Apr 29, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2026-04-29 5:00 PM

[00:00:11]

THIS WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29TH, WITH A QUORUM PRESENT, WE'LL CALL THIS SESSION OF THE DENTON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WORK SESSION TO ORDER. OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS CITIZEN COMMENTS ON CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. I DON'T SEE ANYONE PRESENT, SO WE WILL MOVE ON TO CLARIFICATION OF AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE MEETING. THERE IS. SORRY. ONE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT FROM THE COMMISSION NOT SEEING ANY. WE'LL GO TO OUR INDIVIDUAL

CONSIDERATION ITEMS FOR A IS FP26-13. >> GOOD EVENING CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. ANGIE MINGLER, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR, PRESENTING FP260013. THIS IS THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE APARTMENTS LOCATED SOUTH OF DUCHESS DRIVE. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL AS THEY DON'T QUITE MEET ALL OF OUR CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, BUT HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTED EXTENSION, WHICH COULD BE GRANTED TO MAY 27TH.

>> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER? >> SO I SENT AN EMAIL OUT AND AFTER I SENT IT, I GOT AWAY FROM MY DESK. SO I HAVEN'T CHECKED, BUT OBVIOUSLY NOT NECESSARILY TONIGHT. BUT MAYBE WHEN THIS COMES BACK IN FRONT OF US. I JUST NOTICED THAT THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF LAND HAS A LOT OF TREES AND JUST KIND OF CURIOUS WITH THE DIFFERENT LIKE LANDSCAPING AND TREE CODES THAT WE HAVE, LIKE WHAT KIND OF TREES ARE ON HERE? YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST ALL THAT BECAUSE, BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT TREES FOR A WHOLE YEAR ON THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE AND WAS JUST CURIOUS THAT THEY'RE MEETING ALL OF THE

REQUIREMENTS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. >> I BELIEVE THIS ITEM ACTUALLY CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL FOR A ZONING CHANGE A YEAR OR TWO AGO. RIGHT.

>> SURE. SO I CAN I CAN GIVE JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ON THIS SITE. THIS IS AN SUP. SO IT DID COME BEFORE THIS BODY AND CITY COUNCIL AND AT THE SUP STAGE AS WELL AS NOW IN THE CEP STAGE. THEY ARE MEETING AND EXCEEDING THE TREE PRESERVATION AND LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR S C ZONING. THE SOUTHERN LOT THAT YOU SEE THERE IS. IT'S AN AREA PREDOMINANTLY. IT'S INTENDED TO EITHER BE PARK SPACE, AND IF THAT DOESN'T OCCUR, IT'S INTENDED TO REMAIN IN PERPETUITY AS OPEN SPACE. SO THAT WILL REMAIN UNTOUCHED. AND THAT'S CODIFIED IN THE SUP, BUT THEY ARE PROVIDING 59% TOTAL LANDSCAPING, 65% TREE CANOPY COVERAGE, AND 38% TREE PRESERVATION, WHICH EXCEEDS ALL OF OUR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. AND THAT'S CODIFIED IN BOTH THE SUP. AND THEY'RE THEY'RE SUPERSEDING WHAT WAS APPROVED IN THE SUP AT THE CIVIL STAGE.

SO THEY ARE MEETING ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU ANGIE. NEXT ITEM FOR BFP26-11. >> GOOD EVENING CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. ASHLEY, ASSOCIATE PLANNER. THIS IS A FINAL PLAT FOR HONEY FARMS ESTATES, APPROXIMATELY 9.24 ACRE SITE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SANDERS ROAD. AT THIS TIME, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL, BUT WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTED EXTENSION. HAPPY TO

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> YES, COMMISSIONER MCDUFF? >> YES. JUST A POINT. HI, ASHLEY. HOW ARE YOU? I BELIEVE ON THE BACK PAGE WE HAVE A DIFFERENT DATE THAT I'M SEEING.

IT'S JUST. IT'S JUST A TYPO. IT SAYS MAY 26TH INSTEAD OF MAY 27TH.

>> THAT IS A TYPO IN MAY 27TH IS CORRECT. >> CORRECT.

>> YES. >> YES. >> UNLESS ANYBODY WANTS TO SHOW UP ON A TUESDAY, YOU KNOW. OKAY. THANK YOU ANGIE. NEXT UP IS FOR CFP26-12.

>> GOOD EVENING, JULIE WYATT, PRINCIPAL PLANNER. THIS IS A FINAL PLAT FOR THE SUMMIT 35 EDITION, WHICH IS AN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT I-35 AND LOOP 288. AT THIS TIME, THE PLAT DOES NOT MEET OUR CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING DENIAL. HOWEVER, WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THEIR REQUESTED SECOND EXTENSION TO MAY 27TH, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> I GUESS I HAVE ONE ON ON THIS ONE. I KNOW THERE WAS A

[00:05:03]

BUNCH OF DIFFERENT THINGS. >> WITH A I SORRY, WITH A IT HAS A PD OVER IT. SO IT HAS A PD OVERLAY BECAUSE YOU ARE CORRECT. IT IS OUR NORTHERN GATEWAY. AND AND STAFF WAS CONCERNED ABOUT VISUAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH WITH LARGE WAREHOUSE TYPE INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS. AND SO IT REQUIRED ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING AT THE RIGHT OF WAY AND SCREENING OF

THE OF THE DOCK DOORS. OKAY. THANK YOU. SURE. >> I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ELSE.

COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> IT'S JUST A COMMENT. HI, JULIE. HI. SAME COMMENT ON THAT

BACK PAGE. IT STILL SAYS APRIL 29TH. >> OH IT IS. OH. I'M SORRY. IT

SHOULD BE MAY 27TH. YES. APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. >> YES. NO WORRIES.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANKS. DON'T SEE ANY MORE. THANK YOU. JULIE. WE HAVE FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS

TONIGHT. SO FIRST UP IS 5AZ25-17. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ASHLEY Z, ASSOCIATE PLANNER. THIS IS A REZONING REQUEST FOR DENTON STRYKER. THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE FROM R R ZONING TO A SUBURBAN CORRIDOR ZONING DISTRICT ON APPROXIMATELY 4.37 ACRES OF LAND. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. THE APPLICANT DID REQUEST ANNEXATION EARLIER THIS YEAR AND THAT WAS COMPLETED. THEY ALSO OWN THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES TO THE WEST AND SOUTH, SO THEY ARE SEEKING TO ALIGN THE ZONING DISTRICT. THE ZONING WITH THE REST OF THE PROPERTY AND STAFF DOES

RECOMMEND APPROVAL, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> COMMISSIONER MCDUFF.

>> YES. THANK YOU. I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS TO MAKE A MATCH TO THE ADJACENT

PROPERTY. >> CORRECT? >> I'M UNDERSTANDING AND I'M

ALSO UNDERSTANDING THAT THE COMMERCIAL USES REMAIN DOMINANT. >> CORRECT.

>> OKAY. THANKS. >> NOT SEEING ANYTHING ELSE. THANK YOU. SECOND UP IS 5BZ26-4.

>> THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO R-1 ZONING DISTRICT ON APPROXIMATELY 3.3 ACRES OF LAND. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. OTHER THAN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THE APPLICANT FOR THIS PROPERTY WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, AND HE DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR ZONING. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND

APPROVAL AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> SORRY, I GUESS I'M NOT

SEEING ANY. THANK YOU. BRINGS US TO 5CPD26-1. >> GOOD EVENING CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. I AM JUST FILLING IN FOR SEAN ON THE WORK SESSION PORTION, BUT HE IS EXPECTED TO BE HERE FOR THE REGULAR MEETING. AND THIS, AS STATED IN THE CAPTION IS PD 2601. THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE A PROPERTY FROM R72PDM IN. THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS APPROXIMATELY 0.786 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SCRIPTURE STREET. SPECIFICALLY AT THAT NORTHWEST CORNER OF SCRIPTURE AND OR MALONE. THE REQUEST IS INTENDED TO ESTABLISH AN BASED ZONING DISTRICT AND THEN ADD AN SP REQUIREMENT FOR MULTIFAMILY USE, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT SP PERMISSIONS FOR THE CURRENT R SEVEN ZONING. WITH THAT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST AS IT COMPLIES WITH OUR SPECIFIC CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, AND I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS I HAVE OR TAKE SOME TO GIVE TO

SEAN TO PREPARE FOR YOU FOR THE REGULAR SESSION. >> I IMAGINE SEAN HAS THE WHOLE LIKE SET BACK DIFFERENCES AND THEN REQUIRES THE BUILDING TO BE UP TOWARD THE STREET, THAT SORT OF THING. BECAUSE THAT, IN MY VIEW, THAT'S THE MANY OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PD R SEVEN AND THE PD M N, RIGHT? WE DON'T NEED TO GO OVER IT NOW. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT

THAT'S LAID OUT. >> YEAH, YEAH. THE DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, THE DIMENSIONAL

DIFFERENCES. >> YEAH. BECAUSE I THINK JUST UNDERSTANDING WHERE THE

[00:10:02]

COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> JUST A QUESTION. WHAT IS WHAT IS THIS NOW? WHAT BUILDING IS THIS? NOW I PLAN TO DO A DRIVE BY. I DIDN'T GET OVER THERE.

>> I BELIEVE IT'S COMMERCIAL USES. HALEY. THE EXISTING USE. >> I BELIEVE IT'S A MIXED OFFICE BUILDING. I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS A CURRENT TENANT, BUT MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT'S WHAT SPARKED THIS REQUEST, WAS THAT IT WAS VACANT AND THEY WERE LOOKING FOR TENANTS FOR THE BUILDING. THEY ORIGINALLY HAD A ONE OF THE FLIGHT SCHOOLS FROM THE AIRPORT THAT WANTED TO HAVE THEIR KIND OF A TRAINING FACILITY HERE, AND THAT USE WAS NOT PERMITTED. SO THAT'S WHAT SENT THEM DOWN THIS PATH. THAT USE HAS SINCE FOUND A DIFFERENT LOCATION THAT I BELIEVE BETTER SUITS THEIR NEEDS, BUT THE OWNER WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE WITH THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAD A WIDER VARIETY OF COMMERCIAL TYPE USES THAT COULD FIT ON THE PROPERTY.

