WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:09.840
 Good afternoon and welcome to the planning and zoning work session at 5 o 2 p.m. Wednesday

00:00:09.840 --> 00:00:17.660
 April 9th. Our first item on our work session business is any citizen comments on the consent

00:00:17.660 --> 00:00:26.440
 agenda items. So this is items under number three under agenda on the third page. I'm

00:00:26.440 --> 00:00:37.200
 looking. I don't see any. Okay. Any the next item is clarification for items on the agenda

00:00:37.200 --> 00:00:45.240
 for the meeting. So any consent agenda questions on those three plots from the commission?

00:00:45.240 --> 00:00:49.760
 Any questions? Chair did just want to make sure the commission saw the updated corrected

00:00:49.760 --> 00:00:58.840
 plot that had been distributed to the commission. Part of the meeting. Yeah. Okay. Then we've

00:00:58.840 --> 00:01:03.880
 got a full work session. So let's move to the consent agenda. I'm sorry to the individual

00:01:03.880 --> 00:01:09.620
 consideration items. First thing is chair and vice chair. Were you going to speak to

00:01:09.620 --> 00:01:18.440
 that? I was just going to give an overview. It's a new commission. So we'll since Commissioner

00:01:18.440 --> 00:01:23.480
 Villarreal had to step down. We need a vice chair because I actually know that I will

00:01:23.480 --> 00:01:32.200
 be absent on our first meeting in June. So it comes with responsibility this year. So

00:01:32.200 --> 00:01:37.840
 but yeah. So we'll when we get into the session, we'll have have nominations and work through

00:01:37.840 --> 00:01:49.320
 that. Any questions procedurally on that? Okay. Item B for be FP 25 0011A. Sorry, Julie

00:01:49.320 --> 00:01:55.160
 to get you jumping and then sitting down. Good evening, Julie Wyatt, principal planner.

00:01:55.160 --> 00:02:09.600
 Let me pull up the presentation. Okay, this is a final plot for a zero lot line single

00:02:09.600 --> 00:02:15.640
 family residential development. The zoning was approved for this property at last fall.

00:02:15.640 --> 00:02:19.520
 They are now moving forward with the development process and that includes civil engineering

00:02:19.520 --> 00:02:25.720
 plans and plotting. They do still have some items that they do need to correct on the

00:02:25.720 --> 00:02:29.880
 civil engineering plans as well as the final plot. So staff is recommending denial. However,

00:02:29.880 --> 00:02:37.280
 we have no we have no objection to the extension to the April 23rd planning and zoning commission

00:02:37.280 --> 00:02:45.880
 meeting. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Seeing none. Thank you, Julie. Thank you. Next

00:02:45.880 --> 00:02:56.760
 for see FP 250014. Good evening, Commission. Bryce in Arsdale assistant planner. This is

00:02:56.760 --> 00:03:03.900
 the final plot for approximately 19 acres, just about 300 feet east of country club lane.

00:03:03.900 --> 00:03:07.800
 And this is a development that will be single family homes. The zoning was approved just

00:03:07.800 --> 00:03:11.200
 about a year ago in May of last year. While there are still some comments to work through

00:03:11.200 --> 00:03:15.560
 both on the final plot as well as civil engineering plans, staff has no objection to the requested

00:03:15.560 --> 00:03:23.960
 extension to date certain April 23rd. Any questions? Seeing none. Thank you, Bryce. Thank you. Next

00:03:23.960 --> 00:03:32.720
 item for D. Cameron Robertson, principal planner. This is a final plot for approximately 20

00:03:32.720 --> 00:03:40.440
 acre parcel. Northwest corner of Robson Ranch Road and I 35 West corridor. They still have

00:03:40.440 --> 00:03:44.400
 some civil engineering plan comments that they're working through as well as some comments

00:03:44.400 --> 00:03:48.320
 they're working through on their final plot. But stuff has no objection to their second

00:03:48.320 --> 00:03:55.360
 extension request to an April 23rd date. And I can stand for any questions. Seeing none.

00:03:55.360 --> 00:04:07.600
 Thank you. We'll see you at the meeting. And then for E. FP 25009A. Aaron. Good evening.

00:04:07.600 --> 00:04:13.000
 Aaron Stanley assistant planner. This is a final plot for three lots in the extraterritorial

00:04:13.000 --> 00:04:19.880
 jurisdiction just east of Hilltop Road and north of Hickory Hill Road. At this time,

00:04:19.880 --> 00:04:23.200
 they have not met criteria for approval and staff is recommending denial. But we have

00:04:23.200 --> 00:04:31.160
 no objection to their second extension request to a date certain April 23rd 2025. Any questions?

00:04:31.160 --> 00:04:42.920
 None. Okay. Thank you. And last but not least for F. FP 250015. Good evening, Chair. Member

00:04:42.920 --> 00:04:47.880
 of the Commission Angie Manglars development review manager. This is a final plot for D.C.

00:04:47.880 --> 00:04:53.360
 townhomes. It is a 3.8 acre tract of land generally situated north of East McKinney

00:04:53.360 --> 00:04:58.560
 Street. It is split zoned. There is some residential seven on the property as well as mixed use

00:04:58.560 --> 00:05:04.760
 neighborhood for the development of approximately 14 townhomes and a multifamily project. At

00:05:04.760 --> 00:05:08.680
 this time, they are not meeting our criteria for approval. But staff has no objection to

00:05:08.680 --> 00:05:14.840
 the first requested extension to a date certain of April 23rd. Happy to answer any questions.

00:05:14.840 --> 00:05:20.680
 And this one is the first extension? Yes. This is the first extension. Just out of curiosity,

00:05:20.680 --> 00:05:26.040
 you know, there were either two or three that were on their second extension this time.

00:05:26.040 --> 00:05:31.120
 If I don't ask, I'll feel bad for Jordan. That seems a little bit odd. Was there a strange

00:05:31.120 --> 00:05:38.560
 thing in the scheduling or less time or holidays or something? Or was it just how the applicants

00:05:38.560 --> 00:05:43.160
 didn't quite get everything in this time? It could be a combination of a few things.

00:05:43.160 --> 00:05:46.440
 In these cases tonight, you'll see that a lot of these plots are being requested to

00:05:46.440 --> 00:05:50.040
 our second meeting in April, which is a little out of the norm. Typically, it would be the

00:05:50.040 --> 00:05:54.080
 first meeting of the next month. But because of calendaring, it's not going to fall within

00:05:54.080 --> 00:05:58.800
 that 30 day. So it could be likely that you'll see another second or third extension just

00:05:58.800 --> 00:06:03.880
 because as Tina loves to say, quality engineering doesn't happen in 30 days. Okay. Thank you.

00:06:03.880 --> 00:06:11.980
 Thanks. All right. That brings us to our public hearings.

00:06:11.980 --> 00:06:21.440
 Item 5A will be withdrawn from a staff request and we'll hold that at a later meeting. So

00:06:21.440 --> 00:06:45.320
 that's item 5B is Z25-0003A. Erin. Good evening, Chair and members of the commission.

00:06:45.320 --> 00:06:53.560
 Okay. This is a rezoning request for Wild Haven Woods from residential, rural residential

00:06:53.560 --> 00:07:02.480
 to R7 district. This is a request to rezone approximately 4.9 acres from RR to R7. This

00:07:02.480 --> 00:07:08.520
 site is generally located north of Pokers Page Road and approximately 325 feet west

00:07:08.520 --> 00:07:15.400
 of Swisher Road. This is a bit of an unusual rezoning request. So the site is currently

00:07:15.400 --> 00:07:20.960
 developed with a mix of single family detached dwellings, triplexes and accessory buildings

00:07:20.960 --> 00:07:26.960
 on the site today. And the applicant is not currently planning to redevelop the site. The

00:07:26.960 --> 00:07:33.480
 purpose of this rezoning is to plot the property in accordance with R7 in order to make utility

00:07:33.480 --> 00:07:40.960
 improvements to the existing residential uses on the site today. Some of the considerations

00:07:40.960 --> 00:07:46.680
 that staff looked at when evaluating the rezoning request was the current RR zoning district

00:07:46.680 --> 00:07:51.600
 does require a minimum of five acres in order to plot. And with this being 4.9, they could

00:07:51.600 --> 00:07:56.720
 not plot under their current district today. In the R7 district, they would be allowed

00:07:56.720 --> 00:08:02.280
 to plot 4,000 square foot lots and it would allow the current uses on the site today,

00:08:02.280 --> 00:08:08.600
 including those triplexes, to be plotted on one lot as they're used today. What this staff

00:08:08.600 --> 00:08:13.520
 is recommending approval as they meet all of the other rezoning criteria as well and

00:08:13.520 --> 00:08:19.400
 I'll have a more detailed presentation in the main session, but I'll stand for any questions.

00:08:19.400 --> 00:08:25.360
 Sure. Go ahead. Erin, this is probably in your more detailed presentation later, but

00:08:25.360 --> 00:08:29.640
 I think it would be important to inform the commission of the situation regarding the

00:08:29.640 --> 00:08:34.320
 utilities, particularly with, I believe it was these, yeah, the septic system and then

00:08:34.320 --> 00:08:39.360
 being able to connect to city water. Yes. So those are the specific utility improvements

00:08:39.360 --> 00:08:44.600
 that they are trying to make. So in this graphic or the aerial image on the right, the star

00:08:44.600 --> 00:08:50.000
 in the rear of the site next to triplex C is the septic system that the applicant is

00:08:50.000 --> 00:08:55.080
 having issues with right now. It is failing. It just needs some regular maintenance or

00:08:55.080 --> 00:09:00.920
 to be replaced. But they cannot do that because the DDC requires that to install a new septic

00:09:00.920 --> 00:09:08.680
 system, you do need to plot the property. Another improvement is the parcel here with

00:09:08.680 --> 00:09:14.360
 this single family home. At least this parcel, the applicant wants to extend public water

00:09:14.360 --> 00:09:20.440
 to this property. She hasn't decided if she would extend it further, but at least to that

00:09:20.440 --> 00:09:30.480
 property and that would also trigger the requirement to plot. Commissioner Riggs. Thank you. That

00:09:30.480 --> 00:09:34.640
 actually answered most of my question, but it did bring up another question. So they're

00:09:34.640 --> 00:09:40.440
 going to go back with the septic system instead of tying on to sewer. Yeah, it is served by

00:09:40.440 --> 00:09:46.060
 existing septic today. And so she doesn't plan at this time to extend sewer line, does

00:09:46.060 --> 00:09:53.080
 not run adjacent to this property. So you'll see that dashed pink line, that is a gravity

00:09:53.080 --> 00:10:02.920
 line. So it just would take sewage waste away from a site. But I in talking with utilities,

00:10:02.920 --> 00:10:06.960
 that is not a line that they could tie into today. They would have to extend from further

00:10:06.960 --> 00:10:13.320
 from that neighborhood to the south. And that is not in her intentions today. Okay, thank

00:10:13.320 --> 00:10:41.960
 you. Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you. And then 5C PD 23 0001 C.

00:10:41.960 --> 00:10:49.760
 Good evening again, Angie Manglaris. This is PD 23 0001. This is an overlay plan development

00:10:49.760 --> 00:10:56.840
 for Denton 195. So a little bit of background on this request. This is a overlay plan development

00:10:56.840 --> 00:11:01.880
 request for a rezoning from residential two to an overlay plan development district with

00:11:01.880 --> 00:11:07.080
 base zonings of mixed use neighborhood and public facilities. The overall tract of land

00:11:07.080 --> 00:11:12.680
 is approximately 195 acres and is situated at the southeast corner of Corbin Road and

00:11:12.680 --> 00:11:19.400
 I 35 W. The purpose of this overlay plan development is to facilitate the development of a multifamily

00:11:19.400 --> 00:11:25.360
 and townhome project with parkland dedication or easement for publicly accessible open space.

00:11:25.360 --> 00:11:29.940
 The comprehensive plan designates this area as moderate residential. It is consistent

00:11:29.940 --> 00:11:34.920
 with our housing population projections, our preferred land preservation plan, our parks,

00:11:34.920 --> 00:11:40.020
 conservation and environment goals of the comprehensive plan and staff is recommending

00:11:40.020 --> 00:11:44.240
 approval of the request. I do want to go a little bit deeper than we typically do just

00:11:44.240 --> 00:11:49.280
 to help kind of explain how this tract works. And so you'll see that you have a general

00:11:49.280 --> 00:11:55.480
 zoning exhibit here outlining the three tracts A, B and C totaling approximately 58 acres

00:11:55.480 --> 00:12:03.040
 of land to be rezoned plan development mixed use neighborhood. Tracts A and B take access

00:12:03.040 --> 00:12:08.880
 are situated along Corbin Road. Tract B does have overlay conditions to limit the allowable

00:12:08.880 --> 00:12:15.560
 uses to townhome and single family only. Tracts A and C do not have those use limitations.

00:12:15.560 --> 00:12:24.360
 Any use in MN could be permitted. The remaining 137 acres is proposed to be plan development

00:12:24.360 --> 00:12:29.160
 public facilities with an intent to either dedicate the land area or an easement for

00:12:29.160 --> 00:12:37.120
 public open space uses. A little bit more about that parkland development

00:12:37.120 --> 00:12:40.960
 and just kind of help explain since this is not something you all typically see how these

00:12:40.960 --> 00:12:47.200
 requests kind of work with each other. So this is a very simplified developers agreement

00:12:47.200 --> 00:12:54.120
 process map. So we are here. This is our little arrow and my apologies the text is a little

00:12:54.120 --> 00:13:00.300
 small but we're considering tonight an overlay plan development rezoning. So we're in the

00:13:00.300 --> 00:13:06.040
 entitlement phases. Planning and zoning commission you all serve in a recommending capacity to

00:13:06.040 --> 00:13:11.520
 city council. After this the project will go to city council who has the final vote

00:13:11.520 --> 00:13:15.720
 on the project. Should that project be approved the parkland

00:13:15.720 --> 00:13:21.400
 developers agreement scoping begins where the developer and the city would work to scope

00:13:21.400 --> 00:13:27.280
 the project, define its terms including access points, easements, trails, what all of that

00:13:27.280 --> 00:13:32.160
 would look like as well as receiving public input meetings from the public to get an ultimate

00:13:32.160 --> 00:13:37.720
 idea of what this land could look like. Once all that's kind of been worked through then

00:13:37.720 --> 00:13:42.240
 the developers agreement goes to the parks board who much like you all serves in a recommending

00:13:42.240 --> 00:13:46.760
 capacity they would review that developers agreement, make a recommendation and that

00:13:46.760 --> 00:13:51.360
 would eventually go to city council who has the final say of approval or denial of that

00:13:51.360 --> 00:13:56.440
 agreement. All of that works together as part of this overlay condition in that we specify

00:13:56.440 --> 00:14:01.640
 that that process needs to be worked out prior to the submittal of a final plot for tracks

00:14:01.640 --> 00:14:09.920
 A, B or C. So I just kind of wanted to help maybe put into place where we are in the process

00:14:09.920 --> 00:14:14.600
 what happens if this is approved how that parkland or open space easement ultimately

00:14:14.600 --> 00:14:20.020
 gets configured. Angie can you just give a quick recap of what

00:14:20.020 --> 00:14:27.800
 types of activities from a civil engineering plan construction you know COO type process

00:14:27.800 --> 00:14:34.320
 requires that final plot and what of those types of activities could occur before it?

00:14:34.320 --> 00:14:41.440
 Sure so we require civil engineering plans to be approved before final plot approval

00:14:41.440 --> 00:14:47.080
 but we do require final plan approval for building permit, for grading, for activity

00:14:47.080 --> 00:14:56.160
 on that property. Okay any any this is kind of a weird thing

00:14:56.160 --> 00:15:00.720
 so I just want to make sure we follow and track this. Do you have a question Commissioner

00:15:00.720 --> 00:15:09.120
 Dyer? I do. I know that in tracks B and C they're

00:15:09.120 --> 00:15:17.560
 talking about potentially either apartments or the type of housing where it's like commercial

00:15:17.560 --> 00:15:25.800
 retail on the bottom and then housing above. How is Denton sitting on their number of apartments

00:15:25.800 --> 00:15:32.760
 like are we seeing where we have vacancies in the existing apartments that we do have?

00:15:32.760 --> 00:15:41.200
 How many other developments are there going to be apartments that are in the works but

00:15:41.200 --> 00:15:49.760
 aren't built yet? Like kind of are we going to have too many of these types of structures?

00:15:49.760 --> 00:15:53.640
 Are we going to over develop the apartment world in Denton? I guess is what I'm trying

00:15:53.640 --> 00:15:56.120
 to get at. Sure so there's there's two points that I

00:15:56.120 --> 00:16:02.840
 want to to clarify just to make sure that make sure we keep our tracks straight and my help so

00:16:02.840 --> 00:16:09.960
 actually I may give you a preview of my presentation. Yeah sorry Commissioner Dyer I think it'll

00:16:09.960 --> 00:16:14.400
 maybe make more sense if we just hold that question until after we get a little bit more

00:16:14.400 --> 00:16:20.520
 clarity from the overall application. I do have one question specifically on the Parkland

00:16:20.520 --> 00:16:31.040
 dedication and how that process works. I don't recall seeing a PD which was a single PD application

00:16:31.040 --> 00:16:38.000
 and a single you know border outline that we knew was going to have separated ownership

00:16:38.000 --> 00:16:45.960
 in the future. It's probably less risk because it's parks and the city controls that versus

00:16:45.960 --> 00:16:56.000
 two individual landowners but can you help me understand the thinking behind why have

00:16:56.000 --> 00:17:05.560
 the PD include the the the PF areas as opposed to just rezoning the other three areas and

00:17:05.560 --> 00:17:13.240
 then have a you know have the the developers agreement and the agreement to dedicate the

00:17:13.240 --> 00:17:18.360
 land and then come back and rezone that to PF later. Does that make sense? Like what's

00:17:18.360 --> 00:17:25.280
 the planning rationale for lumping them together? Sure it does. It might help to give a bit of

00:17:25.280 --> 00:17:32.760
 history on the project. This project has been been going on in some form or another I believe

00:17:32.760 --> 00:17:41.240
 prior to my start but it did come in as a pack in the summer of 2022 and at that time

00:17:41.240 --> 00:17:47.180
 it was believed and possibly intended that this overall Parkland area would be something

00:17:47.180 --> 00:17:53.040
 that UNT would actually be assuming and that they would want. Used for intramural fields

00:17:53.040 --> 00:17:58.520
 or anything that generally doesn't affect the floodplain. You know after further discussions

00:17:58.520 --> 00:18:02.680
 that that wasn't the case. UNT was no longer interested. We were already kind of in this

00:18:02.680 --> 00:18:08.720
 process and it is one one tract of land or ownership and it was moving forward as as

00:18:08.720 --> 00:18:16.080
 two applications. One that had this PD for for tract B to address resident concerns and

00:18:16.080 --> 00:18:22.600
 then this remainder was more of a straight zoning case. It's gone through a couple iterations.

00:18:22.600 --> 00:18:26.960
 The city has has stepped into the picture as an interested party either as an ultimate

00:18:26.960 --> 00:18:30.640
 landowner of the Parkland or receiving you know the the easement that would allow for

00:18:30.640 --> 00:18:34.800
 public access. The terms of the maintenance and the ownership would be worked out through

00:18:34.800 --> 00:18:40.920
 that developers agreement but this is not I guess our typical project so it's evolved

00:18:40.920 --> 00:18:46.360
 kind of differently and felt it best to keep it as one project and move it forward rather

00:18:46.360 --> 00:18:52.680
 than trying to continue to piecemeal and go back and rezone and address the project while

00:18:52.680 --> 00:19:02.960
 we're here. Okay yeah that helps. The only thing I would add is while this commission

00:19:02.960 --> 00:19:08.500
 this may be the first zoning case of this nature that this group has received keep in

00:19:08.500 --> 00:19:13.960
 mind while most of our plan development district requests might be associated with one property

00:19:13.960 --> 00:19:17.860
 owner it's also not uncommon to have a plan development district request that might have

00:19:17.860 --> 00:19:24.060
 multiple property owners involved so I would say don't don't let that influence your decision

00:19:24.060 --> 00:19:29.720
 because it you can have multiple landowners involved or one it makes no difference. Yeah

00:19:29.720 --> 00:19:36.440
 certainly in a subdivision. Exactly. Yeah okay okay thank you. And I before I forget

00:19:36.440 --> 00:19:42.720
 I did want to just address one component of the overlay so tract B is the one closest

00:19:42.720 --> 00:19:49.180
 to the residential uses it does have a base zoning district of MN which does allow multifamily

00:19:49.180 --> 00:19:54.680
 but the conditions would only allow single family and town homes. Tract A and C are the

00:19:54.680 --> 00:19:59.880
 ones that are left a little more open-ended. There's there's a lot of tracks to keep track

00:19:59.880 --> 00:20:05.760
 of so wanted to make sure we're on the same page. Thank you yeah we'll we'll let you go

00:20:05.760 --> 00:20:10.280
 on through and then I want to make sure that we we talk to Lisa's question first once we

00:20:10.280 --> 00:20:19.280
 get some more background on the on the park stuff okay yeah go ahead Commissioner Dyer.

00:20:19.280 --> 00:20:26.000
 Okay so going back to the parkland is it an absolute that the city of Denton will be receiving

00:20:26.000 --> 00:20:32.340
 that if this were if we recommended it to move forward to City Council and City Council

00:20:32.340 --> 00:20:39.920
 approved it or is it not a given that the city is going to get the parkland like what

00:20:39.920 --> 00:20:48.260
 happens if the zoning all gets approved and the current owner sells it like does that

00:20:48.260 --> 00:20:58.880
 bound the new owner to have to give the parkland. Yes so it it's written to be one one of two

00:20:58.880 --> 00:21:04.960
 ways one of two options could happen and the city is is dedicated that parkland for public

00:21:04.960 --> 00:21:11.120
 facilities or for parks and open space or through the process of the developers agreement

00:21:11.120 --> 00:21:16.800
 and easement is granted which provides for that public space open access and addresses

00:21:16.800 --> 00:21:22.800
 the maintenance issues. The PD is binding those overlay conditions they don't change

00:21:22.800 --> 00:21:28.120
 with the ownership of the land. If in the future this property were to sell and somebody

00:21:28.120 --> 00:21:32.560
 was no longer interested in those conditions this same process that we're going through

00:21:32.560 --> 00:21:39.760
 today would have to be followed to amend that PD. So it's built to sustain owners but those

00:21:39.760 --> 00:21:49.000
 conditions don't change unless they come back requesting it. This is it for my work session

00:21:49.000 --> 00:21:59.400
 presentation so okay I'm sorry I yeah okay so you're yeah I have a couple of questions

00:21:59.400 --> 00:22:04.720
 so so to the parkland dedication is this something that the city actually wants do we want flood

00:22:04.720 --> 00:22:13.280
 plan for parkland dedication. So the area that is proposed to be dedicated as as parkland

00:22:13.280 --> 00:22:17.880
 or that open space does assist in achieving the city's overall goals in the comprehensive

00:22:17.880 --> 00:22:24.280
 plan and the parks master plans for overall trail connectivity. More specifically access

00:22:24.280 --> 00:22:29.280
 through this property could provide ultimate linkages to the other side of 35 where we

00:22:29.280 --> 00:22:34.400
 do have a similar interconnected trail system throughout the hunter excuse me landmark and

00:22:34.400 --> 00:22:39.280
 coal developments and so this is something the city has been in discussions with since

00:22:39.280 --> 00:22:45.840
 UNT determined they didn't want the property we are able to utilize things like like trails

00:22:45.840 --> 00:22:52.920
 or other uses that don't generate rise like a disc golf course. So yes it has been discussed

00:22:52.920 --> 00:22:57.680
 and there is interest does seem kind of like UNT maybe had it right and then there's not

00:22:57.680 --> 00:23:02.200
 much you can do with it. So I believe they were eyeing it for intramural fields but I

00:23:02.200 --> 00:23:06.680
 don't want to put words in their mouth. Right and then the other question I have so I looked

00:23:06.680 --> 00:23:14.760
 at the at the exhibit in the developer agreement or I guess the PD and so for track B it looks

00:23:14.760 --> 00:23:21.120
 like they plan on doing basically 105 tone town homes and nothing else and I know we

00:23:21.120 --> 00:23:24.740
 said single family and town homes but pretty much just looks like it's gonna be town homes.

00:23:24.740 --> 00:23:29.800
 So it's important to keep in mind with PD overlays we're adopting the conditions and

00:23:29.800 --> 00:23:34.160
 that the concept plan is still subject to some change as you get into the final zoning

00:23:34.160 --> 00:23:39.720
 compliance plan and civil engineering plans provided they fit within the bounds of the

00:23:39.720 --> 00:23:45.360
 overlay development. So no more than 150 units on track to be adhering to those additional

00:23:45.360 --> 00:23:54.760
 setbacks height requirements and those two uses that are allowed for. Okay thanks. And

00:23:54.760 --> 00:24:00.200
 do we have information on housing need and that sort of thing that Commissioner Dyer

00:24:00.200 --> 00:24:04.600
 asked? I have some general it looks like Tina is ready to speak I was I'll just let you

00:24:04.600 --> 00:24:09.080
 speak. Okay well I was gonna say if you recall Haley had given a presentation gosh what about

00:24:09.080 --> 00:24:15.840
 a month or so ago with respect to our multifamily numbers. So with our and Haley correct me

00:24:15.840 --> 00:24:20.240
 if I get this wrong but with our growth assumption that we originally had in the comprehensive

00:24:20.240 --> 00:24:26.960
 plan of 3% for population growth and then looking at our what portion of our housing

00:24:26.960 --> 00:24:34.400
 numbers would be associated with multifamily we have exceeded the number that was anticipated.

00:24:34.400 --> 00:24:39.640
 What we're seeing actually is a little over a 4% growth rate since we've done the comprehensive

00:24:39.640 --> 00:24:45.040
 plan and so we would be below those numbers. If you recall in that presentation you know

00:24:45.040 --> 00:24:50.600
 we had some recommendations regarding still continuing to monitor where multifamily housing

00:24:50.600 --> 00:24:55.360
 is being proposed. We know that there is a housing crisis that is happening within within

00:24:55.360 --> 00:25:00.280
 our country. We know that multifamily is one form of housing that is able to also help

00:25:00.280 --> 00:25:05.560
 satisfy housing needs in addition to single-family detached single-family attached triplexes

00:25:05.560 --> 00:25:10.760
 duplexes fourplexes things of that nature. So I think with with respect to multifamily

00:25:10.760 --> 00:25:14.280
 you know we need to evaluate the location where it's being proposed to determine is

00:25:14.280 --> 00:25:19.440
 it appropriate in that location. Do we have the opportunity to create a further neighborhood

00:25:19.440 --> 00:25:25.320
 within that area. So I would ask you keep that an advisement when you consider the multifamily

00:25:25.320 --> 00:25:30.940
 did I get that correct. Okay. I got a thumbs up. So that's good.

00:25:30.940 --> 00:25:35.940
 Commissioner product real

00:25:35.940 --> 00:25:42.360
 putting there's no more than 150 right and track me on track to be right now as it's

00:25:42.360 --> 00:25:48.040
 down with our two. Do you have an idea of how many would fit. I could do some quick

00:25:48.040 --> 00:25:54.520
 math and have that for your regular session. Okay. It's it's also it'll it'll be a pretty

00:25:54.520 --> 00:25:59.160
 rough estimate. Track to be does have a little bit of floodplain on it. So I'll just look

00:25:59.160 --> 00:26:06.120
 at the total land area and do some simple math just an idea. Sure. Okay. Commissioner

00:26:06.120 --> 00:26:12.840
 Riggs sorry I have other questions too. So so Corbin Road currently does not connect

00:26:12.840 --> 00:26:22.040
 to 35 correct and there's not a service road on 35 either. So if tract a comes in as proposed

00:26:22.040 --> 00:26:27.240
 and it's basically just apartments then all those apartments will be essentially using

00:26:27.240 --> 00:26:34.880
 Corbin Road headed headed east in order to access and then come back. There's not there's

00:26:34.880 --> 00:26:42.400
 not any intention of making the connection of Corbin Road to 35. No. So it the answer

00:26:42.400 --> 00:26:52.640
 is complex. So I'm going to pull up an exhibit here. And so tracks a and b have the same

00:26:52.640 --> 00:27:01.320
 access conditions in that one half the full width of Corbin Road shall be approved and

00:27:01.320 --> 00:27:07.460
 extended to either the new Bonnie Bray constructed as part of the capital project that's currently

00:27:07.460 --> 00:27:16.240
 ongoing or 35 w frontage roads whichever comes first. So no building permits may be issued

00:27:16.240 --> 00:27:22.880
 to go vertical on tracks a or b until that connection is made either extending the approximate

00:27:22.880 --> 00:27:31.440
 900 feet east to new Bonnie Bray or to tee into this 35 intersection. Once that 35 improvement

00:27:31.440 --> 00:27:37.120
 does come along that full connection could conceivably be made so that everybody's not

00:27:37.120 --> 00:27:42.200
 turning east to head to new Bonnie Bray but both of those tracks are contingent upon one

00:27:42.200 --> 00:27:49.900
 of those improvements being made whichever comes first. Could you address the two points

00:27:49.900 --> 00:27:57.760
 of access requirement and remoteness. Sure. So in addition DDC requirements do require

00:27:57.760 --> 00:28:03.000
 that all multifamily developments are able to achieve two points of access as well as

00:28:03.000 --> 00:28:11.960
 a remoteness which would come into play more specifically with tracks a and tracks a fire

00:28:11.960 --> 00:28:16.240
 fire remoteness. I'm sorry to ensure that there's adequate fire access. So in order

00:28:16.240 --> 00:28:22.120
 for track a to develop multifamily they'd need to have access from Corbin Road and from

00:28:22.120 --> 00:28:29.040
 35. Is that is that what I'm hearing two points of access from those two roads. They could

00:28:29.040 --> 00:28:33.760
 have two points of access onto Corbin Correct Chandra. Yes based on how the development

00:28:33.760 --> 00:28:42.120
 code is applied. Well I think the exhibit you had up kind of showed it really yeah that

00:28:42.120 --> 00:28:47.840
 one right there because essentially it seems like is if we have really large single family

00:28:47.840 --> 00:28:54.080
 lots and then right next to them if we approve this it could be nothing but townhomes and

00:28:54.080 --> 00:28:59.840
 then essentially multifamily apartments and it just seems kind of like the feel like there

00:28:59.840 --> 00:29:04.920
 should be more of a buffer. It's just kind of I'm not opposed to multifamily at all but

00:29:04.920 --> 00:29:13.680
 it seems like to me it seems like a lot. So I think Commissioner Padron did you have a

00:29:13.680 --> 00:29:19.360
 question earlier. So Angie some of the public comments centered around flooding and the

00:29:19.360 --> 00:29:24.400
 impact of flooding with the new development. Was there a study that was conducted that

00:29:24.400 --> 00:29:29.200
 could potentially determine if there are any additional impacts as a result of flooding.

