Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - 03/08/2000MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
March 8, 2000
PRESENT:
David Rhone, Chairman Members
Cliff Berg •
Lou Ann Phillips •
Lin Purtle •
Danny Richardson •
Rusty Sons •
Greg Wright •
Ken Birck •
Johnny Burns • Council Liaison
Steve Seese, City Planning Administrator • staff
Paul Stillson, Planner II •
Diane Parker
ABSENT:
Bruce Harris • Members
Randy Wachsman •
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Rhone at 2:00 p.m.
II. PUBLIC COMMENTS
No one from the audience wished to address the Commission.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Berg stated the signature page of the January 12, 2000 minutes needed a
correction. Mr. Berg made a motion to approve the corrected minutes. Mr. Sons
t
seconded. The minutes were passed with a unanimous vote in favor.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 7
IV. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Public Hearing on Preliminary Plats
The Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval of the following plat(s)
subject to the Standard Conditions of Approval for Preliminary Plats and any specific
conditions listed below:
Standard Conditions of Approval for Preliminary Plats
• Provide utility and drainage easements as required by utility companies and the
Director of Public Works.
• Submit water and sewer to the Utilities Engineer; water plans to the Fire Marshall
and street, sidewalk and drainage plans to the Director of Public Works.
Drainage plans must be complete enough to include impact on surrounding
property and include detention facilities as required by Director of Public Works.
• Coordinate street lighting plan and provide utility easements as required by the
Director of Traffic and Transportation.
Submit two (2) copies of corrected preliminary plat to Planning Division before
final platting.
Note: Approval of a plat does not imply development of property in violation of
the Zoning Ordinance.
Recommend approval subject to standard conditions and any specific conditions listed
below:
1. High Point Village, Preliminary (Mar 2000) — moved to Regular Agenda
2. Park Place Subdivision, Preliminary (Mar 2000)
a. Lots are currently served by public sanitary sewer. (PUBLIC WORKS)
b. Extend public water system to serve Lots 3, 4 and 5. (PUBLIC WORKS)
C. Lots 1 and 2 are currently served by public water system. (PUBLIC
WORKS)
d. Provide stormwater detention. (PUBLIC WORKS)
e. Lake Park Drive is located within a 50 foot right-of-way. The City's
Thoroughfare Plan requires this right-of-way to be 65 feet. A dedication of
7.5 feet is required.
Note: This plat was approved in January 2000. The engineer is resubmitting the
plat due to minor changes in the location of some lot lines.
dill"
I
. . ............ . ......... . ...................
PLANNING &ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8,2000 + PAGE 2
2. Public Hearing on Final Plats
The Planning & Zoning commission recommended approval of the following plats
subject to the Standard Conditions of Approval for Final Plats and Replats and any
specific conditions listed below:
Recommend approval subject to standard conditions and any specific conditions listed
below:
• Provide utility easements as required by utility companies and Director of Public
Utilities and drainage easements as required by Director of Public Works.
• Submit water and sewer plans to Utilities Engineer; water plans to the Fire
Marshall; and street, sidewalk and drainage plans to the Director of Public
Works. Drainage plans must be complete enough to include impact on
surrounding property and include detention facilities as required by Director of
Public Works.
• Coordinate street lighting plan with Director of Traffic and Transportation, if
underground electric utilities are to be provided.
Note: Approval of a plat does not imply development of property in violation of
the Zoning Ordinance.
N
1. Park Place Subdivision, Block M (Mar 2000)
a. Lots are currently served by public sanitary sewer. (PUBLIC WORKS)
b. Extend public water system to serve Lots 3, 4 and 5. (PUBLIC WORKS)
C. Lots 1 and 2 are currently served by public water system. (PUBLIC
WORKS)
d. Provide stormwater detention. (PUBLIC WORKS)
e. Provide utility slips.
f. Lake Park Drive is located within a 50 foot right-of-way. The i '
Thoroughfare Plan requires this right-of-way to be 65 feet. A dedication of
7.5 feet is required.
2. PSA Land Addition, Block 1, Lot 1 (Mar 2000)
a. Show names of adjacent properties to the west. If the owner is the same
as the owner of Lot 1, Block 1, the Subdivision Ordinance requires that all
contiguous properties be platted.
b. Label Enterprise Street as "previously dedicated."
C. Lot is currently served by water and sewer. (PUBLIC WORKS)
d. Provide stormwater detention. (PUBLIC WORKS)
Note: Property is located in the 70-75 decibel Airport Zoning Noise Contour.
See Zoning Ordinance for restrictions.
PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8,2000 • PAGE 3
Chairman Rhone removed the High Point Village preliminary plat from the Consent
la
60 Agenda to the Regular Agenda.
Mr. Wright made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Berg seconded the
motion. The plats were approved with a unanimous vote in favor.
V. REGULAR AGENDA
.................. Special Announcement .................
Mr. Seese reported that the Planning & Zoning agenda books now
include the phrase 'Approval of the Conditional Use Permit also
constitutes a requirement that the applicant meet the following
criteria" under the Conditions of Approval. Any conditions listed will
be part of the motion and approval process by this Commission
whether or not they are actually mentioned.
