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.