1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:11,280 Good afternoon at five o'clock on Wednesday, November 19th, welcome to the City of Denton's 2 00:00:11,280 --> 00:00:15,280 planning and zoning work session. 3 00:00:15,280 --> 00:00:23,640 Our first item is comments on the consent agenda for members of the public. 4 00:00:23,640 --> 00:00:36,080 I don't see anybody wanting to, moves us on to our clarification for consent agenda. 5 00:00:36,080 --> 00:00:41,920 So today there's only one item on the consent agenda. 6 00:00:41,920 --> 00:00:44,600 Any questions on that? 7 00:00:44,600 --> 00:00:46,600 No? 8 00:00:46,600 --> 00:00:48,640 Okay. 9 00:00:48,640 --> 00:00:51,040 And then items for individual consideration. 10 00:00:51,040 --> 00:00:53,520 Yeah, go ahead and come up. 11 00:00:53,520 --> 00:01:01,760 There's a few modifications as we go forward. 12 00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:21,600 This is a preliminary spot, 25-004, this is for approximately 181 acres, site located 13 00:01:21,600 --> 00:01:28,580 approximately 5,800 feet north of Robson Ranch and directly west of I-35 West. 14 00:01:28,580 --> 00:01:35,040 It is for landmark phase two, it will be 313 single family residential lots, three HOA 15 00:01:35,040 --> 00:01:38,480 lots, a school lot and neighborhood park lot. 16 00:01:38,480 --> 00:01:42,480 Staff does recommend denial for this preliminary plat at the time as it does not comply with 17 00:01:42,480 --> 00:01:46,840 our criteria for approval, but staff has no objection to the extension date of December 18 00:01:46,840 --> 00:01:50,320 17th. 19 00:01:50,320 --> 00:01:51,320 I don't see any questions. 20 00:01:51,320 --> 00:01:52,320 Thank you. 21 00:01:52,320 --> 00:01:53,320 Item 4B, FP25-0028. 22 00:01:53,320 --> 00:02:09,080 Good evening, Chair, members of the commission, Angie Manglars, Assistant Planning Director. 23 00:02:09,080 --> 00:02:12,160 This is a final plat for the reserves at Brush Creek. 24 00:02:12,160 --> 00:02:18,400 It is a 42 lot residential subdivision situated at the northeast corner of US 377 and Brush 25 00:02:18,400 --> 00:02:19,400 Creek Road. 26 00:02:19,400 --> 00:02:23,960 At this time, staff is recommending denial, but has no objection to the requested extension 27 00:02:23,960 --> 00:02:26,440 to a date certain of December 17th. 28 00:02:26,440 --> 00:02:31,280 Happy to answer any questions. 29 00:02:31,280 --> 00:02:32,280 Any questions? 30 00:02:32,280 --> 00:02:33,280 Nope. 31 00:02:33,280 --> 00:02:34,280 Thank you. 32 00:02:34,280 --> 00:02:42,020 Brings us to 4C, FP25-0034. 33 00:02:42,020 --> 00:02:43,020 Thank you. 34 00:02:43,020 --> 00:02:45,220 This is a final plat for Project Transpyr. 35 00:02:45,220 --> 00:02:51,880 It is an approximately 8.9 acre tract of land situated on the north side of US 380, approximately 36 00:02:51,880 --> 00:02:56,480 300 feet east of Geesling Road. 37 00:02:56,480 --> 00:03:00,400 At this time, the final plot does not meet our criteria for approval, but staff has no 38 00:03:00,400 --> 00:03:04,800 objection to the requested extension to a date certain of December 17th. 39 00:03:04,800 --> 00:03:08,220 Happy to answer any questions. 40 00:03:08,220 --> 00:03:09,520 I don't see any. 41 00:03:09,520 --> 00:03:10,520 Thank you. 42 00:03:10,520 --> 00:03:17,120 4D is Julie with FP25-0031. 43 00:03:17,120 --> 00:03:25,080 Good evening, Julie Wyatt. 44 00:03:25,080 --> 00:03:27,400 I'm presenting FP25-31. 45 00:03:27,400 --> 00:03:35,260 This is a final plat for a multifamily development located on the north side of Sycamore, just 46 00:03:35,260 --> 00:03:41,340 east of downtown in the rail trail. 47 00:03:41,340 --> 00:03:44,920 Right now they have some items that they do need to address in order for staff to recommend 48 00:03:44,920 --> 00:03:47,120 approval and meet that technical requirement. 49 00:03:47,120 --> 00:03:53,280 So we are recommending denial, however, we have no objection to the extension to December 50 00:03:53,280 --> 00:03:54,280 17th. 51 00:03:54,280 --> 00:03:57,760 I'll be happy to answer any questions. 52 00:03:57,760 --> 00:03:58,760 I don't see any. 53 00:03:58,760 --> 00:03:59,760 Thank you. 54 00:03:59,760 --> 00:04:05,240 Next item, FP25-0032. 55 00:04:05,240 --> 00:04:06,240 Good evening. 56 00:04:06,240 --> 00:04:10,640 This is also a final plat for FP25-32. 57 00:04:10,640 --> 00:04:19,520 This property is located on the east side of Bonnie Bray, north of University in Windsor. 58 00:04:19,520 --> 00:04:24,040 Right now they have some items that they do need to address in order to meet that technical 59 00:04:24,040 --> 00:04:25,040 requirement. 60 00:04:25,040 --> 00:04:29,600 So staff is recommending approval, however, we have no objection to the extension to 61 00:04:29,600 --> 00:04:30,600 December 17th. 62 00:04:30,600 --> 00:04:34,200 I'll be happy to answer any questions. 63 00:04:34,200 --> 00:04:36,560 Just to confirm, I think you may have misspoke. 64 00:04:36,560 --> 00:04:38,600 You said staff is recommending approval or denial? 65 00:04:38,600 --> 00:04:39,600 Denial. 66 00:04:39,600 --> 00:04:40,600 I'm sorry. 67 00:04:40,600 --> 00:04:41,600 Yes, denial. 68 00:04:41,600 --> 00:04:42,600 Yes. 69 00:04:42,600 --> 00:04:43,600 I'm so sorry. 70 00:04:43,600 --> 00:04:44,600 That's okay. 71 00:04:44,600 --> 00:04:45,600 I just, sometimes I mishear things. 72 00:04:45,600 --> 00:04:47,760 Any questions on this one? 73 00:04:47,760 --> 00:04:48,760 Nope. 74 00:04:48,760 --> 00:04:49,760 Okay. 75 00:04:49,760 --> 00:04:50,760 Thank you. 76 00:04:50,760 --> 00:05:01,760 That's 4F FP25-0036. 77 00:05:01,760 --> 00:05:04,840 Good evening chair, members of the commission, Mia Hines, senior planner. 78 00:05:04,840 --> 00:05:08,560 This item is a final plat for giving grace addition. 79 00:05:08,560 --> 00:05:15,080 The property is located just south of East McKinney, approximately 900 feet east, I'm 80 00:05:15,080 --> 00:05:20,880 sorry, east of Mayhill Road and the property itself is just under 16 acres. 81 00:05:20,880 --> 00:05:23,960 At this time, the plat is not ready for approval. 82 00:05:23,960 --> 00:05:27,320 They do have some things to address and so we are recommending denial, but we have no 83 00:05:27,320 --> 00:05:32,080 objection to their requested extension, which could be granted to a date certain of December 84 00:05:32,080 --> 00:05:33,080 17th. 85 00:05:33,080 --> 00:05:37,360 I'm happy to answer any questions. 86 00:05:37,360 --> 00:05:39,360 I don't see any. 87 00:05:39,360 --> 00:05:42,980 Thank you, Mia. 88 00:05:42,980 --> 00:05:48,120 That brings us to FP25-0033. 89 00:05:48,120 --> 00:05:52,240 This is a final plat for the Harris addition. 90 00:05:52,240 --> 00:05:59,360 The property is just under 92 acres, located just west of I-35, approximately 1700 feet 91 00:05:59,360 --> 00:06:01,680 south of North Loop 288. 92 00:06:01,680 --> 00:06:05,760 Similarly, we are recommending denial as they do not meet all of our criteria for approval, 93 00:06:05,760 --> 00:06:11,440 but staff has no objection to the requested extension to December 17th. 94 00:06:11,440 --> 00:06:15,920 Any questions? 95 00:06:15,920 --> 00:06:17,840 I don't see any. 96 00:06:17,840 --> 00:06:25,600 That brings us to FR25-0023. 97 00:06:25,600 --> 00:06:29,400 This is a final -- Mia Hines, senior planner, I didn't do that the last time. 98 00:06:29,400 --> 00:06:32,760 Covering for Sean, this is a final plat for Hasler addition. 99 00:06:32,760 --> 00:06:37,320 The property is just over 14 acres, located on the east side of North Locust, near the 100 00:06:37,320 --> 00:06:40,440 intersection of Beale Street and North Locust Street. 101 00:06:40,440 --> 00:06:45,560 This was the extension request that came to you guys a little after 430, I believe, this 102 00:06:45,560 --> 00:06:46,560 afternoon. 103 00:06:46,560 --> 00:06:49,380 So they did get that extension request in. 104 00:06:49,380 --> 00:06:57,320 Staff is recommending denial of this final plat, but we have no objection to their requested 105 00:06:57,320 --> 00:07:00,440 extension to December 17th. 106 00:07:00,440 --> 00:07:06,320 I don't see anything. 107 00:07:06,320 --> 00:07:11,840 That brings us to 4I-PP25-5. 108 00:07:11,840 --> 00:07:17,600 Mia Hines, senior planner, filling in for Aaron, who is no longer with us. 109 00:07:17,600 --> 00:07:21,760 This item is a final plat for the Roselon Meadows. 110 00:07:21,760 --> 00:07:27,720 The property is just -- or almost 6.5 acres, located north of Roselon Drive, east of the 111 00:07:27,720 --> 00:07:33,100 existing Bonneberry Street, west of the future South Bonneberry Street. 112 00:07:33,100 --> 00:07:37,960 At this time, the plat is not meeting all of our criteria for approval, so we are recommending 113 00:07:37,960 --> 00:07:38,960 denial. 114 00:07:38,960 --> 00:07:43,040 However, we have no objection to the requested extension to December 17th. 115 00:07:43,040 --> 00:07:47,200 Any questions for this one? 116 00:07:47,200 --> 00:07:50,280 I don't see any. 117 00:07:50,280 --> 00:07:51,720 Last item, 4J-FP25-35. 118 00:07:51,720 --> 00:07:52,720 Sorry. 119 00:07:52,720 --> 00:07:53,720 Yes. 120 00:07:53,720 --> 00:07:54,720 You're going to go ahead. 121 00:07:54,720 --> 00:08:04,240 I'll step out because I have a conflict with this item. 122 00:08:04,240 --> 00:08:05,240 Very good. 123 00:08:05,240 --> 00:08:08,240 Just a minute. 124 00:08:08,240 --> 00:08:23,800 Good evening, Chair, members of the commission, Ashley Eckstead, associate planner. 125 00:08:23,800 --> 00:08:25,960 This is a final plat for Jefferson North Elm. 126 00:08:25,960 --> 00:08:30,160 It's approximately 26 acres at the intersection of Locust and Elm. 127 00:08:30,160 --> 00:08:32,260 Originally in your backup, this was an extension request. 128 00:08:32,260 --> 00:08:36,040 They were able to satisfy all the outstanding comments, so we are now recommending approval 129 00:08:36,040 --> 00:08:38,400 as it complies with the criteria for approval. 130 00:08:38,400 --> 00:08:44,480 Happy to answer any questions. 131 00:08:44,480 --> 00:08:50,160 I guess I have one on this, if it's in order. 132 00:08:50,160 --> 00:08:55,240 Do we have an update in the process of this, because I know the public was interested in 133 00:08:55,240 --> 00:09:01,440 the parks agreement with the land and that sort of thing? 134 00:09:01,440 --> 00:09:02,880 Where are we in that process? 135 00:09:02,880 --> 00:09:08,160 When this went to city council, the PD for approval, council directed staff to work to 136 00:09:08,160 --> 00:09:12,640 preserve the house that was on the property, so the parks worked on that, and the way that 137 00:09:12,640 --> 00:09:17,600 ended up was the park will actually be dedicated to the county, and the county will keep the 138 00:09:17,600 --> 00:09:18,600 house. 139 00:09:18,600 --> 00:09:19,600 Okay. 140 00:09:19,600 --> 00:09:20,600 All right. 141 00:09:20,600 --> 00:09:24,480 Any other questions? 142 00:09:24,480 --> 00:09:26,520 No? 143 00:09:26,520 --> 00:09:28,600 Okay. 144 00:09:28,600 --> 00:09:30,800 Yeah. 145 00:09:30,800 --> 00:09:36,160 All right. 146 00:09:36,160 --> 00:09:54,960 That brings us to our public hearings. 147 00:09:54,960 --> 00:09:58,560 I guess Mia, do you want to come up for the first three? 148 00:09:58,560 --> 00:10:14,200 This is the comprehensive plan amendment, CA 25-1, mobility plan, and the PD. 149 00:10:14,200 --> 00:10:19,880 All right. 150 00:10:19,880 --> 00:10:28,780 Sorry, since you're so complete, let me just get this in before. 151 00:10:28,780 --> 00:10:32,800 I'll just ask that as we're reviewing this information, I think there's going to be some 152 00:10:32,800 --> 00:10:38,320 members of the public here tonight, so I want to have most of the discussion out in the 153 00:10:38,320 --> 00:10:42,680 public hearing, but especially if there's questions that you have that weren't able 154 00:10:42,680 --> 00:10:48,240 to get in over email specifically that would require staff to go figure out and bring back 155 00:10:48,240 --> 00:10:53,680 information for the hearing, please make sure we make those at this last minute. 156 00:10:53,680 --> 00:10:56,720 Thank you, Chair. 157 00:10:56,720 --> 00:11:00,280 Mia Hines, Senior Planner. 158 00:11:00,280 --> 00:11:06,720 This item, or I'm going to give one presentation for the comprehensive plan amendment, the 159 00:11:06,720 --> 00:11:10,640 mobility plan amendment, and the plan development related to the Craver Ranch development. 160 00:11:10,640 --> 00:11:14,720 I wanted to start off just with this work session, just a brief summary, but I wanted 161 00:11:14,720 --> 00:11:18,840 to give you guys a little history of the project first and then jump into the summary of the 162 00:11:18,840 --> 00:11:20,560 cases themselves. 163 00:11:20,560 --> 00:11:23,200 The existing land use on this site is agriculture. 164 00:11:23,200 --> 00:11:34,760 This property, 2,500 acres, was annexed from 2008 to 2009. 165 00:11:34,760 --> 00:11:39,200 At the time of that annexation, development of the property was anticipated, but the Denton 166 00:11:39,200 --> 00:11:44,760 future land use map did not designate this area for anything beyond agriculture. 167 00:11:44,760 --> 00:11:50,080 Similarly, the minor update of the Denton 2040 plan did not establish a different land 168 00:11:50,080 --> 00:11:54,600 use for this property besides agriculture. 169 00:11:54,600 --> 00:12:00,400 When the developers approached us about potentially doing a municipal management district, which 170 00:12:00,400 --> 00:12:04,160 for your information, I'm sure you guys are familiar with it, but it is a special purpose 171 00:12:04,160 --> 00:12:08,920 district with the power to levy taxes, issue bonds, and charge assessments to property 172 00:12:08,920 --> 00:12:15,280 owners for infrastructure costs for the MMD and the developments that occur within it. 173 00:12:15,280 --> 00:12:18,200 When the applicants approached us about that, we sort of walked them through the process 174 00:12:18,200 --> 00:12:24,360 of the things that would be necessary to get to the development type that they were proposing, 175 00:12:24,360 --> 00:12:29,320 and that has come with the applications that you are considering this evening, including 176 00:12:29,320 --> 00:12:33,080 the comprehensive plan, the mobility plan, and the PD. 177 00:12:33,080 --> 00:12:37,720 We also have been in discussions with them about comprehensive studies related to water, 178 00:12:37,720 --> 00:12:41,800 sewer, and traffic needs for this area and the developments they are proposing, as well 179 00:12:41,800 --> 00:12:44,320 as connectivity throughout. 180 00:12:44,320 --> 00:12:47,740 Some of the things that we need to keep in mind from a regional standpoint and how this 181 00:12:47,740 --> 00:12:52,400 property is sort of, one, has the applicant's interest and the developer's interest and 182 00:12:52,400 --> 00:12:58,000 why staff is, one of the reasons why staff is willing to support this is because there 183 00:12:58,000 --> 00:13:03,360 are some regional trends and regional developments that we're seeing, specifically that MMD, 184 00:13:03,360 --> 00:13:08,320 the creation of that, and then the progress of TechStats Regional Outer Loop, recently 185 00:13:08,320 --> 00:13:12,800 completed in the Collin County area and sort of working its way west over to the Denton 186 00:13:12,800 --> 00:13:13,800 area. 187 00:13:13,800 --> 00:13:18,000 So, with that, what we are considering this evening is a comprehensive plan amendment 188 00:13:18,000 --> 00:13:23,200 to change the future land use designation on this property from agriculture to master 189 00:13:23,200 --> 00:13:24,200 plan community. 190 00:13:24,200 --> 00:13:30,480 There is a mobility plan application on this property to shift a portion of the proposed 191 00:13:30,480 --> 00:13:36,600 east-west alignment that goes through Craver Ranch, a slightly south to avoid a floodplain 192 00:13:36,600 --> 00:13:43,280 crossing, and then there is also a rezoning application to rezone this area from rural 193 00:13:43,280 --> 00:13:51,200 residential to a PD with a mix of R4, R7, MN, and MR to allow for the development of 194 00:13:51,200 --> 00:13:56,580 residential commercial, some public facilities, parks, and open space. 195 00:13:56,580 --> 00:14:02,520 Staff is recommending approval of this application and a full detailed presentation, of course, 196 00:14:02,520 --> 00:14:04,440 will be provided in the full session. 197 00:14:04,440 --> 00:14:09,080 You have your backup as well, but I'll gladly answer any questions that you guys have at 198 00:14:09,080 --> 00:14:10,080 this time. 199 00:14:10,080 --> 00:14:11,080 Commissioner McDuff? 200 00:14:11,080 --> 00:14:12,080 Yes, Mia. 201 00:14:12,080 --> 00:14:23,280 I'd like for you to talk about the relationship of these proposals to the Outer Loop, the 202 00:14:23,280 --> 00:14:26,120 TechStats and the Outer Loop. 203 00:14:26,120 --> 00:14:51,840 So here is the latest alignment options for the Ditton County portion of the regional 204 00:14:51,840 --> 00:14:53,140 Outer Loop. 205 00:14:53,140 --> 00:14:58,480 As you can see, this is the Craver property that's here in the red. 206 00:14:58,480 --> 00:15:08,160 Our mobility plan shows preferred almost alignment just south of this area, and then what we 207 00:15:08,160 --> 00:15:13,960 have been in talks with TechStat is that it seems to be the most likely alignment to occur 208 00:15:13,960 --> 00:15:18,440 as well, but they are still in the process of going through the environmental assessments 209 00:15:18,440 --> 00:15:21,680 and finalizing these alignments. 210 00:15:21,680 --> 00:15:26,680 So just in relation to where the Outer Loop is, this is the Craver property, and these 211 00:15:26,680 --> 00:15:32,920 are the potential alignments that are currently proposed and being discussed. 212 00:15:32,920 --> 00:15:37,120 Another question, if I may. 213 00:15:37,120 --> 00:15:44,440 I was looking on the Googling, as I call it, to see if I could, if the open hearings were 214 00:15:44,440 --> 00:15:45,440 done. 215 00:15:45,440 --> 00:15:46,440 It seems like they are. 216 00:15:46,440 --> 00:15:48,320 There were three possibilities. 217 00:15:48,320 --> 00:15:50,480 I think they were done in October. 218 00:15:50,480 --> 00:15:51,480 Is that correct? 219 00:15:51,480 --> 00:15:52,480 September, I believe. 220 00:15:52,480 --> 00:15:53,480 Was it September? 221 00:15:53,480 --> 00:15:56,880 So we're done on the open hearings from the public. 222 00:15:56,880 --> 00:15:57,880 Yes. 223 00:15:57,880 --> 00:15:58,880 Yes. 224 00:15:58,880 --> 00:15:59,880 Okay. 225 00:15:59,880 --> 00:16:00,880 Thanks. 226 00:16:00,880 --> 00:16:08,200 Commissioner Dyer. 227 00:16:08,200 --> 00:16:15,560 When you say that this Craver Ranch property was annexed in 2008-2009, are you meaning 228 00:16:15,560 --> 00:16:20,160 it was part of the city limits, that this became part of the city limits back then in 229 00:16:20,160 --> 00:16:21,160 2008-2009? 230 00:16:21,160 --> 00:16:22,160 Correct. 231 00:16:22,160 --> 00:16:26,600 So the city knew that eventually this was going to become some sort of residential area 232 00:16:26,600 --> 00:16:29,800 at some point, when they make that step. 233 00:16:29,800 --> 00:16:30,800 Yes. 234 00:16:30,800 --> 00:16:34,720 I believe development was anticipated at that time, and that was partially the reason for 235 00:16:34,720 --> 00:16:37,240 wanting to annex the property. 236 00:16:37,240 --> 00:16:47,420 A lot of the emails and the e-comments that we have been given talk about the leap, is 237 00:16:47,420 --> 00:16:49,160 it leapfrogging? 238 00:16:49,160 --> 00:16:53,720 Can you please explain and define that for us? 239 00:16:53,720 --> 00:16:59,720 Because I believe, if I remember correctly, when the developer came to our workshop a 240 00:16:59,720 --> 00:17:05,800 couple of weeks ago, that was discussed, and there was a reason why they didn't feel like, 241 00:17:05,800 --> 00:17:09,560 and I don't remember if it was the city that explained this, or if it was the developer, 242 00:17:09,560 --> 00:17:15,880 why this wasn't your traditional leapfrog area that most people felt that it was. 243 00:17:15,880 --> 00:17:22,600 So can you kind of explain what leapfrog is, and then does this fit that or not? 244 00:17:22,600 --> 00:17:23,600 Sure. 245 00:17:23,600 --> 00:17:27,200 So I think the concept of leap, or what most people refer to as leapfrog development, I 246 00:17:27,200 --> 00:17:30,840 think there's different definitions depending on who you ask. 247 00:17:30,840 --> 00:17:39,480 But the concept is basically a density of development skipping across, within the city, 248 00:17:39,480 --> 00:17:42,680 but skipping across areas that could be developed. 249 00:17:42,680 --> 00:17:50,480 So as opposed to growing outwardly in a way that as this property grows, the adjacent 250 00:17:50,480 --> 00:17:54,520 property develops, and then the adjacent, and then the adjacent, leapfrog development 251 00:17:54,520 --> 00:17:59,160 is typically defined as you have development over here, and then you have development in 252 00:17:59,160 --> 00:18:02,440 a completely different area, and a development in a completely different area, and the connection 253 00:18:02,440 --> 00:18:09,360 between those is far and not ideal. 254 00:18:09,360 --> 00:18:16,040 In this case, the developer was the person who brought that term up and then explained 255 00:18:16,040 --> 00:18:21,240 that the floodplain in the area and that is surrounding East Sherman Drive makes it a 256 00:18:21,240 --> 00:18:25,680 little bit challenging for the properties within this area along East Sherman Drive 257 00:18:25,680 --> 00:18:26,680 to develop. 258 00:18:26,680 --> 00:18:34,440 And so as far as having a large area of land that is owned by one single property owner, 259 00:18:34,440 --> 00:18:42,520 and is a right forward development, this would be the next largest property to do that with. 260 00:18:42,520 --> 00:18:50,120 That's not significantly encumbered by floodplain and difficult to develop in that manner. 261 00:18:50,120 --> 00:18:56,160 So this is the next logical place where development would take place. 262 00:18:56,160 --> 00:19:02,200 I think that there are small parcels along 428 that could develop their smaller areas, 263 00:19:02,200 --> 00:19:08,000 but in terms of mass scale development and master planning out an area, this would be 264 00:19:08,000 --> 00:19:10,040 the next largest area. 265 00:19:10,040 --> 00:19:16,760 So somebody who's newer, I've only been, what, on here nine months, I think? 266 00:19:16,760 --> 00:19:23,120 I'm not, you know, this is a big development, probably the biggest one that, you know, we've 267 00:19:23,120 --> 00:19:29,320 seen in a while outside of the Hunter and Coal Ranch developments. 268 00:19:29,320 --> 00:19:36,360 Was this leapfrogging because you have a lot of land between some of the areas there on 269 00:19:36,360 --> 00:19:40,480 the south end of Denton all the way to, like, Robeson Ranch Row? 270 00:19:40,480 --> 00:19:48,840 Was this a top, I mean, did that set precedent that this would be okay for this community? 271 00:19:48,840 --> 00:19:51,160 Do you see what I'm kind of saying? 272 00:19:51,160 --> 00:19:56,160 I don't want to say it set precedent, but it's not uncommon because, like you mentioned, 273 00:19:56,160 --> 00:20:01,840 we do have master plan communities that are kind of not on islands, but they're distance 274 00:20:01,840 --> 00:20:05,800 from the city center, and we have different densities, and it's set up that way. 275 00:20:05,800 --> 00:20:09,320 So the City of Denton has seen this in the past? 276 00:20:09,320 --> 00:20:10,320 Yes. 277 00:20:10,320 --> 00:20:11,320 Okay. 278 00:20:11,320 --> 00:20:12,320 Sure. 279 00:20:12,320 --> 00:20:13,320 Yeah. 280 00:20:13,320 --> 00:20:18,440 Just to add that to me is exactly correct. 281 00:20:18,440 --> 00:20:22,040 I would say the city did see the same thing happen with Robeson. 282 00:20:22,040 --> 00:20:26,360 As you're familiar with, you know, that came into the city in 1999, I believe, and was 283 00:20:26,360 --> 00:20:29,320 literally over five miles from the nearest part of the city limits. 284 00:20:29,320 --> 00:20:33,980 So this isn't unheard of, I would say, especially with this type of large-scale development, 285 00:20:33,980 --> 00:20:39,040 because it does take so long for the planning for that development to occur, for the infrastructure 286 00:20:39,040 --> 00:20:42,580 planning that's needed and the infrastructure extensions that are needed. 287 00:20:42,580 --> 00:20:46,080 So it's not unheard of when you have these large tracks that someone is able to acquire 288 00:20:46,080 --> 00:20:51,620 and wants to master plan at this scale to see something like this occur, just because 289 00:20:51,620 --> 00:20:53,860 this isn't happening tomorrow or even next year. 290 00:20:53,860 --> 00:20:58,280 It will be many years down the road, but they're just trying to get those entitlements in place 291 00:20:58,280 --> 00:20:59,840 to allow them to begin that process. 292 00:20:59,840 --> 00:21:03,680 So we have seen that with Robeson, Hunter, Cole, all of those properties. 293 00:21:03,680 --> 00:21:04,680 Okay. 294 00:21:04,680 --> 00:21:05,680 Thank you. 295 00:21:05,680 --> 00:21:10,680 Commissioner McDade? 296 00:21:10,680 --> 00:21:13,160 Just a clarification. 297 00:21:13,160 --> 00:21:19,920 The comprehensive plan amendment and the mobility plan amendment have to occur before you can 298 00:21:19,920 --> 00:21:21,920 get to the rezoning? 299 00:21:21,920 --> 00:21:25,540 So ideally, because the way that, yeah, the way that we plan and the way that we base 300 00:21:25,540 --> 00:21:30,200 our zoning decisions is on policy documents like the comprehensive plan and the PD. 301 00:21:30,200 --> 00:21:35,120 So if the body feels that the comprehensive plan should be changed to master plan and 302 00:21:35,120 --> 00:21:39,120 that the mobility plan amendment policies should be changed, then the zoning can be 303 00:21:39,120 --> 00:21:41,520 changed to be aligned with those things. 304 00:21:41,520 --> 00:21:50,680 I'm sure we'll get into it more, but just to clarify the specific question of leapfrog 305 00:21:50,680 --> 00:22:01,740 and what everybody was meaning, it sounds like the comments, sorry, let me back up. 306 00:22:01,740 --> 00:22:08,040 Because we have this situation where we have a lot of ETJ land between the parcel that 307 00:22:08,040 --> 00:22:16,480 we're considering tonight and sort of the developed portion of the city. 308 00:22:16,480 --> 00:22:23,800 Are we talking about it's the next logical parcel within the city limits? 309 00:22:23,800 --> 00:22:24,800 Yes. 310 00:22:24,800 --> 00:22:25,800 Yes. 311 00:22:25,800 --> 00:22:26,800 Okay. 312 00:22:26,800 --> 00:22:27,800 Large, yeah. 313 00:22:27,800 --> 00:22:31,740 So there's, but there's a decent amount of land between there and the developed part 314 00:22:31,740 --> 00:22:35,960 of the city that's not within the city of limits that could also develop within the 315 00:22:35,960 --> 00:22:36,960 ETJ. 316 00:22:36,960 --> 00:22:39,080 I'll add, just throw it out there. 317 00:22:39,080 --> 00:22:42,960 We have also received development inquiry for some of these parcels along East Sherman 318 00:22:42,960 --> 00:22:43,960 Drive. 319 00:22:43,960 --> 00:22:46,800 They're just, they're not the ones that are before you this evening. 320 00:22:46,800 --> 00:22:47,800 Okay. 321 00:22:47,800 --> 00:22:48,800 Okay. 322 00:22:48,800 --> 00:22:49,800 Sorry. 323 00:22:49,800 --> 00:22:50,800 Go ahead. 324 00:22:50,800 --> 00:22:51,800 Continue. 325 00:22:51,800 --> 00:22:52,800 Oh, that's it? 326 00:22:52,800 --> 00:22:53,800 I'm sorry. 327 00:22:53,800 --> 00:22:54,800 Any questions? 328 00:22:54,800 --> 00:22:55,800 Yes, please do. 329 00:22:55,800 --> 00:23:05,960 So Haley said that part of this was looking at the infrastructure. 330 00:23:05,960 --> 00:23:10,620 We definitely received some comments regarding that and the travel. 331 00:23:10,620 --> 00:23:15,600 What went into looking at that infrastructure to make sure it was able to handle all of 332 00:23:15,600 --> 00:23:16,600 these trips? 333 00:23:16,600 --> 00:23:20,000 I will start off and then hand it a little bit to my experts here. 334 00:23:20,000 --> 00:23:26,320 So we did a traffic demand model with this application and the mobility plan to determine 335 00:23:26,320 --> 00:23:34,360 or using the proposed densities and anticipated population growth and all that stuff to determine 336 00:23:34,360 --> 00:23:39,840 if the roadways within and around the area would be sufficient to support that. 337 00:23:39,840 --> 00:23:45,280 There's also been in discussions with our water and wastewater departments or utility 338 00:23:45,280 --> 00:23:50,080 departments about the infrastructure and things that would be needed in, I believe, in accordance 339 00:23:50,080 --> 00:23:51,080 with the MMD. 340 00:23:51,080 --> 00:23:55,080 A development and operating agreement will be coming forward to city council to sort 341 00:23:55,080 --> 00:23:57,640 of solidify those things. 342 00:23:57,640 --> 00:24:01,040 That's the things that we've done and we've been in talks with with these application 343 00:24:01,040 --> 00:24:06,960 and for any more detail I'd have to look at our experts. 344 00:24:06,960 --> 00:24:11,920 So you said that you've also received inquiries along the route. 345 00:24:11,920 --> 00:24:15,920 Do we put that in with the traffic analysis? 346 00:24:15,920 --> 00:24:19,400 So when I say inquiries, I'll say, and I don't want to be off posting, but I'll say like 347 00:24:19,400 --> 00:24:25,640 pre-application conferences and just questions about the potential development of those properties. 348 00:24:25,640 --> 00:24:32,240 So those, I think, those have not been included because they are not far along. 349 00:24:32,240 --> 00:24:35,720 That's like the before you even apply for anything and your concepts. 350 00:24:35,720 --> 00:24:43,460 We know that people are interested in developing these properties, Haley. 351 00:24:43,460 --> 00:24:48,200 I would say to the degree that a specific development has been considered, they were 352 00:24:48,200 --> 00:24:49,200 not included. 353 00:24:49,200 --> 00:24:53,240 So like a specific number of lots, as we know in this, was not included for any of those. 354 00:24:53,240 --> 00:24:57,280 But there are base assumptions made based on zoning and general development trends in 355 00:24:57,280 --> 00:24:58,280 the area. 356 00:24:58,280 --> 00:24:59,280 Very good. 357 00:24:59,280 --> 00:25:00,280 Thank you. 358 00:25:00,280 --> 00:25:01,280 Thank you. 359 00:25:01,280 --> 00:25:02,280 Commissioner Garland. 360 00:25:02,280 --> 00:25:06,120 I apologize if this has already been addressed or if maybe I'm also getting ahead of myself. 361 00:25:06,120 --> 00:25:14,480 But just to understand, just to keep things super simple, do we build first and then widen 362 00:25:14,480 --> 00:25:19,320 the roads after or do we widen the roads before and then build? 363 00:25:19,320 --> 00:25:20,320 Like what's? 364 00:25:20,320 --> 00:25:28,040 Yeah, I'm going to look to Chandra from our transportation team to help answer that question. 365 00:25:28,040 --> 00:25:32,200 Good evening, Commissioner. 366 00:25:32,200 --> 00:25:34,320 Chandra, city traffic engineer. 367 00:25:34,320 --> 00:25:39,840 So the development the team proposed is they will be building as they go along. 368 00:25:39,840 --> 00:25:45,240 So during phase one, they will do the improvements to the roadway capacities and they will widen 369 00:25:45,240 --> 00:25:47,640 roadway as needed as the phases grow. 370 00:25:47,640 --> 00:25:52,400 So it won't be before, but as they go along with their phases. 371 00:25:52,400 --> 00:26:01,600 I guess my concern is, and maybe we can talk about this more in depth later, is I personally 372 00:26:01,600 --> 00:26:07,800 drive down Sherman, take a right on the loop, trying to get to 35 to get to South Dallas 373 00:26:07,800 --> 00:26:09,040 every single morning. 374 00:26:09,040 --> 00:26:15,600 And usually the most challenging part of my commute is getting down Sherman and onto the 375 00:26:15,600 --> 00:26:16,600 loop. 376 00:26:16,600 --> 00:26:21,120 And it's just so heavily congested as it stands now. 377 00:26:21,120 --> 00:26:27,360 And so that was kind of my concern along with what, you know, a lot of I think the feedback 378 00:26:27,360 --> 00:26:33,760 and the emails that we received is this is already such a jammed up area as it currently 379 00:26:33,760 --> 00:26:34,760 exists. 380 00:26:34,760 --> 00:26:41,680 So if we just start adding a lot more cars in that space and, you know, what does that 381 00:26:41,680 --> 00:26:43,160 look like? 382 00:26:43,160 --> 00:26:48,920 So there are several projects that's going along in the area. 383 00:26:48,920 --> 00:26:56,000 Sherman is planned to be widened by Tech Start and also Loop 288 at the interchange. 384 00:26:56,000 --> 00:27:03,320 The Loop 288, they have a connector project that's coming from 380 all the way to 35. 385 00:27:03,320 --> 00:27:05,960 And the Loop 288 Western extension. 386 00:27:05,960 --> 00:27:11,480 And then this development did their traffic modeling for the entire area based on all 387 00:27:11,480 --> 00:27:16,880 the potential growths that was projected by the NCT-COG for this area. 388 00:27:16,880 --> 00:27:18,560 And they modeled out. 389 00:27:18,560 --> 00:27:23,520 And with their developments, they will classify into what are the on-street, which is within 390 00:27:23,520 --> 00:27:30,160 the Craver Ranch property development, and off-sites, what they need to do on the perimeter 391 00:27:30,160 --> 00:27:31,160 streets. 392 00:27:31,160 --> 00:27:32,160 So they are identifying it. 393 00:27:32,160 --> 00:27:34,040 The study is not complete yet. 394 00:27:34,040 --> 00:27:36,120 So they are modeling it. 395 00:27:36,120 --> 00:27:41,760 But so far, based on Phase 1 results, they meet the adequate capacities, what they're 396 00:27:41,760 --> 00:27:45,960 proposing and what they will be building. 397 00:27:45,960 --> 00:27:55,360 I can't find it right now, but I thought I remembered in the AIS that Tech Start currently 398 00:27:55,360 --> 00:27:59,480 has no plans to widen either 2164 or 428. 399 00:27:59,480 --> 00:28:02,880 Did I read that wrong? 400 00:28:02,880 --> 00:28:06,360 It's 2165, it's 2164. 401 00:28:06,360 --> 00:28:15,400 It's an error on the exhibit, but 2164 is actually widened by the county. 402 00:28:15,400 --> 00:28:19,280 I'm not sure if the capacity improvements, but they are building, widening the roadway 403 00:28:19,280 --> 00:28:21,200 with shoulders. 404 00:28:21,200 --> 00:28:26,880 And FM 428, it's a free flow with 65 miles per hour. 405 00:28:26,880 --> 00:28:33,080 But as that Loop 288 project comes along, but there is no funding identified. 406 00:28:33,080 --> 00:28:39,080 So are any of those projects in Tech Start's 10-year CIP plan going forward? 407 00:28:39,080 --> 00:28:44,600 They are projecting, but no funding identified. 408 00:28:44,600 --> 00:28:49,080 There are plans, but there is no concrete construction timelines. 409 00:28:49,080 --> 00:28:52,500 Okay, thank you. 410 00:28:52,500 --> 00:28:58,360 Any other questions, pieces of information that would help everyone once we get in there? 411 00:28:58,360 --> 00:28:59,780 Commissioner McDuff? 412 00:28:59,780 --> 00:29:06,440 I'm just overwhelmed by all this, I'll tell you that, and the impact in reading these 413 00:29:06,440 --> 00:29:10,880 concerns after I studied all my materials. 414 00:29:10,880 --> 00:29:17,720 I'm just going to make a point here, Chair Pruitt, but it talks about the fiscal responsibilities 415 00:29:17,720 --> 00:29:21,480 transportation traffic and environmental impacts. 416 00:29:21,480 --> 00:29:29,000 So we've talked a little bit about traffic, now I'm going to shift to environmental impacts. 417 00:29:29,000 --> 00:29:38,480 And there were some concerns on the rezoning about environmental protections, wildlife 418 00:29:38,480 --> 00:29:44,320 crossing, buffers to perfect, wetlands, you know, we talk about this at every one of our 419 00:29:44,320 --> 00:29:50,160 meetings, and then strict controls on water resistance surface coverage. 420 00:29:50,160 --> 00:29:57,360 And I know we talked about parks and water resources at our last meeting for this project, 421 00:29:57,360 --> 00:30:03,880 but I'd like to just ask that question, Mia, would you address some of those concerns about 422 00:30:03,880 --> 00:30:05,480 the environment, please? 