May 29, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2024-05-29 5:00 PM

Good afternoon, welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for Wednesday, May 29th, 2024. This is our work session and with the quorum present I'll call us to order at 5 o 3 p.m. Let the record show that Commissioner Cole is absent from today's meeting. First item in our work session is clarification on tonight's agenda. First we have the minutes for May 15th. Any questions, clarifications? Okay, well next we have elect a vice chair which we will need to do in a regular session. Questions? No? Okay. Individual consideration continues with 3B, FR 23-0003. Hi Angie. Review manager, this is a final replat for Glenwood Meadows phase two. There's approximately 42 residential lots on a little over 10 acres of land. When Glenwood Meadows was originally platted this portion of the overall development was situated in FEMA floodway. As part of the Bonnie Bray reconstruction project that area has been brought out of the floodplain and has been undergoing work with our capital improvements team is with FEMA to submit the Clomer Lomar. Staff is recommending conditional approval of this final plat. It does not yet meet all of our conditions for approval in that all the lots are not developable at this time. The Clomar has been submitted and reviewed and has been published for the comment period which is 90 days. However in order for this final plat to receive full approval they would need to make it through that comment period and receive the official Lomar. So staff is recommending conditional approval with the condition as you see here. Once that study or that comment period has ended and they've received that Lomar designation the plat would would have to come back to receive the formal final approval. Happy to answer any questions you all may have regarding that. Thank you Angie. Questions? Commissioner Pruitt? Just a quick question when you showed the satellite overview is that a former gas site pad or is that something else? The site was at one point developed with a gas well it has since been plugged. Okay and is the plug I couldn't find the plug on this replat typically we've called those out in other places other plats subdivision plots at least? Yeah I do believe it's in an open-space lot and I can see if I can locate that and send it to you all but it's not it's not under any any paving or anything like that. Yeah I just want to make sure we check that. Sure. Thank you. Anything else? I know we've got a couple new commissioners and for clarification Lomar and Clomar are kind of new acronyms so are you good with that or do you need Angie to explain that? Yeah thanks chair I'd prefer somebody explain it. Yeah perfect yeah. I will explain to the best of my ability and Tina can and even for what it stands for because I yeah yeah of course. The short version is we have FEMA floodplain maps they show where designated floodplain and floodway are located which we do not allow residential lots or homes to be constructed within floodplain and floodway. Through a variety of improvements a property can submit to have that designation removed and have to demonstrate to FEMA that that area is no longer in the floodplain. That is officially called the letter of map revision. The Clomar is a conditional letter of map revision and so that's kind of their preliminary approval that study does have to be published there is a comment period before FEMA can finally stamp that as approved in what is called the Lomar which is the letter of map revision. That's all I can say about that. That was outstanding. The only thing I would add is typically that conditional letter of map revision is issued first because it's anticipated that in all likelihood the the letter of map revision will be approved but there are some conditions that have to be satisfied before the final letter of map revision is issued and then lastly I would just add it is a time driven process with FEMA it does take applicants some time for this to work its way through FEMA's process and so hence why we try to work with applicants allowing them to be able to proceed forward where we can knowing that they have to get this map revision addressed through FEMA I can think of one project I know it's taken multiple months and if FEMA has any additional comments on it then those have to be resolved and in some cases might start the clock over so hence why they do the conditional letter of map revision first as they work towards that final completion. Thank you. Commissioner Perot. Yeah I just wanted to retract my previous request there are actually three guest well heads shown in the two open space plots I just I was searching for the wrong term so I apologize. All right they're hard to locate too. Thank you. Anything else? Thanks Angie. Okay on to the public hearings for this evening the first item 4A is being postponed and we are just re-noticing that correct yeah we're not even opening that okay so next will be 4B S 23 0006 and that is Ashley hello. Good evening chair members of the Commission. This is S 23 6 Wright Denton Teasley. This is an SUP request to allow for a veterinary clinic use on approximately two acres of land. This site is generally located on the south side of Teasley Lane approximately 550 feet west of Pennsylvania Drive. The current zoning is residential 2 and that is shown on the existing zoning map on the bottom left in the future land use map is low residential and that is shown on the future land use map on the right of the screen. Staff does recommend approval as it does comply with all our criteria for approval and I do have a longer presentation for later. Happy to answer any questions now. Thank you. Questions at the moment for Ashley? I got question just regarding traffic I know there was no study done for this correct. Yes correct. There was mentioned that tex dot might require one can you elaborate on that? Yeah so it so they would only need a TIA for the city since they have such a low number of trips because it's on a tex dot roadway so it's ultimately up to tex dot but it does meet their requirements for waiving the TIA also but if they do request it it will be provided with a tex dot permit. Yeah and I've got I mean I certainly have some pause with that I mean it's it is a busy part of of the road and with only having a right turn out of that site that brings more to that intersection that's already a problem at certain times at Pennsylvania and Teasley. Has there been discussion about traffic can you talk to me caught me through that? A study has been and I have a lead. Yeah that'd be great. Hi. In fact we did do a traffic count based on citizen request at Teasley and Pennsylvania several times in the past and one last month in April. It did marginally meet conditions for a traffic signal. I say marginally met it's not the full criteria like the eight hours four hours and two hours it just met the peak hour and the four hour volumes. So we could make a recommendation for tex dot to install a traffic signal but it's since Teasley is a tex dot facility it's ultimately their call to approve it and for identifying funding construction is sure this is a great part. Yeah yeah I know that's been a talk for a long time on the intersection because I mean the issue is is they have to turn right and if they have to go the other direction they're gonna be doing a u-turn at that intersection and boy I mean certain times a day it is it's super rough there. Commissioner Thacker. Thank you chair. I just want to point out that in having to take that right you are going right into a school zone. That's right. So in terms of there already being traffic on that road which I experience on the daily if there's added traffic particularly around the three o'clock period you are adding like insult to injury in terms of safety issues with children crossing the street and potentially that u-turn. I just wanted that for the for discussion. Thank you. Commissioner Pruitt. Just because I'm curious understand all the concerns and potential lights and it's tech stock roadway all that kind of thing. In general as congestion increases does the speed reduce and therefore how does that affect safety? As the density increases speeds reduce and in the past years in 2021 when I was here and 22 we did counts. It did not meet the signal warrants at Teasley and Pennsylvania but with that so much developments happening in Denton we are seeing 15 to 20 percent rise in traffic volumes and that's why it met the conditions that are marginally at this location for a traffic signal. Okay thank you. Yeah that's 45 miles an hour I believe there isn't it? Yes. Yeah. We are working on to reduce to 35 in the next update to the city speed limits. Got it. Okay thank you. Actually I'm going to ask you a question regarding the site plan. So there's no there's no turn in lane for this right? It would be coming right off at Teasley. Correct. Today the minimum requirements for a turn lane is 50 trips an hour. There are most trips that they had was 12. Okay. Commissioner Villarreal. You're good thank you chair. So I know there were two what seemed to be well attended public meetings regarding this project. We only received one response form and was in opposition. Do we know what the feeling was at those two community meetings? Was it relatively supportive? I know a lot of the questions were answered by the applicant but do we know what the communities feel was on this particular project? It's hard to say from the neighborhood meeting since you received your backup I did receive another letter in opposition earlier today and then I received a letter in support from one property owner who owns seven parcels within the 200 foot area. So one of the letters in opposition that I received today said that this would be spot zoning and he wanted a specific zoning district from our 1991 code. So I did speak to him on the phone before he sent in the letter and I let him know that it's not rezoning it's going to stay R2 so it's not spot zoning. The first letter of opposition I received did not have any information from them. So it's hard to say how they felt. They did ask a lot of questions and there it was I believe it was an hour and a half long at each meeting so there was a lot of discussion back and forth but it was hard to say how they felt towards the end of the meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Anything else at the moment? Thank you very much. Yeah sure Tina go ahead. So one thing for the Commission to take in consideration so no if this if the Commission finds that the traffic concerns associated with this request are challenging I would ask that you balance that in terms of if the property were to develop under the existing single-family residential zoning you know they might be able to get four or five lots in on that property and our traffic exemptions in terms of trips per day are 10 trips per day. So if we have four or five single-family lots that are being constructed there then you're looking at 40 to 50 trips per day which is comparable to or exceeds what we're anticipating with the proposed vet clinic. So just some information for your consideration. Thank you. Appreciate that. Okay on to 4 CS 24 0002. Here is making her way up for that discussion. Hi. Hi good evening chair and members of the Commission. Okay this is S 24 - 0002. This is a request for an amendment to specific use permit 2003 - 325 to allow for site changes to an existing DATCOOP facility. The site is located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Teasley. This is also Teasley FM 2481 Lillian B Miller and Wind River and the Teasley Commons shopping center. So this is an existing DATCOOP facility that they are just proposing to reduce drive through banking lanes and replace with five additional parking lanes. The site is currently zoned mixed-use neighborhood MN and the future zoning is neighborhood mixed-use. The site is approximately 0.89 acres and staff is recommending approval. I have a more detailed presentation in the main session. Great. Questions? Mr. Pruitt? Just for clarification so we're all on the same page. This type of amendment would normally be a staff review of reviewable thing were it not for the SUP requirement for a drive-through existing at all within the MN zoning district. Is that correct? Yes correct. Okay thank you. Anything else? Okay thank you. Okay next is 4D PDA 230005. That is Mia's item today. Good evening chair. Hi. Members of the Commission. This item PDA 230005 is a plan development amendment for Gateway of Denton to establish a site plan for a new auto fuel and auto wash development per a per our former ordinance that the PD 139 was adopted under to adopt the site plan you'd have to go through the PD process so in order to adopt that site plan in accordance with our current standards you have to go through the PD amendment process and this does constitute as a major amendment so that is why it's coming before this body. The site itself is located just southeast at the southeast corner of Vintage Boulevard and I-35W at approximately 4.3 acres. The site plan does meet all of our criteria for approval and so staff is recommending approval of this site plan as presented with some conditions to ensure that off-site improvements associated with the proposed development are constructed accordingly. I do have a more detailed site or presentation to go over in the regular session but if you have any questions I can answer them now. Thank you. Mr. Barrett. Thank you chair. I am being quick today. You're good. If I recall let me just make sure I'm not being the idiot with the foot in my mouth. There was a application for a multifamily that was down in this southeast corner of one of these intersections. Is that directly south of this parcel or is that further south with some buffer space in between? That is directly south of here and if you can see sort of what this aerial is it's under construction currently. Okay so it would connect right at that left access point right there. Correct. There is a so there is a southern connection here on site or off street for that will be established via cross access and then there's another connection to an existing