1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:11,000 Okay. Welcome everyone to this November 11th meeting of the Denton Code Review Committee. 2 00:00:11,000 --> 00:00:17,080 It is 1.04. We do have a quorum present. The mayor has informed me that he will not be 3 00:00:17,080 --> 00:00:25,960 here today, so Keely and I will have to stay on screen the whole time to keep quorum present. 4 00:00:25,960 --> 00:00:31,640 The first item on the agenda is consider approval of the minutes for November 4th, and there 5 00:00:31,640 --> 00:00:39,080 was one correction on there that we did not say the pledges as it states in the minutes 6 00:00:39,080 --> 00:00:43,360 that were provided to us. So with that correction, I'll move approval. 7 00:00:43,360 --> 00:00:48,440 I'll second. All right. And since we only have two, I don't 8 00:00:48,440 --> 00:00:53,480 know that we really need to have a vote, since we have the motioner and the seconder are 9 00:00:53,480 --> 00:01:01,560 both are the only two that really need to vote. So we will move on to item B, receive 10 00:01:01,560 --> 00:01:06,520 a report, hold a discussion, give staff direction regarding code amendments related to subchapter 11 00:01:06,520 --> 00:01:13,160 two, administrative and procedures of the Denton Development Code. 12 00:01:13,160 --> 00:01:30,280 Thank you, Chair. Let me share my screen and we can get started. 13 00:01:30,280 --> 00:01:36,360 Hope you all can see the screen and can hear me. As introduced, this is our continuation 14 00:01:36,360 --> 00:01:42,440 of our DDC amendments discussion with the DCRC Development Code Review Committee, which 15 00:01:42,440 --> 00:01:49,200 you see on your screen is just the list of what we hope to discuss this afternoon. 16 00:01:49,200 --> 00:01:52,300 Seems like there's a lot, there's some that are a little bit more lengthy than others, 17 00:01:52,300 --> 00:01:59,160 but there are some that are hopefully straightforward and we can get through those fairly quickly. 18 00:01:59,160 --> 00:02:06,960 Just a point of correction or clarification. The items listed as number 12 and 13 will 19 00:02:06,960 --> 00:02:12,960 not be discussed. Staff just needs additional more time to have discussion internally to 20 00:02:12,960 --> 00:02:18,760 prepare a code amendment to discuss with the DCRC. So unity of title and declaration in 21 00:02:18,760 --> 00:02:24,840 lieu of a unity of title will be discussed at our next meeting. So those two will not 22 00:02:24,840 --> 00:02:30,360 be discussed this afternoon. So we'll go ahead and get started with the 23 00:02:30,360 --> 00:02:41,440 first development code topic and this is related to the ZBA composition and operational procedure. 24 00:02:41,440 --> 00:02:51,880 This is in section 234A, again, part of the subchapter two code amendments. We have in 25 00:02:51,880 --> 00:03:00,280 the current DDC, the composition and operational procedures. And as you can see in green, the 26 00:03:00,280 --> 00:03:06,600 reference is that it's referenced to the municipal code of orange. The hope was to move all of 27 00:03:06,600 --> 00:03:13,040 the composition and operational procedures that pertain to the ZBA to the municipal code 28 00:03:13,040 --> 00:03:20,120 of orange. However, that is no longer the direction we have changed that direction. 29 00:03:20,120 --> 00:03:28,960 We're now bringing that information to the DDC. So since it's not in the DDC today, the 30 00:03:28,960 --> 00:03:36,360 proposed code amendment is to amend that section and add the following. So the first of the 31 00:03:36,360 --> 00:03:43,120 number of composition is what you see on the screen, that the Zoning Board of Adjustment 32 00:03:43,120 --> 00:03:49,860 will make up or consist of seven members. And as you can read there, their terms will 33 00:03:49,860 --> 00:03:56,120 be staggered so that as they are appointed, we will have the memberships that we need. 34 00:03:56,120 --> 00:04:00,240 And I won't read the whole language, but the one or the two things that are highlighted 35 00:04:00,240 --> 00:04:07,320 in bold are what we are proposing and it's consistent to what we have today. The other 36 00:04:07,320 --> 00:04:13,960 two is related to the alternate, alternates that is. We currently have three alternates 37 00:04:13,960 --> 00:04:22,960 and these are alternates that are appointed by the city council. And as mentioned earlier, 38 00:04:22,960 --> 00:04:30,560 they are this is our current practice and these three alternates serve on the ZBA if 39 00:04:30,560 --> 00:04:39,840 and when the members of the seven members are either absent or cannot participate. The 40 00:04:39,840 --> 00:04:46,320 alternates are numbered by first, second and third. And as a member of the ZBA is absent 41 00:04:46,320 --> 00:04:54,240 or cannot participate, the next person or the person in first will step in and then 42 00:04:54,240 --> 00:04:58,200 continue again. If there is a second person, then the second alternate will serve in that 43 00:04:58,200 --> 00:05:05,200 capacity. The alternates also serve a two year term and are appointed again by the city 44 00:05:05,200 --> 00:05:14,600 council. Other, so let me stop there. Any questions? Again, these are just what we practice 45 00:05:14,600 --> 00:05:20,000 today and we're just making sure that it's in the development code. Do you have any questions 46 00:05:20,000 --> 00:05:30,520 for this portion of the code amendment? Any questions? I do have one because I'm guessing 47 00:05:30,520 --> 00:05:38,400 it's still in our regular ordinance requiring that they are a resident of the city of Denton, 48 00:05:38,400 --> 00:05:44,720 but I did not see that in any of this lineup. Is that elsewhere in our code or is that something 49 00:05:44,720 --> 00:05:48,760 we may need to look at adding? Let me double check and it may be in our code of ordinances. 50 00:05:48,760 --> 00:05:57,120 I know that we do have some language there, but let me check and I'm 100% sure, but we'll 51 00:05:57,120 --> 00:06:02,360 double check that they have to be a resident of the city. Whatever requirements we currently 52 00:06:02,360 --> 00:06:08,720 have as long as they make their way through into this. Yes, Margie. Thank you, chair. 53 00:06:08,720 --> 00:06:15,160 I feel like that's addressed on the application that we have with the city that gets vetted 54 00:06:15,160 --> 00:06:19,600 with the city secretary. So that may take care of that issue if it's not written somewhere, 55 00:06:19,600 --> 00:06:26,400 but I just thought I'd offer that. Aaron? It doesn't directly say you have to be a resident 56 00:06:26,400 --> 00:06:32,440 per se, but what chapter 2-61 of the city code, which is qualifications for members 57 00:06:32,440 --> 00:06:36,320 of boards and commissions, each person shall be a qualified voter of the city. You can 58 00:06:36,320 --> 00:06:42,560 only be a qualified voter in the city of Denton if you are a resident of Denton. That's election 59 00:06:42,560 --> 00:06:49,240 law. So that's how the requirement for anybody who serves on the board has to be a Denton 60 00:06:49,240 --> 00:06:57,040 resident. So it may not be particularly in the ZBA section of the code of ordinances, 61 00:06:57,040 --> 00:07:02,000 but it's covered under boards and commission generally. Okay. And is there any part of 62 00:07:02,000 --> 00:07:10,920 our codes and ordinances that we'll repeal since it's now going to be in the DDC? No, 63 00:07:10,920 --> 00:07:17,160 the ones that we're proposing, chair, currently are not in conflict or in the code of ordinances 64 00:07:17,160 --> 00:07:30,480 now, so there will be no need to repeal anything. Okay. Okay. All right. So we'll move on to 65 00:07:30,480 --> 00:07:42,320 the operation. Again, most of this was or is current practice, and again, we're just 66 00:07:42,320 --> 00:07:47,880 making sure that it's covered under the DDC. I won't go through all of this, but just highlight 67 00:07:47,880 --> 00:07:55,520 it again in bold, that there needs to be a minimum of six, primarily because the vote 68 00:07:55,520 --> 00:08:02,640 in order to approve a variance is super majority. So in order to hold a meeting and be able 69 00:08:02,640 --> 00:08:10,160 to vote, there needs to be a minimum of six members. The other list of procedures here 70 00:08:10,160 --> 00:08:18,920 are just procedural, you know, administrative requirements or provisions for the ZBA. One, 71 00:08:18,920 --> 00:08:21,800 for example, is actually keeping minutes, and that's consistent with all boards and 72 00:08:21,800 --> 00:08:30,200 commission in that a ZBA meeting can be held at the call of the chairman or chairperson, 73 00:08:30,200 --> 00:08:37,520 and also they can adopt governing rules regarding proceedings that they would like to have. 74 00:08:37,520 --> 00:08:43,880 Again, as long as it's not conflict or in conflict or inconsistent with the subchapter 75 00:08:43,880 --> 00:08:52,560 of state law. Additionally, talking about anything that's related to the Zoning Board 76 00:08:52,560 --> 00:09:01,560 of Adjustments decision that is particularly related to a house bill that was passed in 77 00:09:01,560 --> 00:09:11,560 that now not only does the person that has any appeal to a decision have to have to be 78 00:09:11,560 --> 00:09:21,400 related to a project, anybody that is, you know, wants to provide or appeal a decision 79 00:09:21,400 --> 00:09:28,320 can take that position and file with the city. This is something that was recently adopted 80 00:09:28,320 --> 00:09:33,480 or approved per state law. So that's why this section or these two sections that you see 81 00:09:33,480 --> 00:09:41,900 here have been added to the procedures of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Again, more 82 00:09:41,900 --> 00:09:51,280 or less the top one, letter A, is what we're focusing on. Again, the bill that was passed 83 00:09:51,280 --> 00:09:58,640 does allow anybody, even not related to specific application address or project, can take action 84 00:09:58,640 --> 00:10:07,320 or can file an appeal to the city. Similarly, the bill that was passed also changed when 85 00:10:07,320 --> 00:10:14,440 the appeal can be submitted. It set the date or the number of days. So now it's no later 86 00:10:14,440 --> 00:10:20,040 than the 20th day after the decision is made. Prior to that, it did not have a specific 87 00:10:20,040 --> 00:10:25,640 timeframe. So that is now under state bill, and we're just making it consistent in our 88 00:10:25,640 --> 00:10:33,700 development code. So the next few sections here, again, highlighting, I won't read the 89 00:10:33,700 --> 00:10:40,800 whole thing, but again, an appeal. Basically, the first one under this slide, letter D, 90 00:10:40,800 --> 00:10:48,720 if there is a appeal, any other action that is being done or has been approved will have 91 00:10:48,720 --> 00:10:55,960 to remain as a status would still remain the same. Nothing can move forward until that 92 00:10:55,960 --> 00:11:04,560 appeal has been heard. That's what D really is saying. And then letter E is that the appeal 93 00:11:04,560 --> 00:11:11,360 can't be acted, another appeal that is a separate appeal can't be submitted if it is the same 94 00:11:11,360 --> 00:11:20,320 appeal. There must be at least six months in between the first appeal. I think these 95 00:11:20,320 --> 00:11:27,360 are the last two. F basically states that at a public meeting or related appeal, any 96 00:11:27,360 --> 00:11:35,960 interest of party may appear as part of the discussion or consideration to discuss that 97 00:11:35,960 --> 00:11:42,720 specific appeal process. And then letter G is that the board -- this is another law 98 00:11:42,720 --> 00:11:51,100 that was -- or this was passed last summer where if there's an appeal, the ZBA cannot 99 00:11:51,100 --> 00:11:58,120 act on that first meeting. They have to wait for a second meeting, but has to happen within 100 00:11:58,120 --> 00:12:04,160 60 days. So typically what we've done since that bill was passed is present to the Zoning 101 00:12:04,160 --> 00:12:14,200 Board of Adjustment. They hear it. We then move on to the next consideration on the agenda. 