WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:11.000
 Okay. Welcome everyone to this November 11th meeting of the Denton Code Review Committee.

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

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.

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

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

00:00:39.080 --> 00:00:43.360
 that were provided to us. So with that correction, I'll move approval.

00:00:43.360 --> 00:00:48.440
 I'll second. All right. And since we only have two, I don't

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

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

00:01:01.560 --> 00:01:06.520
 a report, hold a discussion, give staff direction regarding code amendments related to subchapter

00:01:06.520 --> 00:01:13.160
 two, administrative and procedures of the Denton Development Code.

00:01:13.160 --> 00:01:30.280
 Thank you, Chair. Let me share my screen and we can get started.

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

00:01:36.360 --> 00:01:42.440
 of our DDC amendments discussion with the DCRC Development Code Review Committee, which

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.

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,

00:01:52.300 --> 00:01:59.160
 but there are some that are hopefully straightforward and we can get through those fairly quickly.

00:01:59.160 --> 00:02:06.960
 Just a point of correction or clarification. The items listed as number 12 and 13 will

00:02:06.960 --> 00:02:12.960
 not be discussed. Staff just needs additional more time to have discussion internally to

00:02:12.960 --> 00:02:18.760
 prepare a code amendment to discuss with the DCRC. So unity of title and declaration in

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

00:02:24.840 --> 00:02:30.360
 be discussed this afternoon. So we'll go ahead and get started with the

00:02:30.360 --> 00:02:41.440
 first development code topic and this is related to the ZBA composition and operational procedure.

00:02:41.440 --> 00:02:51.880
 This is in section 234A, again, part of the subchapter two code amendments. We have in

00:02:51.880 --> 00:03:00.280
 the current DDC, the composition and operational procedures. And as you can see in green, the

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

00:03:06.600 --> 00:03:13.040
 the composition and operational procedures that pertain to the ZBA to the municipal code

00:03:13.040 --> 00:03:20.120
 of orange. However, that is no longer the direction we have changed that direction.

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

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

00:03:36.360 --> 00:03:43.120
 number of composition is what you see on the screen, that the Zoning Board of Adjustment

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

00:03:49.860 --> 00:03:56.120
 be staggered so that as they are appointed, we will have the memberships that we need.

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

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

00:04:07.320 --> 00:04:13.960
 two is related to the alternate, alternates that is. We currently have three alternates

00:04:13.960 --> 00:04:22.960
 and these are alternates that are appointed by the city council. And as mentioned earlier,

00:04:22.960 --> 00:04:30.560
 they are this is our current practice and these three alternates serve on the ZBA if

00:04:30.560 --> 00:04:39.840
 and when the members of the seven members are either absent or cannot participate. The

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

00:04:46.320 --> 00:04:54.240
 or cannot participate, the next person or the person in first will step in and then

00:04:54.240 --> 00:04:58.200
 continue again. If there is a second person, then the second alternate will serve in that

00:04:58.200 --> 00:05:05.200
 capacity. The alternates also serve a two year term and are appointed again by the city

00:05:05.200 --> 00:05:14.600
 council. Other, so let me stop there. Any questions? Again, these are just what we practice

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

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

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,

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

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.

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

00:05:57.120 --> 00:06:02.360
 double check that they have to be a resident of the city. Whatever requirements we currently

00:06:02.360 --> 00:06:08.720
 have as long as they make their way through into this. Yes, Margie. Thank you, chair.

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

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,

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

00:06:26.400 --> 00:06:32.440
 per se, but what chapter 2-61 of the city code, which is qualifications for members

00:06:32.440 --> 00:06:36.320
 of boards and commissions, each person shall be a qualified voter of the city. You can

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

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

00:06:49.240 --> 00:06:57.040
 resident. So it may not be particularly in the ZBA section of the code of ordinances,

00:06:57.040 --> 00:07:02.000
 but it's covered under boards and commission generally. Okay. And is there any part of

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,

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

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

00:07:30.480 --> 00:07:42.320
 the operation. Again, most of this was or is current practice, and again, we're just

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

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

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

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

00:08:10.160 --> 00:08:18.920
 are just procedural, you know, administrative requirements or provisions for the ZBA. One,

00:08:18.920 --> 00:08:21.800
 for example, is actually keeping minutes, and that's consistent with all boards and

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,

00:08:30.200 --> 00:08:37.520
 and also they can adopt governing rules regarding proceedings that they would like to have.

00:08:37.520 --> 00:08:43.880
 Again, as long as it's not conflict or in conflict or inconsistent with the subchapter

00:08:43.880 --> 00:08:52.560
 of state law. Additionally, talking about anything that's related to the Zoning Board

00:08:52.560 --> 00:09:01.560
 of Adjustments decision that is particularly related to a house bill that was passed in

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

00:09:11.560 --> 00:09:21.400
 related to a project, anybody that is, you know, wants to provide or appeal a decision

00:09:21.400 --> 00:09:28.320
 can take that position and file with the city. This is something that was recently adopted

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

00:09:33.480 --> 00:09:41.900
 here have been added to the procedures of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Again, more

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

00:09:51.280 --> 00:09:58.640
 does allow anybody, even not related to specific application address or project, can take action

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

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

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

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

00:10:25.640 --> 00:10:33.700
 development code. So the next few sections here, again, highlighting, I won't read the

00:10:33.700 --> 00:10:40.800
 whole thing, but again, an appeal. Basically, the first one under this slide, letter D,

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

00:10:48.720 --> 00:10:55.960
 to remain as a status would still remain the same. Nothing can move forward until that

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

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

00:11:11.360 --> 00:11:20.320
 appeal. There must be at least six months in between the first appeal. I think these

00:11:20.320 --> 00:11:27.360
 are the last two. F basically states that at a public meeting or related appeal, any

00:11:27.360 --> 00:11:35.960
 interest of party may appear as part of the discussion or consideration to discuss that

00:11:35.960 --> 00:11:42.720
 specific appeal process. And then letter G is that the board -- this is another law

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

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

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

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.

