HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 10/11/2000 4
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11,2000
Commissioners Present: David Berlanga,Chairman
Shirley Minis,Vice Chairman
Neill F.Amsler
W.David Cheek
William 1.Kelly*
Elizabeth Chu Richter
Eloy H.Salazar
Brooke Sween-McGloin
Robert Zamora**
Staff Present: Michael N.Gunning,AICP,Director of Planning
Lucinda P.Beal,Recording Secretary
Robert E.Payne, Senior Planner
Miguel S. Saldana,City Planner
Harry J. Power,City Planner
Doyle Curtis,Assistant City Attorney
Leo Farias,P.E.,Special Services Engineer
George Noe,Deputy City Manager
David Seiler,Traffic Engineer
Walter Jarrin,Traffic Engineer
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Berlanga declared a quorum and called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
NON PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS
PLANNING COMMISSION PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL
After review of a PowerPoint presentation outlining Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Platting
Ordinance Amendments, Comprehensive Planning Projects and other planning projects, the Commission
requested that the Planning Commission priorities previously presented to David Garcia, City Manager,be
outlined for presentation to the City Council on October 17, 2000. The Commission priorities are local
development costs and long-term planning, signage, Master Park and Open Space Plan, Traditional
Neighborhood,Development of Historically Underdeveloped Areas and Infill Development.
Motion by Sween-McGloin,seconded by Kelly,to forward Commission priorities to City Council
on October 17,2000. Motion passed unanimously.
FUTURE SCHEDULED MEETINGS
Chairman Berlanga asked the Commission to note the October 17, 2000 City Council meeting on
the calendar as to the date of the Planning Commission presentation.
EXCUSED ABSENCES
None.
OTHER MATTERS
Commissioner Amsler requested that affordable housing be placed on the Commission agenda as a
discussion item on October 25,2000. SCANNED
at 5:45 p.m. SCANNED
Zamora arrived at 5:35 p.m.
•
*it 14•10
Planning Commission Minutes
October II,2000
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS
Continued Plat
a. 0900110-P51
New River Hills(Preliminary—26.40 Acres)
Located north of Northwest Boulevard(F.M.624)between Wood River Hill and County Road 69.
Commissioner Kelly stated that he needed to abstain from participation in this plat and left the
room.
Mr. Power stated that the applicant's engineer requested a continuance for six(6)weeks,however,
the November 22, meeting had been cancelled. Mr.Power requested that the plat be continued for
eight(8)weeks.
Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public
hearing was closed.
Motion by Mims, seconded by Zamora, to continue the plat for eight weeks to the
December 6,2000 meeting. Motion passed unanimously with Kelly abstaining.
New Plats
Chairman Berlanga requested that plats A,B, and E be considered in a group. Mr. Power read the
plats into the record as follows
a. 0900114-P53
Maple Hills Subdivision Block 7 Lots l &2(Final-5 45 Acres)
Located on the south side of Up River Road east of McKenzie Road
b. 0900115-P54
Padre Island Corous Christi—Ports O'Call Block 10.lot IR(Final Reolat—0.229 Acre)
Located on the northeast corner of Hawksnest Bay Drive and Mont Pelee Drive
e. 1000120-NP63
Suntide Industrial Tracts block 1 Lots 12& 13 (Preliminary—27.038 Acres)
Located between Interstate Highway 37 and Bearden Drive east of Suntide Road
Mr.Power stated that Staff recommends approval as submitted.
Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing.
Tom Heuerman(plat B), 11400 Hawksnest, speaking in favor of Port's O'Call, Block 10, Lot 1R
stated that he intended to add a garage with a 5-foot setback.
Public hearing was closed.
In response to Commissioner Sween-McGloin's question regarding Plat A, Maple Hills
Subdivision, Block 7, Lots l & 2, Mr. Power stated that Stonewall Drive connects to Charles
Street which runs east to west and will ultimately connect to MCKinzie Road.
4r w
Planning Commission Minutes
October I I,2000
Page 3
Motion by Cheek, seconded by Zamora,to approve Staffs recommendation for approval of Plats
A,B,and E. Motion passed unanimously.
c. 0900116-P55
Southside Community Church(Final—6.663 Acres)
Located on the northeast corner of Brooke Road and Airline Road
Mr.Power stated that the applicant's engineer requested a two(2)week continuance.
Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public
hearing was closed.