423 00:30:05,480 --> 00:30:06,860 Yes, ma'am. 424 00:30:06,860 --> 00:30:11,520 So I didn't pull up the PD development plan, and I'll go back to that a little bit to show, 425 00:30:11,520 --> 00:30:13,400 or at least the open space plan. 426 00:30:13,400 --> 00:30:23,560 And here's our ESA map within this area showing some floodplain related habitat, or sorry, 427 00:30:23,560 --> 00:30:28,360 floodplain related ESA going through the property. 428 00:30:28,360 --> 00:30:32,400 That is what was uncovered with the field assessment that was done this year. 429 00:30:32,400 --> 00:30:38,640 I believe with each phase they will have to continue that study to make sure that they 430 00:30:38,640 --> 00:30:43,520 are not encroaching upon the sensitive areas that's been established. 431 00:30:43,520 --> 00:30:48,600 And then in their PD plan, in their open space plan, they do have these areas designated 432 00:30:48,600 --> 00:30:50,460 for open space and park space. 433 00:30:50,460 --> 00:31:00,600 So they are proposing to leave a lot of that area open to open space and park space. 434 00:31:00,600 --> 00:31:01,600 Okay. 435 00:31:01,600 --> 00:31:06,280 And then just to piggyback on a question from last week to remind us again, I believe, Keith, 436 00:31:06,280 --> 00:31:13,240 you ask this question, Commissioner Keith, talk about how we're going to water all of 437 00:31:13,240 --> 00:31:14,240 that. 438 00:31:14,240 --> 00:31:17,120 May I, if you will, water all that green spice here? 439 00:31:17,120 --> 00:31:24,560 Charlie, do you want to speak to us maybe some of the discussions with regard to water? 440 00:31:24,560 --> 00:31:28,920 Yeah, good evening. 441 00:31:28,920 --> 00:31:32,280 Charlie Rosendahl, interim director of development services. 442 00:31:32,280 --> 00:31:38,680 So as far as irrigation goes, they are planning to have wells to assist with irrigation. 443 00:31:38,680 --> 00:31:45,080 But part of the city's overall plan to help with water conservation is related to reclaimed 444 00:31:45,080 --> 00:31:46,080 water. 445 00:31:46,080 --> 00:31:52,400 So with the city going into planning for new wastewater treatment facilities, reclaimed 446 00:31:52,400 --> 00:31:57,440 water will be a component of that with the intention of sending that reclaimed water 447 00:31:57,440 --> 00:31:58,440 back. 448 00:31:58,440 --> 00:32:04,080 So the agreement that we have with the developer is that when we provide reclaimed water to 449 00:32:04,080 --> 00:32:07,040 the site, then they'll be able to use that for their irrigation purposes. 450 00:32:07,040 --> 00:32:12,560 So any of the treated wastewater that comes down into the plant would then be able to 451 00:32:12,560 --> 00:32:16,680 be used for irrigation. 452 00:32:16,680 --> 00:32:27,360 So Charlie, I read about the reclaimed water, but can you share like the water treatment 453 00:32:27,360 --> 00:32:30,320 plant is a few miles from here? 454 00:32:30,320 --> 00:32:35,840 So that water gets treated, and then how do they get back to this area to use for irrigation? 455 00:32:35,840 --> 00:32:37,360 Yeah, pump back up. 456 00:32:37,360 --> 00:32:43,440 So they're going to have to construct gravity sewer lines down into our interceptor. 457 00:32:43,440 --> 00:32:50,520 And then on the interceptors, the city's plan is to run reclaimed water within those easements 458 00:32:50,520 --> 00:32:52,360 back up the sewer system. 459 00:32:52,360 --> 00:32:55,560 And so that's how it would get pumped back up to the site. 460 00:32:55,560 --> 00:33:03,640 So basically an entire second water supply piping system would go from the water treatment 461 00:33:03,640 --> 00:33:09,080 plant all the way back up to this development, and it would be used mostly for public area 462 00:33:09,080 --> 00:33:13,520 irrigation, or is it going to like go to all the homes? 463 00:33:13,520 --> 00:33:17,840 I'm not sure how deep the irrigation would have been probably dependent on where the 464 00:33:17,840 --> 00:33:23,000 infrastructure is placed, but with the intention of being the largest users of irrigation would 465 00:33:23,000 --> 00:33:26,000 be the area that's targeted. 466 00:33:26,000 --> 00:33:27,000 Okay. 467 00:33:27,000 --> 00:33:28,000 Thank you. 468 00:33:28,000 --> 00:33:32,880 Sorry, I stepped on your time, but please go ahead if you have something else. 469 00:33:32,880 --> 00:33:37,560 No, I appreciate that because you certainly intellect on these kinds of things, Chair 470 00:33:37,560 --> 00:33:38,560 Pruitt. 471 00:33:38,560 --> 00:33:44,640 I'm just going to segue into the next topic that's important to us, and that is water 472 00:33:44,640 --> 00:33:47,440 and drinking water resources. 473 00:33:47,440 --> 00:33:52,760 And I know we've considered the water and the wastewater treatment plan before. 474 00:33:52,760 --> 00:33:56,000 Commissioner Riggs isn't here to ask that question. 475 00:33:56,000 --> 00:33:59,480 So would you like to comment on that, please? 476 00:33:59,480 --> 00:34:06,800 Sorry, Commissioner McDuff, is there something specifically about the water that you'd like 477 00:34:06,800 --> 00:34:07,800 to hear more about? 478 00:34:07,800 --> 00:34:11,160 I just want to make sure we get plenty of this information with the public and the public 479 00:34:11,160 --> 00:34:12,160 hearing. 480 00:34:12,160 --> 00:34:13,160 Oh, I see. 481 00:34:13,160 --> 00:34:18,160 Well, I know we talked about putting another plant over there, correct? 482 00:34:18,160 --> 00:34:21,720 On that side, pumping station? 483 00:34:21,720 --> 00:34:29,720 So as far as water goes, you can't see it on the map here, but right here is the Lake 484 00:34:29,720 --> 00:34:30,720 Ray Roberts Dam. 485 00:34:30,720 --> 00:34:35,840 The city has a water treatment facility at that location already. 486 00:34:35,840 --> 00:34:41,720 And then there would be plans to use existing infrastructure that runs down from that plant 487 00:34:41,720 --> 00:34:49,720 to the city for the first few phases of the development, the first 4,000 homes roughly. 488 00:34:49,720 --> 00:34:57,440 And then the city also has plans to go from that treatment facility having a large transmission 489 00:34:57,440 --> 00:35:02,480 main that we've actually worked with the developer to provide easements for the city. 490 00:35:02,480 --> 00:35:07,680 So it's a cost saving measure for the city to run that transmission main across the development 491 00:35:07,680 --> 00:35:13,480 that will serve future phases of this development, but also serve all of the western side of 492 00:35:13,480 --> 00:35:16,360 the city up and down 35. 493 00:35:16,360 --> 00:35:20,700 Okay, thank you. 494 00:35:20,700 --> 00:35:25,960 Any other questions, requests for information once we get there? 495 00:35:25,960 --> 00:35:29,480 Let's try to, yeah, Commissioner Dyer. 496 00:35:29,480 --> 00:35:33,440 I just have a procedural question. 497 00:35:33,440 --> 00:35:34,960 There's three items in front of us. 498 00:35:34,960 --> 00:35:40,240 Are you going to tackle one at a time and we vote one at a time, or is it going to be 499 00:35:40,240 --> 00:35:45,920 we get all of the information and then we go boom, boom, boom? 500 00:35:45,920 --> 00:35:50,960 So I'll leave it to this chair's discretion, but staff's idea for it was to just present 501 00:35:50,960 --> 00:35:55,720 it all as one presentation, it would go Comprehensive Plan, Mobility Plan, and PD. 502 00:35:55,720 --> 00:36:01,440 Staff's recommendation will be at the sort of end of each section, but we would prefer 503 00:36:01,440 --> 00:36:06,320 to get through the presentation and then open it up for discussion and action afterwards. 504 00:36:06,320 --> 00:36:14,600 Yeah, I think open to the commission for what you would all prefer. 505 00:36:14,600 --> 00:36:23,120 My feeling is that the mobility amendment is something that can be taken a little bit 506 00:36:23,120 --> 00:36:27,540 separately, but I understand they're all tied together. 507 00:36:27,540 --> 00:36:30,960 So what I'm understanding is you have like a single presentation that would open for 508 00:36:30,960 --> 00:36:31,960 all of them. 509 00:36:31,960 --> 00:36:32,960 Okay. 510 00:36:32,960 --> 00:36:35,360 So we can call all the items, get the staff presentation. 511 00:36:35,360 --> 00:36:39,640 And then have the public comments all at the same time? 512 00:36:39,640 --> 00:36:45,160 I feel like it's going to get very confusing, probably for me, but also for the public if 513 00:36:45,160 --> 00:36:48,880 just everybody talks on everything. 514 00:36:48,880 --> 00:36:55,600 So what I was thinking of is maybe we call all the items, then hold public hearing on 515 00:36:55,600 --> 00:37:02,360 Mobility Plan, vote on that, public hearing on Comprehensive Plan amendment, vote on that, 516 00:37:02,360 --> 00:37:04,720 and then zoning change and vote on that. 517 00:37:04,720 --> 00:37:10,080 I just was kind of curious so I could know how this would work. 518 00:37:10,080 --> 00:37:14,600 But with that said, I will tell the members of the public that, look, we're doing these 519 00:37:14,600 --> 00:37:19,480 as three steps so that you don't only have three minutes to say everything if you have 520 00:37:19,480 --> 00:37:25,700 a lot of points, but if you veer off about talking about the things that we're actually 521 00:37:25,700 --> 00:37:29,760 considering and about to vote on, then we're going to say, okay, thank you. 522 00:37:29,760 --> 00:37:33,360 Please come back at another time to talk about that. 523 00:37:33,360 --> 00:37:36,480 That was my thought. 524 00:37:36,480 --> 00:37:39,800 So keep their comments to whatever topic we're talking about? 525 00:37:39,800 --> 00:37:40,800 Exactly. 526 00:37:40,800 --> 00:37:44,880 And so they may come up three times throughout the night? 527 00:37:44,880 --> 00:37:46,360 Maybe. 528 00:37:46,360 --> 00:37:53,080 I think most people may have only submitted two things or three. 529 00:37:53,080 --> 00:37:54,440 What is staff feeling on this? 530 00:37:54,440 --> 00:37:59,040 Well, our thought, especially after seeing the e-comments, was most people tend to have 531 00:37:59,040 --> 00:38:03,080 one very robust opinion and then they repeated it on each item, not knowing where to put 532 00:38:03,080 --> 00:38:04,080 it. 533 00:38:04,080 --> 00:38:07,720 So that, in our mind, kind of supported if we just did all of it at once and let everyone 534 00:38:07,720 --> 00:38:08,720 address each thing. 535 00:38:08,720 --> 00:38:13,240 It certainly needs to be three individual votes by you all. 536 00:38:13,240 --> 00:38:14,240 But that was our thought. 537 00:38:14,240 --> 00:38:19,560 It seemed most of the comments were coming in and were just general concern about everything. 538 00:38:19,560 --> 00:38:20,560 So I'm not sure. 539 00:38:20,560 --> 00:38:22,840 We can certainly go either way at your discretion. 540 00:38:22,840 --> 00:38:23,840 Yeah. 541 00:38:23,840 --> 00:38:31,520 I mean, I guess my concern is if we have sort of free-for-all comments, then maybe some 542 00:38:31,520 --> 00:38:40,920 of the things get lost in the shuffle, instead of sort of trying to concentrate the issues 543 00:38:40,920 --> 00:38:42,200 on the specific amendment. 544 00:38:42,200 --> 00:38:43,200 Sure. 545 00:38:43,200 --> 00:38:46,480 I would also say, and Hilary, feel free to jump in here, whatever we decide to do for 546 00:38:46,480 --> 00:38:49,440 the public, I believe we need to extend that same courtesy to the applicant. 547 00:38:49,440 --> 00:38:54,280 So that group of applicants will get 20 minutes on each item, potentially, or 20 minutes on 548 00:38:54,280 --> 00:38:55,280 all of them. 549 00:38:55,280 --> 00:39:01,680 So I would just say, we need to pick a path and be consistent across it for public and 550 00:39:01,680 --> 00:39:02,680 applicant. 551 00:39:02,680 --> 00:39:03,680 Okay. 552 00:39:03,680 --> 00:39:10,680 It won't really take 20 minutes on all of them, will it? 553 00:39:10,680 --> 00:39:14,480 I say knock it all out at once. 554 00:39:14,480 --> 00:39:15,480 All out at once? 555 00:39:15,480 --> 00:39:16,480 All out at once. 556 00:39:16,480 --> 00:39:17,480 Okay. 557 00:39:17,480 --> 00:39:21,160 And then we have our separate vote. 558 00:39:21,160 --> 00:39:22,840 Okay. 559 00:39:22,840 --> 00:39:23,840 I'm good with that. 560 00:39:23,840 --> 00:39:31,200 I will take copious notes and we'll try to all sort of remind each other of what the 561 00:39:31,200 --> 00:39:37,000 issues were once we move on to motions and discussion. 562 00:39:37,000 --> 00:39:48,240 So yeah, so basically, I'll call it at the same time, treat it all at once, and we'll 563 00:39:48,240 --> 00:39:49,240 figure out how to play pick-up sticks. 564 00:39:49,240 --> 00:39:50,240 Yeah. 565 00:39:50,240 --> 00:39:53,400 If we're allowed to do that, I say, get it all. 566 00:39:53,400 --> 00:39:54,400 Yeah. 567 00:39:54,400 --> 00:39:55,400 Okay. 568 00:39:55,400 --> 00:39:56,400 Yes. 569 00:39:56,400 --> 00:40:05,640 I appreciate you bringing that up because I was asking Kathy about ordering breakfast. 570 00:40:05,640 --> 00:40:13,600 But the other thing, because I did read all the e-comments, is there was a cut and paste 571 00:40:13,600 --> 00:40:15,920 all the way through, and then they wrote an email. 572 00:40:15,920 --> 00:40:20,360 So I had a cover email and then three e-comments with the same dialogue. 573 00:40:20,360 --> 00:40:24,240 And so this is observation. 574 00:40:24,240 --> 00:40:27,320 I did want to mention, if I may, that Clay Riggs is not coming. 575 00:40:27,320 --> 00:40:28,320 He's not feeling well. 576 00:40:28,320 --> 00:40:29,320 Oh dear. 577 00:40:29,320 --> 00:40:31,320 I did get a reply. 578 00:40:31,320 --> 00:40:32,320 Okay. 579 00:40:32,320 --> 00:40:33,320 Thank you. 580 00:40:33,320 --> 00:40:34,320 Okay. 581 00:40:34,320 --> 00:40:37,640 Any other questions on this before we take a break? 582 00:40:37,640 --> 00:40:39,400 Not seeing any. 583 00:40:39,400 --> 00:40:40,400 Thank you, Mia. 584 00:40:40,400 --> 00:40:41,400 Thank you. 585 00:40:41,400 --> 00:40:42,400 And at 541- 586 00:40:42,400 --> 00:40:43,400 Sure. 587 00:40:43,400 --> 00:40:44,400 Did you- 588 00:40:44,400 --> 00:40:45,400 I'm sorry. 589 00:40:45,400 --> 00:40:48,400 Did you want to break and grab food, or we do have other public hearing items to discuss 590 00:40:48,400 --> 00:40:49,400 as well? 591 00:40:49,400 --> 00:40:50,400 We can do either, though. 592 00:40:50,400 --> 00:40:52,120 The food is here if you'd like to take that break. 593 00:40:52,120 --> 00:40:58,760 Let's take a six-minute break and grab food, and then have a relaxed eating time to finish 594 00:40:58,760 --> 00:41:01,120 our other public hearings. 595 00:41:01,120 --> 00:41:13,200 So we'll come back at 547. 596 00:41:13,200 --> 00:41:14,200 Good afternoon. 597 00:41:14,200 --> 00:41:21,740 At 549 p.m., we're back from our recess, and that brings us to the next public hearing 598 00:41:21,740 --> 00:41:28,760 item within our work session, item 5D, MPC 25-1. 599 00:41:28,760 --> 00:41:38,600 As stated, this is MPC 25001. 600 00:41:38,600 --> 00:41:44,480 This is approximately 19.6 acres looking to be rezoned to include a part of the Hunter 601 00:41:44,480 --> 00:41:50,860 Ranch MPC and amend both the development plan map as well as Exhibit C through E, which 602 00:41:50,860 --> 00:41:54,160 two of those you received yesterday. 603 00:41:54,160 --> 00:42:00,360 It is a rezoning of a master plan community MPC to an MPC with a mixed-use regional-based 604 00:42:00,360 --> 00:42:01,360 zoning district. 605 00:42:01,360 --> 00:42:07,960 Currently, the MPC that it's zoned as is not enforceable by the city, so this will correct 606 00:42:07,960 --> 00:42:10,000 that. 607 00:42:10,000 --> 00:42:14,720 We did look at the 2040 comprehensive plan, and based off that, it does comply with all 608 00:42:14,720 --> 00:42:27,560 criteria for approval, so staff is recommending approval. 609 00:42:27,560 --> 00:42:32,320 Any questions on this item? 610 00:42:32,320 --> 00:42:33,320 Commissioner MacDuff? 611 00:42:33,320 --> 00:42:34,320 I'm having my... 612 00:42:34,320 --> 00:42:35,480 I have notes here. 613 00:42:35,480 --> 00:42:38,240 What is planned for this site? 614 00:42:38,240 --> 00:42:42,200 So it would be added as an MR mixed-use regional. 615 00:42:42,200 --> 00:42:49,920 This is part of phase four of Hunter Ranch, which is going to include mixed-use and residential. 616 00:42:49,920 --> 00:42:51,280 We don't know exactly what that looks like. 617 00:42:51,280 --> 00:42:55,860 We're only in phase two, beginning phase two for our landmarks, as this is a long-year 618 00:42:55,860 --> 00:42:58,760 multi-phase project. 619 00:42:58,760 --> 00:43:02,760 All right, thanks. 620 00:43:02,760 --> 00:43:10,940 We can get into it in the public hearing, but I'm interested to hear more why the request 621 00:43:10,940 --> 00:43:17,080 is MR instead of MN, given the split right now on east and west of the roadway. 622 00:43:17,080 --> 00:43:21,880 Does that make sense? 623 00:43:21,880 --> 00:43:29,400 So why it's being proposed for MR versus MN in the Hunter Ranch? 624 00:43:29,400 --> 00:43:37,400 Since the land adjacent to it, north and west of here, is essentially MPC/MN, right? 625 00:43:37,400 --> 00:43:38,400 Understood. 626 00:43:38,400 --> 00:43:39,400 Okay. 627 00:43:39,400 --> 00:43:45,840 And there's a roadway to the east of it, so we can talk about that more, but just be thinking 628 00:43:45,840 --> 00:43:46,840 about that. 629 00:43:46,840 --> 00:43:47,840 Yeah. 630 00:43:47,840 --> 00:43:48,840 Okay. 631 00:43:48,840 --> 00:43:54,840 I don't see anything else. 632 00:43:54,840 --> 00:44:01,360 Dr. Dyer? 633 00:44:01,360 --> 00:44:07,520 It says that this is being requested by the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas. 634 00:44:07,520 --> 00:44:08,520 Yes. 635 00:44:08,520 --> 00:44:09,520 That's correct. 636 00:44:09,520 --> 00:44:11,840 So not by Hillwood? 637 00:44:11,840 --> 00:44:13,600 Correct. 638 00:44:13,600 --> 00:44:14,600 Is it going to... 639 00:44:14,600 --> 00:44:18,080 I was trying to figure out, like, is this like a religious community? 640 00:44:18,080 --> 00:44:19,080 Is this... 641 00:44:19,080 --> 00:44:25,440 So it is currently owned by the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas, but the hope is for Hunter 642 00:44:25,440 --> 00:44:28,800 Ranch to purchase it, but they have to go through the rezoning before they can purchase 643 00:44:28,800 --> 00:44:29,800 this property. 644 00:44:29,800 --> 00:44:35,280 And as stated, the MPC zoning district, it's literally just MPC, which we don't have that 645 00:44:35,280 --> 00:44:38,400 in our code, so it's not enforceable zoning. 646 00:44:38,400 --> 00:44:44,000 So if the Episcopal Church were to, you know, not sell the Hunter Ranch and were to develop 647 00:44:44,000 --> 00:44:47,800 it just currently as is, the city could not enforce anything on that property. 648 00:44:47,800 --> 00:44:48,800 Okay. 649 00:44:48,800 --> 00:44:49,800 Okay. 650 00:44:49,800 --> 00:44:50,800 Okay. 651 00:44:50,800 --> 00:45:04,360 That brings us to our next public hearing, which is Item 5E, S25-10. 652 00:45:04,360 --> 00:45:14,560 Good evening, Chair, members of the Commission, Ashley Eckstead, Associate Planner. 653 00:45:14,560 --> 00:45:19,120 This is a request for a specific use permit to allow group home use on approximately .4 654 00:45:19,120 --> 00:45:23,320 acres of land located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Sandpiper Drive and 655 00:45:23,320 --> 00:45:24,720 Abbots Lane. 656 00:45:24,720 --> 00:45:28,800 This group home would be an assisted living facility that provides 24/7 care to up to 657 00:45:28,800 --> 00:45:30,680 six residents at a time. 658 00:45:30,680 --> 00:45:35,760 The existing zoning is R3, and the future land use is low residential. 659 00:45:35,760 --> 00:45:39,400 Staff will be recommending approval, and I have a longer presentation for the meeting 660 00:45:39,400 --> 00:45:40,400 also. 661 00:45:40,400 --> 00:45:44,760 If there are any questions. 662 00:45:44,760 --> 00:45:47,880 Yes, this is my neighborhood. 663 00:45:47,880 --> 00:45:53,080 Just wondering for information for the public hearing, how many other group homes are in 664 00:45:53,080 --> 00:45:54,840 Southridge? 665 00:45:54,840 --> 00:45:59,560 I believe there are three, or there's no other group homes in Southridge. 666 00:45:59,560 --> 00:46:01,560 There are three other community homes. 667 00:46:01,560 --> 00:46:02,560 Community homes? 668 00:46:02,560 --> 00:46:03,560 Okay. 669 00:46:03,560 --> 00:46:04,560 SUPs? 670 00:46:04,560 --> 00:46:06,840 Those are permitted by right in residential zoning. 671 00:46:06,840 --> 00:46:07,840 Community homes. 672 00:46:07,840 --> 00:46:08,840 Okay. 673 00:46:08,840 --> 00:46:09,920 And where are they? 674 00:46:09,920 --> 00:46:15,120 There is, so there's the one immediately to the south of this on Abbots. 675 00:46:15,120 --> 00:46:20,280 There's one on Skylark, and there's one on Chapel. 676 00:46:20,280 --> 00:46:30,240 That might be something to share in the public in the open meeting. 677 00:46:30,240 --> 00:46:31,240 Okay. 678 00:46:31,240 --> 00:46:32,240 Thanks. 679 00:46:32,240 --> 00:46:33,240 Okay. 680 00:46:33,240 --> 00:46:34,240 Anything else? 681 00:46:34,240 --> 00:46:35,240 Okay. 682 00:46:35,240 --> 00:46:38,240 Thank you, Ashley. 683 00:46:38,240 --> 00:46:43,320 That brings us to 5F, S25-13. 684 00:46:43,320 --> 00:46:50,880 Ashley Eckstead, I'll be presenting this one for Erin. 685 00:46:50,880 --> 00:46:55,040 This is a specific use permit request to permit medium impact manufacturing. 686 00:46:55,040 --> 00:46:59,760 They will be producing household insulation in one suite in an existing building, and 687 00:46:59,760 --> 00:47:02,480 that suite is circled in red here on this map. 688 00:47:02,480 --> 00:47:06,720 This is located west of Worthington Drive, south of Shiler Street. 689 00:47:06,720 --> 00:47:11,600 It is consistent with the Denton 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and staff will be recommending approval, 690 00:47:11,600 --> 00:47:14,280 and I'm happy to answer any questions. 691 00:47:14,280 --> 00:47:19,520 I don't see any. 692 00:47:19,520 --> 00:47:20,920 Thank you. 693 00:47:20,920 --> 00:47:25,160 Brings us to 5G, DCA 25-0002. 694 00:47:25,160 --> 00:47:28,160 Good evening. 695 00:47:28,160 --> 00:47:37,000 Julie Wyatt. 696 00:47:37,000 --> 00:47:52,680 All right, I'm presenting DCA 25-2 legislative updates to you this evening, so we'll just 697 00:47:52,680 --> 00:47:53,680 summarize it. 698 00:47:53,680 --> 00:47:56,680 I'll go into more detail at the regular session. 699 00:47:56,680 --> 00:48:02,000 The proposal in front of you tonight is to amend the Denton Development Code in response 700 00:48:02,000 --> 00:48:08,480 to legislation that was adopted with the 89th legislature. 701 00:48:08,480 --> 00:48:13,120 There were really three bills that we have found that apply to our Denton Development 702 00:48:13,120 --> 00:48:16,560 Code and really require this amendment. 703 00:48:16,560 --> 00:48:22,400 One is related to occupancy of dwelling units, another is related to home-based businesses, 704 00:48:22,400 --> 00:48:25,200 and then finally, notification and procedures. 705 00:48:25,200 --> 00:48:32,920 Specifically, the legislature has removed specific cities' ability to limit occupancy 706 00:48:32,920 --> 00:48:37,000 based upon familial status, so that is requiring an update. 707 00:48:37,000 --> 00:48:43,040 Also, distinguishing between No Impact and then all other home-based businesses. 708 00:48:43,040 --> 00:48:49,440 And then finally, clarifying the protest procedures for zoning changes, which would increase residential 709 00:48:49,440 --> 00:48:58,920 development or modify some or all zoning districts, both in the notification and protest procedures. 710 00:48:58,920 --> 00:49:04,200 Staff is recommending approval because it is needed to be in compliance with the state. 711 00:49:04,200 --> 00:49:06,480 I'll be happy to answer any questions. 712 00:49:06,480 --> 00:49:09,920 I may rely on Haley and Hillary to give me some backup. 713 00:49:09,920 --> 00:49:23,520 They know a little more nuance about two of the items, so I may call on them. 714 00:49:23,520 --> 00:49:24,520 Questions? 715 00:49:24,520 --> 00:49:25,520 Commissioner McDuff? 716 00:49:25,520 --> 00:49:26,520 This is a point of information. 717 00:49:26,520 --> 00:49:32,160 Director Haley, I think you were talking about this in the work session presentation that 718 00:49:32,160 --> 00:49:34,160 this was on the horizon. 719 00:49:34,160 --> 00:49:36,240 Am I remembering correctly? 720 00:49:36,240 --> 00:49:44,840 Thank you. 721 00:49:44,840 --> 00:49:45,840 Anything else? 722 00:49:45,840 --> 00:49:48,840 I don't see anything. 723 00:49:48,840 --> 00:49:53,800 Thank you, Julie. 724 00:49:53,800 --> 00:50:03,840 And that brings us to the point in our agenda when we would normally have work session items, 725 00:50:03,840 --> 00:50:06,320 but we don't have any work session items today. 726 00:50:06,320 --> 00:50:15,280 So, at 5.58, we will recess from our work session and reconvene at 6.30 in the council 727 00:50:15,280 --> 00:50:16,280 chambers. 728 00:50:16,280 --> 00:50:24,720 Thank you. 729 00:50:24,720 --> 00:50:25,720 Good evening. 730 00:50:25,720 --> 00:50:37,320 At 6.31 p.m. this Wednesday, November 19th, I will call our regular session to order with 731 00:50:37,320 --> 00:50:38,480 the quorum present. 732 00:50:38,480 --> 00:50:43,120 Our first order of business is to say the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas 733 00:50:43,120 --> 00:50:44,120 flag. 734 00:50:44,120 --> 00:50:57,000 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for 735 00:50:57,000 --> 00:51:04,360 which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. 736 00:51:04,360 --> 00:51:05,360 Honor the Texas flag. 737 00:51:05,360 --> 00:51:06,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 738 00:51:06,360 --> 00:51:07,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 739 00:51:07,360 --> 00:51:08,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 740 00:51:08,360 --> 00:51:09,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 741 00:51:09,360 --> 00:51:10,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 742 00:51:10,360 --> 00:51:11,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 743 00:51:11,360 --> 00:51:12,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 744 00:51:12,360 --> 00:51:13,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 745 00:51:13,360 --> 00:51:14,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 746 00:51:14,360 --> 00:51:15,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 747 00:51:15,360 --> 00:51:16,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 748 00:51:16,360 --> 00:51:17,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 749 00:51:17,360 --> 00:51:18,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 750 00:51:18,360 --> 00:51:19,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 751 00:51:19,360 --> 00:51:20,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 752 00:51:20,360 --> 00:51:21,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 753 00:51:21,360 --> 00:51:22,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 754 00:51:22,360 --> 00:51:23,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 755 00:51:23,360 --> 00:51:24,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 756 00:51:24,360 --> 00:51:25,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 757 00:51:25,360 --> 00:51:26,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 758 00:51:26,360 --> 00:51:27,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 759 00:51:27,360 --> 00:51:28,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 760 00:51:28,360 --> 00:51:29,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 761 00:51:29,360 --> 00:51:30,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 762 00:51:30,360 --> 00:51:31,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 763 00:51:31,360 --> 00:51:32,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 764 00:51:32,360 --> 00:51:33,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 765 00:51:33,360 --> 00:51:34,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 766 00:51:34,360 --> 00:51:35,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 767 00:51:43,360 --> 00:51:44,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 768 00:51:44,360 --> 00:51:45,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 769 00:51:45,360 --> 00:51:46,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 770 00:51:46,360 --> 00:51:47,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 771 00:51:47,360 --> 00:51:48,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 772 00:51:48,360 --> 00:51:49,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 773 00:51:49,360 --> 00:51:50,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 774 00:51:50,360 --> 00:51:51,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 775 00:51:51,360 --> 00:51:52,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 776 00:51:52,360 --> 00:51:53,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 777 00:51:53,360 --> 00:51:54,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 778 00:51:54,360 --> 00:51:55,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 779 00:51:55,360 --> 00:51:56,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 780 00:51:56,360 --> 00:51:57,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 781 00:51:57,360 --> 00:51:58,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 782 00:51:58,360 --> 00:51:59,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 783 00:51:59,360 --> 00:52:00,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 784 00:52:00,360 --> 00:52:01,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 785 00:52:01,360 --> 00:52:02,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 786 00:52:02,360 --> 00:52:03,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 787 00:52:03,360 --> 00:52:04,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 788 00:52:04,360 --> 00:52:05,360 I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag. 789 00:52:14,360 --> 00:52:24,160 Is there a, there's one item on the consent agenda, is there a motion for, or questions? 790 00:52:24,160 --> 00:52:26,680 Commissioner Dia? 791 00:52:26,680 --> 00:52:34,760 I would like to make a motion that we approve the final plat of lots 1XR and 21R block A 792 00:52:34,760 --> 00:52:40,960 and lot 1XR block 1 of Hunter Ranch phase 1A. 793 00:52:40,960 --> 00:52:41,960 And Commissioner MacDuff? 794 00:52:41,960 --> 00:52:45,520 Yes, I'd like to second that motion. 795 00:52:45,520 --> 00:52:48,080 Very good. 796 00:52:48,080 --> 00:52:58,320 Seeing no questions, I'll call for a vote on the board. 797 00:52:58,320 --> 00:53:02,560 That item passes 6-0, brings us to item 4A, PP25-0004. 798 00:53:02,560 --> 00:53:10,880 Good evening, Chair, Commission, Cameron Robertson, Principal Planner. 799 00:53:10,880 --> 00:53:16,720 This is a preliminary plat for landmark phase 2 north. 800 00:53:16,720 --> 00:53:25,240 The approximately 181 acres is located north of Robeson Ranch, west of I-35 west. 801 00:53:25,240 --> 00:53:29,440 Staff has recommended denial of this preliminary plat at this time, as it does not meet our 802 00:53:29,440 --> 00:53:33,680 established criteria for approval, but staff has no objection to a requested extension 803 00:53:33,680 --> 00:53:35,120 of December 17, 2025. 804 00:53:35,120 --> 00:53:41,920 I can stand for any questions. 805 00:53:41,920 --> 00:53:45,400 Any questions or a motion? 806 00:53:45,400 --> 00:53:49,960 Commissioner Ketchersett? 807 00:53:49,960 --> 00:53:57,160 A motion to approve the extension to certain of December 17, 2025. 808 00:53:57,160 --> 00:53:59,280 And Commissioner Garland? 809 00:53:59,280 --> 00:54:04,280 And I'll second that with the approval of staff. 810 00:54:04,280 --> 00:54:12,040 And seeing no questions, I'll call for a vote on the board. 811 00:54:12,040 --> 00:54:15,840 That item passes 6-0, brings us to 4B, FP25-0028B. 812 00:54:15,840 --> 00:54:26,000 Good evening, Chair, members of the Commission, Angie Manglaris, Assistant Planning Director, 813 00:54:26,000 --> 00:54:29,480 here to present FP25-0028. 814 00:54:29,480 --> 00:54:34,520 This is a final plat for approximately 15 acres of land for single-family residential 815 00:54:34,520 --> 00:54:40,160 subdivisions owned to PDR4, generally located at the northeast intersection of US377 and 816 00:54:40,160 --> 00:54:41,160 Brush Creek Road. 817 00:54:41,160 --> 00:54:45,480 At this time, staff is recommending denial, but has no objection to the requested extension 818 00:54:45,480 --> 00:54:47,640 to a date certain of December 17. 819 00:54:47,640 --> 00:54:51,680 Happy to answer any questions. 820 00:54:51,680 --> 00:54:52,680 Commissioner MacDuff? 821 00:54:52,680 --> 00:55:00,080 Yes, I'd like to make a motion to concur with the recommendation of staff for approval, 822 00:55:00,080 --> 00:55:06,360 and this would be a third extension to a date certain of December 17, 2025. 823 00:55:06,360 --> 00:55:07,360 Approval of the extension? 824 00:55:07,360 --> 00:55:08,360 Yes. 825 00:55:08,360 --> 00:55:09,360 Okay. 826 00:55:09,360 --> 00:55:10,360 Commissioner Garland? 827 00:55:10,360 --> 00:55:13,440 And I will second that motion. 828 00:55:13,440 --> 00:55:22,440 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 829 00:55:22,440 --> 00:55:30,600 That item passes 6-0, brings us to 4C, FP25-34. 830 00:55:30,600 --> 00:55:31,600 Thank you, Chair. 831 00:55:31,600 --> 00:55:35,840 Angie Manglaris, Assistant Planning Director, this is a final plat for approximately eight 832 00:55:35,840 --> 00:55:40,960 acres of land, generally located on the north side of US380, approximately 300 feet east 833 00:55:40,960 --> 00:55:41,960 of Giesling Road. 834 00:55:41,960 --> 00:55:46,320 At this time, the plat does not meet our criteria for approval, but staff has no objection to 835 00:55:46,320 --> 00:55:49,680 the requested extension to a date certain of December 17. 836 00:55:49,680 --> 00:55:53,000 Happy to answer any questions. 837 00:55:53,000 --> 00:55:55,840 Commissioner Dio? 838 00:55:55,840 --> 00:56:01,080 I would like to go ahead and make a motion that we approve the requested extension to 839 00:56:01,080 --> 00:56:04,600 a date certain of December 17, 2025. 840 00:56:04,600 --> 00:56:06,160 Commissioner Kichersen? 841 00:56:06,160 --> 00:56:09,160 I second the motion. 842 00:56:09,160 --> 00:56:11,040 Very good. 843 00:56:11,040 --> 00:56:15,080 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 844 00:56:15,080 --> 00:56:23,360 That brings us to 4D, FP25-31. 845 00:56:23,360 --> 00:56:27,960 Good evening, Julie Wyatt, Principal Planner. 846 00:56:27,960 --> 00:56:33,440 The request before you is a final plat for approximately four acre site to facilitate 847 00:56:33,440 --> 00:56:35,360 a multifamily development. 848 00:56:35,360 --> 00:56:40,480 Subject property is located on the north side of East Sycamore at Exposition Street. 849 00:56:40,480 --> 00:56:45,440 At this time, the plat does not meet our established criteria for approval, and therefore staff 850 00:56:45,440 --> 00:56:46,440 recommends denial. 851 00:56:46,440 --> 00:56:51,600 However, we have no objection to the requested extension to December 17. 852 00:56:51,600 --> 00:56:55,760 I'll be happy to answer any questions. 853 00:56:55,760 --> 00:56:58,600 Commissioner Dyer? 854 00:56:58,600 --> 00:57:03,360 I would like to go ahead and make a motion that we approve the requested extension to 855 00:57:03,360 --> 00:57:06,980 a date certain of December 17, 2025. 856 00:57:06,980 --> 00:57:07,980 Commissioner McDade? 857 00:57:07,980 --> 00:57:12,280 I second that motion. 858 00:57:12,280 --> 00:57:20,960 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 859 00:57:20,960 --> 00:57:27,800 That passes 6-0, brings us to 4E, FP25-32. 860 00:57:27,800 --> 00:57:33,640 This is a final plat for about a six and a half acre tract located on the east side of 861 00:57:33,640 --> 00:57:36,640 Bonnie Bray, north of Windsor. 862 00:57:36,640 --> 00:57:40,160 Right now, the final plat does not meet our criteria for approval. 863 00:57:40,160 --> 00:57:44,600 However, staff has no objection to the requested extension to December 17th. 864 00:57:44,600 --> 00:57:48,720 I'll be happy to answer any questions. 865 00:57:48,720 --> 00:57:50,360 Commissioner Kestrelson? 866 00:57:50,360 --> 00:57:57,480 A motion to approve the requested extension date certain of December 17, 2025. 