WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:07.400
 >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the planning and zoning commission

00:00:07.400 --> 00:00:12.060
 work session for Wednesday, July 22, 2020.

00:00:12.060 --> 00:00:16.200
 Seeing that we do have a quorum, I will call the meeting to order at 5 o'clock.

00:00:16.200 --> 00:00:20.840
 Please let the record show that Commissioner Pernetta is absent.

00:00:20.840 --> 00:00:26.760
 The first item we have for tonight is a work session report by Julie Wyatt, and then we'll

00:00:26.760 --> 00:00:28.800
 hop into our agenda for this evening.

00:00:28.800 --> 00:00:32.960
 But I will turn the floor over off the top to Julie Wyatt.

00:00:32.960 --> 00:00:34.720
 >> Good evening.

00:00:34.720 --> 00:00:41.200
 Let me pull up my presentation.

00:00:41.200 --> 00:00:50.120
 All right.

00:00:50.120 --> 00:00:56.720
 So tonight we're going to be going through planning boot camp and talking about platting.

00:00:56.720 --> 00:01:00.080
 So briefly we're going to have some background information about platting, some platting

00:01:00.080 --> 00:01:05.320
 fundamentals, how we plat in Denton, the parts of a plat, and then we'll finish it up with

00:01:05.320 --> 00:01:07.880
 the shot clock.

00:01:07.880 --> 00:01:11.320
 So just at a most basic level, what is a plat?

00:01:11.320 --> 00:01:13.080
 It's a map.

00:01:13.080 --> 00:01:15.400
 It defines the subdivision boundaries.

00:01:15.400 --> 00:01:20.840
 >> Julie, can you share your presentation?

00:01:20.840 --> 00:01:24.120
 I think it's sharing your file folder.

00:01:24.120 --> 00:01:29.640
 >> Oh, hold on, let me -- let me try this again.

00:01:29.640 --> 00:01:39.120
 >> Which -- all right, now let me -- is that right?

00:01:39.120 --> 00:01:40.120
 Did that work?

00:01:40.120 --> 00:01:41.120
 >> That's perfect.

00:01:41.120 --> 00:01:42.120
 Thank you.

00:01:42.120 --> 00:01:43.120
 >> All right.

00:01:43.120 --> 00:01:44.120
 Okay.

00:01:44.120 --> 00:01:46.840
 I'm going to get zoomed down any time now.

00:01:46.840 --> 00:01:47.840
 All right.

00:01:47.840 --> 00:01:53.120
 So we are going over platting and planning boot camp tonight.

00:01:53.120 --> 00:01:54.800
 And so what is a plat?

00:01:54.800 --> 00:01:58.440
 It is a map of a subdivision, addition, or development.

00:01:58.440 --> 00:02:03.000
 It is recorded with the county after it's approved by the city.

00:02:03.000 --> 00:02:09.560
 It defines the lot boundaries, it dedicates right of way, and it also ensures adequate

00:02:09.560 --> 00:02:15.960
 public facilities by things like easements that are dedicated to those facilities.

00:02:15.960 --> 00:02:26.080
 Our city of Denton outlines our planning processes in DDC, section 2.6, and subchapter 8.

00:02:26.080 --> 00:02:28.400
 >> Commissioner Anderson.

00:02:28.400 --> 00:02:30.920
 >> No, he just muted.

00:02:30.920 --> 00:02:35.880
 I was having problems hearing Julie sometimes because Ron was cutting in and out.

00:02:35.880 --> 00:02:36.880
 >> Okay.

00:02:36.880 --> 00:02:37.880
 Perfect.

00:02:37.880 --> 00:02:38.880
 Thanks.

00:02:38.880 --> 00:02:39.880
 >> All right.

00:02:39.880 --> 00:02:40.880
 So why do we plat?

00:02:40.880 --> 00:02:47.120
 >> So we have an image here of a very nice little house on a nice little hill.

00:02:47.120 --> 00:02:51.920
 But before a property owner could build that house, they would need to get building permits.

00:02:51.920 --> 00:02:56.320
 And as part of that development process, we would look at some things.

00:02:56.320 --> 00:03:00.520
 First of all, does that house -- is that the kind of use we want there?

00:03:00.520 --> 00:03:02.200
 Does it meet zoning?

00:03:02.200 --> 00:03:09.000
 Is the property size -- does it fit within that zoning designation?

00:03:09.000 --> 00:03:10.880
 How does the owner get there?

00:03:10.880 --> 00:03:12.160
 Would roads need to be built?

00:03:12.160 --> 00:03:14.800
 Are access easements needed?

00:03:14.800 --> 00:03:17.840
 How do they take a shower or flush the toilet?

00:03:17.840 --> 00:03:20.560
 What kind of water and sewer are they going to tie into the city?

00:03:20.560 --> 00:03:24.160
 Are they going to have septic and well?

00:03:24.160 --> 00:03:27.600
 And then when they go to sell it, how is that going to be sold easily?

00:03:27.600 --> 00:03:30.320
 How are those property boundaries going to be defined?

00:03:30.320 --> 00:03:37.880
 So all of those questions are answered through that platting process.

00:03:37.880 --> 00:03:43.000
 The Texas APA has a great little booklet about platting fundamentals, and we're going to

00:03:43.000 --> 00:03:45.120
 talk about some of those elements in it.

00:03:45.120 --> 00:03:51.560
 So first of all, Chapter 212 of the Texas Local Government Code gives the city of Denton

00:03:51.560 --> 00:03:52.840
 the authority to plat.

00:03:52.840 --> 00:03:58.640
 So it says that the plat is to promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare

00:03:58.640 --> 00:04:04.560
 of the municipality and for safe, orderly, and healthful development.

00:04:04.560 --> 00:04:08.600
 They are to ensure that a development will have adequate infrastructure and that they

00:04:08.600 --> 00:04:11.420
 result in a buildable lot.

00:04:11.420 --> 00:04:18.920
 That Chapter 212 also allows municipalities like Denton to adopt a subdivision ordinance.

00:04:18.920 --> 00:04:22.560
 And that's our Denton Development Code has our subdivision ordinance.

00:04:22.560 --> 00:04:28.040
 It can include definitions of the plat, how our platting process would go within the city,

00:04:28.040 --> 00:04:32.520
 content required, and then those requirements for those public facilities, including things

00:04:32.520 --> 00:04:35.700
 like design standards.

00:04:35.700 --> 00:04:39.360
 Cities like Denton typically require a plat to obtain a building permit.

00:04:39.360 --> 00:04:44.200
 So it really is a necessary step in the development process.

00:04:44.200 --> 00:04:46.960
 There are different types of plats, a preliminary plat.

00:04:46.960 --> 00:04:50.680
 It is not required in the Texas Local Government Code.

00:04:50.680 --> 00:04:53.440
 It's not even really specifically discussed in it.

00:04:53.440 --> 00:05:00.100
 But it really is a great tool that communities and developers can use to get preliminary

00:05:00.100 --> 00:05:04.520
 approvals prior to those final plats.

00:05:04.520 --> 00:05:09.120
 You probably are used to us saying on a preliminary plat, "Well, this is the preliminary plat."

00:05:09.120 --> 00:05:13.200
 And those questions that you have would be answered with that final design, with the

00:05:13.200 --> 00:05:14.200
 final plat.

00:05:14.200 --> 00:05:16.960
 And that really speaks to what a preliminary plat is.

00:05:16.960 --> 00:05:24.440
 It's maybe more than a feasibility study, but it is sort of that preliminary step.

00:05:24.440 --> 00:05:31.720
 The final design associated with engineering, with things like waterline design, roadway

00:05:31.720 --> 00:05:34.800
 design, or drainage can be very expensive.

00:05:34.800 --> 00:05:39.360
 So that preliminary plat is really kind of that first step, that first bite of the apple.

00:05:39.360 --> 00:05:44.320
 After that, it happens within the city or within other cities.

00:05:44.320 --> 00:05:47.240
 You then go to that final plat stage.

00:05:47.240 --> 00:05:52.440
 In Denton, we have an intervening step, which are those civil engineering plans, and that's

00:05:52.440 --> 00:05:54.560
 where they do those final designs.

00:05:54.560 --> 00:05:59.840
 The things like drainage, water and sewer extensions, roadways.

00:05:59.840 --> 00:06:04.920
 Those are all reviewed between the preliminary plat and final plat within the City of Denton.

00:06:04.920 --> 00:06:14.040
 So that final plat really is the last step in that portion of the design process.

00:06:14.040 --> 00:06:19.360
 It's used for kind of more complicated developments, final plats.

00:06:19.360 --> 00:06:24.160
 And what it does is it's that final document that's recorded of record.

00:06:24.160 --> 00:06:26.700
 It creates that lot of record.

00:06:26.700 --> 00:06:31.800
 A minor plat is a type of final plat, but it's administratively approved.

00:06:31.800 --> 00:06:34.160
 It's a less complicated plat.

00:06:34.160 --> 00:06:37.640
 It doesn't have to go to the Planning and Zoning Commission unless it does have to go

00:06:37.640 --> 00:06:39.360
 for denial.

00:06:39.360 --> 00:06:43.280
 And it typically involves four or fewer lots.

00:06:43.280 --> 00:06:48.360
 It has to find an existing street, and there can't be any extensions of municipal facilities

00:06:48.360 --> 00:06:51.520
 associated with that.

00:06:51.520 --> 00:06:53.120
 A replat is another type of plat.

00:06:53.120 --> 00:06:57.560
 It's really just a change in a previously approved plat.

00:06:57.560 --> 00:07:03.840
 So if somebody wanted to change or subdivide the property into additional lots, that would

00:07:03.840 --> 00:07:05.800
 be that replat.

00:07:05.800 --> 00:07:11.360
 Residential replats, as you know, do require public notification, so they're a little different.

00:07:11.360 --> 00:07:15.760
 And then a development plat is not something we see very often, but it is a plat that's

00:07:15.760 --> 00:07:21.640
 permitted not only in the Texas Local Government Code, but also the Denton Development Code.

00:07:21.640 --> 00:07:29.280
 And it's more akin to a site plan in that it doesn't just show the property boundaries.

00:07:29.280 --> 00:07:33.720
 It actually depicts the existing and proposed buildings and any of those public improvements.

00:07:33.720 --> 00:07:40.240
 It is not required to be filed with the county, but can be just filed with the city.

00:07:40.240 --> 00:07:48.200
 And development plat, the only instances that I have seen them used in Denton thus far would

00:07:48.200 --> 00:07:53.440
 be for the Gaswell Platts.

00:07:53.440 --> 00:07:58.560
 Texas Local Government Code 212 also discusses standards for approval.

00:07:58.560 --> 00:08:04.920
 So it states that a municipal authority responsible for approving plat must approve it if it conforms

00:08:04.920 --> 00:08:10.300
 to the general plan and current and future streets, alleys, parks, playgrounds, and public

00:08:10.300 --> 00:08:11.920
 facilities.

00:08:11.920 --> 00:08:17.000
 It conforms to the general plan for the extension of facilities and any other rules adopted

00:08:17.000 --> 00:08:21.880
 by a municipality after a public hearing.

00:08:21.880 --> 00:08:27.080
 So essentially, if all state statues and city ordinances and requirements are met, the city

00:08:27.080 --> 00:08:33.600
 doesn't have discretion and is obligated to approve the plat.

00:08:33.600 --> 00:08:36.780
 We'll zoom in a little closer to what we have in Denton.

00:08:36.780 --> 00:08:39.840
 The city of Denton does have platting authority in the ETJ.

00:08:39.840 --> 00:08:42.600
 We have two divisions of ETJ.

00:08:42.600 --> 00:08:46.560
 We have ETJ 1, which is the area in blue.

00:08:46.560 --> 00:08:51.120
 It is adjacent to the city, the city boundaries.

00:08:51.120 --> 00:08:56.920
 And then we have division 1, which is the blue, and then division 2, which is further

00:08:56.920 --> 00:08:57.920
 out.

00:08:57.920 --> 00:09:01.480
 Our zoning regulations do not extend to the ETJ.

00:09:01.480 --> 00:09:06.720
 So we don't have any land use authority within that ETJ.

00:09:06.720 --> 00:09:10.760
 There are limited exceptions to platting in subchapter 8 of the Denton Development Code.

00:09:10.760 --> 00:09:16.560
 We have a list of them, but generally they are if someone is subdividing property where

00:09:16.560 --> 00:09:23.240
 the lots that would be resulting are greater than 5 acres, if the applicant can prove a

00:09:23.240 --> 00:09:28.360
 lot of record, and a lot of record is a lot that has been in the same configuration since

00:09:28.360 --> 00:09:33.920
 January 1 of 1960, agricultural uses are not required to plat.

00:09:33.920 --> 00:09:38.580
 And additions or alterations to existing structures aren't allowed to plat in those instances

00:09:38.580 --> 00:09:43.520
 where they don't have to extend any public facilities.

00:09:43.520 --> 00:09:48.080
 And all lots that are created through that subdivision process have to be developable,

00:09:48.080 --> 00:09:52.080
 and they have to conform to the minimum zoning, development, and floodplain standards within

00:09:52.080 --> 00:09:53.080
 the DDC.

00:09:53.080 --> 00:09:59.080
 We'll go a little more detail about platting in Denton.

00:09:59.080 --> 00:10:04.760
 So I won't read all of this, but these are the sections of the code that we refer to

00:10:04.760 --> 00:10:11.840
 when we're reviewing plats in terms of the process and the criteria for approval.

00:10:11.840 --> 00:10:18.140
 So a preliminary plat is defined as the overall conceptual plan for a subdivision.

00:10:18.140 --> 00:10:21.960
 So the lots, the roads, the driveways, utilities, and drainage.

00:10:21.960 --> 00:10:26.600
 So there's where you get that conceptual that it's not quite the final design yet for

00:10:26.600 --> 00:10:28.320
 the preliminary plat.

00:10:28.320 --> 00:10:32.840
 The lots must meet the minimum dimensions and demonstrate the adequate access and infrastructure

00:10:32.840 --> 00:10:34.680
 will be provided.

00:10:34.680 --> 00:10:41.360
 Section 2.6.3 in the Denton Development Code outlines the processes and the criteria for

00:10:41.360 --> 00:10:44.200
 approval for a preliminary plat.

00:10:44.200 --> 00:10:50.200
 Staff reviews those for compliance with the regulations for not only the DDC, but also

00:10:50.200 --> 00:10:51.960
 the criteria manuals.

00:10:51.960 --> 00:10:55.800
 A public hearing is not required, but of course it is approved by the Planning and Zoning

00:10:55.800 --> 00:11:00.200
 Commission at a public meeting.

00:11:00.200 --> 00:11:04.960
 The next type of plat within specifically the City of Denton is the final plat.

00:11:04.960 --> 00:11:08.960
 It has to ensure once again that it complies with all of the standards.

00:11:08.960 --> 00:11:14.520
 And once it's approved and recorded, it creates a legal lot of record.

00:11:14.520 --> 00:11:18.100
 Staff once again reviews it for compliance with the regulations.

00:11:18.100 --> 00:11:24.560
 Public hearing not required, but approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission is required.

00:11:24.560 --> 00:11:27.680
 And once again, there are criteria for approval.

00:11:27.680 --> 00:11:32.160
 It needs to conform to the, generally conform to the preliminary plat and requirements of

00:11:32.160 --> 00:11:36.080
 the Denton Development Code.

00:11:36.080 --> 00:11:41.240
 A replat, a modification of that existing platted lot, boundaries, easements, or number

00:11:41.240 --> 00:11:42.920
 of lots.

00:11:42.920 --> 00:11:46.920
 Within there, there are administratively approved plats and I will talk about those a little

00:11:46.920 --> 00:11:50.040
 more in depth in a future slide.

00:11:50.040 --> 00:11:54.160
 Staff reviews for compliance again with those regulations.

00:11:54.160 --> 00:11:59.560
 And a public hearing is required only where a variance is sought for those residential

00:11:59.560 --> 00:12:01.720
 replats.

00:12:01.720 --> 00:12:05.120
 It is approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, typically.

00:12:05.120 --> 00:12:09.080
 But here's where we get into those administratively approved plat.

00:12:09.080 --> 00:12:17.480
 So the Denton Development Code has three administratively approved plats.

00:12:17.480 --> 00:12:21.960
 First we have that minor plat, that's where it's four or fewer lots, and no extension

00:12:21.960 --> 00:12:23.080
 of public improvements.

00:12:23.080 --> 00:12:31.680
 We have an amending plat, which can allow us to address minor plat errors or minor adjustments

00:12:31.680 --> 00:12:32.880
 to boundaries.

00:12:32.880 --> 00:12:35.360
 And then there's a conveyance plat.

00:12:35.360 --> 00:12:40.760
 A conveyance plat is used to subdivide land, but it does not allow a property owner to

00:12:40.760 --> 00:12:41.760
 develop.

00:12:41.760 --> 00:12:46.200
 So, for instance, if someone has a hundred acre tract and they want to sell off 20 of

00:12:46.200 --> 00:12:53.000
 those acres, a conveyance plat is kind of a good tool to subdivide that property where

00:12:53.000 --> 00:12:57.840
 they don't have to do all of the infrastructure designs, maybe they don't know what they want

00:12:57.840 --> 00:12:58.840
 to develop yet.

00:12:58.840 --> 00:13:04.280
 They can't go out and pull a building permit after they've had that conveyance plat approved,

00:13:04.280 --> 00:13:10.680
 but they can at least sell that property that's subdivided lot legally.

00:13:10.680 --> 00:13:16.520
 It is important to know on any administratively approved plat, staff is not permitted to deny

00:13:16.520 --> 00:13:18.200
 them per the Denton Development Code.

00:13:18.200 --> 00:13:24.840
 So if it does not meet the standards within the DDC or the criteria manuals, it would

00:13:24.840 --> 00:13:36.980
 have to go to that public hearing, to the city planning and zoning commission.

00:13:36.980 --> 00:13:41.000
 And finally, we have the development plat.

00:13:41.000 --> 00:13:46.720
 Once again, that's that sort of plat site plan hybrid where it allows us to kind of

00:13:46.720 --> 00:13:49.800
 look and see what someone is proposing to do.

00:13:49.800 --> 00:13:55.760
 They don't as of yet have not been used frequently within the city of Denton.

00:13:55.760 --> 00:14:05.560
 It only requires review and approval by staff and no action by the planning and zoning commission.

00:14:05.560 --> 00:14:08.980
 And as part of that, we have the gas well development plat.

00:14:08.980 --> 00:14:17.560
 Both of those are the standards are in section 2.6.5 and 2.6.6.

00:14:17.560 --> 00:14:25.160
 The gas well development plat, they include those existing and proposed private and public

00:14:25.160 --> 00:14:32.000
 improvements and that would be those gas well development sites and those access to them.

00:14:32.000 --> 00:14:36.800
 Neither of these are recorded of record.

00:14:36.800 --> 00:14:39.120
 So we just want to talk about the parts of a plat.

00:14:39.120 --> 00:14:42.720
 I know y'all are really familiar with them, so we won't spend too much time on it, but

00:14:42.720 --> 00:14:46.900
 I just wanted to kind of call out the parts of the plat that we look at.

