1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:08,640
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission work

2
00:00:08,640 --> 00:00:12,120
 session for Wednesday, February 5th, 2020.

3
00:00:12,120 --> 00:00:15,840
 I'll call the meeting to order at 5.02, seeing that we do have a quorum.

4
00:00:15,840 --> 00:00:19,120
 Let the record show that Commissioner Pernitta is absent.

5
00:00:19,120 --> 00:00:20,720
 This evening we're just working through the agenda.

6
00:00:20,720 --> 00:00:26,080
 There's not any reports tonight, so we'll hop right into just the working agenda for

7
00:00:26,080 --> 00:00:27,080
 this evening.

8
00:00:27,080 --> 00:00:28,360
 The first thing is the minutes.

9
00:00:28,360 --> 00:00:35,680
 Is there any edits or comments on the January 22nd minutes?

10
00:00:35,680 --> 00:00:40,320
 If you see some before the meeting, let us know in the meeting, the public hearing.

11
00:00:40,320 --> 00:00:44,760
 And then we'll move into consent agenda, and I know we do have some specific questions

12
00:00:44,760 --> 00:00:50,120
 on individual items, so the first one is 3A, which is Cindy Jackson, and we do have some

13
00:00:50,120 --> 00:01:12,520
 questions for you on 3A.

14
00:01:12,520 --> 00:01:14,000
 You did have some questions?

15
00:01:14,000 --> 00:01:15,000
 Yes.

16
00:01:15,000 --> 00:01:16,000
 Commissioner Beck.

17
00:01:16,000 --> 00:01:18,800
 Thank you, Chair.

18
00:01:18,800 --> 00:01:29,160
 So Cindy, my first question is about the ESA area in the southeast of the territory over

19
00:01:29,160 --> 00:01:42,160
 near Roselon, and it looks like based on that we're potentially running -- hold up the wrong

20
00:01:42,160 --> 00:01:49,360
 -- this would be phase one, that we're potentially running afoul of some flooding issues, and

21
00:01:49,360 --> 00:02:00,400
 I know that the city recognized that it seemed to match code, and we're recommending approval,

22
00:02:00,400 --> 00:02:08,880
 but I have some concerns about the way that the preliminary plat and the phasing are arranged

23
00:02:08,880 --> 00:02:17,740
 around those wetlands and some of the environmental-sensitive areas, and I guess my question was more along

24
00:02:17,740 --> 00:02:25,360
 the lines of -- can you refresh my memory, because I could -- maybe I just missed it,

25
00:02:25,360 --> 00:02:30,000
 what their tree canopy retention was, and --

26
00:02:30,000 --> 00:02:31,000
 Sure.

27
00:02:31,000 --> 00:02:35,320
 Well, they're under the old code.

28
00:02:35,320 --> 00:02:36,320
 I understand.

29
00:02:36,320 --> 00:02:37,320
 Thank you.

30
00:02:37,320 --> 00:02:46,240
 So what they're doing, their tree canopy is the ESA, the 50% ESA that they are preserving.

31
00:02:46,240 --> 00:02:51,920
 All that ESA that they are preserving will count as their tree canopy.

32
00:02:51,920 --> 00:02:56,120
 So this is sort of where I got a little confused.

33
00:02:56,120 --> 00:03:02,400
 So they're only counting the existing trees that they're saving in the floodplain and

34
00:03:02,400 --> 00:03:09,760
 in the ESA, and they're not being required to do -- I know that's in our new tree ordinance,

35
00:03:09,760 --> 00:03:14,960
 but they're not voluntarily putting anything in the street areas and the frontages?

36
00:03:14,960 --> 00:03:19,740
 Oh, they will have to put street trees in, definitely, and they will have to meet the

37
00:03:19,740 --> 00:03:25,040
 tree canopy requirements that are in the zoning district.

38
00:03:25,040 --> 00:03:33,320
 They are NR4 -- they're under NR4 regulations, so they will have to comply with the NR4 regulations

39
00:03:33,320 --> 00:03:36,880
 for a lot coverage entry canopy.

40
00:03:36,880 --> 00:03:43,840
 And for the floodplain, do you have the map that shows the boundaries of that?

41
00:03:43,840 --> 00:03:50,400
 I was a little confused on where those floodplain boundaries were, and how far into the ESA

42
00:03:50,400 --> 00:03:51,400
 they extended.

43
00:03:51,400 --> 00:03:55,680
 If I can find track it, I can bring it up for you.

44
00:03:55,680 --> 00:03:59,960
 I believe the plat has the boundaries based on the format.

45
00:03:59,960 --> 00:04:00,960
 Okay.

46
00:04:00,960 --> 00:04:03,960
 Let me keep looking.

47
00:04:03,960 --> 00:04:04,960
 Sorry.

48
00:04:04,960 --> 00:04:22,400
 I thought I had my plat in here and I don't.

49
00:04:22,400 --> 00:04:38,000
 If this is accurate, I'm showing the document, attachment 51673BB9, I can use that, but I

50
00:04:38,000 --> 00:04:42,480
 guess I was a little concerned, especially on the southern boundary, that you get right

51
00:04:42,480 --> 00:04:52,080
 up into phase -- you get pretty close to phase three there, and I'm concerned about that

52
00:04:52,080 --> 00:05:00,480
 development on that side of the watershed as well.

53
00:05:00,480 --> 00:05:07,000
 I just don't want to flood out people's homes right there, because there's obviously a slow

54
00:05:07,000 --> 00:05:12,280
 down in the creek bed right there, because you can see the ox bows and stuff.

55
00:05:12,280 --> 00:05:16,720
 And that happens all over Denton, and I'm just a little concerned for flooding of future

56
00:05:16,720 --> 00:05:17,720
 residents.

57
00:05:17,720 --> 00:05:25,440
 Well, they are going to have to comply with the drainage standards that we have in place,

58
00:05:25,440 --> 00:05:36,440
 and the drainage standards don't allow any increase in downstream flow, so that shouldn't

59
00:05:36,440 --> 00:05:46,120
 affect the surrounding areas, and I believe they're doing a Clomar right now.

60
00:05:46,120 --> 00:05:51,840
 The applicant can -- if you want, the applicant can answer that better than I can, but they're

61
00:05:51,840 --> 00:05:56,800
 doing -- I believe they're doing Clomar right now, and to reclaim some of that floodplain

62
00:05:56,800 --> 00:05:57,800
 as well.

63
00:05:57,800 --> 00:06:01,680
 So, as a point of ignorance, can you educate me what a Clomar is?

64
00:06:01,680 --> 00:06:09,560
 A Clomar is a conditional letter of map revision approved by FEMA that allows them to go in

65
00:06:09,560 --> 00:06:15,520
 and reclaim some of the floodplain and raise the floodplain up so that it meets finished

66
00:06:15,520 --> 00:06:21,560
 floor standards and bring it out of the floodplain.

67
00:06:21,560 --> 00:06:23,600
 So, okay.

68
00:06:23,600 --> 00:06:31,040
 It's -- well, I see phases four and two and one all taking away drainage and dropping

69
00:06:31,040 --> 00:06:40,360
 it on parts of phases one and three, and I feel like we're asking for an unfortunate

70
00:06:40,360 --> 00:06:42,840
 circumstance to happen on that one.

71
00:06:42,840 --> 00:06:51,840
 I feel uncomfortable with that, and then if you look at the gas well of the adjacent property

72
00:06:51,840 --> 00:07:01,080
 up in phase four, that's a 300-foot boundary, and I know we can't apply our 500-foot boundary,

73
00:07:01,080 --> 00:07:02,840
 but you know I'm going to ask about it.

74
00:07:02,840 --> 00:07:03,840
 Yes.

75
00:07:03,840 --> 00:07:09,560
 So, it looks like the 500-foot boundary is going to be that first row of western homes

76
00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:10,560
 in phase four.

77
00:07:10,560 --> 00:07:14,240
 Well, actually -- go ahead.

78
00:07:14,240 --> 00:07:20,440
 Actually, I did do the measurements, and the 500-foot boundary is not going to hit any

79
00:07:20,440 --> 00:07:23,200
 of the homes at all.

80
00:07:23,200 --> 00:07:25,200
 Okay.

81
00:07:25,200 --> 00:07:26,200
 That's --

82
00:07:26,200 --> 00:07:28,000
 It's open space that it's hitting.

83
00:07:28,000 --> 00:07:29,000
 It's gratifying.

84
00:07:29,000 --> 00:07:30,000
 I like hearing that.

85
00:07:30,000 --> 00:07:37,840
 And I know that the applicant right now is working on capping the gas well that is closest

86
00:07:37,840 --> 00:07:43,740
 to the west of the site, the northwest of the site.

87
00:07:43,740 --> 00:07:49,520
 There's a gas well up there, and he is working on getting that capped.

88
00:07:49,520 --> 00:07:50,520
 Okay.

89
00:07:50,520 --> 00:07:51,520
 Awesome.

90
00:07:51,520 --> 00:07:52,520
 That's useful information.

91
00:07:52,520 --> 00:07:55,520
 Thank you.

92
00:07:55,520 --> 00:07:56,520
 That's all my questions, Chair.

93
00:07:56,520 --> 00:07:57,520
 Thank you.

94
00:07:57,520 --> 00:08:03,200
 Any other questions for 3A?

95
00:08:03,200 --> 00:08:08,400
 Question 3B, FP 19-21, is there questions for this?

96
00:08:08,400 --> 00:08:09,400
 Yes, Chair.

97
00:08:09,400 --> 00:08:10,400
 I had a question.

98
00:08:10,400 --> 00:08:34,120
 I'll invite Julie Wyatt for this.

99
00:08:34,120 --> 00:08:45,840
 All right.

100
00:08:45,840 --> 00:08:46,840
 I'm ready.

101
00:08:46,840 --> 00:08:47,840
 How can I help?

102
00:08:47,840 --> 00:08:51,800
 So on -- what's the name of the road?

103
00:08:51,800 --> 00:08:52,800
 Westgate Drive.

104
00:08:52,800 --> 00:08:58,600
 I know there's -- according to the map, there was a buried pipeline, so I presume buildings

105
00:08:58,600 --> 00:09:01,160
 are not going to go along that area.

106
00:09:01,160 --> 00:09:02,360
 Correct.

107
00:09:02,360 --> 00:09:09,920
 And there is a -- there's a public utility easement, which probably implies various kinds

108
00:09:09,920 --> 00:09:12,240
 of conduit through the middle of the property.

109
00:09:12,240 --> 00:09:13,240
 Correct.

110
00:09:13,240 --> 00:09:21,160
 And then we have the -- my standard question about the distance from the gas wells.

111
00:09:21,160 --> 00:09:28,800
 So I guess -- do we have an idea where they -- the Denton ISD plans on putting the buildings?

112
00:09:28,800 --> 00:09:30,800
 You bet.

113
00:09:30,800 --> 00:09:37,280
 So the building -- the main building will be -- is proposed for this general area.

114
00:09:37,280 --> 00:09:44,960
 There are additional outbuildings, there are some field houses, there are additional athletic

115
00:09:44,960 --> 00:09:51,040
 structures that are kind of oriented on a north-south axis in this area.

116
00:09:51,040 --> 00:09:57,120
 There's band practice fields and other practice fields scattered throughout the site.

117
00:09:57,120 --> 00:10:03,160
 In terms of the gas well setback, so the gas well is located in this area.

118
00:10:03,160 --> 00:10:05,680
 And it does reference that pad site.

119
00:10:05,680 --> 00:10:10,480
 No buildings are within 250 feet, and then also I measured it as well, and no buildings

120
00:10:10,480 --> 00:10:12,800
 are within 500 feet as well.

121
00:10:12,800 --> 00:10:20,920
 So this is -- this is in that provision within that gas well ordinance where if it was existing,

122
00:10:20,920 --> 00:10:25,160
 if that plat was moving forward, it would follow the previous guidelines, it would be

123
00:10:25,160 --> 00:10:26,440
 considered conforming.

124
00:10:26,440 --> 00:10:30,960
 However, there aren't any structures within 500 feet -- buildings within 500 feet.

125
00:10:30,960 --> 00:10:32,240
 That's useful as well.

126
00:10:32,240 --> 00:10:33,240
 And you are correct.

127
00:10:33,240 --> 00:10:35,560
 There aren't -- buildings are not allowed on top of easements.

128
00:10:35,560 --> 00:10:41,080
 You can put parking or some other element, but the buildings aren't allowed on any easements.

129
00:10:41,080 --> 00:10:42,080
 Okay.

130
00:10:42,080 --> 00:10:43,080
 Thank you so much.

131
00:10:43,080 --> 00:10:44,080
 I appreciate it.

132
00:10:44,080 --> 00:10:45,080
 You bet.

133
00:10:45,080 --> 00:10:48,080
 Thank you, Julie.

134
00:10:48,080 --> 00:10:57,120
 Moving on, is there any questions for item 3C, 3D, or 3E?

135
00:10:57,120 --> 00:10:58,120
 Great.

136
00:10:58,120 --> 00:11:03,240
 So that takes us to items for individual consideration.

137
00:11:03,240 --> 00:11:08,280
 The first item is item 4A, PP19-00278.

138
00:11:08,280 --> 00:11:23,560
 I will invite Haley up for her presentation.

139
00:11:23,560 --> 00:11:31,120
 All right.

140
00:11:31,120 --> 00:11:36,920
 The PP19-0027 is the Elm Street Townhomes Preliminary Plat.

141
00:11:36,920 --> 00:11:43,320
 This project is located at the corner of Sycamore and Elm Street, just south of downtown.

142
00:11:43,320 --> 00:11:47,240
 Currently it is not meeting the technical requirements of the DDC, so staff is recommending

143
00:11:47,240 --> 00:11:48,240
 denial.

144
00:11:48,240 --> 00:11:53,240
 Previously, you all had approved a 30-day extension for this plat, and they did not

145
00:11:53,240 --> 00:11:55,880
 come forward with any revisions to the project in that time.

146
00:11:55,880 --> 00:11:57,880
 So staff is recommending denial.

147
00:11:57,880 --> 00:11:59,520
 I'm happy to answer any questions.

148
00:11:59,520 --> 00:12:00,520
 Great.

149
00:12:00,520 --> 00:12:02,520
 Have we heard from them at all?

150
00:12:02,520 --> 00:12:05,000
 I don't believe so.

151
00:12:05,000 --> 00:12:06,000
 Okay.

152
00:12:06,000 --> 00:12:09,400
 Is the procedure just to deny and let it sit until they come back?

153
00:12:09,400 --> 00:12:10,400
 Yes.

154
00:12:10,400 --> 00:12:14,160
 Once it's denied, they can resubmit, and then there is a requirement within 15 days that

155
00:12:14,160 --> 00:12:18,000
 we would bring that plat back to you all for either denial or approval.

156
00:12:18,000 --> 00:12:19,000
 Okay.

157
00:12:19,000 --> 00:12:20,000
 Great.

158
00:12:20,000 --> 00:12:21,000
 Commissioner Beck.

159
00:12:21,000 --> 00:12:25,280
 So I think it's what the Chair just asked, so they have a 15-day window in which to get

160
00:12:25,280 --> 00:12:26,280
 out of jail?

161
00:12:26,280 --> 00:12:27,280
 Does it work?

162
00:12:27,280 --> 00:12:28,280
 No.

163
00:12:28,280 --> 00:12:29,680
 They can come back whenever they would like to.

164
00:12:29,680 --> 00:12:32,080
 I don't believe there's a time frame assigned in the local government code.

165
00:12:32,080 --> 00:12:36,160
 So once it's denied, they can take weeks, months, however long they need to revise the

166
00:12:36,160 --> 00:12:37,160
 plat.

167
00:12:37,160 --> 00:12:40,520
 Once they submit it back to staff, we have 15 days to get it to you all for consideration.

168
00:12:40,520 --> 00:12:41,520
 Okay.

169
00:12:41,520 --> 00:12:42,520
 Thank you for the clarification.

170
00:12:42,520 --> 00:12:43,520
 Commissioner Anderson.

171
00:12:43,520 --> 00:12:44,520
 Thank you, Chair.

172
00:12:44,520 --> 00:12:45,520
 I have a question.

173
00:12:45,520 --> 00:12:46,520
 I haven't seen this one before.

174
00:12:46,520 --> 00:12:49,040
 Can you tell me what the cross streets are?

175
00:12:49,040 --> 00:12:50,040
 Yes.

176
00:12:50,040 --> 00:12:51,040
 This is Sycamore.

177
00:12:51,040 --> 00:12:52,040
 This is Elm Street.

178
00:12:52,040 --> 00:12:55,520
 I believe there was a car wash on this portion of the property at one point in time that's

179
00:12:55,520 --> 00:12:56,520
 been torn down.

180
00:12:56,520 --> 00:12:57,520
 Okay.

181
00:12:57,520 --> 00:12:58,520
 Thank you.

182
00:12:58,520 --> 00:12:59,520
 Okay.

183
00:12:59,520 --> 00:13:02,320
 I don't see any other questions.

184
00:13:02,320 --> 00:13:03,320
 Thank you.

185
00:13:03,320 --> 00:13:06,320
 Next item is 4B, also Haley.

186
00:13:06,320 --> 00:13:07,320
 Yes.

187
00:13:07,320 --> 00:13:10,800
 So this is a preliminary plat for Eagle Cove.

188
00:13:10,800 --> 00:13:13,360
 The intended use is single family.

189
00:13:13,360 --> 00:13:15,880
 This is on the south side of Dutchess Drive.

190
00:13:15,880 --> 00:13:20,600
 So just to the east of 288, it's kind of a mirror image of the property that's north

191
00:13:20,600 --> 00:13:22,400
 of there.

192
00:13:22,400 --> 00:13:24,400
 It is being recommended for denial at this time.

193
00:13:24,400 --> 00:13:27,760
 However, they did submit a request for a 30-day extension that would bring it back to you

194
00:13:27,760 --> 00:13:29,720
 all on March 4th.

195
00:13:29,720 --> 00:13:31,040
 Any questions?

196
00:13:31,040 --> 00:13:33,080
 Chris, you're back.

197
00:13:33,080 --> 00:13:34,080
 Thank you, Chair.

198
00:13:34,080 --> 00:13:39,880
 Haley, so as I was reading through this, it looked like there was a number of unmet things

199
00:13:39,880 --> 00:13:43,080
 in the table.

200
00:13:43,080 --> 00:13:49,900
 And if it's within your purview, how likely is it that they'll be able to meet those needs

201
00:13:49,900 --> 00:13:55,320
 in the timeframe allotted to them if we give them an extension?

202
00:13:55,320 --> 00:13:56,640
 It's feasible.

203
00:13:56,640 --> 00:13:57,640
 We've met with them.

204
00:13:57,640 --> 00:14:03,600
 Their largest concerns or issues, I would say, are with trees at this point in time.

205
00:14:03,600 --> 00:14:06,680
 Their tree survey showed them not meeting the standards of the code.

206
00:14:06,680 --> 00:14:10,280
 I think there were just some misunderstandings on their part in how the ESA and tree codes

207
00:14:10,280 --> 00:14:11,600
 play together.

208
00:14:11,600 --> 00:14:14,760
 So they now have an understanding of that based on a meeting that Richard and I had

209
00:14:14,760 --> 00:14:15,760
 with them recently.

210
00:14:15,760 --> 00:14:21,120
 And I expect they'll be resubmitting soon to try and meet this timeline.

211
00:14:21,120 --> 00:14:28,160
 Okay, and no, I think that answers my question.

212
00:14:28,160 --> 00:14:29,160
 Thank you.

213
00:14:29,160 --> 00:14:31,680
 I don't see any other questions.

214
00:14:31,680 --> 00:14:32,680
 Thanks, Haley.

215
00:14:32,680 --> 00:14:33,680
 Thank you.

216
00:14:33,680 --> 00:14:35,120
 The next item is item 4C.

217
00:14:35,120 --> 00:14:43,720
 It is Cindy Jackson's item, it's FP19-33B.

218
00:14:43,720 --> 00:14:54,120
 Thank you, FP19-33 is a request for approval of the final plat for Fisher 59 lot 2 block

219
00:14:54,120 --> 00:15:00,480
 A. Staff is recommending approval of this plat with conditions regarding the Associated

220
00:15:00,480 --> 00:15:08,000
 Alternative Environmentally Sensitive Area Plan, AESA 20-0001.

221
00:15:08,000 --> 00:15:13,640
 The plan should be modified to actually reflect the boundaries of the final plat and it must

222
00:15:13,640 --> 00:15:17,960
 be approved prior to the filing of this plat with the county.

223
00:15:17,960 --> 00:15:20,960
 Commissioner Beck.

224
00:15:20,960 --> 00:15:21,960
 Thank you, Chair.

225
00:15:21,960 --> 00:15:29,040
 So help me through the paperwork and just the wording in the staff report was denial,

226
00:15:29,040 --> 00:15:32,760
 but then the recommendation is approval, is that because there's conditions on it, is

227
00:15:32,760 --> 00:15:35,000
 that how that's working?

228
00:15:35,000 --> 00:15:36,000
 Yes.

229
00:15:36,000 --> 00:15:41,000
 But in the report, the ESA was for not their property?

230
00:15:41,000 --> 00:15:49,600
 Well, what they did when they had their ESA approved, they actually had some of the remediation

231
00:15:49,600 --> 00:15:54,760
 mitigation outside of their property boundary.

232
00:15:54,760 --> 00:16:00,720
 So they have to go back and they have to rework their alternate, their mitigation to have

233
00:16:00,720 --> 00:16:04,340
 it all on their site and not the adjacent property owner's site.

234
00:16:04,340 --> 00:16:08,040
 You will be seeing this shortly, we are working on this right now.

235
00:16:08,040 --> 00:16:11,640
 So following on from that point, do we have a chicken and egg ordering problem?

236
00:16:11,640 --> 00:16:14,320
 Do we have to approve one thing before another?

237
00:16:14,320 --> 00:16:20,520
 Because it feels like we're being recommended for approval before we see, at least before

238
00:16:20,520 --> 00:16:22,440
 we've seen their final ESA plan.

239
00:16:22,440 --> 00:16:28,760
 Well, that is why it's conditionally approved and we won't file it until you have it, you

240
00:16:28,760 --> 00:16:31,360
 have approved the ESA plan.

241
00:16:31,360 --> 00:16:37,800
 We can't, this is one of the shot clot items, they had a 30 day extension that they requested

242
00:16:37,800 --> 00:16:42,400
 to work on this problem and in the past 30 days we have worked with the applicant to

243
00:16:42,400 --> 00:16:47,840
 determine what they need to do to bring it, their alt ESA plan into compliance.

244
00:16:47,840 --> 00:16:52,000
 So they're working on that, they have submitted it, we have it scheduled for the next planning

245
00:16:52,000 --> 00:16:54,240
 and zoning commission meeting.

246
00:16:54,240 --> 00:17:01,480
 And in the meantime, if it's not approved, then we can't file the plaque.

247
00:17:01,480 --> 00:17:10,920
 So if we see their ESA plan and we approve that, then is there any problems to them submitting

248
00:17:10,920 --> 00:17:14,080
 this plan after that to get it in the right order?

249
00:17:14,080 --> 00:17:18,080
 Well, because of the fact we didn't recognize the problem until after they submitted the

250
00:17:18,080 --> 00:17:27,360
 plaque and the plaque was on a shot clock, this is how we're trying to address it.

251
00:17:27,360 --> 00:17:32,200
 I don't know, I feel uncomfortable making a judgment where a chunk of it is missing.

252
00:17:32,200 --> 00:17:34,360
 Well, actually, a chunk of it is not missing.

253
00:17:34,360 --> 00:17:39,960
 It complies with everything as it's required to with the exception of their alt ESA.

254
00:17:39,960 --> 00:17:45,600
 That is why it's conditionally approved, which you can do per the new legislation with the

255
00:17:45,600 --> 00:17:51,320
 shot clock plaque requirement and when they meet those conditions then we can file the

256
00:17:51,320 --> 00:17:55,440
 plaque.

257
00:17:55,440 --> 00:18:00,640
 I guess I just don't feel comfortable with doing that but thank you.

258
00:18:00,640 --> 00:18:08,320
 Can you elaborate under old conditions before the shot clock wouldn't have place, this procedure

259
00:18:08,320 --> 00:18:09,320
 would have been different?

260
00:18:09,320 --> 00:18:10,320
 Exactly.

261
00:18:10,320 --> 00:18:12,640
 We wouldn't have brought it before you.

