Aug 12, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2026-08-12 5:30 PM

[00:00:10]

THIS WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12TH, AND WITH A QUORUM PRESENT, WE WILL CALL THIS WORK SESSION OF

[1. Clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for this meeting]

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION ON CONSENT OR ON THE INDIVIDUAL? THERE ARE NO CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. MY APOLOGIES. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MINUTES. NO. OKAY. BRINGS US TO

INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. 3AFP26-19. >> GOOD EVENING, JULIE WYATT.

AND THIS IS. A FINAL PLAT FOR A A NEW FACILITY FOR DENTON ISD FOR THEIR TECHNOLOGY AND WAREHOUSE BUILDING. IT IS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT MILLS AND MAYHILL. THE FINAL PLAT STILL HAS SOME CORRECTIONS THAT THEY NEED TO MAKE, SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL. HOWEVER, WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTED EXTENSION TO SEPTEMBER 9TH AND I WILL BE

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS? I BELIEVE THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE

SEEN THIS. >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING.

THANK YOU. WE HAVE ONE PUBLIC HEARING ITEM FOR A DC. A 26-4. >> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. ANGIE IS HERE TO PRESENT DCA 264. THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT TO THE DC. AS A REMINDER, WE HAD AN INITIAL WORK SESSION ON THIS AT THE BEGINNING OF JULY, AND THEN WE HAD SOME FOLLOW UP WORK SESSIONS AT OUR SECOND MEETING IN JULY. AND THIS IS THE FULL PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE CODE AMENDMENT THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING. I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A SUMMARY. I DO HAVE A MUCH MORE DETAILED PRESENTATION FOR OPEN SESSION, BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MAY HAVE. SO AS A REMINDER, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE CODE AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. THIS DOES AFFECT SEVERAL SUBSECTIONS OF THE DDC, BUT LARGELY AMENDMENTS FALL IN SUBCHAPTERS FIVE, SEVEN AND NINE WITH SOME OTHER LITTLE AMENDMENTS AS IT RELATES TO THOSE MORE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS IN THOSE LARGER CHAPTERS. THE REASON FOR THIS? IT'S MULTIFACETED. IT'S TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY WITH STATE LAW. IT'S TO ENSURE THAT OUR LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARE NOT ONLY UP TO DATE, BUT THEY'RE ALSO CLEAR, CONSISTENT, AND CONCISE. THAT CREATES A MORE USER FRIENDLY DOCUMENT BOTH FOR STAFF AND FOR POTENTIAL APPLICANTS. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ALSO CONTEMPLATE TAKING IN NEW AND EMERGING LAND USES, SO WE CAN ENSURE WE'RE APPLYING OUR REGULATIONS CONSISTENTLY ACROSS LIKE USERS IN THE CITY. SO STAFF DID WORK WITH THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE OVER SEVERAL MONTHS IN PREPARING THESE AMENDMENTS.

SOME OF THESE AMENDMENTS WERE ALSO WORKSHOPPED EITHER THROUGH CITY COUNCIL, AND YOU ALL SAW THEM AT WORK SESSION AS WELL. DUE TO SOME CHANGES IN STATE LAW, RATHER THAN BRINGING CODE AMENDMENTS FORWARD ONE AT A TIME LIKE YOU MAY USED TO BE, YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST, WE ARE PACKAGING TOGETHER AS COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENTS. SO THIS ONE DOES COVER SEVERAL LARGE TOPICS, INCLUDING MINOR AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING USES IN THE TABLE OF LAND USES. USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS, AND IN OUR DEFINITIONS, IT DOES INCLUDE SOME CHANGES OUT OF STATE LAW FROM THE PAST TWO LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS. IT INCORPORATES DIRECTOR DETERMINATIONS AS IT RELATES TO SINGLE FAMILY SITE DESIGN STANDARDS, AS A COUPLE OF NEW LAND USES TO THE DDC.

AND ALSO THERE WAS ONE MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE RAZOR RANCH OVERLAY AS IT RELATES TO THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS ALLOWED WITHIN A SPECIFIC SUBSECTION OF THE RAZOR RANCH OVERLAY DISTRICT. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS CODE AMENDMENT. IT DOES MEET OUR CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MAY HAVE AT THIS TIME.

>> COMMISSIONER CATCHES IT. >> SO YOU MAY HAVE ANSWERED THESE QUESTIONS ALREADY, BUT ON THE EVENT VENUE SECTION, THE. PARKING IS DOES THIS THE WAY THAT IT'S WORDED, DOES THAT COVER PARKING WHERE SOMEBODY HAS A LARGER OUTDOOR AREA THAN AN INDOOR AREA? LIKE IF I KNOW THERE ARE SEVERAL EVENT VENUES AROUND THE AREA THAT ARE MUCH LARGER THAN THEIR INDOOR SPACE?

