1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:10,080
 >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the planning and zoning commission meeting.

2
00:00:10,080 --> 00:00:13,680
 This is the work session for Wednesday, May 6, 2020.

3
00:00:13,680 --> 00:00:17,080
 Seeing that we do have a quorum, I will call this meeting to order at 536.

4
00:00:17,080 --> 00:00:23,320
 I'll let the record show that Commissioner Cole is not present at the start of the meeting.

5
00:00:23,320 --> 00:00:29,600
 The first item on our work session is to consider citizens' comment on consent agenda items.

6
00:00:29,600 --> 00:00:31,600
 There is none to consider.

7
00:00:31,600 --> 00:00:36,440
 So that moves us right into clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for the meeting.

8
00:00:36,440 --> 00:00:41,400
 So that brings us to item 1, the approval of the April 8th meetings.

9
00:00:41,400 --> 00:00:46,160
 Is there any adjustments that need to be made or comments on the April 8th meeting?

10
00:00:46,160 --> 00:00:48,680
 Minutes.

11
00:00:48,680 --> 00:00:50,320
 Seeing none, we'll move on from there.

12
00:00:50,320 --> 00:00:53,320
 We'll take the vote again in the public session.

13
00:00:53,320 --> 00:00:56,120
 The second item for business is the consent agenda.

14
00:00:56,120 --> 00:00:57,280
 We have three items.

15
00:00:57,280 --> 00:01:01,680
 Does any commissioners need any of those polled for individual consideration?

16
00:01:01,680 --> 00:01:03,640
 Commissioner Beck.

17
00:01:03,640 --> 00:01:10,760
 >> Yeah, sorry, I should have raised my hand.

18
00:01:10,760 --> 00:01:17,160
 Are we still going to have the standard discussion of these items?

19
00:01:17,160 --> 00:01:18,160
 Or not?

20
00:01:18,160 --> 00:01:19,960
 >> Well, what we can do is --

21
00:01:19,960 --> 00:01:20,960
 >> Go ahead.

22
00:01:20,960 --> 00:01:26,360
 >> Well, we can certainly, if you want to have any presentation on item, have that presentation.

23
00:01:26,360 --> 00:01:29,680
 But we can also poll one if you want a separate vote.

24
00:01:29,680 --> 00:01:40,480
 So I'll consider either or, or both if needed.

25
00:01:40,480 --> 00:01:46,040
 >> When we have presentations from staff, I'd like to just maybe ask some clarifying

26
00:01:46,040 --> 00:01:48,240
 questions about 2C.

27
00:01:48,240 --> 00:01:53,160
 Otherwise, I don't have any problems with A or B.

28
00:01:53,160 --> 00:01:58,760
 So I may or may not request that the appropriate time that to be polled for the regular meeting.

29
00:01:58,760 --> 00:01:59,760
 >> Okay.

30
00:01:59,760 --> 00:02:00,760
 Item 2C.

31
00:02:00,760 --> 00:02:01,760
 >> Yes.

32
00:02:01,760 --> 00:02:02,760
 >> FR19-0020.

33
00:02:02,760 --> 00:02:11,280
 Why don't we go ahead -- is Haley or someone available to speak on that item, and then

34
00:02:11,280 --> 00:02:15,560
 we can -- Commissioner Beck might be able to better ascertain if that needs to be polled?

35
00:02:15,560 --> 00:02:17,360
 >> Haley's pulling it up now.

36
00:02:17,360 --> 00:02:18,360
 >> Great.

37
00:02:18,360 --> 00:02:19,360
 Thank you.

38
00:02:19,360 --> 00:02:23,960
 >> As she's pulling it up, just if anyone saw the council meeting yesterday, they took

39
00:02:23,960 --> 00:02:26,000
 votes by roll call.

40
00:02:26,000 --> 00:02:29,240
 Last plan and zoning meeting we did virtually, we did show of hands.

41
00:02:29,240 --> 00:02:31,160
 I will be going through the roll call tonight.

42
00:02:31,160 --> 00:02:37,280
 So all votes, I will call you up by name to consider those votes.

43
00:02:37,280 --> 00:02:43,880
 Haley, whenever you're ready or whoever's speaking, you have the floor.

44
00:02:43,880 --> 00:02:45,040
 >> All right.

45
00:02:45,040 --> 00:02:48,680
 This is an amendment to an already approved replant.

46
00:02:48,680 --> 00:02:52,520
 So the plat was approved last year, I believe, in 2019.

47
00:02:52,520 --> 00:02:59,080
 It is a replant of three -- the original replant subdivided one lot into three lots for future

48
00:02:59,080 --> 00:03:01,040
 commercial development.

49
00:03:01,040 --> 00:03:06,000
 There was a note on that plat that referenced that all of the trees on lot 6R2 would be

50
00:03:06,000 --> 00:03:07,560
 preserved.

51
00:03:07,560 --> 00:03:09,080
 That note was in error.

52
00:03:09,080 --> 00:03:13,400
 And so after noticing that error before filing the plat, the applicant has requested this

53
00:03:13,400 --> 00:03:17,960
 amendment be approved to reword that note to correctly indicate that all of the trees

54
00:03:17,960 --> 00:03:21,600
 on that lot can be removed in accordance with the code.

55
00:03:21,600 --> 00:03:25,720
 >> Commissioner Bec, do you have any questions for Haley?

56
00:03:25,720 --> 00:03:26,720
 >> Yeah.

57
00:03:26,720 --> 00:03:28,600
 So that was the one.

58
00:03:28,600 --> 00:03:29,600
 And she addressed that one.

59
00:03:29,600 --> 00:03:34,720
 And the other is -- and I'm just forgetting what was told to us before, and I apologize

60
00:03:34,720 --> 00:03:36,080
 to staff for that.

61
00:03:36,080 --> 00:03:41,680
 But I was concerned about the traffic flowing in and out of the back of the school and there

62
00:03:41,680 --> 00:03:50,320
 out of the fire station, and the traffic reports and the fire people in particular are completely

63
00:03:50,320 --> 00:04:02,380
 copacetic with building right up onto that road.

64
00:04:02,380 --> 00:04:08,140
 >> My understanding from being out at that site near the library and fire station is

65
00:04:08,140 --> 00:04:10,180
 there is some cross-connectivity there.

66
00:04:10,180 --> 00:04:17,360
 This site, I believe, has an additional driveway on Teasley and also has a driveway connection

67
00:04:17,360 --> 00:04:19,380
 to Teasley to the north as well.

68
00:04:19,380 --> 00:04:22,520
 So traffic flow with this replant is not changing.

69
00:04:22,520 --> 00:04:25,520
 Those points of access are staying the same.

70
00:04:25,520 --> 00:04:29,640
 And the lot closest to the fire station that you see is lot 6R3 is currently a detention

71
00:04:29,640 --> 00:04:33,240
 facility that's maintained by the Business Owners Association.

72
00:04:33,240 --> 00:04:37,560
 So it's not likely that that lot will be developed with any sort of building in the near future

73
00:04:37,560 --> 00:04:43,720
 as that detention would have to be put underground to do so.

74
00:04:43,720 --> 00:04:44,720
 >> Okay.

75
00:04:44,720 --> 00:04:45,720
 Thank you.

76
00:04:45,720 --> 00:04:46,720
 That was my biggest concern.

77
00:04:46,720 --> 00:04:48,320
 Chair, I won't need to have that pulled.

78
00:04:48,320 --> 00:04:49,320
 Thank you.

79
00:04:49,320 --> 00:04:51,080
 >> Absolutely, Commissioner Beck.

80
00:04:51,080 --> 00:04:59,900
 Is there any other questions for the consent agenda items to A, B, and C?

81
00:04:59,900 --> 00:05:02,920
 Before we move to the next item, I'll let the record show that Commissioner Cole has

82
00:05:02,920 --> 00:05:03,920
 joined us.

83
00:05:03,920 --> 00:05:06,400
 Welcome, Commissioner Cole.

84
00:05:06,400 --> 00:05:13,760
 This item for business is item 3A, ZCP20-0002.

85
00:05:13,760 --> 00:05:16,720
 This item is for individual consideration.

86
00:05:16,720 --> 00:05:24,280
 And Haley, this is your item for presentation.

87
00:05:24,280 --> 00:05:35,080
 >> All right.

88
00:05:35,080 --> 00:05:37,120
 This is case ZCP20-2.

89
00:05:37,120 --> 00:05:41,200
 It's the site plan for the residences at Razor Ranch.

90
00:05:41,200 --> 00:05:45,720
 The request is for approval of a site plan for single-family detached and townhome uses.

91
00:05:45,720 --> 00:05:48,720
 The site is approximately 40 acres.

92
00:05:48,720 --> 00:05:50,080
 It's outlined in yellow on the map.

93
00:05:50,080 --> 00:05:55,460
 As you can see, it's located just north of the Razor Ranch Marketplace development.

94
00:05:55,460 --> 00:06:00,120
 It's important to note that this is a little odd that we're seeing a site plan for residential

95
00:06:00,120 --> 00:06:01,120
 development.

96
00:06:01,120 --> 00:06:03,800
 This is unique to the Razor Ranch Overlay District.

97
00:06:03,800 --> 00:06:07,200
 The preliminary plat has been approved for this entire 40 acres.

98
00:06:07,200 --> 00:06:13,120
 And the final plat for phase 1 has been approved by this commission as well.

99
00:06:13,120 --> 00:06:15,840
 So a little bit of background on this.

100
00:06:15,840 --> 00:06:19,920
 This site plan is further unique because the marketplace was the first part of the Razor

101
00:06:19,920 --> 00:06:20,920
 Ranch development.

102
00:06:20,920 --> 00:06:27,560
 So this actually ties back to ordinances from 2008 and 2009 for the site plan approval procedures.

103
00:06:27,560 --> 00:06:31,860
 So similar to what you've seen before, but slightly different in that building elevations

104
00:06:31,860 --> 00:06:34,160
 were not a requirement of that ordinance.

105
00:06:34,160 --> 00:06:38,000
 Some samples have been provided here to give you an idea of what the homes would look like,

106
00:06:38,000 --> 00:06:44,600
 but those are not part of the approval criteria, just the site plan and landscape plan.

107
00:06:44,600 --> 00:06:49,380
 The criteria for approval in the 2008 and 2009 ordinances are substantially the same

108
00:06:49,380 --> 00:06:51,880
 as what you've seen for other Razor Ranch site plans.

109
00:06:51,880 --> 00:06:56,260
 So it requires compliance with the concept plan, whether there's a compatible arrangement

110
00:06:56,260 --> 00:07:00,440
 of buildings that would not adversely affect adjoining properties, whether the plan provides

111
00:07:00,440 --> 00:07:04,680
 for adequate and safe vehicular circulation, and rather it complies with all other sections

112
00:07:04,680 --> 00:07:07,600
 of the overlay.

113
00:07:07,600 --> 00:07:11,560
 So just to give you a little bit of background on this site, it does have split zoning.

114
00:07:11,560 --> 00:07:15,280
 The Razor Ranch overlay, again, references back to the 2002 zoning district.

115
00:07:15,280 --> 00:07:19,640
 So that is a split of neighborhood residential 3 on the north and neighborhood residential

116
00:07:19,640 --> 00:07:23,880
 mixed use 12 on the south.

117
00:07:23,880 --> 00:07:27,720
 This has been designated as a residential sub area of the marketplace since the beginning

118
00:07:27,720 --> 00:07:31,960
 of Razor Ranch, and it permits a single family and townhome uses, which is what's proposed

119
00:07:31,960 --> 00:07:34,380
 with this site plan.

120
00:07:34,380 --> 00:07:39,080
 This particular site is subject to the architectural and landscape standards from exhibit C4 of

121
00:07:39,080 --> 00:07:43,640
 the overlay district, which was approved through ordinance in 2018.

122
00:07:43,640 --> 00:07:48,440
 If any of you recall that, you may recall that as part of that approval, the applicant

123
00:07:48,440 --> 00:07:53,080
 at the time volunteered that this northern part of the NRMU 12 portion of the site would

124
00:07:53,080 --> 00:07:57,640
 be developed in accordance with NR3 to provide a single family buffer to the existing neighborhood.

125
00:07:57,640 --> 00:08:04,200
 It further limited the development to 70 single family homes and 230 townhomes, plus an amenity

126
00:08:04,200 --> 00:08:05,640
 center.

127
00:08:05,640 --> 00:08:09,960
 The developer at this time has not quite finalized their plans for the amenity center.

128
00:08:09,960 --> 00:08:13,240
 So that will be coming back before you as a separate site plan in the future once they

129
00:08:13,240 --> 00:08:17,920
 have those plans firmed up a little bit further.

130
00:08:17,920 --> 00:08:22,640
 I wanted to show you the 2008 concept plan that this is required to comply with.

131
00:08:22,640 --> 00:08:26,980
 So this plan, it may be hard to see, but I've outlined in red the property that we're looking

132
00:08:26,980 --> 00:08:27,980
 at.

133
00:08:27,980 --> 00:08:33,360
 It reflects a mixture of townhomes and single family detached uses, you may see a substantial

134
00:08:33,360 --> 00:08:34,960
 portion of open space on that.

135
00:08:34,960 --> 00:08:39,860
 At the time, it allowed for two gas well drilling and production sites to be on this property.

136
00:08:39,860 --> 00:08:44,280
 Those were later removed from the razor range overlay once that site on the south side of

137
00:08:44,280 --> 00:08:46,840
 the campus went into place.

138
00:08:46,840 --> 00:08:49,440
 So that opened up more of this property for residential use.

139
00:08:49,440 --> 00:08:52,960
 And since this time, the ordinances have just shown this as being a single family and townhome

140
00:08:52,960 --> 00:08:55,520
 area.

141
00:08:55,520 --> 00:08:58,520
 So this is a look at the site plan that they've proposed.

142
00:08:58,520 --> 00:09:02,680
 It substantially complies with the preliminary plan and the final plan for phase one that

143
00:09:02,680 --> 00:09:05,000
 the same lot and street configuration.

144
00:09:05,000 --> 00:09:08,360
 This reflects 65 single family homes.

145
00:09:08,360 --> 00:09:13,440
 Those again are within the NR3 area and then within this portion of the NRMU 12 that they

146
00:09:13,440 --> 00:09:18,320
 offered to develop as a buffer between the townhomes and the existing neighborhood.

147
00:09:18,320 --> 00:09:22,720
 There are 215 townhome lots reflected on the south part of the property.

148
00:09:22,720 --> 00:09:26,800
 All of these streets and alleys that are shown within the townhome area would be privately

149
00:09:26,800 --> 00:09:28,100
 maintained.

150
00:09:28,100 --> 00:09:32,640
 The larger streets that you see going through the single family portion would be public

151
00:09:32,640 --> 00:09:36,880
 streets.

152
00:09:36,880 --> 00:09:39,840
 This is a look at their landscape plan that they're proposing.

153
00:09:39,840 --> 00:09:45,160
 It meets the street tree requirements with over 200 street trees shown on the plan.

154
00:09:45,160 --> 00:09:50,840
 The single family lots will maintain 50% landscape area on each individual lot that will be looked

155
00:09:50,840 --> 00:09:54,640
 at individually as those permits come in for those homes, but they've demonstrated that

156
00:09:54,640 --> 00:09:56,960
 they can comply with that.

157
00:09:56,960 --> 00:10:01,520
 And then the NRMU 12 portion averages the open space as is allowed by the ordinance

158
00:10:01,520 --> 00:10:07,800
 and will have a 45% open space across the townhome areas.

159
00:10:07,800 --> 00:10:10,720
 This is a look at the intended townhome elevations.

160
00:10:10,720 --> 00:10:14,520
 So they're consistent with what we see in Razor Ranch in terms of neutral color palette,

161
00:10:14,520 --> 00:10:17,680
 stucco and masonry materials.

162
00:10:17,680 --> 00:10:21,560
 And then this is samples that were provided of the type of single family detached homes

163
00:10:21,560 --> 00:10:25,560
 that are intended to be developed on the north side.

164
00:10:25,560 --> 00:10:31,480
 And staff is recommending approval of this request as it meets the established criteria.

165
00:10:31,480 --> 00:10:35,520
 And I will minimize this so that you can see if there are any questions.

166
00:10:35,520 --> 00:10:37,080
 - Commissioner Smith.

167
00:10:37,080 --> 00:10:39,160
 - Thank you, Chair.

168
00:10:39,160 --> 00:10:44,840
 Haley, is that property is going to link into that detention pond that's just to the south,

169
00:10:44,840 --> 00:10:45,840
 correct?

170
00:10:45,840 --> 00:10:46,840
 - Correct.

171
00:10:46,840 --> 00:10:49,560
 The drainage into that pond actually flows from the neighborhood to the north through

172
00:10:49,560 --> 00:10:51,320
 this property and into that pond.

173
00:10:51,320 --> 00:10:55,480
 So as part of the phase two that hasn't been final plotted yet, they will go through the

174
00:10:55,480 --> 00:10:59,600
 civil engineering process to make sure that the drainage appropriately goes through this

175
00:10:59,600 --> 00:11:03,960
 site and to that pond to maintain the functionality of those bioretention ponds.

176
00:11:03,960 --> 00:11:04,960
 - Okay.

177
00:11:04,960 --> 00:11:05,960
 Got it.

178
00:11:05,960 --> 00:11:06,960
 Thank you.

179
00:11:06,960 --> 00:11:07,960
 Commissioner Anderson.

180
00:11:07,960 --> 00:11:08,960
 - Thank you, Chair.

181
00:11:08,960 --> 00:11:09,960
 Quick question, Haley.

182
00:11:09,960 --> 00:11:15,240
 The neighborhood, the townhomes that are gonna be private roads, are they gonna be gated?

183
00:11:15,240 --> 00:11:20,160
 - No, the only gate within the development will be on the south side where the driveway

184
00:11:20,160 --> 00:11:26,200
 connects into the marketplace commercial development that will be gated to control commercial access

185
00:11:26,200 --> 00:11:27,680
 through the property.

186
00:11:27,680 --> 00:11:29,400
 Otherwise it won't be gated.

187
00:11:29,400 --> 00:11:33,840
 But the way it's plotted, those alleyways are not dedicated to the city, they're to

188
00:11:33,840 --> 00:11:34,840
 the HOA.

189
00:11:34,840 --> 00:11:35,840
 - Thank you.

190
00:11:35,840 --> 00:11:36,840
 - Commissioner Beck.

191
00:11:36,840 --> 00:11:37,840
 - Yeah.

192
00:11:37,840 --> 00:11:45,000
 Haley, can I get you to pull up the map again and then show me where the connection is?

193
00:11:45,000 --> 00:11:48,760
 Is it next to the Walmart?

194
00:11:48,760 --> 00:11:50,760
 - Yes.

195
00:11:50,760 --> 00:11:53,640
 - And that's gonna be gated?

196
00:11:53,640 --> 00:11:57,800
 - Yes, the connection is here on the south side.

197
00:11:57,800 --> 00:12:02,720
 This driveway has been stubbed out from the marketplace, so I believe this is Walmart

198
00:12:02,720 --> 00:12:05,800
 here and then Sam's.

199
00:12:05,800 --> 00:12:09,880
 And that will be a gated connection so that the residents could get through to go shopping,

200
00:12:09,880 --> 00:12:12,900
 but commercial traffic couldn't just freely flow into this development.

201
00:12:12,900 --> 00:12:16,400
 It would still be funneled out through the entrances in and out of the marketplace on

202
00:12:16,400 --> 00:12:18,920
 University and Bonnie Bray.

203
00:12:18,920 --> 00:12:24,120
 - And the Augusta stub on the west, looks like it's just gonna dead end in that connection

204
00:12:24,120 --> 00:12:26,880
 to the marketplace, right?

205
00:12:26,880 --> 00:12:31,200
 - Just this street?

206
00:12:31,200 --> 00:12:38,120
 - So they're gonna connect to the west to Augusta, but then it's gonna dead end in whatever

207
00:12:38,120 --> 00:12:40,720
 the road into the marketplace is called.

208
00:12:40,720 --> 00:12:43,080
 I can't read it on the map.

209
00:12:43,080 --> 00:12:46,620
 - Yes, so that street will, it meanders on purpose.

210
00:12:46,620 --> 00:12:50,080
 Our engineering department was concerned when they came in with their preliminary plat about

211
00:12:50,080 --> 00:12:52,000
 this becoming just a straight shot.

212
00:12:52,000 --> 00:12:53,880
 - Exactly, yes.

213
00:12:53,880 --> 00:12:55,160
 - The frontage road to Bonnie Bray.

214
00:12:55,160 --> 00:12:59,080
 So they intentionally meandered that so that people would have two options.

215
00:12:59,080 --> 00:13:03,360
 They could either come here and turn or they could turn here and make the loop and go through

216
00:13:03,360 --> 00:13:04,760
 to help slow traffic.

217
00:13:04,760 --> 00:13:06,120
 - Okay.

218
00:13:06,120 --> 00:13:07,120
 Those are my questions.

219
00:13:07,120 --> 00:13:09,840
 Thank you, Haley.

220
00:13:09,840 --> 00:13:12,120
 Any other questions for Haley?

221
00:13:12,120 --> 00:13:16,120
 Haley, I do not see any.

222
00:13:16,120 --> 00:13:20,160
 Thank you very much for the presentation.

223
00:13:20,160 --> 00:13:22,720
 That brings us to our public hearings.

224
00:13:22,720 --> 00:13:28,240
 Item 4A has been requested for postponement to a date uncertain.

225
00:13:28,240 --> 00:13:31,600
 Richard, do we need to take a vote to postpone this?

226
00:13:31,600 --> 00:13:32,600
 Okay.

227
00:13:32,600 --> 00:13:36,080
 Christian or Bec, did you have something on item 4A?

228
00:13:36,080 --> 00:13:37,080
 - Yes, I did.

229
00:13:37,080 --> 00:13:39,160
 I just had a clarification.

230
00:13:39,160 --> 00:13:46,160
 So what are the ramifications of postponement to a date uncertain versus the shot clock?

231
00:13:46,160 --> 00:13:48,400
 I'm just not clear on that.

232
00:13:48,400 --> 00:13:52,680
 - Richard, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but the shot clock would apply to platting

233
00:13:52,680 --> 00:13:54,680
 not to zoning changes.

234
00:13:54,680 --> 00:14:00,960
 So this just provides an indefinite time for the applicant to come back with the presentation.

235
00:14:00,960 --> 00:14:01,960
 Correct, Richard?

236
00:14:01,960 --> 00:14:05,640
 - I can't hear you, you're muted.

237
00:14:05,640 --> 00:14:06,640
 - He's muted.

238
00:14:06,640 --> 00:14:07,640
 He doesn't know.

239
00:14:07,640 --> 00:14:08,640
 There we go.

240
00:14:08,640 --> 00:14:17,080
 - It's two mice in front of me, and I grabbed two mouses.

241
00:14:17,080 --> 00:14:21,240
 It only relates to plats, and with respect to the postponement, yes, we would need a

242
00:14:21,240 --> 00:14:22,240
 vote.

243
00:14:22,240 --> 00:14:23,240
 Sorry about that.

244
00:14:23,240 --> 00:14:24,240
 - Okay.

245
00:14:24,240 --> 00:14:25,240
 Great.

246
00:14:25,240 --> 00:14:29,000
 Are they planning on reposting this?

247
00:14:29,000 --> 00:14:33,400
 Do we want to open it and take a vote, or are we reposting this entirely?

248
00:14:33,400 --> 00:14:35,760
 - We'll have to repost it entirely.

249
00:14:35,760 --> 00:14:36,760
 - Okay.

250
00:14:36,760 --> 00:14:39,440
 Let's see if I can take a motion without opening it.

251
00:14:39,440 --> 00:14:41,840
 The chair will understand a motion to postpone this to a date uncertain.

252
00:14:41,840 --> 00:14:44,840
 - I make that motion.

253
00:14:44,840 --> 00:14:49,920
 - Christopher, I make the motion to postpone.

254
00:14:49,920 --> 00:14:50,920
 - To a date uncertain.

255
00:14:50,920 --> 00:14:51,920
 - To a date uncertain.

256
00:14:51,920 --> 00:14:52,920
 Thank you.

257
00:14:52,920 --> 00:14:53,920
 Anyone second the motion?

258
00:14:53,920 --> 00:14:54,920
 - Why are we doing this in work session?

259
00:14:54,920 --> 00:14:55,920
 Why are we voting on this?

260
00:14:55,920 --> 00:14:56,920
 - Oh, yeah.

261
00:14:56,920 --> 00:14:57,920
 Why am I doing this in work session?

262
00:14:57,920 --> 00:14:58,920
 - I don't know.

263
00:14:58,920 --> 00:15:00,920
 Me and Margie both looked really confused for a second.

264
00:15:00,920 --> 00:15:03,920
 - And I was confused that y'all were confused, because I was like, "Why are we doing this

265
00:15:03,920 --> 00:15:04,920
 in work session?"

266
00:15:04,920 --> 00:15:07,640
 - I was confused that y'all were confused, because I was doing this.

267
00:15:07,640 --> 00:15:09,680
 We're not even going to worry about that.

268
00:15:09,680 --> 00:15:11,160
 We're just going to get all done right now.

269
00:15:11,160 --> 00:15:13,480
 Commissioner Smith, thank you for keeping me on task.

270
00:15:13,480 --> 00:15:14,480
 - You're welcome.

271
00:15:14,480 --> 00:15:17,000
 - If I had Richard next to me, it would have been helpful.

272
00:15:17,000 --> 00:15:18,600
 He's in another room.

273
00:15:18,600 --> 00:15:19,600
 Okay.

274
00:15:19,600 --> 00:15:21,560
 So we'll move on from 4A.

275
00:15:21,560 --> 00:15:23,120
 We'll take a vote in public session.

276
00:15:23,120 --> 00:15:24,480
 Sorry about that.

277
00:15:24,480 --> 00:15:31,280
 Item 4B is PDA 20-0001, and the item is Julie Wyatt.

278
00:15:31,280 --> 00:15:33,560
 Is she here to present this item?

279
00:15:33,560 --> 00:15:34,560
 - She's ready to go.

280
00:15:34,560 --> 00:15:39,560
 - Perfect.

281
00:15:39,560 --> 00:15:48,960
 - Sorry, I was muted.

282
00:15:48,960 --> 00:15:49,960
 Good evening.

283
00:15:49,960 --> 00:15:51,520
 I'm pulling up my presentation now.

284
00:15:51,520 --> 00:15:54,960
 - Evening, Julie.

285
00:15:54,960 --> 00:15:58,400
 - All right.

286
00:15:58,400 --> 00:16:04,280
 So I'm Julie Wyatt, and I'm presenting PDA 21 Stonehill Center to you.

287
00:16:04,280 --> 00:16:08,200
 The request is for a detailed plan amendment for PD 142.

288
00:16:08,200 --> 00:16:10,600
 It's also known as Stonehill Center.

289
00:16:10,600 --> 00:16:15,040
 The purpose of the request is to add a 30,000 square foot building to accommodate a single

290
00:16:15,040 --> 00:16:19,120
 tenant workforce solutions of North Texas.

291
00:16:19,120 --> 00:16:20,720
 The property is outlined in yellow.

292
00:16:20,720 --> 00:16:23,440
 It's a 19.6 acre site.

293
00:16:23,440 --> 00:16:31,720
 It's located at the corner of I-35 and West Gate on the east side of I-35.

294
00:16:31,720 --> 00:16:34,180
 Just a little bit of background on this type of PD.

295
00:16:34,180 --> 00:16:36,280
 This is one of our legacy PDs.

296
00:16:36,280 --> 00:16:41,200
 It was in existence prior to the 2002 code being adopted.

297
00:16:41,200 --> 00:16:45,960
 And there was an ordinance that was approved last fall that said those valid PDs that were

298
00:16:45,960 --> 00:16:50,600
 in existence prior to the 2019 DDC, they would follow the regulations that were in place

299
00:16:50,600 --> 00:16:52,200
 when they were adopted.

300
00:16:52,200 --> 00:16:55,520
 So this follows the 91 code.

301
00:16:55,520 --> 00:17:01,360
 And if you recall from previous submittals for others of these types of PDs, it's a

302
00:17:01,360 --> 00:17:02,360
 two-step process.

303
00:17:02,360 --> 00:17:08,480
 First, we have the general concept plan that establishes the use, the property boundaries,

304
00:17:08,480 --> 00:17:13,820
 maybe the approximate locations of those uses, street locations, and then development standards.

305
00:17:13,820 --> 00:17:16,800
 That's kind of the zoning of the property, and that stays in place.

306
00:17:16,800 --> 00:17:19,400
 The second step is that detail plan.

307
00:17:19,400 --> 00:17:24,080
 And this is for specific sites and for specific developments.

308
00:17:24,080 --> 00:17:26,400
 It's very akin to a site plan.

309
00:17:26,400 --> 00:17:29,920
 It provides all those details associated with development.

310
00:17:29,920 --> 00:17:35,880
 If construction did not commence within 24 months, then the detail plan would expire.

311
00:17:35,880 --> 00:17:39,680
 So specifically for PD 142, it was established in 1991.

312
00:17:39,680 --> 00:17:43,480
 It was a total of 245 acres.

313
00:17:43,480 --> 00:17:46,960
 And that was when the concept plan was approved, and it included things like the permitted

314
00:17:46,960 --> 00:17:48,640
 uses and the development standards.

315
00:17:48,640 --> 00:17:51,000
 So that was that step one.

316
00:17:51,000 --> 00:17:54,840
 The subject property, that Stonehill Center, is outlined in black, so you can kind of see

317
00:17:54,840 --> 00:17:59,320
 it sort of nested in the center of PD 142.

318
00:17:59,320 --> 00:18:04,660
 The first detail plan for this PD was approved in 1992.

319
00:18:04,660 --> 00:18:06,840
 It depicted four buildings.

320
00:18:06,840 --> 00:18:08,360
 They were multi-tenant retail buildings.

321
00:18:08,360 --> 00:18:12,920
 They were arranged in a horseshoe pattern around 806 parking spaces.

322
00:18:12,920 --> 00:18:18,440
 So this was the step two in the two-step process, so the first step two.

323
00:18:18,440 --> 00:18:25,040
 There were modifications over the next year or so, and it resulted in this plan from 1993,

324
00:18:25,040 --> 00:18:27,780
 which depicts five buildings.

325
00:18:27,780 --> 00:18:31,800
 The buildings two through five, their numbers are in green.

326
00:18:31,800 --> 00:18:35,040
 Those have been built, so those are existing.

327
00:18:35,040 --> 00:18:42,160
 Building one was never constructed, and so therefore the approval expired.

328
00:18:42,160 --> 00:18:48,280
 So the current proposal really is to introduce that building one back into the plan.

329
00:18:48,280 --> 00:18:52,040
 It would complement that existing four commercial buildings.

330
00:18:52,040 --> 00:18:58,120
 Those existing buildings range in size from about 26,000 square feet to 47,000 square

331
00:18:58,120 --> 00:18:59,120
 feet.

332
00:18:59,120 --> 00:19:03,480
 Currently there are 945 parking spaces on site and three access points, one that connects

333
00:19:03,480 --> 00:19:09,560
 to Westgate, one that connects to the I-35 frontage road, and then a connection to the

334
00:19:09,560 --> 00:19:14,660
 adjacent commercial lot, which connects then through Loop 288.

335
00:19:14,660 --> 00:19:19,680
 As I said, they're proposing this 30,000 square foot building there in yellow.

336
00:19:19,680 --> 00:19:22,880
 With landscaping, the access would remain unchanged.

337
00:19:22,880 --> 00:19:28,880
 We'll zoom in a little bit to that site so you could take a look at some of the details.

338
00:19:28,880 --> 00:19:32,680
 First of all, if you look at that inset aerial, you can see where they're proposing the building

339
00:19:32,680 --> 00:19:34,260
 has parking spaces on it.

340
00:19:34,260 --> 00:19:43,060
 So if approved, this would result in a reduction of parking, but it would maintain a parking

341
00:19:43,060 --> 00:19:49,120
 ratio of about one space for every 206 square feet of gross floor area.

342
00:19:49,120 --> 00:19:56,880
 The area between the building and the right-of-way would have about 17,800 square feet of landscaping.

343
00:19:56,880 --> 00:20:02,720
 They would plant 16 large and medium canopy trees, which would result in a canopy increase

344
00:20:02,720 --> 00:20:08,440
 for the site at maturity of about 16,802 square feet.

345
00:20:08,440 --> 00:20:15,400
 The parking area that they would like to add in nibbles in a bit to the existing landscaping,

346
00:20:15,400 --> 00:20:21,040
 so they would replace that screening hedge, and it's in that squiggly red line there.

347
00:20:21,040 --> 00:20:24,400
 And then the vehicular circulation pattern would remain unchanged.

348
00:20:24,400 --> 00:20:31,000
 It would follow that existing pattern of the drive aisles being determined by those landscape

349
00:20:31,000 --> 00:20:36,280
 islands and landscape medians.

350
00:20:36,280 --> 00:20:40,760
 They are proposing architectural elements that are consistent with what is on site.

351
00:20:40,760 --> 00:20:46,920
 So the top two pictures are their renderings, and then the bottom two pictures are what

352
00:20:46,920 --> 00:20:47,920
 is existing.

353
00:20:47,920 --> 00:20:51,620
 So you can see they're bothering a lot of the themes of what the existing development

354
00:20:51,620 --> 00:20:53,000
 has.

355
00:20:53,000 --> 00:20:59,160
 As I stated, we do follow that 1991 ordinance.

356
00:20:59,160 --> 00:21:07,200
 Section 35-52 laid out the criteria for approval within the '91 ordinance, and we'll go over

357
00:21:07,200 --> 00:21:09,240
 these individually.

358
00:21:09,240 --> 00:21:13,000
 So first, does the proposal comply with the concept plan?

359
00:21:13,000 --> 00:21:18,720
 The purpose of PD 142 was to create an urban center with commercial, retail, office, light

360
00:21:18,720 --> 00:21:24,480
 industrial-type uses to serve as a hub for economic activity employment there at the

361
00:21:24,480 --> 00:21:28,460
 intersection of Loop 288 and I-35.

362
00:21:28,460 --> 00:21:32,140
 Previous detail plans didn't really specify a use.

363
00:21:32,140 --> 00:21:36,560
 They were more limited to spatial elements, like building arrangement, where the parking

364
00:21:36,560 --> 00:21:41,120
 areas would be, what kind of signage, and then that landscaping.

365
00:21:41,120 --> 00:21:43,040
 Just how the PD functions.

366
00:21:43,040 --> 00:21:49,000
 When a particular tenant would like to move in to one of these buildings and seeks a certificate

367
00:21:49,000 --> 00:21:53,880
 of occupancy within the PD, we refer to the listing of permitted uses in that concept

368
00:21:53,880 --> 00:21:57,040
 plan for guidance.

369
00:21:57,040 --> 00:22:00,720
 But we have looked at the uses that the applicant is proposing.

370
00:22:00,720 --> 00:22:07,560
 Their proposed use is offices in a public community center, and those uses are permitted,

371
00:22:07,560 --> 00:22:10,800
 as well as the proposal meets the dimensional requirements.

372
00:22:10,800 --> 00:22:17,520
 So the proposal does comply with that concept plan and meets the first criterion.

