1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:07,120 good afternoon welcome to the planning and zoning special called work session 2 00:00:07,120 --> 00:00:12,060 for Wednesday February 27th 2019 seeing that we do have a quorum I will call 3 00:00:12,060 --> 00:00:17,920 this meeting to order at 411 the only item on the agenda is to receive a 4 00:00:17,920 --> 00:00:21,820 report from staff regarding the development code and draft zoning map so 5 00:00:21,820 --> 00:00:37,920 I'll turn it over to Scott Ron several more of these to walk through each and 6 00:00:37,920 --> 00:00:45,440 all of the chapters within the proposed development code as well as the draft 7 00:00:45,440 --> 00:00:52,400 zoning map staff continues to host some public open houses so we've had one this 8 00:00:52,400 --> 00:00:57,880 week we've got another one tomorrow night and hope to see some of you there 9 00:00:57,880 --> 00:01:05,080 we saw some individuals Monday night we're going to continue to have 10 00:01:05,080 --> 00:01:10,120 stakeholder meetings so we'll get with various community organizations provide 11 00:01:10,120 --> 00:01:16,240 presentations to civic organizations and wherever it is that we can what we're 12 00:01:16,240 --> 00:01:20,600 going to talk about is kind of following up on where we were at with the last 13 00:01:20,600 --> 00:01:25,040 meeting following up on Clarion's overview of the code getting a little 14 00:01:25,040 --> 00:01:29,440 deeper dive getting a little bit more granular on some of the topics and 15 00:01:29,440 --> 00:01:33,840 trying to make sure that we understand the smallest of details of what we're 16 00:01:33,840 --> 00:01:38,920 trying to do I know some of the major comments and concerns that we've been 17 00:01:38,920 --> 00:01:43,840 addressing lately have to do with the landscape and conservation ordinance 18 00:01:43,840 --> 00:01:49,560 which is running on a separate track that will come before this body next 19 00:01:49,560 --> 00:01:57,880 Wednesday we have a work session with council on Tuesday we also have some 20 00:01:57,880 --> 00:02:03,680 changes to the zoning map which Ron is going to get to here shortly so I'll 21 00:02:03,680 --> 00:02:09,400 hold off on that just short of saying that the council committee has been 22 00:02:09,400 --> 00:02:14,000 meeting on Fridays met last Friday as of last Friday there were some 23 00:02:14,000 --> 00:02:20,000 discussions that took place regarding the split zoning and we were trying to 24 00:02:20,000 --> 00:02:25,460 address how best to rezone those properties and as we were doing that we 25 00:02:25,460 --> 00:02:31,280 decided that it might be best for us not to change the zoning so I think as an 26 00:02:31,280 --> 00:02:36,600 interim step we will be putting those into a overlay category and then we'll 27 00:02:36,600 --> 00:02:41,800 come back and evaluate those on a case-by-case basis so we we wouldn't be 28 00:02:41,800 --> 00:02:46,960 getting bogged down into the details of what use might be most appropriate on a 29 00:02:46,960 --> 00:02:53,920 piece of property as we were doing that we also brought reference to the RD 5x 30 00:02:53,920 --> 00:03:01,680 so the RD 5x is a placeholder zoning and initially when we crafted the zoning 31 00:03:01,680 --> 00:03:07,080 map we had worked through that and ultimately assigned some zoning 32 00:03:07,080 --> 00:03:11,140 categories to them where staff thought it was most appropriate so it might be 33 00:03:11,140 --> 00:03:19,200 an rr might be an r1 r2 r3 maybe even r4 and as we met with the council 34 00:03:19,200 --> 00:03:25,080 committee the development review committee excuse me it was determined 35 00:03:25,080 --> 00:03:33,080 that those should be placed as an rr or the the least impactful so we ultimately 36 00:03:33,080 --> 00:03:39,080 were wanting to get the map corrected so I asked that the map be pulled down make 37 00:03:39,080 --> 00:03:42,480 those corrections anticipated that would be done Friday it was not and it wasn't 38 00:03:42,480 --> 00:03:49,320 back up until Monday but again Ronald Ronald highlight the changes with that I 39 00:03:49,320 --> 00:03:54,760 think that overall we've we've garnered positive support and and we continue to 40 00:03:54,760 --> 00:03:58,600 listen to the stakeholders to make sure that we're getting what it is that we 41 00:03:58,600 --> 00:04:03,640 have in place and I think with that if there are any questions as far as just 42 00:04:03,640 --> 00:04:11,280 kind of a broad overview so did you say you're getting rid of the RD 5x and 43 00:04:11,280 --> 00:04:15,480 then you're just gonna bring in bring them in directly like a with a rr is 44 00:04:15,480 --> 00:04:18,320 that what it is correct okay okay because I know that was one of the 45 00:04:18,320 --> 00:04:31,640 questions okay any other questions right now okay with that just a recap of what 46 00:04:31,640 --> 00:04:38,800 we discussed at our last work session we talked about sub chapters one and two we 47 00:04:38,800 --> 00:04:43,800 went through that so that is what we will not be talking about and also a 48 00:04:43,800 --> 00:04:46,760 list here that you see behind me you know we're not gonna talk about the 49 00:04:46,760 --> 00:04:49,720 tree code as you already mentioned we're gonna be discussing that at a later work 50 00:04:49,720 --> 00:04:54,320 session the dormitory again later and then the downtown design standards will 51 00:04:54,320 --> 00:04:59,080 all come as a separate discussion so today's work session continuing our 52 00:04:59,080 --> 00:05:04,440 efforts in reviewing the development code update is sub chapter 3 and I know 53 00:05:04,440 --> 00:05:12,840 we we discussed it last work session a very introductionary of the zoning 54 00:05:12,840 --> 00:05:17,080 districts I went through it fairly quickly I remember you know going 55 00:05:17,080 --> 00:05:22,040 through each of those zoning districts highlighting some of the minimum lot area 56 00:05:22,040 --> 00:05:27,720 requirements the minimum setbacks and minimum you know heights and all that 57 00:05:27,720 --> 00:05:31,380 other dimensional standards associated with each zoning districts but I think 58 00:05:31,380 --> 00:05:35,560 it's it's important that we look at the purpose of each of those zoning 59 00:05:35,560 --> 00:05:40,360 districts because you know as you all know we have a number of existing zoning 60 00:05:40,360 --> 00:05:45,240 districts over 28 zoning districts and if you look at the sheet that's in front 61 00:05:45,240 --> 00:05:49,960 of you that I passed out in place in front of you the middle column is or are 62 00:05:49,960 --> 00:05:54,760 those existing zoning districts close to 28 zoning districts what we're trying to 63 00:05:54,760 --> 00:06:00,200 do is consolidate those and make it more easier to understand there's there's a 64 00:06:00,200 --> 00:06:03,800 number of zoning districts that just either are the same and just have the 65 00:06:03,800 --> 00:06:08,760 same development standards which really doesn't really help us for example the 66 00:06:08,760 --> 00:06:14,880 ECI and the ICE really what's the difference between the two so the way 67 00:06:14,880 --> 00:06:18,400 we're looking at is we're going to transition that into the LI which is 68 00:06:18,400 --> 00:06:30,480 light industrial the thank you so what you what you have in this chart is what 69 00:06:30,480 --> 00:06:35,760 we are looking at or have prepared as far as a draft zoning map that's 70 00:06:35,760 --> 00:06:42,120 currently published so what you see as listed in the middle column is what you 71 00:06:42,120 --> 00:06:46,960 will see in the draft zoning map again that is published online all of those 72 00:06:46,960 --> 00:06:55,040 are taken right from this chart prior to Friday we had taken another step we we 73 00:06:55,040 --> 00:07:00,720 took another step and actually looked at the area and if there was an existing 74 00:07:00,720 --> 00:07:04,680 area that was more suitable for a particular zoning district we gave it 75 00:07:04,680 --> 00:07:09,200 that zoning district gave it a little bit more context to to what is not just 76 00:07:09,200 --> 00:07:12,960 okay this is what it is and we're gonna transfer it over to here but rather we 77 00:07:12,960 --> 00:07:16,840 took it another step and we gave it what we feel was the appropriate zoning 78 00:07:16,840 --> 00:07:22,620 district again as you heard from Scott the direction is that we we step back 79 00:07:22,620 --> 00:07:28,720 and get as close to the existing zoning map as we can there are a few 80 00:07:28,720 --> 00:07:36,180 exceptions the areas around the TW area around downtown as well as around the 81 00:07:36,180 --> 00:07:42,360 University of North Texas area we looked at those area more specifically and 82 00:07:42,360 --> 00:07:47,040 gave it an assigned zone district that may not match this transitional chart so 83 00:07:47,040 --> 00:07:56,120 those areas we kept with what we feel is appropriate in those in those cases in 84 00:07:56,120 --> 00:08:04,240 addition the PF which is the public facilities those we kept from previous 85 00:08:04,240 --> 00:08:12,120 draft so all of the governmental institutional and other properties that 86 00:08:12,120 --> 00:08:17,120 are associated with governmental and institutional are given a proposed PF 87 00:08:17,120 --> 00:08:21,560 zoning district Ron can I see a quick question yes sir it's my understanding 88 00:08:21,560 --> 00:08:29,920 that the DC RC was going by area by area through the map to look at alignment and 89 00:08:29,920 --> 00:08:33,840 it sounds like there's a lot of time and effort spent looking at different areas 90 00:08:33,840 --> 00:08:37,280 whether it be the UNT or cement city or right business innovation all those 91 00:08:37,280 --> 00:08:40,880 different the kind of districts of the town to see what like you said take that 92 00:08:40,880 --> 00:08:44,360 extra step and it seems if I'm understanding correctly at this point 93 00:08:44,360 --> 00:08:49,040 that's been rolled back and so there's just an alignment column a to column B 94 00:08:49,040 --> 00:08:58,880 except for a few designated areas like TW UNT in downtown why those three did 95 00:08:58,880 --> 00:09:04,400 we keep this proactive kind of thought and if those were highly examined to 96 00:09:04,400 --> 00:09:08,760 feel confident that a progress I'm gonna call it progressive a progressive rezone 97 00:09:08,760 --> 00:09:15,800 was possible what has the DC RC been doing that the other areas have not been 98 00:09:15,800 --> 00:09:19,200 also looked at with such scrutiny to keep that progressive rezoning it's a 99 00:09:19,200 --> 00:09:23,600 good question and I felt to mention that we asked we've been meeting with the DC 100 00:09:23,600 --> 00:09:29,000 RC almost every week I think I counted 29 meetings since we started this effort 101 00:09:29,000 --> 00:09:34,000 and we asked we have after we went through the entire book almost page by 102 00:09:34,000 --> 00:09:39,280 page chapter by chapter we forwarded those comments that we received to 103 00:09:39,280 --> 00:09:43,440 Clary on and of course they made the revisions and it was now time to look 104 00:09:43,440 --> 00:09:48,280 at the zoning map and so the last few meetings with the plan with the DC RC 105 00:09:48,280 --> 00:09:56,000 was select study areas is what we called them committee we would like to see we 106 00:09:56,000 --> 00:09:59,520 like to see this area zone this way what are your thoughts give us some of your 107 00:09:59,520 --> 00:10:05,960 input we also looked at some split zoning as Scott mentioned a parcel that 108 00:10:05,960 --> 00:10:11,160 has multiple zoning districts well how do we zone that if you know one or two 109 00:10:11,160 --> 00:10:14,840 or three zoning districts exist so we were going through that exercise and then 110 00:10:14,840 --> 00:10:20,320 we got to that discussion to answer your question related to those specific areas 111 00:10:20,320 --> 00:10:25,480 the TW area the downtown and the University of North Texas area the reason 112 00:10:25,480 --> 00:10:32,280 why we focus on that in the draft that we put out was I made a meant I made 113 00:10:32,280 --> 00:10:37,080 mention of the DS the downtown commercial general and if you look at the 114 00:10:37,080 --> 00:10:45,120 chart it shows that DCG and DCN is going to go to MD and if we read the purpose 115 00:10:45,120 --> 00:10:52,080 of an MD it's primarily for downtown so we know we have some zoning districts 116 00:10:52,080 --> 00:10:58,200 that I'm sorry some DCG and DCN throughout the TW the downtown and the 117 00:10:58,200 --> 00:11:03,960 University of North Texas area that don't fit that purpose and so we were 118 00:11:03,960 --> 00:11:09,920 told or we were directed that in those areas if it doesn't a DCG does not fit 119 00:11:09,920 --> 00:11:17,800 we should look for a similar zoning district that fits DCG I'm sorry MD was 120 00:11:17,800 --> 00:11:21,800 not the appropriate zoning district and it should just be for downtown and that's 121 00:11:21,800 --> 00:11:27,920 why we kept those areas what we had prior to Friday was there any split 122 00:11:27,920 --> 00:11:34,560 zoning cases left in the UNTWU downtown area because it sounds like those are 123 00:11:34,560 --> 00:11:38,640 split zoning we're not touching all of those are not being touched are there 124 00:11:38,640 --> 00:11:42,640 any of those in those three areas I'll have to look I think there may be a few 125 00:11:42,640 --> 00:11:48,960 that have split zoning and Cody can help us identify which of those parcels 126 00:11:48,960 --> 00:11:53,600 within those areas that have split zoning I know we have a lot outside of 127 00:11:53,600 --> 00:11:59,080 the city but if if you'd like Cody can pull that up on a map and identify which 128 00:11:59,080 --> 00:12:04,920 of those parcels within the downtown area TW and UT that have split zoning I 129 00:12:04,920 --> 00:12:10,600 guess the the the the reason for my questions is how to communicate to the 130 00:12:10,600 --> 00:12:15,600 city because if I understand this correctly we have a citywide new zoning 131 00:12:15,600 --> 00:12:20,600 map but we're not proactively rezoning we're aligning except in some areas we 132 00:12:20,600 --> 00:12:24,680 are proactively zoning unless there's a split zoning within those specialized 133 00:12:24,680 --> 00:12:29,400 select study areas we're not going to touch those split zonings and so it 134 00:12:29,400 --> 00:12:35,400 seems ambiguous on what was the condition in which my property got a 135 00:12:35,400 --> 00:12:40,160 certain zoning and so having all these are in levels that I'm trying to work 136 00:12:40,160 --> 00:12:46,520 through I don't hopefully can encourage some clarity when we present to a city 137 00:12:46,520 --> 00:12:52,600 how how the city came to those decisions the only thing I wanted to add I think 138 00:12:52,600 --> 00:12:57,260 would also pose the challenge particularly with the MD is in that in 139 00:12:57,260 --> 00:13:04,560 that conversion from from DCG there was this and it wasn't necessarily a zoning 140 00:13:04,560 --> 00:13:08,880 overlay it was sort of a sort of an overlay but there was there were 141 00:13:08,880 --> 00:13:12,800 specific requirements or provisions but if you were within the central business 142 00:13:12,800 --> 00:13:19,880 district that granted you the ability to parking not provide parking for 143 00:13:19,880 --> 00:13:22,960 commercial not provide parking for residential if you're under ten units 144 00:13:22,960 --> 00:13:26,640 and there were some other items and so it was hard to kind of last so that that 145 00:13:26,640 --> 00:13:31,240 that area around one where it really wasn't representative of what the what 146 00:13:31,240 --> 00:13:36,600 the downtown was and so that was sort of that the impetus for really honing MD 147 00:13:36,600 --> 00:13:42,600 into only the down