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 Item 3A and 3B have been withdrawn so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