1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:03,160 Good evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Planning and Zoning 2 00:00:03,160 --> 00:00:08,660 Commission work session meeting for Wednesday July 8th 2020. Seeing that we 3 00:00:08,660 --> 00:00:16,060 have a quorum I'll call this meeting to order of 5-0-1. The first item of business on the 4 00:00:16,060 --> 00:00:19,640 agenda will be our work session reports. We have two this evening and if you'll 5 00:00:19,640 --> 00:00:25,680 note on the agenda there is an item 3-1-A which is closed meeting and that's 6 00:00:25,680 --> 00:00:31,200 in response if there's any requirement to have a closed meeting in the work 7 00:00:31,200 --> 00:00:35,120 session report on planning. So we don't necessarily need to go into that but it's 8 00:00:35,120 --> 00:00:40,120 reserved for space if we needed to go into a closed meeting. With that being 9 00:00:40,120 --> 00:00:44,760 said Richard if it's okay with you I think we can just jump into the work 10 00:00:44,760 --> 00:00:50,360 session report. Okay we'll have Brian John go ahead and pull up his presentation 11 00:00:50,360 --> 00:01:00,040 and present on the Mobility Plan traffic signals. This is item 2A PZ 20-145. 12 00:01:00,040 --> 00:01:06,680 Good afternoon members of the Planning and Zoning Commission my name is Brian 13 00:01:06,680 --> 00:01:10,160 John I'm the city traffic engineer. I've actually got two presentations I want to 14 00:01:10,160 --> 00:01:14,520 give tonight. The first one will be on the Mobility Plan and just give you a 15 00:01:14,520 --> 00:01:17,960 quick update of what's been done and where we're going and then the second 16 00:01:17,960 --> 00:01:21,760 will be on some traffic signal installation and removal requirements 17 00:01:21,760 --> 00:01:31,520 or criteria. So the Mobility Plan is being updated well hopefully the end of 18 00:01:31,520 --> 00:01:35,480 this year beginning of next year we'll have a new adopted Mobility Plan. Our 19 00:01:35,480 --> 00:01:38,880 purpose tonight is kind of to introduce the Mobility Plan for an overview of the 20 00:01:38,880 --> 00:01:44,120 milestones what we've done and the type and amount of work that's gone into this 21 00:01:44,120 --> 00:01:51,500 effort. For our purposes this Mobility Plan for the first time in the history 22 00:01:51,500 --> 00:01:55,600 of Denton we are combining three plans into one. The thoroughfare plan which 23 00:01:55,600 --> 00:01:59,600 most people are familiar with that's the roads and the different colored lines on 24 00:01:59,600 --> 00:02:03,520 the map and some are dashed there that are not constructed yet but we're also 25 00:02:03,520 --> 00:02:08,440 incorporating the bicycle plan and a new pedestrian plan. So we have a we had a 26 00:02:08,440 --> 00:02:12,960 current bicycle plan that was a separate document we're rolling that into this 27 00:02:12,960 --> 00:02:17,920 Mobility Plan update really trying to integrate all modes of transportation 28 00:02:17,920 --> 00:02:24,600 into a single document. The only mode that we are not truly where we're 29 00:02:24,600 --> 00:02:29,800 addressing but we're not regulating is the transit and DCTA does a fine job of 30 00:02:29,800 --> 00:02:33,280 that and we're working very closely with them as they go through their master 31 00:02:33,280 --> 00:02:40,320 plan update as well. So the thoroughfare plan that element determines where the 32 00:02:40,320 --> 00:02:45,240 roads are going to be determines basically how wide they want to be what 33 00:02:45,240 --> 00:02:50,120 features might or might not be on them. The real intent is to preserve the 34 00:02:50,120 --> 00:02:54,760 right-of-way for future roadways so as people as the developers plat the 35 00:02:54,760 --> 00:02:59,160 property the Mobility Plan this thoroughfare plan element allows us to 36 00:02:59,160 --> 00:03:03,480 identify right-of-way that's going to be needed for future roadway extensions and 37 00:03:03,480 --> 00:03:10,920 we get to reserve that in form of dedication. It also helps us design 38 00:03:10,920 --> 00:03:16,560 roadway cross sections and identify elements such as bicycle facilities 39 00:03:16,560 --> 00:03:23,680 pedestrian facilities, street buffers that kind of thing into our street 40 00:03:23,680 --> 00:03:30,200 sections. The bicycle plan is exactly that it's a it's the same animal for 41 00:03:30,200 --> 00:03:35,640 bicycles as the thoroughfare plan is for vehicles. We try and identify bicycle 42 00:03:35,640 --> 00:03:38,960 corridors and the different types of facilities and where they are 43 00:03:38,960 --> 00:03:45,760 appropriate on a primary arterial versus a residential street and we recommend 44 00:03:45,760 --> 00:03:51,760 design standards for these facilities as well. The pedestrian plan again this is a 45 00:03:51,760 --> 00:03:57,840 relatively new element we're trying to identify gaps in the existing sidewalk 46 00:03:57,840 --> 00:04:04,120 network we're trying to prioritize projects where we've got roadways with 47 00:04:04,120 --> 00:04:10,080 that were constructed without sidewalks and identify the greatest needs and 48 00:04:10,080 --> 00:04:16,680 identify a an implementation plan for the city. This is all three of these 49 00:04:16,680 --> 00:04:23,600 plans once they're adopted put the city in a better position to leverage funding 50 00:04:23,600 --> 00:04:29,840 through the COG or through TxDOT as projects come online. So why are we 51 00:04:29,840 --> 00:04:35,000 updating this now we like to update this this plan and these three plans every 52 00:04:35,000 --> 00:04:39,800 five years at the most because development patterns change population 53 00:04:39,800 --> 00:04:46,400 increases and and as we move into the future we want to be able to respond and 54 00:04:46,400 --> 00:04:55,160 react to those patterns and changes. Part of our initial process was to identify 55 00:04:55,160 --> 00:04:59,720 our stakeholders and we've got internal and external obviously all the 56 00:04:59,720 --> 00:05:04,520 departments in the city such as planning, DME, fire, police, engineering, 57 00:05:04,520 --> 00:05:08,920 sustainability those are all major players in the development of these 58 00:05:08,920 --> 00:05:15,400 three plans. Our external partners at the ISD, the universities, the transit agency, 59 00:05:15,400 --> 00:05:19,600 the county, and the state also all participated in development of these 60 00:05:19,600 --> 00:05:24,720 three plans. So here's just a quick snapshot of the schedule to date. We 61 00:05:24,720 --> 00:05:31,440 started in May and worked through most of 2019 the letter half of 2019 with our 62 00:05:31,440 --> 00:05:37,720 stakeholders we had four public meetings again we had a focus group with bicycles 63 00:05:37,720 --> 00:05:42,680 and starting in December we began to bring this forward to council in a in 64 00:05:42,680 --> 00:05:46,720 the work session format our initial idea was to have one we're gonna end up 65 00:05:46,720 --> 00:05:52,240 having probably up to eight we've had five so far we've got at least two more 66 00:05:52,240 --> 00:05:58,200 and possibly a third so it's it's it's a lot of material and we decided to break 67 00:05:58,200 --> 00:06:04,520 it into smaller bits unfortunately tonight you get all of it in one dose. 68 00:06:04,520 --> 00:06:09,500 Some existing conditions these are I'm gonna go through these very fast we 69 00:06:09,500 --> 00:06:15,760 found that our average travel time to work is 24 minutes we've got 131 lane 70 00:06:15,760 --> 00:06:20,440 miles of congested roads and 18 and expected to increase that congestion 71 00:06:20,440 --> 00:06:30,440 index is expected to almost double by 2040. We've got 65 fatalities between 2014 72 00:06:30,440 --> 00:06:37,160 and 2018 and as it would expected most of those are on our primary roadways. As 73 00:06:37,160 --> 00:06:43,120 far as our bicycle infrastructure we currently have 24 miles of trail you 74 00:06:43,120 --> 00:06:46,600 know 15.3 and you can read most of this I will share all this it's a lot of data 75 00:06:46,600 --> 00:06:53,260 to digest quickly but I'm going to focus on the safety and crash data the 131 76 00:06:53,260 --> 00:06:57,880 bicycle related crashes between 2014 and 2018 that's a significant number and 77 00:06:57,880 --> 00:07:05,800 that's one of our major impetuses on this this plan is to provide safer 78 00:07:05,800 --> 00:07:11,480 bicycle facilities as well as pedestrian facilities. Again this is the 79 00:07:11,480 --> 00:07:15,880 pedestrian element 3,000 and 3,000 people in Denton walk to work that's a 80 00:07:15,880 --> 00:07:19,680 surprising number we've got a lot of pedestrian activity and then I'm going 81 00:07:19,680 --> 00:07:24,560 to go to the safety and crash date 161 pedestrian crashes between 2014 and 2018 82 00:07:24,560 --> 00:07:32,120 and again we use the term crash now because the accident tends to infer that 83 00:07:32,120 --> 00:07:37,880 it's not preventable and we believe that that most are all of these crashes are 84 00:07:37,880 --> 00:07:42,680 preventable and that's again one of the goals of the mobility plan update is to 85 00:07:42,680 --> 00:07:47,560 identify areas where we can improve that safety for all modes. So some of our 86 00:07:47,560 --> 00:07:51,560 guiding principles again vision zero I'm not sure if you're familiar with this 87 00:07:51,560 --> 00:07:59,560 this is a worldwide it started in Europe and has moved into the United States 88 00:07:59,560 --> 00:08:06,880 basically vision zero road to zero vision zero Texas the idea is to design 89 00:08:06,880 --> 00:08:14,840 a roadway and bicycle pedestrian infrastructure that reduces or 90 00:08:14,840 --> 00:08:19,320 eliminates those crashes and those fatalities. Another guiding principle is 91 00:08:19,320 --> 00:08:23,520 that is the concept of complete streets and this is something that an 92 00:08:23,520 --> 00:08:29,400 organization called NACTO the National Association of Traffic Control officials 93 00:08:29,400 --> 00:08:36,920 has put out and this is a overarching vision of all roads need to serve all 94 00:08:36,920 --> 00:08:45,640 users so there is no roadway that should not are intended to should not be 95 00:08:45,640 --> 00:08:50,880 intended to serve bicycles and pedestrians we're trying to identify the 96 00:08:50,880 --> 00:08:56,680 users for each facility and provide an appropriate infrastructure for them. We 97 00:08:56,680 --> 00:09:01,960 had again those four public meetings the major points major feedback we received 98 00:09:01,960 --> 00:09:07,000 is we need to improve connectivity east west and north south we just we've got a 99 00:09:07,000 --> 00:09:12,280 lot of discontinuous roadways or offset roadways and it doesn't lend itself to 100 00:09:12,280 --> 00:09:19,360 comfortable travel and really getting across town. Again prioritize safety over 101 00:09:19,360 --> 00:09:23,800 congestion reduction this is again an overarching principle in the mobility 102 00:09:23,800 --> 00:09:28,920 plan update that we're going through right now. Bicycle pedestrian access 103 00:09:28,920 --> 00:09:33,440 during all project phases so we don't want to take something away just because 104 00:09:33,440 --> 00:09:37,920 we're rebuilding a roadway and wider sidewalks especially the downtown area 105 00:09:37,920 --> 00:09:44,640 or around the high pedestrian volume corridors. We had a meeting with the 106 00:09:44,640 --> 00:09:48,800 Commission's of the Committee on Persons with Disabilities and again this is their 107 00:09:48,800 --> 00:09:56,600 feedback. Sidewalks are our priority ADA requirements and then some specific 108 00:09:56,600 --> 00:10:01,680 Razor Ranch Convention Center just the total lack of sidewalks so these are we 109 00:10:01,680 --> 00:10:07,200 took all this feedback and went back and and programmed that into the update with 110 00:10:07,200 --> 00:10:15,360 the consultant. Similarly we had a bicycle plan focus group in September no 111 00:10:15,360 --> 00:10:21,280 surprise we need to significantly enhance our bicycle facilities our 112 00:10:21,280 --> 00:10:26,400 infrastructure is currently we rely a lot on on the share roads or shared lane 113 00:10:26,400 --> 00:10:35,940 the desire for separated or buffered or off-street facilities is very very much 114 00:10:35,940 --> 00:10:43,200 a popular requirement and we're we're incorporating those those desires into 115 00:10:43,200 --> 00:10:52,640 this mobility plan update. This just gives you an idea of the orange are it's 116 00:10:52,640 --> 00:10:57,920 this is kind of a comfort level offer for bicycle facilities and the orange is 117 00:10:57,920 --> 00:11:03,120 a discomfort so we've got on an off-street trail very very comfortable a 118 00:11:03,120 --> 00:11:08,520 lot of blue separated side path which is that wide 10 to 12 foot wide sidewalk 119 00:11:08,520 --> 00:11:12,400 parallel to our roadway again high comfort but when you get down into the 120 00:11:12,400 --> 00:11:17,000 bottom of that table with the share those the shared lane markings most of 121 00:11:17,000 --> 00:11:22,120 the riders are not comfortable using those facilities. We also did an online 122 00:11:22,120 --> 00:11:29,200 survey 384 survey responses primarily pushed out through social media and the 123 00:11:29,200 --> 00:11:35,680 website. The takeaways from that are it's just more options for transportation in 124 00:11:35,680 --> 00:11:40,800 general again focusing on that multimodal infrastructure design sidewalk 125 00:11:40,800 --> 00:11:47,340 bike and how do we get to transit and then also heard about some maintenance 126 00:11:47,340 --> 00:11:50,680 issues which is not really part of the mobility plan but it's good information 127 00:11:50,680 --> 00:11:55,840 that before we go and build a lot of new facility we need to make sure that the 128 00:11:55,840 --> 00:12:00,120 we maintain what we've got on the ground today and then again this addresses the 129 00:12:00,120 --> 00:12:05,120 gaps in the sidewalk and missing segments. So I'm going to talk a little 130 00:12:05,120 --> 00:12:09,520 bit about the the thoroughfare plan specifically and what is the thoroughfare 131 00:12:09,520 --> 00:12:14,760 plan we already talked a lot a lot of this the determines alignment to some 132 00:12:14,760 --> 00:12:21,720 degree we do have some some wiggle room as we move through implementation when 133 00:12:21,720 --> 00:12:26,680 we do the mobility plan we will identify what seems to be the logical path for 134 00:12:26,680 --> 00:12:31,040 roadway extensions or new roadways but as development actually occurs we'll do 135 00:12:31,040 --> 00:12:35,660 more of an engineering assessment and identify an exact corridor but again 136 00:12:35,660 --> 00:12:38,920 that right-of-way preservation is one of the most important elements or our 137 00:12:38,920 --> 00:12:46,160 functions of the thoroughfare plan and it positions us in the city a much 138 00:12:46,160 --> 00:12:53,040 better situation for external funding through the cog or through tech stock. So 139 00:12:53,040 --> 00:13:02,320 this is just to prove that in fact we are this whole process is identified in 140 00:13:02,320 --> 00:13:08,000 the local government code this is we have the right to develop these plans in 141 00:13:08,000 --> 00:13:13,580 the city limits and in the ETJ and preserve those corridors and identify 142 00:13:13,580 --> 00:13:18,840 that right-of-way dedication requirement. So this is the process that we went 143 00:13:18,840 --> 00:13:23,880 through we looked at the existing roadways and what the 2015 which is the 144 00:13:23,880 --> 00:13:27,800 last time we did an update what identified their ultimate width we 145 00:13:27,800 --> 00:13:31,400 identify some key connections and that's an important thing is we've got 146 00:13:31,400 --> 00:13:37,320 development happening that may not be contiguous who you have a roadway that's 147 00:13:37,320 --> 00:13:42,480 incomplete we need to make sure that we preserve that corridor so we can connect 148 00:13:42,480 --> 00:13:47,760 those two pieces of roadway. We looked at future roadways and established what we 149 00:13:47,760 --> 00:13:54,760 thought again was the best alignment and this last number four was really kind of 150 00:13:54,760 --> 00:14:01,320 the meat of some of the vehicular modeling. We developed a model and some 151 00:14:01,320 --> 00:14:07,200 there's a software program that allows us to identify basically how traffic 152 00:14:07,200 --> 00:14:13,200 will flow through and in and out of Denton and what our design year was 2045. 153 00:14:13,200 --> 00:14:17,760 So a little bit about roadway classifications the freeways we do not 154 00:14:17,760 --> 00:14:22,620 govern the freeways that's owned and operated by tech stop. So the bottom 155 00:14:22,620 --> 00:14:27,360 four categories principal arterial secondary arterial collector and local 156 00:14:27,360 --> 00:14:32,960 are really the purview of the city of Denton. So we've got right-of-way widths 157 00:14:32,960 --> 00:14:39,600 varying from 135 to 55 feet with capacity of 25,000 plus down to 5,000 so 158 00:14:39,600 --> 00:14:44,080 we identify each of these different categories of roadways so that we can 159 00:14:44,080 --> 00:14:49,200 identify the type and the size of roadway and the features that we want to 160 00:14:49,200 --> 00:14:55,760 incorporate into each corridor. So here's a little comparison of some existing 161 00:14:55,760 --> 00:14:59,800 design which is the top of the slide and the proposed design in this mobility 162 00:14:59,800 --> 00:15:05,600 plan update. We're recommending the removal of bikes on-street bike 163 00:15:05,600 --> 00:15:10,840 facilities for six-lane divided roadways. We just think that the volume and speed 164 00:15:10,840 --> 00:15:14,600 characteristics lend themselves much better to the side path which you can 165 00:15:14,600 --> 00:15:21,320 see the bottom slide and separating physically the cyclists and the 166 00:15:21,320 --> 00:15:26,720 motorists. Secondary arterials again you can see the existing design on the top 167 00:15:26,720 --> 00:15:30,300 and then we got a couple of different alternatives. One of the elements and one 168 00:15:30,300 --> 00:15:35,000 of the initiatives that we identified in this mobility plan update is it's to try 169 00:15:35,000 --> 00:15:40,640 and give ourselves flexibility so we've got some of these buffers and what 170 00:15:40,640 --> 00:15:45,040 we can incorporate the bike lane into the buffer maybe a wider sidewalk. It's 171 00:15:45,040 --> 00:15:49,880 kind of a flex zone so we know we need if this we're talking about a secondary 172 00:15:49,880 --> 00:15:54,480 arterial we need two lanes of vehicular travel in each direction and beyond that 173 00:15:54,480 --> 00:15:59,600 it's it's really dependent on context of the roadway so are we going through 174 00:15:59,600 --> 00:16:04,640 residential areas are we going through rural or an urban we want to have enough 175 00:16:04,640 --> 00:16:11,520 tools in our toolbox to address each of those different scenarios. The collectors 176 00:16:11,520 --> 00:16:17,220 are pretty much staying the same we've got two different options either a three 177 00:16:17,220 --> 00:16:21,880 lane section with the center left turn lane or two lane section with parking or 178 00:16:21,880 --> 00:16:26,280 bike lane again that flex zone allows us to do some different things in different 179 00:16:26,280 --> 00:16:33,840 contexts. So this is the travel demand modeling it really allows us to gauge 180 00:16:33,840 --> 00:16:40,520 the impact of future growth and we looked at a build-out scenario 2045 we 181 00:16:40,520 --> 00:16:46,240 took the land use plan and really tried to develop every developable parcel and 182 00:16:46,240 --> 00:16:53,000 we went through the process and identified what we thought would be 183 00:16:53,000 --> 00:16:59,320 generated from each of those tracks and it's really a four-step process so we 184 00:16:59,320 --> 00:17:04,240 identify the land use and that translates into population and employment 185 00:17:04,240 --> 00:17:13,160 and we generate trips based on that land use we looked at existing traffic 186 00:17:13,160 --> 00:17:19,840 patterns and the cogs regional travel demand model and we developed some trip 187 00:17:19,840 --> 00:17:26,800 distribution and mode choice assumptions and then we ran the software and we get 188 00:17:26,800 --> 00:17:31,920 a traffic what we call a traffic assignment which gives our projection 24 189 00:17:31,920 --> 00:17:39,360 hour volumes for each of the roadways that are incorporated into the model so 190 00:17:39,360 --> 00:17:45,880 we we took the cog model we added to it enhanced it made it our own and we've 191 00:17:45,880 --> 00:17:52,600 got a very detailed model now and a very robust model for the city of Denton. Some 192 00:17:52,600 --> 00:18:00,360 other elements that play into this overarching mobility plan update we're 193 00:18:00,360 --> 00:18:06,960 looking at some roadway closures this is a UNT looking at Avenue C closure how 194 00:18:06,960 --> 00:18:11,360 does that affect parallel facilities and do we have enough roadway capacity on 195 00:18:11,360 --> 00:18:16,400 those facilities to carry that expect the traffic load we also did a one-way 196 00:18:16,400 --> 00:18:20,880 two-way analysis it's actually going to council understand now the 28th of this 197 00:18:20,880 --> 00:18:26,580 month oak and hickory locust and elm currently one way what happens if we 198 00:18:26,580 --> 00:18:31,760 convert those to two-way and do we again do we have enough capacity does that 199 00:18:31,760 --> 00:18:36,240 existing pavement cross-section give us enough