Loading...
August 15, Public Hearing Questions CA23-0001a & C Z23-0006A & D S23-0003a Mayhill Road Multi-Family— Public Hearing Questions & Responses o Environmental Concerns: • Question: Currently, the property provides for Preferred-Land-Use-Pattern continuity (corridor) between the onsite ESAs with the adjacent eastern green space across Mayhill, as well as the western green space across 288. While 288 and Mayhill do provide some fragmentation already, is fragmentation not worsened with development of this parcel? The subject site includes two ESAs: Riparian Buffer and Water-Related Habitat (outlined in green below). The proposed SUP shows a plan which does not encroach into the ESA, including a gap in the perimeter fence on the north property line to maintain the connection to the ESA that continues on the adjacent property. Therefore, no further fragmentation of the ESA corridor would occur based on the proposed plan. IKLG #00"M UK GGT �v[,.cwue L r OPE EAM%* • I I y i W04TRtEI S- TOR PRISM • htT" Dr • W rT„! ~� • a wr ut rp V I -L"ISCO tsw • o *.l , VVICULAR .•Pisa J GAVE tSA- .APK •ow • NEIATtD.4WAT i _.-_ ii _•_ - _ ..•,. _ n6TMO TREED • Mf • TO E[POEM" • Question: Given the adjoining and interconnected onsite EASA, would a substantial AESA not be required to develop a large multifamily use at this location? CA23-0001a & C Z23-0006A & D 523-0003a Mayhill Road Multi-Family— Public Hearing Questions & Responses DDC Section 7.4.7 provides for very limited activities which are permitted within the limits of the verified ESAs, but it doesn't restrict the activities or types of uses outside the ESA limits. Generally, grading, clearing, and private improvements are not permitted within a Riparian Buffer ESA, and any encroachments require approval of an Alternative ESA Plan. As currently designed, the multifamily use does not require an AESA, as no encroachments are proposed within the ESA limits. Furthermore, the residential use allows for the smaller-footprint buildings and impervious surface to be clustered outside of the ESA limit to minimize impacts in a way that would be difficult to achieve with a larger-footprint industrial use. However, if approved, staff is recommending a condition notifying the developer that approval of the SUP does not constitute approval of any encroachment into the ESAs. • Question: It is my understanding that while Business Center uses are a marginally more intense use than residential during the workday, over a 24 hour period which use contributes the least intense impact to the ESA? It is difficult to ascertain which Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use designation and corresponding zoning districts would result in greater impacts, given the variety in permitted uses which could be developed and the varied manners in which the uses could be laid out and constructed on site; however, generally, it is presumed that residential districts generate fewer impacts within their development boundaries: larger minimum landscaped areas, greater required tree canopy, smaller structures, less lighting, fewer large expanses of pavement for parking and storage, and less potential for the use, production, and or spills/leaks of potentially harmful chemicals and byproducts that can occur with industrial development. If the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning requests are approved, higher intensity commercial and low-impact industrial uses would no longer be permitted, resulting in residential or small office or commercial development. Industrial and employment districts are typically anticipated to create larger impacts with smaller minimum landscaped areas and tree canopy, bigger building footprints, and larger parking areas to accommodate large trucks. The zoning districts typically associated with Business Center include General Office (GO) and Light Industrial (LI). Current zoning of LI District is consistent with Business Center and permits a variety of higher intensity commercial and low impact industrial uses, including Medical Clinic, Bar, Restaurant, Drive-through Restaurant, Office, General Retail over 15,000 square feet, Hotel, Motel, Car Wash, Automotive Fuel Sales, Major and Minor Automotive Repair, Parking Lot as a Principal Use, Travel Plaza, Low-Impact Manufacturing, and Warehouse and Wholesale Facility. While some of these uses might result in lower or similar impacts (for example, Offices), others could result in greater impacts due to larger expanses of pavement for large-truck parking and maneuvering (large Retail, Low- Impact Manufacturing and Warehouse) and/or expanded hours of operation (Drive- through Restaurant, Automotive Fuel Sales). • Question: Wouldn't the scale of residential that would "pencil" be inconsistent with land preservation and impacts? CA23-0001a & C Z23-0006A & D S23-0003a Mayhill Road Multi-Family— Public Hearing Questions & Responses As proposed, the development would not encroach into the ESAs and would be able to meet both minimum landscaping and tree preservation standards, which are the City's primary regulations related to land preservation and environmental impacts. Any future or proposed encroachments into the ESA would require approval on an Alternative ESA Plan through a separate process. o Question: What is a desirable buffer to Federal Public Facility such as FEMA? Is it secure to have densely occupied uses that close? Denton Development Code Section 7.7.6 requires a 10-foot buffer between an existing institutional or commercial use and a developing multifamily use. The buffer area must have a sufficient number of elements (fencing, trees, and/or other landscaping) to achieve 20 points. As proposed, the development meets the buffer standards, as it contains a 74-feet wide area along the west property boundary that includes a 6-foot-tall wood fence and a large stand of mature trees. Staff met with FEMA representatives and they indicated that they already do and could continue to provide for security on their property. Additionally, the applicant indicated that he met with FEMA and agreed to remove any benches within the open space adjacent to the west property boundary to discourage future residents from congregating in the buffer area. o Question: Could staff describe how multifamily is a consistent use at this location given that the FLUM, Zoning, and SUP's all have to be modified to support the use? Although the proposal includes more requests than typical a project, State Law and the DDC do not limit the number of applications needed to develop a site in a particular manner. In this case, staff analyzed each request independently through the established criteria for approval and determined that area changes, combined with adjacent zoning and development, indicate that moderate density and/or multifamily development is an appropriate transitional use in this location.