WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:11.480 Good afternoon, at 5.02 p.m. Wednesday, October 8th, I will call our work session of the Denton 00:00:11.480 --> 00:00:16.120 Planning and Zoning Commission to order with the quorum present. 00:00:16.120 --> 00:00:22.440 Our first order of business is any citizen comments on consent agenda items. 00:00:22.440 --> 00:00:26.280 I don't see anyone present. 00:00:26.280 --> 00:00:33.640 Next we'll move on to clarification for agenda items on the agenda. 00:00:33.640 --> 00:00:40.920 Any questions on the minutes or the consent agenda item tonight? 00:00:40.920 --> 00:00:41.920 Commissioner McDuff? 00:00:41.920 --> 00:00:48.160 May I go back, only because I'm sometimes slow and have several piles. 00:00:48.160 --> 00:01:02.120 I have had several inquiries on my Facebook messenger and comments, and I also, on several 00:01:02.120 --> 00:01:13.760 of my membership pages, community organizations, and I referred them to my email, and it was 00:01:13.760 --> 00:01:16.560 very, you know, I always thought, how am I going to do this? 00:01:16.560 --> 00:01:21.600 And so I am now going to, I said if you need to see, send me something, send something 00:01:21.600 --> 00:01:27.680 to my city email, and I asked our marketing person to, I'll say it didn't benefit Legge, 00:01:27.680 --> 00:01:29.280 I'll just say it. 00:01:29.280 --> 00:01:36.280 And so she did, but I am now thinking, the other way would be the e-comment, it would 00:01:36.280 --> 00:01:46.200 be quick, so I know I have that on our matrix to discuss, but I'm just, as a comment for 00:01:46.200 --> 00:01:53.680 citizen input, so I wanted to make you aware of that out of the gate. 00:01:53.680 --> 00:01:57.880 Thank you. 00:01:57.880 --> 00:02:00.480 Any other questions on the consent agenda? 00:02:00.480 --> 00:02:03.920 No, okay. 00:02:03.920 --> 00:02:05.960 Individual consideration items. 00:02:05.960 --> 00:02:08.960 First is FR250020. 00:02:08.960 --> 00:02:18.400 Yeah, why don't you, feel free to step back in the hallway. 00:02:18.400 --> 00:02:19.400 Yeah. 00:02:19.400 --> 00:02:22.400 Just a brief intro. 00:02:22.400 --> 00:02:25.680 We'll give you a knock. 00:02:25.680 --> 00:02:26.680 A lot. 00:02:26.680 --> 00:02:31.600 So let the record show that our Commissioner McDade is recusing herself. 00:02:31.600 --> 00:02:42.160 All right, good evening, I'm Julie Wyatt, I'm presenting FR250020. 00:02:42.160 --> 00:02:51.040 This is a replat of a property located on the west side of Loop 288, south of Audre 00:02:51.040 --> 00:02:52.040 Lane. 00:02:52.040 --> 00:02:55.480 It is a fourplex development. 00:02:55.480 --> 00:02:57.200 It was platted previously. 00:02:57.200 --> 00:03:04.400 A new developer has come in and has kind of changed the design of those fourplexes and 00:03:04.400 --> 00:03:06.920 so they had to make some changes to the plat. 00:03:06.920 --> 00:03:11.380 Right now they have some things that they do need to resolve in order to, for staff 00:03:11.380 --> 00:03:16.000 to recommend approval, so we are recommending denial, however, we don't have any objection 00:03:16.000 --> 00:03:21.600 to the requested extension to October 22nd. 00:03:21.600 --> 00:03:24.280 Okay. 00:03:24.280 --> 00:03:27.520 Any questions? 00:03:27.520 --> 00:03:32.480 All right. 00:03:32.480 --> 00:03:41.560 Thank you, Julie. 00:03:41.560 --> 00:03:52.360 Yeah, thank you. 00:03:52.360 --> 00:04:01.080 And then we have one public hearing this evening, item Z250013. 00:04:01.080 --> 00:04:02.080 Welcome Mia. 00:04:02.080 --> 00:04:11.680 Good evening, Chair, members of the Commission, Mia Hines, Senior Planner. 00:04:11.680 --> 00:04:18.000 And this item, as stated in the caption, is a request to rezone a total of 6.63 acres 00:04:18.000 --> 00:04:21.180 to the mixed-use neighborhood zoning district. 00:04:21.180 --> 00:04:28.240 The property is located just south of East McKinney Street, approximately, or just west 00:04:28.240 --> 00:04:38.120 of Glengarry Way and the property is currently, it's comprised of two properties. 00:04:38.120 --> 00:04:43.020 One is zoned R4 and one is zoned RR. 00:04:43.020 --> 00:04:48.400 It is in line with the comprehensive plan for moderate residential in this area and 00:04:48.400 --> 00:04:50.040 so staff is recommending approval. 00:04:50.040 --> 00:04:54.120 I do have a much more in-depth presentation to go over in the work session, but I'd be 00:04:54.120 --> 00:05:00.560 happy to answer any questions or respond to any comments that you have at this time. 00:05:00.560 --> 00:05:05.640 Commissioner McDuff. 00:05:05.640 --> 00:05:07.720 Thank you, Chair Pruitt. 00:05:07.720 --> 00:05:16.080 Ms. Hines, with this change, this would allow for multi-family dwellings, correct? 00:05:16.080 --> 00:05:17.080 Correct. 00:05:17.080 --> 00:05:23.360 And a multi-family dwelling is a code for apartment complexes, correct? 00:05:23.360 --> 00:05:24.360 Correct. 00:05:24.360 --> 00:05:25.360 Okay. 00:05:25.360 --> 00:05:26.360 Okay. 00:05:26.360 --> 00:05:27.360 Yep. 00:05:27.360 --> 00:05:33.840 So yes, though, currently with the existing zoning district's multi-family is not permitted, 00:05:33.840 --> 00:05:35.640 the MN district does permit multi-family. 00:05:35.640 --> 00:05:38.120 Yes, but not the R4. 00:05:38.120 --> 00:05:39.720 R4 or RR, no. 00:05:39.720 --> 00:05:40.720 Yes. 00:05:40.720 --> 00:05:47.720 Another question, if I may, I notice that they were wanting to, proposers were wanting 00:05:47.720 --> 00:05:52.240 to have this rezoned to make the property more marketable. 00:05:52.240 --> 00:05:53.240 Is that your understanding? 00:05:53.240 --> 00:05:54.240 Yes, ma'am. 00:05:54.240 --> 00:05:55.240 Yeah. 00:05:55.240 --> 00:05:59.640 And the applicant will be here to answer some questions later, but essentially what they've 00:05:59.640 --> 00:06:06.120 described and sort of submitted in their narrative, I think that I've attached that also, is they've 00:06:06.120 --> 00:06:11.360 had interests for developing the property for a couple of different uses. 00:06:11.360 --> 00:06:15.000 Some of them are much more intense than what we would actually support. 00:06:15.000 --> 00:06:20.640 So we wouldn't allow for one of the more intense commercial zoning districts. 00:06:20.640 --> 00:06:28.480 In this case, the MN district does come with some buffers and some mitigation requirements 00:06:28.480 --> 00:06:33.240 that would minimize the impact any type of development would have on some of the surrounding 00:06:33.240 --> 00:06:39.840 developments, specifically that we looked hard at the residential development to the 00:06:39.840 --> 00:06:43.520 east there and how that might be impacted. 00:06:43.520 --> 00:06:49.560 And ultimately, MN, it does meet our moderate residential future land use designation, and 00:06:49.560 --> 00:06:50.760 it makes sense in this area. 00:06:50.760 --> 00:06:57.800 I think it provides for a different set of standards that is much more pedestrian oriented 00:06:57.800 --> 00:07:00.000 than other zoning districts. 00:07:00.000 --> 00:07:07.520 So this was kind of that middle and the applicant's intent or purpose for rezoning this is to ultimately 00:07:07.520 --> 00:07:08.520 sell it. 00:07:08.520 --> 00:07:09.520 Okay. 00:07:09.520 --> 00:07:15.600 I just want to get that out here, talk about it, because it caught me by surprise. 00:07:15.600 --> 00:07:18.920 And one more, if I may. 00:07:18.920 --> 00:07:24.880 It's my understanding as well, Ms. Hines, this is across from Ryan High School. 00:07:24.880 --> 00:07:26.960 So I just want to say that out loud too. 00:07:26.960 --> 00:07:30.960 That's of concern to me too with the traffic patterns. 00:07:30.960 --> 00:07:41.160 There is a light currently at that intersection that does hopefully help with traffic in that 00:07:41.160 --> 00:07:42.160 area. 00:07:42.160 --> 00:07:47.160 I'm assuming at peak hours it's still significant, but there is a light at that intersection 00:07:47.160 --> 00:07:51.320 that would support a commercial development on this property as well as the traffic that's 00:07:51.320 --> 00:07:52.880 currently there with Ryan High School. 00:07:52.880 --> 00:07:58.040 Would we do traffic studies, or would we consider that as well, would we not? 00:07:58.040 --> 00:07:59.040 Yes. 00:07:59.040 --> 00:08:02.760 Any new coming development, again, they don't have a development directly attached to this 00:08:02.760 --> 00:08:07.360 zoning change request, but any incoming development would have to meet the MN standards, and they 00:08:07.360 --> 00:08:12.240 would have to submit first trip generation numbers with their zoning compliance plan. 00:08:12.240 --> 00:08:15.680 And if it's determined that those numbers are high enough, then a traffic impact analysis 00:08:15.680 --> 00:08:17.560 would be submitted for review. 00:08:17.560 --> 00:08:18.560 Okay. 00:08:18.560 --> 00:08:19.560 Thanks. 00:08:19.560 --> 00:08:25.760 I guess just one or two things that may already be in your backup report, so we don't need 00:08:25.760 --> 00:08:34.760 to talk about them if they are, but one, if we could at the public hearing see a chart 00:08:34.760 --> 00:08:43.360 of those compatibility buffers between different uses that are applicable to this zoning district 00:08:43.360 --> 00:08:48.760 proposed, I think that would help understand, as well as kind of understanding how wide 00:08:48.760 --> 00:08:51.840 this parcel is. 00:08:51.840 --> 00:09:00.800 And then secondly, if you have handy the uses that would be precluded because of the proximity 00:09:00.800 --> 00:09:03.600 to the school, that would be helpful as well. 00:09:03.600 --> 00:09:05.720 I can definitely get the uses that would be precluded. 00:09:05.720 --> 00:09:08.920 I think typically that's more of a, it's a state law thing, so I have to look that up 00:09:08.920 --> 00:09:10.280 to confirm. 00:09:10.280 --> 00:09:14.400 I do have a little bit of information that I'll go over more in depth in the regular 00:09:14.400 --> 00:09:20.620 session, but just because you asked it here, as far as compatibility buffers and what we 00:09:20.620 --> 00:09:25.720 require from a landscape standpoint, it would be the same regardless, it's imposed on the 00:09:25.720 --> 00:09:26.720 new development. 00:09:26.720 --> 00:09:31.600 So if the new development is commercial, then a 15-foot wide landscape buffer would be required 00:09:31.600 --> 00:09:37.520 between the existing residential property and the development of its multifamily, then 00:09:37.520 --> 00:09:41.020 it's a 10-foot wide landscape buffer that would be required. 00:09:41.020 --> 00:09:44.700 As far as height restrictions, that's one of the other things that's special about the 00:09:44.700 --> 00:09:54.680 MN district, is that they do have a maximum 65-foot height requirement, but there is special 00:09:54.680 --> 00:10:00.280 restrictions that if you're adjacent, directly adjacent to a residential zone property, then 00:10:00.280 --> 00:10:04.320 you cannot go over 40 feet without first obtaining a specific use permit. 00:10:04.320 --> 00:10:09.160 So if they were proposing something higher than basically what is already, or what would 00:10:09.160 --> 00:10:12.600 be allowed in like an R7, they would have to come back before this body. 00:10:12.600 --> 00:10:17.800 And I will note that that is slightly different from the RR district that currently just allows 00:10:17.800 --> 00:10:24.400 the 60-foot height and doesn't have that different SUP requirement for over 40 feet. 00:10:24.400 --> 00:10:25.400 Okay. 00:10:25.400 --> 00:10:26.400 Thank you. 00:10:26.400 --> 00:10:27.400 Any other questions? 00:10:27.400 --> 00:10:28.400 Commissioner Dio? 00:10:28.400 --> 00:10:39.040 I just want to make sure that I'm understanding what I'm hearing and seeing. 00:10:39.040 --> 00:10:43.920 Since some of the information that you have attached to the agenda is the future land 00:10:43.920 --> 00:10:44.920 use map. 00:10:44.920 --> 00:10:49.120 Do you have that in your- Let's see. 00:10:49.120 --> 00:10:50.720 So it's this map here. 00:10:50.720 --> 00:10:51.720 Right. 00:10:51.720 --> 00:10:52.720 Yes. 00:10:52.720 --> 00:10:57.440 So that looks to be, this property looks to be in moderate residential. 00:10:57.440 --> 00:11:02.000 Is that coincide with the MN that they're asking? 00:11:02.000 --> 00:11:03.000 Yes. 00:11:03.000 --> 00:11:08.680 So the mixed use neighborhood district does allow for the moderate and sort of that missing 00:11:08.680 --> 00:11:09.680 residential. 00:11:09.680 --> 00:11:11.360 So it allows for town homes as well as multifamily. 00:11:11.360 --> 00:11:15.480 And depending on how the lot is plotted out, it could get over, I think that the moderate 00:11:15.480 --> 00:11:20.800 residential future land use designation has a density of approximately six to 12 million 00:11:20.800 --> 00:11:22.620 units per acre. 00:11:22.620 --> 00:11:26.560 But realistically with this property, with the trees that are on site currently and they 00:11:26.560 --> 00:11:30.040 would have to preserve, and then the distance requirements that they would have to be set 00:11:30.040 --> 00:11:34.240 back from the single family development, I think with a multifamily development, if that 00:11:34.240 --> 00:11:38.640 were to occur, you would end up getting about the density that we have for the moderate 00:11:38.640 --> 00:11:41.360 residential designation. 00:11:41.360 --> 00:11:45.480 And then similar on the other hand, if the property comes in to develop as commercial, 00:11:45.480 --> 00:11:50.160 because right now we really don't know what the end user would be, if it does come to 00:11:50.160 --> 00:11:54.360 develop as commercial, it's more of those neighborhoods scaled commercial requirements 00:11:54.360 --> 00:11:56.360 for the MN district. 00:11:56.360 --> 00:12:00.840 So it would be something useful for the surrounding residences or neighborhoods or whatever, and 00:12:00.840 --> 00:12:04.000 they would still have to adhere to those setbacks and buffers and things. 00:12:04.000 --> 00:12:10.920 - So that property directly to the east is single family homes, single detached. 00:12:10.920 --> 00:12:21.320 And is it my understanding that city staff was requested to produce a whole like report 00:12:21.320 --> 00:12:27.880 on apartments on multifamily and how many units the city had, how many were vacant and 00:12:27.880 --> 00:12:31.800 all of that, is that true? 00:12:31.800 --> 00:12:36.760 - We did give a report, I think Haley gave a report earlier this year on the total multifamily 00:12:36.760 --> 00:12:41.240 and single family counts and sort of how they align with our overall goals, yes, we have 00:12:41.240 --> 00:12:42.240 done that. 00:12:42.240 --> 00:12:48.960 - And how are we sitting at vacancies, 'cause I'm just kind of curious that if this is being 00:12:48.960 --> 00:12:57.080 potentially changed for marketability, and I mean, personally, I see the chatter on some 00:12:57.080 --> 00:13:04.600 of the community pages about the like or dislike. 00:13:04.600 --> 00:13:09.680 - So I'll add a little bit and then try to focus us back on the zoning case, because 00:13:09.680 --> 00:13:16.000 this isn't a specific land use that they are requesting, it's just the zoning change. 00:13:16.000 --> 00:13:21.400 So any of the uses that are permitted in MN would be permitted if this should go forward. 00:13:21.400 --> 00:13:26.200 We haven't received, as far as public comments, we haven't received any responses in opposition 00:13:26.200 --> 00:13:29.720 to the request or the broad request. 00:13:29.720 --> 00:13:36.280 I tried to stay off of social media for work purposes, so I'm not sure on that end. 00:13:36.280 --> 00:13:40.720 But as far as official like responses to the city or inquiries or calls even, I haven't 00:13:40.720 --> 00:13:45.360 gotten anything in opposition to the proposed. 00:13:45.360 --> 00:13:48.560 - Are there huge vacancies of apartments? 00:13:48.560 --> 00:13:52.320 - I'd look to Haley for that, that might be a question that we need to research. 00:13:52.320 --> 00:13:55.960 - Maybe that's just information you can bring at the meeting tonight to give you guys some 00:13:55.960 --> 00:13:56.960 time. 00:13:56.960 --> 00:14:03.480 I'm just, because I understand that this isn't to approve a potential development, but by 00:14:03.480 --> 00:14:12.760 approving a zoning change, it does, if this goes through, it does open up the door as 00:14:12.760 --> 00:14:16.240 those is one of the potential outcomes. 00:14:16.240 --> 00:14:17.240 - Sure. 00:14:17.240 --> 00:14:18.240 Go ahead. 00:14:18.240 --> 00:14:25.200 - Yeah, I'll just say, I don't think we have good data from a city perspective of 00:14:25.200 --> 00:14:26.200 vacancy. 00:14:26.200 --> 00:14:28.480 It's something that's private data. 00:14:28.480 --> 00:14:33.960 There are industry groups that you're aware of that you can purchase stuff from and you 00:14:33.960 --> 00:14:37.520 trust them as much as you do or not. 00:14:37.520 --> 00:14:41.400 We need to stay focused on the zoning case. 00:14:41.400 --> 00:14:46.000 Did you have anything else? 00:14:46.000 --> 00:14:56.800 - I understand the concern, but there's a lot of zoned lands for other uses that are 00:14:56.800 --> 00:15:00.560 not in demand in the city as well, right? 00:15:00.560 --> 00:15:03.600 - Okay, those are just my questions. 00:15:03.600 --> 00:15:04.600 - Yeah. 00:15:04.600 --> 00:15:05.600 Commissioner Riggs. 00:15:05.600 --> 00:15:11.840 - Yeah, so I mean, I'm looking at the size, very skinny, skinny site. 00:15:11.840 --> 00:15:15.760 I'm not sure how you'd do a whole lot of multifamily on there. 00:15:15.760 --> 00:15:21.120 It seems like as if you'd have half of the site just be a roadway in. 00:15:21.120 --> 00:15:24.360 And I think some of the concerns that you're hearing from the commissioners is that one 00:15:24.360 --> 00:15:27.880 of the things we hear a lot is that we have oversaturation of apartments. 00:15:27.880 --> 00:15:30.680 - Commissioner Riggs, I'm gonna cut in. 00:15:30.680 --> 00:15:36.080 We're getting into deliberation and it's great deliberation, but it's not what we're posted 00:15:36.080 --> 00:15:37.860 for at this time. 00:15:37.860 --> 00:15:42.760 So I'd ask to maybe bookmark those questions and comments and absolutely bring them up 00:15:42.760 --> 00:15:44.640 in the public hearing portion. 00:15:44.640 --> 00:15:50.480 'Cause the reason for that is because the applicant should be able to hear and respond 00:15:50.480 --> 00:15:55.360 or other members of the public making comment, it would be more appropriate there. 00:15:55.360 --> 00:15:56.800 And that's kind of for everyone. 00:15:56.800 --> 00:16:00.720 - Yeah, let me ask you, would it be appropriate to ask, is there another zoning that would 00:16:00.720 --> 00:16:02.080 just be townhomes? 00:16:02.080 --> 00:16:05.480 - Yeah, questions are absolutely appropriate at this time. 00:16:05.480 --> 00:16:09.080 - Is there another zoning that would preclude it just to townhomes and not apartments? 00:16:09.080 --> 00:16:13.120 - That R7 zoning district, I believe, I have to double check that. 00:16:13.120 --> 00:16:17.440 I think that R7 zoning district does allow for townhomes and would require the specific 00:16:17.440 --> 00:16:24.680 use permit to come back before this body if they were to go for multifamily. 00:16:24.680 --> 00:16:31.280 And we did consider, we did consider or bounce that idea off to the applicant that R7 zoning 00:16:31.280 --> 00:16:36.720 district, but ultimately the MN, what they were requesting doesn't adhere to our criteria 00:16:36.720 --> 00:16:37.720 for approval. 00:16:37.720 --> 00:16:39.440 So we are recommending approval of the MN. 00:16:39.440 --> 00:16:40.440 - Okay. 00:16:40.440 --> 00:16:49.120 Any other questions or more data or information we need or see needing at the meeting? 00:16:49.120 --> 00:16:53.080 Commissioner MacDuff? 00:16:53.080 --> 00:16:54.600 - Just a question as well. 00:16:54.600 --> 00:17:00.320 I agree with Commissioner Dyer about it would be interesting to have that not for tonight. 00:17:00.320 --> 00:17:05.600 I think we're going to preclude it because of our time and our posting, as we say, but 00:17:05.600 --> 00:17:12.360 the data on the apartments, because I think it does spill into everything. 00:17:12.360 --> 00:17:19.720 This work session and the public deliberation and the matrix, et cetera. 00:17:19.720 --> 00:17:21.120 - Okay. 00:17:21.120 --> 00:17:22.120 All right. 00:17:22.120 --> 00:17:23.120 Not seeing any more. 00:17:23.120 --> 00:17:24.120 Thank you, Mia. 00:17:24.120 --> 00:17:25.120 - Thank you. 00:17:25.120 --> 00:17:32.800 - We do have a work session item, two work session items tonight. 00:17:32.800 --> 00:17:43.680 First is receiver report, hold a discussion regarding communal living and how small home 00:17:43.680 --> 00:17:48.200 communities could be developed in the city of Denton. 00:17:48.200 --> 00:17:51.560 - Julie Wyatt, principal planner with the city of Denton, and I am presenting communal 00:17:51.560 --> 00:17:54.480 living and small home communities. 00:17:54.480 --> 00:17:57.480 This was a matrix item that was requested last year. 00:17:57.480 --> 00:17:59.480 We're finally coming to talk to you about it. 00:17:59.480 --> 00:18:04.000 I'm going to issue one maya culpa before we get into it, and that is it's a very large 00:18:04.000 --> 00:18:09.720 topic, a lot of broad things, so if I don't hit the mark, let me know and we can come 00:18:09.720 --> 00:18:12.120 back and continue the conversation. 00:18:12.120 --> 00:18:13.760 So with that, we'll get started. 00:18:13.760 --> 00:18:20.280 So we're going to talk about two topics, communal living and small home communities. 00:18:20.280 --> 00:18:22.680 We're going to talk about, we're going to define our terms. 00:18:22.680 --> 00:18:27.760 We're going to talk about some case studies, some common characteristics, and then the 00:18:27.760 --> 00:18:32.360 Denton Development Code regulations, which would typically apply to these. 00:18:32.360 --> 00:18:35.520 I want you to know, these are not separate topics. 00:18:35.520 --> 00:18:43.000 They're pretty intertwined, so the case studies, there's no one singular ideal example. 00:18:43.000 --> 00:18:49.160 So just know that there are approximations and that there are a lot of facets for both 00:18:49.160 --> 00:18:55.040 of these topics, which can affect a lot of different facets to the other topic. 00:18:55.040 --> 00:18:58.880 So here we go, we're going to talk about communal living first. 00:18:58.880 --> 00:19:04.240 There are really two broad topics that we're going to talk about in communal living, co-housing 00:19:04.240 --> 00:19:08.960 or intentional communities, and then also co-op housing. 00:19:08.960 --> 00:19:13.680 Co-housing or intentional communities, the ULI talks about emphasis on shared space, 00:19:13.680 --> 00:19:15.960 shared time, shared values. 00:19:15.960 --> 00:19:20.120 They're usually a collaborative effort between a small group of people. 00:19:20.120 --> 00:19:25.780 Co-op housing.org goes a little further to say really it is public space, but also private 00:19:25.780 --> 00:19:26.780 homes. 00:19:26.780 --> 00:19:33.240 So it's really making sure that residents have those private spaces, but also they want 00:19:33.240 --> 00:19:39.960 the community members in a cooperative and public area. 00:19:39.960 --> 00:19:44.560 Typically these have a condominium structure, but there are other ownership structures, 00:19:44.560 --> 00:19:46.720 and I've got one tonight. 00:19:46.720 --> 00:19:52.480 Co-op housing is different than co-housing in that you're not buying that private space, 00:19:52.480 --> 00:19:59.160 you're not buying a condo or a house, you're buying into an LLC, or I'm sorry, a not-for-profit. 00:19:59.160 --> 00:20:05.480 So you buy shares in that not-for-profit and then you live in that area. 00:20:05.480 --> 00:20:10.720 Participation, so buying into the not-for-profit usually requires approval by a board, and 00:20:10.720 --> 00:20:14.520 they're democratically managed. 00:20:14.520 --> 00:20:18.360 And it can apply to a variety of residential use types. 00:20:18.360 --> 00:20:20.280 I want to be careful. 00:20:20.280 --> 00:20:23.160 These are not really defined land uses. 00:20:23.160 --> 00:20:28.120 They are based on home or ownership structure. 00:20:28.120 --> 00:20:32.000 There are a lot of different uses that could go in these buckets. 00:20:32.000 --> 00:20:38.000 But typically, given the way that these are organized and owned, they are considered multifamily 00:20:38.000 --> 00:20:42.460 in the city of Denton, because condo ownership is actually considered multifamily. 00:20:42.460 --> 00:20:47.680 Our definition for multifamily is five or more dwelling units on one platted lot. 00:20:47.680 --> 00:20:51.360 So with that, let's talk about some case studies. 00:20:51.360 --> 00:20:52.360 Co-housing Houston. 00:20:52.360 --> 00:20:54.520 It's in Houston, Texas. 00:20:54.520 --> 00:20:58.480 It's an infill project in the second ward, a moderate density area. 00:20:58.480 --> 00:21:04.080 There is single family, there's townhomes, there's multifamily, a lot of different residential 00:21:04.080 --> 00:21:06.500 types in the area. 00:21:06.500 --> 00:21:09.360 This use is multifamily. 00:21:09.360 --> 00:21:15.440 The community has a common house, garden, shared decision-making, and community gardens. 00:21:15.440 --> 00:21:19.400 Ownership, this is kind of interesting, and I don't really understand it. 00:21:19.400 --> 00:21:23.840 Hillary would probably know a lot more, but each unit is owned by an LLC, and then the 00:21:23.840 --> 00:21:26.480 individuals are the fiduciaries. 00:21:26.480 --> 00:21:29.680 Affordability, it is not an affordable project. 00:21:29.680 --> 00:21:36.440 It is market rate, and in fact, there is one condo listed for $544,000 right now. 00:21:36.440 --> 00:21:43.160 The zoning that entitles it is none because Houston does not have zoning. 00:21:43.160 --> 00:21:44.720 Hartwood Commons. 00:21:44.720 --> 00:21:48.520 This might look familiar to some on the commission. 00:21:48.520 --> 00:21:50.640 This is in Tulsa, Oklahoma. 00:21:50.640 --> 00:21:57.400 It is located in a mixed-use area with commercial, employment, elderly housing, and other residential 00:21:57.400 --> 00:21:58.600 uses. 00:21:58.600 --> 00:22:04.040 This looks a lot like horizontal multifamily that we saw a lot of in the city of Denton 00:22:04.040 --> 00:22:13.560 about two, three years ago, so it really follows that kind of site layout that that horizontal 00:22:13.560 --> 00:22:23.000 multifamily had, one-story duplexes and then four-plexes on the site on one platted lot. 00:22:23.000 --> 00:22:27.640 This appears to be age kind of over 55. 00:22:27.640 --> 00:22:30.360 They have shared open space. 00:22:30.360 --> 00:22:35.960 The residents own their own home, as well as a share of the common property, including 00:22:35.960 --> 00:22:44.480 the common house, so they own their own condo, and then they also have ownership in that 00:22:44.480 --> 00:22:46.440 lot that it's sitting on. 00:22:46.440 --> 00:22:48.240 These are also market rate. 00:22:48.240 --> 00:22:56.920 It is starting at $429,000, and the zoning for the property is multifamily. 00:22:56.920 --> 00:22:57.920 And then a last one. 00:22:57.920 --> 00:23:02.600 I had to choose ones that had different, like, contexts and building styles. 00:23:02.600 --> 00:23:04.680 So this is Capitol Hill Urban Housing. 00:23:04.680 --> 00:23:05.680 It's in Seattle, Washington. 00:23:05.680 --> 00:23:08.520 It is in an urban dense neighborhood. 00:23:08.520 --> 00:23:10.320 It is multifamily. 00:23:10.320 --> 00:23:12.720 It looks like what you would imagine multifamily, right? 00:23:12.720 --> 00:23:13.720 Four or five stories. 00:23:13.720 --> 00:23:16.120 It's a 4,500-square-foot building. 00:23:16.120 --> 00:23:19.340 There are nine dwellings in it, no on-site parking. 