Loading...
PZ 6-22-2016PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES June 22, 2016 The Schertz Planning and Zoning Commission convened on June 22, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. at the Municipal Complex, Council Chambers, 1400 Schertz Parkway Building #4, Schertz, Texas. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CITY STAFF David Richmond, Chairman Brian James, Executive Director of Development Ernie Evans, Vice Chairman Tiffany Danhof, Executive Administrative Assistant Richard Braud Bryce Cox, Senior Planner Bert Crawford, Jr. Emily Grobe, Planner Ken Greenwald Channary Gould, Planner Michael Dahle Daniel Santee, City Attorney COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Christian Glombik Megan Lasch, Applicant, Saigebrook Development Trey Jacobson, Representative of the Applicant, Golden Steve law firm Lisa Stephens, Representative of the Avanti Canyon Trey Gamble, Alliance Transportation Group 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Mr. Richmond called the meeting to order at 6:02 P.M. 2. HEARING OF RESIDENTS No one spoke 3. PUBLIC HEARING A. ZC2016 -005 Hold a public hearing, consider and make a recommendation to City Council about request to amend the Comprehensive Land Plan by changing approximately 6 acres of land from "Highway Commercial' to "Commercial Campus" on the Future Land Use Plan. The area is generally located south west of the intersection of FM 2252 and I11-35, and is specifically described as 5.929 acres out of the Robert Martin & JNO.F. Walker Survey No. 113, Abstract 244, City of Schertz, Guadalupe County, Texas. Mr. Richmond mentioned that the agenda item was tabled at the last Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on June 8, 2016 and called for a motion to take the item off the table. Mr. Dahle motioned to take this item off the table for further discussion and consideration. Mr. Greenwald seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Motion carried. Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission June 22, 2016 Page 1 of 8 Mr. Cox gave a presentation this item and mentioned that it was tabled on June 8, 2016. During the presentation he stated that the request was to amend the Comprehensive Land Plan by changing approximately 6 acres of land from "Highway Commercial" to "Commercial Campus" on the Future Land Use Plan. Five (5) public hearing notices were mailed to surrounding property owners on May 27, 2016. Staff received one in favor and one opposed. The land is designated on the Comprehensive Land Plan as "Highway Commercial" and is characterized by a land use mix of mostly large format retail with restaurants and entertainment uses or mid -rise office buildings. It may also include lodging and related uses. The applicant is requesting to change the Future Land Use Plan for the subject area to "Commercial Campus" which is intended to encourage the development of lower intensity commercial and office uses in locations between major intersections as a buffer between the interstate highway and adjoining neighborhoods. "Commercial Campus" can also accommodate light manufacturing or flex office uses set in a campus like environment in addition to multi- family residential located at mid - block locations and as transitions between office/ light industrial uses and adjoining single - family residential uses. City Staff's opinion is that this area is appropriately designated as "Highway Commercial" and thus recommended denial of the of the Comprehensive Land Plan Amendment request. Trey Jacobson, a representative of the applicant, gave a small presentation regarding the Avanti Canyon proposed site in relation to the agenda item, and explained how they reached out to residents. Magan Lasch also explained what affordable housing is and is not, described the types of residents that would live in affordable housing, and discussed the investment in the community this project would have. Mr. Jacobson also explained in more detail, the proposed land uses, impacts to traffic, proposed elevations and landscaping for the project and the pros and cons with the current land use designation and zoning. Trey Gamble with Alliance Transportation Group in Austin explained and presented the traffic impacts that the proposed project would have. Mr. Jacobson then addressed some of the community concerns, commented on the associated rezoning case, discussed utility improvements the project would construct, explained the proposed buffer area between commercial and residential land uses and concluded with the estimated impact to the city property taxes and values that the project would have. Mr. Richmond opened the public hearing at 6:46 P.M. Todd Buske /2713 Abaccus Court - Opposed • Commented on the environmental injustice of locating multi - family project in area with potential environmental hazards around project site. • Commented on his concern with the lack of sidewalks and access to grocery stores and other essentials for potential tenants without vehicles. • Commented that the City is playing "catch -up" with infrastructure. Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission June 22, 2016 Page 2 of 8 Penny Jennings /2501 Hourless Oaks-.Opposed • Commented that there are no sidewalks or medical access nearby. • Commented that the applicant identified this project as a "Veteran" focused project yet veterans may not qualify. • Expressed that this location being near a bar is not ideal. • Mentioned that Schertz should bring more businesses into Schertz to prevent people driving elsewhere for restaurants and services. Doug Jennings /2501 Hourless Oaks - Opposed • Commented that the existing commercial zoning will help the City in the long - run and the City's Strategic Plan encourages businesses. Darrell Jack/20540 Hwy 46 W, 78063 — In Favor • Commented that affordable housing works, and brings private and public resources together. • Explained that affordable housing helps provide staffing for big box retail and that there is demand for this type of housing being proposed Richard Stevens /2557 Grenada Gait -.Opposed • Commented that he had attended 2nd community meeting hosted by applicant and it was informative. • Expressed his concerns about