Planning and zoning commission.

Today is Wednesday, September 10th, 2025.

I am Chair Brian McCown and I call this meeting to order at 2 30 p.m.

and announce that a quorum is present.

Commissioners are joined today by Director of Public Works, Matt Leppla and City Secretary Andrew McDonald.

Before we begin working through today's agenda, I would like to remind applicants and interested parties that cases considered by this commission today will also be considered by City Council.

City Council agendas are posted at City Hall at least 72 hours prior to meetings.

And city council agendas can also be found on the City of Weatherford website at Weatherford TX.gov slash meetings.

Okay, we'll start with item 2A, consider approval of the minutes of the planning and zoning commission meeting held August 13th, 2025.

See we have a motion by Mr.

Hinton and a second by Miss Hayes.

And the motion passes unanimously.

Moving on to item 3A, which is to hold a public hearing and consider a request to amend the Title 12 zoning ordinance.

Section 12-3-301 CN Central Neighborhood District to add single family detached dwellings as a permitted use and to clarify household living second story and above as a permitted use in mixed use buildings and household living first story as a conditional use in mixed use buildings and to amend Section 12 6-100 definitions of the zoning ordinance to add a definition for mixed use building.

Good afternoon, Chairman and members of the commission.

The item before you is a request to amend the central neighborhood district of the zoning ordinance.

Um to add single same single family detached dwellings as a permitted use.

Staff has received multiple inquiries regarding to the allowance of single family detached dwellings within the central neighborhood.

And given the high volume of already existing single family detached dwellings throughout the area, um, we believe permitting the single family detached dwellings is considered compatible with the established neighborhood character.

Um we're also amending to clarify household living second second story and above to be a permitted use in mixed use buildings and house of living first story to be a conditional use in mixed use buildings.

Um we believe that this will support the intended mixed uh residential and complementary commercial uses in the central neighborhood.

Um and we also like to amend the definition definition section for mixed use building, which is a building that combines the mixed use of commercial and residential within a single single structure.

Um and we believe that this will improve clarity and ensure consistent interpretation of the zoning code.

And with that, staff recommends approval of the amendment.

And I'm here if you have any questions.

Yeah, can just real quick.

So it's surprising that single family dwelling wasn't already permitted.

Was that just a mis uh writing of that central neighborhood wording?

Because all most of central neighborhood is single family dwellings.

So I'm just curious.

Is it just a miss before or are we really changing something?

Um so I guess the previous ordinance didn't have that.

It was just to preserve the existing um single family residences.

So if someone were to come in with a new single family um detached mailing, then they're allowed to do so now.

Got it.

Okay.

And one more question.

What was mixed use?

What was the definition before?

Was it not defined clearly?

Um, there is no definition for mixed use building before.

Okay, any other questions for city staff.

We do have to open a public hearing on this item.

So no other questions.

So at 2 34 uh p.m.

Uh we'll open a public hearing on item 3A.

Uh seeing that there is no one from the public in attendance right now.

We will immediately immediately close that hearing and uh open it up to the commissioners to ask questions, make a motion discuss.

So we have a motion by Dr.

Tarbay and a second by Mr.

Cray to uh accept the change.

And the motion passes unanimously.

Um moving on to item 3B, and I may need a little helper.

Do I need to read this into the I guess I do need to read this into the record?

And the applicant has requested a delay uh on this item, so I suppose we still need to introduce it.

Sorry to create commotion over.

Sorry about that, sir.

Uh yeah, uh if you don't mind, I think just for the record, if you'd read that in there, I I didn't I wasn't aware, but it sounds like the applicant has asked to table the item.

Is that correct?

Yeah, and we'll yeah, so is and is that an appropriate action on our part to table this, or would we put it up for a regular vote?