Loading...
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - 09/10/2003M I N U T E S CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Date = 3--C3 �� September 10, 2003 B Time PRESENT: Cliff Berg, Chairman Charles Barr L. O. Nelson Bill Rowland Rusty Sons Ken Birck J. C. Bradberry David A. Clark, Director of Community Development Marty Odom, Planner II Paul Stillson, Planner II Diane Parker ABSENT: Susan Wood Reeves Cayce Cleary I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Berg at 2:00 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Members • Alternate #2 ♦ City Staff • Member • Alternate #1 Mr. Bradberry made a motion to approve the minutes of the August 13, 2003 meeting. Mr. Nelson seconded the motion. The minutes were approved with a unanimous vote. III. CONSENT AGENDA 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 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. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 PAGE 1 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. 1. Cardinal Subdivision Preliminary Plat, Block 1, Lot 1, 2 & 3. (Sept. `03) a. Place note on plat stating: "The area indicated on this plat is outside the City limits of Wichita Falls on the date of approval of this plat. This property lies within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Wichita Falls and may be subject to annexation." b. Serve proposed lots with potable water. (PUBLIC WORKS) C. Serve proposed lots with approved sewerage system. (PUBLIC WORKS) d. Comply with curb and gutter ordinance if within Level I of extra - territorial jurisdiction area. (PUBLIC WORKS) e. Provide stormwater detention per City of Wichita Falls' ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) f. Has not submitted the subdivision plan to determine suitability for septic system. (HEALTH) g. An existing 50 -foot easement will need to be added to plat for a high pressure gas line. This line runs north and south approximately 78 feet west of the east property line of Lot 3. 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; 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. Cardinal Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 2 (Sept. `03) a. Place note on plat stating: "The area indicated on this plat is outside the City limits of Wichita Falls on the date of approval of this plat. This property lies within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Wichita Falls and may be subject to annexation." b. Provide signature acknowledgement for the County Judge. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 PAGE 2 C. Add "R.O.W° to "herein dedicated" statement. d. Serve proposed lot with potable water. (PUBLIC WORKS) e. Serve proposed lot with approved sewerage system. (PUBLIC WORKS) f. Comply with curb and gutter ordinance in within Level I of the extra territorial jurisdiction area. (PUBLIC WORKS) g. Provide stormwater detention per City of Wichita Falls' ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) h. Has not submitted the subdivision plan to determine suitability for septic system. (HEALTH) 2. Nitrous Express Addition, Lot 1 (Sept. `03) a. Approved conditioned upon the use of City sewer. (HEALTH) b. Comply with curb and gutter criteria, is applicable. (PUBLIC WORKS) C. Comply with stormwater detention ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) 3. B. B. Woodall Subdivision, Lots 13 -A & 17 -A [replat] (Sept. `03) a. Provide utility slips. b. Label east -west portion of Brown Lee as "Brown Lee Street." Label north -south portion as "alley." C. Show boundary of 100 -year floodplain crossing tract. d. Comply with curb and gutter requirements per City of Wichita Falls' ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) e. Comply with City of Wichita Falls' stormwater detention ordinance. (PUBLIC WORKS) Mr. Barr made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Bradberry seconded the motion. The Consent Agenda passed with a unanimous vote. IV. REGULAR AGENDA 1. Street Closure Request Rider Avenue and the South Part of Columbia Road The adjacent property owners submitted a request to close Rider Avenue and the south part of Columbia, which have never been constructed and are considered "paper streets." The property will be combined and quadruplexes will be built. All surrounding property owners within the affected blocks as well as affected City Departments and utility companies were notified. Their primary concerns are retaining utility easements and Fire Department access. Staff recommended approval with easements being retained. Seventeen surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Three responded in favor and none were opposed. Mr. Rowland made a motion to approve this closure. Mr. Bradberry seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of approval. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 PAGE 3 2. Case R 03 -07 Rezone from LC to GC 1610 Kell Boulevard and Adjacent Right -of -Way On July 9, 2003, this Commission considered this request and recommended approval to City Council who heard the case on August 13th. Council had concerns regarding spot zoning and the inclusion of right -of -way. When staff submitted this request to Council, a portion of the Kell right -of -way was included to create continuity on the zoning map. Council has sent this case back to this Commission for a rehearing because the right -of -way was not a part of the request that P &Z originally approved. After analyzing this request, staff recommended disapproval with remaining concerns regarding spot zoning, intensified commercial development not beneficial at this location, and a size - restrictive site not suitable for General Commercial zoning. The previous notification responses received for the July 9th meeting were three in favor and one opposed out of 12 property owners notified. Three favorable responses from outside the notification area were also received. In a meeting with staff, TXDOT expressed concern for frontage development along the access road. Mr. Sons made a motion to recommend approval of this request to City Council. Mr. Rowland seconded the motion. Mr. Clark presented a list of the uses in Limited Commercial and General Commercial. Many of the uses permitted in General Commercial can be conditionally approved in an LC zone. Chairman Berg inquired about a text amendment for LC zoning. Mr. Clark explained the procedure noting that it would involve more time because of newspaper advertising, presentation to this Commission and subsequently requiring Council approval. Chairman Berg stated that rezoning to General Commercial appears to be the only way a car lot can go on this property. Mr. Martin Litteken, representative for the applicant, stated that when staff presented this rezoning to Council the area was expanded to abut the existing GC zone. It appeared Council was concerned that it was not the same map that was presented to P &Z. This is the same request as previously submitted with a change to the Land Use Plan. It is a commercial use in a residential neighborhood with the alley and street frontage acting as buffers. Mr. Litteken suggested conditioned General Commercial zoning as an alternative. Mr. Birck mentioned that it was difficult making a decision regarding this case knowing that the next rezoning case involves land on Kell several blocks away. He also suggested making a decision on this case after hearing R 03 -08. Chairman Berg stated there are distinct differences between the two cases. Mr. Birck stated that, if we look at both cases, there would be a multitude of lots, and not spot zoning. Mr. Clark clarified that the additional land attached to the original request was right -of -way which would provide connection to a GC zone. Mr. Barr noted that, for many years, GC uses existed on this site in a nonconforming capacity. Mr. Nelson stated that recently great strides have been made to improve this property. He commented that a car lot would be an appropriate use and not appear to complicate the traffic situation noting, however, that staff was not in favor of this request in July or now. TXDOT also appears to be in opposition. Mr. Birck expressed concerns for this area. There are a number of vacant lots being considered in this case as well as the next case. As surrounding houses deteriorate, there will be more vacant lots. There is no way to get commercial development into these areas. He stated this is an opportunity to give consideration to these lots that must be mowed and have the taxes paid. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 PAGE 4 Mr. Rowland asked if, in time, all the property facing Kell would be vacant land. Mr. Clark deferred that conditioned zoning, with the elimination of certain uses, might be the answer. Mr. Birck stated that once the connector to Kell (from the overhead freeway) is built, much of the traffic would be eliminated. Mr. Clark stated that, if the conditions of approval for this rezoning case are made more restrictive, it could be accomplished at this meeting. Mr. Litteken suggested General Commercial Conditioned zoning for automotive sales & service. Mr. Clark recommended including bed & breakfast inns, medical offices, and general offices with the rest of the GC uses requiring conditional use permits. Mr. Barr made a motion to amend the original motion to rezone from Limited Commercial to General Commercial Conditioned with the permitted uses being automotive sales and service, bed and breakfast inns, medical offices, and general offices and conditional use permits required for all other GC uses. Mr. Sons seconded. The vote was unanimous in favor of the amendment to the original motion. NOTE: General Commercial uses requiring a conditional use permit are not permitted in this GC(c) zone. The vote on the original motion was passed unanimously. Mr. Rowland made a motion to recommend to City Council to amend the Land Use Plan to commercial at 1610 Kell Freeway and its accompanying right -of -way. Mr. Bradberry seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of approval. 