Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 08/22/2007 41110 MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers-City Hall Wednesday—August 22,2007 5:30 P.M. STAFF PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Johnny Perales,PE, Deputy Director of Development Chairman Bryan Stone Services/Special Services Rudy Garza,Vice Chairman Faryce Goode-Macon, Interim Assistant Director of Atilano J. Huerta Development Services/Planning David Loeb Miguel S. Saldana,AICP,Senior City Planner Lyon J.Kelly Michael N.Gunning,AICP, Special Assistant to Govind Nadkarni Development Services John C.Tamez Shannon Murphy,AICP, City Planner Johnny R.Martinez Wes Vardeman,City Planner James Skrobarczyk Stephanie Voss, Project Manager Chip Baish, Project Manager COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Gary Smith,Assistant City Attorney Govind Nadkarni Beverly Lang-Priestley,Recording Secretary Si usted quiere dirigirse ala comision y su ingles es limitado, habra un interprete de espafiol a ingles en la junta para ayudarle L CALL TO ORDER A quorum was declared and the meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. II. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Vice-Chairman Garza motioned for Chairman Bryan Stone to continue to serve as chairman of the Planning Commission and was seconded by Commissioner Kelly. Motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. Commissioner Tamez motioned for Vice-Chairman Rudy Garza to continue to serve as vice- chairman of the Planning Commission and was seconded by Commissioner Loeb. Motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made by Vice-chairman Garza for approval of the minutes and was seconded by Commissioner Tamez. Motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. SCANNED Planning Commission Minut� 111110 August 22,2007 Page 2 IV. PLATS 1. Continued Plats Miguel Saldafla read continued plat agenda items "a and b" (shown below) into the record and stated these items have been submitted for a continuance to September 5,2007. a. 0507081-NP054 Chamberlin's Subdivision, Block 23, Lot 12A(Final- 0.189 Acre) Located west of King Street, south of Marguerite Street and east of North Staples Street. b. 0807113-P044 Lexington Subdivision,Block 2, Lot 23A(Final Replat- 0.23 Acre) Located south of Johanna Street between Ayers Street and Richter Street. Chairman Stone, as a courtesy, asked if anyone present would like to come forward in favor or opposition. Nobody came forward. Motion was made by Commissioner Huerta for approval of the continuance. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Martinez and passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. Miguel Saldafa read continued plat agenda item "c" (shown below) into the record and stated this item has been submitted for approval. Staff recommends approval. c. 0807114-P045 Los Arboles at Terra Mar Unit 2(Final - 15.46 Acres) Located south of Holly Road and east of Rodd Field Road. Public hearing was opened. Nobody came forward in support or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Kelly for approval of staff recommendation. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Tamez and passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. Planning Commission Minuted August 22,2007 Page 3 2. New Plats Miguel Saldafia read new plat agenda items"a and b"(shown below) into the record and stated these items have been submitted for approval. Staff recommends approval. a. 0807120-NP077 Heritage Park Unit 2, Block C, Lots 2A&2B(Final Replat- 2.978 Acres) Located west of Rodd Field Road and north of South Padre Island Drive(SH 358). b. 0807121-NP078 South Saratoga Acres, Block I,Lots II & 12(Final -9.889 Acres) Located south of Saratoga Boulevard(SH 357)and west of the Crosstown Expressway(SH 286). Public hearing was opened. Nobody came forward in support or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Vice-chairman Garza for approval of staff recommendation. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Loeb and passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. 3. Time Extensions Mr. Saldana read time extension agenda items "a through e" (shown below) into the record, stating these items have been submitted for a time extension of one year, with the exception of item"e" which is for a time extension of six(6)months. Staff recommends approval. a. 0705120-NP064 Barcelona Estates(Preliminary-62.54 Acres) Located west of Kostoryz Road and north of Saratoga Boulevard (SH357). b. 0805122-NP066 La Concha Estates Unit 4(Preliminary- 106.79 Acres) Located between State Highway 361 and the Gulf of Mexico, north of Mustang Island State Park and Beach Road No.2. c. 0706133-NP069 London Club Estates(Preliminary- 136.32 Acres) Located north of FM 43,between FM 763 and County Road 33 and west of FM 286. Planning Commission Mints August 22,2007 Page 4 d. 0806156-NP087 Gemini Subdivision Unit 2(Preliminary- 17.00 Acres) Located east of North Padre Island Drive(S1-1358)and north of Bear Lane. e. 0207015-NP01 I Surfside Addition Unit 2,PUD 2(Final-2.12 Acres) Located between Laguna Shores Road and the Laguna Madre north of Caribbean Drive. Public hearing was opened. Nobody came forward in support