drive out here to the to the east. Okay thank you. Anything else from you? Tina would like to add one thing. So for the benefit of our newer commissioners I know some some of you more experienced commissioners have seen a similar top request with the multifamily to the south. So one of the normally with a planned development district amendment the commission would have a fair amount of latitude. In this case you do not. Reason being is with these old PDs and given how they transferred over I just wanted to let you know you know as Mia pointed out this use is currently allowed by right under the existing plan development district. So this is not a land use discussion this evening. This is a process that an applicant has to go through in order to be able to have their site plan approved. Normally this would be something that we would approve at the staff level you know as Mia pointed out this site plan meets all of our criteria. So this is more of a ministerial function and less of a discretionary function. So since we don't receive these that often want to especially let our newer commissioners know that that we do not have nearly the amount of discretion with this type of request this evening compared to what we might have with a different type of plan development district ordinance that you might consider. Thank you. Okay thanks Mia. Okay our final public hearing item tonight is for EDCA 230002. Hello Angie you're hearing this again. Hello Angie Manglaris development review manager here to talk to you this evening about short-term rentals and the code amendment process. Quick reminder for you all we are we did consider this item in February and in March of this year and after discussion among staff and the continually evolving legal landscape felt that a wider and broader public outreach and public notification process was was needed so staff did mail out approximately 30,000 postcards to advertise the the public hearing for both Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. There has not been any any content change between the meetings but I will give you all an overview of what we're talking about the proposed changes and why we're doing this. So the current state of short-term rentals short-term rentals are currently allowed in all zoning districts RR through R7 as well as MN. They're currently defined as a rental of an entire dwelling unit for a period of time less than 30 consecutive days not including a bed and breakfast a boarding room hotel or motel. They are currently subject to hotel occupancy taxes. They are required to register register to operate. We estimate approximately 33 of maybe 250 in the city are registered. They are required to provide a 24-hour emergency contact. There is not a permit cap today for short-term rentals. Short-term rentals are different from a bed and breakfast as well as from a hotel by by the definitions you see here. The main the main points of difference between a bed and breakfast and a short-term rental is a bed and breakfast is owner occupied or occupied by a resident manager rooms are rented and meals may be preserved I'm sorry served to those who are staying overnight. A hotel is a facility that offers transient lodging for a daily rate for a period of time not to exceed 30 days and provides additional services. Those could be restaurants meeting rooms and recreation facilities. They're also accessed through a main entry such as a hallway. There was a town hall discussion that was held last week. The discussion varied but two of the main points that came out of that was the hotel occupancy taxes and some concern over being subject to those. That's that's not really part of this discussion. This is a land use discussion and I did want to point out that hotel occupancy taxes are currently required. They're authorized by the state tax code and the decision to to impose hotel occupancy taxes was approved by city ordinance I believe in the 90s maybe 96. So that's where the city gets the authority to impose hotel occupancy taxes and and like I said they are currently required to date. Another topic that came up was the hundred foot distance separation. There was concern among those who who currently have units that they may not meet those requirements. Those who are registered before August 1 2024 they would be considered to be legal non-conforming uses and legal non-conforming uses are subject to the provisions in DDC sub chapter 1.5. That section is rather lengthy but but two main points you they the non-conforming status is kept provided there's not a structural alteration of the building specifically an enlargement and enlargement of the use or if the use ceases operation for a year or more. Those would be some of the circumstances in which an individual may lose their non-conforming status. Having said all of that today we are here to discuss updates to the short-term rental provisions within the DDC that includes our table of allowed uses, use specific standards, commercial specific standards, our parking requirements as well as definitions all as they relate to short-term rentals. The reason for this is a public engagement survey did show concerns related to the impacts of STRs on established residential neighborhoods. The amendments are intended to limit limit any impacts and strengthen the ability of the city's ability to enforce short-term regulations. It's to ensure compliance with recently established legal precedents to strengthen the enforcement of our regulations and assist with the collection of hotel occupancy taxes and is consistent with the DDC's overall purpose statement to promote the health life and safety of the City of Denton and its inhabitants. With that we are recommending approval of the code amendments as they do meet the criteria for approval in the DDC. I will have the the detailed presentation to go through during regular session but I'm happy to answer any questions you all may have now. Thanks Angie. We have questions now for Angie. Commissioner Pratt? Just two things more more so to make sure we cover them in the open session when there may be more public present. One in order to be eligible for the legal non-conforming status do they have to meet the requirements to register for a short term rental under our current code without this amendment? Yes so to get that status somebody would need to be able to register and and be a legally allowed use today in order to one had ever been legal to maintain that or to get that status when they go into effect August 1. Okay so there I don't want to parse words too much but there might be some edge cases like somebody who is renting out a bedroom that's not in a complete dwelling unit who would be eligible under the new but not under the old and that could be sticky but it's a large... There could be some uses that are operating not in compliance with with the current code and and wouldn't be allowed to come register tomorrow that's correct. And then last thing just to make sure that the public grasps it the hundred foot separation as I understand it is applicable for applicants within a residential zoning district but not under some of the mixed use districts is that correct? That's correct and I have separate slides for how it applies in residential and non-residential to hopefully capture that. Very good thank you. Commissioner Thacker. So looking at the hotel occupancy tax and you know mentioning strengthening the enforcement of that short-term regulation and basically us coming up with how we're gonna further enforce this if it's a tax that's existed since the 90s what have we been doing to enforce it for 30 years? Sure so my my understanding in in kind of working with our our team who's implementing the new software is an individual has to be identified as a short-term rental for the city to know that you are a an operating short-term rental that is subject to that tax and so when a short-term rental permit is issued our finance team works with them to ensure they're remitting that tax and so those who are registered they they're remitting either on a monthly or a quarterly basis and then I mean the hotels and motels of the city are more identifiable than the short-term rentals where you're you may not be sure if one is operating but so that's how it's currently working and will continue to work in much the same manner the new software that we have again will be helpful in putting everything in one succinct place as well as identifying who may be a short-term rental but not yet registered. Thank you. Anything else at the moment? Commissioner Padron. So I have a question about the registration. Yep. So reading the information they have to renew annually correct? Correct. Is there any priority given to persons that had registered prior? Yes it's specified I can pull up which subsection but if you if you're registered your renewal period starts in November so you have November to December to do so new registrations are accepted following the first of the year. Commissioner Fager. Sorry one more question and you know remind me if I have forgotten I've slept since the last time we discussed this. Where did we come up with the thousand cap? Yep great question. In the the survey that we held the question about is is is a density limitation or or regulation needed or desired and and the sentiment was yes but results varied greatly. And to interrupt we're talking about residential districts for the thousand. Yes that's where the thousand cap applies yes and the survey results also showed that of those who preferred to see more enforcement on STR as it was in neighborhoods what we saw our downtown or commercial areas is maybe more acceptable to that use. So in exploring density a variety of options were were looked at but what it what it came to was 1,000 residential units is roughly 3% of all single-family zoned properties in the city of Denton or parcels in the city of Denton. And in looking at different numbers and at different thresholds that that was an agreeable middle ground compromise from from those who who wanted to see none to those who who would prefer to see closer to 10 or 20% and this will be obviously this is what the ordinance is amending but it was also understood that if we see that we're running into two issues and the 3% for some reason if something changes or Denton suddenly has much more STRs that it may be appropriate to revisit that from time to time but that this felt like an agreeable starting point. So I mean as we get more houses the 3% is going to create a different number right so is that something that we are going to kind of consider annually or as we do like massive developments? I don't know that there's a plan to consider it annually at this point but it it is a metric that's easily trackable and if we see that we're really running into some issues it could be brought up that it might be time to revisit this. And again with it only applying to single-family it could be that we start to get more located towards downtown where that cap doesn't apply it's difficult to say how it will play out. Anything else? Okay thank you Angie. Thank you. Okay that works us through our agenda for this evening so we have one work session report and that is 2A PZ 24 100 receive a report and hold a discussion regarding amenity centers. Hello Erin. Hello. Okay Erin Stanley assistant planner. So this is a presentation about amenity centers in response to a question from former Councilman Tim Smith just about general inquiries of the requirements and regulations for amenity centers. So the definition in the DDC of an amenity center is a building or facility owned or operated by a corporation association person or persons for a place of meeting social cultural educational or recreational purposes to which membership or residency requirements is required for participation. We currently allow amenity centers in all they're permitted by right in all districts that allow residential uses and we do require amenity center parking one space per 300 square feet gross floor area and parking must be located to the side or rear of the building in limited situations depending on the zoning district classification of the budding roadway surrounding development they could have parking in the front of the building but the standard is to the side or rear. Amenity centers are a non residential use even though they're commonly associated with residential uses so they have they follow all of the non residential building standards their primary at building orientation would be towards the street rather than a parking area trash storage and mechanical equipment needs to be located away from public view and the building needs to have no more than 50 continuous feet without a horizontal or vertical break they also it would be subject to all of the landscape standards that the same any other non-residential use would be required to follow one thing to note is that any amenity centers directly adjacent to single-family detached duplex townhome multifamily uses would be required to buffer between those uses 30 feet or 15 feet or and also 30 points from our buffer table and then they also would be required to follow all tree preservation and access and circulation standards in the DDC the same as any other non-residential use. The main thing to remember is amenity centers are not required they are optional to include in any neighborhood and a multifamily any residential development they when they are required they need to be in addition to any required requirement for open space that duplexes townhomes multifamily has and they we most commonly see them on multifamily developments and in that case they're evaluated at the same time as all of the other multifamily buildings the site design is all evaluated together and in that single-family residential developments the amenity centers we typically look at them to be located on an HOA lot on commonly an open space lot just to ensure that there is someone to be responsible for the financial aspect and the maintenance of the of the amenity center and then when staff reviews amenity centers we are looking for what adjacent street types are make sure it's in an accessible area and that it has sufficient parking access and circulation so here