102 00:12:14,200 --> 00:12:21,200 The following meeting, the ZBA will then make their decision on that previously discussed 103 00:12:21,200 --> 00:12:30,160 appeal application. So this again is consistent -- is consistent, that is, with what the bill 104 00:12:30,160 --> 00:12:36,400 that was passed last summer. So with that, I know that that was a lot, and again, these 105 00:12:36,400 --> 00:12:41,400 are just partly bringing the procedures that were currently -- that are currently being 106 00:12:41,400 --> 00:12:47,560 applied to as far as the Zoning Board of Adjustment, but also adding a couple of the sections that 107 00:12:47,560 --> 00:12:53,960 pertain to House Bill, the House Bill that was passed specifically, who can appeal and 108 00:12:53,960 --> 00:13:02,120 when an appeal can happen, and how the appeal process works as far as having two meetings 109 00:13:02,120 --> 00:13:07,320 versus having it at the same meeting -- a decision at the same meeting. Any questions 110 00:13:07,320 --> 00:13:12,600 with regards to these sections or these provisions? Sorry, let me -- 111 00:13:12,600 --> 00:13:19,440 >> Councilmember Briggs. >> Not a big question, but I assume that these 112 00:13:19,440 --> 00:13:27,120 appeals are not free. So I'm curious, is there a pricing in our code of ordinance? I mean, 113 00:13:27,120 --> 00:13:33,240 is there another place where someone would have to go to look at that, and it would not 114 00:13:33,240 --> 00:13:38,640 be in one location, or is there a reference to where they could go to find out? 115 00:13:38,640 --> 00:13:43,040 >> That's a good question. I'm drawing a blank. Richard, do you recall, and maybe we can look 116 00:13:43,040 --> 00:13:49,400 it up, as if there is a application -- I know that there is a -- there has to be a letter, 117 00:13:49,400 --> 00:13:55,480 and a formal letter, obviously, sent within the time frame that's allowed, but I can't 118 00:13:55,480 --> 00:14:02,240 say for sure if there's a fee and/or application. >> There is. I just don't recall. I'm pulling 119 00:14:02,240 --> 00:14:06,040 it up now. I know that we've only had one, and Sean might have that. 120 00:14:06,040 --> 00:14:13,360 >> Yeah. Zoning Board of Adjustments non-subdivision variance and appeals is $351. 121 00:14:13,360 --> 00:14:16,600 >> Okay. >> Yeah, my question would just be, is there 122 00:14:16,600 --> 00:14:20,040 -- I mean, if we're trying to get all the information in one location, do we need to 123 00:14:20,040 --> 00:14:29,400 make reference to that somewhere, or is it -- or is it, you know, not needed? 124 00:14:29,400 --> 00:14:37,720 >> I think, as we look at updating our table where we talk about applications, and I can 125 00:14:37,720 --> 00:14:42,520 pull up our code. Sean, do you know if there is a -- I think there is an appeal, so -- 126 00:14:42,520 --> 00:14:49,440 >> Yeah, 2.83 is the appeal of an administrative decision. That is what goes to ZBA. 127 00:14:49,440 --> 00:14:59,800 >> So we have it. If it is -- let me look at my section real quick. And those are good 128 00:14:59,800 --> 00:15:03,240 questions. One second. >> And, Ron, in some cases, we have added 129 00:15:03,240 --> 00:15:09,540 specific references just saying that the fee will be as provided in our fee schedule. I'm 130 00:15:09,540 --> 00:15:14,200 not sure that we added that here. That might be useful. 131 00:15:14,200 --> 00:15:22,080 >> Okay. So, right. So we do have it in 2. -- so this -- what we're adding is 2 -- I'm 132 00:15:22,080 --> 00:15:31,720 ending 2.34, and this is pertaining to the ZBA composition. So, Keely, the section that 133 00:15:31,720 --> 00:15:39,000 talks about the appeal process and procedure and application is further in the same subchapter, 134 00:15:39,000 --> 00:15:47,600 but it is not listed under this section 2.34. And we can certainly discuss adding some reference 135 00:15:47,600 --> 00:15:55,080 to look at that section where it talks about the application in the discussion of appeal. 136 00:15:55,080 --> 00:16:02,720 We can certainly look into that. Does that make sense with what we're proposing? It does 137 00:16:02,720 --> 00:16:07,400 not have it in that particular section 2.34, but as Richard mentioned, it's further down 138 00:16:07,400 --> 00:16:10,900 in the development code or further in the same subchapter, but not necessarily in that 139 00:16:10,900 --> 00:16:13,240 particular section. >> Okay. Yeah, I mean -- 140 00:16:13,240 --> 00:16:15,160 >> And if we need to reference it, we can reference it. 141 00:16:15,160 --> 00:16:20,000 >> Right. Well, I mean, as long as it's in there and it's easily found, I just wanted 142 00:16:20,000 --> 00:16:25,960 to make sure we weren't forgetting it or overlooking that. For someone who's going through a process 143 00:16:25,960 --> 00:16:32,160 like this, having information available and easy to find is always helpful. 144 00:16:32,160 --> 00:16:48,400 >> Understood. I'm just going to take real quick notes here, reference application. Okay. 145 00:16:48,400 --> 00:17:00,800 Let me go ahead and continue the presentation. So the next section or the next topic is similar 146 00:17:00,800 --> 00:17:06,820 to the ZBA. This is for the HLC, Historic Landmark Commission, Composition and Powers 147 00:17:06,820 --> 00:17:15,040 and Duties. As you can see identified here, again, we intended to place all of this in 148 00:17:15,040 --> 00:17:21,160 the Code of Ordinances. However, that direction has changed, so we are now bringing it back 149 00:17:21,160 --> 00:17:26,960 into the DDC. So we're striking this section or that language that you see here in green 150 00:17:26,960 --> 00:17:34,160 in adding the following. Similar to ZBA, we have the composition. The HLC is made up of 151 00:17:34,160 --> 00:17:41,720 nine members, and again, appointed by City Council. Of the nine, the list that you see 152 00:17:41,720 --> 00:17:49,000 below here, they must be represented by the following. So when we -- and when the City 153 00:17:49,000 --> 00:17:57,080 Council looks to appoint or add a member or commissioner, we will make sure to let them 154 00:17:57,080 --> 00:18:04,200 know, let you all know that we need a public accountant. We need a registered architect. 155 00:18:04,200 --> 00:18:10,840 For now, I think we have everybody here. I believe maybe letter A, Denny County Historical 156 00:18:10,840 --> 00:18:20,880 Commission. No, I stand corrected. Melody Kohot is representing that position. So I think 157 00:18:20,880 --> 00:18:27,680 for now we are good, but again, wanted to make sure we have in the DDC the list of representatives 158 00:18:27,680 --> 00:18:38,280 that are required to be a HLC commissioner. As far as the other members, they can make 159 00:18:38,280 --> 00:18:46,960 up of any other parts of that. So four of the remaining five -- I'm sorry, three of 160 00:18:46,960 --> 00:18:55,720 the remaining nine can serve in any of those positions or be of those other positions. 161 00:18:55,720 --> 00:19:03,080 And then similar to the ZBA, the HLC commissioners that are appointed serve a two-year staggered 162 00:19:03,080 --> 00:19:13,320 term. As far as powers and duties, we have provided a list. This list is a carryover. 163 00:19:13,320 --> 00:19:17,880 There may be some additional ones, but for the most part, this was covered under the 164 00:19:17,880 --> 00:19:23,800 2002 -- again, we're just providing this list to give guidance as far as what the powers 165 00:19:23,800 --> 00:19:32,040 and duties are available for the HLC. I won't read all of this other than obviously establish 166 00:19:32,040 --> 00:19:38,240 criteria for determining historic landmarks, recommending to the planning zoning commission 167 00:19:38,240 --> 00:19:45,200 historic landmarks and ultimately city council for consideration. Establish guidelines for 168 00:19:45,200 --> 00:19:52,760 determining how to provide certificate of appropriateness. The preservation plan, historic 169 00:19:52,760 --> 00:19:59,960 preservation plan that was approved last year was something that the HLC had reviewed, considered 170 00:19:59,960 --> 00:20:06,720 and recommended to the planning zoning commission. So that is another power that they have in 171 00:20:06,720 --> 00:20:13,400 duty. And then suggest resource of funding to help historic preservation in the city. 172 00:20:13,400 --> 00:20:19,000 In addition, we have a lot more under this particular section. Again, not going to read 173 00:20:19,000 --> 00:20:28,040 through all of this other than make, again, recommendations, provide staff direction on 174 00:20:28,040 --> 00:20:37,480 surveys and maintenance of inventory, that is. There is an opportunity to create committees 175 00:20:37,480 --> 00:20:44,000 made up of the members of the commission for carrying out other purposes of the ordinance. 176 00:20:44,000 --> 00:20:50,640 Prepare specific design guidelines and ultimately also review and provide comments as it relates 177 00:20:50,640 --> 00:20:56,720 to national register of historic places. So it's a long list, but again, wanted to make 178 00:20:56,720 --> 00:21:03,040 sure we cover all of the powers and duties that the HLC has in relationship to historic 179 00:21:03,040 --> 00:21:11,940 preservation for the city. So with that, that is the end of that particular topic. Do you 180 00:21:11,940 --> 00:21:16,800 all have any questions as far as the composition and powers of duties for the historic landmark 181 00:21:16,800 --> 00:21:21,800 commission? 182 00:21:21,800 --> 00:21:26,880 Just to clarify that they have not changed, correct? I mean, it's we're just transferring 183 00:21:26,880 --> 00:21:28,920 all the information over. 184 00:21:28,920 --> 00:21:35,000 Correct. There may be one or two that were added. I know when Roman was here with the 185 00:21:35,000 --> 00:21:41,520 city, he may have added a couple. But again, as you can see from that list, it's basically 186 00:21:41,520 --> 00:21:46,760 consistent in providing additional clarification as far as their duties. Nothing that was out 187 00:21:46,760 --> 00:21:53,440 of the only that I can specifically speak to. Thank you. 188 00:21:53,440 --> 00:21:59,840 Okay. Sure. Fine. If there's no other questions, I'll just go ahead and proceed. Any other 189 00:21:59,840 --> 00:22:11,880 questions or comments? I'm seeing. Okay. Next. Sorry. Next topic on the agenda is expiration 190 00:22:11,880 --> 00:22:20,360 of approval. And this applies to all of the applications. So it's not particular to any 191 00:22:20,360 --> 00:22:25,640 set of application. This is for all applications. And what you see underlined is what's being 192 00:22:25,640 --> 00:22:31,840 added. What's not underlined is currently in the DDC. So just want to make sure that 193 00:22:31,840 --> 00:22:37,040 that's clear. Number two, we're adding says all previously approved applications for the 194 00:22:37,040 --> 00:22:48,240 same land shall also expire. So as an example of this would be if there was a final plat 195 00:22:48,240 --> 00:22:54,960 that was approved or was in process of being approved and a preliminary plat was tied to 196 00:22:54,960 --> 00:23:02,000 it. If the final plat was not approved within the timeframe or never was approved, a preliminary 197 00:23:02,000 --> 00:23:06,640 plat that's associated with that final plat would also expire. So just to make sure that 198 00:23:06,640 --> 00:23:19,960 that was in our development code. Number three refers to the term or the status of a project. 199 00:23:19,960 --> 00:23:25,960 We have under here that a project expires. If on the fifth anniversary of the date of 200 00:23:25,960 --> 00:23:32,400 the first permit application was filed and no progress has been made, the application 201 00:23:32,400 --> 00:23:42,040 of that or that project would not be carried forward. So for example, a project would, 202 00:23:42,040 --> 00:23:49,420 for example, a subdivision variance or subdivision plat would be deemed a project if, you know, 203 00:23:49,420 --> 00:23:56,520 they were to continue. However, after five years, if they don't submit any other applications, 204 00:23:56,520 --> 00:24:03,640 that application or that particular project would no longer be considered a project. So 205 00:24:03,640 --> 00:24:09,680 five years is similar or very, it's consistent with state law and that's why you see that 206 00:24:09,680 --> 00:24:18,080 fifth anniversary identified as the timeframe. Ron, just a quick question. On that five years, 207 00:24:18,080 --> 00:24:23,440 I think that maybe you've mentioned state law, but didn't we discuss something expiring 208 00:24:23,440 --> 00:24:31,320 in two years before in our code discussions? That's specifically pertaining to applications. 209 00:24:31,320 --> 00:24:37,600 Okay. What we're talking about here is projects. So a project like, you know, that has maybe 210 00:24:37,600 --> 00:24:43,760 multiple applications. So if, for example, that project never fully develops, you know, 211 00:24:43,760 --> 00:24:49,720 there's certain parts of it would no longer be. I think vesting is part of this, but five 212 00:24:49,720 --> 00:24:57,200 years is really what we use to determine vesting. But what you're referring to, Keeley, is particularly 213 00:24:57,200 --> 00:25:01,800 related to applications. And we'll get into that in a few slides down. 214 00:25:01,800 --> 00:25:08,400 Okay. Thanks for the clarification. Yes. And Aaron, if there's anything, I saw you, 215 00:25:08,400 --> 00:25:13,280 you know, if you had any additional comments to that five year. 216 00:25:13,280 --> 00:25:17,640 It just relates to the project. So if they get the final plat approval and they just 217 00:25:17,640 --> 00:25:23,000 never come back and five years pass and they don't meet the exceptions on the state statute, 218 00:25:23,000 --> 00:25:28,860 then after five years that final plat would expire, so to speak, it'd be considered dormant 219 00:25:28,860 --> 00:25:32,400 and the applicant would have to start all over again and comply with any new rules and 220 00:25:32,400 --> 00:25:39,760 regulations that the city has amended from the time of their final plat approval. So 221 00:25:39,760 --> 00:25:44,240 that's just the protection that state law provides to developments to make sure that 222 00:25:44,240 --> 00:25:48,200 the rules aren't changed on them during the development process. 