Loading...
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - 11/10/2010MINUTES iilj- 3:)L) g PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION November 10, 2010 PRESENT: L. O. Nelson, Chairman ♦ Members Kevin Callahan Jeremy Dorzab Warren Gardner John Kidwell ♦ Alternate #1 Deborah Morrow Ripley Tate R. C. Taylor ♦ Alternate #2 John Stephenson Larry Ash ♦ seated in audience Mary Ward ♦ Council Liaison Miles Risley, City Attorney ♦ Legal Dept Kevin Hugman, Asst. City Manager ♦ City Staff Marty Odom, Planner Leo Bethge, Planner Diane Parker ABSENT: Vicky Payne ♦ Member CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Nelson at 2:00 p.m. Chairman Nelson then proceeded to make the following comments: a. This meeting is being broadcast live on Channel 11. It will be replayed at 2:00 p.m. daily including Saturday and Sunday until the next live meeting is aired which will be the second Wednesday of next month at 2:00 p.m. b. 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 and vote accordingly. c. 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. This meeting is being taped and there is no microphone to record statements made from the audience. P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 2 NOVEMBER 10, 2010 d. Please silence all cell phones, pagers, and other electronic devices during the meeting. If it is necessary for you to have a cell phone conversation during the meeting, please step into the hallway outside this room. II. PUBLIC COMMENTS No one from the audience wished to address the Commission. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Taylor made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 13, 2010 meeting. Mr. Stephenson seconded the motion. The minutes were approved with a unanimous vote. IV. 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; street; sidewalk; and drainage plans to the Director of Public Works and water plans to the Fire Marshall. 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. Maplewood Crossing, Lots 1 -4, Block 1 a. Need to provide an access easement from Maplewood Avenue, to cross over TXU property. (Ordinance amendment pending.) (Planning) b. Need to show 100 -year floodplain and floodway, and to label boundaries of "in" and "out'. (Planning) c. Need FEMA statement indicating the 100 -year floodplain. (Planning) d. Need to provide a vicinity (location) map. (Planning) e. Need to label the FW & D Railroad. (Planning) f. Need to remove all unnecessary lines. (Planning) g. Water and sewer mains must be extended to serve each individual lot. Water and sewer mains will need to be in the public right of way; otherwise, utility easements must be provided for these mains. (Engineering) P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 3 NOVEMBER 10, 2010 If stormwater drainage patterns are altered and flows are concentrated, then it must be discharged across adjacent properties via an easement; otherwise, it must be discharged into a public right of way. (Engineering) Stormwater detention is required for this property. (Engineering) Additional easements are required along the south and east property lines. (Oncor) 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: Standard Conditions of Approval for Plats Provide utility and drainage easements as required by utility companies and Director of Public Works. Submit water and sewer plans; street; sidewalk; and drainage plans to the Director of Public Works and water plans to the Fire Marshall. 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 & Transportation. Note: Approval of a plat does not imply approval of development of property in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. FINAL PLATS Original Township, Lot 1 -A, Block 215A a. Utility slips must be submitted. (Planning) b. Alley must be closed by Council prior to filing of the plat. (Planning) c. Add "utility easement to be retained" to alley closure. (Engineering) 2. Hillcrest Addition, Lot 24 -A, Block 4 a. Utility slips must be submitted. (Planning) b. Access off of Jacksboro Highway will require TxDOT approval. (TxDOT) c. Though the property is served by water, should a demand develop on this site, the water line may n CARPORTS: 1. Case C 10 -35 Carport in the front setback 229 Glasgow Mr. James Underwood requested conditional use approval to locate a carport in the front setback at his residence. There is one (1) property located within 200 feet of the perimeter of this property with a carport in the front setback. Twenty -seven (27) surrounding property owners were notified of this carport request. Three (3) or 11.11 % replied in favor; none (0) were opposed; and, none (0) replied as undecided /other. P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 4 NOVEMBER 10, 2010 2. Case C 10 -36 Carport in the front setback 1207 Sun Valley Drive Mr. Delfino Maldonado requested conditional use approval to locate a carport in the front setback at his residence. There is one (1) property within 200 feet of the perimeter of this property with a carport in the front setback. Twenty -nine (29) surrounding property owners were notified of this carport request. Two (2) or 6.90% replied in favor; none (0) were opposed; and, none (0) replied as undecided /other. Mr. Gardner made a motion to approve the consent agenda; Ms. Morrow seconded. The motion carried. V. REGULAR AGENDA Case C 10 -34 Carport in the front setback 111 Dundee Drive Mr. Pilar Gonzales requested conditional use approval for his partially constructed carport that is in the front setback of his home on Dundee Drive. There are two (2) properties within 200 feet of the perimeter of this residence with carports in the front setback. Twenty -four (24) surrounding property owners were notified of this request. Four (4) or 16.67% responded in favor; two (2) or 8.33% were opposed; and, none (0) responded as undecided or no opinion. Mr. Odom noted on the carport photo all of the poles exceed the required height. To be in compliance with