Loading...
05-10-2005 PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES May 10,2005 e The Schertz Planning and Zoning Commission convened on May 10, 2005 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 William Sommers Roberta Tutschke Ken Greenwald, ex-officio Gary Wallace CITY STAFF Leonard Truitt, Building Official Misty Nichols, Planning Technician COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Clovis Haddock Keith Van Dine, Secretary OTHERS PRESENT Robert Brockman, 1000 Elbel Road Billy Classen, Carter & Burgess Robert Hunt, Trinity Assets Harry Jewett, Harry Jewett Associates Tom Flores, Flores & Co. Consulting Engineers Fernando Saenz, MBC Engineers Wade McGinnis, Barshop & ales Company Peter Velasco, LandTex Development Company Mr. Blucher, Executive Signs e 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 There was no one present to speak. 3. Code Enforcement Report for the month of April. Mr. Truitt reviewed the May 2005 Code Enforcement report. The Commission thanked Mr. Truitt and the Building Inspections Department. 4. Board of Adjustment Actions: The Board of Adjustment met on May 2, 2005 and approved the request from Russell Graham. Mr. Truitt stated that the meeting went well and the request from Mr. and Mrs. Graham was approved. 5. Discuss and take appropriate action to approve the minutes of the April 12, 2005 Planning and Zoning meeting. Mr. Wallace moved to approve the minutes for April 12, 2005. Mr. Sommers seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. e Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission May 10, 2005 Page I of8 6. PC608-03 Discuss and take action on a request for a 6-month extension of the preliminary plat for The Ridge at Scenic Hills, Unit 2B. Applicant: Carter & Burgess e Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that the applicant is asking for an extension on the approved preliminary plat for an additional 6-months since construction has not yet started. The 6-month extension will begin as of this day and expire on November 10, 2005. The plat conforms to the Unified Development Code Zoning requirements, and there are no variances associated with the originally approved plat. Staff recommends the extension. Mr. Sommers moved to approve the 6-month extension to expire on November 10, 2005. Ms. Tutschke seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 7. PC2005-022 Discuss and take appropriate action on a request for preliminary plat of the Associate Drive Extension, Phase 2. The 0.9643 ::!:: acre tract located on the northwest corner of Doerr Lane and Associate Drive. Applicant: IH-35 233, Inc. Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that the request is to extend Associate Drive an additional 700.10 feet. Staff has reviewed the plan with only one concern from Fire and Safety; they asked that a temporary turnaround be constructed at the end of the extension until the street stubs out to an intersection. Staff recommends approval. e Mr. Wallace moved to approve the request providing a temporary turnaround to be constructed until it is stubbed out into an intersection. Ms. Tutschke seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 8. PC2005-011 Discuss and take appropriate action for a master plan of the Mid-Cities Business Park Embrey. The 127.252 ::!:: acre tract is located on IH 35 approximately 500-feet south of Tri-County Parkway. Applicant: Trinity Asset Development Company, Ltd. c/o Robert Hunt. Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission met on April 27, 2005 for a site tour with the developer to address any questions or concerns the Commission may have. Some of the items discussed were: · Access · Truck maneuverability · Truck parking- how to calculate- applicant to provide industry standards · Drainage, and the floodplain · Phasing and building uses The master plan consists of 1,820,300 square feet of proposed building area. Mid-Cities Boulevard will be a 60- foot right-of-way with 42-feet of pavement used as a collector for the entire development. Mr. Evans asked if the proposed 60-foot right-of-way width of Mid-Cities Blvd. is the same width as Tri-County Parkway? Mr. Truitt stated that he was informed it was; Ms. Nichols stated that Tri-County Parkway is actually an 80-foot right-of-way. Mr. Classen stated that they met with staff on this issue and determined that a 60-foot right-of-way would be sufficient for this development. Mr. Classen also explained that he is planning to remove the access near building "B" and have a right in, right out only on IH 35 North. This will force people onto the access road preventing traffic from trying to access the highway from this point. e Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission May 10, 2005 Page 2 of8 e Mr. Evans asked if a channel is added for drainage, will the water enter the proposed detention ponds? Mr. Classen stated that the water is only going to be channeled not