Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. [music]

[music]

Heat. Heat. [music] [music]

[music] [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

[music] [music] [music] [music] [music]

Heat. Heat. [music] Yeah. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music]

[music] [music]

Daily [music]

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. It is now 5:30 p.m. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission, our work session of Monday, May 4th, 2026. April, has anyone signed up to speak on any item listed on our work session agenda? No, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you so much. Um, Mr. Commissioner Lightfoot, would you like to give us a report on the planning and development committee meeting of April 16th?

Yeah, we went over the retail center improvement program. They were telling us that, you know, they had uh spent 600,000 approved budget for 2026. They did however change up um it used to be 300,000 is a large grant and they would pay you 1/3 or 30% in 1/3 payments. Now they're paying it all at once instead of doing the one-/ird payments. And they also set up a small grant uh of $150,000 for smaller businesses. Um they were talking about the zero interest loan um for smaller businesses they're able to get. Um the uh Irving Convention Bureau was talking about that and we were discussing the charitable feeding regulations. They're basically going over some of the concerns is the health and safety of the food, the temperature and making sure that the people that are receiving it is not receiving bad food. And so they have to notify now based [clears throat] upon the ordinance, they'll have to notify the health inspectors that they're going to be doing a feeding on Tuesday at this location so they can come out and make sure they got the proper sanitation, etc. And then they went over the impact analysis, professional service contract, hiring a company to come in and uh look at the city and go over everything. So it's pretty eventful meeting.

Thank you. Any questions for Ricky? Okay, [clears throat] Joselyn, do you want to go over the report for the city council meeting decision on decisions on the 16th? I can go through it or you can just take a look at it. I don't know what you prefer to do. Usually, I'll just let me know if you have any questions. Complete detail word by word, please. M I'll do it afterwards until 10 o'clock. [sighs] Okay. First, uh review of the public hearing items. Um any comments on the consent agenda for approval or disapproval? No concerns.

On the consent agenda uh for approval, we have uh just the minutes uh for the April 6th meeting. And on the consent agenda for disapproval, we have one plat uh for uh disapproval, minor plat.

Okay. Thank you very much. Um, moving on to case 2025-213-Z. Haley. All righty. Good evening, commissioners. Haley Rick with planning. So, like Deb was saying, uh, this is zoning case 2025 213 ZC. This is located at 8080 Walton Boulevard. suite 120. Uh the current zoning is a generalized site plan for community commercial and they're wanting to do to go to a detailed site plan uh to do on premise consumption of alcohol after staff review. Recommendation is for approval. Um and there was no uh forms in terms of uh support opposition. This is the aerial feature land use which is business office surrounding zoning. So it's SP2 for CC for the east and west and then north is R40 which is that where a pump station is and to the south is SP1 for IBS which is just restaurants. These are the property owners that were notified and then this is the site plan. They are a new addition. Um they are an existing um Indian restaurant. I think it's in Japan elite. Uh their suite is about 5,500 square ft. In terms of parking, um, according to inspections, they have adequate parking, so no variances are being requested. This is the subject property, their neighbors to the right, and then their uh, the property to the northwest, so Walmart. And I'm open to any comments or questions. Haley, I've got a comment or a question

really for transportation because and it's [snorts] not specifically for this case, but in that same parking lot, there's a development of a I guess it's a retail building that's coming in that's taking up that parking space as well. How are all of those businesses meeting the parking requirements? Question might be in inspections.

Yeah, they're actually reviewed through inspections. So, typically with shopping centers, they keep a spreadsheet of the uses, the square footages, and how many parking spaces are on site. Um, I can only assume that it fits that taking the parking spaces away still provided adequate space for all the uses. I think that that should really be looked at because um

the part, you know, the buildings that were already there, it's a grocery store, it's a PetSmart, it's this new addition and a restaurant was already on one end. And yeah, the restaurant, the new addition has some parking around the corner, but the way that building is being built in the middle of the parking lot, it's taking away the existing parking spaces that was there. We'll have inspections, take a look at the permit.

Thank you. And I'd like to just reiterate that that corner is such a mess with traffic now that if there's I know you have requirements that you have to follow in order to put a street light in there, but I this is just a difficult corner. We have it on our our list that we go through and and do traffic counts every other year. We go through and do warrant analysis. So, it's one that we have on our radar to make sure that if and when that happens, similar to what we did at Olympus and Marketplace, once that that's that intersection met the warrants, we went through and installed the traffic signals. So, we keep an eye on it.

Thank you. Any questions, folks? Okay. Thank [clears throat] cases, I guess. Uh, Gina, do you want to take them together? Comprehensive plan 2026 52 CP and 202651 ZC.

Yes, ma'am. We will do them together. Uh the first one uh is the comprehensive plan amendment. It is located at 4203 West Royal Lane. They are requesting to change the future land use from business office to manufacturing warehouse. The staff recommendation is for denial. Uh we did receive one comment in support and none in opposition. Uh the subject property is outlined in red and this is the aerial. Um I will note that that building is no longer there. You'll see a more recent aerial that shows the current development. This is the surrounding zoning map. Uh just to point out most of the surrounding zoning is ML20A and freeway. The uh notification map and the future land use map. You will see that the area in question is surrounded largely by uh the pink colored land use which is business office. There is uh a small area of um manufacturing warehouse that is located south of Royal Lane and also another area to the west up towards uh the eastern boundary of DFW airport up towards uh the upper left area of the screen. Um just to give a little land use history on this area. Uh prior to 2023, the category uh that covered this uh entire area was called business district. Um, it did also have that light pink color that was recategorized um to the current category called business office due to a trend in this

