WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.960 Good evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission work session for October 16th, 2019. 00:00:06.960 --> 00:00:10.880 I'll call the meeting to order at 435, seeing that we do have a quorum. 00:00:10.880 --> 00:00:16.360 Let the records show that Margie Ellis is absent at the start of the meeting. 00:00:16.360 --> 00:00:22.460 The first item for review and for business is item 1A, 00:00:22.460 --> 00:00:28.680 which is an update to the new format under House Bill 3167, I believe Richard has the presentation. 00:00:30.680 --> 00:00:32.640 >> Thank you, I'll be brief. 00:00:32.640 --> 00:00:39.320 I just wanted to just highlight, if you recall we had discussed a few weeks back, maybe it was a month or so ago, 00:00:39.320 --> 00:00:45.480 regarding the impacts of House Bill 3167 and the 30 day shot clock with respect to platting. 00:00:45.480 --> 00:00:50.560 And then the specific findings that we would need to make if we were to deny a plat. 00:00:50.560 --> 00:00:55.240 And so tonight, while we have just one item that's under the shot clock, 00:00:55.240 --> 00:00:59.040 they did meet all of the requirements, so there was no recommendation of denial. 00:00:59.040 --> 00:01:08.360 But I just wanted to highlight in your backup, if you'll note with the plats where we typically just had a straightforward AIS. 00:01:08.360 --> 00:01:16.200 What we've created was sort of a review criteria checklist, if you will, that outlines whether it's been met, not met, or not applicable. 00:01:16.200 --> 00:01:23.280 And then if it's met, those reasons why, when and if we do get one for denial, those will be the reasons for that denial. 00:01:23.280 --> 00:01:28.240 So it's clear you can see up front as to what the specific criteria are. 00:01:28.240 --> 00:01:33.960 So I just wanted to point that out, that we'll be using this sort of format as we move forward with plats. 00:01:33.960 --> 00:01:36.640 >> Thank you, Richard. 00:01:36.640 --> 00:01:41.080 The next item of business is item 1B, which is to receive a report, hold a discussion, and 00:01:41.080 --> 00:01:47.720 give staff direction regarding the changes to gas wells and subchapter eight of the EDC. 00:01:47.720 --> 00:01:49.520 And so, who is presenting this? 00:01:49.520 --> 00:01:50.840 >> Haley. >> Haley. 00:01:50.840 --> 00:01:57.920 It's worth noting to the commissioners, if I understand this correctly, that there will be an opportunity for questions and answers of city attorneys. 00:01:57.920 --> 00:02:03.160 If the attorneys deem that that might be a closed meeting discussion to be had, 00:02:03.160 --> 00:02:07.280 we'll just refer that question later to the agenda and come back to it in a closed meeting. 00:02:07.280 --> 00:02:15.880 So I think it's open to any questions, but we might be given counsel to withhold those to a closed meeting if we need it. 00:02:15.880 --> 00:02:18.240 So that's on your agenda as a closed meeting. 00:02:18.240 --> 00:02:21.080 It might or might not happen, depending on this discussion. 00:02:21.080 --> 00:02:21.760 Thanks, Haley. 00:02:21.760 --> 00:02:26.800 >> All right, so I don't know if all of you are familiar with gas wells or not. 00:02:26.800 --> 00:02:31.760 So I wanted to start with just kind of a quick run down of where the code is today with gas well setbacks. 00:02:31.760 --> 00:02:35.360 So the code establishes two primary types of setbacks. 00:02:35.360 --> 00:02:44.240 The gas well drilling and production site setback is shown here on the left, and that is a measurement taken from the edge of a pad site to any protected use. 00:02:44.240 --> 00:02:51.880 We'll look at what those numbers are later, but essentially it's 501,000 depending on the zoning and the case with the production site. 00:02:51.880 --> 00:02:57.280 The second type of setback is what's called a reverse setback, that's what we'll be primarily discussing this evening. 00:02:57.280 --> 00:03:03.120 That is a setback measurement that's taken from a protected use that's developing in proximity to a gas well pad site. 00:03:03.120 --> 00:03:07.680 So those are typically 250 feet in the code today. 00:03:07.680 --> 00:03:09.400 There is a- >> Mr. Beck. 00:03:09.400 --> 00:03:10.040 >> Yes, sir. 00:03:10.040 --> 00:03:12.760 >> So why are those two numbers different? 00:03:12.760 --> 00:03:19.080 >> My understanding is- >> This is more of an education than anything else. 00:03:19.080 --> 00:03:21.160 >> Well, and I was not here when this ordinance was adopted. 00:03:21.160 --> 00:03:27.760 My understanding is that the thought process is when a gas well site is developing, the protected uses around it are already established. 00:03:27.760 --> 00:03:34.840 So there should be room there for it to stay further away from those uses than say if a gas well site is already existing and 00:03:34.840 --> 00:03:39.440 a homeowner knowingly wants to come in and build a protected use in close proximity to it. 00:03:39.440 --> 00:03:43.560 So the numbers range from 1,000 to 250 across the board generally. 00:03:43.560 --> 00:03:45.760 >> Thank you. 00:03:45.760 --> 00:03:46.920 >> You're welcome. 00:03:46.920 --> 00:03:52.320 And then there's a third type of setback that you'll see when we look at that, that's called a minimum setback. 00:03:52.320 --> 00:03:58.160 As it's written today, that is the minimum distance that a gas well site has to maintain from a protected use after a variance or 00:03:58.160 --> 00:04:02.840 some other type of relief is approved by either, there's multiple instances. 00:04:02.840 --> 00:04:08.080 There's certain cases it can be approved by staff, other times it goes to ZBA, and then there's also opportunity for 00:04:08.080 --> 00:04:12.480 all of the property owners of protected uses to provide a waiver. 00:04:12.480 --> 00:04:15.840 And that could get them down as low as 250 feet in some instances. 00:04:17.800 --> 00:04:19.680 >> So a little bit more background for you all. 00:04:19.680 --> 00:04:22.720 This has been through extensive conversation with city council to date. 00:04:22.720 --> 00:04:24.640 We've had three work sessions. 00:04:24.640 --> 00:04:32.320 Originally in September of 2018, council asked for a discussion to come to them regarding how Denton compares to other cities and 00:04:32.320 --> 00:04:35.560 how our setbacks relate compared to others in the area. 00:04:35.560 --> 00:04:41.160 So that occurred last September, again in July, they requested that that come back for further discussion. 00:04:42.480 --> 00:04:47.600 And at that time, council reached a general consensus that the reverse setback, 00:04:47.600 --> 00:04:54.000 the one I referred to that's the measured protected use to pad site, should be increased from 250 feet to 500 feet. 00:04:54.000 --> 00:05:00.640 And so that was the direction given to staff was to start working towards a code amendment to increase our reverse setback to 500 feet. 00:05:00.640 --> 00:05:05.560 As recently as August 27th, we brought forward what those changes would look like to council. 00:05:05.560 --> 00:05:12.160 So if we increase that, what the code amendments would look like, as well as some other issues that staff had identified, 00:05:12.160 --> 00:05:19.120 such as the possible need for a variance if that setback increases 250 feet, as well as the creation of nonconformities. 00:05:19.120 --> 00:05:25.400 So those discussions were brought to council in August, and they generally gave direction to one, 00:05:25.400 --> 00:05:29.840 try to craft language that would prevent the creation of nonconformities as much as possible. 00:05:29.840 --> 00:05:33.600 And two, to pursue a combination of the variance options that we presented to them. 00:05:33.600 --> 00:05:36.800 So I'll outline those for you in more depth as we go through this. 00:05:36.800 --> 00:05:39.440 >> Haley, if I can interrupt real fast. 00:05:40.640 --> 00:05:43.840 As, I don't know if you can answer this. 00:05:43.840 --> 00:05:49.120 Do we have the authority as a city to increase the reverse setbacks? 00:05:49.120 --> 00:05:50.480 Is that within our authority? 00:05:50.480 --> 00:05:55.040 >> I believe it is, but I may defer to legal counsel on that. 00:05:55.040 --> 00:05:57.200 I believe as a zoning regulation we have that authority. 00:05:57.200 --> 00:05:58.880 Is that correct, Jerry? 00:05:58.880 --> 00:06:05.840 >> We do have some limitations on that and I don't know, do you want to address those now or do you want to do that at a later time? 00:06:11.440 --> 00:06:13.280 >> Aaron Leal, City Attorney. 00:06:13.280 --> 00:06:17.200 The, you know, normally setbacks are zoning regulation and we have that authority. 00:06:17.200 --> 00:06:22.160 I know with respect to setbacks involving gas wells, they come under, 00:06:22.160 --> 00:06:28.160 we do have a limitation under House Bill 40 which says that we're allowed to impose reasonable setbacks. 00:06:28.160 --> 00:06:30.520 We don't know what that means, it's not defined in the code. 00:06:30.520 --> 00:06:35.800 So there is that limitation on the zoning side, or zoning authority with respect to gas wells and their setbacks. 00:06:35.800 --> 00:06:38.960 Reverse setbacks apply to the protected uses. 00:06:38.960 --> 00:06:44.880 They're not gas wells, so House Bill 40 doesn't impact, so it's just a normal zoning analysis. 00:06:44.880 --> 00:06:51.400 At the same time, which if it gets to there, we also, as I explained during the work session on July the 16th, 00:06:51.400 --> 00:06:55.960 there is a takings analysis that we also take into account, into consideration. 00:06:55.960 --> 00:07:00.880 I explained that at length to council and I'm free to do that as well here. 00:07:00.880 --> 00:07:04.720 But that would be a separate limitation on the setbacks. 00:07:04.720 --> 00:07:10.640 At some point, you know, we run into takings issues. 00:07:10.640 --> 00:07:17.320 >> So if I understand correctly, the initial setback, the 500,000, is a limitation on new construction. 00:07:17.320 --> 00:07:20.560 It's a limitation on the oil companies or the gas companies. 00:07:20.560 --> 00:07:26.920 >> Yes. >> Reverse setbacks are a limitation on development, not the gas companies. 00:07:26.920 --> 00:07:27.880 >> That is correct. 00:07:27.880 --> 00:07:36.120 >> Is there any anticipation, it doesn't seem like the fracking groups or the momentum that was gathered behind HV 40 would come into play. 00:07:36.120 --> 00:07:40.040 Because this particular is not against that industry. 00:07:40.040 --> 00:07:45.760 It's against every other development that might want to encroach on the reverse setback limit. 00:07:45.760 --> 00:07:46.520 >> That is correct. 00:07:46.520 --> 00:07:50.440 It would apply just to protected uses, which goes beyond residential houses. 00:07:50.440 --> 00:07:53.880 It includes other types of protected, other types of uses. 00:07:53.880 --> 00:07:55.320 >> Okay. >> But yes, you are correct. 00:07:55.320 --> 00:08:01.720 >> Thank you very much. 00:08:01.720 --> 00:08:06.360 >> All right, so there are four primary topics that we'll get into today. 00:08:06.360 --> 00:08:08.400 One is the increase of the reverse setbacks. 00:08:08.400 --> 00:08:12.080 Second is those non-conformities that would be created that I alluded to. 00:08:12.080 --> 00:08:17.880 Third would be the variance options that I just referenced and what council has directed staff to do there. 00:08:17.880 --> 00:08:23.680 And then fourth would be some changes to how measurements are taken to certain uses such as parks that aren't clearly defined in the ordinance today. 00:08:25.280 --> 00:08:29.760 So here is a summary of where we're at with our current gas well ordinance. 00:08:29.760 --> 00:08:35.160 Setbacks, as I mentioned, are broken down into the drilling and production site setback that applies to the gas well operator. 00:08:35.160 --> 00:08:40.440 The minimum setback that the operator can get to if they have a variance or some sort of waiver. 00:08:40.440 --> 00:08:45.320 And then the reverse setback that's applicable to those protected uses developing near a gas well. 00:08:45.320 --> 00:08:48.000 It's further bifurcated between zoning districts. 00:08:48.000 --> 00:08:53.920 So the setbacks are broken down for new gas well sites and non-industrial districts versus industrial districts. 00:08:53.920 --> 00:08:59.840 And then for existing gas well sites, it's also broken down the same way, industrial versus non-industrial zoning. 00:08:59.840 --> 00:09:05.600 So those setbacks range anywhere from 1,000 feet for a new drilling and production site in a non-industrial district, 00:09:05.600 --> 00:09:10.280 down to as low as 250 feet in the industrial districts and for the reverse setbacks. 00:09:10.280 --> 00:09:19.800 Back in the summer when we brought this forward to council and they wanted an analysis of different setback possibilities. 00:09:19.800 --> 00:09:27.080 We initially went through several land use analysis with them showing different scenarios and what land area would be affected by these. 00:09:27.080 --> 00:09:29.280 Ultimately, the 500 feet is what they settled on. 00:09:29.280 --> 00:09:37.520 So you can see that would increase the amount of acreage impacted by reverse setbacks by just over 2,600 acres. 00:09:37.520 --> 00:09:45.400 And that's a total of 888 additional parcels of land that would be affected by that versus where we're at today with 573. 00:09:45.400 --> 00:09:48.440 >> The increase is 2,600 or is the delta that's 600? 00:09:48.440 --> 00:09:51.740 >> Right, this is the base number, this is what's in addition to that. 00:09:51.740 --> 00:09:54.200 >> So it'd be an additional 2,600. 00:09:54.200 --> 00:09:57.040 >> 4,200, 4,200, 4,200, 4,200, 4,200, 4,200, 4,200. 00:09:57.040 --> 00:09:58.640 >> Yep, current. 00:09:58.640 --> 00:10:02.760 >> Has this, Commissioner Beck. 00:10:02.760 --> 00:10:17.360 >> We're 4,200, wait, so we're above 1,800, we're another 800 and change, does the delta, I'm just trying to understand the deltas here. 00:10:17.360 --> 00:10:23.200 >> Everything 500 and beyond has the 250 base number netted out. 00:10:23.200 --> 00:10:26.880 So this is the increase beyond the 1,800 that we're at today. 00:10:26.880 --> 00:10:28.600 >> So the 2,630 is above. 00:10:28.600 --> 00:10:30.640 >> Commissioner Beck, can you come to the mic, yeah. 00:10:30.640 --> 00:10:33.240 >> The 2,630 is above the 1,800. 00:10:33.240 --> 00:10:33.880 >> Correct. 00:10:33.880 --> 00:10:35.120 >> So it's. 00:10:35.120 --> 00:10:38.000 >> It's an additional 2,600 acres. 00:10:38.000 --> 00:10:38.680 >> Thank you. 00:10:38.680 --> 00:10:39.440 >> Commissioner Smith. 00:10:39.440 --> 00:10:40.840 >> Thank you, Chair. 00:10:40.840 --> 00:10:48.400 So the parcels affected, the 888, that's, of course, an additional on top of the 573. 00:10:48.400 --> 00:10:53.080 So another, talking about 1,300, 1,400 parcels that are affected. 00:10:53.080 --> 00:10:58.320 Specifically, when talking about affected parcels, are these parcels that have development that's already against those setbacks? 00:10:58.320 --> 00:11:00.160 Is there any delineation between what. 00:11:00.160 --> 00:11:02.000 >> This particular analysis didn't have any delineation. 00:11:02.000 --> 00:11:05.080 >> It just had every guess well put the different setbacks on there. 00:11:05.080 --> 00:11:12.760 >> As you can see here on the map, our GIS team just ran these various buffers that council was considering against all existing gas well sites that are in the city limits. 00:11:12.760 --> 00:11:20.440 >> Okay. >> Of course, the setbacks being zoning don't apply to wells in the ETJ, but this is the analysis city wide from every gas well site that we have. 00:11:20.440 --> 00:11:30.240 >> I'd be interested to see, I don't know if it's necessary, but I'd be interested to see if GIS can take it a step further to see what parcels have developed, what parcels aren't developed, meaning with. 00:11:30.240 --> 00:11:32.360 >> We have that analysis and I can get that emailed out to you. 00:11:32.360 --> 00:11:42.920 >> Just so we just have an idea because we're looking at if there's already, if we increase it to 500 foot setback but there's already a housing development that's next to the 250 or it's 300 feet setback already. 00:11:42.920 --> 00:11:52.320 Increasing to 500 doesn't really necessarily affect that parcel, so to speak, but if of those 1,400 parcels, 1,000 of them are undeveloped. 00:11:52.320 --> 00:11:56.920 So then we're talking about undeveloped land at that point in time, and so I'd like to know what that number would be. 00:11:56.920 --> 00:11:58.880 >> Correct, and we have that analysis. 00:11:58.880 --> 00:12:04.120 We may be able to dig through the O drive and find it if we want, but if not, we can email it. 00:12:04.120 --> 00:12:11.880 >> We can include it as part of the, we can email it in advance, but I think we might hit to some of that when we get into, because it's really a two fold. 00:12:11.880 --> 00:12:19.640 It's those that want to develop, but it's also those that are already existing, and if something happens to that property, their ability to rebuild. 00:12:19.640 --> 00:12:21.240 >> Gotcha. >> And those numbers we do have. 00:12:21.240 --> 00:12:22.560 >> Yes. >> Okay, all right, thanks. 00:12:22.560 --> 00:12:27.580 >> I'll hold the question. 00:12:27.580 --> 00:12:29.720 >> Okay. >> All right. 00:12:29.720 --> 00:12:37.880 So I just wanted to give you guys a little bit of background about where council was at with this decision, and so this is what those changes would look like in the code. 00:12:37.880 --> 00:12:43.760 If we look at that same summary table, across the board, the reverse would be increased from 250 to 500. 00:12:43.760 --> 00:12:51.440 We are proposing to introduce a new type of setback called the reverse minimum setback, so same thing as what the gas well operator has. 00:12:51.440 --> 00:12:56.440 Because of the risk of a takings claim, we wanted to offer the opportunity for a variance or a waiver. 00:12:56.440 --> 00:13:03.140 And so this would be that minimum number that that variance or other waiver could reduce it down to, would be the 250 that they're already at today. 00:13:03.140 --> 00:13:06.240 >> Commissioner Burnetta. 00:13:06.240 --> 00:13:18.640 >> Can you give us an example of what would be something that a developer might use to qualify for that reverse minimum setback? 00:13:18.640 --> 00:13:23.480 >> There are specific criteria that I'll get into for what that would look like. 00:13:23.480 --> 00:13:31.760 There's hardship criteria if it goes to ZBA, and then there's other criteria that we've applied if it is something that staff could potentially approve. 00:13:31.760 --> 00:13:34.360 So I can get into that a little bit later in the presentation. 00:13:34.360 --> 00:13:35.160 >> Okay, thank you very much. 00:13:35.160 --> 00:13:43.480 >> All right, so the second topic that, like I said, as we worked through this and started analyzing this, 00:13:43.480 --> 00:13:47.440 we realized there would be a substantial potential increase in the amount of nonconformities. 00:13:47.440 --> 00:13:52.400 We have some properties nonconforming to the 250 foot reverse setback today. 00:13:52.400 --> 00:13:57.120 But of course, if that increases another 250 feet, there's a substantial amount of property that could be affected. 00:13:57.120 --> 00:14:06.440 At the time we introduced those numbers, council directed us to try to add language to the code that would prevent creating nonconformities. 00:14:06.440 --> 00:14:13.400 So there is some concern with this about certain nonconforming uses and structures being treated differently than others that staff has. 00:14:13.400 --> 00:14:21.760 Legal also has similar concerns, but this is the draft language that we would bring forward if you all choose to recommend and council chooses to pursue this option. 00:14:21.760 --> 00:14:29.080 And that would provide that the adoption of the increased setback shall not cause existing legally established protected uses to become nonconforming. 00:14:29.080 --> 00:14:36.720 Such protected uses shall be deemed a lawful site feature lot or structure, provided that the use is not closer than 250 feet from the existing gas well. 00:14:36.720 --> 00:14:42.240 So this would not change anything for things that are within the 250 foot nonconforming as it is today. 00:14:42.240 --> 00:14:49.360 We would further define legally established to include any lawfully existing protected use structure or 00:14:49.360 --> 00:14:55.520 site feature, or any lot that is part of a project, as defined in Texas Local Government Code Chapter 245, 00:14:55.520 --> 00:15:00.520 that has filed a preliminary plat or general development plan that has not expired as of the effective date. 00:15:00.520 --> 00:15:10.320 So that would capture projects that are in review with staff today, or that perhaps have a preliminary plat approved by you all but haven't final platted yet, and would allow those to continue moving forward. 00:15:10.320 --> 00:15:18.400 And then we would also propose adding language that no additional improvements be added to these lots that would decrease the current setback. 00:15:18.400 --> 00:15:19.520 >> Looks like there was a question. 00:15:19.520 --> 00:15:20.880 >> Maybe, yeah, Commissioner Beck. 00:15:20.880 --> 00:15:33.280 >> So what we're talking about here is whether that fraction of the 888 properties would go into conforming or rather nonconforming. 00:15:33.280 --> 00:15:34.320 >> Not necessarily. 00:15:34.320 --> 00:15:37.680 So this is the background data for that. 00:15:37.680 --> 00:15:46.720 So as it is today, we have 349 total protected uses that we were able to identify that are nonconforming to the 250 foot reverse setback. 00:15:46.720 --> 00:15:48.360 Those would not be changed with this language. 00:15:48.360 --> 00:15:58.840 With the proposed 500, there would be 1,240 total protected uses on the ground today that would be potentially nonconforming to the 500 foot. 00:15:58.840 --> 00:16:04.320 If we were to add this language to the code and allow those to be considered legally nonconforming, 00:16:04.320 --> 00:16:12.280 that difference would be 891 nonconformities that would be, in essence, prevented by this language being added into the code, if that makes sense. 00:16:13.520 --> 00:16:19.320 So what we looked at earlier was strictly a count of the number of parcels that fell within that setback. 00:16:19.320 --> 00:16:24.720 This is a further analysis that our GIS team conducted to identify those that have single family, 00:16:24.720 --> 00:16:30.240 multi family, a park, a school, a church, any of the protected uses existing on them today. 00:16:30.240 --> 00:16:37.720 >> And that's the 751? 00:16:37.720 --> 00:16:43.600 >> The 751 is the total of those protected uses that excludes Robeson Ranch. 00:16:43.600 --> 00:16:46.880 So Robeson Ranch has its own gas well setbacks applicable. 00:16:46.880 --> 00:16:53.160 So when they ran the initial analysis, it included all of those and then I asked them to go back and net out Robeson because this wouldn't affect them. 00:16:53.160 --> 00:17:00.680 So 751 would be the total outside of Robeson Ranch that would not become nonconforming if this language were adopted. 00:17:00.680 --> 00:17:03.360 >> And what was Robeson Ranch's setbacks? 00:17:03.360 --> 00:17:07.840 >> They have a 100 foot separation requirement written into their zoning documents. 00:17:07.840 --> 00:17:12.000 >> They have a 100 foot reverse or? 00:17:12.000 --> 00:17:15.840 >> I believe it's just phrased as a separation distance between homes and 00:17:15.840 --> 00:17:19.400 gas well parks as they're called in their documents. 00:17:19.400 --> 00:17:22.520 So Robeson is actually a plant development. 00:17:25.120 --> 00:17:33.640 >> So if I am understanding that, that's less than the 250 state minimum requirement then. 00:17:33.640 --> 00:17:38.640 >> There's not a state minimum requirement, because it is less than the 250. 00:17:38.640 --> 00:17:41.040 >> Who is the source of the 250 then? 00:17:41.040 --> 00:17:42.480 >> That's Denton's current ordinance. 00:17:42.480 --> 00:17:42.980 >> Okay. 00:17:42.980 --> 00:17:48.260 >> Did you want to add something? 00:17:48.260 --> 00:17:49.160 >> I'm apparently out back again. 00:17:49.160 --> 00:17:51.280 I can give you some history on that. 00:17:51.280 --> 00:17:55.680 The reverse setback was not implemented until 2010. 00:17:55.680 --> 00:18:01.280 It was August 2010, I think it was 2010-196. 00:18:01.280 --> 00:18:03.960 That's when the reverse setback came into being. 00:18:03.960 --> 00:18:08.920 Before then, the only separation distance was per the fire code, and that's 100 feet from the well. 00:18:08.920 --> 00:18:12.400 And so a lot of these houses are going to be less than the 250 that we implemented. 00:18:12.400 --> 00:18:17.880 That's why we came with the 250 reverse setback, because pre-2010, as the city was growing, 00:18:17.880 --> 00:18:23.640 residential subdivisions, especially on the south side, they started encroaching into existing gas wells. 00:18:23.640 --> 00:18:26.160 And so they instituted the reverse setback. 00:18:26.160 --> 00:18:31.680 But there are a lot of residential subdivisions that predate the 2010 reverse setback that are subject 00:18:31.680 --> 00:18:33.880 to that 100-foot separation distance. 00:18:33.880 --> 00:18:40.560 So that's just a little bit of background so you can understand about the 250 that was implemented in 2010. 00:18:40.560 --> 00:18:44.000 And there's a lot of development that already existed before then. 00:18:44.000 --> 00:18:45.760 Yes, sir. 00:18:45.760 --> 00:18:49.000 The 250 was initially an arbitrary number? 00:18:49.000 --> 00:18:52.160 I don't know, I was not here in 2010. 00:18:52.160 --> 00:18:58.040 I know that it was proposed to be changed in 2015 to 500. 00:18:58.040 --> 00:19:02.920 At that time, during the public hearings, I don't remember about P&Z, I know definitely at City Council. 00:19:02.920 --> 00:19:10.400 There were various developers, surface owners, real estate brokers that came out and started, 00:19:10.400 --> 00:19:15.600 complained or were concerned about the 500-foot setback when they raised the takings claim. 00:19:15.600 --> 00:19:18.000 At those public hearings. 00:19:18.000 --> 00:19:21.800 Is the 500 being proposed an arbitrary number? 00:19:21.800 --> 00:19:26.560 I'm wondering the research or the methodology, why are we coming up with these numbers? 00:19:26.560 --> 00:19:31.400 I know that Haley will get a little bit more in depth on that as far as how the council got to that number. 00:19:31.400 --> 00:19:33.960 And she can explain that to you. 00:19:33.960 --> 00:19:34.960 Christian or Bec? 00:19:34.960 --> 00:19:40.280 This is sort of a lead-in to that next one, so I'm not sure who the right person is to ask. 00:19:40.280 --> 00:19:44.120 And I'll wait for most of my questions when you get to that section. 00:19:44.120 --> 00:19:52.000 But if the justification for 100 or 500 feet is based on, 00:19:52.000 --> 00:20:00.480 in that one example, the firefighter's needs and codes. 00:20:00.480 --> 00:20:09.200 Then how are, if they wanted to move to 500 feet for 00:20:09.200 --> 00:20:12.880 the firefighting needs, then how are we within that? 00:20:14.280 --> 00:20:18.440 Or our ongoing setback distances? 00:20:18.440 --> 00:20:22.120 >> Are you saying that the fire codes change 500 feet? 00:20:22.120 --> 00:20:25.360 >> If the fire codes are saying that they need 500 feet. 00:20:25.360 --> 00:20:26.640 >> Then I'd say 100. 00:20:26.640 --> 00:20:30.200 >> 100, but let's say, so the fire codes are 100 feet. 00:20:30.200 --> 00:20:38.840 And then they, but there was a, you were saying that there was a desire to move from the fire codes to 500 feet. 00:20:38.840 --> 00:20:40.120 Is that what I heard? 00:20:40.120 --> 00:20:45.440 >> No, that was a city zoning setback in Greece to 500 that was proposed at that time. 00:20:45.440 --> 00:20:49.840 >> And the rationale was for what reason at that time? 00:20:49.840 --> 00:20:56.360 >> It's my understanding that one of the reasons why the reverse setback came back was because of the increased 00:20:56.360 --> 00:20:59.560 development to the south side where a lot of the existing gas well parks are at. 00:20:59.560 --> 00:21:03.120 And there was also the incident, well I shouldn't say incident, but 00:21:03.120 --> 00:21:09.960 the SUP involving McKenna Park, the gas wells that the range resources wanted to develop across from McKenna Park. 00:21:09.960 --> 00:21:17.720 That was the trigger event that caused council to consider a larger setback than what the fire code requires. 00:21:17.720 --> 00:21:22.320 The fire code is not interested in setbacks, they're interested in 00:21:22.320 --> 00:21:29.360 maximum distance between an ignition source, like a gas well or a gas well tank battery. 00:21:29.360 --> 00:21:35.680 To various types of uses, it doesn't say house, but it just various types of uses and 100 is the minimum. 00:21:35.680 --> 00:21:39.160 In some cases it's 300, but that's all we had. 00:21:39.160 --> 00:21:43.680 It wasn't that the council purposely designed to have the 100 foot setback. 00:21:43.680 --> 00:21:50.440 The fire code is the fire code, it's always been there, and that was just the rule that we used in addition to the gas well ordinance. 00:21:50.440 --> 00:21:57.040 Back then, the fire department, the fire marshal specifically, was the one who would process the gas well permit applications. 00:21:57.040 --> 00:22:00.520 And the planning department would process the plats, gas well plats. 00:22:00.520 --> 00:22:06.360 So that's the only thing that was there, but the purpose was, again, for fire safety purposes, 00:22:06.360 --> 00:22:11.320 not necessarily for the zoning, which came in 2010. 00:22:11.320 --> 00:22:14.560 >> I'll reserve the rest of my questions for the later section. 00:22:14.560 --> 00:22:16.400 >> Okay, do you have a question? 00:22:16.400 --> 00:22:20.200 >> Yes, if we can go back to slide eight, I just wanted to, I have a question. 00:22:20.200 --> 00:22:26.120 Because reading this a few times, this looks to me just like a standard kind of grandfather clause. 00:22:26.120 --> 00:22:29.640 It says no, legal does not recommend adding this provision. 00:22:29.640 --> 00:22:32.880 Can you give us a little background on that note? 00:22:32.880 --> 00:22:35.920 >> Well, and I may have to let Aaron speak to that a little bit more. 00:22:35.920 --> 00:22:42.840 In general, the concern is that we would have, as this table shows, we would have existing non-conformities. 00:22:42.840 --> 00:22:46.040 And I have a graphic, actually, that shows this a little bit better. 00:22:46.040 --> 00:22:49.240 So in this example, we looked at what's non-conforming today. 00:22:49.240 --> 00:22:50.880 Those are the lots that are in red. 00:22:50.880 --> 00:22:57.200 What would be non-conforming to the 500, were this language not added, would be those in orange. 00:22:57.200 --> 00:23:03.280 So in general, zoning and our land use plans seek to decrease non-conformities over time. 00:23:03.280 --> 00:23:08.160 So there's concern, number one, that we would be allowing the continuance of non-conformities. 00:23:08.160 --> 00:23:15.280 But then the issue becomes the issue of these lots being treated different than those lots when they're all not meeting the standard. 00:23:15.280 --> 00:23:20.360 So you would have, if something were to happen in this instance and 00:23:20.360 --> 00:23:26.120 a tornado came through, say the lots that are in red that are non-conforming wouldn't be allowed to rebuild their homes. 00:23:26.120 --> 00:23:28.920 Those that are in orange, if this language were added, would be able to rebuild. 00:23:28.920 --> 00:23:36.920 So just the complication created by telling one person on one side of the road, you can rebuild your home, but the other person, your neighbor, can't. 00:23:36.920 --> 00:23:40.080 Because we wrote some language into the code that allowed them to not be non-conforming. 00:23:40.080 --> 00:23:44.520 And legal has further analysis of that that I can certainly let Erin provide. 00:23:44.520 --> 00:23:48.960 But in general, those were the concerns from development services staff with this potential language. 00:23:48.960 --> 00:23:51.780 >> Commissioner Anderson. 00:23:51.780 --> 00:23:58.160 >> Does the state or does any, do they have a minimum recommendations for these setbacks? 00:23:58.160 --> 00:23:59.400 >> They do not, it's fine to say. 00:23:59.400 --> 00:24:03.920 >> They do not, so it's just arbitrary, we just kind of arbitrarily make up your own setbacks. 00:24:03.920 --> 00:24:07.960 >> Correct, and the setbacks vary across cities and across the state. 00:24:07.960 --> 00:24:12.480 It seems that the range of 250 to 300 is fairly common in some instances. 00:24:12.480 --> 00:24:14.760 I know Fort Worth has a 600 foot. 00:24:14.760 --> 00:24:18.320 Cities have various setbacks, we kind of fall in the middle of those ranges. 00:24:18.320 --> 00:24:19.120 >> Okay, thanks. 00:24:19.120 --> 00:24:19.620 >> Commissioner Cole. 00:24:21.620 --> 00:24:29.720 >> So my home happens to be in 250 of Gaswell, has been for 15 years, so if my house burns down or 00:24:29.720 --> 00:24:32.600 gets hit by a tornado, you're telling me I'm not going to be able to rebuild a house. 00:24:32.600 --> 00:24:33.880 >> Commissioner Cole, is your mic on? 00:24:33.880 --> 00:24:36.120 >> Yeah, sorry about that. 00:24:36.120 --> 00:24:37.200 >> Thank you, thank you. 00:24:37.200 --> 00:24:40.400 >> But, I mean, is that the jest of it? 00:24:40.400 --> 00:24:45.760 >> Potentially, yeah, if you are non-conforming, the way the code is written in non-conforming use, 00:24:45.760 --> 00:24:48.280 if it's destroyed by more than 50%, it cannot be rebuilt. 00:24:49.560 --> 00:24:52.240 And a house that's been there for 70 years cannot be rebuilt. 00:24:52.240 --> 00:24:58.880 >> We'd have to look at that particular case and see the timeline, but if it's non-conforming, that's the way the code is written. 00:24:58.880 --> 00:25:01.600 >> Commissioner Smith. 00:25:01.600 --> 00:25:02.720 >> Thank you, Chair. 00:25:02.720 --> 00:25:06.520 There's not a way to grandfather in non-conforming, even if there is a destruction. 00:25:06.520 --> 00:25:09.160 Where is that, within the letter of the law, where is that coming from? 00:25:09.160 --> 00:25:14.520 Is it coming from, is that the definition of the 50%, is that coming from Texas local government code? 00:25:14.520 --> 00:25:17.880 Is that coming from our development code, is that? 00:25:17.880 --> 00:25:19.160 >> That's within our development code. 00:25:19.160 --> 00:25:23.600 Is there not a way for us to amend the development code to where we could, in this scenario, 00:25:23.600 --> 00:25:30.400 saying that if your structure existed before the setback, making you non-conforming, does get destroyed. 00:25:30.400 --> 00:25:35.680 You have the ability to rebuild, or does it allow us to go past what the code is at the point in time we develop, 00:25:35.680 --> 00:25:40.560 because it was existing prior to the code being changed? 00:25:40.560 --> 00:25:42.780 Is that something we should talk about in close, rather than? 00:25:42.780 --> 00:25:43.280 >> What do you think? 00:25:43.280 --> 00:25:47.600 >> Sorry, Aaron. 00:25:47.600 --> 00:25:49.120 >> I'm sorry, Aaron. 00:25:49.120 --> 00:25:54.960 >> One thing that hasn't been discussed, remember, with non-conformities, it applies across the city. 00:25:54.960 --> 00:25:58.320 And so, if it's a- 00:25:58.320 --> 00:26:04.760 >> We can't specify the non-conformity for oil and gas setbacks, if non-conformity means a non-conformity. 00:26:04.760 --> 00:26:08.920 >> Because then, now you're treating different types of uses differently, those that are going to stay non-conforming. 00:26:08.920 --> 00:26:13.040 Now you've got a special class of non-conformities that we're going to allow to continue to rebuild. 00:26:13.040 --> 00:26:17.000 You're creating that scenario, and we have non-conformities all over the city. 00:26:17.000 --> 00:26:20.080 >> Yeah, sure. >> As long as they can continue to be used. 00:26:20.080 --> 00:26:27.520 But at some point, if they are destroyed by a fire or a tornado, and it's more than 50% and- 00:26:27.520 --> 00:26:32.040 >> And there's some non-conformities that are extremely good for safety reasons, 00:26:32.040 --> 00:26:41.440 like a building before the ADA was put in place and whatnot, and then those kinds of things where you need to abide by the code and be conforming at that point. 00:26:41.440 --> 00:26:46.680 >> And so that's where Haley's coming from, that you're now starting to treat non-conformities differently. 00:26:46.680 --> 00:26:52.840 You're only special if you live within so many feet of a gas well, but you're not special if you're elsewhere in the city. 00:26:52.840 --> 00:26:57.800 >> Yeah, I'd hate to split hairs down code on that, but I understand, I can see why Commissioner Cole's upset. 00:26:57.800 --> 00:27:01.800 >> Okay. >> All right. 00:27:01.800 --> 00:27:02.400 >> Thanks, Haley. 00:27:02.400 --> 00:27:07.680 >> I think that pretty much touches on everything I had for non-conformities, unless you guys have other questions. 00:27:07.680 --> 00:27:10.280 >> Chris Rebek. 00:27:10.280 --> 00:27:16.360 >> So are we going to touch on the rationales for the distances being proposed? 00:27:17.160 --> 00:27:18.920 >> Because that was sort of implied earlier. 00:27:18.920 --> 00:27:21.480 >> The, well, the rationale, as I said, council did- 00:27:21.480 --> 00:27:22.800 >> For the actual number. 00:27:22.800 --> 00:27:29.240 >> To my understanding, there isn't necessarily, if you're looking for a scientific basis or something like that, there simply isn't one. 00:27:29.240 --> 00:27:33.120 >> But what was the basis for council's decision on 500 feet is what I'm asking. 00:27:33.120 --> 00:27:39.480 >> It was based on this land use analysis and a desire to be somewhat similar to a Fort Worth study that 00:27:39.480 --> 00:27:45.880 established that a 600 foot setback from a wellhead in the city of Fort Worth could be considered a safe distance. 00:27:45.880 --> 00:27:50.240 Fort Worth's measurements are taken from wellhead to structure, ours are from pad site to structure. 00:27:50.240 --> 00:27:58.240 So when you run the numbers 500 feet from the pad site boundary as we measure it is roughly similar to the 600 feet from a wellhead. 00:27:58.240 --> 00:28:04.000 That was really the only further analysis beyond the land use data and just numbers that were discussed. 00:28:04.000 --> 00:28:11.640 >> And that's essentially a density argument that Fort Worth wanted a certain density on a minimum or 00:28:11.640 --> 00:28:15.920 maximum density of wellheads in these kinds of properties? 00:28:15.920 --> 00:28:17.960 >> No, no, in Fort Worth it's the same thing. 00:28:17.960 --> 00:28:26.520 They have a setback between a residential protected use that's considered for safety reasons a setback from the gas well itself. 00:28:26.520 --> 00:28:28.800 The only difference there is how they take their measurement. 00:28:28.800 --> 00:28:33.160 Theirs is from wellhead, ours is from pad site boundary, so typically the wellheads are in- 00:28:33.160 --> 00:28:39.880 >> So I guess what I'm asking, and I'm sorry, I shouldn't have interrupted, I guess what I'm asking is the rationale for 00:28:39.880 --> 00:28:45.520 whether it's we're cloning Fort Worth's 600 feet as our 500 feet or 00:28:45.520 --> 00:28:53.440 whether there's some other measure is the rationale for the particular distance safety, 00:28:53.440 --> 00:29:00.160 density, air quality, health and water effects, what's the rationale for the number? 00:29:00.160 --> 00:29:07.080 >> I believe it would be a mixture of all of those things, just speaking from what council has brought up at air quality, safety. 00:29:07.080 --> 00:29:14.440 All of those things were discussed, there's not data to solidify what those numbers would be. 00:29:14.440 --> 00:29:20.800 So we're basing it on the study from Fort Worth that was the closest comparable study that's been done. 00:29:20.800 --> 00:29:26.080 >> But there's nothing limiting us to following that Fort Worth study, is there? 00:29:26.080 --> 00:29:28.560 I mean- >> In terms of 600 versus 500? 00:29:28.560 --> 00:29:30.520 >> In terms of rationale. 00:29:30.520 --> 00:29:33.960 We're not, there's no requirement that we need to follow that Fort Worth study. 00:29:33.960 --> 00:29:35.440 >> Certainly not. 00:29:35.440 --> 00:29:40.800 >> And so then, this may be more of a question for legal and less for city planning. 00:29:40.800 --> 00:29:47.720 But what are our requirements in terms of takings, 00:29:47.720 --> 00:29:51.800 in terms of health and safety, in terms of fire code? 00:29:51.800 --> 00:29:58.000 What is the requirements of the city to these various stakeholders? 00:29:58.000 --> 00:30:02.760 >> Well, fire code I believe is a 100 foot standard. 00:30:02.760 --> 00:30:13.120 And as far as safety, this is all home rule authority that is the basis for these setbacks that are established. 00:30:13.120 --> 00:30:20.240 And I think Haley's right, I think there's a number of different factors that entered into the regulatory mindset. 00:30:20.240 --> 00:30:27.800 I don't know what Fort Worth, what theory predominated in their analysis or calculation. 00:30:27.800 --> 00:30:34.300 I don't really even know what theory, there was one theory alone that predominated with respect to dentin. 00:30:34.300 --> 00:30:38.160 I think it was a combination of different factors as Haley indicated. 00:30:38.160 --> 00:30:44.520 >> So do we have particular requirements in our city code or 00:30:44.520 --> 00:30:52.880 that govern our actions that would impact on this number that we need to follow? 00:30:52.880 --> 00:31:00.760 In other words, do we have a responsibility to say, if there's a study that says 1,000 foot is the better distance or 00:31:00.760 --> 00:31:05.080 half a mile is the better distance for a particular rationale. 00:31:05.080 --> 00:31:15.940 Is there a legal requirement that we should, must follow a particular rationale? 00:31:15.940 --> 00:31:26.240 >> Well, I think we would follow a given rationale if there were one that we could count on as being definitive for all situations. 00:31:26.240 --> 00:31:31.480 But there are a variety of studies that are out there, and a lot of them come to different conclusions. 00:31:31.480 --> 00:31:40.160 >> And so if there is a variety of studies, we throw up our hands and we say, 00:31:40.160 --> 00:31:42.880 well, there's a variety of studies and we're not going to do anything? 00:31:42.880 --> 00:31:45.200 >> No, I don't think that's what I said. 00:31:45.200 --> 00:31:47.640 >> No, I'm not trying to pin you down to that. 00:31:47.640 --> 00:31:52.640 >> Right, yeah, I think that the council spent a good long time and 00:31:52.640 --> 00:31:57.320 very carefully considered a number of factors in coming up with these numbers. 00:31:57.320 --> 00:32:03.240 I think that there are some people who would like to revisit those numbers for one reason or another. 00:32:03.240 --> 00:32:08.000 And I think that this is part of what this process is all about. 00:32:08.000 --> 00:32:15.400 It's part of the governmental process of determining what numbers are the most appropriate for the reverse setbacks. 00:32:15.400 --> 00:32:20.880 And that's not to say that one is per se better than the other. 00:32:20.880 --> 00:32:24.760 I think it's just part of the governmental process. 00:32:24.760 --> 00:32:31.160 >> And if it does help, the information was presented to council regarding what the cost and 00:32:31.160 --> 00:32:35.760 time frame would be for Denton to conduct its own study, similar to what Fort Worth did. 00:32:35.760 --> 00:32:39.840 And they, at the time, have chosen not to move forward with that effort. 00:32:39.840 --> 00:32:45.880 But that information was presented to them as an option that if we wanted that basis based on our own data, 00:32:45.880 --> 00:32:49.440 such a study could be conducted, but they've chosen not to move forward with that to date. 00:32:49.440 --> 00:32:55.560 >> So if council has moved this issue back to our work study group for 00:32:55.560 --> 00:33:01.160 us to make clarifications and decisions about, what is it that, 00:33:01.160 --> 00:33:07.240 is council simply asking whether 500 is a number that we can agree to? 00:33:07.240 --> 00:33:14.440 >> So if I could interject, on November 6th, this is going to come back to us for our official recommendation and vote back to council. 