867 00:57:57,480 --> 00:57:58,480 Commissioner Dyer? 868 00:57:58,480 --> 00:58:01,560 I will second that motion. 869 00:58:01,560 --> 00:58:10,320 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 870 00:58:10,320 --> 00:58:16,880 That item passes 6-0, brings us to item 4F, FP25-36. 871 00:58:16,880 --> 00:58:23,360 Evening, Chair, members of the commission, Mia Hines, senior planner. 872 00:58:23,360 --> 00:58:27,080 This item is a final plat for giving great sedition. 873 00:58:27,080 --> 00:58:32,360 The property is located just south of East McKinney, approximately 900 feet east of Mayhill 874 00:58:32,360 --> 00:58:33,360 Road. 875 00:58:33,360 --> 00:58:36,320 At this time, the plat is not meeting all of our criteria for approval, so staff is 876 00:58:36,320 --> 00:58:37,800 recommending a denial. 877 00:58:37,800 --> 00:58:41,080 However, we have no objection to the requested extension to December 17, 2025. 878 00:58:41,080 --> 00:58:44,200 I'll be happy to answer any questions you have. 879 00:58:44,200 --> 00:58:45,200 Thank you. 880 00:58:45,200 --> 00:58:46,200 Commissioner MacDuff? 881 00:58:46,200 --> 00:58:51,640 Yes, I want to make the motion to agree with the staff's recommendation for denial of this 882 00:58:51,640 --> 00:59:00,680 request and also approval of the first extension to a date certain of December 17, 2025. 883 00:59:00,680 --> 00:59:01,680 Commissioner Ketresen? 884 00:59:01,680 --> 00:59:04,880 I second that motion. 885 00:59:04,880 --> 00:59:12,920 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 886 00:59:12,920 --> 00:59:20,760 That item passes 6-0, brings us to 4F, FP25-36. 887 00:59:20,760 --> 00:59:22,600 I'm sorry, FP25-33. 888 00:59:22,600 --> 00:59:23,600 4G. 889 00:59:23,600 --> 00:59:28,840 Evening again, Chair, members of the commission, Mia Hines, senior planner. 890 00:59:28,840 --> 00:59:35,120 This item is a final plat for the Harris addition, approximately 92 acres located just west 891 00:59:35,120 --> 00:59:41,220 of I-35, approximately 1700 feet south of North Loop 288. 892 00:59:41,220 --> 00:59:45,520 At this time, this plat is not meeting all of the established criteria for approval, 893 00:59:45,520 --> 00:59:46,920 so we are recommending denial. 894 00:59:46,920 --> 00:59:52,800 However, staff has no objections to the requested extension to December 17, 2025. 895 00:59:52,800 --> 00:59:58,920 Happy to answer any questions you have. 896 00:59:58,920 --> 00:59:59,980 Commissioner Garland? 897 00:59:59,980 --> 01:00:06,600 I would like to make a motion to approve based on staff's recommendation and extend to December 898 01:00:06,600 --> 01:00:10,040 17, 2025. 899 01:00:10,040 --> 01:00:14,440 Motion to continue, and Commissioner Dio? 900 01:00:14,440 --> 01:00:17,720 I will second that motion. 901 01:00:17,720 --> 01:00:26,480 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 902 01:00:26,480 --> 01:00:29,120 That item passes 6-0. 903 01:00:29,120 --> 01:00:32,360 Next up is item 4H, FR25-23. 904 01:00:32,360 --> 01:00:39,080 Evening, Chair, members of the commission, Mia Hines, senior planner. 905 01:00:39,080 --> 01:00:45,520 This is a final replat for Hazler addition, just under 15 acres located on the east side 906 01:00:45,520 --> 01:00:50,120 of North Locust Street, near the intersection of Ville Street and North Locust Street. 907 01:00:50,120 --> 01:00:54,360 At this time, they are not meeting all of our criteria for approval, so staff is recommending 908 01:00:54,360 --> 01:00:55,360 denial. 909 01:00:55,360 --> 01:01:00,400 An extension request was not included in the backup, but was provided to this body earlier 910 01:01:00,400 --> 01:01:05,840 today, and staff has no objection to that requested extension to December 17, 2025. 911 01:01:05,840 --> 01:01:10,680 Happy to answer any questions you have at this time. 912 01:01:10,680 --> 01:01:12,360 Commissioner Dio? 913 01:01:12,360 --> 01:01:20,860 I would like to make a motion that we do staff's recommendation to extend the applicant's request 914 01:01:20,860 --> 01:01:25,200 through the 17th of December, 2025. 915 01:01:25,200 --> 01:01:26,200 Commissioner Ketcham? 916 01:01:26,200 --> 01:01:28,640 I second that motion. 917 01:01:28,640 --> 01:01:39,680 Seeing no discussion, call for a vote on the board. 918 01:01:39,680 --> 01:01:43,440 That was fun. 919 01:01:43,440 --> 01:01:53,880 That item passes 6-0, brings us to item 4J, FP25-35, yes, sorry, -5. 920 01:01:53,880 --> 01:02:00,480 Evening, Chair, members of the commission, Mia Hines, senior planner. 921 01:02:00,480 --> 01:02:08,000 This is a preliminary plat for Roselon Meadows located just north of Roselon Drive, east 922 01:02:08,000 --> 01:02:13,960 of the existing South Bonneberry Street and west of the future South Bonneberry Street. 923 01:02:13,960 --> 01:02:18,520 The property itself is about six and a half acres, and at this time, the plat is not meeting 924 01:02:18,520 --> 01:02:22,800 all of our criteria for approval, so staff is recommending denial, but we have no objection 925 01:02:22,800 --> 01:02:26,640 to the requested extension to December 17, 2025. 926 01:02:26,640 --> 01:02:29,800 Happy to answer any questions. 927 01:02:29,800 --> 01:02:34,000 Commissioner Ketcham? 928 01:02:34,000 --> 01:02:40,640 A motion to approve the extension to date certain of December 17, 2025. 929 01:02:40,640 --> 01:02:41,640 And Commissioner Dio? 930 01:02:41,640 --> 01:02:45,040 I would like to second that motion. 931 01:02:45,040 --> 01:03:06,880 Seeing no discussion, call for a vote on the board. 932 01:03:06,880 --> 01:03:15,240 That item passes 6-0, brings us to our last individual consideration, item FP25-35. 933 01:03:15,240 --> 01:03:19,680 Good evening, Chair, members of the commission, Ashley Eckstead, associate planner. 934 01:03:19,680 --> 01:03:37,520 Sorry, we have one recusal from Commissioner McDade for this item. 935 01:03:37,520 --> 01:03:39,560 This is FP25-35. 936 01:03:39,560 --> 01:03:44,480 This is a final plat for Jefferson North Elm, an approximately 26-acre site at the intersection 937 01:03:44,480 --> 01:03:46,720 of North Elm and North Locust Street. 938 01:03:46,720 --> 01:03:48,920 Originally, this was an extension request. 939 01:03:48,920 --> 01:03:52,920 We sent out the revised plat on Monday of this week, and they have now satisfied the 940 01:03:52,920 --> 01:03:56,600 criteria for approval, and staff does recommend approval of this final plat. 941 01:03:56,600 --> 01:04:01,680 Happy to answer any questions. 942 01:04:01,680 --> 01:04:02,680 Commissioner McDuff? 943 01:04:02,680 --> 01:04:08,720 Yes, I'd like to make a motion to agree with staff's recommendation for approval of this 944 01:04:08,720 --> 01:04:10,360 final plat. 945 01:04:10,360 --> 01:04:12,640 And Commissioner Ketcham? 946 01:04:12,640 --> 01:04:14,840 I second that motion. 947 01:04:14,840 --> 01:04:17,360 Very good. 948 01:04:17,360 --> 01:04:31,480 Seeing no discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board. 949 01:04:31,480 --> 01:04:43,200 That item passes 5-0 with one abstention. 950 01:04:43,200 --> 01:04:49,960 And the record show, Commissioner McDade is joining us again for our first public hearing 951 01:04:49,960 --> 01:04:58,440 tonight for 5A, B, and C. I'm actually going to call all three of these simultaneously 952 01:04:58,440 --> 01:05:05,000 because staff has a presentation that will cover all three. 953 01:05:05,000 --> 01:05:15,120 Then we will hear from the applicant again on all three. 954 01:05:15,120 --> 01:05:20,220 And then we'll have the public hearing, and we will combine that as well. 955 01:05:20,220 --> 01:05:24,920 So that's how we're going to take this, and then the commission will consider each item 956 01:05:24,920 --> 01:05:28,280 individually for a vote after the public hearing. 957 01:05:28,280 --> 01:05:47,680 So this is item 5A CA25-1, 5B PD25-3, and 5C MPA25-3A. 958 01:05:47,680 --> 01:05:57,200 I'll go ahead and open all three public hearings for those same items, CA25-1, PD25-3, and 959 01:05:57,200 --> 01:06:00,000 MPA25-3 as well. 960 01:06:00,000 --> 01:06:05,220 Chair, with your permission, Charlie Rosendahl, interim director of development services, 961 01:06:05,220 --> 01:06:09,280 at the request of the developer in order to be able to coordinate some of the answers 962 01:06:09,280 --> 01:06:14,840 that we've received from the commission, they've asked to table this item until the next planning 963 01:06:14,840 --> 01:06:22,880 and zoning commission meeting. 964 01:06:22,880 --> 01:06:29,880 So, we... I mean... So, what Haley and I just discussed... I think we're going to have to, 965 01:06:52,880 --> 01:07:19,120 , can I have some clarification? 966 01:07:19,120 --> 01:07:27,120 Is the request to table to a date certain or continue to... Was there direction as far 967 01:07:27,120 --> 01:07:28,120 as that? 968 01:07:28,120 --> 01:07:32,760 Yeah, I think we can bring this back at the next planning and zoning commission meeting 969 01:07:32,760 --> 01:07:37,360 on December 17th. 970 01:07:37,360 --> 01:07:52,920 So, you know, we're certainly... So, let me just get some advice from legal so that everybody's 971 01:07:52,920 --> 01:07:55,760 on the same page here. 972 01:07:55,760 --> 01:08:09,520 If we were... We already opened the public hearing, so if we continue to have the hearing 973 01:08:09,520 --> 01:08:15,360 and people are able to speak, you're saying that the individuals who spoke tonight would 974 01:08:15,360 --> 01:08:25,160 not have the opportunity to speak in the December meeting? Is that the way this works? 975 01:08:25,160 --> 01:08:31,760 So, it is a little bit sticky. Oh, pardon me. Our past practice has been that once the 976 01:08:31,760 --> 01:08:41,000 public hearing is open, a member of the public has a opportunity to comment. So, I believe 977 01:08:41,000 --> 01:08:45,440 the way we've handled it in the past is that if people want to comment now, they're very 978 01:08:45,440 --> 01:08:59,900 much welcome to. And, yeah. I'm sorry, to finish the thought that generally speaking, 979 01:08:59,900 --> 01:09:06,200 because we only allow one public comment per public hearing item, then that would be your 980 01:09:06,200 --> 01:09:08,000 comment time. 981 01:09:08,000 --> 01:09:24,920 Okay. So, when an applicant has an item on the agenda, it requires notice to put something 982 01:09:24,920 --> 01:09:31,120 on the agenda. They always have the option to ask for a continuance, but it is the board's 983 01:09:31,120 --> 01:09:34,960 discretion as to whether to grant that or not. 984 01:09:34,960 --> 01:09:39,320 Right. And you have discretion. You have opened the public hearing. If we postpone, we would 985 01:09:39,320 --> 01:09:43,960 leave it open, and you have discretion to go ahead and take public comment tonight if 986 01:09:43,960 --> 01:09:47,840 you want to. 987 01:09:47,840 --> 01:09:54,360 So, my preference is to go ahead and hear this item. We have many members of the public 988 01:09:54,360 --> 01:10:00,360 who have come to share their views. I don't think it's necessarily fair to them to ask 989 01:10:00,360 --> 01:10:12,840 them to find child care for another night and come out another time. But the request 990 01:10:12,840 --> 01:10:21,600 has been made. So, without objection, I think we'll go ahead and open the item and hear 991 01:10:21,600 --> 01:10:32,800 it. But I think the Commission is aware of the applicant's request, so that we can... 992 01:10:32,800 --> 01:10:42,560 Well, let me ask one more question. Did we receive any information as to why the continuance 993 01:10:42,560 --> 01:10:43,560 was requested? 994 01:10:43,560 --> 01:10:48,360 Yeah. I think we received a number of questions ahead of the Planning and Zoning Commission 995 01:10:48,360 --> 01:10:54,120 meeting, and then we haven't had the chance to coordinate answers on those questions. 996 01:10:54,120 --> 01:10:58,240 Some of them are development-specific. So, in order to give us some additional time to 997 01:10:58,240 --> 01:11:01,760 answer those questions, we've asked for the continuance. 998 01:11:01,760 --> 01:11:03,960 Okay. Understood. Yeah. Commissioner McTuff? 999 01:11:03,960 --> 01:11:10,480 It's a question for my own clarification. Are we tabling all three proposals? 1000 01:11:10,480 --> 01:11:11,480 Yes. 1001 01:11:11,480 --> 01:11:13,080 All three because they're related? 1002 01:11:13,080 --> 01:11:14,080 Correct. 1003 01:11:14,080 --> 01:11:19,720 Thank you. 1004 01:11:19,720 --> 01:11:28,120 Like I said, unless the Commission feels otherwise, I feel like we should hear from the public 1005 01:11:28,120 --> 01:11:31,440 since they took this evening out to come. 1006 01:11:31,440 --> 01:11:41,800 Yeah. So, if we could go ahead and have the staff presentation. I understand the applicant's 1007 01:11:41,800 --> 01:11:48,880 request, and certainly, I think the Commission will take that to heart that there's additional 1008 01:11:48,880 --> 01:11:55,000 information that they believe would help inform the public or other people. I'm not sure who 1009 01:11:55,000 --> 01:12:00,640 all asked these questions that we weren't able to get to, but I just want to make sure 1010 01:12:00,640 --> 01:12:06,760 that we get... If this is someone's only opportunity to speak at the public hearing, I want to 1011 01:12:06,760 --> 01:12:15,120 make sure they have that opportunity. So, with that, let's go ahead and have the presentation. 1012 01:12:15,120 --> 01:12:39,720 I appreciate that. Thank you. 1013 01:12:39,720 --> 01:12:51,680 Evening, Chair, members of the Commission, Mia Hines, Senior Planner. This is one presentation 1014 01:12:51,680 --> 01:12:59,560 for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CA 25-1, MPA 25-03, the Mobility Plan Amendment, and 1015 01:12:59,560 --> 01:13:03,600 the Plan Development, PD 25-0003. 1016 01:13:03,600 --> 01:13:09,160 So, to give you a brief overview of what we're looking at here, again, this is three separate 1017 01:13:09,160 --> 01:13:13,680 requests, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Mobility Plan Thoroughfare Map Amendment, 1018 01:13:13,680 --> 01:13:19,480 and a rezoning to a PD. The property is just under 2,500 acres. The existing Future Land 1019 01:13:19,480 --> 01:13:25,720 Use Map designation for this area is rural areas. The proposed Future Land Use Map that 1020 01:13:25,720 --> 01:13:29,800 the applicant has requested is Master Plan Community. The existing zoning for the property 1021 01:13:29,800 --> 01:13:35,560 is rural residential, and the proposed zoning is a plan development with a mix of R4, R7, 1022 01:13:35,560 --> 01:13:41,200 MN, and MR. And the requested Mobility Plan Thoroughfare Map Amendment is to realign a 1023 01:13:41,200 --> 01:13:46,640 portion of a proposed secondary arterial within the Craver Project. 1024 01:13:46,640 --> 01:13:50,520 I did want to keep some things or have some things at the top of your mind as I talk through 1025 01:13:50,520 --> 01:13:56,600 this presentation, and sort of lay a groundwork of staff's thought process behind this. This 1026 01:13:56,600 --> 01:14:01,920 is a large acre tract with a unified ownership, so it presents a sort of opportunity to master 1027 01:14:01,920 --> 01:14:10,520 plan a significant property, so a size property within the city limits. The Craver Ranch Municipal 1028 01:14:10,520 --> 01:14:16,480 Management District was approved by the state legislation this past legislation session, 1029 01:14:16,480 --> 01:14:21,400 and so that is an instrument for funding for utilities and public infrastructure. And then 1030 01:14:21,400 --> 01:14:27,800 additionally, the TxDOT regional outer loop is making progress in Collin County, and studies 1031 01:14:27,800 --> 01:14:33,440 and analysis for the Denton County portion of that outer loop are coming to fruition 1032 01:14:33,440 --> 01:14:38,820 as well. Alignments are being finalized, and there are some other things that are feeding 1033 01:14:38,820 --> 01:14:44,440 into the sort of interest in staff's analysis of this area. 1034 01:14:44,440 --> 01:14:49,200 So a brief history, we went over this a little bit in a work session. The property itself 1035 01:14:49,200 --> 01:14:55,000 is currently being used for agriculture. In 2008, however, and 2009, the property went 1036 01:14:55,000 --> 01:15:00,680 through an annexation in anticipation of a development of this kind. At the time, the 1037 01:15:00,680 --> 01:15:04,640 city annexed the property, wanting to have a little bit more land use control because, 1038 01:15:04,640 --> 01:15:11,480 as you know, property can develop in the ETJ, and the city may be responsible for providing 1039 01:15:11,480 --> 01:15:15,200 utilities and things to that property, but we will have no land use control in those 1040 01:15:15,200 --> 01:15:20,840 instances. So we were aware of that at the time, but the 2030 plan really didn't designate 1041 01:15:20,840 --> 01:15:26,640 a future land use designation beyond agriculture for this property. Similarly, the minor update 1042 01:15:26,640 --> 01:15:31,960 that didn't 2040 plan didn't look into this property much further beyond the existing 1043 01:15:31,960 --> 01:15:37,680 agricultural use. So when the applicants came forward to staff with their development proposal, 1044 01:15:37,680 --> 01:15:41,640 we sort of walked them through some of the things that would have to occur, that being 1045 01:15:41,640 --> 01:15:44,960 the applications that you see before you this evening. 1046 01:15:44,960 --> 01:15:49,920 In addition to these applications, staff is having ongoing conversations regarding water 1047 01:15:49,920 --> 01:15:55,000 and sewer needs for the property as well as traffic analysis has been performed for this 1048 01:15:55,000 --> 01:15:59,760 development to ensure proper connectivity and infrastructure and utilities would be 1049 01:15:59,760 --> 01:16:03,880 provided for the density. I mentioned that Craver Ranch Municipal Management District 1050 01:16:03,880 --> 01:16:08,240 a little earlier in the previous slide, and just to remind you guys, that is a special 1051 01:16:08,240 --> 01:16:13,520 purpose district with the power to levy taxes, issue bonds, and charge assessments to property 1052 01:16:13,520 --> 01:16:18,040 owners for infrastructure costs for the MMD. And as a part of that, they have to go through 1053 01:16:18,040 --> 01:16:24,640 an operating agreement and a development agreement with the city that would discuss the utilities 1054 01:16:24,640 --> 01:16:29,920 and things needed to provide services for this area, as well as areas developing around 1055 01:16:29,920 --> 01:16:33,480 this site within the city's ETJ. 1056 01:16:33,480 --> 01:16:36,920 So a little bit of talking about the progress that TechStat is making in the Denton County 1057 01:16:36,920 --> 01:16:42,440 Regional Outer Loop. What's shown on your screen is the Denton County segment of that 1058 01:16:42,440 --> 01:16:48,400 outer loop, but this is a regional thing, and they have just recently completed work in 1059 01:16:48,400 --> 01:16:51,680 Collin County. So these next couple of slides will walk you through some of the development 1060 01:16:51,680 --> 01:16:56,480 that we've seen occur around the portions of the outer loop that have been completed 1061 01:16:56,480 --> 01:17:01,560 both in Collin County and on the Denton County side. Just to give you an idea of where the 1062 01:17:01,560 --> 01:17:08,920 Craver Project is in relation to this outer loop, here it is highlighted in red, and currently 1063 01:17:08,920 --> 01:17:14,360 the alignment options has one alignment going through the property and some going to the 1064 01:17:14,360 --> 01:17:17,560 south of the property. 1065 01:17:17,560 --> 01:17:20,960 As far as, like I said, regional trends that we've seen developing around the east outer 1066 01:17:20,960 --> 01:17:26,720 loop, specifically in Collin County area where this roadway is completed, we see a similar 1067 01:17:26,720 --> 01:17:35,360 type of subdivisions popping up as the planned development that we are considering this evening. 1068 01:17:35,360 --> 01:17:40,440 This specifically, or this map is specifically Salinas Master Plan Community Map. Again, 1069 01:17:40,440 --> 01:17:47,040 as you can see, it's not uncommon around the outer loop and other regions for the want 1070 01:17:47,040 --> 01:17:53,200 to master plan out these projects. The single-family sort of residential subdivisions with a little 1071 01:17:53,200 --> 01:17:59,520 bit of mixed uses, some multifamily in there, mixed densities is what we're seeing developing 1072 01:17:59,520 --> 01:18:07,600 around the outer loop in the Collin County area. Similarly, in the Denton County area, 1073 01:18:07,600 --> 01:18:14,720 this is an excerpt from the Aubrey Mobility Map. You can see some subdivisions popping 1074 01:18:14,720 --> 01:18:21,880 up around where their desired option of the outer loop is, similar in form and fashion 1075 01:18:21,880 --> 01:18:27,840 to what we are considering this evening. Clearly, there's a market for it, there's a demand 1076 01:18:27,840 --> 01:18:34,720 for it, and this is not an uncommon sort of trend that we're seeing around the outer loop 1077 01:18:34,720 --> 01:18:41,160 in Collin and Denton County. With regards to existing conditions on the property, the 1078 01:18:41,160 --> 01:18:49,160 larger map is the FEMA floodplain map showing you where, or the portions of the FEMA floodplain. 1079 01:18:49,160 --> 01:18:56,040 The map to the right at the top is the current zoning map showing you that it is all rural 1080 01:18:56,040 --> 01:19:00,640 residential and the properties surrounding it that are within the city limits are also 1081 01:19:00,640 --> 01:19:05,480 zonal residential. Then the map down below is the mobility plan map showing you where 1082 01:19:05,480 --> 01:19:12,600 the secondary arterials are throughout the property as well as the primary arterial along 1083 01:19:12,600 --> 01:19:18,920 the east end there, west end there. The first application, the comprehensive plan amendment, 1084 01:19:18,920 --> 01:19:24,520 this is a request to change the future land use designation from agriculture to master 1085 01:19:24,520 --> 01:19:30,680 plan community. The image on the left is the current future land use map and then the image 1086 01:19:30,680 --> 01:19:36,520 on the right is what they are proposing to change to. The master plan community flume 1087 01:19:36,520 --> 01:19:43,120 is guided by separate development approvals which establishes the land uses, densities 1088 01:19:43,120 --> 01:19:47,740 and intensities of development and character. Ideally, developments that are proposed under 1089 01:19:47,740 --> 01:19:52,960 this flume would have a mix of uses that balance residential and non-residential uses and provide 1090 01:19:52,960 --> 01:19:56,480 connectivity to other developments throughout the city. 1091 01:19:56,480 --> 01:20:01,920 We put the request up against the city's criteria for approval and ultimately we felt that the 1092 01:20:01,920 --> 01:20:05,260 regional planning and development trends that we've seen, specifically what I've pointed 1093 01:20:05,260 --> 01:20:11,480 out with the development of the outer loop, it does provide for us a need to develop this 1094 01:20:11,480 --> 01:20:15,820 area or to think at least critically a little bit about this area beyond the agricultural 1095 01:20:15,820 --> 01:20:20,880 use. We know that the demand is there. We know that the outer loop is coming and this 1096 01:20:20,880 --> 01:20:27,520 is sort of an opportunity for us as a city with this application to plan for this area. 1097 01:20:27,520 --> 01:20:32,480 Additionally, that master plan community flume would encourage or promote the consideration 1098 01:20:32,480 --> 01:20:37,400 of existing and proposed infrastructure both for this property as well as property surrounding 1099 01:20:37,400 --> 01:20:42,880 this area in both the city's limits and the city's ETJ where we have a responsibility 1100 01:20:42,880 --> 01:20:49,200 but again not land use control there. MPCs do encourage development of a mix of land 1101 01:20:49,200 --> 01:20:54,000 spaces in a way that includes the provision of additional public services and facilities 1102 01:20:54,000 --> 01:21:00,100 and as you'll see with the proposed plan development for this MPC or this proposed MPC this evening, 1103 01:21:00,100 --> 01:21:05,040 they do have a provision of some public community facilities, some open park spaces and things 1104 01:21:05,040 --> 01:21:13,600 that we wouldn't otherwise get with the agricultural designation or a residential development without 1105 01:21:13,600 --> 01:21:19,840 the PD. So with that, staff is recommending approval of the comprehensive plan amendment 1106 01:21:19,840 --> 01:21:26,400 as it does comply with the criteria and that is basically the conclusion of my presentation 1107 01:21:26,400 --> 01:21:32,680 for the comprehensive plan amendment piece. The next request is the mobility plan amendment. 1108 01:21:32,680 --> 01:21:41,720 The existing thoroughfare plan shows secondary arterials by east-west going through the property. 1109 01:21:41,720 --> 01:21:46,760 And the requested proposed thoroughfare plan would realign a portion, this portion highlighted 1110 01:21:46,760 --> 01:21:54,040 in green or circled in green, just south or slightly south to avoid a floodplain crossing 1111 01:21:54,040 --> 01:21:58,440 which I will show you on this map here. So as you can see there are existing environmentally 1112 01:21:58,440 --> 01:22:04,200 sensitive areas in this area mostly related to the floodplain and that east-west connection 1113 01:22:04,200 --> 01:22:09,920 crosses right through there. Similarly, that's that floodplain area, it crosses right through 1114 01:22:09,920 --> 01:22:16,200 there so ideally or the request in itself is to realign that east-west connection so 1115 01:22:16,200 --> 01:22:22,000 that a portion of it is south and you avoid sort of crossing the floodplain at the widest 1116 01:22:22,000 --> 01:22:27,400 point there. The mobility plan does allow for administrative approval of alignment deviations 1117 01:22:27,400 --> 01:22:33,540 up to 1,000 feet so typically staff and transportation team does have that discretion. In this case 1118 01:22:33,540 --> 01:22:37,560 where they are proposing to move it in order to completely avoid that floodplain, it does 1119 01:22:37,560 --> 01:22:47,160 have to go beyond 1,000 feet so they are requesting again just a shift for this section of that 1120 01:22:47,160 --> 01:22:53,960 alignment to the south to avoid that crossing. We likewise put this up against the criteria 1121 01:22:53,960 --> 01:22:58,920 for approval. Similarly, feel that the region planning efforts and development trends in 1122 01:22:58,920 --> 01:23:06,700 this area and with regard to the outer loop does serve a need to look at this roadway. 1123 01:23:06,700 --> 01:23:15,280 We do know that development is coming in this area and the consideration of the realignment 1124 01:23:15,280 --> 01:23:20,240 of this roadway considers the floodplain a need to minimize the disturbance of that area. 1125 01:23:20,240 --> 01:23:25,200 Ultimately, it also minimizes long-term maintenance costs for the city as this is one less bridge 1126 01:23:25,200 --> 01:23:30,560 that the city would have to take care of later on. With that staff is recommending approval 1127 01:23:30,560 --> 01:23:35,140 of the mobility plan amendment as it does meet our criteria for approval and that concludes 1128 01:23:35,140 --> 01:23:42,120 my portion of the mobility plan application this evening. 1129 01:23:42,120 --> 01:23:47,400 The next and last application is a rezoning to a plan development. Again, that existing 1130 01:23:47,400 --> 01:23:52,880 zoning is rural residential. The proposed zoning is a plan development with a base zoning 1131 01:23:52,880 --> 01:23:59,600 of R4, R7, mixed-use neighborhood and mixed-use regional. The property in itself and with 1132 01:23:59,600 --> 01:24:07,200 all of these phases is proposed to be developed over a course of about 20 years and that includes 1133 01:24:07,200 --> 01:24:14,180 the development of uses such as a mix of residential. I'll go through that mix in the next slide. 1134 01:24:14,180 --> 01:24:19,480 Some commercial spaces, some parks and open spaces, community facilities, public infrastructure 1135 01:24:19,480 --> 01:24:25,840 and public facilities as well. The proposed land use breakdown that's included in the 1136 01:24:25,840 --> 01:24:34,240 PD reflects about 1.3 million square feet of commercial space. The residential or proposed 1137 01:24:34,240 --> 01:24:40,400 residential units are broken up, ultimately giving an overall density of about 3.6 units 1138 01:24:40,400 --> 01:24:45,040 per acre. As far as single-family residential units, they are proposing to include just 1139 01:24:45,040 --> 01:24:53,040 over 7,000. Single-family residential units, 1,084 zero lot line or town home units and 1140 01:24:53,040 --> 01:24:59,640 within 1,015 multifamily units with the stipulation within the PD that those multifamily units 1141 01:24:59,640 --> 01:25:05,040 could be reallocated as zero lot line or town home units depending on the market and things 1142 01:25:05,040 --> 01:25:09,720 at that time. Just to give a little bit more flexibility and still allow the PD to have 1143 01:25:09,720 --> 01:25:16,040 the mix of housing, but it doesn't have to all be developed as multifamily. The caveat 1144 01:25:16,040 --> 01:25:23,280 is that the unit specified within the PD cannot be exceeded, so the maximum units that are 1145 01:25:23,280 --> 01:25:28,560 specified in there cannot be exceeded. As far as landscaping and screening, they are 1146 01:25:28,560 --> 01:25:33,960 proposing to require a six-foot tall solid masonry wall on any lot backing or siding 1147 01:25:33,960 --> 01:25:40,320 onto any arterial or collector. Additionally, they are requiring a masonry wrought iron 1148 01:25:40,320 --> 01:25:50,080 or tubular fence wall be constructed on areas backing to open space with a landscape buffer 1149 01:25:50,080 --> 01:25:56,800 if wrought iron is used. Then they are prohibiting residential fences within the front yard within 1150 01:25:56,800 --> 01:26:02,160 the development. For street cross-sections, they are proposing a slightly different or 1151 01:26:02,160 --> 01:26:07,880 not a slightly, they're proposing a more specified version of cross-sections within 1152 01:26:07,880 --> 01:26:14,080 this PD including landscaping medians and 10-foot wide side paths on both sides for 1153 01:26:14,080 --> 01:26:20,420 secondary arterials and collectors. In this case, they are meeting all of our right of 1154 01:26:20,420 --> 01:26:27,720 way dimensions that are provided for in our mobility plan. The only or the main differences 1155 01:26:27,720 --> 01:26:33,840 is just regarding the design. Then also within the collector, occasionally we allow for a 1156 01:26:33,840 --> 01:26:38,560 10-foot side path on one side and an 8-foot side path on one side. This would tie all 1157 01:26:38,560 --> 01:26:44,840 collectors to requiring a 10-foot wide side path on both sides of the collector. As far 1158 01:26:44,840 --> 01:26:51,040 as community facilities, the property is proposing about 360 total acres of park land, 181 of 1159 01:26:51,040 --> 01:26:57,280 those are outside of the flood plain. This includes four amenity centers and approximately 1160 01:26:57,280 --> 01:27:05,480 13.5 miles of public trails. They are proposing to reserve some land for Denton ISD and Sanger 1161 01:27:05,480 --> 01:27:10,040 ISD schools. Of course, the development and construction of those will be in coordination 1162 01:27:10,040 --> 01:27:19,200 with those schools. They're also proposing to construct or reserve land for public facilities 1163 01:27:19,200 --> 01:27:25,200 specifically to Denton public safety facilities and those will be joint police and fire facilities 1164 01:27:25,200 --> 01:27:32,080 as well as the construction of infrastructure to serve this development. Additionally or 1165 01:27:32,080 --> 01:27:36,520 lastly they are proposing some special sign standards that would ultimately allow for 1166 01:27:36,520 --> 01:27:43,480 unique monument type of signs to identify the Craver Ranch development. Those would 1167 01:27:43,480 --> 01:27:52,400 be no larger than 150 square feet in sign area and no higher than 20 feet. That includes 1168 01:27:52,400 --> 01:27:59,400 like any monument, any sort of fancy waterfalls. I've seen a lot of interesting residential 1169 01:27:59,400 --> 01:28:05,720 subdivision signs that they could propose in this case and this would allow for those 1170 01:28:05,720 --> 01:28:14,800 to occur. With this request, we put up against the criteria for approval. Again, that regional 1171 01:28:14,800 --> 01:28:23,000 impact of the outer loop and the development inquiries around that regional improvements 1172 01:28:23,000 --> 01:28:28,520 is top of mind for staff in this case. The PD in itself also is a development plan that 1173 01:28:28,520 --> 01:28:33,600 considers the floodplain and ESA and minimizes the disturbance of those areas. It plans around 1174 01:28:33,600 --> 01:28:40,840 them and it preserves them for parks and open spaces in other case. The proposal does include 1175 01:28:40,840 --> 01:28:44,920 that mix of housing which helps reach the city's goal for housing needs with regard 1176 01:28:44,920 --> 01:28:50,880 to demand and housing type as it offers both single family residential and town homes so 1177 01:28:50,880 --> 01:28:57,920 they attach and detached style, housing types for all markets in size. The PD also proposes 1178 01:28:57,920 --> 01:29:03,840 development over 20 year plan, proposing a rational phasing plan in this case starting 1179 01:29:03,840 --> 01:29:13,280 most likely at the southeast corner and then expanding northeast, northwest. Also the PD 1180 01:29:13,280 --> 01:29:17,440 requires the construction of amenities and public facilities to support the proposed 1181 01:29:17,440 --> 01:29:23,240 density. They are proposing to dedicate park space and park land in excess of what we would 1182 01:29:23,240 --> 01:29:29,240 typically require I believe for this area. Again, you saw the community facilities and 1183 01:29:29,240 --> 01:29:36,280 things that are being proposed, all intended to provide an amenity no further than a 10 1184 01:29:36,280 --> 01:29:43,800 minute walk from every residence that they provide within this community. We sent out 1185 01:29:43,800 --> 01:29:52,160 public notifications for this case, the comprehensive plan, the mobility plan as well as the PD. 1186 01:29:52,160 --> 01:29:56,800 Up until I think maybe the signs were posted this past weekend, we hadn't really received 1187 01:29:56,800 --> 01:30:02,520 much feedback in opposition or in favor of the proposal. Just this week, we received 1188 01:30:02,520 --> 01:30:12,480 a few e-comments and three written comments in response in opposition to the proposals. 1189 01:30:12,480 --> 01:30:16,760 The applicant did hold two neighborhood meetings. It's my understanding that it was largely 1190 01:30:16,760 --> 01:30:21,360 attended by members or residents and property owners in the ETJ and their concerns were 1191 01:30:21,360 --> 01:30:29,060 more so related to the impacts to their property with regard to the mobility plan alignments 1192 01:30:29,060 --> 01:30:36,160 and things of that nature. With that, staff is recommending approval of the rezoning request 1193 01:30:36,160 --> 01:30:39,920 contingent upon the approval of the comprehensive plan amendment and mobility plan amendment 1194 01:30:39,920 --> 01:30:45,240 in this case. The PD is consistent with a master plan community future land use designation 1195 01:30:45,240 --> 01:30:50,480 and the realignment of the mobility plan or the portion of the mobility plan thoroughfare 1196 01:30:50,480 --> 01:30:58,840 map that secondary arterial would be needed for the PD to move forward as well. That pretty 1197 01:30:58,840 --> 01:31:05,560 much concludes my presentation. Just a reminder slide to let you guys know that this is three 1198 01:31:05,560 --> 01:31:11,640 items. That comprehensive plan amendment is to go from agricultural future land use designation 1199 01:31:11,640 --> 01:31:15,920 to master plan community future land use designation. The mobility plan amendment is to realign 1200 01:31:15,920 --> 01:31:20,800 a portion of the proposed east-west secondary arterial south of the flood plain. Everything 1201 01:31:20,800 --> 01:31:26,080 else is staying the same with regard to classification and things of that nature. Then the zoning 1202 01:31:26,080 --> 01:31:31,720 change is a change request from rural residential to a plan development with all those base 1203 01:31:31,720 --> 01:31:38,360 zoning districts and those details of the PD that I mentioned throughout the presentation. 