Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 08/08/2007 111110 MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers-City Hall Wednesday—August 8,2007 5:30 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: Chairman Bryan Stone Johnny Perales,PE, Deputy Director of Development Rudy Garze,Vice Chairman Services/Special Services Atilano J. Huerta Faryce Goode-Macon, Interim Assistant Director of David Loeb Development Services/Planning Evon J.Kelly Miguel S. Saldafia,AICP, Senior City Planner Govind Nadkami Michael N.Gunning,AICP, Special Assistant to John C.Tamez Development Services Johnny R. Martinez Shannon Murphy,AICP, City Planner James Skrobarczyk Stephanie Voss,Project Manager Gary Smith,Assistant City Attorney Beverly Lang-Priestley, Recording Secretary Si usted quiere dirigirse a la comision y su ingles es limitado, habra un interprete de espanol a ingles en la junta para ayudarle I. CALL TO ORDER A quorum was declared and the meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion for approval of the July 25, 2007, minutes was made by Commissioner Tamez and seconded by Commissioner Martinez. Motion passed unanimously. III. PLATS Continued Plats Miguel Saldana read continued plat agenda item "a" (shown below) into the record and stated this item has been submitted for a continuance to August 22,2007. 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. SCANNED Planning Commission Minut August 8,2007 Page 2 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 Vice-Chairman Garza and passed unanimously. Mr. Saldafia read continued plat agenda item "b" (shown below) into the record, stating this item has been submitted for approval. Staff recommends approval. b. 0707103-P038 Brighton Village Unit 5. Block I,Lot 5(Final- 14.002 Acres) Located south of Saratoga Boulevard(SH 357)and west of Cimarron Boulevard. Public hearing was opened. Nobody came forward in support or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Skrobarczyk for approval of the request and was seconded by Commissioner Martinez. Motion passed unanimously. 2. New Plats Mr. Saldafia read new plat agenda items "a and b" (shown below) into the record stating these items have been submitted for a continuance to August 22, 2007. a. 0807113-P044 Lexington Subdivision, Block 2, Lot 23A(Final Replat-0.23 Acrel Located south of Johanna Street between Ayers Street and Richter Street. b. 0807114-P045 Los Arboles at Terra Mar Unit 2(Final - 15.46 Acres) Located south of Holly Road and east of Rodd Field Road. 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 Kelly for approval of the continuance. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Loeb and passed unanimously. Mr. Saldafia read continued plat agenda items "c and d" (shown below) into the record, stating these items have been submitted for approval. Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission Minute August 8,2007 Page 3 c. 0807115-NP072 Padre Island-Corpus Christi Mariner's Cay Unit 2A,Block 2, Lot 1 A (Final Replat-0.543 Acre) Located north of Commodores Drive and west of South Padre Island Drive(Park Road 22). d. 0807116-NP073 Padre Island-Corpus Christi Ports O'Call, Block 18, Lot 2R (Final Replat-0.2669 Acre) Located west of Salt Cay Court, south of Whitecap Boulevard and west of South Padre Island Drive(Park Road 22). 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 the request and was seconded by Commissioner Tamez. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Time Extensions Commissioner Tamez stated he will abstain from voting on time extension agenda item "e"due to a conflict of interest. Mr. Saldana read time extension agenda item "e" (shown below) into the record, stating the item has been submitted for a time extension of six months. Staff recommends approval. e. 0207020-NP016 Gonzalez Center,Block 1, Lots 1,2 &3 (Final-4.476 Acres) Located south of Yorktown Boulevard and east of Cimarron Boulevard. 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 the request and was seconded by Commissioner Skrobarczyk. Motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Tamez abstaining. Mr. Saldana read time extension agenda items "a, b, c, d, f, and g" (shown below) into the record,stating these items have been submitted for a time extension of six months, with the exception of item"b"which is for a time extension of one year. Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission Minut August 8,2007 Page 4 a. 0106012-P012 River Bend Ranch Subdivision Unit 1 (Final-31.43 Acres) Located south of Yorktown Boulevard and east of Rodd Field Road. b. 0806144-NP075 Greenwood Estates(Preliminary-27.00 Acres) Located west of Greenwood Drive and north of Saratoga Boulevard(SH 357). c. 0207016-NP012 Brooklyn Addition, Block 19,Lot 13 (Final - 1.937 Acres) Located between Neal and Haynes Streets east of Gulfbreeze Boulevard. d. 0207018-NP014 Flour Bluff Center, Block 4,Lot IA(Final- 1.543 Acres) Located south of South Padre Island Drive(SH 358)between Jonnell and Central Streets east of Flour Bluff Drive. f 0207022-NP018 Waldron Road Subdivision,Block 1, Lot 5 (Final- 1.033 Acres) Located east of Waldron Road and south of Graham Road. g. 0207028-P007 Summit Cove Subdivision(Final-2.79 Acres) Located east of Laguna Shores Road and north of Rex Lane. Public hearing was opened. Nobody came forward in support or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion for approval was made by Commissioner Kelly and seconded by Commissioner Martinez. Motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Minutes`/ August 8,2007 Page 5 IV. ZONING 1. New Zoning a. Case No. 0807-01 A.C. Gilmore: A change of zoning from a "B-I" Neighborhood Business District to a"6-4"General Business District Gardendale Unit 2, Block 5, Lot 18, located approximately 200 feet south of the intersection of S. Staples Street and Curtis Clark Drive Commissioner Kelly stated she will abstain from voting on this case. Stephanie Voss presented the above case via Power Point, stating the subject property is located along the west side of South Staples Street between Bonner and Curtis Clark Drive. Ms. Voss stated the applicant is requesting a change of zoning from a 'B-1" Neighborhood Business District to a `B-4" General Business District. The subject property is surrounded by commercial property. To the north is a"BA" General Business District,to the south is a'B-I" Special Permit,to the east is a`B-4" General Business District and to the west is a "R-1B/SP" One-Family Dwelling District with a Special Permit. The proposed use is consistent with the Southside Area Development Plan which recommends general business for the subject property and surrounding area. Examples of uses permitted within the "B-4" District include multi-family residential, auto and boat sales, restaurants, hotels, enclosed mini-storage and bars. Ms. Voss stated that Article 24 of the Zoning Ordinance states that both the 'B-1" and B-4" Districts require a front yard setback of twenty (20) feet with no required side or rear yard setbacks unless adjacent to a residential district where a setback of ten(10)feet is required. Buildings in a"B-I" District are limited to a height of thirty (35) feet, not to exceed three (3) stories. There are no building height limitations in the`B-4"District. Of the twenty-nine (29) notices mailed to the surrounding property owners, zero (0) were returned in favor and one (I) was returned in opposition, which was outside the 200 foot notification area. Development of the site for a commercial business and potential bar is compatible with existing uses in the area. The "B-4" District would allow the development of a bar within the commercial development while the 'B-1" District does not. The future land use map recommends the development of commercial uses along South Staples Street and the request for the"B-4" is favorable due to it being an extension of existing 'B-4" to the immediate north, west and east across Staples. "B-4" is also located at the corner of Staples and Bonner Streets. Staff recommends approval. In response to Chairman Stone, Ms. Voss stated that the all subject property is currently zoned "6-1". Public hearing was opened. Nobody came forward in support or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minut} August 8,2007 Page 6 Motion was made by Commissioner Skrobarczyk for approval of staff recommendation. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Huerta and passed unanimously with Commissioner Kelly abstaining. V. PRESENTATION—UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE(UDC) SIGNS 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. Mr. Gunning stated that the process began in 2005 with the hiring of the consultants, Duncan and Associates. In May 2006, the initial draft was released. After a 45-day review period and public hearings before twenty-nine (29) different groups, there was concern and disagreement as to what the code was to accomplish. Mr. Gunning pointed out that the purpose of the Unified Development Code is to simply merge the subdivision regulations and the zoning regulations into a single, integrated code that is clear, concise and in a single document. Mr. Gunning stated that after meeting with the City Manager and other management staff, seven areas of focus were brought up. Therefore, seven UDC focus groups were formed with citizens throughout the community representing different business interests, such as bankers, developers, retailers and sign companies, as well as neighborhood representatives. Those focus groups are Administrative Procedures, Base Zoning, Infrastructure, Landscape, Park Development, Shared Access and Signs. Mr. Gunning stated that in mid-2006, staff was asked by City Council to address serious issues with the current language in the sign ordinance allowing unlimited size, height, sign area and number of signs. Mr. Gunning stated that to help in that effort,an Ad-Hoc group was formed for discussion and to give staff feedback. Ms. Camm