00:14:46.900 --> 00:14:52.520
 So first of all, it needs to have a vicinity map to show kind of where that property is

00:14:52.520 --> 00:14:59.120
 situated within the within the city, a north arrow and a scale.

00:14:59.120 --> 00:15:01.140
 We want those elements on it.

00:15:01.140 --> 00:15:03.020
 There are also plat notes.

00:15:03.020 --> 00:15:06.600
 They may refer to engineering items.

00:15:06.600 --> 00:15:10.920
 They may refer to I know you see a lot of them in terms of common area lots and who

00:15:10.920 --> 00:15:12.360
 maintains those.

00:15:12.360 --> 00:15:17.040
 So there's a variety of plat notes associated with any given plat.

00:15:17.040 --> 00:15:18.200
 There's an approval block.

00:15:18.200 --> 00:15:19.200
 So who approves it?

00:15:19.200 --> 00:15:23.280
 If it's administratively approved that the planning the director of development services

00:15:23.280 --> 00:15:30.120
 would sign it or his designee or if if it was approved by the planning and zoning commission,

00:15:30.120 --> 00:15:33.240
 the chair would sign that plat.

00:15:33.240 --> 00:15:38.520
 There's a legend that outlines what any symbols on the plat are used, you know, we want to

00:15:38.520 --> 00:15:40.860
 make sure those are clearly defined.

00:15:40.860 --> 00:15:43.560
 There's a title block that has the subdivision name.

00:15:43.560 --> 00:15:48.320
 There may be previous plots if there is a if it's a replat, so it would need to reference

00:15:48.320 --> 00:15:55.840
 those previous plots, the size of the tract, the that survey that it's within and the jurisdiction.

00:15:55.840 --> 00:16:00.660
 There's also there's also the meets and bounds legal description.

00:16:00.660 --> 00:16:04.960
 And what that plat is doing is taking this very largely meets and bounds legal description

00:16:04.960 --> 00:16:07.460
 and assigning a lot in block to that area.

00:16:07.460 --> 00:16:13.120
 So so that's an important part of that plat because that allows us to define where on

00:16:13.120 --> 00:16:15.560
 the earth that plat is.

00:16:15.560 --> 00:16:21.720
 And then there's a dedication and owner signature.

00:16:21.720 --> 00:16:24.760
 And finally, we'll talk about the shot clock.

00:16:24.760 --> 00:16:32.240
 So as of September 1st of 2019, municipalities now have 30 days to act upon a plat or construction

00:16:32.240 --> 00:16:33.240
 plan.

00:16:33.240 --> 00:16:36.520
 So once they are submitted, that starts the clock.

00:16:36.520 --> 00:16:39.720
 We have to either approve or deny.

00:16:39.720 --> 00:16:43.200
 This law has changed Denton in several ways.

00:16:43.200 --> 00:16:45.280
 And we can just talk through those.

00:16:45.280 --> 00:16:50.920
 So first of all, it required us to transition to some specific submittal dates to coincide

00:16:50.920 --> 00:16:52.660
 with the P&Z dates.

00:16:52.660 --> 00:16:58.500
 So prior to the shot clock, we allowed submittal on any day of the week.

00:16:58.500 --> 00:17:05.400
 Now we really have to limit those to specific Tuesdays, so that so that those align with

00:17:05.400 --> 00:17:09.200
 our planning and zoning dates, because what we don't want to have happen is someone submit

00:17:09.200 --> 00:17:12.240
 a plat and then it to go past those 30 days.

00:17:12.240 --> 00:17:15.480
 So that's a really important part of that.

00:17:15.480 --> 00:17:18.320
 It does require more upfront work from the development community.

00:17:18.320 --> 00:17:24.360
 We have to look at traffic, ESA assessments, FEMA map revisions, all of those prior to

00:17:24.360 --> 00:17:30.120
 that plat because we they can't submit a plat and then have it kind of sit there while they're

00:17:30.120 --> 00:17:33.280
 finishing up that that that work.

00:17:33.280 --> 00:17:36.960
 It really does have to once it's submitted, it has to keep going.

00:17:36.960 --> 00:17:42.200
 It has also eliminated concurrent submittals for plat related applications.

00:17:42.200 --> 00:17:46.920
 Prior to September one of last year, we allowed applicants to submit a preliminary and final

00:17:46.920 --> 00:17:51.040
 plat concurrently to try to find efficiencies in the process.

00:17:51.040 --> 00:17:56.040
 Unfortunately, now because because we have these very specific dates of when we have

00:17:56.040 --> 00:18:03.240
 to approve them, we can no longer allow them to sort of bunch up those those submittals.

00:18:03.240 --> 00:18:05.440
 It's reduced time for reviews and submittals.

00:18:05.440 --> 00:18:11.840
 So we've kind of made a commitment as a staff to to try to get plats to an approvable state

00:18:11.840 --> 00:18:15.200
 within within those prescribed times.

00:18:15.200 --> 00:18:16.880
 It's not always possible.

00:18:16.880 --> 00:18:21.840
 We do have some where they ask for additional time, but but we really try to get them through

00:18:21.840 --> 00:18:22.840
 that.

00:18:22.840 --> 00:18:29.800
 So so what we do is we've we've really reduced our review cycles and times to allow applicants

00:18:29.800 --> 00:18:35.360
 at least two reviews within that 30 days to try to work through any any issues to try

00:18:35.360 --> 00:18:39.360
 to get it to to an approvable state.

00:18:39.360 --> 00:18:43.040
 But the applicant can request additional time and I know I know I think you've got a couple

00:18:43.040 --> 00:18:48.520
 of these on the agenda tonight where if they haven't quite addressed all of the comments,

00:18:48.520 --> 00:18:51.680
 they can ask for a 30 day extension.

00:18:51.680 --> 00:18:56.840
 You're you're probably familiar with these are becoming more frequent now, just especially

00:18:56.840 --> 00:18:59.360
 on these complicated plots.

00:18:59.360 --> 00:19:01.880
 And it's it's created a change to a staff report.

00:19:01.880 --> 00:19:07.240
 So originally, our staff reports were just kind of a one sheet document that said, okay,

00:19:07.240 --> 00:19:08.240
 here's what this is.

00:19:08.240 --> 00:19:14.040
 And it's met all the criteria because we had more time to work through any issues.

00:19:14.040 --> 00:19:21.500
 Now we've we've got an exhibit to those plots, plot reports, because if a plot is denied,

00:19:21.500 --> 00:19:26.860
 we have to include three things and this is per the Texas Local Government Code.

00:19:26.860 --> 00:19:32.360
 Any denial of the plot has to be directly related to our requirements.

00:19:32.360 --> 00:19:34.900
 It has to include citations to the law.

00:19:34.900 --> 00:19:39.800
 So we have to when we're writing our staff reports be very specific about any deficiencies

00:19:39.800 --> 00:19:41.080
 on that plot.

00:19:41.080 --> 00:19:42.720
 And it can't be arbitrary.

00:19:42.720 --> 00:19:47.880
 It has to be related to to a rule of regulation we have within the city.

00:19:47.880 --> 00:19:53.680
 And then those conditional approvals are conditional approvals and denials are treated similarly

00:19:53.680 --> 00:19:59.800
 and I know this came up at our last meeting that the applicant has to provide a response

00:19:59.800 --> 00:20:03.640
 and the Planning and Zoning Commission has to act on that response within 15 days of

00:20:03.640 --> 00:20:04.640
 receipt.

00:20:04.640 --> 00:20:13.240
 So so, you know, approval and denial really are pretty similar in how they're treated

00:20:13.240 --> 00:20:14.520
 after the fact.

00:20:14.520 --> 00:20:16.720
 So that concludes my presentation.

00:20:16.720 --> 00:20:22.560
 I'll answer any questions and then Richard and Cynthia may may jump in if you've got any

00:20:22.560 --> 00:20:27.840
 any questions that I can't answer.

00:20:27.840 --> 00:20:30.400
 Any questions for Julie?

00:20:30.400 --> 00:20:34.400
 Commissioner Ellis.

00:20:34.400 --> 00:20:35.400
 Thank you, Chair.

00:20:35.400 --> 00:20:37.680
 And thanks, Julie, for this presentation.

00:20:37.680 --> 00:20:42.640
 So when you stated earlier on one of your slides where it said the city cannot disprove

00:20:42.640 --> 00:20:48.360
 or, I guess, how did how did it read the city has no discretion and is not is obligated

00:20:48.360 --> 00:20:51.720
 to approve if it fits all the criteria.

00:20:51.720 --> 00:21:02.780
 So when you say the city, does that mean this body, the the the those who are authorized

00:21:02.780 --> 00:21:04.320
 by the code to approve it.

00:21:04.320 --> 00:21:08.240
 So if if it's if it's something that has to go to the Planning and Zoning Commission,

00:21:08.240 --> 00:21:12.920
 it would be this body if it is if it's an administratively approved plat, it would be

00:21:12.920 --> 00:21:16.160
 the Director of Development Service or his or her designee.

00:21:16.160 --> 00:21:20.280
 And I don't know if Richard or Cynthia want to jump in on that.

00:21:20.280 --> 00:21:29.160
 Sure, Commissioner Ellis, how the statute is written is that the approving authority

00:21:29.160 --> 00:21:35.240
 approves the plat and it depends on how your your your subdivision ordinance is written.

00:21:35.240 --> 00:21:39.280
 As Julie pointed out, some of the plats are administratively approved.

00:21:39.280 --> 00:21:44.040
 And then there are plats that are approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission.

00:21:44.040 --> 00:21:49.360
 So when she says city, she means whoever the City Council delegates that authority to.

00:21:49.360 --> 00:21:50.360
 OK.

00:21:50.360 --> 00:21:51.360
 And I understand that.

00:21:51.360 --> 00:21:56.920
 And I guess where I was going with that question is if all if staff is recommending approval

00:21:56.920 --> 00:22:07.360
 because it does meet all of the points, then we really are obligated to vote for approval

00:22:07.360 --> 00:22:10.160
 with the way that it is written, correct?

00:22:10.160 --> 00:22:11.160
 Correct.

00:22:11.160 --> 00:22:12.160
 Yeah.

00:22:12.160 --> 00:22:16.760
 Under under the Texas local government code, we're we're you know, if it meets all criteria

00:22:16.760 --> 00:22:26.480
 and the DDC meets all of our plans, transportation plans and utilities plans, we we must approve

00:22:26.480 --> 00:22:27.480
 the plat.

00:22:27.480 --> 00:22:28.480
 OK.

00:22:28.480 --> 00:22:32.520
 And so if somebody in this body was going to vote no, then it would have they'd have

00:22:32.520 --> 00:22:38.480
 to cite the reason, maybe something that staff didn't see that doesn't conform.

00:22:38.480 --> 00:22:40.880
 Something correct.

00:22:40.880 --> 00:22:41.880
 That's a good point.

00:22:41.880 --> 00:22:49.200
 And Julie did point out if they're if we're going to if the approving body decides to

00:22:49.200 --> 00:22:59.440
 deny a plat, they do have to identify a specific code provision as for the reason to deny the

00:22:59.440 --> 00:23:00.440
 plat.

00:23:00.440 --> 00:23:06.160
 So we have to identify that in in the code or also the in the development code or in

00:23:06.160 --> 00:23:10.160
 the local government code, a specific provision that it's not complying with.

00:23:10.160 --> 00:23:11.160
 OK.

00:23:11.160 --> 00:23:12.160
 Thanks.

00:23:12.160 --> 00:23:13.160
 Sorry.

00:23:13.160 --> 00:23:14.160
 That was kind of wordy.

00:23:14.160 --> 00:23:15.160
 But

00:23:15.160 --> 00:23:16.160
 Commissioner Beck.

00:23:16.160 --> 00:23:19.160
 Thank you, Chair.

00:23:19.160 --> 00:23:24.880
 So Cynthia, following up from that comment, but that's that's anything in our Denton development

00:23:24.880 --> 00:23:33.840
 code, not necessarily materials that were presented in work session or hearing.

00:23:33.840 --> 00:23:36.900
 Is that correct?

00:23:36.900 --> 00:23:42.220
 In terms of grounds for approval or denial.

00:23:42.220 --> 00:23:50.160
 So your question is whether you can identify anything in the development code as a reason

00:23:50.160 --> 00:23:52.080
 to deny a plat.

00:23:52.080 --> 00:23:56.240
 Any applicable.

00:23:56.240 --> 00:24:02.040
 I think I would agree that that's that that's a reasonable summary of what I said.

00:24:02.040 --> 00:24:03.040
 Yes.

00:24:03.040 --> 00:24:04.040
 Thank you.

00:24:04.040 --> 00:24:07.040
 Commissioner Cole, thank you, Chair.

00:24:07.040 --> 00:24:15.200
 What recourse would an applicant have if they feel that, you know, that was the case, that

00:24:15.200 --> 00:24:23.440
 it wasn't something in the development code or what would they what's their recourse?

00:24:23.440 --> 00:24:29.080
 Commissioner Cole, there is a there is an appeal process built into the development

00:24:29.080 --> 00:24:34.320
 code for a plat that's denied, they can appeal it to the city council.

00:24:34.320 --> 00:24:39.160
 I believe that's in table two dash two.

00:24:39.160 --> 00:24:48.640
 Julie or Richard, if you can confirm that that is correct.

00:24:48.640 --> 00:24:54.720
 Any other questions on this item?

00:24:54.720 --> 00:25:00.220
 The only thing I have is maybe to be more explicit than what maybe Commissioner Ellis

00:25:00.220 --> 00:25:01.440
 was getting at.

00:25:01.440 --> 00:25:02.440
 I'm not sure.

00:25:02.440 --> 00:25:03.440
 This is on me.

00:25:03.440 --> 00:25:06.960
 Are commissioners allowed to vote no without citing a reason?

00:25:06.960 --> 00:25:13.680
 Is there any I mean, is that up to our commission and council to determine or is it just if

00:25:13.680 --> 00:25:18.920
 someone votes no without a reason, they can still go on record with a no might be a minority

00:25:18.920 --> 00:25:26.320
 vote, but it seems possible if we allow a minority vote to be placed in opposition without

00:25:26.320 --> 00:25:30.480
 a citation, it is possible that that could move to the majority.

00:25:30.480 --> 00:25:33.120
 And then that would be it sounds illegal.

00:25:33.120 --> 00:25:39.400
 But can you help me out with with if someone has on this commission just a moral principle

00:25:39.400 --> 00:25:49.160
 against development, but has no ability to cite a rule, is that is that vote still viable?

00:25:49.160 --> 00:25:50.160
 Do we accept that vote?

00:25:50.160 --> 00:25:51.160
 Can you tell me?

00:25:51.160 --> 00:25:58.600
 I mean, it sounds like you can vote your conscience on this without any recourse, but I'm conflicted

00:25:58.600 --> 00:26:05.560
 there of what a commissioner authority is on just voting conscience on this type of

00:26:05.560 --> 00:26:06.560
 vote.

00:26:06.560 --> 00:26:12.240
 Sure, sure, Mr. Chair, the the commission is acting as a body as a whole.

00:26:12.240 --> 00:26:17.600
 So it would be the majority of the commission that would make the decision.

00:26:17.600 --> 00:26:22.220
 So I understood that correctly.

00:26:22.220 --> 00:26:27.560
 If we were to vote a denial as a majority, there must be a citation.

00:26:27.560 --> 00:26:30.520
 And if there's not, is that vote void?

00:26:30.520 --> 00:26:36.880
 No, we'd you'd have to identify specific provisions of either the debt and development

00:26:36.880 --> 00:26:43.800
 code or the local government code to deny the plat.

00:26:43.800 --> 00:26:53.600
 And that would be something that would be asked of you when you're making your motion,

00:26:53.600 --> 00:26:55.120
 whoever makes the motion to deny.

00:26:55.120 --> 00:26:59.640
 Okay, I was about to I was about to say we need to offline as a chair, do I recognize

00:26:59.640 --> 00:27:03.440
 a denial motion with without a citation?

00:27:03.440 --> 00:27:06.120
 But it sounds I don't even know if this will ever happen.

00:27:06.120 --> 00:27:09.320
 But I appreciate your insight into that process.

00:27:09.320 --> 00:27:15.480
 You're sort of compelled, I think, by by virtue of the 212.

00:27:15.480 --> 00:27:18.080
 To vote in affirmation if it meets all standards.

00:27:18.080 --> 00:27:22.140
 Or Yeah, or if you're going to deny to do that with a finding, I don't think they give

00:27:22.140 --> 00:27:26.800
 you the the option of just to deny to deny it has to be denied with reasons.

00:27:26.800 --> 00:27:27.800
 Okay.

00:27:27.800 --> 00:27:30.240
 I appreciate that clarification.

00:27:30.240 --> 00:27:31.240
 Christian Anderson.

00:27:31.240 --> 00:27:37.840
 Isn't that something that the staff would probably catch before it ever got to us?

00:27:37.840 --> 00:27:42.160
 You know, I mean, if there was a flagrant violation or something that the staff would

00:27:42.160 --> 00:27:46.440
 probably catch that before it ever cut to us, correct?

00:27:46.440 --> 00:27:47.440
 That's correct.

00:27:47.440 --> 00:27:52.120
 I mean, we would provide we would provide that recommendation, whether, you know, approve

00:27:52.120 --> 00:27:56.600
 based upon it that it beats all of the conditions, or like some of the items tonight where we're

00:27:56.600 --> 00:28:02.040
 recommending denial because it doesn't meet the variety of standards.

00:28:02.040 --> 00:28:04.600
 In this case, they're asking for an extension.

00:28:04.600 --> 00:28:10.080
 But if you were to go against staff's recommendation and want to approve it, there would need to

00:28:10.080 --> 00:28:14.080
 be you would need to make those findings as to how they're meeting those code provisions.

00:28:14.080 --> 00:28:20.640
 So, so for instance, tonight, say we had one tonight that the staff was recommending denial,

00:28:20.640 --> 00:28:26.480
 we would ask commissioners, we wouldn't have to give a reason why we would make the motion

00:28:26.480 --> 00:28:31.200
 to approve the denial, because staff has already recommended it correct, it would just be with

00:28:31.200 --> 00:28:33.480
 staff based upon staff's recommendation.

00:28:33.480 --> 00:28:34.480
 Awesome.

00:28:34.480 --> 00:28:35.480
 Thank you very much.

00:28:35.480 --> 00:28:36.480
 Thank you.

00:28:36.480 --> 00:28:37.920
 Christian back.

00:28:37.920 --> 00:28:41.960
 So so Commissioner Anderson is confused me with the double negatives.

00:28:41.960 --> 00:28:46.380
 And I just would like some clarification.

00:28:46.380 --> 00:28:52.520
 You we can vote approval without any.

00:28:52.520 --> 00:28:59.520
 So if staff is recommending denial, but we want to approve, we can do that without citing

00:28:59.520 --> 00:29:00.520
 anything.

00:29:00.520 --> 00:29:04.920
 But I mean, it's you see my quandary is I'm trying to understand when when do you need

00:29:04.920 --> 00:29:08.360
 to cite specific guidelines?

