Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6-21-04 PC MinutesMINUTES REGULAR MEETING AND JOINT PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING COMMISSION CITE' COUNCIL June 21, 2004 City Council Chambers A Regular Meeting and Joint Public Hearings of the Planning Commission and City Council were held on June 21, 2004 with the following members present: Commission members present: Chairman Laurie Leister Vice -Chairman Greg Dykeman Commissioner Dohn LaBiche Commissioner Glenn Bodwin Commissioner Walter Kyles Commissioner Lynda Kay Makin Commissioner Virginia Hurley Alternate Commissioner Paul Jones Alternate Commissioner Ted Moor Alternate Commissioner Steven Johnson (did not vote) Commission members absent: Commissioner Dale Hallmark Commissioner Marty Craig Councilmembers present: *vlayor Pro-Tem Becky Ames Councilmember-at-Large Andrew Cokinos Councilmember Lulu Smith Councilmember Nancy Beaulieu Councilmember Bobbie Patterson Councilmember Audwin Samuel Councilmembers absent: Mayor Evelyn Lord Also present: Stephen Richardson. Planning Manager; T%Tone Cooper. First Assistant City Attorney; Jill Cole, Recording Secretary: Adina Abshire. Planner: Tom Warner, Public Works Director; Kyle Hayes, City 'Manager APPROVAL OF THE NH-,NLr;TES Commissioner LaBiche made a motion to approve the minutes of the Regular 'Meeting and Joint Public Hearings held May 17, 2004. Commissioner Makin seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 9:0. Planning Commission June 21, 2004 REGULARMEETING Replat-Lot 8. Gladys Business Park, Section Two and Preliminary Plat - Gladys Business ParkSectionFive: Request for the replat of Lot 8, Gladys Business Park, Section Two into Lot 8 and a part of Lot 9, Gladys Business Park, Section Five (A public hearing is required for this case) and a request for the preliminary plat of Gladys Business Park, Section Five and Lots 8 through 23. Location: Gladys Avenue at Cornerstone Court Applicant: Fittz and Shipman. Inc. Mr. Richardson stated that Nichols Development wants to take Lot 8 of Section 2 and divide it into Lot 8 and part of Lot 9 of Section 5, Section 5 is an 8.79 acre, 23 lot commercial subdivision located west of Major Drive and north of Gladys. These items were sent to all interested parties. No negative responses were received. Mr. Richardson recommended approval subject to installing four street lights at the following locations: 1. Between Lots 8 and 9 2. Between Lots 10 and 11 3. Between Lots 12 an�4 13 4. Between Lots 14 and 15. For the replat, two notices were sent propem, o%vners within 200 feet. No notices in favor or in opposition were received. A public hearing is required for the 7eplat. Chairman Leistcr asked for the applicant's comments. John Holm of Fittz and Shipman, in,:.. the applicant, addressed the Commission. Chairman Leistcr opened the public hearing for the replat. No comments were made and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hurley made a motion to approve the Replat-Lot 8, Gladys Business Park, Section Two into Lot 8 and a part of Lot 9. Gladys Business Park, Section Five and the Preliminary Plat - Gladys Business Park, Section Five, Lots 8 through 23 subject to installing four street lights at the following locations: Between Lots 8 and 9 Between Lots 10 and 11 Planning Commission June 21, 2004 Between Lots 12 and 13 Between Lots 14 and 15. Commissioner Kyles seconded the motion. 'Motion to approve carried 9:0. 2) File665-OB: Request to abandon a 600' undeveloped portion of Birmingham Street. Location: Between Taylor Street and Fillmore Street Applicant: Roy A. Gorman The applicant, Roy Gorman, is an adjoining property owner and would like to abandon an undeveloped portion of Birmingham so that he can fence part of it. Mr. Gorman states that there is a problem with undesirables using this right-of-way. This item was sent to all interested parties. No negative responses were received. Mr. Richardson recommended approval subject to maintaining the right-of-way as a drainage/utility casement. Chairman Leister asked for the applicant's comments. Roy Gorman, the applicant, addressed the Commission. Commissioner L aBiche m ade a m otion t o a pprove t he a bandonment o f a 6 00' undeveloped portion of Birmingham Street bet-ween Taylor Street and Fillmore Street as requested in File 665-OB, subject to maintaining the right-of-xvay as a drainage/utility easement. Commissioner Hurley seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 9:0. File 666-OB: Request to abandon a utility.