00:33:14.440 --> 00:33:18.440 So this is just the introductory conversation about what's happening at the city level. 00:33:18.440 --> 00:33:26.840 In a month from now or two weeks from now, we will actually make a recommendation that goes to the city council for them to actually vote to change this. 00:33:26.840 --> 00:33:34.200 As part of the development code amendment process, we're required to hold two public hearings, one at Planning and Zoning Commission, one at City Council. 00:33:34.200 --> 00:33:40.120 So rather than bring this to you all cold on November 6th, which is the tentative date for public hearing, 00:33:40.120 --> 00:33:46.120 Richard decided it would be best to have an introductory work session like this to brief you all on where we're at, what council has discussed to date. 00:33:46.120 --> 00:33:53.480 So that when you see a draft ordinance or a draft of the code amendment before you on the 6th, you have a little background data to base that decision on. 00:33:53.480 --> 00:34:00.640 >> And I appreciate everyone clarifying because this is my second event here, so thank you. 00:34:00.640 --> 00:34:01.800 >> Commissioner Pernetta. 00:34:01.800 --> 00:34:11.320 >> Yeah, and I just kind of wanted to kind of reset real quick because with regards to Commissioner Beck's questions. 00:34:11.320 --> 00:34:14.560 There is no study that sets a number, right? 00:34:14.560 --> 00:34:18.960 I think Colorado has their setback somewhere about 1,200 feet. 00:34:18.960 --> 00:34:26.080 Fort Worth is at 600 compared to us, Fort Worth's production is significantly less dense than Denton. 00:34:26.080 --> 00:34:33.880 We know that this is air, and air doesn't stop blowing particulates after 1,000 feet, which is the problem. 00:34:33.880 --> 00:34:41.640 Right now, we have 1,000 for the setbacks, not the reverse setbacks. 00:34:41.640 --> 00:34:50.400 What we're looking at right now on this screen is simply how close we can put new developments to an existing well. 00:34:50.400 --> 00:34:56.200 And the numbers we're looking at are primarily based not on science but 00:34:56.200 --> 00:35:04.160 on how much it would affect people who are already living in this town compared to their proximity, right? 00:35:04.160 --> 00:35:08.360 >> This is simply an analysis of how many parcels are within those acreages. 00:35:08.360 --> 00:35:09.520 >> Okay, all right. 00:35:09.520 --> 00:35:18.720 And I just wanted to kind of get to that because as somebody who's son has asthma, it's kind of a big deal. 00:35:18.720 --> 00:35:25.560 And I know that 500 isn't going to be far enough. 00:35:25.560 --> 00:35:31.640 I know that 500, according to some things that I've seen, isn't necessarily far enough to be safe in the event of a fire. 00:35:31.640 --> 00:35:41.040 But what we're doing is attempting to, I guess, put a little bit of additional distance from where we are right now, I think, all right? 00:35:41.040 --> 00:35:43.800 >> It's definitely a discussion. 00:35:43.800 --> 00:35:45.360 >> Okay, all right, thanks. 00:35:45.360 --> 00:35:46.840 >> Commissioner Beck. 00:35:46.840 --> 00:35:51.320 >> And I want to beat a slightly related dead horse here a little bit. 00:35:51.320 --> 00:35:59.360 If we are having a discussion about 500 and the ramifications of that and 00:35:59.360 --> 00:36:05.000 then there are rationales that come forward in the future that say, 00:36:05.000 --> 00:36:11.160 well, we do need the other 500 or we need another 1,000, so we need to push it out to 1,500. 00:36:11.160 --> 00:36:17.320 We'll be revisiting this discussion at a future date 00:36:17.320 --> 00:36:24.960 with essentially the same arguments, the same amount of taking, the same amount of owns, the same amount of developments. 00:36:24.960 --> 00:36:30.440 But we will have allowed non-conformities to then, I mean, 00:36:30.440 --> 00:36:39.800 they won't have occurred by our 500 foot rule or 200 foot rule, but they will occur in a hypothetical 1,500 foot rule. 00:36:39.800 --> 00:36:42.960 And it's not like we're not thinking about those things. 00:36:42.960 --> 00:36:48.640 So I guess I urge us to think about those things a little bit. 00:36:48.640 --> 00:36:52.400 >> Any other questions right now? 00:36:54.400 --> 00:36:56.680 I assume you have more slides. 00:36:56.680 --> 00:36:58.640 >> Yes, all right. 00:36:58.640 --> 00:37:01.400 So I think you got the gist of the non-conformities. 00:37:01.400 --> 00:37:04.560 Again, this is the language council directed us to add. 00:37:04.560 --> 00:37:07.600 There are concerns on the staff and the legal department side with that. 00:37:07.600 --> 00:37:11.800 But this is the draft language that would come forward to you all on the 6th as it is today. 00:37:11.800 --> 00:37:20.920 So the third option or the third aspect of this code amendment that I wanted to touch on would be the variance options. 00:37:20.920 --> 00:37:26.480 As I mentioned earlier, for gas well operators, if say the 1,000 foot setback applies to them, 00:37:26.480 --> 00:37:29.680 they have three different options to apply for a reduction in that. 00:37:29.680 --> 00:37:34.160 One of those is a staff option where if they have multiple production sites, 00:37:34.160 --> 00:37:38.240 they can basically put in writing that they will limit or 00:37:38.240 --> 00:37:42.960 close operations at one site and will be able to add more wells at a different site. 00:37:42.960 --> 00:37:44.920 So that's one variance option for them. 00:37:44.920 --> 00:37:50.520 They can also go to ZBA to seek a reduction down to the minimum setback if they meet the hardship criteria. 00:37:50.520 --> 00:37:58.680 Or they could get a waiver signed by 100% of the owners of protected uses within the setback to reduce that number. 00:37:58.680 --> 00:38:05.280 So operators, as it stands, have three different choices they can go to if they need to seek relief from the 1,000 foot setback. 00:38:05.280 --> 00:38:12.520 So with increasing the reverse setback from 250 to 500 to help with the potential takings claims that Legal has mentioned, 00:38:12.520 --> 00:38:19.600 we're introducing two options for a protected use developer or owner to seek similar reductions. 00:38:19.600 --> 00:38:26.560 So the first of those options for them would be to go to ZBA through the standard hardship variance process. 00:38:26.560 --> 00:38:34.280 That could reduce the reverse setback from 500 down to 250 which we again establish is that reverse minimum setback. 00:38:34.280 --> 00:38:39.320 They would have to be able to prove that they meet all of the hardship criteria that exist in our code today. 00:38:39.320 --> 00:38:46.680 So prove that there are special circumstances on their property, that there would be no adverse impacts to the city or the surrounding area. 00:38:46.680 --> 00:38:51.220 That there's reasonableness to their request based upon the conditions in the area. 00:38:51.220 --> 00:38:56.040 And in addition to those, we would introduce some specific criteria for protected uses. 00:38:56.040 --> 00:39:01.360 And those would be the reasonable use of the surface of their property by the owner or developer. 00:39:01.360 --> 00:39:05.480 The availability of alternative site designs or subdivision layouts. 00:39:05.480 --> 00:39:11.080 So if someone was bringing forward a subdivision and saying we need to reduce this so that we can add ten more lots, did they look at other options? 00:39:11.080 --> 00:39:17.000 Are there ways that they could reconfigure the site that wouldn't render the need for that reduction? 00:39:17.000 --> 00:39:22.000 And then finally, compatibility with existing gas well development site plans or plats. 00:39:22.000 --> 00:39:27.560 Almost all of the sites within the city have a gas well plat on them today that establishes the access routes to the pad site. 00:39:27.560 --> 00:39:30.040 That's something that we can't take away. 00:39:30.040 --> 00:39:32.040 Our code doesn't allow us to do that. 00:39:32.040 --> 00:39:35.800 It stipulates that when someone plats within a gas well plat, they have to provide for 00:39:35.800 --> 00:39:43.960 similar, the same access or some alternative that the operators approve, so we would honor that same thing here and ensure that access to the site is maintained. 00:39:43.960 --> 00:39:48.480 And just so you all know, a ZBA vote for a variance would require a three quarters vote. 00:39:48.480 --> 00:39:52.520 All of their decisions require six out of seven members to grant that variance. 00:39:52.520 --> 00:39:53.240 >> Commissioner Smith. 00:39:53.240 --> 00:39:59.960 >> So back to Commissioner Cole's question then, they'll say that a fire does burn down his building, his home. 00:39:59.960 --> 00:40:03.600 But do you mean that he can go apply for a ZBA approval for it? 00:40:03.600 --> 00:40:11.560 >> No, a variance would be for someone developing a new use site, it could not help a non-conformity. 00:40:11.560 --> 00:40:14.120 >> Why is that? 00:40:14.120 --> 00:40:21.520 Why is there a delineation then of, you can go down to 250 if you're building new, but you can't be down to 250 if you're a non-conformity. 00:40:21.520 --> 00:40:32.240 I get it, if Jason's house was 100 feet away from the gas well, I'd get that because it's past the minimum reverse setback, but why the difference there? 00:40:32.240 --> 00:40:34.120 >> Is that a closed session conversation? 00:40:34.120 --> 00:40:37.160 >> It's not necessarily a closed session conversation, but you know. 00:40:37.160 --> 00:40:38.680 >> You just think I'm an idiot, Jerry, I know. 00:40:38.680 --> 00:40:45.120 >> No, it sort of gets into the rationale of legal nonconformities. 00:40:45.120 --> 00:40:49.240 The whole idea of legal nonconformities is that you want, 00:40:49.240 --> 00:40:55.640 eventually, all properties to fall within the regulations of the municipality. 00:40:55.640 --> 00:41:00.400 And part of that is you're anticipating that some of them are going to go away. 00:41:00.400 --> 00:41:02.640 You don't apologize for that. 00:41:02.640 --> 00:41:05.640 Sometimes that happens. 00:41:05.640 --> 00:41:16.120 You don't impose a regulation on someone as an ex post facto law that they can't meet while living in a particular location. 00:41:16.120 --> 00:41:23.320 And so due process requires that you permit them to remain in place under the laws that they came in under. 00:41:23.320 --> 00:41:25.800 That's simply a requirement. 00:41:25.800 --> 00:41:31.080 And but that's not still the case when, I don't know, 00:41:31.080 --> 00:41:38.400 somebody's sign falls down or their house falls down or burns down or what have you. 00:41:38.400 --> 00:41:43.480 The expectation is that they will rebuild under the new standard, whatever that is. 00:41:43.480 --> 00:41:56.020 And so if you provide some other method for them to come back in permissively, 00:41:56.020 --> 00:42:04.680 that's something that's above and beyond the ordinary application of the legally nonconforming use standard. 00:42:04.680 --> 00:42:09.080 >> Okay, Mr. Anderson. 00:42:09.080 --> 00:42:10.960 >> I agree, thank you, by the way. 00:42:10.960 --> 00:42:13.040 I agree, but I kind of disagree with you at the same time. 00:42:13.040 --> 00:42:19.840 Because if you're in a subdivision, and all of a sudden we do set back at 500 and that becomes a nonconformity. 00:42:19.840 --> 00:42:22.560 You have a house in the middle of a subdivision that burns down. 00:42:22.560 --> 00:42:24.440 We're not going to allow them to rebuild. 00:42:24.440 --> 00:42:27.960 So you're going to have a couple of vacant lots between homes. 00:42:27.960 --> 00:42:29.640 That just doesn't seem right to me. 00:42:29.640 --> 00:42:31.560 I mean, that's just my personal opinion. 00:42:31.560 --> 00:42:35.480 I think they should be allowed to rebuild in a neighborhood. 00:42:35.480 --> 00:42:36.480 I just don't understand. 00:42:37.520 --> 00:42:44.360 >> And that's certainly where individual city ordinances come in for those decisions to be made. 00:42:44.360 --> 00:42:49.360 The limitation for legally nonconforming use is kind of a one-sided limitation. 00:42:49.360 --> 00:42:51.880 It sets a floor, not a ceiling. 00:42:51.880 --> 00:42:58.000 And so we have to allow in zoning regulations for 00:42:58.000 --> 00:43:05.200 legally nonconforming uses if the regulations change to make an existing structure nonconforming. 00:43:05.200 --> 00:43:09.200 They're legally nonconforming as a matter of due process. 00:43:09.200 --> 00:43:16.800 But there's no constitutional standard that sets a ceiling for that or otherwise limits it. 00:43:16.800 --> 00:43:25.120 Yeah, you can set a standard that does provide some protection along those lines. 00:43:25.120 --> 00:43:30.400 You could even, for that matter, rezone everybody if you want to. 00:43:30.400 --> 00:43:33.360 But there's a number of ways of dealing with that. 00:43:33.360 --> 00:43:37.760 But it's not part of the legally nonconforming calculus. 00:43:37.760 --> 00:43:47.840 >> So Haley, as a matter of discussion, it seems like this language is super ambiguous. 00:43:47.840 --> 00:43:55.040 And I would love to see if the city could actually square this up to measurable items that we could see what hardship is. 00:43:55.040 --> 00:44:04.720 There's special reasonableness, reasonable availability of alternative site designs based on who's assessment availability. 00:44:04.720 --> 00:44:10.040 I don't know if this is the actual language being used for hardship process. 00:44:10.040 --> 00:44:17.120 But my two cents would be, let's clarify what the person has to do to meet the hardship. 00:44:17.120 --> 00:44:22.320 And it's an equal field for everybody, rather than having this in different city employees. 00:44:22.320 --> 00:44:28.280 It just adds an array of approval abilities for hardships. 00:44:28.280 --> 00:44:32.400 >> We can certainly try to further clarify these additional criteria for this. 00:44:32.400 --> 00:44:40.520 The standard hardship criteria would be a bit more of an amendment because those are standards applicable to variances across the board in the city. 00:44:40.520 --> 00:44:43.160 >> And that's the language we use in our city? 00:44:43.160 --> 00:44:48.240 >> Yes, and Jerry, can you attest to, is that similar to what state law requires? 00:44:48.240 --> 00:44:50.760 Is it not the standard- >> Which language are we talking about here? 00:44:50.760 --> 00:44:55.320 >> The special circumstances and reasonableness based on a condition. 00:44:55.320 --> 00:44:59.800 >> I don't remember what the criteria are. 00:44:59.800 --> 00:45:03.840 >> I believe ours are similar to the state center, but we can look into it. 00:45:03.840 --> 00:45:09.360 Just so you know, that change would affect across the board rather than just this particular instance. 00:45:09.360 --> 00:45:10.760 >> Understood, it seems like a moving target. 00:45:10.760 --> 00:45:20.600 >> Yeah, it is rather vague, but at the same time somewhat hard to prove that you meet those standards. 00:45:21.760 --> 00:45:30.960 >> The other variance option that council kind of directed us to move forward with was similar to what operators are allowed. 00:45:30.960 --> 00:45:36.960 And that if they can meet certain criteria, staff can approve a reduction in setback that isn't all the way down to the minimum. 00:45:36.960 --> 00:45:40.520 It's to 50% of the difference between the minimum and the required. 00:45:40.520 --> 00:45:50.440 So for an operator that has a 1,000 foot setback and the minimum is 500, we can get it to 675, not all the way to 500, through the staff process. 00:45:50.440 --> 00:45:56.560 So this would be similar in that if they can meet these criteria, staff could allow for a reduction down to 375 feet. 00:45:56.560 --> 00:45:59.960 So half of the difference between 500 and 250. 00:45:59.960 --> 00:46:05.320 And in these cases, the administrative relief could only be granted if they can prove 00:46:05.320 --> 00:46:10.400 that the reverse setback would result in 50% or less of the subject property being buildable. 00:46:10.400 --> 00:46:17.760 And if they have applied all of the applicable alternative development standards that we are proposing to allow for. 00:46:18.840 --> 00:46:24.240 So what that looks like is in the code as it is today, if you remember for residential subdivisions, 00:46:24.240 --> 00:46:34.480 we offer a cluster subdivision design where basically the minimum lot sizes are reduced from 7,000 in some zoning districts down to 2,000, 2,500. 00:46:34.480 --> 00:46:40.520 The setbacks are reduced for the lot, so it basically allows for a much denser type of subdivision. 00:46:40.520 --> 00:46:45.960 So for residential, that could be applied and all of the cluster subdivision standards could be utilized 00:46:45.960 --> 00:46:50.640 without having to rezone your property to PD, which is the standard for city-wide. 00:46:50.640 --> 00:46:51.800 >> Commissioner Panetta. 00:46:51.800 --> 00:46:55.400 >> Yeah, I have a question, I don't see it in here. 00:46:55.400 --> 00:47:00.880 My understanding is right now production is actually dropping in the area in terms of fracking and stuff. 00:47:00.880 --> 00:47:10.280 Do we have anything in place that addresses whether or not wells are capped, closed, that kind of thing going forward? 00:47:10.280 --> 00:47:16.960 Would we reevaluate it or is it, once there's ever been a well there, it will always be applied? 00:47:16.960 --> 00:47:22.680 >> These standards are applicable to gas wells that are existing and in production, active wells, if you will. 00:47:22.680 --> 00:47:27.320 Once a well is plugged and abandoned, the code currently does not have any setback requirements at all. 00:47:27.320 --> 00:47:36.000 That's something that we know is a gap in our existing ordinance, but it's not within the scope of what council directed us to do with this. 00:47:36.000 --> 00:47:42.800 But these standards essentially go away once a well is plugged and a site is abandoned and remediated in accordance with state law. 00:47:42.800 --> 00:47:43.520 >> Okay, thank you. 00:47:43.520 --> 00:47:47.280 >> Commissioner Cole. 00:47:47.280 --> 00:47:48.160 >> Thank you, Chair. 00:47:48.160 --> 00:47:53.680 So what about the properties that years ago the city 00:47:53.680 --> 00:47:59.240 annexed and gave special agreements on setbacks? 00:47:59.240 --> 00:48:04.240 Do those go away that were negotiated during annexation with property owners? 00:48:04.240 --> 00:48:06.920 Or how does that work? 00:48:06.920 --> 00:48:10.400 >> I guess I'm not aware of- 00:48:10.400 --> 00:48:13.160 >> I think what you may be talking about is the non-annexation agreements? 00:48:13.160 --> 00:48:15.480 >> During annexation agreements, yes. 00:48:15.480 --> 00:48:17.800 >> But they were non-annexation agreements, these were for- 00:48:17.800 --> 00:48:22.160 >> So they were annexed, but during annexation negotiations, 00:48:22.160 --> 00:48:25.400 asked for certain setbacks and were given certain setbacks. 00:48:25.400 --> 00:48:28.800 >> I'm not familiar with that, are you? 00:48:34.480 --> 00:48:36.200 >> Aaron Lialigan, City Attorney. 00:48:36.200 --> 00:48:43.560 I'm not familiar with that actual type of provision being inserted as part of the annexations. 00:48:43.560 --> 00:48:50.440 The majority of the annexations that occurred that didn't get NAAs were the involuntary annexations, which were completed for the most part. 00:48:50.440 --> 00:48:55.720 Then we had three different areas of the city that had a special 00:48:55.720 --> 00:49:02.080 negotiations per state statute, but most of those dealt with municipal services, 00:49:02.080 --> 00:49:04.640 at least a lot of the bargaining and some were given that. 00:49:04.640 --> 00:49:13.680 As far as during those discussions where we had discussed anything about setbacks and gas wells, that didn't come into that discussion. 00:49:13.680 --> 00:49:20.560 I was involved in the past, not the 2010, but the 2015, 2016. 00:49:20.560 --> 00:49:21.520 >> Okay. 00:49:21.520 --> 00:49:23.160 >> Three, two. 00:49:23.160 --> 00:49:25.720 >> If it's something that old, I'm not as familiar with that. 00:49:25.720 --> 00:49:31.120 I know the majority of the annexations that are pending, or I'm sorry, that were completed. 00:49:31.120 --> 00:49:36.040 >> And those that are pending via non-annexation agreements, 2000 on is what I'm familiar with. 00:49:36.040 --> 00:49:38.840 >> That were given, granted. 00:49:38.840 --> 00:49:40.520 >> And that may certainly be the case. 00:49:40.520 --> 00:49:46.160 I mean, I know we can ask work with staff to try to find those annexation ordinances and 00:49:46.160 --> 00:49:50.400 maybe they can get together with you offline to see if they can have some easier learning than that. 00:49:50.400 --> 00:49:55.960 >> All I want to know is, does this supersede that? 00:49:55.960 --> 00:49:57.440 If that exists. 00:49:57.440 --> 00:50:00.160 >> It depends on the facts at hand. 00:50:00.160 --> 00:50:07.320 If they were annexed into the city, and there was no development, and then we instituted the 250 foot setbacks with the 500, 00:50:07.320 --> 00:50:13.120 and then development comes, they're going to be caught by, or subject to the 500 or the 250 foot setback. 00:50:13.120 --> 00:50:19.960 >> And maybe that what you're referring to is the master plan communities, the Colen Hunter ranches. 00:50:19.960 --> 00:50:26.520 And they did have some gas well setback provisions that were negotiated and 00:50:26.520 --> 00:50:33.040 established within those MPC regulations, but that's after they were already annexed into the city. 00:50:33.040 --> 00:50:40.120 And so, that was a process that was set up by ordinance to allow for 00:50:40.120 --> 00:50:45.960 that in the event that you have a master plan community like those were that 00:50:45.960 --> 00:50:53.400 provided for a variety of uses and to have some customized standards that applied for 00:50:53.400 --> 00:51:02.160 very, very large comprehensive developments, and so that was consistent with the ordinances that existed at the time. 00:51:02.160 --> 00:51:07.520 But no, they could not be subjected to the MPC process unless and 00:51:07.520 --> 00:51:11.360 until they came into the city as part of an annexation. 00:51:11.360 --> 00:51:12.280 >> Thank you. 00:51:12.280 --> 00:51:13.280 >> Thank you, Jerry, for that. 00:51:13.280 --> 00:51:18.920 >> To clarify Commissioner Cole's question though, this would not override an MPC agreement. 00:51:18.920 --> 00:51:25.800 >> No, until they think of the MPC as a separate DDC and they're subject to their own rules. 00:51:25.800 --> 00:51:26.560 >> That's helpful, thank you. 00:51:26.560 --> 00:51:31.720 Back to you, Haley. 00:51:31.720 --> 00:51:42.080 >> Yeah, so where we're at with this is the staff variance possibility would apply if more than 50% of the site is affected by the reverse setback. 00:51:42.080 --> 00:51:48.360 And then for residential subdivisions, they would additionally have to at least attempt applying our cluster subdivision standards to 00:51:48.360 --> 00:51:54.800 maintain as much buildability back as possible, and then for any other protected use that isn't a residential subdivision, 00:51:54.800 --> 00:52:01.480 we would allow for certain reductions in addition to the minor modifications that the code already allows staff to approve. 00:52:01.480 --> 00:52:07.280 So that would be a 20% increase in building height and building coverage to give them essentially more density on the lot. 00:52:07.280 --> 00:52:12.080 And then a decrease by 20% in the minimum parking and minimum unit size. 00:52:12.080 --> 00:52:18.520 And then if this combination of standards does not yield them a comparable result or a desirable result, 00:52:18.520 --> 00:52:23.440 they could still go through the ZBA hardship process if they felt they had a hardship case. 00:52:23.440 --> 00:52:26.640 And this is just an example of kind of what that would look like. 00:52:26.640 --> 00:52:34.080 This is a site off of Windsor where the property is owned by a church in this instance, which is a protected use. 00:52:34.080 --> 00:52:37.080 They have a gas well site that immediately adjoins their property. 00:52:37.080 --> 00:52:41.320 The red buffer shows what that 250 foot setback looks like today. 00:52:41.320 --> 00:52:44.520 It encumbers 39% of their property. 00:52:44.520 --> 00:52:48.160 If there was a 500 foot setback applicable, that would be the green circle. 00:52:48.160 --> 00:52:50.120 That would encumber 96% of their property. 00:52:50.120 --> 00:52:54.960 So they would meet that 50% threshold to be considered for a staff reduction. 00:52:54.960 --> 00:52:59.320 So staff could, in theory, reduce that as low as 375 feet and 00:52:59.320 --> 00:53:03.600 gain them almost 30% of their property back into developability. 00:53:03.600 --> 00:53:07.400 So if that were enough for them to develop, they could move forward under that perhaps. 00:53:07.400 --> 00:53:11.840 If not, they could go to ZBA for further reduction. 00:53:11.840 --> 00:53:12.940 >> Mr. Beck. 00:53:12.940 --> 00:53:15.120 >> So in that picture, can you flip back? 00:53:15.120 --> 00:53:16.120 There we go. 00:53:16.120 --> 00:53:21.360 In the 50% reduction orange line, the 375, 00:53:21.360 --> 00:53:28.640 I know these are kind of cartoon eyeballs and not precise surveys. 00:53:28.640 --> 00:53:34.120 But that one house in the southwest corner that's basically on the property line would 00:53:34.120 --> 00:53:38.740 then also become non-conforming? 00:53:38.740 --> 00:53:41.880 >> Are you referring to the houses down here? 00:53:41.880 --> 00:53:46.700 So yes, if the 500 foot reverse setback were adopted and 00:53:46.700 --> 00:53:51.400 the language that we looked at earlier is not added to the code, yes, the homes and 00:53:51.400 --> 00:53:56.080 the lots that are within this green radius would become non-conforming. 00:53:56.080 --> 00:53:59.360 If you all choose to recommend and council adopts that language that we looked at earlier 00:53:59.360 --> 00:54:04.920 that would essentially prevent them from becoming non-conforming to the 500, then they would 00:54:04.920 --> 00:54:10.200 be considered legally conforming uses still as they are today to the 250. 00:54:10.200 --> 00:54:11.200 >> Okay. 00:54:11.200 --> 00:54:12.200 Thank you. 00:54:12.200 --> 00:54:16.000 >> All right. 00:54:16.000 --> 00:54:21.000 And then the fourth and final topic for this work session is some clarification on how 00:54:21.000 --> 00:54:24.880 reverse setbacks are measured, particularly at parks. 00:54:24.880 --> 00:54:28.240 So a public park is a protected use. 00:54:28.240 --> 00:54:33.480 Basically the DDC defines that the reverse setback measurement is taken from either the 00:54:33.480 --> 00:54:38.000 closest point of the proposed structure to be occupied by a protected use in a straight 00:54:38.000 --> 00:54:43.440 line to the closest boundary designated for the gas well site or for a residential subdivision 00:54:43.440 --> 00:54:48.680 plot it has to be taken from the undeveloped residential lot boundary to the closest boundary 00:54:48.680 --> 00:54:50.660 designated for the gas well site. 00:54:50.660 --> 00:54:55.000 For something such as a park that doesn't have occupied structures typically, that leaves 00:54:55.000 --> 00:54:58.640 it very vague as to where those measurements are taken. 00:54:58.640 --> 00:55:01.560 In the past this wasn't necessarily an issue. 00:55:01.560 --> 00:55:06.360 Very few of our parks are even touched by the 250 foot, but with the 500 foot we did 00:55:06.360 --> 00:55:12.120 find McKenna Park in particular is significantly within that 500 foot setback. 00:55:12.120 --> 00:55:16.640 So staff is proposing to add some clarifying language to state that for the purpose of 00:55:16.640 --> 00:55:20.680 a setback measurement at public parks, a structure shall be considered any improvement such as 00:55:20.680 --> 00:55:25.560 a building, playground equipment, pool, splash pad, clearly delineated ball field or court 00:55:25.560 --> 00:55:26.680 or pavilion. 00:55:26.680 --> 00:55:31.520 This would not include flat work such as parking lots, sidewalks or trails. 00:55:31.520 --> 00:55:36.360 Just to show you where this concern came from, again McKenna Park was the driver for this. 00:55:36.360 --> 00:55:40.800 They are 9% of the park is within the 250 foot today, but there's no improvements in 00:55:40.800 --> 00:55:42.300 that area. 00:55:42.300 --> 00:55:45.920 With the 500 foot, 40% of the park would be encumbered by the setback and they do have 00:55:45.920 --> 00:55:49.760 improvements such as the ball court and some pavilions that are within there. 00:55:49.760 --> 00:55:53.480 So we wanted to make sure we understood for our parks department moving forward what this 00:55:53.480 --> 00:55:58.680 would mean as they possibly have other park line dedicated or developed in proximity to 00:55:58.680 --> 00:56:01.920 Gasswells on the south side of town. 00:56:01.920 --> 00:56:04.840 And then additionally we are seeking some guidance from you all. 00:56:04.840 --> 00:56:10.280 We would also recommend extending the same measurement technique to other similar protected 00:56:10.280 --> 00:56:15.600 uses that have outdoor recreation components such as schools, multi-family daycares. 00:56:15.600 --> 00:56:17.000 It's currently not addressed in our code. 00:56:17.000 --> 00:56:21.280 They would be measured to the building since that's the occupable structure. 00:56:21.280 --> 00:56:25.520 But that is one area where we were kind of considering back and forth on which way to 00:56:25.520 --> 00:56:29.300 take this and it seems most consistent that we would extend the same protection for other 00:56:29.300 --> 00:56:30.920 outdoor recreation uses. 00:56:30.920 --> 00:56:34.760 But I wanted to get some feedback from you all on that before we add that language into 00:56:34.760 --> 00:56:35.760 the code. 00:56:35.760 --> 00:56:41.840 I don't know if anyone has any thoughts on that one. 00:56:41.840 --> 00:56:47.360 It would seem reasonable to extend it if we're looking at parks to outdoor spaces at schools 00:56:47.360 --> 00:56:48.360 and the like. 00:56:48.360 --> 00:56:49.360 Okay. 00:56:49.360 --> 00:56:53.200 Then we can certainly bring back a red line of the code that includes that measurement 00:56:53.200 --> 00:56:54.200 technique. 00:56:54.200 --> 00:56:58.520 And again, just as a reminder, the next steps for this would be the dual public hearing 00:56:58.520 --> 00:56:59.720 process. 00:56:59.720 --> 00:57:04.680 So as it is now, we are planning to notice the public hearing for the November 6th Planning 00:57:04.680 --> 00:57:09.360 and Zoning Commission meeting and then subsequently to City Council on November 19th if you all 00:57:09.360 --> 00:57:11.920 make a recommendation on the 6th. 00:57:11.920 --> 00:57:14.960 And that is all I have for you guys so I'm happy to answer other questions. 00:57:14.960 --> 00:57:15.960 We have some questions. 00:57:15.960 --> 00:57:17.880 Christian or Bec? 00:57:17.880 --> 00:57:22.080 So can we flip back to that picture just for a second that you showed me, Kenna Park. 00:57:22.080 --> 00:57:29.560 So we're talking about playground equipment and everything as being the site from which 00:57:29.560 --> 00:57:30.560 we measure. 00:57:30.560 --> 00:57:38.380 Do we have language in our code that delineates use? 00:57:38.380 --> 00:57:45.000 Is there a difference in the trail on the, what do you call, what's the green space that 00:57:45.000 --> 00:57:48.000 runs between the lakes? 00:57:48.000 --> 00:57:55.640 The green belt, thank you. 00:57:55.640 --> 00:57:57.640 I knew this green was in there somehow. 00:57:57.640 --> 00:58:04.560 The green belt primarily trail, maybe some outhouses or whatever, some parking. 00:58:04.560 --> 00:58:11.800 Is there a distinction between use, that kind of outdoor recreational use and outdoor recreational 00:58:11.800 --> 00:58:21.120 use say at a school or a hospital playground or something like that where there's clearly 00:58:21.120 --> 00:58:28.880 a group of our citizens that are maybe more vulnerable than bicyclists going between the 00:58:28.880 --> 00:58:31.400 lakes? 00:58:31.400 --> 00:58:35.200 Flat work as we've got it proposed would be excluded altogether because flat work doesn't 00:58:35.200 --> 00:58:40.200 constitute a structure and the code did specify a structure so we went with that same thought 00:58:40.200 --> 00:58:45.320 process so as it stands a trail regardless of whether it's at a park or a school or anywhere 00:58:45.320 --> 00:58:48.600 else wouldn't be, the measurement wouldn't be taken to that. 00:58:48.600 --> 00:58:54.520 I meant more for apples to apples so if we choose a structure, the outhouse, the whatever 00:58:54.520 --> 00:59:03.200 improvement counts as an improvement, do we have rules in our code such that we delineate 00:59:03.200 --> 00:59:10.240 typical use or would this, would we just be giving a blanket to all such outdoor kind 00:59:10.240 --> 00:59:11.240 of development? 00:59:11.240 --> 00:59:12.240 I think I see what you're saying. 00:59:12.240 --> 00:59:15.960 So the primary use of the property would still have to be one of the defined protected uses 00:59:15.960 --> 00:59:20.380 so if it's a playground at a daycare then yes with this measurement technique we could 00:59:20.380 --> 00:59:26.700 measure to the playground at a daycare versus if an office building had a playground outside 00:59:26.700 --> 00:59:29.240 because kids occasionally go there with their employees. 00:59:29.240 --> 00:59:33.760 The office building is not a protected use so that wouldn't affect that particular playground. 00:59:33.760 --> 00:59:34.760 Does that answer your question? 00:59:34.760 --> 00:59:35.760 That answers my question. 00:59:35.760 --> 00:59:36.760 Thank you. 00:59:36.760 --> 00:59:39.760 Commissioner Panetta, you still have a question? 00:59:39.760 --> 00:59:41.800 Give me a second. 00:59:41.800 --> 00:59:42.800 Yep. 00:59:42.800 --> 00:59:46.600 Do you have more slides or is this the conclusion? 00:59:46.600 --> 00:59:47.600 No, that was it. 00:59:47.600 --> 00:59:53.640 But the one question I had at the beginning I still have now and I certainly appreciate 00:59:53.640 --> 01:00:00.880 especially knowing Commissioner Panetta's family situation, the health risks of this 01:00:00.880 --> 01:00:05.640 but I'm struggling to understand the rationale. 01:00:05.640 --> 01:00:13.280 It does, I wish I had more information about the precipice of what took place to change 01:00:13.280 --> 01:00:23.000 this and moreover probably the legality of removing 4400 acres of property owner's property 01:00:23.000 --> 01:00:30.080 from use, not only for their investment, personal or otherwise, but also taking that off the 01:00:30.080 --> 01:00:35.000 tax rolls and the cost to the city and I think where I am is a tension of understanding the 01:00:35.000 --> 01:00:42.600 health which I think is valid but maybe undetermined from the data that I've heard today to the 01:00:42.600 --> 01:00:50.360 aspect of the economic factors going into this and is there a legitimate takings issue 01:00:50.360 --> 01:00:55.080 of someone who's owned property for a long time because if you look at all those dots, 01:00:55.080 --> 01:00:58.680 that heat map, we're expanding from a red circle to an orange circle which might not 01:00:58.680 --> 01:01:04.280 seem like a lot but obviously it's 4400 acres. 01:01:04.280 --> 01:01:09.840 Where does council fall on that and where does city legal fall on at least the takings 01:01:09.840 --> 01:01:14.640 force and are we allowed to remove their ability to use their property? 01:01:14.640 --> 01:01:18.480 I will defer to Gary on that one. 01:01:18.480 --> 01:01:25.360 Well, you know, your question about economic impact really applies to all zoning regulations 01:01:25.360 --> 01:01:28.160 if you think about it. 01:01:28.160 --> 01:01:37.440 Anytime we impose any kind of a zoning regulation, it has to be supported by our goals of the 01:01:37.440 --> 01:01:45.720 health and welfare of the community in general and that's established by statute and so the 01:01:45.720 --> 01:01:55.040 justification for doing that I guess is the studies that indicate at least some connection 01:01:55.040 --> 01:02:00.960 between the activities and some negative health impacts. 01:02:00.960 --> 01:02:07.960 Now, as we all know, you know, pollutants don't just stop and turn around and go home 01:02:07.960 --> 01:02:15.920 after a certain distance, you know, you have to set something as a standard, the laws go 01:02:15.920 --> 01:02:22.680 to demand that we establish a bright line as to what's legal and what's illegal at 01:02:22.680 --> 01:02:29.880 a certain point in time but the reality is it's going to be a gradient of some kind and 01:02:29.880 --> 01:02:39.840 I think that's part of, you know, what the concern is here with, you know, say for example 01:02:39.840 --> 01:02:44.480 with the legally nonconforming use debate that we had here. 01:02:44.480 --> 01:02:50.820 Yes, we have the fairness concerns on the one hand but on the other hand, if it's legitimately 01:02:50.820 --> 01:02:58.120 a health concern, does that health concern go away or is that still a legitimate issue 01:02:58.120 --> 01:03:06.480 for regulation if we're looking out for the health and safety of our citizens and so there's 01:03:06.480 --> 01:03:12.760 certainly arguments on both sides, you know, neither I nor our department are trying to 01:03:12.760 --> 01:03:19.880 advocate for one side or the other, you know, we're trying to provide a support role for 01:03:19.880 --> 01:03:28.920 whatever the city feels is an appropriate regulation through this legislative process 01:03:28.920 --> 01:03:33.520 but I think that would be the justification, those are the concerns that we're looking 01:03:33.520 --> 01:03:38.440 at, it's a balancing of health and safety, you know, versus property rights. 01:03:38.440 --> 01:03:39.880 Is there an issue of takings? 01:03:39.880 --> 01:03:47.600 It could be, it depends on if it goes too far, Mr. Lansford I guess has a little bit 01:03:47.600 --> 01:03:53.280 better analysis than - Sorry, Trey Lansford, deputy city attorney. 01:03:53.280 --> 01:03:59.280 Regarding takings is that when enacting something like this, using our police power to promote 01:03:59.280 --> 01:04:03.600 the health, safety and welfare is that we have to have a rational basis to do so. 01:04:03.600 --> 01:04:08.120 So what we're looking at is a challenge in a situation such as this as to where do we 01:04:08.120 --> 01:04:11.920 set this line, where are we going to put the setback. 01:04:11.920 --> 01:04:16.520 City Council has directed staff at this moment to kind of base our decision upon the Fort 01:04:16.520 --> 01:04:20.000 Worth study that was done because we don't have one of our own but the Fort Worth study 01:04:20.000 --> 01:04:24.400 would support a line at 500 feet which is what's being proposed now. 01:04:24.400 --> 01:04:33.000 Now where we move that line, the risk of a taking claim is going to come to was it reasonable 01:04:33.000 --> 01:04:34.000 or not. 01:04:34.000 --> 01:04:39.000 Did you have a rational basis to take my property in exercising your police power to do so? 01:04:39.000 --> 01:04:44.000 I guess fundamentally I have a question because both attorneys have now stated that we need 01:04:44.000 --> 01:04:47.340 to set a line, there's a requirement that we set a line. 01:04:47.340 --> 01:04:48.720 We have a line. 01:04:48.720 --> 01:04:52.560 So I don't - it doesn't seem like we need to set a line. 01:04:52.560 --> 01:04:58.820 The question is we are moving a line and where are we moving it to and my I guess prevailing 01:04:58.820 --> 01:05:02.400 question is why are we moving the line? 01:05:02.400 --> 01:05:05.760 And I think anecdotally we could come up with a lot of different ideas. 01:05:05.760 --> 01:05:12.200 There's a Fort Worth study, there's anecdotes of health concerns but there's - why did this 01:05:12.200 --> 01:05:15.080 come back up to city council? 01:05:15.080 --> 01:05:19.800 Does anyone have that answer of like the origination of this actually becoming an issue again? 01:05:19.800 --> 01:05:23.880 Because it seems like in 2015 it was density on the south side of town was like well we 01:05:23.880 --> 01:05:27.080 need to control this in 2015. 01:05:27.080 --> 01:05:30.880 Is this all about coal ranch, hunter ranch that this is now being brought up again or 01:05:30.880 --> 01:05:32.560 what's the precipice? 01:05:32.560 --> 01:05:39.440 This started last year, there had been a request by a couple council members wanting to revisit 01:05:39.440 --> 01:05:43.280 the reverse setback issue - or setbacks and reverse setbacks. 01:05:43.280 --> 01:05:48.720 They had a work session over at PD during one of their Monday luncheons and there were 01:05:48.720 --> 01:05:54.200 only six there and I can't remember who was absent and so they split as to whether or 01:05:54.200 --> 01:05:57.800 not they wanted to go forward and propose any amendments. 01:05:57.800 --> 01:06:04.200 After that sometime in the late spring before council member Duff came off the board and 01:06:04.200 --> 01:06:11.520 was replaced by Jesse Davis, the council discussed this again and there was a consensus to move 01:06:11.520 --> 01:06:13.520 forward to have the discussion. 01:06:13.520 --> 01:06:17.640 And so that's how this came to - and during that discussion as Haley presented earlier 01:06:17.640 --> 01:06:21.000 the dates, the council came and asked a lot of questions. 01:06:21.000 --> 01:06:27.560 We gave a very detailed presentation including the takings claim and they felt comfortable 01:06:27.560 --> 01:06:32.240 with following the Fort Worth study and the Fort Worth and their ordinance has been seen 01:06:32.240 --> 01:06:36.080 as a model for the other communities to have, they have a very great relationship with the 01:06:36.080 --> 01:06:41.360 gas well industry as well as trying to protect their citizens and so that study - and I can't 01:06:41.360 --> 01:06:45.200 speak for Dr. Banks who talked about that study but what I do recall is one that would 01:06:45.200 --> 01:06:50.580 be something more generally acceptable in the community. 01:06:50.580 --> 01:06:53.440 We know that there are studies - I'm familiar with all the studies that the industry puts 01:06:53.440 --> 01:06:56.640 out as well as the environmental groups put out. 01:06:56.640 --> 01:07:03.640 They are - they're directly opposite of each other and so with the takings claims and where 01:07:03.640 --> 01:07:08.680 we set this, we need to have something out there that's kind of closer to support why 01:07:08.680 --> 01:07:09.680 we're doing this. 01:07:09.680 --> 01:07:15.200 If it is the decision of this PNC to go forward and recommend to council to have the 500 foot 01:07:15.200 --> 01:07:21.000 setback, then we'll proceed or your recommendation could be nothing. 01:07:21.000 --> 01:07:24.120 This is why it's here before you and you're going to have those discussions. 01:07:24.120 --> 01:07:31.960 And so that's why the Fort Worth is more or less looked as a good model in the state and 01:07:31.960 --> 01:07:33.840 that's why we chose to do that. 01:07:33.840 --> 01:07:37.360 It weighed in air quality and tried to come up with a good distance. 01:07:37.360 --> 01:07:42.120 There's, as Haley explained, 600 foot from the gas well, ours is 500 because there's 01:07:42.120 --> 01:07:49.600 usually in a 300 by 300 foot, you're going to have 100 feet extra room inside. 01:07:49.600 --> 01:07:53.120 So that's how this all came to you. 01:07:53.120 --> 01:07:58.280 And so in any kind of takings claim, we're going to have to rely on something, some type 01:07:58.280 --> 01:08:01.720 of scientific evidence because that study is air quality. 01:08:01.720 --> 01:08:04.520 So we're going to have to rely on scientific evidence, which is the Fort Worth study to 01:08:04.520 --> 01:08:09.760 support our decision in a takings claim. 01:08:09.760 --> 01:08:16.480 We could win, but even though we win, we could still end up paying and so that's the - and 01:08:16.480 --> 01:08:23.480 I know Drake is our condemnation attorney, he can go into in-depth and talk to you until 01:08:23.480 --> 01:08:30.240 the rooster starts crowing in the morning, but that's more or less how we got here, how 01:08:30.240 --> 01:08:35.200 the council came to this, why we're using the Fort Worth study as a basis to support 01:08:35.200 --> 01:08:39.760 our amendment, assuming that is what you recommend and that's now what's before and I'm hoping 01:08:39.760 --> 01:08:42.600 that helps clarify some things for you about this whole process. 