the downtown if that helps it does a little bit and I guess 148 00:13:42,600 --> 00:13:48,120 secondary to that rather than making assumptions was there public feedback 149 00:13:48,120 --> 00:13:53,640 and pushback regarding this or is it in more internal fear or hesitation to do 150 00:13:53,640 --> 00:13:59,520 like the the rezoning of the split zoning or more progressive zoning was 151 00:13:59,520 --> 00:14:03,520 was there actual feedback from the city saying well I have questions or is it 152 00:14:03,520 --> 00:14:08,920 more of an internal conversation well I think I think it's important to just I 153 00:14:08,920 --> 00:14:14,400 think remind the Commission that the Development Review Committee is made up 154 00:14:14,400 --> 00:14:17,480 of three council members and three planning and zoning Commission members 155 00:14:17,480 --> 00:14:22,960 and they're they're really the steering committee for staff so staff is meeting 156 00:14:22,960 --> 00:14:27,960 with them weekly and we have legal counsel representing as well so we have 157 00:14:27,960 --> 00:14:33,440 our legal staff plus we have a land use attorney that we've contracted with and 158 00:14:33,440 --> 00:14:38,360 so as we meet we're talking through all of these issues well they're steering 159 00:14:38,360 --> 00:14:43,600 the direction that this is going so when we're when we're taking it to planning 160 00:14:43,600 --> 00:14:49,720 and zoning and a council that it should streamline the process the intent is is 161 00:14:49,720 --> 00:14:54,360 certainly to be transparent and the intent is is that we're getting probably 162 00:14:54,360 --> 00:14:57,560 what we think is the product that will be able to get over the finish line 163 00:14:57,560 --> 00:15:06,000 rather than it being a surprise to either body if that helps and that 164 00:15:06,000 --> 00:15:09,160 certainly helps but I don't know if it answers the question there was public 165 00:15:09,160 --> 00:15:15,340 feedback concerning progressive rezoning or there it was just the DCRC and staff's 166 00:15:15,340 --> 00:15:20,960 conversations no I think I think what what had happened with the the review 167 00:15:20,960 --> 00:15:25,520 committee is as we went through this week by week the conversation took place 168 00:15:25,520 --> 00:15:29,960 when we talked about conversion of zoning districts and the zoning map is 169 00:15:29,960 --> 00:15:35,760 that we minimize those impacts so it was trying to be cognizant of those that may 170 00:15:35,760 --> 00:15:40,800 not be aware and as we're as as staff were we're very much aware that most 171 00:15:40,800 --> 00:15:45,320 people don't necessarily pay attention right and and and the council committee 172 00:15:45,320 --> 00:15:51,880 was very sensitive to the fact that we didn't want to rezone properties that 173 00:15:51,880 --> 00:15:56,360 people that would be adjacent to it wouldn't be aware so we were minimizing 174 00:15:56,360 --> 00:16:01,760 any change so we know consolidating we would have change this was designed to 175 00:16:01,760 --> 00:16:07,340 minimize those changes so as we had this conversation on a couple different 176 00:16:07,340 --> 00:16:14,000 topics as Ron has referenced that that direction from the the review committee 177 00:16:14,000 --> 00:16:19,160 was for us to proceed forward as we as instructed and what's represented on the 178 00:16:19,160 --> 00:16:22,800 map and and again that's why we're putting out to the public for for 179 00:16:22,800 --> 00:16:30,440 feedback so I think I heard a important port an important point to me in there 180 00:16:30,440 --> 00:16:35,120 so I just want to clarify when we redo the zoning map everyone gets notified in 181 00:16:35,120 --> 00:16:39,360 the city we're gonna send out 35,000 locations right that's actually just 182 00:16:39,360 --> 00:16:42,320 notifying the property of their own changes they wouldn't actually 183 00:16:42,320 --> 00:16:47,840 necessarily know their neighbors changes where if we did a city initiated rezone 184 00:16:47,840 --> 00:16:53,040 they would have the 500 foot correct correct and and that's and and that's 185 00:16:53,040 --> 00:16:57,760 been the catalyst for most of this is to make certain that people wouldn't be 186 00:16:57,760 --> 00:17:01,840 aware of what that change is so trying to minimize anybody's potential impact 187 00:17:01,840 --> 00:17:08,080 whether there is benefit to a property owner or detriment to a property owner 188 00:17:08,080 --> 00:17:12,240 that may get rezoned we certainly don't want to give those unintended 189 00:17:12,240 --> 00:17:16,080 consequences of rezoning a piece of property with someone not having their 190 00:17:16,080 --> 00:17:23,240 opportunity to to express their concern or support so unless it's in a typical 191 00:17:23,240 --> 00:17:27,760 in a typical rezoning process right giving that as you indicate the 200 or 192 00:17:27,760 --> 00:17:32,080 500 foot notices so where it is that we could come back later and make those 193 00:17:32,080 --> 00:17:35,480 recommendations that are more aligned with a future land use map but we could 194 00:17:35,480 --> 00:17:40,200 target those to say hey we're talking about this area and we think that it 195 00:17:40,200 --> 00:17:44,160 should be rezoned this way we can literally go door knock we can provide 196 00:17:44,160 --> 00:17:47,360 that notice and say the city is initiating a rezoning we'd like to 197 00:17:47,360 --> 00:17:51,320 change the zoning of this this is going to impact you because of this rather 198 00:17:51,320 --> 00:17:55,480 than taking this you know that the complete corporate limits and say hey 199 00:17:55,480 --> 00:17:59,560 everybody's getting rezoned and here's what happens to you they wouldn't know 200 00:17:59,560 --> 00:18:05,200 what's happening adjacent properties except for the the in the current 201 00:18:05,200 --> 00:18:10,960 published zoning map there are parcels across the city that will be provided a 202 00:18:10,960 --> 00:18:16,880 more liberal use category by the consolidation of zoning districts and 203 00:18:16,880 --> 00:18:21,920 those neighbors won't know about that either I think that there there's there's 204 00:18:21,920 --> 00:18:25,880 the possibility that somebody may have more liberal and somebody may have more 205 00:18:25,880 --> 00:18:30,720 restrictive but I think it's incredibly minimized okay so it's it's trying to 206 00:18:30,720 --> 00:18:35,840 minimize any of those impacts when you take on a project as significant as 207 00:18:35,840 --> 00:18:40,040 rezoning the entirety of a city and and we recognize that there were some 208 00:18:40,040 --> 00:18:44,160 problems that with this that happened in 2002 and the problems that that that 209 00:18:44,160 --> 00:18:48,400 occurred in 2002 was was probably some of that of being a little bit too 210 00:18:48,400 --> 00:18:52,400 aggressive in rezoning properties and not getting that the necessary feedback 211 00:18:52,400 --> 00:18:59,560 so being cautious being proactive but but still trying to be responsible and 212 00:18:59,560 --> 00:19:05,000 ended the decision-making awesome sorry to stop down there no that's that's 213 00:19:05,000 --> 00:19:10,000 perfect we want to make sure we address all your questions and concerns Cody has 214 00:19:10,000 --> 00:19:14,440 pulled up a map just kind of go back to your original question of those parcels 215 00:19:14,440 --> 00:19:19,440 in red those are red are within the general area that we're talking about 216 00:19:19,440 --> 00:19:26,120 that have split zoning so we have to be able to identify what zoning we assign 217 00:19:26,120 --> 00:19:30,120 that because unless we go in there and split the parcel in which we're not 218 00:19:30,120 --> 00:19:34,640 going to we're gonna work with the property owner we're gonna try to get 219 00:19:34,640 --> 00:19:39,440 those address sooner than later in a sign in a zoning district that again fits 220 00:19:39,440 --> 00:19:44,480 you know within the area but those are the parcels that currently have split 221 00:19:44,480 --> 00:19:55,080 zoning there count on those do we have a number 370 split zoning sorry go to that 222 00:19:55,080 --> 00:20:10,880 Mike doesn't work about 15 or DCN or DCG split so and so going forward the 223 00:20:10,880 --> 00:20:14,100 correction of these is individually bring each of these properties to P&Z 224 00:20:14,100 --> 00:20:19,920 and council for city rezone the the idea is to we can do that or we can try to be 225 00:20:19,920 --> 00:20:25,280 try to get it before the timeline that's that's it depends on how much we can get 226 00:20:25,280 --> 00:20:30,560 through but the intent is to put a zoning map that has a zoning map a 227 00:20:30,560 --> 00:20:35,200 zoning district on them if we are not able to we'll have to follow that up 228 00:20:35,200 --> 00:20:41,360 throughout the period between adoption and effective date is we I don't know 229 00:20:41,360 --> 00:20:48,200 if that was discussed earlier on but we will have an opportunity to have a 230 00:20:48,200 --> 00:20:53,440 transition between adoption date and an effective date so we've got some time to 231 00:20:53,440 --> 00:20:57,880 work with property owners I guess my question is is P&Z about to hear 370 232 00:20:57,880 --> 00:21:06,280 individual items to correct split zoning no I was gonna speak sort of different 233 00:21:06,280 --> 00:21:11,720 because I think even if you look on on this map the largest parcel I believe if 234 00:21:11,720 --> 00:21:22,560 I'm not mistaken is the TWU golf course can we turn that mic on or I'm gonna get 235 00:21:22,560 --> 00:21:37,760 oh you took the cable go for it thank you Scott yeah the reason this one is 236 00:21:37,760 --> 00:21:43,600 highlighted and we turn on our current zoning here is this tiny piece right 237 00:21:43,600 --> 00:21:49,680 here so all that gets highlighted for that Wow so I think these are sort of 238 00:21:49,680 --> 00:21:59,960 when you really look at it there they're very mind they're very small and keep in 239 00:21:59,960 --> 00:22:04,480 keep in mind we're certainly trying to make this as simple as possible and I 240 00:22:04,480 --> 00:22:11,380 assure you we do not intend to bring you 300 plus but we we want to try to fix as 241 00:22:11,380 --> 00:22:15,840 much as we can and making certain that most all the citizens that can be 242 00:22:15,840 --> 00:22:19,640 notified will be notified so some of this may have to come individually but 243 00:22:19,640 --> 00:22:25,120 they may come in blocks so theoretically we could come with with a group of ten 244 00:22:25,120 --> 00:22:28,800 split zonings to say hey we've talked to the neighbors we've got an 245 00:22:28,800 --> 00:22:32,080 understanding here's where it's at people have an opportunity then to come 246 00:22:32,080 --> 00:22:36,520 before the Commission and then ultimately counsel to to make certain 247 00:22:36,520 --> 00:22:41,400 that they're aware of what's happening and just for clarification because that 248 00:22:41,400 --> 00:22:45,200 makes more sense I appreciate that I know if there are small things like this 249 00:22:45,200 --> 00:22:51,080 it seems like we might want to do a more progressive rezone for that that seems 250 00:22:51,080 --> 00:22:54,800 like a not to diminish the property owners but maybe a waste of time to go 251 00:22:54,800 --> 00:22:59,160 through a massive public hearing for that single quarter acre piece of 252 00:22:59,160 --> 00:23:03,680 property but when that comes through with ten I don't know the process of a 253 00:23:03,680 --> 00:23:07,160 city-wide rezone but if you were to bring a block of ten would that be an 254 00:23:07,160 --> 00:23:10,520 item with one public hearing it seemed like you'd have to have a plug here and 255 00:23:10,520 --> 00:23:15,760 for each item for the citizens purposes do you know well there's there's a 256 00:23:15,760 --> 00:23:21,640 couple of pieces to this and and Ron alluded to a portion so if we take if we 257 00:23:21,640 --> 00:23:27,160 take a liberal approach to this so if we take a very conservative means to move 258 00:23:27,160 --> 00:23:33,880 forward and we say here's the draft zoning map minimum impact we have 259 00:23:33,880 --> 00:23:40,040 let's say the effective date of the map versus the adoption date so if we 260 00:23:40,040 --> 00:23:47,080 adopted today for example and then we said six months before it's in effect all 261 00:23:47,080 --> 00:23:50,360 the while we're going to continue to work on it and it wouldn't be that we 262 00:23:50,360 --> 00:23:55,680 couldn't come back to isolate a group of properties and and we're trying to work 263 00:23:55,680 --> 00:23:59,800 through that between legal and process and understand kind of some of the 264 00:23:59,800 --> 00:24:04,400 ramifications as we get into the detail we want to minimize that we don't know 265 00:24:04,400 --> 00:24:08,680 that so again just taking a very conservative approach to making sure 266 00:24:08,680 --> 00:24:13,680 that we're minimizing impact to adjacent property owners okay 267 00:24:13,680 --> 00:24:18,600 Michelle thank you chair just a couple words on this I think this is a missed 268 00:24:18,600 --> 00:24:22,320 opportunity by us to fix split zoning I think split zoning is a terrible idea 269 00:24:22,320 --> 00:24:25,840 and and this was a great opportunity to fix it and I'm sorry that we're not 270 00:24:25,840 --> 00:24:30,120 going forward with fixing it now because I think it'll be more complicated later 271 00:24:30,120 --> 00:24:34,840 we've got plenty of public notification going out we have multiple months 272 00:24:34,840 --> 00:24:39,480 involved here to have this map out and get comments so I'll just go on the 273 00:24:39,480 --> 00:24:44,040 record saying I think it's crazy that we have 300 plus split zoning properties 274 00:24:44,040 --> 00:24:50,720 in the city that we're not fixing and I appreciate that and I'll also say that 275 00:24:50,720 --> 00:24:54,260 we obviously are meeting each Friday with it with the council committee we 276 00:24:54,260 --> 00:24:58,520 continue to meet with the development review committee so not to say that we 277 00:24:58,520 --> 00:25:02,880 can't continue to have that conversation and adoption of the map would be in 278 00:25:02,880 --> 00:25:06,640 conjunction with adoption of the code which is April 22nd so we have an 279 00:25:06,640 --> 00:25:10,800 opportunity to continue to work through this we're soliciting public feedback on 280 00:25:10,800 --> 00:25:17,720 both the zoning map as well as the development code so we welcome that and 281 00:25:17,720 --> 00:25:24,920 I think that you know there's utility in it yeah just to just to chime in a 282 00:25:24,920 --> 00:25:30,060 little bit yes we're actually still in the draft note mode right so I know that 283 00:25:30,060 --> 00:25:36,720 there's a lot of people that I've spoken to in the last couple days that have 284 00:25:36,720 --> 00:25:42,760 provided me their input so we encourage input from the public again Scott 285 00:25:42,760 --> 00:25:47,680 mentioned we we had a meeting on Monday we will have a meeting on Thursday 286 00:25:47,680 --> 00:25:52,000 tomorrow we continue to have office office hours like I said I've been 287 00:25:52,000 --> 00:25:55,680 meeting with individuals myself individually but we have every 288 00:25:55,680 --> 00:26:00,600 opportunity for the public to provide input if they have any to provide us we 289 00:26:00,600 --> 00:26:05,240 collect comic cards and so on and so forth in the month of March we'll 290 00:26:05,240 --> 00:26:10,080 continue to have more public meetings so all of which is available online on what 291 00:26:10,080 --> 00:26:17,440 days and times those are so and I think the city's doing mr. else's point a ton 292 00:26:17,440 --> 00:26:22,440 of work to involve the city but it seems like what I'm understanding is the city 293 00:26:22,440 --> 00:26:26,320 is