WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:08.100
 >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the planning and zoning commission

00:00:08.100 --> 00:00:11.960
 work session for Wednesday, May 20th, 2020.

00:00:11.960 --> 00:00:17.240
 I'll call this meeting to order at 532, seeing that we do have a quorum.

00:00:17.240 --> 00:00:22.640
 On our work session for this evening, we will just be going over the agenda, we'll walk

00:00:22.640 --> 00:00:23.640
 through the agenda.

00:00:23.640 --> 00:00:28.800
 There's no reports to go through tonight, so the first thing we have is the consideration

00:00:28.800 --> 00:00:30.280
 of our minutes.

00:00:30.280 --> 00:00:38.920
 Does anyone need to add or edit anything to the May 6th minutes?

00:00:38.920 --> 00:00:42.120
 Seeing none, we'll go into items for individual consideration.

00:00:42.120 --> 00:00:49.820
 Item 2A is being postponed to a date certain of June 3rd, or rather, I will ask for a motion

00:00:49.820 --> 00:00:53.880
 for that item to be postponed to a date certain of June 3rd.

00:00:53.880 --> 00:00:59.000
 There's nothing to talk about that, that item's just getting pushed, which moves us to item

00:00:59.000 --> 00:01:03.520
 2B, ADP 20-0009.

00:01:03.520 --> 00:01:08.800
 And if Julie Wyatt's hanging around, I'll invite her for a presentation on the item.

00:01:08.800 --> 00:01:11.480
 >> Did Commissioner Beck have a question?

00:01:11.480 --> 00:01:15.480
 >> Yes, thank you.

00:01:15.480 --> 00:01:24.400
 >> I was just curious, that was an applicant requesting postponement for 2A?

00:01:24.400 --> 00:01:30.560
 >> Staff is requesting that it be postponed, to continue to work through issues with the

00:01:30.560 --> 00:01:31.560
 applicant.

00:01:31.560 --> 00:01:32.560
 >> Thank you.

00:01:32.560 --> 00:01:33.560
 >> Yep.

00:01:33.560 --> 00:01:39.360
 >> Good evening, commissioners, it's Julie Wyatt.

00:01:39.360 --> 00:01:45.840
 I am going to share my screen now to get my presentation up.

00:01:45.840 --> 00:01:52.400
 All right, we've combined all the presentations, so let me zoom down to mine.

00:01:52.400 --> 00:01:53.800
 All right, here we go.

00:01:53.800 --> 00:02:00.600
 So the request before you is for ADP 29 Smith Street Apartments.

00:02:00.600 --> 00:02:07.560
 The request is for an alternative development plan, excuse me, for a multifamily development

00:02:07.560 --> 00:02:09.280
 on about half an acre.

00:02:09.280 --> 00:02:15.080
 The purpose is to deviate from sub-chapter 13 requirements in the 2002 debt and development

00:02:15.080 --> 00:02:19.480
 code for multifamily developments.

00:02:19.480 --> 00:02:24.800
 So as you're aware, we transitioned to the 2019 code last October.

00:02:24.800 --> 00:02:30.540
 Due to this project's timing, it is subject to the 2002 regulations.

00:02:30.540 --> 00:02:36.880
 And both in the 2002 and 2019 regulations, multifamily is a permitted use.

00:02:36.880 --> 00:02:44.800
 About the 2002, it was DCG was the zoning, and the current zoning is MN.

00:02:44.800 --> 00:02:47.800
 So you're probably familiar with the general area.

00:02:47.800 --> 00:02:49.640
 The site is outlined in yellow.

00:02:49.640 --> 00:02:55.000
 It is on the north side of Smith Street, just west of Dallas Drive.

00:02:55.000 --> 00:02:59.720
 This is kind of an emerging redevelopment area of the city.

00:02:59.720 --> 00:03:03.320
 And it makes sense why that emergence is happening.

00:03:03.320 --> 00:03:08.880
 When you look at where it's positioned within the city, it's about a quarter mile from the

00:03:08.880 --> 00:03:11.600
 central business district as the crow flies.

00:03:11.600 --> 00:03:15.700
 It's about a quarter mile from a UNT transit stop to the south.

00:03:15.700 --> 00:03:19.880
 And then it's also about a tenth of a mile from a DCTA stop.

00:03:19.880 --> 00:03:25.740
 So there's lots of transit options, as well as pretty close to some of the activity hubs

00:03:25.740 --> 00:03:27.200
 within the city.

00:03:27.200 --> 00:03:31.200
 And we've had a couple of projects that have come forward recently.

00:03:31.200 --> 00:03:36.480
 Just adjacent near the property, there is a multifamily development that has actually

00:03:36.480 --> 00:03:38.820
 gone vertical, and it's moving forward.

00:03:38.820 --> 00:03:42.080
 And then you probably recall the Haven at Doherty project.

00:03:42.080 --> 00:03:47.160
 There was an ADP for that one that you saw, and that one will be moving forward soon.

00:03:47.160 --> 00:03:51.960
 So there is some redevelopment going on within the area.

00:03:51.960 --> 00:03:54.640
 They have provided the site plan, and we've reviewed it.

00:03:54.640 --> 00:04:01.400
 Apart from the deviations that they're requesting, it meets all subchapter 13 requirements.

00:04:01.400 --> 00:04:05.560
 But let's go a little bit more into what they're requesting.

00:04:05.560 --> 00:04:09.520
 So there are three deviations they're requesting first.

00:04:09.520 --> 00:04:14.440
 The provision is that at least 50% of the front yard frontage should have buildings

00:04:14.440 --> 00:04:17.840
 within 20 feet of the front property line.

00:04:17.840 --> 00:04:20.440
 The property is kind of a narrow lot.

00:04:20.440 --> 00:04:26.400
 It has 122 linear feet of frontage, which would require 61 feet of buildings within

00:04:26.400 --> 00:04:28.720
 20 feet of that front property line.

00:04:28.720 --> 00:04:35.440
 However, the entire frontage of this site is encumbered with a variable width electric

00:04:35.440 --> 00:04:42.080
 easement so that they are set back 24 feet from that property line.

00:04:42.080 --> 00:04:47.440
 The second provision, the wall area of the front facade must have at least 25% windows

00:04:47.440 --> 00:04:49.000
 and doors.

00:04:49.000 --> 00:04:53.520
 They're proposing 19%, which fits with the architectural theming of the building.

00:04:53.520 --> 00:05:00.400
 Additionally, the building does provide a lot of color and texture, a lot of variation

00:05:00.400 --> 00:05:06.320
 in the building, providing visual interest and transparency into the building.

00:05:06.320 --> 00:05:09.560
 And then finally, the last one is buildings shall be directly accessed from the street

00:05:09.560 --> 00:05:10.560
 and sidewalk.

00:05:10.560 --> 00:05:14.720
 A minimum of one ground floor entrance must be oriented toward the street and include

00:05:14.720 --> 00:05:15.720
 a porch.

00:05:15.720 --> 00:05:22.320
 Once again, due to that easement, it really prevents putting a porch in that area.

00:05:22.320 --> 00:05:30.800
 However, they have within the stairwell screening element provided an entrance structure integrated

00:05:30.800 --> 00:05:31.800
 within there.

00:05:31.800 --> 00:05:36.240
 And that really does provide a sense of arrival for the residents and visitors, and that's

00:05:36.240 --> 00:05:39.840
 also connected to the sidewalk with the pedestrian path.

00:05:39.840 --> 00:05:43.640
 So it really does meet the intent.

00:05:43.640 --> 00:05:47.000
 We'll go over more specifically what the site plan shows.

00:05:47.000 --> 00:05:52.040
 So this is kind of a zoomed in part of the site plan that's adjacent to the street.

00:05:52.040 --> 00:05:54.520
 The building is outlined there in green.

00:05:54.520 --> 00:05:59.920
 You can see it has the 42 and a half feet of frontage.

00:05:59.920 --> 00:06:04.400
 Once again, that lot is 122 feet wide.

00:06:04.400 --> 00:06:07.800
 That variable width easement, you can see the blue line.

00:06:07.800 --> 00:06:12.240
 It is on the east side of the property, 20 feet, and then on the west side of the property,

00:06:12.240 --> 00:06:13.760
 it goes up to 30 feet.

00:06:13.760 --> 00:06:17.780
 So it really runs in a diagonal line across the frontage.

00:06:17.780 --> 00:06:23.160
 They're also proposing a 26-foot fire lane on the site that allows emergency vehicles

00:06:23.160 --> 00:06:34.520
 to adequately get into the site and to provide services if needed.

00:06:34.520 --> 00:06:37.160
 And then here is the front elevation for the building.

00:06:37.160 --> 00:06:41.840
 Once again, they're providing that total 19% opening with the four large windows per

00:06:41.840 --> 00:06:44.040
 floor.

00:06:44.040 --> 00:06:50.440
 What their intent is is to balance those transparency needs with the privacy for future residents,

00:06:50.440 --> 00:06:56.520
 to make sure that those two things are balanced while still providing that relationship to

00:06:56.520 --> 00:06:58.080
 the street.

00:06:58.080 --> 00:07:03.760
 Their proposed design, they've got a strong architectural point of view on their building,

00:07:03.760 --> 00:07:08.600
 and that building does provide a lot of variety, both in color and texture.

00:07:08.600 --> 00:07:11.880
 It's not just a blank wall that somebody would walk past.

00:07:11.880 --> 00:07:16.280
 Additionally, that architectural screening element, you can see it here, does provide

00:07:16.280 --> 00:07:22.600
 that nice gateway entrance for residents to provide, once again, that sense of arrival

00:07:22.600 --> 00:07:25.480
 and it is connected to the right-of-way.

00:07:25.480 --> 00:07:30.520
 The criteria for approval are in subchapter 13 of the 2002 code.

00:07:30.520 --> 00:07:31.520
 There are five of them.

00:07:31.520 --> 00:07:32.800
 We'll go over them briefly.

00:07:32.800 --> 00:07:35.520
 First, preserve existing neighborhoods.

00:07:35.520 --> 00:07:39.440
 This proposal is in that redeveloping area of the city.

00:07:39.440 --> 00:07:42.880
 The proposed use will complement that mix of uses.

00:07:42.880 --> 00:07:48.480
 There is a mix of residential, multifamily, large multifamily, and even some industrial

00:07:48.480 --> 00:07:49.480
 in that area.

00:07:49.480 --> 00:07:53.240
 So it'll provide that needed density near our downtown area.

00:07:53.240 --> 00:07:55.960
 Will assure quality development.

00:07:55.960 --> 00:07:59.880
 This request is not intended to lower design standards, but would facilitate development

00:07:59.880 --> 00:08:02.980
 of a site that is an infill site.

00:08:02.980 --> 00:08:07.400
 These sites can be really constrained in somewhat interesting ways.

00:08:07.400 --> 00:08:09.800
 For instance, in this one, you've got that easement.

00:08:09.800 --> 00:08:10.960
 You've got the narrow lot.

00:08:10.960 --> 00:08:16.480
 So sometimes you have to work with the constraints within these infill areas.

00:08:16.480 --> 00:08:21.880
 Apart from this request, it would meet all other subchapter 13 requirements.

00:08:21.880 --> 00:08:24.400
 Focus new development to activity centers.

00:08:24.400 --> 00:08:29.240
 Once again, this is urban infill, so it would not contribute to sprawl.

00:08:29.240 --> 00:08:33.300
 There is necessary infrastructure available to the site, and as we discussed earlier,

00:08:33.300 --> 00:08:36.040
 it's also near transit.

00:08:36.040 --> 00:08:40.080
 And then does it result in a high quality of development meeting the intent of the standards?

00:08:40.080 --> 00:08:44.560
 So we'll go over each of those requests one by one and just kind of talk a little bit

00:08:44.560 --> 00:08:45.800
 through that.

00:08:45.800 --> 00:08:50.280
 So the first one is that 50% of the front yard frontage should have the buildings within

00:08:50.280 --> 00:08:53.940
 20 feet of the front property line.

00:08:53.940 --> 00:09:01.320
 This intent really is to enclose the public space to make places more interesting to walk

00:09:01.320 --> 00:09:02.320
 around.

00:09:02.320 --> 00:09:09.000
 In this case, the easement does prevent situating that building closer to the street.

00:09:09.000 --> 00:09:13.640
 And further, that 26 foot fire lane also constricts the site.

00:09:13.640 --> 00:09:18.000
 We want to make sure that emergency vehicles do have adequate access.

00:09:18.000 --> 00:09:24.720
 But with their design, with the additional -- with the architecture of the building,

00:09:24.720 --> 00:09:31.520
 it does create that vibrancy in the street, and it will serve to meet that intent.

00:09:31.520 --> 00:09:36.640
 Does it result in a high quality development -- oh, I'm sorry -- the 25% windows and doors,

00:09:36.640 --> 00:09:43.200
 they're providing 19%, you know, and what they're trying to do is balance that transparency

00:09:43.200 --> 00:09:49.400
 to make sure that there is -- that there is -- once again, it's a visually interesting

00:09:49.400 --> 00:09:54.120
 building from the street, but without compromising the resident privacy.

00:09:54.120 --> 00:09:59.200
 We feel like their proposal meets the intent based upon their building elevation.

00:09:59.200 --> 00:10:03.200
 And then finally, the building access and front porch.

00:10:03.200 --> 00:10:06.960
 That entrance structure is integrated in the stairwell screening.

00:10:06.960 --> 00:10:08.160
 And there is that pedestrian pass.

00:10:08.160 --> 00:10:11.800
 So it does meet the intent of that building access.

00:10:11.800 --> 00:10:13.400
 And it does provide that sense of arrival.

00:10:13.400 --> 00:10:17.640
 Once again, there is still that easement that they have to contend with when you're looking

00:10:17.640 --> 00:10:19.480
 at a porch.

00:10:19.480 --> 00:10:23.200
 So based upon the criteria for approval, staff recommends approval.

00:10:23.200 --> 00:10:24.960
 And I will answer any questions.

00:10:24.960 --> 00:10:31.240
 And I believe the applicant is also available to answer questions and is going to make a

00:10:31.240 --> 00:10:34.880
 short presentation.

00:10:34.880 --> 00:10:38.680
 >> Any questions for Julie on this item?

00:10:38.680 --> 00:10:42.000
 I'm going to wait for Matt's screen.

00:10:42.000 --> 00:10:44.600
 Matt, do you have any questions, Christian Pernetta?

00:10:44.600 --> 00:10:45.600
 Okay.

00:10:45.600 --> 00:10:47.600
 Julie, I appreciate the presentation.

00:10:47.600 --> 00:10:48.600
 Thank you.

00:10:48.600 --> 00:10:49.600
 >> Sure.

00:10:49.600 --> 00:10:53.040
 >> The next item for our work session is moving into public hearings.

00:10:53.040 --> 00:10:59.680
 The first item is item 3A, FR19-0016.

00:10:59.680 --> 00:11:02.000
 And this is Cindy Jackson's item.

00:11:02.000 --> 00:11:10.560
 And I believe she is calling in this evening for presentation.

00:11:10.560 --> 00:11:11.560
 >> Thank you.

00:11:11.560 --> 00:11:12.560
 Can you hear me?

00:11:12.560 --> 00:11:13.560
 >> We can.

00:11:13.560 --> 00:11:14.560
 >> Super.

00:11:14.560 --> 00:11:15.560
 Okay.

00:11:15.560 --> 00:11:24.560
 Now, they're going to be running my PowerPoint from City Hall, so I'm just waiting for them

00:11:24.560 --> 00:11:26.440
 to pull it up.

00:11:26.440 --> 00:11:30.120
 >> We're ready to go.

00:11:30.120 --> 00:11:42.440
 >> Fr16-0016, the Vista Verde addition is a request for approval of a residential replat

00:11:42.440 --> 00:11:50.280
 of lot 1279 and lot 1X27X, block A, of the Vista Verde addition, excuse me, being a replat

00:11:50.280 --> 00:11:55.720
 of a remainder of lot 56, block A, of the Oaks of Township 2.

00:11:55.720 --> 00:12:01.000
 The approximately 8.882 acre site is generally located on the southwest side of Colorado

00:12:01.000 --> 00:12:05.760
 Boulevard, 315 feet northwest of San Jacinto Boulevard.

00:12:05.760 --> 00:12:11.280
 For the Texas local government code, a public hearing is required for a residential replat,

00:12:11.280 --> 00:12:15.840
 which requires written notices sent out to property owners within the original subdivision

00:12:15.840 --> 00:12:20.520
 and property owners located within 200 feet of the subject site.

00:12:20.520 --> 00:12:24.440
 And next slide, please.

00:12:24.440 --> 00:12:30.480
 On May 1, 2018, the City Council approved a request to rezone the subject site to NRMU

00:12:30.480 --> 00:12:36.800
 12 with mixed-use overlay protection district, including the following conditions.

00:12:36.800 --> 00:12:40.720
 There shall be no uses permitted other than single-family attached dwelling units, including

00:12:40.720 --> 00:12:44.480
 townhomes or single-family detached dwelling units.

00:12:44.480 --> 00:12:49.120
 The overall density shall not exceed 10 dwelling units per acre.

00:12:49.120 --> 00:12:53.600
 Buildings which are contiguous to the residential neighborhoods shall have a maximum height of

00:12:53.600 --> 00:12:55.040
 2 stories.

00:12:55.040 --> 00:13:00.240
 Installation of an 8-foot tall fence is required along adjacent properties.

00:13:00.240 --> 00:13:04.480
 The City Council also required the provision of two access points to the site from Colorado

00:13:04.480 --> 00:13:07.980
 Boulevard as shown on the plaque.

00:13:07.980 --> 00:13:19.720
 The proposed plaque conforms with requirements A and B regarding the density and the two

00:13:19.720 --> 00:13:22.380
 points of access from Colorado Boulevard.

00:13:22.380 --> 00:13:27.440
 The remainder of those requirements will be enforced during the building permit phase

00:13:27.440 --> 00:13:29.400
 of development.

00:13:29.400 --> 00:13:30.400
 Next slide, please.

00:13:30.400 --> 00:13:34.680
 This is the plaque, the proposed plaque.

00:13:34.680 --> 00:13:40.160
 The applicant intends to develop the site as a gated community of 79 single-family attached

00:13:40.160 --> 00:13:46.560
 houses comprised of 26 townhomes and 53 single-family homes in which the garages will share a common

00:13:46.560 --> 00:13:47.880
 wall.

00:13:47.880 --> 00:13:52.400
 The plaque includes seven open space lots, which include the private street system and

00:13:52.400 --> 00:13:53.720
 an amenity center.

00:13:53.720 --> 00:13:57.120
 The proposed site is intended to be a gated rental home community.

00:13:57.120 --> 00:14:01.880
 This is the original plaque of the Oaks of Township.

00:14:01.880 --> 00:14:03.800
 Next slide, please.

00:14:03.800 --> 00:14:19.360
 And you can see lot 56 originally was very large, went along San Jacinto and Colorado,

00:14:19.360 --> 00:14:22.560
 and it was platted in January 1985.

00:14:22.560 --> 00:14:23.560
 Next slide, please.

00:14:23.560 --> 00:14:30.380
 Phase 1 of the Villas of Piney Creek, platted in October '95, took up approximately half

00:14:30.380 --> 00:14:36.340
 of lot 56, as you can see here, leaving a remainder.

00:14:36.340 --> 00:14:41.400
 That remainder is the subject site and is proposed as the Vista Verde addition.

00:14:41.400 --> 00:14:47.040
 Originally this was supposed to be developed as phase 2 of the Villas of Piney Creek, however,

00:14:47.040 --> 00:14:50.240
 that did not occur.

00:14:50.240 --> 00:14:53.920
 We sent out public notices as required.

00:14:53.920 --> 00:15:01.320
 We received four responses back in opposition, which comprised 3.54% of the area within the

00:15:01.320 --> 00:15:10.760
 200-foot buffer, and we received one in favor, which comprises 19.11% of the property in

00:15:10.760 --> 00:15:16.960
 the 200-foot boundary, and we received one that was neutral in response.

00:15:16.960 --> 00:15:22.720
 The applicant has since contacted the person that says she was neutral and answers her

00:15:22.720 --> 00:15:23.720
 questions.

00:15:23.720 --> 00:15:29.480
 He is here to talk tonight, so he will probably bring that up in his presentation.

00:15:29.480 --> 00:15:34.200
 Staff recommends approval of this request as it meets the established requirements,

00:15:34.200 --> 00:15:36.080
 and that concludes my presentation.

00:15:36.080 --> 00:15:39.320
 >> Thank you very much, Cindy.

00:15:39.320 --> 00:15:45.240
 Is there any questions for Cindy on this item?

00:15:45.240 --> 00:15:48.040
 I do not see -- oh, Commissioner Ellis.

00:15:48.040 --> 00:15:49.680
 >> Thank you, Chair.

00:15:49.680 --> 00:15:54.440
 Cindy, I assume most of the responses were more out of confusion than anything else.

00:15:54.440 --> 00:15:59.000
 I know I got a couple of phone calls on this wondering if any of those overlay conditions

00:15:59.000 --> 00:16:02.960
 had to do with what we were going over today.

00:16:02.960 --> 00:16:04.960
 Is that -- am I understanding that correctly?

00:16:04.960 --> 00:16:14.220
 Did you speak to all of the people who -- >> I spoke to them, and some of them -- I assured

00:16:14.220 --> 00:16:22.080
 all of them that the overlay is still in place, which they didn't realize, and I assured them

00:16:22.080 --> 00:16:28.280
 that there was no commercial development that was planned for this site.

00:16:28.280 --> 00:16:33.000
 I left a voicemail for a couple and didn't receive any calls back, but I know the applicant

00:16:33.000 --> 00:16:37.520
 has also reached out to them as well.

00:16:37.520 --> 00:16:38.640
 >> Perfect.

00:16:38.640 --> 00:16:41.160
 Thank you.

00:16:41.160 --> 00:16:44.480
 Any other questions for Cindy?

00:16:44.480 --> 00:16:50.320
 >> Commissioners, if I can just add, this is -- I'm not sure if Cindy had mentioned

00:16:50.320 --> 00:16:52.160
 it at the beginning of her presentation.

00:16:52.160 --> 00:16:54.040
 This plat is being reviewed under the old DDC.

00:16:54.040 --> 00:17:00.400
 I don't know if you caught some of those references or as part of the analysis in the backup.

00:17:00.400 --> 00:17:05.160
 So this was sort of a pre-shot clock of three other changes.

00:17:05.160 --> 00:17:07.160
 So this is being reviewed under the old DDC.

00:17:07.160 --> 00:17:12.440
 There was a change in this last legislative session where residential replats, the only

00:17:12.440 --> 00:17:18.000
 time there's a public hearing is if -- and the notice goes out in advance, is if there

00:17:18.000 --> 00:17:24.240
 is a variance associated with it, otherwise the notice goes after the Planning and Zoning

00:17:24.240 --> 00:17:25.240
 Commission.

00:17:25.240 --> 00:17:30.280
 So just wanted to reference that.

00:17:30.280 --> 00:17:31.280
 >> Thank you for that, Richard.

00:17:31.280 --> 00:17:41.160
 Seeing other questions, we will go to item 3B, PD-19-005C, which is also Cindy's item.

00:17:41.160 --> 00:17:42.560
 >> Okay.

00:17:42.560 --> 00:17:57.320
 Okay, PD-19-0005, this is a request for a zoning change on 11.53 acres from a planned

00:17:57.320 --> 00:18:03.200
 development mixed-use regional PDMR district and on .88 acres from mixed-use neighborhood

00:18:03.200 --> 00:18:08.320
 MN district to a planned development district to facilitate the development of seven lots

00:18:08.320 --> 00:18:11.000
 with restaurant and commercial uses.

00:18:11.000 --> 00:18:17.120
 This site is generally located on the southwest side of I-35E service road at the intersection

00:18:17.120 --> 00:18:21.520
 of Buckees Boulevard and the service road.