detained. Mr. Truitt stated that the city engineer is comfortable with how the drainage is being handled. Mr. Richmond stated that building "A" and "BOO being so close together bother him. Mr. Classen responded that the distance between the buildings is between 75 and 85 feet apart. Mr. Richmond stated that he would be looking for an exceptional landscaping plan to buffer the areas facing the interstate. Mr. Richmond stated that he is concerned with the phasing of the development and how Mid-Cities Blvd. will be constructed within the phasing. Mr. Classen stated that each phase would be building the street to the extent of that development. Mr. Richmond then questioned if the intent was to begin at IH 35 regardless of what develops first. Mr. Hunt stated that marketing may star at either end of the plan. The intent is to begin at IH 35 and build north. Although building "Q" may start first, Mr Hunt believes that any developer would want a straight shot from IH 35. Mr. Wallace asked Mr. Hunt if he felt that a 60-foot right-of way is sufficient. Mr. Hunt stated, most definitely. Off street truck parking would be provided along Associate Drive at building "Q". Mr. Richmond asked Mr, Hunt if they were working to possibly purchase the Wagner property. Mr. Hunt stated that they are already in preliminary conversations with the owner. Following review and discussion, Mr. Wallace moved to approve the request. Mr. Sommers seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 9. PC2005-019 Discuss and take appropriate action on a request for preliminary plat of the Harral Subdivision. The 4.0 :!:: acre tract is located on Hubertus Road approximately 355-feet south east of FM 482 (361 Hubertus Road). Applicant: Thomas & Sharon Harral e Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that applications for zoning and site plan are forthcoming. The property is currently used for the storage of construction equipment and a portable building. The plat meets the requirements ofthe Unified Development Code. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Evans asked what is the current use. Mr. Jewett stated that the current use is for a construction office and equipment storage. The property owner plans to continue this use and will be applying for an M-l zoning designation. Following review and discussion, Mr. Sommers moved to approve the request. Mr. Wallace seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 10. PC2005-018 Discuss and take appropriate action on a request for final plat approval of the Closner-FM 2252 Subdivision. The 7.981-acre tract is located on FM 2252 north of IH 35. The property is zoned Manufacturing District-Light (M-l) Applicant: G. Bennett Closner Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that the planning and Zoning Commission approved the preliminary plat on March 8, 2005. The proposed use for the property will be heavy equipment sales and service. The plat meets the Unified Development Code and staff recommends approval. e Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission May 10, 2005 Page 3 of8 e Mr. Evans stated that at the last meeting there were questions on how the applicant would be taking care of drainage on the property. Mr. Flores stated that they would be using a lay down curb with an asphalt drive; and areas other than parking will be gravel or dirt. Mr. Evans asked if there would be sales of heavy equipment as well as repairs, and also asked if there would be demonstrations. Mr. Flores stated yes, there would be both sales and repairs. Following review and discussion, Mr Sommers moved to approve the request. Ms Tutschke seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 11. PC2005-020 Discuss and take appropriate action on a request for preliminary plat approval of the Chili's Corridor Subdivision. The 1.6819::!:: acre tract is located at the southeast corner of Corridor Loop Road and IH 35 Frontage Road. The property is zoned General Business (GB). Applicant: Corridor Properties, Ltd. . Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that the 1.677-::1:. acre tract is located at the southeast comer of IH 35 and Corridor Loop Road. Access to the property will be off of Corridor Loop and the private ingress/egress easement. As provided on the Hampton Inn plat, cross access will be granted from this lot for those patrons wanting access to Corridor Loop Road. The plat meets the Unified Development Code and staff recommends approval. Mr. Evan asked that the access points on Corridor Loop Road be identified on the final plat. Mr. Evans also asked for an explanation regarding the vacation of the existing drainage easement. Mr. Saenz stated the there is no need for the easement since all storm water will be directed into the detention pond being constructed at the rear ofthe Hampton Inn property. e Following review and discussion, Mr. Sommers moved to approve with the condition that access on Corridor Loop will be indicated on the final plat. Mr. Wallace seconded the request. Voting Aye: Mr. Richmond, Mr. Evans, Mr. Sommers, and Ms. Tutschke. Voting Nay: Mr. Wallace. Motion carried. 