1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:06,140
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission Work

2
00:00:06,140 --> 00:00:10,580
 Session for Wednesday, January 22, 2020.

3
00:00:10,580 --> 00:00:14,740
 Seeing that we do have a quorum, I will open the meeting at 5.05.

4
00:00:14,740 --> 00:00:18,580
 Let the record show that Commissioner Smith is absent at the start of the meeting.

5
00:00:18,580 --> 00:00:24,660
 The first item of business is a work session report, and to receive a report and hold discussion

6
00:00:24,660 --> 00:00:26,860
 regarding city-initiated rezoning.

7
00:00:26,860 --> 00:00:30,100
 I'll invite Ron McGuida to present.

8
00:00:30,100 --> 00:00:34,940
 Thank you, Chair, members of the Commission.

9
00:00:34,940 --> 00:00:41,580
 This summary or presentation is really to bring you all up to date as to what is going

10
00:00:41,580 --> 00:00:47,960
 on with our city-initiated rezoning that we've started last year as part of the DEN plan,

11
00:00:47,960 --> 00:00:50,720
 I'm sorry, DEN code update.

12
00:00:50,720 --> 00:00:57,820
 We did two rounds of city-initiated rezoning following that the Council requested that

13
00:00:57,820 --> 00:01:06,700
 we have a work session to discuss the zoning changes, city-initiated rezoning due to the

14
00:01:06,700 --> 00:01:15,900
 fact that there were some property owners that had some concerns with some of the city-initiated

15
00:01:15,900 --> 00:01:16,900
 rezoning.

16
00:01:16,900 --> 00:01:24,020
 We brought to the City Council a presentation on November 19th of last year.

17
00:01:24,020 --> 00:01:31,020
 During the work session, we asked the Council three policy questions or considerations,

18
00:01:31,020 --> 00:01:33,900
 and these were the three considerations.

19
00:01:33,900 --> 00:01:39,060
 Should the city continue with city-initiated zonings only to address non-conforming uses

20
00:01:39,060 --> 00:01:46,060
 and structures, or two, should the city continue with city-initiated zoning changes addressing

21
00:01:46,060 --> 00:01:52,660
 non-conforming, and include properties in advance of future development or redevelopment?

22
00:01:52,660 --> 00:02:00,420
 And last, should the city just discontinue city-initiated rezonings as it relates to

23
00:02:00,420 --> 00:02:09,500
 property owners as far as the zoning of their properties, and let them come in with applications?

24
00:02:09,500 --> 00:02:14,340
 The City Council directed staff to go with number two, which is what we had hoped for

25
00:02:14,340 --> 00:02:19,900
 as a staff, wanted to continue our efforts with regards to city-initiated rezonings,

26
00:02:19,900 --> 00:02:28,900
 but they also provided some comments, considerations that we look to when we start to bring back

27
00:02:28,900 --> 00:02:35,300
 our next round, which will be our third city-initiated rezoning group.

28
00:02:35,300 --> 00:02:39,680
 In that, we involve the public as much as possible.

29
00:02:39,680 --> 00:02:44,580
 Where we would have public hearing notices, we would try to make sure that we meet with

30
00:02:44,580 --> 00:02:49,340
 them in advance, and this is not just the property owner, this is the residents within

31
00:02:49,340 --> 00:02:55,420
 200 feet, within 500 feet, so that we have a better understanding of what's being proposed

32
00:02:55,420 --> 00:02:58,620
 prior to the public hearings.

33
00:02:58,620 --> 00:03:03,620
 That we have property owner buy-in, that a lot of times, you know, we will suggest a

34
00:03:03,620 --> 00:03:09,940
 rezoning, and not all the property owners, but the majority of them wanted the zoning

35
00:03:09,940 --> 00:03:16,260
 change, but not all of them, we want to make sure that we have everyone that owns property

36
00:03:16,260 --> 00:03:21,420
 to be in with the proposed rezoning.

37
00:03:21,420 --> 00:03:26,700
 No downzoning, meaning that if the property is zoned, let's say a higher intense use,

38
00:03:26,700 --> 00:03:32,900
 such as an MR, going to an MN or something lower than that, we should try to avoid that

39
00:03:32,900 --> 00:03:35,340
 as much as possible.

40
00:03:35,340 --> 00:03:41,980
 Hold off on proposals when needed, so basically, make sure that if someone comes in and requests

41
00:03:41,980 --> 00:03:46,740
 a city-initiated rezoning, we should review that on a case-by-case, and not just automatically

42
00:03:46,740 --> 00:03:52,180
 put that as part of our city-initiated rezoning, so really just fully vet it through with staff

43
00:03:52,180 --> 00:03:54,800
 and with the general public.

44
00:03:54,800 --> 00:04:01,300
 And lastly, to not disincentivize the zoning change request, meaning that there are property

45
00:04:01,300 --> 00:04:09,100
 owners that still should proceed with their rezoning requests, and that shouldn't just

46
00:04:09,100 --> 00:04:13,900
 fall back on the city to do the rezoning ourselves.

47
00:04:13,900 --> 00:04:20,140
 So in essence, the council directs the staff to proceed with city-initiated rezoning with

48
00:04:20,140 --> 00:04:26,180
 the understanding that we fully vet those changes, those proposed zoning changes, and

49
00:04:26,180 --> 00:04:33,140
 also still continue to promote other ways of getting the zoning, be it by the property

50
00:04:33,140 --> 00:04:36,980
 owner as an example.

51
00:04:36,980 --> 00:04:37,980
 That's it.

52
00:04:37,980 --> 00:04:43,900
 Basically, we got our direction that we were hoping for, and we have put a list, we've

53
00:04:43,900 --> 00:04:50,660
 had a list, we're working on that list, we are continuing to meet with property owners,

54
00:04:50,660 --> 00:04:56,060
 with residents within a certain radius of those properties, and we hope to bring forward

55
00:04:56,060 --> 00:04:59,180
 a third round of city-initiated rezoning soon.

56
00:04:59,180 --> 00:05:03,620
 We don't have an exact date specific, but with all of the other stuff that we're working

57
00:05:03,620 --> 00:05:09,700
 on, it will probably be closer to late spring or maybe early summer as far as the third

58
00:05:09,700 --> 00:05:10,700
 round.

59
00:05:10,700 --> 00:05:11,700
 Commissioner Ellis.

60
00:05:11,700 --> 00:05:18,820
 Ron, are you focusing on a certain area for this next round?

61
00:05:18,820 --> 00:05:25,540
 No, we - let me see if I have the - it's hard to see, I apologize.

62
00:05:25,540 --> 00:05:27,940
 It's pretty much everywhere in the city.

63
00:05:27,940 --> 00:05:33,980
 We are looking at properties, again, using the criteria that we've used in the past.

64
00:05:33,980 --> 00:05:37,540
 So the answer to that question, no, it's not in one particular area.

65
00:05:37,540 --> 00:05:43,300
 We focused on corridors along I-35 for the first one, and then 380 in the loop on the

66
00:05:43,300 --> 00:05:44,480
 second one.

67
00:05:44,480 --> 00:05:49,220
 This one is probably going to focus more on the inner core of the city.

68
00:05:49,220 --> 00:05:51,740
 You can see that there are some still outside.

69
00:05:51,740 --> 00:05:57,140
 That stuff that we didn't consider the last time, but we still have on our list, so those

70
00:05:57,140 --> 00:06:03,740
 will still carry forward as part of the next group.

71
00:06:03,740 --> 00:06:10,700
 And then what happened with those properties that got pulled out of a city-initiated zoning?

72
00:06:10,700 --> 00:06:14,220
 There were a handful of properties, I know, that would kind of -

73
00:06:14,220 --> 00:06:15,220
 Right.

74
00:06:15,220 --> 00:06:16,220
 Postponed.

75
00:06:16,220 --> 00:06:17,220
 Where are those?

76
00:06:17,220 --> 00:06:18,220
 Those will be part of phase three.

77
00:06:18,220 --> 00:06:19,220
 That you're bringing them back?

78
00:06:19,220 --> 00:06:20,220
 Yeah, it's hard to see.

79
00:06:20,220 --> 00:06:24,100
 This is the one off of Lillian Miller in I-35.

80
00:06:24,100 --> 00:06:26,780
 There was one up here, exactly.

81
00:06:26,780 --> 00:06:28,860
 So they're still on the list.

82
00:06:28,860 --> 00:06:31,060
 They're still on our radar.

83
00:06:31,060 --> 00:06:35,820
 When we bring them forward, we'll reevaluate them a little bit based on council's direction,

84
00:06:35,820 --> 00:06:39,740
 and again, we hope to bring some city-initiated rezoning in the near future.

85
00:06:39,740 --> 00:06:40,740
 Commissioner Beck.

86
00:06:40,740 --> 00:06:41,740
 Thank you.

87
00:06:41,740 --> 00:06:47,580
 So for the ones that got delayed, were they delayed for particular reasons, or...?

88
00:06:47,580 --> 00:06:52,340
 There were some questions, and working with the property owner, they asked that they be

89
00:06:52,340 --> 00:06:59,580
 postponed or be carried forward, so it wasn't necessarily a specific reason, per se.

90
00:06:59,580 --> 00:07:05,100
 I know the one to the Lillian Miller, there were some public comments, and we wanted to

91
00:07:05,100 --> 00:07:07,860
 make sure that we addressed those before we brought those forward.

92
00:07:07,860 --> 00:07:09,620
 Okay, thank you.

93
00:07:09,620 --> 00:07:12,820
 Any other questions for Ron?

94
00:07:12,820 --> 00:07:13,820
 Thank you very much, Ron.

95
00:07:13,820 --> 00:07:14,820
 I wouldn't go far.

96
00:07:14,820 --> 00:07:15,820
 Locked those out.

97
00:07:15,820 --> 00:07:22,180
 No, no, I think you're good for the consent, but you're going to be back for the rest of

98
00:07:22,180 --> 00:07:23,180
 the evening.

99
00:07:23,180 --> 00:07:24,180
 Yes.

100
00:07:24,180 --> 00:07:31,820
 So the next item for business will be, if there's any changes to the minutes, we have the consideration

101
00:07:31,820 --> 00:07:37,020
 of January 8th minutes to look at, then we'll dive into our agenda.

102
00:07:37,020 --> 00:07:41,440
 Just wanted to update the record to show that Commissioner Smith is in attendance with us,

103
00:07:41,440 --> 00:07:45,140
 so welcome Commissioner Smith.

104
00:07:45,140 --> 00:07:47,340
 The next items are the consent.

105
00:07:47,340 --> 00:07:52,740
 We have three items, A, B, and C. Is there any question on item 3A that we want to have

106
00:07:52,740 --> 00:07:57,420
 Haley dive further into?

107
00:07:57,420 --> 00:07:58,460
 Item 3B.

108
00:07:58,460 --> 00:08:01,060
 Can we have Cindy Jackson, is she here?