or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Tamez for approval of staff recommendation. Motion was seconded by Vice-chairman Garza and passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. Chairman Stone stated that agenda item "VII" would be moved forward on the agenda and heard at this time. VII. DEFERMENT AGREEMENT: HALF STREET DEFERMENT AGREEMENT AMETRINE DRIVE,LEGENDS OF DIAMANTE UNIT 2 Chip Baish presented the case stating the Legends of Diamante Unit 2 Subdivision is located east of Rodd Field Road and north of Slough Road. Via a Power Point presentation, Mr. Baish identified the subject half-street on the location map and showed the engineer's cost estimate. Mr. Baish presented a section from the Platting Ordinance that covers half-street construction. Mr. Baish stated that staff recommendation for platting this property includes the requirement for dedication and construction of a half-street and its related water infrastructure improvements for Ametrine Drive. The Corpus Christi Urban Transportation Plan designates Ametrine Drive as a future "C-1" Residential Collector with a forty-foot pavement width within a sixty-foot right-of-way. Mr. Baish stated staff has determined that the best interest of the public will be served by delaying construction of Ametrine Drive until its full right-of-way width is dedicated at the time the adjoining property, South Lake Subdivision, is platted. Mr. Baish further stated that, according to the engineer for that subdivision, they do not expect to bring in the plat for the section that adjoins at the half-street for two years. The developer has agreed to pay cash in lieu of construction of the half-street and its related water infrastructure and the funds will be placed into the Infrastructure Trust Fund,earmarked for future Ametrine Drive construction. Mr. Baish stated that this delayed arrangement can be entered into with the developer because each lot within the Legends of Diamante Unit 2 will have all required utility improvements and access to streets as required in the platting ordinance. The Development Services engineer determined City participation by payment into the Infrastructure Trust Fund is not required. A deferment agreement between the City of Corpus Christi and JJAR Development, LLP,the developer,will allow the developer to defer the construction of required improvements including construction of street pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalks and water infrastructure until the tract of land along the west side of future Ametrine Drive is developed and required to participate in the construction of Ametrine Drive. The developer has agreed to deposit $91,491.90 in cash for the estimated cost of constructing the required improvements in compliance with the platting ordinance. Planning Commission Minute V August 22,2007 Page 5 Mr. Baish stated it is requested of the Planning Commission to find that due to the uncertainty of when the west half of the required street will be constructed and the safety issues associated with construction of a half-street, there exists reasonable cause to defer the half-street construction requirement to allow the developer to obtain final plat approval for Legends of Diamante Unit 2. In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mr. Saldana stated that the Legends of Diamante extends up to Ametrine Drive. The area west of Ametrine is owned by a different developer, which is the South Lake Subdivision. In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mr. Johnny Perales stated it is his opinion that when the time comes to build the road,the money will be there. In response to Vice-chairman Garza, Mr. Saldafia stated there is an existing thirty-foot dedication along the east side of what would be the continuation of Ametrine out to Slough Road. Mr. Saldana stated the west half of Ametrine Drive will come in when South Lake Subdivision comes in and plats their property. In response to Vice-chairman Garza, Mr. Perales stated there will be an account set up for the funds specifically for Ametrine Drive. In response to Commissioner Huerta, Mr. Baish stated that when it is built, the width of the half-street will be forty-feet wide. Mr. Saldana further stated that Legends of Diamante Unit 2 are dedicating their half of the sixty-foot right-of-way, which is thirty feet and when South Lake Subdivision comes in they will dedicate their half of the sixty feet resulting in a full sixty-foot right-of- way. In response to Commissioner Loeb, Mr. Saldana stated the money put up by the developer is for the frontage road in front of his subdivision only, and the east end of Ametrine Drive to Slough Road has been dedicated, but that section of land has not been platted,and that it is a different owner than the subject property. In response to Commissioner Huerta, Mr. Perales stated that the account the funds will be deposited in will be an interest bearing account to help off-set the rising cost of construction, and, in addition,there is a ten percent cost contingency built into the cost estimate. In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mr. Saldafia stated that the thirty foot easement on the southern end of Ametrine was dedicated by a separate instrument years ago; and that the thirty foot easement does not extend north at this time. Public hearing was opened. Nobody came forward in support or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Huerta to approve staff recommendation. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Skrobarczyk and passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. Planning Commission Minutt6 August 22,2007 Page 6 V. ZONING 1. Tabled Items WITHDRAWN a. Case No. 0607-03 Silverado Land Development, LP: A change of zoning from a "R-1 B" One- Family Dwelling District to a"R-2"Multiple Dwelling District 6.15 acres, McIntyre Partition, located approximately 150 feet north of the intersection of East Riverview Drive and Bedrock Drive. Faryce Goode-Macon, Interim Assistant Director of Development Services/Planning, came forward stating the above case has been withdrawn by the applicant. No action necessary. 2. New Zoning a. Case No.0807-02 Grace United Methodist Church: A change of zoning from a"R-IB"One-Family Dwelling District to a "B-1"Neighborhood Business District Shell Poultry Acres, Block 8, Lot 6, located on Church Street and approximately 300 feet northeast of Leopard Street. Stephanie Voss, Project Manager/Development Services, came forward to present the above case via Power Point stating the subject property is Shell Poultry Acres, Block 8, Lot 6, located on Church Street and approximately 300 feet northeast of Leopard Street. Ms. Voss stated the applicant is requesting a change of zoning from a 'R-I B" One-Family Dwelling District to a'B-1" Neighborhood Business District. Ms. Voss stated the request is to expand the thrift shop business to an existing building on the church site. The current thrift store building on the church site came before Planning Commission last year in June and would remain in use as a storage/work area. The lot consists of 19,384 square feet which contains a building of 1,040 square feet, requiring an additional five parking spaces. Ms. Voss stated the `B-1" Neighborhood Business District allows for retail and personal service activities and allows for professional office uses such as banks, barber shops, service stations, restaurants, art studios and automobile parking lots. Ms. Voss stated the future land use map supports commercial expansion in this area. Of the twenty (20) notices mailed, zero were returned in favor and two were returned in opposition. Staff recommends denial of the 'B-1" Neighborhood Business District, and in lieu thereof, approval of a Special Permit for a church-related thrift shop with the following five(5)conditions: 1. Uses: The only use permitted by this Special Permit,other than those uses permitted by right in the"R-1 B"One-family Dwelling District, is a church-related thrift shop. 2. Building: The existing building shall be used for the church-related thrift shop. 3. Hours of Operation: Hours of operation shall be Monday through Saturday from 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. 4. Employees: Employees shall be limited to a maximum of six(6)volunteers. • Planning Commission Minute/ August 22,2007 Page 7 5. Time Limit: Such Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within one (1) year of the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used as outlined in Condition #1 and in compliance with all other conditions. In response to Chairman Stone, Ms. Goode-Macon stated that the current staff recommendation reflects the same restrictions as those recommended in the June 2006 case at which time granted a special permit for a thrift store on the first lot behind the church. The church is seeking to expand that special permit to another one of their buildings with the same restrictions. In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Ms. Goode-Macon stated that if the existing buildings are destroyed or damaged to the point of fifty-percent, in order to rebuild, they would have to meet the current"R-IB"building code. The applicant would have to re-apply for the special permit. In response to Commissioner Loeb, Ms. Goode-Macon stated that sign compliance is not part of this current case and cannot be addressed. Commissioner Loeb stated his concern is compliance with the special permit when there are other possible code violations on or near the property controlled by same group. Ms. Goode-Macon stated that there is a large number of portable signs in the Northwest area that are grandfathered, and that if the sign Commissioner Loeb is referring to is not grandfathered then it can be addressed through Code Enforcement. In response to Commissioner Loeb, Wes Vardeman, City Planner, stated there was an on- premise directional sign recently permitted. Public hearing was opened. Joan Morgan, 10921 Mayfield, Corpus Christi, Texas, came forward in support of the request, stating she is available to answer any questions. Ms. Morgan stated that if the current buildings are destroyed by fifty-percent,they will more than likely be scrapped and the property turned into a parking lot. Ms. Morgan stated the purpose of the thrift stores is to provide lesser expensive,yet still nice, items to the Northwest residents who need affordable items,and so far, it has been successful. In