>> YES. THE, THE PARKING AMENDMENTS FOR EVENT VENUES DO, DO CONTEMPLATE THOSE, THOSE

[00:05:03]

NEEDED TO MEET THEIR THEIR NICHE TYPE OF VENUE. >> EXCELLENT. AND ONE MORE QUESTION ON THAT. ON RURAL RESIDENTIAL WITH THE SETBACKS, CAN SOMEBODY HAVE AN OUTDOOR

SPACE RIGHT NEXT TO A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY? >> IT COULD BE ADJACENT TO SOMEBODY LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. I WOULD IMAGINE AT THAT POINT, SOME OF THOSE OTHER STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE IN OTHER PLACES IN THE DDC, LIKE COMPATIBILITY BUFFERS WOULD COME INTO PLAY BECAUSE THAT'S MORE OF A COMMERCIAL USE IN NATURE, AND THE ADJACENT USE WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL. SO WE'D EXPECT TO SEE A LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH DIFFERENT ELEMENTS

OUT OF SEVEN POINT G PROVIDED FOR. >> OKAY. VERY GOOD. THANKS.

>> ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONER MCDUFF? >> I'M DIGGING FOR WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR EARLIER. THERE. ONE CATEGORY I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS OR WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION ON IS PREVIOUS DIRECTOR DETERMINED DETERMINATIONS. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, ANGIE?

>> WHAT THAT MEANS IS THE DDC SUBSECTION 7.19.3 LARGELY SPECIFIES THE REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS WITHIN THE BROADER SUBCHAPTER. IT DOES ALLOW FOR THE DIRECTOR TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE SITE DESIGN FEATURES, SO LONG AS IT MEETS THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE CODE. WHEN THIS WAS ADOPTED IN 2019, WE HAD A LIST OF SEVEN OR SO ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, AND IN 2021, THE DIRECTOR AT THAT TIME MEMORIALIZED A DETERMINATION OF OTHER APPROPRIATE FEATURES TO ASSIST STAFF IN THEIR REVIEW OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND SO STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING OFF OF THAT DIRECTOR DETERMINATION WHEN REVIEWING NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME PERMITS TO ENSURE THAT THE DIFFERENT FEATURES AND THAT'S WHAT THIS LIST IS, OF DIFFERENT ELEMENTS THAT INDIVIDUALS CAN USE TO CREATE VARIETY IN THE FRONT ELEVATION OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES. SO THAT MEMO HAS BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE 2021. AND THEN TWO DIFFERENT ITERATIONS OF THAT TO KIND OF ADAPT TO JUST CHANGING STYLE AND HOME PREFERENCE WERE ISSUED IN 2025. SO REALLY, IT'S IMPORTANT TO CODIFY THESE SORT OF DIRECTOR DETERMINATIONS SO THAT ALL OF STAFF IS WORKING OFF OF THE SAME UP TO DATE INFORMATION, AS WELL AS SO THAT APPLICANTS KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT WHEN THEY'RE SUBMITTING A HOME.

SO RATHER THAN HAVING A MEMO, THIS IS GOING TO BE MEMORIALIZED IN THE CODE OF ALL THE APPROPRIATE FEATURES. I WOULD NOTE WE USED TO REQUIRE THREE FROM OUR LIST OF SEVEN.

AND THEY'LL NOW BE REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE FOUR ELEMENTS ARE PROVIDED.

>> OKAY. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY SO IT'S CODIFIED NOW INSTEAD OF THAT PIECE OF PAPER THAT'S ON THE BACK OF YOUR CREDENZA, THAT'S IN A PLASTIC SLEEVE THAT YOU KEEP REFERRING

TO. I'M JUST IT WILL BE WHEN STUFF. >> YEAH. YES. WHEN THESE ARE ADOPTED, THIS WILL BE CODIFIED. AND REMOVE THE POSSIBILITY FOR ERROR DUE TO THAT CIRCUMSTANCE

YOU JUST DESCRIBED. >> THANK YOU. VERY CLEAR. >> ANYTHING ELSE? I DON'T SEE ANY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANGIE. DO. THAT BRINGS US TO OUR WORK SESSION REPORT, WHICH

[A. PZ26-123 Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding a new process for Commissioners to submit questions in advance of a meeting.]