1204 01:31:38,360 --> 01:31:42,080 That concludes my presentation. At this time, I will happily answer any questions you have. 1205 01:31:42,080 --> 01:31:49,880 Thank you, Mia. Do we have any questions from the commission before we hear from the public 1206 01:31:49,880 --> 01:31:58,920 of staff? Just to clarify again and to say again, I'm hearing that staff is recommending 1207 01:31:58,920 --> 01:32:11,880 approval of all these three proposals. Thank you. Another point for you, just procedural, 1208 01:32:11,880 --> 01:32:19,760 are we thinking ... Do we need a motion to table these proposals? It's always within 1209 01:32:19,760 --> 01:32:28,800 order in Robert's rules to make a motion for that. My hope is that we can hear from 1210 01:32:28,800 --> 01:32:34,880 members of the public who would like to speak since it was posted on the agenda, and then 1211 01:32:34,880 --> 01:32:41,440 we can get to the motion after that. Thank you, Chair Pruitt. 1212 01:32:41,440 --> 01:32:52,240 Any other questions of staff? Just a couple, Mia. One, on the notification, can you go 1213 01:32:52,240 --> 01:33:01,960 back to the notification slide? My understanding is our practice is to notify within the city 1214 01:33:01,960 --> 01:33:11,840 limits for the 200 foot, and then the 500 foot is by utility addresses, but we don't 1215 01:33:11,840 --> 01:33:21,920 actually serve this area from an electrical perspective. Can you explain what notifications 1216 01:33:21,920 --> 01:33:29,600 went out? There is a list of addresses. I will need to check to confirm where we pulled 1217 01:33:29,600 --> 01:33:34,680 those from, but there is a list of 500 foot property courtesy notifications that we sent 1218 01:33:34,680 --> 01:33:39,800 out. I believe some of those were received by members of the ETJ. 1219 01:33:39,800 --> 01:33:44,480 Do you have additional information on that? Yes. Good evening, Commission. Charlie Rosendahl, 1220 01:33:44,480 --> 01:33:48,760 Interim Director of Development Services. We send out notifications. GI staff pulls 1221 01:33:48,760 --> 01:33:56,200 a list together, 200 foot to property owners based on the latest DCAD parcel rule, and 1222 01:33:56,200 --> 01:34:03,040 then 500 foot goes out to the resident, which is the address within 500 feet, as well as 1223 01:34:03,040 --> 01:34:10,600 any utility address within 500 feet. Okay. One is just addressed to resident at the address? 1224 01:34:10,600 --> 01:34:16,040 Yes. That's the 500 foot postcard. Do we send those notifications to addresses 1225 01:34:16,040 --> 01:34:18,920 that are not in the city limits, or is it just the city limits? 1226 01:34:18,920 --> 01:34:23,000 For this one, we pulled addresses within the ETJ as well. 1227 01:34:23,000 --> 01:34:27,760 Thank you. That answers my question, because I thought our normal practice was just within 1228 01:34:27,760 --> 01:34:31,600 the city, and since this parcel is surrounded by ETJ. 1229 01:34:31,600 --> 01:34:35,440 200 foot is just within city limits, because it has to be based on the city's tax rule. 1230 01:34:35,440 --> 01:34:40,080 Okay. But the 500 foot that we did included ETJ addresses. 1231 01:34:40,080 --> 01:34:51,200 Yes. I believe for this project it did. Okay. Thank you. Then my second question, Mia. First 1232 01:34:51,200 --> 01:34:57,520 of all, I appreciate staff getting the fiscal report finished in time to send out with the 1233 01:34:57,520 --> 01:35:03,160 agenda last week. That report, as well as the comprehensive plan when it talks about 1234 01:35:03,160 --> 01:35:09,200 doing fiscal analysis, says this report aims to provide city leadership with a framework 1235 01:35:09,200 --> 01:35:20,440 for understanding the fiscal implications of the proposed expansion and for sharing or 1236 01:35:20,440 --> 01:35:29,320 shaping negotiations with the developer. I guess my question is, in this case, did the 1237 01:35:29,320 --> 01:35:36,000 fiscal analysis shape the discussions between staff and the developer in how that works? 1238 01:35:36,000 --> 01:35:39,600 I'll leave that to Charlie. I think the discussions with the developer did shape the proposals 1239 01:35:39,600 --> 01:35:43,800 in the PD, but I'll leave to Charlie on the fiscal impact analysis shaping those discussions 1240 01:35:43,800 --> 01:35:48,740 before. Okay. Thank you. 1241 01:35:48,740 --> 01:35:53,520 One of the considerations when this item was first brought forward was the fiscal impact. 1242 01:35:53,520 --> 01:35:59,060 We have been working with a consulting firm called AECOM to do the fiscal impact analysis 1243 01:35:59,060 --> 01:36:05,480 to see what the impact is to the city of Denton. When we did get the initial impact, we did 1244 01:36:05,480 --> 01:36:09,920 look at things like one of the items that it's included is a land contribution for 1245 01:36:09,920 --> 01:36:17,680 a future public works facility. In the negotiations with this developer in the development agreement, 1246 01:36:17,680 --> 01:36:22,280 that item has been included, including a number of other items. 1247 01:36:22,280 --> 01:36:30,080 Okay. Just from my understanding and the board, I'm assuming that came out before the agenda 1248 01:36:30,080 --> 01:36:35,600 was posted, because I hadn't seen the fiscal analysis before then. You're saying you had 1249 01:36:35,600 --> 01:36:40,080 a copy of it. How far back did you receive that copy? 1250 01:36:40,080 --> 01:36:46,120 We received a preliminary analysis from AECOM prior to the work sessions that were completed 1251 01:36:46,120 --> 01:36:50,560 last month or the month before. Okay. So about five, six weeks ago, something 1252 01:36:50,560 --> 01:36:51,560 like that. Yeah. 1253 01:36:51,560 --> 01:36:52,560 Yeah. Okay. Thank you. 1254 01:36:52,560 --> 01:36:57,360 Yeah. We received it ahead of that work session. I just want to be clear, not just at the work 1255 01:36:57,360 --> 01:37:05,720 session. Okay. Thank you. I don't see any other questions. 1256 01:37:05,720 --> 01:37:12,160 This is a public hearing that I've opened, like we stated before, because our rules of 1257 01:37:12,160 --> 01:37:22,280 order state that residents may speak one time at a public hearing. If this ends up getting 1258 01:37:22,280 --> 01:37:27,520 continued to next month, then you would have the opportunity to speak tonight if you would 1259 01:37:27,520 --> 01:37:35,320 like, and then you would have the opportunity to come back if you didn't speak when it's 1260 01:37:35,320 --> 01:37:42,600 continued, if that does happen. That same rules of procedure, I believe, applies to 1261 01:37:42,600 --> 01:37:51,440 the applicant, speaking as well. Is that valid? Great. That's a great question. So buried within 1262 01:37:51,440 --> 01:37:56,920 our chapter two of the code of ordinances, we do have a public hearing procedure that 1263 01:37:56,920 --> 01:38:06,360 talks about initial presentations and ability to rebut, and subject to thoughtful determination 1264 01:38:06,360 --> 01:38:14,160 rather than legal advice on the dais. My thought is that if the applicant's proposal changes 1265 01:38:14,160 --> 01:38:19,440 in a material way, that it would be appropriate for them to have another presentation period 1266 01:38:19,440 --> 01:38:30,760 to explain that and that members of the public would then get a fresh comment period to respond. 1267 01:38:30,760 --> 01:38:36,640 If the project does not change, I think that what you initially stated would be correct 1268 01:38:36,640 --> 01:38:43,000 that the applicant has presented once, the public has commented once, and anyone who 1269 01:38:43,000 --> 01:38:50,760 hasn't commented would be welcome to at that subsequent meeting. Okay. Thank you for that. 1270 01:38:50,760 --> 01:38:55,160 I think I understand that. I'm going to say it again just so that you can make sure I 1271 01:38:55,160 --> 01:39:05,440 understand and maybe everybody else can understand. And that is that if no material change in 1272 01:39:05,440 --> 01:39:14,840 the proposal happens between now and when this item is continued until, if it's continued, 1273 01:39:14,840 --> 01:39:19,800 then what I said previously is correct. So both the applicant and members of the public 1274 01:39:19,800 --> 01:39:26,340 could either speak tonight or wait until it's continued and come back and speak. However, 1275 01:39:26,340 --> 01:39:37,020 if there is a material change to the application, then by making that change, both the applicant 1276 01:39:37,020 --> 01:39:42,960 would be able to speak a second time as well as the members of the public. Correct. Okay. 1277 01:39:42,960 --> 01:39:49,520 Are we on board? Thank you. So with that, it is a public hearing, so if the applicant 1278 01:39:49,520 --> 01:40:02,400 would like to speak, you may with those things explained. Thank you for your patience. If 1279 01:40:02,400 --> 01:40:10,920 you could state your name and address, you'll have 20 minutes combined between different 1280 01:40:10,920 --> 01:40:16,080 members of the applicant representative. Good evening, Chairman, commissioners. My name 1281 01:40:16,080 --> 01:40:22,080 is Alexa Knight, one with Dakey Law, 322 West Walnut, Salina. Apologize for the confusion. 1282 01:40:22,080 --> 01:40:25,680 There was just a lot of that we could hear on the TV. There were a lot of questions with 1283 01:40:25,680 --> 01:40:31,560 the commission, and so that's the reason why we asked for the tabling. But knowing your 1284 01:40:31,560 --> 01:40:34,840 interest in hearing the public and having everybody's here this evening, we'd like to 1285 01:40:34,840 --> 01:40:42,960 just go ahead and proceed. So please disregard the tabling comments. So with that, I'm going 1286 01:40:42,960 --> 01:41:08,240 to close the meeting. Good evening again. We have our entire development team here this 1287 01:41:08,240 --> 01:41:11,360 evening, so if there are any questions after this, which it sounds like there'll be quite 1288 01:41:11,360 --> 01:41:18,880 a few, with regard to finances, engineering, planning, or traffic, we have all the professionals 1289 01:41:18,880 --> 01:41:24,480 here. They'll be able to answer your questions. So I'd like to get started. This is a map 1290 01:41:24,480 --> 01:41:30,160 of the course of aerial of the city of Denton, and the red dash line represents your city 1291 01:41:30,160 --> 01:41:35,860 limits. The yellow star represents the 2,500 acres master plan community that we're calling 1292 01:41:35,860 --> 01:41:42,120 Craver Ranch development. Why is this important? It's a 2,500 acre master plan community. It's 1293 01:41:42,120 --> 01:41:46,640 one of the largest contiguous areas owned by a single entity remaining within the city 1294 01:41:46,640 --> 01:41:52,760 of limits. What that does for you as a municipality is to be able to, the land mass right there 1295 01:41:52,760 --> 01:41:57,960 in and of itself, and the single developer that you're able to negotiate with, you're 1296 01:41:57,960 --> 01:42:02,960 much easier to be able to plan cohesively versus if this came in piecemeal. If you had 1297 01:42:02,960 --> 01:42:09,160 25, 100 acre applications, it's much harder to get what you want from a planning perspective 1298 01:42:09,160 --> 01:42:15,520 done. So that being said, the 2,500 acres once built out would be a $5.1 billion assessed 1299 01:42:15,520 --> 01:42:19,840 value project. It's going to be a well appointed and planned and monetized community with trail 1300 01:42:19,840 --> 01:42:24,740 systems, public parks, open space, those are different here in the city of Denton, as you 1301 01:42:24,740 --> 01:42:29,880 well know, community centers, public schools, supporting retail, fire, police stations. 1302 01:42:29,880 --> 01:42:34,480 The proposed alignment is shown on this plan. We've heard from staff with regard to that. 1303 01:42:34,480 --> 01:42:40,120 We know that the intersection at Milam Road there on I-35 is a connecting point, so that 1304 01:42:40,120 --> 01:42:48,320 makes this southern route the route that the outer loop would take. If it was easy, anyone 1305 01:42:48,320 --> 01:42:53,960 could do it, right? But it's not. There's a lot that goes with regard to planning. The 1306 01:42:53,960 --> 01:42:57,840 developers spent two years to this point just to get us here tonight. And obviously tonight 1307 01:42:57,840 --> 01:43:01,800 with the question of tabling, we thought that perhaps there was even more questions. But 1308 01:43:01,800 --> 01:43:04,720 we feel confident in the presentation and the material that we have this evening to 1309 01:43:04,720 --> 01:43:09,240 be able to take you to the place where you can support the three different applications 1310 01:43:09,240 --> 01:43:14,680 that we have before you. So it started back in two years ago with the planning purposes, 1311 01:43:14,680 --> 01:43:20,120 but we came to city council. Your city council approved the creation of an MMD along with 1312 01:43:20,120 --> 01:43:25,040 an operating agreement and a project agreement. That is what we've been working on with staff 1313 01:43:25,040 --> 01:43:31,880 for the past year, then our government passed legislation to allow for that MMD to become. 1314 01:43:31,880 --> 01:43:37,120 So that is the fiscal ability for us to be able to create a master plan community like 1315 01:43:37,120 --> 01:43:43,080 this because you can't just go through 2,500 acres of development without something like 1316 01:43:43,080 --> 01:43:48,280 that. So after that happened, then that was when we were able to come in with our zoning 1317 01:43:48,280 --> 01:43:52,680 case. And because of our zoning case, we have a comp plan amendment that Mia went through 1318 01:43:52,680 --> 01:43:56,360 and the thoroughfare plan amendments, all three dovetail together, all three of which 1319 01:43:56,360 --> 01:44:03,000 we will be voting on this evening. This is the city of Denton. It is not easy. Your staff 1320 01:44:03,000 --> 01:44:08,400 has worked diligently with us. They have turned over every single stone we feel. We've had 1321 01:44:08,400 --> 01:44:15,400 a thorough analysis of the different applications included in that additional studies. We have 1322 01:44:15,400 --> 01:44:19,880 the drainage study. We have the environmental assessment study that was done. We invited 1323 01:44:19,880 --> 01:44:24,580 in and hosted staff out onto the property so that they could walk the property and ask 1324 01:44:24,580 --> 01:44:29,560 any sort of questions, see it for themselves, understand what is out there. Additionally, 1325 01:44:29,560 --> 01:44:35,320 environmental staff went out a secondary time. The ranch hand took them through the site 1326 01:44:35,320 --> 01:44:38,760 and they were able to concentrate. They had some questions with regard to the western 1327 01:44:38,760 --> 01:44:45,240 portion of the floodplain. As Ms. Hines represented that we held two neighborhood meetings, there 1328 01:44:45,240 --> 01:44:48,960 were different people that came to each one. It wasn't the same people coming to the same 1329 01:44:48,960 --> 01:44:54,600 two both meetings, so that was a good information session for everybody. In addition, we had 1330 01:44:54,600 --> 01:44:59,640 the traffic assessment study. This is beyond the typical TIA, which will be coming forward 1331 01:44:59,640 --> 01:45:06,400 with each phase of development. This request was specifically for the city engineers asking 1332 01:45:06,400 --> 01:45:12,400 Westwood Engineering to run the city's traffic demand model. That's something that's a 48-hour 1333 01:45:12,400 --> 01:45:17,800 turnaround each time that they run those things. That's also not a... That's not an insignificant 1334 01:45:17,800 --> 01:45:22,920 engineering analysis. Okay, so our first application that we have 1335 01:45:22,920 --> 01:45:30,080 into you is the Comp Plan Amendment. As you've seen, the Feature Land Use Plan, or FLAM actually, 1336 01:45:30,080 --> 01:45:37,520 is up before you. Let's start from the beginning. Sound planning takes time, and the city has 1337 01:45:37,520 --> 01:45:44,880 been in that process. They started by involuntary annexing this acreage back in 2008 and 2009, 1338 01:45:44,880 --> 01:45:54,100 and voluntarily annexed. In 2018, the water distribution system was updated for additional 1339 01:45:54,100 --> 01:46:01,040 demand within this area. The 2022 thoroughfare plan also reflects three secondary arterials 1340 01:46:01,040 --> 01:46:09,920 with which times went through. Each one carries 29,000 trips per day. That is not for agricultural 1341 01:46:09,920 --> 01:46:15,480 land use. That's moving people. That's moving vehicles. The city has been planning for that 1342 01:46:15,480 --> 01:46:22,560 growth. In your backup material, we provided information from RSI. T. Wilson will be speaking 1343 01:46:22,560 --> 01:46:29,320 this evening about Dr. Perryman's economic report also. We also discussed it in our workshop 1344 01:46:29,320 --> 01:46:37,080 with you all. Growth is coming. It's expensive to run a business and to live on the coasts. 1345 01:46:37,080 --> 01:46:41,320 Business has always been open for business. We've been inviting businesses to come here, 1346 01:46:41,320 --> 01:46:47,440 so that growth has come and is continuing to come. You will have read in your RSI study 1347 01:46:47,440 --> 01:46:55,040 that the supply is less than at equilibrium, so that means that the housing stock is not 1348 01:46:55,040 --> 01:47:01,880 there. As I said, planning doesn't happen overnight. It's taking two years just to get 1349 01:47:01,880 --> 01:47:07,360 to this point. Once the zoning gets approved, then we have to go through all the iterations 1350 01:47:07,360 --> 01:47:11,280 of the traffic studies, the environmental studies, the civil engineering associated 1351 01:47:11,280 --> 01:47:17,640 with each section. You need time to be able to plan for this. It's not like it's just 1352 01:47:17,640 --> 01:47:23,400 going to happen tomorrow. The DFW region has seen the substantial growth as I mentioned 1353 01:47:23,400 --> 01:47:29,200 northward into Collin and Denton counties. As was mentioned, TxDOT is responding to 1354 01:47:29,200 --> 01:47:35,920 this growth by studying and preparing for that regional outer loop. This amendment to 1355 01:47:35,920 --> 01:47:41,040 bring the future land use plan into alignment with all of the city's planning that they've 1356 01:47:41,040 --> 01:47:46,200 done to date. The second application that's before you is a thoroughfare plan. It's a 1357 01:47:46,200 --> 01:47:53,240 mobility plan amendment. This one shows the city's thoroughfare plan in the upper quadrant, 1358 01:47:53,240 --> 01:47:57,400 and you see the green dashed lines. Again, those are those secondary arterials, which 1359 01:47:57,400 --> 01:48:03,760 carry 29,000 trips per day. The only deviation that we have here, because your code does 1360 01:48:03,760 --> 01:48:09,620 allow for 1,000-foot deviation within where it's shown on the thoroughfare plan, is that 1361 01:48:09,620 --> 01:48:15,040 small section that's in orange. That's the only deviation. The reason being that we are 1362 01:48:15,040 --> 01:48:20,480 asking for that, as you can see the green line, is the thoroughfare plan shows it going 1363 01:48:20,480 --> 01:48:27,200 directly through the floodplain and environmental sensitive area. This is the reason why we 1364 01:48:27,200 --> 01:48:31,560 were asking for that variance. From an engineering perspective, you want to cross that floodplain 1365 01:48:31,560 --> 01:48:37,400 in the environmental area at 90 degrees and try to minimize that location. This picture 1366 01:48:37,400 --> 01:48:43,280 was taken when staff was actually out on the site with us. Again, it's the beauty of this 1367 01:48:43,280 --> 01:48:48,640 sort of thing that you wouldn't want to bring that roadway horizontally through that floodplain 1368 01:48:48,640 --> 01:48:53,760 and environmentally sensitive area. The third and final application that's before you this 1369 01:48:53,760 --> 01:48:59,000 evening with regard to this master plan is the zoning. We're taking it from RR, which 1370 01:48:59,000 --> 01:49:03,920 is a placeholder when it was involuntarily annexed back in 2008, and we're taking it 1371 01:49:03,920 --> 01:49:10,320 to a planned development. Something of this size needs to have a PD on it. You wouldn't 1372 01:49:10,320 --> 01:49:17,840 want to just do a cohesive R4 zoning, because that allows the flexibility and the planning 1373 01:49:17,840 --> 01:49:22,800 over the next 20 years as this comes through. As was also mentioned, the majority of our 1374 01:49:22,800 --> 01:49:27,800 neighbors are within the city ETJ. Anything that's green on this map reflects the land 1375 01:49:27,800 --> 01:49:34,480 that is actually in the city limits. A master plan community provides a fabric of land use 1376 01:49:34,480 --> 01:49:40,880 within the community and allows transitioning of densities. We have over 7,000 single family 1377 01:49:40,880 --> 01:49:46,380 homes, over a thousand townhome and zero lot lines. Since our workshop that we had with 1378 01:49:46,380 --> 01:49:53,000 you a few weeks back, we heard you and we reduced our multifamily units by 500, so that 1379 01:49:53,000 --> 01:50:01,200 of this magnitude and this size, that reference is probably only three multifamily housing 1380 01:50:01,200 --> 01:50:06,800 units or developments within this 2,500 acres. We'll also have two elementary schools, one 1381 01:50:06,800 --> 01:50:13,320 for Sanger and one for Denton ISD and one Denton middle school. Again, the quality master 1382 01:50:13,320 --> 01:50:19,280 plan community, which will have trail systems, which I'll go through in a second, will link 1383 01:50:19,280 --> 01:50:25,880 each individual home with the pocket parks throughout and really be a green and heavily 1384 01:50:25,880 --> 01:50:31,080 amenitized community. Something that we took for granted, the development team, because 1385 01:50:31,080 --> 01:50:37,240 we do this on a daily basis, is not recognizing the longevity of a project like this. At its 1386 01:50:37,240 --> 01:50:41,120 best, you're looking at a 20 year build out. This is not something that's going to be plopped 1387 01:50:41,120 --> 01:50:45,120 on the ground and all this infrastructure is going to be developed. That's the worst 1388 01:50:45,120 --> 01:50:48,720 thing you can do from a civil engineering perspective is build all the roadways, all 1389 01:50:48,720 --> 01:50:52,920 the infrastructure and have nobody using it. You want to phase it. That's the best for 1390 01:50:52,920 --> 01:50:58,920 your infrastructure. Within this plan, we show multiple phases with a 20 year build 1391 01:50:58,920 --> 01:51:04,640 out, taking us to 2040, a variety of residential products offered to encourage people to stay 1392 01:51:04,640 --> 01:51:08,720 within the community while their economic standing evolves. You might be young right 1393 01:51:08,720 --> 01:51:14,520 out of college. You might only be in a zero lot line home or perhaps an apartment up to 1394 01:51:14,520 --> 01:51:21,320 having something, a much larger lot, a yard space, dog family, what have you. I'm just 1395 01:51:21,320 --> 01:51:24,380 going to run through these architectural product types. These are the same that you saw in 1396 01:51:24,380 --> 01:51:29,340 the workshop, but these are representative of what the different lot sizes and product 1397 01:51:29,340 --> 01:51:33,080 types that could be developed out here. This is the town home and live work, so more of 1398 01:51:33,080 --> 01:51:38,720 the urban, something future, not something day one by any means. Also some of the neighborhood 1399 01:51:38,720 --> 01:51:46,160 commercial perspectives. This is the land contribution plan. This is another reason 1400 01:51:46,160 --> 01:51:51,760 why you have a bird in the hand with this developer. Again, you have the 2,500 acres 1401 01:51:51,760 --> 01:51:56,200 and you have a single developer that you have the opportunity to negotiate all of these 1402 01:51:56,200 --> 01:52:02,840 things. That is what your staff has done working with us on this project over the past year. 1403 01:52:02,840 --> 01:52:11,440 This is a green and heavily amenitized park land open space plan. Out of the 2,500 acres, 1404 01:52:11,440 --> 01:52:17,360 we have over 463 acres of combined green space or open space. That excludes the additional 1405 01:52:17,360 --> 01:52:22,720 trails and the neighborhood parks. The planners have not had the opportunity to plan out each 1406 01:52:22,720 --> 01:52:27,360 individual phase and within each one of those, there will have neighborhood parks associated 1407 01:52:27,360 --> 01:52:34,480 with that. A reminder that your code only requires us to dedicate 67 acres of parkland, 1408 01:52:34,480 --> 01:52:41,080 so clearly we are well over that amount. In addition, what the developer is giving are 1409 01:52:41,080 --> 01:52:47,880 two fire stations at six acres. City parkland is over 360 acres. The trail system to date 1410 01:52:47,880 --> 01:52:53,540 is only 13 and a half miles. It will definitely increase as, again, those planners are able 1411 01:52:53,540 --> 01:52:59,480 to plan out each one of these phases. In addition, there is right of way for the water line transmission 1412 01:52:59,480 --> 01:53:05,080 that will be running east and west through this area, elevated water storage tank and 1413 01:53:05,080 --> 01:53:14,920 a donation of two school sites. All of that takes land. That has been donated by the developer. 1414 01:53:14,920 --> 01:53:20,600 Just so it puts you in perspective for you, I needed this myself. What does 338 acres 1415 01:53:20,600 --> 01:53:27,240 represent? Well, that's equivalent of almost 256 football fields put together, so quite 1416 01:53:27,240 --> 01:53:34,800 a large area. Again, we have ponds within that central park area as you see here. These 1417 01:53:34,800 --> 01:53:40,200 are examples of trail heads that we'll have along the trail system. This just represents 1418 01:53:40,200 --> 01:53:45,360 that we are meeting and exceeding the city code with regard to all the circles represent 1419 01:53:45,360 --> 01:53:51,600 the half mile radius that's required of each one of the homes. The benefit of this master 1420 01:53:51,600 --> 01:53:56,360 plan community is a benefit for really for all. It's for the city, it's for the surrounding 1421 01:53:56,360 --> 01:54:01,680 community and it's for the developer. Once you have a master plan community, you know 1422 01:54:01,680 --> 01:54:07,500 what you're getting. You have the 2,500 acres, you have a development plan that's associated 1423 01:54:07,500 --> 01:54:12,760 with that zoning case, and so everyone can feel comfortable about what's coming down 1424 01:54:12,760 --> 01:54:18,560 the pike. Again, it's one of the large continuous property owners with a single ownership, and 1425 01:54:18,560 --> 01:54:30,320 it's a well thought out and designed master plan which has not only the district maintaining 1426 01:54:30,320 --> 01:54:36,600 the parkland, but also HOA opportunity to be maintaining that green space also. Heavy 1427 01:54:36,600 --> 01:54:41,800 on the green space, and most importantly is self-funded by this MMD. It's not the city 1428 01:54:41,800 --> 01:54:48,880 having to fund for this infrastructure. Again, in capping at build out, it's a $5.1 billion 1429 01:54:48,880 --> 01:54:54,400 total assessed value with $1.2 billion in dent and tax revenue. That's not discussing 1430 01:54:54,400 --> 01:54:59,740 the city and what happens with the school districts also. Funding contributions in addition 1431 01:54:59,740 --> 01:55:05,960 to the land is $7.5 million. $3 million is to affordable housing. $2 million is for an 1432 01:55:05,960 --> 01:55:12,600 offsite public works facility for the region, not just for this project, and then $2.5 million 1433 01:55:12,600 --> 01:55:20,080 towards police and fire services. On top of that, the developer will be granting land, 1434 01:55:20,080 --> 01:55:26,600 six acres of fire stations, the 360 acres for parkland, the 13.5 mile trail system, 1435 01:55:26,600 --> 01:55:33,320 and easements for the water transmission line, elevated storage tank, and also $16 million 1436 01:55:33,320 --> 01:55:37,560 worth of offsite wastewater. So that's all I have this evening, but I'd like to have, 1437 01:55:37,560 --> 01:55:43,640 we also have T. Wilson that will be coming up. Zoe Thompson will be coming up to speak 1438 01:55:43,640 --> 01:55:56,400 on behalf of Dr. Ray Perryman's economic study. Sure. Thank you. Good evening, chair and commissioners. 1439 01:55:56,400 --> 01:56:02,440 Zoe Thompson with T. Wilson. We're a financial consultant for the developer. Thank you, Alexa, 1440 01:56:02,440 --> 01:56:09,520 and thank you, Seth, for your wonderful presentations and for the concise but really well done summary 1441 01:56:09,520 --> 01:56:17,440 of all of the work that has gone into this project over the past two years. As a result 1442 01:56:17,440 --> 01:56:26,320 of all of this, sorry, all of the benefit and all of the work that has gone in, we wanted 1443 01:56:26,320 --> 01:56:34,200 to quantify it. We wanted to say this is more than just an assessed, thank you, this is 1444 01:56:34,200 --> 01:56:39,680 more than just assessed value that we're adding to Denton. We're adding secondary tertiary 1445 01:56:39,680 --> 01:56:44,720 impacts. We're adding jobs. There's going to be more spending and so much more activity 1446 01:56:44,720 --> 01:56:52,440 in business that will result from this development. And so how do we quantify that? It's hard 1447 01:56:52,440 --> 01:57:01,200 to quantify 350 acres. It's hard to quantify how great of an impact that a development 1448 01:57:01,200 --> 01:57:07,520 of this scale has on a community. So we went to the best economists that we could find. 1449 01:57:07,520 --> 01:57:13,960 Ray Perryman has over 40 years of experience in the industry and he has a PhD from Rice 1450 01:57:13,960 --> 01:57:19,360 University. And then we asked him to prepare the economic and fiscal impact analysis that 1451 01:57:19,360 --> 01:57:25,460 shows just the gross benefit. He looked not only at assessed value and tax benefits but 1452 01:57:25,460 --> 01:57:30,880 also at the total expenditures, the total additional dollars that would change hands 1453 01:57:30,880 --> 01:57:36,360 as a result of this development, the total gross product, goods and services that would 1454 01:57:36,360 --> 01:57:42,360 come, the total increase in personal income of employees in the community, in the city 1455 01:57:42,360 --> 01:57:49,000 of Denton and surrounding it, and also the jobs that would come as a result of this community. 1456 01:57:49,000 --> 01:57:54,520 So some of these things are mentioned here on this slide. But this is going to be a catalyst 1457 01:57:54,520 --> 01:58:02,160 for growth for Denton, a catalyst for not just growth but for additional economic activity. 1458 01:58:02,160 --> 01:58:06,400 And so in the words of Ray Perryman, Craver Ranch should be an excellent addition to the 1459 01:58:06,400 --> 01:58:11,120 local economy, both from the activity it will generate as well as its role in supporting 1460 01:58:11,120 --> 01:58:17,780 residents and commercial resources consistent with anticipated growth in the area. You know, 1461 01:58:17,780 --> 01:58:24,920 in the analysis, he states that this area, the Metroplex here, is one of the third fastest 1462 01:58:24,920 --> 01:58:34,120 growing Metroplexes. So as Alexis said, growth is coming. And this project, there's so much, 1463 01:58:34,120 --> 01:58:39,040 you know, the Parkland, so much thought, so much time that has gone into it that will 1464 01:58:39,040 --> 01:58:45,440 ultimately meet the growth that is coming to Denton in a way that is uniform, in a way 1465 01:58:45,440 --> 01:58:51,160 that, you know, you can do with 2,500 acres that you can't do with other things. And, 1466 01:58:51,160 --> 01:58:57,280 you know, it's going to have temporary benefits during the construction period, as noted here, 1467 01:58:57,280 --> 01:59:04,480 50 million in temporary tax benefits during the construction period, including sales, 1468 01:59:04,480 --> 01:59:09,980 also 30,800 drops for the city of Denton alone, some additional drops outside of the city 1469 01:59:09,980 --> 01:59:18,160 during the construction period, but also permanent benefits after, you know, cumulative 18.2 1470 01:59:18,160 --> 01:59:26,520 billion in gross product and, you know, permanent tax benefits of 38.6 million for the city 1471 01:59:26,520 --> 01:59:34,440 of Denton. So this, you know, the impact study, Ray Berryman, he just kind of wanted to represent 1472 01:59:34,440 --> 01:59:38,480 that this product is more than just buildings and more than just land that we're giving 1473 01:59:38,480 --> 01:59:43,640 to the city of Denton, but it's going to spur economic activity that enhances the quality 1474 01:59:43,640 --> 01:59:48,520 of life for the community, for the city of Denton, but also at the regional level and 1475 01:59:48,520 --> 01:59:53,720 the state level. And that was the findings in the analysis. So just wanted to summarize 1476 01:59:53,720 --> 01:59:56,560 that for you all. 1477 01:59:56,560 --> 02:00:01,760 Thank you. Is that it for your presentation? 1478 02:00:01,760 --> 02:00:06,920 Yes, sir. And we have slides to answer any questions. And, of course, everybody else 1479 02:00:06,920 --> 02:00:09,120 here to answer questions. 1480 02:00:09,120 --> 02:00:19,560 Thank you. Questions for the applicant from the commission? Yeah. Commissioner Dyer. 1481 02:00:19,560 --> 02:00:24,280 When looking at the parks and the trail systems, will that just be utilized by the residents 1482 02:00:24,280 --> 02:00:30,240 within Craver Ranch or will that be accessible to anybody in the area? 1483 02:00:30,240 --> 02:00:36,320 It will be accessible to anybody in the area. Only the amenity centers, which will be internal 1484 02:00:36,320 --> 02:00:40,440 to the site, would be reserved for residents only, but otherwise everything else is for 1485 02:00:40,440 --> 02:00:44,240 the public. Okay. Thank you. 1486 02:00:44,240 --> 02:00:58,240 Any other questions? I have a couple, I guess. One, could you explain, one thing I noticed 1487 02:00:58,240 --> 02:01:08,880 in the text amendment of the PD regulations was that the majority of commercial uses are 1488 02:01:08,880 --> 02:01:16,000 omitted and stricken out, as well as I think ADUs being prohibited for the residential 1489 02:01:16,000 --> 02:01:23,880 areas. But then when I heard you speak, you were saying that this master planned method 1490 02:01:23,880 --> 02:01:36,240 allows you to add flexibility. I'm trying to understand who wants there to be less allowed 1491 02:01:36,240 --> 02:01:42,560 uses between the city or the applicant and how that gives flexibility. 1492 02:01:42,560 --> 02:01:47,680 Sure. Thank you for that question because a lot of municipalities are the ones usually 1493 02:01:47,680 --> 02:01:53,600 telling us, don't bring us the kitchen sink. Be succinct. What do you want? And therefore, 1494 02:01:53,600 --> 02:01:59,200 that's the reason why we paired it back. Happy to add back in uses if you so like. We can 1495 02:01:59,200 --> 02:02:03,040 certainly do that, but we paired it back to the general retail for the neighborhood and 1496 02:02:03,040 --> 02:02:08,120 the commercial. The general retail has all the different sizing, so those are allowed 1497 02:02:08,120 --> 02:02:13,400 in there. We just kind of paired back the things that we thought maybe were not something 1498 02:02:13,400 --> 02:02:19,440 that would be well received within a master plan community. But again, open to receiving 1499 02:02:19,440 --> 02:02:21,680 if you would like us to add something back in. 1500 02:02:21,680 --> 02:02:29,880 And my understanding is, I'm not sure what the business relationship is, but as the developer, 1501 02:02:29,880 --> 02:02:37,060 you would have some private contract control over what businesses were allowed there and 1502 02:02:37,060 --> 02:02:40,600 what homes were allowed to be built and that sort of thing as well, just to control the 1503 02:02:40,600 --> 02:02:42,280 initial build out. Is that correct? 1504 02:02:42,280 --> 02:02:48,560 So those parcels would be, once the rooftops are there, that would be sold to a retail 1505 02:02:48,560 --> 02:02:53,800 developer and yes, that they would work and bring in, come to the city with their plan 1506 02:02:53,800 --> 02:03:02,160 with regard to what would be in that MN or MR designation and yes, work through their 1507 02:03:02,160 --> 02:03:06,280 leasing agent with regard to what the uses would end up going in there. 