Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - 03/11/2009MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
March 11, 2009
PRESENT:
Ripley Tate, Chairman
♦ Members
Larry Ash
Kevin Callahan
Jeremy Dorzab
•
Warren Gardner
•
L. O. Nelson
•
John Stephenson
R. C. Taylor
♦ Alternate #2
Charles Elmore
♦ Council Liaison
Kinley Hegglund, Senior Assistant City Attorney
♦ Legal Dept..
David A. Clark, Director of Community Development
♦ City staff
Marty Odom, Planner
Stephen Zank, Planner
Diane Parker
ABSENT:
Jeff Cooper ♦ Alternate #1
Deborah Morrow
John Kidwell
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Tate at 2:00 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Nelson made a motion to approve the minutes of the February 11, 2009 meeting. Mr.
Stephenson seconded the motion. The minutes were approved with a unanimous vote.
III. CONSENT AGENDA
FINAL PLATS:
Standard Conditions of Approval for Final Plats
Provide utility and drainage easements as required by utility companies and Director of
Public Works.
P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 2
JANUARY 14, 2009
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.
1. WELLINGTON ACRES, LOT 1, BLOCK 1 (March 2009)
a. Provide an additional 5 ft. of ROW along Wellington Road.
b. Comply with storm water detention requirements in accordance with city
ordinance and criteria. (Public Works)
c. Provide sewer or coordinate OSSF with Health Dept. (Public Works)
d. Municipal sewage may not be available in this area. Septic plans and
subdivision review must be completed by the Health District if domestic
sewage will be generated. (Health)
2. FULLER ESTATES, SECTION 3 (March 2009)
a. Extend sewer, water and streets to serve all lots in accordance with City
ordinance and criteria. (Public Works)
b. Coordinate drainage outfall into Holliday Creek with Corps of Engineers,
Tulsa District. (Public Works)
c. Additional electric easements are required. (ONCOR)
CARPORTS:
1. Case C 09 -05
Carport
2718 Palmetto
Mr. James McKinney requested conditional use approval to construct a carport in the front
setback of his residence at 2718 Palmetto Drive. There are three (3) properties within a 200
foot perimeter of this property that have carports in the setbacks. Thirty -one (31) surrounding
property owners were notified of this carport request. Five (5) responded in favor and none (0)
were opposed.
2. Case C 09 -07
Carport
2721 Palmetto
Mr. Billy Mitchell requested conditional use approval to construct a carport in the front setback
of his residence at 2721 Palmetto Drive. There are three (3) carports within a 200 foot
perimeter of this property that have carports in the setbacks. Twenty -eight (28) surrounding
properties were notified of this request. Four (4) responded in favor and none (0) were
opposed.
P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 3 JANUARY 14, 2009
Mr. Ash made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Callahan seconded the motion.
The Consent Agenda passed with a unanimous vote.
IV. REGULAR AGENDA
1. C 09 -06
Request for a conditional use permit to convert a nonconforming use
(Automotive Sales /Outdoor Storage) to another nonconforming use (Automotive
Sales /- Contractors Yard
4216 Iowa Park Road
Mr. Chad Wilson requested conditional use approval to convert a nonconforming use to another
nonconforming use in a Single Family -1 zone on Iowa Park Road. The current nonconforming
use is automotive sales and outdoor storage; the proposed use will be a contractors yard with
the outdoor storage items removed. The applicant has stated "we will have parking in the rear
and have approximately seven (7) vehicles parked at night when they are not out working on a
job site — a backhoe, and miscellaneous trailers."
Staff recommended approval of this item and asked the Commission to place a condition on
their approval indicating that outdoor storage items, other than the vehicles indicated, not be
placed on the subject property.
Five (5) surrounding property owners were notified of this request. No (0) responses were
received.
Mr. Wilson asked if his business grew to 10 vehicles would he be in violation. Mr. Odom
commented that as long as the vehicles are operating and not junked vehicles there should not
be a problem. Mr. Stephenson asked if the wording would lock him in to a specific number of
vehicles; both the staff and Commission agreed there was not.
Mr. Gardner made a motion to approve this conditional use permit; Mr. Ash seconded. The
motion was approved with a unanimous vote.
