Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.
The North Richland Hills City Council convened for a work session at 5:00 PM and a regular meeting at 7:14 PM on October 13, 2025. The work session included discussions on items from the regular meeting, the creation of an Advisory Committee on Senior Affairs, the 2025 Citizen Survey schedule, and updates to short‑term rental ordinances. The regular meeting featured special presentations, public hearings on three special use permits and on proposed short‑term rental regulations, culminating in the adoption of ordinances establishing short‑term rental regulations, zoning amendments, and fee schedules. The Council also approved consent agenda items, contracts, a nomination to the Tarrant County Appraisal District Board, and a settlement agreement in two municipal court cases.
All votes passed 7-0 unless noted.
30 seconds. Thank you. They always have a hard time trying to. I might get with those lousy just when we get to the council. Good evening, and welcome to North Richland Hills City Council work session. It is five o'clock, and I will call the Monday October 13, 2025 City Council work session to order the quorum of the city council is present. The meeting has been duly posted in accordance with Texas Meetings Act of the Texas Government Code. Items listed for a discussion on the work session agenda provide an opportunity for the city council to discuss the items and receive information from the staff. And the city council will not take action on any of the items listed for discussion during the work session. Any members of the public wishing to address the council regarding the items listed in the work session agenda may do so during the public comments portion of the regular session. Moving on to the first item, let's give the council the opportunity to ask any questions. Any do I have any? Yes, Matt. So we have two requests where we're approving or not approving accessory dwelling units. Um are these similar to ones we've done in the past where it's just slightly outside the the what's allowable? Like 12 feet versus 16 feet sidewalls or whatever. Somebody know. Corey. Corey can answer that. There's nothing that's completely out of the ordinary on these cases that I remember. Um be up here to present in the regular meeting. Is that similar to what we've done in the past, which I've uh Corey, um she's I know it seems like she's been here a long time, but she hasn't. But what's fair but um but it's because in the past we we've had several approvals for ones that are are slightly over or just they're bigger than the than the primary dwelling unit. Right. And so that's the question is are these are these uh accessory dwelling units. Is that why we're doing the special use? Is it just because they're just slightly every time an accessory uh accessory dwelling comes before you whatsoever, it's because of an SUP, which is only um applicable in instances where it is exceeding the standards that are outlined in the code, and so um you won't see them unless it is one that is outside of the scope of what's allowed by staff approval um in terms of the the size. Um the I'm trying to think of all the different put components, potentially lot coverage, that sort of thing. Um we have I'm sorry it took me a little bit to get open here. Corey, if that's okay, I'll jump in. Yeah, it's it's the typical case. We've got the size being a little bit bigger than allowed. We've got not having a connection to the existing or the primary structure on the property, and then being further away from the primary structure than is allowed under the ordinance. Perfect. That's good enough for me. Okay, sorry, it's just the accessory dwelling has that attachment component, and so that one specifically had already been converted there. Sorry. I apologize. I've been a little preoccupied with other items in the last week, and so uh Clayton will know all the details here.