Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 10/13/1999 V Planning Commission Meeting October 13, 1999 Commissioners Present: Bert Quintanilla,Chairman Ron Guzman,Vice Chairman William J.Kelly Shirley Mims* Elizabeth Chu Richter Brooke Sween-McGloin David Underbrink Commissioners Absent: David Berlanga Danny Noyola Staff Present: Michael N.Gunning,AICP, Director of Planning W.Thomas Utter,Assistant City Manager Lucinda P.Beal,Recording Secretary Robert Payne,AICP, Senior Planner Miguel S. Saldafia,AICP,City Planner Harry J.Power,City Planner Jay Reining,Assistant City Attorney David Seiler,Traffic Engineer CALL TO ORDER Chairman Quintanilla declared a quonun present called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. NON PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS PRESENTATIONS Mr. W. Thomas Utter, Assistant City Manager, stated that during his business travel to California he obtained a copy of the Port of Los Angeles' Port expansion proposal. The type of Port expansions proposed by Los Angeles is visually similar to what Corpus Christi is attempting to achieve with Harbor Place. Mr.Utter continued that the City is soliciting a Needs Assessment Consultant and a Project Manager for the Convention Center expansion. The Assessment Consultant would be working with Port planners and consultants. The area under review is the Port area and the area between the Art Museum of South Texas and the Museum of Science and History. City Staff is reviewing the possibility of incorporating the overall plan for the area to include the Leathers Housing Projects extending to the Wastewater Plant. The project should be concluded by 2003. The Planning Department is working on preparing proposals for an RFQ and RPP, which should be available for distribution in November,if approved by City Council. Mr.Utter informed the Commission that there was private development on a proprietary project in the process. Commissioner Sween-McGloin questioned whether the process of including private developers would require coordination of planning efforts with the Port. Mr. Utter answered that the RFP would state the requirements for development. The plan for the area is included in the Southcentral Area Development Plan. In order for a private developer to develop the area and be successful,the Bayfront Arts and Sciences Park participants need to be verified. Mr.Utter stated that if a major private interest group is willing to invest large dollar amounts into a project,the project usually succeeds. However, the City Council would be the final approving governmental body. Mr. Utter continued that after speaking with a variety of major corporations, they agreed that requesting RFQs/RFPs from master developers is a preferred practice. In response to Commissioner Sween-McGloin's question regarding the planning process and control of the process,Mr.Utter answered that City Council would need to approve the plans presented and continued that the Ar SCANNED ., a Planning Commission Minutes October 13,1999 Page 2 Museum, the Harbor Playhouse, the Port, Texas A & M University, and several other groups would also be participating in the approval process. Mr. Utter stated that the Planning Commission would have an opportunity to comment on the proposals. Mr. Utter stated that if property is zoned properly, a variety of developments could be proposed and erected. He stated that he believed that the proposed projects would not be inconsistent with the type of developmental idea for Harbor Place. Mr.Utter stated that too often cities found that their downtown area,which is the highest tax base, is eroding at a fast pace. He stated that the Corpus Christi downtown area is being built up and more development is needed in the downtown area. In response to Commissioner Kelly regarding a time frame for implementation of the Harbor Place development,Mr.Utter stated that the RFQ/RFPs would be presented to City Council in mid-November to allow for distribution. With respect to a Needs Assessment Manager and Project Manager,Mr.Utter stated that the plan is to choose the Needs Assessment Manager by the end of December. Mr. Utter stressed that the Convention Center planning would be implemented regardless of acceptance of an RFP by a major developer. Mr. Utter clarified that the master developer would be building on City-owned property and that the developer would fund the development after approval by City Council. Mr.Utter informed the Commission that the Convention Center expansion would be viable if the option to expand to the west over the existing parking lot and over Chaparral Street was chosen. Another option is to expand to the north. However, moving toward the Watergarden could present difficulties because portions of the property were purchased by the Foundation for the Arts and Sciences, which has approving authority for development in the area.The area south of the Convention Center is privately owned and cannot be considered unless the City acquired the property. However,the property would not be considered for a hotel,but rather an expansion of the Convention Center. Mr.Utter assured the