373
00:22:17,520 --> 00:22:23,460
 The second criterion for approval is, does it provide a compatible arrangement of buildings

374
00:22:23,460 --> 00:22:27,800
 and uses, and does it adversely affect the adjoining properties outside the plan?

375
00:22:27,800 --> 00:22:30,820
 So we're going to take both of these elements separately.

376
00:22:30,820 --> 00:22:35,880
 So first, inside the development, the arrangement of the buildings, the proposed building is

377
00:22:35,880 --> 00:22:40,480
 consistent with those general building scales, architectural themes, and that established

378
00:22:40,480 --> 00:22:43,040
 footprint pattern.

379
00:22:43,040 --> 00:22:48,880
 Essentially it completes that unified development that was established with that original plan.

380
00:22:48,880 --> 00:22:55,400
 The proposed use is consistent with the types of uses that are already on site at the Stone

381
00:22:55,400 --> 00:22:56,680
 Hill Center.

382
00:22:56,680 --> 00:23:02,560
 The daily activities as typically associated with an office create minimal nuisances like

383
00:23:02,560 --> 00:23:08,360
 noise or odor and also maintains the typical hours of operation that we see at Stone Hill

384
00:23:08,360 --> 00:23:09,360
 Center.

385
00:23:09,360 --> 00:23:16,000
 The applicant also provided the ITE trip generation rates for the proposed use, and it would generate

386
00:23:16,000 --> 00:23:23,640
 approximately 292 trips per 24-hour weekday with 44 morning peak and 43 evening peak,

387
00:23:23,640 --> 00:23:28,160
 once again consistent with what's on site.

388
00:23:28,160 --> 00:23:33,080
 And then we looked at what was outside the PD, kind of looked at how it affected those

389
00:23:33,080 --> 00:23:34,400
 surrounding properties.

390
00:23:34,400 --> 00:23:39,920
 So before we talk about those, I just want to call your attention to some mobility improvements

391
00:23:39,920 --> 00:23:42,120
 that are going to be going on in the area.

392
00:23:42,120 --> 00:23:47,840
 You could see on the map that there is a green hatched line.

393
00:23:47,840 --> 00:23:55,800
 Only West Gate comes off of the I-35 service road and then stops at the easternmost boundary

394
00:23:55,800 --> 00:23:57,280
 of the Stone Hill Center.

395
00:23:57,280 --> 00:24:02,520
 However, in the future, that will actually be extended and become the new Bronco way

396
00:24:02,520 --> 00:24:06,240
 to accommodate the future Denton High School as well as other developments.

397
00:24:06,240 --> 00:24:12,280
 So that piece will eventually be completed and connect the I-35 service road to Bonnie

398
00:24:12,280 --> 00:24:13,640
 Bray.

399
00:24:13,640 --> 00:24:16,320
 That being said, there are properties around there.

400
00:24:16,320 --> 00:24:20,080
 First of all, I want to talk about number one, that existing residential.

401
00:24:20,080 --> 00:24:24,720
 There is southeast of the subject property, an established neighborhood, it's a large

402
00:24:24,720 --> 00:24:33,040
 lot neighborhood, and their existing West Gate, so that north-south road within that

403
00:24:33,040 --> 00:24:38,720
 neighborhood will not connect to the future West Gate/Bronco way.

404
00:24:38,720 --> 00:24:44,120
 So there will not be any direct vehicular connection between the proposed development

405
00:24:44,120 --> 00:24:50,600
 and that single-family residential neighborhood, so we don't anticipate any adverse impacts.

406
00:24:50,600 --> 00:24:54,000
 There's quite a bit of physical separation.

407
00:24:54,000 --> 00:24:57,600
 Second, the future DHS site.

408
00:24:57,600 --> 00:25:01,760
 The commercial land uses that are proposed are generally compatible with high school campuses.

409
00:25:01,760 --> 00:25:04,840
 It also, once again, is physically separated.

410
00:25:04,840 --> 00:25:09,160
 There's a lot of space between the proposed use and the Denton High School.

411
00:25:09,160 --> 00:25:13,480
 And then third, that future residential north of the Denton High School.

412
00:25:13,480 --> 00:25:16,180
 You might remember it, it's the King's Ridge development.

413
00:25:16,180 --> 00:25:21,240
 It's proposed for 368 single-family uses, or dwellings.

414
00:25:21,240 --> 00:25:24,800
 Once again, it is physically separated from the subject property.

415
00:25:24,800 --> 00:25:29,040
 There's a vacant lot between there, so there's a good buffer and transition area, so we don't

416
00:25:29,040 --> 00:25:33,800
 anticipate any adverse impacts.

417
00:25:33,800 --> 00:25:40,120
 And so the subject request complies with criteria number two.

418
00:25:40,120 --> 00:25:44,480
 Number three, adequate safe circulation of vehicle vehicular traffic.

419
00:25:44,480 --> 00:25:47,520
 Once again, we're going to talk about onsite versus offsite.

420
00:25:47,520 --> 00:25:52,360
 Access to the site will remain unchanged, as I stated, as well as that existing vehicular

421
00:25:52,360 --> 00:25:55,440
 circulation pattern will remain unchanged.

422
00:25:55,440 --> 00:25:59,640
 The only real change regarding vehicular traffic onsite would be that decrease in the number

423
00:25:59,640 --> 00:26:01,640
 of onsite parking spaces.

424
00:26:01,640 --> 00:26:08,240
 However, the overall ratio will, as I said, be maintained at one space per 206 square

425
00:26:08,240 --> 00:26:14,400
 feet of building area, and that's really consistent with the minimum parking requirements we typically

426
00:26:14,400 --> 00:26:18,560
 see for more modern developments within the city of Denton.

427
00:26:18,560 --> 00:26:22,760
 So we don't anticipate any adverse impacts for that.

428
00:26:22,760 --> 00:26:29,200
 And then offsite, you can see that I've kind of showing where the highways are and where

429
00:26:29,200 --> 00:26:30,600
 those arterials are.

430
00:26:30,600 --> 00:26:37,120
 This is adjacent to I-35 and really, really close to the Loop 288 highway, so as well

431
00:26:37,120 --> 00:26:45,720
 as the future Bronco Way and Westgate, Bonnie Bray, and Highway 377.

432
00:26:45,720 --> 00:26:51,440
 So the surrounding arterial network provides adequate access for the existing and future

433
00:26:51,440 --> 00:26:53,520
 development.

434
00:26:53,520 --> 00:26:57,760
 And then criterion four, substantial compliance with the landscape sign subdivision and other

435
00:26:57,760 --> 00:26:59,460
 regulations of the city.

436
00:26:59,460 --> 00:27:04,120
 So with this request, they're not proposing any additional ground signs, and the property

437
00:27:04,120 --> 00:27:05,120
 is already subdivided.

438
00:27:05,120 --> 00:27:07,840
 So what we're really looking at is the landscape plan.

439
00:27:07,840 --> 00:27:12,760
 And this actually follows the 1988 landscape code, and it's pretty different than what

440
00:27:12,760 --> 00:27:13,760
 we have today.

441
00:27:13,760 --> 00:27:18,760
 There really were three elements to that landscape code, street yard landscaping, parking lot

442
00:27:18,760 --> 00:27:22,140
 landscaping, and then parking lot screening.

443
00:27:22,140 --> 00:27:25,400
 So first, we'll talk about the street yard landscaping.

444
00:27:25,400 --> 00:27:32,280
 I've kind of highlighted on the exhibit that you see on your screen.

445
00:27:32,280 --> 00:27:38,400
 It starts where the front building line begins, and then it goes to the right-of-way.

446
00:27:38,400 --> 00:27:43,760
 So that blue line, that blue hatch line, anything between that and that right-of-way toward

447
00:27:43,760 --> 00:27:45,840
 the west is that street yard.

448
00:27:45,840 --> 00:27:54,760
 The current request has within that 40,000 square feet, and the 1988 code required 20%

449
00:27:54,760 --> 00:28:00,880
 of that to be landscaped with one tree planted every 2,500 square feet of total street yard.

450
00:28:00,880 --> 00:28:06,740
 And the applicant is proposing that 17,800 square feet of landscaping plus 16 medium

451
00:28:06,740 --> 00:28:12,120
 and large canopy trees, and that exceeds or meets those minimum requirements.

452
00:28:12,120 --> 00:28:14,160
 It also had parking lot landscaping.

453
00:28:14,160 --> 00:28:20,640
 Within that street yard area, the parking lots had to have 5% of either landscape islands,

454
00:28:20,640 --> 00:28:21,640
 peninsulas, or medians.

455
00:28:21,640 --> 00:28:26,560
 Once again, the applicant is providing those in excess of that minimum requirement.

456
00:28:26,560 --> 00:28:32,520
 They're providing 2,900 square feet, about 2,900 square feet of the parking lot landscaping.

457
00:28:32,520 --> 00:28:40,020
 And then parking lot screening, that 54 dwarf Beaufort holly shrubs where the red squiggly

458
00:28:40,020 --> 00:28:44,680
 line is, that would be, would serve for that parking lot screening, and that does meet

459
00:28:44,680 --> 00:28:47,200
 the minimum requirements.

460
00:28:47,200 --> 00:28:51,960
 So the proposal complies with Criterion 4.

461
00:28:51,960 --> 00:28:58,320
 Public outreach was done, a newspaper notice, a newspaper website, there was a sign posted

462
00:28:58,320 --> 00:28:59,760
 on the property.

463
00:28:59,760 --> 00:29:04,600
 We have sent out 200 and 500 notices, mailing notices.

464
00:29:04,600 --> 00:29:08,960
 We haven't received any in return.

465
00:29:08,960 --> 00:29:13,520
 So staff does recommend approval of the detail plan.

466
00:29:13,520 --> 00:29:19,880
 The site plan and the landscape plan and then those sample building elevations will be incorporated

467
00:29:19,880 --> 00:29:20,880
 into the ordinance.

468
00:29:20,880 --> 00:29:24,120
 We wanted to lay out just what those were.

469
00:29:24,120 --> 00:29:29,880
 First of all, they're proposing that one single story, 30,000 square foot building, the maximum

470
00:29:29,880 --> 00:29:32,780
 parking on site of 828 spaces.

471
00:29:32,780 --> 00:29:37,640
 This is one change to your staff report that was in your backup.

472
00:29:37,640 --> 00:29:40,040
 They're actually proposing 10 large canopy trees.

473
00:29:40,040 --> 00:29:47,760
 I believe I typed in 12 in error, so it's actually 10 large canopy trees and six medium

474
00:29:47,760 --> 00:29:49,040
 canopy trees.

475
00:29:49,040 --> 00:29:52,700
 And then the architecture for all buildings, they haven't fully designed all of their buildings,

476
00:29:52,700 --> 00:29:56,880
 but we did want to capture what those architectural elements were so we make sure it's consistent

477
00:29:56,880 --> 00:29:59,040
 with what's existing out there.

478
00:29:59,040 --> 00:30:04,240
 And so the colonnade for a minimum of 50% of the facade facing the public areas, that

479
00:30:04,240 --> 00:30:09,600
 varied roof parapet line, and then the decorative towers on at least two corners.

480
00:30:09,600 --> 00:30:11,760
 We want to make sure that we capture those.

481
00:30:11,760 --> 00:30:20,040
 So I'm here for any questions, and the applicant should be here this evening as well.

482
00:30:20,040 --> 00:30:21,040
 Great.

483
00:30:21,040 --> 00:30:24,840
 Thank you very much, Julie.

484
00:30:24,840 --> 00:30:26,840
 Does anyone have any questions for Julie?

485
00:30:26,840 --> 00:30:31,960
 If you raise your hand, I can call you up.

486
00:30:31,960 --> 00:30:38,760
 The question I had, Julie, is just on a broader picture question, you said the PD was 142

487
00:30:38,760 --> 00:30:41,540
 acres, if I heard that correctly.

488
00:30:41,540 --> 00:30:48,040
 Does the city have any mechanism, or what's the city's plan with the remaining acres that

489
00:30:48,040 --> 00:30:53,920
 are under a 30-year-old PD, because a lot of that isn't developed, when individuals

490
00:30:53,920 --> 00:31:01,600
 come in to develop that new land, are they going to have retroactive 30-year grandfathering,

491
00:31:01,600 --> 00:31:07,440
 or I want to learn more about how we can get the remaining land up to current code or out

492
00:31:07,440 --> 00:31:09,960
 of the 30-year-old PD.

493
00:31:09,960 --> 00:31:12,840
 Well, this PD does carry forward.

494
00:31:12,840 --> 00:31:16,960
 There have been some areas, it was actually originally 245 acres.

495
00:31:16,960 --> 00:31:17,960
 245.

496
00:31:17,960 --> 00:31:18,960
 Yeah.

497
00:31:18,960 --> 00:31:25,400
 So there are some areas that have been zoned out of the PD, but this PD is, it remains

498
00:31:25,400 --> 00:31:28,640
 in effect as the zoning for this site.

499
00:31:28,640 --> 00:31:32,960
 I think it would be, I'll look to Richard here to see if he wants to chime in, but it

500
00:31:32,960 --> 00:31:36,280
 would kind of be up to the property owner to see if they wanted to kind of bring it

501
00:31:36,280 --> 00:31:44,960
 up to the current standards and develop it outside of the PD.

502
00:31:44,960 --> 00:31:45,960
 That's correct.

503
00:31:45,960 --> 00:31:49,400
 It would be just like any other zoning district that they would have applied to them.

504
00:31:49,400 --> 00:31:54,840
 Now, I, correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't read all the PD language apart from this presentation,

505
00:31:54,840 --> 00:31:59,400
 but there might be some restrictive things that would be in their benefit to get out

506
00:31:59,400 --> 00:32:01,880
 of the PD if certain projects were to come in.

507
00:32:01,880 --> 00:32:08,840
 Right, in fact, unrelated to this, there is, we have some other PDs that are governed by

508
00:32:08,840 --> 00:32:10,920
 interim regulations.

509
00:32:10,920 --> 00:32:14,960
 They're actually considering zoning out of that.

510
00:32:14,960 --> 00:32:20,900
 While the tree standards are obviously much more stricter, it does benefit them in landscaping

511
00:32:20,900 --> 00:32:24,440
 by preserving a huge swath of post oaks.

512
00:32:24,440 --> 00:32:28,760
 So I think it's just as we look at it on a case by case basis, there is some benefit

513
00:32:28,760 --> 00:32:32,400
 to actually zone out of some of these older PDs.

514
00:32:32,400 --> 00:32:37,440
 I'd certainly hope that the city seeks to, where it makes the most sense, bring it to

515
00:32:37,440 --> 00:32:38,440
 current standards.

516
00:32:38,440 --> 00:32:42,120
 We worked really hard to get those updated from 1991.

517
00:32:42,120 --> 00:32:43,120
 They can be applied.

518
00:32:43,120 --> 00:32:48,040
 I think that's in the interest of the city.

519
00:32:48,040 --> 00:32:49,040
 Commissioner Ellis.

520
00:32:49,040 --> 00:32:50,040
 Thanks, Chair.

521
00:32:50,040 --> 00:32:56,320
 Hey, Julie, I know you said you didn't get any responses to the mail outs, but did we

522
00:32:56,320 --> 00:32:58,480
 get an email response on this one?

523
00:32:58,480 --> 00:33:01,000
 I feel like something came in over the weekend.

524
00:33:01,000 --> 00:33:05,640
 I just want to make sure if we did that it's on the record that we did.

525
00:33:05,640 --> 00:33:11,440
 I did speak with someone who wanted to ask about whether that Westgate Road that his

526
00:33:11,440 --> 00:33:14,840
 neighborhood, he lived within the Westgate neighborhood, if it was going to connect.

527
00:33:14,840 --> 00:33:16,680
 It was more of a mobility question.

528
00:33:16,680 --> 00:33:17,680
 Okay.

529
00:33:17,680 --> 00:33:25,340
 But yeah, so I just provided feedback to him about what, you know, what the future plans

530
00:33:25,340 --> 00:33:28,880
 are for mobility in the area and also put him in touch with our transportation group

531
00:33:28,880 --> 00:33:30,720
 to see if he had any further questions.

532
00:33:30,720 --> 00:33:31,720
 Okay.

533
00:33:31,720 --> 00:33:32,720
 Perfect.

534
00:33:32,720 --> 00:33:33,720
 Thank you.

535
00:33:33,720 --> 00:33:34,720
 You bet.

536
00:33:34,720 --> 00:33:35,720
 Commissioner Beck.

537
00:33:35,720 --> 00:33:36,720
 Thank you, Chair.

538
00:33:36,720 --> 00:33:37,720
 Yeah.

539
00:33:37,720 --> 00:33:43,800
 Are we going to, this is, this is not really directly related to that, but are we renaming

540
00:33:43,800 --> 00:33:48,920
 that road Bronco way all the way to the 35 feeder?

541
00:33:48,920 --> 00:33:50,720
 I believe that is the plan.

542
00:33:50,720 --> 00:33:59,720
 We're still working with Denton ISD to get that name firmed up, but that would probably

543
00:33:59,720 --> 00:34:00,720
 be the plan.

544
00:34:00,720 --> 00:34:01,720
 Yes.

545
00:34:01,720 --> 00:34:02,720
 Okay.

546
00:34:02,720 --> 00:34:03,720
 Thank you.

547
00:34:03,720 --> 00:34:04,720
 You bet.

548
00:34:04,720 --> 00:34:05,720
 Any other questions for Julie?

549
00:34:05,720 --> 00:34:08,020
 Looking for a show of hand.

550
00:34:08,020 --> 00:34:09,640
 I do not see any Julie.

551
00:34:09,640 --> 00:34:11,680
 Thank you very much for your presentation.

552
00:34:11,680 --> 00:34:18,920
 The next item of business is item 4C, S19-0015D.

553
00:34:18,920 --> 00:34:20,960
 It is Cindy Jackson's item.

554
00:34:20,960 --> 00:34:22,760
 Is Cindy available to present?

555
00:34:22,760 --> 00:34:23,760
 Yep.

556
00:34:23,760 --> 00:34:24,760
 She's coming up now.

557
00:34:24,760 --> 00:34:25,840
 Have a look at it shortly.

558
00:34:25,840 --> 00:34:26,840
 Great.

559
00:34:26,840 --> 00:34:49,560
 Thank you.

560
00:34:49,560 --> 00:35:09,320
 Thank you.

561
00:35:09,320 --> 00:35:27,640
 Okay.

562
00:35:27,640 --> 00:35:29,320
 We're all set.

563
00:35:29,320 --> 00:35:30,320
 Can you see the screen?

564
00:35:30,320 --> 00:35:31,320
 Not yet.

565
00:35:31,320 --> 00:35:32,320
 I can't see it.

566
00:35:32,320 --> 00:35:56,080
 How about, there we go.

567
00:35:56,080 --> 00:36:00,600
 Good evening.

568
00:36:00,600 --> 00:36:12,360
 Cindy Jackson here to present S19-0015.

569
00:36:12,360 --> 00:36:18,920
 This is a request for approval of a specific use permit to permit a communications tower

570
00:36:18,920 --> 00:36:24,600
 with a maximum height of 810 feet mean sea level for a broadband wireless service.

571
00:36:24,600 --> 00:36:28,680
 The request was originally for 150 foot tall tower.

572
00:36:28,680 --> 00:36:34,440
 However, it has since been determined that the site is located in the airport height hazard

573
00:36:34,440 --> 00:36:36,920
 district.

574
00:36:36,920 --> 00:36:43,080
 The height of structures located within this height hazard district are limited to 810

575
00:36:43,080 --> 00:36:51,720
 feet mean sea level per section 4.5.8C3.

576
00:36:51,720 --> 00:37:00,000
 The applicant has agreed to change the request to an 810 foot mean sea level tall structure.

577
00:37:00,000 --> 00:37:05,160
 The property is located at 3401 Barcelona street at the southeast corner of the intersection

578
00:37:05,160 --> 00:37:10,880
 of Barcelona and Worthington.

579
00:37:10,880 --> 00:37:15,840
 The site is zoned mixed use regional MR.

580
00:37:15,840 --> 00:37:22,720
 Here you see the full site plan.

581
00:37:22,720 --> 00:37:25,520
 The full site is actually 4.37 acres.

582
00:37:25,520 --> 00:37:31,240
 However, the site is constrained by this 140 foot drainage easement.

583
00:37:31,240 --> 00:37:38,320
 So the development impact area is actually 1.05 acres of the entire site.

584
00:37:38,320 --> 00:37:42,560
 And here you can see the location, the proposed location of the tower within that development

585
00:37:42,560 --> 00:37:47,520
 impact area.

586
00:37:47,520 --> 00:37:50,560
 Here's a close up of the development impact area.

587
00:37:50,560 --> 00:37:54,520
 And you can see that there is a drive off of Barcelona and it is a shared drive with

588
00:37:54,520 --> 00:37:59,400
 the property that is to the west of the site.

589
00:37:59,400 --> 00:38:04,760
 The site actually fronts Barcelona, has parking to the side and rear, and the tower is located

590
00:38:04,760 --> 00:38:11,200
 to the rear of the building.

591
00:38:11,200 --> 00:38:12,720
 Here's the landscape plan.

592
00:38:12,720 --> 00:38:17,680
 The applicant is actually proposing to provide 40% of landscape area in the development impact

593
00:38:17,680 --> 00:38:19,120
 area.

594
00:38:19,120 --> 00:38:24,880
 That exceeds the required 25% landscaped area by 15%.

595
00:38:24,880 --> 00:38:30,760
 Six trees will be planted along Barcelona street and the site will have a 30% tree canopy

596
00:38:30,760 --> 00:38:38,600
 all in conformance with the requirements of the DDC.

597
00:38:38,600 --> 00:38:40,880
 The building elevations are as follows.

598
00:38:40,880 --> 00:38:51,320
 The front elevation of the building is this top elevation right up here.

599
00:38:51,320 --> 00:38:56,640
 The proposed communications tower, this is what it will look like.

600
00:38:56,640 --> 00:39:04,400
 The height, as I noted previously, it will have a maximum height of 810 feet mean sea

601
00:39:04,400 --> 00:39:07,040
 level.

602
00:39:07,040 --> 00:39:13,880
 The applicant right now has an application under review by the FAA and the FAA will determine

603
00:39:13,880 --> 00:39:15,840
 what the ultimate height is.

604
00:39:15,840 --> 00:39:21,400
 Cindy, can I pause you real fast and acknowledge Commissioner Beck with a question?

605
00:39:21,400 --> 00:39:22,400
 Sure.

606
00:39:22,400 --> 00:39:23,400
 Thank you, Chair.

607
00:39:23,400 --> 00:39:25,160
 And it's directly germane to this.

608
00:39:25,160 --> 00:39:32,280
 Given the 800 and whatever you said, sea level limit, what would be a rough height of the

609
00:39:32,280 --> 00:39:34,040
 tower from the ground?

610
00:39:34,040 --> 00:39:35,600
 82 feet.

611
00:39:35,600 --> 00:39:40,120
 Okay, thank you.

612
00:39:40,120 --> 00:39:43,120
 Sure.

613
00:39:43,120 --> 00:39:48,240
 The only difference is the applicant is proposing to put a wooden fence to screen the bottom

614
00:39:48,240 --> 00:39:49,240
 of it.

615
00:39:49,240 --> 00:39:57,640
 As you know, we have general criteria for approval of all applications.

616
00:39:57,640 --> 00:39:59,680
 And I go through that in my staff report.

617
00:39:59,680 --> 00:40:02,640
 I'm not going to cover it here.

618
00:40:02,640 --> 00:40:10,960
 We have SUP criteria for approval, which I will go into one by one.

619
00:40:10,960 --> 00:40:14,120
 Criteria one is compatibility with the surrounding area.

620
00:40:14,120 --> 00:40:18,000
 The surrounding development is comprised of light manufacturing companies, warehouses

621
00:40:18,000 --> 00:40:20,520
 and a medical clinic.

622
00:40:20,520 --> 00:40:24,760
 These are primarily industrial in nature with the exception of the medical clinic.

623
00:40:24,760 --> 00:40:29,000
 The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding uses.

624
00:40:29,000 --> 00:40:34,260
 The land criteria two is minimal impacts on future development.

625
00:40:34,260 --> 00:40:37,360
 The land surrounding the site has already been developed.

626
00:40:37,360 --> 00:40:41,800
 The proposed communications tower and accompanying office building will have minimal impact on

627
00:40:41,800 --> 00:40:47,880
 the future development of this area.

628
00:40:47,880 --> 00:40:52,360
 Criteria three, the use conforms with all standards of the DDC and all applicable city

629
00:40:52,360 --> 00:40:59,320
 codes and yes, it does conform with all standards of the DDC and applicable codes.

630
00:40:59,320 --> 00:41:06,480
 Criteria four, impacts associated with access, traffic, emergency services, utilities, parking,

631
00:41:06,480 --> 00:41:12,320
 refuge areas, glare and odor have been adequately mitigated.

632
00:41:12,320 --> 00:41:17,560
 The proposed tower has been located on the interior of the lot.

633
00:41:17,560 --> 00:41:21,860
 It's not located within any building setbacks or easements or right of way.

634
00:41:21,860 --> 00:41:29,440
 There will be minimal if any glare, noise or odor from the tower.

635
00:41:29,440 --> 00:41:35,960
 The criteria five is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and any other applicable

636
00:41:35,960 --> 00:41:37,560
 adopted plans.

637
00:41:37,560 --> 00:41:40,360
 The only plan in effect on this site is a comprehensive plan.

638
00:41:40,360 --> 00:41:45,720
 The site is designated a business innovation on the future land use map.

639
00:41:45,720 --> 00:41:50,800
 Typical uses in this area are offices like manufacturing, research and development.

640
00:41:50,800 --> 00:41:56,560
 The proposed use is in compliance with the future land use designation.

641
00:41:56,560 --> 00:42:03,720
 Criteria six, the use adversely impacts the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants

642
00:42:03,720 --> 00:42:05,600
 of the area and the city of Denton.

643
00:42:05,600 --> 00:42:10,760
 The use will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the

644
00:42:10,760 --> 00:42:12,900
 area and the city of Denton.

645
00:42:12,900 --> 00:42:20,540
 This will have to comply with all city of Denton criteria as well as any FAA criteria

646
00:42:20,540 --> 00:42:30,840
 that is imposed on it to ensure that it doesn't adversely affect any citizens.

647
00:42:30,840 --> 00:42:36,960
 We sent out notifications within 200 and 500 feet as well as put out a newspaper notice.

648
00:42:36,960 --> 00:42:40,000
 The sign was posted on the site.

649
00:42:40,000 --> 00:42:48,000
 We received two responses in opposition which I emailed to all of you this afternoon.

650
00:42:48,000 --> 00:42:56,360
 They comprise 11% of the area within the 200 foot boundary.

651
00:42:56,360 --> 00:43:01,040
 We received one in favor but that was the applicant so it doesn't count.

652
00:43:01,040 --> 00:43:06,400
 No neighborhood meetings were held.

653
00:43:06,400 --> 00:43:11,040
 Staff recommends approval of the request for a communications tower with a maximum height

654
00:43:11,040 --> 00:43:19,280
 of 810 feet mean sea level as it conforms with the criteria in section 2.4.5E, section

655
00:43:19,280 --> 00:43:27,360
 2.5.3D for the approval of a specific use permit and section 4.5.8 of the airport height

656
00:43:27,360 --> 00:43:28,720
 hazard district.

657
00:43:28,720 --> 00:43:30,800
 And that concludes my presentation.

658
00:43:30,800 --> 00:43:36,880
 The applicant will be telephoning in later on to answer any questions.

659
00:43:36,880 --> 00:43:37,880
 Great.

660
00:43:37,880 --> 00:43:39,560
 Thank you so much, Cindy.

661
00:43:39,560 --> 00:43:42,360
 Commissioner back has a question.

662
00:43:42,360 --> 00:43:43,360
 Thank you, chair.

663
00:43:43,360 --> 00:43:50,960
 Cindy, there was the three for one rule that was in effect before and obviously with a

664
00:43:50,960 --> 00:43:58,040
 shorter tower, you know, three for one is shorter now but they're not proposing changing

665
00:43:58,040 --> 00:44:01,080
 that three foot or that three for one rule, right?

666
00:44:01,080 --> 00:44:02,080
 That's right.

667
00:44:02,080 --> 00:44:03,080
 Okay.

668
00:44:03,080 --> 00:44:04,080
 Thank you.

669
00:44:04,080 --> 00:44:10,120
 Any other questions for Cindy?

670
00:44:10,120 --> 00:44:11,940
 Cindy thank you very much.

671
00:44:11,940 --> 00:44:18,460
 Next item for business is item 4D PD20-0001.

672
00:44:18,460 --> 00:44:27,760
 This item is Haley Zagurski's and I'll turn it over to her when she's ready.

673
00:44:27,760 --> 00:44:34,760
 Okay.

674
00:44:34,760 --> 00:45:02,240
 All right.

675
00:45:02,240 --> 00:45:03,240
 Good evening.

676
00:45:03,240 --> 00:45:08,080
 This is PD21 for Sagebrook.

677
00:45:08,080 --> 00:45:12,320
 The request before you this evening is a dual request.

678
00:45:12,320 --> 00:45:18,240
 This is for an initial zoning of planned development district on approximately 132 acres and a

679
00:45:18,240 --> 00:45:24,760
 rezoning from residential six or R6 district to PD on approximately 14 acres that are located

680
00:45:24,760 --> 00:45:26,720
 adjacent to the railroad.

681
00:45:26,720 --> 00:45:29,400
 The site is a total of 146 acres.

682
00:45:29,400 --> 00:45:31,240
 It's outlined in yellow on the map.

683
00:45:31,240 --> 00:45:35,560
 This may be familiar to you all as this developer did come to a work session earlier this year

684
00:45:35,560 --> 00:45:37,720
 and present their plans.

685
00:45:37,720 --> 00:45:41,800
 Since then, they have annexed the property and now that that process is completed, they're

686
00:45:41,800 --> 00:45:45,040
 seeking the desired zoning.

687
00:45:45,040 --> 00:45:47,840
 So this is a look at our current zoning map.

688
00:45:47,840 --> 00:45:51,200
 Properties that have been annexed into the city receive a placeholder designation of

689
00:45:51,200 --> 00:45:52,200
 rural residential.

690
00:45:52,200 --> 00:45:54,200
 So that's the RR that you see on the map.

691
00:45:54,200 --> 00:45:58,560
 The frontage of the railroad track is zoned R6.

692
00:45:58,560 --> 00:46:03,440
 That was part of an annexation down the Fort Worth Drive corridor in the 1960s.

693
00:46:03,440 --> 00:46:09,960
 And then you can see the proposed zoning map with the entire site zoned to PD.

694
00:46:09,960 --> 00:46:13,660
 This is a look at the site layout that was included in your backup.

695
00:46:13,660 --> 00:46:17,640
 So that is a total of 491 lots.

696
00:46:17,640 --> 00:46:23,360
 Within the residential portion of the development, there's approximately 9.4 acres that are dedicated

697
00:46:23,360 --> 00:46:25,800
 to HOA open space areas.

698
00:46:25,800 --> 00:46:29,600
 That includes the two areas circled in yellow on the southern side would be the primary

699
00:46:29,600 --> 00:46:30,600
 amenity center.

700
00:46:30,600 --> 00:46:35,040
 The PD indicates that that would contain a pool, a cabana, and a playground.

701
00:46:35,040 --> 00:46:38,260
 There would also be walking trails throughout that area.

702
00:46:38,260 --> 00:46:44,480
 On the north side, there's going to be a pond with walking trails and benches.

703
00:46:44,480 --> 00:46:48,840
 Circled in blue, there is a central spine through the development that will be kind

704
00:46:48,840 --> 00:46:53,320
 of a boulevard design with the street going one way on either side of a central median

705
00:46:53,320 --> 00:46:58,040
 that will have a 10-foot combined hike bike trail that will run from Allred Road to Brush

706
00:46:58,040 --> 00:47:00,400
 Creek Road.

707
00:47:00,400 --> 00:47:04,600
 And then south of the future Brush Creek Road extension, there's approximately 18 acres

708
00:47:04,600 --> 00:47:07,700
 of land that they're proposing to dedicate to the city.

709
00:47:07,700 --> 00:47:12,720
 That would be potentially used by the Parks Department for future trail extensions.

710
00:47:12,720 --> 00:47:17,160
 Approximately 14 acres of that is within a floodplain ESA.

711
00:47:17,160 --> 00:47:21,880
 And then circled in red on this map is a portion of an HOA lot where a plugged gas well is

712
00:47:21,880 --> 00:47:26,920
 located as in anticipation of this development, the developer did ensure that that well was

713
00:47:26,920 --> 00:47:31,000
 plugged and would be providing for it to be within an open space lot so that no structure

714
00:47:31,000 --> 00:47:34,560
 would be built over the well.

715
00:47:34,560 --> 00:47:37,920
 There is a phasing schedule included as part of this PD.

716
00:47:37,920 --> 00:47:44,360
 Phase one is the area in green that would establish that north-south connection to connect

717
00:47:44,360 --> 00:47:49,720
 Allred to Brush Creek and provide two points of access for approximately 143 units as well

718
00:47:49,720 --> 00:47:52,920
 as the primary amenity lot.

719
00:47:52,920 --> 00:47:56,580
 Phase two would be to the north of that at the intersection of Allred and Bonnie Brain

720
00:47:56,580 --> 00:47:59,720
 would be for 133 additional units.

721
00:47:59,720 --> 00:48:04,360
 And then phase three is about 99 units that would include some further extension of Brush

722
00:48:04,360 --> 00:48:05,500
 Creek Road.

723
00:48:05,500 --> 00:48:10,560
 And phase four would complete their portion of Brush Creek Road and have 116 residential

724
00:48:10,560 --> 00:48:11,560
 units.

725
00:48:11,560 --> 00:48:15,880
 The developer, it will only be developing their half of Brush Creek that's adjacent

726
00:48:15,880 --> 00:48:20,640
 to the residential portions, that'd be two lanes of the road from Fort Worth Drive to

727
00:48:20,640 --> 00:48:25,620
 the western boundary of their property.

728
00:48:25,620 --> 00:48:30,780
 This table compares the plan development standards that they've proposed with the R6 base zoning

729
00:48:30,780 --> 00:48:33,880
 that they're basing this PD on.

730
00:48:33,880 --> 00:48:39,440
 This PD would permit only single-family detached dwellings as a primary use along with parks

731
00:48:39,440 --> 00:48:44,520
 and amenity centers to ensure that future property on the south side can be dedicated

732
00:48:44,520 --> 00:48:48,840
 for park development and that their amenity center is permitted there, of course.

733
00:48:48,840 --> 00:48:53,720
 And then they're permitting any of the accessory and temporary uses allowed within the R6 district

734
00:48:53,720 --> 00:48:56,880
 so that if a resident wanted to install solar panels or something of that nature, that would

735
00:48:56,880 --> 00:49:00,240
 be permitted.

736
00:49:00,240 --> 00:49:06,320
 This table shows a comparison of the dimensional standards from the PD to the R6 district.

737
00:49:06,320 --> 00:49:07,320
 There is one change.

738
00:49:07,320 --> 00:49:12,520
 The applicant noticed this afternoon that they had typed in a 10-foot side yard setback

739
00:49:12,520 --> 00:49:13,960
 for all lots within the PD.

