Loading...
11-13-1990 PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES The Schertz Planning and Zoning Commission convened in a regular session on Tuesday, November 13, 1990 at 7:00 P.M. in the Municipal Complex Conference Room, 1400 Schertz Parkway. Those present were as follows: PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OTHERS PRESENT BOB ANDREWS, CHAIRMAN ALAN SCHINDLER, JIM SHRIVER, VICE-CHAIRMAN ALCO CREATIVE BUILDERS KEITH VAN DINE, SECRETARY MERWIN WILLMAN CITY STAFF HARRY BAUNLAN GARY BRICKEN STEVE SIMONSON, ASST. CITY MANAGER MEMBERS ABSENT NORMA ALTHOUSE, RECORDING SECRETARY GEORGE VICK COUNCILPERSON KEN GREENWALD #1 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Andrews called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. #2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Session October 23, 1990 Merwin Willman made a motion to approve the minutes for the regular session October 23, 1990. Gary Bricken 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: Request from Alco Creative Builders, on Behalf of Henry Spires at 3713 Olde Moss, for a 7` Variance to the Rear Yard Setback Requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (Variance #35-90) Alan Schindler of Alco Creative Builders was at the meeting to .represent this request. . Chairman Andrews asked for Staff input. Steve Simonson informed the Commission .they -now have the proper drawings and additional information. -(This request was on the agenda of the last meeting, but no one attended the meeting to represent the request and the figures were inaccurate, so the Commission voted to return the application (without action) to the applicant for submittal of accurate measurements and further information.) - - _ _ _ Merwin Willman asked why the shed can't be turned sideways and Alan Schindler replied it can be turned, but there is a real big slope in the property starting at about the 9 1/2' mark. Chairman Andrews questioned Alan Schindler about whether the drawing showing the location of the shed is correct. Mr. Andrews said he had been to the location and the shed is 12" from the fence, but the drawing shows the shed to be 3' from the fence. Alan Schindler acknowledged 12" is correct and said he doesn't know why the drawing shows it at 3'. Chairman Andrews stated he estimates the. shed to be approximately 5'6" from the house and Alan Schindler verified that is correct. Mr. Andrews said the shed does not encroach the easement, but it does encroach into the side yard setback. Harry Bauman noted that the way the shed is situated now, there is no way to cut the grass and there will be weeds and grass growing up between the fence and the shed. Chairman Andrews asked why, outside of the problem with the slope of the land, was the shed built this way. Alan Schindler replied it was built this way at the owner''s request. Steve Simonson added that turning the shed around will tear up the yard and no doubt the owner didn't want to do that. Harry Bauman offered the opinion also that the owner may not want to look out his window and see the shed. Chairman Andrews asked Alan Schindler if he built the shed and Mr. Schindler replied yes he did. Mr. Andrews then expressed the opinion it's a good looking building. ' Gary Bricken emphasized we have a situation here, which if approved, violates just about everything and is right out there on the street where everyone can see it. Mr. Bricken continued on saying if the City's going to allow variances of this magnitude just because the shed is already there, then they're opening up a Pandora's Box for lots of other similar requests. Mr. Bricken indicated the distance from the house has gotten worse and he doesn't feel comfortable about granting this .request. Mr. Bricken suggested that possibly a custom-built shed is needed for this property. Harry Bauman commented they have to get the shed away from the fence and this creates a problem with the distance from the - house. Mr. Bauman then asked if the shed will have electricity and was informed it will not. Harry Bauman questioned if it hadn`t been discussed previously that the shed could be built in the easement if the owner agreed to move it when the utility company needs access. -2- Chairman Andrews reminded Harry Bauman that building in the easement is not encouraged by the City, and if it were an option, there would probably have to be a signed statement by the owner saying he understands it is his sole burden, financial and otherwise, to move the shed whenever a utility company needs access. Gary Bricken asked how a signed statement like that would transfer when the house sells. Bob Andrews answered it would probably show up on the survey plat as an encroachment on the easement and the new purchaser would have to sign a statement saying he is aware of the situation, however the -new purchaser would not know he has to shoulder the cost of moving the shed in case a utility company needs access.. Merwin Willman remarked he doesn't even recommend discussing the possibility of building in the easement. Gary Bricken asked Alan Schindler how he would solve this problem if the shed weren't already there. Mr. Schindler replied he would turn the shed sideways. Merwin Willman noted that his recommendation to City Council would be to turn the shed sideways. Chairman Andrews pointed out that if the shed were turned, it would still. require a 3' variance because it would still be only 7' from the house.' Mr. Andrews acknowledged, however, he felt the Commission could live with a 3' variance. Jim Shriver suggested correcting the figures on the drawing. Merwin Willman made a motion to