are just a few examples this one is Eagle Creek I believe yes this is Eagle Creek and so you can see here it's on the major roadways at the corner it's on an HOA lot so there's the maintenance provided there and this one is sage brook also located on an HOA lot at the the cul-de-sac providing parking but they also are required their on-site parking as well and that is the presentation but I'll stand for any questions questions commissioner Perot thank you chair so the the buffering requirement is that purely to vertical improvements for I'm just trying to understand like the delineation between amenity center and like a park with us great right right that would be between the the building itself or any like permanent structure okay like a splash pad that's different from an amenity center that would probably be just part of like their open space amenities but not the amenity center building itself and if they wanted to put like a bathroom building there that that wouldn't rise to that I'm just trying to understand definitions if that makes sense that would are you thinking and like a multifamily development anything just yeah and the permanent structure would be would is what triggers that would trigger the buffer okay to buffer between here we go over how parking is determined this is the required parking calculation so just one space per the gross floor area of the building every 300 feet I mean I'm sure most amenity centers are based on well in a lot of areas just walking to it I'm sure yeah any other questions okay thank you for the presentation appreciate it you're welcome all right that takes us completion of our work session so we'll go ahead and adjourn at 539 p.m. and we will reconvene in council chambers at 630 good evening and welcome to the city of Denton's planning and zoning Commission meeting for Wednesday May 29th 2024 with a quorum present I will call us to order at 630 p.m. let the record show that Commissioner Cole is absent today first item on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance to the u.s. and Texas flags thank you everyone next item on our agenda is the approval of the minutes from our May 15th meeting Commissioner Villarreal move approval Commissioner Padron second thank you got a first and a second for approval of our minutes for May 15th any discussion okay let's go ahead and vote please that motion carries 5-0 on to our items for individual consideration 3a is PZ 2 4 0 9 4 elect a vice chair to the planning and zoning Commission Commissioner Villarreal I nominate Commissioner Eric Pruitt for vice chair Commissioner Padron I second we've got a first and a second for Commissioner Pruitt to be nominated as vice chair any discussion it's an honor thank you okay let's go ahead and vote on the board please that motion carries 5-0 welcome vice chair Pruitt I next item is 3b fr2 3 0 0 0 3 Angie is here for presentation of this item good evening chair and members of the Commission Angie Manglaris development manager this is fr2 3 0 0 0 3b it is a final replat of Glenwood Meadows the purpose of this replat is to create Glenwood Meadows phase 2 which would establish approximately 42 lots on a little over 10 acres of land when Glenwood Meadows was platted this area was situated within the FEMA floodplain and they are working on working through the Clomar and Lomar process to bring that out of the floodplain they're not quite at full approval status yet as the final Lomar for the project has not been received and all lots wouldn't be developable due to that so staff is recommending a conditional approval of this final plot the recommended condition is before you on your screen once that Lomar is received they will have to come back to planning and zoning Commission to receive their their final approval without conditions happy to answer any questions you all may have thanks Angie any questions okay thank you so much for the presentation sure couldn't look for a discussion or a motion Commissioner Villarreal I recommend approval with conditions Commissioner Pruitt second and I'll clarify that is the motion to approve with staff condition as presented okay we've got a first and a second to approve this item as presented and questions or discussion let's go ahead and vote please that motion carries five zero that will take us to our public hearings for this evening a 4a Z 24 0 0 0 5 is postponed and will be renoticed at a future date so we will not be hearing that item so that will take us to 4b s 2 3 0 0 0 6 and Ashley is here for presentation and I will open the public hearing good evening chair members of the Commission Ashley exit associate planner this is s 23 6 right denton Teasley this is a request for a specific use permit to allow our veterinary clinic use on approximately two acres of land this site is generally located on the south side of Teasley Lane west of Pennsylvania Drive the existing zoning is r2 and it is shown on the map on the left and the future land use is low residential which is shown on the map to the right the proposed site plan shows an approximately 4,000 square foot building with approximately 30 foot height that is outlined on the shown site plan in blue they did design it with their residential architectural style to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and those elevations are shown on your screen as well they're proposing an outdoor fence dog run that is shown on your plan outlined in green they did request a director modification for additional parking spaces we did approve those additional 14 parking spaces and those 14 parking spaces will be pervious the parking is located to the front of the building and also on the west side the right of way dedication is outlined on the plan in red we do feel this sets the area up for better long-term connectivity in the future and based on neighborhood feedback at a neighborhood meeting they did show their original plan showed a fire lane connecting to the church to the east through a public access easement onto Pennsylvania and that has been removed to address neighborhood and staff concerns and this new plan does not add any additional traffic to Pennsylvania the proposed landscape plan shows approximately 52 percent landscape area and 70 percent tree canopy cover street trees are placed along Teasley and the new right of way and those are both outlined on the plan in blue they are proposing parking lot landscaping including end caps and landscape islands with the tree in each this does meet the criteria for approval it's consistent with the 2040 comprehensive plan and the future land use map it's also compatible with the surrounding area approval of this SUP is not expected to generate significant adverse environmental infrastructure or fiscal impacts public outreach was done an ad was posted in the newspaper on the website and a sign was posted on the property we mailed out notices to everyone within 500 feet and at the time that we sent out your backup we had only received one response in opposition that has now changed we received two for a total of 5.3 percent in one response in favor from one property owner who owns seven parcels and that is approximately 30% in favor there were also neighborhood meetings held on January 24th and May 1st staff does recommend approval of the SUP with the following conditions and many of these are typical SUP conditions I won't read all of these to you the site plan in the landscape plan will substantially comply to what has been attached Teasley is a text out roadway so any improvements within the text that roadway do require approval by text dot any minor alterations to relocate the proposed right of way that extends south of Teasley Lane Lee relocate parking spaces impacted by that relocation or at a turn lane can be approved by staff all other changes to the site access will require an SUP amendment happy to answer any questions and the applicant is also here and would like to speak and also to answer questions great thank you Ashley any questions for staff at this moment okay and you said the applicant does have a presentation she doesn't have a presentation but she would like to speak okay excellent we have a card so I'll invite the applicant here that would be great yep hello I'm super nervous I'm Cassie I'm dr. Epstein I currently have a practice in town right on the other side of the South Branch Library on Teasley I've moved here in 2000 I think this is the right development partially because I bought it from dr. Wright I'm not sure how that name became attached to it but I assume that's part of it but I've worked closely with the city shelter and with I've been here for 20 years and I'm not looking to make anything big or move this I just want a more suitable home for my clinic we're currently in an old house and it's not purpose-built and we're kind of bumping into each other and I just want to be able to still take care of them and keep the neighborhood also still pretty green and friendly I live around the corner on Santa Monica so just want to be able to walk to work with my kids and keep it as green as possible in that area so great any questions thank you dr. I'm seeing any questions Commissioner Thacker so I noticed on the model that there was like a fenced in area for running what is the noise impact for the people that live on Carmel it's just for walking dogs in a fenced area since we're on a busy road I don't want people even on leash dogs can get away from you so it's just a secondary like safety measure so that we don't have anybody loose I don't want them walking dogs like right near Teasley with only a leash okay fair enough so thanks we won't have any boarding or like overnight things or anything like that it's just a day practice yes and you're good commissioner Thacker do you know do doggy daycare or anything like that yeah it is just it is your practice I'm it's my it's you with with one other doctor yeah and I have enough responsibility under my belt and I'm not the time to sell the corporate and make all the big bucks has passed and it will be me until I die like this is been here 20 years I'll be another 20 years I guess before I retire and this is this is what I do yeah awesome okay thank you any further questions okay thank you for being here thank you appreciate it appreciate it thank you oh this is a public hearing I don't have any cards to speak on this item but anyone is welcome to speak anyone wishing to speak on this item come on down just state your name and addressing your time will begin hi hi my name is Robert Autry I'm a member of the parks board for the city of Denton and a former employee of dr. Epstein's I just wanted to say that Cassie does do a great job for the city she's been on you know boards for the city so on behalf of current and former employees I would just also like to reiterate the need for a new nice purpose-built building thank you thank you is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item okay with that I will close the public hearing and open the floor for a motion or discussion Commissioner Villarreal I move approval Commissioner Thacker second we've got a first and a second for approval is there any further discussion okay we'll go ahead and vote on the board please that motion carries five zero and that will take us to 4c s24 0002 Aaron is here for presentation and I will open the public hearing good evening chair members of the commission Aaron Stanley assistant planner this is s24 - 0 0 0 2 this is an amendment request to specific use permit 2003 - 325 to amend the original site plan of an existing financial institution to put to allow for a reduction in the number of drive-through banking lanes and replace some of these with additional parking the site is located here in the Teasley Commons shopping center southwest of Teasley Wind River and Lillian B Miller and the current zoning is mixed use neighborhood and future zoning is neighborhood mixed use so in 2003 a detailed site plan was approved with a specific use permit to allow for drive-through uses for the Dacu building and the original site plan as you can see here in the upper right corner allowed for six drive-through banking lanes and 20 parking spaces on site just north of those all in a row over the years since 2003 there have been several changes to the site you'll see these 20 parking spaces there are now 14 to allow for a dumpster a handicap handicap spot and an ADA loading space and there are five drive-through banking lanes and a access drive around the southern portion so the original SUP in 2003 did not for allow for any minor modifications to the site and so the director has determined that an amendment to the SUP would require adoption of a new ordinance and an updated site plan so so the specifically the request is going to be to reduce from the existing five drive-through lanes to three drive-through lanes that you see here on the right and to add five parking spaces to total 19 on site so as I previously mentioned the original site plan called for 20 today we have 14 and they're going to add five to total 19 and six bicycle spaces will be provided on site as parking relief this updated plan will also extend the pedestrian pathway around the side of the building that's to the southern portion of the building to connect to these new parking spaces and they are also proposing an 88 square foot vestibule vestibule on the front of the building to serve as the main entrance and really just to match the other Dacu sites in the city there will also be a landscape plan approved with the updated site plans with with this they showed that they are still meeting they required 20% landscape area providing night or providing 22% in the development impact area and tree canopy is increasing to 42% by adding this one tree here to close to the added parking so staff reviewed the request against both of the original site specific use permit from 2003 and the Denton the Denton Development Code in 2019 and found that it is matches the standards of the original site plan and the current code to the greatest extent possible the proposal is also consistent with the comprehensive plan and future land use map and the current zoning district and as this is an existing site these improvements or changes