Loading...
04-27-2004 PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES APRIL 27, 2004 . The Schertz Planning and Zoning Commission convened on April 27, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. at the Municipal Complex, Council Chambers, 1400 Schertz Parkway, Schertz, Texas. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION David Richmond, Chairman Ernie Evans, Vice Chairman Keith VanDine, Secretary Clovis Haddock Joyce Briscoe William Sommers Ken Greenwald, ex-officio CITY STAFF Amy Madison, Community Development Director Misty Nichols, Planning Technician Jonette Ellis, Planning Technician COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Gary Wallace OTHERS PRESENT Robert Brockman, 4S0S Grand Forest Buford Purser, 700 Gleaming Springs Drive Matt Johnson, Pape-Dawson Engineers Jerry Mendenhall, 323 Breesport Toun Dat Tan, Seguin 1. Call to Order/Roll Call . Chairman Richmond called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Citizen Input other than Agenda Items Mr. Brockman thanked the Commission for doing a great job. He also mentioned that he appreciates the efforts of the Public Works Department. 3. Board of Adjustment Actions: There were no Board of Adjustment items discussed. 4. ZC2004-005 Discuss and take appropriate action to call for a Public Hearing to rezone 39.737-r. acres from Predevelopment District (PD) to Residential/Agricultural (RA). The property is located south of Borgfeld Road on Gleaming Springs Drive. Applicant: Tim Tabbert and Buford Purser Ms. Madison reviewed staff comments and stated the applicant wishes to rezone 39.737 acres from Predeve10pment District (PD) to Residential/Agricultural (RA). She also stated that the applicant wishes to keep the large parcels for family members and does not intend to sell. . Mr. Evans asked if the property was in the floodplain. Mr. Purser stated that the property is in the floodplain, but once the FEMA Dietz Creek project is complete, there will be a letter of map revision to removed the property from the floodplain. Mr. Evans also asked how the property would be used and Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission April 27, 2004 Page I of7 questioned if large animals would be on the property. Mr. Purser stated the property will be used as residential with some farming and stated that there are currently animals on the property. Ms. Briscoe asked if this property was next to the landfill, and Mr. Purser stated that the Cibo10 Creek divides the property from the landfill. Following review and discussion, Mr. Haddock moved to call for a public hearing on May 11,2004. Ms. Briscoe seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 5. SV2004-004 Discuss and take appropriate action on a request for a variance to the Unified Development Code, Article IX (Signs) for Wal-Mart Supercenter Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 7, located at the northeast quadrant of FM 3009 and IH 35. The request includes the following variances: a. Additional Wall Signage b. Anchor Business Signage c. Free Standing On-Premise Signage Applicant: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Ms. Madison reviewed staff comments and stated the request is as follows: SIGN UDC REQUIREMENTS REQUESTED VARIANCE Wall Signage 10% of wall surface or 100 The applicant is requesting The request exceeds the sq. ft. Due to the size of the 1,113 sq. ft. of wall 100 sq. ft. maximum. The project, Staff recommends slgnage. variance is to allow 1,013 calculating the signage at sq. ft. of building signage. 10%, which is 2,772. Anchor 200 sq. ft. maximum at 50' The proposed sign is to be The request exceeds the Business One per 50,000 sq. ft. of located at FM 3009 and the 200 sq. ft. maximum. The shopping center. front entrance. The 618 sq. variance is to allow 418 sq. ft. sign is 50' high. ft. of anchor signage. Free 250 sq. ft maximum at 50' The proposed sign is to be The request exceeds the Standing On- high. (Limited to access located at ill 35 Frontage 250 sq. ft. maximum. The Premise road) Road. The 600 sq. ft. sign variance is to allow 350 sq. Signage is 50' high. ft. of on-premise signage. Matt Johnson presented the exhibits noting the locations of the signs. Mr. Evans inquired about the location of the free-standing sign as shown in the rear of the property. Mr. Johnson stated where it was, but that he would place it where the Commission would like to see it. Mr. Evans asked if the sign could be moved to the IH 35 frontage road entrance and Mr. Johnson agreed to move it. . . Mr. Sommers stated that he would not be voting for the request due to the Commission granting too many variances. He felt the sign ordinance needs to be updated, and would like to update the ordinance prior to granting any additional sign variances. Mr. Sommers suggested creating an overlay district for the IH 10 and IH 35 districts for signage. Mr. Haddock asked that the Commission not hold up the applicant to update the ordinance. Previously when the Commission denied the original request, they suggested recommendations, and the applicant has complied with those recommendations. Mr. Van Dine stated the . Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission April 27, 2004 Page 2 of7 ordinance needs to be fair for everyone and that the Commission should work on updating the ordinance. Mr. Haddock reminded the Commission that each variance presented to the Commission should be . handled on a case-by-case basis and each one acted upon individually. Following review and discussion, Mr. Haddock moved to approve the sign variance with a change in the exhibit showing the location of the free-standing on-premise sign to be located at the Wa1-Mart entrance off the IH 35 frontage road. Mr. Van Dine seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Mr. Richmond, Mr. Evans, Mr. Haddock, Mr. Van Dine and Ms. Briscoe. Voting Nay: Mr. Sommers. Motion carried. 6. PC2004-013 Discuss and take appropriate action on a request for site plan approval of a portion of Lot 13, Block 2 of The Village Subdivision. The 1.004-r. acre tract shows a 2,10S square foot retail shop located approximately 300-feet south of Aero Avenue on Schertz Parkway. Applicant: Toun Dat Tan Ms. Madison reviewed staff comments and stated the 2,108 square foot retail/donut shop is located approximately 300-feet south of Aero Avenue on Schertz Parkway. The site plan meets Unified Development Code requirements and staff recommends approval. . Mr. Richmond: I know where this is going to be, adjacent to the Texas Department of Human Resources building. My concern is that on Schertz Parkway, and I know that our overlay district does not extend this far, but given that this is now our principal, intended to be our principal, entry into the City, I think we are fortunate that the effort we have applied previously to signage, lends itself outside the overlay to what we would approve on neighborhood parcels inside the overlay district. My concern with this is given its location and I drove up and looked both ways to have a better idea on how close it is and it's directly across from the library and their monument sign and it's need for it to be 16 feet high. I know that the Knights of Columbus has a pole sign, but I'm not sure of the height, but it doesn't look that high. The Texas Department of Human Resources' building does not have a free-standing sign. They just have a wall sign on the building. The only additional property is going to be the Masonic lodge on the other side of this proposed location. The church adjacent to the Knights of Columbus has a berm sign, monument sign. So we've done a good job probably individually up that way in keeping our signage low and I really don't think here that a monument sign or berm sign - I think it would be seen, because this is a level stretch. There is no problems - no vision problems. You can see either direction, so that's my only concern, do we really need a pole sign 16- feet high? Ms. Madison: I certainly understand and concur with your statement, except that this is in compliance with the UDC. We can request to the applicant to see ifhe would be willing to lower the height of the sign, but... Mr. Richmond: Did Staff talk with him about that? Ms. Madison: We did not discuss him lowering the sign. No. Because if it meets the UDC requirement, then they basically are not asking for a variance. So we can.. ..the applicant is here this evening. Mr. Van Dine: Amy does this meet with the UDC requirements? . Ms. Madison: Yes sir. It does meet the UDC requirements. Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission April 27, 2004 Page 3 of 7 Mr. Van Dine: Thank you very much. Ms. Madison: Whether or not they will be willing to lower their sign, but then I think we get into, if we . ask them to do that, then we have others that come down the pipe we don't have that overlay extended. So, Mr. Van Dine: I don't think we should ask them to lower the sign if it meets the requirements. Ms. Madison: Well, we really can't. We can't ask them to. I mean, we can't require them to. We could ask as a consideration. Mr. Richmond: Right. I was just wondering whether that had been discussed. Ms. Madison: No we didn't. Ifit meets the UDC, we do not have those kinds of discussions. Mr. Richmond: Then, I might ask the applicant if he would give any consideration to that? Could you come forward to the podium here please? And give us your name and address. Applicant: My business name? Mr. Richmond: Yes. Applicant: Donut Palace in Seguin. Mr. Richmond: And you're? And your name is? . Applicant: Toun Tan Mr. Richmond: Okay and you're located in Seguin? Mr. Tan: Yes Mr. Richmond: I guess what I'm suggesting here or what I'm asking is given your proposed location on Schertz Parkway. Mr Tan: Across from public library. Mr. Richmond: Right. Do you see a need for a tall pole sign as you are proposing? Because one of the things that we, that I know that it is authorized by the UDC, and certainly we can't require differently, but one of things that I think we have endeavored to do as a Commission is looking at Schertz Parkway and 3009 and Main Street, some of these areas where we are trying to improve city aesthetics, appearance. Is where we have an opportunity maybe to go with a monument sign, as the library has, for example, as the Church of Christ has beyond the Knights of Columbus, where advertising your business is not a vision problem because it is a level stretch of road, so your sign that's out there on the road is going to be seen from the railroad tracks and will be seen from probably here regardless of height. Ms. Briscoe: One of the things. . Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission April 27, 2004 Page 4 of7 Mr. Van Dine: What a minute. Excuse me. Sir, in all respect, do you understand what he was just trying to explain to you? . Mr. Tan: Yes sir. Mr. Van Dine: Are you sure? Mr. Tan: Yes sir. Mr. VanDine: Because you look awfully confused to me, Buddy. I'm not saying that to put you down or anything like that, I'm just trying, because and I personally don't think if this man met the UDC requirements that we should have him up here asking him to do something when its already established. He's already brought it through us; it's met the requirements and everything. What's wrong with it? Let's vote on it and deal with it as it comes. Mr. Haddock: And if I may add to that Keith, one thing that bothers me would be in any way that we are implying, because we are a governing body, so to speak, Mr. Van Dine: Thank you. Mr. Haddock: That we would try to exert muscle. Mr. Van Dine: Exactly . Mr. Haddock: And I don't believe that is an appropriate tone at this time. Mr. Richmond: It is certainly not the intent. But I understand what you are saying. Okay. Commissioners any other questions, concerns? Mr. Evans: I'm going to state for the record and make sure that it is in the record. I want to state for the record that this Commission needs to go back to school. It has lost its construct of its purpose. What it's here for; in dealing with individual issues, not with community issues. Mr. Richmond: Okay, with that being said. Mr. Haddock: I will leave that alone for the time being. Mr. Richmond: Okay. If there is no further discussion, the Chair will entertain a motion. There being no further discussion, Mr. Haddock moved to approve the site plan. Mr. Van Dine seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Mr. Haddock, Mr. Van Dine, Ms. Briscoe and Mr. Sommers. Voting Nay: Mr. Richmond and Mr. Evans. Motion carried. 7. PC2004-015 Discuss and take appropriate action on a request for site plan approval of the Emergency Services Building. The proposed 9,616 square foot facility is located at the intersection of FM 482 and IH 35 Frontage Road. Applicant: City of Schertz . Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission April 27, 2004 Page 5 of7 Ms. Madison reviewed staff comments and stated that the proposed 9,616 square foot facility is located at the intersection ofFM 482 and IH 35 Frontage Road. The site plan meets the Unified Development Code . requirements and staff recommends approval. This project will require a preliminary and final plat approval. Mr. Jerry Mendenhall stated that the plans have been modified from the original design to reduce the construction costs and that the project is currently out for bid. He also stated that the four bays are capable of handling the ladder truck. Mr. Richmond stated that the Comprehensive Land Plan Committee had toured the area, and it was good that the City was extending its emergency service area. Mr. Van Dine inquired if this facility would be comparable to the proposed facility on Ware Seguin Road, and Mr. Mendenhall stated that they would be similar. There being no further comments, Mr. VanDine moved to approve the site plan. Mr. Haddock seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 8. Items by Commissioners and City Staff Ms. Madison: Updated the Commission on the following: a. Mr. Fritz Sch1ather had submitted an application for a variance for the container signs on IH 35. b. The Comprehensive Land Plan Committee would be meeting again this Thursday (4/29/04) and she stated that they are moving along very quickly. c. The Commission agreed to tour the southern section of the City on May 13,2004 at 8:00 a.m. e d. Informed the Commission that Leonard Truitt had emergency surgery and was recovering well at home. Mr. Haddock: Inquired about the two sexually oriented business signs along IH 35. Ms. Madison stated that she knew about one, which is located in the Cibo10 ETJ, but was unaware of a second sign. She stated that she would review the second sign. Mr. Haddock voiced concern for property along FM 3009 that is in Cibo10's city limits and that signage could appear there as well. Ms. Briscoe: Encouraged the Commission and audience to get out and vote. Early voting would begin Wednesday, Apri128, 2004. Mr. Evans: Asked ifthere have been further communications with the railroad representatives regarding signage along their right-of-way. Mr. Evans stated that some ofthe Reidel signs have been replaced with "Nancy's Windows" signage. He reminded staffthat these are still off-premise signs and that they need to be removed. Ms. Madison stated she would have Code Enforcement review the signage. Councilman Greenwald: Also reminded the Commission and audience to get out and vote. Mr. Richmond: Asked that staff review the signs along FM 3009 located near the first railroad crossing going north into Garden Ridge. He stated that the signs are decrepit and falling down. He also inquired about the sidewalk along Green Valley Road, and Ms. Madison stated that she had spoken with Don McCrary and the plans are currently being designed. Due to drainage problems, the design is being re- worked to include a curb. . Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission April 27, 2004 Page 6 of7 9. Adjournment . There being no further business, Mr. Van Dine moved to adjourn the meeting at 7 :45 p.m. seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. Mr. Haddock q~ ~.L Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission ~/. . . Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission April 27, 2004 Page 7 of7