Loading...
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - 04/11/2001M 0 11L�1� MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION April 11, 2001 PRESENT: David Rhone, Chairman Members Cliff Berg L. O. Nelson Lin Purtle Danny Richardson Bill Rowland Susan Wood Reeves Rusty Sons Ken Birck ♦ Alternate #1 J, C. Bradberry ♦ Alternate #2 Johnny Burns ♦ Council Liaison David A. Clark, Director of Community Development City Staff Steve Seese, Planning Administrator Paul Stillson, Planner 11 ABSENT: Lou Ann Phillips CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Rhone at 2:00 p.m. Mr. Bradberry, alternate member, attended part of the meeting seated in the audience and did not participate in the voting. Chairman Rhone also recognized Bill Altman, Councilor, who was seated in the audience. II. PUBLIC COMMENTS No one from the audience wished to address the Commission. Ill. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Purtle made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 14, 2001 meeting. Mr. Sons seconded the motion. The minutes were approved with a unanimous vote. 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: Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 1 W (gg, Standard Conditions of Approval for Preliminary Plats 61 9 Provide utility and drainage easements as required by utility companies and the Director of Public Works. Submit water and sewer plans 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. 31923=�= 105,173IM007= Note: Approval of a plat does not imply development of property in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Bridge Creek Estates, 11 Revised (April'01) 1Show lot number on each lot. 2. Change "Candlewood Drive" to "Candlewood Circle". 3. Extend water and sewer to serve all lots. (PUBLIC WORKS) 4. Construct internal streets in accordance with City standards. (PUBLIC WORKS) 5. Comply with stormwater detention ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) 6. Drainage improvements shall comply with stormwater drainage design criteria. (PUBLIC WORKS) T. Ten foot dedicated easement needed, prior to filing final plat, along street right-of-way to cover facilities. (TXU) 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: Standard Conditions of Approval for Final Plats 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 the Utilities Engineer; water plans to the Fire Marshall; andstreet, 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 & Transportation, if underground electric utilities are to be provided. Note: Approval of a plat does not imply development of property in violation of the Zonirl Ordirmice. a. Sandra Gail Subdivision No. 3, Block (April '01) 1 . Provide utility slips. 2. Show location of 65 db airport zoning noise contour. 3. All lots are served with water and sewer. (PUBLIC WORKS) 4. Comply with stormwater detention ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) 5. Comply with curb and gutter ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 2 b. Sierra Drive, Amon Family Addition (April '01) 1., Provide utility slips. Mr. Berg made a motion to approve this agenda. Mr. Birck seconded it. The vote was unanimous in fav of the Consent Agenda. i V. REGULAR AGENDA Chairman Rhone abstained from the discussion and voting on the first two agenda items, Canyon Trails plats. He designated Mr. Berg as acting chairman. 1. Approval of Preliminary Plat Canyon Trails a. Staff has a concern about this preliminary plat. This revision removes a loop in Canyon Ridge Drive therefore making it a 1,600-foot dead end street. This is a significant change from the original Planned Unit Development layout approved in 1992. b. Extend water to serve all lots. (PUBLIC WORKS) C. Extend sanitary sewer to serve all lots. (PUBLIC WORKS) d. Comply with stormwater detention ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) e. Construct all internal streets in accordance with City standards. (PUBLIC WORKS) f. Consider installation of traffic light at Canyon Trails Drive and Seymour Highway or Tanglewood and Seymour Highway, (POLICE) 9. Concern for length of dead-end street with one entry/exit point. (FIRE) h. Additional easement needed on final plat. (TXU) It was explained that Planning and the Fire Department had both expressed concern about the revision creating a long dead-end street. Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 3 addressed but not with this plat. Ms. Wood Reeves stated for future development the dead-end street issue needs to be addressed. Mr. Nelson asked if another entrance/exit was being considered for the development. 