1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:18,780 I will call the meeting to order at 1 02 on November 18, 2020 this is a video conference 2 00:00:18,780 --> 00:00:26,460 meeting for the governor's executive orders and said the first item on the agenda is consider 3 00:00:26,460 --> 00:00:34,420 approval of the minutes from November 11th and Councilmember Braves I'll move approval 4 00:00:34,420 --> 00:00:41,040 all right and I will second since the motioner and the seconder are the the only votes there 5 00:00:41,040 --> 00:00:47,040 I don't think it's necessary to take an actual vote count so the motion carries the next 6 00:00:47,040 --> 00:00:52,520 item and Ron do you need me to open up several of these yeah if you don't mind they're there 7 00:00:52,520 --> 00:01:00,240 when one presentation so it probably be best okay so I will call the rest of items for 8 00:01:00,240 --> 00:01:04,600 individual consideration which include receive a report hold discussion give staffs direction 9 00:01:04,600 --> 00:01:11,400 regarding code amendments related to subchapter 2 receive a report hold discussion give staff 10 00:01:11,400 --> 00:01:18,040 direction regarding code amendments to related to subchapter 3 item D receive a report hold 11 00:01:18,040 --> 00:01:24,040 discussion give staff direction record regarding code amendments to subchapter 5 and item EU 12 00:01:24,040 --> 00:01:27,900 receive a report hold discussion give staff direction regarding code amendments related 13 00:01:27,900 --> 00:01:36,720 to subchapter 7 it's all yours Ron thank you chair let me go ahead and share my presentation 14 00:01:36,720 --> 00:01:54,520 okay hopefully you all can see the presentation and can hear me make it full screen so we'll 15 00:01:54,520 --> 00:02:00,600 go ahead and get started we do have a number of code amendments hopefully that you see 16 00:02:00,600 --> 00:02:06,240 here on this list hopefully they are pretty straightforward some of them may require additional 17 00:02:06,240 --> 00:02:13,160 discussion I wanted to make mention that number 11 bringing that item back there was a clarification 18 00:02:13,160 --> 00:02:18,880 that we wanted to discuss further with the DCRC and then number 12 we're going to start 19 00:02:18,880 --> 00:02:23,880 off with development standards but it was more of an introduction the future agenda 20 00:02:23,880 --> 00:02:30,080 items at our next meeting will delve into more of the development standards but I just 21 00:02:30,080 --> 00:02:36,480 wanted to introduce that subchapter as we continue with the code amendment review so 22 00:02:36,480 --> 00:02:41,160 as you can see from this list I won't read it all but we're going to start off with annexation 23 00:02:41,160 --> 00:02:48,400 and then we make our way through all the way down to accessory dwelling units so the first 24 00:02:48,400 --> 00:02:56,240 item of discussion is the annexation procedures as you can see the intent here is to amend 25 00:02:56,240 --> 00:03:04,360 section 275 which is the section that speaks to annexation the language that cared forward 26 00:03:04,360 --> 00:03:10,120 was what you see strict stricken through here very simple statement that the annexation 27 00:03:10,120 --> 00:03:17,000 in the city of den maker pursuant to procedures outlined in text local government code 43 28 00:03:17,000 --> 00:03:23,060 but that's it that's all we we have in the current 2019 development code what staff is 29 00:03:23,060 --> 00:03:31,400 proposing to bring back or to put together a list of procedures for annexation and the 30 00:03:31,400 --> 00:03:37,000 first item or first section of that procedure section is the annexation permitted again 31 00:03:37,000 --> 00:03:43,320 this is generally a statement that talks about involuntary and voluntary may occur pursuant 32 00:03:43,320 --> 00:03:51,760 to again Texas local government code the next item on that section is the types of annexation 33 00:03:51,760 --> 00:03:58,680 so we know we have two types we have an involuntary annexation and we have a voluntary annexation 34 00:03:58,680 --> 00:04:04,160 now some of you may wonder why we have involuntary annexation listed in a development code where 35 00:04:04,160 --> 00:04:12,640 we we know that that is a very difficult process to to achieve but we the staff put it there 36 00:04:12,640 --> 00:04:17,960 because we just wanted to make sure that there's an understanding that there's both involuntary 37 00:04:17,960 --> 00:04:24,440 annexation and a voluntary annexation procedure one specifically for voluntary annexation 38 00:04:24,440 --> 00:04:29,320 is going to be more involved in the ddc and that's what we're going to be discussing 39 00:04:29,320 --> 00:04:34,600 on the next few slides but as far as involuntary annexation that very statement that you see 40 00:04:34,600 --> 00:04:41,720 here in 1a is all that's referenced in the code as relates to involuntary annexation 41 00:04:41,720 --> 00:04:50,040 then anybody have any questions on that particular section and specifically why we're including 42 00:04:50,040 --> 00:04:57,560 involuntary annexation into the ddc again just as a statement not necessarily any procedures 43 00:04:57,560 --> 00:05:07,680 pertaining to involuntary annexation if not i'll go ahead and proceed with sorry sorry 44 00:05:07,680 --> 00:05:16,480 chair i didn't see my foot my uh my uh hand near um the uh the one of the house bills 45 00:05:16,480 --> 00:05:21,480 did say we can no longer do an involuntary annexation is correct we did a couple cases 46 00:05:21,480 --> 00:05:28,000 on that or is that am i wrong understanding the house bill or not go let erin for the 47 00:05:28,000 --> 00:05:33,320 most part that avenue has been foreclosed but there is a list of exceptions even in 48 00:05:33,320 --> 00:05:42,220 the 2019 uh statutory amendment that would allow for involuntary annexations in whether 49 00:05:42,220 --> 00:05:47,200 applies to the city it would really depend on the on in the future on the facts and circumstances 50 00:05:47,200 --> 00:05:52,760 so i i think there's been grumblings on a legislative basis that involuntary annexation 51 00:05:52,760 --> 00:05:58,360 that that house bill might get turned over whether it does or not doesn't matter but 52 00:05:58,360 --> 00:06:03,560 what if it does get turned over and there is involuntary annexation as allowed again 53 00:06:03,560 --> 00:06:08,560 without really strict regulations around it would we just need to do a code amendment 54 00:06:08,560 --> 00:06:12,480 again to change that to reflect it and that i guess the way we have it we built in the 55 00:06:12,480 --> 00:06:17,160 code now which is referencing referencing it doesn't really limit us by any means it's 56 00:06:17,160 --> 00:06:21,360 just really a reference to get it to there if there is ability for us to do it we'll 57 00:06:21,360 --> 00:06:27,000 just add a code amendment at that point in time that's that's exactly um the intent of 58 00:06:27,000 --> 00:06:35,920 adding that or any code amendment okay yeah i'll just remind everybody that uh i am zooming 59 00:06:35,920 --> 00:06:39,840 from the house so when the presentation's up i see nobody on the screen except for whoever's 60 00:06:39,840 --> 00:06:46,800 talking and uh when when the presentation's not up i only see nine faces up there at a 61 00:06:46,800 --> 00:06:53,680 time so if i don't recognize you just go ahead and feel free to hop on in i'll make sure 62 00:06:53,680 --> 00:07:02,040 to pull down the presentation when i ask for questions okay okay so we'll continue with 63 00:07:02,040 --> 00:07:08,080 the presentation again annexation procedures uh applicability um that basically states 64 00:07:08,080 --> 00:07:12,880 that voluntary annexation again voluntary annexation procedures apply to annexations 65 00:07:12,880 --> 00:07:26,960 initiated by the requester um nothing uh complex there next slide is the procedures uh specifically 66 00:07:26,960 --> 00:07:34,640 to um voluntary annexations again i don't have the the whole procedure listed i just 67 00:07:34,640 --> 00:07:40,000 wanted to identify the sections of what is being proposed and pretty much very similar 68 00:07:40,000 --> 00:07:47,600 to what we've seen in the other application types obviously annexation is a separate application 69 00:07:47,600 --> 00:07:54,320 has a lot of other procedures we recently went through an annexation of a property south 70 00:07:54,320 --> 00:07:59,880 of town the municipal service agreement is mentioned there so that's something that we 71 00:07:59,880 --> 00:08:06,300 included in the procedures as far as timing and ordinance requirement that is all covered 72 00:08:06,300 --> 00:08:13,080 under this section and again will be in compliant with the texas local government code schedules 73 00:08:13,080 --> 00:08:18,160 and timing so i didn't want to spend a whole lot of time on these because we know that 74 00:08:18,160 --> 00:08:24,560 what we're trying to do here is just bring into the dc the procedures for again voluntary 75 00:08:24,560 --> 00:08:29,720 annexations 76 00:08:29,720 --> 00:08:36,340 i did want to however include the voluntary annexation approval criteria this is what 77 00:08:36,340 --> 00:08:43,600 we will look at when considering voluntary annexations this is section d of this particular 78 00:08:43,600 --> 00:08:49,440 item and again i'm going to read just just a brief summary of each one of them the first 79 00:08:49,440 --> 00:08:55,560 one is that it's consistent with our annexation policy adopted by the city of denton that 80 00:08:55,560 --> 00:09:00,200 annexation policy is covered in our comprehensive plan and there may be some other policies 81 00:09:00,200 --> 00:09:05,800 related but primarily within our comprehensive plan the owners of all the property in the 82 00:09:05,800 --> 00:09:13,840 area have joined joined sorry in the requests for annexation that there is no previously 83 00:09:13,840 --> 00:09:19,600 non-annexation or similar agreement conflicts number four that the annexation is necessary 84 00:09:19,600 --> 00:09:25,480 to ensure again adjoining the current city limits which may have significant impact upon 85 00:09:25,480 --> 00:09:30,440 the city and then last the annexation will ensure that the added growth land use and 86 00:09:30,440 --> 00:09:36,800 building control are in place in areas again which growth is anticipated so those are the 87 00:09:36,800 --> 00:09:44,760 five criteria's that we will look at in considering any voluntary annexation 88 00:09:44,760 --> 00:09:50,920 so that that's up the the end of that item again does anybody have any comments questions 89 00:09:50,920 --> 00:09:58,520 related to the annexation procedures councilmember braves yeah and it may have been in there 90 00:09:58,520 --> 00:10:03,520 and it may not need to be but whenever we do an annexation part of the the question 91 00:10:03,520 --> 00:10:10,920 is city services water utilities things like that is that does that need to be addressed 92 00:10:10,920 --> 00:10:17,480 here and do those have to be pointed out before the annexation occurs or is that something 93 00:10:17,480 --> 00:10:23,640 that happens afterwards uh councilman breaks that actually happens during the uh the discussion 94 00:10:23,640 --> 00:10:29,440 and negotiation of the municipal service agreement so that is a different process that we do 95 00:10:29,440 --> 00:10:35,360 while considering the annexation so uh it's mentioned or will be uh you know identified 96 00:10:35,360 --> 00:10:40,800 during the municipal service agreement uh discussions and his municipal service agreement 97 00:10:40,800 --> 00:10:46,560 is that here in the um on the list of things that we that they have to do before correct 98 00:10:46,560 --> 00:10:55,240 correct that's part of the procedure the process okay great question and there has been discussion 99 00:10:55,240 --> 00:11:04,080 uh chair may i just yes yes there has been discussion about um broadband and um wi-fi 100 00:11:04,080 --> 00:11:11,040 is is that something um that that we address or is that not going to be included in annexations 101 00:11:11,040 --> 00:11:15,440 i know that it was part of our conversation on council and it may just be too soon to 102 00:11:15,440 --> 00:11:22,040 bring it back up but um it's something that i i think that we were talking about considering 103 00:11:22,040 --> 00:11:27,960 right i i do i do know about that uh request or that that suggestion uh in some areas of 104 00:11:27,960 --> 00:11:35,400 town where uh broadband isn't as um as strong as as others and ensuring that there is facilities 105 00:11:35,400 --> 00:11:41,040 or capacity to provide that um i don't know i don't know the answer to that question i 106 00:11:41,040 --> 00:11:44,400 don't know if that's part of our municipal service agreement i don't think we provide 107 00:11:44,400 --> 00:11:48,800 that service so it probably won't be that might be something that the development community 108 00:11:48,800 --> 00:11:55,320 uh may may need to address and something that we may have to look at uh later in in you 109 00:11:55,320 --> 00:12:02,760 know as we continue with the code amendments in a different section okay thank you okay 110 00:12:02,760 --> 00:12:09,360 anyone else i've got one uh ron on uh number three on the criteria there about uh does 111 00:12:09,360 --> 00:12:16,280 not violate uh or conflict with any previous non-annexation or similar agreement does that 112 00:12:16,280 --> 00:12:24,960 cover if they do start developing that uh uh yeah no i think that um obviously there's 113 00:12:24,960 --> 00:12:29,360 a non-annexation agreement or if there is an agreement that stipulates certain terms 114 00:12:29,360 --> 00:12:34,840 if they obviously breach those terms uh then whatever is covered under that agreement would 115 00:12:34,840 --> 00:12:40,280 take precedent i think what this says is that um we won't obviously annex if they comply 116 00:12:40,280 --> 00:12:47,000 or continue with uh their agreement so again just to make sure that um we are all in good 117 00:12:47,000 --> 00:12:52,000 standings both as far as their non-annexation agreement if we're not going to annex them 118 00:12:52,000 --> 00:12:55,480 obviously because of the agreement that they have in place that's my understanding of what 119 00:12:55,480 --> 00:13:01,360 number three is about making sure that there's no conflict with any other agreement okay 120 00:13:01,360 --> 00:13:06,640 so if they do basically violate not necessarily violate but they decide to start developing 121 00:13:06,640 --> 00:13:12,760 that non-annexation agreement says that you will agree voluntarily to the annex so right 122 00:13:12,760 --> 00:13:18,000 and then so they're if they do that then they're they're they're gonna comply with the non-annexation 123 00:13:18,000 --> 00:13:22,480 agreement or whatever agreement uh so that's not necessarily a conflict per se because 124 00:13:22,480 --> 00:13:26,040 uh they they've agreed to the agreement and they're they're complying with it and they're 125 00:13:26,040 --> 00:13:33,600 moving forward with an annexation under their terms or under their request okay i just wonder 126 00:13:33,600 --> 00:13:40,120 if we might want to reword that a little bit that also says is in compliance with or i'm 127 00:13:40,120 --> 00:13:48,840 i don't know how you would do that does not violate or conflict or is a uh yeah i see 128 00:13:48,840 --> 00:14:00,760 you're saying is a follow-through to a non-annexation agreement in compliance okay we can we can 129 00:14:00,760 --> 00:14:11,480 