00:29:08.360 --> 00:29:13.240
 Is it I mean, because we do have these occasions where there is a sort of, you know, a vote

00:29:13.240 --> 00:29:17.120
 to approve is a negative kind of double negative situation.

00:29:17.120 --> 00:29:29.120
 So can can someone clarify under what circumstances you must cite regulations for?

00:29:29.120 --> 00:29:33.200
 Is it just if the application is denied?

00:29:33.200 --> 00:29:38.080
 It sounds to me if I could hop in real fast, Cynthia, that if our body moves against the

00:29:38.080 --> 00:29:42.040
 recommendation of the city, we need to have concrete evidence of why we're doing that.

00:29:42.040 --> 00:29:46.440
 So if the city recommends approval, a vote against we would need to cite where it doesn't

00:29:46.440 --> 00:29:47.440
 meet the ordinance.

00:29:47.440 --> 00:29:52.040
 If the city is recommending denial, and we would like to approve, we would have to show

00:29:52.040 --> 00:29:59.040
 where they're meeting those items, the city is deemed efficient.

00:29:59.040 --> 00:30:00.040
 Good summary.

00:30:00.040 --> 00:30:04.580
 OK, so so then just one one clarification is for my own brain cells.

00:30:04.580 --> 00:30:12.320
 And that is, it's essentially if we are reversing the recommendation of city staff, is that

00:30:12.320 --> 00:30:13.320
 correct?

00:30:13.320 --> 00:30:14.320
 Correct.

00:30:14.320 --> 00:30:18.240
 OK, thank you.

00:30:18.240 --> 00:30:23.280
 Commissioner Ellis.

00:30:23.280 --> 00:30:24.280
 Thank you, Chair.

00:30:24.280 --> 00:30:30.920
 OK, so Cynthia, this is probably your question to go back with what Chair was saying.

00:30:30.920 --> 00:30:40.460
 So if an individual is going to vote, no, they don't have to cite any reasons for that.

00:30:40.460 --> 00:30:50.280
 If the body as a whole is approving, so I'm just trying to get clarification on that.

00:30:50.280 --> 00:30:52.080
 Sure.

00:30:52.080 --> 00:30:57.000
 When I say the body as a whole makes the decision, that's how the development code is written,

00:30:57.000 --> 00:31:01.640
 unless it's an administrative plat, then the director would make the decision.

00:31:01.640 --> 00:31:10.080
 So if you make a motion to approve, and then there's a second to that motion, and there's

00:31:10.080 --> 00:31:19.160
 a vote, and two of the commissioners don't vote in favor, it's not that they have to

00:31:19.160 --> 00:31:25.920
 specifically articulate their reasons for voting against it.

00:31:25.920 --> 00:31:33.380
 They could, but the vote would still pass, the plat would still be approved if there's

00:31:33.380 --> 00:31:34.960
 a majority vote.

00:31:34.960 --> 00:31:40.480
 So they do not have to cite reasons.

00:31:40.480 --> 00:31:44.680
 You know what, I think it's a good practice for them to articulate why there's voting

00:31:44.680 --> 00:31:46.760
 against something, and it's up to the Chair.

00:31:46.760 --> 00:31:55.680
 Well, because it kind of goes against what we discussed earlier about the body who is

00:31:55.680 --> 00:31:59.160
 approving or denying needs to cite the reason.

00:31:59.160 --> 00:32:00.800
 So that's my confusion.

00:32:00.800 --> 00:32:06.760
 I mean, I asked for this work session because we had an instance where we only had five

00:32:06.760 --> 00:32:15.040
 of us, and I was chairing it, and two commissioners voted no on a plat that met all of the criteria

00:32:15.040 --> 00:32:20.720
 and should have been approved, and it was denied because we didn't have four votes,

00:32:20.720 --> 00:32:22.360
 even though it was a 3-2.

00:32:22.360 --> 00:32:31.880
 So I'm trying not to run into that situation, or I'm trying to get clarity on how to...

00:32:31.880 --> 00:32:39.280
 Cynthia, if I could jump in, in that situation, if the vote fails, wouldn't the Chair in that

00:32:39.280 --> 00:32:49.720
 situation clarify the opposition to articulate the opposition, and if found none, wouldn't

00:32:49.720 --> 00:32:52.280
 the Chair compel the votes for approval?

00:32:52.280 --> 00:32:55.800
 That's kind of what I would think.

00:32:55.800 --> 00:33:01.240
 If staff recommends approval, the vote for approval does not pass.

00:33:01.240 --> 00:33:04.960
 I would think the appropriate next steps is for an articulation of the opposition at that

00:33:04.960 --> 00:33:13.240
 point.

00:33:13.240 --> 00:33:22.920
 I don't remember... Richard, do you remember, or Planning Director Canone, do you remember

00:33:22.920 --> 00:33:25.800
 maybe Commissioner Ellis does, too?

00:33:25.800 --> 00:33:31.680
 Yeah, I mean, it was a vote to approve the plat.

00:33:31.680 --> 00:33:43.160
 That's what we were voting on, and it was a 3-2 vote, three in favor, two not in favor.

00:33:43.160 --> 00:33:44.720
 Correct.

00:33:44.720 --> 00:33:49.000
 Because we only had five members here, and there's seven members of the board, so we

00:33:49.000 --> 00:33:50.840
 didn't have the four votes.

00:33:50.840 --> 00:33:51.840
 That's why it failed.

00:33:51.840 --> 00:33:52.840
 Yes.

00:33:52.840 --> 00:33:53.840
 Oh, I know why it failed.

00:33:53.840 --> 00:33:54.840
 Yeah.

00:33:54.840 --> 00:33:55.840
 I know very well.

00:33:55.840 --> 00:33:56.840
 Right.

00:33:56.840 --> 00:34:05.480
 So, Mr. Chair, you're asking for the two members who voted against that motion, if they should

00:34:05.480 --> 00:34:08.920
 have articulated their reasons why they voted against that motion?

00:34:08.920 --> 00:34:16.080
 Well, I'm just wondering if we are compelled/obligated to approve a plat if it meets all conditions

00:34:16.080 --> 00:34:22.520
 and the vote fails, then it should be appropriate that the opposition to that vote must articulate

00:34:22.520 --> 00:34:37.880
 where the actual opposition is in order to influence the vote to a denial.

00:34:37.880 --> 00:34:39.480
 This is a good discussion, I think.

00:34:39.480 --> 00:34:40.480
 Yeah.

00:34:40.480 --> 00:34:46.360
 This was a very unique situation that happened, and I see your point, and as Chair, you could

00:34:46.360 --> 00:34:50.000
 certainly ask that question of all the commissioners.

00:34:50.000 --> 00:34:51.000
 You're running the meeting?

00:34:51.000 --> 00:34:58.240
 Well, it is a unique situation, but to Commissioner Ellis's point, I can foresee, even with all

00:34:58.240 --> 00:35:06.400
 seven members being there, four vote against and not pass, but the authority to approve

00:35:06.400 --> 00:35:12.800
 the plat falls on our commission, which means it seems to me there needs to be a re-vote

00:35:12.800 --> 00:35:20.400
 immediately after in order to either approve rightfully or articulate the reasons in which

00:35:20.400 --> 00:35:22.720
 a denial is required.

00:35:22.720 --> 00:35:23.720
 Kushala.

00:35:23.720 --> 00:35:26.620
 Thank you, Chair.

00:35:26.620 --> 00:35:32.600
 But the issue was, this particular situation, you couldn't re-vote on it because you already

00:35:32.600 --> 00:35:36.640
 took a vote, and it was a 3-2.

00:35:36.640 --> 00:35:44.040
 You need four votes for it to move forward in that, in a five-person body, I believe.

00:35:44.040 --> 00:35:48.040
 And so, I mean, the Chair couldn't say, "Well, let's vote again," because we were supposed

00:35:48.040 --> 00:35:51.760
 to approve that, you know, even because the motion was to approve.

00:35:51.760 --> 00:35:52.760
 Yeah.

00:35:52.760 --> 00:35:54.640
 That's a good point.

00:35:54.640 --> 00:35:55.640
 Richard.

00:35:55.640 --> 00:35:56.640
 Yeah.

00:35:56.640 --> 00:36:01.560
 If I can make a suggestion, I think we have the ability to create policies for the commission

00:36:01.560 --> 00:36:10.080
 and maybe this is one that we probably definitely need to create sooner than later.

00:36:10.080 --> 00:36:17.160
 And if it is the Board's desire, we can try to draft something for the next meeting that,

00:36:17.160 --> 00:36:22.240
 in those instances, if you are going to -- again, this would have to be something that the commission

00:36:22.240 --> 00:36:29.060
 would all have to agree to, or if you are going to make a motion to deny, whether -- if

00:36:29.060 --> 00:36:34.840
 staff's recommending approval or vice versa, or be a member voting against it to provide

00:36:34.840 --> 00:36:39.320
 for those reasons or provide for those findings.

00:36:39.320 --> 00:36:44.600
 I think if we carry that policy forward, I think it's just a good practice that it's

00:36:44.600 --> 00:36:52.800
 always going to be done in those instances if there is a decision to go against where

00:36:52.800 --> 00:36:59.200
 staff is recommending in this instance for these plots because of what we're stuck with

00:36:59.200 --> 00:37:07.380
 with this bill.

00:37:07.380 --> 00:37:11.380
 But I'll leave that to the commission's desire.

00:37:11.380 --> 00:37:17.480
 I just don't know how policy would work in practice if someone didn't announce their

00:37:17.480 --> 00:37:23.240
 voting opposition, vote in opposition, the vote goes through, then we go back and say,

00:37:23.240 --> 00:37:27.460
 hey, you voted in opposition, you need to, for the record, state why.

00:37:27.460 --> 00:37:35.080
 It's hard to require someone to voice their detailed opinion prior to the vote, in my

00:37:35.080 --> 00:37:36.080
 opinion.

00:37:36.080 --> 00:37:39.080
 But if you want to craft language --

00:37:39.080 --> 00:37:42.000
 Yeah, I was just trying to get us somewhere.

00:37:42.000 --> 00:37:43.000
 No, I agree.

00:37:43.000 --> 00:37:44.000
 Productivity is desired.

00:37:44.000 --> 00:37:45.000
 Commissioner Ellis.

00:37:45.000 --> 00:37:46.000
 Thank you, Chair.

00:37:46.000 --> 00:37:53.040
 Well, I mean, my reason really for calling this work session was to be able to at least

00:37:53.040 --> 00:38:01.200
 maybe have the legal department look on it as a situation that we were in doesn't happen.

00:38:01.200 --> 00:38:07.880
 So I think it at least needs to be looked at to see if policy needs to be set.

00:38:07.880 --> 00:38:13.120
 You know, that would be my opinion.

00:38:13.120 --> 00:38:14.120
 Mr. Chair.

00:38:14.120 --> 00:38:15.120
 Yes.

00:38:15.120 --> 00:38:20.240
 Another point, I think it would have been helpful for the commission to know that evening

00:38:20.240 --> 00:38:29.080
 when we only had five commissioners here, what vote we needed to approve the plats.

00:38:29.080 --> 00:38:31.160
 That was a unique situation.

00:38:31.160 --> 00:38:32.160
 Yeah.

00:38:32.160 --> 00:38:33.160
 Commissioner Beck.

00:38:33.160 --> 00:38:34.160
 Chair.

00:38:34.160 --> 00:38:41.200
 Commissioner Ellis did a very good job that night describing the demographics of that

00:38:41.200 --> 00:38:46.400
 vote, describing it as a five-member and the ramification.

00:38:46.400 --> 00:38:51.520
 So I don't think that it was unclear to circumstance.

00:38:51.520 --> 00:39:03.920
 The question of legal and this discussion is, as a whole, is there are times when our

00:39:03.920 --> 00:39:11.160
 commission, any given commissioner doesn't have the DDC memorized as to chapter, sub-chapter

00:39:11.160 --> 00:39:20.800
 sub-chapter, but in general is familiar with the guidelines and states reasons that they're

00:39:20.800 --> 00:39:25.840
 in agreement, disagreement, whatever, whichever way the vector goes.

00:39:25.840 --> 00:39:30.360
 But you know, that may not be compelling to other commissioners.

00:39:30.360 --> 00:39:38.160
 That does not necessarily imply that those reasons are worthy of chair overturning or

00:39:38.160 --> 00:39:40.160
 requesting a re-vote.

00:39:40.160 --> 00:39:45.900
 You can disagree with any given commissioner, but I'm not, I think we're, while we do,

00:39:45.900 --> 00:39:52.200
 I agree with Richard that we need some, some policies to be clear.

00:39:52.200 --> 00:39:56.160
 I think we're on, we're on dangerous territory where we're talking about overturning a commissioner's

00:39:56.160 --> 00:40:03.520
 vote or forcing a re-vote to get the vote that is desired by the majority.

00:40:03.520 --> 00:40:05.920
 I think that's very dangerous territory.

00:40:05.920 --> 00:40:13.440
 Yeah, and I'm sorry, my, my intent really was just to kind of follow the statute.

00:40:13.440 --> 00:40:17.960
 So if you have to deny it for reasons, if you're going to vote to deny, deny it with

00:40:17.960 --> 00:40:23.060
 reasons again, it was just kind of carrying that through nothing more, nothing less.

00:40:23.060 --> 00:40:24.060
 Thank you.

00:40:24.060 --> 00:40:29.200
 And Mr. Chair, with regard to the re-vote, once the, as commissioner Ellis said, once

00:40:29.200 --> 00:40:32.720
 the, the commission's already voted, they've lost jurisdiction over the matter and it's

00:40:32.720 --> 00:40:40.060
 on to the next body.

00:40:40.060 --> 00:40:42.440
 Commissioner Cole and Anderson, do you still have Commissioner Cole?

00:40:42.440 --> 00:40:46.760
 Yeah, this is exactly what I was thinking, thinking about when I talked about recourse.

00:40:46.760 --> 00:40:50.240
 So that 3-2, it's denial, but it goes to council.

00:40:50.240 --> 00:40:54.000
 It has to be a supermajority, right?

00:40:54.000 --> 00:41:00.300
 To approve since it's a denial, does council have to have a supermajority to pass it?

00:41:00.300 --> 00:41:01.840
 Does it go to council?

00:41:01.840 --> 00:41:02.840
 Yes.

00:41:02.840 --> 00:41:03.840
 It does.

00:41:03.840 --> 00:41:04.840
 Right.

00:41:04.840 --> 00:41:07.680
 But it just requires a supermajority.

00:41:07.680 --> 00:41:09.040
 It would need to be appealed.

00:41:09.040 --> 00:41:10.040
 Okay.

00:41:10.040 --> 00:41:11.040
 Okay.

00:41:11.040 --> 00:41:12.600
 It wouldn't automatically go.

00:41:12.600 --> 00:41:13.600
 It wouldn't automatically go.

00:41:13.600 --> 00:41:14.600
 Okay.

00:41:14.600 --> 00:41:15.600
 No.

00:41:15.600 --> 00:41:16.600
 That's not a reply.

00:41:16.600 --> 00:41:20.200
 You know, can they sue us?

00:41:20.200 --> 00:41:25.000
 Is it possible?

00:41:25.000 --> 00:41:28.960
 Commissioner Cole, I think I would prefer to answer questions like that in closed session.

00:41:28.960 --> 00:41:29.960
 Okay.

00:41:29.960 --> 00:41:31.480
 Thank you.

00:41:31.480 --> 00:41:34.720
 If you have a specific question.

00:41:34.720 --> 00:41:37.720
 And just for the commission to know, we have a placeholder on our agenda.

00:41:37.720 --> 00:41:42.080
 If we need to go to closed session, that's certainly the prerogative of this body to

00:41:42.080 --> 00:41:43.080
 do so.

00:41:43.080 --> 00:41:46.640
 So Commissioner Cole, if you would like to, or if you want to pursue that further, please

00:41:46.640 --> 00:41:47.640
 let us know.

00:41:47.640 --> 00:41:48.640
 Commissioner Anderson.

00:41:48.640 --> 00:41:53.040
 This isn't anything to do with this, but I just had a little pop up on my screen that

00:41:53.040 --> 00:41:54.400
 says, "Internet's unstable."

00:41:54.400 --> 00:41:57.360
 So if I lose you guys and I pop off, I'll get back on immediately.

00:41:57.360 --> 00:42:00.920
 So just give me a heads up, I'm having internet issues, kind of.

00:42:00.920 --> 00:42:02.720
 Thank you, Commissioner Anderson.

00:42:02.720 --> 00:42:03.720
 Commissioner Ellis.

00:42:03.720 --> 00:42:04.720
 Thank you, Chair.

00:42:04.720 --> 00:42:08.480
 Actually, on that same note, the same thing happened to me.

00:42:08.480 --> 00:42:09.480
 So okay.

00:42:09.480 --> 00:42:12.400
 So it may, I don't know if it's, whose end it's on.

00:42:12.400 --> 00:42:16.240
 If it's happened to all of us, it may be, city.

00:42:16.240 --> 00:42:17.240
 Okay.

00:42:17.240 --> 00:42:18.240
 Okay.

00:42:18.240 --> 00:42:22.000
 That was a great discussion on the matter.

00:42:22.000 --> 00:42:25.960
 Is there any other questions for staff on this?

00:42:25.960 --> 00:42:27.960
 Commissioner Smith.

00:42:27.960 --> 00:42:34.280
 Just looking for the agenda, the items we read through, do we have time to go to closed

00:42:34.280 --> 00:42:35.280
 session?

00:42:35.280 --> 00:42:36.280
 Yeah.

00:42:36.280 --> 00:42:41.960
 I mean, we definitely have time to do that.

00:42:41.960 --> 00:42:42.960
 Okay.

00:42:42.960 --> 00:42:45.360
 Then I would like to go to closed session.

00:42:45.360 --> 00:42:50.560
 I do want to talk about the point that Cynthia brought up about that.

00:42:50.560 --> 00:42:51.560
 Okay.

00:42:51.560 --> 00:42:58.400
 So what I will do at 543 is close the work session to a closed session.

00:42:58.400 --> 00:43:11.520
 And I will ask technology of how we do that on a Zoom call.

00:43:11.520 --> 00:43:14.120
 Thank you for allowing us to convene in closed session.

00:43:14.120 --> 00:43:18.560
 It is now 6.05 and we will continue with the agenda items.

00:43:18.560 --> 00:43:23.920
 The next item of business brings us to item two, the consideration of minute approval.

00:43:23.920 --> 00:43:30.280
 Is there any notes or edits to the July 8th minutes?

00:43:30.280 --> 00:43:31.920
 Okay.

00:43:31.920 --> 00:43:34.800
 Next item for business is our individual considerations.

00:43:34.800 --> 00:43:38.480
 Item three A is Ron Maguida's item.

00:43:38.480 --> 00:43:39.480
 Is there any questions?

00:43:39.480 --> 00:43:40.480
 Would you like a presentation?

00:43:40.480 --> 00:43:45.600
 This will be coming back to us pending a vote on this.

00:43:45.600 --> 00:43:47.440
 Commissioner Beck.

00:43:47.440 --> 00:43:54.200
 I don't know that I necessarily want a presentation of the material.