00:23:19.340 --> 00:23:22.720 They talk about intergenerational rooftop farm. 00:23:22.720 --> 00:23:24.760 They are required to share three meals a week. 00:23:24.760 --> 00:23:26.700 It is non-smoking and gun-free. 00:23:26.700 --> 00:23:30.800 So they definitely have a point of view in this community. 00:23:30.800 --> 00:23:33.080 The ownership is long-term rental. 00:23:33.080 --> 00:23:36.400 It's market rate, and the zoning is mixed use. 00:23:36.400 --> 00:23:39.560 So what are the common characteristics of these co-housing types? 00:23:39.560 --> 00:23:45.840 And just to let you know, I did not include a specific co-op, because once again, it's 00:23:45.840 --> 00:23:47.600 very similar to what these are. 00:23:47.600 --> 00:23:50.920 It really is depending on that ownership. 00:23:50.920 --> 00:23:54.640 And before I talk about the common characteristics, I don't know if you're familiar, but there 00:23:54.640 --> 00:23:57.520 is one similar in near Denton. 00:23:57.520 --> 00:24:02.120 It's the White Hawk community, and it is off of Locust to the north. 00:24:02.120 --> 00:24:08.760 It has been there since the 1970s, and the homes are partially built underground. 00:24:08.760 --> 00:24:11.920 So we have one local. 00:24:11.920 --> 00:24:13.960 So once again, not a defined land use. 00:24:13.960 --> 00:24:20.200 It is based upon ownership and how that is structured. 00:24:20.200 --> 00:24:23.240 Typically, these are designed as multifamily. 00:24:23.240 --> 00:24:27.280 It is not necessarily intended to meet affordability needs. 00:24:27.280 --> 00:24:31.080 It's usually intended to promote a sense of community. 00:24:31.080 --> 00:24:37.160 There are affordable ones, particularly in the co-op space, but in terms of co-housing, 00:24:37.160 --> 00:24:41.480 it really does seem to be mostly market rate from what I found. 00:24:41.480 --> 00:24:44.840 They really emphasize common amenities. 00:24:44.840 --> 00:24:51.040 Communities can be shared or organized around shared interests, lifestyle, age, location. 00:24:51.040 --> 00:24:57.080 And I found that they could either be ground up, so a group of residents could say, we're 00:24:57.080 --> 00:25:03.340 going to create this and then go find a developer and build it, or it could be developer driven. 00:25:03.340 --> 00:25:05.600 How could you build one of these in the city of Denton? 00:25:05.600 --> 00:25:10.760 Well, really, we have the regulations already kind of in place because they, once again, 00:25:10.760 --> 00:25:12.040 would follow our multifamily. 00:25:12.040 --> 00:25:15.720 So we're just going to kind of go chapter by chapter in the Denton Development Code. 00:25:15.720 --> 00:25:19.800 In chapter 212, we have affordability incentives that applies to multifamily. 00:25:19.800 --> 00:25:21.920 It would apply to this. 00:25:21.920 --> 00:25:33.700 Our incentives allow developers to maybe increase building height or reduce parking in exchange 00:25:33.700 --> 00:25:39.420 for including affordable units within their projects. 00:25:39.420 --> 00:25:42.760 Multifamily is allowed in MN, MD, and MR. 00:25:42.760 --> 00:25:46.860 It requires an SUP and R7, SC, HC, and GO. 00:25:46.860 --> 00:25:51.820 So there are a variety of districts where this type of use would be allowed. 00:25:51.820 --> 00:25:54.960 We do not separate condominiums out as a separate use. 00:25:54.960 --> 00:25:58.720 Once again, it is under the multifamily umbrella. 00:25:58.720 --> 00:26:00.960 We have residential use standards. 00:26:00.960 --> 00:26:05.320 Minimal multifamily dwelling unit size is 400 square feet. 00:26:05.320 --> 00:26:11.960 And in mixed use districts, the bottom floor has to be at least 12 feet in height. 00:26:11.960 --> 00:26:18.560 In terms of SUP Chapter 7 and site design, parking, two-way drive aisles are typically 00:26:18.560 --> 00:26:20.720 26 feet wide. 00:26:20.720 --> 00:26:25.160 And multifamily parking is based on the number of bedrooms. 00:26:25.160 --> 00:26:29.240 Multifamily projects over 10 require 8 percent open space. 00:26:29.240 --> 00:26:33.760 And then the buildings, their specific building orientation depending on where it is and the 00:26:33.760 --> 00:26:34.760 type of buildings. 00:26:34.760 --> 00:26:41.640 There are also some general fire safety considerations that one would have to keep in mind. 00:26:41.640 --> 00:26:46.560 Not necessarily apply to all, but things like sprinkler in the building, fire lanes adjacent 00:26:46.560 --> 00:26:49.360 to buildings, hose lay. 00:26:49.360 --> 00:26:53.700 You want to make sure all parts of the building can be reached by a hose. 00:26:53.700 --> 00:26:56.500 And then adequate access. 00:26:56.500 --> 00:27:03.200 And finally, platting, lot planning, essentially the lots have to meet the minimum zoning. 00:27:03.200 --> 00:27:06.840 So did you have any questions about co-housing or should we do questions at the end? 00:27:06.840 --> 00:27:11.600 Yeah, let's take a break, I think Commissioner Riggs had something before we get too far. 00:27:11.600 --> 00:27:17.080 I just had a question about one of the examples that you had where the essentially looks like 00:27:17.080 --> 00:27:21.080 there's garages off to the side, the one you were just on. 00:27:21.080 --> 00:27:22.080 This one? 00:27:22.080 --> 00:27:23.080 Yes. 00:27:23.080 --> 00:27:30.960 So who maintains that drive aisle, who maintains, or how does the ownership of those garages 00:27:30.960 --> 00:27:31.960 split up? 00:27:31.960 --> 00:27:32.960 You know, that's a good question. 00:27:32.960 --> 00:27:39.580 I would anticipate that because all residents own a piece of the common area that it would 00:27:39.580 --> 00:27:45.040 have to be maintained by their association or their LLC. 00:27:45.040 --> 00:27:46.040 Okay. 00:27:46.040 --> 00:27:51.240 I just had to deal with a few of those and those ended up being a lot of problems later 00:27:51.240 --> 00:27:54.240 on in the future. 00:27:54.240 --> 00:27:55.240 Okay. 00:27:55.240 --> 00:27:56.240 Right. 00:27:56.240 --> 00:27:57.240 Keep going. 00:27:57.240 --> 00:27:58.240 Thank you. 00:27:58.240 --> 00:27:59.240 Okay, moving on. 00:27:59.240 --> 00:28:00.240 All right. 00:28:00.240 --> 00:28:01.240 And now we have small home communities. 00:28:01.240 --> 00:28:06.440 What we're going to talk about is tiny homes, zero lot line and small lot and then cottage 00:28:06.440 --> 00:28:07.440 courts. 00:28:07.440 --> 00:28:13.360 So, just define our terms, a tiny home per the tiny home industry association is a single 00:28:13.360 --> 00:28:18.800 dwelling unit suitable for a full-time habitation of less than 400 square feet. 00:28:18.800 --> 00:28:22.080 It can be on a permanent or movable foundation. 00:28:22.080 --> 00:28:25.880 When we talk about suitable for full-time habitation, we're thinking it's got to have 00:28:25.880 --> 00:28:28.520 a kitchen, it's got to have a bedroom, it's got to have a place to live and it's got to 00:28:28.520 --> 00:28:31.320 have a bathroom, sanitation. 00:28:31.320 --> 00:28:33.720 Our building safety, we talked to them. 00:28:33.720 --> 00:28:36.160 Tiny homes are not HUD manufactured homes. 00:28:36.160 --> 00:28:37.160 Those are different things. 00:28:37.160 --> 00:28:39.320 They have different industry standards. 00:28:39.320 --> 00:28:44.320 They are inspected within the city of Denton, subject to specific building codes and in 00:28:44.320 --> 00:28:49.040 the city of Denton, in order to be considered a tiny home, it has to be on a permanent foundation. 00:28:49.040 --> 00:28:57.920 We do not allow tiny home developments to be on a movable or chassis, some other foundation. 00:28:57.920 --> 00:29:03.140 The DDC defines that tiny home as anything between 300 and 500 square feet. 00:29:03.140 --> 00:29:11.880 If it is not on a permanent foundation, it is in the recreational vehicle bucket as a... 00:29:11.880 --> 00:29:13.520 I've got it later. 00:29:13.520 --> 00:29:15.160 It's not one that goes on its own. 00:29:15.160 --> 00:29:16.760 It's one that's a travel trailer. 00:29:16.760 --> 00:29:18.480 That's it. 00:29:18.480 --> 00:29:21.680 And then tiny shelter, that is something we kind of hear about. 00:29:21.680 --> 00:29:24.160 A tiny shelter is not a dwelling. 00:29:24.160 --> 00:29:27.080 It is a detached building without some key elements. 00:29:27.080 --> 00:29:31.920 So it might be just a place to sleep and a bathroom, but no kitchen, or it may have no 00:29:31.920 --> 00:29:35.680 bathroom or kitchen, just a place to sleep. 00:29:35.680 --> 00:29:36.680 There are lot line homes. 00:29:36.680 --> 00:29:40.960 We had one of these recently, so I thought I'd toss this in here. 00:29:40.960 --> 00:29:45.720 These are single family dwellings arranged on individual lots, either as detached structures 00:29:45.720 --> 00:29:50.560 and with one or more side walls on the property line. 00:29:50.560 --> 00:29:58.280 So if you have your lot line, one of the building sides would be on that lot line. 00:29:58.280 --> 00:30:02.000 If you're just a small lot, it would be kind of centered in a lot, but the zero lot line 00:30:02.000 --> 00:30:04.520 has to be on that property line. 00:30:04.520 --> 00:30:12.800 And then cottage courts, those are kind of a different residential type. 00:30:12.800 --> 00:30:17.920 And one place that really defines this is missingmiddlehousing.com. 00:30:17.920 --> 00:30:21.600 If you've not gone to that website, it's pretty interesting, you should check it out. 00:30:21.600 --> 00:30:27.200 But it is a group of small detached structures, and it's arranged in a shared courtyard. 00:30:27.200 --> 00:30:29.840 Okay, so let's talk about some case studies. 00:30:29.840 --> 00:30:31.640 So this one is close to home. 00:30:31.640 --> 00:30:35.140 Tried to pick things that kind of were analogs to Denton. 00:30:35.140 --> 00:30:37.640 So we have the Lake Dallas Tiny Home Village. 00:30:37.640 --> 00:30:39.880 It is just south of here. 00:30:39.880 --> 00:30:44.720 If you've not been, it is in an infill area, mixed use, including commercial, single family, 00:30:44.720 --> 00:30:45.720 government. 00:30:45.720 --> 00:30:50.520 They do have tours, if you're interested on their website, they have tours. 00:30:50.520 --> 00:30:55.220 The type of use, these are small travel trailers, so these are not tiny homes the way Denton 00:30:55.220 --> 00:30:56.220 defines them. 00:30:56.220 --> 00:30:58.960 They are not on a permanent foundation. 00:30:58.960 --> 00:31:02.200 They have to be tied down, they have to have skirting. 00:31:02.200 --> 00:31:04.760 The community has 13 lots. 00:31:04.760 --> 00:31:07.680 The lots are 800 and 900 square feet. 00:31:07.680 --> 00:31:13.400 Each house can have two vehicles, and the maximum home size is 340 square feet. 00:31:13.400 --> 00:31:15.400 The tiny homes are individually owned. 00:31:15.400 --> 00:31:17.520 They rent the space. 00:31:17.520 --> 00:31:20.720 And that's about, the space is about 700 to 750 a month. 00:31:20.720 --> 00:31:25.800 I think that includes water, wastewater, and also solid waste. 00:31:25.800 --> 00:31:30.800 And the zoning that made it happen was a planned unit development, or I'm sorry, planned development 00:31:30.800 --> 00:31:32.880 district, other places called planned unit development. 00:31:32.880 --> 00:31:38.000 But yes, so they used a PD in order to allow this. 00:31:38.000 --> 00:31:43.000 Some other tiny home communities that I thought kind of captured the breadth of what tiny homes 00:31:43.000 --> 00:31:44.000 could be. 00:31:44.000 --> 00:31:47.480 This was kind of neat in Oklahoma City, Pivot Tiny Homes. 00:31:47.480 --> 00:31:50.360 This is actually kind of purpose-built, in that they are permanent homes. 00:31:50.360 --> 00:31:52.640 They are on foundations. 00:31:52.640 --> 00:31:57.320 But they provide social services for youth who are transitioning to adulthood, maybe 00:31:57.320 --> 00:32:01.160 youth in foster care, youth whose parents are not around. 00:32:01.160 --> 00:32:05.920 So it gives them no support for, as they're transitioning to adulthood. 00:32:05.920 --> 00:32:13.400 A PUD was used, so that's what Oklahoma City calls that, but the use is multi-family. 00:32:13.400 --> 00:32:22.520 So it's a variety of homes on permanent foundations on one lot. 00:32:22.520 --> 00:32:24.120 And then the Waters Tiny Home Community. 00:32:24.120 --> 00:32:26.120 This is also in Texas. 00:32:26.120 --> 00:32:30.900 It is in a semi-rural area, and it really is just an RV park. 00:32:30.900 --> 00:32:34.640 But it is a community for 55 and older. 00:32:34.640 --> 00:32:36.840 The homes must be owner-occupied. 00:32:36.840 --> 00:32:38.700 Permanent foundation is not required. 00:32:38.700 --> 00:32:41.080 They do have a lake. 00:32:41.080 --> 00:32:44.220 The tiny homes are individually owned, and once again, those lots are rented, and they 00:32:44.220 --> 00:32:46.880 rent for about $600 to $675. 00:32:46.880 --> 00:32:52.880 It's outside the city limits, so there's not a zoning district to really reference. 00:32:52.880 --> 00:32:59.860 When we talk about zero-lot line or small lots, I brought a variety of sample of examples. 00:32:59.860 --> 00:33:03.080 We have a one-in-flower mound just south of here. 00:33:03.080 --> 00:33:06.000 They've got a minimum lot size of 4,000 square feet. 00:33:06.000 --> 00:33:12.040 It is their central business zoning, so it conforms to that existing zoning. 00:33:12.040 --> 00:33:16.680 They have that side yard setback of one feet, so it's not quite zero-lot line. 00:33:16.680 --> 00:33:22.000 But the homes do have to be separated by 10 feet. 00:33:22.000 --> 00:33:26.440 That's for fire rating, so it's kind of a standard. 00:33:26.440 --> 00:33:31.840 If you are closer than 10 feet, the walls have to be fire rated. 00:33:31.840 --> 00:33:36.760 And the lots are 40 feet wide. 00:33:36.760 --> 00:33:39.760 They are alley-loaded, from what I can see. 00:33:39.760 --> 00:33:46.200 In Coppell, there's one development in kind of the Old Town area. 00:33:46.200 --> 00:33:48.840 It's a commercial area with some residential. 00:33:48.840 --> 00:33:53.000 Lot sizes range from 2880 to 3488. 00:33:53.000 --> 00:33:58.400 The side yard setbacks are zero and seven, so this is a zero-lot line community. 00:33:58.400 --> 00:34:01.900 Homes have to be 25 feet wide, and it is a planned development. 00:34:01.900 --> 00:34:06.680 And then finally, Plano has a zoning district which actually encourages this. 00:34:06.680 --> 00:34:09.240 So we've kind of got three ways to approach this. 00:34:09.240 --> 00:34:11.400 We have a zoning district which allows it. 00:34:11.400 --> 00:34:15.600 We have a planned development, and then we also have a zoning district where that is 00:34:15.600 --> 00:34:20.360 kind of what the city anticipates would be built there. 00:34:20.360 --> 00:34:24.000 Minimum lot area, once again, at 4,000 square feet. 00:34:24.000 --> 00:34:30.240 And in this specific instance, it's a planned development, but they do have that specific 00:34:30.240 --> 00:34:34.580 district. 00:34:34.580 --> 00:34:39.500 Cottage courts, as I mentioned, this is kind of a missing middle house type. 00:34:39.500 --> 00:34:45.040 It is intended to be kind of between single-family detached and then multi-family, kind of that 00:34:45.040 --> 00:34:46.040 transition. 00:34:46.040 --> 00:34:52.740 It's intended to fit within existing infill lots, kind of smaller lots. 00:34:52.740 --> 00:34:57.880 And cottage courts are detached residential, but they could also be multi-family, depending 00:34:57.880 --> 00:35:00.160 on how the lot is plotted, right? 00:35:00.160 --> 00:35:02.880 And organized around a central courtyard. 00:35:02.880 --> 00:35:07.960 Kind of the ideal would be five to ten units, one to one and a half stories, and then one 00:35:07.960 --> 00:35:10.880 to two parking spaces per unit. 00:35:10.880 --> 00:35:15.240 One that is kind of similar to this is Conover Commons in Redmond, Washington. 00:35:15.240 --> 00:35:16.480 It's suburban infill. 00:35:16.480 --> 00:35:20.240 It is single-family detached or multi-family. 00:35:20.240 --> 00:35:24.000 I don't really know, because I couldn't discern the platting. 00:35:24.000 --> 00:35:28.120 But they are single-family detached units. 00:35:28.120 --> 00:35:32.160 It is a nine and a half acre site, 24 dwellings. 00:35:32.160 --> 00:35:38.180 4.6 acres could not be developed, because it had a pretty steep slope and wetlands. 00:35:38.180 --> 00:35:39.800 Each home has a private yard. 00:35:39.800 --> 00:35:41.040 I thought this was interesting. 00:35:41.040 --> 00:35:46.200 They require, how they design it is residents pull into their garage, and then they have 00:35:46.200 --> 00:35:49.480 to walk around into the public space to get into their home. 00:35:49.480 --> 00:35:56.360 So it really is forcing those community members to interact with the community. 00:35:56.360 --> 00:36:01.600 Kind of reminiscent of that co-housing, like that shared common space. 00:36:01.600 --> 00:36:06.600 I believe it's private ownership, shared open space, but once again, it kind of depends 00:36:06.600 --> 00:36:08.740 on the platting. 00:36:08.740 --> 00:36:09.740 Not affordable. 00:36:09.740 --> 00:36:14.100 A unit sold in August for $850,000. 00:36:14.100 --> 00:36:16.560 But they were required to have one affordable unit. 00:36:16.560 --> 00:36:19.120 It actually, the zoning was pretty interesting. 00:36:19.120 --> 00:36:22.280 It was an innovative housing demonstration project. 00:36:22.280 --> 00:36:26.600 And I believe the community allows for five a year. 00:36:26.600 --> 00:36:32.040 And just kind of these interesting development plans. 00:36:32.040 --> 00:36:33.040 There's a process. 00:36:33.040 --> 00:36:34.120 They have to go to neighborhood meetings. 00:36:34.120 --> 00:36:35.520 There's architectural review boards. 00:36:35.520 --> 00:36:41.440 So it's an intensive process in order to develop these in Redmond, Washington. 00:36:41.440 --> 00:36:43.360 And I thought this one was really interesting as well. 00:36:43.360 --> 00:36:44.360 East Lake Commons. 00:36:44.360 --> 00:36:50.480 Once again, this kind of brings in all of the different housing types that I've talked 00:36:50.480 --> 00:36:51.640 about tonight. 00:36:51.640 --> 00:36:53.680 This is in Decatur, Georgia. 00:36:53.680 --> 00:36:55.640 It's actually in DeKalb County. 00:36:55.640 --> 00:36:57.840 Did I say that right? 00:36:57.840 --> 00:36:59.640 In Georgia, counties have zoning. 00:36:59.640 --> 00:37:05.000 I know we don't really have zoning in counties in Texas, but other states have zoning in 00:37:05.000 --> 00:37:06.000 counties. 00:37:06.000 --> 00:37:07.960 It is in kind of suburban Atlanta. 00:37:07.960 --> 00:37:10.720 It's located on 20 acres. 00:37:10.720 --> 00:37:14.920 It's small lot townhomes and also cohousing. 00:37:14.920 --> 00:37:21.880 It's 67 townhomes on individually platted lots with a community center, garden, orchard, 00:37:21.880 --> 00:37:25.560 and greenhouse, and also common area parking. 00:37:25.560 --> 00:37:27.900 The ownership is fee simple lots. 00:37:27.900 --> 00:37:31.000 So you can see the site plan here on your screen. 00:37:31.000 --> 00:37:36.920 Each of those little boxes is a little lot in the middle of a big lot. 00:37:36.920 --> 00:37:40.000 And then the common areas are owned by the HOA. 00:37:40.000 --> 00:37:41.840 These are market rate. 00:37:41.840 --> 00:37:45.840 There was one listed for $389,000. 00:37:45.840 --> 00:37:51.120 I anticipate that this was actually built several decades ago or a couple decades ago. 00:37:51.120 --> 00:37:56.760 And so their current zoning doesn't really speak to this specifically, but I did find 00:37:56.760 --> 00:38:03.320 it was interesting in their zoning regulation that they allow cottage homes and urban single 00:38:03.320 --> 00:38:06.600 family defined uses in their use tables. 00:38:06.600 --> 00:38:10.960 And the cottage is a detached dwelling unit that is one to two stories, no greater than 00:38:10.960 --> 00:38:15.380 1200 square feet, arranged around a commonly shared open space. 00:38:15.380 --> 00:38:21.640 So once again, it really follows that missing middle definition of cottage courts. 00:38:21.640 --> 00:38:25.160 And then they also have urban single family dwellings, which are residential dwellings 00:38:25.160 --> 00:38:29.840 that share a similar configuration to townhome develops. 00:38:29.840 --> 00:38:32.980 They may be attached or detached or zero lot line. 00:38:32.980 --> 00:38:37.600 So that was interesting that they had those two use types defined in their code. 00:38:37.600 --> 00:38:41.440 Common characteristics, we see a lot of plan developments in all of these. 00:38:41.440 --> 00:38:44.680 Once again, they're kind of unique, kind of unicorns. 00:38:44.680 --> 00:38:48.920 Tiny homes, remember, if they are not on a permanent foundation, they really are kind 00:38:48.920 --> 00:38:52.880 of managed like RV parks. 00:38:52.880 --> 00:38:59.120 And foundations can be used where permanent dwellings are desired, particularly with the 00:38:59.120 --> 00:39:02.440 city of Denton's definitions, and we'll talk about those. 00:39:02.440 --> 00:39:07.480 So a lot line cottage courts, these zoning typically includes plan developments, but 00:39:07.480 --> 00:39:11.440 there are some based zoning districts that can be affordable, but it probably depends 00:39:11.440 --> 00:39:14.440 on location and amenities. 00:39:14.440 --> 00:39:19.840 And uses are typically those single family detached dwellings on separately platted lots. 00:39:19.840 --> 00:39:24.980 And it is really based upon lot size, access and design. 00:39:24.980 --> 00:39:29.740 Sometimes they could be multifamily, particularly with cottage courts, because those could be 00:39:29.740 --> 00:39:33.660 all on one lot, but just a range around the court. 00:39:33.660 --> 00:39:36.280 So what are the applicable regulations? 00:39:36.280 --> 00:39:41.200 This once again, not an exhaustive list, and in subchapter three, we've got our zoning 00:39:41.200 --> 00:39:43.080 district dimensional standards. 00:39:43.080 --> 00:39:48.320 R7 and MN are probably the most relevant regarding these use types. 00:39:48.320 --> 00:39:51.600 R7, the minimum lot area is 4,000 square feet. 00:39:51.600 --> 00:39:58.360 It's very similar to Plano as well as Flower Mounds examples, lot width of 50 feet, lot 00:39:58.360 --> 00:40:04.000 depth of 80 feet, and then we have those setbacks. 00:40:04.000 --> 00:40:08.000 Zero lot line would not be allowed in this zoning district because you've got side yard 00:40:08.000 --> 00:40:10.800 setbacks, but smaller lots would. 00:40:10.800 --> 00:40:15.440 MN is a lot area of 2,500 square feet. 00:40:15.440 --> 00:40:22.040 It does not have any required side yard setbacks, so you could have zero lot line homes in MN. 00:40:22.040 --> 00:40:27.520 And just to let you know, per the code, lot depth is measured at the right of way. 00:40:27.520 --> 00:40:31.320 I'm sorry, lot width is measured at the right of way. 00:40:31.320 --> 00:40:36.600 These would apply to our affordability incentives when you've got single family, multi family, 00:40:36.600 --> 00:40:42.320 and tiny home developments, it would not apply to RV parks. 00:40:42.320 --> 00:40:45.800 So once again, those tiny homes would have to be on a foundation. 00:40:45.800 --> 00:40:53.440 And once again, providing affordable units would allow them to reduce parking or have 00:40:53.440 --> 00:41:00.780 greater building coverage or changes in minimum dwelling unit size. 00:41:00.780 --> 00:41:03.800 In subchapter five, that has our use tables. 00:41:03.800 --> 00:41:10.240 Single family detached dwellings are allowed in all of our R districts as well as MN. 00:41:10.240 --> 00:41:15.560 Once again, those R7 and MN are probably more consistent with what we could see in the small 00:41:15.560 --> 00:41:17.840 lot or zero lot line. 00:41:17.840 --> 00:41:24.480 Our R through R6, those lot sizes are much larger and really probably wouldn't fall within 00:41:24.480 --> 00:41:27.560 this milieu. 00:41:27.560 --> 00:41:30.480 Tiny home developments require a PD full stop. 00:41:30.480 --> 00:41:36.980 There is not a permitted use in our zoning table other than you would have to get a PD 00:41:36.980 --> 00:41:38.860 to build that. 00:41:38.860 --> 00:41:45.520 And then RV parks are allowed in our R and HI and require an SUP in R3, R4, R5, R6, R7 00:41:45.520 --> 00:41:48.100 and LI. 00:41:48.100 --> 00:41:55.520 And this would be similar to that Lake Dallas model where it would be on a chassis or tied 00:41:55.520 --> 00:41:57.900 down or skirting. 00:41:57.900 --> 00:42:02.440 We do not have any minimum unit size for single family dwellings. 00:42:02.440 --> 00:42:10.920 So we have, remember, 400 square feet in multifamily, I believe 900 square feet in town homes and 00:42:10.920 --> 00:42:15.280 duplexes, but single family does not have any minimum unit size. 00:42:15.280 --> 00:42:23.280 And manufactured homes in our residential districts that allow single family could be 00:42:23.280 --> 00:42:29.860 allowed if the property gets approval of an SUP. 00:42:29.860 --> 00:42:33.240 These are the use specific standards for these different types of uses. 00:42:33.240 --> 00:42:38.240 Tiny home developments, we talked about it, it's 300 to 500, permanent foundation has 00:42:38.240 --> 00:42:43.040 to be organized as a condominium development. 00:42:43.040 --> 00:42:51.160 And then RV parks, it limits the maximum occupancy, so it could not be used as a permanent dwelling. 00:42:51.160 --> 00:42:58.440 And it requires public bathrooms and the dry vial widths have to conform to the minimum 00:42:58.440 --> 00:43:02.920 dimensional standards. 00:43:02.920 --> 00:43:07.080 Residential streets require 55 feet of right of way dedicated, so keep that in mind as 00:43:07.080 --> 00:43:11.600 well as those alleys require 20 feet of width dedicated. 00:43:11.600 --> 00:43:17.800 And so in some of these use types, you see a lot of alley loaded, and that is another 00:43:17.800 --> 00:43:20.780 thing that has to be added to any project. 00:43:20.780 --> 00:43:23.960 Single family detached dwellings require four spaces. 00:43:23.960 --> 00:43:29.400 They can be reduced to two, subject to approval, there's some criteria for approval. 00:43:29.400 --> 00:43:34.600 And then single family can be oriented toward green spaces or common areas. 00:43:34.600 --> 00:43:39.840 Once again, you've got those general fire considerations, you've got to make sure the 00:43:39.840 --> 00:43:45.280 air trucks can turn around, that they can access the properties. 00:43:45.280 --> 00:43:50.840 And then if they have a certain number of units and they would need secondary access 00:43:50.840 --> 00:43:55.000 or have to sprinkle it. 00:43:55.000 --> 00:44:00.840 Subchapter eight has some regulations related to these types of uses. 00:44:00.840 --> 00:44:07.660 Residential lots have to have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage along a public street, 00:44:07.660 --> 00:44:13.600 but up to three single family detached or townhome dwellings can be accessed through 00:44:13.600 --> 00:44:17.320 a private access easement, a private driveway. 00:44:17.320 --> 00:44:22.880 And flag lots, those are those lots that have a skinny little tail that come off the public 00:44:22.880 --> 00:44:27.440 right of way and then a larger property in the rear. 00:44:27.440 --> 00:44:32.740 They require 30 feet of width and a maximum of 300 feet. 00:44:32.740 --> 00:44:39.320 Over 150 requires a turnaround once again for the fire trucks. 00:44:39.320 --> 00:44:44.240 We also have something in our Denton Development Code and I don't think, Haley may correct 00:44:44.240 --> 00:44:51.600 me, I don't think we've had one go forward yet since we adopted the 2019 Denton Development 00:44:51.600 --> 00:44:56.480 Code, but that is cluster subdivisions or auto courts. 00:44:56.480 --> 00:45:00.400 These require approval of a PD, so these are really single family homes. 