00:18:21.520 --> 00:18:24.520
 Next slide, please.

00:18:24.520 --> 00:18:30.840
 The current zoning, as you can see, is PDMR and MN.

00:18:30.840 --> 00:18:38.560
 And the proposed zoning map, you will see that it will be straight PD if this is approved.

00:18:38.560 --> 00:18:39.560
 Next slide, please.

00:18:39.560 --> 00:18:44.280
 This site has a considerable zoning history.

00:18:44.280 --> 00:18:52.160
 On July 15th, 2008, this site was actually rezoned from RCR 1 to regional center commercial

00:18:52.160 --> 00:18:58.640
 downtown, RCCD, for mixed-use development with the following overlay conditions, a 50-foot

00:18:58.640 --> 00:19:03.840
 landscape buffer is required, including at the existing pond abutting the residential

00:19:03.840 --> 00:19:09.360
 districts -- excuse me, districts to the west and to the south with the right to install

00:19:09.360 --> 00:19:15.600
 a walking trail and other complementary hardscape around the existing pond, including the area

00:19:15.600 --> 00:19:20.720
 within the 50-foot buffer in connection with the pedestrian easement.

00:19:20.720 --> 00:19:26.360
 No building within 100 feet of the -- is permitted within 100 feet of the residential developments

00:19:26.360 --> 00:19:35.560
 to the west and south of the subject property in excess of 40 feet in height.

00:19:35.560 --> 00:19:39.600
 The owner of the subject property will not remove the existing pond along the western

00:19:39.600 --> 00:19:46.960
 boundary of the subject property abutting the south ridge estate.

00:19:46.960 --> 00:19:53.200
 The owner of the subject property or its designee will erect at its expense an 8-foot iron fence

00:19:53.200 --> 00:19:57.280
 with finials for the benefit of the homes to the west of the subject property, which

00:19:57.280 --> 00:20:00.640
 are directly across from adjacent to the aforementioned pond.

00:20:00.640 --> 00:20:06.880
 All of the conditions of this overlay were fulfilled with the development of the Buckees

00:20:06.880 --> 00:20:09.120
 store and gas station.

00:20:09.120 --> 00:20:11.320
 Next slide, please.

00:20:11.320 --> 00:20:20.200
 At the time Buckees site plan was approved in October 2017, a master site plan for the

00:20:20.200 --> 00:20:23.800
 entire site was approved, as you can see here.

00:20:23.800 --> 00:20:28.080
 The site was designed to provide a substantial landscape area in the rear of the property

00:20:28.080 --> 00:20:32.680
 to buffer the residences located to the south and southeast of the site.

00:20:32.680 --> 00:20:36.440
 The more intense commercial areas were pushed forward to the front of the property along

00:20:36.440 --> 00:20:45.040
 the I-35E corridor to minimize potential impacts between these commercial areas and the adjacent

00:20:45.040 --> 00:20:47.280
 residential areas.

00:20:47.280 --> 00:20:57.080
 A master phasing plan requested by staff at that time was also approved at the staff level.

00:20:57.080 --> 00:21:04.000
 This included conceptual site layout for the seven remaining lots that are along the I-35

00:21:04.000 --> 00:21:08.120
 corridor and are the subject of tonight's rezoning.

00:21:08.120 --> 00:21:13.800
 The development standards for this development were based on the RCC district standards as

00:21:13.800 --> 00:21:20.280
 well as the open space landscaping requirements and parking requirements in the 2002 development

00:21:20.280 --> 00:21:21.280
 code.

00:21:21.280 --> 00:21:25.840
 As part of the master phasing plan, prior staff had the applicant include the zoning

00:21:25.840 --> 00:21:30.240
 standards applicable to the site, which were graded accordingly to create the pad slides

00:21:30.240 --> 00:21:32.240
 for the development as plotted.

00:21:32.240 --> 00:21:35.880
 Next slide, please.

00:21:35.880 --> 00:21:41.720
 The applicant is proposing to use the 2017 master phasing plan as the PD phasing plan.

00:21:41.720 --> 00:21:46.800
 The plan shows planned and existing connectivity to the I-35 service road.

00:21:46.800 --> 00:21:50.320
 Access to existing pad sites will be from Nugget Way.

00:21:50.320 --> 00:21:58.920
 Prior to the development of phase two and the adjacent driveway that is in the northern

00:21:58.920 --> 00:22:07.520
 part of the property, excuse me, adjacent to the Goodwill building, an alternate ESA

00:22:07.520 --> 00:22:13.080
 will have to be approved in order to broach the ESA for the driveway and the extension

00:22:13.080 --> 00:22:16.980
 of Nugget Way.

00:22:16.980 --> 00:22:17.980
 Next slide, please.

00:22:17.980 --> 00:22:29.280
 As a result of the DDC update, the 38.445 acres zoned RCCD dash overlay transitioned

00:22:29.280 --> 00:22:38.280
 to PD mixed use regional MR and 80.89 acres transitioned to mixed use neighborhood MN.

00:22:38.280 --> 00:22:43.600
 While not originally zoned as a PD, properties with the zoning overlay were transitioned

00:22:43.600 --> 00:22:45.760
 to a dashed PD.

00:22:45.760 --> 00:22:50.460
 The dash adds the underlying zoning district while maintaining any conditions and restrictions

00:22:50.460 --> 00:22:53.560
 that were included as part of the zoning overlay.

00:22:53.560 --> 00:22:59.080
 The most significant changes as a result of the zoning transition were the landscape standards,

00:22:59.080 --> 00:23:05.640
 which increased from 10% to 25%, and tree canopy, which increased from 20% to 30%.

00:23:05.640 --> 00:23:13.320
 The proposed PD standards restore some of the RCCD standards originally used to design

00:23:13.320 --> 00:23:14.940
 the site.

00:23:14.940 --> 00:23:23.120
 Major deviations from the existing standards are the minimum lot size has increased from

00:23:23.120 --> 00:23:26.400
 zero to 2,500 square feet.

00:23:26.400 --> 00:23:36.560
 Minimum landscaped area is reduced by 15% to the original 10% it was designed under.

00:23:36.560 --> 00:23:41.520
 Major changes from the MN standards, the front yard setback has been increased by 10 feet.

00:23:41.520 --> 00:23:46.880
 The minimum landscaped area reduced by 10%, and the minimum tree canopy coverage is reduced

00:23:46.880 --> 00:23:49.720
 by 10%.

00:23:49.720 --> 00:23:55.200
 Any standards not addressed by the PD must comply with the underlying MR zoning district

00:23:55.200 --> 00:23:56.200
 standards.

00:23:56.200 --> 00:23:57.680
 Next slide, please.

00:23:57.680 --> 00:24:02.400
 These are the proposed PD parking standards.

00:24:02.400 --> 00:24:07.440
 For the most part, these are the parking standards in place prior to the approval of the new

00:24:07.440 --> 00:24:09.240
 DDC last year.

00:24:09.240 --> 00:24:13.760
 The only unique parking standard is number four, or sit down restaurants.

00:24:13.760 --> 00:24:18.520
 The standard gives a range between a minimum of one space per 100 square feet gross floor

00:24:18.520 --> 00:24:23.800
 area to one space per 40 feet gross floor area.

00:24:23.800 --> 00:24:28.560
 Any other parking standards which are not addressed by the PD regulations must comply

00:24:28.560 --> 00:24:37.640
 with section 7.9 and table 7.9-I of the 2019 DDC.

00:24:37.640 --> 00:24:40.880
 Next slide, please.

00:24:40.880 --> 00:24:47.560
 We have general criteria for approval of all applications in section 2.4.5E, and the site

00:24:47.560 --> 00:24:52.600
 does comply with those as noted in your backup, so I won't go into detail on those.

00:24:52.600 --> 00:24:59.720
 We also have six criteria for approval of a planned development in section 2.7.3D, and

00:24:59.720 --> 00:25:03.480
 I will go into those in more detail.

00:25:03.480 --> 00:25:09.520
 Criteria one, Denton Plan 2030, the site is designated regional mixed use.

00:25:09.520 --> 00:25:14.960
 The designation applies to areas located along the I-35 interchanges and primary arterials

00:25:14.960 --> 00:25:18.880
 to encourage the greatest regional accessibility.

00:25:18.880 --> 00:25:24.040
 Allowable uses may include national retailers and restaurants.

00:25:24.040 --> 00:25:28.240
 Proposed PD is consistent with the goals of the comprehensive plan.

00:25:28.240 --> 00:25:32.640
 Next slide, please.

00:25:32.640 --> 00:25:35.520
 Criteria two, complies with the DDC.

00:25:35.520 --> 00:25:40.080
 The proposal would be consistent with the PD development plan map which I referenced

00:25:40.080 --> 00:25:48.400
 earlier, PD development standards, and the MR district standards.

00:25:48.400 --> 00:25:52.920
 Criteria three, provides greater building design, amenities, and connectivity.

00:25:52.920 --> 00:25:57.640
 The PD would encourage a unified development standard consistent with the scale and uses

00:25:57.640 --> 00:26:03.200
 typically found on highway corridors and within regional mixed use centers.

00:26:03.200 --> 00:26:05.700
 Criteria four, residential uses.

00:26:05.700 --> 00:26:11.640
 There are no residential uses proposed, so this is not applicable.

00:26:11.640 --> 00:26:18.160
 For criteria five, non-residential uses, appropriate area, location, and planning, the proposed

00:26:18.160 --> 00:26:21.400
 development of restaurants and commercial businesses is consistent with the type of

00:26:21.400 --> 00:26:25.840
 commercial development typically found along an interstate highway.

00:26:25.840 --> 00:26:32.200
 Next slide.

00:26:32.200 --> 00:26:36.560
 Criteria six, provision of public facilities to support development.

00:26:36.560 --> 00:26:41.720
 First one, schools, this is not applicable since this is not a residential development.

00:26:41.720 --> 00:26:46.360
 Fire, the subject site is located within the eight minute or less response time to fire

00:26:46.360 --> 00:26:51.400
 station number six, located I-35 in Lillian Miller.

00:26:51.400 --> 00:26:55.600
 Law enforcement, the Denton PD indicated that the development would not have a significant

00:26:55.600 --> 00:27:02.600
 or negative impact on response time, or that the development of these seven out parcels

00:27:02.600 --> 00:27:08.920
 would impact the number of calls currently received for this area.

00:27:08.920 --> 00:27:14.360
 As slide criteria six continued, water and wastewater connections are available to the

00:27:14.360 --> 00:27:20.200
 out parcels from Nugget Way, as can be seen on this slide.

00:27:20.200 --> 00:27:31.280
 Streets, three access points to the site are planned from the I-35 service road, as can

00:27:31.280 --> 00:27:35.140
 be seen on this slide.

00:27:35.140 --> 00:27:40.160
 Nugget Way, an internal private road, will be the primary access to all the pad sites.

00:27:40.160 --> 00:27:47.600
 Access will not be permitted to the individual pad sites from the I-35 service road.

00:27:47.600 --> 00:27:49.640
 Next slide.

00:27:49.640 --> 00:27:54.560
 The perimeter street improvements along the southbound I-35 service road were recently

00:27:54.560 --> 00:28:00.560
 completed and include the Brinker Road underpass, which will aid in the flow of traffic to this

00:28:00.560 --> 00:28:03.960
 area.

00:28:03.960 --> 00:28:09.600
 And finally, per the traffic assessment memo, Bucky's development and the subject pad sites

00:28:09.600 --> 00:28:13.040
 will have minimal impact on the roadway network.

00:28:13.040 --> 00:28:25.680
 Again, since this is a non-residential development, there will be no impact on the park system.

00:28:25.680 --> 00:28:30.680
 We sent out notices within 200 and 500 feet of the site, as well as putting a newspaper

00:28:30.680 --> 00:28:33.880
 ad in the newspaper.

00:28:33.880 --> 00:28:43.000
 We received two in opposition outside of the 200 foot buffer, and one in favor, also outside

00:28:43.000 --> 00:28:44.880
 of the 200 foot buffer.

00:28:44.880 --> 00:28:48.800
 A neighborhood meeting was not held.

00:28:48.800 --> 00:28:54.200
 Staff recommends approval of rezoning the 12.42 acre site to plan development with the mixed

00:28:54.200 --> 00:29:00.080
 use regional underlying zoning district with the modifications provided in the PD standards

00:29:00.080 --> 00:29:01.080
 table.

00:29:01.080 --> 00:29:07.080
 And each lot must submit for a site plan in accordance with section 2.5.1 of the DDC.

00:29:07.080 --> 00:29:11.200
 That concludes my presentation, and the applicant is available.

00:29:11.200 --> 00:29:18.360
 There are two slides after this presentation that the applicant will discuss.

00:29:18.360 --> 00:29:20.120
 Thank you very much, Cindy.

00:29:20.120 --> 00:29:21.440
 One point of clarification, Cindy.

00:29:21.440 --> 00:29:28.680
 All the plats that you showed had the old road continuing through the property.

00:29:28.680 --> 00:29:33.840
 Is that the actual platting that is the current platting everyone's going off of, or is that

00:29:33.840 --> 00:29:37.200
 just for our presentation had an older plat?

00:29:37.200 --> 00:29:43.760
 Well, the presentation that I provided didn't include a plat, it was just a site plan.

00:29:43.760 --> 00:29:44.760
 Okay.

00:29:44.760 --> 00:29:51.080
 So that site plan is not what I don't think is, it's definitely not what's on the ground

00:29:51.080 --> 00:29:53.440
 right now.

00:29:53.440 --> 00:29:57.960
 Which street are you referring to, Nugget Way?

00:29:57.960 --> 00:30:04.880
 There's the one that went through the ESA that was not passed through P and Z, but it's

00:30:04.880 --> 00:30:07.480
 showing on that site.

00:30:07.480 --> 00:30:08.480
 Yeah.

00:30:08.480 --> 00:30:09.480
 That's planned.

00:30:09.480 --> 00:30:16.600
 As I mentioned in the presentation, in order to develop that part of the street and the

00:30:16.600 --> 00:30:20.080
 entrance, they will have to first get an alternate ESA approved.

00:30:20.080 --> 00:30:25.200
 So that just stays on there as if it could happen in the future?

00:30:25.200 --> 00:30:29.640
 It could happen as long as they get approval for the alternate ESA.

00:30:29.640 --> 00:30:30.640
 Okay.

00:30:30.640 --> 00:30:31.640
 That makes sense.

00:30:31.640 --> 00:30:32.640
 I appreciate that clarification.

00:30:32.640 --> 00:30:35.920
 Commissioner Beck was next.

00:30:35.920 --> 00:30:37.440
 Thank you, chair.

00:30:37.440 --> 00:30:41.200
 My first question falls directly on from the chair's question.

00:30:41.200 --> 00:30:49.620
 So if we grant this PD, does that in any way grant that extension and sort of grease the

00:30:49.620 --> 00:30:54.240
 wheels for the alternate ESA through that area?

00:30:54.240 --> 00:30:56.840
 No, no.

00:30:56.840 --> 00:30:59.160
 They have to get an alternate ESA before they can do it.

00:30:59.160 --> 00:31:01.320
 It's just showing what's proposed.

00:31:01.320 --> 00:31:03.260
 Okay.

00:31:03.260 --> 00:31:12.400
 And my second question is for the facilities, the restaurants or retail on the northeast

00:31:12.400 --> 00:31:21.960
 side, where the .9 acres are being proposed to be changed, is there anything in the current

00:31:21.960 --> 00:31:30.520
 designation precluding a restaurant or retail from coming into that overlap area where the

00:31:30.520 --> 00:31:32.440
 zones overlap?

00:31:32.440 --> 00:31:37.560
 No, because are you talking about the two lots that have the split zoning?

00:31:37.560 --> 00:31:38.560
 Yes, ma'am.

00:31:38.560 --> 00:31:44.920
 Well, those are included right now in the request.

00:31:44.920 --> 00:31:48.080
 And that split zoning would go away and it would become PD.

00:31:48.080 --> 00:31:49.080
 Okay.

00:31:49.080 --> 00:31:58.760
 So but my question is there's nothing currently precluding facilities from going in there in

00:31:58.760 --> 00:32:01.200
 the existing process.

00:32:01.200 --> 00:32:06.440
 I guess where I'm getting at, my question is sort of what's the advantage to the city

00:32:06.440 --> 00:32:13.240
 or to Denton to make this a PD if everything is pretty much staying the same, why should

00:32:13.240 --> 00:32:19.320
 we change anything if restaurants and retail could already come in there and we're not

00:32:19.320 --> 00:32:26.160
 affecting the ESA and alternative ESA process, why do we need to do this?

00:32:26.160 --> 00:32:33.160
 The reason for doing this is because the site was already designed in 2017 when Buckies

00:32:33.160 --> 00:32:41.800
 was approved and if we have to make them meet today's standards, these lots would not be

00:32:41.800 --> 00:32:45.160
 able to meet today's standards.

00:32:45.160 --> 00:32:46.880
 Is that from the tree canopy?

00:32:46.880 --> 00:32:53.360
 That's from the tree canopy and the landscaping.

00:32:53.360 --> 00:32:57.760
 But those are relatively flexible nebulous things that a developer could put in.

00:32:57.760 --> 00:33:03.720
 You could add some more trees and add some more bushes.

00:33:03.720 --> 00:33:11.400
 Again this is the reason that the applicant has requested and applied for this PD.

00:33:11.400 --> 00:33:16.440
 The applicant can address this also if you'd like to question him as well.

00:33:16.440 --> 00:33:20.160
 Well, I'll leave that to Chair to decide.

00:33:20.160 --> 00:33:22.600
 But I think that's all my questions for now.

00:33:22.600 --> 00:33:23.600
 Thank you.

00:33:23.600 --> 00:33:24.600
 Okay.

00:33:24.600 --> 00:33:32.480
 I had Commissioner Ellis next, do you still have a question Commissioner Ellis?

00:33:32.480 --> 00:33:34.400
 I do.

00:33:34.400 --> 00:33:39.880
 One of my questions had to do with that alt ESA, I mean that got tremendous pushback when

00:33:39.880 --> 00:33:45.840
 it was requested and they actually pulled the request, I remember, because it was going

00:33:45.840 --> 00:33:49.040
 to fail.

00:33:49.040 --> 00:33:56.740
 So in looking at the information here, the traffic memo suggests that that nugget way

00:33:56.740 --> 00:34:00.780
 is going to be the main access to these pad sites.

00:34:00.780 --> 00:34:10.000
 So I'm trying to understand if the alt ESA got pushed again in the negative direction,

00:34:10.000 --> 00:34:14.880
 what would be the alternative here?

00:34:14.880 --> 00:34:23.200
 Well, the alternative would be they would have to come in and perhaps revise the PD

00:34:23.200 --> 00:34:31.240
 for a different use for the site or a different concept plan.

00:34:31.240 --> 00:34:37.040
 Okay, let me think on that.

00:34:37.040 --> 00:34:42.000
 Well, because nugget way would be needed to access the site and that drive would, what

00:34:42.000 --> 00:34:51.160
 they'd have to do probably is get a text dot, get a text dot permit to access the site directly

00:34:51.160 --> 00:34:52.760
 from I-35.

00:34:52.760 --> 00:34:57.280
 We're talking just to clarify lot two, correct?

00:34:57.280 --> 00:34:59.400
 Yes.

00:34:59.400 --> 00:35:04.520
 Without an alt ESA, they could not access that site from the private road.

00:35:04.520 --> 00:35:11.040
 They would have to use, there's an old right of way dedication, I believe it was dedicated

00:35:11.040 --> 00:35:18.340
 to Denton County, just to the west of the site on the west boundary of lot two.

00:35:18.340 --> 00:35:24.440
 So they would need to apply to text dot for that in order to access lot two.

00:35:24.440 --> 00:35:30.440
 They could not access it internal from nugget way without an alternative ESA.

00:35:30.440 --> 00:35:31.440
 Right.

00:35:31.440 --> 00:35:36.240
 So if the alternative ESA, which again, it was difficult to get passed before, who knows,

00:35:36.240 --> 00:35:40.760
 I guess, if they asked for it again, but it's the same area, it's the exact same request.

00:35:40.760 --> 00:35:45.680
 I believe that it was several years ago.

00:35:45.680 --> 00:35:46.680
 Correct?

00:35:46.680 --> 00:35:47.680
 Correct.

00:35:47.680 --> 00:35:51.000
 And it's plotted it, but noted that it essentially stops there.

00:35:51.000 --> 00:35:55.500
 And when that master site plan was approved, it shows the road going all the way through,

00:35:55.500 --> 00:36:03.960
 but it is noted that an alternative ESA is required if it would traverse that area.

00:36:03.960 --> 00:36:04.960
 Okay.

00:36:04.960 --> 00:36:11.720
 Another question I had, Cindy, was sign regulations for this, for these sites.

00:36:11.720 --> 00:36:20.600
 I know Bucky's got a variance from ZBA to make their sign larger.

00:36:20.600 --> 00:36:27.120
 What are current sign regulations for these sites once they would be developed?

00:36:27.120 --> 00:36:31.680
 They would have to comply with the sign regulations in place today.

00:36:31.680 --> 00:36:39.200
 So they would not be included in the variance that Bucky's got, or?

00:36:39.200 --> 00:36:42.640
 My understanding was the variance was just for that one sign.

00:36:42.640 --> 00:36:44.300
 Correct.

00:36:44.300 --> 00:36:45.300
 That is correct?

00:36:45.300 --> 00:36:46.300
 Okay.

00:36:46.300 --> 00:36:47.300
 That is correct.

00:36:47.300 --> 00:36:48.300
 All right.

00:36:48.300 --> 00:36:49.300
 Thank you.

00:36:49.300 --> 00:36:50.300
 The next thing we had is Commissioner Smith.

00:36:50.300 --> 00:36:51.300
 You still have a question?

00:36:51.300 --> 00:36:52.300
 I do.

00:36:52.300 --> 00:36:53.300
 Yeah.

00:36:53.300 --> 00:36:57.440
 Going off of Commissioner Ellis as well as Commissioner Beck's question about the alternate

00:36:57.440 --> 00:37:04.240
 ESA, Cindy, what are the criteria for approval for an alternative ESA when it does come back,

00:37:04.240 --> 00:37:07.920
 because they're going to obviously want to try to expand Nugget Way?

00:37:07.920 --> 00:37:13.680
 The thing that I think I'm looking at this from is would the approval of this PD be used

00:37:13.680 --> 00:37:18.920
 as evidence for why the criteria for the approval for the alternative ESA is, well, it's already

00:37:18.920 --> 00:37:20.520
 approved in the PD.

00:37:20.520 --> 00:37:26.120
 So essentially, I can see this as being an issue, saying we're approving a PD, therefore

00:37:26.120 --> 00:37:29.840
 paving the way for there to be criteria for approval for an alternative ESA.

00:37:29.840 --> 00:37:35.600
 So could you walk me through, if you were to come back and do the alternative ESA presentation,

00:37:35.600 --> 00:37:37.880
 what that criteria for approval would be?

00:37:37.880 --> 00:37:43.440
 And outside of there being the plans, the concept plan and the PD for the road there,

00:37:43.440 --> 00:37:48.000
 what other requirements would need to be met so that we have some other ideas of what evidence

00:37:48.000 --> 00:37:51.840
 would have to be presented, other than just say, well, the grounds for approval is mainly

00:37:51.840 --> 00:37:55.340
 that the PD says it should be there.

00:37:55.340 --> 00:38:01.800
 If I may, within the PD regulations themselves, it's explicit that you cannot use a PD to

00:38:01.800 --> 00:38:05.960
 modify any alternative ESA.

00:38:05.960 --> 00:38:11.920
 You can't usurp the ESA process through a PD, nor can you modify tree preservation standards

00:38:11.920 --> 00:38:12.920
 through a PD.

