Feb 27, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2019-02-27 4:00 PM

good afternoon welcome to the planning and zoning special called work session for Wednesday February 27th 2019 seeing that we do have a quorum I will call this meeting to order at 411 the only item on the agenda is to receive a report from staff regarding the development code and draft zoning map so I'll turn it over to Scott Ron several more of these to walk through each and all of the chapters within the proposed development code as well as the draft zoning map staff continues to host some public open houses so we've had one this week we've got another one tomorrow night and hope to see some of you there we saw some individuals Monday night we're going to continue to have stakeholder meetings so we'll get with various community organizations provide presentations to civic organizations and wherever it is that we can what we're going to talk about is kind of following up on where we were at with the last meeting following up on Clarion's overview of the code getting a little deeper dive getting a little bit more granular on some of the topics and trying to make sure that we understand the smallest of details of what we're trying to do I know some of the major comments and concerns that we've been addressing lately have to do with the landscape and conservation ordinance which is running on a separate track that will come before this body next Wednesday we have a work session with council on Tuesday we also have some changes to the zoning map which Ron is going to get to here shortly so I'll hold off on that just short of saying that the council committee has been meeting on Fridays met last Friday as of last Friday there were some discussions that took place regarding the split zoning and we were trying to address how best to rezone those properties and as we were doing that we decided that it might be best for us not to change the zoning so I think as an interim step we will be putting those into a overlay category and then we'll come back and evaluate those on a case-by-case basis so we we wouldn't be getting bogged down into the details of what use might be most appropriate on a piece of property as we were doing that we also brought reference to the RD 5x so the RD 5x is a placeholder zoning and initially when we crafted the zoning map we had worked through that and ultimately assigned some zoning categories to them where staff thought it was most appropriate so it might be an rr might be an r1 r2 r3 maybe even r4 and as we met with the council committee the development review committee excuse me it was determined that those should be placed as an rr or the the least impactful so we ultimately were wanting to get the map corrected so I asked that the map be pulled down make those corrections anticipated that would be done Friday it was not and it wasn't back up until Monday but again Ronald Ronald highlight the changes with that I think that overall we've we've garnered positive support and and we continue to listen to the stakeholders to make sure that we're getting what it is that we have in place and I think with that if there are any questions as far as just kind of a broad overview so did you say you're getting rid of the RD 5x and then you're just gonna bring in bring them in directly like a with a rr is that what it is correct okay okay because I know that was one of the questions okay any other questions right now okay with that just a recap of what we discussed at our last work session we talked about sub chapters one and two we went through that so that is what we will not be talking about and also a list here that you see behind me you know we're not gonna talk about the tree code as you already mentioned we're gonna be discussing that at a later work session the dormitory again later and then the downtown design standards will all come as a separate discussion so today's work session continuing our efforts in reviewing the development code update is sub chapter 3 and I know we we discussed it last work session a very introductionary of the zoning districts I went through it fairly quickly I remember you know going through each of those zoning districts highlighting some of the minimum lot area requirements the minimum setbacks and minimum you know heights and all that other dimensional standards associated with each zoning districts but I think it's it's important that we look at the purpose of each of those zoning districts because you know as you all know we have a number of existing zoning districts over 28 zoning districts and if you look at the sheet that's in front of you that I passed out in place in front of you the middle column is or are those existing zoning districts close to 28 zoning districts what we're trying to do is consolidate those and make it more easier to understand there's there's a number of zoning districts that just either are the same and just have the same development standards which really doesn't really help us for example the ECI and the ICE really what's the difference between the two so the way we're looking at is we're going to transition that into the LI which is light industrial the thank you so what you what you have in this chart is what we are looking at or have prepared as far as a draft zoning map that's currently published so what you see as listed in the middle column is what you will see in the draft zoning map again that is published online all of those are taken right from this chart prior to Friday we had taken another step we we took another step and actually looked at the area and if there was an existing area that was more suitable for a particular zoning district we gave it that zoning district gave it a little bit more context to to what is not just okay this is what it is and we're gonna transfer it over to here but rather we took it another step and we gave it what we feel was the appropriate zoning district again as you heard from Scott the direction is that we we step back and get as close to the existing zoning map as we can there are a few exceptions the areas around the TW area around downtown as well as around the University of North Texas area we looked at those area more specifically and gave it an assigned zone district that may not match this transitional chart so those areas we kept with what we feel is appropriate in those in those cases in addition the PF which is the public facilities those we kept from previous draft so all of the governmental institutional and other properties that are associated with governmental and institutional are given a proposed PF zoning district Ron can I see a quick question yes sir it's my understanding that the DC RC was going by area by area through the map to look at alignment and it sounds like there's a lot of time and effort spent looking at different areas whether it be the UNT or cement city or right business innovation all those different the kind of districts of the town to see what like you said take that extra step and it seems if I'm understanding correctly at this point that's been rolled back and so there's just an alignment column a to column B except for a few designated areas like TW UNT in downtown why those three did we keep this proactive kind of thought and if those were highly examined to feel confident that a progress I'm gonna call it progressive a progressive rezone was possible what has the DC RC been doing that the other areas have not been also looked at with such scrutiny to keep that progressive rezoning it's a good question and I felt to mention that we asked we've been meeting with the DC RC almost every week I think I counted 29 meetings since we started this effort and we asked we have after we went through the entire book almost page by page chapter by chapter we forwarded those comments that we received to Clary on and of course they made the revisions and it was now time to look at the zoning map and so the last few meetings with the plan with the DC RC was select study areas is what we called them committee we would like to see we like to see this area zone this way what are your thoughts give us some of your input we also looked at some split zoning as Scott mentioned a parcel that has multiple zoning districts well how do we zone that if you know one or two or three zoning districts exist so we were going through that exercise and then we got to that discussion to answer your question related to those specific areas the TW area the downtown and the University of North Texas area the reason why we focus on that in the draft that we put out was I made a meant I made mention of the DS the downtown commercial general and if you look at the chart it shows that DCG and DCN is going to go to MD and if we read the purpose of an MD it's primarily for downtown so we know we have some zoning districts that I'm sorry some DCG and DCN throughout the TW the downtown and the University of North Texas area that don't fit that purpose and so we were told or we were directed that in those areas if it doesn't a DCG does not fit we should look for a similar zoning district that fits DCG I'm sorry MD was not the appropriate zoning district and it should just be for downtown and that's why we kept those areas what we had prior to Friday was there any split zoning cases left in the UNTWU downtown area because it sounds like those are split zoning we're not touching all of those are not being touched are there any of those in those three areas I'll have to look I think there may be a few that have split zoning and Cody can help us identify which of those parcels within those areas that have split zoning I know we have a lot outside of the city but if if you'd like Cody can pull that up on a map and identify which of those parcels within the downtown area TW and UT that have split zoning I guess the the the the reason for my questions is how to communicate to the city because if I understand this correctly we have a citywide new zoning map but we're not proactively rezoning we're aligning except in some areas we are proactively zoning unless there's a split zoning within those specialized select study areas we're not going to touch those split zonings and so it seems ambiguous on what was the condition in which my property got a certain zoning and so having all these are in levels that I'm trying to work through I don't hopefully can encourage some clarity when we present to a city how how the city came to those decisions the only thing I wanted to add I think would also pose the challenge particularly with the MD is in that in that conversion from from DCG there was this and it wasn't necessarily a zoning overlay it was sort of a sort of an overlay but there was there were specific requirements or provisions but if you were within the central business district that granted you the ability to parking not provide parking for commercial not provide parking for residential if you're under ten units and there were some other items and so it was hard to kind of last so that that that area around one where it really wasn't representative