1508 02:03:06,280 --> 02:03:10,960 And then lastly, since you brought up once the rooftops are there, when I was looking 1509 02:03:10,960 --> 02:03:16,760 at the fiscal impact analysis, it actually projected the commercial absorption and build 1510 02:03:16,760 --> 02:03:23,160 out earlier than the residential, like all of the commercial was built after 10 years, 1511 02:03:23,160 --> 02:03:27,840 where it was about half or a little over half of the residential and then the remainder 1512 02:03:27,840 --> 02:03:32,640 of the residential got built out after that. I've always heard the reverse is usually what 1513 02:03:32,640 --> 02:03:34,920 happens. Can you help explain that? 1514 02:03:34,920 --> 02:03:39,840 Yeah, absolutely. And usually that is the case, right? So this was our best guess. We 1515 02:03:39,840 --> 02:03:43,320 were asked to put that summary together. So that's what the developer thought, that once 1516 02:03:43,320 --> 02:03:48,800 there's 4,000 single family homes on the ground, it's time to put some commercial in there. 1517 02:03:48,800 --> 02:03:53,440 Now, whether or not it all ends up at that time, like it's underwritten now, that's a 1518 02:03:53,440 --> 02:03:58,440 conservative way, but you're right. It probably will change and half of that commercial might 1519 02:03:58,440 --> 02:04:04,120 come on later on. But today, when we're sitting here today at a zoning process, that's what 1520 02:04:04,120 --> 02:04:07,360 we think it's going to be, but you're right. It will change. 1521 02:04:07,360 --> 02:04:13,360 Thank you. Commissioner Garland. Thank you. I appreciate the various different 1522 02:04:13,360 --> 02:04:17,820 kind of housing types that you've mentioned in the plan. Do you mind kind of elaborating 1523 02:04:17,820 --> 02:04:25,160 on sort of the price point of kind of where the price point range sort of starts and starts 1524 02:04:25,160 --> 02:04:27,480 and stops? Absolutely. But I'd like the developer to 1525 02:04:27,480 --> 02:04:37,880 come up in response to that. Good evening, Commissioner. Kevin Lazarus 1526 02:04:37,880 --> 02:04:43,800 with Old Prosper Partners. As far as the housing price points, depending on the different lot 1527 02:04:43,800 --> 02:04:48,280 sizes and the different home sizes, we think that there's going to be a pretty broad variety 1528 02:04:48,280 --> 02:04:53,320 of home prices, beginning probably in the low 300,000s and then extending up to about 1529 02:04:53,320 --> 02:04:59,640 650, 700,000 in today's dollars. Depending on, and I don't know what the future holds 1530 02:04:59,640 --> 02:05:05,320 as far as pricing price movements up or down. Okay. And this may be a silly question, but 1531 02:05:05,320 --> 02:05:11,120 are you working with different, I don't know, kind of like developers or like how does that 1532 02:05:11,120 --> 02:05:13,520 work exactly? Yeah. So we are the developer and we'll be 1533 02:05:13,520 --> 02:05:18,200 the ones that put all the infrastructure in. And then we're working with various home builders 1534 02:05:18,200 --> 02:05:25,640 to kind of gauge their interest on different lot sizes and kind of market depth and what 1535 02:05:25,640 --> 02:05:31,080 the market needs in terms of like how we're crafting our plan and our density. 1536 02:05:31,080 --> 02:05:36,760 Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions from the commission 1537 02:05:36,760 --> 02:05:48,640 before we hear from the public? Oh, yes. I want to comment that the proposals are very 1538 02:05:48,640 --> 02:05:54,120 thorough. I believe the presentations that we've seen from the developers are very thorough. 1539 02:05:54,120 --> 02:05:59,640 And I believe the last time we did hear from the developers and we had many, many points 1540 02:05:59,640 --> 02:06:08,040 of input and I appreciate your adding those in to these proposals and we had some concerns 1541 02:06:08,040 --> 02:06:16,080 about types of homes, types of dwellings, too many apartments, too many apartments, 1542 02:06:16,080 --> 02:06:20,840 that kind of thing, multifamily. So I appreciate that. One of the things that threads through 1543 02:06:20,840 --> 02:06:32,300 this for me is use of resources, use of resources of all types. Can someone comment on the use 1544 02:06:32,300 --> 02:06:39,240 of water and the wastewater studies that have been done, the proposals? 1545 02:06:39,240 --> 02:06:52,280 I'm Jim Knight, KFM engineering. I thought I was going to get by without any questions. 1546 02:06:52,280 --> 02:06:59,440 We're actually the property is both staff and Alexa mentioned was specifically annexed 1547 02:06:59,440 --> 02:07:04,560 by the city in the early 2000s and they did it because it's immediately adjacent to the 1548 02:07:04,560 --> 02:07:11,120 city's water treatment facility and it's a perfect example for master development. We 1549 02:07:11,120 --> 02:07:17,400 are dedicating land for the city to build as part of their water transmission system 1550 02:07:17,400 --> 02:07:22,680 a 60 inch water line through the property and the developer is designing and building 1551 02:07:22,680 --> 02:07:28,440 an elevated storage tank that will service not only this property but the entire area 1552 02:07:28,440 --> 02:07:34,320 at no cost to the city. So there is no additional cost to the city for the water system for 1553 02:07:34,320 --> 02:07:40,440 the services area. We're within both the chairman mentioned earlier about two miles of the existing 1554 02:07:40,440 --> 02:07:45,560 water treatment plant. Actually it's very, very close. We've worked very closely with 1555 02:07:45,560 --> 02:07:50,840 the city staff on the wastewater as well. We talked about multiple options and we are 1556 02:07:50,840 --> 02:07:56,200 actually following the city's recommendation and we're building a gravity system to tie 1557 02:07:56,200 --> 02:08:00,440 to the Clear Creek wastewater system that is moving forward through the city process 1558 02:08:00,440 --> 02:08:05,680 right now that will connect to the city's wastewater treatment plant. That will allow 1559 02:08:05,680 --> 02:08:12,920 the city to increase the land areas that can capture into the wastewater system at no cost. 1560 02:08:12,920 --> 02:08:17,520 So the developer is spending roughly $100 million in water and wastewater infrastructure 1561 02:08:17,520 --> 02:08:22,500 that will benefit the city outside the development. In addition, and I believe staff mentioned 1562 02:08:22,500 --> 02:08:26,960 this as well, is we are working with the city that once the city's wastewater treatment 1563 02:08:26,960 --> 02:08:31,640 plant is in place and they have wastewater reuse created, we're going to accept that 1564 02:08:31,640 --> 02:08:35,960 wastewater reuse, that non-potable water, to take our public areas so that we reduce 1565 02:08:35,960 --> 02:08:41,160 the impact of the city's water system. This will likely be the most sustainable water 1566 02:08:41,160 --> 02:08:43,200 and wastewater community in Denton. 1567 02:08:43,200 --> 02:08:49,880 Okay, thank you. So you're going to, I'm just concerned that I'm going to have enough water 1568 02:08:49,880 --> 02:08:50,880 in Southridge. 1569 02:08:50,880 --> 02:08:59,640 For everyone, you know. We worked with city staff, and Charlie Rosendahl mentioned this 1570 02:08:59,640 --> 02:09:04,520 earlier, I believe, and staff has talked about it. We are going to drill water wells to take 1571 02:09:04,520 --> 02:09:09,560 care of all of our irrigation, the public open areas, until the city has the reuse water 1572 02:09:09,560 --> 02:09:14,360 there so that we don't have a demand on the city's potable water system. So we're specifically 1573 02:09:14,360 --> 02:09:20,220 reducing the water demands and we're working on the wastewater reuse for recycling and 1574 02:09:20,220 --> 02:09:22,220 the reuse of that material. 1575 02:09:22,220 --> 02:09:23,220 Thank you. 1576 02:09:23,220 --> 02:09:24,220 Yes ma'am. 1577 02:09:24,220 --> 02:09:37,520 Any other questions on the commission? Okay. Thank you. The next card I have to speak is 1578 02:09:37,520 --> 02:09:47,800 Winter Anderson. I'm sorry, or is it Venter? I'm not certain. Please excuse my pronunciation. 1579 02:09:47,800 --> 02:09:52,840 It's Venter. Thank you. I happen to be the daughter of Mary Denny, who is one of the 1580 02:09:52,840 --> 02:09:57,320 founding families of the Craver Ranch, and it is a privilege to stand before you and 1581 02:09:57,320 --> 02:10:03,040 have my brother stand behind me. Having spent a number of years on the Craver as a child 1582 02:10:03,040 --> 02:10:07,880 and as a grown adult running cattle, I understand that the needs for water on that property 1583 02:10:07,880 --> 02:10:12,560 are going to be exorbitant for the families who are there. And while I genuinely understand 1584 02:10:12,560 --> 02:10:17,040 the importance of reuse of the water that's going to be coming out of the wastewater facilities, 1585 02:10:17,040 --> 02:10:30,560 where will the initial water come from? The State of Texas has notified us that our aquifers, 1586 02:10:30,560 --> 02:10:37,040 whether it be Woodbine or Trinity, are significantly low. Deeper, bigger wells are not the solution. 1587 02:10:37,040 --> 02:10:41,400 And I would like to ask our developer to consider an engineered wetland. An engineered wetland 1588 02:10:41,400 --> 02:10:46,400 that would use 19 phenotypic plants to absolutely purify and clean the water, like the North 1589 02:10:46,400 --> 02:10:51,120 Texas Water and Municipal District does at the John Bunker Sands Wetlands. I think that 1590 02:10:51,120 --> 02:10:54,680 there are additional things that they can do to enhance this property, to make sure 1591 02:10:54,680 --> 02:11:00,560 that we are good stewards of this land, and that we are understanding that not only do 1592 02:11:00,560 --> 02:11:05,360 we have that risk, but we're also worried about Bolliver Water and the other water entities 1593 02:11:05,360 --> 02:11:11,280 out there who have already declared that they do not have a 180-day water supply. And right 1594 02:11:11,280 --> 02:11:15,880 now they are our current water providers. My home, our ranch, is directly across the 1595 02:11:15,880 --> 02:11:20,160 street on the balance of the Craver Ranch acreage. And I can tell you right now that 1596 02:11:20,160 --> 02:11:25,080 water shortages are going to be a problem if it isn't somehow addressed in advance. 1597 02:11:25,080 --> 02:11:30,480 And I would very much like this board to consider how this developer, as beautiful and comprehensive 1598 02:11:30,480 --> 02:11:38,080 as our plan is, is going to engage in a water preservation process as well as a reuse process. 1599 02:11:38,080 --> 02:11:46,640 Thank you so much for your time. Thank you. Next card I have is from Brian 1600 02:11:46,640 --> 02:11:56,400 Denny. I'll reserve my time until the 17th. Just so maybe everybody didn't hear, when 1601 02:11:56,400 --> 02:12:04,920 the applicant came up, they stated that they're no longer asking for a continuous to December. 1602 02:12:04,920 --> 02:12:11,640 So tonight is it. We're back to the original plan. If you can state your name and address, 1603 02:12:11,640 --> 02:12:16,680 you'll have four minutes. My name is Brian William Denny. I live at 1604 02:12:16,680 --> 02:12:28,680 8684 FM 2153. I was born in Flow Hospital, May 30th, 1977, and my mother is the only 1605 02:12:28,680 --> 02:12:34,680 child of Kenneth Craver and Lois Skiles. My family has been in Denton, Texas since the 1606 02:12:34,680 --> 02:12:48,680 1880s. I want it on the record that I am absolutely not unaware that progress and growth and all 1607 02:12:48,680 --> 02:12:55,040 of these fantastic things that come with our city, having done what it has done over the 1608 02:12:55,040 --> 02:13:00,800 last 50 years. I know all of this is coming. Well, I'm sure most of the people in this 1609 02:13:00,800 --> 02:13:09,800 room do. My perspective and opinion is I just want it to be done well and properly. If anything 1610 02:13:09,800 --> 02:13:16,680 over the last 50 years has shown us that sometimes things get missed and things get skipped and 1611 02:13:16,680 --> 02:13:23,240 things get jumped around and jumped over. Water, as my sister brought up a second ago, 1612 02:13:23,240 --> 02:13:30,440 is a massive, massive thing. For me in particular, being across the street in that top northeast 1613 02:13:30,440 --> 02:13:38,680 corner, the roads are a massive thing to me. How much is the city going to take of the 1614 02:13:38,680 --> 02:13:44,680 roads that we have existing now? The board of directors that have been assigned to this 1615 02:13:44,680 --> 02:13:50,480 municipal district, according to the law that was passed and signed by the governor here 1616 02:13:50,480 --> 02:13:57,640 recently, it says in there that they have the ability and will appoint a board of directors 1617 02:13:57,640 --> 02:14:03,760 to their nonprofit that will help the further development. I'm looking forward to seeing 1618 02:14:03,760 --> 02:14:09,720 what they come up with and who they come up with in regards to putting that together. 1619 02:14:09,720 --> 02:14:18,240 Again, I know this is coming, but I want it to be done well and I want it to be done properly. 1620 02:14:18,240 --> 02:14:28,480 Thank you. The next card I have is from Mark Laird. If 1621 02:14:28,480 --> 02:14:32,360 you can state your name and address, you'll have four minutes. 1622 02:14:32,360 --> 02:14:39,720 Yes. My name is Mark Laird. I live at 1328 Girls Springs Road, San Diego, Texas, 76266. 1623 02:14:39,720 --> 02:14:45,120 I'd like to disclose I am an employee of the city of Denton, but tonight I am speaking 1624 02:14:45,120 --> 02:14:50,880 to you as a county resident. I'm in opposition of this development here. I understand it. 1625 02:14:50,880 --> 02:14:55,200 I understand the growth and need. Some of my disagreements that I have with the development 1626 02:14:55,200 --> 02:14:59,920 is the type of zoning that they have. The zoning doesn't look like it transitions from 1627 02:14:59,920 --> 02:15:05,640 existing what's next to what is proposed. A lot of the property that it's adjacent to 1628 02:15:05,640 --> 02:15:12,600 is rural residential. Some of the properties that zone that they have is MR and MN. I think 1629 02:15:12,600 --> 02:15:18,840 it's some of these areas that are shown as MR and MN as a benefit is back to rural residential 1630 02:15:18,840 --> 02:15:25,760 or residential one or at least at the minimum or two. I understand the purpose of MR zoning 1631 02:15:25,760 --> 02:15:30,640 and MN zoning. I feel that if that's the use and need of the area, that they'd be pushed 1632 02:15:30,640 --> 02:15:36,040 further into the property instead of being outside of the border. One of the things that 1633 02:15:36,040 --> 02:15:44,280 I'd like to see included if it's not included already include chapter 7.7.6, a landscape 1634 02:15:44,280 --> 02:15:53,640 buffer, 7.7.8 walls and fences and screening, 7.10.6 building height and transition areas. 1635 02:15:53,640 --> 02:15:57,720 I don't want somebody looking in my front yard eating at a restaurant across the street 1636 02:15:57,720 --> 02:16:03,320 from me. The other important thing is exterior lighting. I think that's very important. The 1637 02:16:03,320 --> 02:16:09,560 development code in these chapters only references city zoning property. If the rewarding could 1638 02:16:09,560 --> 02:16:19,360 be put and be respective to the county residents adjacent to it, I think that would be really 1639 02:16:19,360 --> 02:16:26,320 appropriate to do. The other issue I have and this is strictly related to my property 1640 02:16:26,320 --> 02:16:35,960 exactly is that the north-south road that they're proposing in the mobility plan runs 1641 02:16:35,960 --> 02:16:46,560 to my front yard and the Gribble Springs Road also runs across my front yard as well. Given 1642 02:16:46,560 --> 02:16:52,560 the connection point, the intersection and spacing of what they have proposed doesn't 1643 02:16:52,560 --> 02:16:57,480 meet the city's requirements for those types of roads, for that kind of intersection of 1644 02:16:57,480 --> 02:17:08,160 the spacing. Not to mention that Gribble Springs Road is a 1950 judge-appointed, established 1645 02:17:08,160 --> 02:17:13,080 rural road for that purpose and this Denton City Limits is located along the north line 1646 02:17:13,080 --> 02:17:17,840 of that road and not inside of it. I have any questions for you guys. I'd be happy to 1647 02:17:17,840 --> 02:17:29,400 answer them. Thank you. I don't see anything. Thank you. The next card I have is from Patricia 1648 02:17:29,400 --> 02:17:39,040 Adams. You're welcome to come up, state your name and address and you'll have four minutes. 1649 02:17:39,040 --> 02:17:50,840 Good evening. My name is Patricia Adams. I live at 0046 FM 2153 Aubrey, Texas. I, too, 1650 02:17:50,840 --> 02:17:56,240 am an ATJ and I have a lot to say, so I'm going to say it as quickly as I can here with 1651 02:17:56,240 --> 02:18:03,600 my three minutes. My concerns are, one is when I look at comprehensive plans and I look 1652 02:18:03,600 --> 02:18:08,280 at the comprehensive plan process and I look at what state law says, I'm a lawyer, this 1653 02:18:08,280 --> 02:18:13,200 is a practice area of mine. Comprehensive plans usually come about after you've had 1654 02:18:13,200 --> 02:18:18,860 many stakeholder meetings and you have had input and citizen meetings and then you talk 1655 02:18:18,860 --> 02:18:24,000 about what can be used. In the staff report, it says there is no documented discussion 1656 02:18:24,000 --> 02:18:29,080 from the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan adoption process regarding the future land use of the 1657 02:18:29,080 --> 02:18:35,640 area beyond the current agricultural designation. At the bottom, it says the comp plan amendment 1658 02:18:35,640 --> 02:18:39,560 is not a change to existing zoning of any property within this subject boundary nor 1659 02:18:39,560 --> 02:18:44,840 does it render any property non-conforming. It's not a change to zoning, but chapter 211 1660 02:18:44,840 --> 02:18:48,920 of the local government code says you zone in accordance with your comprehensive plan. 1661 02:18:48,920 --> 02:18:55,180 You be for a comprehensive plan retrofit. This was not an amendment that got vetted 1662 02:18:55,180 --> 02:19:00,200 or that anyone gave any input on, that it should be this type of density in this area. 1663 02:19:00,200 --> 02:19:05,600 This was simply here, we want to zone it this way, we know we have to do a comp plan amendment 1664 02:19:05,600 --> 02:19:10,740 because state law requires it, so we're going to ask you to retrofit that for us. That's 1665 02:19:10,740 --> 02:19:15,520 my problem. The density up here, I live up here, I travel this area, I didn't get any 1666 02:19:15,520 --> 02:19:20,840 kind of notice, I just happened to see the signs, so I appreciate that Denton puts the 1667 02:19:20,840 --> 02:19:28,840 signs up. As far as the mobility is concerned, what was referred to by one of the developers 1668 02:19:28,840 --> 02:19:35,520 represented as a deviation, one of these roads deviation, that's my house next to this deviation. 1669 02:19:35,520 --> 02:19:41,120 So it doesn't run through my front property, but it runs through right next to my fence 1670 02:19:41,120 --> 02:19:45,360 line, I believe, based on what I can tell from the map. I live in the Lake Ray Roberts 1671 02:19:45,360 --> 02:19:50,360 zoning district. We have minimum five acre tracks, that's what we have to have. I have 1672 02:19:50,360 --> 02:19:58,280 a little over five, my neighbors have 10 and 15 acres. So this road, 2153, has no shoulders. 1673 02:19:58,280 --> 02:20:06,040 2164, no shoulders. It's a textile road. So we're at Textile's Mercy, it took us three 1674 02:20:06,040 --> 02:20:13,920 years to get a two lane bridge rebuilt. Three years. Our road was closed. So to hear that, 1675 02:20:13,920 --> 02:20:17,320 well, you know, it's kind of wasteful to go ahead and put that infrastructure in upfront 1676 02:20:17,320 --> 02:20:22,720 because nobody's going to use it. Well, why don't we just wait until it's dilapidated 1677 02:20:22,720 --> 02:20:26,320 so much that we have to rebuild it and close it down for three years, and people can't 1678 02:20:26,320 --> 02:20:33,480 get around. So the deviation is next to my home. That's my personal issue in it. My 1679 02:20:33,480 --> 02:20:38,080 bigger issue is that you have a comprehensive plan and you have a process to go through 1680 02:20:38,080 --> 02:20:43,960 so that people can participate. No one got to participate because there was no thought. 1681 02:20:43,960 --> 02:20:50,240 And the speaker, staff speaker said 2030, no comment, 2040, no comment. Agricultural. 1682 02:20:50,240 --> 02:20:54,480 All of a sudden we get some legislation that allows a special district that is a taxing 1683 02:20:54,480 --> 02:20:59,760 unit. You're allowing a city to move in out there. They're going to tax. They're going 1684 02:20:59,760 --> 02:21:04,960 to put parks, businesses, schools, trails. They're going to dedicate land to the city. 1685 02:21:04,960 --> 02:21:09,720 And that's wonderful. But this commission's job in reviewing these is to look at the land 1686 02:21:09,720 --> 02:21:14,260 use. Is it consistent with your future land and comprehensive plan? You don't have any 1687 02:21:14,260 --> 02:21:20,600 direction on that because there was no analysis done. And then is your zoning consistent with 1688 02:21:20,600 --> 02:21:25,440 that? I don't have any idea because we don't have anything in the comprehensive plan. This 1689 02:21:25,440 --> 02:21:30,960 is agricultural. So it's absolutely not consistent unless you go ahead and approve the comprehensive 1690 02:21:30,960 --> 02:21:35,280 plan amendment and then they're going to piggyback off of that. And that's what we will live 1691 02:21:35,280 --> 02:21:42,160 with. So I'm opposed to this and I am not anti-development in the least. It is part 1692 02:21:42,160 --> 02:21:50,880 of my practice area and I love seeing development go in. But this is just wrong. Thank you. 1693 02:21:50,880 --> 02:22:10,760 Next card I have is for Adam Adams. I live at 10046 FM 2153. I would like to just say 1694 02:22:10,760 --> 02:22:14,400 ditto what my wife said because it sounds a lot better than what I was going to say. 1695 02:22:14,400 --> 02:22:20,880 But I do work for a city, a local city, and I just want to reiterate the deviation you 1696 02:22:20,880 --> 02:22:26,080 talked about is correct. It is basically deviating right into my yard. But that's not it. It 1697 02:22:26,080 --> 02:22:32,440 really is the road situation. Working with the city and I'm working in the public infrastructure 1698 02:22:32,440 --> 02:22:39,160 area. TextDOT is chasing their tail everywhere they go right now. And they can't keep up 1699 02:22:39,160 --> 02:22:43,880 with development. I mean that's the development can be so much quicker than TextDOT. And we 1700 02:22:43,880 --> 02:22:49,680 have a massive problem. I know there's no easy solutions but I really would the phasing 1701 02:22:49,680 --> 02:22:52,840 of the road. I understand the developer doesn't want to phase it because they're not using 1702 02:22:52,840 --> 02:22:57,040 it because it's expensive. So they don't want to do the infrastructure prior to the buildings 1703 02:22:57,040 --> 02:23:01,720 coming in. But they really need to look at the impact of the road outside of their development. 1704 02:23:01,720 --> 02:23:06,600 The city I'm working for also is dealing with that issue as well because development comes 1705 02:23:06,600 --> 02:23:13,760 in but the city or in this case the entity, the state doesn't have the ability to do the 1706 02:23:13,760 --> 02:23:18,160 adequate road repairs and improvements for the development that just came in. And I can 1707 02:23:18,160 --> 02:23:23,800 just tell you the past up there, there's a road up there called Running Bear Lane. It's 1708 02:23:23,800 --> 02:23:29,120 the connection between this part of Denton to Ray Roberts and whatever. And it's already 1709 02:23:29,120 --> 02:23:35,000 a nightmare. And I cannot imagine the traffic impact here. I understand the TIA is a later 1710 02:23:35,000 --> 02:23:39,280 phase. But anyway I would like, I'm against it as well just because I think there needs 1711 02:23:39,280 --> 02:23:43,280 to be some more studying on this especially with the mobility aspects. Thank you very 1712 02:23:43,280 --> 02:23:44,280 much. 1713 02:23:44,280 --> 02:24:00,120 Thank you. Next card I have is from Liam Gaum Wakefield. Come up and state your name and 1714 02:24:00,120 --> 02:24:07,300 address. You'll have four minutes. Hello. My name is Liam Gaum Wakefield. My address 1715 02:24:07,300 --> 02:24:19,000 is 411 Ponder Avenue, Denton, Texas. My worry about this is will this development be able 1716 02:24:19,000 --> 02:24:25,240 to pay for itself? It said it brought in a certain amount of money but it was that a 1717 02:24:25,240 --> 02:24:31,160 net when it comes to the 40 year life of the infrastructure, like the roads, the electricity, 1718 02:24:31,160 --> 02:24:39,520 the water. And I appreciate all the infrastructure in park and like land, like for schools and 1719 02:24:39,520 --> 02:24:48,040 police and fire. But unless, this is probably not going to be a popular statement to this 1720 02:24:48,040 --> 02:24:55,160 crowd tonight. But the less dense this development is, the less likely it is to pay for itself. 1721 02:24:55,160 --> 02:25:05,560 In the long run. And I don't like my rent going to subsidize green field developments. 1722 02:25:05,560 --> 02:25:10,320 And that's not even bringing up the fact everybody's talking about the road. Text dot does text 1723 02:25:10,320 --> 02:25:17,440 dot things and we're all at their mercy. But my worry is this is going to be very hard 1724 02:25:17,440 --> 02:25:22,960 to service with public transportation. Like we already have, like let alone, like GoZone's 1725 02:25:22,960 --> 02:25:29,640 going to struggle to get up there, let alone fix route. And one way to fix that would be 1726 02:25:29,640 --> 02:25:37,240 to make that almost a self-sufficient neighborhood with groceries. I don't know exactly which 1727 02:25:37,240 --> 02:25:43,920 uses were not permitted. Probably groceries allowed, but I don't know. But I would also 1728 02:25:43,920 --> 02:25:51,280 think that allowing ADUs would also be a good thing for flexibility. But that's just, people 1729 02:25:51,280 --> 02:25:56,040 should be able to use their land for what they want to. But I also don't like this because 1730 02:25:56,040 --> 02:26:01,860 it's sort of leapfrogging the development of everything. If this was right next to, 1731 02:26:01,860 --> 02:26:05,760 like right next to the loop 288 or something, I wouldn't have as much issue with this. But 1732 02:26:05,760 --> 02:26:10,960 since it's so far out in its East Sherman, like so far up North East Sherman, or it's 1733 02:26:10,960 --> 02:26:18,160 going to come down I-35, and it's going to be all car traffic, that's one of my other 1734 02:26:18,160 --> 02:26:23,480 concerns. It's like there's no way, like it's going to be really hard to get, for people 1735 02:26:23,480 --> 02:26:27,040 to get around without a car. So it limits the amount of, the type of people that can 1736 02:26:27,040 --> 02:26:37,320 live out there. But I guess, and also having it be walkable up there, I do appreciate also 1737 02:26:37,320 --> 02:26:43,120 the 10 foot side paths. And there's a lot of good work done into this. I want to say 1738 02:26:43,120 --> 02:26:48,120 I appreciate that, but like I am just really torn because of the location of it. And like 1739 02:26:48,120 --> 02:26:56,040 didn't we have like Hartley Field issue around this area as well? Like to the South right? 1740 02:26:56,040 --> 02:27:03,200 And it feels weird to say no to that and then say yes to this. But I yield the remainder 1741 02:27:03,200 --> 02:27:21,520 of my time. Next card I have is from Susan Smith. If you come down and state your name 1742 02:27:21,520 --> 02:27:29,280 and address, you'll have four minutes. Thank you. Hello, my name is Susan Smith and I live 1743 02:27:29,280 --> 02:27:40,160 at 7736 FM 428 Denton, Texas. And I am in opposition to this project because I am worried 1744 02:27:40,160 --> 02:27:46,660 about the traffic that it is going to force onto 428. And we're experiencing a lot of 1745 02:27:46,660 --> 02:27:52,600 traffic problems on 428 right now. Anyway, I can hardly turn left when I'm trying to 1746 02:27:52,600 --> 02:27:56,720 get off of my property in the morning. And even getting to this meeting at night was 1747 02:27:56,720 --> 02:28:02,280 difficult. There's a lot of development in the process right now going on. There's 1748 02:28:02,280 --> 02:28:09,680 a Gavi Ranch that's going to bring in 253 more houses. There's another development that's 1749 02:28:09,680 --> 02:28:14,920 trying to start across the street. There's all kinds of things going on in this area. 1750 02:28:14,920 --> 02:28:21,920 And I am worried about the size of this development being something like a small city. And that 1751 02:28:21,920 --> 02:28:28,200 is going to force more traffic onto 428. And I don't know how it's going to handle it. 1752 02:28:28,200 --> 02:28:36,560 428, I don't know, did that go out? No. Okay. 428 is a very dangerous road and I live just 1753 02:28:36,560 --> 02:28:42,720 south. In fact, Clear Creek goes through my property. And I mean, if you follow the traffic, 1754 02:28:42,720 --> 02:28:49,840 there are tremendous problems with Clear Creek with fatalities, very, very significant issues 1755 02:28:49,840 --> 02:28:56,760 there. And until 428 is widened, and I don't know when that's going to be, but I really 1756 02:28:56,760 --> 02:29:04,020 feel like you have to deal with the mobility issues before you load all these people in. 1757 02:29:04,020 --> 02:29:08,640 And I know it's going to be a significant amount of time, but I think there has to be 1758 02:29:08,640 --> 02:29:16,040 some way that needs to be concurrent so that you're not stranding people in their own homes. 1759 02:29:16,040 --> 02:29:23,040 The other problem I have is I do think some of the plans look beautiful, but I think that 1760 02:29:23,040 --> 02:29:30,480 it is not following the 2040 comprehensive plan. And I think leaping from rural residential 1761 02:29:30,480 --> 02:29:37,920 to R7 is excessive, along with too much multifamily. And I think you're just going to, you're just 1762 02:29:37,920 --> 02:29:45,880 going to lock everybody in and something needs to be done with you guys doing your planning. 1763 02:29:45,880 --> 02:29:51,400 We need to figure out a way to make all of this work so that we can move. And that those 1764 02:29:51,400 --> 02:29:55,400 are my issues. So anyway, thank you. 1765 02:29:55,400 --> 02:30:20,440 Thank you. Next card I have is from Ned Woodbridge. Good evening. I'm Ned Woodbridge of the North 1766 02:30:20,440 --> 02:30:31,520 Denton Neighborhood Association, and I live at 3596 Hartley Field Road, Denton. Please 1767 02:30:31,520 --> 02:30:39,120 vote no for these proposals. I have time to address only two of the many, many concerns 1768 02:30:39,120 --> 02:30:45,800 of the residents in North Denton. First point, staff analysis acknowledges that this project 1769 02:30:45,800 --> 02:30:50,720 is in violation of the comprehensive plan in a number of ways. So oddly argues that 1770 02:30:50,720 --> 02:30:59,200 the comp plan should be amended, not the project. We argue the 2040 comp plan has adopted recently 1771 02:30:59,200 --> 02:31:07,800 remains as valid as ever to guide future growth of Denton and should not be amended. Why? 1772 02:31:07,800 --> 02:31:14,720 The principal tenant of the plan is that policy should promote infill of Denton and discourage 1773 02:31:14,720 --> 02:31:22,680 suburban sprawl. Doing otherwise will hollow out the Denton downtown, instead promoting 1774 02:31:22,680 --> 02:31:31,040 investment away from it. Unfortunately, this is exactly what we are seeing happen. A second 1775 02:31:31,040 --> 02:31:38,120 reason is that the suburban sprawl has been shown conclusively to be an, to be uneconomic 1776 02:31:38,120 --> 02:31:44,260 for a city. I'll get back to that. The city is supposed to use the 2040 comprehensive 1777 02:31:44,260 --> 02:31:52,240 plan as a template for development. The plan states on page 2-3, and I quote, in our rural 1778 02:31:52,240 --> 02:31:59,880 fringe areas of the city, in the extraterritorial jurisdiction, we see contiguous stage growth, 1779 02:31:59,880 --> 02:32:06,080 which is fiscally and environmentally sound, reduces fragmentation and sprawl, discourages 1780 02:32:06,080 --> 02:32:12,900 premature development, and conserves the city's environmental and natural resources. It goes 1781 02:32:12,900 --> 02:32:17,960 on to say, and I quote, while the land use element does not speak to impede approved 1782 02:32:17,960 --> 02:32:26,940 developments in outlying areas, it does support rational stage development in the fringe and 1783 02:32:26,940 --> 02:32:34,000 discourage approval of additional large scale plan developments until currently approved 1784 02:32:34,000 --> 02:32:40,840 developments approach build out. All you have to do is look at a map to see this is not 1785 02:32:40,840 --> 02:32:48,280 contiguous by any stretch of the imagination and is leapfrog development. To argue otherwise 1786 02:32:48,280 --> 02:32:53,720 is really a stretch and specious. This is a long way from any other major development, 1787 02:32:53,720 --> 02:33:00,040 and the ETJ, by the way, is included in that definition of contiguous, as I read. Second 1788 02:33:00,040 --> 02:33:06,560 point, so anyway, I guess I should finish by saying the comprehensive plan just explicitly 1789 02:33:06,560 --> 02:33:12,360 and appropriately rejects the Craven Rance proposal. Second point, this pattern of development 1790 02:33:12,360 --> 02:33:17,660 long term may be devastating to city finances and impose significant burdens on the taxpayers 1791 02:33:17,660 --> 02:33:24,880 and community members. On this recommendation, on this, I recommend that you read analyses 1792 02:33:24,880 --> 02:33:30,920 by Charles Marrone of Strong Towns and his case studies of many mid-sized cities that 1793 02:33:30,920 --> 02:33:36,680 found suburban sprawl to virtually bankrupt those cities as cost, the cost to maintain 1794 02:33:36,680 --> 02:33:45,480 and rebuild the infrastructure over time far exceeded the tax revenues received. Instead, 1795 02:33:45,480 --> 02:33:52,560 he argues, a policy of infill is economic and produces vital towns, just like our Denton 1796 02:33:52,560 --> 02:33:58,640 2040 plan dictates. The staff report says that the MMD will take some of that burden 1797 02:33:58,640 --> 02:34:04,000 off the city. Nonetheless, won't the city now have to build a whole new waste treatment 1798 02:34:04,000 --> 02:34:10,360 plan and piping to the development without water supplying water? While maintenance costs 1799 02:34:10,360 --> 02:34:15,720 and replacement costs may be borne in part by the residents of the MMD, I can promise 1800 02:34:15,720 --> 02:34:23,340 you residents will not anticipate the true burden in advance. It is unconscionable that 1801 02:34:23,340 --> 02:34:29,060 you, the PNZ, vote for this without fully understanding who will carry what burden and 1802 02:34:29,060 --> 02:34:35,280 whether that is fair. There are just too many issues. We need economic analysis. By the 1803 02:34:35,280 --> 02:34:40,960 way, addressing an earlier, something I heard in the staff in the earlier meeting, Textot 1804 02:34:40,960 --> 02:34:45,960 told me emphatically at their last public meeting that they have no plans to expand 1805 02:34:45,960 --> 02:34:52,840 FM 428, which is already a huge problem. Level of service five, that's the worst, the highest 1806 02:34:52,840 --> 02:34:59,400 and worst level of service, traffic service. So anyway, again, please vote no on really 1807 02:34:59,400 --> 02:35:12,680 all three. Thank you. Thank you. Next card I have is from Mr. Clay Thurmond. You can 1808 02:35:12,680 --> 02:35:25,600 come down and state your name and address. You'll have four minutes. Clay Thurmond, 1524 1809 02:35:25,600 --> 02:35:32,000 Snyder Street, Denton. And I've been before this body several times over the past few 1810 02:35:32,000 --> 02:35:39,680 decades arguing for open and green space. And this plan does offer quite a bit to be 1811 02:35:39,680 --> 02:35:46,000 desired, I think. However, I have some other problems which have been stated by, Ned took 1812 02:35:46,000 --> 02:35:54,120 some of my comments straight out of my mouth. I am concerned as it does with the 2040 plan 1813 02:35:54,120 --> 02:36:00,520 that we were calling for contiguous development, not trying to leapfrog or fragment, and here 1814 02:36:00,520 --> 02:36:06,400 I'm seeing us fragmenting. I'm usually concerned about fragmenting of green space, but I'm 1815 02:36:06,400 --> 02:36:13,320 seeing we're fragmenting our urban space as well. As people have said, leapfrogging 1816 02:36:13,320 --> 02:36:19,040 and sprawl, I think we're just increasing that. The mobility concerns, I have those 1817 02:36:19,040 --> 02:36:26,320 too from the streets, public transport. When they talk about affordable housing, I'm wondering 1818 02:36:26,320 --> 02:36:37,000 just what that definition of affordable is and how people that don't have the use of 1819 02:36:37,000 --> 02:36:43,720 a car are going to get from there to wherever else they need to go. And also this does increase 1820 02:36:43,720 --> 02:36:52,580 our car traffic and our pollution and everything from that. I'm sad to hear that 428 is not 1821 02:36:52,580 --> 02:37:01,180 going to be widened. Fiscal burden on taxpayers is something else has been addressed by other 1822 02:37:01,180 --> 02:37:07,680 speakers of us possibly subsidizing these other developments, and I am concerned about 1823 02:37:07,680 --> 02:37:17,080 that. But what I originally came here for, and all those were in my mind as I was preparing 1824 02:37:17,080 --> 02:37:27,160 to come here, was the environmental impacts. And one of the things that I've, when I was 1825 02:37:27,160 --> 02:37:34,720 reading through some of the materials, I did not see anything addressing our wildlife corridors. 