262
00:18:12,640 --> 00:18:16,680
 We're only doing this with the conditional approval because this is the only way to navigate

263
00:18:16,680 --> 00:18:22,720
 the ESA being needed to be separately approved but still have the city respond to the shot

264
00:18:22,720 --> 00:18:25,320
 clock put on to you by the state of Texas.

265
00:18:25,320 --> 00:18:30,700
 So maybe to Commissioner Beck's point, this is not the process that the city has.

266
00:18:30,700 --> 00:18:35,000
 This is our way of navigating through the new code.

267
00:18:35,000 --> 00:18:39,080
 This is the solution that Texas gave us with their foresight.

268
00:18:39,080 --> 00:18:49,720
 Yeah, I understand the chair's careful navigation of what we are forced to deal with.

269
00:18:49,720 --> 00:18:54,360
 I think the biggest impediment to this is the ESA.

270
00:18:54,360 --> 00:19:01,120
 The rest of it felt fairly boilerplate but if the ESA isn't in alignment and especially

271
00:19:01,120 --> 00:19:06,600
 because they were including bits and pieces of other people's properties beforehand,

272
00:19:06,600 --> 00:19:10,800
 I understand what we're dealing with and it's not our fault, it's not the city's fault.

273
00:19:10,800 --> 00:19:12,960
 Maybe it's not even the applicant's fault.

274
00:19:12,960 --> 00:19:16,000
 I don't know if Cindy can address that.

275
00:19:16,000 --> 00:19:20,360
 But it feels like we're being asked to make a decision about a thing that like you said

276
00:19:20,360 --> 00:19:24,280
 or actually Cindy said, we wouldn't have seen before because the ducks would have been properly

277
00:19:24,280 --> 00:19:25,280
 in a row.

278
00:19:25,280 --> 00:19:28,520
 So I feel uncomfortable with a goose before a duck here.

279
00:19:28,520 --> 00:19:33,840
 And the ducks were properly in a row until they submitted this plot application and we

280
00:19:33,840 --> 00:19:37,500
 determined that there was a problem with the AESA.

281
00:19:37,500 --> 00:19:44,480
 So there's no way to give a shot clock allowable deferment to after the fact, there's no mechanism

282
00:19:44,480 --> 00:19:45,480
 for that?

283
00:19:45,480 --> 00:19:46,480
 Maybe Cynthia, can you?

284
00:19:46,480 --> 00:19:47,480
 It's very unfortunate.

285
00:19:47,480 --> 00:19:50,640
 Can you address that we don't have any other options, I don't believe.

286
00:19:50,640 --> 00:19:57,160
 Commissioner Beck, the chair and Cindy are correct.

287
00:19:57,160 --> 00:19:58,160
 This is the procedure.

288
00:19:58,160 --> 00:20:00,360
 They've already been given a 30 day extension.

289
00:20:00,360 --> 00:20:03,240
 So we have to take action on it.

290
00:20:03,240 --> 00:20:10,840
 And as was stated, the city can approve the plat with the condition that they get approval

291
00:20:10,840 --> 00:20:18,040
 of the AESA.

292
00:20:18,040 --> 00:20:19,600
 Any other questions on this item?

293
00:20:19,600 --> 00:20:20,600
 Commissioner Anderson?

294
00:20:20,600 --> 00:20:21,600
 Thank you, chair.

295
00:20:21,600 --> 00:20:28,440
 What are the repercussions if they do not follow through with the requirements of the

296
00:20:28,440 --> 00:20:29,440
 what they're asking for?

297
00:20:29,440 --> 00:20:31,680
 You know, what we were recommending?

298
00:20:31,680 --> 00:20:40,160
 Well, the purpose of this plat is fire code related.

299
00:20:40,160 --> 00:20:42,440
 You see this drive right here.

300
00:20:42,440 --> 00:20:46,600
 This is the second point of access for the development here.

301
00:20:46,600 --> 00:20:52,120
 And fire is waiting for them to get this plat approved so they can build their second point

302
00:20:52,120 --> 00:20:55,300
 of access and be in compliance with the fire code.

303
00:20:55,300 --> 00:20:56,300
 So that's it?

304
00:20:56,300 --> 00:20:59,300
 That's the whole purpose of the plat.

305
00:20:59,300 --> 00:21:00,300
 Okay.

306
00:21:00,300 --> 00:21:01,300
 Thank you for clarifying.

307
00:21:01,300 --> 00:21:02,300
 Thank you.

308
00:21:02,300 --> 00:21:07,200
 To maybe ask the question a different way, how long does the conditional approval last

309
00:21:07,200 --> 00:21:10,120
 before they can approve the AESA?

310
00:21:10,120 --> 00:21:11,120
 I'm not sure.

311
00:21:11,120 --> 00:21:16,080
 There's two years from approval from the approval of a plat till when they have to file it or

312
00:21:16,080 --> 00:21:17,600
 record it with the county is two years.

313
00:21:17,600 --> 00:21:20,760
 And they cannot construct anything until that plat has been filed?

314
00:21:20,760 --> 00:21:24,800
 They have some, they will not be able to open the building until then.

315
00:21:24,800 --> 00:21:25,800
 Okay.

316
00:21:25,800 --> 00:21:26,800
 Great.

317
00:21:26,800 --> 00:21:28,760
 Any other questions on this item?

318
00:21:28,760 --> 00:21:29,760
 Okay.

319
00:21:29,760 --> 00:21:30,760
 Great.

320
00:21:30,760 --> 00:21:38,060
 I'll invite Commissioner Colback in if he can hear me, I don't know where he stepped

321
00:21:38,060 --> 00:21:39,060
 out to.

322
00:21:39,060 --> 00:21:40,060
 Okay.

323
00:21:40,060 --> 00:21:42,600
 But item 4D has been pulled from tonight's agenda.

324
00:21:42,600 --> 00:21:50,240
 We will not be addressing or considering item 4D, that ADP.

325
00:21:50,240 --> 00:21:53,520
 That brings us to our public hearings.

326
00:21:53,520 --> 00:21:59,700
 The first item is item 5A, which is postponed from the January 22nd meeting.

327
00:21:59,700 --> 00:22:01,560
 It is presented by Sean Jacobson.

328
00:22:01,560 --> 00:22:06,080
 The floor is yours, sir.

329
00:22:06,080 --> 00:22:21,360
 Good evening, Chair and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

330
00:22:21,360 --> 00:22:25,720
 Sean Jacobson, Assistant Planner at the Department of Development Services.

331
00:22:25,720 --> 00:22:29,560
 Request we're presenting tonight is Z1913 Cambridge Brook.

332
00:22:29,560 --> 00:22:38,040
 This is a request to zone from a planned development to an R6 zoning on approximately 59.24 acres.

333
00:22:38,040 --> 00:22:42,400
 As you can see, the subject property is just off South Bonnie Bray Street.

334
00:22:42,400 --> 00:22:45,200
 To the north we have the Rourke Branch Natural Area.

335
00:22:45,200 --> 00:22:48,360
 To the south is the future Southwest Park.

336
00:22:48,360 --> 00:22:53,680
 To the west is actually a hunter ranch land that's designated for future mixed use development.

337
00:22:53,680 --> 00:22:56,920
 To the west we have a number of large lot single family residences.

338
00:22:56,920 --> 00:23:03,800
 We have a ESA and flood plain along that northern boundary, trees clustered to the east.

339
00:23:03,800 --> 00:23:10,820
 The purpose of this rezoning request, the applicant stated, is to develop 203 single family residential

340
00:23:10,820 --> 00:23:11,820
 dwellings.

341
00:23:11,820 --> 00:23:19,080
 As you can see here, this is the concept plan that the applicant has presented.

342
00:23:19,080 --> 00:23:22,960
 Important part of this request is the history of the zoning on this site.

343
00:23:22,960 --> 00:23:29,560
 In 1991, City Council created PD 139, which included this site, and the concept plan for

344
00:23:29,560 --> 00:23:34,680
 that called for a number of possible uses on this site, which included residential dwelling

345
00:23:34,680 --> 00:23:37,240
 at up to 20 units per dwelling units per acre.

346
00:23:37,240 --> 00:23:43,560
 In 1999, City Council approved a plan development amendment, which included a new concept plan,

347
00:23:43,560 --> 00:23:49,720
 which allowed for attached single family dwellings, so town homes, at up to 12 dwelling units per

348
00:23:49,720 --> 00:23:51,760
 acre on this site.

349
00:23:51,760 --> 00:23:54,200
 There were minor changes, but essentially that's where we are today.

350
00:23:54,200 --> 00:23:58,280
 At this point, the applicant could go in and develop town homes at 12 dwelling units per

351
00:23:58,280 --> 00:23:59,280
 acre.

352
00:23:59,280 --> 00:24:03,520
 However, they're requesting this rezoning to R6 out of the PD.

353
00:24:03,520 --> 00:24:08,480
 The maximum density that would be allowable based on the R6 minimum lot size would be

354
00:24:08,480 --> 00:24:13,120
 7.2 dwelling units per acre, and the applicant's proposed plan, which of course you're not

355
00:24:13,120 --> 00:24:17,880
 held to in zoning, but their proposed plan would actually have a result of only 3.4 dwelling

356
00:24:17,880 --> 00:24:18,880
 units per acre.

357
00:24:18,880 --> 00:24:24,640
 As you can see, the zoning here currently, PD and other elements of that PD, you can

358
00:24:24,640 --> 00:24:30,520
 see to the north there, the original vintage PD, transition would be to R6.

359
00:24:30,520 --> 00:24:36,040
 So we have general approval criteria that apply to all development applications, and

360
00:24:36,040 --> 00:24:38,880
 as in detail in your backup, this does meet those.

361
00:24:38,880 --> 00:24:43,000
 We will touch more detail on a few of them, but primarily we want to focus on the criteria

362
00:24:43,000 --> 00:24:48,000
 that specifically apply to zoning requests, and for this case, the particularly important

363
00:24:48,000 --> 00:24:49,560
 items are A, E, and F.

364
00:24:49,560 --> 00:24:56,680
 So as you know, one of the most important things is consistency with the comprehensive

365
00:24:56,680 --> 00:25:02,320
 plan, and that encompasses general criteria one and zoning specific criteria A, and future

366
00:25:02,320 --> 00:25:04,160
 land use map is a key part of that.

367
00:25:04,160 --> 00:25:10,480
 It designates this site as low-density residential, which is intended for up to four dwelling units

368
00:25:10,480 --> 00:25:11,480
 per acre.

369
00:25:11,480 --> 00:25:17,640
 R6 does not precisely conform to that, but if you consider right now, it could be developed

370
00:25:17,640 --> 00:25:19,720
 at up to 12 dwelling units per acre.

371
00:25:19,720 --> 00:25:26,360
 The fact that this moves the permissible development much closer to what's called for by the comprehensive

372
00:25:26,360 --> 00:25:30,200
 plan, we really are consistent with that, and of course the applicant's proposal would

373
00:25:30,200 --> 00:25:31,920
 actually bring it directly in line.

374
00:25:31,920 --> 00:25:32,920
 Commissioner Beck.

375
00:25:32,920 --> 00:25:34,080
 Thank you, Chair.

376
00:25:34,080 --> 00:25:40,520
 So I'm a little confused because if this is our map, we've got rural to the east, we've

377
00:25:40,520 --> 00:25:43,440
 got our park to the south, we've got moderate residential.

378
00:25:43,440 --> 00:25:49,800
 So it sort of feels like, and this is not meant to be pejorative, but we're cherry-picking

379
00:25:49,800 --> 00:25:56,920
 to make it match the northwest, where this is just a hodgepodge of properties and it

380
00:25:56,920 --> 00:26:06,200
 feels like we're not being consistent with the surrounding areas, maybe, is sort of my

381
00:26:06,200 --> 00:26:09,160
 concern.

382
00:26:09,160 --> 00:26:17,120
 So perspective on this, as I explained, right now what could be developed there would be

383
00:26:17,120 --> 00:26:19,360
 up to 12 dwelling units per acre.

384
00:26:19,360 --> 00:26:24,880
 So what this request is doing is actually bringing the possible density on that site

385
00:26:24,880 --> 00:26:27,940
 lower than what is currently permitted.

386
00:26:27,940 --> 00:26:32,080
 So it's actually bringing that more closely in line with what the comprehensive plan calls

387
00:26:32,080 --> 00:26:35,880
 for in that area.

388
00:26:35,880 --> 00:26:36,880
 Okay.

389
00:26:36,880 --> 00:26:37,880
 Thank you.

390
00:26:37,880 --> 00:26:39,720
 Commissioner Cole.

391
00:26:39,720 --> 00:26:46,400
 So Sean, what you're saying is, is this deal here reduces their density quite a bit.

392
00:26:46,400 --> 00:26:47,400
 Yes, sir.

393
00:26:47,400 --> 00:26:48,400
 Yes, sir.

394
00:26:48,400 --> 00:26:56,640
 And also, if, with Commissioner Cole, the transition from a rural area to moderate residential,

395
00:26:56,640 --> 00:27:02,540
 that natural, if we do the gradient, would be a low residential type, is that an appropriate

396
00:27:02,540 --> 00:27:05,160
 kind of gradation from rural to moderate?

397
00:27:05,160 --> 00:27:06,160
 Absolutely.

398
00:27:06,160 --> 00:27:11,560
 So essentially you would have rural, and then we would have, depending on how it's developed,

399
00:27:11,560 --> 00:27:17,320
 low to moderate, and then, as I said, potentially on the hunter ranch development, then a mixed

400
00:27:17,320 --> 00:27:19,820
 use development that would be at a higher.

401
00:27:19,820 --> 00:27:25,280
 And I do, oh, I'm sorry, I do want to take one point.

402
00:27:25,280 --> 00:27:29,360
 So future land use map is not the only part of the comprehensive plan that we want to

403
00:27:29,360 --> 00:27:30,360
 consider that.

404
00:27:30,360 --> 00:27:34,400
 I mean, it's an important element, but part of what we also want to consider with this

405
00:27:34,400 --> 00:27:39,560
 is that zoning out of the PD means that all future development on this site will be held

406
00:27:39,560 --> 00:27:42,280
 to 2019 DDC standards.

407
00:27:42,280 --> 00:27:47,000
 Right now we'd be using a mix of standards from previous development codes, including

408
00:27:47,000 --> 00:27:49,440
 the 1988 landscape code.

409
00:27:49,440 --> 00:27:54,840
 So it is very much in line with the comprehensive plan to actually be able to apply the development

410
00:27:54,840 --> 00:27:59,240
 standards that were designed to meet that comprehensive plan.

411
00:27:59,240 --> 00:28:03,760
 Beyond that, then we're also bringing housing directly adjacent to a future park, which

412
00:28:03,760 --> 00:28:08,080
 accomplishes our desire to create more functional neighborhoods.

413
00:28:08,080 --> 00:28:12,400
 And an additional point, so just thinking about comprehensive plan, when this was approved

414
00:28:12,400 --> 00:28:17,160
 in 1991, city council determined that it met the comprehensive plan at that time, and it

415
00:28:17,160 --> 00:28:18,160
 did.

416
00:28:18,160 --> 00:28:19,160
 I actually went back and found it.

417
00:28:19,160 --> 00:28:24,080
 When the plan development amendment was approved in 1999, and lower the density, city council

418
00:28:24,080 --> 00:28:27,120
 said that met comprehensive plan at the time, and it did.

419
00:28:27,120 --> 00:28:32,500
 It's only with this most recent comprehensive plan that the future land use designation has

420
00:28:32,500 --> 00:28:34,880
 called for low residential.

421
00:28:34,880 --> 00:28:39,700
 And at the time that was made, we had already approved 12 dwelling units per acre.

422
00:28:39,700 --> 00:28:45,120
 That was, you know, the whole flow was much closer to that level, and it was actually

423
00:28:45,120 --> 00:28:48,240
 put in place by what we see on the future land use map now.

424
00:28:48,240 --> 00:28:49,240
 Chris Rebecca?

425
00:28:49,240 --> 00:28:50,240
 Yeah.

426
00:28:50,240 --> 00:28:54,200
 So when the city made those decisions in the past, did we have a park there at the moment

427
00:28:54,200 --> 00:28:56,280
 when those plans were made?

428
00:28:56,280 --> 00:28:59,800
 At the time, I don't know precisely when that park was put in place.

429
00:28:59,800 --> 00:29:05,920
 I don't believe in 1991 that that would have been most likely an open natural area.

430
00:29:05,920 --> 00:29:07,640
 And can you refresh my memory?

431
00:29:07,640 --> 00:29:08,640
 I'm not as familiar.

432
00:29:08,640 --> 00:29:11,920
 What's in the government institutional area, and what's the plan for that?

433
00:29:11,920 --> 00:29:16,960
 So right now, there is a new fire station there that's also proposed for development

434
00:29:16,960 --> 00:29:22,680
 of a new police facility and a training center there, as well as I believe an indoor shooting

435
00:29:22,680 --> 00:29:24,400
 range.

436
00:29:24,400 --> 00:29:27,400
 Thank you.

437
00:29:27,400 --> 00:29:29,160
 Okay.

438
00:29:29,160 --> 00:29:37,700
 So overall, it's our assessment that this does meet the goals of the comprehensive plan.

439
00:29:37,700 --> 00:29:41,200
 Also want to look specifically at general criteria on seven, minimizing adverse environmental

440
00:29:41,200 --> 00:29:42,200
 impact.

441
00:29:42,200 --> 00:29:46,280
 So as I mentioned before, one of the important things about this zoning change is that it

442
00:29:46,280 --> 00:29:53,520
 takes us out of the various PD-related standards and puts everything under the 2019 standards,

443
00:29:53,520 --> 00:29:59,280
 which means that the ESA and flood plan on the site get the full protection of our current

444
00:29:59,280 --> 00:30:00,280
 2019 standards.

445
00:30:00,280 --> 00:30:05,480
 That also for tree code, again, we're bringing that up to current instead of what was applicable

446
00:30:05,480 --> 00:30:07,380
 in 1988.

447
00:30:07,380 --> 00:30:12,040
 So in terms of minimizing adverse environmental impact, this is a great upgrade in terms of

448
00:30:12,040 --> 00:30:16,640
 the standards that this development will be held to.

449
00:30:16,640 --> 00:30:20,480
 Moving on to general criteria on eight, minimizing adverse impacts on the surrounding property.

450
00:30:20,480 --> 00:30:25,300
 Again, we're looking at the fact that this represents a significant reduction in the

451
00:30:25,300 --> 00:30:28,380
 permissible density that can be developed on the site.

452
00:30:28,380 --> 00:30:33,720
 So in terms of any adverse impacts that you'd be concerned about with density, this request

453
00:30:33,720 --> 00:30:35,440
 is to reduce that.

454
00:30:35,440 --> 00:30:39,040
 And so that would really be in line with minimizing adverse impacts.

455
00:30:39,040 --> 00:30:45,160
 And again, holding it to 2019 standards, including open space standards, which applies to any

456
00:30:45,160 --> 00:30:50,000
 development, 5% open space, landscaping standards that would be consistent with what any other

457
00:30:50,000 --> 00:30:52,280
 property in the area would be held to.

458
00:30:52,280 --> 00:31:00,400
 We also want to look at specific zoning criteria, E and F, so how this proposed development,

459
00:31:00,400 --> 00:31:05,640
 how this zoning change would potentially affect the public infrastructure in the area.

460
00:31:05,640 --> 00:31:10,520
 So a TIA was conducted focused specifically on the intersection of South Bonnie Bray and

461
00:31:10,520 --> 00:31:13,720
 the access road that would be put in place for this development.

462
00:31:13,720 --> 00:31:19,280
 They determined that this development was likely to generate about 1,995 daily trips

463
00:31:19,280 --> 00:31:24,080
 and that that future intersection would function at a level of service A, the highest level

464
00:31:24,080 --> 00:31:28,800
 of service possible and would not require any additional lanes in order to do so.

465
00:31:28,800 --> 00:31:33,400
 They would also be required to pay any and all applicable impact fees at the time they

466
00:31:33,400 --> 00:31:35,520
 move forward with plaque.

467
00:31:35,520 --> 00:31:39,680
 Water and wastewater, public water is available directly to the site.

468
00:31:39,680 --> 00:31:43,640
 Wastewater almost gets there and it would be at their expense to extend that in order

469
00:31:43,640 --> 00:31:44,640
 to serve the property.

470
00:31:44,640 --> 00:31:48,880
 And of course, they'd be subject to all tap and meter fees.

471
00:31:48,880 --> 00:31:53,440
 They would also be responsible for any applicable perimeter street improvements on South Bonnie

472
00:31:53,440 --> 00:31:54,960
 Bray Street.

473
00:31:54,960 --> 00:31:59,680
 And the access road would be, they'd be putting that into the south between the park and their

474
00:31:59,680 --> 00:32:00,680
 property.

475
00:32:00,680 --> 00:32:04,320
 So again, we're looking at the impact on public infrastructure.

476
00:32:04,320 --> 00:32:09,880
 We're not expecting any negative, they'd be paying for fees to cover that.

477
00:32:09,880 --> 00:32:15,840
 In terms of schools, I contacted Denton ISD and was able to find out at the expected,

478
00:32:15,840 --> 00:32:21,760
 used their generation calculator and as you can see there, the expected students, students

479
00:32:21,760 --> 00:32:26,080
 that are expected to be generated by this development would be much less than the additional

480
00:32:26,080 --> 00:32:29,440
 capacity that was available for each school in the last year.

481
00:32:29,440 --> 00:32:32,960
 And then of course, on parks, we have a park just to the south there, so this would be

482
00:32:32,960 --> 00:32:34,920
 well within our desired radius.

483
00:32:34,920 --> 00:32:38,920
 We're putting a neighborhood right next to a park where they can use that and of course,

484
00:32:38,920 --> 00:32:44,680
 park dedication development fees would be required at Platte and building permits.

485
00:32:44,680 --> 00:32:49,520
 So overall, this staff would say that this does meet the criteria.

486
00:32:49,520 --> 00:32:54,080
 We did public outreach, newspaper, property mailing notices.

487
00:32:54,080 --> 00:32:58,520
 We received no responses in favor or against.

488
00:32:58,520 --> 00:33:03,600
 We also, the applicant held a neighborhood meeting that was on Monday and so I gave you

489
00:33:03,600 --> 00:33:06,240
 all the notes from that.

490
00:33:06,240 --> 00:33:12,240
 Two citizens attended, they had some questions about the timing of the construction as well

491
00:33:12,240 --> 00:33:18,200
 as the size of the lots, the potential, you know, the expected cost of the building.

492
00:33:18,200 --> 00:33:20,680
 Essentially, they were wanting, it seemed like they were wanting to determine that the

493
00:33:20,680 --> 00:33:25,000
 house would be of similar value, properties would be similar to their properties at Meadows

494
00:33:25,000 --> 00:33:26,000
 of Hickory Creek.

495
00:33:26,000 --> 00:33:33,400
 They did not express opposition and I would say they were neutral to support it.

496
00:33:33,400 --> 00:33:39,120
 So taking this, all this together, staff does recommend approval as this complies with the

497
00:33:39,120 --> 00:33:43,680
 general criterion section 245E and the specific criterion section 272D.

498
00:33:43,680 --> 00:33:46,160
 With that, I'm happy to answer any questions.

499
00:33:46,160 --> 00:33:47,160
 Commissioner Anderson.

500
00:33:47,160 --> 00:33:50,920
 Commissioner, can you go back to, please go back to slide 16.

501
00:33:50,920 --> 00:33:54,160
 No, sorry, one forward, there you go.

502
00:33:54,160 --> 00:33:58,760
 The boundary, the 200 foot buffer, the 500 foot buffer, are we doing it from the center

503
00:33:58,760 --> 00:34:01,240
 of the property that we're talking about?

504
00:34:01,240 --> 00:34:03,160
 No, that's done from the outer boundary.

505
00:34:03,160 --> 00:34:06,760
 Outer, okay, because what it looks like is how close it is, it looks like it's from the

506
00:34:06,760 --> 00:34:07,760
 center but okay, thank you.

507
00:34:07,760 --> 00:34:09,600
 No, it's just a very large property.

508
00:34:09,600 --> 00:34:10,600
 Appreciate it, yeah.

509
00:34:10,600 --> 00:34:11,600
 Yes, sir.

510
00:34:11,600 --> 00:34:12,600
 Commissioner Ellis.

511
00:34:12,600 --> 00:34:13,600
 Thank you, Chair.

