1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:06,900
 Good afternoon and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission meeting

2
00:00:06,900 --> 00:00:10,800
 for Wednesday, August 5th, 2020.

3
00:00:10,800 --> 00:00:19,200
 This is our work session and with a quorum present, I will call us to order at 5.31 p.m.

4
00:00:19,200 --> 00:00:26,380
 Our first item on the agenda is citizen comments on consent agenda items, and I do believe

5
00:00:26,380 --> 00:00:35,480
 we have one caller in the queue.

6
00:00:35,480 --> 00:00:43,280
 Do we have a caller in the queue?

7
00:00:43,280 --> 00:00:46,120
 Hi there caller, are you there?

8
00:00:46,120 --> 00:00:47,120
 I am.

9
00:00:47,120 --> 00:00:49,060
 Okay, well welcome.

10
00:00:49,060 --> 00:00:53,560
 If you will state your name and address for the record, you will have three minutes to

11
00:00:53,560 --> 00:00:56,560
 speak on the item you called in about.

12
00:00:56,560 --> 00:00:58,120
 All right, thank you so much.

13
00:00:58,120 --> 00:01:04,720
 My name is Sharon Kramer and my address is 3574 Pine Trail, and I want to speak about

14
00:01:04,720 --> 00:01:11,280
 the preliminary plot 19-0023, and so here we go.

15
00:01:11,280 --> 00:01:16,560
 I think all of us, first I want to thank the commissioners for being there and serving

16
00:01:16,560 --> 00:01:21,920
 the city that I'm so deeply fond of, and I think we probably all share the same values

17
00:01:21,920 --> 00:01:27,440
 that good decisions come from good data, so because of that, I tried to do my best to

18
00:01:27,440 --> 00:01:28,440
 be informed.

19
00:01:28,440 --> 00:01:34,440
 I'm quite familiar with Denton Plan 2030, the flum, the mobility plan, various traffic

20
00:01:34,440 --> 00:01:39,560
 studies, the TxDOT traffic study that was done in conjunction with North Central Texas

21
00:01:39,560 --> 00:01:41,360
 Council of Governments.

22
00:01:41,360 --> 00:01:44,800
 I've read almost all of them, not that I remember everything, but I read them.

23
00:01:44,800 --> 00:01:50,560
 I've attended lots of meetings with the commissioners, the city council, mobility plans, the new

24
00:01:50,560 --> 00:01:57,920
 development code, because I like to be informed, and I've had lots of very helpful conversations

25
00:01:57,920 --> 00:02:03,120
 with Jason Fagel of Allison Engineering, John Heilman, who's one of the owners of the Agari

26
00:02:03,120 --> 00:02:08,480
 development, Julie Wyatt with the city, Richard Canone with the city, Preetam, whose last

27
00:02:08,480 --> 00:02:13,120
 name I cannot remember, who's with the city traffic or was, and I've learned a lot from

28
00:02:13,120 --> 00:02:14,120
 them.

29
00:02:14,120 --> 00:02:19,520
 Preetam himself explained the tools and the programs that are involved in traffic studies

30
00:02:19,520 --> 00:02:25,600
 and how they look at the results to make a decision, but here's my point.

31
00:02:25,600 --> 00:02:34,360
 All the programs and data in the world is not good unless it is filtered by a functioning

32
00:02:34,360 --> 00:02:41,260
 human brain that is capable of executive function, and that's what I'm counting on my commissioners

33
00:02:41,260 --> 00:02:49,600
 to do is to use their executive function to look at that southern exit that is on what

34
00:02:49,600 --> 00:02:57,200
 the plan calls to be renamed Hartley Field Road, and consider moving it north for this

35
00:02:57,200 --> 00:02:58,640
 reason.

36
00:02:58,640 --> 00:03:04,280
 If that exit is at the south, it's going to wipe out about four homes at the end of Woodland

37
00:03:04,280 --> 00:03:10,040
 Hills, and it eventually will have a huge effect up and down the existing Hartley Field

38
00:03:10,040 --> 00:03:11,460
 Road.

39
00:03:11,460 --> 00:03:16,400
 Julie Wyatt explained to me more than a year ago when I saw the first attempted mobility

40
00:03:16,400 --> 00:03:21,040
 plan to align Hartley Field Road, that Hartley Field Road could easily remain a local use

41
00:03:21,040 --> 00:03:23,640
 road and they could relocate that road.

42
00:03:23,640 --> 00:03:29,960
 And in fact, even Jason Fagel at a city council meeting said that yes, he could use any of

43
00:03:29,960 --> 00:03:30,960
 the arteries.

44
00:03:30,960 --> 00:03:36,520
 I'd like to see the artery leading out of Agave to be moved north, and I'd like for

45
00:03:36,520 --> 00:03:38,120
 it to be at Starlight.

46
00:03:38,120 --> 00:03:39,120
 And that's it.

47
00:03:39,120 --> 00:03:43,720
 Thank you very much for your time.

48
00:03:43,720 --> 00:03:49,200
 Thank you so much for calling in, Sharon.

49
00:03:49,200 --> 00:03:59,440
 Okay, and we do have another consent agenda caller.

50
00:03:59,440 --> 00:04:07,280
 Hi there, caller.

51
00:04:07,280 --> 00:04:08,280
 Are you there?

52
00:04:08,280 --> 00:04:09,360
 Yes, I am.

53
00:04:09,360 --> 00:04:10,360
 Okay.

54
00:04:10,360 --> 00:04:11,360
 Well, welcome.

55
00:04:11,360 --> 00:04:14,240
 If you'll state your name and address, and you'll have three minutes to speak on the

56
00:04:14,240 --> 00:04:15,680
 item that you called about.

57
00:04:15,680 --> 00:04:16,800
 All right.

58
00:04:16,800 --> 00:04:17,800
 Thank you.

59
00:04:17,800 --> 00:04:23,640
 This is Bridget Marshall, and I live at 3539 Pine Trail.

60
00:04:23,640 --> 00:04:30,920
 And what I wanted to comment was that during the July 16, 2019 city council meeting last

61
00:04:30,920 --> 00:04:37,000
 year regarding Agave Ranch, five city council members made it clear that the location of

62
00:04:37,000 --> 00:04:40,320
 the main road in Agave Ranch was unacceptable.

63
00:04:40,320 --> 00:04:46,400
 And council member Jesse Davis asked if the arterial slides north, does that do anything

64
00:04:46,400 --> 00:04:49,060
 that makes your project not pencil?

65
00:04:49,060 --> 00:04:56,800
 To which Jason Fagel, who from Allison Engineering replied, I can make any of these roads through

66
00:04:56,800 --> 00:04:59,080
 here an arterial.

67
00:04:59,080 --> 00:05:04,600
 So my question is, I'd like to know why the road wasn't moved since city council made

68
00:05:04,600 --> 00:05:07,680
 it clear that the road is unacceptable.

69
00:05:07,680 --> 00:05:12,680
 Destroying homes and property to widen Hartley Field Road and to connect to Agave Ranch at

70
00:05:12,680 --> 00:05:19,640
 the southern terminus is really irresponsible and does not comply with Denton Plan 2030,

71
00:05:19,640 --> 00:05:25,040
 the future land use map, or the comprehensive plan.

72
00:05:25,040 --> 00:05:29,800
 Thank you for taking the time to listen to my comments, I really appreciate it.

73
00:05:29,800 --> 00:05:31,560
 We appreciate you sharing your thoughts.

74
00:05:31,560 --> 00:05:32,560
 Thank you.

75
00:05:32,560 --> 00:05:33,560
 You're welcome.

76
00:05:33,560 --> 00:05:43,960
 Okay, and I think we have one more caller.

77
00:05:43,960 --> 00:05:52,040
 Hello, caller, are you there?

78
00:05:52,040 --> 00:05:53,040
 Yes.

79
00:05:53,040 --> 00:05:54,640
 Okay, well, welcome.

80
00:05:54,640 --> 00:05:56,480
 You will have three minutes to speak.

81
00:05:56,480 --> 00:06:00,760
 If you will give your name and address for the record, then your time will begin.

82
00:06:00,760 --> 00:06:01,760
 Okay.

83
00:06:01,760 --> 00:06:02,760
 Thank you.

84
00:06:02,760 --> 00:06:08,240
 I'm David Ferring, and I live at 4572 Coyote Point.

85
00:06:08,240 --> 00:06:16,160
 That's just east of the development of immediate interest.

86
00:06:16,160 --> 00:06:25,600
 I've called to raise the issue of traffic plans for this development, and I don't know

87
00:06:25,600 --> 00:06:31,600
 if it's appropriate, but it seems very important to me that this proposal be considered in

88
00:06:31,600 --> 00:06:37,440
 concert with a much larger proposal, you're familiar with, of the Carter Ranch property,

89
00:06:37,440 --> 00:06:43,080
 which would be almost 2,000 new homes.

90
00:06:43,080 --> 00:06:50,920
 We've lived out here since 1978, and we love this area, and we're very loyal Dentonites,

91
00:06:50,920 --> 00:06:55,640
 and we understand that growth is going to happen, but we're very concerned about the

92
00:06:55,640 --> 00:07:00,880
 quality of the environment and the traffic situation out here.

93
00:07:00,880 --> 00:07:07,840
 In particular, the Carter Ranch property is planning to make Hartley Field Road a major

94
00:07:07,840 --> 00:07:18,320
 access point to Farm to Market 428, and the placement of that on this development, the

95
00:07:18,320 --> 00:07:26,560
 Agave development, is fixed and would lock in any plans for Hartley Field development

96
00:07:26,560 --> 00:07:31,020
 associated with the Carter property.

97
00:07:31,020 --> 00:07:37,160
 The way I see it, there are four access points from the Agave development to Farm to Market

98
00:07:37,160 --> 00:07:40,600
 428 or Sherman Drive.

99
00:07:40,600 --> 00:07:46,640
 That would be in addition to the existing Hartley Field Road, plus roads that are going

100
00:07:46,640 --> 00:07:50,600
 to come in from the west, such as Long Road.

101
00:07:50,600 --> 00:07:57,480
 All of those intersections on a really busy road at the intersection of Loop 288 seems

102
00:07:57,480 --> 00:08:02,480
 to me to be a major concern for all of us that live out here and for the people that

103
00:08:02,480 --> 00:08:05,740
 are going to use those roads.

104
00:08:05,740 --> 00:08:15,760
 My request is that planning and zoning, if possible, back off and look at Agave in concert

105
00:08:15,760 --> 00:08:23,080
 with the proposed traffic plans associated with the Carter Ranch development.

106
00:08:23,080 --> 00:08:27,960
 That's all I have to say.

107
00:08:27,960 --> 00:08:30,240
 Thank you, Mr. Ferring, for sharing your thoughts with us.

108
00:08:30,240 --> 00:08:31,240
 Okay.

109
00:08:31,240 --> 00:08:32,480
 Appreciate you calling in.

110
00:08:32,480 --> 00:08:42,160
 Okay, and I don't believe we have any other callers in the queue.

111
00:08:42,160 --> 00:08:45,720
 Okay, then that will move us to our next work session item.

112
00:08:45,720 --> 00:08:51,160
 Which is clarification of agenda items listed on our agenda this evening.

113
00:08:51,160 --> 00:08:54,080
 First on would be minutes for July 22nd.

114
00:08:54,080 --> 00:08:59,640
 Commissioners, are there any concerns on the minutes?

115
00:08:59,640 --> 00:09:02,720
 Okay.

116
00:09:02,720 --> 00:09:05,280
 Next would be our consent agenda.

117
00:09:05,280 --> 00:09:07,800
 First item on that, or I guess any item.

118
00:09:07,800 --> 00:09:11,400
 Does anyone have concern, comment on that?

119
00:09:11,400 --> 00:09:12,400
 Commissioner Beck.

120
00:09:12,400 --> 00:09:13,400
 Yeah.

121
00:09:13,400 --> 00:09:14,920
 Thank you, Chair.

122
00:09:14,920 --> 00:09:23,560
 I think considering the level of input and feedback that our fellow citizens are requesting

123
00:09:23,560 --> 00:09:31,160
 on this item, I think that maybe at least warrants further discussion that may be outside

124
00:09:31,160 --> 00:09:34,400
 the scope of a consent agenda item.

125
00:09:34,400 --> 00:09:43,640
 So it is my intention to make a motion to pull those two items to individual consideration.

126
00:09:43,640 --> 00:09:49,500
 And I guess I'll pass the hat for the Chair's consideration at this point before I make

127
00:09:49,500 --> 00:09:50,960
 my motion.

128
00:09:50,960 --> 00:09:59,080
 But I think it would be in keeping with an appropriate separation of these items from

129
00:09:59,080 --> 00:10:00,800
 a general consent agenda.

130
00:10:00,800 --> 00:10:05,360
 And you're talking about the development plan and the preliminary plan for Agave?

131
00:10:05,360 --> 00:10:06,360
 Yes.

132
00:10:06,360 --> 00:10:07,360
 What?

133
00:10:07,360 --> 00:10:08,840
 That is item 3C and 3D.

134
00:10:08,840 --> 00:10:09,840
 3D.

135
00:10:09,840 --> 00:10:10,840
 Okay.

136
00:10:10,840 --> 00:10:14,360
 Okay.

137
00:10:14,360 --> 00:10:15,360
 Noted.

138
00:10:15,360 --> 00:10:16,360
 Anybody else?

139
00:10:16,360 --> 00:10:17,360
 Okay.

140
00:10:17,360 --> 00:10:23,360
 No other concerns on consent?

141
00:10:23,360 --> 00:10:27,480
 And Commissioner Beck, you're certainly welcome to make a motion when we get into the regular

142
00:10:27,480 --> 00:10:28,480
 meeting.

143
00:10:28,480 --> 00:10:29,480
 All right.

144
00:10:29,480 --> 00:10:32,000
 Thank you.

145
00:10:32,000 --> 00:10:34,000
 Okay.

146
00:10:34,000 --> 00:10:39,560
 Moving through consent, we do have, while the item for individual consideration, staff

147
00:10:39,560 --> 00:10:46,080
 is recommending denial on, but the applicant has requested a 30-day extension to September

148
00:10:46,080 --> 00:10:47,640
 2nd meeting.

149
00:10:47,640 --> 00:10:53,240
 So I'll be looking for a motion at the meeting for that if the commissioners are in agreement

150
00:10:53,240 --> 00:10:57,120
 for that.

151
00:10:57,120 --> 00:10:59,000
 Any concerns on that one?

152
00:10:59,000 --> 00:11:00,240
 Okay.

153
00:11:00,240 --> 00:11:02,440
 Next will be the public hearing item.

154
00:11:02,440 --> 00:11:10,360
 5A is being postponed until August 19th meeting.

155
00:11:10,360 --> 00:11:16,080
 And we've got S20004.

156
00:11:16,080 --> 00:11:17,560
 That would be Julie Wyatt.

157
00:11:17,560 --> 00:11:19,600
 Good evening, commissioners.

158
00:11:19,600 --> 00:11:39,160
 Let me pull up my presentation and we'll talk through that item.

159
00:11:39,160 --> 00:11:40,160
 All right.

160
00:11:40,160 --> 00:11:44,840
 So this item is S20004, the Grove Apartments.

161
00:11:44,840 --> 00:11:50,440
 The request before you is for a specific use permit to permit multifamily dwellings.

162
00:11:50,440 --> 00:11:52,600
 The subject property is about 16 acres.

163
00:11:52,600 --> 00:11:54,880
 It is outlined here in yellow.

164
00:11:54,880 --> 00:11:59,480
 It is on the west side of Loop 288, north of Dutchess.

165
00:11:59,480 --> 00:12:04,400
 The property is in the SC district, which permits a multifamily with the approval of

166
00:12:04,400 --> 00:12:06,360
 a specific use permit.

167
00:12:06,360 --> 00:12:08,040
 This may look familiar to you.

168
00:12:08,040 --> 00:12:14,360
 There was a previous SUP that you did see before.

169
00:12:14,360 --> 00:12:17,980
 It did go to the planning and zoning commission and then on to city council.

170
00:12:17,980 --> 00:12:21,720
 It went to city council a couple of times.

171
00:12:21,720 --> 00:12:28,100
 There were concerns raised by adjacent property owners regarding their wanting to see more

172
00:12:28,100 --> 00:12:30,720
 commercial in this area.

173
00:12:30,720 --> 00:12:35,080
 That SUP was postponed and it was eventually withdrawn.

174
00:12:35,080 --> 00:12:38,680
 And now it has come back to us as a new project.

175
00:12:38,680 --> 00:12:42,440
 There were four items that were discussed at city council, so I just wanted to bring

176
00:12:42,440 --> 00:12:43,440
 those up.

177
00:12:43,440 --> 00:12:47,920
 There was a discussion regarding the traffic signal at Dutchess Drive and Loop 288, and

178
00:12:47,920 --> 00:12:50,640
 we'll talk further about that in the presentation.

179
00:12:50,640 --> 00:12:53,160
 There was also a discussion about tree preservation.

180
00:12:53,160 --> 00:12:58,600
 The previous SUP was reviewed under the 2002 Denton Development Code, so it followed the

181
00:12:58,600 --> 00:13:01,720
 previous requirements for tree preservation.

182
00:13:01,720 --> 00:13:06,640
 They've resubmitted under the 2019 code, so it's following the new tree preservation

183
00:13:06,640 --> 00:13:07,640
 requirements.

184
00:13:07,640 --> 00:13:12,080
 So that concern was addressed with the submittal.

185
00:13:12,080 --> 00:13:18,120
 Similar access, the original plan had only two access points, one to Loop 288 and one

186
00:13:18,120 --> 00:13:20,080
 to Dutchess Drive.

187
00:13:20,080 --> 00:13:27,260
 The council talked about adding another access point toward the north to connect to McKinney.

188
00:13:27,260 --> 00:13:32,760
 The new plan does include that access point, so it's sort of taken care of with the submittal.

189
00:13:32,760 --> 00:13:38,660
 And then finally a sidewalk extension, which we'll talk about as we go further in the presentation.

190
00:13:38,660 --> 00:13:42,600
 So first we'll talk about the site plan and what they're proposing.

191
00:13:42,600 --> 00:13:45,860
 The site plan is slightly different than what you saw before.

192
00:13:45,860 --> 00:13:48,360
 It's actually shifted toward the north.

193
00:13:48,360 --> 00:13:54,040
 The original boundary was kind of this north boundary here, but it's slid toward the north

194
00:13:54,040 --> 00:14:00,120
 to allow for a commercial lot, a remainder commercial lot, vacant lot to be developed

195
00:14:00,120 --> 00:14:01,680
 in the future.

196
00:14:01,680 --> 00:14:08,440
 It's a 1.5 acre lot, and it has the SC zoning, so any uses that would be permitted in SC

197
00:14:08,440 --> 00:14:11,560
 could be developed in that site.

198
00:14:11,560 --> 00:14:18,320
 The subject property, the proposal in front of you is for 12, two and three story buildings,

199
00:14:18,320 --> 00:14:23,640
 a total of 276 dwelling units, 524 parking spaces.

200
00:14:23,640 --> 00:14:29,860
 That does include a 44 space reduction that the code allows for affordable housing developments.

201
00:14:29,860 --> 00:14:32,560
 As I said before, it has three driveway connections.

202
00:14:32,560 --> 00:14:36,280
 The main entrance is here on Loop 288.

203
00:14:36,280 --> 00:14:38,600
 It includes a right out connection.

204
00:14:38,600 --> 00:14:48,400
 There isn't a left out because of the way the medians on Loop 288 are designed.

205
00:14:48,400 --> 00:14:53,960
 So it allows for a right out and then a left turn in and a right turn in.

206
00:14:53,960 --> 00:14:59,560
 There is an additional access point to Dutchess Drive and it allows for full in and out access.

207
00:14:59,560 --> 00:15:05,760
 And then finally, there is an exit only access point to the north.

208
00:15:05,760 --> 00:15:09,960
 It connects to some public access easements that then connects on to McKinney.

209
00:15:09,960 --> 00:15:11,880
 Julie, excuse me.

210
00:15:11,880 --> 00:15:15,520
 You said that's an exit only out to McKinney, right?

211
00:15:15,520 --> 00:15:17,320
 Yes, ma'am.

212
00:15:17,320 --> 00:15:18,320
 Great.

213
00:15:18,320 --> 00:15:19,320
 Commissioner Beck.

214
00:15:19,320 --> 00:15:20,320
 Thank you, Chair.

215
00:15:20,320 --> 00:15:30,200
 So I had a similar question as to Chair, that's the road, the north exit is the road behind

216
00:15:30,200 --> 00:15:31,920
 the jack in the box?

217
00:15:31,920 --> 00:15:32,920
 Correct.

218
00:15:32,920 --> 00:15:33,920
 Okay.

219
00:15:33,920 --> 00:15:39,400
 And I know you just answered this for Chair, but that is going to be one way out?

220
00:15:39,400 --> 00:15:44,000
 Because as I understand it, it's two way right now?

221
00:15:44,000 --> 00:15:48,480
 This development, it would only be an exit only.

222
00:15:48,480 --> 00:15:50,000
 It does, here, let me go back to the aerial.

223
00:15:50,000 --> 00:15:51,000
 I think you can see it.

224
00:15:51,000 --> 00:15:57,080
 Yes, this is a public access easement and it does have two way for those commercial developments.

225
00:15:57,080 --> 00:16:01,640
 It will actually have to be extended in this undeveloped tract and so this particularly

226
00:16:01,640 --> 00:16:04,080
 development would only allow for exit.

227
00:16:04,080 --> 00:16:05,080
 Okay, that makes sense.

228
00:16:05,080 --> 00:16:06,080
 Thank you.

229
00:16:06,080 --> 00:16:07,080
 You bet.

230
00:16:07,080 --> 00:16:15,080
 Commissioner Anderson.

231
00:16:15,080 --> 00:16:16,080
 Thank you, Chair.

232
00:16:16,080 --> 00:16:17,800
 I do have a question as well.

233
00:16:17,800 --> 00:16:21,320
 Where is the commercial that's supposed to be facing loop 288?

234
00:16:21,320 --> 00:16:23,600
 I see three apartment buildings.

235
00:16:23,600 --> 00:16:28,840
 I thought they were going to leave room up front off of 288 for commercial.

236
00:16:28,840 --> 00:16:34,360
 This plan has the commercial lot on the southwest side of the development.

237
00:16:34,360 --> 00:16:41,440
 Okay, and are they still planning on putting a red light, a traffic signal on loop 288?

238
00:16:41,440 --> 00:16:44,640
 Yes, and we will get to that.

239
00:16:44,640 --> 00:16:53,720
 They are proposing to deposit $400,000 with the City of Denton in order for the design

240
00:16:53,720 --> 00:16:55,400
 and the construction of that light.

241
00:16:55,400 --> 00:17:00,800
 So yes, there would be a light if this was approved at Dutchess and loop 288.

242
00:17:00,800 --> 00:17:01,800
 Would that be necessary?

243
00:17:01,800 --> 00:17:06,520
 I mean, because for one, you already have a red light at loop 288.

244
00:17:06,520 --> 00:17:09,120
 By the time you get up to speed, you're going to have to stop again.

245
00:17:09,120 --> 00:17:11,960
 That to me sounds like a bad idea.

246
00:17:11,960 --> 00:17:17,400
 Their TIA demonstrated that that intersection does meet the warrants and with that additional

247
00:17:17,400 --> 00:17:22,520
 development along Dutchess Drive, it does meet the warrants for the textile warrants

248
00:17:22,520 --> 00:17:24,400
 for that light.

249
00:17:24,400 --> 00:17:31,560
 Okay.

250
00:17:31,560 --> 00:17:33,400
 So here we have the landscape plan.

251
00:17:33,400 --> 00:17:37,160
 There are a few areas that I want to call your attention to.

252
00:17:37,160 --> 00:17:42,080
 First of all, on the southwest side of the property, there is an enclosed dog park that

253
00:17:42,080 --> 00:17:46,240
 is proposed with the required buffer.

254
00:17:46,240 --> 00:17:50,720
 This is adjacent to that, to the existing office development on Dutchess.

255
00:17:50,720 --> 00:17:54,040
 So there is a buffer required in this location.

256
00:17:54,040 --> 00:17:59,240
 They're also planting the required street trees along Dutchess Drive, as well as loop

257
00:17:59,240 --> 00:18:00,240
 288.

258
00:18:00,240 --> 00:18:06,600
 As you're probably familiar, there is a fairly large electric easement that runs north south

259
00:18:06,600 --> 00:18:08,360
 through the property.

260
00:18:08,360 --> 00:18:14,080
 They are proposing some open space areas within that easement.

261
00:18:14,080 --> 00:18:18,600
 They really can't put structures in that and trees really aren't permitted within that

262
00:18:18,600 --> 00:18:19,600
 easement.

263
00:18:19,600 --> 00:18:27,240
 They're proposing a sort of native planting area here in the area marked three and then

264
00:18:27,240 --> 00:18:30,640
 a butterfly garden within the area marked four.

265
00:18:30,640 --> 00:18:31,640
 Excuse me, Julie.

266
00:18:31,640 --> 00:18:32,640
 Commissioner Beck.

267
00:18:32,640 --> 00:18:33,640
 Yeah.

268
00:18:33,640 --> 00:18:43,880
 Apropos to this exact topic, I know that in the area where the road ends behind the DPS

269
00:18:43,880 --> 00:18:51,040
 or human services in the jack-and-box, that corner between six and four on your map is

270
00:18:51,040 --> 00:18:58,560
 a sort of treed area, but it looks like this plan is suggesting that those are going to

271
00:18:58,560 --> 00:19:04,280
 be moved or I'm a little unclear, is six the current existing treed area?

272
00:19:04,280 --> 00:19:05,280
 It is.

273
00:19:05,280 --> 00:19:06,280
 Yes, sir.

274
00:19:06,280 --> 00:19:07,280
 Okay.

275
00:19:07,280 --> 00:19:08,280
 Yes, sir.

276
00:19:08,280 --> 00:19:09,280
 All right.

277
00:19:09,280 --> 00:19:10,280
 That's a great question.

278
00:19:10,280 --> 00:19:11,280
 I'm sorry.

279
00:19:11,280 --> 00:19:12,280
 Go ahead.

280
00:19:12,280 --> 00:19:17,640
 They are, as I said, they're meeting the 2019 standards for tree preservation and they've

281
00:19:17,640 --> 00:19:23,920
 got this large tree preservation stand that they're, as one of their open space areas

282
00:19:23,920 --> 00:19:26,480
 within the development.

283
00:19:26,480 --> 00:19:28,920
 Thank you, Julie.

284
00:19:28,920 --> 00:19:31,600
 And then we have this area labeled as five.

285
00:19:31,600 --> 00:19:37,160
 This is a 1.4 acre central park for the development.

286
00:19:37,160 --> 00:19:44,480
 It includes a variety of amenities, including a playground, a pavilion, pool, game court,

287
00:19:44,480 --> 00:19:48,320
 tot lot, and seating area.

288
00:19:48,320 --> 00:19:54,240
 And then also they are proposing these areas in blue, they're kind of hard to see.

289
00:19:54,240 --> 00:19:57,880
 They haven't finalized what the actual landscaping will be in that blue area.

290
00:19:57,880 --> 00:20:02,520
 They want to make sure that they provide the right mix of trees and shrubs, but they are

291
00:20:02,520 --> 00:20:08,920
 proposing a landscape area between the parking areas and the buildings to provide sort of

292
00:20:08,920 --> 00:20:14,200
 a front yard for those buildings to create a sense of arrival as you move from the parking

293
00:20:14,200 --> 00:20:19,280
 area to the residential areas on the site.

294
00:20:19,280 --> 00:20:25,460
 And then I wanted to talk a little further about that central park design.