QUESTIONS. CHARLIE. >> HI, GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. CHARLIE ROSENTHAL, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES THIS ITEM IS COMING BEFORE YOU. AFTER A REQUEST WE RECEIVED PREVIOUSLY ABOUT HAVING STAFF IN ATTENDANCE AT SOME OF THESE MEETINGS. AND SO WE WANTED TO SET UP A WAY SIMILAR TO THE WAY CITY COUNCIL PROCESSES QUESTIONS AHEAD OF THE MEETING, SO THAT IT'S ON THE AGENDA. IF YOU SUBMIT QUESTIONS TO US, WE'LL PROVIDE A RESPONSE AHEAD OF THE MEETING, AND THEN THOSE RESPONSES WILL ALSO BE INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA SO THAT EVERYBODY, THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS AND ANYBODY THAT LOOKS IN THE FUTURE WILL BE ABLE TO SEE THE RESPONSES TO THOSE. IN ADDITION TO THAT, IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS THAT ARE VERY TECHNICAL IN NATURE, WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SOMEBODY HERE TO ANSWER

THOSE QUESTIONS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A MORE THOROUGH DISCUSSION. >> YEAH, I'LL JUST SAY I APPRECIATE THIS. I DON'T WANT IT TO BECOME A BURDEN, BUT I DO THINK THERE'S VALUE IN THE WHOLE GROUP GETTING TO, TO SEE THOUGHTS AND QUESTIONS AND, AND THE DATA AND THE ANSWERS BEHIND

[00:10:01]

>> I GUESS MY FIRST WORD WAS, WAS TRANSPARENCY. I THINK FOR THE SAKE OF TRANSPARENCY, THIS IS A GOOD IDEA AND HAVE IT DOCUMENTED. I KNOW THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT AS A GROUP, WE HAD OUR SESSION ON DATA CENTERS, A GREAT WORK SESSION, AND I'M NOT SURE ANYBODY REALLY REALIZED THAT WE WERE ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS. SO I THINK THAT'S THIS IS GREAT.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? >> YEAH. AND JUST JUST TO BE CLEAR, IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE REALLY CUMBERSOME PROCESS. SO WHEN THE AGENDA GOES OUT, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, YOU'LL JUST RESPOND BACK TO THAT AND SAY, HEY, LOOK, A COUPLE ITEMS HERE, HAVE THESE QUESTIONS AND THEN

WE'LL GET THE RESPONSES BACK TO YOU AHEAD OF THE MEETING. >> YEAH, REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.

AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE, THE WORK YOU DO. IT'S, IT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE TO CORRAL. I KNOW, AND HALF OF THEM ARE OFTEN INSPECTIONS HALF THE DAY. AND THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF PERSONNEL CHALLENGES, BUT I APPRECIATE THE THE FOCUS ON GETTING THOSE ANSWERS.

>> YEAH, NO PROBLEM AT ALL. >> I THINK THAT'S IT. WITH THAT. AT 541, WE'LL CALL OUR WORK SESSION IN RECESS, AND WE WILL RECONVENE FOR THE REGULARGOOD ES WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12TH, I WILL

[1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]

U.S. AND TEXAS FLAGS. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE. >> TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD,

INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I

PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE. TEXAS. >> ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND

INDIVISIBLE. >> BRINGS US TO ITEM TWO. A PZ26-121. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF

[2. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR:]

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> AND COMMISSIONER KOCHER SAID. >> I SECOND THAT MOTION.

>> WITH A MOTION AND A SECOND AND NOT SEEING ANY DISCUSSION. I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD. THAT ITEM PASSES FIVE ZERO. BRINGS US TO ITEM 3AFP26-19.

[A. FP26-0019 Consider a request by RLK Engineering, Inc., on behalf of the property owner, Denton Independent School District for approval of Denton I.S.D Technology Office & Warehouse Addition. The approximately 5.094-acre site is generally located at the southeast corner of the intersection of North Mayhill Road and Mills Road, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. (FP26-0019, Denton I.S.D. Technology Office & Warehouse Addition, Julie Wyatt)]

>> GOOD EVENING, JULIE WYATT, PRINCIPAL PLANNER, AND I AM PRESENTING FP2619 TO YOU. THIS IS A FINAL PLAT TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A DENTON ISD TECH CENTER AND WAREHOUSE.

SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MAY HILL AND MILL ROADS AND CURRENTLY THEY DO HAVE SOME ITEMS THEY STILL NEED TO CORRECT IN ORDER TO MEET THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL. SO STAFF CANNOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL. HOWEVER, WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTED EXTENSION TO SEPTEMBER 9TH, AND I'LL BE

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU JULIE. I DO NOT SEE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER

MCDUFF. >> YES. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REQUESTED

EXTENSION TO A DATE CERTAIN OF SEPTEMBER 9TH, 2026. >> AND COMMISSIONER DIRE.