flexibility to do what we need to 200 00:18:36,240 --> 00:18:41,560 do and then the last one is again associated with a university TWU is 201 00:18:41,560 --> 00:18:46,840 interested in closing a portion of Bell Avenue and creating a basically a 202 00:18:46,840 --> 00:18:56,680 pedestrian mall a large crossing between Chapel and Texas and so what happens to 203 00:18:56,680 --> 00:19:02,760 Elm and locust and Carol and Riddell if that piece of Bell is closed and that 204 00:19:02,760 --> 00:19:07,720 all rolls into do we what happens if bells closed and we go to a two-way 205 00:19:07,720 --> 00:19:14,840 scenario so we're it's it becomes a very intricate modeling process a lot of ifs 206 00:19:14,840 --> 00:19:20,000 and if what happens and and we've done a lot of analysis and we'll be sharing the 207 00:19:20,000 --> 00:19:25,560 findings of that with Council on the 28th so this is the draft there for plan 208 00:19:25,560 --> 00:19:32,740 and I've got a slide in here a little bit later that offers a link to the 209 00:19:32,740 --> 00:19:39,600 Walter P Moore website that that basically houses the plan as it sits 210 00:19:39,600 --> 00:19:44,120 not adopted yet but it incorporates all the comments from council today and 211 00:19:44,120 --> 00:19:51,560 staffs analysis as well so when we presented this to council because it 212 00:19:51,560 --> 00:19:57,260 was such a large amount of information we divide we broke it into five sections 213 00:19:57,260 --> 00:20:04,680 and I want to walk through one of those with you just as an example of the 214 00:20:04,680 --> 00:20:09,080 process that we looked at and and how we presented the information and some of 215 00:20:09,080 --> 00:20:12,040 the recommendations that are incorporated into the mobility plan 216 00:20:12,040 --> 00:20:18,280 update so we're looking at the northern part so the 2015 plan is on your left 217 00:20:18,280 --> 00:20:23,600 and the 2020 is on your right just as a comparison what you'll notice on the 218 00:20:23,600 --> 00:20:30,880 2015 plan there was a lot of meandering roadways and a lot of smaller 219 00:20:30,880 --> 00:20:37,560 classification roadways in the 2020 plan we try to identify primarily the major 220 00:20:37,560 --> 00:20:43,240 corridors we wanted to identify more direct connections again goes back to 221 00:20:43,240 --> 00:20:49,080 that improved connectivity east west north south if you know you don't expect 222 00:20:49,080 --> 00:20:54,040 the road that you're on to end and be offset and so we went back and looked at 223 00:20:54,040 --> 00:21:00,440 what we could do to enhance that and here's a little bit better detailed 224 00:21:00,440 --> 00:21:07,480 again between the 2015 and 2020 and I want to go to the next one so these are 225 00:21:07,480 --> 00:21:13,240 some of the updates so Westgate Drive we're making some changes Thunderbird 226 00:21:13,240 --> 00:21:17,920 Drive new collector roadway and number three they're providing some 227 00:21:17,920 --> 00:21:25,680 connectivity that doesn't exist today each of these has some modification from 228 00:21:25,680 --> 00:21:30,240 the 2015 to the 2020 plan I don't need I don't want to get into details if if you 229 00:21:30,240 --> 00:21:35,040 want a more detailed presentation we can do exactly what we've done with council 230 00:21:35,040 --> 00:21:39,800 and bring it back and and really dig into the details but this just gives you 231 00:21:39,800 --> 00:21:44,720 an idea typically each of the five sections had about five to ten major 232 00:21:44,720 --> 00:21:50,000 changes that we discussed some are downgrades some are downsizing some are 233 00:21:50,000 --> 00:21:55,800 upsizing some are realignments but each of these is based on that travel demand 234 00:21:55,800 --> 00:22:02,000 model and the volumes that we expect for our 2040 scenario the next thing I want 235 00:22:02,000 --> 00:22:06,800 to talk about is a bicycle plan and again one of the overarching guiding 236 00:22:06,800 --> 00:22:13,160 principles that we have migrated to with this bicycle plan update is the FHWA 237 00:22:13,160 --> 00:22:21,640 bikeway selection guide and it really kind of identifies the the stress level 238 00:22:21,640 --> 00:22:28,720 where that that riders will feel on different kind of facilities and you can 239 00:22:28,720 --> 00:22:36,200 see that you know more than 50% of the riders pulled in this FHWA document are 240 00:22:36,200 --> 00:22:39,880 not comfortable with with bike lanes even on-street facilities they want 241 00:22:39,880 --> 00:22:46,800 separated facility with either a raised or some kind of a buffer or truly off 242 00:22:46,800 --> 00:22:50,360 street option so hey Brian can I interrupt you real fast and recognize 243 00:22:50,360 --> 00:22:55,000 commissioner back I believe has a question okay do I need to take the slide 244 00:22:55,000 --> 00:23:01,880 down no no we're all up yep thank you chair are we taking questions in these 245 00:23:01,880 --> 00:23:10,240 sections are we waiting to the end I'm fine taking questions as we go so okay 246 00:23:10,240 --> 00:23:16,960 if you before you move on to the bikes I had a couple questions about your 247 00:23:16,960 --> 00:23:21,480 overall sort of 10,000 foot view on the mobility plan that you just described in 248 00:23:21,480 --> 00:23:26,880 the previous slides and and your modeling is based on the future land 249 00:23:26,880 --> 00:23:34,480 use map the flume presuming that the development follows that but we've 250 00:23:34,480 --> 00:23:38,080 noticed the or I've noticed I shouldn't speak for the other commissioners I've 251 00:23:38,080 --> 00:23:46,000 noticed a quite a degree of variability from the future land use map and so if 252 00:23:46,000 --> 00:23:50,880 if your mobility plan is rolling out on the future land use map and we're not 253 00:23:50,880 --> 00:23:55,680 following the future land use map very tightly how does that affect your 254 00:23:55,680 --> 00:24:04,040 modeling well so we did it we did we accommodated or reflected in the land 255 00:24:04,040 --> 00:24:10,760 use plan the developments that are currently proposed and that have been 256 00:24:10,760 --> 00:24:18,480 obviously been constructed since the 2015 update obviously if the land use 257 00:24:18,480 --> 00:24:24,480 changes the trip generation changes and some of the characteristics of the 258 00:24:24,480 --> 00:24:30,720 roadway may change but right now that land use map is the best tool that we've 259 00:24:30,720 --> 00:24:36,560 got and that's one of the reasons why we update the model as frequently as we do 260 00:24:36,560 --> 00:24:44,320 every at least every five years because we are attempting to predict something 261 00:24:44,320 --> 00:24:51,920 that we cannot we cannot necessarily predict 100% accurately so if if we're 262 00:24:51,920 --> 00:24:56,520 only five years out then I think we can see those development trends and we 263 00:24:56,520 --> 00:25:01,600 work and again planning was was side we were side by side as we went through 264 00:25:01,600 --> 00:25:07,880 this process and and we made some modifications to the land use map or we 265 00:25:07,880 --> 00:25:15,480 saw that development trends changing but truly that's it's the best we can do is 266 00:25:15,480 --> 00:25:21,320 is to follow what our existing land use you know our comprehensive plan what it 267 00:25:21,320 --> 00:25:28,360 what it tells us what that the city's is expecting in a given area and if that 268 00:25:28,360 --> 00:25:32,600 changes in the next three to five years we can reflect that in the next update 269 00:25:32,600 --> 00:25:37,680 so so it would be your recommendation that in terms of pain and suffering for 270 00:25:37,680 --> 00:25:43,640 your department and this plan that we should follow the future land use map as 271 00:25:43,640 --> 00:25:50,560 closely as we can as we make decisions that would help your department so are 272 00:25:50,560 --> 00:25:53,880 you talking about the updating the mobility plan or are you talking about as 273 00:25:53,880 --> 00:26:00,460 we approve developments for the mobility plan in this specific case well and again 274 00:26:00,460 --> 00:26:10,120 I we can see some trends and land use changes but I don't mean for lack of a 275 00:26:10,120 --> 00:26:13,480 better word I don't have a crystal ball that tells me that somebody's gonna come 276 00:26:13,480 --> 00:26:20,200 in next week and develop 2,700 single-family homes where we had some 277 00:26:20,200 --> 00:26:26,600 mixed use or large lot development in our land use plan so I think as the as 278 00:26:26,600 --> 00:26:31,040 the properties come in if they request a zoning change then that's obviously 279 00:26:31,040 --> 00:26:35,900 going to be we require traffic impact analysis to make sure that what this 280 00:26:35,900 --> 00:26:42,440 mobility plan reflects or is requiring is going to provide adequate 281 00:26:42,440 --> 00:26:47,800 infrastructure so I think what's there we've got some some checks and balances 282 00:26:47,800 --> 00:26:57,320 if if the development is migrating away significantly from the mobility plan 283 00:26:57,320 --> 00:27:02,160 recommendation are there the assumptions then I think that traffic study 284 00:27:02,160 --> 00:27:07,160 requirement at the development stage is going to tell us whether or not we're 285 00:27:07,160 --> 00:27:12,700 gonna have adequate infrastructure so I it's still the best tool we've got if we 286 00:27:12,700 --> 00:27:17,640 see major changes we can incorporate those but on the flip side as 287 00:27:17,640 --> 00:27:22,600 development occurs if we see something that's just going to overwhelm the 288 00:27:22,600 --> 00:27:27,640 infrastructure that the mobility plan would recommend or required to be in 289 00:27:27,640 --> 00:27:32,080 place then I think that goes into the decision whether or not we're gonna 290 00:27:32,080 --> 00:27:36,880 approve that zoning change or intensity modification okay thank you 291 00:27:36,880 --> 00:27:44,200 mr. Pernetta yeah and to the point that you just made and I guess that the 292 00:27:44,200 --> 00:27:48,720 Commissioner Beckwith was kind of hinting toward you mentioned you know 293 00:27:48,720 --> 00:27:52,080 that there's been some updates since the last you know future land use map back 294 00:27:52,080 --> 00:27:58,360 in 2015 when you guys were looking at you know this draft of the mobility plan 295 00:27:58,360 --> 00:28:05,720 based on what y'all had seen in 2015 where there are many updates to things 296 00:28:05,720 --> 00:28:10,600 that you know that have been done in the city that kind of made y'all kind of 297 00:28:10,600 --> 00:28:14,800 jumped back with was there much drastic change it had to be made the mobility 298 00:28:14,800 --> 00:28:21,880 plan based on changes to the future land use map last time it was updated not 299 00:28:21,880 --> 00:28:25,520 significantly I think some of the major changes that are associated with this 300 00:28:25,520 --> 00:28:31,580 mobility plan update are actually being driven by our some of our external 301 00:28:31,580 --> 00:28:39,560 partners like text or some of our long our own long-range planning efforts one 302 00:28:39,560 --> 00:28:43,360 example and you can see it on the slide that I've got here on the far right hand 303 00:28:43,360 --> 00:28:49,000 corner you see a little dashed black line well that's something that text dot 304 00:28:49,000 --> 00:28:56,920 and the Cobb are looking at US 380 they're now talking about doing a direct 305 00:28:56,920 --> 00:29:03,800 connection to 288 that the controlled access section so that 380 the bulk of 306 00:29:03,800 --> 00:29:12,480 that traffic does not go through town and so that changes significantly some 307 00:29:12,480 --> 00:29:18,000 of the requirements and some of the needs for the traffic that's between 288 308 00:29:18,000 --> 00:29:23,360 and 35 because now 380 doesn't have to carry all the through traffic and it's 309 00:29:23,360 --> 00:29:27,880 available to carry some of the other local traffic that currently might void 310 00:29:27,880 --> 00:29:32,480 it and use a parallel facility so most of the we didn't see a lot of change 311 00:29:32,480 --> 00:29:36,400 significant changes in the mobility plan due to land use changes because again 312 00:29:36,400 --> 00:29:43,560 we're doing a build-out scenario so everything all the developer land within 313 00:29:43,560 --> 00:29:49,920 the city limits and in the ETJ are in this model they're generating something 314 00:29:49,920 --> 00:29:57,040 so we may be off by a factor of you know a few hundred trips for a given acre or 315 00:29:57,040 --> 00:30:01,680 maybe a few thousand trips for a couple hundred acres but we're not we're not 316 00:30:01,680 --> 00:30:08,240 seeing a tenfold increase or decrease in the traffic generation so that really 317 00:30:08,240 --> 00:30:13,560 this mobility plan was able to simplify if anything else some of the roadway 318 00:30:13,560 --> 00:30:19,840 the connectivity but most of the major major changes are driven by either long 319 00:30:19,840 --> 00:30:24,600 range planning efforts of the city or the external partners okay great yeah 320 00:30:24,600 --> 00:30:27,080 because I think that was the concern I you know most of the things will come 321 00:30:27,080 --> 00:30:31,040 with the traffic study but I think the concern is just to make sure that if we 322 00:30:31,040 --> 00:30:35,040 deviate from the future land use map we're not gonna break anything but it 323 00:30:35,040 --> 00:30:38,940 sounds like you know that's not really something that's gonna happen right 324 00:30:38,940 --> 00:30:43,680 speaking right and most of the most of the changes that we see the deviations 325 00:30:43,680 --> 00:30:49,880 at least that I've seen I've been here a year now who are not in the on a grand 326 00:30:49,880 --> 00:30:54,720 scale so those those grand scale like coal hunter we see those coming years and 327 00:30:54,720 --> 00:31:02,560 years in advance and so we're able to identify plug those in and reflect the 328 00:31:02,560 --> 00:31:07,680 needs of that development in the mobility plan update again it's a living 329 00:31:07,680 --> 00:31:12,280 document we we may go through the formal process every five years but the 330 00:31:12,280 --> 00:31:17,880 consultant is able to make land use changes and roadway changes on the fly 331 00:31:17,880 --> 00:31:23,360 so even during those years between updates we've kind of got our finger on 332 00:31:23,360 --> 00:31:29,000 the pulse and we can see what the impact of any significant land use change or 333 00:31:29,000 --> 00:31:34,320 significant roadway change would be excellent that's all I've got thank you 334 00:31:34,320 --> 00:31:38,560 thank you commissioners hey Brian real fast before we go into the bicycle plan 335 00:31:38,560 --> 00:31:45,440 can Avenue C and Bell can the University shut those down without coming through a 336 00:31:45,440 --> 00:31:52,360 council process no okay we own the roadways we have three and and so what 337 00:31:52,360 --> 00:32:00,720 what what this plan is done is we we've studied them and determined the impact 338 00:32:00,720 --> 00:32:05,480 of those closures and again Avenue C is a little bit more straightforward but 339 00:32:05,480 --> 00:32:09,400 when you look at the bell closure rolling that in with the one-way two-way 340 00:32:09,400 --> 00:32:15,640 discussion then we start you know some complexity is introduced in the in the 341 00:32:15,640 --> 00:32:18,980 discussion but no they cannot close the they cannot close the roadways we own 342 00:32:18,980 --> 00:32:26,120 them and so that's why we're involved in that process okay perfect thank you very 343 00:32:26,120 --> 00:32:29,640 much I don't see any other questions so I guess we can go to the bike plan now 344 00:32:29,640 --> 00:32:36,660 okay so again back on this slide the 50 to 60 percent of the people really don't 345 00:32:36,660 --> 00:32:40,920 want to ride on the road so that's kind of what we heard that we've had lengthy 346 00:32:40,920 --> 00:32:45,560 discussions with council and our our plan is to roll out a bike plan of 347 00:32:45,560 --> 00:32:52,960 infrastructure that focuses on trails and side paths we just think that we can 348 00:32:52,960 --> 00:32:57,400 will always have some instances where we just don't have the right of way or we 349 00:32:57,400 --> 00:33:03,840 can't physically construct an off-street facility and we'll always have those 350 00:33:03,840 --> 00:33:08,240 areas where we need to share the road but for the most part we're moving into 351 00:33:08,240 --> 00:33:16,160 the off-street realm so and this is kind of highlights the current bike plan a lot 352 00:33:16,160 --> 00:33:21,040 of shared lengths that was five six seven years ago the share was very 353 00:33:21,040 --> 00:33:25,520 popular on-street bike facilities are better than no bike facility and at 354 00:33:25,520 --> 00:33:30,960 least there was some kind of designation that that was a no cars and in the 355 00:33:30,960 --> 00:33:37,560 intention and that offered the cyclists some increased level of safety so we're 356 00:33:37,560 --> 00:33:43,080 obviously not enough to make people comfortable riding on the road in those 357 00:33:43,080 --> 00:33:49,200 cases based on either volume or speed of the adjacent vehicles and so we're again 358 00:33:49,200 --> 00:33:58,480 we're moving to a separated bike lane or off-street facility all together these 359 00:33:58,480 --> 00:34:03,600 are the on-street and off-street again conventional bike lanes buffered bike 360 00:34:03,600 --> 00:34:08,600 lanes separated bike lanes so we just if you've seen the one on Hickory that's a 361 00:34:08,600 --> 00:34:14,960 buffered bike lane with the pylons we just put those in and we're going to try 362 00:34:14,960 --> 00:34:21,960 and deploy more and more of those as we are on our on-street facilities as we're 363 00:34:21,960 --> 00:34:26,320 limited to not being able to put in a site path and the two off-street 364 00:34:26,320 --> 00:34:32,080 categories are the side path that's at 10 to 12 foot wide sidewalk or trail 365 00:34:32,080 --> 00:34:40,120 which typically exists in a park setting so and this is again going back to our 366 00:34:40,120 --> 00:34:43,920 our bicycle focus group what we're in our public meetings what we heard is 367 00:34:43,920 --> 00:34:47,680 again that's strong interested in buffered and separated bike lanes let's 368 00:34:47,680 --> 00:34:53,840 we want a physical barrier between us and the car we need better options on 369 00:34:53,840 --> 00:34:59,560 major routes so how do we get across town not just from my house to the 370 00:34:59,560 --> 00:35:06,200 grocery store or you know this is not more of a commuter effort than a 371 00:35:06,200 --> 00:35:17,160 recreational bike ride and so again this shows you the proposed designs we've got 372 00:35:17,160 --> 00:35:24,080 multi-use trails our side paths and that top portion of the slide we've got the 373 00:35:24,080 --> 00:35:29,400 buffered or separated bike lane and then in an urban alternative where we just 374 00:35:29,400 --> 00:35:36,120 don't have the we don't have the real estate to put bicycles off-street 375 00:35:36,120 --> 00:35:39,920 because you don't want to put a bicycle on a five-foot sidewalk with pedestrians 376 00:35:39,920 --> 00:35:44,880 we're retaining the the standard bike lane and we're just going to enhance the 377 00:35:44,880 --> 00:35:49,000 width a little bit so we again trying to maximize the number of tools we've got 378 00:35:49,000 --> 00:35:53,880 in our toolbox and and treat everything as a context sensitive approach and put 379 00:35:53,880 --> 00:36:00,240 the appropriate the best facility that we can on each corridor and so here's 380 00:36:00,240 --> 00:36:04,760 the draft bicycle plan again I've got a link that well you can toggle between 381 00:36:04,760 --> 00:36:08,200 the roadway layer the bike layer the pedestrian layer and I'll share that with 382 00:36:08,200 --> 00:36:12,400 you at the end but this just gives you an idea of the connectivity that we're 383 00:36:12,400 --> 00:36:19,720 promoting or are recommending in this 2020 update so again this is an example 384 00:36:19,720 --> 00:36:27,520 of a little bit more detail this is that northern area again the 2014 plan where 385 00:36:27,520 --> 00:36:34,200 we had a lot of you can see the different on a lot of on-street the 386 00:36:34,200 --> 00:36:37,180 green will be in the trail primarily associated with parks and linear 387 00:36:37,180 --> 00:36:41,260 connections and then the right-hand side is just simply what's on the ground 388 00:36:41,260 --> 00:36:49,080 today and then again looking at the 2014 plan versus the 2020 plan a lot of 389 00:36:49,080 --> 00:36:56,160 significantly more off-street than we had before you can see the green on on 390 00:36:56,160 --> 00:37:04,240 Bonnie Bray and on Locust so we're again we're moving we're not going to we're 391 00:37:04,240 --> 00:37:07,640 not going to be able to do away with on-street we just again we're limited in 392 00:37:07,640 --> 00:37:12,880 in right away and real estate in some places but we want to move to that 393 00:37:12,880 --> 00:37:18,520 safer off-street condition and then this is just a little bit more of a zoom 394 00:37:18,520 --> 00:37:25,800 that you can see the significant amount more more green than the 2014 plan 395 00:37:25,800 --> 00:37:33,200 Krister back thank you chair Brian how and these flex zones and and that you 396 00:37:33,200 --> 00:37:36,360 you know I understand you critically need that for the flexibility of 397 00:37:36,360 --> 00:37:43,880 planning different kinds of avenues for pedestrians bikers and and and