Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public hearing spotlights proposed UDC changes on neighborhood meetings and notification radius
Summary
During public hearings, residents and council members debated proposed Unified Development Code edits that would formalize meeting hours and locations and retain a 300‑foot notice radius, prompting calls from residents and a council member for broader district notifications and for retaining council review authority on some planning approvals.
At a May 27 public hearing, residents and council members questioned proposed amendments to the city’s Unified Development Code (UDC) that would modify neighborhood‑meeting requirements and related notice and record‑keeping rules.
Resident Reggie Hill said the city should not reduce opportunities for neighborhood engagement and urged the council to expand notice beyond the 300‑foot radius used for mailed or posted notices. “If there is anything put under this code that is saying we're not gonna meet with individuals in the communities that are gonna be most impacted, that's not only alarming and a red flag,” Hill told the council during the public hearing.
A later resident, James Williams (who asked to be called “JW”), said the 300‑foot notification radius did not adequately inform communities when rezonings affected a broader area. “Just 300 feet. Yes. But that's gonna that when something is rezoned, it's gonna affect more than just 300 feet,” Williams said.
Council members described the proposed UDC edits as clarifying standards for when and where neighborhood meetings must occur. Councilman Woods said the changes require meetings to be held on weekdays between 5 p.m. and 8 p.m., for at least one hour, in a public or institutional building near the proposed site — “not more than a distance of 1 mile from the proposed site,” he read from the proposed language. Woods said the changes would “provide sunlight” and make it easier for neighbors to attend.
Other speakers urged the council to restore certain review powers to the council for planning approvals and to improve signage and mailings when notices are required. Several residents and council members cited past cases where signage or mail notice did not reach nearby residents and urged stricter, clearer outreach standards.
No ordinance vote was taken at the May 27 hearing; the public hearing was opened and closed during the meeting and the council heard multiple comments for the record. Speakers focused on the twin issues of who is notified about zoning or planning actions and what practical steps the city should require of developers to make neighborhood meetings accessible.
