01-10-1989 PLANNING AND ZONING MINIITES
The Schertz Planning and Zoning Commission convened in a regular
session on Tuesday, January 1.0, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. in the
Municipal Complex Conference Room, 1400 Schertz Parkway. Those
present were as follows:
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OTHERS PRESENT
TY BRISGILL, CHAIRMAN JIM SCHRIVER, SCHERTZ
MARY MARSH, VICE-CHAIRMAN BUSINESS CLUB
KEITH VAN DINE.,. SECRETARY
MERWIN WILLMAN CITY STAFF
BOB ANDREWS
JOE POTEMPA STEVE SIMONSON,
KEN GREENWALD, COUNCILMAN ASST. CITY MANAGER
NORMA ALTHOUSE,
MEMBERS ABSENT RECORDING SECY.
GEORGE VICK
#1 CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Brisgill called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
#2 APPROVAL OF MINIITES: Regular Session December 13, 1989
Joe Potempa pointed out that on Page 11, Paragraph 6, where it
says "the City limits sign up parallel to Mobile Villa" it should
be changed to read "the City limits sign parallel to FM 1518".
Bob Andrews asked that on Page 2, last Paragraph, the sentence be
changed from "why the delay in putting up the fence" to read as
"why the delay in requesting an exception".
Joe Potempa made a motion to approve the minutes, as amended, for.
the regular session December 13, 1988. Keith Van Dine seconded
the motion and the-vote was unanimous in favor. Motion carried.
#3 CITIZENS' INPUT OTHER THAN AGENDA ITEMS
There was none.
#4 CONSIDER AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION: Proposed Amendment to
Junk Yard Ordinance 87-H-25
The Inspection Department had submitted some suggested changes,
for Planning and Zoning's consideration,, to Section II of the
Junk Yard Ordinance. They are listed below.
The following regulations apply to all .junk or salvage yards
legally in existence as of October 1, 1987 and to ..any expansion
then-.eof
A. Such junk_or salvage yards-may be operated within the-City.
limits only if the premises fronting on roadways are entirely
enclosed by a fence or wall, and where such premises are visible
to the public from side approaches, they shall be further
screened by a fence of at least fifty ( 5d' ) feet or more to
effectively reduce such visibility.
B. Fences or~walls shall be no less than eight (8') feet and
not more than ten (10`) feet in height from natural grade,
constructed or masonry, metal or wood, or a combination of such
materials. Chain link fences of required height may be screened
. with venetian blind or other similar material. No barbed wire
shal l be used unless the barbed wire is eight ( 8 ` ) feet or more
above grade, and when so used, shall not project beyond the
property line of the premises.
C. All fences or walls shall be constructed of sturdy,
substantial construction, of opaque material, to accomplish
desired screening from public view.
D. They shall be maintained in a neat, safe, structurally
sound condition, in good repair and shall be kept painted.
E. Entrance gates shall be constructed in harmony with the
style of fence, and shall swing inward when open and kept closed
when premises are not open for business.
Chairman Brisgill asked for Staff input.
Steve Simonson informed the Commission these changes would give
the Inspection Department the latitude they need for better
enforcement of the Junk Yard Ordinance.
Bob Andrews expressed concern about what happens when development
springs up around an area adjacent to a junk yard and the junk
yard is not entirely enclosed. Steve Simonson said we need to
make it clear in writing that when the surrounding area develops,
then the junk yard will have to be entirely enclosed.
Mary Marsh asked if that shouldn`t be stipulated in the
ordinance.
Bob Andrews, referring to Paragraph A where it says "effectively
reduce such visibility" commented he thinks the word reduce
should be changed to the word eliminate.
Steve Simonson reminded Bob Andrews that sometimes the lay of the
_ land makes it impossible to entirely eliminate visibility.
- -2-
_ _ ........:....t,.
Keith Van Dine asked why penalize the business ~~if a person
decides to build a home five years later, why should the business
have to fence. Mr. Van Dine pointed out that without doubt the
person building the home is aware their property is adjacent to~a
business. -
Chairman Brisgill mentioned that maybe businesses should consider
sharing the fencing cost if it is part of their development.
Merwin Willman remarked that he thinks any new junk yards in the
City should be required to be fenced entirely.
Steve Simonson pointed out that junk yards are not allowed except
by Specific Use Permit. Those junk yards now in the City were
there when the City annexed the property.
Mary Marsh, referring to the requirement for at least a 50' fence
ori'"the sides of a junk yard to effectively reduce visibility,
asked about the junk yard that may only need a 20' fence to
effectively reduce visibility.
Chairman Brisgill asked about including a sentence that would let
the City official use final discretion in determining effectively
reduced visibility.
