Sep 24, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2025-09-24 5:30 PM

Good evening and welcome to the September 24th 2025 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. At 532 I will call our work session to order. Please note at this time commissioners Pruitt, Riggs, and McDade are absent from the meeting. The first item on our work session agenda for this evening is an item for individual consideration PZ 25 187, elect an acting chair for the Planning and Zoning Commission's September 24th 2025 meeting and that will be for the work session and the regular session. So at this time I will open it up for you all to have a nomination for that. Yes, Commissioner McDuff. Yes I'd like to nominate Commissioner Lisa Dyer to serve as acting chair for this meeting and just want to say out loud that I think she would be a good fit. She's a senior member on the committee that's present this evening. She's a successful realtor and has a knowledge of processes and terminology and also she's a proven leader in our other organizational memberships. Thank you. Is there a second? Yes Commissioner Garland. I'll second that. All right and we can do a hand vote as long as you're willing to accept the nomination. Yes I will accept. All right so I will call for a vote. Everyone raise their hand. There an aye. All right four ayes so you may bring your name tag and agenda and join us here in the middle. Where do I start at? Okay at this time we will call for citizen comments. There is nobody present so there's no citizen comments. Okay is there any clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for this meeting? Okay we will go ahead and go down to the the minutes. Do we have any questions on the minutes or any motions? Oh clarifications on the minute sorry. I'm a newbie. No clarifications? Okay we're gonna go ahead and move on to the consent agenda. We will look at consent agenda a FP 2 5 - 0 0 1 8 C considering our request by double our Devco LLC and Hickory Grove residential community for a final plot of Hickory Grove phase 4. Good evening Planning and Zoning Commission Matt Bourdine assistant planner. Here is Subin Infamia Hine. She's the reviewer of this plot but this is a an approximately 114 acre site located south of Jackson Road and approximately 80 feet east of the intersection of Nail Road and Jackson Road in the city of Denton's ETJ Division 1. This plot staff is recommending approval of as it complies with the established criteria for approval. I'm here to answer any questions. Does anybody have any questions? We do not. Sweet. Thank you. Okay moving on to the consent agenda. We've got now the individuals for item I'm sorry for individual consideration. Number a letter a PP 2 5 - 0 0 3a. We're going to consider a request by Kim Lee Horn and Associates on behalf of Razor Investments LTD for a preliminary plat of C5 LC Razor Ranch Edition. Good evening Chair and members of the Commission. Erin Stanley assistant planner. This is a plot for approximately 76 acres generally located south of US 380 west of I-35 and north of Jim Crystal Road. At this time it does not meet our criteria for approval so staff does recommend a denial. However this applicant did submit a extension request earlier today and this should have been emailed to you just prior to the start of this meeting. So we are have no objection to their requested extension to a date certain of October 22nd 2025. Does anybody have any questions? Any commissioners? Okay thank you so much. Moving along to letter B V 2 5 0 0 6 1. Consider a request by Ron and Elizabeth Langham for approval of a subdivision variance from the 2019 Denton Development Code subsection 8.3.2 point C point 2a regarding the maximum number of residential lots permitted to take access from a private access access easement. Good evening Matt Burdine assistant planner. I'm here presenting the subdivision variance request. I want to begin by explaining a little bit about what these are since we have some newer people on the Commission. So when an applicant comes in and is facing a hardship and meeting our platting and subdivision requirements they may apply for a subdivision variance request which comes before this body for approval. As part of that request staff looks at and they need to meet four items for consideration. Generally these are first that must not cause any detriment to the public. There must be something about the surrounding that's causing a hardship. Third it doesn't violate any planning or guiding documents for the city and fourth that it's not a result of the action of the applicant. This particular subdivision request is for a piece of property located about 5,500 feet north of loop 288 and over a thousand feet east of FM 2164 or North Locust Street in the city of Denton's ETJ 1. This subdivision request is associated with the final plat that's also be considered tonight. They're proposing to subdivide their property into three lots two for residential. Currently this property has access via private access easement that has nine months and so because of that they are requesting a subdivision variance to allow more than three residential lots access a private drive. Staff reviews found that it meets all the criteria for or all the considerations for approval of subdivision variance. We'll get more into that later in the presentation tonight. Ultimately recommending approval. I'm here to answer any questions or concerns. Any commissioners have questions? I do. Yeah. I'm just looking at the plat and you see the one on the far left but then it's like lot two block A is kind of in the middle of everything going around it. Is that where there's going to be the agriculture stuff left? Correct. Yes that lot three that kind of wraps around is the agricultural lot. So just from my vantage point my knowledge base the decision-making that went into having it divided that way why would you not have like residential residential and everything else like farm like why the weird like shape like yeah what's the backstory on this? Yes so the as the code does discourage irregular shape lots it was I can't point out if that doesn't prohibit them that in order for an ag exemption to apply to lot three the whole thing has to be continuous is what they brought up. Additionally lot two on that lot currently is the site of their existing well and so they wanted to keep that on a residential lot and then they want space in between the two residential lots so that was their justification for why they want the lots this way. So on that I'm going to assume it's the eastern border there of lot two why not just make that one great big line and then lot two is now super huge so you have a lot of space and then everything on the east side of that is the the farmland is it now we don't have enough farmland to get their exemptions that they're looking for? So there was recommendations made to the owners this is the layout the insisted upon and so that's I have for you. And on the south end of that is that where the road is that connects all it like this? Yeah so the highlighted blue part is so is the right-of-way reservation for a future primary arterial and so and then the access easement is along their south property border. They wanted the least amount of those residential lots in that right-of-way reservation so hence the way it's oriented. So personally that is just odd to me and what are I'm going to ask from a lawyer advantage what are our parameters if you know especially hearing that the city did do some recommendations that that is not the most ideal what are our parameters as commissioners of approving not approving all of this? Absolutely so there are two matters on this property that are before you right now I just want to point out that we're talking about the variance at this particular instance that's going to be governed by the criteria for approval that Matt's going to discuss in further detail. The second item the Platt approval is where there's a little bit more state law constrainment on to how and when to vote. State law says the Platt approval is largely a ministerial act and that means that if you as a commissioner agree with staff's analysis that the Platt meets approval meets the listed criteria that are in the staff report and in the DDC then essentially you have an obligation to vote to approve. A recommendation in the past for commissioners who want to vote against a Platt is that they need to say so in the discussion phase they need to give a recitation to this particular standard they don't believe has been accomplished so they need to explain why with the reference to state statute or pardon me to the DDC. Am I correct Haley? Yeah to the DDC. So basically from what I read in the agenda they and I know we're not really on the Platt but to me it's all kind of merging together. The approval of the Platt hinges on the approval of the variance. Correct. So what is the city and in the city I feel like there was a little vagueness in the city's recommendation for all of this so what is what is the city's viewpoint on the variance in this and was this something that the neighbors had to get notified how are the neighbors feeling does this not really affect the neighbor it's just really these homeowners that it really just affects. So for subdivision variances and and the final plot public notification is not required so we didn't send out any mailings to the to the neighbors. The as city's position on the variances is recommended approval it's purely about can you have more than three residential lots off of this existing private access drive decisions regarding the lot I mean as city staff has recommended approval of the final plot but as decisions with regards to the layout as we've been discussing would be more appropriate for decision being made on the plot. I would just chime in the the shape of the lots does not necessarily affect the variance to Matt's point it's regarding the number of lots that is the matter for discussion with the variance. We did find that they meet the criteria for approval for this variance with respect to the lot shape and as Matt pointed out are the way the DDC is worded it does not prohibit irregularly shaped lots it says they are discouraged so while Matt did make recommendations and suggestions for ways that they could make the lots more regularly shaped ultimately it is up to the property owner in this instance if they wish to have irregularly shaped lots. Commissioner McDuff. Yes ma'am thank you I think we might find an answer in exhibit five where we have a narrative and just to say that this is a going to be a retirement home for the Lanning Hams and they're putting in the lot one their kids