01:08:42.600 --> 01:08:46.760 It's definitely part of the context to me, so thank you. 01:08:46.760 --> 01:08:49.760 Commissioner Burnett, I know you're next. 01:08:49.760 --> 01:08:50.760 Yeah. 01:08:50.760 --> 01:08:51.760 So a few thoughts on this. 01:08:51.760 --> 01:08:56.360 Ideally, I think my problem has always been not as much the reverse setbacks as the setbacks 01:08:56.360 --> 01:08:57.360 now. 01:08:57.360 --> 01:08:59.760 Unfortunately, we already have what we have. 01:08:59.760 --> 01:09:06.880 I 100% support increasing reverse setbacks because I think we need to kind of limit the 01:09:06.880 --> 01:09:12.880 amount - the proximity new developments have to Wells, especially when as we get further 01:09:12.880 --> 01:09:16.160 along, we're going to have situations like we had with that developmental Windsor that 01:09:16.160 --> 01:09:19.360 was right up against - right up against the setbacks. 01:09:19.360 --> 01:09:28.240 The problem that I have on this is, you know, the whole thing about preventing new non-conformities. 01:09:28.240 --> 01:09:33.200 We kind of fall back on this thing like what happens if somebody's house burns down. 01:09:33.200 --> 01:09:42.240 Now, we know that in reality, you know, we have just a couple of thousand properties 01:09:42.240 --> 01:09:45.440 that might be subjected to that. 01:09:45.440 --> 01:09:49.520 There's no way that a couple of thousand houses are all going to burn down and only be one 01:09:49.520 --> 01:09:50.520 or two. 01:09:50.520 --> 01:09:57.920 I just - I have a problem with the intransigence of saying we can't allow that person to go 01:09:57.920 --> 01:10:04.320 before ZBA or something to rebuild their existing house, especially if they - if that is a choice 01:10:04.320 --> 01:10:10.880 that they're making that that house already exists close to, you know, a well. 01:10:10.880 --> 01:10:14.800 I 100% support, you know, extending the setbacks. 01:10:14.800 --> 01:10:23.240 I just have a problem on taking somebody's house, you know, that they've lived in forever. 01:10:23.240 --> 01:10:29.440 And I would hope that, you know, we could possibly revisit that, you know, in this regulation 01:10:29.440 --> 01:10:33.920 because I think that'd make a huge difference in terms of, you know, people supporting the 01:10:33.920 --> 01:10:36.640 extension of those setbacks. 01:10:36.640 --> 01:10:38.840 And we can certainly take a look at that with the planning staff. 01:10:38.840 --> 01:10:44.640 I know that there's some provisions out there that may get to where you want to be, however, 01:10:44.640 --> 01:10:47.520 but it would apply throughout the city. 01:10:47.520 --> 01:10:53.520 I think the legal interest we have is that it's applied uniformly to all nonconforming 01:10:53.520 --> 01:10:57.280 uses and structures, not just a certain segment and start creating special classes. 01:10:57.280 --> 01:11:01.360 So we'll work with the planning staff, and I think we do have a solution or something 01:11:01.360 --> 01:11:07.880 to address that that we can propose, so - and hopefully we can come back during the - on 01:11:07.880 --> 01:11:08.880 November 6th. 01:11:08.880 --> 01:11:12.480 I don't know if there's a work session schedule, and maybe we can propose something like that. 01:11:12.480 --> 01:11:13.480 Okay. 01:11:13.480 --> 01:11:14.480 Commissioner Stewart. 01:11:14.480 --> 01:11:15.480 Thank you, Chair. 01:11:15.480 --> 01:11:21.360 I don't know if we're able to bring back at least a study on what the claims process would 01:11:21.360 --> 01:11:24.760 be like and then what the costs would be, just if we put this in a presentation and 01:11:24.760 --> 01:11:29.520 say that, you know, if we have a taking claim, then how much could that cost the city if 01:11:29.520 --> 01:11:30.520 we do this? 01:11:30.520 --> 01:11:31.520 Just an estimation of that. 01:11:31.520 --> 01:11:33.840 Any type of research you have on that, that would be appreciated. 01:11:33.840 --> 01:11:34.840 Well, I mean, the - 01:11:34.840 --> 01:11:36.880 We don't have to get into it now, just for the sake of time. 01:11:36.880 --> 01:11:37.880 Right. 01:11:37.880 --> 01:11:40.680 Well, just the property values, we're going to be - I mean, that's going to be expert 01:11:40.680 --> 01:11:43.960 testimony based on the time of the take and everything, that they're going to have an 01:11:43.960 --> 01:11:45.200 appraiser, we're going to have an appraiser. 01:11:45.200 --> 01:11:48.040 I honestly couldn't give you an approximation of what that would be. 01:11:48.040 --> 01:11:50.280 I can tell you, if it's something that's going to go all the way to trial, you're looking 01:11:50.280 --> 01:11:52.480 at easily six digits worth of attorney's fees. 01:11:52.480 --> 01:11:58.080 At least being able to put some slide in there talking about addressing the taking claims 01:11:58.080 --> 01:11:59.080 would be appreciated. 01:11:59.080 --> 01:12:01.360 Maybe not hard numbers, but something - 01:12:01.360 --> 01:12:02.360 Are you talking about litigation? 01:12:02.360 --> 01:12:07.920 Are you talking about asking for a variance before ZBA, the appropriate application fees, 01:12:07.920 --> 01:12:10.480 or are you talking about those kinds of costs? 01:12:10.480 --> 01:12:11.480 No, yeah. 01:12:11.480 --> 01:12:14.880 I'm talking about variance, and the variance is denied, then go into a taking claim at 01:12:14.880 --> 01:12:15.880 that point in time. 01:12:15.880 --> 01:12:16.880 What is that process? 01:12:16.880 --> 01:12:20.720 Giving us some sort of feedback, okay, if there is a property owner who's upset that 01:12:20.720 --> 01:12:24.800 the setback has now increased to 250 feet from where it was before, and then that's 01:12:24.800 --> 01:12:29.000 - they come and make a claim that you're taking my land, be able to talk to that process of 01:12:29.000 --> 01:12:35.800 what that looks like from a city legal standpoint, and how that could affect us as a city from 01:12:35.800 --> 01:12:36.800 having to defend ourselves. 01:12:36.800 --> 01:12:37.800 That's all I ask. 01:12:37.800 --> 01:12:38.800 So, thanks. 01:12:38.800 --> 01:12:39.800 Chris, you're back. 01:12:39.800 --> 01:12:46.980 So, I have a question sort of similar, and that is, what's our exposure if we are aware 01:12:46.980 --> 01:12:55.520 or suspect that there are risks, and we purposely keep our setbacks smaller than those? 01:12:55.520 --> 01:12:59.120 And are we exposed to any legal liability? 01:12:59.120 --> 01:13:01.960 So we have this legal liability of takings. 01:13:01.960 --> 01:13:09.840 Are we exposed to legal liability if we choose to do nothing, and when we're aware of - even 01:13:09.840 --> 01:13:12.800 if there are some variations in studies? 01:13:12.800 --> 01:13:14.600 And I'm not sure - 01:13:14.600 --> 01:13:18.720 Yeah, and I don't know if you want to step in. 01:13:18.720 --> 01:13:26.000 I think my only point that I would want to make is there's the potential that exists 01:13:26.000 --> 01:13:33.120 for any zoning regulation, of it being too much, and so there's the potential for that 01:13:33.120 --> 01:13:39.800 going forward, and so this is one particular - this is probably one that's a little bit 01:13:39.800 --> 01:13:49.680 more intensive than, say, for example, a zoning use classification, but do you have any other 01:13:49.680 --> 01:13:50.960 thoughts on that? 01:13:50.960 --> 01:13:51.960 I think he's good. 01:13:51.960 --> 01:13:52.960 I think his question is different. 01:13:52.960 --> 01:13:54.200 Yeah, my question is different than that. 01:13:54.200 --> 01:13:58.480 My question is, if we're aware - I'm going to make a hypothetical. 01:13:58.480 --> 01:14:05.480 If we're aware that Denton is sitting on a nuclear waste dump and we do nothing, then 01:14:05.480 --> 01:14:12.080 what is our liability as a city if we allow flats to be built and homes to be built near 01:14:12.080 --> 01:14:19.720 a hazard - do we expose ourselves to liability? 01:14:19.720 --> 01:14:24.800 Going back, I could answer the first question you had - at 250, and same thing with the 01:14:24.800 --> 01:14:29.160 gas well setbacks, we're already in that position of a takings claim. 01:14:29.160 --> 01:14:37.240 With the reverse setbacks, at 250, our experience has been since 2010, and more so after 2015, 01:14:37.240 --> 01:14:41.440 that developers have come in and have accepted that 250 and have developed around it and 01:14:41.440 --> 01:14:49.240 designed their developments to comply, so it could be that that's an acceptable level 01:14:49.240 --> 01:14:53.560 for the development community and for the city, because we haven't had any claims brought 01:14:53.560 --> 01:14:55.760 to us on the 250 foot setback. 01:14:55.760 --> 01:15:00.520 I can't tell you what it will be in the 500, maybe it'll be the same, maybe not. 01:15:00.520 --> 01:15:07.320 It all boils down to what risk level is acceptable for this body to recommend and the City Council 01:15:07.320 --> 01:15:08.640 to accept. 01:15:08.640 --> 01:15:09.920 That's what it boils down to. 01:15:09.920 --> 01:15:17.220 What is the level of risk you're willing to incur, and as Trey said, the higher the setback, 01:15:17.220 --> 01:15:22.360 the increase in risk - that's all, and I'm trying to sum it up as probably as succinct 01:15:22.360 --> 01:15:23.360 as I can. 01:15:23.360 --> 01:15:29.760 And there are risks on both sides, you know, and even bringing the case, if you're a property 01:15:29.760 --> 01:15:34.240 owner, there's a risk that you could lose and be out a lot of money because of that, 01:15:34.240 --> 01:15:37.560 and still wind up with no relief. 01:15:37.560 --> 01:15:41.320 So I'm going to go ahead and interject, just for the sake of time, and knowing we're going 01:15:41.320 --> 01:15:44.080 to have a work session on this in a couple of weeks, Commissioner Pernod, one more question 01:15:44.080 --> 01:15:45.080 in order to move on. 01:15:45.080 --> 01:15:50.320 And I just wanted to clarify, I believe Commissioner Beck's question was actually different. 01:15:50.320 --> 01:15:57.600 What I heard him asking was, say we do nothing and leave everything at 250, and 10,000 kids 01:15:57.600 --> 01:16:02.320 within, you know, that are less than 500 feet away get cancer. 01:16:02.320 --> 01:16:09.160 If we didn't do anything, is the City at some point liable or, you know, for negligence 01:16:09.160 --> 01:16:11.360 in not moving to that? 01:16:11.360 --> 01:16:12.560 That sounded like the question you asked me. 01:16:12.560 --> 01:16:13.560 That's my question. 01:16:13.560 --> 01:16:14.560 Okay. 01:16:14.560 --> 01:16:20.520 Now, I don't know that we would be, because I would think that that would be some other 01:16:20.520 --> 01:16:28.760 suit, but the question is, if we don't take a basic measure to at least add a little bit 01:16:28.760 --> 01:16:34.200 of extra safety, are we negligent by leaving things as they are? 01:16:34.200 --> 01:16:39.740 You know, when people ask me these hypotheticals, I usually, my first response is, anybody can 01:16:39.740 --> 01:16:41.740 file a lawsuit. 01:16:41.740 --> 01:16:47.200 In this kind of a case, in which you presented, like if children get sick, get some kind of 01:16:47.200 --> 01:16:51.360 cancer or something like that, and they file the lawsuit against the City because they 01:16:51.360 --> 01:16:56.360 claim that they didn't protect us, there's going to be, it's going to be a battle of 01:16:56.360 --> 01:17:05.520 experts as to whether or not the cancer that they sustained was approximately caused or 01:17:05.520 --> 01:17:13.320 directly caused by the gas wells that are operating and was this, and then in addition 01:17:13.320 --> 01:17:18.520 to that would be, you know, what was the normal, what's a good distance, and so that boils 01:17:18.520 --> 01:17:23.960 down to, you're going to have a lot of experts in that lawsuit, and it will ultimately depend 01:17:23.960 --> 01:17:31.520 on what a jury decides, and so it's not an easy answer to ask, but it is not an easy 01:17:31.520 --> 01:17:32.520 case. 01:17:32.520 --> 01:17:38.520 I can tell you, like if you go back to, I know from the '90s and watching movies, Civil 01:17:38.520 --> 01:17:43.120 Suit, I think, which is John Travolta, it's going to be something that intense where there's 01:17:43.120 --> 01:17:48.160 going to be a lot of expert testimony and scientific evidence to demonstrate the plaintiffs 01:17:48.160 --> 01:17:54.440 will have to come forward and demonstrate that it was caused by this activity, and then 01:17:54.440 --> 01:18:00.520 after then, next show that the City was negligent in trying to address and stop that, so it 01:18:00.520 --> 01:18:04.280 is a complex litigation, is what I'm trying to say. 01:18:04.280 --> 01:18:08.200 The outcome will depend on the evidence and what the jury decides. 01:18:08.200 --> 01:18:15.240 And I think part of the question was presuming that that sort of standard or causal relationship 01:18:15.240 --> 01:18:25.040 exists, like with the nuclear area, for example, that there's a definite harm that will result 01:18:25.040 --> 01:18:30.960 that gets ignored deliberately, and that's really a different standard, and that speaks 01:18:30.960 --> 01:18:36.960 to what Mr. Lansford was talking about earlier, do we have a reasonable basis for our regulations 01:18:36.960 --> 01:18:43.400 that we put into place, or our failure to impose regulations, and we base that upon 01:18:43.400 --> 01:18:45.240 the knowledge that we have at this time. 01:18:45.240 --> 01:18:49.440 I don't think that there's any court that's going to impose a crystal ball requirement 01:18:49.440 --> 01:18:56.800 upon the City to know something that's unknown. 01:18:56.800 --> 01:18:57.800 Great discussion. 01:18:57.800 --> 01:19:03.720 I think it will be a lively one and helpful one on November 6th at that time. 01:19:03.720 --> 01:19:09.200 For the sake of what I imagine many people expecting a meeting to start at 6.30 in chambers, 01:19:09.200 --> 01:19:14.000 what I'd like to propose is we break for a brief dinner. 01:19:14.000 --> 01:19:18.040 We finish dinner while listening to a presentation by Christie to finish up our work session 01:19:18.040 --> 01:19:24.700 reports 1C, and if there is no opposition, the Chair moves that we take the agenda out 01:19:24.700 --> 01:19:32.520 of order after the work session items and move item F, which is the Brush Creek Apartments, 01:19:32.520 --> 01:19:35.200 to the top and hold presentation on that. 01:19:35.200 --> 01:19:38.000 As time permits, hear the other ones in work session. 01:19:38.000 --> 01:19:42.480 If time doesn't permit, we'll listen to the other items in public session at that time 01:19:42.480 --> 01:19:46.760 so we can try to hit a 6.30 hit for the council chambers. 01:19:46.760 --> 01:19:49.000 Is there any issue with that for anyone? 01:19:49.000 --> 01:19:50.000 Okay, perfect. 01:19:50.000 --> 01:19:54.360 So at this time, I'd like to break for five minutes to gather a quick meal and come back. 01:19:54.360 --> 01:20:00.120 It is 5.55. 01:20:00.120 --> 01:20:01.120 Thank you. 01:20:01.120 --> 01:20:02.120 We are back. 01:20:02.120 --> 01:20:05.560 Open the meeting back up at 6.04 and invite Christie for presentation on environmentally 01:20:05.560 --> 01:20:07.960 sensitive areas. 01:20:07.960 --> 01:20:09.160 Thank you. 01:20:09.160 --> 01:20:15.080 And Christie Upton, Environmental Compliance Coordinator, and I wanted to tell you I am 01:20:15.080 --> 01:20:19.900 really happy to be here tonight to share with you this criteria manual. 01:20:19.900 --> 01:20:27.760 We've been working on it for over a year, and I'm excited to reach the culmination and 01:20:27.760 --> 01:20:32.200 take it to adoption. 01:20:32.200 --> 01:20:38.040 So for starters, we wanted to let you know that the City adopted a set of regulations 01:20:38.040 --> 01:20:43.920 to protect and preserve the environmentally sensitive areas, and we've identified this 01:20:43.920 --> 01:20:52.920 as a pragmatic way to protect the City's water infrastructure and provide for green infrastructure. 01:20:52.920 --> 01:20:59.360 And the green infrastructure is a long-term strategy to protect the City's assets and 01:20:59.360 --> 01:21:03.160 support clean water. 01:21:03.160 --> 01:21:17.080 In 2018, the City Council adopted updates to the ESA ordinance, and with the updates 01:21:17.080 --> 01:21:23.520 to the ordinance, they directed staff to develop a criteria manual. 01:21:23.520 --> 01:21:34.440 Staff identified objectives that would support our goal of providing better understanding 01:21:34.440 --> 01:21:39.420 and the processes by which the regulations are applied. 01:21:39.420 --> 01:21:43.640 The criteria manual is a little different than the other criteria manuals because we 01:21:43.640 --> 01:21:55.320 do include a lot of information that provides the reader with better knowledge of the ecological 01:21:55.320 --> 01:22:04.080 -- the ecology that the ESA regulations are based in. 01:22:04.080 --> 01:22:12.160 To start the document, we considered the audience, which the criteria manual would be reaching, 01:22:12.160 --> 01:22:18.240 and we identified two different groups, both residents and property owners, who we aim 01:22:18.240 --> 01:22:26.880 to provide an explanation of what the ESAs are, how those property owners could benefit 01:22:26.880 --> 01:22:34.520 from the ESAs that are within that property, and how they can maintain those ESAs and the 01:22:34.520 --> 01:22:38.040 benefits that the ESAs offer. 01:22:38.040 --> 01:22:43.840 And the other group that we identified was the development community, which we designed 01:22:43.840 --> 01:22:50.820 the criteria manual to provide this group with guidance on how to develop the property 01:22:50.820 --> 01:23:00.160 from conception of that development to completion. 01:23:00.160 --> 01:23:08.120 So we tried to go in chronology and how we developed this criteria manual, the first section 01:23:08.120 --> 01:23:17.120 was dedicated to explaining why the City of Denton chose to protect these ESAs, and then 01:23:17.120 --> 01:23:23.720 we highlighted some of those ways that the ESAs provide ecological services, including 01:23:23.720 --> 01:23:32.840 how the vegetation can stabilize the drainage ways, natural areas are also known to uptake 01:23:32.840 --> 01:23:40.040 and neutralize pollutants, and how that can reduce those pollutants from entering into 01:23:40.040 --> 01:23:46.720 a drinking water supply, and natural areas serve as a resource for the community by providing 01:23:46.720 --> 01:23:53.760 monetary benefits and promoting community health and wellness. 01:23:53.760 --> 01:24:02.080 There are four distinct ESAs that Denton Development Code identifies, and in this section we provide 01:24:02.080 --> 01:24:09.920 a more detailed description of the characteristics and list examples of those ESAs, and we discussed 01:24:09.920 --> 01:24:17.280 the general protection requirements for each one of those types, and where we identified 01:24:17.280 --> 01:24:23.640 needed more specific information to be provided on those protection requirements, we tried 01:24:23.640 --> 01:24:29.000 to go into some more of those details. 01:24:29.000 --> 01:24:36.360 After that, we created a section on how to identify the ESA on private property. 01:24:36.360 --> 01:24:44.800 When a development applicant comes in and they're looking at what criteria they would 01:24:44.800 --> 01:24:50.560 need to consider when they're taking that project forward, one of those things is that 01:24:50.560 --> 01:24:53.720 we guide them to identify ESAs. 01:24:53.720 --> 01:24:57.840 We have the official ESA map and we guide them to that. 01:24:57.840 --> 01:25:05.320 Where we have ESAs identified on their property, the next step is to proceed with an ESA field 01:25:05.320 --> 01:25:06.620 assessment. 01:25:06.620 --> 01:25:15.400 Those ESA field assessments help to either confirm or sometimes we identify that the 01:25:15.400 --> 01:25:27.800 map is incorrect and that we can move forward with removing that from the map. 01:25:27.800 --> 01:25:33.400 The next step is where those ESAs are identified on private property, and the development applicant 01:25:33.400 --> 01:25:38.400 needs to consider how to comply with the regulations. 01:25:38.400 --> 01:25:48.000 This section speaks to the protection requirements and what the developer would need to consider. 01:25:48.000 --> 01:25:55.840 This section also provides guidance on how to develop the site that encompasses the ESAs 01:25:55.840 --> 01:26:01.200 in a way that protects those ESAs during the construction, and the guidance was written 01:26:01.200 --> 01:26:08.840 in a manner to highlight elements that are commonly encountered, and we also wanted to 01:26:08.840 --> 01:26:11.760 emphasize that each site is different. 01:26:11.760 --> 01:26:17.040 There's different elements to consider, and not all elements that are written in this 01:26:17.040 --> 01:26:22.800 guidance would apply to every site. 01:26:22.800 --> 01:26:31.920 Where the development community cannot conform to some aspect of the development code, the 01:26:31.920 --> 01:26:39.440 developer must request for flexibility allowed in the DDC by applying for what's called 01:26:39.440 --> 01:26:42.160 an alternative ESA plan. 01:26:42.160 --> 01:26:50.280 This section was written as guidance on how to create a meaningful, incomprehensible alternative 01:26:50.280 --> 01:26:55.920 ESA plan, and we focused on what would be pertinent information, how the applicant could 01:26:55.920 --> 01:27:04.880 find data that would allow the applicant to create comparable information, what was the 01:27:04.880 --> 01:27:12.120 ecological services that was provided that the development applicant would be removing, 01:27:12.120 --> 01:27:18.200 and how that could be incorporated into the mitigation, and then how the mitigation could 01:27:18.200 --> 01:27:22.440 be implemented and completed. 01:27:22.440 --> 01:27:32.480 In the final section, we wanted to recognize that any natural area within or abutting a 01:27:32.480 --> 01:27:39.960 urbanized area is likely going to need some human intervention at some point, and over 01:27:39.960 --> 01:27:50.800 the years we have received requests and guidance on maintenance, and we tried to summarize 01:27:50.800 --> 01:27:58.320 the guidance that we have provided in the past in this section. 01:27:58.320 --> 01:28:07.240 Moving forward, we have already presented on this criteria manual a few times, and we 01:28:07.240 --> 01:28:14.400 are going to be presenting this information again a couple of times in the next month 01:28:14.400 --> 01:28:19.440 coming up, and we have published the criteria manual online. 01:28:19.440 --> 01:28:23.440 We have not received any written comments back as of yet. 01:28:23.440 --> 01:28:31.920 We will be leaving that document up until a little before the December 3rd public hearing 01:28:31.920 --> 01:28:47.960 and adoption of the ordinance to adopt the criteria manual, and lastly, we have identified 01:28:47.960 --> 01:28:50.480 some future considerations. 01:28:50.480 --> 01:28:59.560 You may know that the criteria manuals will be revised on an annual basis, and in future 01:28:59.560 --> 01:29:06.360 revisions, we would like to add an SLP on field assessments. 01:29:06.360 --> 01:29:14.720 It would provide both explanation on how these forms are filled out, but also would help 01:29:14.720 --> 01:29:21.200 understand what the ESA field assessment is trying to explain. 01:29:21.200 --> 01:29:26.040 And then the other one would be a property owner's guide, which would focus on the vegetation, 01:29:26.040 --> 01:29:32.960 the native vegetation that could be supporting a habitat within the particular ESAs. 01:29:32.960 --> 01:29:33.960 Questions? 01:29:33.960 --> 01:29:34.960 Any questions? 01:29:34.960 --> 01:29:35.960 Commissioner Beck. 01:29:35.960 --> 01:29:47.720 So, you said you had no feedback on our websites or your websites, and none of the professional 01:29:47.720 --> 01:29:50.520 societies have provided any feedback either? 01:29:50.520 --> 01:29:51.520 None of yet. 01:29:51.520 --> 01:29:52.520 Any other questions? 01:29:52.520 --> 01:29:56.680 Thank you very much, Christy. 01:29:56.680 --> 01:30:05.800 As we move into the actual agenda for this evening, is there any updates or edits to 01:30:05.800 --> 01:30:09.440 the minutes on October 2nd? 01:30:09.440 --> 01:30:14.840 And then is there any initial issues with the proposed calendar for 2020? 01:30:14.840 --> 01:30:22.040 Looks like it's first and third week meetings all next year. 01:30:22.040 --> 01:30:26.080 Just in your backup, I legislate. 01:30:26.080 --> 01:30:30.880 If there is, we will consider and vote on that in chambers. 01:30:30.880 --> 01:30:32.560 So with that, we're going to move into the public hearings. 01:30:32.560 --> 01:30:39.880 Like I mentioned earlier, we're going to go out of order and go to item 5F, which is Z18-0013C. 01:30:39.880 --> 01:30:45.400 I'll invite Cindy Jackson for presentation, and then as time permits, we'll listen to 01:30:45.400 --> 01:30:47.080 other items in work session. 01:30:47.080 --> 01:30:50.960 If time does not permit, we will listen to those items in public hearing. 01:30:50.960 --> 01:30:54.720 With that, I'll turn it over to Ms. Jackson. 01:30:54.720 --> 01:30:56.320 Thank you. 01:30:56.320 --> 01:30:59.560 I'm just waiting. 01:30:59.560 --> 01:31:14.440 It wants to save it. 01:31:14.440 --> 01:31:22.480 Okay. 01:31:22.480 --> 01:31:31.440 Okay, Z18-0013, Brush Creek Apartments, is a request to rezone 6.71 acres of land from 01:31:31.440 --> 01:31:40.280 rural residential to mixed use neighborhood MN, and to rezone 11.359 acres of land from 01:31:40.280 --> 01:31:44.560 residential one, R1, to mixed use neighborhood MN. 01:31:44.560 --> 01:31:52.480 That 18.069 acre site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Brush Creek, 01:31:52.480 --> 01:31:59.360 which is right here, and US 377 Fort Worth Drive. 01:31:59.360 --> 01:32:06.840 Here you can see the current zoning map, which shows the R1 and the RR designations as proposed. 01:32:06.840 --> 01:32:11.320 This is what the zoning map would look like if this were approved. 01:32:11.320 --> 01:32:22.480 As you can see, it's following a trend of MN zoning districts along the US 377 corridor. 01:32:22.480 --> 01:32:25.560 A concept plan was included in your backup. 01:32:25.560 --> 01:32:28.920 I want to note that this is a conceptual concept plan. 01:32:28.920 --> 01:32:31.080 The site has not been designed yet. 01:32:31.080 --> 01:32:37.120 The purpose of this concept plan was for the traffic impact analysis to present worst case 01:32:37.120 --> 01:32:43.120 scenarios for the purpose of traffic generation. 01:32:43.120 --> 01:32:50.680 As you can see, we've got multifamily per this concept plan along this portion of it, 01:32:50.680 --> 01:32:57.880 and then at the hard corner of Brush Creek and 377 are proposed commercial areas. 01:32:57.880 --> 01:33:04.080 We have seven criteria for zoning approval, which I'll go into in more detail. 01:33:04.080 --> 01:33:12.720 The first criteria is neighborhood is that the requested zoning designation complies with 01:33:12.720 --> 01:33:17.520 the future land use designation of neighborhood mixed use. 01:33:17.520 --> 01:33:24.120 The locations with this designation, a diverse mix of housing types and densities may be 01:33:24.120 --> 01:33:26.320 accommodated. 01:33:26.320 --> 01:33:33.440 Most of the types of commercial uses in this type of designation are convenience stores, 01:33:33.440 --> 01:33:40.320 small restaurants, personal service facilities like dry cleaners and nail shops and things 01:33:40.320 --> 01:33:44.520 like that, daycare centers and small offices. 01:33:44.520 --> 01:33:50.560 Moderate to high density residential uses are also permitted in areas with this designation. 01:33:50.560 --> 01:33:59.080 The building should be appropriate scale and intensity to complement the surrounding neighborhood. 01:33:59.080 --> 01:34:02.640 Criteria two is that is consistent with relevant small area plans. 01:34:02.640 --> 01:34:07.880 There is no small area plan in place for this site. 01:34:07.880 --> 01:34:12.400 Criteria three is consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zoning district. 01:34:12.400 --> 01:34:17.800 The purpose statement of the MN zoning district is to provide compatibility between higher 01:34:17.800 --> 01:34:23.280 intensity mixed use areas and adjacent residential and commercial areas. 01:34:23.280 --> 01:34:28.040 The district is intended to contribute to a vibrant environment for pedestrians and 01:34:28.040 --> 01:34:32.560 bicyclists and includes varying densities of residential uses, neighborhoods serving 01:34:32.560 --> 01:34:36.960 retail, restaurants, commercial and office uses that are sensitive to the surrounding 01:34:36.960 --> 01:34:40.320 built and natural context and scale and form. 01:34:40.320 --> 01:34:48.000 And note that's very similar to the goals of the future land use designation. 01:34:48.000 --> 01:34:54.040 Criteria four is that there have been or will be significant changes in the area to warrant 01:34:54.040 --> 01:34:55.920 a zoning change. 01:34:55.920 --> 01:35:01.760 Both US 377 and Brush Creek Road right now are unimproved two lane roads. 01:35:01.760 --> 01:35:07.960 TexDOT has begun the process of widening US 377 to the south of this site. 01:35:07.960 --> 01:35:14.320 I'm sure you've run into the traffic issues right now just south of the I-35 overpass 01:35:14.320 --> 01:35:18.320 along Fort Worth Drive. 01:35:18.320 --> 01:35:24.080 Once the full site length of 377 has been improved, the traffic on the roadway will 01:35:24.080 --> 01:35:27.080 increase correspondingly. 01:35:27.080 --> 01:35:32.560 Additionally, current zoning of the site is not concurrent with the future land use designation 01:35:32.560 --> 01:35:35.760 of neighborhood mixed use. 01:35:35.760 --> 01:35:43.680 The designation was part of our 2015 update to the future land use map and as you know 01:35:43.680 --> 01:35:50.080 just very recently within the past month our new zoning code went into effect. 01:35:50.080 --> 01:35:58.840 When we transitioned the zoning, we transitioned to the closest zoning to what is already there. 01:35:58.840 --> 01:36:05.900 So while the current zoning is not concurrent with the future land use designation of the 01:36:05.900 --> 01:36:13.620 site, if this zoning is approved it will then be concurrent. 01:36:13.620 --> 01:36:17.880 The intensity of new development permitted by the required zoning district is not expected 01:36:17.880 --> 01:36:25.240 to create significantly adverse impacts to surrounding areas. 01:36:25.240 --> 01:36:30.720 Impacts to the surrounding road network are anticipated as a result of this development. 01:36:30.720 --> 01:36:35.560 However, requirements such as perimeter street improvements and impact fees coupled with 01:36:35.560 --> 01:36:43.520 capital improvements on Brush Creek and the widening of US 377 Fort Worth Drive will offset 01:36:43.520 --> 01:36:45.920 the traffic generation. 01:36:45.920 --> 01:36:51.960 The applicant completed a traffic impact analysis or TIA pursuit to this rezoning request. 01:36:51.960 --> 01:36:57.640 The TIA makes the following recommendation, pending the timeframe for the proposed widening 01:36:57.640 --> 01:37:07.240 of 377 it is recommended that the southbound turn lanes be installed on US 377. 01:37:07.240 --> 01:37:17.680 So southbound turn lanes at this intersection and at driveway number 4 which is located 01:37:17.680 --> 01:37:19.800 right here. 01:37:19.800 --> 01:37:25.680 So coming this way we would have a turn lane here and a turn lane here. 01:37:25.680 --> 01:37:31.760 The southbound left turn bays at the respective intersection should be constructed in coordination 01:37:31.760 --> 01:37:34.240 upon completion of the development. 01:37:34.240 --> 01:37:39.800 Any additional improvements such as traffic signals and the widening of the road would 01:37:39.800 --> 01:37:43.620 be completed with the improvement of 377. 01:37:43.620 --> 01:37:49.620 And Cindy, do we have a timeline on the improvement of 377 outside with the required and Brush 01:37:49.620 --> 01:37:50.620 Creek? 01:37:50.620 --> 01:37:53.080 We do not have a timeline for 377. 01:37:53.080 --> 01:37:57.000 I do know that they are in the process of acquiring right of way right now. 01:37:57.000 --> 01:38:01.960 I have heard from different property owners along 377. 01:38:01.960 --> 01:38:05.720 And Brush Creek, I was told that is a ten year timeframe. 01:38:05.720 --> 01:38:06.720 Okay. 01:38:06.720 --> 01:38:08.760 Thank you. 01:38:08.760 --> 01:38:12.680 Let's see. 01:38:12.680 --> 01:38:18.800 Water and wastewater, public water is available to the site and wastewater will be extended 01:38:18.800 --> 01:38:21.320 to the site from the east along Brush Creek. 01:38:21.320 --> 01:38:24.980 There is capacity within the system to serve the proposal. 01:38:24.980 --> 01:38:30.840 With regards to parks, the subject property is located approximately 1,032.9 feet south 01:38:30.840 --> 01:38:34.680 from the proposed park at the corner of Bonnie Bray and Allred Road. 01:38:34.680 --> 01:38:40.960 This distance conforms to the park's goal of a ten minute walk to a park. 01:38:40.960 --> 01:38:43.160 Schools. 01:38:43.160 --> 01:38:50.280 There's been a lot of concern expressed about the impact this development may have on the 01:38:50.280 --> 01:38:55.920 Argyle ISD. 01:38:55.920 --> 01:39:00.640 The district has indicated that a new elementary school as well as additions to the high school 01:39:00.640 --> 01:39:04.800 are anticipated by 2022 or 2023. 01:39:04.800 --> 01:39:09.880 We expect this timeline would coincide with the anticipated completion of phase one because 01:39:09.880 --> 01:39:13.680 they have to go through many, this is just the first step of a very long process they 01:39:13.680 --> 01:39:17.440 have to go through before they even start development of the site. 01:39:17.440 --> 01:39:23.360 So we anticipate by the time phase one is complete, the school should be complete as 01:39:23.360 --> 01:39:28.320 well and be able to handle the students that are generated. 01:39:28.320 --> 01:39:32.440 Cindy, we have a letter from the superintendent of Argyle ISD. 01:39:32.440 --> 01:39:33.440 Yes. 01:39:33.440 --> 01:39:35.880 Was she aware of the timeline? 01:39:35.880 --> 01:39:39.520 She seemed adamant about lack of capacity, but it seems like the city somehow has interpreted 01:39:39.520 --> 01:39:41.960 that differently. 01:39:41.960 --> 01:39:50.120 The city has, I requested from Argyle ISD the formulas they used to calculate student 01:39:50.120 --> 01:39:53.560 population for development and I did not receive them. 01:39:53.560 --> 01:39:58.360 What we did when we got this letter was we kind of worked backwards to see what their 01:39:58.360 --> 01:40:04.120 calculations were and as I noted in my staff report, their calculations are quite a bit 01:40:04.120 --> 01:40:07.680 larger than the calculations DISD uses. 01:40:07.680 --> 01:40:10.920 So there's a discrepancy there. 01:40:10.920 --> 01:40:16.040 I've been talking with the assistant to the superintendent, however, I haven't talked 01:40:16.040 --> 01:40:24.120 to the superintendent herself, so I can't really give you a good answer to that question 01:40:24.120 --> 01:40:25.120 otherwise. 01:40:25.120 --> 01:40:26.120 Okay. 01:40:26.120 --> 01:40:27.120 Thank you. 01:40:27.120 --> 01:40:34.360 Fire station, the subject property is approximately 1.8 miles from fire station number seven and 01:40:34.360 --> 01:40:41.120 that is within the eight minute or less response time boundary. 01:40:41.120 --> 01:40:45.400 And there was no error in assigning the current zoning district. 01:40:45.400 --> 01:40:50.080 Public notification, now I've got several slides that are addressing public notification. 01:40:50.080 --> 01:40:55.300 This first slide shows the actual notification response within the 200 foot boundary. 01:40:55.300 --> 01:41:01.800 We received no responses in opposition within the 200 foot boundary which is within the 01:41:01.800 --> 01:41:03.800 city. 01:41:03.800 --> 01:41:08.960 You'll note that this site is on the edge of the ETJ. 01:41:08.960 --> 01:41:15.960 We did receive responses from the ETJ, however, we did not include them on this map. 01:41:15.960 --> 01:41:23.040 We received two responses in favor which you can see here and here and that comprises 10% 01:41:23.040 --> 01:41:26.080 of the area within the 200 foot boundary. 01:41:26.080 --> 01:41:29.160 The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting. 01:41:29.160 --> 01:41:33.680 I put the details of the neighborhood meeting into your backup. 01:41:33.680 --> 01:41:39.960 There were quite a few concerns expressed about this particular project including the 01:41:39.960 --> 01:41:43.880 appropriateness of the site for this location. 01:41:43.880 --> 01:41:53.260 The density, the height of the buildings, traffic, schools, among others. 01:41:53.260 --> 01:42:00.560 Now this notification map shows the responses we have received within two miles of the subject 01:42:00.560 --> 01:42:09.400 site, within two miles of the subject site we received in opposition 41 and you can see 01:42:09.400 --> 01:42:12.640 in the red they're right here. 01:42:12.640 --> 01:42:22.680 And in favor we received two which are the two that we already spoke about. 01:42:22.680 --> 01:42:34.320 In the ETJ we also received two that are in support which you can see here and here. 01:42:34.320 --> 01:42:42.240 And in the ETJ within two miles we received 15 against which you can see the purple. 01:42:42.240 --> 01:42:43.860 >> And Cindy when was that last updated? 01:42:43.860 --> 01:42:46.240 We are still gathering opposition. 01:42:46.240 --> 01:42:48.240 >> We are still gathering. 01:42:48.240 --> 01:42:52.360 The map was last updated at 2 p.m. today. 01:42:52.360 --> 01:42:55.840 I handed out two sets of responses to you. 01:42:55.840 --> 01:43:01.680 The first set of responses in the binder clip, the very thick one, is reflected on the map. 01:43:01.680 --> 01:43:04.040 It's not reflected in the staff report. 01:43:04.040 --> 01:43:10.520 And then the very thin that I gave out to you is what I've received since 2 p.m. 01:43:10.520 --> 01:43:13.280 >> And just to let the commission know, if you haven't checked the email, there's about 01:43:13.280 --> 01:43:19.160 12 more oppositions that have come in after 430. 01:43:19.160 --> 01:43:23.080 Those we have not obviously reviewed so anything coming after 430 is not going to be considered. 01:43:23.080 --> 01:43:24.080 >> No. 01:43:24.080 --> 01:43:25.080 >> These or those? 01:43:25.080 --> 01:43:28.440 >> I checked my email and I'm still receiving them. 01:43:28.440 --> 01:43:31.240 They've been coming in as I've been at this meeting. 01:43:31.240 --> 01:43:35.680 Those will be all calculated and put onto the map that goes to city council. 01:43:35.680 --> 01:43:36.680 >> Commissioner Pernetta. 01:43:36.680 --> 01:43:37.680 >> I just have a question. 01:43:37.680 --> 01:43:42.360 So looking at this, it looks like there's maybe what half a dozen properties that are 01:43:42.360 --> 01:43:43.360 within 200 feet. 01:43:43.360 --> 01:43:44.360 Is that right? 01:43:44.360 --> 01:43:45.360 >> Mm-hmm. 01:43:45.360 --> 01:43:46.360 >> Okay. 01:43:46.360 --> 01:43:50.640 And on those we had one or two that were in support, right? 01:43:50.640 --> 01:43:54.640 >> Two in support representing 10% of the area within 200 feet. 01:43:54.640 --> 01:43:55.640 >> Okay. 01:43:55.640 --> 01:44:00.240 And the ones that were in support, do we know if they have a financial interest in the property 01:44:00.240 --> 01:44:01.240 that's-- 01:44:01.240 --> 01:44:02.240 >> No, they don't. 01:44:02.240 --> 01:44:03.240 >> Okay. 01:44:03.240 --> 01:44:04.240 All right. 01:44:04.240 --> 01:44:05.240 Thank you. 01:44:05.240 --> 01:44:11.200 >> Now, this is the overall responses that we received. 01:44:11.200 --> 01:44:18.800 We received from within the city in opposition 42 as of 2 o'clock plus whatever I've given 01:44:18.800 --> 01:44:20.880 out to you and what's in my email. 01:44:20.880 --> 01:44:27.800 I've received two in favor, which you can see the subject's not right here. 01:44:27.800 --> 01:44:30.720 Two in favor are the two that are within 200 feet. 01:44:30.720 --> 01:44:38.160 In the city of Denton, extraterritorial jurisdiction or ETJ, in opposition we have 15 and in favor 01:44:38.160 --> 01:44:40.320 we have two. 01:44:40.320 --> 01:44:44.320 And then in the city of Argyle, we have six in opposition. 01:44:44.320 --> 01:44:46.960 The city of Flower Mound, we have one in opposition. 01:44:46.960 --> 01:44:51.000 And the city of Crum, we have one in opposition. 01:44:51.000 --> 01:44:52.000 >> Commissioner Smith. 01:44:52.000 --> 01:44:53.480 >> Thank you, Chair. 01:44:53.480 --> 01:44:59.960 The ETJ oppositions, they don't count into the calculation for the super majority requirement? 01:44:59.960 --> 01:45:00.960 >> No. 01:45:00.960 --> 01:45:05.040 The only things that count into the calculation for super majority requirement is in the 200 01:45:05.040 --> 01:45:06.040 foot area. 01:45:06.040 --> 01:45:07.040 >> Okay. 01:45:07.040 --> 01:45:11.040 I know the properties that were in the ETJ that were in the 200 foot area, am I wrong 01:45:11.040 --> 01:45:12.040 with that? 01:45:12.040 --> 01:45:13.680 >> They do not count. 01:45:13.680 --> 01:45:20.160 We are required by law to use only those that are on the certified tax rule and that would 01:45:20.160 --> 01:45:21.160 be within the city. 01:45:21.160 --> 01:45:22.160 >> Okay. 01:45:22.160 --> 01:45:24.600 But even though there are properties letting it within the 200, if they're not in the city, 01:45:24.600 --> 01:45:25.600 they don't count. 01:45:25.600 --> 01:45:26.600 >> That's right. 01:45:26.600 --> 01:45:27.600 We have made note of them. 01:45:27.600 --> 01:45:31.840 But that's not counted in the opposition within 200 feet. 01:45:31.840 --> 01:45:32.840 >> Okay. 01:45:32.840 --> 01:45:33.840 Thanks. 01:45:33.840 --> 01:45:40.200 >> Okay, staff recommendation is approval, is consistent with the goals and objectives 01:45:40.200 --> 01:45:45.640 of the Denton plan and complies with the zoning criteria for approval as I just went through. 01:45:45.640 --> 01:45:46.640 That concludes my presentation. 01:45:46.640 --> 01:45:47.640 >> Commissioner Smith. 01:45:47.640 --> 01:45:50.640 >> Thank you, Chair. 01:45:50.640 --> 01:45:54.480 I have no questions for Cindy, but just something to bring up for the sake of time. 01:45:54.480 --> 01:46:00.800 We've done this before whenever we've had highly attended meetings for certain items. 01:46:00.800 --> 01:46:06.440 Possibly because we do have another, I think we have what, item G, item H or so that we 01:46:06.440 --> 01:46:07.440 have on the agenda. 01:46:07.440 --> 01:46:10.760 Is there a possibility for us to pull F and put it towards the end so we can get the other 01:46:10.760 --> 01:46:14.440 items out of the way and use F at the very end just in case it does take a long time 01:46:14.440 --> 01:46:15.440 and we don't have? 01:46:15.440 --> 01:46:16.440 >> Yeah. 01:46:16.440 --> 01:46:17.440 So G and H are city reports. 01:46:17.440 --> 01:46:18.440 >> Okay. 01:46:18.440 --> 01:46:20.960 >> And so the only ones after this item will be city reports. 01:46:20.960 --> 01:46:21.960 >> Okay. 01:46:21.960 --> 01:46:25.800 >> Before that, it's four final replats that would have been on consent if it was any other 01:46:25.800 --> 01:46:28.160 approval process and then a short variance. 01:46:28.160 --> 01:46:29.160 >> Okay. 01:46:29.160 --> 01:46:30.160 Thanks. 01:46:30.160 --> 01:46:34.640 Is there any other questions? 