of what the what the downtown was and so that was sort of that the impetus for really honing MD into only the down the downtown if that helps it does a little bit and I guess secondary to that rather than making assumptions was there public feedback and pushback regarding this or is it in more internal fear or hesitation to do like the the rezoning of the split zoning or more progressive zoning was was there actual feedback from the city saying well I have questions or is it more of an internal conversation well I think I think it's important to just I think remind the Commission that the Development Review Committee is made up of three council members and three planning and zoning Commission members and they're they're really the steering committee for staff so staff is meeting with them weekly and we have legal counsel representing as well so we have our legal staff plus we have a land use attorney that we've contracted with and so as we meet we're talking through all of these issues well they're steering the direction that this is going so when we're when we're taking it to planning and zoning and a council that it should streamline the process the intent is is certainly to be transparent and the intent is is that we're getting probably what we think is the product that will be able to get over the finish line rather than it being a surprise to either body if that helps and that certainly helps but I don't know if it answers the question there was public feedback concerning progressive rezoning or there it was just the DCRC and staff's conversations no I think I think what what had happened with the the review committee is as we went through this week by week the conversation took place when we talked about conversion of zoning districts and the zoning map is that we minimize those impacts so it was trying to be cognizant of those that may not be aware and as we're as as staff were we're very much aware that most people don't necessarily pay attention right and and and the council committee was very sensitive to the fact that we didn't want to rezone properties that people that would be adjacent to it wouldn't be aware so we were minimizing any change so we know consolidating we would have change this was designed to minimize those changes so as we had this conversation on a couple different topics as Ron has referenced that that direction from the the review committee was for us to proceed forward as we as instructed and what's represented on the map and and again that's why we're putting out to the public for for feedback so I think I heard a important port an important point to me in there so I just want to clarify when we redo the zoning map everyone gets notified in the city we're gonna send out 35,000 locations right that's actually just notifying the property of their own changes they wouldn't actually necessarily know their neighbors changes where if we did a city initiated rezone they would have the 500 foot correct correct and and that's and and that's been the catalyst for most of this is to make certain that people wouldn't be aware of what that change is so trying to minimize anybody's potential impact whether there is benefit to a property owner or detriment to a property owner that may get rezoned we certainly don't want to give those unintended consequences of rezoning a piece of property with someone not having their opportunity to to express their concern or support so unless it's in a typical in a typical rezoning process right giving that as you indicate the 200 or 500 foot notices so where it is that we could come back later and make those recommendations that are more aligned with a future land use map but we could target those to say hey we're talking about this area and we think that it should be rezoned this way we can literally go door knock we can provide that notice and say the city is initiating a rezoning we'd like to change the zoning of this this is going to impact you because of this rather than taking this you know that the complete corporate limits and say hey everybody's getting rezoned and here's what happens to you they wouldn't know what's happening adjacent properties except for the the in the current published zoning map there are parcels across the city that will be provided a more liberal use category by the consolidation of zoning districts and those neighbors won't know about that either I think that there there's there's the possibility that somebody may have more liberal and somebody may have more restrictive but I think it's incredibly minimized okay so it's it's trying to minimize any of those impacts when you take on a project as significant as rezoning the entirety of a city and and we recognize that there were some problems that with this that happened in 2002 and the problems that that that occurred in 2002 was was probably some of that of being a little bit too aggressive in rezoning properties and not getting that the necessary feedback so being cautious being proactive but but still trying to be responsible and ended the decision-making awesome sorry to stop down there no that's that's perfect we want to make sure we address all your questions and concerns Cody has pulled up a map just kind of go back to your original question of those parcels in red those are red are within the general area that we're talking about that have split zoning so we have to be able to identify what zoning we assign that because unless we go in there and split the parcel in which we're not going to we're gonna work with the property owner we're gonna try to get those address sooner than later in a sign in a zoning district that again fits you know within the area but those are the parcels that currently have split zoning there count on those do we have a number 370 split zoning sorry go to that Mike doesn't work about 15 or DCN or DCG split so and so going forward the correction of these is individually bring each of these properties to P&Z and council for city rezone the the idea is to we can do that or we can try to be try to get it before the timeline that's that's it depends on how much we can get through but the intent is to put a zoning map that has a zoning map a zoning district on them if we are not able to we'll have to follow that up throughout the period between adoption and effective date is we I don't know if that was discussed earlier on but we will have an opportunity to have a transition between adoption date and an effective date so we've got some time to work with property owners I guess my question is is P&Z about to hear 370 individual items to correct split zoning no I was gonna speak sort of different because I think even if you look on on this map the largest parcel I believe if I'm not mistaken is the TWU golf course can we turn that mic on or I'm gonna get oh you took the cable go for it thank you Scott yeah the reason this one is highlighted and we turn on our current zoning here is this tiny piece right here so all that gets highlighted for that Wow so I think these are sort of when you really look at it there they're very mind they're very small and keep in keep in mind we're certainly trying to make this as simple as possible and I assure you we do not intend to bring you 300 plus but we we want to try to fix as much as we can and making certain that most all the citizens that can be notified will be notified so some of this may have to come individually but they may come in blocks so theoretically we could come with with a group of ten split zonings to say hey we've talked to the neighbors we've got an understanding here's where it's at people have an opportunity then to come before the Commission and then ultimately counsel to to make certain that they're aware of what's happening and just for clarification because that makes more sense I appreciate that I know if there are small things like this it seems like we might want to do a more progressive rezone for that that seems like a not to diminish the property owners but maybe a waste of time to go through a massive public hearing for that single quarter acre piece of property but when that comes through with ten I don't know the process of a city-wide rezone but if you were to bring a block of ten would that be an item with one public hearing it seemed like you'd have to have a plug here and for each item for the citizens purposes do you know well there's there's a couple of pieces to this and and Ron alluded to a portion so if we take if we take a liberal approach to this so if we take a very conservative means to move forward and we say here's the draft zoning map minimum impact we have let's say the effective date of the map versus the adoption date so if we adopted today for example and then we said six months before it's in effect all the while we're going to continue to work on it and it wouldn't be that we couldn't come back to isolate a group of properties and and we're trying to work through that between legal and process and understand kind of some of the ramifications as we get into the detail we want to minimize that we don't know that so again just taking a very conservative approach to making sure that we're minimizing impact to adjacent property owners okay Michelle thank you chair just a couple words on this I think this is a missed opportunity by us to fix split zoning I think split zoning is a terrible idea and and this was a great opportunity to fix it and I'm sorry that we're not going forward with fixing it now because I think it'll be more complicated later we've got plenty of public notification going out we have multiple months involved here to have this map out and get comments so I'll just go on the record saying I think it's crazy that we have 300 plus split zoning properties in the city that we're not fixing and I appreciate that and I'll also say that we obviously are meeting each Friday with it with the council committee we continue to meet with the development review committee so not to say that we can't continue to have that conversation and adoption of the map would be in conjunction with adoption of the code which is April 22nd so we have an opportunity to continue to work through this we're soliciting public feedback on both the zoning map as well as the development code so we welcome that and I think that you know there's utility in it yeah just to just to chime in a little bit yes we're actually still in the draft note mode right so I know that there's a lot of people that I've spoken to in the last couple days that have provided me their input so we encourage input from the public again Scott mentioned we we had a meeting on Monday we will have a meeting on Thursday tomorrow we continue to have office office hours like I said I've been meeting with individuals myself individually but we have every opportunity for the public to provide input if they have any to provide us we collect comic cards and so on and so forth in the month of March we'll continue to have more public meetings so all of which is available online on what days and times those are so and I think the city's doing mr. else's