00:29:29.200 --> 00:29:34.160
 Not at this time similar to many of the zoning cases that we see where we're in the entitlement

00:29:34.160 --> 00:29:40.600
 stages still downstream assessments civil engineering additional floodplain studies

00:29:40.600 --> 00:29:46.240
 all come at the time of zoning compliance and civil engineering plans. You can't increase

00:29:46.240 --> 00:29:51.360
 the flow of water that you currently release onto neighboring properties when you when

00:29:51.360 --> 00:29:56.080
 you develop. So all of that does need to be accounted for when we get to the civil engineering

00:29:56.080 --> 00:30:09.320
 stages. Commissioner. So none of the current flooding that may or may not be happening

00:30:09.320 --> 00:30:15.000
 on this property has really been looked at for the zoning change is that is that what

00:30:15.000 --> 00:30:20.960
 I just heard. So we understand that there are areas of water and riparian ESA which

00:30:20.960 --> 00:30:25.600
 have been confirmed as part of the ESA field assessment. There's also some floodplain

00:30:25.600 --> 00:30:32.280
 and some floodway that are FEMA identified. By and large those areas are on the potential

00:30:32.280 --> 00:30:37.960
 public facilities based zoning. But at the time of civil engineering plans that is what

00:30:37.960 --> 00:30:44.000
 it is typical to request your downstream assessments and your more detailed studies. So we're really

00:30:44.000 --> 00:30:53.720
 kind of walking in the dark on how tracks A B and C would affect future flooding or

00:30:53.720 --> 00:31:02.000
 non flooding of this area because we would potentially be giving the stamp of approval

00:31:02.000 --> 00:31:08.280
 on the rezoning and then all of the other things for the environment and for the flood

00:31:08.280 --> 00:31:14.440
 zones and the habitats. All of that's going to come later. So that that is our typical

00:31:14.440 --> 00:31:19.840
 development process. Right. So all of those additional studies that are done they typically

00:31:19.840 --> 00:31:25.280
 follow that zoning entitlement process. Zoning is the first step to determine the whether

00:31:25.280 --> 00:31:30.960
 or not the land uses are appropriate in that location. Once the zoning is acted upon whether

00:31:30.960 --> 00:31:35.560
 it's keeping the existing zoning in place or changing the zoning those subsequent development

00:31:35.560 --> 00:31:39.440
 applications would come in and they would submit all of those studies based upon what

00:31:39.440 --> 00:31:43.480
 the applicant has prepared for us. They have reason to believe that tracks A B and C are

00:31:43.480 --> 00:31:49.920
 developable. So that's the information that we work from. Even under today's zoning. Right.

00:31:49.920 --> 00:31:53.680
 There are land use entitlements that are there. If somebody wanted to develop the tracks A

00:31:53.680 --> 00:31:57.960
 B and C under today's zoning then they would have the responsibility of submitting the

00:31:57.960 --> 00:32:02.800
 various or the various studies that would be required. If we determined a downstream

00:32:02.800 --> 00:32:06.720
 assessment was required for being able to do single family residential development on

00:32:06.720 --> 00:32:11.000
 tracks A B and C they would be responsible for submitting that in addition to zoning

00:32:11.000 --> 00:32:16.520
 compliance plans there any traffic impact analysis that would be associated with it

00:32:16.520 --> 00:32:21.720
 in addition to any plats downstream assessments any additional ESA studies that would be needed.

00:32:21.720 --> 00:32:26.920
 So what you're seeing today in the process the developer would have today is no different

00:32:26.920 --> 00:32:30.240
 than if the property were developed under their existing zoning this there. So that

00:32:30.240 --> 00:32:36.440
 includes like traffic studies. So like Commissioner Riggs talked about you know the traffic on

00:32:36.440 --> 00:32:43.080
 Corbin and while yes this is supposed to wait until like the frontage roads go up but people

00:32:43.080 --> 00:32:47.800
 that want to go south they'd have to go all the way north and catch you know a U-turn

00:32:47.800 --> 00:32:53.120
 and go that way. So people that want to be south on 35 they're most likely going to go

00:32:53.120 --> 00:33:01.680
 east on Corbin and then south on Bonnie Bray Road. So we did have a traffic impact analysis

00:33:01.680 --> 00:33:05.080
 that was submitted part of this request and we do have staff here that are subject matter

00:33:05.080 --> 00:33:13.200
 experts from our transportation services team. I think I'd like to hear more about the TIA

00:33:13.200 --> 00:33:22.360
 then kind of chip generation. Sure. While you come up I'll just mention that while it may

00:33:22.360 --> 00:33:27.740
 seem backwards that we approve zoning and then we figure out how to handle the drainage

00:33:27.740 --> 00:33:34.240
 and that sort of thing that engineering analysis you can't do until you know how much impervious

00:33:34.240 --> 00:33:42.100
 area you're adding. You don't know how much retention you need to add etc. So our code

00:33:42.100 --> 00:33:48.280
 right even independent of whether this had a zoning change or not is set up to be reviewed

00:33:48.280 --> 00:33:57.760
 by staff for any development applications and make sure that as they said the downstream

00:33:57.760 --> 00:34:04.360
 impacts of water falling on the developed land versus the undeveloped land is no worse

00:34:04.360 --> 00:34:11.160
 than it was before it was developed. Before we go there I just want to follow up on that

00:34:11.160 --> 00:34:15.920
 and make sure that I understand that right because most of the time when a development

00:34:15.920 --> 00:34:21.200
 comes in they have to basically do detention to go back to pre-existing conditions. With

00:34:21.200 --> 00:34:27.680
 this being directly connected to the floodplain is that still a condition? Yes that is. So

00:34:27.680 --> 00:34:31.920
 that's typical associated with any development process that we have. Okay. I know some places

00:34:31.920 --> 00:34:36.120
 say if you're connected to the floodplain then you don't have to worry about it so I

00:34:36.120 --> 00:34:43.080
 just want to make sure. Okay. So Chandra I'll let you speak to TIA and the impacts there.

00:34:43.080 --> 00:34:53.020
 We'll probably get into it more in open session but I was also curious whether the future

00:34:53.020 --> 00:34:58.800
 of this road along track C would have enough frontage difference to satisfy that two points

00:34:58.800 --> 00:35:05.320
 of access only to this frontage road or whether they would have to cross the property somewhere

00:35:05.320 --> 00:35:10.440
 since it's kind of this island. Does that make sense? Good evening Chair and Commission.

00:35:10.440 --> 00:35:16.040
 Chandra Muruganandam, City Traffic Engineer. So as of now the tech start is in schematic

00:35:16.040 --> 00:35:24.280
 stage on the planning. So the plans show as of now it's only one connection with the 425

00:35:24.280 --> 00:35:32.080
 feet spacing criteria but at the time of full design we will be able to see if we can get

00:35:32.080 --> 00:35:39.160
 one additional connection. The reasoning is if tech start would not buy the access denial

00:35:39.160 --> 00:35:45.280
 then we could have one more connection. Sorry I didn't hear. If tech start would not like

00:35:45.280 --> 00:35:50.080
 the access. Usually they buy access denials so whether they will restrain the access for

00:35:50.080 --> 00:35:57.000
 only one point or something with bridge structure being so close. So if there is no restrictions

00:35:57.000 --> 00:36:01.840
 then we could get another additional one. Okay so TBD as far as whether there could

00:36:01.840 --> 00:36:08.720
 be a second one. That's correct. And then can you speak to the process of the TIA and

00:36:08.720 --> 00:36:13.400
 I'm sure we'll want to ask some more details about the numbers in the open session the

00:36:13.400 --> 00:36:16.460
 public is really going to want to hear that. But I want to make sure you understand the

00:36:16.460 --> 00:36:22.440
 process now so that we're not fighting two confusing battles at the same time once we

00:36:22.440 --> 00:36:31.960
 get in there. So as an overall traffic impact study the developers engineers went and counted

00:36:31.960 --> 00:36:39.480
 the traffic counts on existing intersections as south as Vintage, 35, Rose Lawn, Bonnie

00:36:39.480 --> 00:36:45.200
 Bray all the intersections and they added the development generated traffic on top of

00:36:45.200 --> 00:36:53.880
 those trips that already being used on those roadways and do the analysis that is the typical

00:36:53.880 --> 00:37:02.400
 industry standard and based on the analysis with site A, site B and site C traffic they

00:37:02.400 --> 00:37:07.640
 use the software models and provide us the results on how much the impact will be on

00:37:07.640 --> 00:37:14.160
 the neighborhood streets and based on the outcome of those they have to do some mitigations

00:37:14.160 --> 00:37:19.360
 to bring it up to the city standard which is a level of service D or better. Level of

00:37:19.360 --> 00:37:25.720
 service D is a condition where there is a slight amount of delays during the peak hours

00:37:25.720 --> 00:37:33.400
 but it's a free flow condition during the other peak hours. Level of service A is the

00:37:33.400 --> 00:37:41.520
 low traffic at all which we don't see it anywhere. Level of service B is minimal traffic, C is

00:37:41.520 --> 00:37:50.600
 really good and D is like slightly determined to C, E is really congested like US 380 and

00:37:50.600 --> 00:37:56.200
 level of service F is like during a major incident crash it's like gridlocked you're

00:37:56.200 --> 00:38:03.000
 not moving at all so and the study outcome was level of service B and C which is really

00:38:03.000 --> 00:38:12.040
 good with some improvements and with the proposed connections to new Barney Bray and with 35W

00:38:12.040 --> 00:38:19.920
 frontage roads it has no impacts with minimal to the carbon at Barney Bray which could be

00:38:19.920 --> 00:38:27.520
 mitigated with additional traffic control measures.

00:38:27.520 --> 00:38:38.000
 I heard from the development conditions that Corbin would have to be extended east until

00:38:38.000 --> 00:38:46.200
 it connected to new Barney Bray. Would the entire section between new Barney Bray then

00:38:46.200 --> 00:38:51.880
 and track to A have to be upgraded to that amended cross section that's shown in backup?

00:38:51.880 --> 00:38:59.040
 Is that the requirement? Any other questions? I'm sure we'll have a lot more information

00:38:59.040 --> 00:39:03.960
 out there but it's a few new things here and I just want to make sure everybody understands

00:39:03.960 --> 00:39:11.120
 what the processes are and what things we're going to be considering.

00:39:11.120 --> 00:39:16.760
 I think one of the things that might be helpful particularly for track B and I know this doesn't

00:39:16.760 --> 00:39:21.840
 necessarily question for you is right now the current zoning would be large estate lots

00:39:21.840 --> 00:39:26.960
 and that's essentially the only thing that would be allowed and now with this we're basically

00:39:26.960 --> 00:39:34.880
 saying town homes and apartments not on track B but apartments on A and C essentially so

00:39:34.880 --> 00:39:42.600
 that's kind of in a nutshell what we're considering right?

00:39:42.600 --> 00:39:48.840
 Did you have anything else to add Angie? I think our questions are starting to dry up.

00:39:48.840 --> 00:39:52.400
 No nothing for now. I have a much more detailed presentation and we'll go through an open

00:39:52.400 --> 00:40:01.880
 session. Okay. I think we're good. We're going to have

00:40:01.880 --> 00:40:08.560
 a work session next on some one of a boot camp things given that that will be a lot

00:40:08.560 --> 00:40:14.560
 of content and dinners here I'm going to say let's let's take five minutes and grab dinner

00:40:14.560 --> 00:40:22.400
 and then have a working work session as we learn about some of those zoning processes

00:40:22.400 --> 00:40:32.600
 and so at 542 we will take a five minute recess and be back at 547.

00:40:32.600 --> 00:40:40.200
 Good afternoon at 549 p.m. we will resume our planning and zoning work session this

00:40:40.200 --> 00:40:51.760
 afternoon the next item is item 3a work session regarding zoning changes plan developments

00:40:51.760 --> 00:40:58.240
 and specific use permits so come on up. Thank you good evening chair and members of

00:40:58.240 --> 00:41:04.040
 the commission Sean Jacobson and Ashley will be presenting your zoning changes plan development

00:41:04.040 --> 00:41:09.080
 and specific use permits boot camp for many of y'all this will probably be somewhat familiar

00:41:09.080 --> 00:41:12.560
 information but hopefully you can draw some things from it get some refreshers maybe catch

00:41:12.560 --> 00:41:15.680
 some things you didn't last time you went through it.

00:41:15.680 --> 00:41:19.960
 So hopefully you can see that I'm sorry it's a little bit white there but just that reminder

00:41:19.960 --> 00:41:25.360
 where we are in the process so when you set out to develop a property one of the first

00:41:25.360 --> 00:41:30.040
 questions you're going to ask is is this use allowed can I do that on this property if

00:41:30.040 --> 00:41:35.360
 not then you're going to go into one or more of the what we call the entitlement categories

00:41:35.360 --> 00:41:41.080
 that would be zoning plan development specific use permit in between there we recommend strongly

00:41:41.080 --> 00:41:44.280
 neighborhood engagement really important we encourage that heavily that you have those

00:41:44.280 --> 00:41:48.040
 neighborhood meetings to find out how those around where you want to develop feel about

00:41:48.040 --> 00:41:51.980
 your proposed changes but once you go through the entitlement process then moving on from

00:41:51.980 --> 00:41:55.960
 there as we've learned tonight we have the zoning compliance plan civil plan reviews

00:41:55.960 --> 00:42:00.400
 there's various studies and then on the final plat building permit and any development contracts

00:42:00.400 --> 00:42:04.120
 or public improvements but we're going to focus on that entitlement section what can

00:42:04.120 --> 00:42:09.880
 you do on your property and how do we know that so kind of those brief categories standard

00:42:09.880 --> 00:42:16.920
 zoning so that's what it's your basic zoning category so r1 r2 mn that establishes your

00:42:16.920 --> 00:42:21.960
 dimensional use and development regulations what you can do where on your lot so it guides

00:42:21.960 --> 00:42:26.960
 the impact that your lot has on the lots around you and protects each lot owners right to

00:42:26.960 --> 00:42:32.000
 a reasonable use and enjoyment of their lot it's one of our main tools for regulating

00:42:32.000 --> 00:42:38.240
 uses and development specific use permit is within a zoning district a use may be allowed

00:42:38.240 --> 00:42:42.940
 but it requires some extra scrutiny and so we have the specific use permit to give the

00:42:42.940 --> 00:42:47.200
 opportunity to look at what additional protections or mitigation might be needed for this use

00:42:47.200 --> 00:42:52.440
 to occur here plan development is a special type of zoning sort of a custom zoning for

00:42:52.440 --> 00:42:57.600
 very specific site situations where existing standards might not be fully appropriate for

00:42:57.600 --> 00:43:02.920
 that lot to customize zoning provide some greater flexibility and the goal is to encourage

00:43:02.920 --> 00:43:07.120
 unique or innovative land use concepts we don't just use this for anything it really

00:43:07.120 --> 00:43:11.320
 does need to be out of the box if zoning or scp can do it we shouldn't be using your plan

00:43:11.320 --> 00:43:16.840
 development to do it so taking a step back with any entitlement case we're looking at

00:43:16.840 --> 00:43:22.320
 our main key approval criteria in the ddc things like does it line up with the comprehensive

00:43:22.320 --> 00:43:27.520
 plan does it line up with the purpose of that zoning district are we minimizing adverse

00:43:27.520 --> 00:43:32.680
 impacts on surrounding properties minimizing adverse fiscal impacts and do we have adequate

00:43:32.680 --> 00:43:36.680
 public facilities available so with any form of entitlement we're going to be looking at

00:43:36.680 --> 00:43:41.960
 some variation of those questions zooming in on zoning a little bit remember this is

00:43:41.960 --> 00:43:47.080
 the division of the city into a variety of districts or zones with compatible land uses

00:43:47.080 --> 00:43:52.000
 it's also the establishment of development standards for each particular district or

00:43:52.000 --> 00:43:55.400
 zone so within each district or zone there will be a set of standards that apply there

00:43:55.400 --> 00:43:59.680
 it'll be a little different than every other district state law gives cities authorities

00:43:59.680 --> 00:44:06.080
 to regulate this our zoning ordinance is what sets out what is allowed in each one of those

00:44:06.080 --> 00:44:10.520
 zoning districts that describes those zoning districts for us now remember zoning only

00:44:10.520 --> 00:44:16.400
 applies to properties within denton city limits not out in the extraterritorial jurisdiction

00:44:16.400 --> 00:44:19.560
 if you wanted to learn more about each of our zoning districts you could find that in

00:44:19.560 --> 00:44:24.960
 sub chapter three the zoning ordinance as you can see here i provide a kind of example

00:44:24.960 --> 00:44:31.800
 from our code there that is one of our zoning districts and you can see we have dimensional

00:44:31.800 --> 00:44:35.960
 standards that govern where on the lot you can put the building how large the yard needs

00:44:35.960 --> 00:44:40.960
 to be so that's we talk about setbacks front rear side how tall the building can be essentially

00:44:40.960 --> 00:44:45.920
 the bulk of that building we also as you can see there there's a snip from our table of

00:44:45.920 --> 00:44:50.880
 allowed uses for each zoning district there are uses that are permitted or not permitted

00:44:50.880 --> 00:44:54.040
 and then there's uses that are permitted with the specific use permit that's where you see

00:44:54.040 --> 00:44:59.200
 the s so p is permitted as a specific use permit blank means you can't do it there there's

00:44:59.200 --> 00:45:04.200
 also the supplementary regulations things that y'all are familiar with so parking open storage

00:45:04.200 --> 00:45:09.000
 tree preservation those things can vary between zoning districts so each zoning district will

00:45:09.000 --> 00:45:14.800
 have some supplementary regulations that are different there than they are in other districts

00:45:14.800 --> 00:45:18.940
 let's apply that to the real world so looking at what we call the zoning atlas or zoning

00:45:18.940 --> 00:45:24.600
 map those fancy colors and letters each one of those is one of our zoning districts where

00:45:24.600 --> 00:45:31.680
 those zoning standards apply so pf public facilities r2 residential 2 sc suburban corridor

00:45:31.680 --> 00:45:35.440
 each one of those if you look that up you can find out what you're allowed to do there

00:45:35.440 --> 00:45:40.160
 and how you have to build it what those zoning dimensions are you'll also see that some of

00:45:40.160 --> 00:45:44.440
 them have some extra indicators so that pf and then an s that means there's a specific

00:45:44.440 --> 00:45:51.240
 use permit on that property similarly you might see pdr6 that means that's mostly an

00:45:51.240 --> 00:45:56.760
 r6 district but it has some additional plan development standards that apply there we'll

00:45:56.760 --> 00:46:00.120
 also talk about overlays zoning districts a minute you can spot those because they start

00:46:00.120 --> 00:46:06.280
 with an o and then the zoning district under them so key types of zoning actions we have

00:46:06.280 --> 00:46:09.800
 our standard zoning districts which we've talked about our plan development districts

00:46:09.800 --> 00:46:14.360
 which are more customized overlay districts we'll get into a minute and then those specific

00:46:14.360 --> 00:46:20.240
 use permits that's what affects zoning on land now there's also our zoning tech sometimes

00:46:20.240 --> 00:46:25.160
 we're amending is actually what the zoning ordinance says and you will likely be seeing

00:46:25.160 --> 00:46:31.080
 that a number of times this year so just be prepared at that point we're deciding how

00:46:31.080 --> 00:46:35.320
 the zoning is impacted for potentially every property within a zoning district or even

00:46:35.320 --> 00:46:40.680
 every property depending on how that's written so a little bit different we have 16 of those

00:46:40.680 --> 00:46:45.560
 standard zoning districts we discussed each one has their allowed uses and standards and

00:46:45.560 --> 00:46:52.280
 here's a key point you can vary between zoning districts in what is allowed there but zoning

00:46:52.280 --> 00:46:56.200
 districts one zoning district across the city has to be treated the same no matter where

00:46:56.200 --> 00:47:02.400
 it's located so r3 is r3 is r3 you don't have r3 you can do this here but on that street

00:47:02.400 --> 00:47:09.360
 r3 you can do something different r3 is r3 across the board moving on to plan developments

00:47:09.360 --> 00:47:13.600
 as i said this is something of a customized zoning so usually it's either the site has

00:47:13.600 --> 00:47:17.800
 unique characteristics or it's a unique type of development maybe something we haven't

00:47:17.800 --> 00:47:22.840
 seen before it's been crafted in a certain way gives reason for why we'd use a custom

00:47:22.840 --> 00:47:28.120
 zoning it doesn't fit quite into our normal zoning boxes the pd process is exactly the

00:47:28.120 --> 00:47:33.600
 same as rezoning so you go to you all plan planning zoning commission go city council

00:47:33.600 --> 00:47:38.920
 have neighborhood meetings but you have additional standards that could be what we call pd development

00:47:38.920 --> 00:47:43.160
 plan a site plan that goes with it there could be additional standards or restrictions what

00:47:43.160 --> 00:47:49.680
 uses are allowed or are not allowed there are two types of pd's overlay and standard

00:47:49.680 --> 00:47:55.640
 take a look at that so your overlay zonings and that's actually what we've been talking

00:47:55.640 --> 00:48:00.040
 about tonight those are to modify the effect of the base zoning district so you're not

00:48:00.040 --> 00:48:03.640
 getting a full site plan of everything that's going to be done and where it goes you're

00:48:03.640 --> 00:48:07.280
 saying all right there's specific changes we need to make here to address neighborhood

00:48:07.280 --> 00:48:11.600
 concerns promote compatibility with surrounding properties so we're going to have some additional

00:48:11.600 --> 00:48:16.740
 rules that go with this so for instance you might have certain uses that are added or

00:48:16.740 --> 00:48:21.240
 removed from that base zoning district you might have additional standards for how it's

00:48:21.240 --> 00:48:25.120
 built and there might be additional requirements for landscape or screening around it but again

00:48:25.120 --> 00:48:29.120
 you're not getting a fully developed site plan you're getting additional rules that

00:48:29.120 --> 00:48:35.040
 go with the zoning by contrast standard pd you are getting a fully customized site plan

00:48:35.040 --> 00:48:37.880
 so when you're looking at that you're going to basically know where things are going to

00:48:37.880 --> 00:48:43.560
 be in some cases you may be creating a new use there's going to be potentially detailed

00:48:43.560 --> 00:48:47.880
 landscape and facade plans that go with that so it's going to be much more detailed much

00:48:47.880 --> 00:48:51.800
 more drilled in and it's going to be for very specific circumstance you want to use that

00:48:51.800 --> 00:48:57.440
 again very carefully so when should we use a pd sparingly it's the exception not the

00:48:57.440 --> 00:49:02.120
 rule if you're continually needing pd's that means you probably need to update the code

00:49:02.120 --> 00:49:06.600
 because you have a use that's coming in frequently we've done that with horizontal multifamily

00:49:06.600 --> 00:49:09.960
 with that used to require a pd we realized we were getting a lot of it we wrote it into

00:49:09.960 --> 00:49:14.440
 the code now we don't need to use pd's for that it's often more appropriate on small

00:49:14.440 --> 00:49:18.600
 infill lots and again we never want to use it we're straight zoning or a specific use

00:49:18.600 --> 00:49:23.200
 permit to get us there and we always want to be looking forward do we need to just change

00:49:23.200 --> 00:49:28.640
 our code if we're getting this many pd's keep in mind we don't want to use a pd for

00:49:28.640 --> 00:49:33.000
 instance to require construction of public improvements or reservation or dedication

00:49:33.000 --> 00:49:36.620
 of land where it's not going to primarily benefit the actual area where we're doing

00:49:36.620 --> 00:49:40.320
 the pd so we're not going to say within this pd by the way you have to do this thing over

00:49:40.320 --> 00:49:45.440
 here needs to be directly benefited working in that area where the pd is located we don't

00:49:45.440 --> 00:49:49.680
 want to use it to secure third-party agreements with property owners we're not going to use

00:49:49.680 --> 00:49:53.360
 it to enforce someone's deed restrictions we don't get involved in that and there are

00:49:53.360 --> 00:49:57.800
 certain parts of the code that we can't touch with pd's so environmentally sensitive areas

00:49:57.800 --> 00:50:01.520
 tree preservation gas well requirements we don't mess with those in the pd those remain

00:50:01.520 --> 00:50:07.280
 the same just to give you an example one of the first pd's i was getting this was a full

00:50:07.280 --> 00:50:12.720
 pd this was the very first horizontal multifamily development in the city it was a new use so

00:50:12.720 --> 00:50:17.000
 justified using a pd we've never seen this before you can see you've got that fully laid

00:50:17.000 --> 00:50:22.420
 out site plan had full facade plans landscape very detailed and we were using that also

00:50:22.420 --> 00:50:26.920
 to adapt to a very uniquely shaped lot as well as there were some concerns the neighborhood

00:50:26.920 --> 00:50:31.040
 had that were able to be addressed through the pd that we couldn't have addressed otherwise

00:50:31.040 --> 00:50:36.040
 by contrast denton west was an overlay pd there's no site plan that goes with this there's

00:50:36.040 --> 00:50:40.300
 some additional rules some use regulations some things you can't do there because of

00:50:40.300 --> 00:50:44.560
 concerns the neighbors as well as some additional screening that was required to address concerns

00:50:44.560 --> 00:50:51.840
 surrounding properties so standard overlay pd and then briefly and this we'll try not

00:50:51.840 --> 00:50:55.840
 to get confused here but overlay districts separate from the overlay pd that is when

00:50:55.840 --> 00:51:00.720
 we add an additional special layer of protection for certain areas that could be your historic

00:51:00.720 --> 00:51:04.800
 districts that could be if you're familiar with the fry street overlay in the fry street

00:51:04.800 --> 00:51:09.240
 area or a denton square district where there's some additional regulations or design standards

00:51:09.240 --> 00:51:14.200
 that we want in that area to achieve a certain public purpose and that's put on the map through

00:51:14.200 --> 00:51:18.080
 the same process planning zoning commission city council and again as i mentioned that

00:51:18.080 --> 00:51:22.060
 shows up on the map it's just an o and then the underlying district some additional rules

00:51:22.060 --> 00:51:27.760
 to achieve a certain purpose in a specific area so with that i'm going to hand it off

00:51:27.760 --> 00:51:34.360
 to ashley good evening chair members of the commission ashley x dead associate planner

00:51:34.360 --> 00:51:38.200
 tonight i'm going to go over specific use permits and also the commission's role in

00:51:38.200 --> 00:51:43.360
 zoning actions generally so just to give a broad overview of specific use permits we

00:51:43.360 --> 00:51:47.680
 use an sup when a use is appropriate in that zoning district but not appropriate for all

00:51:47.680 --> 00:51:52.280
 properties in that district it is a rezoning action however the underlying zoning will

00:51:52.280 --> 00:51:58.080
 stay the same it does require approval by p and z and council and once an sup is approved

00:51:58.080 --> 00:52:05.100
 it does expire within 24 months if substantial construction is not underway review timelines

00:52:05.100 --> 00:52:09.880
 for sup generally vary between three to six months depending on the intensity of the project

00:52:09.880 --> 00:52:14.760
 we do review the approval criteria that sean covered the general approval criteria as well

00:52:14.760 --> 00:52:20.040
 as approval criteria specific to sup which i'll go over on a future slide at the time

00:52:20.040 --> 00:52:24.240
 of the first submittal a zoning compliance plan or a site plan is required and if the

00:52:24.240 --> 00:52:29.840
 sup is approved that will be adopted as part of the ordinance and this is our table of

00:52:29.840 --> 00:52:34.040
 allowed uses and on this table if there's a use within a zoning district with an s that

00:52:34.040 --> 00:52:38.320
 does show that a specific use permit is required in that zoning district the table also calls

00:52:38.320 --> 00:52:42.800
 out any additional use specific standards that are required and the sup gives us the

00:52:42.800 --> 00:52:47.360
 ability to evaluate a development and land uses that have unique characteristics and

00:52:47.360 --> 00:52:51.440
 ensure compatibility with the surrounding area and also that the applicant has provided

00:52:51.440 --> 00:52:58.600
 for any mitigation of those anticipated impacts so the specific approval criteria for sup

00:52:58.600 --> 00:53:02.640
 and again these are in addition to the general approval criteria that sean covered we'll

00:53:02.640 --> 00:53:07.380
 look at whether it's compatible with existing development it does not adversely impact future

00:53:07.380 --> 00:53:12.320
 development and any impact associated with traffic access noise odor and light has been

00:53:12.320 --> 00:53:19.120
 mitigated and to give a few examples of a few sup that we saw last year this was a request

00:53:19.120 --> 00:53:23.980
 for a multifamily use the property was zoned r7 with a neighborhood mixed use future land

00:53:23.980 --> 00:53:28.680
 use that future land use does include a diverse mix of housing types and densities and the

00:53:28.680 --> 00:53:32.560
 surrounding neighborhood did already include that mix of housing types including four plexes

00:53:32.560 --> 00:53:37.080
 single family and multifamily the buildings were appropriately scaled with the maximum

00:53:37.080 --> 00:53:41.280
 height of 40 feet which is the maximum height in most of our residential zoning districts

00:53:41.280 --> 00:53:45.480
 and this use is appropriate along a primary arterial which in this case was north elm

00:53:45.480 --> 00:53:51.680
 street the second example was a request for a vet clinic use and this the zoning on this

00:53:51.680 --> 00:53:56.540
 property was r2 with the low residential future land use that future land use does include

00:53:56.540 --> 00:54:00.720
 appropriately scaled commercial and as you can see in this drawing the building was appropriately

00:54:00.720 --> 00:54:06.040
 scaled with residentially designed architecture and as far as mitigating any potential impacts

00:54:06.040 --> 00:54:10.160
 all of their parking spaces were over 200 feet from the nearest single family lot which

00:54:10.160 --> 00:54:14.520
 would reduce any potential noise or lighting impacts and they also dedicated right away

00:54:14.520 --> 00:54:20.980
 to potentially improve a known mobility issue in this area in the future.

00:54:20.980 --> 00:54:24.880
 So once the sup has been approved the landscape plan and the site plan are adopted as part

00:54:24.880 --> 00:54:28.960
 of the ordinance the ordinance will generally call out any minor amendments that can be

00:54:28.960 --> 00:54:33.640
 approved by staff and this is usually a small increase or decrease in landscape area or

00:54:33.640 --> 00:54:38.880
 parking and this is just to give the applicant more flexibility as they work through their

00:54:38.880 --> 00:54:43.520
 final civil engineering plans however any expansions or enlargement of the sup will

00:54:43.520 --> 00:54:50.680
 require a new application and a new public hearing at planning and zoning and city council.

00:54:50.680 --> 00:54:54.700
 So to go over the commission's role in zoning actions generally it's to make a recommendation

00:54:54.700 --> 00:54:59.360
 to city council and these are legislative actions and not ministerial the commission

00:54:59.360 --> 00:55:02.920
 does have some discretion in making these decisions which I'll go over on the next

00:55:02.920 --> 00:55:07.080
 slide and you may consider the testimony of the public and facts presented during the

00:55:07.080 --> 00:55:12.440
 public hearing and just to note zoning regulations must rationally and reasonably advance a legitimate

00:55:12.440 --> 00:55:16.120
 government purpose.

00:55:16.120 --> 00:55:20.440
 So what to consider when evaluating zoning actions is the future land use and whether

00:55:20.440 --> 00:55:24.640
 it's consistent with the plan recommendations whether it's compatible with the surrounding

00:55:24.640 --> 00:55:29.400
 land uses whether it's consistent with the policies in the comprehensive plan and any

00:55:29.400 --> 00:55:34.740
 impact on city services such as infrastructure and public safety and just something to remember

00:55:34.740 --> 00:55:38.600
 is that zoning districts allow a wide range of uses so you'll want to consider that the

00:55:38.600 --> 00:55:43.160
 zoning applicant may not be the one who ultimately develops the property and you'll want to look

00:55:43.160 --> 00:55:47.720
 beyond the individual applicant and their specific business especially with sup requests

00:55:47.720 --> 00:55:53.860
 as the sup does run with the land and don't be influenced by the pretty pictures.

00:55:53.860 --> 00:55:57.880
 So zoning protest procedures before every public hearing will send notifications out

00:55:57.880 --> 00:56:02.200
 to everyone within 500 feet and this is in compliance with state law you'll see these

00:56:02.200 --> 00:56:07.040
 notification maps in your backup and in all of our presentations property owners within

00:56:07.040 --> 00:56:11.840
 200 feet of the rezoning are able to file a written protest if we receive those written

00:56:11.840 --> 00:56:17.160
 protests from landowners of more than 20 percent of the area within 200 feet a super majority

00:56:17.160 --> 00:56:21.720
 vote of council will be required and then just to note in that instance a super majority

00:56:21.720 --> 00:56:25.880
 vote of this commission is not required.

00:56:25.880 --> 00:56:33.080
 Happy to stand for any questions.

