Thread by @StrongerDenton

Inspired by @ncoxbarrett live tweeting of Dallas ZOAC meetings on #parking, we will live tweet Denton's Development Code Review Committee today, where they will discuss primarily #ADUs and #ParkingRequirements. Starts in 10 minutes: dentontx.new.swagit.com/events/8782

And we're off. Before we get to #ADU and #parking, we're talking about the word soup of legally non-conforming homes that are deemed legal, but modifications cannot increase the nonconformity.

Staff: if there is a proposal for an ADU, they would not be able to use existing parking to satisfy the ADU parking requirement, and they would have to do so without removing any existing parking for the home.

Chair Ryan: The concern was if they had to come up to the full code compliance (4 parking spaces per detached home) and add an additional parking space for the ADU, they wouldn't be able to do that.

Staff: :"We had some questions and comments on whether there should be a limit to the number of bedrooms" [in ADUs]

Staff's proposal is to limit ADUs to no more than 1 bedroom on lots smaller than 10,000 square feet

Most ADU applications staff has received are for lots which are less than 10,000 square feet.

Staff, on an example with a loft mezzanine: "In this particular situation, since they are showing two locations for a bed, they would require two additional parking spaces."

Those were examples of additions to existing homes. Now DCRC is looking at applications for new ADU applications along with new home applications on infill lots.

And this is what you get when regulations require five parking spaces while building naturally affordable housing: A paved yard for car storage.

Staff, shen showing this example: "Today, ADUs are allowed on the side of a home." (staff proposals would eliminate that)

That last one is a good example of how limiting where ADUs can be placed can create challenges for site layout and potentially prevent the homeowner from building an ADU.

On lot sizes less than 10,000 square feet, staff is proposing 1 bedroom maximum for an ADU, DCRC is suggesting 2 bedrooms maximum.

DCRC member Davis: "If we're going to say that a bedroom is anywhere we could conceivably plop down a pallet and charge someone rent for it, then I think we should go from 1 bedroom to 2 for the maximum."

Staff will move forward with a 2 bedroom maximum per ADU. Now on to the mired details of 'how much can you change before the development needs to be updated to comply with the code'.

Staff proposal: when modifying a parking lot, if you modify < 10% of the parking spots, no areas must be brought up to code. From 10% and 50%, the entire impact area must be brought into compliance. Greater than 50% and the entire site / lot must be brought into compliance.

One of Staff's examples is a recent renovation / expansion of a local non-profit: Loreto House. Sounds like staff is glad that the modification of the building required redoing the parking lot.

From Loreto House in January: "When that is finished we will begin planting the "Loreto House, National Forest." The City of Denton required a massive amount of trees, shrubs, and grass." Note the pristine roads the city cares for on both sides of this property.

Staff: "Part of the effort here is not necessarily to bring them [smaller parking lots] to conforming, but to enhance what they have."

DCRC member: "Where is the difference between resurfacing or reconstruction?" Staff answer: If changing from gravel to concrete, it would be viewed as a reconstruction.

DCRC member: That's where my heartburn comes from... when you've got someone just trying to resurface their parking lot

Next up: general development provisions: land-disturbing activities, ESAs, Landscaping/buffering, and #parking requirements. The first three are minor changes to improve clarity, which staff has done a very good job of in this code which was last updated in 2019.

Now on to Denton's favorite topic: Tree preservation. Proposal is to clean up the description of when a tree survey and preservation / replacement plan is required and expires if not acted on, but nothing changing in the tree preservation requirements.

Staff is proposing reducing the landscaping requirements for parking structures. It's hard to grow a tree in concrete.

While they talk about fences, I'll return to proposed #ADU restrictions. Staff is proposing that ADUs cannot have separate addresses or mailboxes. No '113A'. How does someone live in an ADU as their primary residence without having a mailing address? Do any other cities do this?

And how do emergency services determine whether to enter the main house or ADU if there is no address?