00:38:12.920 --> 00:38:17.560
 Yeah, and I'm not asking if they're alternating the PD, I'm saying that if, let's say we approve

00:38:17.560 --> 00:38:20.880
 it today and the next meeting they come back and say, hey, we have an application for alternative

00:38:20.880 --> 00:38:26.440
 ESA, and our criteria for approval as a city is does it meet what the current standards

00:38:26.440 --> 00:38:29.160
 are within this area based off of zoning?

00:38:29.160 --> 00:38:34.480
 Well, there's a PD here, it has on the concept plan for the road, it's supposed to go through

00:38:34.480 --> 00:38:35.480
 here.

00:38:35.480 --> 00:38:36.480
 Here's our criteria for approval.

00:38:36.480 --> 00:38:40.360
 This shows that we should support it because we've already approved the concept plan.

00:38:40.360 --> 00:38:46.280
 And I've seen it too many times on the Planning and Zoning Commission where we get recommendations

00:38:46.280 --> 00:38:49.720
 for an approval because we're stuck between a rock and a hard place.

00:38:49.720 --> 00:38:53.840
 And this feels like to me that we're almost at that point right now where we could be

00:38:53.840 --> 00:38:58.280
 painting ourselves or a future commission between a rock and a hard place because the

00:38:58.280 --> 00:39:00.800
 concept plan has it approved, they can do it there.

00:39:00.800 --> 00:39:04.800
 Yes, they have to get an all ESA before they can build it, but you know, the concept plan

00:39:04.800 --> 00:39:05.800
 does it.

00:39:05.800 --> 00:39:09.600
 Does that make sense, Richard, what I'm asking and Cindy, do you guys understand the question?

00:39:09.600 --> 00:39:14.160
 Sure, I understand what you're saying.

00:39:14.160 --> 00:39:22.960
 This is actually the, if you look, let's see, if you look at the master site plan that was

00:39:22.960 --> 00:39:26.120
 approved in 2017, it also shows the same thing.

00:39:26.120 --> 00:39:30.360
 So they already have this approval that is within the existing PD.

00:39:30.360 --> 00:39:38.840
 However, saying that, as Richard said, you can't use a PD to change the requirements

00:39:38.840 --> 00:39:48.040
 and get around other regulations like such as tree preservation or ESA preservation.

00:39:48.040 --> 00:39:55.080
 They would have to show that the all ESA plan is a superior plan above what is currently

00:39:55.080 --> 00:39:57.320
 required.

00:39:57.320 --> 00:40:00.760
 So the criteria for approval, that's really what the original question was, the criteria

00:40:00.760 --> 00:40:04.800
 for approval for an all ESA, whenever we eventually would see it, because they're obviously not

00:40:04.800 --> 00:40:08.960
 to put in the concept plan if they're not going to come back and try to get it, would

00:40:08.960 --> 00:40:12.960
 be tree mitigation rights, preservation within that, it obviously be drainage.

00:40:12.960 --> 00:40:17.440
 What other criteria for approval we'd be seeing that we would have a chance or a future commission

00:40:17.440 --> 00:40:22.240
 would have a chance to vet to make sure that it is a truly good all ESA before we go into

00:40:22.240 --> 00:40:26.080
 there rather than saying, hey, we should approve it because the concept plan is there.

00:40:26.080 --> 00:40:29.200
 So what other criteria for approval are there, Cindy?

00:40:29.200 --> 00:40:34.720
 I'm trying to look them up for you right now, but one I do recall is that I think that is

00:40:34.720 --> 00:40:44.080
 the big one is that they have to prove that this exceeds the requirements for ESA preservation.

00:40:44.080 --> 00:40:51.520
 So they have a pretty stringent development requirement that they have to exceed what

00:40:51.520 --> 00:41:00.640
 is required, and they'd have to prove that up before this could be approved or even recommended

00:41:00.640 --> 00:41:01.640
 for approval.

00:41:01.640 --> 00:41:06.840
 Richard, do you have any other criteria for approval that you can go through for all the

00:41:06.840 --> 00:41:07.840
 ESA...

00:41:07.840 --> 00:41:08.840
 Yeah.

00:41:08.840 --> 00:41:09.840
 I'm pulling those up right now.

00:41:09.840 --> 00:41:10.840
 Okay.

00:41:10.840 --> 00:41:11.840
 Thanks.

00:41:11.840 --> 00:41:20.080
 I know, Chair, we're tied for time, so if I need to maybe bring this up in public, I

00:41:20.080 --> 00:41:21.080
 can do that as well.

00:41:21.080 --> 00:41:26.160
 Well, what I might do is, Commissioner Pernetta, I believe, has a question while Richard's

00:41:26.160 --> 00:41:31.440
 looking up your response, Commissioner Smith, I want to let Pernetta have the floor.

00:41:31.440 --> 00:41:36.400
 Yeah, and a lot of my question was based on what Commissioner Smith is bringing up right

00:41:36.400 --> 00:41:37.400
 now.

00:41:37.400 --> 00:41:42.520
 I want to make sure that by voting for this one, we don't make Altice basically a fait

00:41:42.520 --> 00:41:43.520
 accompli.

00:41:43.520 --> 00:41:50.080
 And I'll probably bring these questions up in public, because overall we know Buc-Ease

00:41:50.080 --> 00:41:54.720
 is a lightning rod, and whether or not there's people on the line right now, eventually these

00:41:54.720 --> 00:41:55.800
 questions will come out.

00:41:55.800 --> 00:42:02.280
 So when I look at what we're voting on, in essence, everything's already been approved,

00:42:02.280 --> 00:42:05.220
 was approved back in 2008.

00:42:05.220 --> 00:42:11.180
 Most of the changes that I'm seeing are pertinent to that one little 0.83 section, and it's

00:42:11.180 --> 00:42:19.760
 a matter of a 10% difference on the tree canopy and some landscaping outside of that.

00:42:19.760 --> 00:42:25.040
 Overall, we're mainly just kind of getting this in compliance with what we've passed

00:42:25.040 --> 00:42:26.040
 last year, right?

00:42:26.040 --> 00:42:31.240
 And is that incorrect in terms of why we're doing this and what we're going forward on

00:42:31.240 --> 00:42:32.240
 this?

00:42:32.240 --> 00:42:34.280
 Well, it's two-phase.

00:42:34.280 --> 00:42:40.200
 A part of it is we are getting it into compliance as much as we can with what was passed last

00:42:40.200 --> 00:42:41.200
 year.

00:42:41.200 --> 00:42:50.640
 However, we are maintaining those few standards that I noted that the applicant needs to be

00:42:50.640 --> 00:42:57.660
 able to make the lots work because of how the drainage and infrastructure was designed.

00:42:57.660 --> 00:43:02.080
 And those standards that I'm talking about are the ones I noted, the increase of the

00:43:02.080 --> 00:43:10.480
 minimum lot size, the minimum landscape area reduced by 15% in the PDMR, the front yard

00:43:10.480 --> 00:43:18.200
 setback increased by 10% in PDMN, minimum landscape area reduced by 10%, and minimum

00:43:18.200 --> 00:43:21.000
 tree canopy coverage reduced by 10%.

00:43:21.000 --> 00:43:29.920
 As I noted, part of the plan for this whole area was to keep the open space and tree preservation

00:43:29.920 --> 00:43:40.040
 to the rear of the site to buffer the residences and push the development up against I-35.

00:43:40.040 --> 00:43:45.560
 And to do that, that would mean they'd have to have a reduced landscape and tree canopy.

00:43:45.560 --> 00:43:51.880
 When the site was first approved, it was all one lot, essentially all one area.

00:43:51.880 --> 00:43:58.600
 And so that was how it was approved.

00:43:58.600 --> 00:44:04.320
 And we're just trying to maintain some of those approvals in order to have the site

00:44:04.320 --> 00:44:13.280
 develop and be an attractive, useful addition to the city.

00:44:13.280 --> 00:44:19.840
 Okay, pending the response to Commissioner Smith's questions, I bet that's all I've

00:44:19.840 --> 00:44:20.840
 got.

00:44:20.840 --> 00:44:21.840
 Thank you.

00:44:21.840 --> 00:44:23.560
 Richard, do you have any context or help?

00:44:23.560 --> 00:44:24.560
 I do.

00:44:24.560 --> 00:44:33.920
 There's section 2.8.4 of the DDC outline six approval criteria for an alternative ESA.

00:44:33.920 --> 00:44:39.520
 One, mitigation goals are obtained by creating, expanding, or improving ESAs.

00:44:39.520 --> 00:44:43.640
 Mitigation goals are obtained by preserving above the minimum requirements, exchanges

00:44:43.640 --> 00:44:47.040
 between different types of ESA.

00:44:47.040 --> 00:44:51.280
 Areas offered as mitigation are linked to existing or planned open space or conservation

00:44:51.280 --> 00:44:52.280
 areas.

00:44:52.280 --> 00:44:55.900
 So if you think in terms of other ESAs that we've seen, there's usually a give and take.

00:44:55.900 --> 00:45:02.920
 So if you take away, there's some mitigation that is required to occur.

00:45:02.920 --> 00:45:07.240
 And then areas offered as mitigation are placed either in a lot or lots that incorporate a

00:45:07.240 --> 00:45:13.040
 permanent conservation easement or preserved habitat or some other legal mechanism for

00:45:13.040 --> 00:45:15.200
 the long-term conservation.

00:45:15.200 --> 00:45:23.280
 And then the Alt ESA, just had a pop-up that blocked it, sorry, the Alt ESA plan demonstrates

00:45:23.280 --> 00:45:28.160
 that the property owners results in a higher quality development meeting the intent.

00:45:28.160 --> 00:45:34.480
 So just because we went through sort of a PD zoning, there's still six tests essentially

00:45:34.480 --> 00:45:40.440
 that they need to meet, none that really depend on the approval of this.

00:45:40.440 --> 00:45:46.560
 One thing I will mention with respect to the tree canopy, they are increasing it from that

00:45:46.560 --> 00:45:48.520
 20 to 30.

00:45:48.520 --> 00:45:54.360
 They are meeting the new standard where they're decreasing it is just on that 0.88 acres where

00:45:54.360 --> 00:45:55.360
 the diagonal side.

00:45:55.360 --> 00:46:00.760
 I just wanted to make sure that was clear.

00:46:00.760 --> 00:46:01.760
 Thank you, Richard.

00:46:01.760 --> 00:46:02.760
 Appreciate it.

00:46:02.760 --> 00:46:07.960
 Can I ask a clarifying question real fast of the site plan?

00:46:07.960 --> 00:46:16.940
 Is there any new detail about, excuse me, nugget way on this request that's not already codified

00:46:16.940 --> 00:46:19.520
 by previous approvals?

00:46:19.520 --> 00:46:21.400
 No.

00:46:21.400 --> 00:46:31.280
 So by approving potentially the PD request tonight, we're not actually changing or providing

00:46:31.280 --> 00:46:38.360
 any more notes or details or approval or consideration or paving any pathway or rationale or context

00:46:38.360 --> 00:46:46.120
 or anything about nugget way that's not already previously been provided to the applicant?

00:46:46.120 --> 00:46:47.120
 That's correct.

00:46:47.120 --> 00:46:48.120
 Okay.

00:46:48.120 --> 00:46:49.120
 Thank you very much.

00:46:49.120 --> 00:46:53.840
 And Chair, it may help if we have just two seconds, if Julie can pull the presentation

00:46:53.840 --> 00:47:13.660
 back up to show the plat or if you look at the attachment to the agenda item.

00:47:13.660 --> 00:47:26.240
 If you look at Exhibit 9 in the packet, it shows you the approved plat.

00:47:26.240 --> 00:47:31.200
 And so that Nugget Way, well, this is the master site plan.

00:47:31.200 --> 00:47:34.360
 It essentially follows the plat.

00:47:34.360 --> 00:47:39.420
 So that Nugget Way is plotted as a private road.

00:47:39.420 --> 00:47:43.540
 So this approval would not change the layout.

00:47:43.540 --> 00:47:45.660
 They would have to amend that plat.

00:47:45.660 --> 00:47:51.800
 So regardless of approving this PD or not tonight, the mechanism of still applying for

00:47:51.800 --> 00:48:00.240
 an ALT ESA is still the required avenue in order to complete Nugget Way across that environmentally

00:48:00.240 --> 00:48:01.540
 sensitive area.

00:48:01.540 --> 00:48:02.540
 Absolutely.

00:48:02.540 --> 00:48:03.540
 Okay.

00:48:03.540 --> 00:48:15.120
 Is there any other questions for Cindy or staff on Item 2B?

00:48:15.120 --> 00:48:16.120
 Okay.

00:48:16.120 --> 00:48:17.120
 Next item for business.

00:48:17.120 --> 00:48:18.120
 Thank you, Cindy, for that.

00:48:18.120 --> 00:48:20.120
 We'll talk to you soon.

00:48:20.120 --> 00:48:21.120
 Okay.

00:48:21.120 --> 00:48:29.940
 Is Item, actually, 3C and it is Julie Wyatt.

00:48:29.940 --> 00:48:36.480
 This item has been brought forward back from our March 4th meeting.

00:48:36.480 --> 00:48:46.080
 Good evening, I'm Julie Wyatt and I am presenting a comprehensive plan amendment to you tonight,

00:48:46.080 --> 00:48:53.720
 CA191A Canopy Trails.

00:48:53.720 --> 00:48:58.900
 So this request before you, and you're correct, this did come before you earlier this year.

00:48:58.900 --> 00:49:03.020
 We're back with some additional information for their rezoning, but first we're going

00:49:03.020 --> 00:49:05.220
 to talk about the comprehensive plan amendment.

00:49:05.220 --> 00:49:13.680
 So this is a request to modify the future land use designation for 98 acres from business

00:49:13.680 --> 00:49:15.820
 innovation to regional mixed use.

00:49:15.820 --> 00:49:17.140
 You can see the property there.

00:49:17.140 --> 00:49:24.240
 It is at the intersection of Shady Oaks and Loop 288.

00:49:24.240 --> 00:49:28.180
 So Dent Plan 2030 was adopted in February of 2015.

00:49:28.180 --> 00:49:32.280
 As part of that comprehensive plan, there was a future land use map and that identifies

00:49:32.280 --> 00:49:35.860
 the locations for future land use designations.

00:49:35.860 --> 00:49:38.820
 This future land use map guides our zoning decisions.

00:49:38.820 --> 00:49:44.160
 We look at that first when we look at any zoning case to see what kind of what the vision

00:49:44.160 --> 00:49:46.040
 of that area is.

00:49:46.040 --> 00:49:49.680
 The best planning practice really is that zoning should be consistent with that comprehensive

00:49:49.680 --> 00:49:52.460
 plan and the future land use map.

00:49:52.460 --> 00:49:56.920
 Under our previous code, our 2002 code, we had pretty limited criteria for approval for

00:49:56.920 --> 00:49:58.580
 a zoning case.

00:49:58.580 --> 00:50:03.700
 It was really just, does it meet the future land use and does it have adequate public

00:50:03.700 --> 00:50:05.340
 infrastructure?

00:50:05.340 --> 00:50:09.580
 And it also provided an alternative path for cases that didn't meet that future land use

00:50:09.580 --> 00:50:10.580
 map.

00:50:10.580 --> 00:50:13.980
 So we saw a lot of cases that didn't meet the future land use map and they were able

00:50:13.980 --> 00:50:21.020
 to be analyzed and recommended for approval or approved based upon that alternative criteria.

00:50:21.020 --> 00:50:26.060
 When we adopted the new 2019 code, we have more robust criteria for approval and we really

00:50:26.060 --> 00:50:30.780
 as staff felt like we should start implementing those best practices, that really the zoning

00:50:30.780 --> 00:50:34.020
 should follow that future land use map.

00:50:34.020 --> 00:50:39.040
 There are instances where that future land use map may require a limited amendment and

00:50:39.040 --> 00:50:42.340
 that's why the code does allow for that.

00:50:42.340 --> 00:50:48.180
 Section 2.7.1 outlines the purposes and process for a comprehensive plan amendment.

00:50:48.180 --> 00:50:52.540
 It really is to provide flexibility when there are changing circumstances.

00:50:52.540 --> 00:50:55.620
 Comprehensive plans are policy documents, but they are living documents that we want

00:50:55.620 --> 00:51:01.740
 to always make sure that they are current and that they are adequately representing

00:51:01.740 --> 00:51:04.820
 our city and our vision.

00:51:04.820 --> 00:51:10.740
 So for this specific case, we're first going to orient ourselves with the existing conditions.

00:51:10.740 --> 00:51:13.760
 The subject property is once again outlined in yellow.

00:51:13.760 --> 00:51:18.820
 There's a large government center across the street, across Loop 288, that's the Denton

00:51:18.820 --> 00:51:19.820
 County buildings.

00:51:19.820 --> 00:51:24.700
 There are utilities adjacent to the west of the site.

00:51:24.700 --> 00:51:31.220
 There's quite a bit of retail along Loop 288 taking advantage of that access and visibility.

00:51:31.220 --> 00:51:33.060
 There's also residential coming in.

00:51:33.060 --> 00:51:36.580
 We've got some age-restricted housing.

00:51:36.580 --> 00:51:42.660
 We have multifamily in several places, so it really has filled in in this area into

00:51:42.660 --> 00:51:47.540
 be a mixed-use commercial corridor.

00:51:47.540 --> 00:51:52.940
 The current future land use map identifies this area, as I said, as business innovation.

00:51:52.940 --> 00:51:58.900
 The intent is for those large tracts that are for employment-type uses, think large-scale

00:51:58.900 --> 00:52:04.220
 office, distribution, light, you know, manufacturing.

00:52:04.220 --> 00:52:09.780
 So we typically see the zoning districts that fall within that umbrella business innovation

00:52:09.780 --> 00:52:15.340
 term are general office and light industrial, which is what's currently on the property.

00:52:15.340 --> 00:52:19.380
 The last time this came before you, Commissioner Smith asked a really good question that I

00:52:19.380 --> 00:52:21.300
 got the answer to.

00:52:21.300 --> 00:52:25.700
 He wanted to know how much acreage is in business innovation within the city.

00:52:25.700 --> 00:52:32.900
 And our GIS did an analysis, and there is about 4,700 acres within the city limits designated

00:52:32.900 --> 00:52:34.820
 as business innovation.

00:52:34.820 --> 00:52:40.500
 Of that total, they did an additional analysis that about 2,000 of those acres are either

00:52:40.500 --> 00:52:44.420
 undeveloped or developed with an agricultural use.

00:52:44.420 --> 00:52:50.340
 You know, by that analysis, staff does not feel like the removal of the 98 acres from

00:52:50.340 --> 00:52:54.600
 business innovation would impact the city's ability to attract employment-type uses and

00:52:54.600 --> 00:52:57.660
 development.

00:52:57.660 --> 00:53:04.340
 So when we get -- when we talk about our comprehensive plan and the structure of our city, I think

00:53:04.340 --> 00:53:08.380
 it's informative to kind of look at the historical context to see where we were.

00:53:08.380 --> 00:53:11.580
 So this is the aerial map from 1964.

00:53:11.580 --> 00:53:15.500
 The subject property is generally in the area of the blue star.

00:53:15.500 --> 00:53:17.140
 It was a rural area.

00:53:17.140 --> 00:53:20.060
 And as the crow flies, it was two miles from the square.

00:53:20.060 --> 00:53:24.240
 So it was probably quite a distance when, you know, mentally thinking you were probably

00:53:24.240 --> 00:53:26.500
 out kind of in the middle of nowhere.

00:53:26.500 --> 00:53:30.340
 One of the biggest defining features was that power plant, the water and power plant that

00:53:30.340 --> 00:53:33.240
 is kind of in the middle of the screen.

00:53:33.240 --> 00:53:38.240
 And so that was kind of out on the outskirts of town, which is where you often find those

00:53:38.240 --> 00:53:40.820
 types of uses.

00:53:40.820 --> 00:53:48.380
 As you jump forward a few years to 1970 -- the 1974 to 1992 comprehensive plan, the aerial

00:53:48.380 --> 00:53:50.940
 is from 1972.

00:53:50.940 --> 00:53:56.620
 Once again, the subject property is about the spot of the star.

00:53:56.620 --> 00:54:02.300
 The defining feature was still that power plant and the rural nature of that area.

00:54:02.300 --> 00:54:08.300
 That comprehensive plan designated it for kind of industrial and public uses probably

00:54:08.300 --> 00:54:16.540
 because of that existing land use out there and just the kind of distance from town.

00:54:16.540 --> 00:54:24.180
 Then we move ahead to the next comprehensive plan, the 1999 to 2020 Denton plan.

00:54:24.180 --> 00:54:28.460
 When you look at the map, sorry, it's a little fuzzy.

00:54:28.460 --> 00:54:31.980
 The once again, subject property is the blue star.

00:54:31.980 --> 00:54:34.820
 The regional mixed use came in at that time.

00:54:34.820 --> 00:54:41.740
 The mall was there, I-35 is a pretty important mixed use corridor within the city.

00:54:41.740 --> 00:54:44.100
 You can kind of see the faint outline of Luke 288.

00:54:44.100 --> 00:54:49.300
 So that regional mixed use started coming in, emanating out from the highway.

00:54:49.300 --> 00:54:51.420
 It restricted that employment center area.

00:54:51.420 --> 00:54:55.740
 That employment center was for that kind of employment industrial type use.

00:54:55.740 --> 00:54:59.460
 And then when you look at the aerial, you can kind of see the commercial development

00:54:59.460 --> 00:55:02.020
 has started to come in.

00:55:02.020 --> 00:55:07.740
 Still pretty rural or still pretty undeveloped adjacent to the property.

00:55:07.740 --> 00:55:10.940
 And then that brings us to today's comprehensive plan.

00:55:10.940 --> 00:55:20.500
 So the larger map shows the general future land use map for the area, that the business

00:55:20.500 --> 00:55:27.500
 innovation kind of spans where that employment center was in the previous comprehensive plan.

00:55:27.500 --> 00:55:32.060
 In looking at the comprehensive plan, this future land use map was based upon the preferred

00:55:32.060 --> 00:55:33.060
 growth concept.

00:55:33.060 --> 00:55:37.700
 And that preferred growth concept was based upon lots of inputs.

00:55:37.700 --> 00:55:43.320
 One of the input was the community, the community survey, and how the community wanted to grow.

00:55:43.320 --> 00:55:48.820
 And their big thing is we wanted to grow compactly, we wanted to try to prevent sprawl.

00:55:48.820 --> 00:55:54.860
 It was also based upon existing land uses, existing zoning, and then context evaluation

00:55:54.860 --> 00:55:55.860
 with aerial maps.

00:55:55.860 --> 00:55:58.860
 So that's really how they arrived at this future land use map.

00:55:58.860 --> 00:56:06.940
 And when you look at the 2002 zoning with the ECI and the ECC, those were our kind of

00:56:06.940 --> 00:56:12.020
 our light industrial districts, you can kind of see how our future land use maps were followed,

00:56:12.020 --> 00:56:17.260
 that pattern that was set way back in '64 and '74 and then moving forward.

00:56:17.260 --> 00:56:20.540
 So that's kind of how we got here.

00:56:20.540 --> 00:56:22.280
 I went out and took pictures of the site.

00:56:22.280 --> 00:56:27.540
 I'm not great at taking site pictures, but this does show you what Shady Oaks looks like.

00:56:27.540 --> 00:56:30.300
 Shady Oaks is a four-lane divided road.

00:56:30.300 --> 00:56:36.580
 There's not a lot of development on it right now, but that road is one of our secondary

00:56:36.580 --> 00:56:38.720
 arterials through the city.

00:56:38.720 --> 00:56:47.700
 And then when you get onto, on Loop 288, you can see the new county building taking shape

00:56:47.700 --> 00:56:49.660
 here along Loop 288.