00:56:33.080 --> 00:56:37.400
 Great job Ashley and Sean I wanted to touch base on something related to zoning requests

00:56:37.400 --> 00:56:42.960
 and in kind of as a follow up to the public notifications aspect so as Ashley pointed

00:56:42.960 --> 00:56:47.960
 out that we do notify property owners within 200 feet that's a requirement of state law

00:56:47.960 --> 00:56:55.600
 we also send out a courtesy notice to residents that are within 500 feet so when we also require

00:56:55.600 --> 00:56:59.820
 our applicants to post a zoning sign on the property and correct me if I'm wrong Ashley

00:56:59.820 --> 00:57:03.680
 I believe we also even run a notice in the newspaper prior to PNC as well.

00:57:03.680 --> 00:57:08.000
 So we try to put out a variety of different forms of notification to property owners we

00:57:08.000 --> 00:57:16.680
 even have tools on our website where people can request to receive various updates or

00:57:16.680 --> 00:57:20.360
 notifications regarding projects that are within a certain distance that they can set

00:57:20.360 --> 00:57:25.760
 on that website but I share all that because eventually some of those property owners that

00:57:25.760 --> 00:57:30.680
 get notified or residents they learn of the project maybe they attended a public meeting

00:57:30.680 --> 00:57:36.200
 or excuse me a meeting that was hosted by the applicant and then in turn you all start

00:57:36.200 --> 00:57:42.120
 getting contacted right people wanting to be able to engage with you as commissioners

00:57:42.120 --> 00:57:47.480
 and so I wanted just to touch base on a couple of things that as commissioners since you're

00:57:47.480 --> 00:57:52.200
 appointed and you're not elected as appointed members to the planning and zoning commission

00:57:52.200 --> 00:57:57.280
 it is up to you to decide as to what level you choose to engage with people that reach

00:57:57.280 --> 00:58:00.720
 out to you it could be residents that reach out to you it could also be the developers

00:58:00.720 --> 00:58:05.600
 representative also wanting to reach out to you if you are to ask staff our recommendation

00:58:05.600 --> 00:58:10.920
 is that we recommend that you avoid ex parte communication and I know you heard me say

00:58:10.920 --> 00:58:16.040
 that in when we did our commissioner training reason for that is from staff's perspective

00:58:16.040 --> 00:58:20.300
 we are interested in protecting what I call the sanctity of the public hearing right the

00:58:20.300 --> 00:58:24.760
 public hearing the goal of the public hearing is for all commissioners to receive the same

00:58:24.760 --> 00:58:31.120
 information for when you are deliberating a proposed zoning request so that that's why

00:58:31.120 --> 00:58:36.440
 from that staff perspective we're always we're careful about protecting that public hearing

00:58:36.440 --> 00:58:43.720
 now that being said I think it's fair to say that residents within communities regardless

00:58:43.720 --> 00:58:46.880
 if you're in Denton or somewhere else feel the need that they want to make sure that

00:58:46.880 --> 00:58:51.440
 their their concerns are heard and expressed to members of the commission and understandably

00:58:51.440 --> 00:58:58.120
 so you're more than welcome to listen and receive that feedback from residents or the

00:58:58.120 --> 00:59:02.320
 developers applicant but I would encourage you especially if those meetings are happening

00:59:02.320 --> 00:59:07.160
 before you have your formal planning and zoning commission meeting I would encourage you to

00:59:07.160 --> 00:59:11.880
 listen right not formulate a formal position or state what your formal position is until

00:59:11.880 --> 00:59:16.960
 you receive all the technical materials that we've provided you the reason being is because

00:59:16.960 --> 00:59:22.020
 as Ashley pointed out or I'm sorry with Sean on the on consideration of zoning requests

00:59:22.020 --> 00:59:27.520
 it's also evaluating those consistency with our adopted policies that we have in our regulations

00:59:27.520 --> 00:59:31.680
 that we put forth also it's fair for you as commissioners to want to be able to actually

00:59:31.680 --> 00:59:37.620
 see the actual development application materials in your packet that are being presented to

00:59:37.620 --> 00:59:43.120
 you so that's why I encourage you to listen if you attend those public meetings you're

00:59:43.120 --> 00:59:46.640
 more than welcome to sit in and listen but you also had to figure out what your comfort

00:59:46.640 --> 00:59:53.400
 level is for engaging with the community if you do decide to engage with members outside

00:59:53.400 --> 00:59:57.960
 the public hearing process then staff does recommend that during your deliberations or

00:59:57.960 --> 01:00:02.000
 during the public hearing that you put on public record hey I had the opportunity to

01:00:02.000 --> 01:00:06.360
 meet with the developer on this project they reached out to me and so I obliged and had

01:00:06.360 --> 01:00:10.800
 a conversation with them here's a summary of the conversation that we had it's always

01:00:10.800 --> 01:00:16.200
 important to get that on public record right and again it goes back to you might have learned

01:00:16.200 --> 01:00:21.000
 something during that conversation whether with the developer or maybe it was a resident

01:00:21.000 --> 01:00:25.520
 that would be important for all members of the commission to be able to have access to

01:00:25.520 --> 01:00:31.660
 that information as part of their deliberation the other thing I would offer up is because

01:00:31.660 --> 01:00:35.980
 you are appointed members of the commission you're welcome to reach out to the council

01:00:35.980 --> 01:00:40.160
 member who appointed you and I realize some of you may have been appointed by a council

01:00:40.160 --> 01:00:45.720
 member who's no longer serving on the council so whatever position on council aligns with

01:00:45.720 --> 01:00:49.480
 your position on the commission you're always welcome to reach out to that council member

01:00:49.480 --> 01:00:53.080
 to get their expert to find out from them you know hey as as your appointee what's your

01:00:53.080 --> 01:00:58.160
 expectation of me in terms of any communication outside the public hearing because they may

01:00:58.160 --> 01:01:02.940
 have some words of wisdom for you from that perspective but I go back to ultimately it's

01:01:02.940 --> 01:01:07.520
 your desire it is for you to determine what your comfort level is again staff we will

01:01:07.520 --> 01:01:10.400
 take a more conservative approach because we're all concerned about the production that

01:01:10.400 --> 01:01:14.920
 public hearing such that you know hence why from time to time a great example is a case

01:01:14.920 --> 01:01:18.560
 on your agenda this evening where we were asking you to withdraw it because we realized

01:01:18.560 --> 01:01:23.400
 that there was an error in our public notification process so so we are all about trying to protect

01:01:23.400 --> 01:01:27.800
 that public hearing as much as we can but more importantly so that you all have the same

01:01:27.800 --> 01:01:32.760
 information for your deliberation and consideration so just wanted to add that I thought they've

01:01:32.760 --> 01:01:37.040
 done a great job with the presentation but I'll allow you all to ask any questions if

01:01:37.040 --> 01:01:43.080
 the chair is willing thank you Tina I guess I have a question about the boot camps coming

01:01:43.080 --> 01:01:50.400
 forward I recall when in the previous iteration of the boot camps the one of the presentations

01:01:50.400 --> 01:01:55.880
 that included some zoning information included some historical information is that plan to

01:01:55.880 --> 01:02:03.560
 be as part of a future or is this the opportunity to ask about the history of zoning so when

01:02:03.560 --> 01:02:08.440
 you say historical information you're talking about why zoning exists or are you interested

01:02:08.440 --> 01:02:13.600
 in more historical information in terms of how is it Denton zoning ordinance has evolved

01:02:13.600 --> 01:02:18.160
 both of that yeah do you guys have anything in your presentation any backup materials

01:02:18.160 --> 01:02:24.520
 that can address the history of Denton we do well Sean's pulling that up you know zoning

01:02:24.520 --> 01:02:33.200
 dates back to oh gosh what early 1900s when it was established you know a lot of it is

01:02:33.200 --> 01:02:38.840
 is somewhat rooted in in case law from the past but really zoning has come about in terms

01:02:38.840 --> 01:02:44.480
 of being able to segregate certain land uses you know with the thinking of grouping like

01:02:44.480 --> 01:02:50.560
 uses that have live like operational characteristics and intensity of operations together in in

01:02:50.560 --> 01:02:55.120
 zoning districts so that's why as Sean shared you know we have our Denton development code

01:02:55.120 --> 01:02:59.320
 we have our various zoning districts and then we have the uses that are allowed within the

01:02:59.320 --> 01:03:04.440
 district when you look at the uses that are within a district again it goes back to uses

01:03:04.440 --> 01:03:08.160
 that are compatible with deemed compatible with each other that have similar operational

01:03:08.160 --> 01:03:13.680
 considerations associated with it that's why you know more intensive uses that have noise

01:03:13.680 --> 01:03:18.640
 odor maybe air emissions that are associated with industrial type uses that's why we keep

01:03:18.640 --> 01:03:23.240
 them separate from say residential uses or even retail commercial uses because of the

01:03:23.240 --> 01:03:28.240
 difference in the operations but that's that's generally how zoning has come about there's

01:03:28.240 --> 01:03:33.360
 been more and more a trend to be able to allow for a mix of uses having residential uses

01:03:33.360 --> 01:03:37.640
 with other commercial uses that are happening but again it's viewed more from a perspective

01:03:37.640 --> 01:03:43.280
 of uses that could coexist and that are more compatible with each other so hence why you'll

01:03:43.280 --> 01:03:47.480
 find some areas and communities developing more as mixed use centers where maybe they

01:03:47.480 --> 01:03:51.940
 have those retail or office uses on the ground floor level and then residential above but

01:03:51.940 --> 01:03:54.600
 I'll turn it over to Sean and Ashley regarding the history of Denton.

01:03:54.600 --> 01:04:01.920
 Lovely thank you so we we certainly had zoning prior to 1941 but the very first zoning map

01:04:01.920 --> 01:04:06.840
 we have that we can point to is from 1941 as you can see on the left there provided for

01:04:06.840 --> 01:04:14.320
 three main zoning districts business manufacturing and dwelling in 1957 similarly we had business

01:04:14.320 --> 01:04:20.360
 manufacturing and dwelling moving forward into 1969 as we saw a greater number of lot sizes

01:04:20.360 --> 01:04:25.260
 the city was growing you had different uses coming in there was potentially uses that

01:04:25.260 --> 01:04:31.520
 needed to be more separated from one another we saw an expansion to 18 districts 1991 moving

01:04:31.520 --> 01:04:38.240
 up to 19 districts so similar differentiation there we had a bit more of a jump up in 2002

01:04:38.240 --> 01:04:42.120
 to 23 because mixed use districts came in we hadn't had that beforehand so we wanted

01:04:42.120 --> 01:04:46.480
 to provide for some areas that were specifically designed to have that mix of uses the same

01:04:46.480 --> 01:04:52.280
 time the planned development district the option to create that was eliminated in the

01:04:52.280 --> 01:04:58.360
 2002 DDC and around that time at some point we did also bring in the MPC as you recall

01:04:58.360 --> 01:05:04.480
 as sort of a replacement but for a while there we didn't see any new PDs and then more recently

01:05:04.480 --> 01:05:09.380
 in 2019 we actually significantly reduced the number of districts we had 17 back down to

01:05:09.380 --> 01:05:13.840
 about what we were in the 60s or 70s because we realized we had a number of districts that

01:05:13.840 --> 01:05:17.680
 really overlapped with one another we didn't really need employment center industrial and

01:05:17.680 --> 01:05:25.200
 industrial center employment figured we could do with just one district for that but the

01:05:25.200 --> 01:05:30.000
 other thing is we brought back the PD districts you see we do now have that ability now whereas

01:05:30.000 --> 01:05:34.980
 for about 17 years there you didn't see new PDs we had to find other ways to deal with

01:05:34.980 --> 01:05:39.860
 unique situations but overall we have had expansions and contractions of the number

01:05:39.860 --> 01:05:45.640
 of districts based on changes in lot sizes the expansion of the city the concerns of

01:05:45.640 --> 01:05:51.040
 the residents at the time and as well as the opportunity to take advantage of new opportunities

01:05:51.040 --> 01:05:56.600
 and trends in planning like plan developments and mixed use districts so short and sweet

01:05:56.600 --> 01:06:03.680
 but hopefully it's helpful I just like maps I got them it occurs to me that

01:06:03.680 --> 01:06:10.740
 you know if we were to plot out sort of the number of zoning districts over time that

01:06:10.740 --> 01:06:16.600
 meandered a little bit but it was a very very large discontinuity between I think you had

01:06:16.600 --> 01:06:30.640
 a 50 54 19 sorry roughly 57 and 69 could you explain I mean what I heard was we had some

01:06:30.640 --> 01:06:39.600
 new uses there was it truly like were we having like launch pads in the city of Denton or

01:06:39.600 --> 01:06:46.320
 missile silos or I'm just trying to think historically what what occurred during that

01:06:46.320 --> 01:06:52.880
 decade and a half that resulted in areas like Denton creating a lot of new zoning districts

01:06:52.880 --> 01:06:58.680
 for what purpose does that make sense so I will admit that I'm definitely not the expert

01:06:58.680 --> 01:07:03.360
 on the history of Denton's development at that time but I would say that it's it's not

01:07:03.360 --> 01:07:07.760
 unlikely that there were new uses things that may not have been new to everyone but because

01:07:07.760 --> 01:07:11.480
 our city was growing we had things coming that we potentially hadn't seen before needed

01:07:11.480 --> 01:07:16.040
 to find ways to regulate as well you just have more people living there and so greater

01:07:16.040 --> 01:07:20.640
 variety of lot sizes people have different incomes you're growing but I can't speak

01:07:20.640 --> 01:07:25.520
 directly to exactly what might have been happening that particular period in terms of use I mean

01:07:25.520 --> 01:07:30.160
 if I'm recalling my history class and I know Commissioner Prado Carrillo is going to correct

01:07:30.160 --> 01:07:36.680
 me if I'm I missed up here but that that was the period of time where a lot of civil rights

01:07:36.680 --> 01:07:43.820
 legislation was passed a lot of regulation around banking on who you could give loans

01:07:43.820 --> 01:07:48.480
 to and who you couldn't or rather who you could deny to and who you could no longer

01:07:48.480 --> 01:07:59.280
 deny to and that seems to be corollary to me is is that a fair statement I really don't

01:07:59.280 --> 01:08:05.760
 think I can address how that may have related but I'll be happy to defer to Tina so I was

01:08:05.760 --> 01:08:12.280
 actually in a session of last week on at the American Planning Association conference but

01:08:12.280 --> 01:08:16.760
 one of the presenters did talk about particularly coming out of World War I think it was after

01:08:16.760 --> 01:08:23.720
 World War II when soldiers were coming home and wanting to purchase housing the country

01:08:23.720 --> 01:08:28.160
 was actually in a housing crisis at that time and so developers were wanting to bring on

01:08:28.160 --> 01:08:33.520
 additional housing units and they cited an example and I forget where it was but a developer

01:08:33.520 --> 01:08:39.520
 who was interested in building a single family residential subdivision and but one of the

01:08:39.520 --> 01:08:43.360
 conditions associated with the financing at that time was certain restrictions being placed

01:08:43.360 --> 01:08:49.140
 on it where the homes would not be sold to persons of color and so you know some of the

01:08:49.140 --> 01:08:55.120
 zoning that exists today would not surprise me in some communities if it does reach back

01:08:55.120 --> 01:09:01.680
 to days of redlining redlining is now an illegal process and rightfully so people also cannot

01:09:01.680 --> 01:09:06.000
 discriminate amongst others when it comes to housing opportunities due to federal laws

01:09:06.000 --> 01:09:12.240
 that have been passed so zoning's history is is somewhat complicated I would say I think

01:09:12.240 --> 01:09:18.680
 if anything but it also goes back to you know to Sean's point is as uses evolve and come

01:09:18.680 --> 01:09:25.040
 about there was a tendency to group like uses into certain zoning districts I can think

01:09:25.040 --> 01:09:28.800
 of a time early in my career when I worked for the city of McKinney and McKinney was

01:09:28.800 --> 01:09:34.360
 maybe roughly 20,000 people believe it or not and you know back in the day it was we

01:09:34.360 --> 01:09:38.280
 got requests for self storage facilities because they were sort of the latest and greatest

01:09:38.280 --> 01:09:42.000
 new upcoming use and we struggled with how do we classify those and what zoning districts

01:09:42.000 --> 01:09:46.320
 we put them in and then the other one was assisted living facilities because that that

01:09:46.320 --> 01:09:49.960
 was a new evolving land use that was happening at that time and again we struggled with what

01:09:49.960 --> 01:09:53.480
 zoning districts were appropriate that they should be located in but it's because of those

01:09:53.480 --> 01:09:57.280
 new uses you know with the entrepreneurial spirit within our community and people coming

01:09:57.280 --> 01:10:02.160
 up with new business types or business uses then it's you know with zoning then we're

01:10:02.160 --> 01:10:06.240
 trying to figure out okay where can we put those uses in those particular districts and

01:10:06.240 --> 01:10:11.880
 if in sometimes our districts also need to be further modified as Sean pointed out with

01:10:11.880 --> 01:10:17.360
 that in industrial employment and industrial center employment and employment center industrial

01:10:17.360 --> 01:10:22.520
 so yeah not not sure what all that glad I wasn't here for that so but but but you know

01:10:22.520 --> 01:10:26.320
 but I make that point from a standpoint of you know as our uses have evolved we go back

01:10:26.320 --> 01:10:30.880
 and we look at our zoning districts and to see if they're still relevant and current

01:10:30.880 --> 01:10:35.720
 with the needs of our community today no I thank you for that you know there's there's

01:10:35.720 --> 01:10:40.120
 a lot of history and and terminology here last question then I want to hear from the

01:10:40.120 --> 01:10:47.440
 rest of the commission I've I've heard a term and and I never know if I'm reading canonical

01:10:47.440 --> 01:10:54.920
 sources or not so I wonder if you could help define kind of what this this term is it's

01:10:54.920 --> 01:11:02.640
 I think it's exclusionary zoning can you just explain what that is and and how that has

01:11:02.640 --> 01:11:08.280
 taken shape in the in the planning profession over the last couple decades wow that would

01:11:08.280 --> 01:11:16.560
 been great if you could give me a heads up before but I mean exclusionary zoning is is

01:11:16.560 --> 01:11:22.960
 pretty literal from the term right it it exclude certain uses or practices that were in place

01:11:22.960 --> 01:11:39.480
 at that time well so again please correct me but what I've read is that along with you

01:11:39.480 --> 01:11:46.220
 know separating residential uses into a greater number of zoning districts that there's a

01:11:46.220 --> 01:11:52.680
 a filtering of you know certain lot sizes or or regulations of what types of structures

01:11:52.680 --> 01:12:01.240
 you can put on a lot tend to require a higher priced home to be built in those areas leading

01:12:01.240 --> 01:12:08.080
 to differentiation from a zoning perspective as opposed to from a lending redlining perspective

01:12:08.080 --> 01:12:14.260
 is that does that fit under that category well I think zoning in general is exclusionary

01:12:14.260 --> 01:12:18.360
 when you look at any of the zoning districts right because in a certain zoning district

01:12:18.360 --> 01:12:22.220
 there's a list of uses that are allowed but if you're not on the list of being allowed

01:12:22.220 --> 01:12:27.040
 then it's going to exclude others you know how that might impact housing prices I think

01:12:27.040 --> 01:12:32.040
 is based upon one's perspective as to how that might be viewed in residential zoning

01:12:32.040 --> 01:12:38.720
 districts you know for example our rural residential district has a minimum lot size of five acres

01:12:38.720 --> 01:12:45.360
 compared to so someone might be able to afford a five acre lot but some may not be able to

01:12:45.360 --> 01:12:50.280
 afford that so you know the the various different zoning districts that we have on the residential

01:12:50.280 --> 01:12:55.460
 side allow for a variety of different lot sizes and in some cases some land use types

01:12:55.460 --> 01:13:05.640
 within them okay thank you questions I'm done sorry I just want to say very well explained

01:13:05.640 --> 01:13:10.840
 thank you thank you I was just gonna follow up on the question what you just said so it's

01:13:10.840 --> 01:13:17.420
 a fight on the RR it's five acres but there's not specifications as to the actual structure

01:13:17.420 --> 01:13:23.440
 of the home right because the zoning is only telling you the amount of space so the actual

01:13:23.440 --> 01:13:28.800
 structure there's not other than as it may have to do with height but yes I can choose

01:13:28.800 --> 01:13:32.280
 many different types of structures as long as you're meeting the other standards development

01:13:32.280 --> 01:13:38.180
 code yeah so I can have a tiny home on a five acre lot and still be okay on our right absolutely

01:13:38.180 --> 01:13:50.620
 thank you I'm not seeing any other questions thank you for such a good overview with that

01:13:50.620 --> 01:14:03.400
 we will break at 6 23 p.m. and reconvene at 6 30 in council chambers thank you good evening

01:14:03.400 --> 01:14:11.620
 at 6 36 we will call our regular meeting of the plant and planning and zoning commission

01:14:11.620 --> 01:14:20.000
 to order our on April 9th the first order of business is to stand for the pledge of

01:14:20.000 --> 01:14:34.240
 allegiance to the U.S. and Texas Flags I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States

01:14:34.240 --> 01:14:46.120
 of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with

01:14:46.120 --> 01:15:01.880
 liberty and justice for all. I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God one indivisible.

01:15:01.880 --> 01:15:07.400
 Our next order of business is item 2a consider approval of March 19th planning and zoning

01:15:07.400 --> 01:15:19.520
 meeting minutes open for a motion Commissioner Padron move approval and Commissioner Riggs

01:15:19.520 --> 01:15:44.240
 second okay let's vote on the board please

01:15:44.240 --> 01:15:54.840
 and that item passes 5-0 brings us to our consent agenda and I will take a motion or

01:15:54.840 --> 01:16:02.560
 discussion from the Commission Commissioner Riggs I'll make a motion to approve and Commissioner

01:16:02.560 --> 01:16:20.120
 Padron second with no discussion seeing I will call for a vote on the board

01:16:20.120 --> 01:16:26.240
 that item passes 5-0 as well brings us to our items for individual consideration item

01:16:26.240 --> 01:16:33.600
 4a PZ 25088 elect a vice chair to the planning and zoning Commission this is coming before

01:16:33.600 --> 01:16:42.520
 us because our previous vice chair Commissioner Villarreal had to resign so any discussion

01:16:42.520 --> 01:16:58.400
 or motions Commissioner product Rio say everyone knows we're pretty new board so I think the

01:16:58.400 --> 01:17:02.640
 next person up with most seniority would be Desiree Padron so I'd like to make a motion

01:17:02.640 --> 01:17:14.280
 that she would be the vice chair and Commissioner Dyer I second that it's it will be an honor

01:17:14.280 --> 01:17:20.800
 to have such a good backup so thank you any other discussion questions seeing none let's

01:17:20.800 --> 01:17:37.600
 vote on the board that item passes 5-0 congratulations vice chair but wrong the next item is item

01:17:37.600 --> 01:17:54.200
 4b FP 250011a good evening Julie Wyatt principal planner with the city of Denton the item before

01:17:54.200 --> 01:18:02.160
 you is a final plat for a property located on the north side of McKinney Street just

01:18:02.160 --> 01:18:09.680
 west of Spring Tree Street the final plat is for a single-family development it is for

01:18:09.680 --> 01:18:14.840
 zero lot line homes that the zoning was approved last year they do have some items that they

01:18:14.840 --> 01:18:19.840
 need to work through for the final plat so staff is recommending denial however we have

01:18:19.840 --> 01:18:25.120
 no objection to the requested extension to the April 23rd planning and zoning Commission

01:18:25.120 --> 01:18:29.840
 meeting it is the second request for an extension and I will be happy to answer any questions

01:18:29.840 --> 01:18:41.440
 any questions or emotion Commissioner Padron move to grant the extension to a date certain

01:18:41.440 --> 01:18:49.720
 of April 23rd and Commissioner Riggs second seeing no discussion I'll call for a vote

01:18:49.720 --> 01:19:04.280
 on the board that item passes 5-0 brings us to 4c FP 250014 good evening Commission Bryce

01:19:04.280 --> 01:19:10.940
 Van Arsdale assistant planner this is FP 2514 this is an approximately 19 acre track about

01:19:10.940 --> 01:19:17.120
 321 feet east of Country Club Road on the north side of Hobson Lane while staff is recommending

01:19:17.120 --> 01:19:20.920
 denial due to a few comments left on both the final plat as well as the civil engineering

01:19:20.920 --> 01:19:26.920
 plans staff has no objection to the requested extension to a date certain of April 23rd

01:19:26.920 --> 01:19:37.000
 2025 I'll stand for any questions any questions or motion on the Commission Commissioner Dyer

01:19:37.000 --> 01:19:46.360
 I make a motion that we allow for an extension to a date certain oh I'm sorry to the date

01:19:46.360 --> 01:19:54.060
 of was it April 23rd yes okay sorry yeah thank you Commissioner Padron I second seeing no

01:19:54.060 --> 01:20:10.400
 discussion let's vote on the board it brings us to item 4d PZ 25 sorry FP 250013 a good

01:20:10.400 --> 01:20:15.920
 evening chair and Commissioners Cameron Robertson principal planner this is for a final plot

01:20:15.920 --> 01:20:22.000
 of approximately 20 acres located on the northwest corner of Robson Ranch Road and I 35 West

01:20:22.000 --> 01:20:26.280
 frontage road they still have some comments that they need work through both on their

01:20:26.280 --> 01:20:30.440
 final plot as well as their civil engineering plans but staff has no objection to their

01:20:30.440 --> 01:20:34.840
 second extension to a date certain of April 23rd and I can stand for any questions thank

01:20:34.840 --> 01:20:40.960
 you I do have a card on this item from a Joe LaCroix if I'm pronouncing that right would

01:20:40.960 --> 01:20:50.160
 you like to speak okay I'm assuming you're the applicant okay any questions from the

01:20:50.160 --> 01:20:58.520
 board no okay thank you Commissioner Padron move approval to grant the extension to a

01:20:58.520 --> 01:21:04.440
 date certain of April 23rd and Commissioner Dyer I second that motion seeing no discussion

01:21:04.440 --> 01:21:23.400
 let's vote on the board that item passes 5-0 which brings us to item 4e FP 25009 a good

01:21:23.400 --> 01:21:27.920
 evening chair and members of the Commission Aaron Stanley assistant planner this is a

01:21:27.920 --> 01:21:33.320
 final plot for hilltop village addition this is located east of hilltop Road and north

01:21:33.320 --> 01:21:39.800
 of East Hickory Hill Road at this time staff are at this time staff is recommending denial

01:21:39.800 --> 01:21:43.280
 as the plot does not meet our criteria for approval but we have no objection to the second

01:21:43.280 --> 01:21:54.960
 extension request to date certain of April 23rd 2025 thank you any questions or motion

01:21:54.960 --> 01:21:59.880
 Commissioner Padron move to grant the extension to a date certain of April 23rd Commissioner

01:21:59.880 --> 01:22:14.960
 Riggs second seeing no discussion we'll vote on the board that item passes 5-0 that brings

01:22:14.960 --> 01:22:30.440
 us to item 4f FP 250015 good evening chair and members of the Commission Angie Manglars

01:22:30.440 --> 01:22:32.400
 development review manager this is a final plot for DC townhomes it's a 3.8 acre tract

01:22:32.400 --> 01:22:37.840
 of land located north of East McKinney Street and west of Springtree Street this lot is

01:22:37.840 --> 01:22:43.440
 split zone between R7 and MN for townhome and multifamily development at this time the

01:22:43.440 --> 01:22:47.720
 final plot does not meet our criteria for approval staff is recommending denial however

01:22:47.720 --> 01:22:51.580
 we have no objection to the requested first extension which could be granted till April

01:22:51.580 --> 01:23:03.000
 23rd happy to answer any questions any questions or emotion Commissioner Dyer I make a motion

01:23:03.000 --> 01:23:11.120
 that we grant the extension to April 23rd and Commissioner Prado Korea I second seeing

01:23:11.120 --> 01:23:27.280
 no discussion let's vote on the board that item passes 5-0 if you're following on your

01:23:27.280 --> 01:23:35.720
 agenda the first public hearing 5a has been requested to be withdrawn and we noticed so

01:23:35.720 --> 01:23:50.080
 that will bring us to item 5b which is z25 0003 a and I'll open the public hearing at

01:23:50.080 --> 01:23:56.720
 this time good evening Aaron Stanley assistant planner this is a rezoning request for Wild

01:23:56.720 --> 01:24:05.760
 Haven woods from rr to r7 so this request is to rezone approximately 4.9 acres generally

01:24:05.760 --> 01:24:12.380
 located north of pockers page road and 350 325 feet west of swisher road within the city

01:24:12.380 --> 01:24:18.000
 of Denton the property is currently developed with a mix of single-family detached dwellings

01:24:18.000 --> 01:24:23.840
 triplexes and accessory buildings on site the applicant is requesting this rezoning

01:24:23.840 --> 01:24:29.640
 in order to plot in accordance with r7 standards to facilitate utility improvements on site

01:24:29.640 --> 01:24:35.160
 these include servicing existing failing septic system that is shown with a star and connecting

01:24:35.160 --> 01:24:43.600
 at least one lot to city water so while the applicant is not has not indicated to staff

01:24:43.600 --> 01:24:49.120
 any intent to redevelop this is a straight rezoning case and so any use that is permitted

01:24:49.120 --> 01:24:55.640
 within r7 wood could be permitted in the future if this is approved by right today single

01:24:55.640 --> 01:25:01.880
 family detached is the only residential use that is allowed but then agriculture and animal

01:25:01.880 --> 01:25:08.080
 uses such as a veterinary clinic or a kennel could be permitted on the lot today and a

01:25:08.080 --> 01:25:16.080
 minimum of five acres would be required under the rr zoning today in the r7 district a few

01:25:16.080 --> 01:25:21.440
 additional residential uses would be allowed by right including townhomes duplexes triplexes

01:25:21.440 --> 01:25:26.240
 and fourplexes as well as medical office and administrative office could be permitted by

01:25:26.240 --> 01:25:31.600
 right in r7 with a specific use permit that would come back before this body and be approved

01:25:31.600 --> 01:25:36.240
 by city council multifamily could be considered as well as manufactured home developments

01:25:36.240 --> 01:25:41.240
 elderly housing bank and general retail that's not the complete list but those would be the

01:25:41.240 --> 01:25:49.200
 main highlights as well as a minimum 4,000 square foot lot size the request does meet

01:25:49.200 --> 01:25:53.520
 the criteria for approval which we'll get into in a bit more detail it is consistent

01:25:53.520 --> 01:25:58.560
 with the r7 purpose statement and is generally consistent with the goals and policies of

01:25:58.560 --> 01:26:04.680
 the future land use map and the 2040 comprehensive plan development plans if this were to come

01:26:04.680 --> 01:26:10.060
 forward for redevelopment would be required to comply with all ddc and other criteria

01:26:10.060 --> 01:26:15.920
 standards and the zoning is not expected to generate adverse significant environmental

01:26:15.920 --> 01:26:24.760
 infrastructure or fiscal impacts the purpose statement for r7 zoning district does say

01:26:24.760 --> 01:26:30.880
 that the r7 district shall accommodate a variety of housing types encourage walking to neighborhood

01:26:30.880 --> 01:26:35.520
 amenities such as parks and schools ensure existing characters maintained while also

01:26:35.520 --> 01:26:41.240
 contributing to a pedestrian atmosphere and serve to support compatibility between single

01:26:41.240 --> 01:26:48.520
 family neighborhoods and adjacent mixed use or non-residential development this location

01:26:48.520 --> 01:26:54.440
 for this site is adjacent to future post oak road which is a primary arterial on the city's

01:26:54.440 --> 01:27:01.600
 mobility plan it is additionally 400 feet from pecan creek elementary school and about

01:27:01.600 --> 01:27:07.760
 2200 feet to the north is villages of caramel park so this is within the park school of

01:27:07.760 --> 01:27:14.100
 a 10 minute walk and any of the higher intensity uses such as multifamily and some of those

01:27:14.100 --> 01:27:19.960
 other commercial uses would require the specific use permit to just to to show how they are