still not comfortable with the amount of feedback that we potentially could 294 00:26:26,320 --> 00:26:31,300 get from the city city residents so we're doing a lot but in your 295 00:26:31,300 --> 00:26:35,400 estimation it's still not enough to ensure that we have enough public 296 00:26:35,400 --> 00:26:38,520 feedback to go with more progressive rezoning am I understanding that 297 00:26:38,520 --> 00:26:47,340 correctly go ahead I would say that it's most most people may not be aware of 298 00:26:47,340 --> 00:26:52,200 what's occurring and may not be paying attention and so I think that is 299 00:26:52,200 --> 00:26:57,000 somewhat of the concern of the elected leaders of the city to say that that we 300 00:26:57,000 --> 00:27:00,640 want to make sure that we're not unless they specifically know something's 301 00:27:00,640 --> 00:27:07,320 happening adjacent to them okay okay mr. Pernitta and if I could just get an 302 00:27:07,320 --> 00:27:12,120 idea of what the benefit is of going with the split zoning as opposed to you 303 00:27:12,120 --> 00:27:15,640 know taking an individual property and making it some kind of mixed use or 304 00:27:15,640 --> 00:27:20,400 something is there I know I know we're talking about 370 so I don't want to get 305 00:27:20,400 --> 00:27:24,600 too granular into what the idea would be I'm just curious as to why we would 306 00:27:24,600 --> 00:27:30,840 address it this way knowing that we'll have to come back again well that was 307 00:27:30,840 --> 00:27:35,680 um that was our attempt before Friday was to address those splits only knows 308 00:27:35,680 --> 00:27:39,760 that was our next step we were looking specific special study areas and in our 309 00:27:39,760 --> 00:27:45,920 next step would have been to look at the split zoning too I think we've got some 310 00:27:45,920 --> 00:27:51,160 time between now and April 23rd for the map and as Scott mentioned we do have an 311 00:27:51,160 --> 00:27:56,400 opportunity with you know with the community to get input with the DC RC 312 00:27:56,400 --> 00:28:01,600 and with staff we're gonna bring we're gonna bring that up I think that will be 313 00:28:01,600 --> 00:28:07,360 the one of the topics we'll discuss to give a property a zoning because right 314 00:28:07,360 --> 00:28:14,520 now those split zone properties will won't get a mixed use right now it's 315 00:28:14,520 --> 00:28:19,680 still unknown what they would get we are gonna look at the area I think 316 00:28:19,680 --> 00:28:24,080 specifically the area how they were split no one really knows and obviously 317 00:28:24,080 --> 00:28:27,800 that causes some issues when you think about development if you have a parcel 318 00:28:27,800 --> 00:28:31,280 that has split zoning where do you draw the line so we want to make sure we 319 00:28:31,280 --> 00:28:36,680 address those as soon as we can but to your point what why are we I think we 320 00:28:36,680 --> 00:28:44,760 still are I think we still I think we still have an opportunity okay thanks 321 00:28:44,760 --> 00:28:48,800 is there any other question I wanted just like I said we went through in our 322 00:28:48,800 --> 00:28:53,920 last work session in my opinion fairly quickly I want to just introduce the 323 00:28:53,920 --> 00:28:58,000 zoning districts we went through the dimensional standards one of the things 324 00:28:58,000 --> 00:29:03,640 that I wanted to go over if the Commission is willing is this really just 325 00:29:03,640 --> 00:29:10,840 to start with the RR and kind of go over the purpose so if you have your your 326 00:29:10,840 --> 00:29:27,480 draft in front of you if it's if you do it's on page RR starts on page 114 so 327 00:29:27,480 --> 00:29:34,800 our art is the lowest intense zoning district residential rural is what it 328 00:29:34,800 --> 00:29:40,160 stands for instead it is intended to provide and maintain the rural use of an 329 00:29:40,160 --> 00:29:47,720 area and it's meant to look at farming environmental and scenic areas of the 330 00:29:47,720 --> 00:29:53,520 city and you see that our draft zoning map is primarily identifying them along 331 00:29:53,520 --> 00:30:00,720 the periphery of the city north of the loop west of I-35 but mainly and there 332 00:30:00,720 --> 00:30:07,960 are some parts in the city that are currently RR and when a property is 333 00:30:07,960 --> 00:30:12,920 annexed the other application of an RR is when a property is recently annexed 334 00:30:12,920 --> 00:30:18,520 it's not zoned it's just given a designation until it is zoned with a 335 00:30:18,520 --> 00:30:25,040 zoning district so the idea here is to give it the RR as the zoning so it'll 336 00:30:25,040 --> 00:30:30,800 actually have zoning and when that property is developed as we talked about 337 00:30:30,800 --> 00:30:36,600 earlier and there is a need for a zoning change that will be through the dual 338 00:30:36,600 --> 00:30:42,760 public hearing process so this is what again the purpose of the RR it is to 339 00:30:42,760 --> 00:30:50,360 assign areas that are rural in nature along the periphery of the city but also 340 00:30:50,360 --> 00:30:56,600 serves as that initial zoning for a recently annexed area and we have a 341 00:30:56,600 --> 00:31:01,880 number of those that we did back starting in 2010 so does everybody 342 00:31:01,880 --> 00:31:06,960 Commissioner Sanchez why would you make a distinction between the RR and that 343 00:31:06,960 --> 00:31:11,200 you've already given it that actual designation as opposed to a property 344 00:31:11,200 --> 00:31:16,360 that you bring in and you're still waiting for it to have change it's a 345 00:31:16,360 --> 00:31:25,320 designation kind of like you have what is it though the you have the five what 346 00:31:25,320 --> 00:31:31,240 is it already five already five and then you have the already five won't X X X 347 00:31:31,240 --> 00:31:35,040 yeah so you have a kind of a distinction when you get it why don't you do 348 00:31:35,040 --> 00:31:40,520 something like that on that particular it's really it's really just a 349 00:31:40,520 --> 00:31:46,480 nomenclature you know already five and already five X they kind of say have the 350 00:31:46,480 --> 00:31:52,760 same purpose when when a person has an already five or an already five X there 351 00:31:52,760 --> 00:31:57,760 they're they're reviewed against the already five design or dimensional 352 00:31:57,760 --> 00:32:02,600 standards so they're they're they're reviewed against that already five so 353 00:32:02,600 --> 00:32:06,240 what we're saying is we're getting rid of the already five X's mm-hmm and we're 354 00:32:06,240 --> 00:32:10,440 just gonna call it our our okay okay but what I'm saying is if you have if 355 00:32:10,440 --> 00:32:14,120 somebody comes in and say they're looking at a particular area and they 356 00:32:14,120 --> 00:32:17,940 said okay I'm RR right okay they're gonna they're gonna look at that and 357 00:32:17,940 --> 00:32:21,640 say okay this is this is my zoning right now I don't want you to change it as 358 00:32:21,640 --> 00:32:27,680 opposed to if I looked at one I said okay this is our - one I would I would 359 00:32:27,680 --> 00:32:31,680 understand that that was a holding position and that's not necessarily it's 360 00:32:31,680 --> 00:32:35,560 it's designation as opposed to looking at somebody that might be looking from 361 00:32:35,560 --> 00:32:44,640 outside wouldn't know the difference yeah it's it's it's no longer a place 362 00:32:44,640 --> 00:32:48,640 holder anymore it will have its own zoning district and again we're not 363 00:32:48,640 --> 00:32:53,640 going to carry for the RD 5x no no no no I know I understand that okay I guess my 364 00:32:53,640 --> 00:32:57,720 question was I thought you had said that when you bring in a property from you're 365 00:32:57,720 --> 00:33:02,560 gonna give it a kind of a holding position it can be either RR or it can 366 00:33:02,560 --> 00:33:06,760 also be in a holding position and it will also have RR is that what you said 367 00:33:06,760 --> 00:33:12,080 no that's that's what we are trying to get away from when we annex property 368 00:33:12,080 --> 00:33:17,320 back in say 2010 when we first started the citywide annexation we annexed it 369 00:33:17,320 --> 00:33:21,960 but we'd never zoned it so moving forward what we would like to do any 370 00:33:21,960 --> 00:33:27,680 property that is annexed we're gonna zone it immediately after that so assign 371 00:33:27,680 --> 00:33:30,840 it a zoning district obviously the property owner is involved in all this 372 00:33:30,840 --> 00:33:37,200 process so okay so moving forward we will when we annex and that's when and 373 00:33:37,200 --> 00:33:44,000 if we will follow that up with a zoning of that property and at that point we 374 00:33:44,000 --> 00:33:49,160 will either give it an RR an MN or whatever it is that the property owner 375 00:33:49,160 --> 00:33:55,240 and the city and ultimately City Council decides that zoning to be so we're trying 376 00:33:55,240 --> 00:33:59,600 to get away from the RD 5x right right I understood that I would just I was 377 00:33:59,600 --> 00:34:04,320 making just a comparison because when you bring property in it seems like you 378 00:34:04,320 --> 00:34:08,760 may not know what that at that point what you want to do with it I mean some 379 00:34:08,760 --> 00:34:13,740 of the properties that were brought in that I that we that we talked about have 380 00:34:13,740 --> 00:34:17,800 been brought in years ago and then they were sitting there until either 381 00:34:17,800 --> 00:34:21,920 development occurred there or you know as the city expanded then you started 382 00:34:21,920 --> 00:34:26,080 making decisions on what what actually you want to do with it you bring it in 383 00:34:26,080 --> 00:34:31,200 and you know especially it's somewhat rural you're gonna give it that RR 384 00:34:31,200 --> 00:34:34,880 right away five years from now you don't know where the city's going to be at or 385 00:34:34,880 --> 00:34:38,520 what's gonna happen and you're gonna have to go back and rezone that so 386 00:34:38,520 --> 00:34:44,680 there's there's what I'm looking at is it's it's a good idea to have a when you 387 00:34:44,680 --> 00:34:51,680 bring property in and it's especially somewhat rural is to hold it until you 388 00:34:51,680 --> 00:34:57,320 see what developments how development is moving I don't know so the the RD 5x 389 00:34:57,320 --> 00:35:01,200 was truly just a placeholder it was right right element now there now they 390 00:35:01,200 --> 00:35:06,000 have an entitlement of RR so ultimately you're you're there and ready anyone can 391 00:35:06,000 --> 00:35:09,680 come in at any time and ask for a rezoning on those properties they choose 392 00:35:09,680 --> 00:35:14,120 to develop differently this just this is a cleaner simpler way of getting there 393 00:35:14,120 --> 00:35:18,560 and we shouldn't be doing any annexing anymore anyhow so it really it's gonna 394 00:35:18,560 --> 00:35:22,360 be we're gonna get the request for annexation we're not going to be going 395 00:35:22,360 --> 00:35:28,360 out in the annexing property that that's kind of the reality for us 396 00:35:28,360 --> 00:35:34,400 Mr. Burnett and I think what Commissioner such is kind of asking and or maybe not 397 00:35:34,400 --> 00:35:40,040 but my clarification is this so right now already 5x is a placeholder we're 398 00:35:40,040 --> 00:35:45,160 moving all those automatically to to our are do we have anything that is 399 00:35:45,160 --> 00:35:57,680 currently RD 5x that doesn't look like a rural yes yes so then in effect I guess 400 00:35:57,680 --> 00:36:05,240 my question is if we have things in RD 5x that that don't look like an RR is 401 00:36:05,240 --> 00:36:09,040 there a reason we wouldn't be proactively going ahead and zoning those 402 00:36:09,040 --> 00:36:14,840 according to what they would fit with otherwise I think the simple answer 403 00:36:14,840 --> 00:36:23,200 there is that we want to have that go through a public hearing process okay to 404 00:36:23,200 --> 00:36:31,720 zone it whatever that zoning is not through this citywide rezoning that's 405 00:36:31,720 --> 00:36:38,440 the simple answer okay let me marinate on that one just to give sort of an 406 00:36:38,440 --> 00:36:42,600 example of that that you could have an art well we do have some RD 5x that 407 00:36:42,600 --> 00:36:49,080 might be surrounded by low low or higher residential and so that's where we want 408 00:36:49,080 --> 00:36:53,020 to be cautious that we're not all of a sudden changing the zoning on it where 409 00:36:53,020 --> 00:36:57,500 the residents have no idea that all of a sudden it went from a field to 410 00:36:57,500 --> 00:37:06,560 Christian Ellis thank you chair staying on this topic knowing we're making all 411 00:37:06,560 --> 00:37:13,440 RD 5x is now our a lot of them don't make sense tell me this do we have them 412 00:37:13,440 --> 00:37:18,400 that are under five acres yes all right so that really doesn't make sense 413 00:37:18,400 --> 00:37:25,320 because that doesn't even fit into the parameters of an RR so effectively it 414 00:37:25,320 --> 00:37:31,760 just makes no sense it can't be developed I think based on the feedback 415 00:37:31,760 --> 00:37:38,800 that we're hearing we'll continue to explore what what transpired as far as 416 00:37:38,800 --> 00:37:48,360 making certain that we evaluate what went from RD 5x to RR and provide our 417 00:37:48,360 --> 00:37:53,100 recommendation if we see those areas that could make improvements and we'll 418 00:37:53,100 --> 00:37:57,640 bring that forward to the to the review committee so that the development code 419 00:37:57,640 --> 00:38:02,720 review committee for recommendation yeah because I mean it if we're setting 420 00:38:02,720 --> 00:38:09,080 these parameters in the new code and then we're in assigning zoning and they 421 00:38:09,080 --> 00:38:14,000 don't fit into the parameters that were that we've written here I don't disagree 422 00:38:14,000 --> 00:38:18,480 Commissioner Ellis absolutely and and I'll make certain that we do thank you 423 00:38:18,480 --> 00:38:24,240 Mr. Ellis brings an interesting point are there other zoning cases out there in 424 00:38:24,240 --> 00:38:29,280 which we're rezoning to a classification that doesn't meet the standard of that 425 00:38:29,280 --> 00:38:33,840 classification because new code says an RR lot has to be five acres but we're 426 00:38:33,840 --> 00:38:38,720 not abiding by that in some cases it sounds like are there other instances in 427 00:38:38,720 --> 00:38:44,720 which apart from RDX RD 5x or RR that we're moving from a DCG to an MN in 428 00:38:44,720 --> 00:38:50,000 which there we were rezoning standards yeah not necessarily conform to that 429 00:38:50,000 --> 00:38:54,880 zoning yes is that happening elsewhere I would say the short answer is yes and we 430 00:38:54,880 --> 00:38:58,520 haven't really fully analyzed that we did look into the question that 431 00:38:58,520 --> 00:39:02,720 Commissioner Allen's asked and we did find quite a number of parcels that were 432 00:39:02,720 --> 00:39:07,160 less than five acres I believe that we if we looked at the R1 which we can go 433 00:39:07,160 --> 00:39:15,320 next to is minimum lot area is 3,200 and if there are some properties that are 434 00:39:15,320 --> 00:39:23,080 less than that or you know however they they would also be not conforming to the 435 00:39:23,080 --> 00:39:29,080 new R1 and so some of those were trying we were trying to fix but you're right 436 00:39:29,080 --> 00:39:34,000 there will be other examples throughout the rest of the zoning districts that may 437 00:39:34,000 --> 00:39:40,520 may not fit the the lot minimum area okay but the distinction on the single 438 00:39:40,520 --> 00:39:44,040 family is that's where we have that provisioning in chapter or sub chapter 439 00:39:44,040 --> 00:39:50,280 