00:56:49.660 --> 00:56:54.020
 There's also an office park kitty corner from the subject site.

00:56:54.020 --> 00:56:57.820
 And this is just looking at the landscaping along Loop 288.

00:56:57.820 --> 00:57:00.260
 Loop 288 really is developed as that commercial corridor.

00:57:00.260 --> 00:57:06.940
 There's landscape medians, there's a lot of commercial development along that right of

00:57:06.940 --> 00:57:07.940
 way.

00:57:07.940 --> 00:57:08.940
 So now we're going to get to their proposal.

00:57:08.940 --> 00:57:12.100
 They are proposing regional mixed use, and you can see what that map would look like

00:57:12.100 --> 00:57:14.540
 generally.

00:57:14.540 --> 00:57:21.660
 This is an area that it can include moderate and high-density residential, commercial office

00:57:21.660 --> 00:57:23.340
 entertainment uses.

00:57:23.340 --> 00:57:31.260
 It's typically found on highways or arterials, major arterials within cities.

00:57:31.260 --> 00:57:37.060
 The general criteria for approval is, it's in your backup, and we won't go really through

00:57:37.060 --> 00:57:38.060
 that.

00:57:38.060 --> 00:57:40.540
 It does meet the criteria, general criteria for approval.

00:57:40.540 --> 00:57:45.380
 We'll get, we'll touch on it a little bit in terms of the comprehensive plan though.

00:57:45.380 --> 00:57:50.260
 The first, what I wanted to look at is, I wanted to look at the comprehensive plan as

00:57:50.260 --> 00:57:54.860
 a whole and see how the goals align with what the proposal was.

00:57:54.860 --> 00:58:02.460
 So particularly three land use goals, the first that grow compactly, the next is grower

00:58:02.460 --> 00:58:06.780
 assets, and then the last one is grow with balance.

00:58:06.780 --> 00:58:09.580
 This segment of Loop 288 is a regional corridor.

00:58:09.580 --> 00:58:16.740
 It connects I-35 to US-380, so it's a pretty important corridor within our city.

00:58:16.740 --> 00:58:22.380
 The development is, as we know on this road, really favors that commercial mixed use.

00:58:22.380 --> 00:58:27.220
 It's got a lot of retail and restaurants, also got that government office center, and

00:58:27.220 --> 00:58:31.780
 that high-density residential as you move kind of away from that high-visibility corridor.

00:58:31.780 --> 00:58:34.740
 So it's all within there is that mixed use area.

00:58:34.740 --> 00:58:39.620
 The proposal does support this trend, and it also provides a basis for zoning decisions

00:58:39.620 --> 00:58:44.160
 that would encourage the infill development that would allow the city to grow compactly

00:58:44.160 --> 00:58:48.820
 on this existing corridor where we've already got development, so just a logical continuation

00:58:48.820 --> 00:58:50.340
 of that pattern.

00:58:50.340 --> 00:58:52.940
 The next would be to grow our assets.

00:58:52.940 --> 00:58:57.100
 We want to make sure that we capitalize and strengthen the commercial character of the

00:58:57.100 --> 00:59:04.260
 area and our important commercial districts within our city.

00:59:04.260 --> 00:59:06.060
 And finally, grow with balance.

00:59:06.060 --> 00:59:11.100
 That regional mixed use, future land use, would support the zoning districts that permit that

00:59:11.100 --> 00:59:14.980
 wide variety of residential, commercial, and also employment uses.

00:59:14.980 --> 00:59:19.340
 So it provides that flexibility to respond to those changing conditions.

00:59:19.340 --> 00:59:24.340
 Now we'll get to the specific criteria for approval for comprehensive plans.

00:59:24.340 --> 00:59:29.540
 Two things I want to look at is the events, trends, or facts after the adoption of the

00:59:29.540 --> 00:59:38.380
 comprehensive plan has changed, and then the events, trends, or facts after the comprehensive

00:59:38.380 --> 00:59:44.420
 plan was adopted to change the character of the area or the condition of the area.

00:59:44.420 --> 00:59:46.860
 And we'll go over these specifically.

00:59:46.860 --> 00:59:48.860
 So first, events, trends, or facts.

00:59:48.860 --> 00:59:54.420
 So 2015 doesn't seem that long ago, but a lot has happened in this area since then,

00:59:54.420 --> 00:59:56.700
 particularly in terms of mobility changes.

00:59:56.700 --> 01:00:02.940
 So Mayhill Road is, there are some pieces that are finished and it will be completely

01:00:02.940 --> 01:00:06.060
 online, hopefully very soon.

01:00:06.060 --> 01:00:10.860
 And that really has brought, I mean, when we think about the transportation changes

01:00:10.860 --> 01:00:18.700
 that that will bring when complete, that it does connect Denton to DFW airport.

01:00:18.700 --> 01:00:22.460
 And so it's a really important regional corridor.

01:00:22.460 --> 01:00:30.440
 We've also got expanded government offices with the county offices on Loop 288.

01:00:30.440 --> 01:00:34.580
 Prior to 2015, I know we talked about this, that zoning was the ECC and ECI.

01:00:34.580 --> 01:00:39.620
 That kind of informed that comp plan and we were looking to see if that is appropriate

01:00:39.620 --> 01:00:40.620
 anymore.

01:00:40.620 --> 01:00:45.940
 And the current trend really is to move away from that light industrial employment to more

01:00:45.940 --> 01:00:53.740
 commercial and higher density housing within these areas, these more urban areas.

01:00:53.740 --> 01:00:56.740
 Additional review standards, does it provide a substantial benefit to the city?

01:00:56.740 --> 01:00:59.940
 This would encourage additional mixed use development near this expanding government

01:00:59.940 --> 01:01:05.020
 center and existing commercial district.

01:01:05.020 --> 01:01:08.300
 Is it compatible with the land use goals and avoid isolated uses?

01:01:08.300 --> 01:01:14.300
 It is consistent with the land use goals and it would extend that existing commercial center.

01:01:14.300 --> 01:01:18.580
 Would it significantly alter acceptable land, existing land use patterns?

01:01:18.580 --> 01:01:21.620
 It's not anticipated to result in undesirable land use patterns.

01:01:21.620 --> 01:01:25.620
 It's pretty consistent with what is out there and both in use and scale.

01:01:25.620 --> 01:01:30.460
 And then we don't see any negative impacts to public services or facilities.

01:01:30.460 --> 01:01:35.820
 This is an existing area that's served by existing transportation networks and nearby

01:01:35.820 --> 01:01:39.860
 public facilities.

01:01:39.860 --> 01:01:46.780
 Also wanted to look at the development, the development pattern contained in the existing

01:01:46.780 --> 01:01:52.140
 plan does not provide adequate and appropriate optional sites for the use or change being

01:01:52.140 --> 01:01:54.240
 proposed in the amendment.

01:01:54.240 --> 01:02:01.020
 So when we look at this, what we want to look at is where we have existing regional centers.

01:02:01.020 --> 01:02:03.700
 So we've got three in Denton that are prominent.

01:02:03.700 --> 01:02:09.500
 We've got Razor Ranch, that is an existing retail restaurant and high density and entertainment

01:02:09.500 --> 01:02:10.500
 area.

01:02:10.500 --> 01:02:11.900
 We have Denton Enterprise Airport.

01:02:11.900 --> 01:02:17.700
 That's kind of a different regional center in that it's kind of serving that air travel

01:02:17.700 --> 01:02:19.380
 and employment uses.

01:02:19.380 --> 01:02:20.740
 And then we have Loop 288.

01:02:20.740 --> 01:02:23.260
 This is really our legacy regional commercial center.

01:02:23.260 --> 01:02:27.740
 It started with the mall and it has radiated out from there.

01:02:27.740 --> 01:02:32.220
 But it has less room to grow than the other ones.

01:02:32.220 --> 01:02:37.940
 It's one of those infill areas and it's pretty limited in the number of sites that are available

01:02:37.940 --> 01:02:44.260
 that have that frontage and that access along Loop 288.

01:02:44.260 --> 01:02:48.900
 And then the next criterion, that site conditions would make development under the current grant

01:02:48.900 --> 01:02:51.780
 plan inappropriate.

01:02:51.780 --> 01:02:57.980
 While areas dedicated to employment centers are needed, and I think, of course, we want

01:02:57.980 --> 01:03:05.740
 to make sure that we've got adequate employment centers, the GEO and LI districts do restrict

01:03:05.740 --> 01:03:06.960
 residential uses.

01:03:06.960 --> 01:03:15.060
 They also add in some potential for more moderate density industrial type development.

01:03:15.060 --> 01:03:19.760
 And so that could limit that necessary component by removing the residential.

01:03:19.760 --> 01:03:24.220
 It could remove that necessary component to support the existing commercial and employment

01:03:24.220 --> 01:03:30.980
 development and maybe introduce uses that would be incompatible with that area.

01:03:30.980 --> 01:03:38.420
 Areas next to Loop 288 are just more suited to commercial and high density residential.

01:03:38.420 --> 01:03:40.160
 We did send out public notices.

01:03:40.160 --> 01:03:45.100
 We haven't heard any responses in opposition or in favor.

01:03:45.100 --> 01:03:52.780
 And so based upon the criteria for approval, staff recommends approval of the request.

01:03:52.780 --> 01:03:56.820
 Thank you very much, Julie.

01:03:56.820 --> 01:04:01.660
 One thing real fast before I recognize Commissioner Beck is we have the public hearing scheduled

01:04:01.660 --> 01:04:02.660
 for 630.

01:04:02.660 --> 01:04:08.340
 So if we just manage some of the questions to public, that'd be, I think, helpful for

01:04:08.340 --> 01:04:09.340
 the public.

01:04:09.340 --> 01:04:11.740
 Commissioner Beck, will you defer to the public session?

01:04:11.740 --> 01:04:12.740
 Yes, absolutely.

01:04:12.740 --> 01:04:14.540
 It could be a public question.

01:04:14.540 --> 01:04:15.540
 Okay.

01:04:15.540 --> 01:04:16.540
 Yeah.

01:04:16.540 --> 01:04:17.540
 Fantastic.

01:04:17.540 --> 01:04:25.540
 With that, is there any opposition to having our discussion for the next item 3D in the

01:04:25.540 --> 01:04:32.780
 public hearing or does anyone need to have it pre-screened in work session?

01:04:32.780 --> 01:04:39.740
 Richard, is there any reason to have that in work session or can we just run 3D in our

01:04:39.740 --> 01:04:41.280
 public?

01:04:41.280 --> 01:04:44.620
 You're on mute, sir.

01:04:44.620 --> 01:04:47.500
 I think we can run it in the public.

01:04:47.500 --> 01:04:48.500
 All right.

01:04:48.500 --> 01:04:49.500
 Fantastic.

01:04:49.500 --> 01:04:54.220
 So with that, I'm going to end, call the work session to end at 637.

01:04:54.220 --> 01:04:57.920
 We're going to take a five minute recess.

01:04:57.920 --> 01:05:01.820
 And so we'll just call it 645.

01:05:01.820 --> 01:05:10.540
 We'll reconvene for the public hearing at 645.

01:05:10.540 --> 01:05:11.660
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

01:05:11.660 --> 01:05:17.460
 Welcome to the planning and zoning meeting for Wednesday, May 20th, 220.

01:05:17.460 --> 01:05:21.460
 Seeing that we do have a quorum, I will call this meeting to order at 646.

01:05:21.460 --> 01:05:25.620
 I appreciate your patience for us running a little bit behind this evening, but we'll

01:05:25.620 --> 01:05:31.300
 hop in right now starting with the first item of business, which is to consider approval

01:05:31.300 --> 01:05:34.420
 of the planning and zoning minutes from May 6th.

01:05:34.420 --> 01:05:38.500
 And the chair will entertain a motion on the item by show of hand.

01:05:38.500 --> 01:05:39.500
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:05:39.500 --> 01:05:42.360
 I move approval.

01:05:42.360 --> 01:05:45.020
 We have a first, Commissioner Anderson.

01:05:45.020 --> 01:05:46.220
 Second the motion.

01:05:46.220 --> 01:05:49.980
 We have a first and a second for approval.

01:05:49.980 --> 01:05:53.480
 Any discussion on the item?

01:05:53.480 --> 01:05:56.620
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

01:05:56.620 --> 01:05:57.620
 Commissioner Anderson.

01:05:57.620 --> 01:05:58.620
 Yay.

01:05:58.620 --> 01:05:59.620
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:05:59.620 --> 01:06:00.620
 Yay.

01:06:00.620 --> 01:06:01.620
 Commissioner Cole.

01:06:01.620 --> 01:06:02.620
 Yay.

01:06:02.620 --> 01:06:03.620
 Commissioner Beck.

01:06:03.620 --> 01:06:04.620
 Yay.

01:06:04.620 --> 01:06:05.620
 Commissioner Pernetta.

01:06:05.620 --> 01:06:06.620
 Yay.

01:06:06.620 --> 01:06:07.620
 Commissioner Scott.

01:06:07.620 --> 01:06:08.620
 Yay.

01:06:08.620 --> 01:06:09.620
 Commissioner Smith.

01:06:09.620 --> 01:06:10.620
 Aye.

01:06:10.620 --> 01:06:15.300
 The chair is in favor as well.

01:06:15.300 --> 01:06:18.860
 Motion carries 7-0.

01:06:18.860 --> 01:06:24.940
 Next item of business is our individual consideration items, starting with item 2A.

01:06:24.940 --> 01:06:29.900
 This item is being requested to be postponed to a date certain of June 3rd.

01:06:29.900 --> 01:06:33.100
 The chair will entertain a motion for a date certain of June 3rd.

01:06:33.100 --> 01:06:34.100
 Commissioner Smith.

01:06:34.100 --> 01:06:37.500
 Make a motion to postpone the date certain of June 3rd.

01:06:37.500 --> 01:06:39.500
 We have a first, Commissioner Pernetta.

01:06:39.500 --> 01:06:40.500
 Second the motion.

01:06:40.500 --> 01:06:44.600
 We have a first and a second for postpone to a date certain of June 3rd.

01:06:44.600 --> 01:06:47.040
 Any discussion on this item?

01:06:47.040 --> 01:06:49.780
 Seeing none, we'll vote via roll call.

01:06:49.780 --> 01:06:50.780
 Commissioner Anderson.

01:06:50.780 --> 01:06:51.780
 Aye.

01:06:51.780 --> 01:06:52.780
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:06:52.780 --> 01:06:53.780
 Aye.

01:06:53.780 --> 01:06:54.780
 Commissioner Cole.

01:06:54.780 --> 01:06:55.780
 Aye.

01:06:55.780 --> 01:06:56.780
 Commissioner Beck.

01:06:56.780 --> 01:06:57.780
 Aye.

01:06:57.780 --> 01:06:58.780
 Commissioner Pernetta.

01:06:58.780 --> 01:06:59.780
 Aye.

01:06:59.780 --> 01:07:00.780
 Commissioner Smith.

01:07:00.780 --> 01:07:01.780
 Yay.

01:07:01.780 --> 01:07:09.400
 The chair is also in favor, vote carries 7-0.

01:07:09.400 --> 01:07:16.460
 Next item of business is item 2B, ADP 20-0009.

01:07:16.460 --> 01:07:35.140
 Now I'll invite Julie Wyatt for presentation.

01:07:35.140 --> 01:07:49.780
 Sorry, I was muted.

01:07:49.780 --> 01:07:50.780
 We'll try again.

01:07:50.780 --> 01:07:51.780
 Good evening.

01:07:51.780 --> 01:07:54.700
 I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton.

01:07:54.700 --> 01:07:58.700
 And I'm presenting ADP 29 Smith Street Apartments.

01:07:58.700 --> 01:08:03.540
 The request is for an alternative development plan for a multi-family development on about

01:08:03.540 --> 01:08:04.900
 half an acre.

01:08:04.900 --> 01:08:11.020
 The subject property is located on the north side of Smith Street, kind of west of Dallas

01:08:11.020 --> 01:08:12.020
 Drive.

01:08:12.020 --> 01:08:19.380
 The purpose is to deviate from section 35.13.13(2) for some site design considerations for multi-family

01:08:19.380 --> 01:08:24.420
 developments.

01:08:24.420 --> 01:08:30.740
 So recently the city adopted a new code and we transitioned to that code in October of

01:08:30.740 --> 01:08:31.740
 last year.

01:08:31.740 --> 01:08:35.500
 We do have some projects, however, that are still being considered under the previous

01:08:35.500 --> 01:08:37.620
 code, the 2002 code.

01:08:37.620 --> 01:08:38.620
 And this is one of them.

01:08:38.620 --> 01:08:44.560
 So this is actually subject to the 2002 code due to the project timing.

01:08:44.560 --> 01:08:49.380
 Under the 2002 code, it had a zoning designation of DCG.

01:08:49.380 --> 01:08:52.140
 Under 2019, it has MN District.

01:08:52.140 --> 01:08:57.420
 Both of those districts allow for multi-family development.

01:08:57.420 --> 01:09:02.140
 The property is situated in a part of town that we're seeing some redevelopment in.

01:09:02.140 --> 01:09:09.580
 It makes sense because this area is well situated for more development.

01:09:09.580 --> 01:09:15.180
 It is located about a quarter of a mile from the central business district, about a quarter

01:09:15.180 --> 01:09:20.660
 of a mile from the UNT transit to the south, and about a tenth of a mile from a DCTA transit

01:09:20.660 --> 01:09:22.940
 station along Dallas Drive.

01:09:22.940 --> 01:09:26.420
 The subject property is shown here outlined in yellow.

01:09:26.420 --> 01:09:30.860
 And as you can see, those properties outlined in blue, there's a multi-family development

01:09:30.860 --> 01:09:33.860
 that is going in here.

01:09:33.860 --> 01:09:37.260
 It's actually gone vertical and it is under construction.

01:09:37.260 --> 01:09:41.500
 And then there's another large multi-family development coming in here that will be going

01:09:41.500 --> 01:09:43.020
 under construction soon.

01:09:43.020 --> 01:09:45.860
 So we're seeing a lot of development in this area.

01:09:45.860 --> 01:09:50.300
 There's some existing multi-family to the south, there's some industrial, and there's

01:09:50.300 --> 01:09:51.700
 some existing residential.

01:09:51.700 --> 01:09:55.780
 So it's a real mixed use area.

01:09:55.780 --> 01:10:02.380
 This is their site plan, and apart from the deviations, it meets the subchapter 13 requirements.

01:10:02.380 --> 01:10:06.060
 We'll go over those three deviations that they are requesting.

01:10:06.060 --> 01:10:09.980
 The first one is at least 50% of the front yard frontage should have buildings within

01:10:09.980 --> 01:10:12.260
 20 feet of the front property line.

01:10:12.260 --> 01:10:18.020
 The property has 122 linear feet of frontage, which would require 61 linear feet of buildings

01:10:18.020 --> 01:10:20.180
 within 20 feet of the front property line.

01:10:20.180 --> 01:10:25.420
 However, due to the entire frontage being encumbered by a variable width electric easement,

01:10:25.420 --> 01:10:29.280
 it really makes it impossible for that to happen.

01:10:29.280 --> 01:10:36.180
 The second is the wall area of the front facade has to have at least 25% windows and doors.

01:10:36.180 --> 01:10:38.500
 They're actually proposing 19%.

01:10:38.500 --> 01:10:47.240
 In order to balance the need for resident privacy with those need for building transparency,

01:10:47.240 --> 01:10:51.940
 additionally, their proposal does fit within the architectural theme of the building.

01:10:51.940 --> 01:10:54.940
 The building also provides a lot of visual relief.

01:10:54.940 --> 01:10:59.740
 It's got a variety of colors and textures and includes an architectural screening element

01:10:59.740 --> 01:11:05.300
 for that stairwell to ensure that interesting and transparent building.

01:11:05.300 --> 01:11:11.180
 And then the proposal, the requirements are that buildings should be directly accessed

01:11:11.180 --> 01:11:16.580
 from the street or sidewalk and have a porch with a ground floor entrance.

01:11:16.580 --> 01:11:23.840
 Once again, that electric easement sort of thwarts that porch, but they have provided

01:11:23.840 --> 01:11:28.080
 an entrance feature in that stairwell screening element.

01:11:28.080 --> 01:11:31.660
 It's integrated within there to provide residents a sense of arrival.

01:11:31.660 --> 01:11:38.100
 It also is connected to the right-of-way with a pedestrian connection.

01:11:38.100 --> 01:11:41.160
 So we'll look at what they are proposing.

01:11:41.160 --> 01:11:45.860
 This is the front part of the proposal.

01:11:45.860 --> 01:11:48.740
 The building is outlined in green.

01:11:48.740 --> 01:11:55.740
 That electric easement is shown in the blue dashed 20 feet wide on the east property line.

01:11:55.740 --> 01:11:59.700
 It's 30 feet wide on the west property line, so it runs that diagonal.

01:11:59.700 --> 01:12:01.340
 There's also a 26-foot fire lane.

01:12:01.340 --> 01:12:07.020
 We want to make sure fire has adequate access so that does further constrict the site to

01:12:07.020 --> 01:12:10.540
 provide for that emergency services.

01:12:10.540 --> 01:12:13.220
 And then here's their front elevation.

01:12:13.220 --> 01:12:20.220
 Here that 19% opening is shown in these four large windows per floor.

01:12:20.220 --> 01:12:25.220
 And that fits within the architectural theme, the sort of clean lines of the building.

01:12:25.220 --> 01:12:31.020
 It provides privacy for future residents while providing that transparency and that visual

01:12:31.020 --> 01:12:35.660
 interest and relief on buildings.

01:12:35.660 --> 01:12:40.100
 And then the architectural screening element for the stairwell has that integrated entrance

01:12:40.100 --> 01:12:46.940
 that's connected to the right-of-way, the sidewalk with that pedestrian lead walk.

01:12:46.940 --> 01:12:49.980
 A criteria for approval are in subchapter 13 in there five.

01:12:49.980 --> 01:12:53.620
 So first is the proposal preserve existing neighborhoods.

01:12:53.620 --> 01:13:00.100
 This is in a kind of a mixed use redeveloping area of the city near the city center.

01:13:00.100 --> 01:13:03.840
 And this use will complement the existing uses and provided some much needed density

01:13:03.840 --> 01:13:06.220
 near our downtown.

01:13:06.220 --> 01:13:12.140
 It'll assure quality development with the request assure quality development.

01:13:12.140 --> 01:13:16.300
 It's not intended to lower design standards, but with facilitate development of the site

01:13:16.300 --> 01:13:19.300
 and sort of the vision of that building.

01:13:19.300 --> 01:13:23.220
 Apart from the request, all other subchapter 13 requirements are met.

01:13:23.220 --> 01:13:26.380
 Does the proposal focus new development to activity centers?

01:13:26.380 --> 01:13:30.580
 And this is urban infill, so it doesn't contribute to sprawl.

01:13:30.580 --> 01:13:35.420
 There is the necessary infrastructure to accommodate the request.

01:13:35.420 --> 01:13:39.580
 And then the last requirement is would it result in a high quality development meeting

01:13:39.580 --> 01:13:40.580
 the intent?

01:13:40.580 --> 01:13:43.940
 So we'll go over these one by one, and I'll go quickly.

01:13:43.940 --> 01:13:49.380
 First, the requirement for the 50% of the front yard frontage, that buildings have to

01:13:49.380 --> 01:13:52.220
 be within 20 feet of that property line.

01:13:52.220 --> 01:13:57.100
 The intent of this is to close that public space to create vibrancy and pedestrian comfort.

01:13:57.100 --> 01:14:03.700
 In this case, that easement really does prevent buildings on this lot from situating the building

01:14:03.700 --> 01:14:05.380
 closer to the street.

01:14:05.380 --> 01:14:08.260
 And then the 26 foot fire lane further constricts the side.