00:43:54.200 --> 00:44:06.560
 But I was curious, it's been my understanding that because the presentation was prepared

00:44:06.560 --> 00:44:16.520
 for council about this issue and I was wondering if at some point prior to us revisiting or

00:44:16.520 --> 00:44:23.200
 seeing this issue come up, before us, could we see that presentation on development on

00:44:23.200 --> 00:44:28.720
 top of gas wells, cap gas wells?

00:44:28.720 --> 00:44:32.720
 And I bring it up now just because this is the topic of the moment rather than at the

00:44:32.720 --> 00:44:34.680
 matrix time.

00:44:34.680 --> 00:44:41.840
 Richard, is there a pertinent presentation to this preliminary plat?

00:44:41.840 --> 00:44:43.960
 Not specific to this preliminary plat.

00:44:43.960 --> 00:44:51.600
 We are working on a work session item for council to discuss plug gas wells and setbacks.

00:44:51.600 --> 00:44:58.920
 And I think much like any time we do do that, shortly thereafter, typically we do it the

00:44:58.920 --> 00:45:05.000
 next -- we have the council work session, and then the next day we do -- we update P&C

00:45:05.000 --> 00:45:06.000
 on that.

00:45:06.000 --> 00:45:08.500
 So that would be our intent.

00:45:08.500 --> 00:45:15.080
 But that will not be for at least another month as we are working through those issues

00:45:15.080 --> 00:45:16.660
 associated with that.

00:45:16.660 --> 00:45:24.000
 So that would be, if I could clarify, after we would see this issue again on August 5th?

00:45:24.000 --> 00:45:26.520
 Is that correct?

00:45:26.520 --> 00:45:27.520
 August 19th.

00:45:27.520 --> 00:45:28.520
 19th.

00:45:28.520 --> 00:45:29.520
 Sorry.

00:45:29.520 --> 00:45:30.520
 Thank you, Chair.

00:45:30.520 --> 00:45:31.560
 That's correct.

00:45:31.560 --> 00:45:35.480
 And then even then if we had the workshop or work session, hypothetically, we would need

00:45:35.480 --> 00:45:38.080
 to go through the entire code amendment process.

00:45:38.080 --> 00:45:43.200
 So it wouldn't likely be implemented for some time.

00:45:43.200 --> 00:45:44.200
 All right.

00:45:44.200 --> 00:45:45.200
 Thank you, Richard.

00:45:45.200 --> 00:45:46.640
 I appreciate it.

00:45:46.640 --> 00:45:52.840
 Any questions for Ron on item 3A?

00:45:52.840 --> 00:45:55.280
 Seeing none, I'll move to item 3B.

00:45:55.280 --> 00:46:00.480
 This is a final -- whoops -- a final replat with Haley Zygursky.

00:46:00.480 --> 00:46:03.000
 Any questions on item 3A?

00:46:03.000 --> 00:46:07.600
 It is being recommended denial, however, the applicant has requested a 30-day extension

00:46:07.600 --> 00:46:08.600
 -- Commissioner Beck.

00:46:08.600 --> 00:46:10.560
 Thank you, Chair.

00:46:10.560 --> 00:46:17.240
 Haley, is it your estimation that it's likely under normal circumstances that the developer

00:46:17.240 --> 00:46:23.020
 could finalize all this in the 30 days?

00:46:23.020 --> 00:46:28.480
 Or are we going to see something weird happen in 30 days?

00:46:28.480 --> 00:46:29.480
 This is Haley Zygursky.

00:46:29.480 --> 00:46:35.400
 Yes, I believe it is perfectly reasonable that they could have this worked out within

00:46:35.400 --> 00:46:37.000
 30 days.

00:46:37.000 --> 00:46:44.560
 There are still some site plan considerations that they're working through for lot 1R1,

00:46:44.560 --> 00:46:48.880
 but I expect that they will work through very quickly the items that are outstanding on

00:46:48.880 --> 00:46:56.000
 the plat, which primarily relate to the drainage easement and the access easement on the plat.

00:46:56.000 --> 00:47:00.960
 So I anticipate that the August 19th date is achievable for them, despite some of the

00:47:00.960 --> 00:47:05.360
 other issues they're having with the site layout that we're still working through with

00:47:05.360 --> 00:47:07.720
 respect to landscaping and details like that.

00:47:07.720 --> 00:47:08.720
 Okay.

00:47:08.720 --> 00:47:09.720
 Thank you.

00:47:09.720 --> 00:47:12.720
 I appreciate it, Haley.

00:47:12.720 --> 00:47:19.360
 Any other questions for Haley on item 3B?

00:47:19.360 --> 00:47:21.600
 Seeing none, we'll go to our public hearing items.

00:47:21.600 --> 00:47:23.760
 The first one is item 4A.

00:47:23.760 --> 00:47:28.080
 Staff has requested to postpone this item until August 5th.

00:47:28.080 --> 00:47:31.720
 So we will not have a presentation for that.

00:47:31.720 --> 00:47:37.420
 We can move to item 4B, S19-0013.

00:47:37.420 --> 00:47:40.200
 This is Julie Wyatt's presentation.

00:47:40.200 --> 00:47:42.480
 I'll turn over the floor to Julie.

00:47:42.480 --> 00:47:49.040
 Let me pull up that presentation.

00:47:49.040 --> 00:47:51.340
 All right.

00:47:51.340 --> 00:48:01.720
 So this is item S19-13, Mingo Road Apartments.

00:48:01.720 --> 00:48:06.460
 So the request before you is for a specific use permit to permit multifamily dwellings.

00:48:06.460 --> 00:48:08.720
 The property is outlined there in yellow.

00:48:08.720 --> 00:48:11.080
 It's on the north side of Mingo Road.

00:48:11.080 --> 00:48:16.600
 It is approximately four acres, and it is located in an R7 district, which does require

00:48:16.600 --> 00:48:20.240
 a specific use permit for multifamily dwellings.

00:48:20.240 --> 00:48:22.360
 This might look familiar to some of you.

00:48:22.360 --> 00:48:26.760
 A previous SUP was approved for this site a couple of years ago.

00:48:26.760 --> 00:48:34.800
 However, it expired in February 2020, so they're coming back for a revised SUP.

00:48:34.800 --> 00:48:41.480
 So just to start off, I wanted to just talk a little bit about the site plan from 2017.

00:48:41.480 --> 00:48:43.840
 It included three two-story buildings.

00:48:43.840 --> 00:48:45.880
 There were 48 two-bedroom units.

00:48:45.880 --> 00:48:51.920
 There was parking along a looped drive aisle, and I sort of outlined it here in brown.

00:48:51.920 --> 00:48:55.640
 And there were 84 parking spaces that were distributed along that loop.

00:48:55.640 --> 00:48:59.120
 They were oriented to minimize lights on adjacent properties.

00:48:59.120 --> 00:49:02.440
 The solid waste receptacle is outlined here in blue.

00:49:02.440 --> 00:49:06.360
 That is about 149 feet from the residential lots.

00:49:06.360 --> 00:49:10.680
 And the vehicular access was to Mingo Road only.

00:49:10.680 --> 00:49:14.640
 Fast forward to the current site plan, and it looks very similar to the previously approved

00:49:14.640 --> 00:49:16.040
 SUP.

00:49:16.040 --> 00:49:18.080
 There are a couple exceptions.

00:49:18.080 --> 00:49:24.040
 They have added additional parking, and that is related to the unit mix, as well as City

00:49:24.040 --> 00:49:29.280
 of Denton has increased the parking standards for multifamily development since the original

00:49:29.280 --> 00:49:30.480
 SUP was approved.

00:49:30.480 --> 00:49:37.000
 So instead of 84 parking spaces, they're proposing 101 to conform to the Denton Development Code.

00:49:37.000 --> 00:49:39.280
 They've also modified the unit mix.

00:49:39.280 --> 00:49:45.200
 While they're keeping the same building footprint, they are modifying it to 48 one-bedroom units

00:49:45.200 --> 00:49:47.520
 and 16 two-bedroom units.

00:49:47.520 --> 00:49:53.400
 So those unit mixes changed, but it actually reduced the number of bedrooms from 96 to

00:49:53.400 --> 00:49:54.400
 80.

00:49:54.400 --> 00:49:58.000
 The other elements related to the site plan are consistent.

00:49:58.000 --> 00:50:01.980
 You have those three two-story buildings outlined in purple.

00:50:01.980 --> 00:50:09.200
 The setback from the adjacent residential properties to the east is still 44 feet.

00:50:09.200 --> 00:50:15.440
 The parking spaces are still distributed along this looped drive aisle to sort of minimize

00:50:15.440 --> 00:50:20.200
 the visual impacts of the parking and also to make sure that as few lights shine on the

00:50:20.200 --> 00:50:22.440
 adjacent properties as possible.

00:50:22.440 --> 00:50:27.720
 The solid waste is in the same place, 149 feet from the northern residential lots, and

00:50:27.720 --> 00:50:31.720
 vehicular access to Mingo Road only.

00:50:31.720 --> 00:50:34.480
 Just wanted to talk about the landscape plan briefly.

00:50:34.480 --> 00:50:41.160
 The original plan had this common open space, central open space, and the current plan retains

00:50:41.160 --> 00:50:42.160
 that.

00:50:42.160 --> 00:50:46.680
 It's about 13,000 square feet, and it does have some large trees in it.

00:50:46.680 --> 00:50:51.440
 So that was part of the reason why they went for this design was to keep some of these

00:50:51.440 --> 00:50:55.440
 large trees just as a sampling of what's in there.

00:50:55.440 --> 00:51:00.400
 There's a 36-inch post oak, 29-inch pecan, a 30-inch post oak.

00:51:00.400 --> 00:51:03.600
 So there's some nice trees in there that they wanted to maintain.

00:51:03.600 --> 00:51:08.760
 There's also a buffer required along the perimeter adjacent to the residential properties.

00:51:08.760 --> 00:51:14.120
 They're proposing that wood fence, three ornamental trees every 25 feet, and tree preservation

00:51:14.120 --> 00:51:15.120
 within that.

00:51:15.120 --> 00:51:17.360
 So they do conform to the buffer requirements.

00:51:17.360 --> 00:51:24.800
 There's also landscaping along the right of way to enhance that frontage of the property.

00:51:24.800 --> 00:51:30.400
 They're proposing a berm along there with a green hedge and street trees in accordance

00:51:30.400 --> 00:51:32.100
 with the Denton Development Code.

00:51:32.100 --> 00:51:41.180
 You can also see that the building adjacent to Mingo Road, those units do face Mingo Road,

00:51:41.180 --> 00:51:44.960
 and they're connected to that sidewalk in accordance with the requirements in the Denton

00:51:44.960 --> 00:51:45.960
 Development Code.

00:51:45.960 --> 00:51:46.960
 Hey, Julie.

00:51:46.960 --> 00:51:49.000
 Can I interrupt real fast?

00:51:49.000 --> 00:51:56.720
 Is there a site plan rationale that the solid waste compartments were located in their little

00:51:56.720 --> 00:51:59.840
 park area and maybe not on the northwest corner?

00:51:59.840 --> 00:52:04.520
 It seems like that's a great place to go play and everything or hang out, but there's two

00:52:04.520 --> 00:52:06.200
 dumpsters there.

00:52:06.200 --> 00:52:09.440
 Is that where the site kind of mandates it, or what's the rationale?

00:52:09.440 --> 00:52:12.360
 That was a discussion at the previous SUP.

00:52:12.360 --> 00:52:19.280
 The intent was to really move those dumpsters as far away from the adjacent residential properties

00:52:19.280 --> 00:52:20.280
 as possible.

00:52:20.280 --> 00:52:21.280
 Okay.

00:52:21.280 --> 00:52:24.800
 So that was the intent of putting them in that location.

00:52:24.800 --> 00:52:25.800
 Okay.

00:52:25.800 --> 00:52:26.800
 Thank you.

00:52:26.800 --> 00:52:27.800
 You bet.

00:52:27.800 --> 00:52:28.800
 Here's some concept elevations.

00:52:28.800 --> 00:52:30.920
 It's a little hard to see on the PowerPoint.

00:52:30.920 --> 00:52:33.400
 This is the building that's going to be facing Mingo Road.

00:52:33.400 --> 00:52:35.520
 So this is going to be the most prominent building.

00:52:35.520 --> 00:52:39.280
 As you can see, it has residential character that's kind of consistent with what's around

00:52:39.280 --> 00:52:40.280
 there.

00:52:40.280 --> 00:52:41.480
 Once again, it's two story.

00:52:41.480 --> 00:52:43.120
 It's got a pitched roof.

00:52:43.120 --> 00:52:49.120
 Those front doors face the street, so it does relate to the street really well.

00:52:49.120 --> 00:52:55.240
 There's awnings to provide those little front porches, the safety from the rain as you're

00:52:55.240 --> 00:52:56.240
 getting in your house.

00:52:56.240 --> 00:53:01.440
 So it is consistent with the architectural character of the surrounding area.

00:53:01.440 --> 00:53:07.760
 And as with any SUP, the planning process is we first look at what's onsite.

00:53:07.760 --> 00:53:12.240
 So what they're proposing and how it meets the development code.

00:53:12.240 --> 00:53:16.840
 But then with any SUP, we sort of broaden out our view and look at what's surrounding.

00:53:16.840 --> 00:53:21.840
 Because part of the criteria for approval for an SUP is how is it consistent with the

00:53:21.840 --> 00:53:22.920
 character of the area.

00:53:22.920 --> 00:53:26.600
 So I wanted to talk about the surrounding development for this project.

00:53:26.600 --> 00:53:29.640
 So as you can see, it's an infill site.

00:53:29.640 --> 00:53:32.080
 It's surrounded by developed property.

00:53:32.080 --> 00:53:34.680
 To the west of the site is a multifamily.

00:53:34.680 --> 00:53:37.520
 It's an age-restricted multifamily.

00:53:37.520 --> 00:53:42.080
 To the north and east, there is residential as well as the south.

00:53:42.080 --> 00:53:46.760
 Mingo Road is a secondary arterial within the city of Denton.

00:53:46.760 --> 00:53:49.200
 There's one correction I need to make for my staff report.

00:53:49.200 --> 00:53:53.580
 So this is Sequoia Park right here.

00:53:53.580 --> 00:53:55.560
 And I left that off of my staff report.

00:53:55.560 --> 00:54:01.160
 But it is a park that is within about a quarter of a mile walking distance from the subject

00:54:01.160 --> 00:54:02.160
 property.

00:54:02.160 --> 00:54:12.160
 And it does have a nice walking trail through it.

00:54:12.160 --> 00:54:15.160
 Chris, you're back.

00:54:15.160 --> 00:54:16.160
 Thank you, Chair.

00:54:16.160 --> 00:54:18.380
 And thank you, Julie, for waiting.

00:54:18.380 --> 00:54:21.380
 So real briefly about that exact point you just made.

00:54:21.380 --> 00:54:35.320
 So on the 10-minute walk park access criteria, it's any of our parcels that are designated

00:54:35.320 --> 00:54:37.420
 park satisfy that?

00:54:37.420 --> 00:54:41.520
 And so this is designated a park, and therefore it satisfies that.

00:54:41.520 --> 00:54:45.760
 You know, it is staff's analysis that it does.

00:54:45.760 --> 00:54:51.760
 I know that Parks is in the middle of updating their park plan, and so that could – they

00:54:51.760 --> 00:54:54.760
 are looking at maybe partnering with Denton ISD.

00:54:54.760 --> 00:55:02.160
 So it may – in the future that may – there may be areas where it's broader than just

00:55:02.160 --> 00:55:04.720
 city parks that could satisfy that requirement.

00:55:04.720 --> 00:55:07.160
 Maybe it's close to a school that has ball fields in it.

00:55:07.160 --> 00:55:13.440
 So as of right now, yes, the way we look at it is if it's within that sort of quarter

00:55:13.440 --> 00:55:18.200
 to a half a mile from a city park, that it meets that criteria.

00:55:18.200 --> 00:55:21.360
 And that Sequoia Park is city property?

00:55:21.360 --> 00:55:22.640
 Yes.

00:55:22.640 --> 00:55:25.900
 It was dedicated by Platt to the city.

00:55:25.900 --> 00:55:30.560
 So I did talk with Parks about it as well as real estate, and they did confirm that

00:55:30.560 --> 00:55:32.240
 it was a city park.

00:55:32.240 --> 00:55:33.240
 Thank you so much.

00:55:33.240 --> 00:55:34.240
 You bet.

00:55:34.240 --> 00:55:35.240
 All right.

00:55:35.240 --> 00:55:41.000
 So for SUPs in the 2019 code, we have two sections of approval criteria.

00:55:41.000 --> 00:55:47.000
 We have the general approval criteria, and we have the specific criteria for SUPs.

00:55:47.000 --> 00:55:50.360
 Staff's analysis is that it does meet the criteria for approval, but what we're going

00:55:50.360 --> 00:55:55.880
 to do is kind of hit on these criteria as we continue to discuss the project.

00:55:55.880 --> 00:55:59.240
 So first, I want to talk about compatibility with the surrounding area.

00:55:59.240 --> 00:56:01.360
 That's one of the criteria for approval.

00:56:01.360 --> 00:56:08.120
 So this is a residential use, and as a residential use, it's not anticipated to – anticipated

00:56:08.120 --> 00:56:12.240
 to introduce activities inconsistent with what we typically see around there.

00:56:12.240 --> 00:56:16.240
 So, you know, people would come and go from work, they would live their lives.

00:56:16.240 --> 00:56:22.240
 Those are really similar uses and activities on the site.

00:56:22.240 --> 00:56:26.840
 The design of the site increases the compatibility.

00:56:26.840 --> 00:56:32.540
 Things like the maximum two-story buildings is more consistent with the surrounding development.

00:56:32.540 --> 00:56:39.360
 That increased setback, particularly from the single-family residential adjacent, helps

00:56:39.360 --> 00:56:41.280
 increase that compatibility.

00:56:41.280 --> 00:56:46.480
 The large open space is a central feature of the site.

00:56:46.480 --> 00:56:50.400
 It's consistent with what you see in residential areas.

00:56:50.400 --> 00:56:56.040
 The access to the site, there is not direct vehicular access to the adjacent residential.

00:56:56.040 --> 00:57:04.320
 It does go out to Mingo Road, so that is – increases the compatibility, as well as the parking lot

00:57:04.320 --> 00:57:12.600
 orientation, not having a large central parking lot, but sort of that – the spaces that

00:57:12.600 --> 00:57:16.720
 are distributed along that driveway loop.

00:57:16.720 --> 00:57:18.520
 And then the buffers.

00:57:18.520 --> 00:57:22.200
 Those do reduce potential noise and light for the adjacent properties.

00:57:22.200 --> 00:57:29.800
 So – but due to those considerations, it is compatible with the surrounding area.

00:57:29.800 --> 00:57:34.320
 We also look at Denton Plan 2030 for any project we review.

00:57:34.320 --> 00:57:39.840
 The site is designated as Neighborhood University Compatibility Area.

00:57:39.840 --> 00:57:48.940
 This is an infill site adjacent to or near TWU, and these Neighborhood University Compatibility

00:57:48.940 --> 00:57:55.280
 Areas are really intended to be kind of transitional, sort of allow the development scale and use

00:57:55.280 --> 00:58:01.960
 to either – to gradually decrease as you go toward the residential areas.