512
00:34:13,600 --> 00:34:19,160
 Sean, I'm curious, do you have any thought to manufactured housing, which I believe changing

513
00:34:19,160 --> 00:34:24,440
 to R6 opens up with an SUP if I'm correct.

514
00:34:24,440 --> 00:34:29,680
 An SUP, of course, would require that that come back before this body and before city

515
00:34:29,680 --> 00:34:30,680
 council.

516
00:34:30,680 --> 00:34:31,680
 Oh, I know.

517
00:34:31,680 --> 00:34:36,400
 It's just, as we were always told, it's not really a tool to keep something from not happening

518
00:34:36,400 --> 00:34:40,520
 but keeping it, you know, with some conditions on it.

519
00:34:40,520 --> 00:34:47,040
 So we would certainly, we would certainly have, they would have to meet a significantly

520
00:34:47,040 --> 00:34:51,240
 high bar for that in terms of how that would fit with the neighborhood not having adverse

521
00:34:51,240 --> 00:34:57,520
 impacts of our specific use permit criteria are fairly strong in that area.

522
00:34:57,520 --> 00:35:00,240
 But you guys as a staff did not discuss that?

523
00:35:00,240 --> 00:35:06,480
 That was not something that I spent great amount of detail on, but I know that if that

524
00:35:06,480 --> 00:35:13,200
 came in, we would review that carefully and look at the impacts of that on the surrounding

525
00:35:13,200 --> 00:35:14,200
 properties.

526
00:35:14,200 --> 00:35:15,560
 Commissioner Beck.

527
00:35:15,560 --> 00:35:26,200
 So if they're moving to, if we rezone, then the 2019 codes for everything apply, is that

528
00:35:26,200 --> 00:35:27,640
 what you were saying?

529
00:35:27,640 --> 00:35:28,640
 Yes.

530
00:35:28,640 --> 00:35:37,120
 So can you, do you, do you have quickly on your slides what their, what their tree canopy

531
00:35:37,120 --> 00:35:42,000
 numbers were for that because that's a little bit of a green area there?

532
00:35:42,000 --> 00:35:44,040
 I don't have the exact tree canopy.

533
00:35:44,040 --> 00:35:49,520
 There is a significant amount of trees and under the 2019 DDC, they would be required

534
00:35:49,520 --> 00:35:55,360
 to preserve either a minimum of 30% or if they had a significant preservation area within

535
00:35:55,360 --> 00:36:00,280
 ESA, then they would have a minimum preservation of 20% of all protected trees and they would

536
00:36:00,280 --> 00:36:07,080
 also then have mitigation requirements for the remainder of the protected trees.

537
00:36:07,080 --> 00:36:14,460
 So based on the layout, I guess one of my concerns is based on the layout, there's obviously

538
00:36:14,460 --> 00:36:22,440
 flood plain issues along the creek bed there and ESAs and green corridors that habitat

539
00:36:22,440 --> 00:36:28,920
 that sort of thing, between, so one of my issues is the sandwiching of this property

540
00:36:28,920 --> 00:36:36,360
 between the proposed facility in the north and then the park in the south, just it feels

541
00:36:36,360 --> 00:36:45,520
 like this does not fit well in that overall architecture because you're tearing out things

542
00:36:45,520 --> 00:36:52,480
 adjacent to a natural area and then you're leaving a strip of terrain and then a government,

543
00:36:52,480 --> 00:36:53,480
 I don't know.

544
00:36:53,480 --> 00:36:59,200
 It feels like it's not a consistent flow, even if it's maybe legal, it feels like it's

545
00:36:59,200 --> 00:37:01,160
 out of place a little bit.

546
00:37:01,160 --> 00:37:06,080
 So I would highlight that what this zoning change would allow us to do is actually provide

547
00:37:06,080 --> 00:37:10,640
 a much greater degree of protection for those natural areas than we would be able to exercise

548
00:37:10,640 --> 00:37:13,580
 right now under the terms of the plan development.

549
00:37:13,580 --> 00:37:16,240
 So this is actually allowing us to put more of it.

550
00:37:16,240 --> 00:37:21,600
 So for instance, the flood plain, we're able to enforce, they cannot infringe upon that.

551
00:37:21,600 --> 00:37:26,720
 We'd actually put that, I believe in a flood, in an easement in that area and similarly

552
00:37:26,720 --> 00:37:31,320
 with the ESA, we'd be able to use our current protections for those areas to make sure that

553
00:37:31,320 --> 00:37:33,880
 those were protected and not infringed upon.

554
00:37:33,880 --> 00:37:39,320
 So we're really getting a greater degree of protection for those natural areas.

555
00:37:39,320 --> 00:37:44,840
 I would also point out that there's certainly a benefit to having neighborhood access to

556
00:37:44,840 --> 00:37:47,840
 natural areas.

557
00:37:47,840 --> 00:37:48,840
 Thank you, Sean.

558
00:37:48,840 --> 00:37:53,480
 Sean, what's the most intense use they can build by right now?

559
00:37:53,480 --> 00:38:00,800
 The only use that they can build right now is townhomes and it can be up to 12 to 1 units

560
00:38:00,800 --> 00:38:01,800
 per acre.

561
00:38:01,800 --> 00:38:07,040
 How many acres, I mean how many townhomes could be built right now?

562
00:38:07,040 --> 00:38:12,440
 So I'm sorry, I should have had, I believe I may have put this in the back up.

563
00:38:12,440 --> 00:38:14,880
 No worries, we can do it and if you could just pull up the public.

564
00:38:14,880 --> 00:38:15,880
 Absolutely.

565
00:38:15,880 --> 00:38:21,040
 I'm just curious about, I understand that this is zoning, but they're going to build

566
00:38:21,040 --> 00:38:22,720
 200 homes?

567
00:38:22,720 --> 00:38:24,800
 They're proposing 230 residences, yes, sir.

568
00:38:24,800 --> 00:38:28,520
 It seems like they could build 400 plus townhomes.

569
00:38:28,520 --> 00:38:35,160
 So and I want to make sure I'm clear, within the PD or once they zone out?

570
00:38:35,160 --> 00:38:41,040
 Yeah, within the PD right now, townhomes, they can do 12 dwelling units per acre.

571
00:38:41,040 --> 00:38:43,960
 They're reducing it down to seven.

572
00:38:43,960 --> 00:38:44,960
 So almost double.

573
00:38:44,960 --> 00:38:45,960
 Yes.

574
00:38:45,960 --> 00:38:50,120
 They have the right to build almost double the intensity than what we're trying to get

575
00:38:50,120 --> 00:38:51,920
 them down to, if I understand that correctly.

576
00:38:51,920 --> 00:38:54,200
 Which they're actually requesting them move down to, yes, sir.

577
00:38:54,200 --> 00:38:58,680
 Right and they're not, once you go to R6, the highest density is 7.2 dwelling units per

578
00:38:58,680 --> 00:38:59,680
 acre.

579
00:38:59,680 --> 00:39:03,200
 They're proposing theoretically 2.3, did I read that right?

580
00:39:03,200 --> 00:39:04,200
 Yes.

581
00:39:04,200 --> 00:39:09,000
 And I would clarify additionally, that estimate is if every possible square foot in that property

582
00:39:09,000 --> 00:39:14,640
 could be fully developed, which will not be the case based on the ESA entry preservation.

583
00:39:14,640 --> 00:39:15,640
 Understood.

584
00:39:15,640 --> 00:39:18,400
 Is there any other questions for Sean?

585
00:39:18,400 --> 00:39:19,400
 Perfect.

586
00:39:19,400 --> 00:39:23,840
 Thank you for the presentation.

587
00:39:23,840 --> 00:39:27,880
 The next item is item 5B, Z19-11A.

588
00:39:27,880 --> 00:39:55,960
 I'll invite Cindy Jackson for the presentation.

589
00:39:55,960 --> 00:39:56,960
 Thank you.

590
00:39:56,960 --> 00:40:04,920
 We have for you a request to rezone approximately 16.79 acres of land from Suburban Corridor

591
00:40:04,920 --> 00:40:11,280
 Zoning District and Residential 2, R2 Zoning District to the Residential 4 Zoning District.

592
00:40:11,280 --> 00:40:19,840
 The site is located between Country Club Drive to the west and the railroad to the east.

593
00:40:19,840 --> 00:40:27,880
 And we've got Hickory Creek here to the south.

594
00:40:27,880 --> 00:40:33,840
 This is a request to rezone, as I said, 16.79 acres of land.

595
00:40:33,840 --> 00:40:41,000
 The purpose of the rezoning is single family subdivision, phase 2 of a single family subdivision.

596
00:40:41,000 --> 00:40:48,240
 Phase 1, Country Club Estates, you approved the preliminary plat for this recently.

597
00:40:48,240 --> 00:40:52,260
 And the preliminary plat for phase 1 has 130 lots.

598
00:40:52,260 --> 00:40:58,160
 We have proposed approximately 53 lots for phase 2.

599
00:40:58,160 --> 00:41:05,240
 And I want to note that the access for phase 2 will actually be taken from phase 1.

600
00:41:05,240 --> 00:41:09,680
 You will see here there's two entries for phase 1.

601
00:41:09,680 --> 00:41:20,920
 The southernmost entry is the access for phase 2.

602
00:41:20,920 --> 00:41:23,680
 Here you see the current zoning map.

603
00:41:23,680 --> 00:41:29,800
 You see the site is currently SC, Suburban Corridor, and R2.

604
00:41:29,800 --> 00:41:37,600
 Recently the site transitioned that SC was originally CMG, Community Mixed Use General,

605
00:41:37,600 --> 00:41:40,160
 and the R2 was NR2.

606
00:41:40,160 --> 00:41:47,800
 The proposed zoning map, if this is approved, will be an extension of the R4 that is located

607
00:41:47,800 --> 00:41:53,680
 to the north right now.

608
00:41:53,680 --> 00:41:58,360
 As Sean noted, we have general approval criteria for all applications.

609
00:41:58,360 --> 00:42:03,800
 I went into detail on how this site complies with those regulations and I'm going to focus

610
00:42:03,800 --> 00:42:05,560
 more on the zoning criteria.

611
00:42:05,560 --> 00:42:07,680
 >> Commissioner Smith, thank you, Chair.

612
00:42:07,680 --> 00:42:11,800
 Cindy, what was the history of why that CMG was there out there in that residential kind

613
00:42:11,800 --> 00:42:16,800
 of rural area?

614
00:42:16,800 --> 00:42:21,320
 >> You know, I don't have why it was zoned CMG.

615
00:42:21,320 --> 00:42:27,080
 I know in your backup I have the history of all of the different rezoning that had taken

616
00:42:27,080 --> 00:42:34,680
 place and I don't have why it was rezoned to CMG, I'm sorry.

617
00:42:34,680 --> 00:42:40,600
 >> I can find out for you if you want before--

618
00:42:40,600 --> 00:42:46,840
 >> I just wanted to-- I'll see what-- I thought I missed it in the backup so I'm going to

619
00:42:46,840 --> 00:42:49,400
 go see it and I'm going to re-read through it and if I have more questions I'll ask

620
00:42:49,400 --> 00:42:50,400
 it in public.

621
00:42:50,400 --> 00:42:51,400
 >> Okay.

622
00:42:51,400 --> 00:42:52,400
 >> So thanks.

623
00:42:52,400 --> 00:42:53,400
 I appreciate it.

624
00:42:53,400 --> 00:42:59,880
 >> The first criteria is whether or not it complies with the future land use designation.

625
00:42:59,880 --> 00:43:03,400
 The future land use designation for this site is a mix.

626
00:43:03,400 --> 00:43:08,360
 It is both low density residential as well as a neighborhood mixed use.

627
00:43:08,360 --> 00:43:11,680
 The site complies with the low density residential designation.

628
00:43:11,680 --> 00:43:19,040
 They are proposing only four dwelling units per acre which is the maximum density permitted

629
00:43:19,040 --> 00:43:21,920
 in the low density.

630
00:43:21,920 --> 00:43:25,880
 It also applies to transition areas between established single family neighborhoods and

631
00:43:25,880 --> 00:43:29,960
 mixed use or commercial areas.

632
00:43:29,960 --> 00:43:38,200
 This is actually adjacent to-- the entire subdivision is adjacent to an SC zone area

633
00:43:38,200 --> 00:43:46,600
 so it would eventually provide a transition between SC and then NR4 and then the low density

634
00:43:46,600 --> 00:43:50,240
 and rural areas that are to the south.

635
00:43:50,240 --> 00:43:56,920
 This also applies to transition area-- well, that's transition areas and key corridors.

636
00:43:56,920 --> 00:44:08,400
 I do want to note that this site is relatively undeveloped right now so the recent approval

637
00:44:08,400 --> 00:44:18,440
 of the CIP plan for Hickory Creek will enable this area to open up for development and you'll

638
00:44:18,440 --> 00:44:23,680
 see more development in this area in the future.

639
00:44:23,680 --> 00:44:27,040
 There are no smaller area plans for this location.

640
00:44:27,040 --> 00:44:33,280
 The purpose statement of the R4 district is to accommodate a variety of housing uses and

641
00:44:33,280 --> 00:44:38,040
 housing types on lots to encourage walking to neighborhood serving retail.

642
00:44:38,040 --> 00:44:42,760
 Well, as I discussed, it is adjacent to the SC zoning district.

643
00:44:42,760 --> 00:44:47,480
 Eventually someday there will be neighborhood serving retail in this area, however, it's

644
00:44:47,480 --> 00:44:50,000
 not there right now.

645
00:44:50,000 --> 00:44:58,760
 The R4 district therefore satisfies this locational requirement.

646
00:44:58,760 --> 00:45:03,280
 And the significant change in the area to warrant the zoning change is actually the

647
00:45:03,280 --> 00:45:06,000
 future improvement of Hickory Creek.

648
00:45:06,000 --> 00:45:15,400
 Hickory Creek is planned to be realigned from this curvilinear type alignment that you see

649
00:45:15,400 --> 00:45:23,980
 to a straight shot across the southern portion to Brush Creek and this is actually going

650
00:45:23,980 --> 00:45:32,240
 to make it much easier for people to get in here and to get this developed.

651
00:45:32,240 --> 00:45:38,280
 Per the traffic analysis for phase one and phase two, Country Club Road must be widened

652
00:45:38,280 --> 00:45:45,040
 by one lane each direction to accommodate the southbound traffic and a southbound left

653
00:45:45,040 --> 00:45:53,080
 turn lane that will be required when-- prior to occupancy of the homes in phase two.

654
00:45:53,080 --> 00:45:57,360
 Country Club Road is designated as the secondary arterial.

655
00:45:57,360 --> 00:46:02,520
 It's got an ultimate right of way of 110 feet and the right of way will be dedicated at

656
00:46:02,520 --> 00:46:11,040
 the final plat stage equal to half of what is required for the frontage of this site.

657
00:46:11,040 --> 00:46:13,880
 Water and wastewater services are available to the site.

658
00:46:13,880 --> 00:46:16,920
 There is capacity within the system to serve the proposal.

659
00:46:16,920 --> 00:46:22,080
 No extensions of public utilities will be required to support phase two.

660
00:46:22,080 --> 00:46:26,840
 The park is located approximately 1.25 miles.

661
00:46:26,840 --> 00:46:31,000
 It's Cross Timbers Park to the east that is the closest park right now.

662
00:46:31,000 --> 00:46:37,600
 Again, the-- as was mentioned previously, the Parks and Rec Department are updating their

663
00:46:37,600 --> 00:46:46,960
 parks master plan and they may be looking at this area with regards to parks in the

664
00:46:46,960 --> 00:46:47,960
 future.

665
00:46:47,960 --> 00:46:48,960
 >> Mr. Beck.

666
00:46:48,960 --> 00:46:49,960
 >> Thank you, Chair.

667
00:46:49,960 --> 00:46:58,640
 Cindy, so if that park requirement didn't change before homes went in, they'd be required

668
00:46:58,640 --> 00:47:03,600
 to build with playgrounds and park sort of facilities within the property?

669
00:47:03,600 --> 00:47:04,600
 Is that correct?

670
00:47:04,600 --> 00:47:05,600
 >> No, no.

671
00:47:05,600 --> 00:47:13,200
 Phase two is they dedicate park fees that will be used for future parks.

672
00:47:13,200 --> 00:47:14,200
 >> Okay.

673
00:47:14,200 --> 00:47:15,200
 >> Right.

674
00:47:15,200 --> 00:47:21,720
 The park fee is based on acreage with the-- and on-- with the building permit by dwelling

675
00:47:21,720 --> 00:47:22,720
 unit.

676
00:47:22,720 --> 00:47:23,720
 >> Okay.

677
00:47:23,720 --> 00:47:26,720
 Thank you.

678
00:47:26,720 --> 00:47:32,920
 >> Schools, I contacted the DISD regarding this site.

679
00:47:32,920 --> 00:47:38,160
 This phase two will generate approximately 13 elementary students, seven medical school

680
00:47:38,160 --> 00:47:41,360
 students and eight high school students.

681
00:47:41,360 --> 00:47:45,800
 They stated that Ryan Elementary will not be able to accommodate these additional students

682
00:47:45,800 --> 00:47:49,880
 so they will likely attend Borman Elementary School.

683
00:47:49,880 --> 00:47:54,820
 The fire station is fire station number six located on Teasley Lane and it is located

684
00:47:54,820 --> 00:48:00,080
 within the eight minutes or less time response boundary.

685
00:48:00,080 --> 00:48:09,560
 Information was sent out and we received three notices in favor of this property request.

686
00:48:09,560 --> 00:48:14,880
 One of the notice is actually from the applicant who owns the property or surrounding it and

687
00:48:14,880 --> 00:48:19,120
 that brings the in favor percentage to 61%.

688
00:48:19,120 --> 00:48:26,160
 If you take out the property owner, the percentage in favor goes down to 5%.

689
00:48:26,160 --> 00:48:28,480
 We received none in opposition.

690
00:48:28,480 --> 00:48:30,240
 A neighborhood meeting was not held.

691
00:48:30,240 --> 00:48:36,120
 There's so few property owners around this area that the applicant's representative actually

692
00:48:36,120 --> 00:48:39,400
 went around and talked to each property owner individually.

693
00:48:39,400 --> 00:48:41,840
 >> Thank you, Mr. Smith.

694
00:48:41,840 --> 00:48:42,840
 >> Thank you, Chair.

695
00:48:42,840 --> 00:48:43,840
 This is a complete aside.

696
00:48:43,840 --> 00:48:49,120
 I think it's the first time I've ever seen where we had road or easement running through

697
00:48:49,120 --> 00:48:53,000
 the middle of the buffer so we don't-- that-- that-- because that's a road right there,

698
00:48:53,000 --> 00:49:00,720
 right, so I guess I just-- my own edification, I never knew that 200-- there's 100 feet of

699
00:49:00,720 --> 00:49:04,480
 road there or whatever it is, it wouldn't be 100 feet, that big old road.

700
00:49:04,480 --> 00:49:07,920
 But there's a big chunk of road that runs there, 100 feet of road and easement on either--

701
00:49:07,920 --> 00:49:12,080
 right away on either side of that, that's-- takes up a big old chunk, but I guess I just

702
00:49:12,080 --> 00:49:13,080
 never knew that.

703
00:49:13,080 --> 00:49:14,080
 >> So were you talking about this right here?

704
00:49:14,080 --> 00:49:15,080
 >> Yeah.

705
00:49:15,080 --> 00:49:16,080
 >> Oh, that's actually a railroad.

706
00:49:16,080 --> 00:49:17,080
 >> Oh, it's railroad.

707
00:49:17,080 --> 00:49:18,080
 Okay.

708
00:49:18,080 --> 00:49:19,080
 Still, same thing.

709
00:49:19,080 --> 00:49:22,080
 I've never seen it before where it's done that, so I guess I just didn't know.

710
00:49:22,080 --> 00:49:23,320
 So it doesn't matter, just it's--

711
00:49:23,320 --> 00:49:24,320
 >> Yeah.

712
00:49:24,320 --> 00:49:25,320
 >> Don't go further than that.

713
00:49:25,320 --> 00:49:26,320
 Okay.

714
00:49:26,320 --> 00:49:27,320
 Thanks.

715
00:49:27,320 --> 00:49:33,560
 >> Staff recommends approval of the request as it is basically compatible with the surrounding

716
00:49:33,560 --> 00:49:39,960
 property and is consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Denton Plan 2030.

717
00:49:39,960 --> 00:49:40,960
 >> Mr. Smith.

718
00:49:40,960 --> 00:49:41,960
 >> Thank you, Chair.

719
00:49:41,960 --> 00:49:45,440
 The backup doesn't have the reason-- the history of why it was SC, so--

720
00:49:45,440 --> 00:49:46,440
 >> Okay.

721
00:49:46,440 --> 00:49:47,440
 I'll look at it for you.

722
00:49:47,440 --> 00:49:50,440
 >> I thought I would have caught it when I read it this weekend, but yeah.

723
00:49:50,440 --> 00:49:51,440
 If you can just find out--

724
00:49:51,440 --> 00:49:52,440
 >> I sure will.

725
00:49:52,440 --> 00:49:53,880
 >> Want to know why it was SC in the first place.

726
00:49:53,880 --> 00:49:54,880
 >> Mm-hmm.

727
00:49:54,880 --> 00:49:57,920
 >> All it says in there is that there was-- it was-- a change was made in 2011.

728
00:49:57,920 --> 00:50:00,720
 There's a final platyper in 2012.

729
00:50:00,720 --> 00:50:01,720
 >> Yeah.

730
00:50:01,720 --> 00:50:02,720
 >> So what?

731
00:50:02,720 --> 00:50:06,100
 >> The plat in 2012 was for a park.

732
00:50:06,100 --> 00:50:07,100
 When I looked at--

733
00:50:07,100 --> 00:50:09,160
 >> And park would have fallen on a CMG at that time?

734
00:50:09,160 --> 00:50:10,160
 >> Yeah.

735
00:50:10,160 --> 00:50:11,160
 Well, you can park everywhere.

736
00:50:11,160 --> 00:50:12,160
 >> Yeah.

737
00:50:12,160 --> 00:50:13,160
 I'm guessing could.

738
00:50:13,160 --> 00:50:14,160
 >> Yeah.

739
00:50:14,160 --> 00:50:15,160
 Mm-hmm.

740
00:50:15,160 --> 00:50:16,160
 Mm-hmm.

741
00:50:16,160 --> 00:50:17,160
 >> Didn't know.

742
00:50:17,160 --> 00:50:18,160
 >> Yeah.

743
00:50:18,160 --> 00:50:19,160
 >> Why I would have had to change the CMG then for it to be a park.

744
00:50:19,160 --> 00:50:20,160
 >> Right.

745
00:50:20,160 --> 00:50:21,160
 It was Hickory Park.

746
00:50:21,160 --> 00:50:22,160
 >> Right.

747
00:50:22,160 --> 00:50:23,160
 It was supposed to be a water-based park.

748
00:50:23,160 --> 00:50:24,160
 >> I'm sorry.

749
00:50:24,160 --> 00:50:25,160
 >> Because there's--

750
00:50:25,160 --> 00:50:26,160
 >> Park's department.

751
00:50:26,160 --> 00:50:27,160
 >> Yeah.

752
00:50:27,160 --> 00:50:28,160
 >> Yeah.

753
00:50:28,160 --> 00:50:29,160
 If you can just find out the history.

754
00:50:29,160 --> 00:50:30,160
 >> Sure.

755
00:50:30,160 --> 00:50:31,160
 >> I'd appreciate it.

756
00:50:31,160 --> 00:50:32,160
 Thanks.

757
00:50:32,160 --> 00:50:35,720
 >> So Cindy, I have a question.

758
00:50:35,720 --> 00:50:42,960
 On slide 10, you talked about the obligations to widen Country Club Road by one lane.

759
00:50:42,960 --> 00:50:45,920
 >> Either side, yeah.

760
00:50:45,920 --> 00:50:47,560
 >> Yeah.

761
00:50:47,560 --> 00:50:55,780
 So that's widening Country Club on either side, one lane, for the duration of their

762
00:50:55,780 --> 00:51:01,320
 property line or just by the entrances?

763
00:51:01,320 --> 00:51:03,320
 >> It would be for their frontage.

764
00:51:03,320 --> 00:51:04,320
 >> Okay.

765
00:51:04,320 --> 00:51:07,560
 So next question.

766
00:51:07,560 --> 00:51:14,760
 What is the city's plan on Country Club if we are about to bring in Hickory Creek?