1826 02:37:34,720 --> 02:37:40,320 And just two years ago, we met, I was part of a working group to create the wildlife 1827 02:37:40,320 --> 02:37:46,880 corridors, and I'm not seeing anything addressing that. And it looks like TXDOTS is going to 1828 02:37:46,880 --> 02:37:52,300 come right on top of one of those corridors. When we did the corridors, we extrapolated 1829 02:37:52,300 --> 02:37:57,440 out into the county. So that is another thing that I'm concerned about, and I would like 1830 02:37:57,440 --> 02:38:04,600 to see addressed if this goes forward. Otherwise, I have some, and I think as you've heard from 1831 02:38:04,600 --> 02:38:14,200 the crowd, I think there's a lot of concerns about this being a physically viable product 1832 02:38:14,200 --> 02:38:20,000 for the rest of the taxpayers here in Denton. Thank you. 1833 02:38:20,000 --> 02:38:27,640 Thank you. Did you have a question? No. 1834 02:38:27,640 --> 02:38:30,040 May I have a comment? 1835 02:38:30,040 --> 02:38:32,280 On specifically on the... 1836 02:38:32,280 --> 02:38:33,280 Public hearing comment? 1837 02:38:33,280 --> 02:38:36,960 On Clay's comments? Okay. 1838 02:38:36,960 --> 02:38:47,640 One of the e-comments that we got was talking about the long-term vision of the environment 1839 02:38:47,640 --> 02:38:53,080 and incorporate a meaningful environment, environmental protection. We did talk about 1840 02:38:53,080 --> 02:38:58,400 that in work session, and we are concerned with that, the wildlife crossings, the buffers 1841 02:38:58,400 --> 02:39:04,560 to protect the wetlands. So there was some good answers, I thought, that came from the 1842 02:39:04,560 --> 02:39:14,280 staff, the developers. So we might want to hear that, but we did visit that. 1843 02:39:14,280 --> 02:39:19,480 Next card I have is from Olivia Lilly. 1844 02:39:19,480 --> 02:39:20,480 Hi. 1845 02:39:20,480 --> 02:39:26,880 Name and address, and you have four minutes. 1846 02:39:26,880 --> 02:39:33,840 Olivia Lilly, 1630 Sheppard Road, Aubrey, Texas. I wasn't prepared to speak tonight, 1847 02:39:33,840 --> 02:39:41,160 but after listening to the presentation and a few of my neighbors, I believe, our property 1848 02:39:41,160 --> 02:39:51,520 is across the street from this proposed development. We did not get any type of notice. We try 1849 02:39:51,520 --> 02:39:56,880 to stay connected with everything that's going on in our neighborhood. So we knew about this 1850 02:39:56,880 --> 02:40:02,920 meeting and a previous meeting, but we never got a notice, nor would we have, I don't believe, 1851 02:40:02,920 --> 02:40:10,240 because we are in the county, and none of this touches us exactly. We're on Sheppard 1852 02:40:10,240 --> 02:40:16,040 above that dotted arrow. And that's what I want to talk about first, is that that dotted 1853 02:40:16,040 --> 02:40:22,960 arrow line is representative of what would be one of the proposed outer loop routes. 1854 02:40:22,960 --> 02:40:31,520 Previously, I believe, in the first person that spoke from staff showed the outer loop. 1855 02:40:31,520 --> 02:40:41,260 What TextDOT has shown us are the proposed route A and route B, everything that you guys 1856 02:40:41,260 --> 02:40:47,840 talked about, has said that that is where it's going to go and that it's going to connect 1857 02:40:47,840 --> 02:40:55,400 to Milam Road. That is not what the residents have been told. It has been told to us that 1858 02:40:55,400 --> 02:41:03,480 that decision has not been made and will not be made until 2026, I believe. We had another 1859 02:41:03,480 --> 02:41:11,280 phone call today about that, actually, and so that the north route, the A route, would 1860 02:41:11,280 --> 02:41:17,760 go through this development. For us that live out there that have been going to the meetings 1861 02:41:17,760 --> 02:41:27,040 for the proposed outer loop for the last 20 years or so, we feel like we've been lied 1862 02:41:27,040 --> 02:41:34,760 to, maybe, and that how could you be proposing this development with the city when the outer 1863 02:41:34,760 --> 02:41:42,640 loop may be bisecting your development? And one of the arguments that all of us residents 1864 02:41:42,640 --> 02:41:48,240 have had out there was that this is one landowner that would be affected by the outer loop. 1865 02:41:48,240 --> 02:41:53,840 And in all of our interviews, we were told it still might go there and that the engineers 1866 02:41:53,840 --> 02:42:01,320 are looking at that. And so our concern had been, why would you affect all of the residents 1867 02:42:01,320 --> 02:42:06,760 that have lived here? And then I'm going to back up a little bit. My children, we are 1868 02:42:06,760 --> 02:42:14,280 fourth or fifth generation out there. We live on 300 acres. We are actually broken up under 1869 02:42:14,280 --> 02:42:25,680 one giant family, so we're a small 300 acres. But all of our cousins live out there. My 1870 02:42:25,680 --> 02:42:33,240 mother-in-law's grandfather was the master gardener at TWU. We are all farmers. We have 1871 02:42:33,240 --> 02:42:43,640 cattle. We have crops. Our goal was to pass on to our children. And now we're thinking 1872 02:42:43,640 --> 02:42:51,080 we might have schools across the street from us and a highway going through our land. So 1873 02:42:51,080 --> 02:42:56,800 we've been in arguments with the outer loop situation, recognizing that it's going to 1874 02:42:56,800 --> 02:43:03,940 go somewhere out here. But then it turns out that this developer has been in communication 1875 02:43:03,940 --> 02:43:12,200 or owners with a developer with communication with the city and working some deals to give 1876 02:43:12,200 --> 02:43:19,120 back money and so forth when we actually don't even have a paved road out by us because it 1877 02:43:19,120 --> 02:43:25,100 doesn't get enough traffic on that road because there's exactly two driveways. There was talk 1878 02:43:25,100 --> 02:43:32,160 about wildlife because of the development that's been coming north from 288 and on. 1879 02:43:32,160 --> 02:43:39,920 For us on our acreage, we have an issue with the feral pigs and all kinds of wildlife that 1880 02:43:39,920 --> 02:43:48,520 is being pushed up because we don't have enough open land. And I actually happen to be a licensed 1881 02:43:48,520 --> 02:43:54,360 architect in the state of Texas. I am for development. I am for building houses. I love 1882 02:43:54,360 --> 02:44:03,960 some custom home residential. But I hate sprawl. I do a lot in community service with the city 1883 02:44:03,960 --> 02:44:13,000 of Denton. And we need to do things for our city residents in the city. And I believe 1884 02:44:13,000 --> 02:44:19,960 in infill instead of the sprawl. And I 100% believe that you're leapfrogging, creating 1885 02:44:19,960 --> 02:44:25,680 a mini city outside of a larger city. Thank you. 1886 02:44:25,680 --> 02:44:34,440 Thank you. Sorry. It's a planning and zoning hearing, not a sporting event. So we can laugh, 1887 02:44:34,440 --> 02:44:43,680 but let's keep the ruckusness down. This is a public hearing. I have a white card from 1888 02:44:43,680 --> 02:44:54,960 an Elizabeth Seymour that typically is used to signal support or opposition, but neither 1889 02:44:54,960 --> 02:45:00,400 box is checked. So just for the record, if you filled this out and you'd like to have 1890 02:45:00,400 --> 02:45:08,160 that clear on the minutes of the meeting, if you could signify that at some point, that 1891 02:45:08,160 --> 02:45:13,920 would help. But it is a public hearing, so you don't have to have filled out a card ahead 1892 02:45:13,920 --> 02:45:18,480 of time. You're welcome to come and speak if you would like and then just fill out a 1893 02:45:18,480 --> 02:45:27,040 card afterwards. Come on up. Same drill, name and address and you'll have four minutes. 1894 02:45:27,040 --> 02:45:31,960 Hi, my name's Elizabeth Seymour. I own property on Shepparger Road. I am one that is a big 1895 02:45:31,960 --> 02:45:38,560 one and the devil of the details. We went to the community meetings and just as this 1896 02:45:38,560 --> 02:45:47,400 architect just said, who's across my street neighbor that I've never met, she stated 1897 02:45:47,400 --> 02:45:55,240 right when the developers, they proposed their pictures and you can look in Mia Hines' slides 1898 02:45:55,240 --> 02:46:01,260 and the first thing it says is A goes right through that development. So why are we prematurely 1899 02:46:01,260 --> 02:46:07,040 making the decision leapfrogging and doing this when automatically everybody thinks right 1900 02:46:07,040 --> 02:46:15,920 now that it's going to go to B or B2. So that is a concern that we have. I think it's premature 1901 02:46:15,920 --> 02:46:21,180 to make that decision in regards to zoning if we don't even know what tax cost is going 1902 02:46:21,180 --> 02:46:27,040 to do, especially when they have a molasses pace. The next thing I have is look at 380. 1903 02:46:27,040 --> 02:46:32,800 So I grew up in Denton. I'm a Ryan High graduate. My husband's been here since the '80s. We 1904 02:46:32,800 --> 02:46:40,720 live in Forest Ridge. We have property. We are Dentonites and I watched my high school 1905 02:46:40,720 --> 02:46:46,360 friends who lived out on 380 and there was this little old Indian smoke shop in an agricultural 1906 02:46:46,360 --> 02:46:51,560 area. You cannot drive 380 without having severe traffic. We know that the deaths are 1907 02:46:51,560 --> 02:46:56,480 high out there. We know that everybody put up Savannah and all these other neighborhoods 1908 02:46:56,480 --> 02:47:02,320 very quickly and look at the disaster that it is in regards to traffic and fatalities 1909 02:47:02,320 --> 02:47:08,680 just alone. That's a traffic issue. So I think there's a concern that we have that 1910 02:47:08,680 --> 02:47:18,280 this area already has 29,000 per day per their engineer's calculations of people on the roads. 1911 02:47:18,280 --> 02:47:22,280 The next thing that I asked at this community meeting was how many people are actually going 1912 02:47:22,280 --> 02:47:28,700 to be in this community? They said, "Oh, average family of three." No, it's not an average 1913 02:47:28,700 --> 02:47:33,600 family of three. It's an average family of four, maybe more. So if I have 7,000 housing 1914 02:47:33,600 --> 02:47:39,800 units, there's four people to a family on average. You're talking 28,000 maybe, I don't 1915 02:47:39,800 --> 02:47:45,440 know, 30,000 people in this area. Again, we don't have the road and we don't have the 1916 02:47:45,440 --> 02:47:49,920 traffic capabilities to deal with that. We already don't have it and we're still rural 1917 02:47:49,920 --> 02:47:57,360 out there. I would also like to talk about the agricultural effects. We have cattle and 1918 02:47:57,360 --> 02:48:02,480 I'm a beekeeper. I'm your local beekeeper and I provide honey and I do all those things. 1919 02:48:02,480 --> 02:48:07,560 So I care about the agriculture. I care about the water. My husband hunts. My husband, the 1920 02:48:07,560 --> 02:48:12,240 boys, they fish out there. We kill tons of feral pigs out there. That's all going to 1921 02:48:12,240 --> 02:48:18,520 continue to just keep going north. I hate to say it, but you're not going to have some 1922 02:48:18,520 --> 02:48:22,680 crazy man out there with a gun who's shooting in the middle of the neighborhood because 1923 02:48:22,680 --> 02:48:29,520 there's wild boar tearing up your sod and your grass. So that is an issue that's continuing 1924 02:48:29,520 --> 02:48:36,480 to go on. The comment about drilling wells, I'm not a water expert, but it's very hard 1925 02:48:36,480 --> 02:48:42,360 for me to understand we're going to fix the water problem by drilling wells for possibly 1926 02:48:42,360 --> 02:48:49,960 28,000 people that are just north of us, especially when there's a water shortage already. I think 1927 02:48:49,960 --> 02:48:54,600 that it's the population, it's the traffic, it's the taxes. It's all these things that 1928 02:48:54,600 --> 02:48:59,440 are coming in that are going to affect landowners, homeowners, and people that live there. I 1929 02:48:59,440 --> 02:49:04,680 think it's too premature to get ahead before TxDOT says it's going to be B, B2, or Road 1930 02:49:04,680 --> 02:49:09,320 A. I'm hoping it's Road A because then they can figure out what they want to do with it. 1931 02:49:09,320 --> 02:49:14,480 The rest of us won't be as impacted, but we all have a place here of how we're going 1932 02:49:14,480 --> 02:49:19,320 to be impacted by it. Do not Dallas my Denton. Thank you. 1933 02:49:19,320 --> 02:49:26,280 This is a public hearing. If anybody else would like to speak, you're certainly more 1934 02:49:26,280 --> 02:49:39,240 than welcome to. I see possible movement. Yes, I see movement. Come on down. 1935 02:49:39,240 --> 02:49:56,400 Good evening. My name is Bridget Marshall. I live at 3539 Pine Trail, Denton. I have 1936 02:49:56,400 --> 02:50:01,600 many other concerns about this development besides the traffic issues I discussed in 1937 02:50:01,600 --> 02:50:08,160 my emails to you and am strongly opposed to all three Craver Ranch proposals. The comprehensive 1938 02:50:08,160 --> 02:50:14,680 plan is the blueprint for development in Denton. It was created with the input of the public, 1939 02:50:14,680 --> 02:50:19,920 the planning staff, and the city government. It is updated every several years by a thoughtful 1940 02:50:19,920 --> 02:50:25,600 and inclusive process. Most importantly, it has strong support in the community. I'd like 1941 02:50:25,600 --> 02:50:31,920 to reiterate what Ned Woodbridge said about the comprehensive plan in the rural fringe 1942 02:50:31,920 --> 02:50:39,420 areas in the ETJ. On page 2-3 and throughout the document, it states, "In our rural fringes 1943 02:50:39,420 --> 02:50:46,200 areas of the city in the ETJ, we see contiguous stage growth, which is fiscally and environmentally 1944 02:50:46,200 --> 02:50:52,120 sound, reduces fragmentation and sprawl, discourages premature development, and conserves the city's 1945 02:50:52,120 --> 02:50:58,480 environmental and natural resources. Conservation development, which retains rural character, 1946 02:50:58,480 --> 02:51:03,800 protects open space and greenways, enhances development value, and provides greater land 1947 02:51:03,800 --> 02:51:10,120 use pattern choices to landowners. While the land use element does not seek to impede approved 1948 02:51:10,120 --> 02:51:15,600 developments in outlying areas, it does support rational stage development in the fringe, 1949 02:51:15,600 --> 02:51:20,480 and it discourages approval of additional large-scale planned developments until currently 1950 02:51:20,480 --> 02:51:26,360 approved developments approach build out." On page 2-14, it specifically talks about 1951 02:51:26,360 --> 02:51:31,360 managing growth at the edge and states, "Conservation development is an approach to the design of 1952 02:51:31,360 --> 02:51:36,760 rural residential subdivisions, which is highly suited to agricultural fringe areas where 1953 02:51:36,760 --> 02:51:44,520 the retention of rural character and open space is desired." Item 2.14 states, "Protect 1954 02:51:44,520 --> 02:51:49,680 rural character and scenic open space at the city's edge to promote the achievement of 1955 02:51:49,680 --> 02:51:56,640 the preferred growth concept, preferred land preservation plan, and the flum. Craver Ranch 1956 02:51:56,640 --> 02:52:02,440 clearly violates the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The land use description for Master Plan Community 1957 02:52:02,440 --> 02:52:07,080 in the Comprehensive Plan mentions providing connectivity to other developments throughout 1958 02:52:07,080 --> 02:52:12,340 the city. Craver Ranch will not provide connectivity to other developments throughout the city due 1959 02:52:12,340 --> 02:52:19,460 to its remote location. It violates the Comprehensive Plan by leapfrogging development, which creates 1960 02:52:19,460 --> 02:52:26,700 fragmentation and sprawl, the exact things that the Comprehensive Plan deems undesirable." 1961 02:52:26,700 --> 02:52:31,880 From page 2-1, the consequences of the sprawl trend has been experienced in longer auto 1962 02:52:31,880 --> 02:52:37,160 trip lengths, greater levels of congestion, strained environmental and fiscal resources, 1963 02:52:37,160 --> 02:52:41,960 and challenges for public services and facilities to keep up with the demands of this rapidly 1964 02:52:41,960 --> 02:52:48,280 enlarging development footprint. The Denton Development Code under Chapter 1 clearly gives 1965 02:52:48,280 --> 02:52:53,480 instructions to implement the city's Comprehensive Plan and other tenants. These two are being 1966 02:52:53,480 --> 02:52:59,920 ignored. Why is another MPC needed and in such a remote location? Denton has several 1967 02:52:59,920 --> 02:53:05,420 MPCs, including the Hunter Cole Ranches, the Hills of Denton near I-35 north of Loop 288, 1968 02:53:05,420 --> 02:53:10,680 and another one north of Discovery Park with much better accessibility to transportation 1969 02:53:10,680 --> 02:53:16,160 and businesses. With Craver Ranch, there is no connection to pedestrian and bicycle networks, 1970 02:53:16,160 --> 02:53:20,960 to transit, shared spaces, or local businesses, and retail businesses won't be built until 1971 02:53:20,960 --> 02:53:28,000 much later phases in the project. It will be an island unto itself. 1972 02:53:28,000 --> 02:53:32,600 As you can see, Craver Ranch violates the Comprehensive Plan and the DDC and is not 1973 02:53:32,600 --> 02:53:37,120 an example of the type of smart growth the Comprehensive Plan advocates for the Outer 1974 02:53:37,120 --> 02:53:42,960 French. I ask that you please deny Craver Ranch's three proposals and adhere to the 1975 02:53:42,960 --> 02:53:51,380 current 2040 Comprehensive Plan's tenants. Thank you so much for your time and consideration. 1976 02:53:51,380 --> 02:54:01,360 Thank you. Any other members of the public wanting to speak before I close the public 1977 02:54:01,360 --> 02:54:10,120 hearing? Yeah, come on up. State your name and address and you have four minutes. 1978 02:54:10,120 --> 02:54:17,740 My name is Beth Leonard and I live at 3470 Shepherd Road. I can sit on my front porch 1979 02:54:17,740 --> 02:54:24,200 every day and look at the beautiful Craver Ranch and their historic houses right across 1980 02:54:24,200 --> 02:54:32,720 from me. I've enjoyed the opportunity to live out there for over a decade. One of my 1981 02:54:32,720 --> 02:54:37,200 biggest complaints about development, which I'm not anti-development, is when there is 1982 02:54:37,200 --> 02:54:43,960 not a master plan. I also commend all of the master planners here and whoever else was 1983 02:54:43,960 --> 02:54:49,560 involved in coming up with something that isn't piecemeal and that there is a master 1984 02:54:49,560 --> 02:54:56,880 plan and a bigger vision. I think that's really important. I really commend that effort. However, 1985 02:54:56,880 --> 02:55:01,900 I can tell with everything that's been said here tonight that there's a lot of perhaps 1986 02:55:01,900 --> 02:55:09,840 missed steps, perhaps some greater concerns that maybe haven't been fully fleshed out 1987 02:55:09,840 --> 02:55:14,760 of the people that live out there. Many of the people who spoke here tonight have lived 1988 02:55:14,760 --> 02:55:21,040 out there way longer than myself. I came into their community, but most of the people that 1989 02:55:21,040 --> 02:55:30,560 surround me have been there for generations and they're watching this outer loop, big 1990 02:55:30,560 --> 02:55:37,040 master plan development encroach on everything that has been special to their family. Just 1991 02:55:37,040 --> 02:55:48,260 out of respect for that, I think it's cause for pause to take into consideration the concerns 1992 02:55:48,260 --> 02:55:57,400 of the community and to not perhaps forever not do anything to the Craver Ranch, but to 1993 02:55:57,400 --> 02:56:02,440 make sure that the community that surrounds it is more involved and has all of their concerns 1994 02:56:02,440 --> 02:56:07,560 addressed. I'm not here to say to vote for or against it. I'm just saying that with everything 1995 02:56:07,560 --> 02:56:18,080 said here tonight that there's reasons to perhaps pause and take into consideration the obstacles 1996 02:56:18,080 --> 02:56:28,800 and concerns of the community, which clearly have not been fully addressed. Thank you. 1997 02:56:28,800 --> 02:56:39,040 This is a public hearing. Anyone else? Not seeing anyone, I will close the public hearing 1998 02:56:39,040 --> 02:56:49,200 for... I'm sorry, I take that back. There's part of our rules and procedures for public 1999 02:56:49,200 --> 02:56:57,320 hearings wherein the applicant after the public has spoken has the option, if they would like, 2000 02:56:57,320 --> 02:57:04,280 to come up and address any of the issues in a rebuttal phase. You don't have to take this. 2001 02:57:04,280 --> 02:57:08,680 If you don't choose to take it, then the public hearing will be closed. If you would like 2002 02:57:08,680 --> 02:57:16,120 to take it, then only the members who spoke in the first phase of the public hearing may 2003 02:57:16,120 --> 02:57:22,440 come up for only one minute to have the last word to address anything. So it's your decision 2004 02:57:22,440 --> 02:57:29,000 as to whether you'd like to do that or not. Question, is it one minute per item like our 2005 02:57:29,000 --> 02:57:33,300 engineer would like to speak and then also I would like to address? Sorry, the one minute 2006 02:57:33,300 --> 02:57:46,160 is for the members of the public. The applicant, I believe, gets a total of two minutes. Okay. 2007 02:57:46,160 --> 02:57:54,240 There were lots of issues raised, so we'll do... It's five minutes reasonable? Yes. I'd 2008 02:57:54,240 --> 02:57:58,360 like the engineer to also address some items. Sure, come on. Some of the items I just wanted 2009 02:57:58,360 --> 02:58:08,400 to address was that I would like to go back to the variance. The only piece for the thoroughfare 2010 02:58:08,400 --> 02:58:14,240 plan variance is in orange. That's internal to the site. It is not external to the site, 2011 02:58:14,240 --> 02:58:21,520 so it is not affecting anybody but future residents within the property. I did not mention 2012 02:58:21,520 --> 02:58:28,080 that we are minding all the environmental corridors. Those are set aside, so we have 2013 02:58:28,080 --> 02:58:35,680 done that. With regard to the water and everything, I would like our engineer to address that. 2014 02:58:35,680 --> 02:58:45,520 Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to address that and a couple of other things. As Alexa just mentioned, 2015 02:58:45,520 --> 02:58:51,560 all the roadways proposed are within the property. We are not impacting any property off outside 2016 02:58:51,560 --> 02:58:56,360 of this property at all. From a transportation plan, we've done three separate transportation 2017 02:58:56,360 --> 02:59:00,920 studies using the exact models provided to us by the city. The city staff challenged 2018 02:59:00,920 --> 02:59:04,580 us to go back and change those again. We've modified them three times to show that every 2019 02:59:04,580 --> 02:59:09,360 time that the existing roadway system would work and we would be able to make the roadway 2020 02:59:09,360 --> 02:59:13,560 improvements as the project went forward. That's been the way projects have been built 2021 02:59:13,560 --> 02:59:18,800 forever, and that's the way every project's been done in Denton as well. Additionally, 2022 02:59:18,800 --> 02:59:26,480 from the water standpoint, we are drilling wells to use water from 2,200 feet deep, not 2023 02:59:26,480 --> 02:59:31,920 from the city's water system, for the irrigation of the open spaces and natural areas. But 2024 02:59:31,920 --> 02:59:36,640 we've also agreed with the city, as soon as the city's current wastewater treatment facility 2025 02:59:36,640 --> 02:59:42,120 is upgraded to use wastewater reuse, we will accept that on the site to make this a very 2026 02:59:42,120 --> 02:59:47,040 sustainable environmentally sensitive project. I will additionally say there's been questions 2027 02:59:47,040 --> 02:59:54,120 about the infrastructure and the cost of it. The city engaged their own economic analysis, 2028 02:59:54,120 --> 03:00:00,760 and after all the, the city consultant said that after all the maintenance was taken care 2029 03:00:00,760 --> 03:00:08,100 of and all the infrastructure was taken care of, there was over $106 million of in surplus 2030 03:00:08,100 --> 03:00:13,840 tax revenue to the city after all maintenance items were taken care of. Our actual study 2031 03:00:13,840 --> 03:00:19,960 shows that it's more than $35 million a year, not over 40 years. So there's a significant 2032 03:00:19,960 --> 03:00:24,680 economic benefit to the city overall. Thank you. 2033 03:00:24,680 --> 03:00:39,560 Thank you. Yeah. So members of the public, if you spoke the first time, you may come 2034 03:00:39,560 --> 03:00:45,040 down for up to one minute more. I would ask though that your comments need to be restricted 2035 03:00:45,040 --> 03:00:53,760 to the subjects that the applicant addressed. So that includes the infrastructure costs 2036 03:00:53,760 --> 03:01:07,480 and tax or fiscal impacts. That includes the well water used for irrigation of public spaces 2037 03:01:07,480 --> 03:01:18,240 and then being replaced with gray water after that. And that includes, what was the first 2038 03:01:18,240 --> 03:01:28,720 thing? Yes, the wildlife corridors and the environmental impacts as well as the mobility 2039 03:01:28,720 --> 03:01:35,040 plan road, just clarification that it's the orange segment in the middle of the property 2040 03:01:35,040 --> 03:01:47,400 that is changing and only the roadways within the property would be improved. Yes. So yes, 2041 03:01:47,400 --> 03:01:50,640 if you spoke the last time and you'd like, then you can come down for one minute. 2042 03:01:50,640 --> 03:01:58,400 Sir, well, I appreciate that those wells will go down 2,200 feet. I have run cattle on the 2043 03:01:58,400 --> 03:02:05,120 Craver for a long time and the wells that are presently there are absolutely dry and 2044 03:02:05,120 --> 03:02:07,480 of no use. My concern is that according to Mia who spoke earlier, there is going to be 2045 03:02:07,480 --> 03:02:12,520 a large trend of these kinds of developments coming in through this corridor. The Trinity 2046 03:02:12,520 --> 03:02:18,440 and Woodburn aquifers are already exceedingly low and have been on the V climb for decades. 2047 03:02:18,440 --> 03:02:23,320 How is this going to adversely affect the balance of those who are needing that water 2048 03:02:23,320 --> 03:02:29,640 in our wells for our agricultural use in your perimeter who are now going to be taxed even 2049 03:02:29,640 --> 03:02:34,960 greater on the volume of water available because of the possibly temporary nature of the wells 2050 03:02:34,960 --> 03:02:39,640 you're digging now? And what would be the retirement date and the remediation processes 2051 03:02:39,640 --> 03:02:46,800 for these wells once they were installed? Thank you. Thank you. Would anyone else like 2052 03:02:46,800 --> 03:02:59,240 to address? Hello. I guess to go more on I guess the infrastructure costs, but I guess, 2053 03:02:59,240 --> 03:03:08,240 again, torn on this, but one thing that would make me feel a bit better on this would be 2054 03:03:08,240 --> 03:03:13,360 looking into ways, like I know it brings in more, but that's if the development goes the 2055 03:03:13,360 --> 03:03:19,560 way and we don't know that there's no guarantee on the economic development of this with trends. 2056 03:03:19,560 --> 03:03:26,520 You never see the one that gets you, like for economic conditions, but instead of doing 2057 03:03:26,520 --> 03:03:33,420 lighted signals at intersections like roundabouts and the such, I don't know how much that pencils 2058 03:03:33,420 --> 03:03:41,240 out for you and willingness to talk to DCTA to work out for public transit because if 2059 03:03:41,240 --> 03:03:47,160 you can't get to work, if you work in the city and you don't have a car in that, I mean 2060 03:03:47,160 --> 03:03:50,880 that's also the city, if you work in downtown and you don't have a car, you can't really 2061 03:03:50,880 --> 03:04:05,160 live in Craver Ranch if that happens. Thank you. I see. Okay. Was it Brian? Mark. Mark. 2062 03:04:05,160 --> 03:04:09,900 Mark. Okay. Thank you. With all due respect, I did notice that you guys are attempting 2063 03:04:09,900 --> 03:04:17,360 to address the mobility plan, but you guys do have a PD and when you have a PD, the roads 2064 03:04:17,360 --> 03:04:22,040 and those improvements listed within that PD is taken for the gospel. And so part of 2065 03:04:22,040 --> 03:04:27,680 the PD, you show these roads in these locations and so they do cause effect. They affect my 2066 03:04:27,680 --> 03:04:34,200 property as well. And so that was my concern I presented to you. And so my issue is with 2067 03:04:34,200 --> 03:04:39,000 the development of the adoption of the PD and the roads that are within it, it doesn't 2068 03:04:39,000 --> 03:04:44,880 really have any adjustment for flexibility to it. So that's all I have. Thanks. Sorry, 2069 03:04:44,880 --> 03:04:50,800 I have just one question. I remember from your earlier comment that you live on the 2070 03:04:50,800 --> 03:04:56,480 border. Yes. Is that north of this property? My property, looking at this map, if you see 2071 03:04:56,480 --> 03:05:03,440 where the Gribble Springs Road, where the letter S is, at this bottom right-hand corner. 2072 03:05:03,440 --> 03:05:07,960 Ah, yes. Gribble Springs Road. Got it. If you see that little, where the S is, my property 2073 03:05:07,960 --> 03:05:13,740 is at that intersection where the three roads intersect. And so at those three roads intersections, 2074 03:05:13,740 --> 03:05:18,640 if you look at the DIT and development code, the requirements for spacing, for those types 2075 03:05:18,640 --> 03:05:25,800 of intersections, for those types of roads, that doesn't work. Okay. What was being proposed 2076 03:05:25,800 --> 03:05:48,200 and that's my concern. So thank you. Thank you. Yeah, there's, I think. It's Ned, correct? 2077 03:05:48,200 --> 03:05:55,520 Ned Woodbridge again. To address some of the economic issues. As a former corporate CFO, 2078 03:05:55,520 --> 03:05:58,760 I always laugh when someone would come to me and say, but look at the revenues we're 2079 03:05:58,760 --> 03:06:05,000 going to generate on this, with no mention of the costs. That's what I heard today on 2080 03:06:05,000 --> 03:06:11,720 that presentation earlier. I did hear a little bit of the discussion just now that maintenance 2081 03:06:11,720 --> 03:06:16,520 costs, but that's just a small part of it. If you, again, I point you to Chuck Morrone's 2082 03:06:16,520 --> 03:06:22,800 analysis at Strong Towns. You go and look. Yes, next year, year one, after the infrastructure 2083 03:06:22,800 --> 03:06:28,400 is developed, there's very little maintenance. But what happens when all that has to be replaced? 2084 03:06:28,400 --> 03:06:33,440 That's where the major cost comes in and that's a burden on the city or in an MMP. Maybe it's 2085 03:06:33,440 --> 03:06:40,840 a burden on the people who live there. I don't know which. That was my point earlier. Anyhow, 2086 03:06:40,840 --> 03:06:46,600 be careful about how you read what you're hearing because I have great skepticism on 2087 03:06:46,600 --> 03:06:52,920 that. The second thing is, please be wary about, we need to solve that water problem. 2088 03:06:52,920 --> 03:07:04,000 That water needs to come from the dam or whatever, not from wells. Thank you. 2089 03:07:04,000 --> 03:07:15,480 Again, Patricia Adams. Okay, so sticking with the topics that we're to discuss, all I heard 2090 03:07:15,480 --> 03:07:19,360 after all the responses from the people who live out there that are worried about traffic 2091 03:07:19,360 --> 03:07:26,960 and other impacts and just putting 28,000 to 30,000 people on the roads was money. Money, 2092 03:07:26,960 --> 03:07:31,440 money. This is how much benefit it is, how much everybody's going to make. Y'all are 2093 03:07:31,440 --> 03:07:37,160 here tonight to determine land use and zoning and I ask that you focus on that and that 2094 03:07:37,160 --> 03:07:42,240 we apply those standards and not the money. Thank you. 2095 03:07:42,240 --> 03:07:50,840 Thank you. Would anyone else? Yes. I'm just going to make a follow up question 2096 03:07:50,840 --> 03:07:59,040 about the water. Again, Olivia Lilly. Our grandparent's well is dry and we have two 2097 03:07:59,040 --> 03:08:04,720 wells on our property that we put in ourselves because we had to, to live there. We are tapped 2098 03:08:04,720 --> 03:08:12,360 into the Trinity. It is 1800 feet down and it's been said out in our area, every time 2099 03:08:12,360 --> 03:08:17,480 somebody goes and sells a larger portion of land, how many wells are going to go on those 2100 03:08:17,480 --> 03:08:24,720 properties? It's just adding more straws to the same drink. And so water is a problem 2101 03:08:24,720 --> 03:08:29,420 for all of us in Texas. It's going to be a big problem out there. I understand that's 2102 03:08:29,420 --> 03:08:35,360 your solution. I don't think it's a longterm solution. Thank you. 2103 03:08:35,360 --> 03:08:43,600 Okay. But anyone else who spoke before like to have the one minute? I don't see anyone. 2104 03:08:43,600 --> 03:09:03,960 Thank you. With that, I will close the public hearing. Sorry. 5A CA25-1 PD25-3 for B and 2105 03:09:03,960 --> 03:09:15,320 MPA25-3A for C and close those public hearings at this time. Open it up for discussion or 2106 03:09:15,320 --> 03:09:23,080 questions of staff from the commission. Yes. Commissioner McTade. 2107 03:09:23,080 --> 03:09:30,400 A question from staff regarding changes and amendments to the comprehensive plan. What 2108 03:09:30,400 --> 03:09:39,000 are the steps in the process? I'll start and then Haley can add or correct 2109 03:09:39,000 --> 03:09:47,120 me if I'm wrong. We do have this process as an application process where a property 2110 03:09:47,120 --> 03:09:51,160 owner can request to have an amendment that is an application process that we have posted 2111 03:09:51,160 --> 03:09:58,960 on our website as well as provided for in our DDC. Subsequently, and I think more familiarly 2112 03:09:58,960 --> 03:10:03,880 probably what we've seen is they're typically staff initiated where it's a policy, we've 2113 03:10:03,880 --> 03:10:09,480 been given direction from the PNC or city council to further explore an area more or 2114 03:10:09,480 --> 03:10:14,360 we've been receiving significant development inquiry. And again, we've received some type 2115 03:10:14,360 --> 03:10:19,560 of direction to take on a staff initiated change to the comprehensive plan amendment. 