740
00:49:13,960 --> 00:49:18,000
 They intended that only for corner lots to have a 10-foot setback.

741
00:49:18,000 --> 00:49:22,840
 So for the standard side yard for interior lots, that would be five feet consistent with

742
00:49:22,840 --> 00:49:25,640
 the R6 district.

743
00:49:25,640 --> 00:49:30,640
 The only major changes they've proposed in terms of these values is the front yard setback,

744
00:49:30,640 --> 00:49:34,400
 which would be 20 feet instead of 10 feet, so a little bit larger front yard than what

745
00:49:34,400 --> 00:49:36,020
 we would normally see.

746
00:49:36,020 --> 00:49:38,320
 And then they're proposing enhanced landscaping.

747
00:49:38,320 --> 00:49:43,520
 So whereas a normal subdivision in R6 would have a minimum of one yard tree, they've proposed

748
00:49:43,520 --> 00:49:48,700
 that for interior lots with two additional ornamental trees on corner lots.

749
00:49:48,700 --> 00:49:53,440
 And then they've stipulated the minimum standards for front yard landscaping for each home as

750
00:49:53,440 --> 00:49:59,240
 well as for evergreen screening on the foundations of corner lots.

751
00:49:59,240 --> 00:50:03,240
 In addition, I do want to note that their minimum open space comes out to 18% overall

752
00:50:03,240 --> 00:50:05,920
 when you look at the 146 acres.

753
00:50:05,920 --> 00:50:10,340
 The DDC minimum is 5% dedicated open space for a single-family subdivision with more

754
00:50:10,340 --> 00:50:15,120
 than 10 lots.

755
00:50:15,120 --> 00:50:19,560
 As has been noted in the other presentations, there are general criteria applicable to all

756
00:50:19,560 --> 00:50:20,560
 applications.

757
00:50:20,560 --> 00:50:23,400
 Those are outlined in detail in your backup, so I won't go through them all here, but did

758
00:50:23,400 --> 00:50:29,700
 want to note that the proposed PD is in compliance with all of those standards.

759
00:50:29,700 --> 00:50:35,060
 And then we'll go through each of these specific PD criteria for approval in turn.

760
00:50:35,060 --> 00:50:39,000
 So criterion one is compliance with the Denton Plan 2030.

761
00:50:39,000 --> 00:50:43,440
 This subject property is actually a mix of neighborhood mixed use, which is intended

762
00:50:43,440 --> 00:50:47,680
 for a mixture of commercial and moderate density residential uses.

763
00:50:47,680 --> 00:50:51,720
 That is, as you can see here on the map, is kind of this entire Bonnie Bray-Fort Worth

764
00:50:51,720 --> 00:50:56,400
 Drive-Brush Creek intersection has that designation, so that's intended to be a service node for

765
00:50:56,400 --> 00:50:58,720
 the surrounding residential areas.

766
00:50:58,720 --> 00:51:02,720
 And then the balance of the property shown in green is designated for rural areas, which

767
00:51:02,720 --> 00:51:07,320
 is intended for farms, ranches, and very low-density residential development.

768
00:51:07,320 --> 00:51:11,160
 Generally that is one unit per five acres.

769
00:51:11,160 --> 00:51:15,800
 But if you look at this broader area, you see this wedge of the pie, if you will, between

770
00:51:15,800 --> 00:51:19,880
 I-35W and Fort Worth Drive has a wide mixture of uses.

771
00:51:19,880 --> 00:51:25,400
 We have commercial nodes at 35 and brush are all red, and then over here along Fort Worth

772
00:51:25,400 --> 00:51:26,400
 Drive.

773
00:51:26,400 --> 00:51:29,800
 And then to the north of this, we have moderate density residential and a future regional

774
00:51:29,800 --> 00:51:31,560
 scale park.

775
00:51:31,560 --> 00:51:35,200
 So it's very unlikely when looking at this little mile and a half wide area that this

776
00:51:35,200 --> 00:51:39,440
 area will stay rural, especially once the arterial roadway that's intended to go across

777
00:51:39,440 --> 00:51:41,440
 here is connected.

778
00:51:41,440 --> 00:51:45,400
 So this is more of a transitional zone, if you will, between the high intensity of the

779
00:51:45,400 --> 00:51:50,520
 highway across to the east, to where we have this neighborhood service area, and then more

780
00:51:50,520 --> 00:51:54,920
 rural and low-density residential on the opposite side of Fort Worth Drive.

781
00:51:54,920 --> 00:52:00,600
 So this PD plan comes in at about 3.3 units per acre and is consistent with the transition

782
00:52:00,600 --> 00:52:04,680
 that we'd expect to see in this area.

783
00:52:04,680 --> 00:52:07,880
 The second criterion is whether it complies with the DDC.

784
00:52:07,880 --> 00:52:11,320
 This table, again, shows that they are meeting or exceeding all of the numerical standards

785
00:52:11,320 --> 00:52:12,320
 of the code.

786
00:52:12,320 --> 00:52:16,940
 The PD does specify that for anything not stipulated specifically in the PD, they would

787
00:52:16,940 --> 00:52:20,640
 meet the DDC standards.

788
00:52:20,640 --> 00:52:23,960
 Then criterion three is whether it provides for greater building design amenities and

789
00:52:23,960 --> 00:52:25,360
 connectivity.

790
00:52:25,360 --> 00:52:29,700
 They are proposing to meet the building design standards within the DDC, and then they would

791
00:52:29,700 --> 00:52:34,120
 enhance each of those lots aesthetically with some enhanced landscaping, as we looked at

792
00:52:34,120 --> 00:52:35,120
 earlier.

793
00:52:35,120 --> 00:52:38,960
 So additional trees and foundation plantings on corner lots, as well as specifying the

794
00:52:38,960 --> 00:52:42,880
 minimum front yard landscaping for each of those homes in terms of shrubs and ornamental

795
00:52:42,880 --> 00:52:45,680
 plants.

796
00:52:45,680 --> 00:52:50,540
 In terms of amenities and open space, as I mentioned, those two large amenity areas account

797
00:52:50,540 --> 00:52:56,200
 for 6.4% of the residential subdivision area at just over nine acres.

798
00:52:56,200 --> 00:53:00,920
 Those would feature ponds, walking paths, in addition to the pool and playground amenities.

799
00:53:00,920 --> 00:53:05,640
 The DDC minimum is 5%, so they are exceeding that.

800
00:53:05,640 --> 00:53:09,520
 And then rather the development would provide for greater connectivity.

801
00:53:09,520 --> 00:53:13,840
 We found that it would improve pedestrian and automotive connectivity in this area.

802
00:53:13,840 --> 00:53:18,440
 The extension of Brush Creek Road will be aiding in the construction of what the city has identified

803
00:53:18,440 --> 00:53:23,200
 as a high priority roadway, because we do need that east-west connectivity in South

804
00:53:23,200 --> 00:53:26,440
 Denton that we don't have today in terms of a primary arterial.

805
00:53:26,440 --> 00:53:28,640
 So this would assist with that.

806
00:53:28,640 --> 00:53:33,360
 And then on a more local scale, it would provide for pedestrian connectivity between the future

807
00:53:33,360 --> 00:53:38,120
 park to the north and then the dedicated trail area on the south side of the development

808
00:53:38,120 --> 00:53:44,520
 with that north-south 10-foot hike and bike trail.

809
00:53:44,520 --> 00:53:49,560
 Criterion 4 applies to residential uses and seeks to know whether there is a compatible

810
00:53:49,560 --> 00:53:52,880
 arrangement of buildings' uses and whether it's consistent with the character of the

811
00:53:52,880 --> 00:53:54,160
 area.

812
00:53:54,160 --> 00:53:59,240
 So this subdivision is consistent in terms of density and design with other established

813
00:53:59,240 --> 00:54:02,920
 neighborhoods in South Denton, Country Lakes and Carnegie Ridge are just down the road

814
00:54:02,920 --> 00:54:04,000
 from here.

815
00:54:04,000 --> 00:54:07,480
 And it's consistent with the type of moderate density residential development we would expect

816
00:54:07,480 --> 00:54:11,920
 to see in the portions of Hunter Ranch that are closest to this.

817
00:54:11,920 --> 00:54:15,560
 The plan and standards that are presented do reflect some additional buffering around

818
00:54:15,560 --> 00:54:20,640
 the perimeter of the subdivision in terms of landscaping, street trees and fencing that

819
00:54:20,640 --> 00:54:26,000
 would provide for higher visual aesthetic driving down Brush Creek Road and help screen

820
00:54:26,000 --> 00:54:30,200
 the subdivision from the railroad right-of-way.

821
00:54:30,200 --> 00:54:33,640
 The fifth criterion is applicable to non-residential uses.

822
00:54:33,640 --> 00:54:35,720
 This PD is primarily residential.

823
00:54:35,720 --> 00:54:39,360
 The only non-residential use is proposed to be parks and open spaces that are compatible

824
00:54:39,360 --> 00:54:42,760
 with the neighborhood design.

825
00:54:42,760 --> 00:54:46,240
 The sixth criterion is whether there's the provision of public facilities.

826
00:54:46,240 --> 00:54:49,600
 And this has several components, so I'll go through each of those in turn.

827
00:54:49,600 --> 00:54:51,440
 The first of those is schools.

828
00:54:51,440 --> 00:54:52,920
 We did reach out to Denton ISD.

829
00:54:52,920 --> 00:54:57,120
 They provided their expected student generation and attendance zones.

830
00:54:57,120 --> 00:55:02,000
 So 113 elementary school students, 59 middle school students and 74 high school students

831
00:55:02,000 --> 00:55:05,840
 are expected for a neighborhood of this size.

832
00:55:05,840 --> 00:55:09,360
 It is zoned into McMath Middle School and Denton High School, which both have capacity

833
00:55:09,360 --> 00:55:12,880
 at this time to serve all of those students.

834
00:55:12,880 --> 00:55:18,100
 Denton ISD indicated that at this time, Borman Elementary does not have capacity, but this

835
00:55:18,100 --> 00:55:21,400
 is expected to be an eight-year build out between those four phases.

836
00:55:21,400 --> 00:55:26,200
 So there is time for that school to either gain capacity or there's a high likelihood

837
00:55:26,200 --> 00:55:29,480
 that this would be rezoned into some of the new schools that are planned within the Hunter

838
00:55:29,480 --> 00:55:33,820
 and Colt Ranch area.

839
00:55:33,820 --> 00:55:38,360
 In terms of fire and police, there is currently a fire station that you can see here on the

840
00:55:38,360 --> 00:55:40,760
 north side of the map on Vintage Boulevard.

841
00:55:40,760 --> 00:55:44,240
 This site is well within that eight-minute response time boundary, which is the standard

842
00:55:44,240 --> 00:55:46,180
 for the fire department.

843
00:55:46,180 --> 00:55:50,320
 And then the police department indicated that this is not expected to have a significant

844
00:55:50,320 --> 00:55:52,720
 or negative impact on their response time.

845
00:55:52,720 --> 00:55:56,440
 They did want to note that there is a new police facility expected to be built here

846
00:55:56,440 --> 00:56:01,720
 by the fire station to be operational by 2022 that would increase their ability to respond

847
00:56:01,720 --> 00:56:05,600
 to this area though.

848
00:56:05,600 --> 00:56:09,500
 Looking at water and wastewater utilities, the blue lines on the map are the water services

849
00:56:09,500 --> 00:56:10,500
 that are available.

850
00:56:10,500 --> 00:56:13,160
 So there's currently water available on Bonnie Bray.

851
00:56:13,160 --> 00:56:18,280
 However, there is this new line that's been built by the city along All Red.

852
00:56:18,280 --> 00:56:22,680
 So water services are available and will be extended throughout the site.

853
00:56:22,680 --> 00:56:24,560
 Wastewater lines are shown in red on the map.

854
00:56:24,560 --> 00:56:31,000
 You'll notice the closest line is pretty significantly far down Brush Creek.

855
00:56:31,000 --> 00:56:33,840
 They will be making a connection there at what's called the Graveyard Interceptor and

856
00:56:33,840 --> 00:56:39,900
 extending that line down Brush Creek to the west across I-35 and the railroad and across

857
00:56:39,900 --> 00:56:42,440
 this site to provide service to this area.

858
00:56:42,440 --> 00:56:47,360
 There have been discussions with our engineering department and they're expected to participate

859
00:56:47,360 --> 00:56:51,400
 with the city to oversize that line to make sure that it can have additional capacity

860
00:56:51,400 --> 00:56:57,040
 to serve other developments in this area in the future.

861
00:56:57,040 --> 00:57:01,280
 Looking at streets, of course, our mobility plan reflects Brush Creek Road going across

862
00:57:01,280 --> 00:57:03,440
 this property as a primary arterial.

863
00:57:03,440 --> 00:57:07,520
 They will be providing the right-of-way for that road and building two lanes of it on

864
00:57:07,520 --> 00:57:10,360
 the north side adjacent to the subdivision.

865
00:57:10,360 --> 00:57:14,200
 The city did a regional traffic study as you may have seen those discussions at City Council

866
00:57:14,200 --> 00:57:18,120
 over the last year and determined this was the best alignment for that road and that

867
00:57:18,120 --> 00:57:22,840
 this is a much needed road that is prioritized for South Denton.

868
00:57:22,840 --> 00:57:27,600
 Looking at the other streets that they have adjacency to, Bonnie Bray, south of All Red,

869
00:57:27,600 --> 00:57:30,440
 is expected to be closed in the future.

870
00:57:30,440 --> 00:57:34,120
 With this development and then making the connection at Brush Creek, they're working

871
00:57:34,120 --> 00:57:38,320
 with the city and the railroad company to close the current unsafe crossing at Bonnie

872
00:57:38,320 --> 00:57:39,320
 Bray.

873
00:57:39,320 --> 00:57:41,760
 If you've ever been out there, it connects at a very odd angle.

874
00:57:41,760 --> 00:57:46,480
 There's not a lot of stacking room for people to get off of the highway to make that turn

875
00:57:46,480 --> 00:57:48,200
 there across the railroad.

876
00:57:48,200 --> 00:57:54,400
 So that will be closed and there will be a new properly aligned intersection or a crossing

877
00:57:54,400 --> 00:57:57,400
 put in there at Brush Creek.

878
00:57:57,400 --> 00:58:02,280
 All Red Road is expected to be unimproved at this time.

879
00:58:02,280 --> 00:58:07,000
 The city will improve that street in the future, either when the park develops or when additional

880
00:58:07,000 --> 00:58:12,960
 development occurs in this area that generates the need for that.

881
00:58:12,960 --> 00:58:16,560
 Within the site, the primary connection will be off of Brush Creek, so the majority of

882
00:58:16,560 --> 00:58:19,080
 the traffic will be funneled to that arterial roadway.

883
00:58:19,080 --> 00:58:23,400
 They will have two additional points of access as options for the residents and for emergency

884
00:58:23,400 --> 00:58:24,400
 response.

885
00:58:24,400 --> 00:58:28,560
 One of those will be off of All Red Road and one would be a second point of access further

886
00:58:28,560 --> 00:58:32,140
 to the west along Brush Creek.

887
00:58:32,140 --> 00:58:35,960
 This afternoon, I believe you all received an email response that was sent in today that

888
00:58:35,960 --> 00:58:40,560
 expressed concern about the alignment of Brush Creek, so I wanted to provide this map to give

889
00:58:40,560 --> 00:58:42,720
 some context to how that decision was made.

890
00:58:42,720 --> 00:58:47,240
 There were multiple options looked at in the feasibility study, and at the end of the day,

891
00:58:47,240 --> 00:58:52,240
 it was determined that the most reasonable, once we got some engineering information from

892
00:58:52,240 --> 00:58:55,560
 this development, the most reasonable alignment was through this property in an angle that

893
00:58:55,560 --> 00:58:57,940
 follows the floodplain.

894
00:58:57,940 --> 00:59:01,640
 This is zone A floodplain, so we needed to avoid that.

895
00:59:01,640 --> 00:59:05,040
 And then we also needed to avoid this gas well site up here so that there wasn't a plugged

896
00:59:05,040 --> 00:59:09,160
 well under the roadway, which could cause some stability concerns.

897
00:59:09,160 --> 00:59:14,000
 So that road essentially had to thread the needle between those two obstacles to connect

898
00:59:14,000 --> 00:59:18,280
 to All Red at a reasonable angle, and so the alignment shown on their plan is the alignment

899
00:59:18,280 --> 00:59:25,760
 that the city felt was best for this roadway extension.

900
00:59:25,760 --> 00:59:29,960
 The final component of criterion six is accessibility to parks.

901
00:59:29,960 --> 00:59:35,800
 So the area shown in green on your map is the future Southwest Park, which will be a

902
00:59:35,800 --> 00:59:37,800
 regional scale park.

903
00:59:37,800 --> 00:59:42,300
 The city is currently negotiating with a consultant on that master plan for that park development,

904
00:59:42,300 --> 00:59:45,680
 so that is coming in the near future.

905
00:59:45,680 --> 00:59:49,500
 And additionally, as I mentioned earlier, the area south of Brush Creek down here with

906
00:59:49,500 --> 00:59:53,280
 the floodplain is proposed to be dedicated to the city to provide future trail connectivities

907
00:59:53,280 --> 00:59:55,420
 through the floodplain.

908
00:59:55,420 --> 00:59:58,640
 And park dedication and development fees will apply to this at the time of platting and

909
00:59:58,640 --> 00:59:59,640
 permitting.

910
00:59:59,640 --> 01:00:00,640
 Hey, can I pause you?

911
01:00:00,640 --> 01:00:01,640
 Excuse me.

912
01:00:01,640 --> 01:00:02,640
 Can I pause you real fast?

913
01:00:02,640 --> 01:00:04,720
 I think Commissioner Beck has a question.

914
01:00:04,720 --> 01:00:07,640
 Yes, thank you, Chair.

915
01:00:07,640 --> 01:00:10,120
 Can you go back to the floodplain map?

916
01:00:10,120 --> 01:00:12,640
 I think that's the previous one.

917
01:00:12,640 --> 01:00:19,800
 So the emails that you communicated to us, we're the go through the corner of that property.

918
01:00:19,800 --> 01:00:26,600
 I guess that's not directly related to this individual property, but it's germane.

919
01:00:26,600 --> 01:00:31,360
 We're going to eminent domain that and the second question is Brush Creek is our road

920
01:00:31,360 --> 01:00:35,040
 or somebody else's road?

921
01:00:35,040 --> 01:00:37,720
 Brush Creek is a city road, I believe.

922
01:00:37,720 --> 01:00:40,920
 So that is a city roadway.

923
01:00:40,920 --> 01:00:47,760
 When I talked to our city engineering department this afternoon, they communicated that yes,

924
01:00:47,760 --> 01:00:51,820
 sometime in the future, the city would negotiate with the adjacent property owner to acquire

925
01:00:51,820 --> 01:00:58,080
 that right of way that's not expected to occur for 10 to 15 years, probably, based on the

926
01:00:58,080 --> 01:01:02,640
 expected timing of the Hunter Cole Ranch and other developments in this area.

927
01:01:02,640 --> 01:01:06,840
 So that would be a future negotiation that the city would have to go through to acquire

928
01:01:06,840 --> 01:01:10,360
 that right of way when the road needs to be expanded.

929
01:01:10,360 --> 01:01:11,360
 Okay.

930
01:01:11,360 --> 01:01:17,720
 And can you wiggle your mouse and show me where the access points you were referencing

931
01:01:17,720 --> 01:01:19,320
 are going to be?

932
01:01:19,320 --> 01:01:20,320
 Yes.

933
01:01:20,320 --> 01:01:25,400
 If we need to, we can go back to the site plan.

934
01:01:25,400 --> 01:01:29,120
 On the north side, their connection will align with what's planned to be the primary entrance

935
01:01:29,120 --> 01:01:31,200
 to the park along Allred.

936
01:01:31,200 --> 01:01:35,240
 On the south side, their primary entry would be roughly in this area and then there would

937
01:01:35,240 --> 01:01:38,000
 be a secondary access point over here on the western side.

938
01:01:38,000 --> 01:01:39,000
 Okay.

939
01:01:39,000 --> 01:01:40,000
 Thank you.

940
01:01:40,000 --> 01:01:45,800
 Commissioners, just seeing the time, being respectful for the public hearing at 630.

941
01:01:45,800 --> 01:01:50,480
 If we could hold other questions about this item until public hearing, certainly have

942
01:01:50,480 --> 01:01:54,680
 the discussion, but if we could hold them until public hearing, let Haley wrap up.

943
01:01:54,680 --> 01:01:57,760
 I think that would be good so we get to public hearing.

944
01:01:57,760 --> 01:01:59,920
 Haley, please continue.

945
01:01:59,920 --> 01:02:01,960
 All right.

946
01:02:01,960 --> 01:02:04,880
 Just a couple more slides here.

947
01:02:04,880 --> 01:02:08,880
 There was a response submitted online, I believe, regarding the fiscal impacts of this, so I

948
01:02:08,880 --> 01:02:11,960
 wanted to provide this detail for you all.

949
01:02:11,960 --> 01:02:15,720
 Just some of the highlights of the fiscal impact analysis that were done as part of

950
01:02:15,720 --> 01:02:17,840
 the annexation.

951
01:02:17,840 --> 01:02:21,720
 Currently with the agriculture exemption on the site, the property tax revenue is about

952
01:02:21,720 --> 01:02:24,240
 $377.

953
01:02:24,240 --> 01:02:30,200
 The estimated annual tax revenue at build out would be $967,000 roughly.

954
01:02:30,200 --> 01:02:35,120
 And then the difference when you net out the cost of services would be about $87,000 there.

955
01:02:35,120 --> 01:02:38,760
 They do have substantial amounts of permit and inspection and impact fees that would

956
01:02:38,760 --> 01:02:43,500
 be paid for this development at our current rates, that would be about $8.5 million.

957
01:02:43,500 --> 01:02:48,560
 Fiscal sales tax over the eight years related to the construction of this would be about

958
01:02:48,560 --> 01:02:50,460
 $1.2 million.

959
01:02:50,460 --> 01:02:54,280
 But I also wanted to bring this back around to not just the fiscal impacts, but also the

960
01:02:54,280 --> 01:02:56,640
 qualitative impacts of the development.

961
01:02:56,640 --> 01:03:02,520
 The developer did plug that gas well in anticipation of bringing this development into the city.

962
01:03:02,520 --> 01:03:06,720
 They are dedicating a substantial amount of right of way and constructing a significant

963
01:03:06,720 --> 01:03:10,960
 portion of Rush Creek Road, which is a city asset that we need.

964
01:03:10,960 --> 01:03:15,880
 And then they are assisting with the improvement of the railroad crossing at 377 that would

965
01:03:15,880 --> 01:03:20,800
 eliminate that very unsafe crossing we have today at Bonnie Bray in 377.

966
01:03:20,800 --> 01:03:25,320
 And then also just the amount of park dedication and trails that we would potentially get out

967
01:03:25,320 --> 01:03:29,080
 of this development and those connections that we would have as the Hunter and Coal

968
01:03:29,080 --> 01:03:35,720
 Ranch developments occur and provide that greater trail connectivity to the West.

969
01:03:35,720 --> 01:03:39,720
 Notification was sent regarding this request.

970
01:03:39,720 --> 01:03:44,840
 Because of the time of this meeting, there had been one response in favor that was provided

971
01:03:44,840 --> 01:03:46,000
 in your backup.

972
01:03:46,000 --> 01:03:50,120
 The additional response in opposition was provided via email today, and that was this

973
01:03:50,120 --> 01:03:52,320
 property immediately to the West.

974
01:03:52,320 --> 01:03:57,360
 And then I did want to read, I have two additional responses that we found at our office today.

975
01:03:57,360 --> 01:04:01,200
 That's been closed, so there wasn't a lot of checking of the fax machines, but we did

976
01:04:01,200 --> 01:04:06,440
 get two additional responses from the properties that are shown in red to the east.

977
01:04:06,440 --> 01:04:10,520
 Both are opposed as well, and I can read those during the public hearing to put them on the

978
01:04:10,520 --> 01:04:11,520
 record.

979
01:04:11,520 --> 01:04:14,840
 The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting in January and had about 12 attendees at the

980
01:04:14,840 --> 01:04:21,200
 meeting and they presented the same slides that were shown to you all at the work session.

981
01:04:21,200 --> 01:04:24,640
 So staff is recommending approval of this request as it complies with both our general

982
01:04:24,640 --> 01:04:27,720
 and our PD specific criteria for approval.

983
01:04:27,720 --> 01:04:31,880
 And if this gets a vote from the P&Z tonight, it would move forward to public hearing at

984
01:04:31,880 --> 01:04:34,400
 City Council on June 2nd.

985
01:04:34,400 --> 01:04:36,840
 I'm happy to answer any other questions if there's time.

986
01:04:36,840 --> 01:04:39,920
 Haley, thank you for the presentation.

987
01:04:39,920 --> 01:04:45,280
 I think we can hold questions to the public hearing if we have any additional.

988
01:04:45,280 --> 01:04:50,200
 And with that, that concludes our work session agenda for this evening.

989
01:04:50,200 --> 01:04:55,480
 If it's copacetic with everyone, let's just roll right into the public hearing.

990
01:04:55,480 --> 01:05:00,320
 We have no need for a break to move into council chambers.

991
01:05:00,320 --> 01:05:04,560
 So we'll go ahead and roll right into the public hearing.

992
01:05:04,560 --> 01:05:10,880
 Let me reset my agenda.

993
01:05:10,880 --> 01:05:17,040
 Just to reset everyone, this is the public hearing for the Planning and Zoning Commission.

994
01:05:17,040 --> 01:05:20,000
 Actually, check, I need to close that work session.

995
01:05:20,000 --> 01:05:22,640
 Let's, should I close that work session?

996
01:05:22,640 --> 01:05:25,480
 Close work and then regular meeting.

997
01:05:25,480 --> 01:05:26,480
 Perfect.

998
01:05:26,480 --> 01:05:28,360
 It's a learning curve.

999
01:05:28,360 --> 01:05:33,640
 I'll close the work session at 6 42.

1000
01:05:33,640 --> 01:05:37,240
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission public

1001
01:05:37,240 --> 01:05:41,560
 hearing meeting for Wednesday, May 6, 2020.

1002
01:05:41,560 --> 01:05:46,440
 Seeing that we do have a quorum, I will call the meeting to order at 6 43.

1003
01:05:46,440 --> 01:05:50,960
 The first item of business is to consider approval of the planning and zoning minutes

1004
01:05:50,960 --> 01:05:55,160
 for April 8th.

1005
01:05:55,160 --> 01:05:56,160
 Commissioner Smith.

1006
01:05:56,160 --> 01:05:58,240
 Make a motion to approve.

1007
01:05:58,240 --> 01:06:01,880
 We have a first for approval.

1008
01:06:01,880 --> 01:06:02,880
 Commissioner Ellis.

1009
01:06:02,880 --> 01:06:03,880
 Second.

1010
01:06:03,880 --> 01:06:06,500
 We have a first and a second for approval.

1011
01:06:06,500 --> 01:06:10,200
 Any discussion on this item?

1012
01:06:10,200 --> 01:06:13,120
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

1013
01:06:13,120 --> 01:06:14,120
 Commissioner Beck.

1014
01:06:14,120 --> 01:06:15,120
 Aye.

1015
01:06:15,120 --> 01:06:16,120
 Commissioner Ellis.

1016
01:06:16,120 --> 01:06:17,120
 Aye.

1017
01:06:17,120 --> 01:06:18,120
 Commissioner Pernetta.

1018
01:06:18,120 --> 01:06:19,120
 Aye.

1019
01:06:19,120 --> 01:06:20,120
 Commissioner Smith.

1020
01:06:20,120 --> 01:06:21,120
 Aye.

1021
01:06:21,120 --> 01:06:22,120
 Commissioner Cole.

1022
01:06:22,120 --> 01:06:23,120
 Aye.

1023
01:06:23,120 --> 01:06:24,120
 Commissioner Anderson.

1024
01:06:24,120 --> 01:06:25,120
 Aye.

1025
01:06:25,120 --> 01:06:29,800
 Motion carries seven zero.

1026
01:06:29,800 --> 01:06:32,080
 Next item of business is our consent agenda.

1027
01:06:32,080 --> 01:06:36,500
 Chair will entertain a motion, Commissioner Smith.

1028
01:06:36,500 --> 01:06:37,960
 Make a motion to approve.

1029
01:06:37,960 --> 01:06:41,320
 We have a first for approval, Commissioner Anderson.

1030
01:06:41,320 --> 01:06:42,320
 Second the motion.

1031
01:06:42,320 --> 01:06:45,320
 We have a first and a second for approval of the consent agenda.

1032
01:06:45,320 --> 01:06:48,320
 Any discussion?

1033
01:06:48,320 --> 01:06:51,220
 Seeing none, I'll call a vote via roll call.

1034
01:06:51,220 --> 01:06:52,220
 Commissioner Beck.

1035
01:06:52,220 --> 01:06:53,220
 Aye.

1036
01:06:53,220 --> 01:06:54,220
 Commissioner Ellis.

1037
01:06:54,220 --> 01:06:55,220
 Aye.

1038
01:06:55,220 --> 01:06:56,220
 Commissioner Pernetta.

1039
01:06:56,220 --> 01:06:57,220
 Aye.

1040
01:06:57,220 --> 01:06:58,220
 Commissioner Smith.

1041
01:06:58,220 --> 01:06:59,220
 Aye.

1042
01:06:59,220 --> 01:07:00,220
 Commissioner Cole.

1043
01:07:00,220 --> 01:07:01,220
 Aye.

1044
01:07:01,220 --> 01:07:02,680
 Commissioner Anderson.

1045
01:07:02,680 --> 01:07:03,680
 Aye.

1046
01:07:03,680 --> 01:07:06,840
 Consent agenda is approved seven zero.

1047
01:07:06,840 --> 01:07:09,080
 Next item of business is our individual consideration.

1048
01:07:09,080 --> 01:07:17,280
 We'll start, we only have one, item 3A, ZCP20-0002.

1049
01:07:17,280 --> 01:07:28,080
 And Haley, if you could provide a summary of the presentation.

1050
01:07:28,080 --> 01:07:38,160
 All right.

1051
01:07:38,160 --> 01:07:41,500
 So Haley Zagurski with the Planning Department.

1052
01:07:41,500 --> 01:07:46,520
 This is a site plan approval for the Residences at Razor Ranch Subdivision.

1053
01:07:46,520 --> 01:07:51,860
 I'll quickly go through the slides for anyone in the public.

1054
01:07:51,860 --> 01:07:55,760
 So the request before you is for approval of a site plan that features single family

1055
01:07:55,760 --> 01:07:59,520
 detached and single family attached or townhome uses.

1056
01:07:59,520 --> 01:08:03,560
 The property is the 40 acres outlined in yellow on the map that's located just north of the

1057
01:08:03,560 --> 01:08:06,360
 Razor Ranch Marketplace.

1058
01:08:06,360 --> 01:08:09,760
 Preliminary plat has been approved for the entire subdivision and a final plat has been

1059
01:08:09,760 --> 01:08:15,360
 approved for phase one, which is the eastern half of the development.

1060
01:08:15,360 --> 01:08:16,800
 Just a little bit of background.

1061
01:08:16,800 --> 01:08:22,680
 This is in accordance with the 2008 and 2009 Razor Ranch ordinances that required approval

1062
01:08:22,680 --> 01:08:24,720
 of a site plan and landscape plan.

1063
01:08:24,720 --> 01:08:28,320
 Building elevations were excluded from that.

1064
01:08:28,320 --> 01:08:32,560
 The criteria for approval or whether it complies with the concept plan, whether it provides

1065
01:08:32,560 --> 01:08:38,120
 for compatible arrangement of uses and buildings that wouldn't affect neighboring properties,

1066
01:08:38,120 --> 01:08:41,760
 whether it provides for adequate and safe vehicular circulation, and if it complies

1067
01:08:41,760 --> 01:08:45,120
 with the overlay district standards.

1068
01:08:45,120 --> 01:08:51,700
 So with regards to those standards, this site does have a mix of zoning of NR3 and NRMU12.

1069
01:08:51,700 --> 01:08:55,440
 The overlay district permits single family and townhome uses in this area.

1070
01:08:55,440 --> 01:08:58,000
 So both uses proposed are permitted.

1071
01:08:58,000 --> 01:09:02,360
 There are architectural and landscape standards that were adopted in 2018 that this was analyzed

1072
01:09:02,360 --> 01:09:03,960
 for compliance with.

1073
01:09:03,960 --> 01:09:08,920
 Those standards limited this to no more than 70 single family and 230 townhomes plus an

1074
01:09:08,920 --> 01:09:10,880
 amenity center.

1075
01:09:10,880 --> 01:09:12,520
 The unit counts are well within that.

1076
01:09:12,520 --> 01:09:15,800
 I wanted to note the amenity center is not part of this request, and we'll come back

1077
01:09:15,800 --> 01:09:19,380
 as a separate site plan in the future.

1078
01:09:19,380 --> 01:09:22,640
 This is a look at the concept plan that they're required to comply with.

1079
01:09:22,640 --> 01:09:27,000
 It reflected, again, single family and townhome uses, which are what is proposed.

1080
01:09:27,000 --> 01:09:31,960
 This plan had a large amount of open space on it that was intended for gas well drilling

1081
01:09:31,960 --> 01:09:32,960
 sites.

1082
01:09:32,960 --> 01:09:36,520
 Those were removed from the Razor Ranch overlay district and opened up more of this property

1083
01:09:36,520 --> 01:09:39,580
 for residential use.

1084
01:09:39,580 --> 01:09:40,900
 This is a look at the site plan.

1085
01:09:40,900 --> 01:09:45,560
 It is in compliance with the approved layout in terms of lots and streets.

1086
01:09:45,560 --> 01:09:50,900
 You can see 65 single family lots on the north side that provide a buffer and a transition

1087
01:09:50,900 --> 01:09:55,580
 with similar lot sizes for the existing subdivision to the north before you hit the townhomes

1088
01:09:55,580 --> 01:09:58,000
 and commercial development to the south.

1089
01:09:58,000 --> 01:10:01,880
 There are 215 townhome lots and 31 HOA lots.

1090
01:10:01,880 --> 01:10:07,360
 Those HOA lots do include the private alleyways that serve as access to the townhomes.

1091
01:10:07,360 --> 01:10:11,440
 The other streets serving the single family homes and providing those primary corridors

1092
01:10:11,440 --> 01:10:15,440
 from east to west through the site are public streets.

1093
01:10:15,440 --> 01:10:18,960
 They would connect at Augusta Drive and provide that stub out that then meanders through the

1094
01:10:18,960 --> 01:10:20,720
 site to get to Bonnie Bray.

1095
01:10:20,720 --> 01:10:24,920
 They do have a connection point to the driveway stub coming from the marketplace that would

1096
01:10:24,920 --> 01:10:29,560
 be gated to restrict access so that commercial access could not enter this site to cut through

1097
01:10:29,560 --> 01:10:32,480
 to Bonnie Bray.

1098
01:10:32,480 --> 01:10:34,800
 This is the proposed landscape plan.

1099
01:10:34,800 --> 01:10:39,100
 Since this is primarily residential development, the details of individual lot landscaping

1100
01:10:39,100 --> 01:10:42,040
 will come with permitting.