767
00:51:14,760 --> 00:51:19,560
 Is the city planning on widening-- first of all, is Country Club a city street?

768
00:51:19,560 --> 00:51:20,840
 Is that a text dot?

769
00:51:20,840 --> 00:51:21,840
 >> Text dot.

770
00:51:21,840 --> 00:51:24,120
 >> Is there any plans for-- oh, I already know the answer.

771
00:51:24,120 --> 00:51:28,440
 Is there any plans for text dot to widen that and the timeline of it?

772
00:51:28,440 --> 00:51:35,000
 I know we've done light studies at Ryan in 1830 for a signal light there that was at

773
00:51:35,000 --> 00:51:36,000
 that time denied.

774
00:51:36,000 --> 00:51:42,880
 I'd like to know the plans for Country Club expansion if you don't have that.

775
00:51:42,880 --> 00:51:48,660
 Because I'm concerned specifically in that area on-- I'm reminded of Ryan Road right

776
00:51:48,660 --> 00:51:50,640
 now.

777
00:51:50,640 --> 00:51:56,320
 Ryan Road, for those who don't drive it, has been piece milled together by the developments

778
00:51:56,320 --> 00:51:57,480
 that have gone in.

779
00:51:57,480 --> 00:52:03,600
 And so you go from a two lane to a four lane to a turn lane and you're kind of S-curving

780
00:52:03,600 --> 00:52:06,080
 almost the duration of that entire street.

781
00:52:06,080 --> 00:52:10,800
 And I find that particularly dangerous on Country Club because the speed limit is 45

782
00:52:10,800 --> 00:52:11,800
 there.

783
00:52:11,800 --> 00:52:18,400
 And right where Hickory Creek hits Country Club right now is a very dangerous S-curve

784
00:52:18,400 --> 00:52:20,400
 already in the road.

785
00:52:20,400 --> 00:52:26,120
 And so in my mind, I'm thinking at speed, you're going through an S-curve at 45 right

786
00:52:26,120 --> 00:52:29,560
 into another alignment of roads.

787
00:52:29,560 --> 00:52:37,320
 I'm not a fan of all that S-turning at 45 miles an hour.

788
00:52:37,320 --> 00:52:46,240
 Again, Hickory Creek will be realigned to be perpendicular to Country Club as it shows

789
00:52:46,240 --> 00:52:47,240
 here.

790
00:52:47,240 --> 00:52:49,560
 And this will go away.

791
00:52:49,560 --> 00:52:51,240
 No, I understand that.

792
00:52:51,240 --> 00:52:57,960
 The S-curve I'm talking about is just north of that right where your icon was or cursor.

793
00:52:57,960 --> 00:52:59,760
 It's on Country Club.

794
00:52:59,760 --> 00:53:06,080
 There's a S-bend on Country Club right near the Hickory Creek.

795
00:53:06,080 --> 00:53:09,400
 So even if Hickory Creek was realigned, if Textodd or the city doesn't do anything with

796
00:53:09,400 --> 00:53:14,840
 Country Club, that is a potential danger to drivers.

797
00:53:14,840 --> 00:53:18,960
 Ryan Road is already crazy enough and you're going 30.

798
00:53:18,960 --> 00:53:22,220
 And we're about to up the game a little bit at 45 miles an hour.

799
00:53:22,220 --> 00:53:30,040
 So I'd be extremely interested in the prioritization that Textodd has about this intersection and

800
00:53:30,040 --> 00:53:35,800
 the expansion of Country Club the entire way, not just in front of that development.

801
00:53:35,800 --> 00:53:36,800
 Okay.

802
00:53:36,800 --> 00:53:43,100
 That's what I was thinking.

803
00:53:43,100 --> 00:53:47,840
 Any other questions for Cindy on this?

804
00:53:47,840 --> 00:53:48,840
 Thank you very much, Cindy.

805
00:53:48,840 --> 00:53:49,840
 Thank you.

806
00:53:49,840 --> 00:54:06,760
 The next item is also you, Cindy, it's item 5C, Z-19-14B.

807
00:54:06,760 --> 00:54:30,840
 Okay, this is a request to rezone 0.154 acres from residential 4R4 to mixed use neighborhood

808
00:54:30,840 --> 00:54:38,320
 MN to bring a commercial parking lot into compliance with the 2019 Denton Code.

809
00:54:38,320 --> 00:54:44,520
 The subject property is located generally at 311 Janney Street, approximately 172 feet

810
00:54:44,520 --> 00:54:47,000
 north of McKinney Street.

811
00:54:47,000 --> 00:54:49,920
 This request is due to a code compliance issue.

812
00:54:49,920 --> 00:54:55,200
 The parking lot was constructed without permits and is not a permitted use in the R4 district.

813
00:54:55,200 --> 00:55:00,800
 If this request is approved, the applicant will have to replat the site into one lot.

814
00:55:00,800 --> 00:55:07,600
 This parking lot is part of the site for the Yale Law Office.

815
00:55:07,600 --> 00:55:10,100
 It's an additional parking lot that they use.

816
00:55:10,100 --> 00:55:16,560
 So they will have to replat this into one lot and they will have to look and see what

817
00:55:16,560 --> 00:55:23,600
 they need to do to bring it into compliance with standards.

818
00:55:23,600 --> 00:55:26,440
 This shows the current map, zoning map.

819
00:55:26,440 --> 00:55:33,400
 You can see that the MN district is along the north side of McKinney Street, east of

820
00:55:33,400 --> 00:55:40,000
 Janney and this would be an extension of the MN district to the north to this lot.

821
00:55:40,000 --> 00:55:55,280
 The MN district was transitioned from NRMU 12, I believe, no, NRMU and the NR4 district

822
00:55:55,280 --> 00:56:04,160
 was transitioned to R4 recently.

823
00:56:04,160 --> 00:56:08,360
 And this shows the proposed zoning map and you can see it's an extension.

824
00:56:08,360 --> 00:56:12,560
 As mentioned previously, we have general approval criteria for all applications.

825
00:56:12,560 --> 00:56:18,440
 This site complies with all of those approval criteria as detailed in your backup.

826
00:56:18,440 --> 00:56:24,840
 I will focus on the zoning criteria in Section 272D.

827
00:56:24,840 --> 00:56:30,760
 With regards to the Denton Plan 2030, the site has multiple designations, government

828
00:56:30,760 --> 00:56:36,520
 institutional, downtown compatibility area and low residential.

829
00:56:36,520 --> 00:56:42,480
 The site complies with the downtown compatibility area.

830
00:56:42,480 --> 00:56:47,600
 This designation actually applies to residential and commercial areas adjacent to the downtown

831
00:56:47,600 --> 00:56:52,440
 core and it provides a transition between the downtown and the surrounding neighborhoods

832
00:56:52,440 --> 00:57:02,120
 to preserve the character of the area through use, the use of context sensitive development.

833
00:57:02,120 --> 00:57:06,560
 There are no small area plans for this particular site.

834
00:57:06,560 --> 00:57:11,280
 Criteria three, consistent with the purpose statement of the zoning district.

835
00:57:11,280 --> 00:57:17,080
 The MN district is provided to support compatibility between higher intensity mixed use areas and

836
00:57:17,080 --> 00:57:23,520
 adjacent residential and commercial areas which you can see all along the north side

837
00:57:23,520 --> 00:57:26,080
 of McKinney Street.

838
00:57:26,080 --> 00:57:30,960
 This MN district in this location satisfies the locational requirements.

839
00:57:30,960 --> 00:57:36,880
 It's going to be located between the lower intensity R4 district to the north and the

840
00:57:36,880 --> 00:57:44,680
 East McKinney Street corridor to the south.

841
00:57:44,680 --> 00:57:49,720
 There have been or will be significant changes in the area to warrant a zoning change.

842
00:57:49,720 --> 00:57:57,360
 Well past few years we have seen a few rezonings approved for this area right here right across

843
00:57:57,360 --> 00:58:00,160
 the street to the east.

844
00:58:00,160 --> 00:58:08,080
 This site was rezoned from neighborhood residential 4 NR4 and NRMU along the McKinney Street frontage

845
00:58:08,080 --> 00:58:12,880
 with the remainder rezoned to neighborhood 6 with an overlay.

846
00:58:12,880 --> 00:58:23,000
 In 2017 that portion of the site that was zoned NR6 was rezoned NRMU 12 with an overlay.

847
00:58:23,000 --> 00:58:30,120
 The two rezoning applications changed the nature of the area from single family to residential

848
00:58:30,120 --> 00:58:36,800
 and for that reason this request actually complies with the surrounding development

849
00:58:36,800 --> 00:58:37,800
 now.

850
00:58:37,800 --> 00:58:46,040
 It's Justice Plaza, it's just recently a couple buildings have just recently been completed

851
00:58:46,040 --> 00:58:47,040
 there.

852
00:58:47,040 --> 00:58:51,560
 Streets, the parking lot has been in this location for several years.

853
00:58:51,560 --> 00:58:56,680
 We don't anticipate that it will further impact any traffic in the area.

854
00:58:56,680 --> 00:59:03,000
 There has been no issues thus far so we don't anticipate any future issues.

855
00:59:03,000 --> 00:59:08,960
 With regards to water and waste water, since the use is a non-habitable use and it's just

856
00:59:08,960 --> 00:59:13,000
 a parking lot, it doesn't require access to water and waste water.

857
00:59:13,000 --> 00:59:20,920
 And the same with parks, it's non-habitable and will not require access to parks.

858
00:59:20,920 --> 00:59:26,600
 With schools, it will not affect the student population and the subject property is a 1.2

859
00:59:26,600 --> 00:59:31,080
 class from fire station number two on McKinney Street within the eight minutes or less response

860
00:59:31,080 --> 00:59:32,080
 time.

861
00:59:32,080 --> 00:59:42,400
 We sent out notifications, we received back six in favor of this request totaling 38% of

862
00:59:42,400 --> 00:59:47,160
 the property within the 200 foot boundary.

863
00:59:47,160 --> 00:59:54,600
 We also had the applicant also had a neighborhood meeting on January 21st.

864
00:59:54,600 --> 00:59:59,480
 One person showed up before the meeting started, indicated they had no problems for it and

865
00:59:59,480 --> 01:00:07,880
 left and we had no other -- nobody else attended the meeting.

866
01:00:07,880 --> 01:00:11,680
 Staff recommends approval of this request, it is compatible with the surrounding property

867
01:00:11,680 --> 01:00:15,840
 and is consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Denton plan 2030.

868
01:00:15,840 --> 01:00:18,840
 That concludes my presentation.

869
01:00:18,840 --> 01:00:19,840
 >> Commissioner Beck.

870
01:00:19,840 --> 01:00:27,120
 >> Thank you, Chair, so okay, I guess I'm a little confused because in the documents

871
01:00:27,120 --> 01:00:31,120
 I was reading, staff was recommending denial?

872
01:00:31,120 --> 01:00:34,640
 >> No, that was error.

873
01:00:34,640 --> 01:00:39,640
 We were originally recommending denial and decided we were going to recommend approval

874
01:00:39,640 --> 01:00:43,920
 and it was changed on the AIS but not the staff analysis.

875
01:00:43,920 --> 01:00:44,920
 >> Ah, okay.

876
01:00:44,920 --> 01:00:48,440
 I guess I mixed up the documentation.

877
01:00:48,440 --> 01:00:49,440
 >> Yeah, I understand that.

878
01:00:49,440 --> 01:00:52,880
 I apologize for that confusion.

879
01:00:52,880 --> 01:00:54,360
 >> Any other questions for Cindy?

880
01:00:54,360 --> 01:00:55,480
 Commissioner Alice.

881
01:00:55,480 --> 01:00:57,160
 >> Thank you, Chair.

882
01:00:57,160 --> 01:01:01,360
 Cindy, earlier you mentioned they have to replat it together.

883
01:01:01,360 --> 01:01:04,840
 Does that need to be a condition of this?

884
01:01:04,840 --> 01:01:05,840
 >> I don't know.

885
01:01:05,840 --> 01:01:10,920
 Can we condition zoning on platting?

886
01:01:10,920 --> 01:01:14,520
 >> I don't necessarily think it needs to be a condition.

887
01:01:14,520 --> 01:01:18,760
 They still have a code enforcement action that will not be resolved until they straighten

888
01:01:18,760 --> 01:01:19,760
 that out.

889
01:01:19,760 --> 01:01:23,000
 >> Okay, so they wouldn't have an approved parking lot without replatting it?

890
01:01:23,000 --> 01:01:24,000
 >> Correct.

891
01:01:24,000 --> 01:01:26,400
 They're going to have to replat to bring it into one lot and then meet the new standards

892
01:01:26,400 --> 01:01:27,400
 of the code.

893
01:01:27,400 --> 01:01:28,400
 This is really step one.

894
01:01:28,400 --> 01:01:29,400
 >> Okay.

895
01:01:29,400 --> 01:01:35,240
 Yeah, they have been operating incorrectly for quite a long time.

896
01:01:35,240 --> 01:01:36,240
 >> Any other questions?

897
01:01:36,240 --> 01:01:38,760
 Thank you very much, Cindy.

898
01:01:38,760 --> 01:01:39,760
 >> Sure.

899
01:01:39,760 --> 01:02:02,120
 Item is 5D, DCA 19-24A, and I'll invite Julie Wyatt for a presentation.

900
01:02:02,120 --> 01:02:14,000
 >> All right, I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton, and I'm presenting

901
01:02:14,000 --> 01:02:17,800
 DCA 19-24A, ECIS and platting.

902
01:02:17,800 --> 01:02:22,520
 I got very lucky in that we had a prime example as to why we needed this code amendment tonight.

903
01:02:22,520 --> 01:02:28,720
 So we'll go over this quickly, and I'll happily answer any questions you have regarding it.

904
01:02:28,720 --> 01:02:32,920
 So the request is to hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to city

905
01:02:32,920 --> 01:02:39,480
 council regarding a proposed revision to subchapter two, the administration and procedures subchapter

906
01:02:39,480 --> 01:02:44,160
 related to alternative environmentally sensitive area plans and platting.

907
01:02:44,160 --> 01:02:50,320
 This is a staff-initiated code amendment to remedy conflicting regulations in the 2019

908
01:02:50,320 --> 01:02:51,360
 DDC.

909
01:02:51,360 --> 01:02:54,160
 So some background on ECIS, I know you all are pretty familiar with them.

910
01:02:54,160 --> 01:02:57,520
 They are certain areas with ecological value.

911
01:02:57,520 --> 01:03:03,840
 As you know, they're mapped on our city's mapping system, and it can create physical

912
01:03:03,840 --> 01:03:08,640
 constraints for a site because development is limited within ESAs.

913
01:03:08,640 --> 01:03:14,480
 You cannot impact those ESAs or disturb them without additional approvals through the alternative

914
01:03:14,480 --> 01:03:21,040
 ESA plan process and dual public hearing process and approval by city council.

915
01:03:21,040 --> 01:03:27,200
 The alternative ESA plan is necessary to provide relief from the ESA regulations in targeted

916
01:03:27,200 --> 01:03:34,080
 specific instances, particularly on some complex sites that we have, where it really does restrict

917
01:03:34,080 --> 01:03:37,440
 development or maybe connectivity.

918
01:03:37,440 --> 01:03:41,120
 Typically all ESA plans include mitigation, which is something that you discussed tonight

919
01:03:41,120 --> 01:03:43,320
 with Cindy's plat.

920
01:03:43,320 --> 01:03:48,880
 Often it will kind of change the map, so maybe an ESA area would be removed for something

921
01:03:48,880 --> 01:03:54,400
 like a roadway in one area, but then additional ESA would be added in an additional area,

922
01:03:54,400 --> 01:03:55,840
 so that would be mapped.

923
01:03:55,840 --> 01:03:59,200
 And as I said, it does require approval from city council through the dual public hearing

924
01:03:59,200 --> 01:04:00,880
 process.

925
01:04:00,880 --> 01:04:06,480
 Our 2002 Dinton Development Code didn't have a lot of standards or process regarding alternative

926
01:04:06,480 --> 01:04:11,000
 ESAs other than it had to follow what is essentially the zoning process.

927
01:04:11,000 --> 01:04:15,340
 So the 2019 Dinton Development Code memorialized some of those processes and procedures and

928
01:04:15,340 --> 01:04:20,360
 criteria for approval, and one of those is it requires concurrent review of a plat with

929
01:04:20,360 --> 01:04:24,120
 consideration of an alternative ESA plan.

930
01:04:24,120 --> 01:04:28,800
 And there are issues regarding this, and in one instance it's plat.

931
01:04:28,800 --> 01:04:33,160
 So as you talked about tonight, the general criteria for approval, that plat must comply

932
01:04:33,160 --> 01:04:38,080
 with the Dinton Development Code, including ESA regulations.

933
01:04:38,080 --> 01:04:43,280
 Plats which propose to encroach into ESAs cannot satisfy that criterion without an approved

934
01:04:43,280 --> 01:04:44,280
 alternative ESA plan.

935
01:04:44,280 --> 01:04:48,360
 Alternative ESA plans, since they do follow the dual public hearing process, can take

936
01:04:48,360 --> 01:04:49,960
 often several months to complete.

937
01:04:49,960 --> 01:04:58,000
 There's typically some back and forth where we get that mitigation settled.

938
01:04:58,000 --> 01:05:02,240
 But under the Texas Local Government Code, that shot clock item, plats have to be approved

939
01:05:02,240 --> 01:05:03,960
 or denied within 30 days.

940
01:05:03,960 --> 01:05:11,440
 So therefore, that submittal concurrency is difficult and is conflicting because plats

941
01:05:11,440 --> 01:05:16,680
 can't be approved with that alternative ESA, but they also can't meet that shot clock

942
01:05:16,680 --> 01:05:17,680
 requirement.

943
01:05:17,680 --> 01:05:24,280
 So essentially, requiring plats be submitted that have to be denied, and it creates additional

944
01:05:24,280 --> 01:05:27,400
 submittals and fees for applicants.

945
01:05:27,400 --> 01:05:28,400
 Commissioner Ellis.

946
01:05:28,400 --> 01:05:29,400
 Thank you, Chair.

947
01:05:29,400 --> 01:05:34,280
 Okay, on that note, we just discussed that we were going to approve one.

948
01:05:34,280 --> 01:05:35,280
 Conditionally.

949
01:05:35,280 --> 01:05:36,280
 Conditionally.

950
01:05:36,280 --> 01:05:39,200
 And it's really something we want to avoid.

951
01:05:39,200 --> 01:05:43,760
 That seems conflicting, what you said there and what we just discussed, so can someone

952
01:05:43,760 --> 01:05:46,520
 clear it up, please?

953
01:05:46,520 --> 01:05:50,760
 Well, and with the plat that you saw tonight, kind of that conditional approval was sort

954
01:05:50,760 --> 01:05:56,360
 of a -- it was something to make it work.

955
01:05:56,360 --> 01:06:00,760
 What we'd like to do is clear up that and just not require that concurrent plats submittal.

956
01:06:00,760 --> 01:06:06,160
 We do allow for the conditional approval of plats, but if we can avoid that, I think we'd

957
01:06:06,160 --> 01:06:10,640
 prefer to just go ahead and have outright approval or denial.

958
01:06:10,640 --> 01:06:16,160
 In these instances, we would prefer to kind of roll it back to the old way.

959
01:06:16,160 --> 01:06:21,500
 In this instance, with the shot clock, we just were sort of limited.

960
01:06:21,500 --> 01:06:25,320
 And the previous one was approved with conditions because they'd already been denied and it

961
01:06:25,320 --> 01:06:27,360
 was being brought back within 30 days, right?

962
01:06:27,360 --> 01:06:28,360
 Right.

963
01:06:28,360 --> 01:06:31,600
 So that was even a more unique situation than this is generally covering.

964
01:06:31,600 --> 01:06:32,600
 Correct.

965
01:06:32,600 --> 01:06:33,600
 Correct.

966
01:06:33,600 --> 01:06:34,600
 And this is that general process.

967
01:06:34,600 --> 01:06:39,000
 Of course, there's going to be limited variations on the process, but from a general standpoint,

968
01:06:39,000 --> 01:06:42,220
 we don't want to just create plats that would either have to be conditionally approved

969
01:06:42,220 --> 01:06:45,040
 or denied.

970
01:06:45,040 --> 01:06:48,720
 General issues resulting from new procedures, now we have the plan development process in

971
01:06:48,720 --> 01:06:52,280
 the debt and development code where we didn't have that in 2002.

972
01:06:52,280 --> 01:06:57,840
 If a PD includes a unique layout, something like a cluster development, a plat which conforms

973
01:06:57,840 --> 01:07:02,120
 to that layout could not be approved until the PD is approved.

974
01:07:02,120 --> 01:07:06,720
 Alternative ESA plans cannot be approved through the PD process.

975
01:07:06,720 --> 01:07:08,620
 It has to follow its own separate process.

976
01:07:08,620 --> 01:07:12,040
 We want to make sure we look at those individually.

977
01:07:12,040 --> 01:07:18,520
 And so you can't approve the PD without the alternative ESA, but you can't submit the

978
01:07:18,520 --> 01:07:25,280
 plat without-- or you can't submit the alternative ESA plan without the plat.

979
01:07:25,280 --> 01:07:28,040
 And the plat can't be approved until the PD is approved.

980
01:07:28,040 --> 01:07:33,180
 So it really gets these applicants and these projects in a catch-22.

981
01:07:33,180 --> 01:07:39,000
 So what we want to do is really avoid this conflict and not create these difficult situations

982
01:07:39,000 --> 01:07:48,460
 where plats get caught in either a cycle of denial or conditional approvals.

983
01:07:48,460 --> 01:07:53,800
 And so we would-- we recommend to just strike that language altogether, just to remove that

984
01:07:53,800 --> 01:07:59,520
 provision for platting concurrent with alternative ESAs.

985
01:07:59,520 --> 01:08:05,160
 We did review this proposal against the criteria for approval for a debt and development code

986
01:08:05,160 --> 01:08:06,760
 tax amendment.

987
01:08:06,760 --> 01:08:08,720
 And we have some findings.

988
01:08:08,720 --> 01:08:12,680
 First of all, the proposal maintains the review and approval process for alternative ESA plans.

989
01:08:12,680 --> 01:08:13,680
 It doesn't negate that.

990
01:08:13,680 --> 01:08:20,080
 It doesn't water down our alternate ESA plans, regulations, criteria for approval.

991
01:08:20,080 --> 01:08:25,320
 But it does allow for more logical submittal timing, just more of a logical development

992
01:08:25,320 --> 01:08:26,640
 process.

993
01:08:26,640 --> 01:08:32,040
 The shot clock is really one of those items that did kind of bring this to the fore, that

994
01:08:32,040 --> 01:08:37,440
 applicants are required to submit an unnecessary plat that could not meet the criteria for approval,

995
01:08:37,440 --> 01:08:41,240
 which resulting in a plat denial with additional submittals and meetings and fees.

996
01:08:41,240 --> 01:08:45,320
 So we really just want to avoid that from a policy standpoint.

997
01:08:45,320 --> 01:08:49,600
 And you know, as we stated before with all of these code amendments, the debt and development

998
01:08:49,600 --> 01:08:53,400
 code was a massive undertaking and it was a really complex document.

999
01:08:53,400 --> 01:08:58,660
 And so this really is just a further refinement of that 2019 debt and development code.

1000
01:08:58,660 --> 01:09:04,320
 As it's being implemented, we're finding conflicts that maybe we need to resolve with that implementation.

1001
01:09:04,320 --> 01:09:06,440
 And I'll stand for any questions.

1002
01:09:06,440 --> 01:09:07,520
 >> Mr. Beck.

1003
01:09:07,520 --> 01:09:08,520
 >> Thank you, Chair.

1004
01:09:08,520 --> 01:09:15,120
 So you sort of started down the path of one of my questions and that was the effect of

1005
01:09:15,120 --> 01:09:20,440
 eliminating 2A3.

1006
01:09:20,440 --> 01:09:25,560
 And I understand that we're trying to eliminate the catch 22 chicken and egg problem and it's

1007
01:09:25,560 --> 01:09:31,760
 exactly what I brought up earlier about, you know, can we, should we approve this for that

1008
01:09:31,760 --> 01:09:32,840
 earlier item?

1009
01:09:32,840 --> 01:09:40,360
 But so one of the advantages of having the plat before the ESA is you kind of have a

1010
01:09:40,360 --> 01:09:45,000
 vague feeling for what the intention of the developer is for that area when you're trying

1011
01:09:45,000 --> 01:09:50,480
 to understand the ramifications of altering the ESA.

