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