certainly word smith that uh to make that clear okay all right i'm gonna go ahead and 130 00:14:11,480 --> 00:14:17,880 unless there's any other questions i'm gonna continue with the presentation okay i see 131 00:14:17,880 --> 00:14:28,480 none so we'll move on to the next item and that is appeal of administrative decision 132 00:14:28,480 --> 00:14:36,120 procedures um these are obviously towards the zoning board of adjustment uh when there 133 00:14:36,120 --> 00:14:45,080 are um appeals to decision and this really this code amendment is not only to uh ensure 134 00:14:45,080 --> 00:14:50,480 it's clear process uh but we also want to be in compliance and follow uh house bill 135 00:14:50,480 --> 00:14:59,080 2497 that was passed that speaks to um the process and procedure for uh the zoning board 136 00:14:59,080 --> 00:15:06,400 of adjustment which includes the appeal process of administrative decisions so i wanted to 137 00:15:06,400 --> 00:15:13,240 first introduce the where it's applicable um who may appeal and this is clearly stated 138 00:15:13,240 --> 00:15:22,560 in the house bill section of where it talks about the the persons that may appeal a decision 139 00:15:22,560 --> 00:15:28,400 the main thing there that i think we mentioned it at our previous meeting that anybody both 140 00:15:28,400 --> 00:15:34,560 in that's related or not related may appeal a decision so that's what we are proposing 141 00:15:34,560 --> 00:15:41,680 to include in the procedure section here so again i won't read all of it i'm just uh know 142 00:15:41,680 --> 00:15:50,080 that the uh proposed code amendment is consistent with what is covered under the new bill that 143 00:15:50,080 --> 00:15:59,040 was passed and how an appeal and who can appeal um can be processed 144 00:15:59,040 --> 00:16:06,960 we go into also the the actual timing of the appeal uh it went from 10 to 20 so that is 145 00:16:06,960 --> 00:16:13,960 reflected in this code amendment and also the content of that appeal application we just 146 00:16:13,960 --> 00:16:18,400 state that the applicant or the administrative appeal application shall be in written uh 147 00:16:18,400 --> 00:16:25,400 statement and that is being submitted again within that 20 days there's also a stay of 148 00:16:25,400 --> 00:16:29,960 proceedings and basically what this is is that if there is a current appeal of an administrative 149 00:16:29,960 --> 00:16:39,880 decision that all other proceedings shall remain undecided until that appeal has been 150 00:16:39,880 --> 00:16:47,880 considered and decided upon 151 00:16:47,880 --> 00:16:52,440 some house cleaning house cleaning here the uh the intent of this code amendment which 152 00:16:52,440 --> 00:16:58,000 is the top one here is that the administrative appeal uh there is none that goes to the planning 153 00:16:58,000 --> 00:17:02,840 zoning commission the ones that do go are either to the zoning board of adjustment and 154 00:17:02,840 --> 00:17:10,800 or to city council uh the next one below that excuse me is regarding the another section 155 00:17:10,800 --> 00:17:16,280 of the code um or the texas local government code that was updated or amended where that 156 00:17:16,280 --> 00:17:21,760 when the appropriate decision-making body when the zoning board of adjustment the decision 157 00:17:21,760 --> 00:17:27,200 on the appeal shall be made on the next meeting for which notice can be provided following 158 00:17:27,200 --> 00:17:33,040 the public hearing of the appeal however not later than 60 days after the date of the appeal 159 00:17:33,040 --> 00:17:40,400 was submitted so an appeal is submitted the staff has up to 60 days to bring it forward 160 00:17:40,400 --> 00:17:47,280 to the cba for consideration but they can only consider it after a second meeting so 161 00:17:47,280 --> 00:17:53,020 we will schedule a meeting that first meeting they will they will discuss it we will present 162 00:17:53,020 --> 00:17:59,560 it that is and then they will not make a decision they will make a decision after that in their 163 00:17:59,560 --> 00:18:05,160 next meeting but again it has to be within 60 days and again that is what is called under 164 00:18:05,160 --> 00:18:09,840 the house bill that was passed and again we're just trying to ensure that it's clear in our 165 00:18:09,840 --> 00:18:16,960 procedure so that it is followed and is and is consistent with texas local government 166 00:18:16,960 --> 00:18:27,120 code so that concludes that section of our list um again the main takeaway there is that 167 00:18:27,120 --> 00:18:33,040 we are complying with the texas local government code amendments that were passed and incorporating 168 00:18:33,040 --> 00:18:38,320 them into our development code and as you see as presented do you all have any questions 169 00:18:38,320 --> 00:18:53,840 not seeing any rounds okay continue on we'll continue on um next section is related to 170 00:18:53,840 --> 00:19:00,400 alternative esa plan environmentally sensitive area plan procedures uh there are two code 171 00:19:00,400 --> 00:19:07,720 of mems here that uh is being presented um one again is more or less trying to make sure 172 00:19:07,720 --> 00:19:14,280 we're consistent in how decisions are made i'm just going to read it for the record an 173 00:19:14,280 --> 00:19:21,080 approved alt isa shall expire after 24 months if progress has not been made to our completion 174 00:19:21,080 --> 00:19:26,720 so again the 24 month as you recall is what we're trying to ensure consistency throughout 175 00:19:26,720 --> 00:19:32,000 the number of applications that we're presenting so we're calling 24 months for this type of 176 00:19:32,000 --> 00:19:38,560 application as well should an approved alt isa expire a new alt isa must be applied for 177 00:19:38,560 --> 00:19:43,960 and approved before any permit may be released allowing encroachment into that alt isa or 178 00:19:43,960 --> 00:19:54,080 that esa so again just to bring that 24 month expiration uh into this uh procedure i have 179 00:19:54,080 --> 00:20:01,520 a question yes ma'am um so esas are a little bit different than than other things uh because 180 00:20:01,520 --> 00:20:10,480 they're it's natural and things can change um what is the current expiration for an esa 181 00:20:10,480 --> 00:20:16,280 it's a good question i i'm trying to think i i don't know if there is one and maybe that's 182 00:20:16,280 --> 00:20:20,240 that's why we're introducing the 24 months and richard i don't know if you are aware 183 00:20:20,240 --> 00:20:26,600 of that i thought at one point we had when when that isa assessment is first done i thought 184 00:20:26,600 --> 00:20:30,640 it was two years i was just going to pull the code because i thought it might have been 185 00:20:30,640 --> 00:20:37,480 mentioned in the old ddc um i just need to i just need to go back to the 2018 version 186 00:20:37,480 --> 00:20:42,840 yeah if we and i know that we did some um updates on the isa as well in the um the guide 187 00:20:42,840 --> 00:20:48,120 the handbook so um i mean this is fine but if it's normally like a year and we're extending 188 00:20:48,120 --> 00:20:56,600 it to two years i'd like to know that um yeah and um i don't know if christy upton's on 189 00:20:56,600 --> 00:21:03,160 the call or she's called in maybe she might have an answer thank you ron i am here um 190 00:21:03,160 --> 00:21:10,480 yes you are correct there is a two-year expiration on the isa field assessment i believe ron 191 00:21:10,480 --> 00:21:17,400 that this proposal is for the alternative isa plan is that correct that's correct so 192 00:21:17,400 --> 00:21:25,240 there's not an expiration date at this time for the alternative isa plans okay so like 193 00:21:25,240 --> 00:21:31,060 since there's not an expiration in our current code someone could get a alternative isa and 194 00:21:31,060 --> 00:21:36,880 hold on to that and come back three or four years later and use that same one um use the 195 00:21:36,880 --> 00:21:50,440 same plan yes okay okay so this just all right thank you great thank you christy 196 00:21:50,440 --> 00:22:00,480 so the um the next item um or next item rather next section of this item is related to um 197 00:22:00,480 --> 00:22:07,040 what what is normally covered under the alt isa plan we often when i say we the city adds 198 00:22:07,040 --> 00:22:14,920 a number of conditions we wanted to uh make sure that when a person is applying for an 199 00:22:14,920 --> 00:22:21,120 alt isa they are aware that these conditions are going to be part of the ordinance and 200 00:22:21,120 --> 00:22:28,800 so again i'll read briefly of what these conditions are that the vegetation is part of the approved 201 00:22:28,800 --> 00:22:36,920 that re-vegetation plan shall be seeded and maintained and planted for a period of three 202 00:22:36,920 --> 00:22:43,160 years following installation so they have to maintain that within within three years 203 00:22:43,160 --> 00:22:48,600 or as long as three years and then the second part of that is that the applicant or a property 204 00:22:48,600 --> 00:22:54,360 owner shall submit an annual report to the environmental services director for that three 205 00:22:54,360 --> 00:23:02,560 years and if and during those annual report reviews there are mitigations or needs to 206 00:23:02,560 --> 00:23:10,200 replace any plant that is done within 30 days of that direction to them so again this is 207 00:23:10,200 --> 00:23:20,080 just to help explain to the proposed applicant that any alt isa they would need to provide 208 00:23:20,080 --> 00:23:25,440 the following and this will be part of the code amendment i'm sorry the uh the ordinance 209 00:23:25,440 --> 00:23:35,960 excuse me and um again to be upfront on what the city's expectation is and that is really 210 00:23:35,960 --> 00:23:43,600 just the two items for that particular section or item that's my breaks yeah i think that's 211 00:23:43,600 --> 00:23:49,400 great to have it in there so when we do go through the process there's no surprises um 212 00:23:49,400 --> 00:23:57,640 on the um so it's the annual review and in that annual review is that when they say well 213 00:23:57,640 --> 00:24:02,760 this is what's dead or dying i mean is it is it self-reporting because i know that when 214 00:24:02,760 --> 00:24:10,240 we put um one year two year three years on landscape it's um like people can report that 215 00:24:10,240 --> 00:24:15,060 it's dying you know we have zoning officers that can drive by and see that it's dying 216 00:24:15,060 --> 00:24:19,800 and then um then they have to replace it so is this a little bit different process for 217 00:24:19,800 --> 00:24:26,520 the i think i think it's the same and then i'll let christy um chime in uh three years 218 00:24:26,520 --> 00:24:30,680 is like you just mentioned galsman breaks is consistent with our landscaping uh minimum 219 00:24:30,680 --> 00:24:35,520 requirement uh but i'll have christy verify that we don't wait till that annual report 220 00:24:35,520 --> 00:24:40,360 that if there is something that is either um needs to be mitigated it's as mitigated 221 00:24:40,360 --> 00:24:46,800 uh as soon as possible but again christy do you have a response to that question yes um 222 00:24:46,800 --> 00:24:55,520 but that is that is accurate when staff notices that uh there are vegetation that is not getting 223 00:24:55,520 --> 00:25:04,320 established as it was proposed um we we do uh occasionally inspect these these sites 224 00:25:04,320 --> 00:25:14,600 and do follow up with the applicant or landowner as appropriate and i thought it was two years 225 00:25:14,600 --> 00:25:21,360 on regular landscaping did we expand that to three years 226 00:25:21,360 --> 00:25:26,440 my understanding is three but three okay yes my understanding is three i'm just looking 227 00:25:26,440 --> 00:25:42,520 to see richard okay great and we'll come back to that um if there are no other questions 228 00:25:42,520 --> 00:25:56,880 i'll continue with the presentation okay so the next section um is related to interpretations 229 00:25:56,880 --> 00:26:04,560 this is a procedure that um can be applied for uh by an applicant and if there are any 230 00:26:04,560 --> 00:26:11,480 appeals to that interpretation we just wanted to clarify that it is appealed to the zoning 231 00:26:11,480 --> 00:26:17,840 board of adjustment that's pretty much it and that's just this quick code amendment 232 00:26:17,840 --> 00:26:22,720 just to clarify that any appeal is to the zoning board of adjustment so i don't think 233 00:26:22,720 --> 00:26:31,800 that's um complex there so if there's no question i'll go ahead and move on to the next item 234 00:26:31,800 --> 00:26:39,680 this is related to the historic landmark designation procedure um where um the hlc will review 235 00:26:39,680 --> 00:26:48,760 um a an application to designate a building or or area or site as a historic local landmark 236 00:26:48,760 --> 00:26:55,560 ultimately the city council approves these historic landmark designations so far today 237 00:26:55,560 --> 00:27:05,120 that is we have five procedures on listed under designations we the the staff and as 238 00:27:05,120 --> 00:27:11,240 what was when roman was here what was proposed uh he he wanted to add the following and i'm 239 00:27:11,240 --> 00:27:16,560 just gonna just briefly read through this there's a i believe a total of five additional 240 00:27:16,560 --> 00:27:23,040 um or six additional amendments or additions to the procedures that the designation of 241 00:27:23,040 --> 00:27:29,480 the historic landmark may be amended or removed using the same procedure as uh provided in 242 00:27:29,480 --> 00:27:36,840 the designation any person making application to have a building site district or area um 243 00:27:36,840 --> 00:27:43,840 as a historic landmark uh shall pay development review fees as as adopted by the fee schedule 244 00:27:43,840 --> 00:27:49,040 property owner consent is required for designation however if the property owner does not give 245 00:27:49,040 --> 00:27:55,920 consent to designate then a three-fourth vote of the hlc playing zoning commission and city 246 00:27:55,920 --> 00:28:01,720 council is required again most most of the time it's being brought forward by the property 247 00:28:01,720 --> 00:28:09,320 owner but there may be occasions where the city or some other entity might nominate or 248 00:28:09,320 --> 00:28:18,040 bring forward a a historic landmark designation application number nine property owners by 249 00:28:18,040 --> 00:28:22,560 religious organizations as qualified under state law may not be designated without consent 250 00:28:22,560 --> 00:28:32,080 so any religious organization are exempted from the designation without their consent 251 00:28:32,080 --> 00:28:37,320 number 10 not later than the 15th day of the date of the initial hearing the historic landmark 252 00:28:37,320 --> 00:28:43,360 designation the property the property of the hlc planning zoning commission and city council 253 00:28:43,360 --> 00:28:50,000 the owner shall be provided a statement describing the impact of the historic designation may 254 00:28:50,000 --> 00:28:55,280 have on the owner and the owner's property the statement shall include so the following 255 00:28:55,280 --> 00:29:01,960 again would be identified and presented to the property owner so that they are familiar 256 00:29:01,960 --> 00:29:07,720 with what it means of what a historic landmark designation is and for the most part they 257 00:29:07,720 --> 00:29:11,720 are familiar with obviously that's one