1 where no single families is considered non-conforming as a result of lot size 440 00:39:50,280 --> 00:39:55,240 but it may not it may be different but it's not considered non-conforming we 441 00:39:55,240 --> 00:40:00,240 have that now when it when we initially changed from 2000 for residential yeah 442 00:40:00,240 --> 00:40:03,800 but but yeah for for for those zoning districts that don't need it and they 443 00:40:03,800 --> 00:40:08,640 are unplatted if they do come to plan they don't meet the minimum lot area then 444 00:40:08,640 --> 00:40:14,520 obviously they won't be able to plot so that's that's a good point to make so 445 00:40:14,520 --> 00:40:19,660 those will be those would have to be rezoned in order to plot the way they 446 00:40:19,660 --> 00:40:24,240 want to plot because again they have to meet the minimum lot area given given 447 00:40:24,240 --> 00:40:30,800 estimate the already 5x going to our under 5 acres believe we were looking at 448 00:40:30,800 --> 00:40:37,320 800 parcels maybe I need to clarify because that sounds astonishing there are 449 00:40:37,320 --> 00:40:43,500 800 RD 5x parcels in the city that are less than 5 acres that are less than 5 450 00:40:43,500 --> 00:40:49,640 acres correct that will be going to our are that is the estimate that I was 451 00:40:49,640 --> 00:40:55,280 given this morning okay it seems like we are potentially setting up P&Z and 452 00:40:55,280 --> 00:41:03,160 council to hear over 1,100 cases between split zone in RD 5x alone to try to 453 00:41:03,160 --> 00:41:14,600 write zoning parcels am I my miss into my math here no I think and again I and 454 00:41:14,600 --> 00:41:20,320 I don't I hadn't heard that number I don't know that number and that's why I 455 00:41:20,320 --> 00:41:23,280 say let it let us please do some research try to put something together 456 00:41:23,280 --> 00:41:28,480 we'll bring that back as as you know more information is available or 457 00:41:28,480 --> 00:41:32,200 provided we can give that to the development review committee for at 458 00:41:32,200 --> 00:41:37,600 least input and have that dialogue I think it's fruitful I just don't know 459 00:41:37,600 --> 00:41:41,600 that we continue to explore this because I don't know that we're going to have 460 00:41:41,600 --> 00:41:47,200 any answers are going to provide you valuable feedback I understand if I can 461 00:41:47,200 --> 00:41:51,040 just add those sort of looking forward I really don't think it's going to be an 462 00:41:51,040 --> 00:41:57,240 issue since we can no longer involuntary annex areas just think of the last two 463 00:41:57,240 --> 00:42:04,160 annexation cases that we had stark farms and Lakeview Ranch that right after they 464 00:42:04,160 --> 00:42:08,440 were annexed that very next day they submitted a rezoning application for 465 00:42:08,440 --> 00:42:11,640 their property and so moving forward I don't think that that's really going to 466 00:42:11,640 --> 00:42:15,760 be that much of an issue because why would you want to fall you know you're 467 00:42:15,760 --> 00:42:20,600 not going to voluntarily annex into the city and then do nothing when all of a 468 00:42:20,600 --> 00:42:23,920 sudden you'll have a number of limitations where if you're in the ETJ 469 00:42:23,920 --> 00:42:29,280 the only thing you're coming to the city for is a final plan I I agree with 470 00:42:29,280 --> 00:42:34,720 future annexation properties but as it stands now to Commissioner Pernette's 471 00:42:34,720 --> 00:42:40,360 point I'm not holding on to the numbers but say of the 800 half of them met our 472 00:42:40,360 --> 00:42:46,600 one standards we could proactively get those down instead of our art our one 473 00:42:46,600 --> 00:42:49,900 which would align it with the neighborhoods and things and save the 474 00:42:49,900 --> 00:42:55,040 potential for 400 properties to come to PNZ that's not few I mean I understand 475 00:42:55,040 --> 00:43:01,720 the future I'm saying the current property owners if we can I definitely 476 00:43:01,720 --> 00:43:07,080 appreciate neighbors who live next to a field and it's a certain zoning not being 477 00:43:07,080 --> 00:43:11,440 aware that all of a sudden they have two houses on that acre next to him I 478 00:43:11,440 --> 00:43:16,520 validate that and I think it's it's it's a worthy concern of the city to have but 479 00:43:16,520 --> 00:43:19,080 from what I'm hearing and from what I've been involved with there's a lot of 480 00:43:19,080 --> 00:43:23,960 meetings out there to try to let them know and it saves the city a ton of time 481 00:43:23,960 --> 00:43:33,080 which is money to to look at those as best we can to align them to again kind 482 00:43:33,080 --> 00:43:36,600 of be proactive to Commissioner Pernette's and Commissioner Ellis's 483 00:43:36,600 --> 00:43:42,400 points and I thank you mr. chair and we'll do that I think it's a worthy 484 00:43:42,400 --> 00:43:46,000 conversation yeah I think if we look at this I'd like to drill it down much 485 00:43:46,000 --> 00:43:49,840 further because even if you look at just sort of in that look in the in the 486 00:43:49,840 --> 00:43:55,080 north the northeast up around 428 a lot of those little those little specks 487 00:43:55,080 --> 00:44:00,680 through there I wonder how much of those even though they're even though 488 00:44:00,680 --> 00:44:08,920 they're they're they're less they're less than five acres a lot of times what 489 00:44:08,920 --> 00:44:14,600 you'll see in these areas since they're not platted they carved out these this 490 00:44:14,600 --> 00:44:18,520 was my aunt so I carved this out for her homestead so they may be part of a 491 00:44:18,520 --> 00:44:23,360 larger ownership so while it shows it's only an acre it might be part of a 20 492 00:44:23,360 --> 00:44:27,880 acre tract that's owned under one and so I think once we kind of drill that down 493 00:44:27,880 --> 00:44:31,880 and filter that out I think it's going to be much a much smaller much smaller 494 00:44:31,880 --> 00:44:41,120 number right and just for conversation purposes we do also see single family or 495 00:44:41,120 --> 00:44:44,720 families that want to develop a single-family home and they don't get to 496 00:44:44,720 --> 00:44:50,440 meet those minimum they won't be able to plat and so we've seen those zoning 497 00:44:50,440 --> 00:44:54,200 cases come through the planning zoning Commission Cody do you have a count on 498 00:44:54,200 --> 00:45:01,320 that you just pulled up under five acres okay oh I see it there 499 00:45:05,800 --> 00:45:11,840 okay great thank you Ron so next one is the RR and I think the next few ones are 500 00:45:11,840 --> 00:45:15,860 going to be fairly easy to understand because really they are carryovers from 501 00:45:15,860 --> 00:45:22,000 the existing zoning districts the NR one as you see in your chart will be an R1 502 00:45:22,000 --> 00:45:28,000 and R1 the main function there is a single-family large lot minimum size 503 00:45:28,000 --> 00:45:35,640 thirty-two hundred sorry three two thousand square feet just flipping over to you are - 504 00:45:35,640 --> 00:45:40,720 Chris Charles thank you chair excuse me Ron I just want to make sure everybody 505 00:45:40,720 --> 00:45:44,560 knows that there's a summary table as we're going through these that is just 506 00:45:44,560 --> 00:45:47,440 one of the best things I think in this new code is to look at all of these 507 00:45:47,440 --> 00:45:53,200 these types you know all together in a chart so just as we're going through it I 508 00:45:53,200 --> 00:45:56,560 just want to make sure that you you all know so it's page 128 for this 509 00:45:56,560 --> 00:46:01,440 particular group of zoning just all the residential and they're all in a table 510 00:46:01,440 --> 00:46:05,200 side-by-side it's it's a really nice comparison as we go through these so I 511 00:46:05,200 --> 00:46:10,880 just want to know that's great thank you and additionally it's obviously the 512 00:46:10,880 --> 00:46:14,560 graphics on each page and I think it's important to point out and that's why 513 00:46:14,560 --> 00:46:19,480 we're excited about the draft code that we have the graphics that clearly 514 00:46:19,480 --> 00:46:24,400 articulate what those setbacks are on each of those zoning districts and then 515 00:46:24,400 --> 00:46:27,440 to get into the table to be able to see it very concisely so if you're 516 00:46:27,440 --> 00:46:32,680 considering something you have that ability in fact the the table is keyed 517 00:46:32,680 --> 00:46:37,960 by letters which reflect back to the graphic which has the letters assigned 518 00:46:37,960 --> 00:46:45,560 to it as well so very good point commissioner Alice are two is primarily 519 00:46:45,560 --> 00:46:51,240 single-family again neighborhood minimum lot size 16,000 and again now I went 520 00:46:51,240 --> 00:46:57,520 through this the are three the same a single family a little bit more denser 521 00:46:57,520 --> 00:47:03,240 because there are smaller lots minimum lot area there is ten thousand square 522 00:47:03,240 --> 00:47:09,800 feet and you can see from the graphic that the lots themselves get smaller the 523 00:47:09,800 --> 00:47:15,440 are four is your NR four which is again you're looking now at an array of 524 00:47:15,440 --> 00:47:21,560 different housing types on the are four zoning districts it is to encourage more 525 00:47:21,560 --> 00:47:27,100 walking neighborhood servicing retail amenities nearby again a character of 526 00:47:27,100 --> 00:47:34,240 your established single family that we see here in and then existing the are 527 00:47:34,240 --> 00:47:40,760 six a little bit more denser minimum lot size is 6,000 you see a lot of the 528 00:47:40,760 --> 00:47:46,280 zoning that we see recently proposed to be around in our six zoning districts so 529 00:47:46,280 --> 00:47:52,680 this would follow in those examples are the are six is again to accommodate a 530 00:47:52,680 --> 00:47:58,000 variety of housing types designed for walking and to neighborhood servicing 531 00:47:58,000 --> 00:48:03,960 retail and other amenities again to resemble the established neighborhoods 532 00:48:03,960 --> 00:48:09,760 that we may have seen early in the century when when those homes were a 533 00:48:09,760 --> 00:48:15,600 lot smaller okay so now are seven that's that's one of the big significant 534 00:48:15,600 --> 00:48:19,560 changes does anybody have any questions I want to pause there on the are one 535 00:48:19,560 --> 00:48:27,920 through our six before okay so the are six I'm sorry the are seven is a new 536 00:48:27,920 --> 00:48:34,680 zoning district and what that zoning district compiled into the are seven is 537 00:48:34,680 --> 00:48:41,680 the dr1 dr2 our CR 1 our CR 2 and there's a there's one mf1 there that was 538 00:48:41,680 --> 00:48:45,600 a carryover that was not addressed but essentially is those four zoning 539 00:48:45,600 --> 00:48:51,420 districts and I know that we've gone through this with the DC RC explained to 540 00:48:51,420 --> 00:48:55,840 them why we're doing this essentially the dr1 and dr2 they're not that much 541 00:48:55,840 --> 00:49:01,360 different there may be a difference in density from 8 to 15 I believe the are 542 00:49:01,360 --> 00:49:09,000 CR 1 are CR 2 a little bit more intense but all in all they fit within the 543 00:49:09,000 --> 00:49:13,200 definition or the purpose of an are seven and that is it's intended to 544 00:49:13,200 --> 00:49:19,000 accommodate a variety of housing types so you're starting to see duplexes town 545 00:49:19,000 --> 00:49:24,040 homes a little bit more different types of homes permitted in the are seven I 546 00:49:24,040 --> 00:49:29,520 believe multifamily is permitted in the are seven with a specific use permit so 547 00:49:29,520 --> 00:49:36,760 it's kind of like the bridge between the NRM you to the MN you know to to what we 548 00:49:36,760 --> 00:49:43,440 currently have we call you know the NRM you and the are six area so are seven is 549 00:49:43,440 --> 00:49:51,200 that bridge between residential and the mixed-use districts Ron of the five 550 00:49:51,200 --> 00:49:54,920 current zoning districts being consolidated which is the least 551 00:49:54,920 --> 00:50:00,880 intensive use the are one the are one I'm sorry are one is that what you're 552 00:50:00,880 --> 00:50:05,720 referring to no no the dr1 dr2 those five oh I see I see that are moving are 553 00:50:05,720 --> 00:50:13,160 seven which is the least intensive use dr1 dr1 and what's the the change and 554 00:50:13,160 --> 00:50:20,180 use broadly speaking between a dr1 and are seven how much more liberal are we 555 00:50:20,180 --> 00:50:27,360 getting in their ability to use that land from a dr1 to an are seven question 556 00:50:27,360 --> 00:50:32,520 I don't have that in front of me we do have a chart that I felt to bring with me 557 00:50:32,520 --> 00:50:36,720 and we will make sure to provide that at our next work session okay well I can go 558 00:50:36,720 --> 00:50:41,000 back and look at the code I was curious on the consolidation of five areas how 559 00:50:41,000 --> 00:50:45,840 much I don't use the word up zoning yeah yeah but how much of that's happening 560 00:50:45,840 --> 00:50:53,280 when we had this presentation to D to the DC RC we did prepare a presentation 561 00:50:53,280 --> 00:50:58,840 and I felt to put that to me I'll make sure that chart that does look at those 562 00:50:58,840 --> 00:51:04,320 differences in lane uses between the dr1 our CR 1 and our CR 2 are provided to 563 00:51:04,320 --> 00:51:10,040 the Commission prior to our next meeting great thank you Ron it might just be 564 00:51:10,040 --> 00:51:20,800 multi right I think dr1 does not allow multi-family RCR does but by SUP but I 565 00:51:20,800 --> 00:51:25,560 think heights are about relatively the same but we can yeah I'm just thinking 566 00:51:25,560 --> 00:51:30,440 about I think it's really the only yeah that'd be interesting to know because I 567 00:51:30,440 --> 00:51:34,080 know we've brought the specific example about their neighbors all of a sudden 568 00:51:34,080 --> 00:51:36,680 having apartments next to them right which it seems like if someone's a 569 00:51:36,680 --> 00:51:41,880 neighbor to a dr1 this rezone without neighbors knowing can automatically have 570 00:51:41,880 --> 00:51:45,480 an apartment next to him so the the actual example given about the fear of 571 00:51:45,480 --> 00:51:50,560 neighbors having an apartment next to them would legitimately exist in this 572 00:51:50,560 --> 00:51:54,680 consolidation of zoning and then right and then the DC RC did express that 573 00:51:54,680 --> 00:51:59,720 when we did bring this forward to them earlier in the process but again we were 574 00:51:59,720 --> 00:52:05,080 trying to consolidate this may be one of those where we we we looked at and we 575 00:52:05,080 --> 00:52:11,280 we were able to receive input that we can move forward the R7 and again that 576 00:52:11,280 --> 00:52:15,640 chart I think would be helpful and again I feel to provide that to the 577 00:52:15,640 --> 00:52:18,880 Commission and we'll make sure to bring that again at our next work session 578 00:52:18,880 --> 00:52:26,800 thanks Ron okay so our seven and as Commissioner Alice mentioned on page 579 00:52:26,800 --> 00:52:33,040 128 is a summary of all of the residential zoning districts that have 580 00:52:33,040 --> 00:52:41,920 their dimensional standards and you can see from the lot area it's going from 581 00:52:41,920 --> 00:52:47,160 the minimum lot area five acres down to 4,000 square feet and I think it's 582 00:52:47,160 --> 00:52:53,360 important to note that what you don't see in this chart is a density 583 00:52:53,360 --> 00:53:00,440 requirement maximum density requirement that is the idea here is that we will 584 00:53:00,440 --> 00:53:07,600 use the dimensional standards the minimum lot area the minimum