01:27:19.960 --> 01:27:25.440
 compatible with the adjacent neighbors neighborhood development and with that location being next

01:27:25.440 --> 01:27:31.320
 to a primary arterial this develop an r7 zoning district here would buffer the adjacent residential

01:27:31.320 --> 01:27:39.460
 from that primary arterial roadway this is also consistent with the future land use map

01:27:39.460 --> 01:27:45.080
 the site is designated as neighborhood mixed use which is intended primarily for residential

01:27:45.080 --> 01:27:50.840
 development and a mix of housing types as well as non-residential neighborhood serving

01:27:50.840 --> 01:27:55.680
 amenities it's typically found in an established part of the city established neighborhoods

01:27:55.680 --> 01:28:02.780
 within the city and where neighborhoods serving retail could be appropriate to be accessible

01:28:02.780 --> 01:28:08.160
 to the neighborhoods buildings should also be appropriately scaled and have an intensity

01:28:08.160 --> 01:28:15.760
 that is complements the surrounding neighborhood staff believes this is appropriate as it would

01:28:15.760 --> 01:28:26.000
 be a residential zoning district and it is in a in a developed neighborhood area notifications

01:28:26.000 --> 01:28:34.200
 were completed per the DDC and state law and property and notices were mailed within two

01:28:34.200 --> 01:28:39.320
 hundred and five hundred feet we did receive one letter in opposition from the adjacent

01:28:39.320 --> 01:28:44.600
 property bringing the opposition to four point seven percent and the applicant did not conduct

01:28:44.600 --> 01:28:48.880
 a neighborhood meeting but did reach out to her neighbors including the adjacent property

01:28:48.880 --> 01:28:54.200
 and I believe she is here to speak if you have questions staff is recommending approval

01:28:54.200 --> 01:28:59.200
 of the rezoning request to r7 as it complies with all criteria and I'll be happy to answer

01:28:59.200 --> 01:29:07.160
 any questions any questions for staff commissioner riggs yeah so Aaron just to confirm that the

01:29:07.160 --> 01:29:11.400
 reason for this rezoning is basically just so that they can essentially get their permit

01:29:11.400 --> 01:29:16.840
 which triggered them meeting the plat and even if say they were to redevelop they couldn't

01:29:16.840 --> 01:29:21.320
 just come in and put apartments up they need a specific use permit for that correct okay

01:29:21.320 --> 01:29:30.120
 thank you commissioner dire you said there you received one letter of opposition did

01:29:30.120 --> 01:29:35.720
 they state any reasons why they were opposing this the letter did just say that they wanted

01:29:35.720 --> 01:29:43.720
 to stay how it is and that was emailed to you earlier today I don't know anything I'll

01:29:43.720 --> 01:29:54.760
 be on that any further questions you said the applicant is here to speak I believe so

01:29:54.760 --> 01:30:00.600
 so this is a public hearing you're welcome to come come speak if you'd like or or just

01:30:00.600 --> 01:30:13.880
 stay for questions if you want it's up to you okay I will say I'm I hope the process

01:30:13.880 --> 01:30:22.060
 has been relatively speedy and and easy yeah sorry if if you want to talk you need to come

01:30:22.060 --> 01:30:36.520
 to the podium so it can be on on the record sure sure if you can state your name and address

01:30:36.520 --> 01:30:47.120
 for the record okay and the address of oh 6287 and 6289 poppers patriot thank you yeah

01:30:47.120 --> 01:30:52.920
 really my only question I know that we as a city see lots of different types of applications

01:30:52.920 --> 01:30:58.760
 everything from hey we want to be able to fix our septic tank to we want to to be able

01:30:58.760 --> 01:31:07.480
 to build you know three million square feet of industrial space and I understand my question

01:31:07.480 --> 01:31:12.560
 is just has your experience been good with staff to be able to to move through this process

01:31:12.560 --> 01:31:17.600
 and understand what is required it's been great and I mean it's just so many different

01:31:17.600 --> 01:31:24.800
 components of having to you know talk to the city sewer guy and city water guy and you

01:31:24.800 --> 01:31:29.800
 know the planning and zoning and so I've learned a lot I mean it's definitely you know everything's

01:31:29.800 --> 01:31:40.000
 in education well I hope that you can learn a lot with a new septic system soon any other

01:31:40.000 --> 01:31:50.040
 questions okay thank you yeah my whole plan I led my land I'm going to keep it the way

01:31:50.040 --> 01:31:58.880
 it is not yeah I mean so yeah definitely don't want apartments entertain a motion or discussion

01:31:58.880 --> 01:32:08.440
 Commissioner Riggs I'll make a motion to approve Commissioner Dyer I'll second that motion

01:32:08.440 --> 01:32:14.600
 and seeing no questions or discussion let's call for a vote on the board I will close

01:32:14.600 --> 01:32:27.720
 the public hearing and seeing no discussion I will call for a vote on the board

01:32:27.720 --> 01:32:35.520
 that item passes five zero thank you thank you that brings us to our other public hearing

01:32:35.520 --> 01:32:57.400
 of the night item 5c pd 23 - 0001 c

01:32:57.400 --> 01:33:10.480
 it's not what I wanted to display okay good evening Angie man glares development review

01:33:10.480 --> 01:33:19.880
 manager here to present PD 23 0001 this is Denton 195 so a bit of background about this

01:33:19.880 --> 01:33:25.360
 request this is a hundred and ninety five acre site generally situated at the southeast

01:33:25.360 --> 01:33:31.760
 intersection of I 35 W and Corbin Road this is a rezoning request from residential to

01:33:31.760 --> 01:33:37.760
 to an overlay plan development district with MN mixed-use neighborhood and public facilities

01:33:37.760 --> 01:33:43.000
 based zoning districts the intent of this overlay plan development district is to facilitate

01:33:43.000 --> 01:33:48.440
 a multifamily townhome and parkland development as it exists today the site is predominantly

01:33:48.440 --> 01:33:53.480
 undeveloped there are cluster of mature trees scattered throughout the site confirmed areas

01:33:53.480 --> 01:33:59.520
 of water related and riparian environmentally sensitive areas those exist around undeveloped

01:33:59.520 --> 01:34:06.040
 floodplain and floodway the future land use is moderate residential it is surrounded by

01:34:06.040 --> 01:34:10.120
 existing r2 to the north and the east of the subject property those are developed with

01:34:10.120 --> 01:34:16.240
 single-family homes to the southeast is ETJ division 1 also single-family residential

01:34:16.240 --> 01:34:20.920
 further south is the vintage development it is a planned development district it is single-family

01:34:20.920 --> 01:34:28.120
 and then to the west is I 35 W a little bit about the area roadway systems Corbin Road

01:34:28.120 --> 01:34:34.480
 is a east west roadway it is designated as a secondary arterial on the mobility plan is

01:34:34.480 --> 01:34:40.360
 currently an unimproved gravel roadway it does have variable right-of-way width 35 feet

01:34:40.360 --> 01:34:45.600
 at its most narrow approximately and 51 feet at its most wide it is only accessible from

01:34:45.600 --> 01:34:53.560
 the east it has been closed by city ordinance at the underpass of I 35 W I 35 W is designated

01:34:53.560 --> 01:34:58.000
 as a freeway and the city's mobility plan and it traverses north-south it's part of

01:34:58.000 --> 01:35:03.960
 the I 35 expansion project which is in schematic designs it will be improved upon further east

01:35:03.960 --> 01:35:09.440
 approximately 900 feet is the newly constructed and partially underway construction of Bonnie

01:35:09.440 --> 01:35:17.760
 Bray it is a north-south secondary arterial on the mobility plan a little bit more about

01:35:17.760 --> 01:35:23.080
 this request specifically as stated this is an overlay plan development request and it

01:35:23.080 --> 01:35:28.040
 has a couple of components to it which we are going to walk through but at a very high

01:35:28.040 --> 01:35:34.280
 level there are three tracks a B and C that are proposed to be rezoned to overlay plan

01:35:34.280 --> 01:35:39.880
 development with a mixed-use neighborhood base those tracks are in the orange ish color

01:35:39.880 --> 01:35:45.640
 the remaining hundred and thirty seven acres are proposed to be dedicated to the city or

01:35:45.640 --> 01:35:52.080
 an easement utilized for public open space uses those parcels can be seen on the lighter

01:35:52.080 --> 01:35:56.960
 blue shading on your map each of these tracks have different overlay conditions associated

01:35:56.960 --> 01:36:04.160
 with them so we're going to walk through them tracked by tracked so tracked a as you see

01:36:04.160 --> 01:36:10.740
 here outlined in pink is proposed to have a base zoning district of mixed-use neighborhood

01:36:10.740 --> 01:36:16.600
 there are no use restrictions on this particular tract meaning any use that is allowed in the

01:36:16.600 --> 01:36:22.400
 MN district could be permitted on tract a as part of the overlay conditions the applicant

01:36:22.400 --> 01:36:27.920
 is required to provide a 10-foot landscape buffer alongside the future northbound I 35

01:36:27.920 --> 01:36:34.560
 W frontage road as well as a 30-foot wide landscape buffer along the future Corbin road

01:36:34.560 --> 01:36:39.440
 as a condition of the overlay plan development no building permits shall be issued for tract

01:36:39.440 --> 01:36:45.160
 a until either one half of the full required width of Corbin road has been constructed

01:36:45.160 --> 01:36:51.680
 to extend with the newly constructed Bonnie Bray or one half the required width of Corbin

01:36:51.680 --> 01:36:59.040
 road is constructed to intersect with a future I 35 W northbound frontage road to help conceptualize

01:36:59.040 --> 01:37:04.440
 that a little bit I have this exhibit showing where those improvements would ultimately

01:37:04.440 --> 01:37:11.480
 need to be made to either connecting to the newly constructed Bonnie Bray or to tee into

01:37:11.480 --> 01:37:23.120
 the future I 35 W frontage roads went backwards I'm stuck in I'm sorry got stuck there specific

01:37:23.120 --> 01:37:31.240
 to tract B again outlined in pink this also proposes a base zoning district of MN with

01:37:31.240 --> 01:37:36.880
 use restrictions on it particular to this tract the only allowable use would be town

01:37:36.880 --> 01:37:43.160
 homes or single family residential it has the same as tract a meaning no building permits

01:37:43.160 --> 01:37:48.260
 shall be issued until either one half of Corbin road is constructed and extended to either

01:37:48.260 --> 01:37:55.720
 new Bonnie Bray or the I 35 W frontage road a maximum of 150 units is also proposed as

01:37:55.720 --> 01:38:01.560
 part of that overlay condition along with a maximum building height of 40 feet in addition

01:38:01.560 --> 01:38:06.880
 there are some higher level of compatibility buffer points required than we would require

01:38:06.880 --> 01:38:11.840
 by the DDC as it relates to the developing use and the existing single family to the

01:38:11.840 --> 01:38:17.040
 east and a 50 foot setback from the eastern and southern property lines which would be

01:38:17.040 --> 01:38:25.960
 this line and this line respectively specific to track C which is our last MN base zoning

01:38:25.960 --> 01:38:32.760
 district tract this again would permit all land uses in the MN zoning district building

01:38:32.760 --> 01:38:38.360
 permits shall not be issued until the completion of the future northbound I 35 frontage road

01:38:38.360 --> 01:38:42.360
 and that 10 foot landscape buffer outside of future text that right away in public utility

01:38:42.360 --> 01:38:50.520
 easements would also be required moving on to tracks D and E again outlined in the pink

01:38:50.520 --> 01:38:55.940
 the base zoning here would be public facilities this does have use restrictions the only allowable

01:38:55.940 --> 01:39:01.460
 uses would be park playground or open space the property owners shall either dedicate

01:39:01.460 --> 01:39:08.400
 parkland or an easement for public open space a developers agreement for the terms and conditions

01:39:08.400 --> 01:39:13.760
 of that parkland or open space is required and needs to be approved prior to the submittal

01:39:13.760 --> 01:39:20.280
 of a final plot for any of the three tracks we just spoke about that's a very high level

01:39:20.280 --> 01:39:26.200
 overview of the plan development overlay and the various conditions associated with each

01:39:26.200 --> 01:39:30.720
 tract this was reviewed in accordance with the general criteria for approval as well

01:39:30.720 --> 01:39:34.760
 as the criteria for approval in the comprehensive plan it's consistent with the comprehensive

01:39:34.760 --> 01:39:39.040
 plan it does comply with the DDC except for those sections that we have specifically noted

01:39:39.040 --> 01:39:45.720
 here in MN is designed to minimize adverse impacts the 2040 plan does designate this

01:39:45.720 --> 01:39:50.000
 as moderate residential it is predominantly designed to accommodate single family detached

01:39:50.000 --> 01:39:57.320
 housing as well as some low-rise multifamily and town homes it contemplates a density between

01:39:57.320 --> 01:40:03.640
 five and twelve dwelling units per acre the gross approximate dwelling units per acre

01:40:03.640 --> 01:40:10.080
 for this development comes out to around four the PD limiting the maximum number of units

01:40:10.080 --> 01:40:15.560
 allowed on tract B as well as the types of development that could occur on there do help

01:40:15.560 --> 01:40:23.220
 to ensure some of that density this is consistent with goal HN 1 to develop and maintain a diverse

01:40:23.220 --> 01:40:29.320
 housing stock with a variety of price points and choices the proposed rezoning of approximately

01:40:29.320 --> 01:40:34.320
 a hundred and thirty seven acres to be placed into public facilities for public open space

01:40:34.320 --> 01:40:40.320
 use is consistent with our goals of our preferred land preservation plan the existing eases

01:40:40.320 --> 01:40:45.560
 on site are predominantly within tracks D&E and by maintaining them for public open space

01:40:45.560 --> 01:40:52.600
 we're able to achieve the goals of our preferred land preservation plan the parks conservation

01:40:52.600 --> 01:40:56.600
 and environment section of the comprehensive plan also calls for the creation of cohesive

01:40:56.600 --> 01:41:02.560
 green infrastructure throughout the city the dedication or easement use of the hundred

01:41:02.560 --> 01:41:07.240
 and thirty seven acres is consistent with goal PCE one to unite Denton through a framework

01:41:07.240 --> 01:41:13.960
 of parks and open space as well as action 544 to encourage the dedication of eases such

01:41:13.960 --> 01:41:20.880
 as floodplains and open spaces for community recreation uses we've talked through most

01:41:20.880 --> 01:41:24.480
 of the conditions and they're also included in your backup as well as the the PD overlay

01:41:24.480 --> 01:41:29.840
 and they've been derived to help ensure some compatibility and enforce design standards

01:41:29.840 --> 01:41:34.520
 to ease transition from the more intensive uses you would see along the 35 corridor to

01:41:34.520 --> 01:41:39.760
 the single family uses situated to the east but just specifically I'll remind you of a

01:41:39.760 --> 01:41:44.960
 few the restriction of allowable uses on track to be to townhomes and single family only

01:41:44.960 --> 01:41:50.240
 along with the imposition of the maximum hundred and fifty units and forty foot building height

01:41:50.240 --> 01:41:54.760
 there's an additional ten buffer points required along that eastern property line where existing

01:41:54.760 --> 01:42:01.000
 single family residential is the development on tracks D&E is restricted to parks playground

01:42:01.000 --> 01:42:06.320
 and open space and the PD as a whole proposes a series of access conditions that are designed

01:42:06.320 --> 01:42:11.200
 to ensure that adequate roadway facilities are in place prior to the construction of

01:42:11.200 --> 01:42:16.560
 any dwelling units public outreach was conducted in accordance with state law and the development

01:42:16.560 --> 01:42:21.560
 code I have received another response or two since this slide was last updated they have

01:42:21.560 --> 01:42:27.800
 been forwarded to you as of about five o'clock this evening it did account for approximately

01:42:27.800 --> 01:42:33.000
 twenty percent of the land area in opposition so this would require a supermajority vote

01:42:33.000 --> 01:42:37.640
 at City Council the neighborhood I'm sorry the applicant has conducted several neighborhood

01:42:37.640 --> 01:42:44.280
 meetings I'll leave them to speak more specifically to that with that staff is recommending approval

01:42:44.280 --> 01:42:50.320
 of this request it is tentatively scheduled for City Council on May 6th and I'm happy

01:42:50.320 --> 01:42:54.840
 to answer any questions the developer is here and is also able to answer any questions you

01:42:54.840 --> 01:43:03.680
 may have of them thank you Angie I will open the public hearing at this time questions

01:43:03.680 --> 01:43:16.720
 for staff commissioner product area Angie were you able to get those numbers that I

01:43:16.720 --> 01:43:25.360
 asked for yes so track to be proposes no more than 150 units combined of townhomes or single

01:43:25.360 --> 01:43:30.480
 family the question that was asked in work session was how many units could be developed

01:43:30.480 --> 01:43:35.240
 under the zoning today given the minimum lot size of 16,000 square feet in residential

01:43:35.240 --> 01:43:41.520
 tube that tract is approximately 26.1 acres so keep in mind this is this is very rough

01:43:41.520 --> 01:43:48.480
 math it does not assume any ESA or floodplain or future right of way dedication at the maximum

01:43:48.480 --> 01:43:57.360
 it would be 70 units taking the math at just face value thank you other questions of staff

01:43:57.360 --> 01:44:06.880
 at this time Commissioner Dyer you talked about right now with the future land use that's

01:44:06.880 --> 01:44:15.440
 moderate housing and that there's about five to twelve homes per acre in that does the

01:44:15.440 --> 01:44:24.640
 townhouses in track B or do the potential apartments in a and C align with the five

01:44:24.640 --> 01:44:31.480
 to twelve homes per acre so our standard practice has been to look at gross acreage which would

01:44:31.480 --> 01:44:37.840
 assume the 195 acres when reviewing density and again please keep in mind that when reviewing

01:44:37.840 --> 01:44:43.080
 PD overlays the conceptual plan is conceptual and subject to change so based on the math

01:44:43.080 --> 01:44:53.200
 that we we had it worked out to about 4.08 units per acre at the gross density so including

01:44:53.200 --> 01:44:59.480
 the unusable floodplain area it would include yes the entire 195 acres and then all the

01:44:59.480 --> 01:45:09.080
 trees in sections D and E will they be protected well in the proposed overlay are there is

01:45:09.080 --> 01:45:13.080
 it written in there because I didn't see it so I and I was reading through it a couple

01:45:13.080 --> 01:45:17.480
 of times and I could have missed it because there's a lot in there are the trees protected

01:45:17.480 --> 01:45:23.480
 where in D and E the developer can't cut down the trees so it's not a blanket statement

01:45:23.480 --> 01:45:29.440
 that the developer cannot cut down any trees the debt and development code requires a minimum

01:45:29.440 --> 01:45:35.200
 30 percent preservation of all heritage and quality trees on site or a reduction to 20

01:45:35.200 --> 01:45:41.200
 percent if using secondary trees as part of overlay plan developments or plan developments

01:45:41.200 --> 01:45:45.800
 in general we don't allow for a reduction in the minimum preservation so they're not

01:45:45.800 --> 01:45:50.520
 requesting that that wouldn't be allowable they'd be required to meet the minimum preservation

01:45:50.520 --> 01:45:59.160
 but that would also be for all areas outside of the ESA.

01:45:59.160 --> 01:46:03.680
 Just to make a point and Angie kind of touched on it at the end on tracks D and E given the

01:46:03.680 --> 01:46:08.360
 fact that there is so much ESA that encumbers the property the the trees in all likelihood

01:46:08.360 --> 01:46:12.440
 would be remaining right so trees within ESA they don't necessarily work for developer

01:46:12.440 --> 01:46:15.760
 or against I should say work for a property owner against a property owner when it comes

01:46:15.760 --> 01:46:20.720
 to tree preservation but but given that they're in that ESA they would be protected.

01:46:20.720 --> 01:46:25.280
 Yeah I was just more kind of concerned about D and E since that's supposed to be parkland

01:46:25.280 --> 01:46:29.640
 playground like is there a reason why those trees would need to be touched if they're

01:46:29.640 --> 01:46:34.240
 not if they're only developing A B and C. Angie correct me if I'm wrong but I believe

01:46:34.240 --> 01:46:38.860
 we amended our debt and development code about three years ago to at least allow for construction

01:46:38.860 --> 01:46:46.400
 of trails and but know that any project that that we do we typically are very cognizant

01:46:46.400 --> 01:46:50.960
 about what trees would have to be removed in order to be able to accommodate trail improvements

01:46:50.960 --> 01:46:51.960
 and similar.

01:46:51.960 --> 01:46:56.880
 Yeah that's a good point there are very few things that could be done in floodplain and

01:46:56.880 --> 01:47:02.680
 floodway predominantly things that don't allow for any sort of rise so we're talking about

01:47:02.680 --> 01:47:08.360
 like disc golf courses or or trails in that potential parkland area but to Tina's point

01:47:08.360 --> 01:47:12.840
 earlier that the ESA regulations are pretty stringent and we don't allow for the removal

01:47:12.840 --> 01:47:14.600
 of those those trees.

01:47:14.600 --> 01:47:22.600
 So I can't say that no tree will come out but that that area is pretty protected.

01:47:22.600 --> 01:47:28.680
 And I have lots of other questions but I'll let my fellow colleagues here talk.

01:47:28.680 --> 01:47:29.680
 Commissioner Riggs.

01:47:29.680 --> 01:47:34.360
 Yeah so we kind of talked about this a little bit in work session but essentially out of

01:47:34.360 --> 01:47:42.480
 the entire the entire property that's being rezoned more than half of it is floodplain

01:47:42.480 --> 01:47:47.720
 to be dedicated to the city and we just said that you really can't do much with it except

01:47:47.720 --> 01:47:52.760
 for golf course but we're also allowing that to be added to the density so essentially

01:47:52.760 --> 01:47:58.080
 more than half of the property is going to be dedicated to the city but we're adding

01:47:58.080 --> 01:48:04.480
 that into the density that they can build on in their lots like I said I kind of have

01:48:04.480 --> 01:48:09.960
 a hard time with that yes so I'd love to hear from that.

01:48:09.960 --> 01:48:14.800
 I don't know that I have much to add add to that other than the standard practice has

01:48:14.800 --> 01:48:19.640
 been for for zoning changes to take in that that gross density now we do require with

01:48:19.640 --> 01:48:25.080
 development parkland dedication fees and so this would offset some of that and to touch

01:48:25.080 --> 01:48:30.280
 on your your gifting of the city but in terms of how that net density is calculated I don't

01:48:30.280 --> 01:48:32.040
 have much to add to you know.

01:48:32.040 --> 01:48:34.920
 Yeah the only thing I would add is you know one of the things we take into consideration

01:48:34.920 --> 01:48:40.400
 is knowing that especially if land is encumbered by floodplain that that's land that's not

01:48:40.400 --> 01:48:50.880
 going to be developed right so then it essentially diffuses the the density otherwise within

01:48:50.880 --> 01:48:54.760
 the area if you will so you know that that's one of the reasons why we take into consideration

01:48:54.760 --> 01:48:59.040
 we look at the gross acres of the tract in and how that relates to the Conference of

01:48:59.040 --> 01:49:04.560
 Plan land use policies because if we know that land is not going to be able to be developed

01:49:04.560 --> 01:49:08.320
 with like in this case for residential purposes right given that's what they're looking at

01:49:08.320 --> 01:49:15.320
 doing on the other tracks then then by allowing for that open space land to help be factored

01:49:15.320 --> 01:49:19.760
 into that density calculation overall the number of people within the area or the number

01:49:19.760 --> 01:49:23.680
 dwelling units within the area is still going to be low because we're basically giving them

01:49:23.680 --> 01:49:27.600
 the benefit of that floodplain land.

01:49:27.600 --> 01:49:32.160
 And I guess that goes to my next question so to for parkland dedication floodplain is

01:49:32.160 --> 01:49:38.520
 just accepted as any other type of property that's not encumbered with floodplain.

01:49:38.520 --> 01:49:44.400
 So we we touched on this a little bit in in work session the parks department to my understanding

01:49:44.400 --> 01:49:50.420
 part looks at every case case by case conversations relating to this land have been in process

01:49:50.420 --> 01:49:57.200
 for some time we're in the entitlement stages whether that land is dedicated to the city

01:49:57.200 --> 01:50:05.800
 or an easement is utilized for perpetual open space uses we consider that a case by case

01:50:05.800 --> 01:50:11.080
 basis those terms will be worked out through the developer agreement but the project does

01:50:11.080 --> 01:50:18.320
 help achieve the the inner trail connectivity on this side of 35 as well as more towards

01:50:18.320 --> 01:50:23.240
 the Hunter and Cole area.

01:50:23.240 --> 01:50:24.680
 Thank you.

01:50:24.680 --> 01:50:30.160
 Commissioner Dyer sorry.

01:50:30.160 --> 01:50:36.600
 So just for full disclosure I did attend the neighborhood meeting that McAdams had put

01:50:36.600 --> 01:50:41.560
 on a couple weeks ago just because I wanted to have a clear understanding of this project

01:50:41.560 --> 01:50:46.720
 since this is only my third planning and zoning meeting and so I know there's been a lot of

01:50:46.720 --> 01:50:54.400
 background with some past presentations in the past couple of years so I did go to that

01:50:54.400 --> 01:51:03.160
 I have received emails from Doug Henry Nancy Condon and Kyle Eden all neighbors in that

01:51:03.160 --> 01:51:11.840
 area and all against this as well as I took Miss Fergens advice about because some of

01:51:11.840 --> 01:51:18.880
 these people wanted to meet with me and so she suggested to reach out to my councilman

01:51:18.880 --> 01:51:23.920
 so I reached out to Councilman Holland and he said you know go for it like if somebody

01:51:23.920 --> 01:51:27.420
 wants to meet with you he said take every advantage to talk to them.

01:51:27.420 --> 01:51:32.240
 So I did meet with Margie Ellis and Patty Haywood who also live in the area to give

01:51:32.240 --> 01:51:39.320
 concerns and really when you go out there and I and I did go out there a lot of those

01:51:39.320 --> 01:51:46.480
 houses are on you know an acre or multiple acres of land and so there's just a lot of

01:51:46.480 --> 01:51:54.480
 concern that this is not going to be compatible with the community and it was interesting

01:51:54.480 --> 01:52:03.720
 because when I was driving down the road that there is a big gate from like a railroad crossing

01:52:03.720 --> 01:52:07.600
 and I thought well that was very interesting I'm like did this used to be a railroad back

01:52:07.600 --> 01:52:14.400
 here well no it's the city has an arm there so if it does flood the arm can go down so

01:52:14.400 --> 01:52:21.200
 nobody can pass through the road and so Margie and Patty were telling me that it does flood

01:52:21.200 --> 01:52:24.820
 you know pretty consistently back there.

01:52:24.820 --> 01:52:30.240
 So I just kind of wanted to you know share all of that with you all just on that extra

01:52:30.240 --> 01:52:38.440
 you know piece of information and in the emails Mr. Henry and Mr. Eaton specifically referenced

01:52:38.440 --> 01:52:44.680
 a lot on the Denton 2040 plan and how they felt like there were several parts in there

01:52:44.680 --> 01:52:54.700
 that this project just does not align with and their concerns in regards to that.

01:52:54.700 --> 01:53:01.880
 Any other questions for staff just so we can get kind of the factual information out there

01:53:01.880 --> 01:53:07.240
 for Commissioner Pradoquio oh sorry yeah.

01:53:07.240 --> 01:53:13.480
 I just wanted based on what I've learned right and I also did speak to some of the community

01:53:13.480 --> 01:53:18.400
 members I also spoke with Doug Henry on the phone and I walked the property with Mr. Eaton

01:53:18.400 --> 01:53:22.760
 as well I spoke to Ms. Ellis as well and anyone else that emailed thank you for doing that

01:53:22.760 --> 01:53:26.160
 even if I didn't get a chance to respond to your email but I've read all of it.

01:53:26.160 --> 01:53:34.400
 I just want to ask based on how the land is zoned right now the land can still be dedicated

01:53:34.400 --> 01:53:41.720
 as it's zoned now to the city right so the rezoning doesn't have to happen if the owner

01:53:41.720 --> 01:53:48.400
 wants to gift the property right track D&E to the city they're able to do that right

01:53:48.400 --> 01:53:50.320
 now.

01:53:50.320 --> 01:53:58.720
 We do allow parks and open land to be situated in the residential two zoning district going

01:53:58.720 --> 01:54:03.600
 back through some of the history of this case when it initially came in it was it was planned

01:54:03.600 --> 01:54:10.960
 to possibly go to UNT when that didn't work out the city expressed interest it is a standard

01:54:10.960 --> 01:54:16.520
 practice for when a public or semi-public entity does have interest in that property to put

01:54:16.520 --> 01:54:25.840
 it into that PF zoning okay but it doesn't have to be it's not a requirement okay I just

01:54:25.840 --> 01:54:30.200
 want to understand that because because we allow public parks by right in all zoning

01:54:30.200 --> 01:54:36.040
 districts so that's why okay just so that I understand so really all of the concerns

01:54:36.040 --> 01:54:42.880
 that were expressed to me and I can go through them afterwards after we do the public hearing

01:54:42.880 --> 01:54:46.900
 that kind of is that kind of is null and void then because it could be they can be gifted

01:54:46.900 --> 01:54:53.840
 at any zoning right am I correct and to say that parkland yes okay it's allowed in all

01:54:53.840 --> 01:55:00.520
 of our okay so really what we're what we're talking about is tracked A B and C is what

01:55:00.520 --> 01:55:06.160
 I'm understanding where the major opposition might be from the neighboring from people

01:55:06.160 --> 01:55:12.000
 that are the neighbors sure they're the only clarifying statement or just yes statement

01:55:12.000 --> 01:55:17.720
 that I would like to make is that keep in mind because this is an overlay PD those conditions

01:55:17.720 --> 01:55:24.640
 do get attached as a function of the zoning and our binding on that property and so while

01:55:24.640 --> 01:55:29.680
 parkland could be developed in R2 those the zoning conditions that we're talking about

01:55:29.680 --> 01:55:33.840
 today those are specific to this request I just want to make sure we have that distinction

01:55:33.840 --> 01:55:39.000
 yeah but I don't disagree that the the other tracks are the the ones were more of a change

01:55:39.000 --> 01:55:44.800
 we'll be seeing okay thank you I'll reserve the rest for later sure yeah yeah I mean just

01:55:44.800 --> 01:55:51.120
 to take Angie's point so keep in mind to your question yes the the park property could occur

01:55:51.120 --> 01:55:58.460
 under the R2 zoning but given how the conditions are worded as such in the proposed plan development

01:55:58.460 --> 01:56:04.040
 district it does limit it to park dedication or an open space easement and then there are

01:56:04.040 --> 01:56:09.320
 also certain conditions that are included in the proposed PD that outline obligations

01:56:09.320 --> 01:56:13.560
 associated with a development agreement being approved by City Council as it relates to

01:56:13.560 --> 01:56:18.840
 that property and it's tied to prior to plats being submitted for any development on tracks

01:56:18.840 --> 01:56:25.040
 a b and c because keep in mind with development of tracks on a b and c particular for residential

01:56:25.040 --> 01:56:30.560
 uses there are parkland dedication requirements that come into play with that so if the property

01:56:30.560 --> 01:56:35.640
 is dedicated to the city that is able to assist with meeting some of their parkland dedication

01:56:35.640 --> 01:56:40.580
 requirements I'm looking to Gary so correct me if I'm wrong on that but but also the other

01:56:40.580 --> 01:56:43.920
 thing I wanted to point out to kind of follow up to Commissioner Riggs question the park

01:56:43.920 --> 01:56:49.200
 ordinance does require more land to be dedicated if it is floodplain versus non-floodplain land

01:56:49.200 --> 01:56:53.800
 right because non-floodplain land has a greater value and I believe the ratio is three to

01:56:53.800 --> 01:56:59.800
 one Gary Gary's giving me hand signals in the back so so because we realize that floodplain

01:56:59.800 --> 01:57:05.200
 land has very limited opportunities associated with our base but but it also serves can serve

01:57:05.200 --> 01:57:11.120
 as as valuable parkland for us so it just helps but again hence why part of this parkland

01:57:11.120 --> 01:57:15.260
 conversation is included with this zoning request because there's a component associated

01:57:15.260 --> 01:57:19.720
 with it that could help with meeting some parkland dedication requirements for any residential

01:57:19.720 --> 01:57:24.360
 development that would happen on tracks a b and c and and lastly one of the thing you

01:57:24.360 --> 01:57:29.080
 know Angie was talking about the the comprehensive plan you may recall a zoning case that we

01:57:29.080 --> 01:57:33.540
 had not too long ago where we had a property that had a significant growth of trees on

01:57:33.540 --> 01:57:39.440
 that western portion and we worked to be able to assist with preservation of those trees

01:57:39.440 --> 01:57:43.360
 in order to be able to make meet some of the community's desires there so we were able

01:57:43.360 --> 01:57:48.180
 to cluster the development predominantly on the eastern portion this proposed PD before

01:57:48.180 --> 01:57:53.080
 you also allows for that clustered type of development that the comprehensive plan also

01:57:53.080 --> 01:57:58.480
 supports so you know for tracks a b and c that's why the development is being clustered

01:57:58.480 --> 01:58:05.640
 in and concentrated in those areas so just wanted to be able to share that as well.

