Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Committee Roles Sb840 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning and Planning Commission discusses dividing responsibilities, SB 840 effects and committee workload
Summary
Commissioners debated how responsibilities should be divided between the Zoning and Planning Commission and the Planning Commission, discussed staff proposals to add height limits in response to Senate Bill 840, and flagged repeatedly canceled joint-committee meetings and rule-posting delays.
The Austin Zoning and Planning Commission spent part of its Tuesday meeting discussing the division of labor and responsibilities between itself and the Planning Commission, and reviewing the status of several joint committees and working groups.
Vice Chair Betsy Greenberg reported that a codes-and-ordinances joint committee recently met to consider the effect of Senate Bill 840 on downtown zoning. According to the briefing, the bill will effectively eliminate any cap tied only to floor-area ratio (FAR) downtown; staff proposed adding a separate height limit to compensate for the change in FAR rules. Greenberg characterized the staff proposal as an attempt to preserve existing built-form expectations where FAR limits would otherwise no longer constrain building size.
Commissioners also previewed the comprehensive-plan joint committee’s upcoming meeting, which will include officer elections and discussion of initiating Title 25 amendments to modify permitted uses along Imagine Dawson corridors and to modify permitted and conditional uses in residential zones. The comprehensive-plan committee’s next meeting was scheduled for the day after the Zoning and Planning Commission meeting.
Separately, commissioners reported that the small-area-planning joint committee has repeatedly failed to meet quorum and has not met since April. One commissioner said the committee had been canceled three times in a row and suggested staff and commissioners consider abolishing the committee if it continues to consume staff and commissioner time without producing agenda items. The commission also asked staff to either post the updated ZAP rules that had been passed earlier or explain why they had not been posted after state changes to posting requirements that became effective Sept. 1.
There were no formal votes on these items during the meeting; commissioners described the discussion as preparatory and directed staff to follow up on rule postings and committee scheduling.
