Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cemetery Udc Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Irving council directs staff to pursue new cemetery permitting standards, debates 25‑acre minimum
Summary
City planning staff recommended permitting new cemeteries under a Generalized Site Plan (SP2) with a recommended 25‑acre minimum to ensure perpetual care; councilors supported moving forward but some argued 25 acres could be a barrier and requested flexibility via variances and tighter site‑plan requirements.
City planning staff on Wednesday presented proposed Unified Development Code (UDC) amendments to create a process for permitting new cemeteries under state law, and the council directed staff to proceed while debating a recommended 25‑acre minimum.
Jocelyn Murphy, director of planning, explained the changes follow a 2023 state law that now permits cities above a population threshold to accept applications for new cemeteries. Murphy said state law generally requires new cemeteries to be perpetual care unless they are under 10 acres or owned and operated by a church, and that staff and industry experts advised a minimum starting size of 25 acres to support long‑term maintenance and endowment requirements.
Murphy summarized proposed standards: minimum lot width (80 feet), setbacks from rights of way and property lines, internal drive dimensions that allow on‑street parking without blocking through traffic, limits on excessive lighting, definitions for burial types and mausoleums, and processing cemeteries as an SP2 generalized site plan that would follow planning and zoning review and the public notification process.
Several council members pushed back on the 25‑acre minimum. One councilmember said available land in Irving makes finding 25 acres unlikely and that the standard could functionally bar modest proposals. Another councilmember noted Oak Grove is about 26 acres but that most local cemeteries are far smaller; staff responded that variances could be requested through the SP process and that the ordinance could require illustrative exhibits or additional submittal materials to give the council more control over site layout.
Council members also discussed whether to use SP2 (the generalized site plan typically used for sites of 2 acres or greater) or require SP1 (a more detailed site plan). Staff said SP2 is customary for larger parcels but the ordinance could require an illustrative exhibit or other detailed submittals so the council can see street layout and drainage plans while preserving some construction flexibility.
By consensus the council directed staff to proceed with the amendments and to return with ordinance language, with several council members requesting explicit flexibility for variances, stronger illustrative exhibits on SP2 submittals, and clearer enforcement language to ensure long‑term maintenance obligations are documented.
What’s next: Staff will draft ordinance language reflecting council feedback, including options to require additional site exhibits on SP2 submissions and to clarify variance procedures, and will present the amendments for formal consideration at a later meeting.