recommend City Council schedule a Board of Adjustment Hearing for approval of the request from Alco Creative Builders, on behalf of Henry Spires at 3713 O1de Moss, for a rear yard setback variance to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The motion also contained the recommendation that approval be granted only if the shed is turned sideways, making it 3` from the fence, and therefore making the rear yard setback variance a total of 3'. Harry Bauman seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor. Motion carried. .Chairman Andrews told Alan Schindler the City tries to work with builders and. citizens, but there was no one here at the last meeting to answer any questions. Steve Simonson informed Alan Schindler the Commission will' send .their recommendation to the Board of Adjustment and the City Secretary will notify him of the date for the hearing. -3- _ ~5 CONSIDER AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION: Proposed Amendment to Sign Ordinance Establishing a "Railroad Right-of-Way District" .(Tabled October 9, 1990) Chairman Andrews reminded the Commission this item had been tabled at the October 9th meeting to allow time for the proposed ordinance to be sent to all businesses along FM 78 and for them to reply and also to allow time for input from the inspectors. Chairman Andrews asked for Staff input. Steve Simonson stated he has nothing further than what he put in his notes to the Commission which said thirty-four (34) copies of the proposed ordinance were sent out and to date he has received one letter back from Honey Dew and a phone call from Odo Riedel. Merwin [ti'illman related. this is the second time the Commission has sent out something on the Sign Ordinance and this is the second time the response has been the same. Jim Shriver, referring to Merwin Willman's letter attached to the proposed ordinance, said it states we need the help of the Railroad. Steve Simonson noted that the City contrcls signs, and the less signs there are, the easier it is for the Railroad. Mr. Simonson did say, however, he will provide the Railroad with a copy of the ordinance. ,.Merwin Willman told the Commission he wishes they all could have heard the excellent presentation by Dale Stein on why it will probably be 1995-96 before FM 78 is widened and probably 1992-93 before Jack Hays is widened. Mr, Willman said due to a lack of funds, the Highway Department has started to prioritize it's projects. Chairman Andrews commented the ordinance is a good idea, but he can't see it being effective, and specifically mentioned paragraph 9d which is requiring the the signature of the owner and/or advertiser of a sign on the following statement: "I have read Section 9, Railroad Right-of-Way Sign District Ordinance (insert number) dated (insert date) of the City of Schertz, and I understand that when construction on FM 78 begins, .I will remove or have removed my sign at no cost to the City of Schertz." Merwin Willman said that statement was put in the ordinance to preclude someone from saying "I didn't know." Gary Bricken mentioned he think's it's an excellent idea to clean up FM 78, but the driving force of the City trying to impose something on the- businesses along FM 78 is the wrong driving force at the moment. Mr. Bricken went on to say there's not -4- going to be a "miracle mile" along FM 78 anyway, not at least until it's widened and improved, and he thinks this is the wrong time to try and enforce this ordinance. Harry Bauman observed that if the City doesn't do it now, it will take longer. Chairman Andrews told the Commission he can see both sides of the issue. There was discussion on some of the pros and cons such as amortization on billboards, cleaning up the entrances to the City, the amount of right-of-way needed for the widening, how best to keep the businesses informed., and the number of signs currently in the right-of-way. Chairman Andrews still insisted he has a problem with paragraph 9d. Merwin Willman stressed it's just a way of informing the businesses. Chairman Andrews expressed the opinion that Steve Simonson has plenty of documentation to prove he has informed the businesses. Keith Van Dine suggested paragraph 9d be revised to read as follows: "All owners and/or advertisers of signs presently in this district will be informed that the signs} twill be removed when reconstruction of FM 78 begins, at no expense to the City." The Commission discussed Mr. Van Dine's suggestion with Steve Simonson commenting there will still be people who say they didn't know they had to remove their signs. Keith Van Dine noted we are attempting to inform them, but maybe when they apply for a permit, the owners and/or advertisers of the sign should sign something saying they have read that part of the ordinance which applies to the situation. Gary Bricken wondered what circumstances would cause this ordinance to be brought out and shown to someone when they apply for a permit. Steve Simonson admitted it would be another burden on the inspectors. Gary Bricken, pointing out it causes another burden and one more task, said he isn't sure we have enough of a problem to warrant the extra work. Keith Van Dine emphasized the Commission's trying to prevent a problem. Gary Bricken stated .that he gets lots of mail everyday and he .doesn't read it all. Mr. Bricken went o n to say the fact that not one of the businesses who received the ordinance said anything about the paragraph containing the statement they would be requested to sign, leads him to believe they didn't read it. Keith Van Dine asked how many of the businesses out of the thirty-four who received