01:46:34.640 --> 01:46:40.220 So I think it's worth noting for the commissioners as well as the new commissioners, maybe particularly, 01:46:40.220 --> 01:46:45.280 they provided a concept map, but we are not looking at that concept map for the purpose 01:46:45.280 --> 01:46:46.280 of this. 01:46:46.280 --> 01:46:49.280 It's extraneous to the point of land use. 01:46:49.280 --> 01:46:55.800 So just for the sake of questions in the public and our discussion internally, it's a rezone 01:46:55.800 --> 01:47:00.680 to MN with every possible land use within MN. 01:47:00.680 --> 01:47:01.960 They provided a concept plan. 01:47:01.960 --> 01:47:03.240 They're not held to that. 01:47:03.240 --> 01:47:07.080 So if we were to prove it, thinking those apartments look awesome, they're not held 01:47:07.080 --> 01:47:08.080 to that. 01:47:08.080 --> 01:47:10.640 They can put in the convenience store or dry cleaning, whatever else they wanted to put 01:47:10.640 --> 01:47:11.640 in. 01:47:11.640 --> 01:47:17.640 So for the sake of our review, our look is does all the land uses or any of the land 01:47:17.640 --> 01:47:20.880 uses within MN work for this property? 01:47:20.880 --> 01:47:23.680 We're not specifically looking at apartments. 01:47:23.680 --> 01:47:26.380 Sometimes we can get convoluted about the TIA, about the apartments, and everything 01:47:26.380 --> 01:47:30.920 about apartments, but it's not -- this item is not looking at apartments. 01:47:30.920 --> 01:47:34.960 It's looking at the land use within MN, specifically on the rezone. 01:47:34.960 --> 01:47:39.040 So hopefully we can tailor the discussion specifically to that and not get in the weeds 01:47:39.040 --> 01:47:44.000 about the developer, the apartments, or what they might promise to put there. 01:47:44.000 --> 01:47:48.160 We're not binding that to this discussion. 01:47:48.160 --> 01:47:53.480 Seeing no other questions on this item, I'm going to close the work session at 631. 01:47:53.480 --> 01:47:58.720 We'll reconvene in council chambers at 640, and we'll stick to the original agenda order 01:47:58.720 --> 01:48:00.440 at 640 in council chambers. 01:48:00.440 --> 01:48:12.880 Ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the planning and zoning public hearing for October 16th. 01:48:12.880 --> 01:48:13.880 Appreciate the patience. 01:48:13.880 --> 01:48:17.760 We'll get started, and I'll call this meeting to order at 647. 01:48:17.760 --> 01:48:22.800 Seeing that we have a quorum, let the record show that Commissioner Ellis is absent this 01:48:22.800 --> 01:48:23.800 evening. 01:48:23.800 --> 01:48:27.360 The first item of business is to stand, if able, and I give the pledge of allegiance 01:48:27.360 --> 01:48:32.360 to the U.S. and Texas flag. 01:48:32.360 --> 01:48:55.720 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for 01:48:55.720 --> 01:49:00.180 which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. 01:49:00.180 --> 01:49:04.240 The next item of business is to consider the minutes from October 2nd, 2019. 01:49:04.240 --> 01:49:05.240 Commissioner Smith? 01:49:05.240 --> 01:49:06.240 Motion for approval. 01:49:06.240 --> 01:49:07.240 Approval? 01:49:07.240 --> 01:49:10.020 Yeah, motion for approval. 01:49:10.020 --> 01:49:12.040 We have a first for approval, Commissioner Pernetta? 01:49:12.040 --> 01:49:13.040 Second the motion. 01:49:13.040 --> 01:49:16.400 We have a first and a second for approval of the minutes. 01:49:16.400 --> 01:49:18.580 Any discussion? 01:49:18.580 --> 01:49:29.520 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:49:29.520 --> 01:49:32.520 Motion carries 5-0 with one recuse. 01:49:32.520 --> 01:49:36.320 The next item of business is the consent agenda. 01:49:36.320 --> 01:49:37.320 Commissioner Smith? 01:49:37.320 --> 01:49:38.320 Motion for approval. 01:49:38.320 --> 01:49:39.320 We have a first for approval. 01:49:39.320 --> 01:49:40.320 Commissioner Pernetta? 01:49:40.320 --> 01:49:41.320 Second the motion. 01:49:41.320 --> 01:49:44.360 We have a first and a second for approval of the consent agenda. 01:49:44.360 --> 01:49:46.480 Any discussion? 01:49:46.480 --> 01:49:54.000 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:49:54.000 --> 01:49:56.800 Motion carries 6-0. 01:49:56.800 --> 01:49:59.680 The next item of business is items for individual consideration. 01:49:59.680 --> 01:50:04.760 We have one item for a consider approval for our calendar. 01:50:04.760 --> 01:50:06.420 Commissioner Smith? 01:50:06.420 --> 01:50:07.420 Motion for approval. 01:50:07.420 --> 01:50:08.420 We have a first for approval. 01:50:08.420 --> 01:50:09.420 Commissioner Pernetta? 01:50:09.420 --> 01:50:10.420 Second. 01:50:10.420 --> 01:50:11.600 We have a first and a second for approval. 01:50:11.600 --> 01:50:12.600 Any discussion on the calendar? 01:50:12.600 --> 01:50:15.600 All the dates look good. 01:50:15.600 --> 01:50:16.600 Perfect. 01:50:16.600 --> 01:50:24.440 With that, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:50:24.440 --> 01:50:25.440 Motion carries 6-0. 01:50:25.440 --> 01:50:27.600 That brings us to our public hearing items. 01:50:27.600 --> 01:50:32.880 The first item is 5A FR-19-18. 01:50:32.880 --> 01:50:37.040 I will invite Julie Wyatt for presentation and open the public hearing. 01:50:37.040 --> 01:50:45.400 Good evening, I'm Julie Wyatt, Senior Planner with the City of Denton. 01:50:45.400 --> 01:50:52.080 I'm presenting to you a residential reef plot for two lots within the Old North Park Phase 01:50:52.080 --> 01:50:53.080 2 subdivision. 01:50:53.080 --> 01:50:57.040 The lots in question are here with the hatching on it. 01:50:57.040 --> 01:51:01.560 These lots were originally plotted in 2015 for a single family residential neighborhood. 01:51:01.560 --> 01:51:07.840 In order to ensure adequate vehicular circulation and emergency access, a temporary access easement 01:51:07.840 --> 01:51:12.400 was placed upon these lots at that time. 01:51:12.400 --> 01:51:18.200 Since then, the entire neighborhood, all phases of the subdivision have been constructed. 01:51:18.200 --> 01:51:21.360 The streets are now punched through the way they were intended to. 01:51:21.360 --> 01:51:26.260 There's adequate circulation and emergency vehicle access, and so they're removing that 01:51:26.260 --> 01:51:28.240 temporary access easement. 01:51:28.240 --> 01:51:32.080 That's why they're here tonight, is just to remove that temporary access easement to develop 01:51:32.080 --> 01:51:34.640 the lots as they were intended with single family uses. 01:51:34.640 --> 01:51:37.640 I'll stand for any questions. 01:51:37.640 --> 01:51:38.640 Any questions? 01:51:38.640 --> 01:51:40.600 I do not see any. 01:51:40.600 --> 01:51:41.600 Thanks, Julie. 01:51:41.600 --> 01:51:44.400 Thomas Fletcher is the applicant that is here. 01:51:44.400 --> 01:51:53.320 Is Mr. Fletcher wanting to speak? 01:51:53.320 --> 01:51:54.320 Good evening, Commissioners. 01:51:54.320 --> 01:51:58.240 Thomas Fletcher, 6160 Warren Parkway, Frisco, Texas. 01:51:58.240 --> 01:52:01.880 Didn't really have anything to add, just wanted to be here in case there were any questions 01:52:01.880 --> 01:52:03.880 that needed to be answered. 01:52:03.880 --> 01:52:06.040 I don't see any questions at this time. 01:52:06.040 --> 01:52:07.040 Thank you. 01:52:07.040 --> 01:52:08.040 This is a public hearing. 01:52:08.040 --> 01:52:13.080 Anyone wishing to speak on the item, they certainly do so. 01:52:13.080 --> 01:52:14.080 Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. 01:52:14.080 --> 01:52:15.080 I turn to the dais for discussion on our motion. 01:52:15.080 --> 01:52:16.080 Commissioner Pernetta? 01:52:16.080 --> 01:52:17.080 Motion to approve. 01:52:17.080 --> 01:52:18.080 We have a first for approval. 01:52:18.080 --> 01:52:19.080 Commissioner Anderson? 01:52:19.080 --> 01:52:20.080 I second. 01:52:20.080 --> 01:52:21.080 Thanks. 01:52:21.080 --> 01:52:22.080 We have a first and a second for approval. 01:52:22.080 --> 01:52:23.080 Any discussion? 01:52:23.080 --> 01:52:23.920 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:52:23.920 --> 01:52:24.920 Motion carries 6-0. 01:52:24.920 --> 01:52:47.520 The next item of business is item 5B, FR19-19. 01:52:47.520 --> 01:53:09.040 I'll invite Sean Jacobson for a presentation, and I will open the public hearing. 01:53:09.040 --> 01:53:28.640 Good evening, Chair and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 01:53:28.640 --> 01:53:33.120 My name is Sean Jacobson, assistant planner with the City of Denton. 01:53:33.120 --> 01:53:38.400 Presenting tonight a request by Gordon Meredith of Denton Community Development on behalf 01:53:38.400 --> 01:53:43.440 of Jimmie and Sandra Cross for approval of a final replat of lot 19R, block 6 of the 01:53:43.440 --> 01:53:44.440 College View addition. 01:53:44.440 --> 01:53:51.960 This would be a residential replat of lots 19 and 20 of block 6 of the College View edition. 01:53:51.960 --> 01:53:58.200 These are two existing lots, each .1744 acre, and they are proposed to be replatted to make 01:53:58.200 --> 01:54:03.520 1.347 acre lot, with the purpose of building a new residence on that property. 01:54:03.520 --> 01:54:07.960 Light 19 is currently vacant, and lot 20 is developed with a house and a shed. 01:54:07.960 --> 01:54:11.920 Both lots are in the R-4 zoning district, which sets a minimum lot size of 7,000 square 01:54:11.920 --> 01:54:16.480 feet, and the proposed replat would create a lot that would meet that minimum standard. 01:54:16.480 --> 01:54:21.800 It also meets all other requirements of the DDC, and therefore staff is recommending approval. 01:54:21.800 --> 01:54:27.920 We did, because this is a replat of a residential property, we sent out notices both to 200 01:54:27.920 --> 01:54:31.800 feet and to all those living in the current subdivision. 01:54:31.800 --> 01:54:36.200 We received two responses in support, which I gave to you before the start of the meeting. 01:54:36.200 --> 01:54:38.560 This is from the property owner. 01:54:38.560 --> 01:54:41.280 With that, we recommend approval, and I'll stand for any questions. 01:54:41.280 --> 01:54:42.280 >> Thank you, Sean. 01:54:42.280 --> 01:54:44.560 I don't see any questions this time. 01:54:44.560 --> 01:54:45.560 This is a public hearing. 01:54:45.560 --> 01:54:46.560 Anyone wish to speak? 01:54:46.560 --> 01:54:47.560 We certainly do so. 01:54:47.560 --> 01:54:51.400 I don't see any cards, but we do have two submissions for this item. 01:54:51.400 --> 01:54:53.080 Both are in favor. 01:54:53.080 --> 01:54:57.720 One is Ken Frissy of Justin, Texas, and the other is Jimmy Cross of Denton. 01:54:57.720 --> 01:55:00.560 That was the only feedback I've gotten on this item. 01:55:00.560 --> 01:55:04.720 Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this replat? 01:55:04.720 --> 01:55:10.120 Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. 01:55:10.120 --> 01:55:12.200 Commissioner Smith. 01:55:12.200 --> 01:55:13.200 >> Motion for approval. 01:55:13.200 --> 01:55:14.360 >> We have a first for approval. 01:55:14.360 --> 01:55:15.360 Commissioner Pernetta. 01:55:15.360 --> 01:55:16.360 >> Second the motion. 01:55:16.360 --> 01:55:18.120 >> We have a first and a second for approval. 01:55:18.120 --> 01:55:20.680 Any discussion on the item? 01:55:20.680 --> 01:55:27.680 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:55:27.680 --> 01:55:28.680 Motion carries 6-0. 01:55:28.680 --> 01:55:35.720 Next item of business is item 5C, FR 19-24, and this is Sean's item again. 01:55:35.720 --> 01:55:38.000 I'll invite him for presentation and open the public hearing. 01:55:58.680 --> 01:56:12.040 Good evening again, Chair and members of the commission. 01:56:12.040 --> 01:56:17.280 The request here is by John Cox of Eagle Surveying on behalf of Jim Heritage LP for approval 01:56:17.280 --> 01:56:24.760 of a replat of lot 1 block A of the Colorado addition to remove easements created by previous 01:56:24.760 --> 01:56:25.760 platts. 01:56:25.760 --> 01:56:29.080 This is an approximately 9.84 acre property currently undeveloped. 01:56:29.080 --> 01:56:31.760 It's in the LI zoning district. 01:56:31.760 --> 01:56:36.720 The replat would create lot 1 R block A, which would meet the 5,000 square foot minimum lot 01:56:36.720 --> 01:56:40.440 size of the light industrial zoning district this lot is located in. 01:56:40.440 --> 01:56:45.640 It would meet all established requirements of the DDC and therefore staff is recommending 01:56:45.640 --> 01:56:46.640 approval. 01:56:46.640 --> 01:57:00.760 With that I'll stand for questions. 01:57:00.760 --> 01:57:01.760 I do not see any questions. 01:57:01.760 --> 01:57:03.720 Sorry, the screen is slow to load. 01:57:03.720 --> 01:57:04.720 This is a public hearing. 01:57:04.720 --> 01:57:08.280 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so. 01:57:08.280 --> 01:57:10.560 Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and turn the dais for discussion. 01:57:10.560 --> 01:57:11.560 Or motion. 01:57:11.560 --> 01:57:12.560 Commissioner Smith. 01:57:12.560 --> 01:57:13.560 Motion to approve. 01:57:13.560 --> 01:57:14.920 We have a motion for approval. 01:57:14.920 --> 01:57:15.920 Commissioner Pernetta. 01:57:15.920 --> 01:57:16.920 I second the motion. 01:57:16.920 --> 01:57:19.080 We have a first and a second for approval. 01:57:19.080 --> 01:57:20.080 Any discussion on the item? 01:57:20.080 --> 01:57:34.240 Seeing none, I call for a vote on the board. 01:57:34.240 --> 01:57:35.240 Motion carries 6-0. 01:57:35.240 --> 01:57:40.200 Next item of business is item 5D, FR 19-25. 01:57:40.200 --> 01:57:42.160 This is Sean Jacobson again. 01:57:42.160 --> 01:57:46.120 I'll invite you to present and I'll open the public hearing. 01:57:46.120 --> 01:57:49.760 Good evening again, Chair and members of the commission. 01:57:49.760 --> 01:57:55.360 This is a request by John Cox of EGLE Surveying again on behalf of GMLP for a replat of lot 01:57:55.360 --> 01:58:00.040 9BR-2 Block C, the Shady Oaks Industrial Edition. 01:58:00.040 --> 01:58:03.800 The purpose of this replat is also to remove easements that were established by PLAT. 01:58:03.800 --> 01:58:08.320 This is an approximately 4.61 acre property that is currently vacant. 01:58:08.320 --> 01:58:12.780 The lot that would be created, lot 9BR-2A, would meet the minimum lot size and other 01:58:12.780 --> 01:58:14.960 standards of the LI zoning district. 01:58:14.960 --> 01:58:20.000 And the proposed replat meets all of the requirements of the DDC, therefore staff is recommending 01:58:20.000 --> 01:58:21.000 approval. 01:58:21.000 --> 01:58:22.000 With that I'll stand for any questions. 01:58:22.000 --> 01:58:23.000 I do not see any. 01:58:23.000 --> 01:58:24.000 Thank you. 01:58:24.000 --> 01:58:25.000 This is a public hearing. 01:58:25.000 --> 01:58:26.000 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so. 01:58:26.000 --> 01:58:27.000 Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. 01:58:27.000 --> 01:58:28.000 Commissioner Smith. 01:58:28.000 --> 01:58:29.000 Motion to approve. 01:58:29.000 --> 01:58:30.000 Commissioner Cole. 01:58:30.000 --> 01:58:31.000 Second. 01:58:31.000 --> 01:58:38.540 We have a first and a second for approval, any discussion? 01:58:38.540 --> 01:58:44.680 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board. 01:58:44.680 --> 01:58:45.680 Motion carries 6-0. 01:58:45.680 --> 01:58:53.200 The next item of business is item 5E, V19-2, I'll invite Julie Wyatt for presentation and 01:58:53.200 --> 01:59:13.080 open the public hearing. 01:59:13.080 --> 01:59:14.080 Okay. 01:59:14.080 --> 01:59:15.080 Once again, I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton. 01:59:15.080 --> 01:59:20.080 And I'm presenting V19-2, Haven at Dougherty. 01:59:20.080 --> 01:59:26.280 The request is to hold a public hearing and consider an approval of a variance from the 01:59:26.280 --> 01:59:31.360 City of Denton's transportation design criteria manual, section 2.2.2. 01:59:31.360 --> 01:59:35.080 The subject property is outlined here in yellow. 01:59:35.080 --> 01:59:41.360 It's located on the north side of East Dougherty Street, about 285 feet west of Johnson Street 01:59:41.360 --> 01:59:42.360 right here. 01:59:42.360 --> 01:59:48.200 The requested variance is to permit a driveway that's 69 feet from an existing driveway 01:59:48.200 --> 01:59:53.120 where typically a 100-foot separation would be required. 01:59:53.120 --> 01:59:54.220 Just some background. 01:59:54.220 --> 01:59:59.400 This property and this development is being reviewed under the 2002 Denton Development 01:59:59.400 --> 02:00:00.400 Code. 02:00:00.400 --> 02:00:03.640 There are some specific site characteristics to the parcel. 02:00:03.640 --> 02:00:05.960 It's a triangular parcel. 02:00:05.960 --> 02:00:10.300 It has a railroad corridor that forms that western boundary. 02:00:10.300 --> 02:00:14.400 It has an existing self-service storage used to the east. 02:00:14.400 --> 02:00:18.360 It's a small self-service storage facility, it's about 30 units. 02:00:18.360 --> 02:00:20.280 It's in an urban infill context. 02:00:20.280 --> 02:00:22.400 It's near Dallas Drive. 02:00:22.400 --> 02:00:26.920 And East Dougherty is classified as a collector, not because of the mobility plan. 02:00:26.920 --> 02:00:31.520 It's not one of those roadways that you see on that mobility plan map, but rather that's 02:00:31.520 --> 02:00:36.280 due to the surrounding zoning and anticipated development in the area. 02:00:36.280 --> 02:00:43.500 The proposed development on the site, it's an 8.87-acre multifamily development. 02:00:43.500 --> 02:00:50.480 That's going to include 132 dwelling units, 466 parking spaces, and an amenity center. 02:00:50.480 --> 02:00:55.900 As part of that, they are proposing three full-access driveways, one to the north on 02:00:55.900 --> 02:01:03.200 Collins Street, and then two to the south onto Dougherty, and then one exit-only driveway 02:01:03.200 --> 02:01:04.200 on Dougherty. 02:01:04.200 --> 02:01:08.440 And that's to ensure adequate emergency access. 02:01:08.440 --> 02:01:12.020 So here is an exhibit that the applicant proposed. 02:01:12.020 --> 02:01:15.520 Here is an existing driveway for that self-service storage use. 02:01:15.520 --> 02:01:19.920 It's located here, and that red arrow points to it. 02:01:19.920 --> 02:01:25.640 69 feet from that, they are proposing that full-access driveway here for the multifamily 02:01:25.640 --> 02:01:27.280 use. 02:01:27.280 --> 02:01:28.280 That will be gated. 02:01:28.280 --> 02:01:31.640 It will be a controlled-access driveway. 02:01:31.640 --> 02:01:32.820 Here's their other driveway. 02:01:32.820 --> 02:01:38.920 There's a full-access driveway for visitor access, and then there's that proposed exit-only. 02:01:38.920 --> 02:01:42.480 Here's an aerial view of that. 02:01:42.480 --> 02:01:47.440 If you can see, it's a little small, but there's that existing driveway for that self-service 02:01:47.440 --> 02:01:49.240 storage use. 02:01:49.240 --> 02:01:55.400 So the Criteria Manual outlines the criteria for approval for this type of variance. 02:01:55.400 --> 02:02:01.040 First, is it -- would it -- granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public's 02:02:01.040 --> 02:02:04.960 safety, health, or welfare, or injurious to other property. 02:02:04.960 --> 02:02:12.200 Second, for background, the minimum driveway separation is intended to provide for safety, 02:02:12.200 --> 02:02:17.580 as well as to reduce vehicular conflicts that could arise during turning movements. 02:02:17.580 --> 02:02:21.880 Spacing requirements increase with roadway speeds, so think a residential neighborhood 02:02:21.880 --> 02:02:28.320 would be a 10-foot spacing, whereas an arterial, a very large arterial, would be 200 feet spacing. 02:02:28.320 --> 02:02:31.440 Collectors usually require 100 feet of spacing. 02:02:31.440 --> 02:02:37.640 The requested 69 feet would not be injurious to other property, and our engineering department 02:02:37.640 --> 02:02:43.140 has reviewed this and has determined it would not be injurious to other property or reduce 02:02:43.140 --> 02:02:48.640 the roadway function, particularly because the adjacent self-service storage use actually 02:02:48.640 --> 02:02:52.360 generates very few trips, about nine per day. 02:02:52.360 --> 02:02:56.200 And also, East Doherty is really a low-traffic street. 02:02:56.200 --> 02:02:59.720 It really kind of only goes from Johnson Street to, I believe, Myrtle. 02:02:59.720 --> 02:03:03.880 So it's a pretty limited street, low traffic. 02:03:03.880 --> 02:03:10.000 The conditions upon which the request for a variance is based are unique to the property 02:03:10.000 --> 02:03:14.440 for which the variance is sought and are not applicable generally to other property. 02:03:14.440 --> 02:03:16.640 This is a narrow, that triangular parcel. 02:03:16.640 --> 02:03:22.120 It's in a redeveloping area, so there's some existing development that could conflict with 02:03:22.120 --> 02:03:24.960 the new development in the area. 02:03:24.960 --> 02:03:29.000 And that railroad corridor to the west really restricts the full access along the western 02:03:29.000 --> 02:03:33.220 portion of the boundary, kind of restricts how they can develop the site. 02:03:33.220 --> 02:03:37.520 Because of the particular physical surrounding shape or topographical condition of the specific 02:03:37.520 --> 02:03:42.880 property involved, a particular hardship of the owner would result as distinguished from 02:03:42.880 --> 02:03:47.360 a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the subdivision regulations is carried 02:03:47.360 --> 02:03:48.360 out. 02:03:48.360 --> 02:03:52.360 Once again, the building placement and those access points have to be determined due to 02:03:52.360 --> 02:03:56.400 that railroad corridor and the restriction of that access in that area. 02:03:56.400 --> 02:04:00.600 That's why they're proposing it in the location that they are. 02:04:00.600 --> 02:04:05.440 And the variance will not in any manner vary the provisions of Denton Plan 2030, the Denton 02:04:05.440 --> 02:04:10.680 Development Code, the Denton Mobility Plan, except that those documents may be amended 02:04:10.680 --> 02:04:13.320 in the manner prescribed by law. 02:04:13.320 --> 02:04:15.800 This road is not one of the Mobility Plan roads. 02:04:15.800 --> 02:04:23.080 It's not intended to vary from the provisions of the Denton Plan 2030 or that Mobility Plan. 02:04:23.080 --> 02:04:28.280 The reduction in the minimum drive approach separation would not modify the street classification 02:04:28.280 --> 02:04:32.820 of East Doherty or introduce new design standards that would be incompatible with the comprehensive 02:04:32.820 --> 02:04:34.320 plan. 02:04:34.320 --> 02:04:38.400 And finally, the special or peculiar conditions upon which the request is based did not result 02:04:38.400 --> 02:04:42.000 from or were not created by the act or commission of the owner. 02:04:42.000 --> 02:04:46.460 Once again, it really is created because of that railroad corridor and the site characteristics 02:04:46.460 --> 02:04:49.140 and narrowness of the site. 02:04:49.140 --> 02:04:53.400 So based upon the criteria for approval and staff's analysis, engineering has no objection 02:04:53.400 --> 02:04:57.720 to the proposed variance and staff recommends approval because it does meet the criteria 02:04:57.720 --> 02:04:58.720 for approval. 02:04:58.720 --> 02:04:59.720 I'll stand for any questions. 02:04:59.720 --> 02:05:00.720 Thank you, Julie. 02:05:00.720 --> 02:05:03.880 I do not see any. 02:05:03.880 --> 02:05:04.880 This is a public hearing. 02:05:04.880 --> 02:05:08.600 Anyone wishing to speak on this item may certainly do so. 02:05:08.600 --> 02:05:14.160 I do not have any cards, so seeing no movement in the crowd, I will close the public hearing. 02:05:14.160 --> 02:05:15.160 Commissioner Pernetta. 02:05:15.160 --> 02:05:18.160 Motion to approve. 02:05:18.160 --> 02:05:19.520 We have a motion for approval. 02:05:19.520 --> 02:05:20.520 Commissioner Cole. 02:05:20.520 --> 02:05:21.520 Second. 02:05:21.520 --> 02:05:22.520 We have a first and a second for approval. 02:05:22.520 --> 02:05:23.520 Any discussion? 02:05:23.520 --> 02:05:38.240 Seeing none, I call for a vote on the board. 02:05:38.240 --> 02:05:40.800 Motion carries 6-0. 02:05:40.800 --> 02:05:46.920 Next item of business is item 5F, Z18-0013C. 02:05:46.920 --> 02:05:57.320 I'll invite Cindy Jackson for presentation and open the public hearing. 02:05:57.320 --> 02:06:13.760 Thank you, Chairman, Commissioners. 02:06:13.760 --> 02:06:17.160 Cindy Jackson with the Development Services Department. 02:06:17.160 --> 02:06:27.040 I'm here to present to you zoning case Z18-0013, which is a request to rezone 6.71 acres from 02:06:27.040 --> 02:06:34.200 rural residential to mixed use neighborhood and to rezone approximately 11.359 acres of 02:06:34.200 --> 02:06:41.760 land from residential one to mixed use neighborhood. 02:06:41.760 --> 02:06:50.180 The 18.069 site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Brush Creek 02:06:50.180 --> 02:06:54.640 and Fort Worth Drive, US 377. 02:06:54.640 --> 02:07:00.800 Here you can see the current zoning map, and the site as it is currently zoned are R and 02:07:00.800 --> 02:07:01.800 R1. 02:07:01.800 --> 02:07:06.120 Should this be approved, this is what the zoning map would look like with MN, and you 02:07:06.120 --> 02:07:16.500 can see it is following a trend of MN along the 377 corridor. 02:07:16.500 --> 02:07:23.400 This is a concept plan that the applicant had created for the purposes of the traffic 02:07:23.400 --> 02:07:27.600 impact analysis. 02:07:27.600 --> 02:07:30.040 This is conceptual only. 02:07:30.040 --> 02:07:35.800 This is not how the site is going to be developed, and I just put it here just to show you that 02:07:35.800 --> 02:07:40.520 the site can be developed as desired. 02:07:40.520 --> 02:07:48.900 We have seven zoning criteria for approval in section 2.7.2D. 02:07:48.900 --> 02:07:55.280 Criteria one is that the site must be compliant with the future land use designation of the 02:07:55.280 --> 02:07:56.680 Denton Plan 2030. 02:07:56.680 --> 02:08:00.880 The land use designation is neighborhood mixed use. 02:08:00.880 --> 02:08:08.120 The intent of a neighborhood mixed use is that it is suited primarily for single family 02:08:08.120 --> 02:08:12.920 development, but where neighborhoods serving retail and services are critical to achieving 02:08:12.920 --> 02:08:19.320 balanced neighborhoods, diverse mix of housing types, and densities may also be accommodated 02:08:19.320 --> 02:08:24.460 in these locations, provided that the buildings are of appropriate scale and intensity to 02:08:24.460 --> 02:08:28.520 complement the surrounding neighborhood. 02:08:28.520 --> 02:08:32.680 Criteria two is that the site be consistent with relevant small area plans. 02:08:32.680 --> 02:08:36.560 There are no small area plans for this site. 02:08:36.560 --> 02:08:41.400 Criteria three is that it be consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zoning 02:08:41.400 --> 02:08:42.400 district. 02:08:42.400 --> 02:08:46.880 The purpose statement of the MN district is to provide compatibility between high intensity 02:08:46.880 --> 02:08:50.960 mixed use areas and adjacent residential areas. 02:08:50.960 --> 02:08:55.160 The proposed rezoning is pursuant to the development of a mixed use development, which will include 02:08:55.160 --> 02:09:00.280 both multi-family and neighborhood serving commercial uses, and will serve as a transition 02:09:00.280 --> 02:09:07.000 between large lot residential and the 377 corridor. 02:09:07.000 --> 02:09:11.760 Number four is there have been or will be significant changes in the area to warrant 02:09:11.760 --> 02:09:14.200 a zoning change. 02:09:14.200 --> 02:09:19.160 Both US 377 and Brush Creek Road are unimproved two lane roads. 02:09:19.160 --> 02:09:24.920 TxDOT has begun the process of widening US 377 to the south of this site. 02:09:24.920 --> 02:09:30.200 As the full length of seat 377 has been improved, the traffic on the roadway will correspondingly 02:09:30.200 --> 02:09:31.200 increase. 02:09:31.200 --> 02:09:35.120 Additionally, the current zoning of the site is not concurrent with the future land use 02:09:35.120 --> 02:09:40.240 designation of neighborhood mixed use. 02:09:40.240 --> 02:09:44.800 Criteria five is the intensity of new development permitted by the requested zoning district 02:09:44.800 --> 02:09:50.760 is not expected to create significantly adverse impacts on the surrounding areas. 02:09:50.760 --> 02:09:54.720 Number one is streets. 02:09:54.720 --> 02:10:06.620 Both Brush Creek Road and US 377 are designated as primary arterials on the mobility plan. 02:10:06.620 --> 02:10:12.400 The TIA completed by the applicant recommends southbound turn lane, turn left turn base 02:10:12.400 --> 02:10:19.840 installed at the Brush Creek intersection and driveway four as shown on the concept plan. 02:10:19.840 --> 02:10:24.640 TxDOT took into account the future land use designation of the site. 02:10:24.640 --> 02:10:30.640 As it's designing US 377 the improvements, as such the road design anticipates the additional 02:10:30.640 --> 02:10:35.880 traffic generated by the proposed development on this site. 02:10:35.880 --> 02:10:40.560 Water and wastewater, public water service is available to the public. 02:10:40.560 --> 02:10:46.280 Public wastewater will be extended to the site from the east along Brush Creek. 02:10:46.280 --> 02:10:50.920 There is a capacity within the system to serve the proposal. 02:10:50.920 --> 02:10:58.720 Regarding parks, the subject property is located within 1032.9 feet approximately south from 02:10:58.720 --> 02:11:02.200 a proposed park at the corner of Bonnie Bray and Allred Road. 02:11:02.200 --> 02:11:08.440 This distance conforms to the park's goal of a 10-minute walk to a park. 02:11:08.440 --> 02:11:16.200 Schools, the proposed development is located within the attendance zone of the Argyle ISD. 02:11:16.200 --> 02:11:20.160 The district has indicated that a new elementary school and additions to the high school are 02:11:20.160 --> 02:11:23.820 anticipated by 2022 or 2023. 02:11:23.820 --> 02:11:30.200 This timeline would coincide with the expected completion of phase one of the proposed development 02:11:30.200 --> 02:11:34.880 and as such should be able to, the new school and additions should be able to accommodate 02:11:34.880 --> 02:11:38.120 the additional students from this site. 02:11:38.120 --> 02:11:44.280 Fire station, the subject property is approximately 1.8 miles from fire station number seven and 02:11:44.280 --> 02:11:50.520 within the eight minute or less response time boundary. 02:11:50.520 --> 02:11:55.040 Criteria six, there was an error in establishing the current zoning district. 02:11:55.040 --> 02:11:59.460 There was no error in establishing the current zoning district. 02:11:59.460 --> 02:12:04.480 I've got several slides to show you public notification. 02:12:04.480 --> 02:12:12.840 The first one just shows you within the 200 and 500 foot area, which is our notification 02:12:12.840 --> 02:12:18.040 area, responses within the 200 foot area, we've received two in favor, which you can 02:12:18.040 --> 02:12:19.520 see here and here. 02:12:19.520 --> 02:12:26.000 We did receive responses from this area right here in opposition, however they are not located 02:12:26.000 --> 02:12:34.640 within the city limits and are not counted on the response map for the 200 foot. 02:12:34.640 --> 02:12:41.720 This is because of the fact that we are limited by state regulation to send out notifications 02:12:41.720 --> 02:12:50.820 only to those people who are on the city tax roll and count those properties. 02:12:50.820 --> 02:12:55.040 People in the ETJ obviously are not on the city tax roll so they did not receive a notice 02:12:55.040 --> 02:13:03.320 and correspondingly their response does not count within the 200 foot response area. 02:13:03.320 --> 02:13:09.920 Second is public notice within two miles of the subject site and we have here in opposition 02:13:09.920 --> 02:13:19.880 from within the city, we've got 41 and you can see them all right in here, excuse me, 02:13:19.880 --> 02:13:23.940 they're all right in here in the green, this is city limits, this is in green. 02:13:23.940 --> 02:13:28.800 We had two in favor, which I already discussed and none neutral. 02:13:28.800 --> 02:13:34.840 From within the ETJ in opposition we had 15, which you can see in all purple and in favor 02:13:34.840 --> 02:13:40.160 we had two and neutral zero. 02:13:40.160 --> 02:13:45.520 Now this is taking in all the responses received to this particular request. 02:13:45.520 --> 02:13:50.640 From within the city in opposition we received 42 and in favor two. 02:13:50.640 --> 02:13:55.240 Within the ETJ we received in opposition 15 and in favor two. 02:13:55.240 --> 02:14:05.520 Let's see, this I deleted but it didn't show up. 02:14:05.520 --> 02:14:10.680 All responses received from other cities, we've received six in opposition and none 02:14:10.680 --> 02:14:12.660 in favor or neutral. 02:14:12.660 --> 02:14:17.280 From the city of Flower Mound we received one in opposition and from the city of Crum 02:14:17.280 --> 02:14:23.640 we received one in opposition and the map is color coded and you can, it's kind of hard 02:14:23.640 --> 02:14:28.520 to see it because it's such a large area. 02:14:28.520 --> 02:14:32.760 Staff recommends approval of this zoning request, it is consistent with the goals and objectives 02:14:32.760 --> 02:14:37.560 of the Denton plan 2030 and complies with the zoning criteria for approval and that 02:14:37.560 --> 02:14:38.560 concludes my presentation. 02:14:38.560 --> 02:14:39.560 Thank you Cindy. 02:14:39.560 --> 02:14:44.000 The applicant is present if you have questions. 02:14:44.000 --> 02:14:45.720 Perfect. 02:14:45.720 --> 02:14:49.280 So this is a public hearing, there will be opportunity for everyone to speak but before 02:14:49.280 --> 02:14:55.120 we start I just wanted to have a couple housekeeping things said that hopefully will be helpful 02:14:55.120 --> 02:14:59.520 over the next potentially several hours. 02:14:59.520 --> 02:15:03.720 First is I mentioned this in work session, I just want to remind the commission as well 02:15:03.720 --> 02:15:07.280 as anyone in attendance that we are looking at only a zoning case tonight. 02:15:07.280 --> 02:15:10.320 There was a concept plan that you saw that had apartments. 02:15:10.320 --> 02:15:17.240 I would urge the commission to look at just the zoning of MN and the uses within MN when 02:15:17.240 --> 02:15:23.640 we think through the zoning, the applicant is not held to that concept map, it's simply 02:15:23.640 --> 02:15:27.600 what he intends to build but once it gets rezoned there could be another cell, another 02:15:27.600 --> 02:15:34.160 buyer come in and so we are simply looking at the zoning case tonight so if we can focus 02:15:34.160 --> 02:15:38.680 on that I think it would be helpful and then as we have questions I'm going to ask that 02:15:38.680 --> 02:15:44.520 the commission holds questions of the developer, the applicant or staff till the end if you 02:15:44.520 --> 02:15:48.500 just jot down your questions instead of coming back and forth to the podium we'll just do 02:15:48.500 --> 02:15:53.440 one set of large questions that the public brings to our attention at the end instead 02:15:53.440 --> 02:15:59.880 of going back and forth and then in accordance with our Robert's Rules training what we attempt 02:15:59.880 --> 02:16:04.920 to do is as soon as we close public hearing get a motion on a table before discussion. 02:16:04.920 --> 02:16:09.120 Typically we have a lot of discussion then look for a motion, I'm going to ask this evening 02:16:09.120 --> 02:16:14.680 that we motion, second that motion and then engage in the necessary discussion at that 02:16:14.680 --> 02:16:20.040 time just for the sake of progress and then for the audience a couple things that I want 02:16:20.040 --> 02:16:25.920 to ensure you're aware of is we are not the final recommending body for this decision. 02:16:25.920 --> 02:16:30.200 There are some things that come before P&Z that we, it ends with us, this is not one 02:16:30.200 --> 02:16:37.000 of those items so whatever the vote is this evening from our commission it will go to 02:16:37.000 --> 02:16:42.400 city council for a vote so if we have a recommendation of denial it still goes to city council and 02:16:42.400 --> 02:16:46.760 they will have an independent decision from us with a recommendation to consider as well 02:16:46.760 --> 02:16:51.200 as an approval if we approve this project it's just a recommendation to city council 02:16:51.200 --> 02:16:57.040 so for whatever happens tonight there potentially will be another evening of your time that 02:16:57.040 --> 02:17:00.840 might be useful when city council hears this. 02:17:00.840 --> 02:17:08.920 Last thing is we received not an insignificant amount of letters and emails from the public. 02:17:08.920 --> 02:17:14.520 We have and have had the opportunity to review everything that received before 4.30 so if 02:17:14.520 --> 02:17:20.720 it came in after 4.30 which we're still getting some in right now we have not reviewed it, 02:17:20.720 --> 02:17:25.760 it will be for city council to review so it's not going unnoticed it's just we haven't had 02:17:25.760 --> 02:17:31.680 time to review the ones that came in within the last ten minutes, lastly I have a stack 02:17:31.680 --> 02:17:38.240 of 54 cards and we ran out of blue ones, the white ones denote to me that you're a non 02:17:38.240 --> 02:17:43.080 speaking individual or you wish not to speak rather so when I get to the white cards I 02:17:43.080 --> 02:17:46.720 might just ask if you're wishing to speak or not because I just don't know because of 02:17:46.720 --> 02:17:52.920 the colour and I'm not trying to be rude and then lastly in a public hearing item the public 02:17:52.920 --> 02:17:57.520 each individual has four minutes to speak, there will be a timer on all the screens and 02:17:57.520 --> 02:18:02.280 then I have a timer here it starts green with 30 seconds left it goes yellow with 10 seconds 02:18:02.280 --> 02:18:06.480 left it goes red just for the sake of everyone's time and consideration if we could pay attention 02:18:06.480 --> 02:18:12.440 to the colours at four minutes I'm going to try politely to cut you off at that point. 02:18:12.440 --> 02:18:19.320 So before we hop into the applicant it looks like Mr. Smith has something to say. 02:18:19.320 --> 02:18:25.560 Just a question of Cindy, you mentioned in work session we didn't have time to ask but 02:18:25.560 --> 02:18:31.520 you said there was discrepancies between how Argyle ISD calculates their student capacity 02:18:31.520 --> 02:18:35.160 versus Denton ISD, can you talk a little bit about that, what do you mean by that because 02:18:35.160 --> 02:18:36.160 you mentioned it briefly. 02:18:36.160 --> 02:18:54.080 Let me get my notes. 02:18:54.080 --> 02:19:00.200 Where does the Denton ISD calculation come from, I guess not to, I know it's the context 02:19:00.200 --> 02:19:08.080 of what RISD the city has but I guess I want to make sure that the Denton ISD calculation 02:19:08.080 --> 02:19:11.640 isn't flawed versus the Argyles or vice versa. 02:19:11.640 --> 02:19:20.920 Now I did request the formulas used from Argyle ISD to find out how they calculate their student 02:19:20.920 --> 02:19:24.560 population impacts and I was unable to get it. 02:19:24.560 --> 02:19:29.200 We did get a letter from the superintendent which is in your backup and we used that letter 02:19:29.200 --> 02:19:39.280 as a way to try to backwards calculate how they calculate their student population projections. 02:19:39.280 --> 02:19:50.800 Now Dentons actually has a student generation rate of 0.23 per non-substitized department 02:19:50.800 --> 02:19:53.040 unit. 02:19:53.040 --> 02:20:05.720 It appeared to us that AISD had a student generation rate of between 0.49 to 0.78 students 02:20:05.720 --> 02:20:08.640 per non-substitized department unit. 02:20:08.640 --> 02:20:15.720 From a development department standpoint, is 0.4 or 0.78, is that outside of the realm, 02:20:15.720 --> 02:20:21.920 is it having that calculation, I mean the 0.23 from Denton ISD is that-- 02:20:21.920 --> 02:20:26.480 Is that industry standards within here? 02:20:26.480 --> 02:20:33.600 I did not go to different school districts to find out what their generation rate was. 02:20:33.600 --> 02:20:40.600 All I can tell you is what the differences are between DISD and AISD and again that's 02:20:40.600 --> 02:20:42.880 really not hard and fast. 02:20:42.880 --> 02:20:48.000 The city of Denton is a college town so usually not a lot of kids in those units. 02:20:48.000 --> 02:20:52.840 There's also a little more manufacturing and whatnot here in town so maybe there's not 02:20:52.840 --> 02:20:56.880 more single family residential that's being used and so an Argyle being more of a bedroom 02:20:56.880 --> 02:21:01.720 community than it is a business community so to speak, there might be a higher rate 02:21:01.720 --> 02:21:02.720 there. 02:21:02.720 --> 02:21:03.720 Okay, thank you. 02:21:03.720 --> 02:21:04.720 Appreciate it, Cindy. 02:21:04.720 --> 02:21:05.720 Sure. 02:21:05.720 --> 02:21:06.720 Thank you, Cindy. 02:21:06.720 --> 02:21:15.680 Seeing no other questions for staff at this point, I invite Bill Dahlstrom to present. 02:21:15.680 --> 02:21:22.040 Mr. Dahlstrom, as the applicant, you have 10 minutes to present if you could state your 02:21:22.040 --> 02:21:23.160 name and address for the record. 02:21:23.160 --> 02:21:24.160 No, that's not it. 02:21:24.160 --> 02:21:35.960 I'm sorry, I'm looking for it. 02:21:35.960 --> 02:21:37.440 It should be right in the middle of the screen. 02:21:37.440 --> 02:21:38.440 Here it is. 02:21:38.440 --> 02:21:39.440 There you go. 02:21:39.440 --> 02:21:53.520 Mr. Chair, Mr. Commissioners, my name is Bill Dahlstrom, 2323 Ross Avenue in Dallas. 02:21:53.520 --> 02:21:57.120 I'm here on behalf of the applicant, MMRQ Land. 02:21:57.120 --> 02:22:02.560 Mr. Madge with MMRQ is here as well as our engineer to address any specific questions 02:22:02.560 --> 02:22:09.640 and as you said, Mr. Chair, we are here asking for a zoning change to the MN District. 02:22:09.640 --> 02:22:12.760 It's been a real privilege to represent MMRQ. 02:22:12.760 --> 02:22:17.400 They have tried to be a good corporate representative for the city. 02:22:17.400 --> 02:22:21.840 They have done several things in conjunction with the city and the city staff. 02:22:21.840 --> 02:22:26.520 They voluntarily annexed a portion of their property to the city, subjected themselves 02:22:26.520 --> 02:22:27.840 to the zoning. 02:22:27.840 --> 02:22:33.040 They've agreed to extend utilities which will open up further development in the area and 02:22:33.040 --> 02:22:37.800 they've abandoned a gas well on the property as well, which again pursues to the city's 02:22:37.800 --> 02:22:38.800 comprehensive plan. 02:22:38.800 --> 02:22:45.440 That's something that the comp plan is promoting in order to provide more developable land. 02:22:45.440 --> 02:22:50.400 But as you said, we're here basically asking for a change in zoning to the MN District. 02:22:50.400 --> 02:22:58.200 Basically, what we're trying to do is what's required of us, that is to bring a zoning 02:22:58.200 --> 02:23:06.120 application to you that is in conformance with the city's comprehensive plan. 02:23:06.120 --> 02:23:10.120 That's all we're trying to do is bring an application to you that is in conformance 02:23:10.120 --> 02:23:16.120 with the city's comprehensive plan, which is the lowest level mixed use district in 02:23:16.120 --> 02:23:18.320 the city's zoning ordinance. 02:23:18.320 --> 02:23:22.520 There are two other zoning districts in the city's zoning ordinance, the new zoning ordinance 02:23:22.520 --> 02:23:27.240 that are mixed use, but they are more intense and allow more intensive uses. 02:23:27.240 --> 02:23:29.760 We are coming in with what we think is reasonable. 02:23:29.760 --> 02:23:34.440 We're basically trying to follow through with the city policy, the city direction. 02:23:34.440 --> 02:23:39.080 The city's comprehensive plan is what guides this zoning case. 02:23:39.080 --> 02:23:44.200 As Cindy said, we conform to those regulations. 02:23:44.200 --> 02:23:53.840 Again, we conform to the future land use map designation of neighborhood mixed use. 02:23:53.840 --> 02:23:58.480 This is again repeating what Cindy showed you, but the location of the property and 02:23:58.480 --> 02:24:02.280 the designation on the future land use map. 02:24:02.280 --> 02:24:07.260 There are various goals and objectives within the comprehensive plan that have been identified 02:24:07.260 --> 02:24:14.320 that we satisfy encouraging compact growth at centers and corridors. 