on site are not expected to generate any substantial impact to surrounding properties roadways or the environment and utilities are not changing either with this they currently serve the site and will continue to serve the site and staff conducted public outreach we mailed 200 foot notices to 12 properties and 500 foot courtesy notices to all residents within the 500 feet we did receive four responses in favor from the neighboring properties the commercial properties in the Teasley common shopping center totaling 58% in favor and staff is recommending approval of the SCP amendment with a few conditions primarily these are just going to allow for future minor modifications for things like a reduction in parking space or a slight reduction in the building coverage and to allow for staff to change any depicted locations of the on-site pedestrian pathways or individual plantings things like that and with that is my presentation I believe the applicant is here I don't know if he wants to speak but to answer any questions great thank you Aaron appreciate it any questions for staff at this point okay thank you this is a public hearing I don't have cards wishing to speak but if there is anyone who would like to come and speak on this item please feel free okay I'll go ahead and close the public hearing I'll open the floor for a motion or discussion Commissioner Pruitt I'll move approval is presented and I just want to thank staff for updating this older ordinance so that it follows our current practice best practice of understanding the minor modifications are sometimes necessary in the future thank you Commissioner Thacker I second and echo what Pruitt said very good got a first and a second for approval any discussion okay let's go ahead and vote please that motion carries five zero that will take us to our next public hearing item for this evening for dpda two three zero zero zero five Mia is here for presentation and I will open the public hearing good evening chair members of the Commission Mia Heinz this item PDA 23 - zero zero zero five is a request to establish a site plan for an auto fuel and auto wash development the site is approximately four point three acres located at the southeast corner of vintage Boulevard and I 35 W the existing zoning is PD 139 with the conceptual development for this area as business village and I'll get into the PD here in a second and the future land use designation for this site is regional mixed use so under PD 139 originally established in 1991 it included approximately 450 acres and this site was included as a part of that plan development again the initial concept for the development of this site was a business village in 1999 that PD was amended to establish this area as a sort of regional mixed use type of area under after the revision in 1999 the PD 139 was amended again in 2002 and then in 2022 there was a plan development amendment for the multifamily site to the south the reason that the site plan is become coming before this body the applicant is not proposing any substantive change changes to the existing PD language they are simply establishing a site plan for the development of a use that is already permitted on this site per the standards and requirements that were adopted in place at the time that this PD was adopted so with that proposed site plan they are proposing a approximately 9300 square foot travel center with a restaurant on the side 53 approximately just over 5300 square foot car wash also and those are shown there in brown and a point nine seven acre pad side to the east that has not had or it has not identified an end user or development site plan the overall landscape percentage coverage is 40% of the street yard as required per again the landscape ordinance in existence at the time of this PD as far as access and connectivity for the moment they are proposing to reconstruct the existing ten foot wide side path along vintage boulevard to align with their eastbound right turn lane that's required for this site in general the access point shown there to the west on side 35 circled in red it will be a emergency only access point the point shown in green is intended to be a entrance and exit point on vintage boulevard the yellow points are pedestrian connectivity connection points and stubs the one to the south is to the existing multifamily development and off-street pedestrian connection point and then there are also two cross access points shown there in blue additionally as a part of off-site or off-street improvements attached to this development they will be required to construct an eastbound right turn lane on vintage boulevard a westbound left turn lane on vintage boulevard and a median opening on message boulevard to ensure that this development has adequate transportation or vehicular service this request is in line with the criteria for approval in our current development code specifically the proposed development is consistent with the didn't 2040 comprehensive plans future land use designation of regional mixed use as it allows for the development of those region to regional uses the proposed development complies with the development standards applicable to this PD again those are the standards that were initially established under that 1969 zoning ordinance and the landscape ordinance from the 1990s this request does not propose to remove any restrictions of the existing PD and adds additional conditions given the existing context and and the proposed site plan we did perform public outreach per our code to up to this point we have not received any responses in favor or in opposition of the proposed site plan and with that staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions fully detailed and laid out in your backup but just to mention some of those and some of those improvements that I mentioned in this presentation that emergency access or the point off of I 35 W shall be emergency access only until such time as text dot reconstruction of I 35 frontage road right away improvements for vintage boulevard shall include an eastbound right turn lane westbound left turn lane and median opening with vintage within vintage boulevard constructed per city standards at this time I will take any questions or comments that you have and I believe I did see the owner and applicant in the crowd if you have any questions and for them thank you meal appreciate it any questions right now for me oh well done thank you this is a public hearing I don't have a card for anyone wishing to speak but if you'd like to come on up to the podium and state your name and address and your time will begin hello hello good evening my name is Mohammed Sharaf I am at why oh five 105 YMCA Drive in Waxahachie I am representing the ownership Victron energy incorporated we'll keep it short and sweet for you guys we have been working with staff they've been honestly really great to work with one of the better cities we've recently developed in for the better part of a year here a little bit on our company Victron energy were the largest my family owns it with largest family-owned convenience store operator in the state of Texas we're based just south of Dallas Waxahachie we have 200 convenience stores and travel centers we own and operate and we're also franchisees with multiple different restaurant brands and we also own and operate car washes and so the plan here is we're going to a travel center with a barbecue restaurant our travel center brand is called Texas best smokehouse you guys may have seen it traveling on some of the highways on I-20 or 35 South or so on and we're going to a Sonic restaurant here and then a car wash so in short if you have any questions just let me know we the original zoning on this property was I would say very favorable to the user maybe not so favorable to the city it had like five foot setbacks and almost a landscaping requirement things like that and and the staff you know sort of asked us to consider complying with the city's modern code requirements even though perhaps technically we didn't absolutely have to but we were happy to do that and so happy to be presenting this and putting it forward you know with no variances based off of the current city's zoning and code so again if you have any questions or comments I'm right here otherwise thank you very much thank you for being here any questions okay thank you this is a public hearing is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item okay I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and open the floor for a motion or discussion I will go ahead and move approval of this item as presented Mia thank you for doing a great job in making things concise and understandable of what we were actually looking at here so thank you very much Commissioner Villarreal second okay we've got a first and a second for approval is there any discussion okay let's go ahead and vote please okay that motion carries five zero that will take us to our final public hearing item tonight that's 4e DCA two three zero zero zero two I will go ahead and open the public hearing and Angie is here for presentation okay good evening chair members of the Commission Angie Manglaris development review manager here to present DCA 23 zero zero zero two F it's a short-term rental code amendment updates before we dive right into our conversation wanted to touch on hotel occupancy taxes real quick as they they were they were brought up quite a bit in our town hall that we held last week hotel occupancy taxes are currently required by the development code for short-term rental operators short I'm sorry hotel occupancy tax is authorized by this Texas state tax code and was approved by city ordinance and so the the the use of hotel occupancy taxes is not really part of this land use discussion it is approved by it by city council and has been in effect since the 1990s it is a current requirement we're not proposing to change that requirement as part of this discussion having said that the item before you this evening is to update our table of allowed uses use specific standards generally commercial use specific standards parking requirements and definitions as they relate to the regulation of short-term rentals reason being as staff was going through and looking at short-term rental regulations in light of the continuing evolving litigation surrounding the use public engagement was held and public engagement found that concerns related to the impacts of short-term rentals on residential neighborhoods was relatively high the amendments are intended to limit those potential impacts while strengthening the city's ability to enforce STR regulations as issues may arise in addition these amendments are designed to ensure compliance with recently established legal precedent as well as strengthen the enforcement of our short-term rental regulations to ensure that we are seeing compliance with these regulations as well as aid in the collection of hotel occupancy taxes a little bit about where we are today with short-term rentals short-term rentals are currently allowed in all of our residential zoning districts by right as well as in the neighborhood mixed-use zoning district short-term rentals are currently defined as the rental of an entire dwelling unit for monetary consideration for a period of time of less than 30 days this is a different definition than what consists of a hotel registration is currently required a local emergency contact or a 24-hour contact is currently required and there is no cap on the number of short-term rentals that may exist within the city limits a little bit of more background on this this project really started at the beginning of 2023 to comply with rulings that came out of the Fifth Circuit which held that STR applicants being required to demonstrate that the dwelling is their primary residence was unconstitutional staff determined that there was a DDC requirement at that time that was in conflict with this and it didn't need to be addressed that has been since amended that was approved back in July of 2023 however during this time staff did a review of the city's STR requirements as I said recent litigation surrounding the land use as well as how other cities in the metroplex and the state are regulating short-term rentals as we reviewed we worked with the development code review committee in several areas were identified where there was need for an improvement some of that was just clarification and consolidation of existing language that we had in our DDC that included refining what consists of a short-term rental to allow for bedrooms to be listed as well as whole units that included refining what a local emergency contact was and making sure that the ordinance was clear that that is pointing to a definition that exists in the DDC some revisions were made to the advertisement requirements for short-term rentals and then additional clarification for enforcement and revocation policies as well as starting to consider maximum densities for short-term rentals so that discussion really went on for a lot of 2023 and it was followed by a heavy public engagement plan there were two town halls conducted in the summer of 2023 to start putting the word out about the potential amendments and talked to residents about it in addition a survey was conducted online it was open for a approximately three weeks and about 220 individuals responded to the 20 question survey results indicated a desire to maintain the integrity of established single-family neighborhoods while also possibly allowing higher densities of short-term rentals in other areas of the city at that time staff as well along with the DC RC began exploring different thresholds for short-term rentals and residential areas while still allowing for those uses to exist in non residential areas such as our mixed-use areas and throughout the fall of 2023 the DC RC and staff really explored that density limitation having said all of that and giving you some background I'm going to go over the proposed amendments that we're considering this evening so the proposed amendments would allow a short-term rental by right by any zoning district that allows for a short-term I'm sorry for a residential use so this extends