the ordinance have signs in the right- of-way and Steve Simonson replied seven of them have signs. Keith Van Dine then theorized that people may have looked at the ordinance and thought it didn't pertain to them. After more discussion on having the sign owners and/or advertisers sign something when they apply for a permit, Steve Simonson told the Commission if that's what they want he will work something out with the inspectors. Mr. Simonson referred to a form they have people sign when they are buying, selling or building within the AICUZ and said this will require something similar. Harry Bauman made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of the proposed amendment to the Sign Ordinance establishing a "Railroad Right-of-Way District" with paragraph 9d changed as suggested by Keith Van Dine ("All owners and/or advertisers of signs presently in this district will be informed that the sign(s) will be removed when reconstruction of FM ?8 begins, at no expenses to the City."). Jim Shriver seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: B. Andrews, J. Shriver, K. Van Dine, M. Willman, H. Bauman NAYS: G. Bricken ABSTENTIONS: None Motion carried. #6 CONSIDER AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION: Proposed Amendment to Subdivision Ordinance Merwin Willman had written a proposed amendment to the .Subdivision Ordinance pertaining to Article II, Section .15, Paragraph 15.5, specifications on the preliminary plat. Mr. Willman advised in his letter to the Commission that during the .approval process of the Parkland Ordinance, even though these changes had been submitted, they were not included. Mr. Willman commented he had questioned Council about the changes and they assured him they would be included,. but they were not.. The main question asked by the Commission. was whether or not, during the approval process, these changes had been stricken out by the lawyer. =6- - _ _ _ _ _ Gary Bricken indicated he would prefer to find out why-these changes were not included first, before the amendment is pushed through. The rest of the Commission agreed this needs to be investigated. Chairman Andrews'. suggestion was to table this item until the next meeting allowing time for research into the situation. Gary Bricken made a motion to table Item #6 (Proposed Amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance) until the next meeting to allow time for research into the situation. Keith Van Dine seconded the motion and the vote-was unanimous in favor. Motion carried. #7 CONSIDER AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION: Discussion of Zoning Map and Update on Progress of Revisions to the Zoning Ordinance Chairman Andrews asked for Staff input. Steve Simonson told the Commission they can't separate the Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map, and since they are making revisions to the ordinance, they need to take a look at the map. Mr. Simonson also noted this process works in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan. Steve Simonson commented the Zoning Map has a lot of area designated for business, but has nothing designated for green space. Mr. Simonson also pointed out that some areas of the City are still zoned PD as they were years ago when they were annexed. Mr. Simonson said the question here is: "Is this the way we want the City to look?" Chairman Andrews mentioned areas zoned for "boom" years and those zoned for "bust" years and pointed out a few of them on the map. For example, there's an area on E. Live Oak Road which contains R-l, R-2 and NS (Neighborhood Services) zoning and Mr. Andrews said he just can't see NS in that location.., Merwin Willman remarked on the area between the Malish Administration Building and the Sycamore Creek Apartments as being the same way (zoned for NS), and said he doesn't think anything of an NS nature will ever go in there. ,Chairman Andrews also commented on some land along Jack Hays Blvd. which is zoned OP (Office & Professional) and said that according to the ordinance, there's not enough land for that type of zoning. Gary Bricken -observed that an important characteristic to be considered is what people who live here do for a living. Steve .Simonson stated this map will be an integral part of the Comprehensive Plan, the City has not been sued by anybody over ' land use. _7_ ' Gary Bricken noted you can`t start carving up the map until a lot of other data is available and has been digested, such as census information. Jim Shriver, referring to individual property owners, asked how you can tell an individual he can't sell his land because it needs to be green space. - Steve Simonson replied he would have to convince the City he has a better use for the land. Chairman Andrews pointed out you can use densities as one means of controlling land use. Steve Simonson told the Commission to keep in mind Schertz is the largest of the San Antonio suburbs as far as square miles of land, the second largest as far as population, and the only one with two major highways (IH-35 and IH-10) within it's City limits. There was more discussion on the Zoning Map with Keith Van Dine saying this involves two plans - one for when the economy is up and another for when the economy is down. Steve Simonson corrected Mr. Van Dine saying we should not consider "bust" or "boom" zoning, but what we as a City really want. Another area of the map. pointed out by Chairman Andrews was that property all along FM 1518 to IH-10 and also along Lower Seguin Road. Mr. Andrews wondered if all this land needs to be zoned for General Business. Keith Van Dine questioned if it's in the Comprehensive