Still talking about fences. It's amazing how concerned we are with the barriers that separate us from our neighbors and keep us from walking places (perimeter fences, wide roadways, landscaping for privacy).

Staff is proposing requiring perimeter fences to be set back from the roadway right of way or edge of sidewalk by at least 10 feet from major streets and 5 feet from minor streets.

Hopefully this won't result in people driving even faster down our roads. But as we know, it will. I suppose the space between the sidewalk and fence is necessary for people to jump out of the way of cars hoping over the curb and driving toward people?

And on to [what should be] the main event: #ParkingRequirements. It impacts almost every aspect of how your city is built and your lifestyle, you just never thought about it before.

Staff: "Right now in the development code we have both a minimum and maximum parking requirements based on ratio of types of uses." They have freedom from 100% to 125% of the minimum requirement.

Staff: "The question for the committee is should the existing 125% maximum be eliminated, and any spaces above the minimum be in accordance with iSWM standards?"

At the same time though, they are updating (mostly increasing) the required minimums. For instance, staff's proposal is for High Schools will now require 2.5x-3x more spaces than they do in the current 2019 code. This requirement would be more than twice ITE's survey data.

DCRC member: 'I don't see developers wanting to provide any more parking than the minimum.'

...maybe that's because we are requiring more than they know their residents/businesses will use?

Staff: We had some offices - very small offices: 4000-5000 square feet which didn't have enough parking for their employees to park. So raising the parking requirements and removing the 125% limit will help them.

Staff: The way mixed-use works now, it only applies to infill areas. We propose that there is a standard mixed-use incentive where the director can reduce the total parking required by up to 25%

DCRC member who supports the mixed-use option: "Parking at the apartment used to be where every space is full, and now they are half filled lots. We are moving to different modes of transportation"

Staff: The next few slides are related to the minimum parking ratio by use. First up: residential.

Current residential requirements:
SFH detached: 4
ADU: 1 per bedroom
Duplex: 4 per unit (8 per lot)
Triplex: 2 per unit (6 per lot)
Fourplex: 2 per unit (8 per lot)

Proposed residential requirements:
SFH detached: 4
ADU: 1 per bedroom
Duplex: 1 per bedroom
Triplex: 1 per bedroom + 10% 'guest' parking
Fourplex: 1 per bedroom + 10% 'guest' parking

Note many rooms count as a 'bedroom':
Any room other than a living room, family room, dining room, kitchen, bathroom, closets, or utility room, for the purpose of this DDC, shall be considered a bedroom. Dens, studies, etc. with or without closets and similar areas, which may...

...be used as bedrooms shall be counted as bedrooms for the purposes of this DDC.

DCRC member: advocating for 1.25 per bedroom instead of 1.1. Staff proposing a minimum of 2 spaces per unit, with an additional parking space for each additional bedroom.

Staff: Most triplexes and fourplexes in the city are old stock, we haven't seen any new builds.

- Perhaps this is because we require so much parking that nobody can build a triplex or fourplex? (or duplex for that matter)

DCRC member: Recommending a minimum of two parking spaces for a one-bedroom or an efficiency unit (in multiplex). For two bedrooms or more, recommending one space per bedroom.

This would be an increase in 1 spot per bedroom on tri/fourplex units ≥3 bedrooms.

DCRC members: For tri and quadplex, committee recommending addition of one guest parking space per dwelling unit on top of the one space per bedroom.

Under this proposal, a quadplex with four two bedroom units would require 12 parking spaces. 16 spaces if they also had a den/office. Quadplexes are by-right in R6, a 6000 square foot minimum lot size. 12 parking spaces would take roughly 5400 square feet on a 50 foot wide lot.

The front setback would take up 500 square feet. So your fourplex on the minimum lot size in R6 can be built on 100 square feet of land, roughly a 2.5 x 40 foot footprint.

That's all, folks! More code amendment talk next time with DCRC.