and then they'll be living in want to live in lot two and then the agriculture around them so it may just be something as simple as dividing the property home lots. Chair if I may we're kind of getting into deliberation and that's not really what we're fixing to do in this part of the work session okay but these are all great things to put a pin in and bring back up in the open community. Any other questions? Okay thank you. I do have one other question I'm sorry I was moving paper do we have a separate motion then will we vote and there will be a motion on this proposal and then another motion on the other proposal they go together but yeah. You have to approve the variance first yeah and then depending on how that goes and that kind of dictates how or helps in the decision-making on the plat. Okay so we will go ahead and move into the FP 25-0030 considering the requests by landmark surveyors on behalf of Ron Elizabeth Langham for approval of a final plat for lots one through three block A 697 Pecan Creek edition. Yes yeah here to present a request for the final plot associated with the variance that we just discussed to create three lots of 11 acre tract. As I slightly misspoke you the earlier staff's recommendation at this time is dependent on PNZ's decision regarding the variance if the Commission approves of subdivision variance staff is recommending approval of this final plot and then vice versa if the Commission denies the subdivision variance staff is then recommending now of this plot. Do we have any other further questions? Okay thank you. Okay moving on to FP 25-0027 consider a request by McAdams on behalf of the property owner RDO equipment for a final plot of the RDO edition. Good evening chair members of the Commission Ashley Eckstead associate planner. This is FP 25-27 RDO equipment. This is a request for a final plat for a 10 acre property on the south side of US 380 west of Mosh Branch Road. At this time staff is recommending denial but we do not have an objection to the requested extension till October 22nd. Do we have any questions? Okay thank you. FP 25-0028 consider a request by Manhard Consulting on behalf of the property owner Kana Capital for a final plot of the reserve at Brush Creek. Good evening Angie Manglars development review manager. This is a final plot for the reserve at Brush Creek. It is located at the northeast corner of US 377 and Brush Creek Road. The purpose of this final plot is to plot 42 residential lots zoned to plan development. At this time staff is recommending denial as it does not comply with all of our criteria for approval but we have no objection to the requested extension to a date certain of October 22nd. Happy to answer any questions. Do we have any questions? Thank you. Okay now we move into the public hearing section. Z 25-0012 we're going to be holding a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to the City Council regarding a request to rezone approximately one acre of land from Mixed Use to Neighborhood MN Zoning District to Suburban Corridor SC Zoning District generally located south of Loop 288 Service Road and north of Randall Street approximately 800 feet west of East Sherman Drive in the City of Denton. Thank you Erin Stanley assistant planner and we are trying to look something a little bit different with this so this and the next item I have one presentation for in the main session they'll still be two separate public hearings but I'll still just give one presentation. So that means we will also cover item B Z25-0016. Thank you. So I'll give just a quick summary in work session so this is a request to rezone two properties to approximately one acre lots from Mixed Use Neighborhood District to Suburban Corridor. We're putting these together since they are right next to each other and the requests are very similar same zoning districts so this these are both generally located south of Loop 288 and north of Randall Street and west of East Sherman Drive. The purpose of these requests are to facilitate development of commercial uses consistent with the adjacent zonings and other plans developments approximate or to the east and this is consistent with the comprehensive plan and future land use map and staff is recommending approval. I'll have a longer presentation in the main session but I'll be happy to answer any questions. Commissioner, do you have any questions? We do not. Thank you. Thank you. Moving along to Z25-0011 hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to the City Council regarding a city initiated zoning change from Public Facilities District to Mixed Use Downtown District on approximately 1.08 acres and from Mixed Use Neighborhood District to Mixed Use Downtown on approximately 42.62 acres. Thank you. Good evening Chair and members of the Commission. Sean Jacobson, Associate Planner here to present Z25-11 expanding opportunities in southern downtown. For some of you this will be somewhat familiar information from the work session we had for others this will be new information but essentially this is a request to rezone 43.7 acres from a public facility and MN zoning to mixed use downtown zoning. To give you a little background this area which I'll be referring to as southern downtown essentially south of Sycamore down to Eagle from 2002 to 2019 was zoned downtown commercial general same zoning as we saw around the square essentially we had one downtown core zoning cover this entire area however in 2019 when the entire city transitioned to new zoning districts the time of the adoption of the new DDC this southern downtown area did not transition to the new mixed use downtown zoning district there were a number of reasons but a main one most likely was because the area was covered by floodplain and so it was not anticipated that we would see much redevelopment there and so the thought was well downtown core zoning doesn't necessarily make sense in this area because it can't develop in that way however in 2024 we completed a city project to remove this area from the floodplain suddenly development redevelopment adaptive reuse was possible for the first time in years we had an opportunity for this to develop like the rest of downtown so 2024 we had the design downtown Denton plan process looking at the next 20 years of downtown as part of that we identified and the community identified that this is an area of great opportunity for our downtown and so one of the recommendations of that plan approved by council and of course supported by the planning and zoning Commission was that we pursue a new southern downtown in this area so that we work to facilitate developing new shops residential areas more activity in that southern downtown area the first step that was recommended by the design downtown Denton plan was that staff study rezoning this area to MD essentially giving it back that downtown zoning that it had had from 2002 to 2019 so staff went ahead and did an extensive analysis of that area and here's essentially what we came back with the future land use map the comprehensive plan designates the entire area as downtown Denton so it's very much consistent with the future land use to zone this area makes to use downtown that would restore the downtown zoning to this area and would give property owners in the area more flexibility to develop in the same way that property owners closer to the square can develop those MD standards that we come into play would also help to make it easier to develop mixed-use developments it makes infill development on smaller lots more possible it makes easier to develop different housing options so town homes become easier develop as well as small multifamily key downtown uses like bars and craft brewery become develop you can develop by right instead of needing an SCP so essentially those things that allow you to develop in a downtown way become much more possible with this zoning change so staff was leaning in favor of this but we wanted to make sure we also talked to the community we held two community meetings in May presented our findings to the attendees and after robust discussion both of those meetings the attendees were unanimously in support of the zoning change so staff's recommendation is that the area you see there that forty three point seven acres be rezoned to mixed use downtown it's consistent with our comprehensive plan it's consistent with the recommendations of the design downtown Denton twenty-year plan for the area and it does also comply with our criteria for approval for zoning changes which I'll discuss more in my main meeting presentation with that I'm happy to answer any and all questions you may have thank you does anybody have any questions yes mr. Jacobson how does this recommendation how is it different from the information that we heard in our work session presentation on July 23rd it should be roughly exactly the same okay excellent another comment is that I am thankful that you have managed to brought forth the change in ordinance that recognizes the current single-family residential dwellings that are legal and conforming yes ma'am I think that was a point of contention the other may I proceed I'll have one more yes chair I notice the comments that we got in the mail today in the email today and over the weekend one of those was from an automotive person will those have a special use permit I know so happening to respond or if you had any more to the question I'm happy yes that was it that was my last one so it is it is correct that for minor automotive uses those are not a permitted use within the MD zoning district so we would not see new minor automotive uses being developed if this passes however any legally existing use at this time can continue operating on into the future essentially for as long as they want to continue to do that and they maintain the use they can sell it to a new business that business continue to do it for example major automotive has not been a permitted use in this area for I think over a decade and we still have many of those same major automotive uses that we've had they've continued operating just as they would have so that our protections for what we call non-conforming uses are very robust and they will be all in place for those existing minor and I'm just asking that question because we had a comment and a comment Sean so I'm sure we get back to all those people on their questions but absolutely okay thank you any other questions okay thank you moving on to CA 25 - to the city of Denton planning and zoning Commission will hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a comprehensive plan amendment on approximately thirty four point five acres from rural areas future land use