00:12:14.200 --> 00:12:21.200
 The following meeting, the ZBA will then make their decision on that previously discussed

00:12:21.200 --> 00:12:30.160
 appeal application. So this again is consistent -- is consistent, that is, with what the bill

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

00:12:36.400 --> 00:12:41.400
 are just partly bringing the procedures that were currently -- that are currently being

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

00:12:47.560 --> 00:12:53.960
 pertain to House Bill, the House Bill that was passed specifically, who can appeal and

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

00:13:02.120 --> 00:13:07.320
 versus having it at the same meeting -- a decision at the same meeting. Any questions

00:13:07.320 --> 00:13:12.600
 with regards to these sections or these provisions? Sorry, let me --

00:13:12.600 --> 00:13:19.440
 >> Councilmember Briggs. >> Not a big question, but I assume that these

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,

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

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?

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

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,

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

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

00:14:02.240 --> 00:14:06.040
 it up now. I know that we've only had one, and Sean might have that.

00:14:06.040 --> 00:14:13.360
 >> Yeah. Zoning Board of Adjustments non-subdivision variance and appeals is $351.

00:14:13.360 --> 00:14:16.600
 >> Okay. >> Yeah, my question would just be, is there

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

00:14:20.040 --> 00:14:29.400
 make reference to that somewhere, or is it -- or is it, you know, not needed?

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

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 --

00:14:42.520 --> 00:14:49.440
 >> Yeah, 2.83 is the appeal of an administrative decision. That is what goes to ZBA.

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

00:14:59.800 --> 00:15:03.240
 questions. One second. >> And, Ron, in some cases, we have added

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

00:15:09.540 --> 00:15:14.200
 not sure that we added that here. That might be useful.

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

00:15:22.080 --> 00:15:31.720
 ending 2.34, and this is pertaining to the ZBA composition. So, Keely, the section that

00:15:31.720 --> 00:15:39.000
 talks about the appeal process and procedure and application is further in the same subchapter,

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

00:15:47.600 --> 00:15:55.080
 to look at that section where it talks about the application in the discussion of appeal.

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

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

00:16:07.400 --> 00:16:10.900
 in the development code or further in the same subchapter, but not necessarily in that

00:16:10.900 --> 00:16:13.240
 particular section. >> Okay. Yeah, I mean --

00:16:13.240 --> 00:16:15.160
 >> And if we need to reference it, we can reference it.

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

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

00:16:25.960 --> 00:16:32.160
 like this, having information available and easy to find is always helpful.

00:16:32.160 --> 00:16:48.400
 >> Understood. I'm just going to take real quick notes here, reference application. Okay.

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

00:17:00.800 --> 00:17:06.820
 to the ZBA. This is for the HLC, Historic Landmark Commission, Composition and Powers

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

00:17:15.040 --> 00:17:21.160
 the Code of Ordinances. However, that direction has changed, so we are now bringing it back

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

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

00:17:34.160 --> 00:17:41.720
 nine members, and again, appointed by City Council. Of the nine, the list that you see

00:17:41.720 --> 00:17:49.000
 below here, they must be represented by the following. So when we -- and when the City

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

00:17:57.080 --> 00:18:04.200
 know, let you all know that we need a public accountant. We need a registered architect.

00:18:04.200 --> 00:18:10.840
 For now, I think we have everybody here. I believe maybe letter A, Denny County Historical

00:18:10.840 --> 00:18:20.880
 Commission. No, I stand corrected. Melody Kohot is representing that position. So I think

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

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

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

00:18:46.960 --> 00:18:55.720
 the remaining nine can serve in any of those positions or be of those other positions.

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

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.

00:19:13.320 --> 00:19:17.880
 There may be some additional ones, but for the most part, this was covered under the

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

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

00:19:32.040 --> 00:19:38.240
 criteria for determining historic landmarks, recommending to the planning zoning commission

00:19:38.240 --> 00:19:45.200
 historic landmarks and ultimately city council for consideration. Establish guidelines for

00:19:45.200 --> 00:19:52.760
 determining how to provide certificate of appropriateness. The preservation plan, historic

00:19:52.760 --> 00:19:59.960
 preservation plan that was approved last year was something that the HLC had reviewed, considered

00:19:59.960 --> 00:20:06.720
 and recommended to the planning zoning commission. So that is another power that they have in

00:20:06.720 --> 00:20:13.400
 duty. And then suggest resource of funding to help historic preservation in the city.

00:20:13.400 --> 00:20:19.000
 In addition, we have a lot more under this particular section. Again, not going to read

00:20:19.000 --> 00:20:28.040
 through all of this other than make, again, recommendations, provide staff direction on

00:20:28.040 --> 00:20:37.480
 surveys and maintenance of inventory, that is. There is an opportunity to create committees

00:20:37.480 --> 00:20:44.000
 made up of the members of the commission for carrying out other purposes of the ordinance.

00:20:44.000 --> 00:20:50.640
 Prepare specific design guidelines and ultimately also review and provide comments as it relates

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

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

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

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

00:21:16.800 --> 00:21:21.800
 commission?

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

00:21:26.880 --> 00:21:28.920
 all the information over.

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

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

00:21:41.520 --> 00:21:46.760
 consistent in providing additional clarification as far as their duties. Nothing that was out

00:21:46.760 --> 00:21:53.440
 of the only that I can specifically speak to. Thank you.

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

00:21:59.840 --> 00:22:11.880
 questions or comments? I'm seeing. Okay. Next. Sorry. Next topic on the agenda is expiration

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

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

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

00:22:31.840 --> 00:22:37.040
 that's clear. Number two, we're adding says all previously approved applications for the

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

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

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

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

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.

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

00:23:25.960 --> 00:23:32.400
 the first permit application was filed and no progress has been made, the application

00:23:32.400 --> 00:23:42.040
 of that or that project would not be carried forward. So for example, a project would,

00:23:42.040 --> 00:23:49.420
 for example, a subdivision variance or subdivision plat would be deemed a project if, you know,

00:23:49.420 --> 00:23:56.520
 they were to continue. However, after five years, if they don't submit any other applications,

00:23:56.520 --> 00:24:03.640
 that application or that particular project would no longer be considered a project. So

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

00:24:09.680 --> 00:24:18.080
 fifth anniversary identified as the timeframe. Ron, just a quick question. On that five years,

00:24:18.080 --> 00:24:23.440
 I think that maybe you've mentioned state law, but didn't we discuss something expiring

00:24:23.440 --> 00:24:31.320
 in two years before in our code discussions? That's specifically pertaining to applications.