01:58:05.640 --> 01:58:09.800
 Commissioner riggs yeah I think just just follow up on that and thank you for looking

01:58:09.800 --> 01:58:15.960
 that up I appreciate that but I guess no matter what the zoning is they would have to do parkland

01:58:15.960 --> 01:58:20.960
 dedication as they developed and since it's all floodplain that they're wanting to donate

01:58:20.960 --> 01:58:26.920
 or they get park laying for they can't do anything with it anyway so for them that just

01:58:26.920 --> 01:58:31.160
 means they don't somebody doesn't have to pay taxes on it and now the city base essentially

01:58:31.160 --> 01:58:37.320
 has to take care of it and so I don't know I just kind of it's kind of like okay well

01:58:37.320 --> 01:58:41.400
 it's floodplain and can't be used for anything but we'll we'll take it and we'll put a trail

01:58:41.400 --> 01:58:45.800
 on it and that's about the only use we can have for it so all of the PD requirements

01:58:45.800 --> 01:58:50.960
 for restrictions I kind of don't don't really matter a whole lot because it's going to be

01:58:50.960 --> 01:58:57.160
 owned by the city so it can't be developed no matter what especially when it's developed

01:58:57.160 --> 01:59:02.320
 when it's donated but I guess and we'll probably get into it more but one of the other concerns

01:59:02.320 --> 01:59:06.400
 and I and I received several emails and I read them and I talked to one of the residents

01:59:06.400 --> 01:59:14.400
 as well but Corbin Road currently does not connect to 35 so where it's essentially what

01:59:14.400 --> 01:59:20.320
 this zoning would allow is two apartment complexes to basically go right there Corbin or along

01:59:20.320 --> 01:59:25.120
 thirty five and it seems like I don't know when that might actually happen but it seems

01:59:25.120 --> 01:59:28.760
 like all that traffic is going to end up on Corbin Road or they're then going to have

01:59:28.760 --> 01:59:34.560
 to just basically travel north to Airport Road and then turn around and we kind of talked

01:59:34.560 --> 01:59:38.760
 about the trip generation but maybe if we just go into just for the sake of this open

01:59:38.760 --> 01:59:44.040
 hearing kind of go into some of the details on that you're wanting some of the like the

01:59:44.040 --> 01:59:48.160
 more specific TIA details and how that traffic pattern would work yeah kind of kind of what

01:59:48.160 --> 01:59:53.160
 did the TIA show as far as trip generation and sure I'm going to ask Chandra to speak

01:59:53.160 --> 02:00:05.120
 to that he's far more better explaining it than I am good evening chair and commissioners

02:00:05.120 --> 02:00:13.200
 Chandra Muruganandam city traffic engineer so specific to your request on traffic impact

02:00:13.200 --> 02:00:25.680
 on the trip generation the site a generates with the 450 units multifamily total of 162

02:00:25.680 --> 02:00:37.840
 AM trips and the PM of 214 trips and the site be with the multifamily or 150 town homes

02:00:37.840 --> 02:00:43.560
 it would generate approximately hundred trips during the AMP cover and hundred trips during

02:00:43.560 --> 02:00:49.320
 the PMP cover with site see with two hundred and eighty nine units it would generate approximately

02:00:49.320 --> 02:00:53.480
 hundred and twelve trips in the AMP cover and hundred and forty five trips during the

02:00:53.480 --> 02:00:59.360
 PMP cover and I think during the work session you said that this would essentially you evaluate

02:00:59.360 --> 02:01:05.000
 some of the intersections and it would be a level service D or better yes with all the

02:01:05.000 --> 02:01:12.540
 sites what they data collected they added to the existing network and analyzed the impact

02:01:12.540 --> 02:01:18.640
 their impact came out to be B or C C is the worst case with the level of service D being

02:01:18.640 --> 02:01:26.600
 acceptable to the city of Denton level of service D is like stop and go E is congested

02:01:26.600 --> 02:01:34.960
 F is like it's stopped traffic so A being the best and F being the worst this TIA projects

02:01:34.960 --> 02:01:49.000
 to be B and C are better thank you I got a couple questions for staff just to to make

02:01:49.000 --> 02:01:58.240
 sure I'm aligned on the Corbin Road right now when I look at our traffic impacts or

02:01:58.240 --> 02:02:08.440
 trade the the two thousand twenty two study that was done for the purpose of roadway impact

02:02:08.440 --> 02:02:17.160
 fees shows that that road has a peak our usage of nine vehicles does that sound about right

02:02:17.160 --> 02:02:26.600
 that's correct right now and I'm not an expert in current quality of a road in a future case

02:02:26.600 --> 02:02:35.880
 where the development opted to connect to the thirty five W access road instead of reconstructing

02:02:35.880 --> 02:02:49.000
 the entire way over to the new Bonnie Bray Road it sounds like the peak our usage for

02:02:49.000 --> 02:02:54.440
 that to lane road would be sufficient do we know anything about the condition of the pavement

02:02:54.440 --> 02:03:01.640
 how you know how much that increased traffic would impact the stability of the area given

02:03:01.640 --> 02:03:07.600
 the lack of drainage control that sort of thing has that been factored in yes so as

02:03:07.600 --> 02:03:15.040
 of right now it's a dirt road with not a good condition to drive and when the road is built

02:03:15.040 --> 02:03:20.440
 they will have carbon gutter and it will bring about the floodplain level and they will have

02:03:20.440 --> 02:03:26.760
 drainage components to drain the water what might be happening out there right now so

02:03:26.760 --> 02:03:32.920
 they will have all the components to have a good roadway okay and just to make sure

02:03:32.920 --> 02:03:43.220
 that my ballpark estimator is calibrated if you can follow me on the math here a similar

02:03:43.220 --> 02:03:49.400
 proposed roadway reconstruction maybe in a slightly different initial condition when

02:03:49.400 --> 02:03:54.080
 we were going through the twenty nineteen bond process Robertson Road the section that's

02:03:54.080 --> 02:04:04.240
 only two lanes if you're familiar kind of east of Teasley west of post oak right doesn't

02:04:04.240 --> 02:04:10.180
 have underground drainage it's two lanes right now and at the time because I was on that

02:04:10.180 --> 02:04:17.040
 committee the city engineer said that they hadn't really priced it out by then against

02:04:17.040 --> 02:04:22.920
 this was twenty nineteen before all the construction inflation but he imagined it could be up to

02:04:22.920 --> 02:04:28.040
 fifteen million dollars for that half mile of roadway primarily because of the expense

02:04:28.040 --> 02:04:37.040
 of drainage right and then when I look in the in that twenty twenty two roadway impact

02:04:37.040 --> 02:04:43.240
 fee study it shows that a future Corbin Road project just the roadway I think would be

02:04:43.240 --> 02:04:50.680
 about ten million and and I'm assuming that doesn't include drainage canals under all

02:04:50.680 --> 02:04:55.440
 that kind of stuff so it would be above that for the total project cost is that correct

02:04:55.440 --> 02:05:02.800
 okay and just one other question to make sure that we're clear on the the trail right of

02:05:02.800 --> 02:05:11.080
 ways and what could or must happen maybe this is more of an Angie question my my understanding

02:05:11.080 --> 02:05:18.000
 is that because a trail connection is shown on our mobility plan any development that

02:05:18.000 --> 02:05:23.600
 would take place including this land would have to provide an access easement for that

02:05:23.600 --> 02:05:31.160
 at the minimum but our development code would not require them to dedicate that land if

02:05:31.160 --> 02:05:39.520
 they didn't want to for parks is that an accurate statement yes that's an accurate statement

02:05:39.520 --> 02:05:49.440
 does that clarify and then I just because it's been such a long process several other

02:05:49.440 --> 02:05:57.440
 applications that we've seen with ESAs have included remediation proposals for the ESA

02:05:57.440 --> 02:06:02.040
 in order to to bring them back to a more healthy state there's a lot of privet in a lot of

02:06:02.040 --> 02:06:09.960
 these areas etc I didn't see anything within the proposed PD overlay stipulating remediation

02:06:09.960 --> 02:06:13.900
 of privet and and that sort of thing in the ESA is that something that was considered

02:06:13.900 --> 02:06:19.120
 or not present because it's not here for some reason every even though it's other places

02:06:19.120 --> 02:06:26.740
 in the city help me understand that sure great question and it's not in this PD remediation

02:06:26.740 --> 02:06:34.180
 efforts reason being as kind of as we discussed in work session still working through those

02:06:34.180 --> 02:06:39.720
 entitlement phases knowing that environmentally sensitive field assessment has been done confirming

02:06:39.720 --> 02:06:45.320
 the areas where we know we do have ESA and we don't that next step would be the more

02:06:45.320 --> 02:06:50.720
 fine-grained site planning where we would know if there are going to be encroachments

02:06:50.720 --> 02:06:55.920
 into the ESA requiring that they go through that that all all ESA plan which is where

02:06:55.920 --> 02:07:02.800
 you see those remediation plans come forth so as we work through you know various agreements

02:07:02.800 --> 02:07:09.360
 or site plans or civil engineering plans the ESA requirements need to be adhered to and

02:07:09.360 --> 02:07:13.720
 then if there's a need for an old ESA plan and that's when you would typically through

02:07:13.720 --> 02:07:19.400
 that separate process see your remediation plans calling for removal of privet or enhancement

02:07:19.400 --> 02:07:24.600
 of a certain section okay thank you any other staff questions because I know there's lots

02:07:24.600 --> 02:07:31.560
 of complicated things sorry sorry I just wanted to follow up to that so the the ESA remediation

02:07:31.560 --> 02:07:37.760
 is only triggered if they're getting into the ESA as part of the alternative ESA plan

02:07:37.760 --> 02:07:43.920
 and approval process there is a separate remediation plan that needs to offset the encroachments

02:07:43.920 --> 02:07:50.760
 into that ESA but since it's all being dedicated to the city that there wouldn't be any encroachment

02:07:50.760 --> 02:07:55.160
 into that with the development so anything that's dedicated to the city the city would

02:07:55.160 --> 02:08:00.120
 need to do the remediation in the future that would all still need to be worked out through

02:08:00.120 --> 02:08:06.100
 that developers agreement including who ultimately maintains and manages either that that open

02:08:06.100 --> 02:08:11.240
 space or if it's an easement that's dedicated the terms of agreement of that easement okay

02:08:11.240 --> 02:08:17.840
 thank you Commissioner Perrone for Angie going back to the tracks just so I understand completely

02:08:17.840 --> 02:08:22.840
 track a is they're just proposals right now of plans but track a is proposed to be single

02:08:22.840 --> 02:08:32.280
 family homes correct it is tracked be tracked it does help when you can see them all I want

02:08:32.280 --> 02:08:37.800
 to blanket okay so just as quick refresher before we get to public comment sure tracked

02:08:37.800 --> 02:08:44.720
 be is the one closest to existing single-family and furthest from the highway this is the

02:08:44.720 --> 02:08:51.280
 one with the use restrictions so only townhomes and single-family would be allowable and a

02:08:51.280 --> 02:08:56.880
 and C have a base zoning district of mixed-use neighborhood with the intent of developing

02:08:56.880 --> 02:09:02.640
 as multifamily but there is not a use condition that restricts the property to that only meaning

02:09:02.640 --> 02:09:08.160
 any of the allowable uses in MN in the future if deemed appropriate could go there so for

02:09:08.160 --> 02:09:14.600
 example if it's a project proposal and let's say either townhomes or multifamily it's still

02:09:14.600 --> 02:09:20.000
 unknown what the result would be it's like oh as far as like what type of development

02:09:20.000 --> 02:09:25.240
 would be choosing whether it would be a mixture of both or solely townhomes or solely multifamily

02:09:25.240 --> 02:09:34.380
 for tracked be tracked not the one for a yeah the intent is is for multifamily development

02:09:34.380 --> 02:09:39.000
 however I just want to make it clear that because it's an overlay PD and we're pretty

02:09:39.000 --> 02:09:43.960
 we're adopting a base zoning with no restrictions that that could change to an allowable use

02:09:43.960 --> 02:09:49.040
 in the MN zoning district okay because the concept plan that is you know used to talk

02:09:49.040 --> 02:09:56.720
 through is not is not finalized like it would be in a standard PD sure thank you.

02:09:56.720 --> 02:09:57.720
 Commissioner Dyer.

02:09:57.720 --> 02:10:05.480
 I'm just a couple more questions so the developers agreement that you're talking about the zoning

02:10:05.480 --> 02:10:12.840
 if the current owner were to sell the property does all of that convey and carry over to

02:10:12.840 --> 02:10:15.440
 the new owner.

02:10:15.440 --> 02:10:19.800
 Yes overlay plan development conditions run with the land not with the owner so if the

02:10:19.800 --> 02:10:25.000
 property were to be sold by a new individual they're subject to the same terms and conditions

02:10:25.000 --> 02:10:30.600
 as outlined in the overlay PD the only way for that to change or be amended is by going

02:10:30.600 --> 02:10:35.160
 back through this process with a amending overlay plan development.

02:10:35.160 --> 02:10:42.040
 And would you have to do a new developers agreement with a new developer.

02:10:42.040 --> 02:10:45.600
 That I think that would also transfer but if terms are altered or if conditions are

02:10:45.600 --> 02:10:49.760
 wanting to be modified we'd be back in much the same situation.

02:10:49.760 --> 02:10:59.560
 Okay and then the other question I have is Corbin's going to get expanded because right

02:10:59.560 --> 02:11:04.680
 now it's just a very narrow dirt road so you're going to have a grassy media and you're going

02:11:04.680 --> 02:11:08.920
 to have lanes on each side you're going to have some landscaping so you're going to take

02:11:08.920 --> 02:11:17.920
 not only the southern property that this current owner has but also as you move east you're

02:11:17.920 --> 02:11:23.860
 going to take those other homeowners part of their property and then all the property

02:11:23.860 --> 02:11:32.340
 owners on the north eminent domain are we trying to work out a deal and also when Corbin

02:11:32.340 --> 02:11:39.300
 gets extended east to connect to the new Bonnie Bray I'm assuming you're going to have to

02:11:39.300 --> 02:11:46.040
 try to acquire those properties as well like is there a plan.

02:11:46.040 --> 02:11:51.480
 Sure and I see Chandra standing I'll let him jump in in a minute to address some more of

02:11:51.480 --> 02:11:59.960
 the details for clarification as part of this project and what's required to be constructed

02:11:59.960 --> 02:12:06.960
 there would be no right of way taken from northern property owners that at this time

02:12:06.960 --> 02:12:13.040
 for the improvements of the two lanes to serve the development is not needed.

02:12:13.040 --> 02:12:15.560
 So it's all coming from the southern.

02:12:15.560 --> 02:12:19.680
 It comes from the southern portions so you are correct there is land area to the east

02:12:19.680 --> 02:12:26.360
 that is not under this owners ownership as well as some parcels needed to make that connection

02:12:26.360 --> 02:12:32.480
 to the new Bonnie Bray but the dedication is coming from the southern side to make that

02:12:32.480 --> 02:12:36.280
 improvement to make it two lanes essentially one lane each way.

02:12:36.280 --> 02:12:38.640
 Did I leave anything out Chandra?

02:12:38.640 --> 02:12:43.680
 Because that kind of has to happen in order because that part of the overlay is A and

02:12:43.680 --> 02:12:50.320
 C can't be developed until that extension is done correct?

02:12:50.320 --> 02:12:56.000
 Yes the improvements need to be made to connect fully connect to either the new Bonnie Bray

02:12:56.000 --> 02:13:01.360
 or 35 whichever comes first with this right of way section that you see here.

02:13:01.360 --> 02:13:10.640
 We know how fast text that works so I would think that the city of Denton could work faster.

02:13:10.640 --> 02:13:15.440
 Sorry just to follow up to that but it in order to extend it further east past this

02:13:15.440 --> 02:13:20.120
 property then the city would need to purchase that right of way and build that portion of

02:13:20.120 --> 02:13:21.120
 the road.

02:13:21.120 --> 02:13:23.560
 Additional right of way is required yes.

02:13:23.560 --> 02:13:29.860
 Okay so in order to for this development to happen the city has basically skin in the

02:13:29.860 --> 02:13:32.840
 game and they have to build part of the roadway.

02:13:32.840 --> 02:13:39.240
 The only I guess what I would add to that is the making that connection to new Bonnie

02:13:39.240 --> 02:13:44.600
 Bray has been something our transportation team has been working on and investigating

02:13:44.600 --> 02:13:50.760
 after having held a neighborhood meeting in this area in the summer of 2024 which really

02:13:50.760 --> 02:13:54.720
 highlighted some of the access challenges that individuals situated north of the subject

02:13:54.720 --> 02:13:55.720
 property have.

02:13:55.720 --> 02:13:59.840
 Okay I guess if I could add a follow-up comment to your point regarding the city having skin

02:13:59.840 --> 02:14:04.460
 in the game the city has skin in the game regarding Corbin Road regardless and the reason

02:14:04.460 --> 02:14:11.880
 why I say that with with tracks A and B if they were to develop the developer is going

02:14:11.880 --> 02:14:15.760
 to build the southern portion of the roadway but the northern portion of the roadway eventually

02:14:15.760 --> 02:14:20.440
 is going to have to be built at some point in time so if this zoning were to be approved

02:14:20.440 --> 02:14:25.120
 then it's really a shared responsibility of constructing the roadway because the developer

02:14:25.120 --> 02:14:29.240
 will have their portions part of their development obligations but given conditions that are

02:14:29.240 --> 02:14:33.920
 on the north side particularly where the existing single-family residential lots are the city

02:14:33.920 --> 02:14:36.880
 would likely be then building the roadway as part of the capital improvements within

02:14:36.880 --> 02:14:39.200
 the existing right of way that's there.

02:14:39.200 --> 02:14:44.700
 Any property on the north side of Corbin if it had the opportunity to be developed then

02:14:44.700 --> 02:14:48.600
 at such point in time when the property is developed that developer would have the obligation

02:14:48.600 --> 02:14:55.280
 for those roadway roadway improvements adjacent to their property so but we we still have

02:14:55.280 --> 02:14:59.960
 a commitment in this and and I think one of the things that you know regardless of what

02:14:59.960 --> 02:15:04.240
 happens with this development one of the things that we the city are working on is trying

02:15:04.240 --> 02:15:08.480
 to help assist with that connection to new Bonnie Bray one of the things that was very

02:15:08.480 --> 02:15:13.880
 evident in a meeting that we hosted last summer I think it was late summer was that given the

02:15:13.880 --> 02:15:19.280
 existing access considerations within the area we know we have some challenges and so

02:15:19.280 --> 02:15:23.360
 our commitment was to be able to look further to see what kind of improvements we could

02:15:23.360 --> 02:15:29.040
 make for trying to secure that connection to the new Bonnie Bray I know many residents

02:15:29.040 --> 02:15:32.640
 at that time had expressed concern regarding when there's incidents in the area that they

02:15:32.640 --> 02:15:37.200
 have not been able to get to their homes and and we heard that loud and clear and so that's

02:15:37.200 --> 02:15:42.120
 why from that point on we've been in discussions with okay how can we work to at least try

02:15:42.120 --> 02:15:49.680
 and secure that connection to new Bonnie Bray thank you yeah and obviously the city has

02:15:49.680 --> 02:15:54.680
 skin in the game anytime there's a roadway but thank you yeah so where was this I guess

02:15:54.680 --> 02:16:00.960
 on the CIP priority list is it was it I mean they'll just move this up on the CIP list

02:16:00.960 --> 02:16:08.720
 I assume so this carbon road section is on the service area B and on the priority list

02:16:08.720 --> 02:16:15.320
 first and second.

02:16:15.320 --> 02:16:20.000
 Commissioner Perodrone you're still on the board did you have a question okay just one

02:16:20.000 --> 02:16:29.600
 final one from me thank you everybody for being patient this is just a complex application

02:16:29.600 --> 02:16:38.080
 I've heard before that notwithstanding all these issues right the for instance the reason

02:16:38.080 --> 02:16:43.180
 I'm asking this is that the the conceptual plan which just so everybody understands it's

02:16:43.180 --> 02:16:49.400
 it's conceptual it's a drawing that shows what staff and the applicant believe would

02:16:49.400 --> 02:16:56.000
 be possible under the proposed zoning but it's not anything beyond that but it did show

02:16:56.000 --> 02:17:03.360
 a roadway connection across the ESA my understanding is that when you cross a floodway you're not

02:17:03.360 --> 02:17:07.520
 allowed to put any vertical support elements actually within the floodway and it has to

02:17:07.520 --> 02:17:14.360
 span that distance is that a fair statement for roadways it's not the case this is a carbon

02:17:14.360 --> 02:17:22.440
 is a mobility plan roadway sorry not not for Corbin Road for the internal connection if

02:17:22.440 --> 02:17:28.820
 if there was a desire to have an internal roadway across that floodplain you mean connecting

02:17:28.820 --> 02:17:34.440
 the sitey C to sitey exactly that's right yeah there are some restrictions on ESA that

02:17:34.440 --> 02:17:39.900
 needs to be mitigated yes so notwithstanding the ESA restrictions assuming those would

02:17:39.900 --> 02:17:48.760
 would be amenable to council the physical construction of a roadway crossing a floodway

02:17:48.760 --> 02:17:56.400
 my understanding is that the deck has to span between supports on on the extents other sides

02:17:56.400 --> 02:18:00.440
 of the floodway that's correct but it can go in the floodplain area beyond that that's

02:18:00.440 --> 02:18:10.360
 not correct okay thank you any other questions before we get to public's comments okay not

02:18:10.360 --> 02:18:21.880
 seeing any thank you Angie thank you Chandra I already opened the public hearing the the

02:18:21.880 --> 02:18:30.420
 applicant per our rules gets to to speak first so I will invite Randy Rivera up to speak

02:18:30.420 --> 02:18:42.840
 so I'm clear on the time is there a drive o'clock yes as the applicant you get 10 minutes

02:18:42.840 --> 02:18:51.400
 is there a clock up here there should be I don't see it yet it should appear once it's

02:18:51.400 --> 02:18:59.320
 usually there okay it will appear momentarily so please state your your name and address

02:18:59.320 --> 02:19:05.320
 for the record and then you will have 10 minutes right and then I need to share my presentation

02:19:05.320 --> 02:19:15.280
 when will that come up do I need to do that there's probably a yeah there's there's a

02:19:15.280 --> 02:19:24.400
 couple screens on there okay okay thank you all right thank you all right my name is Randy

02:19:24.400 --> 02:19:30.880
 Rivera I am a land planner with McAdams located at 4400 State Highway 121 in Louisville thank

02:19:30.880 --> 02:19:36.920
 you for the opportunity to present tonight I want to go through some of the slides and

02:19:36.920 --> 02:19:40.160
 a little bit more detail I'm not trying to cover the things that Angie and staff have

02:19:40.160 --> 02:19:44.360
 already covered in great detail and I appreciate that here's a timeline of events that we did

02:19:44.360 --> 02:19:50.840
 submit first thing early and mid 2022 been through this for four years the ownership

02:19:50.840 --> 02:19:56.000
 I'm representing here on behalf of the property owner Denton 195 Partners LLC and they've

02:19:56.000 --> 02:20:00.840
 owned the land for about a decade or so and so the green I've highlighted those those

02:20:00.840 --> 02:20:05.840
 are our neighborhood outreach meetings and then there was one in July that was referenced

02:20:05.840 --> 02:20:12.200
 about the city led that one about mobility and the Corbin Road improvements all right

02:20:12.200 --> 02:20:16.800
 here the site conditions it is unique we've talked about that I'm not going to belabor

02:20:16.800 --> 02:20:24.120
 it but there is about seventy five percent of the property is floodplain and about eighty

02:20:24.120 --> 02:20:29.200
 percent of the property is E ESA's so those do overlap okay so I'm not trying to duplicate

02:20:29.200 --> 02:20:33.560
 those and then the the topo the high point of the property is on the east side if you

02:20:33.560 --> 02:20:38.320
 see my mouse and then it dips down into this floodplain and then it comes back up so altogether

02:20:38.320 --> 02:20:43.200
 it's about twenty five feet of fall a text that has acquired the right away for the thirty

02:20:43.200 --> 02:20:50.280
 five expansion for the frontage roads all right here's some aerial views of the property

02:20:50.280 --> 02:20:54.800
 looking in these different directions the total tree coverage is at about thirty two

02:20:54.800 --> 02:21:00.800
 percent of the property and you can see there's a lot of pasture land and it's used right

02:21:00.800 --> 02:21:07.440
 now for grazing we spent a lot of time talking about the moderate residential and it is a

02:21:07.440 --> 02:21:11.680
 large this is one of the largest orange kind of polygons for this moderate residential

02:21:11.680 --> 02:21:19.120
 on the city's land use map I think it's located in a very strategic place along 35 typically

02:21:19.120 --> 02:21:23.880
 you want to have some higher intensity uses along your major corridors it's not ideal

02:21:23.880 --> 02:21:29.440
 really for large lot single family to want to live along the highway it's not as desirable

02:21:29.440 --> 02:21:33.800
 so you can see that throughout the land use plan and it's also in a key location it's

02:21:33.800 --> 02:21:39.240
 close proximity to a major employment center the airport and again just close to the highway

02:21:39.240 --> 02:21:46.880
 and good mobility it does allow for a variety of housing types and it does encourage a transition

02:21:46.880 --> 02:21:52.000
 which is what we are proposing and the overall density about five to twelve units an acre

02:21:52.000 --> 02:21:56.980
 the zoning of our two has been in place since two thousand two the land this comprehensive

02:21:56.980 --> 02:22:02.360
 plan has been updated since then and that are two is three units an acre there about

02:22:02.360 --> 02:22:06.420
 but the land use plan indicates five to twelve and so this is what we've been working with

02:22:06.420 --> 02:22:13.840
 since we started this application are the open space and parks and you talked about

02:22:13.840 --> 02:22:19.800
 that property strategically located to provide an extension of the Hickory Creek trail system

02:22:19.800 --> 02:22:24.520
 and there's a lot of encouragement through the city's planning documents to preserve

02:22:24.520 --> 02:22:29.240
 open space to preserve these preservation areas wildlife corridors and things like that

02:22:29.240 --> 02:22:32.800
 there are two wildlife quarters coming through the property one to the northwest and one

02:22:32.800 --> 02:22:41.360
 directly to the east I'm sorry to the west all right this concept plan I'm sorry the

02:22:41.360 --> 02:22:45.680
 zoning exhibit that Angie pointed out just a reminder that the zoning conditions in this

02:22:45.680 --> 02:22:51.120
 PD are binding they are regulatory they're enforceable by the city whoever is to take

02:22:51.120 --> 02:22:55.560
 ownership to develop it will still be held to those same standards still accountable

02:22:55.560 --> 02:23:02.160
 to the commitments and timing and restrictions in those standards just like any other zoning

02:23:02.160 --> 02:23:07.200
 district throughout the city the overall concept plan this shows basically you know there's

02:23:07.200 --> 02:23:11.840
 a lot of land that's floodplain and ESA so we're only really left with about forty four

02:23:11.840 --> 02:23:16.400
 acres of developable property on a hundred and ninety five acres and so we looked at

02:23:16.400 --> 02:23:21.280
 and from the beginning looking at clustering and compact development design since it's

02:23:21.280 --> 02:23:27.800
 along the highway urban residential multifamily was suitable for that and then as we transition

02:23:27.800 --> 02:23:34.440
 over to the east adjacent to the single family to change it to a single family use altogether

02:23:34.440 --> 02:23:40.160
 on this plan just shy of eight hundred units so about four dwelling units per acre and

02:23:40.160 --> 02:23:45.320
 then there is internal and external access to the site to your point we were proposing

02:23:45.320 --> 02:23:49.800
 a street right here to connect track a to track see all sites have to have two points

02:23:49.800 --> 02:23:54.000
 of access we'll work through those in more detail when we get to the civil engineering

02:23:54.000 --> 02:23:59.480
 design phase and working with text dot we may be able to let them have let have them

02:23:59.480 --> 02:24:03.880
 approve two points of access here for track to see but that is something that we'll have

02:24:03.880 --> 02:24:08.160
 to work through when we do the final when we work through design in the detail of that

02:24:08.160 --> 02:24:12.480
 the orange corridors are indicating twelve foot trails aligning through the property

02:24:12.480 --> 02:24:17.200
 we'll work closely with the city on how those trails should be aligned this feedback that

02:24:17.200 --> 02:24:21.120
 we show here something that we've worked on a few years ago with city staff about that

02:24:21.120 --> 02:24:26.520
 I wanted to spend a little bit of time talking about the input over the last four years with

02:24:26.520 --> 02:24:30.040
 the four neighborhood meetings we had and then the community meeting the first concept

02:24:30.040 --> 02:24:35.720
 plan we showed had more multifamily five hundred eighty two units on site B then we came in

02:24:35.720 --> 02:24:40.600
 we listened to them these buildings that were running alongside Corbin road they would rather

02:24:40.600 --> 02:24:45.800
 see them be oriented where they're not as obtrusive so we rotated those and provided

02:24:45.800 --> 02:24:50.800
 a condition and the PD overlay that the building orientation be perpendicular to Corbin and

02:24:50.800 --> 02:24:54.320
 then that we also provided for more of a setback to the east to protect the property owners

02:24:54.320 --> 02:24:59.540
 over there reduce the density by sixty units then we met again a third time in twenty twenty

02:24:59.540 --> 02:25:07.840
 three reduce the units again to three hundred and fifty instead of the five twenty and based

02:25:07.840 --> 02:25:11.520
 on neighborhood input that we received from the twenty twenty earlier twenty twenty three

02:25:11.520 --> 02:25:16.240
 meeting you'll see more of a significant buffer and setback we still keep the same building

02:25:16.240 --> 02:25:20.880
 orientation we limit the height of forty feet then we had this fourth meeting this past

02:25:20.880 --> 02:25:26.680
 March and this meeting was about presenting the conditions to the public to the community

02:25:26.680 --> 02:25:31.960
 and here is where we heard them loud and clear from the meeting in July about mobility infrastructure

02:25:31.960 --> 02:25:37.040
 for Corbin and the improvements needed therein and so what we propose is that we would link

02:25:37.040 --> 02:25:41.680
 the development to the infrastructure and restrict ourselves from getting any building

02:25:41.680 --> 02:25:46.440
 permits until Corbin road was improved and it was the either option to to new body break

02:25:46.440 --> 02:25:51.640
 or to thirty five and then from that neighborhood meeting in March we also heard them loud and

02:25:51.640 --> 02:25:55.760
 clear about they felt like the multifamily was not a good transition to the single family

02:25:55.760 --> 02:26:01.200
 to the east therefore we updated the plan to do single family townhomes and that's consistent