area that saw a lot of businesses um transitioning from low-rise offices and campus commercial type buildings. Uh actually uh many of which have been demoed and redeveloped with warehouses. uh it's kind of a a mix of uses in that area uh due to its proximity to the airport. Uh staff had actually recommended at the time that it be reconsidered for manufacturing warehouse. Um the council felt strongly that the area remain uh with the business uh office designation for the future land use, but they did want to retain some of the areas to the south of Royal and uh that area to the east of the airport as manufacturing warehouse and that is the current configuration of the land uses that we have today. Um, this is a map that we had made that just gives a little bit more of a color representation to the existing uh, zoning categories in the area. The dark purple and the lighter purples are the ML20s, ML20As, and freeway categories. Uh the very light pinks are office and uh the reds are commercials. Um just to put the freeway and ML2A district side by side, they do off uh allow many of the same uh manufacturing, wholesale, uh distribution, storage, um light manufacturing, um as well as office uses. Uh we also did a demolition permit

status map. Um you can see to the to the east and southeast there have been several sites where um demolition permits have actually been uh issued or final where existing uh low-rise office buildings have been demoed and we actually have plans in or plans underway where they are redeveloping those sites uh for distribution and warehouses. Um the one in green uh just south of 114 is an application that's been received. And so again, this is resting on the on the uh future land use map um because of the trend in this area uh that we have seen for uh redevelopment of the existing office parks with warehousing distribution. Um nevertheless, uh the city council's recent direction has been to retain the office, uh the business office future land use category in this area. Uh and because of that, the staff cannot support the requested change of the future land use plan uh to manufacturing warehouse. We do recommend denial. Um, should the planning and zoning commission uh want to recommend approval, uh, we would suggest a postponement to the August 3rd meeting, uh, this would give the Irving Police and Fire Department's additional time. They have uh suggested that they have uh additional significant questions about how the operation uh will work and how those operations will affect public safety um operations in relation to fire and safety issues. And I am happy to take any questions you have

unless you want me to go into the zoning case first. I got one question. [clears throat] Um, you did say that y'all recommend uh looking at it far as postponing till August 3rd. If you choose not to recommend denial. Okay. So, we're going to move it out 3 months. That'll give them enough time to do what they need. We feel that would give fire and police um adequate time to work with the applicant and hopefully get additional information from them to at least um work through those public safety issues. Okay.

Has the applicant agreed to that kind of postponement or have they said they were opposed to it? I did meet with them briefly um prior to the work session and they seemed amendable to it. they were going to discuss it um amongst themselves um prior to the work session and prior to the public hearing.

I understand that there's a Senate bill that may impact this project that a safety plan would be required by the applicant, but it would not be required until after May. that might assist in answering some of the safety issues and questions. Is that something another reason to wait as opposed to just denying it outright? I I will just say that the decision before you all is a land use determination and the way that the business operates certainly will continue to be evaluated. um and no cos would be issued until all of those matters were addressed. So, you know, staff is recommending denial based on the comp plan. And Gina will get into the zoning case in a minute, but um the decision before you all could be made now or could be postponed. Uh that's ultimately up to you. But as far as the safety plans go, that will have to be worked out before a CO could be issued. It looks like um you would like to have a few moments to speak.

Uh yes, ma'am. If you don't mind. We don't mind. Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate you giving me the opportunity. Um just real quickly, uh my name is Jeff Hogan. I'm acting assistant chief of the fire department. And that had come up that we Yes, we do. We do have some concerns like you mentioned. Um, and I believe you were speaking to Senate Bill 2807, which um that uh requires companies to receive author authorization from the Department of Motor Vehicles um before [clears throat] they're allowed to drive on Texas roads. So, that's um that does go into effect May 28th. And um yes, we we are in in contact and discussion with them. Our concerns from a public safety standpoint are more to do with um safety, both with vehicle operation. Um we're assuming lithium ion batteries. Um but we don't really know anything, you know, uh concrete right now, but if that's the case, there's going to be specific cut points that if we have to disable it, we're going to know about. And we don't yet have the training and education from the companies on this to include also um the building itself and uh the battery storage and what that looks like. Just not a sight safety plan at this point. So that's why we would support the uh the delay. That's all I have.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hogan.

Ju, would you like to proceed with the zoning case? Sure. Thank you.

So in the related zoning case, um they are looking to uh change the zoning from freeway to a detailed site plan for ML2A zoning with the additional use of a facility for the storage, dispatch, service, and repair of an autonomous vehicle fleet. The staff recommendation uh is denial. Uh once again, we did receive one comment letter in support and none in opposition. Again, the uh aerial map, future land use, zoning, uh property owner notification, and the proposed site plan in this particular aerial. Um on the left you can see the current aerial configuration. So this uh property had a two-story office building on the southern portion of the property. It was recently demoed and it was reconstructed with these uh three uh low-rise um office warehouse and distribution buildings. Three of them. The uh applicant for this case is Tesla and they are looking at operating uh this facility within two portions of the site. So the actual site plan will cover the entire lot. However, um the site plan uh designates the two areas where they will operate out of. one is uh within the building suite on this uh lower building on the southeast portion of the site. Um that portion of the building is approximately um 35,000 square ft and it will serve as

their maintenance operation um and related offices. So in that particular area is where they would be maintaining um all of the vehicles. in the parking lot area in the center of the site is that is going to serve as a remote parking area. That will be um where all the vehicles would be parked either in between jobs um so in between dispatch calls possibly um just while they're waiting for maintenance or while they're waiting uh to be charged. This area down here um has parking uh not only for uh the employees of the [snorts] maintenance facility, but it also uh will have approximately 17 EV charging stations. So that's where the vehicles will be able to go to be charged. Um in addition they will have uh 212 spaces will be provided in this uh remote parking area for the autonomous vehicles uh that are awaiting maintenance or in between in between jobs. Um, in the applicant's letter of intent, they say that the operations will primarily include uh interior and exterior uh cleaning as well as minor maintenance and repairs such as software upgrades, tire replacement, replacement of minor parts and uh the operation will be 247 um activities associated with maintenance and repair. Um, all vehicle maintenance will occur within the enclosed building and any service, maintenance and repairs uh anticipated to take more than one day uh will require vehicles to be stored within the building. Any uh the parking area will