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

00:24:37.600 --> 00:24:43.760
 multiple applications. So if, for example, that project never fully develops, you know,

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

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

00:24:57.200 --> 00:25:01.800
 related to applications. And we'll get into that in a few slides down.

00:25:01.800 --> 00:25:08.400
 Okay. Thanks for the clarification. Yes. And Aaron, if there's anything, I saw you,

00:25:08.400 --> 00:25:13.280
 you know, if you had any additional comments to that five year.

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

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,

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

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

00:25:32.400 --> 00:25:39.760
 regulations that the city has amended from the time of their final plat approval. So

00:25:39.760 --> 00:25:44.240
 that's just the protection that state law provides to developments to make sure that

00:25:44.240 --> 00:25:48.200
 the rules aren't changed on them during the development process.

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

00:26:01.440 --> 00:26:09.360
 sure that project is explained a little further. This next one, number six, any new application

00:26:09.360 --> 00:26:14.920
 under sub-chapter or application modified shall be deemed to commence a new project.

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

00:26:23.160 --> 00:26:29.080
 or something completely different, that basically starts a new project. So their five years

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

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

00:26:40.600 --> 00:26:47.360
 that project starts at that time of that new application is submitted.

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

00:26:51.960 --> 00:26:59.700
 means that if our codes or anything has changed, then they resubmit under those new codes,

00:26:59.700 --> 00:27:05.040
 not the older ones, right? The new codes or that time frame is the start.

00:27:05.040 --> 00:27:12.320
 And so say after five years after they submitted their modification, if they haven't added

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

00:27:18.680 --> 00:27:24.680
 when that modification was submitted. It's more or less timing. And as Erin mentioned,

00:27:24.680 --> 00:27:31.320
 five years is important because, again, per state law, that kind of follows when vesting

00:27:31.320 --> 00:27:42.200
 starts and ends for a project.

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.

00:27:49.440 --> 00:27:57.740
 We often have these provisions, but having a section of the code that explicitly explains

00:27:57.740 --> 00:28:00.160
 it helps us and the development community.

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.

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

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

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

00:28:32.720 --> 00:28:37.080
 plan. For the most part, they're pretty much the same.

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

00:28:44.120 --> 00:28:51.100
 compliance plan, but we're also making sure that we're adding some clarification to when

00:28:51.100 --> 00:29:01.260
 a zoning compliance plan is required. And letter B, applicability, we initially had

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

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.

00:29:17.880 --> 00:29:25.700
 And so if a project is proposing an expansion or alteration or modification that increases

00:29:25.700 --> 00:29:32.360
 the gross floor area by 50%, they would be required to submit a zoning compliance plan.

00:29:32.360 --> 00:29:39.880
 Similarly, if the expansion or modification increases the total number of dwelling units

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

00:29:45.880 --> 00:29:55.120
 below 25, also anything below 50%, they would not. But again, looking at the tier requirements

00:29:55.120 --> 00:30:00.480
 for tier two, if they meet and exceed these requirements, then they would be required

00:30:00.480 --> 00:30:07.960
 to submit a zoning compliance plan. We go further and added a little bit more requirements

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,

00:30:15.960 --> 00:30:22.920
 listing out the following, you know, graphical and site data information, dimensions of existing

00:30:22.920 --> 00:30:28.760
 and proposed improvements, as well as any environmental tree preservation and landscape

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

00:30:36.360 --> 00:30:41.880
 and review it against certain code requirements so that when the next step of platting is

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

00:30:47.720 --> 00:30:53.640
 on the plat because it's already been established and approved by the zoning compliance plan.

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

00:31:01.720 --> 00:31:10.960
 when someone submits a zoning compliance plan, they have all of the following. That's pretty

00:31:10.960 --> 00:31:17.320
 much it for the zoning compliance plan. Again, to summarize, we're just cleaning up where

00:31:17.320 --> 00:31:22.440
 the term site plan is being replaced with zoning compliance plan and we're also making

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.

00:31:30.000 --> 00:31:35.480
 So these are the examples of what tier two falls under. And lastly, just showing what

00:31:35.480 --> 00:31:42.520
 is required under a zoning compliance plan, what needs to be submitted with that application.

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

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

00:31:56.480 --> 00:32:02.120
 or modifications that increase the total number of existing dwelling units on a lot by more

00:32:02.120 --> 00:32:14.760
 than 25%. Is that multifamily only? Typically, yes. Yes, it'll be multifamily. Obviously,

00:32:14.760 --> 00:32:21.360
 anything less than that would not qualify. But yes, the intent there is for multifamily.

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.

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

00:32:38.920 --> 00:32:43.040
 multifamily. Okay. How would that affect accessory dwelling

00:32:43.040 --> 00:32:50.280
 units? It would not, because we don't require a

00:32:50.280 --> 00:32:55.640
 zoning compliance plan for single family. So that would just be done part of the planning.

00:32:55.640 --> 00:32:58.640
 Okay. Yeah, I was just in my head trying to think

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

00:33:05.080 --> 00:33:20.680
 pertains to multifamily. Will pertain to multifamily. Okay. Here's another one that we have had

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

00:33:27.160 --> 00:33:40.040
 under section 252C as it relates to specific use permits. Right now, it's current practice,

00:33:40.040 --> 00:33:45.280
 but we wanted to put it in the development code. And approval of specific use permit,

00:33:45.280 --> 00:33:51.180
 authorizing the specific use to develop does not preclude the development or the property

00:33:51.180 --> 00:33:59.200
 to develop other uses that are otherwise permitted under that zoning district. So for example,

00:33:59.200 --> 00:34:05.020
 the zoning or the specific use permit that we heard last night for the multifamily say

00:34:05.020 --> 00:34:10.100
 that that developer, for whatever reason, chooses not to move forward with that specific

00:34:10.100 --> 00:34:17.400
 use permit. And instead, under their zoning district, they want to propose something different,

00:34:17.400 --> 00:34:22.280
 they would be able to, it does not preclude them from submitting an application or development

00:34:22.280 --> 00:34:28.280
 for a use that's already permitted or currently permitted under that zoning district. I know

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

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

00:34:36.960 --> 00:34:43.980
 the only one as far as this particular specific use application approval, effective approval.