it to all of our mixed-use districts as well as SC HC and geo in addition you specific standards were modified to remove to add short-term rentals as those land uses that are exempt from maximum persons occupying a dwelling unit in light of recent legislation proposed amendments to the text modify the registration process to clarify that a bedroom or an entire unit may be listed as a short-term rental it does require that the management company be provided when that's applicable as well as better clarify what constitutes a local emergency contact and that it's a defined term in the DDC registration certificates is a new proposal as part of these amendments as probably one of the more substantial changes so I will break it down as to how that affects residential property residentially zoned properties and then our commercially zoned areas so registration certificates and residential zoning areas are limited to 1,000 registration certificates issued per calendar year this applies to all properties within rr through r7 zoning the development services department shall process those applications in the order in which they're received in the event that the number 1,000 is ever reached in a calendar year applications will stop being accepted and individuals could be will be asked to wait a maximum of two short-term rental registration certificates may be issued per parcel this would allow for an individual with a home and an adu to utilize both of those spaces for short-term rentals and then a short-term rental unit cannot be within a hundred feet of an existing short-term rental unit and this is measured at the at the property line so an individual the short-term rental on their parcel somebody new would like to come in the hundred foot property the hundred foot would be taken from the property line to property line to measure that separation distance in non-residential zoning districts which is all of our mixed-use zoning districts suburban corridor highway corridor and general office the thousand registration certificate cap does not apply for multifamily developments so five units or more no more than ten percent of a unit of those units could be listed as short-term rentals allowing at least two short-term rentals per per multifamily development and those within non-residential zoning districts are not subject to the 100 foot separation rule some additional changes and clarification that has been provided for in these amendments are to to clarify that a written safety briefing needs to be provided to guests upon you know arriving and what those responsibilities are for the management company to their guests notification of approval of a short-term rental that section was modified slightly just to clarify when notification goes out and what information needs to be included including that a local emergency contact subsection or number six is revising the registration term and fees which really specifies conditions under which a short-term rental permit may be revoked the right to inspect premises just kind of clarifying when those inspections should occur as part of this process when somebody registers and then finally some amendments were made to the minimum off-street parking we found our existing language to be a little confusing and so the parking has been revised to specify that the maximum number of vehicles allowed on-premise shall be limited to the available spaces on-site definitions were revised to to clarify that a short-term rental shall not be less than 24 hours nor greater than 29 days and also allows for a bedroom to be considered as a short-term rental and then the local emergency contact definition again was just was modified to consolidate a little bit and make it more clear again in summary these these are updates to several sections of the debt and development code as it relates to the regulation of short-term rentals this is compliant with the criteria for approval for tax amendments and the DC and staff is recommending approval of these amendments which I just covered the next step would be City Council on June 4th and I'm happy to answer any questions you all may have thank you Angie any questions at the moment for Angie Angie for clarification of those here and watching and listening with regard to registration talk about that period and also about renewing a registration sure so the registration period runs the the registration validity period is is January 1 through December 31 so that is the the time period for which all registrations are valid for those that are currently registered so let's let's just say it's August 1st and we're in our new requirements they've gone into effect as the year starts to close if you have a current short-term rental permit and you're interested in renewing the renewal period for those existing short-term rental units is is open from November 1 through December 31 giving priority to those who already have an existing registration any new registrations for individuals seeking a new short-term rental permit could be accepted after after the first of the year okay thank you any other questions for Angie thank you very much okay this is a public hearing I do have some cards in front of me wishing to speak first I have is Mary Anderson hello hi you'll state your name and address your time will begin Mary Anderson 924 West Oak so I live in the historic district unlike people that many in this room I don't live in an HOA neighborhood HOA is by most part don't allow short-term rentals and I think that the proposal is a good start it's not hard enough I live near a UNT you need more rules and regulations who's gonna enforce these we can't even enforce speed or traffic or anything and did they race by 55 miles an hour down my street I'm talking oak so how are you going to enforce this nobody is enforcing we have two one or two code enforcements one or two motorcycle police it's all sounds good but there's no enforcement there's no teeth there's no penalties so you need to do more I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to have some but I don't need out-of-town people coming in and you've already told me 27 out of 250 known short-term rentals are not reporting so that's a huge number of non reporting how are you gonna find them cities are already spending thousands trying to find them talk to Plano talk to Arlington talk to Fort Worth there are plenty of non and Dallas all of these cities are doing more than we are doing so I think it's a good start you need to do more than what is here you know I'm for homes you're gonna limit the number of affordable homes to people by putting more of these in developers are gonna come in from out of town buy these whole things and turn them into short-term rentals let them go out to HOA's let them be in your backyard if they are not owner-occupied they should not be there just can't say enough about it thank you so much thank you next card I have wishing to speak is Francis punch hi let's take your name and address your time will begin I'm Francis punch I live at 2002 Wisteria Street I am the previous two-term chair for the parks board and the current vice-chair I am I want to make it clear that I am NOT opposed to amendments I agree I second our first speaker I think we do this is an awesome start I do think we need more stringent and the reason is because when I purchased my home I was drawn to didn't because of the family neighborhoods I think the continued uncontrolled growth of short-term rental rentals as coded I still has a few loopholes to allow neighborhoods to become slums that's what is they're going to become slums I think bed and breakfasts should be also included I think that's a loophole for people to have a bed and breakfast in the front of their house and 80 you in the back and two doors down have another short-term rental enforcement enforcement enforcement I can't say enough about it it is needed it needs to be highly visible to the public and I understand we currently have 250 locations identified I personally suspect that this number is a small estimate I thank you for your time thank you Francis appreciate it next card wishing to speak is Marguerite Newell Neil hi there you'll state your name and address your time will begin my name is Marguerite Newell and I live at 731 Hillcrest and well in Denton and thank you so much for giving me this opportunity to speak tonight I'm here today is a long-term resident and property owner Denton County is known for its high property taxes ranking among the highest in Texas as an STR operator I have consistently contributed and also a long-term rental operator I've consistently contributed significantly to the community through these taxes meanwhile large developments like razor ranch often receive substantial tax incentives despite being non locally owned creating an uneven playing field for smaller property owners like myself STRs provide considerable economic benefits by attracting visitors who spend money locally thus boosting our city's revenue additionally STRs often host families and large groups who are visiting our local universities providing them with comfortable spaces where they can gather and enjoy their time together this not only supports the local economy but it also bolsters our educational institutions by accommodating prospective students and their families as a landlord with experience running to college students I can attest to the stark differences between long-term and short-term rentals long-term rentals often suffer from neglect and can become party hubs leading to issues with property maintenance and neighborhood peace in contrast STRs are typically better maintained due to the need for good reviews and continuous guests turnover moreover STRs provide essential accommodations for families and groups well I've already said that the city has yet to create a position to regulate long-term rentals but this has been done for STRs this is especially egregious when you consider that STRs constitute approximately 0.43 percent of all housing units in Denton the city of Denton has used substantial tax incentives to foster business development and economic growth since 1999 the city has awarded 30 economic development incentives totaling 22 million dollars notable projects like the fine arts theater theater renovation received 1.6 million in tax incentives highlighting the city's commitment to revitalizing key areas and supporting businesses where is this support for STR owners several legal precedents support the property the rights of property owners to use their properties for STRs and tar versus Timberwood Park Owners Association the Texas Supreme Court ruled that short-term rentals do not violate residential use deed restrictions as long as the property is used for residential purposes regardless of the duration of the stay this ruling reinforces the protection of property rights and sets a significant precedent for similar cases across Texas additionally a federal court ruling against Austin stringent STR regulations further supports the argument that local ordinances should not unreasonably restrict property rights the Texas Supreme Court decision an ongoing litigation highlight the importance of fair and balanced regulations that respect property owners rights while addressing community concerns the proposed STR on it ordinance amendments which include capping the number of STR registration certificates and imposing separation requirements unfairly target STR operators these regulation disproportionately affect properties owners such as these we provide economic benefits by attracting visitors who spend money locally contributing to the city's revenue this economic activity is often overlooked compared to these incentives given to larger non locally owned developments like razor ranch in conclusion I urge the city the Commission to reconsider these proposed amendments we should focus on fair and balanced regulations that recognize the contributions of STRs to Denton's economy and community let's work together and that sport and support all the property owners and with continued growth and vibrancy of our city thank you very much for your time thank you we've got a question for you Commissioner Pruitt thank you thank you for coming tonight and thank you for your your years of operating your small business within the city I do have one question because I've I've often wondered my understanding and staff please correct me if I'm wrong is that the county appraisal districts in Texas must appraise properties operated as a single-family residence that have a homestead exemption on them as only valued as much as that use would employ as opposed to perhaps valued more if the land underneath them would be more valuable than that from a redevelopment perspective are the short-term rentals that you operate since they don't have a homestead exemption on them do you have any insight into how didn't CAD treats that and the reason I ask is that we've heard comments from the community in the in the public engagement process of this that they're concerned that increased valuations of homes from short-term rental operations would impact their ability to stay within their own home if that makes sense that does make sense but I say that problem already exists with long-term rentals and as a long-term rental owner we we do not benefit from that 10% cap and I am continuously and I'm serious almost every single year I'm having to go in and and fight the increase in taxes so that's already there thank you thank you I guess I have a question to you because you spoke in very general terms with what you said what specifically in in this that that staff has presented tonight is bothersome to you yes the first one is well the cap is the cap in residential districts the cap and then also the hundred-foot measured by the property line that's going to be problematic there are several short-term rentals that are side by side and it's I I don't see how in the state of Texas where we really value individual property rights how that's going to be just when just one of those is able to operate and and again what honestly just really gets me because I own both long-term and short-term and I've lived beside rental houses for for quite a while the