02:26:01.200 --> 02:26:05.160
 with the town on regulations of the city of Denton's code about a hundred and fifty townhomes

02:26:05.160 --> 02:26:11.360
 is what we are requesting we're prohibiting multifamily on tract B and then we're adding

02:26:11.360 --> 02:26:16.360
 a fifty foot setback max height of three stories and continuing to link the building permits

02:26:16.360 --> 02:26:21.360
 to infrastructure improvements we want to make sure the infrastructure is in place before

02:26:21.360 --> 02:26:27.200
 people are living in these homes that was a commitment that we made earlier this year

02:26:27.200 --> 02:26:33.440
 so overall that was a reduction in about seventy five percent of the density for tract B throughout

02:26:33.440 --> 02:26:37.440
 the course of these neighborhood engagement meetings them additionally the conditions

02:26:37.440 --> 02:26:42.520
 of tract B Angie did a great job of pointing those out I'm not going to belabor those again

02:26:42.520 --> 02:26:48.960
 but again these are consistent with the city's code on what those townhomes can be only townhomes

02:26:48.960 --> 02:26:54.000
 and only single family no multifamilies allowed there the closest multifamily to any existing

02:26:54.000 --> 02:27:00.760
 residence is over nine hundred feet away and the overlay for sorry the conditions for tracks

02:27:00.760 --> 02:27:06.480
 A and B consistent with what and you pointed out that either one either of Corbin's improved

02:27:06.480 --> 02:27:11.440
 to talk to to go to thirty five or to go to new Bonnie Bray we talked to text out today

02:27:11.440 --> 02:27:15.200
 they have no they see no issue with connecting Corbin Road to text out right there it is

02:27:15.200 --> 02:27:21.960
 at grade at this location and they gave us a timeline of construction starting in twenty

02:27:21.960 --> 02:27:28.780
 thirty and then construction commencing in twenty thirty four so that's nine years from

02:27:28.780 --> 02:27:34.280
 now that that would be able to happen and the developers making a commitment to work

02:27:34.280 --> 02:27:38.400
 with the city through a developer's agreement on the improvements to Corbin Road to get

02:27:38.400 --> 02:27:42.160
 it over to Bonnie Bray to be able to develop tract A and B sooner than nine years from

02:27:42.160 --> 02:27:47.440
 now all right and then here's the street section and he showed this is Angie showed this as

02:27:47.440 --> 02:27:52.600
 well the road is being pushed to the south it's extended to the south it's encumbering

02:27:52.600 --> 02:27:57.680
 more this property as it goes over to new Bonnie Bray the reason for that is throughout

02:27:57.680 --> 02:28:01.840
 the duration of this four year period Atmos or in link came in and put a four inch gas

02:28:01.840 --> 02:28:05.720
 line you see that in the middle right here they went ten feet off the edge of the existing

02:28:05.720 --> 02:28:10.360
 roadway of Corbin we have to continue to stay ten feet away from that gas line and so we're

02:28:10.360 --> 02:28:14.600
 proposing to travel lanes one in each direction there are twelve feet there will still be

02:28:14.600 --> 02:28:18.760
 seventeen feet of the right away and then again a thirty foot buffer is in the conditions

02:28:18.760 --> 02:28:24.560
 Mr. very sorry just to interrupt you the timer doesn't seem to be working so about two or

02:28:24.560 --> 02:28:30.120
 three minutes thank you yeah I could not see I appreciate you give me the warning and then

02:28:30.120 --> 02:28:34.240
 a track C is totally contingent on the frontage roads being built we'll work with text out

02:28:34.240 --> 02:28:38.920
 to see how we can get two points of access if it's not viable to construct an access

02:28:38.920 --> 02:28:44.240
 point and then the park and open space area we will work with a city if it's whether it's

02:28:44.240 --> 02:28:48.640
 dedicated whether it is an an access easement I will point out there are parks and floodplains

02:28:48.640 --> 02:28:53.640
 throughout DFW Lewisville Railroad Park is an example of fields and things like that

02:28:53.640 --> 02:29:00.840
 and the open space and I this is one package deal and the zoning is tied to this the agreement

02:29:00.840 --> 02:29:05.280
 that we would work through with the city at a future date to do the dedication or the

02:29:05.280 --> 02:29:10.240
 easement so if that weren't able to happen I don't foresee this being able to be dedicated

02:29:10.240 --> 02:29:13.960
 and then all these other agreements you know the access routes will be worked through and

02:29:13.960 --> 02:29:17.960
 everything like that and then we would comply with ESA standards TIA said there had to be

02:29:17.960 --> 02:29:22.600
 two left turn lanes one at driveway one one at driveway four and then just an overview

02:29:22.600 --> 02:29:27.480
 of the mobility of the area and improvements that are underway I know South State Loop

02:29:27.480 --> 02:29:31.760
 288 will be starting you know in the next year and then Bonnie Bray being open very

02:29:31.760 --> 02:29:36.040
 soon but there is great mobility in the area once these improvements are made so thank

02:29:36.040 --> 02:29:48.960
 you and I'll stand for any questions thank you any questions from Commission Commissioner

02:29:48.960 --> 02:29:56.360
 Riggs Randy thank you so you mentioned that y'all I know this is a difficult site obviously

02:29:56.360 --> 02:29:59.880
 and you mentioned that you reduced the number of units that you all wanted particularly

02:29:59.880 --> 02:30:08.140
 on track I believe it's B yes by about 75 percent did y'all I guess for me it is so

02:30:08.140 --> 02:30:16.400
 close to other large residential lots did y'all look at possibly doing anything less

02:30:16.400 --> 02:30:22.080
 dense than the townhomes and then maybe creating more of a buffer did y'all look at that well

02:30:22.080 --> 02:30:27.440
 with the multifamily we were able to provide more of a buffer and that's what we had proposed

02:30:27.440 --> 02:30:34.520
 for the last year and the feedback was that there the majority of the conversation at

02:30:34.520 --> 02:30:39.520
 that March meeting was they didn't see how that was compatible in any way shape or form

02:30:39.520 --> 02:30:46.120
 as much as I try to explain the separation the distance and the sight lines and they

02:30:46.120 --> 02:30:55.000
 would prefer a single family and use on track B and so our proposal is the townhomes and

02:30:55.000 --> 02:31:00.840
 we wanted to keep in mind that we're restricted to only 44 acres of developable area and the

02:31:00.840 --> 02:31:06.160
 improvements to Corbin Road are expensive and there you know if I know if you know it's

02:31:06.160 --> 02:31:12.040
 on the CIP developers are able to build these roads a lot faster than cities and if our

02:31:12.040 --> 02:31:19.440
 client the property owner is willing to come in and improve Corbin quicker than a certain

02:31:19.440 --> 02:31:23.440
 number of units as needed to be able to be achieved to offset that because that's quite

02:31:23.440 --> 02:31:36.600
 an expense there's a lot of infrastructure obligation with a property commissioner there

02:31:36.600 --> 02:31:41.560
 I had a very similar question to Commissioner Riggs is when you're looking at tracks A and

02:31:41.560 --> 02:31:48.480
 B was there any discussion to do like half acre lots and then maybe as you got closer

02:31:48.480 --> 02:31:54.760
 west to 35 West where you could do more of your traditional smaller single single family

02:31:54.760 --> 02:31:59.800
 lots and then that would leave see either up to the apartments or even up to townhouses

02:31:59.800 --> 02:32:04.880
 so you're still getting some multifamily but it's not up against this community that's

02:32:04.880 --> 02:32:11.920
 already R2 like going from R2 and then having this and then you know designation just it

02:32:11.920 --> 02:32:18.960
 doesn't seem very compatible of the town homes next to R2 you're saying we you know we the

02:32:18.960 --> 02:32:23.160
 track area being multifamily there's a lot of restrictions just working with the eases

02:32:23.160 --> 02:32:29.680
 and we're trying to not encroach in those areas so the developable land is you know

02:32:29.680 --> 02:32:34.080
 it's not it's not very much any at all to get enough yield out of there this is highway

02:32:34.080 --> 02:32:40.440
 property and so there is a certain kind of reality that's expected for the property and

02:32:40.440 --> 02:32:44.960
 the the amount of units that we're proposing I believe it's only four to five acres of

02:32:44.960 --> 02:32:49.160
 land that's required to be dedicated for the park dedication ordinance and so that was

02:32:49.160 --> 02:32:55.560
 all kind of package deal of to do this to be able to get these uses that the 137 acres

02:32:55.560 --> 02:32:59.880
 would be opened up for public access so no discussion with your client the owner of this

02:32:59.880 --> 02:33:05.320
 property or with the city about trying to keep it closer to R2 and doing like half acre

02:33:05.320 --> 02:33:11.800
 lots the numbers don't make it the amount of infrastructure needed it would not work

02:33:11.800 --> 02:33:16.520
 and there wouldn't be maybe less infrastructure on what you have to do to Corbin because it

02:33:16.520 --> 02:33:28.560
 would be a it would be less traffic no ma'am Corbin would still need two lanes okay any

02:33:28.560 --> 02:33:38.480
 other questions for the applicant okay thank you very much thank you so much I'll call

02:33:38.480 --> 02:33:45.640
 the the group representative first for the Denia neighborhood association Kyle Eaton

02:33:45.640 --> 02:33:56.600
 if you can come forward and state your name and address we're working on an alternative

02:33:56.600 --> 02:34:02.120
 timer solution but in the meantime I'll just give you fingers once you get down to five

02:34:02.120 --> 02:34:07.040
 my name is Kyle Eaton I am on Corbin Road and I'm representing the Denia neighborhood

02:34:07.040 --> 02:34:17.800
 association sorry yeah thank you and I don't know how do I show this is this the DTV cam

02:34:17.800 --> 02:34:23.200
 yeah it should come on over I was gonna say are you wanting to show the the paper that

02:34:23.200 --> 02:34:27.520
 you just handed out they can do the overhead camera right fantastic thank you I actually

02:34:27.520 --> 02:34:34.680
 live on Corbin Road I have a driveway on Corbin Road which is scheduled to be secondary arterial

02:34:34.680 --> 02:34:40.160
 which I will be out of code so no one has explained to me how that's going to be handled

02:34:40.160 --> 02:34:43.840
 as there's gonna be a two lane road and I'm gonna have driveway access there's gonna be

02:34:43.840 --> 02:34:49.240
 a couple of us that have driving access no one's told that to us yet but what I wanted

02:34:49.240 --> 02:34:55.920
 to focus on today was I'm a numbers guy by business and so reading through the numbers

02:34:55.920 --> 02:35:01.760
 on the staff approval I don't know that I necessarily agree with the the four units

02:35:01.760 --> 02:35:06.200
 and what I want to do is I wanted to go back to one of the concept plans that that they

02:35:06.200 --> 02:35:13.840
 provided and I know concept plans are not binding right and so the concept plan that

02:35:13.840 --> 02:35:17.360
 the reason the reason why I use the one idea is because it's not binding it's it's actually

02:35:17.360 --> 02:35:21.440
 the fifth iteration right I think we're on the ninth iteration right now of the concept

02:35:21.440 --> 02:35:27.560
 plan but I just wanted to demonstrate that on certain parts of this property there are

02:35:27.560 --> 02:35:35.400
 not limitations specifically with regards to how many units are being built okay now

02:35:35.400 --> 02:35:39.200
 if we look at the restrictions let's let's let's look at the restrictions here site B

02:35:39.200 --> 02:35:46.240
 yeah site B they changed it we're going to be going down to 150 units from the original

02:35:46.240 --> 02:35:52.400
 what is that 319 so that's going to be lower but I want you to take notice on side a side

02:35:52.400 --> 02:35:57.440
 a has 450 units and so that's pretty close to what's being proposed right now but if

02:35:57.440 --> 02:36:03.200
 you look at site C site C actually has closer to 290 units there right now they're showing

02:36:03.200 --> 02:36:08.920
 it as 220 and so my point in this is saying we're basing recommendations we're basing

02:36:08.920 --> 02:36:13.200
 numbers based on concept plans that are not binding there's nothing to stop these individuals

02:36:13.200 --> 02:36:18.000
 from going back the developer going back and putting more there not only that since we're

02:36:18.000 --> 02:36:26.160
 on the topic of constraints in order for them to be able to develop it they have to donate

02:36:26.160 --> 02:36:32.720
 the land that's a hundred a hundred and thirty four acres I believe so they donate a hundred

02:36:32.720 --> 02:36:39.480
 and thirty four acres once that hundred and thirty four acres is out why aren't we basing

02:36:39.480 --> 02:36:46.120
 density on that right I don't understand that because what's really left is fifty eight

02:36:46.120 --> 02:36:55.080
 is it fifty eight acres I believe fifty eight acres are no well there's forty forty one

02:36:55.080 --> 02:37:00.040
 point forty one point five acres that are are developable I believe I'm just going by

02:37:00.040 --> 02:37:05.720
 numbers on here okay so I'm looking at about eight hundred and ninety nine units total

02:37:05.720 --> 02:37:10.680
 and that includes the hundred and fifty townhomes and if I divide that by forty one and a half

02:37:10.680 --> 02:37:21.320
 I come up with about twenty one units per per acre moderate residence is five to twelve

02:37:21.320 --> 02:37:26.760
 and I will tell you I am I am these numbers are generous for two reasons on here you will

02:37:26.760 --> 02:37:32.960
 you will notice that the right away has not been moved south on this so whenever they

02:37:32.960 --> 02:37:38.480
 move the right of way south they're actually taking more of the buildable land away so

02:37:38.480 --> 02:37:43.080
 that's going to drive density up in addition to that there's parts of the land that they

02:37:43.080 --> 02:37:49.920
 can't build we've already discussed that flood land right there's also a two acres of pond

02:37:49.920 --> 02:37:55.640
 there so we're counting that in the mix too so my point is once you start really looking

02:37:55.640 --> 02:38:02.320
 at what is actually buildable the rate is much much higher than that the other thing

02:38:02.320 --> 02:38:07.720
 that that I want to mention that I don't think we touched a little bit on the twenty forty

02:38:07.720 --> 02:38:13.200
 plan the way that I view the twenty forty plan the twenty forty plan was was supposed

02:38:13.200 --> 02:38:17.680
 to be forward looking we had all this r2 here and so what we're going to do is we're going

02:38:17.680 --> 02:38:21.000
 to look and we're going to say what can we put here what can we build here in the future

02:38:21.000 --> 02:38:25.400
 and so the city decided we're going to do moderate moderate density here right and they

02:38:25.400 --> 02:38:29.960
 set that as a standard what what we're proposing now is we're proposing that we move the goal

02:38:29.960 --> 02:38:35.520
 post there's there's commercial on the other side supposedly commercial on the other side

02:38:35.520 --> 02:38:43.240
 what hasn't been mentioned is that it's a federal highway there there is no way to get

02:38:43.240 --> 02:38:47.560
 across the road there used to be a way meaning that you could walk across the road but you

02:38:47.560 --> 02:38:50.800
 can't even walk across the road because there's a bridge that's broken down there and the

02:38:50.800 --> 02:38:57.200
 bridge is out so there's no way to get to the other side at all right so I don't understand

02:38:57.200 --> 02:39:01.800
 how we're saying commercial and then this is a buffer and this is a buffer between r2

02:39:01.800 --> 02:39:07.400
 that doesn't make sense that is not that is not transition that's transformation okay

02:39:07.400 --> 02:39:12.520
 those are two very different things the other thing that I want to point out that I don't

02:39:12.520 --> 02:39:17.840
 understand and we haven't had a point our time to discuss this is that my understanding

02:39:17.840 --> 02:39:26.440
 of the overlay is that in order to build track a the development has to connect either right

02:39:26.440 --> 02:39:36.760
 here to bonnie bray or it has to connect from right here to 35 same thing holds true I'm

02:39:36.760 --> 02:39:41.920
 sorry I said a I should have said the track day same thing it has to go here or it has

02:39:41.920 --> 02:39:48.400
 to go here so my question is if they go they run into problems with getting land right

02:39:48.400 --> 02:39:56.080
 here and they decide to go this way all this is able to be developed that leaves an area

02:39:56.080 --> 02:40:02.100
 right here that's single lane gravel road and not only is it single lane gravel road

02:40:02.100 --> 02:40:07.280
 but it's a residential area that you have to go down on bonnie bray which is a residence

02:40:07.280 --> 02:40:13.120
 you'll have to hit rose lawn and that's the problem that we talked about with the city

02:40:13.120 --> 02:40:18.440
 last July the solution that first proposed does not address that whatsoever we still

02:40:18.440 --> 02:40:24.280
 have that same issue what should even be more important to the city is a scenario where

02:40:24.280 --> 02:40:30.680
 both of these get built out my question is what is to stop the developer from building

02:40:30.680 --> 02:40:39.040
 out both ways and not building in the floodplain if the floodplain is is the four minutes left

02:40:39.040 --> 02:40:45.200
 if the floodplain is the most costly place to build I'm going to build out and so part

02:40:45.200 --> 02:40:50.400
 of the reason that I have concern about that is because we are talking about putting 800

02:40:50.400 --> 02:40:57.040
 units total in this area we're taking land that was once permeable turning it non-permeable

02:40:57.040 --> 02:41:03.960
 and we're forcing it all into a floodplain and then in addition to that further up on

02:41:03.960 --> 02:41:10.480
 bonnie bray right by UNT we've just improved drainage huge culverts going in further south

02:41:10.480 --> 02:41:14.320
 by carbon we're doing more drainage and so that's going to increase the water flow that's

02:41:14.320 --> 02:41:22.200
 going through my question is if we don't have full development of all the road are we not

02:41:22.200 --> 02:41:26.820
 going to end up with a choke point right there and I can tell you June 2nd of last year we

02:41:26.820 --> 02:41:33.880
 got an inch and a half of rain I went out there was 10 inches of water on Corbin Road

02:41:33.880 --> 02:41:39.080
 in a place that was not marked on the floodplain and I was in the meeting with the developer

02:41:39.080 --> 02:41:44.680
 and I said you have to understand these floodplains are not currently accurate you are planning

02:41:44.680 --> 02:41:49.940
 on building in areas that are flooding right now and nobody responded nobody listened to

02:41:49.940 --> 02:41:54.840
 me and I still haven't got I haven't got any indication from the city as to how much

02:41:54.840 --> 02:42:00.280
 it's going to cost to actually build the infrastructure and I brought that up to the developer said

02:42:00.280 --> 02:42:04.080
 you have to build infrastructure there you have to build infrastructure like it's the

02:42:04.080 --> 02:42:10.540
 maximum amount and I got looked at like I had two heads that has to be done otherwise

02:42:10.540 --> 02:42:15.920
 once again land is going to be taken away from people this time not from roads but because

02:42:15.920 --> 02:42:21.240
 the floodplain is going to expand on all of us that are upstream so thank you for your

02:42:21.240 --> 02:42:33.760
 time and that's all I had thank you any questions just for decorum reasons we prefer not to

02:42:33.760 --> 02:42:39.940
 to clap I understand everybody's excited we'll get through this process together I promise

02:42:39.940 --> 02:42:50.040
 any questions for the speaker okay sure I don't know if it was inadvertent or not but

02:42:50.040 --> 02:42:57.240
 it does relate to what was talked about before looking at the agenda agenda item nine look

02:42:57.240 --> 02:43:04.800
 like it was left off the agenda it's the suitable uses form and I think that's important because

02:43:04.800 --> 02:43:10.680
 A and C have no restrictions on them so commercial and other things could technically go in there

02:43:10.680 --> 02:43:17.280
 yeah Angie can you go ahead and and pull up that my apologies that was inadvertently left

02:43:17.280 --> 02:43:26.120
 off of the the digital copy link but we do have that to show here on a slide yes don't

02:43:26.120 --> 02:43:35.840
 know the ins and outs of I can leave it over we can do we can reference it as we need but

02:43:35.840 --> 02:43:39.880
 this is the table of allowed uses as found in the DDC it was intended to be in the packet

02:43:39.880 --> 02:43:56.400
 I'm unsure what happened sorry about that okay okay thank you Angie next I have a card

02:43:56.400 --> 02:44:07.040
 for Rebecca Biggie if that's correct Bray I'm sorry I I now see the extra part of the

02:44:07.040 --> 02:44:14.500
 R I apologize please come in and share your name your correct name and your address and

02:44:14.500 --> 02:44:22.760
 we're talking about Rebecca Bray address traffic engineer I did the TIA with Langan engineering

02:44:22.760 --> 02:44:29.280
 out of Austin Texas nine nine zero six north Mopac Expressway so I'm just here to answer

02:44:29.280 --> 02:44:35.400
 any questions you might have let me know and I will be happy to to address them so thank

02:44:35.400 --> 02:44:42.120
 you any questions from the Commission Commission rigs I guess I just have one when you when

02:44:42.120 --> 02:44:48.720
 you're doing the TIA I guess you did not take into account Corbin being connected to 35

02:44:48.720 --> 02:44:53.160
 we did in the TA we did multiple iterations one with it connection one with it connecting

02:44:53.160 --> 02:44:58.760
 to one with it not connecting it just connecting over to what I call old Bonnie Bray and then

02:44:58.760 --> 02:45:06.000
 in June or June or July I think it was Chandra asked us to also look at the extension of

02:45:06.000 --> 02:45:11.240
 Corbin over to new Bonnie Bray so we did a multiple multiple scenarios and I think we

02:45:11.240 --> 02:45:17.400
 even went up to 2050 okay so the TIA you're operating off of then it assumes that Corbin

02:45:17.400 --> 02:45:22.240
 will be connected to 35 that assumption is in there yes okay I say that assumption because

02:45:22.240 --> 02:45:29.560
 there's other excuse me there's other assumptions as well okay perfect thank you I don't see

02:45:29.560 --> 02:45:38.280
 any other questions next I have a card from Patricia Patricia Sherman if you'd like to

02:45:38.280 --> 02:45:47.680
 speak go ahead and come up and state your name and address and you'll have four minutes

02:45:47.680 --> 02:45:57.920
 I am Patricia Sherman my address is twenty twenty five Tremont Circle in Denton Texas

02:45:57.920 --> 02:46:06.000
 as a resident of the area of the Denia neighborhood we are concerned particularly with getting

02:46:06.000 --> 02:46:12.480
 ahead of ourselves and I think that there is just so much contingent in this plan that

02:46:12.480 --> 02:46:19.440
 so much has to be done by the city that I think that adoption of the zoning change is

02:46:19.440 --> 02:46:27.520
 a bit premature with what we have at this point the traffic is a concern but we've we've

02:46:27.520 --> 02:46:38.080
 heard those studies even the the overlays I think don't extend to the part on 35 but

02:46:38.080 --> 02:46:49.000
 particularly then the inability to access southbound 35 is a significant concern that

02:46:49.000 --> 02:46:55.960
 that will be a lot more through the neighborhoods etc. but any out egress from that then to

02:46:55.960 --> 02:47:01.680
 go south would be would be problematic and I think a lot has been covered already that

02:47:01.680 --> 02:47:08.120
 I was going to say and probably will be by others so I'll end with that thank you any

02:47:08.120 --> 02:47:22.880
 questions seeing none I have a card for Chris Watts if you could come and state your name

02:47:22.880 --> 02:47:34.920
 and address evening please stay healthy on the way down Chris Watts Bonnie Bray Street

02:47:34.920 --> 02:47:40.780
 excuse my voice I've got a little allergies honorable chair members of the planning zoning

02:47:40.780 --> 02:47:48.000
 commission this project I'm not here supporting or opposing it's not right it's premature

02:47:48.000 --> 02:47:53.520
 and I'm going to tell you why it's got a condition in the overlay conditions that could

02:47:53.520 --> 02:47:59.560
 blow the whole thing up it's all predicated upon the city of Denton accepting 130 acres

02:47:59.560 --> 02:48:05.440
 of floodplain for park dedication when there may have been some informal discussions but

02:48:05.440 --> 02:48:09.880
 the whole thing is predicated on that and I believe that it's premature to consider

02:48:09.880 --> 02:48:15.320
 that this this zoning request until there's some kind of official either memorandum of

02:48:15.320 --> 02:48:20.280
 understanding a draft development agreement that you can contract around for contingency

02:48:20.280 --> 02:48:24.400
 upon if it gets rezoned this thing comes into effect but I believe one of the conditions

02:48:24.400 --> 02:48:32.360
 was you cannot do any final planning until those things have occurred as a negotiation

02:48:32.360 --> 02:48:36.760
 coach at the law school one thing I was always told my students that always in my personal

02:48:36.760 --> 02:48:42.600
 and professional if you have a non-negotiable or a potential deal-killer you really want

02:48:42.600 --> 02:48:47.860
 to resolve that first because if you don't you're going to waste a lot of time looking

02:48:47.860 --> 02:48:55.320
 at a lot of things that in the end can just sort of vanish and this is a very complicated

02:48:55.320 --> 02:49:00.040
 complicated project and I understand if I was standing in the property owner's shoes

02:49:00.040 --> 02:49:06.120
 I would be doing the same thing because the filet mignon of this project is track B because

02:49:06.120 --> 02:49:10.360
 it's the highest point it's the point that can be developed probably pretty much immediately

02:49:10.360 --> 02:49:14.640
 they can build Corbin road out to old Bonnie Bray depending on how they get the connection

02:49:14.640 --> 02:49:21.360
 to the new Bonnie Bray and I need to say as a policymaker for over 14 years I've never

02:49:21.360 --> 02:49:27.480
 agreed with the density transfers and especially in this kind of situation where you have a

02:49:27.480 --> 02:49:31.960
 hundred and thirty acres that you're going to say we've got density of four units per

02:49:31.960 --> 02:49:36.800
 acre on this whole track but you're including a hundred and thirty acres that cannot be

02:49:36.800 --> 02:49:41.860
 developed and Commissioner Riggs I really agree with your statement that we were taking

02:49:41.860 --> 02:49:47.840
 it out and I'm not saying that they shouldn't have some density but to say that there's

02:49:47.840 --> 02:49:52.480
 four units per acre on this just understand it's including a hundred and thirty acres

02:49:52.480 --> 02:49:58.960
 so I would I would recommend that you postpone this to an event certain and that event certain

02:49:58.960 --> 02:50:05.200
 is that there be some kind of excuse me draft memorandum of understanding or letter of intent

02:50:05.200 --> 02:50:10.800
 or something that says that the city is willing to accept this floodplain because I will tell

02:50:10.800 --> 02:50:16.240
 you based upon my own experience that there's not as much of an appetite for that right

02:50:16.240 --> 02:50:22.840
 now because it's expensive you have liability and it's not cheap to develop parkland and

02:50:22.840 --> 02:50:27.520
 right now we do have a lot of parkland this land banked and right now we don't have the

02:50:27.520 --> 02:50:31.720
 money to even develop them and that's no slight against staff it's no slight against city

02:50:31.720 --> 02:50:37.580
 management it's those are just the facts so I think at the least there needs to be some

02:50:37.580 --> 02:50:42.960
 more of an indication if the city is going to be okay with this because you're going

02:50:42.960 --> 02:50:46.400
 to spend a lot of time trying to figure this out it's going to go to council it's going

02:50:46.400 --> 02:50:51.960
 to require 20% majority if the opposition holds up and then what happens if the city

02:50:51.960 --> 02:50:57.240
 looks at it either now or five years from now and says we don't want this where does

02:50:57.240 --> 02:51:01.680
 it leave you it leaves a land with an entitlement that can't be done we wasted all this time

02:51:01.680 --> 02:51:08.360
 I would just simply say try to get some indication have city staff put something together where

02:51:08.360 --> 02:51:12.680
 the developers can come staff can come here and say we are willing to do this city is

02:51:12.680 --> 02:51:17.840
 willing to do this because if you don't have that you really don't have much because at

02:51:17.840 --> 02:51:22.440
 any moment the whole thing could just sort of vanish into thin air so thank you so much

02:51:22.440 --> 02:51:30.320
 for your time and thank you for your service to our community thank you.

02:51:30.320 --> 02:51:37.560
 Next I have a card from Jack Howell please come forward state your name and address for

02:51:37.560 --> 02:51:43.940
 the record and you'll have four minutes and I'll give you a 2-1.

02:51:43.940 --> 02:51:50.120
 I'm Jack Howell I live at 3198 South Bonnie Bray Street so you see where I'm going to

02:51:50.120 --> 02:52:00.680
 be impacted quite a bit if this is rezoned a multiple family my property joins this 195

02:52:00.680 --> 02:52:12.200
 acres on the north and west so that's my property line all the way it joins and a lot of things

02:52:12.200 --> 02:52:17.160
 have already been addressed so I won't take me just a minute but that's that's the reason

02:52:17.160 --> 02:52:25.040
 I oppose it because I don't there's a lot of questions out there that I haven't heard

02:52:25.040 --> 02:52:37.360
 being answered and a big concern is that that's proposed for park area and if city takes that

02:52:37.360 --> 02:52:44.680
 on just you know if you're going to develop that and maintain it it's going to be a lot

02:52:44.680 --> 02:52:52.920
 of money in it and I've lived on that property 43 plus years and that when Hickory Creek

02:52:52.920 --> 02:53:03.240
 gets out of bank it's way over my head and all the pasture fences I have it's over them

02:53:03.240 --> 02:53:11.000
 and I don't think Kyle even realized the magnitude of what a lot of rain coming down through

02:53:11.000 --> 02:53:18.280
 that one day and it's a lot of scrub brush on that open land and now cattle graze it

02:53:18.280 --> 02:53:26.680
 so they keep it grazed down pretty well but if it's not kept it's going to be a fire hazard

02:53:26.680 --> 02:53:36.520
 and most of the scrub brush on there is locust bushes and mesquite trees and and Chinese

02:53:36.520 --> 02:53:45.080
 privet and all those are hard to control and if you're in a floodplain it just you cut

02:53:45.080 --> 02:53:54.920
 it down and it comes back up so it's just a problem and then where I live there I'm

02:53:54.920 --> 02:54:00.040
 concerned with the buffer there between and and what is it what is it going to amount

02:54:00.040 --> 02:54:08.680
 to my as far as my property is concerned and how is the city gonna are they gonna infringe

02:54:08.680 --> 02:54:19.320
 on the property that I own and I appreciate your time and and thank you.