Motion by Kelly, seconded by Salazar, to approve a two (2) week continuance. Motion passed
unanimously.
d. 0900117-P56
Staring Estates Unit 1 (Final—3.986 Acres)
Located at the north end of Spring Creek Drive and north of River Hills Country Club.
Commissioner Kelly stated that he needed to abstain from participation on this plat and left the
room.
Mr. Power stated that Staff recommends approval as submitted.
Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public
hearing was closed.
In response to Commissioner Amsler's question regarding location of the residences in the
subdivision and a requirement to build a road, Mr. Power stated that the residences would be
placed in the "horseshoe" type area east of the lake. He continued that the developer would be
required to develop the road to the boundary line.
In response to Commissioner Sween-McGloin's question regarding the length of the dead-end,
Mr. Power stated that the dead-end is 700+feet from the intersection there the street stops.
Commissioner Amsler expressed concern with the dust that is a result of the owner of the property
not having a paved road and asked whether a requirement for paving the driveway into the home
was possible. Mr. Power answered that the driveway is private property which the applicant
cannot be required to pave.
Motion by Cheek, seconded by Zamora, to approve Staffs recommendation. Motion passed
unanimously with Kelly abstaining.
Time Extensions
a. 089776-NP27
Indus, 'al . • ' _ Anne. : Lot2 —0.77 Acre
Located between Hopkins Road and the Texas Mexican Railway yard,west of North Padre Island
Drive(S.H. 357)
Mr.Power stated that Staff recommends approval of a six-month time extension.
•
1
Planning Commission Minutes
October I I,2000 '
Page 4
Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public
hearing was closed.
Motion by Mims, seconded by Salazar, to approve a six-month time extension. Motion passed
unanimously.
Continued Zoning Cases
Virgil Hinojosa: 0900-02
REQUEST: "R-1B"One-family Dwelling District"R-2"Multiple-family Dwelling District on Tract 1
and"B-I"Neighborhood Business District on Tract 2 being 5.44 acres out of a 234.24-
acre tract out of the McKinzie 388.29-acre tract in Survey 411, located on the south side
of Up River Road,approximately 2,250 feet east of McKinzie Road.
Mr. Saldana presented a slide illustration of the subject property and the surrounding areas. The
subject property is part of a large area zoned "R-1B" District that extends south from IH-37 to Leopard
Street and from Rand Morgan Road west to Callicoate Road. The surrounding area remains undeveloped
with the east, west, and south ends of the "R-I B" District area being developed with single-family
residences.
Mr. Saldana stated that the applicant requested a change of zoning to develop Tract 1 with 43
townhouse units and Tract 2 with a retail center containing approximately 8,420 square feet. The subject
property is located along a collector, Up River Road, and a proposed collector street, Deer Run Drive,
currently under construction. Up River Road extends west to McKinzie Road, an arterial, and east to
Carbon Plant Road, also an arterial. Both roads provide access to IH-37. The townhouse development on
Tract I would only have access to Deer Run Drive. Tract 2 will have direct access to Up River Road and
Deer Run Drive. Across Deer Run Drive to the west, the property has been platted for development of an
elementary school. The proposed multiple-family development would not adversely impact the school in
terms of the residential density or traffic. The proposed retail center could impact the school and school
safety zones depending on the uses,such as a convenience store with fuel sales.
The subject property is located in the Northwest Area Development Plan which recommends the
land area along the south side of Up River Road between McKinzie Road and Rand Morgan Road be
developed with low-density residential. Along the north side between Up River Road and Interstate
Highway 37(I.H.37),medium-density residential development is recommended.
Up River Road is a designated collector that currently is improved with a rural cross-section—60
feet of right-of-way;24-foot pavement section with two lanes and no curbs,gutters,or sidewalks.
The proposed townhouse development would have a minimum impact on the carrying capacity of
Deer Run Drive, Up River Road and the future school safety zone for the proposed elementary school to
the west.
The proposed "B-l" District commercial site, however, does raise several issues. Access to the
commercial site will be from Deer Run Drive and Up River Road. The peak hour trip generation from the
commercial use would adversely impact the traffic because Up River Road as a rural cross-section is
marginally adequate for carrying the increased commercial traffic. A'B-1"District will constitute the first
commercial site to be introduced in this segment of Up River Road thereby setting the pattern for future
development. If a"B-1"District were approved,it is likely that the commercial use will"domino"onto the
properties on the south side of Up River Road west towards McKinzie and east towards Carbon Plant Road.