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

00:34:49.280 --> 00:35:06.960
 applied or is applied? Any questions? Pretty straightforward in that particular case. And

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,

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

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

00:35:27.960 --> 00:35:34.840
 raise any questions to the Planning, Zoning Commission, City Council. The next part of

00:35:34.840 --> 00:35:46.640
 this particular topic is related to the approval criteria. Again, the SUP that was heard yesterday,

00:35:46.640 --> 00:35:52.620
 there was criteria for approval for applications of all applications, that is, and then we

00:35:52.620 --> 00:36:00.920
 also had approval criteria for specific use permits. A lot of what was discussed is repetitive

00:36:00.920 --> 00:36:07.240
 duplications of those approval criteria, so what we're doing is eliminating what is already

00:36:07.240 --> 00:36:14.800
 under the approval criteria under all applications. So primarily what you are looking at here

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

00:36:25.120 --> 00:36:33.360
 application section of the code. That one is pretty short and quick. Again, we wanted

00:36:33.360 --> 00:36:38.080
 to just make sure that you all understood what this code amendment was about, so if

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

00:36:48.920 --> 00:36:55.880
 to traffic impact analysis and real estate applications, similar to what we heard at

00:36:55.880 --> 00:37:03.720
 our last meeting with regards to business registration and zoning verification letter.

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

00:37:09.840 --> 00:37:16.560
 reference in the development code, so under Table 2.2A, which lists all of our applications,

00:37:16.560 --> 00:37:23.760
 we're just adding, again, the two or the traffic impact analysis and providing procedures of

00:37:23.760 --> 00:37:33.300
 how they are submitted, reviewed, and hopefully approved. I don't intend on reading, obviously,

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

00:37:38.800 --> 00:37:44.520
 roadway system and if there are any impacts, that the TIA will provide any mitigations

00:37:44.520 --> 00:37:53.600
 that will help negate or lessen the impact identified. It obviously follows under any

00:37:53.600 --> 00:38:04.020
 mobility requirements in any city den model that our engineering department has. Applicability,

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

00:38:09.200 --> 00:38:14.720
 of this, is to kind of illustrate and show our development community what we will be

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,

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

00:38:28.160 --> 00:38:34.960
 these conditions under the development code, if this were to be approved, we will require

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

00:38:41.840 --> 00:38:49.520
 in the applicability portion of the development review process in which a TIA is required.

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

00:38:57.960 --> 00:39:05.280
 code update, but please note that in addition to the purpose, the basis and the applicability,

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

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

00:39:18.440 --> 00:39:25.640
 just kind of understand or give direction to staff that what our purpose is to bring

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.

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

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.

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

00:39:54.740 --> 00:40:00.040
 that there are other sections under this development code amendment.

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?

00:40:07.960 --> 00:40:11.560
 No, sir. We're adding it to the DDC, yes.

00:40:11.560 --> 00:40:15.400
 Okay. So it's our current practice is just moving to a different section, different area.

00:40:15.400 --> 00:40:22.520
 Our engineering department, we're the primary author of that section, as well as any other

00:40:22.520 --> 00:40:28.240
 section that the engineering department uses such as the civil engineering plans, they've

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

00:40:33.600 --> 00:40:42.880
 today in our reviews of TIAs and other engineering applications.

00:40:42.880 --> 00:40:46.760
 Any questions or comments? Margie?

00:40:46.760 --> 00:40:52.960
 Thanks. I just have a question for clarity, Ron. So with the procedure and the determination,

00:40:52.960 --> 00:40:58.400
 is that made by the development review committee on that project, or is it the engineering

00:40:58.400 --> 00:41:06.000
 or head engineer who makes that decision? As far as it's a city engineering department

00:41:06.000 --> 00:41:10.520
 that would make that decision once they establish. So typically what happens is that there is

00:41:10.520 --> 00:41:19.080
 a trip generation study that's done. And based on that analysis or that information, again,

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

00:41:28.240 --> 00:41:32.080
 would then require the applicant to submit a full TIA.

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.

00:41:35.280 --> 00:41:46.800
 Understood. Thank you. Okay. So we'll move on to the next topic. And

00:41:46.800 --> 00:41:54.560
 again, real estate applications, these are encroachment agreements. These are easement

00:41:54.560 --> 00:42:02.560
 encroachments, use of right away. These are some of the examples of what real estate applications

00:42:02.560 --> 00:42:09.040
 are. Again, we do them now and have current practices that we apply or applications or

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

00:42:16.200 --> 00:42:21.280
 when it's required. And so we're proposing to add this particular type of application

00:42:21.280 --> 00:42:27.800
 and applications under the development code. Similar to all the other applications, there

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

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

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,

00:42:47.720 --> 00:42:53.360
 that can be also a real estate application. Right away abandonment. What I was talking

00:42:53.360 --> 00:43:00.760
 about earlier was encroachments into easements, also encroachments into right away use or

00:43:00.760 --> 00:43:09.400
 the right away as well. And any other oil and gas pipeline license requests. So these

00:43:09.400 --> 00:43:17.400
 would be the typical real estate applications that a applicant can request to either abandon

00:43:17.400 --> 00:43:25.240
 or encroach into. So these types of applications will fall under real estate applications.

00:43:25.240 --> 00:43:33.900
 I wanted to just highlight some of the applicability. Obviously public land rights requests from

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

00:43:40.480 --> 00:43:49.120
 or the land itself. The second part of this is that when staff reviews these applications,

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

00:43:55.240 --> 00:44:04.000
 there is public needs or necessity for that, that would make a strong consideration and

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

00:44:10.760 --> 00:44:18.160
 no current and future necessity of said easement or right away, then that particular application

00:44:18.160 --> 00:44:24.120
 is then forwarded to the appropriate board and committee. Typically sometimes it's presented

00:44:24.120 --> 00:44:29.760
 to the planning zoning commission, but most likely it's presented to the public utilities

00:44:29.760 --> 00:44:39.360
 board, the PUB, and ultimately city council. In some instances where it would go to the

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

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

00:44:54.600 --> 00:45:01.720
 by a separate instrument, then that abandonment will have to be approved by a separate instrument

00:45:01.720 --> 00:45:08.480
 and most of the time that is approved and considered by the PUB. Anything further than

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

00:45:16.400 --> 00:45:23.640
 you all, the application procedure has the following sections. I didn't want to go through

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,

00:45:29.160 --> 00:45:36.200
 but just really covered the purpose, the applicability, and then the following code amendment will

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,

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

00:45:48.200 --> 00:45:53.360
 and applicability that we're looking at. We're also actually looking at the procedure and

00:45:53.360 --> 00:45:58.320
 that is something that we'll bring forward to the planning zoning commission and city

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

00:46:01.840 --> 00:46:07.480
 certainly go through them, but very, very similar to other procedures as far as what

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

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,

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

00:46:27.600 --> 00:46:33.040
 I know that these applications, these are things that we've always done and other things

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

00:46:41.120 --> 00:46:44.160
 before? Good question. With the 2002, we didn't have

00:46:44.160 --> 00:46:49.960
 the table. We didn't have procedures. So with the 2002 in helping our development community

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

00:46:55.800 --> 00:47:02.560
 of application, we created this table. But in 2019, when we approved the DDC, we just

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

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

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

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

00:47:24.960 --> 00:47:32.400
 basically covered generally. Right. No, I was just referring to the 2019.