109
00:08:01,060 --> 00:08:02,340
 Oh, there she is.

110
00:08:02,340 --> 00:08:03,740
 Can we have you present on 3B?

111
00:08:03,740 --> 00:08:13,220
 I think we have some questions for this item.

112
00:08:13,220 --> 00:08:41,460
 Okay.

113
00:08:41,460 --> 00:08:54,300
 This is a plat for Glenwood Meadows and it contains 102 residential lots and four open

114
00:08:54,300 --> 00:08:56,220
 space lots.

115
00:08:56,220 --> 00:09:02,980
 There is a gas well currently located here and this is designated for open space.

116
00:09:02,980 --> 00:09:04,940
 And the remainder of the plat is right here.

117
00:09:04,940 --> 00:09:09,580
 There is a plug with gas well that is on this site right here.

118
00:09:09,580 --> 00:09:15,060
 I've had some questions regarding the side of the plug gas well, whether or not we can

119
00:09:15,060 --> 00:09:17,660
 permit houses to be put on that.

120
00:09:17,660 --> 00:09:22,940
 We advise the applicant that it should be designated as open space, but we can't require

121
00:09:22,940 --> 00:09:30,220
 it because we don't have that requirement in our code.

122
00:09:30,220 --> 00:09:36,260
 Any questions for Cindy, Commissioner Beck?

123
00:09:36,260 --> 00:09:42,140
 I got a bunch of questions, so I'm going to cover them a little bit at a time.

124
00:09:42,140 --> 00:09:43,140
 Sure.

125
00:09:43,140 --> 00:09:50,300
 So if you blow up that plat a little bit, those closest homes are 250 and 300 feet.

126
00:09:50,300 --> 00:09:56,780
 That's like the fire code distance and we're, for what, 15 months now have been dabbling.

127
00:09:56,780 --> 00:10:03,180
 I know we are not allowed to vote on something that doesn't exist, but it clearly is in our

128
00:10:03,180 --> 00:10:06,460
 mindset to increase the setback distances.

129
00:10:06,460 --> 00:10:09,940
 Yes, and that 1,000 foot setback is right here.

130
00:10:09,940 --> 00:10:19,260
 It is clearly shown that this is now the 1,000 foot setback and this plat came in before that

131
00:10:19,260 --> 00:10:21,100
 requirement was in place.

132
00:10:21,100 --> 00:10:26,580
 So what we did is we've got it marked on the plat so that people who are interested in purchasing

133
00:10:26,580 --> 00:10:30,780
 the homes, they can look at the plat and they can see that it is within that 1,000 foot

134
00:10:30,780 --> 00:10:36,660
 area that will be non-conforming.

135
00:10:36,660 --> 00:10:45,380
 We were talking 500 feet, as I recall, but I admit, I know that doesn't exist right now,

136
00:10:45,380 --> 00:10:47,060
 so I'm being a little careful.

137
00:10:47,060 --> 00:10:49,740
 Yeah, I know you might be able to.

138
00:10:49,740 --> 00:10:56,780
 But then also, there had been ongoing discussions about just as you led off with the capped

139
00:10:56,780 --> 00:10:59,900
 gas wells, a building on top of them.

140
00:10:59,900 --> 00:11:02,100
 So I guess I'm a little concerned.

141
00:11:02,100 --> 00:11:06,540
 Let's let Haley hop in, maybe she'll have some clarity, and then we'll continue the

142
00:11:06,540 --> 00:11:07,540
 questions.

143
00:11:07,540 --> 00:11:09,340
 Yeah, I just wanted to clarify.

144
00:11:09,340 --> 00:11:13,820
 The 1,000 foot radius shown on there is the notification requirement in the code.

145
00:11:13,820 --> 00:11:18,500
 That is a requirement that on a plat in your HOA documents, in every form of notification

146
00:11:18,500 --> 00:11:22,780
 that we can require, that the homeowners be notified they're within 1,000 feet of a gas

147
00:11:22,780 --> 00:11:27,140
 well, that that well could be refracted, re-stimulated, or expanded in the future.

148
00:11:27,140 --> 00:11:28,740
 So that is not an actual setback distance.

149
00:11:28,740 --> 00:11:32,120
 It's just a notification requirement that this plat reflects.

150
00:11:32,120 --> 00:11:40,460
 There is shown down here, as you reference, Commissioner Beck, the 250 foot setback is

151
00:11:40,460 --> 00:11:43,220
 shown here with the inner dashed line.

152
00:11:43,220 --> 00:11:47,340
 No lots are encroaching upon that 250, which is the requirement of the code.

153
00:11:47,340 --> 00:11:50,140
 This outer radius is the 300 foot fire code requirement.

154
00:11:50,140 --> 00:12:07,980
 So no structure could be built within that 300 foot radius in terms of protected uses.

155
00:12:07,980 --> 00:12:15,300
 Do we know for the capped one if gas is flowing underneath that hole?

156
00:12:15,300 --> 00:12:16,460
 That's not something we would know.

157
00:12:16,460 --> 00:12:20,540
 The well has been plugged in accordance with Railroad Commission requirements to the depth

158
00:12:20,540 --> 00:12:21,820
 required.

159
00:12:21,820 --> 00:12:32,660
 Our code doesn't speak to any requirements for plugged wells, however.

160
00:12:32,660 --> 00:12:38,620
 I know it's -- for my interest in this issue, I know that's a tricky issue that -- I mean,

161
00:12:38,620 --> 00:12:42,940
 there's -- we're not under -- I understand.

162
00:12:42,940 --> 00:12:48,280
 So I don't want Cynthia to come screaming over the table at me right now.

163
00:12:48,280 --> 00:12:53,860
 So I mean, I guess I have a couple other questions about -- for whoever.

164
00:12:53,860 --> 00:13:00,620
 I mean, looking at the map, there looked like there was drainage wetlands in the northeast

165
00:13:00,620 --> 00:13:01,620
 corner.

166
00:13:01,620 --> 00:13:06,220
 I mean, not just the creek bed, but additional wet regions.

167
00:13:06,220 --> 00:13:13,500
 And I know that said we did a report for the ESA wetlands area, but it looks like we're

168
00:13:13,500 --> 00:13:18,460
 building homes right on top of it, or am I misseeing that?

169
00:13:18,460 --> 00:13:24,220
 This whole area has been designated as ESA, and it's open space.

170
00:13:24,220 --> 00:13:27,740
 There are no homes encroaching on this area.

171
00:13:27,740 --> 00:13:34,260
 You can see the limits of the ESA floodplain and drainage easement is right here.

172
00:13:34,260 --> 00:13:39,300
 And the homes back up to it, but they don't build on it.

173
00:13:39,300 --> 00:13:43,980
 And, I mean, do we know -- that's the 100-year floodplain?

174
00:13:43,980 --> 00:13:49,140
 Is that -- am I reading that correctly for the boundary?

175
00:13:49,140 --> 00:13:51,220
 Okay.

176
00:13:51,220 --> 00:13:53,620
 And we're going to tear all of the trees in that same area, too?

177
00:13:53,620 --> 00:13:59,340
 I mean, I'm assuming it's under the, whatever, 20% old guidelines?

178
00:13:59,340 --> 00:14:02,540
 It is.

179
00:14:02,540 --> 00:14:06,820
 I mean, this is just hitting thing after thing after thing, and I know they're under the

180
00:14:06,820 --> 00:14:07,820
 old guidelines.

181
00:14:07,820 --> 00:14:15,580
 But we've moved on since 2002, and this isn't really a Cindy question, it's -- you know,

182
00:14:15,580 --> 00:14:23,780
 we're -- I understand the idea of vesting in old things, but we're just hitting bullet

183
00:14:23,780 --> 00:14:28,740
 after bullet after bullet after bullet on this property where we are cramming everything

184
00:14:28,740 --> 00:14:35,260
 on top of each other and tearing everything out against current ordinances and against

185
00:14:35,260 --> 00:14:39,500
 -- I'm not at all comfortable with voting for this.

186
00:14:39,500 --> 00:14:44,140
 So if this is going to go forward, I'd like it to be put to an individual vote.

187
00:14:44,140 --> 00:14:51,020
 We actually have a -- a lot of -- we're dealing with a lot of applications right now that

188
00:14:51,020 --> 00:14:57,820
 have come in under the 2002 code, and they had that time period up until the code was

189
00:14:57,820 --> 00:15:01,420
 approved October 1st, where they could determine whether or not they wanted to go under the

190
00:15:01,420 --> 00:15:03,540
 old code or the new code.

191
00:15:03,540 --> 00:15:06,100
 So this one is old code.

192
00:15:06,100 --> 00:15:15,420
 We will work our way through these eventually, but right now, we're working on both codes.

193
00:15:15,420 --> 00:15:21,740
 I guess this -- I sort of asked this question several months ago when we had this issue

194
00:15:21,740 --> 00:15:28,780
 come back up with the gas well, and I'll let -- Cynthia, please direct me how -- where we

195
00:15:28,780 --> 00:15:36,140
 should respond to that, but it feels like we are setting ourselves up to create non-conforming

196
00:15:36,140 --> 00:15:45,700
 if the ordinances go the way many people anticipate that they will be going, that the entire subdivision

197
00:15:45,700 --> 00:15:50,020
 will be non-conforming except for maybe the southeast corner.

198
00:15:50,020 --> 00:15:53,020
 And that feels like we shouldn't do things like that.

199
00:15:53,020 --> 00:16:00,380
 That's -- it feels like it's creating problems for our development office and the city.

200
00:16:00,380 --> 00:16:04,180
 So you can answer that, however you want to answer that, I guess.

201
00:16:04,180 --> 00:16:08,620
 Commissioner Mack, if your question is related to the gas well ordinance --

202
00:16:08,620 --> 00:16:09,620
 Yes, ma'am.

203
00:16:09,620 --> 00:16:22,180
 -- as I've stated before, it's not on the agenda this evening for consideration.

204
00:16:22,180 --> 00:16:29,300
 So we can't discuss issues with this matter because that item isn't on the agenda?

205
00:16:29,300 --> 00:16:33,740
 I think more to the -- maybe more to the point is we're thinking about a hypothetical impacting

206
00:16:33,740 --> 00:16:39,340
 something that's -- that's before us tonight, because what happens to a ordinance whenever

207
00:16:39,340 --> 00:16:43,620
 it gets voted on to the future, that is just a hypothetical.

208
00:16:43,620 --> 00:16:50,340
 I understand, and I guess I'm not fighting that per se, and that kind of led each one

209
00:16:50,340 --> 00:16:55,140
 of my little paragraph statements with I understand where we sit.

210
00:16:55,140 --> 00:17:04,420
 But we're asked to make a reasonable, you know, assessment of how these things play

211
00:17:04,420 --> 00:17:10,780
 out, and you know, I'm not necessarily just going to divorce all knowledge out of my head

212
00:17:10,780 --> 00:17:12,980
 in this role.

213
00:17:12,980 --> 00:17:20,180
 Yeah, I'm not comfortable with this property at all, considering all these items.

