Code Diagnostic / Uniform Development Code Sub-Committee

[Shane Saum]

Dear Council Members,

Following our recent City Council meeting on February 5, 2026, I am pleased to announce the formation of the Unified Development Code (UDC) Subcommittee. This group will play a critical role in overseeing the reorganization and modernization of our city’s development code to improve clarity, consistency, and usability without altering existing policy.

Subcommittee Members:

• Councilor Amanda Chavarria, City Council Place 3
• Council Paul Prince, City Council Place 6
• Mayor Shane R. Saum
• Chair, Planning and Zoning Commission: Lynda Aird
• Chair, Building and Standards Commission: Frank Robbins
• Citizen Representative: Paul Roberts
• Citizen Representative: Rachael Gonzales

Key Discussion Points and Agreements from 2/5 council meeting:

1. Purpose and Scope:
   
   • The UDC project aims to reorganize and unify the city’s development regulations into a logical, integrated framework that follows the development process.
   • This effort addresses current code fragmentation, conflicting ordinances, and enforcement challenges.
   • The reorganization will focus on functional and legal compliance first, with policy changes considered separately and only after the foundational work is complete.
2. Project Plan and Prioritization:
   
   • The subcommittee will prioritize “easy wins” and chapters with minimal changes first, followed by more complex sections requiring detailed review.
   • The target for completing the functional reorganization is September 2026.
3. Role of the Subcommittee:
   
   • Serve as a liaison between staff, consultants, commissions, and the full council.
   • Review draft chapters and provide feedback to ensure accuracy and completeness.
   • Help maintain transparency and community engagement throughout the process.
4. Transparency and Communication:
   
   • Staff will provide regular updates and utilize the discussion board to track progress.
   • The subcommittee will facilitate communication and help ensure that stakeholders’ concerns are addressed.
5. Next Steps:
   
   • Finalize the subcommittee charter and scope of work. Councilor Van Ness has had some ideas on this already that she will share.
   • Begin detailed review of the proposed table of contents and chapter order.
   • Schedule regular subcommittee meetings to review materials and provide input.

We look forward to working collaboratively to create a more user-friendly and effective development code that supports Lago Vista’s growth and character.

Please feel free to share any questions or suggestions on the discussion board.

Best regards,

Mayor Shane R. Saum

 

[Karen Van Ness]

Please see the attached draft of the Unified Development Code (UDC) Project Charter. I tried to make this complete yet concise. Please provide feedback, edits, or anything that may be missing. I am happy to edit and re-upload, as well as bring hard copies to the City Council meeting this Thursday.

 

[Norma Owen]

Thank you Councilor Van Ness. The only addition I would add to the end of the Scope of Work is the following:

In addition, the following guardrails should apply:
(1) Conflicts with state or federal law/regulations: Recommendations should be resolved with the most restrictive language permitted that preserves the intent of the existing ordinance.. (2) Conflicts within the City’s ordinances should be resolved in favor of the most recently adopted language, unless doing so would create noncompliance with state or federal law, in which case compliance controls.

 

[Norma Owen]

Hit enter permaturely..... full post is here: Thank you Councilor Van Ness.

The only addition I would add to the end of the Scope of Work is the following:

In addition, the following guardrails should apply:

(1) Conflicts with state or federal law/regulations: Recommendations should be resolved with the most restrictive language permitted that preserves the intent of the existing ordinance.

(2) Conflicts within the City’s ordinances: Recommendations should be resolved in favor of the most recently adopted language, unless doing so would create noncompliance with state or federal law, in which case compliance controls.

 

[Paul Prince]

This looks good, thank you Councilor Van Ness. I also support the proposed language by Mayor Pro-tem Owen.
I have one suggestion for addition to the last sentence of "Scope of Work"... italicized and underlined below...

Should this project require consideration of potential policy changes to achieve deconfliction or compliance with state / federal law or regulations, such policy proposals will be clearly identified as such and follow the normal policy consideration process; i.e., referred through the Planning and Zoning or Building and Standards Commission as appropriate, then to City Council for discussion, public input, and formal adoption.

 

[Amanda Chavarria]

Please see the attached draft of the Unified Development Code (UDC) Project Charter. I tried to make this complete yet concise. Please provide feedback, edits, or anything that may be missing. I am happy to edit and re-upload, as well as bring hard copies to the City Council meeting this Thursday.

Thank you Councilor Van Ness, I too agree with the proposed language by Mayor Pro-Tem Owen as well as the addition to the "scope of work" as suggested by Councilor Prince.

 

[Karen Van Ness]

Thank you for the recommended additions to the draft! Please see attached DRAFT v2. The suggestion emailed by former Councilor Roberts RE: adding more structure to the operations of staff and the subcommittee is in the highlighted "For Consideration" section. Once we determine this I can complete a "final" draft.