rezoning already limited commercial property in the City • Commented that he is not against affordable housing, but feels a different location for affordable housing would be better and the City should stick with already established plans for commercial use at this site. Jose Perez/2973 Pawtucket Road - Opposed • Commented that he does not support project because it would change things in the area and suggested consideration for project that is restricted to only seniors. Sarah Anderson/8004 Havenwood, Austin, 78759 — In Favor • Explained the competitive process for funding and that location of projects in areas of high quality schools and income categories, with avoiding over concentration of low income housing helps with scoring higher based on selection criteria. • Commented that previous opponents of other affordable housing projects, years later, learn that their fears do not materialize. Gary Weaks /2700 Sterling Way - Opposed • Expressed concerns that "monitoring" the project would not really occur and that these does not seem to be any problems with staffing of the Walmart at FM 3009. William Mcneill /725 Fountain Gate - Opposed • Commented that Riata Subdivision is already experiencing issues with safety for children in their community and the statistics that the applicant provided that only 29 students would be generated with the project seems to be incorrect. Roy Ragsdale /733 Hollow Ridge - Opposed • Expressed concerns about home values being negatively affected. Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission June 22, 2016 Page 3 of 8 Gary Immon/417 Frank Baun - Opposed • Commented that the State's funding of schools is shrinking and although schools are fiscally conservative, as soon as a new school opens, it is already overcrowded. • Explained that he wants to see more commercial development because it helps increase property value, generate more taxes, and yet does not generate more students, thus tax dollars per student increases. Andrea Pineda/307 American Flag - Opposed • Commented that Schertz Comprehensive Land Plan already has a vision in place for this site as commercial, and a developer's proposal should not divert the City's vision. • Explained that the project would not help community flourish and tenants of the project may not have as much disposable income to further attract commercial development James Gonzales /517 Foxford Run - Opposed • Commented that the City developed a long -term Strategic Plan that should not be altered. • Explained that the residents want more options for commercial. • Commented that the project's tenants may not have same investment in the community as homeowners. Shane Sailer /2924 Pawtucket Road -.Opposed Commented that the project site is rated "I" in terms of transit accessibility and that he had contacted Ms. Janis Roznowski, author of Operation Comfort's letter. Eric Beam /570 American Flag - Opposed • Commented that the income qualification criteria of project would exclude Bill Miller employees, who would make too much money to qualify to live in this project. • Commented that he had concerns the tenants of project would not put in as much care as a homeowners and apartments tend to have more emergency personnel calls then residential subdivisions. George Antuna /3636 Woodlawn Farms - Opposed • Commented that rezoning would be going backwards and go against research that was conducted in past and the site is prime real estate, perhaps not now, but in future. • Explained that the city should wait for the right proposal to come along, similar to the Amazon site that was once proposed as a Maruchan Noodle plant but was denied by the City. Lorene Reynolds /760 Hightrail Road - Opposed • Explained that the City zoned the site as commercial for a reason. • Expressed skepticism toward only 29 students being generated by the project that the applicant stated. • Commented that the developers have a financial gain while the residents that are opposed have no financial gain in the project. Mandy Owen/2601 Glendale Road — Management of the Lookout property — In Favor • Commented that the student generation rate of 29 students was provided by school district, not the developer. Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission June 22, 2016 Page 4 of 8 John Sullivan/513 Triple Crown - Opposed • Expressed concerns with lack of connectivity and walkability in the area. • Commented that the site location near an overpass makes it suitable for future commercial development due to ease of access and circulation. Jeff Womack/2944 Mineral Springs - Opposed • Commented that the applicants proposal not consistent with Major Thoroughfare Plan or Comprehensive Plan. • Explained that the City already has Sebastian Apartments across from City hall. • Commented that the letters from charities are "form" letters and same letters are provided on multiple projects. • Explained that planning helps City grow sensibly. Brent Bolter /2633 Cloverbrook Lane - Opposed • Commented that the City has experienced a tremendous amount of growth over last 20 years and there is more traffic as a result of the growth. • Commented that the City needs to let its infrastructure "catch up" to support current residents. Andrew Price /130 E. Braden Drive — In Favor • Commented that the project would improve sewer infrastructure for surrounding properties thereby increasing property values. Dana Elridge /2628 Galant Fox - Opposed • Questioned the peak hour estimate generated by the project engineer and wondered about vehicles of other project tenants. • Expressed concerns regarding the new student generation estimate of 29 students. Don Peterson/532 Celtic Ash Run - Opposed • Commented that the location could lead to a child or other pedestrian being hurt or killed along IH 35 Chris Lopez/768 Riata -Opposed • Commented that he hopes for commercial development along I -35 for Schertz to avoid having to travel to Selma or other cities and that the decisions made today will impact the future of the City, and they need to be made wisely. Rick Burger /2912 Pawtucket Road - Opposed • Commented that he had to initially bus his son to Green Valley before his son could attend school in Cibolo. • Expressed that he was curious about crime related data for other apartment projects. Lindsay Nelson /764 Clearbrook Ave - Opposed • Commented that the information the applicant provided was from outdated 2005 document. • Commented on the lack of compatibility between the "host" neighborhood and the project and apartment projects in more urbanized areas are successful, this site is not suitable for project Donald Snyder /3501 Wimbledon Drive - Opposed • Commented that there are already existing Schertz residents that could fill the lower entry -level jobs that are available. Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission June 22, 2016 Page 5 of 8 Adam McDonald /2617 Ansel Heights - Opposed • Commented on the lack of transit services for potential tenants who do not have vehicles and that this project would not make surrounding sites more desirable for commercial development. Joseph Goldsmith/586 Secretariat Drive - Opposed • Commented that he wants to keep his family protected and safe. Kelly Bockel /508 Foxrun Drive - Opposed • Asked if approving this project and rezoning property would be precedent setting for future rezone requests? Commented that the City needs to consider what development would have the most economic benefit for the long run of the community, the apartment complex or the potential commercial developments. Mr. Richmond called the public hearing closed at 8:25 P.M. Mr. Richmond called for discussion by the Planning and Zoning Commissioners on Item 3A. The commissioners had a brief discussion with Staff and the applicant regarding the concerns from the residents and the comprehensive land plan. Mr. Dahle made a motion to forward a recommendation of disapproval to City Council. Mr. Greenwald seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Motion carried. B. ZC2016 -003 Hold a public hearing, consider and make a recommendation to City Council about a request rezone approximately 6 acres of land generally located south west of the intersection of FM 2252 and IH -35, from General Business (GB) to Planned Development District (PDD). The property is specifically described as 5.929 acres out of the Robert Martin & JNO.F. Walker Survey No. 113, Abstract 244, City of Schertz, Guadalupe County, Texas. Mr. Cox made a presentation on agenda item 3B and mentioned this was tabled at the June 8, 2016 meeting. He presented the request to rezone approximately 6 acres of land from General Business to Planned Development District. The proposed zoning consists of a base zoning of Apartment/Multi- Family Residential District (R -4) with a proposed maximum density of 20 units per acre and maximum impervious cover of 65 %. Five (5) public hearing notices were mailed to surrounding property owners on May 27, 2016. Staff received two in favor, eleven opposed, and 255 petition signatures opposed to the rezone for the Apartment/Multi- Family Residential District. The proposed zoning request is not in conformance with the Comprehensive Land Plan which identifies this area as Highway Commercial, which does not allow for apartment/multi- family development. It is the opinion of Staff that this area is appropriately zoned as General Business (GB) which is in conformance with the Highway Commercial designation in the Comprehensive Land Plan. Staff recommends denial of this rezoning request. Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission June 22, 2016 Page 6 of 8 Mr. Richmond mentioned that the agenda item was tabled at the last Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on June 8, 2016 and called for a motion to take the item off the table. Mr. Greenwald motioned to take this item off the table for further discussion and consideration. Mr. Crawford second the motion. The vote was unanimous. Motion carried. Mr. Richmond asked if there was any additional comments from Staff or the Applicant. There was no further comment. Mr. Richmond opened the public hearing at 8:46 P.M. No one spoke during the public hearing. Mr. Richmond closed the public hearing at 8:47 P.M. Mr. Greenwald made a motion to forward a recommendation of disapproval to the City Council for this request. Mr. Crawford seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Motion carried. 4. WORKSIIOP/DISCUSSION A. Public hearing and workshop discussion on amending the Unified Development Code to provide for exemptions to Site Design Standards and Parking Standards for public schools. Mr. James gave a presentation and had a small discussion with the commissioners on amending the Unified Development Code to provide for exemptions to site standards including landscaping and building designs, and parking standards for public schools. 5. REQUESTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Requests by Commissioners to place items on a future Planning and Zoning Agenda. Commissioner Crawford asked to discuss the Walmart Tax Credit on the next agenda, and wanted an update on the Master Thoroughfare Plan, and had questions regarding CCMA. Commissioner Richmond requested to have a review on where the local areas are zoned for Apartment / Multi- Family Residential (R -4). B. Announcements by Commissioners • City and community events attended and to be attended • Continuing education events attended and to be attended None. Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission June 22, 2016 Page 7 of 8 C. Announcements by City Staff. • City and community events attended and to be attended. • NEW SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS: The following site plan was submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department between June 4, 2016 and June 17, 2016. 1) Comal ISD Middle School 6 (Hubertus Road) Site Plan- proposed 129,354 sq. ft. Educational Facility (Middle School) Brian James commented that staff is looking into having a joint presentations with Planning and Zoning, Transportation Safety Advisory Commission, and the Economic Development Corporation regarding the next council meeting if these agenda items are scheduled on July 12, 2016. 7. ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR MEETING The meeti °g mourned at 9:12 P.M. z Chairman, Planning and Zoning Co `Emission Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission June 22, 2016 Page 8 of 8