223 00:25:48,200 --> 00:26:01,440 Perfect. Thank you. It continues to go further on the project. So now we've, you know, made 224 00:26:01,440 --> 00:26:09,360 sure that project is explained a little further. This next one, number six, any new application 225 00:26:09,360 --> 00:26:14,920 under sub-chapter or application modified shall be deemed to commence a new project. 226 00:26:14,920 --> 00:26:23,160 So for example, if they submit a plan for a project and they come in with a new application 227 00:26:23,160 --> 00:26:29,080 or something completely different, that basically starts a new project. So their five years 228 00:26:29,080 --> 00:26:34,200 would not start from the original in which they've changed since. So what we're saying 229 00:26:34,200 --> 00:26:40,600 is if you're coming in with a new application or a new modified plan, that time frame for 230 00:26:40,600 --> 00:26:47,360 that project starts at that time of that new application is submitted. 231 00:26:47,360 --> 00:26:51,960 And so I'm sorry, just to make sure. And so when they do resubmit a new plan, then that 232 00:26:51,960 --> 00:26:59,700 means that if our codes or anything has changed, then they resubmit under those new codes, 233 00:26:59,700 --> 00:27:05,040 not the older ones, right? The new codes or that time frame is the start. 234 00:27:05,040 --> 00:27:12,320 And so say after five years after they submitted their modification, if they haven't added 235 00:27:12,320 --> 00:27:18,680 any or had any progress, say it expires, they would be counting five years from that date 236 00:27:18,680 --> 00:27:24,680 when that modification was submitted. It's more or less timing. And as Erin mentioned, 237 00:27:24,680 --> 00:27:31,320 five years is important because, again, per state law, that kind of follows when vesting 238 00:27:31,320 --> 00:27:42,200 starts and ends for a project. 239 00:27:42,200 --> 00:27:49,440 So these are just to add to the development code, as mentioned earlier, so that it's clear. 240 00:27:49,440 --> 00:27:57,740 We often have these provisions, but having a section of the code that explicitly explains 241 00:27:57,740 --> 00:28:00,160 it helps us and the development community. 242 00:28:00,160 --> 00:28:12,000 All right. Let's move on to the next item. Very, very, I'm going to say more of a cleanup. 243 00:28:12,000 --> 00:28:18,320 I was trying to think of a word here. We're changing the term site plan to zoning compliance 244 00:28:18,320 --> 00:28:27,320 plan. And the reason for that is to be sure that we're in compliance with the state bill 245 00:28:27,320 --> 00:28:32,720 that's passed and just try to isolate or differentiate between the site plan and the zoning compliance 246 00:28:32,720 --> 00:28:37,080 plan. For the most part, they're pretty much the same. 247 00:28:37,080 --> 00:28:44,120 In this particular section, we are swapping a lot of the term state site plan with zoning 248 00:28:44,120 --> 00:28:51,100 compliance plan, but we're also making sure that we're adding some clarification to when 249 00:28:51,100 --> 00:29:01,260 a zoning compliance plan is required. And letter B, applicability, we initially had 250 00:29:01,260 --> 00:29:09,800 a list of when the zoning compliance is required. Rather, what we are proposing is that they 251 00:29:09,800 --> 00:29:17,880 would be only required if they meet the following examples covered under what we call tier two. 252 00:29:17,880 --> 00:29:25,700 And so if a project is proposing an expansion or alteration or modification that increases 253 00:29:25,700 --> 00:29:32,360 the gross floor area by 50%, they would be required to submit a zoning compliance plan. 254 00:29:32,360 --> 00:29:39,880 Similarly, if the expansion or modification increases the total number of dwelling units 255 00:29:39,880 --> 00:29:45,880 on a lot by more than 25%, they would be required to submit a zoning compliance plan. Anything 256 00:29:45,880 --> 00:29:55,120 below 25, also anything below 50%, they would not. But again, looking at the tier requirements 257 00:29:55,120 --> 00:30:00,480 for tier two, if they meet and exceed these requirements, then they would be required 258 00:30:00,480 --> 00:30:07,960 to submit a zoning compliance plan. We go further and added a little bit more requirements 259 00:30:07,960 --> 00:30:15,960 as far as what is that needs to be in the contents of the zoning compliance plan. Again, 260 00:30:15,960 --> 00:30:22,920 listing out the following, you know, graphical and site data information, dimensions of existing 261 00:30:22,920 --> 00:30:28,760 and proposed improvements, as well as any environmental tree preservation and landscape 262 00:30:28,760 --> 00:30:36,360 area. The idea for a zoning compliance plan is to have an idea of what is being proposed 263 00:30:36,360 --> 00:30:41,880 and review it against certain code requirements so that when the next step of platting is 264 00:30:41,880 --> 00:30:47,720 done, we are clear on what is being proposed and we wouldn't have to make any corrections 265 00:30:47,720 --> 00:30:53,640 on the plat because it's already been established and approved by the zoning compliance plan. 266 00:30:53,640 --> 00:31:01,720 So the hope here is with adding this particular section, the three I's is to make sure that 267 00:31:01,720 --> 00:31:10,960 when someone submits a zoning compliance plan, they have all of the following. That's pretty 268 00:31:10,960 --> 00:31:17,320 much it for the zoning compliance plan. Again, to summarize, we're just cleaning up where 269 00:31:17,320 --> 00:31:22,440 the term site plan is being replaced with zoning compliance plan and we're also making 270 00:31:22,440 --> 00:31:30,000 it where it's required, have to follow what's listed in tier two in the development code. 271 00:31:30,000 --> 00:31:35,480 So these are the examples of what tier two falls under. And lastly, just showing what 272 00:31:35,480 --> 00:31:42,520 is required under a zoning compliance plan, what needs to be submitted with that application. 273 00:31:42,520 --> 00:31:46,880 If there are no other questions, I'll go ahead and move forward to the next code amendment 274 00:31:46,880 --> 00:31:56,480 topic. I've got a quick one, Ron, on the tier two number two. It says expansion alterations 275 00:31:56,480 --> 00:32:02,120 or modifications that increase the total number of existing dwelling units on a lot by more 276 00:32:02,120 --> 00:32:14,760 than 25%. Is that multifamily only? Typically, yes. Yes, it'll be multifamily. Obviously, 277 00:32:14,760 --> 00:32:21,360 anything less than that would not qualify. But yes, the intent there is for multifamily. 278 00:32:21,360 --> 00:32:28,360 Now, I'm trying to think with fourplex is that you wouldn't be able to do that possibly. 279 00:32:28,360 --> 00:32:38,920 But more than one for sure would apply for this particular tier. And more likely, it's 280 00:32:38,920 --> 00:32:43,040 multifamily. Okay. How would that affect accessory dwelling 281 00:32:43,040 --> 00:32:50,280 units? It would not, because we don't require a 282 00:32:50,280 --> 00:32:55,640 zoning compliance plan for single family. So that would just be done part of the planning. 283 00:32:55,640 --> 00:32:58,640 Okay. Yeah, I was just in my head trying to think 284 00:32:58,640 --> 00:33:05,080 of the fourplexes and the triplexes. But I think for the most part, this more or less 285 00:33:05,080 --> 00:33:20,680 pertains to multifamily. Will pertain to multifamily. Okay. Here's another one that we have had 286 00:33:20,680 --> 00:33:27,160 a situation with and we just wanted to be clear. And we're adding this particular section 287 00:33:27,160 --> 00:33:40,040 under section 252C as it relates to specific use permits. Right now, it's current practice, 288 00:33:40,040 --> 00:33:45,280 but we wanted to put it in the development code. And approval of specific use permit, 289 00:33:45,280 --> 00:33:51,180 authorizing the specific use to develop does not preclude the development or the property 290 00:33:51,180 --> 00:33:59,200 to develop other uses that are otherwise permitted under that zoning district. So for example, 291 00:33:59,200 --> 00:34:05,020 the zoning or the specific use permit that we heard last night for the multifamily say 292 00:34:05,020 --> 00:34:10,100 that that developer, for whatever reason, chooses not to move forward with that specific 293 00:34:10,100 --> 00:34:17,400 use permit. And instead, under their zoning district, they want to propose something different, 294 00:34:17,400 --> 00:34:22,280 they would be able to, it does not preclude them from submitting an application or development 295 00:34:22,280 --> 00:34:28,280 for a use that's already permitted or currently permitted under that zoning district. I know 296 00:34:28,280 --> 00:34:32,200 it seems like, well, that makes sense, Ron, but why do we have to put in the DDC? I think 297 00:34:32,200 --> 00:34:36,960 it's important to list it out here so that it's clear for everybody. I think this is 298 00:34:36,960 --> 00:34:43,980 the only one as far as this particular specific use application approval, effective approval. 299 00:34:43,980 --> 00:34:49,280 This is all that we're proposing. Do you all have any questions how this is going to be 300 00:34:49,280 --> 00:35:06,960 applied or is applied? Any questions? Pretty straightforward in that particular case. And 301 00:35:06,960 --> 00:35:16,400 as I was saying earlier, a lot of these are more or less trying to provide clarification, 302 00:35:16,400 --> 00:35:22,120 nothing much. We didn't think that this would be a lot of discussion, but wanted to bring 303 00:35:22,120 --> 00:35:27,960 it forward to you all, the DCRC, so that when we bring it forward, hopefully it doesn't 304 00:35:27,960 --> 00:35:34,840 raise any questions to the Planning, Zoning Commission, City Council. The next part of 305 00:35:34,840 --> 00:35:46,640 this particular topic is related to the approval criteria. Again, the SUP that was heard yesterday, 306 00:35:46,640 --> 00:35:52,620 there was criteria for approval for applications of all applications, that is, and then we 307 00:35:52,620 --> 00:36:00,920 also had approval criteria for specific use permits. A lot of what was discussed is repetitive 308 00:36:00,920 --> 00:36:07,240 duplications of those approval criteria, so what we're doing is eliminating what is already 309 00:36:07,240 --> 00:36:14,800 under the approval criteria under all applications. So primarily what you are looking at here 310 00:36:14,800 --> 00:36:25,120 is a deletion of number 3, 5, and 6, as those already are approval criteria under the all 311 00:36:25,120 --> 00:36:33,360 application section of the code. That one is pretty short and quick. Again, we wanted 312 00:36:33,360 --> 00:36:38,080 to just make sure that you all understood what this code amendment was about, so if 313 00:36:38,080 --> 00:36:48,920 there are no other questions, I will move on to the next topic. Next sections are related 314 00:36:48,920 --> 00:36:55,880 to traffic impact analysis and real estate applications, similar to what we heard at 315 00:36:55,880 --> 00:37:03,720 our last meeting with regards to business registration and zoning verification letter. 316 00:37:03,720 --> 00:37:09,840 This is current practice and what we're trying to provide with these code amendments is a 317 00:37:09,840 --> 00:37:16,560 reference in the development code, so under Table 2.2A, which lists all of our applications, 318 00:37:16,560 --> 00:37:23,760 we're just adding, again, the two or the traffic impact analysis and providing procedures of 319 00:37:23,760 --> 00:37:33,300 how they are submitted, reviewed, and hopefully approved. I don't intend on reading, obviously, 320 00:37:33,300 --> 00:37:38,800 the purpose for a TIA, I think we all know that it's to assess the development of the 321 00:37:38,800 --> 00:37:44,520 roadway system and if there are any impacts, that the TIA will provide any mitigations 322 00:37:44,520 --> 00:37:53,600 that will help negate or lessen the impact identified. It obviously follows under any 323 00:37:53,600 --> 00:38:04,020 mobility requirements in any city den model that our engineering department has. Applicability, 324 00:38:04,020 --> 00:38:09,200 this is a long list. What we wanted to provide here, and again, I won't read through all 325 00:38:09,200 --> 00:38:14,720 of this, is to kind of illustrate and show our development community what we will be 326 00:38:14,720 --> 00:38:21,960 looking for and what would be triggered under a, or what will be, what will trigger a TIA, 327 00:38:21,960 --> 00:38:28,160 that is. So a TIA will be required for the following conditions. So if you meet one of 328 00:38:28,160 --> 00:38:34,960 these conditions under the development code, if this were to be approved, we will require 329 00:38:34,960 --> 00:38:41,840 you to prepare and submit a TIA to be reviewed. So again, wanted to provide that procedure 330 00:38:41,840 --> 00:38:49,520 in the applicability portion of the development review process in which a TIA is required. 