2. TA 09 -01 Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment and Subdivision Ordinance Text
Amendment
Section 5800 Alternative Energy Regulations
Section 6.10 Lots and Setbacks, Subdivision Ordinance
Proposal to allow wind power generators to project beyond the maximum height
Mr. Odom stated that at the last meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed a
proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that would add a new section dealing with the
regulation of wind power generators.
The changes requested to be made were completed as well as the addition of a new provision
dealing roof mounted generators. There was discussion to clean up a few minor issues.
Mr. Nelson made a motion to recommend approval to City Council to include this amendment in
the Zoning Ordinance; Mr. Ash seconded the motion. The recommendation passed with a
unanimous vote.
P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 4 JANUARY 14, 2009
3. TA 09 -02
Article V, Outdoor Storage, Chapter 46, Environment, Code of Ordinances
Mr. Odom stated the following changes were discussed at the last meeting of this Commission.
The first item of concern is Article V. Outdoor Storage, Sec. 46 -162. Fencing (e) areas not
required to fence. There are items that do not meet the definition of outdoor storage and do not
have to be screened and items that meet the definition but are unique where an exception
might be warranted. This results in two areas not requiring fencing: vehicles for sales on a
dealer's lot and parking areas for operable vehicles.
Mr. Stan Thomas, 4187 Airport Drive, stated that his business was located in Heavy Industrial
zoning. His concerns were HI should be exempt from outdoor storage and screening
ordinances and screening would promote the opportunity for vandalism.
Ms. Amy Neal, owner of Wear It Again Sam at 1212 Kemp, stated she has been in business for
eight (8) years. She has purchased the entire block and brought customers from the South end
of Kemp to the North end. She sells used baby items and baby clothes. The appeal of her
business is the display of these items on the front lawn of her business to draw the customers
in. The merchandise is always brought inside overnight. The buildings are painted, clean and
not an eyesore. She also stated that many people enjoy the unique novelty of her business and
appreciate her strong customer service as well as the clean merchandise. She asked the
Commission to not pass the ordinance because it would negatively affect her business. Ms.
Neal asked the Commission to reconsider or possibly rewrite the ordinance in order for her
business to thrive.
Mr. Nelson asked what percentage of her business was derived from the display of goods in
front of her location. She stated she has not had to do much advertising because of the
outdoor display.
Mr. Stephenson explained that not all businesses that display their merchandise are not as
pristine as Ms. Neal's. He complimented her for having a good looking business. The City is
trying to create an atmosphere that attracts business rather than runs businesses away.
Chairman Tate stated he felt the changes to this ordinance are limiting. He asked if the
conditional use process could be enacted to exempt certain businesses, such as Ms. Neal from
certain regulations.
Mr. Clark gave a brief history of this ordinance. He noted that the administration of the
ordination is provided by staff and it must be done under the letter of the law. Some citizens
conformed to the screening ordinance immediately and some did not which is why we are here
today. This is a community decision and the ordinance has been primarily successful.
Mr. Hegglund stated the Legal Dept. reworked this ordinance to explain when a business must
screen for legitimate outdoor storage. There is some unnecessary language that was adopted
several years ago in the ordinance. He continued by stating that outdoor storage should be as
objective as possible.
Mr. Stephenson asked if Ms. Neal would need to screen; Mr. Hegglund replied that the
screening ordinance did not apply but her business is located is a zone that does not permit
outdoor storage. She is not allowed to place her inventory in the front yard of her business.
P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 5 JANUARY 14, 2009
Mr. Nelson stated the original intent of the ordinance was to regulate outdoor storage because
it was perceived that it needed to be dealt with in certain situations. In an effort to write the
ordinance, most situations that needed screening was reviewed by the staff. Over time, the
enforcement has brought about issues which were difficult for the legal staff to deal with in
court. Other issues have surfaced since the ordinance was written and the ordinance needs
some adjustments.
Mr. Gardner made a motion to table any action on this text amendment; Mr. Taylor seconded.
The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.
4. TA 09 -03
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment
Section 6700 Signs
Structural alterations of nonconforming on- premise signs, and the method of
calculation of sign area
Mr. Odom stated that two parts of the sign ordinance were being considered for revision.