not be used for any outdoor vehicle storage. And this is just an area that shows uh or a detail that shows those areas of the building and the parking area enlarged and their project description. And these are site photos. This is looking at uh the subject property from uh the corner of Royal and Horizon. This is the corner of the building where the maintenance facility would be located. And this is looking at uh the center of the site where the the remote parking area would be in this area. And this is the north end of the site. The parking area would be behind this uh dark fence. And this is the building at the north end of the site. This is looking to the southeast and looking east of the property. And again on the site plan and regarding uh the staff's recommendation again uh with the city council's recent direction uh to retain the business office future land use uh because of the staff's inability to support that request. We also are not in support of the related uh zoning request and we recommend denial. Once again, uh if the commission uh feels inclined to support uh the request, we would recommend a postponement uh again until August 3rd, which would uh allow the police and fire departments to have additional time to work with the applicant uh to address public safety concerns about the

operations of uh the potential client. And I'm happy to take any other questions you have. So I have a question related to um postponement and um considerations for this proposed use. So I so I've read some literature that this is it strikes me as similar to data centers in that this I don't I don't think this is going to be the last time we see this kind of proposal. And while coming up with criteria may not be directly relevant to this case, it's an opportunity to consider um creating uh something like what we what the city's done with data centers, whether that be being mindful of being away from residential areas or traffic impacts because what I've read is that these can sometimes lead to just uh these autonomous vehicles driving around neighborhoods. you know, while they wait for service or noise levels uh that are, you know, things like that that just we haven't seen before. Um, and so I and I don't know if a conditional use permit type of um proposal would be appropriate, but I think this would be an opportunity for the Well, I don't I guess one question I have is I don't know if the city has looked into this or is considering um taking an approach similar to data centers where there there would we would create a certain designation or an approach to these kinds of proposals. But I would think that that would be one reason to um postpone it or or or at least this is an opportunity to consider that.

Well, I I should have mentioned actually at the beginning um that this is a very new technology and it is a use that we have uh absolutely nothing in our code that addresses it. which is why we when we have a situation like this we do choose the SP the site plan zoning uh that allows us a little bit more control. Um it is also so new that many other cities don't have regulations yet and they are also using things like site plans and uh so we do hope to do a little bit more research because we know as with data centers these are probably going to become uh much more common and much more popular and we would like to research these more intensely and hopefully find uh a more um concrete uh way to address these in our code. And from a zoning perspective, we can only look at what they're doing at the site. So for for this one it's outside storage that that's why we went through this zoning process and looked at it differently from you know different typical mo manufacturing or distribution that are more inside of building. Um so this in a very black and white um position this is outside storage but the state is pretty clear about not being able to regulate anything once it gets off this site. So from a zoning perspective like data centers, we can regulate everything on the property, you know, that the noise and the landscaping and all that, no question. But it's when you get onto the public streets, it's when they're operating as a vehicle that we are essentially preempted by the state. So yes, we we could if there are things that we need to regulate that

would make the property and where the the cars are being stored operate better, that is something that we could do through from a zoning perspective. But we couldn't regulate how they circulate or anything from that perspective. Hey Jocelyn, these are used widely in San Francisco. Has there been any research in those areas on how they're storing those vehicles, what the kind of footprint they have for these vehicles? We've actually Gina's because she's been working on this case for several months and every now and then we'll see an article or a news thing where you know you see it just beeping and backing up and and um so that that is

Right. Right. And and that is just part of the operation of it. I mean we we we can't say you can't back up and you can't quue. I mean that's just you know it's just a question that we would have for the owner or the the operator on you know how if that's going to be a problem. Um, I know some of the ones in San Francisco and some of the others are in more residential areas. So, you know, if you're next to a multif family or something and you're beeping at two o'clock in the morning, you know, for several hours, that's going to be a problem versus whether you're an industrial area, you shouldn't be bothering anybody. Um, so yeah, I mean, it maybe there's software issues that could fix that. I that's more of a a functionality. Yeah, I'm just thinking from a footprint and how they operate here from a planning and zoning perspective. They figured it out there. I know the the way that the footprint there is laid out is a lot different, but they've at least figured it out to where these autonomous vehicles are operating without any issues other than

it's not necessarily other than they get stuck [laughter] going in circles. Um if uh if this plan ultimately is denied uh how long do they have to wait before they would submit a new application? 6 months. Okay. So that would give them enough time to work out some of these things too potentially. That would be another route in terms of working with police and fire and seeing if they could come with a proposal that had worked out some of those concerns.

Yeah. Well, just to be more to the point, I I would be whatever the process is for putting something on the agenda or raising it to the attention of others that would be on board, I I think this would be an appropriate opportunity to study and propose uh restrictions for um this kind of use. I mean, just as an example, uh, a certain number of feet away from certain residential areas, I think would be a reasonable, uh, proposal, and I'm sure there's studies out there that would support those kinds of restrictions. Um, so I that's my the concern I raised with this one. If I may, um, the state has very explicitly preempted cities almost entirely on this issue as far as it concerns regulating the autonomous vehicles themselves. Um, to Commissioner Denny's point, um, from a land use perspective similar to this, because we don't have it as an identified use, anytime something like this would be coming forward would be coming to you for a approval of this nature. So you would be able to evaluate um the location of it and um from there make that decision. But um we are incredibly limited in some of the other things we are able to regulate. Um I know that some of the battery storage and and some of those issues are a concern for fire. Um we do have they have recently adopted a whole bunch of new standards um local amendments to the fire code. all of which will have to be adhered to um regardless. Um you may recall another Tesla facility recently and that was certainly the case there as well. So just a note that yes from the land use perspective you know the distance separation and and

essentially here making sure it's in an appropriate location staff has determined manufacturing warehouse is a compatible use similar to this. So um that is how you would be regulating you know kind of at at this stage of it. So just to clarify that we are incredibly limited on the regulation of the operation itself. So on the comprehensive plan, you're recommending denial and it was didn't you say that city council wanted the land use to continue to be business office here, not manufacturing warehouse?