response to Commissioner Buena, Ms. Goode-Macon stated that the original special permit will remain with the original building due to storage uses. Mr. Richard Kronke, 10209 N. Herrington,Corpus Christi, Texas, came forward in opposition to the request, stating that in addition to the thrift store, the back half of both lots is used for the child daycare center. Mr. Kronke stated his concern is when and where the commercial development is held in check, stating that he owns two residential lots across the street. Mr. Kronke stated that in 2003 they requested a zoning change and platting for a "B-I" Neighborhood Business District and staff recommended the back half stay residential. Mr. Kronke stated the reason given at the time was that it is "quiet, quaint, secluded and a unique neighborhood". Mr. Kronke stated that if that area is now going commercial that's what he wants to do with his property. Mr. Kronke stated that the road his property is on is a dead end road and that parking for the church spills over into the street like garage sale parking and he doubts that he could sell his residential property to anybody because of the parking and because of the child daycare center being directly across the street. Ms. Goode-Macon reiterated that staff is recommending denial of the'B-1" District in lieu of a special permit for the transitioning process of this area. Planning Commission Minut160 August 22,2007 Page 8 In response to Commissioner Skrobarezyk, Mr. Kronke stated his original request to rezone his property was in April of 2003. Ms. Goode-Macon clarified that Mr. Kronke's property along Violet Road was granted a "B-1" for the front two lots and the back was retained as "R-1B" due to the existing residential property at that time. In response to Commissioner Tamez, Ms. Goode-Macon stated that a review of Mr. Kronke's case would have to be made to determine zoning issues with his property. In response to Commissioner Martinez, Ms. Goode-Macon stated the size of the requested thrift store is 1,040 square feet and the existing thrift store is approximately 900 square feet. Commissioner Huerta questioned when the Future Land Use Map would be updated with consideration into what decisions are being made and how they will affect existing residential uses. Commissioner Huerta stated his concern with the current process which forces the residential uses to exist next to commercial uses when originally it was residential. Ms. Goode-Macon stated that is part of the effect of"transitioning" land use planning and this particular map has been reviewed by staff, by the Planning Commission and by City Council and was acceptable at that time. Ms. Goode-Macon stated she believes the Future Land Use Map won't be reviewed again for at least another year and that staff is currently working on the London Area plans. Vice-Chairman Garza spoke in support of staff and the current Future Land Use Map,stating that transitional zoning is the only way to actually accomplish the change in an effective and orderly manner. Vice-Chairman Garza stated that the corner of Violet Road has changed dramatically over the past few years,growing in commercial use due to the many small subdivisions going in around it and the only way to accomplish the change from residential to commercial is slowly through transitional zoning. Vice- Chairman Garza stated that as for the long term residents with ties to the area, over time people move, land is sold off or the old-timers die and the property does not have the same meaning for the new owners as it did for the original owners,making way for painless transitioning. Vice-Chairman Garza stated that it sounds good to say, "Let's rezone the entire block all at once," but that is not reasonable or fair to the existing residential property owners. Transitional zoning is an appropriate tool in changing with the times. Commissioner Loeb stated his concern is that commercial use would be limited on such a narrow dead end street and forcing commercial use in the residential homes via special permit seems redundant. Commissioner Loeb stated it is his opinion that the entire area be rezoned as commercial. In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Ms. Goode-Macon stated the reason staff denied the original request of `B-I" Neighborhood Business District for the subject property is because of the continued residential use in the area. Ms. Morgan came forward stating the thrift shop is allowed to be open six days per week, however, they have chosen to open three days per week from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and are encouraging customers to use the parking lot as opposed to parking on the street. In response to Chairman Stone, Ms. Voss stated there were two letters of opposition returned from the same person,Mr. Richard Kronke,who is present and owns two residential lots on the street, but does not live there. Ms. Voss further stated that none of the residents living on the street have voiced opposition. Planning Commission Minute August 22,2007 Page 9 In response to Vice-Chairman Garza, Ms. Goode-Macon stated that if existing buildings on the church property are torn down, that property may be used as parking for the church without