>> OKAY. >> I DON'T KNOW. >> AND MAY I ASK ANOTHER MAYOR NON-TYPICAL PROPERTIES, IS THAT A DEVELOPER OR IS THIS OWNED BY A BANK? BECAUSE THERE'S A

BANKER'S NAME ON HERE. >> LOOKS LIKE THE APPLICANT IS MCADAMS ON BEHALF OF

NON-TYPICAL PROPERTIES LLC. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT ENTITY IS. >> OKAY.

>> I BELIEVE SEAN IS NOW. >> AND SEAN. JUST WALKED IN THE DOOR. SEEMS LIKE HE MIGHT BE

READY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. >> YES. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, SEAN JACOBSON, SENIOR PLANNER. SO I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH WE'VE

GONE THROUGH HERE, BUT VERY. >> VERY INITIALLY, I THINK THE THE WE GOT THE OVERVIEW OF THE CHANGES. I HAD ASKED JUST BRIEFLY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SORT OF A COMPARISON BETWEEN SETBACKS AND BUILDING SITING OPTIONS BETWEEN THE, THE EXISTING R7 WITH AN SUP AND THE PDM, WHICH I IMAGINE YOU HAVE. AND THEN COMMISSIONER MCDUFF WAS ASKING ABOUT THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PARCEL THAT UNDER THE DEVELOPER LIST THERE WAS A BANKER OR SOMETHING.

>> YEAH. SO IT'S OWNED BY AN LLC. I BELIEVE THAT NON-TYPICAL PROPERTIES, WE PROVIDE THAT LIST AS USUAL, BUT ESSENTIALLY THEY'RE, THEY OWN IT. THEY'RE LOOKING TO LEASE IT. AND WE'RE WANTING TO HAVE MAYBE SOME MORE OPTIONS FOR THE TYPE OF USES TO WHOM THEY CAN LEASE IT.

>> I'LL SAY. >> AND IF I IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THIS WAS THE FIRST LOCATION FOR SOMA DENTON, AND IT'S BEEN VACANT SLASH OTHER THINGS FOR A LONG TIME.

>> YEAH. UNT HAD USED IT FOR A PERIOD OF TIME FOR RESEARCH. AND THEN THERE WAS INITIALLY A PROPOSAL AS, AS MENTIONED IN YOUR BACKUP TO HAVE U.S. AVIATION MOVE IN HERE, WHICH WAS THE INITIAL IMPETUS. AND THEN THEY FOUND A DIFFERENT LOCATION.

>> OKAY. >> DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? >> I KNOW RIGHT WHERE IT IS NOW.

>> OKAY. THAT'S IT'S THE LANDMARK THING. YOU SEE THE SIGNS, NOT THE BUILDINGS.

>> RIGHT? >> YEAH. I UNDERSTAND, COMMISSIONER DYER.

>> WITH THE CHANGE, WILL THERE BE ENOUGH PARKING SPACES? BECAUSE JUST FROM THIS VIEW, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF PARKING AT THIS LOCATION. SO WILL, IS IT GRANDFATHERED IN? LIKE, IS THERE ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE ENOUGH FOR THIS ZONE?

>> YEAH. SO, SO AS OF NOW, WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT USE WOULD GO IN, BUT ANY USE THAT GOES IN WOULD NEED TO MEET OUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THERE ARE CERTAINLY USES UNDER M N THAT COULD FIT WITH PARKING THERE. WE ALSO THERE'S ALSO A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PARKING ON BOTH SIDES WHERE PARKING AGREEMENTS COULD ALSO BE USED. THEY'RE RIGHT NEXT DOOR AND THEN ACROSS THE J. SO THERE'S A FAIRLY LARGE PARKING STRUCTURE. SO THAT WAS SOMETHING WE WERE ACTUALLY TALKING WITH U.S. AVIATION ABOUT THAT THEY MAY HAVE BEEN WORKING OUT SOME

SHARED PARKING AGREEMENTS AS WELL. SO. >> I BELIEVE JUST THE WAY OUR CODE HANDLES PARKING RIGHT NOW IS IT'S IT'S BY THE USE, NOT BY THE ZONING DESIGNATION. SO WHILE THIS MIGHT CHANGE THE, THE USES THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED, THEY WOULD ALL STILL BE

EVALUATED THE SAME WAY WITH PARKING TABLE IN OUR CODE. >> YEAH. THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO USE IS GOING TO GO IN. THEY WOULD NEED TO BE ABLE TO PARK IT OR USE ONE OF OUR PARKING

ALTERNATIVES. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? I DON'T SEE ANY. THANK

YOU SEAN, THANK YOU. AND NEXT UP IS 5DS25-8. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. BRYCE VANARSDALE, ASSISTANT PLANNER THIS IS S 250008. RELATED TO A TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER. IT IS A MONOPOLE TOWER OVER 85FT, WHICH REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. SO THIS LOCATION IS NOT THERE. IT'S THERE. THIS IS ON THE WESTERN CORNER OF NORTH ELM

[00:15:10]

QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS? I DON'T SEE ANY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. WE HAVE ONE WORK SESSION ITEM. HOWEVER, I WILL PAUSE HERE AND WE'RE MAKING VERY GOOD TIME. THE FOOD IS HERE AND IT INVOLVES POTATO, WHICH DOESN'T ALWAYS STAY HOT FOREVER. SO WOULD WOULD THE COMMISSION LIKE TO TO BREAK AND AND DO A WORK SESSION? OR SHOULD WE POWER THROUGH AND THEN EAT ANY PREFERENCES? EITHER HUNGRY TO SPEAK OR NOT HUNGRY YET AND

TIRED. WERE YOU GOING TO SAY SOMETHING, COMMISSIONER MCDUFF? >> I'LL DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO. YOU'RE THE CHAIR. I COULD HAVE A POTATO AT ANY HOUR DURING THE DAY.

>> OH MY GOODNESS. POTATO. POTATO. I THINK THIS WORK SESSION MAY. MAY BRING UP A LOT OF TOPICS. SO WHY DON'T WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND BREAK AND GRAB OUR POTATOES AND BE BACK AT 528. WE'LL AIM FOR. THANK YOU.

[00:23:46]

[A. PZ26-069 Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding Data Centers.]

DISCUSSION REGARDING DATA CENTERS. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. ANGIE ANGLER, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR, HERE TO TALK TO YOU ALL A LITTLE BIT ABOUT DATA CENTERS THIS EVENING. FOLLOWING UP ON ONE OF OUR MATRIX REQUESTED ITEMS. SO BEFORE WE DIVE INTO THE PRESENTATION, JUST KIND OF GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY. WE DO HAVE TWO DATA CENTERS IN THE CITY. YOU ALL ACTUALLY RECENTLY SAW ONE IN DECEMBER, AND THAT IS THE SECOND OF THE TWO AS IT RELATES TO GOING FORWARD, ONGOING DATA CENTER REVIEW AND PLANNING WITH ERCOT. THOSE PROJECTS SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERWAY ARE KNOWN AS BATCH ZERO. ANYONE'S COMING AFTER THAT IN THE 3 TO 5 YEARS FOLLOWING ARE KNOWN AS BATCH ONE. THE CITY OF DENTON HAS NO PROJECTS IN THOSE QUEUES, SO WE'RE NOT PLANNING TO SEE ANY DATA CENTERS WITHIN AT LEAST THAT TIME PERIOD. SO THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S DISCUSSION, I WANT TO GIVE YOU ALL AN OVERVIEW OF DATA CENTERS IN THE DDC, HOW THEY GET INTO THE DDC, WHAT SORT OF SPURRED THAT CONVERSATION. AND THEN WE'RE REALLY GOING TO LOOK INTO THOSE

[00:25:03]