motor 398 00:37:43,880 --> 00:37:49,940 vehicles but it it strikes me on the cartoons and I know the tree was just a 399 00:37:49,940 --> 00:37:55,440 a cartoon tree representing sort of landscaping more than anything else but 400 00:37:55,440 --> 00:38:00,480 to what extent are is this mobility plan integrated with some of our 401 00:38:00,480 --> 00:38:06,800 environmental and sustainability plans because we don't want those necessarily 402 00:38:06,800 --> 00:38:12,280 trees ignored or counted for or against our overall environmental green corridor 403 00:38:12,280 --> 00:38:17,640 plans and and I'm worried that you will we'll put trash trees because we have to 404 00:38:17,640 --> 00:38:21,760 in our in those little flex zones because you need to be able to put them 405 00:38:21,760 --> 00:38:26,200 in take them out as the needs of the traffic change because those are going 406 00:38:26,200 --> 00:38:33,680 to be prioritized but yet it's I so I guess my question is to what degree are 407 00:38:33,680 --> 00:38:41,600 you integrating your flex zones in the mobility plan with the overall efforts 408 00:38:41,600 --> 00:38:47,540 of the tree efforts in our city so again sustainability was part of our 409 00:38:47,540 --> 00:38:52,480 internal stakeholder group so they've been at the table from day one I will 410 00:38:52,480 --> 00:38:59,960 say that the the tree selection is not going to be up to the developer or staff 411 00:38:59,960 --> 00:39:08,840 or table will be up to my staff we will defer to the forestry group and identify 412 00:39:08,840 --> 00:39:16,080 the appropriate size tree or type of tree for each each setting I think as we 413 00:39:16,080 --> 00:39:20,080 develop if the city is going to do a corridor reconstruction and we're going 414 00:39:20,080 --> 00:39:25,840 to include street trees then then obviously sustainability and parks or 415 00:39:25,840 --> 00:39:31,960 forestry will be at the table when we determine what kind how many what size 416 00:39:31,960 --> 00:39:42,880 etc I think this plan is really intended to preserve the space for those kind of 417 00:39:42,880 --> 00:39:47,240 features and and that goes really goes for all of the different types of 418 00:39:47,240 --> 00:39:52,600 whether it be street furniture that bike lane on street parking what we're trying 419 00:39:52,600 --> 00:39:58,880 to do is carve out enough space that we can accommodate whatever we would like 420 00:39:58,880 --> 00:40:05,080 to put into that area in an appropriate manner so we we've identified and I'm 421 00:40:05,080 --> 00:40:09,880 gonna go back to that four lane roadway we need two lanes of vehicular traffic 422 00:40:09,880 --> 00:40:14,480 in each direction we've narrowed those down to you know 11 foot lanes and 423 00:40:14,480 --> 00:40:22,640 narrower if we need to but outside of those four lanes of travel we've tried 424 00:40:22,640 --> 00:40:26,920 to you know within the within the right of way we've identified okay this can 425 00:40:26,920 --> 00:40:31,040 be a wide sidewalk with trees it can be an on-street bike lane it can be a 426 00:40:31,040 --> 00:40:36,840 shared use path the trees are not required I will say that most cyclist 427 00:40:36,840 --> 00:40:43,000 pedestrians like them they provide shade and some what of a buffer between the 428 00:40:43,000 --> 00:40:47,800 angular traffic but I don't so we're not trying to we're not precluding anything 429 00:40:47,800 --> 00:40:54,160 but we're not also requiring the street trees we're deferring to those other 430 00:40:54,160 --> 00:40:58,640 plans that you talked about the the green corridors and the sustainability 431 00:40:58,640 --> 00:41:05,280 to really govern what goes into that that flex zone that buffer space and so 432 00:41:05,280 --> 00:41:10,400 this next comments just real quick and that is you know it as your needs change 433 00:41:10,400 --> 00:41:15,360 for those corridors you know you can't have a large healthy Elmer Oak or 434 00:41:15,360 --> 00:41:19,480 something else lovely that would be in there because if it's in your flex zone 435 00:41:19,480 --> 00:41:26,240 you you know you can't be putting down roots and making a tree that inhibits 436 00:41:26,240 --> 00:41:30,360 your ability to the flex zone but at the same token I guess I encourage you 437 00:41:30,360 --> 00:41:33,880 strongly to work with your urban forestry guys and I know you will so 438 00:41:33,880 --> 00:41:37,520 that's just more of a comment than anything else thank you sure thank you 439 00:41:37,520 --> 00:41:42,800 thank you mr. Beck any other questions on the bike plan looks like Brian's about 440 00:41:42,800 --> 00:41:47,640 to head into the pedestrian plan I do not see any floors back to you Brian 441 00:41:47,640 --> 00:41:54,800 all right thank you pedestrian plan so the pedestrian plan again is something 442 00:41:54,800 --> 00:42:00,480 that's relatively new we we just went through and I'm going to touch on this 443 00:42:00,480 --> 00:42:05,360 briefly we just went through an ADA transition plan with a consultant that 444 00:42:05,360 --> 00:42:11,760 identified all of the substandard pedestrian facilities and features that 445 00:42:11,760 --> 00:42:19,800 need to be updated to accommodate the ADA requirements this document works 446 00:42:19,800 --> 00:42:26,800 with that transition plan but again the mobility plan is primarily a capital so 447 00:42:26,800 --> 00:42:32,280 we're looking at new sidewalks sidewalk gaps and how do we prioritize those and 448 00:42:32,280 --> 00:42:36,200 how do we provide pedestrian infrastructure literally on every 449 00:42:36,200 --> 00:42:41,480 street in town there's no street or I cannot think of one that should not 450 00:42:41,480 --> 00:42:46,000 have pedestrian infrastructure no another example I when I worked with the 451 00:42:46,000 --> 00:42:51,920 city of Carrollton we worked with tech start on some I-35 infrastructure 452 00:42:51,920 --> 00:42:54,960 upgrades and they wouldn't allow us to put sidewalks and now tech stop requires 453 00:42:54,960 --> 00:42:59,320 sidewalks they really want and that's that's the shift that I have seen and 454 00:42:59,320 --> 00:43:05,480 we're pedestrians and bicycles and other all modes of travel really should be 455 00:43:05,480 --> 00:43:12,440 treated equally so this plan is is this mobility plan is really set to identify 456 00:43:12,440 --> 00:43:17,600 those missing elements not the ones that are substandard that's a again that's 457 00:43:17,600 --> 00:43:20,400 going to fall back to that ADA transition plan where we bring everything 458 00:43:20,400 --> 00:43:25,600 up to snuff but this is this plan is it to identify roadways that don't have 459 00:43:25,600 --> 00:43:32,960 sidewalks or sidewalks that are discontinuous or large gap segments so 460 00:43:32,960 --> 00:43:39,160 we identified basically the existing infrastructure so primary arterial 461 00:43:39,160 --> 00:43:45,200 secondary material collector local and then the red is no sidewalk and the 462 00:43:45,200 --> 00:43:50,200 green is sidewalk on both sides so you can see just at a glance most of our 463 00:43:50,200 --> 00:43:55,560 roadways have no sidewalk so we've got a lot of infrastructure that's missing and 464 00:43:55,560 --> 00:44:04,160 subject to the recommendations of this mobility plan update once we've 465 00:44:04,160 --> 00:44:09,400 identified those missing segments then we need to identify how we prioritize 466 00:44:09,400 --> 00:44:15,440 and we did a fairly simple prioritization it's high and low but we 467 00:44:15,440 --> 00:44:20,640 looked at really citywide so again this goes back to that's not just a person 468 00:44:20,640 --> 00:44:24,560 walking through their neighborhood or maybe walking to the store they may be 469 00:44:24,560 --> 00:44:29,680 walking to work we have three thousand people that commute via foot so we 470 00:44:29,680 --> 00:44:35,000 looked at longer connections we looked at what we call safe route to school 471 00:44:35,000 --> 00:44:42,920 those those roadways within a quarter mile of the school to encourage and and 472 00:44:42,920 --> 00:44:48,040 provide ample opportunity for for children to walk to school instead of 473 00:44:48,040 --> 00:44:50,880 being driven or riding the bus so we really want to get out and that's a 474 00:44:50,880 --> 00:44:54,800 healthy lifestyle and that complete street element where we want to be able 475 00:44:54,800 --> 00:45:02,120 to get kids from home to school safely on foot and then sure 476 00:45:02,120 --> 00:45:08,480 commissioner Smith thank you chair the only thing I see the priority mythology 477 00:45:08,480 --> 00:45:11,600 on here the one thing that I think would be missing that I would encourage or 478 00:45:11,600 --> 00:45:16,360 just be talk to the parks and rec department I know Gary is has made it 479 00:45:16,360 --> 00:45:21,000 very clear that they're they're their biggest you know mission moving forward 480 00:45:21,000 --> 00:45:25,880 is trying to create you know 10-minute 10-minute walking capability to every 481 00:45:25,880 --> 00:45:32,600 citizen to a park and so I don't see that really being I think the quarter 482 00:45:32,600 --> 00:45:36,240 mile within school walk shed that kind of thing is great I think but I'd also 483 00:45:36,240 --> 00:45:38,840 like you guys to be able to reach out to the parks department see if they can 484 00:45:38,840 --> 00:45:44,080 identify maybe some areas that they don't have safe walking pathways to a 485 00:45:44,080 --> 00:45:50,360 park right and so we we are working with parks and they're in the process of 486 00:45:50,360 --> 00:45:56,200 doing their trails master plan okay and that's it is integrated into our with 487 00:45:56,200 --> 00:45:59,920 our consultant and their consultant we're sharing data so that we take a 488 00:45:59,920 --> 00:46:06,520 sidewalk to get to their trailhead and exactly the towards that end that you 489 00:46:06,520 --> 00:46:11,800 just described and that's a short walk to parks awesome thanks we're also 490 00:46:11,800 --> 00:46:17,080 working with DCTA on that again they're going through a master plan update look 491 00:46:17,080 --> 00:46:21,040 like everybody's updating their master plans right now and so we want to be in 492 00:46:21,040 --> 00:46:27,000 a position to serve with sidewalks first mile last mile their transit 493 00:46:27,000 --> 00:46:31,760 infrastructure and their transit transit facilities across the city and then 494 00:46:31,760 --> 00:46:39,560 identifying those corridor barriers and again University Drive is a good example 495 00:46:39,560 --> 00:46:45,480 of a pedestrian barrier there's a significant lack of safe pedestrian 496 00:46:45,480 --> 00:46:51,080 crossings and throughout that corridor so we're focusing on those areas as well 497 00:46:51,080 --> 00:46:55,600 so here's my pedestrian plan example this is the you'll see three or four 498 00:46:55,600 --> 00:46:59,360 different colors here the yellow this is our existing infrastructure so where 499 00:46:59,360 --> 00:47:03,760 you've got sidewalks on the ground not saying what condition they're in just we 500 00:47:03,760 --> 00:47:08,180 have a sidewalk either a four foot five foot maybe a six foot sidewalk this is 501 00:47:08,180 --> 00:47:15,320 what's on the ground today then this aqua marine this turquoise color these 502 00:47:15,320 --> 00:47:21,040 are sidewalks that are currently programmed either with projects that are 503 00:47:21,040 --> 00:47:25,240 under construction or going to be under construction that are under the city 504 00:47:25,240 --> 00:47:31,640 control so as we redo a body bray we're gonna add sidewalks if we've got some 505 00:47:31,640 --> 00:47:35,240 neighborhood and street projects we're adding sidewalks so that's that's what 506 00:47:35,240 --> 00:47:40,400 this is this is the known sidewalk infrastructure that's in the on the near 507 00:47:40,400 --> 00:47:48,760 horizon and then stepping back this is the mobility plan these are these are 508 00:47:48,760 --> 00:47:53,760 the missing pieces again this is not and we're not talking about existing or that 509 00:47:53,760 --> 00:47:59,240 that turquoise color that it's coming in a future project these are pieces that 510 00:47:59,240 --> 00:48:04,720 are that are unfunded that we identified that we need and we buy new things that 511 00:48:04,720 --> 00:48:11,920 that prioritization methodology red is high priority and the orange is low and 512 00:48:11,920 --> 00:48:19,840 that's very vague but we've we've got at least we have to identify what we think 513 00:48:19,840 --> 00:48:23,480 of them are the projects we need to address first because part of this 514 00:48:23,480 --> 00:48:28,600 mobility plan is going to be an implementation plan and so that's why 515 00:48:28,600 --> 00:48:36,720 we're prioritizing as we are so putting it all together again the goal is 516 00:48:36,720 --> 00:48:45,640 sidewalks on every street it's I think that's a that's a given that we move 517 00:48:45,640 --> 00:48:51,560 forward through this entire is the pedestrian element needs to be very 518 00:48:51,560 --> 00:49:00,680 robust so next steps as I said before we've we've still we're wrapping up 519 00:49:00,680 --> 00:49:07,440 with the council presentations but we've got another round after after that and 520 00:49:07,440 --> 00:49:12,800 council gives us their feedback then we'll go make the modifications to the 521 00:49:12,800 --> 00:49:16,120 plan with the consultant and then we'll take that back out to the public and 522 00:49:16,120 --> 00:49:20,720 right now we're we're looking at September October of this year for that 523 00:49:20,720 --> 00:49:25,480 next round of three to five public meetings and I think we're going to try 524 00:49:25,480 --> 00:49:31,680 and do one in for each of the five geographic areas and just be able to 525 00:49:31,680 --> 00:49:38,880 address concerns for all areas in case somebody cannot attend or make the 526 00:49:38,880 --> 00:49:44,160 meeting that covers their neighborhood or their area of interest and then 527 00:49:44,160 --> 00:49:50,280 November to December we'll take the input from the public and council again 528 00:49:50,280 --> 00:49:57,960 and mold it all into a final report and a final draft or a draft final third 529 00:49:57,960 --> 00:50:03,320 fair plan map mobility plan rather and then in January February of next year 530 00:50:03,320 --> 00:50:10,480 bring it back to council and hopefully March of 2021 move to adoption now 531 00:50:10,480 --> 00:50:15,200 planning zoning is in there somewhere as well but probably in that same January 532 00:50:15,200 --> 00:50:21,800 February time we'll bring this back as a more complete effort and get your 533 00:50:21,800 --> 00:50:28,160 feedback so that we can incorporate any final changes into that final document 534 00:50:28,160 --> 00:50:37,960 for March or April adoption so this is a slide that the one in red here is that 535 00:50:37,960 --> 00:50:44,360 I'm going to go ahead and click on it if I can this is the Walter P Moore site 536 00:50:44,360 --> 00:50:48,520 and they're our consultants they've been working with us it's a GIS based 537 00:50:48,520 --> 00:51:03,720 website okay well I know there it is okay I know the link works because I 538 00:51:03,720 --> 00:51:09,280 looked at it today so this is the plan as it sits today you can see a lot of 539 00:51:09,280 --> 00:51:16,000 our we reach pretty hey Brian looks like you're sharing your presentation not 540 00:51:16,000 --> 00:51:43,080 okay all right do that again so how do I oh there's new share oops yeah you'll 541 00:51:43,080 --> 00:52:07,400 need to unclean there we go I'm gonna I want to click this I want to do this and 542 00:52:07,400 --> 00:52:14,200 then I want to share own and do a new share right yeah can I do it I got to 543 00:52:14,200 --> 00:52:23,600 stop sharing and then share this one that way all right okay so now you can 544 00:52:23,600 --> 00:52:28,000 see this is the Walter P Moore website that's got the it's got all the plans 545 00:52:28,000 --> 00:52:38,000 on it right now we're looking at the mobility plan you can also toggle 546 00:52:38,000 --> 00:52:43,320 through that's the existing 2015 plan if you want to see them side by side 547 00:52:43,320 --> 00:52:52,880 there's the bicycle plan and the 2014 bike and then the pedestrian plan as 548 00:52:52,880 --> 00:53:03,360 well and it's gonna take a second cuz it yeah so this link is very helpful if you 549 00:53:03,360 --> 00:53:08,520 want to really kind of dig into some of the changes between 2015 and the 2020 550 00:53:08,520 --> 00:53:12,980 update for all three modes except for the pedestrian there was not a previous 551 00:53:12,980 --> 00:53:19,280 plan but you can look at the 2014 bike plan and 2015 mobility plan and see what 552 00:53:19,280 --> 00:53:29,320 changes that we're proposing so with that I will take any questions that you 553 00:53:29,320 --> 00:53:36,640 have Christian back thank you chair Brian in a way of feedback on the the 554 00:53:36,640 --> 00:53:45,120 pedestrian plan just from folks in my area they're a little befuddled by the 555 00:53:45,120 --> 00:53:50,480 the they want sidewalks but they're befuddled by how to best work with the 556 00:53:50,480 --> 00:53:56,160 city on the temporary easements and right-of-ways and all that so to the 557 00:53:56,160 --> 00:54:00,560 extent that you could streamline simplify the process is feedback from 558 00:54:00,560 --> 00:54:04,560 people that have talked to me about they want sidewalks but they also don't want 559 00:54:04,560 --> 00:54:09,880 a pain in the keister so to the extent that you could make that simpler for 560 00:54:09,880 --> 00:54:15,080 them it would help put sidewalks at least in the Nottingham Woods area where 561 00:54:15,080 --> 00:54:20,720 you're currently developing sidewalks okay so that it is it is a challenge and 562 00:54:20,720 --> 00:54:29,200 a lot of times when you put sidewalks where sidewalks were not originally 563 00:54:29,200 --> 00:54:34,760 designed one of the biggest hurdles that we come across it's the yes you have 564 00:54:34,760 --> 00:54:38,920 the easements and maybe as temporary construction easement or maybe a sidewalk 565 00:54:38,920 --> 00:54:44,000 easement but you also have driveways that now you have to bench them and so 566 00:54:44,000 --> 00:54:49,320 but that'll all that will be vetted through the design process and so we'll 567 00:54:49,320 --> 00:54:53,920 have adequate opportunity to to streamline just like you say because it 568 00:54:53,920 --> 00:55:00,800 can get very cumbersome but point taken we can look at ways to minimize the 569 00:55:00,800 --> 00:55:05,720 impact and shorten the timeline I think you'd have easier compliance if you did 570 00:55:05,720 --> 00:55:16,880 that thank you any other questions for Brian and his mobility presentation I 571 00:55:16,880 --> 00:55:23,160 did not see anything thank you very much Brian okay again I did not share this it 572 00:55:23,160 --> 00:55:26,640 was not part of the attachments I will give it to Richard and he can make it 573 00:55:26,640 --> 00:55:34,920 this presentation available to that would be helpful all right so I feel 574 00:55:34,920 --> 00:55:41,340 have it distributed later today if not tomorrow morning at the very latest I do 575 00:55:41,340 --> 00:55:53,400 have actually one more it's getting a whole bunch of me today and this will be 576 00:55:53,400 --> 00:55:57,680 a lot quicker just a discussion on traffic signal installation and removal 577 00:55:57,680 --> 00:56:06,000 I believe there was a question on what allows us as a city to install or remove 578 00:56:06,000 --> 00:56:10,640 and maybe allow us not the right word but what requirements do we have to 579 00:56:10,640 --> 00:56:16,280 satisfy to install or remove a traffic signal and so if you ask any two traffic 580 00:56:16,280 --> 00:56:21,880 engineers crashes and visibility volumes schools and the truth is it's all of the 581 00:56:21,880 --> 00:56:28,600 above and even more so this is the document that we adhere to the Texas 582 00:56:28,600 --> 00:56:34,040 manual on uniform traffic control devices and it's chapter for highway 583 00:56:34,040 --> 00:56:38,440 traffic signals and I know it says highway but it's all traffic signals and 584 00:56:38,440 --> 00:56:49,480 then here's the actual text and and here's a translation so to install a 585 00:56:49,480 --> 00:56:54,640 traffic study basically we have to perform an engineering study of the 586 00:56:54,640 --> 00:56:58,120 traffic volumes pedestrian characteristics and just physical 587 00:56:58,120 --> 00:57:03,960 characteristics so an intersection and show that at least one if not more of 588 00:57:03,960 --> 00:57:07,560 the nine traffic signal warrants I'm going to go through those in a minute at 589 00:57:07,560 --> 00:57:13,360 least one is satisfied and similarly if an engineering study indicates that 590 00:57:13,360 --> 00:57:17,400 something has changed traffic volumes have dropped because we widened a 591 00:57:17,400 --> 00:57:27,240 parallel roadway or a major generator goes away let's see remembers reunion 592 00:57:27,240 --> 00:57:31,960 arena no longer exists you don't need as much infrastructure when something like 593 00:57:31,960 --> 00:57:37,640 that disappears so it's also incumbent on city to continually monitor those 594 00:57:37,640 --> 00:57:41,960 changes and perform those studies to determine whether or not those signals 595 00:57:41,960 --> 00:57:46,120 now no longer satisfy those warrants and really should be removed and replaced 596 00:57:46,120 --> 00:57:52,400 with something else so we just did this on Parkway we removed a couple signals 597 00:57:52,400 --> 