201 W-19 RI I IIIII F1 L9 I I I I I! I I•I I Ii IIP � I I! III I I I I I ••7007=70.RII 2. Request for Approval of Final Plat Canyon Trails, Section Seven, Lots 61-64, 80-90, and 90-A a. Staff has a concern about this final plat as it is based on a preliminary plat which contains a 1,600-foot dead end street. III Concern about the continued extension of dead-end street. Consider second access. C. Extend water and sewer to all lots. (PUBLIC WORKS) d. Comply with stormwater detention ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) e. Construct all internal streets in accordance with City standards. (PUBLIC WORKS) f. Comply with stormwater design criteria. (PUBLIC WORKS) 9. Concern for length of dead-end street with one entry/exit point. (FIRE) Mr. Seese stated the concerns for this plat were the same as for the preliminary plat. Mr. Biggs stated th is a 15-lot addition to the existing subdivision. The vote was unanimously in favor of approval of this final plat. 3. Request to Rezone Light Industrial to General Commercial Six Acres at the Northwest Corner of Old Jacksboro Highway and Jasper Street Case R 01 -0 Applicant Kathy Adams for JR Management Inc. Requested Action Rezone from Light Industrial to General Commercial Property Six (6) acres more or less out of Block 9, Abstract 302. Location The property is located at the northwest corner of Old Jacksboro Highway and Jasper Street. Existing Land Use Vacant land and a portion of a former car dealership parking area. Surrounding Land Uses & Zoning N: Holliday Creek, LI E: Various Commercial Uses, GIC S: Vacant Car Dealership, LI W:Auto Repair, Paint Manufacturing, LI Analysis: The applicant requests rezoning to General Commercial for this six -acre site planned for an apartment complex. Multifamily residential is a permitted use in a General Commercial zone. There is General Commercial zoning to the east of the property and Light Industrial zoning to the west. Adjacent on the wesl side is an auto repair garage and a paint manufacturing and mixing facility. Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 4 a. Chanqed 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., In the past, GO this section of Jacksboro Highway has been an area devoted to car sales and related business. Many of the dealerships have moved, leaving many vacant lots and buildings. 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 this area as Commercial. The applicant's request would, therefore, be in conformance with the Plan. The current Light Industrial zoning is not in conformance with the Land Use Plan. c. The nature and degree of impact upon neighboring lands: With the departure of many of the car dealerships, this area is in transition. The paint manufacturing business has reoccupied a portion of a former auto dealership. A new restaurant was recently completed across Jasper Street from this site. There are diverging trends in development in this area. The owner neighboring paint facility has expressed concerns that adjacent apartment residents may complain about his facility. Information available to staff indicates that the operation is a low -odor, safe operation. If this rezoning is approved, an amendment to the Land Use will not be required. Recommendation: The staff recommends approval of this rezoning to General Commercial. Mr. Seese presented letters of approval and one response opposed to the Commission. In addition, 18 surrounding property owners were notified of this rezoning request. Five (5) replied in favor and none (0) were opposed. Depending on the development, it is possible that the Land Use Plan may need to be changed. Mr. Andy Lee, representative for the owner of the property, stated this rezoning is being requested to provide flexibility for marketing. There is a potential multi -family use with an interested party. He also noted that TXDOT approved funding for the continuation of the trail along Holliday Creek. Mr. Lee stated that Jasper Street dead -ends at Holliday Creek; the bridge is no longer used. It was determined that the use would front Jasper Street. Mr. Randy Funston, owner of Excalibur Paint & Coatings, Ltd., stated he was opposed to the rezoning if a residential use would be permitted. Prior to the purchase of the property, one year ago, he approached the Planning office, Fire Department, and other authorities to apprise them of locating a paint manufacturing company on this site and to make sure there would be no future problems with this type of business in that area. He stated that the business has grown to within 80% of the use of the present building site. Another 25,000 to 30,000 square feet is being considered for development to relocate the manufacturing to rear of the property. Residential housing located on the next lot would prohibit this expansion. Fire hazards, safety risks, and complaints about the processing were some of his concerns. He stated that if the rezoning were approved, it would be a definite negative signal to other manufacturing companies that are considering expansions and to businesses considering Wichita Falls for location. Chairman Rhone inquired about deleting the residential use from General Commercial zoning. Mr. Seese responded by stating that, if the property were zoned Conditioned General Commercial, uses could be eliminated for that specific site. Mr. Berg asked Mr. Funston to show on the map where the manufacturing facility was located. Mr. Funston stated the new manufacturing facility will be located at the rear of the property. When asked if the residential development were to locate closer to Jasper Street, Mr. Funston replied that it would be too close to his proposed facility. Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 5 Ms. Kathy Papp, owner of German Auto Kraft 11, stated that she was not opposed to the General Commercial zoning but did object to the residential aspect. She noted this environment was not appropriate for children with the lack of playgrounds and bicycling and skateboarding areas. Mr. Ron Roberts, owner of JR Management and property owner, stated that he has been trying to sell this property for three years. He continued by stating that if the property were rezoned, there would not be any disadvantages and the advantages would be additional residences for citizens as well as more income on the tax rolls. He stated that his car body shop had to meet clean air standards which involved the purchase of expensive equipment to contain the paint smells and fumes. He stated he thought that paint manufacturing would be governed by the same set of standards. Mr. Clark stated that he felt it was important for this Commission to know the larger picture about this and other cases. The federal government authorizes a financial resource, low income housing tax credits, to build affordable housing. Tealwood Apartments on Professional Drive is an example of the same type of housing. Three projects will be nominated for the Wichita Falls/Abilene area which will be extremely competitive. The next case will be another nomination as well as the one rezoned on Rathegeber Road behind Crestview Cemetery. All these projects are worthwhile because they provide additional housing for this area. He estimated that only one of these three projects would receive the award this year although they can be renominated in the following years. Ms. Purtle asked if the apartments were to locate next to Mr. Funston would this prohibit his business from expanding. Mr. Seese replied it would not. Mr. Clark noted that Mr. Funston has not discussed the details of the expansion with the Planning staff. Mr. Funston stated that Senator Haywood was opposed to this issue last year because a large percentage of his office'stime is being spent by TNRCC in dealing with air problems protecting manufacturing properties. He asked the Commission to protect him from locating a residential area next to his business. Then he asked for support for the other LIHTC projects that were locating in residential environments, not commercial areas. Mr. Rowland asked if a buffer zone would be helpful. Mr. Funston replied that the reason we have zoning is to prevent a situation like this where apartment complexes are located next to manufacturing facilities. He stated he was trying to diversify and increase employment to 40-50 employees. He asked for the Commission's help in expanding by locating apartment complexes in (previously zoned) residential areas. Mr. Birck asked about the restrictions that would apply to his business regarding fumes, smell, and noise. Mr. Funston replied that TNRCC has different standards for an auto body shop than a paint manufacturing plant. Paint manufacturing must use 200,000 gallons of solvent annually before it is regulated by TNRCC. Chairman Rhone commented that renters would probably take into consideration the fact that they would be living next door to a manufacturing facility. They are not being forced to live in a specific apartment complex. He also gave examples of other land uses for the current zoning that would not require conditional use approval from this Commission where a paint manufacturing facility could affect tenants, such as hospital, school, church, etc. Mr. Sons asked if an air permit was required; Mr. Funston replied that the facilities usage does not require it. Ms. Wood Reeves inquired if pregnant women would be affected by solvents; Mr. Funston stated that he does use solvents which require proper respiratory equipment to be worn. He does not allow solvents that are carcinogenic or contain lead, but some in use do cause kidney and other medical problems. They are used inside a controlled setting at his facility. Mr. Lee stated the environmental agent, Dr. Morris Key, met with Mr. Funston last year and issued a letter for this project regarding the manufacturing facilities expansion. He read part of the letter which stated that "we looked into Mr. Funston's opposition to your River Glen project and found that he has no environmental, technical issues. Both Mr. Funston and Ms. Papp stated their concerns as purely for security,." It was suggested that perhaps the expansion of the manufacturing business might exceed the maximum limits of Light Industrial. Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 6 Mr. Birck inquired about the number of units and Ms. Wood Reeves asked about the number of buildings. Mr' Lee replied that there would be 96 units locating approximately 16 per building. The six acre development would be townhouse -type construction including a play area and recreation building. Concern was expressed about traffic and parking but the Chairman deferred discussion until a site plan is submitted. Mr. Sons empathized with Mr. Funston and the TNRCC issues but he also expressed concern for a potential development not getting adequate support. Ms. Wood Reeves stated objections to locating a residential project next to this business and the potential health issues that may arise. She would be in favor of a condition limiting residential development. Mr. Birck stated he supported General Commercial zoning with site plan approval, Mr. Nelson stated when he saw the property he could not imagine a residential development at that location. He commented that he would have preferred hearing from other businesses in the area. He thought there should be numerous other possibilities for that property other than residential; he expressed favoritism toward excluding the residential use in the General Commercial zoning. Mr. Berg stated he supported the change to General Commercial allowing residential uses. Chairman Rhone and Ms. Purtle agreed with Mr. Berg's decision. Mr. Nelson amended the original motion to recommend approval of General Commercial zoning with the residential uses being restricted. Ms. Wood Reeves seconded the motion. The motion failed with a vote of three (3) in favor and six (6) opposed. The original motion was then voted on; four (4) in favor and four (4) opposed with one (1) abstaining from voting. (Chairman Rhone asked Mr. Rowland if he was abstaining; Mr. Rowland indicated in the affirmative with a head nod.) The motion did not pass. (Requires five votes in favor to pass.) 4. Request to Rezone Light Industrial to General Commercial Nine Acres out of Block 3, Kemp and Newby Subdivision of Cherokee County School Lands Case R 01-05 Applicant ...........................................Randy Stevenson, United AF Management, LLC Requested Section...........................Rezone from Light Industrial to General Commercial Property ...... ............... ....... ........Nine acres more or less out of Block 3 Kemp & Newby Subdivision of the Cherokee County School Lands Location ............................................The .......,.The property is an "L" shaped tract located east of 1515 State Highway 79 Existing Land Use .............................Vacant land Surrounding Land Uses & Zoning. N: Highway right-of-way, GC E: Commercial and Residential, LI S: Vacant Land, New Life Church, LI W: Air Conditioning Contractor, Assisted Living Facility, LI & CG Analysis: The applicant requests a zoning change to General Commercial for a 9-acre site planned for an apartment complex. State Highway 79 is adjacent to this "L" shaped tract on the west, and Old Jacksboro Highway is adjacent on the east. 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 landuse adjacency. In 1996 the assisted living property just west of this tract was rezoned to from HC (now LI) to General Commercial to allow it to develop. 16 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 this area as Commercial. The applicant's request would, therefore, be in conformance with the Plan. The current Light Industrial zoning is not in conformance with the Land Use Plan. Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 7 c. The nature and dearee of impact upon neighbodnq lands: This is an area where the recent developme has been of a General Commercial instead of Light Industrial in nature. This development shouldn adversely impact the adjacent properties. Recommendation: The staff recommends approval of this rezoning to General Commercial. Eleven surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Three (3) were in favor and none (0) were opposed. 0 - 0 The vote was unanimous in favor of the recommendation. 5. Request to Rezone Light Industrial, General Commercial and Residential Mixed Use to River Development District Zoning 15 Acres South of East Wichita Street, East of Lee Street, North of Front Street, and West of Patterson Street Case R 01-04 Applic......... ....... City of Wichita Falls Requested Action--, ................... ...... Rezone from Light Industrial, General Commercial and Residential Mixed Use to River Development District. Property,, ................... ...