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.

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

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

00:47:50.640 --> 00:47:52.880
 include it just because we were focused on the others.

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

00:47:58.080 --> 00:48:03.440
 that question. Yeah, Ron, I do have a question on this. Because

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

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

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

00:48:25.080 --> 00:48:29.880
 any protected use within that 500 foot after that, if the plat already existed, you could

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

00:48:36.560 --> 00:48:41.640
 within that distance, or they can't replat in that distance, but yet we never trying

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

00:48:45.720 --> 00:48:50.400
 be handled? So if I understand the question correctly,

00:48:50.400 --> 00:48:59.080
 this, this particular application type, real estate application type is, is any encroachment

00:48:59.080 --> 00:49:06.160
 abandonment or I'm sorry, easement abandonment, any right of way abandonment, any encroachment

00:49:06.160 --> 00:49:11.520
 into the easements. So I think this is two separate things. If, if I'm understanding

00:49:11.520 --> 00:49:17.360
 and I'm trying to understand your question, John, are you talking about the setback requirements

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

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.

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

00:49:36.800 --> 00:49:41.680
 during that time period, they could still build within that, in that distance between

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

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

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

00:49:56.680 --> 00:50:02.600
 now said you cannot plat a residential lot. We didn't say anything about replat necessarily,

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

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

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

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.

00:50:30.560 --> 00:50:35.960
 If such a situation like that arose, council member Ryan, I would probably provide legal

00:50:35.960 --> 00:50:43.000
 advice to close session, to the city council in closed session.

00:50:43.000 --> 00:51:01.000
 Okay. So moving on to the next topic, we get into subdivision application procedures. This

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.

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

00:51:17.960 --> 00:51:23.520
 applications. Our platting does not have an applicability section. So what we're adding

00:51:23.520 --> 00:51:27.560
 is the section that you see or the language that you see here highlighted or underlined

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

00:51:33.800 --> 00:51:40.880
 any development within the city shall submit and apply under the subdivision procedure

00:51:40.880 --> 00:51:48.720
 section any plat application that is applicable, preliminary plat, final plat. If it's a replat

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

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,

00:51:59.800 --> 00:52:08.000
 we also process application for platting in division one of our ETJ. And this is again

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

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

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

00:52:25.760 --> 00:52:32.200
 to the inner local agreement, any civil engineering plans may be applied to areas within division

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

00:52:43.060 --> 00:52:53.800
 particular section refers to the recording of plat applications and particularly any

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

00:53:02.800 --> 00:53:10.720
 that we initially included, but we are now changing. We are changing it to 24 months

00:53:10.720 --> 00:53:20.100
 to be consistent with other expiration or filing dates for, for plats. So again, going

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

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,

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

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

00:53:49.480 --> 00:53:56.640
 of 180 days. Very consistent, again, trying to make sure that we cover every section of

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

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

00:54:10.280 --> 00:54:18.760
 under this subsection. Again, 180 days to 24 months. This is this particular section

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

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

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

00:54:40.920 --> 00:54:45.840
 line. I think that was the intent of this particular code amendment. Again, a very,

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

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

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

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

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

00:55:19.040 --> 00:55:25.040
 this proposed change. It is a very important change, and again, we wanted to make sure

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

00:55:32.400 --> 00:55:34.640
 to the P&Z and City Council.

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

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

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

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

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.

00:56:20.760 --> 00:56:31.720
 That's correct. I think there was an option, more so I think for commercial properties

00:56:31.720 --> 00:56:35.760
 for non-residential, if they wanted to just go straight to construction engineering plans

00:56:35.760 --> 00:56:41.480
 and final plat to have that option available to them. I think most residential subdivisions

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,

00:56:48.680 --> 00:56:52.960
 this could be an option rather than sending them through both processes.

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

00:57:00.280 --> 00:57:08.240
 explanation just to be clearer because as the chair mentioned, it does say city limits

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

00:57:16.900 --> 00:57:21.500
 development from submitting a preliminary plat.

00:57:21.500 --> 00:57:27.880
 Yeah, I agree. Thank you, chair, for catching that.

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

00:57:43.060 --> 00:57:49.920
 application procedure is related to final plots. Again, adding the effects of the approval.

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

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.

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

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

00:58:16.480 --> 00:58:24.000
 more clarification.

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

00:58:29.960 --> 00:58:39.760
 any questions, we can move on to the next one.

00:58:39.760 --> 00:58:45.360
 I'm not seeing any movement by anyone. So go ahead and move on.

00:58:45.360 --> 00:58:55.600
 So replat procedures. We have a very short version of a replat procedure currently. And

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

00:59:01.760 --> 00:59:08.280
 adding purpose and applicability. Again, anything that's underlying you see here is something

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

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

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

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

00:59:35.160 --> 00:59:42.880
 applicability, it applies to any part of a subdivision or any part of a subdivision.