lot width 585 00:53:07,600 --> 00:53:15,120 and depth and setbacks to manage density I think that's an important significant 586 00:53:15,120 --> 00:53:25,400 change from what we currently have today in our current code okay moving on to 587 00:53:25,400 --> 00:53:33,560 mix-use zoning districts there are three zoning districts the MN the MD and the 588 00:53:33,560 --> 00:53:42,160 MR and you can see under the chart that you have in front of you the DCN I'm 589 00:53:42,160 --> 00:53:48,520 sorry let me start with the NRMU 12 and the NRMU we are looking to transition 590 00:53:48,520 --> 00:53:57,480 those into MN and I don't know if Cody has those up on the screen these are all 591 00:53:57,480 --> 00:54:05,000 of the proposed MN zoning districts that would be converted as part of the draft 592 00:54:05,000 --> 00:54:10,180 zoning map so you see there's a there's a number of them within the core of the 593 00:54:10,180 --> 00:54:16,880 year within the city the purpose of a MN district is really to provide 594 00:54:16,880 --> 00:54:23,840 compatibility of a higher intensity mix-use area where adjacent residential 595 00:54:23,840 --> 00:54:30,920 and commercial areas are compatible as much as possible the districts that this 596 00:54:30,920 --> 00:54:35,720 district that however is a vibrant environment for both pedestrians 597 00:54:35,720 --> 00:54:41,880 bicyclists and other residential neighborhood servicing uses as explained 598 00:54:41,880 --> 00:54:49,080 in the purpose statement the MD and this is what we were talking about earlier 599 00:54:49,080 --> 00:54:56,160 this is primarily mixed use downtown core the MD district is provided to allow 600 00:54:56,160 --> 00:55:02,560 for a variety of uses contributing to the economic viability of downtown Den 601 00:55:02,560 --> 00:55:08,040 and that is I think a key there the purpose is primarily for the downtown 602 00:55:08,040 --> 00:55:13,760 it's not to extend along the highway it's not to extend into neighborhood 603 00:55:13,760 --> 00:55:20,280 areas but primarily downtown and as we get into chapter 6 or sub chapter 6 as 604 00:55:20,280 --> 00:55:29,160 Richard mentioned there are provisions that are waived or given exceptions to 605 00:55:29,160 --> 00:55:35,280 if you were that you you are within the MD zoning district so we wanted to make 606 00:55:35,280 --> 00:55:41,480 sure that those that are converted to MD are truly within the downtown area and 607 00:55:41,480 --> 00:55:47,000 that's how we got to where we are with the draft map in making sure that that 608 00:55:47,000 --> 00:55:54,560 doesn't affect those other areas and DCG we had a case at P&Z last 609 00:55:54,560 --> 00:55:59,840 Wednesday of a subject property wanting to go from MRMU 12 to an MRMU and the 610 00:55:59,840 --> 00:56:05,480 city denied that the recommendation because it was a too quick of an 611 00:56:05,480 --> 00:56:13,400 aggressive transition but it seems like now the city is saying MRMU 12 and 612 00:56:13,400 --> 00:56:19,040 MRMU basically the same can you help me as a commissioner over the next between 613 00:56:19,040 --> 00:56:23,960 adoption and effective date understand that current city staff believes there 614 00:56:23,960 --> 00:56:28,160 is a distinct difference between MRMU 12 and MRMU to the point where they're not 615 00:56:28,160 --> 00:56:32,320 going to recommend cases to the point where after the effective date we see 616 00:56:32,320 --> 00:56:36,440 them as the same how how are we guided as commissioners to kind of walk through 617 00:56:36,440 --> 00:56:43,120 what looks to be diametrically opposed positions on those two subjects sure I 618 00:56:43,120 --> 00:56:50,440 think I know you're referring to it if I'm mistaken on the case of Audra Audra 619 00:56:50,440 --> 00:56:59,680 and no right west of Luke 28 oh I see I see your sign Audra and maybe we can pull 620 00:56:59,680 --> 00:57:07,120 that up Audra and McKinney I think was McKinney knows north news north of that 621 00:57:07,120 --> 00:57:11,640 near Audra and Luke 28 yeah they own the retirement facility that's gonna be on 622 00:57:11,640 --> 00:57:15,600 the loop I'm just just to recall I believe that the reason why we were 623 00:57:15,600 --> 00:57:19,400 recommending that was really the purpose of what they were trying to do was just 624 00:57:19,400 --> 00:57:24,080 lot coverage I think and so we have to look at not just the density because 625 00:57:24,080 --> 00:57:27,800 that's what we currently have it's also what are they were they're trying to do 626 00:57:27,800 --> 00:57:32,400 what was really the purpose of their rezoning request and Richard I don't know 627 00:57:32,400 --> 00:57:38,280 if you know that that was correct I mean that that's one they were still below 628 00:57:38,280 --> 00:57:42,240 the density but it really had to do with just the amount of you were you were 629 00:57:42,240 --> 00:57:50,760 essentially going from a 40 percent pervious area to 20 percent so to answer 630 00:57:50,760 --> 00:57:57,240 your question commit chair Roselle now we have the ability with that with the 631 00:57:57,240 --> 00:58:02,360 design standards development standards there are options where you know they 632 00:58:02,360 --> 00:58:06,800 can take advantage of certain flexibility so maybe that rezoning would 633 00:58:06,800 --> 00:58:11,360 not even mean not even be brought forward to the Commission because there 634 00:58:11,360 --> 00:58:17,360 are options and built-in flexibility to adjust in those certain situations it 635 00:58:17,360 --> 00:58:21,320 may not be true for everyone but there there are the ones that that could 636 00:58:21,320 --> 00:58:25,000 manage through through those processes and Cody just brought it up that's the 637 00:58:25,000 --> 00:58:32,720 exact one I'm talking about thank you I guess my question is MRM you 12 MRM you 638 00:58:32,720 --> 00:58:38,880 they're gonna be consolidated so when we look at a case of in the next six to 639 00:58:38,880 --> 00:58:41,760 eight months when we look at a case from someone saying they want to go from 640 00:58:41,760 --> 00:58:47,000 MRM unit to MRU 12 what basis do we have from a city to deny that request if 641 00:58:47,000 --> 00:58:53,120 they're going to be aligned imminently but because that was we the city denied 642 00:58:53,120 --> 00:58:56,520 that rezoning case but it seems inevitable that they're gonna be merged 643 00:58:56,520 --> 00:59:00,280 anyways does that make sense my it does it does and I just want to stress that 644 00:59:00,280 --> 00:59:06,280 we may be merging the districts and but remember we're also amending other parts 645 00:59:06,280 --> 00:59:10,720 of the code that affect that district in the sense of like say density we don't 646 00:59:10,720 --> 00:59:14,280 have density so now they're gonna go primarily on the parking requirement the 647 00:59:14,280 --> 00:59:19,040 landscape area the lot coverage so we're pairing those down so it may not be all 648 00:59:19,040 --> 00:59:25,120 NRM you as it is it may it may seem to like that but really we're pairing that 649 00:59:25,120 --> 00:59:31,120 down and lessening the develop ability or you know intensity by doing that so 650 00:59:31,120 --> 00:59:37,040 but you're right there will be certain areas or certain zoning that will expand 651 00:59:37,040 --> 00:59:42,720 their intensity but remember we're also amending other parts of the code that 652 00:59:42,720 --> 00:59:46,280 would hopefully bring that back and so the other option I was telling you are 653 00:59:46,280 --> 00:59:51,200 trying to explain for example the PD is another option if they chose to not do 654 00:59:51,200 --> 00:59:55,680 that we will be referring them to a PD and that's that's another option that 655 00:59:55,680 --> 01:00:02,220 they can have if again it was a lot coverage issue not necessarily a use 656 01:00:02,220 --> 01:00:07,400 issue after adoption though they would have the potential option to go with the 657 01:00:07,400 --> 01:00:13,120 new zoning districts anyways is that is that true so the the concept is what 658 01:00:13,120 --> 01:00:19,480 we're hoping to propose and that will be passed is that we would have an 659 01:00:19,480 --> 01:00:23,640 adoption date give the opportunity for the code to be out there for for six 660 01:00:23,640 --> 01:00:28,680 months a person would be able to select either code not mix and match like either 661 01:00:28,680 --> 01:00:32,000 code sure all the while we're going to be continuing to look at if there's 662 01:00:32,000 --> 01:00:37,140 anything that we need to modify a third component which I don't believe I 663 01:00:37,140 --> 01:00:42,320 mentioned is that truly I think that we'd like to look at this at a year 664 01:00:42,320 --> 01:00:46,640 really open it back up and say okay rather than making minor changes along 665 01:00:46,640 --> 01:00:49,680 the way is that we just look at it holistically and say how is this working 666 01:00:49,680 --> 01:00:59,680 thank you thank you and I think I just wanted to add to that too there's 667 01:00:59,680 --> 01:01:03,600 certain standards for different types of businesses too that we were building to 668 01:01:03,600 --> 01:01:07,600 this code too so that's going to play a role I think in development of lots as 669 01:01:07,600 --> 01:01:13,560 well even even though it's gonna maybe have the same zoning district and I 670 01:01:13,560 --> 01:01:19,380 might also say and Richard may wish to speak to this that I think staff is 671 01:01:19,380 --> 01:01:24,320 being diligent and not only looking at the draft code but as we're evaluating 672 01:01:24,320 --> 01:01:29,040 cases for approval or denial is really kind of the philosophy of where we're 673 01:01:29,040 --> 01:01:32,760 going and okay and does it does it meet the intent and I don't know if you want 674 01:01:32,760 --> 01:01:37,360 to speak to that or yeah you know this one was really challenging and part of 675 01:01:37,360 --> 01:01:41,520 it is again it's going back to where we're attached single families permitted 676 01:01:41,520 --> 01:01:45,300 and and that's really been you know part of the issue we've had with with the 677 01:01:45,300 --> 01:01:51,000 current code because it just doesn't it really doesn't fit it's you know that 678 01:01:51,000 --> 01:01:54,800 that's where you the one size fits all really affects the most and so that's 679 01:01:54,800 --> 01:01:59,040 where we're trying to just pull that pull that out and it probably would be 680 01:01:59,040 --> 01:02:02,880 more appropriate I don't know if it would be an r7 or something along those 681 01:02:02,880 --> 01:02:09,640 lines even as opposed to the I got you and just again as we're discussing this 682 01:02:09,640 --> 01:02:14,280 there are other cases that we've seen recently as well you know where we were 683 01:02:14,280 --> 01:02:18,240 looking at this you know as we move forward and then when we're talking to 684 01:02:18,240 --> 01:02:23,800 the applicants you know we are advising them that this is a proposed but you 685 01:02:23,800 --> 01:02:28,240 should consider you know either hold off or pursue this and if you do pursue this 686 01:02:28,240 --> 01:02:33,360 this is what you potentially will be zoned as or in the future and also it 687 01:02:33,360 --> 01:02:37,960 helps it has helped us in our analysis when we are making recommendation 688 01:02:37,960 --> 01:02:43,280 because you know we are looking at this somewhat you know in our analysis to 689 01:02:43,280 --> 01:02:49,560 make sure that when we get to the approval we're not going to flip it back 690 01:02:49,560 --> 01:02:54,520 to whatever this transitional zoning is and get it closer to what it should be 691 01:02:54,520 --> 01:02:57,920 yeah that makes sense I mean it at the time on Wednesday was helpful for 692 01:02:57,920 --> 01:03:00,760 Claire's kitchen because it looked like some of that was gonna go empty now that 693 01:03:00,760 --> 01:03:04,840 was a map that got pulled I don't know if that looks the same as it does now 694 01:03:04,840 --> 01:03:08,600 but to your point it does help inform kind of the direction of the city 695 01:03:08,600 --> 01:03:14,120 although pending and it did change it did it provided hopefully some context 696 01:03:14,120 --> 01:03:24,520 of future thoughts right okay so moving on to MR which is the mixed-use regional 697 01:03:24,520 --> 01:03:32,160 this is your golden triangle mall area your razor ranch to a certain degree 698 01:03:32,160 --> 01:03:39,320 regional you know where you are looking at a more of an urban regional draw 699 01:03:39,320 --> 01:03:45,320 development may include national retailers employments and restaurants so 700 01:03:45,320 --> 01:03:54,480 that is why we chose our CCN and our CCD as the MR transition and however there 701 01:03:54,480 --> 01:03:58,280 are other areas in the city that currently have an RCC and in our CCD 702 01:03:58,280 --> 01:04:05,360 specifically to the north of the loop in that area I think back in 2002 there was 703 01:04:05,360 --> 01:04:12,200 a idea that that would be a third or maybe a fourth regional center we 704 01:04:12,200 --> 01:04:17,240 haven't seen that of course the loop is not complete and it could be completed 705 01:04:17,240 --> 01:04:22,160 in the next 15 years and if it does the possibility for a regional draw could be 706 01:04:22,160 --> 01:04:28,720 there so we're going to carry forward those areas as MR and again the MR is a 707 01:04:28,720 --> 01:04:36,680 mixed-use regional zoning district okay there are no any questions on the mixed 708 01:04:36,680 --> 01:04:40,680 use we'll go into the non-residential I'm sorry the quarter I skipped quarter 709 01:04:40,680 --> 01:04:49,320 quarter districts now these this is partly from the den plan 2030 as you 710 01:04:49,320 --> 01:04:53,920 all know there is a preferred growth concept map that we used when we 711 01:04:53,920 --> 01:04:58,400 analyzed looking at a preferred growth concept one of it was a corridor 712 01:04:58,400 --> 01:05:03,760 concept that being said we have a number of corridors throughout the city 713 01:05:03,760 --> 01:05:12,480 specifically the suburban quarter I the loop University Drive Teasley Fort Worth 714 01:05:12,480 --> 01:05:18,640 those are your major corridors so the attempt here is to try to zone those 715 01:05:18,640 --> 01:05:25,640 appropriately but again looking at our existing zoning map we have CMG 716 01:05:25,640 --> 01:05:30,520 community mixed-use general and community mixed-use employment if you 717 01:05:30,520 --> 01:05:34,640 know what with that those zoning districts are and those are primarily 718 01:05:34,640 --> 01:05:41,600 commercial if you read the purpose for SC it's intended to provide moderate to 719 01:05:41,600 --> 01:05:48,040 high commercial uses office and retail along high traffic corridors and again 720 01:05:48,040 --> 01:05:54,560 those scores I listed are just examples University Drive has a number of CMG CME 721 01:05:54,560 --> 01:06:00,920 you see primarily along the Fort Worth area Fort Worth Drive area Teasley has a 722 01:06:00,920 --> 01:06:07,160 lot of CMG as well and this SC district provides elevated building and 723 01:06:07,160 --> 01:06:11,120 landscape design obviously these are where visitors are driving through and 724 01:06:11,120 --> 01:06:16,120 we want to make sure that those areas are well designed primarily it's a 725 01:06:16,120 --> 01:06:21,760 auto-oriented zoning district that accommodates the commercial uses and 726 01:06:21,760 --> 01:06:28,720 looks to provide pedestrians and other mobile mobility that is the cyclist as 727 01:06:28,720 --> 01:06:35,440 well for those areas the other corridor district is the highway corridor this is 728 01:06:35,440 --> 01:06:44,840 intended to be your I-35 zoning areas we we have identified a number of them Cody 729 01:06:44,840 --> 01:06:49,200 has it up I appreciate Cody sharing those with the Commission gives you a 730 