take sewage waste away from a site. But I in talking with utilities,
that is not a line that they could tie into today. They would have to extend from further
from that neighborhood to the south. And that is not in her intentions today. Okay, thank
you. Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you. And then 5C PD 23 0001 C.
Good evening again, Angie Manglaris. This is PD 23 0001. This is an overlay plan development
for Denton 195. So a little bit of background on this request. This is a overlay plan development
request for a rezoning from residential two to an overlay plan development district with
base zonings of mixed use neighborhood and public facilities. The overall tract of land
is approximately 195 acres and is situated at the southeast corner of Corbin Road and
I 35 W. The purpose of this overlay plan development is to facilitate the development of a multifamily
and townhome project with parkland dedication or easement for publicly accessible open space.
The comprehensive plan designates this area as moderate residential. It is consistent
with our housing population projections, our preferred land preservation plan, our parks,
conservation and environment goals of the comprehensive plan and staff is recommending
approval of the request. I do want to go a little bit deeper than we typically do just
to help kind of explain how this tract works. And so you'll see that you have a general
zoning exhibit here outlining the three tracts A, B and C totaling approximately 58 acres
of land to be rezoned plan development mixed use neighborhood. Tracts A and B take access
are situated along Corbin Road. Tract B does have overlay conditions to limit the allowable
uses to townhome and single family only. Tracts A and C do not have those use limitations.
Any use in MN could be permitted. The remaining 137 acres is proposed to be plan development
public facilities with an intent to either dedicate the land area or an easement for
public open space uses. A little bit more about that parkland development
and just kind of help explain since this is not something you all typically see how these
requests kind of work with each other. So this is a very simplified developers agreement
process map. So we are here. This is our little arrow and my apologies the text is a little
small but we're considering tonight an overlay plan development rezoning. So we're in the
entitlement phases. Planning and zoning commission you all serve in a recommending capacity to
city council. After this the project will go to city council who has the final vote
on the project. Should that project be approved the parkland
developers agreement scoping begins where the developer and the city would work to scope
the project, define its terms including access points, easements, trails, what all of that
would look like as well as receiving public input meetings from the public to get an ultimate
idea of what this land could look like. Once all that's kind of been worked through then
the developers agreement goes to the parks board who much like you all serves in a recommending
capacity they would review that developers agreement, make a recommendation and that
would eventually go to city council who has the final say of approval or denial of that
agreement. All of that works together as part of this overlay condition in that we specify
that that process needs to be worked out prior to the submittal of a final plot for tracks
A, B or C. So I just kind of wanted to help maybe put into place where we are in the process
what happens if this is approved how that parkland or open space easement ultimately
gets configured. Angie can you just give a quick recap of what
types of activities from a civil engineering plan construction you know COO type process
requires that final plot and what of those types of activities could occur before it?
Sure so we require civil engineering plans to be approved before final plot approval
but we do require final plan approval for building permit, for grading, for activity
on that property. Okay any any this is kind of a weird thing
so I just want to make sure we follow and track this. Do you have a question Commissioner
Dyer? I do. I know that in tracks B and C they're
talking about potentially either apartments or the type of housing where it's like commercial
retail on the bottom and then housing above. How is Denton sitting on their number of apartments
like are we seeing where we have vacancies in the existing apartments that we do have?
How many other developments are there going to be apartments that are in the works but
aren't built yet? Like kind of are we going to have too many of these types of structures?
Are we going to over develop the apartment world in Denton? I guess is what I'm trying
to get at. Sure so there's there's two points that I
want to to clarify just to make sure that make sure we keep our tracks straight and my help so
actually I may give you a preview of my presentation. Yeah sorry Commissioner Dyer I think it'll
maybe make more sense if we just hold that question until after we get a little bit more
clarity from the overall application. I do have one question specifically on the Parkland
dedication and how that process works. I don't recall seeing a PD which was a single PD application
and a single you know border outline that we knew was going to have separated ownership
in the future. It's probably less risk because it's parks and the city controls that versus
two individual landowners but can you help me understand the thinking behind why have
the PD include the the the PF areas as opposed to just rezoning the other three areas and
then have a you know have the the developers agreement and the agreement to dedicate the
land and then come back and rezone that to PF later. Does that make sense? Like what's
the planning rationale for lumping them together? Sure it does. It might help to give a bit of
history on the project. This project has been been going on in some form or another I believe
prior to my start but it did come in as a pack in the summer of 2022 and at that time
it was believed and possibly intended that this overall Parkland area would be something
that UNT would actually be assuming and that they would want. Used for intramural fields
or anything that generally doesn't affect the floodplain. You know after further discussions
that that wasn't the case. UNT was no longer interested. We were already kind of in this
process and it is one one tract of land or ownership and it was moving forward as as
two applications. One that had this PD for for tract B to address resident concerns and
then this remainder was more of a straight zoning case. It's gone through a couple iterations.
The city has has stepped into the picture as an interested party either as an ultimate
landowner of the Parkland or receiving you know the the easement that would allow for
public access. The terms of the maintenance and the ownership would be worked out through
that developers agreement but this is not I guess our typical project so it's evolved
kind of differently and felt it best to keep it as one project and move it forward rather
than trying to continue to piecemeal and go back and rezone and address the project while
we're here. Okay yeah that helps. The only thing I would add is while this commission
this may be the first zoning case of this nature that this group has received keep in
mind while most of our plan development district requests might be associated with one property
owner it's also not uncommon to have a plan development district request that might have
multiple property owners involved so I would say don't don't let that influence your decision
because it you can have multiple landowners involved or one it makes no difference. Yeah
certainly in a subdivision. Exactly. Yeah okay okay thank you. And I before I forget
I did want to just address one component of the overlay so tract B is the one closest
to the residential uses it does have a base zoning district of MN which does allow multifamily
but the conditions would only allow single family and town homes. Tract A and C are the
ones that are left a little more open-ended. There's there's a lot of tracks to keep track
of so wanted to make sure we're on the same page. Thank you yeah we'll we'll let you go
on through and then I want to make sure that we we talk to Lisa's question first once we
get some more background on the on the park stuff okay yeah go ahead Commissioner Dyer.
Okay so going back to the parkland is it an absolute that the city of Denton will be receiving
that if this were if we recommended it to move forward to City Council and City Council
approved it or is it not a given that the city is going to get the parkland like what
happens if the zoning all gets approved and the current owner sells it like does that
bound the new owner to have to give the parkland. Yes so it it's written to be one one of two
ways one of two options could happen and the city is is dedicated that parkland for public
facilities or for parks and open space or through the process of the developers agreement
and easement is granted which provides for that public space open access and addresses
the maintenance issues. The PD is binding those overlay conditions they don't change
with the ownership of the land. If in the future this property were to sell and somebody
was no longer interested in those conditions this same process that we're going through
today would have to be followed to amend that PD. So it's built to sustain owners but those
conditions don't change unless they come back requesting it. This is it for my work session
presentation so okay I'm sorry I yeah okay so you're yeah I have a couple of questions
so so to the parkland dedication is this something that the city actually wants do we want flood
plan for parkland dedication. So the area that is proposed to be dedicated as as parkland
or that open space does assist in achieving the city's overall goals in the comprehensive
plan and the parks master plans for overall trail connectivity. More specifically access
through this property could provide ultimate linkages to the other side of 35 where we
do have a similar interconnected trail system throughout the hunter excuse me landmark and
coal developments and so this is something the city has been in discussions with since
UNT determined they didn't want the property we are able to utilize things like like trails
or other uses that don't generate rise like a disc golf course. So yes it has been discussed
and there is interest does seem kind of like UNT maybe had it right and then there's not
much you can do with it. So I believe they were eyeing it for intramural fields but I
don't want to put words in their mouth. Right and then the other question I have so I looked
at the at the exhibit in the developer agreement or I guess the PD and so for track B it looks
like they plan on doing basically 105 tone town homes and nothing else and I know we
said single family and town homes but pretty much just looks like it's gonna be town homes.
So it's important to keep in mind with PD overlays we're adopting the conditions and
that the concept plan is still subject to some change as you get into the final zoning
compliance plan and civil engineering plans provided they fit within the bounds of the
overlay development. So no more than 150 units on track to be adhering to those additional
setbacks height requirements and those two uses that are allowed for. Okay thanks. And
do we have information on housing need and that sort of thing that Commissioner Dyer
asked? I have some general it looks like Tina is ready to speak I was I'll just let you
speak. Okay well I was gonna say if you recall Haley had given a presentation gosh what about
a month or so ago with respect to our multifamily numbers. So with our and Haley correct me
if I get this wrong but with our growth assumption that we originally had in the comprehensive
plan of 3% for population growth and then looking at our what portion of our housing
numbers would be associated with multifamily we have exceeded the number that was anticipated.
What we're seeing actually is a little over a 4% growth rate since we've done the comprehensive
plan and so we would be below those numbers. If you recall in that presentation you know
we had some recommendations regarding still continuing to monitor where multifamily housing
is being proposed. We know that there is a housing crisis that is happening within within
our country. We know that multifamily is one form of housing that is able to also help
satisfy housing needs in addition to single-family detached single-family attached triplexes
duplexes fourplexes things of that nature. So I think with with respect to multifamily
you know we need to evaluate the location where it's being proposed to determine is
it appropriate in that location. Do we have the opportunity to create a further neighborhood
within that area. So I would ask you keep that an advisement when you consider the multifamily
did I get that correct. Okay. I got a thumbs up. So that's good.
Commissioner product real
putting there's no more than 150 right and track me on track to be right now as it's
down with our two. Do you have an idea of how many would fit. I could do some quick
math and have that for your regular session. Okay. It's it's also it'll it'll be a pretty
rough estimate. Track to be does have a little bit of floodplain on it. So I'll just look
at the total land area and do some simple math just an idea. Sure. Okay. Commissioner
Riggs sorry I have other questions too. So so Corbin Road currently does not connect
to 35 correct and there's not a service road on 35 either. So if tract a comes in as proposed
and it's basically just apartments then all those apartments will be essentially using
Corbin Road headed headed east in order to access and then come back. There's not there's
not any intention of making the connection of Corbin Road to 35. No. So it the answer
is complex. So I'm going to pull up an exhibit here. And so tracks a and b have the same
access conditions in that one half the full width of Corbin Road shall be approved and
extended to either the new Bonnie Bray constructed as part of the capital project that's currently
ongoing or 35 w frontage roads whichever comes first. So no building permits may be issued
to go vertical on tracks a or b until that connection is made either extending the approximate
900 feet east to new Bonnie Bray or to tee into this 35 intersection. Once that 35 improvement
does come along that full connection could conceivably be made so that everybody's not
turning east to head to new Bonnie Bray but both of those tracks are contingent upon one
of those improvements being made whichever comes first. Could you address the two points
of access requirement and remoteness. Sure. So in addition DDC requirements do require
that all multifamily developments are able to achieve two points of access as well as
a remoteness which would come into play more specifically with tracks a and tracks a fire
fire remoteness. I'm sorry to ensure that there's adequate fire access. So in order
for track a to develop multifamily they'd need to have access from Corbin Road and from
35. Is that is that what I'm hearing two points of access from those two roads. They could
have two points of access onto Corbin Correct Chandra. Yes based on how the development
code is applied. Well I think the exhibit you had up kind of showed it really yeah that
one right there because essentially it seems like is if we have really large single family
lots and then right next to them if we approve this it could be nothing but townhomes and
then essentially multifamily apartments and it just seems kind of like the feel like there
should be more of a buffer. It's just kind of I'm not opposed to multifamily at all but
it seems like to me it seems like a lot. So I think Commissioner Padron did you have a
question earlier. So Angie some of the public comments centered around flooding and the
impact of flooding with the new development. Was there a study that was conducted that
could potentially determine if there are any additional impacts as a result of flooding.
Not at this time similar to many of the zoning cases that we see where we're in the entitlement
stages still downstream assessments civil engineering additional floodplain studies
all come at the time of zoning compliance and civil engineering plans. You can't increase
the flow of water that you currently release onto neighboring properties when you when
you develop. So all of that does need to be accounted for when we get to the civil engineering
stages. Commissioner. So none of the current flooding that may or may not be happening
on this property has really been looked at for the zoning change is that is that what
I just heard. So we understand that there are areas of water and riparian ESA which
have been confirmed as part of the ESA field assessment. There's also some floodplain
and some floodway that are FEMA identified. By and large those areas are on the potential
public facilities based zoning. But at the time of civil engineering plans that is what
it is typical to request your downstream assessments and your more detailed studies. So we're really
kind of walking in the dark on how tracks A B and C would affect future flooding or
non flooding of this area because we would potentially be giving the stamp of approval
on the rezoning and then all of the other things for the environment and for the flood
zones and the habitats. All of that's going to come later. So that that is our typical
development process. Right. So all of those additional studies that are done they typically
follow that zoning entitlement process. Zoning is the first step to determine the whether
or not the land uses are appropriate in that location. Once the zoning is acted upon whether
it's keeping the existing zoning in place or changing the zoning those subsequent development
applications would come in and they would submit all of those studies based upon what
the applicant has prepared for us. They have reason to believe that tracks A B and C are
developable. So that's the information that we work from. Even under today's zoning. Right.
There are land use entitlements that are there. If somebody wanted to develop the tracks A
B and C under today's zoning then they would have the responsibility of submitting the
various or the various studies that would be required. If we determined a downstream
assessment was required for being able to do single family residential development on
tracks A B and C they would be responsible for submitting that in addition to zoning
compliance plans there any traffic impact analysis that would be associated with it
in addition to any plats downstream assessments any additional ESA studies that would be needed.
So what you're seeing today in the process the developer would have today is no different
than if the property were developed under their existing zoning this there. So that
includes like traffic studies. So like Commissioner Riggs talked about you know the traffic on
Corbin and while yes this is supposed to wait until like the frontage roads go up but people
that want to go south they'd have to go all the way north and catch you know a U-turn
and go that way. So people that want to be south on 35 they're most likely going to go
east on Corbin and then south on Bonnie Bray Road. So we did have a traffic impact analysis
that was submitted part of this request and we do have staff here that are subject matter
experts from our transportation services team. I think I'd like to hear more about the TIA
then kind of chip generation. Sure. While you come up I'll just mention that while it may
seem backwards that we approve zoning and then we figure out how to handle the drainage
and that sort of thing that engineering analysis you can't do until you know how much impervious
area you're adding. You don't know how much retention you need to add etc. So our code
right even independent of whether this had a zoning change or not is set up to be reviewed
by staff for any development applications and make sure that as they said the downstream
impacts of water falling on the developed land versus the undeveloped land is no worse
than it was before it was developed. Before we go there I just want to follow up on that
and make sure that I understand that right because most of the time when a development
comes in they have to basically do detention to go back to pre-existing conditions. With
this being directly connected to the floodplain is that still a condition? Yes that is. So
that's typical associated with any development process that we have. Okay. I know some places
say if you're connected to the floodplain then you don't have to worry about it so I
just want to make sure. Okay. So Chandra I'll let you speak to TIA and the impacts there.
We'll probably get into it more in open session but I was also curious whether the future
of this road along track C would have enough frontage difference to satisfy that two points
of access only to this frontage road or whether they would have to cross the property somewhere
since it's kind of this island. Does that make sense? Good evening Chair and Commission.
Chandra Muruganandam, City Traffic Engineer. So as of now the tech start is in schematic
stage on the planning. So the plans show as of now it's only one connection with the 425
feet spacing criteria but at the time of full design we will be able to see if we can get
one additional connection. The reasoning is if tech start would not buy the access denial
then we could have one more connection. Sorry I didn't hear. If tech start would not like
the access. Usually they buy access denials so whether they will restrain the access for
only one point or something with bridge structure being so close. So if there is no restrictions
then we could get another additional one. Okay so TBD as far as whether there could
be a second one. That's correct. And then can you speak to the process of the TIA and
I'm sure we'll want to ask some more details about the numbers in the open session the
public is really going to want to hear that. But I want to make sure you understand the
process now so that we're not fighting two confusing battles at the same time once we
get in there. So as an overall traffic impact study the developers engineers went and counted
the traffic counts on existing intersections as south as Vintage, 35, Rose Lawn, Bonnie
Bray all the intersections and they added the development generated traffic on top of
those trips that already being used on those roadways and do the analysis that is the typical
industry standard and based on the analysis with site A, site B and site C traffic they
use the software models and provide us the results on how much the impact will be on
the neighborhood streets and based on the outcome of those they have to do some mitigations
to bring it up to the city standard which is a level of service D or better. Level of
service D is a condition where there is a slight amount of delays during the peak hours
but it's a free flow condition during the other peak hours. Level of service A is the
low traffic at all which we don't see it anywhere. Level of service B is minimal traffic, C is
really good and D is like slightly determined to C, E is really congested like US 380 and
level of service F is like during a major incident crash it's like gridlocked you're
not moving at all so and the study outcome was level of service B and C which is really
good with some improvements and with the proposed connections to new Barney Bray and with 35W
frontage roads it has no impacts with minimal to the carbon at Barney Bray which could be
mitigated with additional traffic control measures.
I heard from the development conditions that Corbin would have to be extended east until
it connected to new Barney Bray. Would the entire section between new Barney Bray then
and track to A have to be upgraded to that amended cross section that's shown in backup?