of the reasons why they're they're looking to 258 00:29:11,720 --> 00:29:19,080 designate their their structure site or area into a historic landmark designation i believe 259 00:29:19,080 --> 00:29:28,160 that's it so just an additional five procedures to be a little bit more clear on what is required 260 00:29:28,160 --> 00:29:36,720 in designating designating a historic landmark does anybody have any questions so we don't 261 00:29:36,720 --> 00:29:42,160 have a historic landmark officer now do and it mentions that in the previous numbers one 262 00:29:42,160 --> 00:29:50,520 through five does that prohibit or complicate things for anyone no uh we we have one acting 263 00:29:50,520 --> 00:29:55,960 as a historic preservation officer and that's that's me for now uh until we find someone 264 00:29:55,960 --> 00:30:03,000 to um to hire as a historic preservation officer i know that the city has been advertising 265 00:30:03,000 --> 00:30:09,560 and looking to hire a historic preservation officer one that has more of that historic 266 00:30:09,560 --> 00:30:15,440 preservation experience as well as an architectural background we hope to have someone in place 267 00:30:15,440 --> 00:30:20,840 as soon as possible but for now we we still have a historic preservation officer and can 268 00:30:20,840 --> 00:30:31,160 act under those um those requirements thanks yeah 269 00:30:31,160 --> 00:30:36,480 and i will continue um with the next item and this is going to be a little bit more 270 00:30:36,480 --> 00:30:44,760 i think uh more policy questions the first few items were just you know helpful uh clarifications 271 00:30:44,760 --> 00:30:51,120 additions and and uh clearing up some of the the requirements and uh consistency with uh 272 00:30:51,120 --> 00:30:58,520 state uh house uh bills and state uh law so the next item is related to dimensional standards 273 00:30:58,520 --> 00:31:07,040 and what we are proposing staff's proposing is to amend the side yard setback for properties 274 00:31:07,040 --> 00:31:15,600 within the r3 residential three zoning district right now the setback requirement is 10 feet 275 00:31:15,600 --> 00:31:23,320 what staff is proposing is to bring that down to five feet what we have found is that uh 276 00:31:23,320 --> 00:31:30,560 in some instances uh a lot of the homes that were zoned nr3 as you all recall from previous 277 00:31:30,560 --> 00:31:37,000 um development code the previous development code um it it was developed under if they 278 00:31:37,000 --> 00:31:42,920 were developed under the r3 nr3 uh most of those developments had a five yard uh five 279 00:31:42,920 --> 00:31:51,320 yard five foot setback side yard however with the 2019 what happened was uh we moved that 280 00:31:51,320 --> 00:31:59,120 up to 10 in in as a result it created a lot of non-conformity uh and so for for those 281 00:31:59,120 --> 00:32:06,600 that have a five foot setback for example and want to add an addition or something to 282 00:32:06,600 --> 00:32:13,680 that home they are now looked at as as being a 10 foot setback which is not consistent 283 00:32:13,680 --> 00:32:20,640 to what was initially actually developed in addition uh nr3 we feel that uh should be 284 00:32:20,640 --> 00:32:26,240 five feet um instead of 10 feet again to be consistent with what has already been developed 285 00:32:26,240 --> 00:32:32,920 and uh and and what is consistent with um what other uh zoning district around that 286 00:32:32,920 --> 00:32:39,960 particular um district for example and i'll change it to the next slide you can see that 287 00:32:39,960 --> 00:32:48,440 as we leave um as we go from rr to r2 the side yard setback is 10 uh but once we cross 288 00:32:48,440 --> 00:32:56,480 over from r3 on forward it goes down to five and um looking at um again this is kind of 289 00:32:56,480 --> 00:33:01,760 the middle area within the history i'm sorry within the zoning districts that um there 290 00:33:01,760 --> 00:33:09,760 is an opportunity here uh to amend this to be more consistent to what's in in in the 291 00:33:09,760 --> 00:33:17,600 city today and again between r4 and r2 we feel that uh the five foot yard setback uh 292 00:33:17,600 --> 00:33:24,920 is appropriate so that's a policy question policy direction um is is needed anybody have 293 00:33:24,920 --> 00:33:33,880 any questions or comments as to this proposed requirement or code amendment if i may just 294 00:33:33,880 --> 00:33:38,940 add uh really quickly part part of the other uh challenge with that is if you look at the 295 00:33:38,940 --> 00:33:43,800 numbers from the chart at r3 you're you're essentially stuck with a 40 foot wide building 296 00:33:43,800 --> 00:33:48,440 pad and so if you wanted to go with a house slightly larger uh you're limited to the same 297 00:33:48,440 --> 00:33:56,440 size house that you'd have in um r4 r6 or r7 so they all you have a bigger lot but but 298 00:33:56,440 --> 00:34:02,640 essentially a smaller building pad or the same building pad as um the r4 r6 or r7 district 299 00:34:02,640 --> 00:34:05,160 that have the 50 foot wide lots with the five foot setbacks 300 00:34:05,160 --> 00:34:15,360 councilmember briggs yeah i'm okay with this i have a a real life situation question to 301 00:34:15,360 --> 00:34:23,640 ask though um would this does this also go to currently um built homes um i have someone 302 00:34:23,640 --> 00:34:29,840 here in the neighborhood who wanted to do a carport uh next to that the house and even 303 00:34:29,840 --> 00:34:35,120 just to make it even with the fence line and um was told no they couldn't do that because 304 00:34:35,120 --> 00:34:42,520 of the setback um even though it didn't go into the row it still went into the the setback 305 00:34:42,520 --> 00:34:47,160 which was new for me because i'm used to talking about that when we talk about new developments 306 00:34:47,160 --> 00:34:53,080 um but applying it to to an older development was different so um changing something like 307 00:34:53,080 --> 00:34:58,680 this would that alleviate those stresses for homeowners when they're trying to take advantage 308 00:34:58,680 --> 00:35:04,440 of the property that they own um and make an addition i think especially if i can answer 309 00:35:04,440 --> 00:35:09,000 that question especially when their setback that was applied to when they first built 310 00:35:09,000 --> 00:35:14,920 the home was five foot um and now we're saying that they can't add anything closer than five 311 00:35:14,920 --> 00:35:22,000 foot or 10 feet so the answer is yes um this will hopefully help in that situation um and 312 00:35:22,000 --> 00:35:28,240 i don't know that particular um real life scenario but i know when when looking at this 313 00:35:28,240 --> 00:35:32,720 code amendment we've we've heard a number of them so that's what triggered us looking 314 00:35:32,720 --> 00:35:37,560 at this even more and as richard mentioned you know the as we move forward not only those 315 00:35:37,560 --> 00:35:44,560 existing but as we move forward this could um be a lot worse so um having this proposed 316 00:35:44,560 --> 00:35:49,720 code amendment not only alleviates the existing situations that you described councilman briggs 317 00:35:49,720 --> 00:35:56,600 but also as we develop or the areas of our three develops hopefully we can avoid that 318 00:35:56,600 --> 00:36:06,520 same situation okay thanks okay so i don't see any other hands and i'm just going to 319 00:36:06,520 --> 00:36:11,840 go ahead and continue with the presentation i appreciate that uh those questions aren't 320 00:36:11,840 --> 00:36:20,480 that question so um next item um or next part of the dimensional standards is related to 321 00:36:20,480 --> 00:36:29,920 the maximum building height for the hi zoning district hi is a transition from icg from 322 00:36:29,920 --> 00:36:36,720 the previous 2002 code and i don't know if you all remember but there was a code amendment 323 00:36:36,720 --> 00:36:43,280 back in um it was prior to 2019 i don't have the exact year but we increased the height 324 00:36:43,280 --> 00:36:53,520 limit for the icg to 140 it was primarily to address a i believe is the the target a 325 00:36:53,520 --> 00:37:00,600 warehouse off of airport road and they needed they they were proposing a height of greater 326 00:37:00,600 --> 00:37:09,360 than or close to 140 so that's what um was approved in 2000 um again i apologize i don't 327 00:37:09,360 --> 00:37:16,800 have the exact date but it was pre 2019 um so 140 feet was was uh the the height however 328 00:37:16,800 --> 00:37:25,640 in 2019 when we amended the code uh that number went down to 75 obviously we feel uh the staff 329 00:37:25,640 --> 00:37:34,920 feels that in the hi uh the heavy industrial uh zoning district areas primarily west of 330 00:37:34,920 --> 00:37:41,320 i-35 right by the airport area that's that's where you'll see most of the hi zoning district 331 00:37:41,320 --> 00:37:50,400 a height of 140 is appropriate and we are proposing to bring that back 240 now um the 332 00:37:50,400 --> 00:37:57,120 two the footnote two that you see here is also being added um wanting to let you all 333 00:37:57,120 --> 00:38:02,880 know that if there are proposed buildings that are going to exceed a certain height 334 00:38:02,880 --> 00:38:09,560 uh they also have to follow the airport height hazard district requirements again we we want 335 00:38:09,560 --> 00:38:15,680 to make sure that any federal height limits are met and so even though we say under 40 336 00:38:15,680 --> 00:38:22,000 feet that height limit would still be subject to again any airport height hazard district 337 00:38:22,000 --> 00:38:27,800 requirements for those that are not within those within that district their height could 338 00:38:27,800 --> 00:38:35,240 be up to 140 feet and again i just wanted to see if you all had any questions uh related 339 00:38:35,240 --> 00:38:37,080 to this if questions or comments 340 00:38:37,080 --> 00:38:45,080 councilman braves 341 00:38:45,080 --> 00:38:49,160 yeah sorry i'm just trying to go back to the conversation we had when we were reviewing 342 00:38:49,160 --> 00:38:54,160 the code the first time was it did we talk about this and lower the height because there 343 00:38:54,160 --> 00:39:01,960 were um potential and industrial areas in the center of town that may like take advantage 344 00:39:01,960 --> 00:39:06,920 of this like i'm trying to go back to the conversation if there was an intentional reason 345 00:39:06,920 --> 00:39:11,840 why we did it and then the height could be allowed with an sup like is that was that 346 00:39:11,840 --> 00:39:17,960 part of our conversation or or no i i don't recall honestly i just know that when we looked 347 00:39:17,960 --> 00:39:23,880 at some combination or combining some zoning districts there may have been a compromise 348 00:39:23,880 --> 00:39:30,920 to go from whatever it was 75 for one zoning district and then maybe 140 and it was it 349 00:39:30,920 --> 00:39:37,240 was just decided to go down to 75 that is what i think happened i don't think we had 350 00:39:37,240 --> 00:39:42,520 a discussion and some of the other dcrc members if you do recall i please remind but i don't 351 00:39:42,520 --> 00:39:50,280 remember discussing specifically for um the downtown area well i i think we remember having 352 00:39:50,280 --> 00:39:57,280 uh certain discussions about um like uh skyscrape like to make sure that certain views weren't 353 00:39:57,280 --> 00:40:02,360 um obstructive um around areas but i don't know if that's part of this conversation or 354 00:40:02,360 --> 00:40:09,520 not so um no i do know that there there are um sections of the other like for example 355 00:40:09,520 --> 00:40:16,600 mr uh md sorry md uh the mixed use downtown zoning district there is a height limit there 356 00:40:16,600 --> 00:40:23,120 and if anything exceeds it uh it would require either an sup or maybe a variance but i believe 357 00:40:23,120 --> 00:40:28,200 that's what we were discussing and wanting to get to protect those view sheds but specifically 358 00:40:28,200 --> 00:40:33,360 for the hi i think it was just when we combined zoning districts the height that was selected 359 00:40:33,360 --> 00:40:39,000 was more of the conservative versus the 140 but we feel that the hi and specifically in 360 00:40:39,000 --> 00:40:45,040 the area that we're talking about would be appropriate and with the airport hazard district 361 00:40:45,040 --> 00:40:51,320 um that's still another additional um requirement okay thanks for clarifying i think i was getting 362 00:40:51,320 --> 00:40:59,800 two conversations mixed up okay there's the question i'm going to go ahead to the next 363 00:40:59,800 --> 00:41:10,520 dimensional standard i think it's just to basically provide that same amendment as it 364 00:41:10,520 --> 00:41:15,640 relates as it's shown here would which kind of summarizes all the zoning districts within 365 00:41:15,640 --> 00:41:22,640 the non-residential districts so again the 75 to 140 uh we also bring that same note 366 00:41:22,640 --> 00:41:33,400 here to again complete that code amendment okay so now we're moving into a table the 367 00:41:33,400 --> 00:41:40,680 table of allowed uses the staff has a couple of things again as you all know one of the 368 00:41:40,680 --> 00:41:46,680 things that we're trying to do is address non-conformities but also to look at these 369 00:41:46,680 --> 00:41:53,640 use specific standards and these allowed uses uh to apply when we apply them to see what 370 00:41:53,640 --> 00:41:59,280 we can do to improve not only their consistency but to again address those non-conformities 371 00:41:59,280 --> 00:42:09,160 so the first item our first one here is related to medical office um what we are proposing 372 00:42:09,160 --> 00:42:19,120 is that the sc zoning district that it'd be permitted um without any use specific standards 373 00:42:19,120 --> 00:42:29,680 right now the p uh is actually p plus um and that plus refers to uh this particular use 374 00:42:29,680 --> 00:42:34,760 specific standard that you see here in number three if we were to change this to just a 375 00:42:34,760 --> 00:42:41,440 simple p then this would not be applicable for any properties within the zone uh zone 376 00:42:41,440 --> 00:42:49,480 sc zoning district and that they can develop any medical office can develop more than 25,000 377 00:42:49,480 --> 00:42:57,640 square feet again we're talking about within the sc zoning district so to kind of summarize 378 00:42:57,640 --> 00:43:09,760 again currently the medical office is permitted in the sc with a p plus that plus states that 379 00:43:09,760 --> 00:43:18,840 any medical office with more than 25,000 square feet must require sup what we're saying is 380 00:43:18,840 --> 00:43:25,640 that we remove that plus and allow medical office within the sc zoning district and not 381 00:43:25,640 --> 00:43:38,480 have a maximum uh square foot requirement uh by right or with an sup and again if i 382 00:43:38,480 --> 00:43:51,040 need to clarify that if you have any questions uh please let me know and sc's are typically 383 00:43:51,040 --> 00:43:59,120 located along major corridors um t's lee loop 28 uh i'm not sorry loop 288 university 384 00:43:59,120 --> 00:44:12,800 are mainly sc's any questions i'm not seeing any takers ron so okay move move on to if 385 00:44:12,800 --> 00:44:19,200 you if you think of any if you come over and just please let me know or let the chair know 386 00:44:19,200 --> 00:44:27,600 so we'll move on to the next one this is related to central