00:45:00.400 --> 00:45:05.320 So it would be allowed in any single family district, it's just a PD would be required 00:45:05.320 --> 00:45:08.200 in order to plot the property. 00:45:08.200 --> 00:45:14.400 It would require a minimum of five acres, 30% continuous open space. 00:45:14.400 --> 00:45:17.840 Auto courts allow for an alternative to cluster subdivisions. 00:45:17.840 --> 00:45:24.480 Cluster subdivisions are really, well it doesn't have to be, they are intended for conservation 00:45:24.480 --> 00:45:32.240 development, so the intent is to cluster the residential portion outside of any maybe open 00:45:32.240 --> 00:45:37.520 space or environmentally protected spaces. 00:45:37.520 --> 00:45:41.400 Auto courts are a little bit different in that they allow up to four single family units 00:45:41.400 --> 00:45:44.280 to be accessed with a shared driveway. 00:45:44.280 --> 00:45:47.960 This is in the Denton Development Code, kind of shows how it would lay out, so instead 00:45:47.960 --> 00:45:54.400 of being kind of organized around that common open space, it's got the common driveway. 00:45:54.400 --> 00:46:00.360 Anything, or in cluster subdivisions and auto courts, you'd still have to build streets 00:46:00.360 --> 00:46:07.740 with the minimum street widths, and then the maximum block length would be 600 feet. 00:46:07.740 --> 00:46:09.880 That ends my presentation. 00:46:09.880 --> 00:46:14.600 If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them, or if I got it wrong and talked 00:46:14.600 --> 00:46:19.160 about something you did not want to hear about, please let me know and we'll come back. 00:46:19.160 --> 00:46:25.720 - Thank you very much, first of all, that's an amazing amount of information. 00:46:25.720 --> 00:46:33.920 Couple of points that I just looked up, just to set our understanding of things, I know 00:46:33.920 --> 00:46:40.120 the Redmond, Washington example, those were I think 800,000, 860, something like that 00:46:40.120 --> 00:46:43.080 market rate, but it's a very different market there. 00:46:43.080 --> 00:46:48.620 I just looked up the median house price in Redmond, Washington is over $1.3 million, 00:46:48.620 --> 00:46:56.520 so it's, there's context, right? 00:46:56.520 --> 00:47:02.640 I guess I will dive too deep if I let myself, so I'm going to pause and say, let's have 00:47:02.640 --> 00:47:10.320 some discussion, what are people's reactions, thoughts, questions, anyone? 00:47:10.320 --> 00:47:11.320 Commissioner Garland. 00:47:11.320 --> 00:47:14.800 - I just want to thank you for putting this together. 00:47:14.800 --> 00:47:20.720 I think it, like Chairman or Member Pruitt mentioned, it's a lot of information. 00:47:20.720 --> 00:47:24.600 I think that that's something that we all kind of collectively welcome in our community 00:47:24.600 --> 00:47:28.600 is more diversity when it comes to our housing. 00:47:28.600 --> 00:47:36.180 I love the idea of tiny homes, making young adults, home ownership more affordable to 00:47:36.180 --> 00:47:39.840 people that don't otherwise have access to it, and then also maybe the other side of 00:47:39.840 --> 00:47:44.160 life where seniors are ready to downsize, but they don't want to be in an apartment or assisted 00:47:44.160 --> 00:47:45.240 living. 00:47:45.240 --> 00:47:53.000 I think the one thing that all of these things kind of have in common is kind of collectively 00:47:53.000 --> 00:47:57.120 a sense of community and kind of bringing people together and sustainability and just 00:47:57.120 --> 00:48:04.760 kind of a close knit of, you know, it's like a little community, and so I think that probably 00:48:04.760 --> 00:48:10.440 resonates with a lot of people, and a lot of people would find more housing options 00:48:10.440 --> 00:48:14.400 ideal. 00:48:14.400 --> 00:48:25.520 - You gotta say something before I go in the weeds. 00:48:25.520 --> 00:48:26.520 Commissioner McDuff. 00:48:26.520 --> 00:48:28.960 - Do not go in the weeds. 00:48:28.960 --> 00:48:32.760 It's kind of scary, actually, but I love it when you do. 00:48:32.760 --> 00:48:39.360 I will say there's been considerable, I've had considerable input on this topic, and 00:48:39.360 --> 00:48:41.240 I'm very interested in it. 00:48:41.240 --> 00:48:47.760 Julie, I want to applaud you on your ability to put something like this together. 00:48:47.760 --> 00:48:53.620 This is a lot, and I appreciate all that, and I am personally ready for us to do something 00:48:53.620 --> 00:49:02.080 like this, and so thus the number of questions and the layups from our prior discussion. 00:49:02.080 --> 00:49:08.760 I will say that it looks to me these are commercial that we've talked about, commercial type 00:49:08.760 --> 00:49:16.600 dwellings, but I do think we've had some interest in the other type of tiny houses 00:49:16.600 --> 00:49:23.520 where we have clusters in communal living, where we provide basic services to our homeless 00:49:23.520 --> 00:49:27.760 population, or just say our population's in need, how's that? 00:49:27.760 --> 00:49:36.040 I'm interested in that, too, and have been associated with some of this conversation 00:49:36.040 --> 00:49:43.880 when we started our Serve Denton movement again several years ago now, but I know that 00:49:43.880 --> 00:49:51.920 you're involved in this, Chair Pruitt, and the concept, and so I am personally interested 00:49:51.920 --> 00:49:58.840 in being able to study this, to hear more about it, to discuss it. 00:49:58.840 --> 00:50:00.840 Thank you. 00:50:00.840 --> 00:50:10.880 Okay, I warned you, I'll try to stay higher level, I promise. 00:50:10.880 --> 00:50:18.440 You mentioned that the current site design requirements for single family allow it to 00:50:18.440 --> 00:50:26.880 be -- allow the buildings to be oriented around a common green space, but there's also a street 00:50:26.880 --> 00:50:32.320 fundage requirement. 00:50:32.320 --> 00:50:36.920 Let's imagine we live in a world where there's a zoning district with no minimum lot size 00:50:36.920 --> 00:50:39.360 and no setbacks. 00:50:39.360 --> 00:50:44.480 With those two requirements, can you explain to me how one would develop that in Denton? 00:50:44.480 --> 00:50:46.280 That is a good question. 00:50:46.280 --> 00:50:52.040 I don't think we've had one pursue that, so I'm not really sure. 00:50:52.040 --> 00:51:01.920 I don't know if Haley has any thoughts as to how that would be plotted. 00:51:01.920 --> 00:51:09.360 I think you've seen maybe something approximating that in the landmark and -- well, probably 00:51:09.360 --> 00:51:13.200 just in the landmark communities, because they do have some where the home's all front 00:51:13.200 --> 00:51:17.880 on like a shared green space lot, but then their street frontage and right-of-way frontage 00:51:17.880 --> 00:51:23.080 is achieved in the rear of the homes, so that is a possibility. 00:51:23.080 --> 00:51:28.440 Sorry, refresh my memory on what the landmark that you're referring to. 00:51:28.440 --> 00:51:31.440 Hunter Ranch. 00:51:31.440 --> 00:51:34.600 There are some blocks, if you look at the plats that you all have seen for phase one, 00:51:34.600 --> 00:51:41.080 where the home's front on a shared green space or like a little parklet, and they achieve 00:51:41.080 --> 00:51:45.080 that right-of-way frontage for each lot in the rear of the property. 00:51:45.080 --> 00:51:49.320 Instead of having an alley in the rear, they have a full street width in the -- 00:51:49.320 --> 00:51:52.880 I believe they have alleys, but that is technically right-of-way. 00:51:52.880 --> 00:52:02.840 Okay, so I will stop soon, but when we say must have street frontage and alley counts 00:52:02.840 --> 00:52:03.840 as street frontage? 00:52:03.840 --> 00:52:04.840 Yes. 00:52:04.840 --> 00:52:05.840 Okay. 00:52:05.840 --> 00:52:06.840 Thank you. 00:52:06.840 --> 00:52:09.120 It is technically a street type. 00:52:09.120 --> 00:52:12.680 No, that helps. 00:52:12.680 --> 00:52:20.440 My thoughts on this is, we've talked about this before, we've seen pictures before, Denton 00:52:20.440 --> 00:52:26.040 is creative, Denton is, you know, hey, let's try some stuff and see what happens. 00:52:26.040 --> 00:52:34.720 It's sort of the, you know, how we grew over the last hundred years. 00:52:34.720 --> 00:52:41.400 I don't think, and I'm pretty confident on this, that any of these are going to happen 00:52:41.400 --> 00:52:46.200 if we required a plan development district for them to move forward. 00:52:46.200 --> 00:52:53.440 Just because the -- especially, for instance, the cottage court kind of thing, right? 00:52:53.440 --> 00:53:03.960 If you're dividing $300,000 of lawyers and landholding cost over eight units, you can't 00:53:03.960 --> 00:53:08.200 sell them anymore. 00:53:08.200 --> 00:53:14.840 I think if we want to see more of this in Denton, we have to start looking at modifying 00:53:14.840 --> 00:53:23.400 existing zoning districts like R7, R6, I don't know what it is, that may not be full four-story 00:53:23.400 --> 00:53:30.080 multifamily by right to allow these types of things by right, right? 00:53:30.080 --> 00:53:34.960 I'll just put out a few numbers there, right? 00:53:34.960 --> 00:53:40.640 We talked about the 400 square feet minimum for a dwelling unit when it's in a multifamily 00:53:40.640 --> 00:53:43.960 use. 00:53:43.960 --> 00:53:51.360 You know, obviously it varies, but let's just say, for instance, that it's new construction, 00:53:51.360 --> 00:54:02.280 renting it around $2.50 per square foot per month, that comes out to $1,000 a month, which 00:54:02.280 --> 00:54:09.440 in order to be affordable by the 30 percent AMI affordability criteria requires a yearly 00:54:09.440 --> 00:54:16.640 income of $40,000, right, or roughly $20 an hour if it's hourly pay. 00:54:16.640 --> 00:54:27.000 And a large number of City of Denton employees make less than that, right? 00:54:27.000 --> 00:54:35.880 So I think when we look at the chasm between traditional single-family homes, setbacks, 00:54:35.880 --> 00:54:49.720 large lots, and stuff that everybody's scared about, we have systematically laid up a foundation 00:54:49.720 --> 00:54:56.960 of this is how things should happen that have removed the ability to build any of this economically. 00:54:56.960 --> 00:54:57.960 Right? 00:54:57.960 --> 00:54:58.960 Technically, could you do it? 00:54:58.960 --> 00:54:59.960 Sure. 00:54:59.960 --> 00:55:05.840 But you have to spend more building it than you would a single-family home, right? 00:55:05.840 --> 00:55:11.700 Anyway, so I'm very interested in everything from the how do we allow -- I think you had 00:55:11.700 --> 00:55:19.600 a definition in there of the tiny shelters, was that it? 00:55:19.600 --> 00:55:25.360 You know, some of this communal living in areas for transitional housing and that sort 00:55:25.360 --> 00:55:32.680 of thing where maybe common eating and bathroom facilities are provided, just like, look, 00:55:32.680 --> 00:55:36.600 if we don't want people to be on the street, we've got to figure out how to build housing 00:55:36.600 --> 00:55:40.240 that people who are not earning very much money can afford to pay for. 00:55:40.240 --> 00:55:44.020 It's really not -- it's math, right? 00:55:44.020 --> 00:55:50.540 But then it also goes up, as you said, to a lot of the Denton ethos of, hey, I want 00:55:50.540 --> 00:55:58.480 to have a garden that all my neighbors help tend and do all this stuff, and the way I 00:55:58.480 --> 00:56:01.440 see it, I just -- I would love for more of that to happen. 00:56:01.440 --> 00:56:06.480 I don't think any of it's going to happen until we are comfortable modifying our zoning 00:56:06.480 --> 00:56:11.160 districts to say, hey, if you want to go build this, here's the requirements, here's how 00:56:11.160 --> 00:56:20.880 you should do it, go for it, right, instead of having to design a custom PD. 00:56:20.880 --> 00:56:22.120 But thank you very much. 00:56:22.120 --> 00:56:23.120 I'm done. 00:56:23.120 --> 00:56:24.120 Commissioner McDade? 00:56:24.120 --> 00:56:33.320 >> I just want to clarify, I think you may have said it, but would a city of Denton fire 00:56:33.320 --> 00:56:38.320 truck fit down an alleyway if that's the setback? 00:56:38.320 --> 00:56:45.320 >> Yes, so I don't know if a city of Denton fire truck -- they would -- they could. 00:56:45.320 --> 00:56:49.480 A fire truck has to have 20 feet, and so it would fit. 00:56:49.480 --> 00:56:55.840 The alleys are intended or required to be designed to accommodate not only fire trucks 00:56:55.840 --> 00:57:04.440 but also solid-waste trucks, so -- >> Commissioner Dyer? 00:57:04.440 --> 00:57:08.360 >> First off, thank you so much, I mean, this was a lot of information, and I'm sure it 00:57:08.360 --> 00:57:11.720 took a lot of time to put together, so thank you. 00:57:11.720 --> 00:57:19.120 Kind of piggybacking on Chair Pruitt talking about the need for a different -- you know, 00:57:19.120 --> 00:57:24.600 for housing for different communities in our area. 00:57:24.600 --> 00:57:34.980 What is the city's stance or requirements, you know, a lot about strip malls or shopping 00:57:34.980 --> 00:57:43.680 centers that are no longer being utilized, some of those getting converted to housing 00:57:43.680 --> 00:57:49.360 that might fit in some of these, you know, requirements, like how does that all fit in 00:57:49.360 --> 00:57:57.360 there where you're meeting the needs of fair housing, trying to recycle a building, and 00:57:57.360 --> 00:58:01.740 also meet the needs of the requirements that the city has? 00:58:01.740 --> 00:58:05.640 >> I am looking at Haley. 00:58:05.640 --> 00:58:08.560 I don't know. 00:58:08.560 --> 00:58:12.360 >> I mean, you hear about, like, you know, shopping malls that are abandoned that are 00:58:12.360 --> 00:58:16.240 becoming like retirement communities because they're a perfect place to put apartments 00:58:16.240 --> 00:58:17.240 inside of them. 00:58:17.240 --> 00:58:20.840 >> Sure, I would say -- >> Old hotels. 00:58:20.840 --> 00:58:23.600 >> Most of our districts that I can think of that would permit something like a strip 00:58:23.600 --> 00:58:27.560 center or the mall would permit multifamily. 00:58:27.560 --> 00:58:31.720 Some may require a specific use permit for it, but it would -- based on the way those 00:58:31.720 --> 00:58:35.240 facilities are typically platted, it would fall under our multifamily definition if someone 00:58:35.240 --> 00:58:37.160 wanted to do that. 00:58:37.160 --> 00:58:41.200 They would have to, of course, meet all building and fire code requirements, so that may be 00:58:41.200 --> 00:58:45.840 the cost prohibitive piece there, you know, to install, like, fire sprinkling and things 00:58:45.840 --> 00:58:47.560 like that within those buildings. 00:58:47.560 --> 00:58:52.400 But from a zoning perspective, I would imagine the majority of those districts would permit 00:58:52.400 --> 00:58:56.720 both the commercial use that was previously there and multifamily. 00:58:56.720 --> 00:59:00.920 >> Commissioner Garland? 00:59:00.920 --> 00:59:08.160 >> To me, the holdup is typically whoever owns the property or the land wants to turn 00:59:08.160 --> 00:59:09.700 the highest profit. 00:59:09.700 --> 00:59:18.040 And whatever the highest profit, if that's apartments, $2,000 multiunit apartments, if 00:59:18.040 --> 00:59:22.800 they can sell it for that much, or are we ever going to have, like, somebody that has 00:59:22.800 --> 00:59:28.080 the motivation to go, I have this land, this is what I would like to do with it. 00:59:28.080 --> 00:59:34.200 You know, that's where the disconnect is, is who owns what and what is their intention. 00:59:34.200 --> 00:59:36.200 Is it max profit? 00:59:36.200 --> 00:59:41.640 Absolutely, and I think that's why we can never find, bridge that gap of what we need, 00:59:41.640 --> 00:59:45.760 what our community needs, and what we keep getting. 00:59:45.760 --> 00:59:55.280 And that's just kind of on a side note there, so. 00:59:55.280 --> 00:59:57.200 >> Commissioner MacDuff? 00:59:57.200 --> 00:59:58.960 >> What is the action step here? 00:59:58.960 --> 01:00:00.960 >> That's a good question. 01:00:00.960 --> 01:00:01.960 Staff? 01:00:01.960 --> 01:00:06.520 What are your thoughts? 01:00:06.520 --> 01:00:08.720 >> So no direction is needed. 01:00:08.720 --> 01:00:12.800 This was purely an informative work session based on a previous matrix request. 01:00:12.800 --> 01:00:16.600 I would say if the commission's interested, you know, we could discuss something later 01:00:16.600 --> 01:00:21.960 in our matrix section about if there are additional items you want brought back at a future date, 01:00:21.960 --> 01:00:25.840 or alternatively, several members of this body are on the development code review committee, 01:00:25.840 --> 01:00:28.560 so this is a topic that could be brought up there as well. 01:00:28.560 --> 01:00:32.400 If there were any of the things that you heard this evening that you would like that body 01:00:32.400 --> 01:00:39.320 to consider code amendments for. 01:00:39.320 --> 01:00:40.320 >> Very good. 01:00:40.320 --> 01:00:41.320 All right. 01:00:41.320 --> 01:00:42.320 >> All right. 01:00:42.320 --> 01:00:44.400 >> I said I was done, so I'm going to be done. 01:00:44.400 --> 01:00:46.400 But thank you very much for -- 01:00:46.400 --> 01:00:47.400 >> You bet. 01:00:47.400 --> 01:00:48.400 >> Yes. 01:00:48.400 --> 01:00:51.220 As well as any other staff that helped. 01:00:51.220 --> 01:00:52.560 It's a lot to wrap your head around. 01:00:52.560 --> 01:00:55.040 >> It was a group effort. 01:00:55.040 --> 01:00:58.280 >> Thank you. 01:00:58.280 --> 01:01:02.680 That brings us to our second work session report. 01:01:02.680 --> 01:01:07.120 Receive a report, hold a discussion, give staff direction on the Southeast Denton Zoning 01:01:07.120 --> 01:01:08.120 Overlay Districts. 01:01:08.120 --> 01:01:17.640 Yeah, I'm going to say let's take a five-minute break and grab some food so that we don't 01:01:17.640 --> 01:01:21.440 get squished up against the 630 regular session. 01:01:21.440 --> 01:01:24.440 So at 603, we will take a five-minute recess. 01:01:24.440 --> 01:01:25.240 Thank you. 01:01:29.280 --> 01:01:34.040 >> Our recess. 01:01:34.040 --> 01:01:43.760 Welcome up PZ25-194 work session on the Southeast Denton Plan Zoning Overlay Districts, et cetera. 01:01:43.760 --> 01:01:45.920 >> Hi, Julie Wyatt. 01:01:45.920 --> 01:01:51.280 I'm going to start the presentation and then I'm going to turn it over to Mia because we're 01:01:51.280 --> 01:01:54.120 both kind of working on these overlay districts. 01:01:54.120 --> 01:01:56.560 So we'll get started. 01:01:56.560 --> 01:02:02.640 We're going to talk briefly about the Southeast Denton Area Plan and then some public engagement 01:02:02.640 --> 01:02:04.880 and results of the overlay districts. 01:02:04.880 --> 01:02:11.840 As some of you recall, Mia and I both presented information related to the overlay districts. 01:02:11.840 --> 01:02:15.040 Mia was in May and I think I presented in June. 01:02:15.040 --> 01:02:19.840 So just a quick recap and then to let you know what public engagement, what we've heard 01:02:19.840 --> 01:02:21.000 so far. 01:02:21.000 --> 01:02:22.000 And then any discussion? 01:02:22.000 --> 01:02:25.160 And I promise I'll try to talk fast. 01:02:25.160 --> 01:02:32.280 Okay, so the Southeast Denton Area Plan was adopted in July of 2023. 01:02:32.280 --> 01:02:38.480 It was the effort over 18 months, partnering with the community over 40 public engagement 01:02:38.480 --> 01:02:40.040 events. 01:02:40.040 --> 01:02:44.080 So it was a pretty intensive process with the Southeast Denton community. 01:02:44.080 --> 01:02:51.320 As part of the plan, the community developed a vision for how Southeast Denton should look 01:02:51.320 --> 01:02:53.680 and feel in 10 to 20 years. 01:02:53.680 --> 01:02:56.920 And in order to achieve that vision, came up with some goals. 01:02:56.920 --> 01:02:59.000 We're not going to talk about all of them today. 01:02:59.000 --> 01:03:04.720 Really we're just touching on honor the culture and heritage, invest in economic prosperity 01:03:04.720 --> 01:03:07.780 and also strengthen neighborhoods and affordability. 01:03:07.780 --> 01:03:13.640 Also as part of the plan, there were 53 action items to help the community and the city achieve 01:03:13.640 --> 01:03:15.320 those goals. 01:03:15.320 --> 01:03:19.960 Today we're really touching on three of those and that is a residential overlay district, 01:03:19.960 --> 01:03:25.300 a height overlay district, and then a live work overlay district. 01:03:25.300 --> 01:03:32.880 Since we spoke in June, we have done some public engagement related to these overlay 01:03:32.880 --> 01:03:33.880 districts. 01:03:33.880 --> 01:03:36.640 At this point, we've only heard from 14 respondents. 01:03:36.640 --> 01:03:41.080 So we're going to talk about that later in the presentation. 01:03:41.080 --> 01:03:43.240 We had a block party at Fred Moore Park. 01:03:43.240 --> 01:03:47.480 That was actually before we talked to the group here. 01:03:47.480 --> 01:03:49.640 And we advertise that with door hangers. 01:03:49.640 --> 01:03:51.840 We had over 100 people attend. 01:03:51.840 --> 01:03:54.560 It was a really big success. 01:03:54.560 --> 01:03:59.240 After we spoke about the overlay districts, we went to Juneteenth, had a pop-up there. 01:03:59.240 --> 01:04:03.500 We also presented the information to the June CEDNA meeting. 01:04:03.500 --> 01:04:09.880 We talk every month at the CEDNA meetings and then talked with them additionally at subsequent 01:04:09.880 --> 01:04:11.000 ones. 01:04:11.000 --> 01:04:14.220 We've also had three community workshops. 01:04:14.220 --> 01:04:19.160 Because of the rousing success with the block party and the door hangers, we decided, well, 01:04:19.160 --> 01:04:20.160 that's the secret sauce. 01:04:20.160 --> 01:04:25.000 So we put door hangers on each resident in Southeast Denton. 01:04:25.000 --> 01:04:28.560 We wanted to make sure we touched every person who lived in Southeast Denton. 01:04:28.560 --> 01:04:38.520 Then we had an in-person meeting on Saturday, September 27th, a pop-up on October 2nd at 01:04:38.520 --> 01:04:43.200 American Legion, and then we had a virtual meeting on October 3rd. 01:04:43.200 --> 01:04:49.000 Upcoming, we had a survey with our community workshops. 01:04:49.000 --> 01:04:54.360 We're going to launch that on Discuss Denton so that people can take the survey from the 01:04:54.360 --> 01:04:57.960 comfort of their own home whenever they want to. 01:04:57.960 --> 01:05:01.920 We don't have the beginning and end dates for that yet, but it'll be up for a little 01:05:01.920 --> 01:05:04.560 bit so that the community members can weigh in. 01:05:04.560 --> 01:05:10.900 Then also a property owner meeting for residential overlay and height overlay districts in particular. 01:05:10.900 --> 01:05:15.000 We understand that while there are a lot of residents in Southeast Denton, there are also 01:05:15.000 --> 01:05:20.680 properties where there isn't maybe a house on it or there's a different property owner. 01:05:20.680 --> 01:05:24.400 We want to make sure we touch everybody, and so we'll also have a separate meeting for 01:05:24.400 --> 01:05:27.320 that group as well. 01:05:27.320 --> 01:05:32.160 As we talked about earlier, overlay districts are a balancing act. 01:05:32.160 --> 01:05:36.840 We want to make sure that those regulations are restrictive enough that we can work with 01:05:36.840 --> 01:05:40.200 the community to achieve the vision that they have. 01:05:40.200 --> 01:05:42.040 We don't want to make them too restrictive. 01:05:42.040 --> 01:05:45.760 That would deter people from investing in the community. 01:05:45.760 --> 01:05:48.280 We want to make sure, are they clear? 01:05:48.280 --> 01:05:53.440 Do they actually achieve what the plan says they want to achieve? 01:05:53.440 --> 01:05:56.560 With that, we have three proposed overlay districts. 01:05:56.560 --> 01:05:59.720 The height limitation, that's that area in blue. 01:05:59.720 --> 01:06:06.260 It is that transition area between the DCTA station and really those historic neighborhoods 01:06:06.260 --> 01:06:08.280 in Southeast Denton. 01:06:08.280 --> 01:06:11.160 A live work overlay, that's what Mia's going to be talking about. 01:06:11.160 --> 01:06:13.440 She's done a lot of work related to that. 01:06:13.440 --> 01:06:17.440 Then the residential overlay district, that's that area in yellow. 01:06:17.440 --> 01:06:21.120 This really captures those single-family neighborhoods in Southeast Denton. 01:06:21.120 --> 01:06:24.560 We're going to talk about the residential overlay first. 01:06:24.560 --> 01:06:28.800 That action item is to create a residential overlay district to maintain the scale and 01:06:28.800 --> 01:06:32.880 character of the neighborhoods while fostering community investment. 01:06:32.880 --> 01:06:37.760 We heard from the community over and over that they wanted to retain the scale, the 01:06:37.760 --> 01:06:40.480 look, the feel of their community. 01:06:40.480 --> 01:06:46.760 That is really hoping to achieve that desire. 01:06:46.760 --> 01:06:51.440 When we're talking about it, keep in mind, this is as proposed for new construction and 01:06:51.440 --> 01:06:53.600 substantial expansions to homes. 01:06:53.600 --> 01:06:55.720 We're going to talk about that. 01:06:55.720 --> 01:07:01.400 It really is related to three proposed overlay topics, not focused on use. 01:07:01.400 --> 01:07:06.600 It is really design-related, home size, front setback, and building architecture. 01:07:06.600 --> 01:07:11.200 Once again, residential district, and here we go. 01:07:11.200 --> 01:07:18.160 As part of formulating the draft regulations, staff first started with going out to the 01:07:18.160 --> 01:07:22.160 community and see, "What is the character of the homes in Southeast Denton? 01:07:22.160 --> 01:07:23.160 What are the architectural styles? 01:07:23.160 --> 01:07:24.160 What are the scale? 01:07:24.160 --> 01:07:26.080 Where are the garages? 01:07:26.080 --> 01:07:27.080 How do they look? 01:07:27.080 --> 01:07:29.800 What are the front entries like?" 01:07:29.800 --> 01:07:33.160 Really we came up with some consistent themes. 01:07:33.160 --> 01:07:37.400 There are a lot of craftsmen and bungalow and vernacular architecture homes in Southeast 01:07:37.400 --> 01:07:38.400 Denton. 01:07:38.400 --> 01:07:40.360 There's also a lot of ranch style homes. 01:07:40.360 --> 01:07:46.720 Those architectural elements that we're proposing are consistent with those architectural styles. 01:07:46.720 --> 01:07:55.200 Things like dormer windows, bay windows, front porches or stoops, oversized windows with 01:07:55.200 --> 01:08:02.360 substantial trim, and gable roofs or also hipped roofs. 01:08:02.360 --> 01:08:06.840 We don't typically see recessed entries in Southeast Denton. 01:08:06.840 --> 01:08:11.840 We don't typically see maybe some of those more modern roof styles like shed roofs or 01:08:11.840 --> 01:08:14.640 flat roofs or maybe mansard roofs. 01:08:14.640 --> 01:08:16.840 That was the basis. 01:08:16.840 --> 01:08:18.560 We talked to the community in March. 01:08:18.560 --> 01:08:24.240 We heard from them, "Yes, we want to maintain the one-story and two-story. 01:08:24.240 --> 01:08:28.440 We prefer not to have three-story homes in Southeast Denton." 01:08:28.440 --> 01:08:35.040 We also talked to them about where the houses should be placed on the lot. 01:08:35.040 --> 01:08:39.520 Sixty-three percent of the community felt that houses could be located a little closer 01:08:39.520 --> 01:08:46.520 to the street, and then also talking about parking for ADUs, 63% said no additional parking 01:08:46.520 --> 01:08:48.520 for ADUs. 01:08:48.520 --> 01:08:54.960 We also talked to them about those design standards, additional bigger windows, front 01:08:54.960 --> 01:09:00.160 porches and stoops, maintaining that existing roof style, the hipped roof and the gable 01:09:00.160 --> 01:09:03.160 roofs, and then also where garages are. 01:09:03.160 --> 01:09:07.120 The community felt like front-facing garages as well as detached garages were appropriate 01:09:07.120 --> 01:09:09.540 in Southeast Denton. 