Plan, is it etched in stone. The Commission replied no it is not, but Gary Bricken added it does prevent frivolous changes. Chairman Andrews mentioned that another thing the Commission needs to think about is water conservation. In regard to that, Steve Simonson said the Staff will be submitting some ordinance changes to City Council as a means of preparing for the future. _The Commission then discussed the various requests. that come in for rezoning and how best to decide if they should be granted or denied. Gary Bricken expressed. the opinion that a lot of -it depends on the driving force behind the request. For example, if a guy~from Minnesota wants to come in with an acid battery plant, it's not too hard to turn him down. If however, a citizen landowner wants to put in something equally as bad, it might be harder to turn him down. -8- - _ _ Keith Van Dine posed the question to the Commission about what would happen if Randolph Air Force Base were to disappear. The Commission agreed it would have a great deal of impact on.the surrounding area. Chairman Andrews .asked the Commission if there's a certain process they ~.~ant to follow fcr reviewing the Zoning Map. Jim Shriner suggested breaking it intc sections. Steve Simonson reminded the Commission the City now has a Foreign Trade Zone and .there needs to be some way to designate it on the map. Mr. Simonson's suggestion was to keep the same colors for the different zoning classifications, but drop a line so there's open spacing as a means of designating the Foreign Trade Zone. Chairman Andrews recommended making the line darker so it will stand out. Merwin Willman emphasized he would like more information on the Foreign Trade Zone to which Steve Simonson said he will have some information for the Commission at the next meeting. Chairman Andrews commented maybe further discussion of the Zoning Map should be tabled until the next meeting. Mr. Andrews went on to say the Zoning Map is part cf the Zoning Ordinance and also dovetails in with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Andrews said, in his opinion, it will take 9 months to a year to complete the Comprehensive Pian. Gary Bricken asked if more serious work can be .done on the map without completion of the Comprehensive Plan. Merwin Willman commented the map should fit the plan instead of the plan fitting the map. Chairman Andrews then asked the Commission if they want to leave the map as it is now until further work is done on the Comprehensive Plan. Merwin Willman asked the timetable on the Zoning Ordinance saying he has three changes: (1) a Site Plan, (2) Off-Street Parking, and (3) a Landscape Plan. ,Steve Simonson brought up the idea of contacting people involved with the current zoning in the City, .inviting them to meetings., .explaining what we're doing,-and getting their input,, Gary Bricken pointed .out it's an ongoing process - .the- Zoning Ordinance, the Zoning Map and the Comprehensive Plan. After further discussion, Chairman Andrews requested the review of that section of the Zoning Map from EM 78~ to IH-35 be placed on the agenda of the next meeting. _-9- Steve Simonson assured the Commission he will have information at the next meeting on the Foreign Trade Zone. #8 GENERAL DISCIISSION Keith Van Dine: (a) Remarked that in the Schirmerville area, in the road by the water tank going toward FM 1604, there's a large hole. (b) Related that as a result of the last rain, lots of top soil has washed down to Pfeil Road a little ways from Shady Acres. Gary Bricken• ta) Asked if there will ever be a stoplight coming out of Woodland Oaks. (Steve Simonson said the City has requested 4 stoplights in conjunction with the widening of Jack Hays Blvd.) Merwin Willman: (a) Asked if there's any final figures on the Census. (Steve Simonson said there won't be any until spring.) :~?r. Willman then asked if there's been any feedback from the challenges to the figures and Steve Simonson replied that won't be known either until spring. Keith Van Dine asked what the Census Bureau says the figures are and Steve Simonson replied 10,681. Gary Bricken then asked Steve Simonson what he believes the figures to be and Mr. Simonson said 12,000. (b) Mentioned the variance request on the agenda earlier tonight and expressed the opinion we ought to go to City Council and request a stiffer penalty for these people who come in after the fact rather than just a double fee charge for their permit. Steve Simonson reported the City has revoked the bond of one of the builders that has constantly built without a permit. Mr. Simonson said the builder's bonding company was also informed. Gary Bricken asked if the City has inspectors on the weekends. . Steve Simonson replied they do occasionally. (c) Mentioned an article in the Planning Magazine entitled "The Holy Grid: A Skeptic's View" and said it's interesting reading. td) Also mentioned an article in the Zoning News on parkland, specifically fees-in-lieu of land. Mr. Willman said he is disturbed by the sentence which says: "In a 1980 Texas decision, Missouri City's ordinance was ruled unconstitutional because it allowed the developer to contribute fees-in-lieu that-could be spent on parks anywhere in the city." -10- _ _ Steve Simonson informed Mr. Willman the City`s lawyers say it can be done under certain circumstances. Jim Shriver• (a) Asked if discussion on the Home Occupation Permit could be placed on the next agenda. Chairman Andrews replied yes, and asked the Recording Secretary to do so. ~9 ADJOURNMENT Chairman Andrews adjourned the meeting at 9:00 P.M. The next regularly scheduled meeting is November 27, 1990. -11-