01:14:08.260 --> 01:14:12.980
 And that's kind of the nature of these infill sites that you there are sort of boundaries

01:14:12.980 --> 01:14:15.260
 that you have to work within.

01:14:15.260 --> 01:14:23.460
 But the building and the proposal does have a strong architectural point of view and would

01:14:23.460 --> 01:14:26.180
 be a vibrant addition to the street.

01:14:26.180 --> 01:14:29.700
 So it does meet the intent of that requirement.

01:14:29.700 --> 01:14:33.100
 Does the 25% windows and doors?

01:14:33.100 --> 01:14:36.060
 They are providing 19%.

01:14:36.060 --> 01:14:44.780
 And that is to really balance the resident privacy with the needed transparency and that

01:14:44.780 --> 01:14:47.120
 interesting building from the right of way.

01:14:47.120 --> 01:14:48.740
 And it meets that intent.

01:14:48.740 --> 01:14:52.980
 And then finally, that building access and front porch requirement.

01:14:52.980 --> 01:14:57.540
 That entrance is integrated into the stairwell and it is connected to the sidewalk.

01:14:57.540 --> 01:15:02.140
 So it does provide residents and visitors that sense of arrival, meeting the intent

01:15:02.140 --> 01:15:04.140
 of that requirement.

01:15:04.140 --> 01:15:08.420
 So based upon the criteria for approval and the proposal, staff recommends approval of

01:15:08.420 --> 01:15:10.140
 the requested deviations.

01:15:10.140 --> 01:15:12.460
 And I will answer any questions.

01:15:12.460 --> 01:15:18.740
 And I believe the applicant is on the phone as well.

01:15:18.740 --> 01:15:20.400
 >> Thank you very much, Julie.

01:15:20.400 --> 01:15:24.980
 We do have a question, Commissioner Beck.

01:15:24.980 --> 01:15:25.980
 >> Thank you, Chair.

01:15:25.980 --> 01:15:33.620
 Julie, what is the diagonal feature on the fire lane?

01:15:33.620 --> 01:15:37.660
 >> Let me get back to the -- let me share my screen again so we can all look at it.

01:15:37.660 --> 01:15:43.740
 >> Is that just a turnaround?

01:15:43.740 --> 01:15:45.940
 >> Are you talking about this area?

01:15:45.940 --> 01:15:46.940
 >> No.

01:15:46.940 --> 01:15:49.380
 Up north and left.

01:15:49.380 --> 01:15:50.380
 Yeah.

01:15:50.380 --> 01:15:51.380
 What is that?

01:15:51.380 --> 01:15:55.140
 >> This is actually their dumpster enclosure and this is actually going to be moved to

01:15:55.140 --> 01:15:56.140
 the back of the site.

01:15:56.140 --> 01:15:59.020
 Kind of talked about it with Richard and the applicant.

01:15:59.020 --> 01:16:02.760
 And we really feel like this feature, although it's not a part of this request, we would

01:16:02.760 --> 01:16:06.500
 actually prefer it to be embedded a little further back in the site.

01:16:06.500 --> 01:16:11.140
 Its current location meets subchapter 13 requirements, but we think we found a better location.

01:16:11.140 --> 01:16:13.980
 So that's actually going to change on this site.

01:16:13.980 --> 01:16:15.460
 >> All right.

01:16:15.460 --> 01:16:16.460
 Thank you, Julie.

01:16:16.460 --> 01:16:17.460
 I appreciate it.

01:16:17.460 --> 01:16:18.460
 >> You bet.

01:16:18.460 --> 01:16:27.300
 >> Is there any other questions for Julie on this item?

01:16:27.300 --> 01:16:31.580
 This item is for individual consideration, so there's not a public hearing and there

01:16:31.580 --> 01:16:34.900
 is no one here wishing to speak or on the phone wishing to speak.

01:16:34.900 --> 01:16:38.020
 So the Chair will entertain a motion on the item.

01:16:38.020 --> 01:16:39.020
 Commissioner Anderson?

01:16:39.020 --> 01:16:42.100
 >> I make a motion to approve.

01:16:42.100 --> 01:16:43.100
 >> Commissioner Smith?

01:16:43.100 --> 01:16:44.100
 >> Second.

01:16:44.100 --> 01:16:46.540
 >> We have a first and a second for approval.

01:16:46.540 --> 01:16:49.060
 Any discussion?

01:16:49.060 --> 01:16:52.020
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

01:16:52.020 --> 01:16:53.020
 Commissioner Anderson?

01:16:53.020 --> 01:16:54.020
 >> Aye.

01:16:54.020 --> 01:16:55.020
 >> Commissioner Ellis?

01:16:55.020 --> 01:16:56.020
 >> Aye.

01:16:56.020 --> 01:16:57.020
 >> Commissioner Cole?

01:16:57.020 --> 01:16:58.020
 >> Aye.

01:16:58.020 --> 01:16:59.020
 >> Commissioner Pernetta?

01:16:59.020 --> 01:17:00.020
 >> Aye.

01:17:00.020 --> 01:17:01.020
 >> Commissioner Beck?

01:17:01.020 --> 01:17:02.020
 >> Aye.

01:17:02.020 --> 01:17:03.020
 >> Commissioner Smith?

01:17:03.020 --> 01:17:04.020
 >> Aye.

01:17:04.020 --> 01:17:10.300
 >> The Chair also is an aye, which means the vote carries 7-0.

01:17:10.300 --> 01:17:12.620
 The next item of business brings us to our public hearings.

01:17:12.620 --> 01:17:21.260
 The first one is item 3A, FR19-0016, and I'll invite Cindy Jackson for presentation.

01:17:21.260 --> 01:17:26.020
 >> Can you hear me?

01:17:26.020 --> 01:17:29.460
 >> Yes, we can.

01:17:29.460 --> 01:17:30.460
 >> Great.

01:17:30.460 --> 01:17:35.620
 This is Cindy Jackson with the Development Services Department, and I have before you

01:17:35.620 --> 01:17:43.900
 tonight a request for approval of a residential final replant of lots 1-79 and lots 1X-7X,

01:17:43.900 --> 01:17:49.980
 block A, of the Vista Verde addition, being a replant of a remainder of lot 56, block A,

01:17:49.980 --> 01:17:51.860
 the Oaks of Township 2.

01:17:51.860 --> 01:17:57.700
 The approximately 8.882 acre site is generally located on the southwest side of Colorado

01:17:57.700 --> 01:18:04.060
 Boulevard, approximately 315 feet northwest of San Jacinto Boulevard.

01:18:04.060 --> 01:18:10.140
 For the Texas Local Government Code, public hearing is required for residential replants,

01:18:10.140 --> 01:18:14.980
 which requires written notices sent out to property owners within the original subdivision

01:18:14.980 --> 01:18:18.380
 and property owners located within 200 feet of the subject site.

01:18:18.380 --> 01:18:23.020
 I do want to point out this plot is being considered under the 2002 Denton Development

01:18:23.020 --> 01:18:25.460
 Code.

01:18:25.460 --> 01:18:28.540
 Next slide, please.

01:18:28.540 --> 01:18:35.260
 On May 1, 2018, the City Council approved a request to rezone the site from NRMU-12 -- excuse

01:18:35.260 --> 01:18:43.140
 me, to NRMU-12 with a mixed-use overlay protection district, including the following conditions.

01:18:43.140 --> 01:18:47.600
 There shall be no uses permitted other than single-family attached dwelling units, including

01:18:47.600 --> 01:18:50.340
 townhouses or single-family dwelling units.

01:18:50.340 --> 01:18:55.140
 The overall density shall not exceed 10 dwelling units per acre.

01:18:55.140 --> 01:18:59.880
 Situations which are contiguous to the residential neighborhoods shall have maximum height of

01:18:59.880 --> 01:19:07.740
 two stories, and the installation of an 8-foot tall fence along adjacent properties is required.

01:19:07.740 --> 01:19:12.660
 The Council also required a provision of two access points to the site from Colorado Boulevard,

01:19:12.660 --> 01:19:14.900
 as shown on the plot.

01:19:14.900 --> 01:19:23.020
 The plot conforms to the requirements regarding the density and the use, as well as the provision

01:19:23.020 --> 01:19:26.020
 of two access points.

01:19:26.020 --> 01:19:32.340
 The remaining conditions will be enforced during the building permit phase of the development.

01:19:32.340 --> 01:19:34.920
 Next slide, please.

01:19:34.920 --> 01:19:37.620
 This is the proposed Vista Verde addition.

01:19:37.620 --> 01:19:42.860
 This is proposed to be a gated community of 79 single-family attached homes, comprised

01:19:42.860 --> 01:19:49.460
 of 26 townhomes and 53 single-family homes, in which the crashes will share a common wall.

01:19:49.460 --> 01:19:55.420
 The plot includes seven open space sites, which include the private street system and

01:19:55.420 --> 01:19:56.980
 an amenity center.

01:19:56.980 --> 01:20:01.780
 The proposed site is intended to be a gated rental community.

01:20:01.780 --> 01:20:04.540
 Next slide, please.

01:20:04.540 --> 01:20:08.700
 Here we have the original plot of the Oaks of Township, which was plotted in January

01:20:08.700 --> 01:20:12.700
 1985, and you can see the large lot 56.

01:20:12.700 --> 01:20:17.420
 They're adjacent to the single-family homes.

01:20:17.420 --> 01:20:19.700
 Next slide, please.

01:20:19.700 --> 01:20:26.340
 Phase one of the Villas of Piney Creek was plotted in October 1995 and took up half of

01:20:26.340 --> 01:20:28.120
 lot 56.

01:20:28.120 --> 01:20:33.180
 The remainder of lot 56 was intended to be developed as phase two of the Villas of Piney

01:20:33.180 --> 01:20:34.180
 Creek.

01:20:34.180 --> 01:20:35.740
 However, that never happened.

01:20:35.740 --> 01:20:47.300
 And so we have the subject site, the remainder of lot 56, and the proposed Vista Verde addition.

01:20:47.300 --> 01:20:51.740
 One percent out within 200 feet of the site.

01:20:51.740 --> 01:21:00.380
 We received four notices in opposition, comprising 3.54 percent of the site within the 200 foot

01:21:00.380 --> 01:21:07.340
 boundary and one in favor of the proposal, comprising 19.11 percent of the area within

01:21:07.340 --> 01:21:10.060
 the 200 foot boundary.

01:21:10.060 --> 01:21:13.420
 We had one that was neutral.

01:21:13.420 --> 01:21:19.700
 She represents 0.52 percent of the 200 foot boundary area, and no neighborhood meeting

01:21:19.700 --> 01:21:22.760
 was held.

01:21:22.760 --> 01:21:26.660
 Staff recommends approval of the request as it meets the established requirements.

01:21:26.660 --> 01:21:31.100
 The applicant is available to answer any questions.

01:21:31.100 --> 01:21:35.020
 That concludes my presentation.

01:21:35.020 --> 01:21:36.020
 Thank you, Cindy.

01:21:36.020 --> 01:21:38.420
 This is a public hearing, and it is open.

01:21:38.420 --> 01:21:48.700
 Is there any questions for Cindy on this item?

01:21:48.700 --> 01:21:53.140
 For this item, we did have two people make comments using our online form.

01:21:53.140 --> 01:21:56.580
 There was one in support of the item and one against.

01:21:56.580 --> 01:21:59.740
 All of these comment forms were emailed to all the commissioners and our city secretary

01:21:59.740 --> 01:22:00.740
 to be recorded.

01:22:00.740 --> 01:22:07.780
 Additionally, there are zero people that called into our 349-7800 line to register their position.

01:22:07.780 --> 01:22:10.420
 So there's zero in support and zero against.

01:22:10.420 --> 01:22:14.900
 Finally, there are two who have requested to speak over the phone on this item.

01:22:14.900 --> 01:22:22.640
 Staff will be connecting the first one now.

01:22:22.640 --> 01:22:48.200
 They are trying to connect as we speak.

01:22:48.200 --> 01:22:50.060
 Hello caller, you are live with the Planning and Zoning Commission.

01:22:50.060 --> 01:22:56.180
 Can you please state your name and address and you'll have four minutes to speak?

01:22:56.180 --> 01:22:58.780
 My name is Daniel Kettler.

01:22:58.780 --> 01:23:01.640
 I live at 1925 Canyon Court.

01:23:01.640 --> 01:23:06.180
 I back up to the proposed development.

01:23:06.180 --> 01:23:12.060
 My comments revolve around the previous arrangement.

01:23:12.060 --> 01:23:18.860
 The area behind my home used to be zoned for four units per acre.

01:23:18.860 --> 01:23:23.420
 The last developer that came through was successful in getting the zoning changed to something

01:23:23.420 --> 01:23:30.500
 else and we were told at the time that the saturation level was not going to reach whatever

01:23:30.500 --> 01:23:32.820
 it is, 10 or 12 multi units.

01:23:32.820 --> 01:23:37.180
 It was going to reach something like six or seven and of course, that deal has fallen

01:23:37.180 --> 01:23:38.180
 through.

01:23:38.180 --> 01:23:48.200
 Then we get this mailing in the mail that says that do I oppose or I'm in favor of replatting

01:23:48.200 --> 01:23:54.860
 this area and gives no specifics as to what's being planned.

01:23:54.860 --> 01:23:57.140
 What am I agreeing to?

01:23:57.140 --> 01:24:06.580
 I can't tell because there was no information in the packet that was mailed to us.

01:24:06.580 --> 01:24:13.340
 So basically, whatever was agreed to with the previous developer, they were given the

01:24:13.340 --> 01:24:18.740
 green light to change all the zoning and now there's something completely different in

01:24:18.740 --> 01:24:19.740
 the works.

01:24:19.740 --> 01:24:31.860
 So my wife and I have to vote no for if we agree to this flatting or whatever the deal

01:24:31.860 --> 01:24:34.900
 is because there's just no facts to go with.

01:24:34.900 --> 01:24:43.060
 There's no information and now I thought I was going to be calling in and listening to

01:24:43.060 --> 01:24:48.760
 something along the lines of what the previous developer had done where they kind of laid

01:24:48.760 --> 01:24:57.300
 out what the plan was and going forward and they actually had a meeting beforehand to

01:24:57.300 --> 01:25:01.540
 kind of explain to people so people could get an idea of what the development would

01:25:01.540 --> 01:25:09.240
 entail and apparently that's not happening and I didn't get the benefit of hearing whatever

01:25:09.240 --> 01:25:13.220
 transpired before I got on to the call so I have no idea.

01:25:13.220 --> 01:25:18.500
 I'm absolutely in the dark so I can only vote no because I have no information to go on.

01:25:18.500 --> 01:25:23.180
 Is there anything else you want to say, Liz?

01:25:23.180 --> 01:25:24.520
 Okay.

01:25:24.520 --> 01:25:28.100
 I think we're done.

01:25:28.100 --> 01:25:30.060
 I appreciate you calling.

01:25:30.060 --> 01:25:33.700
 I don't believe there's anything changing to the original overlay on the site.

01:25:33.700 --> 01:25:41.180
 Richard, can you confirm that from the original to now that the overlay's not changing?

01:25:41.180 --> 01:25:46.860
 All of those zoning conditions that were put in place when this was rezoned are still being

01:25:46.860 --> 01:25:49.940
 abide by.

01:25:49.940 --> 01:25:57.340
 What this really is is after zoning is complete the next step in the phase is to plat the

01:25:57.340 --> 01:25:58.340
 property.

01:25:58.340 --> 01:26:00.740
 In this instance it was platted previously.

01:26:00.740 --> 01:26:06.060
 This is a residential replat so this is just laying out each individual single family lot

01:26:06.060 --> 01:26:11.540
 and those town home lots in the arrangement that they will be built.

01:26:11.540 --> 01:26:13.540
 Okay.

01:26:13.540 --> 01:26:20.020
 Again there was really nothing indicated on the paperwork so I mean there's, you know,

01:26:20.020 --> 01:26:26.100
 if I was going to have say a clubhouse built directly on the other side of my property

01:26:26.100 --> 01:26:31.140
 line I have no ability to determine that or comment on that.

01:26:31.140 --> 01:26:38.620
 So I mean it's we're kind of left in the dark and I mean this is your process not ours.

01:26:38.620 --> 01:26:42.280
 So I mean I just I can only respond to what I received in the mail.

01:26:42.280 --> 01:26:51.220
 So I guess at this point I still have to vote no based upon lack of information.

01:26:51.220 --> 01:26:55.860
 So I guess that's all I have for you.

01:26:55.860 --> 01:26:59.940
 Well I certainly appreciate you calling in and for what it's worth available online as

01:26:59.940 --> 01:27:05.780
 well as if you're able to rewind this video tomorrow once it's posted there is the full

01:27:05.780 --> 01:27:09.420
 plat of every lot that will be behind you.

01:27:09.420 --> 01:27:15.740
 There is not a clubhouse behind you but you can verify every new lot line to see exactly

01:27:15.740 --> 01:27:20.020
 what would be built or that's being planned to be built behind your property.

01:27:20.020 --> 01:27:22.900
 I certainly understand your opposition I'm not trying to convince you otherwise of that

01:27:22.900 --> 01:27:23.900
 opinion.

01:27:23.900 --> 01:27:28.900
 I just want to let you know there the details of exactly where things will be built is available

01:27:28.900 --> 01:27:35.220
 to you either on the agenda immediately tonight or if you can tomorrow you can you can watch

01:27:35.220 --> 01:27:39.140
 the video and see the presentation of that detailed.

01:27:39.140 --> 01:27:40.140
 Okay I will do that.

01:27:40.140 --> 01:27:41.140
 Thank you very much for that tip.

01:27:41.140 --> 01:27:43.420
 Well I appreciate you calling in.

01:27:43.420 --> 01:27:46.540
 We do have another caller we're going to have that person connected now.

01:27:46.540 --> 01:28:00.220
 Thank you.

01:28:00.220 --> 01:28:03.320
 Hello caller you are live with the Planned and Zoning Commission can you please state

01:28:03.320 --> 01:28:07.620
 your name and address and you'll have four minutes to speak.

01:28:07.620 --> 01:28:13.560
 Collette Brandon 1921 Canyon Court in Denton Texas.

01:28:13.560 --> 01:28:22.820
 My concern is the development going up behind our house being our property is so much lower

01:28:22.820 --> 01:28:29.060
 than where the development is going to be that the drainage is going to all come down

01:28:29.060 --> 01:28:38.740
 on us therefore we need to do something about that I'm not opposed to it at all.

01:28:38.740 --> 01:28:47.740
 Again like the fence I need we need something taller it needs to go up above where the property

01:28:47.740 --> 01:28:54.660
 is instead of being down lower so I don't know how they're going to go about doing that.

01:28:54.660 --> 01:29:00.740
 Also at the other meetings that we had went to we've heard that there were supposed to

01:29:00.740 --> 01:29:08.500
 be two entrances for emergency entrances and I was wondering how they were going to go

01:29:08.500 --> 01:29:12.860
 about doing that.

01:29:12.860 --> 01:29:17.540
 That's my main concern.

01:29:17.540 --> 01:29:20.380
 I certainly appreciate you calling in and voicing your concerns.

01:29:20.380 --> 01:29:25.340
 As far as the site plan goes and I'll have staff confirm this the emergency entrances

01:29:25.340 --> 01:29:32.180
 there will be two that directly face Colorado Boulevard is that correct Richard?

01:29:32.180 --> 01:29:33.380
 That is correct.

01:29:33.380 --> 01:29:41.500
 So both entrances there there is no access to the site except from Colorado.

01:29:41.500 --> 01:29:48.500
 Okay so then and how are they going to what are they building back there and is it going

01:29:48.500 --> 01:29:55.700
 to be are they going to lower the ground to match with us because we go down a slope.

01:29:55.700 --> 01:30:01.260
 So how is I mean property people are going to be setting up above us looking down on

01:30:01.260 --> 01:30:06.540
 us even though we have I have a two-story house they're still we are so far down on

01:30:06.540 --> 01:30:17.180
 the slope and all the drainage coming down in how do they gonna control that.

01:30:17.180 --> 01:30:23.780
 The applicant can probably address that when he makes his presentation.

01:30:23.780 --> 01:30:29.580
 What do what is their plan for this acreage?

01:30:29.580 --> 01:30:35.140
 These are going to be single-family attached homes and townhomes.

01:30:35.140 --> 01:30:44.980
 So and the townhomes go right behind us or where what are we what are we talking about.

01:30:44.980 --> 01:30:50.540
 The townhomes are at either end and between the townhomes will be the single-family houses

01:30:50.540 --> 01:30:52.860
 that will be attached at the garage.

01:30:52.860 --> 01:30:59.300
 So then the townhomes are on the end so that would leave me being right above the townhome

01:30:59.300 --> 01:31:01.900
 lower than the townhomes.

01:31:01.900 --> 01:31:11.380
 So all our privacy and everything is just like wiped away and like I said all the drainage

01:31:11.380 --> 01:31:19.820
 that we're going to be currenting through all this did they take any consideration for

01:31:19.820 --> 01:31:20.820
 that.

01:31:20.820 --> 01:31:25.860
 That's right Brandon in order for them to build they would have to have the engineering

01:31:25.860 --> 01:31:30.540
 plans ensure that drainage is mitigated away from your property.

01:31:30.540 --> 01:31:35.780
 They wouldn't be able to pull a permit and begin construction without engineering being

01:31:35.780 --> 01:31:41.340
 approved by the city to ensure regardless of the terrain of the land that you are not

01:31:41.340 --> 01:31:49.220
 negatively impacted by drainage from the construction of their property.

01:31:49.220 --> 01:31:53.860
 Well again are we set so low that I mean we're going to get all the drain I've already had

01:31:53.860 --> 01:31:57.100
 to put in the drainage thing.

01:31:57.100 --> 01:32:01.900
 So when they start to build it's going to really be running down.

01:32:01.900 --> 01:32:06.820
 As for now there's a field but then when there's houses and stuff back there it's going to

01:32:06.820 --> 01:32:12.460
 be just rushing down because we set below like I said in an incline.

01:32:12.460 --> 01:32:17.020
 Sure I definitely understand that there's a slope in your backyard coming towards you.

01:32:17.020 --> 01:32:24.580
 It would be their responsibility to ensure drainage does not impact your property.

01:32:24.580 --> 01:32:30.140
 Okay and then what kind of fence are they planning to build and where is this going

01:32:30.140 --> 01:32:31.140
 to set.

01:32:31.140 --> 01:32:35.780
 Is it going to be higher than I mean is it going to set where we're at or is it going

01:32:35.780 --> 01:32:39.060
 to be up at the top.

01:32:39.060 --> 01:32:44.540
 They're required to put an eight foot tall fence on their property which is above yours

01:32:44.540 --> 01:32:47.820
 and we don't know the type of fence yet.

01:32:47.820 --> 01:32:50.620
 This request is just for plotting the property.

01:32:50.620 --> 01:32:55.540
 We will know more about the fence when they go through the development process.

01:32:55.540 --> 01:33:02.180
 Okay so we don't know anything until I mean sometimes I don't understand what they have

01:33:02.180 --> 01:33:04.940
 the meeting for if they don't address anything.

01:33:04.940 --> 01:33:14.180
 I mean shouldn't you guys be calling people as whenever you have it planned.

01:33:14.180 --> 01:33:20.100
 Yeah I certainly understand the concern about the ambiguousness of fencing and drainage.

01:33:20.100 --> 01:33:21.900
 Right now we're just following the process.

01:33:21.900 --> 01:33:26.540
 This is the plotting to see where buildings would go on the property.

01:33:26.540 --> 01:33:30.980
 From here they'd have to have a site design of building materials drainage.

01:33:30.980 --> 01:33:35.620
 That's just not the process we're at and the continuum of this project that comes at a

01:33:35.620 --> 01:33:40.640
 later date and so as more information comes to us and it's presented there can be opportunities

01:33:40.640 --> 01:33:46.260
 for discussion but tonight we're specifically looking at just how is the the land plotted

01:33:46.260 --> 01:33:48.700
 for the different properties that are going to be built there.