1101
01:10:42,040 --> 01:10:45,480
 The lots do have to comply with the overlay district, which requires street trees at one

1102
01:10:45,480 --> 01:10:49,920
 per 45 feet, and that is shown here on the plan.

1103
01:10:49,920 --> 01:10:52,840
 And then they had minimum landscaping for the zoning.

1104
01:10:52,840 --> 01:10:56,280
 So each single family lot will have to maintain 50% landscaping.

1105
01:10:56,280 --> 01:11:01,680
 The NRMU 12 area required 40% landscaping averaged across the entire townhome area,

1106
01:11:01,680 --> 01:11:05,240
 and they are at 45% with this plan.

1107
01:11:05,240 --> 01:11:09,720
 These are the sample townhome elevations reflecting consistency with the razor ranch standards

1108
01:11:09,720 --> 01:11:13,080
 for neutral color palette and masonry materials.

1109
01:11:13,080 --> 01:11:16,040
 And then these are some of the samples of the types of single family homes that are

1110
01:11:16,040 --> 01:11:17,980
 intended to be developed here.

1111
01:11:17,980 --> 01:11:22,180
 And staff is recommending approval of this request as it meets the established requirements.

1112
01:11:22,180 --> 01:11:26,440
 And I believe the applicant has called into the meeting and would be available for questions

1113
01:11:26,440 --> 01:11:27,440
 as well.

1114
01:11:27,440 --> 01:11:33,360
 >> Great, thank you so much, Haley, is there any questions for Haley?

1115
01:11:33,360 --> 01:11:34,360
 Chris or Beck?

1116
01:11:34,360 --> 01:11:39,000
 >> Yeah, I forgot to ask this at work session, but is there going to be pedestrian access

1117
01:11:39,000 --> 01:11:47,860
 along that connection to the razor ranch?

1118
01:11:47,860 --> 01:11:51,960
 >> When I last asked the developer about that, they did not want to provide gated pedestrian

1119
01:11:51,960 --> 01:11:52,960
 access there.

1120
01:11:52,960 --> 01:11:57,200
 They thought there could be some security concerns, but I believe they might be amenable

1121
01:11:57,200 --> 01:12:02,440
 to that if you wanted to direct that question to the applicant.

1122
01:12:02,440 --> 01:12:10,720
 >> Yeah, I'm just concerned about pedestrians going down the west road whose name escapes

1123
01:12:10,720 --> 01:12:16,280
 me at the moment or down Bonnie Bray to get around to shopping, which would be adjacent,

1124
01:12:16,280 --> 01:12:22,000
 which would seem very convenient, but with no pedestrian access, they'd have to drive.

1125
01:12:22,000 --> 01:12:26,280
 >> Correct, there's that vehicular access there, but the plan currently does not reflect

1126
01:12:26,280 --> 01:12:28,800
 the gated pedestrian access.

1127
01:12:28,800 --> 01:12:32,840
 >> Okay, thank you.

1128
01:12:32,840 --> 01:12:41,520
 >> Any other questions for Haley or the applicant?

1129
01:12:41,520 --> 01:12:47,480
 Okay, seeing none, the chair will entertain a motion.

1130
01:12:47,480 --> 01:12:48,480
 Commissioner Smith?

1131
01:12:48,480 --> 01:12:51,240
 >> I make a motion to approve.

1132
01:12:51,240 --> 01:12:52,240
 >> We have a first for approval.

1133
01:12:52,240 --> 01:12:56,400
 Commissioner Pernetta, did I see your hand pop up?

1134
01:12:56,400 --> 01:12:57,400
 >> Yes, I second.

1135
01:12:57,400 --> 01:12:59,280
 >> Perfect, we have a first and a second for approval.

1136
01:12:59,280 --> 01:13:03,480
 Is there any discussion on this item?

1137
01:13:03,480 --> 01:13:06,200
 Seeing none, I will call a vote via roll call.

1138
01:13:06,200 --> 01:13:07,200
 Commissioner Beck?

1139
01:13:07,200 --> 01:13:08,200
 >> Aye.

1140
01:13:08,200 --> 01:13:09,200
 >> Commissioner Ellis?

1141
01:13:09,200 --> 01:13:10,200
 >> Aye.

1142
01:13:10,200 --> 01:13:11,200
 >> Commissioner Smith?

1143
01:13:11,200 --> 01:13:12,200
 >> Aye.

1144
01:13:12,200 --> 01:13:13,200
 >> Commissioner Cole?

1145
01:13:13,200 --> 01:13:14,200
 >> Aye.

1146
01:13:14,200 --> 01:13:15,200
 >> Commissioner Anderson?

1147
01:13:15,200 --> 01:13:16,200
 >> Aye.

1148
01:13:16,200 --> 01:13:17,360
 >> Commissioner Pernetta?

1149
01:13:17,360 --> 01:13:18,360
 >> Aye.

1150
01:13:18,360 --> 01:13:24,480
 >> The motion carries 7-0, the next item of business is our public hearing items, we'll

1151
01:13:24,480 --> 01:13:33,300
 start with item 4A, Z20-0005, the applicant is asking to postpone this indefinitely.

1152
01:13:33,300 --> 01:13:40,600
 We talked in work session to a date uncertain, but we're needing a motion for postponement

1153
01:13:40,600 --> 01:13:41,600
 indefinitely.

1154
01:13:41,600 --> 01:13:42,600
 Commissioner Smith?

1155
01:13:42,600 --> 01:13:48,940
 >> Make a motion to postpone a date uncertain.

1156
01:13:48,940 --> 01:13:51,720
 >> Commissioner Smith, are you amenable to postponing indefinitely?

1157
01:13:51,720 --> 01:13:54,720
 >> A date indefinitely is fine.

1158
01:13:54,720 --> 01:13:55,720
 >> Perfect.

1159
01:13:55,720 --> 01:13:56,720
 Commissioner Beck, did I see your hand?

1160
01:13:56,720 --> 01:13:57,720
 >> Yes, I second.

1161
01:13:57,720 --> 01:14:04,680
 >> We have a first and a second to postpone indefinitely, any discussion?

1162
01:14:04,680 --> 01:14:07,900
 Seeing none, I will call for a vote via roll call.

1163
01:14:07,900 --> 01:14:08,900
 Commissioner Beck?

1164
01:14:08,900 --> 01:14:09,900
 >> Aye.

1165
01:14:09,900 --> 01:14:10,900
 >> Commissioner Ellis?

1166
01:14:10,900 --> 01:14:11,900
 >> Aye.

1167
01:14:11,900 --> 01:14:12,900
 >> Commissioner Smith?

1168
01:14:12,900 --> 01:14:13,900
 >> Aye.

1169
01:14:13,900 --> 01:14:14,900
 >> Commissioner Cole?

1170
01:14:14,900 --> 01:14:15,900
 >> Aye.

1171
01:14:15,900 --> 01:14:16,900
 >> Commissioner Anderson?

1172
01:14:16,900 --> 01:14:17,900
 >> Aye.

1173
01:14:17,900 --> 01:14:18,900
 >> Commissioner Pernetta?

1174
01:14:18,900 --> 01:14:19,900
 >> Aye.

1175
01:14:19,900 --> 01:14:32,400
 >> Motion carries 7-0, the next item of business is item 4B, PDA 20-0001, this item is Julie

1176
01:14:32,400 --> 01:14:52,400
 Wyatt and I will invite her for presentation.

1177
01:14:52,400 --> 01:14:58,280
 So I'm presenting PDA 21 Stonehill Center, the request is for a detailed plan amendment

1178
01:14:58,280 --> 01:15:04,820
 for plan development 142, also known as Stonehill Center, the intent is to add a 30,000 square

1179
01:15:04,820 --> 01:15:10,280
 foot building for a single tenant to accommodate the workforce solutions of North Texas.

1180
01:15:10,280 --> 01:15:17,160
 The subject property is outlined in yellow, it is a 19.6 acre site located on the east

1181
01:15:17,160 --> 01:15:22,640
 side of I-35 and west gate drive, north of west gate drive.

1182
01:15:22,640 --> 01:15:30,560
 PDs prior to 2019 per an ordinance that was approved last fall follow the regulations

1183
01:15:30,560 --> 01:15:38,000
 that were in place when they were adopted, so in this case the PD 142 follows the 1991

1184
01:15:38,000 --> 01:15:39,000
 development code.

1185
01:15:39,000 --> 01:15:43,840
 The 1991 development code had a two-step process for plan developments, first the general concept

1186
01:15:43,840 --> 01:15:50,240
 plan that established the PD, created the permitted land uses, development standards

1187
01:15:50,240 --> 01:15:54,800
 and project boundaries, that remains in place, it is the zoning for the property.

1188
01:15:54,800 --> 01:15:59,920
 The second step is the detailed plan, it's essentially a site plan, it is particular

1189
01:15:59,920 --> 01:16:08,720
 to an individual site and an individual development, talks about landscaping, the building placement,

1190
01:16:08,720 --> 01:16:11,840
 parking access, those sorts of elements.

1191
01:16:11,840 --> 01:16:18,800
 So the concept plan for PD 142 was approved in 1991, the original PD boundaries took in

1192
01:16:18,800 --> 01:16:25,040
 245 acres, there has been some rezoned out of that PD, but it does maintain those boundaries

1193
01:16:25,040 --> 01:16:31,260
 that are outlined in the dark blue hatch line.

1194
01:16:31,260 --> 01:16:37,360
 That original PD did lay out the permitted uses and development standards within PD 142,

1195
01:16:37,360 --> 01:16:43,560
 and you can see that Stonehill center outlined in black is central to that PD, it's in the

1196
01:16:43,560 --> 01:16:44,560
 middle of it.

1197
01:16:44,560 --> 01:16:51,040
 A detailed plan was originally approved for the site in 1992, it included four multi-tenant

1198
01:16:51,040 --> 01:16:55,880
 retail buildings and 806 parking spaces.

1199
01:16:55,880 --> 01:17:01,960
 There were subsequent modifications to that detail plan, and this culminating in the 1993

1200
01:17:01,960 --> 01:17:08,200
 detail plan, it added an additional building so that there were five buildings, two through

1201
01:17:08,200 --> 01:17:17,640
 five were eventually built along with 945 parking spaces, building one was never built,

1202
01:17:17,640 --> 01:17:21,920
 so the approval for that building has expired.

1203
01:17:21,920 --> 01:17:27,920
 So the subject request really is adding back in that building one, the existing buildings

1204
01:17:27,920 --> 01:17:34,200
 range in size from about 26,000 square feet to 47,000 square feet, as I said, 945 parking

1205
01:17:34,200 --> 01:17:41,800
 spaces are on site, and three access points, one to the south to Westgate, one to the west

1206
01:17:41,800 --> 01:17:47,680
 to the I-35 frontage road, and then the site connects to loop 288 through the adjacent

1207
01:17:47,680 --> 01:17:51,180
 commercial lot, it's a restaurant, I believe.

1208
01:17:51,180 --> 01:17:57,080
 The proposal would add, as I said, that 30,000 square foot building, it's outlined in yellow,

1209
01:17:57,080 --> 01:18:01,040
 plus some landscaping and access would remain the same.

1210
01:18:01,040 --> 01:18:08,400
 When we zoom in to the specific area, you see that building in yellow again, it would

1211
01:18:08,400 --> 01:18:16,560
 reduce the on-site parking to 828 spaces, and it would include about 17,000 square foot

1212
01:18:16,560 --> 01:18:22,840
 of landscaping, planting of 16 large and medium canopy trees, which would increase the on-site

1213
01:18:22,840 --> 01:18:28,980
 canopy to about 16,802 square feet at maturity.

1214
01:18:28,980 --> 01:18:34,980
 They will also, if approved, replace the screen hedge that's existing now, it will be similar

1215
01:18:34,980 --> 01:18:40,440
 to what's existing now, that sort of undulating hedge, and the vehicular circulation pattern

1216
01:18:40,440 --> 01:18:43,600
 would remain unchanged.

1217
01:18:43,600 --> 01:18:48,400
 The architectural elements, the pictures on the top, those are the renderings of what

1218
01:18:48,400 --> 01:18:53,760
 they're proposing, and they are very similar in detail and styling to the existing development,

1219
01:18:53,760 --> 01:19:01,480
 which is the two pictures to the south, so they've borrowed a lot of those details from

1220
01:19:01,480 --> 01:19:03,920
 what is existing.

1221
01:19:03,920 --> 01:19:07,640
 The criteria for approval are in the 91 ordinates, and there are four of them, and we'll go over

1222
01:19:07,640 --> 01:19:09,880
 them individually.

1223
01:19:09,880 --> 01:19:15,280
 First is the, does the proposal comply with the concept plan that was adopted?

1224
01:19:15,280 --> 01:19:21,680
 The purpose of PD 142 was to create an urban center, a hub of activity, employment and

1225
01:19:21,680 --> 01:19:27,840
 economic activity there at the intersection of loop 288 and I-35.

1226
01:19:27,840 --> 01:19:32,760
 Previous detail plans were not use specific, they were kind of limited to that building

1227
01:19:32,760 --> 01:19:36,800
 arrangement and the parking signage and landscaping.

1228
01:19:36,800 --> 01:19:43,080
 When a particular tenant seeks a certificate of occupancy in PD 142, we refer to that,

1229
01:19:43,080 --> 01:19:47,940
 those permitted uses in that original concept plan for guidance.

1230
01:19:47,940 --> 01:19:54,360
 We have checked the proposed uses against that concept plan, and they are permitted,

1231
01:19:54,360 --> 01:19:57,800
 kind of that office use with the community center.

1232
01:19:57,800 --> 01:20:03,400
 And then the dimensions, the proposed dimensions are also consistent with the concept plan,

1233
01:20:03,400 --> 01:20:07,160
 so it does meet the first criteria for approval.

1234
01:20:07,160 --> 01:20:12,940
 The second criterion for approval is compatible arrangement of the buildings and uses on site,

1235
01:20:12,940 --> 01:20:18,260
 and then if the proposal would adversely affect the adjoining property.

1236
01:20:18,260 --> 01:20:24,040
 So first we'll look at on site, the building arrangement, the proposed building is consistent

1237
01:20:24,040 --> 01:20:27,300
 with the general building scale and architectural themes.

1238
01:20:27,300 --> 01:20:31,240
 It also completes that unified development pattern that was established with the original

1239
01:20:31,240 --> 01:20:32,240
 plan.

1240
01:20:32,240 --> 01:20:39,940
 The daily activities associated with the proposed use are consistent with the existing daily

1241
01:20:39,940 --> 01:20:45,560
 activities on the site as well as those existing uses, so we don't anticipate any adverse or

1242
01:20:45,560 --> 01:20:47,360
 negative impacts.

1243
01:20:47,360 --> 01:20:51,480
 And then the applicant did provide the traffic generation rates for the proposal, it would

1244
01:20:51,480 --> 01:20:59,840
 generate approximately 292 trips per day, 44 morning peak and then 33 evening peak consistent

1245
01:20:59,840 --> 01:21:03,000
 with what is on the site.

1246
01:21:03,000 --> 01:21:08,400
 Outside of the plan, first we'll look at the mobility improvements in the area that will

1247
01:21:08,400 --> 01:21:10,560
 be coming in the future.

1248
01:21:10,560 --> 01:21:17,040
 The Westgate Road that is currently improved on the south side of the property but ends

1249
01:21:17,040 --> 01:21:21,920
 at the eastern edge will be extended at some point in the future to connect all the way

1250
01:21:21,920 --> 01:21:27,280
 to Bonnie Bray, that will provide additional connectivity to the site.

1251
01:21:27,280 --> 01:21:32,000
 When we look at that additional connectivity and the surrounding development, we see first

1252
01:21:32,000 --> 01:21:36,720
 there's an existing residential neighborhood to the southeast of the site, it's an established

1253
01:21:36,720 --> 01:21:43,160
 neighborhood, large lot, however that neighborhood will not connect to that future Westgate slash

1254
01:21:43,160 --> 01:21:52,360
 Bronco way to the north, so there won't be a direct vehicular connection to the subject

1255
01:21:52,360 --> 01:21:57,200
 property, creating that physical separation between the subject site and that neighborhood,

1256
01:21:57,200 --> 01:22:03,640
 so we anticipate no adverse impacts for that neighborhood with the proposal.

1257
01:22:03,640 --> 01:22:09,320
 There's also the future Denton High School campus that's located south of that future

1258
01:22:09,320 --> 01:22:13,480
 Bronco way, which is kind of that Westgate piece now.

1259
01:22:13,480 --> 01:22:18,000
 Commercial land uses are generally compatible with high school campuses, you often see both

1260
01:22:18,000 --> 01:22:22,880
 of those things on arterial roadways and we do not anticipate any adverse impacts and

1261
01:22:22,880 --> 01:22:27,720
 then finally there is a new residential subdivision north of the future Bronco way.

1262
01:22:27,720 --> 01:22:32,280
 There is once again a physical separation, there's a vacant piece of property between

1263
01:22:32,280 --> 01:22:38,440
 the subject site and that future residential neighborhood and we do not anticipate adverse

1264
01:22:38,440 --> 01:22:40,720
 impacts.

1265
01:22:40,720 --> 01:22:45,160
 The third criterion for approval is adequate safe circulation of vehicular traffic.

1266
01:22:45,160 --> 01:22:51,600
 So onsite, the access will remain unchanged as well as that existing circulation pattern.

1267
01:22:51,600 --> 01:22:58,040
 The onsite parking spaces will go down, but they still will maintain an overall ratio

1268
01:22:58,040 --> 01:23:02,380
 that is consistent with what we typically see for similar developments under the current

1269
01:23:02,380 --> 01:23:03,920
 code.

1270
01:23:03,920 --> 01:23:10,120
 And then offsite, there is a surrounding arterial network, not only two highways, but also a

1271
01:23:10,120 --> 01:23:17,520
 secondary arterial and that future Westgate/Bronco way and then the highway 377 as well as Bonnie

1272
01:23:17,520 --> 01:23:18,520
 Braze.

1273
01:23:18,520 --> 01:23:24,160
 So there's a lot of connectivity in the area and so there is adequate access for the existing

1274
01:23:24,160 --> 01:23:26,800
 and future development.

1275
01:23:26,800 --> 01:23:31,860
 Finally the fourth criterion is substantial compliance with the landscape sign subdivision

1276
01:23:31,860 --> 01:23:39,600
 and other regulations of the city.

1277
01:23:39,600 --> 01:23:44,600
 The proposal follows the 1988 landscape code, which is a little different than what we have

1278
01:23:44,600 --> 01:23:45,600
 today.

1279
01:23:45,600 --> 01:23:47,920
 There were three essential elements.

1280
01:23:47,920 --> 01:23:51,720
 First of all, street yard landscaping, parking lot landscaping, and then finally parking

1281
01:23:51,720 --> 01:23:52,920
 lot screening.

1282
01:23:52,920 --> 01:23:57,520
 The street yard is something we don't often talk about under current regulations, but

1283
01:23:57,520 --> 01:24:03,000
 it was that area between the front building line of the buildings and the right-of-way.

1284
01:24:03,000 --> 01:24:09,080
 The subject request has about 40,000 square feet within its street yard, which required

1285
01:24:09,080 --> 01:24:11,520
 a minimum of 20% landscaping.

1286
01:24:11,520 --> 01:24:17,880
 The applicant is proposing about 17,000 square feet of landscaping, well above the required

1287
01:24:17,880 --> 01:24:20,080
 8,000 square feet of landscaping.

1288
01:24:20,080 --> 01:24:25,260
 They're also proposing 16 trees, which is consistent with the requirement of one tree

1289
01:24:25,260 --> 01:24:29,440
 per 2,500 square feet of total street yard.

1290
01:24:29,440 --> 01:24:36,840
 Parking lot landscaping, the parking lot areas in the street yard have to provide 5% of landscaping

1291
01:24:36,840 --> 01:24:40,520
 with landscape islands, peninsulas, medians, that sort of thing.

1292
01:24:40,520 --> 01:24:45,960
 The applicant is proposing 2,900 square feet of parking lot landscaping.

1293
01:24:45,960 --> 01:24:51,600
 And then parking lot screening, parking lots had to be screened with either a berm, a masonry

1294
01:24:51,600 --> 01:24:53,480
 wall, or an evergreen hedge.

1295
01:24:53,480 --> 01:24:58,600
 There is an existing evergreen hedge, and they will replace that with 54 dwarf Buford

1296
01:24:58,600 --> 01:25:07,480
 holly shrubs, which is consistent with the existing plant pallet and landscape design.

1297
01:25:07,480 --> 01:25:10,240
 Public outreach was done in accordance with the code.

1298
01:25:10,240 --> 01:25:15,760
 The newspaper website and assigned posting, mailed notices were sent to property owners

1299
01:25:15,760 --> 01:25:19,800
 within 200 feet, and courtesy notices within 500 feet.

1300
01:25:19,800 --> 01:25:24,480
 We have not received any responses either in opposition or in favor to the request,

1301
01:25:24,480 --> 01:25:28,120
 and they did not hold a public meeting.

1302
01:25:28,120 --> 01:25:33,400
 Staff recommends approval of the detail plan amendment because it is consistent with the

1303
01:25:33,400 --> 01:25:35,680
 criteria for approval in the 91 code.

1304
01:25:35,680 --> 01:25:41,400
 The site plan and landscape plan and sample building elevations will be attached to the

1305
01:25:41,400 --> 01:25:44,880
 ordinance.

1306
01:25:44,880 --> 01:25:52,440
 And they do enumerate the following, one single story 30,000 square foot building would be

1307
01:25:52,440 --> 01:25:56,160
 constructed in addition to those existing four buildings.

1308
01:25:56,160 --> 01:26:01,120
 The maximum parking on site could be 828 spaces.

1309
01:26:01,120 --> 01:26:07,540
 They are proposing 10 large canopy and 6 medium canopy trees, and just to alert you,

1310
01:26:07,540 --> 01:26:11,200
 that is different than the staff report.

1311
01:26:11,200 --> 01:26:17,120
 There was an error on that staff report, so it's the 10 large canopy and 6 medium canopy.

1312
01:26:17,120 --> 01:26:22,560
 And then the architecture for all the buildings need to maintain the consistent themes with

1313
01:26:22,560 --> 01:26:28,880
 the following elements, the colonnade for 50% of the façade, the varied roof parapet

1314
01:26:28,880 --> 01:26:34,960
 for 50% of the façade facing the public areas, and then those at least two decorative towers

1315
01:26:34,960 --> 01:26:40,120
 that have to be at least five feet taller than the surrounding roof line.

1316
01:26:40,120 --> 01:26:47,720
 I'll be available for questions, and I believe the applicant, we're going to try to get them

1317
01:26:47,720 --> 01:26:51,520
 called in as well.

1318
01:26:51,520 --> 01:26:52,520
 >> Thank you so much, Julie.

1319
01:26:52,520 --> 01:26:55,840
 It looks like we have Krister back as a question.

1320
01:26:55,840 --> 01:27:03,040
 Julie, I think you mentioned this, but who owns the property with a vacant lot to the

1321
01:27:03,040 --> 01:27:04,040
 east?

1322
01:27:04,040 --> 01:27:09,080
 >> No, I don't know who the property owner is of that vacant lot to the east.

1323
01:27:09,080 --> 01:27:11,160
 >> Is it a different owner?

1324
01:27:11,160 --> 01:27:13,040
 >> I suspect it is a different owner.

1325
01:27:13,040 --> 01:27:16,880
 Let me see if I can look that up really quickly, though.

1326
01:27:16,880 --> 01:27:17,880
 I'm going to try.

1327
01:27:17,880 --> 01:27:23,520
 >> And I'll say the reason I asked that question is one of the rationales for the development

1328
01:27:23,520 --> 01:27:30,000
 was we don't expect a lot of change, but then the chair also brought up that there's lots

1329
01:27:30,000 --> 01:27:39,400
 of 30-year-old code going into this property and vicinity, and it would be at least informative

1330
01:27:39,400 --> 01:27:47,200
 to know maybe how that vacant lot is, maybe what intentions are for it, at least at the

1331
01:27:47,200 --> 01:27:48,200
 moment.

1332
01:27:48,200 --> 01:27:57,000
 So I do show that as a different owner, just to alert you that it is within a plan development.

1333
01:27:57,000 --> 01:28:02,600
 So prior to development of that site, it would have to go through this whole process.

1334
01:28:02,600 --> 01:28:08,240
 So it would require a detailed plan amendment and the criteria for approval with that.

1335
01:28:08,240 --> 01:28:15,400
 And one of those, as we talked about tonight, is that adverse impacts to adjacent property.

1336
01:28:15,400 --> 01:28:22,920
 So it will still require this additional scrutiny and review by the planning and zoning commission,

1337
01:28:22,920 --> 01:28:25,920
 a recommendation, and then approval by council.

1338
01:28:25,920 --> 01:28:33,760
 So I don't know of any applications that are pending right now or any proposals, but it

1339
01:28:33,760 --> 01:28:37,120
 would have to -- it would have to go before you, before you could -- before it would be

1340
01:28:37,120 --> 01:28:38,120
 developed.

1341
01:28:38,120 --> 01:28:39,120
 >> Okay.

1342
01:28:39,120 --> 01:28:40,120
 Thank you very much.

1343
01:28:40,120 --> 01:28:42,120
 >> You bet.

1344
01:28:42,120 --> 01:28:45,800
 And just to reiterate, I'm not sure if I mentioned it before, I wanted to make sure the public

1345
01:28:45,800 --> 01:28:47,520
 hearing is open.

1346
01:28:47,520 --> 01:28:48,520
 This is a public hearing.

1347
01:28:48,520 --> 01:28:54,800
 So we certainly invite anyone to speak on this item or have any questions, we'll certainly

1348
01:28:54,800 --> 01:28:55,800
 hear those.

1349
01:28:55,800 --> 01:28:58,600
 Does the applicant have a presentation?

1350
01:28:58,600 --> 01:28:59,600
 Commissioner Anderson.

1351
01:28:59,600 --> 01:29:00,600
 >> Sure.

1352
01:29:00,600 --> 01:29:03,920
 I have a quick question for the staff.

1353
01:29:03,920 --> 01:29:06,800
 Is this going to -- I mean, they're going to build that building, is they going to take

1354
01:29:06,800 --> 01:29:10,520
 away parking for the existing -- like the horny toad cafe, is it going to have an adverse

1355
01:29:10,520 --> 01:29:15,120
 impact on their business, because I know they have customers that park there presently?

1356
01:29:15,120 --> 01:29:16,120
 >> Sure.

1357
01:29:16,120 --> 01:29:22,360
 There is -- so the adjacent commercial restaurant use has its own parking on site.

1358
01:29:22,360 --> 01:29:29,320
 This would reduce parking, but it is -- you know, under current DDC standards, something

1359
01:29:29,320 --> 01:29:36,240
 like this office use would -- we would only require one space per 450 square feet, and

1360
01:29:36,240 --> 01:29:39,760
 they're actually parked at one space per 206 square feet.

1361
01:29:39,760 --> 01:29:49,840
 So it's got ample parking, which is over what we would require, and under today's standards.

1362
01:29:49,840 --> 01:29:53,440
 So I believe there's sufficient parking on site.

1363
01:29:53,440 --> 01:29:54,440
 >> Okay.

1364
01:29:54,440 --> 01:29:58,800
 I would just hate to -- you know, hurt another existing business that's out there by themselves

1365
01:29:58,800 --> 01:30:06,640
 right now, and, you know, surviving alone presently, so.

1366
01:30:06,640 --> 01:30:09,840
 Does the applicant have a presentation or this here for questions, it looks like I might

1367
01:30:09,840 --> 01:30:13,540
 have seen their name pop up at the top.

1368
01:30:13,540 --> 01:30:14,540
 >> She does have a --

1369
01:30:14,540 --> 01:30:15,540
 >> We are here.

1370
01:30:15,540 --> 01:30:16,540
 >> Perfect.

1371
01:30:16,540 --> 01:30:20,960
 If you -- it looks like Alex and Amy, but if you could state your full name and address,

1372
01:30:20,960 --> 01:30:24,960
 and then we'll be happy to listen to your presentation.

1373
01:30:24,960 --> 01:30:26,160
 >> Great.

1374
01:30:26,160 --> 01:30:27,160
 This is Alex Payne.

1375
01:30:27,160 --> 01:30:31,200
 I'm at 2304 Cavendish Lane, Argyle, Texas.

1376
01:30:31,200 --> 01:30:38,520
 I am one of the property owners and our company manages and leases the facility.

1377
01:30:38,520 --> 01:30:47,320
 I have a kind of a -- I guess brief -- a brief statement in that -- to Mr. Anderson's question

1378
01:30:47,320 --> 01:30:50,980
 in that the Horny Toad Cafe purchased their lot.

1379
01:30:50,980 --> 01:30:58,280
 It does have a huge parking lot to the east of it, and I think they'll welcome the arrival

1380
01:30:58,280 --> 01:31:09,840
 of 200 new employees and a number of visitors daily to that location, so.

1381
01:31:09,840 --> 01:31:15,400
 The property itself has been in current ownership for about four years, and we have been in

1382
01:31:15,400 --> 01:31:21,200
 the process of trying to, you know, work with the existing tenants that have been there

1383
01:31:21,200 --> 01:31:26,840
 for many years to keep the property well maintained, but then reposition a lot of the vacancy.

1384
01:31:26,840 --> 01:31:31,360
 It was 30% occupied when we took over.

1385
01:31:31,360 --> 01:31:36,880
 It's sitting around 90% today before the construction of this proposed building.

1386
01:31:36,880 --> 01:31:43,280
 So a lot of the tenants that we have put in, some are retail-type tenants.

1387
01:31:43,280 --> 01:31:51,760
 Several though have been kind of your back office, call centers, we've got a dental management

1388
01:31:51,760 --> 01:31:56,720
 group that owns a bunch of dental clinics, and they have 25,000 feet there.

1389
01:31:56,720 --> 01:32:00,920
 We have the Census Bureau is currently officeing there.

1390
01:32:00,920 --> 01:32:05,920
 University of Behavioral Health has an administrative office there, and like I said, this is a new

1391
01:32:05,920 --> 01:32:08,440
 proposed government office center.

1392
01:32:08,440 --> 01:32:14,120
 So I'll read kind of a statement from Workforce Solutions, and I know it and refer to it as

1393
01:32:14,120 --> 01:32:19,520
 Texas Workforce Commission, but the Workforce Solutions for North Texas, they provide a

1394
01:32:19,520 --> 01:32:24,760
 variety of services to employers and career seekers through a network of workforce centers

1395
01:32:24,760 --> 01:32:29,080
 in the North Central Texas, 14-county area.

1396
01:32:29,080 --> 01:32:34,360
 So they provide services to employers offering assistance related to job postings and openings,

1397
01:32:34,360 --> 01:32:38,800
 recruitment efforts, and connecting the employers to career seekers looking for employment.

1398
01:32:38,800 --> 01:32:44,560
 They also provide services to career-seeking customers offering career coaching, employment

1399
01:32:44,560 --> 01:32:49,620
 preparation, educational and skills training, as well as tuition support and other services

1400
01:32:49,620 --> 01:32:53,200
 to support the efforts in finding employment.

1401
01:32:53,200 --> 01:33:00,680
 In addition to those functions, they have a partner agency that provides vocational rehabilitation,

1402
01:33:00,680 --> 01:33:07,120
 which prepares for, finds, and retains employment if you have a disability through their partnership.

1403
01:33:07,120 --> 01:33:14,040
 And so we're excited to have them, and you know, we started working on this project before

1404
01:33:14,040 --> 01:33:21,280
 the current economic environment we're in, but this has, you know, really amplified the

1405
01:33:21,280 --> 01:33:28,780
 need for their growth and expansion of their services and size of their facility.

1406
01:33:28,780 --> 01:33:34,400
 As I think I mentioned already, they expect approximately 200 employees in this facility

1407
01:33:34,400 --> 01:33:40,760
 of their agency, and then they look to place, you know, people in our county into jobs in

1408
01:33:40,760 --> 01:33:41,760
 the area.

1409
01:33:41,760 --> 01:33:47,280
 So, you know, I'll answer more questions later if need be.

1410
01:33:47,280 --> 01:33:52,160
 Amy Bissett also has some more information on our proposed development.

1411
01:33:52,160 --> 01:33:53,800
 I'll let her speak now.

1412
01:33:53,800 --> 01:33:55,560
 Good evening, commissioners.

1413
01:33:55,560 --> 01:34:02,880
 This is Amy Bissett, 1117 Joshua Tree in Salina.

1414
01:34:02,880 --> 01:34:04,920
 Can you all hear me?

1415
01:34:04,920 --> 01:34:05,920
 Yes.

1416
01:34:05,920 --> 01:34:09,260
 Okay, great.

1417
01:34:09,260 --> 01:34:14,620
 I want to start by addressing a couple of questions that were brought up in the work

1418
01:34:14,620 --> 01:34:19,480
 session to just to make sure those are covered.

1419
01:34:19,480 --> 01:34:25,240
 Commissioner Ellis, you specifically asked about the notices that went out to neighbors

1420
01:34:25,240 --> 01:34:28,880
 and whether or not we received any responses.

1421
01:34:28,880 --> 01:34:36,360
 I do want to share with the commission that I got a call from Judy Smith with Rose Costumes.

1422
01:34:36,360 --> 01:34:41,640
 She was just interested in knowing what the proposed use was and what we were going to

1423
01:34:41,640 --> 01:34:46,720
 do in terms of building architecture, and so I sent her the site plan and the renderings

1424
01:34:46,720 --> 01:34:49,160
 and answered her questions.

1425
01:34:49,160 --> 01:34:51,760
 Apparently, she was satisfied with that.

1426
01:34:51,760 --> 01:34:57,800
 I think she's excited to see more, just more tenants and more density in that area.

1427
01:34:57,800 --> 01:35:03,680
 And I think that speaks to Commissioner Anderson's question as well about parking for the restaurant

1428
01:35:03,680 --> 01:35:04,680
 to the north.

1429
01:35:04,680 --> 01:35:12,800
 I think the density of employees up in that area will hopefully be a boost to their restaurant

1430
01:35:12,800 --> 01:35:13,800
 business.

1431
01:35:13,800 --> 01:35:17,960
 Julie, will you go ahead and go to the first slide, please?

1432
01:35:17,960 --> 01:35:24,080
 I have a couple of slides that will be very quick.

1433
01:35:24,080 --> 01:35:30,800
 I want to start by saying that, just to give you an idea, Alex already went over this,

1434
01:35:30,800 --> 01:35:35,440
 but this is just under 20 acres with a PD that was approved in the early '90s.

1435
01:35:35,440 --> 01:35:43,480
 There are four existing buildings with a number of tenants, as you can see in the slide presentation,

1436
01:35:43,480 --> 01:35:45,800
 if you're able to see that.

1437
01:35:45,800 --> 01:35:52,280
 This includes Rose Costumes and Explorium Denton, the Children's Museum, and some antique

1438
01:35:52,280 --> 01:35:53,280
 and retail shops.

1439
01:35:53,280 --> 01:35:59,040
 And there's, Julie, if you can advance now to slides three and four, I just want to show

1440
01:35:59,040 --> 01:36:08,160
 you all the aerial of what the project looks like today and some of the architecture that

1441
01:36:08,160 --> 01:36:09,160
 is there today.

1442
01:36:09,160 --> 01:36:14,840
 What we are proposing basically is consistent with the original PD.