02:24:14.320 --> 02:24:21.040 This area, if you looked at the comprehensive plan, that pink area, what we used to call 02:24:21.040 --> 02:24:26.720 in my old planning school is a node that's not a corridor. 02:24:26.720 --> 02:24:31.480 It's more of a compact area for growth in that area. 02:24:31.480 --> 02:24:36.840 I believe the extension of Brush Creek has a lot to do with that location of this neighborhood 02:24:36.840 --> 02:24:39.400 mixed use area. 02:24:39.400 --> 02:24:44.720 Gas well and pipeline impact and compatibility, again, reducing the areas devoted to and impacted 02:24:44.720 --> 02:24:47.920 by drilling and production can improve development capacity. 02:24:47.920 --> 02:24:48.920 That's what we have done. 02:24:48.920 --> 02:24:53.640 That's what Mr. Madge has done by abandoning a gas well. 02:24:53.640 --> 02:25:04.360 Actually, I don't know what happened to that slide. 02:25:04.360 --> 02:25:10.080 But here's the mobility plan, again, shows the extension of the Brush Creek Road, which 02:25:10.080 --> 02:25:13.280 again intersects just south of our property. 02:25:13.280 --> 02:25:18.520 Again, it provides the location of two major thoroughfares that would provide the activity 02:25:18.520 --> 02:25:23.880 area that justifies this neighborhood mixed use area. 02:25:23.880 --> 02:25:29.520 And as Cindy showed earlier, there is a pattern already for properties on the street going 02:25:29.520 --> 02:25:30.960 to the mixed use districts. 02:25:30.960 --> 02:25:35.720 Again, to quote staff, staff recommends approval of this request as it complies with the criteria 02:25:35.720 --> 02:25:41.120 in the Denton Development Code and is consistent with the overall goals and objectives in the 02:25:41.120 --> 02:25:42.920 Denton Plan 2030. 02:25:42.920 --> 02:25:52.040 Again, it conforms to the Denton City's comprehensive plan. 02:25:52.040 --> 02:25:56.040 We meet all the criteria, as Cindy said, for the ones that apply. 02:25:56.040 --> 02:25:58.360 Obviously, the small area doesn't apply. 02:25:58.360 --> 02:26:00.840 The ones that apply, we do satisfy. 02:26:00.840 --> 02:26:03.840 It's consistent with this future land use plan. 02:26:03.840 --> 02:26:12.520 It's consistent with the purposes of the zoning district and the changes are warranted. 02:26:12.520 --> 02:26:22.200 I know there are several issues raised concerning traffic, concerning impact on the school, 02:26:22.200 --> 02:26:26.040 concerning the actual land uses themselves. 02:26:26.040 --> 02:26:29.880 As far as the land uses themselves go, we are requesting a zoning change that would 02:26:29.880 --> 02:26:34.760 allow the uses permitted in the MN district. 02:26:34.760 --> 02:26:36.320 You are correct, Mr. Chair. 02:26:36.320 --> 02:26:43.320 That site plan that we submitted was a concept plan that we needed to use to base a TIA traffic 02:26:43.320 --> 02:26:45.720 impact analysis off of. 02:26:45.720 --> 02:26:48.520 It's not part of this application. 02:26:48.520 --> 02:26:53.460 We agree with Cindy as far as the school comments go. 02:26:53.460 --> 02:26:59.720 We think the AISD stats are on the high side based on our experiences. 02:26:59.720 --> 02:27:08.840 We don't see equations or percentages that high in these types of multifamily residential. 02:27:08.840 --> 02:27:15.240 This residential is going to consist of, if we get it approved and continue this route, 02:27:15.240 --> 02:27:24.400 70% single family, 25% two-family, a two-bedroom, 70% one-bedroom, 25% two-bedroom and maybe 02:27:24.400 --> 02:27:26.320 5% three-bedroom. 02:27:26.320 --> 02:27:32.580 We aren't proposing a large multifamily complex that would accommodate a lot of students. 02:27:32.580 --> 02:27:36.840 It's been in our experience that the number of students generated from a development like 02:27:36.840 --> 02:27:44.600 this is far, far less than what's shown or identified in the letter from the school district. 02:27:44.600 --> 02:27:51.360 Again, the traffic impact analysis shows that at full build out, we would be required to 02:27:51.360 --> 02:27:57.680 put in two left turn lanes off of 377, one into Brush Creek, one into one of our entrances. 02:27:57.680 --> 02:28:01.520 We think in order to comply with the city's comprehensive plan and further the city's 02:28:01.520 --> 02:28:09.520 comprehensive plan, the policy that was approved by the city for mixed use neighborhood at 02:28:09.520 --> 02:28:12.320 this location, we think this is consistent with that. 02:28:12.320 --> 02:28:16.720 We aren't asking for the more intensive districts, we're asking for the lowest intensive mixed 02:28:16.720 --> 02:28:17.720 use district. 02:28:17.720 --> 02:28:21.840 Again, in order to comply with the city's comprehensive plan, we respectfully request 02:28:21.840 --> 02:28:23.080 a recommendation of approval. 02:28:23.080 --> 02:28:27.440 Again, Mr. Madges here, our engineer is here and I'm here to answer the questions you may 02:28:27.440 --> 02:28:28.440 have. 02:28:28.440 --> 02:28:29.440 I appreciate the presentation. 02:28:29.440 --> 02:28:30.440 We do have some questions. 02:28:30.440 --> 02:28:31.440 Commissioner Smith. 02:28:31.440 --> 02:28:32.440 Thank you, Chair. 02:28:32.440 --> 02:28:40.720 I think when it comes down to your statement and your comment about the city staff makes 02:28:40.720 --> 02:28:47.480 recommendation to approve this, we as a commission have voted for approval of items that the 02:28:47.480 --> 02:28:49.760 city staff has recommended denial of. 02:28:49.760 --> 02:28:54.480 We've voted for approval of things or we've denied things that the city staff has recommended 02:28:54.480 --> 02:28:56.880 approval of. 02:28:56.880 --> 02:29:02.340 I think what always comes down to for us is going to be the public input as well as what 02:29:02.340 --> 02:29:05.600 comes down to actual land use around there. 02:29:05.600 --> 02:29:10.560 I think it's going to be pretty hard for me and I'm speaking for myself here, but I'm 02:29:10.560 --> 02:29:14.200 sure many of the commissioners would agree that pretty hard for me to get on board with 02:29:14.200 --> 02:29:15.200 this project. 02:29:15.200 --> 02:29:22.180 I'd like to give you some time to try to change my mind, but the way I see it now is that 02:29:22.180 --> 02:29:27.880 area, the land surrounding it, while maybe 10 years from now is in fill with an argyle 02:29:27.880 --> 02:29:34.040 and fill with a 100 coal ranch out to the west, Denton creeps further south, that you 02:29:34.040 --> 02:29:36.960 can start seeing multifamily around there 10 years from now. 02:29:36.960 --> 02:29:41.560 I don't think that, not necessarily that your project will be done next year, probably done 02:29:41.560 --> 02:29:46.920 in three years or so, four years, knowing development works, but I just don't think 02:29:46.920 --> 02:29:51.560 the timing is right, but I'd give you the chance to maybe change my mind. 02:29:51.560 --> 02:29:58.080 I really do appreciate that comment and I do understand the comment, I really do. 02:29:58.080 --> 02:30:04.680 The issue is under 211 of the state, local government code, we're trying to do zoning 02:30:04.680 --> 02:30:06.320 in accordance with the comprehensive plan. 02:30:06.320 --> 02:30:07.840 That's basically all we're doing. 02:30:07.840 --> 02:30:16.200 We don't have any other choice under the way the comprehensive plan is designed. 02:30:16.200 --> 02:30:22.040 That decision was made by the city to designate this area as a neighborhood mixed use area. 02:30:22.040 --> 02:30:29.520 We're basically trying to conform to what the city has directed us to do. 02:30:29.520 --> 02:30:32.760 We've already been looking at the 2030 plan as it is and there's been times where we've 02:30:32.760 --> 02:30:36.120 gone against what the flume says. 02:30:36.120 --> 02:30:40.000 We understand as a commission that maybe the future land use map isn't always right and 02:30:40.000 --> 02:30:45.360 we've actually voted against it plenty of other times in the past. 02:30:45.360 --> 02:30:52.000 I understand you're going by what the city stated back when that process started in 2012 02:30:52.000 --> 02:30:56.560 and wrapped up in 2015 and stating what things would be like then, but I would probably argue 02:30:56.560 --> 02:31:02.920 that economics has changed, demographics has changed, the population in Argyle has certainly 02:31:02.920 --> 02:31:05.720 changed over the last four or five years and many of these citizens in the room would probably 02:31:05.720 --> 02:31:08.240 tell you. 02:31:08.240 --> 02:31:09.240 Thank you. 02:31:09.240 --> 02:31:10.240 Thank you. 02:31:10.240 --> 02:31:11.240 I really appreciate that. 02:31:11.240 --> 02:31:13.440 Mr. Chair, could I reserve my last few minutes for rebuttal? 02:31:13.440 --> 02:31:14.440 Absolutely. 02:31:14.440 --> 02:31:15.440 Thank you. 02:31:15.440 --> 02:31:17.240 Do you want to do that now or do you want to? 02:31:17.240 --> 02:31:19.240 Oh, no, after the other speakers speak. 02:31:19.240 --> 02:31:20.760 Yeah, that's fine. 02:31:20.760 --> 02:31:21.760 Yeah. 02:31:21.760 --> 02:31:22.760 Commissioner Prieta. 02:31:22.760 --> 02:31:25.760 Thank you. 02:31:25.760 --> 02:31:30.000 In kind of piggybacking off what Commissioner Smith said, we normally try and come into 02:31:30.000 --> 02:31:33.800 these with a pretty open mind. 02:31:33.800 --> 02:31:40.000 Having said that, right now, between the stack that we have here and the fact that I'd roughly 02:31:40.000 --> 02:31:45.520 count over 90 people that have showed up in opposition to this, it's going to be very 02:31:45.520 --> 02:31:51.600 hard I think for the commission to vote for this and that's not that I think that this 02:31:51.600 --> 02:31:54.120 is inherently a bad idea. 02:31:54.120 --> 02:32:00.960 One of the things that I think we do have a big issue with is the community is not on 02:32:00.960 --> 02:32:07.000 board with it, which I think would also create more difficulty in getting it approved by 02:32:07.000 --> 02:32:09.920 city council. 02:32:09.920 --> 02:32:16.320 With that in mind, one of the things I'd like to ask and I don't know if I know the applicant 02:32:16.320 --> 02:32:17.320 isn't here right now. 02:32:17.320 --> 02:32:18.320 The applicant is here. 02:32:18.320 --> 02:32:19.320 Oh, okay. 02:32:19.320 --> 02:32:20.320 Yes, sir. 02:32:20.320 --> 02:32:30.200 One of the things that I would loosely suggest is it possible to withdraw right now, kind 02:32:30.200 --> 02:32:34.200 of get with the community, see if you can work out something that would kind of get 02:32:34.200 --> 02:32:36.480 them a little bit more on board with what we're going. 02:32:36.480 --> 02:32:40.080 I understand we're talking just about a zoning, right, that right now everybody's looking 02:32:40.080 --> 02:32:44.200 at a huge apartment complex and going no, no, no, we can't have this, but all we're 02:32:44.200 --> 02:32:50.360 talking about is the idea of something going in there, but I would hope that maybe we could 02:32:50.360 --> 02:32:56.640 figure out a way to get more community buy-in with it, which would make it a lot easier 02:32:56.640 --> 02:33:03.240 to get a yes vote from here, and then definitely a yes vote for city council, because as it 02:33:03.240 --> 02:33:12.800 stands right now, I mean, 90 people were looking at about four hours worth of conversation. 02:33:12.800 --> 02:33:20.560 I think when people stick around for two hours to talk, they tend to entrench a little bit. 02:33:20.560 --> 02:33:26.000 Maybe if we could regroup, it might be easier to find something that we could approve on, 02:33:26.000 --> 02:33:29.040 and that would not require a supermajority of city council. 02:33:29.040 --> 02:33:30.320 I would suggest that. 02:33:30.320 --> 02:33:34.440 I think that might be probably a more fruitful way to move forward and ensure that you guys 02:33:34.440 --> 02:33:36.480 have a successful outcome in the future. 02:33:36.480 --> 02:33:39.000 I will ask my client, yes, sir. 02:33:39.000 --> 02:33:40.000 Thank you. 02:33:40.000 --> 02:33:41.000 Again, appreciate that comment. 02:33:41.000 --> 02:33:42.000 Commissioner Cole. 02:33:42.000 --> 02:33:43.000 Thank you, Chair. 02:33:43.000 --> 02:33:49.640 Yeah, I just wanted to echo my fellow commissioners on this. 02:33:49.640 --> 02:33:58.360 This is going to be a ... I almost don't think this is going to happen for you tonight. 02:33:58.360 --> 02:34:05.080 I have many reasons of opposition, too many to ... I mean, we've got a lot of speakers 02:34:05.080 --> 02:34:16.480 tonight, but if there's something to get you ... You can read the tea leaves, man. 02:34:16.480 --> 02:34:24.840 If I could go consult my client, I'll be right back. 02:34:24.840 --> 02:34:39.840 Yeah, if you wouldn't take a minute, that'd be great. 02:34:39.840 --> 02:34:59.360 Thank you. 02:34:59.360 --> 02:35:18.360 Thank you. 02:35:18.360 --> 02:35:37.360 Thank you. 02:35:37.360 --> 02:36:05.200 Thank you. 02:36:05.200 --> 02:36:17.880 Yes, sir. 02:36:17.880 --> 02:36:23.280 I guess one question we had, and we don't have a problem doing something to expedite 02:36:23.280 --> 02:36:32.280 tonight, but what in general, what direction would we be going if ... What else is there 02:36:32.280 --> 02:36:39.400 for us to come back with that might satisfy the commission? 02:36:39.400 --> 02:36:40.520 That's a good question. 02:36:40.520 --> 02:36:44.560 It's worth noting that there would be potentially two options. 02:36:44.560 --> 02:36:49.440 There's a withdrawal, which would be a more permanent decision. 02:36:49.440 --> 02:36:50.840 You'd go through the reapplication. 02:36:50.840 --> 02:36:51.840 You'd start over. 02:36:51.840 --> 02:36:52.840 I understand. 02:36:52.840 --> 02:36:57.120 Whether we could look to postpone, if there's a delay to be asked. 02:36:57.120 --> 02:36:58.120 I understand your question. 02:36:58.120 --> 02:37:01.640 I'll let Commissioner Pereta maybe speak to that. 02:37:01.640 --> 02:37:04.720 Yeah, I'm thinking more in terms of a substantive solution. 02:37:04.720 --> 02:37:05.720 Understood. 02:37:05.720 --> 02:37:08.720 Commissioner Pereta. 02:37:08.720 --> 02:37:14.800 My point is, looking to the future of what's going to go out there, we kind of know where 02:37:14.800 --> 02:37:18.080 this trip is going to be in the long term. 02:37:18.080 --> 02:37:24.280 Right now, like I said, I would say a postponement or something to work something out with the 02:37:24.280 --> 02:37:30.160 neighbors at large to see if you can get more buy-in from them, because here's the deal. 02:37:30.160 --> 02:37:36.600 Right now, with this amount of opposition, it would wind up being most likely a no from 02:37:36.600 --> 02:37:41.120 us, which requires a super majority at City Council, which means that you're denied. 02:37:41.120 --> 02:37:46.480 At that point, it puts off you guys doing something for a couple of years, as opposed 02:37:46.480 --> 02:37:52.360 to maybe getting something that they're more amenable to do it in a closer timeframe. 02:37:52.360 --> 02:37:56.000 On that one, I would leave it to you guys to work out with the community. 02:37:56.000 --> 02:38:00.480 I'll defer to Larry in terms of what can be done. 02:38:00.480 --> 02:38:01.480 I perfectly understand. 02:38:01.480 --> 02:38:04.480 I'm thinking more in terms of a substantive solution. 02:38:04.480 --> 02:38:07.320 In a lot of communities, I work with their plan development options. 02:38:07.320 --> 02:38:10.040 Like procedurally what you would submit right now to move on? 02:38:10.040 --> 02:38:11.040 Exactly. 02:38:11.040 --> 02:38:14.320 I'll defer to Council. 02:38:14.320 --> 02:38:19.880 I would recommend to the Commission not give any feedback without conducting the public 02:38:19.880 --> 02:38:22.120 hearing and following it through. 02:38:22.120 --> 02:38:25.760 I think that this is an appropriate thing to put back to staff. 02:38:25.760 --> 02:38:32.560 If there's any desire to postpone or withdraw or what have you, allow the applicant to work 02:38:32.560 --> 02:38:36.120 with staff and come up with something reasonable. 02:38:36.120 --> 02:38:45.280 I don't think it's fair or appropriate for the Commission to offer suggestions without 02:38:45.280 --> 02:38:50.920 hearing all of the evidence from the people that have come here tonight. 02:38:50.920 --> 02:38:56.720 I would recommend that you not attempt to give any kind of feedback without hearing 02:38:56.720 --> 02:39:01.520 everything here, but instead kick it back to the staff to work with the applicant. 02:39:01.520 --> 02:39:08.400 I'll do respect, but we just need to know what's at the end of the tunnel. 02:39:08.400 --> 02:39:13.960 There's a mechanism to get to a compromise, and I don't know there is yet. 02:39:13.960 --> 02:39:18.320 I'm not asking for a substantive direction, just a procedural direction. 02:39:18.320 --> 02:39:23.800 Is there a tool out there -- Do you postpone, withdraw, or what that step 02:39:23.800 --> 02:39:24.800 would be? 02:39:24.800 --> 02:39:25.800 Is that the question? 02:39:25.800 --> 02:39:26.800 No. 02:39:26.800 --> 02:39:31.200 The next step, because we're agreeable to postpone. 02:39:31.200 --> 02:39:36.440 My question is, is there a tool, like in other communities, we have planned development districts 02:39:36.440 --> 02:39:45.260 where we can modify and reach a conclusion with uses and densities, development standards 02:39:45.260 --> 02:39:48.680 that everybody can agree to? 02:39:48.680 --> 02:39:49.680 That's the question. 02:39:49.680 --> 02:39:52.960 Is there something along those lines that we can pursue? 02:39:52.960 --> 02:40:01.060 I'm going to interject here and ask Richard to maybe speak in so we can do in the immediacy. 02:40:01.060 --> 02:40:06.960 We are under the 2019 DDC, so there's a number of other options that are available to us. 02:40:06.960 --> 02:40:12.720 One of those options could be, if you would seek a postponement, we could ideally hold 02:40:12.720 --> 02:40:19.280 another or a series of community meetings and look at whether you convert this application 02:40:19.280 --> 02:40:24.640 to a straight MN, from a straight MN to a PD, that may address buffer or some other 02:40:24.640 --> 02:40:29.320 concerns that the residents may have with respect to height or some other, whatever 02:40:29.320 --> 02:40:30.320 it may be. 02:40:30.320 --> 02:40:36.920 I don't know every single concern, but there are tools that could be available, I think, 02:40:36.920 --> 02:40:39.600 to potentially address some of the concerns. 02:40:39.600 --> 02:40:40.760 That's what we're looking for. 02:40:40.760 --> 02:40:41.760 Thank you. 02:40:41.760 --> 02:40:47.800 Based on that, we're agreeable to postpone it a month, six weeks, I mean, to give us 02:40:47.800 --> 02:41:00.000 -- Just one second. 02:41:00.000 --> 02:41:01.000 Just one second. 02:41:01.000 --> 02:41:12.480 Do we have the timeline in the city to postpone it? 02:41:12.480 --> 02:41:13.480 I would say at least six weeks. 02:41:13.480 --> 02:41:14.480 Okay. 02:41:14.480 --> 02:41:15.480 So it needs to be at least six weeks to get it through the city and then agenda. 02:41:15.480 --> 02:41:16.480 Oh, okay. 02:41:16.480 --> 02:41:17.480 That's right, because it's a change in the application. 02:41:17.480 --> 02:41:18.480 What's the next meeting? 02:41:18.480 --> 02:41:19.480 That's the -- We've all taken time out of our days to come here to make sure we have 02:41:19.480 --> 02:41:20.480 a voice. 02:41:20.480 --> 02:41:29.480 We really do like to have a voice tonight. 02:41:29.480 --> 02:41:33.720 I certainly understand, I'm not closing that option down. 02:41:33.720 --> 02:41:40.000 It is worth noting, first, we can't have banter between the dais and the individuals out there. 02:41:40.000 --> 02:41:42.320 You're not mic'd up, for one. 02:41:42.320 --> 02:41:47.800 Two, if we postpone, you're going to come out another night for another public hearing. 02:41:47.800 --> 02:41:52.200 So I understand that, and we will open the public hearing for anyone who wishes to speak. 02:41:52.200 --> 02:41:55.560 That right is not going to be taken from anyone in this room this evening. 02:41:55.560 --> 02:42:00.560 That's not what we're discussing about closing down the public testimony this evening. 02:42:00.560 --> 02:42:04.560 We're discussing a postponement of a decision this evening, potentially, and that would 02:42:04.560 --> 02:42:11.560 have to be a vote from the dais. 02:42:11.560 --> 02:42:20.600 So our meetings are December 11th or January 8th? 02:42:20.600 --> 02:42:27.840 Or we can postpone to a date uncertain? 02:42:27.840 --> 02:42:45.400 All right, let me -- One second, please. 02:42:45.400 --> 02:42:52.440 Mr. Chair, I think we believe the most flexible thing for the city and everybody would be 02:42:52.440 --> 02:42:57.440 to a date uncertain so that we can have as much time as we need to work on these issues 02:42:57.440 --> 02:42:58.440 and then re-notify. 02:42:58.440 --> 02:42:59.440 Okay. 02:42:59.440 --> 02:43:01.760 I appreciate that. 02:43:01.760 --> 02:43:08.240 At this time, that vote would be taken after the public hearing's closed, and then we'd 02:43:08.240 --> 02:43:12.480 reopen the public hearing because we'll re-notice it, correct? 02:43:12.480 --> 02:43:15.720 So if there's no other -- Do you have a question for the applicant, Christopher Smith? 02:43:15.720 --> 02:43:16.720 Yes. 02:43:16.720 --> 02:43:18.840 We have one more question for you, and then we'll go to the public hearing. 02:43:18.840 --> 02:43:19.840 Christopher Smith. 02:43:19.840 --> 02:43:20.840 Thank you, Chair. 02:43:20.840 --> 02:43:24.480 No, you were asking about just substance and whatnot, and I get the PD direction that Richard 02:43:24.480 --> 02:43:26.480 -- That's what you're looking for. 02:43:26.480 --> 02:43:27.480 Yes. 02:43:27.480 --> 02:43:32.320 I guess if you're wanting to know from a standpoint of -- and because of what Council said, I 02:43:32.320 --> 02:43:36.040 won't necessarily what exactly we're looking for, but I could tell you more in depth maybe 02:43:36.040 --> 02:43:40.360 what I think my issue is with this, and it's the density part. 02:43:40.360 --> 02:43:43.920 And so if you're going to reconsider going to a PD to be able to adjust the buffers and 02:43:43.920 --> 02:43:48.180 the height restrictions and everything else that are outside of the conformance of MN, 02:43:48.180 --> 02:43:49.180 that's totally understandable. 02:43:49.180 --> 02:43:50.780 You can definitely come back with that. 02:43:50.780 --> 02:43:55.120 You probably still run into the same stone walls personally with me because of the density 02:43:55.120 --> 02:43:56.120 issue. 02:43:56.120 --> 02:43:57.120 I think the density is not right. 02:43:57.120 --> 02:44:01.580 Now, do I think that it needs to go to an R1 or an R2 where you have one or two units 02:44:01.580 --> 02:44:02.580 per acre? 02:44:02.580 --> 02:44:03.580 No. 02:44:03.580 --> 02:44:09.400 I think that something that is a higher density, a four or six unit maybe, I don't think multifamily 02:44:09.400 --> 02:44:11.720 makes sense in my mind for this project. 02:44:11.720 --> 02:44:13.720 But that's just my two cents. 02:44:13.720 --> 02:44:15.440 Before you move on, we get public hearings. 02:44:15.440 --> 02:44:16.920 That allows us to research those. 02:44:16.920 --> 02:44:17.920 Yeah. 02:44:17.920 --> 02:44:18.920 Correct. 02:44:18.920 --> 02:44:19.920 Thank you. 02:44:19.920 --> 02:44:20.920 Appreciate it. 02:44:20.920 --> 02:44:21.920 I don't see any other questions for you. 02:44:21.920 --> 02:44:22.920 Thank you. 02:44:22.920 --> 02:44:23.920 Thank you. 02:44:23.920 --> 02:44:26.100 Because this is a public hearing, we have these cards. 02:44:26.100 --> 02:44:28.720 If you have not filled out a card, we ask that you would. 02:44:28.720 --> 02:44:31.840 If not, I think we do have some extra blue cards now. 02:44:31.840 --> 02:44:34.880 If not, when everyone's done, you can walk up and speak. 02:44:34.880 --> 02:44:37.480 So we'll just go through these. 02:44:37.480 --> 02:44:41.960 I apologize in advance if I mispronounce any names. 02:44:41.960 --> 02:44:44.760 But the first one I have here is Brian Trail. 02:44:44.760 --> 02:44:50.680 It's Brian Trail here. 02:44:50.680 --> 02:44:53.080 I'll call him in a little bit. 02:44:53.080 --> 02:44:54.760 Is there anyone in the overflow? 02:44:54.760 --> 02:44:55.760 Okay. 02:44:55.760 --> 02:44:59.520 We'll put him to the side for a second. 02:44:59.520 --> 02:45:02.180 Next is JP Jensen. 02:45:02.180 --> 02:45:05.600 And then after JP, we're going to call Mike Block. 02:45:05.600 --> 02:45:09.320 I need you to state your name and address for the record. 02:45:09.320 --> 02:45:11.080 And you have four minutes. 02:45:11.080 --> 02:45:12.640 I won't need that long. 02:45:12.640 --> 02:45:20.000 JP Jensen, 2304 Chipping Campton Road, Argyle, actually in the city of Denton, with the Argyle 02:45:20.000 --> 02:45:21.000 address. 02:45:21.000 --> 02:45:28.640 I agree with some of the commissioners that the density that would be created with the 02:45:28.640 --> 02:45:35.640 addition of the units or with the zoning change that would allow the density is overwhelming 02:45:35.640 --> 02:45:36.720 at this time. 02:45:36.720 --> 02:45:45.560 I think that maybe in a few years once those roads are expanded and there's better access 02:45:45.560 --> 02:45:54.040 and safety, et cetera, in addition to that, I think the school system would be overburdened. 02:45:54.040 --> 02:45:56.280 It's already overburdened. 02:45:56.280 --> 02:46:05.440 In your packets, you notice there are a number from the -- excuse me -- from the superintendent 02:46:05.440 --> 02:46:11.480 from Argyle ISD said there's a number of units that are lots that are under constructs, under 02:46:11.480 --> 02:46:15.360 development, finished and are planned. 02:46:15.360 --> 02:46:19.960 So there's lots of housing opportunities coming down Argyle's way, and it's going to fill 02:46:19.960 --> 02:46:24.200 up the school system from that standpoint. 02:46:24.200 --> 02:46:29.640 In addition to that, I happen -- although I'm not within 200 feet of the subject property, 02:46:29.640 --> 02:46:35.920 I do live in a neighborhood that's around it and in the city. 02:46:35.920 --> 02:46:42.280 I do have to access 377 and Brush Creek Road, and right now there's plenty of traffic on 02:46:42.280 --> 02:46:44.800 those roads. 02:46:44.800 --> 02:46:50.760 Well taken from the presentation that there's going to be expansion of those thoroughfares, 02:46:50.760 --> 02:46:59.440 but that's down the road and so to speak, and when as and if that might happen, then 02:46:59.440 --> 02:47:05.760 this particular application might be better received because it can accommodate that as 02:47:05.760 --> 02:47:06.760 well. 02:47:06.760 --> 02:47:15.040 Also, the city of -- the Argyle ISD at that point might have more facilities to accommodate 02:47:15.040 --> 02:47:20.640 more students, and the last thing we want -- although I'm an empty nester at this point, 02:47:20.640 --> 02:47:30.400 I do have grandkids in the school system at Argyle, and I would not like to see an overpopulation 02:47:30.400 --> 02:47:38.360 of the student-teacher ratio increasing just because of this zoning change at this time. 02:47:38.360 --> 02:47:46.600 So I appreciate what the commissioners have voiced so far tonight, and I would hope that 02:47:46.600 --> 02:47:52.240 the applicant would reconsider, you know, how this presentation -- or what they might 02:47:52.240 --> 02:47:54.160 come back to you with. 02:47:54.160 --> 02:47:56.600 So thank you for your time, and I appreciate it. 02:47:56.600 --> 02:48:09.480 Thank you. 02:48:09.480 --> 02:48:10.480 I am Mike Block. 02:48:10.480 --> 02:48:13.680 I live at 4993 Kiowa Trail. 02:48:13.680 --> 02:48:15.480 I do live within 200 feet. 02:48:15.480 --> 02:48:25.760 I'm in the ETJ, and I just don't understand why this area being considered for apartments 02:48:25.760 --> 02:48:32.760 is being considered an area that's surrounded by -- is designated as a rural area. 02:48:32.760 --> 02:48:36.320 Since we're in the ETJ, we're basically like farmland. 02:48:36.320 --> 02:48:41.780 We have farm animals, we have horse barns, we have -- there's all kinds of animals that 02:48:41.780 --> 02:48:47.080 back right up to this property, and to us, it just doesn't make sense. 02:48:47.080 --> 02:48:49.120 It doesn't make any sense at all. 02:48:49.120 --> 02:48:50.720 But thank you, Commissioner Smith. 02:48:50.720 --> 02:48:54.560 Thank you -- I don't know how to pronounce your name -- Pranetta. 02:48:54.560 --> 02:48:55.940 Thank you, Commissioner Pranetta. 02:48:55.940 --> 02:48:57.360 Thank you, Commissioner Cole. 02:48:57.360 --> 02:48:59.480 I agree with you guys and everything you said. 02:48:59.480 --> 02:49:01.360 I really do appreciate that. 02:49:01.360 --> 02:49:04.320 And what it comes down to is the area's just not ready for this. 02:49:04.320 --> 02:49:05.320 It's not. 02:49:05.320 --> 02:49:11.760 Yeah, and the zoning -- the zoning to me doesn't seem to be following a trend. 02:49:11.760 --> 02:49:16.800 To me, it seems more like spot zoning to me, just plopping, you know, some apartments right 02:49:16.800 --> 02:49:21.320 into the -- into that area. 02:49:21.320 --> 02:49:22.320 No buffer zone. 02:49:22.320 --> 02:49:27.200 I mean, we're going to have apartments with balconies with people looking into our yard, 02:49:27.200 --> 02:49:28.560 you know, where we're used to privacy. 02:49:28.560 --> 02:49:33.760 I've been there for 20 years, so this just doesn't make any sense at all. 02:49:33.760 --> 02:49:41.640 I'm not seeing any timelines on Highway 377 as far as when that road is going to be completed, 02:49:41.640 --> 02:49:46.440 but we just had two mothers and two daughters die on that road because of the traffic, and 02:49:46.440 --> 02:49:49.580 it's a terrible tragedy. 02:49:49.580 --> 02:49:55.640 That's a quarter mile away from this apartment complex, you know, so there's been a lot of 02:49:55.640 --> 02:49:58.720 accidents on that road. 02:49:58.720 --> 02:50:00.160 Let's see. 02:50:00.160 --> 02:50:06.120 Other concerns, light pollution, noise pollution, decreased property values. 02:50:06.120 --> 02:50:11.160 Who's going to want to buy my house, you know, as a horse property when there's four story 02:50:11.160 --> 02:50:16.160 apartments, you know, right behind it? 02:50:16.160 --> 02:50:18.640 You know, we've already had those storage facilities go up. 02:50:18.640 --> 02:50:21.440 We had no say in that because that's ETJ. 02:50:21.440 --> 02:50:24.480 Those things just plopped up one day, and we're like, hey, what's going on? 02:50:24.480 --> 02:50:27.600 You know, we had no notification or anything. 02:50:27.600 --> 02:50:33.440 I know it's state law that you guys are not required to notify us being in the ETJ, but 02:50:33.440 --> 02:50:37.400 it would be a really nice courtesy if you guys would notify us. 02:50:37.400 --> 02:50:44.040 I mean, I know it's something that -- it just would be a really nice neighborly, you know, 02:50:44.040 --> 02:50:45.320 courtesy to be notified. 02:50:45.320 --> 02:50:49.000 I know the signs are your notification, but it would be nice to be personally notified 02:50:49.000 --> 02:50:53.320 too. 02:50:53.320 --> 02:51:04.760 As far as those two -- the two people that are basically wanting this approved within 02:51:04.760 --> 02:51:09.280 the 200-foot zone, I believe they do have a financial interest because that basically 02:51:09.280 --> 02:51:11.400 is going to be commercial land. 02:51:11.400 --> 02:51:16.640 Those people own a lot of land right there, so how can that not be a financial interest? 02:51:16.640 --> 02:51:20.960 I mean, they're going to -- you know, that land is going to be developed, and they're 02:51:20.960 --> 02:51:27.360 going to make money off of it because -- and they want development, they want apartments. 02:51:27.360 --> 02:51:30.320 So anyway, my wife -- I submitted a letter with my wife. 02:51:30.320 --> 02:51:34.920 She couldn't be here tonight with her. 02:51:34.920 --> 02:51:44.720 She's opposed to this, and anyway, we both adamantly oppose this rezoning and we oppose 02:51:44.720 --> 02:51:46.720 especially apartments going in here. 02:51:46.720 --> 02:51:47.720 Thank you. 02:51:47.720 --> 02:51:48.720 Thank you. 02:51:48.720 --> 02:52:06.000 So the next one that I can call is Tara Higgins, and then followed by Court Higgins. 02:52:06.000 --> 02:52:09.000 Tara, if you could state your name and address for the record. 02:52:09.000 --> 02:52:10.000 Yes, sir. 02:52:10.000 --> 02:52:11.000 My name is Tara Higgins. 02:52:11.000 --> 02:52:15.240 I live at 4951 Kiowa Trail, and it's actually directly behind that property in question. 02:52:15.240 --> 02:52:16.240 I was told -- 02:52:16.240 --> 02:52:19.160 You can turn the camera on upstairs. 02:52:19.160 --> 02:52:26.560 Anyway, I live directly behind this property in question. 02:52:26.560 --> 02:52:31.000 So as you can see, that is the fence line right here. 02:52:31.000 --> 02:52:32.000 There are no trees. 02:52:32.000 --> 02:52:33.000 Oh, sorry. 02:52:33.000 --> 02:52:34.440 There are no trees. 02:52:34.440 --> 02:52:39.680 There's no buffer whatsoever, and I understand that we're ETJ and therefore don't get a notification 02:52:39.680 --> 02:52:44.120 about the zoning change request, but it would have been nice to know before not finding 02:52:44.120 --> 02:52:46.280 out through the grapevine. 02:52:46.280 --> 02:52:48.580 There are six other homes, as you can see, that are affected. 02:52:48.580 --> 02:52:50.640 It's not just me. 02:52:50.640 --> 02:52:56.200 So anything that you build this, by the way, is what a four-story building looks like. 02:52:56.200 --> 02:52:58.880 I know they don't want to necessarily put apartments there. 02:52:58.880 --> 02:53:03.840 They don't have a plan, or so they say, but this is what a four-story building looks like, 02:53:03.840 --> 02:53:07.920 and this is the view from my backyard right now. 02:53:07.920 --> 02:53:14.240 I own one acre, and as Mike just said, the only people approving of the zoning change 02:53:14.240 --> 02:53:16.960 are big landowners, so they stand to gain. 02:53:16.960 --> 02:53:21.200 Our property value will decline, and even with a shiny, pretty, and brand-new building 02:53:21.200 --> 02:53:25.880 of any kind, it will affect the marketability of our homes negatively. 02:53:25.880 --> 02:53:34.720 Also, I was an I-1-1 dispatcher for the county and have taken many, many calls of noise complaints 02:53:34.720 --> 02:53:39.680 from any area, whether it's an apartment or business, and disturbance calls. 02:53:39.680 --> 02:53:45.000 This will put a strain on Denton PD, because this requires a two-unit response, and again, 02:53:45.000 --> 02:53:50.600 crime statistics will rise negatively and will put a strain on my, or negatively impact 02:53:50.600 --> 02:53:52.600 my property value. 02:53:52.600 --> 02:53:57.240 At the July and August mobility committee meeting and residence meeting, your very own 02:53:57.240 --> 02:54:03.240 city engineers said, rather adamantly and passionate, that the infrastructure is not 02:54:03.240 --> 02:54:04.240 in place. 02:54:04.240 --> 02:54:09.000 The streets are not in place, sewer's not in place, there is no room for growth at this 02:54:09.000 --> 02:54:10.000 time. 02:54:10.000 --> 02:54:13.760 I understand Brush Creek and Fort Worth Drive will be widened, but that's not in place, 02:54:13.760 --> 02:54:18.240 and it's already overloaded per your own engineers. 02:54:18.240 --> 02:54:23.760 Not even two weeks after that, apparently, the developer, along with another developer 02:54:23.760 --> 02:54:29.240 in the area, made a deal with the city to go in together to split the cost to run the 02:54:29.240 --> 02:54:33.200 necessary sewer lines, so I guess money does talk. 02:54:33.200 --> 02:54:39.880 I'm sorry, that's just not right for the little homeowner in the area. 02:54:39.880 --> 02:54:44.440 The character and overall setup of the homes along Brush Creek Road, Hamilton, Wood Creek, 02:54:44.440 --> 02:54:45.800 and Hills of Argyle. 02:54:45.800 --> 02:54:51.000 The property in question with this zoning change will, is far from consistent with the 02:54:51.000 --> 02:54:56.680 existing character of the area. 02:54:56.680 --> 02:54:58.920 And I don't know how much time I still have. 02:54:58.920 --> 02:55:00.960 - A minute and 10. 02:55:00.960 --> 02:55:02.960 - Okay, thank you. 02:55:02.960 --> 02:55:08.720 So, this does not even conform to your own vision, as per your development code, that 02:55:08.720 --> 02:55:14.560 the specific use will be compatible with, and not be injurious to the use and enjoyment 02:55:14.560 --> 02:55:20.760 of other property, nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate 02:55:20.760 --> 02:55:21.760 vicinity. 02:55:21.760 --> 02:55:24.800 So, this alone should make you vote no to the zoning change request. 02:55:24.800 --> 02:55:31.760 And like I said, I'm not opposed to development going in, but not in form of a four story 02:55:31.760 --> 02:55:36.560 or higher building, or something that will impact my property value and quality of life, 02:55:36.560 --> 02:55:37.560 sir, gentlemen. 02:55:37.560 --> 02:55:38.560 Thank you. 02:55:38.560 --> 02:55:45.120 - Thank you very much. 02:55:45.120 --> 02:55:48.240 Next will be Court Higgins, followed by Latham Jones. 02:55:48.240 --> 02:55:52.720 If you could just state your name and address for the record, you have four minutes. 02:55:52.720 --> 02:55:57.080 - Court Higgins, 4951 Kyle O'Trail. 02:55:57.080 --> 02:56:00.360 I'm not 200 feet from this property, I am this property. 02:56:00.360 --> 02:56:04.240 And I back up right in the middle of this property, on it, as my wife showed you on 02:56:04.240 --> 02:56:05.240 there. 02:56:05.240 --> 02:56:08.080 I apologize, y'all, I'm not here in uniform to impress y'all, I just came from a funeral 02:56:08.080 --> 02:56:12.400 from another retired firefighter, so I got here as soon as I could. 02:56:12.400 --> 02:56:18.720 I wanna talk about just, this apartment complex is gonna reduce my property value. 02:56:18.720 --> 02:56:23.720 As everybody else in this county, our property values keep being skyrocketed by Denton County 02:56:23.720 --> 02:56:27.360 and the way things are being bought and sold around here. 02:56:27.360 --> 02:56:28.360 And that's all well and fine. 02:56:28.360 --> 02:56:32.340 I go and argue every year, my property value, they keep going up with it. 02:56:32.340 --> 02:56:34.800 I keep fighting it, trying to drive it down. 02:56:34.800 --> 02:56:40.680 And one day, I'm gonna get to a point where I am gonna wanna move or try to sell, and 02:56:40.680 --> 02:56:43.880 this is gonna take out a major part of my value that I've earned. 02:56:43.880 --> 02:56:49.740 I built that house with me and my daughter on it, and I don't expect I'll get my value 02:56:49.740 --> 02:56:53.320 out of it for what I've got into it because of this. 02:56:53.320 --> 02:56:57.480 As far as some other things, best, and I could be wrong about this, to the best of my knowledge, 02:56:57.480 --> 02:57:04.200 as far as 377, there's no public plans, except maybe extremely long-range plans for 377 to 02:57:04.200 --> 02:57:06.080 come down that far right now to be improved. 02:57:06.080 --> 02:57:11.360 As far as I know, it's gonna stop right now at 1830 and maybe go to vintage when vintage 02:57:11.360 --> 02:57:12.560 is increased. 02:57:12.560 --> 02:57:16.800 So you're talking a long time before that infrastructure gets here on 377 to take care 02:57:16.800 --> 02:57:19.640 of that. 02:57:19.640 --> 02:57:25.640 As other people have already said, I'm a firefighter, I go on wrecks on there all the time. 02:57:25.640 --> 02:57:29.800 It's horrible already, and it's not like I'm gonna get a worship by this department in 02:57:29.800 --> 02:57:30.800 there. 02:57:30.800 --> 02:57:31.800 So thank you. 02:57:31.800 --> 02:57:32.800 Thank you. 02:57:32.800 --> 02:57:44.840 Next is Latham Jones, and then followed by, I believe it's Dr. Talia Wright. 02:57:44.840 --> 02:57:46.280 Good evening, Commissioners. 02:57:46.280 --> 02:57:47.280 My name's Latham Jones. 02:57:47.280 --> 02:57:52.840 I live at 2400 Cavendish Lane in Argyle. 02:57:52.840 --> 02:58:02.680 And I've been trying to look over the 2030 plan, and it's 415 pages, so I didn't read 02:58:02.680 --> 02:58:03.840 it all. 02:58:03.840 --> 02:58:11.540 But I did try to look at the map, and as far as I could tell, I didn't see that future 02:58:11.540 --> 02:58:15.000 zoning on that map, but maybe that's changed since then. 02:58:15.000 --> 02:58:21.360 But what it does talk about is a balanced growth and not taking away from a character. 02:58:21.360 --> 02:58:25.720 And there was a lot about that in there. 02:58:25.720 --> 02:58:33.280 And I think probably if you look at all the numerous huge apartment complexes that Denton's 02:58:33.280 --> 02:58:39.560 built just in the last year or two, I think if you're gonna have balance and character 02:58:39.560 --> 02:58:44.320 and you wanna have all different kinds of places to live and all that, then I mean it 02:58:44.320 --> 02:58:50.360 seems like the apartments, honestly for now, it seems like they would have met the need. 02:58:50.360 --> 02:58:59.940 You know, I could be wrong, but as far as the, oh, I was gonna break something up on 02:58:59.940 --> 02:59:05.040 the sewer that's supposed to be sufficient for that. 02:59:05.040 --> 02:59:08.120 You know, we live in a whole neighborhood that surrounds that, and we're in the city 02:59:08.120 --> 02:59:17.560 of Denton, and we're still on septic, so you know, I mean, I don't know, and so it seems 02:59:17.560 --> 02:59:21.680 like we would get sewer maybe before that. 02:59:21.680 --> 02:59:27.040 And then on the schools, you know, I think that's a big thing because I think most of 02:59:27.040 --> 02:59:30.200 the people live in Argyle because of the school. 02:59:30.200 --> 02:59:34.520 And I have two kids that went all the way from kindergarten through high school there, 02:59:34.520 --> 02:59:41.400 and I think the formula that they use for Denton schools I'm pretty sure has no correlation 02:59:41.400 --> 02:59:43.440 whatsoever to Argyle schools. 02:59:43.440 --> 02:59:50.400 You know, I don't know, I think Denton's up to five high schools, four, five high schools? 02:59:50.400 --> 02:59:55.840 Anyway, you know, there's one in Argyle, and I think probably the number of the people 02:59:55.840 --> 03:00:00.000 that will live in the apartments instead of being North Texas students or something are 03:00:00.000 --> 03:00:01.000 just single families. 03:00:01.000 --> 03:00:03.720 I mean, I think they're gonna have kids because they go to Argyle schools. 03:00:03.720 --> 03:00:05.840 I think that's gonna be the attraction. 03:00:05.840 --> 03:00:12.160 So it's gonna change things quite a bit, but and I think they're building schools and adding 03:00:12.160 --> 03:00:14.640 portables and they're doing everything as fast as they can. 03:00:14.640 --> 03:00:16.600 I just don't think they can handle it right now. 03:00:16.600 --> 03:00:24.280 So you know, I know it's gonna develop along 377 eventually, and I mean, I would even suggest 03:00:24.280 --> 03:00:27.960 I'm sure there's gonna, you know, hopefully there'll be a little bit of retail and a little, 03:00:27.960 --> 03:00:33.800 you know, I don't know what, but I think probably as Commissioner Smith said, the density is 03:00:33.800 --> 03:00:37.080 just kind of wrong right there right now. 03:00:37.080 --> 03:00:38.080 Thank you very much. 03:00:38.080 --> 03:00:46.440 Dr. Plainright, if you could just state your name and address for the record and the next 03:00:46.440 --> 03:00:50.120 one will be Sam Slovak. 03:00:50.120 --> 03:00:52.360 My name is Talena Wright. 03:00:52.360 --> 03:00:57.920 My residence is 2016 Walden Boulevard in Flower Mound, Texas. 