295
00:20:25,460 --> 00:20:31,800
 So as you can see, there are several sites for active recreation or gathering spaces.

296
00:20:31,800 --> 00:20:38,220
 Each of those blue diamonds highlights one, and they're distributed throughout that central

297
00:20:38,220 --> 00:20:39,720
 park area.

298
00:20:39,720 --> 00:20:45,040
 The buildings are oriented as to enclose that open space, and they also have patios and

299
00:20:45,040 --> 00:20:50,800
 balconies that overlook that open space, so they really become a backyard for those residents.

300
00:20:50,800 --> 00:20:57,020
 And then the yellow outlines those pedestrian pathways that bring people into those open

301
00:20:57,020 --> 00:21:02,720
 space areas and connect the buildings with the amenities.

302
00:21:02,720 --> 00:21:05,680
 They've provided concept elevations.

303
00:21:05,680 --> 00:21:12,240
 These are those two and three story buildings along loop 288 that are proposed, as well

304
00:21:12,240 --> 00:21:19,040
 as the three story buildings that will ring that central park area.

305
00:21:19,040 --> 00:21:24,080
 So as with any SUP, our kind of our procedure for how we review that is first we look at

306
00:21:24,080 --> 00:21:27,200
 onsite, so it doesn't meet the code requirements.

307
00:21:27,200 --> 00:21:31,440
 And then second, we broaden how we look at the project, and we look at the surrounding

308
00:21:31,440 --> 00:21:36,120
 development and what any potential impacts would be for that surrounding development,

309
00:21:36,120 --> 00:21:38,400
 what those uses are, what the development pattern is.

310
00:21:38,400 --> 00:21:44,720
 So when we broaden out the view for this property, we see that the property is outlined here

311
00:21:44,720 --> 00:21:47,880
 in yellow again.

312
00:21:47,880 --> 00:21:53,120
 There is multifamily residential just adjacent to the subject property, just to the west.

313
00:21:53,120 --> 00:21:58,880
 There is office development to the southwest and also south of the property, kind of office

314
00:21:58,880 --> 00:22:00,600
 and then there's also a bank.

315
00:22:00,600 --> 00:22:03,520
 And then there's commercial development to the north.

316
00:22:03,520 --> 00:22:08,000
 As you can see, there's a lot of undeveloped property around the subject site.

317
00:22:08,000 --> 00:22:12,960
 It does have a zoning designation that's consistent with the subject property, so we anticipate

318
00:22:12,960 --> 00:22:19,400
 that any development on those lots would be consistent with the scale and uses that we

319
00:22:19,400 --> 00:22:22,680
 see out there and that are proposed.

320
00:22:22,680 --> 00:22:26,760
 And finally, the area outlined in green, that's the Pebblebrook open space.

321
00:22:26,760 --> 00:22:30,580
 It is owned by the City of Denton.

322
00:22:30,580 --> 00:22:32,160
 It is a future park.

323
00:22:32,160 --> 00:22:35,800
 It is not developed right now, but there are trails proposed for it.

324
00:22:35,800 --> 00:22:40,200
 They haven't been designed yet, and we anticipate development of it would be in the next two

325
00:22:40,200 --> 00:22:44,400
 or three years, so it's not imminent just yet.

326
00:22:44,400 --> 00:22:47,520
 So the criteria for approval for an SUP are in subchapter two.

327
00:22:47,520 --> 00:22:51,800
 We have general criteria for approval, and we also have specific criteria for approval.

328
00:22:51,800 --> 00:22:55,520
 I won't read out all of these individually to you.

329
00:22:55,520 --> 00:23:01,620
 What we'll do is we'll just talk about those elements that relate to the criteria for approval

330
00:23:01,620 --> 00:23:05,600
 and relate to the staff's recommendation.

331
00:23:05,600 --> 00:23:09,480
 So first what we want to look at is compatibility with the surrounding area.

332
00:23:09,480 --> 00:23:13,120
 That really is the big thing when it comes to SUPs.

333
00:23:13,120 --> 00:23:18,400
 And so this relates to why we look at what the surrounding development pattern is.

334
00:23:18,400 --> 00:23:22,320
 So Loop 288 is a suburban commercial corridor.

335
00:23:22,320 --> 00:23:27,600
 It includes office, retail, restaurant, service, and multifamily uses up and down that Loop

336
00:23:27,600 --> 00:23:30,560
 288 corridor.

337
00:23:30,560 --> 00:23:36,120
 Multifamily uses and their associated activities are compatible with office and commercial

338
00:23:36,120 --> 00:23:37,120
 development.

339
00:23:37,120 --> 00:23:42,200
 The proposed development is also in scale to what is similar, what is typically found

340
00:23:42,200 --> 00:23:45,800
 on Loop 288 and also the adjacent uses.

341
00:23:45,800 --> 00:23:49,600
 Those three access points will help disperse the vehicular traffic.

342
00:23:49,600 --> 00:23:54,440
 So any traffic impacts associated with it will be more dispersed because there are those

343
00:23:54,440 --> 00:23:56,160
 three access points.

344
00:23:56,160 --> 00:23:58,640
 We're not funneling it into just one area.

345
00:23:58,640 --> 00:24:05,280
 So they'll be able to go to the north or to the south or to the east of the site.

346
00:24:05,280 --> 00:24:10,520
 Multifamily uses are a vital component of our mixed use centers.

347
00:24:10,520 --> 00:24:20,360
 They provide housing for employees and they're as close to work and to places to shop.

348
00:24:20,360 --> 00:24:23,900
 And it also provides that customer base for our commercial areas.

349
00:24:23,900 --> 00:24:27,880
 So they really are that vital piece to the mixed use areas.

350
00:24:27,880 --> 00:24:31,240
 And as I said, the undeveloped property nearby is similarly zoned.

351
00:24:31,240 --> 00:24:35,040
 So we do anticipate that the future development would be consistent with the existing development

352
00:24:35,040 --> 00:24:37,240
 pattern.

353
00:24:37,240 --> 00:24:40,000
 We also always look at Denton Plan 2030.

354
00:24:40,000 --> 00:24:44,600
 There are actually two future land use designations that affect the subject property.

355
00:24:44,600 --> 00:24:47,000
 First we have community mixed use.

356
00:24:47,000 --> 00:24:49,680
 This is one of our mixed use districts.

357
00:24:49,680 --> 00:24:53,960
 It encourages a variety of commercial uses and those should be predominant.

358
00:24:53,960 --> 00:24:58,520
 But where we do have that residential and service, those other complementary uses to

359
00:24:58,520 --> 00:25:01,360
 support our commercial centers.

360
00:25:01,360 --> 00:25:07,240
 There's also moderate residential and that's one of our future land use designations that

361
00:25:07,240 --> 00:25:15,240
 is intent for our urban areas, urban housing areas where it's single family housing, typically

362
00:25:15,240 --> 00:25:18,760
 on small lots and four to 12 dwelling units per acre.

363
00:25:18,760 --> 00:25:23,440
 So through that urban infill housing type.

364
00:25:23,440 --> 00:25:29,840
 The proposal really is a good blend of what the intent of these two future land use designations

365
00:25:29,840 --> 00:25:30,840
 are.

366
00:25:30,840 --> 00:25:37,720
 So that critical mass and that intensity that community mixed use is intended for.

367
00:25:37,720 --> 00:25:42,840
 But it also provides that residential component which blends well with that moderate density

368
00:25:42,840 --> 00:25:49,600
 residential not only for that future land use but what's existing in the area.

369
00:25:49,600 --> 00:25:55,120
 We also looked at the public facilities within the general area.

370
00:25:55,120 --> 00:26:02,480
 So first traffic, 276 dwelling units generate about 2000 trips per 24 hour weekday.

371
00:26:02,480 --> 00:26:08,480
 That's about 125 trips in the morning peak and then 146 in the evening peak.

372
00:26:08,480 --> 00:26:10,640
 Loop 288 is a primary arterial.

373
00:26:10,640 --> 00:26:13,000
 So it's one of our big roads within the city.

374
00:26:13,000 --> 00:26:17,940
 It's six lane divided and Dutchess is a collector.

375
00:26:17,940 --> 00:26:19,880
 They did submit a TIA.

376
00:26:19,880 --> 00:26:21,360
 It's been reviewed.

377
00:26:21,360 --> 00:26:26,680
 As part of that, there were two interventions that were suggested and that would be required.

378
00:26:26,680 --> 00:26:28,560
 One is a restriping on Dutchess.

379
00:26:28,560 --> 00:26:32,240
 So right now, Dutchess dead ends into loop 288.

380
00:26:32,240 --> 00:26:38,720
 So as cars are traveling toward the east on loop 288, that road would be restriped to

381
00:26:38,720 --> 00:26:45,040
 have one lane that turns dedicated to the south and one lane that is dedicated to turn

382
00:26:45,040 --> 00:26:51,640
 toward the north to allow that intersection to work more smoothly.

383
00:26:51,640 --> 00:26:57,640
 And then the other is the traffic light there at Dutchess and loop 288.

384
00:26:57,640 --> 00:27:05,200
 And that was a discussion point at the city council meetings earlier in the year.

385
00:27:05,200 --> 00:27:09,640
 And as part of that, the applicant offered a deposit of $400,000, which would be for

386
00:27:09,640 --> 00:27:13,040
 the cost of the design and construction of that traffic signal.

387
00:27:13,040 --> 00:27:17,200
 And that would include a pedestrian crossing there at the corner of Dutchess and South

388
00:27:17,200 --> 00:27:19,260
 Loop 288.

389
00:27:19,260 --> 00:27:26,080
 We checked with them on this new application and that was still an offer that they provided.

390
00:27:26,080 --> 00:27:31,480
 They are also proposing additional pedestrian connections.

391
00:27:31,480 --> 00:27:34,480
 Excuse me, Julie.

392
00:27:34,480 --> 00:27:35,480
 Yes.

393
00:27:35,480 --> 00:27:40,000
 Chair, let Julie finish her point and I'll ask her at the end of her slide if you would.

394
00:27:40,000 --> 00:27:41,000
 Thank you, Chair.

395
00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:42,000
 Fair enough.

396
00:27:42,000 --> 00:27:43,000
 All right.

397
00:27:43,000 --> 00:27:47,400
 So as part of the development, as with any development within the city of Denton, they

398
00:27:47,400 --> 00:27:52,280
 are required to build sidewalks adjacent to the existing rights of way if they're not

399
00:27:52,280 --> 00:27:53,440
 there.

400
00:27:53,440 --> 00:27:59,160
 So they are proposing those sidewalks on Loop 288 and on Dutchess.

401
00:27:59,160 --> 00:28:04,200
 This one's a little different in that they would also be extending those sidewalks along

402
00:28:04,200 --> 00:28:08,840
 those undeveloped commercial tracks adjacent to them.

403
00:28:08,840 --> 00:28:17,920
 So this track in particular was discussed at city council that they extend that sidewalk

404
00:28:17,920 --> 00:28:22,720
 along the frontage to connect to an existing sidewalk here.

405
00:28:22,720 --> 00:28:27,640
 And then also as part of this request, they are proposing to extend the sidewalk in front

406
00:28:27,640 --> 00:28:36,000
 of that future commercial lot to connect to the existing sidewalk that's in front of the

407
00:28:36,000 --> 00:28:38,320
 adjacent office building.

408
00:28:38,320 --> 00:28:41,960
 This helps multimodal transportation in the area.

409
00:28:41,960 --> 00:28:48,200
 There are two DCTA stops within the vicinity of the site, one down south, which doesn't

410
00:28:48,200 --> 00:28:49,840
 have a lot of sidewalk connections.

411
00:28:49,840 --> 00:28:57,960
 So I suspect any residents would be moving toward the north to this transit stop here.

412
00:28:57,960 --> 00:28:59,840
 It's Denton Connect 4.

413
00:28:59,840 --> 00:29:06,640
 With the addition of the sidewalk, it will actually complete that pedestrian route all

414
00:29:06,640 --> 00:29:12,680
 along Dutchess from the adjacent property through the subject property and then up to

415
00:29:12,680 --> 00:29:20,920
 nearly the intersection of McKinney and Loop 288.

416
00:29:20,920 --> 00:29:21,920
 Commissioner Beck.

417
00:29:21,920 --> 00:29:22,920
 Thank you, Chair.

418
00:29:22,920 --> 00:29:28,560
 So I'll ask my second question first since you were talking about the sidewalks.

419
00:29:28,560 --> 00:29:36,440
 Do we have for our right of ways for the properties not in question that head south towards the

420
00:29:36,440 --> 00:29:39,160
 creek?

421
00:29:39,160 --> 00:29:46,960
 Do we have in our capital improvements and in our right of way authorizations the ability

422
00:29:46,960 --> 00:29:51,600
 to put sidewalks to the south?

423
00:29:51,600 --> 00:29:52,600
 South of Dutchess?

424
00:29:52,600 --> 00:29:53,600
 Independent of this development?

425
00:29:53,600 --> 00:29:54,600
 Yes.

426
00:29:54,600 --> 00:29:55,600
 South of Dutchess.

427
00:29:55,600 --> 00:29:56,600
 You know, I don't know the answer to that question.

428
00:29:56,600 --> 00:29:58,520
 I'll see if I can get something.

429
00:29:58,520 --> 00:30:04,000
 I'm not aware of any capital projects that would include a sidewalk south of Dutchess,

430
00:30:04,000 --> 00:30:08,520
 but I can try to find out that prior to the regular session.

431
00:30:08,520 --> 00:30:09,520
 Okay.

432
00:30:09,520 --> 00:30:15,800
 And my first question, is the implication of the stoplight at the three-way intersection

433
00:30:15,800 --> 00:30:24,400
 of Dutchess and 288 that with the park being a continuation of Dutchess ostensibly, is

434
00:30:24,400 --> 00:30:29,040
 that we would punch through Dutchess into the park?

435
00:30:29,040 --> 00:30:33,840
 I am not aware of Dutchess extending -- I'm going to pull up the mobile.

436
00:30:33,840 --> 00:30:38,140
 Is that in the horizon?

437
00:30:38,140 --> 00:30:44,880
 I'm not aware of it being on the mobility plan, so I would not expect at this time that

438
00:30:44,880 --> 00:30:52,500
 Dutchess would extend into the -- I'm going to check while I'm talking here.

439
00:30:52,500 --> 00:31:00,640
 The mobility plan does not show Dutchess extending toward the park property or into the park

440
00:31:00,640 --> 00:31:03,040
 property right now.

441
00:31:03,040 --> 00:31:09,120
 And so access to the park property in the five-minute walk paradigm is up to McKinney

442
00:31:09,120 --> 00:31:11,720
 down a block or two and back south again?

443
00:31:11,720 --> 00:31:15,840
 That is a great question, and it actually goes to my next slide.

444
00:31:15,840 --> 00:31:20,320
 You are correct.

445
00:31:20,320 --> 00:31:25,540
 So Pebblebrook open space is 130 feet from the site as the crow flies.

446
00:31:25,540 --> 00:31:27,220
 So it's really close.

447
00:31:27,220 --> 00:31:34,640
 But there are two things that sort of reduce its efficacy in that it's not developed yet,

448
00:31:34,640 --> 00:31:41,700
 so it doesn't have any trails or any facilities within it right now.

449
00:31:41,700 --> 00:31:46,360
 And then yes, there is not a direct route to it currently.

450
00:31:46,360 --> 00:31:52,780
 The pedestrian route is about a half a mile, up to McKinney and then down again.

451
00:31:52,780 --> 00:31:59,380
 And really that's why they're on site on recreational amenities, that central park project -- central

452
00:31:59,380 --> 00:32:04,000
 park, that one-acre park in the center is really vital to this because it does provide

453
00:32:04,000 --> 00:32:11,760
 the recreational opportunities for the residents.

454
00:32:11,760 --> 00:32:14,800
 I'll just keep going on this slide if that's all right.

455
00:32:14,800 --> 00:32:17,160
 So water and wastewater is available to the site.

456
00:32:17,160 --> 00:32:21,320
 There will be some extensions they'll have to do for the water line along loop 288.

457
00:32:21,320 --> 00:32:25,320
 There is capacity in the system to serve the proposal, and they will have -- be subject

458
00:32:25,320 --> 00:32:30,920
 to TAP and impact fees at the time of platting and permitting.

459
00:32:30,920 --> 00:32:32,160
 And then schools.

460
00:32:32,160 --> 00:32:38,160
 So the proposal would generate about 83 elementary students, 30 middle school students, and 44

461
00:32:38,160 --> 00:32:39,840
 high school students.

462
00:32:39,840 --> 00:32:45,880
 The Rivera Elementary and Myers Middle School have capacity for the students, but there

463
00:32:45,880 --> 00:32:51,480
 is limit to the future residential growth for those campuses.

464
00:32:51,480 --> 00:32:56,600
 Ryan High School also has limited capacity, but according to Denton ISD, the number of

465
00:32:56,600 --> 00:33:01,040
 students generated for the proposal could be accommodated, but once again, it is limited

466
00:33:01,040 --> 00:33:04,960
 for future growth in the area.

467
00:33:04,960 --> 00:33:12,040
 Public outreach, newspaper ad was placed, notification was sent by mail.

468
00:33:12,040 --> 00:33:17,960
 We have received two notices -- responses in favor of the project, and those are toward

469
00:33:17,960 --> 00:33:21,660
 the north.

470
00:33:21,660 --> 00:33:24,720
 And -- >> Julie, excuse me.

471
00:33:24,720 --> 00:33:29,800
 Those are the same landowners that I believe were in opposition of this when it was originally

472
00:33:29,800 --> 00:33:33,080
 presented before it was pulled, correct?

473
00:33:33,080 --> 00:33:38,320
 >> Actually the landowners who were in opposition were more toward the south end of the project.

474
00:33:38,320 --> 00:33:39,320
 >> Okay.

475
00:33:39,320 --> 00:33:40,320
 Okay.

476
00:33:40,320 --> 00:33:41,320
 >> I have not heard from them.

477
00:33:41,320 --> 00:33:43,360
 The applicant has been in discussions with them.

478
00:33:43,360 --> 00:33:46,720
 They will be on the call tonight, so they may be able to give you more information about

479
00:33:46,720 --> 00:33:47,720
 their communications.

480
00:33:47,720 --> 00:33:48,720
 >> Okay.

481
00:33:48,720 --> 00:33:49,720
 Great.

482
00:33:49,720 --> 00:33:50,720
 Thanks.

483
00:33:50,720 --> 00:33:54,080
 >> So I promise I won't read this to you.

484
00:33:54,080 --> 00:33:55,400
 It's all in your backup.

485
00:33:55,400 --> 00:34:02,860
 It's a pretty extensive recommendation because of the history of this project and the communications

486
00:34:02,860 --> 00:34:03,860
 with it.

487
00:34:03,860 --> 00:34:09,600
 So we do have five conditions that we are recommending.

488
00:34:09,600 --> 00:34:14,960
 One would be kind of our standard recommendation on SUPs for landscaping, that the intent of

489
00:34:14,960 --> 00:34:19,240
 the landscaping is to comply with the debt and development code and that they comply

490
00:34:19,240 --> 00:34:22,680
 with the landscape plan that you were shown tonight.

491
00:34:22,680 --> 00:34:29,720
 There may be some minor changes to plant selection or individual small locations of where those

492
00:34:29,720 --> 00:34:32,920
 plants would go once they get into the full design of the site.

493
00:34:32,920 --> 00:34:38,680
 So that condition would just allow staff-level approval of those small changes to the landscape

494
00:34:38,680 --> 00:34:39,880
 plan.

495
00:34:39,880 --> 00:34:43,680
 The next one is related to the traffic signal.

496
00:34:43,680 --> 00:34:48,440
 That $400 would be deposited with the city prior to the recording of the final plat for

497
00:34:48,440 --> 00:34:53,240
 that design and construction of the traffic signal with the pedestrian crossing.

498
00:34:53,240 --> 00:34:59,520
 That $400 could be entitled to the reimbursement of the pro rata cost.

499
00:34:59,520 --> 00:35:05,000
 And this was discussed at City Council, but that reimbursement would be credited toward

500
00:35:05,000 --> 00:35:10,080
 the development of the Pebblebrook open space to provide recreational opportunities for

501
00:35:10,080 --> 00:35:12,480
 the residents once that's done.

502
00:35:12,480 --> 00:35:15,520
 The terms of that agreement haven't been hashed out yet.

503
00:35:15,520 --> 00:35:21,440
 That would be determined by a development agreement between the developer and City Council

504
00:35:21,440 --> 00:35:24,160
 should this SUP be approved.

505
00:35:24,160 --> 00:35:29,800
 The sidewalk extension, this relates to that sidewalk extension through the unimproved

506
00:35:29,800 --> 00:35:34,280
 property to the north that's not a part of this request.

507
00:35:34,280 --> 00:35:40,700
 And then the zoning map would reflect the SUP with that symbology to make sure it's

508
00:35:40,700 --> 00:35:48,280
 -- that it's the planning staff as well as anyone reviewing the property would know that

509
00:35:48,280 --> 00:35:50,880
 a specific use permit had been approved.

510
00:35:50,880 --> 00:35:55,200
 And then notwithstanding those limited approvals in condition one, we would reserve the right

511
00:35:55,200 --> 00:36:00,720
 to require a revised SUP for any changes to the site.

512
00:36:00,720 --> 00:36:05,240
 And then -- >> Excuse me, Julie, Commissioner Anderson.

513
00:36:05,240 --> 00:36:06,240
 >> Thank you, Chair.

514
00:36:06,240 --> 00:36:07,240
 Julie, could you go back one slide?

515
00:36:07,240 --> 00:36:08,240
 >> You bet.

516
00:36:08,240 --> 00:36:12,560
 >> Can you explain number two, so they're going to deposit $400,000 to have the traffic

517
00:36:12,560 --> 00:36:17,040
 signal installed and then we're going to give the money kind of back to them so they can

518
00:36:17,040 --> 00:36:18,760
 do landscaping?

519
00:36:18,760 --> 00:36:27,480
 >> Well, the pro rata cost is really -- if that entire $400,000 either wasn't used for

520
00:36:27,480 --> 00:36:37,580
 the design and installation of that light or as other developments are contemplated

521
00:36:37,580 --> 00:36:45,480
 and come in under Dutchess Drive, may have to pay into the -- into that light as part

522
00:36:45,480 --> 00:36:50,360
 of their development, as part of their impact fees with their development.

523
00:36:50,360 --> 00:36:56,280
 Any of those monies that would be credited back for those reasons would then go to the

524
00:36:56,280 --> 00:37:01,360
 development of the city's Pebblebrook open space was the intent of that.

525
00:37:01,360 --> 00:37:02,360
 >> Okay.

526
00:37:02,360 --> 00:37:08,720
 And these are the same people that are asking for the Texas or -- I was reading on here

527
00:37:08,720 --> 00:37:10,680
 a second I was looking down.

528
00:37:10,680 --> 00:37:17,760
 They're asking for money from the state to help build these apartments, too, correct?

529
00:37:17,760 --> 00:37:18,760
 >> They have -- yes.

530
00:37:18,760 --> 00:37:19,760
 They have -- >> Yeah.

531
00:37:19,760 --> 00:37:20,760
 So, yeah.

532
00:37:20,760 --> 00:37:21,760
 Okay.

533
00:37:21,760 --> 00:37:22,760
 Thanks.

534
00:37:22,760 --> 00:37:25,200
 >> Commissioner Beck.

535
00:37:25,200 --> 00:37:26,200
 >> Thank you, Chair.

536
00:37:26,200 --> 00:37:31,920
 So, are the owners of the main part of the property going to continue to be the owners

537
00:37:31,920 --> 00:37:38,880
 of the proposed commercial extension along Dutchess, at least at this time?

538
00:37:38,880 --> 00:37:42,880
 >> You know, I have -- they have not been given me any information as regarding ownership

539
00:37:42,880 --> 00:37:45,160
 of that separately platted lot.

540
00:37:45,160 --> 00:37:53,000
 So I don't know when they would sell it off or if they will retain ownership of it.

541
00:37:53,000 --> 00:37:54,000
 I'm not quite sure.

542
00:37:54,000 --> 00:37:56,600
 I think the applicant will be able to answer that, I think.

543
00:37:56,600 --> 00:37:57,600
 >> That's fine.

544
00:37:57,600 --> 00:38:00,600
 Thank you, Julie.

545
00:38:00,600 --> 00:38:02,160
 >> All right.

546
00:38:02,160 --> 00:38:06,560
 And then the second part of the recommendation is something you've seen quite frequently.

547
00:38:06,560 --> 00:38:07,880
 >> Excuse me, Julie.

548
00:38:07,880 --> 00:38:08,880
 Commissioner Smith.

549
00:38:08,880 --> 00:38:12,400
 >> Thank you, Vice Chair.

550
00:38:12,400 --> 00:38:19,600
 Julie, that $400,000 plus the pro rata back to the Pebblebrook open space, was that in

551
00:38:19,600 --> 00:38:22,040
 the original SUP that we saw on this project?

552
00:38:22,040 --> 00:38:24,400
 >> It is new information to you.

553
00:38:24,400 --> 00:38:25,400
 That was --

554
00:38:25,400 --> 00:38:26,400
 >> I didn't recognize it from the last one.

555
00:38:26,400 --> 00:38:27,400
 So what was that?

556
00:38:27,400 --> 00:38:30,160
 Was that because we didn't know from text out if we were going to put that traffic light

557
00:38:30,160 --> 00:38:33,160
 in or what was -- why was it added on this one?

558
00:38:33,160 --> 00:38:38,080
 >> That was in response -- that came up at council during the previous -- when it went

559
00:38:38,080 --> 00:38:40,760
 forward to council, the previous request.

560
00:38:40,760 --> 00:38:46,560
 It was something that the applicant offered during a city council meeting in response

561
00:38:46,560 --> 00:38:54,440
 to the concerns regarding traffic on Dutchess, the existing pressures for those vehicles

562
00:38:54,440 --> 00:39:02,200
 as they move along Dutchess for the office buildings on there as well as the existing

563
00:39:02,200 --> 00:39:04,200
 residential.

564
00:39:04,200 --> 00:39:08,760
 So that was something that was proffered by the applicant during the city council meeting.

565
00:39:08,760 --> 00:39:13,080
 >> Is that pretty common for us to see something like that where it is -- I guess Cynthia's

566
00:39:13,080 --> 00:39:18,800
 got a hand up so maybe a better sense of the thought, but is that -- it seems uncommon

567
00:39:18,800 --> 00:39:22,020
 for me to -- I've never seen something like this where we're going to pay for the traffic

568
00:39:22,020 --> 00:39:24,400
 light and then we're going to pay it back to the city but that's going to be dedicated

569
00:39:24,400 --> 00:39:25,400
 to an open space.

570
00:39:25,400 --> 00:39:29,640
 I've never seen something like that.

571
00:39:29,640 --> 00:39:33,880
 >> Commissioner Smith and the rest of the planning commission, I did want to jump in

572
00:39:33,880 --> 00:39:35,400
 on this item.

573
00:39:35,400 --> 00:39:40,960
 It is a recommendation that this be attached as a condition of approval, but there would

574
00:39:40,960 --> 00:39:46,840
 be another step, it would -- the agreement would have to be approved by the city council.

575
00:39:46,840 --> 00:39:52,740
 So as Julie had stated, it was brought up by the applicant during one of the public

576
00:39:52,740 --> 00:39:55,280
 hearings at the city council meeting.

577
00:39:55,280 --> 00:39:58,380
 That's why it was incorporated into these conditions of approval.

578
00:39:58,380 --> 00:40:02,240
 But there would be a development agreement that would have to be approved by the council

579
00:40:02,240 --> 00:40:08,200
 for this to all -- this condition to take effect.