Is that the requirement? Any other questions? I'm sure we'll have a lot more information
out there but it's a few new things here and I just want to make sure everybody understands
what the processes are and what things we're going to be considering.
I think one of the things that might be helpful particularly for track B and I know this doesn't
necessarily question for you is right now the current zoning would be large estate lots
and that's essentially the only thing that would be allowed and now with this we're basically
saying town homes and apartments not on track B but apartments on A and C essentially so
that's kind of in a nutshell what we're considering right?
Did you have anything else to add Angie? I think our questions are starting to dry up.
No nothing for now. I have a much more detailed presentation and we'll go through an open
session. Okay. I think we're good. We're going to have
a work session next on some one of a boot camp things given that that will be a lot
of content and dinners here I'm going to say let's let's take five minutes and grab dinner
and then have a working work session as we learn about some of those zoning processes
and so at 542 we will take a five minute recess and be back at 547.
Good afternoon at 549 p.m. we will resume our planning and zoning work session this
afternoon the next item is item 3a work session regarding zoning changes plan developments
and specific use permits so come on up. Thank you good evening chair and members of
the commission Sean Jacobson and Ashley will be presenting your zoning changes plan development
and specific use permits boot camp for many of y'all this will probably be somewhat familiar
information but hopefully you can draw some things from it get some refreshers maybe catch
some things you didn't last time you went through it.
So hopefully you can see that I'm sorry it's a little bit white there but just that reminder
where we are in the process so when you set out to develop a property one of the first
questions you're going to ask is is this use allowed can I do that on this property if
not then you're going to go into one or more of the what we call the entitlement categories
that would be zoning plan development specific use permit in between there we recommend strongly
neighborhood engagement really important we encourage that heavily that you have those
neighborhood meetings to find out how those around where you want to develop feel about
your proposed changes but once you go through the entitlement process then moving on from
there as we've learned tonight we have the zoning compliance plan civil plan reviews
there's various studies and then on the final plat building permit and any development contracts
or public improvements but we're going to focus on that entitlement section what can
you do on your property and how do we know that so kind of those brief categories standard
zoning so that's what it's your basic zoning category so r1 r2 mn that establishes your
dimensional use and development regulations what you can do where on your lot so it guides
the impact that your lot has on the lots around you and protects each lot owners right to
a reasonable use and enjoyment of their lot it's one of our main tools for regulating
uses and development specific use permit is within a zoning district a use may be allowed
but it requires some extra scrutiny and so we have the specific use permit to give the
opportunity to look at what additional protections or mitigation might be needed for this use
to occur here plan development is a special type of zoning sort of a custom zoning for
very specific site situations where existing standards might not be fully appropriate for
that lot to customize zoning provide some greater flexibility and the goal is to encourage
unique or innovative land use concepts we don't just use this for anything it really
does need to be out of the box if zoning or scp can do it we shouldn't be using your plan
development to do it so taking a step back with any entitlement case we're looking at
our main key approval criteria in the ddc things like does it line up with the comprehensive
plan does it line up with the purpose of that zoning district are we minimizing adverse
impacts on surrounding properties minimizing adverse fiscal impacts and do we have adequate
public facilities available so with any form of entitlement we're going to be looking at
some variation of those questions zooming in on zoning a little bit remember this is
the division of the city into a variety of districts or zones with compatible land uses
it's also the establishment of development standards for each particular district or
zone so within each district or zone there will be a set of standards that apply there
it'll be a little different than every other district state law gives cities authorities
to regulate this our zoning ordinance is what sets out what is allowed in each one of those
zoning districts that describes those zoning districts for us now remember zoning only
applies to properties within denton city limits not out in the extraterritorial jurisdiction
if you wanted to learn more about each of our zoning districts you could find that in
sub chapter three the zoning ordinance as you can see here i provide a kind of example
from our code there that is one of our zoning districts and you can see we have dimensional
standards that govern where on the lot you can put the building how large the yard needs
to be so that's we talk about setbacks front rear side how tall the building can be essentially
the bulk of that building we also as you can see there there's a snip from our table of
allowed uses for each zoning district there are uses that are permitted or not permitted
and then there's uses that are permitted with the specific use permit that's where you see
the s so p is permitted as a specific use permit blank means you can't do it there there's
also the supplementary regulations things that y'all are familiar with so parking open storage
tree preservation those things can vary between zoning districts so each zoning district will
have some supplementary regulations that are different there than they are in other districts
let's apply that to the real world so looking at what we call the zoning atlas or zoning
map those fancy colors and letters each one of those is one of our zoning districts where
those zoning standards apply so pf public facilities r2 residential 2 sc suburban corridor
each one of those if you look that up you can find out what you're allowed to do there
and how you have to build it what those zoning dimensions are you'll also see that some of
them have some extra indicators so that pf and then an s that means there's a specific
use permit on that property similarly you might see pdr6 that means that's mostly an
r6 district but it has some additional plan development standards that apply there we'll
also talk about overlays zoning districts a minute you can spot those because they start
with an o and then the zoning district under them so key types of zoning actions we have
our standard zoning districts which we've talked about our plan development districts
which are more customized overlay districts we'll get into a minute and then those specific
use permits that's what affects zoning on land now there's also our zoning tech sometimes
we're amending is actually what the zoning ordinance says and you will likely be seeing
that a number of times this year so just be prepared at that point we're deciding how
the zoning is impacted for potentially every property within a zoning district or even
every property depending on how that's written so a little bit different we have 16 of those
standard zoning districts we discussed each one has their allowed uses and standards and
here's a key point you can vary between zoning districts in what is allowed there but zoning
districts one zoning district across the city has to be treated the same no matter where
it's located so r3 is r3 is r3 you don't have r3 you can do this here but on that street
r3 you can do something different r3 is r3 across the board moving on to plan developments
as i said this is something of a customized zoning so usually it's either the site has
unique characteristics or it's a unique type of development maybe something we haven't
seen before it's been crafted in a certain way gives reason for why we'd use a custom
zoning it doesn't fit quite into our normal zoning boxes the pd process is exactly the
same as rezoning so you go to you all plan planning zoning commission go city council
have neighborhood meetings but you have additional standards that could be what we call pd development
plan a site plan that goes with it there could be additional standards or restrictions what
uses are allowed or are not allowed there are two types of pd's overlay and standard
take a look at that so your overlay zonings and that's actually what we've been talking
about tonight those are to modify the effect of the base zoning district so you're not
getting a full site plan of everything that's going to be done and where it goes you're
saying all right there's specific changes we need to make here to address neighborhood
concerns promote compatibility with surrounding properties so we're going to have some additional
rules that go with this so for instance you might have certain uses that are added or
removed from that base zoning district you might have additional standards for how it's
built and there might be additional requirements for landscape or screening around it but again
you're not getting a fully developed site plan you're getting additional rules that
go with the zoning by contrast standard pd you are getting a fully customized site plan
so when you're looking at that you're going to basically know where things are going to
be in some cases you may be creating a new use there's going to be potentially detailed
landscape and facade plans that go with that so it's going to be much more detailed much
more drilled in and it's going to be for very specific circumstance you want to use that
again very carefully so when should we use a pd sparingly it's the exception not the
rule if you're continually needing pd's that means you probably need to update the code
because you have a use that's coming in frequently we've done that with horizontal multifamily
with that used to require a pd we realized we were getting a lot of it we wrote it into
the code now we don't need to use pd's for that it's often more appropriate on small
infill lots and again we never want to use it we're straight zoning or a specific use
permit to get us there and we always want to be looking forward do we need to just change
our code if we're getting this many pd's keep in mind we don't want to use a pd for
instance to require construction of public improvements or reservation or dedication
of land where it's not going to primarily benefit the actual area where we're doing
the pd so we're not going to say within this pd by the way you have to do this thing over
here needs to be directly benefited working in that area where the pd is located we don't
want to use it to secure third-party agreements with property owners we're not going to use
it to enforce someone's deed restrictions we don't get involved in that and there are
certain parts of the code that we can't touch with pd's so environmentally sensitive areas
tree preservation gas well requirements we don't mess with those in the pd those remain
the same just to give you an example one of the first pd's i was getting this was a full
pd this was the very first horizontal multifamily development in the city it was a new use so
justified using a pd we've never seen this before you can see you've got that fully laid
out site plan had full facade plans landscape very detailed and we were using that also
to adapt to a very uniquely shaped lot as well as there were some concerns the neighborhood
had that were able to be addressed through the pd that we couldn't have addressed otherwise
by contrast denton west was an overlay pd there's no site plan that goes with this there's
some additional rules some use regulations some things you can't do there because of
concerns the neighbors as well as some additional screening that was required to address concerns
surrounding properties so standard overlay pd and then briefly and this we'll try not
to get confused here but overlay districts separate from the overlay pd that is when
we add an additional special layer of protection for certain areas that could be your historic
districts that could be if you're familiar with the fry street overlay in the fry street
area or a denton square district where there's some additional regulations or design standards
that we want in that area to achieve a certain public purpose and that's put on the map through
the same process planning zoning commission city council and again as i mentioned that
shows up on the map it's just an o and then the underlying district some additional rules
to achieve a certain purpose in a specific area so with that i'm going to hand it off
to ashley good evening chair members of the commission ashley x dead associate planner
tonight i'm going to go over specific use permits and also the commission's role in
zoning actions generally so just to give a broad overview of specific use permits we
use an sup when a use is appropriate in that zoning district but not appropriate for all
properties in that district it is a rezoning action however the underlying zoning will
stay the same it does require approval by p and z and council and once an sup is approved
it does expire within 24 months if substantial construction is not underway review timelines
for sup generally vary between three to six months depending on the intensity of the project
we do review the approval criteria that sean covered the general approval criteria as well
as approval criteria specific to sup which i'll go over on a future slide at the time
of the first submittal a zoning compliance plan or a site plan is required and if the
sup is approved that will be adopted as part of the ordinance and this is our table of
allowed uses and on this table if there's a use within a zoning district with an s that
does show that a specific use permit is required in that zoning district the table also calls
out any additional use specific standards that are required and the sup gives us the
ability to evaluate a development and land uses that have unique characteristics and
ensure compatibility with the surrounding area and also that the applicant has provided
for any mitigation of those anticipated impacts so the specific approval criteria for sup
and again these are in addition to the general approval criteria that sean covered we'll
look at whether it's compatible with existing development it does not adversely impact future
development and any impact associated with traffic access noise odor and light has been
mitigated and to give a few examples of a few sup that we saw last year this was a request
for a multifamily use the property was zoned r7 with a neighborhood mixed use future land
use that future land use does include a diverse mix of housing types and densities and the
surrounding neighborhood did already include that mix of housing types including four plexes
single family and multifamily the buildings were appropriately scaled with the maximum
height of 40 feet which is the maximum height in most of our residential zoning districts
and this use is appropriate along a primary arterial which in this case was north elm
street the second example was a request for a vet clinic use and this the zoning on this
property was r2 with the low residential future land use that future land use does include
appropriately scaled commercial and as you can see in this drawing the building was appropriately
scaled with residentially designed architecture and as far as mitigating any potential impacts
all of their parking spaces were over 200 feet from the nearest single family lot which
would reduce any potential noise or lighting impacts and they also dedicated right away
to potentially improve a known mobility issue in this area in the future.
So once the sup has been approved the landscape plan and the site plan are adopted as part
of the ordinance the ordinance will generally call out any minor amendments that can be
approved by staff and this is usually a small increase or decrease in landscape area or
parking and this is just to give the applicant more flexibility as they work through their
final civil engineering plans however any expansions or enlargement of the sup will
require a new application and a new public hearing at planning and zoning and city council.
So to go over the commission's role in zoning actions generally it's to make a recommendation
to city council and these are legislative actions and not ministerial the commission
does have some discretion in making these decisions which I'll go over on the next
slide and you may consider the testimony of the public and facts presented during the
public hearing and just to note zoning regulations must rationally and reasonably advance a legitimate
government purpose.
So what to consider when evaluating zoning actions is the future land use and whether
it's consistent with the plan recommendations whether it's compatible with the surrounding
land uses whether it's consistent with the policies in the comprehensive plan and any
impact on city services such as infrastructure and public safety and just something to remember
is that zoning districts allow a wide range of uses so you'll want to consider that the
zoning applicant may not be the one who ultimately develops the property and you'll want to look
beyond the individual applicant and their specific business especially with sup requests
as the sup does run with the land and don't be influenced by the pretty pictures.
So zoning protest procedures before every public hearing will send notifications out
to everyone within 500 feet and this is in compliance with state law you'll see these
notification maps in your backup and in all of our presentations property owners within
200 feet of the rezoning are able to file a written protest if we receive those written
protests from landowners of more than 20 percent of the area within 200 feet a super majority
vote of council will be required and then just to note in that instance a super majority
vote of this commission is not required.
Happy to stand for any questions.
Great job Ashley and Sean I wanted to touch base on something related to zoning requests
and in kind of as a follow up to the public notifications aspect so as Ashley pointed
out that we do notify property owners within 200 feet that's a requirement of state law
we also send out a courtesy notice to residents that are within 500 feet so when we also require
our applicants to post a zoning sign on the property and correct me if I'm wrong Ashley
I believe we also even run a notice in the newspaper prior to PNC as well.
So we try to put out a variety of different forms of notification to property owners we
even have tools on our website where people can request to receive various updates or
notifications regarding projects that are within a certain distance that they can set
on that website but I share all that because eventually some of those property owners that
get notified or residents they learn of the project maybe they attended a public meeting
or excuse me a meeting that was hosted by the applicant and then in turn you all start
getting contacted right people wanting to be able to engage with you as commissioners
and so I wanted just to touch base on a couple of things that as commissioners since you're
appointed and you're not elected as appointed members to the planning and zoning commission
it is up to you to decide as to what level you choose to engage with people that reach
out to you it could be residents that reach out to you it could also be the developers
representative also wanting to reach out to you if you are to ask staff our recommendation
is that we recommend that you avoid ex parte communication and I know you heard me say
that in when we did our commissioner training reason for that is from staff's perspective
we are interested in protecting what I call the sanctity of the public hearing right the
public hearing the goal of the public hearing is for all commissioners to receive the same
information for when you are deliberating a proposed zoning request so that that's why
from that staff perspective we're always we're careful about protecting that public hearing
now that being said I think it's fair to say that residents within communities regardless
if you're in Denton or somewhere else feel the need that they want to make sure that
their their concerns are heard and expressed to members of the commission and understandably
so you're more than welcome to listen and receive that feedback from residents or the
developers applicant but I would encourage you especially if those meetings are happening
before you have your formal planning and zoning commission meeting I would encourage you to
listen right not formulate a formal position or state what your formal position is until
you receive all the technical materials that we've provided you the reason being is because
as Ashley pointed out or I'm sorry with Sean on the on consideration of zoning requests
it's also evaluating those consistency with our adopted policies that we have in our regulations
that we put forth also it's fair for you as commissioners to want to be able to actually
see the actual development application materials in your packet that are being presented to
you so that's why I encourage you to listen if you attend those public meetings you're
more than welcome to sit in and listen but you also had to figure out what your comfort
level is for engaging with the community if you do decide to engage with members outside
the public hearing process then staff does recommend that during your deliberations or
during the public hearing that you put on public record hey I had the opportunity to
meet with the developer on this project they reached out to me and so I obliged and had
a conversation with them here's a summary of the conversation that we had it's always
important to get that on public record right and again it goes back to you might have learned
something during that conversation whether with the developer or maybe it was a resident
that would be important for all members of the commission to be able to have access to
that information as part of their deliberation the other thing I would offer up is because
you are appointed members of the commission you're welcome to reach out to the council
member who appointed you and I realize some of you may have been appointed by a council
member who's no longer serving on the council so whatever position on council aligns with
your position on the commission you're always welcome to reach out to that council member
to get their expert to find out from them you know hey as as your appointee what's your
expectation of me in terms of any communication outside the public hearing because they may
have some words of wisdom for you from that perspective but I go back to ultimately it's
your desire it is for you to determine what your comfort level is again staff we will
take a more conservative approach because we're all concerned about the production that
public hearing such that you know hence why from time to time a great example is a case
on your agenda this evening where we were asking you to withdraw it because we realized
that there was an error in our public notification process so so we are all about trying to protect
that public hearing as much as we can but more importantly so that you all have the same
information for your deliberation and consideration so just wanted to add that I thought they've
done a great job with the presentation but I'll allow you all to ask any questions if
the chair is willing thank you Tina I guess I have a question about the boot camps coming
forward I recall when in the previous iteration of the boot camps the one of the presentations
that included some zoning information included some historical information is that plan to
be as part of a future or is this the opportunity to ask about the history of zoning so when
you say historical information you're talking about why zoning exists or are you interested
in more historical information in terms of how is it Denton zoning ordinance has evolved
both of that yeah do you guys have anything in your presentation any backup materials
that can address the history of Denton we do well Sean's pulling that up you know zoning
dates back to oh gosh what early 1900s when it was established you know a lot of it is
is somewhat rooted in in case law from the past but really zoning has come about in terms
of being able to segregate certain land uses you know with the thinking of grouping like
uses that have live like operational characteristics and intensity of operations together in in
zoning districts so that's why as Sean shared you know we have our Denton development code
we have our various zoning districts and then we have the uses that are allowed within the
district when you look at the uses that are within a district again it goes back to uses
that are compatible with deemed compatible with each other that have similar operational
considerations associated with it that's why you know more intensive uses that have noise
odor maybe air emissions that are associated with industrial type uses that's why we keep
them separate from say residential uses or even retail commercial uses because of the
difference in the operations but that's that's generally how zoning has come about there's
been more and more a trend to be able to allow for a mix of uses having residential uses
with other commercial uses that are happening but again it's viewed more from a perspective
of uses that could coexist and that are more compatible with each other so hence why you'll
find some areas and communities developing more as mixed use centers where maybe they
have those retail or office uses on the ground floor level and then residential above but
I'll turn it over to Sean and Ashley regarding the history of Denton.