• easement. Location: 1945 Westchase Drive Applicant: Westchase Development Company The subject request is to abandon a 30' x 50'drainage easement along the rear of 1945 Westchase. There is a DD#6 drainage ditch along the east side of Westchase Addition. The south end of the easement ends on the subject property. The request was sent to all interested parties. No negative responses were received. DD#6 has agreed to the abandonment. Mr. Richardson recommended approval. Chairman Leister asked for the applicant's comments. Sam Parigi, the applicant, was present. K Planning Commission June 21. 2004 Commissioner Kyles made a motion to approve the request to abandon a 30' x 50' drainage easement along the rear of 1945 Westchase Drive as requested in File 666- OB. Commissioner LaBiche seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 9:0. 4) Vacation - T. W. Lane Addition: Request to consider the vacation of the T. W. Lane Addition. Location: North of Walden Road and east of Dishman Elementary School Applicant: Segue Properties, Ltd. Segue Properties, Ltd., the applicant, has purchased a 120 acre tract that contains the T. W. Lane Addition. It is their intent to develop the property into a single family subdivision. No improvements were ever m2de. In 1984. a deed of gift was granted to the Cit% for right-of-way for Dowlen Road. This right-of4vay runs along the east side of the property. This right-of-way would not be affected by the vacation. Mr. Richardson recommended approval. The applicant was not present. Commissioner Hurley made a motion to approve the request to vacate the T. W. Lane Addition, located north of Walden Road and cast of Dishman Elementary School as requested. Commissioner Jones seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 9:0. JOINT PUBLIC HEARINGS Mayor Pro-Tem Ames called the Join, Public Hearings of June 11, 2004 to order and explained the purpose of the joint hearing process and then turned the meeting over to Chairman Leister. She explained the policies and procedures for the hearing process. Chairman Leister announced that File 1724-Z.-P, item number 7 on the agenda, was withdrawn by the applicant. 1) File 1718-P: Request fora specific use permit to allow a rooming house in an R24I-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling -Highest Density) District. Location: 2135 Victoria Applicant: Betty Tuckcr and Tom Clark 'e subject property is the former site of the Women and Children's Shelter. On May 5, the Planning Division received a complaint about a possible halfway house being run out of the subject property. Upon inspection, it was determined 4 Planning Commission June 21, 2004 that the property was being used as a boarding house. A boarding house requires a specific use permit in an RM-H District. The applicant states that the house has four bedrooms and two baths upstairs and five bedrooms and two baths downstairs. The garage apartment at the rear has 3 bedrooms and one bath. Mr. Richardson recommended approval based upon the fact that the house has been modified to such an extent that it is doubtful that the property could be used for anything else without major modification. Seventeen notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the subject property. No responses in favor and tw-o response in opposition were returned. Slides of the subject propertyovere shown. Chairman Leister opened the public hearing and asked for the applicant's comments. Tom Clark and Betty Tucker. the applicants, addressed the Commission and answered questions regarding the boarders, parking, the manager and facilitator of the house. Chairman Letster asked for comments in favor or in opposition. Richard Callais spoke in opposition to the request. Mr. Callais owns the property at 2120 Victoria. Rebuttal by Betty Tucker and Tom Clark. The public hearing was closed. Discussion between the Commission, Council and staff followed. Commissioner Makin made a motion to approve a specific use permit to allow a rooming house in an RM-H District at 2135 Victoria as requested in File 1718-P. Commissioner Hurley seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 7:2 (Bodwin, LaBiche). 2) File 1719-P: Request for an amended specific use permit to allow a gymnastics/chcerleading instruction and a family entertainment center in an RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling -Highest Density) District. Location: 7575 and 7595 Highway 105 Applicant: Marion Quibodeaux Planning Commission June 21. 