Dougherty served as chairman of the Ad-Hoc group. On April 11, 2006, the City Council approved the recommended amendments from the Ad-Hoc group and those changes were incorporated into the current language in the sign ordinance. The UDC Sign Focus Group was asked to reconvene in December 2006 to review the signs section of the draft UDC. They met bi-weekly through April 2007, reviewing other miscellaneous sign provisions. Mr. Gunning commended the sign group representatives for seeing it through to completion. In addition to Ms. Dougherty, others serving on the group included David Loeb, Vice-Chairman, Jay Porterfield from the American Institute of Architects, Planning Commissioner Javier Huerta, and Chris de la Fuente representing schools, James Tumcotte from Whataburger,Katrina Campbell from American Bank,and Regan Brown from Peterson Development. Tim Painschwab served as a neighborhood representative. Mr. Gunning stated that three of the seven focus groups have completed their UDC reviews, the first being the Signs group, followed by the Landscape group and the Park Development group. The Planning Commission public hearing for the Signs presentation is scheduled for August 22, 2007. The Landscape and the Park Development groups will be presenting their recommendations between now and December. Mr. Gunning stated that he has been the facilitator for these groups, supported by Faryce Goode-Macon and Shannon Murphy and other city staff. Shannon Murphy, City Planner for the City of Corpus Christi,came forward to present the findings and recommendations of the Signs Focus Group, stating that when the group was formed, the sign section of the ordinance was in good shape due to the previous revisions by the Ad-Hoc group. The UDC proposed additional amendments not previously included, such as illustrations,definitions,and other sign standards. Planning Commission Minute/ August 8,2007 Page 7 Ms. Murphy highlighted some of the changes recommended by the focus group such as additional definitions,a provision for sign maintenance which states signs must be maintained and must be removed or replaced with a blank panel or painted over panel within 90 days of a business closure or relocation. Ms. Murphy stated there is also a provision for unsafe signs stating such signs must be removed within ten days or be in compliance within ten days. Also, a section was added on computation of sign area, prohibited signs and exempt signs, i.e., address signs, political signs, government signage and works of art. Ms. Murphy stated that aside from the added illustrations, the group provided additional standards for building signs. Also included is a provision to allow for additional signs for uses such as fuel sales and new vehicle sales and service allowing an additional sign per street frontage or lot and a specified height and square foot area. Ms. Murphy stated that a time limit of 90 days was added to the current nonconforming sign provision. Ms. Murphy stated that illustrations of sign types have been added along with sign definitions and standards. Ms. Murphy pointed out that these signs are still tied to street types,not zoning. Ms. Murphy stated that staff concurs with the focus group recommendations for the most part; however, there are two points of disagreement, one of those being the definition of a sign. Staff is recommending we continue with the current sign definition in the Zoning Ordinance. The second point of disagreement concerns the current arterial streets listed in the Zoning Ordinance that are being regulated as collector street standards. Staff is recommending the section remain as is and the Focus group is recommending deletion of the entire section. Ms. Murphy explained that since the City does not have an adopted Unified Development Code, the proposed sign text amendments would be incorporated into the current zoning ordinances. Therefore, the entire Article 33, which is the sign regulation section of the ordinance, will have a new organization and new verbage pulled from the UDC. With the Parks, it will be a text amendment to the platting ordinance,and a revised Article 27 for the Landscape section. In response to Chairman Stone,Ms. Murphy stated the two areas of disagreement between staff and the Signs focus group is the definition of a sign and whether to keep the current arterial streets listed in the Zoning Ordinance regulated as collector street standards. Mr. Gunning stated the plan from the beginning was for the focus groups to come up with their recommendations and present them to staff and if there were any discrepancies or disagreements between staff and the groups, then both positions would be presented. Ms. Murphy stated the next step is for a public hearing at the August 22 Planning Commission meeting at which time a Planning Commission recommendation will be made and carried forward to City Council. In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Ms. Murphy stated that staff recommends the list of arterial streets remain as is, to be reviewed with collector street standards; and the Sign Focus group recommends deleting the entire section. Ms. Murphy stated that collector streets have stricter sign regulations than arterials. Ms. Camm Dougherty, Chairperson of the Signs Focus Group, stated that the reason the Signs Focus Group recommends deletion that section is due to a past incident in which Northwest Boulevard, a commercial corridor, was reclassified by City Council from an arterial status to a collector status for signage. Ms. Dougherty stated it is the concern of the group that this could happen anywhere across the city to deter commercial businesses. 