Lovely thank you so we we certainly had zoning prior to 1941 but the very first zoning map
we have that we can point to is from 1941 as you can see on the left there provided for
three main zoning districts business manufacturing and dwelling in 1957 similarly we had business
manufacturing and dwelling moving forward into 1969 as we saw a greater number of lot sizes
the city was growing you had different uses coming in there was potentially uses that
needed to be more separated from one another we saw an expansion to 18 districts 1991 moving
up to 19 districts so similar differentiation there we had a bit more of a jump up in 2002
to 23 because mixed use districts came in we hadn't had that beforehand so we wanted
to provide for some areas that were specifically designed to have that mix of uses the same
time the planned development district the option to create that was eliminated in the
2002 DDC and around that time at some point we did also bring in the MPC as you recall
as sort of a replacement but for a while there we didn't see any new PDs and then more recently
in 2019 we actually significantly reduced the number of districts we had 17 back down to
about what we were in the 60s or 70s because we realized we had a number of districts that
really overlapped with one another we didn't really need employment center industrial and
industrial center employment figured we could do with just one district for that but the
other thing is we brought back the PD districts you see we do now have that ability now whereas
for about 17 years there you didn't see new PDs we had to find other ways to deal with
unique situations but overall we have had expansions and contractions of the number
of districts based on changes in lot sizes the expansion of the city the concerns of
the residents at the time and as well as the opportunity to take advantage of new opportunities
and trends in planning like plan developments and mixed use districts so short and sweet
but hopefully it's helpful I just like maps I got them it occurs to me that
you know if we were to plot out sort of the number of zoning districts over time that
meandered a little bit but it was a very very large discontinuity between I think you had
a 50 54 19 sorry roughly 57 and 69 could you explain I mean what I heard was we had some
new uses there was it truly like were we having like launch pads in the city of Denton or
missile silos or I'm just trying to think historically what what occurred during that
decade and a half that resulted in areas like Denton creating a lot of new zoning districts
for what purpose does that make sense so I will admit that I'm definitely not the expert
on the history of Denton's development at that time but I would say that it's it's not
unlikely that there were new uses things that may not have been new to everyone but because
our city was growing we had things coming that we potentially hadn't seen before needed
to find ways to regulate as well you just have more people living there and so greater
variety of lot sizes people have different incomes you're growing but I can't speak
directly to exactly what might have been happening that particular period in terms of use I mean
if I'm recalling my history class and I know Commissioner Prado Carrillo is going to correct
me if I'm I missed up here but that that was the period of time where a lot of civil rights
legislation was passed a lot of regulation around banking on who you could give loans
to and who you couldn't or rather who you could deny to and who you could no longer
deny to and that seems to be corollary to me is is that a fair statement I really don't
think I can address how that may have related but I'll be happy to defer to Tina so I was
actually in a session of last week on at the American Planning Association conference but
one of the presenters did talk about particularly coming out of World War I think it was after
World War II when soldiers were coming home and wanting to purchase housing the country
was actually in a housing crisis at that time and so developers were wanting to bring on
additional housing units and they cited an example and I forget where it was but a developer
who was interested in building a single family residential subdivision and but one of the
conditions associated with the financing at that time was certain restrictions being placed
on it where the homes would not be sold to persons of color and so you know some of the
zoning that exists today would not surprise me in some communities if it does reach back
to days of redlining redlining is now an illegal process and rightfully so people also cannot
discriminate amongst others when it comes to housing opportunities due to federal laws
that have been passed so zoning's history is is somewhat complicated I would say I think
if anything but it also goes back to you know to Sean's point is as uses evolve and come
about there was a tendency to group like uses into certain zoning districts I can think
of a time early in my career when I worked for the city of McKinney and McKinney was
maybe roughly 20,000 people believe it or not and you know back in the day it was we
got requests for self storage facilities because they were sort of the latest and greatest
new upcoming use and we struggled with how do we classify those and what zoning districts
we put them in and then the other one was assisted living facilities because that that
was a new evolving land use that was happening at that time and again we struggled with what
zoning districts were appropriate that they should be located in but it's because of those
new uses you know with the entrepreneurial spirit within our community and people coming
up with new business types or business uses then it's you know with zoning then we're
trying to figure out okay where can we put those uses in those particular districts and
if in sometimes our districts also need to be further modified as Sean pointed out with
that in industrial employment and industrial center employment and employment center industrial
so yeah not not sure what all that glad I wasn't here for that so but but but you know
but I make that point from a standpoint of you know as our uses have evolved we go back
and we look at our zoning districts and to see if they're still relevant and current
with the needs of our community today no I thank you for that you know there's there's
a lot of history and and terminology here last question then I want to hear from the
rest of the commission I've I've heard a term and and I never know if I'm reading canonical
sources or not so I wonder if you could help define kind of what this this term is it's
I think it's exclusionary zoning can you just explain what that is and and how that has
taken shape in the in the planning profession over the last couple decades wow that would
been great if you could give me a heads up before but I mean exclusionary zoning is is
pretty literal from the term right it it exclude certain uses or practices that were in place
at that time well so again please correct me but what I've read is that along with you
know separating residential uses into a greater number of zoning districts that there's a
a filtering of you know certain lot sizes or or regulations of what types of structures
you can put on a lot tend to require a higher priced home to be built in those areas leading
to differentiation from a zoning perspective as opposed to from a lending redlining perspective
is that does that fit under that category well I think zoning in general is exclusionary
when you look at any of the zoning districts right because in a certain zoning district
there's a list of uses that are allowed but if you're not on the list of being allowed
then it's going to exclude others you know how that might impact housing prices I think
is based upon one's perspective as to how that might be viewed in residential zoning
districts you know for example our rural residential district has a minimum lot size of five acres
compared to so someone might be able to afford a five acre lot but some may not be able to
afford that so you know the the various different zoning districts that we have on the residential
side allow for a variety of different lot sizes and in some cases some land use types
within them okay thank you questions I'm done sorry I just want to say very well explained
thank you thank you I was just gonna follow up on the question what you just said so it's
a fight on the RR it's five acres but there's not specifications as to the actual structure
of the home right because the zoning is only telling you the amount of space so the actual
structure there's not other than as it may have to do with height but yes I can choose
many different types of structures as long as you're meeting the other standards development
code yeah so I can have a tiny home on a five acre lot and still be okay on our right absolutely
thank you I'm not seeing any other questions thank you for such a good overview with that
we will break at 6 23 p.m. and reconvene at 6 30 in council chambers thank you good evening
at 6 36 we will call our regular meeting of the plant and planning and zoning commission
to order our on April 9th the first order of business is to stand for the pledge of
allegiance to the U.S. and Texas Flags I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States
of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with
liberty and justice for all. I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God one indivisible.
Our next order of business is item 2a consider approval of March 19th planning and zoning
meeting minutes open for a motion Commissioner Padron move approval and Commissioner Riggs
second okay let's vote on the board please
and that item passes 5-0 brings us to our consent agenda and I will take a motion or
discussion from the Commission Commissioner Riggs I'll make a motion to approve and Commissioner
Padron second with no discussion seeing I will call for a vote on the board
that item passes 5-0 as well brings us to our items for individual consideration item
4a PZ 25088 elect a vice chair to the planning and zoning Commission this is coming before
us because our previous vice chair Commissioner Villarreal had to resign so any discussion
or motions Commissioner product Rio say everyone knows we're pretty new board so I think the
next person up with most seniority would be Desiree Padron so I'd like to make a motion
that she would be the vice chair and Commissioner Dyer I second that it's it will be an honor
to have such a good backup so thank you any other discussion questions seeing none let's
vote on the board that item passes 5-0 congratulations vice chair but wrong the next item is item
4b FP 250011a good evening Julie Wyatt principal planner with the city of Denton the item before
you is a final plat for a property located on the north side of McKinney Street just
west of Spring Tree Street the final plat is for a single-family development it is for
zero lot line homes that the zoning was approved last year they do have some items that they
need to work through for the final plat so staff is recommending denial however we have
no objection to the requested extension to the April 23rd planning and zoning Commission
meeting it is the second request for an extension and I will be happy to answer any questions
any questions or emotion Commissioner Padron move to grant the extension to a date certain
of April 23rd and Commissioner Riggs second seeing no discussion I'll call for a vote
on the board that item passes 5-0 brings us to 4c FP 250014 good evening Commission Bryce
Van Arsdale assistant planner this is FP 2514 this is an approximately 19 acre track about
321 feet east of Country Club Road on the north side of Hobson Lane while staff is recommending
denial due to a few comments left on both the final plat as well as the civil engineering
plans staff has no objection to the requested extension to a date certain of April 23rd
2025 I'll stand for any questions any questions or motion on the Commission Commissioner Dyer
I make a motion that we allow for an extension to a date certain oh I'm sorry to the date
of was it April 23rd yes okay sorry yeah thank you Commissioner Padron I second seeing no
discussion let's vote on the board it brings us to item 4d PZ 25 sorry FP 250013 a good
evening chair and Commissioners Cameron Robertson principal planner this is for a final plot
of approximately 20 acres located on the northwest corner of Robson Ranch Road and I 35 West
frontage road they still have some comments that they need work through both on their
final plot as well as their civil engineering plans but staff has no objection to their
second extension to a date certain of April 23rd and I can stand for any questions thank
you I do have a card on this item from a Joe LaCroix if I'm pronouncing that right would
you like to speak okay I'm assuming you're the applicant okay any questions from the
board no okay thank you Commissioner Padron move approval to grant the extension to a
date certain of April 23rd and Commissioner Dyer I second that motion seeing no discussion
let's vote on the board that item passes 5-0 which brings us to item 4e FP 25009 a good
evening chair and members of the Commission Aaron Stanley assistant planner this is a
final plot for hilltop village addition this is located east of hilltop Road and north
of East Hickory Hill Road at this time staff are at this time staff is recommending denial
as the plot does not meet our criteria for approval but we have no objection to the second
extension request to date certain of April 23rd 2025 thank you any questions or motion
Commissioner Padron move to grant the extension to a date certain of April 23rd Commissioner
Riggs second seeing no discussion we'll vote on the board that item passes 5-0 that brings
us to item 4f FP 250015 good evening chair and members of the Commission Angie Manglars
development review manager this is a final plot for DC townhomes it's a 3.8 acre tract
of land located north of East McKinney Street and west of Springtree Street this lot is
split zone between R7 and MN for townhome and multifamily development at this time the
final plot does not meet our criteria for approval staff is recommending denial however
we have no objection to the requested first extension which could be granted till April
23rd happy to answer any questions any questions or emotion Commissioner Dyer I make a motion
that we grant the extension to April 23rd and Commissioner Prado Korea I second seeing
no discussion let's vote on the board that item passes 5-0 if you're following on your
agenda the first public hearing 5a has been requested to be withdrawn and we noticed so
that will bring us to item 5b which is z25 0003 a and I'll open the public hearing at
this time good evening Aaron Stanley assistant planner this is a rezoning request for Wild
Haven woods from rr to r7 so this request is to rezone approximately 4.9 acres generally
located north of pockers page road and 350 325 feet west of swisher road within the city
of Denton the property is currently developed with a mix of single-family detached dwellings
triplexes and accessory buildings on site the applicant is requesting this rezoning
in order to plot in accordance with r7 standards to facilitate utility improvements on site
these include servicing existing failing septic system that is shown with a star and connecting
at least one lot to city water so while the applicant is not has not indicated to staff
any intent to redevelop this is a straight rezoning case and so any use that is permitted
within r7 wood could be permitted in the future if this is approved by right today single
family detached is the only residential use that is allowed but then agriculture and animal
uses such as a veterinary clinic or a kennel could be permitted on the lot today and a
minimum of five acres would be required under the rr zoning today in the r7 district a few
additional residential uses would be allowed by right including townhomes duplexes triplexes
and fourplexes as well as medical office and administrative office could be permitted by
right in r7 with a specific use permit that would come back before this body and be approved
by city council multifamily could be considered as well as manufactured home developments
elderly housing bank and general retail that's not the complete list but those would be the
main highlights as well as a minimum 4,000 square foot lot size the request does meet
the criteria for approval which we'll get into in a bit more detail it is consistent
with the r7 purpose statement and is generally consistent with the goals and policies of
the future land use map and the 2040 comprehensive plan development plans if this were to come
forward for redevelopment would be required to comply with all ddc and other criteria
standards and the zoning is not expected to generate adverse significant environmental
infrastructure or fiscal impacts the purpose statement for r7 zoning district does say
that the r7 district shall accommodate a variety of housing types encourage walking to neighborhood
amenities such as parks and schools ensure existing characters maintained while also
contributing to a pedestrian atmosphere and serve to support compatibility between single
family neighborhoods and adjacent mixed use or non-residential development this location
for this site is adjacent to future post oak road which is a primary arterial on the city's
mobility plan it is additionally 400 feet from pecan creek elementary school and about
2200 feet to the north is villages of caramel park so this is within the park school of
a 10 minute walk and any of the higher intensity uses such as multifamily and some of those
other commercial uses would require the specific use permit to just to to show how they are
compatible with the adjacent neighbors neighborhood development and with that location being next
to a primary arterial this develop an r7 zoning district here would buffer the adjacent residential
from that primary arterial roadway this is also consistent with the future land use map
the site is designated as neighborhood mixed use which is intended primarily for residential
development and a mix of housing types as well as non-residential neighborhood serving
amenities it's typically found in an established part of the city established neighborhoods
within the city and where neighborhoods serving retail could be appropriate to be accessible
to the neighborhoods buildings should also be appropriately scaled and have an intensity
that is complements the surrounding neighborhood staff believes this is appropriate as it would
be a residential zoning district and it is in a in a developed neighborhood area notifications
were completed per the DDC and state law and property and notices were mailed within two
hundred and five hundred feet we did receive one letter in opposition from the adjacent
property bringing the opposition to four point seven percent and the applicant did not conduct
a neighborhood meeting but did reach out to her neighbors including the adjacent property
and I believe she is here to speak if you have questions staff is recommending approval
of the rezoning request to r7 as it complies with all criteria and I'll be happy to answer
any questions any questions for staff commissioner riggs yeah so Aaron just to confirm that the
reason for this rezoning is basically just so that they can essentially get their permit
which triggered them meeting the plat and even if say they were to redevelop they couldn't
just come in and put apartments up they need a specific use permit for that correct okay
thank you commissioner dire you said there you received one letter of opposition did
they state any reasons why they were opposing this the letter did just say that they wanted
to stay how it is and that was emailed to you earlier today I don't know anything I'll
be on that any further questions you said the applicant is here to speak I believe so
so this is a public hearing you're welcome to come come speak if you'd like or or just
stay for questions if you want it's up to you okay I will say I'm I hope the process
has been relatively speedy and and easy yeah sorry if if you want to talk you need to come
to the podium so it can be on on the record sure sure if you can state your name and address
for the record okay and the address of oh 6287 and 6289 poppers patriot thank you yeah
really my only question I know that we as a city see lots of different types of applications
everything from hey we want to be able to fix our septic tank to we want to to be able
to build you know three million square feet of industrial space and I understand my question
is just has your experience been good with staff to be able to to move through this process
and understand what is required it's been great and I mean it's just so many different
components of having to you know talk to the city sewer guy and city water guy and you
know the planning and zoning and so I've learned a lot I mean it's definitely you know everything's
in education well I hope that you can learn a lot with a new septic system soon any other
questions okay thank you yeah my whole plan I led my land I'm going to keep it the way
it is not yeah I mean so yeah definitely don't want apartments entertain a motion or discussion
Commissioner Riggs I'll make a motion to approve Commissioner Dyer I'll second that motion
and seeing no questions or discussion let's call for a vote on the board I will close
the public hearing and seeing no discussion I will call for a vote on the board
that item passes five zero thank you thank you that brings us to our other public hearing
of the night item 5c pd 23 - 0001 c
it's not what I wanted to display okay good evening Angie man glares development review
manager here to present PD 23 0001 this is Denton 195 so a bit of background about this
request this is a hundred and ninety five acre site generally situated at the southeast