00:58:01,120 and we're we're in the process of replacing with some additional in this 598 00:58:01,120 --> 00:58:09,400 case pedestrian infrastructure to make that a safer condition so there's nine 599 00:58:09,400 --> 00:58:12,440 up and I'm going through as quickly as I can I just want to give you an idea of 600 00:58:12,440 --> 00:58:19,840 what the MUT CD that manual and uniform traffic control devices initiates as a 601 00:58:19,840 --> 00:58:25,240 federal document and then the state of Texas has taken it tweaked it published 602 00:58:25,240 --> 00:58:32,120 it as a state document and a lot of our funding and compliance and or rather our 603 00:58:32,120 --> 00:58:37,340 funding is is key to our compliance to the document and the requirements that it 604 00:58:37,340 --> 00:58:42,320 provides so the first warrant is the eight-hour vehicular volume basically 605 00:58:42,320 --> 00:58:47,400 this is just say that if you've got eight hours where a Main Street just 606 00:58:47,400 --> 00:58:54,040 starves the availability of a side street to get access you can look at the 607 00:58:54,040 --> 00:58:58,760 installation of the traffic signal and on all of these volume warrants it's a 608 00:58:58,760 --> 00:59:03,120 combination of Main Street and Side Street so it's really looking at how does 609 00:59:03,120 --> 00:59:08,120 that traffic peak does it peak for long periods of time does it peak even higher 610 00:59:08,120 --> 00:59:12,720 for shorter periods of time so this eight-hour is a fairly low volume 611 00:59:12,720 --> 00:59:18,940 threshold but it has to be satisfied for eight hours of the day warrant two is a 612 00:59:18,940 --> 00:59:22,560 forearm and you see a pattern developing here so this is a slightly 613 00:59:22,560 --> 00:59:26,560 higher threshold that combination of Main Street and Side Street vehicular 614 00:59:26,560 --> 00:59:33,100 volumes but it only has to satisfy that for four years and we have a one hour so 615 00:59:33,100 --> 00:59:39,680 if you've got something that is just very very time specific large office 616 00:59:39,680 --> 00:59:46,760 building something that every day basically shuts you know that your side 617 00:59:46,760 --> 00:59:50,520 street generates so much traffic that it can't get out of the Main Street and you 618 00:59:50,520 --> 00:59:55,040 can use the peak hour warrant to justify the installation of traffic signal now I 619 00:59:55,040 --> 01:00:00,120 will say that the MUTCD says to use this sparingly and only on unusual conditions 620 01:00:00,120 --> 01:00:06,040 very specific conditions not because almost any driveway in town can satisfy 621 01:00:06,040 --> 01:00:12,400 the one hour or it is not that's not how it's intended to be used so more 622 01:00:12,400 --> 01:00:17,840 enforced pedestrian and this again is a combination of vehicular and pedestrian 623 01:00:17,840 --> 01:00:23,360 volumes the pedestrian volumes are fairly high my experience is you've got 624 01:00:23,360 --> 01:00:28,040 to have 200 people crossing in an hour for a couple hours in the day it's 625 01:00:28,040 --> 01:00:34,080 really this this is really intended for a more of a downtown type atmosphere 626 01:00:34,080 --> 01:00:40,320 where you've got a side street that has a again maybe it's an office building or 627 01:00:40,320 --> 01:00:43,920 some other kind of commercial retail development generates a lot of foot 628 01:00:43,920 --> 01:00:49,400 traffic I mean a lot of foot traffic and they need that signal to safely cross 629 01:00:49,400 --> 01:00:56,000 the Main Street. Warrant five is kind of a follow-on for that and that's a school 630 01:00:56,000 --> 01:01:01,840 crossing so these are school-age children from basically first grade to 631 01:01:01,840 --> 01:01:05,720 high school the requirement here is that you have to have at least 20 children 632 01:01:05,720 --> 01:01:10,400 crossing in an hour and that the nearest major intersection is more than 300 feet 633 01:01:10,400 --> 01:01:14,600 away with with traffic control so with that provides a safe like a traffic 634 01:01:14,600 --> 01:01:18,520 signal or an all-way stop that provides that safe crossing so this again is a 635 01:01:18,520 --> 01:01:24,880 identified for smaller streets around a school or we may have a school zone or a 636 01:01:24,880 --> 01:01:30,520 crosswalk mark and the children are using that to access the school. Warrant six 637 01:01:30,520 --> 01:01:37,240 coordinated signal system so one of the one of the goals of traffic engineering 638 01:01:37,240 --> 01:01:43,680 is historically has been to provide a smooth flow of traffic so we get this 639 01:01:43,680 --> 01:01:49,760 platoon where you you leave one signal you get the green and by the time you 640 01:01:49,760 --> 01:01:54,560 get to the next signal you get the green and it progresses on that has its 641 01:01:54,560 --> 01:02:00,440 pros and cons but this warrant is identified are designed to to serve 642 01:02:00,440 --> 01:02:05,160 those locations where you've got cross street traffic that might disrupt the 643 01:02:05,160 --> 01:02:11,080 platooning so we can we can better control how they enter the system we can 644 01:02:11,080 --> 01:02:16,200 better control the platooning of the traffic on the Main Street. Warrant seven 645 01:02:16,200 --> 01:02:20,000 again is crash experience five or more correctable crashes and those are 646 01:02:20,000 --> 01:02:24,360 correctable by the installation of a traffic signal so different kinds of 647 01:02:24,360 --> 01:02:30,320 T-bone crashes are correctable rear end crashes are not so in a 12 month 648 01:02:30,320 --> 01:02:34,720 period we have to have five or more correctable crashes and then we can use 649 01:02:34,720 --> 01:02:39,480 that warrant to justify the installation of traffic signal. Warrant eight roadway 650 01:02:39,480 --> 01:02:45,040 network and this is really where you've got major routes that come together and 651 01:02:45,040 --> 01:02:49,920 you want to encourage the concentration and organization of traffic flow on those 652 01:02:49,920 --> 01:02:54,120 major routes what you don't want to have is people migrating off of the major 653 01:02:54,120 --> 01:02:58,600 roadways onto secondary or tertiary roadways into neighborhoods because it's 654 01:02:58,600 --> 01:03:01,920 now faster to cut through the neighborhood than it is to stay on the 655 01:03:01,920 --> 01:03:05,800 Main Street because you can't get on to the if you want to make a turn you can't 656 01:03:05,800 --> 01:03:10,720 get onto the Main Street so you bypass that problem intersection using 657 01:03:10,720 --> 01:03:14,840 facilities that were not intended to design the traffic volumes and then 658 01:03:14,840 --> 01:03:18,720 warrant nine is intersection near a grade crossing that's a rail crossing 659 01:03:18,720 --> 01:03:25,320 typically within if it's within a hundred and forty feet of a railroad 660 01:03:25,320 --> 01:03:28,480 crossing on the major street and you've got a side street within that hundred and 661 01:03:28,480 --> 01:03:32,920 forty feet you can use this warrant to justify the installation of a traffic 662 01:03:32,920 --> 01:03:46,000 signal. So questions or comments? I do not see any. Oh Commissioner Ellis. Thank you 663 01:03:46,000 --> 01:03:49,680 Chair. Thanks Brian for the info. I actually asked for this to to come 664 01:03:49,680 --> 01:03:54,000 forward it was mainly because in a short period of time a while back when I had 665 01:03:54,000 --> 01:03:58,040 asked for this there were several signals that were removed so that was 666 01:03:58,040 --> 01:04:03,200 really my the the justification for my requesting the presentation was to 667 01:04:03,200 --> 01:04:11,320 understand how the city decides to remove them. So on that do you rely on 668 01:04:11,320 --> 01:04:15,720 someone asking you to look at an intersection? Is it something that is 669 01:04:15,720 --> 01:04:19,880 regularly done by staff to look at certain intersections? I'm just curious as 670 01:04:19,880 --> 01:04:27,640 to how that comes about. We revisit all of our signals every it's it's hard to 671 01:04:27,640 --> 01:04:31,200 say I mean some of them we don't need to I don't ever need to revisit Carroll at 672 01:04:31,200 --> 01:04:37,520 University I just don't but some of our our lower volume streets we do collect 673 01:04:37,520 --> 01:04:42,840 traffic data so we know when we've got some significant changes either increases 674 01:04:42,840 --> 01:04:47,760 or in this case decreases. So if the if the volumes have changed because again 675 01:04:47,760 --> 01:04:53,160 parallel facilities or or just traffic flow is taking a different route 676 01:04:53,160 --> 01:04:58,120 because we've improved it we look at probably three to five years I mean 677 01:04:58,120 --> 01:05:02,680 that's about a it's about average for us to look at whether or not these 678 01:05:02,680 --> 01:05:09,640 locations still meet warrants. I appreciate the info. Thanks for sharing. 679 01:05:09,640 --> 01:05:16,560 Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. So jumping off from that at that point do 680 01:05:16,560 --> 01:05:23,120 you when you revisit a traffic study are you using live dynamic data from like 681 01:05:23,120 --> 01:05:28,920 embedded sensors or are you having to put out sensors and have human beings go 682 01:05:28,920 --> 01:05:33,220 out and do a traffic study? We do it both ways we have a lot of our 683 01:05:33,220 --> 01:05:41,860 intersections so give you a little background our detection is called grid 684 01:05:41,860 --> 01:05:46,200 smart and it's basically a fisheye camera and so we can with one camera we 685 01:05:46,200 --> 01:05:51,680 can see the entire intersection and they have developed a module and an 686 01:05:51,680 --> 01:05:55,680 algorithm that allows us to count cars left throughs and rights on all 687 01:05:55,680 --> 01:06:00,520 approaches which is fantastic data for us because we can literally count we 688 01:06:00,520 --> 01:06:06,640 have a rolling database of what's using each of those intersections so on those 689 01:06:06,640 --> 01:06:11,680 on those instances those locations we use the automated data where we don't 690 01:06:11,680 --> 01:06:17,560 have that where we have either radar or I don't think we have any intersections 691 01:06:17,560 --> 01:06:22,240 on loops anymore but where we have a different kind of vehicle detection than 692 01:06:22,240 --> 01:06:25,920 we do we have to go out and actually collect the data but we will always use 693 01:06:25,920 --> 01:06:32,560 current we will not base it on something two years old again if we're counting and 694 01:06:32,560 --> 01:06:36,800 to we're gonna analyze an intersection to determine whether or not it's still 695 01:06:36,800 --> 01:06:42,000 warrants we want to know we use the most current data that we can get and as you 696 01:06:42,000 --> 01:06:46,640 put in new traffic lights and do maintenance are you are you automating 697 01:06:46,640 --> 01:06:51,600 more and more or or is that just too expensive? No that's it is our it is our 698 01:06:51,600 --> 01:06:56,760 standard now it's just some of our older locations either the existing 699 01:06:56,760 --> 01:07:01,120 infrastructure the conduit under the ground or the cabling does not lend 700 01:07:01,120 --> 01:07:05,920 itself to the installation of these these new sensors but all of our new 701 01:07:05,920 --> 01:07:14,120 installations are using the video detection. Okay thank you any other 702 01:07:14,120 --> 01:07:20,240 questions for Brian on that? I do not see anything thank you so much for the 703 01:07:20,240 --> 01:07:28,080 presentations Brian. Thank you very much for the time. Richard would you do want to 704 01:07:28,080 --> 01:07:33,800 hop into the items and table the other work session report for now or is that 705 01:07:33,800 --> 01:07:37,880 high priority to get done this evening? No I think we can we can bring that back 706 01:07:37,880 --> 01:07:42,560 at the next meeting. Okay. That's okay with with the Commission. Is there any 707 01:07:42,560 --> 01:07:49,600 opposition to going a tabling item to be by Julie until next meeting? I don't 708 01:07:49,600 --> 01:07:54,720 see any opposition so let's go ahead and hop into our actual agenda for this 709 01:07:54,720 --> 01:08:02,320 evening. First item is approval of the minutes item 2. Is there any notations 710 01:08:02,320 --> 01:08:09,720 that need to be made on the minutes? All right seeing none we'll go to the 711 01:08:09,720 --> 01:08:14,120 consent agenda there's just one item 3a was there any questions that Kim could 712 01:08:14,120 --> 01:08:21,600 address for anyone on the consent? Commissioner Beck. Yes thank you chair. So 713 01:08:21,600 --> 01:08:30,080 the last time we saw this I think was last time and that was a denial and so I 714 01:08:30,080 --> 01:08:34,360 guess the applicant has cleaned up everything is that why we've got a yes 715 01:08:34,360 --> 01:08:46,360 on the consent agenda? That's correct. Okay I mean I guess it doesn't make any 716 01:08:46,360 --> 01:08:52,880 difference but because it's a single item on the consent agenda but I I kind of 717 01:08:52,880 --> 01:08:58,680 like to have this pulled for individual consideration. I mean it's the same it's 718 01:08:58,680 --> 01:09:02,440 a vote for consent or a vote for individual consideration so it's a 719 01:09:02,440 --> 01:09:07,840 little bit silly of me to do that but I don't want to vote against the consent 720 01:09:07,840 --> 01:09:15,440 agenda I'm I'm particularly concerned about the item itself. Okay that has 721 01:09:15,440 --> 01:09:24,560 been noted any other questions for item 3a? Okay moves us to item 4a these are 722 01:09:24,560 --> 01:09:28,600 individual consideration items there are three of these and that will complete 723 01:09:28,600 --> 01:09:36,080 our agenda for this evening but the first one is item 4a FP 20-0009B 724 01:09:36,080 --> 01:09:47,240 and this is Julie Wyatt she looks ready to go on this one. Sorry I was muted I'm 725 01:09:47,240 --> 01:09:57,080 Julie Wyatt I'm gonna go ahead and share my screen. Okay so this is a this is a 726 01:09:57,080 --> 01:10:04,520 plat that you had that you saw last month they did request a an extension at 727 01:10:04,520 --> 01:10:12,680 last month's meeting and that extension was granted for tonight. They have not we 728 01:10:12,680 --> 01:10:17,700 still don't have a plat that has addressed the comments and the and the 729 01:10:17,700 --> 01:10:21,800 deficiencies within the plat so staff still recommends denial of the request. 730 01:10:21,800 --> 01:10:27,360 And Julie just for clarification there was some communication transmitted 731 01:10:27,360 --> 01:10:35,960 about this item can you let us know the difference in a conditional approval and 732 01:10:35,960 --> 01:10:40,280 a denial in terms of the requirements from the applicant or just the maybe just 733 01:10:40,280 --> 01:10:44,200 the the consequences or applications of those two different outcomes just so we 734 01:10:44,200 --> 01:10:49,760 are aware of what potential vote we can make this evening? Sure so the applicant 735 01:10:49,760 --> 01:10:55,840 did contact staff yesterday and asked that we reach out to you they are 736 01:10:55,840 --> 01:11:01,880 requesting a conditional approval and their representative will be calling in 737 01:11:01,880 --> 01:11:07,000 tonight to to discuss that with you but they are recommending a conditional 738 01:11:07,000 --> 01:11:12,320 approval with those conditions of all of those deficiencies. The Texas Local 739 01:11:12,320 --> 01:11:16,040 Government Code treats conditional approvals and denials much in the same 740 01:11:16,040 --> 01:11:24,120 way and that whatever whatever governing body grants that conditional approval 741 01:11:24,120 --> 01:11:29,840 still has to make sure those conditions are satisfied so it would still have to 742 01:11:29,840 --> 01:11:35,280 come back to you regardless of whether it was denied or conditionally approved 743 01:11:35,280 --> 01:11:40,720 and and so what the applicant would do in either instance is they would correct 744 01:11:40,720 --> 01:11:46,440 those deficiencies resubmit the plaque to staff for review to for us to confirm 745 01:11:46,440 --> 01:11:50,880 that that those corrections have been made and then we would place this item 746 01:11:50,880 --> 01:12:00,040 on a PNZ agenda within 15 days of us receiving that that resubmittal. At this 747 01:12:00,040 --> 01:12:05,240 time because we got the their corrections so late we did do a cursory 748 01:12:05,240 --> 01:12:09,840 review there are still some some deficiencies that we identified just 749 01:12:09,840 --> 01:12:14,640 kind of off the bat some easements that are aren't clearly dimensioned there's 750 01:12:14,640 --> 01:12:20,720 there's some other access easements that that need further attention so right now 751 01:12:20,720 --> 01:12:27,120 staff just believes it's not ready for for approval and so our recommendation 752 01:12:27,120 --> 01:12:32,200 still remains as the denial. Okay thank you for that clarification Commissioner Beck. 753 01:12:32,200 --> 01:12:38,120 So so that is as I understand thank you thank you chair thank you Julie so as I 754 01:12:38,120 --> 01:12:46,600 understand it this is more about a lack of sufficient information is in terms of 755 01:12:46,600 --> 01:12:52,760 what's been submitted to city staff is what's the basis for this we would 756 01:12:52,760 --> 01:12:58,400 basically have to be saying setting a precedent that we would allow 757 01:12:58,400 --> 01:13:04,800 insufficient information to come to staff and and with conditions rather than can 758 01:13:04,800 --> 01:13:10,800 adopt the proper levels of information coming to staff that's the concern 759 01:13:10,800 --> 01:13:16,120 that's why you're asking for the denial sort of thing. Staff just hasn't had an 760 01:13:16,120 --> 01:13:21,520 opportunity to review their their revisions yet and and so we feel like 761 01:13:21,520 --> 01:13:25,920 that that denial still needs to stay in place in this instance. Okay that makes 762 01:13:25,920 --> 01:13:32,240 sense to me thank you Julie. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair just a quick 763 01:13:32,240 --> 01:13:36,280 question I don't know if it's Julie or Richard or Cynthia on this one but can 764 01:13:36,280 --> 01:13:40,520 an applicant ask for a conditional approval I was very confused on that one 765 01:13:40,520 --> 01:13:45,620 I read I mean because it's like they submit it and in from how I had 766 01:13:45,620 --> 01:13:51,320 understood it or read it were the ones who approve with conditions so I was 767 01:13:51,320 --> 01:13:58,660 confused on that if someone could clarify I would love that. Mr. Chair I can 768 01:13:58,660 --> 01:14:04,600 respond I haven't seen the correspondence but like you said it is up 769 01:14:04,600 --> 01:14:09,600 to the Planning and Zoning Commission to make the determination whether the plat 770 01:14:09,600 --> 01:14:18,460 complies with with the DDC requirements and if you want to deny because of 771 01:14:18,460 --> 01:14:24,760 certain reasons or approve with conditions and the staff has made a 772 01:14:24,760 --> 01:14:32,080 recommendation to you. And then regardless it's coming before us again. 773 01:14:32,080 --> 01:14:44,640 If they resubmit right okay thank you. Commissioner Smith. Thank you chair so to 774 01:14:44,640 --> 01:14:48,480 Margie's point though or Commissioner Ellis's point though the the fact that 775 01:14:48,480 --> 01:14:51,920 they have to resubmit and repay fees to go through this now it is on the 776 01:14:51,920 --> 01:14:55,680 applicant because they got the paperwork in without enough time not sufficient 777 01:14:55,680 --> 01:14:59,360 time for the staff to review the make sure the easements and everything else 778 01:14:59,360 --> 01:15:05,160 were were correct and fit city code requirements but if we did an approval 779 01:15:05,160 --> 01:15:12,520 that an approval with conditions that they do satisfy staff's criteria that is 780 01:15:12,520 --> 01:15:16,080 acceptable Cynthia is what you're saying. 781 01:15:18,200 --> 01:15:23,760 The staff's recommendation is denial because of reasons how the local 782 01:15:23,760 --> 01:15:31,760 government code is written is that they would resubmit a plat and address 783 01:15:31,760 --> 01:15:37,800 those written comments and then it would come back to you again. But we could as a 784 01:15:37,800 --> 01:15:41,840 commission we could we could we could we could make a motion for an approval 785 01:15:41,840 --> 01:15:48,180 with the conditions that the items that were in question meet the code then the 786 01:15:48,180 --> 01:15:56,040 then the plot would be approved. Yes correct. Julie I mean is is there a 787 01:15:56,040 --> 01:15:59,880 reason why staff didn't make that recommendation versus making a denial 788 01:15:59,880 --> 01:16:03,800 just because you didn't feel comfortable with it? Well we got this information 789 01:16:03,800 --> 01:16:10,280 very late and so even all of the development reviewers that are typically 790 01:16:10,280 --> 01:16:15,360 review have not had an opportunity to review all of these so we really want to 791 01:16:15,360 --> 01:16:19,680 make sure that it met all of the criteria for approval. So you wouldn't even you 792 01:16:19,680 --> 01:16:23,560 guys there was not even enough time for you guys to retain a conditional 793 01:16:23,560 --> 01:16:27,160 approval recommendation it was just we've had no time to look at it we have 794 01:16:27,160 --> 01:16:31,840 no clue how close it is to being being correct so a denial is the best and 795 01:16:31,840 --> 01:16:39,040 safest suggestion. That's my I'm mainly I'm asking why why not if we're allowed 796 01:16:39,040 --> 01:16:42,360 to do conditional approvals why wasn't a conditional recommended versus just 797 01:16:42,360 --> 01:16:46,240 doing it the denial and you're just afraid that there is too much wrong with 798 01:16:46,240 --> 01:16:54,680 it then a denial is safer than okay. You know we really try to get plots through 799 01:16:54,680 --> 01:16:58,960 as quickly and efficiently as possible through through the review process and 800 01:16:58,960 --> 01:17:04,320 we we do try to ensure they get as many reviews as possible to address those 801 01:17:04,320 --> 01:17:10,440 comments. However in this instance there's just you know this was just that 802 01:17:10,440 --> 01:17:16,680 the second time we saw the plot they received the comments for us you know 803 01:17:16,680 --> 01:17:20,960 right after that first review and so we really just didn't have enough time to 804 01:17:20,960 --> 01:17:25,680 look for everything and feel comfortable with that conditional approval. What is 805 01:17:25,680 --> 01:17:29,680 the cost for a resubmittal and the timeline for resubmittal of a plot I mean 806 01:17:29,680 --> 01:17:33,960 how much how far back will this set the applicant if we just go for a denial? 