parties the noise the trash the upkeep my home for example that is the short-term rental it was a long-term rental prior to that and I would try to do landscaping it was never maintained if you were to drive by and see my home now I was out there today weeding it it's beautiful it's one of the nicest properties on the street so I just understand the fear that people have that oh no you're gonna have all these strangers coming into town you already have that you know and it's much worse with long-term rentals there is no regulation of that there is no oversight not been very frustrated by that the way that it's kept up across the street there is an actual music venue in the residential neighborhood it's in a home and they had a two-day music festival that's not house venues are not uncommon so if someone could share exactly and honestly rather than just an abstract fear of what's gonna happen what danger the STRs pose it's it's it's yeah that's that's it okay thank you very much okay thank you next card I have I think wishing to speak because I have two from the same person so Mark had a check I've got one wishing to speak and one not wishing to speak so you are wishing I'm here today to pose the regulations to the short-term rentals versus the long-term rentals I've been in real estate business of running for over 30 years and residential rentals have been getting astronomically worse with the I've got judgments of ten twenty thousand out the people no way to collect they destroy my home destroy my property I can't maintain it I lose rights to my property I've had situations where they were destroying my home and I called the PD and they were only able to keep the peace and keep us from beating up each other but they could not prevent them from tearing down the house and the PD said they can completely rip the house down and you can take them to court well there's no insurance companies gonna pay for that there's nobody but me that's gonna rebuild that home out of my pocket so it's detrimental to the environment of our community compared to long short-term rentals I am in control of my home at all times if they violate the law or the right the rules of the home I can immediately impose sanctions against their credit card their deposits and these people have money they come to town with expense accounts budgets I've been renting for two years phenomenal no court cases talked to Joe Holland the other night at the informational he used to be the precinct one judge he said there's absolutely about I'm in any cases from STRs in this community so the fear that we have against them is not valid the the complaints against long term rentals of hooligans running around or 60 years you know partiers in there or I can't kick them out because they have rights they have my owner rights and so you know if they park you know irregularly or they destroy your home we have no control but short-term rentals once again immediately if they violate anything we can immediately put sanctions on and we can immediately charge them or if we can post where they to park or not to park and everyone that has been in my home because I have an apartment built next to it they're hard working professionals their families come into the Texas Motor Speedway their families come into even hospitals for family emergencies there has never been once any parties no neighborhood problems where I'm in a small little home and another thing too is it's kind of doesn't seem fair that we're gonna hit him with the hotel tax we're already harvesting a beautiful amount of eight point two five percent from our existing bedrooms in our community that we've never harvested before do we have to go and plow them for another two percent that's unfair and we need to provide them you know taxation with representation so if we get taxed we need to have a billboard out on the highway welcome STRs and also too if we maintain lower fees we're gonna track more business to this community versus Dallas Carrollton or wherever and those people come here and they buy food they go to the restaurants they go to grocery stores and the very good part of our community I think and also too I had a tenant for three weeks their family was with me their home was getting worked on on insurance it was damaged through a storm or whatever unlike the storms we just experienced you know where these poor families gonna go they have to go to a hotel hotels are cold nasty germy you know I go through my home and clean it thoroughly every single time I can paint paint it take care of it at will that's any questions thank you questions I do not see any thanks for coming to speak appreciate it I do not have any other cards in front of me but is there anyone else wishing to speak come on down you can fill out a card after but if you'll state your name and address your time will begin hi sure hello thank you for allowing me to speak my name is Philip bossan I'm a resident here in Denton 1429 Kendal drive we my wife and I are new STR owners we've been operating for less than a year and I just wanted to sort of support some of the early speakers comments about reasonable and considerate option operation of the facility so this STR is on our lot it's by our house so it's in our own interest that it be maintained it's in our own interest that there be no parties that things don't get out of hand and when we began constructing this as an ADU for a future mother-in-law unit which one day will agree to come live in it and then it will be that so it's in our interest to keep everything beautiful to keep everything in good condition and the fact this is why we decided not to do a long-term rental is because we put so much love and time into it we want control and we're able to do this so through Verbo through Airbnb it's clear from the get-go there are no parties there are quiet hours there are rules and it clearly states that anyone in violation of that can immediately be kicked out we if there were complaints we could call the police we could end it and we haven't had anything like that we've had requests for people who wanted to have parties and we had to turn them down we had requests for people who wanted to stay longer than 30 days not by a lot and this happened to be a visiting opera conductor for UNT because he was working on a program so I think there needs to be some potential exception for duration of time if there is maybe a provable need or some legitimate concern I think there needs to be room for that I'd also like to state that from the beginning when we began construction we were in communication with their neighbors we sent we gave everyone letters that had all of our contact information we let them know what the plans are we talked about the parking solution and the limit to it so that it would not impact their street their homes and they know what it is and all the guests that come to our place also know these rules they get the same thing as well as that I'd like to sort of underscore the support of the community so in our suggestions we have our welcome manual our welcome booklet that's there it's all local it's like these are the local restaurants you might want to go to these are the local breweries you might want to go to these are the crafts these are the markets we use local landscapers we use local nurseries we guide people if they request it we try to point them in the direction of all kinds of interesting or fascinating things and I won't belabor this too much more I'll keep this short but I can tell you that a lot of our guests have a lot to do with TWU or UNT their families coming in they need some time and space to look at the area to maybe look for a long-term solution we have a kitchen we have laundry we have a comfortable small family space it's only 800 square foot to bedroom but yet it's set up to support all kinds of people coming here for very legitimate reasons we haven't had any issues yet there have been a couple occasions where we had to check people on parking just say hey we you know what the rules are we have to do it this way or they requested that more cars come and we had to decline saying we're not able to do that so I just believe that everything if everyone is respectful and considerate and communicates I think there's all kinds of room for the STR market to be quite comfortable and accessible to everybody and that's all thank you for your time I think we've got a question for you Commissioner Prud. Thank you Chair. Thank you for coming tonight one thing you said I just want to make sure I grasp it and we communicate because it came up as we were considering these amendments over the last year I believe you said that you operate an STR out of an ADU within your property is that correct? Did the knowledge of that ability in the future make it easier to finance or afford building that ADU as right now an STR but future as a housing unit for someone here in Denton? Well the fact is it would probably be more successful as a long-term rental but again we wanted to control it so that's what it kind of came down to we didn't like the idea of a potential renter not doing well causing damage to the home as was mentioned before I'm also I also have two long-term rental properties in Denton and I've had to deal with some of this myself and I can tell you so far the SEI just seems like heaven compared to those properties. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item? You can come on down. Oh sorry. Good evening how are y'all? Hi. Thank you for this opportunity I've spoken with y'all before. I have a number of concerns number one is enforcement and I would like to know from probably Angie what exactly is going to be increased with the enforcement of this possible 1000 STRs because it looks like there could be four times as many as is estimated now so as someone said previously where is where's the enforcement coming from so she may wish to answer that in a minute another one is that this is a business it's a business in a residential area and although Texas is flies the flag of capitalism big and loud it's a business and if you're having problems with your business you could always sell that house for a really good profit I'm sure so so whining about you know I have bad tenants blah blah blah well get out of the business okay I just don't have any patience for that I've been a renter so I don't like to be slammed as someone who is horrible renters are not all horrible now I understand we're a college town but you get to screen your prospective customers so do it I don't like the idea of a lot of STRs in my neighborhood and everyone I talked to they don't like the idea either so I think 1000 is really too many and also we also have to think of our other business people in our city and those are hotel owners this is taking money from hotel owners so you're I can see where they're not be very happy with STRs lots of STRs because you're taking away from the hotels that you know are going to pay the hotel tax you know you have a constant stream of tax money coming from the hotels so you're taking a big gamble because they don't have to register we're not enforcing this because that's exactly what I heard from Angie in the past is that well we just haven't enforced it in the past so I'll sit down and be quiet but just because it's legal doesn't always mean that it's good because those STRs are being denied to families who need a place to live just this past two three days someone in my neighborhood put on next door pleading for neighbors to tell them about a house for rent they had an elderly mother they had another relative in the home they had a pet and they were their lease is expiring in June and they need you know two three-bedroom home and they're very it's very difficult to find the STRs take away from that opportunity for decent families to find rental property so I think a thousand it's way too many you're cutting off hotels at the ankles and just because greed is good you know that's our society I don't think just because you can you should so thank you for listening thank you very much ma'am sorry procedurally we need you to give your name and address and go ahead and fill out a card my apologies Pam Springer 513 Chateau thank you okay next person wishing to speak I think is over here hi Jay how are you my name is Jay Ocker 1851 Brinker I have been a resident of Denton for nearly 30 years thank you all for your time and your service to the Commission thank you for the presentation Angie a really a lot of good points have been brought up my partners and I own three different STRs all within six blocks of the square we've been involved in the town hall since last August when they fired up I think the genesis of putting parameters around STRs is very smart and I think it all started from the problems we had from our larger neighbors to the south I can echo what several people have already said our STRs on our streets are the nicest looking homes on the streets the yards are the most well-kept homes on the street and we vet the people that we actually lease out to and if they don't have reviews that they don't have a pile of very positive reviews we just deny them it's really that simple the hundred foot rule I don't know where that came from it seems like a lot of these things that were kind of imposed in the last few months these weren't things that were discussed at the town halls back in August and September again I'm echoing the sentiments that someone else said earlier Margaret mentioned if I've got somebody right beside me who's an STR STR owner and a responsible one at that when the deadline comes to register is it a matter of who clicks submit at 1201 on the registration date and the other person's the odd man out it seems like there should be some sort of a grandfathering system or something like that that comes into play so I can tell you that since these town homes started last summer we put together a group of STR owners that are specific to the city of Denton we've got a social media page I would love for you all to check it out it's Denton STR owners calm or I'm sorry at Facebook Denton STR owners and I wanted to read to you the mission purpose of that the group was created for STR owners in the city of Denton who love their