1. High Point Village, Preliminary (Mar 2000)
a. Dedicate 2.5 feet of additional right-of-way (for a total of 32.5 feet) along
the north line of Rathgeber Road. Thoroughfare plan shows a 65-foot
arterial street section.
b. Street extensions in alignment with existing streets shall continue with
existing street names.
C. Extend water and sewer to serve all lots. (PUBLIC WORKS)
d. Provide stormwater detention for development. (PUBLIC WORKS)
e. Construct all interior streets to current City standards. (PUBLIC WORKS)
f. Meet curb and gutter requirements for boundary streets. (PUBLIC
WORKS)
g. Additional easements will be needed. ( )
Note: Area is zoned General Commercial. A rezoning to Single Family-2 for
residential development is recommended
Mr. Berg made a motion to approve this plat. Ms. Phillips seconded the motion.
Mr. Seese stated that the Thoroughfare Plan shows that Rathgeber Road will expand to
a 65 foot minimum width in the future and will require additional dedication of 2.5 feet to
meet the side width requirement. Mr. Seese stated that the applicant can request a
variance from the Board of Appeals at their April meeting. Mr. Seese stated that under
condition #a. he would like to add "or obtain a variance." Staff recommends approval of
this plat with the above listed conditions.
Mr. Dennis Probst, engineer representing, the owner of the property, stated he was
surprised to find this condition on this plat. He further commented that this is first time
(�w this condition has appeared on any property that he has platted on Rathgeber Road,
PLANNING f G COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 4
�% including the property across the street that he platted last year. He expressed
concerns for the time delay involved in taking this condition to the April meeting the
Board of Adjustment. Mr. Seese stated the Thoroughfare Plan is adopted by a City
ordinance and the Planning & Zoning Commission does not have the authority to
override a city ordinance. The more timely option would be to dedicate the 2.5 feet. Mr.
Seese commented that he was trying to be fair to the developer by suggesting that he
could apply for a variance. Mr. Probst asked if this case could be heard at the March
meeting; Mr. Seese responded that certain measures (neighborhood notification,
newspaper postings, etc.) would prevent the case from being heard next week. Mr.
Seese suggested that Mr. Probst contact the Board of Adjustment chairman to schedule
a meeting.
Mr. Berg asked about the property that was platted last year that did not require
additional dedicated right-of-way. Mr. Seese stated that Rathgeber Road is a recent
addition as a major collector to the Thoroughfare Plan.
Mr. Prost asked if a final plat could be submitted for approval in April without being
detained by this condition to which staff and the Commission agreed.
,, 2. Notification Replats
4
Various Tracts within Ranch Estates
Cartwright Road
These three tracts are located along Cartwright Road in Ranch Estates. The plats will
subdivide existing lots creating additional lots. The lots will range from 80 to 13 feet i
width. The subdivision was originally platted with lots having over 250-foot frontages.
Section 212.015 (c) of the Local Government Code requires public notification for any
replat that:
1. Within the past five years had zoning limiting the area to single family or duplex
use, and
. Will remove any covenants or deed restrictions on a property.
The notification includes all of the owners of the lots or lands immediately adjoining the
area covered by the proposed rlat, and extending 200 feet from that area, but within
the original subdivision.
Staff recommends approval of this with each tract listed separately below. Approval of
each item shall include the standard conditions of approval and the following ifi
conditions:
PLANNINGi COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 5
Preliminary Plats
1. Lots 14-A & 14-13, Block 2, Ranch Estates, a replat of Lot 14, Block 2, Ranch
Estates, Wichita Falls, TX (Preliminary Plat)
a Lots are currently served by public water. (PW)
b. Lots must be served by an approved sewerage system. (PW)
C. Meet curb and gutter requirements. (PW)
d. Meet current stormwater detention ordinance. (PW)
e. This is a notification plat and requires a separate public hearing. There is an
item later in this agenda for public comment.
2. Lots 1-C, 1-D, 1-E & Lots 2-A, 2-13, 2-C, Block 2, Ranch Estates, a replat of
Lots I -B and Lot 2, Block 2, Ranch Estates, Wichita Falls TX (Preliminary
Plat)
a Lots are currently served by public water. (PW)
b. Lots must be served by an approved sewerage system. .(PW)
C. Meet curb and gutter requirements. (PW)
d. Meet current stormwater detention ordinance. (PW)
3. Lots 3-A, 3-13 3-C, Block 1, Ranch Estates, a replat of Lot 3, Block 1 Ranch
Estates, Wichita Falls TX. (Preliminary Plat)
a Lots are currently served by public water. (PW)
b. Lots must be served by an approved sewerage system. .(PW)
C. Meet curb and gutter requirements. (PW)
d. Meet current stormwater detention ordinance. (PW)
e. This is a notification plat and requires a separate public hearing. There is an
item later in this agenda for public comment.
