Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City attorney outlines proposed changes to Shenandoah's Integrated Development Code
Summary
City Attorney Bill presented proposed revisions to Chapters 6 and 7 of Shenandoah’s Integrated Development Code, including aligning variance and appeal language with Texas Local Government Code chapter 211, eliminating an unused development review committee, reducing PDD minimum acreage from 10 to 5 acres, shortening PDD inactivity termination from 5 to 3 years, and revising mixed‑use exterior material rules.
City Attorney Bill gave a detailed briefing on recommended revisions to Chapters 6 and 7 of the Integrated Development Code (IDC) at the April 8 meeting, describing legal changes driven by the Texas Legislature and several local policy recommendations.
Bill said many of the changes are required by Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government Code and affect how variances and appeals are handled. Proposed edits would move some functions to ordinance (for Planning & Zoning membership, vacancies and terms), eliminate the development review committee (section 6.5) because it has never been used, and shift review sequences so Planning & Zoning provides recommendations before matters reach City Council.
Specific local policy changes recommended by Planning & Zoning include lowering the minimum acreage for a planned development district (PDD) from 10 acres to 5 acres and shortening the inactivity termination period for inactive PDDs from five years to three years. Bill also said planning and zoning suggested removing tile from acceptable exterior materials for mixed‑use buildings and considering different material standards for commercial versus residential portions of a mixed‑use project.
Bill noted the legislature has replaced the city's prior variance criteria with five new statutory criteria that make obtaining a variance "a little bit easier," and he walked council through corresponding changes to appeal venues (now including county court at law in addition to district court). He said council will next consider chapters 21–22 and later chapters 22–25, with chapter 5 (parking, vegetation, height requirements) to be revisited afterward.
Council members asked clarifying questions (for example, what constitutes a "special exception" versus a variance) and Bill responded that variances are the most common request and special exceptions concern changes in legal classification of uses; he said the staff will return with refined language as planning and zoning finalizes its recommendations.