331 00:38:49,520 --> 00:38:57,960 So this is the full section that we're proposing. I did not want to just provide you the whole 332 00:38:57,960 --> 00:39:05,280 code update, but please note that in addition to the purpose, the basis and the applicability, 333 00:39:05,280 --> 00:39:11,800 there's a whole section that will include the process as well as any actions and criteria 334 00:39:11,800 --> 00:39:18,440 for acceptance. I can certainly bring that up if you'd like, or again, if you want to 335 00:39:18,440 --> 00:39:25,640 just kind of understand or give direction to staff that what our purpose is to bring 336 00:39:25,640 --> 00:39:32,800 a procedure into the DDC, which it is currently not for a TIA, a traffic impact analysis. 337 00:39:32,800 --> 00:39:40,160 Again, if the DCRC would like to see the full procedure, I can certainly provide that with 338 00:39:40,160 --> 00:39:46,440 you all, but I thought it was just important to share the purpose and when it is applicable. 339 00:39:46,440 --> 00:39:54,740 So I'll seek direction from the DCRC. I did not want to just go through this without mentioning 340 00:39:54,740 --> 00:40:00,040 that there are other sections under this development code amendment. 341 00:40:00,040 --> 00:40:07,960 Ron, is this just moving it into the DDC, or are we changing what we're actually? 342 00:40:07,960 --> 00:40:11,560 No, sir. We're adding it to the DDC, yes. 343 00:40:11,560 --> 00:40:15,400 Okay. So it's our current practice is just moving to a different section, different area. 344 00:40:15,400 --> 00:40:22,520 Our engineering department, we're the primary author of that section, as well as any other 345 00:40:22,520 --> 00:40:28,240 section that the engineering department uses such as the civil engineering plans, they've 346 00:40:28,240 --> 00:40:33,600 been involved in. So whatever we're adding, we are adding is part of what we are doing 347 00:40:33,600 --> 00:40:42,880 today in our reviews of TIAs and other engineering applications. 348 00:40:42,880 --> 00:40:46,760 Any questions or comments? Margie? 349 00:40:46,760 --> 00:40:52,960 Thanks. I just have a question for clarity, Ron. So with the procedure and the determination, 350 00:40:52,960 --> 00:40:58,400 is that made by the development review committee on that project, or is it the engineering 351 00:40:58,400 --> 00:41:06,000 or head engineer who makes that decision? As far as it's a city engineering department 352 00:41:06,000 --> 00:41:10,520 that would make that decision once they establish. So typically what happens is that there is 353 00:41:10,520 --> 00:41:19,080 a trip generation study that's done. And based on that analysis or that information, again, 354 00:41:19,080 --> 00:41:28,240 if it meets the list of criteria for TIA, then the city engineer or his or her designee 355 00:41:28,240 --> 00:41:32,080 would then require the applicant to submit a full TIA. 356 00:41:32,080 --> 00:41:35,280 So it's the city engineer that's making the decision with what we just looked at. Okay. 357 00:41:35,280 --> 00:41:46,800 Understood. Thank you. Okay. So we'll move on to the next topic. And 358 00:41:46,800 --> 00:41:54,560 again, real estate applications, these are encroachment agreements. These are easement 359 00:41:54,560 --> 00:42:02,560 encroachments, use of right away. These are some of the examples of what real estate applications 360 00:42:02,560 --> 00:42:09,040 are. Again, we do them now and have current practices that we apply or applications or 361 00:42:09,040 --> 00:42:16,200 applicants apply for. We're trying to make sure that it's clear in what is required and 362 00:42:16,200 --> 00:42:21,280 when it's required. And so we're proposing to add this particular type of application 363 00:42:21,280 --> 00:42:27,800 and applications under the development code. Similar to all the other applications, there 364 00:42:27,800 --> 00:42:35,160 is a purpose. And the purpose here, again, as you read is the propose of an applicant's 365 00:42:35,160 --> 00:42:42,700 proposal to use some of the public lands such as easements that's been dedicated. Or they 366 00:42:42,700 --> 00:42:47,720 choose to abandon if they would like to abandon an easement that the city no longer uses, 367 00:42:47,720 --> 00:42:53,360 that can be also a real estate application. Right away abandonment. What I was talking 368 00:42:53,360 --> 00:43:00,760 about earlier was encroachments into easements, also encroachments into right away use or 369 00:43:00,760 --> 00:43:09,400 the right away as well. And any other oil and gas pipeline license requests. So these 370 00:43:09,400 --> 00:43:17,400 would be the typical real estate applications that a applicant can request to either abandon 371 00:43:17,400 --> 00:43:25,240 or encroach into. So these types of applications will fall under real estate applications. 372 00:43:25,240 --> 00:43:33,900 I wanted to just highlight some of the applicability. Obviously public land rights requests from 373 00:43:33,900 --> 00:43:40,480 an applicant or property owner to have direct, that has a direct interest in the land use 374 00:43:40,480 --> 00:43:49,120 or the land itself. The second part of this is that when staff reviews these applications, 375 00:43:49,120 --> 00:43:55,240 we don't just look at what is the current need for the city, but rather if in the future 376 00:43:55,240 --> 00:44:04,000 there is public needs or necessity for that, that would make a strong consideration and 377 00:44:04,000 --> 00:44:10,760 often decide if it is going to be approved or not. If staff determines that there is 378 00:44:10,760 --> 00:44:18,160 no current and future necessity of said easement or right away, then that particular application 379 00:44:18,160 --> 00:44:24,120 is then forwarded to the appropriate board and committee. Typically sometimes it's presented 380 00:44:24,120 --> 00:44:29,760 to the planning zoning commission, but most likely it's presented to the public utilities 381 00:44:29,760 --> 00:44:39,360 board, the PUB, and ultimately city council. In some instances where it would go to the 382 00:44:39,360 --> 00:44:48,120 PNZ is, sorry, if the dedication of that easement or that right away was done by plat, it needs 383 00:44:48,120 --> 00:44:54,600 to be abandoned by plat. And so PNZ would be considering those. If it is done and conveyed 384 00:44:54,600 --> 00:45:01,720 by a separate instrument, then that abandonment will have to be approved by a separate instrument 385 00:45:01,720 --> 00:45:08,480 and most of the time that is approved and considered by the PUB. Anything further than 386 00:45:08,480 --> 00:45:16,400 that, the city council will be involved as far as any other request. Again, just to provide 387 00:45:16,400 --> 00:45:23,640 you all, the application procedure has the following sections. I didn't want to go through 388 00:45:23,640 --> 00:45:29,160 all of them. They're very similar to what you already know is applied to all applications, 389 00:45:29,160 --> 00:45:36,200 but just really covered the purpose, the applicability, and then the following code amendment will 390 00:45:36,200 --> 00:45:43,920 also have the particular sections as it relates to procedures. So if you all have no questions, 391 00:45:43,920 --> 00:45:48,200 I can move on to the next one. But again, wanted to mention that it's not just the purpose 392 00:45:48,200 --> 00:45:53,360 and applicability that we're looking at. We're also actually looking at the procedure and 393 00:45:53,360 --> 00:45:58,320 that is something that we'll bring forward to the planning zoning commission and city 394 00:45:58,320 --> 00:46:01,840 council ultimately, but did not want to go through it unless you all want to. We can 395 00:46:01,840 --> 00:46:07,480 certainly go through them, but very, very similar to other procedures as far as what 396 00:46:07,480 --> 00:46:15,760 is required. Chair, I don't want to go through all of these at all. I'm just curious because 397 00:46:15,760 --> 00:46:21,200 when we went through the code before, and I know that this is stuff that we were realizing, 398 00:46:21,200 --> 00:46:27,600 is there a reason why before it wasn't in the code that we just approved? I mean, because 399 00:46:27,600 --> 00:46:33,040 I know that these applications, these are things that we've always done and other things 400 00:46:33,040 --> 00:46:41,120 that we've reviewed so far, we've had a reason why they weren't in. So why wasn't this in 401 00:46:41,120 --> 00:46:44,160 before? Good question. With the 2002, we didn't have 402 00:46:44,160 --> 00:46:49,960 the table. We didn't have procedures. So with the 2002 in helping our development community 403 00:46:49,960 --> 00:46:55,800 understand our procedures and providing them a way of knowing what we have as far as type 404 00:46:55,800 --> 00:47:02,560 of application, we created this table. But in 2019, when we approved the DDC, we just 405 00:47:02,560 --> 00:47:07,520 listed a few. We didn't expand it to all of the applications. So that's why you don't 406 00:47:07,520 --> 00:47:11,760 see the TIA, you don't see the civil engineering plans, and that's why you don't see the real 407 00:47:11,760 --> 00:47:18,560 estate application. So that's why we're adding it to what we have today. So Keely, it wasn't 408 00:47:18,560 --> 00:47:24,960 even in the 2002 code, because again, we didn't have a list outlined in that part. It was 409 00:47:24,960 --> 00:47:32,400 basically covered generally. Right. No, I was just referring to the 2019. 410 00:47:32,400 --> 00:47:39,560 I think we were just focused on the ones that we were focused on, the main applications. 411 00:47:39,560 --> 00:47:46,080 And as we go through the development review process, we find that we need to have those 412 00:47:46,080 --> 00:47:50,640 applications in the sub chapter. And that's why we're adding it. I think we just didn't 413 00:47:50,640 --> 00:47:52,880 include it just because we were focused on the others. 414 00:47:52,880 --> 00:47:58,080 Right. Okay. Well, I mean, it makes sense. And it needs to be in there. So, right. Appreciate 415 00:47:58,080 --> 00:48:03,440 that question. Yeah, Ron, I do have a question on this. Because 416 00:48:03,440 --> 00:48:10,320 you talk about it's a slide that wasn't in my, my backup that that I saw about dedication 417 00:48:10,320 --> 00:48:18,440 had to be done by platting, if it was originally done by platting. Yes. And I know that or 418 00:48:18,440 --> 00:48:25,080 I believe that when we change the gas well ordinance to 500 foot, any, you couldn't plat 419 00:48:25,080 --> 00:48:29,880 any protected use within that 500 foot after that, if the plat already existed, you could 420 00:48:29,880 --> 00:48:36,560 still build on it, but you couldn't do any replatting. So if someone needs to replat 421 00:48:36,560 --> 00:48:41,640 within that distance, or they can't replat in that distance, but yet we never trying 422 00:48:41,640 --> 00:48:45,720 to do something that might require a dedication or a reclaimed right of way, how will that 423 00:48:45,720 --> 00:48:50,400 be handled? So if I understand the question correctly, 424 00:48:50,400 --> 00:48:59,080 this, this particular application type, real estate application type is, is any encroachment 425 00:48:59,080 --> 00:49:06,160 abandonment or I'm sorry, easement abandonment, any right of way abandonment, any encroachment 426 00:49:06,160 --> 00:49:11,520 into the easements. So I think this is two separate things. If, if I'm understanding 427 00:49:11,520 --> 00:49:17,360 and I'm trying to understand your question, John, are you talking about the setback requirements 428 00:49:17,360 --> 00:49:26,680 or you said, yeah, the way I understood what, what got passed was you cannot, you cannot 429 00:49:26,680 --> 00:49:32,160 build within 500 foot of a gas well unless it had been previously plotted for that use. 430 00:49:32,160 --> 00:49:36,800 So during that time period that we're at 250 and we switched to 500, if it got plotted 431 00:49:36,800 --> 00:49:41,680 during that time period, they could still build within that, in that distance between 432 00:49:41,680 --> 00:49:48,280 the 250 and the 500. But if you needed to go back and change your plat, all that was 433 00:49:48,280 --> 00:49:51,960 one of the things that was happening is that you're, you're taking anybody that's in that 434 00:49:51,960 --> 00:49:56,680 area and if they have to, for whatever reason, do a replat, they can't do it because we've 435 00:49:56,680 --> 00:50:02,600 now said you cannot plat a residential lot. We didn't say anything about replat necessarily, 436 00:50:02,600 --> 00:50:13,520 but to me, replatting is a plat, is a, an act of platting. So yeah, I, sorry, I didn't 437 00:50:13,520 --> 00:50:17,640 understand at first. I really don't know the answer to that question. I think that's more 438 00:50:17,640 --> 00:50:24,840 of a, a, a vesting or under maybe a gas well question that I'm not familiar with how that 439 00:50:24,840 --> 00:50:30,560 procedure works. I don't know if Aaron can help me out with this one or Richard. 