214
00:17:20,180 --> 00:17:24,460
 I would at least ask that it be pulled out of consent.

215
00:17:24,460 --> 00:17:25,460
 We certainly do that.

216
00:17:25,460 --> 00:17:29,220
 It might be helpful, Richard, if you could help me out here.

217
00:17:29,220 --> 00:17:32,980
 The preliminary and plaths and final plaths are an administrative process that we have

218
00:17:32,980 --> 00:17:33,980
 as a body.

219
00:17:33,980 --> 00:17:35,740
 It's not a recommending process.

220
00:17:35,740 --> 00:17:44,700
 And with that, obviously, anyone can vote any way, but if it meets technical requirements...

221
00:17:44,700 --> 00:17:49,340
 It essentially needs to be approved, or I mean, it's almost a ministerial function.

222
00:17:49,340 --> 00:17:56,860
 I think this last House bill gives the ability for P&Z to deny a plath, but there would need

223
00:17:56,860 --> 00:18:02,060
 to be findings associated with that, so you would need to make a finding that would go

224
00:18:02,060 --> 00:18:08,040
 against the technical review of, say, the city engineer or the traffic engineer and make

225
00:18:08,040 --> 00:18:15,900
 your own finding associated with those criteria that are included in the backup.

226
00:18:15,900 --> 00:18:18,100
 That's not a...

227
00:18:18,100 --> 00:18:20,880
 Is that a requirement for a no vote?

228
00:18:20,880 --> 00:18:26,180
 Is a citation of where it doesn't meet technical requirements, or do we have the autonomy to

229
00:18:26,180 --> 00:18:30,500
 vote no out of conscience on plaths?

230
00:18:30,500 --> 00:18:37,740
 Incident can back me up, but it needs to be tied to the letter of the law, if you will.

231
00:18:37,740 --> 00:18:38,740
 Okay.

232
00:18:38,740 --> 00:18:42,980
 Commissioner Begg, I would just ask at public hearing if you just remind me if you want

233
00:18:42,980 --> 00:18:43,980
 that pulled...

234
00:18:43,980 --> 00:18:48,820
 I think I'm gonna request that we still vote individually, even if the vote is on technical

235
00:18:48,820 --> 00:18:54,300
 merits and even if we vote the way we would likely vote on the consent other items.

236
00:18:54,300 --> 00:18:59,420
 I just kind of want an actual record of that event, if we could, please.

237
00:18:59,420 --> 00:19:00,420
 Will do.

238
00:19:00,420 --> 00:19:01,420
 Thank you, Mr. Smith.

239
00:19:01,420 --> 00:19:02,420
 Thank you, Chair.

240
00:19:02,420 --> 00:19:08,940
 So on those plug gas wells, it's usually encouraged to make that open space, but it's not city

241
00:19:08,940 --> 00:19:09,940
 code to make it open space?

242
00:19:09,940 --> 00:19:10,940
 That's right.

243
00:19:10,940 --> 00:19:11,940
 Okay.

244
00:19:11,940 --> 00:19:12,940
 I just wanted to make sure it wasn't...

245
00:19:12,940 --> 00:19:13,940
 Yeah.

246
00:19:13,940 --> 00:19:14,940
 And they were encouraged.

247
00:19:14,940 --> 00:19:15,940
 I just wanted to make clarification of it.

248
00:19:15,940 --> 00:19:16,940
 Thanks.

249
00:19:16,940 --> 00:19:17,940
 Dr. Shirellis.

250
00:19:17,940 --> 00:19:18,940
 Thank you, Chair.

251
00:19:18,940 --> 00:19:24,140
 I think you might have just answered it with regard to that lot nine, block A. So you encouraged

252
00:19:24,140 --> 00:19:25,140
 it.

253
00:19:25,140 --> 00:19:26,980
 I noticed it's not designated open space, so...

254
00:19:26,980 --> 00:19:27,980
 No.

255
00:19:27,980 --> 00:19:28,980
 Their response was no?

256
00:19:28,980 --> 00:19:29,980
 Yes.

257
00:19:29,980 --> 00:19:30,980
 All right.

258
00:19:30,980 --> 00:19:31,980
 Thanks.

259
00:19:31,980 --> 00:19:36,380
 Until we have something in the gas well ordinance that addresses this, we really can't force

260
00:19:36,380 --> 00:19:40,460
 the issue on the applicant.

261
00:19:40,460 --> 00:19:42,180
 Any other questions for Sundee?

262
00:19:42,180 --> 00:19:43,180
 Great.

263
00:19:43,180 --> 00:19:44,900
 Thank you very much, Sundee.

264
00:19:44,900 --> 00:19:45,900
 Sure.

265
00:19:45,900 --> 00:19:46,900
 Next item is 3C.

266
00:19:46,900 --> 00:19:49,720
 Does anyone have any questions on this item for Julie?

267
00:19:49,720 --> 00:19:50,720
 We do.

268
00:19:50,720 --> 00:20:00,260
 Next item is on by Julie Upp.

269
00:20:00,260 --> 00:20:06,300
 Good evening.

270
00:20:06,300 --> 00:20:08,420
 The final plat for Sherman Crossing.

271
00:20:08,420 --> 00:20:09,420
 This might look familiar.

272
00:20:09,420 --> 00:20:11,500
 You saw the preliminary plat not too long ago.

273
00:20:11,500 --> 00:20:17,660
 It is a single-family residential subdivision, and I'll stand for any questions.

274
00:20:17,660 --> 00:20:18,660
 Commissioner Ellis.

275
00:20:18,660 --> 00:20:19,660
 Thank you, Chair.

276
00:20:19,660 --> 00:20:23,100
 I noticed that the recommendation is the tree mitigation.

277
00:20:23,100 --> 00:20:27,740
 So with an approval of this, is that recommendation automatically being part of this?

278
00:20:27,740 --> 00:20:29,740
 Yes, ma'am.

279
00:20:29,740 --> 00:20:30,740
 Okay.

280
00:20:30,740 --> 00:20:31,740
 Any other questions?

281
00:20:31,740 --> 00:20:32,740
 Great.

282
00:20:32,740 --> 00:20:33,740
 Thank you.

283
00:20:33,740 --> 00:20:34,740
 Thank you.

284
00:20:34,740 --> 00:20:35,740
 That concludes our consent agenda.

285
00:20:35,740 --> 00:20:36,740
 We'll move into public hearings.

286
00:20:36,740 --> 00:20:44,180
 Item 4A is asking for a postponement, and so we will not hear presentation for 4A in chambers.

287
00:20:44,180 --> 00:20:45,180
 We will...

288
00:20:45,180 --> 00:20:46,180
 Go ahead.

289
00:20:46,180 --> 00:20:47,180
 Michelle Ellis.

290
00:20:47,180 --> 00:20:48,180
 Thank you.

291
00:20:48,180 --> 00:20:49,180
 Postponement.

292
00:20:49,180 --> 00:20:50,180
 Yes, February 5th.

293
00:20:50,180 --> 00:20:51,180
 Thanks.

294
00:20:51,180 --> 00:20:52,180
 Yeah.

295
00:20:52,180 --> 00:20:53,180
 So we will open...

296
00:20:53,180 --> 00:20:58,980
 I will open public hearing and ask for a postponement to date certain at February 5th.

297
00:20:58,980 --> 00:21:07,660
 Next item is 4B, and this is presented by Ron on a code amendment.

298
00:21:07,660 --> 00:21:14,700
 Presentation real quick.

299
00:21:14,700 --> 00:21:16,260
 Are these three separate ones?

300
00:21:16,260 --> 00:21:17,260
 They are.

301
00:21:17,260 --> 00:21:18,260
 Okay.

302
00:21:18,260 --> 00:21:24,060
 Thank you for your consideration and votes.

303
00:21:24,060 --> 00:21:29,340
 Chair members of the commission, this is one of three code amendments that we will be considering...

304
00:21:29,340 --> 00:21:31,380
 You all will be considering this evening.

305
00:21:31,380 --> 00:21:36,940
 The first one is a code amendment, a city-initiated code amendment regarding low-impact manufacturing

306
00:21:36,940 --> 00:21:39,280
 use.

307
00:21:39,280 --> 00:21:44,260
 As you all know, back in April, we adopted the Dunn Code Update.

308
00:21:44,260 --> 00:21:51,540
 As part of that effort, there was a lot of work towards the use-specific uses, as well

309
00:21:51,540 --> 00:21:54,340
 as creating some use-specific standards.

310
00:21:54,340 --> 00:22:03,500
 Some of the uses were consolidated, some were introduced as new uses, as well as some were

311
00:22:03,500 --> 00:22:06,940
 just renamed from one use to another.

312
00:22:06,940 --> 00:22:10,940
 The low-impact manufacturing was one of those uses that was renamed.

313
00:22:10,940 --> 00:22:16,180
 It was previously light manufacturing, and it is now low-impact manufacturing, and there

314
00:22:16,180 --> 00:22:21,260
 is a definition that was included as part of the Dunn Code Update.

315
00:22:21,260 --> 00:22:27,200
 That definition that you see here is defined in sub-chapter 9 of the DDC, and I'll just

316
00:22:27,200 --> 00:22:28,940
 read it for the record.

317
00:22:28,940 --> 00:22:34,980
 Low-impact manufacturing is defined as an industrial operations relying on the assembly,

318
00:22:34,980 --> 00:22:40,020
 distributing, fabricating, manufacturing, packaging, processing, recycling, repairing,

319
00:22:40,020 --> 00:22:46,820
 servicing, storing, and wholesaling of goods or products using parts previously developed

320
00:22:46,820 --> 00:22:48,580
 from raw material.

321
00:22:48,580 --> 00:22:53,860
 Low-impact manufacturing uses include only those uses that will not create noise, smoke,

322
00:22:53,860 --> 00:23:02,180
 fumes, odors, glare, or health or safety hazards outside of the building where such assembly,

323
00:23:02,180 --> 00:23:05,140
 fabrication, or processing takes place.

324
00:23:05,140 --> 00:23:13,340
 A very low-impact, mainly assembly-type uses under this type of use.

325
00:23:13,340 --> 00:23:20,260
 The way it is permitted in the DDC currently, it is permitted in the MD with a specific

326
00:23:20,260 --> 00:23:29,220
 use permit, and that is permitted in the MR, SC, HC, GO, LI, and HI with a use-specific

327
00:23:29,220 --> 00:23:34,900
 standard, and that use-specific standard is 536E, and that is the subject that we will

328
00:23:34,900 --> 00:23:38,780
 be discussing as part of this Code Amendment.

329
00:23:38,780 --> 00:23:46,580
 So 536E, the city-initiated amendment, Code Amendment, is really to correct what's there

330
00:23:46,580 --> 00:23:47,580
 today.

331
00:23:47,580 --> 00:23:54,740
 Currently, the section states that distribution, warehousing, or wholesaling activities are

332
00:23:54,740 --> 00:24:00,900
 prohibited, but by the definition that I read earlier, it says that is part of their activity.