00:59:42.880 --> 00:59:50.440
 Next slide is just what we discussed earlier. In addition to the purpose and applicability,

00:59:50.440 --> 00:59:57.500
 we have the following sections. And again, they pretty much follow very similar steps

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

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

01:00:11.420 --> 01:00:18.640
 through all of this, the pre-application activities are similar to the submittal and handling

01:00:18.640 --> 01:00:25.560
 of the application, staff review and action, scheduling notices of public meetings and

01:00:25.560 --> 01:00:30.320
 hearings and review and decision and post-decision actions and limitations are a little different

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

01:00:37.840 --> 01:00:44.680
 that requires a variance or an exception, it has to go through a public hearing process

01:00:44.680 --> 01:00:48.400
 with the Planning and Zoning Commission, just the Planning and Zoning Commission. And this

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

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

01:01:05.080 --> 01:01:10.920
 Zoning Commission is required to vote in the supermajority. And again, this is partly as

01:01:10.920 --> 01:01:16.320
 applies to state law under 212. We wanted to illustrate that or provide that in our

01:01:16.320 --> 01:01:24.260
 development code. So the decision of a replat that has a variance or an exception would

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

01:01:32.640 --> 01:01:39.320
 or exception, they will be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission, but does not

01:01:39.320 --> 01:01:49.320
 require a public hearing. And the only notification that would be presented or shared for that

01:01:49.320 --> 01:01:55.920
 particular property would be a notice after the decision has been made. So these, again,

01:01:55.920 --> 01:02:04.040
 a residential replat that does not require a variance shall be noticed to the public

01:02:04.040 --> 01:02:12.040
 by no later than 15 days of the replat. The public being just those properties within

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

01:02:20.440 --> 01:02:26.800
 to the Planning and Zoning Commission that did not have a variance. Those were considered

01:02:26.800 --> 01:02:32.400
 under items for individual consideration. Those that were actually approved, staff has

01:02:32.400 --> 01:02:39.280
 been sending out notices to those individuals or those property owners within the 200 foot

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

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

01:02:53.960 --> 01:02:58.560
 that was presented because this is different from all the other applications because it

01:02:58.560 --> 01:03:09.920
 is something that was recently passed by state law for replats. Any questions with regards

01:03:09.920 --> 01:03:17.980
 to replat procedures? Just for me, because it is something new because of state law,

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

01:03:25.520 --> 01:03:31.120
 aspect of it? On the notification aspect, yes, ma'am. Okay. And the notification is

01:03:31.120 --> 01:03:37.400
 specifically called out in state law? Correct. The difference between ones that require a

01:03:37.400 --> 01:03:44.360
 variance or exception and ones that do not require a variance. Okay. And that was added

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,

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

01:04:10.640 --> 01:04:17.480
 variance is our next topic. And for those in planning and zoning, this is something

01:04:17.480 --> 01:04:23.560
 that is decided only at planning and zoning commission. And with the 2019 development

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

01:04:37.360 --> 01:04:41.760
 that, or any variance, sorry, any variance, not subdivision, but just any variance would

01:04:41.760 --> 01:04:49.400
 go to ZBA, including subdivision variance. We felt that something that we overlooked

01:04:49.400 --> 01:04:55.440
 and something that we need to change and bring back to the planning and zoning commission.

01:04:55.440 --> 01:05:03.360
 So you see here, the decision is planning and zoning commission as opposed to the zoning

01:05:03.360 --> 01:05:09.480
 board of adjustments. So again, subdivision variance is anything that pertains to a variance

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

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

01:05:25.480 --> 01:05:33.160
 hardship or any other variance that the applicant is seeking to grant relief outside of what

01:05:33.160 --> 01:05:40.000
 is required under the current DDC subdivision requirements. So here's the applicability

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

01:05:46.320 --> 01:05:51.680
 owner seeking relief for standards contained in the following sections of the DDC. So streets,

01:05:51.680 --> 01:05:58.680
 driveways, lot planning, and block layout. These are what would be only required or may

01:05:58.680 --> 01:06:07.360
 be requested as a variance for their development. And again, we are saying that the planning

01:06:07.360 --> 01:06:13.760
 and zoning commission shall decide the request for subdivision variances rather than the

01:06:13.760 --> 01:06:20.960
 zoning board of adjustment, which is what is currently in our 2019 development code.

01:06:20.960 --> 01:06:27.360
 It currently falls under the ZBA. What we're trying with this proposed code amendment is

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

01:06:34.600 --> 01:06:40.080
 to share with you that the subdivision variance approval criteria so that anyone that's looking

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

01:06:48.020 --> 01:06:55.360
 are the criteria in which the planning zoning commission will use in granting that variance.

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

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

01:07:10.440 --> 01:07:25.320
 that would be considered, and hopefully, if approved by the planning zoning commission.

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

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

01:07:39.560 --> 01:07:46.520
 conditions of which the request variance is based on a uniqueness of the property, but

01:07:46.520 --> 01:07:52.000
 because the particular physical surroundings, shape or topography or condition is a particular

01:07:52.000 --> 01:07:58.820
 hardship, and it's not just an inconvenience, the subdivision will not in any manner vary

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.

01:08:09.340 --> 01:08:15.920
 And that the special and peculiar condition of which the request is based did not result

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

01:08:25.000 --> 01:08:31.360
 to other variances, approval criteria, but again, wanted to make sure that the subdivision

01:08:31.360 --> 01:08:41.160
 variance has its own approval criteria. Ron? Yes, ma'am. So this was planning and zoning,

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.

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,

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

01:08:57.800 --> 01:09:02.680
 and zoning commission reviews, plots, subdivisions, obviously a lot more than the zoning board

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.

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

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,

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,

01:09:31.520 --> 01:09:38.160
 we thought the variance would, any variance would just be ZBA. However, this was a special

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

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

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

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

01:10:03.080 --> 01:10:13.320
 or two have been block lengths or other, you know, transportation-related variances, driveway

01:10:13.320 --> 01:10:26.200
 separations, that sort of thing. Okay. Okay. We are hopefully getting close. I know that

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

01:10:38.600 --> 01:10:45.920
 rezoned to a planned development. Similar to the replat, we carried forward some language

01:10:45.920 --> 01:10:55.960
 related to PD, you know, rezoning to PD, but it wasn't a full comprehensive procedure,

01:10:55.960 --> 01:11:02.720
 and so we are adding the following sections, again, similar to the other ones having a

01:11:02.720 --> 01:11:10.240
 purpose, applicability, and other sections. So, again, as you can see here, and you can

01:11:10.240 --> 01:11:18.040
 read that obviously a PD is a special type of zoning where the applicant or property

01:11:18.040 --> 01:11:24.240
 owner would like to propose a type of development that may not necessarily meet the development

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

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

01:11:44.360 --> 01:11:53.220
 amended recently. I think the true PDs are the ones that have a design submitted that

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

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,

01:12:08.680 --> 01:12:16.160
 when we reconsider rezoning and we add conditions, ultimately a PD or a zoning with condition