Final Plat
1. Lot 14-A, Block 1, Ranch Estates, a replat of Lot 14, Block 2 Ranch Estates,
Wichita Falls TX (Final Plat)
a Lots are currently served by public water. (PW)
b. Lots must be served by an approved sewerage system. (PW)
C. Meet curb and gutter requirements. (PW)
d. Meet current stormwater detention ordinance. (PW)
ALSO HEARD WITH THIS CASE WAS CASE C 00-06:
Approval for Manufactured Home
184 Cartwright Road
Case C 00-06
Applicant ...................................... Tony and Nicole Ueb
C�Requested Action ........................ Conditional Use Per Purpose ....................................... Manufactured Homel
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 # PAGE 6
Property ............... ........................ 184 Cartwright Road, Lot 1 - , Block 2
« Existing Land Use ........................ Vacant Lot
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning. N: Residence, -1
: Vacant Lot, SF-1
: Vacant Lots, SF-1
W: Vacant L -1
Analysis:
This site is located in an area that was annexed by the city on August 31, 1999. This
location is zoned Single Family Residential (SF-1). The applicant is requesting a
Conditional Use Permit for a manufactured home. Manufactured homes require a
conditional use permit in an SF-1 zoning district. The subdivision along Cartwright
Road consists of 22 vacant lots, 13 residences, four single -wide mobile homes and one
manufactured home. Staff feels that a manufactured home is compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood recommends approval of this request.
Developmental Requirements
1. A final plat must be filed with the county prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
2. Compliance with the current storm water detention ordinance will be required
on this property.
. The plat of this property shows a 60-foot building limit line. Applicant's site
plan shows the manufactured home setback only 45 feet. Increase setback
to 60 feet to match building limit line.
Conditions:
Approval of the Conditional Use Permit also constitutes a requirement that the following
conditions be met by the applicant:
1. The housing unit is installed on a permanent foundation.
2. Brick underskirting shall be installed.
3. The manufactured home is new and not less than 22 feet wide.
. The housing unit front on a public street.
Mr. Sons made a motion to approve the plats and the conditional use permit. Ms.
Phillips seconded the motion.
Nineteen surrounding property owners were notified of the replats. None replied in
favor and ten (10) or 41.04% were opposed. This percentage was calculated by taking
the actual square footage owned by each property owner plus 50% of any right-of-way
adjacent to their property divided by the total square footage of land within 200 feet of
the perimeter of this plat.
r. Seese commented that the annexation of this property had no bearing on the
notification of the replatting of this property; however, it did result in the surrounding
property owners being notified of the proposed placement of the manufactured home.
(PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH S, 2000 • PAGE 7
In that case, nine surrounding property owners were notified of the request to place a
manufactured home at 184 Cartwright Road. One (1) or 11.11% replied in favor and
four (4) or 44.44% were opposed.
Mr. Seese stated that concerning the notification plats, staff determined there was no
reason to recommend any type of denial. He further commented that staff also
recommended approval of the manufactured home.
Mr. Michael Detrick, realtor for the applicants, gave a description of the location of the
plats along with a brief history of the subdivision and its utility problems. He further
commented that with the construction of Allred Prison, a water line was extended down
Reilly Road and down the front of this subdivision. Subdivision property owners have
pooled their resources to have water lines extended into the subdivision. He is
proposing to reduce the three acre lots down to one acre lots and described in detail the
reduction process of each lot. The depth of the lots were not reduced; the frontage was
subdivided; however, all lots will front the established access roads. He remarked that
three acre lots were cost prohibitive to develop because of curb, gutter, and sidewalk
requirements as well as the storm water detention ordinance.
Mr. Detrick then addressed the request for the manufactured home. He stated that the
most recent additions to the neighborhood were three manufactured houses installed on
surrounding properties. He commented that houses in that area were brick veneer,
QNO frame construction, single -wide mobile homes, and an RV camper with attached frame
construction. There were also various steel fabricated buildings in the neighborhood.
Mr. Richardson stated that perhaps the opposing responses are not aware of the quality
of the manufactured home being considered. Mr. Birck agreed and stated that there
has not been much development in that area since 1965. He felt that this home would
be an improvement.
The replats were passed with a unanimous vote in favor.
The manufactured home (C 00-06) passed with a unanimous vote in favor of a
conditional approval. The conditions are
1. The housing unit is installed on a permanent foundation.
2. Brick underskirting shall be installed.
3. The manufactured home is new and not less than 22 feet wide.
4. The housing unit front on a public street.
3. Rezone from Limited Commercial and Multifamily to General Commercial
4004, 4010, 4110, & 4114-4128 Faith Road and Adjacent Property
Case R 00-02
C, Applicant ...................................... Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8,2000 * PAGE 8
r Requested Action ........................ Rezone from Limited Commercial and Multifamily to
General Commercial
Purpose ....................................... To conform to adjacent zoning
Property ....................................... a. 4004, 4010 & 4110 Faith Road from Limited
Commercial to General Commercial,
b. 4114-4128 Faith Road from Multifamily Residential
to General Commercial,
c. An unnamed street intersecting Faith Road from
Multifamily Residential to General Commercial,
d. The north portion of Lot 32, Block 7, Faith Village 1,
and alley adjacent to Lots 24-31, Block 7, Faith
Village 1, from Multifamily to General Commercial.