Correct. And then the zoning case, if you don't make the change to manufacturing warehouse, then the zoning case is is okay. Thanks. Any other questions, folks? Will the applicant be here tonight? Yes.

Okay. Well, my thought process on this is that listen to everything that uh I would support an indefinite postponement or if they want to go to August or whatnot. There's a lot of unanswered questions here. A lot of a lot of things we don't have the answers to at this point. About two years ago, I did extensive research because of the building I lived in and EVs and whatnot. There's a lot of questions that still aren't answered and they are a hazard. Not only the cars, but even the motor, the electric bikes, their batteries are a hazard. But besides that, I think we I think for the city council and for us both, we need a lot more questions answered. So, I I personally would would support an indefinite postponement. Chief Hogan, the you all will continue to research this topic

regardless of whether this is goes forward or not. So, you're going to continue to research it. And [clears throat] we've done quite a bit already. This is I think specific to this case. Yeah. Just exactly what it is they're bringing and how we're going to respond to it. We just don't know right now. But yeah, we'll continue to look into it. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Okay, moving on to zoning case 2026-57-Z. Dylan, is that you? Yes, but this case has been uh withdrawn and no action is required.

We'll do a public hearing in case um anyone shows up tonight. Okay. So, moving on Abraham to the Heritage Crossing District, the both the CP and the zoning case. If you'd like to talk to them, take them together.

Good evening everyone. Abraham Sera with the planning department. Yes. Uh we have a son case uh comprehensive plan case as well, but they were postponed to June 1st. However, I don't know if you would like me to go through the presentation. I don't know if we have anything to preserve. Yes, we do. But um we can just continue the conversation next uh commissioner. Let's wait since we have another couple [snorts] of longer presentations from you. Yes. Thank you.

Thank you. So, we're going to postpone uh [snorts] we'll make a postponement motion in our public hearing for comp comprehensive plan 2026-112 CP and the zoning case 202658ZC. Um so, the next one is for Dylan 2026-82-ZC. It's postponed to first. Okay. Yes, I'm aware it's postponed, but don't you want to hear or no? I mean, we've always we've always actually listen to them during work sessions, so I'm giving you the option. I was just,

hi. Yes, this is zoning case 2026 82Z located at 4149 North Belt Line. Uh, going from CN and State Highway 161 overlay to SP1 for CN and State Highway. It's staff recommendation is for postponement due to a publication error uh to June 1st and I I'm happy to go through it if needed. It's it's fine with me. We'll wait.

Thank you, Dylan. Y'all have changed course because we usually listen to them during work session and then get the repeat later. So, um Jocelyn, uh the next agenda item, short-term rentals by conditional use permit. All right. So, this is um just the zoning piece of something that council has been working on for several months or years if you want to look at that way. Um I want to to recognize that Shane Diller, our code director, is here today. um if you have any questions about what his part is, which is most of it. Um I'm just kind of doing a zoning piece, but I wanted to make sure he was here in case you had any questions. They're not particularly in your jurisdiction, but it's just good to know the context of it. So, in January, um the city council asked um mainly uh Shane when he was doing one of his many presentations to look into regulating short-term rentals um by conditional use permit. So again, this is the zoning part of that bigger package on regulating short-term rentals. Um, currently short-term rentals are allowed by right in resident res residential districts and single family homes as long as they register with the city. Um, that is again something that Shane's been working on for years. He started a registration um where they require um just knowledge about who is operating um you know just how where the how where the parking is going to be just various uh types of requirements again Shane can give you more information um and they are he's actually working on some updates to add requirements such as insurance and um some other expectations of that registration process. Um the city does receive occasional complaints about the operations of short-term rentals. Um and again the staff um had the city council

adopt the registration in 22 and then as did some updates just recently in 25 and he's also updating u preparing some more updates right now. So for our part, we would just be doing the amendments to require conditional use permit for all future short-term rentals in most of the residential districts. And when the reason I put most is be single family um the like zero lot line uh you know one um but one units, two units, three units um but anything above four units would be multif family and so it would be allowed by right in multif family. uh that's actually where they see a lot of the short-term rentals are in the multif family complexes and um sometimes from what I understand if they can't lease out the units for long-term residency then they lease them out for short-term. So that apparently is a pretty popular thing for some of the multif family operators to do currently. Um but this regulation would not apply in the multif family structures just in those single in twos and threes. Um, so we would amend the non-residential use chart and all the individual districts to um also allow the districts by right and the CN and the CC commercial districts. So they essentially operate as small uh hotels and so we don't see any reason they couldn't be in some of the um commercial districts. And we'd also add the definition of short-term rental which would be consistent with what is already in chapter 8 in the code. Um, so the existing short-term rentals um that are in place after this is adopted would be considered legal non-conforming uses as long as they were legal at the time. So sometimes people will say, "Well, my grandfather bought it in 1952." I was like, "Yeah, but was it legal in 1952?" Um, so as long as a use was legal at the time, as long as that short-term rental was registered and everything about it was legal the

day of the uh effective date of this ordinance, then it could remain as long as it stays legal. stays legal means that they have to uh make sure they're in compliance with all the requirements and they have their registration current. Um any short-term rentals that begin after the effective date of the ordinance um or cease operations or otherwise lose their legal status s such as um have to you know they get it revoked for some reason because of non-comp non-compliance. um they would have to go through the conditional use permit um process to operate um because this is a use that is allowed by right today. Again, in a single family home, you can have a short-term rental as long as you are registered. Um adding the conditional use permit and the zoning requirement does make any existing short-term rentals legal non-conforming. So, this triggers our wonderful new zoning uh notification requirement that the state gave us a couple years ago. So, we will be sending notices to about 52,000 single family home. So, every single family home and anything that's not a multif family home will be getting a postcard. Uh we also just like we've done with some of the other recent amendments, we have a website. So, there'll be a QR code on the postcard. They can go to the website and get some more information. Um, so we will be working on that in early June. I think we're aiming for about June 8th to get those postcards out. So all of y'all in your single family home be getting a postcard. Um, and yeah, so we got it the web page. So here we are today just letting you know what the request is from city council. Um, the short-term rental by conditioning use permit is something we're working on be mailing out in June. And this is scheduled to come to the city council, I'm sorry, to the planning and zoning commission on July 6th into the city council on July 30th for your consideration.