point a ton of work to involve the city but it seems like what I'm understanding is the city is still not comfortable with the amount of feedback that we potentially could get from the city city residents so we're doing a lot but in your estimation it's still not enough to ensure that we have enough public feedback to go with more progressive rezoning am I understanding that correctly go ahead I would say that it's most most people may not be aware of what's occurring and may not be paying attention and so I think that is somewhat of the concern of the elected leaders of the city to say that that we want to make sure that we're not unless they specifically know something's happening adjacent to them okay okay mr. Pernitta and if I could just get an idea of what the benefit is of going with the split zoning as opposed to you know taking an individual property and making it some kind of mixed use or something is there I know I know we're talking about 370 so I don't want to get too granular into what the idea would be I'm just curious as to why we would address it this way knowing that we'll have to come back again well that was um that was our attempt before Friday was to address those splits only knows that was our next step we were looking specific special study areas and in our next step would have been to look at the split zoning too I think we've got some time between now and April 23rd for the map and as Scott mentioned we do have an opportunity with you know with the community to get input with the DC RC and with staff we're gonna bring we're gonna bring that up I think that will be the one of the topics we'll discuss to give a property a zoning because right now those split zone properties will won't get a mixed use right now it's still unknown what they would get we are gonna look at the area I think specifically the area how they were split no one really knows and obviously that causes some issues when you think about development if you have a parcel that has split zoning where do you draw the line so we want to make sure we address those as soon as we can but to your point what why are we I think we still are I think we still I think we still have an opportunity okay thanks is there any other question I wanted just like I said we went through in our last work session in my opinion fairly quickly I want to just introduce the zoning districts we went through the dimensional standards one of the things that I wanted to go over if the Commission is willing is this really just to start with the RR and kind of go over the purpose so if you have your your draft in front of you if it's if you do it's on page RR starts on page 114 so our art is the lowest intense zoning district residential rural is what it stands for instead it is intended to provide and maintain the rural use of an area and it's meant to look at farming environmental and scenic areas of the city and you see that our draft zoning map is primarily identifying them along the periphery of the city north of the loop west of I-35 but mainly and there are some parts in the city that are currently RR and when a property is annexed the other application of an RR is when a property is recently annexed it's not zoned it's just given a designation until it is zoned with a zoning district so the idea here is to give it the RR as the zoning so it'll actually have zoning and when that property is developed as we talked about earlier and there is a need for a zoning change that will be through the dual public hearing process so this is what again the purpose of the RR it is to assign areas that are rural in nature along the periphery of the city but also serves as that initial zoning for a recently annexed area and we have a number of those that we did back starting in 2010 so does everybody Commissioner Sanchez why would you make a distinction between the RR and that you've already given it that actual designation as opposed to a property that you bring in and you're still waiting for it to have change it's a designation kind of like you have what is it though the you have the five what is it already five already five and then you have the already five won't X X X yeah so you have a kind of a distinction when you get it why don't you do something like that on that particular it's really it's really just a nomenclature you know already five and already five X they kind of say have the same purpose when when a person has an already five or an already five X there they're they're reviewed against the already five design or dimensional standards so they're they're they're reviewed against that already five so what we're saying is we're getting rid of the already five X's mm-hmm and we're just gonna call it our our okay okay but what I'm saying is if you have if somebody comes in and say they're looking at a particular area and they said okay I'm RR right okay they're gonna they're gonna look at that and say okay this is this is my zoning right now I don't want you to change it as opposed to if I looked at one I said okay this is our - one I would I would understand that that was a holding position and that's not necessarily it's it's designation as opposed to looking at somebody that might be looking from outside wouldn't know the difference yeah it's it's it's no longer a place holder anymore it will have its own zoning district and again we're not going to carry for the RD 5x no no no no I know I understand that okay I guess my question was I thought you had said that when you bring in a property from you're gonna give it a kind of a holding position it can be either RR or it can also be in a holding position and it will also have RR is that what you said no that's that's what we are trying to get away from when we annex property back in say 2010 when we first started the citywide annexation we annexed it but we'd never zoned it so moving forward what we would like to do any property that is annexed we're gonna zone it immediately after that so assign it a zoning district obviously the property owner is involved in all this process so okay so moving forward we will when we annex and that's when and if we will follow that up with a zoning of that property and at that point we will either give it an RR an MN or whatever it is that the property owner and the city and ultimately City Council decides that zoning to be so we're trying to get away from the RD 5x right right I understood that I would just I was making just a comparison because when you bring property in it seems like you may not know what that at that point what you want to do with it I mean some of the properties that were brought in that I that we that we talked about have been brought in years ago and then they were sitting there until either development occurred there or you know as the city expanded then you started making decisions on what what actually you want to do with it you bring it in and you know especially it's somewhat rural you're gonna give it that RR right away five years from now you don't know where the city's going to be at or what's gonna happen and you're gonna have to go back and rezone that so there's there's what I'm looking at is it's it's a good idea to have a when you bring property in and it's especially somewhat rural is to hold it until you see what developments how development is moving I don't know so the the RD 5x was truly just a placeholder it was right right element now there now they have an entitlement of RR so ultimately you're you're there and ready anyone can come in at any time and ask for a rezoning on those properties they choose to develop differently this just this is a cleaner simpler way of getting there and we shouldn't be doing any annexing anymore anyhow so it really it's gonna be we're gonna get the request for annexation we're not going to be going out in the annexing property that that's kind of the reality for us Mr. Burnett and I think what Commissioner such is kind of asking and or maybe not but my clarification is this so right now already 5x is a placeholder we're moving all those automatically to to our are do we have anything that is currently RD 5x that doesn't look like a rural yes yes so then in effect I guess my question is if we have things in RD 5x that that don't look like an RR is there a reason we wouldn't be proactively going ahead and zoning those according to what they would fit with otherwise I think the simple answer there is that we want to have that go through a public hearing process okay to zone it whatever that zoning is not through this citywide rezoning that's the simple answer okay let me marinate on that one just to give sort of an example of that that you could have an art well we do have some RD 5x that might be surrounded by low low or higher residential and so that's where we want to be cautious that we're not all of a sudden changing the zoning on it where the residents have no idea that all of a sudden it went from a field to Christian Ellis thank you chair staying on this topic knowing we're making all RD 5x is now our a lot of them don't make sense tell me this do we have them that are under five acres yes all right so that really doesn't make sense because that doesn't even fit into the parameters of an RR so effectively it just makes no sense it can't be developed I think based on the feedback that we're hearing we'll continue to explore what what transpired as far as making certain that we evaluate what went from RD 5x to RR and provide our recommendation if we see those areas that could make improvements and we'll bring that forward to the to the review committee so that the development code review committee for recommendation yeah because I mean it if we're setting these parameters in the new code and then we're in assigning zoning and they don't fit into the parameters that were that we've written here I don't disagree Commissioner Ellis absolutely and and I'll make certain that we do thank you Mr. Ellis brings an interesting point are there other zoning cases out there in which we're rezoning to a classification that doesn't meet the standard of that classification because new code says an RR lot has to be five acres but we're not abiding by that in some cases it sounds like are there other instances in which apart from RDX RD 5x or RR that we're moving from a DCG to an MN in which there we were rezoning standards yeah not necessarily conform to that zoning yes is that happening elsewhere I would say the short answer is yes and we haven't really fully analyzed that we did look into the question that Commissioner Allen's asked and we did find quite a number of parcels that were less than five acres I believe that we if we looked at the R1 which we can go next to is minimum lot area is 3,200 and if there are some properties that are less than that or you know however they they would also be not conforming to the new R1 and so some of those were trying we were trying to fix but you're right there will be other examples throughout the rest of the zoning districts that may may not fit the the lot minimum area okay but the distinction