333
00:24:00,900 --> 00:24:05,940
 So I'm not really sure why that was included, and that is why we're here today just to correct

334
00:24:05,940 --> 00:24:09,260
 that use-specific standard.

335
00:24:09,260 --> 00:24:15,620
 The second part of the use-specific standard is related to the maximum square feet of gross

336
00:24:15,620 --> 00:24:18,020
 flow area per lot.

337
00:24:18,020 --> 00:24:24,420
 The maximum that is specified for low-impact manufacturing is 5,000 square feet, and if

338
00:24:24,420 --> 00:24:29,180
 you know low-impact manufacturing and the type of uses that are allowed under that,

339
00:24:29,180 --> 00:24:31,820
 5,000 really is not much.

340
00:24:31,820 --> 00:24:38,340
 In fact, there are a number of businesses today that are now non-conforming because of that

341
00:24:38,340 --> 00:24:44,240
 limitation in the square footage of, again, a maximum of 5,000 square feet.

342
00:24:44,240 --> 00:24:49,080
 What staff is proposing, as you see here in this strikethrough and underline, is we're

343
00:24:49,080 --> 00:24:55,220
 getting rid of that first use-specific standard, and that distribution, warehousing, and wholesaling

344
00:24:55,220 --> 00:24:56,980
 activities are prohibited.

345
00:24:56,980 --> 00:25:00,340
 We would like to see that be part of low-impact manufacturing.

346
00:25:00,340 --> 00:25:03,260
 Again, it is part of their activity.

347
00:25:03,260 --> 00:25:12,140
 The MD would have a maximum 10,000 square feet, and MD is the area around the downtown

348
00:25:12,140 --> 00:25:13,140
 primarily.

349
00:25:13,140 --> 00:25:14,140
 -Tricia Ellis.

350
00:25:14,140 --> 00:25:15,140
 -Thank you, Chair.

351
00:25:15,140 --> 00:25:19,620
 So, Ron, with regard to the MD, you are removing the SUP.

352
00:25:19,620 --> 00:25:21,900
 -No, we still have the SUP.

353
00:25:21,900 --> 00:25:24,420
 -You're leaving it in there?

354
00:25:24,420 --> 00:25:25,420
 -That's still in there.

355
00:25:25,420 --> 00:25:26,420
 That's not changing.

356
00:25:26,420 --> 00:25:32,340
 -The 10,000 is just an added use-specific standard that they will still have to comply

357
00:25:32,340 --> 00:25:36,940
 with even with a specific use permit.

358
00:25:36,940 --> 00:25:46,900
 Under the MRSC and HC, which are the next three lineup of zoning districts that permit

359
00:25:46,900 --> 00:25:53,140
 low-impact manufacturing by right, they can go up to 10,000 square feet.

360
00:25:53,140 --> 00:25:58,620
 However, if they choose to exceed 10,000, they have the option to get that through a

361
00:25:58,620 --> 00:26:00,260
 specific use permit.

362
00:26:00,260 --> 00:26:05,980
 So you can see there's a tier as far as square footage based on the zoning district as we

363
00:26:05,980 --> 00:26:09,380
 move further to the more intense.

364
00:26:09,380 --> 00:26:17,980
 The remaining zoning districts, the GO, LI, and HI, have a use-specific standard.

365
00:26:17,980 --> 00:26:23,220
 All that is required for those zoning districts is that all activities shall occur entirely

366
00:26:23,220 --> 00:26:25,300
 within an enclosed structure.

367
00:26:25,300 --> 00:26:28,060
 They don't have any maximum square footage.

368
00:26:28,060 --> 00:26:32,900
 All that is required of them is that they be within an enclosed structure.

369
00:26:32,900 --> 00:26:36,980
 And that is the basis of the code amendment.

370
00:26:36,980 --> 00:26:37,980
 -Commissioner Smith.

371
00:26:37,980 --> 00:26:38,980
 -Thank you, Chair.

372
00:26:38,980 --> 00:26:45,620
 Ron, have we turned down or lost anybody who's trying to apply for a rezoning because the

373
00:26:45,620 --> 00:26:46,620
 code was wrong?

374
00:26:46,620 --> 00:26:48,820
 There was a small window there, it just didn't open.

375
00:26:48,820 --> 00:26:49,820
 -Yeah, we have it.

376
00:26:49,820 --> 00:26:50,820
 Luckily, we haven't.

377
00:26:50,820 --> 00:26:51,820
 I don't think we have.

378
00:26:51,820 --> 00:26:56,780
 I know that we've had a lot of people call in that have existing facilities that are

379
00:26:56,780 --> 00:26:59,980
 now not conforming, and so they asked that, right?

380
00:26:59,980 --> 00:27:05,140
 So this is why we're bringing this forward as we have gone through a number of development

381
00:27:05,140 --> 00:27:06,140
 review processes.

382
00:27:06,140 --> 00:27:08,580
 -Just wanted to make sure we didn't lose any new people we were looking at.

383
00:27:08,580 --> 00:27:09,580
 -Not to my understanding.

384
00:27:09,580 --> 00:27:14,580
 I believe that most of the ones that have this issue is mainly non-conforming.

385
00:27:14,580 --> 00:27:15,580
 -Awesome.

386
00:27:15,580 --> 00:27:16,580
 Thanks.

387
00:27:16,580 --> 00:27:23,540
 Just a follow-on from Commissioner Smith's question, do we have a feel for how many non-conforming

388
00:27:23,540 --> 00:27:25,020
 businesses we have right now?

389
00:27:25,020 --> 00:27:27,660
 -I did not do an inventory, but I can tell you...

390
00:27:27,660 --> 00:27:28,660
 -It's crudely.

391
00:27:28,660 --> 00:27:33,620
 -I tell you, most of the areas along Loop 288 in the Mayhill area, there's a number

392
00:27:33,620 --> 00:27:39,180
 of LI zoning districts there where there's existing Labanol, I believe, Labanol's in

393
00:27:39,180 --> 00:27:40,180
 that area.

394
00:27:40,180 --> 00:27:48,140
 There are some other larger square footage facilities that no longer comply with the

395
00:27:48,140 --> 00:27:49,140
 use-specific standard.

396
00:27:49,140 --> 00:27:50,140
 -Thank you.

397
00:27:50,140 --> 00:27:56,380
 -Do they, Ron, individuals that meet the second criteria, let's say, of 25,000 square feet

398
00:27:56,380 --> 00:28:03,540
 in HC, do they need to come back for an SUP, or how is that non-conform...

399
00:28:03,540 --> 00:28:06,500
 Are they considered non-conformed if they don't have an SUP, but they do fall within

400
00:28:06,500 --> 00:28:07,500
 an ability?

401
00:28:07,500 --> 00:28:17,180
 -If they don't meet, they would be non-conforming, and if they choose to expand or whatnot, then

402
00:28:17,180 --> 00:28:19,340
 they would have to get in a specific use-perm.

403
00:28:19,340 --> 00:28:23,500
 They couldn't expand because they're non-conforming, but if they choose to, they would be able

404
00:28:23,500 --> 00:28:25,620
 to under this standard.

405
00:28:25,620 --> 00:28:30,500
 -They would be non-conforming, but nothing would happen until they took action or a rebuild

406
00:28:30,500 --> 00:28:31,500
 or an expansion.

407
00:28:31,500 --> 00:28:32,500
 -Correct.

408
00:28:32,500 --> 00:28:33,500
 Yeah.

409
00:28:33,500 --> 00:28:34,500
 -They would come back.

410
00:28:34,500 --> 00:28:35,500
 Okay.

411
00:28:35,500 --> 00:28:37,500
 Any questions on this item?

412
00:28:37,500 --> 00:28:38,500
 Great.

413
00:28:38,500 --> 00:28:40,380
 Next item of business is 4C.

414
00:28:40,380 --> 00:28:47,780
 This is also Ron with the development code.

415
00:28:47,780 --> 00:28:50,780
 -Okay.

416
00:28:50,780 --> 00:28:54,580
 Okay.

417
00:28:54,580 --> 00:28:57,380
 This is the second code amendment that we'll bring forward.

418
00:28:57,380 --> 00:28:59,420
 It's the city-initiated code amendment.

419
00:28:59,420 --> 00:29:05,460
 This is related to the administrative criteria manual and some of the other criteria manuals

420
00:29:05,460 --> 00:29:08,660
 that we have currently in place.

421
00:29:08,660 --> 00:29:14,940
 Part of the effort that we are working with staff internally is to develop and improve

422
00:29:14,940 --> 00:29:21,540
 our development review process, and one way of doing that is to create offshore efficiency.

423
00:29:21,540 --> 00:29:27,020
 What we've done is identified a development handbook where it is one document where all

424
00:29:27,020 --> 00:29:32,860
 of the following information will be available for the development community.

425
00:29:32,860 --> 00:29:40,020
 The development handbook will have and contain within itself will be flow charts, submittal

426
00:29:40,020 --> 00:29:45,660
 schedules, application forms, checklists, calendars, and other development review documents

427
00:29:45,660 --> 00:29:50,660
 that are typical that you normally see during the development review process.

428
00:29:50,660 --> 00:29:56,140
 What we found is that what is the administrative criteria manual, which I presented to you

429
00:29:56,140 --> 00:30:02,420
 all back last year, a lot of the information would be included there.

430
00:30:02,420 --> 00:30:07,460
 There is also an application criteria manual that's referenced in the DDC, but really

431
00:30:07,460 --> 00:30:10,380
 it's the same document that we're talking about.

432
00:30:10,380 --> 00:30:12,940
 The site design criteria manual, similar.

433
00:30:12,940 --> 00:30:18,640
 It has a lot of the requirements that is needed for the development review process.

434
00:30:18,640 --> 00:30:23,120
 We feel that that is something that can be contained or consolidated within a development

435
00:30:23,120 --> 00:30:24,460
 handbook.

436
00:30:24,460 --> 00:30:30,020
 The construction criteria manual, as we began to look at the construction criteria manual,

437
00:30:30,020 --> 00:30:35,220
 we found that a lot of what is stated in the construction criteria manual can also be included

438
00:30:35,220 --> 00:30:38,140
 and consolidated into the development handbook.

439
00:30:38,140 --> 00:30:45,140
 Lastly, the ESA criteria manual that you all heard from our water protection team, it also

440
00:30:45,140 --> 00:30:51,220
 has certain information and other requirements that are related to development that again

441
00:30:51,220 --> 00:30:56,020
 would benefit in being part of a development handbook.

442
00:30:56,020 --> 00:31:02,300
 With that, we are proposing as far as code amendment that all of these references that

443
00:31:02,300 --> 00:31:08,980
 are listed here be referenced in the then development code as a development handbook.