intersection of I 35 W and Corbin Road this is a rezoning request from residential to
to an overlay plan development district with MN mixed-use neighborhood and public facilities
based zoning districts the intent of this overlay plan development district is to facilitate
a multifamily townhome and parkland development as it exists today the site is predominantly
undeveloped there are cluster of mature trees scattered throughout the site confirmed areas
of water related and riparian environmentally sensitive areas those exist around undeveloped
floodplain and floodway the future land use is moderate residential it is surrounded by
existing r2 to the north and the east of the subject property those are developed with
single-family homes to the southeast is ETJ division 1 also single-family residential
further south is the vintage development it is a planned development district it is single-family
and then to the west is I 35 W a little bit about the area roadway systems Corbin Road
is a east west roadway it is designated as a secondary arterial on the mobility plan is
currently an unimproved gravel roadway it does have variable right-of-way width 35 feet
at its most narrow approximately and 51 feet at its most wide it is only accessible from
the east it has been closed by city ordinance at the underpass of I 35 W I 35 W is designated
as a freeway and the city's mobility plan and it traverses north-south it's part of
the I 35 expansion project which is in schematic designs it will be improved upon further east
approximately 900 feet is the newly constructed and partially underway construction of Bonnie
Bray it is a north-south secondary arterial on the mobility plan a little bit more about
this request specifically as stated this is an overlay plan development request and it
has a couple of components to it which we are going to walk through but at a very high
level there are three tracks a B and C that are proposed to be rezoned to overlay plan
development with a mixed-use neighborhood base those tracks are in the orange ish color
the remaining hundred and thirty seven acres are proposed to be dedicated to the city or
an easement utilized for public open space uses those parcels can be seen on the lighter
blue shading on your map each of these tracks have different overlay conditions associated
with them so we're going to walk through them tracked by tracked so tracked a as you see
here outlined in pink is proposed to have a base zoning district of mixed-use neighborhood
there are no use restrictions on this particular tract meaning any use that is allowed in the
MN district could be permitted on tract a as part of the overlay conditions the applicant
is required to provide a 10-foot landscape buffer alongside the future northbound I 35
W frontage road as well as a 30-foot wide landscape buffer along the future Corbin road
as a condition of the overlay plan development no building permits shall be issued for tract
a until either one half of the full required width of Corbin road has been constructed
to extend with the newly constructed Bonnie Bray or one half the required width of Corbin
road is constructed to intersect with a future I 35 W northbound frontage road to help conceptualize
that a little bit I have this exhibit showing where those improvements would ultimately
need to be made to either connecting to the newly constructed Bonnie Bray or to tee into
the future I 35 W frontage roads went backwards I'm stuck in I'm sorry got stuck there specific
to tract B again outlined in pink this also proposes a base zoning district of MN with
use restrictions on it particular to this tract the only allowable use would be town
homes or single family residential it has the same as tract a meaning no building permits
shall be issued until either one half of Corbin road is constructed and extended to either
new Bonnie Bray or the I 35 W frontage road a maximum of 150 units is also proposed as
part of that overlay condition along with a maximum building height of 40 feet in addition
there are some higher level of compatibility buffer points required than we would require
by the DDC as it relates to the developing use and the existing single family to the
east and a 50 foot setback from the eastern and southern property lines which would be
this line and this line respectively specific to track C which is our last MN base zoning
district tract this again would permit all land uses in the MN zoning district building
permits shall not be issued until the completion of the future northbound I 35 frontage road
and that 10 foot landscape buffer outside of future text that right away in public utility
easements would also be required moving on to tracks D and E again outlined in the pink
the base zoning here would be public facilities this does have use restrictions the only allowable
uses would be park playground or open space the property owners shall either dedicate
parkland or an easement for public open space a developers agreement for the terms and conditions
of that parkland or open space is required and needs to be approved prior to the submittal
of a final plot for any of the three tracks we just spoke about that's a very high level
overview of the plan development overlay and the various conditions associated with each
tract this was reviewed in accordance with the general criteria for approval as well
as the criteria for approval in the comprehensive plan it's consistent with the comprehensive
plan it does comply with the DDC except for those sections that we have specifically noted
here in MN is designed to minimize adverse impacts the 2040 plan does designate this
as moderate residential it is predominantly designed to accommodate single family detached
housing as well as some low-rise multifamily and town homes it contemplates a density between
five and twelve dwelling units per acre the gross approximate dwelling units per acre
for this development comes out to around four the PD limiting the maximum number of units
allowed on tract B as well as the types of development that could occur on there do help
to ensure some of that density this is consistent with goal HN 1 to develop and maintain a diverse
housing stock with a variety of price points and choices the proposed rezoning of approximately
a hundred and thirty seven acres to be placed into public facilities for public open space
use is consistent with our goals of our preferred land preservation plan the existing eases
on site are predominantly within tracks D&E and by maintaining them for public open space
we're able to achieve the goals of our preferred land preservation plan the parks conservation
and environment section of the comprehensive plan also calls for the creation of cohesive
green infrastructure throughout the city the dedication or easement use of the hundred
and thirty seven acres is consistent with goal PCE one to unite Denton through a framework
of parks and open space as well as action 544 to encourage the dedication of eases such
as floodplains and open spaces for community recreation uses we've talked through most
of the conditions and they're also included in your backup as well as the the PD overlay
and they've been derived to help ensure some compatibility and enforce design standards
to ease transition from the more intensive uses you would see along the 35 corridor to
the single family uses situated to the east but just specifically I'll remind you of a
few the restriction of allowable uses on track to be to townhomes and single family only
along with the imposition of the maximum hundred and fifty units and forty foot building height
there's an additional ten buffer points required along that eastern property line where existing
single family residential is the development on tracks D&E is restricted to parks playground
and open space and the PD as a whole proposes a series of access conditions that are designed
to ensure that adequate roadway facilities are in place prior to the construction of
any dwelling units public outreach was conducted in accordance with state law and the development
code I have received another response or two since this slide was last updated they have
been forwarded to you as of about five o'clock this evening it did account for approximately
twenty percent of the land area in opposition so this would require a supermajority vote
at City Council the neighborhood I'm sorry the applicant has conducted several neighborhood
meetings I'll leave them to speak more specifically to that with that staff is recommending approval
of this request it is tentatively scheduled for City Council on May 6th and I'm happy
to answer any questions the developer is here and is also able to answer any questions you
may have of them thank you Angie I will open the public hearing at this time questions
for staff commissioner product area Angie were you able to get those numbers that I
asked for yes so track to be proposes no more than 150 units combined of townhomes or single
family the question that was asked in work session was how many units could be developed
under the zoning today given the minimum lot size of 16,000 square feet in residential
tube that tract is approximately 26.1 acres so keep in mind this is this is very rough
math it does not assume any ESA or floodplain or future right of way dedication at the maximum
it would be 70 units taking the math at just face value thank you other questions of staff
at this time Commissioner Dyer you talked about right now with the future land use that's
moderate housing and that there's about five to twelve homes per acre in that does the
townhouses in track B or do the potential apartments in a and C align with the five
to twelve homes per acre so our standard practice has been to look at gross acreage which would
assume the 195 acres when reviewing density and again please keep in mind that when reviewing
PD overlays the conceptual plan is conceptual and subject to change so based on the math
that we we had it worked out to about 4.08 units per acre at the gross density so including
the unusable floodplain area it would include yes the entire 195 acres and then all the
trees in sections D and E will they be protected well in the proposed overlay are there is
it written in there because I didn't see it so I and I was reading through it a couple
of times and I could have missed it because there's a lot in there are the trees protected
where in D and E the developer can't cut down the trees so it's not a blanket statement
that the developer cannot cut down any trees the debt and development code requires a minimum
30 percent preservation of all heritage and quality trees on site or a reduction to 20
percent if using secondary trees as part of overlay plan developments or plan developments
in general we don't allow for a reduction in the minimum preservation so they're not
requesting that that wouldn't be allowable they'd be required to meet the minimum preservation
but that would also be for all areas outside of the ESA.
Just to make a point and Angie kind of touched on it at the end on tracks D and E given the
fact that there is so much ESA that encumbers the property the the trees in all likelihood
would be remaining right so trees within ESA they don't necessarily work for developer
or against I should say work for a property owner against a property owner when it comes
to tree preservation but but given that they're in that ESA they would be protected.
Yeah I was just more kind of concerned about D and E since that's supposed to be parkland
playground like is there a reason why those trees would need to be touched if they're
not if they're only developing A B and C. Angie correct me if I'm wrong but I believe
we amended our debt and development code about three years ago to at least allow for construction
of trails and but know that any project that that we do we typically are very cognizant
about what trees would have to be removed in order to be able to accommodate trail improvements
and similar.
Yeah that's a good point there are very few things that could be done in floodplain and
floodway predominantly things that don't allow for any sort of rise so we're talking about
like disc golf courses or or trails in that potential parkland area but to Tina's point
earlier that the ESA regulations are pretty stringent and we don't allow for the removal
of those those trees.
So I can't say that no tree will come out but that that area is pretty protected.
And I have lots of other questions but I'll let my fellow colleagues here talk.
Commissioner Riggs.
Yeah so we kind of talked about this a little bit in work session but essentially out of
the entire the entire property that's being rezoned more than half of it is floodplain
to be dedicated to the city and we just said that you really can't do much with it except
for golf course but we're also allowing that to be added to the density so essentially
more than half of the property is going to be dedicated to the city but we're adding
that into the density that they can build on in their lots like I said I kind of have
a hard time with that yes so I'd love to hear from that.
I don't know that I have much to add add to that other than the standard practice has
been for for zoning changes to take in that that gross density now we do require with
development parkland dedication fees and so this would offset some of that and to touch
on your your gifting of the city but in terms of how that net density is calculated I don't
have much to add to you know.
Yeah the only thing I would add is you know one of the things we take into consideration
is knowing that especially if land is encumbered by floodplain that that's land that's not
going to be developed right so then it essentially diffuses the the density otherwise within
the area if you will so you know that that's one of the reasons why we take into consideration
we look at the gross acres of the tract in and how that relates to the Conference of
Plan land use policies because if we know that land is not going to be able to be developed
with like in this case for residential purposes right given that's what they're looking at
doing on the other tracks then then by allowing for that open space land to help be factored
into that density calculation overall the number of people within the area or the number
dwelling units within the area is still going to be low because we're basically giving them
the benefit of that floodplain land.
And I guess that goes to my next question so to for parkland dedication floodplain is
just accepted as any other type of property that's not encumbered with floodplain.
So we we touched on this a little bit in in work session the parks department to my understanding
part looks at every case case by case conversations relating to this land have been in process
for some time we're in the entitlement stages whether that land is dedicated to the city
or an easement is utilized for perpetual open space uses we consider that a case by case
basis those terms will be worked out through the developer agreement but the project does
help achieve the the inner trail connectivity on this side of 35 as well as more towards
the Hunter and Cole area.
Thank you.
Commissioner Dyer sorry.
So just for full disclosure I did attend the neighborhood meeting that McAdams had put
on a couple weeks ago just because I wanted to have a clear understanding of this project
since this is only my third planning and zoning meeting and so I know there's been a lot of
background with some past presentations in the past couple of years so I did go to that
I have received emails from Doug Henry Nancy Condon and Kyle Eden all neighbors in that
area and all against this as well as I took Miss Fergens advice about because some of
these people wanted to meet with me and so she suggested to reach out to my councilman
so I reached out to Councilman Holland and he said you know go for it like if somebody
wants to meet with you he said take every advantage to talk to them.
So I did meet with Margie Ellis and Patty Haywood who also live in the area to give
concerns and really when you go out there and I and I did go out there a lot of those
houses are on you know an acre or multiple acres of land and so there's just a lot of
concern that this is not going to be compatible with the community and it was interesting
because when I was driving down the road that there is a big gate from like a railroad crossing
and I thought well that was very interesting I'm like did this used to be a railroad back
here well no it's the city has an arm there so if it does flood the arm can go down so
nobody can pass through the road and so Margie and Patty were telling me that it does flood
you know pretty consistently back there.
So I just kind of wanted to you know share all of that with you all just on that extra
you know piece of information and in the emails Mr. Henry and Mr. Eaton specifically referenced
a lot on the Denton 2040 plan and how they felt like there were several parts in there
that this project just does not align with and their concerns in regards to that.
Any other questions for staff just so we can get kind of the factual information out there
for Commissioner Pradoquio oh sorry yeah.
I just wanted based on what I've learned right and I also did speak to some of the community
members I also spoke with Doug Henry on the phone and I walked the property with Mr. Eaton
as well I spoke to Ms. Ellis as well and anyone else that emailed thank you for doing that
even if I didn't get a chance to respond to your email but I've read all of it.
I just want to ask based on how the land is zoned right now the land can still be dedicated
as it's zoned now to the city right so the rezoning doesn't have to happen if the owner
wants to gift the property right track D&E to the city they're able to do that right
now.
We do allow parks and open land to be situated in the residential two zoning district going
back through some of the history of this case when it initially came in it was it was planned
to possibly go to UNT when that didn't work out the city expressed interest it is a standard
practice for when a public or semi-public entity does have interest in that property to put
it into that PF zoning okay but it doesn't have to be it's not a requirement okay I just
want to understand that because because we allow public parks by right in all zoning
districts so that's why okay just so that I understand so really all of the concerns
that were expressed to me and I can go through them afterwards after we do the public hearing
that kind of is that kind of is null and void then because it could be they can be gifted
at any zoning right am I correct and to say that parkland yes okay it's allowed in all
of our okay so really what we're what we're talking about is tracked A B and C is what
I'm understanding where the major opposition might be from the neighboring from people
that are the neighbors sure they're the only clarifying statement or just yes statement
that I would like to make is that keep in mind because this is an overlay PD those conditions
do get attached as a function of the zoning and our binding on that property and so while
parkland could be developed in R2 those the zoning conditions that we're talking about
today those are specific to this request I just want to make sure we have that distinction
yeah but I don't disagree that the the other tracks are the the ones were more of a change
we'll be seeing okay thank you I'll reserve the rest for later sure yeah yeah I mean just
to take Angie's point so keep in mind to your question yes the the park property could occur
under the R2 zoning but given how the conditions are worded as such in the proposed plan development
district it does limit it to park dedication or an open space easement and then there are
also certain conditions that are included in the proposed PD that outline obligations
associated with a development agreement being approved by City Council as it relates to
that property and it's tied to prior to plats being submitted for any development on tracks
a b and c because keep in mind with development of tracks on a b and c particular for residential
uses there are parkland dedication requirements that come into play with that so if the property
is dedicated to the city that is able to assist with meeting some of their parkland dedication
requirements I'm looking to Gary so correct me if I'm wrong on that but but also the other
thing I wanted to point out to kind of follow up to Commissioner Riggs question the park
ordinance does require more land to be dedicated if it is floodplain versus non-floodplain land
right because non-floodplain land has a greater value and I believe the ratio is three to
one Gary Gary's giving me hand signals in the back so so because we realize that floodplain
land has very limited opportunities associated with our base but but it also serves can serve
as as valuable parkland for us so it just helps but again hence why part of this parkland
conversation is included with this zoning request because there's a component associated
with it that could help with meeting some parkland dedication requirements for any residential
development that would happen on tracks a b and c and and lastly one of the thing you
know Angie was talking about the the comprehensive plan you may recall a zoning case that we
had not too long ago where we had a property that had a significant growth of trees on
that western portion and we worked to be able to assist with preservation of those trees
in order to be able to make meet some of the community's desires there so we were able
to cluster the development predominantly on the eastern portion this proposed PD before
you also allows for that clustered type of development that the comprehensive plan also
supports so you know for tracks a b and c that's why the development is being clustered
in and concentrated in those areas so just wanted to be able to share that as well.