>> I'LL GO AHEAD AND SECOND THAT MOTION. >> VERY GOOD. MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE BOARD. SEEING NO DISCUSSION, I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD. THAT ITEM

[A. DCA26-0004 Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a proposed comprehensive amendment to the Denton Development Code; amendments include, but are not limited to, Subsection 3.7-Measurements and Exceptions, Subchapter 5 - Use Regulations, Table 7.H - Fencing Standards on Individual Lots, Table 7.9-I Parking, Subsection 7.6.9 - Off-Street Parking Layout and Design, Subsection 7.10.3 - Single-Family Detached, Duplex, Townhome, Triplex and Fourplex Dwelling and Site Building Design, Subsection 9.2 - Definitions, Appendix A, Exhibit C-2B - Rayzor Ranch South Mixed-Use District-1 and Rayzor Ranch South Mixed Use District-2 Single-Family Residential Guidelines (DCA26-0004, Comprehensive Update, Angie Manglaris).]

>> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, ANGIE MANGLER, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR, HERE TO PRESENT A 264. THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT TO THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE. THIS AMENDMENT TOUCHES SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE, BUT PRIMARILY DEALS WITH CHANGES TO SUBCHAPTER FIVE, SEVEN, AND NINE. THERE ARE SOME OTHER SMALLER AMENDMENTS AS IT RELATES TO ADJUSTING TITLES TO

[00:15:02]