2116 03:10:19,560 --> 03:10:23,040 The most recent one I can think about if I can throw that in there that you all heard 2117 03:10:23,040 --> 03:10:30,740 was the corridor on 380 on the east side of town. So the comprehensive plan amendments 2118 03:10:30,740 --> 03:10:34,440 have come before you and that's the most recent one I can think of. 2119 03:10:34,440 --> 03:10:41,480 Yes. Go ahead. Excuse me. So part of the process is a public 2120 03:10:41,480 --> 03:10:43,640 hearing? Yes. This is part of the process. 2121 03:10:43,640 --> 03:10:49,600 And this would be the process. Thank you. If I could, I would just add everything Mia 2122 03:10:49,600 --> 03:10:54,960 said is correct. The code does allow for this process to be initiated by city staff, by 2123 03:10:54,960 --> 03:10:58,560 the planning and zoning commission, by city council or by a landowner or their representative. 2124 03:10:58,560 --> 03:11:03,960 So we are following that process. It is utilized maybe not as frequently as the zoning tool, 2125 03:11:03,960 --> 03:11:07,640 but these come before you all a handful of times per year. And it follows the same process 2126 03:11:07,640 --> 03:11:11,120 that you're familiar with in zoning where we encourage the neighborhood outreach, but 2127 03:11:11,120 --> 03:11:15,600 it's not strictly required. They have a public hearing at PNC and then it goes to city council 2128 03:11:15,600 --> 03:11:19,520 with your recommendation and council is the final decision maker. I'm also at a public 2129 03:11:19,520 --> 03:11:28,720 hearing. Thank you. Commissioner Dyer. 2130 03:11:28,720 --> 03:11:34,920 For city staff, just to kind of piggyback on commissioner McDade's question. Obviously 2131 03:11:34,920 --> 03:11:43,000 this area was annexed into the city limits in 2008, 2009 with the intention that in the 2132 03:11:43,000 --> 03:11:50,240 future it was going to be a large development. So, um, is staff able to say why it was not 2133 03:11:50,240 --> 03:11:58,040 included in the 2030 or the 2040 plan if staff already knew that this wasn't the intention? 2134 03:11:58,040 --> 03:12:03,480 I'm not, I'm not sure. Um, that's what my reference in the backup was as far as no documented 2135 03:12:03,480 --> 03:12:09,280 discussion on, on why there is in the minutes of when this was annexed, there is discussion 2136 03:12:09,280 --> 03:12:14,560 that development wasn't anticipated. Um, that's there, but as far as why it wasn't considered 2137 03:12:14,560 --> 03:12:20,120 in the didn't 2030 or, um, um, in, in that plan, I'm not sure. And then I think the didn't 2138 03:12:20,120 --> 03:12:25,720 2040 plan was a minor update. So if you look across the feature land use, um, map, a lot 2139 03:12:25,720 --> 03:12:29,820 of those designations are the same where they've carried over trends and transition to what 2140 03:12:29,820 --> 03:12:33,520 we would then we now call them in the didn't 2040. 2141 03:12:33,520 --> 03:12:43,280 Okay. Thank you. Um, just to add to that net a little more light, often, um, if development 2142 03:12:43,280 --> 03:12:49,320 is not eminent or has not been applied for at that time, um, the staff P and Z council 2143 03:12:49,320 --> 03:12:52,920 or the consultants helping us on plans will default to what the existing land use is as 2144 03:12:52,920 --> 03:12:57,600 a placeholder until such time as something comes along. So to me, his point, those future 2145 03:12:57,600 --> 03:13:01,480 land use map updates that were made with the 2040 plan were very limited in scope to those 2146 03:13:01,480 --> 03:13:06,220 areas where development interest had been expressed at that time or may have already 2147 03:13:06,220 --> 03:13:11,280 occurred in the map was not updated, um, previously. So very limited in scope. 2148 03:13:11,280 --> 03:13:14,800 And I'm curious if staff can answer this. Cause that was one thing I thought of, you 2149 03:13:14,800 --> 03:13:21,940 know, you look at, for example, landmark where that property was purchased in the eighties. 2150 03:13:21,940 --> 03:13:28,080 And so that took almost 40 years. I mean, 30, 34, 35 years for it to come to the plan 2151 03:13:28,080 --> 03:13:33,100 and do what, you know, we're doing right now with Craver Ranch. So if you think about it, 2152 03:13:33,100 --> 03:13:40,720 you know, 2008, 2009 to 2025, you know, that's essentially 17 years ago. So maybe, you know, 2153 03:13:40,720 --> 03:13:45,560 with staff thinking that this, we got like 10 more years, we can do it at the next review, 2154 03:13:45,560 --> 03:13:49,680 you know, cause you review that every five years. So that's why I was just kind of curious 2155 03:13:49,680 --> 03:13:54,800 like, you know, what that discussion was. Sure. And, and to me at this point, I don't 2156 03:13:54,800 --> 03:13:59,400 believe there was any specific discussion with that limited scale update of the plan, 2157 03:13:59,400 --> 03:14:05,720 um, from the 2030 to the 2040 plan. Um, the agriculture use is often just a placeholder 2158 03:14:05,720 --> 03:14:09,840 knowing that that's the existing use and the land can stay with that. It's the same thing 2159 03:14:09,840 --> 03:14:14,120 that happens when properties annexed into the city. It automatically is assigned an agriculture 2160 03:14:14,120 --> 03:14:21,760 zoning for that purpose as a placeholder until development occurs. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner 2161 03:14:21,760 --> 03:14:29,120 Kettresett. So I would like to hear more about the Gribble Springs road intersection and 2162 03:14:29,120 --> 03:14:39,400 how that may or may not be, you know, encode. Um, so I'll look to Chandra, um, our transportation, 2163 03:14:39,400 --> 03:14:44,520 um, from our transportation team. Um, I speak to the current alignments on the mobility 2164 03:14:44,520 --> 03:14:49,400 planets, which are seeing there, um, that has that, that crossing. It's a sort of realignment 2165 03:14:49,400 --> 03:14:54,920 of Gribble Springs road, um, and shepherd road to be one. Um, and then the primary or 2166 03:14:54,920 --> 03:15:03,920 secondary arterial that's shown that, uh, intersects it, but I'll defer to Chandra. 2167 03:15:03,920 --> 03:15:11,440 Good evening commissioner Chandra city traffic engineer. The road that is shown in our mobility 2168 03:15:11,440 --> 03:15:16,980 plan actually intersects, uh, as a straight connecting road. Uh, it will be a connecting 2169 03:15:16,980 --> 03:15:23,120 road either to the north of Gribble Springs, or it could be shifted. Staff has the authority 2170 03:15:23,120 --> 03:15:30,040 to shift the roadway 1000 feet and there is a mound going on the north south road. So 2171 03:15:30,040 --> 03:15:36,160 it could be shifted for the east as well. So it's not a, um, set on stone. These are 2172 03:15:36,160 --> 03:15:42,440 just a 30 foot, 30,000 foot level lines on a map. So this could be shifted either way 2173 03:15:42,440 --> 03:15:53,640 and uh, planned, uh, as the phasing and the development happens. 2174 03:15:53,640 --> 03:16:00,960 I think maybe some of the, just to clarify some of the confusion is when I hear intersection 2175 03:16:00,960 --> 03:16:10,160 spacing conflict, I think a point of an intersection is nearby another point, but I'm not sure 2176 03:16:10,160 --> 03:16:13,680 I understand where that other point is. Are you familiar enough with the area to speak 2177 03:16:13,680 --> 03:16:20,680 to that? Yes. Okay. So as you see, uh, this dotted green lines, that is the actual, uh, 2178 03:16:20,680 --> 03:16:28,440 lines on our mobility plan. So the PD changes to say, uh, it's shifting to like a blue lines, 2179 03:16:28,440 --> 03:16:37,320 right? So it shift us within 1000 feet. They could do that. That is, uh, legally allowed, 2180 03:16:37,320 --> 03:16:42,640 but if it's more than 1000 feet, that's where they're doing this PD change from it's crossing 2181 03:16:42,640 --> 03:16:49,120 that, uh, floodplain. So they're shifting 1900 feet approximately. So that's why that 2182 03:16:49,120 --> 03:16:55,400 roadway change, this gray line has come forward because it's more than the thousand feet shift. 2183 03:16:55,400 --> 03:17:00,120 But if they want to move this blue line that's connecting here, little up north, that is 2184 03:17:00,120 --> 03:17:06,600 doable. So every line that is shown, it's really, uh, a road that is needed. It doesn't 2185 03:17:06,600 --> 03:17:12,040 have to be on Gribble Springs. It could go north, it could go south, it could go east 2186 03:17:12,040 --> 03:17:22,480 or west within the 1000 feet limit. Okay. Thank you. Sure. Uh, I'm going to bring it 2187 03:17:22,480 --> 03:17:29,920 back to the, the last question Mia. Um, because I, I just want to get a little bit more clarity. 2188 03:17:29,920 --> 03:17:37,280 I know none of us woke up yesterday in 2013 or 2014 when the public process was ongoing 2189 03:17:37,280 --> 03:17:43,440 for the 2030 plan. Uh, it, it seems to me, and I think one of the public members of the 2190 03:17:43,440 --> 03:17:51,400 public actually read a portion of the plan that specifically says, um, we, we should 2191 03:17:51,400 --> 03:18:00,320 essentially encourage the existing MPCs, which I'm aware of Hunter Coal and then, um, what's 2192 03:18:00,320 --> 03:18:07,720 the one on, on the northeast side of the loop and 35 Hills of Denton. Um, are, are those 2193 03:18:07,720 --> 03:18:13,560 built out now? I do not believe so. I know Hills of Denton has not. Um, I don't believe 2194 03:18:13,560 --> 03:18:17,880 that they started construction. And then, uh, what were the other ones? Landmark is 2195 03:18:17,880 --> 03:18:24,160 under construction. Um, coal is under construction. They're kind of just getting started, right? 2196 03:18:24,160 --> 03:18:33,120 Right. Okay. So, so I understand the process of updating the comp plan and I could understand, 2197 03:18:33,120 --> 03:18:39,440 I completely understand why the, the 2040 plan update just left that as is. It wasn't 2198 03:18:39,440 --> 03:18:47,560 a major point that we looked at, but the 2030 plan wrote that language that says we should 2199 03:18:47,560 --> 03:18:57,520 encourage these before we go afar. And, and so my, my confusion and I appreciate staff's 2200 03:18:57,520 --> 03:19:03,960 answers. I think there was one answer that, well, with within this process of a limited 2201 03:19:03,960 --> 03:19:10,280 to sort of the, the comprehensive plan amendment of a public hearing notice and then pass, 2202 03:19:10,280 --> 03:19:17,040 we wouldn't suggest changing the vision statement or, or that type of verbiage, right? Because 2203 03:19:17,040 --> 03:19:25,640 that's sort of a more fundamental change. Um, I'm just confused. Like, do you see or 2204 03:19:25,640 --> 03:19:31,880 does staff see this as an example of what the text in the comp plan is saying that we 2205 03:19:31,880 --> 03:19:38,600 should fill up these existing MPCs before? Yeah. Yeah. So in, in my analysis, I tried 2206 03:19:38,600 --> 03:19:43,960 to capture the, the, there, there are somewhat of competing goals in a Denton 2040 plan and 2207 03:19:43,960 --> 03:19:47,920 it's not, um, inherently competing. It's, it's based on the subject or the property 2208 03:19:47,920 --> 03:19:51,840 of the development that you're talking about at the time. Um, like this one is helping 2209 03:19:51,840 --> 03:19:55,360 us achieve some housing goals. It's helping us achieve some open space goals. It's helping 2210 03:19:55,360 --> 03:20:00,880 us achieve some development goals that are in the comprehensive plan. Um, but it does, 2211 03:20:00,880 --> 03:20:04,960 it does speak to some of the sprawls, some of the things that we've heard, um, um, this, 2212 03:20:04,960 --> 03:20:14,160 this evening. Um, so, um, always Haley to add something here, but I think, I think that 2213 03:20:14,160 --> 03:20:19,320 the, that, that staff acknowledges that there's some, some conflict here and we have an application 2214 03:20:19,320 --> 03:20:23,840 at hand that we're, we're trying to take advantage of an opportunity that's coming forward, or 2215 03:20:23,840 --> 03:20:27,600 we're recommending approval of taking advantage of an opportunity that's coming forward, um, 2216 03:20:27,600 --> 03:20:31,000 with this development of a property. Those properties, like we mentioned earlier, the 2217 03:20:31,000 --> 03:20:37,200 other, uh, MPCs are developing. Um, there's zoning changes with them. There's active projects 2218 03:20:37,200 --> 03:20:41,760 that are going on with those. So staff is in the meantime also encouraging the growth 2219 03:20:41,760 --> 03:20:46,920 and the, and the actual, um, construction of those and processing that, um, through 2220 03:20:46,920 --> 03:20:52,240 this is an application that we have on hand that we feel is, is, is also helping us meet 2221 03:20:52,240 --> 03:20:56,080 and achieve some of those goals within the, the comprehensive plan. And the reason that 2222 03:20:56,080 --> 03:21:00,680 the, the comprehensive plan amendment is a part of this also is cause that is, needs 2223 03:21:00,680 --> 03:21:04,640 to be a part of the discussion. Do we feel that the, the master plan community future 2224 03:21:04,640 --> 03:21:10,640 land use designation here is, is appropriate? And if, and, and, and in the context the applicant 2225 03:21:10,640 --> 03:21:15,400 has presented their full idea in this case, and not just the blanket, do we feel that 2226 03:21:15,400 --> 03:21:24,120 MPC is appropriate? Okay. If that makes sense. Yeah. Thank you. Questions or discussion? 2227 03:21:24,120 --> 03:21:34,960 Commissioner Dyer. Um, I know that I asked this, um, in our workshop, but just to, um, 2228 03:21:34,960 --> 03:21:39,320 you know, and for the crowd and those watching that may not have been watching the workshop, 2229 03:21:39,320 --> 03:21:44,800 can you please just address the whole leapfrog thing? Um, cause I know we talked about it 2230 03:21:44,800 --> 03:21:49,600 a couple of weeks ago when this was first introduced to us, um, to start, you know, 2231 03:21:49,600 --> 03:21:55,280 giving us some background information and just examples of Denton going a little bit 2232 03:21:55,280 --> 03:22:01,080 farther out from the center of the city and doing that typical, you know, growth where 2233 03:22:01,080 --> 03:22:06,040 you started, started the center and kind of work your way out. Why there have been some, 2234 03:22:06,040 --> 03:22:11,220 you know, different developments like a ropes and ranch, like a coal ranch hunter landmark, 2235 03:22:11,220 --> 03:22:15,840 you know, all of that. Um, if you could just kind of address that place. Yeah. So clearly 2236 03:22:15,840 --> 03:22:21,080 this is a 2,500 acre property that is on the Northern edge of the city. It is farther. 2237 03:22:21,080 --> 03:22:25,240 It is far from the city center. That's, that's not something that we're saying is not the 2238 03:22:25,240 --> 03:22:32,680 case. Um, there are some other things to consider though. This is the, with the 2,500 acres, 2239 03:22:32,680 --> 03:22:38,060 it's one property owner. So it's allowing us the opportunity to, um, um, deal with one 2240 03:22:38,060 --> 03:22:43,960 property owner in the full development of this property. It's not, um, that the properties 2241 03:22:43,960 --> 03:22:52,500 between that property and the city of Denton, um, are not developing. There is some challenges 2242 03:22:52,500 --> 03:22:56,580 with developing those properties. There's floodplain that crosses through there. Um, 2243 03:22:56,580 --> 03:23:00,960 but we have received interest and inquiries in the development of those properties. So 2244 03:23:00,960 --> 03:23:08,480 while this is, this is kind of remote to the, uh, the city of Denton, um, it, it isn't, 2245 03:23:08,480 --> 03:23:14,240 it is holding, uh, are offering things that are, are able to support the, the development 2246 03:23:14,240 --> 03:23:18,360 and the residents that is proposing. Um, so it is kind of proposing to be a community 2247 03:23:18,360 --> 03:23:23,400 within itself. Um, but it does also, um, like I said, an opportunity to develop with, with 2248 03:23:23,400 --> 03:23:30,080 one property owner and then, um, um, it, this is not to say that the properties between this 2249 03:23:30,080 --> 03:23:40,760 development and the, the core city of Denton wouldn't develop, um, as well. Thank you. 2250 03:23:40,760 --> 03:24:04,320 Everybody's quiet tonight. Uh, Commissioner MacDuff. I will say, uh, I knew this was coming. 2251 03:24:04,320 --> 03:24:09,520 I didn't know that we'd be considering it this, in November, this time of year, you 2252 03:24:09,520 --> 03:24:14,960 know, we first started talking about it October. Well, that said, I think that Mia, Miss Hines, 2253 03:24:14,960 --> 03:24:20,280 you've done a good job in addressing these concerns. What I hear, I heard two big things 2254 03:24:20,280 --> 03:24:28,760 besides the, the resource concerns, I'll call them, uh, the outer loop in the mobility. 2255 03:24:28,760 --> 03:24:34,560 I'm not sure if we've addressed that fully, but also the thing that struck me the most, 2256 03:24:34,560 --> 03:24:40,880 and I think Brian Denny has gone, has left the building, right? Miss Anderson, what he 2257 03:24:40,880 --> 03:24:49,360 said struck me and I thought about that today. Uh, and he said, I just want this development 2258 03:24:49,360 --> 03:24:55,480 to be done well and proper, properly to honor my mother's legacy. So I think what we have 2259 03:24:55,480 --> 03:25:03,560 to say is, are all these things, can we get these in line with, can we bring these concerns 2260 03:25:03,560 --> 03:25:11,760 in, can we address them so that Mary Denny's legacy is honored well and properly? 2261 03:25:11,760 --> 03:25:18,280 I would say the, the proposal as it is before you tonight is, is what it is. I think I'd 2262 03:25:18,280 --> 03:25:23,280 have to defer to the applicant on any, um, changes on the, on the plan. 2263 03:25:23,280 --> 03:25:25,320 Absolutely. Thank you. 2264 03:25:25,320 --> 03:25:32,480 Sure. So I'll just remind the commission that as we deliberate, our opportunity now 2265 03:25:32,480 --> 03:25:41,320 is to explain, um, if there are specific or long-term planning things, whatever it is 2266 03:25:41,320 --> 03:25:46,800 that, um, that we like about this or that we are concerned about, let's, let's make 2267 03:25:46,800 --> 03:25:54,120 those clear to staff, um, so that they can, uh, take that feedback in, in the future, 2268 03:25:54,120 --> 03:26:02,840 um, for, for this and others. Um, I'll, I'll say a few things. I, I really appreciate, 2269 03:26:02,840 --> 03:26:07,800 um, staff, you know, clarifying, hey, it's a difficult application and, and there are 2270 03:26:07,800 --> 03:26:14,360 some things like develop, like planning out the 2,500 acres at once allows you to do some 2271 03:26:14,360 --> 03:26:20,520 unique things. Um, and, and when you look at our comprehensive plan, there's, there's 2272 03:26:20,520 --> 03:26:29,720 a lot of goals, right? There's, and so a large application like this is going to help 2273 03:26:29,720 --> 03:26:35,840 in many of those. It may be contrary to some of them as well. Um, and, and I appreciate 2274 03:26:35,840 --> 03:26:42,160 you saying that because I'm going to try to be very specific about, um, what concerns 2275 03:26:42,160 --> 03:26:50,440 I have, not just in this and that concern, but in this is my concern because I believe 2276 03:26:50,440 --> 03:26:55,240 it should be a higher priority than some of the other goals, right? And I imagine that's 2277 03:26:55,240 --> 03:27:03,480 a, that's an iterative process to understand what the direction is. Um, so, so I'll try 2278 03:27:03,480 --> 03:27:10,280 to go quickly. Um, but I have a few things here. So, um, appreciate the, the staff presentation 2279 03:27:10,280 --> 03:27:17,360 showing kind of the, the other development in the, um, Collin County portion of the outer 2280 03:27:17,360 --> 03:27:23,920 loop and some of the things around Salina. Like my feeling when I read the comprehensive 2281 03:27:23,920 --> 03:27:29,400 plan and I talked to other people in Denton is that we're not dreaming of becoming a city 2282 03:27:29,400 --> 03:27:37,960 like Salina. Um, TextDOT is going to do what TextDOT does. Uh, I think this is a prime 2283 03:27:37,960 --> 03:27:47,920 example of, um, uh, quite honestly, TextDOT carrying through a very long-term planning 2284 03:27:47,920 --> 03:27:53,960 process. Um, but we've seen that they're saying, well, we're still considering these 2285 03:27:53,960 --> 03:27:59,400 other roads and we're going to do an environmental clearance and then make a decision. Um, at 2286 03:27:59,400 --> 03:28:06,720 the same time, Texas is one of the few state DOTs that has the ability to do its own environmental 2287 03:28:06,720 --> 03:28:12,440 clearance instead of the federal government doing that. Um, and it seems obvious to me 2288 03:28:12,440 --> 03:28:21,880 that, that the, the end goal is known by people in certain rooms and not explained openly 2289 03:28:21,880 --> 03:28:28,240 in the open meetings that TextDOT has. And so I'm sorry for that, but we don't have any 2290 03:28:28,240 --> 03:28:36,160 power over TextDOT. Um, that's also a concern for me because we don't have power over them, 2291 03:28:36,160 --> 03:28:41,440 which means that all the connecting roads between the developed portion of Denton and 2292 03:28:41,440 --> 03:28:51,260 the Craver Ranch, um, we cannot help our residents deal with that, right? Short of no longer 2293 03:28:51,260 --> 03:28:56,060 having budget crunches and having to freeze staff salaries, which we did this year, uh, 2294 03:28:56,060 --> 03:29:02,480 so that we can hire more lobbyists to go to Austin and beg for more transportation money 2295 03:29:02,480 --> 03:29:11,920 that we don't have any control. Um, the, there was something that I want to address in, in 2296 03:29:11,920 --> 03:29:20,180 the staff backup, um, where mobility plan, uh, showing these roadways was talked about 2297 03:29:20,180 --> 03:29:26,840 as one of the reasons why now this area is ready for development. There's a very circular 2298 03:29:26,840 --> 03:29:32,120 process. Um, I'm happy to be corrected in the future because I don't think it should 2299 03:29:32,120 --> 03:29:41,080 happen this way, but what I've seen is that we put lines on a map and as shown by the 2300 03:29:41,080 --> 03:29:47,280 mobility plan amendment, they're not always exactly where they make sense to go. Um, but 2301 03:29:47,280 --> 03:29:55,560 we, we put those lines there, yes, to some extent for planning, but also because if we 2302 03:29:55,560 --> 03:30:03,000 draw lines there, we can put them in our 10 year CIP, which then justifies a impact fee 2303 03:30:03,000 --> 03:30:09,600 study so that we can collect enough money to build them. Um, and, and so this, it's 2304 03:30:09,600 --> 03:30:13,840 the circular process of, you don't want to be behind on impact fees. So you put the lines 2305 03:30:13,840 --> 03:30:19,040 on the, on the map, even if it's designated as rural and you know, if it stays rural, 2306 03:30:19,040 --> 03:30:24,560 you'll never build it, right? But you do those so that you can raise impact fees so that you 2307 03:30:24,560 --> 03:30:28,200 can get money and build them. And then when you build them or you plan to build them, 2308 03:30:28,200 --> 03:30:37,360 well, of course it shouldn't be rural anymore. Um, so, so transportation planning wags the 2309 03:30:37,360 --> 03:30:47,480 tail of land use planning in Texas and I don't think that's the way it should be. Um, the, 2310 03:30:47,480 --> 03:30:53,680 the thing I would say just overall that is the highest priority for me, I've heard it 2311 03:30:53,680 --> 03:31:02,560 from several residents, but I don't know about the commission as a whole is the fiscal concerns. 2312 03:31:02,560 --> 03:31:08,800 Um, I understand a study was done. I understand that this process started two years ago to 2313 03:31:08,800 --> 03:31:14,600 develop this plan. And then I understand that, Oh, we got the fiscal impact study maybe six 2314 03:31:14,600 --> 03:31:22,600 weeks ago. That's backwards. And I understand, I say that understanding that you can't have 2315 03:31:22,600 --> 03:31:29,120 everything figured out at the beginning. But when I read our comprehensive plan, it says 2316 03:31:29,120 --> 03:31:36,480 the purpose for doing conservation development at the fringe for doing infill for doing additional 2317 03:31:36,480 --> 03:31:41,480 housing types, all these types of things that are actions in our comprehensive plan. One 2318 03:31:41,480 --> 03:31:51,000 of the main reasons why that was done is to grow Denton in a way that makes us more fiscally 2319 03:31:51,000 --> 03:31:57,040 strong in the future instead of less. Okay. Uh, and, and there's a whole lot of that in 2320 03:31:57,040 --> 03:32:02,920 the first chapter introduction of the comprehensive plan to back that up. Um, as I look at this 2321 03:32:02,920 --> 03:32:07,800 particular, uh, fiscal analysis and just so everybody's aware of the way this happens 2322 03:32:07,800 --> 03:32:14,800 with very large developments like this, um, the developer basically pays for a third party 2323 03:32:14,800 --> 03:32:21,800 company to do the analysis on their plan. Um, so, so the analysis was done not by the 2324 03:32:21,800 --> 03:32:27,960 city and not by the applicant, but by someone else who, who was paid to, to do it as contract 2325 03:32:27,960 --> 03:32:38,080 work. Um, when I look at that, I see several shortcomings that do concern me, right? Um, 2326 03:32:38,080 --> 03:32:46,240 I'll just say that in general, it, it pretends like costs in the future are going to be the 2327 03:32:46,240 --> 03:32:56,400 same that they have been in the past for the city, um, per some metric. One of the, um, 2328 03:32:56,400 --> 03:33:05,040 just as an example of this, right back when we were doing the 2019 bond package, um, there 2329 03:33:05,040 --> 03:33:12,660 were questions about, okay, how does this, uh, how does some of the roadway projects 2330 03:33:12,660 --> 03:33:16,640 pencil out and are we going to be able to afford maintaining them? Um, so there was 2331 03:33:16,640 --> 03:33:21,800 some discussion then about how much do we spend on maintenance? And the, the response 2332 03:33:21,800 --> 03:33:29,720 that we got from staff was, well, um, not all of our roadways of the 1600 lane miles 2333 03:33:29,720 --> 03:33:38,360 are being maintained. Um, and, but for the ones that are being maintained because they're 2334 03:33:38,360 --> 03:33:47,400 in good enough repair that small maintenance would give them a longer life, um, would, 2335 03:33:47,400 --> 03:33:57,200 uh, would, were costing roughly 6,000 or $11,000 a year amortized to maintain. So, so this 2336 03:33:57,200 --> 03:34:02,720 fiscal analysis, just because of the methodology, which is very clearly laid out, um, assumes 2337 03:34:02,720 --> 03:34:12,600 that these roads, uh, are going to cost $4,300 a year to maintain, right? And not only that, 2338 03:34:12,600 --> 03:34:22,080 but call it $9,000 a year in 2019 with construction inflation for roads is more like 15 or 16,000 2339 03:34:22,080 --> 03:34:27,160 a year. Um, so, so I look at all those things and I add up these numbers and the end result 2340 03:34:27,160 --> 03:34:37,720 I get is a, uh, roughly, you know, call it 300 to $400 million deficit, um, at the end 2341 03:34:37,720 --> 03:34:44,920 of this period that somebody has to pay. And, uh, as, as we heard, some members of the public 2342 03:34:44,920 --> 03:34:54,400 are nervous about that. So to me that's a very high priority. Um, the challenge is how 2343 03:34:54,400 --> 03:35:02,040 do we build a community that our residents like, enjoy, where we don't have to start 2344 03:35:02,040 --> 03:35:09,200 raising and raising taxes to start rebuilding roads and pipes, um, in the future. And, and 2345 03:35:09,200 --> 03:35:15,640 in order to do that, we have to start the process of considering new development from 2346 03:35:15,640 --> 03:35:23,600 the perspective of how can we achieve these things that residents want while also achieving, 2347 03:35:23,600 --> 03:35:30,520 um, better fiscal stability so that we're not asking our children to pay for things. 2348 03:35:30,520 --> 03:35:37,640 So commissioner catcher said, it seems to me like there's a lot of things that are unanswered 2349 03:35:37,640 --> 03:35:45,200 still including this Gribble Springs road intersection. So I motion to table this certain 2350 03:35:45,200 --> 03:35:50,400 of December 17th, uh, 2025 meeting. 2351 03:35:50,400 --> 03:35:57,640 Let me just ask a procedural question for a public hearing. Once we've had the public 2352 03:35:57,640 --> 03:36:05,400 hearing and we closed the public hearing, if we continue it before a vote, is it just 2353 03:36:05,400 --> 03:36:11,320 come back as a item for individual consideration and we vote on it then? 2354 03:36:11,320 --> 03:36:20,360 Well chair, um, I would say you have discretion to reopen the public hearing because, um, 2355 03:36:20,360 --> 03:36:25,040 everyone who would need to be noticed that the public hearing was still happening at 2356 03:36:25,040 --> 03:36:31,040 December 17th this year in the room. Um, and that would be my recommendation. 2357 03:36:31,040 --> 03:36:41,200 Okay. Thank you. So with that we have a motion to, um, table, uh, to a date certain of December 2358 03:36:41,200 --> 03:36:45,520 17th. Is that your intention? Okay. 2359 03:36:45,520 --> 03:36:57,760 Yes. Oh, um, all of the items. Let's see. Let me pull them up. 2360 03:36:57,760 --> 03:37:07,680 Yeah. The five, five a, b and c. Yes. Okay. Commissioner Dyer. 2361 03:37:07,680 --> 03:37:13,340 Can I just ask what additional information you're hoping to get between now and then 2362 03:37:13,340 --> 03:37:18,360 to be able to do a vote? Well, so I asked the question about Gribble 2363 03:37:18,360 --> 03:37:27,080 Springs and I didn't actually get an answer from that, um, for sure. Um, and I think we 2364 03:37:27,080 --> 03:37:35,920 still maybe could get a little bit more clarification on the water, um, usage because we had another 2365 03:37:35,920 --> 03:37:43,840 person come up, you know, and reiterate how they're having water issues right now. And 2366 03:37:43,840 --> 03:37:59,080 I think maybe we could revisit that as well with more information. 2367 03:37:59,080 --> 03:38:11,320 Is there a second for the motion? Not seeing one. We'll, uh, we'll continue and be open 2368 03:38:11,320 --> 03:38:20,880 for a, for a motion or more discussion. I, I think honestly, um, uh, commissioner McDade. 2369 03:38:20,880 --> 03:38:35,400 Okay. So there's just for clarification, there's the comprehensive plan map amendment, which 2370 03:38:35,400 --> 03:38:42,580 changes the future land use from rural, uh, individually, right? But, but two of them 2371 03:38:42,580 --> 03:38:49,160 are technically amendments to the comprehensive plan because the mobility plan is a component 2372 03:38:49,160 --> 03:39:11,920 of it. Um, okay. Okay. So five a, um, to, uh, amend the comprehensive plan for a future 2373 03:39:11,920 --> 03:39:21,160 land use designation from rural residential to, or from agriculture to master plan community. 2374 03:39:21,160 --> 03:39:47,760 Okay. Is there a second for the motion? Commissioner Dyer. Sorry. I will second that, um, motion 2375 03:39:47,760 --> 03:39:58,040 to go ahead and approve that we, um, move the current designation of agriculture to 2376 03:39:58,040 --> 03:40:08,520 the, um, I'm losing it. Master plan community, future land use. But I've, are we going to 2377 03:40:08,520 --> 03:40:12,000 have a discussion just a little bit more? Cause there's a couple of things I'd like 2378 03:40:12,000 --> 03:40:19,960 to say. Okay. So, um, actually with all three, I feel very comfortable, um, voting in favor 2379 03:40:19,960 --> 03:40:26,460 of them. I read all the emails that I got and I heard everything and this is where it's 2380 03:40:26,460 --> 03:40:34,920 hard because you're balancing out all these homeowners needs and the community needs and 2381 03:40:34,920 --> 03:40:39,480 the property owners needs. And one of the things, some of the things I would like to 2382 03:40:39,480 --> 03:40:47,800 say is this is a level of trust between a developer in a city that we as a board in 2383 03:40:47,800 --> 03:40:55,560 voting for this is, is giving you. And I would really hope that both the city and the developer 2384 03:40:55,560 --> 03:41:01,380 would listen to the citizens comments because these are your neighbors. And as you heard, 2385 03:41:01,380 --> 03:41:08,040 some of these individuals have been here for generations. And when you have a development 2386 03:41:08,040 --> 03:41:13,560 of this size, I mean, I live in an area right now. I live in ropes and ranch and we have 2387 03:41:13,560 --> 03:41:18,040 ropes and ranch and we have what North Lake is doing across the street and we now have 2388 03:41:18,040 --> 03:41:24,960 landmarks. So I'm in it. I I'm in where you guys may be in the next five to 10 years, 2389 03:41:24,960 --> 03:41:30,160 um, when you get to it. So, so I do have a heart for that. So I would really encourage 2390 03:41:30,160 --> 03:41:37,440 the city staff and the developer to work together. Um, and the city council, I know city council's 2391 03:41:37,440 --> 03:41:44,180 not here, but work with your city, um, elected officials, work with your county elected officials, 2392 03:41:44,180 --> 03:41:50,280 work with your state elected officials, because obviously Craver ranch is not the only, this 2393 03:41:50,280 --> 03:41:55,400 is the largest in that area, but there are other smaller developments coming. Even, you 2394 03:41:55,400 --> 03:42:01,520 know, Ms Mia said that they've got other applicants who have been, you know, talking about developing 2395 03:42:01,520 --> 03:42:10,080 some of the other neighboring areas on this road, figure out a way that water and road 2396 03:42:10,080 --> 03:42:18,080 can be met. The needs can be met without it before it becomes a problem because this isn't 2397 03:42:18,080 --> 03:42:23,840 going to be built for three years and it's not like you're going to have, you know, 9,000 2398 03:42:23,840 --> 03:42:29,160 door fronts in five years. Like this is a, you know, from today until it's done, you're 2399 03:42:29,160 --> 03:42:36,440 talking like a 20 year process, but be forward thinking and please find a way to get all 2400 03:42:36,440 --> 03:42:42,360 of this done. So these people sitting in the audience, the homeowners who are watching 2401 03:42:42,360 --> 03:42:47,520 on the internet and those who are not making it and future homeowners, because some of 2402 03:42:47,520 --> 03:42:50,940 these people are going to sell their lands. There's, there's vacant lands. There's a vacant 2403 03:42:50,940 --> 03:42:54,960 land across the street. That's for sale. That's going to be purchased one day and built on. 2404 03:42:54,960 --> 03:43:01,280 So just be good, be good neighbors and figure out a way for the city to support citizens 2405 03:43:01,280 --> 03:43:09,120 for the developer of Craver to make sure that everybody can kind of find a way so that the 2406 03:43:09,120 --> 03:43:22,880 hardship is not so hard. Any other? Like I said, this is our opportunity to explain what 2407 03:43:22,880 --> 03:43:41,880 we like and what we don't. Okay. Okay. With that, seeing no further discussion, I'll call 2408 03:43:41,880 --> 03:43:56,640 for a vote on the board. That item passes four to two. We still have two other items 2409 03:43:56,640 --> 03:44:07,960 that we need a motion for. I'll ask that we go ahead and I'll just do it. I will move 2410 03:44:07,960 --> 03:44:21,200 that we adopt the proposed mobility plan amendment for this. While I'm not in favor of the rest 2411 03:44:21,200 --> 03:44:32,160 of this plan, thank you. I, I see this as honestly just cleaning it up regardless of 2412 03:44:32,160 --> 03:44:38,840 whether this, uh, this development happens or not. Uh, this, this mobility plan shouldn't 2413 03:44:38,840 --> 03:44:46,680 have a line going through, uh, the sideways on a flood point. Uh, commissioner Macduff. 