444
00:31:08,980 --> 00:31:14,200
 Now everyone that sees that will be directed to one document, and that is the intent to

445
00:31:14,200 --> 00:31:19,540
 create again an efficient way, a more easier way of understanding our development review

446
00:31:19,540 --> 00:31:21,380
 process.

447
00:31:21,380 --> 00:31:26,620
 That is again what is being proposed, are these references that are listed here that

448
00:31:26,620 --> 00:31:33,460
 they will be renamed as part of this code amendment to development handbook.

449
00:31:33,460 --> 00:31:39,260
 There are a few sections where they are referenced, obviously the admin criteria manual, construction

450
00:31:39,260 --> 00:31:45,220
 criteria manual, and ESA criteria manual will no longer exist, so then they will no longer

451
00:31:45,220 --> 00:31:50,440
 be included or added or left on this list, so that's why you see a strikethrough for

452
00:31:50,440 --> 00:31:52,300
 those three there.

453
00:31:52,300 --> 00:31:58,260
 And then just to summarize, throughout the code, administrative criteria manual is mentioned

454
00:31:58,260 --> 00:32:03,740
 22 times, the application criteria manual five times, the site design criteria manual

455
00:32:03,740 --> 00:32:10,660
 is referenced 13, construction once, and then ESA is referenced four times in the DDC.

456
00:32:10,660 --> 00:32:15,740
 And all of these references, again if this code amendment were to be passed, will now

457
00:32:15,740 --> 00:32:21,180
 be referenced in the DDC as the development handbook.

458
00:32:21,180 --> 00:32:24,620
 Concludes my presentation, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

459
00:32:24,620 --> 00:32:25,620
 Commissioner Beck.

460
00:32:25,620 --> 00:32:28,060
 So thank you, Chair.

461
00:32:28,060 --> 00:32:31,900
 So it feels like an efficiency to me as well, and it feels like something that we should

462
00:32:31,900 --> 00:32:37,980
 do, but I have some questions about like unintended consequences that I'm trying to work through

463
00:32:37,980 --> 00:32:42,580
 in my head, and that is if we group these books together, going forward in the future

464
00:32:42,580 --> 00:32:49,300
 we would just, for modifications, we would just take one vote on that consolidated item?

465
00:32:49,300 --> 00:32:53,020
 Because right now we take like 12 different votes for every criterion manual.

466
00:32:53,020 --> 00:32:55,740
 Right, it would be one document in any amendment manual.

467
00:32:55,740 --> 00:33:01,340
 This is a handbook, and that is something that is going to be administered administratively

468
00:33:01,340 --> 00:33:07,380
 by staff, and so any changes to that would be done internally by staff.

469
00:33:07,380 --> 00:33:12,100
 So there would be no vote, I guess, I don't know if that is your question.

470
00:33:12,100 --> 00:33:16,180
 It wasn't, but it's informative, so I appreciate it.

471
00:33:16,180 --> 00:33:23,660
 So we feel that the content of the development handbook is again administrative, again flowcharts,

472
00:33:23,660 --> 00:33:29,700
 checklist items, procedures that is needed for the development review process.

473
00:33:29,700 --> 00:33:38,780
 Anything that is regulatory or policy related, we will include or have include into the development

474
00:33:38,780 --> 00:33:40,120
 code itself.

475
00:33:40,120 --> 00:33:45,700
 So just to help differentiate between a handbook and the development code, obviously the development

476
00:33:45,700 --> 00:33:50,980
 code is something that this body will review and has reviewed and will continue to review,

477
00:33:50,980 --> 00:33:57,700
 while the handbook is meant to be just that, a development handbook administered by staff.

478
00:33:57,700 --> 00:34:01,460
 So then why don't we put the other criterion manuals into a giant handbook?

479
00:34:01,460 --> 00:34:05,500
 Well that's a good question, and that's something that we will be coming to you hopefully in

480
00:34:05,500 --> 00:34:12,820
 the near future, there is plans to consolidate the criterion manuals into one criterion manual.

481
00:34:12,820 --> 00:34:18,700
 While they'll still have the transportation, the waste water and water sections and storm

482
00:34:18,700 --> 00:34:26,220
 water in each of, in broken down in the actual criterion manual, but that will be a separate

483
00:34:26,220 --> 00:34:30,940
 document and it will be just referred to as the development criterion manual.

484
00:34:30,940 --> 00:34:32,900
 So kind of leading to what you were saying.

485
00:34:32,900 --> 00:34:37,200
 So again, efficiency, right, so you have one criterion manual where you have all of those

486
00:34:37,200 --> 00:34:42,940
 different categories identified, but again that is a criterion manual, this is a handbook

487
00:34:42,940 --> 00:34:45,420
 and again the difference between the two.

488
00:34:45,420 --> 00:34:50,700
 The handbook is again very development review process, the criterion manual very technical

489
00:34:50,700 --> 00:34:55,140
 related to engineering, related to storm water, that's a little bit different from a development

490
00:34:55,140 --> 00:34:56,140
 handbook.

491
00:34:56,140 --> 00:34:59,740
 Okay, thank you Ron.

492
00:34:59,740 --> 00:35:03,500
 Ron in the posting, I don't know if this is a big deal or not, but in the posting it's

493
00:35:03,500 --> 00:35:07,840
 saying that there's going to be two handbooks, a development handbook and an ESA handbook.

494
00:35:07,840 --> 00:35:12,940
 That is, I apologize, that should have been updated, the caption, what we're trying to

495
00:35:12,940 --> 00:35:16,540
 do is consolidate into one development handbook.

496
00:35:16,540 --> 00:35:19,980
 Initially we were thinking that it would be a development handbook and an ESA handbook,

497
00:35:19,980 --> 00:35:26,640
 but towards the end of our analysis we decided that we would fold in the ESA into one development

498
00:35:26,640 --> 00:35:30,260
 handbook, but that is the plan.

499
00:35:30,260 --> 00:35:35,140
 This has no bearing on public notification or anything that what's being voted upon is

500
00:35:35,140 --> 00:35:36,660
 different than the item?

501
00:35:36,660 --> 00:35:38,420
 I don't think so.

502
00:35:38,420 --> 00:35:39,420
 Great, perfect.

503
00:35:39,420 --> 00:35:43,140
 Okay, any other questions for this item?

504
00:35:43,140 --> 00:35:51,540
 The next item of business is 4D, this is also Ron with the development code.

505
00:35:51,540 --> 00:35:59,420
 Okay, this is the third code amendment.

506
00:35:59,420 --> 00:36:05,700
 It's related to the location of parking areas, primarily parking in front.

507
00:36:05,700 --> 00:36:08,900
 Again as you all know, there was a code update.

508
00:36:08,900 --> 00:36:14,980
 Part of that effort, there were some standards that were created or carried forward and added

509
00:36:14,980 --> 00:36:21,220
 to, specifically section 796D2.

510
00:36:21,220 --> 00:36:26,660
 Under that section it refers to all other uses and all other uses are basically the

511
00:36:26,660 --> 00:36:32,220
 uses that are not single family, duplexes, ten homes, triplexes, or fourplexes, everything

512
00:36:32,220 --> 00:36:33,460
 else.

513
00:36:33,460 --> 00:36:44,620
 In all other uses, parking in front is prohibited in the MN, the MD, and the MR.

514
00:36:44,620 --> 00:36:51,460
 Now what was added as part of the development code update in 2019 was the addition of the

515
00:36:51,460 --> 00:36:53,580
 MR.

516
00:36:53,580 --> 00:37:00,580
 Previously in the 2002 code, the parking in front was prohibited in a protection oriented

517
00:37:00,580 --> 00:37:06,980
 districts, which is your MN, and it was also prohibited in the downtown, the DCG, which

518
00:37:06,980 --> 00:37:10,220
 is your MD.

519
00:37:10,220 --> 00:37:16,820
 The MR again, like I said earlier, was a zoning district that was added to this list.

520
00:37:16,820 --> 00:37:23,460
 What we have found through development reviews after the code was updated, we found that

521
00:37:23,460 --> 00:37:28,740
 properties that were zoned MR, and you can see from the zoning map, MR are these dark

522
00:37:28,740 --> 00:37:30,280
 purple areas.

523
00:37:30,280 --> 00:37:39,780
 They're primarily located along I-35 and along major arterials and collectors.

524
00:37:39,780 --> 00:37:48,180
 Now they're no longer allowed to have parking in front, while prior to 2002, they were in

525
00:37:48,180 --> 00:37:50,020
 those zoning districts.

526
00:37:50,020 --> 00:38:01,900
 For those that are familiar, the MR was once RCCN and RCCD, and under that zoning district

527
00:38:01,900 --> 00:38:08,780
 in the 2002, they were allowed parking in front, but now with the 2019, the MR, by adding

528
00:38:08,780 --> 00:38:17,780
 the MR into that prohibition, those areas that were once RCCN and RCCD are no longer

529
00:38:17,780 --> 00:38:21,540
 able to have parking in front.

530
00:38:21,540 --> 00:38:28,900
 What we found is that it's not appropriate to have that prohibition under the MR.

531
00:38:28,900 --> 00:38:35,620
 Primarily those that are along an arterial, such as the loop, such as I-35 frontage road

532
00:38:35,620 --> 00:38:40,700
 would be considered an arterial, and such as other collectors that are largely areas

533
00:38:40,700 --> 00:38:44,640
 where there's high traffic volumes and whatnot.

534
00:38:44,640 --> 00:38:56,380
 What staff is proposing is that we correct 7962, again, primarily because parking in front

535
00:38:56,380 --> 00:39:03,580
 is appropriate in the MR district, and that is also appropriate within arterials and collectors.

536
00:39:03,580 --> 00:39:09,220
 This is the code update that we are proposing under that section, where I'm going to read

537
00:39:09,220 --> 00:39:15,260
 it for the record, off-street parking areas located between the front building facade

538
00:39:15,260 --> 00:39:22,540
 and the adjacent street frontage is prohibited, unless the parcel satisfies the following.

539
00:39:22,540 --> 00:39:28,500
 It is located outside the NMD.

540
00:39:28,500 --> 00:39:35,300
 We struck out the MR zoning district, so all other zoning districts would be allowed parking

541
00:39:35,300 --> 00:39:37,200
 in front.

542
00:39:37,200 --> 00:39:44,060
 There is also that it also shall adjoin, the property shall also adjoin either an arterial

543
00:39:44,060 --> 00:39:49,420
 or collector, as defined by the mobility plan.

544
00:39:49,420 --> 00:39:52,780
 Those are the changes that we are proposing.

545
00:39:52,780 --> 00:40:00,700
 Again, if there's a specific property that's located within an MR, today they would not

546
00:40:00,700 --> 00:40:03,820
 be allowed to park in front.

547
00:40:03,820 --> 00:40:10,980
 Those properties that are MR and are on a collector also would not be permitted.

548
00:40:10,980 --> 00:40:17,580
 What we're saying is that they should be allowed under the MR, as well as those properties

549
00:40:17,580 --> 00:40:23,420
 that are both MR and along a collector and an arterial.