02:54:19.320 --> 02:54:44.320
 Thank you. Next I have a card for John Brown if you'd like to come forward. Sorry we just

02:54:44.320 --> 02:54:52.200
 had an update on the group speaking we've had a request that that that's well it's

02:54:52.200 --> 02:54:57.360
 for the Denia neighborhood association that's intended to be used with four people who are

02:54:57.360 --> 02:55:04.560
 present from that neighborhood association who opt to not speak so just need to to confirm

02:55:04.560 --> 02:55:10.720
 if there are four other people in the room who are planning to not speak that okay thank

02:55:10.720 --> 02:55:19.480
 you carry on John good evening I'm John Brown I live at 206 Goodson Way so my backyard butts

02:55:19.480 --> 02:55:26.640
 up against Corbin my family owned the property owned by 195 land from about 1980 to about

02:55:26.640 --> 02:55:32.380
 2002 so I grew up on that land I'm very familiar with it my concerns about this proposed rezoning

02:55:32.380 --> 02:55:37.680
 are several one is it's incompatible with the character of the neighborhood you mentioned

02:55:37.680 --> 02:55:43.520
 single-family residents but along the western side of the old Bonnie Bray between Parvin

02:55:43.520 --> 02:55:49.200
 and Hickory all of those are 0.6 acres per home or higher and when you go on to Sola

02:55:49.200 --> 02:55:54.000
 Way or Goodson Way the two cul-de-sacs there are acre lots and then as you move from Corbin

02:55:54.000 --> 02:55:59.880
 towards Hickory Creek the property gets even larger so from Corbin Road to Hickory Creek

02:55:59.880 --> 02:56:07.000
 there's four families residing in a quarter mile Mr. Barber Mr. Howe Mr. Barber's parents

02:56:07.000 --> 02:56:13.400
 and then a gentleman who lives right on Hickory Creek this is rural fringe area there's grazing

02:56:13.400 --> 02:56:19.540
 in our backyard we see bobcats foxes there's deer it's used for cows as my wife and I were

02:56:19.540 --> 02:56:24.000
 coming this evening we saw horses going down Corbin Road that's back where Estes stables

02:56:24.000 --> 02:56:28.420
 used to go on the trails for those of you a long time didn't nights this is rural fringe

02:56:28.420 --> 02:56:34.560
 area and according to the comprehensive 2040 didn't plan in that rural fringe area we will

02:56:34.560 --> 02:56:40.320
 discourage premature development and we will try to retain rural character and I don't

02:56:40.320 --> 02:56:45.640
 think that this rezoning and this proposed project does either of those additionally

02:56:45.640 --> 02:56:51.520
 Corbin Road is a bigger issue even has been mentioned so far not only is it dirt and undeveloped

02:56:51.520 --> 02:56:55.560
 and not only does it flood regularly I was there when they put in the railroad guard

02:56:55.560 --> 02:57:01.240
 to keep people from growing through but it's also very uneven so don't imagine a quarter

02:57:01.240 --> 02:57:05.260
 mile of dirt thing that's just going to be expanded there's a sharp hill that goes up

02:57:05.260 --> 02:57:09.840
 and then back and then again it's blocked off through 35 you can no longer pass through

02:57:09.840 --> 02:57:15.240
 flooding is a significant issue and Mr. Howell is right that's not merely along Corbin that's

02:57:15.240 --> 02:57:20.000
 also all over that property and so Hickory Creek when it rises all of our back pasture

02:57:20.000 --> 02:57:24.520
 would turn into a lake and so that's going to be a significant issue and like Kyle said

02:57:24.520 --> 02:57:30.680
 with the additional concrete and impermeable surfaces that's only going to get worse and

02:57:30.680 --> 02:57:36.200
 then there's just the idea of a park we're less than two miles from Dina Park which is

02:57:36.200 --> 02:57:41.080
 currently being expanded and improved we're less than two and a half miles from Southwest

02:57:41.080 --> 02:57:45.560
 Park the 190 acres that's going to be a significant development as a father of two children that

02:57:45.560 --> 02:57:50.480
 appreciates parkland we don't need additional park there it's going to be very expensive

02:57:50.480 --> 02:57:55.320
 to develop very expensive to maintain and it's unnecessary given the adequate park areas

02:57:55.320 --> 02:58:00.760
 that the city's investing into the south of us and to the east of us and the old Bonnie

02:58:00.760 --> 02:58:05.640
 Bray with the new Bonnie Bray expansion it's going to be cul-de-sac off near Parvin near

02:58:05.640 --> 02:58:11.080
 Chris Watts property and so now that's going to be we'll be cul-de-sacs on a cul-de-sac

02:58:11.080 --> 02:58:15.520
 and when you put the amount of traffic that's going to come in on the carbon Corbin and

02:58:15.520 --> 02:58:21.720
 then turning on to Bonnie Bray to try to access 35 or if waves directs the semi-traffics if

02:58:21.720 --> 02:58:27.040
 there's a blockage on 35 right now they turn off vintage all come down old Bonnie Bray that's

02:58:27.040 --> 02:58:31.600
 now going to be coming down Corbin there's a significant impact on the traffic that we're

02:58:31.600 --> 02:58:36.000
 already feeling and roads that used to be populated by moms with strollers and joggers

02:58:36.000 --> 02:58:40.600
 and walkers and bicyclist groups already a hazard with the amount of traffic we have

02:58:40.600 --> 02:58:44.760
 with the amount of traffic that's being proposed on Corbin on an old Bonnie Bray it's really

02:58:44.760 --> 02:58:49.520
 going to be a hazard and a danger and it's just not sufficient for what's being proposed

02:58:49.520 --> 02:58:53.760
 so at the very least I would request a postponement until there is an agreement on what's going

02:58:53.760 --> 02:58:58.960
 to be done with the land you know it not ought to be either we connected 35 with textile

02:58:58.960 --> 02:59:03.840
 or the new Bonnie Bray that should be a both and not an either or but when you actually

02:59:03.840 --> 02:59:06.760
 go and look at the neighborhood even that's going to be inadequate for what's being a

02:59:06.760 --> 02:59:15.520
 proposed for that property thank you all very much for your time thank you.

02:59:15.520 --> 02:59:22.500
 Next I have a card from Lisa Henry you're welcome to come up and say your name and address

02:59:22.500 --> 02:59:27.360
 for the record and you'll have four minutes and I'll give you some fingers thank you I'm

02:59:27.360 --> 02:59:32.680
 Lisa Henry I live at 212 Goodson way thank you all for this very thoughtful discussion

02:59:32.680 --> 02:59:38.200
 and all your questions John just said pretty much everything I was going to say but I will

02:59:38.200 --> 02:59:43.160
 I do want to reiterate then about the density issue and even if you take that there are

02:59:43.160 --> 02:59:49.440
 26 acres on track B with 150 units even track B has floodplain on it so they're all being

02:59:49.440 --> 02:59:56.680
 pushed to one side that is also the closest to where to where all the current houses are

02:59:56.680 --> 03:00:02.560
 the other thing that I wanted to say is that again the neighborhood does not have the infrastructure

03:00:02.560 --> 03:00:11.160
 the road infrastructure for this development and in order to go east to new Bonnie Bray

03:00:11.160 --> 03:00:18.760
 you somebody has to acquire land and houses and I don't I haven't heard a plan for that

03:00:18.760 --> 03:00:26.520
 and so that seems like it's a very long you know it seems like it's very far away also

03:00:26.520 --> 03:00:34.040
 to go west the frontage road has to be developed nine to I don't know fifteen twenty years

03:00:34.040 --> 03:00:39.380
 from now tech stop might develop the frontage road so it just seems like now is not the

03:00:39.380 --> 03:00:45.880
 time to be rezoning this land we don't have the infrastructure in the road system to accommodate

03:00:45.880 --> 03:00:51.260
 it also I do want to point out that in the original traffic report the neighbors had

03:00:51.260 --> 03:00:58.640
 to point out number of errors in that traffic report so there's that and also when the bar

03:00:58.640 --> 03:01:04.000
 was put down on Corbin Road that was because there was a death on that road in terms of

03:01:04.000 --> 03:01:13.240
 the flooding that happens thank you Miss Henry I have one little question just since you

03:01:13.240 --> 03:01:19.040
 mentioned that it's obviously been a long process that you mentioned that there had

03:01:19.040 --> 03:01:26.360
 been some misconstrued things errors in the traffic report that you had seen from what

03:01:26.360 --> 03:01:33.500
 you've seen now do you see any existing discrepancies that I haven't looked at the current traffic

03:01:33.500 --> 03:01:38.640
 report only what I heard today so the original traffic report was conflating old Bonnie Bray

03:01:38.640 --> 03:01:42.640
 and new Bonnie Bray and not talking about that there was the new construction going

03:01:42.640 --> 03:01:47.480
 on and they were talking about how Corbin was going to intersect with Bonnie Bray and

03:01:47.480 --> 03:01:52.760
 talking about how Bonnie Bray was this nice new four-lane road and it just isn't it's

03:01:52.760 --> 03:01:59.000
 a 22-foot golf cart path as far as I'm concerned and so we were talking about the traffic flow

03:01:59.000 --> 03:02:03.840
 having to go around to new Bonnie Bray and that being very problematic but that wasn't

03:02:03.840 --> 03:02:08.640
 on the original plan that the traffic would and there was a stop sign missing okay thank

03:02:08.640 --> 03:02:15.720
 you for that it just helps me understand the history next I have a card from Doug Henry

03:02:15.720 --> 03:02:28.360
 welcome to come down state your name and address and you'll have four minutes hi I'm Doug Henry

03:02:28.360 --> 03:02:36.440
 at 212 Goodson Way my property backs up to this from Corbin Road I am thrilled most of

03:02:36.440 --> 03:02:42.160
 you read my email which never happens for my students so yay so in fact I've been deleting

03:02:42.160 --> 03:02:47.960
 most of what I had originally proposed to say yeah and most of what I'll talk about

03:02:47.960 --> 03:02:55.440
 is really site B which is and sort of the magic math of density calculations that seems

03:02:55.440 --> 03:03:03.680
 to be going on yeah I will also point out one thing Jackson Chang whose property would

03:03:03.680 --> 03:03:10.040
 have to be taken along the south group on the wrong the south side of Corbin Road just

03:03:10.040 --> 03:03:14.560
 last night the Chang family said they really do not want to sell and no one has even approached

03:03:14.560 --> 03:03:20.040
 them and so I do want to point out that this zoning change is predicated on the city acquiring

03:03:20.040 --> 03:03:27.600
 land to the south that the property owners of that land are rejecting right so I think

03:03:27.600 --> 03:03:32.400
 the one thing I will add to the discussions that have already happened is to call attention

03:03:32.400 --> 03:03:38.740
 to in the 2040 plan what's called the preferred growth concept and the future land use map

03:03:38.740 --> 03:03:46.440
 the flume that calls for compact growth in some areas and single-family housing and bigger

03:03:46.440 --> 03:03:51.880
 density in others and I'm not going to try to put this up but this was in an email that

03:03:51.880 --> 03:03:56.920
 I had sent you all I just want to point out our neighborhood is really far outside of

03:03:56.920 --> 03:04:04.720
 any of the areas that are designated for compact development we support you know smart high

03:04:04.720 --> 03:04:10.560
 density housing in Denton's urban core please put that there in the designated focus areas

03:04:10.560 --> 03:04:17.560
 that have infrastructure to support it you know high density housing great idea in areas

03:04:17.560 --> 03:04:21.720
 where people can park their cars and walk to shops or restaurants where they can access

03:04:21.720 --> 03:04:26.720
 public transportation I just want to point out our neighborhood is far outside of any

03:04:26.720 --> 03:04:33.360
 of that yeah we are not on any bus line there's no grocery store at all in southwest Denton

03:04:33.360 --> 03:04:37.480
 so these are not people that would be able to bike or walk to work we're talking about

03:04:37.480 --> 03:04:44.240
 creating 800 to 1000 units of commuters right of car commuters in the middle of a low density

03:04:44.240 --> 03:04:49.400
 suburban neighborhood and so we just simply don't have the infrastructure to support this

03:04:49.400 --> 03:04:54.760
 so please you know our reading of the Denton development codes and the 2040 plan is that

03:04:54.760 --> 03:05:00.640
 these are meant to protect neighborhoods like ours because we are all on one to seven acre

03:05:00.640 --> 03:05:06.520
 lots we have been blessed to be on one to seven acre lots it's just very difficult to

03:05:06.520 --> 03:05:12.280
 see how an 800 or 1000 unit apartment complex in the middle of this can sort of complement

03:05:12.280 --> 03:05:22.880
 the existing prevailing prevailing character of our neighborhood so thank you thank you

03:05:22.880 --> 03:05:29.560
 that is the last card that I had to speak but this is a public hearing so if you would

03:05:29.560 --> 03:05:34.000
 like to speak and you're not one of the four volunteers from the denier neighborhood association

03:05:34.000 --> 03:05:40.400
 that that Kyle spoke for you're welcome to share any additional thoughts or different

03:05:40.400 --> 03:05:53.220
 thoughts than what you've heard if you if you would like to yeah I see one okay come

03:05:53.220 --> 03:06:19.560
 on down just my name is Bennett Jenkins Tanner and I live on Westridge Street in Denton Texas

03:06:19.560 --> 03:06:26.720
 and I have been following along with the Corbin gone to the meetings listened never really

03:06:26.720 --> 03:06:35.160
 said anything but I do know about floodplains and I own property indicator that sets on

03:06:35.160 --> 03:06:42.400
 floodplains you cannot do anything with those floodplains you can try to put a road through

03:06:42.400 --> 03:06:49.240
 there but the first really big flood you have is going to take that road with it and we've

03:06:49.240 --> 03:06:55.680
 had this problem because it took out a bridge on one of the roads because I live on one

03:06:55.680 --> 03:07:03.880
 way in one way out at one time there was no way out because both ends of the roads were

03:07:03.880 --> 03:07:13.680
 taken out so you know to to jump ahead and say hey we'll just go ahead and buy this property

03:07:13.680 --> 03:07:19.880
 will allow this development and I'm not against development but not in an area where it doesn't

03:07:19.880 --> 03:07:26.640
 work and it doesn't work over where these guys live on Corbin Road it's going to be

03:07:26.640 --> 03:07:36.280
 such an out of it'll be an eyesore my neighborhood Dina is going to be going through the same

03:07:36.280 --> 03:07:45.720
 problem with a developer who wants to build directly behind my home in a historic area

03:07:45.720 --> 03:07:52.400
 with what he calls affordable living homes so these people can buy these homes for two

03:07:52.400 --> 03:08:01.120
 hundred fifty thousand dollars and then eventually live there amongst all these historic homes

03:08:01.120 --> 03:08:07.480
 and these homes are historic too they've been there a long time but to put something that

03:08:07.480 --> 03:08:16.680
 I call an eyesore in the middle of these communities isn't doing Denton a very good you know it's

03:08:16.680 --> 03:08:21.800
 just not making them look like they're working with the communities I don't want to become

03:08:21.800 --> 03:08:29.320
 a Dallas and I feel since I've lived here Denton is slowly becoming a Dallas it's build

03:08:29.320 --> 03:08:36.520
 build build let's see how many people we can cram into excuse me into 1600 square feet

03:08:36.520 --> 03:08:43.080
 into less than a quarter of an acre this development would be better off with a bigger acreage

03:08:43.080 --> 03:08:52.160
 with a home that fits into their community rather than townhouses apartment complexes

03:08:52.160 --> 03:08:57.440
 that are going to become an eyesore and they're going to be flooded out big time thank you

03:08:57.440 --> 03:09:12.120
 not seeing anyone else making any sudden movements I will note that our hearing process offers

03:09:12.120 --> 03:09:21.040
 the opportunity if the applicant wishes to give a rebuttal I think it's up to two minutes

03:09:21.040 --> 03:09:27.640
 I believe I think it's a two minute limit and the stipulation though is that if you do take that

03:09:27.640 --> 03:09:33.840
 opportunity then members of the public who did speak in the public hearing prior can

03:09:33.840 --> 03:09:39.520
 have one minute to speak just on the rebuttal items not on rehashing everything so but it's

03:09:39.520 --> 03:09:54.960
 up to you whether you'd like to take that opportunity or not two minutes yes you'll

03:09:54.960 --> 03:10:04.320
 have two minutes starting okay all right so some of the comments that were made density

03:10:04.320 --> 03:10:09.240
 is higher than what was shown and I just just looking at that again just if you look at

03:10:09.240 --> 03:10:13.200
 each of those different parcels some of them if you look at them from net or grow some

03:10:13.200 --> 03:10:19.180
 of them range from 18 units an acre down to 12 units an acre maybe up to 20 if you look

03:10:19.180 --> 03:10:24.080
 down that way but the land use plan has it moderate residential and when they're making

03:10:24.080 --> 03:10:28.040
 land use assumptions for all their planning purposes they're looking at that entire polygon

03:10:28.040 --> 03:10:32.160
 at five to twelve units an acre so they use that for their cities use that for their planning

03:10:32.160 --> 03:10:36.560
 tools I don't think we're getting ahead I think there's still a lot of work that has

03:10:36.560 --> 03:10:41.280
 to be done after zoning and there's a significant investment of resources made to be able to

03:10:41.280 --> 03:10:45.760
 answer the questions that come after zoning when it comes to design we look at grading

03:10:45.760 --> 03:10:51.700
 we look at the you know the how large the utilities need to be how elevated Corbin Road

03:10:51.700 --> 03:10:55.600
 needs to be to cross the floodplain so that it doesn't drain us out we also have to do

03:10:55.600 --> 03:10:59.800
 a downstream assessment so when we're looking at the flooding conditions we might even have

03:10:59.800 --> 03:11:03.640
 to have detention on these properties which would also reduce the density there's a lot

03:11:03.640 --> 03:11:07.440
 more engineering work that has to happen but zoning is the first step it's the first step

03:11:07.440 --> 03:11:13.280
 to be able to say to the development community or to our client rather that okay I will go

03:11:13.280 --> 03:11:18.000
 ahead and invest this amount of you know resources into this to be able to look at this in more

03:11:18.000 --> 03:11:22.100
 detail to be work work through that with the city in no way are we binding the city to

03:11:22.100 --> 03:11:27.040
 any agreement in the zoning condition or the zoning request what we are doing is saying

03:11:27.040 --> 03:11:32.160
 we're going to work together in a in collaborative spirit of who's participating in one will

03:11:32.160 --> 03:11:37.440
 we maintain it maybe we will could be likely but both parties will have to agree to work

03:11:37.440 --> 03:11:41.720
 on those the parks agreement the developers agreement for the roadway so a lot of that

03:11:41.720 --> 03:11:44.920
 still has to be done and we can't do that until we do our engineering and we're not

03:11:44.920 --> 03:11:48.680
 going to our engineering until we get zoning so all of that to be said it's done prematurely

03:11:48.680 --> 03:11:53.720
 is incorrect it is just the first step into doing that this is a long road it'll be probably

03:11:53.720 --> 03:12:00.640
 three years before we're doing any breaking of ground okay thank you thank you now the

03:12:00.640 --> 03:12:06.160
 members of the public who had spoken previously you don't have to come down again if you heard

03:12:06.160 --> 03:12:10.160
 something that you would like to respond to you would have a one minute time limit and

03:12:10.160 --> 03:12:16.980
 I ask that you keep your comments focused on the subject matter that was in the rebuttal

03:12:16.980 --> 03:12:24.960
 so the phasing of the process as well as the density and the infrastructure regarding the

03:12:24.960 --> 03:12:28.840
 infrastructure again part of my concern is the widening of Corbin whether that's part

03:12:28.840 --> 03:12:34.560
 city part developer whomever that's going to either imminent domain mr. Chang's property

03:12:34.560 --> 03:12:38.960
 on the south or several of our properties on the north or perhaps both because they

03:12:38.960 --> 03:12:44.960
 have to remove the property lines so I don't have a comment but a question but can are

03:12:44.960 --> 03:12:49.680
 there certain guidelines for the city imminent domaining to aid a private development project

03:12:49.680 --> 03:12:55.040
 to give access to their community because I know that's a concern for several of us

03:12:55.040 --> 03:12:59.280
 is we're going to lose 35 feet of our backyard is what we've heard or mr. Chang will lose

03:12:59.280 --> 03:13:03.480
 more or we'll both lose a big chunk and that's significant to us so how does that relate

03:13:03.480 --> 03:13:06.880
 to this I don't understand that portion of it yeah thank you I think we'll make sure

03:13:06.880 --> 03:13:13.140
 to get an answer to that from staff after after the public hearing thank you anybody

03:13:13.140 --> 03:13:25.520
 else I see I see too it's good sorry I just I want to address the timeline so I actually

03:13:25.520 --> 03:13:32.440
 I didn't move into my my residence until January of 2023 but I attended the first meeting on

03:13:32.440 --> 03:13:37.160
 the 17th and if I recall looking at some of the documents the original plan to break ground

03:13:37.160 --> 03:13:41.840
 was 2025 that's whenever they were wanting to start to say that is something that's new

03:13:41.840 --> 03:13:46.400
 on that's not the case and the other reason why I say that is because I've read through

03:13:46.400 --> 03:13:52.440
 every single document this is a nice middle I've read through the comments if you look

03:13:52.440 --> 03:13:56.320
 at the document in front of you that I provided you'll see that there's a right of way that

03:13:56.320 --> 03:14:01.680
 is incorrect the right of way should be 110 feet it's not a hundred and forty feet so

03:14:01.680 --> 03:14:07.200
 throughout this process it's my opinion it has been very sloppy not attention to details

03:14:07.200 --> 03:14:12.440
 and that's one of the things that's concerning is that that's what will continue forward

03:14:12.440 --> 03:14:28.640
 thank you mr. Watts you can have one minute thank you excuse me and I agree with the applicant

03:14:28.640 --> 03:14:33.720
 there are many many things that have to be done after zoning is achieved you've got plotting

03:14:33.720 --> 03:14:37.520
 and they all happened before plotting because you have to get your civils in you have to

03:14:37.520 --> 03:14:42.640
 get all those things in that's why I made the recommendation about having the agreement

03:14:42.640 --> 03:14:47.960
 of the dedication and the development agreement because they have to have that before final

03:14:47.960 --> 03:14:53.040
 plat and before final plat you have to have a lot of those engineering civil plans done

03:14:53.040 --> 03:14:57.600
 and a lot of the infrastructure and all that so it would only make sense that why would

03:14:57.600 --> 03:15:03.480
 you spend money moving forward you have to have that agreement first and I don't think

03:15:03.480 --> 03:15:09.160
 it's going to take that long to get that or somebody just says well we're not ready to

03:15:09.160 --> 03:15:14.160
 negotiate with that right now so it's not being about anti applicant or anything like

03:15:14.160 --> 03:15:19.560
 that it's just make sure that everything done is done in an orderly process so that maximizes

03:15:19.560 --> 03:15:24.040
 the expenses in the time of everybody involved the applicant and city staff and y'all's

03:15:24.040 --> 03:15:35.240
 time as well thank you okay seeing nobody else interested on on the rebuttal I will

03:15:35.240 --> 03:15:49.560
 close the public hearing at this time and Commissioner Dyer am I allowed to ask Mr.

03:15:49.560 --> 03:15:55.280
 Eaton a question yeah yeah that's fine Mr. Eaton I have a question since you're kind

03:15:55.280 --> 03:16:05.400
 of the spokesperson for the community looking at their plan if track B remained are two

03:16:05.400 --> 03:16:14.120
 and A and C remain or got approved for the proposed of PDMN like would that be acceptable

03:16:14.120 --> 03:16:19.520
 to your community if you're putting like let's say half acre lots on track B where at least

03:16:19.520 --> 03:16:26.680
 there's a more sensible flow from your one to seven acres to half acres to then as you

03:16:26.680 --> 03:16:31.440
 get closer to 35 that gets us closer so if I can speak to that point and I think it's

03:16:31.440 --> 03:16:36.160
 the the document that I provided you is very important there are no overlays as to what

03:16:36.160 --> 03:16:41.380
 can be put on ANC so that's why I wanted to point out the acceptable uses are not there

03:16:41.380 --> 03:16:47.120
 so it is possible that the developer the owner can sell the property the next owner is not

03:16:47.120 --> 03:16:52.920
 they're not held to the promises and so retail can go there and my question is looking at

03:16:52.920 --> 03:17:00.280
 the schematics of I-35 unless they have changed the schematics of I-35 recently the way that

03:17:00.280 --> 03:17:05.400
 you get to Corbin Road is you actually exit vintage you exit vintage you're gonna have

03:17:05.400 --> 03:17:08.880
 to go through whatever intersection they have there then you can hit the frontage road and

03:17:08.880 --> 03:17:14.680
 go to Corbin the way you leave Corbin is you turn onto the frontage road and then you get

03:17:14.680 --> 03:17:19.100
 on the interstate somewhere closer that's next to the gas well that's on the road the

03:17:19.100 --> 03:17:24.480
 gas well the trailer that's how you get on that's how you get on to northbound there

03:17:24.480 --> 03:17:30.480
 is not a way to go south on Corbin Road it the city go back to February I believe it's

03:17:30.480 --> 03:17:36.160
 February 10th of 2011 City Council had a meeting and they brought Teague nail and Perkins in

03:17:36.160 --> 03:17:40.960
 they did a research and they said can we get across and they said unfortunately can't

03:17:40.960 --> 03:17:46.680
 because 35 is too low we'd have to raise Corbin out of a floodplain if we did that trucks

03:17:46.680 --> 03:17:51.200
 could not go underneath not possible only way we can do that was we have to go over

03:17:51.200 --> 03:17:56.360
 Corbin Road or we have to go over the interstate so my point being if commercial is put there

03:17:56.360 --> 03:18:03.120
 it's gonna force commercial back either into the Dean neighborhood to go north or south

03:18:03.120 --> 03:18:08.480
 on Bonnie Bray either the airport road or to vintage road or they're gonna have to go

03:18:08.480 --> 03:18:16.040
 down 35 and make a u-turn and turn around there's there's no it's either all or nothing

03:18:16.040 --> 03:18:20.400
 I'm saying that if that's going to be a case there needs to be some other overlay that

03:18:20.400 --> 03:18:25.560
 limits the amount that is on A and C have you guys have has your community spoken with

03:18:25.560 --> 03:18:37.920
 tax dot on the proposed frontage roads we have not no okay thank you any other questions

03:18:37.920 --> 03:18:45.680
 with staff discussion or we can have a motion and then discuss it's the more typical way

03:18:45.680 --> 03:18:54.960
 but it hasn't been how we did it in the past I guess I have a question so I know so there

03:18:54.960 --> 03:19:00.480
 was some discussion about tabling this what so we can table this we can make a motion

03:19:00.480 --> 03:19:07.720
 to approve deny so as noted in your staff write-up and has the options if the commission

03:19:07.720 --> 03:19:14.120
 were desiring to continue this item to a date certain in the future then staff would ask

03:19:14.120 --> 03:19:18.040
 that you let us know what additional information you believe that you need in order to be able

03:19:18.040 --> 03:19:30.320
 to render a decision I have a question probably for Gary if he's still here on the parks maintenance

03:19:30.320 --> 03:19:41.360
 and that whole thing you know if I if I jump in my DeLorean and go forward sixty years

03:19:41.360 --> 03:19:49.640
 into the future I can imagine that a large you know confluence stream park with all of

03:19:49.640 --> 03:19:55.200
 hunter coal development and that sort of thing around would have some value I don't understand

03:19:55.200 --> 03:20:01.320
 what sort of maintenance has to happen in a floodplain like this if you did get it in

03:20:01.320 --> 03:20:06.640
 the next two years but there wasn't funding to develop it what kind of strain that puts

03:20:06.640 --> 03:20:12.040
 on the budget and capacity of staff can you speak to that sure Gary pack and director

03:20:12.040 --> 03:20:16.440
 parks and recreation so regarding the floodplain maintenance we have a lot of properties in

03:20:16.440 --> 03:20:23.680
 a floodplain some flood often some not as much clear is in the floodplain if it gets a lot

03:20:23.680 --> 03:20:28.040
 of rain we shut down just because it doesn't dry quick enough in regards to something like

03:20:28.040 --> 03:20:32.120
 this it would be minimal development we can't put structures in there so there wouldn't

03:20:32.120 --> 03:20:38.520
 be a playground restrooms any type of building structure it would be general open space so

03:20:38.520 --> 03:20:46.760
 at best a trail wildlife area viewing maybe this golf course something of that nature

03:20:46.760 --> 03:20:53.040
 it could be just left to preserve as a preserve and do very little maybe just mowing it once

03:20:53.040 --> 03:20:59.040
 or twice a year just to keep it down keep it low obviously we work around trees from

03:20:59.040 --> 03:21:03.200
 that perspective I know that was mentioned earlier when we're putting in trails so we

03:21:03.200 --> 03:21:09.960
 try not to disturb that privet is a challenge throughout the entire area we've tried to

03:21:09.960 --> 03:21:15.000
 eradicate it in a few areas that we've been working on a couple years it is very hardy

03:21:15.000 --> 03:21:20.200
 and very challenging and very time consuming so that's a that's a general challenge as

03:21:20.200 --> 03:21:26.520
 a whole generally we don't get a lot into the planning process because if we do a lot

03:21:26.520 --> 03:21:31.280
 of planning and then the project doesn't move forward then we're kind of you know using

03:21:31.280 --> 03:21:36.320
 city resources that that's not very about not successful at that point in time so we

03:21:36.320 --> 03:21:40.880
 typically handle that after the next phase through a developer agreement and then have

03:21:40.880 --> 03:21:45.760
 our public engagement and discussions at that point okay thank you commissioner Petrone

03:21:45.760 --> 03:21:58.800
 I'm not sure if it's permissible but there's a mention of conversations with text dot Mr.

03:21:58.800 --> 03:22:03.240
 Henry I believe I saw you raise your hand I didn't know if you had additional information

03:22:03.240 --> 03:22:11.800
 that you wanted to share sorry just for the the posterity of the video you can imagine

03:22:11.800 --> 03:22:18.440
 that your your grandchildren in 50 years will come back and watch this the question was

03:22:18.440 --> 03:22:26.240
 have any of us talk to text dot and yeah I had a conversation with text dot about a year

03:22:26.240 --> 03:22:31.120
 that was part of the time when we found out because the city's initial plat of this are

03:22:31.120 --> 03:22:36.720
 the developers concept plan of this showed that Corbin Road would go through and it looked

03:22:36.720 --> 03:22:43.080
 like it could be even southbound access to I-35W and that was when we found out no it

03:22:43.080 --> 03:22:47.840
 essentially was going to be a T in the road and that's at the same time that the city

03:22:47.840 --> 03:22:53.400
 we we all found out that the city had Angie is going to yell at me for not getting the

03:22:53.400 --> 03:23:00.120
 words correctly that the city had sort of replatted or rezoned Corbin Road and none

03:23:00.120 --> 03:23:05.480
 of us knew about it right it sort of caught all all of us off guard at the time and so

03:23:05.480 --> 03:23:10.920
 the city's initial plan for redoing Corbin Road showed that it would go through to I-35

03:23:10.920 --> 03:23:15.760
 south and so it was a conversation with text dot that showed no in fact we're talking about

03:23:15.760 --> 03:23:28.800
 a T in the road to the to the northbound frontage road any other questions okay I have one more

03:23:28.800 --> 03:23:46.200
 question for staff it almost has escaped my brain so I'm grabbing it ah yes thank you

03:23:46.200 --> 03:23:51.400
 Angie I recall and I think it was myself although it may have been somebody else on the commission

03:23:51.400 --> 03:23:58.960
 at the time when we went through the 2040 plan adoption process we we noted the change

03:23:58.960 --> 03:24:05.560
 of this area from I don't remember exactly what the the previous future land use was

03:24:05.560 --> 03:24:15.320
 in the 2030 map up to this moderate residential my recollection is that when we asked that

03:24:15.320 --> 03:24:20.800
 the the response was something like well with the infrastructure improvements along Bonnie

03:24:20.800 --> 03:24:27.480
 Bray we think that in the longer term future development of this area would make sense

03:24:27.480 --> 03:24:34.560
 toward that can you help remind me of that process and and what staff's thinking was

03:24:34.560 --> 03:24:43.200
 when we changed this to moderate residential I can only speak very generally to it and

03:24:43.200 --> 03:24:49.120
 the reason being is I happen to join right after the new comprehensive plan was adopted

03:24:49.120 --> 03:24:56.440
 so I wasn't fortunate to sit on those conversations Tina was and she looks like she has some thoughts

03:24:56.440 --> 03:25:02.960
 thanks Angie yes I was trying to think back to that time period so I do remember us making

03:25:02.960 --> 03:25:08.800
 changes to the future land use map in this area I'm trying to think back to the impetus

03:25:08.800 --> 03:25:13.720
 for that other than probably notice knowing some of the other changes that were happening

03:25:13.720 --> 03:25:20.560
 within the area knowing that there could potentially be development interest for this property

03:25:20.560 --> 03:25:25.120
 because there were there were a few different areas within the comp plan that I know we

03:25:25.120 --> 03:25:30.600
 had made some changes to recognizing where we were anticipating additional development

03:25:30.600 --> 03:25:34.100
 potentially occurring in the northeast Denton was one area where we made that change but

03:25:34.100 --> 03:25:38.000
 but I believe that was some of the reasoning also in this area because the other thing

03:25:38.000 --> 03:25:45.000
 we know is as the southwest part of the city continues to evolve and develop particularly

03:25:45.000 --> 03:25:49.560
 given with the development interest happening with the hunter landmark development and also

03:25:49.560 --> 03:25:55.160
 the coal development there will continue to be interest within this area couple that also

03:25:55.160 --> 03:26:02.560
 with plan text out improvements that we know are happening so you know all of those findings

03:26:02.560 --> 03:26:06.920
 or or conversations related to what's all happening in the area and where we're seeing

03:26:06.920 --> 03:26:11.240
 the trends in the development have a tendency to influence decisions that we make regarding

03:26:11.240 --> 03:26:25.400
 updates to the plan thank you Commissioner product career thank you because there's a

03:26:25.400 --> 03:26:32.160
 lot of information here and I keep going back and forth and trying to understand what everybody's

03:26:32.160 --> 03:26:38.400
 you know what you all are explaining I'm listening to the applicant based on what I know of my

03:26:38.400 --> 03:26:45.880
 role as a commissioner for PNZ is to look at the appropriateness of land use that's

03:26:45.880 --> 03:26:52.860
 what I was trained on that's what I'm trying to do here without without putting too much

03:26:52.860 --> 03:27:01.440
 emphasis on other external factors I did like I said I walked the property with Mr. Eaton

03:27:01.440 --> 03:27:06.080
 if it floods with one and a half inches of rain I think that's a big concern but everything

03:27:06.080 --> 03:27:09.680
 that I'm listening to is and I think part of the reason why it's so hard at least for

03:27:09.680 --> 03:27:15.600
 me I won't speak for everyone else is that everything seems to not follow a progression

03:27:15.600 --> 03:27:20.680
 that is likely in my mind right that we think that so many other things have to be fall

03:27:20.680 --> 03:27:24.840
 in order first we should know how much to raise and who's going to pay for what and

03:27:24.840 --> 03:27:28.640
 who's going to keep the maintenance of what and you know are we going to accept the land

03:27:28.640 --> 03:27:36.200
 how's council going to vote like there's so many things that are basically pending right

03:27:36.200 --> 03:27:43.720
 what I keep going back to is I don't necessarily think that that the gift to the city with

03:27:43.720 --> 03:27:49.480
 the land is a big deal if council later on wants to deny it they can vote against it

03:27:49.480 --> 03:27:56.240
 they don't have to accept it they don't have to allocate money to keep it right but the

03:27:56.240 --> 03:28:00.300
 applicant does have the ownership of the land so if they want to develop it what I'm looking

03:28:00.300 --> 03:28:06.040
 at is tracked track a b and c you know d and e I'm going to put to the side but a b and

03:28:06.040 --> 03:28:12.180
 c I see the biggest concern being with b right and that you know and I and what I'm listening

03:28:12.180 --> 03:28:19.320
 to on the applicant side is man we went from 400 to 300 we've reduced it now we're at 75%

03:28:19.320 --> 03:28:24.400
 you know of units that we've taken away and so now we're at 150 and even that is too dense

03:28:24.400 --> 03:28:30.440
 to what the neighbors want which completely understandable.