designation to light industrial future shim generally located south of US 380 beginning a half a mile east of Gisling Road and extending approximately half a mile east to North Trinity Road thank you Aaron Stanley assistant planner so this is a city initiated request for a future land use map amendment of approximately 57 acres this is located on the far northeast side of town indicated with the star in the top right map there and we are going to talk about this in two different areas there's two recommendations for the area so area one is shown in yellow this is approximately thirty four point five acres the current future land use map designation is rural areas for this part and we are recommending changing this to light industrial the second area circled in orange is approximately 22.5 acres this is existing low residential designation today and we are proposing amending the future land use map designation to community mixed use we are recommending approval of both of these and I have a few background slides I want to go through during work session as well so before we dive in I kind of wanted to put this request in perspective with our larger development process so the comprehensive plan Sean talked about it others have talked about it's that 20-year vision guidebook for the city and within this comprehensive plan we have the future land use map so in this future land use map it's a bigger picture for what types of land uses in different parts of the city we want to see you see that's there's not as many colors as in the zoning map it's not as as detail that just would highlight things of residential area commercial area industrial area and this is what we're discussing today that future land use map not zoning zoning is where you get more detailed it's at the parcel level you see more colors on that map that's where it determines if you can have a single-family home or an office a restaurant those specific uses but all of that is intended to match the future land use map designation and it's a tool to carry out that future land use map so just keeping in mind as we're going through the discussion this this request does not change any zoning of properties today only that future land use map and then some background on the project why we're looking at this specific area not the entire corridor so staff began this corridor study because we received in the last year year and a half several development inquiries in the area that do not match the current zoning designation or the future land use designation this kind of indicates to us that maybe something something might be wrong in the area to take a look at that it's also identified in the comprehensive plan as a gateway into the city for staff to look further at so approximately nine months ago we began this corridor study we looked at things like existing conditions those two photos are from this from the site we see a lot of single-family homes vacant lots there are some there's some agriculture some driveways into the ETJ where we see more commercial and industrial uses in the area but along the corridor itself it's a lot of vacant and single-family properties with driveways directly onto 380 we also looked at the development history of the area existing zoning annexation pattern and transportation had some meetings with our transportation department and text dot and some of their proposed changes for the area some of you might be aware of the anticipated 380 and 288 connector this is anticipated to be completed a roughly through 2030 and that would be approximately half a mile west of the subject area for the subject area longer term they anticipate a freeway conversion where the freeway would be free flowing all the way towards Frisco and they would have service roads on the north and south with with intersections signaled intersections so this would be a big change to the area and influence what types of developments come in also wanted to mention we we came before this body in April for the work session not a lot has changed with that recommendation has stayed the same this body recommended that we go out and talk with the community was already our plan but we did have four community meetings two in person and two virtual and all who attended those agreed with staffs recommendation thought that this was appropriate for the area and and liked the suggestion I will have a longer presentation in the main session but I'll be happy to answer any questions commissioners you have any questions Commissioner McDowell this is a comment where is the environmentally sensitive area so there is some ESA further towards the east it comes in a little bit into the subject area but where you see the Elm Fork Trinity River that area gets into some ESA it's really on the outskirts of this area there's some some corners where it comes in but mostly to the east okay and how we're going to manage that the same way we do for all developments that come in if there is any suspected ESA on the property they have to do their ESA field assessment if they're impacting it they might have to go through that alternative ESA usually they just would not impact it in this case any other questions okay thank you okay is there any other comments or discussions by the commissioners or the staff we will go ahead and close out today's work session we will see you in the main chambers at 630 for our regular meeting good evening welcome to the City of Netons planning and zoning Commission on Wednesday September 24th we do have a quorum today of commissioners so we are going to start our meeting we will begin with the pledge to the United States flag and then to the Texas flag I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God one and indivisible we will begin by considering approval of the minutes from the September 10th 2025 planning and zoning meeting minutes is there any discussion over the minutes from our last meeting do we have a motion do we have a second okay we have a motion is our motion to approve yes our motion to approve the September 10th 2025 planning and zoning meeting minutes commissioner and you're second I second okay all in favor of approving the minutes from September 10th 2025 okay they pass unanimously four to zero we will go ahead and move into our consent agenda for the evening we will begin with a FP 25 - zero zero 18 C we are going to consider a request by double our Devco LLC and Hickory Grove Residential Community Inc for a final plat of Hickory Grove phase four okay thank you do we have a motion Commissioner Mcduff like to move approval of a final plat for the double our Devco and Hickory Grove Residential Community Incorporated for a final plat okay and a second I second okay go ahead and place your vote okay the motion is passed four to zero we will now move into the evening where we have individual items for individual consideration the first one is PP 25 - 3a we're going to consider a request by Kim Lee Horn and Associates on behalf of razor investments limited for a preliminary plat of c5 LC razor ranch edition good evening Aaron Stanley assistant planner this is a plat for approximately 76 acres generally located south of US 380 west of I 35 and north of Jim Crystal Road at this time the plot does not meet our criteria for approval and the applicant has requested an extension to the date certain date certain of October 22nd 2025 and staff has no objection to that extension I'll stand for any questions commissioners are there any questions okay do we have a motion Commissioner is it catcher said and we do want to welcome you tonight to your very first meeting so thank you for joining us so I'm motion to adopt approve the extension to the date that was stated by the city okay okay we'll take a vote that motion passed unanimously moving on to be 25 - 61 we're going to consider a request by Ron and Elizabeth Langham for approval of a subdivision variance from the 2019 Denton Development Code subsection eight point three point two point C point two point a it's regarding the maximum number of residential lots permitted to take access from a private access easement good evening planning zoning Commission Matt Bodine assistant planner I said here to present the six nine seven pecan Creek subdivision variance so this variance is for a piece of property located approximately 5500 feet north of loop 288 and over a thousand feet west of FM 2164 and city of Denton's ETJ division one the subject property itself is approximately 11.2 acres it takes has access to a public road by means of an existing private access easement this variance is associated with the final plot is being considered as a separate item on today's agenda and seeking to subdivide the property into three lots just another thing for consideration a similar variance for property also off of this existing easement was approved by P and Z back in March 19th of this year so now on to the variance request itself so this is a request to allow more than three residential lots to access a public street by means of a private access easement or variance from the requirement that no more than three no more than three single-family detached lots may access a road by and easement for the first consideration staff found that the granting of this variance would not be detrimental to the public safety health or welfare of the public as well as the surrounding property owners for the second consideration staff found that the peculiar pattern of development in this area I created the hardship that the owner is in now because of how the the lots have developed in this area there are nine properties that take access from a private access easement so no matter what the property owner could do to subdivide even just to plot one lot they would still need a variance from our requirements in order to perform that action additionally the easement they are using does cross does cross several property lines so staff finds it would be laborious and difficult on their part to try and secure that land that would be needed to come into compliance and in the end probably also requiring a variance but from another requirement about five lot maximums and this combination of things leads staff to believe that the strict letter of our subdivision regulations would make it particularly difficult for this applicant to develop this property the third consideration that this variance will not vary or change those guiding documents that help develop help guide our city of Denton on the associated plot there is a right of way reservation being established that would preserve the corridor for a future primary arterial that the debt mobility plan identifies for this area the fourth consider fourth and