-..Fifteen (15) acres more or less out of the R.E. Montgomery Second Subdivision and adjoining portion of the Wichita River. Location...,....... ..... --- ........... .......... The property is located south of East Wichita Street, east of Lee Street, north of Front Street and west of Patterson Street. Existing Land Use ......... -..Vacant land, Residences and Commercial uses. Surrounding Land Uses & Zoning ... - N: Housing Authority, MFR E: Residential and Commercial uses, RMU S: Residences and Commercial Uses, I -I W: O'Reilly Park, RDD Analysis: 0 This is a City initiated rezoning. It was felt desirable to rezone this property to protect and encourag through zoning, development conducive to the intent of the River Development District. To achieve th t purpose, a rezoning from Light Industrial, General Commercial and Residential Mixed Use to Riv Development District zoning is proposed. Earlier this year, the City council asked the Planning Division t review the boundaries of the River Development Zone (RDD) for possible changes to encourage relate amenities. At the February P&Z meeting, the staff presented some recommendations for rezonings, and t Commission voted to begin the process. This tract contains properties roughly from O'Reilly Park to B Donnell Park on both sides of the Wichita River., On the north side of the river, the City owns all of the property including Ben Donnell Park, now zoned General Commercial. On the south side of the river, some of the property along the river is zoned Residential Mixed Use. On the south side of the river, there is a large tract with a metal building (formerly Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 8 Wichita Gear) and next to it are residences and vacant land. Development and redevelopment compatible with these nearby parks will be more likely under the provisions of the River Development District. 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 development of the MPEC facility and walking trails has occurred since these tracts were originally zoned. b. Relationship to the ComprehensiveStaff 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 the area north of the river as Commercial and High Density Residential. South of the River the plan designates the rezoning area as Commercial to the west and Residential to the east. c. The nature @nd deg[���f im�qctyppn neigbborinq lands. This rezoning will provide a more compatible reuse of existing non -conforming facilities and vacant land. Because this rezoning is not initiated by the property owners, the owners of property within the proposed rezoning area have been notified as well as those within 200 feet of the proposal. If this rezoning is approved, an amendment to the Land Use will be required. Recommendation: 16 Thirty-one (31) surrounding property owners within the 200' notification area were notified of this request. No responses were received. Seven (7) property owners located in the area to be rezoned were notified of this request to rezone their property. No responses were received. Mr. John Levatte stated he received the notification while he was out of town and could not respond by the deadline. He owns the property at 105 Eastside Drive and Front Street where he has a warehouse. He stated he was concerned about the restrictions the new zoning might impose on his property. Mr. Seese stated his property would not be effected. There are no plans or provisions to require him to change anything about his business; his business could be a non -conforming use. If he changes the use of his property, he might be required to obtain conditional use approval. If he wanted to expand his current use, Mr. Seese commented that would be permitted with approval. Mr. Levatte stated he was concerned about his frequent outside storage needs in RDD. The location of Mr. Levatte's lot was discussed and it was noted that his lot could be excluded from the rezoning. Ms. Wood Reeves stated she was in favor of that option, Ms. Purtle asked if Mr. Levatte's outdoor storage was in compliance with the current zone's uses; Mr. Seese replied that he is currently In Light Industrial where outdoor storage is permitted. Chairman Rhone noted that outdoor storage would be permitted in this case in RDD since Mr. Levatte's business would be classified as a non -conforming use. Mr. Seese brought to the Commission's attention that his property was the key tract of land in the area; Chairman Rhone stated it would not be worth it to exclude this land from the rezoning. Mr. Seese then read the permitted uses allowed in RDD; it would be similar to a tourism district in other cities. ' QMr. Levatte was asked if he was still opposed to the rezoning, and he stated he was. Chairman Rhone hh asked if he had future plans for this property. Mr. Levatte responded that he currently has the property for sale with a few prospects. He continued that several possibilities exist for wrecker business with outdoor storage or an automotive garage. Chairman Rhone stated that if the property is sold and turned into another non -conforming use then the prospective owner would need to apply for conditional use approval. Mr. Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 9 Seese stated that there is a conversion process, including conditional use approval, if the use is more restrictive than the current use; however, the property could not be converted to a less restrictiveuse. Mr. Levatte stated that he was still opposed to the rezoning. Mr. Nelson stated that a zoning change could severely impact his property. The positive side is that there are many lucrative opportunities for his property in RDD but they are not in the categories for which Mr. Levatte has prospects. He stated he was not sure how to vote. Mr. Seese stated that a zoning change applies to the land, not to the owner. Ms. Wood Reeves stated concerns for harming Mr. Levatte's property value. Mr. Clark stated that, since this is an internally initiated zone change the Commission, has the right to add or delete requirements. Mr. Seese also commented that the intent of zoning is to protect the area. Mr. Seese indicated on the map the portion of the property that is included in the floodway. There was discussion regarding development in the area since the Coliseum was constructed. Councilor Burns stated that zoning was designed to protect areas of town and provide direction for growth of a city. Individual property rights are paramount. The Commission should scrutinize their decision since the property owner has objections, Mr. Rowland stated that if this rezoning were approved, then Mr. Levatte would not be able to sell the property to be used as a salvage yard. Chairman Rhone stated that would potentially prohibit that specific sale. If a salvage yard bought the property they would need conditional use approval, The Commission members stated they would not grant that permit in RDD. Mr. Berg stated this is the first opportunity staff has had to acknowledge an objection from a property owner. He suggested tabling the decision today. Chairman Rhone stated that would allow City staff to meet with Mr. Levatte. Mr. Seese asked for direction from the Commission in dealing with Mr. Levatte. Mr. Berg replied to explain why a salvage yard would not be appropriate in RDD and clarify the permitted and conditional uses of RDD. Ms. Wood Reeves recognized that Mr. Levatte has a pearl of a piece of property in RDD and it could be enhanced for future development for tourism and associated businesses. Mr. Levatte commented that he did not want to wait a long period of time to sell this land. Chairman Rhone noted that this property is probably the largest piece of land that could be developed in the immediate area. Mr. Seese stated that if this property is not considered, then the rezoning should be dropped. Ms. Wood Reeves stated she wished to see this property in RDD. Ms. Purtle suggested City staff should meet with Mr. Levatte before this Commission makes a decision regarding this property. Mr. Clark stated that a public meeting should be held inviting those property owners effected. Mr. Nelson made a motion to table this rezoning request. Ms. Purtle seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of tabling the rezoning. Chairman Rhone stated this would allow staff time to make a presentation to the property owners. 6. Request to Rezone General Commercial to River Development District Block 1, R. E. Montgomery Subdivision Containing 4.5 Acres More or Less Applicant ...........................................City of Wichita Falls Requested Action .............................Rezone Rezone from General Commercial to River Development District Property ............................................Block 1, R. E. Montgomery Subdivision, containing 4.5 acres more or less Location ............................................The property is located south of Wichita Street, east of North Lamar Street, north of Warren Street and west of North Scott Avenue Existing Land Use .............................Retail, Manufacturing, Clubs, Outdoor Storage Surrounding Land Uses & Zoning ..... N: Vacant Commercial, Retail, GC E: Commercial and Residential, RDD S: Bingo Facility, RDD W: Bridwell Agriculture Center, RDD Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 10 Analysis: This tract is surrounded on three sides by existing RDD zoning. This block contains two lounges, a used merchandise business and auto sales. Located on this block are a machine shop and several large storage buildings along with outdoor storage. The property is east of the J. S. Bridwell Agricultural Center, Changed conditions: Staff analyzed the rezoning to identify conditions that have changed in the distric� or may have changed outside the district that directly or indirectly affect land use adjacency. T&-. development of the MPEC facility and walking trails has occurred since these tracts were originally zoned. b. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan: Statf considered the etYects of the land uses allowed under t1h proposed zoning district relative to conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Plan currentl, designates this area as Commercial. There is no classification on the Land Use Plan that correspond,1 to the RDD district. The closest match would be the commercial land use. In staff's opinion eith General Commercial or River Development zoning would be similar to the Land Use Plans "commercia designation". c. The nature and deg-ree of impact upon neighboring lands: This rezoning would encourage uses that will be compatible with the adjacent MPEC facility.. Existing outdoor storage/display and repair services would become nonconforming uses. ,, ]IFTIFT17-Tirs =0 2i1Ill1;;1ii I ,,;; 11 Ka =- Own-* ecommendation: -n-FlUrk-9 M Mr. Nelson made a motion to recommend approval of this rezoning request to City Council; Mr. Richardsor ,2econded. 4, 0 Mr. J. A. Simmons, property owner in the rezoning area, stated that he complied with the City's request construct a privacy fence around his property twenty years ago. He noted that now he is having proble with the City's I Code Enforcement Division about illegal outdoor storage. Chairman Rhone explained th outdoor storage enforcement issues were not reviewed by this Commission. Ms. Patricia McCoy stated she was out of town and could not respond in time. She asked if her property 807 Wichita Street could be [eased or sold to a different business; Chairman Rhone explained if it was non -conforming use she would be required to get conditional use approval. To sell the property, she woull not have to get approval. 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 r. F1 A-Z&O R 10 IZA Vj 0 0 0 0 - 0 91711 LVZA73 " I E I I N 0 01 as] S 111 CIA$ 0 0 0 .11LORI io U Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 11 411 7. Request for Video Arcade W 1410 Beverly Drive Case C 01-16 Applicant__ ..... _ ....................... __ ..... Vickie Ho Requested Action ........... ___ .__Conditional Use Permit Property., ...... .......... ............. .... ...1410 Beverly Dr. Zoning ......... _ ....................... ......... ............. General Commercial Existing Land Use ......... ............ ...... -Commercial Plaza Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: .... .N: Commercial Plaza, GC S: Residences, SF-2 E: Commercial Plaza, GC W: Residences, SF-2 Analysis: The applicant wishes to occupy space wn a 4 unit commercial plaza on Beverly Dr. for an "eight line type arcade. The arcade will consist of 25 to 40 machines that will dispense tickets redeemable for prizes gift certificates. This activity requires a conditional use permit in General Commercial when it is within 2 feet of a residence, school, or a residential zoning boundary. This site is zoned General Commercialand within 200 feet of residences. This plaza presently has a laundromat, New Life Rehabilitation (Alcoholics Anonymous), and two vacant units. 4 Developmental Requirements: None. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this permit. Mr. Birck made a motion to approve this conditional use request. Mr. Nelson seconded the motion. Thirty-one surrounding property owners were notified of this request. our (4) replied in favor, five (5) were opposed, and one (1) replied as "Other." Ms. Vicki Ho, applicant, gave a brief summary of the eight -liner video arcade games for is she was requesting the permit. To questioning she responded that it cost one penny to play one game which issue redeemable gift certificates. Mr. Seese stated that these machines are classified as video game arcades, not for use by minors, a issue redeemable gift certificates. Only the land use was considered in staffs recommendation, not t gambling aspect. He further explained that hours of operation could be regulated by the conditional u permit. Ms. Ho explained that she would be open from 11 a.m. until 8 p.m. weekdays and, on the weeken from 10 a.m. until 12 a.m. Ms. Betty Murphy, representative of the Cheryl Street Community Church of God, stated the neighborhood has been inundated with adult only businesses. As a church representative, she wants to encourage development of more child ren-related businesses in the area. Mr. Clark mentioned that there is pending legislature before the State regarding the legality of eight -liners. He further commented that he hoped Ms. Ho would take that into consideration prior to investment. Planning & Zoning Commission April 1111, 2001 Page 12 Mr, Nelson stated that if we are challenged to look at this from a land use point of view, then Mr. Gossom comments, .•• land use in proximity to •• is highly valued. Even though Crockett School is outside of the notification area, it should • taken into consideration. Mr. Birck stated that because only adults are allowed to play these machines does not mean it will be rough and rowdy. If it is properly maintained and managed, there is nothing wrong with that. The concerns of the church and schools are centered around influence — what influence would this have on the children passing by. There are •` types •- business that would • adversely affect children. Ms. Wood Reeves expressed concern that Ms. Ho would invest money in these machines and could possibly be closed down by the State. Chairman Rhone agreed it would be a risk. Mr. Sons stated that he was not comfortable with the proximity to the schools but the core issue here is land rights and property use. 8. Request for Video Arcade 3002 Midwestern Parkway Case C 01-15 Applicant... ............ .......... ... Max A. Gary Use Permit gg, •- . ............ ......... ....... ......,3002 Zoning....-, ....... ........ ..—General Midwestern Parkway Commercial Existing Land Use ... ...... — —.. —Commercial Plaza Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:...... N: Barwise Jr. High School, Go S: Sikes Senter Mail, GC E: •• Practice Field, GC W: Dentist Office, GC Analysis. - The applicant wishes to occupy space within a three unit commercial plaza on Midwestern Parkway for an "eight liner" type video game arcade. The arcade will be within a 1,200 square foot area and will consist of 10 to 15 machines that will dispense tickets redeemable for gift certificates. This activity requires a conditional use permit in General Commercial when it is within 200 feet of a residence, school, or a residential zoning boundary. This site is zoned General Commercial and is within 200 feet of a school and residences. Recommendation. - Staff recommends approval of this permit. Mr, Birck made a motion to approve this request. Mr. Sons seconded the motion. Eleven surrounding property owners were notified of this request. None (0) replied in favor and three (3) were opposed. Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 14 Mr. Gary stated this location was across the street from the Mail. Base track field, which is fenced, is to the rear of this location. There is no access from the school in the immediate area nor are there children walking in that area. Mr. Gossom stated this case is closer to the school than the previous case. He also recognized that this use is conditional and not permitted because citizens may have some objections. The notification process offers citizens to comment. Mr. Birck asked what the school feared from this business; Mr. Gossom replied that security risk problem when there is a large number of adults congregating in an area and do not have school business. When asked about hours of operation, Mr. Gary replied 10 a.m. until 10 or 11 p.m. at night, six or seven days a week. Mr. Gossom stated there is a higher concentration of students because Barwise is a transfer area for children going to other schools. There is always the possibility of children coming in contact with adults that could pose a security threat. Mr, Birck commented that there were more adults exiting the Mall that would visit this propos establishment. When asked about security, Mr. Gary responded that there would always be one or attendants on site, and if a situation got out of control the police would be called. He again stressed that t average player would be elderly or retired. When asked about the noise factor, Mr. Gary stated there wou• be no noise from the machines because there is a printed message. Ms. Wood Reeves stated she has a problem with the location. Ms. Purtle stated concern with the issu raised by Mr. Gossom; she did not see this business as a threat. Chairman Rhone concurred. He al agreed with Mr. Birck that if alcohol were sold or it was an adult -oriented business, then it could be Qproblem, but it seemed relatively harmless. I 103EME3=1 9. Request for Carport #5 Renee Circle Case 01-17 Mr. Nelson made a motion to approve this carport request; Ms. Wood Reeves seconded the motion. Eighteen surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Six (6) replied in favor and one (1) was opposed. The Commission was very impressed with the type of carport to be constructed when Mr. Stills on presented photos. Mr. John Privie, applicant, stated the amended size of the carport will be 20' x 20', four feet shorter than originally proposed. The carport passed with a unanimous vote. VI. OTHER BUSINESS 1. City Council Update a. Amendment to Airport Zoning Regulations Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 15 Mr. Clark stated the Regulations were adopted by City Council at their last meeting. 62. Discussion of Items of Concern to Members of the P&Z Commission Mr. Nelson stated that he had previously asked Mr. Clark if a conditional use permit could be revoked; Mr. Clark told him that it was possible. Mr. Clark stated that this Commission has revoked permits in the past. Mr. Nelson commented that it made him feel better about the decision -making process since there was some regulation in place, Chairman Rhone stated that if there are complaints and this Commission verifies with the Planning Division that they are valid, the applicant must appear and the permit can be revoked. VII. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 5:02 p.m. David Rhone, Chairman Date a ATTEST: 0" 0 Steve Seese, City Planning Administrator Date do Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 2001 Page 16