Be happy to answer any questions. Again, Shane is here if you have any questions about the registration or any of the specifics that he's working on. So, if the property sell it's it's a legal non-conforming use and then the property sells, is that short-term rental legal non-conforming use taken away? I believe with the registration they would have to they'd have to reregister. So, that would make it that would trigger the conditional use permit. I believe that's the intention.

Great. Thanks. Now, this wouldn't necessarily affect [clears throat] any of our forplexes, correct? The multif family is considered four and above in Irving. And so, if it's four, then it would be considered multif family would be allowed. Anything less than four would be considered in that lower level of residential that would require conditioning permit. What prompted this kind of action?

Do you want to [laughter] [snorts] just a lot of years of of phone calls and concerns from the city council?

You're the specialist.

Absolutely. Good evening, Commissioner. Shane Diller here, code enforcement director. The uh when the city adopted the current ordinance in 2022, it was registration only. So, there were no real operating standards. They just had to notify us that they were operating short-term rental and how to contact the owner or host in the event of an emergency. And over time, as the city council has continued to hear concerns from residents about short-term rentals, we have added uh different operating standards and further restrictions to the ordinance. Uh in 2025, we added some significant uh additional requirements about operation limitations, and the council continues to hear concerns about the short-term rentals. So, we're looking at uh what else is commonly done in this space to regulate short-term rentals. And we have an ordinance uh we have several ordinances running in tandem to adopt additional uh operation standards and restrictions on the short-term rentals across the board, including an inspections requirement and then regulating them uh by uh by land use through this cup process in order to make sure that we've got as strict a regulation as possible on the short-term rentals that are operating.

[clears throat] Now, about how many short-term rentals are in Irving that you may know of?

We contract with a company called Lodging Revs to track uh the internet for uh short-term rental ads. And it's it's a it's a little complicated to identify those that are not in single family homes because of the algorithms and photos and and internet information they use. So, we know right now we have 190 registered short-term rentals in single family homes in Irving. And then we've got a handful registered in apartments, but we have uh anywhere anywhere above probably 75 to 150 more of those that number waffles back and forth depending on what lodging res is finding that are possibly operating in uh in apartments right now. So, we're estimating once we in increase our enforcement and investigative efforts next year, we could identify as many as 340 operating in Irving right now.

And how many complaints have you had out of those percentage- wise when comparing it to just a regular long-term lease or actually just a residential home?

I I don't have real firm stats in regards to the percentages. I can tell you that the police department uh keeps track of calls for service at short-term rentals and the code enforcement department of course we track our own numbers there. Uh we've got a a decent amount uh without getting uh without having numbers specifically in front of me. We have a decent amount of calls for service of complaints at short-term rentals. I can tell you that many of those are at repeat customers, if you will, that not all short-term rentals are receiving calls for service. And uh in code enforcement ourselves, we've only had to get to the point to where we we've revoked one registration uh so far from for a short-term rental that was violating city ordinances. So, I I would not say that it's um it's an overwhelming amount as far as the uh the workload we've seen so far. It's a steady drum beat of complaints and concerns uh both at us and at the police department regarding uh noise and parking. I came into uh uh two or three complaints uh from over the weekend at short-term rentals uh for example, but I don't have specific numbers in front of me uh here at presentations we're pres preparing to present and we can bring these numbers back as we get ordinances uh before you. We can talk more in more detail about that landscape and sort of what we're seeing complaintwise uh what we're seeing enforcement wise from both the police department and code enforcement on the short-term rentals. What are you what are your plans with FIFA coming? Because I I [laughter]

I suspect people are gonna that's not registered going to be.

We have seen an increase in registered short-term rentals. Uh uh 3 months ago we had 100 just under 170 short-term rentals and that number went up to uh just above 190 as of now. And that's the largest single increase we've seen in that period of time in short-term rentals since we've been operating the registration in 22. Uh we do have planned patrols. So code enforcement is going to put our evening and weekend officers out uh on the nights where we know that there are matches occurring where people may be in town so that we can proactively check the short-term rentals that we know of that are registered and then be available to assist PD should they get a call to a short-term rental that is having a party, let's say, or there's disturbances so that we can document what we need to document in order to take action against the registration while the police department deals with uh uh their end of the call. Does this ordinance address pad splits and people that are um running private hotels per se in our city? That's the biggest complaint that I'm I'm hearing about, not necessarily the STRs. The people

and that's the Yeah, that's the the rub there. So, if the the short-term rentals uh definition is any property that rents for less than 30 days. So, we have other uh definitions in our code and we're exploring the uh use and enforcement of some of those to where properties that are are work that are renting longer than 30 days that are not falling under this may be falling under one of our other definitions that's either uh prohibited or provisional in the uh in the residential area. And we're pursuing those properties with some of those ordinances right now. Matter of fact, there will be a presentation at the council meeting on Thursday about the nonsr uh properties that we're currently investigating.