further rezoning. In response to Commissioner Huerta, Ms. Goode-Macon stated that the parking lot is allowed with the church within the `R-I B" District and would not have to be screened from residential neighborhoods. Motion was made by Commissioner Tamez for approval of staff recommendation and was seconded by Commissioner Kelly. Motion passed with Commissioner Skrobarczyk and Commissioner Loeb opposed and Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. b. Case No. 0807-03 Ryan McCarthy: A change of zoning from an "I-2" Light Industrial District to a'B-4"General Business District Whelan Tract Unit 4, Block 1,Lot 2, located on Navigation Boulevard and approximately 200 feet south of Interstate 37. Wes Vardeman,City Planner,presented the case via Power Point stating that the case involves the Hampton Inn Hotel on property located on Navigation Boulevard currently zoned "1-2" and the applicant is requesting a change of zoning to a "B-4" District. Mr. Vardeman stated the property involves two lots and was previously a transmitter tower. Mr. Vardeman stated that although the aerial photograph does not show it, there is new construction of a hotel on one of the lots. Mr. Vardeman pointed out for the Commissioners that there are many hotels in the area,as well as some restaurants. Mr. Vardeman stated that"B-4" General Business District provides for all types of commercial uses, such as multi-family, hotels and motels. Minimum front yard requirement is twenty-feet, zero lot line along the sides and in the rear unless there is a residential adjacency, in this case there isn't. Mr. Vardeman showed photographs of the hotel under construction stating that it is pretty far along in construction. Mr. Vardeman pointed out the "1-2" District does not allow for hotels, which are considered temporary residential. He further stated the `9-2" District does allow retail shopping and personal service uses, such as banks. Of the sixteen notices mailed, zero were returned in favor and one was returned in opposition. Mr. Vardeman stated the Future Transportation Plan calls for a 95 foot back to back with "A-3" Arterial with an ultimate build-out of 160 feet. The potential traffic generated with the proposed hotel could generate approximately 700 vehicle trip ends per day. Staff recommends approval. In response to Commissioner Huerta, Mr. Vardeman stated it was a conflict in data that resulted in the hotel being permitted in the "I-2" District, in that one map showed the property "1-2" and a different one showed it as"B-4". In response to Commissioner Tamez, Ms. Goode-Macon the zoning ordinance,which was crafted back in the '60's, does not allow for mixed use of manufacturing with housing and is considered an incompatible use,therefore,temporary residential is not allowed in the manufacturing area. Public hearing was opened. Nobody came forward in support or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Huerta to approve staff recommendation and was seconded by Commissioner Tamez. Motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. Planning Commission Minute August 22,2007 Page 10 VI. PUBLIC HEARING — DEFINITION OF SIGN LEGAL OPINION AND UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC) SIGN FOCUS GROUP FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Michael Gunning, Special Assistant to Development Services, came forward to present a summary of the Unified Development Code (UDC) Signs Focus Group and their Final Report and Recommendation, stating that the process began in 2005 with the hiring of the consultants to prepare a Unified Development Code. However, before moving forward with the May 2007 draft document of the Unified Development Code, Mr. Gunning stated there was a strong need and indication from City Council that staff work with an Ad Hoc Sign group address some of the major concerns of the existing 2005 sign regulations. Therefore, in May 2006, an Ad Hoc Focus Group was formed with Camm Dougherty of Homeport Signs serving as chairman. Mr. Gunning stated that through their work efforts with staff,the group proposed to regulate the sign allowances based on the functional classification of the street that a property fronts on,whether it be an arterial or residential instead of by zoning district. Those amendments were adopted by City Council on April 11, 2006, and then amended on August 22, 2006,to add some additional arterial roadways to the list and another amendment in January 2007 to address the LED type signage. The Ad Hoc Focus Group was asked to reconvene in December 2006 to review the signs section of the draft UDC. The group met bi- weekly through April 2007, reviewing many miscellaneous sign provisions. Mr. Gunning commended the sign group representatives for seeing it through to completion. Mr. Gunning stated that in addition to Ms. Dougherty, others serving on the group included David Loeb, Vice-Chairman, Planning Commissioner Javier Huerta, Jay Porterfield, Chris de la Fuente and David de la Fuente, James Turcotte, Katrina Campbell,Debra Mulch, Scott Meyers, Bryan Stone,Tim Painschwab and Regan Brown. Mr.Gunning stated from the beginning, staff assured each Unified Development Code Focus Group that it would be the recommendation of the