NOW, AT THE TIME, WE DIDN'T HAVE AN ALLOWABLE LAND USE THAT NECESSARILY CAPTURED DATA CENTER, BUT UTILIZE THE DIRECTOR DETERMINATION PROCEEDINGS THAT ARE IN THE DDC TO MAKE THE CATEGORY THAT THIS WAS MOST MAKE THE GENERALIZATION THAT THIS WAS MOST CONSISTENT WITH THE USE WAREHOUSE AND WHOLESALE WHOLESALE FACILITY. SO THAT DATA CENTER WAS APPROVED UNDER THAT SORT OF OVERARCHING LAND USE. BUT FOLLOWING THAT APPROVAL, THERE WERE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT REQUESTS AND INTEREST FOR SIMILAR DATA CENTERS THAT DIDN'T QUITE FIT THAT INITIAL WAREHOUSE DATA CENTER PRODUCT. PREDOMINANTLY, THE DATA CENTERS WERE MORE MODULAR IN NATURE, AND IT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT TO FIT THOSE UNDER THAT DIRECTOR DETERMINATION OF A WAREHOUSE USE. SO AT THAT TIME, WITH THAT ADDITIONAL INTEREST, THE CITY DID BRING DATA CENTERS AS A TOPIC TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE IN 2022. THEY DID DISCUSS IT AND ESTABLISH TWO DIFFERENT SUBCATEGORIES OF DATA CENTERS THAT WENT THROUGH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AND THEN IN SEPTEMBER OF 2022, CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THOSE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS INCORPORATING THE REGULATIONS THAT WE HAVE TODAY, WHICH I'M GOING TO GO OVER IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL. SO FIRST, IT'S IMPORTANT TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHERE DATA CENTERS FIT IN OUR OVERALL TABLE OF ALLOWED USES. WE DO CONSIDER THEM TO BE AN INDUSTRIAL LAND USE. AND WE DO DIVIDE DATA CENTERS INTO TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES A MODULAR DATA CENTER AND A WAREHOUSE DATA CENTER. SO MODULAR DATA CENTERS SUP ONLY AND ALLOWED AN L I, H I AND WAREHOUSE DATA CENTERS. YOU COULD REQUEST IT AS AN SUP IN MRSC AND H C. IT IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN GOLIHI AND P F SO A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. NOW WHAT'S THE SORT OF THE DIFFERENCE. SO MODULAR DATA CENTERS AS A PRINCIPAL USE ARE INTENDED FOR LONG TERM STORAGE OF SPECIALIZED COMPUTING EQUIPMENT WITHIN MODULAR STRUCTURES. THIS COULD BE PODS, SHIPPING CONTAINERS, CARGO CONTAINERS AND OTHER SIMILAR STORAGE CONTAINERS USED FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF STORING, GATHERING, PROCESSING OR ANALYZING LARGE AMOUNTS OF DATA. THEY ARE SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND AGAIN, ONLY ALLOWED WITHIN S, U, P, AND L, I, H, I, AND P F. SO THESE IMAGES THAT YOU SEE ON YOUR SCREEN HERE ARE KIND OF WHAT MODULAR DATA CENTERS COULD LOOK LIKE THERE. AGAIN, NOT HOUSED IN A SINGULAR BUILDING, BUT THEY ARE MORE POD LIKE IN NATURE AND SORT OF STANDALONE. ANY MODULAR DATA CENTER PROPOSED IN THE CITY IS SUBJECT TO OUR USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS. THAT INCLUDES ALL ON SITE EQUIPMENT, AND ANY OUTDOOR STORAGE DOES NEED TO BE OPAQUELY SCREENED FROM ALL RIGHTS OF WAY, AS WELL AS ANY ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USE OR ZONING DISTRICT STRUCTURES. ON SITE EQUIPMENT AND OUTDOOR STORAGE NEEDS TO BE SET BACK AT LEAST 100FT FROM ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS OR USES, AND AT LEAST TWO ELEMENTS FROM TABLE SEVEN POINT E, WHICH IS OUR LANDSCAPING TABLE, SHALL BE REQUIRED ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES. SORRY, I SKIPPED A SLIDE. IN ADDITION, UPON EACH INITIAL SUBMITTAL, AN APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT AN ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION STUDY. THE DDC DOES OUTLINE WHO'S QUALIFIED TO TO GIVE THOSE STUDIES, BUT IT DOES NEED TO BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL. UPON THE FINDINGS OF THAT STUDY, THE DATA CENTER SHALL NOT INCREASE THE NOISE MORE TO MORE THAN 60DB AT THE PROPERTY LINE, OR SHALL NOT INCREASE IT BY MORE THAN THREE DECIBELS. AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS AT THE PROPERTY LINE, THE DATA CENTER SHOULDN'T BE GENERATING NOISE GREATER THAN 60DB. HOWEVER, IF THE AMBIENT NOISE IS ALREADY GREATER THAN THAT AT THE PROPERTY LINE, IT CAN'T INCREASE MORE THAN THREE. UPON COMPLETION OF THEIR CONSTRUCTION, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT VERIFICATION THAT THEY ARE MEETING THOSE LEVELS TO THE CITY, AND THEN IF THEY DO NEED AN ON SITE ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION, WE SIMPLY REQUIRE THAT THEY NEED TO FOLLOW THOSE REQUIREMENTS IN THE DDC THAT WE MAINTAIN FOR OURSELVES. AS IT RELATES TO THE DESIGN OF THOSE SUBSTATIONS. WAREHOUSE DATA CENTERS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, PREDOMINANTLY IN HOW THEY'RE DEFINED. WAREHOUSE DATA CENTERS ARE A BUILDING THAT'S INTENDED TO STORE THE EQUIPMENT FOR SPECIALIZED COMPUTING HARDWARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF STORING, GATHERING, PROCESSING, OR ANALYZING DATA. IT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT IN WHERE WE ALLOW THESE USES ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THE GOLIH. I'M P F ZONING DISTRICTS, AND THEY'RE ALLOWED WITH AN S P IN

[00:30:02]

ALSO HAVE REPRESENTATIVE FROM DMV HERE. >> THANK YOU ANGIE. ARE.

COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> SEE IF I CAN GET HER IN THE CENTER HERE.

>> ANGIE, DID YOU SAY IN? GOOD JOB. DID YOU DRAW THE SHORT STRAW ON DOING THIS

PRESENTATION, OR IS THIS YOUR AREA OF EXPERTISE? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S NECESSARILY MY AREA OF EXPERTISE, BUT GIVEN I HAD THE MOST RECENT DATA CENTER, SUP, I

WAS FAMILIAR AND VOLUNTEERED MYSELF. >> I GOT IT. SO WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY WAS WE HAVE TWO APPROVED RIGHT NOW. YES. AND ONE, WE JUST DID THE APPROVAL

FOR KIND OF A REPURPOSING, I BELIEVE, RIGHT AT 380. >> SO WE WE HAVE TWO IN THE CITY. THAT INCLUDES THE ONE YOU ALL JUST APPROVED. ONE IS LOCATED AT THE DECK. SO THE ENERGY CENTER AND THE OTHER ONE, THE SUP WAS IT WAS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER SOUTH FROM 380. IT WAS SOUTH OF JIM CRYSTAL ROAD ADJACENT TO THAT SUBSTATION, SORT OF SANDWICHED BETWEEN THAT AND THE PETERBILT PARKING FACILITY. THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO.

>> IT'S KIND OF A REUSE. THAT SECOND ONE IS KIND OF LIKE I REMEMBER IT KIND OF A REUSE OF AN OLD FOOD LION BUILDING. IT WAS AN ABANDONED SITE AND IT WASN'T TAKING UP ANY GREEN

SPACE. WASN'T IT WAS CORRECT. >> IT HAD IT WAS UNDEVELOPED AND THERE'S NOT WATER OR ANY UTILITIES TO THAT AREA. BUT YES, IT WASN'T IT WASN'T NECESSARILY GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN,

IT WAS SANDWICHED BETWEEN MULTIPLE INDUSTRIAL USES. >> YEAH. AND THEN AND SO WHAT I

ALSO HEARD YOU SAY THERE'S NOTHING IN THE HOPPER. >> CORRECT.

>> NONE IN THE HOPPER. >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU ANGIE.

>> COMMISSIONER MCDADE. >> I WAS TRYING TO GET UP. PLEASE EXCUSE MY VOICE, BUT I WAS TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING IN MY EAR AND MIND WHAT THE NOISE LEVEL THAT'S ALLOWED ABOUT. DO. IS THERE AN EXPECTATION OR DO THEY PUT OFF A LOT OF NOISE IF IT'S

60, WHAT IS THAT ABOUT SOUNDING LIKE? >> I THINK 60 WE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THIS EARLIER THIS WEEK IS SIMILAR TO TO MAYBE YOUR DISHWASHER WHEN IT'S RUNNING IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD. WHEN YOU GET CLOSER TO THE 7080 RANGE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LIKE, LIKE TRAFFIC IN YOUR IMMEDIATE VICINITY IN THE AREAS WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED, 60 WOULD, WOULD BE PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH AN INDUSTRIAL AREA THAT WE DO BUILD IN THAT ADDITIONAL THREE

[00:35:03]

DECIBELS FOR THOSE CASES. >> AND JUST ONE MORE QUESTION. AND THE WAREHOUSES ARE THERE TRADITIONALLY STAFF FOR PERSONNEL ON SITE AT THE DATA CENTERS OR WAREHOUSES?

>> THAT YES, IT WILL DEPEND ON THE USER WHAT STAFFING THEY DO HAVE, BUT THERE'S THERE'S LIKELY TO AT LEAST BE SOME STAFF COMING AND GOING FOR, FOR MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING

OPERATIONS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> COMMISSIONER DYER.

>> HOW CLOSELY IS STAFF KEEPING UP WITH LIKE THE CHANGES IN DATA CENTERS? BECAUSE THIS IS LIKE THE HOT TOPIC. IT SEEMS LIKE FOR THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS AND DATA CENTER REQUIREMENTS AND WHAT THEY CAN DO IS EVER CHANGING. YOU KNOW, I THINK IN FULL DISCLOSURE, MY HUSBAND WORKS FOR A COMPANY THAT HIS JOB REQUIRES DATA CENTERS FOR THE MAINTAINING OF DATA AND RECORDS AND ALL OF THAT. AND AS WE RELY MORE AND MORE ON TECHNOLOGY, THIS IS GOING TO BE A, YOU KNOW, MORE AND MORE DATA STORAGE. AND SO I KNOW THAT BECAUSE THERE'S PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT THE CONSUMPTION OF WATER AND THE CONSUMPTION OF ENERGY, THAT THESE DATA CENTERS HAVE, THEIR, YOU KNOW, DATA CENTERS ARE ALSO TRYING TO FIND NEW WAYS TO ADDRESS THAT WITH SELF-SUSTAINING WHERE THEY HAVE LIKE THEIR OWN LITTLE POWER PLANT THERE ON THE SITE. SO HOW IS STAFF KIND OF KEEPING UP WITH THAT AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE INFORMED? BECAUSE WHILE WE MAY ONLY HAVE TWO RIGHT NOW, IT'S QUITE POSSIBLE THAT WE COULD HAVE MORE BECAUSE WE LIVE IN AN AREA WHERE THERE IS OPEN LAND. AND RIGHT NOW THAT'S WHERE THE DATA CENTERS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY TAKE UP A LOT OF SPACE WHERE THEY'RE THEY WANT TO BUILD. AND, AND DO YOU LIKE CHECK OUT TO OUR NEIGHBORS WHO ALREADY HAVE DATA CENTERS? LIKE, IS THE CITY TALKING TO THEIR CITIES ON HOW THEY'VE WORKED ON THIS? I KNOW IT'S A

