Loading...
PZ 06-10-2015PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES June 10, 2015 A Special Joint Meeting was held by the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 10, 2015 at the Municipal Complex, Council Chambers, 1400 Schertz Parkway Building #4, Schertz, Texas. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION David Richmond, Chairman Ernie Evans, Vice - Chairman Ken Greenwald Bert Crawford, Jr. Richard Braud CITY STAFF Brian James, Executive Director Development Michelle Sanchez, Permit Expeditor Lesa Wood, Senior Planner Bryce Cox, Planner I Patti White, Executive Asst. Development COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Christian Glombik Michael Dahle 1. Call to Order of the Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. Mr. Richmond called the Regular Planning and Zoning meeting to order at 6:01 P.M. Mr. Richmond stated that he would like to congratulate Mr. Glombik on his reappointment to the Planning and Zoning Commission along with Mr. Braud and himself for two more years. Ms. Wood stated that the election of the chair and vice chair would be on the next agenda. 2. HEARING OF RESIDENTS • Maggie Titterington, 10217 Ivy Horn, spoke on item 4A on the septic permit process. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: A. Minutes for the April 22, 2015 Regular Meeting. B. Minutes for the May 13, 2015 Regular Meeting. Mr. Crawford moved to approve both sets of minutes as presented. Mr. Brand seconded the motion. Vote was 5 -0. Motion carried. 4. Presentation and discussion on the Bexar County septic permit process. Ms. Wood introduced Andrew Winter who is the Environmental Engineer for Bexar County responsible for OSSF's. Mr. Winter stated that their applications are reviewed independently from City Staff and he discussed the following points: • Review Process o Submittals ■ Application Signed ■ Basic Development ■ Plat ■ Site Evaluation Minutes P &Z Meeting June 10, 2015 Page 1 of 5 ■ Maintenance Contract ■ OSSF Design ■ Tank Details ■ Pipes (length, strength) ■ Calculations ■ Location of Trees ■ Boring Locations ■ Well and Water line locations ■ Two foot contours ■ Flood and Aquifer Certification ■ Map (location) • Application Package • Review time ■ Up to 30 days to review (by law) • Dependent on floodplain issues, platting issues, driveway permit issues. o Approval ■ Authorization to Construct (ATC) Letter ■ Electrical Release issued through CPS • Inspection Process • Standard System ■ Typically 3 inspections during installation • 1St — installation of tank and excavation of drainfield • 2nd — elevation grades of pipe and gravel • Yd — final soil placement • Aerobic System ■ Typically 1 inspection during installation • 1St — basic elevation grades of stub outs and inlet of the primary tank; check sizing of aerobic spray patterns; ensure audible and visual alarm system. • Maintenance • Standard System ■ Required to have tank pumped every 5 years. ■ Receipt shown and permit renewed for $30. • Aerobic System ■ Initial requirement is 2 year maintenance contract. ■ Current contract must be provided. ■ Quarterly inspections must be provided. • Lot Size o TAC 285.4 "Facility Planning" • Platted or unplatted subdivisions served by public water system; lot shall have at least half (1/2) an acre. • Platted or unplatted subdivisions NOT served by a public water system shall have at least one and a half (1 %2) acres. ■ Variances can be requested in writing and may be granted if the owner or professional engineer can demonstrate to the permitting authority that equivalent or greater protection can be provided by alternate means. Minutes P &Z Meeting June 10, 2015 Page 2 of 5 Mr. Richmond asked if City Staff is concerned about the coordination process. Ms. Sanchez stated that we don't currently ask for a copy of the application, but do ask for a copy of the inspection before the Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Mr. Crawford asked about a license to operate. Mr. Winter stated that if they don't have a license to operate they have 30 days to fix the problem, and then at the end of this time he can send an officer to give a citation. Mr. Braud asked if there is a leach field or just sprinklers. Mr. Winter stated that they can use a drip field which is very expensive and the footprint on a commercial lot is much smaller. Mr. Braud asked about the system on a database and if there is an inspection date, it will generate a notice. Mr. Winter stated that they have to do a query and notify the owner of an inspection, but if you refuse to cooperate, he can issue a civil citation which would be a $200 fine. Mr. Braud asked about easements in Hallie Heights. Ms. Wood stated that there is a chart that shows the requirements. Mr. Braud stated that some residents have complained that their yards are consistently wet. Mr. Winter stated that they would check the diameter of the sprinkler heads and if wet spots are in the yard, then they are using more water than the system is designed to handle. Discussion continued between Mr. Winter, Staff and the Commission. 5. WORKSHOP / DISCUSSION A. Public Hearing, presentation and discussion on proposed amendments to UDC, Sec. 21.9.5 Exterior Construction and Design Standards. . Mr. Cox presented this item by stating that the UDC Sec. 21.9.5 Exterior Construction and Design Standards was identified as a section in need of revision. To assist with the revision to UDC Sec. 21.9.5 Exterior Construction and Design Standards, Planning Staff created a focus group. The Design Standards Focus Group was comprised of various architects, engineers, developers, and City Boards including Board of Adjustments, Schertz Economic Development Board, and Planning and Zoning Commission. Planning Staff drafted this amendment based on the recommendations and input from the Design Standards Focus Group. These three elements are regulated under the current design standards as well. The proposed amendment continues to regulate these elements, but also provides additional flexibility to encourage innovation and promote quality development. This amendment was sent on June 1, 2015 for review and comments to all the members of the focus group. At the time of this report no objections have been received. This amendment is currently under review by the City Attorney. This amendment includes the following points: Materials: The current design