1443
01:36:14,840 --> 01:36:20,760
 The change here is that the building is slightly smaller than what the original PD approved.

1444
01:36:20,760 --> 01:36:25,880
 But generally speaking, if you'll go to slide five, Julie, we're looking at a net increase

1445
01:36:25,880 --> 01:36:30,880
 of almost 3,000 square feet in landscaping and a net increase of 10 trees.

1446
01:36:30,880 --> 01:36:38,620
 We'll be planting 16 new trees, but there's some on the site that we'll be able to keep

1447
01:36:38,620 --> 01:36:44,000
 there as well, but some will have to come down to accommodate the building.

1448
01:36:44,000 --> 01:36:50,120
 And then finally, Julie has already shared the renderings with you on slides six and

1449
01:36:50,120 --> 01:36:51,120
 seven.

1450
01:36:51,120 --> 01:36:56,560
 So that's the summary of what we're looking for, and I'll be glad to answer any questions.

1451
01:36:56,560 --> 01:37:00,980
 And Alex is here as well to answer any questions.

1452
01:37:00,980 --> 01:37:01,980
 Thank you, Amy.

1453
01:37:01,980 --> 01:37:02,980
 Thank you, Alex.

1454
01:37:02,980 --> 01:37:03,980
 Does anyone have any questions?

1455
01:37:03,980 --> 01:37:09,720
 I don't see any hands raised right now, so I think we're good.

1456
01:37:09,720 --> 01:37:13,720
 I appreciate you calling in and working with us virtually to present to us.

1457
01:37:13,720 --> 01:37:14,720
 Thank you.

1458
01:37:14,720 --> 01:37:15,720
 Absolutely.

1459
01:37:15,720 --> 01:37:19,920
 We're glad to do it.

1460
01:37:19,920 --> 01:37:23,920
 Is there any looking at city, any call ins for comments?

1461
01:37:23,920 --> 01:37:25,880
 I don't see any.

1462
01:37:25,880 --> 01:37:29,160
 And so with that, I will close the public hearing.

1463
01:37:29,160 --> 01:37:33,120
 And it looks like Commissioner Smith was the first one I saw there.

1464
01:37:33,120 --> 01:37:35,920
 Make a motion to approve.

1465
01:37:35,920 --> 01:37:37,280
 We have a first for approval.

1466
01:37:37,280 --> 01:37:38,280
 And Commissioner Ellis?

1467
01:37:38,280 --> 01:37:39,280
 Second.

1468
01:37:39,280 --> 01:37:42,400
 We have a first and a second for approval.

1469
01:37:42,400 --> 01:37:47,280
 Is there any discussion on this item?

1470
01:37:47,280 --> 01:37:50,280
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

1471
01:37:50,280 --> 01:37:51,640
 Commissioner Ellis?

1472
01:37:51,640 --> 01:37:52,640
 Aye.

1473
01:37:52,640 --> 01:37:54,400
 Commissioner Smith?

1474
01:37:54,400 --> 01:37:55,400
 Aye.

1475
01:37:55,400 --> 01:37:56,960
 Commissioner Cole?

1476
01:37:56,960 --> 01:37:57,960
 Aye.

1477
01:37:57,960 --> 01:37:59,440
 Commissioner Anderson?

1478
01:37:59,440 --> 01:38:00,440
 Aye.

1479
01:38:00,440 --> 01:38:01,880
 Commissioner Pernetta?

1480
01:38:01,880 --> 01:38:02,880
 Aye.

1481
01:38:02,880 --> 01:38:04,200
 Commissioner Beck?

1482
01:38:04,200 --> 01:38:05,200
 Aye.

1483
01:38:05,200 --> 01:38:07,160
 And the chair votes in favor.

1484
01:38:07,160 --> 01:38:10,560
 That means it carries seven, zero.

1485
01:38:10,560 --> 01:38:17,160
 Next item of business is item 4C, S19-0015D.

1486
01:38:17,160 --> 01:38:33,320
 I will open the public hearing and invite Cindy Jackson for presentation.

1487
01:38:33,320 --> 01:39:00,880
 Okay, so I'll put this up for your hearing.

1488
01:39:00,880 --> 01:39:20,800
 I don't see it here.

1489
01:39:20,800 --> 01:39:29,440
 Damn, it's down here.

1490
01:39:29,440 --> 01:39:31,440
 Okay.

1491
01:39:31,440 --> 01:39:33,440
 Okay.

1492
01:39:33,440 --> 01:40:00,440
 Okay.

1493
01:40:00,440 --> 01:40:28,960
 I don't think it's my revised one.

1494
01:40:28,960 --> 01:40:54,480
 It will be just a minute.

1495
01:40:54,480 --> 01:41:02,480
 Perfect.

1496
01:41:02,480 --> 01:41:13,480
 Here.

1497
01:41:13,480 --> 01:41:24,400
 Okay.

1498
01:41:24,400 --> 01:41:25,400
 Sorry about that.

1499
01:41:25,400 --> 01:41:27,460
 We lost the presentation.

1500
01:41:27,460 --> 01:41:28,460
 Okay.

1501
01:41:28,460 --> 01:41:34,880
 For the record, this is Cindy Jackson with the planning and development, the planning

1502
01:41:34,880 --> 01:41:36,920
 division.

1503
01:41:36,920 --> 01:41:44,320
 S19-0015 is a request for approval of a specific use permit to permit communications tower

1504
01:41:44,320 --> 01:41:53,120
 with a maximum height of 810 feet mean sea level for broadband wireless service.

1505
01:41:53,120 --> 01:41:56,280
 The request was originally for 150 foot tower.

1506
01:41:56,280 --> 01:42:01,480
 However, it's been determined that the subject site is actually located within the airport

1507
01:42:01,480 --> 01:42:03,760
 height hazard district.

1508
01:42:03,760 --> 01:42:10,480
 The height of structures located in this area, the maximum height permitted is 810 feet mean

1509
01:42:10,480 --> 01:42:19,000
 sea level per section 4.5.8C3, which translates to 82 feet as a maximum permitted height for

1510
01:42:19,000 --> 01:42:24,140
 the tower.

1511
01:42:24,140 --> 01:42:33,640
 The site is zoned mixed use regional MR.

1512
01:42:33,640 --> 01:42:39,960
 The proposed tower and accompanying office is located on 4.37 acre lot.

1513
01:42:39,960 --> 01:42:46,680
 However, the lot is encumbered by 140 foot wide drainage easement on the west side.

1514
01:42:46,680 --> 01:42:52,460
 With this map, particularly the north, is to the right.

1515
01:42:52,460 --> 01:42:58,760
 This shows you the impact area, which is 1.05 acres, and the proposed tower location in

1516
01:42:58,760 --> 01:43:05,680
 relation to the entire site.

1517
01:43:05,680 --> 01:43:10,880
 This is a close up of the proposed development site plan, the impact area.

1518
01:43:10,880 --> 01:43:15,080
 You can see that the site will take access on Barcelona Street, and it has a shared access

1519
01:43:15,080 --> 01:43:20,720
 with the property that's located to the west, and this tower is proposed to be located right

1520
01:43:20,720 --> 01:43:27,800
 here.

1521
01:43:27,800 --> 01:43:36,800
 The proposed landscape plan has providing 40% landscape area, which is 15% above the

1522
01:43:36,800 --> 01:43:39,500
 required 25%.

1523
01:43:39,500 --> 01:43:46,360
 Six street trees are proposed along Barcelona Street along with a hedge, and the site meets

1524
01:43:46,360 --> 01:43:53,960
 the required 30% tree canopy coverage.

1525
01:43:53,960 --> 01:43:57,800
 Here you see the building elevations that are proposed, and the elevation that is on

1526
01:43:57,800 --> 01:44:06,300
 the top here is the elevation proposed that will face Barcelona Street.

1527
01:44:06,300 --> 01:44:10,480
 This is a photo of a tower similar to the one that is proposed.

1528
01:44:10,480 --> 01:44:19,480
 The only difference would be that rather than the chain link, we will have a wooden fence

1529
01:44:19,480 --> 01:44:25,520
 around the bottom of the structure.

1530
01:44:25,520 --> 01:44:30,620
 General criteria for approval is in section 2.4.5E.

1531
01:44:30,620 --> 01:44:36,520
 This site complies with all criteria for approval as noted in the staff report.

1532
01:44:36,520 --> 01:44:45,440
 The SUP criteria for approval in section 2.5.3D I will go into in more detail.

1533
01:44:45,440 --> 01:44:48,600
 Criteria one, compatibility with the surrounding area.

1534
01:44:48,600 --> 01:44:52,080
 The surrounding development is comprised of light manufacturing companies, warehouses

1535
01:44:52,080 --> 01:44:56,440
 and a medical clinic, which are primarily industrial in nature.

1536
01:44:56,440 --> 01:45:03,480
 The proposed use of the site is compatible with the surrounding uses.

1537
01:45:03,480 --> 01:45:08,000
 Criteria two, minimal impacts on future development.

1538
01:45:08,000 --> 01:45:10,560
 The land surrounding the site is already developed.

1539
01:45:10,560 --> 01:45:16,000
 The proposed communications tower and accompanying office building will have minimal impact on

1540
01:45:16,000 --> 01:45:21,560
 the future development in the area.

1541
01:45:21,560 --> 01:45:27,020
 Criteria three, proposed use conforms with all other standards of the DDC and all other

1542
01:45:27,020 --> 01:45:29,300
 applicable city codes.

1543
01:45:29,300 --> 01:45:34,420
 The proposed communications tower and accompanying office building meet all the applicable requirements

1544
01:45:34,420 --> 01:45:38,040
 in the DDC and other city codes.

1545
01:45:38,040 --> 01:45:42,920
 Criteria four, impacts associated with access traffic, emergency services, utilities, parking

1546
01:45:42,920 --> 01:45:47,600
 refuge areas, glare and odor have been adequately mitigated.

1547
01:45:47,600 --> 01:45:53,040
 The proposed communications tower is located on the interior of the platted lot outside

1548
01:45:53,040 --> 01:45:56,320
 of any building setbacks, easements and right of way.

1549
01:45:56,320 --> 01:45:59,680
 The utilities are already in place.

1550
01:45:59,680 --> 01:46:09,720
 There is adequate transportation infrastructure that will be minimal if any glare, noise or

1551
01:46:09,720 --> 01:46:10,720
 odor from the tower.

1552
01:46:10,720 --> 01:46:17,200
 It will have minimal impacts.

1553
01:46:17,200 --> 01:46:22,440
 Criteria five, the use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and other adopted applicable

1554
01:46:22,440 --> 01:46:24,020
 plans.

1555
01:46:24,020 --> 01:46:28,800
 There is no other adopted plan for this site other than the comprehensive plan.

1556
01:46:28,800 --> 01:46:33,360
 The site is designated business innovation on the future land use map.

1557
01:46:33,360 --> 01:46:39,320
 Typical uses in this area include offices, light manufacturing and research and development.

1558
01:46:39,320 --> 01:46:45,040
 The proposed use is for a broadband company's office and communication tower and it conforms

1559
01:46:45,040 --> 01:46:50,560
 with this designation.

1560
01:46:50,560 --> 01:46:55,640
 Criteria six, the use adversely impacts the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants

1561
01:46:55,640 --> 01:46:58,760
 of the area and the city of Denton.

1562
01:46:58,760 --> 01:47:03,160
 The use will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the

1563
01:47:03,160 --> 01:47:11,480
 city of Denton.

1564
01:47:11,480 --> 01:47:20,520
 We sent out notification within 200 feet, a newspaper ad was posted and a sign was posted

1565
01:47:20,520 --> 01:47:21,800
 on the site.

1566
01:47:21,800 --> 01:47:27,960
 We have received two responses in opposition to this request.

1567
01:47:27,960 --> 01:47:32,200
 They are located on the other side of the railroad track here.

1568
01:47:32,200 --> 01:47:36,400
 And they represent 11% of the area within the 20 foot buffer.

1569
01:47:36,400 --> 01:47:41,560
 We did receive one notice in favor which was from the property owner, however, that was

1570
01:47:41,560 --> 01:47:46,400
 not counted.

1571
01:47:46,400 --> 01:47:50,280
 Staff recommends approval of this request for a communications tower with a maximum

1572
01:47:50,280 --> 01:47:59,400
 height of 810 feet mean sea level as it conforms with the criteria in section 2.4.5e.

1573
01:47:59,400 --> 01:48:08,160
 The criteria in section 2.5.3d for approval of a specific use permit and section 4.5.8

1574
01:48:08,160 --> 01:48:10,640
 of the air height hazard district.

1575
01:48:10,640 --> 01:48:14,040
 And that concludes my presentation.

1576
01:48:14,040 --> 01:48:17,800
 I believe the applicant has called in to answer any questions.

1577
01:48:17,800 --> 01:48:18,800
 Great.

1578
01:48:18,800 --> 01:48:22,040
 Thank you so much for your presentation, Cindy.

1579
01:48:22,040 --> 01:48:23,040
 Commissioner Beck.

1580
01:48:23,040 --> 01:48:24,040
 Yes.

1581
01:48:24,040 --> 01:48:25,120
 Thank you, chair.

1582
01:48:25,120 --> 01:48:32,200
 Can the applicant say whether there will be any changes in range from having the height

1583
01:48:32,200 --> 01:48:34,720
 of the tower?

1584
01:48:34,720 --> 01:48:36,720
 In terms of service range?

1585
01:48:36,720 --> 01:48:42,560
 How do we get the applicant?

1586
01:48:42,560 --> 01:48:43,560
 DTV?

1587
01:48:43,560 --> 01:48:56,920
 If we want to have the applicant, I don't know if Mark or John, if you want to handle

1588
01:48:56,920 --> 01:49:01,920
 that question?

1589
01:49:01,920 --> 01:49:06,160
 Thank you.

1590
01:49:06,160 --> 01:49:08,480
 This is Mark Martin, 100 West Oak Street.

1591
01:49:08,480 --> 01:49:09,480
 Can you hear me?

1592
01:49:09,480 --> 01:49:10,480
 Yes, sir.

1593
01:49:10,480 --> 01:49:11,480
 Okay.

1594
01:49:11,480 --> 01:49:12,480
 Excellent.

1595
01:49:12,480 --> 01:49:22,200
 To answer Mr. Beck's question, yes, the height does make a difference, so the taller that

1596
01:49:22,200 --> 01:49:28,440
 we can get the tower, obviously, the better, but as Cindy had mentioned, we are somewhat

1597
01:49:28,440 --> 01:49:35,600
 limited by the airport restrictions at this point, at least.

1598
01:49:35,600 --> 01:49:41,440
 I don't know if John's on the line, but if he needs to add something to that, please

1599
01:49:41,440 --> 01:49:42,440
 go ahead.

1600
01:49:42,440 --> 01:49:48,280
 Hello, this is John Hall, can you hear me?

1601
01:49:48,280 --> 01:49:49,280
 We can, John.

1602
01:49:49,280 --> 01:49:50,280
 Yes, John.

1603
01:49:50,280 --> 01:49:51,280
 Oh, good.

1604
01:49:51,280 --> 01:49:52,280
 There we go.

1605
01:49:52,280 --> 01:49:53,280
 Okay.

1606
01:49:53,280 --> 01:49:54,280
 Yeah, Mark is correct.

1607
01:49:54,280 --> 01:49:59,640
 Obviously, the taller the tower, the better for us, and for all other providers that would

1608
01:49:59,640 --> 01:50:04,280
 have access to that tower as well, we've leased out space to 18T of horizon.

1609
01:50:04,280 --> 01:50:11,420
 However, with the current restriction, we're facing a deadline to get this project going

1610
01:50:11,420 --> 01:50:16,680
 so we're willing to press forward at this point in time to get our SEP and get our building

1611
01:50:16,680 --> 01:50:25,040
 permit and get shovels to the ground and start this project.

1612
01:50:25,040 --> 01:50:26,040
 Okay, thank you.

1613
01:50:26,040 --> 01:50:36,400
 Is there any other questions for Cindy or the applicant?

1614
01:50:36,400 --> 01:50:39,840
 I don't see any at this time, Mark and John, I appreciate you being here.

1615
01:50:39,840 --> 01:50:43,960
 Cindy, do I need to get them to state their address or did we get that when they called

1616
01:50:43,960 --> 01:50:44,960
 in?

1617
01:50:44,960 --> 01:50:45,960
 Do we have that information?

1618
01:50:45,960 --> 01:50:48,280
 Yes, I do need to state their address.

1619
01:50:48,280 --> 01:50:54,720
 Yeah, John, can you just state your name again and your address as well as Mark?

1620
01:50:54,720 --> 01:50:56,280
 Yeah, correct.

1621
01:50:56,280 --> 01:51:03,440
 John Hall, 1310 Chimney Rock Drive, Keller, Texas.

1622
01:51:03,440 --> 01:51:08,720
 And Mark Martin, 100 West Oak Street, Suite 201, Denton, Texas.

1623
01:51:08,720 --> 01:51:10,460
 I appreciate that for both of you.

1624
01:51:10,460 --> 01:51:12,080
 Is there any public comments coming in?

1625
01:51:12,080 --> 01:51:15,800
 I don't see anyone from the public wanting to speak on this item.

1626
01:51:15,800 --> 01:51:19,040
 With that, I will close the public hearing and turn to motion or discussion.

1627
01:51:19,040 --> 01:51:20,040
 Commissioner Anderson.

1628
01:51:20,040 --> 01:51:21,040
 I make a motion to approve.

1629
01:51:21,040 --> 01:51:23,080
 We have a first for approval.

1630
01:51:23,080 --> 01:51:24,080
 Commissioner Pernetta?

1631
01:51:24,080 --> 01:51:25,080
 Second.

1632
01:51:25,080 --> 01:51:27,480
 We have a first and a second for approval.

1633
01:51:27,480 --> 01:51:30,840
 Is there any discussion on this item?

1634
01:51:30,840 --> 01:51:33,800
 Seeing none, I'll call a vote via roll call.

1635
01:51:33,800 --> 01:51:34,800
 Commissioner Ellis?

1636
01:51:34,800 --> 01:51:35,800
 Aye.

1637
01:51:35,800 --> 01:51:36,800
 Commissioner Smith?

1638
01:51:36,800 --> 01:51:37,800
 Aye.

1639
01:51:37,800 --> 01:51:38,800
 Commissioner Colle?

1640
01:51:38,800 --> 01:51:39,800
 Aye.

1641
01:51:39,800 --> 01:51:40,800
 Commissioner Anderson?

1642
01:51:40,800 --> 01:51:41,800
 Aye.

1643
01:51:41,800 --> 01:51:42,800
 Commissioner Bek?

1644
01:51:42,800 --> 01:51:43,800
 Aye.

1645
01:51:43,800 --> 01:51:44,800
 Commissioner Pernetta?

1646
01:51:44,800 --> 01:51:45,800
 Aye.

1647
01:51:45,800 --> 01:51:48,880
 The chair is an aye.

1648
01:51:48,880 --> 01:51:52,400
 Motion carries 7-0.

1649
01:51:52,400 --> 01:51:58,760
 Next item of business is item 4D, PD 20-0001.

1650
01:51:58,760 --> 01:52:16,280
 I'll invite Haley Zagurski for presentation and open the public hearing.

1651
01:52:16,280 --> 01:52:30,280
 Good evening.

1652
01:52:30,280 --> 01:52:37,240
 This is case PD 20-0001 for Sagebrook.

1653
01:52:37,240 --> 01:52:39,920
 The request before you is twofold.

1654
01:52:39,920 --> 01:52:47,760
 It is an initial zoning request for plan development district on approximately 132 acres.

1655
01:52:47,760 --> 01:52:54,400
 It is a rezoning request from the residential 6 or R6 district to PD on the remaining 14

1656
01:52:54,400 --> 01:52:55,400
 acres.

1657
01:52:55,400 --> 01:52:58,000
 The site is a total of approximately 146 acres.

1658
01:52:58,000 --> 01:53:00,080
 It's outlined in yellow on the map.

1659
01:53:00,080 --> 01:53:06,600
 It has frontage on Allred Road on the north, Bonnie Bray to the east, and is located along

1660
01:53:06,600 --> 01:53:11,660
 the railroad tracks parallel to Fort Worth Drive on the east side as well.

1661
01:53:11,660 --> 01:53:16,960
 This is a look at the current zoning map that shows the R6 district along the railroad frontage

1662
01:53:16,960 --> 01:53:18,360
 there along Fort Worth Drive.

1663
01:53:18,360 --> 01:53:23,920
 That was part of a strip annexation down the highway in the 1960s.

1664
01:53:23,920 --> 01:53:28,460
 The balance of the property is shown as RR, which is our rural residential district.

1665
01:53:28,460 --> 01:53:32,760
 After a property is annexed, it receives that placeholder designation until it is initially

1666
01:53:32,760 --> 01:53:33,760
 zoned.

1667
01:53:33,760 --> 01:53:39,960
 This property completed the annexation process in March of this year.

1668
01:53:39,960 --> 01:53:43,960
 This is a look at the site layout exhibit that's included as part of the PD.

1669
01:53:43,960 --> 01:53:47,120
 It shows 491 residential lots.

1670
01:53:47,120 --> 01:53:53,520
 There are approximately 9.4 acres of dedicated HOA open space that includes the amenity center

1671
01:53:53,520 --> 01:53:56,080
 on the south side that's circled in yellow.

1672
01:53:56,080 --> 01:54:01,160
 That area also includes a pond and walking trails as well as some play features.

1673
01:54:01,160 --> 01:54:05,240
 And then the other site circled in yellow on the northeast corner of the property is

1674
01:54:05,240 --> 01:54:11,160
 another larger HOA area that would feature a pond with trails and benches as well.

1675
01:54:11,160 --> 01:54:15,720
 Outlined in blue is the kind of central north-south spine through the development.

1676
01:54:15,720 --> 01:54:20,040
 That road is designed more like a boulevard with traffic divided to go one way in each

1677
01:54:20,040 --> 01:54:23,360
 direction on either side of a central median.

1678
01:54:23,360 --> 01:54:27,120
 That median will feature enhanced landscaping as well as a 10-foot wide combined hike bike

1679
01:54:27,120 --> 01:54:33,080
 trail that will allow for pedestrian connectivity from Allred Road down to Brush Creek Road on

1680
01:54:33,080 --> 01:54:34,720
 the south.

1681
01:54:34,720 --> 01:54:38,760
 Brush Creek is a future primary arterial.

1682
01:54:38,760 --> 01:54:44,240
 The right-of-way width for that would be dedicated and the developer would construct two lanes

1683
01:54:44,240 --> 01:54:49,840
 of that road with each phase of their development adjacent to their property.

1684
01:54:49,840 --> 01:54:53,520
 South of Brush Creek is an area that's approximately 18 acres total.

1685
01:54:53,520 --> 01:54:57,600
 Fourteen of that is floodplain and ESA.

1686
01:54:57,600 --> 01:55:00,960
 That area is proposed to be dedicated to the city for the development of future trails by

1687
01:55:00,960 --> 01:55:03,240
 our Parks Department.

1688
01:55:03,240 --> 01:55:06,880
 And then circled in red on the map is another feature I wanted to call out, which is the

1689
01:55:06,880 --> 01:55:09,440
 location of a plugged gas well.

1690
01:55:09,440 --> 01:55:13,120
 Up until the last year or so, there was an active gas well on this site and the developer

1691
01:55:13,120 --> 01:55:16,040
 did plug that in anticipation of this development.

1692
01:55:16,040 --> 01:55:21,600
 And it's shown in an open space so that nothing would be built over that well.

1693
01:55:21,600 --> 01:55:25,680
 This plan is intended to show the phasing that's proposed for this development.

1694
01:55:25,680 --> 01:55:31,520
 It's proposed as four phases, with phase one being the largest of those with 143 units

1695
01:55:31,520 --> 01:55:33,440
 as well as the amenity center.

1696
01:55:33,440 --> 01:55:39,680
 With phase one, the connection of Brush Creek to Fort Worth Drive would be established.

1697
01:55:39,680 --> 01:55:43,680
 That includes the relocation of the railroad crossing that's currently at South Pawnee

1698
01:55:43,680 --> 01:55:49,000
 Bray and Fort Worth Drive, which is at a very odd angle and fairly unsafe today with limited

1699
01:55:49,000 --> 01:55:53,720
 stacking distance for cars turning off of 377.

1700
01:55:53,720 --> 01:55:59,280
 That intersection would be closed and that crossing would be relocated and properly aligned

1701
01:55:59,280 --> 01:56:00,280
 down at Brush Creek.

1702
01:56:00,280 --> 01:56:04,000
 And they are coordinating that with the city and the railroad company so that that can

1703
01:56:04,000 --> 01:56:05,640
 occur with phase one.

1704
01:56:05,640 --> 01:56:09,800
 Phase one also includes that primary north-south boulevard so that there are two points of

1705
01:56:09,800 --> 01:56:11,960
 connection for phase one.

1706
01:56:11,960 --> 01:56:16,400
 Phase two would be to the north of that and have approximately 133 units.

1707
01:56:16,400 --> 01:56:20,100
 Phase three would be on the west side and would continue the extension of Brush Creek

1708
01:56:20,100 --> 01:56:23,440
 Road as well as 99 residential units.

1709
01:56:23,440 --> 01:56:27,760
 And the north of that would be phase four, closing this out with another 116 units and

1710
01:56:27,760 --> 01:56:33,660
 that final portion of Brush Creek that falls within this property.

1711
01:56:33,660 --> 01:56:38,640
 This chart just shows a comparison of the proposed PD to the base zoning of R6 that

1712
01:56:38,640 --> 01:56:40,600
 they've based this on.

1713
01:56:40,600 --> 01:56:45,480
 This takes out many of the uses that are permitted in R6 and allows only single-family detached

1714
01:56:45,480 --> 01:56:50,000
 dwellings, parks, playgrounds, open space, and amenity centers as well as the accessory

1715
01:56:50,000 --> 01:56:55,560
 and temporary uses as they're permitted within R6.

1716
01:56:55,560 --> 01:57:00,460
 This table then shows the comparison of the dimensional standards and some of the landscaping

1717
01:57:00,460 --> 01:57:04,840
 standards between the PD and the R6 district.

1718
01:57:04,840 --> 01:57:06,320
 Largely they are the same.

1719
01:57:06,320 --> 01:57:10,520
 They are proposing an enhanced front yard with an additional 10 feet of depth for a

1720
01:57:10,520 --> 01:57:12,640
 total of 20 feet.

1721
01:57:12,640 --> 01:57:18,180
 I did want to note up until today the plans reflected a 10-foot side yard.

1722
01:57:18,180 --> 01:57:22,760
 That was an error they intended for that 10-foot side yard to be only on the corner lots.

1723
01:57:22,760 --> 01:57:27,760
 That was carried throughout and that is proposed to be amended to 5 feet to meet the R6 standard

1724
01:57:27,760 --> 01:57:31,560
 on the interior lots.

1725
01:57:31,560 --> 01:57:36,440
 The other primary enhancement from our DDC standards is with respect to landscaping.

1726
01:57:36,440 --> 01:57:40,760
 The code only specifies one tree per yard for residential uses.

1727
01:57:40,760 --> 01:57:45,700
 They would propose one tree per front yard, an additional two ornamental trees on each

1728
01:57:45,700 --> 01:57:51,640
 corner lot, and then a standard of 12 shrubs and 10 other ornamental plants for interior

1729
01:57:51,640 --> 01:57:57,880
 lots as well as evergreen screening along the foundations for those corner properties.

1730
01:57:57,880 --> 01:58:00,440
 They do have an overall enhancement in open space.

1731
01:58:00,440 --> 01:58:05,360
 The DDC requires a minimum of 5% of the area be open space.

1732
01:58:05,360 --> 01:58:10,840
 For the entire development they are at 18%.

1733
01:58:10,840 --> 01:58:14,520
 There are general criteria for approval that are applicable to all applications in the

1734
01:58:14,520 --> 01:58:16,560
 DDC.

1735
01:58:16,560 --> 01:58:19,560
 The plan does comply with all of these, so I won't go through them in detail, but they

1736
01:58:19,560 --> 01:58:21,920
 are outlined in your backup.

1737
01:58:21,920 --> 01:58:26,960
 And then I will go through each of these PD specific criteria for approval in turn.

1738
01:58:26,960 --> 01:58:36,240
 Criteria 1 is compliance with the plan 2030, when looking at our future land use map, this

1739
01:58:36,240 --> 01:58:43,000
 site has a...

1740
01:58:43,000 --> 01:58:44,000
 We lost...

1741
01:58:44,000 --> 01:58:45,000
 There we go.

1742
01:58:45,000 --> 01:58:48,000
 Haley, are you back?

1743
01:58:48,000 --> 01:58:49,000
 Okay, yes.

1744
01:58:49,000 --> 01:58:50,800
 It shows I'm unmuted now.

1745
01:58:50,800 --> 01:58:51,800
 Okay.

1746
01:58:51,800 --> 01:58:52,800
 All right.

1747
01:58:52,800 --> 01:58:57,200
 So this has the neighborhood mixed use designation on the east part of the property.

1748
01:58:57,200 --> 01:59:02,400
 You can see on the map that area in the dark pink color is a node of neighborhood service

1749
01:59:02,400 --> 01:59:07,560
 uses, commercial uses and moderate density residential that's expected where Bonnie Bray

1750
01:59:07,560 --> 01:59:11,880
 and Brush Creek intersect with highway 377.

1751
01:59:11,880 --> 01:59:15,400
 The balance of the property is designated as rural areas.

1752
01:59:15,400 --> 01:59:20,000
 Most of the properties that are within the city's ETJ or donut holes are designated on

1753
01:59:20,000 --> 01:59:21,600
 our map as rural areas.

1754
01:59:21,600 --> 01:59:24,160
 This is consistent with that.

1755
01:59:24,160 --> 01:59:28,320
 This area is highly transitional though, if you look at the broader...

1756
01:59:28,320 --> 01:59:35,760
 The wedge of this pie between where 35 bisects the city on the west side, and then 377 creates

1757
01:59:35,760 --> 01:59:40,000
 a very stark dividing line with the railroad tracks to the east.

1758
01:59:40,000 --> 01:59:43,080
 All of this is within about a mile and a half span here.

1759
01:59:43,080 --> 01:59:46,920
 So it's very unlikely that once another primary arterial goes through, this would remain rural

1760
01:59:46,920 --> 01:59:48,920
 in character.

1761
01:59:48,920 --> 01:59:53,080
 So it's important to look at this broader area and see the light pink here is community

1762
01:59:53,080 --> 01:59:58,320
 mixed use, which is intended for higher density residential, more intensive commercial uses

1763
01:59:58,320 --> 02:00:02,720
 where Brush Creek or All Red Road will meet I-35.

1764
02:00:02,720 --> 02:00:05,960
 And then moderate density residential is designated to the north.

1765
02:00:05,960 --> 02:00:09,960
 That allows between four and 12 dwelling units per acre.

1766
02:00:09,960 --> 02:00:14,080
 And then we have, of course, a regional park just to the north of this property.

1767
02:00:14,080 --> 02:00:18,400
 So with the proposed development being at about 3.3 units per acre, it does fit comfortably

1768
02:00:18,400 --> 02:00:23,000
 within this transition where we see the more intensive uses on the highway, transitioning

1769
02:00:23,000 --> 02:00:27,720
 to lower intensity uses as we get closer to 377.

1770
02:00:27,720 --> 02:00:32,760
 And then allowing for that transition to the low residential and rural areas that are developed

1771
02:00:32,760 --> 02:00:37,240
 on the east side of highway 377.

1772
02:00:37,240 --> 02:00:39,840
 Criterion two is compliance with the DDC.

1773
02:00:39,840 --> 02:00:44,080
 This table is a repeat of what we saw earlier, just showing that they do intend to either

1774
02:00:44,080 --> 02:00:48,440
 comply with or have enhanced standards compared to the R-6 district.

1775
02:00:48,440 --> 02:00:54,920
 For anything not specified in the PD, they would default back to the DDC standards.

1776
02:00:54,920 --> 02:00:58,640
 Criterion three is whether there's greater building design amenities and connectivity.

1777
02:00:58,640 --> 02:01:03,120
 For building design and architecture, they're proposing compliance with the DDC minimum

1778
02:01:03,120 --> 02:01:04,120
 standards.

1779
02:01:04,120 --> 02:01:08,120
 They are proposing to enhance these lots and residential units with that additional landscaping

1780
02:01:08,120 --> 02:01:13,600
 that I mentioned earlier in terms of additional trees and foundation plantings.

1781
02:01:13,600 --> 02:01:18,240
 In terms of open space and amenities, they're proposing a greater enhancement above the

1782
02:01:18,240 --> 02:01:23,360
 5% minimum, just within those two areas that I called out on their site plan earlier around

1783
02:01:23,360 --> 02:01:28,160
 the amenity center and the ponds, they have 6.4% open space.

1784
02:01:28,160 --> 02:01:32,680
 And then in terms of connectivity, this would substantially improve automotive and pedestrian

1785
02:01:32,680 --> 02:01:35,000
 connectivity in this area of the city.

1786
02:01:35,000 --> 02:01:38,880
 Brush Creek Road is a much needed east-west connection through South Denton, and they

1787
02:01:38,880 --> 02:01:41,080
 would be aiding in the construction of that.

1788
02:01:41,080 --> 02:01:46,120
 And then for pedestrians, within their subdivision, they're proposing that a 10-foot north-south

1789
02:01:46,120 --> 02:01:50,400
 hike bike trail that would allow pedestrians and bikers to connect from the future park

1790
02:01:50,400 --> 02:01:55,000
 to the north to the intended trails that the parks department would eventually develop

1791
02:01:55,000 --> 02:02:02,320
 to the south of here within the flood plain as part of our parks trail system master plan.

1792
02:02:02,320 --> 02:02:06,080
 Criterion four is applicable to residential uses, and that's rather there's compatible

1793
02:02:06,080 --> 02:02:09,400
 buildings, uses, and consistency with the character of the area.

1794
02:02:09,400 --> 02:02:13,580
 This subdivision in terms of density layout and the type of homes that are proposed is

1795
02:02:13,580 --> 02:02:16,960
 consistent with other neighborhoods in Southern Denton, such as Country Lakes and Carnegie

1796
02:02:16,960 --> 02:02:18,300
 Ridge.

1797
02:02:18,300 --> 02:02:22,160
 It's also consistent with the density and housing types that are expected to occur within

1798
02:02:22,160 --> 02:02:25,440
 Hunter and Cole Ranch.

1799
02:02:25,440 --> 02:02:29,500
 The plan does reflect enhancements around the perimeter of the subdivision that would help

1800
02:02:29,500 --> 02:02:34,140
 with that consistency with the character of the area as well as buffering from the railroad,

1801
02:02:34,140 --> 02:02:38,280
 and then includes a variety of perimeter fencing as well as enhanced landscaping and street

1802
02:02:38,280 --> 02:02:41,240
 trees.

1803
02:02:41,240 --> 02:02:44,640
 Criterion five is for PDs proposing non-residential uses.

1804
02:02:44,640 --> 02:02:48,600
 The only of those that are proposed here are the parks and open spaces, which are typical

1805
02:02:48,600 --> 02:02:54,400
 for and encouraged for a residential development such as this.