THIS WOULD ENSURE NEW AND EMERGING LAND USES ARE APPROPRIATELY CATEGORIZED, AND USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS ARE ADOPTED AS IT RELATES TO THEM, AS WELL AS ENSURING CONSISTENCY WITH STATE LAW IN GENERAL. THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE INTENDED TO LEAD TO A MORE EFFICIENT REVIEW PROCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PERMITS, BOTH FOR STAFF AND AND FOR APPLICANTS. STAFF HAS WORKED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE OVER SEVERAL MONTHS ON MANY OF THESE AMENDMENTS DUE TO CHANGES IN STATE LAW GOING FORWARD, RATHER THAN SEE EACH AMENDMENT COME FORWARD TOPIC BY TOPIC, STAFF WILL BE PACKAGING SEVERAL AMENDMENTS INTO COMPREHENSIVE UPDATES THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. SO THIS IS REALLY THE FIRST OF THOSE COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENTS THAT YOU'LL BE SEEING TOPICS WITHIN THIS AMENDMENT DEAL, LARGELY WITH MINOR AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING TABLE OF ALLOWED USES, USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND DEFINITIONS, AND INCORPORATE SOME CHANGES DUE TO STATE LAW OUT OF THE LAST TWO LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS, AND INCORPORATES DIRECTOR DETERMINATIONS RELATING TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS AS NEW LAND USES TO THE DDC THAT ARE EMERGING, AND THERE ARE SOME MINOR AMENDMENTS TO THE RAZOR RANCH OVERLAY DISTRICT. WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH TOPIC BY TOPIC AND JUST SORT OF TOUCH ON THE KEY POINTS TO EACH OF THOSE CHANGES. SO FIRST, LOOKING AT AMENDMENTS TO THE EXISTING TABLE OF ALLOWED USES, USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND DEFINITIONS. CHANGES TO THESE SECTIONS ARE LARGELY IN TABLE FIVE, POINT TWO POINT A, SECTION 5.3. IN SECTION 9.2 OF THE DDC. THESE ARE AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING LAND USES AND DEFINITIONS TO ADDRESS SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT HAVE COME TO STAFF'S ATTENTION BY USING THE DDC SINCE ITS ADOPTION IN 2019. THE REASON FOR THAT IS TO REALLY REDUCE ANY AMBIGUITY AND LEAD TO CLEAR AND CONSISTENT APPLICATION OF THE DDC AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SPECIFICITY WHERE NEEDED. WE'RE DOING THIS BY PROVIDING CLARIFYING LANGUAGE WHERE WE SEE NECESSARY, REVISING DEFINITIONS TO FURTHER DISTINGUISH SIMILAR LAND USES FROM ONE ANOTHER, AND CORRECT KNOWN ISSUES AND INCONSISTENCIES WITHIN THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS. THE CHANGES THAT RELATE TO DEFINITIONS AND USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS ARE SEVERAL, SO I'M JUST GOING TO PULL OUT SOME OF THE KEY CHANGES. THAT FULL LIST WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR BACKUP, BUT WE ARE SEPARATING SOME OF OUR DEFINITIONS AS IT RELATES TO LOW AND MEDIUM IMPACT MANUFACTURING TO MAKE THEM NOT AS SIMILAR TO ONE ANOTHER, APPROPRIATELY ALIGNING THE DEFINITION FOR GENERAL RETAIL WITH THE TITLE THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH IT. DISTINGUISHING OUTDOOR RECREATION, THE PRIVATE LAND USE FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, THE PUBLIC LAND USE, AS WELL AS CLARIFYING SOME THINGS LIKE WHAT ACCESSORY USES ARE CUSTOMARY WITH AUTOMOTIVE SALES, SOME USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS. WE ARE CLARIFYING THAT MOBILE FOOD COURTS IS ALLOWED AS AN ACCESSORY. LAND USE. WE'RE ALIGNING THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE ASSOCIATED WITH VARIOUS MEDICAL OFFICES AND CLINICS WITH THE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT THEY'RE LOCATED IN, CLARIFYING MEASUREMENT FOR SEVERAL OF OUR USES AS IT RELATES TO PERSONAL SERVICES AND MAKING SURE WE'RE APPLYING THE SAME STANDARD FOR FOOD PROCESSING. SUP REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TWO CATEGORIES OF FOOD PROCESSING LAND USES THAT WE HAVE. AND THEN FINALLY ALIGNING THE PERSONAL SERVICES LAND USE WITH ZONING DISTRICTS BY ALLOWING IT IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE KEY CHANGES AS IT RELATES TO THE EXISTING LAND USES, DEFINITIONS AND TABLE OF ALLOWED USES. THE CHANGES THAT RELATE TO STATE LAW. THIS WILL BE TOUCHING AGAIN. TABLE 5.2, POINT A AND THEN SUBSECTIONS IN SUBCHAPTER FIVE. AS IT RELATES TO RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS. THERE ARE A COUPLE PARKING AMENDMENTS WITH THIS, AS WELL AS SOME UPDATES TO THE DEFINITIONS. LOOKING AT MANUFACTURED HOUSING OR HUD. COM HUD HOME HUD CODE HOMES. I'M SORRY, TAKES A COUPLE OF TIMES. THIS IS TO PERMIT A MANUFACTURED HOME BY RIGHT AND THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. THE REASON BEING IS SB 785, ADOPTED IN 2025, GOES INTO EFFECT IN SEPTEMBER 1ST AND REQUIRES THAT CITIES HAVE AT LEAST ONE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH MANUFACTURED HOMES ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT AND A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. CURRENTLY, THE DDC DOES NOT HAVE THAT. WE REQUIRE AN SUP FOR THE SITING OF A MANUFACTURED HOME, AND SO BY UPDATING THE TABLE OF ALLOWED USES AND ESTABLISHING NEW SPECIFIC STANDARDS, WE WILL BE COMPLIANT WITH THIS REGULATION. AND SO THE TABLE OF ALLOWED USES WILL BE AMENDED TO PERMIT MANUFACTURED HOMES BY RIGHT AND THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, RETAINING THE S, U, P AND OUR OTHER RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AS WELL AS SETTING SOME NEW SPECIFIC STANDARDS AS IT RELATES TO THE SITING OF THE MANUFACTURED HOME. THE OTHER CHANGE RELATING TO STATE LAW IS MEDIA PRODUCTION FACILITIES. AND SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO INCORPORATE MEDIA PRODUCTION FACILITIES IN THE DDC. H.B. 4051, ADOPTED IN 2023, AMENDED THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A CITY OR AN AREA TO BE APPROVED AS A MEDIA PRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT ZONE BY REVISING THE POPULATION TO CITY MUST HAVE FROM 250,000 DOWN TO 100,000, MAKING THE CITY OF DENTON ELIGIBLE. MEDIA PRODUCTION ZONES DO A VARIETY OF THINGS, BUT PRIMARILY ALLOW FOR SALES AND USE TAX

[00:20:02]