3. Case R 03 -08 Rezone from LC to GC 1516, 1518, 1520, 1524 through 1534 Kell 1523, 1524, 1526, and 1528 Seventeenth Street 1707 Grace Street A request was received from several property owners within the Spivey Subdivision to rezone three tracts of land from Limited Commercial to General Commercial. Staff received several other applications to be included in this rezoning after the deadline. Those applications could not be processed in time for this meeting. The original proposal represents spot zoning. Staff recommended this request be tabled until all property owners can submit their applications. Thirty -four surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Six responded in favor, two responded opposed, and two responses were marked undecided. Mr. Sons made a motion to recommend approval of this rezoning request to City Council. Mr. Birck seconded the motion. Mr. Clark stated that, after the deadline for submission, two applications were submitted with a third received this morning. These applications were not included in the agenda book, in the public notice in the newspaper, or in the mailing to the surrounding property owners. Mr. Clark reviewed concerns which included access and curb cuts along Kell and increasing commercial traffic in the residential area. He stated that this rezoning is speculative, no project has been submitted. Mr. Clark presented a zoning map of the City. He discussed concerns for lining thoroughfares throughout the City with commercial zoning. He acknowledged that this neighborhood is at risk PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 PAGE 5 for continued residential development. With properties being added to the original application, he felt this is being prematurely presented to the Commission. There could be developmental tract potential if all lots participated in the application. Mr. Birck asked if the applications were received cohesively would it have made a difference. Mr. Clark stated that possibly it would, but there are still concerns for commercial abutting residential. Mr. Clark explained staff's role is to present planning principles to this Commission and City Council. The process is American government, at its best, with a citizen review of requests at two levels as well as input noted by the surrounding property owners. Staff is concerned with the level of commercial zoning in the City, a sensitivity to protect the remaining neighborhood, a serious concern with an incomplete petition, and the development of a project with principle access from another route other than the freeway. Chairman Berg inquired about the possibility of a lot (in the proposed area) retaining residential status and not agreeable to being sold. Mr. Clark commented thatzoning does not assure a land use change. Zoning is permissiveness for the ultimate development of property but there are no requirements that the property owners must participate. Chairman Berg noted that there are three proposed tracts that are surrounded on all sides by residents and vacant lots. The problem of the lack of a project was discussed. Mr. Clark stated that knowing the nature of a project could have an effect. Mr. Birck stated that it is easier to market an area with the zoning rather than with the prospect of obtaining a rezoning. Mr. Jon Moller, applicant, stated he is seeking General Commercial entitlement for Tract Target A shown on the UAND map (exhibit ZC -1) as a highly deliverable plottage, not individual GC entitlements for separate parcels. Individually, the fee - simple Limited Commercial status quo would prevail. In a transaction for the entire 4.14 -acre tract, GC development rights would be the home rule applicable to potential buyers and redevelopers. Mr. Moller then explained the map he presented, updating the Commission on the status of lots that would be involved in this rezoning. Mr. Moller stated he did not think the Zoning Ordinance's definition of General Commercial would be applicable to the development of this tract. He continued by commenting this is an image corner in the City, being highly visible and associated with the medical district. A socio- economic study depicted 3,400 people employed within seven blocks of this tract. An economic obsolescence is occurring with many of the homes in this tract. Chairman Berg asked if there was a buyer for the tract. Mr. Moller stated that, through a combination of fee - simple interests as parcels in a plottage, he is asking for an entitlement to sell this tract as General Commercial. He stated that he is trying to assemble a seven -acre tract with the concept that it could be a Chapter 311 Reinvestment Zone. Chairman Berg stated this rezoning request as submitted shows a disjointed, non - contiguous configuration of lots, unlike any requests previously submitted to P &Z. Mr. Moller noted this is a group of interested citizens trying to get their land rezoned. He stated that he needs the City to support this request. He continued by commenting that he is looking for guidance from this Commission and Council to obtain an entitlement if four acres were to be sold rather than individual tracts. He stated he is not asking for General Commercial rezoning for individual lots. Chairman Berg commented that there are a number of ways to accomplish the end result. He suggested working with staff to get an organized plan of the rezoning procedures then proceed. Mr. Moller stated he would like an entitlement in order for the purchaser to feel comfortable that the City will approve (the rezoning). Mr. Birck stated that replatting (this acreage) into one large lot cannot occur until the land is sold to one individual. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 PAGE 6 Mr. Barr asked if the rezoning request could be tabled until the next meeting so the three other lots can be presented along with the original request. Mr. Moller stated he would not object to tabling the request and resubmitting in October. Mr. Moller asked if the Commission had received Addendum #5, Police Report, submitted to staff the morning of this meeting. Mr. Clark stated that Addendums were not provided to the Commission because they were received after the agenda packets were mailed. Mr. Moller asked if Addendums #3, #4, and #5 could be included in the (agenda) packets for the next meeting. Mr. Clark replied, "Probably." Chairman Berg asked Mr. Moller to have his group (of applicants) work with Planning staff to facilitate approval (by staff) of this rezoning. He stated he would like to see a procedure list. Mr. Moller commented he would be happy to work with Mr. Clark on this issue and have it (the list) prepared for him (Chairman Berg). Mr. Bradberry made a motion to table this rezoning request. Mr. Nelson seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of approval. Mr. Roland Marchand, applicant, stated he previously attempted to get some of these lots rezoned and it was denied. Then, he listed this property with several brokers and it did not sell. He thought that his parcel was not large enough to market. He stated he wants to work with the City for the betterment of the City. Mr. Marchand stated that Mr. Moller is representing the group because he has more knowledge (than the group). Mr. Powers stated he thought the concept is good for this dying area. He commented that perhaps the (existing) General Commercial zoning is not in the proper area for the City. He said he would be in favor of the concept (this rezoning request) if presented according to the proper procedures. Mr. Clark stated that when it comes to development (of property), the City is not the developer; the City does not assemble land for private individuals to make a package sale. If a land package is presented to the City, it will be considered. Chairman Berg stated that it appears the applicants are making an effort to make this a contiguous tract. It would be noteworthy for the City to make a list of the processes that the applicant should follow to get a favorable recommendation. 4. Case C 03 -48 Construct a Church in SF -2 1101 Harlan Avenue The applicant, Mr. Angus Thompson for New Jerusalem Baptist Church, requested a conditional use permit to construct a new church within a Single Family -2 zone. This is a proposal to construct the first phase, a 208 -seat facility, of a two -phase project. The second phase will be an internal addition to accommodate a total of 462 people and it will require an additional conditional use permit. Staff recommended approval of this request. Twenty -six surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Five responded in favor, one was opposed, and one response was undecided. Mr. Odom responded to questioning by stating the opposing response was concerned about parking. Mr. Barr made a motion to approve this request. Mr. Sons seconded the motion PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 PAGE 7 Mr. Thompson stated the required number of parking spaces would be constructed. He also would comply with the drainage requirements and would abide by all ordinances. Mr. William Ray Toles, project director, was also available for questioning. Mr. Thompson stated he was aware of the conditions of approval recommended by staff. The vote was unanimous in favor of approval. 5. Case C 03 -50 Carport at 4323 Boren Avenue The applicant, Mr. Chris Aday, requested a carport at his residence. There are six properties located within 200 feet of this property that have carports in their front setbacks. Thirty -four surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Seven responded in favor and none were opposed. Mr. Stillson stated that the applicant was in route to the meeting. The carport was approved with a unanimous vote in favor. V. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Discussion of Items of Concern to Commission Members Mr. Barr mentioned that the Coliseum appears to have a weed problem. He also noted there were dead trees around MPEC. Mr. Clark stated that letters are being sent to commercial establishments with landscaping maintenance problems. 2. Staff and Commission Discussion Mr. Clark stated that staff developed a checklist, officially titled the Project Development Checklist, providing an overview of items concerning developmental projects. Mr. Barr commented that the (Marant) sign on the fence on the Kell access street has been removed. VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. VII. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 3:29 p.m. Cliff Berg, Chairman Date PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 PAGE 8 ATTEST: David A. Clark, Director Date PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 PAGE 9