01:06:49,200 --> 01:06:54,800 little bit more context as to where they are in the areas that are currently 731 01:06:54,800 --> 01:07:01,040 zoned CMG and CME that are along the highway along I-35 we've given it the 732 01:07:01,040 --> 01:07:08,520 HC and and in some cases where there are zoning districts such as the DCG which 733 01:07:08,520 --> 01:07:14,680 is not really intended for the highway we've also given that an HC again we 734 01:07:14,680 --> 01:07:19,520 wanted to make sure that the MD which would have gotten it specifically be 735 01:07:19,520 --> 01:07:26,440 only in downtown well along the highway we give it an HC Cody can you turn on SC 736 01:07:26,440 --> 01:07:32,280 and change a different color both of them I just wanted to see one thing that 737 01:07:32,280 --> 01:07:43,240 I thought my eyes saw but yeah so why is there any blue on I-35 here why is there 738 01:07:43,240 --> 01:07:50,520 wouldn't that go to highway corridor if that's the same if CMG and CME are both 739 01:07:50,520 --> 01:07:55,120 being moved over to suburban core and highway corridor I'm wondering why I'm 740 01:07:55,120 --> 01:07:59,720 not seeing red on both sides of the highway that's full worth drive is one 741 01:07:59,720 --> 01:08:06,120 area so that's why we kept it on the south side by 35 I'm not sure what that 742 01:08:06,120 --> 01:08:11,080 is on the other because if I haven't seen the comparison but I think this is 743 01:08:11,080 --> 01:08:14,440 one of the changes that was made from Friday to Monday's map right and I'm 744 01:08:14,440 --> 01:08:17,680 wondering if this is just an alignment of uses where the city didn't feel 745 01:08:17,680 --> 01:08:24,960 comfortable and proactively rezoning or no we we we converted the where we felt 746 01:08:24,960 --> 01:08:31,200 the corridor which is not the highway it's forward drive we kept it SC but I 747 01:08:31,200 --> 01:08:33,880 see what you're talking about I see forward drive but west of Fort Worth 748 01:08:33,880 --> 01:08:40,600 Drive east of Fort Worth Drive I mean I get the forward drive and yeah I'm trying 749 01:08:40,600 --> 01:08:54,840 to recall why there's like there's a hospital there's an outback there we 750 01:08:54,840 --> 01:08:57,720 can yeah we can certainly look at that and going back to what we talked about 751 01:08:57,720 --> 01:09:03,200 earlier anything that is CMG and CME along the highway we should have as HC 752 01:09:03,200 --> 01:09:06,520 yeah and I think this goes back to maybe a point I've brought up or I've 753 01:09:06,520 --> 01:09:10,960 certainly talked to city staff about it is part of my hope in this zoning map 754 01:09:10,960 --> 01:09:15,040 was to provide clarity of the city like when you look at our current zoning map 755 01:09:15,040 --> 01:09:20,400 there's 26 different colors just looking crazy and then we have this opportunity 756 01:09:20,400 --> 01:09:24,920 to make this really nice good-looking thoughtful zoning map and right off the 757 01:09:24,920 --> 01:09:28,240 top we have suburban quarter on a highway when we actually have a zone 758 01:09:28,240 --> 01:09:34,160 named highway corridor and so this might echo Commissioner Ellis's point earlier 759 01:09:34,160 --> 01:09:39,720 about missed opportunities this is not a question but more just maybe a statement 760 01:09:39,720 --> 01:09:48,280 on record that this is I don't think fully taking advantage of the opportunity 761 01:09:48,280 --> 01:09:54,080 to make a zoning map presented to developers and cities that is a massive 762 01:09:54,080 --> 01:09:59,520 step in the right direction in terms of the opportunity we have no I appreciate 763 01:09:59,520 --> 01:10:02,560 that comment I think and I'm not gonna make excuses I just know that we are 764 01:10:02,560 --> 01:10:08,740 working to get it converted to the transition zoning and so we may have just 765 01:10:08,740 --> 01:10:14,040 overlooked those those areas that you see there that's shown in blue yeah I 766 01:10:14,040 --> 01:10:19,480 think that's an honest response my initial gut reaction to the word 767 01:10:19,480 --> 01:10:24,720 overlook makes me think a lot more meetings because what else to be not 768 01:10:24,720 --> 01:10:29,200 lower look and I don't want to be on a tangent here but how many of the 370 769 01:10:29,200 --> 01:10:33,000 split zonings do we need to look at individually from either a subcommittee 770 01:10:33,000 --> 01:10:39,520 council staff perspective how many of the 867 already five X's that are less 771 01:10:39,520 --> 01:10:44,680 than five acres need to be looked at how many of these opportunities need to be 772 01:10:44,680 --> 01:10:52,000 looked at that word overlook I think is honest and I think probably accurate but 773 01:10:52,000 --> 01:10:59,320 to me it's it's a this truck just got stuck in the mud type language and I 774 01:10:59,320 --> 01:11:10,780 felt like we were on a faster track than that okay so any other questions on the 775 01:11:10,780 --> 01:11:19,120 corridor districts we can move on to the non-residential so now the first 776 01:11:19,120 --> 01:11:24,240 non-residential zone district is your geo general office and those are intended 777 01:11:24,240 --> 01:11:31,180 to be as you can see it from the exhibit more of office employment research 778 01:11:31,180 --> 01:11:37,600 development type related uses as well as some supporting uses provides the 779 01:11:37,600 --> 01:11:41,560 flexibility for office space and encourages the establishment of 780 01:11:41,560 --> 01:11:45,800 research and development enterprises startups and opportunities for business 781 01:11:45,800 --> 01:11:51,920 innovation and I want to just express that the then plan 2030 talks a lot 782 01:11:51,920 --> 01:11:55,720 about business innovation and this was the zoning district that would be used 783 01:11:55,720 --> 01:12:03,580 to encourage or implement that designation of business innovation you 784 01:12:03,580 --> 01:12:11,800 see them there now those are the Geo's using the conversion chart your Geo is 785 01:12:11,800 --> 01:12:22,880 essentially your ECC employment center commercial so those are our Geo the next 786 01:12:22,880 --> 01:12:27,760 one is light industrial and it speaks for itself that is intended for 787 01:12:27,760 --> 01:12:32,840 industrial employment uses such as light manufacturing assembly fabrication 788 01:12:32,840 --> 01:12:38,440 warehousing and distribution includes indoor and outdoor storage and a wide 789 01:12:38,440 --> 01:12:46,120 range of commercial use activities intended to be more in light as far as 790 01:12:46,120 --> 01:12:52,080 intensity that allows for transit bicycle and pedestrian uses as well while 791 01:12:52,080 --> 01:12:57,040 there are other zoning district following this is the heavy industrial 792 01:12:57,040 --> 01:13:05,440 and this is primarily around the airport the more intense industrial uses it is 793 01:13:05,440 --> 01:13:11,000 intended to provide suitable locations for development for outdoor recreation 794 01:13:11,000 --> 01:13:16,420 distribution and manufacturing uses again this is the highest intense zoning 795 01:13:16,420 --> 01:13:24,440 district that we have because it allows for a number of high heavy industrial 796 01:13:24,440 --> 01:13:33,940 type uses again right close to I-35W and your then Enterprise Airport and the 797 01:13:33,940 --> 01:13:44,000 area that you see down there is the Acme we're getting to the last one and 798 01:13:44,000 --> 01:13:49,760 that is the PF this is a new zoning district and I mentioned this earlier in 799 01:13:49,760 --> 01:13:55,640 the presentation that this will cover the public and quasi public community 800 01:13:55,640 --> 01:14:03,480 uses it includes your parks your your regional parks your civic buildings your 801 01:14:03,480 --> 01:14:11,260 institutional schools and the like now we do have a number of smaller parcels 802 01:14:11,260 --> 01:14:18,300 that are governmental we did not give it a PF we felt that those would be already 803 01:14:18,300 --> 01:14:21,840 permitted in those existing zoning districts so we left it as is but we did 804 01:14:21,840 --> 01:14:28,300 identify the larger groupings and larger parcels and gave those a PF so the 805 01:14:28,300 --> 01:14:35,800 airport the the landfill the universities the Discovery Park to north 806 01:14:35,800 --> 01:14:39,840 some water treatment plants that are fairly large and so we made sure that 807 01:14:39,840 --> 01:14:45,800 those were given the PF zoning district where the small ones left off because of 808 01:14:45,800 --> 01:14:49,680 liquidity issues too in terms of city wanted to sell the property no it was 809 01:14:49,680 --> 01:14:54,200 just more if we if we kept it it would have been all these blue dots because we 810 01:14:54,200 --> 01:15:01,840 have so many you know so we just we made sure we've spoke to DISD or I'm sorry 811 01:15:01,840 --> 01:15:13,040 that yeah DISD the DCTA UNT and TW and other the county and if their property 812 01:15:13,040 --> 01:15:19,400 was in use already and or have future uses we we shared with them the zoning 813 01:15:19,400 --> 01:15:23,280 district and so we didn't feel that they needed to be a PF in those instances but 814 01:15:23,280 --> 01:15:26,760 not necessarily because we didn't want to see a bunch of blue dots throughout 815 01:15:26,760 --> 01:15:31,720 this throughout the map that's probably the simple answer and since they're not 816 01:15:31,720 --> 01:15:35,360 being rezoned PF they would have to align with dimensional standards design 817 01:15:35,360 --> 01:15:39,120 of right and in most of them are already developing we that's one reason we 818 01:15:39,120 --> 01:15:45,680 left it as is great and that's that's a new zoning district and that captures 819 01:15:45,680 --> 01:15:52,440 all of what we have and again on page 150 is the summary of all those zoning 820 01:15:52,440 --> 01:16:00,840 districts that you can see there. The next if there are no other questions on 821 01:16:00,840 --> 01:16:06,000 the zoning districts we can move into the latter part of subchapter 3 and that 822 01:16:06,000 --> 01:16:12,920 is again I don't know if we want to go through the table but you can see that 823 01:16:12,920 --> 01:16:18,240 the they have lot area of dimensional standards minimum the setbacks in the 824 01:16:18,240 --> 01:16:23,760 building heights. There's a there's a couple hundred feet tall buildings that 825 01:16:23,760 --> 01:16:28,160 could potentially begin that's the maximum height for those areas and these 826 01:16:28,160 --> 01:16:34,080 are intended to be on purpose to be able to accommodate large tall buildings 827 01:16:34,080 --> 01:16:41,520 such as in the geo or the HC and then PF if there are any governmental buildings 828 01:16:41,520 --> 01:16:48,040 or institutional buildings that exceed that want to get up to 100 feet. So the 829 01:16:48,040 --> 01:16:52,840 other important piece to this is really your your measurements and exceptions 830 01:16:52,840 --> 01:16:57,200 that I'm not going to go through you can read here but they're essentially given 831 01:16:57,200 --> 01:17:02,600 giving you what we already have in regards to how we measure things and 832 01:17:02,600 --> 01:17:09,240 what's neat is that there are exhibits that are provided to help explain some 833 01:17:09,240 --> 01:17:16,160 of those measurement standards. If there are no other questions on the zoning 834 01:17:16,160 --> 01:17:22,360 districts I'd like to introduce the chapter subchapter 5 which is our use 835 01:17:22,360 --> 01:17:26,200 regulations. I'm going to skip four we'll come back to that they'll be in a later 836 01:17:26,200 --> 01:17:31,580 work session. I wanted to come to subchapter 5 and specifically the table 837 01:17:31,580 --> 01:17:38,320 of allowed uses these are really where the rubber hits the road when it comes 838 01:17:38,320 --> 01:17:42,920 to what's permitted. Now that we have a general understanding of the zoning 839 01:17:42,920 --> 01:17:47,760 districts we can now understand what uses are permitted so if you refer to 840 01:17:47,760 --> 01:17:53,320 page 201 it's really the beginning of a series of table or it's a table with 841 01:17:53,320 --> 01:18:01,400 series of pages that cover the the uses and just for the benefit of the 842 01:18:01,400 --> 01:18:06,920 Commission when we get a later version or later draft of this you won't see 843 01:18:06,920 --> 01:18:11,440 these footnotes these will go away these are just for our benefit to 844 01:18:11,440 --> 01:18:16,440 understand how we got to what we have today our later version will be without 845 01:18:16,440 --> 01:18:21,840 these footnotes so the table will fit more and so you won't be this long but 846 01:18:21,840 --> 01:18:27,640 let's let's kind of focus on the residential uses. You see that the P 847 01:18:27,640 --> 01:18:34,360 stands for permitted by right there are no use specific standards those that 848 01:18:34,360 --> 01:18:39,200 have a plus assigned to it you have to refer to the use specific standard which 849 01:18:39,200 --> 01:18:45,680 is listed in the on the far right column. The S stands for specific use permit I 850 01:18:45,680 --> 01:18:49,480 think everybody knows what a specific use permit here is and again if there is 851 01:18:49,480 --> 01:18:53,600 a plus in addition to a specific use permit you are required to follow the 852 01:18:53,600 --> 01:19:01,840 use specific standards that are that are outlined as shown here on the table. 853 01:19:01,840 --> 01:19:08,280 Those that are blank signify that it is not permitted in that zoning district so 854 01:19:08,280 --> 01:19:12,680 let's let's start with multifamily I think that's a probably a good one to 855 01:19:12,680 --> 01:19:17,120 bring up and I want to make sure that we're clear on where they're permitted 856 01:19:17,120 --> 01:19:22,100 and where they're permitted and how. Multifamily the first one that you see 857 01:19:22,100 --> 01:19:28,800 is R7 so any multifamily that is proposed in the R7 is required to have a 858 01:19:28,800 --> 01:19:38,360 specific use permit and a use specific standard which is 533 C if you want to 859 01:19:38,360 --> 01:19:46,600 look over and I'll find the page so that I can direct you all 533 C maybe Scott 860 01:19:46,600 --> 01:20:05,920 can get there quicker. 