THAT CAN BE EITHER IN FRONT OF OR BEHIND THE FRONT PLANE OF THE HOME, PROVIDING FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY THERE, AND THEN UPDATING OUR ARCHITECTURAL VARIETY, GRAPHIC AND LANGUAGE. JUST TO CLARIFY WHERE AND HOW THE SAME ELEVATION CAN BE REPEATED. SO THIS IS AN UPDATED GRAPHIC THAT STAFF FINDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE USER FRIENDLY. FOR ANYBODY LOOKING AT IT. LOOKING AT ADDING NEW LAND USES TO THE DDC, THIS WILL PREDOMINANTLY FALL ON OUR TABLE OF ALLOWED USES, USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS, PARKING AND DEFINITION SECTION. SO THE REASON FOR THIS SPECIFIC SET OF AMENDMENTS IS TO INCORPORATE SEVERAL NEW LAND USES TO THE DDC, WHICH DON'T CLEARLY FIT INTO AN EXISTING CATEGORY, BUT WHICH ARE CONTINUING TO COME UP AND CAUSE JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME THAN STAFF WOULD PREFER TO HAVE ON REVIEWING THE APPLICATION AND CATEGORIZING. AND IT OPENS ITSELF UP TO SOME INCONSISTENCIES BY NOT HAVING A CLEAR CATEGORY TO PLACE THESE USES IN SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO CONTRACTOR SERVICES, DRONE DELIVERY SERVICES AND EVENT VENUES. AND SO SOME OF THESE CHALLENGES ARE APPROPRIATELY CLASSIFYING THE LAND USES, ENSURING WE'RE APPROPRIATELY APPLYING USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS TO MITIGATE ANY SORT OF ADVERSE IMPACTS, AND ALSO TO PROVIDE CLEAR DIRECTION TO STAFF AND APPLICANTS ALIKE THAT WILL RESULT IN CONSISTENT REVIEWS AND ENSURE THAT SIMILAR USES ARE TREATED THE SAME THROUGHOUT THE CITY. AND SO WE'LL GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE USES AND TALK ABOUT HOW STAFF IS PROPOSING TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE AND CLASSIFICATION OF THEM, STARTING WITH CONTRACTOR SERVICES. THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO ESTABLISH A LAND USE CONTRACTOR SERVICES, WHICH PREDOMINANTLY DEALS IN OFF SITE MANUAL LABOR SERVICES. SO THINK OF PLUMBERS OR ELECTRICIANS THAT MAY OFTEN NEED INDOOR AND OUTDOOR AREA FOR STORAGE, BUT ALSO HAVE AN OFFICE SPACE. THESE USES ARE A LITTLE UNIQUE. THEY DON'T QUITE FIT INTO PROFESSIONAL OR PERSONAL SERVICES AND HAVE BEEN CLASSIFIED IN A VARIETY OF WAYS WHEN STAFF HAS BEEN REVIEWING THEM, SUCH AS PROFESSIONAL OFFICE WITH ACCESSORY, INDOOR STORAGE OR OFFERING OFFICE WITH ACCESSORY SALES. AND SO, BECAUSE THE DDC DOESN'T REALLY FULLY CAPTURE ALL THE COMPONENTS OF THIS TYPE OF USE, WE'RE PROPOSING TO ADD THE LAND USE TO BETTER GUIDE STAFF AND APPLICANTS BY CREATING THE LAND USE, DEFINING IT, AND ESTABLISHING USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS. SO THIS WOULD BE PERMITTED IN REALLY ALL OF OUR MIXED USE CORRIDOR AND OTHER RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AS WELL AS IN THE RR. AS THE DC ARC FOUND THAT SOME OF THOSE LARGER LOTS MAY BE APPROPRIATE FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONTRACTOR SERVICES THAT YOU MAY TYPICALLY SEE LANDSCAPING COMPANIES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO THE DEFINITIONS HERE ON THE LEFT SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN, BUT LARGELY, AGAIN, THIS IS A BUSINESS THAT REALLY SPECIALIZES IN PROVIDING SERVICES NOT CLEARLY CLASSIFIED ELSEWHERE IN THE DDC DOES PREDOMINANTLY DEAL IN OFF SITE MANUAL LABOR LIKE CLEANING, HEATING AND AIR POOL COMPANIES

[00:25:03]

SPECIFIC STANDARDS RELATE TO WHERE THE DRONES MAY BE STORED ON SITE, WHEN AND HOW, HOW FAR THEY NEED TO BE SET BACK FROM EXISTING LAND USES. ONE THING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND WITH DRONE DELIVERY SERVICES MOST EVERYTHING WHEN THE DRONE GOES UP IN THE AIR IS REGULATED BY THE FAA. THE CITIES DO RETAIN SOME LAND USE CONTROL, BUT THIS IS LARGELY REGULATED AT THE FEDERAL AND STATE LEVELS. SOME OF THE SPECIFIC STANDARDS DO SET A MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR ACCESSORY DRONE DELIVERY AREAS, LIMITING THAT TO NOT MORE THAN 1000FT■!S OR 10% OF THE LOT. IT DOES REQUIRE THAT ALL DRONE STAGING AREAS NEED TO BE LOCATED OUT OF ANY REQUIRED SETBACKS LANDSCAPED AREAS, PARKING, FIRE LANES, EASEMENTS, ANYTHING WE WOULD TYPICALLY NOT ALLOW A BUILDING IN. IT'S SPECIFIED THAT AREA MAY NOT BE IN EITHER. ENSURING THAT THESE. THE DRONE STAGING AREAS ARE SCREENED FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL LAND USES, AND SETTING A MINIMUM SETBACK OF 300FT FROM EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AND ANY SCHOOLS, INCLUDING PRE-K, ALL THE WAY THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL.