1012
01:09:50,480 --> 01:09:58,120
 And so I don't think we've gotten, I'm not sure this just shifts the burden to the ESA

1013
01:09:58,120 --> 01:10:00,200
 by removing the plat.

1014
01:10:00,200 --> 01:10:08,720
 So I'm concerned that in the process, is there a way to have a non-plat plat or a provisional

1015
01:10:08,720 --> 01:10:15,800
 plat or something where you have an idea of what's going into the plan without it being

1016
01:10:15,800 --> 01:10:17,360
 a shot clock plat?

1017
01:10:17,360 --> 01:10:23,960
 >> Well, and that is, you know, in some instances, maybe a preliminary plat is something that

1018
01:10:23,960 --> 01:10:25,640
 they want to propose.

1019
01:10:25,640 --> 01:10:30,920
 You know, what we wanted to do was to kind of leave it open ended and in those unique

1020
01:10:30,920 --> 01:10:36,440
 circumstances where an alternative ESA is, those relief procedures are being sought.

1021
01:10:36,440 --> 01:10:41,760
 We want to provide flexibility in that timing and that progression of the project.

1022
01:10:41,760 --> 01:10:45,400
 So that is something that we talked about because the applicant does need to have an

1023
01:10:45,400 --> 01:10:51,280
 understanding of what they're proposing and what's on the ground before, you know, really

1024
01:10:51,280 --> 01:10:59,200
 even an alternative ESA can be reviewed or considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission

1025
01:10:59,200 --> 01:11:00,200
 and City Council.

1026
01:11:00,200 --> 01:11:04,720
 So, you know, on the typical development process, the very first step that an applicant will

1027
01:11:04,720 --> 01:11:10,800
 do is if there is an ESA, a possible ESA on a site, they'll do an ESA assessment just

1028
01:11:10,800 --> 01:11:13,440
 to determine if it's there and what the boundaries are.

1029
01:11:13,440 --> 01:11:17,520
 We'll have several meetings with an applicant to see what they're proposing.

1030
01:11:17,520 --> 01:11:21,980
 For instance, I'm working on a plan development right now where they are wanting to potentially

1031
01:11:21,980 --> 01:11:25,480
 impact an ESA and we've had several meetings with them.

1032
01:11:25,480 --> 01:11:30,360
 We've looked at their layout and then we've looked at the ESA, the limits of that ESA

1033
01:11:30,360 --> 01:11:31,680
 in relationship to that.

1034
01:11:31,680 --> 01:11:36,800
 So it doesn't, the alternative ESA typically doesn't spring from nowhere.

1035
01:11:36,800 --> 01:11:43,120
 There's a continuing conversation with staff in order to ensure that that ESA is in fact

1036
01:11:43,120 --> 01:11:47,120
 there, what the limits are and then what their proposal is going to be.

1037
01:11:47,120 --> 01:11:54,400
 So I understand for most development and developers and people are trying to work with a piece

1038
01:11:54,400 --> 01:12:00,080
 of property that 90% of the time just the sheer churn is going to give you what you

1039
01:12:00,080 --> 01:12:07,040
 want but I'm worried about the edge cases where you have a recalcitrant developer who

1040
01:12:07,040 --> 01:12:13,960
 wants to cut it right at the edge and do the minimum and that ends up creating a problem

1041
01:12:13,960 --> 01:12:18,120
 where you see my issues there.

1042
01:12:18,120 --> 01:12:19,120
 Sure.

1043
01:12:19,120 --> 01:12:20,600
 That is a concern.

1044
01:12:20,600 --> 01:12:26,320
 We always have those additional steps within the development process.

1045
01:12:26,320 --> 01:12:31,800
 Within platting you also have civil plans, you have tree preservation plans and then

1046
01:12:31,800 --> 01:12:34,160
 you have public infrastructure.

1047
01:12:34,160 --> 01:12:39,720
 So there's a lot of steps in the process where if there are concerns about those edges

1048
01:12:39,720 --> 01:12:44,160
 of those ESAs or potential impacts that you could stop and say hang on, we need to tap

1049
01:12:44,160 --> 01:12:45,160
 the brakes.

1050
01:12:45,160 --> 01:12:48,400
 If this is the direction you want to go, you're going to have to go through this additional

1051
01:12:48,400 --> 01:12:49,400
 scrutiny.

1052
01:12:49,400 --> 01:12:50,400
 Okay.

1053
01:12:50,400 --> 01:12:51,400
 Thank you.

1054
01:12:51,400 --> 01:12:52,400
 Dr. Schultz.

1055
01:12:52,400 --> 01:12:53,400
 Thank you, Chair.

1056
01:12:53,400 --> 01:12:58,960
 So Julie, I definitely understand why we're proposing this and it's the state that's

1057
01:12:58,960 --> 01:13:01,040
 really made this difficult.

1058
01:13:01,040 --> 01:13:05,440
 I guess what I want to know is there was a reason that we put it in there in the first

1059
01:13:05,440 --> 01:13:13,800
 place so what was the intent of wanting to run them concurrently and are we losing what

1060
01:13:13,800 --> 01:13:14,880
 that intent was?

1061
01:13:14,880 --> 01:13:18,440
 I mean, is this the best we can do to just eliminate it?

1062
01:13:18,440 --> 01:13:22,960
 I've had difficulty discovering that because actually when I went back and reviewed the

1063
01:13:22,960 --> 01:13:30,300
 ordinance, the ESA update that was done I believe in 2017 and then that subsequent update

1064
01:13:30,300 --> 01:13:34,680
 that took the tree preservation and ESA altogether, it didn't include this provision.

1065
01:13:34,680 --> 01:13:35,680
 Yeah.

1066
01:13:35,680 --> 01:13:40,120
 So we didn't have anything in writing in the old code that said run them concurrently.

1067
01:13:40,120 --> 01:13:45,240
 We just ran them concurrently, right, is just I guess.

1068
01:13:45,240 --> 01:13:52,880
 And there was a feeling at that time that it should, platting and ESA should run together

1069
01:13:52,880 --> 01:13:58,880
 and that's not necessarily a bad thing but conditions have changed with that shot clock

1070
01:13:58,880 --> 01:14:03,920
 and with the introduction of the PDs as a tool in our toolbox.

1071
01:14:03,920 --> 01:14:09,520
 They're kind of making that process difficult and kind of untenable.

1072
01:14:09,520 --> 01:14:12,080
 It's not that platting couldn't run with it.

1073
01:14:12,080 --> 01:14:17,500
 It's just from a broad perspective in general requiring it all the time.

1074
01:14:17,500 --> 01:14:20,480
 It's just difficult to implement and require.

1075
01:14:20,480 --> 01:14:21,480
 Okay.

1076
01:14:21,480 --> 01:14:25,960
 So we don't remember really discussing this as a staff that we want, hey, we want this

1077
01:14:25,960 --> 01:14:27,600
 put in the code.

1078
01:14:27,600 --> 01:14:32,420
 It just -- Unless Richard remembers a specific conversation.

1079
01:14:32,420 --> 01:14:34,120
 I've searched my brain.

1080
01:14:34,120 --> 01:14:35,840
 I really don't recall.

1081
01:14:35,840 --> 01:14:39,400
 I don't remember discussing it in the subcommittee at all.

1082
01:14:39,400 --> 01:14:47,920
 When we first started talking about it, I didn't think it was even in the code.

1083
01:14:47,920 --> 01:14:49,880
 Any other questions for Julie?

1084
01:14:49,880 --> 01:14:50,880
 Great.

1085
01:14:50,880 --> 01:14:54,120
 So that is our last item for the work session.

1086
01:14:54,120 --> 01:14:59,240
 Before we break, I wanted to just let you all know of an ordinance change for your edification

1087
01:14:59,240 --> 01:15:00,720
 because it might come up.

1088
01:15:00,720 --> 01:15:02,680
 Did council vote on this?

1089
01:15:02,680 --> 01:15:04,040
 Is this how they got voted?

1090
01:15:04,040 --> 01:15:06,220
 So council voted on this and it's now implemented.

1091
01:15:06,220 --> 01:15:13,320
 So the change is it now allows individuals to speak a second time at public hearing under

1092
01:15:13,320 --> 01:15:14,320
 a condition.

1093
01:15:14,320 --> 01:15:15,320
 Not everyone speaks twice.

1094
01:15:15,320 --> 01:15:19,840
 But I want to let you all know what the code or the ordinance says just so as we know if

1095
01:15:19,840 --> 01:15:22,520
 someone came back up and spoke, that might be permittable.

1096
01:15:22,520 --> 01:15:28,880
 It says only those speakers who previously provided input on a specific item will be permitted

1097
01:15:28,880 --> 01:15:33,500
 to provide a final rebuttal of up to two minutes per speakers.

1098
01:15:33,500 --> 01:15:37,800
 Speakers will have the opportunity to make a single final rebuttal after hearing the

1099
01:15:37,800 --> 01:15:42,040
 applicant's rebuttal as set forth in this section referenced here.

1100
01:15:42,040 --> 01:15:47,040
 So if a speaker comes up and gives three minutes of testimony, the applicant then comes up

1101
01:15:47,040 --> 01:15:49,560
 to say something back to them.

1102
01:15:49,560 --> 01:15:53,520
 The citizen has the final say with those two minutes.

1103
01:15:53,520 --> 01:15:58,240
 And so if they're rebutting something from the applicant, and they've already spoken,

1104
01:15:58,240 --> 01:16:01,020
 they're able to have an additional two minutes.

1105
01:16:01,020 --> 01:16:07,240
 So with that, I will close the work session at 618, we'll reconvene at 635 in council

1106
01:16:07,240 --> 01:16:08,240
 chambers.

1107
01:16:08,240 --> 01:16:15,480
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting

1108
01:16:15,480 --> 01:16:18,560
 for February 5th, 2020.

1109
01:16:18,560 --> 01:16:22,520
 Seeing that we do have a quorum, I will call this meeting to order at 639.

1110
01:16:22,520 --> 01:16:26,840
 Just let the record reflect that Commissioner Panetta is absent from us this evening.

1111
01:16:26,840 --> 01:16:30,400
 The first item of business is to stand if able and provide a Pledge of Allegiance to

1112
01:16:30,400 --> 01:16:31,400
 the US and Texas flag.

1113
01:16:31,400 --> 01:16:32,400
 >> Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic

1114
01:16:32,400 --> 01:16:33,400
 for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for

1115
01:16:33,400 --> 01:16:34,400
 all.

1116
01:16:34,400 --> 01:16:35,400
 Honored by the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one

1117
01:16:35,400 --> 01:16:36,400
 and indivisible.

1118
01:16:36,400 --> 01:16:37,400
 >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic,

1119
01:16:37,400 --> 01:16:38,400
 under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

1120
01:16:38,400 --> 01:16:39,400
 >> Honored by the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one and

1121
01:16:39,400 --> 01:16:40,400
 indivisible.

1122
01:16:40,400 --> 01:16:41,400
 >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic, under

1123
01:16:41,400 --> 01:16:42,400
 God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

1124
01:16:42,400 --> 01:17:01,440
 >> Honored by the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one

1125
01:17:01,440 --> 01:17:02,440
 and indivisible.

1126
01:17:02,440 --> 01:17:06,280
 >> The next item of business is to consider the approval of our minutes from January 22nd.

1127
01:17:06,280 --> 01:17:18,000
 Mr. Smith, Mr. Anderson, we have a first and a second for approval, any discussion?

1128
01:17:18,000 --> 01:17:26,000
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

1129
01:17:26,000 --> 01:17:30,200
 Motion carries 6-0 with one absent.

1130
01:17:30,200 --> 01:17:37,080
 The next item of business is our consent agenda.

1131
01:17:37,080 --> 01:17:38,080
 Mr. Ellis?

1132
01:17:38,080 --> 01:17:39,080
 >> I move approval.

1133
01:17:39,080 --> 01:17:42,720
 >> We have a first for approval of the consent agenda, Mr. Smith?

1134
01:17:42,720 --> 01:17:43,720
 >> Second.

1135
01:17:43,720 --> 01:17:48,240
 >> We have a first and a second for approval, any discussion?

1136
01:17:48,240 --> 01:17:57,000
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

1137
01:17:57,000 --> 01:17:59,440
 Motion carries 6-0.

1138
01:17:59,440 --> 01:18:05,680
 The next item for business is item 4A, PP19-0027A.

1139
01:18:05,680 --> 01:18:21,880
 I'll invite Haley Zagirsky for presentation.

1140
01:18:21,880 --> 01:18:22,880
 >> Good evening.

1141
01:18:22,880 --> 01:18:24,960
 This is the preliminary plan for the Elm Street townhome addition.

1142
01:18:24,960 --> 01:18:28,600
 It's located at the southwest corner of Sycamore and Elm Street.

1143
01:18:28,600 --> 01:18:32,320
 Staff is recommending denial of this plant for the reasons outlined in your backup.

1144
01:18:32,320 --> 01:18:36,760
 A 30-day extension has already been granted for this plant and they failed to reconcile

1145
01:18:36,760 --> 01:18:38,240
 all the comments during that time.

1146
01:18:38,240 --> 01:18:39,960
 So we are recommending denial.

1147
01:18:39,960 --> 01:18:42,960
 Stand for any questions?

1148
01:18:42,960 --> 01:18:44,240
 >> I do not see any questions.

1149
01:18:44,240 --> 01:18:45,240
 Thank you very much.

1150
01:18:45,240 --> 01:18:46,240
 Mr. Smith?

1151
01:18:46,240 --> 01:18:50,560
 >> Make a motion and deny.

1152
01:18:50,560 --> 01:18:52,280
 >> We have a first for deny.

1153
01:18:52,280 --> 01:18:53,280
 Mr. Anderson?

1154
01:18:53,280 --> 01:18:54,280
 >> I second.

1155
01:18:54,280 --> 01:18:58,260
 >> We have a first and a second to deny.

1156
01:18:58,260 --> 01:18:59,260
 Any discussion?

1157
01:18:59,260 --> 01:19:09,480
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

1158
01:19:09,480 --> 01:19:12,920
 The motion to deny carries 6-0.

1159
01:19:12,920 --> 01:19:19,040
 The next item for business is item 4B, PP19-38, and I'll invite Haley back up for presentation.

1160
01:19:19,040 --> 01:19:21,040
 >> Good evening.

1161
01:19:21,040 --> 01:19:25,360
 The request before you is a preliminary plan for the Eagle Cove addition.

1162
01:19:25,360 --> 01:19:30,280
 This is located on the south side of Dutchess Drive, west of Loop 288.

1163
01:19:30,280 --> 01:19:33,640
 Staff is recommending denial for the reasons that are outlined in your backup, however,

1164
01:19:33,640 --> 01:19:37,280
 the applicant has requested a 30-day extension which would put the plant back on the March

1165
01:19:37,280 --> 01:19:38,280
 4th agenda.

1166
01:19:38,280 --> 01:19:39,280
 >> Thank you.

1167
01:19:39,280 --> 01:19:41,280
 I don't see any questions.

1168
01:19:41,280 --> 01:19:43,760
 Commissioner Beck?

1169
01:19:43,760 --> 01:19:46,200
 >> I make a motion to deny.

1170
01:19:46,200 --> 01:19:49,000
 >> We have a motion to deny.

1171
01:19:49,000 --> 01:19:54,480
 Is there a second?

1172
01:19:54,480 --> 01:20:00,880
 Seeing none, motion fails.

1173
01:20:00,880 --> 01:20:01,880
 Commissioner Smith?

1174
01:20:01,880 --> 01:20:06,060
 >> I make a motion to approve the extension to date certain March 4th, 2020.

1175
01:20:06,060 --> 01:20:08,440
 >> We have a first for a postponement.

1176
01:20:08,440 --> 01:20:09,440
 Commissioner Anderson?

1177
01:20:09,440 --> 01:20:11,620
 >> I second the motion.

1178
01:20:11,620 --> 01:20:15,320
 >> We have a first and a second to postpone to a date certain of March 4th.

1179
01:20:15,320 --> 01:20:19,120
 Is there any discussion?

1180
01:20:19,120 --> 01:20:31,160
 >> I see none, I call for a vote on the board.

1181
01:20:31,160 --> 01:20:34,960
 Motion carries 5-1.

1182
01:20:34,960 --> 01:20:41,160
 Next item of business is item 4C, FP 19-33B.

1183
01:20:41,160 --> 01:20:43,540
 Commissioner Cole, are you?

1184
01:20:43,540 --> 01:20:47,880
 Thank you very much.

1185
01:20:47,880 --> 01:20:51,320
 This item is presented by Cindy Jackson.

1186
01:20:51,320 --> 01:20:52,320
 >> Thank you.

1187
01:20:52,320 --> 01:20:59,840
 This is a request for approval of the final plat of Fisher 59, lot 2 block A. The site

1188
01:20:59,840 --> 01:21:09,040
 is located on the north side of University and west of Marsh Branch.

1189
01:21:09,040 --> 01:21:15,120
 Staff recommends approval of this plat with the following conditions regarding the associated

1190
01:21:15,120 --> 01:21:22,480
 AESA plan, AESA 20-0001.

1191
01:21:22,480 --> 01:21:29,480
 The AESA must be modified to reflect the boundaries of the final plat and the AESA must be approved

1192
01:21:29,480 --> 01:21:32,600
 prior to the filing of this plat with the county.

1193
01:21:32,600 --> 01:21:33,600
 That completes my presentation.

1194
01:21:33,600 --> 01:21:34,600
 >> Thank you, Cindy.

1195
01:21:34,600 --> 01:21:37,480
 We do have a question for Commissioner Beck?

1196
01:21:37,480 --> 01:21:38,480
 >> Thank you, Chair.

1197
01:21:38,480 --> 01:21:42,000
 Cindy, I'm just going to be careful here.

1198
01:21:42,000 --> 01:21:52,580
 The conditions are that if the future FEB 19th alternative ESA plan does not carry, then

1199
01:21:52,580 --> 01:21:54,920
 that's the condition for this plan and it would also not carry.

1200
01:21:54,920 --> 01:21:55,920
 Is that correct?

1201
01:21:55,920 --> 01:21:56,920
 >> That's right.

1202
01:21:56,920 --> 01:22:00,120
 We wouldn't be able to file it if the AESA was not approved.

1203
01:22:00,120 --> 01:22:01,120
 >> Okay.

1204
01:22:01,120 --> 01:22:02,120
 Thank you.

1205
01:22:02,120 --> 01:22:04,840
 >> I do not see any other questions.

1206
01:22:04,840 --> 01:22:05,840
 Thank you.

1207
01:22:05,840 --> 01:22:06,840
 >> Thank you.

1208
01:22:06,840 --> 01:22:07,840
 >> Commissioner Anderson?

1209
01:22:07,840 --> 01:22:08,840
 >> No motion.

1210
01:22:08,840 --> 01:22:09,840
 >> New motion, no?

1211
01:22:09,840 --> 01:22:10,840
 >> Yes.

1212
01:22:10,840 --> 01:22:12,960
 >> I make a motion to approve.

1213
01:22:12,960 --> 01:22:14,640
 >> We have a first, Commissioner Smith?

1214
01:22:14,640 --> 01:22:15,640
 >> Second.

1215
01:22:15,640 --> 01:22:21,400
 >> We have a first and a second for approval in the discussion.

1216
01:22:21,400 --> 01:22:24,120
 And Commissioner Anderson, just to clarify, you're approving with those conditions?

1217
01:22:24,120 --> 01:22:25,120
 >> With conditions, yes.

1218
01:22:25,120 --> 01:22:28,420
 >> And you're good with that second, Commissioner Smith?

1219
01:22:28,420 --> 01:22:29,880
 We have no discussion.

1220
01:22:29,880 --> 01:22:42,520
 We'll call for a vote to approve with conditions on the board.

1221
01:22:42,520 --> 01:22:45,280
 Motion carries 5-0 with one recusal.

1222
01:22:45,280 --> 01:22:49,840
 I'll invite Commissioner Cole to rejoin us.

1223
01:22:49,840 --> 01:22:53,360
 Item 4B is being pulled from tonight's consideration.

1224
01:22:53,360 --> 01:23:01,480
 So that moves us to the public hearing items beginning with 5A, Z19-13B.

1225
01:23:01,480 --> 01:23:04,560
 I'll invite Sean Jacobson for presentation and open the public hearing.

1226
01:23:20,560 --> 01:23:24,640
 >> Thank you, good evening, Chair and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

1227
01:23:24,640 --> 01:23:28,480
 My name is Sean Jacobson, Assistant Planner with the Department of Development Services.

1228
01:23:28,480 --> 01:23:33,960
 The item I'm presenting tonight is Z19-13, the Cambridge Brook Project.

1229
01:23:33,960 --> 01:23:40,800
 The request before you tonight is to rezone from a planned development to an R6 district

1230
01:23:40,800 --> 01:23:44,440
 on approximately 59.24 acres.

1231
01:23:44,440 --> 01:23:48,960
 This property is located just to the east of South Bonnie Bray.

1232
01:23:48,960 --> 01:23:52,460
 To the north, there is a natural area along Rourke Branch Creek.

1233
01:23:52,460 --> 01:23:57,200
 To the south is an area designated for the future Southwest Park.

1234
01:23:57,200 --> 01:24:00,400
 You have large lot single-family development to the east.

1235
01:24:00,400 --> 01:24:06,600
 And to the west is vacant land that is designated as part of the Hunter Ranch Master Plan Community

1236
01:24:06,600 --> 01:24:09,420
 for future mixed-use development.

1237
01:24:09,420 --> 01:24:14,640
 We have trees to the east of that property, a floodplain and ESA crossing the boundary

1238
01:24:14,640 --> 01:24:16,160
 at the north.

1239
01:24:16,160 --> 01:24:20,920
 The applicant has stated their proposed intent with this rezoning is to be able to develop

1240
01:24:20,920 --> 01:24:27,320
 203 detached single-family residences.

1241
01:24:27,320 --> 01:24:32,880
 The concept plan the applicant has provided, you can see there before you.

1242
01:24:32,880 --> 01:24:36,080
 For this case, it's important to be aware of the site zoning history.

1243
01:24:36,080 --> 01:24:42,460
 In 1991, City Council included this property in PD 139, which was approved.

1244
01:24:42,460 --> 01:24:47,800
 The concept plan for that PD for the subject property authorized a mix of possible uses,

1245
01:24:47,800 --> 01:24:53,680
 which included residential up to 20 dwelling units per acre, among others.

1246
01:24:53,680 --> 01:24:59,240
 In 1999, a plan development amendment was approved, which included a change to the concept

1247
01:24:59,240 --> 01:25:06,880
 plan for this area, which called for the sole possible development to be attached single-family

1248
01:25:06,880 --> 01:25:12,800
 at maximum permitted density of 12 dwelling units per acre.

1249
01:25:12,800 --> 01:25:15,680
 Other than some minor amendments since then, that's where we are today.

1250
01:25:15,680 --> 01:25:20,240
 The applicant could develop the property with town homes at 12 dwelling units per acre.

1251
01:25:20,240 --> 01:25:28,280
 However, the applicant is requesting this rezoning to residential R6 based on the minimum

1252
01:25:28,280 --> 01:25:29,720
 lot size in R6.

1253
01:25:29,720 --> 01:25:35,600
 The maximum permitted density after this rezoning would be 7.2 dwelling units per acre, which

1254
01:25:35,600 --> 01:25:41,160
 because you asked about it earlier, I just want to note under the PD, that would be a

1255
01:25:41,160 --> 01:25:45,400
 total of 710 units that could develop.

1256
01:25:45,400 --> 01:25:49,040
 After this, it would be a total of 390 units, and of course, the applicant is proposing

1257
01:25:49,040 --> 01:25:53,800
 203, which is a density of 3.4 dwelling units per acre.

1258
01:25:53,800 --> 01:26:01,080
 As you can see here, the current state, the PD, and then it would be, if this was approved,

1259
01:26:01,080 --> 01:26:03,340
 R6 zoning.

1260
01:26:03,340 --> 01:26:09,760
 So we have general criteria under the development code that apply to all development applications,

1261
01:26:09,760 --> 01:26:13,920
 and based on our review, we've determined that this case meets all of those criteria,

1262
01:26:13,920 --> 01:26:16,120
 but we will discuss some of those items in more detail.