Existing Land Use ........................ Commercial development, apartments and vacant
land.
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning N: Call Field Road, GC
S: Multifamily Residential, MFR
E: Commercial, duplexes, LC
W: Shopping Center, GC
IL
Analysis:
The subject property, located along the west side of Faith Road, includes a barbershop,
small apartment complex, a short dead-end street, and some vacant lots zoned
multifamily. The developer is combining these lots along with property to the west for a
large shopping center. The larger tract will have frontage on Faith Road, Call Field
Road and Rhea Road. General Commercial zoning is being requested to
accommodate the planned shopping center.
a. Changed conditions:
Staff analyzed the rezoning to identify conditions that have changed in the
district or may have changed outside the district that directly or indirectly
affect land use adjacency. The recent trends include higher traffic counts
and more intense commercial development along Call Field Road. This
development pressure has made this site attractive for redevelopment.
The rezoned tracts will be combined with other property which following
replatting will produce a single lot.
b. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan:
Staff considered the effects of the land uses allowed under that proposed
zoning district relative to conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Plan. The Plan currently designates all of this land for High -Density
Residential use. The current Limited Commercial zoning on part of this
property is not in conformance with the Land Use Plan. The High Intensity
Residential designation was probably influenced by the existing apartment
building and the vacant townhouse lots on the south of the rezoning area.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 # PAGE 9
C. The nature and degree of impact upon neighboring lands:
The property is adjacent to townhouse development with Multifamily
zoning to the south. To the east is Limited Commercial zoning containing
small business and multiple family development. Staff considered impacts
of this development on adjacent residential development. Since the
existing townhouses are located in a multifamily zone, no additional
buffering measures are required by the Zoning Ordinance. The property is
located along a major traffic corridor and located adjacent to residential
uses. In order to insure compatibility with adjacent land uses, staff
recommends a conditioned zoning.
Recently medians were constructed in Call Field Road preventing left
turns on Faith Road. Motorists on Faith Road are using Gossett Drive to
travel to Rhea Road where left -turns are allowed. Residences along
Gossett have already noted an increase in the traffic on Gossett Drive.
With this development, additional traffic on Gossett may be expected.
This increase may be reduced if the development provides easy access to
Rhea and Call Field Road.
If this rezoning were approved, an amendment to the Land Use Plan will be required.
Recommendation:
Staff has recommended to the applicant for rezoning these tracts to Conditioned
General Commercial. The staff proposal will eliminate uses that are incompatible with
the surrounding uses due to the almost total retail nature of this corridor and the need to
continue this trend, while eliminating other high traffic generators.
The tract also contains a short unnamed street adjacent to the apartment complex.
Staff recommends that this tract also be rezoned to avoid an "island" of Limited
Commercial if the surrounding property is rezoned. The applicant has planned to
request closure of this street to incorporate it into the site.
Ms. Phillips made a motion to recommend approval to City Council for this rezoning
request. Ms. Purtle seconded the motion.
Forty-two surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Twenty-one (21) or
49.63% replied in favor and two (2) or 0.68% were opposed. The percentages were
calculated by taking the actual square footage owned by each property owner plus 50%
of any right-of-way adjacent to their property divided by the total square footage of land
within 200 feet of the perimeter of this property.
Ms. Julie Diamond represented Kimley-Horn and Associates, applicant. She stated that
the rezoning will simplify the property for new retail development.
Ms. Phillips asked when the apartments were constructed; Mr. Martin Litteken,
Cornerstone Engineering, replied it was prior to 1985.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8,2000 * PAGE 10
Chairman Rhone inquired about possible flooding and drainage problems in that area.
Mr. Seese replied the majority of the area is under impervious cover. He stated that
Public Works will determine the percentages, if any, that will fall under the stormwater
detention requirement.
The rezoning recommendation passed with a unanimous vote in favor.
4. Rezone from Single Family-2 to Multifamily
1911 & 1913 Midwestern Parkway
Case R 00-03
Applicant ...................................... Syd Litteken
Requested Action ........................ Rezone from Single Family-2 to Multifamily
VesideTtial
Purpose ....................................... To construct a quadraplex
Property ....................................... 1911 & 1913 Midwestern Parkway
Existing Land Use ........................ Residences, vacant land
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning. N: Midwestern Parkway, LC
S: Residential, SF-2
E: Residential, SF-2
W: Holliday Creek, LC
Analysis:
The subject property is located adjacent to the east bank of the Holliday Creek channel,
fronting on Midwestern Parkway. The developer is requesting rezoning in order to
construct a quadraplex.
a. Changed conditions:
Staff analyzed the rezoning to identify conditions that have changed in the
district or may have changed outside the district that directly or indirectly
affect land use adjacency. The recent reconstruction of Holliday Creek
channel has removed this property from the floodway. Without a flood
study, construction in the floodway is prohibited.
b. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan:
Staff considered the effects of the land uses allowed under that proposed
zoning district relative to conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Plan. The Plan currently designates all of this land for Low Density
Residential use. The change to High Density Residential will require an
amendment to the Land Use Plan.