on the single family is that's where we have that provisioning in chapter or sub chapter 1 where no single families is considered non-conforming as a result of lot size but it may not it may be different but it's not considered non-conforming we have that now when it when we initially changed from 2000 for residential yeah but but yeah for for for those zoning districts that don't need it and they are unplatted if they do come to plan they don't meet the minimum lot area then obviously they won't be able to plot so that's that's a good point to make so those will be those would have to be rezoned in order to plot the way they want to plot because again they have to meet the minimum lot area given given estimate the already 5x going to our under 5 acres believe we were looking at 800 parcels maybe I need to clarify because that sounds astonishing there are 800 RD 5x parcels in the city that are less than 5 acres that are less than 5 acres correct that will be going to our are that is the estimate that I was given this morning okay it seems like we are potentially setting up P&Z and council to hear over 1,100 cases between split zone in RD 5x alone to try to write zoning parcels am I my miss into my math here no I think and again I and I don't I hadn't heard that number I don't know that number and that's why I say let it let us please do some research try to put something together we'll bring that back as as you know more information is available or provided we can give that to the development review committee for at least input and have that dialogue I think it's fruitful I just don't know that we continue to explore this because I don't know that we're going to have any answers are going to provide you valuable feedback I understand if I can just add those sort of looking forward I really don't think it's going to be an issue since we can no longer involuntary annex areas just think of the last two annexation cases that we had stark farms and Lakeview Ranch that right after they were annexed that very next day they submitted a rezoning application for their property and so moving forward I don't think that that's really going to be that much of an issue because why would you want to fall you know you're not going to voluntarily annex into the city and then do nothing when all of a sudden you'll have a number of limitations where if you're in the ETJ the only thing you're coming to the city for is a final plan I I agree with future annexation properties but as it stands now to Commissioner Pernette's point I'm not holding on to the numbers but say of the 800 half of them met our one standards we could proactively get those down instead of our art our one which would align it with the neighborhoods and things and save the potential for 400 properties to come to PNZ that's not few I mean I understand the future I'm saying the current property owners if we can I definitely appreciate neighbors who live next to a field and it's a certain zoning not being aware that all of a sudden they have two houses on that acre next to him I validate that and I think it's it's it's a worthy concern of the city to have but from what I'm hearing and from what I've been involved with there's a lot of meetings out there to try to let them know and it saves the city a ton of time which is money to to look at those as best we can to align them to again kind of be proactive to Commissioner Pernette's and Commissioner Ellis's points and I thank you mr. chair and we'll do that I think it's a worthy conversation yeah I think if we look at this I'd like to drill it down much further because even if you look at just sort of in that look in the in the north the northeast up around 428 a lot of those little those little specks through there I wonder how much of those even though they're even though they're they're they're less they're less than five acres a lot of times what you'll see in these areas since they're not platted they carved out these this was my aunt so I carved this out for her homestead so they may be part of a larger ownership so while it shows it's only an acre it might be part of a 20 acre tract that's owned under one and so I think once we kind of drill that down and filter that out I think it's going to be much a much smaller much smaller number right and just for conversation purposes we do also see single family or families that want to develop a single-family home and they don't get to meet those minimum they won't be able to plat and so we've seen those zoning cases come through the planning zoning Commission Cody do you have a count on that you just pulled up under five acres okay oh I see it there okay great thank you Ron so next one is the RR and I think the next few ones are going to be fairly easy to understand because really they are carryovers from the existing zoning districts the NR one as you see in your chart will be an R1 and R1 the main function there is a single-family large lot minimum size thirty-two hundred sorry three two thousand square feet just flipping over to you are - Chris Charles thank you chair excuse me Ron I just want to make sure everybody knows that there's a summary table as we're going through these that is just one of the best things I think in this new code is to look at all of these these types you know all together in a chart so just as we're going through it I just want to make sure that you you all know so it's page 128 for this particular group of zoning just all the residential and they're all in a table side-by-side it's it's a really nice comparison as we go through these so I just want to know that's great thank you and additionally it's obviously the graphics on each page and I think it's important to point out and that's why we're excited about the draft code that we have the graphics that clearly articulate what those setbacks are on each of those zoning districts and then to get into the table to be able to see it very concisely so if you're considering something you have that ability in fact the the table is keyed by letters which reflect back to the graphic which has the letters assigned to it as well so very good point commissioner Alice are two is primarily single-family again neighborhood minimum lot size 16,000 and again now I went through this the are three the same a single family a little bit more denser because there are smaller lots minimum lot area there is ten thousand square feet and you can see from the graphic that the lots themselves get smaller the are four is your NR four which is again you're looking now at an array of different housing types on the are four zoning districts it is to encourage more walking neighborhood servicing retail amenities nearby again a character of your established single family that we see here in and then existing the are six a little bit more denser minimum lot size is 6,000 you see a lot of the zoning that we see recently proposed to be around in our six zoning districts so this would follow in those examples are the are six is again to accommodate a variety of housing types designed for walking and to neighborhood servicing retail and other amenities again to resemble the established neighborhoods that we may have seen early in the century when when those homes were a lot smaller okay so now are seven that's that's one of the big significant changes does anybody have any questions I want to pause there on the are one through our six before okay so the are six I'm sorry the are seven is a new zoning district and what that zoning district compiled into the are seven is the dr1 dr2 our CR 1 our CR 2 and there's a there's one mf1 there that was a carryover that was not addressed but essentially is those four zoning districts and I know that we've gone through this with the DC RC explained to them why we're doing this essentially the dr1 and dr2 they're not that much different there may be a difference in density from 8 to 15 I believe the are CR 1 are CR 2 a little bit more intense but all in all they fit within the definition or the purpose of an are seven and that is it's intended to accommodate a variety of housing types so you're starting to see duplexes town homes a little bit more different types of homes permitted in the are seven I believe multifamily is permitted in the are seven with a specific use permit so it's kind of like the bridge between the NRM you to the MN you know to to what we currently have we call you know the NRM you and the are six area so are seven is that bridge between residential and the mixed-use districts Ron of the five current zoning districts being consolidated which is the least intensive use the are one the are one I'm sorry are one is that what you're referring to no no the dr1 dr2 those five oh I see I see that are moving are seven which is the least intensive use dr1 dr1 and what's the the change and use broadly speaking between a dr1 and are seven how much more liberal are we getting in their ability to use that land from a dr1 to an are seven question I don't have that in front of me we do have a chart that I felt to bring with me and we will make sure to provide that at our next work session okay well I can go back and look at the code I was curious on the consolidation of five areas how much I don't use the word up zoning yeah yeah but how much of that's happening when we had this presentation to D to the DC RC we did prepare a presentation and I felt to put that to me I'll make sure that chart that does look at those differences in lane uses between the dr1 our CR 1 and our CR 2 are provided to the Commission prior to our next meeting great thank you Ron it might just be multi right I think dr1 does not allow multi-family RCR does but by SUP but I think heights are about relatively the same but we can yeah I'm just thinking about I think it's really the only yeah that'd be interesting to know because I know we've brought the specific example about their neighbors all of a sudden having apartments next to them right which it seems like if someone's a neighbor to a dr1 this rezone without neighbors knowing can automatically have an apartment next to him so the the actual example given about the fear of neighbors having an apartment next to them would legitimately exist in this consolidation of zoning and then right and then the DC RC did express that when we did bring this forward to them earlier in the process but again we were trying to consolidate this may be one of those where we we we looked at and we we were able to receive input that we can move forward the R7 and again that chart I think would be helpful and again I feel to provide that to the Commission and we'll make sure to bring that again at our next work session thanks Ron okay so our seven and as Commissioner Alice mentioned on page 128 is a summary of all of the residential zoning districts that have their dimensional standards and you can see from the lot area it's going from the minimum lot area five acres down to 4,000 square feet and I think it's important to note that what you don't see in this chart is a density requirement maximum density