Commission that the Needs Assessment and Project Managers would have experience in developing Convention Centers. Annexation Mr.Utter identified the areas proposed for annexation and action by City Council:Area A-Portions on the west side of Wood River Subdivision; Area C-73 acres formally proposed as an outlet mall in the Northwest area, Mr. Utter stated that Areas A and C would have a positive impact on the City's General Fund. Mr. Utter identified two(2)areas to be annexed on the Island. Area D—an area that cannot be developed. Area F—Controversial area which runs from the State Park, city limits line, up to the city limits of Port Aransas. He stated that by annexing Area F a positive cash flow for the city would occur by generating $800,000 in hotel/motel tax, of which approximately $175,000 could be distributed to the Convention Center. Mr. Utter stated that the Mayor of Port Aransas appeared before City Council stating that Port Aransas was proposing to annex Area F. City Council will review presentations regarding the proposed annexation on November 9. The public hearing before Planning Commission will be November 10, 1999. Mr. Utter stated that during the past legislative term, an Annexation Plan was created for all non-exempt property, which needs to be adopted by December 31. The Annexation Plan allows for a penalty for two to five years if items,which were initially included in the Annexation Plan,are omitted. However,there are alternatives for industrial districts, colonias, or tracts of land containing 100 or less parcels which are developed with one or more residential units. In response to Commissioner Sween-McGloin's question regarding City services being provided to annexed areas,Mr. Utter answered that certain services are to be implemented immediately: police, fife,and solid waste. If the service is included in the Annexation Plan,the service needed to be implemented. Mr.Utter stated that he believed that development should bear the cost of the annexed area. EXCUSED ABSENCES Vice Chairman Guzman requested an excused absence for the September 29, 1999 meeting due to an illness. Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Underbrink, to approve the request for an excused absence. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga,Noyola,and Mims being absent. 41+ Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 3 FUTURE SCHEDULED MEETINGS Chairman Quintanilla asked the Commissioners to review the future scheduled meetings. Mr. Gunning reminded the Commission that the November 10ih Planning Commission meeting would focus on annexation and zoning of annexed areas. OTHER MATTERS City Council Zoning Action Mr.Gunning highlighted action taken regarding zoning cases presented to City Council. October 12, 1999 City Council approved Planning Commission's recommendation regarding the following cases: Case No. 999-2,Hayley Builders,Inc.:"R-1A"to"A-2" Located on the north side of Ocean Drive,approximately 500 feet west of S.Alameda Street. Commission Recommendation:Approval Case No. 999-3,William R.Hayward:"F-R"to"B-4" Located on the southwest corner of Northwest Boulevard(F.M.624)and County Road 73. Commission Recommendation:Approval Case No.999-4,Doddridge Associates: "B-1"to"B-4" Located on the northwest corner of Doddridge and S.Alameda Streets. Commission Recommendation:Approval At the request of the applicant,City Council tabled Case No. 899-9 and 999-10. Case No. 899-9 Chester C.Coker: "F-R"to"1-2"/Case No. 999-10 Chester C.Coker: "F-R"and"R-IB"to"B-3" Located between Heinsohn Road and North Padre Island Drive north of Bear Lane Commission Recommendation:Denial of the"1-2"District and approval of a Special Permit for an outside amusement park. Approval of the"B-3"District. Zoning Cases Scheduled for Future City Council Action Mr. Gunning asked the Commission to review the cases scheduled for future City Council action and reminded the Commission that Case No. 899-9 and 999-10 would be presented at the October 19ih Council meeting. October 19, 1999 Case No. 899-3,Valerie R.Goodwin: "R-IA"to"R-2" Located at the northwest corner of Rio Vista&Country Club Drives. Commission Recommendation: Denial of the"R-2"District and approval of a Special Permit for a second dwelling unit. Case No.999-7:Calvin and Renee Self "A-1"to"1-2" Located on the southwest corner of Graham and Humble Roads Commission Recommendation:Denial of the"1-2"District and approval of a Special Permit for boat barns. October 26, 1999 Case No. 999-9: Shell Development Joint Venture: "B-4"to"R-1C" Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 4 Located on the north side of Lipes Boulevard,approximately 500 feet east of South Staples Street Commission Recommendation:Approval Case No.999-8: William Paul Sissamis: "B-1"to"B-4" Located on the east side of Weber Road,approximately 150 feet south of Gollihar Road .110 Commission Recommendation: Denial of the"B-4"District, and in lieu thereof, approval of a Special Permit for a bar and a mini-storage facility subject to a site plan with eight(8)conditions. Case No.999-6: Wade A.Walker: "R-113"to"R-2" Located on the east side of Calallen