440 00:50:30,560 --> 00:50:35,960 If such a situation like that arose, council member Ryan, I would probably provide legal 441 00:50:35,960 --> 00:50:43,000 advice to close session, to the city council in closed session. 442 00:50:43,000 --> 00:51:01,000 Okay. So moving on to the next topic, we get into subdivision application procedures. This 443 00:51:01,000 --> 00:51:09,320 covers all platts. So again, moving on to the section of the code that talks about platting. 444 00:51:09,320 --> 00:51:17,960 This is section two six and two six further on right now two six one, which is again subdivision 445 00:51:17,960 --> 00:51:23,520 applications. Our platting does not have an applicability section. So what we're adding 446 00:51:23,520 --> 00:51:27,560 is the section that you see or the language that you see here highlighted or underlined 447 00:51:27,560 --> 00:51:33,800 that is just to provide that clarity that we were talking about. As you all know that 448 00:51:33,800 --> 00:51:40,880 any development within the city shall submit and apply under the subdivision procedure 449 00:51:40,880 --> 00:51:48,720 section any plat application that is applicable, preliminary plat, final plat. If it's a replat 450 00:51:48,720 --> 00:51:53,560 or an amending final plat or anything of the like, they will need to submit under this 451 00:51:53,560 --> 00:51:59,800 particular section. And as you all know, with the cities in a local agreement with the county, 452 00:51:59,800 --> 00:52:08,000 we also process application for platting in division one of our ETJ. And this is again 453 00:52:08,000 --> 00:52:14,000 to help illustrate that that's in our code to make sure that anyone that's developing 454 00:52:14,000 --> 00:52:20,360 has a section or in the ETJ has a section that they can refer to, to make sure that 455 00:52:20,360 --> 00:52:25,760 they understand that they need to submit to the city of Denton. And also as it relates 456 00:52:25,760 --> 00:52:32,200 to the inner local agreement, any civil engineering plans may be applied to areas within division 457 00:52:32,200 --> 00:52:43,060 one as well. So continuing on with the subdivision application. So again, two six and on this 458 00:52:43,060 --> 00:52:53,800 particular section refers to the recording of plat applications and particularly any 459 00:52:53,800 --> 00:53:02,800 replat or final plat. What I wanted to focus on here is that the 180 days, this is something 460 00:53:02,800 --> 00:53:10,720 that we initially included, but we are now changing. We are changing it to 24 months 461 00:53:10,720 --> 00:53:20,100 to be consistent with other expiration or filing dates for, for plats. So again, going 462 00:53:20,100 --> 00:53:28,040 from 180 days to 24 months. So if someone had a plat that was approved by P and Z, they 463 00:53:28,040 --> 00:53:37,960 have up to 24 months to file that plat. Prior to that, they can keep it, you know, unrecorded, 464 00:53:37,960 --> 00:53:44,000 but in order to move forward with their development, they would have to file it or record it. But 465 00:53:44,000 --> 00:53:49,480 what we're saying is they have up to 24 months rather than what it is currently shown here 466 00:53:49,480 --> 00:53:56,640 of 180 days. Very consistent, again, trying to make sure that we cover every section of 467 00:53:56,640 --> 00:54:03,080 the code where it talks about 180 days. We want to make sure that it's now 24 months 468 00:54:03,080 --> 00:54:10,280 again to be consistent with all the filing of and expiration dates of any of the plots 469 00:54:10,280 --> 00:54:18,760 under this subsection. Again, 180 days to 24 months. This is this particular section 470 00:54:18,760 --> 00:54:24,320 that we're proposing to amend is it's more or less a cleanup. We know that a preliminary 471 00:54:24,320 --> 00:54:33,840 plat in the ETJ is not required, but it is permitted if the applicant chooses to. We 472 00:54:33,840 --> 00:54:40,920 are just making this more clear by adding it to the first line and deleting the second 473 00:54:40,920 --> 00:54:45,840 line. I think that was the intent of this particular code amendment. Again, a very, 474 00:54:45,840 --> 00:54:54,520 very minor change in our code just to be a little bit more clear. Again, we initially 475 00:54:54,520 --> 00:55:00,600 had 180 days or six months. What we're doing is changing the effectiveness of a preliminary 476 00:55:00,600 --> 00:55:06,840 plat. If it was approved by P&Z, it would be effective for up to 24 months until they 477 00:55:06,840 --> 00:55:13,720 final plat either the whole site or parts of it. We're saying that six months is just 478 00:55:13,720 --> 00:55:19,040 too short in that 24 months is a little bit more practical, and that's why you're seeing 479 00:55:19,040 --> 00:55:25,040 this proposed change. It is a very important change, and again, we wanted to make sure 480 00:55:25,040 --> 00:55:32,400 that the DCRC did not have any question as we bring forward this set of code amendments 481 00:55:32,400 --> 00:55:34,640 to the P&Z and City Council. 482 00:55:34,640 --> 00:55:46,440 Rob, sorry to interrupt, but before we get too far ahead of it, go back one more. Where 483 00:55:46,440 --> 00:55:56,080 you took the permitted, but not required, to me that is a change because now it's reading 484 00:55:56,080 --> 00:56:05,340 that within the city limits or the ETJ, so are we saying we don't require? Right now 485 00:56:05,340 --> 00:56:12,880 is not required, is not required in the city. I'm sorry, in the ETJ. In the ETJ, but with 486 00:56:12,880 --> 00:56:20,760 the way that this is rewritten, it would not be required in the ETJ or the city limits. 487 00:56:20,760 --> 00:56:31,720 That's correct. I think there was an option, more so I think for commercial properties 488 00:56:31,720 --> 00:56:35,760 for non-residential, if they wanted to just go straight to construction engineering plans 489 00:56:35,760 --> 00:56:41,480 and final plat to have that option available to them. I think most residential subdivisions 490 00:56:41,480 --> 00:56:48,680 would go the preliminary plat route just because of the phasing, but we thought for a non-residential, 491 00:56:48,680 --> 00:56:52,960 this could be an option rather than sending them through both processes. 492 00:56:52,960 --> 00:57:00,280 Richard, if I may, I'm taking note of this section. We may probably need to add that 493 00:57:00,280 --> 00:57:08,240 explanation just to be clearer because as the chair mentioned, it does say city limits 494 00:57:08,240 --> 00:57:16,900 as well, so just didn't want to keep this from us a lot. We're requiring say residential 495 00:57:16,900 --> 00:57:21,500 development from submitting a preliminary plat. 496 00:57:21,500 --> 00:57:27,880 Yeah, I agree. Thank you, chair, for catching that. 497 00:57:27,880 --> 00:57:43,060 All right. Great. We can, we can move on. Great. Okay. So the next part of the subdivision 498 00:57:43,060 --> 00:57:49,920 application procedure is related to final plots. Again, adding the effects of the approval. 499 00:57:49,920 --> 00:57:55,800 I think this particular section or this piece right here under A was just moving it down 500 00:57:55,800 --> 00:58:03,320 to here, but again, the second part D talks a little bit more of the expiration of approval. 501 00:58:03,320 --> 00:58:11,080 Again, two years, 24 months is what we're saying is what we want to be consistent with 502 00:58:11,080 --> 00:58:16,480 the code with the other sections of the code that is. So again, this is just going to provide 503 00:58:16,480 --> 00:58:24,000 more clarification. 504 00:58:24,000 --> 00:58:29,960 So that is the end of that topic, subdivision application procedures. If you all don't have 505 00:58:29,960 --> 00:58:39,760 any questions, we can move on to the next one. 506 00:58:39,760 --> 00:58:45,360 I'm not seeing any movement by anyone. So go ahead and move on. 507 00:58:45,360 --> 00:58:55,600 So replat procedures. We have a very short version of a replat procedure currently. And 508 00:58:55,600 --> 00:59:01,760 what we're trying to do is be consistent with all the other application types. So we're 509 00:59:01,760 --> 00:59:08,280 adding purpose and applicability. Again, anything that's underlying you see here is something 510 00:59:08,280 --> 00:59:14,680 that we are adding to the development code. It's shown in red primarily because it's obviously 511 00:59:14,680 --> 00:59:19,360 a high priority for us and we want to make sure that we get this code amendment to you 512 00:59:19,360 --> 00:59:26,160 all as soon as possible. Again, we all know that the replatting process of what it's intended 513 00:59:26,160 --> 00:59:35,160 for is to amend or vacate a plat. I'm sorry, to replat a property, of course. And then 514 00:59:35,160 --> 00:59:42,880 applicability, it applies to any part of a subdivision or any part of a subdivision. 515 00:59:42,880 --> 00:59:50,440 Next slide is just what we discussed earlier. In addition to the purpose and applicability, 516 00:59:50,440 --> 00:59:57,500 we have the following sections. And again, they pretty much follow very similar steps 517 00:59:57,500 --> 01:00:04,040 in the process and the procedures that is. I do want to make mention that there is a 518 01:00:04,040 --> 01:00:11,420 particular section I wanted to share with you all. Again, this is under Step 6. So going 519 01:00:11,420 --> 01:00:18,640 through all of this, the pre-application activities are similar to the submittal and handling 520 01:00:18,640 --> 01:00:25,560 of the application, staff review and action, scheduling notices of public meetings and 521 01:00:25,560 --> 01:00:30,320 hearings and review and decision and post-decision actions and limitations are a little different 522 01:00:30,320 --> 01:00:37,840 for replats. So I'm going to go ahead and share that with you. So if there is a replat 523 01:00:37,840 --> 01:00:44,680 that requires a variance or an exception, it has to go through a public hearing process 524 01:00:44,680 --> 01:00:48,400 with the Planning and Zoning Commission, just the Planning and Zoning Commission. And this 525 01:00:48,400 --> 01:00:54,920 is under 212.05 in the Texas Local Government Code. It has to be a public hearing. There 526 01:00:54,920 --> 01:01:05,080 has to be notices sent out. And if there is written protest from those, the Planning and 527 01:01:05,080 --> 01:01:10,920 Zoning Commission is required to vote in the supermajority. And again, this is partly as 528 01:01:10,920 --> 01:01:16,320 applies to state law under 212. We wanted to illustrate that or provide that in our 529 01:01:16,320 --> 01:01:24,260 development code. So the decision of a replat that has a variance or an exception would 530 01:01:24,260 --> 01:01:32,640 need to follow this procedure. However, if there is a replat that does not have a variance 531 01:01:32,640 --> 01:01:39,320 or exception, they will be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission, but does not 532 01:01:39,320 --> 01:01:49,320 require a public hearing. And the only notification that would be presented or shared for that 533 01:01:49,320 --> 01:01:55,920 particular property would be a notice after the decision has been made. So these, again, 534 01:01:55,920 --> 01:02:04,040 a residential replat that does not require a variance shall be noticed to the public 535 01:02:04,040 --> 01:02:12,040 by no later than 15 days of the replat. The public being just those properties within 536 01:02:12,040 --> 01:02:20,440 200 feet of the subject site within that subdivision. We've had several replats already that went 537 01:02:20,440 --> 01:02:26,800 to the Planning and Zoning Commission that did not have a variance. Those were considered 538 01:02:26,800 --> 01:02:32,400 under items for individual consideration. Those that were actually approved, staff has 539 01:02:32,400 --> 01:02:39,280 been sending out notices to those individuals or those property owners within the 200 foot 540 01:02:39,280 --> 01:02:46,640 or properties within 200 feet of that subject property. And again, that is