requirement that is the idea here is that we will use the dimensional standards the minimum lot area the minimum lot width and depth and setbacks to manage density I think that's an important significant change from what we currently have today in our current code okay moving on to mix-use zoning districts there are three zoning districts the MN the MD and the MR and you can see under the chart that you have in front of you the DCN I'm sorry let me start with the NRMU 12 and the NRMU we are looking to transition those into MN and I don't know if Cody has those up on the screen these are all of the proposed MN zoning districts that would be converted as part of the draft zoning map so you see there's a there's a number of them within the core of the year within the city the purpose of a MN district is really to provide compatibility of a higher intensity mix-use area where adjacent residential and commercial areas are compatible as much as possible the districts that this district that however is a vibrant environment for both pedestrians bicyclists and other residential neighborhood servicing uses as explained in the purpose statement the MD and this is what we were talking about earlier this is primarily mixed use downtown core the MD district is provided to allow for a variety of uses contributing to the economic viability of downtown Den and that is I think a key there the purpose is primarily for the downtown it's not to extend along the highway it's not to extend into neighborhood areas but primarily downtown and as we get into chapter 6 or sub chapter 6 as Richard mentioned there are provisions that are waived or given exceptions to if you were that you you are within the MD zoning district so we wanted to make sure that those that are converted to MD are truly within the downtown area and that's how we got to where we are with the draft map in making sure that that doesn't affect those other areas and DCG we had a case at P&Z last Wednesday of a subject property wanting to go from MRMU 12 to an MRMU and the city denied that the recommendation because it was a too quick of an aggressive transition but it seems like now the city is saying MRMU 12 and MRMU basically the same can you help me as a commissioner over the next between adoption and effective date understand that current city staff believes there is a distinct difference between MRMU 12 and MRMU to the point where they're not going to recommend cases to the point where after the effective date we see them as the same how how are we guided as commissioners to kind of walk through what looks to be diametrically opposed positions on those two subjects sure I think I know you're referring to it if I'm mistaken on the case of Audra Audra and no right west of Luke 28 oh I see I see your sign Audra and maybe we can pull that up Audra and McKinney I think was McKinney knows north news north of that near Audra and Luke 28 yeah they own the retirement facility that's gonna be on the loop I'm just just to recall I believe that the reason why we were recommending that was really the purpose of what they were trying to do was just lot coverage I think and so we have to look at not just the density because that's what we currently have it's also what are they were they're trying to do what was really the purpose of their rezoning request and Richard I don't know if you know that that was correct I mean that that's one they were still below the density but it really had to do with just the amount of you were you were essentially going from a 40 percent pervious area to 20 percent so to answer your question commit chair Roselle now we have the ability with that with the design standards development standards there are options where you know they can take advantage of certain flexibility so maybe that rezoning would not even mean not even be brought forward to the Commission because there are options and built-in flexibility to adjust in those certain situations it may not be true for everyone but there there are the ones that that could manage through through those processes and Cody just brought it up that's the exact one I'm talking about thank you I guess my question is MRM you 12 MRM you they're gonna be consolidated so when we look at a case of in the next six to eight months when we look at a case from someone saying they want to go from MRM unit to MRU 12 what basis do we have from a city to deny that request if they're going to be aligned imminently but because that was we the city denied that rezoning case but it seems inevitable that they're gonna be merged anyways does that make sense my it does it does and I just want to stress that we may be merging the districts and but remember we're also amending other parts of the code that affect that district in the sense of like say density we don't have density so now they're gonna go primarily on the parking requirement the landscape area the lot coverage so we're pairing those down so it may not be all NRM you as it is it may it may seem to like that but really we're pairing that down and lessening the develop ability or you know intensity by doing that so but you're right there will be certain areas or certain zoning that will expand their intensity but remember we're also amending other parts of the code that would hopefully bring that back and so the other option I was telling you are trying to explain for example the PD is another option if they chose to not do that we will be referring them to a PD and that's that's another option that they can have if again it was a lot coverage issue not necessarily a use issue after adoption though they would have the potential option to go with the new zoning districts anyways is that is that true so the the concept is what we're hoping to propose and that will be passed is that we would have an adoption date give the opportunity for the code to be out there for for six months a person would be able to select either code not mix and match like either code sure all the while we're going to be continuing to look at if there's anything that we need to modify a third component which I don't believe I mentioned is that truly I think that we'd like to look at this at a year really open it back up and say okay rather than making minor changes along the way is that we just look at it holistically and say how is this working thank you thank you and I think I just wanted to add to that too there's certain standards for different types of businesses too that we were building to this code too so that's going to play a role I think in development of lots as well even even though it's gonna maybe have the same zoning district and I might also say and Richard may wish to speak to this that I think staff is being diligent and not only looking at the draft code but as we're evaluating cases for approval or denial is really kind of the philosophy of where we're going and okay and does it does it meet the intent and I don't know if you want to speak to that or yeah you know this one was really challenging and part of it is again it's going back to where we're attached single families permitted and and that's really been you know part of the issue we've had with with the current code because it just doesn't it really doesn't fit it's you know that that's where you the one size fits all really affects the most and so that's where we're trying to just pull that pull that out and it probably would be more appropriate I don't know if it would be an r7 or something along those lines even as opposed to the I got you and just again as we're discussing this there are other cases that we've seen recently as well you know where we were looking at this you know as we move forward and then when we're talking to the applicants you know we are advising them that this is a proposed but you should consider you know either hold off or pursue this and if you do pursue this this is what you potentially will be zoned as or in the future and also it helps it has helped us in our analysis when we are making recommendation because you know we are looking at this somewhat you know in our analysis to make sure that when we get to the approval we're not going to flip it back to whatever this transitional zoning is and get it closer to what it should be yeah that makes sense I mean it at the time on Wednesday was helpful for Claire's kitchen because it looked like some of that was gonna go empty now that was a map that got pulled I don't know if that looks the same as it does now but to your point it does help inform kind of the direction of the city although pending and it did change it did it provided hopefully some context of future thoughts right okay so moving on to MR which is the mixed-use regional this is your golden triangle mall area your razor ranch to a certain degree regional you know where you are looking at a more of an urban regional draw development may include national retailers employments and restaurants so that is why we chose our CCN and our CCD as the MR transition and however there are other areas in the city that currently have an RCC and in our CCD specifically to the north of the loop in that area I think back in 2002 there was a idea that that would be a third or maybe a fourth regional center we haven't seen that of course the loop is not complete and it could be completed in the next 15 years and if it does the possibility for a regional draw could be there so we're going to carry forward those areas as MR and again the MR is a mixed-use regional zoning district okay there are no any questions on the mixed use we'll go into the non-residential I'm sorry the quarter I skipped quarter quarter districts now these this is partly from the den plan 2030 as you all know there is a preferred growth concept map that we used when we analyzed looking at a preferred growth concept one of it was a corridor concept that being said we have a number of corridors throughout the city specifically the suburban quarter I the loop University Drive Teasley Fort Worth those are your major corridors so the attempt here is to try to zone those appropriately but again looking at our existing zoning map we have CMG community mixed-use general and community mixed-use employment if you know what with that those zoning districts are and those are primarily commercial if you read the purpose for SC it's intended to provide moderate to high commercial uses office and retail along high traffic corridors and again those scores I listed are just examples University Drive has a number of CMG CME you see primarily along the Fort Worth area Fort Worth Drive area Teasley has a lot of CMG as well and this SC district provides elevated building and landscape design obviously these are where visitors are driving through and we want to make sure that those areas are well designed primarily it's a auto-oriented zoning district that accommodates the commercial uses and looks to provide pedestrians and other mobile mobility that is the cyclist as well for those areas the other corridor district is the highway corridor this is intended to be your I-35 zoning