01:09:09.540 --> 01:09:11.920 With that, I won't go in depth on this. 01:09:11.920 --> 01:09:14.200 We're going to talk about it briefly. 01:09:14.200 --> 01:09:20.680 We are proposing, as part of the overlay district, is to reduce that front yard setback for lots 01:09:20.680 --> 01:09:25.240 that are less than 7,000 square feet. 01:09:25.240 --> 01:09:27.040 Typically the front yard setback is 20 feet. 01:09:27.040 --> 01:09:28.360 We're proposing 10 feet. 01:09:28.360 --> 01:09:29.520 It was kind of mixed. 01:09:29.520 --> 01:09:34.480 I think it was mixed with this body as well, a little concern about that front yard setback. 01:09:34.480 --> 01:09:36.800 And I'd say the community reflected that. 01:09:36.800 --> 01:09:39.920 Five agreed, two disagreed. 01:09:39.920 --> 01:09:45.120 Max building height, I'd say there was overwhelming agreement, and to limit the building heights 01:09:45.120 --> 01:09:51.320 for the primary structure to 30 feet, and then the accessory structure to 20 feet. 01:09:51.320 --> 01:09:57.640 In terms of entry feature, the overlay as proposed would require a front porch or a 01:09:57.640 --> 01:09:58.640 stoop. 01:09:58.640 --> 01:10:01.720 The community agreed with that proposal. 01:10:01.720 --> 01:10:07.600 And we're also proposing, as part of the overlay, to require larger windows and doors 01:10:07.600 --> 01:10:11.600 on the front facade than what we would typically require in single-family neighborhoods in 01:10:11.600 --> 01:10:17.320 Denton, as well as prescribing the width of the trim, making sure it's real visible 01:10:17.320 --> 01:10:20.360 from the street, consistent with that craftsman style. 01:10:20.360 --> 01:10:25.360 The community agreed with that, six to one. 01:10:25.360 --> 01:10:26.360 Roof form. 01:10:26.360 --> 01:10:31.960 All of those who responded agreed to limit the roof form to the hip and the gabled. 01:10:31.960 --> 01:10:36.680 And then in terms of the additional architectural features, we're proposing, remember those 01:10:36.680 --> 01:10:46.440 two architectural features in that green box, five respondents agreed, zero disagreed. 01:10:46.440 --> 01:10:48.200 There was one question about affordability. 01:10:48.200 --> 01:10:52.720 I thought we'd go a little bit deeper on this, just very quickly. 01:10:52.720 --> 01:10:56.600 We looked at both new construction and then existing expansions. 01:10:56.600 --> 01:11:03.180 So new construction, we just looked at kind of volume builders, what their quick move-in 01:11:03.180 --> 01:11:08.360 homes are, and then what the average or what the average price per square foot is if you 01:11:08.360 --> 01:11:11.520 have a large porch, a small porch, or no porch. 01:11:11.520 --> 01:11:13.940 And really, it was pretty consistent. 01:11:13.940 --> 01:11:23.240 It went anywhere from average of $187 per square foot to $192 per square foot, so in 01:11:23.240 --> 01:11:24.240 the same range. 01:11:24.240 --> 01:11:28.240 I think where it was a little different is when you're talking about adding a porch to 01:11:28.240 --> 01:11:30.040 an existing home. 01:11:30.040 --> 01:11:34.100 But that, because you have to tie into the roof, you have to get an engineered foundation, 01:11:34.100 --> 01:11:43.800 you have to do all the engineered framing, it does run between $8,000 and $25,000 ballpark. 01:11:43.800 --> 01:11:48.960 And then there are also some homes being constructed in Southeast Dent right now. 01:11:48.960 --> 01:11:56.520 We compared these regulations to those homes being built, and the majority of them have 01:11:56.520 --> 01:12:02.520 those larger porches with the decorative columns in their designs. 01:12:02.520 --> 01:12:09.520 When we talk about applicability, we proposed required on all new construction, only requiring 01:12:09.520 --> 01:12:17.040 the maximum height and roof forms for expansions less than 50% of the existing square footage, 01:12:17.040 --> 01:12:22.260 requiring all of the regulations on expansions greater than 50%, and then not requiring it 01:12:22.260 --> 01:12:23.260 for maintenance. 01:12:23.260 --> 01:12:29.280 So you maintain your home without having to adhere to any of the regulations. 01:12:29.280 --> 01:12:31.280 So with that, I just have some questions. 01:12:31.280 --> 01:12:32.280 Feel free to give me some feedback. 01:12:32.280 --> 01:12:34.360 Once again, this is just a feedback. 01:12:34.360 --> 01:12:40.080 It's not intended to, it's not a public hearing, so we're just kind of talking about it and 01:12:40.080 --> 01:12:44.320 wanting to hear what your thoughts are and concerns. 01:12:44.320 --> 01:12:48.320 So any other additional ideas to engage the public? 01:12:48.320 --> 01:12:53.880 We want to make sure property owners and residents understand that these would be additional 01:12:53.880 --> 01:12:58.520 regulations than what you would typically have in another single-family neighborhood 01:12:58.520 --> 01:12:59.880 in the city of Denton. 01:12:59.880 --> 01:13:04.680 So we want to make sure that while we know the community is very keen on keeping that 01:13:04.680 --> 01:13:10.880 character, we just want everybody to be aware. 01:13:10.880 --> 01:13:15.080 We heard the community responses are mixed on that front yard setback. 01:13:15.080 --> 01:13:21.340 Do you think it should go forward at this time, or maybe wait on that proposal? 01:13:21.340 --> 01:13:27.120 And then regarding the front porch or stoop, do you think it's an important design feature? 01:13:27.120 --> 01:13:33.800 If so, given the potential cost, should there be some variability or some modifications 01:13:33.800 --> 01:13:37.300 allowed with director approval for that front porch? 01:13:37.300 --> 01:13:42.680 For instance, maybe allowing a 10% reduction with director approval. 01:13:42.680 --> 01:13:48.420 Then is the cost of a front porch or stoop too prohibitive in an expansion? 01:13:48.420 --> 01:13:50.240 So I don't know if we want to talk now or at the end. 01:13:50.240 --> 01:13:57.080 I know Mia has slides, too, so I don't know how we want to approach this. 01:13:57.080 --> 01:14:03.920 We don't have a lot of time left, and I don't want to rush the discussion. 01:14:03.920 --> 01:14:12.560 We do have an ability on our agenda to postpone the rest of this until after the culmination 01:14:12.560 --> 01:14:16.920 of the regular session, so I just want to take the temperature of the commission. 01:14:16.920 --> 01:14:21.760 Would it be okay if we did that, just to give everybody a chance to get to the bathroom, 01:14:21.760 --> 01:14:27.400 and then maybe after the end of the regular session, we could come back to this? 01:14:27.400 --> 01:14:28.400 Where are your feelings? 01:14:28.400 --> 01:14:31.400 I like that idea. 01:14:31.400 --> 01:14:32.400 Okay. 01:14:32.400 --> 01:14:33.400 Is now a good pausing moment? 01:14:33.400 --> 01:14:34.400 It's a great pausing point. 01:14:34.400 --> 01:14:35.400 Okay, thank you so much. 01:14:35.400 --> 01:14:36.400 You bet. 01:14:36.400 --> 01:14:43.440 With that, we will recess for five minutes, come back at 630 in council chambers for the 01:14:43.440 --> 01:14:44.440 regular meeting. 01:14:44.440 --> 01:14:47.440 Thank you. 01:14:47.440 --> 01:14:54.160 PM with the quorum present and will call us to order for the City of Denton Planning and 01:14:54.160 --> 01:15:01.640 Zoning Commission meeting on Wednesday, October 8th, 632 PM. 01:15:01.640 --> 01:15:06.320 Our first order of business is to stand and say the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. 01:15:06.320 --> 01:15:07.320 and Texas flag. 01:15:07.320 --> 01:15:08.320 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for 01:15:08.320 --> 01:15:09.320 which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. 01:15:09.320 --> 01:15:10.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:10.320 --> 01:15:11.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state, under God, one indivisible. 01:15:11.320 --> 01:15:12.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:12.320 --> 01:15:13.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state, under God, one indivisible. 01:15:13.320 --> 01:15:14.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:14.320 --> 01:15:15.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:15.320 --> 01:15:16.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:16.320 --> 01:15:17.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:17.320 --> 01:15:18.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:18.320 --> 01:15:19.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:19.320 --> 01:15:20.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:20.320 --> 01:15:21.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:21.320 --> 01:15:22.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:22.320 --> 01:15:23.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:23.320 --> 01:15:24.320 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 01:15:24.320 --> 01:15:42.560 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag, under God, one indivisible. 01:15:42.560 --> 01:15:50.800 That brings us to item 2A, PZ25188, consider approval of the September 24th planning and 01:15:50.800 --> 01:15:52.440 zoning meeting minutes. 01:15:52.440 --> 01:15:57.200 Any discussion or a motion from the commission? 01:15:57.200 --> 01:15:58.200 Commissioner Riggs? 01:15:58.200 --> 01:16:01.880 I make a motion to approve. 01:16:01.880 --> 01:16:04.600 Thank you. 01:16:04.600 --> 01:16:06.560 And Commissioner MacDuff? 01:16:06.560 --> 01:16:12.560 I second that motion to approve the minutes. 01:16:12.560 --> 01:16:22.020 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:16:22.020 --> 01:16:34.080 That item passes 6-0, brings us to item 3A, FP25-0026, our singles consent agenda item 01:16:34.080 --> 01:16:35.880 for this evening. 01:16:35.880 --> 01:16:43.280 Any discussion or a motion from the commission? 01:16:43.280 --> 01:16:44.280 Commissioner Riggs? 01:16:44.280 --> 01:16:46.560 I make a motion to approve. 01:16:46.560 --> 01:16:48.000 And Commissioner MacDuff? 01:16:48.000 --> 01:16:54.600 I'd like to second that motion to approve a request by Robson, Denton Development for 01:16:54.600 --> 01:17:02.120 a final plan of the Robson Ranch Unit 30. 01:17:02.120 --> 01:17:07.440 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:17:07.440 --> 01:17:12.080 Oh, sorry. 01:17:12.080 --> 01:17:17.720 I apologize to the commissioners, but I don't know that I can vote on this because I live 01:17:17.720 --> 01:17:18.720 there. 01:17:18.720 --> 01:17:23.720 Am I right? 01:17:23.720 --> 01:17:28.160 So the decision to recuse is a personal one and I can't advise you on that, but generally 01:17:28.160 --> 01:17:34.920 speaking in the past, commissioners who live where a property is located, a project area, 01:17:34.920 --> 01:17:35.920 they don't vote on the item. 01:17:35.920 --> 01:17:36.920 Okay. 01:17:36.920 --> 01:17:42.900 So I apologize that I didn't catch that when we were in the other meeting. 01:17:42.900 --> 01:17:43.900 It's not fatal. 01:17:43.900 --> 01:17:47.400 This is a consent agenda, so we're not having a presentation. 01:17:47.400 --> 01:17:55.440 So my suggestion is to not vote and then get with Kathy afterwards for a recusal form. 01:17:55.440 --> 01:17:56.440 Okay. 01:17:56.440 --> 01:17:59.960 Good timing, though. 01:17:59.960 --> 01:18:01.280 Okay. 01:18:01.280 --> 01:18:04.120 Thank you. 01:18:04.120 --> 01:18:18.080 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:18:18.080 --> 01:18:26.000 And that item passes five zero with one recusal. 01:18:26.000 --> 01:18:29.200 Sorry. 01:18:29.200 --> 01:18:41.820 That moves us to item 4A, our item for individual consideration, item FR25-0020. 01:18:41.820 --> 01:18:42.820 Excuse me. 01:18:42.820 --> 01:18:43.820 Yes. 01:18:43.820 --> 01:18:44.820 Excuse me, chair. 01:18:44.820 --> 01:18:45.820 Yes. 01:18:45.820 --> 01:18:47.560 I would like to recuse myself from this item. 01:18:47.560 --> 01:18:48.560 Very good. 01:18:48.560 --> 01:18:52.800 Commissioner MacDuff, there's an area right back to your right there. 01:18:52.800 --> 01:19:03.440 Thank you. 01:19:03.440 --> 01:19:04.440 Good evening. 01:19:04.440 --> 01:19:05.440 I'm Julie Wyatt. 01:19:05.440 --> 01:19:08.480 I'm presenting FR25-0020. 01:19:08.480 --> 01:19:13.640 This is a replat of a four-plex subdivision. 01:19:13.640 --> 01:19:15.800 They do have some items that they do need to work through. 01:19:15.800 --> 01:19:19.660 The property is located just west of Loop 288. 01:19:19.660 --> 01:19:24.320 It was previously platted, but they have changed some of their designs, so they are making 01:19:24.320 --> 01:19:29.180 some changes to the lot lines and some of the design. 01:19:29.180 --> 01:19:32.600 We do recommend denial because they have some items they need to address. 01:19:32.600 --> 01:19:37.600 However, we have no objection to their request for an extension to October 22nd. 01:19:37.600 --> 01:19:44.160 I'll be happy to answer any questions. 01:19:44.160 --> 01:19:46.520 Any questions from the commission? 01:19:46.520 --> 01:19:51.700 I have one just because I'm curious, and I think it's an educational opportunity. 01:19:51.700 --> 01:19:58.000 The agenda information sheet mentions that this was due to alleys were needed in order 01:19:58.000 --> 01:20:02.600 to meet the design considerations. 01:20:02.600 --> 01:20:09.160 Am I reading too much into that to say that they're opting to build three-plexes or four-plexes 01:20:09.160 --> 01:20:12.900 in the form of what we would typically think of a townhome? 01:20:12.900 --> 01:20:13.900 And that's why? 01:20:13.900 --> 01:20:14.900 You are correct. 01:20:14.900 --> 01:20:15.900 Yes. 01:20:15.900 --> 01:20:22.560 I do think that that's a known way to make these three-plexes and four-plexes not as expensive 01:20:22.560 --> 01:20:28.300 to build because once you move into a triplex, you have to abide by the International Building 01:20:28.300 --> 01:20:34.420 Code book as opposed to the International Residential Code, which requires seven plus 01:20:34.420 --> 01:20:42.400 architectural and engineering stamps and that sort of thing. 01:20:42.400 --> 01:20:46.600 The more you know with the rainbow and everything. 01:20:46.600 --> 01:20:57.440 Any discussion or motion from the commission or questions? 01:20:57.440 --> 01:20:58.440 Commissioner MacDuff? 01:20:58.440 --> 01:21:00.560 So can I actually ... Oh, I'm sorry. 01:21:00.560 --> 01:21:02.280 One question from Commissioner Riggs. 01:21:02.280 --> 01:21:03.280 No. 01:21:03.280 --> 01:21:04.520 So we're going to have another recusal. 01:21:04.520 --> 01:21:07.720 I have to recuse myself from this one too. 01:21:07.720 --> 01:21:12.680 Very good. 01:21:12.680 --> 01:21:14.640 Yes. 01:21:14.640 --> 01:21:17.680 They're dropping like flies. 01:21:17.680 --> 01:21:23.160 Thank you for everybody else being here tonight. 01:21:23.160 --> 01:21:24.160 Commissioner MacDuff? 01:21:24.160 --> 01:21:27.520 Well, I'm not going to recuse myself. 01:21:27.520 --> 01:21:33.840 So I'll make the motion for approval by the request by ECM Eden Village LP for approval 01:21:33.840 --> 01:21:37.280 of a replant of the Eden Village edition. 01:21:37.280 --> 01:21:45.840 And this would include a 30-day extension to a date certain of October 22nd, 2025. 01:21:45.840 --> 01:21:47.520 And Commissioner Garland? 01:21:47.520 --> 01:21:49.680 And I will second that. 01:21:49.680 --> 01:21:51.160 Very good. 01:21:51.160 --> 01:22:02.560 Seeing no more discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:22:02.560 --> 01:22:12.960 And that item passes 4-0 with two recusals. 01:22:12.960 --> 01:22:18.320 Commissioner MacDuff, would you mind tapping on the door to invite our other commissioners 01:22:18.320 --> 01:22:21.320 or secretary? 01:22:21.320 --> 01:22:29.040 Yes, thank you. 01:22:29.040 --> 01:22:34.640 Thank you. 01:22:34.640 --> 01:22:43.180 That brings us to our public hearing this evening, item 5A, Z25-0013. 01:22:43.180 --> 01:22:58.680 Evening, Chair, members of the commission, Mia Hines, senior planner. 01:22:58.680 --> 01:23:05.320 This item, as stated in the caption, is a rezoning request for just under an acre, currently 01:23:05.320 --> 01:23:12.920 zone R4 and 5.75 acres zone RR to go to the mixed-use neighborhood MN district. 01:23:12.920 --> 01:23:18.280 The property is located south of East McKinney Street, approximately 600 feet west of Glengarry 01:23:18.280 --> 01:23:26.360 Way and just directly west adjacent to the McDonald Highlands subdivision. 01:23:26.360 --> 01:23:32.280 The applicant's stated purpose for this requested zoning is to have consistent MN zoning in preparation 01:23:32.280 --> 01:23:34.240 for resale. 01:23:34.240 --> 01:23:40.920 They have received some interest that they believe the MN zoning would help with that 01:23:40.920 --> 01:23:42.360 property. 01:23:42.360 --> 01:23:44.600 So here is the current zoning map to the left. 01:23:44.600 --> 01:23:50.840 Again, that northernmost tract is zone R4, which typically requires that minimum 7,000-square 01:23:50.840 --> 01:23:52.520 foot lot. 01:23:52.520 --> 01:23:59.760 The southern R track is RR, which is typically a minimum five-acre lot, so very different 01:23:59.760 --> 01:24:04.480 in dimension standards and zoning district standards there, but primarily the uses that 01:24:04.480 --> 01:24:09.720 would be located on those lots are single-family residential. 01:24:09.720 --> 01:24:16.080 Compared to that, the requested zoning district, MN, is primarily pedestrian-oriented in design 01:24:16.080 --> 01:24:19.000 and development regulation standards. 01:24:19.000 --> 01:24:27.440 There is a maximum 15-foot front yard setback that requires that certain portion of the 01:24:27.440 --> 01:24:32.720 building be pushed up to the front and, again, really oriented towards that pedestrian scale. 01:24:32.720 --> 01:24:36.560 There is a max building height of 65 feet, but as I'll discuss throughout the presentation, 01:24:36.560 --> 01:24:42.620 there are some transitions that could help sort of mitigate any negative impacts or adverse 01:24:42.620 --> 01:24:47.080 impacts to the property to the east. 01:24:47.080 --> 01:24:51.400 So an overall overview, of course, we did, once we got this request, put it up against 01:24:51.400 --> 01:24:55.320 our criteria for approval, and we do find that it does meet the criteria. 01:24:55.320 --> 01:25:02.040 I'll go through in detail a little bit in my next couple of slides on that piece, but 01:25:02.040 --> 01:25:06.280 here I just wanted to mention that it is consistent with the future land use map designation of 01:25:06.280 --> 01:25:08.160 modern residential. 01:25:08.160 --> 01:25:14.600 The proposal is generally consistent with the purpose statement for the MN zoning district. 01:25:14.600 --> 01:25:21.480 The property or the request does allow for the existing use of single-family residential 01:25:21.480 --> 01:25:26.520 on the property to continue, and development plans would be required and must comply with 01:25:26.520 --> 01:25:33.040 the DDC or other criteria should this property or the MN zoning district be approved. 01:25:33.040 --> 01:25:38.240 And then finally, zoning is not expected to generate significant adverse environmental 01:25:38.240 --> 01:25:42.920 infrastructure or fiscal impacts. 01:25:42.920 --> 01:25:48.720 So as far as its consistency with the MN purpose statement, in our DDC, the MN is intended 01:25:48.720 --> 01:25:54.000 to support compatibility between higher-intensity mixed-use areas and adjacent residential and 01:25:54.000 --> 01:25:58.560 commercial areas, and that's exactly what we have here. 01:25:58.560 --> 01:26:04.640 The property directly to the west of it has not developed yet, but it is planned for -- it's 01:26:04.640 --> 01:26:08.080 a part of a PD, and it's sort of planned for transitional housing. 01:26:08.080 --> 01:26:11.200 Essentially, from our point of view, it's multifamily. 01:26:11.200 --> 01:26:17.100 There are quite a few different structures that are permitted on there to support residences 01:26:17.100 --> 01:26:23.920 as well as programs intended to support those residences. 01:26:23.920 --> 01:26:29.400 So the intended audience or the intended market for that development would be those in need 01:26:29.400 --> 01:26:33.600 of transitional housing, and then there would be some buildings and offices and things and 01:26:33.600 --> 01:26:38.000 programs that would sort of help them within their transitioning state. 01:26:38.000 --> 01:26:39.720 And that's on the property to the west. 01:26:39.720 --> 01:26:46.440 The property to the east, conversely, is a single-family residential subdivision with 01:26:46.440 --> 01:26:50.580 a density of approximately six units per acre. 01:26:50.580 --> 01:26:55.720 As far as the roadway, of course, East McKinney Street is located just to the north. 01:26:55.720 --> 01:27:02.040 It is a primary arterial with recently improved pedestrian facilities, and I'll go into that 01:27:02.040 --> 01:27:04.040 a little bit here in a second. 01:27:04.040 --> 01:27:09.760 And then development standards would require compatibility transitions and buffers if this 01:27:09.760 --> 01:27:15.960 property were zoned MN as opposed to any other sort of residential district between them, 01:27:15.960 --> 01:27:18.080 these two properties. 01:27:18.080 --> 01:27:25.280 So I brought up this table a little bit in the work session to talk the comparison or 01:27:25.280 --> 01:27:30.300 to give you a comparison between what is currently permitted on those properties, what could 01:27:30.300 --> 01:27:36.000 be permitted with maybe a more intense residential district, and then what would be permitted 01:27:36.000 --> 01:27:40.720 under the MN zoning district. 01:27:40.720 --> 01:27:43.600 For the most part, the dimensions are significantly different. 01:27:43.600 --> 01:27:48.840 You're looking at a maximum 2,500 square foot lot size compared to the five-acre lot size 01:27:48.840 --> 01:27:50.320 minimum there. 01:27:50.320 --> 01:27:55.420 But again, existing zoning is not in line with our future land use map of moderate residential. 01:27:55.420 --> 01:27:59.680 So really, when we're looking at differences, we're looking at how the property can be built 01:27:59.680 --> 01:28:01.300 and developed. 01:28:01.300 --> 01:28:06.000 The MN district does impose that maximum 65-foot building height and requires a specific use 01:28:06.000 --> 01:28:10.240 permit for anything over 40 because it is adjacent to that single-family residential 01:28:10.240 --> 01:28:11.240 district. 01:28:11.240 --> 01:28:18.680 A wider range of land uses could be permitted in the MN, ultimately helping us achieve some 01:28:18.680 --> 01:28:23.440 of the goals of the neighborhood scale commercial services and other things that are intended 01:28:23.440 --> 01:28:29.720 to support residential development in those moderate land use designations. 01:28:29.720 --> 01:28:33.640 As far as compatibility requirements, you'd be looking at the same generally across the 01:28:33.640 --> 01:28:38.280 board because that's more based on the land use, and we would look at that once the land 01:28:38.280 --> 01:28:39.280 use came in. 01:28:39.280 --> 01:28:44.720 And then, like I said before, permitted uses, whereas the current zoning districts and residential 01:28:44.720 --> 01:28:50.280 zoning districts would primarily permit residential and community facilities, that mixed-use zoning 01:28:50.280 --> 01:28:56.040 does permit more commercial opportunities as well as the more dense residential development 01:28:56.040 --> 01:28:59.840 such as multifamily. 01:28:59.840 --> 01:29:04.560 I wanted to show you this slide as we talked a little bit about the buffers and transitions 01:29:04.560 --> 01:29:06.440 that are applicable to MN. 01:29:06.440 --> 01:29:10.360 If you could reorient yourself, because I want to blow this up as much as possible, 01:29:10.360 --> 01:29:16.720 north is to the left of the screen, and so this area here is East McKinney Street. 01:29:16.720 --> 01:29:25.240 What would be required with MN zoning or with a new development in general is that 10-foot 01:29:25.240 --> 01:29:30.080 to 15-foot landscape buffer here, so you're looking at at least this area that cannot 01:29:30.080 --> 01:29:37.160 contain anything but landscaping and possibly utilities, and then you have a maximum building 01:29:37.160 --> 01:29:43.660 height of 40 feet up to at least this orange line here, and then a maximum 55-foot building 01:29:43.660 --> 01:29:45.520 height at least up to this yellow line. 01:29:45.520 --> 01:29:52.200 Beyond that, they could go above 55 feet, but it would still require a specific use 01:29:52.200 --> 01:29:53.200 permit. 01:29:53.200 --> 01:30:00.880 So we're really looking at a max 40-foot blank here in general, and then a specific 01:30:00.880 --> 01:30:05.520 use permit would be required, and within the request of a specific use permit, they still 01:30:05.520 --> 01:30:13.160 have to meet the maximum 40 and maximum 55-foot within those distances. 01:30:13.160 --> 01:30:17.800 I did do a rough calculation and pulled up the property dimensions for this, and the 01:30:17.800 --> 01:30:23.260 property width total, I think that was a question, is approximately 215 feet, so that gives you 01:30:23.260 --> 01:30:28.840 an idea of scale and the permissible developments that could occur on this property. 01:30:28.840 --> 01:30:33.500 With regard, I talked a little bit about this so far, but regard to our comprehensive plan, 01:30:33.500 --> 01:30:37.520 that moderate residential land use is what we have on this site, and that MN district 01:30:37.520 --> 01:30:40.840 does conform to that land use. 01:30:40.840 --> 01:30:44.680 This zoning change would help us achieve a couple of our other goals, specifically the 01:30:44.680 --> 01:30:48.480 goal of growing with character and supporting desired forms of development that improve 01:30:48.480 --> 01:30:50.400 standards for urban design. 01:30:50.400 --> 01:30:54.320 As I discussed, that mixed-use neighborhood district really is intended to be more of 01:30:54.320 --> 01:31:01.640 an urban pedestrian-oriented district, similarly creating character, achieving that exemplary 01:31:01.640 --> 01:31:08.740 urban design, and then finally, the goal of designing a fiscally advantageous land use 01:31:08.740 --> 01:31:12.840 pattern paired with fiscally responsible infrastructure management and investment. 01:31:12.840 --> 01:31:17.080 I included that one in there because we just made improvements to East McKinney widening 01:31:17.080 --> 01:31:23.240 it and adding those pedestrian facilities, so if this property is to redevelop, it would 01:31:23.240 --> 01:31:30.240 make sense to be able to utilize that improved infrastructure, either from a commercial standpoint 01:31:30.240 --> 01:31:37.580 or from a residential standpoint that connects to those pedestrian paths and, again, makes 01:31:37.580 --> 01:31:42.100 use of those improvements. 01:31:42.100 --> 01:31:43.100 Here is a picture. 01:31:43.100 --> 01:31:48.360 I don't know if you can actually see it clearly on this blown up, but here's a comparison 01:31:48.360 --> 01:31:53.800 of East McKinney back in 2021 compared to 2025. 01:31:53.800 --> 01:31:59.080 I believe 2021 is around the time that they began construction of that expansion. 01:31:59.080 --> 01:32:07.200 At one point, it was a two-lane, center-turned-lane divided, and currently, it is a four-lane. 01:32:07.200 --> 01:32:08.200 That isn't correct. 