Keith Van Dine indicated he has no problem with the word reduce
but he does have a problem with the word eliminate.
There was some discussion on what exactly determines effectively
- reduced visibility. It was suggested it be at the discretion of
the City Manager or his designated representative.
Chairman Brisgill commented he's trying to get it out of the
responsibility of Planning and Zoning and into the hands of the
Inspection Department.
Bob Andrews said in Paragraph B of the proposed changes it look
to him like you have to tear down any natural barrier and put up
a fence.
Merwin Willman commented he has had second thoughts on allowing
the use of vegetation as a fence - who determines when vegetation
is dead.
Chairman Brisgill remarked that if the fencing is not opaque when
vegetation dies, then screening will be required.
Merwin Willman said he is trying to take the Inspection
.Department off the hot seat about opaque fencing and recommended
that in the future opaque not include vegetation. Other members
of the Commission had some. disagreement with this opinion.
Chairman Brisgill asked the City's standpoint on this. -
-3-
Steve Simonson _replied that the City has no objections to
vegetation, if an area is 90% screened, then they consider it
screened.
Bob. Andrews said as far as he can determine, .Paragraph B
precludes vegetation as fencing.
Chairman Brisgill indicated he wants vegetation to be included,
but feels they must also have some kind of fence, and if the
vegetation dies, they will have to make it opaque.
'Steve Simonson once again mentioned that there are only five
;existing junk yards in the City and if a new one wanted to come
it would have to go to a public hearing with a request for a
Specific Use Permit.
There was further discussion about including natural vegetation
with Mary Marsh saying natural vegetation is not enough, Merwin
Willman saying he does not wish to include it, and Chairman
Brisgill stating they have granted an exception already, and in
.his opinion, have set a precedent.
Keith Van Dine asked what the potential is for more salvage yards
in Schertz and Steve Simonson replied none, again repeating that
they are not permitted in the City except by Specific Use Permit.
Bob Andrews made a motion to recommend approval to City Council
of the proposed changes to the Junk Yard Ordinance 87-H-25, as
submitted by the Inspection Department, adding to the end of the
last sentence in Paragraph A "as approved by the City Manager or
his designated representative", and to recommend it be scheduled
for a public hearing.
Keith Van Dine seconded the motion.
Merwin Willman remarked, before the vote was taken, that he would
like to comment on venetianblind material as mentioned in
Paragraph B. Mr. Willman said he knew someone who had used that
material and it all rotted. It was decided among the Commission
that if it rotted, it would have to be replaced or something
substituted in it's place to make the fencing opaque.
At this time the vote was taken and it was unanimous in favor.
Motion carried.
~4 CONSIDER AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION: Proposed Amendment to
Zoning Ordinance 87-S-1
The .Inspection Department. had submitted some suggested changes,
for Planning and Zoning`s consideration, to the sections in the
Zoning. Ordinance regarding accessory buildings. Those changes
are as follows:
-4-
It is recommended that the wall height of this type building be
limited to not more than eight feet in height and total building
not exceed fifteen feet. _
Chairman Brisgill asked for Staff input. Steve Simonson informed
the Commission this limitation will preclude.__the construction of
two-story accessory buildings which become very offensive to
neighbors. Mr. Simonson said as the ordinance reads now, you can
go up to thirty-five feet if you're not using more than 40
percent of the required rear yard.
Joe Potempa asked if the place on FM 1518 isn`t a violation of
this and Steve Simonson said no, the building is not an accessory
building, it is simply another building.
Joe Potempa then asked about a violation of this at the house
across from the Schertz Pool where ,there's building on top of a
carport.. Merwin Willman replied it is not a violation because it
is not an accessory building.
Following a brief discussion, the proposed amendment was reworded
to read as follows:
The wall height of the accessory building shall be limited to not
more than eight feet and total building height shall not exceed
fifteen feet.
Mary Marsh made a motion to recommend approval to City Council of
the proposed amendment, as reworded, to Zoning Ordinance 87-5-1.
The amendment will be added to the following Zoning Districts:
R-1, R-2, R-6, R-7, R-3, R-4, R-5A & R-5B, O& P, NS, GB. The
paragraph about accessory buildings, (which is already included
in other zoning districts), as well as the proposed amendment
regarding accessory buildings, will be added to the PUD Zoning
District. Following the addition of the proposed amendment to
the PUD Zoning District, the statement "(This applies to
residential areas only.)" will also be added. Mrs. Marsh's
motion also included the recommendation that City Council
schedule this proposed amendment for a public hearing.
Joe Potempa seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in
favor. Motion carried.