1806
02:02:54,400 --> 02:02:58,640
 Criterion six has several subcomponents related to the provision of public facilities to support

1807
02:02:58,640 --> 02:03:01,720
 the development, so I'll go through each of those individually.

1808
02:03:01,720 --> 02:03:04,600
 The first is with respect to schools.

1809
02:03:04,600 --> 02:03:10,120
 The expected student generation, according to Denton ISD, is 113 elementary students,

1810
02:03:10,120 --> 02:03:13,760
 59 middle school students, and 74 high schoolers.

1811
02:03:13,760 --> 02:03:16,900
 This property is currently zoned in to McMath Middle School and Denton High School, which

1812
02:03:16,900 --> 02:03:20,160
 both have capacity to support that number of students.

1813
02:03:20,160 --> 02:03:23,720
 It's currently zoned for Borman Elementary School, which does not have capacity at this

1814
02:03:23,720 --> 02:03:28,760
 time, but this development is expected to occur in phases over eight years, so there's

1815
02:03:28,760 --> 02:03:33,360
 the chance for enhanced capacity at that school within that timeframe or for the school to

1816
02:03:33,360 --> 02:03:35,720
 be rezoned to a different attendance zone.

1817
02:03:35,720 --> 02:03:38,960
 There are multiple schools proposed within Hunter and Cole Ranch that would be closer

1818
02:03:38,960 --> 02:03:44,540
 to this property than Borman currently is.

1819
02:03:44,540 --> 02:03:49,160
 Criterion six also includes fire and police provisions.

1820
02:03:49,160 --> 02:03:53,480
 With respect to fire, the closest fire station is just north of here on Vintage Boulevard.

1821
02:03:53,480 --> 02:03:55,380
 It's shown in red on the map.

1822
02:03:55,380 --> 02:03:57,880
 That is well within the eight minute or less response time boundary.

1823
02:03:57,880 --> 02:04:00,000
 That's the standard for our fire department.

1824
02:04:00,000 --> 02:04:04,120
 I reached out to the Denton Police Department, and they indicated this is not expected to

1825
02:04:04,120 --> 02:04:08,240
 have a significant or negative impact on their response times, and they did note that a new

1826
02:04:08,240 --> 02:04:12,240
 police facility will be coming much closer to this in the near future.

1827
02:04:12,240 --> 02:04:15,800
 Near that fire station, there is an additional police facility expected to be operational

1828
02:04:15,800 --> 02:04:19,860
 by 2022.

1829
02:04:19,860 --> 02:04:24,040
 For utilities, the blue lines on this map represent the water lines.

1830
02:04:24,040 --> 02:04:26,120
 There's currently water available along Bonnie Braith.

1831
02:04:26,120 --> 02:04:30,180
 The city also had a major water line extension along Allred.

1832
02:04:30,180 --> 02:04:34,280
 Those lines will be tied into and water services carried throughout the development.

1833
02:04:34,280 --> 02:04:36,700
 The wastewater lines are shown in red on the map.

1834
02:04:36,700 --> 02:04:42,540
 The closest line for them to tie to is to the east of here down Brush Creek Road at what's

1835
02:04:42,540 --> 02:04:43,940
 called the Graveyard Interceptor.

1836
02:04:43,940 --> 02:04:47,400
 They would make a connection at that point and extend the line down Brush Creek across

1837
02:04:47,400 --> 02:04:53,360
 the railroad tracks and across the site and throughout to serve the development.

1838
02:04:53,360 --> 02:04:56,620
 That main line extension down Brush Creek, they are expected to participate with the

1839
02:04:56,620 --> 02:05:00,920
 city to oversize that line to make sure it can accommodate the capacity and demand of

1840
02:05:00,920 --> 02:05:06,080
 this area as future development occurs.

1841
02:05:06,080 --> 02:05:10,160
 With respect to streets, there's several major roadways at play here.

1842
02:05:10,160 --> 02:05:12,100
 The first of those would be Brush Creek Road.

1843
02:05:12,100 --> 02:05:16,920
 As I mentioned earlier, they would be dedicating the 120 feet of right-of-way width for that

1844
02:05:16,920 --> 02:05:19,080
 primary arterial to be extended.

1845
02:05:19,080 --> 02:05:23,040
 They would be responsible for constructing half of that, so two lanes adjacent to their

1846
02:05:23,040 --> 02:05:26,340
 development to provide access in the interim.

1847
02:05:26,340 --> 02:05:31,240
 The city did conduct a regional traffic study within the last year to look at this road

1848
02:05:31,240 --> 02:05:34,000
 and its possible alignments.

1849
02:05:34,000 --> 02:05:38,480
 As a result of that study and some of the specific site engineering that we were able

1850
02:05:38,480 --> 02:05:42,580
 to look at with this development, the potential alignment for that was determined and that's

1851
02:05:42,580 --> 02:05:45,680
 what's reflected on the plans for this development.

1852
02:05:45,680 --> 02:05:51,120
 That alignment really came down to needing to kind of thread the needle between the major

1853
02:05:51,120 --> 02:05:56,240
 features on this site, that being the floodplain, which is zone A floodplain along the tributary

1854
02:05:56,240 --> 02:06:02,200
 to the south that's shown in blue on this map and then the gas well that I mentioned

1855
02:06:02,200 --> 02:06:07,360
 on the northwest corner of this property that plugged well did not need to be within city

1856
02:06:07,360 --> 02:06:10,480
 right-of-way or underneath the roadway, so they had to squeeze in between those two with

1857
02:06:10,480 --> 02:06:14,880
 this road and that's what's reflected on the plans.

1858
02:06:14,880 --> 02:06:19,180
 The other roadways that this property has connection to are Bonnie Bray Street.

1859
02:06:19,180 --> 02:06:22,840
 The very southern end of that is on the east side of this property.

1860
02:06:22,840 --> 02:06:26,860
 When they make that railroad connection at Brush Creek, as part of that getting that

1861
02:06:26,860 --> 02:06:32,300
 new connection, the city does have to close the crossing at Bonnie Bray, which is currently

1862
02:06:32,300 --> 02:06:36,980
 considered very unsafe because of the limited stacking space and the odd and very sharp

1863
02:06:36,980 --> 02:06:41,700
 angle of that connection, so that would be south Bonnie Bray would be closed south of

1864
02:06:41,700 --> 02:06:45,160
 Allred Road at that point in time.

1865
02:06:45,160 --> 02:06:49,560
 Allred Road to the north side of this property would not be improved at this time.

1866
02:06:49,560 --> 02:06:53,600
 Its current status is sufficient to serve this development for the initial phase.

1867
02:06:53,600 --> 02:06:57,780
 The city is expected to make those improvements in the future, either when the park develops

1868
02:06:57,780 --> 02:07:01,560
 or when an additional development occurs in this area that would generate the need for

1869
02:07:01,560 --> 02:07:03,360
 those improvements.

1870
02:07:03,360 --> 02:07:07,560
 The primary entrance to this site, as we saw on the plan earlier, is near that amenity

1871
02:07:07,560 --> 02:07:08,560
 center.

1872
02:07:08,560 --> 02:07:11,160
 It would occur on Brush Creek roughly in this part of the property and then they would have

1873
02:07:11,160 --> 02:07:15,080
 secondary access further to the west on Brush Creek as well as one point of access to the

1874
02:07:15,080 --> 02:07:21,960
 north at Allred that would align with the primary entrance to the park.

1875
02:07:21,960 --> 02:07:23,680
 Parks are the final component of this.

1876
02:07:23,680 --> 02:07:28,920
 The area in green is the area of that future southwest park that I mentioned earlier that

1877
02:07:28,920 --> 02:07:33,280
 is a regional scale city park, so think North Lakes Park or something of that nature in

1878
02:07:33,280 --> 02:07:35,560
 terms of amenities that will be there.

1879
02:07:35,560 --> 02:07:40,200
 The city is currently negotiating with a consultant to develop the master plan for that park,

1880
02:07:40,200 --> 02:07:44,980
 so it is underway and in development at this time.

1881
02:07:44,980 --> 02:07:49,200
 In addition, as I mentioned earlier, the developer is proposing to dedicate the land area south

1882
02:07:49,200 --> 02:07:53,680
 of Brush Creek Road for future trail connections by the parks department.

1883
02:07:53,680 --> 02:07:56,840
 As part of the trails master plan, they are focusing on providing trails throughout the

1884
02:07:56,840 --> 02:08:00,720
 city in our floodplain areas, so this would tie into that.

1885
02:08:00,720 --> 02:08:04,400
 And then park dedication and development fees would apply to this project at the time of

1886
02:08:04,400 --> 02:08:07,880
 platting and permitting.

1887
02:08:07,880 --> 02:08:12,960
 I wanted to mention briefly the fiscal impact analysis that was done as part of the annexation

1888
02:08:12,960 --> 02:08:18,440
 of this property, just to give you some estimates with its current agricultural use.

1889
02:08:18,440 --> 02:08:22,600
 Its current property tax revenue is about $377 a year.

1890
02:08:22,600 --> 02:08:29,140
 The estimated annual tax revenue at full build out would be $967,000 roughly.

1891
02:08:29,140 --> 02:08:34,160
 And then when you look at the cost of service, that nets out to about $87,000 in incremental

1892
02:08:34,160 --> 02:08:36,000
 tax revenue.

1893
02:08:36,000 --> 02:08:41,320
 The construction fees and sales taxes would be significant for this development.

1894
02:08:41,320 --> 02:08:46,680
 Our current rates permitting inspections and impact fees would come out to about $8.5 million.

1895
02:08:46,680 --> 02:08:50,280
 Local sales tax related to the construction of this subdivision would come out to about

1896
02:08:50,280 --> 02:08:53,800
 $1.2 million over that eight-year build out.

1897
02:08:53,800 --> 02:08:58,320
 In addition to those quantitative impacts, though, it's also important to just kind of

1898
02:08:58,320 --> 02:09:02,400
 think about the qualitative impact, so I want to summarize some of those before we get into

1899
02:09:02,400 --> 02:09:05,040
 the conclusion of this and move on to comments.

1900
02:09:05,040 --> 02:09:08,920
 A gas well was plugged in anticipation of this development.

1901
02:09:08,920 --> 02:09:13,820
 The developer will be contributing a significant amount of benefit to the city in terms of

1902
02:09:13,820 --> 02:09:18,120
 Brush Creek being extended and the right of way dedicated across this property.

1903
02:09:18,120 --> 02:09:24,160
 The railroad crossing at 377 will be significantly improved and made safer with this development.

1904
02:09:24,160 --> 02:09:28,480
 Extending Brush Creek Road, because that unsafe crossing at Bonnie Bray would be closed.

1905
02:09:28,480 --> 02:09:32,220
 And then there is a significant amount of contribution to our park system and our trail

1906
02:09:32,220 --> 02:09:38,720
 system with the dedications and the hike and bike trail through the subdivision.

1907
02:09:38,720 --> 02:09:41,960
 Notification was provided for this zoning case.

1908
02:09:41,960 --> 02:09:46,840
 We received one response in favor that's from the current property owner, the Birch family.

1909
02:09:46,840 --> 02:09:49,560
 Three oppositions were recorded just today.

1910
02:09:49,560 --> 02:09:51,680
 One of those was emailed to you all earlier.

1911
02:09:51,680 --> 02:09:56,880
 And then two additional ones we located at City Hall that were delivered by mail.

1912
02:09:56,880 --> 02:10:00,640
 I wanted to read those into the record to make sure they get recorded.

1913
02:10:00,640 --> 02:10:04,560
 The first is from Morgan Trail at 4789 South Bonnie Bray Street.

1914
02:10:04,560 --> 02:10:09,640
 She is opposed and her comments were to quit trying to put neighborhoods near us.

1915
02:10:09,640 --> 02:10:14,880
 She says they all want to, they all start out wanting to rezone only to sell out to

1916
02:10:14,880 --> 02:10:18,000
 other developers, keep Argyle rural.

1917
02:10:18,000 --> 02:10:22,680
 And then Brian Trail also at 4789 South Bonnie Bray is opposed and said, no more requests

1918
02:10:22,680 --> 02:10:24,060
 for neighborhoods.

1919
02:10:24,060 --> 02:10:26,720
 We live right across the street from this one.

1920
02:10:26,720 --> 02:10:31,160
 I also wanted to note in your backup, there were six additional responses provided that

1921
02:10:31,160 --> 02:10:36,160
 were in favor of this request from areas outside of the scope of these notices.

1922
02:10:36,160 --> 02:10:40,360
 Those responses were provided to the developer when he first started the annexation process

1923
02:10:40,360 --> 02:10:41,760
 for this subdivision.

1924
02:10:41,760 --> 02:10:45,280
 So those weren't directly tied to the notices that the city sent, but I wanted to mention

1925
02:10:45,280 --> 02:10:48,080
 that those were in your backup as well.

1926
02:10:48,080 --> 02:10:51,080
 There was a neighborhood meeting held on January 31st.

1927
02:10:51,080 --> 02:10:55,280
 There were approximately 12 attendees at that meeting.

1928
02:10:55,280 --> 02:10:59,380
 And staff is recommending approval of this request as it complies with the general criteria

1929
02:10:59,380 --> 02:11:03,320
 as well as the PD specific criteria for approval.

1930
02:11:03,320 --> 02:11:08,640
 And if this progresses for tonight, it would be scheduled for city council on June 2nd.

1931
02:11:08,640 --> 02:11:12,600
 And I believe the developers here and they do have a presentation that they would like

1932
02:11:12,600 --> 02:11:13,600
 to give as well.

1933
02:11:13,600 --> 02:11:14,600
 Great.

1934
02:11:14,600 --> 02:11:17,640
 Thank you so much for that.

1935
02:11:17,640 --> 02:11:20,120
 You did say the applicant has a presentation, correct?

1936
02:11:20,120 --> 02:11:21,120
 Correct.

1937
02:11:21,120 --> 02:11:22,120
 Okay.

1938
02:11:22,120 --> 02:11:23,120
 Let's start with that.

1939
02:11:23,120 --> 02:11:26,240
 Or is there any questions for Haley right now?

1940
02:11:26,240 --> 02:11:29,640
 Thank you, chair.

1941
02:11:29,640 --> 02:11:31,040
 Hey, Haley.

1942
02:11:31,040 --> 02:11:36,960
 We've had a couple of projects recently where DISD after their analysis said elementary

1943
02:11:36,960 --> 02:11:39,040
 schools did not have capacity.

1944
02:11:39,040 --> 02:11:48,320
 Do they offer any other feedback to you other than the numbers and capacity or not?

1945
02:11:48,320 --> 02:11:49,320
 Typically not.

1946
02:11:49,320 --> 02:11:53,960
 In some cases, like one of our recent rezoning on Ryan road, they indicated that they could

1947
02:11:53,960 --> 02:11:56,760
 zone that into another school relatively easily.

1948
02:11:56,760 --> 02:11:59,760
 They actually kept in contact with me after that.

1949
02:11:59,760 --> 02:12:03,200
 And within a month, they had changed the attendance zone for that project.

1950
02:12:03,200 --> 02:12:08,560
 So I think as development comes in, they adapt and respond pretty quickly to those changes.

1951
02:12:08,560 --> 02:12:09,560
 Okay.

1952
02:12:09,560 --> 02:12:10,560
 Very good.

1953
02:12:10,560 --> 02:12:11,560
 Thanks.

1954
02:12:11,560 --> 02:12:12,560
 Commissioner Beck.

1955
02:12:12,560 --> 02:12:17,280
 Yeah, this exactly falls on Commissioner Ellis's question.

1956
02:12:17,280 --> 02:12:31,000
 And that is, does the district, the school district, when they adapt and are forced to

1957
02:12:31,000 --> 02:12:38,080
 switch the school zones around, do they give you any estimate of general capacity in the

1958
02:12:38,080 --> 02:12:44,560
 south and southwest that for, it just follows exactly on from Commissioner Ellis's question.

1959
02:12:44,560 --> 02:12:48,680
 It seems like we're cramming a lot of elementary kids into these areas and the school district

1960
02:12:48,680 --> 02:12:52,280
 keeps saying, no, we can't do that.

1961
02:12:52,280 --> 02:12:58,760
 And they kind of, we kind of make them make it work by continuing to have development.

1962
02:12:58,760 --> 02:13:00,920
 And that concerns me.

1963
02:13:00,920 --> 02:13:10,000
 Do they talk about their general southwest capacity for students when you talk to them?

1964
02:13:10,000 --> 02:13:11,000
 They did not.

1965
02:13:11,000 --> 02:13:13,640
 They didn't indicate opposition to this case necessarily.

1966
02:13:13,640 --> 02:13:17,520
 They just provided us the data and let us know their current capacity.

1967
02:13:17,520 --> 02:13:21,280
 But again, I think it's important to keep in mind that those are current capacities

1968
02:13:21,280 --> 02:13:25,500
 that they're looking at and this, that amount of students wouldn't potentially be there

1969
02:13:25,500 --> 02:13:30,840
 until eight years or more in the future based on the phasing for this subdivision.

1970
02:13:30,840 --> 02:13:35,480
 And then as we recently saw with Hunter and Cole Ranch being approved, there are properties

1971
02:13:35,480 --> 02:13:40,860
 slated for other elementary schools in the south and western part of Denton in the near

1972
02:13:40,860 --> 02:13:45,120
 future as well.

1973
02:13:45,120 --> 02:13:46,120
 Thank you.

1974
02:13:46,120 --> 02:13:52,480
 Haley, I had one question really quickly, if it's possible to share your screen again

1975
02:13:52,480 --> 02:14:04,480
 and go back to the fiscal impact.

1976
02:14:04,480 --> 02:14:05,480
 Thank you.

1977
02:14:05,480 --> 02:14:12,360
 It's very enlightening to see these numbers, even if they're kind of rough estimates.

1978
02:14:12,360 --> 02:14:17,520
 But I had one specific question on the calculation for our own edification.

1979
02:14:17,520 --> 02:14:22,320
 On the left-hand side, it says local sales tax over the eight years is 1.2 million.

1980
02:14:22,320 --> 02:14:27,120
 And then on the table on the right side of the screen under direct effects from construction,

1981
02:14:27,120 --> 02:14:39,800
 it says construction materials purchased locally would be 31,443,000 is one is locally defined

1982
02:14:39,800 --> 02:14:44,000
 as city of Denton because over at the 1.2, it says local sales tax.

1983
02:14:44,000 --> 02:14:48,320
 So I'm wondering how geographically specific locally means.

1984
02:14:48,320 --> 02:14:53,880
 And if that is the city of Denton, is the taxes on that construction material taken

1985
02:14:53,880 --> 02:14:58,360
 into consideration on the local sales tax number of 1.2?

1986
02:14:58,360 --> 02:15:04,920
 Or any sales tax on that 31 million would be additional revenue potentially for the

1987
02:15:04,920 --> 02:15:14,520
 city not reflected on the left-hand side of this slide.

1988
02:15:14,520 --> 02:15:19,600
 I was trying to look through the analysis and see if they specified or defined the term

1989
02:15:19,600 --> 02:15:21,600
 local.

1990
02:15:21,600 --> 02:15:26,400
 I don't know that they do other than it references the Denton area.

1991
02:15:26,400 --> 02:15:27,400
 Okay.

1992
02:15:27,400 --> 02:15:32,800
 Well, let's not worry about if it's 100% or 10%.

1993
02:15:32,800 --> 02:15:38,640
 The taxes that the city would obtain off whatever that number would be of construction materials

1994
02:15:38,640 --> 02:15:44,280
 that sold in the city, that's additional revenue not reflected on the summary of the left-hand

1995
02:15:44,280 --> 02:15:49,680
 side of the screen, am I correct?

1996
02:15:49,680 --> 02:15:57,160
 I believe the local sales tax total is inclusive of the construction materials.

1997
02:15:57,160 --> 02:15:59,760
 That was my understanding of the analysis.

1998
02:15:59,760 --> 02:16:02,040
 Okay.

1999
02:16:02,040 --> 02:16:05,720
 That is the clarification that I was hoping for.

2000
02:16:05,720 --> 02:16:07,720
 Commissioner Beck.

2001
02:16:07,720 --> 02:16:09,320
 Thank you, Chair.

2002
02:16:09,320 --> 02:16:18,440
 Haley, can you educate me on how drainage and floodplain is included in the calculation

2003
02:16:18,440 --> 02:16:25,200
 of green space and parks for developments?

2004
02:16:25,200 --> 02:16:27,760
 I am not an expert on our parks ordinance.

2005
02:16:27,760 --> 02:16:34,200
 I believe for areas that are floodplain, there is kind of a multiplier there.

2006
02:16:34,200 --> 02:16:38,320
 I think, Richard, do you know there's a 50% credit for those areas?

2007
02:16:38,320 --> 02:16:39,880
 I don't know.

2008
02:16:39,880 --> 02:16:45,340
 I believe it's either a 25% or a 50% credit that they can receive for those areas.

2009
02:16:45,340 --> 02:16:49,900
 If there was eight acres of park dedication needed and they had 16 acres of floodplain,

2010
02:16:49,900 --> 02:16:52,240
 I think that would be somewhat equivalent.

2011
02:16:52,240 --> 02:16:53,240
 There's a multiplier in there.

2012
02:16:53,240 --> 02:17:00,360
 I don't recall the exact amount, but it is a reduced value, if you will, for floodplain

2013
02:17:00,360 --> 02:17:03,280
 within our current parks ordinance.

2014
02:17:03,280 --> 02:17:07,440
 That can certainly still be dedicated to the city because our parks master plan is relying

2015
02:17:07,440 --> 02:17:13,040
 heavily upon floodplain areas to provide those trail connections throughout the city because

2016
02:17:13,040 --> 02:17:20,680
 our riparian corridors do spider, you know, across the majority of the city, so they would

2017
02:17:20,680 --> 02:17:26,840
 provide some useful avenues for connectivity in areas such as this.

2018
02:17:26,840 --> 02:17:29,680
 I'm not sure, Richard, were you able to?

2019
02:17:29,680 --> 02:17:32,440
 Yeah, I'm looking for it right now.

2020
02:17:32,440 --> 02:17:40,200
 While he looks that up, I have sort of a related question, and that is, does the police facility

2021
02:17:40,200 --> 02:17:47,340
 there north of the new park, that's the firing range that's going to put us in compliance

2022
02:17:47,340 --> 02:17:50,040
 with the response time?

2023
02:17:50,040 --> 02:17:56,120
 Yes, I believe that is a training facility as well as a police station where officers

2024
02:17:56,120 --> 02:18:00,860
 would be stationed out of, but yes, I believe that does include the firing range as part

2025
02:18:00,860 --> 02:18:02,440
 of that training facility.

2026
02:18:02,440 --> 02:18:08,120
 But I guess that's, you sort of, I think answered that question, is there will actually be stationed

2027
02:18:08,120 --> 02:18:10,400
 officers in that facility?

2028
02:18:10,400 --> 02:18:16,440
 It's not just a training facility, they would be able to respond out of that facility.

2029
02:18:16,440 --> 02:18:22,320
 That was my understanding from the police department's response when I asked about this.

2030
02:18:22,320 --> 02:18:27,200
 Any other questions for Haley?

2031
02:18:27,200 --> 02:18:29,760
 Right now I'm sure there might be more, but...

2032
02:18:29,760 --> 02:18:34,680
 Just to respond on the floodplain acreage, it's a three to one, so floodplain acreage

2033
02:18:34,680 --> 02:18:40,040
 may be dedicated at a ratio of three to one in lieu of non-floodplain property.

2034
02:18:40,040 --> 02:18:45,680
 So if I can clarify that, three acres, they get a credit for one?

2035
02:18:45,680 --> 02:18:46,680
 Correct.

2036
02:18:46,680 --> 02:18:49,520
 Okay, thank you.

2037
02:18:49,520 --> 02:18:55,840
 At this time, I understand the applicant does have a presentation, so I'll invite them to

2038
02:18:55,840 --> 02:18:59,680
 be unmuted and present, if you could, whoever is presenting, if they could just state their

2039
02:18:59,680 --> 02:19:17,280
 name and address for the record.

2040
02:19:17,280 --> 02:19:42,280
 It should be either Randy Rivera or Doug Powell with McAdams, and then Rob Betancur representing

2041
02:19:42,280 --> 02:19:45,800
 Zena, if that helps.

2042
02:19:45,800 --> 02:19:47,960
 Hi, this is Randy.

2043
02:19:47,960 --> 02:19:50,040
 Good evening.

2044
02:19:50,040 --> 02:19:51,040
 I think I started...

2045
02:19:51,040 --> 02:19:52,040
 Good evening.

2046
02:19:52,040 --> 02:19:58,120
 I think I started talking a little too early, but okay, so yes, Randy Rivera, I'm a planner

2047
02:19:58,120 --> 02:20:05,120
 with McAdams at 111 Hillside Drive in Lewisville, Texas.

2048
02:20:05,120 --> 02:20:12,120
 Doug Powell is another planner on this project, and he is here with me, and also on the phone

2049
02:20:12,120 --> 02:20:22,440
 is Rob Betancur, our client and the developer with Zena Land Development out of Grapevine.

2050
02:20:22,440 --> 02:20:32,040
 And we are happy and glad to be able to present to you tonight this request for this 146 acres.

2051
02:20:32,040 --> 02:20:38,840
 We have had the pleasure of working with Haley and the planning staff and the other departments.

2052
02:20:38,840 --> 02:20:46,120
 Over the course of almost a couple of years now, and we were able to come in with P&Z

2053
02:20:46,120 --> 02:20:54,680
 to do a work session in late January to really kind of introduce this project to you prior

2054
02:20:54,680 --> 02:20:58,320
 to tonight.

2055
02:20:58,320 --> 02:21:05,440
 And so our application was submitted for initially, not necessarily for the zoning, but when we

2056
02:21:05,440 --> 02:21:10,800
 were in the ETJ, we turned in our first application in December of 2018.

2057
02:21:10,800 --> 02:21:15,240
 And so we have been around for a little while, working through the different code updates

2058
02:21:15,240 --> 02:21:17,240
 and making changes as needed.

2059
02:21:17,240 --> 02:21:23,840
 And it's been a very enjoyable experience working with staff, and we're glad to finally

2060
02:21:23,840 --> 02:21:26,720
 be able to be in front of you tonight for this request.

2061
02:21:26,720 --> 02:21:34,040
 So I'll start off, and Haley, I'll just number which slide to jump to, because I do not want

2062
02:21:34,040 --> 02:21:38,640
 to spend time, you know, going over things that you did a great job already covering

2063
02:21:38,640 --> 02:21:39,640
 in detail.

2064
02:21:39,640 --> 02:21:49,560
 And so Sagebrook, again, is a, you know, 491 lot subdivision and the, you know, the style

2065
02:21:49,560 --> 02:21:55,360
 and the theme and the entry features are pretty reminiscent of, like, a Texas country style

2066
02:21:55,360 --> 02:22:00,720
 using some natural elements and that we wanted to pull from this area.

2067
02:22:00,720 --> 02:22:05,520
 And if you can go ahead and go to slide two.

2068
02:22:05,520 --> 02:22:11,880
 And this is taken off of the city's map, just showing, again, this donut area that we talked

2069
02:22:11,880 --> 02:22:17,680
 that Haley talked about too, of ETJ land in the southwest part of the city.

2070
02:22:17,680 --> 02:22:23,120
 And Sagebrook is highlighted in yellow, I think you know where it is at this point,

2071
02:22:23,120 --> 02:22:29,760
 and that we are asking for a zoning change for all 146 acres for this PD to be consistent

2072
02:22:29,760 --> 02:22:32,520
 with our six uses.

2073
02:22:32,520 --> 02:22:39,120
 I'd like to go ahead and jump to slide, actually the next one, slide three, please.

2074
02:22:39,120 --> 02:22:44,360
 Showing a location of our property, you know, with 35 being so close, it really is about

2075
02:22:44,360 --> 02:22:48,680
 a quarter mile from our northwest corner.

2076
02:22:48,680 --> 02:22:57,040
 And then with a railroad to the east, it really acts as a kind of a dividing line, you know,

2077
02:22:57,040 --> 02:23:02,080
 from dividing the east to the west, and, you know, that this area is treated a little bit

2078
02:23:02,080 --> 02:23:09,840
 differently than the properties up and down 377 on the east side that aren't constrained

2079
02:23:09,840 --> 02:23:14,560
 by that railroad crossing, which limits the access.

2080
02:23:14,560 --> 02:23:17,480
 Slide four will be the next one.

2081
02:23:17,480 --> 02:23:24,760
 And what we did here is we overlaid the city boundaries so that, you know, you can clearly

2082
02:23:24,760 --> 02:23:28,520
 see this land has been left over in the ETJ.

2083
02:23:28,520 --> 02:23:34,120
 And I think it's a safe, you know, kind of guess at this point that at some point in

2084
02:23:34,120 --> 02:23:38,640
 the future, this land will be annexed into the city of Denton since it's completely surrounded

2085
02:23:38,640 --> 02:23:39,640
 by it.

2086
02:23:39,640 --> 02:23:44,800
 It's just kind of how we fit in there and you can see the 14 acres that's already within

2087
02:23:44,800 --> 02:23:48,200
 the city that is the zone R6.

2088
02:23:48,200 --> 02:23:59,880
 Slide five will be the next one, and we wanted to show how our 146 acres fit into the context

2089
02:23:59,880 --> 02:24:06,740
 of these enormous master plan communities with Hunter and Coal Ranch.

2090
02:24:06,740 --> 02:24:12,040
 And on this graphic, you can also see the Brush Creek extension that follows the flood

2091
02:24:12,040 --> 02:24:22,120
 plain and then intersects with 377, but this plan here had a lot to do with the proposal

2092
02:24:22,120 --> 02:24:28,400
 before you tonight and that, you know, to match up with similar uses in the area to

2093
02:24:28,400 --> 02:24:34,000
 be consistent with what's expected, what people are seeing, what the city is seeing, the community

2094
02:24:34,000 --> 02:24:36,000
 and the neighbors.

2095
02:24:36,000 --> 02:24:44,400
 And so you can see as we transition from Hunter-Coal's MN zoning district, which is the nearest to

2096
02:24:44,400 --> 02:24:53,560
 be developed areas of those MPCs to Sagebrook, we transition into an R6 density as we get

2097
02:24:53,560 --> 02:25:00,280
 to the railroad and 377 as Haley talked about this being a highly transitional area.

2098
02:25:00,280 --> 02:25:06,560
 And that is exactly the plan that we're proposing that works, it's very, it's feasible.

2099
02:25:06,560 --> 02:25:12,920
 And again, it just fits into the context of the surrounding PDs as well as Hunter-Coal.

2100
02:25:12,920 --> 02:25:20,320
 Slide six shows the parts and amenities of Hunter-Coal on the left.

2101
02:25:20,320 --> 02:25:28,200
 And then on the right are the regional and kind of local trails.

2102
02:25:28,200 --> 02:25:33,360
 And what we think is significant and the reason for sharing this with you, just the context

2103
02:25:33,360 --> 02:25:39,480
 of this, how it applies to Sagebrook, is the interconnectedness of all of the greenways

2104
02:25:39,480 --> 02:25:47,840
 as those are natural linkages to provide for pedestrian opportunities and activities, cyclists

2105
02:25:47,840 --> 02:25:54,600
 and all of those types of activities to enjoy in these green belts that connect the community

2106
02:25:54,600 --> 02:25:56,120
 together.

2107
02:25:56,120 --> 02:26:05,560
 And the benefit of Sagebrook's location is we are able to provide a link to residents

2108
02:26:05,560 --> 02:26:12,800
 from Hunter-Coal, from Country Lakes to come up through these trail systems into Sagebrook

2109
02:26:12,800 --> 02:26:19,800
 and eventually into Southwest Regional Park there for the sports activities that they'll

2110
02:26:19,800 --> 02:26:23,680
 be doing with their kids and families.

2111
02:26:23,680 --> 02:26:30,720
 And that magenta line that you see on the right, the dashed magenta in the yellow box,

2112
02:26:30,720 --> 02:26:33,560
 that's the proposed trail linkage.

2113
02:26:33,560 --> 02:26:39,880
 We're providing a piece of that, but the idea again is to create consistent connectivity

2114
02:26:39,880 --> 02:26:45,560
 for people to access Southwest Park through Sagebrook.

2115
02:26:45,560 --> 02:26:55,000
 I would like to go ahead and jump to slide 10 and slide 10 shows the existing site characteristics

2116
02:26:55,000 --> 02:27:04,000
 of the property and kind of what we were working with in our canvas and as designers, working

2117
02:27:04,000 --> 02:27:10,440
 with what the land has given you to work around features that are worth preserving and identifying

2118
02:27:10,440 --> 02:27:15,000
 those before we really put any pencil to paper.

2119
02:27:15,000 --> 02:27:21,640
 This slide here shows you of course the flood in the southwest corner, it's 14 acres of

2120
02:27:21,640 --> 02:27:29,200
 zone A floodplain, and then the terrain on here, it's a pretty consistent slope from

2121
02:27:29,200 --> 02:27:33,920
 the north and northwest down to the southeast corner.

2122
02:27:33,920 --> 02:27:41,120
 And there's about a 30-foot average fall of terrain from those two points to the southeast

2123
02:27:41,120 --> 02:27:47,520
 corner, which makes sense and why the floodplain is where it is.

2124
02:27:47,520 --> 02:27:52,800
 And so looking at this, looking at the tree cover canopy that's there on the property

2125
02:27:52,800 --> 02:28:01,560
 today, the mature and protected trees, the nice trees that are located in that southeast

2126
02:28:01,560 --> 02:28:06,400
 corner, which makes sense, that's where most of the drainage is going.

2127
02:28:06,400 --> 02:28:13,280
 And so we wanted to work around those elements as we came up with the design here.

2128
02:28:13,280 --> 02:28:18,400
 And the rest of the gas well being plugged with a huge, huge plus that we could work

2129
02:28:18,400 --> 02:28:20,720
 around that.

2130
02:28:20,720 --> 02:28:26,840
 But with this blank canvas, what do we do to create an interesting design?

2131
02:28:26,840 --> 02:28:32,440
 And that has a lot to do with why we're proposing this meandering north-south boulevard.

2132
02:28:32,440 --> 02:28:38,080
 So if you can go ahead and go to slide 11, please.

2133
02:28:38,080 --> 02:28:48,880
 The concept plan that Haley showed, too, the signifying feature of Sagebrook is the open

2134
02:28:48,880 --> 02:28:54,400
 space that we're providing, that 18 percent of open space throughout the community, but

2135
02:28:54,400 --> 02:29:02,400
 also this public accessible corridor through the middle of it from north to south at the

2136
02:29:02,400 --> 02:29:10,640
 length of about 1,200 to 1,500 feet in length, that acts as kind of a theme and it brings

2137
02:29:10,640 --> 02:29:19,680
 the community together and a focal point for the residents and an access for public community

2138
02:29:19,680 --> 02:29:25,360
 members to be able, again, to traverse up this trail up to Southwest Park.

2139
02:29:25,360 --> 02:29:30,360
 And so that was kind of our starting point in the design as well as what we were saving.

2140
02:29:30,360 --> 02:29:36,900
 You see the pond in the southeast corner, wanted to save that natural open space area.

2141
02:29:36,900 --> 02:29:43,240
 It will create for a very nice driving experience, a long brush creek, and also a natural setting

2142
02:29:43,240 --> 02:29:46,880
 for the residents to enjoy.