01:32:08.200 --> 01:32:09.200 Not six-lane. 01:32:09.200 --> 01:32:13.440 Four-lane with the center-turned-lane divided, a 12-foot-wide sidewalk on the north side 01:32:13.440 --> 01:32:18.440 and a five-foot-wide sidewalk on the south side. 01:32:18.440 --> 01:32:23.120 As far as changes in the area, again, I've mentioned a little bit to the west, the property 01:32:23.120 --> 01:32:28.160 that's entitled for that mix of uses and those transitional housing that hasn't developed 01:32:28.160 --> 01:32:34.440 yet, but within the past just seven-year span, here's what we have. 01:32:34.440 --> 01:32:38.280 There have been significant changes in that area to the west. 01:32:38.280 --> 01:32:44.040 On the other side of that transitional housing property is a multifamily development that 01:32:44.040 --> 01:32:48.680 just occurred, and then to the west of that is a commercial development that just occurred. 01:32:48.680 --> 01:32:54.480 Additionally, Ryan High School, I believe that's Ryan High School, has expanded their campus. 01:32:54.480 --> 01:32:58.680 They've added some buildings and increased their capacity a little bit. 01:32:58.680 --> 01:33:04.200 Then similarly, the property to the further down east along McKinney is currently developing 01:33:04.200 --> 01:33:06.640 a manufactured home community. 01:33:06.640 --> 01:33:09.840 There has been an increase in rooftops in this area. 01:33:09.840 --> 01:33:13.760 There's been an increase in residents, and there's also been an increase in commercial 01:33:13.760 --> 01:33:20.160 activity along with the infrastructure improvements that we've seen happening to East McKinney. 01:33:20.160 --> 01:33:25.300 There has been changes in the area that an in-men property could or opens up opportunity 01:33:25.300 --> 01:33:30.920 for a property zone in-men to either, again, contribute to that residential growth in this 01:33:30.920 --> 01:33:36.440 area or actually provide neighborhood-scaled commercial services for these new residents 01:33:36.440 --> 01:33:39.480 that have been added to this area. 01:33:39.480 --> 01:33:44.560 With that, we did do public notification as per state law. 01:33:44.560 --> 01:33:48.900 We have not received any letters in opposition. 01:33:48.900 --> 01:33:50.160 We have received one in favor. 01:33:50.160 --> 01:33:55.180 It was the property owner, technically accounting for the property they own to the east. 01:33:55.180 --> 01:33:58.280 That is not a part of this subdivision. 01:33:58.280 --> 01:34:05.240 That will be updated as we go to city council, but that's the only response that we've seen 01:34:05.240 --> 01:34:07.400 of the notifications that we've sent out. 01:34:07.400 --> 01:34:12.420 The applicant did inform me that they sent out letters to the neighboring community basically 01:34:12.420 --> 01:34:17.080 explaining what's in their project narrative, what their goals are and what their purpose 01:34:17.080 --> 01:34:23.680 is for this rezoning, and asking the community if they had any questions being open to contact, 01:34:23.680 --> 01:34:29.280 and they had not received any inquiries or any questions, so they did not host a neighborhood 01:34:29.280 --> 01:34:33.080 meeting from that point. 01:34:33.080 --> 01:34:36.680 With that, staff is recommending approval of this zoning change request to mixed-use 01:34:36.680 --> 01:34:39.540 neighborhood as it does meet our criteria. 01:34:39.540 --> 01:34:42.080 That concludes my presentation. 01:34:42.080 --> 01:34:47.560 Following this, if this body is able to make a recommendation this evening, it is planned 01:34:47.560 --> 01:34:52.160 for the November 18, 2025 city council meeting. 01:34:52.160 --> 01:34:57.160 That concludes my presentation, and the applicant is here to answer questions, if you all have 01:34:57.160 --> 01:34:58.160 any. 01:34:58.160 --> 01:35:02.200 They do not have a presentation, but if you have questions, they are happy to answer. 01:35:02.200 --> 01:35:03.600 Thank you, Mia. 01:35:03.600 --> 01:35:12.840 I will open the public hearing at this time. 01:35:12.840 --> 01:35:17.320 In our public hearings, the applicant has an opportunity to go first, if they so wish, 01:35:17.320 --> 01:35:24.080 but you can defer if you want to, and then we will open up for the public to comment, 01:35:24.080 --> 01:35:31.400 so it's up to you whether you would like to speak at this time. 01:35:31.400 --> 01:35:32.960 This is a public hearing. 01:35:32.960 --> 01:35:38.560 I don't have any cards in front of me, but you can easily fill out a card after and come 01:35:38.560 --> 01:35:41.960 up and speak as you are ready. 01:35:41.960 --> 01:35:49.840 Please come up to the mic, just for the record, we need your name and address, and then you'll 01:35:49.840 --> 01:35:54.280 have four minutes to speak. 01:35:54.280 --> 01:35:57.720 Betty Keeley, 5213 Gaelic Court. 01:35:57.720 --> 01:36:02.440 It's the first street as you pull into the subdivision there. 01:36:02.440 --> 01:36:10.920 We are in, I believe, the 500 zone, but we did not receive any other documentation on 01:36:10.920 --> 01:36:17.800 what's intended to go in there other than the card that was recently sent out. 01:36:17.800 --> 01:36:24.200 Right now, to our subdivision, we've got a dollar general on the corner, which by the 01:36:24.200 --> 01:36:34.720 way has caused complete havoc for us and all of my neighbors along that backside with all 01:36:34.720 --> 01:36:39.960 the stuff that goes on there, the lights, the noise, the traffic. 01:36:39.960 --> 01:36:44.280 There's no traffic signal coming out of our subdivision. 01:36:44.280 --> 01:36:51.720 I've come to several of these meetings and requested somebody to look into putting in 01:36:51.720 --> 01:36:58.320 a traffic light there for mainly the kids, but now we've got more residents, all the 01:36:58.320 --> 01:37:04.680 traffic from the dollar general, and now we're going to have something on the other side, 01:37:04.680 --> 01:37:10.720 which that would dump out right where the kids go in, it's a crossing for the school 01:37:10.720 --> 01:37:13.720 there. 01:37:13.720 --> 01:37:20.680 Again, I don't know if the detail of what is planned for that area went out to the 500 01:37:20.680 --> 01:37:29.560 foot, but we did not receive anything, and I'm opposed to the change. 01:37:29.560 --> 01:37:36.900 Just to give you a little understanding of how this confusing process works, the zoning 01:37:36.900 --> 01:37:46.480 on this parcel currently is in some designations that would allow single family homes, if one 01:37:46.480 --> 01:37:51.640 could develop that in this parcel, and would not allow much else. 01:37:51.640 --> 01:37:57.000 The applicant is asking to change that zoning to a different zoning district that would 01:37:57.000 --> 01:38:05.280 have the uses that Mia presented, but there's no specific development plan at this time. 01:38:05.280 --> 01:38:11.580 It's really just what we call a straight zoning case, so it's should these other uses be allowed 01:38:11.580 --> 01:38:13.360 within this area? 01:38:13.360 --> 01:38:18.840 Does that help clear that up on why you didn't get additional details about what would be 01:38:18.840 --> 01:38:19.840 developed? 01:38:19.840 --> 01:38:28.480 She said something was sent out to the residents outlining what was going in there, and we 01:38:28.480 --> 01:38:33.440 didn't receive anything, at least that's what I heard. 01:38:33.440 --> 01:38:39.600 Maybe you can get with staff, but I think that postcard is what she was referring to, 01:38:39.600 --> 01:38:44.480 so it will just state what the current zoning is and what the application is for a different 01:38:44.480 --> 01:38:48.400 zoning district. 01:38:48.400 --> 01:38:53.160 Is there anything else that staff needs to correct me, or change anything on? 01:38:53.160 --> 01:38:54.160 Okay. 01:38:54.160 --> 01:38:55.160 Any questions from the commission? 01:38:55.160 --> 01:38:56.960 I don't see any. 01:38:56.960 --> 01:38:57.960 Thank you very much. 01:38:57.960 --> 01:38:58.960 Okay. 01:38:58.960 --> 01:38:59.960 Thank you. 01:38:59.960 --> 01:39:06.640 This is a public hearing, so if anyone else would like to speak, you're welcome to. 01:39:06.640 --> 01:39:13.680 I'm representing my client. 01:39:13.680 --> 01:39:19.920 The only reason that we want to do the rezoning is because the adjacent property, 5130, is 01:39:19.920 --> 01:39:28.160 already mixed use, and we're trying to sell the 8.5 acres, and the majority of the people 01:39:28.160 --> 01:39:34.960 who have an interest is like, "Well, you have 1.7, one zoning, and everything else is different," 01:39:34.960 --> 01:39:41.360 so we want to just kind of match everything, so whoever buy it, they have to come to you 01:39:41.360 --> 01:39:47.200 and request whatever permit and see what they want to do, but we're just trying to make 01:39:47.200 --> 01:39:48.200 it easy for the sale. 01:39:48.200 --> 01:39:54.400 I mean, we don't have a buyer yet, because obviously everybody's waiting for us to have 01:39:54.400 --> 01:39:55.400 rezoned it. 01:39:55.400 --> 01:39:56.400 Sure. 01:39:56.400 --> 01:39:59.600 We just want to make it kind of simple for a buyer. 01:39:59.600 --> 01:40:00.600 Okay. 01:40:00.600 --> 01:40:01.600 That's it. 01:40:01.600 --> 01:40:02.600 Okay. 01:40:02.600 --> 01:40:03.600 Okay. 01:40:03.600 --> 01:40:04.600 Any questions from the commission? 01:40:04.600 --> 01:40:05.600 Thank you. 01:40:05.600 --> 01:40:07.800 I don't see any. 01:40:07.800 --> 01:40:08.800 Thank you very much. 01:40:08.800 --> 01:40:09.800 Thank you. 01:40:09.800 --> 01:40:15.560 This is a public hearing. 01:40:15.560 --> 01:40:20.620 If you'd like to speak, you can come down, state your name and address, and you'll have 01:40:20.620 --> 01:40:23.800 four minutes to speak. 01:40:23.800 --> 01:40:24.800 Careful on those steps. 01:40:24.800 --> 01:40:25.800 I've played hockey too long. 01:40:25.800 --> 01:40:26.800 My name is Mike Keely. 01:40:26.800 --> 01:40:35.560 I live at 5213 Gala Court. 01:40:35.560 --> 01:40:44.040 I guess my biggest concern is that we never, ever want to see another dollar general in 01:40:44.040 --> 01:40:46.240 a residential neighborhood. 01:40:46.240 --> 01:40:57.280 I know that you're people that are supposed to come in and check for the standards. 01:40:57.280 --> 01:41:10.180 We have semis that park 10 feet from the back of our backyard and sit there and idle overnight. 01:41:10.180 --> 01:41:17.760 So I have to call the police and have them come out and try to wake up this driver. 01:41:17.760 --> 01:41:19.160 This is not supposed to be. 01:41:19.160 --> 01:41:26.640 There's not supposed to be any commercial vehicles, especially idling overnight. 01:41:26.640 --> 01:41:31.640 That's against the law, for God sakes. 01:41:31.640 --> 01:41:34.840 I've called the city manager's office on this. 01:41:34.840 --> 01:41:39.960 Also the street lights in the parking lot. 01:41:39.960 --> 01:41:45.720 I could sit and read a newspaper at my kitchen table 24 hours a day. 01:41:45.720 --> 01:41:49.480 These lights are so bright, and they're way too bright. 01:41:49.480 --> 01:41:54.280 I've complained, but nobody's done anything. 01:41:54.280 --> 01:41:59.080 Four people had to come out and check it, but I know they didn't, because you can get 01:41:59.080 --> 01:42:06.640 an app for your phone and hold it up, and it'll give you the lumens of the light inside 01:42:06.640 --> 01:42:10.320 my house, which is just incredibly bright. 01:42:10.320 --> 01:42:23.440 Of course, the noise, driving in and out of the parking lot, all of that is ... I can't 01:42:23.440 --> 01:42:27.400 wait to sell my house and get the hell out of debt. 01:42:27.400 --> 01:42:28.720 It's a nightmare. 01:42:28.720 --> 01:42:29.760 We built this house. 01:42:29.760 --> 01:42:38.800 This was our dream home 35 years ago, and all of a sudden, this thing pulls in, and 01:42:38.800 --> 01:42:48.200 we never got any requests for zoning change or anything for this dollar general. 01:42:48.200 --> 01:42:54.320 They kind of snuck it in on us, the way I see it. 01:42:54.320 --> 01:43:00.360 I don't know why we weren't notified that this was coming, but here we go. 01:43:00.360 --> 01:43:03.960 We got it, so that's why we're here. 01:43:03.960 --> 01:43:12.560 We just want to make sure that everybody follows the rules, and it didn't happen with Dollar 01:43:12.560 --> 01:43:15.040 General. 01:43:15.040 --> 01:43:21.080 There's no way they follow the rules, and they're not following the ordinances of the 01:43:21.080 --> 01:43:25.760 city of Nettin that you have on your website. 01:43:25.760 --> 01:43:33.840 All these rules, they're there, but somehow they get away with it. 01:43:33.840 --> 01:43:39.240 What else? 01:43:39.240 --> 01:43:41.440 What about sewers? 01:43:41.440 --> 01:43:49.680 We don't have storm sewers in our neighborhood, and you're going to add this stuff on. 01:43:49.680 --> 01:43:59.120 The storm sewer for the Dollar General, the water ... They put a trough in, basically, 01:43:59.120 --> 01:44:05.840 and run it out to the street, and it runs down the street to the end of ... I don't 01:44:05.840 --> 01:44:11.280 know what those streets are, and dumps into the creek. 01:44:11.280 --> 01:44:16.320 There's no storm sewers, and what's going to happen with this? 01:44:16.320 --> 01:44:21.640 This is more of that, and I've never seen anything like that, and I didn't realize it 01:44:21.640 --> 01:44:30.120 when we purchased our house, but I need to look into getting some real sewers put in, 01:44:30.120 --> 01:44:33.880 storm sewers, so we don't have open storm sewers. 01:44:33.880 --> 01:44:40.920 When they dump their trash, it's basically running down their streets, which is not a 01:44:40.920 --> 01:44:41.920 problem. 01:44:41.920 --> 01:44:43.480 It doesn't sound like so. 01:44:43.480 --> 01:44:47.560 Just one point of clarification on the ... When you talk about storm sewers, you're talking 01:44:47.560 --> 01:44:59.800 about storm rain runoff, as opposed to refuse water, if you will. 01:44:59.800 --> 01:45:00.800 Yeah, it's not that. 01:45:00.800 --> 01:45:07.920 It's everything else, though, and most neighborhoods, they have a storm sewer, and a storm sewer 01:45:07.920 --> 01:45:08.920 system. 01:45:08.920 --> 01:45:11.400 We don't have that. 01:45:11.400 --> 01:45:14.400 We have the curbs. 01:45:14.400 --> 01:45:19.000 We don't have the six inch, nine inch curbs. 01:45:19.000 --> 01:45:25.360 We have this thing, so that's where the water runs, and it runs down to the end of all the 01:45:25.360 --> 01:45:34.400 streets in that neighborhood, to the cul-de-sac, which then has a ... I don't know what you 01:45:34.400 --> 01:45:38.880 would call it, just a drainage area that runs to the back of the houses down there, and 01:45:38.880 --> 01:45:40.760 all that dumps into the creek. 01:45:40.760 --> 01:45:41.760 Right. 01:45:41.760 --> 01:45:42.760 Okay. 01:45:42.760 --> 01:45:43.760 Really? 01:45:43.760 --> 01:45:44.760 Thank you very much. 01:45:44.760 --> 01:45:45.760 Into Lake Louisville? 01:45:45.760 --> 01:45:46.760 Thank you. 01:45:46.760 --> 01:45:51.760 We can have a drink in one of those, please. 01:45:51.760 --> 01:45:52.760 All right. 01:45:52.760 --> 01:46:02.120 I don't see any additional people jumping up to comment, so at this time, I will close 01:46:02.120 --> 01:46:05.120 the public hearing. 01:46:05.120 --> 01:46:11.760 I guess I'll ask for staff to come up and address a couple of things I heard. 01:46:11.760 --> 01:46:20.220 One, can you give just a very brief explanation on what the stormwater evaluation and remediation 01:46:20.220 --> 01:46:30.400 process is for development in general, and then the other one must not have been important. 01:46:30.400 --> 01:46:31.400 Start with that, please. 01:46:31.400 --> 01:46:35.320 I'll go through a couple of them, and if you think of the other one, you can, of course, 01:46:35.320 --> 01:46:36.320 ask me. 01:46:36.320 --> 01:46:37.320 Thank you. 01:46:37.320 --> 01:46:47.240 I think for, yes, so for lighting, for utilities, public or water, sewer, drainage, all of those 01:46:47.240 --> 01:46:52.240 things, traffic impact, all of those things are reviewed when we have an actual development, 01:46:52.240 --> 01:46:58.320 and the reason that we don't typically discuss them with straight zoning changes is because 01:46:58.320 --> 01:46:59.320 we just don't know. 01:46:59.320 --> 01:47:04.780 So anything from a single-family residential home to multifamily development with a lot 01:47:04.780 --> 01:47:10.880 of residences or a commercial use, like a retail store, could be developed on this site, 01:47:10.880 --> 01:47:19.200 and there's more information that goes into site development and site design to answer 01:47:19.200 --> 01:47:20.720 questions related to those things. 01:47:20.720 --> 01:47:24.320 We do check those when developments come in with the zoning compliance plan as well as 01:47:24.320 --> 01:47:29.800 the civil engineering plans, so they are engineered drawings that are intended to meet the minimum 01:47:29.800 --> 01:47:37.720 requirements of water, sewer, drainage, and things like that. 01:47:37.720 --> 01:47:39.880 One of the other questions? 01:47:39.880 --> 01:47:45.160 There's general confusion about lighting. 01:47:45.160 --> 01:47:49.880 I guess let's couch it for this parcel in particular. 01:47:49.880 --> 01:47:59.160 What would be the requirements of site lighting, be it landscape or parking lot, side of building, 01:47:59.160 --> 01:48:03.040 in any development, especially to the west of the neighborhood that's to the east? 01:48:03.040 --> 01:48:07.800 So I mentioned a little bit before, there is a buffer requirement or a landscape buffer 01:48:07.800 --> 01:48:14.640 requirement between the property and the existing single-family residential structures. 01:48:14.640 --> 01:48:18.480 The width of it is going to be dependent on what actually develops on the site, but there 01:48:18.480 --> 01:48:23.240 will be at least a minimum buffer that's intended to shield from car lighting and things like 01:48:23.240 --> 01:48:24.780 that in parking lots. 01:48:24.780 --> 01:48:30.520 As far as site lighting, there is a minimum standard that site should be downcast and 01:48:30.520 --> 01:48:34.840 shielded downward so it's not reflecting on neighboring properties. 01:48:34.840 --> 01:48:41.320 There are minimum foot candle requirements that have to be met at the property line as 01:48:41.320 --> 01:48:42.320 well. 01:48:42.320 --> 01:48:53.720 That is checked when we typically either check for DCPs or a site plan, building site plan. 01:48:53.720 --> 01:48:59.960 Pardon my ignorance here, but when we go through a development process, how do we check foot 01:48:59.960 --> 01:49:04.760 candle illumination based on a site plan? 01:49:04.760 --> 01:49:05.760 What is the name? 01:49:05.760 --> 01:49:06.760 Photometric. 01:49:06.760 --> 01:49:13.160 Submit photometric plans that identifies where the proposed lighting structures will be and 01:49:13.160 --> 01:49:18.520 then literally has measurements of how much illumination is going to be on the ground 01:49:18.520 --> 01:49:19.960 in certain locations. 01:49:19.960 --> 01:49:20.960 Okay. 01:49:20.960 --> 01:49:22.600 Thank you. 01:49:22.600 --> 01:49:24.000 Any other questions? 01:49:24.000 --> 01:49:25.000 Yes. 01:49:25.000 --> 01:49:26.000 Commissioner McDade? 01:49:26.000 --> 01:49:27.000 Sorry. 01:49:27.000 --> 01:49:28.000 Excuse me. 01:49:28.000 --> 01:49:29.000 Dyer? 01:49:29.000 --> 01:49:30.000 Commissioner Dyer. 01:49:30.000 --> 01:49:38.120 Just a question, when the Dollar General was put in and it is also MN, which is what the 01:49:38.120 --> 01:49:45.240 applicant is asking this area to be, do they also have to follow that buffer zone with 01:49:45.240 --> 01:49:47.600 certain amount of landscaping? 01:49:47.600 --> 01:49:48.600 Yes. 01:49:48.600 --> 01:49:53.640 Now, I need to maybe do some research on that one because it's not a part of this request, 01:49:53.640 --> 01:49:58.960 but yes, if they came in under the current DDC, I'll put it that way, I'm not sure what 01:49:58.960 --> 01:50:02.320 the timing, if they came in under the current DDC, they would have also been required to 01:50:02.320 --> 01:50:05.720 do that landscape buffer as well as those lighting requirements. 01:50:05.720 --> 01:50:11.760 And with MN, one of the objectives, if this land is to be sold and somebody comes in and 01:50:11.760 --> 01:50:16.640 buys it, one of the things that they would now be allowed to do if we do the zoning change 01:50:16.640 --> 01:50:18.960 is for apartment complexes, correct? 01:50:18.960 --> 01:50:19.960 Correct. 01:50:19.960 --> 01:50:21.960 But they can also do townhouses. 01:50:21.960 --> 01:50:22.960 Correct. 01:50:22.960 --> 01:50:28.160 And what is the zoning if they just, that would just allow townhouses and not apartments? 01:50:28.160 --> 01:50:34.120 Most townhouses could potentially be like an R7 or maybe R4 as far as residential zoning 01:50:34.120 --> 01:50:39.880 districts and not apartments, and then it would also alleviate most of the opportunities 01:50:39.880 --> 01:50:45.120 for commercial in that instance because it would be residential. 01:50:45.120 --> 01:50:53.520 So MN is our most least intense commercial district, and then if you're wanting less 01:50:53.520 --> 01:50:58.280 intense density in residential, you start to leak back into the residential district, 01:50:58.280 --> 01:51:03.720 so that's your R7s and R4s, which doesn't allow for much of those commercial uses. 01:51:03.720 --> 01:51:11.400 Could you on the .93 acres there up against East McKinney where that right now is R4, 01:51:11.400 --> 01:51:18.640 could you just do that as MN because it's up against the road and then the remaining 01:51:18.640 --> 01:51:24.440 5.75 acres, could we recommend a different zoning? 01:51:24.440 --> 01:51:25.560 Is that always a possibility? 01:51:25.560 --> 01:51:26.560 Yeah. 01:51:26.560 --> 01:51:30.840 So I talked over with the applicant a couple of, I think they initially submitted this 01:51:30.840 --> 01:51:36.200 two, three months ago, so we've thought about it extensively and talked about it extensively. 01:51:36.200 --> 01:51:42.520 The R7 zoning district, I think, would also meet our moderate residential future land 01:51:42.520 --> 01:51:46.160 use designation and would also be appropriate for this area. 01:51:46.160 --> 01:51:52.360 I understand the applicant's goal of having consistent zoning across the property for 01:51:52.360 --> 01:51:57.800 their purposes, and the moderate residential or the mixed use neighborhood zoning designation 01:51:57.800 --> 01:52:01.440 does also meet our moderate residential future land use designation. 01:52:01.440 --> 01:52:06.120 So you could request R7, and if that is the direction of this body, I believe you have 01:52:06.120 --> 01:52:07.760 the flexibility to do that. 01:52:07.760 --> 01:52:17.200 Jeff is recommending approval of the full, the MN for both tracks. 01:52:17.200 --> 01:52:24.680 Point where I guess to follow up on that question on the, my understanding is that the purpose 01:52:24.680 --> 01:52:30.800 of the rezoning is because this is all a single parcel and because of prior annexations and 01:52:30.800 --> 01:52:38.040 whatnot, the, there's a strip along East McKinney Street, which is a different zoning than what's 01:52:38.040 --> 01:52:39.240 south of there. 01:52:39.240 --> 01:52:44.720 And so am I correct in thinking that in order to have two different zonings and still have 01:52:44.720 --> 01:52:49.720 this land developable, you'd have to replat it so that both parcels would have street 01:52:49.720 --> 01:52:51.720 access essentially? 01:52:51.720 --> 01:52:56.960 You would have to replat the second lot or at least provide some type of public easement 01:52:56.960 --> 01:52:57.960 to that property. 01:52:57.960 --> 01:53:03.480 I didn't want to clarify that, yes, they are two different parcels under one ownership. 01:53:03.480 --> 01:53:09.120 And I believe that a large part of that split is if you follow the history of the annexation 01:53:09.120 --> 01:53:14.560 is because of the, the property is basically along East McKinney Street, we're annexed 01:53:14.560 --> 01:53:19.440 first and then we kind of came through and did the southern half as well. 01:53:19.440 --> 01:53:25.380 And could you, sorry to put you on the spot, but I know you know this stuff like the back 01:53:25.380 --> 01:53:27.500 of your hand. 01:53:27.500 --> 01:53:34.760 One thing I think didn't come out is the tree preservation requirements for the more intense 01:53:34.760 --> 01:53:42.160 uses in MN versus what would be allowed that would be mostly residential in, in R7. 01:53:42.160 --> 01:53:43.160 Does that make sense? 01:53:43.160 --> 01:53:47.600 Yeah, just if you can talk to that. 01:53:47.600 --> 01:53:51.240 I don't know the difference on top of my head with tree preservation requirements. 01:53:51.240 --> 01:53:53.240 So I'll point to Haley for that. 01:53:53.240 --> 01:54:02.800 I will say they require a similar landscape and tree canopy coverage requirements. 01:54:02.800 --> 01:54:05.440 That is supposed to say tree canopy coverage, not tree preservation. 01:54:05.440 --> 01:54:06.440 My apologies. 01:54:06.440 --> 01:54:08.440 But go ahead, Haley, if you have something to add. 01:54:08.440 --> 01:54:12.080 Yeah, I was just going to add the tree preservation requirements would be the same regardless 01:54:12.080 --> 01:54:16.680 of zoning or land use, the same standards apply across the board. 01:54:16.680 --> 01:54:23.400 Okay, I guess since we heard talk of townhomes, that would be single family residential or 01:54:23.400 --> 01:54:30.000 that I thought those tree preservation requirements were different than commercial and multifamily. 01:54:30.000 --> 01:54:33.840 Residential is they are allowed to drop a little lower than commercial. 01:54:33.840 --> 01:54:40.360 So for tree preservation, is it ESA on site or are we talking just straight tree preservation? 01:54:40.360 --> 01:54:41.680 There is ESA on site. 01:54:41.680 --> 01:54:46.000 There is a difference and you may be thinking of the upland habitat ESA type, which has 01:54:46.000 --> 01:54:50.880 a lower standard for commercial than single family in terms of the amount that has to 01:54:50.880 --> 01:54:52.360 be maintained. 01:54:52.360 --> 01:54:56.120 Straight tree preservation for things outside of ESAs is the same across the board. 01:54:56.120 --> 01:55:01.280 It starts at 30% being the required, but you can drop to 20% with higher mitigation. 01:55:01.280 --> 01:55:02.280 Okay. 01:55:02.280 --> 01:55:03.280 Thank you. 01:55:03.280 --> 01:55:04.280 Thank you. 01:55:04.280 --> 01:55:12.960 So let me just make sure I'm understanding this right, because it's lots of tree talk. 01:55:12.960 --> 01:55:21.600 And that is the key difference between perhaps an MN and an RR7 would be that with single 01:55:21.600 --> 01:55:32.600 family type uses, any upland habitat in the area has a larger upland habitat ESA preservation. 01:55:32.600 --> 01:55:39.300 It's probably not the word our code uses, but you must maintain a higher percentage 01:55:39.300 --> 01:55:46.000 of that for the commercial and multifamily uses than you do for the residential uses. 01:55:46.000 --> 01:55:47.000 Yes. 01:55:47.000 --> 01:55:48.000 Is that correct? 01:55:48.000 --> 01:55:49.000 Yes. 01:55:49.000 --> 01:55:57.920 And I do want to point out that because this is a straight rezoning request, the MN district 01:55:57.920 --> 01:56:06.120 does still permit some of those single families, so it could develop either way, but that is 01:56:06.120 --> 01:56:07.120 the case, correct? 01:56:07.120 --> 01:56:11.680 If it is developed with residential, they are permitted to preserve or conserve less 01:56:11.680 --> 01:56:13.920 than commercial and multifamily. 01:56:13.920 --> 01:56:14.920 Okay. 01:56:14.920 --> 01:56:15.920 Thank you. 01:56:15.920 --> 01:56:22.200 Any other questions from the commission or discussion? 