807 01:17:33,960 --> 01:17:40,120 Let me look up the fees there there they would be treated equally we do have with 808 01:17:40,120 --> 01:17:46,080 that shot clock we we did add the those those deadlines those timelines that 809 01:17:46,080 --> 01:17:49,400 resubmittals that we take those resubmittals to make sure they coincide 810 01:17:49,400 --> 01:17:55,040 with planning and zoning Commission meetings. So can I interrupt really it might be worth 811 01:17:55,040 --> 01:17:59,840 clarifying regardless of there's a conditional approval or denial they 812 01:17:59,840 --> 01:18:06,280 still have to meet the requirements and be approved by P&Z. I don't know if I 813 01:18:06,280 --> 01:18:10,720 misunderstood Commissioner Smith or not but if we approve with conditions and 814 01:18:10,720 --> 01:18:15,080 they meet the conditions staff would not have the authority to approve that those 815 01:18:15,080 --> 01:18:20,720 conditions are met they still file and come back to P&Z either way. But if we 816 01:18:20,720 --> 01:18:24,400 deny them they would have to go through a brand new resubmittal process isn't that correct? 817 01:18:24,400 --> 01:18:30,080 If I can clarify we have submittals that are due every Tuesday so we got 818 01:18:30,080 --> 01:18:34,760 these submittals that that came in yesterday. What was submitted for this 819 01:18:34,760 --> 01:18:40,760 plat was not a formal resubmittal this was just a a courtesy or cursory review 820 01:18:40,760 --> 01:18:45,520 that they asked Julie to look at as a way to get the conditional approval so 821 01:18:45,520 --> 01:18:51,040 this was not formally resubmitted where it was distributed to all of the 822 01:18:51,040 --> 01:18:57,920 departments to to review. But I guess my question is is is there a cost in the 823 01:18:57,920 --> 01:19:02,120 timeline difference between what to deny and they have to go through the process all over 824 01:19:02,120 --> 01:19:07,760 again versus a conditional approval that's really the impetus of my question 825 01:19:07,760 --> 01:19:11,180 is that. And I understand that Chair that yes they have to come back in front of us 826 01:19:11,180 --> 01:19:14,440 and see it again it's not really so much that as it is do they have to start all 827 01:19:14,440 --> 01:19:21,800 the way back over if we give it denial versus conditional. I'm looking up those fees schedule. 828 01:19:21,800 --> 01:19:36,840 I'll concede the floor to Commissioner Beck in the interim. My understanding is I don't 829 01:19:36,840 --> 01:19:41,080 believe that they've submitted for a second review if it's part of a second 830 01:19:41,080 --> 01:19:46,040 review there would be no additional no additional fee. Okay either way Richard 831 01:19:46,040 --> 01:19:51,360 correct. Either way yeah and with a even with a conditional approval it's still 832 01:19:51,360 --> 01:19:56,520 coming back to to PNC once we review it. But denial does not does not impact the 833 01:19:56,520 --> 01:20:02,800 applicant or timeline wise other than a very small amount if anything. If they're 834 01:20:02,800 --> 01:20:06,800 on their second review it should cost them anything. Got it thank you that's all I 835 01:20:06,800 --> 01:20:13,560 needed to know. Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. I take the Commissioner Smith's point 836 01:20:13,560 --> 01:20:18,360 about you know we should be mindful of fees and to developers but at the same 837 01:20:18,360 --> 01:20:23,800 token the onus is not on the city or PNC to establish that fee schedule or those 838 01:20:23,800 --> 01:20:30,040 fees that the onus is on the applicant if I understand the process correctly. So 839 01:20:30,040 --> 01:20:35,560 and I would hate to set a precedent where the incomplete applications were 840 01:20:35,560 --> 01:20:40,040 sent to the city in sufficient time to review I think that's it's a terrible 841 01:20:40,040 --> 01:20:43,960 precedent to do conditionals on that ground so that's more of a comment than 842 01:20:43,960 --> 01:20:50,080 a question from Julie but thank you. Commissioner Granada. So either way this 843 01:20:50,080 --> 01:20:55,720 has to come back to us right. Not to seem excessively cheeky or anything like 844 01:20:55,720 --> 01:21:00,600 that is there anything that would keep us from saying it's a conditional 845 01:21:00,600 --> 01:21:08,280 approval and the conditions are that it meets staff's approval on the next come 846 01:21:08,280 --> 01:21:18,520 go around I mean. I don't know if TGC allows us to do that. Richard can you provide insight 847 01:21:18,520 --> 01:21:25,200 can we on this allow for a condition to be that staff approves it. I think it 848 01:21:25,200 --> 01:21:30,000 would have to be very specific to the code sections and findings. It sounds 849 01:21:30,000 --> 01:21:35,920 like Cynthia might want to weigh in as well. Mr. Chair the the DDC requires the 850 01:21:35,920 --> 01:21:43,360 Planning Commission to approve Platts so I'd have to come back. Okay thank you for 851 01:21:43,360 --> 01:21:50,560 that clarification. I know I think Julie is still looking at that fee structure 852 01:21:50,560 --> 01:21:58,660 maybe or is there any other questions that we can do we have for Julie? And I 853 01:21:58,660 --> 01:22:02,080 believe Richard answered the fee question. Okay great great. Your second 854 01:22:02,080 --> 01:22:07,400 review so correct. All right Julie thank you for that presentation and walking 855 01:22:07,400 --> 01:22:12,440 through the nuances of this approval process in the new era we kind of live 856 01:22:12,440 --> 01:22:17,000 in with this. Is there any other questions for Julie on this item? Okay 857 01:22:17,000 --> 01:22:23,360 seeing none we'll move to the next item of business which is item 4B FP 20-0010 858 01:22:23,360 --> 01:22:28,240 and I believe Mark Laird is calling in on this is he the one presenting this 859 01:22:28,240 --> 01:22:46,520 evening? Good evening this is Mark Laird. This evening I have for your 860 01:22:46,520 --> 01:22:51,460 consideration Lot 1 Block 8 Quincy Court Edition. Staff has recommended approval 861 01:22:51,460 --> 01:22:58,700 and I stand for any questions. Any questions for Mark on this approval 862 01:22:58,700 --> 01:23:04,640 recommendation for approval? Commissioner Ellis. Thank you Chair. Just actually I 863 01:23:04,640 --> 01:23:09,080 had a quick question as to why this was an individual and not consent is it is 864 01:23:09,080 --> 01:23:16,080 it because it's an ETJ or I was confused on that? You have to forgive me this is 865 01:23:16,080 --> 01:23:22,000 not one of the first go arounds for me. I must have placed it on the agenda 866 01:23:22,000 --> 01:23:25,880 incorrectly it probably should have been consent agenda so I do apologize for 867 01:23:25,880 --> 01:23:31,760 that. No worries thanks for the clarification. Any other questions for 868 01:23:31,760 --> 01:23:39,120 Mark on this item? Okay that moves us to our last item of discussion for the work 869 01:23:39,120 --> 01:23:47,000 session that's 4C PD 20-0001E. This item was extended or postponed from our 870 01:23:47,000 --> 01:23:53,160 June 3rd meeting it is Haley Zagorski's item for Sagebrook and as she presents 871 01:23:53,160 --> 01:23:57,720 this I just wanted to remind everyone to be mindful of time and so if we can get 872 01:23:57,720 --> 01:24:03,400 through the presentation that would be great and then just maybe leave some of 873 01:24:03,400 --> 01:24:09,160 our questions until the the the public meeting that might be beneficial for for 874 01:24:09,160 --> 01:24:17,120 timing but with that I will turn it over to Haley for presentation. Good evening 875 01:24:17,120 --> 01:24:21,920 Commissioners Haley Zagorski. I won't go through the entire presentation again 876 01:24:21,920 --> 01:24:26,560 because we've seen this a few times so Julie is actually advancing the slides 877 01:24:26,560 --> 01:24:32,920 for me so Julie if you could be on slide 22. I just wanted to call to your 878 01:24:32,920 --> 01:24:36,760 attention the the change in project boundaries here if you if you look on 879 01:24:36,760 --> 01:24:39,360 the map you'll see there's now a notch out of the western boundary of the 880 01:24:39,360 --> 01:24:44,600 property the total acreage included in this PD request has been modified from 881 01:24:44,600 --> 01:24:51,840 146 acres to 143 that is due to those three acres on the western side are 882 01:24:51,840 --> 01:24:56,440 going to be transferred to the adjacent property owner rather than being 883 01:24:56,440 --> 01:25:03,160 included in this PD and Julie if you can go to the next slide I will quickly show 884 01:25:03,160 --> 01:25:08,240 you a comparison of the original layout versus where we are today so this slide 885 01:25:08,240 --> 01:25:12,480 shows the the original PD concept plan that you're all familiar with you can 886 01:25:12,480 --> 01:25:16,600 see the some of the key features being that central trail the the large amount 887 01:25:16,600 --> 01:25:21,640 of amenity open space on the south side this plan actually featured a total of 888 01:25:21,640 --> 01:25:26,840 fourteen point one nine acres that would be within the HOA as a HOA's maintenance 889 01:25:26,840 --> 01:25:31,880 is open space and then it featured 18 acres south of the brush Creek extension 890 01:25:31,880 --> 01:25:36,200 that would be transferred to the city to our parks department for a future trail 891 01:25:36,200 --> 01:25:43,480 system Julie if you can go to the next slide this shows the the layout that was 892 01:25:43,480 --> 01:25:47,480 presented on June 3rd that was ultimately not voted on the the key 893 01:25:47,480 --> 01:25:52,040 change here was that the alignment of brush Creek shifted the previous plan 894 01:25:52,040 --> 01:25:56,680 had a 1000 foot curve radius on that roadway this plan shows that reduced to 895 01:25:56,680 --> 01:26:02,080 750 feet which is the the tightest curve for a road of this size that the city's 896 01:26:02,080 --> 01:26:07,680 criteria will allow that road is approximately 93 feet north of the barn 897 01:26:07,680 --> 01:26:12,280 so it does avoid aligning with the barn as the previous plan did this plan does 898 01:26:12,280 --> 01:26:16,120 avoid the the plugged gas well that circled in red and it still features that 899 01:26:16,120 --> 01:26:20,120 key central spine that would have the the pedestrian connectivity to the park as 900 01:26:20,120 --> 01:26:24,640 well as the open space is is generally maintained this one comes in just 901 01:26:24,640 --> 01:26:29,720 slightly lower at fourteen point oh nine acres of HOA space and did have a slight 902 01:26:29,720 --> 01:26:32,800 increase in the amount of acreage that would have been dedicated to the city at 903 01:26:32,800 --> 01:26:39,320 eighteen point three acres if you go to the next slide Julie and this this is the 904 01:26:39,320 --> 01:26:43,720 newest alignment the newest plan that's presented to you all today so largely 905 01:26:43,720 --> 01:26:48,160 the same the the roadway brush Creek's alignment is the same as the previous 906 01:26:48,160 --> 01:26:53,560 plan it's still about 93 feet north of the barn the area and that's outlined in 907 01:26:53,560 --> 01:26:57,400 purple there are those three acres that are excluded from the PD now as I 908 01:26:57,400 --> 01:26:59,880 mentioned those are going to be transferred to the ownership of the 909 01:26:59,880 --> 01:27:05,240 adjacent property owner and then the other key change here is with regards to 910 01:27:05,240 --> 01:27:10,560 all red road the adjacent property owner had some concern about the the 911 01:27:10,560 --> 01:27:14,760 intersection of all red and brush Creek aligning on their property so this 912 01:27:14,760 --> 01:27:19,840 shifts that road intersection onto the Sageport property so that connection 913 01:27:19,840 --> 01:27:24,920 between all red and brush Creek will be made within this PD this again maintains 914 01:27:24,920 --> 01:27:29,400 that that central pedestrian corridor it does feature some changes in the amount 915 01:27:29,400 --> 01:27:33,200 of open space there would be just under 13 acres that would be maintained by the 916 01:27:33,200 --> 01:27:37,680 HOA you can see there in that southern amenity center area that more lots has 917 01:27:37,680 --> 01:27:42,360 been added to to adjust for that loss on the western side of the property with 918 01:27:42,360 --> 01:27:46,840 the shift in brush Creek and the total amount that would be dedicated to the 919 01:27:46,840 --> 01:27:51,580 city south of brush Creek is is lower at 15.3 acres because that three acres 920 01:27:51,580 --> 01:27:56,000 being conveyed to the adjacent property owner Julie if you can go to the next 921 01:27:56,000 --> 01:28:01,260 slide I just wanted to call out that with this table that there are no changes to 922 01:28:01,260 --> 01:28:05,960 the proposed uses or the PD standards just the changes to the concept plan or 923 01:28:05,960 --> 01:28:12,560 what's being proposed next slide and again no changes in the dimensional 924 01:28:12,560 --> 01:28:16,920 standards that are proposed with this PD those all remain the same the changes 925 01:28:16,920 --> 01:28:21,360 are in the number of lots and the amount of open space one lot is lost from what 926 01:28:21,360 --> 01:28:27,320 from the original plan this latest plan features 490 lots as opposed to 491 the 927 01:28:27,320 --> 01:28:31,920 HOA open space is still above the city's minimum of 5% it comes in at 9% with 928 01:28:31,920 --> 01:28:36,120 this revised plan and then there is that change and reduction in acreage that 929 01:28:36,120 --> 01:28:42,520 would be dedicated to the city Julie if you could go to the next slide and then 930 01:28:42,520 --> 01:28:46,320 this table it was featured in your staff report that you received it just wanted 931 01:28:46,320 --> 01:28:49,760 to put it here today in case we needed it for conversation purposes this called 932 01:28:49,760 --> 01:28:54,320 out some of those changes and in more of a tabular format for you to compare so 933 01:28:54,320 --> 01:29:00,320 you can see the the road curvature was a significant change the the amounts of 934 01:29:00,320 --> 01:29:05,040 open space changed and then the amount of land that would be affected on the 935 01:29:05,040 --> 01:29:09,560 neighboring property also changed with the June 3rd and July 8th plans reduced 936 01:29:09,560 --> 01:29:12,800 the amount of acreage that the road would take up of the neighboring property 937 01:29:12,800 --> 01:29:19,440 from 6 acres to 1.5 acres and then the final slide I just wanted to highlight 938 01:29:19,440 --> 01:29:23,880 again the staff is still recommending approval of this plan the neighbor did 939 01:29:23,880 --> 01:29:27,040 remove their opposition to this you should have received a letter this 940 01:29:27,040 --> 01:29:30,280 afternoon from the neighboring property owner they are now in support of this 941 01:29:30,280 --> 01:29:34,120 July 8th version of the plan and staff is also in support and I'm happy to 942 01:29:34,120 --> 01:29:36,720 answer any questions now or at the public meeting 943 01:29:36,720 --> 01:29:41,080 Haley thanks for the presentation Mr. Smith has a question I believe yeah just 944 01:29:41,080 --> 01:29:44,280 a quick one Haley with the with the excluded chunk that's coming out of this 945 01:29:44,280 --> 01:29:47,920 that's being given to the adjacent property owner what is the total acreage 946 01:29:47,920 --> 01:29:55,960 that we're rezoning now it is now 143 acres as opposed to 146 thank you very 947 01:29:55,960 --> 01:30:00,280 much I know is in there but as you're going through thank you question 948 01:30:00,280 --> 01:30:04,720 Anderson thank you chair are the property owners that are receiving the 949 01:30:04,720 --> 01:30:11,320 three acres are they and we heard from them as well yes those are the anor the 950 01:30:11,320 --> 01:30:15,280 adjacent property owners that were opposing this previously and they are 951 01:30:15,280 --> 01:30:19,320 now in support well I'd like to give kudos to you guys for working with the 952 01:30:19,320 --> 01:30:22,920 property owners to resolve an issue instead of just keep bringing this back 953 01:30:22,920 --> 01:30:26,280 and denying it trying to do all this stuff kudos to you guys for working it 954 01:30:26,280 --> 01:30:33,720 out thank you Christian back real briefly is the latest plan I thought we 955 01:30:33,720 --> 01:30:38,040 couldn't put roads on top of the gas well is the latest plan the intersection 956 01:30:38,040 --> 01:30:44,040 is basically on top of the gas well Julie if you can pull up slide 25 for 957 01:30:44,040 --> 01:30:52,280 them that's the July 8th site layout if you're looking at the plan the the red 958 01:30:52,280 --> 01:30:56,000 circle that's on the map indicates the location of the well it is it is going 959 01:30:56,000 --> 01:31:00,000 to be within an HOA lot that it's located roughly in between the the knuckle 960 01:31:00,000 --> 01:31:04,360 and in the residential street and all red road where it would bisect the 961 01:31:04,360 --> 01:31:07,800 property so they they managed to miss the gas well with both all red and brush 962 01:31:07,800 --> 01:31:17,000 Creek okay so question I'm gonna maybe maybe you could look up because I'm 963 01:31:17,000 --> 01:31:21,680 gonna ask this later at meeting for the sake of time is is the distance that the 964 01:31:21,680 --> 01:31:27,040 engineers like to see of a gas well I mean we were previously told don't put 965 01:31:27,040 --> 01:31:30,640 the road anywhere near guess well which was one of the original plans and now 966 01:31:30,640 --> 01:31:35,080 we're basically close to being on top of it and so I'm gonna bring that up here 967 01:31:35,080 --> 01:31:39,160 in a few minutes and so if you want to prepare an answer for that question I'll 968 01:31:39,160 --> 01:31:45,520 take it at that time I can answer it now if you would like okay sure great but 969 01:31:45,520 --> 01:31:50,120 the short answer is there there is no standard for that our engineers because 970 01:31:50,120 --> 01:31:52,880 there's there's no standard there's not a lot of knowledge on this issue as 971 01:31:52,880 --> 01:31:57,000 we've talked about their request was that that the gas will not be underneath 972 01:31:57,000 --> 01:32:01,600 the pavement of the roadway and they did manage to to miss that with both roads 973 01:32:01,600 --> 01:32:06,840 so the the wellhead itself will be within that green space on the plan it 974 01:32:06,840 --> 01:32:10,840 is still within an HOA maintained lot so it won't be city right-of-way and it 975 01:32:10,840 --> 01:32:14,080 won't be under the pavement which was the the crucial piece that we were 976 01:32:14,080 --> 01:32:25,040 looking for there all right thank you Haley any other questions for Haley okay 977 01:32:25,040 --> 01:32:31,280 with that that concludes our agenda for a work session we are going to have a 978 01:32:31,280 --> 01:32:38,640 short recess just to kind of recalibrate I will have us all join back here at 640 979 01:32:38,640 --> 01:32:49,080 for the public meeting and with that I will close the work session at 633 good 980 01:32:49,080 --> 01:32:52,200 evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the plan and zoning regular meeting 981 01:32:52,200 --> 01:32:57,320 scheduled for Wednesday July 8th 2020 seeing that we do have a quorum I will 982 01:32:57,320 --> 01:33:05,200 call the meeting to order at 642 the first item of business is item 1 a and 983 01:33:05,200 --> 01:33:09,760 b that's to write a pledge of allegiance to the US and Texas flag if the 984 01:33:09,760 --> 01:33:13,240 commissioners like to join me they can unmute themselves we'll do it 985 01:33:13,240 --> 01:33:19,000 collectively I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and 986 01:33:19,000 --> 01:33:26,320 to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with 987 01:33:26,320 --> 01:33:41,560 liberty and justice for all honor the Texas flag sure I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God one indivisible 988 01:33:41,560 --> 01:33:47,200 the next item of business is item 2 a consider the approval of the June 17th 989 01:33:47,200 --> 01:33:52,180 minutes Commissioner Smith make a motion to approve we have a first for approval 990 01:33:52,180 --> 01:33:56,800 Commissioner Ellis second we have a first and a second for the approval of the June 991 01:33:56,800 --> 01:34:03,840 17th minutes any discussion seeing none I'll call for a vote via roll call 992 01:34:03,840 --> 01:34:10,840 Commissioner Cole Commissioner Smith aye Commissioner Ellis aye Commissioner Beck 993 01:34:10,840 --> 01:34:17,260 aye Commissioner Pernetta aye Commissioner Anderson aye the chair is 994 01:34:17,260 --> 01:34:25,480 also an aye minutes are approved 7-0 the next item of business is item 3a or the 995 01:34:25,480 --> 01:34:30,320 consent in general first item is 3a Commissioner Beck has asked that this 996 01:34:30,320 --> 01:34:36,220 item gets pulled from the consent and so that will reduce our consent agenda to 997 01:34:36,220 --> 01:34:42,480 zero and the item 3a will become our first individual consideration item so 998 01:34:42,480 --> 01:34:51,800 we'll take that item first so 3a is now the first item of IC it's PP 20 - 0 0 1 999 01:34:51,800 --> 01:35:02,360 3a and Christian are back do you have any questions for Karina or staff no 1000 01:35:02,360 --> 01:35:09,600 additional comments on that I do you want me to wait for discussion or for 1001 01:35:09,600 --> 01:35:15,520 general comments yeah we can do is we can see if there is a motion and then we 1002 01:35:15,520 --> 01:35:19,280 can come back during the discussion before the vote if that's good with you 1003 01:35:19,280 --> 01:35:24,960 yes Christian Smith make a motion to approve we have a first for approval 1004 01:35:24,960 --> 01:35:29,480 Commissioner Anderson I second the motion we have first and a second for 1005 01:35:29,480 --> 01:35:34,400 approval of PP 20 - 0 0 1 3a it's time for discussion 1006 01:35:34,400 --> 01:35:41,000 Christian are back yeah so I have real concerns about the the sort of integrity 1007 01:35:41,000 --> 01:35:45,700 of this residential plot in the surrounding community in terms of the 1008 01:35:45,700 --> 01:35:50,480 overall business diversity so I don't know that I agree with staff that it 1009 01:35:50,480 --> 01:35:57,680 matches the joint 2030 plan I'm concerned about the the drainage plans 1010 01:35:57,680 --> 01:36:02,880 that have seen in the backup materials in terms of mitigating future flood loss 1011 01:36:02,880 --> 01:36:09,800 and flood damage and it feels like this is dropped in the middle of the lows the 1012 01:36:09,800 --> 01:36:19,200 dump in the surrounding shopping and and with without mitigating risk or costs to 1013 01:36:19,200 --> 01:36:24,720 to any of those surrounding elements including the the green corridor that it 1014 01:36:24,720 --> 01:36:29,920 sort of represents in the shopping area so I can't good conscious the support 1015 01:36:29,920 --> 01:36:35,000 this okay thank you commissioner Beck we do have a first and a second for 1016 01:36:35,000 --> 01:36:40,760 approval is any other discussion on this item seeing none I'll call for a vote 1017 01:36:40,760 --> 01:36:49,440 be a roll call Commissioner Cole I Mr. Smith I Christian Ellis I Christian back 1018 01:36:49,440 --> 01:37:00,640 may kiss her pernetta okay Commissioner Anderson I the chair is an aye vote 1019 01:37:00,640 --> 01:37:09,200 carries five to the next item of business is item for a FP 20 - 0 0 0 9 B 1020 01:37:09,200 --> 01:37:14,640 and this item is presented by Julie Wyatt 1021 01:37:16,520 --> 01:37:23,360 do we Julie do you want to bring up your presentation or see there's any 1022 01:37:23,360 --> 01:37:32,400 questions or comments I know staff is recommending denial all right so yes this 1023 01:37:32,400 --> 01:37:37,480 plot was originally I'm considered on June 17th they did request an extension 1024 01:37:37,480 --> 01:37:46,080 at that time and and the plat is located along Teasley on the the west side of 1025 01:37:46,080 --> 01:37:52,200 Teasley and staff is recommending denial as the Platts we received do not meet 1026 01:37:52,200 --> 01:37:56,960 the minimum criteria and so I'm established requirements and I'll answer 1027 01:37:56,960 --> 01:37:59,920 any questions I do believe the applicant is on the phone in order to answer 1028 01:37:59,920 --> 01:38:05,760 questions as well great thank you very much Julie so any questions from the 1029 01:38:05,760 --> 01:38:14,160 commissioners I have one question the applicant is available it'd be helpful 1030 01:38:14,160 --> 01:38:19,560 to understand from from my perspective the process of a denial and approval 1031 01:38:19,560 --> 01:38:26,880 with conditions seems to result in the same actions on on the applicant's end 1032 01:38:26,880 --> 01:38:33,200 can I understand the desire for an approval with conditions versus a denial 1033 01:38:33,200 --> 01:38:39,400 if you have a preference and why and if you are on the line if you could just 1034 01:38:39,400 --> 01:38:43,720 state your name and address when you speak just we can identify you this is 1035 01:38:43,720 --> 01:38:49,200 Amy Bissett can you guys hear me can Amy great thank you commissioners I 1036 01:38:49,200 --> 01:38:53,920 appreciate your time this evening and I do want to explain to you why we've made 1037 01:38:53,920 --> 01:38:59,080 that made this request to for you guys to consider an approval with conditions 1038 01:38:59,080 --> 01:39:05,720 just to give you a very brief background and we started this project in 2018 it's 1039 01:39:05,720 --> 01:39:11,520 a very unusual site with some some considerable constraints between court 1040 01:39:11,520 --> 01:39:16,760 ordered easements and trees and a number of other things so we pursued an 1041 01:39:16,760 --> 01:39:22,540 alternative development plan back in 2018 that was approved and then we have 1042 01:39:22,540 --> 01:39:29,040 an approved preliminary plat and it approved civil plans we filed our final 1043 01:39:29,040 --> 01:39:37,360 plat application in May and in around the 1st of June we had a significant 1044 01:39:37,360 --> 01:39:43,640 change occur in that we had a regional originally planned for seven office 1045 01:39:43,640 --> 01:39:49,920 buildings and we have one end user who was looking for a significant more 1046 01:39:49,920 --> 01:39:53,680 amount significantly higher amount of square footage they wanted twenty 1047 01:39:53,680 --> 01:39:59,640 thousand square feet which required enough changes to the site plan to 1048 01:39:59,640 --> 01:40:06,120 warrant an amendment to the alternative development plan that was early June so 1049 01:40:06,120 --> 01:40:13,080 we did request an extension on final plat which you granted on June 17th and 1050 01:40:13,080 --> 01:40:19,520 the 30-day extension really ended up from our from our end in terms of real 1051 01:40:19,520 --> 01:40:25,480 opportunity ended up being about five days because in order to be considered 1052 01:40:25,480 --> 01:40:32,840 for approval today we had to resubmit five days after we were granted the the 1053 01:40:32,840 --> 01:40:39,000 extension in June and so it just ended up in terms of a turnaround time we had 1054 01:40:39,000 --> 01:40:44,200 hoped to come before you today with the alternative development plan as well as 1055 01:40:44,200 --> 01:40:49,400 the changes to the final plat and the time was just super compressed due to 1056 01:40:49,400 --> 01:40:53,840 the shot clock certainly has nothing to do with with anything that any of us 1057 01:40:53,840 --> 01:41:00,240 could control other you know it's just how it worked with under the new law so 1058 01:41:00,240 --> 01:41:07,440 in light of that we were put in a position where we had so we we have this 1059 01:41:07,440 --> 01:41:14,880 20,000 square foot user that is their counseling office and we need them to 1060 01:41:14,880 --> 01:41:21,900 essentially commit to us that they are that they are taking this building for 1061 01:41:21,900 --> 01:41:27,880 us to go through the amended ADP and the amended civil plans and so our 1062 01:41:27,880 --> 01:41:34,920 arrangement with them was that the with with an approval from the Planning and 1063 01:41:34,920 --> 01:41:39,520 Zoning Commission on the final plat tonight they would essentially commit to 1064 01:41:39,520 --> 01:41:46,000 all of the other changes that need to come down the line so we I want you to 1065 01:41:46,000 --> 01:41:51,000 know that we fully understand that when we made the request to Julie and to you 1066 01:41:51,000 --> 01:41:55,200 guys we know that we have not been through a formal submittal process or 1067 01:41:55,200 --> 01:41:59,440 recent mental process and we know that that's outside of of what would normally 1068 01:41:59,440 --> 01:42:06,240 be the review requirements and we're not trying to circumvent those we've been 1069 01:42:06,240 --> 01:42:12,480 going through those requirements on this particular project since 2018 so we want 1070 01:42:12,480 --> 01:42:16,880 to comply with everything and we understand circling back to your 1071 01:42:16,880 --> 01:42:22,680 question and chair we understand that approval with conditions and denial 1072 01:42:22,680 --> 01:42:28,320 essentially have the same impact on us from a submittal and review standpoint 1073 01:42:28,320 --> 01:42:34,800 it doesn't impact our timeline either way but what it does is it impacts our 1074 01:42:34,800 --> 01:42:39,960 arrangement with the end user that's taking 20,000 square feet for a 1075 01:42:39,960 --> 01:42:46,200 counseling office for them to fully commit to this change and so that that 1076 01:42:46,200 --> 01:42:52,040 gives us the confidence that we need to go back through and make sure that 1077 01:42:52,040 --> 01:42:59,280 everything gets changed to reflect city requirements that and the civil plans 1078 01:42:59,280 --> 01:43:04,360 are revised accordingly and the plat is revised accordingly so we did our very 1079 01:43:04,360 --> 01:43:10,680 best to accommodate or to respond to all of the staff comments and to bring the 1080 01:43:10,680 --> 01:43:16,280 plat into compliance as quickly as we could and we were just simply up against 1081 01:43:16,280 --> 01:43:22,100 a very short timeline and I do have Brad Andrews on the line I think he's still 1082 01:43:22,100 --> 01:43:26,280 on hold that he is the property owner and developer and I think he'd like to 1083 01:43:26,280 --> 01:43:29,560 have an opportunity to speak and answer any questions as well 1084 01:43:29,560 --> 01:43:34,560 specifically Commissioner Ellis I know you asked earlier today about why you 1085 01:43:34,560 --> 01:43:39,640 know why are we asking for this approval with conditions if the end result is the 1086 01:43:39,640 --> 01:43:46,800 same either way in terms of timing and costs and we realize that it is Commissioner 1087 01:43:46,800 --> 01:43:52,560 Ellis thank you chair so with that Amy is there any way to explain to your end 1088 01:43:52,560 --> 01:43:57,760 user exactly what's going on here it's the same thing I mean you're still gonna 1089 01:43:57,760 --> 01:44:01,800 have to come back we're still gonna have to see it and we're still gonna have to 1090 01:44:01,800 --> 01:44:07,640 approve it so is there not a way to explain to the end user what you so 1091 01:44:07,640 --> 01:44:12,520 nicely presented to us today which was answers to all of staff's questions it's 1092 01:44:12,520 --> 01:44:19,400 just it's hard for me to to go against staff's recommendation here especially 1093 01:44:19,400 --> 01:44:23,440 when they just have not reviewed you know what it is that you submitted to 1094 01:44:23,440 --> 01:44:30,040 them yesterday I I understand Commissioner Ellis and I'm gonna let Brad 1095 01:44:30,040 --> 01:44:40,120 answer your question specifically but before I hand it over to him and I do 1096 01:44:40,120 --> 01:44:43,480 want to say that we you know we do acknowledge and understand that that 1097 01:44:43,480 --> 01:44:48,600 it's the same process either way this was just a an arrangement that we had 1098 01:44:48,600 --> 01:44:57,040 with the end user that and that put us in this position can we Brad oh he's 1099 01:44:57,040 --> 01:45:02,640 there thank you yeah Brad Andrews 212 South Elm Street in Denton I appreciate 1100 01:45:02,640 --> 01:45:08,440 the time this evening on the point of that it's gonna end up being the same 1101 01:45:08,440 --> 01:45:14,680 timeline and and end result that was that was something that we did not 1102 01:45:14,680 --> 01:45:21,040 understand until today and that may have just been our misunderstanding or maybe 1103 01:45:21,040 --> 01:45:26,800 just even mine but it was it was my understanding that one of your options 1104 01:45:26,800 --> 01:45:30,280 for the one of the options of the planning zoning commission would be to 1105 01:45:30,280 --> 01:45:37,520 approve with condition you know work out those conditions and meet those 1106 01:45:37,520 --> 01:45:42,520 satisfy all of those conditions and working with staff and as soon as those 1107 01:45:42,520 --> 01:45:49,200 conditions were met with staff then it is then ready for filing that it would 1108 01:45:49,200 --> 01:45:55,480 not need to go back to PNC and Amy did call me earlier this afternoon and told 1109 01:45:55,480 --> 01:46:03,240 me that's not the case so I guess that does change things in some ways you know 1110 01:46:03,240 --> 01:46:08,640 but that's that's what I've been telling our our client all this time is that 1111 01:46:08,640 --> 01:46:15,920 that that would be the approach and so not sure how I got got off war on that 1112 01:46:15,920 --> 01:46:22,120 is that not an option at this point it took to work with those work with staff 1113 01:46:22,120 --> 01:46:28,800 to meet those conditions and not come back to PNC unfortunately we contemplated 1114 01:46:28,800 --> 01:46:33,000 that in our work session this evening and concluded that's not an option the 1115 01:46:33,000 --> 01:46:39,520 PNC is the authority the authority to approve that staff would not even if we 1116 01:46:39,520 --> 01:46:45,720 tried to delegate that authority to them be able to to make that decision okay so 1117 01:46:45,720 --> 01:46:51,440 again our misunderstanding on that we we have worked with other cities where that 1118 01:46:51,440 --> 01:46:54,760 has been an option maybe it's a different interpretation of the law that 1119 01:46:54,760 --> 01:46:59,640 so that was that was the route that we we were going down or the understanding 1120 01:46:59,640 --> 01:47:06,160 that we had in kind of telling our clients that that approach so I know it 1121 01:47:06,160 --> 01:47:13,040 seems well I understand the commissioners will do what you feel is in 1122 01:47:13,040 --> 01:47:19,160 the best interest of the city and protect the the integrity of the process 1123 01:47:19,160 --> 01:47:26,800 we do humbly and respectfully however still request that you work with us in 1124 01:47:26,800 --> 01:47:34,160 this way and we'll be back the we've we've submitted and and received 1125 01:47:34,160 --> 01:47:39,960 approval for numerous projects and plats in the city then we were here we were 1126 01:47:39,960 --> 01:47:45,160 local we we certainly intended to do everything that we say we're gonna do 1127 01:47:45,160 --> 01:47:50,920 and on top of this now that you get you get a chance to confirm it we come back 1128 01:47:50,920 --> 01:47:58,920 anyway as strange as the request may sound it would be helpful in what we're 1129 01:47:58,920 --> 01:48:03,880 trying to accomplish with this particular client if we can go this way 1130 01:48:03,880 --> 01:48:10,280 so we do do respectfully request that you give that serious consideration thank 1131 01:48:10,280 --> 01:48:13,240 you well Amy and Brad thank you for being available 1132 01:48:13,240 --> 01:48:19,960 Commissioner Smith thank you so Amy I don't think I got a straight answer from 1133 01:48:19,960 --> 01:48:24,260 what Margie had asked beginning which is are you saying that you will lose your 1134 01:48:24,260 --> 01:48:29,160 end-user if it is a denial versus a conditional approval after after Brad 1135 01:48:29,160 --> 01:48:33,640 had spoke it sounds like it it guys kind of came in tonight and but probably then 1136 01:48:33,640 --> 01:48:38,000 your end-user probably assumes that tonight you could have moved forward but 1137 01:48:38,000 --> 01:48:42,040 now knowing that no matter what you have to come back are you still saying that 1138 01:48:42,040 --> 01:48:44,920 without a conditional probably you're gonna lose your you're gonna lose your 1139 01:48:44,920 --> 01:48:52,080 client basically you're gonna lose your your tenant if I may speak to that that's 1140 01:48:52,080 --> 01:48:57,640 unknown what what the the commitment that we made to them is that we would 1141 01:48:57,640 --> 01:49:01,620 submit and and be on on the agenda tonight for the plaque to maintain the 1142 01:49:01,620 --> 01:49:07,600 timeline that that that everybody had anticipated this project to be under and 1143 01:49:07,600 --> 01:49:12,440 so their their commitment to us is that we'll go ahead and execute this lease 1144 01:49:12,440 --> 01:49:18,480 they they executed the lease today based on our our being on the agenda tonight 1145 01:49:18,480 --> 01:49:23,280 and so I can't I don't know I mean I don't want to tell you I'm certainly not 1146 01:49:23,280 --> 01:49:27,360 trying to threaten you with hey we're gonna lose our client and that's your 1147 01:49:27,360 --> 01:49:31,800 problem it's not your problem I understand that but that those are the 1148 01:49:31,800 --> 01:49:36,840 promises that we met made to them tonight and I don't know honestly how it 1149 01:49:36,840 --> 01:49:42,280 will play out from here obviously I've got some explaining to do based on the 1150 01:49:42,280 --> 01:49:47,320 my misunderstanding of how this could play out I've got some explaining to do 1151 01:49:47,320 --> 01:49:56,200 to them anyway so okay thank you very much I think if I can interject some 1152 01:49:56,200 --> 01:50:03,520 some thoughts on this our Commission me personally have set through literal work 1153 01:50:03,520 --> 01:50:08,200 sessions on trying to understand this new governmental code of platting and 1154 01:50:08,200 --> 01:50:17,400 shot clocks and we can't deny a plat or all these different rules that we still 1155 01:50:17,400 --> 01:50:25,960 are as clear as mud on how to interpret and use these and so I have a an issue 1156 01:50:25,960 --> 01:50:31,920 that even the volunteer Commission who has been trained on this doesn't 1157 01:50:31,920 --> 01:50:36,640 understand this to delegate the responsibility out to local developers 1158 01:50:36,640 --> 01:50:43,360 to then try for them to defend or describe how to navigate this new local 1159 01:50:43,360 --> 01:50:49,800 government code and so if it is the exact same burden and onus back on the 1160 01:50:49,800 --> 01:50:53,920 city and the applicant to apply I know just in my personal and professional 1161 01:50:53,920 --> 01:50:58,320 experience the idea of having a status of approved with conditions is 1162 01:50:58,320 --> 01:51:04,040 monumentally different and extremely more interpretable than denial and then 1163 01:51:04,040 --> 01:51:08,840 having someone defend what that denial means despite them saying it's the exact 1164 01:51:08,840 --> 01:51:15,120 same it's it's it's a tough conversation to have with anybody to say it's a 1165 01:51:15,120 --> 01:51:19,600 denial but really it is an approval with conditions if I don't I don't like the 1166 01:51:19,600 --> 01:51:23,320 idea of me putting that on any person trying to develop and didn't when we as 1167 01:51:23,320 --> 01:51:27,200 a Commissioner still going through work sessions on how to actually process the 1168 01:51:27,200 --> 01:51:33,240 approval of these things and so it would be my desire and I obviously and fully 1169 01:51:33,240 --> 01:51:37,880 respect staff's recommendation for denial but to facilitate the 1170 01:51:37,880 --> 01:51:41,800 conversations left with the individuals trying to do business in our town I 1171 01:51:41,800 --> 01:51:49,080 would prefer and I guess I just go ahead and make the motion to approve this with 1172 01:51:49,080 --> 01:51:56,520 conditions and so that's my motion on the table Commissioner Smith a second we 1173 01:51:56,520 --> 01:52:02,240 have a first and a second for approval with conditions Commissioner Beck yeah 1174 01:52:02,240 --> 01:52:07,360 so I appreciate the thank you chair I appreciate that the chairs desire to 1175 01:52:07,360 --> 01:52:12,420 make this easier on on our fellow citizens who are just trying to do their 1176 01:52:12,420 --> 01:52:17,200 best to develop property under their control and and I appreciate that I I 1177 01:52:17,200 --> 01:52:22,480 don't want to overburden my neighbors who are trying to develop these properties 1178 01:52:22,480 --> 01:52:28,240 but I think it sets a it is the more conservative and sets the the more 1179 01:52:28,240 --> 01:52:35,960 limited impact to say that we are going to follow the rules and and it's it may 1180 01:52:35,960 --> 01:52:42,400 be unfortunate that in this particular case they're getting caught so I 1181 01:52:42,400 --> 01:52:47,880 appreciate the chairs concern about that that this is cumbersome and and dropped 1182 01:52:47,880 --> 01:52:51,920 in from the sky as it were this at the state level and and it's really 1183 01:52:51,920 --> 01:52:57,360 impacting our neighborhood but at the same token we the staff hasn't had a 1184 01:52:57,360 --> 01:53:02,160 chance to review these materials and I think that sets a precedent where you're 1185 01:53:02,160 --> 01:53:06,620 saying well we're going to we're going to make a judgment call on something 1186 01:53:06,620 --> 01:53:10,400 where the staff is not fully reviewed the materials and I think that sets a 1187 01:53:10,400 --> 01:53:14,960 terrible precedent so I I I'm sympathetic and I'm very sorry for the 1188 01:53:14,960 --> 01:53:19,440 applicant but I don't think I can support this in