00:58:01.960 --> 00:58:07.760
 And this proposal is really consistent with that, because it's a multi-family use, so

00:58:07.760 --> 00:58:12.320
 it's that – it's still that residential character, but it does allow for the necessary

00:58:12.320 --> 00:58:18.120
 housing needed near our university areas, but still maintains that architectural feel

00:58:18.120 --> 00:58:21.360
 that's consistent with the adjacent residential.

00:58:21.360 --> 00:58:25.240
 So it does conform – it is consistent with that future land use map.

00:58:25.240 --> 00:58:29.880
 Additionally, there – those site elements we talked about increase that compatibility

00:58:29.880 --> 00:58:37.600
 and just go to further – further meet the goals of that future land use designation.

00:58:37.600 --> 00:58:44.800
 The SUP Criteria for Approval also addresses impacts related to access, traffic, emergency

00:58:44.800 --> 00:58:50.520
 services, utilities, parking, refuse, noise, glare, odor, and have those been mitigated.

00:58:50.520 --> 00:58:53.600
 So we'll kind of take those one by one.

00:58:53.600 --> 00:58:55.040
 First we looked at transportation.

00:58:55.040 --> 00:58:59.960
 They did provide a trip generation – generation numbers to us.

00:58:59.960 --> 00:59:04.880
 The 64 dwelling units would generate about 468 trips in a 24-hour weekday.

00:59:04.880 --> 00:59:08.600
 That's 36 morning peak and then 43 evening peak.

00:59:08.600 --> 00:59:11.440
 I talked with our engineering staff.

00:59:11.440 --> 00:59:14.600
 Mingo Road, as I said, is a secondary arterial.

00:59:14.600 --> 00:59:20.040
 Certainly it is not constructed to what we typically see of the secondary arterial, which

00:59:20.040 --> 00:59:25.640
 is two lanes in each direction with that – that are separated with a median.

00:59:25.640 --> 00:59:30.720
 However, they believe that Mingo Road can accommodate that traffic, that that would

00:59:30.720 --> 00:59:34.240
 not negatively impact Mingo Road.

00:59:34.240 --> 00:59:38.680
 It is also located next to a DCTA stop.

00:59:38.680 --> 00:59:41.440
 I've got it outlined here, that red dot right there.

00:59:41.440 --> 00:59:48.640
 It's about 500 walking feet from the – the stop.

00:59:48.640 --> 00:59:55.600
 So having that transit does allow for different modes of transportation for the residents.

00:59:55.600 --> 00:59:56.760
 And then pedestrians.

00:59:56.760 --> 01:00:02.880
 So there is a sidewalk that was constructed on the adjacent property.

01:00:02.880 --> 01:00:08.280
 Development of the site would require continuing that sidewalk along their frontage, so it

01:00:08.280 --> 01:00:16.520
 would provide a nice improved pedestrian path for residents to access that bus stop.

01:00:16.520 --> 01:00:20.320
 Water and wastewater have reviewed it, and there is capacity within the system to serve

01:00:20.320 --> 01:00:21.920
 the proposal.

01:00:21.920 --> 01:00:25.680
 There is water and wastewater available, and so they wouldn't be required to extend any

01:00:25.680 --> 01:00:27.000
 public facilities.

01:00:27.000 --> 01:00:31.420
 This is an infill site, so those – those public facilities are already available.

01:00:31.420 --> 01:00:35.160
 Fire station number one is about 1.3 miles from the site.

01:00:35.160 --> 01:00:40.500
 And then parking and refuse, that – once again, I know we've talked about this, but

01:00:40.500 --> 01:00:45.680
 that parking area, the way it's designed does minimize those visual impacts associated

01:00:45.680 --> 01:00:46.980
 with it.

01:00:46.980 --> 01:00:53.280
 And then the solid waste containers are screened, and they are located 149 feet from the nearest

01:00:53.280 --> 01:01:00.320
 single-family residential lot, so minimizing any potential issues for odors or noise associated

01:01:00.320 --> 01:01:04.600
 with those solid waste receptacles.

01:01:04.600 --> 01:01:06.540
 Public outreach was done.

01:01:06.540 --> 01:01:10.120
 We did – we did send out the required notices.

01:01:10.120 --> 01:01:13.180
 We haven't received any responses.

01:01:13.180 --> 01:01:15.560
 The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting.

01:01:15.560 --> 01:01:23.960
 It's been – it's been a while since they had it, just due to all of the COVID issues.

01:01:23.960 --> 01:01:31.000
 But they did have about four attendees, and, you know, they talked about the previous SUP,

01:01:31.000 --> 01:01:36.040
 and the – especially those buffer elements.

01:01:36.040 --> 01:01:41.520
 And so that was an important element to the adjacent property owners.

01:01:41.520 --> 01:01:43.160
 And that is all I have.

01:01:43.160 --> 01:01:48.880
 The applicant is here, and they have a presentation to go over at the regular session, and I'll

01:01:48.880 --> 01:01:49.880
 answer any questions.

01:01:49.880 --> 01:01:50.880
 Oh, I'm sorry.

01:01:50.880 --> 01:01:51.880
 I forgot.

01:01:51.880 --> 01:01:52.880
 The recommendation.

01:01:52.880 --> 01:01:53.880
 (Laughter.)

01:01:53.880 --> 01:01:54.880
 I'm sorry.

01:01:54.880 --> 01:01:57.200
 One more.

01:01:57.200 --> 01:02:01.800
 So staff does recommend approval, because it is consistent with the – with the criteria

01:02:01.800 --> 01:02:04.040
 for approval, as well as Denton Plan 2030.

01:02:04.040 --> 01:02:10.120
 We do have some conditions that we're recommending, one, that the landscaping in the attached

01:02:10.120 --> 01:02:16.880
 plan, it is intended to comply with the Denton Development Code in terms of all of the elements

01:02:16.880 --> 01:02:22.240
 associated with that, things like parking lot landscaping, street trees, minimum landscape

01:02:22.240 --> 01:02:24.200
 and canopy areas and buffers.

01:02:24.200 --> 01:02:29.440
 However, there could be minor modifications associated with just individual plantings,

01:02:29.440 --> 01:02:35.960
 maybe availability at the nurseries, final plant selections, maybe plants might have

01:02:35.960 --> 01:02:41.120
 to shift for a reason as they're moving forward development.

01:02:41.120 --> 01:02:45.880
 So that would be the first condition, that it would allow some minor modifications to

01:02:45.880 --> 01:02:51.040
 that landscaping, not with the overall landscaping, but just those – maybe where a plant would

01:02:51.040 --> 01:02:56.000
 be planted or those individual plant selections.

01:02:56.000 --> 01:02:59.980
 The zoning map, if this is approved, would be changed to reflect that a specific use

01:02:59.980 --> 01:03:04.360
 permit has been approved on the site.

01:03:04.360 --> 01:03:09.640
 And then, notwithstanding the limited approval for landscaping in number one, we would reserve

01:03:09.640 --> 01:03:14.400
 the right to require approval of any other amendments to the SUP.

01:03:14.400 --> 01:03:20.640
 Furthermore, we always like to kind of spell out some of the elements associated with that

01:03:20.640 --> 01:03:22.640
 SUP in text form.

01:03:22.640 --> 01:03:27.680
 The site plan and landscape plan and those conceptual elevations will be attached to

01:03:27.680 --> 01:03:28.680
 the ordinance.

01:03:28.680 --> 01:03:31.880
 So if it's approved, they would be required to comply with that.

01:03:31.880 --> 01:03:38.480
 But we also like to follow that up with some text, and that is just that the 48 one-bedroom

01:03:38.480 --> 01:03:44.720
 units and 16 two-bedroom units in those three two-story buildings would be – are as part

01:03:44.720 --> 01:03:46.600
 of that approval.

01:03:46.600 --> 01:03:54.120
 The 101 parking spaces, that central open-air area, the solid waste containers 149 feet

01:03:54.120 --> 01:03:58.080
 from the nearest adjacent lot, and that those buildings would be designed with the pitch

01:03:58.080 --> 01:04:02.440
 roofs, those porches and awnings, those things that correspond to the architectural character

01:04:02.440 --> 01:04:03.720
 of the area.

01:04:03.720 --> 01:04:09.040
 Our recommendation does have a provision that staff would have the ability to approve increases

01:04:09.040 --> 01:04:15.080
 up to and including 5 percent of any of the amounts in requirements one and two, provided

01:04:15.080 --> 01:04:17.660
 that they met all DDC requirements.

01:04:17.660 --> 01:04:22.200
 Anything greater than 5 percent would require a new SUP approval.

01:04:22.200 --> 01:04:26.360
 And with that, I conclude my presentation.

01:04:26.360 --> 01:04:27.440
 Thank you very much, Julie.

01:04:27.440 --> 01:04:28.440
 Commissioner Smith?

01:04:28.440 --> 01:04:31.960
 Julie, was there any changes in the recommendation from the last SUP?

01:04:31.960 --> 01:04:34.600
 I saw the SUP the first time we approved it.

01:04:34.600 --> 01:04:38.000
 Is there anything different from the last time until now?

01:04:38.000 --> 01:04:43.220
 So there were – and I talked with Commissioner Ellis about this.

01:04:43.220 --> 01:04:49.880
 There were some slightly different conditions with the previous one, and I'm pulling up

01:04:49.880 --> 01:04:57.960
 my – that ordinance.

01:04:57.960 --> 01:05:02.560
 What we've really done is within the site plan and the landscape plan, we sort of baked

01:05:02.560 --> 01:05:06.880
 in those conditions that were on the previous ordinance.

01:05:06.880 --> 01:05:11.080
 So let me get there, sorry.

01:05:11.080 --> 01:05:13.700
 One had to do with tree preservation.

01:05:13.700 --> 01:05:19.320
 That was – the original SUP was reviewed under our previous tree code.

01:05:19.320 --> 01:05:21.840
 Since then, we've adopted a new tree code.

01:05:21.840 --> 01:05:28.160
 So that previous condition that said they had to preserve the protected trees – the

01:05:28.160 --> 01:05:32.160
 old code didn't require preservation of those protected trees.

01:05:32.160 --> 01:05:34.800
 Our new code does require minimum preservation for that.

01:05:34.800 --> 01:05:45.040
 So those are just some of those elements that have been brought in to that.

01:05:45.040 --> 01:05:46.040
 That's fine.

01:05:46.040 --> 01:05:47.040
 Thank you.

01:05:47.040 --> 01:05:48.040
 You bet.

01:05:48.040 --> 01:05:49.040
 Commissioner Beck?

01:05:49.040 --> 01:05:51.760
 Thank you, Chair.

01:05:51.760 --> 01:05:59.340
 I think this is a cute little infill area, but can you educate me about projected growth

01:05:59.340 --> 01:06:00.340
 patterns along Mingo?

01:06:00.340 --> 01:06:05.900
 I mean, I live up in D2, and that's – Mingo is a trial.

01:06:05.900 --> 01:06:08.440
 It's not secondary arterial, as you said.

01:06:08.440 --> 01:06:10.540
 So what are our plans for that?

01:06:10.540 --> 01:06:15.960
 Because it seems like we're – I'm concerned about pedestrian and vehicular access right

01:06:15.960 --> 01:06:18.960
 there.

01:06:18.960 --> 01:06:23.720
 I used to bike down there, and I don't do it anymore because it's dangerous.

01:06:23.720 --> 01:06:29.160
 So it's – can you walk me – get me over those concerns a little bit?

01:06:29.160 --> 01:06:35.040
 So I did check with engineering regarding any planned improvements for Mingo Road.

01:06:35.040 --> 01:06:37.840
 Right now, there aren't any.

01:06:37.840 --> 01:06:45.400
 So right now, it's sort of reliant upon development or redevelopment of the site of the area along

01:06:45.400 --> 01:06:48.880
 Mingo Road that would get some of those pedestrian facilities.

01:06:48.880 --> 01:06:55.000
 So as projects like this one come in, they would be required to put in the sidewalk,

01:06:55.000 --> 01:06:59.640
 which would just allow that facility to be completed.

01:06:59.640 --> 01:07:05.520
 So right now, there aren't any changes to expand that.

01:07:05.520 --> 01:07:09.640
 But there are some parcels that haven't been developed along Mingo Road.

01:07:09.640 --> 01:07:13.720
 So as those do develop, there would be requirements for sidewalks.

01:07:13.720 --> 01:07:19.200
 And as I understand, Julie, we can't touch the south side because that's railway easement.

01:07:19.200 --> 01:07:20.680
 Is that correct?

01:07:20.680 --> 01:07:21.680
 You are correct.

01:07:21.680 --> 01:07:23.840
 So really, any improvements to Mingo?

01:07:23.840 --> 01:07:32.200
 There may be some minimal right of way on that side, but, yes, the majority of improvements

01:07:32.200 --> 01:07:36.640
 to Mingo Road would have to come from the north side.

01:07:36.640 --> 01:07:37.920
 Okay.

01:07:37.920 --> 01:07:38.920
 And one last question.

01:07:38.920 --> 01:07:42.800
 Did I read it, "Zone for Hodge"?

01:07:42.800 --> 01:07:46.960
 Is that what I read in the documents?

01:07:46.960 --> 01:07:47.960
 Zone for –

01:07:47.960 --> 01:07:48.960
 Element 3.

01:07:48.960 --> 01:07:49.960
 For the elementary school?

01:07:49.960 --> 01:07:50.960
 Oh, yes.

01:07:50.960 --> 01:07:53.560
 That seems insane, but okay.

01:07:53.560 --> 01:07:58.480
 I will tell you, I checked that today again because I was like, are you sure?

01:07:58.480 --> 01:08:09.680
 But yes, there is a – almost like a figure eight pattern that nips this lot and the surrounding

01:08:09.680 --> 01:08:11.800
 subdivision into Hodge.

01:08:11.800 --> 01:08:16.760
 Now Denton ISD could – you know, they're always looking at their attendance zone.

01:08:16.760 --> 01:08:20.840
 So that could change as more development comes on that side of town.

01:08:20.840 --> 01:08:25.400
 But yes, I was a little shocked by that as well.

01:08:25.400 --> 01:08:26.400
 Thank you, Julie.

01:08:26.400 --> 01:08:27.400
 Appreciate it.

01:08:27.400 --> 01:08:28.400
 Bet.

01:08:28.400 --> 01:08:31.200
 Any other questions for Julie on this item?

01:08:31.200 --> 01:08:36.300
 Hey, Julie, what mandates the two points of entry for fire?

01:08:36.300 --> 01:08:37.600
 This one only has one.

01:08:37.600 --> 01:08:42.240
 Some – it seems like we require two entry points for emergency access.

01:08:42.240 --> 01:08:46.240
 How did this one escape by that one, that requirement?

01:08:46.240 --> 01:08:50.440
 It may be because it is on Mingo, so they could fight that fire.

01:08:50.440 --> 01:08:55.200
 It would be dependent upon how close they can get for that hose lay.

01:08:55.200 --> 01:09:02.120
 So I believe for two points for multifamily – and I can check on this – it's required

01:09:02.120 --> 01:09:03.920
 for over 100 units.

01:09:03.920 --> 01:09:04.920
 Okay.

01:09:04.920 --> 01:09:07.520
 I'll check on – I can check on that.

01:09:07.520 --> 01:09:08.520
 That would be helpful.

01:09:08.520 --> 01:09:12.840
 I'm sure it's right, but just to double check would be – would appease me.

01:09:12.840 --> 01:09:15.680
 Thank you.

01:09:15.680 --> 01:09:19.160
 Any other items for Julie on this?

01:09:19.160 --> 01:09:21.420
 Okay, fantastic.

01:09:21.420 --> 01:09:24.840
 With that, we will close our work session meeting at 635.

01:09:24.840 --> 01:09:32.160
 We'll take a five-minute recess, be back here at 630 – did I say 531?

01:09:32.160 --> 01:09:33.560
 This ends at 631.

01:09:33.560 --> 01:09:37.440
 We'll be back at 636 for the public meeting.

01:09:37.440 --> 01:09:38.440
 Thank you.

01:09:38.440 --> 01:09:43.700
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission regular

01:09:43.700 --> 01:09:48.120
 meeting for Wednesday, July 22, 2020.

01:09:48.120 --> 01:09:53.460
 Given that we have a quorum, I'll call this meeting to order at 641.

01:09:53.460 --> 01:09:58.640
 Please let the record show that Commissioner Pernetta is absent at the start of the meeting.

01:09:58.640 --> 01:10:04.880
 The first item of business is to provide a pledge of allegiance to the U.S. and Texas

01:10:04.880 --> 01:10:05.880
 flag.

01:10:05.880 --> 01:10:10.000
 Commissioners, if you would want to join me, you can unmute, then we'll begin.

01:10:10.000 --> 01:10:15.760
 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for

01:10:15.760 --> 01:10:27.280
 which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

01:10:27.280 --> 01:10:28.940
 Honor the Texas flag.

01:10:28.940 --> 01:10:37.080
 I pledge allegiance to the Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible people.

01:10:37.080 --> 01:10:42.120
 Next item of business is item two, the consideration of the July 8th minutes.

01:10:42.120 --> 01:10:44.400
 Chair will entertain discussion or motion.

01:10:44.400 --> 01:10:45.800
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:10:45.800 --> 01:10:48.320
 I move approval.

01:10:48.320 --> 01:10:49.600
 We have a first for approval.

01:10:49.600 --> 01:10:50.600
 Commissioner Smith.

01:10:50.600 --> 01:10:51.600
 Second.

01:10:51.600 --> 01:10:53.320
 We have a first and a second for approval.

01:10:53.320 --> 01:10:56.520
 Any discussion on the item?

01:10:56.520 --> 01:11:00.200
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

01:11:00.200 --> 01:11:01.200
 Commissioner Beck.

01:11:01.200 --> 01:11:02.200
 Aye.

01:11:02.200 --> 01:11:03.320
 Commissioner Cole.

01:11:03.320 --> 01:11:04.320
 Aye.

01:11:04.320 --> 01:11:05.320
 Commissioner Anderson.

01:11:05.320 --> 01:11:06.320
 Aye.

01:11:06.320 --> 01:11:07.320
 Commissioner Smith.

01:11:07.320 --> 01:11:08.320
 Aye.

01:11:08.320 --> 01:11:09.320
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:11:09.320 --> 01:11:10.320
 Aye.

01:11:10.320 --> 01:11:13.600
 Chair is also an aye.

01:11:13.600 --> 01:11:14.960
 Motion carries 6-0.

01:11:14.960 --> 01:11:21.600
 Next item for business is item 3A, it's our individual consideration section.

01:11:21.600 --> 01:11:28.400
 This item is being recommended for denial, but the applicant has requested a 30-day extension.

01:11:28.400 --> 01:11:36.000
 Is there any questions for Ron on this item or the chair will entertain a motion.

01:11:36.000 --> 01:11:37.640
 Commissioner Smith.

01:11:37.640 --> 01:11:42.480
 Make a motion to approve an extension for 30 days to date certain, or do you mean to

01:11:42.480 --> 01:11:43.480
 give a date?

01:11:43.480 --> 01:11:44.480
 Today is August 19th.