A City Council adopted Policy Statement states that due to the City's financial limitations, new
development should occur in a pattern which is cost effective.
4 r
Planning Commission Minutes
October IL 2000
Page 5
Traffic Engineering has reviewed the change of zoning and anticipates that vehicular access to the
new elementary school, located west of the subject property, and to this new commercial development will
primarily be via Up River Road. Up River Road presently has a county road cross-section, 24-feet of
pavement with ditches on both sides. Up River Road is classified as a collector with sixty (60) feet of
right-of-way. The only available traffic volume information is from the Texas Department of
Transportation's traffic volume counts taken in 1996 showing this section of Up River Road carrying 930
vehicles per day. Over the last five years traffic volumes have increased to over 1,000 vehicles per day. It
is estimated that the proposed school will generate approximately 430 vehicle trips during the p.m. peak
hour. The proposed townhouse development is estimated to generate 25 vehicle trips (p.m. peak hour)and
the proposed commercial development 300 vehicle trips during the same time period. Traffic Engineering
has assumed that 20%of the projected p.m.peak hour traffic or 150 vehicles will access this area from the
south, Charles Street/stonewall/Deer Run. The remaining 80% or 600 vehicles will use Up River Road.
Another assumption is that 10% of the 24-hour traffic volume or 100 vehicles will be included in traffic
volume of the p.m.peak hour traffic. Therefore,the estimated volume of traffic during a"p.m."peak hour
along Up River Road is 700 vehicles. Using roadway capacity guidelines, it estimates that the hourly
service volume per lane for a fringe collector is 475 vehicles per lane or 950 vehicles on Up River Road.
The projected 700 vehicles during the p.m. peak hour traffic would degrade the Level-of-Service (LOS)
from a LOS A to a LOS C or LOS D. In order to keep traffic flowing smoothly along Up River Road,
required road improvements include expanded pavement at the Up River Road and Deer Run Drive
intersection to allow for a right-turn lane on the eastbound side and a left-turn lane on the westbound side
of Up River Road. These improvements would not be necessary if Tract 2 developed residentially.
Mr. Saldana stated that Staff recommends approval of the "R-2" Multiple Dwelling District on
Tracts 1 and 2 and denial of the"B-1"Neighborhood Business District. There were five(5)notices sent to
property owners within a 200-foot radius,of which one was returned in favor and none in opposition.
Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing.
Victor Medina, 2434 Sacky, representing Virgil Hinojosa, stated that the applicant proposed to
develop commercial property along Up River Road and townhomes in the rear of the property. He stated
that the development would enable the residents of the townhomes to walk to the retail center. Mr.Medina
addressed traffic concerns by stating that school traffic occurs in the early morning and late afternoon;
therefore, commercial traffic will not impact school traffic. He stated that there is a similar situation on
Rodd Field Road and Wooldridge near Smith Elementary with "B-1" District zoning. Mr. Medina stated
that he believed that the property across Up River Road would not develop residentially and that the
Northwest Area Development Plan will eventually blend the school district with"B-1" District zoning in
the area.
In response to Commissioner Cheek's question regarding specific ideas for the development, Mr.
Virgil Hinojosa, Portland, stated that the development would compliment the neighborhood. He provided
examples: Moody's Taquitos, Subway, and dry cleaners. Mr. Hinojosa stated that a bank was developed
across McKinzie Road and that the area is beginning to develop.With regard to alcohol sales,the applicant
was advised that a business that serves alcohol would not be allowed within the area of the proposed
school.
Mr. Hinojosa addressed Commissioner Cheek's question regarding zoning-based development by
stating that he required the requested zoning to meet his desired accomplishment for the area. He
continued that a"B-IA"Neighborhood Business District would be a compromise.
Public hearing was closed.
Mr. Gunning stated that between McKinzie Road and Rand Morgan Road, there are mixed
commercial and multi-family uses and that Up River Road is a collector. He continued that because Up
Planning Commission Minutes
October I I,2000
Page 6
River Road would be used as a school route,it would be very difficult to recommend a"B-I"District in the
area.
Commissioner Kelly stated that a "B-1A" District offers the same uses and would be less of a
traffic impact in the area. To which Mr. Gunning stated that there is less buildable area for the lot in a
"B-IA"District.