01:33:48.700 --> 01:33:57.700
 So two town homes and on each end and then houses single family houses in between.

01:33:57.700 --> 01:34:01.940
 I would encourage you to take a look at the site plan it's available online and you can

01:34:01.940 --> 01:34:07.100
 you can see exactly where every lot I believe there's 78 lots you can see exactly where

01:34:07.100 --> 01:34:12.180
 each one will will be located.

01:34:12.180 --> 01:34:21.340
 Okay I know that we have got a letter but it never said anything about anything developing

01:34:21.340 --> 01:34:22.340
 out there.

01:34:22.340 --> 01:34:25.340
 Sure I understand.

01:34:25.340 --> 01:34:26.340
 Commissioner Beck?

01:34:26.340 --> 01:34:33.940
 Yes Richard on these communications with the surrounding property we we provide links to

01:34:33.940 --> 01:34:39.780
 the materials that are similar to what's presented tonight there yeah there should be at as part

01:34:39.780 --> 01:34:47.260
 of that notice when that when the agenda item will be available and a link to that notice.

01:34:47.260 --> 01:34:55.300
 Okay that was in this notice too at the bottom of the notice.

01:34:55.300 --> 01:35:01.860
 Sure what may help we can have staff reach out tomorrow and explain in detail exactly

01:35:01.860 --> 01:35:04.700
 what what's going on.

01:35:04.700 --> 01:35:10.820
 I'm not sure which lot is hers off of Canyon Court but one thing to point out there is

01:35:10.820 --> 01:35:19.220
 a large open space lot right at the end of where I think it's lots 33 and 34 of the Oaks

01:35:19.220 --> 01:35:27.980
 Township phase two so they do have a large open space lot that that it joins where that

01:35:27.980 --> 01:35:37.060
 all the SEC ends those two properties so they will not be able to.

01:35:37.060 --> 01:35:45.280
 So we're okay all right oh we don't know anything until you're just calling to see if we're

01:35:45.280 --> 01:35:49.580
 opposed to it or not.

01:35:49.580 --> 01:35:53.940
 We definitely will take any citizen feedback on the project that's what we're trying to

01:35:53.940 --> 01:36:00.980
 engage with tonight yeah I mean like I said it's going to take away everything that our

01:36:00.980 --> 01:36:07.380
 privacy everything I could see maybe if they do like a business or if they do I would you

01:36:07.380 --> 01:36:14.220
 know but not that many homes that town homes that are taller than our house overlooking

01:36:14.220 --> 01:36:20.540
 us I mean again I have a problem with the drainage and all that stuff now looking over

01:36:20.540 --> 01:36:25.700
 you know well miss Brandon I appreciate you taking time to speak tonight and registering

01:36:25.700 --> 01:36:30.200
 your opposition and we will have someone from our staff reach out to you in the upcoming

01:36:30.200 --> 01:36:35.500
 days to talk specifically about some of your concerns okay thank you very much and what

01:36:35.500 --> 01:36:43.420
 was your name my name is Andrew Rozelle okay thank you very much of course you have a good

01:36:43.420 --> 01:36:44.420
 evening.

01:36:44.420 --> 01:36:49.920
 There's only two individuals on hold to speak and seeing that they have spoken I will close

01:36:49.920 --> 01:36:58.660
 the public hearing on this item and turn to the commission for a motion Commissioner Smith

01:36:58.660 --> 01:37:06.860
 make a motion to approve Commissioner Pernetta second we have a first and a second for approval

01:37:06.860 --> 01:37:13.100
 is there any discussion on the item seeing none I will call for a vote be a roll call

01:37:13.100 --> 01:37:21.700
 Commissioner Anderson aye Commissioner Ellis aye Commissioner Cole aye Commissioner Pernetta

01:37:21.700 --> 01:37:32.180
 aye Commissioner Beck aye Commissioner Smith aye chair is an aye motion carries 7-0 the

01:37:32.180 --> 01:37:42.460
 next item of business is item 3B it's PD 19-0005C unfortunately Cindy Jackson's voice is leaving

01:37:42.460 --> 01:37:52.620
 her quickly so Richard is going to be her proxy for the presentation this evening and

01:37:52.620 --> 01:38:20.020
 I will open the public hearing Chair if you'll give me just one second I'm going to move

01:38:20.020 --> 01:38:30.220
 forward.

01:38:30.220 --> 01:38:35.100
 Good evening chair members of the of the commission and members of public Richard Canone development

01:38:35.100 --> 01:38:44.140
 services the item in front of you tonight is a request to rezone a 11.53 acre parcel

01:38:44.140 --> 01:38:56.580
 from PDMR and 8.88 acres from MN to PD one thing to note the PD-MR this was in a previously

01:38:56.580 --> 01:39:02.660
 zoned property that was an RCCD that had an overlay and if you recall when we did the

01:39:02.660 --> 01:39:11.900
 DDC update any overlay district it transitioned into a PD so it's not a true PD in the sense

01:39:11.900 --> 01:39:19.500
 of how we're dealing with PDs today but it is a PD-MR which represents that it was previously

01:39:19.500 --> 01:39:30.660
 a had a zoning overlay and so in total it's 12.42 acres and it is the parcels essentially

01:39:30.660 --> 01:39:43.260
 that front the service road in front of the Bucky's travel station.

01:39:43.260 --> 01:39:50.540
 The as you see the current zoning you have the PDMR and the the split zoning with MN

01:39:50.540 --> 01:39:56.300
 and so what this will do is the main Bucky's site will will remain with the PDMR this site

01:39:56.300 --> 01:40:04.860
 will go to a straight PD give you a little bit of zoning history back in 2008 I think

01:40:04.860 --> 01:40:09.940
 even myself we were somewhat confused with where these conditions came about we thought

01:40:09.940 --> 01:40:14.660
 initially it had to do with with the Bucky's development but this was well in advance of

01:40:14.660 --> 01:40:25.100
 that development so in 2008 the site was rezoned from RCR one to RCCD for a mixed use development

01:40:25.100 --> 01:40:31.380
 with these four overlay conditions I won't read each of the reach of each of the conditions

01:40:31.380 --> 01:40:36.620
 but it had to do primarily with protecting the single-family residential neighborhoods

01:40:36.620 --> 01:40:40.500
 that that are adjacent to the site.

01:40:40.500 --> 01:40:47.660
 This is a the master site plan for the Bucky's store all of those conditions that were that

01:40:47.660 --> 01:40:54.380
 were required from that 2008 zoning were complied with as part of this site plan approval so

01:40:54.380 --> 01:41:04.860
 because these sites the these sites that front the service road at I-35 don't involve the

01:41:04.860 --> 01:41:09.540
 residential properties to the to the south those overlay conditions are not being made

01:41:09.540 --> 01:41:15.500
 part of of this PD so those those conditions will still stay with Bucky's so for some reason

01:41:15.500 --> 01:41:25.860
 it redevelops those conditions would still apply under under that PD-MR and if you one

01:41:25.860 --> 01:41:32.500
 thing I wanted to point out when when they developed this site under that RCCD obviously

01:41:32.500 --> 01:41:38.300
 the standards were a lot different and so really the intent was to push as much of the

01:41:38.300 --> 01:41:48.380
 development as close to 35 as possible that's why we have the the pad sites out out front

01:41:48.380 --> 01:41:54.180
 and so what they're requesting for their master for their PD their master phasing plan is

01:41:54.180 --> 01:41:59.340
 essentially the master phasing plan that was approved with that master site plan when that

01:41:59.340 --> 01:42:04.020
 site plan was approved there are a number of components with related to that one of

01:42:04.020 --> 01:42:11.540
 them being a master phasing plan and so you see the lots two three going left left to

01:42:11.540 --> 01:42:18.740
 right two three four five six seven and eight so those were the original pad sites that

01:42:18.740 --> 01:42:26.180
 that were graded when this was when phase one the main site was was was developed and

01:42:26.180 --> 01:42:30.780
 so they're they're really requesting to just carry forward what they were planning to do

01:42:30.780 --> 01:42:37.740
 when they when they started this work a few years ago I know this was discussed as part

01:42:37.740 --> 01:42:46.300
 of the work session but you can see the note here it does say conceptual crossing so this

01:42:46.300 --> 01:42:51.340
 eat there is an environmentally sensitive area here so that does need to be complied

01:42:51.340 --> 01:42:57.260
 with so even though that road is shown similar to the road that private road being on the

01:42:57.260 --> 01:43:10.940
 plat they cannot traverse that ESA area without without seeking an alternative ESA approval

01:43:10.940 --> 01:43:17.380
 some of the standards that that are being proposed to put being proposed to be followed

01:43:17.380 --> 01:43:25.500
 as a result of the PD again we have a split zoning currently PD MR and the in about point

01:43:25.500 --> 01:43:33.020
 eight eight acres are MN and so for the most part looking to pull everything into the current

01:43:33.020 --> 01:43:43.200
 MR standards the only real changes are a reduction in the minimum landscape area the current

01:43:43.200 --> 01:43:51.260
 MR provides for 25 percent minimum landscape the existing MN 20 percent they're proposing

01:43:51.260 --> 01:43:58.780
 a 10 percent minimum landscape area typically we look at these really hard and and and have

01:43:58.780 --> 01:44:05.020
 a lot of have have a lot of hard time supporting any changes to the minimum landscape area

01:44:05.020 --> 01:44:09.340
 but when you really look at how this site was developed even potential vesting that

01:44:09.340 --> 01:44:14.660
 they may have with respect to landscaping staff did not see a problem with with the

01:44:14.660 --> 01:44:24.020
 10 percent minimum landscape the tree canopy coverage the existing or I should say the

01:44:24.020 --> 01:44:32.460
 prior approval the old development standard for maximum tree canopy was 20 percent the

01:44:32.460 --> 01:44:39.620
 new DDC for most districts is 30 percent most of our mixed use districts is 30 for that

01:44:39.620 --> 01:44:44.980
 point eight eight acres it is 40 again there are some provisions particularly as it relates

01:44:44.980 --> 01:44:50.780
 to landscaping and tree canopy where they are some vesting however they're just looking

01:44:50.780 --> 01:44:59.660
 to move forward with their with their overlay I'm sorry with their PD to follow the existing

01:44:59.660 --> 01:45:06.360
 standards of 30 of 30 percent again this has nothing to do with the ESA I wanted to stress

01:45:06.360 --> 01:45:15.580
 again that you cannot you cannot alter any ESA language or or standards or any tree preservation

01:45:15.580 --> 01:45:21.620
 standards through through the PD and so all of those standards will be met or or have

01:45:21.620 --> 01:45:27.780
 already been met for parking requirements they are proposing some changes essentially

01:45:27.780 --> 01:45:34.460
 for items one two and three seeking to go back to what was previously in the code and

01:45:34.460 --> 01:45:40.060
 then for item four just given the nature of the type of restaurants that they're looking

01:45:40.060 --> 01:45:48.420
 to attract given it given that it's directly adjacent to 35 looking to have a have a little

01:45:48.420 --> 01:45:54.100
 bit of a wider range and increased parking just given the nature that you're probably

01:45:54.100 --> 01:46:00.020
 not going to have a lot of folks walking to this given that it is right on interstate

01:46:00.020 --> 01:46:08.020
 35 there are 13 general approval criteria for all applications where we won't go through

01:46:08.020 --> 01:46:13.580
 all 13 but it is in your backup staff did find that that this request was consistent

01:46:13.580 --> 01:46:20.140
 with all 13 of those criteria and then there were six specific criteria for approval of

01:46:20.140 --> 01:46:27.380
 a PD that we will highlight each the first is that it is consistent with the Denton 2030

01:46:27.380 --> 01:46:33.780
 plan this site is designated regional mixed use and so again that the PD would not would

01:46:33.780 --> 01:46:43.380
 not defer or alter any of what was intended to be developed under this land use category

01:46:43.380 --> 01:46:50.340
 the second is compliance with the DDC so again looking at the standards in MR and what they're

01:46:50.340 --> 01:46:58.180
 being proposed to change they would obviously if approved would be consistent with criteria

01:46:58.180 --> 01:47:04.620
 two criteria three provides greater building design amenities and connectivity again this

01:47:04.620 --> 01:47:09.780
 just encourages it continues to encourage that unified pattern consistent with what

01:47:09.780 --> 01:47:16.660
 we typically see along highway corridors as well as what was initially anticipated and

01:47:16.660 --> 01:47:24.380
 graded for this site and then criteria for residential if there's residential uses compatibility

01:47:24.380 --> 01:47:28.900
 associated with that in the character of the area there's no residential development proposed

01:47:28.900 --> 01:47:36.100
 as part of this of this PD and then criteria five that it's appropriate in in an appropriate

01:47:36.100 --> 01:47:42.620
 area location and the planning is just again these are primarily looking to develop restaurants

01:47:42.620 --> 01:47:49.180
 and commercial adjacent to the interstate highway so this this is intended exactly with with

01:47:49.180 --> 01:47:58.420
 what we would expect to develop there criteria six provision of public facilities as we stated

01:47:58.420 --> 01:48:06.620
 earlier there is no students being generated there is fire station six within a eight minute

01:48:06.620 --> 01:48:12.380
 or less response time Denton PD indicated that they did not believe this would have

01:48:12.380 --> 01:48:18.520
 a significant or negative impact on response times with respect to water and wastewater

01:48:18.520 --> 01:48:25.380
 as as indicated earlier when the site was developed and platted it was platted all as

01:48:25.380 --> 01:48:30.860
 one phase so all of the utilities were put in place ahead of time so there is no additional

01:48:30.860 --> 01:48:37.860
 utility work that's needed with respect to water or wastewater streets are already are

01:48:37.860 --> 01:48:43.340
 already provided again through through that through that initial plat that was approved

01:48:43.340 --> 01:48:49.700
 and so the major access points to the site will be Bucky's Way they have a private road

01:48:49.700 --> 01:48:56.340
 here obviously the private road of nugget way in in the back and then in order to access

01:48:56.340 --> 01:49:03.740
 this site if it were to develop sooner than later and they did not get a approval of an

01:49:03.740 --> 01:49:10.700
 alternate ESA there would need to be access granted through tex dot through a service

01:49:10.700 --> 01:49:17.540
 road I do believe there's a an existing right of way dedication right away easement along

01:49:17.540 --> 01:49:27.000
 this along this boundary this western boundary

01:49:27.000 --> 01:49:32.620
 one thing that I would also like to mention is drainage when the site was developed and

01:49:32.620 --> 01:49:38.920
 graded all of the drainage was incorporated into the site and so if if you notice now

01:49:38.920 --> 01:49:45.420
 there there's a small structure overflow structure here so it is in conjunction both with I thirty

01:49:45.420 --> 01:49:51.300
 five widening improvements and the large pond that they and and drainage that they've already

01:49:51.300 --> 01:49:59.100
 added as part of the the improvements associated with that plat again that there is no residential

01:49:59.100 --> 01:50:05.260
 development and so access to public parks will not be required but if you recall there

01:50:05.260 --> 01:50:11.220
 is a trail system that they did install on the back of the property interestingly enough

01:50:11.220 --> 01:50:17.100
 I happened to stop there the other night and and I was surprised to see the number of of

01:50:17.100 --> 01:50:23.940
 residents using using the the trail in the back we did send notice actually over notice

01:50:23.940 --> 01:50:30.900
 this property however within that two hundred foot buffer we did not receive any letters

01:50:30.900 --> 01:50:38.140
 of opposition outside of the two hundred there were two in opposition and one in favor and

01:50:38.140 --> 01:50:44.220
 they they did not hold a neighborhood meeting with that staff recommends approval of the

01:50:44.220 --> 01:50:54.620
 rezoning to PD as as presented thank you Richard for presentation this is a public hearing

01:50:54.620 --> 01:51:01.260
 so we certainly would welcome any public feedback at this point we have not received any feedback

01:51:01.260 --> 01:51:08.160
 via our online form anyone calling our office to register a position and we have no one

01:51:08.160 --> 01:51:15.820
 on the phone lines right now to speak so with that I will close the public hearing see that

01:51:15.820 --> 01:51:23.200
 we have no one to speak in in the public is there any questions for staff about this project

01:51:23.200 --> 01:51:33.460
 Christian back thank you chair Richard the access to the retail and restaurant potential

01:51:33.460 --> 01:51:41.220
 plots is all from nugget way is that correct no access from the Peter it will all be from

01:51:41.220 --> 01:51:49.620
 from nugget way and and do we know what the ramifications are if an alternative easement

01:51:49.620 --> 01:52:00.220
 isn't granted and therefore you only have two access points they it would only affect

01:52:00.220 --> 01:52:06.620
 the one lot and so that lot two would need to get access from short of how they how they

01:52:06.620 --> 01:52:12.740
 showed it on that master site plan so they would need to apply for a a permit through

01:52:12.740 --> 01:52:20.500
 textdoc to gain access so there wouldn't be cross access or interconnectivity with lot

01:52:20.500 --> 01:52:27.060
 two with the remaining development unless that all visa is is is approved so that lot

01:52:27.060 --> 01:52:34.380
 one would just sort of dangle there on the corner correct until you love to sorry like

01:52:34.380 --> 01:52:49.980
 to thank you and that's all my questions thank you any other questions for Richard or staff

01:52:49.980 --> 01:52:56.860
 Christian thank you chair so Richard we're effectively pulling these these parcels out

01:52:56.860 --> 01:53:05.300
 of the the master plan I guess so to speak correct to some extent it's still it's still

01:53:05.300 --> 01:53:12.500
 looked at as as a cohesive development because it's it's there's still those cross access

01:53:12.500 --> 01:53:19.900
 through the plat but for for development purposes yes okay so I know that there were protections

01:53:19.900 --> 01:53:25.900
 put in place with that master plan effectively most I think have been satisfied with the

01:53:25.900 --> 01:53:33.180
 buckies development what if you can tell me what are we losing by pulling these parcels

01:53:33.180 --> 01:53:40.820
 out and making them effectively their own pd I don't quite honestly I don't think we're

01:53:40.820 --> 01:53:49.100
 we're losing anything really just making them stand on their own and become with the exception

01:53:49.100 --> 01:53:57.180
 of of the minimum landscape area bringing them into compliance with the new ddc okay

01:53:57.180 --> 01:54:02.740
 and I know you mentioned on one of the lots there was some kind of drainage compliance

01:54:02.740 --> 01:54:08.420
 on one of the lots yeah when when the site was when the site was platted and went through

01:54:08.420 --> 01:54:15.220
 their construction engineering plans all of the drainage for the for that site was was

01:54:15.220 --> 01:54:22.540
 was planned I think that was part of of the request when staff had them submit for the

01:54:22.540 --> 01:54:30.180
 site plan for for lot one for the for the buckies proper they wanted to look at at that

01:54:30.180 --> 01:54:36.180
 site in totality how those lots were would develop at that max night you know built out

01:54:36.180 --> 01:54:45.260
 at that 90% to ensure that the drainage and all the utilities were were built to to a

01:54:45.260 --> 01:54:51.180
 standard that that would be able to handle handle both the runoff and and any impacts

01:54:51.180 --> 01:54:57.500
 from water and wastewater okay so by pulling that lot out of it if something goes awry

01:54:57.500 --> 01:55:03.220
 with drainage who's responsible there there are there's a property and I know the applicants

01:55:03.220 --> 01:55:10.220
 on on there is a property owners association also established that covers all of that so

01:55:10.220 --> 01:55:17.780
 it will still be main it will still be owned and maintained by by buckies I think it's

01:55:17.780 --> 01:55:26.020
 ltd which controls the the main lot one but that's where all of the drainage is the ponds

01:55:26.020 --> 01:55:30.860
 at least are located but my understanding that there is a property owners association

01:55:30.860 --> 01:55:36.020
 that will handle all of that that these that these parcels would still remain part of correct

01:55:36.020 --> 01:55:47.340
 okay yeah I guess that's all my quote I still have concerns with regarding to the the need

01:55:47.340 --> 01:55:54.980
 for the alternative ESA especially with regard to like staff analysis plus the traffic study

01:55:54.980 --> 01:56:03.020
 that talks about how nugget way is the main point of access to to um to get to these parcels

01:56:03.020 --> 01:56:13.340
 um so anyway I will stop talking and give other commissioners commissioner beck thank

01:56:13.340 --> 01:56:23.780
 you chair um real quick so the parcel one has the hundred foot zba um variance and for

01:56:23.780 --> 01:56:31.500
 this pd that is being proposed the sign um uh variance or the sign uh requirement would

01:56:31.500 --> 01:56:38.660
 be a hundred foot as well is that correct no there is no variance for the um as part

01:56:38.660 --> 01:56:44.180
 of this pd for for sign height so they would have to meet meet the current the current

01:56:44.180 --> 01:56:50.700
 and that's 65 as I recall or am I misrecalling I'd have to I don't have the the that's that's

01:56:50.700 --> 01:57:00.780
 fine that's fine thank you that that's my question thank you any other questions for

01:57:00.780 --> 01:57:06.660
 um staff and richard mentioned that the applicant is on the line if there's any questions for

01:57:06.660 --> 01:57:17.020
 the applicant commission ellis thank you chair I guess my question for the applicant would

01:57:17.020 --> 01:57:26.480
 be is if the alternative esa is not approved do you have a secondary plan in your mind

01:57:26.480 --> 01:57:30.540
 the uh the current access thank you commissioner for the question this is scott rackliff with

01:57:30.540 --> 01:57:35.060
 the luckies ltv I appreciate the opportunity to address you guys this evening via this

01:57:35.060 --> 01:57:43.500
 coded uh interface um but there is a lot eight there is a driveway to text that right away

01:57:43.500 --> 01:57:47.960
 so you have luckies boulevard you have driveway eight and then part of our agreement with

01:57:47.960 --> 01:57:54.460
 our neighbors is there's a driveway to the south that also connects to back south to

01:57:54.460 --> 01:57:59.060
 several other developments so there is an additional ingress and egress as it relates

01:57:59.060 --> 01:58:05.460
 to the isa crossing the original tia that was performed with this property in the original

01:58:05.460 --> 01:58:09.980
 overall development which accounted for all these lots as seen in the master phasing plan

01:58:09.980 --> 01:58:15.300
 did account for not having that connection the connection was proposed in a manner to

01:58:15.300 --> 01:58:22.940
 help uh improve traffic but it was not a requirement of the original traffic impact uh review for

01:58:22.940 --> 01:58:27.460
 this particular project as it relates to lot number two an earlier question that came up

01:58:27.460 --> 01:58:32.260
 with regards to access there was already a permitted driveway there with text dot and

01:58:32.260 --> 01:58:37.820
 uh if you've been out there lately you'll see that it's there right behind the uh goodwill

01:58:37.820 --> 01:58:43.780
 facility that services us and our neighbors that are uh to the north of us uh that have

01:58:43.780 --> 01:58:50.460
 an undeveloped track as well and so that access is there for lot two which is isolated because

01:58:50.460 --> 01:58:57.180
 of the isa area does that answer your question um possibly um let me say if i understand

01:58:57.180 --> 01:59:06.660
 so if if the alternative esa does not get approved um lots the the other parcels except

01:59:06.660 --> 01:59:12.700
 for lot two would still have plenty of of access in and out lot two would remain effectively

01:59:12.700 --> 01:59:17.740
 an island by itself and you have a way of of developing that and having access is that

01:59:17.740 --> 01:59:23.060
 how is that what i'm understanding correct lot two would remain a standalone through

01:59:23.060 --> 01:59:30.300
 the driveway connection that exists out there today from text on um lots three through eight

01:59:30.300 --> 01:59:37.000
 and lot one of buckies we have access all shared through our property owners group and

01:59:37.000 --> 01:59:42.540
 cross access easements that are already in place today through buckies boulevard which