580
00:40:08,200 --> 00:40:15,200
 >> And if I might jump in right quick, Julie, when you're presenting, it's fine to keep

581
00:40:15,200 --> 00:40:21,040
 the PowerPoint up, but ultimately when it is that we have the commission speaking, if

582
00:40:21,040 --> 00:40:24,820
 you can reduce that down so we can see all of the commission members.

583
00:40:24,820 --> 00:40:25,820
 >> Absolutely.

584
00:40:25,820 --> 00:40:27,480
 >> It's hard to remember.

585
00:40:27,480 --> 00:40:30,280
 So if anything, I'll give you a nod.

586
00:40:30,280 --> 00:40:31,280
 >> Okay.

587
00:40:31,280 --> 00:40:32,280
 >> Thank you.

588
00:40:32,280 --> 00:40:39,000
 >> Mr. Smith, did you still have questions?

589
00:40:39,000 --> 00:40:40,000
 >> I'm good.

590
00:40:40,000 --> 00:40:41,000
 Thank you very much.

591
00:40:41,000 --> 00:40:42,000
 >> Okay.

592
00:40:42,000 --> 00:40:43,000
 You bet.

593
00:40:43,000 --> 00:40:44,000
 >> You bet.

594
00:40:44,000 --> 00:40:45,000
 >> All right.

595
00:40:45,000 --> 00:40:51,440
 And then my last slide is just that, as I said, that one you typically see with SUPs.

596
00:40:51,440 --> 00:40:56,880
 It outlines what you saw on the site plan regarding the number of dwelling units, the

597
00:40:56,880 --> 00:41:00,180
 number of buildings.

598
00:41:00,180 --> 00:41:05,800
 Number one does state that there are 276 one, two, and three bedroom units in 12 two and

599
00:41:05,800 --> 00:41:07,520
 three story buildings.

600
00:41:07,520 --> 00:41:13,280
 The applicant has requested that to add an additional sentence that they may increase

601
00:41:13,280 --> 00:41:17,840
 the number of buildings so they may split one of those buildings in two, provided that

602
00:41:17,840 --> 00:41:23,160
 the number of the units in that building square footage would remain the same.

603
00:41:23,160 --> 00:41:29,480
 We do have within all of our SUPs that staff would have the ability to approve increases

604
00:41:29,480 --> 00:41:35,520
 up to and including 5% of the amount specified in that requirement number one, and then also

605
00:41:35,520 --> 00:41:42,200
 number four related to parking, but anything over 5% would require a new SUP.

606
00:41:42,200 --> 00:41:46,960
 This recommendation also lays out what the central gathering area, those amenities and

607
00:41:46,960 --> 00:41:50,480
 the amount of square footage.

608
00:41:50,480 --> 00:41:57,520
 Other open spaces, those three access points, memorializing the balcony or patio for each

609
00:41:57,520 --> 00:42:02,960
 dwelling unit, as well as decorative sconces for those primary building entrances, that

610
00:42:02,960 --> 00:42:09,800
 mix of trees and shrubs between the parking areas and building entrances, and then those

611
00:42:09,800 --> 00:42:14,160
 buildings oriented toward Luke 288 or organized around that central gathering area.

612
00:42:14,160 --> 00:42:15,640
 Finally, solid waste.

613
00:42:15,640 --> 00:42:20,440
 They are proposing some solid waste locations, but that final location be determined with

614
00:42:20,440 --> 00:42:24,760
 review of the building permit to make sure they're in just the right spot.

615
00:42:24,760 --> 00:42:29,600
 And that is concludes my presentation.

616
00:42:29,600 --> 00:42:33,200
 Any more questions for Julie on this item?

617
00:42:33,200 --> 00:42:40,880
 Okay, I have just one, Julie, and it's probably maybe for legal.

618
00:42:40,880 --> 00:42:49,820
 I was reading the draft ordinance, and on page two, it would be draft item E. We probably

619
00:42:49,820 --> 00:42:57,760
 need to edit that just for clarity because we mentioned referencing condition one, except

620
00:42:57,760 --> 00:43:00,720
 it's condition A on page one.

621
00:43:00,720 --> 00:43:03,440
 So we just may want to edit that one for clarity.

622
00:43:03,440 --> 00:43:04,440
 Sure.

623
00:43:04,440 --> 00:43:05,440
 If they should pass.

624
00:43:05,440 --> 00:43:06,440
 We'll fix that.

625
00:43:06,440 --> 00:43:07,440
 Thank you.

626
00:43:07,440 --> 00:43:08,440
 Thanks.

627
00:43:08,440 --> 00:43:09,440
 Anybody else?

628
00:43:09,440 --> 00:43:10,440
 Okay.

629
00:43:10,440 --> 00:43:11,440
 Thanks, Julie.

630
00:43:11,440 --> 00:43:12,440
 You bet.

631
00:43:12,440 --> 00:43:13,440
 Okay.

632
00:43:13,440 --> 00:43:30,320
 That brings us to our next public hearing, which will be the alternative ESA, and that's

633
00:43:30,320 --> 00:43:50,960
 Christy Upton, who I believe is here.

634
00:43:50,960 --> 00:44:00,840
 Okay.

635
00:44:00,840 --> 00:44:28,160
 Okay.

636
00:44:28,160 --> 00:44:29,160
 Good evening, commissioners.

637
00:44:29,160 --> 00:44:42,080
 My name is Christy Upton, and I am here tonight to share, sorry, there's an echo.

638
00:44:42,080 --> 00:44:48,120
 Is there a way to improve that?

639
00:44:48,120 --> 00:44:50,120
 I think I fixed it.

640
00:44:50,120 --> 00:44:51,120
 Sorry.

641
00:44:51,120 --> 00:44:57,440
 The city of Denton has adopted a set of regulations to protect the environmentally sensitive areas

642
00:44:57,440 --> 00:45:05,640
 that are found along streams and channels in our city, along with upland habitats.

643
00:45:05,640 --> 00:45:12,720
 And when land disturbances do not conform to protection requirements for the protection

644
00:45:12,720 --> 00:45:19,080
 of those environmentally sensitive areas, then an alternative ESA plan is, the approval

645
00:45:19,080 --> 00:45:23,840
 of that alternative ESA plan is required.

646
00:45:23,840 --> 00:45:32,200
 There's a set of criteria for approval that guide the plan and guide staff towards recommendation

647
00:45:32,200 --> 00:45:36,600
 for approval of that plan.

648
00:45:36,600 --> 00:45:43,160
 The request tonight is for a tract of land generally located north of Rose Lawn Drive

649
00:45:43,160 --> 00:45:47,940
 and east of railroad tracks along Highway 377.

650
00:45:47,940 --> 00:45:55,560
 There is a preliminary plat that was approved for 214 acres of a single-family detached

651
00:45:55,560 --> 00:45:57,360
 dwelling development.

652
00:45:57,360 --> 00:46:03,760
 And in order to support that development, the applicant is proposing four stormwater

653
00:46:03,760 --> 00:46:15,360
 channels that would encroach into riparian buffer ESA and water-related habitat.

654
00:46:15,360 --> 00:46:25,200
 To give you some background into what these environmentally sensitive areas, what is located

655
00:46:25,200 --> 00:46:34,240
 on this property, there was a field assessment that was conducted by a third-party biologist

656
00:46:34,240 --> 00:46:37,600
 and approved by staff.

657
00:46:37,600 --> 00:46:47,560
 The field assessment identified a tributary that crosses the creek – sorry.

658
00:46:47,560 --> 00:46:58,400
 There's a tributary called Stream HC1, and in addition to that, there is a small secondary

659
00:46:58,400 --> 00:47:04,200
 stream that's located generally about approximately right here.

660
00:47:04,200 --> 00:47:10,800
 And there's a riparian buffer that supports that stream, and by definition, that riparian

661
00:47:10,800 --> 00:47:19,160
 buffer is 50 feet on each side of the stream's centerline, so 100 feet in width total.

662
00:47:19,160 --> 00:47:23,880
 The riparian buffer was found to be in fair condition.

663
00:47:23,880 --> 00:47:31,800
 Surrounding that stream is a series of bottomland hardwood forests.

664
00:47:31,800 --> 00:47:42,320
 These are forests that survive in wetter conditions and support the water quality of the stream

665
00:47:42,320 --> 00:47:49,320
 and water that enters into that stream from land adjacent to the stream.

666
00:47:49,320 --> 00:47:55,280
 In addition, there is undeveloped floodplain, and this is floodplain areas that have not

667
00:47:55,280 --> 00:48:02,640
 been disturbed in the past or filled, and the floodplain boundary is defined by the

668
00:48:02,640 --> 00:48:07,160
 current FEMA 1% chance for the 100-year floodplain.

669
00:48:07,160 --> 00:48:15,040
 In addition, 30-plus acres of contiguous habitat was identified as cross-timbers upland forests,

670
00:48:15,040 --> 00:48:25,160
 and that is generally located on the eastern side of the creek and on the southeast corner

671
00:48:25,160 --> 00:48:30,360
 of the property.

672
00:48:30,360 --> 00:48:36,240
 Before I get into the reasons for the alternative ESA plan, I wanted to present the permitted

673
00:48:36,240 --> 00:48:40,240
 encroachments.

674
00:48:40,240 --> 00:48:48,560
 The Denton Development Code allows for up to 50% of the upland habitat to be removed,

675
00:48:48,560 --> 00:48:57,360
 so that means 50% preserved, and the applicant identified 15.1 acres of upland habitat that

676
00:48:57,360 --> 00:49:04,220
 is being set aside, and that upland habitat preservation generally will be located along

677
00:49:04,220 --> 00:49:12,480
 the creek and within the development and generally about this area.

678
00:49:12,480 --> 00:49:21,520
 The roadways that are identified on the city mobility plan are also permitted encroachment,

679
00:49:21,520 --> 00:49:28,280
 and there are two roadways that were identified on the mobility plan that will be constructed

680
00:49:28,280 --> 00:49:37,600
 by the developer, and one of those is Parvin Road, and Parvin Road will be crossing the

681
00:49:37,600 --> 00:49:48,240
 stream channel and encroaching into some water-related habitat, and civil plans have been submitted

682
00:49:48,240 --> 00:49:56,520
 for a section that will include improvements to Parvin Road, and within that civil plans,

683
00:49:56,520 --> 00:50:06,360
 there are compliance with the regulations to promote the recovery of the ESA and to

684
00:50:06,360 --> 00:50:16,040
 prevent future erosion of the creeks and the channels, and Rose Lawn Drive will be later

685
00:50:16,040 --> 00:50:24,240
 upgraded, and that will include some encroachments into the ESAs along the southern border of

686
00:50:24,240 --> 00:50:30,720
 the property, and then lastly, there are some allowances for public and private utility

687
00:50:30,720 --> 00:50:40,160
 facilities within the undeveloped floodplain ESAs, and thus this small section of the storm

688
00:50:40,160 --> 00:50:47,600
 drain channel will be encroaching into the undeveloped floodplain, and that is a permitted

689
00:50:47,600 --> 00:50:50,960
 activity.

690
00:50:50,960 --> 00:50:56,560
 The proposed deviations and the reason for the alternative ESA plan that we are presenting

691
00:50:56,560 --> 00:51:03,480
 here tonight is for four storm drain channels, which will support the residential development.

692
00:51:03,480 --> 00:51:12,640
 The width of those channels is, and 10 feet outside of the width of those channels, will

693
00:51:12,640 --> 00:51:23,020
 be the extent of the disturbance of the ESAs, and when added up, the total of the disturbances

694
00:51:23,020 --> 00:51:36,120
 of the ESAs will be approximately 0.6, less than 0.7 acres of disturbances.

695
00:51:36,120 --> 00:51:45,680
 The mitigation strategies that the applicant has offered is to, first of all, re-vegetate

696
00:51:45,680 --> 00:51:52,780
 the disturbances, so once the applicant has come in and removed the vegetation and aligned

697
00:51:52,780 --> 00:52:01,400
 the channels to allow for the drainage of the neighborhood, then they will be reseeding

698
00:52:01,400 --> 00:52:08,720
 that area plus the 10 feet outside of that area, which are also being cleared for the

699
00:52:08,720 --> 00:52:17,760
 construction, and all of that will be reseated with native grasses and other soft vegetation.

700
00:52:17,760 --> 00:52:26,400
 The plantings will also include some large trees, small trees, and shrubs that will mimic

701
00:52:26,400 --> 00:52:33,520
 some of the native vegetation that are found in the area.

702
00:52:33,520 --> 00:52:43,040
 The second mitigation strategy is to go 10 feet outside of the disturbed areas and do

703
00:52:43,040 --> 00:52:48,980
 a selective removal of invasive Chinese privet.

704
00:52:48,980 --> 00:52:57,920
 During the field assessment, the field biologists identify 10 to 50 percent infestation in different

705
00:52:57,920 --> 00:53:08,040
 areas across this channel, and they are proposing to selectively remove that privet and to re-vegetate

706
00:53:08,040 --> 00:53:14,440
 the area where they have removed the privet with native grasses and, again, soft plant

707
00:53:14,440 --> 00:53:27,400
 materials that will hopefully or intentionally will crowd out any future privet from reinvesting

708
00:53:27,400 --> 00:53:29,920
 the area.

709
00:53:29,920 --> 00:53:38,880
 There were notifications sent out, the 200-foot legal notice that was sent, we received responses.

710
00:53:38,880 --> 00:53:47,500
 Five were in opposition, three were in favor, and one was neutral, and the concerns of those

711
00:53:47,500 --> 00:53:59,240
 who were in opposition mostly were in expression of things that had been addressed by review

712
00:53:59,240 --> 00:54:05,440
 of the preliminary plat and confirming that the preliminary plat meets the minimum requirements

713
00:54:05,440 --> 00:54:08,960
 of the Debt and Development Code.

714
00:54:08,960 --> 00:54:15,000
 There was a neighborhood meeting on July 14th, and at that neighborhood meeting there were

715
00:54:15,000 --> 00:54:23,440
 34 participants, and, again, most of the concerns were items that were addressed at the preliminary

716
00:54:23,440 --> 00:54:26,400
 plat.

717
00:54:26,400 --> 00:54:34,920
 And after reviewing the plan against the criteria for approval, staff is recommending approval

718
00:54:34,920 --> 00:54:45,080
 for this request, and we have placed the following conditions for approval, and the first one

719
00:54:45,080 --> 00:54:50,920
 would be to limit the land disturbances to the amounts that were expressed in the alternative

720
00:54:50,920 --> 00:54:58,320
 ESA plan, and then in discussions with the applicant, they have agreed to identify heritage

721
00:54:58,320 --> 00:55:10,000
 or quality trees that might be within the path of these channels and to make a consideration

722
00:55:10,000 --> 00:55:16,200
 in the location of those channels to avoid those heritage or quality trees, and then

723
00:55:16,200 --> 00:55:23,080
 at the end of the project to provide the meets and bounds for environmental services to record

724
00:55:23,080 --> 00:55:33,840
 where those disturbances occurred, and then the revegetation of the areas that were disturbed,

725
00:55:33,840 --> 00:55:40,560
 and then the fourth and fifth condition of approval is something that environmental services

726
00:55:40,560 --> 00:55:51,200
 and general requests where we request an annual report to confirm that the area has been vegetated

727
00:55:51,200 --> 00:56:01,400
 as shown in the alternative ESA plan, and that we can gain some guarantee of the survivability

728
00:56:01,400 --> 00:56:02,680
 of the plants.

729
00:56:02,680 --> 00:56:07,760
 Are there any questions?

730
00:56:07,760 --> 00:56:13,960
 We're back.

731
00:56:13,960 --> 00:56:24,880
 Can you help me understand when the postponement from prior meeting was asked for, it was partly

732
00:56:24,880 --> 00:56:33,120
 on the grounds to work with neighborhood residents in the vicinity and make changes from what

733
00:56:33,120 --> 00:56:39,360
 would have been the prior submission to this current one, can you help me understand what

734
00:56:39,360 --> 00:56:44,280
 those changes are between the prior submission and this one?

735
00:56:44,280 --> 00:56:50,320
 That was a request made by the planning and development services and the parks and recs

736
00:56:50,320 --> 00:56:58,960
 department, and I would defer to the planning department to explain that request.

737
00:56:58,960 --> 00:57:09,600
 Is Richard available?

738
00:57:09,600 --> 00:57:11,160
 Can you hear me?

739
00:57:11,160 --> 00:57:12,160
 Yes.

740
00:57:12,160 --> 00:57:16,920
 Am I on for P&V?

741
00:57:16,920 --> 00:57:21,360
 Yes, we can hear you.

742
00:57:21,360 --> 00:57:27,200
 The reason for the postponement was for us to try to work with the applicant to preserve

743
00:57:27,200 --> 00:57:31,560
 additional canopy area.

744
00:57:31,560 --> 00:57:40,640
 That was the area that was part of the upland habitat that they were permitted to remove.

745
00:57:40,640 --> 00:57:43,720
 Staff still is working on that.

746
00:57:43,720 --> 00:57:50,800
 I believe we're going to be going back now to council on the 11th for discussion, but

747
00:57:50,800 --> 00:57:59,640
 we are still in the works of looking to possibly acquire land for additional tree preservation.

748
00:57:59,640 --> 00:58:08,200
 Richard or Christy or whoever is the appropriate person, I understand that this alternate ESA,

749
00:58:08,200 --> 00:58:13,280
 actually I'm just going to make a comment, the stuff along the riparian edges along the

750
00:58:13,280 --> 00:58:18,360
 creek bed is really well done, and I applaud Kimley-Horn for the efforts that they went

751
00:58:18,360 --> 00:58:19,760
 to along the creek.

752
00:58:19,760 --> 00:58:25,400
 I think the areas that are leading to contention with the neighborhood folks is that cross

753
00:58:25,400 --> 00:58:28,280
 timbers upland region.

754
00:58:28,280 --> 00:58:33,800
 My question is, if we're still in the process of working this out, how is it that we can

755
00:58:33,800 --> 00:58:36,520
 approve the alternate ESA?

756
00:58:36,520 --> 00:58:40,920
 Is the cross timbers not included as part of the alternate ESA?

757
00:58:40,920 --> 00:58:43,560
 That is correct.

758
00:58:43,560 --> 00:58:49,880
 The alternate ESA plan that is being proposed tonight is for the encroachment of the four

759
00:58:49,880 --> 00:58:57,840
 channels, and not part of any discussion of the cross timbers upland habitat.

760
00:58:57,840 --> 00:58:58,840
 All right.

761
00:58:58,840 --> 00:59:04,480
 Thank you for clarifying that, Christy, I appreciate it.

762
00:59:04,480 --> 00:59:05,480
 Anybody else?

763
00:59:05,480 --> 00:59:11,520
 Christy, I have just one quick question on the recommendation, the number two, the way

764
00:59:11,520 --> 00:59:12,520
 it's worded.

765
00:59:12,520 --> 00:59:17,280
 So, when we say the applicant will consider preservation of heritage and quality trees,

766
00:59:17,280 --> 00:59:23,320
 we're really not holding them to anything then, correct, with the way we worded that?

767
00:59:23,320 --> 00:59:28,400
 I believe the applicant can speak to this more.

768
00:59:28,400 --> 00:59:39,440
 They do intend to present tonight, and from what I understand, there is some ability to

769
00:59:39,440 --> 00:59:51,840
 consider the final location of the channels, and this is just an ability of theirs to modify

770
00:59:51,840 --> 00:59:57,880
 the location so that if they identify some quality heritage trees, that we are giving

771
00:59:57,880 --> 01:00:01,480
 them some flexibility in the placement of those channels.

772
01:00:01,480 --> 01:00:08,340
 Yeah, it's just the way it's worded, the applicant will consider the preservation.

773
01:00:08,340 --> 01:00:11,460
 Maybe they will, maybe they won't, it's odd, but I'll ask the applicant.

774
01:00:11,460 --> 01:00:14,460
 Thank you.

775
01:00:14,460 --> 01:00:16,280
 Okay.

776
01:00:16,280 --> 01:00:18,280
 Anybody else?

777
01:00:18,280 --> 01:00:24,120
 Okay, commissioners, that is the end of our agenda.

778
01:00:24,120 --> 01:00:28,680
 We are effectively at the time for our public meeting.

779
01:00:28,680 --> 01:00:34,400
 Do you all need a quick break before, or can we go right into that?

780
01:00:34,400 --> 01:00:39,480
 Consensus.

781
01:00:39,480 --> 01:00:43,400
 I wouldn't mind like a little five-minute break just to grab a snack real quick.

782
01:00:43,400 --> 01:00:44,400
 Okay.

783
01:00:44,400 --> 01:00:51,920
 So, at 632, I will call the work session closed, and we will reconvene in five minutes.

784
01:00:51,920 --> 01:00:52,920
 Okay.

785
01:00:52,920 --> 01:00:53,920
 Does that work?

786
01:00:53,920 --> 01:00:54,920
 Thanks.

787
01:00:54,920 --> 01:01:08,280
 Good evening, and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for

788
01:01:08,280 --> 01:01:12,160
 Wednesday, August 5th, 2020.

789
01:01:12,160 --> 01:01:16,820
 With a quorum present, I will call our meeting to order at 645 p.m.

790
01:01:16,820 --> 01:01:18,440
 Thank you for your patience.

791
01:01:18,440 --> 01:01:23,300
 Let the record show that Chair Roselle is absent tonight from our meeting.

792
01:01:23,300 --> 01:01:32,200
 Our first agenda item is to honor the U.S. and Texas flag, so please join me in the Pledge

793
01:01:32,200 --> 01:01:33,500
 of Allegiance.

794
01:01:33,500 --> 01:01:40,000
 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for

795
01:01:40,000 --> 01:01:49,960
 which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

796
01:01:49,960 --> 01:01:58,600
 On the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one nation

797
01:01:58,600 --> 01:02:03,600
 indivisible.

798
01:02:03,600 --> 01:02:04,600
 Thank you.

799
01:02:04,600 --> 01:02:10,640
 Our next agenda item is to consider the approval of the Planning and Zoning Minutes for July

800
01:02:10,640 --> 01:02:11,640
 22nd.

801
01:02:11,640 --> 01:02:14,880
 The Chair would entertain a motion.

802
01:02:14,880 --> 01:02:15,880
 Commissioner Beck?

803
01:02:15,880 --> 01:02:17,800
 I move for approval.

804
01:02:17,800 --> 01:02:21,040
 Is there a second?

805
01:02:21,040 --> 01:02:22,040
 Commissioner Anderson?

806
01:02:22,040 --> 01:02:23,040
 Second.

807
01:02:23,040 --> 01:02:24,040
 Okay.

808
01:02:24,040 --> 01:02:29,360
 We've got a first and a second for approval of the July 22nd minutes.

809
01:02:29,360 --> 01:02:32,680
 We will take a vote by roll call.

810
01:02:32,680 --> 01:02:33,680
 Commissioner Beck?

811
01:02:33,680 --> 01:02:34,680
 Aye.

812
01:02:34,680 --> 01:02:35,680
 Commissioner Anderson?

813
01:02:35,680 --> 01:02:36,680
 Aye.

814
01:02:36,680 --> 01:02:37,680
 Commissioner Cole?

815
01:02:37,680 --> 01:02:38,680
 Aye.

816
01:02:38,680 --> 01:02:39,680
 Commissioner Prunetta?

817
01:02:39,680 --> 01:02:40,680
 I recuse.

818
01:02:40,680 --> 01:02:41,680
 I was absent.

819
01:02:41,680 --> 01:02:48,080
 Oh, you can still actually vote on the minutes.

820
01:02:48,080 --> 01:02:50,360
 Then aye.

821
01:02:50,360 --> 01:02:51,360
 Commissioner Smith?

822
01:02:51,360 --> 01:02:52,360
 Aye.

823
01:02:52,360 --> 01:02:54,600
 And the Chair is an aye.

824
01:02:54,600 --> 01:02:59,760
 That motion passes 6-0.

825
01:02:59,760 --> 01:03:03,920
 Next on our agenda is the Consent Agenda.

826
01:03:03,920 --> 01:03:07,320
 Does anyone want to pull anything from Consent?

827
01:03:07,320 --> 01:03:08,320
 Commissioner Beck?

828
01:03:08,320 --> 01:03:09,760
 Thank you, Chair.

829
01:03:09,760 --> 01:03:15,840
 I think given the feedback that we've been seeing, I'd like to request that Items 3C and

830
01:03:15,840 --> 01:03:22,120
 3D about Agave Ranch development be pulled for individual consideration and discussion.

831
01:03:22,120 --> 01:03:23,120
 Okay.

832
01:03:23,120 --> 01:03:29,200
 We will pull Item 3C and 3D.

833
01:03:29,200 --> 01:03:39,720
 Those will become individual consideration, Items C and D. So with that, we can move

834
01:03:39,720 --> 01:03:42,120
 to a motion on Consent.

835
01:03:42,120 --> 01:03:43,120
 Commissioner Smith?

836
01:03:43,120 --> 01:03:47,440
 I make a motion to approve Consent Agenda Items A and B.

837
01:03:47,440 --> 01:03:48,440
 Okay.

838
01:03:48,440 --> 01:03:51,440
 Commissioner Anderson?

839
01:03:51,440 --> 01:03:52,440
 Second the motion.

840
01:03:52,440 --> 01:03:53,440
 Okay.

841
01:03:53,440 --> 01:03:58,600
 We have a first and a second to approve Consent Agenda Items 3A and 3B.

842
01:03:58,600 --> 01:04:00,600
 Any discussion?

843
01:04:00,600 --> 01:04:02,320
 Okay.

844
01:04:02,320 --> 01:04:05,280
 Seeing none, we'll call for a vote by roll call.

845
01:04:05,280 --> 01:04:06,280
 Commissioner Smith?

846
01:04:06,280 --> 01:04:07,280
 Aye.

847
01:04:07,280 --> 01:04:08,280
 Commissioner Anderson?

848
01:04:08,280 --> 01:04:09,280
 Aye.

849
01:04:09,280 --> 01:04:10,280
 Commissioner Smith?

850
01:04:10,280 --> 01:04:11,280
 Aye.

851
01:04:11,280 --> 01:04:12,280
 Commissioner Beck?

852
01:04:12,280 --> 01:04:13,280
 Aye.

853
01:04:13,280 --> 01:04:14,280
 Commissioner Cole?

854
01:04:14,280 --> 01:04:15,280
 Aye.

855
01:04:15,280 --> 01:04:16,280
 Commissioner Prunetta?

856
01:04:16,280 --> 01:04:17,280
 Aye.

857
01:04:17,280 --> 01:04:19,360
 And the Chair is an aye.

858
01:04:19,360 --> 01:04:25,800
 Consent Agenda Items 3A and 3B pass 6-0.

859
01:04:25,800 --> 01:04:32,900
 So that will then take us to our first item that was pulled from Consent.

860
01:04:32,900 --> 01:04:40,600
 That is GDP 19001, and that's considered a request by Agave Ranch Development for approval

861
01:04:40,600 --> 01:04:43,000
 of a general development plan.

862
01:04:43,000 --> 01:04:46,400
 And I'm going to turn it over to Julie Wyatt for the presentation.

863
01:04:46,400 --> 01:04:47,400
 Good evening.

864
01:04:47,400 --> 01:04:48,400
 I'm Julie Wyatt.

865
01:04:48,400 --> 01:04:50,320
 I just have a short presentation.

866
01:04:50,320 --> 01:04:56,200
 Let me share my screen.

867
01:04:56,200 --> 01:05:04,760
 Okay, so this is GDP 19-0001.

868
01:05:04,760 --> 01:05:08,200
 This is in relationship to the Agave Ranch project.

869
01:05:08,200 --> 01:05:10,040
 You're probably somewhat familiar with it.