Commissioner riggs yeah I think just just follow up on that and thank you for looking
that up I appreciate that but I guess no matter what the zoning is they would have to do parkland
dedication as they developed and since it's all floodplain that they're wanting to donate
or they get park laying for they can't do anything with it anyway so for them that just
means they don't somebody doesn't have to pay taxes on it and now the city base essentially
has to take care of it and so I don't know I just kind of it's kind of like okay well
it's floodplain and can't be used for anything but we'll we'll take it and we'll put a trail
on it and that's about the only use we can have for it so all of the PD requirements
for restrictions I kind of don't don't really matter a whole lot because it's going to be
owned by the city so it can't be developed no matter what especially when it's developed
when it's donated but I guess and we'll probably get into it more but one of the other concerns
and I and I received several emails and I read them and I talked to one of the residents
as well but Corbin Road currently does not connect to 35 so where it's essentially what
this zoning would allow is two apartment complexes to basically go right there Corbin or along
thirty five and it seems like I don't know when that might actually happen but it seems
like all that traffic is going to end up on Corbin Road or they're then going to have
to just basically travel north to Airport Road and then turn around and we kind of talked
about the trip generation but maybe if we just go into just for the sake of this open
hearing kind of go into some of the details on that you're wanting some of the like the
more specific TIA details and how that traffic pattern would work yeah kind of kind of what
did the TIA show as far as trip generation and sure I'm going to ask Chandra to speak
to that he's far more better explaining it than I am good evening chair and commissioners
Chandra Muruganandam city traffic engineer so specific to your request on traffic impact
on the trip generation the site a generates with the 450 units multifamily total of 162
AM trips and the PM of 214 trips and the site be with the multifamily or 150 town homes
it would generate approximately hundred trips during the AMP cover and hundred trips during
the PMP cover with site see with two hundred and eighty nine units it would generate approximately
hundred and twelve trips in the AMP cover and hundred and forty five trips during the
PMP cover and I think during the work session you said that this would essentially you evaluate
some of the intersections and it would be a level service D or better yes with all the
sites what they data collected they added to the existing network and analyzed the impact
their impact came out to be B or C C is the worst case with the level of service D being
acceptable to the city of Denton level of service D is like stop and go E is congested
F is like it's stopped traffic so A being the best and F being the worst this TIA projects
to be B and C are better thank you I got a couple questions for staff just to to make
sure I'm aligned on the Corbin Road right now when I look at our traffic impacts or
trade the the two thousand twenty two study that was done for the purpose of roadway impact
fees shows that that road has a peak our usage of nine vehicles does that sound about right
that's correct right now and I'm not an expert in current quality of a road in a future case
where the development opted to connect to the thirty five W access road instead of reconstructing
the entire way over to the new Bonnie Bray Road it sounds like the peak our usage for
that to lane road would be sufficient do we know anything about the condition of the pavement
how you know how much that increased traffic would impact the stability of the area given
the lack of drainage control that sort of thing has that been factored in yes so as
of right now it's a dirt road with not a good condition to drive and when the road is built
they will have carbon gutter and it will bring about the floodplain level and they will have
drainage components to drain the water what might be happening out there right now so
they will have all the components to have a good roadway okay and just to make sure
that my ballpark estimator is calibrated if you can follow me on the math here a similar
proposed roadway reconstruction maybe in a slightly different initial condition when
we were going through the twenty nineteen bond process Robertson Road the section that's
only two lanes if you're familiar kind of east of Teasley west of post oak right doesn't
have underground drainage it's two lanes right now and at the time because I was on that
committee the city engineer said that they hadn't really priced it out by then against
this was twenty nineteen before all the construction inflation but he imagined it could be up to
fifteen million dollars for that half mile of roadway primarily because of the expense
of drainage right and then when I look in the in that twenty twenty two roadway impact
fee study it shows that a future Corbin Road project just the roadway I think would be
about ten million and and I'm assuming that doesn't include drainage canals under all
that kind of stuff so it would be above that for the total project cost is that correct
okay and just one other question to make sure that we're clear on the the trail right of
ways and what could or must happen maybe this is more of an Angie question my my understanding
is that because a trail connection is shown on our mobility plan any development that
would take place including this land would have to provide an access easement for that
at the minimum but our development code would not require them to dedicate that land if
they didn't want to for parks is that an accurate statement yes that's an accurate statement
does that clarify and then I just because it's been such a long process several other
applications that we've seen with ESAs have included remediation proposals for the ESA
in order to to bring them back to a more healthy state there's a lot of privet in a lot of
these areas etc I didn't see anything within the proposed PD overlay stipulating remediation
of privet and and that sort of thing in the ESA is that something that was considered
or not present because it's not here for some reason every even though it's other places
in the city help me understand that sure great question and it's not in this PD remediation
efforts reason being as kind of as we discussed in work session still working through those
entitlement phases knowing that environmentally sensitive field assessment has been done confirming
the areas where we know we do have ESA and we don't that next step would be the more
fine-grained site planning where we would know if there are going to be encroachments
into the ESA requiring that they go through that that all all ESA plan which is where
you see those remediation plans come forth so as we work through you know various agreements
or site plans or civil engineering plans the ESA requirements need to be adhered to and
then if there's a need for an old ESA plan and that's when you would typically through
that separate process see your remediation plans calling for removal of privet or enhancement
of a certain section okay thank you any other staff questions because I know there's lots
of complicated things sorry sorry I just wanted to follow up to that so the the ESA remediation
is only triggered if they're getting into the ESA as part of the alternative ESA plan
and approval process there is a separate remediation plan that needs to offset the encroachments
into that ESA but since it's all being dedicated to the city that there wouldn't be any encroachment
into that with the development so anything that's dedicated to the city the city would
need to do the remediation in the future that would all still need to be worked out through
that developers agreement including who ultimately maintains and manages either that that open
space or if it's an easement that's dedicated the terms of agreement of that easement okay
thank you Commissioner Perrone for Angie going back to the tracks just so I understand completely
track a is they're just proposals right now of plans but track a is proposed to be single
family homes correct it is tracked be tracked it does help when you can see them all I want
to blanket okay so just as quick refresher before we get to public comment sure tracked
be is the one closest to existing single-family and furthest from the highway this is the
one with the use restrictions so only townhomes and single-family would be allowable and a
and C have a base zoning district of mixed-use neighborhood with the intent of developing
as multifamily but there is not a use condition that restricts the property to that only meaning
any of the allowable uses in MN in the future if deemed appropriate could go there so for
example if it's a project proposal and let's say either townhomes or multifamily it's still
unknown what the result would be it's like oh as far as like what type of development
would be choosing whether it would be a mixture of both or solely townhomes or solely multifamily
for tracked be tracked not the one for a yeah the intent is is for multifamily development
however I just want to make it clear that because it's an overlay PD and we're pretty
we're adopting a base zoning with no restrictions that that could change to an allowable use
in the MN zoning district okay because the concept plan that is you know used to talk
through is not is not finalized like it would be in a standard PD sure thank you.
Commissioner Dyer.
I'm just a couple more questions so the developers agreement that you're talking about the zoning
if the current owner were to sell the property does all of that convey and carry over to
the new owner.
Yes overlay plan development conditions run with the land not with the owner so if the
property were to be sold by a new individual they're subject to the same terms and conditions
as outlined in the overlay PD the only way for that to change or be amended is by going
back through this process with a amending overlay plan development.
And would you have to do a new developers agreement with a new developer.
That I think that would also transfer but if terms are altered or if conditions are
wanting to be modified we'd be back in much the same situation.
Okay and then the other question I have is Corbin's going to get expanded because right
now it's just a very narrow dirt road so you're going to have a grassy media and you're going
to have lanes on each side you're going to have some landscaping so you're going to take
not only the southern property that this current owner has but also as you move east you're
going to take those other homeowners part of their property and then all the property
owners on the north eminent domain are we trying to work out a deal and also when Corbin
gets extended east to connect to the new Bonnie Bray I'm assuming you're going to have to
try to acquire those properties as well like is there a plan.
Sure and I see Chandra standing I'll let him jump in in a minute to address some more of
the details for clarification as part of this project and what's required to be constructed
there would be no right of way taken from northern property owners that at this time
for the improvements of the two lanes to serve the development is not needed.
So it's all coming from the southern.
It comes from the southern portions so you are correct there is land area to the east
that is not under this owners ownership as well as some parcels needed to make that connection
to the new Bonnie Bray but the dedication is coming from the southern side to make that
improvement to make it two lanes essentially one lane each way.
Did I leave anything out Chandra?
Because that kind of has to happen in order because that part of the overlay is A and
C can't be developed until that extension is done correct?
Yes the improvements need to be made to connect fully connect to either the new Bonnie Bray
or 35 whichever comes first with this right of way section that you see here.
We know how fast text that works so I would think that the city of Denton could work faster.
Sorry just to follow up to that but it in order to extend it further east past this
property then the city would need to purchase that right of way and build that portion of
the road.
Additional right of way is required yes.
Okay so in order to for this development to happen the city has basically skin in the
game and they have to build part of the roadway.
The only I guess what I would add to that is the making that connection to new Bonnie
Bray has been something our transportation team has been working on and investigating
after having held a neighborhood meeting in this area in the summer of 2024 which really
highlighted some of the access challenges that individuals situated north of the subject
property have.
Okay I guess if I could add a follow-up comment to your point regarding the city having skin
in the game the city has skin in the game regarding Corbin Road regardless and the reason
why I say that with with tracks A and B if they were to develop the developer is going
to build the southern portion of the roadway but the northern portion of the roadway eventually
is going to have to be built at some point in time so if this zoning were to be approved
then it's really a shared responsibility of constructing the roadway because the developer
will have their portions part of their development obligations but given conditions that are
on the north side particularly where the existing single-family residential lots are the city
would likely be then building the roadway as part of the capital improvements within
the existing right of way that's there.
Any property on the north side of Corbin if it had the opportunity to be developed then
at such point in time when the property is developed that developer would have the obligation
for those roadway roadway improvements adjacent to their property so but we we still have
a commitment in this and and I think one of the things that you know regardless of what
happens with this development one of the things that we the city are working on is trying
to help assist with that connection to new Bonnie Bray one of the things that was very
evident in a meeting that we hosted last summer I think it was late summer was that given the
existing access considerations within the area we know we have some challenges and so
our commitment was to be able to look further to see what kind of improvements we could
make for trying to secure that connection to the new Bonnie Bray I know many residents
at that time had expressed concern regarding when there's incidents in the area that they
have not been able to get to their homes and and we heard that loud and clear and so that's
why from that point on we've been in discussions with okay how can we work to at least try
and secure that connection to new Bonnie Bray thank you yeah and obviously the city has
skin in the game anytime there's a roadway but thank you yeah so where was this I guess
on the CIP priority list is it was it I mean they'll just move this up on the CIP list
I assume so this carbon road section is on the service area B and on the priority list
first and second.
Commissioner Perodrone you're still on the board did you have a question okay just one
final one from me thank you everybody for being patient this is just a complex application
I've heard before that notwithstanding all these issues right the for instance the reason
I'm asking this is that the the conceptual plan which just so everybody understands it's
it's conceptual it's a drawing that shows what staff and the applicant believe would
be possible under the proposed zoning but it's not anything beyond that but it did show
a roadway connection across the ESA my understanding is that when you cross a floodway you're not
allowed to put any vertical support elements actually within the floodway and it has to
span that distance is that a fair statement for roadways it's not the case this is a carbon
is a mobility plan roadway sorry not not for Corbin Road for the internal connection if
if there was a desire to have an internal roadway across that floodplain you mean connecting
the sitey C to sitey exactly that's right yeah there are some restrictions on ESA that
needs to be mitigated yes so notwithstanding the ESA restrictions assuming those would
would be amenable to council the physical construction of a roadway crossing a floodway
my understanding is that the deck has to span between supports on on the extents other sides
of the floodway that's correct but it can go in the floodplain area beyond that that's
not correct okay thank you any other questions before we get to public's comments okay not
seeing any thank you Angie thank you Chandra I already opened the public hearing the the
applicant per our rules gets to to speak first so I will invite Randy Rivera up to speak
so I'm clear on the time is there a drive o'clock yes as the applicant you get 10 minutes
is there a clock up here there should be I don't see it yet it should appear once it's
usually there okay it will appear momentarily so please state your your name and address
for the record and then you will have 10 minutes right and then I need to share my presentation
when will that come up do I need to do that there's probably a yeah there's there's a
couple screens on there okay okay thank you all right thank you all right my name is Randy
Rivera I am a land planner with McAdams located at 4400 State Highway 121 in Louisville thank
you for the opportunity to present tonight I want to go through some of the slides and
a little bit more detail I'm not trying to cover the things that Angie and staff have
already covered in great detail and I appreciate that here's a timeline of events that we did
submit first thing early and mid 2022 been through this for four years the ownership
I'm representing here on behalf of the property owner Denton 195 Partners LLC and they've
owned the land for about a decade or so and so the green I've highlighted those those
are our neighborhood outreach meetings and then there was one in July that was referenced
about the city led that one about mobility and the Corbin Road improvements all right
here the site conditions it is unique we've talked about that I'm not going to belabor
it but there is about seventy five percent of the property is floodplain and about eighty
percent of the property is E ESA's so those do overlap okay so I'm not trying to duplicate
those and then the the topo the high point of the property is on the east side if you
see my mouse and then it dips down into this floodplain and then it comes back up so altogether
it's about twenty five feet of fall a text that has acquired the right away for the thirty
five expansion for the frontage roads all right here's some aerial views of the property
looking in these different directions the total tree coverage is at about thirty two
percent of the property and you can see there's a lot of pasture land and it's used right
now for grazing we spent a lot of time talking about the moderate residential and it is a
large this is one of the largest orange kind of polygons for this moderate residential
on the city's land use map I think it's located in a very strategic place along 35 typically
you want to have some higher intensity uses along your major corridors it's not ideal
really for large lot single family to want to live along the highway it's not as desirable
so you can see that throughout the land use plan and it's also in a key location it's
close proximity to a major employment center the airport and again just close to the highway
and good mobility it does allow for a variety of housing types and it does encourage a transition
which is what we are proposing and the overall density about five to twelve units an acre
the zoning of our two has been in place since two thousand two the land this comprehensive
plan has been updated since then and that are two is three units an acre there about
but the land use plan indicates five to twelve and so this is what we've been working with
since we started this application are the open space and parks and you talked about
that property strategically located to provide an extension of the Hickory Creek trail system
and there's a lot of encouragement through the city's planning documents to preserve
open space to preserve these preservation areas wildlife corridors and things like that
there are two wildlife quarters coming through the property one to the northwest and one
directly to the east I'm sorry to the west all right this concept plan I'm sorry the
zoning exhibit that Angie pointed out just a reminder that the zoning conditions in this
PD are binding they are regulatory they're enforceable by the city whoever is to take
ownership to develop it will still be held to those same standards still accountable
to the commitments and timing and restrictions in those standards just like any other zoning
district throughout the city the overall concept plan this shows basically you know there's
a lot of land that's floodplain and ESA so we're only really left with about forty four
acres of developable property on a hundred and ninety five acres and so we looked at
and from the beginning looking at clustering and compact development design since it's
along the highway urban residential multifamily was suitable for that and then as we transition
over to the east adjacent to the single family to change it to a single family use altogether
on this plan just shy of eight hundred units so about four dwelling units per acre and
then there is internal and external access to the site to your point we were proposing
a street right here to connect track a to track see all sites have to have two points
of access we'll work through those in more detail when we get to the civil engineering
design phase and working with text dot we may be able to let them have let have them
approve two points of access here for track to see but that is something that we'll have
to work through when we do the final when we work through design in the detail of that
the orange corridors are indicating twelve foot trails aligning through the property
we'll work closely with the city on how those trails should be aligned this feedback that
we show here something that we've worked on a few years ago with city staff about that
I wanted to spend a little bit of time talking about the input over the last four years with
the four neighborhood meetings we had and then the community meeting the first concept
plan we showed had more multifamily five hundred eighty two units on site B then we came in
we listened to them these buildings that were running alongside Corbin road they would rather
see them be oriented where they're not as obtrusive so we rotated those and provided
a condition and the PD overlay that the building orientation be perpendicular to Corbin and
then that we also provided for more of a setback to the east to protect the property owners
over there reduce the density by sixty units then we met again a third time in twenty twenty
three reduce the units again to three hundred and fifty instead of the five twenty and based
on neighborhood input that we received from the twenty twenty earlier twenty twenty three
meeting you'll see more of a significant buffer and setback we still keep the same building
orientation we limit the height of forty feet then we had this fourth meeting this past
March and this meeting was about presenting the conditions to the public to the community
and here is where we heard them loud and clear from the meeting in July about mobility infrastructure
for Corbin and the improvements needed therein and so what we propose is that we would link
the development to the infrastructure and restrict ourselves from getting any building
permits until Corbin road was improved and it was the either option to to new body break
or to thirty five and then from that neighborhood meeting in March we also heard them loud and
clear about they felt like the multifamily was not a good transition to the single family
to the east therefore we updated the plan to do single family townhomes and that's consistent
with the town on regulations of the city of Denton's code about a hundred and fifty townhomes
is what we are requesting we're prohibiting multifamily on tract B and then we're adding
a fifty foot setback max height of three stories and continuing to link the building permits
to infrastructure improvements we want to make sure the infrastructure is in place before
people are living in these homes that was a commitment that we made earlier this year
so overall that was a reduction in about seventy five percent of the density for tract B throughout
the course of these neighborhood engagement meetings them additionally the conditions
of tract B Angie did a great job of pointing those out I'm not going to belabor those again
but again these are consistent with the city's code on what those townhomes can be only townhomes
and only single family no multifamilies allowed there the closest multifamily to any existing
residence is over nine hundred feet away and the overlay for sorry the conditions for tracks
A and B consistent with what and you pointed out that either one either of Corbin's improved
to talk to to go to thirty five or to go to new Bonnie Bray we talked to text out today
they have no they see no issue with connecting Corbin Road to text out right there it is
at grade at this location and they gave us a timeline of construction starting in twenty
thirty and then construction commencing in twenty thirty four so that's nine years from
now that that would be able to happen and the developers making a commitment to work
with the city through a developer's agreement on the improvements to Corbin Road to get
it over to Bonnie Bray to be able to develop tract A and B sooner than nine years from
now all right and then here's the street section and he showed this is Angie showed this as
well the road is being pushed to the south it's extended to the south it's encumbering
more this property as it goes over to new Bonnie Bray the reason for that is throughout