these kinds of conditions 1189 01:53:19,440 --> 01:53:24,200 if the staff would review it then I probably if they supported it and it 1190 01:53:24,200 --> 01:53:28,200 matched everything then then I might feel much more comfortable thank you 1191 01:53:28,200 --> 01:53:33,520 chair sure Christian actually Christian put out real fast and I let Cynthia hop 1192 01:53:33,520 --> 01:53:40,360 in to see if she has some context for us mr. chair I just wanted to point out or 1193 01:53:40,360 --> 01:53:45,300 ask if if the conditions that you mentioned in your motion are the 1194 01:53:45,300 --> 01:53:50,200 conditions in the staff report I I appreciate that clarification they are 1195 01:53:50,200 --> 01:53:53,480 the conditions listed in the staff report Commissioner Smith are you okay 1196 01:53:53,480 --> 01:53:57,560 with that clarification yes I am thank you Commissioner for being patient you 1197 01:53:57,560 --> 01:54:04,320 know the floor that was gonna be my question so the conditions that we're 1198 01:54:04,320 --> 01:54:09,400 voting on are going to be basically staff's conditions so so when this comes 1199 01:54:09,400 --> 01:54:15,120 around because it's gonna have to come back right would that vote be contingent 1200 01:54:15,120 --> 01:54:19,720 on them meeting the conditions in this report or whether or not they just meet 1201 01:54:19,720 --> 01:54:28,040 the requirements period well I guess that my question is what are we setting 1202 01:54:28,040 --> 01:54:34,040 ourselves up to have to approve when it comes back the expectation of my motion 1203 01:54:34,040 --> 01:54:38,620 was that they meet the baseline of all approval necessary for to meet the 1204 01:54:38,620 --> 01:54:46,960 technical requirements to approve okay okay I think that's all the question 1205 01:54:46,960 --> 01:54:50,320 because ultimately like this comes down to like weird stuff that we have to do 1206 01:54:50,320 --> 01:54:54,920 because of the shot clock and bizarre things that this imperfect law that we 1207 01:54:54,920 --> 01:55:02,680 hate is wreaking on our town right okay all right 1208 01:55:02,680 --> 01:55:08,400 is there any other Christian Alice yeah thank you chair just to further the 1209 01:55:08,400 --> 01:55:12,280 discussion because I'm I'm super uncomfortable with it I mean I feel like 1210 01:55:12,280 --> 01:55:16,060 we're circumventing our own process and we're going against our own staff with 1211 01:55:16,060 --> 01:55:20,960 their recommendation I mean the way the law states is that we as a commission 1212 01:55:20,960 --> 01:55:25,400 can set forth an approval with conditions and cite the conditions in 1213 01:55:25,400 --> 01:55:29,520 this case we've literally had an applicant come to us requesting a 1214 01:55:29,520 --> 01:55:34,560 conditional approval which to me seems backwards for the way the law is written 1215 01:55:34,560 --> 01:55:40,680 and while I appreciate the difficulty in in having to explain to their client 1216 01:55:40,680 --> 01:55:45,760 what was misunderstood I mean that's just part of doing business we all have 1217 01:55:45,760 --> 01:55:49,880 clients we have to talk to and explain things to and sometimes that you know 1218 01:55:49,880 --> 01:55:53,560 we're back to do a corner because we misunderstood something and it's it's on 1219 01:55:53,560 --> 01:56:00,560 us to go back to our client and explain to them and I don't I don't feel like we 1220 01:56:00,560 --> 01:56:06,040 should circumvent what our process is and circumvent our staff's 1221 01:56:06,040 --> 01:56:11,560 recommendation because they need to go back and clarify something with their 1222 01:56:11,560 --> 01:56:18,280 clients so and again it's not to try to to put a bigger burden that the issue is 1223 01:56:18,280 --> 01:56:24,840 the same difference for them this is coming before us regardless I don't know 1224 01:56:24,840 --> 01:56:29,880 why we want to circumvent our own process which staff work diligently to 1225 01:56:29,880 --> 01:56:35,040 put in place when this shot clock became law and I think they've done a great job 1226 01:56:35,040 --> 01:56:42,200 with with how they are managing plats being submitted and resubmittals and so 1227 01:56:42,200 --> 01:56:50,480 I am I'm not comfortable with with emotion as stated good Richard just for 1228 01:56:50,480 --> 01:56:54,240 point of clarification the conditions were not in the staff report I think the 1229 01:56:54,240 --> 01:56:58,840 conditions were put in in the letter that was submitted by the by the 1230 01:56:58,840 --> 01:57:07,320 applicants representative so for clarification on that point then the the 1231 01:57:07,320 --> 01:57:14,200 implications of a denial and an approval with conditions ultimately though the 1232 01:57:14,200 --> 01:57:21,920 threshold for approval is the same I would have to look at all of their 1233 01:57:21,920 --> 01:57:26,440 conditions and how they align with the various items that that Julie has in her 1234 01:57:26,440 --> 01:57:31,740 staff analysis that was found to be deficient if it is if for some reason 1235 01:57:31,740 --> 01:57:37,880 one of those conditions missed a deficiency that that was determined by 1236 01:57:37,880 --> 01:57:42,760 by Julian her staff analysis if that was not addressed in those conditions we 1237 01:57:42,760 --> 01:57:48,600 could then not force them to comply they would only be limited to those 1238 01:57:48,600 --> 01:57:55,320 conditions that were put in place by by PNC I don't I don't like that at all 1239 01:57:55,320 --> 01:58:01,060 that's unsettling to me thank you for that clarification I was under the 1240 01:58:01,060 --> 01:58:07,600 impression that yeah I was under a different impression yeah I think that 1241 01:58:07,600 --> 01:58:12,400 was Cynthia's earlier comment she could correct me but that they would need to 1242 01:58:12,400 --> 01:58:17,760 be very specific not this broad sort of broad approval or broad conditional 1243 01:58:17,760 --> 01:58:22,920 approval understood things like clarification Christian Pernetta so just 1244 01:58:22,920 --> 01:58:26,720 a couple of things so thanks Richard for bringing in that up so just to verify 1245 01:58:26,720 --> 01:58:34,200 the the conditions are not staff conditions these are conditions requested 1246 01:58:34,200 --> 01:58:38,880 by the applicant in their letter to us right 1247 01:58:38,880 --> 01:58:49,760 that are part of the motion I guess is what I'm asking yeah it Julie did you 1248 01:58:49,760 --> 01:58:57,280 have something yes Christian Pernetta that was my understanding prior to us 1249 01:58:57,280 --> 01:59:01,320 going to a vote there might be a rescinding of a motion bear with me on 1250 01:59:01,320 --> 01:59:08,840 that one Julie did you have something to add to that um no they were yeah it was 1251 01:59:08,840 --> 01:59:14,120 requested by the applicant I don't I'm looking back through their email I don't 1252 01:59:14,120 --> 01:59:19,720 see where they specifically laid out conditions it appears that they're 1253 01:59:19,720 --> 01:59:29,440 essentially kind of requesting that condition that all staff comments will 1254 01:59:29,440 --> 01:59:41,240 be addressed which is broad okay so and before we go to the part where we may or 1255 01:59:41,240 --> 01:59:45,000 may not rescind the motion everything I just do want to take one second to 1256 01:59:45,000 --> 01:59:49,120 grandstand for a second knowing that all the problems that we've had with you 1257 01:59:49,120 --> 01:59:51,840 know things like the shot clock and everything this is a law that went back 1258 01:59:51,840 --> 01:59:57,280 and went to place in the last session and knowing that these are all you know 1259 01:59:57,280 --> 02:00:02,440 things that are lobbied upon to to the state to pass you know I would hope that 1260 02:00:02,440 --> 02:00:06,960 things like this kind of go forward and there is lobbying at the next session to 1261 02:00:06,960 --> 02:00:11,600 maybe revoke this refined it in some way so that way that these don't quite hobble 1262 02:00:11,600 --> 02:00:16,560 us in our job going forward it seems like it was a very rush thing that was 1263 02:00:16,560 --> 02:00:19,800 you know that while it was put forward to make sure that in the event of 1264 02:00:19,800 --> 02:00:24,800 disasters like Hurricane Harvey people aren't left you know in the lurch it 1265 02:00:24,800 --> 02:00:29,640 seems like for everyday things this is this winds up hurting our partners in 1266 02:00:29,640 --> 02:00:33,520 town who are trying to build a better town so if you're out there listening 1267 02:00:33,520 --> 02:00:37,200 here for developer please get with everybody else and see what we can do to 1268 02:00:37,200 --> 02:00:43,560 make sure that this thing gets corrected in the next session thank you so I 1269 02:00:43,560 --> 02:00:47,720 completely agree with the Commissioner pernetta I saw this as an opportunity 1270 02:00:47,720 --> 02:00:57,040 for local authorities to to find a way to help local developers but it seems as 1271 02:00:57,040 --> 02:01:02,400 though that the kind of the state wins again in this situation in terms of what 1272 02:01:02,400 --> 02:01:07,640 we can do I I am going to withdraw my motion as much as I I would want to 1273 02:01:07,640 --> 02:01:11,720 facilitate an easy conversation between the applicant and the tenants the 1274 02:01:11,720 --> 02:01:16,600 ambiguity and and the applicant presenting conditions to us as 1275 02:01:16,600 --> 02:01:20,440 Commissioner Ellis pointed out does change the process we have in place and 1276 02:01:20,440 --> 02:01:24,200 and without those being reviewed I wouldn't be in good conscience knowing 1277 02:01:24,200 --> 02:01:30,000 exactly what conditions that I would be in favor of and so back to Commissioner 1278 02:01:30,000 --> 02:01:35,000 pernetta's eloquent grandstanding this is ridiculous and it continues to be 1279 02:01:35,000 --> 02:01:39,760 ridiculous from the state mandate and needs to change but but knowing all the 1280 02:01:39,760 --> 02:01:44,120 context Cynthia and Richard for helping out there with Julie's help I'm going to 1281 02:01:44,120 --> 02:01:49,240 withdraw my motion Julie well I did want to add I apologize I look back through 1282 02:01:49,240 --> 02:01:56,400 Amy's through Amy's request she did have some specific conditions I they're not 1283 02:01:56,400 --> 02:01:59,960 something that staff is fully fully vetted once again because it's it's 1284 02:01:59,960 --> 02:02:05,840 based upon deficiencies in the plot that we haven't reviewed but do you want me 1285 02:02:05,840 --> 02:02:11,200 to read out what her requested conditions are or I I do not need them 1286 02:02:11,200 --> 02:02:17,920 right out okay so with that the chair will entertain another motion 1287 02:02:17,920 --> 02:02:22,960 Commissioner Beck I make a motion to accept staff's recommendation for 1288 02:02:22,960 --> 02:02:30,720 denial as recommended by staff customer pernetta good I'm sorry doing I just 1289 02:02:30,720 --> 02:02:37,440 wanted to interject mr. chair yeah I'm sorry if our commissioner back are you 1290 02:02:37,440 --> 02:02:41,980 saying that you want to deny with the conditions or the reasons in the staff 1291 02:02:41,980 --> 02:02:49,060 report I am saying I I make a motion to accept staff's recommendation as it has 1292 02:02:49,060 --> 02:02:57,160 as it was conveyed to us okay so is that a how that the state law is written is 1293 02:02:57,160 --> 02:03:02,440 that the Planning Commission has to deny for reasons specific reasons for those 1294 02:03:02,440 --> 02:03:06,560 need to be in those reasons as identified in the staff report okay thank 1295 02:03:06,560 --> 02:03:12,520 you Christian pernetta as much as it pains me to do this to the applicant I 1296 02:03:12,520 --> 02:03:23,500 would second yeah we have a first and a second for denial any discussion yeah I 1297 02:03:23,500 --> 02:03:29,280 don't need to talk anymore but this is not a fun vote I certainly for Brad and 1298 02:03:29,280 --> 02:03:32,240 Amy who I hope so on the line hopefully that conversation goes well and the 1299 02:03:32,240 --> 02:03:36,520 tenant holds that lease they you got executed today so wish you the best in 1300 02:03:36,520 --> 02:03:41,840 that conversation we'll take this to a vote via roll call again this is a vote 1301 02:03:41,840 --> 02:03:51,640 to deny so in I vote is vote to deny commissioner Cole Commissioner Ellis I 1302 02:03:51,640 --> 02:04:00,480 customer back I customer pernetta I customer Anderson I commissioner Smith 1303 02:04:00,480 --> 02:04:09,120 all right the chair is also an I the motion carries of denial seven zero next 1304 02:04:09,120 --> 02:04:15,660 round of business is item for BFP 20 - 0 0 1 0 and this item is going to be 1305 02:04:15,660 --> 02:04:24,480 presented by mark layered and mark as you come on the line if you can hear me 1306 02:04:24,480 --> 02:04:28,440 I've just been asked that any time you speak since you're on the phone if you 1307 02:04:28,440 --> 02:04:33,480 could just say this is mark speaking or just identify yourself on the onset of 1308 02:04:33,480 --> 02:04:37,440 you speaking this be helpful for anyone watching along we know what that voice 1309 02:04:37,440 --> 02:04:47,680 is good evening this is mark layered can you hear me we can great thank you this 1310 02:04:47,680 --> 02:04:51,800 evening I have for your consideration the final plot of lot one block a 1311 02:04:51,800 --> 02:04:56,400 Quincy court in addition this property is generally low is located at the 1312 02:04:56,400 --> 02:05:00,720 southeast corner of Stewart Road and Luke 288 located here within the city of 1313 02:05:00,720 --> 02:05:06,200 Denton staff recommends the approval of the plot and I stand for any questions 1314 02:05:06,200 --> 02:05:14,360 you may have thank you very much Mark there any questions for this item okay 1315 02:05:14,360 --> 02:05:18,400 seeing none the chair will entertain a motion the commissioner Anderson I make 1316 02:05:18,400 --> 02:05:24,840 the motion to approve commissioner Smith second we have a first and a second for 1317 02:05:24,840 --> 02:05:30,800 approval any discussion on the item seeing none I'll call for a vote be a 1318 02:05:30,800 --> 02:05:39,840 roll call commissioner Cole Mr. Smith I push your Ellis I push your back I 1319 02:05:39,840 --> 02:05:46,960 push your pernetta I push your Anderson I chairs also an I motion carries seven 1320 02:05:46,960 --> 02:05:57,120 zero next item of business is item 4c PD 20 - 0 0 0 1e this item was postponed at 1321 02:05:57,120 --> 02:06:02,020 our June 3rd meeting is being brought back before us and I will turn the floor 1322 02:06:02,020 --> 02:06:09,240 over to Haley's Agurski for presentation good evening Commission Haley's 1323 02:06:09,240 --> 02:06:17,360 Agurski senior planner can you all hear me we can all right great so I won't go 1324 02:06:17,360 --> 02:06:21,600 through everything in full detail again I'll just skim through those slides we 1325 02:06:21,600 --> 02:06:27,100 went through at work session to highlight the changes so again the major change to 1326 02:06:27,100 --> 02:06:31,400 this request is the the change in acreage that would be within the PD three 1327 02:06:31,400 --> 02:06:35,440 acres on the western edge of the property have been removed from the PD 1328 02:06:35,440 --> 02:06:41,400 request so we're at a total of 143 acres as opposed to the 146 that we previously 1329 02:06:41,400 --> 02:06:48,780 looked at the the request would be broken down as 128 acres being initially 1330 02:06:48,780 --> 02:06:54,280 zoned to PD to PD from the placeholder of our that was received after annexation 1331 02:06:54,280 --> 02:07:00,240 and then 14.19 acres would be rezoned from the existing r6 designation to PD 1332 02:07:00,240 --> 02:07:07,360 we can go to the next slide this this is the original layout that you all saw 1333 02:07:07,360 --> 02:07:11,280 when this first came before you as a public hearing item this featured 491 1334 02:07:11,280 --> 02:07:18,880 lots 14 a 14.19 acres rather of HOA open space that the two main areas are 1335 02:07:18,880 --> 02:07:22,800 shown in yellow on the map a larger amenity center with trails on the south 1336 02:07:22,800 --> 02:07:27,200 side and then a smaller pond feature with trails around that on the north 1337 02:07:27,200 --> 02:07:33,360 northeast side of the property the the area called that in blue is a central 1338 02:07:33,360 --> 02:07:37,800 pedestrian corridor that would be a divided roadway with a sidewalk through 1339 02:07:37,800 --> 02:07:42,160 the middle of it to facilitate pedestrian traffic going through this 1340 02:07:42,160 --> 02:07:46,720 neighborhood to the future regional City Park that is north of all Red Road and 1341 02:07:46,720 --> 02:07:51,160 then south of the extension of Rush Creek Road this plan featured about 18 1342 02:07:51,160 --> 02:07:54,520 acres of land that would be dedicated to the Parks Department for a trail 1343 02:07:54,520 --> 02:07:58,400 extension that would connect to this neighborhood and be part of a larger 1344 02:07:58,400 --> 02:08:02,120 network of trails throughout the city the area shown in red is the approximate 1345 02:08:02,120 --> 02:08:06,760 location of a plug gas well and we can look at that location in a little more 1346 02:08:06,760 --> 02:08:12,440 detail on the other plans as well so if we go to the next slide this was the the 1347 02:08:12,440 --> 02:08:16,780 plan that was presented to you on June 3rd the major change here again is the 1348 02:08:16,780 --> 02:08:20,800 alignment of Rush Creek Road the previous plan had that road terminating 1349 02:08:20,800 --> 02:08:25,960 section that aligned with a barn on the adjacent property after negotiations 1350 02:08:25,960 --> 02:08:31,720 with the the property owner and reanalyzing this the developer was able 1351 02:08:31,720 --> 02:08:36,580 to tighten the curve on this roadway up from a thousand feet to the minimum of 1352 02:08:36,580 --> 02:08:42,180 750 feet so that moved the roadway about 93 feet from that barn so it would 1353 02:08:42,180 --> 02:08:47,580 avoid that future intersection a few lots were lost on the west side of the 1354 02:08:47,580 --> 02:08:52,000 property those were relocated near the amenity center on the south side but 1355 02:08:52,000 --> 02:08:55,120 this does still feature those two main amenity areas as well as the central 1356 02:08:55,120 --> 02:09:01,520 trail this plan has slightly less acreage within HOA control 14.09 acres 1357 02:09:01,520 --> 02:09:07,120 and then the approximately 18.3 acres so slightly more acreage that would have 1358 02:09:07,120 --> 02:09:12,020 been dedicated to the city and then if we go to the next slide this this is the 1359 02:09:12,020 --> 02:09:16,440 final version of the plan that's been agreed upon by the neighbors it is much 1360 02:09:16,440 --> 02:09:21,720 the same as the previous version again the road does miss the barn by about 93 1361 02:09:21,720 --> 02:09:26,680 feet the intersection of Allred Road and Rush Creek Road has been relocated on 1362 02:09:26,680 --> 02:09:31,040 this plan so you can see a few less lots there on the northwest corner to 1363 02:09:31,040 --> 02:09:34,840 clarify Commissioner Beck's question at work session the developer did provide 1364 02:09:34,840 --> 02:09:38,720 me with some exact measurements the plugged well that's approximately in the 1365 02:09:38,720 --> 02:09:44,120 red area is about 37 feet south of Allred Road and about 35 feet north of 1366 02:09:44,120 --> 02:09:48,340 that knuckle within the residential street there so it is over 30 feet 1367 02:09:48,340 --> 02:09:53,760 outside of both right of ways and within an HOA lot just to clarify that the 1368 02:09:53,760 --> 02:09:57,880 other major change here is the area outlined in purple that's the the three 1369 02:09:57,880 --> 02:10:00,800 acres that would be conveyed to the adjacent property owner and therefore 1370 02:10:00,800 --> 02:10:06,120 are excluded from this PD request now and then the the totals just to compare 1371 02:10:06,120 --> 02:10:10,480 open space again this plan does have less HOA open space at just under 13 1372 02:10:10,480 --> 02:10:16,320 acres and it it has three less acres 15.3 total that would be conveyed to the 1373 02:10:16,320 --> 02:10:21,520 city approve it for the future trails if we can go to the next slide this is 1374 02:10:21,520 --> 02:10:25,920 simply here to clarify that there are no changes proposed with this revised plan 1375 02:10:25,920 --> 02:10:28,920 to the uses that would be permitted within the PD it would still be 1376 02:10:28,920 --> 02:10:32,960 strictly a single-family residential as well as the typical accessory and 1377 02:10:32,960 --> 02:10:38,240 temporary uses that we permit within our single-family districts and on the next 1378 02:10:38,240 --> 02:10:43,400 slide this is just a breakdown again to show that there are no differences 1379 02:10:43,400 --> 02:10:47,680 proposed within the dimensional standards the major changes here again 1380 02:10:47,680 --> 02:10:52,080 that are shown on the plan is a slight reduction in open space from 10% to 9% 1381 02:10:52,080 --> 02:10:57,200 that three acre reduction in open space to be conveyed to the city and then an 1382 02:10:57,200 --> 02:11:06,400 overall loss of one lot so from 491 to 490 the next slide this again is just a 1383 02:11:06,400 --> 02:11:10,000 breakdown of those three plans and how they compare the major changes are in 1384 02:11:10,000 --> 02:11:15,800 bold so the the curve radius on on brush Creek has been shrank from a thousand 1385 02:11:15,800 --> 02:11:20,840 feet to about 750 feet which is the city minimum this is slightly less 1386 02:11:20,840 --> 02:11:24,360 