standards require all Multi - Family and Non - Residential buildings to have a front fagade of 100% masonry material, and each of remaining facades must be comprised of a minimum of 75% masonry materials. Masonry materials is defined as brick, stone, stucco, cementatious fiberboard, split face concrete masonry units, concrete with an aggregate finish and faux stone or brick. The proposed amendment provides flexible options for industrial, commercial, office /public and multi - family building types by allowing accent materials to be used on the front fagade. Additionally, for industrial and multi - family buildings, the amendment provides an alternative of a Minutes P &Z Meeting June 10, 2015 Page 3 of 5 100% masonry front fagade and a cumulative percentage of the entire building as masonry materials. The proposed amendment also specifies which masonry materials can be used on each of the building types. This allows for creativity and innovation in material usage while promoting quality development through the use of aesthetically appropriate materials for the various building types. Glazin &: The current design standards require the front fagade of commercial buildings to be comprised of 30% windows and doors that provide visibility into the building. Additionally the current design standards require the front fagade of industrial buildings in M -1 and M -2 zoning districts to be comprised of 15% windows and doors that provide visibility into the building. The current requirement does not provide any flexibility for distributing the required glazing around the building. The proposed amendment provides flexible glazing options for industrial, commercial and office /public building types by allowing the applicant to choose a set percentage of the front fagade to be comprised of windows and doors or, to use a higher percentage of windows and doors that will be spread around the building. Additionally the proposed amendment clearly defines what side of the building is considered the front and provides additional requirements and options for buildings which front on two or more streets. Articulations: The current design standards require vertical and horizontal articulations on all walls which are longer than twice the wall's height. The depth of the articulation is a percentage of the wall's height. Additionally if a horizontal articulation is required, the length of the new plane created by the articulation must be at least 25% of the wall's length. The current requirement is very wordy and lacks clarity in its language. The proposed amendment provides clear language ,as to when articulations are needed and sets a minimum articulation depth of two feet (2') instead of a variable percentage. Additionally the proposed amendment provides articulation criteria specific to each building type (industrial, commercial, office /public and multi - family) which allows for flexibility and aesthetics that cater to the specific building type. The proposed amendment regulates the building facades which are most visible to the public, allowing for synergy between the building form, function and aesthetics. Additional Changes: Building Expansions— The amendment proposes to make building expansions which cumulatively increase the gross floor area more than 25% of the original building area, comply with the design standards. This will allow a small expansion on existing older buildings and still maintain the original building aesthetics. Single Family Residential Materials- The proposed amendment removes split face CMU from the list of approved masonry materials for a single - family residential dwelling. Staff will be recommending approval of the amendment to the Unified Development Code (UDC), Sec.21.9.5 — Exterior Construction and Design Standards at the June 24, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Minutes P &Z Meeting June 10, 2015 Page 4 of 5 6. 7. Mr. Richmond opened the Public Hearing at 7:19 P.M. There being no one to speak, Mr. Richmond closed the Public Hearing at 7:20 P.M. Ms. Wood stated that Staff would like to keep track of comments by starting at the beginning of the document. Mr. Evans asked under single family materials which type of cementatious fiberboard is being referred to. Mr. Cox stated that it could be hardiplankc material, T11 siding fiberboard, and other wood looking products. Mr. Evans stated that there is a product labeled hardiplank that is cement and fiber and there is another one which is ground up wood with some cement and it's not the same. Mr. Cox asked if there is a brand that Staff can look into. Mr. Richmond asked if there is an industry definition of cementatious fiberboard. Mr. Cox stated that Staff will check on that. Mr. Crawford asked if there is a minimum industry standard. Mr. Cox stated that Staff will check into that. Ms. Wood stated that as we go through site plans, if there is a material Staff is not clear on, then Staff asks for specifications. Mr. Richmond stated that this would be necessary for all these products that might be questioned. Mr. Braud stated that he would like to see pictures as examples of these products at the next presentation. Discussion continued between Staff and the Commission. REQUESTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Requests by Commissioners to place items on a future Planning and Zoning Agenda. • Mr. Braud stated that he would like to extend an invitation to Randolph representatives to come to a meeting to discuss their concern about trees, birds, etc. with the Commission. Mr. James stated that Staff has considered the concerns that Randolph has raised and is keenly involved in the joint land use study actively working on information for them. • Mr. Greenwald stated he would like to thank Ms. Sanchez on the presentation at the City Council May 26, 2015 meeting regarding Elevation Surveys of all new Residential Foundations. B. Announcements by Commissioners. • None. C. Announcements by City Staff. Mr. James stated that next Tuesday, there is an Urban Institute League luncheon at the Pearl with a topic of Suburban Communities and any Commissioner who would like to attend, please see him after the meeting. ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR MEETING Thee meeting adjourned at 8 -05 P.M. Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes P &Z Meeting June 10, 2015 Page 5 of 5 e Recording Secretary, City of Schertz