550
00:40:23,420 --> 00:40:25,620
 Any questions?

551
00:40:25,620 --> 00:40:28,580
 Commissioner Beck.

552
00:40:28,580 --> 00:40:30,340
 Thank you, Chair.

553
00:40:30,340 --> 00:40:35,580
 Is there any, I guess I haven't mapped it out like you guys have, is there any place

554
00:40:35,580 --> 00:40:42,460
 where you're going to give the potential for an unintended, undesirable parking lot to

555
00:40:42,460 --> 00:40:49,460
 be plopped down and sort of because you're creating an allowed exception, where it would

556
00:40:49,460 --> 00:40:53,620
 just really break things, as it were?

557
00:40:53,620 --> 00:40:54,900
 We definitely looked into that.

558
00:40:54,900 --> 00:41:00,980
 We even thought about any other zoning districts that we would prohibit the parking in front.

559
00:41:00,980 --> 00:41:06,620
 Right now it is proposed to be just the MN and the MD.

560
00:41:06,620 --> 00:41:12,660
 We've looked at not only the zonings and where certain uses are permitted.

561
00:41:12,660 --> 00:41:20,980
 I'll use an example, general retail is permitted in the R7, right?

562
00:41:20,980 --> 00:41:29,500
 As long as it's not MN and MR, it's permitted in the R7, however, the R7 requires a specific

563
00:41:29,500 --> 00:41:30,500
 use permit.

564
00:41:30,500 --> 00:41:35,280
 We've kind of gone through a lot of the analysis, not only on the zoning side, but also where

565
00:41:35,280 --> 00:41:41,520
 it is in relationship to a arterial or collector, and a lot of what we found was these uses

566
00:41:41,520 --> 00:41:47,640
 that would be impacting a neighborhood or some other way of impacting an area, we found

567
00:41:47,640 --> 00:41:54,220
 that they were covered under a specific use permit, so our understanding and our analysis

568
00:41:54,220 --> 00:41:59,900
 show that if we approve this, there's still a specific use permit that would address parking

569
00:41:59,900 --> 00:42:04,060
 in your front if and when a property decides to do something in that effect.

570
00:42:04,060 --> 00:42:06,020
 Okay, thank you, Ron.

571
00:42:06,020 --> 00:42:17,460
 Ron, it doesn't appear that this is changing, but can you help me out on 796D, C, the corridors

572
00:42:17,460 --> 00:42:20,300
 that are not allowed?

573
00:42:20,300 --> 00:42:24,220
 There's like this weird exemption, it seems to be downtown.

574
00:42:24,220 --> 00:42:32,940
 Chair, those are what was carried forward from the previous code and what that represents,

575
00:42:32,940 --> 00:42:36,580
 they represent corridors that lead into the downtown.

576
00:42:36,580 --> 00:42:41,620
 Entry corridors like Dallas Drive, Fort Worth Drive, again, the intent there, Elm and Locust

577
00:42:41,620 --> 00:42:49,180
 as you come in from the north, is to not allow parking in front in those particular arterials

578
00:42:49,180 --> 00:42:51,660
 because they are classified as arterials.

579
00:42:51,660 --> 00:42:56,380
 If we didn't make that exception, then they would be allowed parking in front under that

580
00:42:56,380 --> 00:43:04,300
 segment, so we wanted to identify those specifically where we would prohibit those within those

581
00:43:04,300 --> 00:43:05,300
 entry corridors.

582
00:43:05,300 --> 00:43:06,300
 Gotcha.

583
00:43:06,300 --> 00:43:09,340
 Okay, thanks for that clarification.

584
00:43:09,340 --> 00:43:13,900
 Any other questions for Ron on this item?

585
00:43:13,900 --> 00:43:17,060
 Okay, that concludes our agenda for this evening.

586
00:43:17,060 --> 00:43:21,700
 It is 548, I'll call this meeting to a close.

587
00:43:21,700 --> 00:43:24,660
 We'll reconvene at 630 in council chambers.

588
00:43:27,380 --> 00:43:33,100
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting

589
00:43:33,100 --> 00:43:35,660
 for Wednesday, January 22, 2020.

590
00:43:35,660 --> 00:43:38,780
 Seeing that we do have a quorum, I will call this meeting to order.

591
00:43:38,780 --> 00:43:42,220
 The first item of business is to stand if able and give a Pledge of Allegiance to the

592
00:43:42,220 --> 00:43:45,220
 U.S. and Texas flag.

593
00:43:45,220 --> 00:44:00,340
 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for

594
00:44:00,340 --> 00:44:12,300
 which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

595
00:44:12,300 --> 00:44:15,940
 The next item of business is to consider the approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission

596
00:44:15,940 --> 00:44:21,740
 minutes from January 8th, and as a point of order, anyone who missed that meeting is still

597
00:44:21,740 --> 00:44:26,620
 able to vote, so there's no need for recusal, even if you were absent, you can still participate

598
00:44:26,620 --> 00:44:28,580
 and should participate in the vote.

599
00:44:28,580 --> 00:44:30,220
 Commissioner Ellis.

600
00:44:30,220 --> 00:44:31,780
 I move approval.

601
00:44:31,780 --> 00:44:32,780
 We have a first for approval.

602
00:44:32,780 --> 00:44:33,780
 Commissioner Smith.

603
00:44:33,780 --> 00:44:34,780
 Second.

604
00:44:34,780 --> 00:44:35,780
 We have a first and a second for approval.

605
00:44:35,780 --> 00:44:36,780
 Any discussion?

606
00:44:36,780 --> 00:44:41,780
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

607
00:44:41,780 --> 00:45:03,340
 Motion carries 6-0.

608
00:45:03,340 --> 00:45:08,060
 Next item of business is the Consent Agenda, and at the request of Commissioner Beck, we're

609
00:45:08,060 --> 00:45:11,300
 going to be pulling 3-B into a separate vote.

610
00:45:11,300 --> 00:45:15,780
 So the Chair will entertain a motion for items 3-A and 3-C.

611
00:45:15,780 --> 00:45:16,780
 Commissioner Smith.

612
00:45:16,780 --> 00:45:20,020
 I move approval of items 3-A and 3-C.

613
00:45:20,020 --> 00:45:21,820
 We have a first for 3-A and 3-C.

614
00:45:21,820 --> 00:45:22,820
 Commissioner Pernetta.

615
00:45:22,820 --> 00:45:23,820
 I second.

616
00:45:23,820 --> 00:45:28,860
 We have a first and a second for the Consent Agenda, items 3-A and 3-C. Any discussion?

617
00:45:28,860 --> 00:45:36,820
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

618
00:45:36,820 --> 00:45:39,540
 Motion carries 7-0.

619
00:45:39,540 --> 00:45:42,980
 We also will take a separate vote for item 3-B.

620
00:45:42,980 --> 00:45:46,060
 Any discussion or motion for item 3-B?

621
00:45:46,060 --> 00:45:47,060
 Commissioner Beck?

622
00:45:47,060 --> 00:46:13,380
 Yeah, we discussed some of this in the first session, but I think just given the proximity

623
00:46:13,380 --> 00:46:14,380
 and the gas volume, some of the other issues with the wetlands and the lack of tree canopy,

624
00:46:14,380 --> 00:46:15,380
 I feel like we're setting ourselves up for more future work.

625
00:46:15,380 --> 00:46:16,380
 I can't support this.

626
00:46:16,380 --> 00:46:17,380
 We have a first for approval.

627
00:46:17,380 --> 00:46:18,380
 Commissioner Anderson?

628
00:46:18,380 --> 00:46:19,380
 Second.

629
00:46:19,380 --> 00:46:21,860
 We have a first and a second for approval.

630
00:46:21,860 --> 00:46:24,300
 Any further discussion?

631
00:46:24,300 --> 00:46:34,620
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

632
00:46:34,620 --> 00:46:38,460
 Motion carries 5-2.

633
00:46:38,460 --> 00:46:46,180
 Next item of business is item 4-A. It's item Z19-0013.

634
00:46:46,180 --> 00:46:50,180
 I will open the public hearing.

635
00:46:50,180 --> 00:46:58,020
 This applicant has requested to postpone the item until a date certain of February 5th,

636
00:46:58,020 --> 00:46:59,020
 2020.

637
00:46:59,020 --> 00:47:00,020
 It is a public hearing.

638
00:47:00,020 --> 00:47:05,100
 If anyone's wishing to speak, we will listen to public comment this evening.

639
00:47:05,100 --> 00:47:09,580
 Seeing none, I'll leave the public hearing open and ask Commissioner Smith.

640
00:47:09,580 --> 00:47:13,380
 Move to postpone to date certain of February 5th.

641
00:47:13,380 --> 00:47:15,020
 We have a first for postponement.

642
00:47:15,020 --> 00:47:16,020
 Commissioner Ellis?

643
00:47:16,020 --> 00:47:17,020
 Thank you.

644
00:47:17,020 --> 00:47:19,300
 We have a first and a second for postponement.

645
00:47:19,300 --> 00:47:20,300
 Any discussion?

646
00:47:20,300 --> 00:47:29,100
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

647
00:47:29,100 --> 00:47:31,480
 Motion carries 7-0.

648
00:47:31,480 --> 00:47:36,860
 Next item of business is item 4B, DCA 19-0025.

649
00:47:36,860 --> 00:47:48,700
 I'll invite Ron Maguina for presentation and open the public hearing.

650
00:47:48,700 --> 00:47:55,580
 This item is a city initiated code amendment regarding, that is, low impact manufacturing

651
00:47:55,580 --> 00:47:58,980
 in the use related to use specific standards.

652
00:47:58,980 --> 00:48:05,180
 As you all know, there was a development code update back in April 2019.

653
00:48:05,180 --> 00:48:12,500
 Part of that effort, there were work towards unifying some of the existing uses, consolidating

654
00:48:12,500 --> 00:48:17,740
 them for simplicity, also to introduce new ones for clarity, and then also to rename

655
00:48:17,740 --> 00:48:20,460
 some of the existing uses.

656
00:48:20,460 --> 00:48:25,900
 Light manufacturing was one of those existing uses that was renamed into or to low impact

657
00:48:25,900 --> 00:48:30,420
 manufacturing and also was provided a definition.

658
00:48:30,420 --> 00:48:36,460
 For the record, you see here is the definition for low impact manufacturing.

659
00:48:36,460 --> 00:48:42,540
 Just by looking at it, you see that there is distributing manufacturing and other processes

660
00:48:42,540 --> 00:48:51,540
 involved in the manufacturing of items as part of a low impact manufacturing use.

661
00:48:51,540 --> 00:48:55,420
 This slide here illustrates where low impact manufacturing is permitted.

662
00:48:55,420 --> 00:48:59,620
 You can see that under the MD, it is permitted with an SUP.

663
00:48:59,620 --> 00:49:06,140
 And then the following MR, SC, HC, G, O, L, I, and HI, it is permitted with a use specific

664
00:49:06,140 --> 00:49:07,140
 standard.