The first proposal concerns the calculation of the area of an on- premise sign. The problem
staff is encountering is how to measure the area of the sign when the support structure is as
wide as the sign. The proposal suggests including the support structure to be included in the
calculation.
Chairman Tate stated that he did not want to be too restrictive to be anti - business. He
commented there are a handful of businesses that use the side of their building for their signs.
Mr. Odom clarified the issue by stating that signs on buildings are not the problem.
The problem is the distance from the property line. Mr. Odom stated that signs are being
permitted that are larger and closer to the property line because the cabinet area is not being
included. Mr. Nelson agreed that it is a problem because there are some signs in the city that
are obstructing the view when exiting parking lots.
Chairman Tate stated he was in favor of fixing the problem. Mr. Odom mentioned this would
not affect the wall signs. Mr. Taylor asked about the existing signs. Mr. Odom stated they
would be grandfathered; this ordinance would take care of the new ones.
The second change addresses the reconstruction of nonconforming signs, specifically their
placement. Under the current ordinance, if the cabinet of a nonconforming sign is removed, the
replacement sign must come into compliance with the setback requirement.
The proposed change would permit the replacement of a sign cabinet provided that the new
sign is not taller or larger than the existing sign.
Chairman Tate asked about placing some time restraints on removing the cabinet and when it
was to be reinstalled. Mr. Odom stated that it was a good idea; however, staff would not have
any way of knowing when a sign cabinet was removed and how long it had been off the pole.
Mr. Stephenson made a motion to recommend to City Council to approve the two amendments
to the sign ordinance in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Ash seconded. The motion carried.
P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 6 JANUARY 14, 2009
5. TA 09 -04 Chapter 26, Business Regulations, Code of Ordinances
Restricting hours of operation of certain uses open to the public within the
Central Business District (CBD) zoning district and listing certain uses as exempt
Mr. Clark stated the Downtown Wichita Falls Development Board approached City Council as a
result of concerns from recent problems. If this proposal is approved as a Zoning Ordinance
change, then the current businesses will be grandfathered. On the other hand, if it is passed as
an ordinance in the Code of Ordinances, no grandfathering would occur.
Ms. Cynthia Laney, Downtown Wichita Falls Development Director, stated this issue started
when some of the late night BYOB clubs began having trouble. Property owners and downtown
residents were having trouble with the club patrons. They brought concerns to the DWFD
board of directors with their goal being to approach City Council. She further commented that
two of the three problem establishments are already closed. Ms. Laney asked if the late hours
would be transferable; Mr. Hegglund replied the nonconforming use [and their hours] would
continue. Mr. Odom noted that there is a two -year period if a use ceases to operate, then the
nonconforming status is lost.
There was discussion regarding a restrictive ordinance and the effect it might have regarding
prospective businesses interested in locating in downtown. It was also noted by Ms. Laney that
downtown late hours [ 2:00 a.m. until 4:00 a.m. ] police presence is not as visible as in some of
the more populated areas of the city.
Mr. Nelson stated the Commission was sympathetic to all the problems, the noise, loitering,
littering, and keeping the area respectable. He stated there is probably another manner in
which to deal with these problems without creating more problems later. Mr. Taylor noted that
the closed establishments might reopen with different owners in a short timeframe.
Ms. Laney thanked the Commission for their interest in this problem and thanked Chief
Bachman and the Police Dept. for speaking with the Board and their help with the property
owners.
Mr. Dorzab made a motion to approve this text amendment; Mr. Ash seconded. The vote was
zero (0) in favor and eight (8) opposed. The motion failed.
V. OTHER BUSINESS
Other Business
Mr. Clark stated that at the next City Council meeting, Tuesday, March 16, 2009, one of the
items to be discussed and voted on will be the city goals. Many of those came from the Vision
20/20 plan with which this Commission was involved.
VI. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 4:03 p.m.
P & Z COMMISSION PAGE 7 JANUARY 14, 2009
ie- �-5:
Ripley -rate-,'thairfinan Palef
ATTEST:
David A.
mmunity Development
Id
RL]CEIVED IN
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
IW N.
W-
By