 

[Amanda Chavarria]

Thank you for the recommended additions to the draft! Please see attached DRAFT v2. The suggestion emailed by former Councilor Roberts RE: adding more structure to the operations of staff and the subcommittee is in the highlighted "For Consideration" section. Once we determine this I can complete a "final" draft.

Thank you Councilor Van Ness for your prompt edits. I believe this draft is comprehensive while remaining succinct and easy to navigate.

 

[Karen Van Ness]

As per our discussion in last night's City Council Meeting, I have completed the remaining final edits to clean up the UDC Project Charter. Please review the attached and respond with any additional comments. Once confirmed, the "final" version will be on the agenda for approval our next CC meeting.

 

[Jess Hall Jr]

This "final" revision looks great. I appreciate your work on this Councilor Van Ness, and the contributions of Councilors Owen and Prince.

 

[Norma Owen]

Thank you for completing the remaining edits, Councilor Van Ness. I am in favor of putting this version forward as final.

 

[Karen Van Ness]

Thank you Councilors for reviewing this. Not hearing any objections....should I send this version to Robin and request of the Mayor that approval of this charter be an action item in our next CC meeting?

 

[Amanda Chavarria]

Thank you Councilors for reviewing this. Not hearing any objections....should I send this version to Robin and request of the Mayor that approval of this charter be an action item in our next CC meeting?

I will be your second so that you can send this to Robin for the next meeting. I am in fvor of putting this forward as revised. Thank you for your diligence putting this together.

 

[Karen Van Ness]

Great! Thank you Councilor Chavarria.

 

[Adam Benefield]

All,

I appreciate the work that has gone into developing the Unified Development Code and I generally support the goal of modernizing and organizing our development regulations into a clearer and more accessible structure. Bringing the City’s ordinances into a single, logical framework that follows the development process should make the code easier for residents, builders, engineers, and staff to navigate.

Development codes directly affect property rights, economic activity, and long-term planning for our community, I think it is important that we establish strong guardrails at the outset to ensure the process remains transparent and that policy decisions remain clearly within the authority of Council.

First, the document references the ability to introduce “clarifying language to support better enforceability without changing the spirit and intent of current policy.” While clarification is certainly appropriate in a code consolidation effort, this type of language can sometimes unintentionally alter the practical effect of an ordinance. In many cities, what is described as clarification has the effect of tightening regulatory standards or changing how an ordinance is interpreted. To avoid any ambiguity, I believe we should treat any change that results in a more restrictive requirement or materially different interpretation as a policy matter rather than a purely technical edit.

Second, the charter states that conflicts should be resolved using “the most restrictive language permitted that preserves the intent of the existing ordinance.” While the goal of maintaining consistency is understandable, I would caution against adopting a default approach that favors the most restrictive interpretation. Our objective should be clarity and consistency rather than unintentionally expanding regulatory burdens beyond what Council previously adopted.

I believe a few procedural safeguards would help ensure that the UDC project remains aligned with Council’s intent.

I would require full redline comparisons between the existing code and the proposed unified code. Providing a side-by-side comparison of current and proposed language will allow Council and the public to clearly see exactly what has changed.

Second, any modification that introduces new restrictions, changes interpretation, or alters the practical application of an ordinance should be clearly identified as a policy change and routed through the normal process for policy decisions, including review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and final consideration by Council.

Third, rather than adopting the unified code as a single comprehensive ordinance at the end of the process, I would recommend that Council review and approve the major sections of the code individually as they are completed. This would allow Council to examine each chapter in detail and avoid situations where a very large document must be considered all at once.

Another area that I believe deserves attention is public engagement. The charter does a good job describing transparency within the internal process through staff reporting, discussion board updates, and subcommittee review. It does not establish a structured public engagement framework. Development regulations affect a wide range of stakeholders, including residents, property owners, builders, engineers, architects, and real estate professionals. Many cities undertaking UDC projects hold stakeholder roundtables, public workshops, or draft review periods to ensure that those who regularly work with the development code have an opportunity to provide input before formal hearings begin. Establishing a clear public engagement component early in the process would improve the quality of the final product and help ensure the community understands how the code is evolving.

Finally, the proposed subcommittee includes the Mayor and two Council members, along with representatives from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Building and Standards Commission, and citizen members. While I support the goal of improving communication between these groups, we should be mindful that the subcommittee’s role remains advisory and that policy direction continues to come from the full Council in open meetings. Care should be taken to ensure the subcommittee does not function as a decision-making body outside the regular public process, particularly when multiple Council members are participating in the discussions.

I believe the UDC project could be a valuable modernization effort for the City if it is implemented carefully.