areas we we have identified a number of them Cody has it up I appreciate Cody sharing those with the Commission gives you a little bit more context as to where they are in the areas that are currently zoned CMG and CME that are along the highway along I-35 we've given it the HC and and in some cases where there are zoning districts such as the DCG which is not really intended for the highway we've also given that an HC again we wanted to make sure that the MD which would have gotten it specifically be only in downtown well along the highway we give it an HC Cody can you turn on SC and change a different color both of them I just wanted to see one thing that I thought my eyes saw but yeah so why is there any blue on I-35 here why is there wouldn't that go to highway corridor if that's the same if CMG and CME are both being moved over to suburban core and highway corridor I'm wondering why I'm not seeing red on both sides of the highway that's full worth drive is one area so that's why we kept it on the south side by 35 I'm not sure what that is on the other because if I haven't seen the comparison but I think this is one of the changes that was made from Friday to Monday's map right and I'm wondering if this is just an alignment of uses where the city didn't feel comfortable and proactively rezoning or no we we we converted the where we felt the corridor which is not the highway it's forward drive we kept it SC but I see what you're talking about I see forward drive but west of Fort Worth Drive east of Fort Worth Drive I mean I get the forward drive and yeah I'm trying to recall why there's like there's a hospital there's an outback there we can yeah we can certainly look at that and going back to what we talked about earlier anything that is CMG and CME along the highway we should have as HC yeah and I think this goes back to maybe a point I've brought up or I've certainly talked to city staff about it is part of my hope in this zoning map was to provide clarity of the city like when you look at our current zoning map there's 26 different colors just looking crazy and then we have this opportunity to make this really nice good-looking thoughtful zoning map and right off the top we have suburban quarter on a highway when we actually have a zone named highway corridor and so this might echo Commissioner Ellis's point earlier about missed opportunities this is not a question but more just maybe a statement on record that this is I don't think fully taking advantage of the opportunity to make a zoning map presented to developers and cities that is a massive step in the right direction in terms of the opportunity we have no I appreciate that comment I think and I'm not gonna make excuses I just know that we are working to get it converted to the transition zoning and so we may have just overlooked those those areas that you see there that's shown in blue yeah I think that's an honest response my initial gut reaction to the word overlook makes me think a lot more meetings because what else to be not lower look and I don't want to be on a tangent here but how many of the 370 split zonings do we need to look at individually from either a subcommittee council staff perspective how many of the 867 already five X's that are less than five acres need to be looked at how many of these opportunities need to be looked at that word overlook I think is honest and I think probably accurate but to me it's it's a this truck just got stuck in the mud type language and I felt like we were on a faster track than that okay so any other questions on the corridor districts we can move on to the non-residential so now the first non-residential zone district is your geo general office and those are intended to be as you can see it from the exhibit more of office employment research development type related uses as well as some supporting uses provides the flexibility for office space and encourages the establishment of research and development enterprises startups and opportunities for business innovation and I want to just express that the then plan 2030 talks a lot about business innovation and this was the zoning district that would be used to encourage or implement that designation of business innovation you see them there now those are the Geo's using the conversion chart your Geo is essentially your ECC employment center commercial so those are our Geo the next one is light industrial and it speaks for itself that is intended for industrial employment uses such as light manufacturing assembly fabrication warehousing and distribution includes indoor and outdoor storage and a wide range of commercial use activities intended to be more in light as far as intensity that allows for transit bicycle and pedestrian uses as well while there are other zoning district following this is the heavy industrial and this is primarily around the airport the more intense industrial uses it is intended to provide suitable locations for development for outdoor recreation distribution and manufacturing uses again this is the highest intense zoning district that we have because it allows for a number of high heavy industrial type uses again right close to I-35W and your then Enterprise Airport and the area that you see down there is the Acme we're getting to the last one and that is the PF this is a new zoning district and I mentioned this earlier in the presentation that this will cover the public and quasi public community uses it includes your parks your your regional parks your civic buildings your institutional schools and the like now we do have a number of smaller parcels that are governmental we did not give it a PF we felt that those would be already permitted in those existing zoning districts so we left it as is but we did identify the larger groupings and larger parcels and gave those a PF so the airport the the landfill the universities the Discovery Park to north some water treatment plants that are fairly large and so we made sure that those were given the PF zoning district where the small ones left off because of liquidity issues too in terms of city wanted to sell the property no it was just more if we if we kept it it would have been all these blue dots because we have so many you know so we just we made sure we've spoke to DISD or I'm sorry that yeah DISD the DCTA UNT and TW and other the county and if their property was in use already and or have future uses we we shared with them the zoning district and so we didn't feel that they needed to be a PF in those instances but not necessarily because we didn't want to see a bunch of blue dots throughout this throughout the map that's probably the simple answer and since they're not being rezoned PF they would have to align with dimensional standards design of right and in most of them are already developing we that's one reason we left it as is great and that's that's a new zoning district and that captures all of what we have and again on page 150 is the summary of all those zoning districts that you can see there. The next if there are no other questions on the zoning districts we can move into the latter part of subchapter 3 and that is again I don't know if we want to go through the table but you can see that the they have lot area of dimensional standards minimum the setbacks in the building heights. There's a there's a couple hundred feet tall buildings that could potentially begin that's the maximum height for those areas and these are intended to be on purpose to be able to accommodate large tall buildings such as in the geo or the HC and then PF if there are any governmental buildings or institutional buildings that exceed that want to get up to 100 feet. So the other important piece to this is really your your measurements and exceptions that I'm not going to go through you can read here but they're essentially given giving you what we already have in regards to how we measure things and what's neat is that there are exhibits that are provided to help explain some of those measurement standards. If there are no other questions on the zoning districts I'd like to introduce the chapter subchapter 5 which is our use regulations. I'm going to skip four we'll come back to that they'll be in a later work session. I wanted to come to subchapter 5 and specifically the table of allowed uses these are really where the rubber hits the road when it comes to what's permitted. Now that we have a general understanding of the zoning districts we can now understand what uses are permitted so if you refer to page 201 it's really the beginning of a series of table or it's a table with series of pages that cover the the uses and just for the benefit of the Commission when we get a later version or later draft of this you won't see these footnotes these will go away these are just for our benefit to understand how we got to what we have today our later version will be without these footnotes so the table will fit more and so you won't be this long but let's let's kind of focus on the residential uses. You see that the P stands for permitted by right there are no use specific standards those that have a plus assigned to it you have to refer to the use specific standard which is listed in the on the far right column. The S stands for specific use permit I think everybody knows what a specific use permit here is and again if there is a plus in addition to a specific use permit you are required to follow the use specific standards that are that are outlined as shown here on the table. Those that are blank signify that it is not permitted in that zoning district so let's let's start with multifamily I think that's a probably a good one to bring up and I want to make sure that we're clear on where they're permitted and where they're permitted and how. Multifamily the first one that you see is R7 so any multifamily that is proposed in the R7 is required to have a specific use permit and a use specific standard which is 533 C if you want to look over and I'll find the page so that I can direct you all 533 C maybe Scott can get there quicker. 