Loading...
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - 08/10/2005MINUTES PLANNING S ZONING COMMISSION August 10, 2005 RECEIVED IN CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Date q_ z r_ O 5 By Ss Time 10:25 A PRESENT: L. O. Nelson, Chairman ♦ Members Charles Barr • Ken Birck J. C. Bradberry Ken Dowdy • John R. Stephenson Ripley Tate ♦ Alternate #1 Charles Elmore ♦ Council Liaison David A. Clark, Director of Community Development ♦ City Staff Marty Odom, Planner II • Paul Stillson, Planner II Diane Parker ABSENT: Cayce Cleary ♦ Members Steve Lane • Rusty Sons I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Nelson at 2:00 p.m. Chairman Nelson made the following announcements: This meeting is being broadcast live on Channel 11. It will be played tonight at 7:00 p.m. and replayed tomorrow night and Friday night at 7:00 p. M. Motions made by the Commission members include all staff recommendations and developmental requirements listed in the staff report. Any deviations will be discussed on a case -by -case basis. Applicants and citizens who wish to address the Commission or answer questions from the Commission members, are asked to please speak into the microphone at the podium. The meeting is being taped and there is no microphone to record of statements made from the audience. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Bradberry made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted of the July 13, 2005 meeting. Mr. Stephenson seconded the motion. The minutes were approved with a unanimous vote. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 1 III. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Public Hearing on Preliminary Plats - none receieved 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: 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; 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 & 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. 1. Belair Addition, Replat Part Block 7, Unit 7 (August 2005) a. Provide utility slips. 2. Hillcrest Addition, Block 9, Lots 1 -A & 2 -A [replat] (August 2005) a. Provide utility slips. b. If proposed use is residential, provide a 15 -foot setback along Bluff Street. For all other uses provide a 25 -foot setback. C. Correct spelling of "Addition" in plat subtitle. d. An additional five (5) foot easement is needed along the south property lines of both lots. (TXU E. D.) 3. Norman Nelson Addition, Block 1, Lot 1 (August 2005) a. Provide utility slips. b. Remove "proposed" from utility easement. C. Provide dimensions for location of easements. d. Lot is currently served by water. (PUBLIC WORKS) e. Extend sanitary sewer to serve property. (PUBLIC WORKS) f. Comply with stormwater detention ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) 4. Swan Addition, Block 1, Lot 1 [ replat] (August 2005) a. Provide utility slips. b. Also include "and a portion of Lot 4 -A, Block 2, Edgemere Heights" in subtitle. C. Lot is served by water and sewer. (PUBLIC WORKS) d. Comply with stormwater detention ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) e. Additional easements are needed prior to final plat approval. (TXU E. D.) f. Utility easement of 75 needs to be added along north and west line backing up to existing 7.5' utility easement. (TXU E. D.) g. Dedicated utility easement of 10' needs to be added along south and east property lines along right -of -way of Jacksboro Highway and Southwest Parkway. (TXU E. D.) Mr. Barr made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Bradberry seconded the motion. The Consent Agenda passed with a unanimous vote. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 2 IV. REGULAR AGENDA 1. Case R 05 -08 Rezone from Single Family -2 to Limited Commercial and Amending the Land Use Plan 2803 Montgomery Place and Adjacent Right -of -Way Mr. Phuong Khong requested approval to rezone a residential lot that is adjacent to the commercial plaza on Kemp Street. He is proposing to use the lot for parking; the house will remain. The existing fence meets the six -foot privacy fence requirement. If approved, the Land Use Plan will be required to be updated on this property from low density residential to light commercial. Twenty surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Two (2) responded in favor and six (6) were opposed. The applicant, Mr. Khong, stated this (Kemp Street) area is growing. He commented that he needs additional parking for his business. Mr. Khong stated that this lot would give him 16 to 20 additional parking spaces. He also stated he has had problems renting the two additional spaces because of inadequate parking. Mr. Khong told the Commission that the tenant in the house does not have a problem with this proposed parking arrangement. Mr. Birck inquired if there was sufficient parking when the building was constructed. Mr. Odom stated that the parking requirement was adequate when the building was approved for occupancy. Mr. Birck stated that if Mr. Khong needs an additional 16 to 20 spaces, there will not be enough room (from the adjacent lot). Mr. Khong stated that this building was leased to a flower shop and beauty