870
01:05:10,040 --> 01:05:15,880
 It had a rezoning request last year, and that was approved last July by City Council.

871
01:05:15,880 --> 01:05:20,320
 There were some overlay conditions related to that request.

872
01:05:20,320 --> 01:05:25,320
 And so they submitted a GDP so we could just sort of look at how all of those overlay conditions

873
01:05:25,320 --> 01:05:31,360
 work together, as well as the public improvements associated with the request.

874
01:05:31,360 --> 01:05:41,880
 So here we have the open space requirements shown in this exhibit, as well as an exhibit

875
01:05:41,880 --> 01:05:50,160
 of what the landscape buffer along FM 428 will sort of look like.

876
01:05:50,160 --> 01:06:03,220
 And then they also provided a paving plan associated with it, which shows the roadways

877
01:06:03,220 --> 01:06:06,440
 that would be associated with the development.

878
01:06:06,440 --> 01:06:13,240
 And then in your backup, there's also a utility plan that didn't come across so well, but

879
01:06:13,240 --> 01:06:18,600
 that is in your backup regarding the lift station that is proposed for this general

880
01:06:18,600 --> 01:06:23,080
 location and the connections to the water and sewer line.

881
01:06:23,080 --> 01:06:29,360
 So the applicant is on the line if you have any questions, and I can answer questions

882
01:06:29,360 --> 01:06:32,360
 as well.

883
01:06:32,360 --> 01:06:36,480
 Commissioner Beck.

884
01:06:36,480 --> 01:06:37,700
 Thank you, Chair.

885
01:06:37,700 --> 01:06:43,100
 So Julie, as you heard earlier, a lot of the comments and concerns were there didn't seem

886
01:06:43,100 --> 01:06:44,800
 to be a lot of opposition to it.

887
01:06:44,800 --> 01:06:51,440
 A development in this area was actually what is the mobility plan for this development?

888
01:06:51,440 --> 01:06:58,920
 And could you enlighten us as to the connectivity in the mobility plan proposed for this development?

889
01:06:58,920 --> 01:06:59,920
 You bet.

890
01:06:59,920 --> 01:07:00,920
 Let me share my screen again.

891
01:07:00,920 --> 01:07:10,120
 I've got some slides related to that.

892
01:07:10,120 --> 01:07:15,480
 So right now, so we have a current mobility plan, it was approved in 2015.

893
01:07:15,480 --> 01:07:18,700
 And here is the subject site located right here.

894
01:07:18,700 --> 01:07:26,960
 And you can see Hartley Field Road per this mobility plan is intended to be a collector

895
01:07:26,960 --> 01:07:34,240
 east of the site and then transitioning to a secondary arterial through the subject property.

896
01:07:34,240 --> 01:07:38,440
 In this map, you can see the proposed mobility plan.

897
01:07:38,440 --> 01:07:44,520
 There are some small changes, it's kind of removed a lot of these collectors kind of

898
01:07:44,520 --> 01:07:56,120
 crisscrossing this area and maintained that proposed Hartley Field with a secondary arterial

899
01:07:56,120 --> 01:08:03,600
 now to the east of the subject property and then cutting through the property and continuing

900
01:08:03,600 --> 01:08:04,600
 onto FM428.

901
01:08:04,600 --> 01:08:10,480
 To the north of the subject property, there will actually be a collector that transitions

902
01:08:10,480 --> 01:08:16,000
 to an arterial that is just north of the subject property.

903
01:08:16,000 --> 01:08:20,600
 If you see right here, that is just clips north of the subject property.

904
01:08:20,600 --> 01:08:26,640
 I also pulled the county thoroughfare plans because I know that this area is a mix of

905
01:08:26,640 --> 01:08:29,340
 both city property and county property.

906
01:08:29,340 --> 01:08:32,400
 So I kind of wanted to just see how those two things compared.

907
01:08:32,400 --> 01:08:39,160
 So here we have the 2017 county mobility plan with Hartley Field here.

908
01:08:39,160 --> 01:08:46,480
 And that shows a two-lane road east of the subject site transitioning to a four-lane

909
01:08:46,480 --> 01:08:50,420
 divided road near the subject property.

910
01:08:50,420 --> 01:08:56,960
 And that's consistent with what they show in their 2019 thoroughfare plan as well.

911
01:08:56,960 --> 01:09:00,000
 So I just wanted to provide that background information.

912
01:09:00,000 --> 01:09:02,520
 I also pulled a slide from the zoning case.

913
01:09:02,520 --> 01:09:06,360
 This was from the council, what was presented to the council last year.

914
01:09:06,360 --> 01:09:11,800
 So I apologize for the dates on it, but I did want to show you what the city commissioned

915
01:09:11,800 --> 01:09:18,560
 a transportation study for this entire sector of the city to see what kind of roadways would

916
01:09:18,560 --> 01:09:23,160
 be needed to support residential development in this area.

917
01:09:23,160 --> 01:09:33,040
 So this does show the future outer loop that is north of the site, which FM428 will eventually

918
01:09:33,040 --> 01:09:34,660
 connect to.

919
01:09:34,660 --> 01:09:39,160
 It shows that once again, Hartley Field sort of straightening out in this location and

920
01:09:39,160 --> 01:09:47,480
 cutting bisecting the property and then also provided that north connection as well.

921
01:09:47,480 --> 01:09:49,560
 That's really it for my presentation.

922
01:09:49,560 --> 01:09:55,380
 Let me stop sharing my screen and I'll be able to answer any questions.

923
01:09:55,380 --> 01:09:58,200
 - So some of the comments, thank you Julie, I appreciate that.

924
01:09:58,200 --> 01:10:05,160
 A lot of the comments and feedback that we got seemed to suggest that during neighborhood

925
01:10:05,160 --> 01:10:13,080
 engagement phases of this development and during various council actions, the citizens

926
01:10:13,080 --> 01:10:19,760
 were led to believe that the connectivity would be connecting in north.

927
01:10:19,760 --> 01:10:28,680
 And maybe that they may not have organized or supported or deferred or fought, whatever

928
01:10:28,680 --> 01:10:35,520
 appropriate verb we want to use with that understanding.

929
01:10:35,520 --> 01:10:42,680
 So is there anything precluding the mobility plan or changes or development from the developer

930
01:10:42,680 --> 01:10:48,440
 from moving more northward as the citizens have suggested?

931
01:10:48,440 --> 01:10:57,280
 - There wasn't a condition in the zoning case related to Hartley Field and the position

932
01:10:57,280 --> 01:10:58,560
 of it.

933
01:10:58,560 --> 01:11:04,000
 The mobility plan does indicate that a roadway should be in that general area.

934
01:11:04,000 --> 01:11:12,320
 Now the mobility plan is schematic, so it sort of depends on how the project moves forward.

935
01:11:12,320 --> 01:11:18,640
 So but that mobility plan does show that connection in that general area.

936
01:11:18,640 --> 01:11:26,120
 - And if we were to connect new Hartley Field, whatever the roundabout lollipop there in

937
01:11:26,120 --> 01:11:33,160
 the middle of the proposed plan to the existing dogleg, would we have to, would some sort

938
01:11:33,160 --> 01:11:39,520
 of property exchange have to happen to make that happen?

939
01:11:39,520 --> 01:11:40,960
 - Well there is a gap.

940
01:11:40,960 --> 01:11:47,200
 So Agave Ranch is proposing to dedicate the right of way for the future Hartley Field

941
01:11:47,200 --> 01:11:53,580
 alignment, as well as with the development, they would have to build portions of that.

942
01:11:53,580 --> 01:12:00,400
 But there is a gap just to the east of the subject site that is not under control of

943
01:12:00,400 --> 01:12:01,400
 the city.

944
01:12:01,400 --> 01:12:07,140
 So the future development of Hartley Field would require either right of way dedication

945
01:12:07,140 --> 01:12:10,680
 or acquisition of some sort.

946
01:12:10,680 --> 01:12:19,280
 But there is, you're suggesting that there is some flexibility in the mobility plan and

947
01:12:19,280 --> 01:12:27,700
 in the layout such that this is a possibility if the developer were to be amenable.

948
01:12:27,700 --> 01:12:32,000
 - Well the mobility plan does show Hartley Field in that general location.

949
01:12:32,000 --> 01:12:38,860
 I am not, you know, they work with engineering regarding these developments and getting the

950
01:12:38,860 --> 01:12:42,500
 roads in the right places.

951
01:12:42,500 --> 01:12:47,800
 So the applicant is on the line and they may be able to answer questions regarding, you

952
01:12:47,800 --> 01:12:51,840
 know, the decision making that they have made.

953
01:12:51,840 --> 01:12:56,440
 But the mobility plan does call for a road in this general location.

954
01:12:56,440 --> 01:13:02,640
 - All right, I'll hold questions for other, thank you.

955
01:13:02,640 --> 01:13:03,640
 - Commissioner Anderson.

956
01:13:03,640 --> 01:13:06,160
 - Thank you, Chair.

957
01:13:06,160 --> 01:13:10,520
 Really my understanding in reading all the comments that we did receive today and, you

958
01:13:10,520 --> 01:13:16,440
 know, me growing up in that area and I know that area very well is initially the road

959
01:13:16,440 --> 01:13:21,180
 was not gonna connect there, it was gonna be north like Commissioner Beck said.

960
01:13:21,180 --> 01:13:26,240
 And now, you know, apparently everybody in Hartley Field area was kind of on board.

961
01:13:26,240 --> 01:13:28,640
 They don't mind having new neighbors.

962
01:13:28,640 --> 01:13:35,240
 It's just you don't want them to have all this traffic coming through as quiet community.

963
01:13:35,240 --> 01:13:42,360
 And as Commissioner Beck expressed a second ago, having the road north like many of the

964
01:13:42,360 --> 01:13:46,580
 people and many of the residents thought it was gonna be.

965
01:13:46,580 --> 01:13:55,080
 Now they are kind of given a quick present like, oh, sorry, you know, now it's gonna

966
01:13:55,080 --> 01:14:00,160
 connect to your major area and sorry, neighbor A, you're gonna lose, Mr. Smith, you're gonna

967
01:14:00,160 --> 01:14:05,480
 lose part of your yard and sorry, Ms. Ellis, you're gonna lose your house.

968
01:14:05,480 --> 01:14:09,960
 And I don't see how that would be very feasible.

969
01:14:09,960 --> 01:14:18,320
 I mean, that's kind of, we want, in our plan, it says we're gonna protect the rural areas.

970
01:14:18,320 --> 01:14:23,920
 And here we are trying to take away somebody's property and somebody's house just to connect

971
01:14:23,920 --> 01:14:25,880
 a new development.

972
01:14:25,880 --> 01:14:32,880
 I mean, as Commissioner Beck said again, is there a way to move the road further north?

973
01:14:32,880 --> 01:14:39,480
 Well, let me share my screen again.

974
01:14:39,480 --> 01:14:48,560
 And I apologize, I am not, I'm not quite sure what the discussion was.

975
01:14:48,560 --> 01:14:53,600
 There is a road that is north and it is just, it's north of the subject site.

976
01:14:53,600 --> 01:15:00,240
 And I don't know if that is the one that's being referenced.

977
01:15:00,240 --> 01:15:08,400
 But the mobility plan has, you know, that was adopted in 2015 has shown this sort of

978
01:15:08,400 --> 01:15:23,520
 straightening out alignment of Hartley Field kind of in this manner.

979
01:15:23,520 --> 01:15:24,800
 I think Scott wants to jump in.

980
01:15:24,800 --> 01:15:25,800
 Sure.

981
01:15:25,800 --> 01:15:30,640
 Yes, I was just gonna let you know that the traffic engineering is on the line if needed,

982
01:15:30,640 --> 01:15:31,640
 Julie.

983
01:15:31,640 --> 01:15:32,640
 Oh, great.

984
01:15:32,640 --> 01:15:35,080
 Thank you.

985
01:15:35,080 --> 01:15:40,800
 And he may be able to better explain the mobility plan.

986
01:15:40,800 --> 01:15:42,800
 Commissioner Burnetta.

987
01:15:42,800 --> 01:15:50,040
 Yeah, and kind of along those lines, we did get a number of, you know, basically responses

988
01:15:50,040 --> 01:15:51,660
 on this one.

989
01:15:51,660 --> 01:15:56,000
 When it came through and it finally passed at P&Z last year that, you know, the approval

990
01:15:56,000 --> 01:16:01,960
 for Agave had had quite an evolution of going back and forth with the developers and the

991
01:16:01,960 --> 01:16:07,480
 people in the area, I know that at the time we made the bill when we finally approved

992
01:16:07,480 --> 01:16:15,520
 it prior to that, we kind of made sure that we were providing a good transition, basically

993
01:16:15,520 --> 01:16:17,920
 to rule.

994
01:16:17,920 --> 01:16:24,480
 In that one of the discussions that we had was was Hartley Field Road and the I guess

995
01:16:24,480 --> 01:16:29,960
 the question I have right now is that a lot of the responses tend to imply that there's

996
01:16:29,960 --> 01:16:37,560
 going to be basically an impact on properties, homes, wells, things like that with the way

997
01:16:37,560 --> 01:16:40,640
 that the Hartley Field Road extension is going to go now.

998
01:16:40,640 --> 01:16:46,720
 I don't remember that being part of any consideration that we had once we approved.

999
01:16:46,720 --> 01:16:52,240
 Is this something that's missing from the presentation or is this a change?

1000
01:16:52,240 --> 01:16:58,600
 Because once again, when we had the vote last time, we had a very strong consensus among

1001
01:16:58,600 --> 01:17:00,960
 the local community for that area.

1002
01:17:00,960 --> 01:17:01,960
 We don't have that now.

1003
01:17:01,960 --> 01:17:09,560
 And I'm just trying to get a grasp of what changed, you know, because when I look at

1004
01:17:09,560 --> 01:17:13,640
 what we have right here and hear the presentation, it seems like everything should be the same,

1005
01:17:13,640 --> 01:17:15,080
 but obviously it's not.

1006
01:17:15,080 --> 01:17:20,520
 So maybe that's a question for traffic engineering, but I'm just trying to get a grasp of the

1007
01:17:20,520 --> 01:17:26,260
 full impact of what's different because the opposition is significantly stronger than

1008
01:17:26,260 --> 01:17:36,320
 one would have expected after the kind of group approval we had last summer.

1009
01:17:36,320 --> 01:17:42,520
 And I might want to have transportation talk about, I'm not aware of any changes to the

1010
01:17:42,520 --> 01:17:48,320
 mobility plan that have taken place since 2015, but transportation may be able to answer

1011
01:17:48,320 --> 01:17:50,600
 any questions regarding that.

1012
01:17:50,600 --> 01:17:52,760
 We're working on getting Brian and John unmuted.

1013
01:17:52,760 --> 01:17:53,760
 Okay.

1014
01:17:53,760 --> 01:17:58,400
 And Julie, if I could jump in, maybe you can explain to the commission.

1015
01:17:58,400 --> 01:18:04,640
 Is this something, because it's on the mobility plan, is this something that they had to include

1016
01:18:04,640 --> 01:18:09,880
 because it's in the mobility plan to extend this road?

1017
01:18:09,880 --> 01:18:10,880
 Yes.

1018
01:18:10,880 --> 01:18:15,400
 When we have a development, and this is just in general, when we have a development that

1019
01:18:15,400 --> 01:18:21,920
 intersects with a road that is on the mobility plan, it is the intent of the city to get

1020
01:18:21,920 --> 01:18:28,840
 the right of way dedication and have the development construct that road as shown on the mobility

1021
01:18:28,840 --> 01:18:29,840
 plan.

1022
01:18:29,840 --> 01:18:34,960
 So that's pretty typical of the developments, and in this case, it was something that because

1023
01:18:34,960 --> 01:18:40,120
 the mobility plan shows that road was something that was required because that is our adopted

1024
01:18:40,120 --> 01:18:42,880
 plan.

1025
01:18:42,880 --> 01:18:49,200
 Is there flexibility in that requirement or no?

1026
01:18:49,200 --> 01:18:53,620
 You know, the final, as I said, that mobility plan is schematic.

1027
01:18:53,620 --> 01:19:00,400
 So as you probably recall in that 2015 plan, that the road kind of jogged a little bit,

1028
01:19:00,400 --> 01:19:02,640
 sort of jogged around that pond.

1029
01:19:02,640 --> 01:19:11,320
 So there is flexibility, I believe, and Brian may be able to more fully expound on it, of

1030
01:19:11,320 --> 01:19:17,480
 in general, or the specifics of the road, but in general, it needs to go from the kind

1031
01:19:17,480 --> 01:19:19,400
 of the established point A to the point B.

1032
01:19:19,400 --> 01:19:20,400
 Okay.

1033
01:19:20,400 --> 01:19:21,400
 Thanks, Julie.

1034
01:19:21,400 --> 01:19:25,560
 Commissioner Beck, did you have a question before we bring in traffic?

1035
01:19:25,560 --> 01:19:26,560
 No.

1036
01:19:26,560 --> 01:19:27,560
 I raised my hand.

1037
01:19:27,560 --> 01:19:28,560
 Thank you, Chair.

1038
01:19:28,560 --> 01:19:30,600
 I raised my hand to get the traffic engineer in.

1039
01:19:30,600 --> 01:19:31,600
 I was nodding for that.

1040
01:19:31,600 --> 01:19:35,400
 So if we could, however we can integrate that discussion, I'd like to hear that.

1041
01:19:35,400 --> 01:19:36,400
 Okay, great.

1042
01:19:36,400 --> 01:19:37,400
 I do think he's in.

1043
01:19:37,400 --> 01:19:39,600
 So Brian, take it away.

1044
01:19:39,600 --> 01:19:41,440
 Can you hear me now?

1045
01:19:41,440 --> 01:19:42,440
 We can.

1046
01:19:42,440 --> 01:19:43,440
 Excellent.

1047
01:19:43,440 --> 01:19:51,880
 So there are a couple of points, I think one of the questions was, do they have to dedicate

1048
01:19:51,880 --> 01:19:57,600
 or do they have to propose roadways in accordance with the mobility plan, and the answer to

1049
01:19:57,600 --> 01:20:03,120
 that is yes, unless they go through an amendment process.

1050
01:20:03,120 --> 01:20:07,760
 And so those are very rare to remove a roadway.

1051
01:20:07,760 --> 01:20:14,320
 This particular extension of Hartley Field is on both the 2015 mobility plan and the

1052
01:20:14,320 --> 01:20:17,880
 proposed 2020 update to that mobility plan.

1053
01:20:17,880 --> 01:20:25,320
 So there's some consistency in showing that east-west connection, as again, as Julie said,

1054
01:20:25,320 --> 01:20:27,080
 in this general area.

1055
01:20:27,080 --> 01:20:34,680
 So we do have some leeway as far as the particular alignment.

1056
01:20:34,680 --> 01:20:36,560
 We can move it.

1057
01:20:36,560 --> 01:20:39,960
 I think we can move it up to a thousand feet without having to go through the amendment

1058
01:20:39,960 --> 01:20:49,760
 process, north or south in this case, but the mobility plan does compel the right-of-way

1059
01:20:49,760 --> 01:20:56,240
 dedication and it does require compliance, at least to the level of you're providing

1060
01:20:56,240 --> 01:21:00,120
 a connection, as Julie said, from the point A to the point B.

1061
01:21:00,120 --> 01:21:11,960
 So I will say in the 2020 update, there is a shift to the major roadway, the larger primary

1062
01:21:11,960 --> 01:21:17,560
 arterial is shifted to the north, to that golden circle.

1063
01:21:17,560 --> 01:21:20,200
 I think it's the northern boundary of this property.

1064
01:21:20,200 --> 01:21:27,920
 That will become the primary east-west connection and Hartley Field will remain the secondary.

1065
01:21:27,920 --> 01:21:35,920
 So at most four lanes, whereas the northern connection will be up to six lanes.

1066
01:21:35,920 --> 01:21:45,000
 So we are pushing a lot of what we would consider cross-country through traffic to the northern

1067
01:21:45,000 --> 01:21:47,080
 boundary of this site.

1068
01:21:47,080 --> 01:21:53,320
 You'll still have the connection through the middle, Hartley Field, but it will not be

1069
01:21:53,320 --> 01:21:59,640
 that six lane divided arterial.

1070
01:21:59,640 --> 01:22:00,640
 Thank you, Brian.

1071
01:22:00,640 --> 01:22:01,800
 Commissioner Beck.

1072
01:22:01,800 --> 01:22:02,880
 Thank you, Chair.

1073
01:22:02,880 --> 01:22:10,060
 So Brian, if you can help me understand that they're building the connectivity to the mobility

1074
01:22:10,060 --> 01:22:16,920
 plan and Hartley Field is ostensibly going to remain the same, but the plan that they're

1075
01:22:16,920 --> 01:22:24,680
 presenting that they're forced into through the mobility plan requirements seems to suggest

1076
01:22:24,680 --> 01:22:31,120
 that that's their primary arterial in and out of the neighborhood, which doesn't precisely

1077
01:22:31,120 --> 01:22:37,040
 align with the golden circle, or I forgot the name of the road to the north.

1078
01:22:37,040 --> 01:22:43,760
 And if it's schematic, I mean, can they not match a, if we change our schematic to be

1079
01:22:43,760 --> 01:22:50,120
 more aligned to the north, then can they not then fall in line with our mobility plan by

1080
01:22:50,120 --> 01:22:51,420
 being more aligned to the north?

1081
01:22:51,420 --> 01:22:55,000
 It feels like that this would be sort of a win-win for everyone.

1082
01:22:55,000 --> 01:22:59,880
 The neighborhood would go through, the neighbors would be happy.

1083
01:22:59,880 --> 01:23:04,240
 It feels like if we're already intending the predominant traffic flow to be to the north,

1084
01:23:04,240 --> 01:23:08,080
 why don't we just make it to the north and then allow the developers to develop in that

1085
01:23:08,080 --> 01:23:14,120
 way instead of requiring them to punch through Hartley with the main arterial, or maybe I'm

1086
01:23:14,120 --> 01:23:15,120
 mixing things.

1087
01:23:15,120 --> 01:23:17,080
 Can you help me understand that, Brian?

1088
01:23:17,080 --> 01:23:27,200
 Well, so, okay, it may be that we're in kind of limbo, but if you look at the amount of

1089
01:23:27,200 --> 01:23:36,280
 property east of this site, that's going to want to get to 428, and if they want to come

1090
01:23:36,280 --> 01:23:43,360
 into town, we really don't necessarily want to push them north to bring them south.

1091
01:23:43,360 --> 01:23:49,600
 And so we want to provide that connectivity, and I think Hartley Field is the appropriate

1092
01:23:49,600 --> 01:23:50,600
 facility.

1093
01:23:50,600 --> 01:23:51,600
 We want to provide the connectivity.

1094
01:23:51,600 --> 01:23:54,480
 We just want to size it appropriately.

1095
01:23:54,480 --> 01:24:07,280
 So I don't know that I would necessarily – we could certainly model taking the Hartley Field

1096
01:24:07,280 --> 01:24:15,120
 connection out, but that particular connection does not serve just this – or is not intended

1097
01:24:15,120 --> 01:24:18,360
 to serve just this development.

1098
01:24:18,360 --> 01:24:29,320
 That is kind of a quasi-regional – not regional, but it's a major connection to 428, which

1099
01:24:29,320 --> 01:24:37,040
 is currently being studied by TxDOT to be a controlled access facility, something larger

1100
01:24:37,040 --> 01:24:38,040
 than it is today.

1101
01:24:38,040 --> 01:24:43,960
 So it's going to be a primary – 428 is going to be a primary spine into Denton.

1102
01:24:43,960 --> 01:24:51,960
 So we want to strategically place connections, and typically it's about a mile spacing,

1103
01:24:51,960 --> 01:25:02,320
 plus or minus, but we want to strategically provide connections to 428 that serves not

1104
01:25:02,320 --> 01:25:06,440
 just this property, which fronts 428, but all the property to the east.

1105
01:25:06,440 --> 01:25:17,000
 So we really – we're trying to balance local access versus more, like I said, quasi-regional,

1106
01:25:17,000 --> 01:25:21,100
 where you're – you've got a long-reach potential.

1107
01:25:21,100 --> 01:25:28,520
 Now I will say that the 2020 update, in providing that larger connection to the north, is going

1108
01:25:28,520 --> 01:25:40,520
 to remove a lot of the traffic that's not associated with anything in this area.

1109
01:25:40,520 --> 01:25:43,560
 They're simply – strictly through traffic.

1110
01:25:43,560 --> 01:25:48,240
 So anybody that's coming from the east, not – and maybe not even from Denton, but further

1111
01:25:48,240 --> 01:25:52,480
 east, they're going to have the opportunity to be on a facility that's a little bit north

1112
01:25:52,480 --> 01:25:59,000
 of here and hit 428 and either continue north or continue south.

1113
01:25:59,000 --> 01:26:06,360
 And that's why we've down – kind of downplayed the cross-section on Hartley Field versus

1114
01:26:06,360 --> 01:26:09,720
 that Golden Circle.

1115
01:26:09,720 --> 01:26:13,760
 We still need the connectivity.

1116
01:26:13,760 --> 01:26:20,720
 It's not just these 250 homes that we have to plan for, but the entirety of the area

1117
01:26:20,720 --> 01:26:24,840
 east of here that's going to want to get to 428.

1118
01:26:24,840 --> 01:26:33,560
 So we – we are shifting some of that travel, that traffic north, by providing a better

1119
01:26:33,560 --> 01:26:36,160
 facility, bigger facility.

1120
01:26:36,160 --> 01:26:41,680
 But we're still going to need to provide connectivity between ultimately Golden Circle

1121
01:26:41,680 --> 01:26:46,120
 or the Ganzer connection and 288.

1122
01:26:46,120 --> 01:26:49,680
 We need some – we need some additional access points.

1123
01:26:49,680 --> 01:26:56,800
 And again, they're building a two-lane initially.

1124
01:26:56,800 --> 01:27:02,680
 And they're dedicating right of way for an ultimate four-lane.

1125
01:27:02,680 --> 01:27:13,520
 But it may stay a two-lane for a long time until the travel patterns develop such that

1126
01:27:13,520 --> 01:27:16,320
 an expansion is required.

1127
01:27:16,320 --> 01:27:26,040
 But to remove it or to restrict it to a two-lane would require some additional effort on our

1128
01:27:26,040 --> 01:27:32,440
 consultant's part to determine whether or not then are we providing enough connectivity

1129
01:27:32,440 --> 01:27:42,520
 to 428 between the Golden Circle, the Ganzer connection that goes all the way to 35W and

1130
01:27:42,520 --> 01:27:50,680
 288, because what we don't want is people winding through residential streets because

1131
01:27:50,680 --> 01:27:53,040
 they don't want to get on the big road north.

1132
01:27:53,040 --> 01:27:57,800
 They don't want to drive north to go south, so they're going to filter their way through

1133
01:27:57,800 --> 01:28:00,920
 these residential streets to get to 428.

1134
01:28:00,920 --> 01:28:09,520
 I'd rather put them on a facility that is designed and is ready to take that travel

1135
01:28:09,520 --> 01:28:18,760
 demand than to let them just filter through roadways that are – you know, have houses

1136
01:28:18,760 --> 01:28:22,640
 fronting and more pedestrian activity.

1137
01:28:22,640 --> 01:28:29,280
 So that's really what the intent is, is to strategically identify those connectivity – those

1138
01:28:29,280 --> 01:28:37,640
 corridors, space them appropriately so that people – they want to stay on the major

1139
01:28:37,640 --> 01:28:41,720
 roadways and not find their way through neighborhoods.