[00:30:04]

YOU ALL MAY HAVE. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONER

GUTTERSON. >> YEAH, I WAS GOING TO REVISIT THE RR DISTRICT ON THE EVENT VENUE AGAIN. IS WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE A BOUNDARY TRIGGER, SUCH AS IF AN EVENT VENUE WERE 200 FOOT FROM A NEIGHBORING RESIDENCE, THAT THAT WOULD TRIGGER A SUSUP LIKE

REQUIRE AN SUP. WOULD THAT BE REASONABLE? >> I THINK WE COULD USE SOME OF THE EXISTING SIMILAR LANGUAGE WE HAVE FOR, FOR BUFFERING TO, TO CRAFT A SPECIFIC STANDARD TO THAT EFFECT. IF THAT WAS THE DESIRE THAT THE DISCUSSION AROUND RR FOR EVENT VENUE WAS TALKED ABOUT QUITE A BIT IN DC. SEE, A LOT OF EVENT VENUES DO EXIST IN SIMILAR RURAL SETTINGS, NOT NECESSARILY IN THE CITY, BUT BUT OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. SO IF THAT'S SOMETHING THE

COMMISSION WANTED, WE COULD LOOK AT CRAFTING THAT LANGUAGE. >> YEAH, THERE'S JUST A LOT OF TALK LATELY ABOUT PLANNING, NOT PLANNING AHEAD. AND THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD COME UP.

AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAYBE ADD SOMETHING JUST TO KEEP THAT FROM HAPPENING RIGHT NEXT DOOR

TO SOMEONE. >> OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DO HAVE ONE CARD FROM MISS AMY BISSETT. IF YOU STATE YOUR NAME

AND ADDRESS. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS AMY BISSETT, 109 NORTH ELM, DENTON, 76201. AND I JUST HAVE OBSERVED THE WORK SESSIONS RELATED TO THESE CODE AMENDMENTS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS. AND I REPRESENT THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER FOR THE RAZOR RANCH SITE THAT'S IN QUESTION, WHERE THE REQUEST HAS BEEN MADE TO CHANGE FROM ONLY ALLOWING ONE BEDROOM SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT TO THAT. I DID PROVIDE SOME NARRATIVE BACK UP, BUT JUST WANTED TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF A FRAMEWORK BASED ON THE QUESTIONS THAT I'VE HEARD COME UP OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WORK SESSIONS. SO THIS SITE WAS FULLY ENTITLED AND PLATTED SEVERAL YEARS AGO. THEY ARE ZERO LOT LINE GARDEN STYLE HOMES THAT HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC DEFINITION WITHIN RAZOR RANCH.

AND THE LOTS ARE VERY SMALL. THEY'RE MUCH SMALLER THAN IT WOULD TYPICALLY BE PERMITTED UNDER THE BASE CODE IN DENTON. ADDITIONALLY, THESE LOTS ARE SUBJECT TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH RAZOR RANCH. AND SO THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS ABOUT IS THIS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR AFFORDABILITY? IF WE WERE TO LEAVE THESE SINGLE BEDROOM HOMES AND THE INTENTION OF MY CLIENT FROM THE OUTSET WAS FOR THIS TO BE A SMALL DEVELOPMENT FOR YOUNG PROFESSIONALS WHO HAD NOT YET HAD CHILDREN, OR EMPTY NESTERS WHO WANTED TO DOWNSIZE.

SO THE THE INTENT WAS ALWAYS FOR IT TO BE SOMETHING THAT WAS A MORE ATTAINABLE PRODUCT IN TERMS OF AFFORDABILITY. HOWEVER, JUST BETWEEN THE THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AND THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE OVERLAY, AS TIME PASSED, THE THE COST WENT UP TO

[00:35:04]

EVERYTHING IS ALREADY THERE TODAY. SO IT'S REALLY PERMIT READY AT THIS POINT. AND SO TO GO BACK AND AND CHANGE DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS OR ANYTHING ELSE ASSOCIATED WITH IT WOULD, WOULD REALLY NOT BE FEASIBLE, ESPECIALLY FOR THIS SMALL PROPERTY IS ONLY 37 LOTS.

SO TO START MAKING CHANGES LIKE THAT WOULD JUST FINANCIALLY BE INFEASIBLE. THERE'S ALSO SOME FRONT AND BACK YARD SETBACKS THAT THAT REALLY DICTATE THE OVERALL FOOTPRINT OF THE HOME.