Mr. Leo Farias, Special Services Engineer, stated that there are no planned road improvements
with regard to Up River Road. However, such improvements will probably be a capital improvement
project,since there is not requirement for the developer to enlarge the roadway.
Mr. Gunning stated that the Superintendent of Tuloso-Midway School District has remained
neutral in the matter to consider"B-I"District and is in favor of the requested"R-2"District.
Commissioner Amsler stated that Up River Road has to be improved and that he did not believed
the City would stop development due to financial concerns and stated that he supported the rezoning
request.
Commissioner Mims expressed concern with the high traffic count provided in the zoning report.
She stated that she toured the area prior to the Commission meeting and did not believe the traffic count
was that high. She continued that most of the traffic would begin and end at a certain time due to the
school and work trips.
Mr. David Seiler, Traffic Engineer, stated that there is no development in the area at this time.
Traffic is during peak hour of the school. Traffic projections are proven by the demand on the streets. The
problem is not necessarily the traffic but the turning ability from Up River Road into the development. By
not limiting the development,there would be a significant,impact unless there is improvement of the road.
In response to the Commission's question regarding time-frame for development of the property,
Mr. Hinojosa stated that he would be developing the townhouse project first and the commercial site soon
after. He stated that his long-term plans are to complete the project within 24 months.
Commissioner Richter stated that she believed that the development was a creative solution to no
development,especially considering the density. Traffic concerns will be in the future. She stated that she
supports the application request.
Mr. Gunning stated that with regard to the land use aspect, Staff reviews every application
carefully. He continued that once a commercial use is allowed in an area, it creates a domino affect. He
stated that there are several uses in `B-l" District that would not be appropriate for the area and that he
favored the multi-family zoning.
Commissioner Salazar congratulated the applicant for stimulating growth in the area.
Commissioner Sween-McGloin stated that she concurred with Commissioner Richter; however,
favored a 'B-1A" District. She continued that a "B-1A" District promoted pedestrian development and
excludes "B-I" District uses that are not compatible with neighborhoods. Commissioner Sween-McGloin
stated that the "B-IA" District is the type of development that the Commission wanted to create for areas
similar to the Up River Road area and favors layered zoning.
Commissioner Richter did not support a"B-1A" District for this undeveloped area and believed
the"B-IA"District was more appropriate for redeveloping areas.
Motion by Richter,seconded by Amsler, for a"R-2"Multiple-family Dwelling District on Tract 1
and"B-1" Neighborhood Business District on Tract 2. Motion passed with Amsler, Cheek, Kelly, Minis,
Richter, Salazar,and Berlanga voting"Aye"and Sween-McGloin and Zamora voting"Nay".
w
Planning Commission Minutes
October I I,2000
Page 7
Don Hodges: 1000-01
REQUEST: "B-1" Neighborhood Business District to "B-4" General Business District on Koolside
Addition,Block 6,Lot 22R, located on the west side of Airline Road,approximately 150
feet south of Gollihar Road.
Mr. Saldana presented a slide illustration of the subject property and the surrounding area. In
October 1990,as part of a comprehensive rezoning of a larger area,the subject property retained its current
"B-1"District designation. The subject property is part of 12.91 acres of land zoned a "B-1" District that
are developed with a mixture of retail uses,offices and residential uses. Northwest of the subject property,
there are 1.82 acres of land zoned an"AB"District and developed with medical offices. East and west of
the subject property, the area is zoned an "R-1B" District and is predominantly developed with
single-family residential uses.
Mr. Saldana stated that the applicant requested a change of zoning to continue operating an illegal
auto sales use. No certificate of occupancy was obtained from the City. The subject property is located
along an arterial, Airline Road, with no direct access to a local residential street. It also backs up to an
established residential neighborhood. In October 1990, the City undertook a comprehensive rezoning of
the west side of Airline Road,between Lum Avenue on the north and McArdle Road on the south. Due to
the number of Special Permits in the area and its residential adjacency, it was recommended by the
Planning Commission and affirmed by the City Council that the appropriate zoning of the area was a"B-1"
District. Approval of a"B-4"District would open the door for other"B-4"District requests along this area
and undermine the decision of previous Planning Commission and City Council. It is Staff's opinion that
conditions in the area have remained constant under the current"B-1"District, which does not necessitate
rezoning the area. Staff believes that the existing"B-1"District is the appropriate zoning classification for
this area because it provides protection to the adjacent.residential neighborhood. Should the Planning
Commission consider granting a Special Permit,conditions for a Special Permit should include limiting the
use to an auto sales with a specified number of automobiles,prohibition of exterior telephone bell, chimes
and loudspeakers, require landscaping, and approval of a site plan. Staff does not recommend either the
change of zoning or a Special Permit.