1140
01:28:41,720 --> 01:28:46,240
 And I'll just follow up real briefly and then let the other commissioners chime in or let

1141
01:28:46,240 --> 01:28:50,280
 Cher have control back again, and that is, yeah, I understand that there's a balance

1142
01:28:50,280 --> 01:28:56,800
 of needs for the larger development plan, but it feels like now is the opportune time

1143
01:28:56,800 --> 01:29:03,880
 to balance the existing property rights needs and traffic patterns of neighbors that weren't

1144
01:29:03,880 --> 01:29:11,800
 actually opposing this development but are more concerned about how it impacts their

1145
01:29:11,800 --> 01:29:19,940
 property values, their community, their consistency of life in this region, especially given the

1146
01:29:19,940 --> 01:29:24,000
 schematic and sort of semi-flexible nature of an ongoing development.

1147
01:29:24,000 --> 01:29:30,360
 I think that we have an opportunity to try and be flexible, to try to satisfy as many

1148
01:29:30,360 --> 01:29:32,600
 of all the demands as necessary.

1149
01:29:32,600 --> 01:29:35,240
 And I'll leave it there, thank you, Chair.

1150
01:29:35,240 --> 01:29:42,240
 So let me follow up on that and make sure I understand.

1151
01:29:42,240 --> 01:29:50,280
 So the properties that are east of here, are those the neighbors that you're talking about?

1152
01:29:50,280 --> 01:29:55,040
 Yeah, and the little notch on the properties.

1153
01:29:55,040 --> 01:29:56,040
 Okay.

1154
01:29:56,040 --> 01:30:00,520
 Because I think one of the advantages we have is they're not – this development is not

1155
01:30:00,520 --> 01:30:06,960
 providing a connection on Hartley Field through this development.

1156
01:30:06,960 --> 01:30:08,560
 It stops.

1157
01:30:08,560 --> 01:30:16,960
 And until development occurs east, until that property develops, there won't be a connection

1158
01:30:16,960 --> 01:30:18,960
 on Hartley Field.

1159
01:30:18,960 --> 01:30:25,000
 That roundabout, if – and I don't know if Julie has that site plan up, but the roundabout,

1160
01:30:25,000 --> 01:30:28,480
 the fourth leg is not part of their development plan.

1161
01:30:28,480 --> 01:30:33,360
 That is, they're dedicating right away, but they are not providing the connection.

1162
01:30:33,360 --> 01:30:43,120
 So Hartley Field will only serve this development until development occurs east of here.

1163
01:30:43,120 --> 01:30:50,280
 So the road – I can't read its name, my eyes are too bad.

1164
01:30:50,280 --> 01:30:57,240
 The road to the north, silver something – I forget its name.

1165
01:30:57,240 --> 01:31:03,960
 In the right on Julie's mouse, the – where there is the lift that she was discussing,

1166
01:31:03,960 --> 01:31:09,040
 that can't be the connectivity to the future roadway use?

1167
01:31:09,040 --> 01:31:10,360
 Okay.

1168
01:31:10,360 --> 01:31:14,120
 So because – is it Starlight?

1169
01:31:14,120 --> 01:31:15,120
 No.

1170
01:31:15,120 --> 01:31:16,120
 Starlight, that's it.

1171
01:31:16,120 --> 01:31:17,120
 Thank you.

1172
01:31:17,120 --> 01:31:18,120
 Yes.

1173
01:31:18,120 --> 01:31:19,120
 Okay.

1174
01:31:19,120 --> 01:31:20,120
 I understand.

1175
01:31:20,120 --> 01:31:25,600
 When we're remote, we cannot watch what's on the web because it's a 20-second delay.

1176
01:31:25,600 --> 01:31:28,640
 So I have the site plan called up on my PC as well.

1177
01:31:28,640 --> 01:31:43,320
 So Starlight possibly could, but it would need to be sized similarly to Hartley Field.

1178
01:31:43,320 --> 01:31:49,560
 I mean, what are – the potential development east of here that wants to get to 428, what

1179
01:31:49,560 --> 01:31:56,120
 our model is telling us is that you don't want that on a residential street.

1180
01:31:56,120 --> 01:31:58,840
 You want it on something bigger.

1181
01:31:58,840 --> 01:32:04,640
 And you don't want houses facing because there's going to be a lot of traffic.

1182
01:32:04,640 --> 01:32:10,720
 And so if – my concern would be that if we connected Starlight and we left it with

1183
01:32:10,720 --> 01:32:16,720
 the cross-section that it currently has, which is a two-lane residential roadway, you're

1184
01:32:16,720 --> 01:32:21,240
 going to have a lot of unhappy people because they are going to be fronting their homes

1185
01:32:21,240 --> 01:32:25,560
 on a street that's going to be carrying significant volumes.

1186
01:32:25,560 --> 01:32:29,360
 We can't force everyone to use that northern connection.

1187
01:32:29,360 --> 01:32:33,360
 We want to provide it, and that's what our 2020 update does.

1188
01:32:33,360 --> 01:32:37,520
 That northern – for this property, it's the northern boundary.

1189
01:32:37,520 --> 01:32:39,720
 We're enhancing that roadway.

1190
01:32:39,720 --> 01:32:43,060
 We're making it a little bit bigger, more capacity.

1191
01:32:43,060 --> 01:32:45,360
 We want people to use that.

1192
01:32:45,360 --> 01:32:53,680
 But people are going to find – if we don't provide anything between what is Golden Circle

1193
01:32:53,680 --> 01:33:01,260
 and 288, if we don't provide a larger roadway that connects east-west to 428, we're going

1194
01:33:01,260 --> 01:33:06,080
 to have a lot of neighborhood infiltration, and that's what we try to avoid.

1195
01:33:06,080 --> 01:33:07,080
 Okay.

1196
01:33:07,080 --> 01:33:12,760
 I will back off for a while and let other commissioners talk.

1197
01:33:12,760 --> 01:33:17,120
 Thank you.

1198
01:33:17,120 --> 01:33:18,120
 Commissioner Anderson.

1199
01:33:18,120 --> 01:33:20,640
 Thank you, Chair.

1200
01:33:20,640 --> 01:33:24,200
 John, thanks for answering some of these questions.

1201
01:33:24,200 --> 01:33:28,400
 But I do have – I mean, Brian, sorry about that.

1202
01:33:28,400 --> 01:33:32,960
 You made a statement that is what the residents are saying.

1203
01:33:32,960 --> 01:33:39,920
 They don't want all the east traffic coming through their two-lane neighborhood with their

1204
01:33:39,920 --> 01:33:42,500
 houses facing the streets.

1205
01:33:42,500 --> 01:33:46,040
 And that's what I think the extension eventually of Hartley Field is going to do.

1206
01:33:46,040 --> 01:33:52,280
 It's going to cut through this nice, quiet, rural neighborhood with houses facing a two-lane,

1207
01:33:52,280 --> 01:33:56,960
 non-divided road, and you're going to make it a four-lane street, and you're going to

1208
01:33:56,960 --> 01:34:01,480
 take up some of their yards, and that's what they don't want.

1209
01:34:01,480 --> 01:34:06,880
 They don't want all this traffic coming through their quiet neighborhood.

1210
01:34:06,880 --> 01:34:09,360
 And I think that's what – I think Commissioner Begg is trying to get across.

1211
01:34:09,360 --> 01:34:11,800
 I think that's what – you know, that's what I'm saying.

1212
01:34:11,800 --> 01:34:15,560
 And after reading all the comments, that's what all the residents – I mean, almost every

1213
01:34:15,560 --> 01:34:22,200
 residents in that area submitted a response today, you know, that we read.

1214
01:34:22,200 --> 01:34:25,520
 And I'm in total agreeance with them that if I live there – and like I said, I grew

1215
01:34:25,520 --> 01:34:30,240
 up out there – the trails and fishing, and that's not what I would want in my neighborhood.

1216
01:34:30,240 --> 01:34:35,480
 I wouldn't want my two-lane street becoming a major four-lane road with all the traffic

1217
01:34:35,480 --> 01:34:37,040
 because that's where people walk.

1218
01:34:37,040 --> 01:34:38,040
 They walk their dogs.

1219
01:34:38,040 --> 01:34:40,640
 They have kids on bikes.

1220
01:34:40,640 --> 01:34:44,200
 You know, you got people walking – you know, riding out there to the creeks to go – you

1221
01:34:44,200 --> 01:34:50,120
 know, go hunting and fishing, and now you're going to have a four-lane road, which is against

1222
01:34:50,120 --> 01:34:55,920
 everything that you just said about not wanting all that traffic coming through a neighborhood.

1223
01:34:55,920 --> 01:34:58,560
 And I'll let you answer.

1224
01:34:58,560 --> 01:35:02,440
 So what I said was that we need to plan for that traffic.

1225
01:35:02,440 --> 01:35:04,200
 That traffic is going to be there.

1226
01:35:04,200 --> 01:35:05,680
 That property is going to develop.

1227
01:35:05,680 --> 01:35:12,200
 We're working with a developer right now, significantly larger proposal than what we're

1228
01:35:12,200 --> 01:35:16,280
 looking at tonight, just east of here.

1229
01:35:16,280 --> 01:35:18,800
 That traffic is going to be there.

1230
01:35:18,800 --> 01:35:21,080
 But Hartley Field – okay, sorry.

1231
01:35:21,080 --> 01:35:22,080
 Right.

1232
01:35:22,080 --> 01:35:23,640
 So it's a Carter property.

1233
01:35:23,640 --> 01:35:30,440
 So what the balance – what the choice is, is do you want to leave Hartley Field a two-lane

1234
01:35:30,440 --> 01:35:37,280
 roadway that's going to have the same amount of traffic, or do you want to build it so

1235
01:35:37,280 --> 01:35:43,800
 that it attracts traffic – and I understand the homeowners.

1236
01:35:43,800 --> 01:35:51,760
 But if we don't build an adequate roadway infrastructure, then all that traffic – they're

1237
01:35:51,760 --> 01:35:57,200
 going to find a way to 428, and it's going to be down all of the little two-lane streets

1238
01:35:57,200 --> 01:35:58,200
 in this neighborhood.

1239
01:35:58,200 --> 01:36:02,080
 It's going to be on Hartley Field.

1240
01:36:02,080 --> 01:36:05,680
 You can't avoid traffic on Hartley Field.

1241
01:36:05,680 --> 01:36:06,680
 And so do you want –

1242
01:36:06,680 --> 01:36:15,280
 Why can't you go behind the houses on Hartley Field Road, and like Commissioner Beck said,

1243
01:36:15,280 --> 01:36:21,200
 and tie into Starlight, and just widen Starlight to make it a four-lane arterial instead of

1244
01:36:21,200 --> 01:36:22,960
 having people come through Hartley Field?

1245
01:36:22,960 --> 01:36:28,120
 Because right now, Hartley Field already has access to 428.

1246
01:36:28,120 --> 01:36:32,120
 And you're just going to make it wider coming through on the north side of the existing

1247
01:36:32,120 --> 01:36:33,120
 Hartley Field Road.

1248
01:36:33,120 --> 01:36:34,120
 Right.

1249
01:36:34,120 --> 01:36:43,760
 So part of the problem is where the property lines are and what is being – what's developed.

1250
01:36:43,760 --> 01:36:49,540
 And we try and straddle property lines when we look at roadways.

1251
01:36:49,540 --> 01:36:55,200
 So this particular property that's developing east of here, their northern boundary is Hartley

1252
01:36:55,200 --> 01:36:57,680
 Field Road.

1253
01:36:57,680 --> 01:37:03,040
 So I can't make a connection north of there.

1254
01:37:03,040 --> 01:37:07,640
 They don't own that.

1255
01:37:07,640 --> 01:37:18,120
 And what we would end up with is that we would end up with a future connection when the property

1256
01:37:18,120 --> 01:37:20,960
 north of those homeowners develops.

1257
01:37:20,960 --> 01:37:24,800
 But until then, all of the traffic is going to be on Hartley Field Road.

1258
01:37:24,800 --> 01:37:27,300
 We can't avoid that.

1259
01:37:27,300 --> 01:37:36,500
 And so what we try to plan for is adequate and appropriate spacing.

1260
01:37:36,500 --> 01:37:42,480
 Now there is a plan, and I don't – I'm not sure when that development's coming forward,

1261
01:37:42,480 --> 01:37:47,160
 but they have an interim plan to address the issue that you're talking about.

1262
01:37:47,160 --> 01:37:53,840
 I don't want to get – that's way off topic tonight, but they're working with the homeowners

1263
01:37:53,840 --> 01:38:04,720
 to mitigate the impact of this new Hartley Field on their existing homes.

1264
01:38:04,720 --> 01:38:17,680
 So what we have to look at is 25 years from now, 50 years from now, whether or not – how

1265
01:38:17,680 --> 01:38:20,400
 the property's going to develop.

1266
01:38:20,400 --> 01:38:27,040
 And if it's going to stay a large lot, single family, is it going to convert to a little

1267
01:38:27,040 --> 01:38:30,920
 bit higher density, like the property south of Hartley Field is going to develop?

1268
01:38:30,920 --> 01:38:34,200
 It's not going to be a large lot.

1269
01:38:34,200 --> 01:38:41,200
 And then where are the appropriate infrastructure elements that we need to plan for?

1270
01:38:41,200 --> 01:38:46,040
 We don't want to get – you know, if we push it to starlight, then how much closer

1271
01:38:46,040 --> 01:38:54,480
 – and I can answer my own question – if we push it to starlight, then the starlight

1272
01:38:54,480 --> 01:39:04,200
 connection and the Golden Circle connection are, I don't know, 1,000 feet apart.

1273
01:39:04,200 --> 01:39:11,080
 And that's – from a transportation planning standpoint, that's a little close.

1274
01:39:11,080 --> 01:39:18,920
 So we try and space them out.

1275
01:39:18,920 --> 01:39:19,920
 Can we look at that?

1276
01:39:19,920 --> 01:39:20,920
 I guess we can.

1277
01:39:20,920 --> 01:39:30,000
 But again, I – even if you propose starlight as the future alignment for the next number

1278
01:39:30,000 --> 01:39:35,400
 of years, all of the traffic with this new development is going to be on Hartley Field

1279
01:39:35,400 --> 01:39:41,200
 because that's the road that's there, and they have every right to use it.

1280
01:39:41,200 --> 01:39:42,360
 It's a public roadway.

1281
01:39:42,360 --> 01:39:50,420
 So do we leave it as a two-lane and then wait until somebody north of them develops?

1282
01:39:50,420 --> 01:39:54,960
 And then how do we get those – then there's the question of how do you get the traffic

1283
01:39:54,960 --> 01:39:59,960
 that's south – on the south side of Hartley Field through to this new connection?

1284
01:39:59,960 --> 01:40:07,400
 I mean, there's no empty – nobody's proposing a connector road.

1285
01:40:07,400 --> 01:40:13,280
 So we keep coming back to, even though it's not the best solution or not the most – it

1286
01:40:13,280 --> 01:40:22,880
 is not an optimal solution, Hartley Field Road continues to be the best solution from

1287
01:40:22,880 --> 01:40:28,240
 the mobility plan's perspective.

1288
01:40:28,240 --> 01:40:36,080
 Seeing the impact it has on existing homeowners, I totally understand that, and I'm with you.

1289
01:40:36,080 --> 01:40:42,320
 And that's why I think the developers that are proposing east of here are trying to work

1290
01:40:42,320 --> 01:40:47,020
 with the homeowners and come up with a plan where they don't have the traffic in their

1291
01:40:47,020 --> 01:40:48,020
 front yards.

1292
01:40:48,020 --> 01:40:52,640
 And we can – again, I don't want to – that's a little bit off-posting, so I don't want

1293
01:40:52,640 --> 01:40:58,760
 to talk about it, but too much, but there is some – there is a conversation that's

1294
01:40:58,760 --> 01:41:07,920
 underway with that developer and the homeowners on Hartley Field to develop some kind of middle

1295
01:41:07,920 --> 01:41:08,920
 ground.

1296
01:41:08,920 --> 01:41:12,760
 And I've seen it, and I think it's a great plan.

1297
01:41:12,760 --> 01:41:19,760
 At some point, Hartley Field is going to be what the mobility plan wants it to be, I think.

1298
01:41:19,760 --> 01:41:21,840
 It's going to be an east-west connection.

1299
01:41:21,840 --> 01:41:27,720
 You're going to have a lot more density east of here, you know, 50 years from now, 30 years

1300
01:41:27,720 --> 01:41:28,720
 from now.

1301
01:41:28,720 --> 01:41:32,200
 Those single-family large-lot developments may not be there.

1302
01:41:32,200 --> 01:41:33,200
 I don't know.

1303
01:41:33,200 --> 01:41:39,980
 But our land use plan and all of our planning efforts show us that density is going to increase.

1304
01:41:39,980 --> 01:41:45,400
 We're going to have cars that want to get to 428, and we don't want –

1305
01:41:45,400 --> 01:41:46,400
 Okay, Brian.

1306
01:41:46,400 --> 01:41:50,800
 I think I'm going to interrupt you, and I appreciate you being here and all the comments.

1307
01:41:50,800 --> 01:41:55,200
 Just to kind of get this – circle this back to what we're really dealing with here and

1308
01:41:55,200 --> 01:41:58,640
 how we can kind of move forward here with what's on the table.

1309
01:41:58,640 --> 01:42:04,140
 I believe Commissioner Pernetta had a question.

1310
01:42:04,140 --> 01:42:07,320
 Kind of a question, because there's some things that have been kind of dropped in here

1311
01:42:07,320 --> 01:42:13,480
 and there, you know, amongst what Commissioner Beck, Commissioner Anderson, and Brian John

1312
01:42:13,480 --> 01:42:15,040
 said.

1313
01:42:15,040 --> 01:42:19,040
 One of the things that seems to be the concern is you mentioned that there is a future development

1314
01:42:19,040 --> 01:42:23,600
 that is kind of not on the books yet.

1315
01:42:23,600 --> 01:42:28,480
 One of the things that we seem to hear from the local residents right now is that the

1316
01:42:28,480 --> 01:42:33,640
 decision that we make right now is going to impact how negatively future development hits

1317
01:42:33,640 --> 01:42:34,640
 them.

1318
01:42:34,640 --> 01:42:39,160
 Now, if I'm not mistaken, a lot of the people that are talking and are concerned with everything

1319
01:42:39,160 --> 01:42:43,060
 on Hartley Field Road are technically in the ETJ.

1320
01:42:43,060 --> 01:42:48,240
 So for me, a lot of this feels like, you know, what kind of neighbors are we going to be

1321
01:42:48,240 --> 01:42:50,960
 in the vote that we take right now?

1322
01:42:50,960 --> 01:42:57,400
 And it seems like right now we are going to be making a decision that negatively impacts

1323
01:42:57,400 --> 01:43:02,660
 people that are technically in the ETJ for the benefit of people who don't even live

1324
01:43:02,660 --> 01:43:06,280
 in homes that don't even exist now yet.

1325
01:43:06,280 --> 01:43:10,920
 And I, you know, you mentioned that there's some planning that can be done that can kind

1326
01:43:10,920 --> 01:43:12,120
 of alleviate this.

1327
01:43:12,120 --> 01:43:17,360
 I would hope that maybe we could kind of make some adjustments.

1328
01:43:17,360 --> 01:43:26,000
 I know we're not going to have a perfect scenario, but if we could mitigate the impact by rerouting

1329
01:43:26,000 --> 01:43:30,640
 just a little bit, I think that would be kind of the optimal thing, because once again,

1330
01:43:30,640 --> 01:43:35,040
 when we had this discussion a year ago, one of the things that we talked about was looking

1331
01:43:35,040 --> 01:43:42,640
 toward the future and trying to make sure that we didn't expedite, you know, basically

1332
01:43:42,640 --> 01:43:49,920
 high density on some nice country that's transitioning out towards other areas and trying to preserve

1333
01:43:49,920 --> 01:43:53,560
 some of what makes this area beautiful.

1334
01:43:53,560 --> 01:43:58,900
 You know, I would hope that maybe, you know, I'm not sure I can, I'm pretty sure I can't

1335
01:43:58,900 --> 01:44:02,640
 support what's going, what we're going to be voting on tonight.

1336
01:44:02,640 --> 01:44:08,100
 I would hope that there'd be some additional adjustments that took into consideration the

1337
01:44:08,100 --> 01:44:14,200
 impact of people now and didn't put quite as much weight on, like I said, homes that

1338
01:44:14,200 --> 01:44:20,360
 don't exist, neighbors we don't have, and you know, it impacts that we might regret

1339
01:44:20,360 --> 01:44:21,360
 sitting in the future.

1340
01:44:21,360 --> 01:44:22,360
 That's kind of where I am.

1341
01:44:22,360 --> 01:44:29,000
 I don't know that there's any response to that, but I just wanted to put that out there.

1342
01:44:29,000 --> 01:44:34,600
 Okay, does anybody have any more questions for Brian at this moment?

1343
01:44:34,600 --> 01:44:44,520
 Okay, I'm wondering if I believe we have the engineer for this application on the line.

1344
01:44:44,520 --> 01:44:48,800
 I'm wondering if he wants to chime in and say a few words with the discussion we've

1345
01:44:48,800 --> 01:44:49,800
 been having.

1346
01:44:49,800 --> 01:44:50,800
 Sure.

1347
01:44:50,800 --> 01:44:51,800
 Can you hear me?

1348
01:44:51,800 --> 01:44:52,800
 This is Jason.

1349
01:44:52,800 --> 01:44:53,800
 Okay, Jason.

1350
01:44:53,800 --> 01:44:54,800
 We can.

1351
01:44:54,800 --> 01:44:55,800
 Thank you.

1352
01:44:55,800 --> 01:44:56,800
 Yeah.

1353
01:44:56,800 --> 01:45:01,920
 So obviously we have gone around and around ever since we presented our first concept

1354
01:45:01,920 --> 01:45:08,440
 plans way back again over a year ago, trying to accommodate neighbor concerns as well as

1355
01:45:08,440 --> 01:45:12,080
 staff concerns and developer desires.

1356
01:45:12,080 --> 01:45:23,120
 And so the plan that we've presented with the rezoning we move forward is into the preliminary

1357
01:45:23,120 --> 01:45:26,880
 plan and receive staff feedback.

1358
01:45:26,880 --> 01:45:28,600
 We've addressed those comments.

1359
01:45:28,600 --> 01:45:31,120
 There have been some revisions to the concept plan.

1360
01:45:31,120 --> 01:45:37,200
 It looks a little bit different than the concept plan that you all saw at daring zoning.

1361
01:45:37,200 --> 01:45:44,680
 And the relocation of that Hartley Field stub, I guess, is what I'll call it as Brian kind

1362
01:45:44,680 --> 01:45:46,520
 of alluded to earlier.

1363
01:45:46,520 --> 01:45:55,440
 It ends with the traffic circle for now and probably for quite some time just due to those

1364
01:45:55,440 --> 01:46:01,320
 ponds and some other restrictions that will prevent this from punching through any kind

1365
01:46:01,320 --> 01:46:03,680
 of immediate timeframe.

1366
01:46:03,680 --> 01:46:09,080
 But that was positioned there due to spacing along 428, which is a textile roadway and

1367
01:46:09,080 --> 01:46:16,240
 has spacing requirements, access requirements that you can't have major intersections too

1368
01:46:16,240 --> 01:46:18,200
 close to each other.

1369
01:46:18,200 --> 01:46:23,200
 We looked at having Starlight has been brought up here a couple times.

1370
01:46:23,200 --> 01:46:26,920
 We had that as a residential collector when we first submitted.

1371
01:46:26,920 --> 01:46:30,120
 And we revised that down to just a local residential.

1372
01:46:30,120 --> 01:46:34,600
 Again, as Brian said, they've been modeling this area, they've been looking at this area,

1373
01:46:34,600 --> 01:46:37,120
 and we've been responding to staff input.

1374
01:46:37,120 --> 01:46:45,120
 So we've been working together to make a plan that fits with the adopted mobility plan with

1375
01:46:45,120 --> 01:46:54,280
 just engineering limitations, tech stock considerations and trying to follow what we said we would

1376
01:46:54,280 --> 01:46:56,080
 do and working with staff.

1377
01:46:56,080 --> 01:47:04,000
 And I'm not sure if moving it closer or farther north would make any sense.

1378
01:47:04,000 --> 01:47:14,060
 Again, with that next road at a northern boundary, yeah, that's the next arterial.

1379
01:47:14,060 --> 01:47:17,720
 We can't get really any closer to that and then have two arterials back to back.

1380
01:47:17,720 --> 01:47:19,960
 That doesn't make sense either.

1381
01:47:19,960 --> 01:47:24,720
 So I would just like to say that we've worked with staff, we've had four rounds of comments

1382
01:47:24,720 --> 01:47:32,000
 to get this preliminary plan, this GDP to where it is to receive staff support to put

1383
01:47:32,000 --> 01:47:33,660
 it before you tonight.

1384
01:47:33,660 --> 01:47:40,920
 And so after four submittals and resubmittals and revisions, this is what we're presenting,

1385
01:47:40,920 --> 01:47:48,280
 a plan that meets all of the city requirements and has staff support.

1386
01:47:48,280 --> 01:47:50,400
 And I appreciate that, Jason.

1387
01:47:50,400 --> 01:47:55,280
 Having watched this go back and forth with the neighborhood and seeing what a positive

1388
01:47:55,280 --> 01:48:00,880
 outcome it is, I think that's what the commission is having a hard time with, is we hate to

1389
01:48:00,880 --> 01:48:05,040
 see it go in a negative direction.

1390
01:48:05,040 --> 01:48:09,960
 Before I recognize Commissioner Smith, who I believe has a question for you, would you

1391
01:48:09,960 --> 01:48:15,160
 possibly entertain a postponement on this since so much has been brought up tonight

1392
01:48:15,160 --> 01:48:18,240
 to be considered?

1393
01:48:18,240 --> 01:48:22,160
 That would really require further discussion?

1394
01:48:22,160 --> 01:48:27,720
 It's a lot harder to do this when I can't turn around and whisper to my client and other

1395
01:48:27,720 --> 01:48:34,120
 people on our team like we normally can when we're all in church.

1396
01:48:34,120 --> 01:48:39,920
 Yeah, I'm going to have to say that we have a text thread going and so can we have a few

1397
01:48:39,920 --> 01:48:46,840
 minutes to discuss that, but basically like via text?

1398
01:48:46,840 --> 01:48:50,920
 Let me recognize Commissioner Smith in case there's further questions.

1399
01:48:50,920 --> 01:48:51,920
 Great.

1400
01:48:51,920 --> 01:48:52,920
 Thank you, Chair.

1401
01:48:52,920 --> 01:49:00,440
 It's not really a question for Mr. Bagel, but is the developer on, Jason, is your developer

1402
01:49:00,440 --> 01:49:01,440
 on?

1403
01:49:01,440 --> 01:49:02,440
 Yes.

1404
01:49:02,440 --> 01:49:03,440
 John is on.

1405
01:49:03,440 --> 01:49:04,440
 Okay.

1406
01:49:04,440 --> 01:49:07,600
 So if you have a specific question for John, you're free to.

1407
01:49:07,600 --> 01:49:11,680
 It's more just from a development standpoint, because I know from an engineering standpoint,

1408
01:49:11,680 --> 01:49:17,360
 it would be some of the question for you, too, that if moving properties around, moving

1409
01:49:17,360 --> 01:49:23,080
 plot lines around, I don't want to go too far against what Brian and John has said so

1410
01:49:23,080 --> 01:49:28,000
 far, because I think that could get you, but if it's even possible for the project to still

1411
01:49:28,000 --> 01:49:34,880
 fit within the zoning requirements where we pass through, even move these streets around,

1412
01:49:34,880 --> 01:49:41,240
 change density, you put a higher, I remember from this zoning correctly, and John and Amy

1413
01:49:41,240 --> 01:49:49,640
 or whoever else is on, if you move a higher density, higher flow for the north where Starlight

1414
01:49:49,640 --> 01:49:55,740
 is, that was a lower density area in this place, and so would that end up shifting density

1415
01:49:55,740 --> 01:50:00,040
 up there if you're putting, if you're basically taking up more land by putting a road there?