LOT OF QUESTIONS IN THERE. I'M SORRY. >> SURE. I'LL TRY AND BREAK THEM OUT A LITTLE BIT, ONE BY ONE. BUT AN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, HOW CLOSELY STAFF MONITORING CHANGES IN THAT VERY CLOSELY, PARTICULARLY OUR FRIENDS OVER AT DME MONITOR THESE THINGS AND GIVE US, AS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HEADS UP AS POSSIBLE. LEGISLATION IS MOVING THROUGH, AS WELL AS LOOKING AT WAYS IN WHICH WE COULD IMPROVE FUTURE DATA CENTERS GOING FORWARD. I DO THINK WE WERE POSSIBLY ONE OF THE FIRST OR ONE OF THE FIRST FEW TO ESTABLISH DATA CENTER REGULATIONS AS IT RELATES TO REQUIREMENTS IN THE D, D, C, AND AGAIN, AS AS THINGS CHANGE, WE DO LOOK TO WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING AND WHAT DOES AND DOESN'T WORK. AND OF COURSE, IF ANYBODY SEES A SUGGESTION, YOU REALLY LIKE HOW ONE CITY DID SOMETHING, WE'RE ALWAYS WILLING TO HEAR THOSE CONCERNS, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WILL PROBABLY CONTINUE TO CHANGE OVER THE NEXT COUPLE YEARS. BUT WE DO MONITOR THOSE THINGS VERY, VERY

CLOSELY. >> COMMISSIONER KOCHER SAID. >> YEAH, THANKS. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE BENEFIT WOULD BE TO THE CITY, LIKE IN A FINANCIAL, YOU KNOW, ANALYSIS TYPE WAY FOR

DATA CENTER? >> THAT'S A LITTLE OUT OF MY PARTICULAR SCOPE. I WILL LOOK

TO CHRIS, WHO'S MUCH SMARTER. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS. SO I'M THE GUY THAT GETS TO SPEND ALL THIS TIME LOOKING AT DATA CENTERS. SO ANGIE IS CORRECT. WE'RE LOOKING AT IT. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, ERCOT IS LOOKING AT IT, THE PUC. SO THE SENATE BILL SIX IS THE LEGISLATORS GIVING THE DIRECTION TO THE PUC. HEY, WE GOT WE GOT AN ISSUE HERE. SO AS FAR AS IT GOES, THE LIMITING FACTOR FOR THESE DATA CENTERS IS, IS POWER PROBABLY MORE SO THAN WATER. AS YOU MENTIONED, THEY'RE THEY'RE VERY SMART COMPANIES, VERY FORWARD LOOKING. THE WATER ISSUE PRETTY MUCH HAS BEEN SOLVED. ALL THESE DATA CENTERS HAVE GONE TO A CLOSED LOOP SYSTEM. SO AS SOON AS YOU FILL THEM THE FIRST TIME, THEIR WATER USAGE GOES DOWN TO, YOU KNOW, THOUSANDS OF GALLONS A YEAR. SO THEY'VE SOLVED THE WATER ISSUE, THE ELECTRIC ISSUE, NOT SO MUCH. SO THAT IS THE HOT TOPIC ISSUE. AND THAT'S WHERE THEY CAME UP WITH THIS BATCH ZERO. AND JUST TO CLARIFY SOMETHING, THERE'S NO NEW PROJECTS, BUT OUR EXISTING DATA CENTER IS A CANDIDATE FOR BATCH ZERO. SO THEY'RE EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE FACILITIES BUILT OUT, THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO THEY NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE POWER. AND THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN ON THE PLAN. BUT WE WERE USING THE ERCOT OLD METHOD, WHICH WE JUST FOUND OUT IS NO LONGER VALID.

SO WE DO HAVE SOME PORTION OF THAT PROJECT, BUT IT'S AN EXISTING PROJECT AND IT DOESN'T REQUIRE ANY MORE CONSTRUCTION OUT THERE FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. SO THINGS BEING CONSIDERED IN BATCH ZERO ARE BRING YOUR OWN POWER PLANT. SO IF YOU WANT TO BE AWS, SOMETHING THEY'RE DOING AROUND, IF YOU HAVE 1000 MEGAWATT SYSTEM, YOU HAVE TO HAVE 1000 MEGAWATT GENERATION

[00:40:06]

OF DENTON AND THE RATEPAYERS. SO. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> YES, SIR. >> ANYTHING ELSE? JUST JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE I THINK THE THE CO-LOCATED POWER PLANT STUFF WAS NOT FULLY. IN, IN USE AT THE TIME THAT WE LOOKED AT THESE REQUIREMENTS. WOULD THE NOISE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE IN THE IN THE ZONING CODE COVER ANY NOISE THAT COMES FROM THOSE ACCESSORY USES OF A POWER PLANT? IF SOMEONE CAN THINK OF

SOMETHING AS LARGE AS A POWER PLANT AS AN ACCESSORY, USE IT. >> YES. SO. BECAUSE THAT WOULD PRESUMABLY BE NEAR OR ON SITE AND CONTINUALLY OPERATING, THEY DO TAKE THAT INITIAL MEASUREMENT AT THE PROPERTY LINE AND SHOULD WOULD CAPTURE THAT NOISE WITHIN THEIR INITIAL ASSESSMENT. AND SO FOLLOWING THE INSTALLATION OF THEIR EQUIPMENT, THEY COULD INCREASE IT. THREE ON TOP OF THAT THREE DECIBELS. SO IT WOULD IT WOULD CAPTURE SOME OF THAT, THAT ON SITE OR LIKE AMBIENT NOISE THAT'S ALREADY EXISTING BASED ON WHAT'S ALREADY AROUND THEM,

IS THAT. >> YEAH, MAYBE, MAYBE I ASKED THE QUESTION WRONG OR I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND. BUT IF, IF WE HAD A FUTURE PROJECT AFTER THE STATE GETS A PIPELINE FIGURED OUT OF SOMEONE WHO WANTED TO CO-LOCATE BUILDING A NEW POWER GENERATION STATION WITH THE DATA CENTER, USE WOULD WOULD ALL OF THE NEW NOISE BE SUBJECT TO THAT SAME NOISE REQUIREMENT?

>> YES, I FOLLOW NOW. YES, IT WOULD STILL BE SUBJECT TO THAT, THAT 60 OR NO MORE THAN THREE

ABOVE THE AMBIENT. OKAY. SORRY. >> THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS COMMISSIONER.

>> ANGIE, WILL YOU BE ABLE TO PUT SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THIS BATCH ZERO ETC. IN THE

IN THE SLIDE DECK. >> WHEN WE SEND IT. >> OUT.

>> I CAN WORK WITH WITH CHRIS TO GET. >> YOUR.

>> SUMMARY ON THAT. >> YES. >> WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL BECAUSE I LIKE TO KEEP MY RESOURCES ON MY DESKTOP. I'M JUST SAYING I AM JUST TO SHARE.

I'M, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT DATA CENTERS. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE USE OF AI AND ITS ROLE IN MODERN SOCIETY 2026. AND BECAUSE I'M IN THE CLASSROOM AND TRAINING ADULT LEARNERS, I HEAR ALL OF THIS. I SEE ALL OF IT. I SEE WHAT THEY ADULT LEARNERS WANT TO DO INSTEAD OF WRITING, CREATING A SPREADSHEET ON THEIR OWN WITH. AND IT'S JUST EASY. IT'S THE BIG EASY.

SO I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT IT AND JUST SHARING THAT PERSONALLY TO GET THAT OUT THERE FOR IS TRANSPARENCY. AND MY HUSBAND DOES NOT WORK FOR DATA CENTERS OR AMAZON'S, BUT I DID SEE MY EX HUSBAND ON YOUTUBE THE OTHER DAY TALKING FOR VOTING CENTRAL CENTRALIZED VOTING. SO VERY SIMILAR. BUT ANYWAY, ANGIE, IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, IT'D BE, IT'D BE GREAT TO ADD A COUPLE MORE SLIDES. AND WITH THAT, THE BATCH ZERO CONCEPT. AND I'M GLAD TO HEAR WE HAVE NOTHING IN THE HOPPER THOUGH NEW I AM. I AM GLAD ABOUT THAT.

>> AND I MEAN, I KNOW A LOT OF THINGS HAVE CHANGED IN WHAT DATA CENTER MEANS SINCE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS PASSED BACK IN. LATE, LATE TEENS MAYBE. I DON'T REMEMBER,

[00:45:06]

>> I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED AS AS A AS A PRIORITY. I, I'M AND I KNOW I THINK THAT'S BEING POSSIBLY REVISITED IN THE UPCOMING MONTHS. CHARLIE MAY BE ABLE TO

SPEAK TO THAT PARTICULAR TOPIC MORE. >> YEAH. YOU'RE CORRECT. DATA CENTERS WAS A TOPIC AS PART OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MASTER STRATEGIC PLAN. I THINK THEY HAD A RECENT RETREAT. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYTHING IS CHANGED OUT OF THAT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DEFINITELY BRING BACK TO THIS, THIS COMMISSION. OKAY, WHEN WE SEND MORE

INFORMATION OUT. >> SURE. NO, I APPRECIATE THAT. AND THEN LAST, I THINK I DON'T RECALL YOUR NAME FROM FROM DM CHRIS CHRIS. I HAVE ONE ONE MORE QUESTION FOR CHRIS. THE. I I'VE NEVER FULLY UNDERSTOOD. I UNDERSTAND THAT AS AS WE HAVE A MUNICIPAL UTILITY, WE HAVE SOME ABILITY AS THESE LARGE CONSUMERS COME IN TO NEGOTIATE THE THE CONTRACT FOR, FOR THEIR ESSENTIALLY PURCHASING POWER FROM DME. AND. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS GIVEN, IF SOMEBODY CAME IN TO OUR CCN, YOU KNOW, THE AREA THAT WE HAVE TO PROVIDE UTILITY SERVICE THAT WAS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS. NOTWITHSTANDING THE CURRENT SITUATION WITH THE THE PHASE ZERO BATCH, BATCH ZERO AND BATCH ONE UNDER A NORMAL CONDITIONS OF, SAY, FIVE, EIGHT YEARS AGO, IF A IF AN APPLICANT CAME IN TO DO DEVELOPMENT IN COUNTY LAND ETJ LAND, WE. WE.