211 533 C 2 212 again C multifamily not many 861 01:20:05,920 --> 01:20:11,320 essentially what it's saying that if it's in a mixed use district the ground 862 01:20:11,320 --> 01:20:17,480 floor that's fronting a public street shall have a ceiling height of 12 feet so 863 01:20:17,480 --> 01:20:24,440 that we have a higher first floor for intense for for intending to be if water 864 01:20:24,440 --> 01:20:27,880 if it were to can be converted to commercial use in the future it does not 865 01:20:27,880 --> 01:20:31,840 have to be commercial it just has to be a height of 12 feet so if and when a 866 01:20:31,840 --> 01:20:36,900 commercial use comes in they're able to have that higher ceiling but does not 867 01:20:36,900 --> 01:20:42,240 mean that that has to be a commercial use and then it says that each 868 01:20:42,240 --> 01:20:46,720 individual dwelling unit shall have a minimum of 400 now we haven't touched 869 01:20:46,720 --> 01:20:54,680 this yet but the minimum today is 500 the proposal is to go down to 400 870 01:20:54,680 --> 01:21:04,520 minimum square feet so again those apply to all of the zoning district I'm sorry 871 01:21:04,520 --> 01:21:09,720 those that have the pluses for multifamily you must comply with those 872 01:21:09,720 --> 01:21:15,760 two zoning districts I'm sorry those two specific you specific standards but 873 01:21:15,760 --> 01:21:24,480 again in the r7 you required a specific use permit on the under the mixed use 874 01:21:24,480 --> 01:21:30,840 districts M and MD and MR they are permitted by right so think about where 875 01:21:30,840 --> 01:21:35,440 those zoning districts were you we were looking at earlier and if they're in man 876 01:21:35,440 --> 01:21:44,680 MD or MR they would be permitted by right with those two you specific 877 01:21:44,680 --> 01:21:54,080 standards moving forward to SC HC and geo multifamily are permitted with a 878 01:21:54,080 --> 01:21:59,600 specific use permit outside of those zoning districts multifamily would not 879 01:21:59,600 --> 01:22:05,480 be permitted so I gave you that as an example and I think it's important 880 01:22:05,480 --> 01:22:09,520 because we deal a lot with with that type of use and we want to make sure that 881 01:22:09,520 --> 01:22:14,400 we understand moving forward with those are or they would be permitted another 882 01:22:14,400 --> 01:22:19,920 thing I want to highlight is we are introducing triplexes and fourplexes 883 01:22:19,920 --> 01:22:25,360 currently triplexes and fourplexes are considered multifamily however we've 884 01:22:25,360 --> 01:22:32,960 broken them out and you can see that starting as early as r3 they are 885 01:22:32,960 --> 01:22:36,520 permitted triplexes are permitted that is and there is a definition of what a 886 01:22:36,520 --> 01:22:42,000 triplex is is primarily a three unit on a single lot and that's that's a 887 01:22:42,000 --> 01:22:48,960 triplex and fourplex of course is four units on a single lot r4 and you see 888 01:22:48,960 --> 01:22:53,880 there where they're permitted are six they're permitted by right and then 889 01:22:53,880 --> 01:22:59,360 again the use specific standards are covered under 533 B are there any other 890 01:22:59,360 --> 01:23:02,160 I mean under residential I'm highlighting things that I think is 891 01:23:02,160 --> 01:23:05,840 important but if the Commission would like to discuss this is the opportunity 892 01:23:05,840 --> 01:23:11,840 we can take notes we can take your recommendations we can receive your 893 01:23:11,840 --> 01:23:16,880 input good or bad really we want to make sure we want to make sure that you are 894 01:23:16,880 --> 01:23:23,480 aware or informed of what is being proposed so that when we move this where 895 01:23:23,480 --> 01:23:29,840 we're all on the same page the only question I have I think this table is a 896 01:23:29,840 --> 01:23:38,040 supreme upgrade for we currently have I mean most of this is there are some 897 01:23:38,040 --> 01:23:40,640 things that he said at the beginning on the onset of your presentation that we 898 01:23:40,640 --> 01:23:43,600 are not going to be addressing because it's being addressed elsewhere or later 899 01:23:43,600 --> 01:23:49,520 specifically like dorms correct how does that apply when dorms are listed here 900 01:23:49,520 --> 01:23:55,760 with attributable things to them but yet we haven't really approved that can you 901 01:23:55,760 --> 01:23:59,600 walk me through what's happening with dorms in the interim so as you all know 902 01:23:59,600 --> 01:24:05,800 we've had a number what we didn't have a number we had a work session and we're 903 01:24:05,800 --> 01:24:08,960 gonna be bringing that back to the Commission that we received direction 904 01:24:08,960 --> 01:24:14,000 from the Commission and we're gonna be addressing that will it be before we get 905 01:24:14,000 --> 01:24:19,400 this code update is really unknown currently though rent by the bedroom 906 01:24:19,400 --> 01:24:24,280 developments are still under the multifamily so we're not we're having 907 01:24:24,280 --> 01:24:31,120 addressed that to date we're trying to and we will again it may be after the 908 01:24:31,120 --> 01:24:37,600 code update or soon soon after or I don't think we'll be able to get to it 909 01:24:37,600 --> 01:24:44,360 before it honestly yes we currently have standards that we use now that are 910 01:24:44,360 --> 01:24:50,360 falling in multifamily is just trying to find a definition a use that would fit 911 01:24:50,360 --> 01:24:55,840 the current dormitory has a definition and if and it's it's in this code it 912 01:24:55,840 --> 01:25:01,440 carried over so those that fit that definition will be able to develop under 913 01:25:01,440 --> 01:25:06,880 that use of a dormitory but again the rent by the bedroom that we're talking 914 01:25:06,880 --> 01:25:12,720 about currently falls under multifamily and is gonna be carried forward until we 915 01:25:12,720 --> 01:25:16,920 get to the dormitory discussion and code amendment and it will continue to be 916 01:25:16,920 --> 01:25:22,080 multifamily just realize thank you chair and just to clarify a little bit you were 917 01:25:22,080 --> 01:25:26,840 out of town for that discussion and that was when we were discussing dormitory as 918 01:25:26,840 --> 01:25:33,000 the collegiate type facilities not dormitory as I guess we currently have 919 01:25:33,000 --> 01:25:41,520 dormitory right I had the privilege of watching that video the short answer is 920 01:25:41,520 --> 01:25:45,320 there are standards that are in place today we're running with those standards 921 01:25:45,320 --> 01:25:51,800 not to say that that we can't talk about dormitories as they exist in this draft 922 01:25:51,800 --> 01:25:56,520 code but we are also proposing some updates which are not part of the 923 01:25:56,520 --> 01:26:00,400 discussion today just because we're carrying under separate cover similar to 924 01:26:00,400 --> 01:26:04,000 that of the the tree what's known as a tree ordinance but really it's the 925 01:26:04,000 --> 01:26:11,200 conservation landscape easement ordinance and and some other pieces so it does 926 01:26:11,200 --> 01:26:14,720 exist in here today we're just carrying forward what we have in the existing 927 01:26:14,720 --> 01:26:19,840 code and then I imagine there's a process to add uses so if we came up with a 928 01:26:19,840 --> 01:26:24,480 student purpose-built was the language they all used purpose-built student 929 01:26:24,480 --> 01:26:29,520 housing that would be a potential new land use does that go through the same 930 01:26:29,520 --> 01:26:35,120 P&Z review process to add a land use to this code that's correct it'd be a code 931 01:26:35,120 --> 01:26:38,800 amendment it'll follow the same dual process public hearing and if that's the 932 01:26:38,800 --> 01:26:42,360 case it would be another column or another row here that we would be adding 933 01:26:42,360 --> 01:26:48,680 under residential great the only thing I not to keep going on on this item but I 934 01:26:48,680 --> 01:26:51,600 think that was that's a challenge and really what we learned I think that 935 01:26:51,600 --> 01:26:56,000 night at P&Z is it's not just it's even though we're calling it student purpose 936 01:26:56,000 --> 01:26:59,560 built or purpose-built student it's not just students who are living there right 937 01:26:59,560 --> 01:27:05,520 it's a number of individuals and even the project that we saw last week I mean 938 01:27:05,520 --> 01:27:10,400 that's one where right next to it that's how they advertise it they target 939 01:27:10,400 --> 01:27:14,320 students even though they're on individual lots each of those four 940 01:27:14,320 --> 01:27:18,080 bedrooms are rented by the bedroom 941 01:27:21,200 --> 01:27:27,800 so we also have group living I'm gonna I'm gonna go past residential unless 942 01:27:27,800 --> 01:27:32,560 you all have hot household living unless you all have any other uses that we you 943 01:27:32,560 --> 01:27:40,840 like for us to clarify a group living and there's dormitory under 202 that's 944 01:27:40,840 --> 01:27:47,840 that's the carryover that you'll see be permitted there are seven in the MN with 945 01:27:47,840 --> 01:27:51,920 a specific use permit and it permitted by right under the MD but again that 946 01:27:51,920 --> 01:27:56,360 has a different definition that it's not what we're talking about right with 947 01:27:56,360 --> 01:28:04,520 related to collegiate housing not much yeah the public institutional and civic 948 01:28:04,520 --> 01:28:11,400 uses we added a couple of new zone a couple new uses airport city-owned 949 01:28:11,400 --> 01:28:16,880 cemetery city-owned but primarily these are the same uses that you see currently 950 01:28:16,880 --> 01:28:22,000 in our development code it's organized a little bit better in the sense that it's 951 01:28:22,000 --> 01:28:26,840 now broken to other categories educational facilities the same there 952 01:28:26,840 --> 01:28:35,520 health care health care facilities I think under the commercial uses one 953 01:28:35,520 --> 01:28:41,280 interesting one to add to highlight is that we have a community garden in an 954 01:28:41,280 --> 01:28:46,720 urban garden and I'm trying to remember what the difference between the two are 955 01:28:46,720 --> 01:28:54,200 but we have definitions and they're in chapter 8 if you guys are interested I 956 01:28:54,200 --> 01:29:00,840 can read those definitions if not drive on drive on Ron keep going 957 01:29:00,840 --> 01:29:07,320 Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I do have a question in following this use 958 01:29:07,320 --> 01:29:13,360 table where musician studios lives so we've got it to where we have you 959 01:29:13,360 --> 01:29:17,760 specific standards but we don't have any use specifics specific standards 960 01:29:17,760 --> 01:29:25,560 written so I'm that confused me yes so you you're absolutely right and I will 961 01:29:25,560 --> 01:29:29,920 make a note of that we do have the plus that you see that we do but when you 962 01:29:29,920 --> 01:29:33,360 yeah then there's no page reference but so then when you further you know read 963 01:29:33,360 --> 01:29:38,600 along it just it has it under specific use standards but there it's blank 964 01:29:38,600 --> 01:29:44,040 information so I didn't know if we are taking that out or if there's standards 965 01:29:44,040 --> 01:29:51,360 going in we were we were in the process of putting it together and it's still in 966 01:29:51,360 --> 01:29:56,880 it's still in draft and we work we plan on having you specific standards okay so 967 01:29:56,880 --> 01:29:59,640 that's information that needs to go in there that still needs to be in there 968 01:29:59,640 --> 01:30:03,560 yes I bought yes it's not it's not included and we will make sure that we 969 01:30:03,560 --> 01:30:13,080 do include that in the next draft okay one thing I want to just highlight also 970 01:30:13,080 --> 01:30:18,120 RV Park we currently do not have that listed in our current zoning district 971 01:30:18,120 --> 01:30:22,000 it's actually mixed in with the manufacturer housing development we're 972 01:30:22,000 --> 01:30:26,480 pulling it out and giving its own use and its own use specific standards so I 973 01:30:26,480 --> 01:30:32,800 think that's a clean up that we wanted to make sure we do we already talked 974 01:30:32,800 --> 01:30:43,320 about musicians studios the payday lending it's to be determined I know 975 01:30:43,320 --> 01:30:49,680 Jerry and our attorney Brenda McDonald we've had some discussion about how we 976 01:30:49,680 --> 01:30:54,800 address that I know that City of Irving has a an example that we're looking into 977 01:30:54,800 --> 01:31:11,120 so that too needs to be further contemplated we get to retail uses or 978 01:31:11,120 --> 01:31:15,520 retail sales I kind of skipped the personal services when we're retail 979 01:31:15,520 --> 01:31:22,160 cells we now have a breakdown of retail cells less than 5,000 between 5 and 15 980 01:31:22,160 --> 01:31:28,960 and greater than 15 this is to help differentiate some of the higher or 981 01:31:28,960 --> 01:31:36,000 larger square footages versus the smaller mom-and-pop stores lodging 982 01:31:36,000 --> 01:31:41,680 facilities probably the important one there is the short-term rental we do not 983 01:31:41,680 --> 01:31:49,320 currently have that we do have a you specific standard for that and that's 5 984 01:31:49,320 --> 01:31:55,480 3 5 q and you can see that your your short-term rentals are permitted in all 985 01:31:55,480 --> 01:32:01,240 zoning district residential zoning districts and then the MN and MD with 986 01:32:01,240 --> 01:32:07,880 the new specific standard and really what that is it's just as of how long a 987 01:32:07,880 --> 01:32:17,440 person can have a short-term rental lease what page is that Scott 223 988 01:32:19,320 --> 01:32:35,760 Q so so we're well the first one is a property owner shall register a 989 01:32:35,760 --> 01:32:43,040 short-term rental with the city of then which means we got to have a registration 990 01:32:43,040 --> 01:32:48,560 form and making sure that we manage that it talks about taxes associated with 991 01:32:48,560 --> 01:33:01,920 that and then no more than 30 days for a rental by paying guests okay I'm just 992 01:33:01,920 --> 01:33:07,520 gonna go through this unless you all have other ones I think travel Plaza on 993 01:33:07,520 --> 01:33:13,880 page 206 under the vehicle and equipment vehicles and equipment I think that's 994 01:33:13,880 --> 01:33:22,240 important to make sure we that's a new use that we've added and then I'm looking 995 01:33:22,240 --> 01:33:28,640 as I'm going through here to else thanks chair one thing that had stood out at me 996 01:33:28,640 --> 01:33:32,080 because you brought up travel Plaza so right under that is the adult 997 01:33:32,080 --> 01:33:38,560 entertainment things so we have a lot of highway or a high industrial parcels out 998 01:33:38,560 --> 01:33:43,080 there so I'm hoping that the use specific standards for that business is 999 01:33:43,080 --> 01:33:49,960 strong enough to understand where I'm going yeah yeah well if you look at page 1000 01:33:49,960 --> 01:33:56,600 starting at 225 it is because I think it was only allowed in like a rural 1001 01:33:56,600 --> 01:34:01,360 commercial area or something back in the past and I mean those were I think few 1002 01:34:01,360 --> 01:34:05,120 and far between so now that we're moving it into high industrial we we've got a 1003 01:34:05,120 --> 01:34:09,640 lot of high industrial parcels I think I think I mean I could be wrong but I 1004 01:34:09,640 --> 01:34:13,240 think they're permitted to ICG with a specific use permissive that's why that carried 1005 01:34:13,240 --> 01:34:20,560 over as H I the note says otherwise it says currently allowed as a specific use 1006 01:34:20,560 --> 01:34:27,520 in rural commercial sorry I said corrected so if you look at starting at 1007 01:34:27,520 --> 01:34:35,360 page 225 it's one two three four four and a half pages just under that you 1008 01:34:35,360 --> 01:34:45,280 specific standard so there's a lot of standards that they must follow in order 1009 01:34:45,280 --> 01:34:51,520 and there's there's there's references to Texas local records too so there's 1010 01:34:51,520 --> 01:34:59,040 there's and mainly I bring it up because I know we have particularly down on Jim 1011 01:34:59,040 --> 01:35:05,920 Crystal we have on the draft map H I in there and literally across the way is 1012 01:35:05,920 --> 01:35:12,900 going into rural residential so that was my concern there that the that the you 1013 01:35:12,900 --> 01:35:19,720 know parameters there particularly for distance would be enough right and with 1014 01:35:19,720 --> 01:35:25,880 the with the yes that means a specific use permit and I'm sure there are some 1015 01:35:25,880 --> 01:35:30,140 references to let Texas local government code that have distance requirements 1016 01:35:30,140 --> 01:35:42,000 that are important to comply with that's a good good point I really don't I don't 1017 01:35:42,000 --> 01:35:45,120 want to skip anything I just want to make sure that we if you have questions 1018 01:35:45,120 --> 01:35:48,920 and then this won't be the last time and I want to make sure that it's clear we 1019 01:35:48,920 --> 01:35:53,520 will be we'll be bringing back this discussion at a next work session I 1020 01:35:53,520 --> 01:35:57,680 really feel that this is really the meat the Commission needs to really 1021 01:35:57,680 --> 01:36:02,280 understand along with the development standards but the use because we often 1022 01:36:02,280 --> 01:36:07,520 refer to this in our review of zoning in our review of SUPs I think it's important 1023 01:36:07,520 --> 01:36:12,560 that we focus on on this chapter and again in my opinion but you guys can tell 1024 01:36:12,560 --> 01:36:17,800 me otherwise and then the last I mean the really the last two pages are public 1025 01:36:17,800 --> 01:36:23,160 and semi-public utility uses which is our substations and whatnot and then we 1026 01:36:23,160 --> 01:36:30,600 also have our accessory and temporary uses listed in the table after the take 1027 01:36:30,600 --> 01:36:35,960 yes mr. Sanchez I was just kind of looking through this now if there's 1028 01:36:35,960 --> 01:36:40,880 something that isn't covered I'll just think like a cremation facilities I think 1029 01:36:40,880 --> 01:36:47,360 I saw something under funeral facilities and but is that also include cremation 1030 01:36:47,360 --> 01:36:53,520 facilities that's a good question let me let's let's do you if you can point you 1031 01:36:53,520 --> 01:37:08,920 let me help me find work where you saw 202 202 cemetery Oh cemetery funeral and 1032 01:37:08,920 --> 01:37:12,880 interment facilities that does that include a cremation facility so let me 1033 01:37:12,880 --> 01:37:18,520 let's let's go you know so let's go to chapter eight and I'm gonna look for it 1034 01:37:18,520 --> 01:37:28,920 I'll give you a page number so you can it's a good question or 41 so it does 1035 01:37:28,920 --> 01:37:44,400 include so it does include it okay any other questions so verification is this 1036 01:37:44,400 --> 01:37:47,880 me dismiss meeting have an end time were you trying to get out by six or is this 1037 01:37:47,880 --> 01:37:50,920 just I think we're shooting for six okay perfect yeah we're shooting for six 1038 01:37:50,920 --> 01:37:57,360 great but again I'll be want to make sure that we have ample time to answer 1039 01:37:57,360 --> 01:38:01,560 questions and like I said we want to give you as much time as possible we 1040 01:38:01,560 --> 01:38:06,400 will be bringing back sub chapter five and introducing sub chapter six at our 1041 01:38:06,400 --> 01:38:10,040 next meeting so please know that this is not the only time you can provide 1042 01:38:10,040 --> 01:38:14,480 comments so if you have additional uses that are not included or have question 1043 01:38:14,480 --> 01:38:17,840 on specific uses please let us know I just know Commissioner Alice my need to 1044 01:38:17,840 --> 01:38:22,040 sneak away so if there's handouts I'd love to get those passed out yeah 1045 01:38:22,040 --> 01:38:24,880 Michelle's yeah thank you I will have to sneak out it that we don't lose our 1046 01:38:24,880 --> 01:38:28,960 quorum but so you guys can continue but if there's anything I need I am going to 1047 01:38:28,960 --> 01:38:36,280 sneak out here in about two minutes okay we do have we do have handouts we do 1048 01:38:36,280 --> 01:38:44,400 have handouts the handouts that Scott's passing out are the map that was before 1049 01:38:44,400 --> 01:38:53,440 Friday and then the map that is currently online we also have a map that 1050 01:38:53,440 --> 01:38:59,140 shows the changes where where they changed after Friday a little bit more 1051 01:38:59,140 --> 01:39:08,240 highlighted in the fact that that differentiates the two maps there so I'm 1052 01:39:08,240 --> 01:39:11,360 not pass this out as well 1053 01:39:23,480 --> 01:39:26,600 thank you Ron 1054 01:39:26,600 --> 01:39:39,880 is this it there's an after change right there's just one of the after am I 1055 01:39:39,880 --> 01:39:49,040 missing one there's three handouts right okay four after a change ah there 1056 01:39:49,040 --> 01:40:05,400 you go that's perfect I don't want to complicate things 1057 01:40:19,040 --> 01:40:27,720 let me take this opportunity to say that I applaud staff Ron and Cody have done a 1058 01:40:27,720 --> 01:40:33,320 bang-up job of really trying to highlight these changes make the 1059 01:40:33,320 --> 01:40:39,600 changes based on direction now we've got more work to do we'll continue to do 1060 01:40:39,600 --> 01:40:46,100 that we'll do some of the the analysis that we heard today and we'll bring that 1061 01:40:46,100 --> 01:40:50,560 back and and ultimately we'll talk about what we can on Friday of whatever it is 1062 01:40:50,560 --> 01:40:55,200 that we learn I will tell you that Cody has put an immense amount of time into 1063 01:40:55,200 --> 01:41:00,800 gathering data he has heard what was said today and has already been assigned 1064 01:41:00,800 --> 01:41:06,040 more work to do so just with that being said I just I want to applaud them for 1065 01:41:06,040 --> 01:41:09,920 the work that they've done and I appreciate it absolutely thank you all 1066 01:41:09,920 --> 01:41:16,160 so just to wrap up I know we're gonna cut it short here we will continue our 1067 01:41:16,160 --> 01:41:22,360 discussion on sub chapter 5 towards the end but be introducing sub chapter 6 and 1068 01:41:22,360 --> 01:41:27,320 also talking about sub chapter 4 4 is really an overlay district we're carrying 1069 01:41:27,320 --> 01:41:31,320 forward all of the overlay district not many changes in sub chapter form that's 1070 01:41:31,320 --> 01:41:35,360 why I didn't really feel that we need to talk about it but we will make sure we 1071 01:41:35,360 --> 01:41:40,360 touch on it next week again and then start introducing the development 1072 01:41:40,360 --> 01:41:45,440 standards great thanks Ron and one more thing mr. chair I don't know if there's 1073 01:41:45,440 --> 01:41:48,840 anything in particular from you or the rest of the Commission that we could 1074 01:41:48,840 --> 01:41:52,120 bring forward anything that would be helpful as we go through this process 1075 01:41:52,120 --> 01:41:55,640 we've got a couple more weeks that we're going to continue to run through this 1076 01:41:55,640 --> 01:41:59,680 and I know people have to continue to digest we're just trying to hit some of 1077 01:41:59,680 --> 01:42:04,400 the high points of what we've heard and what we know and certainly our work 1078 01:42:04,400 --> 01:42:08,800 continues on this daily so we're much more familiar and we don't want to take 1079 01:42:08,800 --> 01:42:12,640 it for granted what it is that you may want to hear have a little more 1080 01:42:12,640 --> 01:42:18,920 information on the only request I'd have is just and you've been doing this fine 1081 01:42:18,920 --> 01:42:22,880 this is just a reiteration just to keep us updated on a timeline if if this 1082 01:42:22,880 --> 01:42:27,680 slows down or changes timelines just keep us posted on on those type things 1083 01:42:27,680 --> 01:42:36,040 we anticipate bringing the code and the map to you for recommendation on April 1084 01:42:36,040 --> 01:42:40,080 the 5th so that's excuse me 10th I keep saying the fifth and I apologize for 1085 01:42:40,080 --> 01:42:44,880 that the 10th and we're anticipating we're gonna do everything possible to 1086 01:42:44,880 --> 01:42:49,560 keep that that timeline okay great does anyone else have any questions or 1087 01:42:49,560 --> 01:42:56,520 requests to examine next work session when this comes back and if I might 1088 01:42:56,520 --> 01:43:03,080 mention one more no it's off top no it's not off topic we have the landscape and 1089 01:43:03,080 --> 01:43:10,680 conservation code coming forward to you next Wednesday that is in the 1090 01:43:10,680 --> 01:43:15,240 development code what is in the development code today is kind of one of 1091 01:43:15,240 --> 01:43:20,600 the earlier drafts we've had some some modifications with that at the request 1092 01:43:20,600 --> 01:43:27,880 of the city manager we've met with that a member of the COE as well as with the 1093 01:43:27,880 --> 01:43:31,880 mayor and we're kind of refining that we're gonna put it to a council work 1094 01:43:31,880 --> 01:43:35,960 session to make sure that we understand their direction very clearly and that 1095 01:43:35,960 --> 01:43:41,960 will be coming back and to you at PNC for recommendation next Wednesday so 1096 01:43:41,960 --> 01:43:47,880 that Richard has Richard and Haley have worked immensely on that that's been 1097 01:43:47,880 --> 01:43:52,240 another one of those daily I'm truly trying to get us out of kind of this 1098 01:43:52,240 --> 01:43:55,640 crisis mode that we're in and so we can begin to do the planning work that we 1099 01:43:55,640 --> 01:43:59,840 need to do and then on the comp plan and future land use map that's great the 1100 01:43:59,840 --> 01:44:02,960 only question I had I noted it at the very beginning I just wanted to if there 1101 01:44:02,960 --> 01:44:09,160 is a quick answer maybe just to throw it out there this is my first time I've 1102 01:44:09,160 --> 01:44:14,840 ever done a city rewrite guys surprise so I'm ignorant in a lot of these things 1103 01:44:14,840 --> 01:44:20,560 but one of the things that has come up and I just would like maybe some 1104 01:44:20,560 --> 01:44:25,160 understanding is there's a lot of work done and rewrite and updating it but it 1105 01:44:25,160 --> 01:44:29,480 seems like we're pulling out a lot so some of things like razor ranch storms 1106 01:44:29,480 --> 01:44:33,720 landscape parking which has been talked about split zoning potential future city 1107 01:44:33,720 --> 01:44:39,680 wide rezoning case putting in overlays of the split zonings and there's other 1108 01:44:39,680 --> 01:44:43,640 things I'm sure I'm forgetting of things that we are not addressing currently 1109 01:44:43,640 --> 01:44:49,280 how how much of a completed project are we trying to adopt and put into effect 1110 01:44:49,280 --> 01:44:54,440 are we we're putting forth a 70% completed project with 30% left to be 1111 01:44:54,440 --> 01:45:00,560 done and is this normal for a citywide code rewrite to have such to me 1112 01:45:00,560 --> 01:45:08,680 significant pieces just being addressed ancillary to the focus let me let me 1113 01:45:08,680 --> 01:45:14,920 try and that was a lot I will say that you have a complete document before you 1114 01:45:14,920 --> 01:45:19,720 okay we have a number of things running in parallel because we're trying to make 1115 01:45:19,720 --> 01:45:27,560 improvements so this process started truly in 2013 it stalled for any period 1116 01:45:27,560 --> 01:45:32,840 of time we have been working on it very diligently for the past maybe 18 months 1117 01:45:32,840 --> 01:45:40,920 in that no different than well with any luck word we're adopting this in April 1118 01:45:40,920 --> 01:45:47,120 so I don't anticipate any new situations arising but when we talk about something 1119 01:45:47,120 --> 01:45:51,000 for example we have dormitories in the code today right we're running with that 1120 01:45:51,000 --> 01:45:56,880 we're continuing to have that but as we see changes in land use and we see other 1121 01:45:56,880 --> 01:46:00,200 communities doing something successful we don't want to sit on our laurels and 1122 01:46:00,200 --> 01:46:04,320 wait like we did with this code for 17 years to say well we should update our 1123 01:46:04,320 --> 01:46:09,600 code so we're running it parallel not not that to bog the process and it 1124 01:46:09,600 --> 01:46:14,200 doesn't mean that it won't be completed and put into this it's just if we can 1125 01:46:14,200 --> 01:46:20,540 continue to work on those processes we're not rushing them so a perfect 1126 01:46:20,540 --> 01:46:24,320 example is is the landscape code that we went ahead and incorporated some 1127 01:46:24,320 --> 01:46:29,400 components in here as we work through those final iterations but but rather 1128 01:46:29,400 --> 01:46:34,320 than specifically talking about those in this work session you'll have another 1129 01:46:34,320 --> 01:46:40,120 opportunity to talk about those to incorporate it into the code so I guess 1130 01:46:40,120 --> 01:46:43,920 I have to say that we're gonna have a very complete code we're not bringing 1131 01:46:43,920 --> 01:46:49,320 you an incomplete code it's just rather than mixing issues and talking about the 1132 01:46:49,320 --> 01:46:53,520 tree code on two different occasions is that we talk about it one time so best 1133 01:46:53,520 --> 01:46:58,240 use of your time I understand but it's my understanding as well that this code 1134 01:46:58,240 --> 01:47:02,400 might be complete but there's addendums that will not be complete at the time we 1135 01:47:02,400 --> 01:47:07,640 vote on this is that correct the razor ranch addendum I'm thinking 1136 01:47:07,640 --> 01:47:12,240 specifically that's what we will not have that as part of this document that 1137 01:47:12,240 --> 01:47:16,040 will be a part of this document the difference is it will not be included in 1138 01:47:16,040 --> 01:47:20,840 the document so we're gonna take because and I don't know the exact number so 1139 01:47:20,840 --> 01:47:25,320 please do not quote me on this but but the mere fact of when that was created 1140 01:47:25,320 --> 01:47:31,820 and there are some 13 or 15 ordinances that amend that that development the 1141 01:47:31,820 --> 01:47:36,480 amendments cross different versions of what our development code might look 1142 01:47:36,480 --> 01:47:41,640 like okay and so there's no simple way to say we'll just incorporate it into 1143 01:47:41,640 --> 01:47:46,080 this book so we're gonna take those versions of the code the reference is 1144 01:47:46,080 --> 01:47:51,800 there too and and it creates a a separate document if you will which will 1145 01:47:51,800 --> 01:47:57,980 can be complete it's just not going to be a part of this development code what 1146 01:47:57,980 --> 01:48:02,840 documents are not going to be part of this code but also germane to this code 1147 01:48:02,840 --> 01:48:07,320 so there's razor ranch landscape will be part of this code so we go to April 10th 1148 01:48:07,320 --> 01:48:11,360 will have the landscape and preservation in here is there any other documents or 1149 01:48:11,360 --> 01:48:16,560 addendums that are working in parallel that are not part of this no razor ranch 1150 01:48:16,560 --> 01:48:20,680 is the razor ranch will be an appendix reference in the code as Scott mentioned 1151 01:48:20,680 --> 01:48:25,780 is just be a separate document because it's such a large complex great I was 1152 01:48:25,780 --> 01:48:30,080 worried there's there's more and then just just to just add real quickly we're 1153 01:48:30,080 --> 01:48:33,840 trying to simplify the code there's a lot of stuff in there a lot of the stuff 1154 01:48:33,840 --> 01:48:39,400 that you know may not necessarily be be in the code will be transferred or 1155 01:48:39,400 --> 01:48:44,440 carried over into a criteria manual or manuals and so that's where we're 1156 01:48:44,440 --> 01:48:47,640 working with the other departments to make sure that we do that we're also 1157 01:48:47,640 --> 01:48:51,280 cleaning up the the muni code or I'm sorry not the muni code but the code of 1158 01:48:51,280 --> 01:48:56,760 ordinances where there's a lot of conflicting duplications we're cleaning 1159 01:48:56,760 --> 01:49:01,300 that up and that is all gonna be part of this effort so when at the end of it we 1160 01:49:01,300 --> 01:49:05,680 hopefully will have a development code that's more concise and clear for 1161 01:49:05,680 --> 01:49:09,240 everyone to understand perfect it's clear and also helping with criteria manuals 1162 01:49:09,240 --> 01:49:14,000 or is that fully in-house with a portion the administrative manuals the other 1163 01:49:14,000 --> 01:49:18,880 criteria managed have already been adopted by council great any other 1164 01:49:18,880 --> 01:49:25,320 questions for city staff this evening Ron Scott thank you for the presentation 1165 01:49:25,320 --> 01:49:29,840 most helpful at this time we'll close the meeting at six o'clock