final consideration at the particular conditions creating the need for this request are not the result of the owners actions so this is found that this roughly general lot configuration of all these lot of multiple lots off of this private road have been existence since at least 1987 well before this owner and as well as the Denton development code requirement came into place along with that more than three residential lots are in existence so the reason for the variance is not a result of the owner actions itself therefore the staff is recommending approval of said subdivision variance as it complies with the criteria but here to answer any questions commissioners do you have any questions anything that you would like to discuss regarding okay Commissioner McDuff do you have a motion yes I do I'd like to make a motion to agree with the staff's recommendation for approval to consider a request by Ron and Elizabeth Langham for approval of a subdivision variance from the 2019 didn't development code okay Commissioner Garland yes and I second the motion to approve the variance okay let's vote that motion passed unanimously thank you we're gonna move to FP 25 - 30 consider a request by landmark surveyors on behalf of Ron and Elizabeth Langham for approval of a final plot for the same property for lots one through three block a 697 the pecan Creek addition good evening again Matt burdening assistant planner here to present a request to approve a final plot for lots two through three of the 697 pecan Creek addition I'm located in the city of Denton ZTJ this is the same plot associated with the subdivision variance request that you just approved in light of that staff is recommending approval of said plot due to PNC approving the subdivision variance but here to answer any questions do we have any questions discussion sorry I need to switch my screen back Commissioner Macduff do you have a motion I've just made that motion thank you chair Dyer I have a motion to approve this proposal this final plan based on the approval of the variance okay and Commissioner Garland and I second the approval okay we will move into a vote the motion passes thank you now on to FP 25 - 27 we're going to consider a request by McAdams on behalf of the property owner RDO equipment for a final plat of the RDO addition good evening chair members of the Commission Ashley extended associate planner this is a request for a final plat for the art RDO addition at this time staff recommends denial as they do not meet the criteria for approval but we have no objection to the requested extension to a date certain of October 22nd 2025 happy to answer any questions are there any questions or discussion no do we have Commissioner Macduff yes I'd like to make a motion for approval for a first extension for the request by McAdams on behalf of the property owner RDO equipment for a final plant of the RDO edition and this would be an extension to a date certain of October 22nd 2025 okay Commissioner Kertrussett I second the motion for the extension to the October date okay we have we have a motion and a second to approve the moving of the date to October 22nd which we will vote on now and that motion passed now on to FP 25 - 28 we will consider a request by man hard consulting on behalf of the property owner Kana capital for a final plat of the reserve at Bush Creek I'm sorry brush Creek good evening chair members of the Commission Angie Manglars development review manager here to present FP 25 - 0 0 2 8 this is a final plat for approximately 42 residential lots located at the northeast corner of Fort Worth Drive and brush Creek Road the subject property is zoned PD at this time they do not meet all of the requirements to recommend approval of the final plot but staff has no objection to the recommended extension to date certain of October 22nd I'm happy to answer any questions you all may have do we have any questions any discussion okay Commissioner McDuff yes elect to make a motion to approve the first extension of a request for manner consulting on behalf of the property owner Kana capital for a final plant of the reserve at brush Creek and this extension would be to a date certain of October 22nd 2025 okay Commissioner Garland no second the approval to move forward okay let's go ahead and vote on that that motion passes we will now move into the public hearings portion of the evening we have a few public hearings but our first one we're actually going to do a joint one for Z 25 - 12 and Z 25 - 16 they both are regarding wreck making a recommendation to City Council to request to rezone approximately an acre of land from mixed-use neighborhood districts zoning district to suburban corridor around the loop 288 service road north of Randall Street and I at this time I would like to open up the public hearing good evening Aaron Stanley assistant planner so this is a request to rezone two properties approximately one acre each from mixed-use neighborhood zoning district to suburban corridor district these properties throughout the presentation will be referenced as a and B correlating to the items on your agenda they're both located south of loop 288 and north of Randall Street and west of East Sherman Drive and the purpose of these requests are to facilitate development of commercial uses consistent with adjacent existing zoning so to go over the current and proposed zoning districts currently the sites are both zoned mixed-use neighborhood district and be they are requesting a suburban corridor zoning district a few different highlights of comparisons between the districts the mixed-use neighborhood district is more pedestrian oriented for residential commercial office and retail uses while the suburban corridor district is more auto oriented it does however still provide the development standards would provide a safe pedestrian and cyclist atmosphere even in that suburban corridor district some dimensional standards between the two mixed-use neighborhood has a front setback of 10 feet suburban corridor has a front setback of 20 feet side yard setback of 5 and rear setback of 10 the big thing to point out also is in the mixed-use neighborhood district a development standard for that district is that buildings must be located close to the street between 10 and 15 feet from the front setback or from the front property line that would bring the building up close to loop 288 and be difficult to align with the adjacent properties that are zoned suburban corridor those properties are proposing front drive aisles that would be difficult to align with if these two properties had to have their building closer to the street it could also propose pedestrian safety issues trying to encourage people to be closer to loop 288 criteria for approval this develop both of these requests do meet both the general application criteria and zoning specific criteria for approval the proposed zoning's are consistent with the SC purpose statement both are generally consistent with the comprehensive plan goals and policies as well as the future land use map designation which we will get into in a second and the development plans would be required for these properties to move forward and they must comply with all development code criteria and the zoning's are not expected to generate significant adverse environmental infrastructure or fiscal impacts that suburban corridor purpose statement does state that the district shall provide moderate to high intensity commercial office and retail use along major corridors which this does it also will be required to provide that safe environmental or safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists as I mentioned this location being on the corner of a freeway and primary arterial is appropriate for suburban corridor and development standards or standards will require that safe pedestrian atmosphere as well the comprehensive plan designates both of these sites for community mixed use development that's intended to provide a variety of uses that support residential development but where commercial uses are predominant the suburban corridor district conforms to this as well as other goals mentioned below growing compactly in coordination with transportation and infrastructure being that this is along a major freeway it is it does make sense to have this district and would meet this goal and also would create new workplaces that are close to residential properties to the south is a developing multifamily site and to the west is an existing multifamily site and that would support those residential uses notifications were conducted for both projects 255 mailed notices were sent out for the first item 5a and we did not receive any responses in favor or opposition the applicants did hold a virtual meeting for this project on month this past Monday no applicant no residents attended the meeting 5b also was required to send out their notices and we did not receive any responses in favor or opposition to my knowledge a meeting was not held for this by the applicant that is a suggestion and in the development code not a requirement for rezonings but that stuff is recommending approval of this zoning change for both of the requests 5a and 5b and I'll be happy to answer any questions before the public makes their comments commissioners do you have any questions or discussion okay we will go ahead so far it looks like we have one person that would like to speak on this I'm clay Christie you will have four minutes to talk good evening Commission click Christie claim we're engineering 3231 Harwood Drive in Bedford we're actually the applicant here so I think staff did a good job present presenting what they had for us for we are for representing 5b here and we're just here for the rezoning and mainly if there's any questions we're here to answer and as the applicant you actually get ten minutes so if there's anything it's okay I tried to tell her whenever I handed it to her that I was the applicant and they had it on here and I did not see it it's my first time in this chair so thank you for your patience no no problem no no questions at all I mean staff presented everything that we have I don't know that I have a whole lot else to add we're definitely here for any questions okay commissioners do you have any questions for the applicant okay I know we have no other cards for this but is there anybody here in the public that would like to address this agenda item okay for this agenda item we'll close the public comments on that close the public hearing on that and any questions or anything from commissioners okay commissioner catcher said my motion to approve the Sony change as requested yeah and I think you have to