preparation facilities these are 387 00:44:27,600 --> 00:44:34,680 typically associated with food trucks as you all know we have a number of food trucks that 388 00:44:34,680 --> 00:44:42,680 are allowed here in the city either on private property in sometimes within public property 389 00:44:42,680 --> 00:44:52,920 with the right permits so these food trucks have to by by law have to replenish or they 390 00:44:52,920 --> 00:45:00,200 have to get rid of any waste or whatever it may be for the next day and they have to be 391 00:45:00,200 --> 00:45:06,480 able to do that in a central preparation facility is what we're calling them often also known 392 00:45:06,480 --> 00:45:13,840 as commissaries the city currently does not have a use that speaks to what we're calling 393 00:45:13,840 --> 00:45:19,840 again central preparation facility most of these are located outside the city some in 394 00:45:19,840 --> 00:45:25,500 the county i know that some are also down in lewisville and this is where our our food 395 00:45:25,500 --> 00:45:34,040 trucks the food trucks have to go to get again products replenish and or remove any waste 396 00:45:34,040 --> 00:45:41,120 that they've accumulated what we're saying is that we should identify this as a use and 397 00:45:41,120 --> 00:45:45,920 identify where they should be or could be permitted we are saying that they should be 398 00:45:45,920 --> 00:45:53,120 located only within the li and the hi the light industrial and the heavy industrial 399 00:45:53,120 --> 00:46:02,240 with a plus u specific standard section 535 i which specifically and i'll go into that 400 00:46:02,240 --> 00:46:08,440 let me think it's the next slide here which specifically states that use of a private 401 00:46:08,440 --> 00:46:14,160 residence assistant as a central preparation facility is prohibited so again not that that's 402 00:46:14,160 --> 00:46:20,480 going to happen hopefully there's not a private residence in a li or hi there may be but again 403 00:46:20,480 --> 00:46:27,600 if it is it would be prohibited any food establishment used as a central facility such an exist an 404 00:46:27,600 --> 00:46:34,080 existing restaurant shall be permitted by appropriate local regulatory authority by 405 00:46:34,080 --> 00:46:39,840 the department of state health services be constructed in a manner approved by the appropriate 406 00:46:39,840 --> 00:46:44,360 local regular authority again most likely the development i'm sorry the department of 407 00:46:44,360 --> 00:46:50,840 state health services meet all applicable zoning health building and fire codes and 408 00:46:50,840 --> 00:46:58,360 comply with the chapter 13 of the of the city municipal code of ordinances which is related 409 00:46:58,360 --> 00:47:07,080 to food and food service establishment so again what we're trying to do is it is identify 410 00:47:07,080 --> 00:47:13,800 central preparation facility also known as commissaries as a use and identifying where 411 00:47:13,800 --> 00:47:19,840 they're located or should be located and that is the li and the hi zoning districts only 412 00:47:19,840 --> 00:47:28,520 we also provide a definition if you all need to know what what it is but again basically 413 00:47:28,520 --> 00:47:35,320 it's a facility that is that is an approved and permitted food establishment at a at which 414 00:47:35,320 --> 00:47:41,900 a at which food is prepared stored wrapped in and that the mobile unit is supplied with 415 00:47:41,900 --> 00:47:50,500 fresh water potable water ice and emptied of waste into a proper waste disposal system 416 00:47:50,500 --> 00:47:56,000 and clean including washing rinsing and sanitizing so basically what you would think would need 417 00:47:56,000 --> 00:48:03,920 to happen after they've been out during the day and just need to re replenish restart 418 00:48:03,920 --> 00:48:11,720 for the next coming workday so i'm gonna stop sharing and again ask if there are any questions 419 00:48:11,720 --> 00:48:20,360 that's my breaks i i do have a question um because we have food truck parks and i don't 420 00:48:20,360 --> 00:48:27,120 i don't necessarily see those trucks moving off location to do what you're talking about 421 00:48:27,120 --> 00:48:32,180 um is there a is there a difference and i guess what i'm trying to get out here is that 422 00:48:32,180 --> 00:48:40,720 right now i know that um we need to be innovative and there's a lot of um other um places struggling 423 00:48:40,720 --> 00:48:49,200 and i don't want to uh create any um hardships for um people who are trying to be flexible 424 00:48:49,200 --> 00:48:53,160 um so i don't know if this is by adding this we're making this a requirement and it's going 425 00:48:53,160 --> 00:48:58,960 to become an issue um if you could just help me understand that and and is this does this 426 00:48:58,960 --> 00:49:04,240 also incorporate cottage bakeries because i know that we have people individuals who 427 00:49:04,240 --> 00:49:10,720 bake things and give them to the food trucks to sell so is that gonna um is this gonna 428 00:49:10,720 --> 00:49:17,160 make those um places be restrictive on what they can do and cannot do in their home right 429 00:49:17,160 --> 00:49:22,500 right so so the the ones that you're referring to the the bakeries or whatever uh food preparation 430 00:49:22,500 --> 00:49:27,720 that's done by home would not um fall under this what we're what we're saying is those 431 00:49:27,720 --> 00:49:35,600 food trucks that need a place to again wash up or do what they need to do have a place 432 00:49:35,600 --> 00:49:43,120 in the city of denton as far as how often they should go i know that our food establishment 433 00:49:43,120 --> 00:49:49,680 chapter and our municipal code of orensis speaks uh directly to that and again i believe 434 00:49:49,680 --> 00:49:55,880 it's within a certain amount of time i want to say 24 hours but i i don't know for sure 435 00:49:55,880 --> 00:50:01,880 i don't know if it's scott if scott mcdonald is on the line if he's aware of how often 436 00:50:01,880 --> 00:50:09,020 a food truck needs to be uh needs to visit pay commissary and or central preparation 437 00:50:09,020 --> 00:50:15,640 facility well that's i mean i don't i just want to make sure that we're not um by creating 438 00:50:15,640 --> 00:50:21,300 something new we're not putting any new hardships on um people who have been used to doing things 439 00:50:21,300 --> 00:50:26,340 a certain way if it's been in our rules and they've been following them then it's not 440 00:50:26,340 --> 00:50:32,480 an issue right right yes ma'am the that that requirements i'm sorry those are also state 441 00:50:32,480 --> 00:50:36,120 requirements those are those are state yeah so they would be following what we're trying 442 00:50:36,120 --> 00:50:42,880 to do is offer a place closer to town or in town for uh these food truck businesses so 443 00:50:42,880 --> 00:50:53,840 helping them okay thanks and ron i have a question because this is scott mcdonald oh 444 00:50:53,840 --> 00:51:01,360 go ahead scott thank you thank you mr chair um and um keely just to your point this this 445 00:51:01,360 --> 00:51:05,960 is actually going to make it simpler this is not more restrictive um we have a number 446 00:51:05,960 --> 00:51:11,320 of food trucks that have to travel a long ways it just offers a greater opportunity 447 00:51:11,320 --> 00:51:17,360 for that commissary to be located in the city of denton and convenient for food truck operators 448 00:51:17,360 --> 00:51:22,960 it is a component within state law and is required for those trucks to clean um after 449 00:51:22,960 --> 00:51:29,200 day's service so it's required for them to do for a state license and we just replicate 450 00:51:29,200 --> 00:51:35,720 that with our municipal code so less restrictive um more convenient perfect and so up until 451 00:51:35,720 --> 00:51:43,040 now we didn't allow those in the city of denton we we we don't have anything in our zoning 452 00:51:43,040 --> 00:51:47,880 that would allow for that use specifically okay all right well thanks for finding it 453 00:51:47,880 --> 00:51:56,740 thanks but at the same time councilmember briggs we've had regulations that have addressed 454 00:51:56,740 --> 00:52:01,680 food trucks that were found in the city's amendments to the texas food establishment 455 00:52:01,680 --> 00:52:06,760 rules that contain some of the same provisions that ron is going over today so there has 456 00:52:06,760 --> 00:52:12,560 been some regulation but it's it's the the regulation of the zoning the use itself that 457 00:52:12,560 --> 00:52:25,040 has not been regulated in the past and one other question on this is should this somehow 458 00:52:25,040 --> 00:52:31,400 reflect central preparation facility as a primary use because i know of some restaurants 459 00:52:31,400 --> 00:52:38,680 that are that have been looking at trying to do where they allow the food truck to come 460 00:52:38,680 --> 00:52:44,040 in in the morning because they're only open for an evening service so you know it's kind 461 00:52:44,040 --> 00:52:50,200 of the dual use in that same facility and that would not be in an li or hi zoning district 462 00:52:50,200 --> 00:52:58,520 so thereby it would be against our our rules good question um i'm trying to think of because 463 00:52:58,520 --> 00:53:05,840 i know that that was a discussion and they may fall under just a restaurant use and the 464 00:53:05,840 --> 00:53:12,840 actual primary use would not be permitted in any other places such as li or hi but while 465 00:53:12,840 --> 00:53:20,160 you're talking to um councilman ryan is that if it's a restaurant and they're able to do 466 00:53:20,160 --> 00:53:24,640 what they need to do that will fall under a restaurant but let me let me circle back 467 00:53:24,640 --> 00:53:29,000 on that because i think that is a good point are they are they considered a commissary 468 00:53:29,000 --> 00:53:37,040 under um under or are they a restaurant in that situation and ron we can confirm that 469 00:53:37,040 --> 00:53:43,520 but um yeah ultimately the primary use is a restaurant and they may offer a commissary 470 00:53:43,520 --> 00:53:52,280 so that that isn't uncommon so it and i think that is permitted okay i i recall that if 471 00:53:52,280 --> 00:53:57,840 i may chair i i recall that when the council had a series of work sessions on this back 472 00:53:57,840 --> 00:54:05,520 in like 2013 or 2014 there was a concern regarding allowing restaurants to to serve as a commissary 473 00:54:05,520 --> 00:54:10,640 and i believe it had to do something with the grease traps the the amount of of deposits 474 00:54:10,640 --> 00:54:15,520 within that especially in the downtown area so it's something that we can certainly or 475 00:54:15,520 --> 00:54:20,320 at least staff can look back at at the work session videos from that time to see if that 476 00:54:20,320 --> 00:54:24,480 was the concern that gave council pause from going forward in that direction 477 00:54:24,480 --> 00:54:33,120 and any other questions or comments on that 478 00:54:33,120 --> 00:54:51,800 okay i guess we move up move on ahead okay okay well um we've already talked about this 479 00:54:51,800 --> 00:55:01,680 one um next allowed or use is related to a personal service our general personal service 480 00:55:01,680 --> 00:55:07,400 and these are um an establishment that provides repair care maintenance i'm reading right 481 00:55:07,400 --> 00:55:13,920 here below or customizing of wearing peril or other personal articles of or human grooming 482 00:55:13,920 --> 00:55:20,920 services include include such as beauty barber shops dry cleanings shoe repair and so on 483 00:55:20,920 --> 00:55:26,280 and so forth this does not include commercial laundry or dry clean facility so we're talking 484 00:55:26,280 --> 00:55:35,080 about again your general personal services what we are proposing is a allowance for these 485 00:55:35,080 --> 00:55:44,280 types of businesses within an r7 zoning district and as you all know some of the r7 when transitioned 486 00:55:44,280 --> 00:55:53,360 from the previous code were nrmu 12 in some instances so they already had some commercial 487 00:55:53,360 --> 00:56:00,200 uses non-residential uses what we would like to recommend is a specific use permit for 488 00:56:00,200 --> 00:56:07,280 these types of uses again within the r7 if there are any mitigation or impacts to be 489 00:56:07,280 --> 00:56:13,920 mitigated the sup would be able to address those but again this gives an opportunity 490 00:56:13,920 --> 00:56:20,320 for someone that may want to open a barbershop that's maybe in a particular location on the 491 00:56:20,320 --> 00:56:28,020 r7 that's on a roadway an arterial or corridor or collective road that is gives them the 492 00:56:28,020 --> 00:56:33,600 opportunity at least to apply for a specific use permit in that situation so again this 493 00:56:33,600 --> 00:56:39,280 is what staff's proposing do you all have any question related to general personal service 494 00:56:39,280 --> 00:56:47,640 i have just a comment like so when you hear people talking about wanting complete neighborhoods 495 00:56:47,640 --> 00:56:54,200 would this making this allowed in r7 kind of inch a little bit closer to that to have 496 00:56:54,200 --> 00:56:59,660 retail in a walkable area i think so i think if you if you mean we have to look at site 497 00:56:59,660 --> 00:57:05,040 by site and that's where the specific use permit comes in you know we i'm just trying 498 00:57:05,040 --> 00:57:10,600 to think of some places you know down in downtown in downtown area southeast end to be specific 499 00:57:10,600 --> 00:57:16,360 if if there is a barbershop or something that helps the neighborhood or helps you know provide 500 00:57:16,360 --> 00:57:20,420 services to a neighborhood that that might be a possibility again the zoning has to be 501 00:57:20,420 --> 00:57:26,760 r7 right and within the r7 if they propose something like this a specific use permit 502 00:57:26,760 --> 00:57:34,660 so there's still avenues to review what they're proposing and if there's any public opposition 503 00:57:34,660 --> 00:57:40,840 we can certainly address it at that time either by you know considering it or not considering 504 00:57:40,840 --> 00:57:51,160 it or if we do consider it place conditions it's good sure if i might add we if you recall 505 00:57:51,160 --> 00:57:55,960 we did a similar amendment i want to say at the beginning of the year for r7 to allow 506 00:57:55,960 --> 00:58:01,800 for medical office this was in relation to the dentist office down on teesley and so 507 00:58:01,800 --> 00:58:08,880 we had medical office is now allowed if it's less than 10,000 anything greater than 10,000 508 00:58:08,880 --> 00:58:21,000 square feet requires an sqp and so just kind of following along those same lines okay we'll 509 00:58:21,000 --> 00:58:26,480 continue i think there there's probably some use specific standard code amendments related 510 00:58:26,480 --> 00:58:33,600 to what just what richard just mentioned as well um as it relates to medical office um 511 00:58:33,600 --> 00:58:42,160 next um use is parking lots as a principal use as you can see here what we're proposing 512 00:58:42,160 --> 00:58:50,640 is to add this use as a permitted use under the pf public facilities for um whatever reason 513 00:58:50,640 --> 00:58:57,240 it was left out um i don't think it was contemplated at the time but we know that the city the county 514 00:58:57,240 --> 00:59:04,680 and some other public entities often own property