1263
01:26:16,120 --> 01:26:23,360
 I want to focus primarily on the specific criteria for zoning case approval or denial,

1264
01:26:23,360 --> 01:26:30,840
 and the most relevant items in those criteria are A, E, and F. So we'll jump into that.

1265
01:26:30,840 --> 01:26:35,320
 One of the most important things that we consider with the rezoning request is that it's compatible

1266
01:26:35,320 --> 01:26:40,400
 with the comprehensive plan, Denton Plan 2030, and one key element of that is our future

1267
01:26:40,400 --> 01:26:41,400
 land use map.

1268
01:26:41,400 --> 01:26:46,760
 The subject property is designated as low-density residential, and Denton Plan 2030 tells us

1269
01:26:46,760 --> 01:26:53,620
 that calls for a maximum of four dwelling units per acre.

1270
01:26:53,620 --> 01:26:59,600
 The R6 zoning proposed would not precisely conform to that, however, currently, it could

1271
01:26:59,600 --> 01:27:02,440
 be developed as discussed at 12 dwelling units per acre.

1272
01:27:02,440 --> 01:27:07,840
 So the reduction to a maximum of 7.2 dwelling units per acre brings it much closer to what

1273
01:27:07,840 --> 01:27:12,960
 the future land use map calls for, and therefore, we would consider that it's compatible with

1274
01:27:12,960 --> 01:27:13,960
 the intent.

1275
01:27:13,960 --> 01:27:17,160
 It's moving much closer to it with this decision.

1276
01:27:17,160 --> 01:27:20,000
 The future land use map is not the only thing in the comprehensive plan, though.

1277
01:27:20,000 --> 01:27:26,720
 It's important to also recognize that by zoning out of the PD to a standard R6 district, that

1278
01:27:26,720 --> 01:27:32,340
 brings this site under the jurisdiction of all of the standards of the current 2019 DDC,

1279
01:27:32,340 --> 01:27:38,120
 rather than the mix of standards that would apply under the PD, and because the 2019 DDC

1280
01:27:38,120 --> 01:27:43,480
 was designed to align with the goals and intent of Denton Plan 2030, requiring that this property

1281
01:27:43,480 --> 01:27:48,320
 meet those standards really helps bring this property in line with the comprehensive plan.

1282
01:27:48,320 --> 01:27:53,760
 Additionally, it would help to achieve a 2030 plan goal, LU5, by bringing a neighborhood

1283
01:27:53,760 --> 01:27:56,960
 close to parks, make more functional neighborhoods.

1284
01:27:56,960 --> 01:28:01,400
 A last point is just to be aware of a little bit of the history of the approvals on this

1285
01:28:01,400 --> 01:28:02,400
 site.

1286
01:28:02,400 --> 01:28:06,480
 When this was approved in 1991, City Council determined that the comprehensive plan at

1287
01:28:06,480 --> 01:28:11,440
 the time, this was an appropriate density, and that was actually 20 dwelling units per

1288
01:28:11,440 --> 01:28:12,440
 acre.

1289
01:28:12,440 --> 01:28:17,520
 In 1999, the Plan Development Amendment, City Council determined that 12 dwelling units

1290
01:28:17,520 --> 01:28:21,880
 per acre, perfectly consistent with the comprehensive plan, future land use at the time.

1291
01:28:21,880 --> 01:28:26,720
 It was only the most recent comprehensive plan in which the future land use map moved

1292
01:28:26,720 --> 01:28:29,240
 out of step with what was already approved for this property.

1293
01:28:29,240 --> 01:28:32,800
 I think that's just good to be aware of, as we're considering the overall compatibility

1294
01:28:32,800 --> 01:28:37,200
 of this request with the comprehensive plan, and we would say that it is compatible with

1295
01:28:37,200 --> 01:28:40,200
 the comprehensive plan.

1296
01:28:40,200 --> 01:28:42,080
 Next I want to look at general criterion seven.

1297
01:28:42,080 --> 01:28:46,440
 It's particularly important for this site that's minimizing adverse environmental impacts,

1298
01:28:46,440 --> 01:28:50,800
 because we do have ESA and a significant amount of tree canopy on the site.

1299
01:28:50,800 --> 01:28:55,840
 It's important to note that by zoning out of the PD, we ensure that the most current

1300
01:28:55,840 --> 01:29:02,800
 standards in the 2019 DDC for protection of ESA and tree canopy would be applied to this

1301
01:29:02,800 --> 01:29:03,800
 site.

1302
01:29:03,800 --> 01:29:09,720
 Currently, we'd be applying a mix of standards on the PD, including the 1988 landscape code.

1303
01:29:09,720 --> 01:29:15,280
 So we're raising the standard of protection for our natural environment significantly

1304
01:29:15,280 --> 01:29:16,280
 with this, if this is approved.

1305
01:29:16,280 --> 01:29:20,880
 And good to be aware of that, this request would help to minimize adverse environmental

1306
01:29:20,880 --> 01:29:24,720
 impacts of development on this site.

1307
01:29:24,720 --> 01:29:28,820
 General criterion eight, very important to consider the potential adverse impacts on

1308
01:29:28,820 --> 01:29:30,600
 surrounding property.

1309
01:29:30,600 --> 01:29:35,280
 And the key point here is that this is represents, this request would represent a reduction in

1310
01:29:35,280 --> 01:29:36,800
 possible density.

1311
01:29:36,800 --> 01:29:42,080
 So any negative impacts you'd be concerned about due to density would be naturally reduced

1312
01:29:42,080 --> 01:29:45,760
 by this request because it represents a significant reduction.

1313
01:29:45,760 --> 01:29:51,160
 And of course, again, we're bringing it into being held with the standard, the 2019 DDC,

1314
01:29:51,160 --> 01:29:56,480
 which includes higher landscape standards, open space standards, and essentially ensures

1315
01:29:56,480 --> 01:30:02,680
 that it'd be held with similar standards to the properties around it as they develop.

1316
01:30:02,680 --> 01:30:07,720
 Zoning criteria E and F, and this is where we look at the potential impact of this request

1317
01:30:07,720 --> 01:30:11,360
 on the public infrastructure around the property.

1318
01:30:11,360 --> 01:30:17,240
 The TIA that was done with this project determined that the intersection that would come between

1319
01:30:17,240 --> 01:30:24,560
 the site access road in South Bonnebury, it'd be expected to see about 1,995 daily trips

1320
01:30:24,560 --> 01:30:26,200
 generated by this site.

1321
01:30:26,200 --> 01:30:30,560
 And it's expected to perform at a level of service A, which is the highest possible level

1322
01:30:30,560 --> 01:30:33,000
 of service with no additional turn lanes needed.

1323
01:30:33,000 --> 01:30:37,400
 In terms of water and wastewater, water is already available to the site.

1324
01:30:37,400 --> 01:30:42,080
 Water line comes close and bringing that to serve the property would be at the expense

1325
01:30:42,080 --> 01:30:43,720
 of the applicant.

1326
01:30:43,720 --> 01:30:48,580
 And finally, perimeter street improvements, the site access road as well as any perimeter

1327
01:30:48,580 --> 01:30:52,240
 street improvements to South Bonnebury would need to be constructed to meet city of Denton

1328
01:30:52,240 --> 01:30:55,320
 standards.

1329
01:30:55,320 --> 01:31:01,920
 In terms of schools, I was able to get in touch with Denton ISD and use their student

1330
01:31:01,920 --> 01:31:06,240
 generation calculator, and then they were also able to give me kind of the current capacity

1331
01:31:06,240 --> 01:31:08,360
 at the schools that would be affected.

1332
01:31:08,360 --> 01:31:12,720
 As you can see, the students expected to be generated would be significantly less than

1333
01:31:12,720 --> 01:31:15,440
 the available capacity in each of those schools.

1334
01:31:15,440 --> 01:31:21,240
 Finally, on parks, of course, the Southwest Park is headed and designed to go in directly

1335
01:31:21,240 --> 01:31:25,060
 across the street from where this request has been made, so you'd have a neighborhood

1336
01:31:25,060 --> 01:31:28,920
 well within a 10-minute walk of a park, and they would have to pay all applicable park

1337
01:31:28,920 --> 01:31:34,040
 education and development fees, time of planning and building permits.

1338
01:31:34,040 --> 01:31:38,320
 So I also want to touch on just the notification.

1339
01:31:38,320 --> 01:31:43,440
 We did send out letters and postcards with 200-500-foot limits.

1340
01:31:43,440 --> 01:31:47,040
 We didn't receive any response for or against.

1341
01:31:47,040 --> 01:31:51,160
 The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting, which was attended by two individuals.

1342
01:31:51,160 --> 01:31:56,320
 They had some questions about the expected price that these properties would sell at,

1343
01:31:56,320 --> 01:32:00,160
 the size of the lots, kind of the construction timeline.

1344
01:32:00,160 --> 01:32:04,600
 They seemed satisfied with the answers they received and were neutral to support of when

1345
01:32:04,600 --> 01:32:05,600
 they left.

1346
01:32:05,600 --> 01:32:10,400
 Taking all this together, staff recommends approval of the request as it complies with

1347
01:32:10,400 --> 01:32:16,600
 both the general criteria in section 2.45E and the specific zoning criteria in section

1348
01:32:16,600 --> 01:32:19,800
 272D for approval.

1349
01:32:19,800 --> 01:32:21,880
 With that, I'll stand for any questions you have.

1350
01:32:21,880 --> 01:32:22,880
 >> Thank you.

1351
01:32:22,880 --> 01:32:23,880
 Shawn, I do have a question.

1352
01:32:23,880 --> 01:32:24,880
 Commissioner Beck?

1353
01:32:24,880 --> 01:32:25,880
 >> Yes, thank you, Chair.

1354
01:32:25,880 --> 01:32:31,440
 I forgot to ask you this earlier, but with the zoning change, if it's approved to R6,

1355
01:32:31,440 --> 01:32:35,800
 any subsequent development would have to go through the normal planning and development

1356
01:32:35,800 --> 01:32:36,800
 process.

1357
01:32:36,800 --> 01:32:37,800
 Is that correct?

1358
01:32:37,800 --> 01:32:38,800
 >> That is absolutely correct, sir.

1359
01:32:38,800 --> 01:32:39,800
 >> Okay, thank you.

1360
01:32:39,800 --> 01:32:41,840
 >> I did not see any other questions.

1361
01:32:41,840 --> 01:32:43,920
 Thank you for the presentation.

1362
01:32:43,920 --> 01:32:44,920
 This is a public hearing.

1363
01:32:44,920 --> 01:32:46,360
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

1364
01:32:46,360 --> 01:32:54,640
 We do have a card from the applicant, so I'll invite Jerry Silo, I'm guessing, up for speaking.

1365
01:32:54,640 --> 01:33:03,720
 If he just states your name and address for the record, you'll be provided up to 10 minutes.

1366
01:33:03,720 --> 01:33:14,040
 >> Good evening, my name is Jerry Silo, I'm with the JBI partners, 2121 Midway Road in

1367
01:33:14,040 --> 01:33:15,040
 Carrollton.

1368
01:33:15,040 --> 01:33:17,280
 We do represent the applicant on this request this evening.

1369
01:33:17,280 --> 01:33:21,400
 Appreciate everybody's time this evening, especially considering the weather change.

1370
01:33:21,400 --> 01:33:23,400
 So I'm going to be as brief as I can.

1371
01:33:23,400 --> 01:33:27,320
 Jeff goes through a very detailed analysis, provides the commission with a lot of information

1372
01:33:27,320 --> 01:33:28,720
 up ahead.

1373
01:33:28,720 --> 01:33:32,400
 My goal here is to touch on a couple points that were brought up during the briefing session

1374
01:33:32,400 --> 01:33:37,200
 and maybe alleviate some concerns, just to give you a little brief synopsis of where

1375
01:33:37,200 --> 01:33:41,280
 we are and how we got here.

1376
01:33:41,280 --> 01:33:46,080
 This is the property shown up there in the orange outline is the Cambridge Brook neighborhood,

1377
01:33:46,080 --> 01:33:52,960
 south of Vintage on the west side of Bonnie Bray, I-35W is just to the west.

1378
01:33:52,960 --> 01:33:55,400
 59 acres.

1379
01:33:55,400 --> 01:34:03,080
 While the zoning allows for a much higher density, the configuration, the lotting configuration,

1380
01:34:03,080 --> 01:34:08,680
 the street pattern that's shown on the drawing here, we have worked with our client to come

1381
01:34:08,680 --> 01:34:11,300
 up with a plan to develop the property.

1382
01:34:11,300 --> 01:34:15,200
 We fully anticipate that a plan very similar to this, if not identical to this, will be

1383
01:34:15,200 --> 01:34:18,720
 coming forward as a preliminary plan and a final plan.

1384
01:34:18,720 --> 01:34:24,520
 And as Sean indicated, we're proposing 203 homes that may be 200 and maybe 205 when we

1385
01:34:24,520 --> 01:34:29,000
 get to ultimate platting, but it's going to be right there, plus or minus one or two,

1386
01:34:29,000 --> 01:34:33,520
 which is 3.4 homes to the acre, which qualifies as the low density, irrespective of what the

1387
01:34:33,520 --> 01:34:37,840
 zoning designation allows for.

1388
01:34:37,840 --> 01:34:44,340
 That 3.4 to the acre, those 200 homes, that is a 71% decrease from what the zoning currently

1389
01:34:44,340 --> 01:34:48,280
 allows out there, which is 710 townhomes.

1390
01:34:48,280 --> 01:34:52,680
 And with that, there is a proportional decrease in the traffic on Bonnebrae, because that's

1391
01:34:52,680 --> 01:34:57,040
 where everything's going to hit, eventually up to Vintage or down south.

1392
01:34:57,040 --> 01:35:01,800
 So a 71% decrease in traffic from what is allowed at that zoning today.

1393
01:35:01,800 --> 01:35:05,840
 As Sean indicated, the level of service that we would be hitting at that intersection with

1394
01:35:05,840 --> 01:35:09,440
 our development is level of service A. We cannot get any better than that.

1395
01:35:09,440 --> 01:35:11,920
 It's only going to get worse if there's more homes.

1396
01:35:11,920 --> 01:35:16,160
 The school district, we are well within the capacity of the elementary school, the middle

1397
01:35:16,160 --> 01:35:20,400
 school, and the high school, same thing, the existing zoning would have that much proportional

1398
01:35:20,400 --> 01:35:22,840
 more impact on the school district.

1399
01:35:22,840 --> 01:35:27,280
 So we feel those are all benefits, not only to the community, but the associated entities

1400
01:35:27,280 --> 01:35:29,800
 with the community.

1401
01:35:29,800 --> 01:35:33,560
 We are asking for the R6 zoning, we're not asking for a plan development, we're not asking

1402
01:35:33,560 --> 01:35:35,240
 for anything special.

1403
01:35:35,240 --> 01:35:39,480
 We're very comfortable with Denton's development requirements and their standards.

1404
01:35:39,480 --> 01:35:45,640
 We had an ESA assessment back in March of 2019, we went out on the property, walked

1405
01:35:45,640 --> 01:35:52,440
 the site, what we are proposing with the design, we are avoiding all of the ESAs, the major

1406
01:35:52,440 --> 01:35:55,960
 one being the creek itself.

1407
01:35:55,960 --> 01:36:01,320
 There was questions, points brought up regarding the master plan and how this proposal related

1408
01:36:01,320 --> 01:36:03,180
 to the master plan.

1409
01:36:03,180 --> 01:36:07,480
 As you remember on the master plan, I'm not going to go back to you, but I-35, this area

1410
01:36:07,480 --> 01:36:11,320
 over here is primarily designated for medium intensity residential.

1411
01:36:11,320 --> 01:36:16,080
 And the area to the east of us is designated for low intensity residential.

1412
01:36:16,080 --> 01:36:21,280
 And so from that typical transition, you would go from medium to on the west side, low in

1413
01:36:21,280 --> 01:36:24,480
 the middle, sorry, and rural on east of Bonnie Bray.

1414
01:36:24,480 --> 01:36:29,520
 So in our head, that's a very logical transition from the rural on east of Bonnie Bray to the

1415
01:36:29,520 --> 01:36:35,080
 more intensive development along I-35, that transition of the low intensity in between.

1416
01:36:35,080 --> 01:36:39,960
 With respect to north-south transition, on the north side of the creek, we have police

1417
01:36:39,960 --> 01:36:43,100
 stations, fire stations, indoor shooting range.

1418
01:36:43,100 --> 01:36:46,920
 That's all sort of governmental that we really don't have control over.

1419
01:36:46,920 --> 01:36:52,240
 But if I have a park on the south side of me and a major ESA on the north side of me,

1420
01:36:52,240 --> 01:36:56,440
 I'm not sure what else would be more appropriate in that transition area besides a low density

1421
01:36:56,440 --> 01:36:57,440
 residential neighborhood.

1422
01:36:57,440 --> 01:37:01,360
 Obviously, in my opinion, commercial, industrial, none of that's appropriate.

1423
01:37:01,360 --> 01:37:04,560
 Some type of residential is appropriate from a land use perspective.

1424
01:37:04,560 --> 01:37:09,520
 And I think low intensity residential, as we're proposing, makes the most sense in terms

1425
01:37:09,520 --> 01:37:15,680
 of that type of interaction between those uses there.

1426
01:37:15,680 --> 01:37:19,440
 To address one of the commissioner's question regarding, even though we're zoning into the

1427
01:37:19,440 --> 01:37:24,360
 R6, it allows for manufactured housing with an SUP, that is not our intent at all.

1428
01:37:24,360 --> 01:37:28,560
 Our client's going to be building homes on site, just like every other home out in this

1429
01:37:28,560 --> 01:37:29,560
 area.

1430
01:37:29,560 --> 01:37:32,840
 The homes to be built are going to be very compatible to those built in the vintage and

1431
01:37:32,840 --> 01:37:37,240
 the Meadows neighborhoods to the north.

1432
01:37:37,240 --> 01:37:40,520
 This is a little more detail of the concept plan.

1433
01:37:40,520 --> 01:37:45,040
 With regards to the emphasis on the environmental sensitive area up here at the north end with

1434
01:37:45,040 --> 01:37:49,440
 the creek, the tree stands, those are a benefit to us.

1435
01:37:49,440 --> 01:37:51,900
 JBI has a process we call smart design.

1436
01:37:51,900 --> 01:37:58,080
 We try to find the best parts of the property and make sure that we emphasize them.

1437
01:37:58,080 --> 01:38:01,540
 If you go back here in the vintage neighborhood, you look up here with the creek, what they

1438
01:38:01,540 --> 01:38:05,260
 did in the olden days was they backed lots to that open space.

1439
01:38:05,260 --> 01:38:08,080
 So the only people that are really getting a benefit from that open space are the people

1440
01:38:08,080 --> 01:38:10,320
 that back up to that open space.

1441
01:38:10,320 --> 01:38:15,880
 What we have done is we have, for the most part, sited and run streets down to emphasize

1442
01:38:15,880 --> 01:38:19,680
 those open spaces so that on these streets as you go down, this is the top of the hill

1443
01:38:19,680 --> 01:38:23,720
 that goes down to the creek, everybody that drives down these streets, their view corridor

1444
01:38:23,720 --> 01:38:27,200
 is the tree stands and the creeks at the bottom end of the hill.

1445
01:38:27,200 --> 01:38:31,800
 We think that is a better design for the neighborhood versus the few people that back up to the

1446
01:38:31,800 --> 01:38:32,800
 creek.

1447
01:38:32,800 --> 01:38:38,000
 Yes, our client would get a few more lot premiums by selling those lots against the creek, but

1448
01:38:38,000 --> 01:38:41,280
 we think overall we are creating a better neighborhood by doing the design the way we

1449
01:38:41,280 --> 01:38:42,280
 do it.

1450
01:38:42,280 --> 01:38:46,600
 And we do that throughout, whether it is this project or any other project that JBI is involved

1451
01:38:46,600 --> 01:38:47,600
 with.

1452
01:38:47,600 --> 01:38:48,600
 But that is what we try to focus on.

1453
01:38:48,600 --> 01:38:52,080
 We are trying to make the best thing that we can so that our client has the best product

1454
01:38:52,080 --> 01:38:55,960
 that they can market and sell because it is a competitive world and they have to compete

1455
01:38:55,960 --> 01:38:58,160
 with every other single family neighborhood out there.

1456
01:38:58,160 --> 01:39:00,760
 So why should people come here?

1457
01:39:00,760 --> 01:39:04,720
 We can have 20 people that back up to the creek or we can have 203 people that have

1458
01:39:04,720 --> 01:39:06,040
 access to the creek.

1459
01:39:06,040 --> 01:39:09,440
 We think that latter solution is a better solution for the neighborhood.

1460
01:39:09,440 --> 01:39:14,520
 With that, I will end my presentation and be happy to answer any questions you may have.

1461
01:39:14,520 --> 01:39:18,440
 I appreciate you being here, I don't see any questions at this time.

1462
01:39:18,440 --> 01:39:19,440
 Thank you.

1463
01:39:19,440 --> 01:39:27,880
 This is a public hearing, anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

1464
01:39:27,880 --> 01:39:31,320
 Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and turn it for discussion or motion.

1465
01:39:31,320 --> 01:39:32,320
 Commissioner Smith?

1466
01:39:32,320 --> 01:39:33,320
 Move to approve.

1467
01:39:33,320 --> 01:39:35,160
 We have a first for approval.

1468
01:39:35,160 --> 01:39:36,160
 Commissioner Anderson?

1469
01:39:36,160 --> 01:39:37,160
 I second the motion.

1470
01:39:37,160 --> 01:39:38,800
 We have a first and a second for approval.

1471
01:39:38,800 --> 01:39:42,480
 Is there any discussion on this?

1472
01:39:42,480 --> 01:39:50,720
 Seeing none, I call for a vote on the board.

1473
01:39:50,720 --> 01:39:51,720
 Motion carries 6-0.

1474
01:39:51,720 --> 01:39:52,720
 Congratulations.

1475
01:39:52,720 --> 01:39:58,160
 Next item of business is item 5B, Z-19-11A.

1476
01:39:58,160 --> 01:40:17,160
 I will invite Cindy Jackson for presentation and open the public hearing.

1477
01:40:17,160 --> 01:40:18,160
 Thank you, Chairman, Commissioners.

1478
01:40:18,160 --> 01:40:23,240
 For the record, I'm Cindy Jackson with the Development Services Department.

1479
01:40:23,240 --> 01:40:29,240
 I have before you tonight Z-19-0011, Country Club Terrace Phase 2.

1480
01:40:29,240 --> 01:40:35,720
 This is a request to rezone approximately 16.79 acres of land from the SC Suburban Corridor

1481
01:40:35,720 --> 01:40:41,720
 District to the R-2 Residential District, excuse me, and the R-2 Residential District

1482
01:40:41,720 --> 01:40:45,120
 to the R-4 Zoning District.

1483
01:40:45,120 --> 01:40:51,440
 The subject property is located between Country Club Drive to the west, the railroad to the

1484
01:40:51,440 --> 01:41:00,640
 east, and it's approximately 318 feet north of Hickory Creek Road.

1485
01:41:00,640 --> 01:41:09,760
 This is a phasing plan for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the site.

1486
01:41:09,760 --> 01:41:12,720
 Before you tonight is Phase 2 with 53 lots.

1487
01:41:12,720 --> 01:41:18,800
 Eliminate plot for Phase 1 was approved by this Commission recently.

1488
01:41:18,800 --> 01:41:25,520
 You'll note that the site does not have frontage along Country Club and it takes its access

1489
01:41:25,520 --> 01:41:27,040
 through Phase 1.

1490
01:41:27,040 --> 01:41:35,440
 That's preserving the ESA that is on this southern and western side.

1491
01:41:35,440 --> 01:41:40,800
 Here you see the current zoning map.

1492
01:41:40,800 --> 01:41:47,000
 The site is zone SC and R-2 currently and they're proposing continuation of the R-4

1493
01:41:47,000 --> 01:41:49,200
 that is located to the north.

1494
01:41:49,200 --> 01:41:56,960
 I had a question during the work session regarding the origins of the SC and the CMG that it

1495
01:41:56,960 --> 01:41:57,960
 was originally.

1496
01:41:57,960 --> 01:42:00,760
 Thank you to my coworkers who looked it up for me.

1497
01:42:00,760 --> 01:42:05,640
 They had the answer before I even finished my presentation at work session.

1498
01:42:05,640 --> 01:42:12,200
 The CMG was actually the product of the 2002 city-wide rezoning.