01:11:44.480 --> 01:11:47.660
 Today is August 19th.

01:11:47.660 --> 01:11:51.000
 We have a first for approval.

01:11:51.000 --> 01:11:52.000
 Commissioner Cole.

01:11:52.000 --> 01:11:53.000
 Second.

01:11:53.000 --> 01:11:55.800
 We have a first and a second for approval.

01:11:55.800 --> 01:11:58.320
 Any discussion on the item?

01:11:58.320 --> 01:11:59.320
 Commissioner Beck.

01:11:59.320 --> 01:12:01.800
 Thank you, chair.

01:12:01.800 --> 01:12:10.320
 So the rationale for the denial was as stated in our backup, whose was this?

01:12:10.320 --> 01:12:11.920
 This was Ron's.

01:12:11.920 --> 01:12:14.680
 Is there, again, I guess this is a similar question.

01:12:14.680 --> 01:12:26.120
 Is there belief that this extension would be sufficient time to resolve the issues?

01:12:26.120 --> 01:12:27.120
 Is Ron...

01:12:27.120 --> 01:12:31.400
 Julie or Richard or whoever can answer the...

01:12:31.400 --> 01:12:32.400
 Ron is on the call.

01:12:32.400 --> 01:12:33.400
 I'll allow Ron.

01:12:33.400 --> 01:12:34.400
 Can everyone hear me?

01:12:34.400 --> 01:12:35.400
 Yeah, there you are.

01:12:35.400 --> 01:12:36.400
 Hi.

01:12:36.400 --> 01:12:37.400
 Good afternoon, everyone.

01:12:37.400 --> 01:12:41.480
 Long time, no talk.

01:12:41.480 --> 01:12:46.160
 The applicant is finishing up some of the comments and primarily related to drainage

01:12:46.160 --> 01:12:48.360
 issues, which they're very close.

01:12:48.360 --> 01:12:53.800
 And then the other outstanding comment is related to the gas well, which we're working through

01:12:53.800 --> 01:12:54.800
 that as well.

01:12:54.800 --> 01:12:59.360
 So, yes, I believe that they will be able to accomplish this within the 30 day time

01:12:59.360 --> 01:13:00.360
 limit.

01:13:00.360 --> 01:13:01.360
 All right.

01:13:01.360 --> 01:13:02.360
 Thank you, Ron.

01:13:02.360 --> 01:13:03.360
 You're welcome.

01:13:03.360 --> 01:13:07.040
 Any other discussion on this item?

01:13:07.040 --> 01:13:11.720
 Just for the record, for this item, we had two people make comments using the online form.

01:13:11.720 --> 01:13:15.400
 There was zero in support for this item and two against.

01:13:15.400 --> 01:13:20.160
 All of these comment forms were emailed to the commissioners and our city secretary to

01:13:20.160 --> 01:13:21.300
 be recorded.

01:13:21.300 --> 01:13:26.800
 For those who are opposed to this item, this will be coming back on August 19th.

01:13:26.800 --> 01:13:34.320
 So please join us when we will look to make a motion of approval or denial on this item.

01:13:34.320 --> 01:13:35.320
 There's no other discussion.

01:13:35.320 --> 01:13:40.360
 I will go ahead and take a vote via roll call to postpone this item to a date certain of

01:13:40.360 --> 01:13:41.360
 August 19th.

01:13:41.360 --> 01:13:42.360
 Commissioner Beck.

01:13:42.360 --> 01:13:43.360
 Aye.

01:13:43.360 --> 01:13:44.360
 Commissioner Cole.

01:13:44.360 --> 01:13:45.360
 Aye.

01:13:45.360 --> 01:13:46.360
 Commissioner Anderson.

01:13:46.360 --> 01:13:47.360
 Aye.

01:13:47.360 --> 01:13:48.360
 Commissioner Smith.

01:13:48.360 --> 01:13:49.360
 Aye.

01:13:49.360 --> 01:13:50.360
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:13:50.360 --> 01:13:51.360
 Aye.

01:13:51.360 --> 01:13:52.360
 Chair is also an aye.

01:13:52.360 --> 01:13:53.360
 Motion carries 6-0.

01:13:53.360 --> 01:13:54.520
 Next item of business is item 3B, FR20-0007.

01:13:54.520 --> 01:14:09.360
 This item staff is also recommending denial and the applicant has also requested a 30-day

01:14:09.360 --> 01:14:13.520
 extension to a date certain of August 19th.

01:14:13.520 --> 01:14:15.080
 Chair will entertain a motion or discussion.

01:14:15.080 --> 01:14:16.760
 Commissioner Smith.

01:14:16.760 --> 01:14:20.920
 Make a motion to approve the extension to date certain of August 19th.

01:14:20.920 --> 01:14:25.500
 We have a motion to extend or postpone to date certain.

01:14:25.500 --> 01:14:26.500
 Commissioner Cole.

01:14:26.500 --> 01:14:27.500
 Second.

01:14:27.500 --> 01:14:33.560
 We have a first and a second to postpone this item extended to August 19th.

01:14:33.560 --> 01:14:38.620
 Is there any discussion on this item?

01:14:38.620 --> 01:14:42.400
 Seeing none, I will make a call for a vote via roll call.

01:14:42.400 --> 01:14:43.400
 Commissioner Beck.

01:14:43.400 --> 01:14:44.400
 Aye.

01:14:44.400 --> 01:14:45.400
 Commissioner Cole.

01:14:45.400 --> 01:14:46.400
 Aye.

01:14:46.400 --> 01:14:47.400
 Commissioner Anderson.

01:14:47.400 --> 01:14:48.400
 Aye.

01:14:48.400 --> 01:14:49.400
 Commissioner Smith.

01:14:49.400 --> 01:14:50.400
 Aye.

01:14:50.400 --> 01:14:51.400
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:14:51.400 --> 01:14:52.400
 Aye.

01:14:52.400 --> 01:14:53.680
 Chair is also an aye.

01:14:53.680 --> 01:14:55.940
 Motion carries 6-0.

01:14:55.940 --> 01:15:00.400
 The next item of business is item 4A.

01:15:00.400 --> 01:15:07.120
 This item is EASA 20-0003A.

01:15:07.120 --> 01:15:11.880
 This item staff is requesting to postpone this item until August 5th.

01:15:11.880 --> 01:15:17.720
 I will go ahead and open the public hearing and look for Commissioner to make the motion.

01:15:17.720 --> 01:15:18.720
 Commissioner Smith.

01:15:18.720 --> 01:15:22.440
 I will make a motion to postpone date certain of August 5th.

01:15:22.440 --> 01:15:25.840
 We have a first for postponement to August 5th.

01:15:25.840 --> 01:15:26.840
 Commissioner Anderson.

01:15:26.840 --> 01:15:27.840
 I second the motion.

01:15:27.840 --> 01:15:33.520
 We have a first and a second to postpone this item date certain of August 5th.

01:15:33.520 --> 01:15:40.160
 Is there any discussion on this?

01:15:40.160 --> 01:15:43.160
 We do have an individual wanting to speak on this item.

01:15:43.160 --> 01:15:48.400
 Since there was no presentation and it's being postponed, I will ask the individual to come

01:15:48.400 --> 01:15:54.360
 back on August 5th to engage in the discussion at that time once there's been a full presentation

01:15:54.360 --> 01:15:58.160
 and we can engage with your thoughts on the item.

01:15:58.160 --> 01:16:00.160
 Commissioner Beck.

01:16:00.160 --> 01:16:10.040
 Just as a confusion on order, don't we have to finish the open hearing and then vote?

01:16:10.040 --> 01:16:16.340
 I'm confused by the order that we're doing these things and I don't think it makes any

01:16:16.340 --> 01:16:17.340
 practical difference.

01:16:17.340 --> 01:16:20.320
 I'm just trying to follow the right procedure.

01:16:20.320 --> 01:16:23.320
 I went ahead and opened the public hearing so we could extend the public hearing which

01:16:23.320 --> 01:16:28.680
 would prevent us having to re-notice this item.

01:16:28.680 --> 01:16:29.880
 The public hearing remains open.

01:16:29.880 --> 01:16:31.520
 I'm not closing the public hearing.

01:16:31.520 --> 01:16:37.000
 It will remain open until August 5th if the vote goes forward.

01:16:37.000 --> 01:16:38.000
 Okay.

01:16:38.000 --> 01:16:41.520
 Thank you, Chair.

01:16:41.520 --> 01:16:46.000
 With that, we did have a first from Commissioner Smith and a second from Commissioner Anderson.

01:16:46.000 --> 01:16:47.000
 Any discussion?

01:16:47.000 --> 01:16:48.000
 All right.

01:16:48.000 --> 01:16:53.040
 Seeing none, I will call for a vote via roll call.

01:16:53.040 --> 01:16:54.040
 Commissioner Beck.

01:16:54.040 --> 01:16:55.040
 Aye.

01:16:55.040 --> 01:16:56.040
 Commissioner Cole.

01:16:56.040 --> 01:16:57.040
 Aye.

01:16:57.040 --> 01:16:58.040
 Commissioner Anderson.

01:16:58.040 --> 01:16:59.040
 Aye.

01:16:59.040 --> 01:17:00.040
 Commissioner Smith.

01:17:00.040 --> 01:17:01.040
 Aye.

01:17:01.040 --> 01:17:02.040
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:17:02.040 --> 01:17:03.040
 Aye.

01:17:03.040 --> 01:17:05.080
 Chair, there's also an aye.

01:17:05.080 --> 01:17:06.320
 Motion is approved.

01:17:06.320 --> 01:17:09.320
 This item will come back to P&Z on August 5th.

01:17:09.320 --> 01:17:13.800
 Anyone wishing to speak on this item, I certainly invite you back on August 5th to engage with

01:17:13.800 --> 01:17:14.800
 that discussion.

01:17:14.800 --> 01:17:20.800
 The next item of business is item 4B, S19-0013.

01:17:20.800 --> 01:17:25.440
 This is an item presented by Julie Wyatt, and she has the floor.

01:17:25.440 --> 01:17:26.440
 All right.

01:17:26.440 --> 01:17:27.440
 Good evening.

01:17:27.440 --> 01:17:33.040
 I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton, and I'm pulling up my presentation.

01:17:33.040 --> 01:17:36.640
 Julie, as you pull up the presentation, I just want to go ahead and open the public

01:17:36.640 --> 01:17:37.640
 hearing formally.

01:17:37.640 --> 01:17:39.640
 Thank you.

01:17:39.640 --> 01:17:41.440
 All right.

01:17:41.440 --> 01:17:47.640
 So this is S19-0013, Mingo Road Apartments.

01:17:47.640 --> 01:17:52.560
 The request before you is for a specific use permit to permit multifamily dwellings.

01:17:52.560 --> 01:17:54.920
 The subject property is approximately four acres.

01:17:54.920 --> 01:17:59.800
 It's located on the north side of Mingo Road, outlined there in yellow.

01:17:59.800 --> 01:18:06.020
 It does have an R7 zoning designation, which does require an SUP for multifamily developments.

01:18:06.020 --> 01:18:08.360
 There was a previous SUP approved for the site.

01:18:08.360 --> 01:18:15.160
 However, it expired earlier this year, so they are coming back with a revised plan.

01:18:15.160 --> 01:18:20.280
 We'll start out just talking about the 2017 site plan.

01:18:20.280 --> 01:18:26.560
 It included three two-story buildings with 48 two-bedroom units, a looped drive aisle

01:18:26.560 --> 01:18:33.880
 with parking spaces distributed along that drive aisle, dumpsters located with a setback

01:18:33.880 --> 01:18:40.540
 of about 149 feet from the northern residential lots, and vehicular access was to Mingo Road

01:18:40.540 --> 01:18:42.280
 only.

01:18:42.280 --> 01:18:44.920
 The current plan is very similar to that.

01:18:44.920 --> 01:18:47.640
 There are some changes to the project.

01:18:47.640 --> 01:18:50.040
 I just want to talk about those briefly.

01:18:50.040 --> 01:18:52.640
 They are still proposing three two-story buildings.

01:18:52.640 --> 01:18:55.080
 However, they have modified that mix.

01:18:55.080 --> 01:19:02.240
 Forty-eight one-bedroom units would be included in that, as well as 16 two-bedroom units.

01:19:02.240 --> 01:19:06.600
 The setbacks from the adjacent properties, both for the buildings and the dumpsters,

01:19:06.600 --> 01:19:09.040
 would remain the same.

01:19:09.040 --> 01:19:15.720
 The parking spaces have increased, not only because of the modification to the unit mixes,

01:19:15.720 --> 01:19:22.680
 but also because the City of Denton has modified their minimum parking standards for multifamily

01:19:22.680 --> 01:19:23.680
 development.

01:19:23.680 --> 01:19:27.560
 Once again, but those are oriented to minimize those lights on adjacent properties and to

01:19:27.560 --> 01:19:31.760
 sort of break up the parking area.

01:19:31.760 --> 01:19:34.120
 The landscape plan is shown here.

01:19:34.120 --> 01:19:41.680
 It includes a central open area to accommodate some nice trees on the site.

01:19:41.680 --> 01:19:47.400
 It's about 13,000 square feet, and just to kind of give you a sampling of what trees

01:19:47.400 --> 01:19:54.280
 are on that site, there's a 36-inch post oak, a 29-inch pecan, and a 30-inch post oak.

01:19:54.280 --> 01:19:58.720
 There's also a buffer on the north and east property line that does meet the Denton Development

01:19:58.720 --> 01:20:04.320
 Code requirements, and that includes a wood fence, three ornamental trees every 25 feet,

01:20:04.320 --> 01:20:08.400
 and also additional tree preservation within that buffer area.

01:20:08.400 --> 01:20:17.960
 There's landscaping at the right of way to enhance the front portion of the site, and

01:20:17.960 --> 01:20:24.400
 that includes a berm, a hedge along that berm, as well as street trees along Bingo.

01:20:24.400 --> 01:20:32.400
 Also wanted to point out, there is pedestrian improvements proposed along Bingo Road, a

01:20:32.400 --> 01:20:43.560
 sidewalk along the frontage, as well as walkways connecting to the front door of those units.

01:20:43.560 --> 01:20:51.200
 Here's the concept elevation, and this is that front unit that will be the most prominent

01:20:51.200 --> 01:20:52.200
 building on the site.

01:20:52.200 --> 01:20:57.040
 It will be adjacent to Bingo Road, and you can see it does have a residential character

01:20:57.040 --> 01:20:58.040
 to it.

01:20:58.040 --> 01:21:10.440
 It does have that two-story, so to limit that height, it has a pitched roof as well as awnings

01:21:10.440 --> 01:21:14.880
 to cover those front porches, those doors that lead out to the front of the property.

01:21:14.880 --> 01:21:21.400
 So it is consistent with the architectural character of the surrounding area.

01:21:21.400 --> 01:21:25.160
 When we look at an SUP, we not only look at the specific site, so we want to make sure

01:21:25.160 --> 01:21:29.860
 that site complies with the Denton Development Code, but we also want to look at the surrounding

01:21:29.860 --> 01:21:35.200
 area, because part of the criteria for approval of an SUP is, is it compatible with what is

01:21:35.200 --> 01:21:43.200
 existing out there, and are there things that are important to that site plan to ensure

01:21:43.200 --> 01:21:45.440
 compatibility with the surrounding area.

01:21:45.440 --> 01:21:52.640
 So in this case, it's a primarily residential area, it's mostly developed around it, so

01:21:52.640 --> 01:21:54.800
 this is an infill lot.

01:21:54.800 --> 01:22:00.760
 There is single-family residential to the north, south, and east of the site.

01:22:00.760 --> 01:22:04.120
 And then there's an age-restricted multi-family to the west.

01:22:04.120 --> 01:22:09.560
 There's also a park, a city park, just to the north, that is Sequoia Park, and it is

01:22:09.560 --> 01:22:14.760
 about a quarter of a mile walking distance from the subject property, so it does meet

01:22:14.760 --> 01:22:20.520
 our standard for a 10-minute walk to a park that we try to achieve within the city of

01:22:20.520 --> 01:22:21.520
 Denton.

01:22:21.520 --> 01:22:26.160
 Mingo Road is a secondary arterial within the city.

01:22:26.160 --> 01:22:30.560
 We have criteria for approval for specific use permits.

01:22:30.560 --> 01:22:35.480
 It's in SUP Chapter 2 of the Denton Development Code, and there are general and specific criteria

01:22:35.480 --> 01:22:36.980
 for approval.

01:22:36.980 --> 01:22:39.280
 What we're going to do is just talk through these.

01:22:39.280 --> 01:22:44.300
 By staff's analysis, the proposal does meet both the general and specific, so we'll talk

01:22:44.300 --> 01:22:51.620
 through these and pick out those elements that are most relevant to this site.

01:22:51.620 --> 01:22:56.520
 So first, and importantly, compatibility with the surrounding area.

01:22:56.520 --> 01:23:01.000
 So this is a residential use, and activities associated with it would be residential in

01:23:01.000 --> 01:23:06.040
 nature, and that is consistent with what is out there.

01:23:06.040 --> 01:23:12.640
 It is a residential area, so this use is consistent with and compatible with the surrounding property.

01:23:12.640 --> 01:23:18.440
 And further, the way the site is designed increases the compatibility with the surrounding

01:23:18.440 --> 01:23:20.240
 properties.

01:23:20.240 --> 01:23:25.320
 There's the maximum two-story buildings, those increased setbacks adjacent to the residential

01:23:25.320 --> 01:23:31.820
 areas, not only for the building, but also for the solid waste enclosures.

01:23:31.820 --> 01:23:35.840
 That central open space is an amenity and a focal point for the development, which is

01:23:35.840 --> 01:23:39.740
 consistent with what you typically see in residential areas.

01:23:39.740 --> 01:23:47.400
 Visual access is provided to minimize impacts to the surrounding property as it only goes

01:23:47.400 --> 01:23:51.000
 out, only connects to Mingo Road.

01:23:51.000 --> 01:23:55.080
 That parking lot, the way it's designed, minimizes those visual impacts.

01:23:55.080 --> 01:24:00.160
 You don't have a large swath of uninterrupted pavement.

01:24:00.160 --> 01:24:04.320
 It's kind of sprinkled in that open space area.

01:24:04.320 --> 01:24:08.680
 And then it does have those buffers, and that reduces the potential for light and noise

01:24:08.680 --> 01:24:11.680
 to adjacent properties.

01:24:11.680 --> 01:24:13.760
 We also look at the Denton Plan 2030.

01:24:13.760 --> 01:24:18.000
 The site is designated as neighborhood university compatibility area.

01:24:18.000 --> 01:24:20.800
 These are really intended to be transitional areas.

01:24:20.800 --> 01:24:27.560
 As you move from those nodes of high activity at the university areas toward residential

01:24:27.560 --> 01:24:37.640
 areas, you want those uses to be sensitive to that context, but also provide that necessary

01:24:37.640 --> 01:24:42.200
 housing that we need to see near our university areas.

01:24:42.200 --> 01:24:44.720
 And this is consistent with that.

01:24:44.720 --> 01:24:51.000
 The use is kind of what we want to see within these compatibility areas.

