Aug 14, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2019-08-14 5:00 PM (Special Called Meeting)

Good evening ladies and gentlemen welcome to the planning and zoning commission work session. I'll call the work session to order seeing that we have a quorum at 5 0 5 and we'll begin this evening on the agenda on item 2 which is the consent agenda. We have three items and consent. Anyone have any questions about the final plots? Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair. Julie I it's on C and it's really just for my own understanding. Please. So it's the Carmel villas. Yeah so my only question on it actually was because it was a final plat before but it was never recorded so is it like it never happened and so we just redo a final. We're just redoing a final. Okay yeah and and it was for that that that change in that right-of-way width so okay okay very good thank you. Any other questions for the consent? Seeing none that moves other next item of business to the public hearings. Item 3A and 3B have been withdrawn so we will not be hearing those this evening. We'll skip right to 3C and 3D and tonight although there'll be two separate votes we'll hear it in one presentation so we'll have one presentation for C and D and then we will in the public take two separate votes on that. Good evening Mr. Chair members of the Commission. I'm Cynthia Kirkhoff. I'm with the city attorney's office. I'm filling in for Ron Manguita on the the two public hearing items and pardon my delay. So the staff has recommended okay drafting to what they're called stopgap ordinances to essentially suspend the current development standards that conflict with two of the House bills House bill 2167 which deals with the 30-day time limit to approve plats and plans and then the other House bill 2439 dealing with the building material prohibition just to kind of re-happen I know the the Planning and Zoning Commission has heard about these two bills but 24 and 39 deals with the prohibition on the city drafting any ordinance that would prescribe or limit require certain building materials. House bill 3167 deals with the 30-day what's called the shot clock for plats and plan approvals. These were both signed by the governor on June 14th they take effect September 1. Staff does or has been reviewing the the current code as well as the 2019 DDC to see what changes need to be made. These stopgap ordinances essentially are ordinances that the Planning and Zoning Commission would consider making a recommendation onto the City Council giving staff direction to follow the law with regard to the 30-day shot clock and also the prohibition on the on the building materials. There's a public hearing tonight with the P the Planning and Zoning Commission and next Tuesday night there'll be a City Council public hearing. With that I'm happy to answer any questions. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair because Cynthia is reading through the ordinances so the 2439 draft ordinance it kept referencing bill 2497 can you enlighten me on that what that is enlighten us on that? The the bill 2497 deals with changes regarding appeals heard by the the board of his adjustments. What that requires is the board to hear different types of appeals and also that they any rules or regulations that they adopt would have to be approved by the City Council. Okay so then is this ordinance is that this ordinance would it's an it's an interim ordinance to say yes this is the procedure that we will take the the board of the ZBA will adhere to this this new bill. So is 2497 new as well? Correct. Okay so we had just never discussed it that's where as I was reading through it I we never discussed that particular House bill number so that's part of this as well. Yeah that's why it's incorporated into 2439. If you if you look on page five of the draft ordinance section seven it talks about amendments to the procedures for zoning board of adjustment and so that's where these changes are incorporated. Okay I think my confusion was I didn't realize it's actually three bills then we're dealing with correct? Correct. Okay. Commissioner Pernetta. So the step stop gap is simply based on enforcement right so in the event if these bills were to be overturned or withdrawn our code would not change we would simply withdraw that we would simply begin reinforcing them is and I guess my question is this simply pertains to whether or not we enforce something are we going to be changing the code or are we going to be leaving the code as is but simply not enforcing it? These two stopgap ordinances basically are suspending those provisions of the development code they're inconsistent with those bills so there are no changes to the code in these two stopgap ordinances and Mr. Drake if you have any additional comments to make. Yeah as far as you know plans for amendment I think that that's something that that staff is probably looking at but there's nothing in here that provides for that. And in the meat so in the meantime we would simply not enforce them if these were to be overturned or with or in some way you know legally reversed we wouldn't make any changes to the code we would simply simply revert revoke this stopgap. Yeah we would repeal these two ordinances. Okay. Or one or the other or both or whichever as the case may be. Thank you. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair so I noticed on the ordinance for 3167 had a provision in there that said City Council is urged to tell their legislature to effectively repeal this bill which I thought was great do we not want that in the other one? It could certainly go in there if you wanted to. It was a matter of some urgency with respect to the shot clock that we felt some comfort in there. I think that with respect to the building materials you know I don't know that that's a would necessarily be a universally held belief that we should do that. So we didn't know that the entire council would necessarily endorse that just for the purposes of a shot clock just for the purposes of a stopgap ordinance but we felt comfortable that the council would want to reflect their desire for the legislature to read this at that. I would probably want it before council to see I mean I I can't believe that we would want local control taken completely away from building materials we wouldn't want them to revoke that as soon as possible that would be my opinion. If the Commission wanted to incorporate that recommendation in there we'll modify it before we take it to council. I will let my fellow commissioners think on that. And just just to clarify so what we're talking about is adding in a recommendation urging City Council to to promote that revocation right we wouldn't it wouldn't necessarily be that City Council would have to we would just urge a resolution is that correct? Well yes so one of the ordinances reads whereas a City Council City of Denton urges the Texas legislator to reconsider the provisions of the act at its earliest opportunity that's that's already in the ordinance for 3167 but it's not in the ordinance for 2439 and to me I think that line is is well stated and and to me would fit both because I don't I don't think any of us are thrilled with either of these bills. So Commissioner Ellis I appreciate the recommendation there's no any other questions for clarification for that we can have the discussion but also if we're talking about a potential amendment or recommendation I want to have that full conversation out in the public but if there's no other questions is there I have two one is an assumption I'm making but I'd rather have clarification the like and the ordinance for 2439 the city's calling out building exemptions I'm gonna assume those are in line with what we're allowed to call out as building exemptions it looks like it's mostly for historical designated buildings but I'm curious on why are we calling that out specifically if is that not protected by the House bill to begin with so why are we being redundant to say it in our ordinance that we're putting a stopgap measure on those type of buildings correct correct that is just restating the exemptions that are actually in that House bill into the ordinance okay and then another assumption I'm assuming that these stop gap measures are temporary that at some point there's gonna be another discussion before us to remove stopgap measures and actually amend our code correct or is is the thought we could keep stopgap measures in for two years until legislation is held again is there any wisdom and to Commissioner Prentiss point instead of amending code could these stopgap measures potentially be in place for two years so that we don't have to amend code and then re-amend code if and when these bills are overturned correct correct they will they will be in place until they repeal so I guess the discussion later on is do we just keep the stopgap measures on the books for two years is there anything is there any preventing the city from keeping stopgap measures in for two years rather than updating or mending our code believe so okay you know it's it's just a matter of choice and and I think that our outside consultant was suggesting that that made I think she was actually recommending that we not amend our code to to make these changes just in case that very eventuality comes to pass in case the legislature revisits it we've seen with some regulations that that they may provide a grandfather provision that if you had a regulation in place prior to a certain date that you could keep it in place and and it may be that the that if the legislature revises maybe they'll grant some kind of an exception for procedures that we had in place prior to the effective date of this ordinance additional question so with that in mind if we're not going to be amending our code at all everyone who comes before you know planning and zoning is going to have I guess a plan that is not in compliance with code when we vote will the will we require the documentation attached to this to include these measures so that way do you know what I mean because in essence we will have a code that we're going to be aligning to that we know we won't be enforcing and we will be voting for you know properties and plans that are not compliant with the code under the understanding that we're simply not enforcing that code is there additional documentation that we'd want to see or have to have in you know in everything that's presented because of this or I would imagine this ordinance would be cited in the regulation according to DC 19 - 6 okay we're not forcing that's what I would imagine okay yeah not all ordinances of the city are codified codification provides a nice reference for people to follow and and ideally that's what you would want to do but there may be reasons not to incorporate a particular provision into the code like if you're expecting it might be repealed and so I think that the chair is absolutely correct that there's absolutely nothing that would prevent us from incorporating references to these ordinances and staff reports and other kinds of approvals as well okay and I guess the other question I have is precedent because very often we have something come come before us you know nothing happens two years later it comes back and it