do both of them oh both of them we're gonna do one at a time okay so this will just be for z25 0 0 1 2 yes I approve vote to approve okay motion do we have a second commissioner Macduff yes I'll present a second to that motion to approve okay we'll go ahead and vote on that and we have a four to zero motion passed approval now for item number z25 - 16 do we have a motion for that recommendation to City Council commissioner catcher said a motion to adopt these z25 0 0 16 be as requested okay and Commissioner Garland I'll second the motion okay we'll go ahead and vote on that and that one also passes unanimously okay moving on to z25 - 0 0 11 we will now open the public hearing to consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a city initiated zoning change from public facilities district to a mixed use downtown district on approximately one point oh eight acres and from a mixed-use neighborhood to a mixed-use downtown on approximately 42.62 acres good evening chair and members of the Commission Sean Jacobson associate planner here to present z25 11 expanding opportunities in southern downtown so I'm going to move forward this is a request for a rezoning of approximately 43.7 acres from the current public facilities and mixed-use neighborhood zoning to a mixed-use downtown district zoning I'll start by giving y'all a little bit of history and background on this area which I'll be referring to as southern downtown 2002 this area was zoned downtown commercial general DCG same zoning is around the square we essentially had one zoning for the majority of the core of downtown in 2010 we passed the downtown implementation plan and that boundary that drew a boundary around kind of a more central core part of downtown around the square which excluded the southern downtown that was in part because much of the southern downtown at the time was covered by a floodplain so additional development in that area was not anticipated because the floodplain essentially presented prevented any new development or redevelopment based on that D tip border that was drawn in 2019 when we had the citywide zoning transition to a whole new set of zoning districts that southern downtown area did not transition to the new mixed-use downtown zoning so the area around the square within that kind of core boundary that went to mixed use downtown but in downtown instead transition to mixed-use neighborhood the change that occurred after that in 2024 was that the city did a project to remove the southern downtown from the floodplain that took away the barrier hat that had existed to those properties redeveloping developing with new uses and created an opportunity at that point we got to the design downtown Denton plan process in 2024 this process identified we have a great opportunity here this southern downtown area is now out of the floodplain and it has the opportunity to develop more in line with the rest of downtown we got community responses from our engagement efforts that indicated desire for more businesses and more focus on that area south of the square there was an opportunity with the flood plan removal and a need for more going down in that area so we respond to that in the design downtown Denton plan which was approved by City Council with two key recommendations one of those 3a was that we moved towards a future southern downtown with new housing shops restaurants and potentially a city park in the area the other recommendation 3d was that in order to implement this staff analyze whether we should rezone that area that southern downtown to MD and essentially restore the downtown zoning that it had had up until 2019 so staff went ahead and analyzed the area came back with the recommendation that it did in fact make sense to rezone this area to MD it would expand development opportunity and flexibility for property owners respond to that community desire to see more attention more life more activity in that area and it would be that first step to implement the design downtown didn't envision future southern downtown however we do want to go into more detail about that analysis to clarify why this makes sense for this area so first off what does it mean to transition to MD from MN so mixed use downtown biggest thing is it allows property owners to use more of their lots so within MD you have a somewhat lower requirement for landscape a higher building coverage permitted for commercial uses you're not required to provide a minimum parking so there's more freedom for an owner decide how much parking they need for their use similarly for smaller residential so townhomes and multifamily under 10 units again they're not held to a mandatory parking requirement there's more flexibility that allows you to develop on a smaller lot more easily so it's providing more flexibility does also allow more height on those lots essentially it's allowing a greater level of density and more flexibility for the property owners to develop in a more downtown way just for example right now under MN you would have to provide a buffer between a multifamily use and a commercial use which in a downtown setting really doesn't make any sense why would you be putting a hole you know a fence and some landscaping between those things to downtown area with the MD zoning that requirement goes away in this area is free develop more like the lots north of it it's always important to look at our comprehensive plan and what that's saying about the area the future land use map for this area indicates that its future land use is downtown Denton it's actually the most appropriate zoning for this area is MD mixed use downtown likely the only reason that it hasn't been that all along was because of that floodplain which is now no longer in the way it does also align with some of the other goals or help us to move towards some of the other goals in our comprehensive plan the comprehensive plan encourages compact development reinvestment in our key corridors and diversifying the uses downtown so different types of commercial you notice we have a number of corridors going through this area Elm Street Locust Street this is helping us enable property owners to invest more use their properties to a greater extent along those key corridors this is an area where we have strong infrastructure already much of it recently upgraded again this is where we want to see that denser development occurring where we already have the infrastructure in place to support it very much in line with our comprehensive plans goals similarly with our sound growth principles we want to encourage reinvestment and infill in a historically underutilized area again this is enabling making it easier for property owners to make some of those investments and get a better return on it it's also consistent with our housing goals in the Denton 2040 plan and in the design downtown Denton plan we want to encourage more people to live downtown so that they can support businesses there again because this does not require parking for multifamily up to 10 units because it has some of those reduced standards for landscaping and crucially multifamily is not required to provide an open space on each individual a lot this makes it much easier potentially to develop townhomes smaller multifamily in this area versus what it is now under MN so again more opportunities to create diverse housing opportunities in our downtown we also want to consider though are there adverse impacts and have we minimized those our height transition buffer is a key part of the DDC that's remains in place and that limits how close you can build a very tall building next to a residential home in a residentially zoned area sets a limit of you have to be 50 feet away if you're going to build any higher than the adjacent residential zoning district so again that protection for single family uses use buffers are still in place between any commercial or multifamily building and a single-family home so again that protection is required that spacing for single-family homes we also need to think about the impact on existing uses and I really want emphasize this our DDC protections mean that no currently existing legal use business or otherwise would have to stop operating because of this everyone can continue to operate just as they have before whether use was non-conforming before it's made non-conforming by this regardless everything that is currently legally existing can continue to exist and operate as it did we also want to specifically address single-family residential it is true that within the MD zoning district single-family residential is not normally a permitted use however we recognize that we have quite a bit of existing single-family in this area and we don't want to have an impact on those so this ordinance has been specifically written to protect single-family housing so that any single-family residential that would be rezoned to continue just as it has and not only that if you wanted to say tear it down and build a new house there you could do that nothing would change you can expand it invest in it for single-family residential there would be no change to this ordinance it's always important that we do our public outreach so we sent out our standard mailings as well as posting signs we did receive four responses in opposition and ten in favor we also as I mentioned hosted two neighborhood meetings in May 2025 the attendees at both of those meetings expressed unanimous support for the rezoning and we did also present this to planning and zoning Commission in a work session planning zone Commission indicated support for the rezoning at that time so with that staff does recommend approval of the rezoning with the condition presented in your backup that is my presentation happy to stand for any questions commissioners does anybody have any questions Commissioner McDuff mr. Jacobson I just want to make sure that what I'm hearing you say and I've asked this question that it would not affect the current single-family residential dwellings and it would not affect the current building employment opportunities that are currently available in this area yes so for single-family residential absolutely nothing changes for any existing business they can continue to operate as they have if a user business were to be made non-conforming they can nonetheless continue to operate they can sell that business to another business that business can continue to operate it the only limitation would be on potentially the ability to expand so they would not have to cease operation they would not I have a couple questions first off I want to state that there was an e-comment that was in favor of this as well that the city received