01:24:51.000 --> 01:24:57.380
 And then furthermore, those site design considerations with the two-story limit and the setbacks

01:24:57.380 --> 01:25:02.600
 and open space provide that compatibility piece to it.

01:25:02.600 --> 01:25:04.480
 And it's also an infill site.

01:25:04.480 --> 01:25:13.240
 So it's on an existing roadway with the existing infrastructure in place.

01:25:13.240 --> 01:25:20.720
 We also look at impacts related to traffic, emergency services, utilities, parking, refuse,

01:25:20.720 --> 01:25:23.880
 noise, glare, and odor, and how those have been mitigated.

01:25:23.880 --> 01:25:25.800
 So we'll just talk about each of those briefly.

01:25:25.800 --> 01:25:33.580
 So first of all, in terms of transportation, the trip generation analysis determined that

01:25:33.580 --> 01:25:38.120
 about 468 trips would be generated per 24-hour weekday.

01:25:38.120 --> 01:25:42.800
 That would be 36 morning and then 43 evening trips.

01:25:42.800 --> 01:25:47.680
 This is also located on a transit line, so about 500 feet.

01:25:47.680 --> 01:25:52.240
 So I've provided a measurement here from this corner to the bus stop.

01:25:52.240 --> 01:25:54.080
 It's about 500 feet.

01:25:54.080 --> 01:26:00.020
 And so it definitely encourages those alternate modes of transportation for the site.

01:26:00.020 --> 01:26:05.280
 And then furthermore, pedestrian improvements, there is a sidewalk on the adjacent property.

01:26:05.280 --> 01:26:08.080
 It was developed about, I think, 20 years ago.

01:26:08.080 --> 01:26:12.240
 And so they did include a sidewalk along Mingo Road.

01:26:12.240 --> 01:26:14.920
 When this site develops, a sidewalk will also be required.

01:26:14.920 --> 01:26:19.520
 So it'll tie into that existing facility and allow the residents to have an improved

01:26:19.520 --> 01:26:24.840
 walkway to that transit stop.

01:26:24.840 --> 01:26:28.720
 Water and wastewater are available to the site, so there wouldn't be any extensions

01:26:28.720 --> 01:26:33.960
 required and there is capacity in the system to accommodate the proposal.

01:26:33.960 --> 01:26:39.320
 Fire station number one is 1.3 miles from the site.

01:26:39.320 --> 01:26:44.160
 And the parking and refuse, I know we've talked about that solid waste enclosure location,

01:26:44.160 --> 01:26:51.120
 but that has been, that setback for that solid waste enclosure, as well as the setbacks or

01:26:51.120 --> 01:27:01.160
 as well as the other, the setback for the building do ensure that that increases that

01:27:01.160 --> 01:27:08.640
 compatibility and mitigates any odor for those solid waste from the adjacent residential.

01:27:08.640 --> 01:27:12.760
 Additionally, the parking areas have been designed to minimize those impacts to the

01:27:12.760 --> 01:27:16.040
 adjacent residential properties.

01:27:16.040 --> 01:27:21.820
 Public outreach was completed in accordance with the Denton Development Code.

01:27:21.820 --> 01:27:28.600
 We have not received any responses related to that notification.

01:27:28.600 --> 01:27:33.440
 The applicant did have a public meeting for nearby residents did attend.

01:27:33.440 --> 01:27:39.360
 They did talk about the things like the buffers and the previous site plan and how this current

01:27:39.360 --> 01:27:42.840
 site plan relates to what was previously approved.

01:27:42.840 --> 01:27:48.040
 And so they did provide that neighborhood outreach.

01:27:48.040 --> 01:27:53.240
 So staff does recommend approval as it is consistent with the Denton Plan 2030, as well

01:27:53.240 --> 01:27:54.980
 as the criteria for approval.

01:27:54.980 --> 01:27:57.880
 We do have three conditions.

01:27:57.880 --> 01:28:03.520
 One that the attached landscape, landscaping the attached concept plan reflects the intent

01:28:03.520 --> 01:28:08.440
 to comply with the 2019 Denton Development Code requirements for parking, street trees,

01:28:08.440 --> 01:28:13.560
 minimum landscaping, canopy areas and compatibility buffers.

01:28:13.560 --> 01:28:17.800
 Minor alterations to the depicted locations of the individual plantings or that final

01:28:17.800 --> 01:28:24.520
 plant selection may be approved by city staff provided that the final landscaping is planned

01:28:24.520 --> 01:28:32.600
 and complies with the attached plan and all of the elements of the 2019 DDC.

01:28:32.600 --> 01:28:36.920
 The zoning map, if this is approved, would be modified to reflect that an SUP for the

01:28:36.920 --> 01:28:39.620
 property has been approved.

01:28:39.620 --> 01:28:43.800
 And then notwithstanding the limited approval in condition one, the city does reserve the

01:28:43.800 --> 01:28:48.600
 right to require any changes to be approved by ordinance.

01:28:48.600 --> 01:28:56.320
 Furthermore, we do like to provide some specificity to those site plans.

01:28:56.320 --> 01:29:00.800
 So the site plan landscape plan and that conceptual elevation will be attached to the ordinance

01:29:00.800 --> 01:29:06.200
 and the applicant will have to comply with that as they develop the site in order to

01:29:06.200 --> 01:29:08.520
 make sure that it's very clear.

01:29:08.520 --> 01:29:13.680
 We do list out some of the elements of that.

01:29:13.680 --> 01:29:20.040
 And so number one, that this would approve, if it was approved, 48 one-bedroom units and

01:29:20.040 --> 01:29:26.440
 16 two-bedroom units in the three two-story buildings connected by that loop drive aisle.

01:29:26.440 --> 01:29:33.000
 Each building footprint would have a maximum of 7,644 square feet.

01:29:33.000 --> 01:29:38.180
 They're proposing 101 parking spaces evenly distributed along that loop drive.

01:29:38.180 --> 01:29:42.840
 They're proposing 13,000 square feet of that central open area as well as the solid waste

01:29:42.840 --> 01:29:48.800
 containers being located 149 feet from the nearest adjacent residential lot.

01:29:48.800 --> 01:29:53.000
 And the building should be designed with pitch roofs, porches and awnings to correspond with

01:29:53.000 --> 01:29:54.980
 the architecture of the area.

01:29:54.980 --> 01:30:02.760
 We do add in this recommendation to allow staff to have the ability to approve increases

01:30:02.760 --> 01:30:09.040
 up to and including 5% of the amount specified in one and two provided that they do comply

01:30:09.040 --> 01:30:12.520
 with all the 2019 debt and development co-requirements.

01:30:12.520 --> 01:30:17.400
 Anything over 5% would require a new application and approval by ordinance.

01:30:17.400 --> 01:30:18.840
 That concludes my presentation.

01:30:18.840 --> 01:30:23.000
 The applicant hopefully is online.

01:30:23.000 --> 01:30:26.480
 He does have a presentation and I'll stand for any questions.

01:30:26.480 --> 01:30:28.840
 >> Thank you, Julie.

01:30:28.840 --> 01:30:30.920
 Chris, you're back.

01:30:30.920 --> 01:30:33.160
 >> Thank you, Chair.

01:30:33.160 --> 01:30:40.640
 Julie, is the sidewalk -- is the plan for the sidewalk and that first road adjacent

01:30:40.640 --> 01:30:46.120
 line of building or building -- is there sufficient easement that if a miracle were to happen

01:30:46.120 --> 01:30:52.020
 and we were actually to renovate Mingo, which I don't expect to happen, but let's hope,

01:30:52.020 --> 01:30:57.720
 is there sufficient easement that Mingo could be expanded given this plan?

01:30:57.720 --> 01:31:01.640
 >> Mingo is challenging because it's developed over time.

01:31:01.640 --> 01:31:07.000
 So there is adjacent development that some have dedicated the right-of-way sufficient

01:31:07.000 --> 01:31:11.560
 to provide additional capacity in lanes within Mingo.

01:31:11.560 --> 01:31:16.840
 There are other developments that are -- you know, that were built a long time ago and

01:31:16.840 --> 01:31:20.280
 did not provide that right-of-way dedication.

01:31:20.280 --> 01:31:26.120
 So as far as how that would move forward, I don't have information about how that would

01:31:26.120 --> 01:31:29.640
 move forward in terms of expanding Mingo.

01:31:29.640 --> 01:31:37.960
 >> And the sidewalk is tying to the senior facility multifamily on the west.

01:31:37.960 --> 01:31:41.520
 Is it tying to the sidewalks of the residential to the east?

01:31:41.520 --> 01:31:45.960
 >> There is not a sidewalk to the east of the property.

01:31:45.960 --> 01:31:46.960
 So there's no sidewalk.

01:31:46.960 --> 01:31:49.440
 Let me verify.

01:31:49.440 --> 01:32:02.100
 But I don't believe there is a sidewalk adjacent -- and I might be -- I might misspeak here.

01:32:02.100 --> 01:32:04.440
 Hold on.

01:32:04.440 --> 01:32:14.040
 It's -- I don't believe there is a sidewalk to the -- on that eastern property adjacent

01:32:14.040 --> 01:32:15.040
 to the lot.

01:32:15.040 --> 01:32:19.340
 >> Not on the south side, but isn't there one on the orthogonal street?

01:32:19.340 --> 01:32:21.640
 Maybe I'm misremembering.

01:32:21.640 --> 01:32:31.360
 Anyway, if there were a sidewalk, would it be presumed to be forced to tie in?

01:32:31.360 --> 01:32:34.600
 Is that how our code would -- >> Yes, we would want those to connect.

01:32:34.600 --> 01:32:38.960
 If there's an adjacent sidewalk, we want them to connect.

01:32:38.960 --> 01:32:39.960
 >> Thank you, Julie.

01:32:39.960 --> 01:32:40.960
 >> Sure.

01:32:40.960 --> 01:32:46.200
 And there is one item I forgot to mention that I believe Commissioner Roselle asked

01:32:46.200 --> 01:32:47.920
 about the fire access.

01:32:47.920 --> 01:32:56.800
 We did get a response from our fire reviewer, and it would require 200 units in order -- more

01:32:56.800 --> 01:33:01.520
 than 200 units would require that secondary access.

01:33:01.520 --> 01:33:06.720
 So that one point of access is sufficient for the number of units they're proposing.

01:33:06.720 --> 01:33:07.720
 >> Great.

01:33:07.720 --> 01:33:10.600
 Thank you for that update.

01:33:10.600 --> 01:33:11.600
 >> Sure.

01:33:11.600 --> 01:33:12.600
 >> Commissioner Ellis.

01:33:12.600 --> 01:33:13.600
 >> Thank you, Chair.

01:33:13.600 --> 01:33:21.520
 And Julie, just to clarify, so the originally approved SUP that has since expired had three

01:33:21.520 --> 01:33:22.520
 conditions.

01:33:22.520 --> 01:33:28.640
 The setbacks from the residential, the dumpster location away from the residential, and the

01:33:28.640 --> 01:33:29.960
 protected trees.

01:33:29.960 --> 01:33:36.000
 And so those first two are rolled in, and then our tree code takes care of that other

01:33:36.000 --> 01:33:37.000
 condition?

01:33:37.000 --> 01:33:38.000
 >> You are correct.

01:33:38.000 --> 01:33:39.000
 >> Okay.

01:33:39.000 --> 01:33:40.000
 Thank you.

01:33:40.000 --> 01:33:45.320
 >> Any other questions for Julie at the moment?

01:33:45.320 --> 01:33:48.480
 If not, I'll invite the applicant for their presentation.

01:33:48.480 --> 01:33:51.440
 Julie, I think you're good.

01:33:51.440 --> 01:33:56.960
 If we could queue up the applicant, and when the applicant goes live, can you just state

01:33:56.960 --> 01:34:01.520
 your name and address for the record?

01:34:01.520 --> 01:34:06.100
 >> My name is Lawrence Holdwer, and I work at Allison Engineering Group.

01:34:06.100 --> 01:34:10.260
 I'm representing my client.

01:34:10.260 --> 01:34:15.840
 We are proposing to redo the SUP.

01:34:15.840 --> 01:34:22.480
 Like Julie said, we had an existing SUP, and we're trying to go through an extension.

01:34:22.480 --> 01:34:27.120
 However, the SUPs don't go through an extension, so we applied for a new one.

01:34:27.120 --> 01:34:29.360
 That's why we're here today.

01:34:29.360 --> 01:34:39.040
 Going down to how do I control the slides, I don't -- can I go to the next slide, please?

01:34:39.040 --> 01:34:41.280
 Thank you.

01:34:41.280 --> 01:34:44.360
 The purpose of the multifamily -- I don't want to really read this whole thing to you.

01:34:44.360 --> 01:34:55.960
 The purpose of the multifamily, again, is that we need to apply for a new one.

01:34:55.960 --> 01:34:58.180
 We had a previous one approved.

01:34:58.180 --> 01:35:05.280
 This site does comply with the new -- I'm going to call it the new code, and it does

01:35:05.280 --> 01:35:12.680
 still adhere to the requirements that were placed on it for the first approval.

01:35:12.680 --> 01:35:21.880
 The reason for this -- the whole reason for this new SUP in front of you today is because

01:35:21.880 --> 01:35:29.800
 the developer, DLH Investments, was delayed in their construction of the plans.

01:35:29.800 --> 01:35:35.920
 They were delayed because of a project, Ronnie Road Project Townhomes, that ended up having

01:35:35.920 --> 01:35:38.200
 a really wet spring.

01:35:38.200 --> 01:35:46.520
 They didn't want to put through engineering plans and then have permits that would expire.

01:35:46.520 --> 01:35:53.920
 So instead of that route, they chose to hold off for a while, and then it just kind of

01:35:53.920 --> 01:36:01.560
 cascaded from there until we are here today requesting the SUP to be renewed, but not

01:36:01.560 --> 01:36:02.560
 really renewed.

01:36:02.560 --> 01:36:03.560
 A new SUP.

01:36:03.560 --> 01:36:07.640
 We're requesting a new SUP.

01:36:07.640 --> 01:36:09.720
 And again, it has been reviewed under the new code.

01:36:09.720 --> 01:36:15.720
 Next slide, please.

01:36:15.720 --> 01:36:19.800
 Just like Julia had stated, we did hold a neighborhood meeting.

01:36:19.800 --> 01:36:25.760
 We held old neighborhood meetings for the old -- I'm going to call the original SUP.

01:36:25.760 --> 01:36:30.080
 For the original SUP, we held neighborhood meetings.

01:36:30.080 --> 01:36:39.520
 The major concerns at that time was the setbacks for the buildings, which we worked through,

01:36:39.520 --> 01:36:50.000
 and the residents were applicable with the location of the single-family residence -- or

01:36:50.000 --> 01:36:53.920
 the multi-family residence buildings shown on the plans.

01:36:53.920 --> 01:36:55.280
 They were concerned about the dumpster.

01:36:55.280 --> 01:37:02.120
 We relocated the dumpster several times and finally came to a location that the neighbors

01:37:02.120 --> 01:37:05.840
 were applicable to.

01:37:05.840 --> 01:37:14.000
 And the site being unique for not only the location but in the area as well as the neighborhood

01:37:14.000 --> 01:37:19.720
 wanted us to preserve trees, and so we tried to come up with a concept that did that.

01:37:19.720 --> 01:37:24.600
 So that was what we submitted previously.

01:37:24.600 --> 01:37:31.120
 The new SUP with the new concerns was -- included the buffer plantings and maintenance of those

01:37:31.120 --> 01:37:32.120
 buffers.

01:37:32.120 --> 01:37:39.480
 We increased those buffers to meet the new code requirements.

01:37:39.480 --> 01:37:45.400
 The maintenance is going to be -- is going to be with -- on Ningo Road Apartments.

01:37:45.400 --> 01:37:46.400
 They will have to maintain that.

01:37:46.400 --> 01:37:48.000
 It is on their property.

01:37:48.000 --> 01:37:55.200
 Lighting was discussed, and we will adhere to the city code requirements on the lighting,

01:37:55.200 --> 01:38:00.280
 and we will not direct our lighting towards the residents.

01:38:00.280 --> 01:38:01.280
 Drainage was discussed.

01:38:01.280 --> 01:38:08.200
 Drainage issues that were discussed were people's concerns that the development may cause additional

01:38:08.200 --> 01:38:09.200
 runoff.

01:38:09.200 --> 01:38:16.080
 We will not be doing a development that will cause negative impacts to our residents or

01:38:16.080 --> 01:38:21.280
 adjoining properties that will meet code, that there's nothing in this set of plans

01:38:21.280 --> 01:38:24.640
 that will show that we will cause drainage issues.

01:38:24.640 --> 01:38:33.040
 We actually have two detention ponds to show that we plan to detain our runoff, so that

01:38:33.040 --> 01:38:36.120
 we will not have negative impacts.

01:38:36.120 --> 01:38:45.120
 The construction will in all efforts not impact the local nesting of the seasonal local birds.

01:38:45.120 --> 01:38:51.080
 That was a concern that was raised, and we will try to adhere to that.

01:38:51.080 --> 01:38:58.800
 There has not been any changes in the character of the surrounding neighborhoods.

01:38:58.800 --> 01:39:04.840
 There has been a few other developments on Ningo, but not to our -- to my recollection

01:39:04.840 --> 01:39:05.840
 close by.

01:39:05.840 --> 01:39:12.400
 Whenever I did my own research and did this, there had not been any new developments next

01:39:12.400 --> 01:39:18.120
 to our development, so we would like to state that the character of the surrounding neighborhoods

01:39:18.120 --> 01:39:29.600
 has not changed, and we believe that our development still is an acceptable and enhancing development

01:39:29.600 --> 01:39:32.120
 for Ningo Road.

01:39:32.120 --> 01:39:35.600
 Next slide, please.

01:39:35.600 --> 01:39:42.480
 Again, there was little to no changes from the original SUP that was approved to the

01:39:42.480 --> 01:39:45.200
 original SUP that was approved.

01:39:45.200 --> 01:39:48.760
 What has changed is the fire line adjustments to meet the new code.

01:39:48.760 --> 01:39:51.960
 I left off on here the parking.

01:39:51.960 --> 01:39:57.840
 I don't know why, but the parking count was adjusted to meet new code.

01:39:57.840 --> 01:40:04.880
 The landscape buffers and other landscaping was brought to the new code's point system

01:40:04.880 --> 01:40:13.880
 as opposed to a set old code way of doing the landscaping.

01:40:13.880 --> 01:40:18.400
 The proposed SUP does maintain our efforts to spread out the whole site and save as many

01:40:18.400 --> 01:40:19.800
 trees as possible.

01:40:19.800 --> 01:40:25.840
 We are saving upwards of 600 inches of trees.

01:40:25.840 --> 01:40:36.920
 That does include what the old code did consider secondary and quality trees.

01:40:36.920 --> 01:40:39.280
 We're saving 600 of those inches.

01:40:39.280 --> 01:40:46.840
 We are only required to save 188 of those inches for the new code's requirements.

01:40:46.840 --> 01:41:01.080
 I wrote something down I wanted to make sure I stated, and I can't find it.

01:41:01.080 --> 01:41:03.720
 Next slide.