211 533 C 2 212 again C multifamily not many essentially what it's saying that if it's in a mixed use district the ground floor that's fronting a public street shall have a ceiling height of 12 feet so that we have a higher first floor for intense for for intending to be if water if it were to can be converted to commercial use in the future it does not have to be commercial it just has to be a height of 12 feet so if and when a commercial use comes in they're able to have that higher ceiling but does not mean that that has to be a commercial use and then it says that each individual dwelling unit shall have a minimum of 400 now we haven't touched this yet but the minimum today is 500 the proposal is to go down to 400 minimum square feet so again those apply to all of the zoning district I'm sorry those that have the pluses for multifamily you must comply with those two zoning districts I'm sorry those two specific you specific standards but again in the r7 you required a specific use permit on the under the mixed use districts M and MD and MR they are permitted by right so think about where those zoning districts were you we were looking at earlier and if they're in man MD or MR they would be permitted by right with those two you specific standards moving forward to SC HC and geo multifamily are permitted with a specific use permit outside of those zoning districts multifamily would not be permitted so I gave you that as an example and I think it's important because we deal a lot with with that type of use and we want to make sure that we understand moving forward with those are or they would be permitted another thing I want to highlight is we are introducing triplexes and fourplexes currently triplexes and fourplexes are considered multifamily however we've broken them out and you can see that starting as early as r3 they are permitted triplexes are permitted that is and there is a definition of what a triplex is is primarily a three unit on a single lot and that's that's a triplex and fourplex of course is four units on a single lot r4 and you see there where they're permitted are six they're permitted by right and then again the use specific standards are covered under 533 B are there any other I mean under residential I'm highlighting things that I think is important but if the Commission would like to discuss this is the opportunity we can take notes we can take your recommendations we can receive your input good or bad really we want to make sure we want to make sure that you are aware or informed of what is being proposed so that when we move this where we're all on the same page the only question I have I think this table is a supreme upgrade for we currently have I mean most of this is there are some things that he said at the beginning on the onset of your presentation that we are not going to be addressing because it's being addressed elsewhere or later specifically like dorms correct how does that apply when dorms are listed here with attributable things to them but yet we haven't really approved that can you walk me through what's happening with dorms in the interim so as you all know we've had a number what we didn't have a number we had a work session and we're gonna be bringing that back to the Commission that we received direction from the Commission and we're gonna be addressing that will it be before we get this code update is really unknown currently though rent by the bedroom developments are still under the multifamily so we're not we're having addressed that to date we're trying to and we will again it may be after the code update or soon soon after or I don't think we'll be able to get to it before it honestly yes we currently have standards that we use now that are falling in multifamily is just trying to find a definition a use that would fit the current dormitory has a definition and if and it's it's in this code it carried over so those that fit that definition will be able to develop under that use of a dormitory but again the rent by the bedroom that we're talking about currently falls under multifamily and is gonna be carried forward until we get to the dormitory discussion and code amendment and it will continue to be multifamily just realize thank you chair and just to clarify a little bit you were out of town for that discussion and that was when we were discussing dormitory as the collegiate type facilities not dormitory as I guess we currently have dormitory right I had the privilege of watching that video the short answer is there are standards that are in place today we're running with those standards not to say that that we can't talk about dormitories as they exist in this draft code but we are also proposing some updates which are not part of the discussion today just because we're carrying under separate cover similar to that of the the tree what's known as a tree ordinance but really it's the conservation landscape easement ordinance and and some other pieces so it does exist in here today we're just carrying forward what we have in the existing code and then I imagine there's a process to add uses so if we came up with a student purpose-built was the language they all used purpose-built student housing that would be a potential new land use does that go through the same P&Z review process to add a land use to this code that's correct it'd be a code amendment it'll follow the same dual process public hearing and if that's the case it would be another column or another row here that we would be adding under residential great the only thing I not to keep going on on this item but I think that was that's a challenge and really what we learned I think that night at P&Z is it's not just it's even though we're calling it student purpose built or purpose-built student it's not just students who are living there right it's a number of individuals and even the project that we saw last week I mean that's one where right next to it that's how they advertise it they target students even though they're on individual lots each of those four bedrooms are rented by the bedroom so we also have group living I'm gonna I'm gonna go past residential unless you all have hot household living unless you all have any other uses that we you like for us to clarify a group living and there's dormitory under 202 that's that's the carryover that you'll see be permitted there are seven in the MN with a specific use permit and it permitted by right under the MD but again that has a different definition that it's not what we're talking about right with related to collegiate housing not much yeah the public institutional and civic uses we added a couple of new zone a couple new uses airport city-owned cemetery city-owned but primarily these are the same uses that you see currently in our development code it's organized a little bit better in the sense that it's now broken to other categories educational facilities the same there health care health care facilities I think under the commercial uses one interesting one to add to highlight is that we have a community garden in an urban garden and I'm trying to remember what the difference between the two are but we have definitions and they're in chapter 8 if you guys are interested I can read those definitions if not drive on drive on Ron keep going Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I do have a question in following this use table where musician studios lives so we've got it to where we have you specific standards but we don't have any use specifics specific standards written so I'm that confused me yes so you you're absolutely right and I will make a note of that we do have the plus that you see that we do but when you yeah then there's no page reference but so then when you further you know read along it just it has it under specific use standards but there it's blank information so I didn't know if we are taking that out or if there's standards going in we were we were in the process of putting it together and it's still in it's still in draft and we work we plan on having you specific standards okay so that's information that needs to go in there that still needs to be in there yes I bought yes it's not it's not included and we will make sure that we do include that in the next draft okay one thing I want to just highlight also RV Park we currently do not have that listed in our current zoning district it's actually mixed in with the manufacturer housing development we're pulling it out and giving its own use and its own use specific standards so I think that's a clean up that we wanted to make sure we do we already talked about musicians studios the payday lending it's to be determined I know Jerry and our attorney Brenda McDonald we've had some discussion about how we address that I know that City of Irving has a an example that we're looking into so that too needs to be further contemplated we get to retail uses or retail sales I kind of skipped the personal services when we're retail cells we now have a breakdown of retail cells less than 5,000 between 5 and 15 and greater than 15 this is to help differentiate some of the higher or larger square footages versus the smaller mom-and-pop stores lodging facilities probably the important one there is the short-term rental we do not currently have that we do have a you specific standard for that and that's 5 3 5 q and you can see that your your short-term rentals are permitted in all zoning district residential zoning districts and then the MN and MD with the new specific standard and really what that is it's just as of how long a person can have a short-term rental lease what page is that Scott 223 Q so so we're well the first one is a property owner shall register a short-term rental with the city of then which means we got to have a registration form and making sure that we manage that it talks about taxes associated with that and then no more than 30 days for a rental by paying guests okay I'm just gonna go through this unless you all have other ones I think travel Plaza on page 206 under the vehicle and equipment vehicles and equipment I think that's important to make sure we that's a new use that we've added and then I'm looking as I'm going through here to else thanks chair one thing that had stood out at me because you brought up travel Plaza so right under that is the adult entertainment things so we have a lot of highway or a high industrial parcels out there so I'm hoping that the use specific standards for that business is strong enough to understand where I'm going yeah yeah well if you look at page starting at 225 it is because I think it was only allowed in like a rural commercial area or something back in the past and I mean those were I think few and far between so now that we're moving it into high industrial we we've got a lot of high industrial parcels I think I think I mean I could be wrong but I think they're permitted to ICG with a specific use permissive that's why that carried over as H I the note says otherwise it says currently allowed as a specific use in rural commercial sorry I said corrected so if you look at starting at page 225 it's one two three four four and a half pages just under that you specific standard so there's a lot of standards that they must follow in order and there's there's there's references to Texas local records too so there's there's and mainly I bring it up because I know we have particularly down on Jim Crystal we have on the draft map H I in there and literally across the way is going into rural residential so that was my concern there that the that the you know parameters there particularly for distance would be enough right and with the with the yes that means a specific use permit and I'm sure there are some references to let Texas local government code that have distance requirements that are important to comply with that's a good good point I really don't I don't want to skip anything I just want to make sure that we if you have questions and then this won't be the last time and I want to make sure that it's clear we will be we'll be bringing back this