desirable but it is still within the parameters for safety for a roadway of 1387 02:11:24,360 --> 02:11:30,280 this size all three of the alignments avoid going over the gas well in terms 1388 02:11:30,280 --> 02:11:34,480 of maximizing open space for the neighborhood the the revised plan does 1389 02:11:34,480 --> 02:11:38,960 have slightly less acreage it goes from fourteen point one nine to twelve point 1390 02:11:38,960 --> 02:11:44,920 nine six acres total that would be with an HOA control and then the the open 1391 02:11:44,920 --> 02:11:47,880 space that would be conveyed to the city is reduced from eighteen point three to 1392 02:11:47,880 --> 02:11:52,000 fifteen point three acres with the exclusion of that Western area from the 1393 02:11:52,000 --> 02:11:55,800 PD that we looked at earlier some of the other considerations with the roadway 1394 02:11:55,800 --> 02:11:59,480 that they were striving to meet with these plans was to keep the neighborhood 1395 02:11:59,480 --> 02:12:03,120 intact and avoid bisecting it with that arterial roadway all three designs 1396 02:12:03,120 --> 02:12:07,560 achieved that goal and then finally with regard to impact to the neighbors the 1397 02:12:07,560 --> 02:12:11,000 original plan would have affected about six acres of the neighbor neighboring 1398 02:12:11,000 --> 02:12:15,200 property with the road alignment both of the revisions take that number down to 1399 02:12:15,200 --> 02:12:20,120 1.5 acres this final plan also offers the neighbor the benefit of removing the 1400 02:12:20,120 --> 02:12:23,840 all-red road intersection from their property and putting it on to the sage 1401 02:12:23,840 --> 02:12:29,040 work property and finally with the the next slide just wanted to clarify that 1402 02:12:29,040 --> 02:12:33,160 staff is still recommending approval of this plan the neighbor is no longer in 1403 02:12:33,160 --> 02:12:37,360 opposition so so they achieve that goal of the postponements that we've been 1404 02:12:37,360 --> 02:12:41,920 going through and staff is in favor of the the July 8th plan as it's been 1405 02:12:41,920 --> 02:12:46,840 presented tonight and I'm happy to answer any questions thank you very much 1406 02:12:46,840 --> 02:12:52,840 Haley commissioner Beck yes thank you chair so as I recall the the order of 1407 02:12:52,840 --> 02:12:56,480 events that happened here and you sort of mentioned on the previous slide I'm 1408 02:12:56,480 --> 02:13:02,160 not asking you to bring it up is the original all red road or sorry brush 1409 02:13:02,160 --> 02:13:11,480 Creek Road expansion was put in place to come to avoid the floodplain crossing 1410 02:13:11,480 --> 02:13:20,360 through the middle of this property and that put it to take over the the the 1411 02:13:20,360 --> 02:13:24,440 neighboring property and when we had questions about that we were like well 1412 02:13:24,440 --> 02:13:28,360 we don't want to cross the floodplain and we don't we can't remove it north 1413 02:13:28,360 --> 02:13:35,120 because we'll we'll hit a gas well and then as we begin to massage this to take 1414 02:13:35,120 --> 02:13:39,600 into the concerns of the neighboring property which I admit are very and very 1415 02:13:39,600 --> 02:13:43,760 important we don't want to have impacts necessarily on the neighboring property 1416 02:13:43,760 --> 02:13:48,760 but we move to a condition where suddenly now we're crossing into the 1417 02:13:48,760 --> 02:13:55,080 floodplain and suddenly we're building I heard the numbers 37 and I can't remember 1418 02:13:55,080 --> 02:13:58,560 the other but it doesn't really approximately the same we know we're 1419 02:13:58,560 --> 02:14:04,520 basically building on top of a gas well which we said we couldn't do and you 1420 02:14:04,520 --> 02:14:09,280 know I was when I my original question on three three meetings back or so was 1421 02:14:09,280 --> 02:14:14,280 you know can't we just punch it through there and oh no we can't do that or the 1422 02:14:14,280 --> 02:14:19,280 engineer doesn't want to do that so it feels like we're we're playing a little 1423 02:14:19,280 --> 02:14:24,080 fast and loose with both our needs of our floodplain and our needs of our gas 1424 02:14:24,080 --> 02:14:29,720 well the needs of our property adjacent property owners and then you know the 1425 02:14:29,720 --> 02:14:35,040 you know the collecting all the the issues of you know what does it mean to 1426 02:14:35,040 --> 02:14:39,640 have additional drainage potential damage by moving into the floodplain what 1427 02:14:39,640 --> 02:14:44,560 does it mean to to you know why was the engineer concerned to build next to a 1428 02:14:44,560 --> 02:14:49,080 gas well that wasn't ever really super clear we all agreed it was maybe not 1429 02:14:49,080 --> 02:14:57,280 optimal but now we can do that we're not taking into a cost the the the costs or 1430 02:14:57,280 --> 02:15:06,640 the development and the future costs for for Denton I'm not at all blind to this 1431 02:15:06,640 --> 02:15:12,560 this property you know already road was you know used psychic circly to justify 1432 02:15:12,560 --> 02:15:17,920 this property and and and a hundred coal and hundred coal was I mean so these 1433 02:15:17,920 --> 02:15:23,480 things are being circularly used to justify each other and and I I think we 1434 02:15:23,480 --> 02:15:30,800 need to follow our own guidelines or have really good clear rationale for you 1435 02:15:30,800 --> 02:15:36,240 know why we can suddenly change those things and I I'm just not at all I don't 1436 02:15:36,240 --> 02:15:40,960 think this matches our cost benefits I don't think it matches our drainage 1437 02:15:40,960 --> 02:15:45,820 rules I don't think it matches you know good engineering plans you know we 1438 02:15:45,820 --> 02:15:50,080 curved this a lot to go into the floodplain and get around the gas well 1439 02:15:50,080 --> 02:15:53,840 and so curves are bad or and straights are good earn weight now curves are 1440 02:15:53,840 --> 02:15:58,640 acceptable so I think there's a lot of fudging around the edges in order to 1441 02:15:58,640 --> 02:16:02,520 make this development happen when we should have just had a clean plan to 1442 02:16:02,520 --> 02:16:08,080 begin with and not just try to run a sidewalk up into the North Park so I can 1443 02:16:08,080 --> 02:16:12,760 I feel very comfortable saying that I can't support the this this development 1444 02:16:12,760 --> 02:16:19,200 for those reasons this is Haley speaking Commissioner Beck can I respond to a 1445 02:16:19,200 --> 02:16:26,320 couple of those thoughts there yes I get again this is Haley speaking the road 1446 02:16:26,320 --> 02:16:31,600 has not been shifted into the floodplain the if Julie if you could go to slide 1447 02:16:31,600 --> 02:16:39,200 25 please the July 8th layout it may be hard to see I'm not sure how well this 1448 02:16:39,200 --> 02:16:42,720 comes through for you all but there is a dashed line a double dashed line 1449 02:16:42,720 --> 02:16:48,520 actually that runs south of brush Creek through the the purple area on the plan 1450 02:16:48,520 --> 02:16:53,080 that is the limits of the floodplain so the road the road has not shifted towards 1451 02:16:53,080 --> 02:16:56,340 the floodplain it's actually shifted further away from the floodplain on the 1452 02:16:56,340 --> 02:17:01,560 north the northeast or northwest side of the property so I just wanted to 1453 02:17:01,560 --> 02:17:04,480 alleviate your concern there that the road is still not within the floodplain 1454 02:17:04,480 --> 02:17:09,080 the reduction in floodplain acres that you saw being conveyed to the city is 1455 02:17:09,080 --> 02:17:12,920 because of that area in purple that is instead being conveyed to the neighbor 1456 02:17:12,920 --> 02:17:18,120 they are receiving some of the acres within the floodplain and and again with 1457 02:17:18,120 --> 02:17:21,480 regards to the gas well I just want to reiterate there there is no standard for 1458 02:17:21,480 --> 02:17:25,720 this anywhere within the country the concerns of our city engineer was that 1459 02:17:25,720 --> 02:17:30,400 the the well not be underneath pavement in the it so that in the event the well 1460 02:17:30,400 --> 02:17:34,360 has to be you know something goes wrong and it starts leaking or we have to 1461 02:17:34,360 --> 02:17:39,120 access it for some reason to reseal the casing that that not be within the 1462 02:17:39,120 --> 02:17:43,000 pavement of a city roadway so that the road wouldn't have to be shut down to do 1463 02:17:43,000 --> 02:17:47,600 that and we would avoid any any potential risk of there being some sort 1464 02:17:47,600 --> 02:17:51,760 of failure within the casing that could have affected the the paving itself and 1465 02:17:51,760 --> 02:17:56,120 the safety of the road so the well is still well outside of the right of way 1466 02:17:56,120 --> 02:18:00,680 of any city street to be at a residential street a collector or an 1467 02:18:00,680 --> 02:18:06,920 arterial so it satisfies all of those concerns again the change here was was 1468 02:18:06,920 --> 02:18:11,440 taking away the the preference that these curves be as broad and as gentle 1469 02:18:11,440 --> 02:18:14,880 as possible because this will someday be a six lane roadway with high-speed 1470 02:18:14,880 --> 02:18:19,360 traffic on it and and reducing that to the the bare minimum that we deem 1471 02:18:19,360 --> 02:18:23,760 acceptable for safety standards which is that 750 foot curve radius shown on the 1472 02:18:23,760 --> 02:18:29,240 plan so I certainly appreciate your concerns with how this was all massaged 1473 02:18:29,240 --> 02:18:33,280 but there there was a great amount of thought and effort put into making sure 1474 02:18:33,280 --> 02:18:37,360 that all of those safety concerns were still addressed and that the the flood 1475 02:18:37,360 --> 02:18:43,720 plain is not affected by the roadway so just just one one little quibble with 1476 02:18:43,720 --> 02:18:46,880 that and I think you guys do an excellent job so I'm not I'm not knocking 1477 02:18:46,880 --> 02:18:51,760 the development office at all I think that you you did your best to make a 1478 02:18:51,760 --> 02:18:59,800 plan that matched certain stakeholders but as I recall the original all-red 1479 02:18:59,800 --> 02:19:04,520 road a plan was to go from approximately where the south end of the sidewalk was 1480 02:19:04,520 --> 02:19:12,080 in the circle in blue to approximately where the barn is and so you may they 1481 02:19:12,080 --> 02:19:16,400 would the road may not have shifted into the flood plain but it is shifted 1482 02:19:16,400 --> 02:19:28,560 towards the flipped is that correct this is Haley again the then I would not say 1483 02:19:28,560 --> 02:19:33,080 it's fair to say either road has shifted towards the flood plain Brush Creek Road 1484 02:19:33,080 --> 02:19:37,360 shifted away from the flood plain since it shifted north of the barn which is 1485 02:19:37,360 --> 02:19:42,920 right at the limits of the flood plain and the intersection of all red yes did 1486 02:19:42,920 --> 02:19:49,400 move further to the east but it's it's nowhere near the flood plain itself it 1487 02:19:49,400 --> 02:19:57,280 it's even further north from it than Brush Creek Road would be I'm not sure 1488 02:19:57,280 --> 02:20:00,920 if that helps or not but again if you can see it on the plan that the very 1489 02:20:00,920 --> 02:20:05,520 faint dashed line that is just to the the southwest of the barn is the flood 1490 02:20:05,520 --> 02:20:09,760 plain limit I see those those dotted lines thank you for the clarification 1491 02:20:09,760 --> 02:20:16,280 Julie can you go I think two slides back shows the original plan so that's the 1492 02:20:16,280 --> 02:20:22,720 original one and so all red it looks like instead of going into the adjacent 1493 02:20:22,720 --> 02:20:30,560 property now cuts through their own property and Brush Creek turns north a 1494 02:20:30,560 --> 02:20:35,600 little bit quicker that's that's the significant changes in the roads it 1495 02:20:35,600 --> 02:20:44,120 looks like okay thanks Julie is there any other questions for Haley Kushner 1496 02:20:44,120 --> 02:20:52,080 Cole thank you chair Haley just do you happen to know what type of plugging 1497 02:20:52,080 --> 02:20:57,120 they use was a mechanical or was it cement mud that not you know what they 1498 02:20:57,120 --> 02:21:05,480 did this is Haley again yes I did pull the Railroad Commission report 1499 02:21:05,480 --> 02:21:10,480 and they I believe it is a cement plug at least from my understanding of the 1500 02:21:10,480 --> 02:21:15,280 plugging report the well is plugged at three different depths the the shallowest 1501 02:21:15,280 --> 02:21:18,920 steps I believe is 20 feet below the surface but it has three separate cement 1502 02:21:18,920 --> 02:21:23,480 plugs starting at that 20 feet and then progressing down through the the the 1503 02:21:23,480 --> 02:21:27,440 various strata of gas and water to to ensure that there's separation between 1504 02:21:27,440 --> 02:21:34,040 the groundwater and and the the shale layer featuring the the natural gas but 1505 02:21:34,040 --> 02:21:46,320 I believe it was purely cement plugs thank you any other items so with that I 1506 02:21:46,320 --> 02:21:49,960 just wanted to acknowledge that for this item we had zero people make comments 1507 02:21:49,960 --> 02:21:54,240 using our online form there was zero in support of this item and zero against 1508 02:21:54,240 --> 02:21:59,280 all these comment forms were emailed to all the commissioners and city 1509 02:21:59,280 --> 02:22:02,680 secretaries to be recorded additionally there were zero people that called into 1510 02:22:02,680 --> 02:22:08,200 our phone number to register their position there is neither any support or 1511 02:22:08,200 --> 02:22:12,360 against but finally there is one person who has called in this evening to speak 1512 02:22:12,360 --> 02:22:18,120 on this item so staff will be connecting to them now 1513 02:22:32,680 --> 02:22:41,040 good evening caller you're live with the plan and zoning Commission can you 1514 02:22:41,040 --> 02:22:44,040 please state your name and address for the record and you'll have four minutes 1515 02:22:44,040 --> 02:22:50,960 to speak sure this is Eric Perrett 2111 Westwood Drive thank you for the 1516 02:22:50,960 --> 02:22:56,000 opportunity I'll be brief just to summarize my thoughts that I've shared 1517 02:22:56,000 --> 02:23:00,640 previously I don't really have an objection to the railway line that 1518 02:23:00,640 --> 02:23:06,320 proposed for this application that my objection really comes from the fact 1519 02:23:06,320 --> 02:23:11,000 that I don't think the fiscal analysis provided actually satisfies our long 1520 02:23:11,000 --> 02:23:17,600 range plans call for long-term fiscal analysis which as I read it is intended 1521 02:23:17,600 --> 02:23:20,920 to ensure that we don't have to raise taxes on our current residents in the 1522 02:23:20,920 --> 02:23:27,600 future you know I as I look through what has happened it sort of seems like the 1523 02:23:27,600 --> 02:23:33,840 de facto process is that a certain amount of land use is assumed that goes 1524 02:23:33,840 --> 02:23:39,520 into the modeling for traffic studies that guides mobility plan assumptions 1525 02:23:39,520 --> 02:23:43,600 then that drives infrastructure investments in order to make sure that 1526 02:23:43,600 --> 02:23:48,720 we're not caught behind like we have in the past in certain areas but then that 1527 02:23:48,720 --> 02:23:54,440 brings annexation and zoning change requests into those corridors when I 1528 02:23:54,440 --> 02:23:58,600 look back at the broader area that this is in I see thousands of acres and is 1529 02:23:58,600 --> 02:24:05,560 currently rural with no city services no nothing and I just kind of wonder what 1530 02:24:05,560 --> 02:24:10,600 what's the future hold do we have a process in place to ensure that that 1531 02:24:10,600 --> 02:24:17,280 development will actually pay enough taxes to serve it as I look through the 1532 02:24:17,280 --> 02:24:24,800 the paragraph and a half of fiscal analysis included in the the backup report 1533 02:24:24,800 --> 02:24:31,560 I can't imagine that staff would be proud to provide that if if they were 1534 02:24:31,560 --> 02:24:37,760 called to do a rigorous long-term fiscal analysis of a development plan so I just 1535 02:24:37,760 --> 02:24:43,680 really call for the Commission and staff to consider fulfilling the long-range 1536 02:24:43,680 --> 02:24:50,800 plans call for getting a serious serious process in place in order to fulfill 1537 02:24:50,800 --> 02:24:58,520 those desires of the long-range plan thank you thank you mr. Prude for 1538 02:24:58,520 --> 02:25:02,800 calling in and I appreciate your letter to us earlier this week I read through 1539 02:25:02,800 --> 02:25:07,440 the bulk of it and I thought it was really helpful especially your analysis 1540 02:25:07,440 --> 02:25:12,880 of mobility and thoroughfare through what's currently flume rural which 1541 02:25:12,880 --> 02:25:18,160 doesn't seem to be the future land use in actuality and we talked about that in 1542 02:25:18,160 --> 02:25:19,760 a work session so I appreciate your insight 1543 02:25:19,760 --> 02:25:24,360 Commissioner Smith thank you chair Erica we've heard you speak here on the 1544 02:25:24,360 --> 02:25:26,960 Commission a couple of times and I think I've interacted with you a couple of 1545 02:25:26,960 --> 02:25:33,080 times but if I kind of get your concern straight it sounds like the development 1546 02:25:33,080 --> 02:25:37,680 of rural and adding roadways and city services to have to go into these rural 1547 02:25:37,680 --> 02:25:42,440 areas that the tax rate that we have currently for residential property that 1548 02:25:42,440 --> 02:25:45,800 amount of tax the amount of tax collected by the city in your mind for a 1549 02:25:45,800 --> 02:25:50,840 long-term for a long-term fiscal analysis isn't sufficient enough to keep 1550 02:25:50,840 --> 02:25:56,280 up with those services that's what you're essentially saying yeah I mean 1551 02:25:56,280 --> 02:25:59,800 obviously I haven't done a rigorous study on this particular development so I 1552 02:25:59,800 --> 02:26:03,760 can't state that it absolutely won't but it concerns me that we don't have a 1553 02:26:03,760 --> 02:26:08,920 process to do that the fiscal analysis that I've seen the city do for for other 1554 02:26:08,920 --> 02:26:14,520 large developments has been limited to save one lifecycle of the infrastructure 1555 02:26:14,520 --> 02:26:20,120 and and then I just wonder okay what happens are we agreeing to let that 1556 02:26:20,120 --> 02:26:24,040 infrastructure crumble and fail once it's gone or are we going to levy taxes 1557 02:26:24,040 --> 02:26:29,760 to replace it gotcha thank you for your input I appreciate 1558 02:26:35,880 --> 02:26:42,440 I was muting any other any other questions for Eric Prout Eric I 1559 02:26:42,440 --> 02:26:47,680 appreciate you calling in this evening with that the chair will entertain any 1560 02:26:47,680 --> 02:26:52,960 motions or further discussion the item commissioner Smith make a motion to 1561 02:26:52,960 --> 02:26:58,600 approve we have a motion to approve Commissioner Anderson second the motion 1562 02:26:58,600 --> 02:27:03,720 we have a first and a second for approval any discussion on this item 1563 02:27:03,720 --> 02:27:09,600 Commissioner Ellis thank you just real quick comment to thank the developer for 1564 02:27:09,600 --> 02:27:16,840 their patience and flexibility in this I think you know they came to the best 1565 02:27:16,840 --> 02:27:20,600 possible scenario in the concerns that that were raised through the multiple 1566 02:27:20,600 --> 02:27:27,400 times that this item was before us so kudos to them thank you I agree and I 1567 02:27:27,400 --> 02:27:31,120 echo what Commissioner Anderson said earlier it's it's good to see in-depth 1568 02:27:31,120 --> 02:27:35,760 conversation trying to find compromise for the sake of all parties so well done 1569 02:27:35,760 --> 02:27:41,120 to staff applicant and citizens for being involved in the discussion with 1570 02:27:41,120 --> 02:27:44,480 that we will take this vote by roll call 1571 02:27:44,480 --> 02:27:53,880 Commissioner Cole aye Commissioner Ellis aye Commissioner Beck nay Commissioner 1572 02:27:53,880 --> 02:28:01,640 Anderson aye Commissioner Smith aye Commissioner Pernetta 1573 02:28:01,640 --> 02:28:09,280 chairs an aye motion carries 6-1 the next item of our agenda is item 5a it's a 1574 02:28:09,280 --> 02:28:13,800 planning Zoni Commission project matrix I'll turn the floor over to Richard 1575 02:28:13,800 --> 02:28:19,960 Kenoni for any updates and then the Commission for questions or additions 1576 02:28:19,960 --> 02:28:24,520 just just briefly the only update I would I would have is we'll be bringing 1577 02:28:24,520 --> 02:28:29,520 back the obviously the planning discussion for at the next PNC meetings 1578 02:28:29,520 --> 02:28:34,360 we'll make sure that that is the only work session item on that agenda so we 1579 02:28:34,360 --> 02:28:39,480 can have plenty plenty of time devoted devoted to that without be happy answer 1580 02:28:39,480 --> 02:28:44,400 any questions great zoom and have any questions for the matrix or anything to 1581 02:28:44,400 --> 02:28:53,280 add to the matrix going forward okay seeing none I will call this meeting to 1582 02:28:53,280 --> 02:29:00,540 a close at 738 Oh Christian Anderson yes are you saying it can be said after you 1583 02:29:00,540 --> 02:29:06,480 just messed up okay great so the meeting is now closed at 738 thank you