03:00:57.920 --> 03:01:05.160 I am the Argyle School Superintendent and as the Argyle School Superintendent, I want you 03:01:05.160 --> 03:01:13.760 to be aware of the concerns and the impact that rezoning and initial zoning and use classification 03:01:13.760 --> 03:01:19.120 at Brush Creek in 377 is going to have on Argyle ISD. 03:01:19.120 --> 03:01:25.120 You are aware that the property is in Denton, but it's in Argyle ISD. 03:01:25.120 --> 03:01:30.440 Argyle ISD has parts of five different municipalities in it. 03:01:30.440 --> 03:01:38.100 The main concerns that I have regarding the rezoning and initial zoning and use classification, 03:01:38.100 --> 03:01:45.480 which would allow a phase one, 256 unit complex and a phase two, 100 unit complex for a total 03:01:45.480 --> 03:01:53.240 of 356 units are regarding capacity in the AISD schools and transportation challenges. 03:01:53.240 --> 03:01:59.240 Repeating, capacity and transportation challenges within the schools as well as not meeting 03:01:59.240 --> 03:02:05.000 the requirement of the Denton growth plan, which states that the goal is to keep growth 03:02:05.000 --> 03:02:06.000 centralized. 03:02:06.000 --> 03:02:10.280 Building apartments outside the city does not centralize the growth. 03:02:10.280 --> 03:02:14.240 We're a 4A school district with 3,452 students. 03:02:14.240 --> 03:02:18.040 Many of the students are transported each day by bus. 03:02:18.040 --> 03:02:23.880 There are 20 routes currently that travel a portion of 377 each day in the morning and 03:02:23.880 --> 03:02:25.840 again in the afternoon. 03:02:25.840 --> 03:02:29.600 There are four midday routes daily. 03:02:29.600 --> 03:02:35.160 Five routes travel on or near Brush Creek in the morning and again in the afternoon. 03:02:35.160 --> 03:02:46.040 There are 1,667 registered riders in the morning and 1,712 registered riders in the afternoon. 03:02:46.040 --> 03:02:53.920 The apartment complex could bring over 500 cars, even up to 700 cars into the area. 03:02:53.920 --> 03:02:59.000 I did hear tonight what the percentage was on one bedroom, two bedroom, and three bedroom. 03:02:59.000 --> 03:03:02.720 I had not heard that up until tonight. 03:03:02.720 --> 03:03:07.680 The growth in Argyle ISD is currently over 11% a year. 03:03:07.680 --> 03:03:10.640 It's considered a fast growth school district. 03:03:10.640 --> 03:03:18.400 In 2017, the voters passed a bond, but the third elementary will not even be possibly 03:03:18.400 --> 03:03:23.320 ready before 22 or maybe even 23. 03:03:23.320 --> 03:03:27.700 We have to sell the third issue of the bonds in order to build it. 03:03:27.700 --> 03:03:32.080 The middle school and the high school are scheduled to flip in 21, but we just got the 03:03:32.080 --> 03:03:39.640 building permit last Friday for that construction, so it may not be ready in the fall of 21. 03:03:39.640 --> 03:03:46.280 The district's facilities cannot accommodate the number of students that a 356 unit apartment 03:03:46.280 --> 03:03:47.560 would bring. 03:03:47.560 --> 03:03:55.280 This number could be anywhere up around 175, even up to 250 students. 03:03:55.280 --> 03:03:59.480 It's clearly obvious that with the number of students that Argyle already has, the limited 03:03:59.480 --> 03:04:04.880 and crowded facilities and the number of developments already approved, Argyle's not ready for this 03:04:04.880 --> 03:04:05.880 kind of change. 03:04:05.880 --> 03:04:08.480 I wasn't asked how we figured the yield. 03:04:08.480 --> 03:04:11.480 I will be glad to answer that question for anyone. 03:04:11.480 --> 03:04:17.320 Harvest yield has gone as high as one student per residence. 03:04:17.320 --> 03:04:21.000 Harvest has 2,720 lots. 03:04:21.000 --> 03:04:23.120 That's one of our biggest developments. 03:04:23.120 --> 03:04:26.320 Canyon Falls, 1,240 lots. 03:04:26.320 --> 03:04:35.160 Trailwood Terrace, 310, Lakes of Argyle, 138, the Oaks, 108, 1590, Waterbrook, 265, Pepper 03:04:35.160 --> 03:04:38.680 Creek, 50, Montecino, 199. 03:04:38.680 --> 03:04:41.880 Those are already all approved. 03:04:41.880 --> 03:04:49.760 Right now the Argyle ISD cannot handle this from a capacity standpoint and from a transportation 03:04:49.760 --> 03:04:50.880 standpoint. 03:04:50.880 --> 03:04:51.880 Thank you. 03:04:51.880 --> 03:04:54.880 I appreciate your listening. 03:04:54.880 --> 03:05:03.760 Dr. Wright, we actually have a question for you. 03:05:03.760 --> 03:05:08.480 Dr. Wright, could you come back up? 03:05:08.480 --> 03:05:09.480 Just one second, Mr. Slovak. 03:05:09.480 --> 03:05:10.480 Commissioner Smith. 03:05:10.480 --> 03:05:11.480 Thank you, Chair. 03:05:11.480 --> 03:05:17.440 I asked Cindy earlier about the calculation that the Dent ISD uses and they said 0.23 03:05:17.440 --> 03:05:20.160 students per unit in a multi-family unit. 03:05:20.160 --> 03:05:21.560 What is Argyle ISD's calculations? 03:05:21.560 --> 03:05:23.560 I'm not even mentioning it by development. 03:05:23.560 --> 03:05:24.560 Do you guys have a standard? 03:05:24.560 --> 03:05:27.320 Can you speak into the mic, please? 03:05:27.320 --> 03:05:30.360 It depends on which development that you're talking about. 03:05:30.360 --> 03:05:36.440 Does Argyle ISD, I guess, have a standard or is it just decided by development? 03:05:36.440 --> 03:05:40.000 The demographer figures it by the development. 03:05:40.000 --> 03:05:47.400 For example, in harvest, which I just read how many homes, there's like 2,740 lots there. 03:05:47.400 --> 03:05:52.760 That yield has gone as high as 1.0 for us now, 1.0. 03:05:52.760 --> 03:05:55.200 That's an unheard of yield. 03:05:55.200 --> 03:05:58.260 There's no specific one-time formula. 03:05:58.260 --> 03:06:00.520 It's based on the size of the home. 03:06:00.520 --> 03:06:04.720 It's based on how many homes that you're putting on an acre. 03:06:04.720 --> 03:06:10.280 If you're putting one home on 0.5 acre, then the yield is less. 03:06:10.280 --> 03:06:17.600 The yield at Montalcino is much less than harvest, but the yield at the Yokes is 0.6. 03:06:17.600 --> 03:06:18.600 It differs. 03:06:18.600 --> 03:06:19.600 Okay. 03:06:19.600 --> 03:06:20.600 I just didn't know if the ISD had a standard. 03:06:20.600 --> 03:06:22.600 Canyon Falls is 0.83 right now. 03:06:22.600 --> 03:06:23.600 Okay. 03:06:23.600 --> 03:06:24.600 I just didn't know if the ISD had a standard. 03:06:24.600 --> 03:06:25.600 So thank you. 03:06:25.600 --> 03:06:26.600 I appreciate it. 03:06:26.600 --> 03:06:31.640 Mr. Slovak, if you could just say your name and I just... 03:06:31.640 --> 03:06:36.540 I'm Sam Slovak, I live at 4905 Argyle Lane. 03:06:36.540 --> 03:06:43.120 The proposal for this zoning change before this committee is to really to force a high-density, 03:06:43.120 --> 03:06:49.640 low-income, multi-story apartment complex with a company commercial strip among the 03:06:49.640 --> 03:06:54.800 several prestigious neighborhoods in Denton, the city of Denton. 03:06:54.800 --> 03:07:07.600 The average home in these three areas is $600,000, and to dump a large apartment complex as being 03:07:07.600 --> 03:07:13.000 talked about will have irreparable damage to the value of these homes and the quality 03:07:13.000 --> 03:07:15.360 of life in these neighborhoods. 03:07:15.360 --> 03:07:22.120 This Denton 2030 plan, in my humble opinion, is seriously flawed in assuming the need for 03:07:22.120 --> 03:07:29.600 mixed commercial and multi-family residential development among this area of very prestigious 03:07:29.600 --> 03:07:34.000 rural neighborhoods in southwest Denton. 03:07:34.000 --> 03:07:41.560 I doubt that the members of this planning committee, nor the staff members, or the city 03:07:41.560 --> 03:07:51.920 council members would welcome the desolation of their homes by an abutment of a facility 03:07:51.920 --> 03:07:55.480 such as being proposed here. 03:07:55.480 --> 03:08:02.820 This along with the fact that the city has proposed to put a six-lane highway down Brush 03:08:02.820 --> 03:08:14.160 Creek represents really a malevolent attack on the neighborhoods that we live in. 03:08:14.160 --> 03:08:22.640 The platitudes in your 2030 plan touting conservation development that retains the rural character 03:08:22.640 --> 03:08:30.080 and protects the open space and greenways and enhances value rings very hollow in the 03:08:30.080 --> 03:08:33.240 platitudes that are in that plan. 03:08:33.240 --> 03:08:39.600 I and many in this room implore you to reject this zoning change. 03:08:39.600 --> 03:08:47.040 Do not destroy our neighborhoods and I, for one, will make clear to every member on this 03:08:47.040 --> 03:08:54.520 council of this body and the members of the city council to reject this proposal. 03:08:54.520 --> 03:09:02.600 It is ill-conceived and does not add quality stability for our neighborhoods. 03:09:02.600 --> 03:09:10.000 Thank you, we have a question for you, sir. 03:09:10.000 --> 03:09:12.360 We do have a question for you, Commissioner Pernetta. 03:09:12.360 --> 03:09:15.560 It wasn't so much a question, I just wanted to make sure that everyone in the room was 03:09:15.560 --> 03:09:20.640 aware that we had already discussed with the developer the idea of going back and coming 03:09:20.640 --> 03:09:25.080 back with something more suited to the community. 03:09:25.080 --> 03:09:28.000 That was basically just the point I wanted to make real quick. 03:09:28.000 --> 03:09:29.480 Thank you, Commissioner Pernetta. 03:09:29.480 --> 03:09:37.880 The next is Sharon Cox, followed by, I'm going to say Denny Cox, but it could be Dennis. 03:09:37.880 --> 03:09:46.560 If you could just state your name and address for the record, you have four minutes. 03:09:46.560 --> 03:09:47.560 Good evening. 03:09:47.560 --> 03:09:54.320 My name is Sharon Cox and we have lived in the city of Denton at 8008 Wood Creek Circle 03:09:54.320 --> 03:09:55.880 for more than 28 years. 03:09:55.880 --> 03:10:01.720 We built our house in the city of Denton because we love the area and the neighborhood and 03:10:01.720 --> 03:10:03.720 we so appreciate all of you. 03:10:03.720 --> 03:10:08.440 I know you're highly paid to serve on the Planning and Zoning Commission, so I appreciate 03:10:08.440 --> 03:10:13.820 all that you do and listening to us, but we feel strongly that a multi-use complex on 03:10:13.820 --> 03:10:20.720 Brush Creek and 377 will not only devastate our area homes, but all of several and many 03:10:20.720 --> 03:10:24.280 of Denton's outstanding neighborhoods and our schools. 03:10:24.280 --> 03:10:31.040 We live in front of the creek that runs parallel to Brush Creek and this zoning proposal will 03:10:31.040 --> 03:10:36.480 thoroughly, well, it has major, major impact on the flooding of that area. 03:10:36.480 --> 03:10:40.160 We consistently face flooding. 03:10:40.160 --> 03:10:47.120 We have had our picnic tables, our trampoline, and even two concrete benches float down the 03:10:47.120 --> 03:10:50.800 creek into the Country Club and on into Hickory Creek. 03:10:50.800 --> 03:10:54.120 We have seen it over the 28 years we've lived there. 03:10:54.120 --> 03:10:59.240 We have seen that creek turn into the Mississippi River at least five or six times. 03:10:59.240 --> 03:11:02.160 If you need pictures, I can show you photos. 03:11:02.160 --> 03:11:03.880 We have big rains. 03:11:03.880 --> 03:11:07.840 Also you need to look at Brush Creek on heavy rains. 03:11:07.840 --> 03:11:10.720 The people in our neighborhood can testify to this. 03:11:10.720 --> 03:11:16.800 You cannot cross Brush Creek or drive on Brush Creek because of the flooding that goes from 03:11:16.800 --> 03:11:23.480 the proposed zoning through to our creek and into our backyards. 03:11:23.480 --> 03:11:28.360 Also the apartment complex or whatever is on there needs to consider our environment. 03:11:28.360 --> 03:11:29.760 We have coyotes. 03:11:29.760 --> 03:11:31.680 We have cranes. 03:11:31.680 --> 03:11:39.040 We have a neighborhood bobcat that sleeps on my husband's track and raccoons and deers 03:11:39.040 --> 03:11:41.960 and owls and so much more. 03:11:41.960 --> 03:11:46.700 You need to also consider the environment in one of the prettiest areas of the city 03:11:46.700 --> 03:11:47.880 of Denton. 03:11:47.880 --> 03:11:49.280 And again, thank you so much. 03:11:49.280 --> 03:11:50.280 We appreciate your service. 03:11:50.280 --> 03:11:57.680 Thank you. 03:11:57.680 --> 03:12:03.400 Next is Dennis Cox, followed by Dick Shan House. 03:12:03.400 --> 03:12:04.400 I'm Dennis Cox. 03:12:04.400 --> 03:12:09.320 I live at 8008 Wood Creek Circle, Argyle. 03:12:09.320 --> 03:12:13.800 One of the houses that's in the area that required written notice, I think there's five 03:12:13.800 --> 03:12:19.840 houses that required written notice, and I received mine and I almost threw it away because 03:12:19.840 --> 03:12:22.840 it said "Dear Occupant." 03:12:22.840 --> 03:12:25.960 I think that's how they see us as occupants. 03:12:25.960 --> 03:12:28.480 They don't see us as family members. 03:12:28.480 --> 03:12:31.000 They don't see us as citizens in the community. 03:12:31.000 --> 03:12:36.520 They see us as a stepping stone for them to overcome, to build their complex and then 03:12:36.520 --> 03:12:40.280 move to another city and another development. 03:12:40.280 --> 03:12:44.060 And I think they saw y'all as pawns until tonight. 03:12:44.060 --> 03:12:46.160 And I appreciate all of y'all's work. 03:12:46.160 --> 03:12:50.060 I appreciate y'all listening to all of us and everything. 03:12:50.060 --> 03:12:54.680 I know it's probably been a pretty grueling day for you, but I appreciate it. 03:12:54.680 --> 03:12:57.680 Thank you. 03:12:57.680 --> 03:13:01.560 Thank you. 03:13:01.560 --> 03:13:14.480 Next is Dick Shan House, followed by David Grineer. 03:13:14.480 --> 03:13:15.640 My name is Dick Shan House. 03:13:15.640 --> 03:13:23.960 I live at 8001 Wood Creek Circle in Argyle, right across the street from Dennis and Sharon. 03:13:23.960 --> 03:13:33.160 And the speakers tonight have laid out exactly how all of us in that neighborhood feel about 03:13:33.160 --> 03:13:41.920 how pretty and rural and enjoyable that whole community is out there, that whole area. 03:13:41.920 --> 03:13:47.560 So I just, I'd like to voice my opposition against an apartment complex coming in to 03:13:47.560 --> 03:13:56.460 change so much about that rural community from a standpoint of schools and congestion 03:13:56.460 --> 03:14:03.120 and perhaps increases in crime and traffic. 03:14:03.120 --> 03:14:12.240 And I'm wondering if regarding the park within a 10 minute walk of the apartment complex, 03:14:12.240 --> 03:14:20.040 whether those kids walking to that park would have to cross 377 to do it. 03:14:20.040 --> 03:14:24.560 I yield my time to anybody else who wants to speak in addition to me. 03:14:24.560 --> 03:14:27.000 And I do appreciate you guys and your time tonight. 03:14:27.000 --> 03:14:28.000 Thank you. 03:14:28.000 --> 03:14:29.000 Appreciate being here. 03:14:29.000 --> 03:14:30.000 Thank you. 03:14:30.000 --> 03:14:34.960 I'm not gonna try again. 03:14:34.960 --> 03:14:35.960 I assume you're David? 03:14:35.960 --> 03:14:36.960 Yeah. 03:14:36.960 --> 03:14:37.960 Perfect. 03:14:37.960 --> 03:14:38.960 After that will be Linda Puckett. 03:14:38.960 --> 03:14:41.280 Maybe you can say your name and address for the record. 03:14:41.280 --> 03:14:46.420 It's David Grineer, 3312 Clubview Drive, and excuse my poor penmanship for the, it's not 03:14:46.420 --> 03:14:48.080 your fault, it's mine. 03:14:48.080 --> 03:14:50.840 But thank you for the commission for letting us speak. 03:14:50.840 --> 03:14:57.360 I'm within the 500 foot area of this development and I'll respect everyone's time just because 03:14:57.360 --> 03:15:02.920 as you know, people sort of say the same things over and over and over again, so I'll respect 03:15:02.920 --> 03:15:03.920 that in everyone's time. 03:15:03.920 --> 03:15:08.080 But I just want to emphasize a couple things and one is what people have been talking about 03:15:08.080 --> 03:15:13.560 is the nature and the character of that area and the development and that sticking in apartment 03:15:13.560 --> 03:15:18.000 complex high density housing does not fit with the characteristic of that particular 03:15:18.000 --> 03:15:22.800 area, nor the commercial development along 377 that might go in. 03:15:22.800 --> 03:15:28.000 No disrespect to gray cuts and nail salons, but that kind of commercial development, there's 03:15:28.000 --> 03:15:33.360 plenty of that around and that definitely detracts from the area and from why people 03:15:33.360 --> 03:15:37.040 have moved to that part of Argyle/Denton. 03:15:37.040 --> 03:15:42.000 And also just want to, again, talking about the schools, and we talked about the number 03:15:42.000 --> 03:15:45.880 of students and the over capacity of the Argyle School District, I just want to mention one 03:15:45.880 --> 03:15:50.600 thing, and I'm not an expert on this, but it's the pain for those students. 03:15:50.600 --> 03:15:57.040 There is a local burden for, the local tax rate for sending kids to the public schools. 03:15:57.040 --> 03:16:00.840 The tax rate that's in the packet that's going to be generated by this complex, you 03:16:00.840 --> 03:16:03.720 know, based on estimates of the number of kids that might come out of this complex and 03:16:03.720 --> 03:16:09.200 go to the schools, is not going to, it's not going to sustain those kids and the portion 03:16:09.200 --> 03:16:13.280 of those taxes that are going to go and pay for the kids to go to Argyle School District, 03:16:13.280 --> 03:16:16.700 which means that the burden is picked up by the taxpayers of Argyle. 03:16:16.700 --> 03:16:21.800 And we're a rural community where our tax base is property tax, individual property 03:16:21.800 --> 03:16:24.480 tax, and not business tax that pays for that. 03:16:24.480 --> 03:16:29.560 So that's a burden that will be shifted to us, essentially subsidizing the students that 03:16:29.560 --> 03:16:31.160 come out of the apartment complex. 03:16:31.160 --> 03:16:37.640 And again, just want to emphasize the potential impact with noise, light, pollution, all those 03:16:37.640 --> 03:16:42.640 things that go in with high density housing, you know, as well as diminished property values, 03:16:42.640 --> 03:16:47.360 which a zoning change that would diminish the property values, especially those affected 03:16:47.360 --> 03:16:51.560 around the surrounding areas, would be, you know, regulatory taking in a way where, you 03:16:51.560 --> 03:16:58.120 know, the zoning change in itself would directly affect our property values in future sales. 03:16:58.120 --> 03:16:59.120 Thank you for your time. 03:16:59.120 --> 03:17:00.120 Thank you. 03:17:00.120 --> 03:17:01.120 Linda Puckett here. 03:17:01.120 --> 03:17:14.620 Following her will be Jacqueline Wendell. 03:17:14.620 --> 03:17:15.620 My name's Linda Puckett. 03:17:15.620 --> 03:17:17.840 I live on Fincher Road in Argyle. 03:17:17.840 --> 03:17:21.400 I want to appreciate your thoughtful consideration on this. 03:17:21.400 --> 03:17:24.800 I am somewhat disappointed this is not going to a vote. 03:17:24.800 --> 03:17:33.600 I would appreciate a denial at this level in order to, I believe, make AS have the City 03:17:33.600 --> 03:17:35.040 Council have a super majority. 03:17:35.040 --> 03:17:37.600 I think that was the most appropriate action. 03:17:37.600 --> 03:17:44.840 I think that it's really kind of depriving everyone of their time, but I do appreciate 03:17:44.840 --> 03:17:45.840 everyone's comments. 03:17:45.840 --> 03:17:55.240 I would like to kind of go on what Mr. Smith said about how the yields on non-subsidized 03:17:55.240 --> 03:18:02.120 apartments are very different in Denton as opposed to what they would be in an apartment 03:18:02.120 --> 03:18:03.120 in Argyle. 03:18:03.120 --> 03:18:07.200 And the fact is that we don't have any information on apartments in Argyle because there's no 03:18:07.200 --> 03:18:09.080 apartments in Argyle. 03:18:09.080 --> 03:18:16.680 So even in your development plan, which seems to be the Bible, it says that 25 percent of 03:18:16.680 --> 03:18:20.960 Denton's population is between the ages of 18 to 24. 03:18:20.960 --> 03:18:28.840 Also single childless people are attracted to Denton because of its vibrant downtown 03:18:28.840 --> 03:18:32.360 nightlife and scene, and there is a lot of industry here. 03:18:32.360 --> 03:18:38.400 Denton County is one of the biggest, well, the biggest employers. 03:18:38.400 --> 03:18:39.880 I'd also like to talk about the yields. 03:18:39.880 --> 03:18:47.840 Now, the yields are very high in Argyle because it's a very desirable school district. 03:18:47.840 --> 03:18:53.440 Part of the reason why the yields, though, are still fairly low is people have children. 03:18:53.440 --> 03:18:54.440 They graduate. 03:18:54.440 --> 03:18:57.560 They stay in their homes because they are homeowners. 03:18:57.560 --> 03:18:58.760 They have roots there. 03:18:58.760 --> 03:19:00.120 They have neighbors there. 03:19:00.120 --> 03:19:04.120 And I'm not denigrating people that live in apartments, but you rarely get to know your 03:19:04.120 --> 03:19:05.500 neighbors in apartments. 03:19:05.500 --> 03:19:10.520 They are a more transitory population. 03:19:10.520 --> 03:19:15.840 You are not going to have people kind of age out and retire in the home and not have children 03:19:15.840 --> 03:19:17.200 in the school district. 03:19:17.200 --> 03:19:22.660 I think that it's laughable that he says it's going to be 75 percent one bedroom. 03:19:22.660 --> 03:19:29.160 Why would you ever want to live in the middle of nowhere, nowhere close to a grocery store, 03:19:29.160 --> 03:19:33.920 a gas station, anywhere to have anything done? 03:19:33.920 --> 03:19:39.880 You live in Argyle because it's rural, because you like trees and space, and it's a great 03:19:39.880 --> 03:19:41.280 school district. 03:19:41.280 --> 03:19:48.280 That apartment complex, it was going to be a magnet for people to come to this ISD and 03:19:48.280 --> 03:19:51.480 75 percent one bedroom. 03:19:51.480 --> 03:19:56.760 I don't think there's any apartment complex and didn't at 75 percent one bedroom. 03:19:56.760 --> 03:20:03.800 I'd also like to point out that Cindy Jackson used the local government code as a limiting. 03:20:03.800 --> 03:20:09.520 She said that they were limited to notify people in the ETJ right next to this development. 03:20:09.520 --> 03:20:11.360 That is not correct. 03:20:11.360 --> 03:20:17.080 Local government code in that section is giving the minimum standards for notification. 03:20:17.080 --> 03:20:22.000 I don't even live near this complex, but it offends me that people that would butt right 03:20:22.000 --> 03:20:26.640 up to it just because they're in the ETJ were not notified. 03:20:26.640 --> 03:20:31.560 She's talking out of both sides of her mouth when she says that we have to notify within 03:20:31.560 --> 03:20:37.800 200 feet within the city limits only, but as a courtesy did it 500 feet. 03:20:37.800 --> 03:20:38.800 Which is it? 03:20:38.800 --> 03:20:40.760 Are you limited by the local government code or are you not? 03:20:40.760 --> 03:20:45.320 The people in the ETJ deserve notification too that are next to this. 03:20:45.320 --> 03:20:51.760 I'd also like to say too that this was R1. 03:20:51.760 --> 03:20:53.980 This is one dwelling per acre. 03:20:53.980 --> 03:20:56.440 We just had a bond election in Argyle that barely passed. 03:20:56.440 --> 03:21:00.200 It passed by under 50 votes. 03:21:00.200 --> 03:21:06.600 That land was projected to have 18 families there and to even increase it by a planned 03:21:06.600 --> 03:21:14.040 development to as low as 100 or 200 is going to be an undue burden on the school district 03:21:14.040 --> 03:21:26.680 and it's just not fitting with ... Thank you. 03:21:26.680 --> 03:21:30.640 This is Jacqueline Wendel followed by David Wendel. 03:21:30.640 --> 03:21:31.640 Do you need to state your name and address? 03:21:31.640 --> 03:21:32.640 You have four minutes. 03:21:32.640 --> 03:21:33.640 Yes, sir. 03:21:33.640 --> 03:21:38.120 My name is Jacqueline Wendel and I'm a resident at 4981 Kiowa Trail located directly behind 03:21:38.120 --> 03:21:39.120 the property of interest. 03:21:39.120 --> 03:21:42.040 I'm going to read the email that I sent to Cindy today. 03:21:42.040 --> 03:21:46.640 A year and a half ago my husband and I moved our family into this house thinking it would 03:21:46.640 --> 03:21:48.260 be our forever home. 03:21:48.260 --> 03:21:51.920 We came from the busy and overpopulated city of Plano and we're related to find a property 03:21:51.920 --> 03:21:53.840 near the rural town of Argyle. 03:21:53.840 --> 03:21:55.920 It had everything we were looking for in a home. 03:21:55.920 --> 03:22:00.640 A large lot located on a quiet cul-de-sac in the Argyle school district and most importantly 03:22:00.640 --> 03:22:03.560 it provided us with the privacy we were denied in Plano. 03:22:03.560 --> 03:22:07.820 Fast forward to a couple of months ago when we first heard about the proposed rezoning 03:22:07.820 --> 03:22:09.800 of the land directly behind us. 03:22:09.800 --> 03:22:13.600 On social media, might I add, because we are not within city limits so they're not required 03:22:13.600 --> 03:22:17.600 by law to notify us of what's going on even though we'll be one of several houses impacted 03:22:17.600 --> 03:22:19.800 the most by the change. 03:22:19.800 --> 03:22:20.800 Apartments. 03:22:20.800 --> 03:22:24.840 The developers want to build two to four story apartments less than 100 yards from our home, 03:22:24.840 --> 03:22:28.360 from where our children play, from where our farm animals are housed. 03:22:28.360 --> 03:22:31.280 People will be in and out all hours of the day and night, some of whom will have the 03:22:31.280 --> 03:22:35.280 ability to look into our yard with who knows what intentions, invading our privacy and 03:22:35.280 --> 03:22:37.440 potentially risking our safety. 03:22:37.440 --> 03:22:40.880 The thoughts that have raced through my mind over the past two months make me sick to my 03:22:40.880 --> 03:22:41.880 stomach. 03:22:41.880 --> 03:22:45.360 The things that my husband and I worked so hard for just blatantly stomped on. 03:22:45.360 --> 03:22:47.240 For financial gain of course. 03:22:47.240 --> 03:22:50.420 We made a lifetime investment when buying this property and I promise you we would have 03:22:50.420 --> 03:22:55.360 never bought this house knowing that the apartments could be built behind it. 03:22:55.360 --> 03:22:57.400 But then why would that have ever been a concern? 03:22:57.400 --> 03:23:00.240 The property is owned for single family homes on acre lots. 03:23:00.240 --> 03:23:04.000 You're changing the rules of the game and quite frankly it's not fair. 03:23:04.000 --> 03:23:07.000 And now the thought of selling our forever home has crossed my mind but you know what's 03:23:07.000 --> 03:23:08.000 really upsetting? 03:23:08.000 --> 03:23:11.920 It's doubtful that we would recoup our investment because our property value will be significantly 03:23:11.920 --> 03:23:14.480 diminished in the event that this rezoning is approved. 03:23:14.480 --> 03:23:17.440 So it's a no win situation for us whether we stay or leave. 03:23:17.440 --> 03:23:21.960 But let me step off my soap box for a moment and talk about, or should I say reiterate, 03:23:21.960 --> 03:23:25.120 some of the other problems that will come from this wonderful project. 03:23:25.120 --> 03:23:27.640 These proposed apartments will feed into Argyle schools. 03:23:27.640 --> 03:23:32.280 The school districts are known for its exceptional academics as well as its low student to teacher 03:23:32.280 --> 03:23:33.280 ratio. 03:23:33.280 --> 03:23:36.480 Argyle is already growing at a rapid rate and struggling to accommodate the growth in 03:23:36.480 --> 03:23:38.080 its student population. 03:23:38.080 --> 03:23:41.280 How is it going to handle an immediate influx of potentially hundreds of children when it's 03:23:41.280 --> 03:23:43.240 essentially already maxed out? 03:23:43.240 --> 03:23:44.760 And what about police and fire? 03:23:44.760 --> 03:23:47.980 It currently takes 10 to 15 minutes for a 911 call to be answered in this area. 03:23:47.980 --> 03:23:52.040 How are they going to deal with a sudden increase in population and call volume? 03:23:52.040 --> 03:23:53.480 Or the traffic? 03:23:53.480 --> 03:23:56.580 The roads in Argyle and South Dent need improvement as is. 03:23:56.580 --> 03:23:59.680 There are streets located in multiple jurisdictions needing repair and widening. 03:23:59.680 --> 03:24:03.160 So what happens when there are hundreds of more cars on the roads that can hardly accommodate 03:24:03.160 --> 03:24:05.240 the current traffic in the region? 03:24:05.240 --> 03:24:08.740 This rezoning will bring nothing to the area but more crime, more traffic and more people 03:24:08.740 --> 03:24:11.660 than the city and the Argyle school district can handle. 03:24:11.660 --> 03:24:13.640 If you ask me it's an easy decision. 03:24:13.640 --> 03:24:17.220 Try the rezoning and the potential for brush creek apartments and let this area continue 03:24:17.220 --> 03:24:21.040 to be a quiet small community that prides itself on beautiful rural character and small 03:24:21.040 --> 03:24:22.360 town lifestyle. 03:24:22.360 --> 03:24:25.360 Thank you. 03:24:25.360 --> 03:24:29.420 Thank you. 03:24:29.420 --> 03:24:32.760 Next is David Wendell followed by Vince Schreiber. 03:24:32.760 --> 03:24:39.400 I need you to state your name and address for the record. 03:24:39.400 --> 03:24:40.400 David Wendell. 03:24:40.400 --> 03:24:46.440 I live with my wife at 4981 Kiowa trail. 03:24:46.440 --> 03:24:50.240 My house backs up to the proposed property. 03:24:50.240 --> 03:24:54.340 I wasn't notified about any of this because they don't have to. 03:24:54.340 --> 03:24:56.120 Because they don't care about us. 03:24:56.120 --> 03:24:58.320 This is just a money grab for them. 03:24:58.320 --> 03:25:03.520 They want to put as much as they can in a small area. 03:25:03.520 --> 03:25:05.680 They didn't come talk to any of us. 03:25:05.680 --> 03:25:14.080 I don't know if you all know, but they had to have an informational hearing to let us 03:25:14.080 --> 03:25:15.080 know about this. 03:25:15.080 --> 03:25:17.680 The people that showed up, they showed up 30 minutes late to that from wherever they 03:25:17.680 --> 03:25:19.880 flew in because they don't care. 03:25:19.880 --> 03:25:22.680 This isn't, these are my neighbors. 03:25:22.680 --> 03:25:23.680 This is our community. 03:25:23.680 --> 03:25:25.600 They're not a part of that. 03:25:25.600 --> 03:25:30.520 And so somebody said earlier that's just how they look at it. 03:25:30.520 --> 03:25:37.160 I do appreciate y'all being against it, just the idea of it seems silly I know. 03:25:37.160 --> 03:25:39.800 And I'm glad you all see that. 03:25:39.800 --> 03:25:43.480 The kind of bummer is, like I work for the Dallas fire department. 03:25:43.480 --> 03:25:47.320 I had to pay quite a bit of money to be here today because today's my shift. 03:25:47.320 --> 03:25:50.840 So I don't appreciate that. 03:25:50.840 --> 03:25:53.520 I don't know how much longer this is going to go on for. 03:25:53.520 --> 03:25:55.820 It's already been rescheduled a couple times. 03:25:55.820 --> 03:25:57.600 My wife is super high strung. 03:25:57.600 --> 03:26:03.520 So just the talk of this ruins my day. 03:26:03.520 --> 03:26:08.280 So I do appreciate, but I don't want to do this every six weeks. 03:26:08.280 --> 03:26:09.280 You know what I mean? 03:26:09.280 --> 03:26:13.740 I have to get a babysitter for my four-year-old and my 18-month-old because I don't want someone 03:26:13.740 --> 03:26:19.120 to be able to look into my backyard and watch them play. 03:26:19.120 --> 03:26:21.560 And real quick, I'm not a super smart dude. 03:26:21.560 --> 03:26:27.160 I don't know about yields and all that kind of stuff, but I'm a lieutenant for the Dallas 03:26:27.160 --> 03:26:28.160 fire department. 03:26:28.160 --> 03:26:29.160 I work downtown. 03:26:29.160 --> 03:26:32.600 I know a couple things about apartments, crime. 03:26:32.600 --> 03:26:36.720 The majority of violent crime in Dallas is in apartments. 03:26:36.720 --> 03:26:40.180 That's not where the majority of people live, but that's where the majority of violent crime 03:26:40.180 --> 03:26:41.180 is. 03:26:41.180 --> 03:26:49.440 I saw a little blurb up there on station 7, 1.8 miles away, less than eight minutes. 03:26:49.440 --> 03:26:51.240 Oh, that's awesome. 03:26:51.240 --> 03:26:52.240 I'm sure they don't know. 03:26:52.240 --> 03:26:55.640 And you know, it's too bad they didn't come to our street because we have Chief Higgins 03:26:55.640 --> 03:26:56.640 that lives on our street. 03:26:56.640 --> 03:26:58.400 He could have told them anything they wanted to know. 03:26:58.400 --> 03:27:01.040 He's a battalion chief in the city of Denton. 03:27:01.040 --> 03:27:04.800 If this building caught on fire, he'd be the one directing the firefighters on how to put 03:27:04.800 --> 03:27:05.800 it out. 03:27:05.800 --> 03:27:07.320 He's right there at the top. 03:27:07.320 --> 03:27:08.440 Too bad they didn't come talk to him. 03:27:08.440 --> 03:27:09.680 He could have answered some questions. 03:27:09.680 --> 03:27:16.880 But if an apartment caught on fire in Denton, station 7 has one fire engine, one ambulance. 03:27:16.880 --> 03:27:18.080 So they could be there super quick. 03:27:18.080 --> 03:27:20.560 They're not going to do anything. 03:27:20.560 --> 03:27:26.440 Do you know in Dallas, if an apartment catches on fire in Dallas, that's a two-alarm response. 03:27:26.440 --> 03:27:33.600 Four fire engines, four trucks, three battalion chiefs, a deputy chief, EMS supervisor, an 03:27:33.600 --> 03:27:34.600 ambulance. 03:27:34.600 --> 03:27:36.880 That's over 40 people. 03:27:36.880 --> 03:27:42.240 And it's different cities, but we have NIMS standards and we're not that different. 03:27:42.240 --> 03:27:46.160 So I'm sure they did do the research, so they might be able to answer that question 03:27:46.160 --> 03:27:51.380 on what kind of response it would take to get all that to an apartment fire. 03:27:51.380 --> 03:27:52.560 I don't know. 03:27:52.560 --> 03:27:56.200 But I think that's pretty much all I got. 03:27:56.200 --> 03:28:00.120 I appreciate y'all, and I appreciate y'all being against it. 03:28:00.120 --> 03:28:01.760 Hopefully we don't do this every two months. 03:28:01.760 --> 03:28:11.020 That's my one thing. 03:28:11.020 --> 03:28:12.020 Appreciate that. 03:28:12.020 --> 03:28:13.020 And I appreciate your service. 03:28:13.020 --> 03:28:14.200 Thank you. 03:28:14.200 --> 03:28:25.400 Next is Vince Shriver, followed by Kevin Fasciane, station name and address for the record. 03:28:25.400 --> 03:28:27.380 Vince Shriver, 4990 Kiowa Trails. 03:28:27.380 --> 03:28:31.760 I'm also in the unincorporated part of Denton, so I did not get the notification on this 03:28:31.760 --> 03:28:32.760 rezoning. 03:28:32.760 --> 03:28:36.040 I'm going to go a little bit off script tonight, since everybody's kind of talked a little 03:28:36.040 --> 03:28:41.840 bit about what my thoughts have been, and again, I want to echo Mr. Smith, thank you 03:28:41.840 --> 03:28:46.440 so much for your support, Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Pernetta, Commissioner Cole. 03:28:46.440 --> 03:28:52.440 I appreciate you guys taking a look and assisting the developer and kind of reconsidering how 03:28:52.440 --> 03:28:53.440 they want to approach this. 03:28:53.440 --> 03:28:57.880 And that's kind of what I want to go off script and talk a little bit about is I think there's 03:28:57.880 --> 03:29:03.240 a great opportunity that we are going to see, and everybody in this room knows from my neighbors 03:29:03.240 --> 03:29:06.680 and everyone, we're going to see growth in the Argyle area. 03:29:06.680 --> 03:29:10.560 I think it's a great opportunity for this particular property, and as one of my neighbors 03:29:10.560 --> 03:29:14.080 and I were talking about this evening, it would be a great opportunity for us to be 03:29:14.080 --> 03:29:18.120 able to walk down somewhere that's got a nice little coffee shop and fits the tranquil nature 03:29:18.120 --> 03:29:21.520 of the area to be able to say, hey, this is an area we walk our kids down, it becomes 03:29:21.520 --> 03:29:26.800 a Saturday event, and we get to look at something that one of the developers built, took pride 03:29:26.800 --> 03:29:30.720 in and said, hey, this is something that I added and added a tremendous amount of value 03:29:30.720 --> 03:29:34.760 to the area that I'm developing. 03:29:34.760 --> 03:29:39.880 That seems to be missing at the moment, so I would definitely encourage somehow the developer 03:29:39.880 --> 03:29:45.640 tonight to take a look at how he could do that, reach out to the local community, take 03:29:45.640 --> 03:29:49.320 the recommendation by this commission, take the recommendation that we provided during 03:29:49.320 --> 03:29:55.920 the feedback session that we had, and figure out a way to as a community, because that's 03:29:55.920 --> 03:29:59.240 really what we're talking about here, not just an apartment complex that they want to 03:29:59.240 --> 03:30:05.200 drop in on top of our farm animals, on top of where we don't have the infrastructure 03:30:05.200 --> 03:30:08.800 from the street standpoint, we don't have the infrastructure from the schools contrary 03:30:08.800 --> 03:30:14.840 to what their reports say, work with the community to come up with a plan that we can all get 03:30:14.840 --> 03:30:19.080 behind and that when they decide to break ground, the community wants to be there and 03:30:19.080 --> 03:30:22.320 say, hey, you know what, this is something we all got involved in and we're proud to 03:30:22.320 --> 03:30:24.240 have you here as one of our partners. 03:30:24.240 --> 03:30:28.360 Right now, nobody in our community feels that this is a partnership, this is something we 03:30:28.360 --> 03:30:29.920 want to chase out of our community. 03:30:29.920 --> 03:30:35.560 There's a prime opportunity here for to change that around if they decide to take that initiative, 03:30:35.560 --> 03:30:41.680 and I know my community, given that opportunity, we would embrace the right development and 03:30:41.680 --> 03:30:45.580 we'd embrace the right opportunity to enhance where we live. 03:30:45.580 --> 03:30:49.840 So thank you. 03:30:49.840 --> 03:30:53.960 Evening commissioners. 03:30:53.960 --> 03:30:59.480 Kevin Fassian, 4805 Argyle Lane, and City of Denton. 03:30:59.480 --> 03:31:05.300 First of all, as a former elected public official, thank you for your service, you're what makes 03:31:05.300 --> 03:31:08.800 this happen and we truly appreciate your service. 03:31:08.800 --> 03:31:12.120 In consideration of time, I'm not going to rehash all the points. 03:31:12.120 --> 03:31:17.740 I will introduce one point I don't know that was brought up yet, and one of the elements 03:31:17.740 --> 03:31:23.280 in changing the zoning, element number one, is that the use of this land complement the 03:31:23.280 --> 03:31:24.960 surrounding areas. 03:31:24.960 --> 03:31:29.720 And given that a vote doesn't appear likely tonight that it'll be postponed, I just ask 03:31:29.720 --> 03:31:36.240 you to remember that when this is brought up before you again, that clearly you've heard 03:31:36.240 --> 03:31:40.960 from the community, and whatever use we put to this land, let's make sure it does complement 03:31:40.960 --> 03:31:46.720 what's already around it, and that we maintain the beauty of this area of Denton and Argyle. 03:31:46.720 --> 03:31:52.760 Thank you. 03:31:52.760 --> 03:31:56.080 Next is Judy Folkerson, followed by Gary Davis. 03:31:56.080 --> 03:31:59.080 Is Judy here? 03:31:59.080 --> 03:32:00.080 Okay. 03:32:00.080 --> 03:32:02.680 I'll go on record as you're opposed to this? 03:32:02.680 --> 03:32:04.640 Yes, sir. 03:32:04.640 --> 03:32:05.640 Okay. 03:32:05.640 --> 03:32:06.640 Gary Davis. 03:32:06.640 --> 03:32:07.640 Is Gary here? 03:32:07.640 --> 03:32:16.720 Okay, next here will be David Yoder. 03:32:16.720 --> 03:32:17.720 Thank you, Commissioner. 03:32:17.720 --> 03:32:18.720 My name's Gary Davis. 03:32:18.720 --> 03:32:25.560 I live at 970 Brush Creek Road, and what used to be a really nice little road is now going 03:32:25.560 --> 03:32:27.680 to be a freeway. 03:32:27.680 --> 03:32:31.040 It seems like all of this falls into build it, and they will come. 03:32:31.040 --> 03:32:37.480 Well, we're going to put the mobility plans as to come through, and then go across 377 03:32:37.480 --> 03:32:39.280 to 35W. 03:32:39.280 --> 03:32:41.520 We understand that. 03:32:41.520 --> 03:32:49.160 If you look in the ETJ area on the west side of 377, there's a huge number of homes that 03:32:49.160 --> 03:32:54.720 are already on the plans to be put there, and the reason I know that is my son-in-law's 03:32:54.720 --> 03:32:56.640 the civil engineer for it. 03:32:56.640 --> 03:33:02.560 If you just continue on south from that same point, housing tracks after housing tracks. 03:33:02.560 --> 03:33:05.040 I know you can't do much about that. 03:33:05.040 --> 03:33:08.480 But then this one starts doubling down. 03:33:08.480 --> 03:33:17.040 We've got a few things that are facing 377, but we've got an awful lot of apartments, 03:33:17.040 --> 03:33:24.600 an awful lot of multifamily, and I thank you very much for acknowledging that, the commissioners. 03:33:24.600 --> 03:33:32.800 I work for the city of Keller, so I'm in these riveting meetings all the time. 03:33:32.800 --> 03:33:40.160 I heard more consideration given by you fellows than I hope nobody from Keller is watching 03:33:40.160 --> 03:33:44.560 this tonight. 03:33:44.560 --> 03:33:45.560 That's my thing. 03:33:45.560 --> 03:33:47.600 We're being dumped on. 03:33:47.600 --> 03:33:53.640 They're bringing the six-lane highway through, and I live right on the road. 03:33:53.640 --> 03:33:55.600 It's going to come up close to our front door. 03:33:55.600 --> 03:33:59.880 Right now, people in the neighborhood such as Cox's, they walk it every day. 03:33:59.880 --> 03:34:02.960 They walk by my house and stroll up and down there. 03:34:02.960 --> 03:34:04.960 That's going to go away. 03:34:04.960 --> 03:34:10.560 Used to let my grandkids ride the golf cart up and down the road and over on the Kyle 03:34:10.560 --> 03:34:11.560 Trail. 03:34:11.560 --> 03:34:13.560 That's going away. 03:34:13.560 --> 03:34:20.160 All the housing and all of the people that are going to go zooming up, you know the drill. 03:34:20.160 --> 03:34:24.960 I know you got the message, and I just appreciate you considering all of that. 03:34:24.960 --> 03:34:29.480 I think it can wait. 03:34:29.480 --> 03:34:33.920 Coming back in six weeks, again, living in this environment, I don't know what that'll 03:34:33.920 --> 03:34:35.800 do for you. 03:34:35.800 --> 03:34:41.120 I would rather see you take 90 days and get with us and come up with a better plan. 03:34:41.120 --> 03:34:46.160 At least they wouldn't be told, "Hit the road," even though that's what we'd like 03:34:46.160 --> 03:34:47.160 to say. 03:34:47.160 --> 03:34:52.400 I think it's a longer process than what you're giving it. 03:34:52.400 --> 03:34:53.400 Thank you for your time. 03:34:53.400 --> 03:34:57.680 No disrespect, I have to leave, and it's not because I'm angry. 03:34:57.680 --> 03:35:00.040 Thank you so much. 03:35:00.040 --> 03:35:05.800 Thanks for being here. 03:35:05.800 --> 03:35:08.480 Next is David Yoder, followed by Allison Prather. 03:35:08.480 --> 03:35:12.400 If you could state your name and address for the record. 03:35:12.400 --> 03:35:13.400 My name is David Yoder. 03:35:13.400 --> 03:35:17.600 I live at 940 and 950 Brush Creek Road in Argyle, Texas. 03:35:17.600 --> 03:35:22.680 We're David and Kathy Yoder, and we have lived on Brush Creek Road since 1985. 03:35:22.680 --> 03:35:26.280 We moved here when there were only 10 houses on all of Brush Creek. 03:35:26.280 --> 03:35:31.520 Kiowa Trails, Wood Creek Circle, the Hills of Argyle, Country Club Village, and all subdivisions 03:35:31.520 --> 03:35:33.800 built after 1985. 03:35:33.800 --> 03:35:38.340 We have worked tirelessly with the project developers, Den County and Citi, to create 03:35:38.340 --> 03:35:42.400 and maintain a rural community that supported our rural atmosphere and lifestyle. 03:35:42.400 --> 03:35:45.360 This is not about social status or economics. 03:35:45.360 --> 03:35:49.480 It's about the inappropriateness of inserting a two-, three-, and four-story multifamily 03:35:49.480 --> 03:35:55.200 apartment complex, immediately abutting a rural community made up of one to five-acre 03:35:55.200 --> 03:35:57.160 homes and ranchettes. 