focus group that would be brought forward for the public hearing, hence, the information in the packet provided to the Commissioners is the recommendation from the focus group. Mr. Gunning stated the focus groups were also advised that if staff took exception to a committee recommendation, both recommendations, i.e., staffs and the focus group's, would be presented at the public hearing and properly identified. At this point, Mr. Gunning turned the presentation over to Shannon Murphy,City Planner for the City of Corpus Christi. Ms. Murphy stated that as reported to the Commission at the presentation on August 8, 2007, the City does not yet have a Unified Development Code; therefore, the method of taking the Sign Focus Group's recommendation forward is by text amendment to the City's existing Article 33 of the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Murphy stated that new provisions and definitions that are not in the current zoning ordinance have been provided to the Commissioners in draft form. Ms. Murphy stated the jurisdiction for signs has been extended to the ETJ, in that if a property is within 200 feet of an arterial or collector, then those regulations would be applied when a sign permit is requested. Ms. Murphy stated that in reference to sign maintenance, wording has been added stating that all signs must be maintained and must be replaced with a blank panel within 90 days of the business closure or relocation. Ms. Murphy stated that any unsafe signs must be removed within ten days or be in compliance with the ordinance within ten days. Also, a prohibited signs list has been expanded, adding to the list roof signs, flashing and moving signs, streamers and temporary signs on trees and utility poles. A list of exempted signs has been provided listing items such as address signs, real estate signs and home occupation signs. Illustrations of signs have been added and the sign standards for each of the sign types have been grouped together with illustrations. Ms. Murphy stated the Focus Group also included specific standards for each sign type. Provisions for allowing additional signs for uses such as fuel sales and new vehicle sales and service have been added, as well as a time limit for abandoned signs of 90 days that are nonconforming. Planning Commission Minute August 22,2007 Page II Ms. Murphy stated that staff concurs with the Focus Group's recommendation with the exception of two items. The first item is the definition for "sign". Ms. Murphy stated the Focus Group proposes a new definition for "sign" as follows: "Any device that conveys a commercial message. See `commercial message'." The definition given for "commercial message" is: "A message placed before the public that calls attention to a business, product, service or other commercial activity." Ms. Murphy stated that staff s recommendation is to keep the current zoning ordinance definition with a modification from legal Counsel for "sign" which begins, "A device, structure, frame, letter, figure, character, mark, " Ms. Murphy stated the definition is lengthy and has been provided for review in the Commissioner's packet, along with the legal opinion from Legal Counsel on the definition for"sign". Ms. Murphy stated the second item staff does not concur with the Focus Group's recommendation to delete the existing list of arterial roadways that are regulated with collector street standards; and it is staffs recommendation to keep that list. In response to Commissioner Huerta, Ms. Murphy took note of a correction to the Commissioner's packet under"Miscellaneous/Off-premise Signs", stating the standards referred to should read,"Article 33- 1.20". Public hearing was opened. Nobody came forward in support or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Ms. Murphy stated that keeping the existing list of arterial streets with collector street provisions is staff recommendation and the Focus Group recommends deleting that list. In response to Commissioner Kelly, Commissioner Loeb stated the Focus Group recommends deletion of the existing list in an effort to keep everything standard and fair for everyone. Commissioner Loeb stated originally the group wanted to base signage on the size of the street so the proper signage could be determined based on safety, aesthetics and ultimately to encourage larger developments in an effort to minimize curb cuts, thus the reasoning for multi-tenants to get larger signs. The desired effect was to help with the aesthetics by encouraging developers to decide on larger developments with one multi-tenant sign as opposed to many smaller businesses with many smaller signs. However, over time it appeared that this provision was not being used for its intended purpose and re-introduced the practice of spot zoning. Therefore, the Focus Group determined that in order to keep things consistent the existing arterial street list should be deleted. Ms. Murphy stated the sign dimensions being proposed are actually larger than what the consultant had recommended in the original draft of the UDC. Ms. Murphy stated that staffs intent of keeping the existing list of arterial streets with collector street provisions was to protect the adjacent residential areas along these