AS LONG AS WE COULD PROVIDE SERVICE TO THEM, WE WOULD. WE WOULD HAVE TO DO THAT. IS THAT

CORRECT? FOR PER STATE LAW. >> KIND OF KINDNESS. SO TO CLARIFY THAT. SO IN OUR WHAT YOU MENTIONED IS OUR CCN. SO THAT WHEN THEY DEREGULATED THE UTILITIES, THEY DIVIDED THE STATE INTO SINGLE SERVE. SO IN DME, WHERE WE'RE SITTING RIGHT NOW, SINGLE SERVE. SO IF A DATA CENTER WANTED TO GO RIGHT THERE AND THEY COULD MEET ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REQUIREMENT, IT WAS ZONED, WE HAVE TO SERVE THEM. WE DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. SO IN YOUR SINGLE SERVE TERRITORY, THEN YOU'RE OBLIGATED TO SERVE ANY LOAD THAT COMES IN THERE. SO AS YOU GET AND OUR SINGLE SERVE TERRITORY, THE MAPS KIND OF CONVOLUTED IF YOU THINK OF IT AS KIND OF A CIRCLE, THAT'S GENERALLY OUR, OUR SINGLE SERVICE TERRITORY. OUTSIDE OF THAT. NOW WE JUMP TO DUAL CERTIFIED. SO IN A DUAL CERTIFIED TERRITORY, THAT WOULD BE US AND COSERV OR US IN ENCORE. SO IN THAT, IN THAT PARTICULAR SITUATION, THEY COULD NEGOTIATE WITH, WITH ONCOR, THEY CAN NEGOTIATE WITH US AND THEN THEY WOULD STILL GO THERE. SO THEY COULD GO IN THE ETJ AND NOT PICK DME, AND THEN THEY WOULD BE SERVED BY ONCOR.

WE'LL GO WITH THAT EXAMPLE, AND WE REALLY WOULDN'T HAVE A SAY. THEY'RE GOING TO GO THERE. SO THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF HOW THAT WORKS. SO IT DEPENDS ON THE SO THEY'RE SINGLE AND THEN THERE'S TRIPLE CERTIFIED THAT'S KIND OF GETTING OUT TOWARDS ROPES AND RANCH IN THAT AREA. WHERE IS COSERV, ONCOR AND DME? IT'S THE CHOICE OF THE DEVELOPER WHO THEY WANT TO SERVE THAT. AND WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO. IT'S CALLED A PURCHASE POWER AGREEMENT.

THEY'RE GENERALLY CONFIDENTIAL. THAT'S HOW EVERYBODY NEGOTIATES WITH THESE WITH THESE LARGE COMPANIES. BUT BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WE'RE GETTING VERY CLOSE TO THERE IS TO ESTABLISH A TARIFF FOR THOSE CUSTOMERS WHERE LIKE RIGHT NOW, IF YOU'RE A PETERBILT, YOUR GENERAL SERVICE, A LARGE CUSTOMER, THEN ALL CUSTOMERS PAY THAT TARIFF. WE'RE WORKING TOWARDS A LARGE LOAD TARIFF, WHEREAS THEY WOULD ALL PAY THE SAME AND IT WOULD BE PUBLIC INFORMATION. IT WOULDN'T BE A PRIVATE PPA. SO YEAH, WE'RE GETTING AWAY FROM THOSE IN THE FUTURE.

>> THANK YOU THAT THAT HELPS. AND JUST FOR CURIOSITY, THE THE SINGLE SERVE. TERRITORY TERRITORY. IS THAT CONTIGUOUS WITH THE CITY LIMITS OR IS IT A DIFFERENT MAP WITH DIFFERENT

BORDERS? >> IT'S IT'S A DIFFERENT MAP. IT'S A DIFFERENT MAP. YEAH. IT WAS DRAWN UP BY THE PUC IN 1999, I THINK WHEN THEY DEREGULATED. IT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED FROM THERE AND PEOPLE HOLD ON TO THEIR TERRITORY. SO THERE'S PARTS OF DENTON OVER BY THE LANDFILL THAT ONCOR STILL HAS A LINE. SO KIND OF ALONG THE EDGE OF IT, IT'S KIND OF FUZZY, BUT

THE CENTRAL PART OF DENTON IS ALL SINGLE SERVE TERRITORY. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> AND JUST ONE CLARIFICATION ON ON THE BATCH ZERO. THEY HAVEN'T FIGURED THAT OUT YET.

SO THEY'RE TELLING US TO PLAY BY ALL THESE RULES AS THEY GO DOWN THE ROAD BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO MEET A DEADLINE. BUT THE PUC AND ERCOT HAVE NOT AGREED ON THE THE RULES FOR BATCH ZERO. SO THEY'RE THEY'RE CHANGING EVERY DAY. SO WE TALK ABOUT MONITORING THAT. THERE'S

[00:50:05]

SO WE CAN DEFINITELY FOLLOW UP WITH YOU WHAT THE FINAL RULES ARE. BUT WE DON'T EXACTLY KNOW

OURSELVES AT THIS POINT. >> AND TO CLARIFY, THAT WOULD BE THE RULES GOVERNING THE

EXPANSION OF THE FIRST DATA CENTER. >> CORRECT. SO SO WHAT THEY WHAT THEY FOUND OUT NOW IS GENERALLY ERCOT HAS TO KIND OF PUT IT IN CONTEXT. ERCOT HAS A A PEAK LOAD OF 85GW. SO THAT'S THE HOTTEST DAY OF THE YEAR. THAT'S THE MOST POWER THAT THAT TEXAS IS USED. THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF POWER THAT'S BEEN GENERATED IN THE STATE SO FAR, ALL YOUR RENEWABLES, THE WIND'S BLOWING, THE SUN SHINING, YOUR PLANTS ARE RUNNING IS RIGHT AT ABOUT 100GW. THEY EXPECT BATCH ZERO TO BE ABOUT 100GW. AND THERE'S 300 MORE GIGAWATTS OUTSIDE OF THAT 100GW THAT IS WAITING TO GET IN LINE. SO THEY'RE TRYING TO ESTABLISH. SO IT'S NOT IT'S NOT THE UTILITIES OR THE THE TRANSMISSION PROVIDERS THAT THAT DME IS THAT'S GOING TO HAVE ANY SAY IN THIS. IT'S ERCOT THAT'S GOING TO SAY, WE HAVE THIS MUCH POWER.

WE BROUGHT POWER PLANTS WITH US. SO THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ALL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. WE CAN'T PHYSICALLY POWER ALL OF THESE DATA CENTERS. THERE'S JUST NO WAY. SO ERCOT'S TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MOVE THOSE FORWARD IN A MANNER THAT MEETS THIS DEMAND. WE HAVE, PLUS YOUR

EXISTING CUSTOMERS, WHICH TAKE PRIORITY. >> OKAY.

>> SO WE WISH WE KNEW, BUT WHEN WE DO, WE'LL WE'LL DEFINITELY FOLLOW UP WITH YOU. YES, MA'AM.

OKAY. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I, I GUESS JUST THANK YOU FOR THE, THE GREAT PRESENTATION. IT'S IT'S VERY HELPFUL. IT'S BEEN A FEW YEARS. I'M, I'M VERY GLAD THAT WE WERE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, BE ASKED EARLY SO THAT WE GOT SOME, SOME COMMON SENSE THINGS IN ON THE BOOKS. I GUESS MY ONLY THOUGHT FEEDBACK MAYBE TO COUNSEL AS THEY LOOK AT LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES AND WHATNOT IS TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR NOISE CONTROLS.

BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHAT IS A BIG POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL USE PROBLEM WOULD WOULD NOT BE CURTAILED BY ANY FUTURE, YOU KNOW, STATE ACTION. THAT'S MY MY THOUGHTS

INDIVIDUALLY. BUT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OH. >> YEAH, I JUST.

>> AGREE WITH YOU. I APPRECIATE THE BEING AHEAD OF THE CURVE ON THIS IS TO KNOW BEFORE WHETHER SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, BEFORE RATHER THAN AFTER. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. AND DID WE SAY

JULY 10TH? >> THAT'S WHEN WE EXPECT. >> THAT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR.

>> SOME MORE UNDERSTANDING FROM ERCOT. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE'LL CIRCULATE THESE SLIDES

AND WE CAN FOLLOW UP WITH A MEMO. THANK YOU OR SOMETHING. >> THANK YOU ANGIE.

>> YEAH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SEEING NO MORE QUESTIONS, WE WILL CLOSE OUR WORK SESSION AT 557. WE WILL RECONVENE IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS ATGOOD EVENING. THIS WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29TH WITH A QUORUM PRESENT, I WILL CALL THIS REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DENTON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO ORDER. FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO STAND AND SAY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE U.S. AND TEXAS FLAGS. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE

[1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]

[2. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR:]

COMMISSIONER DIRE? >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR MINUTES

FROM OUR APRIL 8TH MEETING. >> AND COMMISSIONER. >> I SECOND THAT MOTION.

>> SEEING NO DISCUSSION WITH THE MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL, CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD. THAT ITEM PASSES FIVE ZERO BRINGS US TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA. DO I HAVE.

[3. CONSENT AGENDA]

COMMISSIONER CARTER SAID. >> A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR THE MEETING

OF APRIL 8TH. >> THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR TONIGHT. RIGHT.

[00:55:03]

>> YOU SAID. >> OH, YEAH. YES. THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR TONIGHT.

>> THANK YOU. OKAY. AND COMMISSIONER DIRE. >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION TO

APPROVE TONIGHT'S CONSENT AGENDA. >> VERY WELL. SEEING NO DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS. MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL. I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD.

[A. FP26-0013a Consider a request by Quiddity Engineering on behalf of TG Duchess Denton, LLC., for a Final Plat of Olivo Apartments. The 18.897-acre site is generally located south of Duchess Drive, approximately 794.21 feet west of Loop 288 in City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. (FP26-0013a, Olivo Apartments, Angie Manglaris).]