• OR= 11 OES n
Thepropertyis adjacent to Holliday Creek on the west with single family
residential development to the east and south. The lot fronts on
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 * PAGE 11
Midwestern Parkway, a major arterial street. This property was platted
during the 1920's prior to the construction of Midwestern Parkway.
The applicant has submitted a site plan along with the rezoning request. However, the
rezoning approval is not tied to a specific plan, and once rezoned, the property could be
used for any use permitted in the Multifamily district regulations, subject to site plan
approval.
Staff notes that the parking layout, and driveway widths and locations shown on the site
plan will have to be revised in order to meet city standards. In addition, no fences are
permitted within a floodway. Approval of the rezoning does not imply approval of the
site plan.
If this rezoning is approved, an amendment to the Land Use Plan is also required. The
amendment would change this property classification from Low Density Residential to
High Density Residential.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this rezoning.
Mr. Richardson made a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning request to City
Council. Mr. Berg seconded the motion.
Eight surrounding property owners were notified of this request. One 1) or 5.59%
replied in favor, two (2) or 15.82% were opposed, and two () responses were outside
the notification area. The above percentages were calculated by taking the actual
square footage owned by each property owner plus 50% of any right-of-way adjacent to
their property divided by the total square footage of land within 200 feet of the perimeter
of this property.
Mr. Syd Lieken, applicant, stated that he understands there is concern regarding
ingress and egress. He confirmed that there would not be any alley access. The
construction will face Holliday Creek which separates it from the surrounding houses.
Mr. Dick Higgins, 1908 Club View, stated that the oppositions he cited in his response
have been addressed but there is one other matter, drainage. He explained the path of
high water when it drains into the Creek. He asked if there would be any change in the
drainage swell on City property. Mr. Seese responded by stating that he will turn this
item over to the Public Works Department for a response.
Mr. Birck stated that he doubted that a single family residence would be appropriate for
this lot; Mr. Seese agreed stated that the City would not permit a single family house.
Mr. Birck stated he was in favor of this request.
The vote was unanimous in favor of this recommendation.
PLANNINGi COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 12
5. Carport
5418 Stephens Drive
Case C 00-09
Mr. Berg made a motion to approve this carport request. Mr. Wright seconded the
motion.
Thirteen surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Three () or 23. 7%
replied in favor and none (0) were opposed.
Mr. Seese stated that a stop work order has been issued on this carport because the
applicant failed to apply for a Conditional Use Permit. The applicant is also in violation
for parking in the front yard on an unpaved surface. Staff usually does not make
recommendations on carport; however, in this case staff is requesting the Commission
consider conditional approval if pavement is constructed.
Mr. Jerry Johnson, applicant, stated that he was unaware of wrongdoing by adding an
extension to the carport.
The carport passed with a unanimous vote in favor.
6. Carport
1443 Cortez
Case C 00-10
Mr. Berg made a motion to approve this carport request. Mr. Wright seconded the
motion.
Twenty-one surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Five () or
23.81 % replied in favor and none (0) were opposed.
The vote was unanimous in favor of this carport request.
7. Carport
1624 Longview
Case C 00-11
Mr. Berg made a motion to approve this carport request. Mr. Wright seconded the
motion.
Twenty-three surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Three ( or
13.04% replied in favor and none (0) were opposed.
PLAN NG & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 13
The carport passed with a unanimous vote in favor.
8. Approval for Ceramics Shop
2909 Tenth Street
Case C 00-12
Applicant ......................................
Philip C. Miller
Requested Action ........................
Conditional Use Permit.
Purpose .......................................
Ceramics Shop. Items for sale will
paints and supplies
Property .......................................2909
1 Oth Street
Existing Land Use ........................
Vacant Service Station, zoned LC
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:
N: Residences, SF-2
E: Residences, SF-2
S: Residences, SF-2
W: Residences, SF-2
Analysis:
The applicant is requesting approval to convert this service station to retail sales of
ceramics and ceramic supplies. The property is located at the intersection of Tenth
Street, Hays Street and Avenue D.
Conformance with the Zoning Ordinance:
Retail sales in a Limited Commercial zoning district require the approval of the
Planning and Zoning Commission. This is a case where a nonconforming
service station is being converted to a conforming conditional use in this district.
Compatibility of site development with, and negative impacts on, existing o
permitted uses on abutting sites:
The sale of ceramics typically produce little noise, and traffic generation that
would impact the neighborhood.
$DQ
Safety and convenience of vehicular and pedestrian circulation and potential for
increases in the vicinity in relation to existing or permitted uses in the area:
The applicant's site plan shows five parking spaces. Based on the size of the
building (1096 sq. ft.) five spaces will meet requirements. A ceramics business is
not a high traffic generator and should be compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 14
Conditions Of Approval:
r' Approval of the Conditional Use Permit also constitutes a requirement that the applicant
meet the following conditions:
1. The use shall be approved using the existing floor area within the primary
structure only.