the duration of this four year period Atmos or in link came in and put a four inch gas
line you see that in the middle right here they went ten feet off the edge of the existing
roadway of Corbin we have to continue to stay ten feet away from that gas line and so we're
proposing to travel lanes one in each direction there are twelve feet there will still be
seventeen feet of the right away and then again a thirty foot buffer is in the conditions
Mr. very sorry just to interrupt you the timer doesn't seem to be working so about two or
three minutes thank you yeah I could not see I appreciate you give me the warning and then
a track C is totally contingent on the frontage roads being built we'll work with text out
to see how we can get two points of access if it's not viable to construct an access
point and then the park and open space area we will work with a city if it's whether it's
dedicated whether it is an an access easement I will point out there are parks and floodplains
throughout DFW Lewisville Railroad Park is an example of fields and things like that
and the open space and I this is one package deal and the zoning is tied to this the agreement
that we would work through with the city at a future date to do the dedication or the
easement so if that weren't able to happen I don't foresee this being able to be dedicated
and then all these other agreements you know the access routes will be worked through and
everything like that and then we would comply with ESA standards TIA said there had to be
two left turn lanes one at driveway one one at driveway four and then just an overview
of the mobility of the area and improvements that are underway I know South State Loop
288 will be starting you know in the next year and then Bonnie Bray being open very
soon but there is great mobility in the area once these improvements are made so thank
you and I'll stand for any questions thank you any questions from Commission Commissioner
Riggs Randy thank you so you mentioned that y'all I know this is a difficult site obviously
and you mentioned that you reduced the number of units that you all wanted particularly
on track I believe it's B yes by about 75 percent did y'all I guess for me it is so
close to other large residential lots did y'all look at possibly doing anything less
dense than the townhomes and then maybe creating more of a buffer did y'all look at that well
with the multifamily we were able to provide more of a buffer and that's what we had proposed
for the last year and the feedback was that there the majority of the conversation at
that March meeting was they didn't see how that was compatible in any way shape or form
as much as I try to explain the separation the distance and the sight lines and they
would prefer a single family and use on track B and so our proposal is the townhomes and
we wanted to keep in mind that we're restricted to only 44 acres of developable area and the
improvements to Corbin Road are expensive and there you know if I know if you know it's
on the CIP developers are able to build these roads a lot faster than cities and if our
client the property owner is willing to come in and improve Corbin quicker than a certain
number of units as needed to be able to be achieved to offset that because that's quite
an expense there's a lot of infrastructure obligation with a property commissioner there
I had a very similar question to Commissioner Riggs is when you're looking at tracks A and
B was there any discussion to do like half acre lots and then maybe as you got closer
west to 35 West where you could do more of your traditional smaller single single family
lots and then that would leave see either up to the apartments or even up to townhouses
so you're still getting some multifamily but it's not up against this community that's
already R2 like going from R2 and then having this and then you know designation just it
doesn't seem very compatible of the town homes next to R2 you're saying we you know we the
track area being multifamily there's a lot of restrictions just working with the eases
and we're trying to not encroach in those areas so the developable land is you know
it's not it's not very much any at all to get enough yield out of there this is highway
property and so there is a certain kind of reality that's expected for the property and
the the amount of units that we're proposing I believe it's only four to five acres of
land that's required to be dedicated for the park dedication ordinance and so that was
all kind of package deal of to do this to be able to get these uses that the 137 acres
would be opened up for public access so no discussion with your client the owner of this
property or with the city about trying to keep it closer to R2 and doing like half acre
lots the numbers don't make it the amount of infrastructure needed it would not work
and there wouldn't be maybe less infrastructure on what you have to do to Corbin because it
would be a it would be less traffic no ma'am Corbin would still need two lanes okay any
other questions for the applicant okay thank you very much thank you so much I'll call
the the group representative first for the Denia neighborhood association Kyle Eaton
if you can come forward and state your name and address we're working on an alternative
timer solution but in the meantime I'll just give you fingers once you get down to five
my name is Kyle Eaton I am on Corbin Road and I'm representing the Denia neighborhood
association sorry yeah thank you and I don't know how do I show this is this the DTV cam
yeah it should come on over I was gonna say are you wanting to show the the paper that
you just handed out they can do the overhead camera right fantastic thank you I actually
live on Corbin Road I have a driveway on Corbin Road which is scheduled to be secondary arterial
which I will be out of code so no one has explained to me how that's going to be handled
as there's gonna be a two lane road and I'm gonna have driveway access there's gonna be
a couple of us that have driving access no one's told that to us yet but what I wanted
to focus on today was I'm a numbers guy by business and so reading through the numbers
on the staff approval I don't know that I necessarily agree with the the four units
and what I want to do is I wanted to go back to one of the concept plans that that they
provided and I know concept plans are not binding right and so the concept plan that
the reason the reason why I use the one idea is because it's not binding it's it's actually
the fifth iteration right I think we're on the ninth iteration right now of the concept
plan but I just wanted to demonstrate that on certain parts of this property there are
not limitations specifically with regards to how many units are being built okay now
if we look at the restrictions let's let's let's look at the restrictions here site B
yeah site B they changed it we're going to be going down to 150 units from the original
what is that 319 so that's going to be lower but I want you to take notice on side a side
a has 450 units and so that's pretty close to what's being proposed right now but if
you look at site C site C actually has closer to 290 units there right now they're showing
it as 220 and so my point in this is saying we're basing recommendations we're basing
numbers based on concept plans that are not binding there's nothing to stop these individuals
from going back the developer going back and putting more there not only that since we're
on the topic of constraints in order for them to be able to develop it they have to donate
the land that's a hundred a hundred and thirty four acres I believe so they donate a hundred
and thirty four acres once that hundred and thirty four acres is out why aren't we basing
density on that right I don't understand that because what's really left is fifty eight
is it fifty eight acres I believe fifty eight acres are no well there's forty forty one
point forty one point five acres that are are developable I believe I'm just going by
numbers on here okay so I'm looking at about eight hundred and ninety nine units total
and that includes the hundred and fifty townhomes and if I divide that by forty one and a half
I come up with about twenty one units per per acre moderate residence is five to twelve
and I will tell you I am I am these numbers are generous for two reasons on here you will
you will notice that the right away has not been moved south on this so whenever they
move the right of way south they're actually taking more of the buildable land away so
that's going to drive density up in addition to that there's parts of the land that they
can't build we've already discussed that flood land right there's also a two acres of pond
there so we're counting that in the mix too so my point is once you start really looking
at what is actually buildable the rate is much much higher than that the other thing
that that I want to mention that I don't think we touched a little bit on the twenty forty
plan the way that I view the twenty forty plan the twenty forty plan was was supposed
to be forward looking we had all this r2 here and so what we're going to do is we're going
to look and we're going to say what can we put here what can we build here in the future
and so the city decided we're going to do moderate moderate density here right and they
set that as a standard what what we're proposing now is we're proposing that we move the goal
post there's there's commercial on the other side supposedly commercial on the other side
what hasn't been mentioned is that it's a federal highway there there is no way to get
across the road there used to be a way meaning that you could walk across the road but you
can't even walk across the road because there's a bridge that's broken down there and the
bridge is out so there's no way to get to the other side at all right so I don't understand
how we're saying commercial and then this is a buffer and this is a buffer between r2
that doesn't make sense that is not that is not transition that's transformation okay
those are two very different things the other thing that I want to point out that I don't
understand and we haven't had a point our time to discuss this is that my understanding
of the overlay is that in order to build track a the development has to connect either right
here to bonnie bray or it has to connect from right here to 35 same thing holds true I'm
sorry I said a I should have said the track day same thing it has to go here or it has
to go here so my question is if they go they run into problems with getting land right
here and they decide to go this way all this is able to be developed that leaves an area
right here that's single lane gravel road and not only is it single lane gravel road
but it's a residential area that you have to go down on bonnie bray which is a residence
you'll have to hit rose lawn and that's the problem that we talked about with the city
last July the solution that first proposed does not address that whatsoever we still
have that same issue what should even be more important to the city is a scenario where
both of these get built out my question is what is to stop the developer from building
out both ways and not building in the floodplain if the floodplain is is the four minutes left
if the floodplain is the most costly place to build I'm going to build out and so part
of the reason that I have concern about that is because we are talking about putting 800
units total in this area we're taking land that was once permeable turning it non-permeable
and we're forcing it all into a floodplain and then in addition to that further up on
bonnie bray right by UNT we've just improved drainage huge culverts going in further south
by carbon we're doing more drainage and so that's going to increase the water flow that's
going through my question is if we don't have full development of all the road are we not
going to end up with a choke point right there and I can tell you June 2nd of last year we
got an inch and a half of rain I went out there was 10 inches of water on Corbin Road
in a place that was not marked on the floodplain and I was in the meeting with the developer
and I said you have to understand these floodplains are not currently accurate you are planning
on building in areas that are flooding right now and nobody responded nobody listened to
me and I still haven't got I haven't got any indication from the city as to how much
it's going to cost to actually build the infrastructure and I brought that up to the developer said
you have to build infrastructure there you have to build infrastructure like it's the
maximum amount and I got looked at like I had two heads that has to be done otherwise
once again land is going to be taken away from people this time not from roads but because
the floodplain is going to expand on all of us that are upstream so thank you for your
time and that's all I had thank you any questions just for decorum reasons we prefer not to
to clap I understand everybody's excited we'll get through this process together I promise
any questions for the speaker okay sure I don't know if it was inadvertent or not but
it does relate to what was talked about before looking at the agenda agenda item nine look
like it was left off the agenda it's the suitable uses form and I think that's important because
A and C have no restrictions on them so commercial and other things could technically go in there
yeah Angie can you go ahead and and pull up that my apologies that was inadvertently left
off of the the digital copy link but we do have that to show here on a slide yes don't
know the ins and outs of I can leave it over we can do we can reference it as we need but
this is the table of allowed uses as found in the DDC it was intended to be in the packet
I'm unsure what happened sorry about that okay okay thank you Angie next I have a card
for Rebecca Biggie if that's correct Bray I'm sorry I I now see the extra part of the
R I apologize please come in and share your name your correct name and your address and
we're talking about Rebecca Bray address traffic engineer I did the TIA with Langan engineering
out of Austin Texas nine nine zero six north Mopac Expressway so I'm just here to answer
any questions you might have let me know and I will be happy to to address them so thank
you any questions from the Commission Commission rigs I guess I just have one when you when
you're doing the TIA I guess you did not take into account Corbin being connected to 35
we did in the TA we did multiple iterations one with it connection one with it connecting
to one with it not connecting it just connecting over to what I call old Bonnie Bray and then
in June or June or July I think it was Chandra asked us to also look at the extension of
Corbin over to new Bonnie Bray so we did a multiple multiple scenarios and I think we
even went up to 2050 okay so the TIA you're operating off of then it assumes that Corbin
will be connected to 35 that assumption is in there yes okay I say that assumption because
there's other excuse me there's other assumptions as well okay perfect thank you I don't see
any other questions next I have a card from Patricia Patricia Sherman if you'd like to
speak go ahead and come up and state your name and address and you'll have four minutes
I am Patricia Sherman my address is twenty twenty five Tremont Circle in Denton Texas
as a resident of the area of the Denia neighborhood we are concerned particularly with getting
ahead of ourselves and I think that there is just so much contingent in this plan that
so much has to be done by the city that I think that adoption of the zoning change is
a bit premature with what we have at this point the traffic is a concern but we've we've
heard those studies even the the overlays I think don't extend to the part on 35 but
particularly then the inability to access southbound 35 is a significant concern that
that will be a lot more through the neighborhoods etc. but any out egress from that then to
go south would be would be problematic and I think a lot has been covered already that
I was going to say and probably will be by others so I'll end with that thank you any
questions seeing none I have a card for Chris Watts if you could come and state your name
and address evening please stay healthy on the way down Chris Watts Bonnie Bray Street
excuse my voice I've got a little allergies honorable chair members of the planning zoning
commission this project I'm not here supporting or opposing it's not right it's premature
and I'm going to tell you why it's got a condition in the overlay conditions that could
blow the whole thing up it's all predicated upon the city of Denton accepting 130 acres
of floodplain for park dedication when there may have been some informal discussions but
the whole thing is predicated on that and I believe that it's premature to consider
that this this zoning request until there's some kind of official either memorandum of
understanding a draft development agreement that you can contract around for contingency
upon if it gets rezoned this thing comes into effect but I believe one of the conditions
was you cannot do any final planning until those things have occurred as a negotiation
coach at the law school one thing I was always told my students that always in my personal
and professional if you have a non-negotiable or a potential deal-killer you really want
to resolve that first because if you don't you're going to waste a lot of time looking
at a lot of things that in the end can just sort of vanish and this is a very complicated
complicated project and I understand if I was standing in the property owner's shoes
I would be doing the same thing because the filet mignon of this project is track B because
it's the highest point it's the point that can be developed probably pretty much immediately
they can build Corbin road out to old Bonnie Bray depending on how they get the connection
to the new Bonnie Bray and I need to say as a policymaker for over 14 years I've never
agreed with the density transfers and especially in this kind of situation where you have a
hundred and thirty acres that you're going to say we've got density of four units per
acre on this whole track but you're including a hundred and thirty acres that cannot be
developed and Commissioner Riggs I really agree with your statement that we were taking
it out and I'm not saying that they shouldn't have some density but to say that there's
four units per acre on this just understand it's including a hundred and thirty acres
so I would I would recommend that you postpone this to an event certain and that event certain
is that there be some kind of excuse me draft memorandum of understanding or letter of intent
or something that says that the city is willing to accept this floodplain because I will tell
you based upon my own experience that there's not as much of an appetite for that right
now because it's expensive you have liability and it's not cheap to develop parkland and
right now we do have a lot of parkland this land banked and right now we don't have the
money to even develop them and that's no slight against staff it's no slight against city
management it's those are just the facts so I think at the least there needs to be some
more of an indication if the city is going to be okay with this because you're going
to spend a lot of time trying to figure this out it's going to go to council it's going
to require 20% majority if the opposition holds up and then what happens if the city
looks at it either now or five years from now and says we don't want this where does
it leave you it leaves a land with an entitlement that can't be done we wasted all this time
I would just simply say try to get some indication have city staff put something together where
the developers can come staff can come here and say we are willing to do this city is
willing to do this because if you don't have that you really don't have much because at
any moment the whole thing could just sort of vanish into thin air so thank you so much
for your time and thank you for your service to our community thank you.
Next I have a card from Jack Howell please come forward state your name and address for
the record and you'll have four minutes and I'll give you a 2-1.
I'm Jack Howell I live at 3198 South Bonnie Bray Street so you see where I'm going to
be impacted quite a bit if this is rezoned a multiple family my property joins this 195
acres on the north and west so that's my property line all the way it joins and a lot of things
have already been addressed so I won't take me just a minute but that's that's the reason
I oppose it because I don't there's a lot of questions out there that I haven't heard
being answered and a big concern is that that's proposed for park area and if city takes that
on just you know if you're going to develop that and maintain it it's going to be a lot
of money in it and I've lived on that property 43 plus years and that when Hickory Creek
gets out of bank it's way over my head and all the pasture fences I have it's over them
and I don't think Kyle even realized the magnitude of what a lot of rain coming down through
that one day and it's a lot of scrub brush on that open land and now cattle graze it
so they keep it grazed down pretty well but if it's not kept it's going to be a fire hazard
and most of the scrub brush on there is locust bushes and mesquite trees and and Chinese
privet and all those are hard to control and if you're in a floodplain it just you cut
it down and it comes back up so it's just a problem and then where I live there I'm
concerned with the buffer there between and and what is it what is it going to amount
to my as far as my property is concerned and how is the city gonna are they gonna infringe
on the property that I own and I appreciate your time and and thank you.
Thank you. Next I have a card for John Brown if you'd like to come forward. Sorry we just
had an update on the group speaking we've had a request that that that's well it's
for the Denia neighborhood association that's intended to be used with four people who are
present from that neighborhood association who opt to not speak so just need to to confirm
if there are four other people in the room who are planning to not speak that okay thank
you carry on John good evening I'm John Brown I live at 206 Goodson Way so my backyard butts
up against Corbin my family owned the property owned by 195 land from about 1980 to about
2002 so I grew up on that land I'm very familiar with it my concerns about this proposed rezoning
are several one is it's incompatible with the character of the neighborhood you mentioned
single-family residents but along the western side of the old Bonnie Bray between Parvin
and Hickory all of those are 0.6 acres per home or higher and when you go on to Sola
Way or Goodson Way the two cul-de-sacs there are acre lots and then as you move from Corbin
towards Hickory Creek the property gets even larger so from Corbin Road to Hickory Creek
there's four families residing in a quarter mile Mr. Barber Mr. Howe Mr. Barber's parents
and then a gentleman who lives right on Hickory Creek this is rural fringe area there's grazing
in our backyard we see bobcats foxes there's deer it's used for cows as my wife and I were
coming this evening we saw horses going down Corbin Road that's back where Estes stables
used to go on the trails for those of you a long time didn't nights this is rural fringe
area and according to the comprehensive 2040 didn't plan in that rural fringe area we will
discourage premature development and we will try to retain rural character and I don't
think that this rezoning and this proposed project does either of those additionally
Corbin Road is a bigger issue even has been mentioned so far not only is it dirt and undeveloped
and not only does it flood regularly I was there when they put in the railroad guard
to keep people from growing through but it's also very uneven so don't imagine a quarter
mile of dirt thing that's just going to be expanded there's a sharp hill that goes up
and then back and then again it's blocked off through 35 you can no longer pass through
flooding is a significant issue and Mr. Howell is right that's not merely along Corbin that's
also all over that property and so Hickory Creek when it rises all of our back pasture
would turn into a lake and so that's going to be a significant issue and like Kyle said
with the additional concrete and impermeable surfaces that's only going to get worse and
then there's just the idea of a park we're less than two miles from Dina Park which is
currently being expanded and improved we're less than two and a half miles from Southwest
Park the 190 acres that's going to be a significant development as a father of two children that
appreciates parkland we don't need additional park there it's going to be very expensive
to develop very expensive to maintain and it's unnecessary given the adequate park areas
that the city's investing into the south of us and to the east of us and the old Bonnie
Bray with the new Bonnie Bray expansion it's going to be cul-de-sac off near Parvin near
Chris Watts property and so now that's going to be we'll be cul-de-sacs on a cul-de-sac
and when you put the amount of traffic that's going to come in on the carbon Corbin and
then turning on to Bonnie Bray to try to access 35 or if waves directs the semi-traffics if
there's a blockage on 35 right now they turn off vintage all come down old Bonnie Bray that's
now going to be coming down Corbin there's a significant impact on the traffic that we're
already feeling and roads that used to be populated by moms with strollers and joggers
and walkers and bicyclist groups already a hazard with the amount of traffic we have
with the amount of traffic that's being proposed on Corbin on an old Bonnie Bray it's really
going to be a hazard and a danger and it's just not sufficient for what's being proposed
so at the very least I would request a postponement until there is an agreement on what's going
to be done with the land you know it not ought to be either we connected 35 with textile
or the new Bonnie Bray that should be a both and not an either or but when you actually
go and look at the neighborhood even that's going to be inadequate for what's being a
proposed for that property thank you all very much for your time thank you.