1416
01:50:00,040 --> 01:50:04,240
 You guys answer that question or maybe talk about it from a development standpoint, because

1417
01:50:04,240 --> 01:50:08,280
 it's an issue that's not being brought up that might end up affecting the zoning, that

1418
01:50:08,280 --> 01:50:12,520
 might, if we move that road around, we might end up walking you guys into a zoning issue,

1419
01:50:12,520 --> 01:50:20,960
 so I don't know if you can bring that up, I'd appreciate it.

1420
01:50:20,960 --> 01:50:24,520
 John, or?

1421
01:50:24,520 --> 01:50:30,840
 I'm not sure he's there, but I mean, that was one of the reasons I suggested the postponement,

1422
01:50:30,840 --> 01:50:35,520
 just because so much has been brought up that certainly needs more discussion and is not

1423
01:50:35,520 --> 01:50:37,320
 going to be able to be had today.

1424
01:50:37,320 --> 01:50:40,560
 Why, Jason, are you still there?

1425
01:50:40,560 --> 01:50:45,040
 So, why don't we, okay, if you're, do you need five minutes?

1426
01:50:45,040 --> 01:50:51,400
 Hey, John is on here, the developer is on here, if you guys can hear me.

1427
01:50:51,400 --> 01:50:53,000
 Okay, now we can.

1428
01:50:53,000 --> 01:50:55,360
 Okay, sorry about that.

1429
01:50:55,360 --> 01:51:05,160
 Yeah, so to go back to Mr. Smith's comment, and guys, I mean, we have, we've done every

1430
01:51:05,160 --> 01:51:14,040
 single turn that the city has asked us to do on this, I mean, we're two years into development,

1431
01:51:14,040 --> 01:51:22,800
 we do this all over the place, and I've never had this type of pushback when I as a developer

1432
01:51:22,800 --> 01:51:29,520
 and my whole team has done every single thing, placed every single road, done every single

1433
01:51:29,520 --> 01:51:36,840
 park, done, you know, fences that are over the top, ponds that are everywhere, you know,

1434
01:51:36,840 --> 01:51:42,960
 I mean, we've done everything that we can do, and we have drawn this, the subdivision

1435
01:51:42,960 --> 01:51:49,560
 probably five different times, and then I mean, we're about to kill a subdivision because

1436
01:51:49,560 --> 01:51:57,220
 we're going to run out of money, I mean, we've drawn this thing so many times, I'm $250,000

1437
01:51:57,220 --> 01:52:04,360
 into engineering on it, and you're asking me to go back in the 10th hour to do it again,

1438
01:52:04,360 --> 01:52:17,920
 and road exactly where you told me to put it, and I mean, to be honest, exactly where

1439
01:52:17,920 --> 01:52:26,360
 the city engineering road people told us to put them and exactly what they are, you know,

1440
01:52:26,360 --> 01:52:32,360
 so to come back today, and I have an issue with it, after we've gone through five rounds

1441
01:52:32,360 --> 01:52:41,880
 of reviews, it's like you don't trust your own city engineer road people, you know, and

1442
01:52:41,880 --> 01:52:48,400
 that's, I don't know where the disconnect is in this city or here tonight, you know,

1443
01:52:48,400 --> 01:52:52,680
 some people in Hartleyville road that have got your ear, which that's happened the whole

1444
01:52:52,680 --> 01:52:58,080
 time, all the way through, we're two years into it, only thing we've done is exactly

1445
01:52:58,080 --> 01:53:03,720
 what we told you would do, and exactly what you've asked us to do, and how we fix this

1446
01:53:03,720 --> 01:53:12,880
 going forward, I don't, I particularly don't know. I mean, I really, really don't. I mean,

1447
01:53:12,880 --> 01:53:16,600
 I don't know how to fix it. I mean, the next thing we do, somebody else is going to gripe

1448
01:53:16,600 --> 01:53:24,880
 about it, and we're going to be right back here again, it feels like, you know?

1449
01:53:24,880 --> 01:53:25,880
 Commissioner Smith, you still have the floor.

1450
01:53:25,880 --> 01:53:31,960
 Yeah, thank you very much. And this is not really to John, thank you for speaking up

1451
01:53:31,960 --> 01:53:37,360
 and not really so much to Jason, even though I would be willing to entertain a post-specialist

1452
01:53:37,360 --> 01:53:42,560
 if I could help, and I hate to get to you, John, but it might be good to have a discussion,

1453
01:53:42,560 --> 01:53:51,120
 but my own personal opinion on this is just that if city staff, and I shouldn't even say

1454
01:53:51,120 --> 01:53:56,360
 staff, if engineering is coming to us and saying that this, it's a pick your poison

1455
01:53:56,360 --> 01:54:02,080
 decision and really, we're trying to choose the best poison we've got available to us,

1456
01:54:02,080 --> 01:54:07,840
 it makes it really hard for me to start saying, well, I'm not a traffic engineer, not a development

1457
01:54:07,840 --> 01:54:12,300
 engineer. If I'm planning and zoning, I don't know, you'll have to talk to Chris Watts

1458
01:54:12,300 --> 01:54:16,720
 about that, but here I am three years later. But the fact of the matter is that if somebody

1459
01:54:16,720 --> 01:54:20,920
 smarter than me knows what's going on, knows what's happening with this project, knows exactly

1460
01:54:20,920 --> 01:54:25,160
 what should be done and what the bad things could be if we chose wrong, is suggesting

1461
01:54:25,160 --> 01:54:30,120
 we do it this way, it makes it really hard for me to go against that. Even though there's

1462
01:54:30,120 --> 01:54:35,240
 definitely neighbors who are going to be impacted, I get it, and I get from what Commissioner

1463
01:54:35,240 --> 01:54:39,080
 Pernetta, I get it from what Commissioner Becker said, is that we're worrying about

1464
01:54:39,080 --> 01:54:43,480
 the quality of life for people who haven't had the houses built versus the quality of

1465
01:54:43,480 --> 01:54:48,160
 life for people who already have the houses built. I get it. I think it's a crappy position

1466
01:54:48,160 --> 01:54:56,160
 to be put in, honestly, but if engineers are saying it's a choice between bad and worse,

1467
01:54:56,160 --> 01:55:01,360
 I'm going to choose bad. And so if I could just maybe make one thing before maybe hear

1468
01:55:01,360 --> 01:55:07,320
 from the engineer, if they are open to postponing it, I just, I feel really hard going against

1469
01:55:07,320 --> 01:55:12,160
 what the engineers have to say.

1470
01:55:12,160 --> 01:55:18,280
 Okay, Jason, are you there?

1471
01:55:18,280 --> 01:55:25,520
 I'm still here. I think it's really difficult to, I guess, I'm not sure what we would accomplish

1472
01:55:25,520 --> 01:55:33,480
 in a postponement. Again, like you just reiterated, Tim, we have the road where it is because

1473
01:55:33,480 --> 01:55:41,360
 that is where your city staff, your engineering staff, they've told us to put it there. We

1474
01:55:41,360 --> 01:55:50,560
 did not make that decision. So unless you think that you should tell staff that they're

1475
01:55:50,560 --> 01:55:57,680
 not the experts and that it shouldn't be in that location and the staff needs to reconsider

1476
01:55:57,680 --> 01:56:06,440
 their position and years of mobility planning and hours and hours of traffic modeling. Like,

1477
01:56:06,440 --> 01:56:11,760
 I'm not sure what a postponement would really accomplish this time. We've submitted over

1478
01:56:11,760 --> 01:56:20,800
 and over and over again to get to where we are, to flush all this out, to make the plan

1479
01:56:20,800 --> 01:56:28,440
 that we have before you. And again, we're meeting all your requirements. We're complying

1480
01:56:28,440 --> 01:56:32,600
 with the mobility plans. We're complying with all the city code. We're not asking for any

1481
01:56:32,600 --> 01:56:40,480
 changes. We're receiving staff support. I don't know how, I hope this isn't too blunt,

1482
01:56:40,480 --> 01:56:46,200
 but I don't know how PMZ would recommend a denial. Like, what would be the basis for

1483
01:56:46,200 --> 01:56:51,880
 recommending the denial? We meet all of the requirements for a preliminary plan.

1484
01:56:51,880 --> 01:56:59,280
 I think what it is, and we're talking about the general development plan at the moment,

1485
01:56:59,280 --> 01:57:06,080
 we have received 13 public comments on the online form that were emailed to all of us

1486
01:57:06,080 --> 01:57:12,180
 and submitted and recorded by the secretary. So that, it's hard to just put those aside.

1487
01:57:12,180 --> 01:57:19,840
 So trying to get answers for them, like, can it be moved at all? I think it's answers that

1488
01:57:19,840 --> 01:57:25,200
 we would need to make an informed decision and maybe be able to support as a whole. So

1489
01:57:25,200 --> 01:57:32,480
 I think that's the reason that I suggested the postponement, just because there's answers

1490
01:57:32,480 --> 01:57:38,880
 to questions that, there's questions where there haven't been any answers yet, to where

1491
01:57:38,880 --> 01:57:46,000
 we could feel comfortable facing the public who gave us these comments. You know, this

1492
01:57:46,000 --> 01:57:53,640
 is a tough area. It's rural. It's rural on the future land use map. We obviously know

1493
01:57:53,640 --> 01:57:59,680
 development's going to happen. We got community involvement and support for the development.

1494
01:57:59,680 --> 01:58:06,520
 And again, it's just hard to take a negative turn on this, that everybody, you all, staff,

1495
01:58:06,520 --> 01:58:12,200
 us, city council, I mean, that put a lot of time into to make this development work in

1496
01:58:12,200 --> 01:58:18,280
 this special area of the city. So, you know, I'm obviously just speaking for myself. I

1497
01:58:18,280 --> 01:58:23,200
 don't want to speak for everyone, but I feel that's where the comments and concerns of

1498
01:58:23,200 --> 01:58:25,560
 today are coming from with the commission.

1499
01:58:25,560 --> 01:58:31,680
 Well, and I think that, and I think that, and yes, I mean, I, like you said, this is

1500
01:58:31,680 --> 01:58:36,720
 the GDP that we're discussing. I mean, obviously the next item is the preliminary plan. You

1501
01:58:36,720 --> 01:58:41,440
 know, those are so, those are completely linked together. So a lot of what I am saying is,

1502
01:58:41,440 --> 01:58:50,240
 of course, related to the preliminary plan. And they do correlate. But I just, I don't

1503
01:58:50,240 --> 01:59:00,840
 know. I don't know what other, I guess it's, it's, it's the staff. And I just reiterate

1504
01:59:00,840 --> 01:59:07,460
 John and Tim again. I mean, staff is in position to, to guide us and to provide the input to

1505
01:59:07,460 --> 01:59:15,120
 make sure we're in compliance with the direction and the requirements of codes and, and, and

1506
01:59:15,120 --> 01:59:21,120
 of your, your comprehensive plan and of your mobility plans and, and everything that the

1507
01:59:21,120 --> 01:59:28,120
 council has approved as the, as the governing documents of the city. And that's what staff

1508
01:59:28,120 --> 01:59:34,760
 has implemented. And that is, again, then that's why it took us five rounds, five submittals

1509
01:59:34,760 --> 01:59:40,240
 to, to get that plan before you. They didn't just take our first plan and say, yeah, it

1510
01:59:40,240 --> 01:59:44,160
 looks good stamped it. No, I mean, we've spent the last several months going back and forth

1511
01:59:44,160 --> 01:59:49,440
 and back and forth and back and forth to, to make sure we were in compliance. So, I

1512
01:59:49,440 --> 01:59:57,280
 mean, we really just ask that, that we can move forward with, with the plan that, that

1513
01:59:57,280 --> 02:00:04,720
 your staff is, that the, the staff is, is, is supporting.

1514
02:00:04,720 --> 02:00:11,640
 Could I, could I interject? This is John, the developer again, just for one second.

1515
02:00:11,640 --> 02:00:20,800
 Oh, yes, sure. Okay. The, I mean, it's kind of be understood that this road is not going

1516
02:00:20,800 --> 02:00:28,320
 to plunge through people's property in the next six months or years that we're talking

1517
02:00:28,320 --> 02:00:36,640
 about 20 years from now. I mean, this is not something that is, it doesn't even have anything

1518
02:00:36,640 --> 02:00:41,080
 to do with us. It's, I mean, our road doesn't even go up and touch the edge of the property

1519
02:00:41,080 --> 02:00:48,360
 there. It was, it was told to by us to put it there because I don't know if it's five

1520
02:00:48,360 --> 02:00:53,360
 years or 25 years, that's how they want the roads to go because that's how the mobility

1521
02:00:53,360 --> 02:00:59,920
 plan is. It's, I mean, we're acting as if this road is going to be built next week,

1522
02:00:59,920 --> 02:01:02,540
 you know, or these people are going to be pushed out of their homes. Well, that's not

1523
02:01:02,540 --> 02:01:10,360
 how it works. It's as that gets developed, then like we did, we will have to give road

1524
02:01:10,360 --> 02:01:16,840
 development right away and it'll carry forward and 20 years from now it's going to, it's

1525
02:01:16,840 --> 02:01:21,800
 going to match a plan that was supposed to be a 2030 plan.

1526
02:01:21,800 --> 02:01:27,880
 Thanks, John. Julie, I believe you want to step in.

1527
02:01:27,880 --> 02:01:32,000
 Yes, it may be instructive for me to just kind of call out what those standards for

1528
02:01:32,000 --> 02:01:41,160
 approval for a general development plan are, if you'd like. So this is, this is considered

1529
02:01:41,160 --> 02:01:47,520
 under the 2002 Denton Development Code. So I am referring to subchapter 16 in that code

1530
02:01:47,520 --> 02:01:53,820
 and, and the, those conditions for, or those requirements for approval are, it conforms

1531
02:01:53,820 --> 02:01:59,220
 to the infrastructure policies identified in the Denton Plan 2030 and other city infrastructure

1532
02:01:59,220 --> 02:02:04,640
 master plan and the city's current and future parks and playground facilities. Conforms

1533
02:02:04,640 --> 02:02:10,800
 to the extension of the city's infrastructure within the municipality and its ETJ as identified

1534
02:02:10,800 --> 02:02:16,000
 by the Denton Plan 2030 and any other city of Denton infrastructure master plan. Number

1535
02:02:16,000 --> 02:02:22,920
 three conforms to any rules adopted under section 212.002 or is set forth in the application

1536
02:02:22,920 --> 02:02:27,680
 criteria manual. Number four complies with all city construction standards and number

1537
02:02:27,680 --> 02:02:34,220
 five complies with all applicable laws and subchapters. So just as your, it might be

1538
02:02:34,220 --> 02:02:37,560
 instructive to just know what those criteria for approval are.

1539
02:02:37,560 --> 02:02:41,760
 Okay. Thank you, Julie. Appreciate it. Commissioner Beck.

1540
02:02:41,760 --> 02:02:51,760
 Julie, for a GDP, can you remind me, educate me, is the preliminary plat a component of

1541
02:02:51,760 --> 02:02:58,800
 the GDP? If we were to approve the GDP, would we be tied to specific platting?

1542
02:02:58,800 --> 02:03:04,920
 So the GDP is kind of the preliminary, preliminary, preliminary plat. So all of these, all of

1543
02:03:04,920 --> 02:03:10,560
 these projects sort of build on each other. So the GDP is that foundational document that

1544
02:03:10,560 --> 02:03:16,160
 really looks at that infrastructure piece and, and all, how all of these elements associated

1545
02:03:16,160 --> 02:03:21,680
 with, with the requirements fit together. So it's sort of conceptual. It get, it drills

1546
02:03:21,680 --> 02:03:26,480
 down and gets a little more specific than with the preliminary plat. And then, and then

1547
02:03:26,480 --> 02:03:31,840
 the civil engineering plans are, are reviewed with staff and then it goes to the final plat.

1548
02:03:31,840 --> 02:03:40,320
 So they all sort of build on each other. So ostensibly, if we, if we approve the sort

1549
02:03:40,320 --> 02:03:47,840
 of general concept plan, then we are forcing the mobility plan, the roads, the platting,

1550
02:03:47,840 --> 02:03:54,240
 everything to go where they're sort of envisioning it in the plan we were presented with. I mean,

1551
02:03:54,240 --> 02:03:59,120
 there might be some light flexibility, but we are generally going to kind of have to

1552
02:03:59,120 --> 02:04:07,120
 go. And so it, it isn't just arbitrary. We are, we are establishing the way we will behave

1553
02:04:07,120 --> 02:04:16,800
 for the next 20 years. It, it, it, the criteria for approval for subsequent applications should

1554
02:04:16,800 --> 02:04:21,680
 generally conform to it. There, there can be variations and y'all have seen that in,

1555
02:04:21,680 --> 02:04:26,400
 in, in your, when something goes, say from a final preliminary plot to a final plot,

1556
02:04:26,400 --> 02:04:30,960
 there, there can be some minor variations, but generally they, the projects stay consistent

1557
02:04:30,960 --> 02:04:41,120
 throughout those projects. Thank you, Julie. Any other questions for staff or anyone on the line?

1558
02:04:41,120 --> 02:04:52,960
 Okay. Chair could entertain a motion on this item or we can have further discussion.

1559
02:04:55,280 --> 02:05:02,720
 I'm sorry, we didn't get some of our questions answered or concerns of, of the public, but

1560
02:05:02,720 --> 02:05:06,720
 we do nonetheless have to vote on the item one way or another.

1561
02:05:06,720 --> 02:05:16,240
 Commissioner Smith.

1562
02:05:16,240 --> 02:05:20,960
 Oh, you're muted.

1563
02:05:25,520 --> 02:05:30,800
 I'll make a, I'll make a motion to approve with staff recommendations. And just because I didn't

1564
02:05:30,800 --> 02:05:35,760
 hear anybody else pipe up to say anything about a post moment or something else, but going back to

1565
02:05:35,760 --> 02:05:41,280
 the original point I made this to me, just if engineers are saying this is the direction we

1566
02:05:41,280 --> 02:05:48,320
 need to go and that this is the best possible option, then I'm inclined to trust experts when

1567
02:05:48,320 --> 02:05:55,120
 I'm not an expert in an area. So that's my motion. Okay. So the motion on the floor

1568
02:05:55,120 --> 02:06:05,280
 for GDP 19001 is made for approval with staff recommendations. Is there a second?

1569
02:06:05,280 --> 02:06:17,760
 I do not see a second. So that motion will fail.

1570
02:06:17,760 --> 02:06:24,640
 Is there anyone wanting to make another motion? Commissioner Smith.

1571
02:06:25,520 --> 02:06:29,840
 Guess I'm the only one who likes making motions up in this place. I'll make a motion to postpone

1572
02:06:29,840 --> 02:06:38,160
 until the date uncertain. If we can maybe talk to Scott and see if there is a date ahead that we can

1573
02:06:38,160 --> 02:06:42,560
 reschedule them on to be put on for an item of individual consideration. I'm assuming that's

1574
02:06:42,560 --> 02:06:46,480
 where they'll go, Cynthia. It'd be an item of individual consideration, correct? Is there

1575
02:06:46,480 --> 02:06:51,280
 even told from the consent agenda? I think that would be appropriate.

1576
02:06:51,280 --> 02:06:59,040
 Commissioner Smith. Okay. So I think I'm just going to jump in just for a minute.

1577
02:06:59,040 --> 02:07:05,680
 I know we're talking about the GDP here, which is a separate vote from the preliminary plat,

1578
02:07:05,680 --> 02:07:13,200
 but the preliminary plat we could not postpone. I do not believe because of a certain house bill.

1579
02:07:15,680 --> 02:07:22,400
 Is that correct? Go ahead, Cynthia. Oh, madam chair and commission.

1580
02:07:22,400 --> 02:07:27,600
 It's my understanding that that item was submitted prior to September 1 of 2019.

1581
02:07:27,600 --> 02:07:34,160
 So it's not subject to the 30 day review period. Okay. So it is not part of the house bill shot

1582
02:07:34,160 --> 02:07:42,160
 clock, correct? That's my understanding that, and Ms. Wyatt can confirm. That is correct.

1583
02:07:42,720 --> 02:07:47,280
 Okay. I appreciate that. So with that, a motion is on the floor to postpone the item.

1584
02:07:47,280 --> 02:07:55,120
 Yeah. I was just going to say to the next meeting and then ultimately we would carry the next item

1585
02:07:55,120 --> 02:08:01,760
 with that. Okay. Then I'll, can you give me a date on what that is, Scott? Or should I just say,

1586
02:08:01,760 --> 02:08:05,680
 should I just say next meeting for you? I'm sorry. Yeah. The next scheduled

1587
02:08:05,680 --> 02:08:09,200
 meeting. I don't know the date. Okay. I'll make a motion to postpone

1588
02:08:09,200 --> 02:08:15,040
 this item to items with individual consideration until the next, next meeting day for planning

1589
02:08:15,040 --> 02:08:22,400
 and zoning commission. Okay. August 19th. August 19th. Okay. The motion on the floor to postpone

1590
02:08:22,400 --> 02:08:29,280
 this item to a date certain of August 19th. Commissioner Prunetta. I'll second that.

1591
02:08:29,280 --> 02:08:35,920
 Okay. We have a first and a second to postpone this item to August 19th. Is there any discussion?

1592
02:08:37,280 --> 02:08:44,400
 Commissioner Beck. We have to have a separate motion for the related second item. Is that

1593
02:08:44,400 --> 02:08:49,520
 correct? It is a separate item to vote on. Correct. Okay. That was my question. Thank you.

1594
02:08:49,520 --> 02:08:56,160
 Okay. Any other discussion before we take a vote? And I'll just, just say a few words. I appreciate

1595
02:08:56,160 --> 02:09:02,080
 the patience of, of the applicant on this. I do think this is a special project. I don't think

1596
02:09:02,080 --> 02:09:09,600
 anyone's trying to make it not happen. I think we just need it to be the best it can be. And we do

1597
02:09:09,600 --> 02:09:16,240
 make decisions now. Yes, the road may not be developed for decades to come, but the decisions

1598
02:09:16,240 --> 02:09:22,320
 we make now affects how that's going to happen in the future. So serious consideration of the now

1599
02:09:22,320 --> 02:09:29,120
 for the future is imperative from my perspective. So with that, I'll call for a vote by roll call.

1600
02:09:29,120 --> 02:09:35,680
 Commissioner Smith. Aye. Commissioner Prunetta. Aye. Commissioner Anderson.

1601
02:09:35,680 --> 02:09:46,240
 Aye. Commissioner Cole. Aye. Commissioner Beck. Aye. And the chair is an aye to postpone this item

1602
02:09:46,240 --> 02:09:55,840
 to August 19th. That passes six zero. So that will get us to item next for individual consideration,

1603
02:09:55,840 --> 02:10:03,840
 PP 190023. Consider a request of agave ranch for their preliminary plat. Commissioner Smith.

1604
02:10:03,840 --> 02:10:06,560
 I'll make a motion to postpone the date certain of August 19th.

1605
02:10:06,560 --> 02:10:13,520
 Commissioner Beck. I second that motion. Okay. Motion on the floor is to postpone this

1606
02:10:13,520 --> 02:10:20,320
 item to a date certain of August 19th. Any discussion? Okay. With that, I will call for

1607
02:10:20,320 --> 02:10:26,800
 a vote via roll call. Commissioner Smith. Aye. Commissioner Beck. Aye. Commissioner Prunetta.

1608
02:10:26,800 --> 02:10:36,960
 Aye. Commissioner Anderson. Aye. Commissioner Cole. Aye. And the chair is an aye. That motion passes

1609
02:10:36,960 --> 02:10:50,080
 six zero. Our next item for individual consideration is FP 200013. That's consider a request on

1610
02:10:50,080 --> 02:10:56,160
 behalf of North Texas Contracting for approval of a final plat. Staff is recommending denial.

1611
02:10:56,160 --> 02:11:02,160
 However, the applicant has requested a 30-day extension to September 2nd. Commissioner Smith.

1612
02:11:02,160 --> 02:11:09,520
 I make a motion to approve the postpone for 30 days to September 2nd. Okay. Motion on the floor

1613
02:11:09,520 --> 02:11:15,600
 is to extend to September 2nd. Commissioner Prunetta. I'll second that. Okay. We have a

1614
02:11:15,600 --> 02:11:24,160
 first and a second to postpone to September 2nd. Any discussion? Okay. Take a vote via roll call.

1615
02:11:24,160 --> 02:11:29,520
 Commissioner Smith. Aye. Commissioner Prunetta. Aye. Commissioner Anderson.

1616
02:11:29,520 --> 02:11:40,000
 Aye. Commissioner Cole. Aye. Commissioner Beck. Aye. And the chair is an aye. That

1617
02:11:40,000 --> 02:11:46,560
 passes six zero. That will move us to our public hearing items. Prior to us doing that,

1618
02:11:46,560 --> 02:11:52,640
 let's take a five-minute break. Let's adjourn at 7:55 back here at 8 p.m. Thank you.

1619
02:11:52,640 --> 02:12:09,600
 Okay. Thank you. Welcome back to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. We'll call us back to

1620
02:12:09,600 --> 02:12:22,160
 order at 8.08 p.m. We left off on our public hearing, our agenda. Item 5A, PDA 19004A.

1621
02:12:22,160 --> 02:12:28,400
 The request is to postpone to a date certain of August 19th. Commissioner Beck.

1622
02:12:28,400 --> 02:12:36,800
 It's 5A, is it not, Madam Chair? Yes, the PDA number ends in a 4A.

1623
02:12:36,800 --> 02:12:45,520
 Sorry. Yes. It is 5A on the agenda. My motion to postpone to the date is recommended by

1624
02:12:45,520 --> 02:12:52,160
 staff. August 19th. Okay. Motion on the floor is to postpone to August 19th. Commissioner Smith.

1625
02:12:52,160 --> 02:12:58,800
 Okay. First and a second to postpone to August 19th. Let's take a vote by a roll call.

1626
02:12:59,680 --> 02:13:07,360
 Commissioner Beck. Aye. Commissioner Smith. Aye. Commissioner Anderson. Aye. Commissioner Prunetta.

1627
02:13:07,360 --> 02:13:16,880
 Aye. Commissioner Cole. Aye. And the Chair is an aye. That passes 6-0 to postpone to August 19th.

1628
02:13:16,880 --> 02:13:26,480
 Next public hearing item is 5B, S200004. Make recommendation to City Council regarding

1629
02:13:27,600 --> 02:13:33,280
 requests for a specific use permit for a multifamily. I will open the public hearing

1630
02:13:33,280 --> 02:13:38,400
 at this time and invite Julie Wyatt for presentation. Good evening, commissioners.

1631
02:13:38,400 --> 02:13:53,440
 I'm going to go ahead and share my screen. Let me see if I can get the correct one.

1632
02:13:53,440 --> 02:14:09,360
 Hang on, just one second. Sorry about that. Well, let me try one more time.

1633
02:14:09,360 --> 02:14:21,760
 All right. Here we go. So the request before you is S200004, the Grove Apartments.

1634
02:14:23,120 --> 02:14:28,800
 It is for a specific use permit to permit multifamily dwellings on approximately 16 acres.

1635
02:14:28,800 --> 02:14:33,840
 The subject property has a zoning designation of SC District, which requires an SUP for

1636
02:14:33,840 --> 02:14:40,960
 multifamily uses. If this looks familiar, it's because you have seen a similar request before.

1637
02:14:40,960 --> 02:14:48,560
 S190012 did come before the Planning and Zoning Commission late last year for multifamily use.