665
00:49:07,140 --> 00:49:11,140
 And that use specific standard is 536E.

666
00:49:11,140 --> 00:49:16,940
 For the purpose of this code amendment, we are correcting two sections of that use specific

667
00:49:16,940 --> 00:49:17,940
 standard.

668
00:49:17,940 --> 00:49:22,900
 The first one is related to the prohibition of distribution, warehousing, and wholesaling

669
00:49:22,900 --> 00:49:24,220
 activities.

670
00:49:24,220 --> 00:49:31,620
 The second of the two is the limited maximum of 5,000 square feet of gross floor area per

671
00:49:31,620 --> 00:49:34,700
 lot.

672
00:49:34,700 --> 00:49:41,260
 The staff is proposing with the following code amendment to eliminate that first use

673
00:49:41,260 --> 00:49:47,180
 specific standard that we would allow for distribution, wholesaling, and warehousing.

674
00:49:47,180 --> 00:49:53,780
 And that in the MD, the maximum square feet gross floor area per lot is 10,000.

675
00:49:53,780 --> 00:49:59,460
 And just for, again, MD, MD is primarily in the downtown, and that is an appropriate maximum

676
00:49:59,460 --> 00:50:00,900
 square footage.

677
00:50:00,900 --> 00:50:08,020
 The MR, SC, and HC, zoning districts would have a limitation of 10,000 square feet, where

678
00:50:08,020 --> 00:50:14,220
 if they choose to propose a larger square footage, they could through an SUP.

679
00:50:14,220 --> 00:50:20,140
 Lastly, the remaining zoning districts, the G, O, L, I, and HI, would not have a maximum

680
00:50:20,140 --> 00:50:25,420
 square footage, however, all of the zoning districts would have to comply with the use

681
00:50:25,420 --> 00:50:31,420
 specific standard, which is number three, that all activities shall occur entirely within

682
00:50:31,420 --> 00:50:33,900
 an enclosed structure.

683
00:50:33,900 --> 00:50:34,900
 That concludes my presentation.

684
00:50:34,900 --> 00:50:36,660
 I'd be happy to answer any questions.

685
00:50:36,660 --> 00:50:39,380
 I do not see any questions.

686
00:50:39,380 --> 00:50:41,100
 Thank you for the presentation.

687
00:50:41,100 --> 00:50:42,100
 Okay.

688
00:50:42,100 --> 00:50:43,100
 This is a public hearing.

689
00:50:43,100 --> 00:50:44,100
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

690
00:50:44,100 --> 00:50:49,980
 I do not see anyone here wishing to do so, so I will close the public hearing and ask

691
00:50:49,980 --> 00:50:52,260
 Commissioner Burnett for a motion.

692
00:50:52,260 --> 00:50:54,020
 Motion to approve the amendment.

693
00:50:54,020 --> 00:50:55,700
 We have a first for approval, Commissioner Smith.

694
00:50:55,700 --> 00:50:56,700
 Second.

695
00:50:56,700 --> 00:50:58,340
 We have a first and a second.

696
00:50:58,340 --> 00:51:00,900
 Any discussion on the item?

697
00:51:00,900 --> 00:51:09,740
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

698
00:51:09,740 --> 00:51:12,780
 Motion to approve carries 7-0.

699
00:51:12,780 --> 00:51:16,460
 The next item of business is item 4C, DCA 19-0026.

700
00:51:16,460 --> 00:51:24,580
 I'll invite Ron McGuina back for presentation and open the public hearing.

701
00:51:24,580 --> 00:51:26,380
 Thank you, Chair, members of the commission.

702
00:51:26,380 --> 00:51:29,540
 This is the second code amendment for tonight for your consideration.

703
00:51:29,540 --> 00:51:33,900
 This is in relationship to a code amendment, a city-initiated code amendment related to

704
00:51:33,900 --> 00:51:36,380
 development handbook.

705
00:51:36,380 --> 00:51:42,980
 In an effort to improve our development review process, create efficiency, we are preparing

706
00:51:42,980 --> 00:51:43,980
 a development handbook.

707
00:51:43,980 --> 00:51:49,820
 What a development handbook is is a document that contains a number of information.

708
00:51:49,820 --> 00:51:55,540
 For example, flow charts, submittal schedules, checklists, calendars, any related development

709
00:51:55,540 --> 00:52:03,000
 review-related supporting documents is what a handbook will contain, will have.

710
00:52:03,000 --> 00:52:11,460
 We are proposing a code amendment to the development code for renaming the following criteria manuals.

711
00:52:11,460 --> 00:52:16,620
 We have found that a lot of the information contained in these criteria manuals have information

712
00:52:16,620 --> 00:52:22,300
 that are related to development review and therefore meet or should be more in line as

713
00:52:22,300 --> 00:52:25,640
 being part of a development handbook.

714
00:52:25,640 --> 00:52:31,140
 Those are the administrative criteria manual, the application criteria manual, the site

715
00:52:31,140 --> 00:52:36,340
 design criteria manual, the construction criteria manual, as well as the environmental sensitive

716
00:52:36,340 --> 00:52:42,140
 areas criteria manual, again, all of which have the same information that is related

717
00:52:42,140 --> 00:52:46,180
 to development review and should be part of a development handbook.

718
00:52:46,180 --> 00:52:51,700
 And again, part of this code amendment is to rename all of those references as a development

719
00:52:51,700 --> 00:52:53,440
 handbook.

720
00:52:53,440 --> 00:52:57,500
 We are also proposing to amend section 134B.

721
00:52:57,500 --> 00:53:02,900
 Again, because these will no longer be criteria manuals, they will be eliminated from this

722
00:53:02,900 --> 00:53:07,700
 list that you see here as part of this section.

723
00:53:07,700 --> 00:53:13,300
 For your purposes, administrative criteria manual is referenced in the development code

724
00:53:13,300 --> 00:53:19,780
 22 times, the application criteria manual five times, the site design 13 construction

725
00:53:19,780 --> 00:53:24,620
 criteria manual once, and the ESA is referenced in the code four times.

726
00:53:24,620 --> 00:53:30,760
 And all of these references, again, will be renamed as development handbook in the Denton

727
00:53:30,760 --> 00:53:33,100
 development code.

728
00:53:33,100 --> 00:53:34,100
 That concludes my presentation.

729
00:53:34,100 --> 00:53:36,260
 I would be happy to answer any questions.

730
00:53:36,260 --> 00:53:37,260
 We do have one question.

731
00:53:37,260 --> 00:53:38,260
 Commissioner Beck?

732
00:53:38,260 --> 00:53:39,260
 Yes.

733
00:53:39,260 --> 00:53:40,260
 Thank you, Chair.

734
00:53:40,260 --> 00:53:43,540
 Ron, you answered this for me, and I think I've forgotten the answer, so I'm going to

735
00:53:43,540 --> 00:53:44,540
 ask it again.

736
00:53:44,540 --> 00:53:45,540
 Sure.

737
00:53:45,540 --> 00:53:54,780
 Are we going to this combined handbook, and then what's the vision for how many more handbooks?

738
00:53:54,780 --> 00:53:56,300
 One giant handbook, or?

739
00:53:56,300 --> 00:54:01,820
 One consolidated handbook that will contain all the information related to development

740
00:54:01,820 --> 00:54:02,820
 review.

741
00:54:02,820 --> 00:54:09,180
 Again, items that are administratively processed or administered.

742
00:54:09,180 --> 00:54:10,180
 Thank you.

743
00:54:10,180 --> 00:54:11,180
 That answers my question.

744
00:54:11,180 --> 00:54:12,180
 Thank you.

745
00:54:12,180 --> 00:54:14,420
 I do not see any other questions, Ron.

746
00:54:14,420 --> 00:54:15,420
 Thank you.

747
00:54:15,420 --> 00:54:16,420
 This is a public hearing.

748
00:54:16,420 --> 00:54:21,300
 Anyone who wishes to speak may certainly do so, seeing none, I will close the public hearing.

749
00:54:21,300 --> 00:54:22,300
 Commissioner Smith?

750
00:54:22,300 --> 00:54:23,800
 Move to approve.

751
00:54:23,800 --> 00:54:25,340
 We have a first for approval.

752
00:54:25,340 --> 00:54:26,340
 Mr. Pernetta?

753
00:54:26,340 --> 00:54:27,340
 Second.

754
00:54:27,340 --> 00:54:28,660
 We have a first and a second for approval.

755
00:54:28,660 --> 00:54:29,660
 Any discussion?

756
00:54:29,660 --> 00:54:37,700
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

757
00:54:37,700 --> 00:54:40,100
 Motion to approve carries 7-0.

758
00:54:40,100 --> 00:54:45,140
 Next item of business is item 4D, DCA 19-0028.

759
00:54:45,140 --> 00:54:48,700
 I'll invite Ron McGuida back for presentation and open the public hearing.

760
00:54:48,700 --> 00:54:50,460
 Thank you, Chair, members of the commission.

761
00:54:50,460 --> 00:54:53,900
 This is the last code amendment for consideration this evening.

762
00:54:53,900 --> 00:54:59,260
 This is related to location of parking areas, specifically parking in front.

763
00:54:59,260 --> 00:55:04,500
 Again, as you all know, April 2019, there was a development code update.

764
00:55:04,500 --> 00:55:12,180
 As part of that update, the section 796D2 was carried over from the previous code.

765
00:55:12,180 --> 00:55:18,620
 As part of that carryover, there was an addition to where parking in front is prohibited.

766
00:55:18,620 --> 00:55:27,140
 For the 2002 code, MN, which is protection-oriented related, and MD, which is the downtown area,

767
00:55:27,140 --> 00:55:31,780
 were areas that had a prohibition for parking in front.

768
00:55:31,780 --> 00:55:39,220
 What the 2019 code did was add MR as part of that prohibition zoning districts.

769
00:55:39,220 --> 00:55:46,940
 We have had several development reviews since April, and we have heard and seen examples

770
00:55:46,940 --> 00:55:52,580
 where MR is permitted, where it is proposed, that is, where development is proposed, and

771
00:55:52,580 --> 00:55:57,460
 where the parking in front became a concern or an issue.

772
00:55:57,460 --> 00:56:03,860
 Looking at the zoning map, we realized that adding that MR probably was not the best direction,

773
00:56:03,860 --> 00:56:06,620
 and that this code amendment is going to correct that.

774
00:56:06,620 --> 00:56:13,380
 The MR is primarily located along I-35, as well as primary arterials, as you can see here

775
00:56:13,380 --> 00:56:18,500
 on the zoning map, as well as collectors.

776
00:56:18,500 --> 00:56:23,860
 Having the MR, having it prohibited, or parking in front, we looked at also existing site

777
00:56:23,860 --> 00:56:29,700
 features that have the same location, and a lot of those areas did have parking in front,

778
00:56:29,700 --> 00:56:35,380
 so we feel that keeping in line with those urban characters that we would remove and

779
00:56:35,380 --> 00:56:41,180
 correct the MR as part of that zoning district that prohibits parking in front.