FP26-13. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, ANGIE MANGLER, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR, HERE TO PRESENT. FP2613. THIS IS A FINAL PLAT FOR THE APARTMENTS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES. IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF DUCHESS DRIVE. AT THIS TIME, THE FINAL PLAT DOES NOT MEET ALL OF OUR REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL, BUT STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTED EXTENSION, WHICH COULD BE GRANTED TO A DATE CERTAIN OF MAY 27TH. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> YES, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE SECOND EXTENSION TO A DATE CERTAIN OF MAY 27TH, 2026.

>> COMMISSIONER CARTER SAID. >> I SECOND THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION.

>> SEEING NO DISCUSSION, I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD. ITEM PASSES FIVE ZERO BRINGS US

[B. FP26-0011a Consider a request by Kimley-Horn on behalf of the property owner, Honey Farms Estates, LLC, for a Final Plat of the Honey Farms Estates Addition. The approximately 9.24-acre site is generally located on the south side of Sanders Road, approximately 1,910 feet east of Country Club Road in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. (FP26-0011a, Honey Farms Estates, Ashley Ekstedt)]

TO 4BFP26-11. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ASHLEY ECKSTUT, ASSOCIATE PLANNER THIS IS FP2611. A FINAL PLAT FOR HONEY FARMS ESTATES IN APPROXIMATELY 9.24 ACRE SITE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SANDERS ROAD. AT THIS TIME, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AS THEY DO NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, BUT WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTED EXTENSION UNTIL MAY 27TH, 2026. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> YES, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE SECOND EXTENSION TO A DATE CERTAIN OF MAY 27TH, 2026.

>> COMMISSIONER CARTER SAID. >> I SECOND THAT MOTION TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION REQUEST.

>> SEEING NO DISCUSSION, I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD. THAT ITEM PASSES FIVE ZERO

[C. FP26-0012a Consider a request by Mack Mattke of Kimley Horn & Associates on behalf of CATDENTON 35 for a Final Plat of Summit 35 Addition. The approximately 68.175-acre property is generally located east of North Interstate 35, north of Loop 288, and southwest of Highway 77 (North Elm Street) in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. (FP26-0012a, Summit 35, Julie Wyatt)]

BRINGS US TO 4CFP26-12. >> GOOD EVENING, JULIE WYATT, PRINCIPAL PLANNER THIS IS FP2612 AND THIS IS A FINAL PLAT FOR THE SUMMIT 35 PROJECT LOCATED AT I-35 AND LOOP 288 ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TOWN. AT THIS TIME, THIS PLAT DOES NOT MEET ALL OF OUR CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL. HOWEVER, WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTED EXTENSION TO MAY 27TH, AND THAT IS THE SECOND REQUEST. I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> YES, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE SECOND REQUEST. THE SECOND EXTENSION, PLEASE, AND TO A

DATE CERTAIN OF MAY 27TH, 2026. >> AND, COMMISSIONER DIRE. >> I WOULD LIKE TO. SECOND

COMMISSIONER MCDUFF'S MOTION. >> SEEING NO DISCUSSION. WE'LL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD.

[A. Z25-0017 Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a request by Kimley-Horn on behalf of the property owner, Denton Double Down, LLC, to rezone approximately 4.37 acres of land from a Residential Rural (RR) zoning district to a Suburban Corridor (SC) zoning district. The subject site is generally located on the south side of Hartlee Field Road, approximately 580 feet east of East Sherman Drive in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. (Z25-0017, Denton Striker, Ashley Ekstedt)]

ITEM 5AZ25-17. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. ASHLEY Z, ASSOCIATE PLANNER THIS IS Z 2517, DENTON STRIKER. THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE FROM A RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT TO A SUBURBAN CORRIDOR ZONING DISTRICT ON APPROXIMATELY 4.37 ACRES OF LAND. THIS PROPERTY WAS RECENTLY ANNEXED EARLIER THIS YEAR, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SEEKING TO ALIGN THE ZONING WITH THE REMAINDER. REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY. THIS REQUEST IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, WHICH IS PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL USES THAT COMPLEMENT AND EMBRACED EXISTING AND VIABLE USES. IT'S ALSO IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE ZONING PURPOSE STATEMENT, WHICH IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE MODERATE TO HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL, OFFICE AND RETAIL USES ALONG HIGH TRAFFIC CORRIDORS. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING DISTRICT PURPOSE STATEMENT. IN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, IT'S NOT EXPECTED TO GENERATE ADVERSE IMPACTS ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE OR FISCAL IMPACTS. ADS WERE POSTED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND ON THE WEBSITE, AND A SIGN WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY. WE ALSO MAILED OUT NOTIFICATIONS TO EVERYONE WITHIN 500FT. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES IN OPPOSITION OR IN FAVOR IN. THE

[01:00:06]

QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. ASHLEY. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE CALL FOR COMMENTS? I DON'T SEE ANY. THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS, JUST WISHING TO SPEAK. BUT THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. SO IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, CERTAINLY WILLING TO OR ABLE TO. NOT SEEING ANY MOVEMENT. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN THE FLOOR FOR QUESTIONS OR OR

EMOTION. COMMISSIONER DIRE. >> I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND

APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CHANGE FROM R R TO R ONE. >> I JUST TO CLARIFY, I THINK

THAT'S THE NEXT ITEM IS THE R R. >> OH SORRY. FROM THE RR TO THE SC. SORRY I MISSED THAT ONE.

>> OKAY. COMMISSIONER SAID. >> I SECOND THAT MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

>> OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NOT SEEING ANY CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD. OKAY. THAT ITEM PASSES FIVE ZERO. BRINGS US TO ITEM 5BZ26-4.

[B. Z26-0004 Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a request by Nick Johnson and Joann Madrie to rezone approximately 3.3 acres of land from a Residential Rural (RR) zoning district to a Residential 1 (R1) zoning district. The subject site is generally located on the north side of Chinn Road, approximately 1,180 feet east of Ganzer Road in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. (Z26-0004, Chinn Rezoning, Ashley Ekstedt)]

>> GOOD EVENING CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ASSOCIATE PLANNER THIS IS Z 26. FOR THE REZONING, THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE FROM A RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL ONE ZONING DISTRICT ON APPROXIMATELY 3.33 ACRES OF LAND. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO ADJUST THE NONCONFORMITY, AS THE LOT IS 3.33 ACRES. IT DOES NOT MEET THE FIVE ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN R ZONING. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF AGRICULTURE, WHICH IS LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL, THAT PRESENTS THAT CONTINUES THE PRESENT CHARACTER OF THE RURAL AREAS OF DENTON. IT IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE R1 ZONING PURPOSE STATEMENT, WHICH PRESERVES EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS WITH COMPATIBLE AND EXISTING LAND USE AND PATTERNS. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL AND IS NOT EXPECTED TO GENERATE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE OR FISCAL IMPACTS, OR HAVE ADVERSE IMPACTS ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. ADS WERE POSTED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND ON THE WEBSITE, AND A SIGN WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY. WE MAILED OUT ADDRESS. WE MAILED OUT NOTIFICATIONS TO EVERYONE WITHIN 500FT. WE DID RECEIVE ONE RESPONSE IN FAVOR SHOWN HERE ON THE MAP ON THE RIGHT, WHICH IS TOTALING 17.58% OF THE LAND AREA WITHIN 200FT. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE CRITERIA

FOR APPROVAL, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME. I HAVE ONE JUST BECAUSE I, I PERIODICALLY ASK THIS IN RURAL AREAS, TECHNICALLY, OUR ONE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS HAVE, YOU KNOW, CURB AND GUTTER, SIDEWALK, ALL THIS KIND OF STUFF THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MAKE SENSE IN THIS TYPE OF AREA. HOW DO WE.

EVALUATE THAT WHEN IT COMES TIME TO PERMIT APPROVAL AND THAT SORT OF THING IN THESE AREAS THAT MIGHT BE ZONED R1 BECAUSE OF THE LOT SIZE, BUT IT'S REALLY MORE OF A RURAL

CHARACTER. >> WITH THIS. IN THIS INSTANCE, IT WOULD JUST BE A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THIS ONE HOUSE. SO WE WOULD NOT REQUIRE THEM TO IMPROVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME DOWN AND SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, YOU'RE MORE THAN WILLING OR MORE THAN MORE THAN HAPPY TO I SOMETHING GETS ME EVERY EVERY WEEK. I APPARENTLY TODAY IT'S I'M MAKING STATEMENTS ABOUT YOUR WILLINGNESS. I'M SORRY. NOT SEEING ANY SUDDEN MOVEMENT. YES, PLEASE. IF YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES.

>> I HAVE A LOT ACROSS THE STREET LISTED FOR THE SAME ACREAGE. THE QUESTION BEING WHAT? YOU'RE TAKING IT FROM RURAL COMMUNITY INTO THIS DESIGNATION IS THERE AS FAR AS THEM HAVING THE ABILITY TO DO TO SOME KIND OF AGG EXEMPTION ON THIS PROPERTY, BEES OR SOMETHING TO THAT ORDER. ONCE THEY CHANGE THAT DESIGNATION, IS THAT GOING TO BE POSSIBLE OR

[01:05:04]

NOT? SINCE IT'S UNDER THE FIVE ACRES? >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I'LL LET STAFF ADDRESS THAT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANTED TO ADDRESS BEFORE?

>> WELL, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, I HAVE TALKED TO ASHLEY, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THAT THAT WHOLE AREA, WHEN IT WAS ANNEXED, IT WAS ANNEXED AS RURAL RR AND RURAL RESIDENTS. BUT NOW AS BECAUSE I DO HAVE THAT LISTING ACROSS THE STREET, THERE'S A WHOLE LINE OF THEM AT THREE ACRES. SO WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A DETERMINATION IF THIS IS GOING TO BE THE SUIT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FALL ON EACH ONE OF THOSE PIECES OF PROPERTY. AND, AND I KNOW I'M NOT FOR SURE THAT IT HAS BEEN PLATTED YET. WE'RE TRYING TO GET THAT INFORMATION.