that may um may be useful to be parking lot 515 00:59:04,680 --> 00:59:11,200 that's a part uh that's a principal use so we are proposing that uh this particular type 516 00:59:11,200 --> 00:59:16,400 of use be permitted in the pf and again the definition for parking lot as a principal 517 00:59:16,400 --> 00:59:23,500 use is stated as a the ownership lease operation and or i'm sorry or management of a surface 518 00:59:23,500 --> 00:59:33,080 parking lot above ground or below ground structure so again again introducing it under the pf 519 00:59:33,080 --> 00:59:38,880 do you all have any questions comments concerns with this code amendment proposed code amendment 520 00:59:38,880 --> 00:59:52,360 okay we will continue to i think this might be one more i think it's one more but um the 521 00:59:52,360 --> 01:00:00,560 next use is elderly housing similar to um the other use that we talked about allowing 522 01:00:00,560 --> 01:00:09,080 in the sc we feel that elderly housing is an appropriate use on within a suburban corridor 523 01:00:09,080 --> 01:00:17,400 zoning district that is again located along you know loop 28 and or um university any 524 01:00:17,400 --> 01:00:23,220 suburban corridor zoning district elderly housing is defined as a structure licensed 525 01:00:23,220 --> 01:00:29,000 by the texas department of aging and disability which 80 percent of those occupants are of 526 01:00:29,000 --> 01:00:35,800 age or are 50 or aged i'm sorry are of age or older and that meets the definition of 527 01:00:35,800 --> 01:00:41,640 one of the following four listed below so um there are four breakout types of elderly 528 01:00:41,640 --> 01:00:50,760 housing but again this is what we're talking about allowing them within the sc zoning district 529 01:00:50,760 --> 01:00:57,360 by right without us without any use specific standard but again permitted by right any 530 01:00:57,360 --> 01:01:18,320 questions comments regarding this proposed code amendment okay we'll move on um this 531 01:01:18,320 --> 01:01:25,320 is this is a actually part of it i i failed to change my slide here um what we are also 532 01:01:25,320 --> 01:01:32,080 saying is that the mn uh there is currently if we if we go back up there is a p plus what 533 01:01:32,080 --> 01:01:40,240 we're saying is that um within the mn removing that use specific standard um where it limits 534 01:01:40,240 --> 01:01:48,520 the maximum number i'm sorry maximum score footage of 55 000 per lot um we feel that 535 01:01:48,520 --> 01:01:57,360 some mn zoning districts um in in this situation would be able to uh it would be appropriate 536 01:01:57,360 --> 01:02:06,720 to be 55 000 square feet um again thoughts there because again mn most of the mn are 537 01:02:06,720 --> 01:02:13,520 located within areas that would be suitable for elderly housing and again they're typically 538 01:02:13,520 --> 01:02:22,240 one stories so they take up a larger area uh and maximizing it to 55 square feet 50 539 01:02:22,240 --> 01:02:29,680 sorry 55 000 square feet uh could be limiting in in some situations so the proposed code 540 01:02:29,680 --> 01:02:36,520 amendment is to remove that plus uh which means that they will that any elderly housing 541 01:02:36,520 --> 01:02:44,080 proposed in the mn uh would not be limited uh currently they are limited to only 55 000 542 01:02:44,080 --> 01:02:51,760 square feet per lot 543 01:02:51,760 --> 01:02:57,400 any questions on that ron i think my preference would be that uh that would be limited to 544 01:02:57,400 --> 01:03:04,280 55 000 unless they got an sup because mn goes through you know some of our historic areas 545 01:03:04,280 --> 01:03:09,920 uh you know over around the campuses we've got a lot of that that you know i don't know 546 01:03:09,920 --> 01:03:14,920 exactly how i guess that would just be a one of the uh use specifics that if you were an 547 01:03:14,920 --> 01:03:21,600 mn you would you could go up to 55 000 with without an sup but if you want to be over 548 01:03:21,600 --> 01:03:28,400 55 000 you need to get that sup understood i mean i think we have similar um um provisions 549 01:03:28,400 --> 01:03:34,040 that that that have that so if that's the direction we can certainly make that change 550 01:03:34,040 --> 01:03:39,560 for this uh particular code amendment it's a great suggestion 551 01:03:39,560 --> 01:03:49,320 okay all right looks like we have consensus so we'll go ahead and adjust that and we'll 552 01:03:49,320 --> 01:03:59,360 keep the plus uh but add uh as it falls here um and and and for the dcrc that's only for 553 01:03:59,360 --> 01:04:09,040 the mn not the r6 and r7 we'll make sure that that's clear correct okay all right sounds 554 01:04:09,040 --> 01:04:18,680 good appreciate that all right so um we are now um jumping into the next topic and that 555 01:04:18,680 --> 01:04:24,960 is our item on the agenda and that is use specific standards uh this uh specifically 556 01:04:24,960 --> 01:04:33,840 is related to uh five four three um general accessory structures uh uses sorry and structures 557 01:04:33,840 --> 01:04:40,240 uh we are adding what you see here in green if it's underlined it's being added if it's 558 01:04:40,240 --> 01:04:47,360 uh struck through that means it's being deleted uh so letter c i'm just going to read it um 559 01:04:47,360 --> 01:04:56,920 for the dcrc so any accessory uses or structures where permitted non-habitable accessory structures 560 01:04:56,920 --> 01:05:06,480 shall be set back a minimum of three feet from the property line non-habitable um habitable 561 01:05:06,480 --> 01:05:15,600 structures that again if it's obviously um a room or other um kitchen or whatnot shall 562 01:05:15,600 --> 01:05:21,360 be set back in accordance with the requirements of the property zoning district so if it's 563 01:05:21,360 --> 01:05:30,840 a if it's a storage unit or a patio i mean i'm trying to think of an accessory structure 564 01:05:30,840 --> 01:05:38,080 a pergola or something to that effect they shall be set back from the property line three 565 01:05:38,080 --> 01:05:46,440 feet any habitable structure um shall follow the setback requirements of the the property 566 01:05:46,440 --> 01:05:54,800 zoning district a letter e we are adding a little bit more clarification to this requirement 567 01:05:54,800 --> 01:06:03,200 uh all accessory structures that are more than 200 feet shall be architecturally compatible 568 01:06:03,200 --> 01:06:09,760 with its associate primary i'm sorry principal dwelling unit and or screen from public view 569 01:06:09,760 --> 01:06:16,000 of budding properties and public rights away so the first part of that is uh it says required 570 01:06:16,000 --> 01:06:22,000 a required building permit we want to be clear that any accessory structure that is 200 square 571 01:06:22,000 --> 01:06:32,000 feet or more uh shall be architecturally compatible anything not 200 feet less than 200 feet 199 572 01:06:32,000 --> 01:06:39,120 or 200 or less will not necessarily have to be architecturally compatible but again those 573 01:06:39,120 --> 01:06:47,000 that are more than 200 feet shall be architecturally compatible the second part of this is that 574 01:06:47,000 --> 01:06:54,720 it shall be um architecturally compatible with and or screen from view of a budding 575 01:06:54,720 --> 01:07:01,760 properties what is architecturally compatible is often asked of staff what do you mean by 576 01:07:01,760 --> 01:07:07,800 what's architecturally compatible we are saying that this includes but is not limited to the 577 01:07:07,800 --> 01:07:16,320 architectural style and details the roof design exterior color and also the height of that 578 01:07:16,320 --> 01:07:23,880 building shall be less or equal to the principal structure principal dwelling unit furthermore 579 01:07:23,880 --> 01:07:30,680 pergolas and decks are excluded from being required because we know that some of these 580 01:07:30,680 --> 01:07:37,760 are um don't have roofs or are very limited as far as types of um architectural features 581 01:07:37,760 --> 01:07:46,280 so again we we excluded them from from that particular requirement um any questions related 582 01:07:46,280 --> 01:07:51,600 to this i i know i went through that fairly quickly i just wanted to highlight again that 583 01:07:51,600 --> 01:07:59,100 200 square feet is what is required uh for a building permit so we're staying that plainly 584 01:07:59,100 --> 01:08:06,640 here and that them uh those that have a square feet of greater than 200 feet must be compatible 585 01:08:06,640 --> 01:08:10,760 uh or screen from the budding or public right away 586 01:08:10,760 --> 01:08:20,120 ron so you said that 200 square feet or more and you you had it crossed out that requires 587 01:08:20,120 --> 01:08:24,920 it doesn't it won't require a building permit it was that was reading weird to me let me 588 01:08:24,920 --> 01:08:34,440 go back to that um i think we were trying to clean that up um no they would still require 589 01:08:34,440 --> 01:08:40,280 a building permit um just it reads it reads with a line through it like yeah square feet 590 01:08:40,280 --> 01:08:43,120 doesn't need a building requirement just needs to be architecturally compatible with its 591 01:08:43,120 --> 01:08:47,800 associated principal dwelling maybe we keep this right here i think i think that would 592 01:08:47,800 --> 01:08:53,640 be best right i think i think we were trying to we were trying to clear uh provide a clear 593 01:08:53,640 --> 01:08:58,760 understanding what requires a building permit by way of doing that we inadvertently may 594 01:08:58,760 --> 01:09:04,360 uh have deleted this we will certainly bring this back because i don't think it hurts by 595 01:09:04,360 --> 01:09:13,160 keeping it here no ron mr chair yes go ahead um the the building code has an exemption 596 01:09:13,160 --> 01:09:18,520 for accessory structures under 200 square feet not requiring a building permit so they 597 01:09:18,520 --> 01:09:22,160 still have to comply with the zoning ordinance but not necessarily the building permit so 598 01:09:22,160 --> 01:09:27,600 if somebody wanted to bring in an eight by ten shed a building permit is not required 599 01:09:27,600 --> 01:09:33,360 for that that's that's the purpose and just being consistent with the construction codes 600 01:09:33,360 --> 01:09:38,920 all right just if we're adding in there that 200 square feet or more then we have some 601 01:09:38,920 --> 01:09:42,720 of the other items in there i think it would be safe to just go ahead but building requirement 602 01:09:42,720 --> 01:09:47,440 or a building permit would be required just because that's the way it is in the in the 603 01:09:47,440 --> 01:09:53,040 code there so might as well reference is there a reason for that not being in there then 604 01:09:53,040 --> 01:09:59,480 no that would be that would be accurate building permit be required okay we can clean that 605 01:09:59,480 --> 01:10:00,480 up thanks 606 01:10:00,480 --> 01:10:10,440 yes council member breaks thanks tim for that question i had i had the same one so um anything 607 01:10:10,440 --> 01:10:17,480 less than 200 feet um square feet or would not need a permit what if it's not so if it's 608 01:10:17,480 --> 01:10:25,120 non-habitable it would not need a permit correct it's you know how it reads it's really accessory 609 01:10:25,120 --> 01:10:34,240 structures for for one and two family dwellings um so if a person did and again go back to 610 01:10:34,240 --> 01:10:40,040 a detached garage um less than 200 square feet is exempt from the building permit but 611 01:10:40,040 --> 01:10:46,480 still must comply with the zoning requirements okay yeah just um as long as that because 612 01:10:46,480 --> 01:10:52,120 i have people asking me questions like that all the time they're just not sure if um that 613 01:10:52,120 --> 01:10:58,480 information's made easily available so i i do have a question because i know that um 614 01:10:58,480 --> 01:11:04,400 a while ago there was an end of there was a um a household who wanted to build a pool 615 01:11:04,400 --> 01:11:09,760 house um and they had a lot of issues there were some issues that took a lot longer than 616 01:11:09,760 --> 01:11:16,200 um than i think it was supposed to have those issues been addressed um in this code as we 617 01:11:16,200 --> 01:11:24,000 update it i'm trying to remember i mean it may have been more of a an architectural issue 618 01:11:24,000 --> 01:11:28,800 i'm not i'm not quite sure i'm trying to miss on woodland yeah i think i know what you're 619 01:11:28,800 --> 01:11:34,600 referring to councilman briggs um it was um it was a cabana or i think like you said a 620 01:11:34,600 --> 01:11:39,880 pool house and the requirement was that it be architecturally compatible and so that's 621 01:11:39,880 --> 01:11:44,120 where the question came up well what does that mean and you know in some instances you 622 01:11:44,120 --> 01:11:50,680 know some of our plans examiners have one idea uh while some others may have a different 623 01:11:50,680 --> 01:11:56,880 idea so all we're trying to say is putting in the code what we've drafted here is that 624 01:11:56,880 --> 01:12:04,440 they shall be architecturally compatible uh in in terms of i'll pull it up again the that 625 01:12:04,440 --> 01:12:10,480 the architectural style and details um the roof design the roof pitch for example uh 626 01:12:10,480 --> 01:12:18,360 the exterior color um shall be consistent with the primary home as to look like it was 627 01:12:18,360 --> 01:12:23,880 uh intended to be part of the home and that is the height shall not exceed the height 628 01:12:23,880 --> 01:12:31,960 of the primary or principal unit so trying to minimize any um adverse impact to the the 629 01:12:31,960 --> 01:12:37,720 neighborhood by keeping it as close to the architecture of the home the primary home 630 01:12:37,720 --> 01:12:44,800 as possible and so our when i when you read that list um are all of them required pitch 631 01:12:44,800 --> 01:12:52,200 color i mean or is it just a mixture or maybe one of them um and and also when someone applies 632 01:12:52,200 --> 01:12:58,560 for this are are we requiring architecture architectural drawings to be submitted as 633 01:12:58,560 --> 01:13:05,560 well so the first part um the answer is is yes to all of those requirements um and then 634 01:13:05,560 --> 01:13:12,960 two yes we do require elevations so that we can review it and confirm that it does match 635 01:13:12,960 --> 01:13:19,160 the primary or principal dwelling unit we can move on i may have some more conversation 636 01:13:19,160 --> 01:13:29,720 about um the matchiness of it but um yeah we can we can continue okay okay i don't see 637 01:13:29,720 --> 01:13:41,720 any other questions all right so we get into um a short-term rental um this is the another 638 01:13:41,720 --> 01:13:49,000 topic and i know that we've talked about this as far as the dcrc i know that there may be 639 01:13:49,000 --> 01:13:54,440 a person or two that may not have been part of it and i just wanted to make sure that 640 01:13:54,440 --> 01:14:02,120 the dcrc is aware and is familiar with what we're proposing primarily what you see here 641 01:14:02,120 --> 01:14:10,120 is in response to a comment or question that came after the code was adopted our update 642 01:14:10,120 --> 01:14:21,240 that is was adopted in 2019 a person or persons asked to help understand letter b where we 643 01:14:21,240 --> 01:14:32,480 state that verification of the proposed short-term rental um is the primary