01:59:42.540 --> 01:59:47.900
 then connects to nugget way nugget way parallels 35 running north and south there is a driveway

01:59:47.900 --> 01:59:53.860
 on lot eight which has an easement that allows people to access that driveway and then there's

01:59:53.860 --> 02:00:01.560
 an easement that continues on south into the uh movie theater and multi-family developments

02:00:01.560 --> 02:00:07.940
 that are south of us okay so there's three existing connection points that would handle

02:00:07.940 --> 02:00:13.540
 and we're designed to handle the bulk of the transportation needs for the development okay

02:00:13.540 --> 02:00:25.580
 thank you i appreciate the clarifications at this time the the public hearing is closed

02:00:25.580 --> 02:00:32.860
 the chair will certainly entertain any questions of staff applicant or motion and discussion

02:00:32.860 --> 02:00:37.500
 commissioner smith make a motion to approve we have a first for approval commissioner

02:00:37.500 --> 02:00:43.140
 anderson i second the motion we have a first and a second for approval is there any discussion

02:00:43.140 --> 02:00:54.180
 on this item commissioner pernetta was was was that a hand or okay okay seeing no discussion

02:00:54.180 --> 02:01:02.500
 i will call for a vote via roll call commissioner anderson aye commissioner alice aye commissioner

02:01:02.500 --> 02:01:14.260
 cole aye commissioner pernetta aye commissioner beck nay commissioner smith aye chairs an

02:01:14.260 --> 02:01:21.980
 aye vote carries six one the next item of business is item well before i go on to item

02:01:21.980 --> 02:01:27.980
 three c i'd be remiss not to say something here item three b um was an item from cindy

02:01:27.980 --> 02:01:34.700
 jackson and with the closing of that item she has now um presented her last item to

02:01:34.700 --> 02:01:41.860
 p and z cindy jackson is retiring and so it's with a heartfelt thank you to cindy for all

02:01:41.860 --> 02:01:47.820
 your work you've been here for my i think i'm on five years and i i've heard dozens

02:01:47.820 --> 02:01:52.540
 of your presentations and and answered dozens of my questions and so you will be missed

02:01:52.540 --> 02:01:57.220
 and i i appreciate all the hard work you've put into all your city service so thank you

02:01:57.220 --> 02:02:04.980
 very much cindy thank you very much i appreciate that i enjoyed working with all of you as

02:02:04.980 --> 02:02:09.540
 well well enjoy retirement and get better it sounds like you're fighting something hopefully

02:02:09.540 --> 02:02:17.500
 that that passes soon i'm hoping thank you very much thank you cindy moving on the next

02:02:17.500 --> 02:02:27.740
 item is item 3c it's item ca19-0001a and this is an item by julie wyatt invite her for presentation

02:02:27.740 --> 02:02:42.060
 and open the public hearing good evening i'm good evening i'm julie wyatt and i am presenting

02:02:42.060 --> 02:02:50.460
 ca19-0001a canopy trails the request before you is for a comprehensive plan amendment

02:02:50.460 --> 02:02:55.900
 on about 98 acres the property is situated at the intersection of shady oaks and loop

02:02:55.900 --> 02:03:00.380
 288 and they are requesting to modify the future land use designation from business

02:03:00.380 --> 02:03:08.660
 innovation to regional mixed use the den plan 2030 which has the future land use map and

02:03:08.660 --> 02:03:15.380
 future land use designations was adopted in february of 2015 that future land use map

02:03:15.380 --> 02:03:20.980
 we use that to guide our our zoning decisions those future land use designations are broad

02:03:20.980 --> 02:03:26.380
 categories in which several zoning districts could fall under generally there are specific

02:03:26.380 --> 02:03:30.580
 districts that go with each future land use designation for example business innovation

02:03:30.580 --> 02:03:36.860
 we often see go or li associated with it a best planning practice is that zoning should

02:03:36.860 --> 02:03:41.020
 be consistent with the comprehensive plan in the future land use map we've had some

02:03:41.020 --> 02:03:45.900
 varied rules within the city of denton we adopted a new code last year but our prior

02:03:45.900 --> 02:03:51.140
 code the 2002 denton development code had limited criteria for approval but when a project

02:03:51.140 --> 02:03:56.820
 did not meet the future land use designation there was an alternate path for cases and

02:03:56.820 --> 02:04:01.300
 so we often had cases come forward and get approved that didn't meet the future land

02:04:01.300 --> 02:04:07.020
 use designation with the adoption of the 2019 code and its implementation and we've got

02:04:07.020 --> 02:04:11.460
 more robust criteria for approval and we want to implement those best practices so zoning

02:04:11.460 --> 02:04:16.860
 really should follow the future land use map it's you know there are instances where that

02:04:16.860 --> 02:04:24.380
 map should and and could be amended to address specific a specific area or circumstance it

02:04:24.380 --> 02:04:32.500
 is a living document and conditions on the ground do change and so section 2.7.1 does

02:04:32.500 --> 02:04:39.280
 give us the the purpose and the process for those comprehensive plan amendments it's intended

02:04:39.280 --> 02:04:46.860
 to provide flexibility to accommodate those changing circumstances or or policy now more

02:04:46.860 --> 02:04:53.460
 specifically to the site once again the site is outlined in yellow it is located on one

02:04:53.460 --> 02:04:59.980
 of our commercial corridors the loop 288 across loop 288 there is a government center the

02:04:59.980 --> 02:05:09.380
 county offices to the south and southeast of the site there's quite a few retail developments

02:05:09.380 --> 02:05:15.220
 there's a mall that there's some kind of larger centers with with large developments there's

02:05:15.220 --> 02:05:20.780
 also residential within the area a particularly higher density residential and also we do

02:05:20.780 --> 02:05:25.780
 have some elderly housing so we have a real good mix of residential and commercial and

02:05:25.780 --> 02:05:32.460
 office uses in the area as I said the current future land use designation is business innovation

02:05:32.460 --> 02:05:38.460
 that is intended for more employment uses think a larger scale office parks maybe distribution

02:05:38.460 --> 02:05:45.020
 centers industrial type uses and and as I said before the typical zoning districts are

02:05:45.020 --> 02:05:50.140
 the general office and light industrial those are associated with business innovation currently

02:05:50.140 --> 02:05:58.740
 within the city there is 4,700 acres dedicated or within that business innovation designation

02:05:58.740 --> 02:06:05.220
 and of that 4,700 about 2,000 acres is either undeveloped or developed with an agricultural

02:06:05.220 --> 02:06:11.300
 use so with this proposal staff does feel like there is adequate capacity of business

02:06:11.300 --> 02:06:19.780
 innovation and it would not impact the city's ability to attract employment type uses it's

02:06:19.780 --> 02:06:24.060
 informative to look at the historical context when the comp plan amendment to see how we

02:06:24.060 --> 02:06:30.260
 got where we are so we're going to go back to 1964 this is an aerial map from 1964 and

02:06:30.260 --> 02:06:34.760
 the subject property has a blue star on it and as you can see it looked really far out

02:06:34.760 --> 02:06:40.260
 of town it was it was pretty rural surrounding the subject property it was it was about two

02:06:40.260 --> 02:06:46.300
 miles as the crow flies from square a big defining feature and I'll point it out here

02:06:46.300 --> 02:06:52.460
 was a power plan and a water treatment facility so that was that was out kind of on the outskirts

02:06:52.460 --> 02:07:03.900
 of town when we jump ahead to a 1972 aerial in the 1974 to 1994 comprehensive plan we

02:07:03.900 --> 02:07:07.820
 still see that that power plan and water treatment plan is a pretty defining feature both in

02:07:07.820 --> 02:07:12.920
 the comprehensive plan and on the map and that really informed that this was intended

02:07:12.920 --> 02:07:20.840
 for kind of industrial type uses to to sort of be consistent with that that that standard

02:07:20.840 --> 02:07:28.780
 that had been set and now we'll go forward to the 1999 denton plan that brought in some

02:07:28.780 --> 02:07:36.820
 some differences in the area it really took into account the mall that was was is along

02:07:36.820 --> 02:07:43.820
 I-35 and loop 288 and that that growing commercial center there that was emanating out from from

02:07:43.820 --> 02:07:50.380
 the highway corridor so it brought in regional mixed use and that's that dark purple area

02:07:50.380 --> 02:07:55.860
 the subject property was still defined by employment center that code still looked at

02:07:55.860 --> 02:08:01.260
 that as sort of the industrial and employment type uses so that really still did define

02:08:01.260 --> 02:08:09.060
 that area and and even though that the regional commercial and mixed use was was coming into

02:08:09.060 --> 02:08:17.480
 play and now we go to the dent plan 2030 and that that adoption in 2015 so the future land

02:08:17.480 --> 02:08:22.460
 use map does show this as the business innovation and you can see that that light purple is

02:08:22.460 --> 02:08:27.060
 sort of surrounding the subject property all along Shady Oaks you've got that regional

02:08:27.060 --> 02:08:33.660
 mixed use to the south this future land use back was based upon community input that the

02:08:33.660 --> 02:08:39.340
 intent to grow compactly they also looked at existing land used existing zoning and

02:08:39.340 --> 02:08:45.860
 context evaluation with aerial maps so they took all of these inputs created a preferred

02:08:45.860 --> 02:08:51.340
 growth concept and then created the future land use map based upon that preferred growth

02:08:51.340 --> 02:08:57.340
 concept and you can see kind of where those inputs came from you've got the zoning map

02:08:57.340 --> 02:09:02.740
 here at the bottom of the page that shows what that zoning was in the surrounding area

02:09:02.740 --> 02:09:07.300
 and it really does sort of track with that business innovation it had that ECI and ECC

02:09:07.300 --> 02:09:13.000
 which were our employment districts under the the 2002 code so it really does inform

02:09:13.000 --> 02:09:23.540
 the evolution of this area here's some photographs of Shady Oaks it is a four lane divided roadway

02:09:23.540 --> 02:09:28.700
 there's not a lot of development on it as of now and then you can kind of see how the

02:09:28.700 --> 02:09:35.300
 development in this part of loop 288 is filling in we've got the county building coming into

02:09:35.300 --> 02:09:41.180
 focus across loop 288 from the subject site and then here is sort of standing in front

02:09:41.180 --> 02:09:46.740
 of that building and looking toward the north and the landscaping for the other county buildings

02:09:46.740 --> 02:09:52.820
 there's also a little office complex kitty corner from the subject site so there is office

02:09:52.820 --> 02:09:59.000
 development and other commercial developments in the vicinity so they are proposing to modify

02:09:59.000 --> 02:10:04.540
 that future land use map to regional mixed use this future land use designation is intended

02:10:04.540 --> 02:10:09.700
 to really promote moderate and high density residential and commercial and office and

02:10:09.700 --> 02:10:16.100
 entertainment uses they kind of nets out that industrial piece but it does have that employment

02:10:16.100 --> 02:10:23.840
 component and it is typically found along highway corridors and aerial or I'm sorry

02:10:23.840 --> 02:10:28.300
 arterials and the typical zoning districts that we see with regional mixed use would

02:10:28.300 --> 02:10:35.620
 be mixed use regional as well as highway corridor things that we see on I-35 and our larger

02:10:35.620 --> 02:10:40.900
 roadways the general criteria for approval is in sub chapter two of the debt and development

02:10:40.900 --> 02:10:47.300
 code and we'll just go over one section of that there's there's a full discussion of

02:10:47.300 --> 02:10:51.940
 all of the criteria in your backup but we'll just go over one particular point and that

02:10:51.940 --> 02:10:57.300
 is the overall goals of the comprehensive plan when analyzing the applicant's proposal

02:10:57.300 --> 02:11:01.540
 we looked at those land use goals we wanted to see if it met if it was consistent with

02:11:01.540 --> 02:11:09.020
 those and and and three in particular so first grow compactly this segment of loop 288 is

02:11:09.020 --> 02:11:15.860
 that regional corridor that we that connects I-35 to US 380 so it's a pretty important

02:11:15.860 --> 02:11:20.580
 road within the city and it has developed and you can kind of see that the evolution

02:11:20.580 --> 02:11:26.700
 of that road starting with the development along I-35 and then slowly tracking and transitioning

02:11:26.700 --> 02:11:32.300
 north that it's developed with those commercial uses with a mix of retail restaurant office

02:11:32.300 --> 02:11:37.740
 and high-density residential this request was supports that trend and it would provide

02:11:37.740 --> 02:11:43.900
 a basis for zoning just decisions that would encourage not only infill development but

02:11:43.900 --> 02:11:49.940
 in infill development in one of our important commercial corridors with a variety of commercial

02:11:49.940 --> 02:11:55.140
 and residential uses the second goal we looked at was to grow our assets it's an important

02:11:55.140 --> 02:11:59.180
 corridor as I said and so we want to make sure that we support that and this request

02:11:59.180 --> 02:12:03.580
 would support that and further strengthen the commercial character of loop 288 and then

02:12:03.580 --> 02:12:09.660
 finally grow with balance regional mixed use does provide support those zoning districts

02:12:09.660 --> 02:12:15.740
 and in particular that mixed use regional that is that that permits a wide variety of

02:12:15.740 --> 02:12:21.940
 uses so it would allow any zoning decision or any zoning on property to provide flexibility

02:12:21.940 --> 02:12:29.140
 for a property owner and development to respond to changing conditions and economic trends

02:12:29.140 --> 02:12:34.100
 there's also specific criteria for approval we won't go over all of them but we will touch

02:12:34.100 --> 02:12:41.460
 on a few of those so first of all how have events trends or facts changed in on the ground

02:12:41.460 --> 02:12:46.940
 in policy and in the character of the area since that comprehensive plan was adopted

02:12:46.940 --> 02:12:51.860
 so first I want to look at mobility changes I know I talk about Mayhill Road a lot but

02:12:51.860 --> 02:12:56.700
 it is it is a it's a pretty important road and that it connects Denton to a lot of other

02:12:56.700 --> 02:13:02.540
 to our Denton County communities to the south and then on to DFW airport and points beyond

02:13:02.540 --> 02:13:08.220
 so it's a really important roadway for regional mobility and that is there are piece of it

02:13:08.220 --> 02:13:14.380
 pieces of it that are finished there and it's it's it's coming online and it will continue

02:13:14.380 --> 02:13:18.900
 to strengthen the regional mobility in that area and there's also expanded government

02:13:18.900 --> 02:13:23.820
 offices the the county offices that I pointed out and took a picture of those have really

02:13:23.820 --> 02:13:28.780
 expanded in the last five years and and kind of come become a sort of hub for for their

02:13:28.780 --> 02:13:37.820
 operations as I said before prior to the 2015 comprehensive plan adoption this area was

02:13:37.820 --> 02:13:43.500
 zoned for more industrial and employment type uses and that really did inform that comprehensive

02:13:43.500 --> 02:13:48.740
 plan and has set the stage for that future land use designation and and now we're looking

02:13:48.740 --> 02:13:54.380
 at you know with with the the surrounding development pattern maybe maybe that that

02:13:54.380 --> 02:14:00.620
 isn't the correct zoning and the correct development pattern we want to see because the the current

02:14:00.620 --> 02:14:05.580
 trend really is to move away from that light industrial employment or industrial employment

02:14:05.580 --> 02:14:10.220
 in the area more to that commercial development and that higher density housing to support

02:14:10.220 --> 02:14:17.340
 the commercial development additional reviews standards we want to make sure any any change

02:14:17.340 --> 02:14:22.740
 to the future land map is is a provides a benefit to the city and in this case it would

02:14:22.740 --> 02:14:27.820
 encourage that additional mixed use development to expand that that development near that

02:14:27.820 --> 02:14:31.780
 government center in the commercial district we want to make sure it's compatible with

02:14:31.780 --> 02:14:39.420
 the land use goals and avoid the isolated isolated uses the permitted uses in the associated

02:14:39.420 --> 02:14:44.980
 zoning districts with the proposed future land use designation is consistent with the

02:14:44.980 --> 02:14:50.060
 land use goals and consistent with existing development we want to make sure it doesn't

02:14:50.060 --> 02:14:55.420
 significantly alter acceptable land use patterns existing land use patterns once again we don't

02:14:55.420 --> 02:14:59.860
 anticipate that this would result in undesirable land use patterns where there won't be any

02:14:59.860 --> 02:15:05.940
 jarring transitions it's it's pretty consistent in both use and scale and then we want to

02:15:05.940 --> 02:15:10.540
 make sure that we don't create any adverse impacts on public services and facilities

02:15:10.540 --> 02:15:16.140
 you know this is an area where there's been a lot of investment and and thought put into

02:15:16.140 --> 02:15:22.180
 mobility and so this is this is kind of an infill area that that is currently served

02:15:22.180 --> 02:15:29.500
 and would not be adversely impact impacted by the change additionally we want to make

02:15:29.500 --> 02:15:34.340
 sure that the development pattern contained in the existing plan does not provide adequate

02:15:34.340 --> 02:15:39.240
 and appropriate optional sites for the use or change being proposed in the amendment

02:15:39.240 --> 02:15:45.020
 so when we looked at this we looked at where we have regional mixed use in the city and

02:15:45.020 --> 02:15:51.360
 it really centers on three areas we've got razor ranch which is a retail restaurant and

02:15:51.360 --> 02:15:57.460
 high density residential area also has entertainment uses also didn't enterprise airport that's

02:15:57.460 --> 02:16:02.140
 a little different that's kind of the transportation hub so it's kind of it's sort of sort of

02:16:02.140 --> 02:16:11.440
 a different a different end result or a different type of use or development but but the end

02:16:11.440 --> 02:16:16.780
 result is it is regional type development and then finally loop 288 this is this is

02:16:16.780 --> 02:16:22.660
 our legacy commercial center this is where golden triangle mall started at all in the

02:16:22.660 --> 02:16:29.220
 80s and then the retail has really moved toward the north and is really filled in but but

02:16:29.220 --> 02:16:38.220
 there are now limited spots where you could kind of master plan a mixed use commercial

02:16:38.220 --> 02:16:46.420
 development that has frontage along 288 loop 288 with that that access and that visibility

02:16:46.420 --> 02:16:51.240
 and that site decision conditions would make development under the current plan designation

02:16:51.240 --> 02:16:57.180
 inappropriate while while we want to make sure that we are protective of our employment

02:16:57.180 --> 02:17:03.100
 centers throughout the city we feel like there is adequate land dedicated to that based upon

02:17:03.100 --> 02:17:11.340
 our GIS analysis and that in this instance folding in those residential uses and going

02:17:11.340 --> 02:17:17.580
 to more to more commercial standard is is would be necessary to support the existing

02:17:17.580 --> 02:17:23.000
 and future commercial and employment development within the city and then areas adjacent to

02:17:23.000 --> 02:17:30.320
 loop 288 are really more suited to those commercial uses we did send out public notification we

02:17:30.320 --> 02:17:36.100
 haven't received any responses in opposition or in favor and so based upon the criteria

02:17:36.100 --> 02:17:41.700
 for approval staff recommends approval of the request and I will be happy to answer

02:17:41.700 --> 02:17:49.340
 any questions and I do believe the applicant is also on the line as well that is great

02:17:49.340 --> 02:17:55.180
 Julie I appreciate the presentation Commissioner Beck thank you chair Julie can you go back

02:17:55.180 --> 02:18:10.220
 to slide 73 and 74 the alternative review for geo and light industrial you bet yeah

02:18:10.220 --> 02:18:17.940
 that larger one would be better actually yeah so for that region it's it's I'm concerned

02:18:17.940 --> 02:18:27.260
 I mean I you covered it but I'm concerned about the the sort of induction of sprawl

02:18:27.260 --> 02:18:33.220
 of our sort of office complex light industrial business innovation areas can you point out

02:18:33.220 --> 02:18:40.980
 where other than that purple region we're talking about where we might have light industrial

02:18:40.980 --> 02:18:47.660
 general office in in the region I don't want to push all those to the outskirts of town

02:18:47.660 --> 02:18:53.940
 because that's another form of sprawl so where would we develop sort of centrally in a compact

02:18:53.940 --> 02:19:01.700
 way those same uses that we're proposing to change in a nearby facility in a nearby region

02:19:01.700 --> 02:19:07.540
 you bet I can I can absolutely answer that so we have a little piece here and it does

02:19:07.540 --> 02:19:13.540
 have that access to mayhill so and that kind of within the city we also have a piece here

02:19:13.540 --> 02:19:22.400
 off of 380 we have and then we have quite a bit on this northern portion and you know

02:19:22.400 --> 02:19:27.260
 when I when I think of business innovation it really kind of my mind goes to something

02:19:27.260 --> 02:19:34.300
 like something like a distribution type development and so you know you are going to see that

02:19:34.300 --> 02:19:40.020
 centered more on I-35 because you really do have that easy in and out for large truck

02:19:40.020 --> 02:19:46.980
 traffic and so so you know especially this piece on the north side of town business innovation

02:19:46.980 --> 02:19:53.380
 is a great that's a great spot for it because business innovation can fold in that that

02:19:53.380 --> 02:20:00.380
 that distribution that light manufacturing maybe some medium manufacturing provide optimal

02:20:00.380 --> 02:20:10.060
 access to to I-35 for or distribution and and logistics type uses it also provides points

02:20:10.060 --> 02:20:14.980
 to the west when you consider it's it's right there off of three days 380 we also have a

02:20:14.980 --> 02:20:21.220
 few parts of business innovation here on the west side of town and then we have a little

02:20:21.220 --> 02:20:29.660
 bit here on 377 so you can kind of see it does sort of hug some of our our our areas

02:20:29.660 --> 02:20:33.540
 where it's kind of easy to get in and out of the city probably because you want to make

02:20:33.540 --> 02:20:38.980
 sure that those do you have adequate capacity for large truck traffic we want to make sure

02:20:38.980 --> 02:20:44.660
 that we we think about those edges with business innovation and particularly adjacent to residential

02:20:44.660 --> 02:20:50.820
 so that we always think about that when when we're talking about when you get to the fine

02:20:50.820 --> 02:20:56.100
 grain of zoning so you know we want to make sure that the business innovation is appropriate

02:20:56.100 --> 02:21:03.280
 and not only in transportation but in in land use in development scale so I guess my concern

02:21:03.280 --> 02:21:08.620
 is the the areas you pointed out again were on the sort of edges the periphery of town

02:21:08.620 --> 02:21:15.780
 and in terms of maintaining a sort of compactness and an opportunity for sort of a mixed environment

02:21:15.780 --> 02:21:20.980
 where you know you have transitions from residential to commercial to light industrial and they

02:21:20.980 --> 02:21:28.540
 and you have a nice sort of mix that prevents sprawl to the outskirts I understand the the

02:21:28.540 --> 02:21:34.820
 rationale for for getting on the 35 corridors but if you wanted a 2020 light industrial

02:21:34.820 --> 02:21:43.300
 use which isn't going to be maybe necessarily a you know a large you know Kubota factory

02:21:43.300 --> 02:21:50.820
 or something like that but might be more of a high tech establishment that would be maybe

02:21:50.820 --> 02:21:57.180
 more ideal for being near government offices near downtown near the commercial district

02:21:57.180 --> 02:22:01.100
 that would be adjacent to it if we maintain that and the other thing that concerns me

02:22:01.100 --> 02:22:08.980
 is those light industrials will be have less of a traffic impact on shady oaks whereas

02:22:08.980 --> 02:22:14.020
 if you have a bunch of small facilities with lots of traffic in and out all the time for

02:22:14.020 --> 02:22:21.060
 commercial use you'll have a lot higher impact and the TIA will be much more important right

02:22:21.060 --> 02:22:28.540
 there and and then further sort of peripherally on the light industrial especially on the

02:22:28.540 --> 02:22:32.540
 south part of that property is going to have less of an environmental impact unless you

02:22:32.540 --> 02:22:38.420
 fill up the entire parcel than a bunch of small businesses and residential and their