>> IT IS NOT SURE THE PROPERTY. I'M SORRY, I'M OUT OF ORDER. >> OKAY.

>> I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION. OKAY. IT HAS NOT BEEN REPORTED YET.

>> YEAH. IT'S MOSTLY JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE THE RECORDING. SO PEOPLE HAVE A RECORD OF WHAT'S TRANSPIRING. BUT IF I CAN GET STAFF TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES AND GET

SOME CLARITY. >> I CAN'T ANSWER THE AG QUESTIONS. THAT'S DONE THROUGH DCAD. SO I'M NOT SURE OF THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. AS FAR AS THE OTHER HOUSES ON THE STREET, THE MAJORITY OF THEM HAVE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THERE IS A PROVISION IN THE D DC THAT DOES NOT. THE D DC DOES NOT MAKE THOSE HOMES NON-CONFORMING IF THERE'S AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY. SO THERE IS THE LOT ACROSS THE STREET, AND THIS ONE AND MAYBE ONE OTHER ONE THAT ARE GOING TO RUN INTO THIS PROBLEM. BUT FOR THE MOST PART, THOSE ARE ALL

LEGAL LOTS WITH THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. >> OKAY. AND, AND JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF ME WRAPPING MY HEAD AROUND IT AND EVERYBODY IN THE, IN THE ROOM TONIGHT, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A LEGAL LOT, THAT MEANS THAT IF, IF YOU'RE ZONED RR, BUT IT'S SMALLER THAN FIVE ACRES AND YOU HAVE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME THERE, THEN ADDITIONS, ALTERATIONS, BUILDING PERMITS TO THAT EXISTING STRUCTURE WOULD NOT REQUIRE THE ZONING CHANGE.

CORRECT. BUT BUILDING A NEW STRUCTURE ON AN EMPTY LOT WOULD. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK. OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANY ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION. NOT SEEING ANY AT THIS TIME. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN THE

FLOOR. COMMISSIONER DYER. >> I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO GO AHEAD AND CHANGE THE ZONING FROM RR TO R-1.

>> AND COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> YES, I'D LIKE TO. SECOND, COMMISSIONER DYER'S MOTION,

PLEASE. >> VERY GOOD. NOT SEEING ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION, I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD FOR THE MOTION TO APPROVE. AND THAT ITEM PASSES FIVE ZERO.

[C. PD26-0001a Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a request by McAdams on behalf of the property owner, Non-Typical Properties, LLC to rezone approximately 0.786 acres from Residential 7 (R7) zoning district to Overlay Planned Development with a Mixed-Use Neighborhood (PD-MN) base zoning district. The subject site is generally located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Jagoe Street and Scripture Street in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. (PD26-0001a, 1716 Scripture US Aviation Development Overlay, Sean Jacobson)]

NEXT ITEM IS 5CPD26-1. >> ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. SEAN JACOBSON, SENIOR PLANNER HERE TO PRESENT PD2611716 SCRIPTURE. SO THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM AN R SEVEN ZONING TO A M N ZONING WITH A PD ZONING WITH A BASE OF M N AND THE PROPERTY IS 0.786 ACRES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SCRIPTURE STREET AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SCRIPTURE STREET AND JAGOE SLASH MALONE STREET. THE STREET NAME CHANGES RIGHT AT THAT POINT AND THERE IS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING EXISTING. THERE IS NO PLAN THAT HAS BEEN PUT FORWARD TO REDEVELOP THAT. AT THIS TIME. THE SURROUNDING LAND USES ARE COMMERCIALLY EAST AND WEST AND SOUTHEAST, RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH AND MULTI-UNIT RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTHWEST. SO SOMETHING OF A COMMERCIAL NODE IN THIS AREA, AT THIS INTERSECTION OF TWO COLLECTORS. SO JUST BEARING IN MIND THE OVERLAY PD IS PRIMARILY INTENDED FOR TO ADD RESTRICTIONS OR ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS TO ADDRESS CONCERNS, NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS TO MAKE SURE ANY USES ON THE SITE ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AND LESS INTENSIVE USES. SO THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS YOU CAN ADDRESS IN THAT. IN THIS CASE, WE'RE JUST ADDRESSING ONE USE, AND THAT IS TO SAY THAT A MULTIFAMILY USE WILL REQUIRE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT ON THIS LOT, WHICH MAINTAINS EXACTLY THE SITUATION THAT'S IN PLACE TODAY WITH THE R SEVEN ZONING. SO JUST KEEP THAT CONSISTENCY IN REGARD TO MULTIFAMILY. A CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL. SO THIS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO ALL THE

[01:10:07]

SO JUST PROVIDING THAT BROADER RANGE. SO THAT DOES COMPLY WITH THE GOALS OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE WE WANT TO SEE INFILL DEVELOPMENT. WE WANT TO STRENGTHEN OUR EXISTING COMMERCIAL AND EMPLOYMENT AREAS AND FISCALLY ADVANTAGEOUS LAND USE. WE ALREADY HAVE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE HERE. THIS IS WHERE YOU WANT TO SEE IT. IT ALSO DOES ALIGN, AND WE DON'T TALK ABOUT THIS MUCH, BUT THE OAK GATEWAY AREA PLAN WAS THERE WAS A RESOLUTION IN FAVOR OF THAT FOR THIS AREA BY CITY COUNCIL. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS SPECIFIC AREA INCLUDED MODIFY ZONING WERE NEEDED TO ENCOURAGE REVITALIZATION AND REINVESTMENT, WHICH THIS WOULD DO, AND CREATE MORE BUSINESSES ALONG STREETS THAT ARE WALKABLE AND IN SCALE WITH THE AREA, WHICH AGAIN, THIS WOULD ALLOW THAT OPPORTUNITY. SO OVERALL, THE PROPOSED PD IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. WE ALSO DO ALWAYS WANT TO LOOK AT BOTH MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACTS AND ENSURING THAT THIS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO THE AREA. SO I'VE JUST OUTLINED THERE. AGAIN AS I NOTED, WE HAVE SOMETHING OF A COMMERCIAL NODE IN THIS AREA. SO IT'S ANOTHER YOU KNOW, A RANGE OF COMMERCIAL USES ON THIS SITE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. AND THAT HAS BEEN A CONSISTENT CONDITION HERE FOR LONGER THAN I'VE LIVED IN THE CITY OF DENTON. IN TERMS OF JUST THE CONSISTENCY, ANY CONCERN ABOUT MULTIFAMILY? AGAIN, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE SUP BECAUSE THAT ENSURES THAT YOU HAVE THAT ADDITIONAL LAYER OF REVIEW AND OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO HAVE INPUT. SHOULD THERE EVER BE A DESIRE TO REDEVELOP MULTIFAMILY. HERE AGAIN, THE APPLICANT HAS EXPRESSED NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER IN THAT, BUT WE'RE PREPARED FOR IT. AND JUST ALSO BEING AWARE OF ANY CONCERN ABOUT FUTURE HEIGHT INCREASES. THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO DIFFERENT LAYERS TO THIS. THERE IS BOTH AN SUP REQUIREMENT TO GO ABOVE 41FT, BUT ALSO OUR BUILDING HEIGHT AND TRANSITION AREAS SIGNIFICANTLY LIMITS WHERE YOU COULD GO ABOVE 55FT. EVEN IF YOU GOT THE SUP, LIKE 95% OF THAT LOT, YOU COULDN'T GO HIGHER THAN 55 ANYWAY, EVEN IF YOU GOT THE SUP, THERE'S ONE CORNER AGAIN, M N ZONING RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET IN TWO DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS. IT'S BEEN THERE SINCE MANZONI HAS EXISTED. AND THIS IS AT THE INTERSECTION OF TWO COLLECTORS. AGAIN, THAT'S WHERE OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WANTS TO SEE SOME OF THIS LOCAL SURVEYING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. WE DID OUR STANDARD PUBLIC OUTREACH, SENT OUT THOSE NOTICES, RECEIVED NO RESPONSES. THE APPLICANT DID HOLD TWO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. THERE WERE NO ATTENDEES AT THE FIRST ONE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN ONE AT THE SECOND. THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION, BUT NO OPPOSITION EXPRESSED BY THAT ATTENDEE. SO WITH THAT, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST BECAUSE IT DOES MEET ALL OF OUR CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE. THANK

YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE DON'T SEE ANY. THANK YOU SEAN. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THIS POINT I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS WISHING TO

SPEAK, BUT CERTAINLY WELCOME TO COME. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND COMMISSION. MY NAME IS RANDY RIVERA. I'M A PLANNER WITH MCADAMS. 4400 STATE HIGHWAY 121 IN LEWISVILLE. I'M HERE TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT WITH MCADAMS. WITH THIS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST, WE HAVE A PRESENTATION PREPARED. I'D BE HAPPY TO GO THROUGH THAT IF YOU WOULD LIKE, BUT I ALSO WOULD STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. IN ADDITION TO. SEAN DID A GREAT JOB OF PROVIDING A DETAILED OVERVIEW OF OUR REQUESTS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR

ATTENTION. >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION OR DESIRE TO SEE THE THE PRESENTATION? THANK YOU, THANK YOU. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY ELSE WHO'S

[01:15:04]

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MOTION APPROVAL OF THE PDMN. >> AND COMMISSIONER MCDUFF.