city and would love to share with others this group is dedicated to those those property owners committed to responsibly operating STRs and providing guests with a unique lodging experience and options in the within the city of Denton through diligence responsibility and communication we can all be good stewards to our city and create a true win-win for everyone so that's really the genesis of what we're doing it was really interesting to hear that Judge Holland had zero cases regarding STRs I've been in real estate in Denton for over 20 years and I have no problem with renters at all but I can tell you long-term renters do not care for the property like it's their own if somebody comes in for a long weekend we know what's going on we're driving by at night we know our neighbors our neighbors love us so that's really I think been what's brought success for STR owners here locally is just being involved in that process and the gentleman I don't remember your name but most of our people who come into town are faculty and staff at UNT or TWU NCTC for that matter parents coming in for visits for their kids at either of the schools and people coming in town for an anniversary for a long weekend to spend on the square so it's been a huge asset for the city of Denton just based on the number of people that come in to spend their time and more importantly their money here in town I would love to answer any questions you all have because I think that's where things really start to unravel and start to make sense is when the questions are being asked so I appreciate you asking those questions and that's all I had thank you Commissioner Thacker go ahead thank you chair um hi Jay hello so quick question in terms of regulations do you have any verbose register we have three okay these no verbo so aren't the regulations that that company sets for that property even more stringent than some of the ones that exist in here I'm sorry repeat that I could aren't some of the regulations that they hold you to like through their company more stringent than the ones were even putting they are so there's a thing called a super host which means you maintain a four point nine rating on a scale of five that has to do with cleanliness availability of us in case something goes sideways but yes to your point we can get kicked off of Airbnb really easily and conversely if somebody comes in and doesn't take good care of it we're very honest with Airbnb that community is pretty tight despite how large it is so when we go in and read reviews on prospective renters for a long weekend here in town we can go deep and we can talk to the people they've leased to before or at least from before to find out okay why did they get a four star because we don't want to come in and have to pay a housekeeper by the way that's also employed here in Denton to come in and hire two more people and spend six hours cleaning it versus them by themselves for three hours conversely if they tear things up we have a local contractor come out that's money out of our pocket we can try to recoup some of that from Airbnb there's insurance around it but that's really tough to do thank you thanks so Jay you mentioned in talking about what we're talking about tonight these these or regulations we want to put into the DDC you mentioned the hundred-foot rule that that you weren't that happy with what else is in here that Angie had in her presentation that is bothersome to you as a I'm very appreciative of everybody from the city who's put all this time into this and I think again it's well intended and I think it's great I think there need to be regulations around it it just seems like some of them the hundred-foot rule being one we've got an Airbnb that is three blocks from here it's five blocks from the square but it's our three right behind us is a restaurant two doors down is another restaurant but because we're on that side of the road where are three where there are three other Airbnbs between there and Fulton you know across Carol on Fulton so it's it's really interesting because when we talk to our neighbors residents of these homes across the street they have zero issue when I come by to check on the property one of my neighbors comes out across the street we come inside she's like oh how'd they leave it you know she's just curious about it I've hired her to bring our trash cans in we set them out on Monday morning she'll take them in in the afternoon and it's it's a harmonious relationship with all these people we've talked to we've had zero pushback from anybody so it's been a really positive experience for them and us good deal thank you all right thank you all is there anyone else wishing to speak come on down and state your name and address and your time will begin come way down I understand 610 Emory and I'm first of all I'm I understand when they're talking about the hundred whatever and I'm not gonna sit here and talk about what might happen but what will happen and the gentleman that just left my neighborhood is the one he's talking about so it's prime for STRS and what happens is he may be a great neighbor but he's not going to be my neighbor and that's that's why I'm yeah I hope you hold fast with a hundred foot rule because our neighborhood is built we know our neighbors they help us they do things for us they and when you've got somebody just in for a weekend and out you're never you're you're killing a community when you start flooding it with STRS where they're in and out and in and out we've had great rental property neighbors and I I just I those weekends are not going to create a community the parking is going to be an issue we have more than one person on our street that has more than one car there's already lots of cars on the street I just I just I'm concerned about the thousand people and while I know oh no it's not gonna flood in I still think there needs to be fewer permits until this city can actually know that they're finding you've got 250 and only third I'm assuming the people that came up and talked are registered but you you can't even find the ones now so I a thousand I object to the number and I hope you stick with at least 100 feet because you're going to kill neighborhoods and it's a business in a neighborhood they may be good neighbors in terms of maintaining it but not to borrow a cup of sugar from so that's all I have to say who wants this thank you Kathy I'll take that for me thank you very much is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item come on down hi you'll state your name and address your time will begin 9/11 North Maple Munster Texas thank you all for being here by the way I know this is probably pretty thankless gig having been on many boards and different things over time I know this isn't always the ideal thing to get both sides of this and have to deal with but I'm on the I would say everybody's points here on the SDR logic I sympathize with both sides of this coin but we are owners of three STRs in this in this part of the world and I have to echo the sentiments of of just the quality when you look at the competition piece you look at the elements of doing the right thing to get business it is a business but to do that you have to do everything very very well you have to pay your people you have to take care of your house to get it hire people to take care of it there there's numerous things we pay the sales tax piece we do those big picture it like I own both and again no problem with long-term rentals if you have a chance to vet them but honestly the control you have over an STR is so much different than an LTR it just is the parking pieces we restrict that again part of Airbnb we have restrictions on everything we do we have to do it very very well we have ensure extra insurance that most don't have there's a hundred different things that they go into this as somebody with I know we talked about hotels being competition but as somebody with three kids and traveling when did I ever get a hotel room with one I had these are perfect two bedrooms two baths there's it's a whole different animal then then as a hotel in many cases like it's not the same thing but we provide a service to those folks that don't fit in that nice neat little bucket we're currently you know and not to toot our own horn but you know we know somebody that was in the tornadoes in value he's currently in our house grass we're not charging him to do this we're able to do this because we have a location for him to do it we wouldn't be able to do if it's a long term rental but we can do things like that we can serve the community and we do we take care of neighbors yards but there need mowing like we'll have them run over that with a mower right there's there's a hundred different things that we do that I think actually are positive and then the worst case scenario we started thinking property rights I mean what if I lost my job yesterday and the only way I can make some income was renting a room out we're gonna restrict this person that lost his job yesterday from renting a room because he's a hundred feet from somebody else that happened to be doing it before him right I mean these are questions that you got to think about when you look big picture especially the hundred foot rule I mean we already know that there are plenty of people within a hundred feet that are act actively operating them now you know what happens when somebody really really needs to you know quote unquote and can't because somebody else has already signed up I I kind of have to go with let the free market prevail here right if there are too many they will fall away if you can't make money doing it you won't it's same thing with a hotel same thing with any business how do we know what the right answer is on the total cap we really don't again ours are very near the city center yet because of the restrictions on our levels it's like well you know what it doesn't make a lot of sense when you're across the street from a commercial business but your are three and maybe this is a zoning problem maybe it needs to be changed maybe that's something we need to take care of but there are all kinds of little pitfalls around making rules that assume that we know the answer right that's really it I don't want to go too long if you have any questions happy to answer thank you for speaking any questions okay appreciate it thank you thank you is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item come on down hi 3616 Clydesdale Drive in Texas well you bring the microphone down there we go they that way I can hear you on TV and online thanks and thank you for this opportunity and for everything that you've done I agree with a lot of things that were said tonight one thing I feel like as an owner of a short-term rental I have 42 ranging from Arkansas to the very tip of Texas but I feel like I'm creating an opportunity for families to create memories that you're not going to get when you're in a hotel or any kind of commercial place whether they're coming together for a funeral or a graduation it's creating a unique space for them so that's what I feel like my heart is for the business I was a teacher and didn't for 20 years so I feel like I've given a lot to this community I'm very nervous even though I'm used to talking in front of the classroom but not in this situation but being a teacher I also feel like educating the host it would be a big part that could help with you know whatever y'all decide to move them forward because if your host is educated they know what to look for with their guests and whether they're going to be someone that's going to come in and tear up the place or be rude to the neighbors there's so many flags and if the host is educated in the beginning they can stop it right there so I feel like education would maybe be one part that maybe would help in all of this and as far as the cap I feel like as Denton grows it doesn't need to be limited to a thousand it needs to be a percent based on how Denton is going to continue to grow and then the other thing is maybe not a hundred foot limit but maybe per kappa only three per city block or something like that because of situations that we've already heard spoken tonight that's what I feel like would help in this situation and thank you for your time thank you for coming to speak appreciate it and I can fill out a card if you need to yep we'll have staff get with you and fill out a card thank you is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item who has not already okay with that I will close the public hearing and open the floor for a motion or discussion I know I do have a question Angie for you if you'll just give me a pause for just a minute Commissioner really real and you just wanted to ask for you to clarify how that hundred foot discussion played out if you could share that please how we came to that conclusion yes sure so the hundred foot distance separation and and the thousand unit cap they kind of go hand in hand when this went to the the public engagement survey that was was conducted last summer one of one of the questions was surrounding density and and specifically the way the question was was showed a sort of residential neighborhood of a hundred units right roughly and the question was out of a hundred units how many do you feel should be a short-term rental answers ranged from 0 to 100 with with some heavy clustering around the zero and then you had a few in the hundred and then some numbers everywhere in between that that really started the the density limitation discussion and and several options were were looked at is is what what is the best way to address and capture the concern seen in the neighborhood survey to protect our neighborhoods that that's still an enforceable mechanism so so so percentages were looked at per block and and that became somewhat confusing when put into practice and so that the thousand the the capping across residential districts came about as it's it's in it's a enforceable way to regulate that it comes out to roughly three percent of all parcels with residentially zoned parcels within the city limits and then the further discussion of but do we still want some sort of distance between them and so really the two kind of