2414 03:44:46,680 --> 03:44:54,000 Oh, yes. I will second, uh, that motion to approve the thoroughfare map of the 2022 mobility 2415 03:44:54,000 --> 03:45:13,000 plan amendment. Any discussion? Not seeing any. I'll call for a vote on the board. That 2416 03:45:13,000 --> 03:45:26,440 item passes a five one and we're open for, uh, more discussion or emotion for the remaining 2417 03:45:26,440 --> 03:45:38,720 public hearing commissioner Dyer. I would like to make a motion that we move to approve 2418 03:45:38,720 --> 03:45:43,960 this area going from rural residential to a plan development district. Commissioner 2419 03:45:43,960 --> 03:46:02,720 catcher said, I second that any discussion, no comments. Yeah, I'll just say, um, this 2420 03:46:02,720 --> 03:46:15,440 will be a continuation of, um, suburban growth in Northern Denton and Collin County. Uh, 2421 03:46:15,440 --> 03:46:22,440 it will cause Denton to have to raise taxes significantly 40 or 50 years from now and 2422 03:46:22,440 --> 03:46:32,160 our children will be paying for it. Uh, commissioner Garland. Um, I will go ahead and say that 2423 03:46:32,160 --> 03:46:36,800 I have to be honest that I have received a lot of pressure from people outside of our 2424 03:46:36,800 --> 03:46:43,600 community to pass this, um, which is something that immediately makes me suspicious when 2425 03:46:43,600 --> 03:46:50,920 I feel like there are outside pressures. Um, especially when it's evident that there isn't, 2426 03:46:50,920 --> 03:46:56,280 there doesn't seem to be a lot of community support. Um, I think that the neighbors made 2427 03:46:56,280 --> 03:47:04,720 some extremely valid concerns tonight with regards to water and the environmental impact. 2428 03:47:04,720 --> 03:47:11,320 Um, as it sits, I love the idea of a master plan community. Um, I thought the homes were 2429 03:47:11,320 --> 03:47:16,680 beautiful. I thought everything looked great. Um, it looks like somewhere I would want to 2430 03:47:16,680 --> 03:47:23,000 live, but I do think that there is quite a bit that still needs quite a few discussions 2431 03:47:23,000 --> 03:47:33,800 that need to be have and need to be had. And, um, yeah, it's just, there's a lot I live. 2432 03:47:33,800 --> 03:47:39,880 Um, I commute down Sherman, I turn right on the loop and in an effort to make a commute 2433 03:47:39,880 --> 03:47:45,920 to South Dallas every single day. And so I battle that traffic as it exists now. And 2434 03:47:45,920 --> 03:47:50,800 so I do think everybody is very valid in their concerns of what that impact of just having 2435 03:47:50,800 --> 03:48:03,600 so many people in a space is going to look like. Um, and so, yeah, we'll see any other 2436 03:48:03,600 --> 03:48:18,920 discussion, not seeing any, I'll call for a vote on the board. That item passes four 2437 03:48:18,920 --> 03:48:25,880 to two. Um, I'm going to call a five minute recess just to let the commission stretch 2438 03:48:25,880 --> 03:48:38,240 their legs and let the room empty out. We will reconvene at nine 34 PM. And with the 2439 03:48:38,240 --> 03:48:49,160 record in present, we will reconvene after the recess, brings us to item five D, uh, 2440 03:48:49,160 --> 03:48:53,040 MPC 25 dash one. 2441 03:48:53,040 --> 03:48:59,520 This is a rezoning for approximately 19.6 acres from master plan community zoning district 2442 03:48:59,520 --> 03:49:05,280 to a master plan committee with a mixed use, uh, regional based zoning district. Um, it 2443 03:49:05,280 --> 03:49:11,160 will also amend the Hunter ranch MPC development map as well as, uh, related exhibits. Uh, 2444 03:49:11,160 --> 03:49:16,680 the zoning is currently surrounded by that coal ranch MPC to the North and the West. 2445 03:49:16,680 --> 03:49:23,680 And then the landmark, um, now or landmark, futurely known as Hunter ranch, uh, MPC at, 2446 03:49:23,680 --> 03:49:30,360 to the South East and Northeast. Uh, currently the property is open pasture and it does have 2447 03:49:30,360 --> 03:49:36,040 confirmed and potential ESAs on site. Um, the current zoning, which is that master plan 2448 03:49:36,040 --> 03:49:40,520 community district is not enforceable by the city because it does not have a base zoning 2449 03:49:40,520 --> 03:49:46,160 district. Um, the total acreage, uh, would be approximately within that Hunter and, uh, 2450 03:49:46,160 --> 03:49:54,100 ranch MPC would now be, uh, approximately 3,187 acres. Uh, staff did look at the approval 2451 03:49:54,100 --> 03:50:02,480 criteria within the Hunter ranch MPC in section 2.4.5 E. Um, one of the areas I want to focus 2452 03:50:02,480 --> 03:50:06,920 on is that Denton 2040 plan. Um, the future land use for this area is that master plan 2453 03:50:06,920 --> 03:50:12,680 community, uh, which does apply to large scale multi-phase developments, which is the, uh, 2454 03:50:12,680 --> 03:50:17,000 the Hunter ranch MPC is one of those. Um, it does, as I stated, add that approximately 2455 03:50:17,000 --> 03:50:22,160 19.6 acres to the Hunter ranch MPC development plan, but it does remain consistent with that 2456 03:50:22,160 --> 03:50:27,760 future land use map. Um, additionally, um, it is consistent with action item two dot 2457 03:50:27,760 --> 03:50:35,160 11 dot one, um, by allowing or providing a mix of housing types and uses. Public outreach 2458 03:50:35,160 --> 03:50:40,320 was done, um, in the newspaper website and signs were posted on November 6th. Um, mail 2459 03:50:40,320 --> 03:50:46,080 notices were sent to that 200 foot, um, area and that 500 foot buffer. We did not receive 2460 03:50:46,080 --> 03:50:52,120 any responses. Staff is recommending approval of the request as it complies with that criteria 2461 03:50:52,120 --> 03:50:57,520 section 2.4.5 E of the Hunter ranch MPC for approval of all applications. And this is 2462 03:50:57,520 --> 03:51:02,400 scheduled to go to city council on December 16th. Um, and I do want to invite the applicant 2463 03:51:02,400 --> 03:51:07,540 to come up to address that, uh, request of that MR based zoning that was, uh, brought 2464 03:51:07,540 --> 03:51:12,340 up during work session. Thank you. Let me go ahead and open the public hearing at this 2465 03:51:12,340 --> 03:51:23,840 time for MPC 25 dash one and you can come on up. Good morning commissioners. Andrew 2466 03:51:23,840 --> 03:51:30,280 Piper with Hillwood communities, a 3000 Turtle Creek Boulevard Dallas, Texas. Um, so this 2467 03:51:30,280 --> 03:51:37,000 is a unique opportunity for us. Uh, this tract is owned by the diocese of Dallas. Um, we 2468 03:51:37,000 --> 03:51:41,600 have the property under contract. Uh, we hope to close, uh, hopefully with, with the zoning 2469 03:51:41,600 --> 03:51:48,760 that's consistent with our MPC. Um, so the MR zoning, uh, is really, we feel consistent 2470 03:51:48,760 --> 03:51:56,000 with the zoning up and down the highway, uh, and the, um, the setback from 35. Um, can 2471 03:51:56,000 --> 03:52:08,280 I put the map back on? Yes. So you can see the dark purple is MR. Um, we do have some 2472 03:52:08,280 --> 03:52:15,020 MN to the West, you know, whether, whether this is MR, uh, or not, we're still adjacent 2473 03:52:15,020 --> 03:52:21,120 to MN with our current MR zoning. Um, this piece of property is unique in that it sits 2474 03:52:21,120 --> 03:52:28,800 in the Northwest corner of future, all red, um, interchange on 35. Um, currently that's 2475 03:52:28,800 --> 03:52:34,800 already an overpass. There's no on off ramps. Tech stats plans include a full interchange 2476 03:52:34,800 --> 03:52:41,520 there. Um, that would, uh, once that's complete, um, those are four intersections, excuse me, 2477 03:52:41,520 --> 03:52:48,080 four corners, uh, solely in the, um, city of Denton. This has the opportunity to really 2478 03:52:48,080 --> 03:52:54,720 be one of the largest intersections in the city. Um, and certainly south of, of the city. 2479 03:52:54,720 --> 03:53:01,140 Um, so this, this MR zoning we feel is consistent with not only the property around us, but 2480 03:53:01,140 --> 03:53:06,840 also what's coming in terms of these four intersections. Um, because of this property, 2481 03:53:06,840 --> 03:53:11,080 we can now kind of curve John Payne a little bit and make that Northwest corner a little 2482 03:53:11,080 --> 03:53:17,920 bit larger. And so with that larger intersection, having consistent zoning in that whole Northwest 2483 03:53:17,920 --> 03:53:23,700 quadrant, we think is, is, uh, is vital and it gives us the best flexibility to create 2484 03:53:23,700 --> 03:53:30,300 a good commercial corridor. So, um, it is at a future phase, you know, largely will 2485 03:53:30,300 --> 03:53:37,200 be dependent on 35 improvements being complete before we get there. Um, so more to come, 2486 03:53:37,200 --> 03:53:41,800 but, um, the MR zoning, we think is, is the best fit. 2487 03:53:41,800 --> 03:53:50,320 Okay. Any questions from the commission? I'll try to keep this quick. I, I'm trying to, 2488 03:53:50,320 --> 03:53:57,240 I really don't like having to read tea leaves. You know, I'm reading tea leaves from staff 2489 03:53:57,240 --> 03:54:05,540 on previous items. I, is it really just that the plan of this is a big shopping center 2490 03:54:05,540 --> 03:54:13,920 and you need MR because MN has the front parking requirement that you don't have front parking? 2491 03:54:13,920 --> 03:54:19,720 Like, like, is that it? It's just, we're, we're building like razor ranch version 17. 2492 03:54:19,720 --> 03:54:25,400 Yeah, I would say, yeah, with the addition of this property, there could be this Northwest 2493 03:54:25,400 --> 03:54:31,240 corner, um, you know, could be split MR and MN. And so you just have this artificial divide 2494 03:54:31,240 --> 03:54:35,800 in the middle of the corner that would, you know, create some inconsistency with uses 2495 03:54:35,800 --> 03:54:42,920 and prohibit some, um, you see what I'm saying? I mean, there's a line demarcation of zoning 2496 03:54:42,920 --> 03:54:48,920 between MN and MR, uh, now in that Northwest corner, um, which is a very active corner. 2497 03:54:48,920 --> 03:54:58,720 So do you not see? I actually, I need your help cause I don't see it. Yeah. Cause what 2498 03:54:58,720 --> 03:55:03,580 I understand is that there's a roadway to the east of the subject parcel and there will 2499 03:55:03,580 --> 03:55:15,640 be an extended and rerouted John Payne road to the south. Yeah. And the adjacent MR zoning 2500 03:55:15,640 --> 03:55:23,520 is to the east across the North South road and everything else is MN around it. North 2501 03:55:23,520 --> 03:55:29,160 Southwest. Is that correct? Sorry, I was looking at the screen while you, can you maybe just 2502 03:55:29,160 --> 03:55:41,360 repeat your question? So, so maybe I was looking at it wrong and please educate me. Yeah. Okay. 2503 03:55:41,360 --> 03:55:49,120 This helps, I think. So, so are we saying that the, the small property between the subject 2504 03:55:49,120 --> 03:55:56,240 rectangle and the West and South up until you hit the dashed red and green lines is 2505 03:55:56,240 --> 03:56:02,920 already MR? Correct. Okay. And so now with that, that answers my question. When I looked 2506 03:56:02,920 --> 03:56:10,320 at the map, it looked like it was MN to me. So, well, there is some MN at some point to 2507 03:56:10,320 --> 03:56:16,980 the North. Yeah. But, but between this subject property and the planned intersection location. 2508 03:56:16,980 --> 03:56:23,560 Is that what you're referring to? Yeah. Yeah. Cause it's just, when everything's orange, 2509 03:56:23,560 --> 03:56:30,280 it's because of the MPC coloring. The purple shades of purple is probably the best reference. 2510 03:56:30,280 --> 03:56:38,320 Okay. So really both sides of the highway. Is this dark purple? Sorry. Well, and this, 2511 03:56:38,320 --> 03:56:44,040 this one's kind of not very good. I, I think I understand now. So thank you. Yeah. So it's 2512 03:56:44,040 --> 03:56:50,520 really just consistency really up and down. I mean, the sites, about around a thousand 2513 03:56:50,520 --> 03:56:55,640 feet setback from the highway, which is that MR zoning up and down, but really both sides 2514 03:56:55,640 --> 03:57:01,240 of the highway exceeds a thousand feet. So it's really kind of consistent with our frontage 2515 03:57:01,240 --> 03:57:07,600 up and down. Okay. 35. Thank you. Any questions of the applicant? After I made a fool of myself 2516 03:57:07,600 --> 03:57:13,120 not understanding the map, I guess it's a good thing I'm not in cartography commissioner 2517 03:57:13,120 --> 03:57:19,020 Dyer and, and it says a public hearing. If anybody would like to speak, you're welcome 2518 03:57:19,020 --> 03:57:25,680 to come down. Not seeing any motion that will close the public hearing. Thank you. Commissioner 2519 03:57:25,680 --> 03:57:35,520 Dyer. I would like to go ahead and make a motion that we approve the rezoning of a master 2520 03:57:35,520 --> 03:57:47,380 plan community to an mixed use MR region. Very good. Commissioner catcher said I second 2521 03:57:47,380 --> 03:58:01,200 that motion. Okay. Any other questions? Discussion? Seeing none. I'll call for a vote on the board. 2522 03:58:01,200 --> 03:58:17,200 That item passes six zero moves us to item five E as 25 dash 10. Good evening chair members 2523 03:58:17,200 --> 03:58:24,120 of the commission. Ashley exit associate planner. This is S 25 10 joyful journey group home. 2524 03:58:24,120 --> 03:58:27,920 This is a request for a specific use permit to allow a group home use on approximately 2525 03:58:27,920 --> 03:58:33,320 0.4 acres of land located on the southwest corner of sandpiper drive and Abbott's lane. 2526 03:58:33,320 --> 03:58:38,800 The existing zoning is our three and the future land use is low residential as discussed in 2527 03:58:38,800 --> 03:58:42,960 the work session. There are other similar uses in this neighborhood. There are other 2528 03:58:42,960 --> 03:58:47,760 community homes. There is one to the south of this parcel and there's also a community 2529 03:58:47,760 --> 03:58:54,040 home on Skylark and on chapel. There are no other group homes in this neighborhood. This 2530 03:58:54,040 --> 03:58:59,200 business will provide 24/7 care to a maximum of six residents. That care will include things 2531 03:58:59,200 --> 03:59:03,760 like assistance with meals, medication management, and daily living activities in a home like 2532 03:59:03,760 --> 03:59:08,400 setting. They will not be proposing any exterior alterations to the existing single family 2533 03:59:08,400 --> 03:59:13,640 structure. These residents do not drive. So any vehicular traffic will consist of staff 2534 03:59:13,640 --> 03:59:21,120 and visitors. It does meet the criteria for approval. It's consistent with the dead in 2535 03:59:21,120 --> 03:59:25,620 40 comprehensive plan. It's compatible with the surrounding area. It's not expected to 2536 03:59:25,620 --> 03:59:32,040 generate adverse fiscal impacts and utilities and infrastructure already serving the property. 2537 03:59:32,040 --> 03:59:36,200 It does meet the low residential future land use which includes single family neighborhoods. 2538 03:59:36,200 --> 03:59:40,840 It also complies with other goals of the plan including developing a housing stock that 2539 03:59:40,840 --> 03:59:45,880 means the needs of all residents and encouraging the development of options for senior housing 2540 03:59:45,880 --> 03:59:52,320 with a variety of unit types and cost choices. As we're posted in the newspaper on the website 2541 03:59:52,320 --> 03:59:56,280 and signs were posted on the property, we mailed out notices to everyone within 500 2542 03:59:56,280 --> 04:00:01,040 feet. We have received two responses in favor shown here on the map in blue for a total 2543 04:00:01,040 --> 04:00:06,400 of around 11% of the land area within 200 feet and the applicant also held two neighborhood 2544 04:00:06,400 --> 04:00:12,120 meetings. Staff does recommend approval with the conditions in your backup. The next step 2545 04:00:12,120 --> 04:00:17,240 is this is scheduled for city council on December 16th. Happy to answer any questions and the 2546 04:00:17,240 --> 04:00:26,680 applicant is also here for questions. Any questions for staff? No. At this time I will 2547 04:00:26,680 --> 04:00:45,840 open the public hearing. I have one card wishing to speak for Marcel Huffman. Hi. I'm Marcel 2548 04:00:45,840 --> 04:00:56,240 Huffman. I live at 11620 Airway Boulevard in Roanoke. This is my home. So a joyful journey 2549 04:00:56,240 --> 04:01:02,720 is has been in operation for 14 years on the Abbott's Lane in Denton. Not a lot of people 2550 04:01:02,720 --> 04:01:10,040 were even aware that this exists. It's a small home. We have six residents and we're looking 2551 04:01:10,040 --> 04:01:18,360 to expand and use the home actually right next door and have an additional six residents. 2552 04:01:18,360 --> 04:01:25,340 So I spend my days with the elderly helping them with various needs and this is a growing 2553 04:01:25,340 --> 04:01:32,720 need in the community. I have requests all the time for people to come and take residency 2554 04:01:32,720 --> 04:01:40,760 but unfortunately we just don't have the beds. So this is as our population you talk about 2555 04:01:40,760 --> 04:01:50,280 growth all evening. 70% of our population is aging out and most of them do need help 2556 04:01:50,280 --> 04:01:58,040 at some point and not all families can provide that. So that's where we step in. We provide 2557 04:01:58,040 --> 04:02:02,640 the assistance and the care that they need in a loving home environment so that they 2558 04:02:02,640 --> 04:02:13,940 can essentially age in place. So I'm open to questions. Any questions? Okay. Thank you. 2559 04:02:13,940 --> 04:02:19,000 This is a public hearing. If you'd like to speak on this item you're more than willing 2560 04:02:19,000 --> 04:02:28,720 or more than welcome. Seeing no movement I will close the public hearing. Open the floor 2561 04:02:28,720 --> 04:02:42,160 for discussion or motion. Commissioner Garland. I would like to make a motion to approve. 2562 04:02:42,160 --> 04:02:50,880 Commissioner McDade. I will second that motion. It's a motion to recommend approval. Anymore 2563 04:02:50,880 --> 04:03:03,040 discussion? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on the board. That item passes 6-0. Brings 2564 04:03:03,040 --> 04:03:20,760 us to item 5F, S25-13. Ashley Eckstad, Associate Planner. This is S25-13, Milo Installation. 2565 04:03:20,760 --> 04:03:25,680 This is a request for a specific use permit for a medium impact manufacturing use to permit 2566 04:03:25,680 --> 04:03:30,600 household insulation production in one suite in an existing building. This is located west 2567 04:03:30,600 --> 04:03:36,240 of Worthington Drive and south of Shuler Street. The material used to produce this insulation 2568 04:03:36,240 --> 04:03:41,720 is biodegradable, all natural and made from milled grain sorghum seeds. The production 2569 04:03:41,720 --> 04:03:47,200 process is said to sound like an air compressor and smell like popcorn or baked bread. The 2570 04:03:47,200 --> 04:03:52,200 entire production process will be done inside of the existing structure. So the noises and 2571 04:03:52,200 --> 04:03:57,640 smells will not be heard or smelled outside of the building. It does meet the criteria 2572 04:03:57,640 --> 04:04:02,120 for approval. It's consistent with the goals of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the LI Zoning 2573 04:04:02,120 --> 04:04:07,200 District Statement. It's not expected to generate adverse impacts and utilities and infrastructure 2574 04:04:07,200 --> 04:04:13,360 are already in place. The LI Purpose Statement provides for light manufacturing, assembling 2575 04:04:13,360 --> 04:04:18,440 and fabrication. This is considered a medium impact manufacturing use due to the use of 2576 04:04:18,440 --> 04:04:23,760 raw materials in the production process. It is low intensity manufacturing and in an existing 2577 04:04:23,760 --> 04:04:29,520 industrial area. This map on the screen shows some of the surrounding uses. There's auto 2578 04:04:29,520 --> 04:04:37,320 repair, low impact manufacturing, outdoor storage and office uses in this area. The 2579 04:04:37,320 --> 04:04:40,880 light industrial future land use provides for light industrial and supporting commercial 2580 04:04:40,880 --> 04:04:45,760 uses and activities. So it does conform to the phone goals and purpose. It also achieves 2581 04:04:45,760 --> 04:04:51,880 our goals of growing compactly and improving the city's job to worker ratio. Signs were 2582 04:04:51,880 --> 04:04:55,640 posted in the newspaper on the website and a sign was posted on the property. We mailed 2583 04:04:55,640 --> 04:05:00,440 out notices to everyone within 500 feet. We have not received any responses in opposition 2584 04:05:00,440 --> 04:05:05,640 or in favor. Staff does recommend approval with their conditions in your backup and this 2585 04:05:05,640 --> 04:05:11,520 item is scheduled for City Council on December 2nd. Happy to answer any questions. 2586 04:05:11,520 --> 04:05:19,880 Any questions? Commissioner Dyer? What's the condition that staff is recommending? 2587 04:05:19,880 --> 04:05:25,440 So the conditions are that it's limited to the 4,500 square feet within suite 100. They 2588 04:05:25,440 --> 04:05:29,040 can't alter the building or any areas of the building without a new SUP. 2589 04:05:29,040 --> 04:05:42,720 Okay. Thank you. I will open the public hearing at this time. You're welcome to come down 2590 04:05:42,720 --> 04:05:48,400 and speak if you'd like. I don't see any movement, so I will close the public hearing and open 2591 04:05:48,400 --> 04:05:59,040 the floor for discussion or a motion or questions for staff. Commissioner Dyer? 2592 04:05:59,040 --> 04:06:08,440 I would like to make a motion that we go ahead and approve the special use permit with the... 2593 04:06:08,440 --> 04:06:12,360 I just lost the word. Staff recommended... 2594 04:06:12,360 --> 04:06:19,000 The staff recommended... Conditions. Conditions was a word that my brain just went blank on. 2595 04:06:19,000 --> 04:06:22,080 Yes. Commissioner Garland? 2596 04:06:22,080 --> 04:06:28,040 And I will second that. Very good. Not seeing any more discussion. I'll call 2597 04:06:28,040 --> 04:06:40,400 for a vote on the board. That item passes 6-0 and brings us to our last public hearing 2598 04:06:40,400 --> 04:06:50,640 of the night, item 5G DCA 25-2. 2599 04:06:50,640 --> 04:06:56,320 Good evening, Julie Wyatt, presenting DCA 25-2 legislative updates. As we discussed 2600 04:06:56,320 --> 04:07:01,880 in the work session, the purpose of this DDC text amendment is to address conflicts in 2601 04:07:01,880 --> 04:07:10,960 the code with new state law that was adopted with the 89th regular session of the legislature. 2602 04:07:10,960 --> 04:07:14,680 There's three bills that really impacted the Denton Development Code. The first one is 2603 04:07:14,680 --> 04:07:22,280 Senate Bill 1567. It applied to cities that had a population of less than 250,000, but 2604 04:07:22,280 --> 04:07:28,400 also had a university that had an enrollment greater than 20,000. Denton falls within that. 2605 04:07:28,400 --> 04:07:33,920 It prohibits regulating the number of occupants of a dwelling unit based upon age, familial 2606 04:07:33,920 --> 04:07:40,480 status, occupation, relationship status, or relation, but it does allow occupancy regulations 2607 04:07:40,480 --> 04:07:46,080 related to the square footage of a bedroom. In particular, each bedroom in a dwelling 2608 04:07:46,080 --> 04:07:56,000 that is 70 square feet could have one person, and then an additional 120 square feet would 2609 04:07:56,000 --> 04:08:02,280 allow for two people. That would be the basis of the occupancy. That conflicts with our 2610 04:08:02,280 --> 04:08:08,160 current Denton Development Code, which states that a maximum of four unrelated persons may 2611 04:08:08,160 --> 04:08:13,720 occupy a dwelling. The proposed change would strike that language, which is inconsistent 2612 04:08:13,720 --> 04:08:20,760 with state law, and really using that state law straightforwardly as that basis for occupancy 2613 04:08:20,760 --> 04:08:27,240 in the city of Denton. We're also proposing to change our definition of bedroom so that 2614 04:08:27,240 --> 04:08:32,760 it gives a little more clarity as what could be considered a bedroom, using that international 2615 04:08:32,760 --> 04:08:38,840 building code as well as the square footage, and then also changing our definition of family 2616 04:08:38,840 --> 04:08:43,080 to remove that familial relationship, just so it's nice and consistent with all state 2617 04:08:43,080 --> 04:08:51,520 law. The second bill is Senate Bill 2464. This is related to home-based businesses, 2618 04:08:51,520 --> 04:08:57,440 and it establishes a no-impact home-based business, and it says cities may not prohibit 2619 04:08:57,440 --> 04:09:03,560 the operation of those no-impact home businesses. Those are things that would not generate any 2620 04:09:03,560 --> 04:09:12,640 on-street traffic, would not create any negative impacts, or even be visible from the street. 2621 04:09:12,640 --> 04:09:20,760 For all other home-based businesses, it wouldn't fall within that no-impact home-based business. 2622 04:09:20,760 --> 04:09:27,400 Cities can prohibit specific uses, but we cannot require the rezoning or installation 2623 04:09:27,400 --> 04:09:34,840 of fire sprinklers in a single family or duplex. We can also regulate fire and building code, 2624 04:09:34,840 --> 04:09:39,520 health and sanitation, transportation or traffic control, waste, pollution, and noise. Use 2625 04:09:39,520 --> 04:09:45,200 is incompatible with residential neighborhoods scale, that is, the home-based business needs 2626 04:09:45,200 --> 04:09:50,400 to be secondary to the dwelling unit, and limitation on prohibition for alcohol sales, 2627 04:09:50,400 --> 04:09:57,280 so we're living and sexually-oriented businesses. The proposed changes would update our table 2628 04:09:57,280 --> 04:10:04,800 of allowed uses to allow home-based businesses across our zoning districts, and then also 2629 04:10:04,800 --> 04:10:10,240 provide additional standards and our use-specific standards to update them so that they're consistent 2630 04:10:10,240 --> 04:10:15,840 with that state law. Providing for those things that the city can regulate, and also for that 2631 04:10:15,840 --> 04:10:24,080 no-impact home-based business. Also providing the definition of no-impact home-based business 2632 04:10:24,080 --> 04:10:31,320 based upon the state law definition. Then finally, House Bill 24. This is related 2633 04:10:31,320 --> 04:10:38,200 to notification and protest requirements. This is probably the one you're going to see 2634 04:10:38,200 --> 04:10:45,460 the most here. It establishes some different levels of notification. First, we have a comprehensive 2635 04:10:45,460 --> 04:10:52,340 zoning change that is defined as a city-initiated zoning change that would allow more housing 2636 04:10:52,340 --> 04:10:57,640 and applies to one or more zoning districts, would be an adoption of a new zoning code 2637 04:10:57,640 --> 04:11:03,380 or map that implies to the entire city, or adoption of a zoning overlay that allows more 2638 04:11:03,380 --> 04:11:10,400 housing and is along a major roadway, highway, or transit corridor. Comprehensive zoning 2639 04:11:10,400 --> 04:11:17,700 changes only would require the newspaper and website notice, then they would be exempt 2640 04:11:17,700 --> 04:11:24,640 from any protest. That would be that 20% of property owners within 200 feet of the subject 2641 04:11:24,640 --> 04:11:30,720 property. Other zoning changes, which allow additional housing or meet specific standards 2642 04:11:30,720 --> 04:11:37,360 for mixed-use development, would follow the previous practice for notice, but would require 2643 04:11:37,360 --> 04:11:49,400 written notice of at least 60% of property within 200 feet of the subject site. If it 2644 04:11:49,400 --> 04:11:54,960 reaches that threshold, a majority of city council members, for example, four out of 2645 04:11:54,960 --> 04:12:01,400 seven members or four out of five members who are present at a meeting, would be required 2646 04:12:01,400 --> 04:12:09,000 to approve that. All other zoning changes, so if it was from HI to LI, would remain the 2647 04:12:09,000 --> 04:12:17,160 same process. Our DDC updates are really just updating our defined protest procedures so 2648 04:12:17,160 --> 04:12:25,480 that they are, and notification procedures so that they are consistent with this requirement. 2649 04:12:25,480 --> 04:12:29,760 The proposal meets the criteria for approval. It's consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2650 04:12:29,760 --> 04:12:34,960 It doesn't conflict with other provisions, and they are needed to ensure consistency 2651 04:12:34,960 --> 04:12:42,080 with state law. Public outreach was sent out, and staff recommends approval as it is consistent 2652 04:12:42,080 --> 04:12:47,280 with state law and the criteria for approval. It is tentatively scheduled for December 16th 2653 04:12:47,280 --> 04:12:53,440 if it moves forward tonight, and I'll be happy to answer any questions. 2654 04:12:53,440 --> 04:13:01,520 Questions for staff? I will open the public hearing. If anyone would like to speak on 2655 04:13:01,520 --> 04:13:09,440 this item, you're welcome to. I see no motion, but I see laughs, so I will close the public 2656 04:13:09,440 --> 04:13:22,120 hearing. Yeah. Commissioner Ketcham said. A motion approval for the proposals to the 2657 04:13:22,120 --> 04:13:31,280 DDC. And Commissioner Garland? And I second that motion. 2658 04:13:31,280 --> 04:13:44,720 I have a question/comment, Julie. For the first item, 1567 for occupancy, can you help 2659 04:13:44,720 --> 04:13:54,480 me understand why we didn't just do a simple red line like that doesn't exist anymore and 2660 04:13:54,480 --> 04:14:02,960 why we - it seems like every opportunity we have to simplify our code, we add more stuff. 2661 04:14:02,960 --> 04:14:13,120 And I look at the additional specificity of a bedroom, and it's not this and this and 2662 04:14:13,120 --> 04:14:18,360 this, and it is this, and you have to have so many square feet per person for occupancy, 2663 04:14:18,360 --> 04:14:28,360 and I don't think that's ever going to be enforceable, right? Like, it's a home. 2664 04:14:28,360 --> 04:14:36,600 Well, we did meet with our building safety group to discuss just that, especially the 2665 04:14:36,600 --> 04:14:43,000 enforceability. And that's really why we came up with the revision to the bedroom definition, 2666 04:14:43,000 --> 04:14:51,160 to be more consistent with the International Residential Code, so that all of these items 2667 04:14:51,160 --> 04:14:56,720 marry. They have minimum requirements for a bedroom to be considered a bedroom. It has 2668 04:14:56,720 --> 04:15:01,880 to have egress, and it has to have a minimum 70 square feet. So it really did align quite 2669 04:15:01,880 --> 04:15:10,160 nicely. We also added a provision that the bedrooms need to be labeled on the building 2670 04:15:10,160 --> 04:15:17,400 plans so that we as a city can understand what rooms in a home would be considered a 2671 04:15:17,400 --> 04:15:25,600 bedroom. As far as applicability, yeah, we don't issue certificates of occupancy for 2672 04:15:25,600 --> 04:15:31,480 residential dwellings, but there could be situations where maybe our code of ordinances 2673 04:15:31,480 --> 04:15:35,640 talks about overcrowding, where there could be a health and safety issue that the city 2674 04:15:35,640 --> 04:15:42,600 would need to address. And in that case, having some parameters in which we can look at to 2675 04:15:42,600 --> 04:15:48,800 see if we're following our policies and regulations and to make sure that we can apply them fairly 2676 04:15:48,800 --> 04:15:56,040 is with the intent of having this. Thank you for that. I appreciate that honest 2677 04:15:56,040 --> 04:16:06,920 explanation. I wish that... I'll just say two years ago the DCRC said we don't like 2678 04:16:06,920 --> 04:16:14,160 these silly occupancy limits that have roots in classist and racist histories, and we didn't 2679 04:16:14,160 --> 04:16:20,400 do anything until state law changed, and now all of a sudden we do something. It's not 2680 04:16:20,400 --> 04:16:27,360 a big deal. It's just I don't understand why we can't move faster than that. So any other 2681 04:16:27,360 --> 04:16:31,480 comments or questions from the commission? Chair, I would just add you'd be surprised 2682 04:16:31,480 --> 04:16:36,800 how many conversations we've already had to have, and you rely on the standard for various 2683 04:16:36,800 --> 04:16:41,400 things that people have attempted to do, knowing that this law has been passed. So the numeric 2684 04:16:41,400 --> 04:16:46,120 standards are helpful, and we are finding them to help with enforcement issues for concerns 2685 04:16:46,120 --> 04:16:53,080 that have been raised already. Please come to me and surprise me instead 2686 04:16:53,080 --> 04:17:01,960 of me flailing and trying to guess why we are supporting things. Any other questions? 2687 04:17:01,960 --> 04:17:10,120 Yes, Commissioner McDade. With the changes to the wording to the code, 2688 04:17:10,120 --> 04:17:16,200 the living room could be a sleeping area. People can sleep in the living room, right? 2689 04:17:16,200 --> 04:17:25,840 Well, hold on. Let me check my definition. Make sure I don't misquote it. All right. 2690 04:17:25,840 --> 04:17:32,840 So it's really kind of two parts to that. So a bedroom can mean any room used predominantly 2691 04:17:32,840 --> 04:17:38,600 as a sleeping room other than a living room, family room, dining room, kitchen, bathroom, 2692 04:17:38,600 --> 04:17:44,080 closets or utility room. And the reason for that is how we define a dwelling is you have 2693 04:17:44,080 --> 04:17:48,840 to have sleeping area, you have to have sanitation, you have to have a place to cook, and you 2694 04:17:48,840 --> 04:17:53,680 have to have a place to live. So those parts of the house that are really needed to be 2695 04:17:53,680 --> 04:18:02,720 considered a dwelling are ones that are exempted from that. But things like dens or studies, 2696 04:18:02,720 --> 04:18:08,900 bathroom room like that, media room, those could be changed to a bedroom provided that 2697 04:18:08,900 --> 04:18:20,560 they have the proper egress and then the square footage. 2698 04:18:20,560 --> 04:18:37,040 Any other questions? Okay. Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board. That item passes 2699 04:18:37,040 --> 04:18:44,040 6-0. Brings us to our Planning and Zoning Commission matrix. 2700 04:18:44,040 --> 04:18:51,920 Yes, I don't believe we had any changes to the matrix this time. A few council updates 2701 04:18:51,920 --> 04:18:56,600 just last night. We had three cases that you all have recently seen that were approved. 2702 04:18:56,600 --> 04:19:00,280 The zoning change on McKinney Street that came to you all as MN but you recommended 2703 04:19:00,280 --> 04:19:07,840 R7 was approved as R7. And then the plan development at the corner of Brush Creek and 377 was approved 2704 04:19:07,840 --> 04:19:14,320 as well as the plan development amendment for that charter school on Vintage near I-35W. 2705 04:19:14,320 --> 04:19:19,600 And one other thing I did want to note since our last meeting in October, Erin Stanley 2706 04:19:19,600 --> 04:19:24,000 has left the city of Denton to go work for the much larger and more exciting city of 2707 04:19:24,000 --> 04:19:28,640 Boston. So we're very sad to see her go but happy for that opportunity for her to go be 2708 04:19:28,640 --> 04:19:32,980 a planner in the city of Boston. So just wanted to let you all know why you were seeing various 2709 04:19:32,980 --> 04:19:37,880 other staff in place of Erin on the agenda tonight. 2710 04:19:37,880 --> 04:19:43,080 Any additions to the matrix? Yes, Commissioner McDonough. 2711 04:19:43,080 --> 04:19:50,000 Yes, I did have something else to say. Obviously, I still need to discuss the best practices 2712 04:19:50,000 --> 04:19:56,360 for responding to developer and city inquiries. So I'm just wondering if I'm not saying let's 2713 04:19:56,360 --> 04:20:04,480 do it next week at our next meeting. But anyway, I'd like to move that. 2714 04:20:04,480 --> 04:20:10,880 Yes, I do believe we have that as well as the notification item coming next month. 2715 04:20:10,880 --> 04:20:22,880 Great. Thank you for taking note of that. Any other matrix items? Not seeing any. Brings 2716 04:20:22,880 --> 04:20:31,800 us to item 7, concluding items. Anyone have any concluding items? Ah, Commissioner Dreier. 2717 04:20:31,800 --> 04:20:39,120 I hope everyone has a great Thanksgiving. Yes, very good. With no objection, I will 2718 04:20:39,120 --> 04:20:41,520 We'll adjourn our meeting at 10, 12 p.m.