03:35:57.160 --> 03:36:01.680 Within a one-mile radius of the corner of Highway 377 and Brush Creek Road, there are 03:36:01.680 --> 03:36:05.720 zero homes on less than one-acre lots, period. 03:36:05.720 --> 03:36:10.680 It's about safety and traffic flow, as currently designed, this apartment complex site plan 03:36:10.680 --> 03:36:15.920 has 352 units, 646 parking spaces, and four exits. 03:36:15.920 --> 03:36:25.880 The northernmost exit is 135 feet south of Bonnie Bray. Sage Brook, a 150-acre development 03:36:25.880 --> 03:36:31.860 with 497 proposed lots, is currently in annexation and zoning with the City of Denton. 03:36:31.860 --> 03:36:37.080 This development will also exit onto Highway 377 at Brush Creek and Bonnie Bray. 03:36:37.080 --> 03:36:42.000 These two developments will increase the daily trips to well over 10,000. 03:36:42.000 --> 03:36:47.040 The widening of Brush Creek Road and 377 and the installation of traffic lights at both 03:36:47.040 --> 03:36:50.280 have no definitive completion date at this time. 03:36:50.280 --> 03:36:55.360 Both traffic lights will require synchronization with a very active railroad crossing. 03:36:55.360 --> 03:37:01.280 The proposed zoning request of the property from RR and R1 to MN mixed-use neighborhood 03:37:01.280 --> 03:37:07.120 is not consistent or conducive with many of the values espoused in the Denton Development 03:37:07.120 --> 03:37:09.120 Plan 2030. 03:37:09.120 --> 03:37:14.400 In community vision statement, land use overview and the Denton Development Code. 03:37:14.400 --> 03:37:18.880 Rezoning of this property to MN mixed-use without maintaining the appropriate scale 03:37:18.880 --> 03:37:26.120 and intensity of the surrounding neighborhood defalues the neighborhood, destroys community 03:37:26.120 --> 03:37:30.720 and is inconsistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Denton Plan. 03:37:30.720 --> 03:37:34.560 Ensuring that buildings are of the appropriate scale and intensity to complement the surrounding 03:37:34.560 --> 03:37:37.200 neighborhood environment is critical. 03:37:37.200 --> 03:37:42.520 The planning and zoning staff analysis material is misleading and incomplete. 03:37:42.520 --> 03:37:46.560 Traffic analysis is incomplete because it does not take into consideration the additional 03:37:46.560 --> 03:37:51.560 planned development of Sagebrook Subdivision at 377 and Bonnie Bray. 03:37:51.560 --> 03:37:56.320 Parks, access to the proposed parks at the corner of Bonnie Bray and Allred Road will 03:37:56.320 --> 03:38:01.040 require children to cross a very busy four-lane highway and active railroad tracks to access 03:38:01.040 --> 03:38:02.240 the park. 03:38:02.240 --> 03:38:08.200 The stated walking distance is 1,033 feet, is misleading and raises significant and potential 03:38:08.200 --> 03:38:12.280 deadly safety concerns not addressed by staff. 03:38:12.280 --> 03:38:15.000 Dr. Wright has answered the question on schools. 03:38:15.000 --> 03:38:17.840 My recommendation is denial of this request. 03:38:17.840 --> 03:38:18.840 Thank you very much. 03:38:18.840 --> 03:38:19.840 Thank you. 03:38:19.840 --> 03:38:29.760 I would also like to note that the two commercial properties that they identify are both setbacks 03:38:29.760 --> 03:38:33.240 and do not include the first part which is in the city limits. 03:38:33.240 --> 03:38:39.280 They're built in the ETJ and therefore they are not out as commercial properties. 03:38:39.280 --> 03:38:40.280 Thank you. 03:38:40.280 --> 03:38:41.280 Thank you. 03:38:41.280 --> 03:38:49.280 Next is Allison Prather followed by Perry Dyer. 03:38:49.280 --> 03:38:57.120 If you would just state your name and address for record. 03:38:57.120 --> 03:38:58.120 My name is Allison Prather. 03:38:58.120 --> 03:39:02.400 I live at 4921 Kyle Wittrell. 03:39:02.400 --> 03:39:05.040 Thank you for hearing me tonight. 03:39:05.040 --> 03:39:08.920 My husband and I are in opposition to the rezoning of this property. 03:39:08.920 --> 03:39:14.840 Our property backs up to this property would be our backyard basically. 03:39:14.840 --> 03:39:21.160 Noise pollution, light pollution, not to mention people walking their dogs down our street 03:39:21.160 --> 03:39:27.560 and allowing their animals to defecate in our yards, that would be messes to clean up. 03:39:27.560 --> 03:39:31.960 We enjoy our sunsets if there's a four story, anything back there. 03:39:31.960 --> 03:39:33.820 We would not see the sunsets. 03:39:33.820 --> 03:39:37.200 It's very quiet and tranquil out there. 03:39:37.200 --> 03:39:42.800 We would lose our quiet and our tranquility if this was rezoned. 03:39:42.800 --> 03:39:51.320 The zoning needs to stay one acre residential as it is now to complement the neighborhood 03:39:51.320 --> 03:39:55.480 and leave the ... People move out there and live out there for a reason. 03:39:55.480 --> 03:39:57.080 They want it to be like it is now. 03:39:57.080 --> 03:40:01.320 They don't want big changes coming. 03:40:01.320 --> 03:40:03.320 Thank you very much for listening to me. 03:40:03.320 --> 03:40:08.060 Thank you very much. 03:40:08.060 --> 03:40:12.280 Next is Perry Dyer followed by Leon Dade. 03:40:12.280 --> 03:40:13.280 Leon Dade. 03:40:13.280 --> 03:40:14.280 Good evening. 03:40:14.280 --> 03:40:15.280 Thank you for your time. 03:40:15.280 --> 03:40:19.240 Perry Dyer, 4800 Snow Shield Court, Argyle, Texas or Denton, however it's worded out for 03:40:19.240 --> 03:40:21.440 the mail there. 03:40:21.440 --> 03:40:25.640 Our area is very unique and the reason I moved out there two years ago was because of that 03:40:25.640 --> 03:40:26.640 uniqueness. 03:40:26.640 --> 03:40:30.320 We live in a very small town out in Northern California and the reason we lived there and 03:40:30.320 --> 03:40:32.360 liked it is because it is a small town. 03:40:32.360 --> 03:40:35.040 The people who are moving to these areas want that. 03:40:35.040 --> 03:40:37.600 They are understanding that it takes 10 minutes to go to a grocery store. 03:40:37.600 --> 03:40:39.720 It takes 10 minutes to go to a gas station. 03:40:39.720 --> 03:40:41.760 It takes 10 minutes to get about anywhere from where we are. 03:40:41.760 --> 03:40:43.660 We don't need instantaneous access. 03:40:43.660 --> 03:40:44.660 We don't want that. 03:40:44.660 --> 03:40:46.380 That's not why we moved there. 03:40:46.380 --> 03:40:49.780 As Lieutenant from the fire department talked about, response times. 03:40:49.780 --> 03:40:53.960 My neighbor's house, unfortunately Donna had to leave, burnt down last year. 03:40:53.960 --> 03:40:58.840 To the ground, 100 percent, if an apartment complex catches fire, that's going to take 03:40:58.840 --> 03:41:02.000 all the resources for our area to deal with that. 03:41:02.000 --> 03:41:03.000 Anybody else? 03:41:03.000 --> 03:41:04.000 I'm sorry. 03:41:04.000 --> 03:41:08.920 We've got to bring somebody else in from another division and department to bring it in. 03:41:08.920 --> 03:41:14.900 It takes bold vision from you guys, from the city council, to stand up to just making it 03:41:14.900 --> 03:41:17.200 another town, just like everywhere else. 03:41:17.200 --> 03:41:19.920 You drive through all these neighborhoods, they're identical. 03:41:19.920 --> 03:41:20.920 There's this. 03:41:20.920 --> 03:41:21.920 There's that. 03:41:21.920 --> 03:41:22.920 There's apartments. 03:41:22.920 --> 03:41:23.920 There's small houses. 03:41:23.920 --> 03:41:25.480 There's all the same businesses. 03:41:25.480 --> 03:41:30.520 It takes vision on your guys' part to say, "No, we're going to allow something to stay 03:41:30.520 --> 03:41:33.600 rural, something to stay unique, and have charm." 03:41:33.600 --> 03:41:36.720 That's what brings people to the area, makes people want to be there. 03:41:36.720 --> 03:41:42.120 In 20 years, maybe that's why people want to still come, is because they see that vision, 03:41:42.120 --> 03:41:43.120 they have that uniqueness. 03:41:43.120 --> 03:41:48.040 If people want apartments, they can go just down the road, find apartments. 03:41:48.040 --> 03:41:49.520 They're all over the place. 03:41:49.520 --> 03:41:52.800 We don't need to make ourselves just like every other area. 03:41:52.800 --> 03:41:53.800 Thank you for your time. 03:41:53.800 --> 03:42:03.920 After Mr. Dade, we'll have Pam Harrington, Ms. Dade. 03:42:03.920 --> 03:42:04.920 I'm sorry. 03:42:04.920 --> 03:42:05.920 He was walking right towards me. 03:42:05.920 --> 03:42:10.500 I just made a bad assumption. 03:42:10.500 --> 03:42:11.500 It's quite all right. 03:42:11.500 --> 03:42:12.500 My apologies. 03:42:12.500 --> 03:42:13.500 No, that's quite all right. 03:42:13.500 --> 03:42:14.560 I need to state your name and address for the record. 03:42:14.560 --> 03:42:19.920 My name is Leona McDade, and I live at 116 Stonecrest Road, Argyle, Texas. 03:42:19.920 --> 03:42:27.760 I am also a parent in the school district, believe it or not, I am, raising our grandson. 03:42:27.760 --> 03:42:32.760 I do have some very serious concerns about the proposed apartment complex. 03:42:32.760 --> 03:42:34.520 I know a lot of people have said a lot of things. 03:42:34.520 --> 03:42:38.840 I'm not going to take the time to repeat it, but I will say that I agree with pretty much 03:42:38.840 --> 03:42:42.400 100 percent everything that everybody has said. 03:42:42.400 --> 03:42:44.880 Put that on the record for that. 03:42:44.880 --> 03:42:50.360 We opened up a new elementary campus this fall to relieve overcrowding in our previous 03:42:50.360 --> 03:42:55.080 elementary school, which almost reached 1,000 students last year. 03:42:55.080 --> 03:42:58.240 We now have that second elementary open, which has given some relief. 03:42:58.240 --> 03:43:05.520 We have a third one, hopefully, that will open up in 2022 that is part of the bond election 03:43:05.520 --> 03:43:08.560 that was passed in 2017. 03:43:08.560 --> 03:43:14.480 But all that is based on the current projections by our demographer and do not include this 03:43:14.480 --> 03:43:17.080 apartment complex. 03:43:17.080 --> 03:43:22.160 If I did some numbers here, which I thought you might be interested in hearing. 03:43:22.160 --> 03:43:24.040 Denton ISD has 40 schools. 03:43:24.040 --> 03:43:26.320 I might be off by one or two. 03:43:26.320 --> 03:43:29.200 Argyle ISD has five. 03:43:29.200 --> 03:43:33.560 We are one-eighth the size of Denton. 03:43:33.560 --> 03:43:40.920 Denton ISD has, as of 2018, which I could find, 28,628 students. 03:43:40.920 --> 03:43:48.840 Argyle ISD, as of now, has 3,454, also one-eighth the amount of students. 03:43:48.840 --> 03:43:51.440 Interesting how that worked out. 03:43:51.440 --> 03:43:56.680 If you look at, and I've revised some of my projections here based on what I've heard 03:43:56.680 --> 03:44:01.080 this evening, but I'm going to give you a range. 03:44:01.080 --> 03:44:07.320 If we get 150 students from this apartment complex, that's four and a half percent of 03:44:07.320 --> 03:44:09.760 Argyle ISD's student population. 03:44:09.760 --> 03:44:13.160 If we get 200 students, it's six percent. 03:44:13.160 --> 03:44:17.360 If we get 300 students, it's nine percent. 03:44:17.360 --> 03:44:20.560 We can't absorb any of that. 03:44:20.560 --> 03:44:22.960 Push forward now to Denton ISD. 03:44:22.960 --> 03:44:30.760 If Denton ISD had to absorb this apartment complex, four and a half percent of their 03:44:30.760 --> 03:44:40.100 student population would be 1,288 students, six percent, 1,700, nine percent, 2,500, 03:44:40.100 --> 03:44:43.920 if it was truly that, all clustered in one attendance zone. 03:44:43.920 --> 03:44:48.560 But either way, if you put that many students in our school district, we're going to have 03:44:48.560 --> 03:44:50.680 to build another elementary school. 03:44:50.680 --> 03:44:52.080 There's no doubt that we'd have to. 03:44:52.080 --> 03:44:53.240 We don't have the funds. 03:44:53.240 --> 03:44:56.400 We don't have the bonding capacity that Denton ISD has. 03:44:56.400 --> 03:44:59.000 We do not have the infrastructure. 03:44:59.000 --> 03:45:04.760 We do not have the commercial tax base in order to float another bond election. 03:45:04.760 --> 03:45:11.480 Our next one we're looking at is about 2023 at the earliest, and that would have to include 03:45:11.480 --> 03:45:17.320 additional schools other than the one elementary, excuse me, the one elementary that's planned. 03:45:17.320 --> 03:45:25.140 And this all takes into account what we already know is coming to Argyle ISD, excuse me. 03:45:25.140 --> 03:45:32.300 If this apartment complex were approved, it would definitely overburden the resources 03:45:32.300 --> 03:45:33.800 of Argyle ISD. 03:45:33.800 --> 03:45:38.800 There's absolutely no doubt in my mind, along with the quality of education in our school 03:45:38.800 --> 03:45:43.480 district, which is primarily, honestly, well, not primarily, but one of the big reasons 03:45:43.480 --> 03:45:49.280 that people move, including myself, to Argyle is for the school district, and it's also 03:45:49.280 --> 03:45:52.360 for the ruralness of the community. 03:45:52.360 --> 03:45:57.960 As Denton ISD does, Argyle ISD depends on a professional demographer to give us our 03:45:57.960 --> 03:45:58.960 projections. 03:45:58.960 --> 03:46:04.800 And as this property right now is zoned one acre lots, that's how we have determined 03:46:04.800 --> 03:46:05.800 our bond. 03:46:05.800 --> 03:46:09.560 It has determined the number of schools we build and when the needs of the schools are 03:46:09.560 --> 03:46:10.560 going to occur. 03:46:10.560 --> 03:46:14.960 I just have one little quick statement. 03:46:14.960 --> 03:46:15.960 Okay. 03:46:15.960 --> 03:46:20.560 I appreciate the work that all of you are doing, absolutely, that you serve. 03:46:20.560 --> 03:46:25.840 I encourage you to drive to the area and look at what already exists there and how whatever 03:46:25.840 --> 03:46:30.200 decision you decide to make will impact that area. 03:46:30.200 --> 03:46:35.680 And I also respectfully request that you deny this rezoning request and relook at your comp 03:46:35.680 --> 03:46:39.320 plan regarding this area and not allow multifamily in there at all. 03:46:39.320 --> 03:46:42.320 Thank you. 03:46:42.320 --> 03:46:45.600 Thank you. 03:46:45.600 --> 03:46:47.360 Pam Arrington, followed by Susan Apple. 03:46:47.360 --> 03:46:51.480 Hi, I'm Pamela Arrington, 3121 Stone Crop Trail. 03:46:51.480 --> 03:46:54.180 And I do live in the city of Denton Argyle ISD. 03:46:54.180 --> 03:46:59.640 I'm representing Argyle ISD as the communications director as well as a parent resident. 03:46:59.640 --> 03:47:04.200 I'd like to start by adding to what Dr. Wright communicated regarding the growth in the district. 03:47:04.200 --> 03:47:09.120 Argyle ISD currently has 923 vacant lots available to build on right now. 03:47:09.120 --> 03:47:12.440 And there are 4,400 future planned lots. 03:47:12.440 --> 03:47:16.860 There's groundwork underway on more than 1,165 lots. 03:47:16.860 --> 03:47:19.800 And there are several developments underway as well. 03:47:19.800 --> 03:47:25.440 And just looking at those numbers right there shows you that as a district growing at over 03:47:25.440 --> 03:47:32.200 11% annually, we just don't have the ability or the capacity to take on an apartment complex 03:47:32.200 --> 03:47:33.480 of this size. 03:47:33.480 --> 03:47:39.000 It's obvious with that number of students, Argyle ISD does have limited and crowded facilities. 03:47:39.000 --> 03:47:41.520 The number of developments already approved. 03:47:41.520 --> 03:47:45.760 Argyle ISD is not ready for the initial zoning and rezoning requested at this time for this 03:47:45.760 --> 03:47:47.160 apartment complex. 03:47:47.160 --> 03:47:50.120 All right, moving on. 03:47:50.120 --> 03:47:54.480 Approving the zoning and rezoning of the land at 377 and Brush Creek for apartments contradicts 03:47:54.480 --> 03:47:57.480 the following points in the City of Denton's growth plan. 03:47:57.480 --> 03:48:02.480 In the land use overview, it states the concern of a trend referred to as spreading out. 03:48:02.480 --> 03:48:06.800 The trend leads to longer commutes, greater levels of congestion and strained environment, 03:48:06.800 --> 03:48:10.360 fiscal resources and challenges for public services and facilities to keep up with the 03:48:10.360 --> 03:48:13.880 demands of this rapidly enlarging development footprint. 03:48:13.880 --> 03:48:17.480 It goes on to state that in response to the public input that led to the community vision 03:48:17.480 --> 03:48:25.140 statement, that it is the intention of the land use, well, it is the intention to reverse 03:48:25.140 --> 03:48:29.920 this trend by encouraging thoughtful and resourceful development investment, supporting more compact 03:48:29.920 --> 03:48:34.840 and interconnected land use patterns, providing walkability, biking. 03:48:34.840 --> 03:48:39.520 Is this, I think we need to analyze this and ask ourselves, is this really encouraging 03:48:39.520 --> 03:48:43.840 thoughtful and resourceful development investment by approving this apartment complex at the 03:48:43.840 --> 03:48:46.640 corner of 377 and Brush Creek? 03:48:46.640 --> 03:48:51.320 When it's mentioned by the representative that works for the developer, providing walkability 03:48:51.320 --> 03:48:56.600 to the residents at this apartment complex and biking to a nearby park outstated by other 03:48:56.600 --> 03:49:01.440 residents, would mean that those bikers and those walkers would not only have to cross 03:49:01.440 --> 03:49:06.000 a busy highway 377, but also the safety concern of the railroad, which the railroad really 03:49:06.000 --> 03:49:10.160 hasn't been mentioned much, which I'm surprised by as a parent having to drive my students 03:49:10.160 --> 03:49:15.360 to and from school every day and to all of their activities, I use 377 as my main mode 03:49:15.360 --> 03:49:19.280 of transportation and I know the parents out there that have to cross the railroad tracks 03:49:19.280 --> 03:49:21.600 every single day know that that adds to the commute time. 03:49:21.600 --> 03:49:28.120 When you add 500 extra vehicles on that roadway that are having to travel across that railroad, 03:49:28.120 --> 03:49:31.400 your commute time is going to even increase more and then of course you're going to have 03:49:31.400 --> 03:49:35.440 more accidents, therefore increasing the need for the fire and the police. 03:49:35.440 --> 03:49:38.200 All right, so again, there are a lot of concerns. 03:49:38.200 --> 03:49:41.000 We've heard a lot of the concerns we've had here tonight. 03:49:41.000 --> 03:49:45.440 Our motto or one of our mottos in Argyle is we are Argyle and that's because we all support 03:49:45.440 --> 03:49:46.440 each other. 03:49:46.440 --> 03:49:50.640 We support the school district, we support the community members, the small businesses 03:49:50.640 --> 03:49:54.760 and you know our voices have been heard and we just ask that the developers work together 03:49:54.760 --> 03:50:00.240 with us, work together and opening those lines of communication, listening to our concerns 03:50:00.240 --> 03:50:04.240 and our voices and supporting the city's growth plan and the vision of Argyle. 03:50:04.240 --> 03:50:05.240 Thank you so much. 03:50:05.240 --> 03:50:09.920 Thank you. 03:50:09.920 --> 03:50:10.920 We actually have a question for you. 03:50:10.920 --> 03:50:11.920 We have a question for you, Mr. Smith. 03:50:11.920 --> 03:50:12.920 Yes, absolutely. 03:50:12.920 --> 03:50:13.920 Thank you, Chair. 03:50:13.920 --> 03:50:18.060 Mrs. Arrington, I meant to mention this earlier when your superintendent spoke, but I think 03:50:18.060 --> 03:50:21.360 the school density piece is one thing that's really driving a lot of the comments I have 03:50:21.360 --> 03:50:25.840 to make tonight about this project and my affinity towards it, but if I can make one 03:50:25.840 --> 03:50:29.840 recommendation to Argyle ISD with both of you guys listening in here now, this should 03:50:29.840 --> 03:50:35.620 be a really good chance for you guys as an ISD to build a standard for your density of 03:50:35.620 --> 03:50:36.620 developments coming in. 03:50:36.620 --> 03:50:41.040 With as much growth as could be coming in Argyle here soon, I don't think from a planning 03:50:41.040 --> 03:50:48.340 standpoint going case by case and development by development is smart and it gives the city 03:50:48.340 --> 03:50:53.740 of Denton the opportunity to say, "Well, we think that their number calculation is flawed." 03:50:53.740 --> 03:50:59.400 So I would encourage the ISD to begin a standardization of your density if you can. 03:50:59.400 --> 03:51:04.900 I know it's hard to do because not every development is the exact same, but at least trying something 03:51:04.900 --> 03:51:06.680 rather than saying, "Well, this neighborhood is this way. 03:51:06.680 --> 03:51:07.680 This neighborhood is that way." 03:51:07.680 --> 03:51:14.080 The marker was within 10 students of the projection. 03:51:14.080 --> 03:51:15.080 Absolutely. 03:51:15.080 --> 03:51:16.080 Spot on. 03:51:16.080 --> 03:51:17.080 Okay. 03:51:17.080 --> 03:51:18.080 Just a recommendation. 03:51:18.080 --> 03:51:22.480 Knowing how the city of Denton has reacted to your numbers, how the city of Denton has 03:51:22.480 --> 03:51:26.180 grown over the last 15 years or so and the way that we've done development and growth 03:51:26.180 --> 03:51:31.140 up here, I would encourage Argyle as Denton is not going to stop seeping down into your 03:51:31.140 --> 03:51:32.140 ISD. 03:51:32.140 --> 03:51:37.260 So if the demographer, if it's efficient for them to go case by case, understood. 03:51:37.260 --> 03:51:43.020 But I think it might be a time to build some sort of standardization or some codified way 03:51:43.020 --> 03:51:45.660 of being able to quantify that. 03:51:45.660 --> 03:51:46.660 Next. 03:51:46.660 --> 03:51:54.780 Dr. Wright, since you're not mic'd up, I want to caution against commissioners that engage 03:51:54.780 --> 03:51:56.500 in the audience. 03:51:56.500 --> 03:52:04.380 For the sake of answering your question, Dr. Wright, can you come back up to the mic? 03:52:04.380 --> 03:52:08.920 Interestingly enough, I actually have an appointment with the demographer tomorrow afternoon and 03:52:08.920 --> 03:52:16.100 I do appreciate your insightful comments regarding this, Mr. Smith, and I will discuss it thoroughly 03:52:16.100 --> 03:52:17.100 with the demographer. 03:52:17.100 --> 03:52:18.100 Thank you. 03:52:18.100 --> 03:52:19.100 Tell them hi for me. 03:52:19.100 --> 03:52:20.100 Thank you. 03:52:20.100 --> 03:52:21.700 Thank you. 03:52:21.700 --> 03:52:33.980 Next is Susan Apple, followed by James Vogel-Gessonck. 03:52:33.980 --> 03:52:34.980 There's no way I'm close. 03:52:34.980 --> 03:52:40.580 Ms. Apple, if you could state your name and address, I'd appreciate it. 03:52:40.580 --> 03:52:41.580 My name is Susan Apple. 03:52:41.580 --> 03:52:46.060 I live at 8,000 Wood Creek Circle, Argyle, Texas. 03:52:46.060 --> 03:52:52.220 However, we are in the city of Denton, the city annexed our cul-de-sac in 1979. 03:52:52.220 --> 03:52:55.280 We've been in the same home for 26 years. 03:52:55.280 --> 03:53:00.860 Our cul-de-sac is zoned R1 and all of the lots are over one acre. 03:53:00.860 --> 03:53:07.060 Y'all have messed me up because I had one speech to give and then with the careful conversations 03:53:07.060 --> 03:53:12.380 that y'all have had, which I appreciate very much, it's kind of changed my focus a little 03:53:12.380 --> 03:53:13.380 bit. 03:53:13.380 --> 03:53:17.740 I have to agree with the previous folks who said that they would really like a denial 03:53:17.740 --> 03:53:19.300 tonight. 03:53:19.300 --> 03:53:25.700 This was the first notice I got for the September 18th public hearing. 03:53:25.700 --> 03:53:31.460 Since the developer failed to put signs up and I had to let the planner know that the 03:53:31.460 --> 03:53:37.620 signs had not put up because apparently they didn't follow up, that meeting was rescheduled 03:53:37.620 --> 03:53:42.980 to this meeting, which was on October the 2nd. 03:53:42.980 --> 03:53:48.500 We never got a really good reason for why October the 2nd didn't happen, but then we 03:53:48.500 --> 03:53:52.220 got our third notice for tonight's meeting. 03:53:52.220 --> 03:53:57.820 So I really don't have a lot of excitement about coming back again. 03:53:57.820 --> 03:54:00.460 I think this is kind of ridiculous. 03:54:00.460 --> 03:54:08.620 Let's see, I'll try to-- we actually, after we complained that there were no signs up 03:54:08.620 --> 03:54:13.720 and they had to reschedule that meeting, then we complained that they had held no neighborhood 03:54:13.720 --> 03:54:15.420 meeting. 03:54:15.420 --> 03:54:20.660 It's been my experience that developers are encouraged, especially when it's such a huge 03:54:20.660 --> 03:54:28.860 up zone like this, to have a meeting so that they don't meet with daggers and foul words. 03:54:28.860 --> 03:54:33.420 After we complained that there was no neighborhood meeting, that we had had no contact with the 03:54:33.420 --> 03:54:38.900 developers, two days prior to a meeting being scheduled we got a piece of paper in the mail 03:54:38.900 --> 03:54:40.940 that said there was a neighborhood meeting. 03:54:40.940 --> 03:54:45.600 Also, in my experience, neighborhood meetings are held in the neighborhood. 03:54:45.600 --> 03:54:49.420 This neighborhood meeting was scheduled 15 miles away. 03:54:49.420 --> 03:54:56.100 Forty of us, approximately 40 of us, drove the 15 miles to the meeting, which was scheduled 03:54:56.100 --> 03:55:01.780 at 6.30, and as someone else mentioned, the developers arrived after 7 o'clock. 03:55:01.780 --> 03:55:09.320 They brought with them no materials, no pictures, nothing that you normally would see at a neighborhood 03:55:09.320 --> 03:55:10.580 meeting. 03:55:10.580 --> 03:55:15.540 They were actually overconfident when asked questions. 03:55:15.540 --> 03:55:19.740 Their responses were, "I don't know," or, "We haven't thought about that. 03:55:19.740 --> 03:55:26.380 We just did that concept plan to get the traffic study going." 03:55:26.380 --> 03:55:28.180 They would not answer any questions. 03:55:28.180 --> 03:55:36.620 They were quite joking, they were condescending, and they did not lend themselves to a friendly 03:55:36.620 --> 03:55:39.340 neighborhood relationship. 03:55:39.340 --> 03:55:45.860 Again, aside from that would be more meetings, I also don't see them being touchy-feely 03:55:45.860 --> 03:55:52.220 with the neighbors because they've proven at that meeting we asked for them to reach 03:55:52.220 --> 03:55:53.220 out to us. 03:55:53.220 --> 03:55:57.060 Again, we gave them our names, our addresses, our emails. 03:55:57.060 --> 03:56:01.940 No one has heard from those developers since, and I'm sure they're quite shocked to come 03:56:01.940 --> 03:56:07.500 in here tonight because someone said they didn't read the tea leaves. 03:56:07.500 --> 03:56:09.720 They don't have the ability to read the tea leaves. 03:56:09.720 --> 03:56:15.980 It was clear that they thought this was going to be a slam dunk. 03:56:15.980 --> 03:56:20.540 Staff recommends approval because it's deemed consistent with the overall goals and objectives 03:56:20.540 --> 03:56:21.540 of the Denton Plan. 03:56:21.540 --> 03:56:25.740 I'm going to have to talk really fast, yet it's the exact opposite of the off-stated. 03:56:25.740 --> 03:56:27.940 The Denton Plan is like nobody read it. 03:56:27.940 --> 03:56:31.180 It says over and over and over again, "We want to be consistent. 03:56:31.180 --> 03:56:32.540 We don't want any encroach. 03:56:32.540 --> 03:56:36.220 We don't want leapfrog development," blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. 03:56:36.220 --> 03:56:39.780 In closing, I served on this board for six years. 03:56:39.780 --> 03:56:42.020 I served as the chair. 03:56:42.020 --> 03:56:47.300 I know that your eyes are probably glazing over at this point, but this is important, 03:56:47.300 --> 03:56:52.100 and I hate for all these fine people who have been put through what we've already been put 03:56:52.100 --> 03:56:59.620 through the developer's fault to have to continue this charade for something that's clearly 03:56:59.620 --> 03:57:01.500 inappropriate for the neighborhood. 03:57:01.500 --> 03:57:05.380 I would appreciate a denial, at least consider a denial. 03:57:05.380 --> 03:57:10.380 Thank you for your time. 03:57:10.380 --> 03:57:20.660 If you could state your name and pronounce your last name, it would be helpful, and then 03:57:20.660 --> 03:57:24.140 your address for the record. 03:57:24.140 --> 03:57:33.100 James A. Vogelgesang, 1805 Warwick Crescent Court, Hills of Argyle. 03:57:33.100 --> 03:57:35.340 There's not much I can add to what everybody said here. 03:57:35.340 --> 03:57:41.900 I think you understand where all these people are coming from and their reasons. 03:57:41.900 --> 03:57:45.460 I worked all my life to get the house that I have in Hills of Argyle, and I don't want 03:57:45.460 --> 03:57:47.660 to see it destroyed either. 03:57:47.660 --> 03:57:55.180 I think as far as the Denton plan, when she went through the six points, I found an error 03:57:55.180 --> 03:58:01.460 or disagreement I had with five of them that weren't consistent with what that plan said 03:58:01.460 --> 03:58:05.060 in far as my interpretation. 03:58:05.060 --> 03:58:10.620 I think you have a choice tonight, and I hope you do the right thing. 03:58:10.620 --> 03:58:17.820 I do appreciate your time staying here, but you need to vote this thing no tonight. 03:58:17.820 --> 03:58:19.900 This is not going to be a six-week process. 03:58:19.900 --> 03:58:24.420 They're not going to come back in six weeks with anything any different than what you've 03:58:24.420 --> 03:58:25.420 seen. 03:58:25.420 --> 03:58:27.980 This is going to take a while. 03:58:27.980 --> 03:58:32.300 Disapprove it, send them back to the drawn boards, and have them come up with a different 03:58:32.300 --> 03:58:34.940 plan. 03:58:34.940 --> 03:58:39.380 That's what I challenge you to do tonight, is just do the right thing and say, "Nope, 03:58:39.380 --> 03:58:41.620 wrong answer," and bring them back again. 03:58:41.620 --> 03:58:42.940 Thank you. 03:58:42.940 --> 03:58:44.500 Thank you. 03:58:44.500 --> 03:58:46.300 Commissioner Pernitta. 03:58:46.300 --> 03:58:55.700 I just want to get a clarification real quick. 03:58:55.700 --> 03:59:01.020 If there were a motion to deny, what's the minimum turnaround time for them to come back 03:59:01.020 --> 03:59:04.020 with something else, once again? 03:59:04.020 --> 03:59:18.060 If there's a denial by city council, I believe it's a six-month or a year, I'd have to check 03:59:18.060 --> 03:59:22.180 unless it's a substantially different proposal. 03:59:22.180 --> 03:59:29.420 In this instance, it would either be less land area or a different zoning category. 03:59:29.420 --> 03:59:34.100 It would still be kicking the can down the road, but it would be kicking the can down 03:59:34.100 --> 03:59:35.100 the road a year from now. 03:59:35.100 --> 03:59:36.100 At least. 03:59:36.100 --> 03:59:37.860 I'm going to confirm that in the code right now. 03:59:37.860 --> 03:59:38.860 All right. 03:59:38.860 --> 03:59:39.860 Thank you. 03:59:39.860 --> 03:59:40.860 Commissioner Smith. 03:59:40.860 --> 03:59:41.860 Thank you, Chair. 03:59:41.860 --> 03:59:44.860 Richard, just to follow up on that, because we were talking about earlier, the motion 03:59:44.860 --> 03:59:49.100 to postpone within that, to let them go back and possibly bring back a PD rather than an 03:59:49.100 --> 03:59:50.100 MN. 03:59:50.100 --> 03:59:53.020 You're saying that there was a denial that they can go back, and a substantially different 03:59:53.020 --> 03:59:58.300 application would be coming back with a brand new zoning of a PD rather than an MN, correct? 03:59:58.300 --> 04:00:02.300 Essentially, the denial and the postponement, the only difference between those two things 04:00:02.300 --> 04:00:03.300 is time. 04:00:03.300 --> 04:00:04.300 Correct. 04:00:04.300 --> 04:00:10.300 If this went with a recommendation of denial, then it would go as a supermajority to city 04:00:10.300 --> 04:00:11.460 council. 04:00:11.460 --> 04:00:20.380 If council were to deny it, it would have to be a substantially different proposal. 04:00:20.380 --> 04:00:24.020 The next card I have is for Ashley Nguyen. 04:00:24.020 --> 04:00:32.220 Can I speak with you for her, if you have her, please? 04:00:32.220 --> 04:00:33.220 Sure. 04:00:33.220 --> 04:00:34.220 Absolutely. 04:00:34.220 --> 04:00:41.220 If you could just stage your name and address for the record. 04:00:41.220 --> 04:00:42.220 Okay. 04:00:42.220 --> 04:00:43.220 My name is Peaches Smith. 04:00:43.220 --> 04:00:47.140 I live at 2812 Newport Avenue in Denton, Texas. 04:00:47.140 --> 04:00:55.820 My daughter Ashley and my son-in-law Suvin Nguyen live at 231 407 in Argyle. 04:00:55.820 --> 04:00:59.820 They just moved there two years ago. 04:00:59.820 --> 04:01:01.300 They have three children. 04:01:01.300 --> 04:01:10.500 They've been bombarded basically by the expansion of 407, the expansion of 377. 04:01:10.500 --> 04:01:18.200 They moved there from Irving to be in a small town to raise their children. 04:01:18.200 --> 04:01:20.100 My daughter grew up in a small town. 04:01:20.100 --> 04:01:22.420 My son-in-law grew up in the city. 04:01:22.420 --> 04:01:24.380 They have farm animals. 04:01:24.380 --> 04:01:26.260 They love the school. 04:01:26.260 --> 04:01:31.260 My son-in-law, which is surprising, he's a firefighter in Richardson, Texas. 04:01:31.260 --> 04:01:34.380 I can't believe he turned into a little farmer. 04:01:34.380 --> 04:01:43.020 But apartment complexes, and I know I've lived in them, people do not take the same care 04:01:43.020 --> 04:01:49.820 and concern not only for their home, they don't take the same care and concern for their children. 04:01:49.820 --> 04:01:55.420 They don't take the same care and concern for their community or their schools. 04:01:55.420 --> 04:02:02.940 I'm not doubting anyone that in apartments I've lived in them, but that's a fact of life. 04:02:02.940 --> 04:02:13.220 And Argyle, I just hate to see it be turned into something it's never meant to be. 04:02:13.220 --> 04:02:22.820 It's a beautiful small town place that I, like my children grew up in. 04:02:22.820 --> 04:02:25.140 My kids grew up in a small town. 04:02:25.140 --> 04:02:26.140 They had farm animals. 04:02:26.140 --> 04:02:29.100 They went to a small school. 04:02:29.100 --> 04:02:36.020 I was very active in the school, active with my children, and in an apartment complex, 04:02:36.020 --> 04:02:45.900 especially with looming right over every other house, I just pray that y'all reject it. 04:02:45.900 --> 04:02:46.900 Thank you. 04:02:46.900 --> 04:02:47.900 Thank you. 04:02:47.900 --> 04:02:57.820 Richard, can you clarify the question that Mr. Smith had earlier? 04:02:57.820 --> 04:03:01.340 I just wanted to, and I'll read right from the code. 04:03:01.340 --> 04:03:05.900 This is on limitation of subsequent similar applications accepted city council's request. 04:03:05.900 --> 04:03:09.300 Following denial of an application, an application that is the same or substantially similar 04:03:09.300 --> 04:03:12.660 will be accepted with a one year of a previous denial. 04:03:12.660 --> 04:03:16.620 For the purpose of this provision, substantially similar shall mean any application that is 04:03:16.620 --> 04:03:21.300 not materially different in terms of the proposed development or activities related to the reasons 04:03:21.300 --> 04:03:25.220 for denial of the previously submitted application as determined by the director. 04:03:25.220 --> 04:03:30.140 As a part two to this subsection F, the waiting period may be waived by the decision making 04:03:30.140 --> 04:03:34.980 body provided that A, there is a substantial change of circumstances or new information 04:03:34.980 --> 04:03:38.940 available relevant to the issues or facts considered during the previous application 04:03:38.940 --> 04:03:43.900 review, or the new application is materially different from the previous application as 04:03:43.900 --> 04:03:44.900 determined by the director. 04:03:44.900 --> 04:03:49.660 I mean, I can tell you right now, it would have to be substantially different, a different 04:03:49.660 --> 04:03:52.740 zoning category for even consideration. 04:03:52.740 --> 04:03:58.900 Okay, so once again, minimum one year, but if they came back with like a PD, we could 04:03:58.900 --> 04:04:02.500 waive that one year if they had something that was amenable to the community within 04:04:02.500 --> 04:04:03.980 six months. 04:04:03.980 --> 04:04:08.100 It could be a PD, it could be a suburban court, I mean there's a number of- 04:04:08.100 --> 04:04:09.100 It just could not be- 04:04:09.100 --> 04:04:10.100 An MN. 04:04:10.100 --> 04:04:11.100 An MN, right. 04:04:11.100 --> 04:04:12.100 Okay, all right. 04:04:12.100 --> 04:04:13.100 Or substantially similar. 04:04:13.100 --> 04:04:14.100 All right. 04:04:14.100 --> 04:04:25.380 So the next card I have is Keith Whitehouse, see here. 04:04:25.380 --> 04:04:39.260 Hello, my name's Keith Whitehouse, I live on 1120 Brush Creek Road, along with my neighbors 04:04:39.260 --> 04:04:42.820 David Yoder and Gary Davis who spoke earlier. 04:04:42.820 --> 04:04:45.980 So I appreciate your gentleman's time this evening. 04:04:45.980 --> 04:04:55.500 I think this proposal is clearly not in the way that the community was originally designed. 04:04:55.500 --> 04:05:00.820 I moved there 15 years ago when it was just a semi-rural area. 04:05:00.820 --> 04:05:06.820 I think that's the charm of that community and it continues to be that way. 04:05:06.820 --> 04:05:11.300 I think you've heard time and time again this evening that the infrastructure is not created 04:05:11.300 --> 04:05:16.180 well enough to really support those sets of apartments. 04:05:16.180 --> 04:05:20.020 And I don't really see that happening until there's a four-lane or six-lane road going 04:05:20.020 --> 04:05:23.780 down 377 Andor Brush Creek Road. 04:05:23.780 --> 04:05:27.420 So it's already dangerous as it is, you know? 04:05:27.420 --> 04:05:33.900 So it is a- I just can't emphasize how dangerous it is, we've had a lot of accidents down at 04:05:33.900 --> 04:05:42.500 Fairway Acres, you know, Vantage Road and, you know, Hills of Argyle entrances and those, 04:05:42.500 --> 04:05:47.980 that's not going to get any better if those roads aren't expanded and created properly. 04:05:47.980 --> 04:05:51.620 And it's- I think it's clearly good that we've heard the superintendent here tonight talk 04:05:51.620 --> 04:05:56.260 about the infrastructure, the schools, et cetera, and the fire department. 04:05:56.260 --> 04:06:04.900 So I think it's really clear that to me that this has not been a- that the apartments aren't 04:06:04.900 --> 04:06:07.100 in the really good design plan. 04:06:07.100 --> 04:06:12.300 So I think you gentlemen have all kind of spoke out for that, I appreciate it. 04:06:12.300 --> 04:06:17.580 You know, I just relish the time when that bridge was out on Brush Creek for several 04:06:17.580 --> 04:06:18.580 years. 04:06:18.580 --> 04:06:20.740 It was nice and quiet there. 04:06:20.740 --> 04:06:25.200 We like it nice and quiet there and we wish to keep it nice and quiet there. 04:06:25.200 --> 04:06:32.540 So again, I think bottom line is that is the infrastructure is not there and it is a semi-rural 04:06:32.540 --> 04:06:33.540 area. 04:06:33.540 --> 04:06:34.540 That's the way we'd like to keep it. 04:06:34.540 --> 04:06:35.540 Thank you. 04:06:35.540 --> 04:06:36.540 Thank you. 04:06:36.540 --> 04:06:56.420 Is Brian Trail back, I called his name a couple hours ago, I'll assume he's gone. 04:06:56.420 --> 04:06:59.980 Okay, as I mentioned earlier, I have a stack of white cards that I don't know if you all 04:06:59.980 --> 04:07:00.980 are wishing to speak or not. 04:07:00.980 --> 04:07:04.300 So I'm just going to ask if you want to speak, if you don't want to speak, I'll just read 04:07:04.300 --> 04:07:08.180 your stance, support or oppose into the record. 04:07:08.180 --> 04:07:15.740 The first one I have is Steven Lepot, are you wishing to speak or do you just want to 04:07:15.740 --> 04:07:16.740 go into records opposed? 04:07:16.740 --> 04:07:17.740 Come on down. 04:07:17.740 --> 04:07:30.740 Thank you very much for taking the time to listen to me, I appreciate it. 04:07:30.740 --> 04:07:31.860 I actually grew up in Argyle. 04:07:31.860 --> 04:07:34.460 I was here in 1977. 04:07:34.460 --> 04:07:36.260 Can you just state your name and address for the record? 04:07:36.260 --> 04:07:39.940 Oh, I'm sorry, Steven Lepot, it's 2104 Winthrop Hill. 04:07:39.940 --> 04:07:41.940 Thank you. 04:07:41.940 --> 04:07:48.300 All right, yeah, so we moved out here in 1977, grew up here, grew up in Argyle School District, 04:07:48.300 --> 04:07:52.260 moved away for about ten years or so. 04:07:52.260 --> 04:07:57.780 Lived in a very high developed area over in Frisco and Dallas, Addison area. 04:07:57.780 --> 04:08:01.740 So once I got married, had kids, I thought, where are we going to go where we can get 04:08:01.740 --> 04:08:06.860 a nice rural environment, put a lot of effort in researching. 04:08:06.860 --> 04:08:11.260 And the substance that I was looking for, we have to have something, some kind of reference 04:08:11.260 --> 04:08:14.660 to figure out where we're going to go, some information. 04:08:14.660 --> 04:08:19.820 Zoning is one of the biggest, one of the best ways to figure out what the development plan 04:08:19.820 --> 04:08:24.140 is between the city and the residents. 04:08:24.140 --> 04:08:27.780 And knowing this area, I knew what the plan was, we looked at the zoning laws, we looked 04:08:27.780 --> 04:08:31.700 at the zoning for Denton and also Argyle, put a lot of research in them, I really did 04:08:31.700 --> 04:08:33.500 a lot of research. 04:08:33.500 --> 04:08:37.620 And it was quite a bit of, it took us a long time to get moved out here, to get established, 04:08:37.620 --> 04:08:41.740 put a lot of effort into it, I want to raise my kids here, my family. 04:08:41.740 --> 04:08:45.460 And there's all kinds of things I can plan for, I mean, that's how we live as humans, 04:08:45.460 --> 04:08:53.860 we plan for, we get insurance for coverage, we do a lot of research to plan for our family, 04:08:53.860 --> 04:08:57.580 for safety, for future growth development. 04:08:57.580 --> 04:09:03.260 I feel like we did everything we could possibly do, and we get out here and all of a sudden 04:09:03.260 --> 04:09:07.620 I see these proposals for zoning changes, I feel like that's the only thing in life 04:09:07.620 --> 04:09:10.540 that I haven't been able to plan for. 04:09:10.540 --> 04:09:16.780 We did all our research and here we are and all of a sudden we have a lot of zoning changes. 04:09:16.780 --> 04:09:22.620 And anyway, there's a lot of great knowledge here, I mean, I could go on and on for four 04:09:22.620 --> 04:09:25.740 hours and get specifics, but I think that's already been done. 04:09:25.740 --> 04:09:29.260 So it's kind of for me just a personal, since you already heard, you know everything, heard 04:09:29.260 --> 04:09:30.260 everything. 04:09:30.260 --> 04:09:35.300 So it's just kind of a personal, we've put a lot, I know a lot of people have moved out 04:09:35.300 --> 04:09:43.100 here, have put years into an effort in establishing their residence and the schools. 04:09:43.100 --> 04:09:49.980 And I can say the zoning is one thing, just to be able to go in and change the zoning. 04:09:49.980 --> 04:09:53.780 And there's a handful of people, I'm sure there's a few people that are going to really 04:09:53.780 --> 04:10:01.820 benefit while the whole rest of the community ends up in a disadvantage, quite a big disadvantage. 04:10:01.820 --> 04:10:08.180 So I don't know how else you can go to plan, but anyway, I really appreciate you listening 04:10:08.180 --> 04:10:13.620 to us and I know there's a lot more people who would love to be here tonight. 