so we want to note that first question is the four in opposition do you know what they're did they state what they were opposing with why they were in opposition to this in some cases there was believe some concern about the effect on existing businesses in the area one of those four I have had a conversation with the applicant by the time we were done he'd essentially determined in fact we were going to make it more possible for to do what he wanted to do but he hadn't necessarily rescinded that opposition at the time okay and then my other question and this is just more personal but a little history behind this you said this wasn't a flood flood zone how did that get removed like was there a rerouting of a body of water is that now this has the flood zone designation been taken off these properties what's the what's the history behind this great question yes the city in fact executed a multi million dollar peck for project to take what was the floodplain and put very large pipes under the ground there to completely remove that floodplain from the area so yeah that was that was a very significant change okay thank you any other questions yes it completed that stage of it is there will be another one to remove even more of downtown from the floodplain thank you okay we need to close the public hearing oh we can oh sorry we have not even had the public thank you I'm so sorry okay um we have a few people that would like to speak Hugo Cruz I think you filled out two of these yes man so mr. Cruz you you only get to speak for one and you'll get four minutes okay that's fine okay thank you okay well the reason we are here is because I mean we've been having our business for more than 30 years serving to Denton community people and it's a ways until you know service then and then Tony the most beautiful place actually we actually we'd be leaving I mean it's amazing I would change them from for no other place but I mean the situation right now is you know all the things I mean they trying to do constructions of all the the houses around apartments and everything I mean that's fine but the only problem about is why they have to actually destroy some little business we've been actually working for more than 30 years and also they need to think about this our retirement plans on my on my case my wife is already retirement I will be retirement pretty soon so who's gonna pay my retirement plan they're gonna do it building all those things around and they're gonna provide me all that stuff like that and I've always been thinking I mean there's nothing wrong with that but I mean if they're gonna start you know taking people away just because they want to make business around here in Denton I mean that's fine if they agree that's fine but they're gonna be destroying families taking their business away legacy for their own kids and everything I mean then to get a lot of you know Lance around here and by the way you know on eagle they build those apartments and everything and I don't want to tell you this but you know how many actually being happy because it's just close to the street and this what they actually start doing it but all what I want to know is how is that gonna affect my business that's my question on five to five side M Street and sir what is your business what what business do you run do you know I don't sell LHC okay okay we will have this we will have Mr. Jacobson come back up and he will address that shape thank you very much thank you guys happy to address that so right now under the current zoning auto sales is not a permitted use however it is protected as non-conforming uses the terminology we used to use was grandfathered in so right now it is not permitted but it can continue operating just it has if this zoning change goes through nothing changes exactly the same situation not technically permitted but protected under non-conforming continue to operate can be sold to someone else they can operate this has no impact so mr. Cruz could sell his business he could pass it down to his children to continue to run it if he wanted to absolutely okay did you want to say anything else mr. Cruz you need to come up here to the mics please state your name and your address so my father has two so five eleven locusts and six eleven south locusts or six eleven locusts and your name Jennifer Cruz sorry so I am the daughter but one of the things I wanted to express is I have been born and raised in Denton all my life like all my life so I feel like I submitted one of the requests I think it was to him I feel like a score didn't nice I just don't want to feel like we've been run out one of the things I fell in love with didn't is the small town feel and that's kind of going away it's being overcrowded over-trafficated I even tell my sister all the time it feels like it's little Dallas now you know so those are the things that I'm just concerned about aside from losing the business like my dad said that's his retirement plan that's something he is gonna pass over to us so I just want to make sure that one the original business that actually helped grow Denton and our family oriented don't get affected but also we don't get overcrowding because first like a while they had construction there on the street that affected our business we've literally lost a lot of business because they couldn't even enter our way I want to make sure that's not something that's gonna happen with both of our locations mr. Jacobson would you like to address potential future construction I know that's hard like I can make an effort certainly we have no intention with this this is not designed for any particular project this is designed simply to create opportunities for all property owners in the area if they wish to redevelop develop adaptive labor use that may involve construction at some point I will note that on Elm and Locust both of those projects have recently been redone by textile and so we don't anticipate significant future construction on either of those roadways but beyond that I really can't speak to future construction one way or the other okay do either of you have any other questions for mr. Jacobson okay I also have one from Kristen Bigley please state your name and address good evening I'm Kristen Kendrick Bigley address is 4004 Vineyard Way I am the director at the UNT collab on 207 North Elm Street I've been there five years and been very involved in the downtown community since taking that role the last two years have actually served as president of the Denton Main Street Association and that's really why I'm speaking is on behalf of that organization and our participation in the whole design downtown didn't plan throughout last year so we really were strong participants our board our members were in you know engaging with any of those sessions that the design downtown didn't plan had with the public we gave feedback we were involved in the presentation to City Council to also approve the design downtown didn't plan we are in support of this redevelopment for property owners for business owners to help bring more to downtown that will help build and sustain that for the long term so that South corridor area is a huge area development that is underutilized right now and to allow the zoning to change in a way that will allow those properties to be developed to bring in more business and residential kind of coexisting seamlessly together where you have a coffee shop downstairs you know you've got residential above you get that density they're close to all three universities it becomes a very a very what's the word just vibrant community and space for people to exist if we you know can look further to developing some green space in that area so we have Quaker town in the north and then we have a South Denton Park you can imagine dogs being walked you have areas for young families to go out and play you can navigate the downtown area bicycle walking other ways and it just becomes a kind of community within a community that really provides all that you need so where you don't have to get in your car and drive out to this urban areas very often and that's what we're really trying to do here is develop a vibrant downtown where everyone can live and work and play and have an entertainment district and do all of these great things together so we are in support of the rezone of the South downtown area to allow for this mixed-use development thank you um those are all the individuals that have filled out a card but is there anybody in the audience if you would like to come up just please make sure to state your name and your address and then I think they still want you to get a card and fill it out for the record please my name is Martha Wallard I hope y'all can hear me I can't hear anything in here but I own a property on 301 South Locust I was not informed about this and I'd like first of all to know who is the developer who is planning all of this is this a city idea or is this a private individual who wants to take over the downtown area and put high-rises and whatever else congestion we can have down there is this a way to raise taxes for the city what is what's the real decision behind this number two if you are going to approve this I would like personally to have a guarantee for all all of the businesses that have been working and residents like this gentleman who there is a nice little group of houses in this neighborhood that have most of them are being bulldozed down for not one but many apartments way too many apartments I've been in Denton since 1956 and the town has changed dramatically for the worst and I'm sorry to say that and actually I'm very sorry but I want something in writing I didn't get any notification on this that if anybody who has a business in this neighborhood or has a residence in this before you come in and bulldoze down our little neighborhood that these people get to stay and stay most of these people have had businesses there for 20 25 years and it is totally unfair to have them uprooted for a Starbucks or another tattoo shop or what are their other little trendy item that you want to have put in to welcome a student and it's a real shame I mean when Davis Bakery can't even it's been sitting idle for months for years because nobody can afford to rent it what makes us think that these big high rises are going to make a difference so I hope you'll consider this 75 year old person who's been in debt in a long time and that wants to preserve what little history we have mr. Keith I hope you've heard this Hillary Erica and the rest of you thank you very much thank you are that before I send it back to mr. Jacobson for her questions is there any other person that would like