12. SV2005-027 Discuss and take appropriate action for a variance to the Unified Development Code, Article IX (Signs) for Chili's Corridor Properties. The request is for a Free Standing Sign exceeding the maximum height and size. Applicant: Corridor Properties, Ltd. Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that the applicant is requesting a freestanding sign to service two lots. The sign would be located at the comer of Corridor Loop Road and IH 35. The two lots the sign would service will be the Chili's lot and the 3.614 acre tract behind Chili's and Hampton Inn. This 3.6l4-acre lot would not have any other signage. The variance is for the following: 1. Sign Height: 65-feet (variance of IS-feet) 2. Sign Size: 300 square feet (variance of 50 square feet) 3. Off Premise Sign: Allow for two panels to be used for 3.6 1 4-acre lot. Staff has reviewed several different options with the applicant and supports the request. Mr. Sommers stated that his concern was that an off-premise sign is not allowed, and until there is an overlay district for IH 35 and IH 10, allowing a variance would harm the intent of the sign ordinance. e Mr. Wallace asked if Chili's Corporation would have any problem with a shared pole sign. The Hampton Inn Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission May 10, 2005 Page 4 of 8 e stated that they would not permit a restaurant sign to be placed on the same pole as their sign since this would give the perception that the two are associated. Mr. McGinnis stated that the Chili's Corporation is aware of the shared pole sign. Mr, Evans stated that the last paragraph of the letter dated April 11, 2005 should be added to the minutes for record. The paragraph reads: In addition, the property Owner will record an instrument in the deed records providing for shared construction, use and maintenance of this sign. This variance request does not apply to building signs on the property. The Commission stated that the two additional signs would be restricted to 100 square feet each, and provide signage for a maximum of four tenants on the vacant 3.6::1: acre tract. Following review and discussion, Mr. Wallace moved to approve the request. Ms. Tutschke seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Mr. Richmond, Mr. Wallace, and Mr. Evans. Voting Nay: Mr. Sommers and Ms. Tutschke. Motion carried. 13. Discussion regarding rezoning a portion of the Meadow Creek Subdivision to Planned Unit Development (PUD). Applicant: Land Tex Development Company e Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that it has been discussed with the applicant to rezone the portion of land within the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The AICUZ study suggests a maximum density of 1-2 dwelling units per acre with a possible increase under a PUD where maximum lot coverage is less than 20 percent. This does allow the applicant to increase the number of lots by 10, to 96 lots. If the Commission and City Council favor the proposal, then the ordinance would include the elements to promote compatible land use for Randolph AFB which include height limitations and noise mitigation. The ordinance would also eliminate the need for a Specific Use Permit for each individual property owner. The exhibit before the Commission is a revised Master Plan showing the proposed lot layout with the proposed zoning. The plan includes a second point of access. This item is for discussion only. Mr. Wallace stated that using a Planned Unit Development (PUD) would circumvent the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study (AICUZ). Mr. Truitt explained that a PUD is allowed in the study and would prevent the need for a Specific Use Permit for every property owner. Mr. Wallace stated that he would like to see a stub out for walking access from lot "B", to the Soccer America fields (aka: S.A.M.Y.S). Mr. Richmond commended Mr. Velasco for his efforts in making a viable product. Mr. Evans stated that all requirements of a mixed-use development must be placed on the plat. 14. SV2005-028 Discuss and take appropriate action for a variance to the Unified Development Code, Article IX, (Sign Standards) requesting a flag and pole that exceeds the maximum height and size requirement located in The Fairways at Scenic Hills Subdivision. (Pulte Homes) Applicant: Executive Signs tit Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission May 10, 2005 Page 5 of8 Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that The Fairways at Scenic Hills Subdivision, is requesting the following sign variance for Pulte Homes: e ITEM ALLOWED REQUEST VARIANCE Flag 32 sq. ft. Pole 25 ft. high 49 ft. 10 Yz inches hillh 24 ft. 1 0 Yz inches Following review and discussion. Mr. Sommers moved to approve the request