Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee Authority (26-1099A)
View full legal title
Consideration of amending the City Plan Commission Rules of Procedure to add an additional responsibility of the zoning ordinance advisory committee. [See language highlighted in yellow on Page 21] Planner: Megan Wimer Council District: Citywide
Get notified on new hearings, votes, or status changes for this matter.
Actions
Showing all 4 actions. Filter by: , , , .
Compare zoning committee rule text before Dallas Council vote
Why now: City Attorney Morrison proposed the restructuring on the record, sponsor Sims accepted it, and the 12-0 vote on 2026-03-26 was explicitly on the amended motion — meaning the enrolled ordinance differs from the staff draft.
What to do: Pull the final CPC-adopted text and compare Morrison's restructuring — which moved language from subsection (i) into subsection (iii) — against the pre-hearing staff draft to confirm whether the change alters continuance rights, notice periods, or hearing sequencing for any client with a pending Under Advisement case. Council adoption locks this language permanently with no further CPC amendment path.
Act before: After Council adopts ordinance
Confirm whether Dallas zoning committee restructuring shifts pending hearing dates
Why now: The 12-0 CPC vote on 2026-03-26 was on an amended motion that moved language between subsections; four Under Advisement cases were active on the same agenda, making procedural sequence changes immediately material to pending applicants.
What to do: Contact CPC staff directly and ask whether Morrison's restructuring of subsection (iii) changes how Under Advisement cases are noticed or sequenced — if it does, your pending hearing date could shift without a new filing or formal notice to you, and that change becomes permanent upon Council adoption.
Act before: After ordinance effective date
Investigate Kingston's rejected Dallas development code expansion
Why now: Kingston's amendment was rejected by Sims at the 2026-03-26 CPC vote; the gap between a commissioner publicly pushing for a new development code and the absence of any announced alternative process leaves the question of who is advancing this agenda — and through what channel — unresolved in the public record.
What to do: File a records request for Commissioner Kingston's friendly amendment text and any City Attorney or staff correspondence referencing a 'new development code' — Kingston proposed extending this procedural rules change to authorize an entirely new code, was rejected on the record by sponsor Sims, and no public standalone process for such a code has since been announced.
Act before: After records request response (typically 10 business days)
Target Dallas Council members before final zoning committee scope vote
Why now: Kingston's friendly amendment to extend committee authority beyond ordinance amendments to an entirely new development code was rejected by sponsor Sims on the record at the 12-0 CPC vote on 2026-03-26; Council adoption permanently forecloses that expansion without a new ordinance process.
What to do: Contact council members now to determine whether any plan to reopen the development code expansion Kingston proposed and Sims rejected at CPC — Council is the only remaining venue where the ordinance's scope can be broadened before citywide adoption, and once enacted there is no CPC-level correction path.
Act before: After Council adopts ordinance
Key Entities
View relationship map
Loading relationship map…
Timeline
Consideration of amending the City Plan Commission Rules of Procedure to add an additional responsibility of the zoning ordinance advisory committee. [See language highlighted in yellow on Page 21] Planner: Megan Wimer Council District: Citywide
Vote: 12 for, 0 against, 3 absent
recommend approval of amending Rules of Procedure to add additional responsibility of ZOAC, as amended to add subsection (iii) regarding receiving input from citizens, interest groups, professional organizations, and other groups or individuals
Kingston offered friendly amendment to include consideration of a new development code, not only amendments; Sims did not accept. City Attorney Morrison suggested breaking language from (i) and adding to (iii); Sims accepted. Vote was on amended motion.