•
Mr. Saldana stated that the property is located within the Southeast Area Development Plan which
recommends the area to develop with neighborhood business uses. The requested "B-4" District is not
consistent with the Plan's adopted future land use map.
Staff recommends denial of the rezoning request. There were 17 notices mailed to property
owners within a 200-foot radius of which two (2) were returned in favor and one (1) was returned in
opposition.
Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing.
Don Hodges, 6202 Coppedge, stated that he purchased the subject property in December 1999.
Mr. Hodges stated that he is the owner of the Lock Doc business next door to the subject property and that
he has refused to lease the property to mechanic shops and detail shops. He admits that he did not know
that he was in violation of the zoning ordinance. The property is being leased to a used car business which
has clean cars. The owner of the used car business does not have a mechanic shop on the premises and has
not been allowed to work on vehicles as required by Mr.Hodges. Mr.Hodges stated that he was informed
that he needed to request a"B-4"District zoning, but would be agreeable to a Special Permit to allow the
current use of the property. He stated that he would abide by all height/setback,signage, and traffic codes.
He stated that he there was a wooden screening fence at the rear of the property. Mr.Hodges said that the
property previously had a Special Permit.
The public hearing was closed.
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11,2000
Page 8
In response to Commissioner Cheek's question regarding a Special Permit discussion with Mr.
Hodges, Mr. Gunning stated that Staff did not pursue this option in detail with the applicant due to the fact
that Staff was opposed to the auto sales use.
Mr. Saldafia requested that the Commission continue the case for two (2) weeks if a Special
Permit is a consideration. Staff needs to design conditions addressing lighting, screening, landscaping,and
use. In response to Commissioner Kelly's question regarding whether a Special Permit is voided after the
business is closed, Mr. Saldafia stated that if a similar business opens within a year, the Special Permit is
still active with the same conditions.
Mr. Saldafia stated that in 1988 a Special Permit was issued for an auto repair shop that operated
for six(6)years. Commissioner Salazar commented that the previous and current businesses were the same
types of businesses;however,the current business was a cleaner business.
In response to Commissioner Zamora's question regarding signs, Mr. Saldana stated that a 'B-l"
District sign allowance would be allowed under a Special Permit.
Commissioner Amsler stated that Airline Road is developing a character and he could not support
the rezoning request. Chairman Berlanga concurred.
Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Amsler, to deny the rezoning request. Motion passed
with Amster, Kelly, Richter, Sween-McGloin, and Berlanga voting "Aye'; Cheek and Salazar voting
"Nay"and Mims being out of the room.
Paul S.Vera: 1000-02
REQUEST: "R-I B" One-family Dwelling District and "B-1"Neighborhood Business District with a
"SP" to "B-4" General Business District onLaguna Acres, Block 1, Lots II and 12
located on the southwest corner of Home Road and Teresa Street
Mr. Saldafia stated that the applicant requested a two(2)week continuance. Staff recommends the
continuance.
Motion by Mims, seconded by Salazar, to continue the zoning case for two (2) weeks. Motion
passed unanimously.
PLAT ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
Mr.Gunning opened the discussion by stating that the proposed Plat Ordinance Amendments were
presented to developers on August 31,2000 for review and comment. At that time, developers suggested
changes to the amendments.
Mr. Gunning presented an overview of the changes proposed to the Platting Ordinance. Money
collected in-lieu of park dedication to be spent within l '/z miles of the contributing subdivision would be
expanded to a three(3)mile radius. The City currently has too many small and under utilized parks. City
street participation for construction of one-half(1/2) of the street is required when a street abuts a park.
These streets are usually 60-foot collectors. Where a park dedication is required, it will be the City's
responsibility that adequate city funds are available for street construction and approved by Council before
the park is requested and prior to plat approval.
Commissioner Kelly asked whether park tnrst fund and park bond dollars, as proposed in the
amendment, could be used for any curb, gutters, sidewalks, and paving. Mr. Gunning answered in the
negative. Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested a change to the amendments to state that funding could
be used for extension of utilities into parks only.