AND THERE WAS ALSO QUESTIONS RELATED TO OR CONCERNS RELATED TO THE FLAG LOTS TOWARDS THE INTERIOR. AND WHILE THEY LOOK LIKE FLAG FLAG LOTS ON THE PLAT, IN REALITY THEY ALL HAVE REAR ACCESS OFF OF ALLEYS THAT INCLUDE DRIVEWAYS, INDIVIDUAL DRIVEWAYS AND GARAGES. SO THE CONCERNS THAT I HEARD WERE RELATED TO SHARED DRIVEWAYS. AND IN THIS CASE, THOSE ACCESSES WOULD BE TAKEN FROM THE ALLEYS. AND THE REASON THAT IT WAS SET UP THAT WAY IS BECAUSE BONNIE BRAE, YOU CAN REALLY PUT NO HOMES FRONTING IT. SO THEY ALL HAVE TO FACE

INTERIOR AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS

FROM THE COMMISSION, COMMISSIONER MCDUFF? >> WELL, I GUESS I'M UNCLEAR.

ARE YOU ARE YOU SUPPORTING THESE DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES, THESE AMENDMENTS? YES. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. I WANTED TO HEAR THAT, I THOUGHT SO, YES. THANK YOU, MISS AMY.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I DON'T SEE ANY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE CARDS, BUT THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. SO ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IS MORE THAN WELCOME TO COME ON DOWN IF YOU WOULD LIKE. SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION OR EMOTION. COMMISSIONER. DIRE.

>> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE GO AHEAD AND PASS AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE STATED CHANGES, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY AND THE DCR, C.

>> AND COMMISSIONER GARLAND. >> AND I WOULD LIKE TO SECOND THE MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> OKAY, I'LL JUST ADD A COUPLE THOUGHTS. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, STAFF. I KNOW AS WE'VE GOTTEN INTO THIS NEW PROCESS OF KIND OF GETTING THROUGH A BUNCH OF SMALLER THINGS AND BUNDLING THEM TOGETHER, THAT'S NO EASY TASK. SO I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT GETS THERE AND LOOK FORWARD TO FUTURE SORT OF REGULAR UPDATES SO THAT WE CAN NOT LEAVE YOU DEALING WITH MEMOS IN THE IN THE BOOK, IN THE BACK OF THE OFFICE FOR MULTIPLE YEARS. I'LL ALSO MENTION, SINCE COMMISSIONER KOCHER SAID, BROUGHT IT UP, THAT THE. I AND I WELCOME COMMISSIONER DYER'S COMMENTS TO. I THINK THE DISCUSSION AT D. CRC ABOUT THE RR EVENT VENUES WAS ONE OF. HEY, THERE'S THINGS LIKE THIS NOW IN THAT AREA. AND SO BY GETTING GETTING THIS CODIFIED, IT GIVES US IT GIVES STAFF BASICALLY A BETTER FRAMEWORK FROM WHICH THEY CAN START TO REQUIRE THOSE BUFFERS AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS VERSUS RIGHT NOW WHERE IT IT'S A, IT'S AN UNKNOWN. THERE'S NOTHING OFFICIAL. THERE'S NO RULES. SO THERE'S, THEY'RE MORE LIMITED ON WHAT THEY CAN DO. I GUESS, FROM A ENFORCEABILITY PERSPECTIVE. BUT THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION. COMMISSIONER DWYER, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO.

>> NO, I JUST REMEMBER THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT RR. IT A LOT OF DISCUSSION. AND SO THIS IS WHAT THE CONSENSUS OF THE GROUP. YOU KNOW WHAT. WE CAME TO AN AGREEMENT FOR SOME OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, DEFINITE REASONS. AND WHAT YOU'RE SEEING, WE WEREN'T THINKING IT WAS

[00:40:02]

THOUGHT PROCESS THERE. >> OKAY. AND JUST FOR STAFF, I GUESS THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE ON RR IS FIVE ACRES. IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMENTS? OKAY. NOT SEEING ANY. I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE BOARD. AND THAT ITEM PASSES FIVE ZERO. BRINGS

[5. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PROJECT MATRIX]

US TO ITEM FIVE A THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MATRIX. >> ALL RIGHT. I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAD ANY UPDATES TO THE MATRIX FOLLOWING OUR LAST MEETING. AND I HAVE NO UPDATES ON COUNCIL ITEMS SINCE OUR PREVIOUS MEETING. SO HAPPY TO CONSIDER ANYTHING YOU ALL MIGHT

WANT TO ADD THOUGH. >> ANY ADDITIONS QUESTIONS FOR THE MATRIX? I DON'T SEE ANY.

THANK YOU. BRINGS US TO CONCLUDING ITEMS. ANY CONCLUDING ITEMS THIS WEEK FROM MEMBERS? I DON'T SEE ANY. THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR YOUR ATTENDANCE AND YOUR HELP MOVING MOVING THINGS FORWARD IN THE TOWN. AND AT 7:00 PM, WE'LL CALL

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.