go ahead my name is Barbara Shaw I live at 309 Stroud Street and I have been in Denton since I started nursing school back in 73 it's same house my big concern with all of this is I know that we need to expand I won't be here probably who knows for how many years let God decide but what's happening to our area on Stroud sycamore the construction that is going on right now on Hickory Street and the credit union and with the gas companies coming through and changing everything we have had major traffic that is just we're being annihilated with it it's unbelievable the traffic that comes through the road is in such disrepair right now and nobody when you try to contact somebody like we had Atmos come in and they went ahead and re did the pipes they left our place in a total mess I had a two-foot drop-off that people were tripping over that I have to contact people all the time to say you need to fix this I think that you guys should take you know a ride down our street on Pierce prayer not Pierce because that's nice and smooth now so is prairie a little bit but hit Stroud and sycamore and see what all of this is done and my concern is even like when we had the Jazz Fest here the Blues Fest we had parking on our street what's going to happen when everything really starts to come into play my main concern is that any time something is done especially like this 20-foot area that's on Hickory to sycamore street where they're throwing up these apartments that there's no place to go to utilize a fairway of one area to just like Hickory Street you can't have all these construction cars going down there because of the businesses and how it takes so long to go through so you're using our areas to cut through and these people are not friendly they're coming from Fort Worth these companies who are redoing they don't care they go down you know 60 miles an hour down our street we've had animals killed we've you know thank God we don't have children anymore on the area but it's just it's a menace and it shouldn't be so I don't know we talked about this and we said we'd get back with it and to see about how this is all going to re-effect you know or affect our area as far as parking goes and is it slowly we see this area being taken over slowly I'm with her I wanted him writing that you know that we can stay as it is but let's get the traffic taken care of let's get the streets I can tell you if we were in Montecito or Southridge this wouldn't have happened this would not have happened but of course we're not building high-rises over there but still you're gonna leave that area clean neat the minute you do it so why not us okay thank you for your comment is there anybody else from the public that would like to say something mr. Jacobson would you like to address the items that both individuals brought up please absolutely and I tried to write them down in so in case you know we'll make sure to hit them I appreciate you can let me know if there's any that I missed first off on the 301 South Locust property that is actually currently zoned MD so nothing will change for that property standing exactly the same in regard to single-family existing single-family uses and putting that in writing I actually completely and totally agree which is why I put it in writing in this ordinance that absolutely nothing will change for any single-family home in this area there they'll be able to continue just as they have they can sell it expand it you wanted to so that guarantee is in the ordinance yes I wrote it myself if it burned to the ground you want to build it right back up you could do that too and to change it that would be another bringing it forth to planning and zoning yes and then City Council the whole the process yes that is correct that is correct and similarly for any businesses operating that is part of our nonconformity protections that they can continue to operate really the only limitation is that there may be limitation on the ability to expand it but continue to operate be sold and operated by someone else into the future I can't necessarily speak to at miss or street repair but certainly I would hope that would be handled better in the future yes so one individual said she was not notified okay so can you kind of explain the notification and maybe if she was missed how that could have happened or absolutely so we our goal was to send out a notification to every property owner within the boundary as well as within 200 feet we rely on the appraisal districts certified addresses and we do our best to send that as well as postcards to utility customers out to 500 feet occasionally letters will come back because the post office has said they for some reason the address didn't work for them or occasionally what the appraisal district gives us doesn't get to where we want to we do make every effort but it is possible that that can happen and I did just remember the other thing I wanted to address because I remember hearing this there is no private developer planning any specific project here and in fact the city doesn't necessarily have any exact project either what we're wanting to do is simply make it easier for each property owner if they chose to develop to give them more freedom to do that however they see fit long term of course the vision is to see in the southern downtown area more things for people to enjoy that live there and the opportunity for more folks to enjoy it and live there but there is no project that this is anticipated so no developer this is just a recommendation by city staff before the boards of the planning and zoning and then it will go into the City Council after this yes ma'am okay taxes somebody it was asked would this raise their property taxes that is in the hands of the appraisal district it is certainly possible that if the area becomes more desirable property values can increase but we have no control okay ladies did I get did mr. Jacobson answer all of those questions for you yes ma'am yes ma'am and oh no I'm a city planner I I work I work for the city I live just ten minutes from here there's no there's no project there's no developer this is simply to allow property owners to have more freedom if they wanted to do something different with their property they had the freedom to do that if not they don't have to and as far as being right I want to make sure I say that again I wrote the ordinance and what I wrote in there was that for single-family homes nothing changes they can stay exactly as they are you can add on to it you can knock it down and build it up again you can you can do everything you can do now after this so mr. Jake no it's okay we would like to put if you're okay with it if maybe you can have some of these conversations out outside in the hallway so we can move on with the agenda did you want to add anything okay yes commissioners did you have anything yes I was just going to say that we also talked about high-rise proliferation so perhaps we can address that in what does the ordinance allow for high rises to be built in this area so that's actually already permitted in the MN zoning and as I mentioned what we also already have is protections limiting how close any high-rise building can be built to a single-family home so currently in the current zoning high rises are already allowed and but that what this does is it changes some of like the proximity of one building close to another building and some little nuances like that okay any any other questions okay so this closes the public hearing for this item agenda agenda item thank you okay any last-minute questions or discussion by commissioners yes commissioners one other comment I think that's important to me because that's lived in this neighborhood for quite some time was experience the issues with floodplain and sold my house to the city it's not a minute not a week goes by I don't miss that neighborhood it's a critical neighborhood south of downtown we want to continue to preserve it but I think we need to say out loud the other thing that mr. Jacobson talked about was the need for town homes and smaller family multifamily developments that we don't have in debt and close to the downtown area so I just want to make that point the other thing the point I'd like to make from my seat is that I will tell you I'm also horrified by how the area around south of downtown looks and the empty businesses and the empty store fronts so for me when I saw this and heard this presentation from Sean Jacobson we've been working on it quite some time I believe I was personally glad to see this and personally glad to see that there are some things in writing and I will tell you that this young man Sean Jacobson is a very personable and very good and very willing to receive comments and act on them and if you all don't know that please know that thank you chair and I would agree with all of that it would be nice to see some revitalization and the growth for by bringing in new businesses and more residents that should hopefully help the current businesses grow as well so that will be nice to see okay if there are no other questions or discussion by commissioners um do we have a motion Commissioner Ketchers it a motion to adopt the z25 11 to make a recommendation to the City Council to change the zoning yes okay do we and do we have a second Commissioner Macduff yes I second the motion for approval to make the recommendation to the City Council okay let's take a vote okay the motion passes three to one okay we're gonna move on to the next item CA 25 - - the we're gonna hold a public hearing to consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a comprehensive plan amendment on approximately thirty four and a half acres from rural acres future land use designation to light industrial future land use designation I would like to open up the public hearing at this time for this item good evening Aaron Stanley assistant planner this is CA 25 - 0 0 0 2 US 380 corridor flume amendment this is a request to change the future land use designation on two separate areas located on the far northeast side of town along US 380 we'll discuss these in two separate areas area one and two area one is circled in yellow on your screen this is approximately thirty four point five acres and is currently has a future land use designation of rural areas and a proposed future land use designation of light industrial area two is circled in orange on the screen and is approximately twenty two point five acres this is currently has a future land use designation of low residential and a proposed future land use designation of community mixed use some existing conditions for the area there's primarily single-family homes here today