for a 49-foot 10 Yz - inch pole for a flag. Mr. Wallace seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 15. SV2005-029 Discuss and take appropriate action for a variance to the Unified Development Code, Article IX, (Sign Standards) requesting a builder entrance sign that exceeds the maximum height and size requirements located in the Belmont Park Subdivision. Applicant: Executive Signs Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that D.R. Horton Company is requesting the following variance for a sign located at the entrance to Belmont Park Subdivision offWiederstein Road: ITEM ALLOWED REQUEST VARIANCE Builder 32 sq. ft. 96 sq. ft. 64 sq. ft. Development 10ft. high 12 ft. high 2 ft. Sign *** This sign shall be removed when the subdivision is 75% completed or 5-years, whichever is sooner*** e Mr. Richmond reminded the Commission that D.R. Horton Company agreed they would refrain from bringing traffic onto Wiederstein Road; the main access was to be located on IH 35. Following review and discussion, Mr. Sommers moved to deny the request for variance. Ms. Tutschke seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 16. SV2005-030 Discuss and take appropriate action for a variance to the Unified Development Code, Article IX, (Sign Standards) requesting a flag and pole that exceeds the maximum height and size requirements located in the Belmont Park Subdivision. (D R Horton Flag) Applicant: Executive Signs Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that D.R. Horton is requesting the following variance for a flag and pole located at the model homes of the Belmont Park Subdivision: ITEM Flag Pole REQUEST 40 s . ft. 30 ft. high VARIANCE 8 s . ft. 5 ft. Following review and discussion, Mr. Sommers moved to deny the request for variance. Ms. Tutschke seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 17. SV2005-031 Discuss and take appropriate action for a variance to the Unified Development Code, Article IX, (Sign Standards) requesting a flag and pole that exceeds the maximum height and size requirements located e Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission May 10, 2005 Page 6 of8 in the Belmont Park Subdivision. (Texas Flag) Applicant: Executive Signs e Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that D.R. Horton is requesting the following variance for a flag and pole located at the model homes of the Belmont Park Subdivision: ITEM Fla Pole ALLOWED 32 s . ft. 25 ft. high REQUEST 40 s . ft. 30 ft. hi h VARIANCE 8 s . ft. 5 ft. Following review and discussion, Mr. Sommers moved to deny the request for variance. Mr. Wallace seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous. 18. SV2005-032 Discuss and take appropriate action for a variance to the Unified Development Code, Article IX, (Sign Standards) requesting a flag and pole that exceeds the maximum height and size requirements located in the Belmont Park Subdivision. (American Flag) Applicant: Executive Signs Mr. Truitt reviewed staff comments and stated that D.R. Horton is requesting the following variance for a flag and pole located at the model homes of the Belmont Park Subdivision: e ITEM Fla Pole REQUEST 216s .ft. 50 ft. VARIANCE 184 s . ft. 25 ft. Following review and discussion, Mr. Wallace moved to approve the 50-foot flag pole with the condition that the requests excludes the stipulation of the American flag, and allows the builder to fly one to three flags with a total of up to 2l6-square feet. Additionally, this will be a temporary sign and shall be removed at 75% of completion of the subdivision or 5-years, whichever is sooner. Mr. Sommers seconded the motion. Motion carried Vote unanimous. 19. Items by Commissioners and City Staff Mr. Richmond: Stated that he is upset with D.R. Horton on signage and the agreement made about the main access to Belmont Park not to be on Wiederstein Road. Mr. Evans: Stated that the patio area of the new Wal-Mart did not reflect that there would be outside storage of bricks and such facing IH 35. He stated that this was unsightly. Mr. Wallace: Stated that he is concerned with the idea of the Planned Unit Development within the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone and wants to know if this will harm Randolph Air Force Base. Mr. Greenwald: Stated that there will be a reception for the new City Manager Don Taylor, located in the Community Center on the 16th of May from 5-7 P.M. He then introduced Council Member Tony Wilenchik and stated that he will be the new liaison for the Planning and Zoning Commission. e Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission May 10, 2005 Page 7 of8 20. Adjournment e Mr. Sommers moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:27 p.m. Ms. Tutschke seconded the motion. Motion carried. Vote unanimous, if WvJ vlV\,~i Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission e e Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission May 10, 2005 Page 8 of8