salon. The flower shop moved out; however, the beauty salon is growing and requires additional parking. He would like to rent the vacant spaces to retail establishments. Mr. Clark stated that it is difficult to determine where commercial should end and residential should begin, such as with this case. The primary buildings front on Kemp which has a heavy commercial aspect. The map shows the proposed property situated closer to Kemp than the lots on Wolfe Street. The view seen from 2803 Montgomery is the Pier One trash container which lends a commercial atmosphere to this location. He noted the number of negative replies from the surrounding residences. Mr. Barr recognized that this is not the only location in the City where there are residential properties behind the businesses on a commercial street. He stated that he has a problem changing a residence to commercial because the homeowners purchased their property with the assumption that it would always be located in a residential area. Mr. Victor Avenius, 2805 Fleming, voiced concern for increased traffic in the neighborhood; parking problems, specifically on the street; and privacy screening problems. He noted that the fence needed repair between GEICO and the store that Kocks Liquor previously occupied; Chairman Nelson assured Mr. Avenius that staff would research the problem. There was discussion regarding the logistics of using the yard for parking. Mr. Avenius asked if the renter moved from the house, could it be rented to a business. Chairman Nelson acknowledged that, if a business occupied the house, the commercial aspect would penetrate more into the neighborhood. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 3 Ms. Berniece Knightstep, 2809 Montgomery Place, stated she was concerned about the possible future use of house on the proposed lot. When asked where her house was, she stated it was three houses away. Ms. Margaret Stewart, 2805 Montgomery Place, expressed concern about a parking lot being located next door to her residence as well as the future use of the house. Chairman Nelson stated that, if this lot were rezoned to Limited Commercial, there would be permitted uses not requiring approval by this Commission and the owner could use that house for any of these uses. He stated that he visited the location and felt the parking was adequate. He acknowledged concern for intrusion into the neighborhood even though the zoning district boundary appears to align on the map. Mr. Bradberry stated he was not in favor of this change because of the effect on the neighborhood. Mr. Birck stated that business and residential side by side is not a problem. He cited Parker Square Shopping Center where the two zones coexist. He continued by commenting that office uses would not be objectionable; however, a service type of business might not be appropriate for that location. He stated that the parking was determined based on the building being used for offices. If a retail establishment were to move in, there would not be adequate parking. Mr. Khong explained to his tenant that he was going to construct a parking lot in the rear yard. Mr. Birck asked if there would be an access off Montgomery. Mr. Khong replied that there would be adequate space to access behind the building on Kemp (not using Montgomery). Mr. Birck suggested using a conditional use permit instead of rezoning the property. He explained that the permit would be able to be monitored and approval would be based on certain conditions. Mr. Odom stated that, with Single Family zoning, there are no provisions to allow a parking lot to extend into that zoning. Mr. Clark commented that the conditional use process would not apply and he felt the rezoning should either be approved or denied. Councilor Elmore asked, if this rezoning were not approved, would there be more parking on the side street. Chairman Nelson replied that he felt people would park on the street, especially for the business located on the Montgomery side of the building. Mr. Odom reported that one unit in this building has a retail conditional use permit. Additional conditional use permits would be required if more units were leased for retail purposes. Mr. Barr asked if a business could go in the house if the current tenant vacated. Staff responded that was correct if the rezone request was approved. Mr. Birck made a motion to recommend approval to City Council to approve this rezoning request and change the Land Use Plan. Mr. Bradberry seconded. The vote was zero (0) in favor and seven (7) opposed. The recommendation failed. 2. Case C05 -29 Convert a Portion of a Convenience Store into a Package Store (Liquor Store) 1135 Central Freeway Mr. Ajaib Gill requested approval to convert a portion of an existing convenience store into a package store for off - premise alcoholic beverage sales in General Commercial. The applicant wants to convert a storage area that was previously used for automotive service into the package store. Staff recommended approval. Four surrounding property owners were notified of this request. The only response received was opposed. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 4 Mr. Richard Romanek, 43319 Grants Glen, spoke as the representative for the applicant. He explained that the addition of this package store would be a convenience to the surrounding areas. The businesses will be operated separately with different hours of operation. The liquor store will be open from 11:00 a.m. until 9:00 p.m. and closed on Sunday. The existing store is open from 6:30 a.m. until 11:00 p.m. Monday through Sunday. Mr. Stephenson asked about the opposing response; Mr. Odom replied it was the convenience store across the street that also sells alcohol. Mr. Tate made a motion to approve this request. Mr. Bradberry offered the second. The liquor store was approved with a unanimous vote. 3. C 05 -30 Establish a Wine and Beer Off - Premise Sales Adjacent to Single Family -2 Zoning 2214 Ninth Street Mr. Anil Parikh requested approval to establish off - premise beer and wine sales at an existing convenience store. Staff recommends conditional approval with a six -foot tall privacy fence placed along the north property line. Twenty surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Two (2) responded in favor and seven (7) were opposed. Mr. Odom noted that there is a church directly across the street from this location. The method of measurement is from front door to front door. Staff measured the distance and found it to be 372 feet to the nearest front door which Mr. Odom believed to be the activity center. He stated that the law reads to follow the property lines. Mr. Barr stated that a new portico was constructed several years ago between the church and day care and he believed that technically that was the front door. In response to a request, Mr. Odom explained that this license was for selling wine and beer which is to be consumed away from the premises where it is sold. Mr. Odom stated the applicant contacted him to tell him he would not be at this meeting. Mr. Steve Robertson, 2202 Berkley, stated that he was the pastor of Floral Heights United Methodist Church located at 2214 Tenth Street. The front doors of the church no longer open; they lead to a historic sanctuary that is not longer functioning. The congregation enters from Polk Street or Tyler Street which are the doors to the office and through the portico. That is also where the parking is located. The activity center also functions as a latch -key facility, food pantry, and children's mini -gym. He stated that several years ago, Floral Heights made a decision to stay in that neighborhood even though the demographics of the neighborhood are changing. Recently, the Church has added a missionary minister for that neighborhood to the Church staff. The Church wants to be a positive influence in the community as well as the neighborhood. He continued by stating that selling beer and wine across the street from the playground and primary service areas for the children and the latch -key program would be detrimental to the programs and the Church. With two large parking lots in the vicinity, he speculated that some of the off - premise consumption might occur in those lots. Even though the Church is not currently close to an establishment selling alcohol, beer cans are picked up on the Church grounds on a daily basis. He stated the church is opposed to the approval of this conditional use request. Ms. Liz Talbert, 6217 Kovarik Road, asked the Commission to consider that churches, hospitals, and schools have multiple entrances, not just a main entrance by which the address is identified. The main traffic pattern is not always through the front door. She asked the Commission to consider that with this and future alcohol - related cases. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 5 Mr. Odom stated the 300 -foot issue is separate from the conditional use approval which is being considered by the Commission. Chairman Nelson stated the issue is the consideration of the sale of beer and wine adjacent to a single - family boundary. There is a church nearby and this alcohol use does not fit at the proposed location. Mr. Birck stated this is a difficult and delicate question for the Commission to consider. He stated that it offends him that the applicant or his representative is not in attendance. The application does not appear to be serious. Mr. Bradberry stated he was opposed. Chairman Nelson stated it would have been beneficial if the applicant were here to answer questions and interact. Mr. Birck made a motion to approve; Mr. Bradberry offered the second. There none (0) in favor and seven (7) opposed. V. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Discussion of Items of Concern to Members of the P &Z Commission Chairman Nelson inquired about a proposed traffic light at North Elmwood and Maplewood. Mr. Clark stated there is also a traffic light proposed for Elmwood and Kemp but he did not know when it would be installed. Chairman Nelson asked if he would check on both locations. VI. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m. L. O. Nelson, Chairman ATTEST: David A. Clark, Director of Community Development PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Date ;J 1 1 ,� - ate PAGE 6