undeveloped property some agricultural property and driveways into the ETJ with varying commercial and industrial uses the purpose there's also this is on a six lane divided textile roadway US 380 with a future freeway conversion planned the purpose of this request is that staff has received several development inquiries in the area that do not match the current zoning nor the future land use designations in the area which prompted us to take our take a closer look it is also identified in the comprehensive plan as a gateway area for staff to examine closer we pursued it an approximately nine month corridor study of this area which revealed the current designation does is not appropriate for this area hence this request to go through each of the the areas and proposed designation light industrial is proposed for area one so you can see in the images primarily light industrial future land use designation is intended for things like light manufacturing assembling warehouses distribution but also those supporting uses such as office retail and restaurants it does not have to be as industrial can be those office and retail type uses this also should be in areas that have adequate infrastructure and transportation network the the proposed textile changes for the area as well as the existing conditions would support these types uses more than the existing single-family and what would be allowed today therefore as I said it's consistent with the development pattern in the area we do already see some of these uses in the ETJ changing this area to light industrial would just allow these uses to be up closer to the roadway rather than pushed back in the ETJ and it considers the US 380 roadway design improvement today and in the future throughout the city and that top right map is where you can see our current land use map light blue is light industrial and we see it already along US 380 just further to the west of this subject site so it would naturally continue that designation we also see it northwest side of town where US 380 and I 35 meet generally aligned zoning districts with this future land use designation would be light industrial general office and suburban corridor this is not an exclusive list but that these are what we typically see throughout the city aligned with this future land use designation as for area 2 staff is recommending changing this from low residential to community mixed use in the community mixed use future land use designation this is intended to be primarily commercial but where residential service and other uses are are complementary it should complement and embrace existing uses so those existing residential uses in the area and create a sense of place for the local community the reason staff is recommending community mixed use in this area and not light industrial as well it's because there is an existing neighborhood that was built in the early 2000s just south of this where you see a lot of the yellow today this community mixed use designation would provide neighborhood services that are an appropriate scale for US 380 also buffer industrial and you industrial uses and traffic from those existing homes and provide a higher design standard near this existing residential area in the upper right hand corner this map shows again where you see this designation today it is throughout the city indicated with light pink and it's clustered around primary arterial roadways and text out roadways similar to this one generally aligned zoning districts would include suburban corridor and mixed use regional zoning districts this request is does achieve a couple goal goals of the comprehensive plan the first one is to grow compactly so this this change would allow the corridor to develop compactly closer to the roadway rather than back further in the ETJ where we already see some of these uses that would allow that more compact dense growth along the corridor rather than spreading out into the ETJ it would also be compact with the adjacent development to the west and east of this corridor where we already see similar development action item 2 also stresses that staff and every application should try to match the future land use map since we have been receiving these requests that are not consistent with the future land use map this is difficult today so revising this map would allow future developments to be in in coordination with the future land use designations as with all requests we do see how this aligns with the criteria for approval this is not in conflict with any other goals or policies of the comprehensive plan and proposed and the proposed amendment is consistent with existing non-residential pattern of development in the area and would encourage development that's compatible with what's existing today and with the future plans of tech stop this also considers the existing and proposed infrastructure as with all our projects and as we can encourage applicants to we did notice all of the owners and residents within the boundary and also within 500 feet owners within 200 feet and property residents 200 feet and owners within 500 feet and we posted two signs out in the area as well we did receive two responses one in opposition and one in favor of the request and we held two in-person meetings and two virtual meetings at both of those meetings in person of those who attended everyone was in favor of their quest and agreed with staff that this was a favorable revision to the comprehensive plan staff is recommending approval of the comprehensive plan amendment to the zoning to the future land use map and the next step would be City Council on October 14th and I'll be happy to answer any questions commissioners do you have any questions or comments at this time yes mr. McDuff yes miss Stanley would you speak to the environmentally sensitive area the ESA we continue to be concerned about preservation sure yes there is some environmentally sensitive area to the east of the subject site closer where you see and so on the very far east side of this map where you see Elm Fork and Trinity River this area does have some ESA some of it kind of comes into the boundary here of the subject area when any development would come forward in the future they would be required to do an environmentally sensitive area field assessment to identify those areas if they're encroaching they would have to do an alternative ESA any other questions okay as of right now we do not have any public comments on this but is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak regarding this agenda item yes go ahead and come forward please make sure you state your name and address and then you we do ask that you still fill out a speaker card for us good evening everybody my name is E Tony I my address is 50 120 East University Drive we are actually the property that Aaron was talking about having some little affected by the reservation of the trees and stuff I just want to be honest with everybody we are planning to develop this site and we are supporting this comprehensive comprehensive plan change and as somebody who is trying to bring something to this tree and environment is the biggest thing to me and my family as with some conversations with cities and some county commissioners we made a promise that if we may remove any trees we will plant above what city requested to do so that's that's all thank you thank you commissioners do you have any other questions any other public comments okay we will close the public hearing at this time on this agenda item any final comments or questions from the commissioners do we have a motion I would you have a comment just a comment I think there was some concern about traffic on 380 there was some we had some input from a citizen from that the e-comment oh we did I'm sorry yes ma'am thank you so much for reminding me we did have one e-comment that was against this proposal yes the e-comment did speak to concern with fast traffic along us 380 and how these uses would would would interact with that traffic the uses that are allowed today under the current zonings and current future land use designation what would align with that staff believes would be more inconsistent with this traffic today future future land use designations of low residential and the current zonings out there would allow things like single-family homes agricultural property but really not a lot of larger development where we see multiple points of access and more traffic studies those single-family homes have have driveways directly off of us 380 and future development would be required to likely go through traffic studies have different points of access turn lanes that you wouldn't see today with single-family driveways does that answer the question yes I just want to make sure we address that concern thank you commissioner okay anything else okay we have a motion from Commissioner Garland yes I make a motion to approve the recommendation of the amendment of the comprehensive plan as defined by the city and Commissioner Ketcher said you have a second I second the motion okay any other discussion we will go ahead and take a vote okay that passes unanimously four to zero that ends the public hearing section of the evening we will go into the project matrix on PZ 25 - 28 do we have any updates to the matrix yes I will just add that we removed the one item from the matrix that we addressed last meeting regarding the I believe is the gas well request but that's the only change that we have made at this time just to give you all the typical updates on council actions that have occurred on items that came before you all the mobility plan amendment that you recently heard for the area south of UNT Eagle and Avenue A was approved by council at their meeting on the 16th as well as the plan development request for the property that was in that triangle between loop 288 I 35 north and highway 77 and then the alternative ESA plan that was heard that same night for the property on Spencer Road has been postponed indefinitely those are the only updates that I have for you all okay any final remarks from the commissioners okay I just want to again welcome Commissioner catcher said tonight I hope that this was an exciting one for your first one and I just want to thank the public we had quite a group of attendance and it really does take the public to interact with the government you are checks and balances so I know a lot of them have left but if they should see this thank you all for coming and I hope those of you watching know that this is your opportunity come to these meetings because it's really important and with that we will conclude our meeting at 749 tonight everyone have a good evening