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

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

01:12:33.120 --> 01:12:38.920
 PD may just be like we discussed and have done recently with the Planning and Zoning

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

01:12:47.000 --> 01:12:52.840
 that was going to be approved straight zoning and that there was some conditions. We wanted

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

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

01:13:06.720 --> 01:13:14.200
 meet a specific zoning dimensional standard or a specific requirement and would like to

01:13:14.200 --> 01:13:23.400
 propose a PD, create their own standards and their development standards and have the P&Z

01:13:23.400 --> 01:13:29.360
 and City Council consider it. This is what we're determining or defining as a standard

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

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

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

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

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

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,

01:14:14.280 --> 01:14:19.320
 correct under tiny homes, you're absolutely correct Keely because it's unique and we want

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

01:14:26.280 --> 01:14:32.160
 and the development code. A PD would be the appropriate method for getting those types

01:14:32.160 --> 01:14:46.200
 of developments approved. Any other questions?

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

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

01:15:01.720 --> 01:15:10.080
 different from the other ones. There is also approval criteria for PDs. Again, all of this

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

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.

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

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

01:15:38.600 --> 01:15:42.920
 to make sure that it's compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods, it's consistent

01:15:42.920 --> 01:15:48.320
 with our comprehensive plan and so on and so forth. But again, the process or procedure

01:15:48.320 --> 01:15:54.320
 is very similar to the other process or applications.

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

01:16:02.000 --> 01:16:07.160
 super majority for the City Council to approve. Okay.

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

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,

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

01:16:32.440 --> 01:16:40.760
 next week or the meeting next week, or maybe some meeting in the future. Following that

01:16:40.760 --> 01:16:48.160
 discussion we'll have additional discussions on annexation procedures as we move forward.

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

01:16:56.000 --> 01:17:03.120
 major, but I wanted to share that with you because obviously it does have some implications.

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

01:17:09.480 --> 01:17:16.280
 column, we get to a little bit more specific changes and a little bit more discussion,

01:17:16.280 --> 01:17:22.280
 in my opinion, dimensional standards as it relates to setback changes, as it relates

01:17:22.280 --> 01:17:29.160
 to height clarifications, table of allowed uses. We recently went through a discussion

01:17:29.160 --> 01:17:35.560
 on tattoo and piercing parlors. There are some uses that we want to address and clear

01:17:35.560 --> 01:17:43.960
 up and address nonconformities as well. Use specific standards, those are specific to

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

01:17:52.920 --> 01:17:59.800
 eliminating some duplications and or adding more clarification or clarity. And last, 11

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

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

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

01:18:19.440 --> 01:18:26.920
 a refresher. And these are important because we know that these are concerns from the community

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

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

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

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,

01:18:53.080 --> 01:19:00.280
 as we get further down in our meetings, the priorities, high priorities, will soon go

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

01:19:09.240 --> 01:19:15.580
 changes and then also substantive changes as well. And then our criteria manual transition

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

01:19:22.520 --> 01:19:29.840
 of meetings in the next couple of weeks or months. Whenever we have them scheduled, that

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

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,

01:19:42.920 --> 01:19:48.000
 we should be prioritizing, or that we should be bringing forward.

01:19:48.000 --> 01:19:52.200
 I think Margie had a question.

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

01:19:58.520 --> 01:20:03.840
 talked over me and I couldn't stop you, Ron. You just kept going.

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

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?

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

01:20:25.440 --> 01:20:31.680
 looking at as far as restricting the uses, we should consider those PDs rezoning.

01:20:31.680 --> 01:20:33.480
 We're still considering that a PD.

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

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

01:20:44.680 --> 01:20:51.840
 considered. And Richard, remind me again, if the P&Z has a recommendation for restricting

01:20:51.840 --> 01:20:55.840
 uses, would we consider those, I mean, we should, PDs?

01:20:55.840 --> 01:21:00.840
 Right, right. And so what's happening now is if you remember when we transitioned to

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

01:21:07.200 --> 01:21:11.840
 the mixed use overlay, those transitioned to with a PD designation. And so essentially

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

01:21:19.240 --> 01:21:26.360
 and then PD overlays. So it's just really consolidating into one thing. So it essentially

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

01:21:32.840 --> 01:21:33.840
 mapped today.

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

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

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

01:21:55.360 --> 01:21:59.040
 to get clarification.

01:21:59.040 --> 01:22:05.040
 Yeah, so this would function just like that. So they could apply under that with rather

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

01:22:09.240 --> 01:22:13.720
 coming back next meeting, because then there was another condition that they wanted to

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

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

01:22:25.200 --> 01:22:30.600
 had requested an overlay or conditions be put on it.

01:22:30.600 --> 01:22:40.280
 Right. So what are we calling that? Are they rezoning to R4 with conditions?

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,

01:22:44.800 --> 01:22:50.540
 there was the one off of 35W that had some restrictions after the community meeting that

01:22:50.540 --> 01:22:52.440
 ultimately went as an overlay.

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,

01:22:59.320 --> 01:23:04.300
 right? Because oftentimes these overlay discussions don't even get talked about until we're discussing

01:23:04.300 --> 01:23:06.840
 the rezone request in our meetings.

01:23:06.840 --> 01:23:12.400
 Correct. It could. There are those instances where, a lot different from where we were

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

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

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

01:23:28.760 --> 01:23:35.160
 likely that it would get brought up after we have the, there's a neighborhood meeting

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

01:23:42.200 --> 01:23:45.800
 that the majority of them will either happen at the meeting or right between the neighborhood

01:23:45.800 --> 01:23:46.800
 meeting.

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

01:23:52.120 --> 01:23:58.760
 of time and possibly and bring them before P and Z as a PD overlay request?

01:23:58.760 --> 01:24:01.720
 If possible, because right now the code doesn't allow staff to.

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

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

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

01:24:22.880 --> 01:24:26.240
 if it's not called PD overlay?

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

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.

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

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

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

01:24:53.160 --> 01:24:56.760
 to what is moved to city council? What is forwarded to city council?