Next I have a card from Lisa Henry you're welcome to come up and say your name and address
for the record and you'll have four minutes and I'll give you some fingers thank you I'm
Lisa Henry I live at 212 Goodson way thank you all for this very thoughtful discussion
and all your questions John just said pretty much everything I was going to say but I will
I do want to reiterate then about the density issue and even if you take that there are
26 acres on track B with 150 units even track B has floodplain on it so they're all being
pushed to one side that is also the closest to where to where all the current houses are
the other thing that I wanted to say is that again the neighborhood does not have the infrastructure
the road infrastructure for this development and in order to go east to new Bonnie Bray
you somebody has to acquire land and houses and I don't I haven't heard a plan for that
and so that seems like it's a very long you know it seems like it's very far away also
to go west the frontage road has to be developed nine to I don't know fifteen twenty years
from now tech stop might develop the frontage road so it just seems like now is not the
time to be rezoning this land we don't have the infrastructure in the road system to accommodate
it also I do want to point out that in the original traffic report the neighbors had
to point out number of errors in that traffic report so there's that and also when the bar
was put down on Corbin Road that was because there was a death on that road in terms of
the flooding that happens thank you Miss Henry I have one little question just since you
mentioned that it's obviously been a long process that you mentioned that there had
been some misconstrued things errors in the traffic report that you had seen from what
you've seen now do you see any existing discrepancies that I haven't looked at the current traffic
report only what I heard today so the original traffic report was conflating old Bonnie Bray
and new Bonnie Bray and not talking about that there was the new construction going
on and they were talking about how Corbin was going to intersect with Bonnie Bray and
talking about how Bonnie Bray was this nice new four-lane road and it just isn't it's
a 22-foot golf cart path as far as I'm concerned and so we were talking about the traffic flow
having to go around to new Bonnie Bray and that being very problematic but that wasn't
on the original plan that the traffic would and there was a stop sign missing okay thank
you for that it just helps me understand the history next I have a card from Doug Henry
welcome to come down state your name and address and you'll have four minutes hi I'm Doug Henry
at 212 Goodson Way my property backs up to this from Corbin Road I am thrilled most of
you read my email which never happens for my students so yay so in fact I've been deleting
most of what I had originally proposed to say yeah and most of what I'll talk about
is really site B which is and sort of the magic math of density calculations that seems
to be going on yeah I will also point out one thing Jackson Chang whose property would
have to be taken along the south group on the wrong the south side of Corbin Road just
last night the Chang family said they really do not want to sell and no one has even approached
them and so I do want to point out that this zoning change is predicated on the city acquiring
land to the south that the property owners of that land are rejecting right so I think
the one thing I will add to the discussions that have already happened is to call attention
to in the 2040 plan what's called the preferred growth concept and the future land use map
the flume that calls for compact growth in some areas and single-family housing and bigger
density in others and I'm not going to try to put this up but this was in an email that
I had sent you all I just want to point out our neighborhood is really far outside of
any of the areas that are designated for compact development we support you know smart high
density housing in Denton's urban core please put that there in the designated focus areas
that have infrastructure to support it you know high density housing great idea in areas
where people can park their cars and walk to shops or restaurants where they can access
public transportation I just want to point out our neighborhood is far outside of any
of that yeah we are not on any bus line there's no grocery store at all in southwest Denton
so these are not people that would be able to bike or walk to work we're talking about
creating 800 to 1000 units of commuters right of car commuters in the middle of a low density
suburban neighborhood and so we just simply don't have the infrastructure to support this
so please you know our reading of the Denton development codes and the 2040 plan is that
these are meant to protect neighborhoods like ours because we are all on one to seven acre
lots we have been blessed to be on one to seven acre lots it's just very difficult to
see how an 800 or 1000 unit apartment complex in the middle of this can sort of complement
the existing prevailing prevailing character of our neighborhood so thank you thank you
that is the last card that I had to speak but this is a public hearing so if you would
like to speak and you're not one of the four volunteers from the denier neighborhood association
that that Kyle spoke for you're welcome to share any additional thoughts or different
thoughts than what you've heard if you if you would like to yeah I see one okay come
on down just my name is Bennett Jenkins Tanner and I live on Westridge Street in Denton Texas
and I have been following along with the Corbin gone to the meetings listened never really
said anything but I do know about floodplains and I own property indicator that sets on
floodplains you cannot do anything with those floodplains you can try to put a road through
there but the first really big flood you have is going to take that road with it and we've
had this problem because it took out a bridge on one of the roads because I live on one
way in one way out at one time there was no way out because both ends of the roads were
taken out so you know to to jump ahead and say hey we'll just go ahead and buy this property
will allow this development and I'm not against development but not in an area where it doesn't
work and it doesn't work over where these guys live on Corbin Road it's going to be
such an out of it'll be an eyesore my neighborhood Dina is going to be going through the same
problem with a developer who wants to build directly behind my home in a historic area
with what he calls affordable living homes so these people can buy these homes for two
hundred fifty thousand dollars and then eventually live there amongst all these historic homes
and these homes are historic too they've been there a long time but to put something that
I call an eyesore in the middle of these communities isn't doing Denton a very good you know it's
just not making them look like they're working with the communities I don't want to become
a Dallas and I feel since I've lived here Denton is slowly becoming a Dallas it's build
build build let's see how many people we can cram into excuse me into 1600 square feet
into less than a quarter of an acre this development would be better off with a bigger acreage
with a home that fits into their community rather than townhouses apartment complexes
that are going to become an eyesore and they're going to be flooded out big time thank you
not seeing anyone else making any sudden movements I will note that our hearing process offers
the opportunity if the applicant wishes to give a rebuttal I think it's up to two minutes
I believe I think it's a two minute limit and the stipulation though is that if you do take that
opportunity then members of the public who did speak in the public hearing prior can
have one minute to speak just on the rebuttal items not on rehashing everything so but it's
up to you whether you'd like to take that opportunity or not two minutes yes you'll
have two minutes starting okay all right so some of the comments that were made density
is higher than what was shown and I just just looking at that again just if you look at
each of those different parcels some of them if you look at them from net or grow some
of them range from 18 units an acre down to 12 units an acre maybe up to 20 if you look
down that way but the land use plan has it moderate residential and when they're making
land use assumptions for all their planning purposes they're looking at that entire polygon
at five to twelve units an acre so they use that for their cities use that for their planning
tools I don't think we're getting ahead I think there's still a lot of work that has
to be done after zoning and there's a significant investment of resources made to be able to
answer the questions that come after zoning when it comes to design we look at grading
we look at the you know the how large the utilities need to be how elevated Corbin Road
needs to be to cross the floodplain so that it doesn't drain us out we also have to do
a downstream assessment so when we're looking at the flooding conditions we might even have
to have detention on these properties which would also reduce the density there's a lot
more engineering work that has to happen but zoning is the first step it's the first step
to be able to say to the development community or to our client rather that okay I will go
ahead and invest this amount of you know resources into this to be able to look at this in more
detail to be work work through that with the city in no way are we binding the city to
any agreement in the zoning condition or the zoning request what we are doing is saying
we're going to work together in a in collaborative spirit of who's participating in one will
we maintain it maybe we will could be likely but both parties will have to agree to work
on those the parks agreement the developers agreement for the roadway so a lot of that
still has to be done and we can't do that until we do our engineering and we're not
going to our engineering until we get zoning so all of that to be said it's done prematurely
is incorrect it is just the first step into doing that this is a long road it'll be probably
three years before we're doing any breaking of ground okay thank you thank you now the
members of the public who had spoken previously you don't have to come down again if you heard
something that you would like to respond to you would have a one minute time limit and
I ask that you keep your comments focused on the subject matter that was in the rebuttal
so the phasing of the process as well as the density and the infrastructure regarding the
infrastructure again part of my concern is the widening of Corbin whether that's part
city part developer whomever that's going to either imminent domain mr. Chang's property
on the south or several of our properties on the north or perhaps both because they
have to remove the property lines so I don't have a comment but a question but can are
there certain guidelines for the city imminent domaining to aid a private development project
to give access to their community because I know that's a concern for several of us
is we're going to lose 35 feet of our backyard is what we've heard or mr. Chang will lose
more or we'll both lose a big chunk and that's significant to us so how does that relate
to this I don't understand that portion of it yeah thank you I think we'll make sure
to get an answer to that from staff after after the public hearing thank you anybody
else I see I see too it's good sorry I just I want to address the timeline so I actually
I didn't move into my my residence until January of 2023 but I attended the first meeting on
the 17th and if I recall looking at some of the documents the original plan to break ground
was 2025 that's whenever they were wanting to start to say that is something that's new
on that's not the case and the other reason why I say that is because I've read through
every single document this is a nice middle I've read through the comments if you look
at the document in front of you that I provided you'll see that there's a right of way that
is incorrect the right of way should be 110 feet it's not a hundred and forty feet so
throughout this process it's my opinion it has been very sloppy not attention to details
and that's one of the things that's concerning is that that's what will continue forward
thank you mr. Watts you can have one minute thank you excuse me and I agree with the applicant
there are many many things that have to be done after zoning is achieved you've got plotting
and they all happened before plotting because you have to get your civils in you have to
get all those things in that's why I made the recommendation about having the agreement
of the dedication and the development agreement because they have to have that before final
plat and before final plat you have to have a lot of those engineering civil plans done
and a lot of the infrastructure and all that so it would only make sense that why would
you spend money moving forward you have to have that agreement first and I don't think
it's going to take that long to get that or somebody just says well we're not ready to
negotiate with that right now so it's not being about anti applicant or anything like
that it's just make sure that everything done is done in an orderly process so that maximizes
the expenses in the time of everybody involved the applicant and city staff and y'all's
time as well thank you okay seeing nobody else interested on on the rebuttal I will
close the public hearing at this time and Commissioner Dyer am I allowed to ask Mr.
Eaton a question yeah yeah that's fine Mr. Eaton I have a question since you're kind
of the spokesperson for the community looking at their plan if track B remained are two
and A and C remain or got approved for the proposed of PDMN like would that be acceptable
to your community if you're putting like let's say half acre lots on track B where at least
there's a more sensible flow from your one to seven acres to half acres to then as you
get closer to 35 that gets us closer so if I can speak to that point and I think it's
the the document that I provided you is very important there are no overlays as to what
can be put on ANC so that's why I wanted to point out the acceptable uses are not there
so it is possible that the developer the owner can sell the property the next owner is not
they're not held to the promises and so retail can go there and my question is looking at
the schematics of I-35 unless they have changed the schematics of I-35 recently the way that
you get to Corbin Road is you actually exit vintage you exit vintage you're gonna have
to go through whatever intersection they have there then you can hit the frontage road and
go to Corbin the way you leave Corbin is you turn onto the frontage road and then you get
on the interstate somewhere closer that's next to the gas well that's on the road the
gas well the trailer that's how you get on that's how you get on to northbound there
is not a way to go south on Corbin Road it the city go back to February I believe it's
February 10th of 2011 City Council had a meeting and they brought Teague nail and Perkins in
they did a research and they said can we get across and they said unfortunately can't
because 35 is too low we'd have to raise Corbin out of a floodplain if we did that trucks
could not go underneath not possible only way we can do that was we have to go over
Corbin Road or we have to go over the interstate so my point being if commercial is put there
it's gonna force commercial back either into the Dean neighborhood to go north or south
on Bonnie Bray either the airport road or to vintage road or they're gonna have to go
down 35 and make a u-turn and turn around there's there's no it's either all or nothing
I'm saying that if that's going to be a case there needs to be some other overlay that
limits the amount that is on A and C have you guys have has your community spoken with
tax dot on the proposed frontage roads we have not no okay thank you any other questions
with staff discussion or we can have a motion and then discuss it's the more typical way
but it hasn't been how we did it in the past I guess I have a question so I know so there
was some discussion about tabling this what so we can table this we can make a motion
to approve deny so as noted in your staff write-up and has the options if the commission
were desiring to continue this item to a date certain in the future then staff would ask
that you let us know what additional information you believe that you need in order to be able
to render a decision I have a question probably for Gary if he's still here on the parks maintenance
and that whole thing you know if I if I jump in my DeLorean and go forward sixty years
into the future I can imagine that a large you know confluence stream park with all of
hunter coal development and that sort of thing around would have some value I don't understand
what sort of maintenance has to happen in a floodplain like this if you did get it in
the next two years but there wasn't funding to develop it what kind of strain that puts
on the budget and capacity of staff can you speak to that sure Gary pack and director
parks and recreation so regarding the floodplain maintenance we have a lot of properties in
a floodplain some flood often some not as much clear is in the floodplain if it gets a lot
of rain we shut down just because it doesn't dry quick enough in regards to something like
this it would be minimal development we can't put structures in there so there wouldn't
be a playground restrooms any type of building structure it would be general open space so
at best a trail wildlife area viewing maybe this golf course something of that nature
it could be just left to preserve as a preserve and do very little maybe just mowing it once
or twice a year just to keep it down keep it low obviously we work around trees from
that perspective I know that was mentioned earlier when we're putting in trails so we
try not to disturb that privet is a challenge throughout the entire area we've tried to
eradicate it in a few areas that we've been working on a couple years it is very hardy
and very challenging and very time consuming so that's a that's a general challenge as
a whole generally we don't get a lot into the planning process because if we do a lot
of planning and then the project doesn't move forward then we're kind of you know using
city resources that that's not very about not successful at that point in time so we
typically handle that after the next phase through a developer agreement and then have
our public engagement and discussions at that point okay thank you commissioner Petrone
I'm not sure if it's permissible but there's a mention of conversations with text dot Mr.
Henry I believe I saw you raise your hand I didn't know if you had additional information
that you wanted to share sorry just for the the posterity of the video you can imagine
that your your grandchildren in 50 years will come back and watch this the question was
have any of us talk to text dot and yeah I had a conversation with text dot about a year
that was part of the time when we found out because the city's initial plat of this are
the developers concept plan of this showed that Corbin Road would go through and it looked
like it could be even southbound access to I-35W and that was when we found out no it
essentially was going to be a T in the road and that's at the same time that the city
we we all found out that the city had Angie is going to yell at me for not getting the
words correctly that the city had sort of replatted or rezoned Corbin Road and none
of us knew about it right it sort of caught all all of us off guard at the time and so
the city's initial plan for redoing Corbin Road showed that it would go through to I-35
south and so it was a conversation with text dot that showed no in fact we're talking about
a T in the road to the to the northbound frontage road any other questions okay I have one more
question for staff it almost has escaped my brain so I'm grabbing it ah yes thank you
Angie I recall and I think it was myself although it may have been somebody else on the commission
at the time when we went through the 2040 plan adoption process we we noted the change
of this area from I don't remember exactly what the the previous future land use was
in the 2030 map up to this moderate residential my recollection is that when we asked that
the the response was something like well with the infrastructure improvements along Bonnie
Bray we think that in the longer term future development of this area would make sense
toward that can you help remind me of that process and and what staff's thinking was
when we changed this to moderate residential I can only speak very generally to it and
the reason being is I happen to join right after the new comprehensive plan was adopted
so I wasn't fortunate to sit on those conversations Tina was and she looks like she has some thoughts
thanks Angie yes I was trying to think back to that time period so I do remember us making
changes to the future land use map in this area I'm trying to think back to the impetus
for that other than probably notice knowing some of the other changes that were happening
within the area knowing that there could potentially be development interest for this property
because there were there were a few different areas within the comp plan that I know we
had made some changes to recognizing where we were anticipating additional development
potentially occurring in the northeast Denton was one area where we made that change but
but I believe that was some of the reasoning also in this area because the other thing
we know is as the southwest part of the city continues to evolve and develop particularly
given with the development interest happening with the hunter landmark development and also
the coal development there will continue to be interest within this area couple that also
with plan text out improvements that we know are happening so you know all of those findings
or or conversations related to what's all happening in the area and where we're seeing
the trends in the development have a tendency to influence decisions that we make regarding
updates to the plan thank you Commissioner product career thank you because there's a
lot of information here and I keep going back and forth and trying to understand what everybody's
you know what you all are explaining I'm listening to the applicant based on what I know of my
role as a commissioner for PNZ is to look at the appropriateness of land use that's
what I was trained on that's what I'm trying to do here without without putting too much
emphasis on other external factors I did like I said I walked the property with Mr. Eaton
if it floods with one and a half inches of rain I think that's a big concern but everything
that I'm listening to is and I think part of the reason why it's so hard at least for
me I won't speak for everyone else is that everything seems to not follow a progression
that is likely in my mind right that we think that so many other things have to be fall
in order first we should know how much to raise and who's going to pay for what and
who's going to keep the maintenance of what and you know are we going to accept the land
how's council going to vote like there's so many things that are basically pending right
what I keep going back to is I don't necessarily think that that the gift to the city with
the land is a big deal if council later on wants to deny it they can vote against it
they don't have to accept it they don't have to allocate money to keep it right but the
applicant does have the ownership of the land so if they want to develop it what I'm looking
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
c I see the biggest concern being with b right and that you know and I and what I'm listening
to on the applicant side is man we went from 400 to 300 we've reduced it now we're at 75%
you know of units that we've taken away and so now we're at 150 and even that is too dense
to what the neighbors want which completely understandable.