02:22:38.420 --> 02:22:45.100
 impact on concrete so I think that sort of the the density of what we're proposing going

02:22:45.100 --> 02:22:51.820
 to is is you know not ideal for traffic not ideal for the environment and and precludes

02:22:51.820 --> 02:22:58.980
 anything but small retail extending up into that corridor so we just won't have an option

02:22:58.980 --> 02:23:05.420
 we'll have to go 380 we'll have to go 35 there won't be any opportunity for the kinds

02:23:05.420 --> 02:23:09.540
 of businesses that were sort of proposed just a few years ago to go into that region so

02:23:09.540 --> 02:23:16.860
 I'm I'm concerned about these changes and I guess those are those are my comments thank

02:23:16.860 --> 02:23:28.060
 you Julie thank you Mr back anyone else have questions for staff and I think she said the

02:23:28.060 --> 02:23:37.100
 applicant was here as well if there's questions for the applicant again we don't have anyone

02:23:37.100 --> 02:23:43.340
 calling in on this item or registering any opposition or support formally so I will close

02:23:43.340 --> 02:23:50.940
 the public hearing and I will turn back to the virtual dais for questions comments motion

02:23:50.940 --> 02:23:56.900
 and discussion commissioner Alice thank you chair I guess I do have a question for Julie

02:23:56.900 --> 02:24:02.740
 unless she's addressing this perhaps with the next item but I know when when this item

02:24:02.740 --> 02:24:11.220
 came before us before it had to do with traffic and possible future signal lights and whatnot

02:24:11.220 --> 02:24:16.820
 are you addressing that on this item or perhaps you have the next I've got that in my next

02:24:16.820 --> 02:24:20.300
 presentation but if you like if that if that is something we want to talk about with this

02:24:20.300 --> 02:24:24.780
 I can certainly I can certainly fast forward to those slides and we can start chatting

02:24:24.780 --> 02:24:31.680
 about it if you like I can I don't want to speak for the rest of the commission but that

02:24:31.680 --> 02:24:37.620
 would be fine with me if it would help inform your vote commissioner Alice I think it'd

02:24:37.620 --> 02:24:43.180
 be a good idea to go ahead and and look into that all right well let me get that pulled

02:24:43.180 --> 02:24:55.560
 up and we'll kind of talk through that let me get to the most all right so here we go

02:24:55.560 --> 02:25:12.940
 so I'm I apologize I'm having some technical difficulties with the presentation almost

02:25:12.940 --> 02:25:28.340
 there okay here we go so yes we did talk about this in March and it did it did we did have

02:25:28.340 --> 02:25:32.180
 a discussion about traffic and wanted a little more information about traffic associated

02:25:32.180 --> 02:25:36.780
 with the request so the applicant went back and did a little analysis I did a little research

02:25:36.780 --> 02:25:44.540
 and then also talked with engineering so the first of all I want to talk about loop 288

02:25:44.540 --> 02:25:50.620
 when I talk with engineering a six-lane arterial road like loop 288 can accommodate about 80

02:25:50.620 --> 02:25:56.820
 to 90,000 vehicles per day that's what they're designed to accommodate I also found the cog

02:25:56.820 --> 02:26:01.460
 traffic counts for the subject property or for I'm sorry an area just south of the subject

02:26:01.460 --> 02:26:09.540
 property it's where this yellow star is the 2018 traffic counts they were they were taken

02:26:09.540 --> 02:26:14.340
 on a Wednesday and it's for 24 hours there were twenty four thousand five hundred and

02:26:14.340 --> 02:26:19.300
 forty five northbound trips and there were twenty three thousand four hundred and fifty

02:26:19.300 --> 02:26:27.500
 southbound trips of those over about ninety five percent of those trips were motorcycles

02:26:27.500 --> 02:26:33.780
 cars and pickup trucks so essentially passenger vehicles so when you look at that to me that

02:26:33.780 --> 02:26:39.140
 data tells me that this really is a commercial corridor and that an introduction of something

02:26:39.140 --> 02:26:46.260
 like an industrial use could impact the character of that street commissioner Ellis I know you

02:26:46.260 --> 02:26:51.900
 asked about signals in the area the subject proper or the the the corner of the subject

02:26:51.900 --> 02:26:58.700
 property shady oaks and loop 288 there is a signal there that shady oaks turns into

02:26:58.700 --> 02:27:06.300
 morse when you go to the east and it it is slated for improvements that will increase

02:27:06.300 --> 02:27:11.440
 the size of the road to three lanes as you get closer to mayhill I believe it's four

02:27:11.440 --> 02:27:16.660
 lanes here it'll transition to three lanes so that that's those improvements are slated

02:27:16.660 --> 02:27:21.140
 at some point in the future it is on the mobility plan and the city actually has some right

02:27:21.140 --> 02:27:29.500
 of way for for for this road brinker to extend north so there's a lot of connectivity in

02:27:29.500 --> 02:27:36.340
 this area and there's a lot of arterial connectivity and then the applicant also provided a couple

02:27:36.340 --> 02:27:45.140
 of scenarios for us to look at so so for their proposed rezoning they're one thousand multifamily

02:27:45.140 --> 02:27:52.420
 dwellings about 250,000 square feet of shopping center and 150,000 square feet of office according

02:27:52.420 --> 02:27:58.200
 to their analysis would generate about 18,000 588 trips for a 24-hour period I think that

02:27:58.200 --> 02:28:01.900
 changed slightly from their original analysis but I think the first one was a little closer

02:28:01.900 --> 02:28:07.580
 to 19,000 but but but that's what they're estimated is now because this would be a mixed

02:28:07.580 --> 02:28:13.560
 use development it would create something called internal capture so say you drive to

02:28:13.560 --> 02:28:20.280
 your office that's in a mixed use development and at lunch you go shopping on site or you

02:28:20.280 --> 02:28:26.100
 get a sandwich you don't leave the site so you don't impact the surrounding roadway network

02:28:26.100 --> 02:28:31.560
 so they're they're they anticipated internal capture for that would reduce those trips

02:28:31.560 --> 02:28:39.020
 to about 9,270 on site there would also be large trucks because there are deliveries that

02:28:39.020 --> 02:28:44.500
 would have to be made so the estimate is about 30 large trucks would be would visit that

02:28:44.500 --> 02:28:51.460
 site on a daily basis so that would be the proposal under the current zoning they would

02:28:51.460 --> 02:28:56.340
 they could develop 800,000 square feet of industrial space with 400,000 square feet

02:28:56.340 --> 02:29:02.380
 of offices just as sort of a top line concept that would generate about 6,500 trips per

02:29:02.380 --> 02:29:07.340
 day because this would be more single use there would be minimal internal capture so

02:29:07.340 --> 02:29:12.820
 that really wouldn't play into it but it would increase the large truck traffic to about

02:29:12.820 --> 02:29:20.140
 450 per 24-hour period and that impacts loop 288 in two ways first of all it would reduce

02:29:20.140 --> 02:29:26.020
 roadway capacity just by their sheer size I did I did a little little research on it

02:29:26.020 --> 02:29:33.460
 at a large truck is about 65 feet versus a 17 feet for a large SUV so they're about four

02:29:33.460 --> 02:29:38.940
 to one so it would reduce that roadway capacity just by their sheer size and additionally

02:29:38.940 --> 02:29:44.980
 just by adding that additional large truck traffic on loop 288 think about you know exiting

02:29:44.980 --> 02:29:49.340
 I-35 and then going up loop 288 it really would just kind of change that character of

02:29:49.340 --> 02:29:55.260
 that area to something that it is not what it is today due to the that that data that

02:29:55.260 --> 02:30:03.780
 cog has has has captured also transit you know something we didn't talk about in the

02:30:03.780 --> 02:30:10.420
 last meeting but there's a there's a DCTA route on the subject property there's a bus

02:30:10.420 --> 02:30:17.140
 stop right there on loop 288 and that route four connects directly to the a train so once

02:30:17.140 --> 02:30:22.660
 this property develops you know a resident on the property or an office worker could

02:30:22.660 --> 02:30:28.940
 could take the bus and the trains all the way to DFW airport or downtown Dallas without

02:30:28.940 --> 02:30:33.940
 ever getting on a roadway so you know the traffic is just one thing but we want to think

02:30:33.940 --> 02:30:39.700
 about all of those modes of transportation and then a full two TIA would be required

02:30:39.700 --> 02:30:43.540
 for the development of the site however and they have been on that scoping with engineering

02:30:43.540 --> 02:30:50.700
 but per engineering with the with that existing capacity that loop 288 has and the proposed

02:30:50.700 --> 02:31:00.340
 trips it there's the current arterial network can accommodate it and that's kind of the

02:31:00.340 --> 02:31:04.540
 end of of the traffic discussion.

02:31:04.540 --> 02:31:13.580
 Kushalis are you good you saw the floor I want to make sure yeah thanks just a quick

02:31:13.580 --> 02:31:19.580
 follow-up I think I saw in that slide Julie there is no signal planned for Katrina correct

02:31:19.580 --> 02:31:24.340
 correct so I did talk with engineering and right now that intersection doesn't meet the

02:31:24.340 --> 02:31:29.780
 warrants for a signal you know it could in the future but right now there's no plan for

02:31:29.780 --> 02:31:34.980
 it being it just be nice for for people in those new county offices to be able to access

02:31:34.980 --> 02:31:42.300
 this with ease instead of getting in the car and and heading over but okay walk right well

02:31:42.300 --> 02:31:49.460
 yeah but it would help if there was a light on that end of their property as well so okay

02:31:49.460 --> 02:31:57.260
 thanks for the info Julie you bet there's your back Julie can you pull up the traffic

02:31:57.260 --> 02:32:11.540
 analysis study again please yeah there you go so even on a 4 to 1 analysis you're looking

02:32:11.540 --> 02:32:18.020
 at 1600 plus 6500 you know you're you're looking at at apples to apples there I mean that's

02:32:18.020 --> 02:32:26.420
 roughly 9000 for both you know in a best case scenario for the proposed zoning and a worst

02:32:26.420 --> 02:32:34.460
 case scenario for the current zoning so you know I'm not sure that that you're you're

02:32:34.460 --> 02:32:39.460
 really looking at the kind of changes other than the the makeup of the I agree the makeup

02:32:39.460 --> 02:32:44.780
 of the vehicles could change but again it's if you have a light industrial of a 2020 variety

02:32:44.780 --> 02:32:50.820
 as opposed to a heavy industrial heavy truck use you're not going to have the the level

02:32:50.820 --> 02:33:00.020
 of large trucks of 450 that could potentially be on that property so I'm not sure I guess

02:33:00.020 --> 02:33:05.700
 I well while I respect the numbers that I'm seeing there I'm not sure that that it's it's

02:33:05.700 --> 02:33:23.460
 really as disparate as is as we're being as perhaps as being said so thank you Julie sure

02:33:23.460 --> 02:33:27.780
 the public hearing is closed the chair would entertain a motion at this point there's no

02:33:27.780 --> 02:33:37.940
 other questions Chris Ellis I move approval we have a first for approval Christian Smith

02:33:37.940 --> 02:33:44.460
 we have a first and a second for approval is there any discussion on this item seeing

02:33:44.460 --> 02:33:54.740
 none I'll call for a vote be a roll call Christian Anderson hi Christian Ellis hi Christian Beck

02:33:54.740 --> 02:34:09.260
 hey Christian Cole hi Christian Pernetta hi Christian Smith all right chairs and I vote

02:34:09.260 --> 02:34:15.860
 carries our motion carries six one the next item of business as we've already alluded

02:34:15.860 --> 02:34:23.540
 to is item 3d z20 - 0002 a and Julie Wyatt does have the presentation for this I will

02:34:23.540 --> 02:34:37.740
 open the public hearing and invite Julie to present all right so all right so this request

02:34:37.740 --> 02:34:48.620
 before you is z20 0002 a and this is the zoning case for the canopy trails development so

02:34:48.620 --> 02:34:53.580
 the request is to rezone the subject property from general office and light industrial to

02:34:53.580 --> 02:34:59.700
 mixed use regional and as you know this is being considered concurrently with the comprehensive

02:34:59.700 --> 02:35:05.660
 plan amendment and it covers the same three tracks we'll compare the current zoning map

02:35:05.660 --> 02:35:11.060
 to the proposed zoning map that currently it has that li the split zoning of li and

02:35:11.060 --> 02:35:18.860
 geo they would like to rezone that to mr and you can see it is a it is a really a logical

02:35:18.860 --> 02:35:23.980
 continuation of that existing mr to the south of the general criteria for approval for zoning

02:35:23.980 --> 02:35:30.900
 applications is in sub chapter two of the dent in development code as well as the more

02:35:30.900 --> 02:35:36.980
 specific criteria and we'll go over the the relevant portions of that so first of all

02:35:36.980 --> 02:35:43.260
 dent plan 2030 the site is us designated as business innovation I think we've we've kind

02:35:43.260 --> 02:35:49.180
 of gone over that and that it's staff's analysis that that really should go toward the more

02:35:49.180 --> 02:35:57.460
 regional mix the regional mixed use and then the those overall goals of the comprehensive

02:35:57.460 --> 02:36:04.300
 plan really apply to this as well and so I won't go over all of these again but just

02:36:04.300 --> 02:36:11.740
 that that that intent to grow to encourage the end fill development we have these these

02:36:11.740 --> 02:36:17.700
 transportation networks in this area we've got a lot of existing development that can

02:36:17.700 --> 02:36:22.300
 that that can support each other and so this is the kind of area we want to see development

02:36:22.300 --> 02:36:31.500
 that it does it does provide a benefit to that city to our city one criteria for approval

02:36:31.500 --> 02:36:37.060
 minimizes adverse impacts on surrounding property and the permitted uses in mr district are

02:36:37.060 --> 02:36:43.180
 consistent with the surrounding existing development in both youth and use and scale we see that

02:36:43.180 --> 02:36:49.340
 the government office uses we see a lot of retail uses we've got multifamily additional

02:36:49.340 --> 02:36:55.540
 multifamily coming in we also have public facilities so those two those typical uses

02:36:55.540 --> 02:37:01.900
 found on loop 288 are are consistent with the types of uses that are found in mr district

02:37:01.900 --> 02:37:10.380
 and they do complement each other is the proposal consistent with the purpose statement of mr

02:37:10.380 --> 02:37:17.380
 that the the 2019 code has purpose statements for our zoning districts in that and I'm I'm

02:37:17.380 --> 02:37:21.420
 really grateful for those because it really does provide guidance and and the purpose

02:37:21.420 --> 02:37:25.260
 statement for the mr district is that it's intended to provide a walkable urban center

02:37:25.260 --> 02:37:30.360
 to augment the regional draw and image of denton development may include national retailers

02:37:30.360 --> 02:37:35.340
 employment restaurants entertainment video venues and housing at the highest levels of

02:37:35.340 --> 02:37:41.300
 scale and intensity in within the city the mr district may be established in areas with

02:37:41.300 --> 02:37:45.900
 the greatest regional access and is sensitive to the adjacent built in natural context and

02:37:45.900 --> 02:37:53.060
 I feel like the proposal in this area is consistent with that purpose statement I think we've

02:37:53.060 --> 02:37:56.820
 gone over the transportation unless we want to talk about it again I'll sort of leave

02:37:56.820 --> 02:38:03.260
 that leave that we can talk traffic counts and then water wastewater is available to

02:38:03.260 --> 02:38:07.740
 the site of course tap and impact fees would be based upon the intensity of the development

02:38:07.740 --> 02:38:15.660
 right now they don't have that that that mix set so so that will be based upon their final

02:38:15.660 --> 02:38:22.880
 design public outreach was done we haven't heard any responses and staff recommends a

02:38:22.880 --> 02:38:26.740
 approval of the crest because it does meet criteria not only the general criteria but

02:38:26.740 --> 02:38:33.500
 also the approval for or the criteria for approval for zoning changes and I can answer

02:38:33.500 --> 02:38:39.100
 any questions and I also believe the applicant is available as well thank you very much Julie

02:38:39.100 --> 02:38:49.740
 for that presentation any questions for Julie on this item as I give the commissioners a

02:38:49.740 --> 02:38:53.380
 little bit of time to think through that I just want to note that there was no submission

02:38:53.380 --> 02:39:00.140
 of support or opposition to our email to the phone recording to the office or on the line

02:39:00.140 --> 02:39:06.220
 currently there's not been any public feedback on this item specifically the applicant is

02:39:06.220 --> 02:39:12.020
 on the line if there's any questions of the applicant but since there's no one here to

02:39:12.020 --> 02:39:18.220
 speak I will go ahead and close the public hearing and turn it to discussion motion questions

02:39:18.220 --> 02:39:24.780
 of the of the commission commissioner Smith make a motion to approve we have a first for

02:39:24.780 --> 02:39:33.100
 approval commissioner Anderson a second we have a first and a second for approval any

02:39:33.100 --> 02:39:43.100
 discussion on this item seeing none we'll call us to a vote via roll call commissioner

02:39:43.100 --> 02:39:57.980
 Anderson aye commissioner Ellis aye commissioner Beck aye commissioner Cole aye commissioner

02:39:57.980 --> 02:40:10.020
 Smith aye commissioner Pernetta aye the chair is also an aye motion carries six one congratulations

02:40:10.020 --> 02:40:15.860
 that moves us to the next item of business which is our plan and zoning project matrix

02:40:15.860 --> 02:40:21.620
 I will turn the floor over to Richard Kanoni for updates and then if there's any questions

02:40:21.620 --> 02:40:28.820
 of the commission I don't have any updates on the on the matrix chart itself I will just

02:40:28.820 --> 02:40:37.640
 update briefly city council last night approved the SUP for the speed of light tower the monopole

02:40:37.640 --> 02:40:44.020
 tower that we heard at our last meeting as well as the rezoning for the Stonehill center

02:40:44.020 --> 02:40:51.700
 so those were both approved last night I suspect we'll be having a lot more agenda items as

02:40:51.700 --> 02:40:59.940
 we continue to move forward the next month or two we had a very good submittal this week

02:40:59.940 --> 02:41:06.340
 if you recall we had some limitations on the type of applications that we were accepting

02:41:06.340 --> 02:41:17.220
 under the under the various orders we now are open to accept all applications for the

02:41:17.220 --> 02:41:22.940
 most part variant we're variances well that is the only one that we are not yet until

02:41:22.940 --> 02:41:29.620
 ZBA meets but for at least planning and zoning commission we are accepting all and in total

02:41:29.620 --> 02:41:36.100
 we have submittals every Tuesday from new submit new applications in recent submittals

02:41:36.100 --> 02:41:42.540
 we had 30 came in yesterday which which is a very good sign so it's one of the higher

02:41:42.540 --> 02:41:46.220
 numbers that we've had in in some time and so I think there's some folks that have been

02:41:46.220 --> 02:41:52.860
 waiting to submit initially and so it's a good thing that they still wanted to see their

02:41:52.860 --> 02:42:00.780
 projects move forward and so hopefully we'll be having a much more busier agenda not that

02:42:00.780 --> 02:42:04.860
 these aren't but I suspect we'll be seeing a lot more applications as we continue to

02:42:04.860 --> 02:42:10.740
 move forward the next couple meetings Richard those 30 were they plats for shot clock consideration

02:42:10.740 --> 02:42:16.940
 or they the gamut of zoning and and all else really the gamut from from site plan or zoning

02:42:16.940 --> 02:42:25.420
 compliance plans ESA's initial ESA assessments construction engineering plans platting mending

02:42:25.420 --> 02:42:32.540
 plats so it really ran the gamut Christian Smith thank you chair Richard two questions

02:42:32.540 --> 02:42:46.580
 one what's the latest on when we can we can reconvene the face-to-face that period is

02:42:46.580 --> 02:42:52.660
 that I'm not sure I know they're gonna have another meeting I think next week they've

02:42:52.660 --> 02:43:00.100
 talked at some in some limited aspects of opening City Hall but I I don't think there's

02:43:00.100 --> 02:43:06.780
 anything at least in the near future I suspect for June our meeting in June we will still

02:43:06.780 --> 02:43:14.820
 be meeting this way at least for now second question on can we it seems like both these

02:43:14.820 --> 02:43:22.020
 past two weeks we've had work sessions spilled over into that 630 hour can we is there any

02:43:22.020 --> 02:43:26.300
 way we can we can push we can we go ahead and start work session at 5 rather than 530

02:43:26.300 --> 02:43:29.740
 just because there's there are a lot of questions and I don't know if it's the technology and

02:43:29.740 --> 02:43:34.780
 that's why it's delayed but two times now we've been 645 I think even last week Andrew

02:43:34.780 --> 02:43:43.900
 just went right from work session into into full meeting so we pushed it up to 430 or

02:43:43.900 --> 02:43:48.300
 5 for any of these things I mean we mean we even lost an item tonight you're still pushing

02:43:48.300 --> 02:43:54.260
 645 before you got started so just a recommendation no yeah we I think what had happened was there

02:43:54.260 --> 02:43:59.660
 were a couple of those meetings where we had light agendas and we just kept it at that

02:43:59.660 --> 02:44:05.700
 530 start time but we'll we'll kind of go back look at the agenda kind of kind of project

02:44:05.700 --> 02:44:11.060
 how long depending on the items and then we'll go back to Kathy reaching out to make sure

02:44:11.060 --> 02:44:16.740
 people are available whether we start at 430 or 5 depending and I think as we start to

02:44:16.740 --> 02:44:22.140
 get back into the swing of things we'll start having even some more work session items so

02:44:22.140 --> 02:44:27.860
 we may even have some of those four o'clock starts in the very near future and I'm saying

02:44:27.860 --> 02:44:33.300
 not saying you know I'm begging for it for four o'clock or 430 but you know when we do

02:44:33.300 --> 02:44:36.980
 a lot of questions we can get the items you know let's just let's let's give ourselves

02:44:36.980 --> 02:44:44.340
 a time to work such whenever we can so public meeting can go as fast as possible absolutely

02:44:44.340 --> 02:44:49.820
 definitely did help consolidate in the presentation so I appreciate that we just kept it up and

02:44:49.820 --> 02:44:57.460
 was able to go through those pretty quick Kirshir Ellis did you have something I did

02:44:57.460 --> 02:45:04.180
 yeah sorry so Richard is there any way we can make sure that that the notifications

02:45:04.180 --> 02:45:09.740
 going out have it pretty specific of where people can get more information I just I felt

02:45:09.740 --> 02:45:15.180
 bad that we had a couple of callers and they were angry because they felt like they didn't

02:45:15.180 --> 02:45:20.480
 have any information and we asked them to for their opinion and and if it was on there

02:45:20.480 --> 02:45:26.780
 then maybe it's not on there clear enough of where they can access the information but

02:45:26.780 --> 02:45:31.620
 can we we work on that absolutely I think what we need to start doing and we've talked

02:45:31.620 --> 02:45:37.420
 about it is making sure well we've while we've tried to include a little bit more of a descriptive

02:45:37.420 --> 02:45:43.860
 write-up more so I think on the SGPs because we don't have that many of these residential

02:45:43.860 --> 02:45:50.380
 replats I think that's where it it just kind of got it what we saw what happened but really

02:45:50.380 --> 02:45:58.020
 making sure that we include a copy of that so people at least have an idea what it is

02:45:58.020 --> 02:46:03.780
 it's sometimes more convenient to just look at the piece of paper along with the notice

02:46:03.780 --> 02:46:09.220
 yeah that's true but yeah anything we're yeah so that they can get more app more information

02:46:09.220 --> 02:46:17.740
 and be less confused and less mad when they speak to us thanks any other things for staff

02:46:17.740 --> 02:46:26.300
 in the matrix all right well seeing none I will close this meeting at 827 thank you everyone

02:46:26.300 --> 02:46:28.200
 and see you in a couple of weeks.

02:46:28.200 --> 02:46:29.040
 - Thank you.