1638
02:14:49,760 --> 02:14:55,040
 It did go to City Council. There was a lot of discussion over a couple of City Council meetings,

1639
02:14:55,040 --> 02:15:02,960
 and it was eventually postponed. That previous SUP was withdrawn. However, I do want to alert

1640
02:15:02,960 --> 02:15:08,240
 you to four items that were discussed at City Council, one being a traffic signal at Dutchess

1641
02:15:08,240 --> 02:15:13,600
 and Loop 288, and we'll discuss that a little further later in the presentation. Another is

1642
02:15:13,600 --> 02:15:19,360
 regarding tree preservation. The original plan that you saw was reviewed under our previous

1643
02:15:19,360 --> 02:15:24,240
 code, the 2002 Denton Development Code, and previous tree preservation requirements.

1644
02:15:24,240 --> 02:15:30,000
 The new submittal has been reviewed under our most current standards, and that includes tree

1645
02:15:30,000 --> 02:15:36,960
 preservation. So that discussion has been addressed with this submittal. Additionally,

1646
02:15:36,960 --> 02:15:42,960
 the same thing is with a vehicular access. Council did request that the applicant provide a north

1647
02:15:43,600 --> 02:15:49,760
 access point. The new submittal does include that, and then we'll also talk about a sidewalk

1648
02:15:49,760 --> 02:15:58,160
 extension. So we'll go briefly over the site plan. It has shifted toward the north to allow for a

1649
02:15:58,160 --> 02:16:05,440
 1.52-acre remainder lot to stay adjacent to Dutchess Drive. This would remain undeveloped,

1650
02:16:05,440 --> 02:16:11,600
 and in the future it could be developed with a commercial use under the SC Zoning. It includes

1651
02:16:11,600 --> 02:16:18,240
 12 two- and three-story buildings, residential buildings, and then one amenity center. 276

1652
02:16:18,240 --> 02:16:27,520
 dwelling units are proposed. They are also providing parking, 524 parking spaces. This

1653
02:16:27,520 --> 02:16:33,200
 does include a reduction for affordable housing that the code allows. They're proposing three

1654
02:16:33,200 --> 02:16:38,960
 driveway connections. The one that I mentioned earlier to the north, it's an exit only. It's

1655
02:16:38,960 --> 02:16:44,480
 going to extend through the undeveloped property to the north through a public access easement,

1656
02:16:44,480 --> 02:16:50,320
 connecting to the commercial properties and then on to McKinney Drive. The main access point is on

1657
02:16:50,320 --> 02:16:58,560
 Loop 288 that will allow for a full entrance, so a left turn and right turn in. However, there will

1658
02:16:58,560 --> 02:17:04,960
 only be a right turnout. That is due to the way the medians are designed on Loop 288. And then

1659
02:17:04,960 --> 02:17:11,760
 there will be a full access connection to Dutchess Drive. Sidewalks are proposed not only in front of

1660
02:17:11,760 --> 02:17:19,200
 the or adjacent to the subject site on the property on Loop 288 and Dutchess, but also they're proposed

1661
02:17:19,200 --> 02:17:25,840
 to extend to the existing facilities across the undeveloped tracks adjacent to the site.

1662
02:17:25,840 --> 02:17:32,560
 The landscape plan includes seven areas. I'll highlight briefly. First of all, they're proposing

1663
02:17:32,560 --> 02:17:39,200
 an enclosed dog park with a buffer here in number one. Number two is the street trees along Dutchess

1664
02:17:39,200 --> 02:17:45,920
 Drive and Loop 288. Three and four are embedded within an existing utility easement. There can't

1665
02:17:45,920 --> 02:17:52,400
 be really any structures in there or tree canopy. So what they've done is proposed some naturalized

1666
02:17:52,400 --> 02:17:58,320
 area, a butterfly garden in area four, and then some natural plantings and native grasses in three

1667
02:17:58,320 --> 02:18:07,040
 to provide some nice passive open area. Five is a 1.4 acre central park that has -- is proposed to

1668
02:18:07,040 --> 02:18:13,280
 have a playground, a pavilion, pool, game court, tot lot, and also a seating area. And then six

1669
02:18:13,280 --> 02:18:20,000
 finally is the primary tree preservation area. There's a pretty large stand of trees in that

1670
02:18:20,000 --> 02:18:26,720
 area, so they're just proposing to preserve those. Finally, they're proposing that enhanced

1671
02:18:26,720 --> 02:18:32,400
 landscape area between the parking lot and the buildings to soften those building edges, to kind

1672
02:18:32,400 --> 02:18:40,320
 of create a front yard for those residents, and to sort of create a sense of arrival when you get

1673
02:18:40,320 --> 02:18:46,480
 from the parking areas to the residential portions of the lot. The final design is not complete. They

1674
02:18:46,480 --> 02:18:51,600
 want to make sure that they have the right amount of landscaping, including tree canopy and shrubs,

1675
02:18:51,600 --> 02:18:57,600
 to make sure they don't interfere with the building and get that mix. I also just wanted to highlight

1676
02:18:57,600 --> 02:19:03,680
 that central park. As we talked about in work session, there aren't a lot of recreation

1677
02:19:03,680 --> 02:19:11,280
 opportunities in this general area, so it was really important to staff to provide that recreation

1678
02:19:11,280 --> 02:19:18,800
 for those residents. So they've created this kind of large open area that includes amenities

1679
02:19:18,800 --> 02:19:24,640
 distributed throughout. So there's a playground, a pavilion in this area, there's the community pool,

1680
02:19:24,640 --> 02:19:30,080
 a game court, a tot lot for younger children, and then a seating area. So it's kind of evenly

1681
02:19:30,080 --> 02:19:37,520
 distributed. The way the buildings are oriented, sort of encircling this central park with patios

1682
02:19:37,520 --> 02:19:42,720
 and balconies overlook, really do create that sort of backyard for these buildings. And then

1683
02:19:42,720 --> 02:19:48,560
 pedestrian pathways connect the buildings to those amenities. They've provided the concept

1684
02:19:48,560 --> 02:19:53,200
 elevations. These are the proposed buildings along loop 288. And then these are the proposed

1685
02:19:53,200 --> 02:20:00,320
 buildings, the balance of those buildings. With any SUP, we not only look at what's on site,

1686
02:20:00,320 --> 02:20:05,120
 but we want to see what's around it. Part of the SUP is, is it compatible with the surrounding area

1687
02:20:05,120 --> 02:20:09,520
 and how does it affect that surrounding area? So we look to see what those uses are. So we've got

1688
02:20:09,520 --> 02:20:14,800
 multifamily residential directly to the west. There is some commercial development to the north

1689
02:20:14,800 --> 02:20:20,640
 along McKinney. And then offices, there's an office just the southwest of the lot and then to

1690
02:20:20,640 --> 02:20:25,920
 the south across Dutchess. As you can see by this aerial, there's, there's quite a bit of undeveloped

1691
02:20:25,920 --> 02:20:31,920
 land surrounding the subject site. It has a zoning district consistent with the subject property and

1692
02:20:31,920 --> 02:20:36,400
 we anticipate it will develop with uses at a scale that's consistent not only with what's

1693
02:20:36,400 --> 02:20:42,000
 existing out there, but also what the applicant is proposing. Pebble Brook open space is the area

1694
02:20:42,000 --> 02:20:46,720
 outlined in green. It is a city owned park. It hasn't been developed yet. It is intended to have

1695
02:20:46,720 --> 02:20:52,240
 the trail system through it. We don't anticipate it will be completed for the, for the next couple

1696
02:20:52,240 --> 02:21:00,080
 of years at least. So, so that's why staff was, was, was concerned about those onsite recreation

1697
02:21:00,080 --> 02:21:07,360
 facilities. The criteria for approval and SUPs for SUPs are in sub chapter two. I won't go over

1698
02:21:07,360 --> 02:21:12,400
 all of these. That's outlined in your, in your backup material, but I will hit the parts that

1699
02:21:12,400 --> 02:21:17,360
 are really important in terms of compatibility and impacts to adjacent properties. So first of all,

1700
02:21:17,360 --> 02:21:22,800
 this sort of goes hand in hand with the previous map we looked at and that's compatibility with

1701
02:21:22,800 --> 02:21:28,160
 the surrounding area. Loop 288 is, is one of our big suburban commercial corridors. It's,

1702
02:21:28,160 --> 02:21:34,000
 it's a divided two lane or three, six lane divided road. It includes a mix of office,

1703
02:21:34,000 --> 02:21:39,280
 retail, restaurant, service, entertainment, multifamily, residential uses. It has all,

1704
02:21:39,280 --> 02:21:45,120
 it is a really a mixed use corridor. Multifamily uses and their associated activities are

1705
02:21:45,120 --> 02:21:50,560
 compatible with commercial and office development. The proposed development scale is also consistent

1706
02:21:50,560 --> 02:21:56,480
 with what we typically see on Loop 288. Those three access points do disperse the vehicular

1707
02:21:56,480 --> 02:22:01,520
 ingress and egress. So it doesn't, it doesn't funnel all the traffic into one general area,

1708
02:22:01,520 --> 02:22:07,280
 it disperses it. Multifamily uses are a vital component for our commercial centers. They

1709
02:22:07,280 --> 02:22:14,320
 provide housing for, for those who work in our commercial centers and it also provides a customer

1710
02:22:14,320 --> 02:22:19,600
 base for commercial centers. So those that's kind of one of the three legs of the three legged stool

1711
02:22:19,600 --> 02:22:26,640
 for, for mixed use development. And then, and then the, as I said, the undeveloped property is

1712
02:22:26,640 --> 02:22:31,520
 similarly zoned. Future development is anticipated to be consistent with that zoning pattern.

1713
02:22:31,520 --> 02:22:39,600
 We also look at Debt and Plan 2030. This area is divided by two future land use designations. We

1714
02:22:39,600 --> 02:22:45,360
 have community mixed use and moderate residential. Community mixed use is kind of what it says. It's

1715
02:22:45,360 --> 02:22:51,520
 that mix of uses. Commercial uses should be the predominant uses, but those residential and service,

1716
02:22:51,520 --> 02:22:56,800
 other complementary uses are an important part of that. A moderate residential really goes more into

1717
02:22:56,800 --> 02:23:03,920
 our smaller lot, single family housing, that four to 12 dwelling units per acre. The proposed

1718
02:23:03,920 --> 02:23:09,200
 multifamily use is, is consistent with both in that it kind of blends with those goals. It combines

1719
02:23:09,200 --> 02:23:15,920
 those two. It provides the scale that's necessary for community mixed use, but it does have that

1720
02:23:15,920 --> 02:23:22,080
 residential component. So it doesn't introduce any, any activities that would be inconsistent with a

1721
02:23:22,080 --> 02:23:29,200
 moderate residential. Are there adequate public facilities? That's something we look at in those

1722
02:23:29,200 --> 02:23:34,640
 impacts to those public facilities. So in terms of traffic, the proposed dwelling units would

1723
02:23:34,640 --> 02:23:44,000
 generate about 2000 trips in any, in a weekday. That's 125 morning, 146 evening. Loop 288, as I

1724
02:23:44,000 --> 02:23:51,120
 said, is one of our primary arterials and Dutchess is a collector. They did submit a TIA in, in

1725
02:23:51,120 --> 02:24:01,440
 relationship to the, the first SUP, but the, the, the proposed number of units stayed the same. So,

1726
02:24:01,440 --> 02:24:08,240
 so that the, the conclusions of that TIA remain the same. And what those conclusions were is that

1727
02:24:08,240 --> 02:24:12,720
 restriping on Dutchess would be needed. There's enough, there's sufficient right of way and

1728
02:24:12,720 --> 02:24:18,640
 pavement to provide for that restriping. And what that would do would be to allow those who are

1729
02:24:18,640 --> 02:24:25,920
 traveling eastbound on Dutchess to turn either north or south, a dedicated north or south lane

1730
02:24:25,920 --> 02:24:31,600
 on Dutchess, just to allow that intersection to move more smoothly. And then, and then the other

1731
02:24:31,600 --> 02:24:40,240
 result of that TIA was that Dutchess and Loop 288 does, that intersection does meet the warrants

1732
02:24:40,240 --> 02:24:46,720
 for a light. And so during the city council discussions at city council meetings, the

1733
02:24:46,720 --> 02:24:52,320
 applicant offered to deposit $400,000 for that, for the design and construction of that traffic

1734
02:24:52,320 --> 02:24:57,360
 signal. One, one thing we did talk about, and we'll talk about a little more with the recommendations

1735
02:24:57,360 --> 02:25:04,880
 as part of council's discussion with the applicant earlier in the year, they, they, if there were any

1736
02:25:04,880 --> 02:25:13,760
 pro rata cost that was recovered as part of this, if, if, if it, if the light didn't, didn't result

1737
02:25:13,760 --> 02:25:18,960
 in a $400,000 cost, or if there were other developments in the area that would pay into that,

1738
02:25:18,960 --> 02:25:25,280
 that light, the balance of that $400,000 would be credited toward that Pebblebrook open space

1739
02:25:25,280 --> 02:25:30,960
 in order to, for, for the future development. The details of that will be worked out through

1740
02:25:30,960 --> 02:25:35,680
 a development agreement with council. So this is kind of just the first step in that proposal,

1741
02:25:35,680 --> 02:25:40,720
 if this, if this did move forward. So, so those details would be hashed out at a later date.

1742
02:25:40,720 --> 02:25:48,000
 Pedestrian improvements, they are proposing a 12 foot sidewalk on Loop 288. That sidewalk would

1743
02:25:48,000 --> 02:25:54,320
 extend north to connect to an existing sidewalk. It, you can kind of see it here in this map right

1744
02:25:54,320 --> 02:26:00,240
 here, that there is an existing sidewalk. So they are proposing to extend it through an undeveloped

1745
02:26:00,240 --> 02:26:09,360
 tract to connect to that existing sidewalk. And then, and then the, the eight, an eight foot

1746
02:26:09,360 --> 02:26:15,520
 sidewalk along Dutchess would also extend and connect to the existing development. And that

1747
02:26:15,520 --> 02:26:23,520
 will assist in the multimodal development or the multimodal transportation options within,

1748
02:26:23,520 --> 02:26:30,720
 within the area. It will, we do have two bus stops, one, one located about where the blue dot is,

1749
02:26:30,720 --> 02:26:39,040
 and then another one located south of the subject property. The, the, the sidewalk connection would

1750
02:26:39,040 --> 02:26:46,480
 allow a, an improved pedestrian path to connect to this bus stop here. I don't yet have an answer on,

1751
02:26:46,480 --> 02:26:55,520
 on whether that sidewalk, if there's a CIP project for, to connect that south, sidewalk to the south,

1752
02:26:55,520 --> 02:27:01,120
 I'm not aware of any, but, but we may be able to get an answer for that at a future Planning

1753
02:27:01,120 --> 02:27:06,640
 and Zoning Commission meeting. There is water and wastewater to the site. It's available. There will

1754
02:27:06,640 --> 02:27:10,720
 be extensions that will be required, but there is adequate capacity in the system to serve the

1755
02:27:10,720 --> 02:27:17,200
 proposal. They will have to pay tap and impact fees at the time of development. As I mentioned,

1756
02:27:17,200 --> 02:27:22,880
 Publbic Open Space is not an improved park. We do own the land, but it has not been approved yet.

1757
02:27:22,880 --> 02:27:30,480
 Right now, the site is, is getting to it does require a, a half mile walk that goes up to

1758
02:27:30,480 --> 02:27:37,680
 McKinney and then down south on the other side of, of the loop. And so that was, that was why those

1759
02:27:37,680 --> 02:27:44,000
 on-site improvements for, or recreation improvements were important. And then schools that will

1760
02:27:44,000 --> 02:27:52,080
 generate 83 elementary students, 30 middle school students, and then 44 high school students. There

1761
02:27:52,080 --> 02:27:59,120
 is capacity within the attendance zone for it, but those, those schools are, are reneering capacity.

1762
02:27:59,120 --> 02:28:05,680
 So future residential growth will, will, the school will have to look at that for any future

1763
02:28:05,680 --> 02:28:13,280
 residential growth in the area. There was public outreach. We did post a newspaper ad as well as

1764
02:28:13,280 --> 02:28:17,760
 send out notices and the applicant did post signs on the property. We have received from

1765
02:28:17,760 --> 02:28:28,080
 responses in two. And so there's a 14% in favor. And staff does recommend approval because it is

1766
02:28:28,080 --> 02:28:33,200
 consistent with the Denton Plan 2030 and the criteria for approval. We are recommending five

1767
02:28:33,200 --> 02:28:38,800
 conditions. I won't, I won't read these to you. I'll just, I'll just sort of briefly talk through

1768
02:28:38,800 --> 02:28:45,360
 them. The first condition is that landscaping condition we typically see on SUPs, that the

1769
02:28:45,360 --> 02:28:50,640
 landscaping is intended to comply with not only the 2019 Denton Development Code, but also the

1770
02:28:50,640 --> 02:28:57,600
 plan you saw today. There could be minor alterations associated with the development. Once, once they

1771
02:28:57,600 --> 02:29:04,480
 get closer to, to planting plants in the ground, either individual plant selections, or maybe some

1772
02:29:04,480 --> 02:29:10,560
 minor modifications of where they're planted. However, they would have to comply with all those

1773
02:29:10,560 --> 02:29:15,200
 other elements and those minor modifications would be staff level approved. Here's that

1774
02:29:15,200 --> 02:29:21,440
 traffic signal. They are, they are offering that $400,000 to be deposited for that traffic signal

1775
02:29:21,440 --> 02:29:25,440
 at Dutchess Drive and Loop 288. And that would be worked out with council through a development

1776
02:29:25,440 --> 02:29:32,080
 agreement prior to the filing of the plat. Sidewalk extension, they're proposing those offsite,

1777
02:29:32,080 --> 02:29:37,680
 that offsite sidewalk to the north as well as to, to the east of the subject property.

1778
02:29:37,680 --> 02:29:44,480
 And the zoning act would reflect that there, if this was approved that the, the, that there is

1779
02:29:44,480 --> 02:29:48,880
 an SUP on the subject property and then not withstanding those administrative approvals in

1780
02:29:48,880 --> 02:29:56,080
 condition one, we would reserve the right to require an amendment to the, the SUP for, for

1781
02:29:56,080 --> 02:30:04,560
 any of, any reasons. If they were going to make any changes to those SUP, the SUP. And then here's

1782
02:30:04,560 --> 02:30:11,600
 also the next part of our recommendation is that staff would have the ability to approve increases

1783
02:30:11,600 --> 02:30:18,800
 for the number of dwelling units or the building square footage up to 5% of the amounts specified

1784
02:30:18,800 --> 02:30:23,360
 in requirements one and four. And that's the dwelling units, the, the building square footage

1785
02:30:23,360 --> 02:30:31,760
 and the parking spaces. But anything over 5% would require a revision to the SUP. The numbers

1786
02:30:31,760 --> 02:30:35,760
 one through seven sort of outline what they're proposing on their development. The number of

1787
02:30:35,760 --> 02:30:40,560
 dwelling units, the number of buildings kind of outlines what those central gathering, what

1788
02:30:40,560 --> 02:30:45,440
 should be included in that central gathering area as well as the other open spaces. The number of

1789
02:30:45,440 --> 02:30:52,240
 parking spaces that does reflect the reduction that the code permits for affordable housing. Any

1790
02:30:52,240 --> 02:30:57,920
 additional parking reductions could potentially be granted for maybe additional tree preservation

1791
02:30:57,920 --> 02:31:02,080
 or tree plantings. And that would be in accordance with SUP chapter seven of the debt and development

1792
02:31:02,080 --> 02:31:09,200
 code. The three access points and then the design elements you saw, the balconies and patios, those

1793
02:31:09,200 --> 02:31:14,400
 primary entrances with the, with the lighting, the mix in trees and shrubs between the buildings in

1794
02:31:14,400 --> 02:31:19,440
 the parking areas and that the orientation of the building. And then final, the final would be the

1795
02:31:19,440 --> 02:31:25,680
 solid waste. Those locations would be finalized with the building permit. The applicant is on

1796
02:31:25,680 --> 02:31:34,960
 the line and I will stand for any questions. >> Thanks, Julie. Does anyone have any questions

1797
02:31:34,960 --> 02:31:45,200
 for Julie or the applicant for that matter? Okay. I have one quick one just for the applicant. I

1798
02:31:45,200 --> 02:31:55,840
 believe you got approval from the south property owners. Is that correct? They were in opposition

1799
02:31:55,840 --> 02:32:06,080
 the first time around. Is that correct? >> That's correct. Can you hear me? That is correct. And I

1800
02:32:06,080 --> 02:32:11,520
 do have a short presentation and that's part of it. But yes, those property owners that are to the

1801
02:32:11,520 --> 02:32:19,840
 southwest actually instead of opposing now support this new application. >> Okay. That's great. Did

1802
02:32:19,840 --> 02:32:27,520
 you want to give your presentation or? >> You know, if you'd like to make a motion for approval,

1803
02:32:27,520 --> 02:32:34,400
 I can skip it, but I'm certainly happy to do it. >> I'm going to leave that up to commission. Do

1804
02:32:34,400 --> 02:32:44,800
 we need, would you like to see the applicants? No? Okay. Apparently your presentation is not

1805
02:32:44,800 --> 02:32:50,320
 necessary. Commissioner Bec? >> I'd like to make a motion to approve with the conditions as

1806
02:32:50,320 --> 02:32:57,600
 presented by staff. >> Motion on the floor is to approve with staff conditions. Is there a second?

1807
02:32:57,600 --> 02:33:09,600
 Commissioner Smith? Commissioner Smith, you're muted. >> I will second the motion. I just didn't

1808
02:33:09,600 --> 02:33:14,880
 know if we needed to open up the public. >> You know what? The public hearing has been opened,

1809
02:33:14,880 --> 02:33:21,680
 but I should close the public hearing before we vote. >> That worked. Yes, I'd like to second

1810
02:33:21,680 --> 02:33:27,520
 the motion. >> Very good. We do not have anyone on the line to speak for this public hearing item,

1811
02:33:27,520 --> 02:33:32,880
 so I will close the public hearing. And we do have a motion on the floor to approve with staff

1812
02:33:32,880 --> 02:33:40,400
 conditions. Any discussion? Very good. We will take a vote by a roll call. Commissioner Bec?

1813
02:33:40,400 --> 02:33:42,560
 >> Aye. >> Commissioner Smith?

1814
02:33:42,560 --> 02:33:44,480
 >> Aye. >> Commissioner Cole?

1815
02:33:44,480 --> 02:33:46,800
 >> Aye. >> Commissioner Anderson?

1816
02:33:46,800 --> 02:33:50,720
 >> Aye. >> Commissioner Pernetta?

1817
02:33:50,720 --> 02:33:57,200
 >> Aye. >> And the chair is an aye. That motion carries 6-0.

1818
02:33:59,760 --> 02:34:08,800
 That will take us to our next public hearing item. That is AESA20-0003B.

1819
02:34:08,800 --> 02:34:20,000
 I will open the public hearing and invite Kristi Upton for presentation.

1820
02:34:30,000 --> 02:34:36,000
 [PAUSE]

1821
02:34:59,760 --> 02:35:16,720
 >> Good evening, commissioners. And this is a presentation on the alternative AESA plan for

1822
02:35:16,720 --> 02:35:25,120
 four-star razor. And just to review again, the City of Dinton has adopted a set of regulations

1823
02:35:25,120 --> 02:35:32,720
 to protect environmental sensitive areas. And when land disturbances do not conform to

1824
02:35:32,720 --> 02:35:38,640
 the protection requirements, then approval of an alternative AESA plan is required

1825
02:35:39,600 --> 02:35:59,360
 per a set of criteria as provided in the Dinton development code. The request tonight is for a

1826
02:35:59,360 --> 02:36:05,840
 property generally located north of Rose Lawn Drive and east of the railroad tracks along highway 377.

1827
02:36:05,840 --> 02:36:14,480
 There is a preliminary plot for a single-family development of approximately 214 acres that was

1828
02:36:14,480 --> 02:36:22,560
 previously approved. And the alternative AESA plan that is being presented tonight is for

1829
02:36:22,560 --> 02:36:28,080
 four encroachments for the construction of stormwater channels that will support the

1830
02:36:28,080 --> 02:36:35,280
 residential development and will be encroaching into riparian buffer ESA and water-related

1831
02:36:35,280 --> 02:36:43,920
 habitat. For a little background on this project, there was a field assessment that was conducted

1832
02:36:43,920 --> 02:37:00,080
 by a third-party biologist. And the field assessment was approved by staff. During the

1833
02:37:00,080 --> 02:37:07,680
 field assessment, the biologist identified a tributary of Hickory Creek. It's a braided

1834
02:37:07,680 --> 02:37:16,320
 channel with a small side stream found near the center of the property and the channel

1835
02:37:16,320 --> 02:37:29,440
 generally crossing from north to south across this development. The creek has a riparian buffer ESA

1836
02:37:29,440 --> 02:37:36,000
 that's 50 feet and each side of the stream, each side of the centerline of the stream

1837
02:37:36,000 --> 02:37:43,920
 per the definition of the riparian buffer ESA and was identified to be in fair condition and then

1838
02:37:43,920 --> 02:37:53,520
 interspersed along that creek and supporting the creek's water quality and

1839
02:37:57,120 --> 02:38:04,080
 is a bottomland hardwood forest and it generally is an area that

1840
02:38:04,080 --> 02:38:15,760
 where forests are supported by a more moist soil conditions and the bottomland hardwood forest has

1841
02:38:15,760 --> 02:38:22,400
 a number of tree species such as American elm, green ash, pecan, and hackberry. There's an

1842
02:38:22,400 --> 02:38:30,400
 undeveloped floodplain as well that was identified along the southern border of the property and is

1843
02:38:30,400 --> 02:38:39,120
 defined by the current FEMA 1% chance or 100-year floodplain. And then along the eastern side of the

1844
02:38:39,120 --> 02:38:46,960
 creek and the southeastern corner of the proposed development, there is crust timbers upland habitat

1845
02:38:46,960 --> 02:38:56,320
 of 30 acres of contiguous forest. There are permitted encroachments that I wanted to review

1846
02:38:56,320 --> 02:39:04,080
 with you before we dived into the reason for the alternative ESA plan and that includes

1847
02:39:04,080 --> 02:39:12,640
 50% preservation of the crust timbers upland habitat and the applicant is proposing to preserve

1848
02:39:13,520 --> 02:39:23,040
 at least 50% of that upland that crust timbers forest generally along the

1849
02:39:23,040 --> 02:39:32,640
 and adjacent to the creek and then within the property. And there are roadways that are identified

1850
02:39:32,640 --> 02:39:41,200
 on the city mobility plan and are with the construction of those of the roadways being

1851
02:39:42,640 --> 02:39:50,720
 they are permitted to encroach into the ESAs as long as there is

1852
02:39:50,720 --> 02:39:56,320
 sorry as long as there is

1853
02:39:56,320 --> 02:40:05,280
 mitigation that is done to prevent erosion and to promote the recovery of the ESAs.