2143
02:29:46,880 --> 02:29:51,160
 And then in the northeast corner is another detention pond.

2144
02:29:51,160 --> 02:29:58,560
 There is a little bit of the way the site is, the fall of the site, some of it goes

2145
02:29:58,560 --> 02:30:04,600
 to that corner, so it's necessary to put a detention facility there.

2146
02:30:04,600 --> 02:30:11,960
 And so those were kind of the design focal points that we wanted to include in this layout

2147
02:30:11,960 --> 02:30:18,000
 to make it unique, working with the land and coming up with something that was creative.

2148
02:30:18,000 --> 02:30:22,400
 And so here you can see all the things that Haley kind of already touched on.

2149
02:30:22,400 --> 02:30:27,520
 We are dedicating about 12 acres of perimeter right away, and within the Sagebrook community

2150
02:30:27,520 --> 02:30:33,720
 there is about nine acres of open space in the x-lots, but that doesn't include the landscape

2151
02:30:33,720 --> 02:30:41,400
 buffers along the future brush creek extension or all red.

2152
02:30:41,400 --> 02:30:45,880
 And so let's go ahead and go to slide 12, please.

2153
02:30:45,880 --> 02:30:53,440
 I apologize for that, I just wanted to check in, it is my fault for not starting a proper

2154
02:30:53,440 --> 02:30:57,960
 clock when you began, but typically applicants have 10 minutes to present, and so I want

2155
02:30:57,960 --> 02:31:01,440
 to be mindful of that for the individual I think who is waiting on the phone to do public

2156
02:31:01,440 --> 02:31:02,600
 comment as well.

2157
02:31:02,600 --> 02:31:06,880
 So I certainly want to be respectful of your presentation, but we have been at about 12

2158
02:31:06,880 --> 02:31:11,160
 minutes right now, so if we can get to high points and then we can certainly follow up

2159
02:31:11,160 --> 02:31:13,200
 with questions, that might be helpful.

2160
02:31:13,200 --> 02:31:19,360
 Okay, well I think the next high point would probably be slide 20, again that's showing

2161
02:31:19,360 --> 02:31:24,280
 representative examples of what the homes will look like, these are 50-foot lots, so

2162
02:31:24,280 --> 02:31:31,600
 the products will be 40 feet wide, and the average price point here is around $340, and

2163
02:31:31,600 --> 02:31:38,360
 they'll start at the low or the high $200 and go up to the high $300.

2164
02:31:38,360 --> 02:31:45,880
 And then I think the next important slide that I just wanted to touch on is, we can

2165
02:31:45,880 --> 02:31:50,200
 go ahead and go to slide 26, and then I can conclude after that.

2166
02:31:50,200 --> 02:31:51,200
 Great, thank you.

2167
02:31:51,200 --> 02:31:56,240
 Slide 26, you're welcome, and thank you so much for letting me know I wasn't aware we

2168
02:31:56,240 --> 02:31:57,240
 had 10 minutes.

2169
02:31:57,240 --> 02:32:00,160
 Yeah, that was my fault, no worries.

2170
02:32:00,160 --> 02:32:02,680
 Okay, give me some grace on that.

2171
02:32:02,680 --> 02:32:07,400
 Okay, so the public benefits again, we're dedicating with the development 120 feet of

2172
02:32:07,400 --> 02:32:11,080
 the right of way for the Brush Creek extension, that's 9.2 acres of land that's going to

2173
02:32:11,080 --> 02:32:17,640
 be dedicated when we plot, and then we have agreed to develop and construct two of those

2174
02:32:17,640 --> 02:32:21,640
 lanes per the phases that come online.

2175
02:32:21,640 --> 02:32:27,120
 We have worked with Union Pacific Railroad on the changing the crossing from Bonnie Bray

2176
02:32:27,120 --> 02:32:32,600
 to this location, they have told us that they will not permit a new additional crossing

2177
02:32:32,600 --> 02:32:40,800
 along 377, but we have to replace crossings that are already there, and this one has been

2178
02:32:40,800 --> 02:32:47,040
 identified as an unsafe crossing on Bonnie Bray, and it makes sense to replace it to

2179
02:32:47,040 --> 02:32:51,840
 come down here on a brush on brush Creek extension where there's going to be more motorists and

2180
02:32:51,840 --> 02:32:53,600
 more traffic there.

2181
02:32:53,600 --> 02:33:00,160
 And then the last thing and then I'm done is extending about 3500 feet of sanitary sewer

2182
02:33:00,160 --> 02:33:02,600
 from the graveyard interceptor.

2183
02:33:02,600 --> 02:33:06,320
 And like Haley mentioned, this will be up sized as necessary, we'll work with the city

2184
02:33:06,320 --> 02:33:12,360
 on our developers agreement, and it will service an area of about 580 acres, and so Sagebrook

2185
02:33:12,360 --> 02:33:15,160
 is really only a quarter of that.

2186
02:33:15,160 --> 02:33:20,720
 And so I will wrap up, I'll be glad to wrap up, and we're also here for any questions

2187
02:33:20,720 --> 02:33:24,480
 of the council and the chairman, if you see fit.

2188
02:33:24,480 --> 02:33:29,120
 I certainly appreciate your presentation and your perspective and context of the project,

2189
02:33:29,120 --> 02:33:30,120
 thank you very much.

2190
02:33:30,120 --> 02:33:36,560
 Do you have any questions right now for the applicant?

2191
02:33:36,560 --> 02:33:41,640
 I don't see any hands raised, so we're going to proceed forward.

2192
02:33:41,640 --> 02:33:49,200
 For this item PD 20-001, we had one person make comments using our online form.

2193
02:33:49,200 --> 02:33:53,800
 There was zero in support for the item and one against.

2194
02:33:53,800 --> 02:33:58,480
 All these comment forms were emailed to the city secretary to be recorded, and additionally

2195
02:33:58,480 --> 02:34:03,240
 there is one individual who has requested to speak over the phone on this item, and

2196
02:34:03,240 --> 02:34:10,360
 staff is currently loading up the phone line for that caller.

2197
02:34:10,360 --> 02:34:25,840
 Hello, caller, welcome to the planning and zoning commission meeting, can you please

2198
02:34:25,840 --> 02:34:29,640
 state your name and address, and you'll have four minutes to speak on this item.

2199
02:34:29,640 --> 02:34:35,800
 Yes, it is Angela Dominguez, and I reside at 6250 Allred Road.

2200
02:34:35,800 --> 02:34:39,760
 Thank you for taking my call and giving me the opportunity to speak.

2201
02:34:39,760 --> 02:34:45,760
 My husband and I live on the 35 acres bordering the western property line of the proposed

2202
02:34:45,760 --> 02:34:51,560
 Sagebrook development, and we own and farm 96 acres bordering the southern property line

2203
02:34:51,560 --> 02:34:53,560
 of the proposed development.

2204
02:34:53,560 --> 02:34:58,380
 No one will be impacted more by this development than me and my husband.

2205
02:34:58,380 --> 02:35:03,800
 We are opposing the zoning change request to allow more time to discuss the alignment

2206
02:35:03,800 --> 02:35:09,520
 of the Brush Creek extension with the city and the developer, and to verify the reasons

2207
02:35:09,520 --> 02:35:14,080
 for the alignment by an engineer or qualified third party.

2208
02:35:14,080 --> 02:35:21,520
 In July 2019, we received a notice for the Hickory Creek road feasibility study and a

2209
02:35:21,520 --> 02:35:27,040
 request by the city of Denton for right-of-way entry to our property.

2210
02:35:27,040 --> 02:35:31,700
 An exhibit was included with a notice that showed two proposed alignments of the Brush

2211
02:35:31,700 --> 02:35:37,240
 Creek extension labeled 3A, 3E, and 3H.

2212
02:35:37,240 --> 02:35:41,680
 Both proposed alignments showed Brush Creek intersecting Allred Road to the east of our

2213
02:35:41,680 --> 02:35:46,440
 property line at the northwest corner of the subject property.

2214
02:35:46,440 --> 02:35:52,920
 I called Mr. Jim Jenkins, who was Senior Engineer of Capital Projects at the time, to discuss

2215
02:35:52,920 --> 02:35:59,320
 the proposed alignment, and he confirmed that the exhibit accurately represented the future

2216
02:35:59,320 --> 02:36:02,080
 alignment of Brush Creek at that time.

2217
02:36:02,080 --> 02:36:07,960
 I thanked him for the information and granted right of entry to our property for the feasibility

2218
02:36:07,960 --> 02:36:09,920
 study.

2219
02:36:09,920 --> 02:36:15,200
 When the notice of public hearing signs for Sagebrook were posted on Allred Road, I noted

2220
02:36:15,200 --> 02:36:18,280
 them and fully intended to listen to this hearing.

2221
02:36:18,280 --> 02:36:23,560
 However, the signs and the notice that we received in the mail referenced a request

2222
02:36:23,560 --> 02:36:29,160
 for a zoning change, not a future extension of Brush Creek Road.

2223
02:36:29,160 --> 02:36:35,920
 So I was very surprised when I reviewed the agenda and related exhibits to see a new proposed

2224
02:36:35,920 --> 02:36:39,080
 alignment of the Brush Creek extension.

2225
02:36:39,080 --> 02:36:46,720
 The new alignment shown on the Sagebrook exhibit cuts off the northeast corner of our property,

2226
02:36:46,720 --> 02:36:52,280
 of our residence, and places the roadway squarely through my husband's shop that he uses to

2227
02:36:52,280 --> 02:36:54,600
 store his farming implements.

2228
02:36:54,600 --> 02:37:00,000
 When I saw this, I called Mr. Jenkins immediately and received a voicemail message that he was

2229
02:37:00,000 --> 02:37:02,240
 no longer with the City of Denton.

2230
02:37:02,240 --> 02:37:05,320
 I called and emailed Ms. Zygarski.

2231
02:37:05,320 --> 02:37:09,320
 She called me back promptly and informed me that the new alignment was made after the

2232
02:37:09,320 --> 02:37:15,000
 feasibility study, and she provided various reasons from the study for the alignment.

2233
02:37:15,000 --> 02:37:19,040
 The Brush Creek extension could have been placed anywhere on the proposed Sagebrook

2234
02:37:19,040 --> 02:37:23,880
 development to avoid impact to our property, but unfortunately, it was not.

2235
02:37:23,880 --> 02:37:28,600
 I see in the exhibits that there was a neighborhood meeting to discuss the development, but we

2236
02:37:28,600 --> 02:37:30,720
 did not receive a notice.

2237
02:37:30,720 --> 02:37:35,680
 The developer did not contact us specifically to discuss the roadway alignment and receive

2238
02:37:35,680 --> 02:37:37,000
 our input.

2239
02:37:37,000 --> 02:37:43,400
 Furthermore, we believe the decision on the alignment was made based on inaccurate information

2240
02:37:43,400 --> 02:37:46,560
 related to a gas well that no longer exists.

2241
02:37:46,560 --> 02:37:52,800
 Again, we oppose the zoning change request to allow more time to discuss the alignment

2242
02:37:52,800 --> 02:37:58,000
 of the Brush Creek extension with the city and the developer and to verify the reasons

2243
02:37:58,000 --> 02:38:09,720
 for the alignment by an engineer or qualified third party.

2244
02:38:09,720 --> 02:38:17,560
 Thank you so much for calling in and being patient and holding to bring us that perspective

2245
02:38:17,560 --> 02:38:18,560
 of your property.

2246
02:38:18,560 --> 02:38:21,920
 Do we have any questions for...

2247
02:38:21,920 --> 02:38:23,200
 Is it Dominguez?

2248
02:38:23,200 --> 02:38:25,160
 Yes, Angela Dominguez.

2249
02:38:25,160 --> 02:38:27,800
 Ms. Dominguez, do we have any questions for her?

2250
02:38:27,800 --> 02:38:34,160
 Ms. Dominguez, I don't see any questions at this time, but I certainly appreciate you

2251
02:38:34,160 --> 02:38:35,160
 calling in.

2252
02:38:35,160 --> 02:38:37,320
 Just one second, Commissioner Beck.

2253
02:38:37,320 --> 02:38:43,040
 This is not for Ms. Dominguez, but it is related to materials she brought up.

2254
02:38:43,040 --> 02:38:46,560
 Thank you, Chair, by the way.

2255
02:38:46,560 --> 02:38:53,920
 Maybe it's a question for the city and engineer, but can you educate us why we felt the Brush

2256
02:38:53,920 --> 02:39:00,280
 Creek couldn't go through the gas well property region, especially considering it's being

2257
02:39:00,280 --> 02:39:04,920
 disused now?

2258
02:39:04,920 --> 02:39:06,520
 Anyone at city?

2259
02:39:06,520 --> 02:39:10,760
 Yeah, I can attempt to answer that.

2260
02:39:10,760 --> 02:39:13,920
 A lot of it is due to lack of information.

2261
02:39:13,920 --> 02:39:19,360
 There's not a lot of studies or information out there regarding development over gas wells,

2262
02:39:19,360 --> 02:39:22,480
 especially for something as dynamic as a roadway.

2263
02:39:22,480 --> 02:39:27,280
 The well is capped at a fairly shallow distance below the surface in accordance with the Railroad

2264
02:39:27,280 --> 02:39:33,600
 Commission standards, so there would be a potential need to reopen that well and do

2265
02:39:33,600 --> 02:39:40,160
 whatever workover is necessary to adjust that for the paving and construction of the base

2266
02:39:40,160 --> 02:39:42,680
 for the roadway.

2267
02:39:42,680 --> 02:39:48,600
 In general, just due to the lack of knowledge of what really occurs when something is put

2268
02:39:48,600 --> 02:39:55,720
 over a well over a long term and has the constant use of a well of a roadway, there was just

2269
02:39:55,720 --> 02:39:59,800
 a lot of uncertainty on the city's part of not wanting to put that directly underneath

2270
02:39:59,800 --> 02:40:05,200
 a very costly and highly anticipated Ush Road.

2271
02:40:05,200 --> 02:40:11,120
 I don't know if there's anything else you want to add to that.

2272
02:40:11,120 --> 02:40:17,480
 The only other that I would add is I think you hit it, Haley, when we touched on, I should

2273
02:40:17,480 --> 02:40:22,880
 say, when you went through your presentation, it was sort of sandwiched between the flood

2274
02:40:22,880 --> 02:40:27,840
 plain to the south, and so really it was to have the road kind of hug that flood plain

2275
02:40:27,840 --> 02:40:32,920
 as much as possible for the continuity of the park trail so it can continue through.

2276
02:40:32,920 --> 02:40:38,760
 But again, it was not any intention of the city to have a plugged gas well under any

2277
02:40:38,760 --> 02:40:45,800
 even a local street, let alone a future six-lane arterial.

2278
02:40:45,800 --> 02:40:50,200
 I guess if there's a lack of knowledge, that doesn't mean it's something that can't be

2279
02:40:50,200 --> 02:40:51,200
 done.

2280
02:40:51,200 --> 02:40:53,700
 It means that there's a concern, which I appreciate.

2281
02:40:53,700 --> 02:41:04,360
 We should take cautions and concerns, that there's no standards for removal of gas lines,

2282
02:41:04,360 --> 02:41:11,460
 plugging of things such that building can be done on top of these kinds of things.

2283
02:41:11,460 --> 02:41:15,840
 Certainly this is not the only gas well in existence that's ever wanted to have development

2284
02:41:15,840 --> 02:41:22,400
 near it.

2285
02:41:22,400 --> 02:41:28,600
 I feel like the lack of information is insufficient to make a judgment on that.

2286
02:41:28,600 --> 02:41:32,560
 Yeah, I understand that concern.

2287
02:41:32,560 --> 02:41:37,120
 Staff has researched this topic extensively due to a council request that still hasn't

2288
02:41:37,120 --> 02:41:40,280
 gone to a work session regarding plugged wells.

2289
02:41:40,280 --> 02:41:45,880
 There are very limited studies nationwide regarding this topic.

2290
02:41:45,880 --> 02:41:51,300
 Just speaking from experience with other projects where wells have been plugged, the plugging

2291
02:41:51,300 --> 02:41:53,480
 is done in accordance with Railroad Commission standards.

2292
02:41:53,480 --> 02:41:57,160
 It's typically about 10 feet below the surface where the well is capped.

2293
02:41:57,160 --> 02:42:03,240
 It would be a significant process for anyone, the city or private developer, to adjust that

2294
02:42:03,240 --> 02:42:04,240
 once the well is capped.

2295
02:42:04,240 --> 02:42:09,360
 You would have to go in, remove all the casing and materials that were used to cap the well,

2296
02:42:09,360 --> 02:42:14,720
 put the well off further below the surface, recap it, and then there's ultimately just

2297
02:42:14,720 --> 02:42:20,180
 still the unknown of any potential hazards of that well casing cracking or anything like

2298
02:42:20,180 --> 02:42:26,080
 that with the added pressure and activity above ground with a roadway above it.

2299
02:42:26,080 --> 02:42:31,080
 I understand that, but when we do floodplains, when we do drainages, when we build next to

2300
02:42:31,080 --> 02:42:39,840
 a lake, when we build next to any geological feature, there are risks that need to be mitigated

2301
02:42:39,840 --> 02:42:43,840
 along with that, regardless of what that was.

2302
02:42:43,840 --> 02:42:48,720
 Build next to a volcano, you've got to mitigate for the volcano.

2303
02:42:48,720 --> 02:42:57,080
 The question I have is, those are risks that are associated with development by the developer

2304
02:42:57,080 --> 02:43:05,200
 when they have a feature on their property that they wish to develop, and in concern

2305
02:43:05,200 --> 02:43:09,760
 that we have a lack of knowledge that I said earlier.

2306
02:43:09,760 --> 02:43:17,060
 I feel like we're being asked to make a decision about both for the mobility plan and for this

2307
02:43:17,060 --> 02:43:24,200
 property and zoning, and they all impact where we have a lack of knowledge about future roadways,

2308
02:43:24,200 --> 02:43:28,040
 and of course, that impacts all the surrounding properties.

2309
02:43:28,040 --> 02:43:31,280
 Thank you, Commissioner Beck.

2310
02:43:31,280 --> 02:43:32,280
 Commissioner Anderson?

2311
02:43:32,280 --> 02:43:33,280
 Thank you, Chair.

2312
02:43:33,280 --> 02:43:39,160
 I thought they spoke earlier that there was nothing going to be built over the cat well.

2313
02:43:39,160 --> 02:43:40,800
 Is that correct?

2314
02:43:40,800 --> 02:43:41,800
 Yes.

2315
02:43:41,800 --> 02:43:48,880
 As part of the review process, staff indicated to the developer that we would not accept

2316
02:43:48,880 --> 02:43:55,580
 the gas well being underneath the city street of any type, as Richard indicated, and although

2317
02:43:55,580 --> 02:43:59,200
 we have no standards in the code, we asked the developer and they voluntarily complied

2318
02:43:59,200 --> 02:44:03,460
 with our request to have that well situated on an open space lot so that nothing was built

2319
02:44:03,460 --> 02:44:04,460
 over the top of it.

2320
02:44:04,460 --> 02:44:05,460
 Thank you very much.

2321
02:44:05,460 --> 02:44:12,080
 Commissioner Burnett, I want to get to you real quickly, is there any other questions

2322
02:44:12,080 --> 02:44:19,800
 for the citizen, Ms. Dominguez, I'd like to do is if not, go ahead and close public comment,

2323
02:44:19,800 --> 02:44:26,460
 move into discussion for the commission.

2324
02:44:26,460 --> 02:44:33,200
 Seeing none, I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing for this item and acknowledge

2325
02:44:33,200 --> 02:44:35,400
 Commissioner Burnett.

2326
02:44:35,400 --> 02:44:39,560
 My question was covered by Commissioner Anderson.

2327
02:44:39,560 --> 02:44:52,980
 Mr. Smith, any motion to approve first for approval, Mr. Anderson, I'll second his motion.

2328
02:44:52,980 --> 02:44:53,980
 Okay.

2329
02:44:53,980 --> 02:44:54,980
 Any discussion on the item?

2330
02:44:54,980 --> 02:44:57,160
 Christian or back.

2331
02:44:57,160 --> 02:45:02,400
 So I, I actually had some additional discussion I'd like to ask the city before we go to the

2332
02:45:02,400 --> 02:45:03,400
 motion if that's proper.

2333
02:45:03,400 --> 02:45:11,440
 Yeah, and in fact, it's it's preference to have the motion on the table and then discuss

2334
02:45:11,440 --> 02:45:12,440
 around that motion.

2335
02:45:12,440 --> 02:45:14,200
 So you're you're good questioner back.

2336
02:45:14,200 --> 02:45:15,200
 Okay.

2337
02:45:15,200 --> 02:45:16,640
 Thank you, chair.

2338
02:45:16,640 --> 02:45:24,920
 So I have a question about sort of Criterion for and that is the, the nearby consistency

2339
02:45:24,920 --> 02:45:33,880
 Criterion, essentially, and that is what concerns me is that we are using, we use this development

2340
02:45:33,880 --> 02:45:39,500
 the development north of the park, I forget the name of it, right south of the range along

2341
02:45:39,500 --> 02:45:47,680
 the creek, as well as the PD to the southwest of this as justification for Hunter Cole.

2342
02:45:47,680 --> 02:45:52,240
 And then we're using Hunter Cole as justification for these properties.

2343
02:45:52,240 --> 02:45:58,600
 And and all four or five properties that I've just mentioned are well outside the general

2344
02:45:58,600 --> 02:46:04,740
 bound they're in they're in the city, but they're outside the sort of consistent boundaries

2345
02:46:04,740 --> 02:46:08,400
 of what we would call development in our city.

2346
02:46:08,400 --> 02:46:15,200
 And so I feel like we're sort of forcing these into place and using recursively to justify

2347
02:46:15,200 --> 02:46:16,400
 each other.

2348
02:46:16,400 --> 02:46:22,280
 And and so I'm not at all convinced that we're meeting Criterion for and in the slightest.

2349
02:46:22,280 --> 02:46:29,440
 And I'm also not convinced that we're meeting the Denton 2030 plan for centralized development

2350
02:46:29,440 --> 02:46:36,680
 that again we're using we're using these external development opportunities to to try to justify

2351
02:46:36,680 --> 02:46:40,240
 themselves in sort of a circular recursive nature.

2352
02:46:40,240 --> 02:46:46,760
 And that doesn't it feel at all to me that we're being I think it's 2.4 maybe I forget

2353
02:46:46,760 --> 02:46:48,720
 the exact chapter.

2354
02:46:48,720 --> 02:46:57,480
 But we're we're the the subsection that that's governed the 2030 plan to sort of mitigate

2355
02:46:57,480 --> 02:47:02,820
 sprawl and and keep our density in the central corridor or higher.

2356
02:47:02,820 --> 02:47:08,880
 We discussed this at a number of different opportunities and so this this greatly concerns

2357
02:47:08,880 --> 02:47:16,320
 me that we're promoting sprawl where we're not looking at development opportunities for

2358
02:47:16,320 --> 02:47:22,320
 these for these guests are not the road through the gas wells and therefore we're impacting

2359
02:47:22,320 --> 02:47:29,400
 other surrounding properties and and I and then you know the the information that was

2360
02:47:29,400 --> 02:47:34,960
 brought up by some of our commentators about the fiscal impacts seem like they're they're

2361
02:47:34,960 --> 02:47:37,460
 not at all completely justified.

2362
02:47:37,460 --> 02:47:44,240
 So I'm I'm not at all I'm I'm not opposed to the the nature of the proposed plan for

2363
02:47:44,240 --> 02:47:45,960
 this property were to go through.

2364
02:47:45,960 --> 02:47:52,160
 I'm concerned that we are not meeting our criteria for our overall development goals

2365
02:47:52,160 --> 02:47:59,800
 and and that's the great concern to me for this property and surrounding properties.

2366
02:47:59,800 --> 02:48:08,920
 Thank you Mr. Beck I'm going to jump in and add kind of my thoughts on this.

2367
02:48:08,920 --> 02:48:17,000
 I given that the there's a city park right north of this it seems to me a really unique

2368
02:48:17,000 --> 02:48:21,400
 place to have a neighborhood next to the park a lot of our most cherished neighborhoods

2369
02:48:21,400 --> 02:48:28,320
 and didn't in my my opinion are embedded in close parks whether that's Nettie Schultz

2370
02:48:28,320 --> 02:48:33,960
 or Eureka or North Lakes those are I think some of our most desired neighborhoods in

2371
02:48:33,960 --> 02:48:40,120
 town and so the idea of putting a neighborhood just south of this park and and embedding

2372
02:48:40,120 --> 02:48:44,120
 it into a trail system is certainly of interest to me.

2373
02:48:44,120 --> 02:48:48,520
 The only really concern I have is that I want to talk more about the mobility plan and and

2374
02:48:48,520 --> 02:48:54,080
 maybe further acknowledge Mr. Mingus's concerns without speculating too much about my ignorance

2375
02:48:54,080 --> 02:49:00,480
 and mobility was it not possible to for this property or for the mobility plan to bring

2376
02:49:00,480 --> 02:49:06,240
 in Allred and Brush Creek further to the east and looking at it that s-curve for a six lane

2377
02:49:06,240 --> 02:49:10,320
 road might have been tight and you might have been running to the same angle as Bonnie Bray

2378
02:49:10,320 --> 02:49:15,640
 currently presents itself and so in my finite mind I'm thinking that's the reason we didn't

2379
02:49:15,640 --> 02:49:22,040
 just do two right angles and cut this property right in half with a six lane or two or arterial

2380
02:49:22,040 --> 02:49:26,280
 but I just want a confirmation that I know Haley said we're kind of thread the needle

2381
02:49:26,280 --> 02:49:33,960
 between flood zone and the gassed the capped gas and just so I state this I'm not in favor

2382
02:49:33,960 --> 02:49:39,320
 of putting a road over a capped gas I know I agree with Commissioner Beck that more information

2383
02:49:39,320 --> 02:49:44,400
 is probably needed in that study but just innately that seems a little unstable but

2384
02:49:44,400 --> 02:49:50,480
 nevertheless Haley mentioned threading the needle in between the the capped gas well

2385
02:49:50,480 --> 02:49:57,720
 and the floodplain but there wasn't any mention on going east on the property closer to the

2386
02:49:57,720 --> 02:50:02,240
 park and maybe they don't want to city has one a six lane road next to the park I'm just

2387
02:50:02,240 --> 02:50:09,280
 trying to understand why an eastern route was not part of the finalized mobility plan

2388
02:50:09,280 --> 02:50:14,440
 any insight staff could give on that would be appreciated.

2389
02:50:14,440 --> 02:50:21,160
 Yeah I think you touched on a lot of the reasons for that as the the citizen referenced when

2390
02:50:21,160 --> 02:50:27,040
 the city when the city initiated this feasibility study they looked at I believe six or seven

2391
02:50:27,040 --> 02:50:31,640
 options probably I think it was like options A through H for potential alignments for this

2392
02:50:31,640 --> 02:50:38,440
 roadway they're looking at all of those factors the topography of the land you know with that

2393
02:50:38,440 --> 02:50:43,800
 significant fall was part of that as well as like I said avoidance of the floodplain

2394
02:50:43,800 --> 02:50:48,040
 and the gas well I think you're exactly right on the eastern part of the property that those

2395
02:50:48,040 --> 02:50:53,840
 angles between the railroad and hitting all red would have been a bit sharper than what

2396
02:50:53,840 --> 02:50:59,400
 are allowed for a road of this type that would have this potential speed on it but I know

2397
02:50:59,400 --> 02:51:04,240
 that study was reviewed extensively by our engineering staff as well as with the City

2398
02:51:04,240 --> 02:51:09,640
 Council before an alignment was was eventually settled on this developer as they mentioned

2399
02:51:09,640 --> 02:51:15,480
 has been working with us since 2018 at some point so they've been involved in those discussions

2400
02:51:15,480 --> 02:51:20,840
 and and ultimately it was determined that this roadway in the alignment that they proposed

2401
02:51:20,840 --> 02:51:26,120
 was was the best deal that we could get to get this road across you know with all the

2402
02:51:26,120 --> 02:51:34,080
 challenges involved sure that was my my assumptions but I wanted to clarify it this project makes

2403
02:51:34,080 --> 02:51:40,000
 a lot of sense to me I think it's a high quality project that is needed or at least a desired

2404
02:51:40,000 --> 02:51:48,120
 project south of town however it certainly gives me some pause seeing that the the plan

2405
02:51:48,120 --> 02:51:53,440
 provided in the deck we saw tonight shows a potential road going right into Mr. Mingus

2406
02:51:53,440 --> 02:51:58,160
 said a shop looks kind of a house is a big structure and so I just want to be sensitive

2407
02:51:58,160 --> 02:52:05,560
 to the decision we make tonight potentially is going to put a homeowner in a really undesirable

2408
02:52:05,560 --> 02:52:10,760
 position as she stated herself so I just wanted to clarify and ensure that when we think about

2409
02:52:10,760 --> 02:52:16,200
 the extension of mobility in our city we're thinking about all assets to ensure that we're

2410
02:52:16,200 --> 02:52:22,360
 not displacing citizens unnecessarily if there's another option and so Haley I appreciate you

2411
02:52:22,360 --> 02:52:28,600
 confirming some of my assumptions and trying to look at this road from a different angle

2412
02:52:28,600 --> 02:52:34,200
 Commissioner Ellis I'll turn to you thank you chair and thank you for bringing up this further

2413
02:52:34,200 --> 02:52:42,760
 discussion on this when again was the feasibility study done I believe it was started last summer

2414
02:52:42,760 --> 02:52:49,960
 I think the letters to property owners went out in July of 2019 and I don't know more

2415
02:52:49,960 --> 02:52:53,820
 specifically on that I was looking to Richard to see if he had a better date as to to when

2416
02:52:53,820 --> 02:53:00,520
 that wrapped up I don't recall the exact date that it that it wrapped up but there was a

2417
02:53:00,520 --> 02:53:07,920
 work session that was done at City Council on February 11th part of that work session

2418
02:53:07,920 --> 02:53:15,720
 one of the main discussions was that alignment for the east west there were a number of alternatives

2419
02:53:15,720 --> 02:53:21,920
 that were presented I don't have the ability to pull the presentation up right now but

2420
02:53:21,920 --> 02:53:28,400
 I want to say they looked at four different alignment options and so again this is this

2421
02:53:28,400 --> 02:53:36,680
 is looking at connecting this from 35w all the way over to 2499 so this will connect

2422
02:53:36,680 --> 02:53:44,720
 into Hickory Creek and so I think it has an estimated daily trips 2045 of 15 I think it

2423
02:53:44,720 --> 02:53:52,080
 was 15,000 vehicles which is a substantial increase from today but there are there they

2424
02:53:52,080 --> 02:54:03,760
 went through a number of alignments as associated with that and so it I believe it was discussed

2425
02:54:03,760 --> 02:54:10,560
 you believe what was discussed the the alignment as it's presented okay so do you know that

2426
02:54:10,560 --> 02:54:16,860
 in that study if to chairs point was it ever discussed to bring that alignment into this

2427
02:54:16,860 --> 02:54:21,480
 property that we are discussing I think it maybe step back a little bit and think about

2428
02:54:21,480 --> 02:54:27,560
 what a what the feasibility analysis is all it does is just shows a straight line so it

2429
02:54:27,560 --> 02:54:33,000
 doesn't necessarily give a direct route there's no engineering it's just hey we've got a six

2430
02:54:33,000 --> 02:54:38,480
 lane road what are the major obstacles that we have to overcome to bring this road through

2431
02:54:38,480 --> 02:54:43,960
 and so that's really that's really kind of how it said how it really framed it and then

2432
02:54:43,960 --> 02:54:48,780
 like anything and until development comes in we really start looking at how it how it

2433
02:54:48,780 --> 02:54:53,520
 how it starts to shape up and so through the conclusion or through the not even the conclusion

2434
02:54:53,520 --> 02:54:58,560
 but as that was being developed this project came in and obviously we've been working through

2435
02:54:58,560 --> 02:55:03,840
 and they could probably attest to this this alignment as well as a number of other issues

2436
02:55:03,840 --> 02:55:08,600
 that we ultimately work through to get to where we are today but that's that's where

2437
02:55:08,600 --> 02:55:14,760
 it was essentially what staff agreed to as the best location long term for that for that

2438
02:55:14,760 --> 02:55:20,360
 six lane road and I mean I agree that it's certainly will be an asset when that road

2439
02:55:20,360 --> 02:55:28,400
 is in I do hate impacting a property owner the way that it appears we are they're losing

2440
02:55:28,400 --> 02:55:36,920
 a sizable and I mean usable sizable expensive structure and while I understand them in a

2441
02:55:36,920 --> 02:55:45,360
 domain and all of that will be worked out it's it still impacts them their life which

2442
02:55:45,360 --> 02:55:46,360
 is concerning

2443
02:55:46,360 --> 02:56:02,000
 Mr. Anderson could I rescind my second after looking at this map I'm starting to understand

2444
02:56:02,000 --> 02:56:07,840
 I I was just looking at the the square of the properties but now I do see what Mr. Mingus

2445
02:56:07,840 --> 02:56:15,240
 is talking about and to Commissioner Ellis's point I mean they're going to lose a substantial

2446
02:56:15,240 --> 02:56:22,780
 northeastern part of their property and I don't know if this is something that the developer

2447
02:56:22,780 --> 02:56:28,600
 could rethink about turning it back to the north earlier than going through their property

2448
02:56:28,600 --> 02:56:33,120
 like you discussed to go east of the well somehow but I mean I know they're going to

2449
02:56:33,120 --> 02:56:38,680
 lose some you know lots that they can sell for property but but you got to think of the

2450
02:56:38,680 --> 02:56:43,800
 neighbors and you got to be cognizant of their you know their well-being as well and that's

2451
02:56:43,800 --> 02:56:47,440
 something after looking at this a little bit more in detail that of the points you guys

2452
02:56:47,440 --> 02:56:55,400
 brought up you commissioners brought up I do see and that it would be a drastic chunk

2453
02:56:55,400 --> 02:57:01,080
 of their property and you know I'd like to rescind my second until I hear more that that's

2454
02:57:01,080 --> 02:57:08,860
 okay yeah I definitely can Christian Smith Haley can you remind me on PD's the plenary

2455
02:57:08,860 --> 02:57:14,120
 plot there's be a plenary file with the PD right and then that has some binding natures

2456
02:57:14,120 --> 02:57:20,700
 to it correct the conceptual plans that you're tonight yeah those would be tied to the ordinance

2457
02:57:20,700 --> 02:57:25,680
 all of the exhibits provided in your backup the you know the concept landscape plans all

2458
02:57:25,680 --> 02:57:32,120
 of that go as part of the ordinance we had a we had a case Jim strange had brought up

2459
02:57:32,120 --> 02:57:38,860
 it was gosh it was called a bridge ridge month or something like that over there off of Ryan

2460
02:57:38,860 --> 02:57:44,000
 Road where same deal concerns from them from the neighborhoods to south of the property

2461
02:57:44,000 --> 02:57:52,080
 that it was a plan development that they worked out a changing of the conceptual plan to make

2462
02:57:52,080 --> 02:57:57,760
 that work with traffic for that neighborhood between us and planning and us in City Council

2463
02:57:57,760 --> 02:58:05,920
 I don't know how I'm going to navigate this via zoom but but have how much how much work

