Members of a Zoning and Platting Commission working group focused on its roles and responsibilities vis-à-vis the Planning Commission hinted at a plan that would move most simple zoning cases to their docket during their July 15 meeting.
“(Generally), things that are site-specific would go to us, while things that are more planning-planning, more policy-based, would go to the Planning Commission,” said Commissioner David Fouts, who delivered the update from the working group.
Specifically, Fouts said, the Zoning and Platting Commission duties would expand to encompass zoning cases, site-specific conditional overlays, amendments to site plans and other smaller documents, variances, plats, conditional use permits, restrictive covenants and “site-specific neighborhood plan amendments,” which Fouts said are “apparently quite common.” Fouts said they were still discussing Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) and Planned Development Areas (PDAs).
Meanwhile, the Planning Commission would retain work related to neighborhood and small area plans, transit-oriented developments and anything related to wider policy and legislating, like land use code amendments.
Austin’s Land Use Development Code often references a single land use commission, but one that really has two faces, sort of like a civic Janus. The Zoning and Platting and Planning commissions are both considered land use commissions, and share many of the same responsibilities, while dividing others. As it stands now, the Planning Commission handles the majority of the work. One key reason for that is that the Zoning and Platting Commission is charged with handling cases tied to land that isn’t in any neighborhood plan, which excludes the much of the developed parts of the city.
While discussion of the plan was brief, and none of the commissioners directly alluded to the wider effort to streamline the city’s expansive system of boards and commissions during the meeting, their recommendations appear to align closely with what was proposed in a draft document of “recommended actions” by councilmembers Ryan Altern, Vanessa Fuentes, Chito Vela, Mackenzie Kelly and Leslie Pool released back in December of last year. That document called for a new “division of labor” between the two commissions under similar terms.
During a July 16 meeting of City Council’s Audit and Finance Committee, Council Member Chito Vela had proposed merging the commissions. Vela questioned the merit of having two land use commissions, and said it had long been an “open question” why zoning and platting persists as an independent commission.
“I think we really need to go back to one land use commission that handles the entire city,” Vela said. “It’s a big job, but they’re good people, on the Planning Commission in particular. And (the Zoning and Platting Commission).”
Fouts, reached by phone, said it was “the first he was hearing of” Vela’s suggestion.
“I will say, the Planning Commission has a heavy workload,” Fouts said, while noting that his own commission’s workload had been “relatively light” in recent months. “It could all be on one commission, but it’d be tricky to balance.”
The timeline for any changes actually being implemented seems likely to be long. Commissioner Taylor Major said the working group hoped to eventually put together a resolution that could be approved by both commissions, which would require more work and discussions between the two bodies.
“We want to do our best to assist the Planning Commission so they don’t have four-hour meetings every time they meet,” Major said.
Chair Hank Smith suggested discussing the plan with the whole commission at a future meeting.
The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.