went hand in hand and exploring the best way to capture those those those concerns while also coming up with an enforceable way to measure and monitor the density discussion that we had I would I would say we looked we looked at several different different options during that that process and the the hundred the hundred foot was an agreeable one to for everybody on the spectrum because this was worked out through the DCRC where we had individuals who would prefer to see none and those who would prefer to see every block and our survey results were kind of a fuck to that as well and this was an enforceable way to capture those concerns and that density metric thank you I thought Angie provided an excellent response the other thing I would just add is when we are developing ordinances and to address the enforcement aspect we need to make sure that our ordinance is in a manner where we can easily enforce it being able to administer it but also for the benefit of the public in being able to understand what the requirements were that also factored into our density conversation because I can assure you and Angie attested we explored a variety of different option and I know there's a couple of folks here on the Commission that served on that on that board that discussed it but we felt like this was a reasonable means to balance the interest of the neighborhood residents with the operators but also for people to be able to clearly understand what the requirements were thank you Commissioner Pruitt thank you chair just a few questions for staff just to clarify some things and make sure everybody especially in the audience here and perhaps watching has some some real-time questions answered one there was some talk about bed-in breakfasts in residential locations I believe that those are only permitted by right in our are and the other residential zoning designations some of them you can't do a bed and breakfast at all and others require an SUP is that correct that is correct I don't have the table of allowed uses in my backup but we will pull that up but they're not allowed in all districts by right right okay about statement thank you and then there was some talk about hot taxes and how are those used if we collect this revenue are we gonna invest back into the community can you share just a really high level what what those hot taxes must be used for by a state law and what does as a practice yes I can and I can also provide the bed and breakfast clarity so I'm going to do that first before I drop this laptop permitted by right in our are by SUP in our four six and seven permitted by right in the mixed use districts as well as suburban corridor okay so not permitted across all how they are spent that is dictated by the state tax code and it's a limited expenditure those funds have to be utilized on projects that would that generate tourism for the city specifically in my understanding is we utilize sort of a grants program to provide money to festivals like day of the dead or arts and jazz or those other major den specific venues that you would expect to generate tourism for the city so so hot taxes are specifically limited to to those tourist expenses and aren't used as part of the general fund okay and then may say Joe is an operator who has an STR permit does that limit him in any way from choosing to do a long-term rental on the same property instead of a short term for some period of time that there was a concern or a couple of comments about if I have an STR will I be able to rent it for longer than 30 days and so I just wanted to make sure that was answered yeah rentals that start to go over over 30 days do fall into the the long-term rental category and they are as a specifically different they're not the same use likewise if an individual had a property and wanted to go through the process of getting it registered as a short-term rental and could meet the requirements of that they would be able to utilize that land use okay thank you and last but not least can you explain a little bit about how the phasing and and effective date of this ordinance will play out and and what avenues existing operators have to ensure that they can continue their business once once that effective date occurs sure so the assuming everything plays out as we plan here moving forward this would go to City Council next week on June 4th where they would consider they would make final determination of approval or with conditions or what have you the way the proposed ordinance is written today is it would have an effective date of August 1st individuals who are legally registered on August 1st would would in the event that maybe they don't meet one of the provisions of the new requirements but are registered legally today would be considered a legal non-conforming use and and legal non-conforming uses are allowed to retain that status with some caveats including providing there's not a cessation of the use for longer than a year or more as well as some limited provisions to modification such as that the structure couldn't be enlarged it could no way be that the total area could not be increased but but those legally registered operators today will be able to retain that legal operating status and they may fall into the category of legal non-conforming thank you can't see any discussion so I'll call on Commissioner Villarreal thank you madam chair I spent the better part of 2023 workshopping this going through the town halls the subcommittee vice chair Prudent and I serve on has had many conversations discussions and lots of disagreements over this and as Angie said you know some of us were closer to unlimited some of us were closer to zero I was one of those closer to zero very much agree with a lot of the statements made by the first three rows here but you know it's it's about reaching consensus and putting something forward that would be agreeable to both the operators as well as the vast majority of citizens who are not operators we need to make sure we're defending our neighborhoods you know folks are moving here not to live next to a hotel and I fully understand that and we need to make sure that we're preventing that from happening but no one wants to be surrounded by five different hotels right so I'm very much in favor of the 100 foot rule because it does prevent that and I'm also in favor of the 1000 permit rule as a starting step so that we can at least have something on the books going forward I do agree that in my perfect world to be a lot closer to 250 or less so with that I'm gonna support the current amendment as written and I thank staff for all the work they put into this thank you Commissioner Prout. Thank you chair and I will second I think you know Commissioner Villarreal and I had had lots of good discussions over this I think he brought up a lot of good points about you know how do we avert the the dangerous thing happening and and the reality is that our current code prevented some operators in certain situations from being able to register just because of some of the complexities and the specific definitions which in addition to other things just we had no knowledge of who is operating specifically so enforcement even if council wanted to make it a budget priority was not feasible right and so I think that this amendment really gives us a chance to start having a basis from which we we can reasonably enforce things if they do come up and when they do so so I appreciate all that you know I hope existing operators take advantage of of the meantime to be able to register so they don't have their rights curtailed in the future you know and we will I look forward to future councils being able to iterate on this as we need to right I understand change is scary for for people who've been there in their neighborhood for a long time the reality is that this change isn't sudden you know we have 250 some odd operating now not zero a month ago right it started over a period of gosh maybe 20 years is that a little bit too long okay 13 sorry I'm not an expert of internet history and and the reality is that you know I haven't heard of a lot of specific examples but there have been some specific examples in other communities where it legitimately bad things have happened so I think this puts the city in a good good state to be able to enforce and monitor what's happening and then gives us good data in the future is this one thing we talked about that council can use in the future to to refine this process so sorry for my long windows thank you okay we've got a first and a second for approval is there any discussion first I'll thank everyone for coming out to speak obviously we have some tremendously responsible STR owners out there so thank you very much I am an Airbnb user and I understand how important it is to have super hosts out there that's fantastic you know this discussion has gone on for a long time as Commissioner Villarreal and Commissioner Pruitt have have mentioned for even longer than this year and you know this is not a discussion about like long-term versus short-term those are two different animals with varying degree of problems and that's not what we're discussing here what we're discussing is trying to get regulations on the books so that the city has something to go on so that they can enforce certain things and and having the metrics in place they weren't just you know taken out of the air as Angie and Tina have explained you know they were given lots of thought they're a metric that can be measured so that when we're not here when a different council is there when different staff is in place it's there and it can be measured if for some reason down the road it's not working that's when things get amended again I mean that that is what we do here that's what staff is doing on the constant so this is all good stuff it really is it's to help not only the city but the business owners the the the people who will be staying there it's not based on fear from the public about you know not having STRs it's it's based on just the city getting something in writing in our DDC that makes sense that can be regulated and enforced so thank you again for the great discussion over many months so with that let's vote on the board please that motion carries five zero that will take us to our planning and zoning matrix and I will turn the day us over to Tino thank you charles so included in your pocket was an updated matrix somewhere I have my apologies so we updated the matrix to reflect commissioner approved to request or yes Commissioner Pruitt's request last week the the legal staff report explaining the practices and legal limitations as a result of state law changes a commissioner Pruitt or vice-chair Pruitt if we did not capture that correctly let us know but I think we got it so also we will update their matrix to reflect that we completed the discussion related to neighborhood amenity centers and the requirements related to that otherwise there were no other edits to the matrix itself past council or past cases that were considered by the City Council since your last meeting so on councils may 21st agenda we actually had several items go before council so we have several items an item that we anticipate that will likely come before you here in the near future to be aware of so an annexation proceedings has started on property that is roughly 92 acres of land generally located north of Johnson Lane south south of Elred Road in about 2300 feet east of John Payne Road so that property is going through a process as you know as it enters the city it'll have a rural residential zoning category on it and then an applicant will likely come forward with the zoning change so we'll anticipate that probably later this year with the Commission in terms of public hearings that were considered we did a street renaming I know this did not go before the Planning and Zoning Commission because par street naming policy they don't they go straight to council but of course you may be interested given the requests that we receive from time to time so there is a portion of South May Hill Road that was renamed as a result of a new section of South May Hill Road being constructed so to avoid any confusion and not have two parallel roadways with the name South May Hill Road the one to the east the old portion if you will was renamed to Edwards Drive so about a 30,000 or excuse me about a 1,000 foot linear section of that roadway so if you travel in that area you'll you'll recognize and probably appreciate the the newly constructed portion we did have let's see that was we did have a request if you recall we had called it the Vanda Smith tract rezoning this was the property that was approximately 1.52 acres located about 260 feet east of Country Club Road north of Hobson Lane this was the request where the applicant was trying to rezone the 1.52 acres so it had the same zoning as the property to the east and to the north the zoning was changed from suburban quarter to residential six so council did approve that we also had a specific use permit to allow for the equipment sales and rental use this was on property about 10 acres an area on the south side of 380 about 3,800 feet west of Mosh Branch recall this was a case that actually had presented to you all the western portion of the property was significantly encumbered by easements and so City Council did approve that request as well and then and oh and then we also had I know that that sometime every now and then the Commission may receive a property that's entertaining a local designation request from a historic perspective we actually in for those properties that have the local designation there is our tax exemption program that they're able to participate so we did have a property that was able to be able to successfully participate in a partial tax exemption so it was located at 903 West Oak but otherwise that concludes all of the items that were considered by council at that meeting date as well as also concludes my report so thank you thank you is there anything to add to the matrix any concluding items okay thank you all for being here appreciate it very much congratulations vice chair nice to have you on board with that I'll go ahead and adjourn us at 8 10 p.m.