per a new state 541 01:02:46,640 --> 01:02:53,960 law that was passed last summer. Again, just want to make sure that that was clear and 542 01:02:53,960 --> 01:02:58,560 that was presented because this is different from all the other applications because it 543 01:02:58,560 --> 01:03:09,920 is something that was recently passed by state law for replats. Any questions with regards 544 01:03:09,920 --> 01:03:17,980 to replat procedures? Just for me, because it is something new because of state law, 545 01:03:17,980 --> 01:03:25,520 but does that differ from the procedure that we did in the past? Yes. On the notification 546 01:03:25,520 --> 01:03:31,120 aspect of it? On the notification aspect, yes, ma'am. Okay. And the notification is 547 01:03:31,120 --> 01:03:37,400 specifically called out in state law? Correct. The difference between ones that require a 548 01:03:37,400 --> 01:03:44,360 variance or exception and ones that do not require a variance. Okay. And that was added 549 01:03:44,360 --> 01:03:51,440 again, added to state law under, I forget the house bill, I think I have it in the presentation, 550 01:03:51,440 --> 01:04:10,640 it was last summer. That is okay. Thank you. Sorry. Going back the other way. Okay. Subdivision 551 01:04:10,640 --> 01:04:17,480 variance is our next topic. And for those in planning and zoning, this is something 552 01:04:17,480 --> 01:04:23,560 that is decided only at planning and zoning commission. And with the 2019 development 553 01:04:23,560 --> 01:04:37,360 code, the subdivision variance was changed to the ZBA. It went to the ZBA and we realized 554 01:04:37,360 --> 01:04:41,760 that, or any variance, sorry, any variance, not subdivision, but just any variance would 555 01:04:41,760 --> 01:04:49,400 go to ZBA, including subdivision variance. We felt that something that we overlooked 556 01:04:49,400 --> 01:04:55,440 and something that we need to change and bring back to the planning and zoning commission. 557 01:04:55,440 --> 01:05:03,360 So you see here, the decision is planning and zoning commission as opposed to the zoning 558 01:05:03,360 --> 01:05:09,480 board of adjustments. So again, subdivision variance is anything that pertains to a variance 559 01:05:09,480 --> 01:05:17,040 to a subdivision. And we've got a list under the applicability. But again, I wanted to 560 01:05:17,040 --> 01:05:25,480 share the purpose of the subdivision variance just to share with you if it resulted in unnecessary 561 01:05:25,480 --> 01:05:33,160 hardship or any other variance that the applicant is seeking to grant relief outside of what 562 01:05:33,160 --> 01:05:40,000 is required under the current DDC subdivision requirements. So here's the applicability 563 01:05:40,000 --> 01:05:46,320 section or part of the section that we wanted to include. We are saying that any property 564 01:05:46,320 --> 01:05:51,680 owner seeking relief for standards contained in the following sections of the DDC. So streets, 565 01:05:51,680 --> 01:05:58,680 driveways, lot planning, and block layout. These are what would be only required or may 566 01:05:58,680 --> 01:06:07,360 be requested as a variance for their development. And again, we are saying that the planning 567 01:06:07,360 --> 01:06:13,760 and zoning commission shall decide the request for subdivision variances rather than the 568 01:06:13,760 --> 01:06:20,960 zoning board of adjustment, which is what is currently in our 2019 development code. 569 01:06:20,960 --> 01:06:27,360 It currently falls under the ZBA. What we're trying with this proposed code amendment is 570 01:06:27,360 --> 01:06:34,600 to bring it back to the planning zoning commission. I won't read through this again. I just wanted 571 01:06:34,600 --> 01:06:40,080 to share with you that the subdivision variance approval criteria so that anyone that's looking 572 01:06:40,080 --> 01:06:48,020 to do a subdivision variance will need to make sure that they follow or know that these 573 01:06:48,020 --> 01:06:55,360 are the criteria in which the planning zoning commission will use in granting that variance. 574 01:06:55,360 --> 01:07:03,440 And I know there's a lot there, and I didn't want just to go past this, but I wanted to 575 01:07:03,440 --> 01:07:10,440 make sure that you knew that there is a long list of criteria for a subdivision variance 576 01:07:10,440 --> 01:07:25,320 that would be considered, and hopefully, if approved by the planning zoning commission. 577 01:07:25,320 --> 01:07:29,520 And if you all need more time, please let me know, or if you want me to go through this 578 01:07:29,520 --> 01:07:39,560 individually, I can do that as well. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental. The 579 01:07:39,560 --> 01:07:46,520 conditions of which the request variance is based on a uniqueness of the property, but 580 01:07:46,520 --> 01:07:52,000 because the particular physical surroundings, shape or topography or condition is a particular 581 01:07:52,000 --> 01:07:58,820 hardship, and it's not just an inconvenience, the subdivision will not in any manner vary 582 01:07:58,820 --> 01:08:09,340 from the Den Plan 2030 or the Den Plan Comprehensive Plan, the Den Mobility Plan, and other documents. 583 01:08:09,340 --> 01:08:15,920 And that the special and peculiar condition of which the request is based did not result 584 01:08:15,920 --> 01:08:25,000 from or were created by the act or commission of the owner or any prior owner. So very similar 585 01:08:25,000 --> 01:08:31,360 to other variances, approval criteria, but again, wanted to make sure that the subdivision 586 01:08:31,360 --> 01:08:41,160 variance has its own approval criteria. Ron? Yes, ma'am. So this was planning and zoning, 587 01:08:41,160 --> 01:08:49,280 and then it went to the zoning board? Correct, by way of, yes, 2019 development code. Okay. 588 01:08:49,280 --> 01:08:53,920 So it went to the zoning board, and we're realizing that that didn't work out the best, 589 01:08:53,920 --> 01:08:57,800 and so we're moving it back to planning and zoning? Right, right. We feel that the planning 590 01:08:57,800 --> 01:09:02,680 and zoning commission reviews, plots, subdivisions, obviously a lot more than the zoning board 591 01:09:02,680 --> 01:09:12,040 of adjustments. So they're more, I guess, prepared or aware of what to look for. Okay. 592 01:09:12,040 --> 01:09:16,540 And was it the word variance that was in there that made us feel like we needed to send it 593 01:09:16,540 --> 01:09:22,960 over to the zoning board? I'm trying to remember this conversation, and I... Yeah, we just, 594 01:09:22,960 --> 01:09:31,520 again, trying to make it simple, trying to make it, you know, it's the right word. Streamlined, 595 01:09:31,520 --> 01:09:38,160 we thought the variance would, any variance would just be ZBA. However, this was a special 596 01:09:38,160 --> 01:09:45,240 variance because of the nature of it, subdivision regulations, and felt that the P&Z would be 597 01:09:45,240 --> 01:09:53,760 the better board or commission to look through these. Okay. Thank you. Ed, we don't have 598 01:09:53,760 --> 01:09:56,800 very many of these. I don't think, at least in the three years that I've been here, that 599 01:09:56,800 --> 01:10:03,080 we've processed one. They're very rare when we do have one. Yeah, I know in the past one 600 01:10:03,080 --> 01:10:13,320 or two have been block lengths or other, you know, transportation-related variances, driveway 601 01:10:13,320 --> 01:10:26,200 separations, that sort of thing. Okay. Okay. We are hopefully getting close. I know that 602 01:10:26,200 --> 01:10:38,600 we have a couple more. Here's one that I think requires a lot of review from the DCRC. It's 603 01:10:38,600 --> 01:10:45,920 rezoned to a planned development. Similar to the replat, we carried forward some language 604 01:10:45,920 --> 01:10:55,960 related to PD, you know, rezoning to PD, but it wasn't a full comprehensive procedure, 605 01:10:55,960 --> 01:11:02,720 and so we are adding the following sections, again, similar to the other ones having a 606 01:11:02,720 --> 01:11:10,240 purpose, applicability, and other sections. So, again, as you can see here, and you can 607 01:11:10,240 --> 01:11:18,040 read that obviously a PD is a special type of zoning where the applicant or property 608 01:11:18,040 --> 01:11:24,240 owner would like to propose a type of development that may not necessarily meet the development 609 01:11:24,240 --> 01:11:33,920 code, but by way of design and proposal, they have a little bit more unique concept and 610 01:11:33,920 --> 01:11:44,360 would like to consider it as a PD. I know we have had several PDs already approved or 611 01:11:44,360 --> 01:11:53,220 amended recently. I think the true PDs are the ones that have a design submitted that 612 01:11:53,220 --> 01:12:01,480 vary up front, is specific to a uniqueness and is different. Then there's also a different 613 01:12:01,480 --> 01:12:08,680 type of PD, which we'll get into in a little bit here, is where what we consider rezoning, 614 01:12:08,680 --> 01:12:16,160 when we reconsider rezoning and we add conditions, ultimately a PD or a zoning with condition 615 01:12:16,160 --> 01:12:24,680 or even overlay, they're all the same in nature, but different in their scope. So I'll go to 616 01:12:24,680 --> 01:12:33,120 the next slide. So what we have are two types of PDs. We have an overlay PD. An overlay 617 01:12:33,120 --> 01:12:38,920 PD may just be like we discussed and have done recently with the Planning and Zoning 618 01:12:38,920 --> 01:12:47,000 Commission is restrict a use that's permitted under the base zoning because it's not a zoning 619 01:12:47,000 --> 01:12:52,840 that was going to be approved straight zoning and that there was some conditions. We wanted 620 01:12:52,840 --> 01:12:59,760 to make it distinct and so this is what we would refer to as an overlay PD. A standard 621 01:12:59,760 --> 01:13:06,720 PD is a little bit more intended by the applicant and they realize that they are not going to 622 01:13:06,720 --> 01:13:14,200 meet a specific zoning dimensional standard or a specific requirement and would like to 623 01:13:14,200 --> 01:13:23,400 propose a PD, create their own standards and their development standards and have the P&Z 624 01:13:23,400 --> 01:13:29,360 and City Council consider it. This is what we're determining or defining as a standard 625 01:13:29,360 --> 01:13:36,640 PD. So just wanted to share that because again, we see these two types of PDs or have seen 626 01:13:36,640 --> 01:13:43,480 these two types of PDs and we anticipate on seeing more of them as we continue to develop 627 01:13:43,480 --> 01:13:48,520 in the city and wanting to see some of our infill development occur. I think this is 628 01:13:48,520 --> 01:13:54,480 a tool that we can certainly use and not just infill but any other areas of the city if 629 01:13:54,480 --> 01:14:07,480 again, we in the development community finds a need for them. And so that would be, I remember 630 01:14:07,480 --> 01:14:14,280 we talked about tiny homes, would that be as a PD, would that be a standard? Correct, 631 01:14:14,280 --> 01:14:19,320 correct under tiny homes, you're absolutely correct Keely because it's unique and we want 632 01:14:19,320 --> 01:14:26,280 to make sure that the design of them are consistent with the goals and the objective of the Complan 633 01:14:26,280 --> 01:14:32,160 and the development code. A PD would be the appropriate method for getting those types 634 01:14:32,160 --> 01:14:46,200 of developments approved. Any other questions? 635 01:14:46,200 --> 01:14:55,320 And again, the PD has, again, we wanted to make sure we followed the same outline of 636 01:14:55,320 --> 01:15:01,720 procedures. Again, I wanted to spend time a little bit more on step two because it is 637 01:15:01,720 --> 01:15:10,080 different from the other ones. There is also approval criteria for PDs. Again, all of this 638 01:15:10,080 --> 01:15:16,060 which is you see here are very similar. The ones that are called out, I wanted to make 639 01:15:16,060 --> 01:15:24,480 sure that you understood the differences. So that's why you saw that or had that discussion. 640 01:15:24,480 --> 01:15:31,360 Any questions on rezoning to PD? Again, I don't know if you all want to look at what's 641 01:15:31,360 --> 01:15:38,600 the approval criteria but what I would say is very similar to a rezoning. You just want 642 01:15:38,600 --> 01:15:42,920 to make sure that it's compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods, it's consistent 643 01:15:42,920 --> 01:15:48,320 with our comprehensive plan and so on and so forth. But again, the process or procedure 644 01:15:48,320 --> 01:15:54,320 is very similar to the other process or applications. 