01:41:03.720 --> 01:41:11.240
 This is the site that Julie did present, and this is the site that we do propose to move

01:41:11.240 --> 01:41:14.120
 forward with.

01:41:14.120 --> 01:41:20.340
 We believe it is a quality enhancement for this area, and to answer the sidewalk question,

01:41:20.340 --> 01:41:26.920
 there is a sidewalk to the west, and we will have to tie into the west, but there isn't

01:41:26.920 --> 01:41:28.760
 a sidewalk to the east.

01:41:28.760 --> 01:41:35.120
 We have provided the right-of-way for Dingo Road's future expansion.

01:41:35.120 --> 01:41:44.000
 If Dingo does expand, our property has provided that additional right-of-way for that.

01:41:44.000 --> 01:41:52.320
 At this time, I believe I can open up for questions.

01:41:52.320 --> 01:41:56.600
 Next slide and next questions.

01:41:56.600 --> 01:41:57.600
 Great.

01:41:57.600 --> 01:42:00.240
 Thank you for the presentation and context to the project.

01:42:00.240 --> 01:42:06.640
 Is there any questions for the applicant?

01:42:06.640 --> 01:42:09.660
 I do not see any.

01:42:09.660 --> 01:42:15.000
 This is a public hearing, and so for this item, we had one person make comments using

01:42:15.000 --> 01:42:16.000
 our online form.

01:42:16.000 --> 01:42:20.400
 There was one support and zero against those comments or emails to the commissioners and

01:42:20.400 --> 01:42:23.000
 our city secretary to be recorded.

01:42:23.000 --> 01:42:27.320
 There is one individual who is asked to speak on this item over the phone, and so I'm going

01:42:27.320 --> 01:42:35.720
 to ask staff to go ahead and connect that individual to us for public comment.

01:42:35.720 --> 01:42:41.920
 Good evening, caller.

01:42:41.920 --> 01:42:43.640
 You are live with the Planning and Zoning Commission.

01:42:43.640 --> 01:42:47.840
 Can you please state your name and address, and you'll have four minutes to speak?

01:42:47.840 --> 01:42:48.840
 Sure.

01:42:48.840 --> 01:42:50.600
 My name is Katie McGee.

01:42:50.600 --> 01:42:53.440
 I live at 1510 Seminole.

01:42:53.440 --> 01:42:57.360
 That's the north side of this property, third house from the left.

01:42:57.360 --> 01:43:00.040
 I just have two items of concern.

01:43:00.040 --> 01:43:06.360
 I don't believe we discussed this in previous meetings, but currently on this concept plan,

01:43:06.360 --> 01:43:10.320
 there is a six-foot tall wooden buffer fence.

01:43:10.320 --> 01:43:15.880
 I would like to request that to be at least eight feet at this point, just to provide

01:43:15.880 --> 01:43:20.760
 additional privacy to the backyard on those fence lines.

01:43:20.760 --> 01:43:28.280
 I would prefer to be more difficult to see into or climb over the fence into our backyard.

01:43:28.280 --> 01:43:35.680
 The second concern is on the driveway in the apartments, especially on the north end where

01:43:35.680 --> 01:43:38.160
 those curves are.

01:43:38.160 --> 01:43:44.320
 I'm just concerned if traffic in that drive is going too fast or not paying attention.

01:43:44.320 --> 01:43:48.960
 When they take those curves, it could pose some kind of danger, especially since our

01:43:48.960 --> 01:43:53.200
 backyards are at that point are kind of on a downward slope.

01:43:53.200 --> 01:43:59.080
 I didn't know if it was possible to provide some kind of concrete barrier or parking pylons

01:43:59.080 --> 01:44:04.000
 to make, just to prevent any accidents from happening there with the cars being so close

01:44:04.000 --> 01:44:05.000
 to our backyards.

01:44:05.000 --> 01:44:07.640
 That's all I have to say for now.

01:44:07.640 --> 01:44:11.680
 I certainly appreciate you calling in and voicing your concerns.

01:44:11.680 --> 01:44:13.240
 Commissioner Beck.

01:44:13.240 --> 01:44:20.320
 Yeah, this is for the caller's concerns, but Julie, are we allowed to have eight foot tall

01:44:20.320 --> 01:44:26.480
 fences in the DDC or Richard or whoever cares to answer?

01:44:26.480 --> 01:44:27.480
 Yes.

01:44:27.480 --> 01:44:31.200
 Perimeter fences can go up to eight feet.

01:44:31.200 --> 01:44:34.400
 Thank you.

01:44:34.400 --> 01:44:39.840
 Is there any other questions for the caller?

01:44:39.840 --> 01:44:44.840
 I do not see any, I certainly appreciate you calling in and expressing your concerns.

01:44:44.840 --> 01:44:46.760
 Thank you very much.

01:44:46.760 --> 01:44:48.960
 Thank you for taking the time to listen.

01:44:48.960 --> 01:44:51.400
 Of course.

01:44:51.400 --> 01:44:54.920
 With that, seeing there's no other public comment, I'm going to go ahead and close the

01:44:54.920 --> 01:45:05.560
 public hearing and turn it to this virtual dais for discussion or motion.

01:45:05.560 --> 01:45:06.560
 Commissioner Smith.

01:45:06.560 --> 01:45:11.160
 Make a motion to approve with staff recommendations.

01:45:11.160 --> 01:45:13.400
 We have a first for approval with staff recommendations.

01:45:13.400 --> 01:45:14.680
 Commissioner Anderson.

01:45:14.680 --> 01:45:16.520
 I second.

01:45:16.520 --> 01:45:19.480
 We have a first and a second for approval.

01:45:19.480 --> 01:45:20.480
 Any discussion?

01:45:20.480 --> 01:45:21.480
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:45:21.480 --> 01:45:22.480
 Thank you, chair.

01:45:22.480 --> 01:45:32.280
 Just on the caller's concerns, and I guess I just want to maybe get the applicant's opinion.

01:45:32.280 --> 01:45:35.600
 So when she talks about that curve, which is right at her backyard as I'm looking at

01:45:35.600 --> 01:45:36.600
 it.

01:45:36.600 --> 01:45:43.080
 I assume on the road there will be a speed limit sign throughout that curve.

01:45:43.080 --> 01:45:44.420
 Will there be?

01:45:44.420 --> 01:45:50.920
 Am I allowed to jump in here?

01:45:50.920 --> 01:45:51.920
 Absolutely.

01:45:51.920 --> 01:45:52.920
 Please.

01:45:52.920 --> 01:45:53.920
 Yes, please.

01:45:53.920 --> 01:46:00.280
 Lawrence Holder up again, analysis engineering.

01:46:00.280 --> 01:46:03.240
 There should be a posted speed limit sign.

01:46:03.240 --> 01:46:07.480
 It is a parking area.

01:46:07.480 --> 01:46:17.160
 Parking areas in this nature do have a speed associated with them.

01:46:17.160 --> 01:46:20.880
 There's not enough room to really get up to high speeds.

01:46:20.880 --> 01:46:25.880
 However, I do understand some of these concerns.

01:46:25.880 --> 01:46:32.040
 The main thing that I would say in worst case scenario, if there was a kid that was learning

01:46:32.040 --> 01:46:37.720
 how to drive and hit the gas instead of the brake and was driving as fast as he could,

01:46:37.720 --> 01:46:44.480
 he would hit the wonderful, beautiful trees that we've placed and spaced every 10 feet

01:46:44.480 --> 01:46:50.400
 apart or 15 feet apart before he would even hit the fence.

01:46:50.400 --> 01:46:54.520
 We have a good 10 feet if not, then on the radius, depending on where he is, we have

01:46:54.520 --> 01:47:00.680
 a good 10 feet plus another 26 feet of grass that you'd have to then mow through as well.

01:47:00.680 --> 01:47:04.720
 So what I'm saying is unless it's an off-road vehicle that would really hit that and then

01:47:04.720 --> 01:47:11.280
 continue to keep going, the likelihood of it continuing into a backyard is highly unlikely.

01:47:11.280 --> 01:47:12.280
 Not impossible.

01:47:12.280 --> 01:47:14.480
 I'm not going to sit here and say that that's impossible.

01:47:14.480 --> 01:47:17.560
 I don't think you can find an engineer who will say that.

01:47:17.560 --> 01:47:24.520
 But it's super and highly improbable that that would be the case.

01:47:24.520 --> 01:47:32.800
 But yes, we can post speed limit signs throughout the development if that is a concern that

01:47:32.800 --> 01:47:42.000
 the Ford, or not Ford, I'm sorry, the commission would like to place on that.

01:47:42.000 --> 01:47:47.600
 What I'm wondering if, I don't know, if speed limit or just a couple of slow signs, just

01:47:47.600 --> 01:47:59.040
 warning people of that curve, some kind of signage just to make drivers aware is an idea.

01:47:59.040 --> 01:48:00.040
 Absolutely.

01:48:00.040 --> 01:48:07.720
 We can always get, those signs are easily obtainable and you can place either a slow

01:48:07.720 --> 01:48:13.040
 or a speed limit, please specify which ones or how you'd like us to do that and we'd

01:48:13.040 --> 01:48:22.840
 be more than happy to place a few of those signs around to educate the public on the

01:48:22.840 --> 01:48:25.280
 speed of this area.

01:48:25.280 --> 01:48:26.280
 Mr. Anderson.

01:48:26.280 --> 01:48:32.680
 Since there's already been a first and a second motion taken, is it too late that we can

01:48:32.680 --> 01:48:40.680
 ask the engineering firm if they would be willing to put up an eight foot fence for

01:48:40.680 --> 01:48:43.840
 the caller's concerns?

01:48:43.840 --> 01:48:48.440
 You definitely can ask that.

01:48:48.440 --> 01:48:49.440
 Okay.

01:48:49.440 --> 01:48:54.480
 I mean, Mr. Holdoff, is that something that you would entertain due to the privacy issues

01:48:54.480 --> 01:48:58.480
 that the caller and the residents would not, you know, that have, I mean, is that something

01:48:58.480 --> 01:49:01.960
 that you guys would entertain is putting up an eight foot fence instead of the six foot

01:49:01.960 --> 01:49:04.080
 wooden fence?

01:49:04.080 --> 01:49:13.240
 Yeah, to put it bluntly, yes, we would entertain it as a requirement, however, we would not

01:49:13.240 --> 01:49:18.000
 like to offer that up without a major reason for that.

01:49:18.000 --> 01:49:23.320
 And the reason why I state that is yes, we have a six foot tall fence, but we are proposing

01:49:23.320 --> 01:49:26.640
 extensive landscape requirements in that buffer.

01:49:26.640 --> 01:49:32.140
 We have offset our buildings 44 more feet, so you have a lot of green space there.

01:49:32.140 --> 01:49:38.160
 We have detention pond between the building and that back area and that buffer that will

01:49:38.160 --> 01:49:41.600
 be landscaped as well.

01:49:41.600 --> 01:49:52.080
 We are providing a lot of landscape for the real estate on those property lines.

01:49:52.080 --> 01:49:53.080
 Okay.

01:49:53.080 --> 01:49:56.520
 A few more feet is not the end of the world, but it is.

01:49:56.520 --> 01:50:01.240
 We feel like we're starting to get a little under pressure on that.

01:50:01.240 --> 01:50:03.040
 I totally understand.

01:50:03.040 --> 01:50:05.040
 Is the caller still on the line?

01:50:05.040 --> 01:50:12.160
 And if so, hopefully that helps answer her question and maybe helps her understand some

01:50:12.160 --> 01:50:13.680
 stuff.

01:50:13.680 --> 01:50:16.840
 She is no longer on the call, but hopefully she's listening in.

01:50:16.840 --> 01:50:17.840
 Okay.

01:50:17.840 --> 01:50:19.720
 Thank you, Mr. Holdo, for your answer.

01:50:19.720 --> 01:50:20.720
 Absolutely.

01:50:20.720 --> 01:50:23.320
 Commissioner Back, I think your hand was up.

01:50:23.320 --> 01:50:26.800
 My question was exactly the same as Commissioner Anderson's that's been answered.

01:50:26.800 --> 01:50:27.800
 Thank you.

01:50:27.800 --> 01:50:28.800
 Okay.

01:50:28.800 --> 01:50:31.360
 We do have a first and a second for approval.

01:50:31.360 --> 01:50:32.360
 Commissioner Smith.

01:50:32.360 --> 01:50:41.100
 I'd like to amend my motion to include a requirement or a recommendation that speed mitigation

01:50:41.100 --> 01:50:46.360
 signage be included in the approval of this.

01:50:46.360 --> 01:50:47.360
 And was it Anderson?

01:50:47.360 --> 01:50:48.800
 Did you have a second on that?

01:50:48.800 --> 01:50:49.800
 Yes.

01:50:49.800 --> 01:50:52.840
 I'll second that motion as well.

01:50:52.840 --> 01:50:53.840
 Okay.

01:50:53.840 --> 01:50:54.840
 And Commissioner Ellis.

01:50:54.840 --> 01:50:59.520
 I was going to make that friendly amendment, so thank you, Commissioner Smith.

01:50:59.520 --> 01:51:00.520
 Okay.

01:51:00.520 --> 01:51:04.960
 So we have a first and a second for approval given staff's recommendation with the addition

01:51:04.960 --> 01:51:09.520
 of signage for speed mitigation.

01:51:09.520 --> 01:51:14.240
 Is there any other discussion on this item?

01:51:14.240 --> 01:51:17.880
 Seeing none, I will call vote via roll call.

01:51:17.880 --> 01:51:18.880
 Commissioner Beck.

01:51:18.880 --> 01:51:19.880
 Aye.

01:51:19.880 --> 01:51:20.880
 Commissioner Cole.

01:51:20.880 --> 01:51:21.880
 Aye.

01:51:21.880 --> 01:51:22.880
 Commissioner Anderson.

01:51:22.880 --> 01:51:23.880
 Aye.

01:51:23.880 --> 01:51:24.880
 Commissioner Ellis.

01:51:24.880 --> 01:51:25.880
 Aye.

01:51:25.880 --> 01:51:26.880
 Commissioner Smith.

01:51:26.880 --> 01:51:27.880
 Aye.

01:51:27.880 --> 01:51:29.840
 Chair is also an aye.

01:51:29.840 --> 01:51:31.560
 Motion carries 6-0.

01:51:31.560 --> 01:51:32.560
 Congratulations.

01:51:32.560 --> 01:51:38.560
 That brings us to our concluding item on the planning and zoning matrix, our item five,

01:51:38.560 --> 01:51:41.120
 the planning and zoning project matrix.

01:51:41.120 --> 01:51:45.760
 Before I turn it over to Richard, I just have one quick thing to say.

01:51:45.760 --> 01:51:50.200
 Tonight is Kathy Welborn's last meeting with P&Z.

01:51:50.200 --> 01:51:58.280
 She is moving over to the city secretary's office, and so she is sadly departing from

01:51:58.280 --> 01:51:59.280
 us.

01:51:59.280 --> 01:52:04.920
 I just wanted to say thank you to Kathy for all the work that you did for us and keeping

01:52:04.920 --> 01:52:12.960
 us organized and certainly me as the chair, keeping me well-appointed with information

01:52:12.960 --> 01:52:17.640
 and paperwork and all those signing of minutes, all those things that you did, Kathy.

01:52:17.640 --> 01:52:18.800
 I certainly appreciate it.

01:52:18.800 --> 01:52:20.760
 I wish you the best at the city secretary's office.

01:52:20.760 --> 01:52:23.360
 I'm glad you're still hanging around Denton.

01:52:23.360 --> 01:52:24.680
 Thank you very much, Kathy.

01:52:24.680 --> 01:52:28.160
 With that, I'll turn it over to Richard.

01:52:28.160 --> 01:52:29.160
 Thank you, Chair.

01:52:29.160 --> 01:52:35.760
 Just to echo the same sentiments, I will deeply miss Kathy in our department, but I will still

01:52:35.760 --> 01:52:41.180
 be working with her on agendas, just in a very different role, and Selena will be stepping

01:52:41.180 --> 01:52:48.320
 in and has already done a great job in continuing what Kathy has worked in helping us.

01:52:48.320 --> 01:52:52.880
 Just that, really, I don't have much to add to the matrix at this point.

01:52:52.880 --> 01:52:58.840
 I did want to update everyone on some actions that council took last night.

01:52:58.840 --> 01:53:03.960
 There was an annexation that was approved, so it will go back for a second reading.

01:53:03.960 --> 01:53:09.880
 At some point in time, if council does pass that annexation, it will be brought in front

01:53:09.880 --> 01:53:15.680
 of this body for the initial zoning application.

01:53:15.680 --> 01:53:21.040
 That was a property at essentially vintage and Fort Worth.

01:53:21.040 --> 01:53:26.440
 The other two items that they took action on last night, they did approve both the canopy

01:53:26.440 --> 01:53:28.040
 trails rezoning.

01:53:28.040 --> 01:53:30.120
 That was a reconsideration.

01:53:30.120 --> 01:53:37.640
 That was passed 4-3, and my goodness, I'm drawing a blank.

01:53:37.640 --> 01:53:46.120
 The sage brook, how can I forget sage brook, that was approved last night with PNZ's recommendation

01:53:46.120 --> 01:53:48.400
 5-2.

01:53:48.400 --> 01:53:52.980
 Just to clarify, I talked to Cynthia briefly over the break, so we will work on putting

01:53:52.980 --> 01:53:58.440
 something together for the second meeting in August to talk a little bit more about

01:53:58.440 --> 01:54:05.320
 voting, maybe a policy to at least speak off of, as well as some of the other policies

01:54:05.320 --> 01:54:12.260
 and procedures as it relates to high votes and other voting requirements within the boards

01:54:12.260 --> 01:54:17.120
 and commission rules of procedure, probably just a good time to freshen up on some of

01:54:17.120 --> 01:54:18.120
 that stuff.

01:54:18.120 --> 01:54:19.920
 With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions.

01:54:19.920 --> 01:54:20.920
 >> Great.

01:54:20.920 --> 01:54:22.560
 Thank you for the update.

01:54:22.560 --> 01:54:26.120
 Is there any questions for Richard or any items that need to be added to the matrix?

01:54:26.120 --> 01:54:27.120
 Commissioner Beck.

01:54:27.120 --> 01:54:32.480
 >> I said this out of order earlier, so I'd just like to formally put it in here in the

01:54:32.480 --> 01:54:41.200
 matrix discussion that if we could have a work session when appropriate on the capped

01:54:41.200 --> 01:54:47.800
 gas well, building on capped gas wells, in houses, roads, it's come up a couple of different

01:54:47.800 --> 01:54:50.920
 issues, so if we could have that, I'd appreciate it.

01:54:50.920 --> 01:54:56.640
 >> Certainly, we'll add it to the matrix and then sort of as we do customarily, as soon

01:54:56.640 --> 01:55:03.420
 as we have that work session with council, the next day, we will present that to PNC.

01:55:03.420 --> 01:55:04.420
 >> Thank you so much.

01:55:04.420 --> 01:55:07.680
 >> Any other questions or items for the matrix?

01:55:07.680 --> 01:55:13.120
 Seeing none, I will close this meeting at 726.

01:55:13.120 --> 01:55:13.360
 Thank you.