arterial and collector streets. Mr. Gunning added that staff had agreed with the committee that the committee's recommendation for the regulating signs based on their street frontage would be incorporated into the Unified Development Code as the basic standards. Mr. Gunning stated that committee members and staff worked hard to come up with that plan and it will be with us for a long time. Planning Commission Minut‘ August 22,2007 Page 12 Commissioner Huerta stated that if we do not regulate the arterials as collectors we still have the instrument of zoning to exercise controls. However, for example, if a zoning is changed on Ocean Drive for a lot they would be allowed to put up a big sign. Therefore, the issue is maintaining the character of those residential streets that exist. Commissioner Huerta stated that it is important to look to the future and to better plan what is done in the future. As for the past, this is an alternative plan to address things already done and a good instrument to preserve certain existing neighborhoods and is a good protective layer. Commissioner Huerta reiterated that if the existing list of arterials is deleted, we still have zoning as a control measure;however,we must be very careful how zoning changes are handled in the future. Commissioner Skrobarczyk stated that we are at the final stages of the UDC plan and we are not hear to make a "stop-gap" measure, but attempting to establish the final, standardized UDC version. However, Commissioner Skrobarczyk stated that already we are creating loop holes, hoping that zoning will provide protection, but we are actually creating potential for many "exceptions". Commissioner Skrobarczyk suggested that the designation of streets should change with the changing street, for example, if a road designated as a collector for the future does not develop into a collector,then the overall zoning of that street should be changed to fit whatever the street has become. Mr. Gunning responded that he has never seen streets downgraded from a given designation in the Transportation Plan. Ms. Murphy stated the situation would be addressed and rectified through a text amendment to remove an arterial from the list, which is initiated through public comment or upon reassessment by staff. Commissioner Skrobarczyk reiterated that that process exemplifies a loop hole in that it allows one to explore different options available based on who and what one knows as opposed to being standardized for everyone, eliminating uncertainties. Mr. Gunning stated that it is important to realize that, as commissioners and staff, we recognize when change is occurring and the impact it is having, or will have, on the surrounding land and developments in the future, and to update area development plans accordingly. Mr. Gunning stated it is a process,and the UDC has a provision for amendments built in. Mr. Gunning stated that the committee members and staff worked on the list of arterials, considering which streets and neighborhoods really needed to be protected. Everyone agreed on the resulting list. Mr. Gunning stated the only arterial that became a problem was Northwest Boulevard. Mr. Gunning also stated that something staff is hoping to do through the UDC is to look at minimum lot sizes for properties converting to commercial uses. In response to Commissioner Loeb, Camm Dougherty, Chairman of the UDC Signs Focus Group, stated that Northwest Boulevard was discussed in the meetings and that the group recommended deletion of Northwest Boulevard and FM 1889 from the arterial list, and this request was prior to the initial Council passage of the ordinance. Ms. Dougherty stated, however,that when the ordinance went to City Council, it was a totally different section of Northwest Boulevard that was included, not the section as reviewed by the Planning Commission. As for the rest of the streets on the list, the committee members were in agreement with staff that those residential areas needed protection. Commissioner Huerta stated there is no instrument that prevents change. However, certain things do need to be protected from change and encroachment, such as Yorktown Boulevard between Everhart and Staples which is residential;and Alameda which is residential. Commissioner Loeb stated that base zoning protects Ocean Drive. He further stated that the current process is purely politics, not even an application process like there was before and that he believes tying signage to zoning is probably a better idea than this. Commissioner Loeb stated that at least the other way one knew what would be next to you and it's not based purely on who you know and what you can get changed. Commissioner Loeb further stated that the Future Land Use Map has that whole area being commercial and there should not be any houses there to protect. The way to protect houses from heavy Planning Commission MinutNa/ ' August 22,2007 Page 13 commercial use is by transitional uses of light office and apartments,not by saying you need a smaller sign. Commissioner Loeb stated that the bad thing about living next to a shopping center is not how big the sign is out front on the arterial,but it's the 18-wheeler Dollar General truck rolling thirty feet past your bedroom