Yeah. The the concern I'm hearing is people are renting rooms for $40, $50, you know, putting double bunk beds or triple bunk beds in their house and yes, you know, and stuff like that. And that's what I'm hearing back from the residents. So I I just want to make sure if we're utilizing an ordinance, we're also including the pad splits and stuff like that because yes, that that's where a lot of the problems coming in that

Yeah, we have a specific strategy that we're pursuing right now related to those that are that are longer than the 30 days that don't fall under this uh dealing with rooming houses. Uh the code uh calls them in our our current UDC definitions. and we're going to talk to the uh the council at work session on Thursday about the investigations we have open for those, what our enforcement strategies uh can and can't be, and some of the challenges that we face in regards to uh documenting the violation and enforcing those uh those zoning standards. So, we do have a it that's not directly addressed in any of these short-term rentals because of the time limits involved. Uh but we do have a parallel uh enforcement process that we've begun there.

So what are we doing on the ordinance when we have someone who necessarily does not register and is doing these $40 and $50 a night rooms or beds or whatever they decide to basically running a hostile. Um what are we able to do as a city from your standpoint? What do we have in effect that we could utilize

if we use our if we use our current zoning standards related to rooming houses and because we've got a we've got a boarding uh boarding house, boarding home, rooming house, uh several definitions in our code and the enforcement of those depending on the rental situation and how they're operating. We're in we're we're we're enforcing the uh the definition and the restrictions that land on what we find. So, if we find a property where they're renting out individual rooms and they're longer than 30 days, so they're not a short-term rental, then we're looking at the zoning code definition that meets that and enforcing to that current standard. Uh that's not to say that there's not some cleanup maybe that is needed in our definitions. uh the overlapping of boarding house and rooming house and these are all things that are uh antiquated terms and you know the code itself doesn't talk about pad splits. It doesn't take into account the internet exists even because of when it was adopted. So there's language that talks about you know when you do this and you serve meals as though we're running a traditional bed and breakfast where somebody's staying and somebody's cooking them breakfast. Th those things are not what we see in the market anymore. So, there's some work that needs to be done, I think, in regards to uh cleanup there. But, we've got these definitions in the in the ordinance now. And as we identify that it's occurring, we're pursuing enforcement to our current standards where like for instance, in the rooming house, rooming houses, if we identify them as they're in the code now, are prohibited in the residential zone and we would enforce against those. Shane, how long are we recommending the CUP be issued for?

Uh, we we don't have a uh timeline time limit specifically adopted or recommended at this point. Do you think we should or why wouldn't we? I'll turn that over to my planning [laughter] expert. Why wouldn't why wouldn't we? Code enforcement is happy to enforce whatever standard they land on. Uh but yeah, that's my political answer. But uh I'm not sure if we've batted that around yet. That's I think might still be in the works.

By default, the conditional use permit is indefinite. So if if PNZ chooses to set a policy, if council chooses to set a policy of each of them are two years or three years, then that is, you know, and and we we can recommend a date. We just don't know. And we'll work with code, too. you know, maybe it is two years to see kind of give them a trial run and make sure they operate their STRs appropriately and then maybe they come back and you give them three years or five years. But that'll just be kind of a policy decision um from PNC and council as we move forward with a conditional use permit by for the STRs. Yeah, I was thinking six months. [laughter] Oh, I've never seen one that short.

They'd barely be out of the cycle before they'd get there. I I understand, but they certainly have been um pro if they're problematic, they're problematic from day one. I think there's a small set that's problematic, but this will help know where they are for sure. Yeah. My question is to Shane. Are we going to set up a special I guess group of people within code enforcement that's going to be working these STRs and split pad situations and stuff like that to make sure that we're dedicating enforcement to that or is this going to be just incorporated in their daily duties?

No, right now uh STR enforcement is an other duty as assigned to the multif family housing team. So, as we get complaints or as uh as we find properties that are not registered, that team currently uh takes on enforcement. We're right now doing budget analysis and we're in the middle of the city's budget process and uh we're looking at what it would take to add dedicated staff. Uh how much of that staff we needed, what the fee would need to be to recover those costs. We're in the middle of analyzing all of that right now. And as we go through those discussions with the finance team, the city management team, and then ultimately the council, uh we're going to have some recommendations there in regards to what we think the best practices would be to be as effective as we can be and uh and yet make it uh as cost neutral as it could be. Similarly, are we looking at a policy for auto rentals since that is also another rub for people who don't want that in their neighborhood?

Yes, we some of the uh some of the code cleanup that we did in 2023 and 2024 helped us significantly in regards to uh those those auto rentals and the new uh marketed the internet based market if you will for uh for renting vehicles. So since we have had that ordinance in place, we've been able to close a couple of those operations and we've not had any we don't have any on our radar right now that are operating in a problematic way. So we feel like that that was a a great win that uh uh that we got in the zoning code uh back in late 23 early 24. And just to clarify, this short-term root ordinance, we're not going after people who are leasing houses out for single families and stuff like that.

No, none none of this none of what I'm talking about touches the traditional rental space. If you're renting a if it's a traditional home rental situation where families rented a home, uh we have nothing in our language that would uh require registration or license for that or inspection for that or any of that sort of thing. We would just deal with those properties as we do now through our regular code enforcement processes when they come up.

Um, are there any concerns with maybe the legality with the restrictions that may be imposed?

Well, there's always concerns. You know, we work closely with the city attorney's office to make sure that as we're looking at uh the regulations that we're considering for adoption or considering imposing that it's legal. We have lot with the preeemption bills that the state has passed in the past few years with case law that's come out regarding private property rights. There's always concerns that want to make sure that we don't overreach and that we land on something that we think is both effective but also legal from a a regulatory standpoint of the state and from a case law standpoint. So yes, that's certainly a concern and we stay locked at the hip as we develop these uh ordinances with the city attorney's office to make sure that we land in the right spot with those. Um, recently I was in a meeting last week in Austin. This was a big topic about it and um Idaho just passed a a law actually where it's banning cities and and counties from proposing any kind of ban on Airbnbs.