~6 CONSIDER AND MARE RECOMMENDATION: Updating of City Plan
Bob Andrews asked if Planning and- Zoning had received any
guidance from City Council.
Ken Greenwald informed the Commission there had been discussion
about the survey and most of Council feels this will lead to
needing another survey due to questions that will arise.
- A copy of the final draft of the survey had been included in the -
- packages of the Commission-members._ (Copy attached> _ -
-5- -
In those subdivisions that have Homeowners' Associations, the
- association will distribute the survey. For those areas of the
City that do not have a Homeowners` Association, the survey will
be distributed with the help of the Samuel Clemens R.O.T.C. and
the scouts.
Homeowners' Associations .will provide a central point of
collection for the .surveys from their particular subdivisions.
The other sections of the City .may return their surveys to City
Hall. Ken Greenwald asked if there's room in the water bill drop
box for people to return their surveys and Joe Potempa asked
about using the library book drop as a point of collection.
Steve Simonson said he would check out both possibilities.
Steve Simonson indicated he will go ahead and have the survey
printed.
The Commission thought it would be worth the extra expense to
have a cover letter accompany the survey explaining it's purpose.
Chairman Brisgill asked about the time frame for having the
survey printed and was informed by Steve Simonson it could be
accomplished by the next Planning and Zoning meeting.
Mary Marsh informed the Commission that Kerry Sweatt, City
Manager, had sent out letters regarding a meeting this Thursday
evening at 7:00 P.M. at the Schertz Library. The purpose of the
meeting is to try and revitalize an Industrial Development
Committee for working on the specifics of industrial economic
development. Mrs. Marsh said this group will work with Planning
and Zoning, but not at cross purposes.
Chairman Brisgill reminded the Commission that City Council wants
a list of names for recommendation to the civic leaders' panel
and asked that the members bring their list to the next regularly
scheduled meeting.
Mary Marsh also reminded the Commission they need to think about
those areas of the City Plan where a consultant will be required
so a request for monies, etc. can be submitted to City Council.
Steve Simonson suggested they get the survey off the ground first
and then proceed with the business of those areas of the City
Plan needing a consultant.
~7 GENERAL DISCDSSION
Councilman Greenwald suggested to the Commission they read page 6
of the January "Zoning Bulletin".which has to do with non-
-conforming uses.
-6-
Mr. Greenwald also informed the Commission that CVADAC will be
conducting a seminar on January 19th at the Schertz Library on
the subject of Adult -Children of Alcoholics.
Merwin Willman commented that one of the items scheduled for a
public hearing on February 7th is the request from Jesse Hellums
for a non-conforming use for Oak View Mobile Home Park. Mr.
Willman said, in his opinion, the $50.00 public hearing fee
should be waived in this case.
Merwin Willman also remarked on some of the "No Parking" signs
missing in front of Corbett Junior High and said that either we
should authorize no parking in that area, therefore ticketing
cars for parking there, or take the rest of the signs down.
Keith Van Dine noted that Pfeil road is being patched. Mr. Van
Dine also said he,, has in his possession (he found them in a
field) a Stop Sign and a blinking light like they put up when
doing construction on a road, and he will turn this property over
to the City of Schertz.
Mary Marsh thanked Steve Simonson for his success in getting the
State Highway Department to put "No Parking" signs up on Jack
Hays Blvd.
Mrs. Marsh also pointed out that the City of Live Oak has just
erected a huge billboard and she feels the City of Schertz needs
something similar. .
Mary Marsh also asked Steve Simonson how the brochure on Schertz
is coming and Mr. Simonson said he has all the economic data, he
does need time to update some of the other material.
The Inspection Department had written up some proposed changes to
the Sign Ordinance and Chairman Brisgill asked that this item be
on the agenda of the next regularly scheduled meeting.
Chairman Brisgill informed the Commission he will be out of town
and cannot attend the meeting on January 24th, and reminded the
Commission of the public hearing scheduled for February 7th on a
rezoning request from Dannenbaum Engineering for Scenic Hills
Phase II, a Specific Use Permit request from Mike Bench of
Salvage Enterprises and the non-conforming use request for Oak
View Mobile Home Park from Jesse Hellums.
Steve Simonson commented he will be meeting with the Schertz
Business Club on January 24th and will be discussing the Sign
Ordinance with them with the idea of seeking their help and
input.
Mr. Simonson also told the Commission he will show a video of
current s-ignage in-the City of Schertz at the next meeting.
-7-
~S ADJOIIRNMENT
Chairman Brisg-ill adjourned the%meeting at 8:27 P.M.
- The_next regularly scheduled meeting is January 24, 1989.
- _8_ -