1110# 111180 Planning Commission Minut August 8,2007 Page 8 In response to Commissioner Kelly, Commissioner Loeb stated the reason the focus group recommends shortening of the definition of `sign' is that the current definition could be interpreted very broadly and could include things like architecture and other things that are not really signs, leaving the definition open and vulnerable to legal action. Commissioner Loeb stated that it was focus group's commitment to create a definition that would fit into what the City can actually enforce. In his experience, a sign must convey a"commercial message", and further, a"commercial message" is written material. As an example, Commissioner Loeb stated that if a fried chicken establishment has a chicken statue out front, under our current definition,the statue is a sign,but it's unenforceable. Legal counsel Gary Smith stated that his concern with the shorter definition is that it could open a back door to allow things the City does not define as signs to populate area and space If it is not a commercial message there is the possibility that lots of placards would be placed at a commercial location that the City really did not intend. Mr. Gunning stated that in previous reviews with the consultant and their attorneys,the definition that is in the UDC, which is the current Zoning Ordinance definition, provides the City with more protection because of all the detail, reiterating that staff recommendation is keeping with the current definition in the Unified Development Code. Commissioner Kelly stated that it is her opinion that keeping the arterial and collector streets designated as is does not constitute an anti-development stance, but is an attempt to keep the signs on these roads from becoming too large or cluttered. Commissioner Huerta noted that during the focus group deliberations, members sometimes agreed and sometimes disagreed with certain issues, and those issues were then voted on. Commissioner Huerta stated it was a difficult process and he would like more input from Legal to make sure that whatever definition goes in allows the City the leverage needed to look at all cases on a case by case basis and to determine what is a commercial message. In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk,Ms. Dougherty stated that current sign regulations for arterial streets is 200 square feet of signage, forty feet tall; for a collector it drops to 20 feet tall and 64 square feet of signage. Mr. Gunning explained that street designations are made by the City's Transportation Plan,which is adopted by ordinance by City Council; that same document came to the Planning Commission before going to City Council. The intent of the regulation change was to protect the existing residential neighborhoods along the arterial streets. Commissioner Loeb stated his concern with the issue is that, for example, along Alameda or Airline, if and when the residential dwellings go commercial, as is happening, it puts the commercial businesses at a disadvantage for somebody to buy them for "real" commercial use because then they won't get the same signage as somebody else. Then the business person has to go all the way up to City Council just to get the same signs as everybody else. Chairman Stone thanked the focus group members present and staff for the hard work and stated that a public hearing would be held at the next Planning Commission meeting of August 22, 2007. Planning Commission Minutes` ' August 8,2007 Page 9 In response to Commissioner Garza, Mr. Gunning stated the Commissioners' next step on August 22, 2007, will be to make a recommendation to City Council. It is staffs responsibility to provide to the Commissioners enough information to address public concerns. VL DIRECTOR'S REPORT A. FUTURE SCHEDULED MEETINGS Next Planning Commission Meeting is August 22,2007. The departing commissioners will be invited back on September 5, 2007 for a presentation. VII. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn was made at 6:26 p.m. by Commissioner Loeb and was seconded by Commissioner Tamez. Motion passed unanimously. Faryce Goode-Macon Beverly Lang-Priestley Interim Assistant Director of Recording Secretary Development Services/Planning H'.\PLN-DIR\SHARED\WORD\PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\2007\08-08.07MINUTES.DOC