01:56:22.200 --> 01:56:31.520 I will actually ask our legal to explain a few issues, because one is we have six commissioners 01:56:31.520 --> 01:56:32.520 here. 01:56:32.520 --> 01:56:38.600 We will explain what our procedure is in the case of a tight vote, as well as give us some 01:56:38.600 --> 01:56:52.840 background and information on how to form a motion if the intention is to require counsel 01:56:52.840 --> 01:56:57.000 to trigger the super majority requirement on the council for a motion where we would 01:56:57.000 --> 01:56:58.000 not... 01:56:58.000 --> 01:57:00.760 Yeah, I'll stop there because I'll just make it easy. 01:57:00.760 --> 01:57:01.760 Thank you. 01:57:01.760 --> 01:57:02.760 Okay. 01:57:02.760 --> 01:57:03.760 I've got you. 01:57:03.760 --> 01:57:04.760 Okay. 01:57:04.760 --> 01:57:05.760 So no worries. 01:57:05.760 --> 01:57:14.480 So if there's a tie vote here, then the item comes back at the next PNZ meeting. 01:57:14.480 --> 01:57:18.680 It escapes me whether it comes back as an individual consideration or a public hearing, 01:57:18.680 --> 01:57:24.760 but you will have another opportunity to take a whack at it and hopefully resolve the tie. 01:57:24.760 --> 01:57:32.480 If there is a desire to recommend an alternative zoning district to council and make it clear 01:57:32.480 --> 01:57:44.200 that planning and zoning's opinion on the request to rezone MN is a denial, then probably 01:57:44.200 --> 01:57:51.960 the simplest way to do that, pardon me, is to make a motion generally in the form of, 01:57:51.960 --> 01:58:04.680 "I move to recommend approval of R7 and recommend denial of MN for the subject zoning request." 01:58:04.680 --> 01:58:10.920 I just want to note that that's a motion that's doing two things, and so consider in your 01:58:10.920 --> 01:58:18.920 vote whether you agree with both things should that motion be made and seconded. 01:58:18.920 --> 01:58:24.760 And please ask questions before the vote if you're not sure. 01:58:24.760 --> 01:58:25.760 Thank you. 01:58:25.760 --> 01:58:29.400 Commissioner McDuff, I think you had your name on the board for a question. 01:58:29.400 --> 01:58:30.400 Yes. 01:58:30.400 --> 01:58:35.240 I just wanted to say this in a public hearing that I do have some concerns about this, and 01:58:35.240 --> 01:58:45.060 my first concern is that the MN rezoning allows for multifamily construction, and that would 01:58:45.060 --> 01:58:49.240 mean apartments behind the neighborhood. 01:58:49.240 --> 01:58:57.160 The other thing that concerns me now that I hear from the public is the light pollution, 01:58:57.160 --> 01:59:00.360 the noise pollution, just of some concern. 01:59:00.360 --> 01:59:07.080 So for the record, we were hearing it for the record, but I guess the big one for me 01:59:07.080 --> 01:59:14.440 as a retired educator is the traffic that will be involved with the more commercial 01:59:14.440 --> 01:59:19.420 development right across from Ryan High School, and the staff is assured that that would be 01:59:19.420 --> 01:59:27.640 one of the steps of analysis, the study further on down the line, but I want to register that 01:59:27.640 --> 01:59:29.240 as my concern. 01:59:29.240 --> 01:59:39.440 I will say I am thinking from looking at what's around adjacent to this property that requested 01:59:39.440 --> 01:59:45.280 to be rezoned, I do think an R-7 might be more appropriate. 01:59:45.280 --> 01:59:47.120 Thank you. 01:59:47.120 --> 01:59:48.760 Sure. 01:59:48.760 --> 01:59:51.760 Commissioner Dyer. 01:59:51.760 --> 01:59:54.360 Sorry. 01:59:54.360 --> 02:00:03.820 I would also like to say that after hearing everything and looking at the property located 02:00:03.820 --> 02:00:10.000 on the east side being a single family residential, and the property on the west side of this 02:00:10.000 --> 02:00:21.960 particular strip of land, I just don't have concerns that if we move to do an MN zoning 02:00:21.960 --> 02:00:30.880 approval that having the potential to have apartment units there is not a good transition 02:00:30.880 --> 02:00:37.600 between a single family residence into what is slated to be built on the west side of 02:00:37.600 --> 02:00:38.600 this property. 02:00:38.600 --> 02:00:45.800 I also have concerns about lights that would be accompanied with the parking requirements 02:00:45.800 --> 02:00:52.280 for apartment units, the noise that would also be associated with that. 02:00:52.280 --> 02:00:54.680 You're already up against a busy street. 02:00:54.680 --> 02:01:02.400 I think an R-7 would be a better suited zone for this because I think having town homes 02:01:02.400 --> 02:01:11.120 would be a great transition between what is established with the single family, what is 02:01:11.120 --> 02:01:16.320 scheduled to be built on the west side of this property, and I think it also is a great 02:01:16.320 --> 02:01:26.800 way to achieve home ownership for some of our residents who I would think townhouses, 02:01:26.800 --> 02:01:31.400 as long as they're not luxury, I think in this area it would be a good affordable plan 02:01:31.400 --> 02:01:32.560 for this. 02:01:32.560 --> 02:01:43.440 So as it sits before us, I would be a no vote on an MN zone motion. 02:01:43.440 --> 02:01:44.440 Commissioner Riggs. 02:01:44.440 --> 02:01:48.740 Yeah, I share the same concerns with the MN zoning. 02:01:48.740 --> 02:01:53.240 Not only can you do apartments in MN, but you could also do retail, so it sounds like 02:01:53.240 --> 02:01:56.160 another kind of dollar general situation. 02:01:56.160 --> 02:02:01.920 I personally think I'd be more concerned about the apartments, and Mia, this is maybe a question 02:02:01.920 --> 02:02:03.480 for you. 02:02:03.480 --> 02:02:09.560 With the R-7, multifamily is still allowed, but it's a specific use permit. 02:02:09.560 --> 02:02:13.080 What would that process be, because it's still technically allowed? 02:02:13.080 --> 02:02:18.920 Yes, so the specific use permit process, that R-7 district does allow multifamily with a 02:02:18.920 --> 02:02:20.280 specific use permit. 02:02:20.280 --> 02:02:25.600 That process, basically we review the zoning compliance plan beforehand, so before the 02:02:25.600 --> 02:02:29.080 zoning change instead of with a straight zoning change, we do it after. 02:02:29.080 --> 02:02:33.480 We would review the zoning compliance plan, landscape plans, as well as building elevations 02:02:33.480 --> 02:02:39.120 in some cases, and then we would make sure that it is in compliance with the Denton Development 02:02:39.120 --> 02:02:43.040 Code standards for development in multifamily. 02:02:43.040 --> 02:02:46.800 We would bring it before this body as a specific use permit. 02:02:46.800 --> 02:02:52.060 It would be noticed, so the neighborhood or the adjacent property owners would also get 02:02:52.060 --> 02:02:58.360 a notification of the hearing, as well as they would be available or able to see copies 02:02:58.360 --> 02:03:01.320 of the site plan and the actual development plan for the area. 02:03:01.320 --> 02:03:04.880 This body would make a recommendation, and then city council is ultimately the approving 02:03:04.880 --> 02:03:07.360 body for specific use permits. 02:03:07.360 --> 02:03:13.680 Okay, I kind of like that, because if we go with R-7, it doesn't preclude a multifamily. 02:03:13.680 --> 02:03:17.640 Maybe there's a plan they could come up with and come back to us and go, "Maybe that's 02:03:17.640 --> 02:03:22.920 a good idea," but as of right now, it kind of precludes the multifamily and definitely 02:03:22.920 --> 02:03:27.540 precludes the retail, so I think I would be more in favor of that. 02:03:27.540 --> 02:03:32.200 The other question I have is the property to the west is a PD. 02:03:32.200 --> 02:03:35.600 Can you talk a little bit about the PD and what's going to go there? 02:03:35.600 --> 02:03:36.600 Sure. 02:03:36.600 --> 02:03:39.360 I tried to explain it a little bit. 02:03:39.360 --> 02:03:43.840 The intent behind the PD or the applicants for the PD is a non-profit organization. 02:03:43.840 --> 02:03:47.240 It's the Love First Community or Grace Like Rain. 02:03:47.240 --> 02:03:52.360 I can't remember the name of the community or the organization. 02:03:52.360 --> 02:03:59.480 They are proposed or they have approved or they have been approved for ... Basically, 02:03:59.480 --> 02:04:00.480 it's multifamily. 02:04:00.480 --> 02:04:03.400 From our point of view, it's like horizontal multifamily. 02:04:03.400 --> 02:04:09.240 It's a variety or a bunch of different residential structures on one site. 02:04:09.240 --> 02:04:13.240 As a part of their PD, though, they also have to have program buildings, so they also have 02:04:13.240 --> 02:04:22.300 to have an office space, certain community features for the enjoyment of those residents, 02:04:22.300 --> 02:04:29.400 and then the housing is intended to be transitional housing that supports people who are sort 02:04:29.400 --> 02:04:30.600 of an in-between state. 02:04:30.600 --> 02:04:33.640 They're either looking for jobs, they're looking for service, they're looking for assistance 02:04:33.640 --> 02:04:36.360 in some kind of way. 02:04:36.360 --> 02:04:37.360 That's what that's intended for. 02:04:37.360 --> 02:04:41.960 I think from a land use standpoint, it's largely multifamily. 02:04:41.960 --> 02:04:45.260 That's the best way that what we see from the outside and what we'd see on the ground, 02:04:45.260 --> 02:04:46.880 that's what it will look like. 02:04:46.880 --> 02:04:47.880 Okay. 02:04:47.880 --> 02:04:48.880 Thank you. 02:04:48.880 --> 02:04:49.880 Yeah. 02:04:49.880 --> 02:04:55.840 I do think that the R7 sounds like a good transition from single family into the PD. 02:04:55.840 --> 02:04:56.840 Understood. 02:04:56.840 --> 02:04:57.840 I shared concerns. 02:04:57.840 --> 02:05:06.280 Just one question from me. 02:05:06.280 --> 02:05:10.600 There's a separate parcel from where the Dollar General is that's north of this neighborhood 02:05:10.600 --> 02:05:13.000 to the east of the subject property. 02:05:13.000 --> 02:05:17.520 That's also zoned MN right now, and I think it's undeveloped. 02:05:17.520 --> 02:05:25.360 I want to make sure that because of the complication of how zoning works, I want to make sure that 02:05:25.360 --> 02:05:31.520 the public who's here understands what could happen on that piece of land as well and how 02:05:31.520 --> 02:05:36.600 that impacts what we might decide on the subject property. 02:05:36.600 --> 02:05:40.720 If you could just confirm what zoning that is and explain what could be built. 02:05:40.720 --> 02:05:41.720 Yeah. 02:05:41.720 --> 02:05:46.200 Just to confirm the property you should talk ... Are you referencing this one here at the 02:05:46.200 --> 02:05:47.200 corner? 02:05:47.200 --> 02:05:49.400 There's that, and then I think there's the one to the east as well. 02:05:49.400 --> 02:05:50.400 This one here? 02:05:50.400 --> 02:05:51.400 Yeah. 02:05:51.400 --> 02:05:52.400 Yes. 02:05:52.400 --> 02:05:53.400 Those properties are currently zoned MN. 02:05:53.400 --> 02:05:59.200 The land uses that have been providing your backup that would be permitted under the current 02:05:59.200 --> 02:06:04.800 MN zoning is also currently permitted on MN property. 02:06:04.800 --> 02:06:08.100 General retail is permitted on those properties, so I know that the neighborhood expressed 02:06:08.100 --> 02:06:12.360 concerns about the existing retail there. 02:06:12.360 --> 02:06:13.360 That could occur. 02:06:13.360 --> 02:06:18.280 We don't discriminate against the specific brand of retail, but that could occur there 02:06:18.280 --> 02:06:19.280 also. 02:06:19.280 --> 02:06:20.280 Okay. 02:06:20.280 --> 02:06:21.720 As well as multifamily? 02:06:21.720 --> 02:06:22.720 As well as multifamily. 02:06:22.720 --> 02:06:23.720 That is correct. 02:06:23.720 --> 02:06:24.720 Okay. 02:06:24.720 --> 02:06:37.480 I want to check with the applicant, just because there's some differing opinions. 02:06:37.480 --> 02:06:44.120 I know staff spoke to the discussion between you all on MN versus R7. 02:06:44.120 --> 02:06:50.200 Is R7 something that you are willing to entertain, or would you rather have an up-down vote on 02:06:50.200 --> 02:06:52.880 whether MN is approved? 02:06:52.880 --> 02:06:55.480 Well, we would prefer the MN. 02:06:55.480 --> 02:07:02.320 The only reason is because the adjacent property is MN, and on that point, we can sell the 02:07:02.320 --> 02:07:07.600 8.5 acres as a one zoning and not different zoning. 02:07:07.600 --> 02:07:08.600 I see. 02:07:08.600 --> 02:07:14.960 That's why we have people ... Well, you have right now, we're trying to sell three different 02:07:14.960 --> 02:07:20.680 parcels, three different zonings, and it's what is causing conflict. 02:07:20.680 --> 02:07:25.760 They're all looking for one zoning, so it's make it easier. 02:07:25.760 --> 02:07:29.800 I think I now understand, and I missed this point before. 02:07:29.800 --> 02:07:36.160 The applicant that you're representing owns both the R4 zoned parcel next to ... 02:07:36.160 --> 02:07:47.400 It's the RR and R2, that's the 6.7 acres in total, and then the property next to it is 02:07:47.400 --> 02:07:54.680 a 1.7 acre, that's MN, and so we're trying to sell everything as a bundle. 02:07:54.680 --> 02:07:55.680 Got it. 02:07:55.680 --> 02:07:56.680 It's three different parcels, three different zonings. 02:07:56.680 --> 02:08:02.360 So three different parcels are under common ownership, only two of them are for the rezoning 02:08:02.360 --> 02:08:03.360 this evening? 02:08:03.360 --> 02:08:05.040 Yes, because one is already MN. 02:08:05.040 --> 02:08:06.040 Understood. 02:08:06.040 --> 02:08:11.960 And everybody who's showing interest for the MN is like, "Yeah, but you have two more zonings 02:08:11.960 --> 02:08:15.200 in here, so everything should be one." 02:08:15.200 --> 02:08:16.200 Okay. 02:08:16.200 --> 02:08:17.200 That's the reason. 02:08:17.200 --> 02:08:20.200 Thank you. 02:08:20.200 --> 02:08:24.480 Commissioner Dyer. 02:08:24.480 --> 02:08:35.920 Just to piggyback off of Commissioner Riggs, Mia, so if we do the R7 and they were to come 02:08:35.920 --> 02:08:42.240 back with the PD overlay, do you as city staff, because city staff changes, the people sitting 02:08:42.240 --> 02:08:47.880 up here on this board changes, do you guys go back and look at transcripts to see what 02:08:47.880 --> 02:08:50.520 the discussion was in the past? 02:08:50.520 --> 02:08:51.840 Sometimes. 02:08:51.840 --> 02:08:59.160 I think probably with the more particular, not odd, PD overlays, but if there's something, 02:08:59.160 --> 02:09:04.640 we'll pool the overlay, of course, and if there's something in there that's very specific, 02:09:04.640 --> 02:09:09.120 sometimes there is curiosity about, "Well, what was the discussion that led to that?" 02:09:09.120 --> 02:09:14.520 And then sometimes we'll put it, I think Hillary might come in on this, we'll put it in the 02:09:14.520 --> 02:09:16.720 statement for the ordinance as well. 02:09:16.720 --> 02:09:22.160 If it's something very specific or very niche, we'll put it in the whereas statements that 02:09:22.160 --> 02:09:34.600 expresses the desire behind the intent of the ordinance and the PD sometimes as well. 02:09:34.600 --> 02:09:35.600 Commissioner Riggs. 02:09:35.600 --> 02:09:38.000 I just wanted to follow back up on that. 02:09:38.000 --> 02:09:45.640 So I'm looking at the zoning uses and it looks like also general retail would be allowed, 02:09:45.640 --> 02:09:49.920 but would be a specific use permit again, right? 02:09:49.920 --> 02:09:50.920 Let's double-check. 02:09:50.920 --> 02:09:57.520 Because what I'm thinking is if it doesn't preclude, it makes it a little bit more difficult, 02:09:57.520 --> 02:10:03.320 but it doesn't preclude, say, having some kind of retail up there against McKinney Street 02:10:03.320 --> 02:10:07.320 and then possibly multifamily that just make it harder and they would have to come in with 02:10:07.320 --> 02:10:12.640 the specific plan and then we're talking about a specific plan instead of just blanket zoning. 02:10:12.640 --> 02:10:14.240 Yes, that is correct. 02:10:14.240 --> 02:10:19.560 If general retail were to occur on an R7 property, it would require approval of a specific use 02:10:19.560 --> 02:10:28.560 permit. 02:10:28.560 --> 02:10:29.560 Commissioner Dyer. 02:10:29.560 --> 02:10:30.560 Oh, no. 02:10:30.560 --> 02:10:31.560 I'm sorry. 02:10:31.560 --> 02:10:35.840 At one time, I thought I was reading minds and I was not, my apologies. 02:10:35.840 --> 02:10:44.120 No, I mean, I know you said R7, but is there one that would exempt a potential, you know, 02:10:44.120 --> 02:10:51.680 the PD for the multifamily or for the retail where it's just some form of residential in 02:10:51.680 --> 02:10:52.680 the long strip? 02:10:52.680 --> 02:10:58.240 I mean, I understand the applicant's desire to have it all MN because it matches what's 02:10:58.240 --> 02:11:05.080 to the east of it, but, and I also see the, like I said earlier, that .93 acres up against 02:11:05.080 --> 02:11:13.480 McKinney because that all makes, I mean, it all makes logical sense to have potential 02:11:13.480 --> 02:11:17.920 retail space up there because you're on a major road, but just that long strip where 02:11:17.920 --> 02:11:29.240 you're butting up against a whole single family unit, to me, it just, the transition between 02:11:29.240 --> 02:11:37.520 that and the PD overlay on the west side, townhomes just seem like such a better fit. 02:11:37.520 --> 02:11:43.920 I think if that was the move of the body, it would most likely, there have to be a PD 02:11:43.920 --> 02:11:51.440 or one of the less intense residential districts that just doesn't permit many of the commercial 02:11:51.440 --> 02:11:52.440 land uses. 02:11:52.440 --> 02:11:53.440 Okay. 02:11:53.440 --> 02:11:54.440 Yeah. 02:11:54.440 --> 02:12:02.640 So it's an interesting parcel. 02:12:02.640 --> 02:12:07.320 It has the one remaining crosswalk since as we widen the road, we like to close crosswalks. 02:12:07.320 --> 02:12:14.120 If you look back at the overlay, I think in your presentation, before we widened the road, 02:12:14.120 --> 02:12:17.800 we had two crosswalks there and it was safe for people to walk across the street and now 02:12:17.800 --> 02:12:22.160 it no longer is, so we closed one of them, but it does have a light there, so as long 02:12:22.160 --> 02:12:31.400 as people stop at the red light, it's safer than it would otherwise be. 02:12:31.400 --> 02:12:42.680 I understand the desire for R7 as well, I mean, sorry, for MN as well, for contiguousness. 02:12:42.680 --> 02:12:49.520 I think it's likely there is some upload and habitat here, so we've got to be conscious 02:12:49.520 --> 02:12:52.160 about the priorities that we're setting in place. 02:12:52.160 --> 02:13:03.500 I think I've said before that almost all applications have some competing priorities and we need 02:13:03.500 --> 02:13:11.760 to be mindful of that between habitat preservation and development and that sort of thing. 02:13:11.760 --> 02:13:20.640 I'll just remind the commission that R7, I think I could go along with that, R6 or below 02:13:20.640 --> 02:13:32.160 I couldn't, just because all it does is move the neighborhood concerns from this eastern 02:13:32.160 --> 02:13:35.500 border of the subject property to the western border of the subject property. 02:13:35.500 --> 02:13:40.680 It doesn't actually resolve them. 02:13:40.680 --> 02:13:48.200 One thing just for the applicant's awareness, in some cases like this, adjacent to residential 02:13:48.200 --> 02:13:57.360 neighborhoods, while it would cause an additional public hearing process to come before council 02:13:57.360 --> 02:14:06.400 and this commission if multifamily use was proposed, because of our requirements in the 02:14:06.400 --> 02:14:13.400 MN district for height of the first floor, in some cases you can actually be more creative 02:14:13.400 --> 02:14:20.580 in site layout and number of units that you can get on the property with R7 than you can 02:14:20.580 --> 02:14:26.960 with MN, because of that 12 foot first floor combined with the 40 foot height limitations. 02:14:26.960 --> 02:14:36.640 So it's not necessarily the downgrade in buildability that it might appear. 02:14:36.640 --> 02:14:41.320 Commissioner McDade. 02:14:41.320 --> 02:14:48.120 Thank you Mike, we're here tonight and what's on the agenda is a straight zoning the applicant 02:14:48.120 --> 02:14:52.520 has requested for MN. 02:14:52.520 --> 02:15:00.080 We would vote up or down on that for the item that's on the agenda and if the applicant 02:15:00.080 --> 02:15:05.960 then wants to come back and request R7, is that how it will work or we would tell the 02:15:05.960 --> 02:15:10.720 applicant what we're going to do tonight, whether they want it or not. 02:15:10.720 --> 02:15:24.660 Yes, so what I heard was that MN was preferable, but R7 would still be accepted, the process 02:15:24.660 --> 02:15:29.440 would, it's not so much that if we approve MN they would come back later for R7 if they 02:15:29.440 --> 02:15:35.320 wanted a use in R7, because MN is a superset of what's allowed in R7, it would be sort 02:15:35.320 --> 02:15:41.380 of the opposite if we were to approve R7 and they wanted to do one of the two uses that 02:15:41.380 --> 02:15:48.080 requires that SUP, which is the multifamily and/or retail use that would require them 02:15:48.080 --> 02:15:54.240 to come back with a full SUP request, which typically includes a site plan, layout, that 02:15:54.240 --> 02:15:55.240 sort of thing. 02:15:55.240 --> 02:15:57.560 Does that answer your question? 02:15:57.560 --> 02:16:05.280 A little bit, but whatever someone wants to build on this site, they're going to still 02:16:05.280 --> 02:16:10.400 come back here or to council? 02:16:10.400 --> 02:16:16.600 Only if a specific use permit would be required, so for all those uses that have, for example, 02:16:16.600 --> 02:16:22.600 the P or the P+, those are buildable by right, whereas staff was still, we reviewed site 02:16:22.600 --> 02:16:26.800 plans for all developments, so we would still review it to make sure it meets our DDC, but 02:16:26.800 --> 02:16:33.880 it wouldn't require a public hearing process. 02:16:33.880 --> 02:16:34.880 Commissioner Riggs. 02:16:34.880 --> 02:16:42.240 Yeah, just to piggyback on what Commissioner McDade was asking, so we make recommendations 02:16:42.240 --> 02:16:47.760 to council, so technically we don't approve or deny, we're just recommending, but the 02:16:47.760 --> 02:16:54.440 next step, no matter what we recommend, is to go to council, and so what we'd be voting 02:16:54.440 --> 02:17:01.720 on or making a motion on is whether or not that we recommend to approve MN, and then 02:17:01.720 --> 02:17:05.560 is there something, anything else that we would recommend to council for them to consider? 02:17:05.560 --> 02:17:09.000 That's the way I understand it, so. 02:17:09.000 --> 02:17:12.680 Yeah, yeah, that's correct. 02:17:12.680 --> 02:17:22.720 Any other questions or discussion or a motion? 02:17:22.720 --> 02:17:25.320 Commissioner McDuff. 02:17:25.320 --> 02:17:33.800 I'd like to make a motion that we disapprove, mixed use neighborhood MN zoning district, 02:17:33.800 --> 02:17:42.520 and approve, or recommend for approval, residential 7, an R7 zoning district, and this is in reference 02:17:42.520 --> 02:17:54.800 to Z25-0013, a public hearing recommendation to city council requesting a request by Veronica 02:17:54.800 --> 02:18:05.280 Yeary on behalf of Benjamin Delcea and Oswaldo Canales to rezone 0.93 acres of land in approximately 02:18:05.280 --> 02:18:06.280 5.75. 02:18:06.280 --> 02:18:11.320 Okay, just let me get the second. 02:18:11.320 --> 02:18:13.480 Commissioner Dyer. 02:18:13.480 --> 02:18:17.000 I would like to second everything Commissioner McDuff said. 02:18:17.000 --> 02:18:18.000 Thank you. 02:18:18.000 --> 02:18:21.000 And staff, is there additional comments? 02:18:21.000 --> 02:18:26.840 Just wanting to get clarity, because of the discussion that we had, I think if the intent 02:18:26.840 --> 02:18:32.460 is to have the property to the north zoned MN, I think it needs to be, the motion might 02:18:32.460 --> 02:18:36.240 need to be slightly different, or at least clarify that that one can be MN and the southern 02:18:36.240 --> 02:18:39.280 5.75 track to be R7. 02:18:39.280 --> 02:18:40.280 Thank you for that. 02:18:40.280 --> 02:18:50.080 So, sorry, it's, I'm doing a good job at making this more complex than necessary because it's 02:18:50.080 --> 02:18:51.080 confusing me. 02:18:51.080 --> 02:18:53.640 Do you want to speak to that? 02:18:53.640 --> 02:18:59.140 No, I think, yeah, I would just like to clarify, was your motion for the entire property before 02:18:59.140 --> 02:19:06.880 you tonight R7 instead of MN, or was the front portion MN, as had been discussed earlier, 02:19:06.880 --> 02:19:10.760 and then the southern partial R7, if you could clarify that. 02:19:10.760 --> 02:19:18.240 I believe to reflect a concern is the currently zoned R4, I'd like to recommend that that 02:19:18.240 --> 02:19:28.960 be modified, the request for MN to R7, and the MN request is allowable, the one that's 02:19:28.960 --> 02:19:29.960 on McKinney. 02:19:29.960 --> 02:19:40.080 So, it's just the property to clarify the R4 presented is R4 on the existing zoning 02:19:40.080 --> 02:19:42.600 map, exhibit four. 02:19:42.600 --> 02:19:48.440 Just for clarification, can staff pull up the GIS map or the current zoning map so that 02:19:48.440 --> 02:19:51.600 we can kind of play, pin the tail on the donkey? 02:19:51.600 --> 02:19:53.440 Of course we need to. 02:19:53.440 --> 02:19:55.360 I think that's probably the best map I have. 02:19:55.360 --> 02:20:02.920 So the brown portion adjacent to McKinney is currently R4, the green portion below that 02:20:02.920 --> 02:20:09.200 is currently RR, both of them contiguously are requested to be rezoned to MN, so could 02:20:09.200 --> 02:20:13.960 you clarify your motion based on that information on the map? 02:20:13.960 --> 02:20:24.800 Yes, exhibited we want to, is shown, I'm talking like you Eric, is depicted on the map, that 02:20:24.800 --> 02:20:28.040 would be R7, both of those properties. 02:20:28.040 --> 02:20:31.840 Okay, is that the consensus of the seconder? 02:20:31.840 --> 02:20:35.000 Okay, so I have a question about that. 02:20:35.000 --> 02:20:37.760 Okay, hold on. 02:20:37.760 --> 02:20:39.680 No, no, go ahead. 02:20:39.680 --> 02:20:44.520 All of it R7, or the first part MN in the southern half R7? 02:20:44.520 --> 02:20:49.200 Well, I believe the concern was R7, all of it R7. 02:20:49.200 --> 02:20:52.920 Yeah, I would like to see all of it R7. 02:20:52.920 --> 02:20:58.480 So if, yeah, all of it R7. 02:20:58.480 --> 02:21:05.840 So I'm going to pop in, because it's getting a little weird. 02:21:05.840 --> 02:21:10.640 I'm going to revise my recommendation, I'd like to do a straight up down on MN, so we 02:21:10.640 --> 02:21:17.720 have that on record for council, so that if they want to proceed with MN, they understand 02:21:17.720 --> 02:21:21.320 that it's a super majority requirement. 02:21:21.320 --> 02:21:28.000 Then I would like to recommend that we all understand that a subsequent motion may come 02:21:28.000 --> 02:21:36.240 up, and that is basically what Commissioner McDev has said, which is to substitute staff's 02:21:36.240 --> 02:21:39.840 recommendation that says MN with R7. 02:21:39.840 --> 02:21:42.840 I like that. 02:21:42.840 --> 02:21:44.240 Cool. 02:21:44.240 --> 02:21:48.520 So Commissioner McDev, the most procedurally correct thing to do would be to withdraw your 02:21:48.520 --> 02:21:51.440 motion, and then make a new one. 02:21:51.440 --> 02:21:52.440 Commissioner McDev. 02:21:52.440 --> 02:22:01.520 Well, Lisa, I've withdrawn my motion, and Commissioner Dyer, I believe, has a motion. 02:22:01.520 --> 02:22:02.520 Commissioner Dyer. 02:22:02.520 --> 02:22:11.520 So I would like to make a motion that we vote to deny staff's recommendation that the .93 02:22:11.520 --> 02:22:20.080 acres, and the 5.75 acres be zone MN, that we deny that request. 02:22:20.080 --> 02:22:22.080 With the understanding that there will be subsequent motions? 02:22:22.080 --> 02:22:29.600 With the understanding that we will have a subsequent motion. 