780
00:56:41,180 --> 00:56:46,540
 In addition, parking in front, staff has determined that it is appropriate on properties that

781
00:56:46,540 --> 00:56:49,600
 are along arterials, as well as collectors.

782
00:56:49,600 --> 00:56:54,940
 These street classifications primarily have high volumes of traffic and have a high speed

783
00:56:54,940 --> 00:56:59,260
 as far as miles per hour, so again, these locations would be appropriate for parking

784
00:56:59,260 --> 00:57:01,260
 in front.

785
00:57:01,260 --> 00:57:08,100
 What staff is proposing as part of Section 796(d)(2) is to amend that section to eliminate

786
00:57:08,100 --> 00:57:13,940
 the MR from the list where parking in front is prohibited as a zoning district, and also

787
00:57:13,940 --> 00:57:20,300
 to add collector as part of where parking in front would be allowed, and that is what

788
00:57:20,300 --> 00:57:25,460
 is shown here, and that is what staff is proposing as part of this code amendment.

789
00:57:25,460 --> 00:57:30,820
 Staff again is recommending approval and can stand for any questions.

790
00:57:30,820 --> 00:57:34,500
 Thanks for the presentation, Ron, I don't see any questions.

791
00:57:34,500 --> 00:57:35,500
 This is a public hearing.

792
00:57:35,500 --> 00:57:38,020
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

793
00:57:38,020 --> 00:57:40,380
 Seeing none, I will close the public hearing.

794
00:57:40,380 --> 00:57:41,380
 Commissioner Smith?

795
00:57:41,380 --> 00:57:42,500
 Move to approve.

796
00:57:42,500 --> 00:57:43,900
 We have a first for approval.

797
00:57:43,900 --> 00:57:44,900
 Commissioner Pernetta?

798
00:57:44,900 --> 00:57:45,900
 Second.

799
00:57:45,900 --> 00:57:46,900
 We have a first and a second for approval.

800
00:57:46,900 --> 00:57:49,140
 Any discussion?

801
00:57:49,140 --> 00:57:57,500
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

802
00:57:57,500 --> 00:58:00,260
 Motion to approve carries 7-0.

803
00:58:00,260 --> 00:58:07,140
 The next item of business is item 5A, the P&Z Commission Project Matrix.

804
00:58:07,140 --> 00:58:14,260
 I will ask Richard for any updates and then turn it to the dais for additions or questions.

805
00:58:14,260 --> 00:58:15,900
 No real updates on the matrix.

806
00:58:15,900 --> 00:58:20,820
 I think we've got through most of the items that have been on there.

807
00:58:20,820 --> 00:58:26,580
 We have no additional items that went to council at the last meeting.

808
00:58:26,580 --> 00:58:34,380
 The only thing I will mention is next week on the 28th, council will be rehearing the

809
00:58:34,380 --> 00:58:38,820
 Gaswell item, so that will be on the 28th, other than that, that's all I had.

810
00:58:38,820 --> 00:58:42,780
 Will they take a vote on 28th or is it just a further discussion?

811
00:58:42,780 --> 00:58:46,060
 It'll be to reconsider that ordinance.

812
00:58:46,060 --> 00:58:48,340
 It's essentially a do-over, if you will.

813
00:58:48,340 --> 00:58:49,340
 Gotcha.

814
00:58:49,340 --> 00:58:50,340
 Commissioner Beck?

815
00:58:50,340 --> 00:58:51,860
 Yeah, thank you, Chair.

816
00:58:51,860 --> 00:58:59,780
 I briefly brought this up at work session, but a citizen had the idea of regarding the

817
00:58:59,780 --> 00:59:07,860
 notification issues, having an opt-in system on our webpage where they could enter in an

818
00:59:07,860 --> 00:59:14,900
 address and our general notification 200 or 500 foot distance, and for any developments

819
00:59:14,900 --> 00:59:22,300
 in that radius, it would automatically email them of any public hearings that we were having.

820
00:59:22,300 --> 00:59:26,980
 I don't know about the feasibility, the FTE, the development, anything of that sort of

821
00:59:26,980 --> 00:59:36,300
 thing, but I thought, as an opt-in mechanism, that it could be separate than the state-mandated

822
00:59:36,300 --> 00:59:40,540
 mechanism that we currently follow, but it sounded very intriguing to me because people

823
00:59:40,540 --> 00:59:43,020
 that were interested could be notified.

824
00:59:43,020 --> 00:59:46,420
 Is that something we could explore for the matrix?

825
00:59:46,420 --> 00:59:48,900
 We can certainly look into it.

826
00:59:48,900 --> 00:59:56,980
 What we have now is we have our active projects map, and then every week we submit a new or

827
00:59:56,980 --> 01:00:03,000
 publish a new map that shows the projects that were submitted that week.

828
01:00:03,000 --> 01:00:08,420
 We also do post all of the upcoming community meetings or neighborhood meetings related

829
01:00:08,420 --> 01:00:10,240
 to development projects.

830
01:00:10,240 --> 01:00:15,420
 What I can do is look to see if there's a way that -- that's something we've started

831
01:00:15,420 --> 01:00:20,780
 to look at already, but if there's a way that we can link when we have those community meetings,

832
01:00:20,780 --> 01:00:25,500
 at least tied to that project map, so if somebody is interested at any given time, if they click

833
01:00:25,500 --> 01:00:31,900
 on it, it might show there's a neighborhood meeting set up for whatever day that is.

834
01:00:31,900 --> 01:00:36,740
 I think if we could make some progress in that mechanism, I mean, even if we just took

835
01:00:36,740 --> 01:00:43,860
 baby steps in that direction to improve our notification, I think it would help to maybe

836
01:00:43,860 --> 01:00:49,220
 address some of the items that keep coming up before the commission about notification,

837
01:00:49,220 --> 01:00:54,300
 where people could get some level of notification in an automatic fashion.

838
01:00:54,300 --> 01:00:58,580
 There will be a public -- there are community hearing at -- you know, because you asked

839
01:00:58,580 --> 01:00:59,580
 for this.

840
01:00:59,580 --> 01:01:03,860
 There will be a public hearing about that property, and it's in the radius you asked.

841
01:01:03,860 --> 01:01:09,700
 Now, I understand that it might be more involved, hire a computer programmer or whatever, a

842
01:01:09,700 --> 01:01:15,880
 web developer, but if we could explore that, I certainly would like to hear information

843
01:01:15,880 --> 01:01:16,880
 with that regard.

844
01:01:16,880 --> 01:01:17,880
 Yeah.

845
01:01:17,880 --> 01:01:18,880
 I can look into it.

846
01:01:18,880 --> 01:01:23,780
 I know it -- I want to say a year or two ago there was a -- something similar, I think,

847
01:01:23,780 --> 01:01:27,140
 the town of Southlake does for notifications.

848
01:01:27,140 --> 01:01:31,740
 I know there was a ISR that was put together for council, but I can pull that together

849
01:01:31,740 --> 01:01:32,740
 and provide that.

850
01:01:32,740 --> 01:01:33,740
 Thank you, Richard.

851
01:01:33,740 --> 01:01:34,740
 Commissioner Ellis.

852
01:01:34,740 --> 01:01:35,740
 Thank you, Chair.

853
01:01:35,740 --> 01:01:43,840
 Richard, can we get maybe a work session or maybe just a memo on removal of traffic lights

854
01:01:43,840 --> 01:01:44,840
 in light?

855
01:01:44,840 --> 01:01:49,500
 Recently, there have been several traffic lights removed, and I've gotten questions,

856
01:01:49,500 --> 01:01:55,580
 and I don't know the answer as to how this city makes these decisions.

857
01:01:55,580 --> 01:01:57,660
 So I would love to be enlightened on that.

858
01:01:57,660 --> 01:02:03,260
 We talk all the time about how a traffic light is needed and the steps for that, but I don't

859
01:02:03,260 --> 01:02:06,060
 know how the city decides to remove traffic lights.

860
01:02:06,060 --> 01:02:07,580
 So I would love that information.

861
01:02:07,580 --> 01:02:08,980
 I can get something for you.

862
01:02:08,980 --> 01:02:09,980
 Thanks.

863
01:02:09,980 --> 01:02:10,980
 Put together.

864
01:02:10,980 --> 01:02:11,980
 Yeah.

865
01:02:11,980 --> 01:02:16,660
 The only thing I have, and maybe this is just an offline update, I would love to hear how

866
01:02:16,660 --> 01:02:24,620
 the city is seeing any impact from the HB violence from last year, if there's construction

867
01:02:24,620 --> 01:02:29,460
 happening that is less than what we historically have with build materials and aesthetics,

868
01:02:29,460 --> 01:02:34,060
 or I know the process of the shot clock is being very well managed from what I can tell,

869
01:02:34,060 --> 01:02:39,220
 but I'm just curious if we've seen any projects come through in which the city, maybe it's

870
01:02:39,220 --> 01:02:43,700
 too short, it hasn't been long enough, but I'm curious if that has a detrimental aesthetic

871
01:02:43,700 --> 01:02:47,340
 to our city yet, or if fears are coming to fruition about that.

872
01:02:47,340 --> 01:02:51,620
 I think in the very near future we'll start to see that, and I think where it's going

873
01:02:51,620 --> 01:02:56,620
 to impact more is in the existing neighborhoods.

874
01:02:56,620 --> 01:03:02,900
 Just to give you one example, because we had it happen this week where an individual is

875
01:03:02,900 --> 01:03:05,420
 looking to do a carport.

876
01:03:05,420 --> 01:03:10,020
 So previously with carports, accessory structures, there were certain architectural requirements

877
01:03:10,020 --> 01:03:17,300
 where it had to match the style of the house and the building materials of the house.

878
01:03:17,300 --> 01:03:24,540
 What this individual wanted to do essentially was to have two shipping containers, metal

879
01:03:24,540 --> 01:03:29,140
 roof, corrugated metal over top of it.

880
01:03:29,140 --> 01:03:30,980
 That is now permitted.

881
01:03:30,980 --> 01:03:35,740
 It would have been prohibited now that somebody could put that in.

882
01:03:35,740 --> 01:03:42,220
 They still need to comply with setbacks in that, but we cannot tell them that they cannot

883
01:03:42,220 --> 01:03:43,220
 use that material.

884
01:03:43,220 --> 01:03:44,220
 Great.

885
01:03:44,220 --> 01:03:47,460
 Thanks for that update.

886
01:03:47,460 --> 01:03:51,180
 Any other things to add or questions of the MED matrix?

887
01:03:51,180 --> 01:03:52,180
 Okay.

888
01:03:52,180 --> 01:03:53,900
 Seeing none, that concludes our agenda.

889
01:03:53,900 --> 01:03:55,820
 I'll close the meeting at 6.50.

890
01:03:55,820 --> 01:03:56,660
 Thank you.