applicant's uh resident 644 01:14:32,480 --> 01:14:41,000 or the applicant's primary resident um in most cases that's not the case um what we 645 01:14:41,000 --> 01:14:48,920 would like to propose is a i guess a compromise that reads as follows verification that the 646 01:14:48,920 --> 01:14:55,320 proposed short-term rental property is owned by the applicant that resides in the city 647 01:14:55,320 --> 01:15:02,000 of denton for more than six months out of the year so they don't necessarily live in 648 01:15:02,000 --> 01:15:08,320 that primary primary resident but reside in the city of denton the applicant must provide 649 01:15:08,320 --> 01:15:14,720 proof of their residency by evidence of a state issued identification document the reason 650 01:15:14,720 --> 01:15:22,560 why we chose six months is we know people travel um and then we know people have other 651 01:15:22,560 --> 01:15:32,680 homes out elsewhere why we chose reside in the city of denton is because we want to have 652 01:15:32,680 --> 01:15:38,280 those property owners of short-term rentals be within the city of denton and not necessarily 653 01:15:38,280 --> 01:15:42,880 out of state or out of country and again this is just a proposal and this is what staff 654 01:15:42,880 --> 01:15:53,600 is um recommending and i can stand for any questions or any comments that you'll have 655 01:15:53,600 --> 01:16:02,120 all right uh let's start with uh commissioner smith and we'll go to commissioner alice and 656 01:16:02,120 --> 01:16:07,440 then council member breaks i think the i think the requirement for it to be uh i think i 657 01:16:07,440 --> 01:16:13,360 think the state or location geographic requirement is intelligent and smart to do i'm worried 658 01:16:13,360 --> 01:16:19,960 that the city of denton border might be a little bit too narrow um just corinth is right 659 01:16:19,960 --> 01:16:25,600 there i mean crumb is right there there's argiles right there and then if you're right 660 01:16:25,600 --> 01:16:29,400 on those borderline cities i would almost want to recommend it being den county but 661 01:16:29,400 --> 01:16:33,880 i don't know it really seems like the boundary line was just just to protect against having 662 01:16:33,880 --> 01:16:40,480 outside um you want to call it an an alien investor so to speak being involved in order 663 01:16:40,480 --> 01:16:45,680 owning short-term rental properties um i would say maybe expanding the borders in county 664 01:16:45,680 --> 01:16:50,840 that'd be just to for those little small little instances where an argile owner somebody lives 665 01:16:50,840 --> 01:16:55,640 in argile owns a property in denton and it's kind of where they're splitting hairs a little 666 01:16:55,640 --> 01:17:08,040 too much there for my opinion okay margie go ahead okay all right so i mean i i think 667 01:17:08,040 --> 01:17:12,520 this is kind of probably a wish list i'm assuming by the city i mean to think that we have people 668 01:17:12,520 --> 01:17:18,800 that are short-term and rentaling short-term rental their property and are living in it 669 01:17:18,800 --> 01:17:26,360 six months is is is probably not happening um on a lot of them and so are you saying 670 01:17:26,360 --> 01:17:30,560 you want them to live in the city of denton six months and prove that they're a resident 671 01:17:30,560 --> 01:17:36,640 of denton as well so they don't have to live in that primarily that that unit the short-term 672 01:17:36,640 --> 01:17:42,640 rental they just have to be a resident of the city of denton for six months so living in 673 01:17:42,640 --> 01:17:49,360 the city now i know commissioner smith mentioned expanding that from the city to the county 674 01:17:49,360 --> 01:17:58,080 but that is the intent is to to keep the owners of these short-term rentals a resident of 675 01:17:58,080 --> 01:18:04,240 the city and or county for six months at minimum six months and i think what with this what 676 01:18:04,240 --> 01:18:10,920 we're probably keeping them from doing is registering because they probably won't because 677 01:18:10,920 --> 01:18:20,040 i i'm not saying i have the answer to to you know to make this improvement i'm just speaking 678 01:18:20,040 --> 01:18:26,440 of the reality of the situation um that when we're dealing with short-term rentals they 679 01:18:26,440 --> 01:18:36,120 are oftentimes uh not in this city oftentimes not in this country um so again i i don't 680 01:18:36,120 --> 01:18:43,440 know i mean what's to say how do they prove they're living in the city of dentin six months 681 01:18:43,440 --> 01:18:50,080 a year again i mean that's where where the state required you know identification and 682 01:18:50,080 --> 01:18:56,200 and just let me let me just let me mention again the reason why we were brought this 683 01:18:56,200 --> 01:19:01,500 uh it was brought to our attention is as i understand it there was a owner or uh of multiple 684 01:19:01,500 --> 01:19:08,560 short-term rentals that was not living in the city of dentin just outside the city and 685 01:19:08,560 --> 01:19:15,900 part of this concern or question came from our our code enforcement or zoning enforcement 686 01:19:15,900 --> 01:19:22,200 officer where responding to complaints and they were not able to get a hold of the property 687 01:19:22,200 --> 01:19:28,760 owner because they're either out of state or out of reach at that time so that that's 688 01:19:28,760 --> 01:19:33,120 sort of somewhat of the background um again you're right is this the right answer then 689 01:19:33,120 --> 01:19:38,720 this is why we're bringing it to you to help us determine what that answer is yeah i'm 690 01:19:38,720 --> 01:19:43,480 not saying there doesn't need to be improvement to it and fixes to it i just don't know that 691 01:19:43,480 --> 01:19:54,600 this is actually fixing what what the problem is um 692 01:19:54,600 --> 01:20:02,400 so i remember our conversation it was uh quite a long one um in the feedback that we got 693 01:20:02,400 --> 01:20:07,640 from individuals who lived in dentin who have uh short-term rentals and so i think maybe 694 01:20:07,640 --> 01:20:13,840 that suggestion may have come from that person which is great so i i believe one of the things 695 01:20:13,840 --> 01:20:19,240 we um were saying that i'm glad that we're not saying anymore is that they had to actually 696 01:20:19,240 --> 01:20:24,420 live in the unit i think that was um complicated it wasn't what we intended but it somehow 697 01:20:24,420 --> 01:20:31,840 kind of got mixed up in there so um and i i do believe that it's important for whoever 698 01:20:31,840 --> 01:20:38,920 is the owner of the short-term rentals to be accessible and to be um nearby so that 699 01:20:38,920 --> 01:20:45,120 if there are issues that are um habitual issues that are created within the neighborhoods 700 01:20:45,120 --> 01:20:55,120 of our long-term residents then they could be addressed yes marge go ahead thank you 701 01:20:55,120 --> 01:21:01,560 chair um yes but you know why can't somebody who is doing a short-term rental and not living 702 01:21:01,560 --> 01:21:07,600 here um just be required to have a management company contact or something that of that 703 01:21:07,600 --> 01:21:14,800 um you know to to to be the point of contact locally i mean we could be precluding somebody 704 01:21:14,800 --> 01:21:22,280 who's taking maybe a three-month job overseas but wants to keep their property here in denton 705 01:21:22,280 --> 01:21:27,560 for when that they're done overseas and maybe that's what they want to do to it is is turn 706 01:21:27,560 --> 01:21:32,840 it into an airbnb or something like that what do we do with them they wouldn't be allowed 707 01:21:32,840 --> 01:21:39,160 to do it because they're not going to be living here they're living abroad um so so i think 708 01:21:39,160 --> 01:21:45,720 i think which we need to fix the code enforcement issues and again i'm not sure that this requirement 709 01:21:45,720 --> 01:21:52,680 fixes the code enforcement issues um you know i i know we've talked about the registration 710 01:21:52,680 --> 01:21:59,600 of these properties um you know maybe on that it has to have a local contact for when there 711 01:21:59,600 --> 01:22:07,200 are issues or coding code violations or what have you um you know again just you know back 712 01:22:07,200 --> 01:22:12,600 to it i just i just don't know that this requirement um does what we need it to do and it actually 713 01:22:12,600 --> 01:22:18,080 might have unintended consequences for a situation that i just illuminated 714 01:22:18,080 --> 01:22:27,200 yeah i mean i think that's a great idea having a management company or a local contact or 715 01:22:27,200 --> 01:22:31,540 something somewhere that you can actually pick up or if somebody needs to leave to drive 716 01:22:31,540 --> 01:22:37,900 over to see what the situation is that's occurring um would would be great i mean it's something 717 01:22:37,900 --> 01:22:43,960 that we should definitely entertain i think that we're just trying to address having someone 718 01:22:43,960 --> 01:22:51,480 who our city can reach out to if there's an issue with the registered unit where the owner 719 01:22:51,480 --> 01:22:57,120 is absent 720 01:22:57,120 --> 01:23:01,840 and i would agree with that i know a few years back state law changed where multifamily over 721 01:23:01,840 --> 01:23:07,200 a certain size was required to have an emergency contact number that would be answered 24 hours 722 01:23:07,200 --> 01:23:14,200 a day so maybe we can look at that to bring in as to how you know making sure that we've 723 01:23:14,200 --> 01:23:20,080 got a contact point that's really what it sounds like the issue is is it is more having 724 01:23:20,080 --> 01:23:25,360 someone that can take care of a problem when one exists sure no i think that's a great 725 01:23:25,360 --> 01:23:33,380 idea i gotta dump that down so management company local contact um what about the suggestion 726 01:23:33,380 --> 01:23:41,000 about extending it to den county versus city of denton 727 01:23:41,000 --> 01:23:49,520 that well i think if the other two um options are explored then that would be obsolete right 728 01:23:49,520 --> 01:23:55,320 away okay i agree i think i don't know i'm just asking that's true that's true since 729 01:23:55,320 --> 01:23:59,600 you know the local company or uh or management company can be close by 730 01:23:59,600 --> 01:24:10,140 all right i think that residency requirement would then go away right 731 01:24:10,140 --> 01:24:15,080 robin did you have something to add on that one i was just gonna say i know i read and 732 01:24:15,080 --> 01:24:20,440 i was gonna ask erin if he had any experience or had read that city of san antonio case 733 01:24:20,440 --> 01:24:25,800 where it talks specifically about what miss ellis brought up regarding a resident who 734 01:24:25,800 --> 01:24:29,520 lived out of the country for several months out of the year i think that's what that case 735 01:24:29,520 --> 01:24:34,400 is about i don't know what that determined for how sts are regulated and i know it was 736 01:24:34,400 --> 01:24:39,840 a different circuit but i wasn't sure if he was familiar i'm not familiar with that case 737 01:24:39,840 --> 01:24:43,640 i'm familiar with the city of austin's case which is in the supreme court right now i'm 738 01:24:43,640 --> 01:24:49,560 also familiar with that the last two legislative sessions there have been six total bills on 739 01:24:49,560 --> 01:24:54,400 on short-term rentals that are limiting what they propose to limit the city's ability to 740 01:24:54,400 --> 01:24:58,600 regulate them i anticipate that there'll be some filed this legislative session as well 741 01:24:58,600 --> 01:25:05,000 so we'll monitor those as well i wasn't sure if their proposal was in compliance with that 742 01:25:05,000 --> 01:25:12,120 that's all thank you well that's a great suggestion and we'll certainly um we'll revisit that 743 01:25:12,120 --> 01:25:21,000 or we revise that item to include a management company and or a local contact in in that 744 01:25:21,000 --> 01:25:30,600 verification requirement okay i know we've got a couple more um under short-term rental 745 01:25:30,600 --> 01:25:40,440 d is just um it's stated restated what is required under 531 uh i i believe the intent 746 01:25:40,440 --> 01:25:48,920 here was that um we have it under 531 d and and we don't necessarily have to make mention 747 01:25:48,920 --> 01:25:59,320 here so the proposal is to delete d from this particular section 748 01:25:59,320 --> 01:26:06,920 as it relates to short-term rentals again there is a section in the code 535t which 749 01:26:06,920 --> 01:26:16,120 is the first one here where it prohibits um um certain short-term rentals and one of the 750 01:26:16,120 --> 01:26:22,880 things that we would like to add is to prohibit uh the operation of a short-term rental in 751 01:26:22,880 --> 01:26:30,920 a recreational vehicle or trailer travel trailer so um that would not be allowed as a short-term 752 01:26:30,920 --> 01:26:38,960 rental a recreational vehicle or travel trailer uh the second one here number 112 is really 753 01:26:38,960 --> 01:26:47,080 just to amend uh or revise where the registration form is located and what fees are are where 754 01:26:47,080 --> 01:26:52,800 they're where they are referenced that is and again it's in city's adopted fee schedule 755 01:26:52,800 --> 01:27:00,140 and then um number 13 is just to clarify that if a dwelling unit on a lot has offered for 756 01:27:00,140 --> 01:27:06,760 rent then that dwelling unit plus amenities may be inspected so just again to clear that 757 01:27:06,760 --> 01:27:13,920 up um it doesn't say it first initially it said if only portions of the premise uh is 758 01:27:13,920 --> 01:27:19,840 offered um we're we're just clearing that up a little bit more and just saying any dwelling 759 01:27:19,840 --> 01:27:26,480 unit on the lot um if it's being offered for rent uh for dwell as a dwelling unit it shall 760 01:27:26,480 --> 01:27:35,120 be a part of the inspection okay so that that's it on short-term rental the the next uh item 761 01:27:35,120 --> 01:27:42,000 is accessory dwelling unit similarly um we had a long discussion with the dcrc on this 762 01:27:42,000 --> 01:27:49,520 prior and again we wanted to bring this up uh to share with the um members of dcrc that 763 01:27:49,520 --> 01:27:58,680 may not have um seen this before what we are adding to or proposing to add to this uh this 764 01:27:58,680 --> 01:28:06,320 particular use specific standard under accessory dwelling units is as follows so right now one 765 01:28:06,320 --> 01:28:14,640 adu shall be allowed per lot adu shall only be permitted on lots where the principal use 766 01:28:14,640 --> 01:28:20,840 is a single family detached dwelling so it has to have or the primary use of principal 767 01:28:20,840 --> 01:28:27,760 use has to be single family what we're proposing is to add the following only one mail back 768 01:28:27,760 --> 01:28:36,380 i'm sorry one mailing address and mailbox is allowed on a lot so um if you have an accessory 769 01:28:36,380 --> 01:28:44,360 dwelling unit it does not um will not get a second address and will not have a second 770 01:28:44,360 --> 01:28:53,280 mailbox on the lot adus um letter d adu shall not be conversions of any square footage of 771 01:28:53,280 --> 01:28:59,480 the living space attic or attached garage of the principal dwelling unit so if it was 772 01:28:59,480 --> 01:29:08,800 a garage or if it was um say a living room or part of a