2. The activities on the site shall be limited to greenware and ceramic
supplies. No merchandise or inventory shall be stored outside of the
building.
3. The firing of ceramics shall be permitted as an ancillary use on this site.
4. Landscaping shall be as installed as shown on the landscaping plan. Note
staff has added an additional planting area near the front of the site.
5. A six-foot tall privacy fence shall be required along the rear property line.
Due to visibility concerns, the fence shall be omitted within 10 feet of the
property line along Tenth Street and Avenue D.
. Remove any gasoline tanks that may be present on site.
Mr. Berg made a motion to approve this request. Ms. Phillips seconded the motion.
Eighteen surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Five (5) or 27.77%
replied in favor and one 1 or 5.56 was opposed.
Mr. Seese stated that the gasoline tanks have been removed from this property. He
added that staff would like to add another condition that the two columns in front of the
building be removed.
Mr. Phillip Miller, applicant, stated that he did not have a problem with the conditions
except for the six foot privacy fence. He stated if he put up a fence it would encroach
on the neighboring lot. He could start at the corner of his building and come south
toward Avenue D. Mr. Seese stated that the privacy fence is required because of
zoning differences. Mr. Seese also brought attention to the parking lot which is
encroaching on the neighboring lot. Mr. Berg suggested constructing the fence into two
segments. Mr. Seese reminded the Commission that part of a building was used as the
fencing requirement in the Neon Spur case. There was more discussion about the
fencing which resulted in the fence starting from the corner of the building.
Mr. Miller inquired about the landscaping requirement which states there should be a
building in the front of the property. He stated that it might be a visibility hazard. Mr.
Seese stated that a canopy tree would be appropriate. Staff would work with the
applicant on both the landscaping and fence issues to come to mutual agreements.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 15
Ms. Purtle stated that area is very well kept even though this particular building needs
attention.
The vote was unanimous in favor of conditionally approving this request. The
conditions are as follows:
1. The use shall be approved using the existing floor area within the primary
structure only.
. The activities on the site shall be limited to greenware and ceramic
supplies. No merchandise or inventory shall be stored outside of the
building.
3. The firing of ceramics shall be permitted as an ancillary use on this site.
4. Landscaping shall be as installed as shown on the landscaping plan. Note
staff has added an additional planting area near the front of the site.
5. A six-foot tall privacy fence shall be required along the rear property line.
Due to visibility concerns, the fence shall be omitted within 10 feet of the
property line along Tenth Street and Avenue D.
. Remove the two columns in front of the building as well as the sign pole
located in front.
9. Approval for Used Furniture and Collectible Sales
1500 Kemp Blvd.
Case C 00-13
Applicant ...................................... Jimmie Kerr Stodghill
Requested Action ........................ Conditional Use Permit
Purpose ....................................... Used Furniture and Collectible Sales
Property.......................................1500 Kemp Blvd.
Existing Land Use ........................ Office, zoned L
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Dentist, Residential, LC
E: Residential, Apartments, LC
S: Residential, L
W: Residential, F-2
Analysis:
The applicant is requesting approval to convert this former Mental Heath and Mental
Retardation office to retail sales of used furniture and collectibles. The property i
located at the northwest corner of Avenue E and Kemp Blvd. The property was granted
conditional use approval (Case 90-01) for office use in January 1990.
PLANNING'i
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 16
Conformance with the Zoning Ordinance
Retail sales in a Limited Commercial zoning district require the approval of the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
of site development with, and neciative impacts on. existina or
permitted uses on abutting sites
The sale of furniture typically produce little noise, and traffic generation that
would impact the neighborhood. Outdoor storage of items will not be permitted.
Safety and convenience of vehicular and pedestrian circulation and potential for
increases in the vicinity in relation to existing or permitted uses in the area:
Because of the requirement for a six-foot fence along the alley, no increase in
traffic should result in the alley behind the adjacent residences. The applicant's
site plan shows five parking spaces. Based on the size of the building (1296 sq.
ft.) six parking spaces would be required. Because of the low traffic generation
typical of the furniture sales business, staff believes that the five existing spaces
should be sufficient for this operation. See Zoning Ordinance Section 6210
paragraph 15.
Conditions of Approval.
Approval of the Conditional Use Permit also constitutes a requirement that the applicant
shall meet the following conditions:
1 The use shall be approved using the existing floor area within the primary
structure only. The garage at the rear of the building is approved only for
storage. It shall not be used as for retail sales
2. The activities on the site shall be limited to used furniture sales. No
merchandise or inventory shall be stored outside of the building.
3. Approval of uses ancillary to the primary use. Only minor repairs related
to the sale of furniture shall be permitted.
4. Additional landscaping shall be provided as shown on the staff modified
site plan.
5. Remove deteriorated porch covers in the front.
Mr. Wright made a motion to approve this Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Sons seconded
the motion.
PLAANW6 & !dN(N—G commasioN
MARCH 8, 2000 # PAGE 17
Nineteen surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Nine () or 47.37%
replied in favor and one (1) or 5.26% was opposed.