the ordinance, they should be reduced to no more than eight (8) feet high. One (1) pole exceeds the required distance to the west property line. To comply with the ordinance, this pole should be moved three (3) feet from this property line. Ms. Melissa Mathews, 109 Dundee Drive, stated if the carport is approved, this would cause shade which would kill her rose garden. The lot is on a curve and there would be adequate space in the rear for a carport. She continued by stating that she had no problems with the actual place to park but [did object] to the carport [structure]. Chairman Nelson verified one of the poles would be moved then asked Ms. Mathews how that might effect the sunlight on the rose garden. She stated it would shade the morning sun which would result in killing it [the roses]. To questioning Ms. Mathews stated that moving and lowering the poles would provide too much shade to grow roses. She suggested that there is rear access for a carport to be constructed in the backyard. It was mentioned that a carport of any size located in the front would restrict the sunlight on her rose garden. Ms. Adelia Gonzales, applicant, stated she is aware of the problems with the poles and would correct them. She continued by noting construction of the carport was to avoid problems with the neighbors by providing parking space in front of her home [curbside street parking] for visitors [instead of other residents' homes]. Mr. Odom showed a photograph of a similarly constructed carport; the applicant stated it would be constructed entirely of metal. P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 5 NOVEMBER 10, 2010 Mr. Taylor made a motion to approve this carport; Mr. Gardner seconded. The motion carried. The applicant was reminded to comply with all building codes and to obtain all necessary city permits. 2. Case C 10 -37 Conditional use approval to locate a pallet restoration and distribution center on a commercially developed lot in Residential Mixed Use (RMU) zoning 3716 Iowa Park Road Mr. Vernon Mergerson requested conditional use approval to locate a pallet restoration and distribution center on a commercially developed lot on Iowa Park Road. He plans to move his existing operation from Sheppard Access Road. He currently has four (4) employees but plans to expand to employ up to ten (10). The proposed site has an existing metal building that was previously used as a machine shop and for oil field supply storage. RMU zoning does not permit outdoor storage so incoming pallets and material must be stored in buildings or other storage containers. Eight (8) surrounding property owners were notified of this request. One (1) or 12.50% responded in favor and no additional responses were received. Mr. Mergerson stated he plans to store the newly made pallets outside but nothing will be continually stored outside [rotation of sold pallets]. He plans to install a privacy fence between his property and the school behind him. Mr. Odom presented a photo of the existing location. If the used and dismantled pallets are stored outside, it would be considered outdoor storage. City code requires pallets to be stored inside or in a storage container. The refurbished pallets are classified as new and can be stored outside. To questioning Mr. Odom explained new items [pallets] stored outside would be classified as outdoor display. Mr. Mergerson commented the refurbished pallets are continually being shipped out to fulfill orders from contracts. Mr. Mergerson asked if he might be able to use his three (3) 53 foot trailers /containers for storage; Mr. Odom agreed the containers could be used for pallet storage and there will not be an issue if there is no visual problem with pallets. A privacy fence would reduce the chance of any complaints. If the pallets are stacked high and sit in public view for a long period of time, there may be complaints. Mr. Callahan remarked it seems like this commission is in a position [with the outdoor storage ordinance] that makes it difficult for a business to operate. He suggested a review [by this commission] of the ordinance. Chairman Nelson commended Mr. Mergerson for providing employment; having an operating business; and, dealing with discarded, unusable pallets that can be recycled. He noted his business was relocating, expanding, and adding employees. He further stated this Commission is trying to work with this ordinance to help his business. The concern seems to be the manner in which the used pallets will be handled before they are processed. Chairman Nelson agreed with Mr. Mergerson's suggestion of using the storage containers to store the pallets when they are moving in and out for processing through his facility. Chairman Nelson remarked if tall stacks of pallets are sitting around for days without action, that would be a violation. Chairman Nelson reminded the applicant, once the pallets have been refurbished, they could be stored outside; the pallets awaiting processing could not be stored outside. Chairman Nelson suggested amending the motion then Mr. Taylor made a motion to require the minimum six (6) foot fence along the back of the proposed property and incoming pallets be P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 6 NOVEMBER 10, 2010 stored in containers prior to movement through the refurbishing center; Mr. Stephenson seconded. The motion carried. Mr. Tate made a motion to grant the conditional use permit for Case C 10 -37 with the additional two (2) conditions; Mr. Gardner seconded. The motion carried. VI. OTHER BUSINESS City Council Update Mr. Odom stated there were no items from the Planning and Zoning Commission presented to City Council in the last month. End of the televised portion of this meeting in order for a training session of the P &Z Commission members to be conducted by Mr. Risley and Mr. Odom. VII. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m. L. O. Nelson, Chairman ATTEST: Qf Marty Odom, Community Development Date 12-/'q ate