window at 5:00 in the morning. Decreasing sign heights does not protect residential areas from commercial uses. Commissioner Loeb stated the signs are the least of the problem. Commissioner Kelly stated she understands the desire and reasoning to standardize, however, her view of"residential in nature" does not imply houses on that particular street. For example, Northwest Boulevard already is developing commercially, however, it is surrounded by residential neighborhoods and that makes it "residential in nature". Commissioner Kelly stated it is her desire to protect Northwest Boulevard from becoming a roadway with huge signs. Ms. Dougherty responded that through all these years of developing a sign code the"unlimited sign size" was done away with, therefore, any business out there has been restricted to a forty foot sign which makes Northwest Boulevard already protected from the huge signs. Ms. Dougherty stated that when staff asked the ad hoc committee to work on the sign ordinance, the reason given was to eliminate "zoning shopping". Therefore, instead of having signs based on zoning, the committee based it on the street sizes. Ms. Dougherty stated that later, staff came to the committee requesting to deregulate some of the arterials. After going out and viewing the streets the committee agreed with the exception of Northwest Boulevard and FM 1889. In response to Commissioner Stone, Ms. Murphy stated that if in the future an arterial street needs to be a regulated collector with street and sign standards, it is taken care of through an amendment. In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Ms. Goode-Macon stated that the zoning ordinance is always evolving, constantly being amended as time changes. Mr.Gunning stated that at one time there was an untenable situation in the business zones and"1-2" in that sign allowances were unlimited as to the number of signs, height of signs, and sign areas. Mr. Gunning pointed out that the change of zoning for a piece of property is a legislative action taken by City Council. That is what they are empowered to do, whether you call it politics or not. Because our sign allowances were tied to zoning, we had a number of people zone shopping for more sign allowances. Our intent was to find a new standard,not to standardize. Vice-chairman Garza stated the Ad Hoc Committee and the UDC Sign Focus Group did a great job in putting together the sign ordinance and it provides a lot of protection. However, Vice-chairman Garza further stated that in those areas that are asking for additional protection and you start to write exceptions to standards that you are adopting, those exceptions are actually giving the community less protection than what you are looking to try to get. Vice-chairman Garza stated that if additional protection is needed, then an overlay would be in order. Legal Counsel Gary Smith presented a legal opinion on the definition of"sign", stating that it is his belief that if our definition is aimed at commercial speech only it would put us in a strict scrutiny position and we need to engage in regulations that protect legitimate, substantial governmental interests that relate to all communications in a content neutral basis that we regulate on a time, manner and place basis. Mr. Smith reviewed with the commissioners various definitions from other city's codes. Regulating just commercial speech puts a different burden on commercial speech than we put on other speech and that makes us subject to strict scrutiny, making it difficult to defend our ordinance and definition. Mr. Smith stated he would encourage a broader disjunctive definition. Planning Commission Minutlii 111110 August 22,2007 Page 14 Commissioner Loeb stated the problem with the disjunctive is that it makes architecture a sign, as well as making sculptures and art a sign, because if it attracts attention to a place of business, it fits the definition. Commissioner Huerta motioned to approve staffs recommendation of Section 33-1 Sign Regulations with the revised sign definition from legal counsel and to include the sections of arterial streets designated as collectors that are currently listed in our zoning ordinance. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Kelly and passed with Commissioner Skrobarczyk and Commissioner Loeb voting against and Commissioner Nadkarni absent. Ms. Murphy stated for the record that the Wood River Community Association is in favor of keeping Northwest Boulevard and FM 1889 on the list of arterials to be regulated as collectors. VIII. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Ms. Goode-Macon stated the next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for September 5, 2007, and at that time a presentation will be made for outgoing commissioners Fred Braselton and Michael Pusley. VII. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn was made at 7:45 p.m. by Commissioner Skrobarczyk and was seconded by Commissioner Loeb. Motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Nadkarni being absent. Faryce Goode-Macon Beverly Lang-Priestley Interim Assistant Director of Recording Secretary Development Services/Planning H:\PLN-DIR\SHARED\WORD\PLANNING COMM ISSIOMMINUTES\2007\08-22-07MINUTES.DOC