bedroom or part of the main house 773 01:29:08,800 --> 01:29:15,520 it cannot be converted into a accessory dwelling unit it either has to be attached as a separate 774 01:29:15,520 --> 01:29:23,800 unit or detached as a separate dwelling unit letter e adu shall be limited to one bedroom 775 01:29:23,800 --> 01:29:34,840 um letter f one additional off-street parking space is a place dedicated for the adu is 776 01:29:34,840 --> 01:29:42,880 required so any additional parking um um is sorry any required parking for the single 777 01:29:42,880 --> 01:29:50,400 family has to be there and any other i mean one other parking space would be required 778 01:29:50,400 --> 01:29:59,080 because of the additional adu and i know that is a lot i wanted to make sure i share my 779 01:29:59,080 --> 01:30:08,680 or bring down my screen to see if there are any questions councilmember briggs 780 01:30:08,680 --> 01:30:12,780 it is a lot i didn't really um the two that stuck out i'm good with d i'm glad that we 781 01:30:12,780 --> 01:30:17,920 put that in there i know that there were some um tried like conversions and instead of making 782 01:30:17,920 --> 01:30:23,280 it you know like one house and carving up one room and saying it was a an accessory 783 01:30:23,280 --> 01:30:29,840 dwelling unit so i'm glad that that letter d is in there um is there a reason why it's 784 01:30:29,840 --> 01:30:36,560 just one bedroom i mean if somebody wanted to like a you know a single parent or just 785 01:30:36,560 --> 01:30:42,000 a family with a child wanted to live in one because it was more affordable but since it's 786 01:30:42,000 --> 01:30:48,960 one bedroom we're limiting the um the amount of or the types of families or individuals 787 01:30:48,960 --> 01:30:53,840 that could move into these so um can you explain the thinking of making it just a one bedroom 788 01:30:53,840 --> 01:30:59,520 instead of maybe two yeah i think the the reason um just a real quick answer is if we 789 01:30:59,520 --> 01:31:07,520 did add two that would mean um two more cars two more parking spaces just basically increasing 790 01:31:07,520 --> 01:31:15,680 the the density of the neighborhood um so we decided to go with one um just again by 791 01:31:15,680 --> 01:31:23,680 adding one you still have the opportunity for a older child or an elderly parent to 792 01:31:23,680 --> 01:31:30,480 be able to occupy that space but if we went to two we potentially could have two you know 793 01:31:30,480 --> 01:31:37,680 different adults that live there i think we can't you know we can't tell who lives there but again 794 01:31:37,680 --> 01:31:43,760 it was just to address the uh the increased density of that neighborhood that was that's 795 01:31:43,760 --> 01:31:49,920 generally the the reason to limiting it to one and again if if richard if anybody else 796 01:31:49,920 --> 01:31:56,000 recalls or has anything to add to that please let me know the only thing i'll add is there were one 797 01:31:56,000 --> 01:32:00,960 or two that we looked at also that um they were starting to border along the lines of when when 798 01:32:00,960 --> 01:32:05,840 does it become a duplex versus an accessory dwelling um and we just wanted to make sure 799 01:32:05,840 --> 01:32:10,320 that we don't what's intended doesn't go the wrong way for the accessory dwellings 800 01:32:11,760 --> 01:32:16,320 and and i would agree with richard's statement and we may even have talked about it with the 801 01:32:16,320 --> 01:32:22,720 committee back in the day um but but you know keep in mind that many of these are going to be 802 01:32:22,720 --> 01:32:28,400 utilized for college students and it's going to be a second rental even though the intent may 803 01:32:28,400 --> 01:32:35,920 be for an elderly parent or a you know someone's family member um it what we're what we're 804 01:32:35,920 --> 01:32:44,320 recognizing is that largely they're they're turning in just rentals so councilmember briggs 805 01:32:44,320 --> 01:32:56,640 councilmember briggs you're on mute i was going to say margie can go ahead and and go i saw okay 806 01:32:58,960 --> 01:33:06,560 okay thank you um hey ronda are there uh square footage restrictions on these i remember discussing 807 01:33:06,560 --> 01:33:10,320 that back yes sorry to cut you out there yes it'll be on the next slide but i just want to 808 01:33:10,320 --> 01:33:19,120 make sure that there were any questions on the first slide that brings my question up so if there 809 01:33:19,120 --> 01:33:26,160 are square footage is that um what if they can get two rooms in within that square footage are 810 01:33:26,160 --> 01:33:33,600 we still going to say um just one bedroom that's the current proposal yes okay 811 01:33:33,600 --> 01:33:41,040 yeah i don't know that i necessarily go along with the idea of doing the limit to one bedroom 812 01:33:41,040 --> 01:33:45,680 because i i looked ahead on the slide and when you get to 900 square feet that's generally a two 813 01:33:45,680 --> 01:33:52,480 bedroom size and then if your lot is larger than 10 000 square feet you can do up to 50 percent of 814 01:33:52,480 --> 01:33:59,200 whatever the house square footage is um you know you could end up with a 2500 815 01:33:59,200 --> 01:34:03,120 square foot accessory dwelling unit with one bedroom doesn't make sense at all so 816 01:34:03,120 --> 01:34:09,200 and when you get into those bigger lots a lot of times they are a guest house type situation so 817 01:34:09,200 --> 01:34:17,040 and truly not a rental but just for when guests come over which quite often go up to two or three 818 01:34:17,040 --> 01:34:26,080 bedrooms margie go ahead thank you chair so yeah that leads me to a question of guest house versus 819 01:34:26,080 --> 01:34:34,320 accessory accessory dwelling unit two different things correct define differently define different 820 01:34:34,320 --> 01:34:41,040 guests guest quarters typically are not rented uh accessory dwelling units are typically leased or 821 01:34:41,040 --> 01:34:47,680 rented do we make depiction of that in our definition i'll double check but i know we 822 01:34:47,680 --> 01:34:52,240 have a definition for accessory dwelling units we may have a definition for guest quarters 823 01:34:52,240 --> 01:34:56,560 okay yeah i would love to know how we're defining each of those 824 01:34:56,560 --> 01:35:05,440 because that may help us craft this better and i'm looking for sent to get helping out 825 01:35:05,440 --> 01:35:12,480 with the definition guest quarters yeah because that that definitely brings up a whole new can 826 01:35:12,480 --> 01:35:18,960 of worms on that that okay i go ahead and i build a guest house and it's three bedroom 2000 square 827 01:35:18,960 --> 01:35:25,760 foot etc you know 10 years down the road i sell my house the next person that buys it wants to rent 828 01:35:25,760 --> 01:35:32,960 that out or you know rents out both buildings separately you know so it's difficult to discern 829 01:35:32,960 --> 01:35:38,320 what the difference would be down the road so something just informed me that there is no 830 01:35:38,320 --> 01:35:45,520 definition for guest quarters in our current tpc but we definitely have one for accessory dwelling 831 01:35:45,520 --> 01:35:52,960 units and if you'd like i can read the definition for well accessory dwelling units if you would like 832 01:35:52,960 --> 01:35:59,040 for me to read that out loud or i can bring it up as well if i can just add in really quick if you 833 01:35:59,040 --> 01:36:05,520 almost goes back to council member briggs your question regarding the um the cabana or the the 834 01:36:05,520 --> 01:36:10,960 pool house in the old ddc we did have that distinction between guest house or guest quarters 835 01:36:10,960 --> 01:36:16,320 and accessory dwelling and they kind of they just didn't they didn't mesh and i think when we updated 836 01:36:16,320 --> 01:36:22,800 if i'm if i'm recalling from memory correctly as part of the the update to the standards for 837 01:36:22,800 --> 01:36:29,440 accessory dwellings i think we removed the um sup requirement and then eliminated the the the 838 01:36:29,440 --> 01:36:35,200 guest quarters um because it just didn't fit with with with kind of where where things were headed 839 01:36:35,200 --> 01:36:39,600 and everything where everything was included as part of that accessory dwelling if if my memory 840 01:36:39,600 --> 01:36:45,840 serves correct and and and yes richard and i think you are correct and one other piece that i might 841 01:36:45,840 --> 01:36:53,360 add to this is about the same time we were doing this we were we were experiencing a lot of growth 842 01:36:53,360 --> 01:36:59,120 in the rent by the room and i think that was the other component that was coming into this where 843 01:36:59,120 --> 01:37:07,920 we had proposals for individuals um that that actually came into building safety and were 844 01:37:07,920 --> 01:37:13,760 attempting to permit a structure and and do it by the room where all of a sudden we start turning 845 01:37:13,760 --> 01:37:24,880 what was an accessory dwelling unit into um a multi-family building 846 01:37:24,880 --> 01:37:33,840 so what i'm what i'm hearing i think there's there's questions on the one bedroom 847 01:37:33,840 --> 01:37:36,880 maximum or required um 848 01:37:40,160 --> 01:37:44,000 is let me bring back up so we can look at this 849 01:37:44,000 --> 01:37:55,280 so c we're okay d we're okay i think one i'm sorry f is one that we currently have 850 01:37:55,280 --> 01:38:00,880 and i mean that's just um to to restate that a parking space is required 851 01:38:00,880 --> 01:38:09,920 but e is what we're talking about and if we want to continue that or if you want me to go on and 852 01:38:09,920 --> 01:38:15,280 talk about the maximum um square footages and minimum square footage we can do that 853 01:38:15,280 --> 01:38:22,000 and come back to this if we need to um or if there's some direction that's uh the dcrc would 854 01:38:22,000 --> 01:38:26,480 like to give staff on letter e we can certainly um discuss that as well 855 01:38:26,480 --> 01:38:36,800 yeah i think letter e just it just does not make sense uh as it's as it stands uh again when you 856 01:38:36,800 --> 01:38:43,200 get up into that square footage that on a lot up to 10 000 square foot you can go up to 900 square foot 857 01:38:43,200 --> 01:38:54,640 of size again that's a that's a two bedroom and on lots over 10 000 you can do up to 50 percent of 858 01:38:54,640 --> 01:39:02,880 what the the primary structure is or yeah from from what i read i mean what you're going to end 859 01:39:02,880 --> 01:39:08,560 up with is somebody who's going to build an accessory dwelling unit that has uh you know a 860 01:39:08,560 --> 01:39:13,280 living room a family room a great room you know all these extra rooms that they're just not going 861 01:39:13,280 --> 01:39:18,480 to call bedrooms but that's essentially what they will be used for and they just you know if it's a 862 01:39:18,480 --> 01:39:23,760 guest house you just put an armoire in there instead of a uh having a closet so 863 01:39:29,600 --> 01:39:35,280 yes pardon yeah and and maybe we just need to work on the definition because 864 01:39:35,280 --> 01:39:39,760 are we saying a guest house is an excel accessory dwelling unit i mean that's kind of what we're 865 01:39:39,760 --> 01:39:48,480 saying and so then um i mean then that definitely doesn't work for one bedroom i mean certainly 866 01:39:48,480 --> 01:39:53,520 you know and obviously a pool house is an accessory dwelling well no you don't necessarily stay in a 867 01:39:53,520 --> 01:39:58,800 pool house per se but certainly a guest house would be considered that so i think um again to 868 01:39:58,800 --> 01:40:04,640 to mitigate what we're trying to to do um we got to make sure that this is actually 869 01:40:04,640 --> 01:40:12,400 right so again as fixed right as i was mentioning earlier i think what we're trying to mitigate is 870 01:40:12,400 --> 01:40:20,560 the increase in number of um vehicles or density in the area because as scott mentioned this is 871 01:40:20,560 --> 01:40:27,280 most likely going to be rented out so if it's just a one bedroom that prevents that i mean like you 872 01:40:27,280 --> 01:40:32,080 said but is it practical is that it's got is that going to prevent someone from doing something 873 01:40:32,080 --> 01:40:37,120 different maybe and what do you do with somebody who has a two bedroom guest house because those 874 01:40:37,120 --> 01:40:43,520 do already exist so what so what are those those would just be non-conforming if if this were to 875 01:40:43,520 --> 01:40:49,760 be passed you know and well to john's point about size when we get into that type of square footage 876 01:40:49,760 --> 01:40:57,520 that i mean that that doesn't even make sense even in you know in reality you know of building 877 01:40:57,520 --> 01:41:05,600 something that large but saying it can only have one bedroom in it so that this is a this is a great 878 01:41:05,600 --> 01:41:10,000 conversation for for the committee and really the purpose in the committee so we can kind of vet 879 01:41:10,000 --> 01:41:17,120 this before we take it for pnz and council um keep in mind if we if we looked at a 500 square foot 880 01:41:17,120 --> 01:41:24,800 accessory dwelling unit and we used 100 square feet for a kitchen living area leaves 400 square feet 881 01:41:24,800 --> 01:41:32,800 and that could fundamentally be four bedrooms so in a 500 square foot unit you could you know house 882 01:41:32,800 --> 01:41:39,120 four individual people so if we elect to do something different parking standards create 883 01:41:39,120 --> 01:41:47,120 another type of use you know that's what we're looking for that direction if i recall correctly 884 01:41:47,120 --> 01:41:54,240 it's really kind of what we ended up with after we adopted the code when we adopted the code we 885 01:41:54,240 --> 01:42:00,080 started putting this into practice a number of the council members were receiving phone calls we were 886 01:42:00,080 --> 01:42:07,360 getting a a lot of applications and and those applications were primarily for accessory dwelling 887 01:42:07,360 --> 01:42:13,760 units for rental purposes and when we did that that's where the mailbox came from and some of 888 01:42:13,760 --> 01:42:19,360 these other provisions is really we were getting the account the guidance from dcrc committee 889 01:42:19,360 --> 01:42:25,920 members and this was that one that we were going to take back to council for really that the the 890 01:42:25,920 --> 01:42:32,160 full body to to make a decision and determination and how we want to do it so i just i guess want 891 01:42:32,160 --> 01:42:38,480 to make sure that we're we're clear and and kind of how we came to this and it was it was primarily 892 01:42:38,480 --> 01:42:46,080 i think that focus that we recognize it's being utilized close to twu and unt and our historic 893 01:42:46,080 --> 01:42:52,320 districts and where there are you know detached um you know maybe there were a single car garage 894 01:42:52,320 --> 01:42:57,440 back in the day but they've been converted since or going to be converted and especially if those 895 01:42:57,440 --> 01:43:03,760 are already rental properties um it just adds another couple of units or the more the beds the 896 01:43:03,760 --> 01:43:14,960 more profitable the property is it's andrew thanks chair um i just wanted to uh kind of echo 897 01:43:14,960 --> 01:43:21,120 i think my same question i had two weeks ago uh and it's to scott's