Meeting Report:
COMMUNITY MEETING by KIRKMAN ENGINEERING GROUP
RE: Alternative Environmentally Sensitive Area Plan
Monday, July 29, 2024, scheduled for 5:00pm - 6:00PM (Q&A continued until after 8:00PM)
Holiday Inn Express and Suites
4485 North I-35 Denton, Texas 76207 United States
NOTIFICATION–Neighbors within the notification zone (200 feet from the property) did not receive written notification of this meeting until the day of the meeting (Monday). These notices were delivered by USPS within 1-2 hours of the meeting start time and were all postmarked 7/26 in Austin, TX. North Lakes Preservation Group received an email from Kirkman Engineering at 4:30 PM on Friday, 7/26 to notify our group that these letters had been mailed. NLP Group met with a number of residents on Sunday, 7/28 to discuss mobilization and sent notifications about the meeting via social media, our email contact list, and word of mouth, giving our neighborhood about 24 hours to rearrange our schedules.
Unfortunately, many residents were unable to adjust their schedules to attend this informational meeting, so we offer this summary report, a LINK from Denton’s eTRAKiT website to the full AESA report, and a LINK from Kirkman to the powerpoint slides presented at the meeting. Access to the Kirkman materials requires submission of your name and email address.
ATTENDANCE
COMMUNITY:
Despite the lack of adequate notification about the meeting, neighbors spread the word like wildfire! Our community attended with a force of over 60 people. The line was out the door to sign in, and additional chairs were brought in to accommodate the crowd.
PRESENTERS:
Shea Kirkman, Kirkman Engineering Group
Melissa Fontenot, Cypress Environmental Consulting, LLC.
CITY OF DENTON ATTENDEES:
Angie Manglaris, City of Denton Senior Planner and Project Manager
Christi Upton, City of Denton Environmental Compliance Coordinator
Eric Pruett, Planning and Zoning Commission
Brandon Chase McGee, Denton City Council
AGENDA
INTRODUCTIONS
Shea Kirkman and Melissa Fontenot, an ecologist from Cypress Environmental Consulting, LLC introduced themselves. Cypress is the company hired by Investcor to prepare an Alternative Environmentally Sensitive Area (AESA) Report as part of the larger project (S22-0010) which includes building the multifamily residential housing development on the land along the perimeter of North Lakes Park and the residential properties on Amherst Drive and west of a portion of Parkside Dr.
A community member quickly brought up their concerns about the late notification by Kirkman Engineering. Mr. Kirkman stated that it was not intentional and claimed to have “checked to make sure and that the letters had been sent on 7/22.”
Mr. Kirkman informed attendees that this project (S22-0010) is scheduled for a vote at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on August 28, 2024. This will be a public hearing and all are invited to attend. (See City of Denton Public Meetings and Agendas for additional information.)
Mr. Kirkman explained that the purpose of the meeting was to present only the AESA report, and he asked the audience to hold questions until the end of the presentation to let the ecologist “at least get through the report.” He stated that they would both address questions after the report.
AESA REPORT PRESENTATION
The ecologist from Cypress Environmental Consulting read through a powerpoint presentation created directly from the AESA Report.
No questions were asked during the presentation by audience members and no elaboration or explanations were given during the presentation.
See AESA REPORT PRESENTATION LINK here.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Question: Will pesticides be used to remove the Chinese privet and other invasive species?
Answer: We have not identified the definite need to use pesticide. There is the “potential” for the need to use pesticides, and this plan does not preclude the possibility. Mechanically removing privet will be important, but follow up removal activities will likely be required.
Question: How will flood waters be prevented from flowing into the backyards of neighboring properties?
Answer: During construction there is an erosion control plan. Site mitigation will be in place and city approved.
NLP Group Note: No mitigation efforts for flood or stormwater management, erosion control, or protection of the pecan creek water quality were discussed for the post-construction period.