Mr. Jimmie Stodghill, applicant, explained changes to the parking area he is
considering. Mr. Seese stated that since the site plan has not been reviewed by staff,
the parking could be considered at a later date. Mr. Stodghill then discussed the
landscaping requirements. Mr. Seese commented that the landscaping could also be
discussed later.
Ms. Purtle inquired about the placement of furniture outside. Mr. Stodghill stated there
would not be furniture stored or displayed outside the building. The garage will be used
for storage purposes.
Chairman Rhone stated the motion was amended to include that staff and the applicant
will work towards a mutual agreement on landscaping and parking or the applicant can
return to the Commission.
The vote was unanimous in favor of conditionally approving this request. The
conditions are as follows:
1. The use shall be approved using the existing floor area within the primary
structure only. The garage at the rear of the building is approved only for
storage. It shall not be used as for retail sales
2. The activities on the site shall be limited to used furniture sales. No
merchandise or inventory shall be stored outside of the building.
3. Approval of uses ancillary to the primary use. Only minor repairs related
to the sale of furniture shall be permitted.
4. Additional landscaping shall be provided as shown on the staff modified
site plan.
5. Remove deteriorated porch covers in the front.
10. Convert Nonconforming Service Station to Used Car Sales
1803 Kemp Blvd.
Case C 00-14
Applicant ...................................... Floyd C. Browning, Jr.
Requested Action ........................ Conditional Use Permit
Purpose ....................................... Convert Nonconforming service station to non-
conforming used car sales
,.. Property.......................................1803 Kemp Blvd.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 18
11
Existing Land Use ........................ Service Station, zoned LC
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Auto Sales, LC
E: Residential, SF-2
S: Residential, LC
W: Commercial, LC
Analysis:
The applicant is proposing to operate a used car business on this property at the
southeast corner of Avenue H and Kemp Blvd. The property was developed before
zoning as an auto service station. Under Section 6140 of the Zoning Ordinance, a
nonconforming use can be converted to another nonconforming use with the approval of
the Planning and Zoning Commission. Both a service station and the proposed used
car sales are not permitted in the Limited Commercial District. Only under the
provisions of Section 6140, Conversion of Nonconforming Uses, can the used car sales
qualify for approval in a Limited Commercial District.
Conformance with the Zoning Ordinance
Section 6140 states in part, that, "A nonconforming use may be converted to
another nonconforming use provided that the noise order, refuse, traffic volumes
and patterns, hours of operation, parking requirements and other factors are
similar or less intense." Staff believes, based on the nature of the two
businesses, that auto sales will be a less intense use.
Compatibility of site development with, and negative impacts on, existing or
permitted uses on abutting sites
The applicant's proposed use will impact the surrounding uses less than a
service station operation. Used car sales typically produce less noise, and traffic
generation than a service station and will be less intrusive into the neighborhood.
9 Z 0 170=0
There are no signs shown on the applicant's site plan. All lighting shall be
directed away from adjacent properties and public right-of-ways. Lighting and
signage shall not adversely impact traffic or adjacent properties. The applicants
site plan shows lighting directed towards the rear of the lot. That lighting must be
directed away from the residences across the alley.
Safetv and convenience of vehicular and vedestrian circulation and potential for
increases in the vicinity in relation to existing or permitted uses in the area
Because of the requirement for a six-foot fence along the alley, no increase in
traffic should result in the alley behind the adjacent residences. This
development is typical in size and parking with other developments of its size. In
staffs opinion, the proposed development does not present an unusual traffic or
pedestrian hazard.
Conditions of Approval.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8,2000 # PAGE 19
Approval of the Conditional Use Permit also constitutes a requirement that the following
conditions be met by the applicant:
The use shall be approved using the existing floor area within the building.
2. The activities on the site shall be limited to used vehicle sales with
ancillary minor repairs related to the sale of vehicles. Repairs shall be
performed inside of the building.
3. Planning Division staff shall approve building elevations.
4. Site ingress and egress - Unused driveways shall be barricaded so as to
prevent their use. Unused portions of drive approaches shall not be used
for parking.
5. No vehicles shall be displayed within the right-of-way.
6. Landscaping shall be as installed as shown on the landscaping plan. Note
staff has added an additional planting area around the perimeter of the
site. Redesign parking to accommodate additional landscaping. Provide
three (3) canopy and two () understory trees.
. All lighting shall be directed away from residential areas. No lighting shall
be mounted on the rear of the building. All lighting fixtures shall be face
west and light shall be directed from the rear of the lot towards the front.
8. A six-foot tail wood privacy fence shall be constructed along the alley. No
vehicular access shall be taken from the alley. The fenced area at the
rear of the lot shall not be accessed from the alley.
9. Section 610, Subsection 6 requires the removal of the any canopies not
associated with the proposed use. All canopies shall be removed.
10. Provide four parking spaces for customers. Show customer parking
spaces on site plan.
Mr. Sons made a motion to approve this request. Ms. Purtle seconded the motion.
Twenty-four surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Five ) or
20. 3% replied in favor and none (0) were opposed.
Mr. Mike Dettrick, Nortex Realty, represented the buyer, Mr. Floyd Browning. Mr.