04:10:13.620 --> 04:10:19.780 But it's obviously we're doing the best we can, so I appreciate it. 04:10:19.780 --> 04:10:20.780 Thank you very much. 04:10:20.780 --> 04:10:27.620 Thanks for your time. 04:10:27.620 --> 04:10:33.660 Donna Parfetti, Donna Parfetti, great. 04:10:33.660 --> 04:10:44.780 She was post, she is from Argyle, 47085, yeah, I'm not sure about that one. 04:10:44.780 --> 04:10:49.740 And then I have, I believe, Mike Block, I think that was his name, I have a letter from 04:10:49.740 --> 04:10:51.740 him, his wife just wanted to read in the record. 04:10:51.740 --> 04:10:55.380 It says, committee members, I live within 200 feet of the proposed rezoning for the Brush 04:10:55.380 --> 04:10:59.060 Creek Apartments, item Z18-00113. 04:10:59.060 --> 04:11:02.500 I am strongly opposed to the zoning change and the apartments. 04:11:02.500 --> 04:11:06.780 Considering it's surrounded by a designated rural area, I do not agree on building apartments 04:11:06.780 --> 04:11:07.780 at this time. 04:11:07.780 --> 04:11:12.740 Thank you for your consideration, Robin E. Block. 04:11:12.740 --> 04:11:18.460 The next card I have is Carrie Johnson. 04:11:18.460 --> 04:11:27.500 Thank you, opposed, Larry and Sue Johnson, opposed, Cheryl McWilliams, are you wishing 04:11:27.500 --> 04:11:28.500 to speak? 04:11:28.500 --> 04:11:29.500 Yeah, absolutely. 04:11:29.500 --> 04:11:30.500 Come on down. 04:11:30.500 --> 04:11:43.340 Hi, I want to thank you guys and just reiterate, or not reiterate, but just to say that everything 04:11:43.340 --> 04:11:44.340 that is said tonight. 04:11:44.340 --> 04:11:45.340 If I could get your, I apologize. 04:11:45.340 --> 04:11:46.340 Oh, I'm sorry. 04:11:46.340 --> 04:11:54.900 I'm sorry, it's Cheryl McWilliams, 2765 Skyview Lane, Argyle, Texas. 04:11:54.900 --> 04:11:58.980 Everybody here has said everything that I've had on my mind and my heart about this rezoning 04:11:58.980 --> 04:12:03.180 change and really what I want to say is, you know, there's been several people that have 04:12:03.180 --> 04:12:05.180 asked you guys to consider voting for that tonight. 04:12:05.180 --> 04:12:08.580 I hope that is something that you guys take into consideration is to go ahead and step 04:12:08.580 --> 04:12:12.420 forward in voting on this tonight and not delaying this any further. 04:12:12.420 --> 04:12:13.420 Thank you. 04:12:13.420 --> 04:12:14.420 Thank you. 04:12:14.420 --> 04:12:30.220 Susan Fasciani, opposed, Trey Fulkerson, are you wishing to speak or are you opposed? 04:12:30.220 --> 04:12:43.860 We have Brandon Paffley, he is opposed, John King, he's opposed, Frank Boddy, opposed, 04:12:43.860 --> 04:12:53.640 thank you, Bev and Wayne Beeler, are you wishing to speak, okay, you all are opposed, Stacey 04:12:53.640 --> 04:13:07.940 Schnabel, Schnabel, opposed, Alexander Allen, opposed, Jessica Russell, is opposed, Amy 04:13:07.940 --> 04:13:24.500 Fanning, opposed, Shane Tatum, he's opposed, Lane Tidwell, opposed, Justin Jensen, are 04:13:24.500 --> 04:13:26.140 you wishing to speak? 04:13:26.140 --> 04:13:27.140 Sure. 04:13:27.140 --> 04:13:28.140 Absolutely. 04:13:28.140 --> 04:13:32.900 If you could just say your name and address, you have four minutes. 04:13:32.900 --> 04:13:40.540 Justin Jensen, 3237 Clubview Drive, just from what it is, 11 acres, 11 residents to become 04:13:40.540 --> 04:13:44.420 350, I don't think it's right, I don't think it's fair to the students, I don't think 04:13:44.420 --> 04:13:48.120 it's fair to the teachers, to severely stress that. 04:13:48.120 --> 04:13:52.900 I want to thank you guys with Denton, I happened to serve on the Argyle for a while, economic 04:13:52.900 --> 04:13:57.180 development, but I've been very impressed with you guys and very appreciative of you 04:13:57.180 --> 04:13:58.940 trying to shut this down. 04:13:58.940 --> 04:14:01.980 Please don't let them just kick this can down the road, please don't waste all of our time 04:14:01.980 --> 04:14:09.420 coming back out here again, and I thank you for your time. 04:14:09.420 --> 04:14:12.420 Thank you. 04:14:12.420 --> 04:14:29.500 Terry Boas, opposed, Lucinda Boas, opposed, John Prather, opposed, James Andrews, opposed, 04:14:29.500 --> 04:14:36.860 Andy Faceon, Faceon, opposed, Leo Faceon, and I apologize if I'm mispronouncing it, 04:14:36.860 --> 04:14:39.180 opposed, are you wishing to speak? 04:14:39.180 --> 04:14:40.180 You are wishing to speak? 04:14:40.180 --> 04:14:41.180 No. 04:14:41.180 --> 04:14:42.180 Okay. 04:14:42.180 --> 04:14:45.180 Commissioner Pernetta, you want to interject? 04:14:45.180 --> 04:14:46.180 No. 04:14:46.180 --> 04:14:47.180 Okay, perfect. 04:14:47.180 --> 04:14:59.020 Brett Reed, opposed, Steve Alcorn, he is, it's actually marked blank, so that's marked 04:14:59.020 --> 04:15:13.460 blank, Sam Slayton, okay, perfect, Jennifer Lane, marked as opposed, Brandy Mansfield, 04:15:13.460 --> 04:15:25.780 marked as opposed, oh, do you want to speak, please? 04:15:25.780 --> 04:15:30.500 Brandy Mansfield, and I'm 3101 Hornbeam Street. 04:15:30.500 --> 04:15:38.180 I spent over a year researching where we wanted to live before we picked Argyle, and the reasons 04:15:38.180 --> 04:15:42.540 we did it are for all the other reasons that people have stated today. 04:15:42.540 --> 04:15:50.460 One thing that I find interesting is when you go to Argyle Intermediate or Argyle High 04:15:50.460 --> 04:15:56.460 School, or I mean, Argyle Intermediate or the middle school, you have to go over the 04:15:56.460 --> 04:16:03.100 train tracks, and then there's a sign that's posted that says no left-hand turns during 04:16:03.100 --> 04:16:08.940 the morning at drop-off, and no left-hand turns in the afternoon during pick-up, and 04:16:08.940 --> 04:16:16.420 the reason for that is there is no lights at those areas, and to even get right out 04:16:16.420 --> 04:16:22.820 of those schools, you have to wait there for a while, and if, God forbid, any parent decides 04:16:22.820 --> 04:16:30.620 to not follow those rules and try to make a left on that in the morning, they are immediately, 04:16:30.620 --> 04:16:38.740 you know, not liked, but so this adding more people into that whole scenario is just completely 04:16:38.740 --> 04:16:44.780 unacceptable on top of, it's dangerous, so I just wanted to add that. 04:16:44.780 --> 04:16:45.780 Thank you. 04:16:45.780 --> 04:16:46.780 [ Applause ] 04:16:46.780 --> 04:17:03.380 >> Cassimira Ray, opposed, Kim Jones, she's marked opposed, Tina Brewer, she's marked 04:17:03.380 --> 04:17:16.340 opposed, Ricky Wood, OK, please do, if you could just state your name and address for 04:17:16.340 --> 04:17:18.380 the record, you have four minutes. 04:17:18.380 --> 04:17:27.300 >> Rick Wood, 8011 Wood Creek Circle in Argyle, Texas, Denton City Limits, Denton, Texas. 04:17:27.300 --> 04:17:32.620 I just want to, I'll go on record as opposed, and I want to say and encourage the commissioners, 04:17:32.620 --> 04:17:37.900 and I really appreciate your positions and the work you put in on this, but I want to 04:17:37.900 --> 04:17:42.220 go on record to encourage that you vote this down now. 04:17:42.220 --> 04:17:47.020 These guys will come back with, you know, a slightly altered plan, we'll do this again, 04:17:47.020 --> 04:17:53.860 it feels like we're under assault, they're building a six-lane brush creek out of a two-lane 04:17:53.860 --> 04:17:57.900 brush creek, you know, I've been to two or three of these meetings in the past couple 04:17:57.900 --> 04:18:04.740 of months, either about the road or this property, and I think you should put this one to bed, 04:18:04.740 --> 04:18:09.060 these guys are serial developers, they have over a hundred shell companies, cross-development, 04:18:09.060 --> 04:18:15.140 there's a hundred different LLCs that they've formed, the people in Wiley had the same thing 04:18:15.140 --> 04:18:19.780 happen to them except they built the apartment complex, and it's a disaster, the residents, 04:18:19.780 --> 04:18:23.860 you know, there's people going to lose their city council seats because of it, I just want 04:18:23.860 --> 04:18:32.420 to go on record as strong opposition, my neighbors, good people, and we're all pretty passionate 04:18:32.420 --> 04:18:35.420 about where we live. 04:18:35.420 --> 04:18:40.660 Thank you very much. 04:18:40.660 --> 04:18:51.980 The next card I have is Amanda Falvey-Wood, okay, thank you, Mark's supposed, and Colin 04:18:51.980 --> 04:18:57.900 Brooks, okay, he's marked opposed. 04:18:57.900 --> 04:19:02.780 That is all the cards I have, is there anyone, this is a public hearing, is there anyone 04:19:02.780 --> 04:19:12.580 who would like to speak who hasn't had an opportunity or hasn't filled out a card? 04:19:12.580 --> 04:19:21.620 Okay, so at this point, Mr. Dahlstrom, you requested at the very beginning your excess 04:19:21.620 --> 04:19:26.940 time to be granted, and so I want to provide you those three minutes. 04:19:26.940 --> 04:19:35.340 My legs got tied up there, no, I had, I guess, three extra minutes, but in the interest of 04:19:35.340 --> 04:19:39.500 time, I won't go through my rebuttal, I've got a lot of comments, again, we respectfully 04:19:39.500 --> 04:19:43.620 request that we postpone this indefinitely to allow us to go back to the drawing board 04:19:43.620 --> 04:19:49.700 and to continue actually working with the neighborhoods like we want to, so thank you. 04:19:49.700 --> 04:19:52.540 Thank you. 04:19:52.540 --> 04:20:00.140 This is a public hearing, anyone wishing to speak on the item may certainly do so. 04:20:00.140 --> 04:20:03.940 Seeing none, I am going to close the public hearing and turn it to the dais for any questions 04:20:03.940 --> 04:20:07.860 they might have, discussion or motion? 04:20:07.860 --> 04:20:09.860 Commissioner Smith. 04:20:09.860 --> 04:20:11.980 Thank you, Chair. 04:20:11.980 --> 04:20:19.420 The indefinitely, how long can we, does it indefinitely give us, I know we were looking, 04:20:19.420 --> 04:20:25.980 it was just because we were just confused on dates, but that indefinitely. 04:20:25.980 --> 04:20:31.940 It could be indefinitely, literally indefinitely. 04:20:31.940 --> 04:20:36.420 It could essentially come to an impasse where they just ask to move forward, but whether 04:20:36.420 --> 04:20:42.940 that's two weeks, a month, three months, I mean, it's anybody's guess. 04:20:42.940 --> 04:20:43.940 Commissioner Anderson. 04:20:43.940 --> 04:20:44.940 Thank you, Chair. 04:20:44.940 --> 04:20:53.500 First of all, this is my third meeting on the commission, so bear with me for a second, 04:20:53.500 --> 04:20:58.140 but anyway, I would like to thank Mr. Dahlstrom and the MMRQ people for coming out and giving 04:20:58.140 --> 04:21:02.340 your speech and representing it, and thank each of you for coming out and speaking. 04:21:02.340 --> 04:21:06.700 It's not about voicing your concerns about your city, I can hear the passion and your 04:21:06.700 --> 04:21:11.620 love for your city and your property and your voices, but I agree with each of you regarding 04:21:11.620 --> 04:21:15.620 your concerns about the infrastructure of the schools and the nature of the beauty of 04:21:15.620 --> 04:21:16.620 the country. 04:21:16.620 --> 04:21:23.340 I lived in the country in a PowerPoint for 12 years, so I can really, I can feel you. 04:21:23.340 --> 04:21:27.860 Along with you don't see this being a good fit for the community, and after hearing your 04:21:27.860 --> 04:21:32.940 concerns and speaking in opposition and the reading of all the cards, I just recommend 04:21:32.940 --> 04:21:36.660 we go ahead and put this matter to bed and take a vote on it tonight instead of kicking 04:21:36.660 --> 04:21:37.660 it down the road. 04:21:37.660 --> 04:21:49.700 Thank you very much, and I'll see you next time. 04:21:49.700 --> 04:21:50.700 [Applause] 04:21:50.700 --> 04:21:55.260 >> I have a few moments to say a few things before I offer the motion, or just the motion? 04:21:55.260 --> 04:21:59.420 >> No, you have the floor since you've asked for a motion. 04:21:59.420 --> 04:22:08.620 I'll go ahead and offer, put forth the motion to postpone indefinitely then. 04:22:08.620 --> 04:22:17.420 >> Okay, we have a first for a motion to postpone, do we have a second? 04:22:17.420 --> 04:22:18.420 Seeing none, motion fails. 04:22:18.420 --> 04:22:19.420 >> Thank you. 04:22:19.420 --> 04:22:20.420 >> Commissioner Beck. 04:22:20.420 --> 04:22:23.380 >> Yeah, I have a question for the city. 04:22:23.380 --> 04:22:24.380 >> Can you raise your mic, please? 04:22:24.380 --> 04:22:27.460 >> I have a question for the city. 04:22:27.460 --> 04:22:33.500 If we had postponed, are there additional requirements for additional community meetings, 04:22:33.500 --> 04:22:38.980 or have the existing requirements for community meetings been met and would continue to have 04:22:38.980 --> 04:22:41.980 been met? 04:22:41.980 --> 04:22:51.540 >> Excuse me, the DDC has the community meetings as optional, however, if that, I mean, the 04:22:51.540 --> 04:22:59.140 motion did fail, however, to me, the direction was that there would be multiple community 04:22:59.140 --> 04:23:04.300 meetings to try to work to a resolution. 04:23:04.300 --> 04:23:10.740 >> Okay, and I have a second question for the city, and that is, if this is voted down 04:23:10.740 --> 04:23:17.940 at this point, the surrounding areas on the street itself are MN, correct? 04:23:17.940 --> 04:23:21.120 Wasn't that in the city's presentation? 04:23:21.120 --> 04:23:25.120 >> To the, there are some MN to the north and south, I believe. 04:23:25.120 --> 04:23:34.760 >> Okay, and how would that impact the city's decision to have a completely unrelated application 04:23:34.760 --> 04:23:40.420 go in that interstitial, like if they can't be MN because it has to be substantially different, 04:23:40.420 --> 04:23:42.340 how does that impact? 04:23:42.340 --> 04:23:48.780 >> We would have to look, I would want to say right off the cuff of how we would treat 04:23:48.780 --> 04:23:53.740 a future category, it would all depend, I mean, there's a multitude that they could 04:23:53.740 --> 04:23:55.220 look to include in that area. 04:23:55.220 --> 04:23:58.060 >> After a year, they can come back in, right? 04:23:58.060 --> 04:24:02.340 >> A year later, I mean, if it were to go all the way to council, council were to deny, 04:24:02.340 --> 04:24:06.260 365 days later, they could apply again for MN. 04:24:06.260 --> 04:24:11.060 >> Commissioner Cole, we're going to have to wait on you since you have a motion on 04:24:11.060 --> 04:24:12.060 the table. 04:24:12.060 --> 04:24:13.060 It's Commissioner Smith. 04:24:13.060 --> 04:24:15.600 >> I'd like to make a motion to deny. 04:24:15.600 --> 04:24:17.420 >> We have a first for denial, Commissioner Panetta. 04:24:17.420 --> 04:24:18.420 >> I'll second the motion. 04:24:18.420 --> 04:24:27.580 >> We have a first and a second for denial, do you no longer want to speak? 04:24:27.580 --> 04:24:32.820 >> This is what I was wanting to do is get this, put this to bed, I mean, the applicant, 04:24:32.820 --> 04:24:43.300 they deserve a quick, painless death, it shouldn't linger, I mean, I don't see the facts on the 04:24:43.300 --> 04:24:46.020 ground changing in six months. 04:24:46.020 --> 04:24:48.940 That's what I view, or a year even. 04:24:48.940 --> 04:24:51.660 >> Thank you, Commissioner, Commissioner Panetta. 04:24:51.660 --> 04:24:58.060 >> Yeah, so I just kind of wanted to go over a few things and kind of cover my thoughts 04:24:58.060 --> 04:25:05.980 on the odyssey that this has been for tonight, and do you know why I second in this motion? 04:25:05.980 --> 04:25:11.140 So just a little background, I moved up to Denton in like in 1992, and back then Denton 04:25:11.140 --> 04:25:16.520 was this little island far away from everything, and the drive to Fort Worth was this serene 04:25:16.520 --> 04:25:23.900 thing with just greenness and cows, and now when I go down there, it's beige-brown rooftops, 04:25:23.900 --> 04:25:30.500 and every now and then, we have the opportunity up here to actually shape what's actually 04:25:30.500 --> 04:25:34.000 going to be happening in the community going forward. 04:25:34.000 --> 04:25:39.260 We had a very successful negotiation heading to the northeast very recently, where we were 04:25:39.260 --> 04:25:51.020 able to preserve some rural, as opposed to going into a very dense apartment-type situation. 04:25:51.020 --> 04:25:55.300 What I'd hoped would happen would be that the developer could get back together with 04:25:55.300 --> 04:26:00.780 the community, and we could work out something that would be amenable, because you look at 04:26:00.780 --> 04:26:04.780 377, we all know that there's going to be change coming at some point. 04:26:04.780 --> 04:26:09.260 The question is how do we manage that change, and how do we preserve the spirit of what 04:26:09.260 --> 04:26:14.340 people want in that area, and that's what I'd like to see. 04:26:14.340 --> 04:26:22.240 To the developer, the reason I'm kind of going with a denial on this one was when we looked 04:26:22.240 --> 04:26:28.420 at a postponement, and the idea of a postponement indefinitely meant it could be six months, 04:26:28.420 --> 04:26:32.940 indefinitely meant it could be six weeks, one of the things that I didn't want to see 04:26:32.940 --> 04:26:40.900 happen would be a situation where in a month something comes back, and because of time 04:26:40.900 --> 04:26:46.260 constraints and because of the burden put on a community that wants to speak for itself, 04:26:46.260 --> 04:26:53.700 if we came back and instead of over 100 people, we had 20. 04:26:53.700 --> 04:26:58.980 Through the process of just attrition, we wound up not getting a true sense of what 04:26:58.980 --> 04:27:01.740 the community wanted. 04:27:01.740 --> 04:27:07.340 Hopefully we can look at a denial as an opportunity to come back with something that would be 04:27:07.340 --> 04:27:13.740 more fitting, and possibly also more profitable for you guys, because we know that the right 04:27:13.740 --> 04:27:17.620 thing out there, based on what we've seen in other communities, can still turn a lot 04:27:17.620 --> 04:27:21.700 of money while making everybody happy and preserving the spirit. 04:27:21.700 --> 04:27:27.020 I'm going to be voting to deny this. 04:27:27.020 --> 04:27:31.260 We know this will come back, because the people still own the property, and hopefully the 04:27:31.260 --> 04:27:36.340 next thing we see will be something that is in keeping with what the community wants. 04:27:36.340 --> 04:27:37.340 Thank you. 04:27:37.340 --> 04:27:38.340 Questioner Smith. 04:27:38.340 --> 04:27:39.340 Thank you, Chair. 04:27:39.340 --> 04:27:45.940 I didn't really say much with my denial, I don't think I really need to, I think we've 04:27:45.940 --> 04:27:48.500 all talked about it in circles. 04:27:48.500 --> 04:27:55.460 Honestly, I think this project was kind of doomed from the start, and so I've got no 04:27:55.460 --> 04:28:00.460 problem with development, even if it's surrounded by rural land, we've voted on plenty of other 04:28:00.460 --> 04:28:04.660 projects that have had development that have been surrounded by farmland, I just don't 04:28:04.660 --> 04:28:09.340 agree with the density, and I hope that this denial will show to the applicant that if 04:28:09.340 --> 04:28:13.500 you come back with a less dense project, something that's essentially different, even coming 04:28:13.500 --> 04:28:17.660 back with a PD that changes, it's not the MN, so it is substantially different underneath 04:28:17.660 --> 04:28:21.700 the denial rules, that you could probably bring back something that's a little more 04:28:21.700 --> 04:28:26.500 amenable to the rest of the neighborhood, and something that hopefully tonight our comments 04:28:26.500 --> 04:28:30.020 have given you direction of what we think we're amenable to as well, what we think is 04:28:30.020 --> 04:28:31.020 right for the city. 04:28:31.020 --> 04:28:32.020 So, thanks. 04:28:32.020 --> 04:28:37.780 I don't see any other discussion, but before we put this to a vote, I just wanted to say 04:28:37.780 --> 04:28:40.540 one thing, I haven't spoken yet on this. 04:28:40.540 --> 04:28:45.320 First, I've said to several of you that I've talked on the phone and emailed that you being 04:28:45.320 --> 04:28:50.620 here is important, and so hiring a babysitter, I have a sick two-year-old at home right now, 04:28:50.620 --> 04:28:56.740 I sympathize with you, and doing all the things sacrificially to be here is important. 04:28:56.740 --> 04:29:04.540 It helps contextualize our ignorance, potentially, on the area that you all call home, and so 04:29:04.540 --> 04:29:09.460 thanks for spending three hours with us and sharing your own personal perspectives on 04:29:09.460 --> 04:29:10.460 this. 04:29:10.460 --> 04:29:16.140 It shapes how we can best cultivate our city, and we had an interesting tension today because 04:29:16.140 --> 04:29:22.380 it's City of Denton, but Argyle ISD, and so as much as we're appointed by city officials 04:29:22.380 --> 04:29:27.420 for the City of Denton, we also wanna be good neighbors to Argyle ISD and the other jurisdictions 04:29:27.420 --> 04:29:35.660 that we share, and I think just I might bring up after you all leave the potential to see 04:29:35.660 --> 04:29:40.220 if there's any way we can nuance ETJ notices. 04:29:40.220 --> 04:29:41.220 There might be opportunities. 04:29:41.220 --> 04:29:47.300 I know there's a lot of notification laws, but it seems like you have five houses, you 04:29:47.300 --> 04:29:49.100 could just hand-deliver five pieces. 04:29:49.100 --> 04:29:52.860 But I appreciate that feedback for this evening. 04:29:52.860 --> 04:29:56.780 I appreciate all the work that our city staff does. 04:29:56.780 --> 04:30:03.180 I know Cindy has been working hard on this to go through the analysis, and I'm certain 04:30:03.180 --> 04:30:07.700 that there's a lot of hard work, and answering emails and phone calls that she got, I just 04:30:07.700 --> 04:30:11.580 respectfully disagree with the analysis that was completed on the property. 04:30:11.580 --> 04:30:15.100 I've spent four years on P&Z, and I have a long history of being frustrated with the 04:30:15.100 --> 04:30:16.340 future land use map. 04:30:16.340 --> 04:30:18.940 We call it the flume. 04:30:18.940 --> 04:30:23.300 It doesn't make sense, and I've asked for it to be updated, because it's not in alignment 04:30:23.300 --> 04:30:25.740 with what's actually on the ground happening. 04:30:25.740 --> 04:30:29.940 For instance, north of Lute 288 on Sherman Drive, it says that should all be rural, and 04:30:29.940 --> 04:30:35.540 that's not what's taking place, and so it seems as though the flume is not helpful across 04:30:35.540 --> 04:30:41.100 the board in understanding where the trajectory of our city's going. 04:30:41.100 --> 04:30:44.820 And with that, the mobility plan shows that all that will be expanded. 04:30:44.820 --> 04:30:49.700 Brush Creek, I think, is a 10-year project, 377 might be a little bit quicker than that. 04:30:49.700 --> 04:30:52.900 But the future land use map, if you're going to go by that, is assuming the future of the 04:30:52.900 --> 04:30:53.900 mobility plan. 04:30:53.900 --> 04:31:00.260 And so it seems as though if Brush Creek becomes a six-lane road, and 377 is built out, we 04:31:00.260 --> 04:31:03.060 need to assess what the property on the ground is at that point. 04:31:03.060 --> 04:31:07.300 And so I don't know what happens to P&Z 10 years from now on that intersection, but I 04:31:07.300 --> 04:31:10.860 think tonight it's not an apartment. 04:31:10.860 --> 04:31:16.340 And with that, I've also complained significantly about the amount of zoning we get to do on 04:31:16.340 --> 04:31:18.300 this commission and not a lot of planning. 04:31:18.300 --> 04:31:23.540 And so by title, I enjoy both aspects, planning and zoning, and tonight the commission gets 04:31:23.540 --> 04:31:26.180 the rare opportunity to actually plan for our city. 04:31:26.180 --> 04:31:30.780 And so in that way, we can protect it in a significant way. 04:31:30.780 --> 04:31:37.820 So my motion, or my support will be for denial this evening, and I appreciate all your time 04:31:37.820 --> 04:31:40.260 coming out this evening. 04:31:40.260 --> 04:31:42.780 Seeing no other discussion, I'm going to call for a vote on the board. 04:31:42.780 --> 04:31:48.340 Please remember that a vote to approve is to deny. 04:31:48.340 --> 04:31:52.540 So the green button is deny. 04:31:52.540 --> 04:31:57.180 It's a negative motion, so it gets confusing. 04:31:57.180 --> 04:32:06.300 With that, I'll call for a vote on the board. 04:32:06.300 --> 04:32:16.020 Motion carries 6-0. 04:32:16.020 --> 04:32:18.740 Real fast, this goes to council. 04:32:18.740 --> 04:32:20.500 It doesn't die here. 04:32:20.500 --> 04:32:23.140 So the advocacy needs to continue. 04:32:23.140 --> 04:32:26.380 It's now in council's hand going forward. 04:32:26.380 --> 04:32:28.400 At this time, I'm going to call a break for the... 04:32:28.400 --> 04:32:29.940 Oh, Richard, what's going on? 04:32:29.940 --> 04:32:35.660 Just wanted to announce here, I know some of you have gotten the notice, some have not, 04:32:35.660 --> 04:32:40.140 but for those that are in attendance this evening, this is scheduled to go to city council 04:32:40.140 --> 04:32:42.020 November 5th. 04:32:42.020 --> 04:32:46.660 The only reason that it would not go to November 5th is if for some reason the applicant would 04:32:46.660 --> 04:32:51.420 ask for a withdrawal or even a postponement. 04:32:51.420 --> 04:32:57.860 But again, this was noticed, so it will be on the agenda regardless for November 5th 04:32:57.860 --> 04:32:58.860 at city council. 04:32:58.860 --> 04:33:08.320 With that, I'm going to call for a 10-minute break to clear the room. 04:33:08.320 --> 04:33:09.320 Thank you. 04:33:09.320 --> 04:33:10.320 Thank you for the quick recess. 04:33:10.320 --> 04:33:13.380 I'll call the meeting back to order at 945. 04:33:13.380 --> 04:33:20.940 The next item of business is item 5G, DCA 19-0012, and I'll invite Haley Zagorski for 04:33:20.940 --> 04:33:23.580 a presentation and open the public hearing. 04:33:23.580 --> 04:33:29.180 This is a proposed approvement for the medical use standards. 04:33:29.180 --> 04:33:33.340 The request before you is to consider making a recommendation to the city council regarding 04:33:33.340 --> 04:33:38.940 revisions to subchapter 5 of the 2019 Denton Development Code to amend the use specific 04:33:38.940 --> 04:33:46.060 standards for medical offices and medical clinics within the mixed use regional district. 04:33:46.060 --> 04:33:50.480 Looking at this map, you can see the darker purple color on the map represents the MR district. 04:33:50.480 --> 04:33:57.180 This was transitioned from the RCCN and RCCD districts under the 2002 code, primarily is 04:33:57.180 --> 04:34:03.500 located along arterial roadways and major highway interchanges at our regional centers. 04:34:03.500 --> 04:34:07.940 It's worth noting that both of Denton's major hospitals and all of their surrounding supportive 04:34:07.940 --> 04:34:11.700 uses such as offices and clinics are located within the MR district, and I called those 04:34:11.700 --> 04:34:15.820 out on the map with the black stars. 04:34:15.820 --> 04:34:20.980 The DDC defines a medical clinic as an establishment that provides for medical or surgical services 04:34:20.980 --> 04:34:22.780 primarily on an outpatient basis. 04:34:22.780 --> 04:34:26.940 It can be either walk-in or appointment-based operations. 04:34:26.940 --> 04:34:32.700 Examples would be an ambulatory surgical center, a renal disease facility for dialysis, outpatient 04:34:32.700 --> 04:34:36.460 services, and freestanding ERs. 04:34:36.460 --> 04:34:40.340 Medical offices, on the other hand, are more appointment-based, your typical dentist and 04:34:40.340 --> 04:34:45.040 doctor's office type operations where you can have consultations and appointments for 04:34:45.040 --> 04:34:49.180 any sort of medicinal purposes. 04:34:49.180 --> 04:34:55.220 Looking back at the 2002 code and the RCCN and RCCD district, medical clinics were permitted 04:34:55.220 --> 04:34:57.580 by right with no limitations. 04:34:57.580 --> 04:35:02.940 Medical offices were limited to no more than 10,000 square feet of floor area only in RCCN. 04:35:02.940 --> 04:35:06.380 Within RCCD, they were permitted by right. 04:35:06.380 --> 04:35:11.200 Within the 2019 code, it seems that we inadvertently placed limitations on those that would make 04:35:11.200 --> 04:35:14.300 a lot of those existing facilities nonconforming. 04:35:14.300 --> 04:35:16.140 So we're looking to correct that this evening. 04:35:16.140 --> 04:35:22.740 So we're looking to take away the 10,000 square foot size limitation per lot for medical clinics. 04:35:22.740 --> 04:35:27.620 The only limitation on those within MR would be that the main entries and ambulance loading 04:35:27.620 --> 04:35:30.260 zones not face residential zoning categories. 04:35:30.260 --> 04:35:34.900 We do have several instances across the city where MR abuts residential uses, so we felt 04:35:34.900 --> 04:35:37.100 it is important to maintain that. 04:35:37.100 --> 04:35:41.140 And then medical office, we would propose to remove all of the limitations within the 04:35:41.140 --> 04:35:47.220 MR district to allow those to be permitted by right again, as they were under RCCD. 04:35:47.220 --> 04:35:51.580 So this is just a snapshot of what you had in your backup with related to the code amendments. 04:35:51.580 --> 04:35:54.820 Just a very minimal redlining there. 04:35:54.820 --> 04:35:57.880 As I mentioned, medical clinic would still have the loading zone restriction. 04:35:57.880 --> 04:36:01.180 Medical offices would now be permitted by right. 04:36:01.180 --> 04:36:07.500 So staff is recommending approval of this request, and I'm happy to answer any questions. 04:36:07.500 --> 04:36:08.500 Thank you, Haley. 04:36:08.500 --> 04:36:10.020 I don't see any questions. 04:36:10.020 --> 04:36:11.020 This is a public hearing. 04:36:11.020 --> 04:36:13.000 If anyone wishes to speak, they may certainly do so. 04:36:13.000 --> 04:36:16.820 We've got two nos in the room. 04:36:16.820 --> 04:36:18.500 With that, I will close the public hearing. 04:36:18.500 --> 04:36:19.660 Commissioner Panetta. 04:36:19.660 --> 04:36:20.900 >> Motion to approve. 04:36:20.900 --> 04:36:22.540 >> Commissioner Anderson. 04:36:22.540 --> 04:36:24.180 >> Second the motion. 04:36:24.180 --> 04:36:25.700 >> We have a first and a second for approval. 04:36:25.700 --> 04:36:27.460 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 04:36:27.460 --> 04:36:36.060 Motion carries 6-0. 04:36:36.060 --> 04:36:41.300 Next item of business is item 5H DCA 19-0013. 04:36:41.300 --> 04:36:45.980 I'll invite Richard Kinone to present, open the public hearing, and allow Commissioner Cole to step away. 04:36:45.980 --> 04:37:01.460 >> Chair Commissioners, the item in front of you this evening is just a simply housekeeping item, for lack of a better way to put it. 04:37:01.460 --> 04:37:11.700 What it does is it creates a subsection, it creates a different subsection within 1.7 which deals with transition from prior regulations. 04:37:11.700 --> 04:37:20.900 And essentially what this does is this just incorporates the existing MPCs into the 2019 DDC as Appendix C. 04:37:20.900 --> 04:37:31.060 And this one slide for the most part sums it up, the ordinance DCA 18-0009U was recently adopted. 04:37:31.060 --> 04:37:34.660 This is the ordinance that adopted the new zoning map. 04:37:34.660 --> 04:37:43.460 What I've highlighted there is paragraph two of section two which recognizes the MPCs and the ordinances that govern them. 04:37:43.460 --> 04:37:53.860 The transition table which was attached to that ordinance, as you can see highlighted in yellow, MPC remained MPC, it didn't transfer to any other district. 04:37:53.860 --> 04:38:03.580 And so really what this does is adds this language, which is essentially a mirror of what was in that paragraph two of section two of the ordinance. 04:38:03.580 --> 04:38:08.660 Recognizes the four existing MPCs that we have, and those ordinances governing them. 04:38:08.660 --> 04:38:18.620 And essentially puts it a place to keep those within the DDC as a reference as opposed to having to search all over for them somewhere else. 04:38:18.620 --> 04:38:21.460 That's really all that does. 04:38:24.100 --> 04:38:24.900 Thank you for the presentation. 04:38:24.900 --> 04:38:27.940 I don't see any questions. 04:38:27.940 --> 04:38:28.780 This is a public hearing. 04:38:28.780 --> 04:38:30.180 Anyone wish to speak may certainly do so. 04:38:30.180 --> 04:38:33.060 Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. 04:38:33.060 --> 04:38:34.500 Commissioner Smith? 04:38:34.500 --> 04:38:35.260 >> Motion to approve. 04:38:35.260 --> 04:38:35.900 >> We have a first. 04:38:35.900 --> 04:38:37.100 Commissioner Anderson? 04:38:37.100 --> 04:38:38.020 >> I second the vote. 04:38:38.020 --> 04:38:40.020 >> We have a first and a second for approval. 04:38:40.020 --> 04:38:42.060 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 04:38:42.060 --> 04:38:51.340 Motion carries five, zero, one, or Cusal. 04:38:51.340 --> 04:38:59.940 I invite Commissioner Cole back to the dais, and we'll go to the next item for business, item 6A, the planning and zoning matrix. 04:38:59.940 --> 04:39:06.340 I will turn to Richard for reports, and then open it for additional items or questions. 04:39:06.340 --> 04:39:07.980 >> Just a quick update. 04:39:07.980 --> 04:39:12.780 Council did approve the Alt ESA last night for Fisher 59, so that was approved. 04:39:12.780 --> 04:39:16.580 That was just sort of an update on some past action. 04:39:16.580 --> 04:39:18.540 Just wanted to update a couple things. 04:39:18.540 --> 04:39:24.180 As I mentioned, we do have the 2019 code now in effect for about two weeks. 04:39:24.180 --> 04:39:34.420 We have the new zoning map uploaded, updated on the interactive website through our GIS, so all of that is up to date. 04:39:34.420 --> 04:39:38.180 I also wanted to, while we're on the new code, 04:39:38.180 --> 04:39:45.100 we did get notice from the Texas APA that we have won an award for best practices. 04:39:45.100 --> 04:39:54.020 So we will be at the state conference in a few weeks to accept that award on behalf of the- 04:39:54.020 --> 04:39:55.220 >> When do our bonus checks come in? 04:39:55.220 --> 04:39:58.300 >> I was wondering, where is our invite? 04:39:58.300 --> 04:39:59.460 >> In a year. 04:39:59.460 --> 04:40:01.340 >> In a year? 04:40:01.340 --> 04:40:02.940 >> In a year. 04:40:02.940 --> 04:40:07.460 The only other item I wanted to touch base or highlight, and 04:40:07.460 --> 04:40:12.500 I think I brought this up at the last, the previous work session or 04:40:12.500 --> 04:40:16.180 previous council meeting, is part of the budget year, 04:40:16.180 --> 04:40:21.060 council did approve funds for an update to the comprehensive plan. 04:40:21.060 --> 04:40:23.340 I think we talked about that the last meeting. 04:40:23.340 --> 04:40:26.860 So we are in the process of getting that RFP out. 04:40:26.860 --> 04:40:31.500 So the first part again will be to really do a thorough analysis of what we did, what we didn't do. 04:40:31.500 --> 04:40:39.820 But I think this is a good opportunity in the next year to really put some kind of roll up our sleeves and 04:40:39.820 --> 04:40:45.700 really take a hard look at what some of these land use categories and where those designations are. 04:40:45.700 --> 04:40:48.580 Do they still make sense, and how do we want to grow? 04:40:48.580 --> 04:40:56.300 So that planning will come back in a little while and in full force for the most part. 04:40:56.300 --> 04:41:03.060 I mean, this is really the guiding document that we refer to on a lot of our particular decisions for zoning. 04:41:03.060 --> 04:41:07.540 But that will be back in the very near future. 04:41:07.540 --> 04:41:08.940 That was all I had. 04:41:08.940 --> 04:41:12.540 >> Thanks for the update, Christopher Smith. 04:41:12.540 --> 04:41:17.140 >> Not to take Chair Rozelle's thunder here, but I was thinking this earlier. 04:41:17.140 --> 04:41:20.860 >> That's never a good way to start a sentence. 04:41:20.860 --> 04:41:25.020 >> But we need to do something about the ETJ notifications. 04:41:25.020 --> 04:41:30.860 I brought that up in a different time, Richard, for a different case, probably about 18 months to two years ago. 04:41:30.860 --> 04:41:35.820 And I don't know how it fell off the matrix or if it was addressed and I just wasn't paying attention. 04:41:35.820 --> 04:41:42.020 But we need to do something about the ETJ notification, especially if you're right there. 04:41:42.020 --> 04:41:45.500 If you're within that 200 foot boundary, you're right there. 04:41:45.500 --> 04:41:50.460 I know by law it's not required, but the law is a set of minimums, am I correct, Jerry? 04:41:50.460 --> 04:41:54.460 It's not a set of things that we have to follow to the letter, it's a set of minimums. 04:41:54.460 --> 04:41:57.260 We can go above and beyond the minimum. 04:41:57.260 --> 04:42:02.580 It doesn't seem like it's that hard if we can see that there are domiciles that are within that 500 foot buffer or 04:42:02.580 --> 04:42:10.580 just the 200 foot buffer that they can't count for the majority notice, for the supermajority requirement. 04:42:10.580 --> 04:42:12.700 But they can still get a notification. 04:42:12.700 --> 04:42:17.260 >> Sure, did I understand that the sentencing, courtesy notifications though? 04:42:17.260 --> 04:42:20.140 >> That's what I thought I heard Cindy say. 04:42:20.140 --> 04:42:23.860 >> Yeah, I believe that the courtesy notice, there's two notices that go out. 04:42:23.860 --> 04:42:29.580 It's the 200 foot notice goes to those property owners within the city. 04:42:29.580 --> 04:42:33.460 The 500 foot notice- >> Still goes within the EPA? 04:42:33.460 --> 04:42:39.980 >> Goes 500 feet around to the, and I think the gentleman had made a statement about the occupant. 04:42:39.980 --> 04:42:44.300 And the reason it states occupant- >> So really it was they threw it away, they just weren't paying attention. 04:42:44.300 --> 04:42:52.060 >> Yeah, and in fact, I think the Chair had mentioned that one time where he almost threw the postcard away. 04:42:52.060 --> 04:42:57.580 >> Can we see the, can we next time make this the matrix item? 04:42:57.580 --> 04:42:59.420 Can we see what the notifications look like? 04:42:59.420 --> 04:42:59.980 >> Certainly. 04:42:59.980 --> 04:43:03.660 >> I've never, I've never, I take it back, I have seen them because I've had zoning stuff happen there. 04:43:03.660 --> 04:43:06.060 But show those postcards that I hadn't seen in a while. 04:43:06.060 --> 04:43:10.140 But is there a way that we can give feedback possibly at a work session and say, hey, 04:43:10.140 --> 04:43:17.420 here's some ways we can make it look a little bit more attention grabbing rather than just being the standard junk mail look alike. 04:43:17.420 --> 04:43:25.140 >> I will include that either at our next work session or the following. 04:43:25.140 --> 04:43:29.140 Charlie in our office has been really working on revamping a lot of that. 04:43:30.180 --> 04:43:35.700 Almost going to a color coded model where it's easily recognizable. 04:43:35.700 --> 04:43:40.500 So you'll notice the sign, if it's a rezoning, it might be blue, if it's an SUV, it might be red. 04:43:40.500 --> 04:43:46.300 And so just try to brand it a little bit more and make it a little bit more user friendly and identifiable. 04:43:46.300 --> 04:43:51.060 But let me coordinate with him and, but I will add that to the matrix to bring that. 04:43:51.060 --> 04:43:58.740 >> Thanks. >> But yeah, the city limits ones are taking off municipal tax roll, which obviously is not going to be ETJ. 04:43:58.740 --> 04:44:02.860 So they're going to have to figure out a different way to do the courtesy notifications. 04:44:02.860 --> 04:44:11.980 And as I think Mr. Smith pointed out the Strong versus Grand Prairie case says that they can't count for anything if they're not in the city limits. 04:44:11.980 --> 04:44:13.940 >> Yeah, and I get that part and that's fine. 04:44:13.940 --> 04:44:16.460 But we can't pull from the county tax rolls? 04:44:16.460 --> 04:44:22.740 >> I'm sure you'd pull it from anything if it's going to be a courtesy notification. 04:44:22.740 --> 04:44:26.940 I mean, whatever is the easiest way to do it or the best way. 04:44:28.260 --> 04:44:35.900 >> Yeah, I know at one point, sorry, we were looking at even the municipal water bills, I think, for the 500 foot notice. 04:44:35.900 --> 04:44:40.940 Part of the issue then is in some of the rural areas where they might be on well. 04:44:40.940 --> 04:44:46.620 >> Well, yeah, but you know, DCAD, you could find that stuff pretty quickly I think, so. 04:44:46.620 --> 04:44:52.580 >> I understand the 200, 500 foot rule in a city, but like I said earlier, 04:44:52.580 --> 04:44:56.500 I lived in Palo Point for 12 years and I lived on three and a quarter acres. 04:44:56.500 --> 04:45:03.620 And if we use the 200 or 500 foot rule, I had frontage of 350 feet. 04:45:03.620 --> 04:45:07.820 So if you do 200 feet, only myself was going to be getting the notification. 04:45:07.820 --> 04:45:12.860 So I think if it's in a rural community, I think we should look outside that. 04:45:12.860 --> 04:45:15.500 I agree with Commissioner Smith down there as well. 04:45:15.500 --> 04:45:20.620 >> I think that the notification, by the way, goes from your property line, not from like your domicile, so to speak. 04:45:20.620 --> 04:45:22.020 Does that make sense? 04:45:22.020 --> 04:45:25.020 >> Right, no, but I mean, from my property line to my next property line. 04:45:25.020 --> 04:45:28.300 >> So still. >> Well, I had 345 feet of frontage. 04:45:28.300 --> 04:45:31.260 And on one side and 285 feet on the other side. 04:45:31.260 --> 04:45:31.820 >> Oh yeah. 04:45:31.820 --> 04:45:34.140 >> So I would have been the only one who got a notification. 04:45:34.140 --> 04:45:37.420 >> Oh yeah. >> You know, so. 04:45:37.420 --> 04:45:39.260 >> Commissioner Panetta. 04:45:39.260 --> 04:45:44.740 >> Actually, I think I've thrown away a notice from fireside once, but, and this. 04:45:44.740 --> 04:45:51.500 My bad, I think my wife pulled it out of the recycle bin. 04:45:51.500 --> 04:45:58.500 >> Anyway, so revisiting the conversation about the setbacks. 04:45:58.500 --> 04:46:02.820 I know we had questions about why we had the distances that we had. 04:46:02.820 --> 04:46:08.740 And obviously, you know, there were questions about, you know, science, etc. 04:46:08.740 --> 04:46:14.020 It was suggested that at a future occasion, 04:46:14.020 --> 04:46:21.860 we invite Dr. Zachariah Hildebrand to discuss their studies with regards to fracking and 04:46:21.860 --> 04:46:25.220 safe distances to speak to the commission, if we could get that on there. 04:46:25.220 --> 04:46:31.180 That might be helpful in giving us a little context in what we're talking about. 04:46:31.180 --> 04:46:31.900 I mean, that's all I had. 04:46:31.900 --> 04:46:36.740 >> Commissioner Beck, I'm redrawing the request. 04:46:36.740 --> 04:46:37.900 Perfect. 04:46:37.900 --> 04:46:42.660 Richard, you have an update to my item about the city initiated rezoning. 04:46:42.660 --> 04:46:44.780 Work session date 11/20. 04:46:44.780 --> 04:46:47.580 Is that just a, are you just going to give us an update or 04:46:47.580 --> 04:46:52.380 are we actually starting to look at those properties we skipped over previously? 04:46:52.380 --> 04:46:54.380 >> I think it'll be a little bit of both. 04:46:54.380 --> 04:47:00.700 Sort of an update where we are as well as gearing up to do the sort of the round three, if you will. 04:47:00.700 --> 04:47:01.200 >> Perfect. 04:47:01.200 --> 04:47:03.580 Any other items for the matrix? 04:47:06.140 --> 04:47:16.060 >> I just want to consult with Aaron, with the city attorney on Dr. Hildebrand. 04:47:16.060 --> 04:47:20.340 I just want to make sure that there's not an issue with that. 04:47:20.340 --> 04:47:26.300 But I will get an answer right away and respond back as soon as I can. 04:47:26.300 --> 04:47:28.860 >> Thank you. 04:47:28.860 --> 04:47:33.300 Seeing no other discussion, I'll close the hearing at 10 PM. 04:47:33.300 --> 04:47:33.800 Thank you.