discussion at a next work session I really feel that this is really the meat the Commission needs to really understand along with the development standards but the use because we often refer to this in our review of zoning in our review of SUPs I think it's important that we focus on on this chapter and again in my opinion but you guys can tell me otherwise and then the last I mean the really the last two pages are public and semi-public utility uses which is our substations and whatnot and then we also have our accessory and temporary uses listed in the table after the take yes mr. Sanchez I was just kind of looking through this now if there's something that isn't covered I'll just think like a cremation facilities I think I saw something under funeral facilities and but is that also include cremation facilities that's a good question let me let's let's do you if you can point you let me help me find work where you saw 202 202 cemetery Oh cemetery funeral and interment facilities that does that include a cremation facility so let me let's let's go you know so let's go to chapter eight and I'm gonna look for it I'll give you a page number so you can it's a good question or 41 so it does include so it does include it okay any other questions so verification is this me dismiss meeting have an end time were you trying to get out by six or is this just I think we're shooting for six okay perfect yeah we're shooting for six great but again I'll be want to make sure that we have ample time to answer questions and like I said we want to give you as much time as possible we will be bringing back sub chapter five and introducing sub chapter six at our next meeting so please know that this is not the only time you can provide comments so if you have additional uses that are not included or have question on specific uses please let us know I just know Commissioner Alice my need to sneak away so if there's handouts I'd love to get those passed out yeah Michelle's yeah thank you I will have to sneak out it that we don't lose our quorum but so you guys can continue but if there's anything I need I am going to sneak out here in about two minutes okay we do have we do have handouts we do have handouts the handouts that Scott's passing out are the map that was before Friday and then the map that is currently online we also have a map that shows the changes where where they changed after Friday a little bit more highlighted in the fact that that differentiates the two maps there so I'm not pass this out as well thank you Ron is this it there's an after change right there's just one of the after am I missing one there's three handouts right okay four after a change ah there you go that's perfect I don't want to complicate things let me take this opportunity to say that I applaud staff Ron and Cody have done a bang-up job of really trying to highlight these changes make the changes based on direction now we've got more work to do we'll continue to do that we'll do some of the the analysis that we heard today and we'll bring that back and and ultimately we'll talk about what we can on Friday of whatever it is that we learn I will tell you that Cody has put an immense amount of time into gathering data he has heard what was said today and has already been assigned more work to do so just with that being said I just I want to applaud them for the work that they've done and I appreciate it absolutely thank you all so just to wrap up I know we're gonna cut it short here we will continue our discussion on sub chapter 5 towards the end but be introducing sub chapter 6 and also talking about sub chapter 4 4 is really an overlay district we're carrying forward all of the overlay district not many changes in sub chapter form that's why I didn't really feel that we need to talk about it but we will make sure we touch on it next week again and then start introducing the development standards great thanks Ron and one more thing mr. chair I don't know if there's anything in particular from you or the rest of the Commission that we could bring forward anything that would be helpful as we go through this process we've got a couple more weeks that we're going to continue to run through this and I know people have to continue to digest we're just trying to hit some of the high points of what we've heard and what we know and certainly our work continues on this daily so we're much more familiar and we don't want to take it for granted what it is that you may want to hear have a little more information on the only request I'd have is just and you've been doing this fine this is just a reiteration just to keep us updated on a timeline if if this slows down or changes timelines just keep us posted on on those type things we anticipate bringing the code and the map to you for recommendation on April the 5th so that's excuse me 10th I keep saying the fifth and I apologize for that the 10th and we're anticipating we're gonna do everything possible to keep that that timeline okay great does anyone else have any questions or requests to examine next work session when this comes back and if I might mention one more no it's off top no it's not off topic we have the landscape and conservation code coming forward to you next Wednesday that is in the development code what is in the development code today is kind of one of the earlier drafts we've had some some modifications with that at the request of the city manager we've met with that a member of the COE as well as with the mayor and we're kind of refining that we're gonna put it to a council work session to make sure that we understand their direction very clearly and that will be coming back and to you at PNC for recommendation next Wednesday so that Richard has Richard and Haley have worked immensely on that that's been another one of those daily I'm truly trying to get us out of kind of this crisis mode that we're in and so we can begin to do the planning work that we need to do and then on the comp plan and future land use map that's great the only question I had I noted it at the very beginning I just wanted to if there is a quick answer maybe just to throw it out there this is my first time I've ever done a city rewrite guys surprise so I'm ignorant in a lot of these things but one of the things that has come up and I just would like maybe some understanding is there's a lot of work done and rewrite and updating it but it seems like we're pulling out a lot so some of things like razor ranch storms landscape parking which has been talked about split zoning potential future city wide rezoning case putting in overlays of the split zonings and there's other things I'm sure I'm forgetting of things that we are not addressing currently how how much of a completed project are we trying to adopt and put into effect are we we're putting forth a 70% completed project with 30% left to be done and is this normal for a citywide code rewrite to have such to me significant pieces just being addressed ancillary to the focus let me let me try and that was a lot I will say that you have a complete document before you okay we have a number of things running in parallel because we're trying to make improvements so this process started truly in 2013 it stalled for any period of time we have been working on it very diligently for the past maybe 18 months in that no different than well with any luck word we're adopting this in April so I don't anticipate any new situations arising but when we talk about something for example we have dormitories in the code today right we're running with that we're continuing to have that but as we see changes in land use and we see other communities doing something successful we don't want to sit on our laurels and wait like we did with this code for 17 years to say well we should update our code so we're running it parallel not not that to bog the process and it doesn't mean that it won't be completed and put into this it's just if we can continue to work on those processes we're not rushing them so a perfect example is is the landscape code that we went ahead and incorporated some components in here as we work through those final iterations but but rather than specifically talking about those in this work session you'll have another opportunity to talk about those to incorporate it into the code so I guess I have to say that we're gonna have a very complete code we're not bringing you an incomplete code it's just rather than mixing issues and talking about the tree code on two different occasions is that we talk about it one time so best use of your time I understand but it's my understanding as well that this code might be complete but there's addendums that will not be complete at the time we vote on this is that correct the razor ranch addendum I'm thinking specifically that's what we will not have that as part of this document that will be a part of this document the difference is it will not be included in the document so we're gonna take because and I don't know the exact number so please do not quote me on this but but the mere fact of when that was created and there are some 13 or 15 ordinances that amend that that development the amendments cross different versions of what our development code might look like okay and so there's no simple way to say we'll just incorporate it into this book so we're gonna take those versions of the code the reference is there too and and it creates a a separate document if you will which will can be complete it's just not going to be a part of this development code what documents are not going to be part of this code but also germane to this code so there's razor ranch landscape will be part of this code so we go to April 10th will have the landscape and preservation in here is there any other documents or addendums that are working in parallel that are not part of this no razor ranch is the razor ranch will be an appendix reference in the code as Scott mentioned is just be a separate document because it's such a large complex great I was worried there's there's more and then just just to just add real quickly we're trying to simplify the code there's a lot of stuff in there a lot of the stuff that you know may not necessarily be be in the code will be transferred or carried over into a criteria manual or manuals and so that's where we're working with the other departments to make sure that we do that we're also cleaning up the the muni code or I'm sorry not the muni code but the code of ordinances where there's a lot of conflicting duplications we're cleaning that up and that is all gonna be part of this effort so when at the end of it we hopefully will have a development code that's more concise and clear for everyone to understand perfect it's clear and also helping with criteria manuals or is that fully in-house with a portion the administrative manuals the other criteria managed have already been adopted by council great any other questions for city staff this evening Ron Scott thank you for the presentation most helpful at this time we'll close the meeting at six o'clock