Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Code Updates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission opens hearing on development‑code updates (accessory structures, flags) and continues item for clarification
Summary
The Planning Commission opened a legislative hearing on proposed code changes to accessory‑structure setbacks and flag standards, asked clarifying questions about flag size and free‑speech implications, and voted to continue the item to the commission’s next meeting for revisions.
The Dallas Planning Commission opened a Type‑4 legislative hearing on proposed updates to the city’s development code covering accessory‑structure setbacks and flag standards, then continued the hearing after commissioners sought clarifications, particularly about maximum flag sizes and content‑based restrictions.
Staff said the accessory‑structure change would amend the development standards table (section 2.203) to permit a zero‑foot setback for accessory structures (sheds, carports, etc.) while retaining a 3‑foot setback for accessory dwelling units. "After some review, we have proposed to reduce the setback for accessory structures down to 0, except for accessory dwellings, which remain at 3 feet," Chase told the commission. The change is intended to address frequent unpermitted accessory construction that did not meet existing setback standards.
On flags and banners, staff proposed adding a definition of "flag," allowing flags not exceeding 15 square feet generally, and larger flags for certain nonresidential uses (schools, places of worship) up to 45 square feet. Commissioners raised concerns about an apparent gap in the draft that would allow unrestricted large flags in commercial and industrial zones; Chase and commissioners agreed the language should be clarified to make the size limits and any content‑related distinctions explicit and consistent with free‑speech law.
Commissioners asked whether the proposal removes content‑based regulation of flags and what constitutes commercial advertising versus protected noncommercial speech. Several commissioners suggested staff add explicit size limits for commercial and industrial zones or an exceptions process and fix a suspected copy/paste error in the packet. Given those open questions, the commission voted to continue the legislative hearing to the next regularly scheduled meeting so staff can refine the language and return with a corrected packet.
The hearing was continued to the commission’s next meeting (scheduled for April 10 at 6 p.m.) and the item will return with clarified language on flag sizes, any distinctions between commercial advertising and noncommercial expression, and the accessory‑structure wording. No formal action on the substantive code changes was taken at this meeting.