2464
02:58:05,920 --> 02:58:12,720
 if it has been discussed about trying to avoid this this property and then maybe I can point

2465
02:58:12,720 --> 02:58:20,720
 this that question maybe to to Randy and your staff down there Randy about you know how

2466
02:58:20,720 --> 02:58:24,160
 you guys built that out in that conceptual plan and how much work can be done to be able

2467
02:58:24,160 --> 02:58:29,600
 to move that road around I get the concerns but I don't know how much how much leeway

2468
02:58:29,600 --> 02:58:34,400
 we can give right now to be able to move that that road during the the conceptual plan inside

2469
02:58:34,400 --> 02:58:45,680
 the PD that could definitely be an option it the PD you reference they did rearrange

2470
02:58:45,680 --> 02:58:49,400
 the the street configuration and presented a second option to City Council that ultimately

2471
02:58:49,400 --> 02:58:53,600
 got approved I think that would be a little more significant impact on this development

2472
02:58:53,600 --> 02:58:58,960
 given the the hundred and twenty feet of width for that right of way during initial discussions

2473
02:58:58,960 --> 02:59:04,200
 we we did discuss with them some some other alignments that can find it within their property

2474
02:59:04,200 --> 02:59:09,560
 which is what they can the you know schematic line on the mobility plan originally showed

2475
02:59:09,560 --> 02:59:14,040
 but ultimately like Richard said this this worked out to be the most feasible option

2476
02:59:14,040 --> 02:59:19,760
 for that street that we could see through about a year and a half or so of working with

2477
02:59:19,760 --> 02:59:24,480
 them and our engineering staff but at this point you know I can definitely let Randy

2478
02:59:24,480 --> 02:59:29,600
 and her team address the impact that that would have on them the only thing I would

2479
02:59:29,600 --> 02:59:34,160
 add I think it's also important to note that well I don't believe they set the design speed

2480
02:59:34,160 --> 02:59:40,920
 for this road typically six lane arterials are at least 45 to 50 miles an hour and so

2481
02:59:40,920 --> 02:59:48,080
 those those curves for the road or those turns have to be within a certain within a certain

2482
02:59:48,080 --> 02:59:54,080
 geometry so I'm I'm not sure if that hard if a hard right or a hard bend to go north

2483
02:59:54,080 --> 02:59:59,880
 to go east of that well could be possible then to realign back up with with all red

2484
02:59:59,880 --> 03:00:06,160
 to that existing road but so there's there's also a number of other factors to look at

2485
03:00:06,160 --> 03:00:11,960
 yeah my concern is one we have an outstanding motion without a second I don't I want to

2486
03:00:11,960 --> 03:00:20,960
 make sure we wrap that up the two it does seem it most likely that the mobility plan

2487
03:00:20,960 --> 03:00:27,040
 is going to have that road go through that property if it cannot go over a well or and

2488
03:00:27,040 --> 03:00:33,360
 it can't go to the east and so even if we we don't approve this particular item that

2489
03:00:33,360 --> 03:00:38,120
 doesn't necessarily protect the homeowner because 100 coal come in that six lane arterial

2490
03:00:38,120 --> 03:00:45,680
 it's it's going to happen and so the the understanding that the feasibility and the engineers found

2491
03:00:45,680 --> 03:00:52,120
 it fit and I trust our city staff that it needs to go the direction they found it makes

2492
03:00:52,120 --> 03:00:58,880
 me inclined to to support this project because it's a sound project they've done years worth

2493
03:00:58,880 --> 03:01:08,680
 of work on it and and I don't I don't see that if the road going there is is a a foregone

2494
03:01:08,680 --> 03:01:13,680
 conclusion to to deny a project before I open for more discussion commissioner Smith you

2495
03:01:13,680 --> 03:01:22,680
 had the motion on the table is there a second for the motion I will second it so we have

2496
03:01:22,680 --> 03:01:29,520
 a first and a second for approval commissioner back thank you chair so I guess following

2497
03:01:29,520 --> 03:01:36,720
 directly on your comments I mean if we had Haley mentioned and Richard mentioned some

2498
03:01:36,720 --> 03:01:42,520
 some other plans and I'm not second guessing our engineers either I would like to see maybe

2499
03:01:42,520 --> 03:01:48,040
 what were the impacts of those so you can rank sort a series of plans and and say well

2500
03:01:48,040 --> 03:01:53,360
 we think this is the best one but if the top three are not that different in terms of impact

2501
03:01:53,360 --> 03:01:59,160
 then and three has I'm just making things up now hypothetically and number three moves

2502
03:01:59,160 --> 03:02:06,480
 to the east and costs plat developments in the property but saves the Dominguez property

2503
03:02:06,480 --> 03:02:13,540
 for the mobility plan I'd like to see those options before I personally would feel comfortable

2504
03:02:13,540 --> 03:02:18,520
 voting through and I'd also like to see you know more of the you know I agree with you

2505
03:02:18,520 --> 03:02:24,560
 that you don't want to build a road on top of a an engineered structure underground but

2506
03:02:24,560 --> 03:02:29,160
 at the same token I'd like to see some of the results of that before I felt comfortable

2507
03:02:29,160 --> 03:02:34,300
 saying yep we should definitely punch through the Dominguez property and make this happen

2508
03:02:34,300 --> 03:02:39,160
 I just don't feel comfortable doing either one of those thank you Richard did you have

2509
03:02:39,160 --> 03:02:44,760
 something to say yeah where I'm trying to we're trying to pull in pre tam Deshmukh our deputy

2510
03:02:44,760 --> 03:02:49,200
 director of engineering so he can provide some more insight with respect to the to the

2511
03:02:49,200 --> 03:02:53,280
 alignment if you'll just bear with me absolutely that would be worth the wait commissioner

2512
03:02:53,280 --> 03:03:00,920
 Ellis thank you chair do we have the applicant still here did she want to add anything to

2513
03:03:00,920 --> 03:03:17,480
 this discussion hello this is Doug Powell with McAdams I've I'm a planner is Randy Doug

2514
03:03:17,480 --> 03:03:24,960
 you there yes okay my name is that's why my name is Doug Powell I'm a planner but we have

2515
03:03:24,960 --> 03:03:30,240
 a background in transportation planning and Richards Wright what happens if you move the

2516
03:03:30,240 --> 03:03:38,880
 road to the east then you have to curve it back at the south so you have an s curve and

2517
03:03:38,880 --> 03:03:46,200
 because you can't bring that that roadway into the railroad crossing you have to have

2518
03:03:46,200 --> 03:03:56,120
 a straightaway so if you look at the map you can't get back up into the west two curves

2519
03:03:56,120 --> 03:04:00,640
 right now we've got a gentle curve and a and a kind of a sharper one off the property but

2520
03:04:00,640 --> 03:04:08,600
 you can't put two curves it'd be an s curve and I don't think it would work and especially

2521
03:04:08,600 --> 03:04:16,920
 given that it's there to carry traffic with the speeds Richard was was mentioning it just

2522
03:04:16,920 --> 03:04:30,640
 doesn't make make sense I appreciate you Doug weighing in on that I like I said I in my

2523
03:04:30,640 --> 03:04:37,800
 limited scope it seems like that's a that's a tough move it's not a lot of space there

2524
03:04:37,800 --> 03:04:57,120
 we are currently waiting to see if our engineers city engineer is able to speak just one moment

2525
03:04:57,120 --> 03:05:00,640
 sure would it help if we pulled the if we brought the PowerPoint presentation back up

2526
03:05:00,640 --> 03:05:06,440
 to show that alignment would that help with the discussion certainly I don't know who

2527
03:05:06,440 --> 03:05:11,400
 has it pulled up or or not I have it in front of me but yeah we can pull it up to have a

2528
03:05:11,400 --> 03:05:39,080
 shared screen so at least be great Richard can you confirm this conceptual plan shows

2529
03:05:39,080 --> 03:05:44,000
 the full hundred and twenty feet right away that's represented to scale of the right away

2530
03:05:44,000 --> 03:05:55,120
 needed for the road it does okay so if we were to conceptually try to bend that road

2531
03:05:55,120 --> 03:06:16,960
 we'd use that same kind of width correct okay sure Chris are back so looking at the layout

2532
03:06:16,960 --> 03:06:23,600
 that that Richard has on the screen is one of the concerns that they're trying to keep

2533
03:06:23,600 --> 03:06:28,840
 the central corridor and I understand that's a it's a fundamental feature of the development

2534
03:06:28,840 --> 03:06:35,800
 but if they're trying to keep the central north-south corridor no I don't think is

2535
03:06:35,800 --> 03:06:39,880
 that correct no I mean I think an s-curve would completely change their development

2536
03:06:39,880 --> 03:06:45,800
 I think the concern now is if given where all right is east to west and where brush

2537
03:06:45,800 --> 03:06:51,920
 creek comes in can you get a hundred and twenty foot right away with two different radiuses

2538
03:06:51,920 --> 03:07:00,680
 or radii at a 50 mile per hour speed on on the height or the depth rather of this property

2539
03:07:00,680 --> 03:07:07,920
 can can you have a a 90 and a 90 degree turn on a on a six lane arterial I don't think

2540
03:07:07,920 --> 03:07:13,920
 so it can 245 fit I think that's the question is regardless of their conception if I would

2541
03:07:13,920 --> 03:07:17,960
 imagine if all red becomes an s-curve through their property their entire conceptual plan

2542
03:07:17,960 --> 03:07:23,680
 needs to be started a hundred percent over we're just looking at the feasibility in general

2543
03:07:23,680 --> 03:07:29,520
 of being able to move future brush creek extension to cut through their property because I think

2544
03:07:29,520 --> 03:07:35,440
 the the the presentation from Haley suggests that based on the mobility plan the current

2545
03:07:35,440 --> 03:07:54,320
 location of the road is the only location for the road

2546
03:07:54,320 --> 03:08:01,040
 I believe pre-tem is available oh fantastic pre-tem if you can hear me and if you're unmuted

2547
03:08:01,040 --> 03:08:11,800
 I can you are you aware of the question being proposed or can I restate that to you I am

2548
03:08:11,800 --> 03:08:18,000
 this pre-tem deputy city engineer I'm I'm not sure if I heard your question completely

2549
03:08:18,000 --> 03:08:25,840
 I've just got into the last of it and I was muted I think I'm unmuted at this point you

2550
03:08:25,840 --> 03:08:32,480
 are the question I think that the that all the commissioners has is the rationale or

2551
03:08:32,480 --> 03:08:41,320
 the the logic behind putting the brush creek expansion or extension road where it currently

2552
03:08:41,320 --> 03:08:48,520
 is rather than trying to have brush creek and all red meet more to the east we're wanting

2553
03:08:48,520 --> 03:08:56,600
 to know if it's possible that the future brush creek extension be moved at all or if it is

2554
03:08:56,600 --> 03:09:07,400
 where it has to be typically I think I think typically when a site is designed there are

2555
03:09:07,400 --> 03:09:15,240
 places that you definitely look for an ideal location one of the features for this particular

2556
03:09:15,240 --> 03:09:22,000
 road was to extend and continue the trail system through the existing floodplain that

2557
03:09:22,000 --> 03:09:29,080
 was one of the consideration that was taken into account we have a continuous trail extending

2558
03:09:29,080 --> 03:09:36,960
 on the rest of the hickory creek alignment all the way it connects back into some of

2559
03:09:36,960 --> 03:09:46,000
 the existing trails along hickory creek near the elementary school back there I want to

2560
03:09:46,000 --> 03:09:56,040
 say that this design was based on the way the profile is the drainage plans and the

2561
03:09:56,040 --> 03:10:05,040
 grading as well as the slopes and everything associated with this typically what happens

2562
03:10:05,040 --> 03:10:11,000
 there are a couple things when we get into getting into the nitty-gritty of design and

2563
03:10:11,000 --> 03:10:16,000
 getting into the weeds of it it's slightly different than where you're conceptually planning

2564
03:10:16,000 --> 03:10:23,600
 stuff conceptually you can draw lines on mobility plans as well as some other plans but when

2565
03:10:23,600 --> 03:10:33,240
 you actually get into the design component you want it to be at a location where it couple

2566
03:10:33,240 --> 03:10:38,400
 things safety is important when you lay these roads out you have a community that split

2567
03:10:38,400 --> 03:10:47,800
 and a six lane arterial goes through the community crossings and having an access to trail system

2568
03:10:47,800 --> 03:10:55,840
 and all that becomes an issue can it be done can it be laid differently within the site

2569
03:10:55,840 --> 03:11:05,680
 absolutely I mean we can engineer everything there are issues with the back to back s curve

2570
03:11:05,680 --> 03:11:14,520
 that may be of concern you have a gas site on the north with the little red area between

2571
03:11:14,520 --> 03:11:25,040
 that and the 90 degree connection to go over the railroad and connected 377 that may be

2572
03:11:25,040 --> 03:11:30,120
 an issue typically that's another concern safety wise when you're traveling at those

2573
03:11:30,120 --> 03:11:39,980
 speeds you do not want curves in your layout so you'd rather lay roadway segments as much

2574
03:11:39,980 --> 03:11:47,840
 as you can plan them and lay them that they have minimal curves and extensions just in

2575
03:11:47,840 --> 03:11:55,040
 the future I mean it's basically planning you plan the best safety alternative so can

2576
03:11:55,040 --> 03:12:01,720
 we look into options going through back to back s curves ideally not recommended in this

2577
03:12:01,720 --> 03:12:09,120
 side because it's very close but can we engineer it we can safety wise not a better option

2578
03:12:09,120 --> 03:12:18,760
 than what's going to aid I hope that covers well I appreciate you hopping on and providing

2579
03:12:18,760 --> 03:12:26,480
 that context and let's see if any commissioners have any questions for you commissioner beck

2580
03:12:26,480 --> 03:12:34,040
 yeah so I'm there's some vagueness in the language and I and I appreciate that you're

2581
03:12:34,040 --> 03:12:38,960
 trying to provide options but I guess one of my questions is and it seems like some

2582
03:12:38,960 --> 03:12:43,440
 of the other commissioners have some of the same questions is is it something that can

2583
03:12:43,440 --> 03:12:55,480
 be done and meet code and therefore mitigate potential property issues on the west or is

2584
03:12:55,480 --> 03:13:04,120
 it you know something that that absolutely cannot be done by safety code yes it can be

2585
03:13:04,120 --> 03:13:13,120
 done we can engineer a different alignment it may be expensive it may be it may create

2586
03:13:13,120 --> 03:13:20,400
 issues related to safety that we have to mitigate at a later date and then as far as the way

2587
03:13:20,400 --> 03:13:26,080
 it goes and connects on the other side of the property at this point that connection

2588
03:13:26,080 --> 03:13:33,500
 and alignment is just in the plans we do not have any plans to extend or have this built

2589
03:13:33,500 --> 03:13:41,680
 anytime in the near future it is purely as properties come up as parcels develop we continue

2590
03:13:41,680 --> 03:13:50,900
 to make sure that we create an alignment that is least encroaching as well as we work with

2591
03:13:50,900 --> 03:13:56,240
 different parcels so yes engineering wise to answer your question we can definitely

2592
03:13:56,240 --> 03:14:05,680
 engineer it as far as safety and other concerns that will pop up as a result the new design

2593
03:14:05,680 --> 03:14:11,200
 we currently don't know we've not explored that option so and can I follow that up with

2594
03:14:11,200 --> 03:14:16,000
 can you you may not know the answer to that and that'd be perfectly fine but can you enlighten

2595
03:14:16,000 --> 03:14:22,800
 us as to the issues that we brought up earlier that you may not have heard of of can you

2596
03:14:22,800 --> 03:14:35,400
 retrofit a capped gas well to put a road open um engineering wise you can engineer anything

2597
03:14:35,400 --> 03:14:43,080
 it's the amount of money and the physics it's a benefit cost analysis that has to be run

2598
03:14:43,080 --> 03:14:51,800
 so what how much are we going to spend in order to have a roadway laid in safely and

2599
03:14:51,800 --> 03:15:02,200
 which is a public facility so yes we have to if we have to explore the option it may

2600
03:15:02,200 --> 03:15:11,600
 be that that might be an expensive alternative but it's something that is potentially feasible

2601
03:15:11,600 --> 03:15:22,320
 if if the source of money were to come into play it's not something that's forbidden or

2602
03:15:22,320 --> 03:15:29,840
 against rules or guidelines it's more of an yeah at this point I mean this is the last

2603
03:15:29,840 --> 03:15:34,040
 minute question but there are two materials I'm not really familiar with that particular

2604
03:15:34,040 --> 03:15:40,560
 site so I'm not sure if I can be specific and say yes this is a great thing or the yes

2605
03:15:40,560 --> 03:15:48,160
 I can do it we definitely have to get into the details of it I can't really answer that

2606
03:15:48,160 --> 03:16:00,080
 question a yes or no at this time okay thank you so any other questions for pre-tim or

2607
03:16:00,080 --> 03:16:17,600
 staff we do have a motion and a second but I want to make sure all discussion all right

2608
03:16:17,600 --> 03:16:24,160
 seeing no discussion I will call for oh Commissioner Ellis sorry about that thank you chair I believe

2609
03:16:24,160 --> 03:16:31,960
 Commissioner Cole had his hand up Commissioner Cole thank you yeah do we know if that what

2610
03:16:31,960 --> 03:16:41,360
 particular kind of well that is is that a horizontal or a vertical I am not entirely

2611
03:16:41,360 --> 03:16:45,320
 sure I believe it's old enough that it was most likely just a vertical well rather than

2612
03:16:45,320 --> 03:16:56,600
 a horizontal I can look into that more with the Railroad Commission Trisha Ellis thank

2613
03:16:56,600 --> 03:17:00,720
 you chair I guess just a couple of thoughts here I'm really struggling here because I

2614
03:17:00,720 --> 03:17:08,680
 really like this development but I don't like that we're being forced to we've got some

2615
03:17:08,680 --> 03:17:13,760
 things on the answer with what was brought up today with this future alignment so it's

2616
03:17:13,760 --> 03:17:19,480
 like if we vote on this project that's effectively saying we're going to align this road like

2617
03:17:19,480 --> 03:17:27,280
 that and pre-tim said there are possible other alternatives possible I just don't like throwing

2618
03:17:27,280 --> 03:17:30,760
 this property owner is like the sacrificial lamb for this development and that's what

2619
03:17:30,760 --> 03:17:38,160
 it feels like to me so that's where my struggle is I don't know if anybody would be up for

2620
03:17:38,160 --> 03:17:42,800
 postponing if the applicant would be up to postponing just to get a little bit more clarity

2621
03:17:42,800 --> 03:17:50,080
 on some of the things that were brought up today that was just share my thoughts thank

2622
03:17:50,080 --> 03:17:57,040
 you Mr. Ellis I think in response to those comments I I certainly without any lack of

2623
03:17:57,040 --> 03:18:04,920
 gravity to miss Dominguez and her family understand that impact but in the same vein we just approved

2624
03:18:04,920 --> 03:18:12,760
 a hundred foot cell tower in someone's backyard off University a lot of the decisions we have

2625
03:18:12,760 --> 03:18:19,640
 do isolate one individual and potentially put them at a disadvantage or or changes their

2626
03:18:19,640 --> 03:18:25,880
 enjoyment of their property for for me the brush Creek and all red represent a southern

2627
03:18:25,880 --> 03:18:29,480
 road for our city that's eventually going to connect east and west all the way over

2628
03:18:29,480 --> 03:18:36,960
 to Hickory Creek through coal ranch and hunter ranch and the idea of adding an s curve or

2629
03:18:36,960 --> 03:18:43,200
 45s to a 50 mile power road makes me think of 1830 right at Hickory Creek in between

2630
03:18:43,200 --> 03:18:47,840
 brush Creek now and just because we can engineer anything which I trust pretends to be able

2631
03:18:47,840 --> 03:18:52,400
 to engineer anything the the mobility impact the safety impact the bifurcation of a neighborhood

2632
03:18:52,400 --> 03:18:58,520
 the impact of trails put it right next to the brand new park I I believe that the road

2633
03:18:58,520 --> 03:19:05,000
 given all the information that I've been provided is in is in the correct place it's where that

2634
03:19:05,000 --> 03:19:11,200
 mobility is the best connector and it does appear that it doesn't imminently put miss

2635
03:19:11,200 --> 03:19:18,040
 Dominguez's family at at at any kind of disposition it's going to be years decades before that

2636
03:19:18,040 --> 03:19:24,640
 road even extends into the property which is a small concession I'll concede that but

2637
03:19:24,640 --> 03:19:29,720
 nevertheless it's it's not and within a year that her shop or her property is going to

2638
03:19:29,720 --> 03:19:35,080
 be impacted a lot of hands up I want to go I think I saw Commissioner Anderson first

2639
03:19:35,080 --> 03:19:41,440
 uh the staff know thank you chair first uh but does the staff know or is Mr Dominguez

2640
03:19:41,440 --> 03:19:47,640
 still on the phone how many acres we're looking at you know taking from the family because

2641
03:19:47,640 --> 03:19:53,200
 if they if they own 100 acres right there and we're only taking three that's not I don't

2642
03:19:53,200 --> 03:19:57,880
 see a big issue with that but if they own three uh five acres and we're taking two and

2643
03:19:57,880 --> 03:20:02,440
 a half I mean I could see a big impact there but I didn't know staff knew how many acres

2644
03:20:02,440 --> 03:20:14,680
 that we would be uh taken to build the road

2645
03:20:14,680 --> 03:20:36,280
 I'm going to just try to give a rough rough estimate if you let me just

2646
03:20:36,280 --> 03:20:40,640
 I mean I agree with chair this is it's going to be years down the road before we see a

2647
03:20:40,640 --> 03:20:48,880
 major impact but I just just percentages for me it's just you know if we're taking the

2648
03:20:48,880 --> 03:20:52,560
 majority of the property I'd you know I feel horrible but if we're only taking a small

2649
03:20:52,560 --> 03:21:07,520
 percentage or something to you know to do this um so I just did a just a quick uh calculation

2650
03:21:07,520 --> 03:21:15,440
 or or a polygon of a rectangle it's roughly 300 feet uh maybe Haley if you can pull that

2651
03:21:15,440 --> 03:21:30,400
 back up it'll at least give some context so from the corner of their the northeast corner

2652
03:21:30,400 --> 03:21:40,120
 of their property if you go over about 300 feet um which is uh approximately right where

2653
03:21:40,120 --> 03:21:48,480
 the road starts where it kind of tees in we're all red tees in and then down about 630 feet

2654
03:21:48,480 --> 03:21:58,240
 is about uh four and a quarter acres but do we know how much they own I mean I mean it's

2655
03:21:58,240 --> 03:22:04,080
 she had stated earlier I thought it was a 96 acres okay all right I thought that's what

2656
03:22:04,080 --> 03:22:15,000
 she said okay thanks rich uh the next hand I saw was Christa back so so one of the things

2657
03:22:15,000 --> 03:22:24,160
 that concerns me about this is um the development costs maybe should be explored by the developers

2658
03:22:24,160 --> 03:22:34,120
 um but also I'm concerned by um have we so two questions have we explored a potential

2659
03:22:34,120 --> 03:22:40,520
 pathway through the other surrounding properties um to commissioner Ellis's or Anderson's

2660
03:22:40,520 --> 03:22:49,560
 uh point um if we take less of a of a piece of the Dominguez property and and and explore

2661
03:22:49,560 --> 03:22:55,960
 the properties to the north a little bit uh you know sacrifice a corner of the park whatever

2662
03:22:55,960 --> 03:23:03,200
 then you have a potential uh uh shared impact as it were from from moving the potential

2663
03:23:03,200 --> 03:23:09,080
 road around um the other thing that that so I'll bring them both up because I think they're

2664
03:23:09,080 --> 03:23:13,960
 related the other question I have is related to chair's comment and that is um we're talking

2665
03:23:13,960 --> 03:23:17,400
 about splitting a neighborhood we're talking about splitting a neighborhood if you want

2666
03:23:17,400 --> 03:23:22,320
 to develop homes on both sides of the neighborhood if you say that I want to expand the trail

2667
03:23:22,320 --> 03:23:28,220
 and park system to the southwest by moving the road to the east and have instead of whatever

2668
03:23:28,220 --> 03:23:37,220
 150 homes I am going to have 120 homes uh then again that's that's a cost born as risk

2669
03:23:37,220 --> 03:23:41,680
 and risk abatement by the developers uh not by the city and not by the surrounding property

2670
03:23:41,680 --> 03:23:51,800
 owners so I guess the first question is have we explored the potential for uh other roots

2671
03:23:51,800 --> 03:23:57,520
 and other pieces of property

2672
03:23:57,520 --> 03:24:00,640
 commissioner Ellis I wanted to circle back to you real fast one commissioner was that

2673
03:24:00,640 --> 03:24:06,480
 a question or is that a kind of the question is staff okay I'll let them answer yeah and

2674
03:24:06,480 --> 03:24:10,280
 I don't know if pre-temp still on the call but I think that that was part of that analysis

2675
03:24:10,280 --> 03:24:15,400
 they did when they looked at four or five different alignments but again a lot of that

2676
03:24:15,400 --> 03:24:21,860
 ties to that crossing and aligning it with brush creek okay thank you I can I can jump

2677
03:24:21,860 --> 03:24:29,240
 in I have a quick couple sentences we looked at we started with actually during the feasibility

2678
03:24:29,240 --> 03:24:35,580
 study it's very preliminary planning level we started with close to 13 alternatives and

2679
03:24:35,580 --> 03:24:49,560
 we dwindled down on different levels for feasibility primarily focusing on the terrain the constraints

2680
03:24:49,560 --> 03:24:56,600
 floodplain was one of the main one and the constraints and then also looked at the most

2681
03:24:56,600 --> 03:25:01,840
 direct route if you have a circuitous route that goes different angles and goes further

2682
03:25:01,840 --> 03:25:09,240
 away and swings away people are most likely not going to use that so in order to have

2683
03:25:09,240 --> 03:25:15,840
 something that is an arterial level six lane divided you need to have a most direct route

2684
03:25:15,840 --> 03:25:24,280
 and I think we out of all those alternatives this was one of the alignment that was pretty

2685
03:25:24,280 --> 03:25:36,400
 much distilled down to thank you commissioner Alice I want to follow back up with you I

2686
03:25:36,400 --> 03:25:41,280
 don't know if your hand is up or not you had mentioned about looking to postpone were you

2687
03:25:41,280 --> 03:25:45,080
 interested in making a subsidiary motion or were you just kind of thrown it out seeing

2688
03:25:45,080 --> 03:25:52,360
 if someone else was doing I just wanted to respect that comment well I was trying I was

2689
03:25:52,360 --> 03:26:00,520
 trying to get possibly thoughts from the applicant on that and other commissioners thoughts but

2690
03:26:00,520 --> 03:26:07,440
 I mean the issue is is I'm not an engineer but good points have been brought up tonight

2691
03:26:07,440 --> 03:26:16,840
 that we can't get answered tonight I don't understand deciding to necessarily line a

2692
03:26:16,840 --> 03:26:24,340
 road right through a developed piece of someone's property when we had vacant land I understand

2693
03:26:24,340 --> 03:26:29,560
 we're discussing a project on it now but we did have vacant land and it just seems odd

2694
03:26:29,560 --> 03:26:36,440
 that we didn't and again I haven't seen the study that we didn't that wasn't part of our

2695
03:26:36,440 --> 03:26:40,960
 backup or anything here it's just good points have been brought brought up that we can't

2696
03:26:40,960 --> 03:26:49,520
 get answered and so I'm I would have a really hard time supporting this without getting

2697
03:26:49,520 --> 03:27:01,000
 some of that answered so I guess at this point I will make a motion to postpone to the next

2698
03:27:01,000 --> 03:27:05,320
 I'm not sure when our next PNZ meeting is in the world we're living in but to the next

2699
03:27:05,320 --> 03:27:15,260
 PNZ meeting we have a motion to postpone to a date certain of next PNZ meeting I will

2700
03:27:15,260 --> 03:27:24,480
 let Richard pop quiz tell us that date Mr. Cole I saw your hand yeah second that okay

2701
03:27:24,480 --> 03:27:29,480
 the next the sorry the next meeting would be May 20th I just want to make sure we have

2702
03:27:29,480 --> 03:27:37,960
 enough time to look at what what we're being asked to look at that gives us about a one

2703
03:27:37,960 --> 03:27:44,960
 week to turn it or to turn everything around and specifically Commissioner Ellis and other

2704
03:27:44,960 --> 03:27:49,720
 commissioners is the main request to maybe look at those 13 different alternatives that

2705
03:27:49,720 --> 03:27:54,320
 engineering came up with and understand the rationale it seems like that would be probably

2706
03:27:54,320 --> 03:27:59,560
 the most helpful thing to review it would be very helpful to I would like that too yeah

2707
03:27:59,560 --> 03:28:05,440
 to understand why I mean the structure is on the property and why I would love to see

2708
03:28:05,440 --> 03:28:12,520
 why that was the best idea was to go through someone's developed piece of property Richard

2709
03:28:12,520 --> 03:28:17,480
 can we go date uncertain and then just be followed back up with when the applicant and

2710
03:28:17,480 --> 03:28:30,520
 city can choreograph a meeting

2711
03:28:30,520 --> 03:28:37,440
 I think we can have it back by next by the next meeting on the 20th I love the confidence

2712
03:28:37,440 --> 03:28:43,460
 so we have just to have a great staff just to clarify Christian Ellis are you okay with

2713
03:28:43,460 --> 03:28:51,400
 the date certain of May 20th I am and Commissioner Cole do you second a date certain of May 20th

2714
03:28:51,400 --> 03:28:58,040
 yes this is a superseding motion to the motion on the table so we will have this vote first

2715
03:28:58,040 --> 03:29:06,500
 is there any discussion on the motion seeing none I'll call for a vote to postpone this

2716
03:29:06,500 --> 03:29:14,560
 item to a date certain of May 20th be a roll call Christian Ellis I Christian Cole I Christian

2717
03:29:14,560 --> 03:29:25,720
 Beck I Christian Anderson I Christian Pernetta I Christian Smith I chair votes in favor motion

2718
03:29:25,720 --> 03:29:34,120
 carries seven zero looking forward to have this back the next item on our agenda for

2719
03:29:34,120 --> 03:29:39,640
 business is item five the planning and zoning Commission project matrix I will turn this

2720
03:29:39,640 --> 03:29:46,440
 over to Richard for any updates and then discussion I don't have really any updates at this point

2721
03:29:46,440 --> 03:29:53,000
 on on the matrix I matrix items just wanted to give a quick update I know we've had it's

2722
03:29:53,000 --> 03:29:58,600
 almost been a month I think since we since we met although we haven't been accepting

2723
03:29:58,600 --> 03:30:07,400
 applications that has now changed where starting today really council lifted that that that

2724
03:30:07,400 --> 03:30:13,000
 part of the order on Tuesday and with good news we had about nine new submittals came

2725
03:30:13,000 --> 03:30:18,680
 in today so as soon as that was lifted yesterday we had nine new submittals come in and the

2726
03:30:18,680 --> 03:30:25,960
 day before we had ten resubmittals and so with that PNC will continue meeting twice

2727
03:30:25,960 --> 03:30:33,140
 a month so I think that's at least good news in seeing that people are still looking at

2728
03:30:33,140 --> 03:30:39,280
 finishing projects and and moving forward with projects that they had in the hopper

2729
03:30:39,280 --> 03:30:44,840
 council did approve last night the rezoning at I-35 for the offices if you recall just

2730
03:30:44,840 --> 03:30:52,040
 south of Windsor that was the rezoning with the conditions so that was approved unanimously

2731
03:30:52,040 --> 03:30:58,040
 in addition we while it didn't come in front of PNZ council approved an interim mud or

2732
03:30:58,040 --> 03:31:03,880
 or Paul municipal utility district policy what I will do is I will make sure everybody

2733
03:31:03,880 --> 03:31:09,920
 has both the materials that were provided for the work session on the 30th and then

2734
03:31:09,920 --> 03:31:17,680
 what was approved last night and if so wish if anybody desires or wish wishes I'd be happy

2735
03:31:17,680 --> 03:31:23,280
 at least to give a brief overview at at one of the next work sessions just what that means

2736
03:31:23,280 --> 03:31:29,800
 and and what it is but we are seeing quite a number of these municipal utility districts

2737
03:31:29,800 --> 03:31:40,280
 spring up in our ETJ thanks Richard Kushner back yeah Richard can I follow up on that

2738
03:31:40,280 --> 03:31:48,480
 so with the with the application starting today coupled with the small number that trickled

2739
03:31:48,480 --> 03:31:54,720
 through on the previous pipeline when are we I mean we're basically going to start meeting

2740
03:31:54,720 --> 03:32:00,120
 normal schedule is that what you're saying correct we'll go back to our normal schedule

2741
03:32:00,120 --> 03:32:06,640
 so the next meeting will be the 20th and then it'll continue the twice a month for the time

2742
03:32:06,640 --> 03:32:12,800
 being I don't know when we'll be meeting in person anytime soon but I do know that we'll

2743
03:32:12,800 --> 03:32:24,640
 be proceeding like we are today thank you hey Richard I was talking to Jim strange and

2744
03:32:24,640 --> 03:32:31,680
 he said that his project on Ryan Road was retroactively approved I had never heard even

2745
03:32:31,680 --> 03:32:37,640
 of that term can you help me out he said he he had a date that it was going to be approved

2746
03:32:37,640 --> 03:32:41,140
 then he got a letter saying that had been approved I'm assuming that's shot clock related

2747
03:32:41,140 --> 03:32:47,280
 but I'd love to know the mechanism of how his project was retroactively approved that's

2748
03:32:47,280 --> 03:32:53,600
 the one off Ryan that Ryan road that Tim yeah and it might be the the the wrong you might

2749
03:32:53,600 --> 03:32:59,960
 be using the wrong the wrong terminology there was a as part of the council meeting there

2750
03:32:59,960 --> 03:33:08,320
 was an exhibit that was modified as part of that discussion with the community that exhibit

2751
03:33:08,320 --> 03:33:15,040
 wasn't correctly updated and so what happened was the although while the ordinance was passed

2752
03:33:15,040 --> 03:33:25,840
 it came back I want to say two weeks later if I'm oh I'm sorry I'm I was thinking with

2753
03:33:25,840 --> 03:33:34,680
 the number it was the plat because the meeting was cancelled so under the shot clock it automatically

2754
03:33:34,680 --> 03:33:39,280
 got approved automatically got approved that's what I assumed and but when Jim was not aware

2755
03:33:39,280 --> 03:33:43,480
 of the shot clock he would notice the speed on that so I was I think it was shot clock

2756
03:33:43,480 --> 03:33:46,800
 he's like I don't I don't know what it was and I was like well I'm now confused and so

2757
03:33:46,800 --> 03:33:51,280
 as did I and we had I hadn't seen any personally shot clock issues where this automatic approval

2758
03:33:51,280 --> 03:33:57,920
 happens so thanks for that clarification that's what I imagined happened any other items for

2759
03:33:57,920 --> 03:34:06,680
 Richard or staff do you put on the matrix upcoming well that's fantastic guys thanks

2760
03:34:06,680 --> 03:34:11,640
 for a great meeting this evening I think they'll only get smoother from here at nine ten I

2761
03:34:11,640 --> 03:34:13,600
 will close the meeting y'all be safe