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,

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

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

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

01:25:18.880 --> 01:25:25.280
 is going to city council because it is PD over, you know, I'm confused.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

01:27:12.440 --> 01:27:21.720
 make it more restrictive. That is correct. Yes. Councilmember Briggs. So this is really

01:27:21.720 --> 01:27:27.560
 good conversation and a lot of really great things come out of planning and zoning when

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

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

01:27:40.720 --> 01:27:47.220
 already marked a PD overlay and the staff has put conditions on it, can those conditions

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

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

01:28:03.120 --> 01:28:06.560
 placed. Right. I just wanted to make sure their hands weren't tied if something like

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

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

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

01:28:28.080 --> 01:28:33.160
 wrong term, the site plan, preliminary plan to be codified in the zoning change. Is it

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

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

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

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

01:28:54.840 --> 01:28:59.480
 that the codified site plan, preliminary plan, whatever the wording is, seems, it seems to

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

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

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

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

01:29:18.240 --> 01:29:24.160
 specifically to a lot layout or whatever, then we would need to have that documented

01:29:24.160 --> 01:29:33.720
 somehow. Just a clarification. Thank you for that. Yes. Andrew. Thank you, chair. I don't

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

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

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

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

01:29:52.840 --> 01:29:58.640
 about the opportunity for property owners to petition the city to abandon a road. And

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

01:30:06.120 --> 01:30:10.720
 provides a mechanism for road abandonment for property owners. And I don't know if the

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

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

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

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

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

01:30:38.560 --> 01:30:43.000
 on what the city can do to set up structures for that process.

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

01:30:49.040 --> 01:30:54.760
 real estate application is a road right away abandonment. And that is an application that

01:30:54.760 --> 01:30:59.880
 they can submit either property owners on both sides or obviously you would hope that

01:30:59.880 --> 01:31:05.080
 both sides would request for that abandonment. So, Andrew, we do have an application already

01:31:05.080 --> 01:31:10.340
 in place. Okay, great. That's helpful. I didn't get

01:31:10.340 --> 01:31:15.800
 that information last week. Maybe I did. Maybe I didn't under process it enough. Richard,

01:31:15.800 --> 01:31:20.400
 if you want to. The only thing I was going to add is that's

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

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

01:31:32.640 --> 01:31:38.640
 sense to lump everything under real estate applications or should we break those out?

01:31:38.640 --> 01:31:43.640
 Maybe it is better to have separate items for right of way abandonment or vacation easement

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

01:31:51.320 --> 01:32:02.840
 all phrase. There really isn't a formal process for road abandonments. They have just been

01:32:02.840 --> 01:32:09.520
 handled through the real estate division. So that could be something that probably not

01:32:09.520 --> 01:32:14.700
 development services but maybe the engineering department can work on and with real estate.

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

01:32:20.240 --> 01:32:24.560
 example with Mayhill where we have redone realigned the road, there's going to be a

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

01:32:31.280 --> 01:32:35.200
 to anything regarding a physical development that development services will be involved

01:32:35.200 --> 01:32:42.280
 with, but the people there may want to request that that portion of the nonfunctional roadway

01:32:42.280 --> 01:32:49.200
 piece to be abandoned so that they can use it for whatever purposes. That will impact

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

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

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

01:33:06.080 --> 01:33:11.720
 gated subdivisions that predate the rules that we used to have and they want to have

01:33:11.720 --> 01:33:18.800
 that road abandoned and so that's a different story. But typically these requests come after

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

01:33:23.700 --> 01:33:28.960
 that's how they usually occur. Yeah, I appreciate that insight. I mean more

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

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

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

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

01:33:54.480 --> 01:33:59.880
 what mechanisms are available to remove Shady Shores, that portion of Shady Shores road,

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

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

01:34:11.600 --> 01:34:18.360
 property outside that ESA. So in this specific example it's not necessarily that the road

01:34:18.360 --> 01:34:22.800
 needs to be abandoned because of development that's already taken or that there's been

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

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

01:34:33.800 --> 01:34:42.120
 encourage the development of properties that because of ESA or otherwise have limitations

01:34:42.120 --> 01:34:47.840
 and this specific example it seems to benefit everyone that the neighbors, the city, the

01:34:47.840 --> 01:34:53.480
 developers, to look into what mechanisms they would have to combine those two parcels on

01:34:53.480 --> 01:34:58.400
 the north and south side of Shady Shores. That's what I appreciate historically how

01:34:58.400 --> 01:35:03.400
 a right away abandonment is taking place. I was looking for more like proactive to encourage

01:35:03.400 --> 01:35:11.480
 development where a right away is preventing it potentially.

01:35:11.480 --> 01:35:14.800
 That's a very good example, something that we can discuss internally.

01:35:14.800 --> 01:35:21.420
 That would be great. Thank you.

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

01:35:29.080 --> 01:35:35.240
 committee would be interested in that but I know that since we upgraded our or changed

01:35:35.240 --> 01:35:40.640
 our ordinance a while ago different things have happened and we have some flexibility

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

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

01:35:54.200 --> 01:36:01.040
 and if there's -- if what we have, the new ordinance is working or not.

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

01:36:07.040 --> 01:36:11.040
 certainly get to that and we do have some recommendations.

01:36:11.040 --> 01:36:19.080
 Okay, thank you. Anyone else? I've got one. And that is I think

01:36:19.080 --> 01:36:26.400
 somehow it got misinterpreted when we're dealing with perimeter fences and we said you could

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

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

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

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

01:36:52.200 --> 01:36:56.720
 only to get a refresher but to hopefully if there was any miscommunication we can clear

01:36:56.720 --> 01:37:00.280
 that up. Yeah, I believe fences, perimeter fences were

01:37:00.280 --> 01:37:07.640
 about a six-hour conversation the first go. More like six days.

01:37:07.640 --> 01:37:12.880
 Days versus hours. Yeah, so I have one more suggestion. If we

01:37:12.880 --> 01:37:17.360
 could get these presentations that we see uploaded to the backup so that the public

01:37:17.360 --> 01:37:20.760
 can review them, I think that would be helpful to you.

01:37:20.760 --> 01:37:27.000
 We'll do that, yes ma'am. Okay, thanks.

01:37:27.000 --> 01:37:33.640
 Anything else on this item? All right, any concluding items?

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

01:37:42.560 --> 01:37:48.280
 what they have done for us. And if there's nothing else we will adjourn

01:37:48.280 --> 01:37:52.040
 the meeting at 2 41. Thank you everyone.

01:37:52.040 --> 01:37:53.540
 - Thank you. - Thank you.