>> YES, I'D LIKE TO. SECOND, COMMISSIONER PATTERSON'S MOTION. >> VERY GOOD. YEAH, I'LL JUST SAY THAT IT'S. I'M GLAD WE CAN GET THROUGH THIS. IT'S SOMETIMES LIKE TYING YOUR SHOES FROM YOUR LEFT FOOT TO YOUR RIGHT FOOT IN ORDER TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN, TO BE ABLE TO LEASE A BUILDING OUT. SO I'M GLAD TO SEE THIS FLEXIBILITY AFFORDED HERE. NOT SEEING ANY MORE DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS. I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD. THAT ITEM PASSES

[D. S25-0008 Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit (SUP) to allow for a Monopole Tower over 85 feet use on approximately 0.048 acres of land, approximately located on the western corner of North Elm Street and Riney Road in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. (S25-0008, Bryce Van Arsdale)]

FIVE ZERO BRINGS US TO PUBLIC HEARING. 5DS25-8. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION BRYCE VAN ARSDALE, ASSISTANT PLANNER. THIS IS S 2508. RELATED TO A REQUEST BY APC TOWERS FOR A MONOPOLE TOWER OVER 85FT. THIS IS A TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER USED FOR CELL PHONE SERVICE. THIS LOCATION IS. PROJECT IS LOCATED ON THE WESTERN CORNER OF THE NORTH ELM STREET AND RODNEY ROAD INTERSECTION. IT IS APPROXIMATELY 0.048 ACRES OF LAND. THE SURROUNDING AREA IS COMPRISED OF MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL AS PUBLIC FACILITIES, ZONING DISTRICTS AND. THE AREA IS DEVELOPED WITH A NUMBER OF USES SUCH AS MULTIFAMILY, UNT, DISCOVERY PARK AS WELL AS G. ROLAND VILLA SOCCER COMPLEX. THIS REQUEST DOES MEET OUR CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, AS IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS WELL AS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, AND IT DOES ADHERE TO OUR USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR TELECOMMUNICATION, TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. NOTE THIS AREA AS A TRANSITIONAL PARCEL BETWEEN THE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE DESIGNATION AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE DESIGNATION. TYPICALLY, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE DESIGNATION DOES APPLY TO AREAS OF DENTON, WHICH ARE PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL. HOWEVER, IT DOES ALLOW FOR RETAIL AND SERVICES WHICH ARE CRITICAL TO ACHIEVING A BALANCE AND ACCESSIBLE NEIGHBORHOOD MAKEUP. THIS PROPOSED USE, AGAIN, IS A TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER. IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND ALSO SUPPORTS ESTABLISHED USES. THIS PROPERTY WAS NOTICED IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR POLICIES AS WELL AS STATE STATUTE. ONE NOTE TO MAKE THAT'S NOT ON THE SLIDES IS THAT THE DEVELOPER DID HOLD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. THEY HAD NO ATTENDEES, SO WE DID NOT REQUEST A SECOND. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REQUEST WITH OUR STANDARD SPECIFIC USE PERMIT CONDITIONS. AND THE NEXT STEP WILL BE CITY COUNCIL. I'M

HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF AT

THIS TIME? I DON'T SEE ANY. OH YES, COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> YES. BRYCE, CAN YOU TALK

ABOUT THE RELOCATION OF TREES? THE LARGE TREES? >> SURE. SO I DON'T HAVE ANY STREET VIEW IMAGES, BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE LANDSCAPING TREES THAT WERE PLANTED IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE APARTMENT COMPLEX JUST TO THE WEST OF THIS PROPERTY. THOSE TREES WILL NOT BE REMOVED, BUT THEY WILL BE MOVED IN ORDER TO MAKE ROOM FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SMALL PAD SITE. IT'S ABOUT 710 750FT■!S OF OPERATING AREA. SO T IS A VERY SMALL AREA. AND THIS SITE IS VERY ENCUMBERED BY UTILITY EASEMENTS. SO THERE'S VERY LIMITED PORTION OF THIS

PARCEL THAT ARE ABLE TO BE DEVELOPED. >> SO THESE ARE NEW NEWER TREES

CORRECT. >> THEY'RE NOT THEY ARE NOT OLD GROWTH. THANK YOU. YES MA'AM.

>> WE COULD NOT HAVE PICKED A BETTER PLANNER TO KNOW ABOUT THE TREES ON THIS SITE. IF

YOU'RE INTERESTED IN MORE INFORMATION, I'M SURE WE COULD. >> I'M HAPPY TO TALK.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. BRYCE. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME, ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IS MORE THAN WELCOME TO COME DOWN. NOT SEEING ANYONE. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COMMISSIONER CATTERSON. >> I MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE SUP.

>> ALL RIGHT. AND COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

>> SOUNDS GOOD. NOT SEEING ANY DISCUSSION. I'LL JUST MAKE ONE REQUEST, AND THAT IS THAT BRYCE WOULD STICK AROUND FOR ANOTHER FIVE MINUTES. WITH NO DISCUSSION THOUGH. I'LL I'LL

[01:20:04]

NOW. WE REALLY NEED MUSIC. THAT MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO BRINGS US TO OUR NEXT ITEM OF THE

[A. PZ26-072 Hold a discussion regarding the Planning and Zoning Project Matrix.]

>> YES. SO WITH RESPECT TO THE MATRIX ITSELF, WE WILL MARK OFF THE DATA CENTER REQUEST SINCE WE WERE ABLE TO ACHIEVE THAT THIS EVENING. JUST A FEW UPDATES FOR THE COMMISSION.

COUNCIL MET ON APRIL 21ST AND APPROVED THE REZONING FROM RR TO LEE ON MAY HILL ROAD THAT YOU ALL SAW RECENTLY. THEY ALSO APPROVED THE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY ON KENDALL THAT YOU ALL SAW AT YOUR LAST MEETING, AND THEY ALSO GRANTED AN EXTENSION FOR THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE EQUIPMENT SALES AND RENTAL USE. SPECIFICALLY, IT WAS A JOHN DEERE FACILITY OUT ON HIGHWAY 380 THAT SOME OF YOU MAY RECALL. THEY NEED A LITTLE MORE TIME TO GET MOVING ON THAT PROJECT. BESIDES THAT, THERE IS A HANDOUT AT ALL OF YOUR SEATS.

JUST WANTED TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THOSE ARE INTENDED JUST AS A QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE FOR YOU.

ALL OF PROJECT TYPES THAT COME BEFORE YOU, WHAT LEVEL OF DISCRETION YOU ALL HAVE ON THOSE, AND THEN SUGGESTED MOTION LANGUAGE IN THE EVENT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO YOU.

THERE'S A LONGER VERSION AND A SHORTER VERSION OF IT. AND THEN WE DO HAVE A TENTATIVE DATE. I BELIEVE IT'S ALMOST SET IN STONE, BUT I WON'T SAY THAT UNTIL THE NOTICES GO OUT FOR THE SOUTHEAST DENTON OVERLAY INFORMATIONAL MEETING. WE ARE LOOKING AT MONDAY, MAY 18TH.

THAT WILL BE AT THE MLK REC CENTER, I BELIEVE, STARTING AT 6 P.M. BUT THOSE NOTICES WILL BE GOING OUT. AND ALSO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE GET SENT TO YOU ALL AS WELL. WHEN THAT HAPPENS.

IN THE EVENT YOU'D LIKE TO ATTEND THE MEETING, I WOULD ALSO ASK IF YOU ALL THINK YOU WILL ATTEND, PLEASE LET US KNOW SO THAT WE CAN MONITOR IF WE NEED TO POST A NOTICE OF POSSIBLE QUORUM FOR THAT MEETING. AND THEN LASTLY, SINCE WE HAD BRYCE STICK AROUND, SOME OF YOU KNOW, FROM BEING AT DC, BUT JUST FOR EVERYONE ELSE, THIS WILL BE BRYCE'S LAST PNC MEETING WITH US. HE IS LEAVING TO GO ON A VERY EXCITING ADVENTURE ON THE PACIFIC CREST TRAIL. I THINK I SAID THAT CORRECTLY, SO HE'LL HE WILL BE OUT WEST HIKING AND ENJOYING MONTHS, AND WE WISH HIM ALL THE BEST AND THANK HIM FOR HIS TIME WITH THE CITY OF DENTON, ESPECIALLY HIS INVALUABLE WORK IN HELPING US WITH OUR TREE AND LANDSCAPE

CODE UPDATES OVER THIS LAST YEAR. >> YEAH, I'LL JUST ECHO THAT. I THINK WHEN I WAS A GUMSHOE HERE, COMING IN, SITTING NEXT TO COMMISSIONER SMITH. YOU KNOW, WE WERE IT WAS ALMOST A IT RENDERED YOU SPEECHLESS HOW MUCH WAS GOING ON AND HOW MUCH DEVELOPMENT WAS HAPPENING IN THE CITY AT THAT TIME. AND I REMEMBER BRYCE AS WELL AS A FEW OTHERS WHO CAME ON BOARD AND REALLY JUST TOOK THE REINS AND SAID, LET'S GO DO IT. SO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR ALL YOUR HELP AND, AND THOUGHTFUL SERVICE THIS TIME. AND I WISH YOU AN AMAZING LIFE DEFINING SUMMER. SO. ANY ITEMS TO ADD TO THE MATRIX FROM THE COMMISSION? I

DON'T SEE ANY. OH, COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR OUR WORK SESSION TODAY AND THANK THE STAFF AND FOR PUTTING THAT TOGETHER. AND SINCE I

BELIEVE THAT IT'S AN ITEM THAT WE'LL BE REVISITING. >> YEAH.

[7. CONCLUDING ITEMS]

>> THANK YOU. THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM SEVEN CONCLUDING ITEMS. ANY CONCLUDING ITEMS FROM THE

COMMISSION COMMISSIONER? >> DIRE BRYCE, I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU GOOD LUCK ON YOUR ADVENTURE AND HAVE FUN. AND ONCE IT CONCLUDES AND YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT NEXT CHAPTER WOULD BE, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL RECONSIDER COMING BACK HERE BECAUSE I THINK THE YOU HAVE SUCH A GREAT SKILL SET THAT THE CITY AND THE COMMUNITY REALLY NEED.

>> COMMISSIONER MCDUFF. >> I JUST WANTED TO REMIND US TO BE. KEEPING OUR PRAYERS. THE CITY'S MINERAL WELLS AND WEATHERFORD REALLY. PALO PINTO COUNTY AND PARKER COUNTY. WE

[01:25:01]

SO LET'S BE MINDFUL. YEAH. >> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU FOR THAT. SEEING NOTHING ELSE WITHOUT OBJECTION, WE'LL ADJOURN OUR MEETING AT 702

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.