645 01:15:54,320 --> 01:16:02,000 And the notification is the same, right? Correct. So 20%, you know, or denial, it requires a 646 01:16:02,000 --> 01:16:07,160 super majority for the City Council to approve. Okay. 647 01:16:07,160 --> 01:16:17,040 Yes, ma'am. Right. That brings us to the end of three set of code amendments. I just wanted 648 01:16:17,040 --> 01:16:26,960 to kind of give you some idea as to what to expect next week if we have a meeting. Again, 649 01:16:26,960 --> 01:16:32,440 the unity of title and declaration in lieu of unity of title may be part of this meeting 650 01:16:32,440 --> 01:16:40,760 next week or the meeting next week, or maybe some meeting in the future. Following that 651 01:16:40,760 --> 01:16:48,160 discussion we'll have additional discussions on annexation procedures as we move forward. 652 01:16:48,160 --> 01:16:56,000 Again, the next four, five, and six, and seven are basic cleanup like we saw earlier, nothing 653 01:16:56,000 --> 01:17:03,120 major, but I wanted to share that with you because obviously it does have some implications. 654 01:17:03,120 --> 01:17:09,480 I want to make sure that everyone under the DCRC is aware of them. As far as the other 655 01:17:09,480 --> 01:17:16,280 column, we get to a little bit more specific changes and a little bit more discussion, 656 01:17:16,280 --> 01:17:22,280 in my opinion, dimensional standards as it relates to setback changes, as it relates 657 01:17:22,280 --> 01:17:29,160 to height clarifications, table of allowed uses. We recently went through a discussion 658 01:17:29,160 --> 01:17:35,560 on tattoo and piercing parlors. There are some uses that we want to address and clear 659 01:17:35,560 --> 01:17:43,960 up and address nonconformities as well. Use specific standards, those are specific to 660 01:17:43,960 --> 01:17:52,920 a particular use and there are some standards that we want to either change or clarify by 661 01:17:52,920 --> 01:17:59,800 eliminating some duplications and or adding more clarification or clarity. And last, 11 662 01:17:59,800 --> 01:18:06,680 and 12, I know that the DCRC, that prior to the DCRC, and I know that Tim's on the call 663 01:18:06,680 --> 01:18:13,680 or on the Zoom link may not have been purviewed to this, but we have had a lot of discussion 664 01:18:13,680 --> 01:18:19,440 probably more than we want to, but we wanted to bring this back to you all just to have 665 01:18:19,440 --> 01:18:26,920 a refresher. And these are important because we know that these are concerns from the community 666 01:18:26,920 --> 01:18:32,740 that we have been aware of and been brought to our attention. And we just want to make 667 01:18:32,740 --> 01:18:39,000 sure that when we bring this forward, you all are okay with what's being proposed or 668 01:18:39,000 --> 01:18:46,240 recommended. If there is anything else that you all know of that you would like to bring 669 01:18:46,240 --> 01:18:53,080 forward, please let me know. We can certainly add to the list. I was telling someone earlier, 670 01:18:53,080 --> 01:19:00,280 as we get further down in our meetings, the priorities, high priorities, will soon go 671 01:19:00,280 --> 01:19:09,240 away and we'll be focusing more on just regular code amendments, that is under our non-substantive 672 01:19:09,240 --> 01:19:15,580 changes and then also substantive changes as well. And then our criteria manual transition 673 01:19:15,580 --> 01:19:22,520 or transfer, we will also be getting into in our next set of couple, our next couple 674 01:19:22,520 --> 01:19:29,840 of meetings in the next couple of weeks or months. Whenever we have them scheduled, that 675 01:19:29,840 --> 01:19:37,120 is. So with that, I'll stand for any questions and/or if you have any recommendations or 676 01:19:37,120 --> 01:19:42,920 would like to see any other code amendments that you know of that we should be researching, 677 01:19:42,920 --> 01:19:48,000 we should be prioritizing, or that we should be bringing forward. 678 01:19:48,000 --> 01:19:52,200 I think Margie had a question. 679 01:19:52,200 --> 01:19:58,520 Well, it actually had to do when we were talking about PDs. So if I can ask it now, you just 680 01:19:58,520 --> 01:20:03,840 talked over me and I couldn't stop you, Ron. You just kept going. 681 01:20:03,840 --> 01:20:10,240 Just super quick question with regard to rezoning to PD. So would that just be considered for 682 01:20:10,240 --> 01:20:19,120 standard PD? I mean, or are you trying to say there's two PD rezoning options now? 683 01:20:19,120 --> 01:20:25,440 There will be two different PD options. So if it is something that say it's all we're 684 01:20:25,440 --> 01:20:31,680 looking at as far as restricting the uses, we should consider those PDs rezoning. 685 01:20:31,680 --> 01:20:33,480 We're still considering that a PD. 686 01:20:33,480 --> 01:20:38,640 Right. If we know ahead of time, that's the hope, right? I know that there was one rezoning 687 01:20:38,640 --> 01:20:44,680 that was brought forward and we didn't catch it before, but certainly those would be still 688 01:20:44,680 --> 01:20:51,840 considered. And Richard, remind me again, if the P&Z has a recommendation for restricting 689 01:20:51,840 --> 01:20:55,840 uses, would we consider those, I mean, we should, PDs? 690 01:20:55,840 --> 01:21:00,840 Right, right. And so what's happening now is if you remember when we transitioned to 691 01:21:00,840 --> 01:21:07,200 the 2019 PDC, all of those little, I'll call them the parcel overlays that we had from 692 01:21:07,200 --> 01:21:11,840 the mixed use overlay, those transitioned to with a PD designation. And so essentially 693 01:21:11,840 --> 01:21:19,240 what this will do is codify that, but then have a better way. So now we don't have overlays 694 01:21:19,240 --> 01:21:26,360 and then PD overlays. So it's just really consolidating into one thing. So it essentially 695 01:21:26,360 --> 01:21:32,840 is the old mixed use overlay just reconstituted into a PD, because that's how we have them 696 01:21:32,840 --> 01:21:33,840 mapped today. 697 01:21:33,840 --> 01:21:41,440 Yeah. And that I understand. I guess what my question is, is if we're rezoning to, let's 698 01:21:41,440 --> 01:21:49,220 say a recent request we had, and I can't remember what the rezone was, but there ended up being 699 01:21:49,220 --> 01:21:55,360 a condition put on it. It wasn't brought to us as a PD overlay rezoning. So I'm trying 700 01:21:55,360 --> 01:21:59,040 to get clarification. 701 01:21:59,040 --> 01:22:05,040 Yeah, so this would function just like that. So they could apply under that with rather 702 01:22:05,040 --> 01:22:09,240 than going through the whole PD, because I think the one you're talking, I think it's 703 01:22:09,240 --> 01:22:13,720 coming back next meeting, because then there was another condition that they wanted to 704 01:22:13,720 --> 01:22:19,480 add at council, unbeknownst to staff. And so that's when council had kicked it back for 705 01:22:19,480 --> 01:22:25,200 B and Z to reconsider again. But that was the one where they were rezoning to R4 and 706 01:22:25,200 --> 01:22:30,600 had requested an overlay or conditions be put on it. 707 01:22:30,600 --> 01:22:40,280 Right. So what are we calling that? Are they rezoning to R4 with conditions? 708 01:22:40,280 --> 01:22:44,800 With an overlay condition then that gets mapped as, because I think we've had one or two others, 709 01:22:44,800 --> 01:22:50,540 there was the one off of 35W that had some restrictions after the community meeting that 710 01:22:50,540 --> 01:22:52,440 ultimately went as an overlay. 711 01:22:52,440 --> 01:22:59,320 Right. So we're calling it a PD overlay, but it really would come to us originally as that, 712 01:22:59,320 --> 01:23:04,300 right? Because oftentimes these overlay discussions don't even get talked about until we're discussing 713 01:23:04,300 --> 01:23:06,840 the rezone request in our meetings. 714 01:23:06,840 --> 01:23:12,400 Correct. It could. There are those instances where, a lot different from where we were 715 01:23:12,400 --> 01:23:18,120 before with the, you know, before we had some residential, if you were over two acres, you 716 01:23:18,120 --> 01:23:22,720 didn't have those minimum sizes. And so there were times where we could support an R6 provided 717 01:23:22,720 --> 01:23:28,760 certain uses weren't more involved. And that may be the case, but I think it'll be more 718 01:23:28,760 --> 01:23:35,160 likely that it would get brought up after we have the, there's a neighborhood meeting 719 01:23:35,160 --> 01:23:42,200 or community meeting and some issues are raised. So very well could come before, but I suspect 720 01:23:42,200 --> 01:23:45,800 that the majority of them will either happen at the meeting or right between the neighborhood 721 01:23:45,800 --> 01:23:46,800 meeting. 722 01:23:46,800 --> 01:23:52,120 Okay. So, so to understand, so you're going to try to vet a lot of these things ahead 723 01:23:52,120 --> 01:23:58,760 of time and possibly and bring them before P and Z as a PD overlay request? 724 01:23:58,760 --> 01:24:01,720 If possible, because right now the code doesn't allow staff to. 725 01:24:01,720 --> 01:24:09,320 Right. We have to kind of get, have the applicant ask for an overlay. So does, so if you don't 726 01:24:09,320 --> 01:24:18,280 catch that ahead of time, but we catch it in a discussion, do we have to, what do we 727 01:24:18,280 --> 01:24:22,880 do at that point? Are we still allowed to approve a rezone with some kind of a condition 728 01:24:22,880 --> 01:24:26,240 if it's not called PD overlay? 729 01:24:26,240 --> 01:24:32,000 I think it would just have that PD overlay applied to it. So it would be say R or MN 730 01:24:32,000 --> 01:24:39,760 with that PD overlay. I think that's how Ron, if you can pull the language back up. 731 01:24:39,760 --> 01:24:43,280 I think I understand what you're trying to say Margie, if it's not brought to you as 732 01:24:43,280 --> 01:24:47,680 a PD, you know, as far as an application, it's a straight zoning and there was a condition 733 01:24:47,680 --> 01:24:53,160 placed after, you know, or during P and Z, what, what do we move? How do we move it forward 734 01:24:53,160 --> 01:24:56,760 to what is moved to city council? What is forwarded to city council? 735 01:24:56,760 --> 01:25:02,440 Exactly. So if it comes to us as you know, wanting to rezone, you know, from R2 to R4, 736 01:25:02,440 --> 01:25:06,440 but then we want to put something on it or I guess it maybe it wouldn't be R4, but maybe 737 01:25:06,440 --> 01:25:11,400 R2 to R6 or something. We want it eliminated or say you can only have single family detached 738 01:25:11,400 --> 01:25:18,880 or what have you. If we, if we discuss that in our, our meeting, then what, yeah, what 739 01:25:18,880 --> 01:25:25,280 is going to city council because it is PD over, you know, I'm confused. 740 01:25:25,280 --> 01:25:29,680 Yeah. I think, I think, uh, what we would do is obviously bring forward what you're 741 01:25:29,680 --> 01:25:34,080 recommending or what the P and Z is recommending. The only thing that I think we need to work 742 01:25:34,080 --> 01:25:39,040 on and I've noted here and we'll talk, uh, internally with Richard and legal is how do 743 01:25:39,040 --> 01:25:44,160 we notice it? Because obviously is it a PD or is it a rezoning or are they all the same 744 01:25:44,160 --> 01:25:49,440 or are they different? How do we clarify that for the public? That's the, I think that's 745 01:25:49,440 --> 01:25:54,520 the only thing. That's exactly my question. Yes. So I guess Richard and maybe Erin, I don't 746 01:25:54,520 --> 01:25:59,360 know the answer right now. I mean, maybe, uh, again, these are the ones that are, are 747 01:25:59,360 --> 01:26:04,480 conditions on a rezoning that are, that are, that are recommended by the city, um, by the 748 01:26:04,480 --> 01:26:08,520 planning zoning commission. How do we move that forward? Is that a rezoning or do we change 749 01:26:08,520 --> 01:26:18,160 it midstream as a PD overlay or PD? And is it notice, how do we notice that? And it may 750 01:26:18,160 --> 01:26:25,920 require re-noticing. And most of the time when those come up, it is a function of they're 751 01:26:25,920 --> 01:26:31,800 trying to go from an R2 to an R4 and then we put conditions on them. So as I, as I read 752 01:26:31,800 --> 01:26:36,280 through this, it talks about on the zoning map, it will be designated as PD dash and 753 01:26:36,280 --> 01:26:41,080 whatever the base zoning is. So the PD is just simply saying that we put an overlay 754 01:26:41,080 --> 01:26:47,880 on it on the zoning map when it's that style. Similar to the old, yeah, the mixed use overlay 755 01:26:47,880 --> 01:26:54,840 is exactly how we did that prior. So unless there's some, it's just kind of denoting that 756 01:26:54,840 --> 01:27:00,560 there is something different about, it's not just your basic MN or basic R4 that there's 757 01:27:00,560 --> 01:27:04,640 something special about it. I think it's just a notification. In my, in my opinion, I think 758 01:27:04,640 --> 01:27:08,040 it's