Sure. But that was a big talk in Austin last week.

Yeah. We we we watched this next uh next session in the legislature closely. Uh, in the last legislative session, they adopted a number of ordinances that regulate and restrict our ability to deal with homebased businesses. And one of the things they did, which I think is a little telling, is that they specifically carved out short-term rentals from that from that uh preeemption. So, they said you can't do any of this related to home businesses in these ways, unless it's a short-term rental, in which case go ahead and regulate it. So, uh we get a little mixed message sometime out of Austin in regards to what they're wanting to do there. And at least the data we were provided is that it's less than 1% of complaints on Airbnbs. So it's like a loud minority. And that's what you probably hear on the news about running I don't know criminal activity or trash and and parking. But when you compare all the data on residential it's just about less than 1%. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thanks very much, Shane. Any other questions, folks? Okay, Abraham, back to you for the North Nursery Corridor neighborhood plan.

Yes, thank you, Abraham Sura with the plan department. And yes, back in February, I had the opportunity to present the final draft of the nurse nursery corridor neighborhood plan. Then in March, I was able to submit a report that was created based on the question that we had during the presentation. Uh with those questions, uh one of them was was the let me go this is not a PowerPoint so let me bear with me guys. So the purpose of this report again is to uh answer the question that you had during the presentation. One of the question was what this actual map is and the future of the uh future land use changes with the uh comprehensive plan was just a planning tool. It shows what the community would like to go and see in the future. Uh nothing changes on the property unless property owners come forward and request it through the normal zoning process. So again, this is just a a comprehensive plan amendment and that process is not triggered by any zoning process is not triggered by this map. With that, the second question was about the community, excuse [clears throat] me, the planning process, the community engagement. Um, and the question was whether we actually reached to all the people, most of the people within the neighborhood. And that is a fair question. uh this is a corridor that is about 80% Hispanic or Latino and we know that participation in planning process in those areas are historically low. So that's why the uh planning department at the time uh did a couple couple of activities to make sure that we reach out as many people as possible. We mailed 3,900 postcards to property owners and occupants. We received 139 survey responses. We held 10 stakeholder meetings over uh roughly nine months. We

visited 24 business directly in person and we held a final public meeting with about 60 residents in English and Spanish. We also worked with Irving ISD. We attended two, I believe two, uh, meetings within the schools when uh, staff had the opportunity to talk to parents and students and we also partnered with the Urban Hispanic Chamber of Commerce to reach out people where um, they are. We uh, had an activity with Amishana when we were able to had the opportunity to ask questions about they what they would like to see in the area and to establish community priorities. With that survey, we also had a summary of the 12 recommendations regarding the future land use changes. Um all of them in in one table where we specify the location and the proposed designation. And for section four, we go into detail for every single uh session or I'm sorry for every uh proposal. And we also have a future land use maps where we labeled all the recommendations uh established by that community. Um I just want to bring the opportunity to continue the discussion that we had in February and see uh if you guys have any other questions or recommendations about this neighborhood plan. Abraham, I think the last time we met, it was before you were having I think the last community meeting. So, what was the community's feedback? Uh actually the last community meeting we had was uh the final meeting uh back in it was last year when we had the opportunity to meet with the table and

they had an event and we took the opportunity to talk as many people as possible and we got a a count of around 60 people. So I don't recall that I was having a community meeting based on this neighborhood plan. Okay. I I thought it was a mistake. Oh, I'm sorry. Maybe I'm I'm confusing with the actual meeting that we had with the stakeholders. We have we have met with a No, sorry. That is heritage. Never mind. Sorry. I'm working on two projects. No, so I apologize. Maybe I was thinking heritage

probably. Yes. [laughter] Uh, I mean I as I think I mentioned last time and and you just went back over it. I mean, y'all did a lot of work to try and connect with a lot of people and uh the by and large I mean the recommendations seemed like they made sense to me. Um, and I'm not surprised that that the people you talked to and you were able to who responded to your your your efforts um generally were were supportive. I seem to recall that you had more more people participating from the northern end of this this area than from the southern. And and one of the ones that that sort of caught my attention was that that area along Pioneer. And and really it mostly caught my attention because we'd had a couple of cases come before us on planning and zoning and the people in the neighborhood had come out against kind of what you're recommending. um that the changing that to to commercial there along Pioneer and so that that concerned me. You know, for whatever reason, those people didn't respond to the to the postcards, which is unfortunate. Um but they did come here uh on on more than one occasion and say that they don't want that area converted from being residential to to uh to any sort of commercial. So that that seems to me that maybe that's not a good idea. I mean, I understand why you're recommending it. Like it it in theory makes sense. Um, and when those cases came, I I initially was kind of ambivalent about which way to go, but there seemed to be a lot of people in the neighborhood who very strongly want to retain the residential aspect of of the neighborhoods they live in, which I can understand. Well, once if this uh plan gets approved, hopefully other people who didn't have the chance to talk to us while we have the planning

process for this neighborhood uh will come and speak uh regarding if anything I mean if there's some boring opposition, new ideas. This is just a planning tool where we hope that it could be revised as well as long as you know we hear from the community and see what the demands is uh basically want. So it's it's it's just it's just a tool based on what we heard and we welcome the opportunity to reconnect with the community and see what we would like to see in the future as well. No

and I and I understand that but like when we have it come before us on in terms of some of these changes, one of the things we're looking at is to what extent the proposal is in keeping with a comprehensive plan. And so if it is in keeping with a comprehensive plan, certainly I tend to assume that sounds like probably a pretty reasonable zoning change to make. And so if you know a property owner along pioneer here you know there came and said they want to change one of those residential lots into a commercial lot and the comprehensive plan already said it should be commercial then my sort of first sense of it would be that that we should grant you know we should recommend that that change that they've requested. Um it was in part, you know, one of part of my decision certainly when those neighbors, the the other people who lived in that neighborhood opposed it, one of the things they were able to point to and one of the things that I think that we considered was that the comprehensive plan said to rem keep that residential. So I I I don't think it's a good idea to change that. I think it would be better to leave that portion as residential uh in the way that it has been, in the way that that the people we've heard from in that neighborhood have requested that it stay. Now Abraham, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is sort of a idea sort of an overlay, a voluntary type deal, not necessarily a city enforced. That that's correct. We're not enforcing anybody to do to do any type of changes what is exist currently that keep keep using the uh the existing zone or or use