Drive, approximately 550 feet north of Teague Lane Commission Recommendation: Approval November 9, 1999 Case No.999-11,Tennison T.Keeler:"B-1"to"B-4" Located on the south side of Yorktown Boulevard,approximately 600 feet east of Yorkshire Drive. Commission Recommendation: Denial of the "B-4" District and approval of a Special Permit for a private auto museum Case No.999-12,John M.Olson,"A-2"to"B-1" Located on the southeast corner of McKenzie and Tenth Streets. Commission Recommendation: Approval Other Matters APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested a correction to Page 2, regarding the Plat Ordinance Review Committee to clarify that Staff would need to decide who would be writing the grant. Motion by Guzman,seconded by Kelly,to approve September 29, 1999 minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga,Noyola, and Minis being absent. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS PLATS Continued Plats a. 099988-NP50 Caia Industrial Development Block 1,Lots 2C.2D 2E.&2F(Final Reolat—8.564 Acres) Located west of North Padre Island Drive(5.11.358)and north of Bear Lane Vice Chairman Guzman abstained from participation of the plat and left the room. Mr.Power stated that Staff recommended approval. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Quintanilla, to approve Staffs recommendation. Motion passed unanimously with Guzman abstaining, Underbrink being out of the room, and Berlanga and Noyola being absent. J S Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 5 New Plats a. 099990-P40 Karsten Acres Block I.Lots 1 &2(Preliminary— 11.15 Acres) Located between Laguna Shores Road and the Laguna Madre south of Lola Johnson Road Mr.Power stated that Staff recommends approval as submitted. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Richter, seconded by Mims, to approve Staffs recommendation. Motion passed unanimously with Guzman and Underbrink being out of the room and Berlanga and Noybla being absent. b. 109999-NP57 Crystal Park Subdivision Block I.Lots 7A—7D(Final Reolat-4.002 Acres) Located south of Yorktown Boulevard,west of South Staples(FM 2444) Mr.Power stated that Staff recommends approval as submitted. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Guzman, to approve Staffs recommendation. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga and Noyola being absent. c. 1099101-NP58 Padre Island—Corpus Christi Ports O'Call.Block 12 Lot 4R(Final Reolat—0.165 Acre) Located south of Mingo Cay Court and west of Mont Pelee Drive,both west of Gypsy Street Mr.Power stated that Staff recommends approval as submitted. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Richter, seconded by Quintanilla, to approve Staff's recommendation. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga and Noyola being absent. d. 1099102-NP52 Amending Plat of Padre Island— Corpus Christi Ports O'Call, Block 18, Lot 15R (Final Replat— 0.266 Acre) Located north of Ports O'Call Drive and east of Salt Cay Court,all west of Gypsy Street Mr.Power stated that the plat had been withdrawn. Time Extensions a. 1198141-NP72 Stockseth Tract.Block 1 Lot I (Final— 13 646 Acres) Located west of Hunter Road between Interstate Highway 37 and Bearden Drive t.. .r Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 6 Mr.Power stated that Staff recommends approval of a six-month time extension. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing } was closed. V Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Kelly, to approve Staffs recommendation. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanea and Noyola being absent. b. 049936-NP21 Texas State Aquarium(Final Remlat—6.299 Acres) Bounded by Surfside Boulevard on the northwest,Pearl Street on the northeast, Corpus Christi Bay on the southeast,and the Corpus Christi Ship on the southwest Mr.Power stated that Staff recommends approval of the six-month time extension. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Guzman, seconded by Quintanilla, to approve Staff's recommendation. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga and Noyola being absent. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS AND PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT CHANGES — i -animation of the Gardendale Southside ADP Amendments and the Proposed •B-1A" Neighborhood Business District Public Hearing Vice Chairman Guzman abstained from participation and left the room. Mr. Robert Payne, Senior Planner, presented two options regarding the proposed "B-IA" Neighborhood Business District. Option 1, which is recommended by Staff for approval, includes a Maximum Floor Area Ratio ,ad (FAR) of 0.50 along Holly Road; 0.50 on the north side of Williams Drive; 0.30 along the south side of Williams Drive. A FAR of 0.30 is consistent with Study recommendations. Mr. Payne continued to highlight changes made to the proposed 'B-1A" District. He stated that there would be a reduction of up to 20 percent of required parking when shared driveway access is provided and continued that there would be a requirement of a minimum of 20 percent of open space rather than 30 percent,as in the prior `B-IA" District