just a notification. How do we want to make sure it's clear? Because to the best 759 01:27:08,040 --> 01:27:12,440 of my knowledge, we cannot make it less restrictive than what the zoning requires. We can only 760 01:27:12,440 --> 01:27:21,720 make it more restrictive. That is correct. Yes. Councilmember Briggs. So this is really 761 01:27:21,720 --> 01:27:27,560 good conversation and a lot of really great things come out of planning and zoning when 762 01:27:27,560 --> 01:27:32,440 you guys are discussing things together on the dais that when it comes to us at council 763 01:27:32,440 --> 01:27:40,720 are really great conditions. My question would be, so if an item comes to P and Z and it's 764 01:27:40,720 --> 01:27:47,220 already marked a PD overlay and the staff has put conditions on it, can those conditions 765 01:27:47,220 --> 01:27:57,760 be changed by P and Z or added to? Yes. Yes. Okay. Yes. Ultimately city council will take 766 01:27:57,760 --> 01:28:03,120 the recommendation by P and Z and by staff and then decide on what conditions would be 767 01:28:03,120 --> 01:28:06,560 placed. Right. I just wanted to make sure their hands weren't tied if something like 768 01:28:06,560 --> 01:28:17,720 that already came to them. So as, as the PD, okay. Yes, Tim. Hey chair. So I know on most 769 01:28:17,720 --> 01:28:23,360 of the PDs, Ron, and I think I missed it on the, not most, all PDs, I missed it possibly 770 01:28:23,360 --> 01:28:28,080 in the change to the PD overlay. Most of the PDs require that, and I probably used the 771 01:28:28,080 --> 01:28:33,160 wrong term, the site plan, preliminary plan to be codified in the zoning change. Is it 772 01:28:33,160 --> 01:28:37,440 the same on the overlay? Is it going to be a codified piece within there? Cause that's 773 01:28:37,440 --> 01:28:42,560 something that I haven't liked so far by even having the PD in the first place, but I understand 774 01:28:42,560 --> 01:28:48,360 it if we're doing a, you know, a 100% true blue PD, but in this type of scenario, it's 775 01:28:48,360 --> 01:28:54,840 a PD overlay and we're just restricting some of the conditions in the, in the base zoning 776 01:28:54,840 --> 01:28:59,480 that the codified site plan, preliminary plan, whatever the wording is, seems, it seems to 777 01:28:59,480 --> 01:29:03,200 add even more restrictions to it. Right. Right. No, I understand what you're saying. I think 778 01:29:03,200 --> 01:29:07,680 that's why we had those two types of PDs. So on the overlay, I think I missed it, in 779 01:29:07,680 --> 01:29:12,720 the PD overlay that codified site plan, preliminary plan wouldn't be required. Correct. If it's 780 01:29:12,720 --> 01:29:18,240 just the uses that we're talking about, then yes. However, with any condition, if it speaks 781 01:29:18,240 --> 01:29:24,160 specifically to a lot layout or whatever, then we would need to have that documented 782 01:29:24,160 --> 01:29:33,720 somehow. Just a clarification. Thank you for that. Yes. Andrew. Thank you, chair. I don't 783 01:29:33,720 --> 01:29:37,400 know if this is appropriate to move on to another item, but I had a question about something 784 01:29:37,400 --> 01:29:42,120 else that might be applicable to the DCRC to cover, but I certainly don't want to take 785 01:29:42,120 --> 01:29:47,040 the floor from the PD conversation. So, I'll just go ahead and ask it. And if someone wants 786 01:29:47,040 --> 01:29:52,840 to circle back to PD, I apologize for interrupting that conversation. I came up in PNZ last week 787 01:29:52,840 --> 01:29:58,640 about the opportunity for property owners to petition the city to abandon a road. And 788 01:29:58,640 --> 01:30:06,120 I don't, it didn't seem like there was, I didn't get clarity on how the city actually 789 01:30:06,120 --> 01:30:10,720 provides a mechanism for road abandonment for property owners. And I don't know if the 790 01:30:10,720 --> 01:30:17,680 DCRC is the appropriate mechanism to review that. But I would like to figure out a way 791 01:30:17,680 --> 01:30:23,520 to outline to property owners who own both sides of a road, what petition they have available 792 01:30:23,520 --> 01:30:29,960 to them to look at. I don't know if it's TIA to see if a road can be removed or if it's 793 01:30:29,960 --> 01:30:33,520 road quality. I don't know those things that go into play about how a property owner can 794 01:30:33,520 --> 01:30:38,560 do it, but I certainly want to follow through on that conversation we had at PNZ last week 795 01:30:38,560 --> 01:30:43,000 on what the city can do to set up structures for that process. 796 01:30:43,000 --> 01:30:49,040 Richard, I don't know if you want to respond to that, but I know that we have part of the 797 01:30:49,040 --> 01:30:54,760 real estate application is a road right away abandonment. And that is an application that 798 01:30:54,760 --> 01:30:59,880 they can submit either property owners on both sides or obviously you would hope that 799 01:30:59,880 --> 01:31:05,080 both sides would request for that abandonment. So, Andrew, we do have an application already 800 01:31:05,080 --> 01:31:10,340 in place. Okay, great. That's helpful. I didn't get 801 01:31:10,340 --> 01:31:15,800 that information last week. Maybe I did. Maybe I didn't under process it enough. Richard, 802 01:31:15,800 --> 01:31:20,400 if you want to. The only thing I was going to add is that's 803 01:31:20,400 --> 01:31:25,960 really the we do, but it's not really as formal as it needs to be. Going back to the real 804 01:31:25,960 --> 01:31:32,640 estate application that we were that Ron had talked about earlier, I guess it doesn't make 805 01:31:32,640 --> 01:31:38,640 sense to lump everything under real estate applications or should we break those out? 806 01:31:38,640 --> 01:31:43,640 Maybe it is better to have separate items for right of way abandonment or vacation easement 807 01:31:43,640 --> 01:31:51,320 abandonment. That way it's clear in the code and it just doesn't get hidden under one catch 808 01:31:51,320 --> 01:32:02,840 all phrase. There really isn't a formal process for road abandonments. They have just been 809 01:32:02,840 --> 01:32:09,520 handled through the real estate division. So that could be something that probably not 810 01:32:09,520 --> 01:32:14,700 development services but maybe the engineering department can work on and with real estate. 811 01:32:14,700 --> 01:32:20,240 The cases that I have seen over the years have included where we have taken like for 812 01:32:20,240 --> 01:32:24,560 example with Mayhill where we have redone realigned the road, there's going to be a 813 01:32:24,560 --> 01:32:31,280 piece of Mayhill that is still a street, but it has no function anymore. That's not related 814 01:32:31,280 --> 01:32:35,200 to anything regarding a physical development that development services will be involved 815 01:32:35,200 --> 01:32:42,280 with, but the people there may want to request that that portion of the nonfunctional roadway 816 01:32:42,280 --> 01:32:49,200 piece to be abandoned so that they can use it for whatever purposes. That will impact 817 01:32:49,200 --> 01:32:53,440 them as they develop that property in the future if they wish to do that. But that's 818 01:32:53,440 --> 01:32:58,680 typically what we see with road abandonments. It's an old road that no longer has any function 819 01:32:58,680 --> 01:33:06,080 and the people just want to abandon it. Sometimes it does spill over into the development on 820 01:33:06,080 --> 01:33:11,720 gated subdivisions that predate the rules that we used to have and they want to have 821 01:33:11,720 --> 01:33:18,800 that road abandoned and so that's a different story. But typically these requests come after 822 01:33:18,800 --> 01:33:23,700 a development has occurred for the most part. Not always, but for the most part they think 823 01:33:23,700 --> 01:33:28,960 that's how they usually occur. Yeah, I appreciate that insight. I mean more 824 01:33:28,960 --> 01:33:36,040 specifically the item that came into P&Z was Shady Shores west of Lakeview in which there's 825 01:33:36,040 --> 01:33:42,000 the northern part of the property is basically half ESA and the southern part of the property 826 01:33:42,000 --> 01:33:48,560 which the owner owns both parcels is I-35 frontage road and Shady Shores, I'm not sure 827 01:33:48,560 --> 01:33:54,480 what the rating of that road is but I can't assume it's high and so I would like to see 828 01:33:54,480 --> 01:33:59,880 what mechanisms are available to remove Shady Shores, that portion of Shady Shores road, 829 01:33:59,880 --> 01:34:06,440 allow the developer to put in what we it seemed like retail or grocery store there and give 830 01:34:06,440 --> 01:34:11,600 him access or them access to I-35 frontage road so that they can have more developable 831 01:34:11,600 --> 01:34:18,360 property outside that ESA. So in this specific example it's not necessarily that the road 832 01:34:18,360 --> 01:34:22,800 needs to be abandoned because of development that's already taken or that there's been 833 01:34:22,800 --> 01:34:27,960 a realignment of roads that road I imagine gets driven on, I'm not sure by whom or how 834 01:34:27,960 --> 01:34:33,800 many but in this case this is what I was looking for is the ability for the city to proactively 835 01:34:33,800 --> 01:34:42,120 encourage the development of properties that because of ESA or otherwise have limitations 836 01:34:42,120 --> 01:34:47,840 and this specific example it seems to benefit everyone that the neighbors, the city, the 837 01:34:47,840 --> 01:34:53,480 developers, to look into what mechanisms they would have to combine those two parcels on 838 01:34:53,480 --> 01:34:58,400 the north and south side of Shady Shores. That's what I appreciate historically how 839 01:34:58,400 --> 01:35:03,400 a right away abandonment is taking place. I was looking for more like proactive to encourage 840 01:35:03,400 --> 01:35:11,480 development where a right away is preventing it potentially. 841 01:35:11,480 --> 01:35:14,800 That's a very good example, something that we can discuss internally. 842 01:35:14,800 --> 01:35:21,420 That would be great. Thank you. 843 01:35:21,420 --> 01:35:29,080 I would like to re-discuss or talk about parking minimum and maximums. I don't know if this 844 01:35:29,080 --> 01:35:35,240 committee would be interested in that but I know that since we upgraded our or changed 845 01:35:35,240 --> 01:35:40,640 our ordinance a while ago different things have happened and we have some flexibility 846 01:35:40,640 --> 01:35:46,800 in there for the planners to work with the developments which is really great but I'm 847 01:35:46,800 --> 01:35:54,200 just curious if we could have that conversation to see where we used to be, where we are now 848 01:35:54,200 --> 01:36:01,040 and if there's -- if what we have, the new ordinance is working or not. 849 01:36:01,040 --> 01:36:07,040 Kayla, we have that on our list and that is part of subchapter 7 so as we move down we'll 850 01:36:07,040 --> 01:36:11,040 certainly get to that and we do have some recommendations. 851 01:36:11,040 --> 01:36:19,080 Okay, thank you. Anyone else? I've got one. And that is I think 852 01:36:19,080 --> 01:36:26,400 somehow it got misinterpreted when we're dealing with perimeter fences and we said you could 853 01:36:26,400 --> 01:36:35,440 use wood if it was raised above -- we meant to say above masonry where it was like a wood 854 01:36:35,440 --> 01:36:41,240 panel up inside the masonry so your bottom was all solid and just to make sure that that 855 01:36:41,240 --> 01:36:46,960 kind of gets corrected if it hasn't already. That too will be brought forward in subchapter 856 01:36:46,960 --> 01:36:52,200 7 and if we need to clarify that further we'll make sure the DCRC has an opportunity not 857 01:36:52,200 --> 01:36:56,720 only to get a refresher but to hopefully if there was any miscommunication we can clear 858 01:36:56,720 --> 01:37:00,280 that up. Yeah, I believe fences, perimeter fences were 859 01:37:00,280 --> 01:37:07,640 about a six-hour conversation the first go. More like six days. 860 01:37:07,640 --> 01:37:12,880 Days versus hours. Yeah, so I have one more suggestion. If we 861 01:37:12,880 --> 01:37:17,360 could get these presentations that we see uploaded to the backup so that the public 862 01:37:17,360 --> 01:37:20,760 can review them, I think that would be helpful to you. 863 01:37:20,760 --> 01:37:27,000 We'll do that, yes ma'am. Okay, thanks. 864 01:37:27,000 --> 01:37:33,640 Anything else on this item? All right, any concluding items? 865 01:37:33,640 --> 01:37:42,560 Well, I'll just say happy Veterans Day and I want to thank all the service members for 866 01:37:42,560 --> 01:37:48,280 what they have done for us. And if there's nothing else we will adjourn 867 01:37:48,280 --> 01:37:52,040 the meeting at 2 41. Thank you everyone. 868 01:37:52,040 --> 01:37:53,540 - Thank you. - Thank you.