references you know a previous approval if say something comes before us it is approved and it's technically not in compliant with code but we pass it based on you know this non-enforcement stopgap if it were to come back later on after a bill is approved how I guess which standards would be applicable would it be applicable under and non enforced code or would we be enforcing that code as it's no longer the statute is something that we have to follow okay irrespective of what our code says okay we have to follow the statute effective September 1st so I don't think that that's anything that we're going to have to defend as a decision to not memorialize as a code provision but yet in force the statute upon ourselves and and so we had that come up with when the vested rights provision was first brought into law under chapter 245 it was probably a good year or two before we came forward with a code amendment to actually create a procedure in the code to model chapter 245 and in that interim period we simply obeyed state law okay thank you any other questions about these two ordinances mr. Cole thank you chair so we're saddled with this thing legislatively for two years now right well we don't know how long the legislature's gonna have to come back in session at some you know and fix this or is there a legal way to fix this through the court system is that being looked at or is there any you hearing anything like an adjunction yes yeah I don't know you you attended the TML meeting did did did you hear any discussion of that I did not attend it no there's no discussion of that sounds like we're saddled with it any other questions that concludes our work session for this evening I'll close the meeting at 521 we'll reconvene in council chambers at 630 good evening ladies and gentlemen welcome to the planning zoning Commission session for August 14th 2019 seeing that we have a quorum call this meeting to order at 632 31 and that's one let the record show that Commissioner Beck is absent for this evening's meeting the first item of business is to stand and give a pledge allegiance to the US and Texas flag under God the indivisible with the liberty and justice for all I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God one indivisible the next item of businesses to consider the consent agenda Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I move approval we have a motion to approve Commissioner Smith second we have a first and a second any discussion on the items seeing none I'll call for a vote by way of hands all those in favor all those opposed abstain motion carries six zero next item of business is the public hearing as a point of agenda clarification items 3a and 3b have been withdrawn from this evening that'll move us directly into items 3c and 3d I'll open the public hearing for both 3c DCA 19 - 6 and 3d DCA 19 - 0 0 7 invite Cynthia for presentation thank you mr. chair members of the Commission I'm Cynthia Kirkoff of the city attorney's office I'm filling in for Ron Mangida you have in front of you tonight two different stopgap ordinances that are on the agenda to deal with or address two house bills that were adopted this past session the first one is house bill 2439 the second one is house bill 3167 these were passed on June 14th and are in effect September 1 this these stopgap ordinances will give staff time to draft amendments to the code development code the first house bill is relating to the building materials what it will do is suspend enforcement of those provisions of the code that specify building materials and allow staff time to propose amendments to the current DDC as well as the DDC that's takes effect October 1 there's another bill in this first ordinance it's house bill 2439 and that really deals with the Board of Adjustments and their procedure when they can hear appeals from administrative decisions the the third bill and this would be the second ordinance item D this deals with 30-day shot clock for plats and plans what this stopgap stopgap ordinance will do is allow the current code to stay in place and require staff to follow that new bill where any plats and plans have to be either approved approved with conditions or disapproved with reasons within 30 days after being filed with that I'll stand for any questions that you have you city presentation any questions I don't see thank you this is a public hearing anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so seeing none I will close the public hearing for both item C and D and the chair will entertain a discussion or motion for item 3c mr. Smith motion to approve item 3c we have first for approval mr. Sanchez make us a second it okay we have first and second for approval any discussion on the item question Alice thank you chair with regard to this ordinance I was wondering if we could add to the motion a recommendation to add to the ordinance whereas the City Council of the City of Denton urges the Texas legislature to consider the provisions of the act at its earliest opportunity mr. Smith you accept the friendly amendment thank you and mr. Sanchez are you okay with seconding that yes any other discussion on the item seeing none I'll call for a vote by way of hands all in favor all opposed abstained motion carries 6-0 now the chair will entertain discussion or a motion for item 3d Christian Ellis Mr. Pernitta second we have a first and a second for approval any discussion seeing none I'll call for a vote by show of hands all those in favor all those opposed abstained motion carries 6-0 that concludes the agenda for this evening special call the P&Z meeting I will close the meeting at 637 thank you