02:22:29.600 --> 02:22:30.600 Commissioner McDade. 02:22:30.600 --> 02:22:33.880 I'll second the motion on the floor. 02:22:33.880 --> 02:22:34.880 Very good. 02:22:34.880 --> 02:22:41.760 Any other questions or discussion on this first motion before the commission? 02:22:41.760 --> 02:22:50.560 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board. 02:22:50.560 --> 02:22:55.080 And I'll call for any subsequent motions at this time. 02:22:55.080 --> 02:22:56.080 Commissioner Riggs. 02:22:56.080 --> 02:23:04.440 Yes, I make a motion for both the R4 and the RR to be considered as R7. 02:23:04.440 --> 02:23:13.120 Certainly with the idea, just to clarify, that both multifamily and commercial is still 02:23:13.120 --> 02:23:16.720 allowed but would require specific use permit. 02:23:16.720 --> 02:23:17.720 And Commissioner Dyer. 02:23:17.720 --> 02:23:24.960 I would like to second that motion. 02:23:24.960 --> 02:23:34.320 Seeing no discussion or questions, I'll call for a vote on the board. 02:23:34.320 --> 02:23:37.640 And that item passes 6-0 as well. 02:23:37.640 --> 02:23:41.160 Thank you. 02:23:41.160 --> 02:23:49.320 That brings us to item 6, the planning and zoning commission matrix. 02:23:49.320 --> 02:23:52.680 Does staff have an update? 02:23:52.680 --> 02:24:00.080 Yes, so we will be marking the communal and small home item off of the matrix after this 02:24:00.080 --> 02:24:03.480 evening's work session. 02:24:03.480 --> 02:24:06.560 With that, I have no updates to report from City Council. 02:24:06.560 --> 02:24:11.660 I did want to remind the commission, you should have received an email this week from Kathy 02:24:11.660 --> 02:24:15.340 regarding our next meeting on October 22nd. 02:24:15.340 --> 02:24:18.800 We are looking at a couple of more robust work session items for that night and are 02:24:18.800 --> 02:24:23.200 seeking to know if the commission can come in at 4.30 that day in the event that both 02:24:23.200 --> 02:24:25.960 of the tentative work sessions move forward. 02:24:25.960 --> 02:24:30.880 So please respond to Kathy and let her know your availability at 4.30 that day. 02:24:30.880 --> 02:24:32.360 Thank you. 02:24:32.360 --> 02:24:33.720 That would be appreciated. 02:24:33.720 --> 02:24:38.640 Any additions to the matrix from the commission, Commissioner MacDuff? 02:24:38.640 --> 02:24:44.680 Yes, I'd like to add, as we discussed in the work session, there was a request for 02:24:44.680 --> 02:24:50.680 additional apartment versus single family occupancy data. 02:24:50.680 --> 02:24:54.120 So I'd like to add that to the matrix so we'll have that documented. 02:24:54.120 --> 02:25:03.800 I believe there was also a request for, although we have finished the small communities agenda 02:25:03.800 --> 02:25:11.920 item on our matrix, there was some interest in having more discussion on that item. 02:25:11.920 --> 02:25:15.040 So I'd like to make sure that that's noted. 02:25:15.040 --> 02:25:16.540 Sure. 02:25:16.540 --> 02:25:22.000 Just to give staff clarity, are there any specific goals or proposals that you'd like 02:25:22.000 --> 02:25:24.200 to see on the second item? 02:25:24.200 --> 02:25:26.360 Thank you for asking that, Chair Pruitt. 02:25:26.360 --> 02:25:32.720 I think in our work session we talked about the next step to our action item, how we could 02:25:32.720 --> 02:25:43.880 take some sort of action in recommending development code changes to allow for these types of communities. 02:25:43.880 --> 02:25:52.240 And I think on the first item, within about last year we had a pretty beefy update on 02:25:52.240 --> 02:25:53.240 that already. 02:25:53.240 --> 02:25:58.080 I'll leave it to staff to see whether we need to come back and present that or if we can 02:25:58.080 --> 02:25:59.560 just send out the information. 02:25:59.560 --> 02:26:06.280 I will make one request though to add a small item to that information, to that presentation, 02:26:06.280 --> 02:26:08.040 even if we do just email it out. 02:26:08.040 --> 02:26:14.040 And that would be, we talked about how we don't have occupancy data, but we do have 02:26:14.040 --> 02:26:16.040 land area data. 02:26:16.040 --> 02:26:23.920 And I'd like to see the total acreage in the city that is currently zoned to allow multifamily 02:26:23.920 --> 02:26:25.600 and is currently undeveloped. 02:26:25.600 --> 02:26:32.800 So that would be MN, MR, MD zones, as well as the total acreage in the city currently 02:26:32.800 --> 02:26:39.920 zoned for single family residential uses, so R1 through R7, and how much of that acreage 02:26:39.920 --> 02:26:43.400 is undeveloped, essentially. 02:26:43.400 --> 02:26:49.920 I think that would help us understand the difference between unmet housing need and 02:26:49.920 --> 02:26:53.760 land availability, if that makes sense. 02:26:53.760 --> 02:26:54.760 Sure. 02:26:54.760 --> 02:26:59.180 So I believe what I'm hearing is recirculate the previous presentation with the addition 02:26:59.180 --> 02:27:03.800 of data regarding zoning that allows those uses but is undeveloped. 02:27:03.800 --> 02:27:08.640 And then we may be able to get some occupancy data, I would say take it with a few grains 02:27:08.640 --> 02:27:11.920 of salt, but I'll look and see what we can find with the help of our friends in economic 02:27:11.920 --> 02:27:12.920 development. 02:27:12.920 --> 02:27:13.920 Okay. 02:27:13.920 --> 02:27:14.920 Thank you. 02:27:14.920 --> 02:27:15.920 Commissioner Dyer. 02:27:15.920 --> 02:27:17.800 Can I add something else to the matrix? 02:27:17.800 --> 02:27:24.800 Just because we have such a newer board, there's so many new members, you know, what, six-sevenths 02:27:24.800 --> 02:27:28.000 of us have not even served a full year yet. 02:27:28.000 --> 02:27:34.520 So is it possible that when we have some of our workshops that staff can just go over 02:27:34.520 --> 02:27:40.040 all those different zones, zoning things, and, you know, where it has P and S and the 02:27:40.040 --> 02:27:46.400 asterisks, and just, not necessarily in one time, I mean, it might be a couple meetings, 02:27:46.400 --> 02:27:51.840 but just to kind of review all that with us so we have a true understanding of it. 02:27:51.840 --> 02:27:54.160 We know what questions we should be asking. 02:27:54.160 --> 02:27:59.120 It will help with our questioning on that as well because, like, I sit here sometimes 02:27:59.120 --> 02:28:04.000 in awe that, you know, Chair Pruitt can just, like, rattle them off, but he's also been 02:28:04.000 --> 02:28:10.800 here for three years, and so we, I know a lot of that comes with having this information, 02:28:10.800 --> 02:28:20.700 you know, on a bimonthly basis or biweekly, so, yeah. 02:28:20.700 --> 02:28:25.240 Any other matrix requests from the Commission? 02:28:25.240 --> 02:28:27.120 Okay. 02:28:27.120 --> 02:28:30.160 That brings us to concluding items. 02:28:30.160 --> 02:28:35.680 Anybody have any concluding items this week? 02:28:35.680 --> 02:28:40.080 I have one concluding item. 02:28:40.080 --> 02:28:45.600 Because of work travel, I was absent for a couple of meetings. 02:28:45.600 --> 02:28:53.640 I know that we've discussed the implications of land use and mobility planning and how 02:28:53.640 --> 02:29:01.120 they intertwine, and I'd just like to take a moment to recognize two people in Denton 02:29:01.120 --> 02:29:05.440 who lost their lives since the last Pleasant Planning and Zoning Commission that I was 02:29:05.440 --> 02:29:06.740 at. 02:29:06.740 --> 02:29:09.400 That was on August 31st. 02:29:09.400 --> 02:29:20.280 I apologize if I get the pronunciation wrong, but Christian Chovannetz lost her life near 02:29:20.280 --> 02:29:29.840 Dutch Brothers Coffee, and then last month, on September 22nd, someone lost their life 02:29:29.840 --> 02:29:32.320 on University Drive near Ector. 02:29:32.320 --> 02:29:38.300 It's near the new home zone that's being developed, so I'd just like to take a moment of silence 02:29:38.300 --> 02:29:46.460 for them. 02:29:46.460 --> 02:29:47.460 Thank you. 02:29:47.460 --> 02:29:52.640 Any other concluding items? 02:29:52.640 --> 02:30:02.120 Seeing none, I will adjourn the public regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission, 02:30:02.120 --> 02:30:09.400 and we will resume from our recess of the work session here momentarily once the room 02:30:09.400 --> 02:30:10.400 clears. 02:30:10.400 --> 02:30:34.560 Thank you very much for coming. 02:30:34.560 --> 02:30:44.480 Thank you for coming. 02:30:44.480 --> 02:30:54.000 If I can get an indication from staff whether we need to recount or not, I'm not sure, to 02:30:54.000 --> 02:31:06.640 restart the video. 02:31:06.640 --> 02:31:24.680 This time, we will reconvene from our work session and continue work session item 3B, 02:31:24.680 --> 02:31:27.840 PZ25-194. 02:31:27.840 --> 02:31:35.640 Just to remind you where we were, we had discussed the overview of the Southeast End Area Plan, 02:31:35.640 --> 02:31:42.720 what the goals were, and then what the proposed residential overlay district includes. 02:31:42.720 --> 02:31:50.040 That is the proposed reduction in minimum front yard setback for a lot smaller than 02:31:50.040 --> 02:31:54.680 7,000 square feet, a maximum building height of 30 feet for the primary structure and 20 02:31:54.680 --> 02:32:00.960 feet for the accessory structure, some requirements for the entry features as well as larger windows 02:32:00.960 --> 02:32:09.080 and doors and trim, and then specific roof forms, and then those architectural elements. 02:32:09.080 --> 02:32:13.720 We also talked about affordability and then applicability. 02:32:13.720 --> 02:32:19.400 That gets us to where we were talking about ... I was requesting feedback on what you 02:32:19.400 --> 02:32:26.360 thought in terms of ... We have talked to the public about some of these things. 02:32:26.360 --> 02:32:33.760 We are anticipating getting more feedback, but if there's anything else that you think 02:32:33.760 --> 02:32:44.820 we should be doing or where we should be, so any additional ideas, we're open to. 02:32:44.820 --> 02:32:50.160 Some direction on that front yard setback, whether we should continue to pursue it or 02:32:50.160 --> 02:32:54.680 do you think it's something that maybe we should table for now, and then those elements 02:32:54.680 --> 02:32:59.280 related to the front porch or stoop, given there should there be some flexibility in 02:32:59.280 --> 02:33:02.680 the size and then what that applicability is. 02:33:02.680 --> 02:33:12.660 If you have any direction or thoughts, we'd love to have them. 02:33:12.660 --> 02:33:16.240 Is this separate from the portion that Mia was going to present? 02:33:16.240 --> 02:33:17.240 Yes. 02:33:17.240 --> 02:33:18.240 Okay. 02:33:18.240 --> 02:33:20.800 So direction from the commission on these? 02:33:20.800 --> 02:33:21.800 Yes. 02:33:21.800 --> 02:33:25.200 Do you just have any feedback regarding the residential overlay you wanted to provide? 02:33:25.200 --> 02:33:29.560 Of course, you don't have to answer these questions, but if that ... You can use that 02:33:29.560 --> 02:33:32.240 as a framing device. 02:33:32.240 --> 02:33:38.720 Yeah, Commissioner McDade? 02:33:38.720 --> 02:33:44.080 Just some concerns regarding the requirement to have the porches and the stoops. 02:33:44.080 --> 02:33:51.600 If someone doesn't have it and they're remodeling, I think it'd be a bit much to require them 02:33:51.600 --> 02:33:55.040 to add it on there if it doesn't already have it. 02:33:55.040 --> 02:34:03.320 And then the other side is to require it. 02:34:03.320 --> 02:34:08.960 It would be nice, may be consistent, but are we telling everybody they have to put in a 02:34:08.960 --> 02:34:10.320 porch or a stoop? 02:34:10.320 --> 02:34:17.040 I think maybe that might be something to discuss further or not make it a requirement requirement, 02:34:17.040 --> 02:34:20.280 but maybe a suggestion. 02:34:20.280 --> 02:34:25.600 Do you think like a requirement on new construction, but not like if they don't have it, it's grandfathered 02:34:25.600 --> 02:34:33.820 in and if they decide to do like remodeling of their current home, like existing homes 02:34:33.820 --> 02:34:38.020 kind of get grandfathered in that they don't have to have it if they have it, but new construction 02:34:38.020 --> 02:34:39.400 has to have it? 02:34:39.400 --> 02:34:44.380 I don't even think new construction should have to have it. 02:34:44.380 --> 02:34:51.400 What was the percentage of residents that liked having? 02:34:51.400 --> 02:34:59.820 At this point we had six agree for that regulations, zero disagree. 02:34:59.820 --> 02:35:05.360 So six residents of the entire community. 02:35:05.360 --> 02:35:10.040 I think I should kind of share the concern of, it seems like we have low participation 02:35:10.040 --> 02:35:14.480 in the voting on this and there's a lot of people in the neighborhood. 02:35:14.480 --> 02:35:20.880 I know one of the concerns that we had is obviously gentrification and if we start requiring 02:35:20.880 --> 02:35:25.920 a lot of these things or we're just making it more expensive to build a home in order 02:35:25.920 --> 02:35:29.480 to keep the feel, we definitely don't want to do that. 02:35:29.480 --> 02:35:34.000 We don't want to make it to where, what we're doing is going to make it harder for somebody 02:35:34.000 --> 02:35:35.960 to build and stay in the area. 02:35:35.960 --> 02:35:38.360 So that's a big concern I have. 02:35:38.360 --> 02:35:42.700 I don't know how you get more public participation, because it sounds like you all have gone above 02:35:42.700 --> 02:35:44.640 and beyond trying to. 02:35:44.640 --> 02:35:49.840 So that's just some of my thoughts. 02:35:49.840 --> 02:35:51.440 Commissioner McDuff. 02:35:51.440 --> 02:35:57.600 I want to address the engage the public, I'm going to be a little flippant here. 02:35:57.600 --> 02:36:02.400 The only way I would recommend would be to see if you could get CDLAM to come over there 02:36:02.400 --> 02:36:10.340 and have a public and have some barbecue or something, but a sports figure to come. 02:36:10.340 --> 02:36:15.360 That's always a great attractor to see somebody to sponsor that. 02:36:15.360 --> 02:36:22.520 But I agree with Commissioner Riggs, that's not a very good showing to make a decision. 02:36:22.520 --> 02:36:27.480 My other comment on that, Ms. Julie, is I was waiting for Commissioner McDade to come 02:36:27.480 --> 02:36:29.400 and give her thoughts. 02:36:29.400 --> 02:36:32.280 This is her district, district one. 02:36:32.280 --> 02:36:41.040 She's a lifelong native of Denton, I believe, and went to school here, too. 02:36:41.040 --> 02:36:42.640 So I value her opinion. 02:36:42.640 --> 02:36:51.400 So I will defer on making that a requirement. 02:36:51.400 --> 02:36:59.640 But I will not defer on CDLAM if you could make that happen. 02:36:59.640 --> 02:37:00.640 Please not catch it. 02:37:00.640 --> 02:37:05.920 Yeah, I'll just -- I know budgets are tight. 02:37:05.920 --> 02:37:09.200 Maybe we talked to some of the churches and community groups over there. 02:37:09.200 --> 02:37:15.080 But I will echo Commissioner McDuff in what gets people out is food. 02:37:15.080 --> 02:37:20.760 It's really that simple. 02:37:20.760 --> 02:37:28.040 And I can't find it right now, so I will have to look and send it to staff later. 02:37:28.040 --> 02:37:35.960 But there was a portion of a Friday staff report at some point in this last year that 02:37:35.960 --> 02:37:40.680 talked about some of the Southeast Denton processes. 02:37:40.680 --> 02:37:50.720 And it went through and described specifically how some of these overlays to ensure design 02:37:50.720 --> 02:37:58.640 compatibility can be married with additional housing option types in order to allow more 02:37:58.640 --> 02:38:01.700 affordable homes to be built. 02:38:01.700 --> 02:38:06.920 You know, our Southeast Denton area plan states it a little bit differently, but it talks 02:38:06.920 --> 02:38:12.920 about these districts being the overlay districts, can limit height, allow additional uses, require 02:38:12.920 --> 02:38:18.440 higher design standards, just parking regulations, or anything else normally regulated through 02:38:18.440 --> 02:38:22.500 zoning, which is what we're talking about, except we're not really talking about the 02:38:22.500 --> 02:38:26.560 allowing additional uses piece, right? 02:38:26.560 --> 02:38:30.960 And it says Southeast Denton residents welcome new development in the area if it respects 02:38:30.960 --> 02:38:36.800 the scale and feel of existing neighborhood, of the existing neighborhood, such as moderately 02:38:36.800 --> 02:38:41.800 sized single-family homes, duplexes, triplexes, small apartment buildings, and pocket neighborhoods 02:38:41.800 --> 02:38:48.720 clustered around a central courtyard or green space, like what we heard earlier today. 02:38:48.720 --> 02:38:52.680 So I guess my suggestion would be food. 02:38:52.680 --> 02:39:01.120 And then when you get people out there, you have a poster that says we can get these things 02:39:01.120 --> 02:39:09.400 and we can get affordability if you're willing to have a marriage of the changes. 02:39:09.400 --> 02:39:13.920 I want to do what they want, the last thing I want to do, and I think the last thing they 02:39:13.920 --> 02:39:19.040 want is to hasten displacement, like Commissioner Riggs talked about. 02:39:19.040 --> 02:39:27.240 I don't want to impose things they don't want, but I want people who come because of food-- 02:39:27.240 --> 02:39:32.960 sorry, I'm just going to keep saying it-- to fully understand and appreciate the trade-offs 02:39:32.960 --> 02:39:39.600 they're making and how to get the combination of goals, if that's what they seek. 02:39:39.600 --> 02:39:40.600 Yes. 02:39:40.600 --> 02:39:47.800 And at this stage, we have not addressed use and kept it more of those design guidelines 02:39:47.800 --> 02:39:54.560 to get that umbrella of protection in place to protect that scale and character. 02:39:54.560 --> 02:40:01.080 If and when there's ever a part two of that conversation, that would be-- was our approach 02:40:01.080 --> 02:40:02.080 thus far. 02:40:02.080 --> 02:40:03.080 I don't really understand. 02:40:03.080 --> 02:40:10.720 I'm totally on board with that phasing from a procedural ordinance perspective. 02:40:10.720 --> 02:40:17.520 But I think we have to have the conversation at the same time with the public, right? 02:40:17.520 --> 02:40:23.320 But yeah, whatever the feedback is, if we could have clarity on what staff's future 02:40:23.320 --> 02:40:28.800 intentions are based on that feedback, and then we can move forward, I think. 02:40:28.800 --> 02:40:29.800 Commissioner Riggs. 02:40:29.800 --> 02:40:32.960 Julie, I do have one more thing to say. 02:40:32.960 --> 02:40:38.840 You talked about the front yard setback, and that was pretty much even kind of a 50/50 02:40:38.840 --> 02:40:39.840 split on that. 02:40:39.840 --> 02:40:40.840 Not quite. 02:40:40.840 --> 02:40:51.080 It was slightly in favor of allowing it, but it seems to be a little more mixed in terms 02:40:51.080 --> 02:40:56.600 of the community as well as what Planning and Zoning Commission expressed at the last 02:40:56.600 --> 02:40:57.600 meeting. 02:40:57.600 --> 02:41:00.560 That's why I was kind of on the fence. 02:41:00.560 --> 02:41:02.720 Is that a part two conversation? 02:41:02.720 --> 02:41:06.920 Is that something that we should just set aside for now and think through that a little 02:41:06.920 --> 02:41:11.800 more, open to any and all suggestions, recommendations? 02:41:11.800 --> 02:41:14.400 Unfortunately, it's still only seven people. 02:41:14.400 --> 02:41:15.400 Right. 02:41:15.400 --> 02:41:19.240 Well, and that's kind of where I was going with it, too. 02:41:19.240 --> 02:41:23.400 Remind me again, did we-- on the front porch, Stupe, I feel like as if we had conversations 02:41:23.400 --> 02:41:29.400 as if that would be-- is that allowed in the setback or nothing's allowed in the setback? 02:41:29.400 --> 02:41:36.880 The front porch or Stupe is allowed to extend into the front yard setback, so it is allowed 02:41:36.880 --> 02:41:39.880 to encroach as long as it is not enclosed. 02:41:39.880 --> 02:41:41.040 Okay. 02:41:41.040 --> 02:41:45.200 With that, I would kind of lean toward not changing it, but allowing the front porch 02:41:45.200 --> 02:41:46.200 to encroach. 02:41:46.200 --> 02:41:47.200 Okay. 02:41:47.200 --> 02:41:51.480 I don't know about anybody else. 02:41:51.480 --> 02:41:59.560 Staff, and I'm going to assume you have, please, I apologize for my ignorance, but is there 02:41:59.560 --> 02:42:07.480 some sort of like survey monkey with all these things that you're doing where every single 02:42:07.480 --> 02:42:16.440 resident property owner in this overlay gets a postcard that says, "We are doing an overlay. 02:42:16.440 --> 02:42:17.920 We have some suggestions. 02:42:17.920 --> 02:42:19.120 We want your input. 02:42:19.120 --> 02:42:20.440 This is your community. 02:42:20.440 --> 02:42:26.920 Do you want-- go to, you know, go to this, put a QR code where they can take their phone 02:42:26.920 --> 02:42:28.720 and you know." 02:42:28.720 --> 02:42:34.640 So that way, at least, you're not having to do events there or do the online meetings 02:42:34.640 --> 02:42:35.640 or the pop-up meetings. 02:42:35.640 --> 02:42:41.840 It's just another opportunity for those individuals who are probably working and can't make the 02:42:41.840 --> 02:42:50.040 meetings because only having five, seven, 12, 10, that's not a good read. 02:42:50.040 --> 02:42:55.840 And I agree, like, I don't live in that area, so I don't know what those individuals would 02:42:55.840 --> 02:42:56.840 like. 02:42:56.840 --> 02:43:02.760 You know, obviously, Commissioner McDade is the closest thing, you know, that we have 02:43:02.760 --> 02:43:08.840 to hearing what these individuals will like, but it's all about we want to engage. 02:43:08.840 --> 02:43:14.200 We want to engage with our community, which is why last week or last meeting, I said, 02:43:14.200 --> 02:43:19.200 you know, thank you to all the people that came because that's how our system is supposed 02:43:19.200 --> 02:43:20.200 to work. 02:43:20.200 --> 02:43:21.200 That's how government is supposed to work. 02:43:21.200 --> 02:43:25.200 It's not supposed to be just us up here making all the decisions. 02:43:25.200 --> 02:43:31.760 We're just supposed to be representing what everybody in there or outside of these walls, 02:43:31.760 --> 02:43:34.000 what they want. 02:43:34.000 --> 02:43:38.560 So we-- there will be a survey online. 02:43:38.560 --> 02:43:46.120 So with our community meetings, we had a minty meter where we had a survey during the discussion. 02:43:46.120 --> 02:43:53.160 All of those questions will be put online along with a video of the virtual and then 02:43:53.160 --> 02:43:55.880 the slide deck. 02:43:55.880 --> 02:43:59.960 We chose to do the door hangers instead of postcards. 02:43:59.960 --> 02:44:05.480 The door hangers were much more successful than we had had with postcards. 02:44:05.480 --> 02:44:09.960 With this area plan, it has been, you know, public engagement has been something that 02:44:09.960 --> 02:44:16.960 has been very-- we've had to be in the community in lots of places in order to talk to as many 02:44:16.960 --> 02:44:18.940 people as possible. 02:44:18.940 --> 02:44:28.000 I would say that this residential overlay is a result of the community engagement and 02:44:28.000 --> 02:44:30.480 adoption of the area plan by council. 02:44:30.480 --> 02:44:36.360 So the community has indicated that they want to protect the scale, that they want to protect 02:44:36.360 --> 02:44:37.600 the character. 02:44:37.600 --> 02:44:43.520 So we're-- that kind of-- that foundation is in the area plan. 02:44:43.520 --> 02:44:49.320 Now we're kind of like, what are those details associated with it? 02:44:49.320 --> 02:44:55.260 We have not found like a community meeting that really like pulled in a significant percentage. 02:44:55.260 --> 02:45:02.800 It has been those small interactions with community members over many months. 02:45:02.800 --> 02:45:08.680 So maybe instead of the postcard, maybe it's another set of door hangers that say, your 02:45:08.680 --> 02:45:09.680 voice is important. 02:45:09.680 --> 02:45:11.280 We want to hear from you. 02:45:11.280 --> 02:45:17.040 Please, you know, click on this link, put the QR code like, you know, we want you to 02:45:17.040 --> 02:45:18.040 be engaged. 02:45:18.040 --> 02:45:23.360 We want you to be in the decision making of what P&Z and your city council are voting 02:45:23.360 --> 02:45:24.360 on. 02:45:24.360 --> 02:45:26.520 Have a voice, you know, type of thing. 02:45:26.520 --> 02:45:32.000 And we're also-- we are proposing to send out a postcard to property owners because that 02:45:32.000 --> 02:45:37.280 is while, you know, they're not necessarily residents of Southeast Denton. 02:45:37.280 --> 02:45:42.240 They may have-- if they own property, we want to make sure that we've heard from everybody 02:45:42.240 --> 02:45:45.600 who has a-- who's a stakeholder in Southeast Denton. 02:45:45.600 --> 02:45:48.040 So that's-- yeah, that's a great suggestion. 02:45:48.040 --> 02:45:51.480 We'll see if that is something that we can accomplish. 02:45:51.480 --> 02:45:55.240 But we'll definitely have that survey available. 02:45:55.240 --> 02:46:02.200 Maybe it's more social media, kind of those-- that opportunity, but we'll continue to try 02:46:02.200 --> 02:46:04.760 to find ways to get the word out on that one. 02:46:04.760 --> 02:46:07.600 Well, especially-- I mean, social media can be a huge tool. 02:46:07.600 --> 02:46:13.680 I mean, I'm looking here and all the Halloween posts that the city of Denton is putting, 02:46:13.680 --> 02:46:19.760 like-- I mean, I don't-- I know that whoever your team is, I'm sure they work really hard. 02:46:19.760 --> 02:46:23.680 But we've talked a lot about some of the decisions that we're making and it would be nice to 02:46:23.680 --> 02:46:29.840 see more posts about what's happening in the government, you know, like, your city council. 02:46:29.840 --> 02:46:30.840 Here's your agenda. 02:46:30.840 --> 02:46:31.840 Come to the meeting. 02:46:31.840 --> 02:46:32.840 Come to the PNZ. 02:46:32.840 --> 02:46:33.840 Come to this committee. 02:46:33.840 --> 02:46:35.200 Come to that committee. 02:46:35.200 --> 02:46:40.960 And it's just kind of another thing because when I see stuff like that, I share it out. 02:46:40.960 --> 02:46:45.200 You know, there's so many around Denton, the Denton downtowners, like, there's all these 02:46:45.200 --> 02:46:47.360 different groups that you can share it out. 02:46:47.360 --> 02:46:52.720 And I'm sure this community has their own group that if the city puts something out, 02:46:52.720 --> 02:46:59.840 it can be shared to that group because that is, fortunately, unfortunately, it's one of 02:46:59.840 --> 02:47:02.240 the major places where people get their information. 02:47:02.240 --> 02:47:03.240 Yep. 02:47:03.240 --> 02:47:04.240 Yep. 02:47:04.240 --> 02:47:05.240 That's a good point. 02:47:05.240 --> 02:47:10.880 Also, a recommendation that you leave some door hangers or flyers or postcards, whatever 02:47:10.880 --> 02:47:14.480 you're going to put out, at the churches in the neighborhood. 02:47:14.480 --> 02:47:18.880 That's the biggest meeting every week for everybody in the neighborhood and community 02:47:18.880 --> 02:47:19.880 is at their churches. 02:47:19.880 --> 02:47:20.880 Thank you. 02:47:20.880 --> 02:47:21.880 Yes. 02:47:21.880 --> 02:47:24.880 Thank you. 02:47:24.880 --> 02:47:25.880 Maybe the church. 02:47:25.880 --> 02:47:33.920 I will commend staff for the meeting you had in Fredmore Park where you had over 100 people 02:47:33.920 --> 02:47:37.320 because I heard about it and thought that sounds fun. 02:47:37.320 --> 02:47:43.200 And I even let my staff leave to come early because there was free pizza. 