Related Question for staff: Have you spoken with the engineers that helped develop and design the Pecan Creek flood and drainage plans for the bond we voted on in 2023 to see how this affects their analysis and plan?
Answer: The drainage plans for the bond are designed with future development in mind.
NLP Group Note: Overall, Pecan Creek has a moderate risk from flooding that increases with weather events. Having an adequate buffer for creeks and streams is vital to manage flood waters and stormwater runoff.
Question: What property maintenance actions will be required as part of establishing the new Riparian Buffer zone and other ESA improvements, and what assurance do we have that these actions will be continued into the future?
Answer: There is a 3 year maintenance plan/schedule in the AESA.
Related Question: When does the 3-year maintenance period begin, relating to the phased construction timelines?
Answer: Kirkman was not able to answer this question. He could not say whether the project would be completed in phases or all at once and did not know when the maintenance period would begin.
Question: How does the AESA get maintained in perpetuity?
Answer: There would be certain maintenance requirements as part of the development permit. (Kirkman noted that not every development plan has a maintenance plan in place.) ESA protections would continue to apply to the environmentally sensitive areas. However, there is no guarantee that future ongoing maintenance would continue if and when the apartment complex is sold unless transfer requirements are added to the title.
Question to Kirkman and staff: Since most ecologists recommend wider riparian buffer zones than many city ordinances require to protect against flooding, pollution, etc. and ensure future water supplies, how can Denton possibly support an alternative ESA that would decrease this buffer zone in several areas along Pecan Creek? In other words, why allow a developer to encroach on these environmentally sensitive areas at all?
Answer: Kirkman stated that when he first met with the community, a major concern was how close the planned buildings were to the existing homes. He said they redesigned the property to move the buildings as far away from neighboring properties as possible. Denton planning and zoning staff stated that the option of an alternative ESA was created to give more flexibility to development projects impacting environmentally sensitive areas.
NLP Group Note: The development plans show that the proposed development encroaches BOTH on the riparian buffer ESA AND on the North Lakes residences. Neither encroachment is acceptable to our community.
Question: How does the AESA account for wildlife species that live in this dense, green tract of land and its neighboring areas? How does the overall tree removal affect the wildlife corridors?
Answer: All we can do is explain the in-depth process we’ve gone through to protect and improve the area. Regarding animal displacement—With the improvements to this area, our hope is to not permanently push out the wildlife currently living there.
NLP Group Note: There appeared to be little concern for the impact on wildlife or the avian migratory population, and no wildlife inventory was included in the AESA report.
Question: What is the overall tree reduction percentage for the property?
Answer: Neither presenter knew this number, but said that somewhere around 570 trees would be removed. They expressed little concern about the equitable and successful replacement of trees and other vegetation beyond the required maintenance period for the tract of land containing the AESA.
Some other issues raised that were left without adequate answers include:
The impact of the overall development, asphalt, concrete, buildings, vehicles, and accompanying reduction in vegetation and tree canopy on the urban heat island effect
The impact of the buildings, roadways, vehicles, and human activities based on the Eastern tract (6.1 acres) on the flood plain ESA and riparian buffer ESA (located in the 8.6 acres on the western tract)
The impact of the 2 large buildings encroaching on the ESA.
The impact of having no appropriate barrier wall along the perimeter of the property for sound, privacy, security, or pollution
The impact of the development on the character of the North Lakes neighborhood
4. WHAT’S NEXT?
In sum, the extreme community opposition to this development project was obvious at this meeting. Nonetheless, it appears that project S22-0010 is on its way to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a vote on August 28th at 6:30 PM. Please mark your calendars and plan to attend, if possible.
And if you have any other comments from the meeting you would like noted, please email NLP Group at northlakesneighbors@gmail.com.
North Lakes Preservation Group will keep you posted on any additional developments regarding this project. Stay tuned, spread the word, and keep on keeping on! We can do this!