proposals. Mr. Payne stated that changes regarding prohibited commercial uses as requested by Commissioners include prohibition of mini-storage, restaurants with alcoholic beverages or clubs, car washes, auto repair, auto parking lots, auto parts with service bays, fueling stations, undertaking, pawnshops and liquor stores. Mr. Payne continued that Staff met with Commissioners Richter and Sween-McGloin to discuss concerns expressed at a previous Planning Commission meeting. Option 2 resulted from the meeting for the Commission's consideration. Many of the concepts within this district are based on the "Austin Traditional Neighborhood Ordinance and Criteria Manual". In Option 2,the allowable density is 0.64(FAR) along Holly Road, 0.64 on the north and south sides of Williams Drive, which is inconsistent with recommendation of the Gardendale Study. A reduction of up to 50 percent in required parking, which would be one parking space required for each 400 square feet of gross leasable area. Mr. Payne stated that prohibited uses and open space requirement were identical in Options 1 and 2. Mr.Payne stated that Option 2 requires 600 linear feet of frontage in order to qualify for a"B-IA"District In the past, if an applicant proposed to convert their residence into a low traffic generating business, Staff normally recommends "B-1" District. However, the "B-1A" District could be the ideal district for the proposed use, but would not be qualified due to the 600 linear foot frontage requirement. Option 1, which does not require a 600 J V Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 7 linear foot frontage, could eliminate the issuance of Special Permits for low traffic generating businesses and provide protection for adjacent neighborhoods. 41. Commissioner Sween-McGloin stated that although she believed Option 2 could be used in other subdivisions, she preferred Option 1 for the Gardendale area. Option 2, which requires front yard alignment and parking in the rear, is being used nationwide. Commissioner Sween-McGloin stated that she believed that residences would not object to commercial development is created in a manner similar to Option 2. Commissioner Richter prepared an assessment of Options 1 and 2 for the proposed "B-1A" District and read the fmdings into the record: "Option 1 model: Overriding goal and concern of Option 1 is to turn Williams Street into a relieve street for the traffic generated by Moore Plaza and South Padre Island Drive...by limiting origin/destination points from Williams Street, it is essentially making Williams into a through-traffic corridor. By lowering the FAR(allowable buildable area), and with parking requirements at 1/200 square feet, it is restricting the district's ability to achieve even a medium density district of low intensity use. The "B-IA" District, as proposed in option 1, lies somewhere between single-family residential and "AB" and "B-I"Neighborhood Business Districts. It is a no-man's land. Its lots front on a major collector or arterial which renders it undesirable for single family residences,and the low FAR and parking requirements are too restrictive for small to medium neighborhood businesses to make substantial investments. With options limited and marginal returns for investment, the real result is that land value on Williams will be lowered. In fact, the limitations can keep the property values down. As far as not generating originating/destination traffic, it is probably a successful model. However, denying low intensity commercial opportunities on Williams is not likely to keep traffic away from Betty lean, Moore Plaza, Williams,or the Gardendale neighborhood. Option 2 model: The goal is to increase property value by creating a unique district that encourages medium density (0.64 FAR and parking requirements at 1/400 square feet) and encourages quality developments of low intensity uses(such as neighborhood offices,personal services,and boutiques). With the medium density,shops and offices are closer together, encouraging pedestrian activity and have a sense of vitality and neighborhood. Property owners can make more use of their land. Medium density also brings the district's buildings closer together, encouraging a unified street front with landscaping and a canopy of street trees for shade. Option 2 also moves the commercial developments closer to the street edge and away from the adjacent residential dwellings. It can become a very attractive district, attracting quality investments, and help raise the value of the properties. Higher land value will prevent such undesirable neighborhood uses such as pawn shops and mini-storage facilities which often look to build in areas where property value is lower. Granted this may not solve the traffic problem generated by Moore Plaza and South Padre Island Drive, but it should not be expected to. This neighborhood deserves a vision and a positive direction,not an attempt to trade its best use for mere traffic counts. Traffic such as generated by the intense use of Moore Plaza will find another way,into and out of one neighborhood or another. Conclusion: It is possible to have medium density development without significantly adding to the traffic count. The highest traffic generator, according to the study, is a convenience store, which is, in fact, a relatively low-density development. Based on the chart in the study on pages 11-12 of the study, you can have up to 36 times as many offices before you generate the traffic of one single convenience store. By pursing low intensity uses like office, multi-family, and specialty retail, you can achieve double or triple the densities of higher intensity uses with still rr .� Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 8 only a small fraction of the traffic generated. Traffic is not nearly as affected by density of development as it is by the type of use(intensity of use). The result of Option 2 will be a reasonable change at the economic values necessary to support new, vibrant and pedestrian friendly development. The Gardendale district has everything going for it—a good location, deep lots, walkable neighborhood. It would be a shame to intentionally or inadvertently lower its potential to succeed." Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Commissioner Underbrink stated that he favored the FAR requirements in Option 1; however, Commissioner Underbrink did not agree with the 600 linear foot frontage requirement in Option 2 and believed that combining two lots would be appropriate for the district. Mr.Gunning suggested that Staff could review the frontage and develop a land use policy statement in the Area Development Plan to address Planning Commission's concerns. Motion by Underbrink,seconded by Mims,to approve Option I and the recommended change of a land use policy to the Area Development Plan for the Gardendale area. Motion failed with Mims, Underbrink, and Quintanilla voting"Aye";Kelly,Richter, and Sween-McGloin voting "Nay"; Guzman abstaining;and Berlanga and Noyola being absent. Motion by Kelly, seconded by Richter, to approve Option 2 and the recommended change of a land use policy to the Area Development Plan for the Gardendale area. Motion failed with Kelly and Richter voting"Aye"; Mims, Sween-McGloin, Underbrink, and Quintanilla voting "Nay"; Guzman absta:..mg; and Berlaaga and Noyola being absent. Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Underbrink, to amend Option 1 to require 600 linear feet to rezone, include the recommended change of a land use policy to the Area Development Plan for Gardendale, and amending Article 24 as necessary. Motion failed with Sween-McGloin,Underbrink,and Quintanilla voting"Aye' Kelly,Mims,and Richter voting"Nay';Guzman abstaining;and Berlanga and Noyola being absent. ,od Chairman Quintanilla stated that a recommendation of denial would be forwarded to City Council. Chairman Quintanilla stated that he believed that after two(2)years of developing the"B-1A"District,the Planning Commission needed to forward a recommendation to City Council either accepting or denying the Area Development Plan and"B-1A"District. He asked that the Commission reconsider their vote and table for two(2) weeks to develop a plan that would address concerns regarding frontage issues as expressed by the Commission. Motion by Mims, seconded by Quintanilla, to reconsider the Comprehensive Plan. Motion passed unanimously with Guzman abstaining,and Berlanga and Noyola being absent. Motion to table by Mims, seconded by Underbrink, to table to Comprehensive Plan for two weeks to the October 27, 1999 Planning Commission meeting. Motion passed unanimously with Guzman abstaining, and Berlanga and Noyola being absent. Continued Zoning Cases Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Minis, to remove Case No. 899-7 and 999-1 from the table. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga and Noyola being absent. Sonrisa Partners,Inc.: 899-7 REQUEST: "B-2A"Bather Island District to "1-2"Light Industrial District on Padre Island No. 1,Block 17, Lots 17A, 18A, 19A, 20A, 20B, and 21 and Block 18, Lot 1B, which is located on the west side of South Padre Island Drive(Park Road 22),approximately 900 feet south of Encantada Avenue. `I Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 9 Sonrisa Partners,Inc.: 999-1 REQUEST: "B-2A" Bather Island District to "I-2"Light Industrial District on Padre Island No. I, Block 18, 411, Lot 6B which is located on the east side of Palmira Avenue,approximately 880 feet north of Sea Pines Drive. Mr. Saida&a stated that the applicants were requesting a change of zoning to legalize the existing outside storage of boats,boat-trailers,and recreational vehicles. The applicants received a second notice of violation in July 1999 advising that charges would be filed if the violation was not corrected. Mr.Saldafia stated that at the previous Planning Commission meeting the applicants requested a continuance of the case until December due to the fact that the Planning Commission was considering an amendment to the "B-2A" District which, if amended, would allow storage of boats,boat-trailers,and recreational vehicles,which would make their current use a conforming use. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. Armando Avalos, representing the applicant, stated that Mr. Boudlaush felt that since the Planning Commission,in the future,would be considering amendments to the"B-2A"District it would be appropriate to table until the Planning Commission forwards a recommendation regarding the "B-2A". Mr. Avalos stated that the owners had not been able to obtain access to the property and that the case was still in mediation in District Court. Mike Boudlaush, 4650 Oso Parkway, stated that he was in partnership with an individual and has been given full legal right to the property; however, Mr. Boudlaush stated that litigation had been pursued regarding obtaining possession of the subject property and the matter had not been resolved. Mr. Boudlaush requested a continuance of the rezoning case until he could obtain possession of the property and rectify violations on the property. Public hearing was closed. Commissioner Underbrink stated that he supported the rezoning request; however, he was opposed to rezoning the three(3)lots that front on Palmira Avenue. Motion by Mims, seconded by Sween-McGloin,to table the zoning case until December 8, 1999. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga and Noyola being absent. New Zoning Cases George Mostaghase: 1099-1 REQUEST: "F-R"Farm-Rural District to "B-4" General Business District on Tract 1 and"R-1C"One-family Dwelling District on Tract 2 on Nueces River Irrigation Park Annex No. 2, Tract 1 which is located on the northeast corner of Northwest Boulevard(FM624)and Trinity River Drive Mr.Saida&a presented a slide illustration regarding the subject property and the surrounding area. The area to the north is zoned"R-IB"One-family Dwelling District and developed with single-family residences;the area to the south and east is zoned"F-R"Farm-Rural District and developed as farm land;and the area to the west is zoned "R-IB" One-family Dwelling District and "B-4" General Business District and developed with single-family residences,a church,townhomes and convenience store with fueling. Mr. Saldana stated that the applicant requested a change of zoning to "B-4" General Business District on Tract 1 and a "R-1C" One-family Dwelling District on Tract 2 to develop retail establishments and offices and a single-family subdivision. The development of Tract 1 with commercial uses would be an extension of the commercial development currently existing along Northwest Boulevard. The requested "B-4" District is an expansion of the adjacent "B-4" District to the west. Staff's opinion is that the "B-4" District should have direct access to Trinity River Drive,a collector,and/or to Northwest Boulevard,an arterial. Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 10 The subject property is in the Northwest Area Development Plan's adopted future land use map which recommends the intersection of Northwest Boulevard and Trinity River Drive/FM 1889 to development with commercial uses and the remainder of the area to develop with medium density residential. Mr. Saldafia read the Pros and Cons contained in the Staff Report(Copy on File). Staff recommends approval of the "R-1C"District on Tract 2, approval of the"B-4"District on the south 275 feet of Tract 1 and denial of the"B-4"District on the north 125 feet of Tract 1, and in lieu thereof, approval of an "AB" Professional Office District District. There were 35 notices mailed to property owners within a 200-foot radius of which one(1) was returned in favor, and one(1)was returned in opposition. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. Pamela Dahl Corder, adjacent property owner, stated that she was opposed to the rezoning request due to the fact that she believed rezoning would devalue her property. Ms. Ford stated that she intended to develop her property with single-family residences, and would not be able to if the adjacent property were developed with commercial uses. James Hemet,owner of Tract 4, stated that he was opposed to the rezoning request due to the fact that he would not be able to develop the property as farmland,using pesticides and chemicals. He believed the residential adjacency would hinder his ability to farm the property. Chairman Quintanilla closed the public hearing. Motion by Guzman,seconded by Sween-McGloin,to approve Staff's recommendation.Motion passed with Kelly, Minx Sween-McGloin, Guzman, and Quintanilla voting "Aye"; Richter and Underbrink voting "Nay"; and Berlanga and Noyola being absent. Edgar E.Farrera: 1099-2 REQUEST: "12-1B"One-family Dwelling District to"B-1"Neighborhood Business District on Alameda Park, Block 6, Lots 24, 25, and 26 which is located on the east side of Everhart Road, approximately 185 feet north of Harry Street Mr. Saldaiia presented a slide illustration of the subject property and its surrounding area. The surrounding area is zoned"R-1B"One-family Dwelling District and are developed with single-family residences. Mr. Saidata stated that the applicant requested a change of zoning on three(3)lots, Lot 24, 25, and 26 to a"B-1"Neighborhood Business District in order to convert the existing residences into retail establishments. Lot 26 is planned to be converted