Dettrick stated that the seller and his realtor were also present. Mr. Dettrick described
the corner properties across from this property. Mr. Dettrick stated that the two
driveways closest to the intersection will be closed by the applicant to provide additional
stocking space on the property for cars and improve traffic safety. The proposal for
PLANNINGlCOMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 20
interior landscaping includes a permanent brick masonry planter along the front of the
building and landscape the interior property line which will preserve the front (Kemp
side) of the lot for displaying automobiles. Mr. Dettrick commented that the length of
vacancy pertaining to this property does not meet the landscaping prerequisite and the
remodeling value will not meet the $50,000, another prerequisite. He then stated that
the ordinance reads, "A change in zoning, land use or a conditional use permit may
require landscaping equivalent.. Mr. Dettrick emphasized the ordinance says "may,"
not "shall' and he does not believe landscaping is required. He further commented that
he supports the ordinance by trying to operate within its boundaries, and is not trying to
circumvent it. Chairman Rhone remarked that this should be a workable issue for both
the applicant and the City.
Mr. Browning stated that if he is required to plant trees in the front it would hinder the
display of his automobiles. He commented on the improvements he has made to the
property which include lighting, parking, painting and remodeling the building, etc. Ms.
Purtle stated that the Commission is trying to find a workable solution to this problem,
but she would be opposed to not complying with the ordinance. There was discussion
regarding options other than frontage landscaping which included islands, planters, and
usage of the corners of the lot.
It was proposed to take the five tree requirement and alter it to 50% canopy trees, 25%
underunderstory trees, and the remaining % five gallon shrubs. It was suggested that three
trees be planted on the south side and the rest in planters on the west side of the
4W property.
Mr. Birck commented that the location has previously been leased to automobile -related
businesses who were not concerned with aesthetics. This tenant is proposing t
improve the property but visual access from Kemp is foremost. Mr. Browning stressed
that his business would be an improvement to the present condition of the property. He
commented that his present business is kept immaculate and he has additional staff for
that purpose. Ms. Purtle commented that she felt the applicant would be able to work
with staff regarding the landscaping difficulties.
Mr. Berg suggested three canopy trees on south side fronting Kemp with two under
canopy trees with shrubs in the planter. There continued to be more discussion
analyzing the landscaping possibilities with the applicant. Mr. Clark reminded the
Commission that they must decide what is reasonable concerning the landscaping
requirements and that this is their opportunity to improve that corner. He suggested
using large planters between the cars with Mr. Seese recommending that the contents
be specified. More discussion about specifics occurred between staff and the
Commission.
Mr. Seese was unable to stay for the remainder of the meeting.
ZONNG COMMOSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 21
An amended motion was made by Mr. Wright stating that landscaping shall be installed
per agreement with applicant and City staff regarding condition #6; Ms. Purtle seconded
the motion.
Mr. Browning stated that he has cooperated with all the City's City'requirements regarding
the remodeling phase of this project. He stressed again that he needs visibility f his
stock (cars) from Kemp.
Ms. Purtle was unable to stay for the remainder of the meeting.
After more dialog, Mr. Wright called the question on the amended motion.
Mr. Dettrick suggested the landscaping consist of five (5) Bradford pear trees, with two
inch calipers, would be planted along the south side between the building and the Kemp
Street frontage, in the planter box along the front of the building with shrubs similar to
boxwoods or holly.
There was a motion to amend condition #6 to plant five (5) two inch caliper Bradford
pear trees planted on the south side of the building and the planter box along the front
of the building planted with shrubs. Mr. Berg seconded the motion. The amendment
passed with a vote of six (6) in favor and one (1) opposed.
The original motion to approve the conditional use permit was passed with a vote of six
(6) in favor and one (1) opposed.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
1. City Council Update
Manufactured Home Ordinance
Mr. Clark reported that Council tabled the ordinance with the direction that staff continue
to work with the park owners to further look into the direction of the ordinance. The
concerns were the age of the homes to be moved in, moving homes across time, and
the acceptability of permanently based V'.
2. Discussion of Items of Concern to Members of the P&Z Commission
Chairman Rhone asked Councilor Burns about bringing the carport issue before
Council. Councilor Burns' opinion was that Council might be close to a majority opinion
of leaving the carport decision (rear access or not) to the P&Z Commission.
3. Staff/Commission Discussion
Mr. Clark stated that the workshop for outdoor screening has been cancelled. Mr. Berg
asked why it was cancelled; Mr. Clark responded that this issue would be extremely
PLANNING & -70NING COMMISSION
MARCH 8, 2000 • PAGE 22
L V/01- controversial issue and asked if the Commission was prepared for that event. Ms.
Phillips stated that she would be interested in having the workshop for a better
understanding of where the development of the ordinance is at this time. There was a
consensus of the members to have a workshop with a bus tour of the areas of concern
on March 22.
V11. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.
9115
David Rhone,
ATTEST:
10
Steve,Seese, City PrpAfiing Administrator
I girl, I (-
4 lel
Date '
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 8,2000 * PAGE 23