02:47:43.200 --> 02:47:51.640 So maybe the staff works with some of the churches to do an event on a weeknight at 02:47:51.640 --> 02:47:58.560 the church. 02:47:58.560 --> 02:47:59.560 Any other thoughts? 02:47:59.560 --> 02:48:00.560 Sorry. 02:48:00.560 --> 02:48:05.080 I didn't know if I was seeing a stretch or ... Okay. 02:48:05.080 --> 02:48:10.600 And just to follow up on Commissioner Riggs, who we'll get to in a second. 02:48:10.600 --> 02:48:13.040 I'm fine with the reduced front setback. 02:48:13.040 --> 02:48:16.600 It's a detail people probably don't understand. 02:48:16.600 --> 02:48:24.560 My explanation of that would be to allow homes to be placed closer to the street more like 02:48:24.560 --> 02:48:30.680 a lot of the older homes in that community are today, right? 02:48:30.680 --> 02:48:35.080 But that's not a hill I'm going to fight for, so Commissioner Riggs. 02:48:35.080 --> 02:48:36.080 Yeah. 02:48:36.080 --> 02:48:40.240 I'd say ... I think we all know there's a couple of homes that went up that don't quite 02:48:40.240 --> 02:48:45.520 meet the character and assuming that if these recommendations were put into place, those 02:48:45.520 --> 02:48:48.920 homes would not be able to be built right now. 02:48:48.920 --> 02:48:52.040 Is that correct? 02:48:52.040 --> 02:48:57.960 There are elements to those homes which would not be consistent with the proposed overlay. 02:48:57.960 --> 02:48:58.960 Okay. 02:48:58.960 --> 02:49:04.360 I think that's the overall intent. 02:49:04.360 --> 02:49:10.000 I think one of those was actually caused by traffic violence itself, but the car instead 02:49:10.000 --> 02:49:12.920 of hitting a person went into the home. 02:49:12.920 --> 02:49:16.080 Yeah. 02:49:16.080 --> 02:49:19.280 Is it an accident if it happens 40,000 times a year? 02:49:19.280 --> 02:49:21.560 I don't know. 02:49:21.560 --> 02:49:22.560 Okay. 02:49:22.560 --> 02:49:26.120 Any other feedback on this portion? 02:49:26.120 --> 02:49:28.200 Okay. 02:49:28.200 --> 02:49:29.200 One more. 02:49:29.200 --> 02:49:30.200 The height overlay. 02:49:30.200 --> 02:49:31.200 This is just two slides. 02:49:31.200 --> 02:49:34.200 This is really quick. 02:49:34.200 --> 02:49:39.280 If you recall, the community is concerned about the downtown-style development encroaching 02:49:39.280 --> 02:49:41.920 in those single-family neighborhoods. 02:49:41.920 --> 02:49:46.360 The plan calls for a limitation on heights in that area in blue. 02:49:46.360 --> 02:49:50.680 That's the area between the DCTA and then the neighborhoods. 02:49:50.680 --> 02:49:58.920 Our proposal is to ... All that property is on either PF or MN, and PF is public facilities. 02:49:58.920 --> 02:50:02.400 Those are city facilities or government. 02:50:02.400 --> 02:50:05.880 An MN allows that height up to 65 feet. 02:50:05.880 --> 02:50:09.360 We are proposing to limit that height to 40 feet. 02:50:09.360 --> 02:50:17.640 That would allow a nice transitional zoning or a nice transitional scale between areas 02:50:17.640 --> 02:50:22.720 to the east and then ... I'm sorry, to the west and then areas to the east. 02:50:22.720 --> 02:50:25.720 I don't know if you have any feedback on that. 02:50:25.720 --> 02:50:26.720 That one's pretty straightforward. 02:50:26.720 --> 02:50:28.920 I think it's a good idea. 02:50:28.920 --> 02:50:29.920 Okay. 02:50:29.920 --> 02:50:30.920 Awesome. 02:50:30.920 --> 02:50:31.920 All right. 02:50:31.920 --> 02:50:39.300 I like that the city's going to follow its own suggestions. 02:50:39.300 --> 02:50:44.240 I think it's the same feedback I had previously that I'm fine with the height overlay. 02:50:44.240 --> 02:50:51.720 Let's just make sure we're explaining it to people with the knowledge that we may be limited 02:50:51.720 --> 02:50:56.760 in how short we can enforce that in the future because of state legislation. 02:50:56.760 --> 02:50:57.760 Awesome. 02:50:57.760 --> 02:50:58.760 Thank you. 02:50:58.760 --> 02:50:59.760 All right. 02:50:59.760 --> 02:51:03.440 Thank you so much for your advice and your help and your guidance, and now it's me's 02:51:03.440 --> 02:51:04.440 turn. 02:51:04.440 --> 02:51:05.440 Okay. 02:51:05.440 --> 02:51:06.440 Evening again. 02:51:06.440 --> 02:51:11.200 I'll try to be brief with mine. 02:51:11.200 --> 02:51:17.320 Like Julie, this is mostly an update from the last discussion or last time we talked 02:51:17.320 --> 02:51:23.200 about this as the feedback that we've gotten since then has not been significant enough 02:51:23.200 --> 02:51:29.280 to really have changes here, but there are some changes based on our last discussion. 02:51:29.280 --> 02:51:33.240 With this, just to remind you guys, this is the live work overlay. 02:51:33.240 --> 02:51:36.600 Like the other goals, this is our actions. 02:51:36.600 --> 02:51:41.440 This is helping us achieve some of those goals of honoring the culture, investing in economic 02:51:41.440 --> 02:51:46.000 prosperity, and strengthening neighborhoods and housing affordability, but I wanted to 02:51:46.000 --> 02:51:52.400 bring this specific language that the action recommends because what we are proposing, 02:51:52.400 --> 02:51:56.640 especially at least in one section, is slightly different from what the action recommends. 02:51:56.640 --> 02:52:01.840 The action in the southeastern area plan is to create a live work overlay district that 02:52:01.840 --> 02:52:06.720 focuses on allowing small mom and pop retail, such as bookstores, toy shop, coffee shop, 02:52:06.720 --> 02:52:12.480 music stores, bar, beer shops, those types of uses, and a portion of a single family 02:52:12.480 --> 02:52:17.080 home with a portion being used as a residence simultaneously. 02:52:17.080 --> 02:52:23.240 What we are proposing, and especially in one of the districts, especially, or one of the 02:52:23.240 --> 02:52:27.800 areas especially, is different than that in that we are proposing to allow standalone 02:52:27.800 --> 02:52:35.480 businesses as opposed to them being combined with the single family home residence, but 02:52:35.480 --> 02:52:39.000 that's because we've run into some challenges with implementation and things like that that 02:52:39.000 --> 02:52:41.280 I'll talk about now. 02:52:41.280 --> 02:52:47.780 The live work dwelling unit as a land use in our DDC, as well as as defined by the International 02:52:47.780 --> 02:52:54.900 Building Code, has some very specific requirements to allow for both the living and working component 02:52:54.900 --> 02:53:00.440 to exist in the same structure. 02:53:00.440 --> 02:53:04.520 Primarily it is, I won't go into, we kind of covered this in the work session earlier 02:53:04.520 --> 02:53:11.080 this year, but primarily the residential piece is subordinate to the work piece. 02:53:11.080 --> 02:53:17.440 So the live work structure is intended to be sort of commercial in the front or commercial 02:53:17.440 --> 02:53:22.040 on the ground floor, the residents up top or in the back, and the residents should not 02:53:22.040 --> 02:53:25.780 exceed 50% of the total gross floor area. 02:53:25.780 --> 02:53:32.060 So within this overlay district, if our goal is to basically allow for some of those uses 02:53:32.060 --> 02:53:40.580 to exist, I think the question is, is it more important that we allow those uses to exist, 02:53:40.580 --> 02:53:46.160 or more important that we require them to exist with the combination of a residential 02:53:46.160 --> 02:53:47.160 structure? 02:53:47.160 --> 02:53:50.880 So one of the challenges that we've run into with implementing the live work, just land 02:53:50.880 --> 02:53:55.480 use with absent the overlay, is that the, I think the major one is that the International 02:53:55.480 --> 02:54:02.120 Building Code requires fire suppression for the mix of uses. 02:54:02.120 --> 02:54:07.120 If you have a single family residence and a commercial use in the same building, that 02:54:07.120 --> 02:54:12.060 mixed use type of building does require a significant investment in the existing structure 02:54:12.060 --> 02:54:17.140 to be able to utilize that as such, or for both of those uses. 02:54:17.140 --> 02:54:25.040 So the area that we're talking about here, just to remind you guys, is along East Prairie 02:54:25.040 --> 02:54:31.000 Street, properties west of Skinner, and then properties south of, or on the north and south 02:54:31.000 --> 02:54:34.680 side of Robertson Street, and on the east and west side of Cook Street. 02:54:34.680 --> 02:54:38.800 We sort of subsection these out based on the existing land uses, as well as the future 02:54:38.800 --> 02:54:44.760 land use map designation for these, and mostly what we've been discussing so far is Section 02:54:44.760 --> 02:54:53.020 A. Just looking at the future land use map, you see Section A there has a neighborhood 02:54:53.020 --> 02:54:55.760 mixed use designation to the north. 02:54:55.760 --> 02:55:01.520 They do have those sort of multifamily developments occurring to the north. 02:55:01.520 --> 02:55:06.880 There's an existing industrial facility in this location here, and so there is an existing 02:55:06.880 --> 02:55:12.480 mix of both existing land uses, as well as what the future land use map intends for the 02:55:12.480 --> 02:55:13.840 future. 02:55:13.840 --> 02:55:19.160 The other sections are a bit more homogenous, that Section B is mostly moderate residential, 02:55:19.160 --> 02:55:21.080 and Section C is mostly single family residential. 02:55:21.080 --> 02:55:27.280 So those, in our mind in proposing this, are slightly different from what's along East 02:55:27.280 --> 02:55:29.880 Prairie Street. 02:55:29.880 --> 02:55:33.760 What we are proposing, and this is just a further, a closer look at some of those existing 02:55:33.760 --> 02:55:38.720 land uses, the character I think for the most part is still largely residential. 02:55:38.720 --> 02:55:41.800 You drive down that street, you see mostly single family homes. 02:55:41.800 --> 02:55:47.580 There are a couple of different businesses and churches on this street, as well as those 02:55:47.580 --> 02:55:51.960 industrial facilities that I mentioned earlier. 02:55:51.960 --> 02:55:58.720 So we asked the community, one, if they believe that uses should stand alone in this area, 02:55:58.720 --> 02:56:03.840 and specifically which uses should be allowed to or be permitted to stand alone in this 02:56:03.840 --> 02:56:05.360 area. 02:56:05.360 --> 02:56:08.440 And what we see is shown there in this table. 02:56:08.440 --> 02:56:16.160 We've got overwhelming support from the respondents that we spoke to, that restaurants, small 02:56:16.160 --> 02:56:21.020 retail, personal service, daycare uses are all appropriate for this area. 02:56:21.020 --> 02:56:28.360 So what staff is proposing is to allow for those uses and those uses alone to stand alone 02:56:28.360 --> 02:56:34.880 as permitted offices, I'm sorry, as permitted uses within section A, and that's the properties 02:56:34.880 --> 02:56:37.440 along East Prairie, of the overlay. 02:56:37.440 --> 02:56:43.440 The properties that are underlying there would be potentially permitted with a specific use 02:56:43.440 --> 02:56:44.440 permit. 02:56:44.440 --> 02:56:50.280 Those are land uses that the community, again, is in support of, but staff may have some 02:56:50.280 --> 02:56:54.860 concerns and would like to take basically the opportunity to take a closer look at them 02:56:54.860 --> 02:56:55.920 where they are proposed. 02:56:55.920 --> 02:57:00.840 So Mobile Food Corps typically comes with outdoor events and noise and things, and we 02:57:00.840 --> 02:57:07.880 heard that that was a concern from the community, similar with professional offices, lighting 02:57:07.880 --> 02:57:14.120 in that aspect, and possibly what it could bring to the area. 02:57:14.120 --> 02:57:19.640 So those would be proposed, or those are proposed to be permitted with a specific use permit. 02:57:19.640 --> 02:57:24.840 Some of the use-specific standards that we would propose for those uses would be to limit 02:57:24.840 --> 02:57:26.280 the size of the property. 02:57:26.280 --> 02:57:30.480 I think the commission last time we talked had expressed concerns about the potential 02:57:30.480 --> 02:57:35.560 of if we do allow for standalone commercial businesses in this area, that the concern 02:57:35.560 --> 02:57:41.520 about gentrification where this area is redeveloped and looks completely different. 02:57:41.520 --> 02:57:47.660 So we would impose some size limitations to ensure that it is more compatible with the 02:57:47.660 --> 02:57:50.320 existing structures and the existing character. 02:57:50.320 --> 02:57:56.920 We would also impose some of the architectural components that are included in the residential 02:57:56.920 --> 02:57:57.920 overlay. 02:57:57.920 --> 02:58:02.120 We would make sure that those were imposed on these properties as well, so that should 02:58:02.120 --> 02:58:07.040 someone decide to use the existing single-family structure as a business instead, if they were 02:58:07.040 --> 02:58:11.280 to want to make improvements, they would have to adhere to those architectural standards 02:58:11.280 --> 02:58:17.960 that the residential area adheres to, and similarly, if they were to want to construct 02:58:17.960 --> 02:58:24.600 a new building, it would still have to meet the architectural character of the area. 02:58:24.600 --> 02:58:31.160 At one point earlier in the year, we were proposing a change of base zoning to R7 for 02:58:31.160 --> 02:58:35.580 the remainder of these properties basically that are not currently zoned R7. 02:58:35.580 --> 02:58:39.260 After talking a little bit more with the community, there was some concern about how that might 02:58:39.260 --> 02:58:43.560 impact property taxes and some other things, and ultimately, we can still achieve what 02:58:43.560 --> 02:58:48.360 we're trying to achieve with allowing those land uses with just keeping the base zoning. 02:58:48.360 --> 02:58:53.720 So we have removed that from the proposal. 02:58:53.720 --> 02:58:56.880 Specifically to address some of those other concerns and things that we would include 02:58:56.880 --> 02:59:05.520 in the proposal would be a minimum hours or limited hours of operation restrictions, specifically 02:59:05.520 --> 02:59:09.720 that would be the 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. Friday 02:59:09.720 --> 02:59:10.720 through Sunday. 02:59:10.720 --> 02:59:15.960 Again, the community seemed to be generally in support of those restrictions, as well 02:59:15.960 --> 02:59:21.480 as a minimum buffer between a new commercial business and an existing residence that would 02:59:21.480 --> 02:59:26.600 be an 8-foot tall wood fence along the entire property line, as well as a landscape buffer 02:59:26.600 --> 02:59:31.680 to help mitigate any lighting or things that impacts in that way that might sneak through 02:59:31.680 --> 02:59:32.680 that fence. 02:59:32.680 --> 02:59:36.480 Some of the other concerns that we heard were about noise in general. 02:59:36.480 --> 02:59:42.840 The city does have a noise ordinance that everyone has to adhere by. 02:59:42.840 --> 02:59:43.840 Most uses have to adhere by. 02:59:43.840 --> 02:59:47.240 I believe there are some exceptions for the airport and some of the other more intense 02:59:47.240 --> 02:59:48.240 industrial uses. 02:59:48.240 --> 02:59:53.920 But in this case, the height or the noise ordinance requirement here would be a max 02:59:53.920 --> 03:00:00.680 65 dBA measured at 50 feet from the source, and that's about just over normal conversation. 03:00:00.680 --> 03:00:08.160 So that would be imposed, and if there are concerns, there are paths to enforce that. 03:00:08.160 --> 03:00:09.760 And then the proposed parking requirement. 03:00:09.760 --> 03:00:17.520 If you look at our standard, a live/work dwelling unit only requires 1.5 spaces per unit, and 03:00:17.520 --> 03:00:22.000 so what we are actually imposing would be four spaces per non-residential use. 03:00:22.000 --> 03:00:26.240 And again, that's the only those uses that the community has said that they would like 03:00:26.240 --> 03:00:28.140 to see in this area. 03:00:28.140 --> 03:00:34.000 That basically is consistent with the four spaces per residential or single-family residence 03:00:34.000 --> 03:00:35.580 that is within the area. 03:00:35.580 --> 03:00:40.360 So for people who are trying to use their existing structure, it wouldn't require again 03:00:40.360 --> 03:00:44.120 significant investment and extra paving and things like that. 03:00:44.120 --> 03:00:49.320 And we do feel like the size of the structures, given the size of the structures and the properties, 03:00:49.320 --> 03:00:54.840 four spaces would be adequate enough to support parking on that site and not create significant 03:00:54.840 --> 03:01:00.320 traffic and congestion on the residential streets. 03:01:00.320 --> 03:01:03.240 One of the other questions, now that we've kind of thought about this, we've had some 03:01:03.240 --> 03:01:06.940 time to sit with this a little bit and we've talked to the community. 03:01:06.940 --> 03:01:11.400 So one of the other questions that I wanted to post to commission, and we really hadn't 03:01:11.400 --> 03:01:15.880 had the opportunity to get community feedback on this piece, but it's those other sections 03:01:15.880 --> 03:01:18.240 of the live/work overlay. 03:01:18.240 --> 03:01:23.400 Do we feel like the commercial land uses that we're permitting or we're trying to propose 03:01:23.400 --> 03:01:29.480 permitting to stand alone within East Prairie, do we feel that those might also be appropriate 03:01:29.480 --> 03:01:30.480 for this area? 03:01:30.480 --> 03:01:34.880 And again, we haven't had the opportunity to take that to the community, so I absolutely 03:01:34.880 --> 03:01:42.000 would, once we find ways to get an improved participation, I would like to discuss that 03:01:42.000 --> 03:01:43.000 with him. 03:01:43.000 --> 03:01:47.160 But I also, because we were here at this presentation, wanted to gauge the commission's opinion 03:01:47.160 --> 03:01:56.000 on standalone commercial uses in the other area, given their existing land uses and sort 03:01:56.000 --> 03:02:00.160 of what is shown on the future land use map. 03:02:00.160 --> 03:02:06.040 And I believe that is, yeah, that concludes my portion of the live/work presentation. 03:02:06.040 --> 03:02:11.380 I can pose that question, Chair, and then if there's any other discussion or questions 03:02:11.380 --> 03:02:14.440 that the commission has about that, we can dive into that also. 03:02:14.440 --> 03:02:23.080 Sure, so specifically on the proposed land uses, as staff has explained, any comments 03:02:23.080 --> 03:02:26.040 of support or concern on that? 03:02:26.040 --> 03:02:32.840 I'm sorry, I made them all tired. 03:02:32.840 --> 03:02:36.840 Yeah, sorry. 03:02:36.840 --> 03:02:39.280 I think it's a very thoughtful proposal. 03:02:39.280 --> 03:02:43.000 I appreciate the parking flexibility. 03:02:43.000 --> 03:02:50.280 I think that will go a long way to allowing the types of small lot uses that the residents 03:02:50.280 --> 03:02:53.480 have said that they want. 03:02:53.480 --> 03:02:58.120 I'm not seeing... 03:02:58.120 --> 03:03:00.520 Are we happy with what staff has said? 03:03:00.520 --> 03:03:07.120 I'll just say it sounds good that I'm happy with what you put together, but again, I'll 03:03:07.120 --> 03:03:09.240 defer to the community. 03:03:09.240 --> 03:03:14.760 I particularly like the eight-foot fence in between, like if there's an existing residence 03:03:14.760 --> 03:03:21.720 and then new retail commercials going in, eight feet, that's a nice-sized fence. 03:03:21.720 --> 03:03:26.640 And then having some vegetation and stuff so that the parking is not right up against 03:03:26.640 --> 03:03:29.840 the fence will be great. 03:03:29.840 --> 03:03:31.280 I just echo those sentiments. 03:03:31.280 --> 03:03:34.960 I feel like it's very balanced and very reasonable on it. 03:03:34.960 --> 03:03:39.120 I don't know, I think it looks great. 03:03:39.120 --> 03:03:43.540 I do have one redirection, not on the policy. 03:03:43.540 --> 03:03:48.560 If you can go back to your slide where it was showing the 50% live work and explaining 03:03:48.560 --> 03:03:49.560 that. 03:03:49.560 --> 03:03:51.560 Oh, this here? 03:03:51.560 --> 03:03:56.680 Yes, thank you. 03:03:56.680 --> 03:04:01.880 I don't blame anyone because this is way in the weeds, but I keep making a point of this 03:04:01.880 --> 03:04:08.320 and it keeps getting lost, so I'm just going to read out the actual verbiage in the building 03:04:08.320 --> 03:04:14.680 code and Fannie Mae's requirements and in our code, and this is where I see a contradiction. 03:04:14.680 --> 03:04:23.080 So in the building code, when it's defining live work dwellings and saying if you meet 03:04:23.080 --> 03:04:29.520 these conditions, you can build it under the IRC code, it says the non-residential area 03:04:29.520 --> 03:04:39.200 is permitted to be not more than 50% of the area of each live work unit. 03:04:39.200 --> 03:04:44.480 And then Fannie Mae, for financing reasons to make it so that you can actually build 03:04:44.480 --> 03:04:52.760 these things, quote, "Requires that no more than 35% of a condo or co-op project or 35% 03:04:52.760 --> 03:04:59.040 of the building in which the project is located be commercial space or allocated to mix use." 03:04:59.040 --> 03:05:06.440 So those two are saying the commercial has to be less than 50% or less than 35%. 03:05:06.440 --> 03:05:12.160 And then when I read in our code, the definition of work live dwelling says the residential 03:05:12.160 --> 03:05:22.520 component of a work live dwelling shall not exceed 50% of the total gross floor area. 03:05:22.520 --> 03:05:24.640 Do we understand how those are contradictory? 03:05:24.640 --> 03:05:27.600 So say the first part of the building code. 03:05:27.600 --> 03:05:33.280 So the builder code says the non-residential area is permitted to be not more than 50% 03:05:33.280 --> 03:05:36.280 of the area per live work dwelling unit. 03:05:36.280 --> 03:05:37.280 It is the non-residential piece. 03:05:37.280 --> 03:05:38.280 I see. 03:05:38.280 --> 03:05:39.280 Yes. 03:05:39.280 --> 03:05:43.600 And then our code says the residential component shall not exceed 50% of the total gross floor 03:05:43.600 --> 03:05:44.600 area. 03:05:44.600 --> 03:05:45.600 Yes. 03:05:45.600 --> 03:05:46.600 Okay. 03:05:46.600 --> 03:05:48.960 So do we understand now how those are contradictory? 03:05:48.960 --> 03:05:49.960 Yes. 03:05:49.960 --> 03:05:57.500 And I will say that the live work use has been interesting to work with because of those reasons 03:05:57.500 --> 03:06:06.240 where we have the requirements in our DDC and then we are ready to go and then we get 03:06:06.240 --> 03:06:12.200 to the building permit phase and realize that actually it's what we're requiring immediately 03:06:12.200 --> 03:06:15.360 kicks into the fire suppression system. 03:06:15.360 --> 03:06:20.360 So I mean, if that's maybe something that we need to take a look at to allow this use 03:06:20.360 --> 03:06:24.800 to be more useful within the city, then we can absolutely take that direction. 03:06:24.800 --> 03:06:27.560 I think it has implications beyond just Southeast Denton. 03:06:27.560 --> 03:06:28.560 Of course. 03:06:28.560 --> 03:06:29.560 Right? 03:06:29.560 --> 03:06:36.400 There are seven areas that may be appropriate for work live dwellings that if we just flip 03:06:36.400 --> 03:06:42.240 a greater than to less than sign, maybe if there's demand then there's financing and 03:06:42.240 --> 03:06:43.240 everybody's happy. 03:06:43.240 --> 03:06:44.240 Yeah. 03:06:44.240 --> 03:06:47.400 I know it's late and we all probably want to get out of here soon. 03:06:47.400 --> 03:06:52.760 But I would just add, I think the distinction for the work live dwellings in the DDC, those 03:06:52.760 --> 03:06:57.000 do have to be considered under the IBC, the International Building Code, as opposed to 03:06:57.000 --> 03:06:58.840 the International Residential Code. 03:06:58.840 --> 03:07:00.880 So we do understand there's that challenge. 03:07:00.880 --> 03:07:06.400 However, what the International Residential Code is describing is essentially what a home 03:07:06.400 --> 03:07:07.920 occupation is in the DDC. 03:07:07.920 --> 03:07:13.520 So we do allow that to occur just under a different title where the residential is the 03:07:13.520 --> 03:07:16.880 primary and the occupation is the secondary. 03:07:16.880 --> 03:07:17.880 Okay. 03:07:17.880 --> 03:07:19.360 And I threw that definition up here. 03:07:19.360 --> 03:07:24.280 I talked a little bit about it more in our community meeting to make sure that the residents 03:07:24.280 --> 03:07:28.200 understood that distinction, but I didn't go into detail here. 03:07:28.200 --> 03:07:33.960 That use is, we do have the opposite use permitted, like Haley was saying, where it's predominantly 03:07:33.960 --> 03:07:36.360 the residential piece as opposed to the other. 03:07:36.360 --> 03:07:37.360 Yeah. 03:07:37.360 --> 03:07:38.360 Yeah. 03:07:38.360 --> 03:07:43.320 I mean, I think when most people think of a live work thing, they're thinking of someone 03:07:43.320 --> 03:07:46.320 who lives there and has a business. 03:07:46.320 --> 03:07:49.960 And yes, I recognize we have the home occupation, but that has... 03:07:49.960 --> 03:07:55.120 It's really intended for non-public facing occupations. 03:07:55.120 --> 03:07:59.880 You can't have a sign announcing that there's a business there. 03:07:59.880 --> 03:08:03.440 There's all sorts of limitations like that. 03:08:03.440 --> 03:08:04.440 It's a broader discussion. 03:08:04.440 --> 03:08:09.720 I don't want to get off on the weeds, but I see that as a good intention by our code 03:08:09.720 --> 03:08:16.040 when we passed the 2019 code, where we didn't really fully align those things, at least 03:08:16.040 --> 03:08:17.040 in my mind. 03:08:17.040 --> 03:08:18.040 Right? 03:08:18.040 --> 03:08:22.280 So, I'll leave it at that. 03:08:22.280 --> 03:08:23.280 Any other... 03:08:23.280 --> 03:08:24.280 Okay. 03:08:24.280 --> 03:08:26.880 I really put everybody to sleep with that. 03:08:26.880 --> 03:08:27.880 I'm sorry. 03:08:27.880 --> 03:08:28.880 It was... 03:08:28.880 --> 03:08:29.880 I'm sure it was me. 03:08:29.880 --> 03:08:30.880 I'm so sorry. 03:08:30.880 --> 03:08:31.880 Up and up here. 03:08:31.880 --> 03:08:32.880 Sorry. 03:08:32.880 --> 03:08:33.880 Anything else, Mia? 03:08:33.880 --> 03:08:34.880 That's it for us. 03:08:34.880 --> 03:08:41.400 The last part of it was just open discussions and any general feedback on what we've presented. 03:08:41.400 --> 03:08:42.720 I did have just one question. 03:08:42.720 --> 03:08:45.000 Mia, do you feel like you got the feedback you're looking for? 03:08:45.000 --> 03:08:48.400 Because I feel like we're just kind of like, "Yeah." 03:08:48.400 --> 03:08:49.400 Yeah. 03:08:49.400 --> 03:08:54.440 I think this has been a challenging one to address because just building off of the base 03:08:54.440 --> 03:09:01.080 use of the live work dwelling unit and its challenges and then trying to apply that to 03:09:01.080 --> 03:09:07.000 what the community called for and then what, in practice, could actually happen and how 03:09:07.000 --> 03:09:08.000 much it would cost. 03:09:08.000 --> 03:09:10.520 So, marrying all those things has been a challenge. 03:09:10.520 --> 03:09:18.000 I'm hoping that I'm explaining it correctly and that's not why it's just quiet and supportive. 03:09:18.000 --> 03:09:19.440 But I think I got the feedback that I need. 03:09:19.440 --> 03:09:26.200 If we're all on board with it, then I think I'm okay. 03:09:26.200 --> 03:09:27.880 Okay. 03:09:27.880 --> 03:09:31.760 Thank you for all the work. 03:09:31.760 --> 03:09:37.920 And with that, I will conclude our extended work session with Planning and Zoning Commission 03:09:37.920 --> 03:09:39.400 at 8.26 p.m. 03:09:39.400 --> 03:09:40.400 - Thank you.