1854
02:40:05,920 --> 02:40:13,120
 And then lastly there is an allowance for the placement of public and private utility

1855
02:40:13,120 --> 02:40:21,360
 facilities in the undeveloped floodplain ESA and there is a small section of the floodplain ESA

1856
02:40:21,360 --> 02:40:30,000
 that will be encroached upon at the southernmost drainage channel and the proposed deviations that

1857
02:40:30,000 --> 02:40:36,480
 we will be focused on tonight are within our for the four stormwater drainage channels that

1858
02:40:36,480 --> 02:40:43,120
 will support the residential neighborhood there's and the proposal is to construct these channels

1859
02:40:43,120 --> 02:40:51,280
 at the the necessary width for the channels plus another 10 feet that outside of those channels

1860
02:40:51,280 --> 02:40:57,040
 that will be cleared of vegetation for the construction of the channels and the total

1861
02:40:57,040 --> 02:41:06,000
 acreage of the encroachments in order to construct and finalize those channels is approximately 0.7

1862
02:41:06,000 --> 02:41:15,600
 acres of ESA. In order to offset for those encroachments the applicant is promoted

1863
02:41:15,600 --> 02:41:23,920
 proposing two mitigation strategies the first is to revegetate the areas that were cleared for the

1864
02:41:24,800 --> 02:41:35,760
 construction of the channels with a seed of native grasses and forbs and then a planting of trees

1865
02:41:35,760 --> 02:41:46,320
 and shrubs that are that were selected as a native species to promote the recovery of the ESAs.

1866
02:41:48,160 --> 02:41:55,520
 The second strategy is to remove invasive Chinese privet within the ESAs. The field biologists

1867
02:41:55,520 --> 02:42:06,000
 identified 10 to 50 percent infestation along the channel and the proposal is to remove that

1868
02:42:06,000 --> 02:42:17,520
 Chinese privet and then to revegetate the area to promote the reduction of the ability of the

1869
02:42:18,480 --> 02:42:30,880
 privet to reinvest the area. Notifications were sent and a response was to the notifications were

1870
02:42:30,880 --> 02:42:42,560
 five in opposition which equaled four percent and then three in favor and the opposition's concerns

1871
02:42:43,200 --> 02:42:52,560
 mostly were related to items that were worked out with the preliminary plot.

1872
02:42:52,560 --> 02:43:02,240
 There was a neighborhood meeting on July 14th and there were 34 participants and similar concerns

1873
02:43:02,240 --> 02:43:11,280
 were expressed at the neighborhood meeting and after reviewing the alternative ESA plan staff

1874
02:43:11,280 --> 02:43:17,920
 has identified that the plan meets the criteria for approval and is recommending that the

1875
02:43:17,920 --> 02:43:24,560
 plan be approved with the following conditions that the land disturbance be limited to the areas that

1876
02:43:24,560 --> 02:43:31,360
 were the extent that was identified on the alternative ESA plan that the applicant will

1877
02:43:31,360 --> 02:43:37,680
 consider the preservation of heritage or quality trees in the final location of the stormwater

1878
02:43:37,680 --> 02:43:44,960
 infrastructure and after identifying the final location to provide the meets and bounds to

1879
02:43:44,960 --> 02:43:51,280
 environmental services so we can keep record of that and then the revegetation of the disturbed

1880
02:43:51,280 --> 02:43:59,600
 areas as described in the alternative ESA plan and then these are recommendations for approval

1881
02:44:00,400 --> 02:44:10,320
 that environmental services is recommending for all alternative ESA plans that include plantings

1882
02:44:10,320 --> 02:44:14,800
 to ensure the survivability. Are there questions?

1883
02:44:14,800 --> 02:44:27,120
 Thanks Christy. Yes. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. Christy we brought this up in work session

1884
02:44:27,120 --> 02:44:34,560
 but I want to say it again for anyone that's watching this riparian alt ESA is just for that

1885
02:44:34,560 --> 02:44:39,520
 region along the channel it doesn't include the upland habitat region is that correct? Correct.

1886
02:44:39,520 --> 02:44:44,880
 All right so we're not we're not addressing that upland habitat region or any of the

1887
02:44:44,880 --> 02:44:52,240
 contention that may or may not exist about it that we may have heard of in the public is that correct?

1888
02:44:52,240 --> 02:44:58,720
 Correct. Okay. This is strictly related to the four storm drain channels at this time.

1889
02:44:58,720 --> 02:45:07,040
 Thank you. Any other questions for Christy?

1890
02:45:07,040 --> 02:45:16,400
 Okay I don't see any more at this moment Christy. This is a public hearing we do

1891
02:45:16,400 --> 02:45:18,880
 have several people on the line wishing to speak.

1892
02:45:22,960 --> 02:45:29,040
 So I will invite our first caller.

1893
02:45:29,040 --> 02:45:49,120
 Hi caller can you hear me? Yes. Okay welcome to the planning. Yes we can. Welcome to the planning

1894
02:45:49,120 --> 02:45:54,000
 and zoning commission meeting. If you will state your name and address for the record your time

1895
02:45:54,000 --> 02:46:02,240
 will begin and you can speak on the item you called about. Sure Rachel Diyager 2115 McCormick

1896
02:46:02,240 --> 02:46:14,880
 Street Denton Texas 76205 and I'm calling in regards to the the forest razor plan and the

1897
02:46:14,880 --> 02:46:21,360
 environmentally sensitive area and I'm just concerned about the removal of the upland habitat.

1898
02:46:21,360 --> 02:46:29,760
 It looks like about at least half of the the upland habitat or the trees the tree

1899
02:46:29,760 --> 02:46:36,320
 forest area is being removed and that concerns me because this is kind of an older growth

1900
02:46:37,840 --> 02:46:46,240
 with lots of old growth trees and some of those trees are you know hundreds a years old you can't

1901
02:46:46,240 --> 02:46:52,320
 really replace those trees it would take you know centuries for that to you know regrow and it's

1902
02:46:52,320 --> 02:46:59,600
 just I just feel like it needs to there needs to be a more of that preserved and also it just also

1903
02:46:59,600 --> 02:47:06,240
 makes denton more livable and it's not it's just nice to have some green places too and again I

1904
02:47:06,240 --> 02:47:14,800
 just don't think it should that much of it should be removed it just concerns me so that's my concern

1905
02:47:14,800 --> 02:47:21,120
 and I guess thank you. Hang on just a minute caller commissioner Beck.

1906
02:47:21,120 --> 02:47:27,680
 Thank you chair Christy this is sort of directed to you but it's an answer to the caller's question

1907
02:47:27,680 --> 02:47:34,560
 for folks that have concerns about the upland habitat region how what is the appropriate

1908
02:47:34,560 --> 02:47:40,400
 venue for them to address those concerns if if this ESA does not include the upland habitat as

1909
02:47:40,400 --> 02:47:52,320
 you said a second ago? I don't know if I understand the question. If if if citizens have concerns about

1910
02:47:52,320 --> 02:47:59,440
 the the overall plan that includes the upland habitat but this vote is only about the riparian

1911
02:47:59,440 --> 02:48:06,480
 ESA what's the appropriate venue for citizens to address their concerns about that upland habitat?

1912
02:48:06,480 --> 02:48:16,880
 So there is a there's a proposal for for some options that are being presented to city council

1913
02:48:16,880 --> 02:48:24,400
 and those that proposal is being led by the planning and development services

1914
02:48:24,400 --> 02:48:33,920
 and the parks and recreation department and is not a is not a a part of this application at this time.

1915
02:48:33,920 --> 02:48:42,240
 Thank you Christy. Okay so I'm a little confused because according to the this that area is part

1916
02:48:42,240 --> 02:48:48,640
 of that map so they're going to have a different meeting on that area it looks like housing is

1917
02:48:48,640 --> 02:48:55,040
 covering at least half of it in this plan. Well the item that we're discussing today right now

1918
02:48:55,040 --> 02:49:03,120
 that we're voting on is an alternative ESA which is just affecting parts of the riparian buffer.

1919
02:49:03,120 --> 02:49:10,640
 It is not affecting the upland habitat so that's not what we are considering

1920
02:49:10,640 --> 02:49:14,480
 here with what is is on our agenda for this public hearing.

1921
02:49:17,120 --> 02:49:26,800
 But I'm confused because it it shows it's the AESA 20-00034 star razor

1922
02:49:26,800 --> 02:49:37,280
 plan and it includes the upland that upland habitat area and it shows houses so there's

1923
02:49:37,280 --> 02:49:43,760
 two different meetings on this actual project. Yeah I'm gonna I'm gonna let Christy answer that.

1924
02:49:43,760 --> 02:49:53,360
 Sure just to to help explain again what the regulations require a developer to

1925
02:49:53,360 --> 02:49:58,160
 to how to address the cross timbers upland habitat.

1926
02:49:58,160 --> 02:50:07,440
 The development is allowed to remove up to 50 percent of the cross timbers upland habitat so

1927
02:50:08,560 --> 02:50:20,720
 when we identify that habitat and we we tell we look the developer no there's upland habitat here

1928
02:50:20,720 --> 02:50:30,960
 that must be protected but only 50 percent the regulations also do not address where those where

1929
02:50:30,960 --> 02:50:38,960
 that 50 percent is. We do highly encourage the development to consider the protection

1930
02:50:38,960 --> 02:50:48,000
 of that habitat in a manner that could allow for some connectivity and this development has done

1931
02:50:48,000 --> 02:50:57,520
 that by protecting the 50 percent on the on the western side of the habitat closest to the creek

1932
02:50:57,520 --> 02:51:04,560
 which will allow for a continuousness of that upland habitat with the habitats that will be

1933
02:51:04,560 --> 02:51:12,720
 protected along the creek. Commissioner Beck. Yeah thank you I wasn't sure if I still had the floor.

1934
02:51:12,720 --> 02:51:23,280
 So so Christy I mean just to help maybe clarify a little more if regions of those of the upland

1935
02:51:23,280 --> 02:51:30,640
 habitat to the east to those from the water tower eastward towards Denia Park if those were of

1936
02:51:30,640 --> 02:51:38,320
 concern to citizens they citizens should talk to planning and development office and city council

1937
02:51:38,320 --> 02:51:45,360
 to address those concerns. Correct I think that that might be the the avenue that that would

1938
02:51:45,360 --> 02:51:52,960
 best that you could best address this at this time. Okay is there a way we can maybe

1939
02:51:54,240 --> 02:51:59,440
 get the caller Christy's information so that can we do that and then they can talk

1940
02:51:59,440 --> 02:52:09,120
 you know about that that future issue. Is that okay? Yeah if we can if we can get that information

1941
02:52:09,120 --> 02:52:14,560
 we most certainly will reach out to her and explain the next steps. Very good okay thank

1942
02:52:14,560 --> 02:52:30,720
 you for calling in. You're welcome. Do we have our next caller?

1943
02:52:44,560 --> 02:52:47,680
 Hi caller you're on with the Planning and Zoning Commission. Are you there?

1944
02:52:47,680 --> 02:52:53,840
 Well I am here but I think I just got the answer I needed so I don't think I'll waste your time.

1945
02:52:53,840 --> 02:53:01,200
 Well okay well thank you very much. All right you're very welcome thank you. Appreciate your

1946
02:53:01,200 --> 02:53:10,160
 involvement thank you. Sure bye bye. Bye okay let's bring up our next caller.

1947
02:53:14,560 --> 02:53:24,160
 Okay. Of course.

1948
02:53:44,560 --> 02:53:50,160
 There

1949
02:53:50,160 --> 02:54:08,160
 they are working on bringing the caller to our meeting.

1950
02:54:14,560 --> 02:54:20,160
 Maybe.

1951
02:54:20,160 --> 02:54:31,200
 Any second now. Hello? Hi there caller welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.

1952
02:54:31,200 --> 02:54:37,200
 Can you hear us? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. If you'll state your name and number for the record

1953
02:54:37,200 --> 02:54:43,760
 your time will begin. You'll have three minutes to speak. Okay I am Leanne Todd. I live at 3316

1954
02:54:43,760 --> 02:54:51,360
 Rose Lawn. I'm 200 feet away from the proposed housing subdivision of King and Four Star Razor.

1955
02:54:51,360 --> 02:54:58,880
 I am opposed to the current developmental plan in that it does not consider environmentally sensitive

1956
02:54:58,880 --> 02:55:06,480
 area of the upland. A majority of the post-op's which are 18 to 21 inches will be destroyed.

1957
02:55:07,440 --> 02:55:13,680
 It is which is against to me there needs to be more restrictions in the planning

1958
02:55:13,680 --> 02:55:23,600
 with a developmental plan for future comprehensive plan for the city of Denton and future land use

1959
02:55:23,600 --> 02:55:29,920
 is in violation with that. There's not enough stipulations or restrictions in relation to house

1960
02:55:29,920 --> 02:55:38,000
 height in relation to floor plan and size and density. Not only that it is environmentally

1961
02:55:38,000 --> 02:55:45,520
 devastating to the historical post-ops which are now protected under law with a new tree ordinance

1962
02:55:45,520 --> 02:55:53,280
 and the only thing that they show environmental sensitivity to is doing the drainage ditches

1963
02:55:54,960 --> 02:56:03,440
 which is the only okay thing about the plan but everything else is a subdivision nightmare

1964
02:56:03,440 --> 02:56:08,800
 and they are within law with their 50 percent trees but that's because there's floodplain

1965
02:56:08,800 --> 02:56:16,480
 insignificant trees along there. Well since I'm opposed to the whole plan I think it needs to go

1966
02:56:16,480 --> 02:56:24,320
 back to the drawing board come up with fewer houses maybe higher dollar including with more

1967
02:56:24,320 --> 02:56:31,600
 tree protection more land acquisition by parks and recreation. I know they're proposing a

1968
02:56:31,600 --> 02:56:40,000
 hike bike trail along the floodplain and sewer line but there is also significant forest

1969
02:56:40,000 --> 02:56:48,160
 in the upland area and no environmental sensitivity has been considered in relation to that. Four Star

1970
02:56:48,160 --> 02:56:57,440
 is not a part of this community and Denton they will they don't care except for making their money

1971
02:56:57,440 --> 02:57:03,200
 in a development project and moving on. I think the current plan is not for the benefit of the

1972
02:57:03,200 --> 02:57:13,280
 community and its residents of this city as far as aesthetics and beauty and carbon offset and parks

1973
02:57:13,280 --> 02:57:20,320
 and rec and there's bound to be a better plan that I mean who wants a home underneath a water tank

1974
02:57:20,320 --> 02:57:26,000
 and let's take out all the trees it makes no sense. Plus these trees the post oaks cannot be

1975
02:57:26,000 --> 02:57:33,920
 cannot be replaced they are endangered tree they cannot be if you look at an 18 to 21 inch tree

1976
02:57:33,920 --> 02:57:40,800
 of that size you're looking at thousands of dollars per tree and millions per forest which

1977
02:57:40,800 --> 02:57:47,760
 cannot be replaced and once it's gone it's gone and it's one of the few forested areas still

1978
02:57:47,760 --> 02:57:57,600
 in the city of Denton with that kind of significant as far as their ESA plan for the drainage ditches

1979
02:57:57,600 --> 02:58:08,000
 it's okay except that no post oak should be taken out and we appreciate your comments can

1980
02:58:08,000 --> 02:58:16,560
 your three minutes hat is up are you close to wrapping it up okay yes if they can replace

1981
02:58:16,560 --> 02:58:23,200
 any taken trees with tree of same significance but overall I'm against to the Kimberley horn

1982
02:58:23,200 --> 02:58:31,520
 current design in relation to four star razor is not for the benefit of Denton city and its residents

1983
02:58:32,640 --> 02:58:38,240
 and we definitely appreciate you sharing your thoughts with us I will reiterate what we're

1984
02:58:38,240 --> 02:58:47,200
 voting on today is not the development itself it is that that is already a project that can happen

1985
02:58:47,200 --> 02:58:53,840
 by right with the zoning that's on the property what we are voting on is an alternate ESA that

1986
02:58:53,840 --> 02:59:03,040
 will affect the riparian buffer I will share with you again that that there is talk still being

1987
02:59:03,040 --> 02:59:09,280
 had about the upland habitat on the property and I would encourage you to get with staff on that

1988
02:59:09,280 --> 02:59:16,320
 for your input with regard to that and we can get you a contact information

1989
02:59:17,760 --> 02:59:24,640
 so that you can show your thoughts on that so as far as the lower ESA plan a is better than plan b

1990
02:59:24,640 --> 02:59:32,160
 plan a is okay with the stipulation of no post oaks taken and trees taken of equal value

1991
02:59:32,160 --> 02:59:39,920
 it's better than it's like ponds and taking more trees so that's the only place that I see the

1992
02:59:39,920 --> 02:59:49,920
 current plan is being environmentally sensitive which is you know the lower ESA in relation to

1993
02:59:49,920 --> 02:59:56,400
 the water run okay appreciate your thoughts uh Commissioner Beck I believe has a question

1994
02:59:56,400 --> 03:00:02,400
 in his response to the color Christy didn't you say this current revised plan

1995
03:00:03,360 --> 03:00:10,880
 has flexibility for the precise placement of the the four channels to to protect trees

1996
03:00:10,880 --> 03:00:16,640
 in those channels but I'm what I have done is try to build some flexibility in

1997
03:00:16,640 --> 03:00:26,240
 the alternative to doing that would have forced the applicant to place those storm drains directly

1998
03:00:26,240 --> 03:00:32,080
 in the location that they had drawn up in their plans trying to build a little bit of flexibility

1999
03:00:32,080 --> 03:00:42,000
 for them to avoid heritage or quality trees that they identify on site once they get there and

2000
03:00:42,000 --> 03:00:50,880
 start construction so that they could preserve those trees if if it's possible to move the

2001
03:00:50,880 --> 03:01:03,360
 channel in one direction or another and and still meet their their design criteria I'm definitely in

2002
03:01:03,360 --> 03:01:13,440
 I'm definitely in favor of flexibility to protect what trees we can in that lowland ESA excellent

2003
03:01:13,440 --> 03:01:19,840
 and everything and just leave trash trees as opposed to historical thank you so much for

2004
03:01:19,840 --> 03:01:25,600
 sharing your thoughts with us tonight all right and I will be back on the 19th for the up one

2005
03:01:25,600 --> 03:01:32,240
 excellent thank you is that when that's happening on the 19th or do we give our comments before

2006
03:01:32,240 --> 03:01:36,640
 uh the meeting on the 19th or right into the pnz

2007
03:01:36,640 --> 03:01:45,600
 stand by we'll get you an answer on that miss miss Todd you absolutely can provide

2008
03:01:45,600 --> 03:01:51,360
 comments um through me or through staff and and we'll get those okay and who is this

2009
03:01:51,360 --> 03:01:58,800
 I'm sorry this is Scott McDonald oh okay so I yeah okay so send it in general to the planning

2010
03:01:58,800 --> 03:02:05,360
 zoning uh in relation to that and then you can speak before the meeting or after or whatever on

2011
03:02:05,360 --> 03:02:11,680
 the 19th um correct just as soon as we get to that date but I'll be certain to reach out to you

2012
03:02:12,800 --> 03:02:17,440
 okay thank you so much thank you take care

2013
03:02:17,440 --> 03:02:23,920
 I think we will have our next caller brought up

2014
03:02:23,920 --> 03:02:42,000
 hi there caller you're on with the planning and zoning commission meeting can you hear me

2015
03:02:43,440 --> 03:02:47,360
 yes can you hear me all right we can thank you if you'll state your name and address

2016
03:02:47,360 --> 03:02:53,600
 you three minutes we'll begin okay thank you um Jennifer Lane I live on Willowood street in

2017
03:02:53,600 --> 03:03:01,200
 Denton 76205 and I'm calling because at the meeting the neighborhood meeting that we had

2018
03:03:01,200 --> 03:03:05,120
 one of the people who was adjacent to the property mentioned some flooding

2019
03:03:05,120 --> 03:03:09,520
 and I don't know if we've been trying to find her since then but I don't know if she's been

2020
03:03:09,520 --> 03:03:17,120
 able to call in or write to you um okay but the issue with that um there was storm water that

2021
03:03:17,120 --> 03:03:25,600
 would be but maybe if um Kim Lihon or four star were to expand the um the planting and seeding

2022
03:03:25,600 --> 03:03:33,680
 buffer or if they could use the use give us give up more of the um the land with the the old growth

2023
03:03:33,680 --> 03:03:38,640
 trees that it would help with that flooding so there might be actually a reason to consider

2024
03:03:39,280 --> 03:03:44,000
 the trees not just because they are a value in and of themselves but in relation to the EFA

2025
03:03:44,000 --> 03:03:46,000
 that's basically it

2026
03:03:46,000 --> 03:03:54,080
 thank you Jennifer for your comments yes yes we are here thank you yes I believe her I believe

2027
03:03:54,080 --> 03:03:59,120
 the lady's name was I believe the lady's name was Nancy that's what I remember I think that's her

2028
03:03:59,120 --> 03:04:05,040
 name living adjacent to the property so I don't know if she's called in or written but um I wanted

2029
03:04:05,040 --> 03:04:09,440
 to point that out because I remembered it from the neighborhood meeting very good well thank you for

2030
03:04:09,440 --> 03:04:14,800
 doing so we appreciate it thank you yeah and I do think that those trees are valuable and I hope that

2031
03:04:14,800 --> 03:04:21,200
 the um the ESA can make room for them thank you thank you okay bye bye

2032
03:04:21,200 --> 03:04:27,440
 Commissioner Beck did you have a question yeah again this is for Christy um and it

2033
03:04:27,440 --> 03:04:36,560
 just the caller's comments um when when we're assisting the needs of an ESA do we how are the

2034
03:04:36,560 --> 03:04:42,640
 the drainage of the surrounding properties and how those affect the ESA uh addressed

2035
03:04:42,640 --> 03:04:55,840
 um flooding is not really something that um is while it overlaps with um with the ESA's um the

2036
03:04:55,840 --> 03:05:02,960
 the protection requirements of the the floodplain and the riparian buffer in the water related

2037
03:05:02,960 --> 03:05:11,200
 habitats um they work in tandem and complement the floodplain regulations but it's really the

2038
03:05:11,200 --> 03:05:21,280
 floodplain regulations that are are the um the um overseer of of that of the of the flooding the

2039
03:05:21,280 --> 03:05:28,560
 downstream properties and um again with this preliminary plat and those issues were addressed

2040
03:05:28,560 --> 03:05:36,240
 and um the the reason that staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat was because

2041
03:05:36,240 --> 03:05:43,360
 the applicant had shown sufficiently that they had um they had addressed those type of concerns

2042
03:05:43,360 --> 03:05:48,480
 thank you I think we have another caller on the line

2043
03:05:51,280 --> 03:06:00,480
 um

2044
03:06:00,480 --> 03:06:08,880
 while we're waiting for the call to be brought up I will um mention for the record that we did

2045
03:06:08,880 --> 03:06:16,880
 have eight people use our online forms to comment on this item um all eight were against the item

2046
03:06:16,880 --> 03:06:22,160
 um these comment forms were emailed to all of us as well as will be recorded by our secretary

2047
03:06:22,160 --> 03:06:25,120
 hi caller are you there

2048
03:06:25,120 --> 03:06:30,720
 hello caller are you there

2049
03:06:30,720 --> 03:06:44,480
 I do not hear anyone stand by well we look into that technology issue

2050
03:06:47,040 --> 03:06:56,480
 um

2051
03:07:16,880 --> 03:07:26,480
 um

2052
03:07:26,480 --> 03:07:40,480
 um

2053
03:07:46,880 --> 03:07:56,880
 okay it'll be just a minute they are getting her back on the line apparently her call was dropped

2054
03:07:56,880 --> 03:08:07,360
 and madam chair it I can just mention that um we're tentatively scheduled for go ahead

2055
03:08:07,360 --> 03:08:15,760
 hi caller are you there hello I am here I welcome welcome to the public planning and zoning commission

2056
03:08:15,760 --> 03:08:19,760
 meeting yes we can hear you if you'll state your name and address your time will begin you'll have

2057
03:08:19,760 --> 03:08:27,040
 three minutes to speak thank you this is Sharon Kramer three five seven four pine trail and I'm

2058
03:08:27,040 --> 03:08:33,040
 a member of the North Denton neighbor association and there are quite a few of us along the Hartley

2059
03:08:33,040 --> 03:08:39,200
 field area we consider ourselves a community some of us have been here 40 plus years others 50

2060
03:08:39,200 --> 03:08:47,520
 and some are a little newer and I have had occasion to speak to my membership and here's the puzzle

2061
03:08:47,520 --> 03:08:58,720
 that we're in July 16th 2019 we were in front of the city council and the city council five of them

2062
03:08:58,720 --> 03:09:07,600
 members Davis members Armenter member Meltzer member Briggs and oh I'm fuzzy and it's late

2063
03:09:07,600 --> 03:09:14,080
 in the evening for me and my sympathy to the commissioners member Watts even said all right

2064
03:09:14,080 --> 03:09:22,640
 so we're arguing or we're considering the placement of this connection to Hartley field road

2065
03:09:22,640 --> 03:09:27,920
 and making Hartley field miss Kramer can I can I interrupt you just a minute so you're not calling

2066
03:09:27,920 --> 03:09:36,080
 in on the alt ESA that we're discussing I am not because I wasn't following I was calling in on the

2067
03:09:36,080 --> 03:09:42,560
 agave southern arterial okay because um the way our process works is yeah you're only allowed to

2068
03:09:42,560 --> 03:09:50,800
 yeah comment once on that and you called in at work session got it okay all right all right sorry

2069
03:09:50,800 --> 03:09:59,920
 thank you so much thank you miss Kramer all right bye do we have any other callers on the line

2070
03:10:00,880 --> 03:10:13,760
 okay we do have other callers

2071
03:10:30,880 --> 03:10:39,760
 so

2072
03:10:39,760 --> 03:10:57,600
 okay apparently um they've made several attempts to get the caller on the line

2073
03:10:57,600 --> 03:11:05,200
 and we cannot do so so that leaves us with no callers on the line so with that I will close

2074
03:11:05,200 --> 03:11:11,680
 the public hearing and open the floor for a motion or discussion commissioner smith make a motion to

2075
03:11:11,680 --> 03:11:20,240
 approve with staff recommendations commissioner cole second okay we have a motion on the floor

2076
03:11:20,240 --> 03:11:32,800
 to approve a esa 20 0003 b in a second discussion commissioner beck yeah I can I just be clear

2077
03:11:32,800 --> 03:11:38,560
 are we're discussing the the sort of the flexible option that that christy made is that your motion

2078
03:11:38,560 --> 03:11:50,800
 mr commissioner smith yes thank you okay any other discussion and I think I'd just like to

2079
03:11:50,800 --> 03:11:56,640
 add that certainly um I would love to for them to be able to more than consider the trees if at all

2080
03:11:56,640 --> 03:12:04,000
 possible um but certainly love that that flexibility is in there okay we have a motion uh in a second

2081
03:12:04,000 --> 03:12:12,000
 to approve we will take a vote via roll call commissioner smith aye commissioner cole

2082
03:12:12,000 --> 03:12:19,840
 aye commissioner beck aye commissioner anderson aye commissioner prunetta

2083
03:12:19,840 --> 03:12:30,480
 aye and the chair is an aye that motion passes six zero that concludes our public hearings

2084
03:12:30,480 --> 03:12:38,880
 and takes us to our planning and zoning matrix um I think Richard is on the line if he has any updates

2085
03:12:38,880 --> 03:12:47,200
 I'll speak on behalf of Richard that there wasn't necessarily any updates okay

2086
03:12:47,200 --> 03:12:53,680
 very good appreciate that um does any commissioner have anything to add to our matrix

2087
03:12:57,120 --> 03:13:03,680
 okay seeing none um that would just leave it concluding items um and with that what I would

2088
03:13:03,680 --> 03:13:08,960
 like to do is is congratulate chair roselle and and his wife heather who welcomed their third son

2089
03:13:08,960 --> 03:13:14,560
 this past weekend which is why he is not at the meeting today so congratulations to them and all

2090
03:13:14,560 --> 03:13:20,880
 the best as they settle in all together um so with that we will conclude our meeting and I will call

2091
03:13:20,880 --> 03:13:25,600
 us adjourned at 9 o' 9 p.m. Thank you everyone.