I think because there are so many other questions that I have I think someone else listed it
before they said you know a lot of what's not considered floodplain is floodplain because
I see it you know it's it's flooding it's flooding my yard it's flooding when it rains
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
know that I have enough information to make an educated decision right now to move forward
with this I would like to see a more current floodplain map that would include a more recent
assessment of what land is is what I would like to see the actual land that is going
to be used where all of this is going to be developed and not considered like you like
you all said all 196 you know however many acres but just the ones that are going to
be developed to see how much density is there because I'm all for affordable housing I'm
all for bringing in diversified housing options to the city of Denton but that doesn't always
mean super high dense for anyone it's not it's not appropriate for it for everyone because
I think the roads will come I think all of that will like you said you know you are much
smarter than I am you'll have a process of how this is supposed to work but I think where
I'm at right now I just don't have enough information although I do want to say like
I said to the applicant I see that you're moving forward and trying to listen to the
neighbors and so I think that maybe after a couple more meetings you know if we can
come back we can listen and see what else can happen but I think right now that's what
I'm trying to that's what I'm trying to understand but definitely density based on only the places
that are going to get developed a better understanding of the floodplains you know and possibly maybe
other options maybe not 150 units maybe you know that's twice as many as what's supposed
to be on there right now as its zone as as r2 they said approximately 70 units if you're
saying 150 that's twice as many and so maybe we can meet somewhere in the middle or y'all
can be somewhere in the middle not me but I think that that's where I'm at I do appreciate
all of the information like I said I think track A and C I'm not against what's being
proposed there I think that it makes a lot of sense because it's on I-35 especially if
text dot is gonna come and they're gonna have that frontage road and it's gonna tee up so
you don't even have to go down to where that bridge is because that would be very scary
you know so I think that there's a lot of potential here I just think that we're just
I am not personally ready to move forward and to approve this right now thank you thank
you before I call you Commissioner Dyer I'm just gonna ask for Mr. Rivera if you would
come down and there's been some discussion around the possibility of continuing or the
possibility of of reducing density just from a where you are in the process perspective
would you prefer a delay or rather have an up-down vote what's what's your your readiness
at this point well I appreciate the feedback so far and we've been very patient for four
years reducing density throughout that four-year period the floodplain maps are current the
ones we're showing those are the current ones on FEMA and you know downstream assessment
and all that would have to be studied and analyzed further but all that to be said we
have we feel like we have been accommodating throughout this four-year period and we would
appreciate a vote tonight okay thank you thank you Commissioner Dyer well first off I would
like to thank you can tell all the work that was put into this by city staff by McAdams
as a representative for the owner and by the citizens so I want to thank you all because
yes you provided us with a ton of information but how I look at this is it's a very clear
balance between an owner's property rights and the neighboring property rights as well
and it was very interesting to have in our workshop today talking about zoning regulations
and having a little background on voting and there was a few phrases in our in the presentation
that kind of struck with me that while you do owners have a right to do to the property
with what they want we as P&Z also have a right to and I wrote this down protect each
lot owners right to the reasonable use and enjoyment of their lot and I feel that right
now how this is when you're looking at in the future land use map that was supposed
to be moderate housing and this is not moderating moderate housing and there's usually a progression
and you don't necessarily have houses that are sitting on one to seven acres of land
up against townhouses even small single-family that could be you know five to six thousand
square foot lots and in the training they also talked about how these zones should be
compatible which is why I asked the question of Mr. Eaton if you left track B as the R2
where you can have a larger lot like at least a half an acre lot that's that would be a
nice transition you can build some nice houses on those lots and then I totally get and I'm
sorry I forgot your name from McAdams I apologize but when you talked about you know butting
up against the interstate there is a certain expectation of land use when you're up against
the interstate so maybe leaving that as you know what is proposed right now and trying
to find that balance between the property owners rights and the neighbors rights and
it also talked about the impact on public safety that was also addressed and I'm looking
at the road conditions and I understand that you know there's in what's proposed in the
overlays there are certain stipulations that A and C cannot be built and even B until you
know Corbin is extended to the east or the frontage roads are put in by TxDOT but you
still have to think about you know the access to that area you know we just had a major
traffic accident and all of those people had to get off at vintage what if that happens
later are they all going to be getting off now on Corbin if that happens on the north
bound and so you do kind of have to think about that stuff and then I also think about
the large financial investment by the city you know the financial investment in expanding
Corbin Road but also this donated land and what that financial investment so as the request
as the agenda item stands I think I will be a no vote on this one.
Yeah so I agree with everything both of you all said I do know that I have I have a lot
of trust and support that I know that staff whenever this road has to be built it's not
going to be a road that's going to flood out you know they'll build it the correct way
and make sure it's designed the correct way and the floodplain to reanalyze the floodplain
is a big engineering feat and costs a lot of money which is why you come and you talk
about zoning before before an applicant gets into all that so I don't really have issues
with that I know that staff will make sure it's it's designed and the way it should
be but I to your point I think it just doesn't seem like a good transition you have large
estate lots and then you're going to have town homes and an apartment complex and so
I could see something significantly less dense on track B and track A track C it seems like
that would be kind of reasonable to be be what's proposed because it is right there
on the highway but yeah I couldn't support this zoning change.
Commissioner Pedro.
Yes thank you and I also want to thank everyone for your presentation and addressing your
concerns with this proposal I too want to echo the statements that were given today
by the fellow commissioners I am definitely a champion of diversified housing I strongly
believe in the opportunity for somebody to enter into homeownership to build equity to
create that system of change I also believe that I do have some concerns regarding flooding
accessibility safety of the proposal as it's been presented.
With that being said I think it's been a really good idea to see if it would be an opportunity
to meet in the middle specifically with site B with site C and site A again their proximity
to I-35 I think that that would be appropriate as it's proposed but I still think that there
may be some opportunity to go back to the drawing board perhaps to see if there any
other plans any other concepts that we can consider for that I will be voting no.
Thank you I'll just offer a few thoughts and we'll see where this goes you know we on this
commission as I see it have a duty to assure our residents from where we are now to where
we will be right that means explaining when change is inevitable and how to direct it
that means explaining the tradeoffs and the choices that we realistically have with economic
pressures the way they are and that means also considering the needs of the future residents
who will shop at the at the you know commercial areas that we zone and live in the homes that
we allow to be built you know we need more of this sort of transfer of development rights
I know it sounds weird and it's this crazy term and you say well they're getting something
for free but we need it if our goal as a city is to preserve more land and have plentiful
green spaces that are easily accessible to our residents right but we don't need it in
a place that doesn't have any infrastructure right my my back of the napkin math as I look
here says okay this this project's probably about a 300 million project dollar project
as it's proposed if you allocated the entire portion of the property taxes from a project
like that that was built here that isn't already spoken for to pay for existing debt that we've
already borrowed then it would take over 30 years for it to pay back the cost to rebuild
Corbin Road right that doesn't pay for any of the police doesn't pay for any fire doesn't
pay for a new fire station down in this area etc. you know so but there are some real concerns
about the residents down in this area right it's it's a real problem to either get stuck
in your house or not be able to get home in a rainstorm fixing that however I'm not a
not a traffic engineer but I have a really hard time believing that the cheapest way
to fix that is a 20 million dollar road project right a gravel world works fine for the number
of people who are using this we need some culverts and some dump trucks of gravel to
raise it up a few feet in key locations right we got to go from people being stuck to be
people being able to get home when they have an emergency it's it's there's no near-term
need to shuffle 20,000 cars a day across this road you know if you haven't seen me before
I've made the the the foible in many people's minds of not being afraid to offend everybody
in the room but I try to do it nicely I have a great respect for our planning staff I do
not understand this recommendation at all I don't understand what changed obviously
there were it took a long time took four years so there was concern and then somehow that
went away when we see applications like this with a recommendation of approval it looks
to me like approval inflation I guess that's the current term de jour right and it starts
to look like the recommendation is does it satisfy these eight boxes on this checklist
as opposed to do we as planners professional opinion think that this is the optimal location
and time for this type of development in Denton and and I'll just point out that we've lost
a lot of trust from the public when they see staff recommends approval staff recommends
approval staff recommends approval I understand why the vast majority of projects that come
have an approval recommendation because most applicants won't come until they get that
right but this one just seems seems really weird I can't I can't understand why it's
that way because there are a dozen places I can think of near other floodplains where
this type of thing makes a ton more sense right so with that anybody have a motion or
other discussion commissioner Dyer I make a motion that we vote to deny the request
for this zoning change thank you commissioner Riggs second any other discussion or questions
can I just say something I I keep going back because I'm hearing what everybody's saying
and those are all the initial thoughts that I had as well but as as as P and Z commissioners
are we supposed to look at all of that or are we supposed to concentrate on the appropriateness
of land use and so if it's just the appropriateness of land use you know then including what you
said right then I tend to understand staffs recommendation a little bit better not to
say that I have all the information that I have to vote in favor of this but I keep going
back and so I think you know I for me I'm gonna request a little bit more guidance from
staff and to what the role is of this body because if it's taken into consideration all
of those things that that makes things a lot harder if we're looking at one thing and that's
the appropriateness of land use can this be you know rezoned to this you know especially
with all the conditions that were made then then I think we need to to be very clear on
that because it just seems like everybody's taking a lot more into consideration than
than what we're supposed to I would imagine that if we voted to deny and this is where
staff can give us guidance that the applicant could always come back with some more changes
or things so is there there are some timeline limitations in different different conditions
however the since we're a recommended recommending body ultimately those timelines are decided
by council's action on this and I guess I will point out also that depending on how
the percent opposition lines up at a council hearing whether we deny or not there may still
be a super majority requirement right I think they they announced that there was a super
majority requirement from this one for yeah for today I think it gets remeasured at the
date of the public hearing for council is that correct we will keep monitoring that
and we provide the most update information that we have based upon the written opposition
received prior to council thank you did you want me to address yeah if you could speak
to Commissioner product of Rio's concerns sure thing so with respect to the staff recommendation
keep in mind the Denton Development Code has a series of criteria that we factor into our
recommendations so that way we have consistency and application of all zoning requests that
are received and it's it tries to make a zoning process more objective in instead of subjective
if that makes sense so we have a series of criteria for general approval of all zoning
applications and then we also have another set of approval criteria for plan development
districts so that's what we use to base our recommendation on we have the Denton twenty
forty comprehensive plan as you know it's it's a thick document it has a wide variety
of recommendations that are in there tries to address a variety of different aspects
associated with the city how the city grows in and evolves over time and so that's factored
into our recommendation all of the technical information that's been spoken to this evening
regarding how roadways may be engineered how the floodplain is addressed what are the impacts
from a flooding standpoint as it's been discussed this evening those are all technical items
that are reviewed following consideration of zoning if a zoning request gets approved
then that tells the applicant okay here are the development rights that I have from a
land use standpoint and then they're able to design all of their construction plans
accordingly based upon the use that they're going to develop if their rezoning request
is not approved then ultimately you know that they're still left with the existing zoning
that's on the property they could choose to attempt to develop the property in accordance
with the existing zoning again designing all of their various technical documents associated
with whatever land use they pursue under the existing zoning so I realize it's a struggle
at times with a rezoning request because people are interested in having more of that technical
information that's available but this is when we talk about trusting our process that we
have in place based upon the development codes and the criteria manuals that we the city
of Denton have determined for doing quality development so that's a little bit more with
respect to the development process but just to circle back to our recommendation know
that our recommendation is based upon those approval criteria that are provided for in
the Denton development code in addition to any adopted policies that we the city have
not just the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan but also the parks master plan that's been
referred to this evening we also have an affordable housing toolkit policy that sometimes comes
into play with respect to of those policies we have a lot of things that we have to evaluate
what requests associated with as this as this group is well aware of so but hopefully that
helps address your question you know in terms of timelines for development applications
the planning and zoning commission is a recommending body so if a vote manages to transpire this
evening from this body then this zoning request would move forward to City Council and I forget
what what the date is May 6th so it would go to City Council on May 6th ultimately City
Council has the final decision authority on all zoning matters thank you Tina and I just
I want to clarify because I don't think I was very specific when I talked about sort
of this doesn't seem the right place my chief concern for that is actually that it doesn't
seem a particularly beneficial location for future residents to live at right if the choice
is here or nowhere because we have no new housing in the city then that's a completely
different problem right but but when I look at the the trade-offs that we ask people to
make as we transition from a smaller Denton to a bigger Denton and we get hopefully into
a better fiscally balanced situation where we can afford to repave our roads etc. part
of that trade-off that we're asking existing and future residents for is to understand
that allowing some people even if it's somebody else to live in higher density areas helps
keep all of our taxes low but to make that trade-off people need to see positive ends
of it as well they need to see that they're they're living near a neighborhood or in a
neighborhood they need to see that they're close by to amenities and shops and things
they want to go to places for their kids to play etc. and so that's really my my chief
concern from a location perspective is that I you know people would live here yes but
I trust that we have a lot of other develop a land that would have development interests
over the next 10 years between now and when 35 W frontage roads get finished so any other
comments I just want to follow up on that so my decision you know to your point it wasn't
based on the roadway needing to be widened or the for the floodplain it was strictly
just does this seem like compatible uses you know because that's essentially what we're
doing to Tina's point is we're just saying is this a use that is compatible and then
then they'll go through all of the engineering and they'll go through all the review and
they'll do all that and they may the applicant may decide it's it's too expensive to actually
go forward with it but you can't make that decision until you know whether or not you
have the zoning and so that's where I made my decision thank you and I just want to thank
the public you've been very patient after my initial asking you to not clap I understand
this takes a lot of time out of time you could otherwise spend with your families and friends
and I appreciate that you're you're doing this for the future of your city so thank
you with that I will call for a vote on the board this is a motion to deny
that motion passes five zero so we just have a couple closing matters but I'll give everyone
a couple minutes to filter out if you're not interested in the closing matters because
it creates some noise yeah yeah so just so everybody understands the process the recommendation
of a denial passed so that means that it will go forward to City Council on May 7th 6th
thank you so so stay stay aware and thank you
okay thank you all for all your hard work like this committee looks like a lot of not
fun and so I'm so impressed and proud thank you thank you okay that brings us to item
6a the planning and zoning committing Commission project matrix so I'll give the people an
opportunity to move down doesn't start getting loud until 80% of people okay I think I do
this good news is my report short compared to some evening so so no changes to the matrix
remain there were no additional requests from our last meeting so we left everything as
is I know we had the boot camp presentation this evening but we just have that general
placeholder item so be on the lookout for future boot camp presentations since your
last planning and zoning Commission meeting council has not taken action on any development
applications that you might have seen come through I will though bring to your attention
back on April 1st we did have a work session discussion with City Council regarding food
trucks and we will be bringing back some future zoning amendments related to that particular
as it relates to how we've been allowing them to operate as accessory use within the city
so this item has not been calendared just yet but know that that is on our work program
and so we'll be working on that I believe Council did not give direction on whether
it's a high medium or low priority but given that we have received direction from City
Council we will initiate a public hearing and bring that forth directly to the planning
and zoning Commission it is not something that would be going through the DC RC since
we have that direction and that concludes my report thank you okay any commissioners
have anything to put on the matrix no okay any concluding items item seven sorry Tina
for for the matrix no for concluding items concluding items yes I just want to compliment
the planning and zoning Commission regarding your consideration of this zoning case that
we had this evening that it was a challenging request and I know the comment was made previously
that that we're a new bot we're a new body or a new board the Commission itself is not
new from the Commission's been around for many many decades but I understand the people
on our Commission we've had some turnover and so you all some are relatively new to
your seats and your responsibilities but I want to commend you for your thoughtfulness
your consideration you asked some really good questions I also appreciate the fact that
you provided your remarks on the public record that is beneficial for us when we are communicating
to staff what you all were thinking behind your motion but also it's very beneficial
for the audience and the applicant to hear so just wanted to say thank you for that yeah
and thank you for me as well I know you know the the city is better because of all of you
and I just thank you for for bringing your your full attention and mind and reviewing
the content it really shows so thank you I would like to thank the city staff because
I you know I felt like I did a lot of planning just to understand this particular one and
I can't even imagine how many hours you guys put into getting everything ready so so thank
you I for one really appreciate that okay with no objection then I will adjourn our
meeting at 9 19 p.m.