1499
01:42:12,200 --> 01:42:22,660
 It was zone CMG to match the future land use designation of the site.

1500
01:42:22,660 --> 01:42:28,040
 We have general criteria for approval of all applications and I covered all of this in

1501
01:42:28,040 --> 01:42:31,120
 your backup and it does comply with these regulations.

1502
01:42:31,120 --> 01:42:40,840
 I'm going to focus on the zoning criteria for approval in section 272D.

1503
01:42:40,840 --> 01:42:48,080
 First up is the Denton Pond 2030 requirement to comply with the future land use designation

1504
01:42:48,080 --> 01:42:49,080
 of the site.

1505
01:42:49,080 --> 01:42:51,640
 This site has got two designations.

1506
01:42:51,640 --> 01:42:56,720
 One is low residential and one is neighborhood mixed use.

1507
01:42:56,720 --> 01:43:02,520
 This request complies with the low density residential designation which is intended for

1508
01:43:02,520 --> 01:43:08,280
 suburban development up to four one and two story single family dwelling units per acre

1509
01:43:08,280 --> 01:43:11,600
 complies with that requirement.

1510
01:43:11,600 --> 01:43:18,080
 Also this particular zoning district is considered a transition zoning district between the higher

1511
01:43:18,080 --> 01:43:26,640
 intensity zoning districts such as commercial areas or higher intensity residential and

1512
01:43:26,640 --> 01:43:33,520
 more rural areas to the south and this site complies with that as well.

1513
01:43:33,520 --> 01:43:37,760
 The second criteria consistent with relevant small area plans.

1514
01:43:37,760 --> 01:43:41,080
 There are no small area plans for this site.

1515
01:43:41,080 --> 01:43:45,600
 The third criteria is consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zoning district.

1516
01:43:45,600 --> 01:43:50,560
 The R4 zoning district is intended to accommodate a variety of housing types on lots designed

1517
01:43:50,560 --> 01:43:56,080
 to encourage walking to neighborhood serving retail and other amenities such as parks and

1518
01:43:56,080 --> 01:44:00,520
 school facilities while also serving as a transition area between established single

1519
01:44:00,520 --> 01:44:03,880
 family neighborhoods and mixed use neighborhoods.

1520
01:44:03,880 --> 01:44:09,000
 The R4 district in this location satisfies this locational criteria.

1521
01:44:09,000 --> 01:44:10,360
 This site is located south.

1522
01:44:10,360 --> 01:44:16,520
 The entire subdivision is located south of property zone SC and will serve as a transition

1523
01:44:16,520 --> 01:44:20,000
 between future commercial development and the SC district.

1524
01:44:20,000 --> 01:44:24,520
 There are no mixed use or commercial neighborhoods in the area right now.

1525
01:44:24,520 --> 01:44:30,840
 However once the residential development starts developing in this area we'll start seeing

1526
01:44:30,840 --> 01:44:37,100
 some commercial development come in.

1527
01:44:37,100 --> 01:44:43,040
 Therefore there has been or will be significant changes in the area to warrant a zoning change.

1528
01:44:43,040 --> 01:44:47,760
 The significant change in the area is the recently approved CIP project for the improvement

1529
01:44:47,760 --> 01:44:49,520
 of Hickory Creek Road.

1530
01:44:49,520 --> 01:44:53,440
 When the Hickory Creek improvement project is completed it has the potential to open

1531
01:44:53,440 --> 01:44:56,120
 the entire area up for development.

1532
01:44:56,120 --> 01:45:02,160
 During the work session you asked a question regarding text dot plans for Country Club.

1533
01:45:02,160 --> 01:45:07,080
 Coincidentally the applicant met with text dot today so he will be able to address that

1534
01:45:07,080 --> 01:45:11,760
 for you when he makes his presentation.

1535
01:45:11,760 --> 01:45:17,440
 Criteria five is the intensity of new development permitted by the requested zoning district

1536
01:45:17,440 --> 01:45:23,080
 is not expected to create significantly adverse impacts to the surrounding areas.

1537
01:45:23,080 --> 01:45:28,360
 Per the traffic impact analysis for both phase one and phase two Country Club Road will have

1538
01:45:28,360 --> 01:45:34,000
 to be widened by one lane in both directions to accommodate a south bound left turn lane

1539
01:45:34,000 --> 01:45:39,960
 at the southern entrance to phase one prior to the occupancy of homes in phase two.

1540
01:45:39,960 --> 01:45:44,280
 Country Club Road is designated as a secondary arterial with an ultimate right of way of

1541
01:45:44,280 --> 01:45:46,120
 a hundred and ten feet.

1542
01:45:46,120 --> 01:45:51,520
 Right of way will be dedicated at the final plat stage equal to half that required with

1543
01:45:51,520 --> 01:45:55,280
 the frontage of the site.

1544
01:45:55,280 --> 01:46:00,260
 There is a CIP project in the planning stages to improve Hickory Creek Road to the south

1545
01:46:00,260 --> 01:46:04,840
 of the site which will enable the improved overall access to the area and the applicant

1546
01:46:04,840 --> 01:46:09,840
 will speak to improvements anticipated on Country Club.

1547
01:46:09,840 --> 01:46:14,040
 With regards to water and waste water services they are available to the site and there is

1548
01:46:14,040 --> 01:46:19,320
 capacity within the system to serve this development.

1549
01:46:19,320 --> 01:46:24,420
 No extensions of public utilities will be required for phase two.

1550
01:46:24,420 --> 01:46:30,660
 The subject property is located 1.25 miles from Cross Timbers Park meaning it does not

1551
01:46:30,660 --> 01:46:35,360
 conform with the park department's goal of a ten minute walk to a park.

1552
01:46:35,360 --> 01:46:42,640
 This is as a result of this area in particular is relatively undeveloped and parks department

1553
01:46:42,640 --> 01:46:47,680
 is in the process of updating their parks master plan.

1554
01:46:47,680 --> 01:46:54,200
 As this site develops and they get more parks fees I anticipate there will be parks closer

1555
01:46:54,200 --> 01:46:57,840
 to this site.

1556
01:46:57,840 --> 01:47:00,280
 Criteria five, schools.

1557
01:47:00,280 --> 01:47:07,240
 We contacted the Denton Independent School District and per their formula this proposal

1558
01:47:07,240 --> 01:47:12,880
 for phase two would generate approximately 13 elementary students, seven middle school

1559
01:47:12,880 --> 01:47:15,080
 students and eight high school students.

1560
01:47:15,080 --> 01:47:20,480
 A DISD representative has stated that Ryan Elementary will not be able to accommodate

1561
01:47:20,480 --> 01:47:26,800
 these additional students and they will probably attend Borman Elementary.

1562
01:47:26,800 --> 01:47:33,280
 The fire station is approximately 3.8 miles away, fire station number six on Teasley Lane

1563
01:47:33,280 --> 01:47:39,080
 and that is within the eight minute or less response time boundary.

1564
01:47:39,080 --> 01:47:43,160
 We sent out notices within 200 and 500 feet of the site.

1565
01:47:43,160 --> 01:47:48,160
 We did receive three responses back in favor of this request.

1566
01:47:48,160 --> 01:47:54,920
 One of the notices was from the property owner and this green that encompassed the site to

1567
01:47:54,920 --> 01:48:02,120
 the west and the south is the property owner's land.

1568
01:48:02,120 --> 01:48:08,080
 That brings the response rate up to 61% in favor of this proposal within the 200 foot

1569
01:48:08,080 --> 01:48:09,080
 boundary.

1570
01:48:09,080 --> 01:48:15,560
 If you take out the property owner's land that takes it to 5% of the land within the

1571
01:48:15,560 --> 01:48:18,440
 200 foot boundary that are in favor.

1572
01:48:18,440 --> 01:48:20,040
 We received nothing in opposition.

1573
01:48:20,040 --> 01:48:23,520
 A neighborhood meeting was not held.

1574
01:48:23,520 --> 01:48:29,960
 The applicant actually spoke to the property owners and told them about the project.

1575
01:48:29,960 --> 01:48:31,920
 Staff recommends approval of this request.

1576
01:48:31,920 --> 01:48:37,280
 It is compatible with the surrounding property and is consistent with the overall goals and

1577
01:48:37,280 --> 01:48:39,680
 objectives of the Denton plan.

1578
01:48:39,680 --> 01:48:41,040
 That concludes my presentation.

1579
01:48:41,040 --> 01:48:43,120
 The applicant is present to answer questions.

1580
01:48:43,120 --> 01:48:46,160
 Thank you very much, Cindy, I don't see any questions at this time.

1581
01:48:46,160 --> 01:48:47,160
 Okay.

1582
01:48:47,160 --> 01:48:48,160
 This is a public hearing.

1583
01:48:48,160 --> 01:48:49,160
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

1584
01:48:49,160 --> 01:48:50,160
 I do have one card.

1585
01:48:50,160 --> 01:48:51,160
 It is Thomas Fletcher.

1586
01:48:51,160 --> 01:48:55,080
 If you just state your name and address for the record, you will be provided up to ten

1587
01:48:55,080 --> 01:49:00,280
 minutes to speak.

1588
01:49:00,280 --> 01:49:08,640
 Good evening, Chair and commissioners.

1589
01:49:08,640 --> 01:49:10,320
 My name is Thomas Fletcher with Kimley Horne.

1590
01:49:10,320 --> 01:49:16,240
 I am the engineer for the applicant, 6160 Warren Parkway, Frisco, Texas.

1591
01:49:16,240 --> 01:49:21,360
 I appreciate the opportunity to speak before you tonight on this project.

1592
01:49:21,360 --> 01:49:27,040
 This overall exhibit and before you right now just kind of shows the overall area with

1593
01:49:27,040 --> 01:49:33,160
 the portion of the track that is actually part of the zoning request.

1594
01:49:33,160 --> 01:49:38,480
 As we get into the next slide, what this shows, the actual property that is owned by the applicant

1595
01:49:38,480 --> 01:49:43,280
 is just right at 57 total acres.

1596
01:49:43,280 --> 01:49:46,640
 The majority of that property is located within the floodplain.

1597
01:49:46,640 --> 01:49:51,840
 When we went through and we looked at doing the zoning application request, we looked

1598
01:49:51,840 --> 01:49:55,680
 at it and we said, well, there's really no need to rezone the portion of the property

1599
01:49:55,680 --> 01:49:57,920
 that's not located outside of the floodplain.

1600
01:49:57,920 --> 01:50:04,400
 So as we met with staff and looked at the project, we made our application for that

1601
01:50:04,400 --> 01:50:07,120
 portion of the area that could be developed.

1602
01:50:07,120 --> 01:50:11,580
 The proposed 53 lots is located on just under 17 acres.

1603
01:50:11,580 --> 01:50:13,880
 That's a 3.2 density.

1604
01:50:13,880 --> 01:50:18,240
 So it's R4 zoning, which allows up to four units per acre.

1605
01:50:18,240 --> 01:50:24,960
 But the proposal with the site plan there is 3.2 units per acre.

1606
01:50:24,960 --> 01:50:32,600
 The other thing I'd like to point out, the R4 minimum lot size, the lot area is a 7,000

1607
01:50:32,600 --> 01:50:34,720
 square foot lot area.

1608
01:50:34,720 --> 01:50:40,880
 With this proposal, our average lot size is about 8,600 square feet.

1609
01:50:40,880 --> 01:50:45,400
 So we've already gone through and done enough work on the site to lay the tract out because

1610
01:50:45,400 --> 01:50:50,760
 we were in the process of doing the construction plans on the site to the north.

1611
01:50:50,760 --> 01:50:56,440
 In order to make sure that we had adequate utility and access, we had to go and do some

1612
01:50:56,440 --> 01:51:02,240
 planning adequate for this site to know the layout and the actual number of lots and the

1613
01:51:02,240 --> 01:51:03,520
 average square footage.

1614
01:51:03,520 --> 01:51:07,700
 So the R4 is an average or a minimum of 7,000.

1615
01:51:07,700 --> 01:51:12,320
 Our proposed average is 8,600 square feet on the lot size.

1616
01:51:12,320 --> 01:51:19,740
 In addition to that, the minimum rear yard area on an R4 zoning district is 10 feet.

1617
01:51:19,740 --> 01:51:23,120
 Our minimum is 25 and our typical is 45.

1618
01:51:23,120 --> 01:51:32,400
 So we've got oversized lots that are going to provide a much larger yard for the residents.

1619
01:51:32,400 --> 01:51:37,120
 Another thing I'd like to point out, the two different colors of the green, we had a meeting

1620
01:51:37,120 --> 01:51:41,360
 earlier with the Parks Department with Gary Packin and we talked to them about their long

1621
01:51:41,360 --> 01:51:42,360
 range plans.

1622
01:51:42,360 --> 01:51:47,320
 They're in the planning process for their master parks plan, regional trails.

1623
01:51:47,320 --> 01:51:52,800
 And what we discussed with them was doing a parkland dedication of the land that's in

1624
01:51:52,800 --> 01:51:55,800
 the lighter colored green to the city.

1625
01:51:55,800 --> 01:51:58,720
 We met with them to see if they would have interest in that land.

1626
01:51:58,720 --> 01:52:01,640
 It does fit with their parks master plan.

1627
01:52:01,640 --> 01:52:06,760
 That is one of the corridors that they would like to do is a regional trail along Hickory

1628
01:52:06,760 --> 01:52:07,760
 Creek.

1629
01:52:07,760 --> 01:52:09,040
 So this is in line with that.

1630
01:52:09,040 --> 01:52:15,960
 It provides land that helps kind of create that corridor so that they can provide that

1631
01:52:15,960 --> 01:52:16,960
 regional trail.

1632
01:52:16,960 --> 01:52:21,840
 And that the regional trail would kind of, it would start kind of going up to the to

1633
01:52:21,840 --> 01:52:28,120
 the northwest and enter, you know, head that direction where they've got other parks and

1634
01:52:28,120 --> 01:52:30,960
 improvements planned.

1635
01:52:30,960 --> 01:52:36,240
 And wanted to go through with that, you know, go over that with you because the Parks Department

1636
01:52:36,240 --> 01:52:43,840
 is interested in acquiring or accepting that land as a park dedication.

1637
01:52:43,840 --> 01:52:48,100
 This is just showing the topography, everything from the site kind of drains.

1638
01:52:48,100 --> 01:52:53,380
 There is a tributary that runs kind of on the eastern portion of the site.

1639
01:52:53,380 --> 01:52:57,560
 There's a little bit of the area of the site that drains back to the west, goes through

1640
01:52:57,560 --> 01:53:01,680
 a culvert under Country Club Road and then south to Hickory Creek.

1641
01:53:01,680 --> 01:53:07,920
 Hickory Creek, Hickory Creek follows Hickory Creek Road just on the south side of the roadway.

1642
01:53:07,920 --> 01:53:13,440
 I would imagine that when Hickory Creek Road is realigned, that would possibly improve

1643
01:53:13,440 --> 01:53:18,240
 some of the floodplain limits in this area because that's kind of a an impediment to

1644
01:53:18,240 --> 01:53:19,240
 the floodplain.

1645
01:53:19,240 --> 01:53:24,600
 So once that gets removed, it may provide some benefits to the and reduction of the

1646
01:53:24,600 --> 01:53:29,480
 floodplain.

1647
01:53:29,480 --> 01:53:33,760
 Some of the comments or questions that came up in the work session with regard to transportation,

1648
01:53:33,760 --> 01:53:36,640
 we have done a traffic impact analysis.

1649
01:53:36,640 --> 01:53:41,820
 When we did the traffic impact analysis for phase one, we were contemplating the phase

1650
01:53:41,820 --> 01:53:43,120
 two part of the project.

1651
01:53:43,120 --> 01:53:46,360
 So we included that within the study.

1652
01:53:46,360 --> 01:53:51,280
 Within that study, it showed the need for a left turn lane to access this development.

1653
01:53:51,280 --> 01:53:56,600
 So we've gone through and actually have started the construction plans for that left turn

1654
01:53:56,600 --> 01:53:57,600
 lane.

1655
01:53:57,600 --> 01:54:01,280
 The left turn lane would be constructed with the phase one development.

1656
01:54:01,280 --> 01:54:05,080
 So it would be in place prior to the phase two development.

1657
01:54:05,080 --> 01:54:08,980
 I did have a meeting with TexDOT today to go over this.

1658
01:54:08,980 --> 01:54:15,480
 The TexDOT did make us aware that they do have plans to improve Country Club Road to

1659
01:54:15,480 --> 01:54:17,920
 four lane divided roadway.

1660
01:54:17,920 --> 01:54:24,120
 We were told that the schematic has been completed and is available to review on their website.

1661
01:54:24,120 --> 01:54:29,240
 The engineers that we were meeting with, they weren't sure of a timeframe for that.

1662
01:54:29,240 --> 01:54:35,520
 But generally, once the schematic is done, they enter the right of way acquisition.

1663
01:54:35,520 --> 01:54:38,560
 And then once it's funded, then they can move forward with construction.

1664
01:54:38,560 --> 01:54:44,020
 So don't have a timeframe on the construction, but can tell you it's four lane divided roadway

1665
01:54:44,020 --> 01:54:46,360
 and the schematic is complete for that.

1666
01:54:46,360 --> 01:54:51,840
 And the development of these projects would provide a significant portion of the right

1667
01:54:51,840 --> 01:54:56,520
 of way for this section of roadway.

1668
01:54:56,520 --> 01:55:01,440
 Another thing on the access to the site, the tracks that we're currently developing currently

1669
01:55:01,440 --> 01:55:03,240
 have four drives.

1670
01:55:03,240 --> 01:55:05,560
 With this development, there would be two drives.

1671
01:55:05,560 --> 01:55:07,580
 So we would eliminate two of those drives.

1672
01:55:07,580 --> 01:55:11,680
 So you would have less access points to Country Club Road.

1673
01:55:11,680 --> 01:55:18,560
 We are making localized improvements to the road system and then that's where we're entering

1674
01:55:18,560 --> 01:55:23,960
 the traffic, having the traffic enter the roadway.

1675
01:55:23,960 --> 01:55:26,980
 Another thing we've already done is we've gone through and we've done the tree survey

1676
01:55:26,980 --> 01:55:28,640
 for this site.

1677
01:55:28,640 --> 01:55:33,240
 If you look at this, this includes the overall track, not just what's included as part of

1678
01:55:33,240 --> 01:55:34,460
 the zoning.

1679
01:55:34,460 --> 01:55:39,960
 But within the overall track and looking at what trees would be removed for the development,

1680
01:55:39,960 --> 01:55:47,260
 we are proposing over 75% tree preservation with a lot, a significant portion of those

1681
01:55:47,260 --> 01:55:53,720
 trees being located in the land that we're working with the city to donate as parkland.

1682
01:55:53,720 --> 01:55:59,800
 So also on this exhibit, you'll see that we are showing the trees along Country Club Road

1683
01:55:59,800 --> 01:56:01,540
 to be removed.

1684
01:56:01,540 --> 01:56:06,040
 We don't necessarily need to remove those with this project unless there's visibility

1685
01:56:06,040 --> 01:56:08,840
 or safety reasons to do so.

1686
01:56:08,840 --> 01:56:13,480
 What we wanted to do is make sure that when we looked at our calculation that we, knowing

1687
01:56:13,480 --> 01:56:19,840
 that Country Club Road will be widened, that we took that into account with our tree preservation

1688
01:56:19,840 --> 01:56:21,040
 calculations.

1689
01:56:21,040 --> 01:56:26,920
 So even with those trees being removed, over 75% tree preservation.

1690
01:56:26,920 --> 01:56:34,840
 So really the community benefits, oversized lots compared to the R4 minimums, FM1830 improvements

1691
01:56:34,840 --> 01:56:41,680
 with left turn lane and widening, tree preservation greater than 75%, parkland dedication that

1692
01:56:41,680 --> 01:56:44,460
 would be in excess of 30 acres.

1693
01:56:44,460 --> 01:56:46,720
 There's no ESA impacts proposed.

1694
01:56:46,720 --> 01:56:52,360
 There are ESA on the overall project and we're staying out of those areas.

1695
01:56:52,360 --> 01:56:59,160
 And then the existing gas wells that are around or within this area are over 1,500 feet from

1696
01:56:59,160 --> 01:57:00,160
 the development.

1697
01:57:00,160 --> 01:57:06,160
 So there's no, from a gas well standpoint, what we're proposing is well in excess of

1698
01:57:06,160 --> 01:57:08,880
 the current ordinance.

1699
01:57:08,880 --> 01:57:12,640
 With that, that concludes my presentation and I would be happy to answer any questions

1700
01:57:12,640 --> 01:57:13,640
 you may have.

1701
01:57:13,640 --> 01:57:20,800
 Thank you, Mr. Fletcher, I do not see any questions.

1702
01:57:20,800 --> 01:57:21,800
 This is a public hearing.

1703
01:57:21,800 --> 01:57:29,440
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

1704
01:57:29,440 --> 01:57:34,160
 Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and turn to the dais for a motion or discussion.

1705
01:57:34,160 --> 01:57:35,160
 Commissioner Smith.

1706
01:57:35,160 --> 01:57:36,280
 Move to approve.

1707
01:57:36,280 --> 01:57:37,640
 We have a first for approval.

1708
01:57:37,640 --> 01:57:38,640
 Commissioner Cole.

1709
01:57:38,640 --> 01:57:39,640
 Second.

1710
01:57:39,640 --> 01:57:41,280
 We have a first and a second for approval.

1711
01:57:41,280 --> 01:57:44,080
 Any discussion?

1712
01:57:44,080 --> 01:57:51,760
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

1713
01:57:51,760 --> 01:57:53,200
 Motion carries 6-0.

1714
01:57:53,200 --> 01:57:54,200
 Congratulations.

1715
01:57:54,200 --> 01:58:00,040
 Next item of business is item 5CZ19-14B.

1716
01:58:00,040 --> 01:58:16,960
 I'll invite Cindy Jackson for presentation and open the public hearing.

1717
01:58:16,960 --> 01:58:29,280
 Thank you, again, for the record, I'm Cindy Jackson with the Development Services Department

1718
01:58:29,280 --> 01:58:35,680
 and I have before you today Z19-0014, Janney Street.

1719
01:58:35,680 --> 01:58:44,240
 It's a request to rezone 0.154 acre lot from residential R4 district to the mixed use MN

1720
01:58:44,240 --> 01:58:50,720
 district to bring an existing commercial parking lot into compliance with the 2019 Denton Development

1721
01:58:50,720 --> 01:58:51,720
 Code.

1722
01:58:51,720 --> 01:58:59,320
 The subject property is located at 311 Janney Street, approximately 172 feet north of East

1723
01:58:59,320 --> 01:59:01,840
 McKinney Street.

1724
01:59:01,840 --> 01:59:07,680
 Here you can see the current zoning map on the left and you can see the site is adjacent

1725
01:59:07,680 --> 01:59:15,920
 to an MN zoning district that runs along the length of the north side of McKinney Street.

1726
01:59:15,920 --> 01:59:25,580
 If this is approved, this will be a continuation of the MN to the north onto the subject site.

1727
01:59:25,580 --> 01:59:29,000
 We have general criteria for approval of all applications.

1728
01:59:29,000 --> 01:59:36,520
 I went through an analysis of this to show you that this complies with all of that criteria

1729
01:59:36,520 --> 01:59:38,240
 in your backup.

1730
01:59:38,240 --> 01:59:43,280
 We have zoning criteria for approval that I will focus on in Section 272D of the Denton

1731
01:59:43,280 --> 01:59:45,880
 Development Code.

1732
01:59:45,880 --> 01:59:51,960
 Criteria one, does the site comply with the Denton Plan 2030 land use designation?

1733
01:59:51,960 --> 01:59:59,440
 The site has several designations due to its location, its designated government institutional,

1734
01:59:59,440 --> 02:00:03,160
 downtown compatibility area and low residential.

1735
02:00:03,160 --> 02:00:08,160
 This site complies with the downtown compatibility area.

1736
02:00:08,160 --> 02:00:13,640
 This area, downtown compatibility, applies to residential and commercial areas adjacent

1737
02:00:13,640 --> 02:00:20,240
 to the downtown core and it provides a transition between downtown and surrounding areas and

1738
02:00:20,240 --> 02:00:24,400
 neighborhoods to preserve the character of the area through the use of context-sensitive

1739
02:00:24,400 --> 02:00:28,440
 development.

1740
02:00:28,440 --> 02:00:33,320
 Criteria two, is it consistent with relevant small area plans and there are no small area

1741
02:00:33,320 --> 02:00:36,320
 plans for this location?