doesn't it modify the comprehensive plan. Uh maybe maybe I'm misunderstanding that because that would be important. No, it yeah it does modify the comprehensive plan. It does. It's suggestive though, right? Well, if it's modifying but but if it's modifying it's it's actually changing the comprehensive plan. [clears throat] Okay. So then that when a case comes before us for one of those properties on Pioneer, we would get in our staff report comprehensive plan says this should be commercial and the person making the proposal is asking to change it to commercial. And so we we'd be saying, well, looks looks like they're asking to change it to what the city council wants. Yeah.

That's that's what concerns me.

Yeah. My understanding is some of the meetings and stuff like that. And correct me if I'm wrong, Abraham, but this was just something that the neighborhood got together, looked at, and said, "This would be good to be in this area or this would be good to be in that area, but it wasn't something that the city was necessarily enforcing." It was something that was sort of a voluntary, hey, this is what we would like to see type deal. Well, part of it, y'all know this area well. Of course, you got Owens Corning to the south. So, from a planning perspective, having some type of more gentle non-residential buffer to the the residential to the north just objectively seems to make sense to us. Uh we hear all the time, and I'm sure it happens on a daily basis of trucks, you know, large trucks just sitting in the street either coming or going, uh which is not conducive to a single family property. So we see this as kind of a transitional area and and yes when we had the meetings with the neighborhood they acknowledge acknowledged Owens Corning and the problems and and that this might be a way to help mitigate some of that. Um but it is a plan is always a guideline. Um, you know, if what sometimes happens is if y'all see it all the time that if somebody wants to build or rebuild a house and they need to reszone and then the future land use is different. Now they have a comp plan case and a zoning case. Um, so that's just that was our thought here is is the local commercial which would be the neighborhood commercial zoning would not be inappropriate. Um and then you know if somebody uh wanted to build a house the underlying zoning is still there. You know this this is just kind of the first what do we think would be most appropriate there. What do we think would be um the the you know the the best use. Um reszoning is the whole legal process

notifications that's not what this is. But this is not giving them a by right that this is what it is and this is what I want.

No this does not change that. That's the whole zoning process that y'all see all the time. So, this is just the first, you know, larger picture of what is appropriate here from a compatibility perspective. You know, again, we talk about the trucks and everything. Um, but that that's why we proposed it. That's why the neighborhood proposed it is because of Owens Corning. If Owens Corning could move somewhere else, that would be awesome. But that's not the reality where we are. I think you mentioned that um that neighborhood commercial that you're talking about be like a small printing office or you know it wouldn't be a heavy commercial use

right these these sites are pretty small maybe quarter half acre something like that um you know and then there are adjacency protections fencing and landscaping and setbacks when you're near residential uh with the intention of understanding ing that there is that residential commercial boundary that we have to respect. Um but but yeah, nothing too big can go here unless people assemble but even the the configuration of the lots is very regular. So there it'd be difficult for anybody to assemble for something larger here. So that's what we would see. Um you know even you can't do a contractor's office and local commercial. So, it it's intended to be, you know, hopefully CPA offices or um like the the coffee office we just had that got uh withdrawn. That was their intention is they just had kind of a a their office space, a gathering area um and you know, just some of the more gentle uses. That's the intention of a local commercial. So, are you looking for us to um make a motion to present this to city council?

Not tonight. So, this is just to this is not on your agenda for consideration. So, we we will never bring anything to you and then ask for you to act on it that night. Um so, uh and we never assume that y'all are ready to go. So, if if we get direction from you tonight, then you will see it on your June agenda. Um and then council would see it on the next meeting after that.

Just a a quick question. Uh with the exception of the the change to the single family residential along Pioneer that that we've already discussed, I tried to go through the different proposed changes. I just was wondering if you could confirm are there any other areas where a single family residential is being changed to another use on the plan? Uh there there were some areas for example I believe the Mishakana some some corrections to change it to a local commercial. I believe right now is traditional neighborhood [clears throat] but the existing use was already commercial there right? Yeah.

Let me see. Not that I'm aware of. I if Justin can correct that, but I don't think there is any existing single family. Uh as a matter of fact, uh there are areas that are identified existing use as traditional or single family that the community wants to protect. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Abraham. Sure.

Very detailed. It's really amazing how much you can pull into a ch a graphic and a chart. Really summarizes a lot of thought and conversation. Thank you. Sure. If I may, get ready for heritage. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, next item is future agenda items. I'd like to remind everybody that we have a me a Monday, May 18th for one of our education meetings. That's at 6 PM. We have two topics. One will be the city's fiscal analysis project, which is one of Joselyn's um favorite topics. And then we also will uh go through our annual proposed future land use updates. Um, and then the next one after that would be probably around August 17th, but we'll confirm that for you. Um, and then I think that's Tanner with a Is that Tanner with a short haircut or No, that's not Tanner. Okay.

Is he coming? We haven't We have We do have a new um planning. Yeah, he'll be officially the planner on May 24th. He won't start until June 1st because he's going to Europe for three weeks. Okay. So, our intern became a full-time city employee. Yes. He was in perfect timing. He'll be He's already a great part of our team, so we're looking forward to having him.

Good. [snorts] Congratulations on that. Um, any other questions or comments tonight? All right. The We are adjourned at 6:46 for the work session. We'll see you all in the public hearing room. Hey, hey, [music] hey. [music]

[music]