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11,2000
Page 9
Mr. Power stated that the changes to the Platting Ordinance constituting replacing "will" to
"may", clarifying residential collector streets and adding criteria that will require certification of fund
availability by the City prior to development. In the event the City could not participate due to financial
constraints, the developer would have to accept a 100 percent of the cost. Another change addressed
bridges. Bridges over drainage ways having a bottom width greater than 15 feet having a 4:1 slope was not
addressed in the ordinance. Addition of the 4:1 slope requirement would make it easier to maintain the
drainage way.
Commissioner Sween-McGloin stated that the City does not have to promise to participate but will
be reviewing participation costs on a case by case basis. Mr. Power clarified that the City will not be
participating with bridge construction costs.
In response to Commissioner Richter's question regarding the funding source for participation
costs,Mr.Power stated that the funding source has been 1986 Bonds,which are now depleted. Mr.George
Noe,Deputy City Manager,stated that there was $500,000 available from the 1986 Bonds which was spent
at a rate of$200,000 per year.
Mr. Power outlined changes by stating that he deleted the original paragraph pertaining to
minimum standards for street lights, the cost of street lights and the city's participation. He stated that
language addressing midblock locations were also amended. Mr.David Seiler,Traffic Engineer, stated that
the location criteria did not change. The depth of a cul-de-sac is currently 250 feet in length; 230 midblock
and 260 intersection. Mr. Seiler explained that for every dollar the developer pays, the City pays an
additional dollar. Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested that"however"be deleted from the passage.
Mr. Seiler stated that the intent of requiring one pole type for each subdivision is to maintain
consistency within the subdivision. Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested that a requirement be added
which requires that lamp and globe type be consistent throughout the subdivision.
Commissioner Mims questioned the inclusion of street lighting requirements in new subdivisions
in the City's Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETH. Mr. Seiler stated that the requirement has been the
practice,but not the rule. Therefore,the requirement was placed in the Platting Ordinance.
Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing.
John Wallace, 12 Camden,thanked City staff for allowing developers to participate in discussions
regarding amendments to the Platting Ordinance. Mr. Wallace stated that inadequate infrastructure needed
to be addressed in the Northwest and Wooldridge areas due to the fact that there are areas that are not
buildable. He expressed concern with the inability to build affordable housing. There has been an cost
increase to the consumer who wishes to purchase a home. The developer has the financial liability for
development which will eventually increase the price of a home.
In response to Commissioner Kelly's question regarding what the City could do to assist
developers,Mr. Wallace stated that he welcomes the opportunity to change. Change needs to occur. Mr.
Wallace suggested that City needed to upgrade its infrastructure to allow the City to move forward and
grow.
In response to the Commission's questions regarding developing in the City, Mr. Wallace stated
that developers consider the cost of the property, sewer, etc. The cost needs to be consistent with the
marketable price of homes.
Lon Hipp, 5210 County Road 95, stated that the City needed to be competitive for growth to
increase the tax base. Mr. Hipp also said that there needed to be affordable housing in order to be
marketable. He continued that the developers understand the City's financial status; however, problems
will stop a subdivision from being developed and hoped that the financial situation will be corrected to get
"back on track".
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11,2000
Page 10
Chuck Urban, 2725 Swanmer, expressed concern with the bridge construction requirements. Mr.
Urban stated that the requirement limits the bridge structure. He continued that a bridge can cost$150,000
to$200,000 and continued that drainage was also an issue.
Public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested that changes be made to the proposed Plat Ordinance
Amendments to include:
Page 2: "City Council can authorize expenditure for parks."
Page 2: "Park Trust and Park Bond funds can be used for extensions of utilities only."
Page 3: Section 16: (See Section V.B.1.b.i, ii,and
Page 5: ilea.,..,.,the cost of intersection
Page 5: 1. Subdivisions platted....., 1980,require the developer.....
Page 6: 3. Only one pole,lamp,and elobe type will be .....
Motion by Sween-McGloin,seconded by Amsler, to forward the Platting Ordinance Amendments
with corrections to City Council. Motion passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Mims, seconded by Kelly, to adjourn. Motion passed unanimously. Meeting
adjourned at 9:04 p.m.
i ru^/
1.
ichael .Gunning,AICP inda P.Beal
Director of Planning Recording Secretary