1742
02:00:36,320 --> 02:00:40,480
 Criteria three, is it consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zoning district?

1743
02:00:40,480 --> 02:00:46,360
 The MN district is provided to support compatibility between higher intensity mixed use areas and

1744
02:00:46,360 --> 02:00:49,680
 adjacent residential and commercial areas.

1745
02:00:49,680 --> 02:00:55,640
 This MN district proposed in this location satisfies the locational requirement.

1746
02:00:55,640 --> 02:01:01,040
 It will be located between the lower intensity R4 zoning to the north and East McKinney Street

1747
02:01:01,040 --> 02:01:04,960
 corridor to the south.

1748
02:01:04,960 --> 02:01:09,840
 Criteria four, have there been or will there be significant changes in the area to warrant

1749
02:01:09,840 --> 02:01:11,840
 a zoning change?

1750
02:01:11,840 --> 02:01:16,600
 The changes that have happened in the area have occurred in the past few years, specifically

1751
02:01:16,600 --> 02:01:18,400
 rezoning of this site.

1752
02:01:18,400 --> 02:01:29,920
 This site was originally R4 residential and it was rezoned to neighborhood residential

1753
02:01:29,920 --> 02:01:31,640
 6 with an overlay.

1754
02:01:31,640 --> 02:01:40,360
 In 2017, that portion of the site zoned NR6 was rezoned to NRMU 12 with an overlay.

1755
02:01:40,360 --> 02:01:45,520
 We had the transition for the Denton Development Code this year.

1756
02:01:45,520 --> 02:01:53,320
 This site transitioned to PDMN on the south side and PDR7 on the north side.

1757
02:01:53,320 --> 02:02:00,220
 The change of use on this corner across the street from residential to more mixed use

1758
02:02:00,220 --> 02:02:07,320
 commercial is what kind of opened the door for this kind of proposal to be recommended

1759
02:02:07,320 --> 02:02:08,320
 for approval.

1760
02:02:08,320 --> 02:02:20,320
 It is compatible with the surrounding area to the east and the south and the southwest.

1761
02:02:20,320 --> 02:02:24,640
 Criteria five, the intensity of new development permitted by the requested zoning district

1762
02:02:24,640 --> 02:02:29,920
 is not expected to create significantly adverse impacts to the surrounding areas.

1763
02:02:29,920 --> 02:02:34,760
 With regards to streets, the parking lot has been in this location for several years.

1764
02:02:34,760 --> 02:02:41,240
 It has not had adverse effect as of yet and it's not expected to have an adverse effect

1765
02:02:41,240 --> 02:02:43,320
 in the future.

1766
02:02:43,320 --> 02:02:49,680
 Water and wastewater, the parking lot does not require the access to water and wastewater

1767
02:02:49,680 --> 02:02:54,200
 and will not necessitate the need for extension of services.

1768
02:02:54,200 --> 02:02:59,080
 With regards to location of parks, since the parking lot is not habitable, it does not

1769
02:02:59,080 --> 02:03:02,680
 require access to parks.

1770
02:03:02,680 --> 02:03:09,720
 With regards to schools, this parking lot will not affect the student population.

1771
02:03:09,720 --> 02:03:13,920
 With regards to the fire station location, the subject property is approximately 1.2

1772
02:03:13,920 --> 02:03:20,560
 miles from fire station number two located at 2209 East McKinney Street and that is within

1773
02:03:20,560 --> 02:03:24,740
 the eight minute or less response time boundary.

1774
02:03:24,740 --> 02:03:29,120
 We did send out notices within 200 and 500 feet.

1775
02:03:29,120 --> 02:03:35,120
 I just handed you at the day as another notice that the applicant brought in another response

1776
02:03:35,120 --> 02:03:39,200
 that was in favor of this request.

1777
02:03:39,200 --> 02:03:46,000
 I have not had time to calculate the increase in the percentage of land area within 200

1778
02:03:46,000 --> 02:03:47,000
 feet.

1779
02:03:47,000 --> 02:03:49,800
 However, that will be done prior to the city council meeting.

1780
02:03:49,800 --> 02:03:57,320
 As it stands with the six that we did have prior to this meeting, the land area in favor

1781
02:03:57,320 --> 02:04:02,060
 of this request within the 200 foot boundary is 38%.

1782
02:04:02,060 --> 02:04:07,960
 The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting on January 21st.

1783
02:04:07,960 --> 02:04:12,040
 One person attended and that was before the meeting started and stated they had no issues

1784
02:04:12,040 --> 02:04:17,000
 with the proposed rezoning.

1785
02:04:17,000 --> 02:04:18,960
 Staff recommends approval of this request.

1786
02:04:18,960 --> 02:04:23,240
 It is compatible with the surrounding property and is consistent with the overall goals and

1787
02:04:23,240 --> 02:04:26,100
 objectives of the Denton Plan 2030.

1788
02:04:26,100 --> 02:04:30,160
 That concludes my presentation and the applicant is present if you have any questions.

1789
02:04:30,160 --> 02:04:31,160
 >> Thank you, Cindy.

1790
02:04:31,160 --> 02:04:32,360
 I don't have any questions for you.

1791
02:04:32,360 --> 02:04:34,360
 I appreciate the presentation.

1792
02:04:34,360 --> 02:04:35,360
 This is a public hearing.

1793
02:04:35,360 --> 02:04:36,680
 Anyone wishing to speak may do so.

1794
02:04:36,680 --> 02:04:38,320
 I do have one card.

1795
02:04:38,320 --> 02:04:39,320
 Roger Yale.

1796
02:04:39,320 --> 02:04:40,320
 >> I'm the applicant.

1797
02:04:40,320 --> 02:04:41,320
 >> Perfect.

1798
02:04:41,320 --> 02:04:46,600
 If you could state your name and address for the record, you'll have ten minutes to speak.

1799
02:04:46,600 --> 02:04:47,600
 >> Thank you, sir.

1800
02:04:47,600 --> 02:04:48,960
 My name is Roger Yale.

1801
02:04:48,960 --> 02:04:53,920
 My business address is 1417 East McKinney Street, which is the property immediately

1802
02:04:53,920 --> 02:04:56,440
 to the south of this parking lot.

1803
02:04:56,440 --> 02:05:02,760
 With regard to the percentage of folks that were in favor, I went and walked the neighborhood

1804
02:05:02,760 --> 02:05:07,160
 after we didn't have a meeting and knocked on every door, there were approximately eight

1805
02:05:07,160 --> 02:05:08,160
 potentials.

1806
02:05:08,160 --> 02:05:10,120
 I got six of them that agreed.

1807
02:05:10,120 --> 02:05:14,200
 The other two simply said we're not signing anything, not we're for it, not we're against

1808
02:05:14,200 --> 02:05:17,920
 it, we're simply not going to sign anything.

1809
02:05:17,920 --> 02:05:23,720
 My wife and I are the majority owners of the remaining property and that we own the MN property

1810
02:05:23,720 --> 02:05:28,720
 that is the subject of this location adjacent to it, then immediately to the west there's

1811
02:05:28,720 --> 02:05:30,760
 a street called Heady Street.

1812
02:05:30,760 --> 02:05:35,680
 On either side of Heady Street we've built two contemporary buildings in the past year

1813
02:05:35,680 --> 02:05:42,160
 that were in this zoning and they would be in the range of the 200 feet.

1814
02:05:42,160 --> 02:05:47,440
 We've also talked to all of the neighbors and believe that we're compatible and we'd

1815
02:05:47,440 --> 02:05:50,320
 ask the board to approve this.

1816
02:05:50,320 --> 02:05:52,400
 >> Thank you for being here.

1817
02:05:52,400 --> 02:05:55,800
 I don't see any questions for you at this time.

1818
02:05:55,800 --> 02:05:57,680
 Thank you.

1819
02:05:57,680 --> 02:05:58,680
 This is a public hearing.

1820
02:05:58,680 --> 02:06:01,140
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

1821
02:06:01,140 --> 02:06:03,480
 Seeing none, I will close the public hearing.

1822
02:06:03,480 --> 02:06:04,480
 Commissioner Anderson.

1823
02:06:04,480 --> 02:06:06,240
 >> I make a motion to approve.

1824
02:06:06,240 --> 02:06:07,720
 >> We have a motion for approval.

1825
02:06:07,720 --> 02:06:08,720
 Commissioner Smith.

1826
02:06:08,720 --> 02:06:09,720
 >> Second.

1827
02:06:09,720 --> 02:06:12,400
 >> We have a first and a second for approval.

1828
02:06:12,400 --> 02:06:14,600
 Commissioner Ellis.

1829
02:06:14,600 --> 02:06:15,600
 >> Thank you, Chair.

1830
02:06:15,600 --> 02:06:19,480
 Just wanted to say a couple words on this because this particular area I've had some comments

1831
02:06:19,480 --> 02:06:23,960
 on because I've been concerned for a long time about the encroachment of these commercial

1832
02:06:23,960 --> 02:06:29,680
 projects on this single family affordable neighborhood in our city.

1833
02:06:29,680 --> 02:06:31,880
 So I'm not a big fan of the rezoning request.

1834
02:06:31,880 --> 02:06:37,560
 I do understand that the owner has been misusing the property as a parking lot for some time.

1835
02:06:37,560 --> 02:06:42,960
 And I do understand that it's not going to be a single family home site again.

1836
02:06:42,960 --> 02:06:47,840
 So I will be voting to support this, though I have not been a fan in the past of supporting

1837
02:06:47,840 --> 02:06:50,380
 these rezones in this area.

1838
02:06:50,380 --> 02:06:56,160
 And I'm certainly a fan of bringing the property to code compliance.

1839
02:06:56,160 --> 02:06:58,880
 >> Any other discussion?

1840
02:06:58,880 --> 02:07:06,560
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

1841
02:07:06,560 --> 02:07:07,560
 Motion carries 6-0.

1842
02:07:07,560 --> 02:07:19,480
 The next item of business is item 5B, DCA-19-24A, followed by Julie Wyatt for presentation.

1843
02:07:19,480 --> 02:07:20,480
 And open the public hearing.

1844
02:07:20,480 --> 02:07:29,160
 >> Good evening, I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton, and I'm presenting

1845
02:07:29,160 --> 02:07:34,160
 DCA-19-24A, ESA's and Platting.

1846
02:07:34,160 --> 02:07:37,480
 The request before you is to hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation

1847
02:07:37,480 --> 02:07:42,360
 to city council regarding a proposed revision to subchapter 2 of the Denton Development

1848
02:07:42,360 --> 02:07:47,240
 Code that is the administration and procedures subchapter, and it's related to alternative

1849
02:07:47,240 --> 02:07:50,000
 environmentally sensitive area plans and platting.

1850
02:07:50,000 --> 02:07:54,120
 This is a staff-initiated code amendment to remedy some conflicting regulations within

1851
02:07:54,120 --> 02:07:55,120
 the DDC.

1852
02:07:55,120 --> 02:08:00,640
 ESAs are areas in the city that have ecological value.

1853
02:08:00,640 --> 02:08:05,800
 They are mapped, and that map does create constraints on lots.

1854
02:08:05,800 --> 02:08:12,360
 Those cannot impact or disturb those ESAs without approval through the alternative ESA

1855
02:08:12,360 --> 02:08:13,360
 plan process.

1856
02:08:13,360 --> 02:08:18,400
 That alternative ESA plan process provides relief from those regulations.

1857
02:08:18,400 --> 02:08:25,480
 Sometimes it is necessary on complex sites to consider the alternative ESA plan proposals.

1858
02:08:25,480 --> 02:08:29,120
 They typically involve mitigation.

1859
02:08:29,120 --> 02:08:36,360
 It's often a discussion with staff and provides mitigation with that alternative ESA plan.

1860
02:08:36,360 --> 02:08:40,520
 It does require city council approval through the dual public hearing process, so those

1861
02:08:40,520 --> 02:08:44,640
 do actually come before the Planning and Zoning Commission and on to city council for final

1862
02:08:44,640 --> 02:08:45,640
 approval.

1863
02:08:45,640 --> 02:08:50,720
 The 2002 Denton Development Code didn't have a whole lot of specificity regarding alternative

1864
02:08:50,720 --> 02:08:56,600
 ESA plans, so the 2019 code did add a little more in terms of process and criteria for

1865
02:08:56,600 --> 02:08:57,600
 approval.

1866
02:08:57,600 --> 02:09:04,880
 As part of that 2019 DDC adoption, there was a requirement for a concurrent review of a

1867
02:09:04,880 --> 02:09:09,320
 plat with consideration of an alternative ESA plan.

1868
02:09:09,320 --> 02:09:14,320
 There are issues associated with this, and in two particular places we'll talk about

1869
02:09:14,320 --> 02:09:15,320
 tonight.

1870
02:09:15,320 --> 02:09:16,320
 First of all, platts.

1871
02:09:16,320 --> 02:09:20,320
 When we talk about platts, they all have to meet the general criteria for approval and

1872
02:09:20,320 --> 02:09:26,120
 any specific criteria for approval, and one of those criterion is they must comply with

1873
02:09:26,120 --> 02:09:29,160
 the DDC, and that includes the ESA regulations.

1874
02:09:29,160 --> 02:09:34,880
 Platts, which propose encroachments on those ESAs, cannot satisfy the criteria for approval

1875
02:09:34,880 --> 02:09:37,400
 without an alternative ESA plan.

1876
02:09:37,400 --> 02:09:41,840
 Alternative ESA plans, because they require the dual public hearing process, often have

1877
02:09:41,840 --> 02:09:45,160
 a much longer time to get through the process and get approved.

1878
02:09:45,160 --> 02:09:50,720
 It can take several months, but under the shot clock provisions with the state of Texas,

1879
02:09:50,720 --> 02:09:54,360
 platts have to be approved within 30 days of a complete submittal.

1880
02:09:54,360 --> 02:10:00,280
 Therefore, these concurrent submittal requirements ensure that platts are going to be denied,

1881
02:10:00,280 --> 02:10:04,360
 typically denied, at the Planning and Zoning Commission because they can't meet the criteria

1882
02:10:04,360 --> 02:10:05,360
 for approval.

1883
02:10:05,360 --> 02:10:14,760
 And then regarding plan developments, so with the 2019 DDC we have PDs in our toolbox, something

1884
02:10:14,760 --> 02:10:18,560
 we didn't have within the 2002 Denton Development Code.

1885
02:10:18,560 --> 02:10:26,240
 If a PD does include a unique lot layout and something like a cluster subdivision or subchapter

1886
02:10:26,240 --> 02:10:32,640
 7, or I'm sorry, 8 also has something like auto courts, those platts associated with

1887
02:10:32,640 --> 02:10:38,320
 those PDs could not be approved until that PD is approved because the lots have to conform

1888
02:10:38,320 --> 02:10:40,680
 to the underlying zoning.

1889
02:10:40,680 --> 02:10:44,160
 Alternative ESA plans cannot be approved as part of a PD approval.

1890
02:10:44,160 --> 02:10:48,560
 It has to go as a separate, but can be a parallel process.

1891
02:10:48,560 --> 02:10:53,960
 We really want to make sure that we, they have the scrutiny and that individual attention

1892
02:10:53,960 --> 02:10:57,960
 that they need.

1893
02:10:57,960 --> 02:11:02,040
 But that creates a catch-22 because a plat can't be approved until the PD is approved.

1894
02:11:02,040 --> 02:11:06,800
 But the PD can't be approved without alternative ESA plan approval.

1895
02:11:06,800 --> 02:11:09,920
 And then alternative ESA plan approval can't be submitted without a plat.

1896
02:11:09,920 --> 02:11:15,880
 So it really just creates some circular logic there for all of these processes.

1897
02:11:15,880 --> 02:11:22,720
 So as a result, staff is recommending a modification to the text of the Denton Development Code,

1898
02:11:22,720 --> 02:11:30,160
 and that really is just to strike that language requiring that concurrent submittal of a plat.

1899
02:11:30,160 --> 02:11:32,880
 Doesn't mean an applicant can't do that.

1900
02:11:32,880 --> 02:11:39,120
 Sometimes it may make sense for a development, but it would just strike it as that requirement

1901
02:11:39,120 --> 02:11:40,480
 across the board.

1902
02:11:40,480 --> 02:11:46,160
 We reviewed the request in association with the criteria for approval, and our findings

1903
02:11:46,160 --> 02:11:51,380
 were that the proposal maintains the review and approval process for alternative ESA plans.

1904
02:11:51,380 --> 02:11:57,920
 So it doesn't minimize our regulations or water down the fact that if an applicant does

1905
02:11:57,920 --> 02:12:03,600
 want to impact an ESA, they still have to get that alternative ESA plan approval.

1906
02:12:03,600 --> 02:12:09,240
 But it would just allow logical submittal timing, depending on the application.

1907
02:12:09,240 --> 02:12:14,760
 That shot clock that was enacted over the summer by the State of Texas really does kind

1908
02:12:14,760 --> 02:12:18,560
 of change the calculus for some of these provisions.

1909
02:12:18,560 --> 02:12:23,960
 And this concurrent submittal essentially requires applicants to submit an unnecessary

1910
02:12:23,960 --> 02:12:24,960
 plat.

1911
02:12:24,960 --> 02:12:28,680
 It just may not meet the final results.

1912
02:12:28,680 --> 02:12:35,640
 And so therefore, it would result in a plat denial or conditional approvals or some other

1913
02:12:35,640 --> 02:12:38,360
 mechanism that would just keep it going.

1914
02:12:38,360 --> 02:12:47,160
 And so we're proposing just to break that coupling and the connection of those two.

1915
02:12:47,160 --> 02:12:51,880
 And then this proposal is really just a further refinement of that 2019 Denton Development

1916
02:12:51,880 --> 02:12:52,880
 Code.

1917
02:12:52,880 --> 02:12:59,160
 It was a really big process, a lot of complicated matters were discussed and put into place

1918
02:12:59,160 --> 02:13:00,160
 with that code.

1919
02:13:00,160 --> 02:13:04,360
 And as it's being implemented, we're finding some little tweaks that we need to further

1920
02:13:04,360 --> 02:13:05,360
 refine.

1921
02:13:05,360 --> 02:13:08,040
 So this is just a part of that process.

1922
02:13:08,040 --> 02:13:10,720
 So that concludes my presentation.

1923
02:13:10,720 --> 02:13:13,480
 Staff does recommend approval, and I'll stand for any questions.

1924
02:13:13,480 --> 02:13:14,480
 Thank you, Julie.

1925
02:13:14,480 --> 02:13:16,720
 I don't see any questions.

1926
02:13:16,720 --> 02:13:17,720
 This is a public hearing.

1927
02:13:17,720 --> 02:13:21,760
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

1928
02:13:21,760 --> 02:13:23,360
 Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing.

1929
02:13:23,360 --> 02:13:24,360
 Commissioner Smith?

1930
02:13:24,360 --> 02:13:25,360
 Move to approve.

1931
02:13:25,360 --> 02:13:27,080
 We have a first for approval.

1932
02:13:27,080 --> 02:13:28,560
 Commissioner Ellis?

1933
02:13:28,560 --> 02:13:29,560
 Second.

1934
02:13:29,560 --> 02:13:32,760
 We have a first and a second for approval.

1935
02:13:32,760 --> 02:13:34,880
 Any discussion?

1936
02:13:34,880 --> 02:13:43,480
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

1937
02:13:43,480 --> 02:13:46,120
 Motion carries 6-0.

1938
02:13:46,120 --> 02:13:50,680
 The next and final item for this evening is the Plaint and Zoning Commission Project Matrix.

1939
02:13:50,680 --> 02:13:57,880
 I will turn the floor over to Richard for an update, and then we can discuss and question.

1940
02:13:57,880 --> 02:14:03,500
 Just a brief update in regards to the two items that were requested last meeting.

1941
02:14:03,500 --> 02:14:08,000
 We're working on getting that information, so we'll have a written response, both from

1942
02:14:08,000 --> 02:14:14,000
 traffic engineering, and I know Charlie is working on pulling together some of the information

1943
02:14:14,000 --> 02:14:16,520
 on the noticing about the opt-in.

1944
02:14:16,520 --> 02:14:21,760
 So we put it on there just in order to keep track of it, but hopefully you should have

1945
02:14:21,760 --> 02:14:26,080
 a written, at least a short memo explaining that, so we'll email that out.

1946
02:14:26,080 --> 02:14:31,000
 The only other items I just wanted to update on, some council items that were approved

1947
02:14:31,000 --> 02:14:36,880
 last night, and one postponed, the text amendments, the various text amendments that we had were

1948
02:14:36,880 --> 02:14:37,880
 approved.

1949
02:14:37,880 --> 02:14:44,600
 One, we did not move forward with respect to the criteria manual, so we're still working

1950
02:14:44,600 --> 02:14:46,380
 through that text.

1951
02:14:46,380 --> 02:14:51,560
 People will probably most likely come back to P&Z prior to going to council.

1952
02:14:51,560 --> 02:15:01,720
 The SUP that was voted down, I guess that was three meetings ago, two meetings ago,

1953
02:15:01,720 --> 02:15:03,160
 council considered that item last night.

1954
02:15:03,160 --> 02:15:07,240
 That's the reason the ADP was pulled off of the agenda.

1955
02:15:07,240 --> 02:15:13,320
 While the public hearing was held and closed, they postponed the vote until next week.

1956
02:15:13,320 --> 02:15:19,480
 There are a number of amendments to the motion to approve some of those, including funding

1957
02:15:19,480 --> 02:15:25,360
 a traffic signal, additional funds for parks, among others.

1958
02:15:25,360 --> 02:15:29,920
 So we're working through that final language of the ordinance.

1959
02:15:29,920 --> 02:15:35,480
 It was requested by the mayor that because there were so many changes, he didn't feel

1960
02:15:35,480 --> 02:15:42,440
 comfortable moving it forward without seeing it written, and that was essentially his reason

1961
02:15:42,440 --> 02:15:45,960
 for making the motion to postpone, which ultimately was approved 5-2.

1962
02:15:45,960 --> 02:15:49,680
 So I'll have an update at the next meeting as to the status of that.

1963
02:15:49,680 --> 02:15:52,600
 With that, I'll be happy to answer any additional questions.

1964
02:15:52,600 --> 02:15:53,600
 Thanks, Richard.

1965
02:15:53,600 --> 02:15:54,600
 Commissioner Ellis.

1966
02:15:54,600 --> 02:15:55,600
 Thank you, Chair.

1967
02:15:55,600 --> 02:15:57,320
 Richard, I did have a question.

1968
02:15:57,320 --> 02:16:02,040
 You said the amendment that was pulled, was that the handbook consolidation?

1969
02:16:02,040 --> 02:16:03,040
 Correct.

1970
02:16:03,040 --> 02:16:05,280
 It was the handbook, the ESA criteria.

1971
02:16:05,280 --> 02:16:09,200
 I think there's just some language that we want to make sure legal is comfortable with

1972
02:16:09,200 --> 02:16:11,760
 and the various departments that are associated with it.

1973
02:16:11,760 --> 02:16:13,680
 So you're going to bring that back?

1974
02:16:13,680 --> 02:16:14,680
 Correct.

1975
02:16:14,680 --> 02:16:15,680
 Yes.

1976
02:16:15,680 --> 02:16:16,680
 Okay.

1977
02:16:16,680 --> 02:16:17,680
 Thanks.

1978
02:16:17,680 --> 02:16:18,680
 Commissioner Beck.

1979
02:16:18,680 --> 02:16:19,680
 Thank you, Chair.

1980
02:16:19,680 --> 02:16:20,680
 It's almost the exact same question.

1981
02:16:20,680 --> 02:16:21,680
 Were there particular concerns?

1982
02:16:21,680 --> 02:16:23,880
 I haven't watched the video of yesterday.

1983
02:16:23,880 --> 02:16:30,080
 Were there particular concerns that Council had about consolidating the...

1984
02:16:30,080 --> 02:16:31,680
 That item did not move forward.

1985
02:16:31,680 --> 02:16:33,120
 We pulled it prior to going to Council.

1986
02:16:33,120 --> 02:16:34,280
 Just completely pulled it.

1987
02:16:34,280 --> 02:16:35,280
 Okay.

1988
02:16:35,280 --> 02:16:36,280
 Thank you.

1989
02:16:36,280 --> 02:16:40,920
 Any other items for the matrix?

1990
02:16:40,920 --> 02:16:43,400
 I will close the meeting at 7 40. Thank you