point is i'd like to know what 898 01:43:21,120 --> 01:43:27,280 the problem is that we're trying to solve and then solve that problem it doesn't seem inherently 899 01:43:27,280 --> 01:43:31,440 there's a problem with number of beds it seems like inherently there's some other problem with 900 01:43:31,440 --> 01:43:39,040 parking or capping rental income or capping the ability to have four bedrooms and a 400 square 901 01:43:39,040 --> 01:43:45,280 foot uh building whatever that problem is i think the language should be geared towards solving 902 01:43:45,280 --> 01:43:51,120 that problem explicitly because as other individuals in this commission or committee have spoken about 903 01:43:51,120 --> 01:43:56,080 that one bedroom thing seems weird um and it seems like there's probably some non-conformities and 904 01:43:56,080 --> 01:44:00,160 there's probably going to be some limitation to property rights to limit it to one bedroom 905 01:44:00,160 --> 01:44:05,920 so i think that bullet whether it's d or e should probably be either removed or cleaned up but i 906 01:44:05,920 --> 01:44:11,840 think more broadly speaking uh the committee council p and z staff needs to figure out what's 907 01:44:11,840 --> 01:44:17,840 the problem uh and then actually write language to solve that problem and if it's rental income then 908 01:44:17,840 --> 01:44:23,440 then carve out some sort of cap on renting you can only rent one bedroom of an auxiliary dwelling 909 01:44:23,440 --> 01:44:28,800 unit whatever it should be i think we can think more creatively to be more specific about addressing 910 01:44:28,800 --> 01:44:37,040 the problem and thank you andrew and and i'll add that um it really wasn't anything to do with 911 01:44:37,040 --> 01:44:43,680 rental capping um whatever somebody's going to do that that's absolutely fine um as i recall the 912 01:44:43,680 --> 01:44:49,040 conversation it was really concerned with preserving the neighborhoods so i think that first and 913 01:44:49,040 --> 01:44:54,800 foremost the primary issue was parking because we already have a parking problem in many of those 914 01:44:54,800 --> 01:45:01,360 neighborhoods and it was the inability to add um you know where it is let me just go back to the 915 01:45:01,360 --> 01:45:08,000 example of it being a single car garage that was converted into living and it's got a single 916 01:45:08,000 --> 01:45:13,120 driveway and you've already got a couple of occupants in the primary structure there really 917 01:45:13,120 --> 01:45:20,880 is no off-street parking and and so um the one came out of the came out of or i believe we heard 918 01:45:20,880 --> 01:45:26,720 that through the committee trying to to limit the impact and then the other piece to that you know 919 01:45:26,720 --> 01:45:32,400 really got into that ancillary stuff of of whether it's going to be a nuisance because it's a rental 920 01:45:32,400 --> 01:45:39,680 property but i'm happy to take the feedback and work forward um on whatever the direction is we 921 01:45:39,680 --> 01:45:49,040 receive yeah and i might think about changing f to one additional off-street per bedroom because 922 01:45:49,040 --> 01:45:53,600 then you're going to start when you start looking at density you've got lot coverage when you start 923 01:45:53,600 --> 01:45:58,640 adding that that additional parking place you might be limited to you can only put in one 924 01:45:58,640 --> 01:46:03,920 bedroom or only put in two bedrooms because you can't get your lot coverage right with having to 925 01:46:03,920 --> 01:46:13,760 add those additional parking spaces absolutely john thank you let me bring this up again yes 926 01:46:13,760 --> 01:46:19,440 you're absolutely correct when we drafted this it was stated to be one bedroom so we just said one 927 01:46:19,440 --> 01:46:26,080 additional parking off-street parking but if this were to not be included we would definitely make 928 01:46:26,080 --> 01:46:33,200 sure that this reflected uh based on the number of bedrooms that each bedroom is required to provide 929 01:46:33,200 --> 01:46:41,040 one off-street parking additional so if i was hearing that correctly john and and maybe we can 930 01:46:41,040 --> 01:46:47,760 get some consensus on this is that so the intent of this is it's really for it to be an accessory 931 01:46:47,760 --> 01:46:56,000 dwelling unit um and ultimately that it would be a minimum of one parking spot for each bedroom 932 01:46:56,000 --> 01:47:04,400 provided one off-street parking and so the secondary piece to that is we we have the primary 933 01:47:04,400 --> 01:47:10,720 residence which we will make the assumption that they have an off-street parking spot i don't know 934 01:47:10,720 --> 01:47:15,680 that we can even take the assumption of two off-street parking spots which wouldn't be included 935 01:47:15,680 --> 01:47:23,760 would that be an accurate statement no what i'm looking at is our current building code if you were 936 01:47:23,760 --> 01:47:28,960 building your house new today you'd be required to have four off-street parking places if i'm 937 01:47:28,960 --> 01:47:37,040 if i'm correct on that so if so if you wanted to add a three bedroom accessory dwelling unit you 938 01:47:37,040 --> 01:47:43,760 would have to meet the current code for parking for your primary plus so you'd have to have seven 939 01:47:43,760 --> 01:47:50,160 off-street parking places which is you know if you've got in two or three acres that's no problem 940 01:47:50,160 --> 01:47:54,720 to put that in but if if you're on a small inner city lot you're not going to be able to build it 941 01:47:54,720 --> 01:48:00,480 because we're just we're just saying we don't want you to get that dense we don't we know that it's 942 01:48:00,480 --> 01:48:08,800 going to be more rental at that point so do you have a recommendation that we could work from 943 01:48:10,880 --> 01:48:21,760 um maybe must meet current off-street parking requirements and have one additional off-street 944 01:48:21,760 --> 01:48:29,120 parking place per bedroom they they wouldn't be able to do that today largely and if you were just 945 01:48:29,120 --> 01:48:35,760 go down oak street they don't have four off-street parking so and i think that was really where this 946 01:48:35,760 --> 01:48:44,320 the catalyst for this was well well if they if they don't have if they can't meet that standard 947 01:48:44,320 --> 01:48:54,960 then i mean technically they can't meet the code and share yeah i i'm not really that comfortable 948 01:48:54,960 --> 01:49:01,200 doing that with the requirement of the parking at this point because then we're saying well sorry 949 01:49:01,200 --> 01:49:08,880 due to code you can't build it um just because of car access so maybe if they could provide 950 01:49:08,880 --> 01:49:16,640 you know other access or you know prove that there's other transportation um i i i don't know i i 951 01:49:16,640 --> 01:49:21,120 think we still need to to be a little bit more creative when we're talking about this instead of 952 01:49:21,120 --> 01:49:30,080 requiring seven spaces for you know a house and an accessory dwelling unit how about if we take this 953 01:49:30,080 --> 01:49:36,000 back as staff at least on this portion of the topic ron you can continue on and we'll see if 954 01:49:36,000 --> 01:49:41,120 we can't come up with some ideas or suggestions that that kind of meet the intent of what we're 955 01:49:41,120 --> 01:49:47,760 hearing and and i guess if i were to summarize that is that we um the committee doesn't care for 956 01:49:47,760 --> 01:49:54,160 the one bedroom like to find some alternatives and as andrew pointed out is is what are the 957 01:49:54,160 --> 01:49:59,040 potential problems and what are some of those solutions and we'll bring those back to you for 958 01:49:59,040 --> 01:50:03,680 a little further discussion sounds good 959 01:50:03,680 --> 01:50:12,160 okay um uh sorry sorry to interrupt this i'm gonna let anyone know that i have a hard stop at three 960 01:50:12,160 --> 01:50:18,880 i'm not going to be rude but if it carries over i might i might uh exit out sorry no i i also have 961 01:50:18,880 --> 01:50:25,360 a stop at three uh uh chair i sent you an email just a minute a minute ago so they said ron you 962 01:50:25,360 --> 01:50:33,440 better hurry up no i i i see the clock i want to be respectful of everyone's time um and this may 963 01:50:33,440 --> 01:50:40,160 be the the last item we talk about um with regards to accessory dwelling is we also are proposing 964 01:50:40,160 --> 01:50:47,120 that we change up the minimum sizes as well as the the maximum size for adus 965 01:50:48,400 --> 01:50:55,920 that the adus shall be 50 now these are for uh adus um a lot smaller than 10 000 square feet 966 01:50:55,920 --> 01:51:01,600 adu shall not exceed 50 percent of the square footage of a principal structure 967 01:51:01,600 --> 01:51:09,280 in addition shall not exceed 900 square feet and shall not be less than 400 square feet 968 01:51:09,280 --> 01:51:14,960 900 we chose 900 because that's the minimum square footage for a single family detach 969 01:51:16,160 --> 01:51:22,560 we chose 400 because that is the minimum requirement for a multi-family dwelling 970 01:51:22,560 --> 01:51:28,800 unit so that's where you see these numbers again just to set some parameters on how big and how 971 01:51:28,800 --> 01:51:36,960 small a an accessory dwelling unit should or could be now we also know that there are lots that are 972 01:51:36,960 --> 01:51:42,880 10 000 square feet or larger in that particular case they cannot exceed 50 percent of the principal 973 01:51:42,880 --> 01:51:48,080 dwelling unit they do not have the follow the two that we just described or i described 974 01:51:48,080 --> 01:51:54,000 uh to follow but they still have that 50 percent of the principal dwelling unit maximum 975 01:51:54,000 --> 01:52:05,120 some of the other items under accessory dwelling unit are just mainly clean up um one i want to 976 01:52:05,120 --> 01:52:12,800 specifically address is the last one here where the entry doors shall not be visible from a public 977 01:52:12,800 --> 01:52:18,960 building right away and to your point andrew the the reason why that's being introduced is that we 978 01:52:18,960 --> 01:52:27,440 want to keep the the fabric of the neighborhood and having one front entry doorway visible means 979 01:52:27,440 --> 01:52:35,200 that that's you know that's one home under one lot having more than one will appear to be a duplex 980 01:52:35,200 --> 01:52:38,880 and change the fabric or the character of the neighborhood and so that's what we're trying to 981 01:52:38,880 --> 01:52:44,480 address here is by adding this limitation it can still be accessed but it's just not visible from 982 01:52:44,480 --> 01:52:52,400 the public right away at least not in the front and it can be accessed through the side facing entry 983 01:52:52,400 --> 01:52:58,400 and then last again as part of that keeping the fabric in the character of the neighborhood 984 01:52:58,400 --> 01:53:02,160 we want to make sure that that additional accessory dwelling unit is architecturally 985 01:53:02,160 --> 01:53:09,120 compatible with the primary home uh chair 986 01:53:09,120 --> 01:53:17,200 these there is easy yeah yeah go ahead go ahead andrew sorrows so ron how does that work on corner 987 01:53:17,200 --> 01:53:26,560 lots um where it the backyard is the side yard is the adu supposed to be facing uh perpendicular 988 01:53:26,560 --> 01:53:31,200 to the street in that regard it doesn't seem like that's the aesthetic for neighborhoods 989 01:53:31,200 --> 01:53:37,360 no i think i i sorry to cut you off there i think for internal lots um not facing the front right of 990 01:53:37,360 --> 01:53:43,040 course then there won't be two front for a corner lot um the that is a good question you know where 991 01:53:43,040 --> 01:53:48,480 would it face i think in that we probably need to add something to um reflect corner lots and in that 992 01:53:48,480 --> 01:53:55,920 particular case a corner lot where the adu say on the side of the the other street would be able to 993 01:53:55,920 --> 01:54:02,000 have a front entry doorway facing that street and we can certainly add that to the amendment 994 01:54:02,000 --> 01:54:14,720 okay any other questions on this comments that's a good that's a good point 995 01:54:14,720 --> 01:54:23,040 i think the other the last item under accessory dwelling unit we'll we'll we'll stop it at that 996 01:54:23,040 --> 01:54:31,840 is that any amenities or sorry services separate water or sewer service for adu shall not be 997 01:54:31,840 --> 01:54:38,320 allowed so they must be off of the primary sewer and water service however separate meeting for 998 01:54:38,320 --> 01:54:46,800 other utilities electric or others can be allowed as long as those separate meters are within 999 01:54:48,080 --> 01:54:54,560 direct sight of each other and the intent there the reason why we have this is that when a service 1000 01:54:54,560 --> 01:55:02,320 person comes they are servicing one area and also for public safety reasons if there were a fire or 1001 01:55:02,320 --> 01:55:07,680 electric issue the fire department can shut off the electric at one location not have to look at 1002 01:55:07,680 --> 01:55:12,800 it or find it in a different location so that is the intent of why we feel that it should be within 1003 01:55:12,800 --> 01:55:22,320 the same proximity or close direct sight of each other and that's it um and i'm not going to jump 1004 01:55:22,320 --> 01:55:28,800 into the next item because we're close to the time and i'll stand for any questions or additional 1005 01:55:28,800 --> 01:55:36,960 directions on any of the code amendments any questions comments concerns 1006 01:55:38,880 --> 01:55:44,160 seen none i think that brings us to concluding items unless you had anything else wrong just uh 1007 01:55:44,160 --> 01:55:49,200 just appreciate the the comments and suggestions i i we've heard a lot um specifically with the 1008 01:55:49,200 --> 01:55:53,520 short-term rentals as well as the eccentric dwelling units we'll certainly um circle back 1009 01:55:53,520 --> 01:55:59,840 with you on those items one of the things i want to just discuss real quickly next week um is um 1010 01:55:59,840 --> 01:56:06,880 thanksgiving uh or the day before so um my suggestion is that we postpone the next 1011 01:56:06,880 --> 01:56:14,560 meeting to december 2nd if i remember yes december 2nd and if that's okay with the dcrc members uh 1012 01:56:14,560 --> 01:56:21,920 we'll certainly make accommodations okay council member briggs real quick are we going to discuss 1013 01:56:21,920 --> 01:56:26,800 sros um i know that there was a stall last time in the discussion and it went to planning and 1014 01:56:26,800 --> 01:56:30,880 zoning and then it was supposed to come back i don't know like we were talking about definition 1015 01:56:30,880 --> 01:56:36,000 or there was a lot of um discussion that i don't ever know if it was completed or not so 1016 01:56:36,640 --> 01:56:42,240 does that come back to this committee or is that just gone we we currently do not have a code 1017 01:56:42,240 --> 01:56:48,480 amendment uh directly um related to sros um if there is a particular section in the code that 1018 01:56:48,480 --> 01:56:53,360 you would like us to research regarding that item we can certainly do so okay thanks 1019 01:56:53,360 --> 01:56:58,720 all right any concluding items 1020 01:57:00,960 --> 01:57:06,800 seeing none we will adjourn at 2 59 thank you everyone