03:28:30.440 --> 03:28:35.440
 I think because there are so many other questions that I have I think someone else listed it

03:28:35.440 --> 03:28:42.360
 before they said you know a lot of what's not considered floodplain is floodplain because

03:28:42.360 --> 03:28:46.560
 I see it you know it's it's flooding it's flooding my yard it's flooding when it rains

03:28:46.560 --> 03:28:52.400
 an inch and a half and so I think for me where I'm where I'm at right now I don't I don't

03:28:52.400 --> 03:28:58.600
 know that I have enough information to make an educated decision right now to move forward

03:28:58.600 --> 03:29:06.100
 with this I would like to see a more current floodplain map that would include a more recent

03:29:06.100 --> 03:29:13.960
 assessment of what land is is what I would like to see the actual land that is going

03:29:13.960 --> 03:29:18.960
 to be used where all of this is going to be developed and not considered like you like

03:29:18.960 --> 03:29:23.880
 you all said all 196 you know however many acres but just the ones that are going to

03:29:23.880 --> 03:29:28.320
 be developed to see how much density is there because I'm all for affordable housing I'm

03:29:28.320 --> 03:29:36.840
 all for bringing in diversified housing options to the city of Denton but that doesn't always

03:29:36.840 --> 03:29:44.080
 mean super high dense for anyone it's not it's not appropriate for it for everyone because

03:29:44.080 --> 03:29:48.160
 I think the roads will come I think all of that will like you said you know you are much

03:29:48.160 --> 03:29:52.360
 smarter than I am you'll have a process of how this is supposed to work but I think where

03:29:52.360 --> 03:29:58.720
 I'm at right now I just don't have enough information although I do want to say like

03:29:58.720 --> 03:30:02.280
 I said to the applicant I see that you're moving forward and trying to listen to the

03:30:02.280 --> 03:30:06.560
 neighbors and so I think that maybe after a couple more meetings you know if we can

03:30:06.560 --> 03:30:13.200
 come back we can listen and see what else can happen but I think right now that's what

03:30:13.200 --> 03:30:19.560
 I'm trying to that's what I'm trying to understand but definitely density based on only the places

03:30:19.560 --> 03:30:26.240
 that are going to get developed a better understanding of the floodplains you know and possibly maybe

03:30:26.240 --> 03:30:32.480
 other options maybe not 150 units maybe you know that's twice as many as what's supposed

03:30:32.480 --> 03:30:37.840
 to be on there right now as its zone as as r2 they said approximately 70 units if you're

03:30:37.840 --> 03:30:41.920
 saying 150 that's twice as many and so maybe we can meet somewhere in the middle or y'all

03:30:41.920 --> 03:30:46.080
 can be somewhere in the middle not me but I think that that's where I'm at I do appreciate

03:30:46.080 --> 03:30:55.360
 all of the information like I said I think track A and C I'm not against what's being

03:30:55.360 --> 03:31:00.880
 proposed there I think that it makes a lot of sense because it's on I-35 especially if

03:31:00.880 --> 03:31:04.040
 text dot is gonna come and they're gonna have that frontage road and it's gonna tee up so

03:31:04.040 --> 03:31:07.920
 you don't even have to go down to where that bridge is because that would be very scary

03:31:07.920 --> 03:31:11.480
 you know so I think that there's a lot of potential here I just think that we're just

03:31:11.480 --> 03:31:18.240
 I am not personally ready to move forward and to approve this right now thank you thank

03:31:18.240 --> 03:31:26.120
 you before I call you Commissioner Dyer I'm just gonna ask for Mr. Rivera if you would

03:31:26.120 --> 03:31:32.640
 come down and there's been some discussion around the possibility of continuing or the

03:31:32.640 --> 03:31:39.600
 possibility of of reducing density just from a where you are in the process perspective

03:31:39.600 --> 03:31:47.160
 would you prefer a delay or rather have an up-down vote what's what's your your readiness

03:31:47.160 --> 03:31:54.360
 at this point well I appreciate the feedback so far and we've been very patient for four

03:31:54.360 --> 03:31:59.680
 years reducing density throughout that four-year period the floodplain maps are current the

03:31:59.680 --> 03:32:06.280
 ones we're showing those are the current ones on FEMA and you know downstream assessment

03:32:06.280 --> 03:32:12.040
 and all that would have to be studied and analyzed further but all that to be said we

03:32:12.040 --> 03:32:17.200
 have we feel like we have been accommodating throughout this four-year period and we would

03:32:17.200 --> 03:32:25.720
 appreciate a vote tonight okay thank you thank you Commissioner Dyer well first off I would

03:32:25.720 --> 03:32:32.360
 like to thank you can tell all the work that was put into this by city staff by McAdams

03:32:32.360 --> 03:32:39.440
 as a representative for the owner and by the citizens so I want to thank you all because

03:32:39.440 --> 03:32:48.700
 yes you provided us with a ton of information but how I look at this is it's a very clear

03:32:48.700 --> 03:32:54.960
 balance between an owner's property rights and the neighboring property rights as well

03:32:54.960 --> 03:33:01.880
 and it was very interesting to have in our workshop today talking about zoning regulations

03:33:01.880 --> 03:33:08.640
 and having a little background on voting and there was a few phrases in our in the presentation

03:33:08.640 --> 03:33:14.600
 that kind of struck with me that while you do owners have a right to do to the property

03:33:14.600 --> 03:33:23.040
 with what they want we as P&Z also have a right to and I wrote this down protect each

03:33:23.040 --> 03:33:30.160
 lot owners right to the reasonable use and enjoyment of their lot and I feel that right

03:33:30.160 --> 03:33:39.520
 now how this is when you're looking at in the future land use map that was supposed

03:33:39.520 --> 03:33:46.800
 to be moderate housing and this is not moderating moderate housing and there's usually a progression

03:33:46.800 --> 03:33:55.400
 and you don't necessarily have houses that are sitting on one to seven acres of land

03:33:55.400 --> 03:34:03.520
 up against townhouses even small single-family that could be you know five to six thousand

03:34:03.520 --> 03:34:08.880
 square foot lots and in the training they also talked about how these zones should be

03:34:08.880 --> 03:34:17.600
 compatible which is why I asked the question of Mr. Eaton if you left track B as the R2

03:34:17.600 --> 03:34:23.560
 where you can have a larger lot like at least a half an acre lot that's that would be a

03:34:23.560 --> 03:34:33.400
 nice transition you can build some nice houses on those lots and then I totally get and I'm

03:34:33.400 --> 03:34:38.840
 sorry I forgot your name from McAdams I apologize but when you talked about you know butting

03:34:38.840 --> 03:34:46.200
 up against the interstate there is a certain expectation of land use when you're up against

03:34:46.200 --> 03:34:54.120
 the interstate so maybe leaving that as you know what is proposed right now and trying

03:34:54.120 --> 03:35:01.720
 to find that balance between the property owners rights and the neighbors rights and

03:35:01.720 --> 03:35:08.040
 it also talked about the impact on public safety that was also addressed and I'm looking

03:35:08.040 --> 03:35:17.200
 at the road conditions and I understand that you know there's in what's proposed in the

03:35:17.200 --> 03:35:24.600
 overlays there are certain stipulations that A and C cannot be built and even B until you

03:35:24.600 --> 03:35:32.160
 know Corbin is extended to the east or the frontage roads are put in by TxDOT but you

03:35:32.160 --> 03:35:41.880
 still have to think about you know the access to that area you know we just had a major

03:35:41.880 --> 03:35:47.640
 traffic accident and all of those people had to get off at vintage what if that happens

03:35:47.640 --> 03:35:51.540
 later are they all going to be getting off now on Corbin if that happens on the north

03:35:51.540 --> 03:35:57.360
 bound and so you do kind of have to think about that stuff and then I also think about

03:35:57.360 --> 03:36:03.760
 the large financial investment by the city you know the financial investment in expanding

03:36:03.760 --> 03:36:13.640
 Corbin Road but also this donated land and what that financial investment so as the request

03:36:13.640 --> 03:36:26.120
 as the agenda item stands I think I will be a no vote on this one.

03:36:26.120 --> 03:36:34.520
 Yeah so I agree with everything both of you all said I do know that I have I have a lot

03:36:34.520 --> 03:36:40.240
 of trust and support that I know that staff whenever this road has to be built it's not

03:36:40.240 --> 03:36:44.040
 going to be a road that's going to flood out you know they'll build it the correct way

03:36:44.040 --> 03:36:49.680
 and make sure it's designed the correct way and the floodplain to reanalyze the floodplain

03:36:49.680 --> 03:36:54.400
 is a big engineering feat and costs a lot of money which is why you come and you talk

03:36:54.400 --> 03:37:00.200
 about zoning before before an applicant gets into all that so I don't really have issues

03:37:00.200 --> 03:37:04.840
 with that I know that staff will make sure it's it's designed and the way it should

03:37:04.840 --> 03:37:12.440
 be but I to your point I think it just doesn't seem like a good transition you have large

03:37:12.440 --> 03:37:17.560
 estate lots and then you're going to have town homes and an apartment complex and so

03:37:17.560 --> 03:37:24.920
 I could see something significantly less dense on track B and track A track C it seems like

03:37:24.920 --> 03:37:28.940
 that would be kind of reasonable to be be what's proposed because it is right there

03:37:28.940 --> 03:37:35.840
 on the highway but yeah I couldn't support this zoning change.

03:37:35.840 --> 03:37:37.320
 Commissioner Pedro.

03:37:37.320 --> 03:37:42.920
 Yes thank you and I also want to thank everyone for your presentation and addressing your

03:37:42.920 --> 03:37:49.000
 concerns with this proposal I too want to echo the statements that were given today

03:37:49.000 --> 03:37:55.440
 by the fellow commissioners I am definitely a champion of diversified housing I strongly

03:37:55.440 --> 03:38:01.560
 believe in the opportunity for somebody to enter into homeownership to build equity to

03:38:01.560 --> 03:38:08.840
 create that system of change I also believe that I do have some concerns regarding flooding

03:38:08.840 --> 03:38:15.360
 accessibility safety of the proposal as it's been presented.

03:38:15.360 --> 03:38:19.760
 With that being said I think it's been a really good idea to see if it would be an opportunity

03:38:19.760 --> 03:38:26.460
 to meet in the middle specifically with site B with site C and site A again their proximity

03:38:26.460 --> 03:38:32.320
 to I-35 I think that that would be appropriate as it's proposed but I still think that there

03:38:32.320 --> 03:38:37.560
 may be some opportunity to go back to the drawing board perhaps to see if there any

03:38:37.560 --> 03:38:44.740
 other plans any other concepts that we can consider for that I will be voting no.

03:38:44.740 --> 03:38:53.160
 Thank you I'll just offer a few thoughts and we'll see where this goes you know we on this

03:38:53.160 --> 03:39:01.840
 commission as I see it have a duty to assure our residents from where we are now to where

03:39:01.840 --> 03:39:10.400
 we will be right that means explaining when change is inevitable and how to direct it

03:39:10.400 --> 03:39:15.400
 that means explaining the tradeoffs and the choices that we realistically have with economic

03:39:15.400 --> 03:39:22.760
 pressures the way they are and that means also considering the needs of the future residents

03:39:22.760 --> 03:39:30.120
 who will shop at the at the you know commercial areas that we zone and live in the homes that

03:39:30.120 --> 03:39:39.880
 we allow to be built you know we need more of this sort of transfer of development rights

03:39:39.880 --> 03:39:44.440
 I know it sounds weird and it's this crazy term and you say well they're getting something

03:39:44.440 --> 03:39:55.620
 for free but we need it if our goal as a city is to preserve more land and have plentiful

03:39:55.620 --> 03:40:02.360
 green spaces that are easily accessible to our residents right but we don't need it in

03:40:02.360 --> 03:40:09.960
 a place that doesn't have any infrastructure right my my back of the napkin math as I look

03:40:09.960 --> 03:40:14.840
 here says okay this this project's probably about a 300 million project dollar project

03:40:14.840 --> 03:40:22.960
 as it's proposed if you allocated the entire portion of the property taxes from a project

03:40:22.960 --> 03:40:28.500
 like that that was built here that isn't already spoken for to pay for existing debt that we've

03:40:28.500 --> 03:40:34.560
 already borrowed then it would take over 30 years for it to pay back the cost to rebuild

03:40:34.560 --> 03:40:40.080
 Corbin Road right that doesn't pay for any of the police doesn't pay for any fire doesn't

03:40:40.080 --> 03:40:50.380
 pay for a new fire station down in this area etc. you know so but there are some real concerns

03:40:50.380 --> 03:40:55.360
 about the residents down in this area right it's it's a real problem to either get stuck

03:40:55.360 --> 03:41:02.960
 in your house or not be able to get home in a rainstorm fixing that however I'm not a

03:41:02.960 --> 03:41:07.580
 not a traffic engineer but I have a really hard time believing that the cheapest way

03:41:07.580 --> 03:41:13.220
 to fix that is a 20 million dollar road project right a gravel world works fine for the number

03:41:13.220 --> 03:41:18.680
 of people who are using this we need some culverts and some dump trucks of gravel to

03:41:18.680 --> 03:41:24.960
 raise it up a few feet in key locations right we got to go from people being stuck to be

03:41:24.960 --> 03:41:30.420
 people being able to get home when they have an emergency it's it's there's no near-term

03:41:30.420 --> 03:41:40.100
 need to shuffle 20,000 cars a day across this road you know if you haven't seen me before

03:41:40.100 --> 03:41:48.680
 I've made the the the foible in many people's minds of not being afraid to offend everybody

03:41:48.680 --> 03:41:58.280
 in the room but I try to do it nicely I have a great respect for our planning staff I do

03:41:58.280 --> 03:42:06.360
 not understand this recommendation at all I don't understand what changed obviously

03:42:06.360 --> 03:42:14.200
 there were it took a long time took four years so there was concern and then somehow that

03:42:14.200 --> 03:42:23.880
 went away when we see applications like this with a recommendation of approval it looks

03:42:23.880 --> 03:42:35.360
 to me like approval inflation I guess that's the current term de jour right and it starts

03:42:35.360 --> 03:42:43.360
 to look like the recommendation is does it satisfy these eight boxes on this checklist

03:42:43.360 --> 03:42:52.880
 as opposed to do we as planners professional opinion think that this is the optimal location

03:42:52.880 --> 03:43:02.120
 and time for this type of development in Denton and and I'll just point out that we've lost

03:43:02.120 --> 03:43:07.840
 a lot of trust from the public when they see staff recommends approval staff recommends

03:43:07.840 --> 03:43:13.480
 approval staff recommends approval I understand why the vast majority of projects that come

03:43:13.480 --> 03:43:18.280
 have an approval recommendation because most applicants won't come until they get that

03:43:18.280 --> 03:43:29.680
 right but this one just seems seems really weird I can't I can't understand why it's

03:43:29.680 --> 03:43:37.000
 that way because there are a dozen places I can think of near other floodplains where

03:43:37.000 --> 03:43:46.920
 this type of thing makes a ton more sense right so with that anybody have a motion or

03:43:46.920 --> 03:43:55.660
 other discussion commissioner Dyer I make a motion that we vote to deny the request

03:43:55.660 --> 03:44:07.840
 for this zoning change thank you commissioner Riggs second any other discussion or questions

03:44:07.840 --> 03:44:12.360
 can I just say something I I keep going back because I'm hearing what everybody's saying

03:44:12.360 --> 03:44:20.880
 and those are all the initial thoughts that I had as well but as as as P and Z commissioners

03:44:20.880 --> 03:44:25.760
 are we supposed to look at all of that or are we supposed to concentrate on the appropriateness

03:44:25.760 --> 03:44:33.720
 of land use and so if it's just the appropriateness of land use you know then including what you

03:44:33.720 --> 03:44:41.320
 said right then I tend to understand staffs recommendation a little bit better not to

03:44:41.320 --> 03:44:47.440
 say that I have all the information that I have to vote in favor of this but I keep going

03:44:47.440 --> 03:44:51.760
 back and so I think you know I for me I'm gonna request a little bit more guidance from

03:44:51.760 --> 03:44:58.320
 staff and to what the role is of this body because if it's taken into consideration all

03:44:58.320 --> 03:45:02.680
 of those things that that makes things a lot harder if we're looking at one thing and that's

03:45:02.680 --> 03:45:09.760
 the appropriateness of land use can this be you know rezoned to this you know especially

03:45:09.760 --> 03:45:14.640
 with all the conditions that were made then then I think we need to to be very clear on

03:45:14.640 --> 03:45:19.600
 that because it just seems like everybody's taking a lot more into consideration than

03:45:19.600 --> 03:45:24.560
 than what we're supposed to I would imagine that if we voted to deny and this is where

03:45:24.560 --> 03:45:29.720
 staff can give us guidance that the applicant could always come back with some more changes

03:45:29.720 --> 03:45:39.960
 or things so is there there are some timeline limitations in different different conditions

03:45:39.960 --> 03:45:46.480
 however the since we're a recommended recommending body ultimately those timelines are decided

03:45:46.480 --> 03:45:52.560
 by council's action on this and I guess I will point out also that depending on how

03:45:52.560 --> 03:46:03.120
 the percent opposition lines up at a council hearing whether we deny or not there may still

03:46:03.120 --> 03:46:07.680
 be a super majority requirement right I think they they announced that there was a super

03:46:07.680 --> 03:46:13.640
 majority requirement from this one for yeah for today I think it gets remeasured at the

03:46:13.640 --> 03:46:18.640
 date of the public hearing for council is that correct we will keep monitoring that

03:46:18.640 --> 03:46:22.680
 and we provide the most update information that we have based upon the written opposition

03:46:22.680 --> 03:46:28.880
 received prior to council thank you did you want me to address yeah if you could speak

03:46:28.880 --> 03:46:38.040
 to Commissioner product of Rio's concerns sure thing so with respect to the staff recommendation

03:46:38.040 --> 03:46:43.480
 keep in mind the Denton Development Code has a series of criteria that we factor into our

03:46:43.480 --> 03:46:47.960
 recommendations so that way we have consistency and application of all zoning requests that

03:46:47.960 --> 03:46:57.480
 are received and it's it tries to make a zoning process more objective in instead of subjective

03:46:57.480 --> 03:47:02.500
 if that makes sense so we have a series of criteria for general approval of all zoning

03:47:02.500 --> 03:47:07.640
 applications and then we also have another set of approval criteria for plan development

03:47:07.640 --> 03:47:13.820
 districts so that's what we use to base our recommendation on we have the Denton twenty

03:47:13.820 --> 03:47:18.920
 forty comprehensive plan as you know it's it's a thick document it has a wide variety

03:47:18.920 --> 03:47:22.480
 of recommendations that are in there tries to address a variety of different aspects

03:47:22.480 --> 03:47:28.920
 associated with the city how the city grows in and evolves over time and so that's factored

03:47:28.920 --> 03:47:35.040
 into our recommendation all of the technical information that's been spoken to this evening

03:47:35.040 --> 03:47:39.640
 regarding how roadways may be engineered how the floodplain is addressed what are the impacts

03:47:39.640 --> 03:47:45.680
 from a flooding standpoint as it's been discussed this evening those are all technical items

03:47:45.680 --> 03:47:52.520
 that are reviewed following consideration of zoning if a zoning request gets approved

03:47:52.520 --> 03:47:56.960
 then that tells the applicant okay here are the development rights that I have from a

03:47:56.960 --> 03:48:00.680
 land use standpoint and then they're able to design all of their construction plans

03:48:00.680 --> 03:48:05.520
 accordingly based upon the use that they're going to develop if their rezoning request

03:48:05.520 --> 03:48:09.320
 is not approved then ultimately you know that they're still left with the existing zoning

03:48:09.320 --> 03:48:12.520
 that's on the property they could choose to attempt to develop the property in accordance

03:48:12.520 --> 03:48:16.600
 with the existing zoning again designing all of their various technical documents associated

03:48:16.600 --> 03:48:23.360
 with whatever land use they pursue under the existing zoning so I realize it's a struggle

03:48:23.360 --> 03:48:28.840
 at times with a rezoning request because people are interested in having more of that technical

03:48:28.840 --> 03:48:33.720
 information that's available but this is when we talk about trusting our process that we

03:48:33.720 --> 03:48:38.040
 have in place based upon the development codes and the criteria manuals that we the city

03:48:38.040 --> 03:48:42.960
 of Denton have determined for doing quality development so that's a little bit more with

03:48:42.960 --> 03:48:46.920
 respect to the development process but just to circle back to our recommendation know

03:48:46.920 --> 03:48:50.640
 that our recommendation is based upon those approval criteria that are provided for in

03:48:50.640 --> 03:48:57.120
 the Denton development code in addition to any adopted policies that we the city have

03:48:57.120 --> 03:49:01.160
 not just the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan but also the parks master plan that's been

03:49:01.160 --> 03:49:06.880
 referred to this evening we also have an affordable housing toolkit policy that sometimes comes

03:49:06.880 --> 03:49:13.520
 into play with respect to of those policies we have a lot of things that we have to evaluate

03:49:13.520 --> 03:49:18.800
 what requests associated with as this as this group is well aware of so but hopefully that

03:49:18.800 --> 03:49:24.380
 helps address your question you know in terms of timelines for development applications

03:49:24.380 --> 03:49:29.660
 the planning and zoning commission is a recommending body so if a vote manages to transpire this

03:49:29.660 --> 03:49:36.560
 evening from this body then this zoning request would move forward to City Council and I forget

03:49:36.560 --> 03:49:42.800
 what what the date is May 6th so it would go to City Council on May 6th ultimately City

03:49:42.800 --> 03:49:50.240
 Council has the final decision authority on all zoning matters thank you Tina and I just

03:49:50.240 --> 03:49:54.060
 I want to clarify because I don't think I was very specific when I talked about sort

03:49:54.060 --> 03:50:03.080
 of this doesn't seem the right place my chief concern for that is actually that it doesn't

03:50:03.080 --> 03:50:12.040
 seem a particularly beneficial location for future residents to live at right if the choice

03:50:12.040 --> 03:50:17.280
 is here or nowhere because we have no new housing in the city then that's a completely

03:50:17.280 --> 03:50:23.640
 different problem right but but when I look at the the trade-offs that we ask people to

03:50:23.640 --> 03:50:33.120
 make as we transition from a smaller Denton to a bigger Denton and we get hopefully into

03:50:33.120 --> 03:50:39.440
 a better fiscally balanced situation where we can afford to repave our roads etc. part

03:50:39.440 --> 03:50:44.640
 of that trade-off that we're asking existing and future residents for is to understand

03:50:44.640 --> 03:50:51.700
 that allowing some people even if it's somebody else to live in higher density areas helps

03:50:51.700 --> 03:50:57.820
 keep all of our taxes low but to make that trade-off people need to see positive ends

03:50:57.820 --> 03:51:02.160
 of it as well they need to see that they're they're living near a neighborhood or in a

03:51:02.160 --> 03:51:08.680
 neighborhood they need to see that they're close by to amenities and shops and things

03:51:08.680 --> 03:51:14.280
 they want to go to places for their kids to play etc. and so that's really my my chief

03:51:14.280 --> 03:51:24.320
 concern from a location perspective is that I you know people would live here yes but

03:51:24.320 --> 03:51:29.080
 I trust that we have a lot of other develop a land that would have development interests

03:51:29.080 --> 03:51:37.020
 over the next 10 years between now and when 35 W frontage roads get finished so any other

03:51:37.020 --> 03:51:45.400
 comments I just want to follow up on that so my decision you know to your point it wasn't

03:51:45.400 --> 03:51:50.160
 based on the roadway needing to be widened or the for the floodplain it was strictly

03:51:50.160 --> 03:51:55.760
 just does this seem like compatible uses you know because that's essentially what we're

03:51:55.760 --> 03:52:02.480
 doing to Tina's point is we're just saying is this a use that is compatible and then

03:52:02.480 --> 03:52:05.320
 then they'll go through all of the engineering and they'll go through all the review and

03:52:05.320 --> 03:52:10.640
 they'll do all that and they may the applicant may decide it's it's too expensive to actually

03:52:10.640 --> 03:52:14.440
 go forward with it but you can't make that decision until you know whether or not you

03:52:14.440 --> 03:52:21.280
 have the zoning and so that's where I made my decision thank you and I just want to thank

03:52:21.280 --> 03:52:29.360
 the public you've been very patient after my initial asking you to not clap I understand

03:52:29.360 --> 03:52:34.760
 this takes a lot of time out of time you could otherwise spend with your families and friends

03:52:34.760 --> 03:52:39.840
 and I appreciate that you're you're doing this for the future of your city so thank

03:52:39.840 --> 03:52:53.480
 you with that I will call for a vote on the board this is a motion to deny

03:52:53.480 --> 03:53:04.800
 that motion passes five zero so we just have a couple closing matters but I'll give everyone

03:53:04.800 --> 03:53:10.080
 a couple minutes to filter out if you're not interested in the closing matters because

03:53:10.080 --> 03:53:24.360
 it creates some noise yeah yeah so just so everybody understands the process the recommendation

03:53:24.360 --> 03:53:31.640
 of a denial passed so that means that it will go forward to City Council on May 7th 6th

03:53:31.640 --> 03:53:48.560
 thank you so so stay stay aware and thank you

03:53:48.560 --> 03:53:52.440
 okay thank you all for all your hard work like this committee looks like a lot of not

03:53:52.440 --> 03:54:03.600
 fun and so I'm so impressed and proud thank you thank you okay that brings us to item

03:54:03.600 --> 03:54:10.640
 6a the planning and zoning committing Commission project matrix so I'll give the people an

03:54:10.640 --> 03:54:20.160
 opportunity to move down doesn't start getting loud until 80% of people okay I think I do

03:54:20.160 --> 03:54:24.880
 this good news is my report short compared to some evening so so no changes to the matrix

03:54:24.880 --> 03:54:29.640
 remain there were no additional requests from our last meeting so we left everything as

03:54:29.640 --> 03:54:33.560
 is I know we had the boot camp presentation this evening but we just have that general

03:54:33.560 --> 03:54:38.760
 placeholder item so be on the lookout for future boot camp presentations since your

03:54:38.760 --> 03:54:43.760
 last planning and zoning Commission meeting council has not taken action on any development

03:54:43.760 --> 03:54:48.440
 applications that you might have seen come through I will though bring to your attention

03:54:48.440 --> 03:54:53.680
 back on April 1st we did have a work session discussion with City Council regarding food

03:54:53.680 --> 03:54:58.480
 trucks and we will be bringing back some future zoning amendments related to that particular

03:54:58.480 --> 03:55:04.760
 as it relates to how we've been allowing them to operate as accessory use within the city

03:55:04.760 --> 03:55:09.640
 so this item has not been calendared just yet but know that that is on our work program

03:55:09.640 --> 03:55:13.480
 and so we'll be working on that I believe Council did not give direction on whether

03:55:13.480 --> 03:55:18.720
 it's a high medium or low priority but given that we have received direction from City

03:55:18.720 --> 03:55:21.840
 Council we will initiate a public hearing and bring that forth directly to the planning

03:55:21.840 --> 03:55:25.800
 and zoning Commission it is not something that would be going through the DC RC since

03:55:25.800 --> 03:55:31.400
 we have that direction and that concludes my report thank you okay any commissioners

03:55:31.400 --> 03:55:43.040
 have anything to put on the matrix no okay any concluding items item seven sorry Tina

03:55:43.040 --> 03:55:49.840
 for for the matrix no for concluding items concluding items yes I just want to compliment

03:55:49.840 --> 03:55:54.320
 the planning and zoning Commission regarding your consideration of this zoning case that

03:55:54.320 --> 03:55:59.120
 we had this evening that it was a challenging request and I know the comment was made previously

03:55:59.120 --> 03:56:03.840
 that that we're a new bot we're a new body or a new board the Commission itself is not

03:56:03.840 --> 03:56:08.480
 new from the Commission's been around for many many decades but I understand the people

03:56:08.480 --> 03:56:13.680
 on our Commission we've had some turnover and so you all some are relatively new to

03:56:13.680 --> 03:56:17.800
 your seats and your responsibilities but I want to commend you for your thoughtfulness

03:56:17.800 --> 03:56:22.400
 your consideration you asked some really good questions I also appreciate the fact that

03:56:22.400 --> 03:56:27.520
 you provided your remarks on the public record that is beneficial for us when we are communicating

03:56:27.520 --> 03:56:33.160
 to staff what you all were thinking behind your motion but also it's very beneficial

03:56:33.160 --> 03:56:39.720
 for the audience and the applicant to hear so just wanted to say thank you for that yeah

03:56:39.720 --> 03:56:47.760
 and thank you for me as well I know you know the the city is better because of all of you

03:56:47.760 --> 03:56:52.440
 and I just thank you for for bringing your your full attention and mind and reviewing

03:56:52.440 --> 03:57:00.460
 the content it really shows so thank you I would like to thank the city staff because

03:57:00.460 --> 03:57:07.080
 I you know I felt like I did a lot of planning just to understand this particular one and

03:57:07.080 --> 03:57:12.880
 I can't even imagine how many hours you guys put into getting everything ready so so thank

03:57:12.880 --> 03:57:25.420
 you I for one really appreciate that okay with no objection then I will adjourn our

03:57:25.420 --> 03:57:30.720
 meeting at 9 19 p.m.