into a consignment clothing store. Mr.Saldatia continued that the subject property abuts single-family residences on the north,south,and east. Approximately 430 feet north of the subject property,multiple lots have developed commercially with a clock shop and consignment store. In 1995 with the change of Lot 28 to a "B-1" District, the City Council established a development policy along the east side of Everhart Road to grant neighborhood commercial zoning in mid-block location. City Council agreed that future similar rezonings, such as the subject request were to be expected and accommodated. Mr. Saida&read the Pros and Cons as stated in the Staff Report(Copy on File). Thirty-six notices were mailed to property owners within a 200-foot radius of the subject property,of which three(3)were returned in favor and five(4)in opposition. Staff recommends approval of the requested"B-1"District. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. Edgar Farrera, owner, stated that Lot 26 was proposed to be developed with a retail establishment, while Lots 24 and 25 were occupied at the present time. Therefore, there were no plans to evict the current tenants to develop Lots 24 and 25. 4110 V Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 11 I. E.O'Brien,4130 Pompano,stated that he was opposed to the rezoning of Lots 24 and 25 until the future use of the property is disclosed,but was in favor of the proposed use on Lot 26. Lloyd Miller, 4134 Pompano, stated that he believes that traffic is a problem in the area and that if a bar was proposed,it would deteriorate the neighborhood. Commissioner Sween-McGloin listed uses that would be allowed in a "B-1" District: restaurants, convenience stores, fueling stations,newsstands,florists,banks,etc.but did not allow bars. 1.E.O'Brien stated that he was opposed to rezoning Lots 24 and 25. Mrs.J.E.O'Brien,4130 Pompano,asked whether or not alcohol could be served at an establishment zoned "B-1" District. Mr. Reining answered that a restaurant that sold alcohol with food sales not less than 25% could develop in a"B-1"District. Ray Govett,4146 Harry,stated that he was opposed to any zoning other than"It-IB"District for the area. He continued that City Council was not respectful of the neighborhood when a business district is created in the middle of a neighborhood. Mr. Govett stated that the occupants would not be able to comply with the parking requirements for a bar. Paul Brandes,4150 Harry,stated that he was opposed to business zoning due to the increased traffic issue. Nora Govett,4146 Harry, stated that she would be in favor if the zoning change was for professional uses, but opposed business zoning. Ms.Govett stated that she felt that approving the zoning request would be spot zoning and that traffic would increase and added that businesses have not been successful in the area. Public hearing was closed. In response to the Commission, Mr. Gunning stated that the "AB" Professional Office District did not allow retail, but a Special Permit could be granted. Mr. Gunning continued that the Special Permit needed to address the specific use for the property. After Commission discussion regarding the proposed use of Lots 24 and 25, Mr. Farrera stated that he would accept a Special Permit for identical uses on Lots 24 through 26. Motion by Guzman, seconded by Kelly,to deny the "B-1"District and in lieu thereof, approved an"AB" Professional Office District with a Special Permit for retail uses subject to the following three(3)conditions: I) USES: The only uses authorized by this Special Permit other than those uses permitted by right in the "AB" Professional Office District, are retail uses. Retail uses do not include the on-site and off-site consumption of alcoholic beverages,convenience stores,and fueling uses. 2) LANDSCAPING: Landscaping must be provided according to Article 27B, Landscape Regulations, as if new constniction in the "AB" Professional Office District. All required landscaping must be Stalled before a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued. All landscape material must be maintained in a healthy and growing condition at all times. 3) TINE LIMIT: This Special Permit expires one(1)year from the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used for the purpose outlined in Condition#1 and all other conditions have been complied with. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga and Noyola being absent. Marcelino Soliz: 1099-3 ti, 'S Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 12 REQUEST: "R-2" Multiple Dwelling District to "B-l" Neighborhood Business District on L. A. Barrett's Resubdivision, Block 2, Lot 1 located on the southeast corner of Colonial Court and Old Robstown Road Mr. Saidafia presented a slide illustration of the subject property and the surrounding areas. The area to the north and east are zoned"R-2"Multiple Dwelling District and developed with a convenience store with fueling and single-family residences. The areas to the south and west are zoned "R-IB" One-family Dwelling District and developed with single-family residences and a multiple-family complex. Mr. Salda0a stated that the applicant proposes to develop the vacant land with a 1,500 square foot building for a restaurant and retail store. The applicant plans to develop a drive-thru restaurant first and the retail uses at a later date. The restaurant would be oriented toward Old Robstown Road,an arterial, with a drive around the facility and out the same road. Mr. Saldaiia read the Pros and Cons contained in the Staff Report (Copy on File) and stated that a`B-1" District on the subject property would extend the commercial encroachment into a residential neighborhood. There were twenty (20) notices mailed to property owners within 200-foot radius of the subject property of which none were returned in favor or in opposition. Staff recommends denial. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. Mr. Saldana served as interpreter for Marcelino Soliz. Marcelino Soliz. applicant stated that he believed that due to the zoning of property on the northwest side, which is 13-4' District, he should be allowed to develop his property with"B-I" District. Mr. Soliz continued that there is a convenience store across Colonial Court which is abutting a residential neighborhood and asked the Commission to grant a'B-1"District. Chairman Quintanilla closed the public hearing. Motion by Mims, seconded by Richter, to approve a "B-1" District. Motion passed with Mims, Richter, J Sween-McGloin, Guzman, and Quintanilla voting "Aye"; Kelly and Underbrink voting "Nay"; and Berlanga and Noyola being absent. Carlos E.Castro: 1099-4 REQUEST: "R-2" Multiple Dwelling District and "AB" Professional Office District to "B-4" General Business District on Southside Addition Unit 4,Block 38, Lots 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18,located on the west side of Kostoryz Road,approximately 60 feet north of McArdle Road Mr. Saldana presented a slide illustration of the subject property and the surrounding area. The area to the north is zoned'B-1" District and is developed with single-family residences; the area to the south is zoned"R-2" District and developed with single-family residences; the area to the east is zoned "B-1" and "B-3" Districts and developed with a restaurant,retail uses,an office,and auto repair;the area to the west is zoned"R-1B"District and developed with single-family residences. Mr. Saldafa stated that in May 1994, Lots 19 and 20, located on the southwest corner of Manshiem Boulevard and Kostoryz Road and north of the subject property,were denied a change of zoning to a"B-4"District and were granted a"B-1"District with Lot 20 also getting a Special permit for auto sales and small engine repair. The applicant proposes to develop Lots 13 and 14 with an auto sales lot and the remaining lots,Lots 15, 16, 17,and 18 with retail uses ranging from gift shops to jewelry shops. The subject property is within the Southeast Area Development Plan which recommends the area to develop with neighborhood business uses. Mr. Saldana continued that the requested"B-4"District is not consistent with the Plan's recommended land use. However, a "B-1" District would be consistent with the Plan's J V rt Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 1999 Page 13 recommendation. Staff recommends denial of the "B-4" District, and in lieu thereof, approval of a 'B-1" Neighborhood Business District and a Special Permit on Lots 13 and 14 for an auto sales lot use subject to four(4) conditions: fir 1. USES: The only use authorized by this Special Permit other than those uses permitted by right in the'B-1" Neighborhood Business District is an auto sales lot. 2. SPEAKERS: Outside loudspeakers,telephone chimes,or bells are prohibited. 3. LIGHTING: All exterior lighting must be directional and shielded. Lighting must be directed away from the adjacent residential area and public rights-of-way. 4. TIME LIMIT: This Special Permit shall expire within one year from the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used as outlined in Condition#1 and in compliance with all other conditions. There were 38 notices mailed to property owners within a 200-foot radius of the subject property,of which none were returned in favor and four (4) were returned in opposition to the 'B-4" District, but not opposed to a "B-1"District. Chairman Quintanilla opened the public hearing. Carlos Castro, applicant, stated that he agreed with Staffs recommendation. After questions regarding whether Mr. Castro would object to a condition to the Special Permit requiring landscaping on Lots 13 and 14,he stated that he would not object. Chairman Quintanilla closed the public hearing. Commission asked Mr. Salda0a to include a condition requiring landscaping of Lots 13 and 14 with the Special Permit. Motion by Guzman, seconded by Mims, to amend Staffs recommendation to include a condition requiring landscaping. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga and Noyola being absent. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Guzman,seconded by Sween-McGloin,to adjourn. Motion passed unanimously with Berlanga and Noyola being absent. Ylthad CPa Potai Michael Gunning,AICD Lu da P.Beal Director of Planning Recording Secretary