2004 The applicant, Marlon Quibodeaux, would like to do a phased conversion of his current facility into a family entertainment center that would include a number of family oriented activities. Mr. Richardson recommended approval of the request. Twenty notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet. No responses in favor or in opposition were received. Slides of the subject property were shown. Chairman Leister opened the public hearing and asked for the applicant's comments. Marlon Quibodeaux, the applicant, addressed the Commission. Chairman Leister asked for comments in favor or in opposition. No comments were made. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Bodwin made a motion to approve an amended specific use permit to allow a gymnastics,,cheerleading instruction and a family enteriamment center in an RM-H District at 7575 and 7595 Highway 105 as requested in File 1719-P. Commissioner Jones seconded the motion. Commissioner Laffiche amended the motion to include a stipulation that the existing detached sign be replaced with a conforming sign. The amended motion to approve carried 9:0. 3) File 1720-P: Request for a specific use permit to allow a re -upholstery and furniture repair shop in an RCR (Residential Conservation and Revitalization) District. Location: 1801 North Street Applicant: Gonzalo Estrada The applicant, Gonzalo Estrada, is requesting a specific use permit for an existing commercial building. There is an existing Gtall wood screening fence along the west side of the property and a 4'tall wood screening fence alone the north side of the property. Mr. Estrada is requesting a modification to the landscaping/screening requirements for the west and north sides of the property. Mr. Richardson recommended approval of the request with a modification to the landscaping/serccning requirements along the north and west sides of the property. Seventeen notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet. No responses in favor or in opposition were received. Planning Commission June 21. 2004 Slides of the subject property were shown. Chairman Leister opened the public hearing and asked for the applicant's comments. The applicant %vas not present. Chairman Leister asked for comments in favor or in opposition. No comments were made. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner LaBiche made a motion to approve a specific use permit to allow a re -upholstery and furniture repair shop in an RCR District at 1801 North Street as requested in File 1720-P with a modification to the landscaping/screening requirements along the north and west sides of the property. - Commissioner Makin seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 9:0. 4) File 1721-P: Request for a specific use permit to allow a two-family residence in an RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling) District. Location: 4460 Diamond Street Applicant: Tommy Singleton The applicant, Tommy Singleton, wishes to build an attached addition to his mother's house. Mr. Singleton states that since the death of his father, it has been his goal to expand the house to provide living quarters for his wife and he so that they can take care of his mother. The two story addition will be attached at the rear of the existing house and will have a common wall but a separate entrance. Mr. Richard recommended approval of the request subject to neither unit being used as rental property. Thirty-two notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet. Four responses in favor and four in opposition were returned. Chairman Leister opened the public hearing and asked for the applicant's comments. Tommy and Karen Singleton, the applicants, addressed the Commission. Chairman Leister asked for comments in favor or in opposition. Paul Jean, 4485 Opal Street, addressed the Commission and asked for clarification of the use of the house. The public hearing was closed. tj Planning Commission June 2 1. N04 Commissioner Jones made a motion to approve a specific use permit to allow a two- family residence in an RS District at 4460 Diamond Street as requested in File 1721 -P subject to neither unit being used as rental property. Commissioner Hurley seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 9:0. 5) File 1722-P: Request Fora specific use permit to allow an indoor shooting range and retail store in a GC-MD-2 (General Conunerc ial -Multiple Family Dwelling-2) District. Location: Approximately 1,000 feet south of the southeast comer of Major and the Folsom Extension Applicant: RCSS Properties, Ltd. Mr. Richardson stated that in February. 2004,Clty Council approved an amendment to the City Code of Ordinances to allow for indoor shooting ranges. RCSS Properties, Ltd., the applicant, is buying a 2 acre tract of land to build an 8,765 sq. ft. building that will house the shooting range. The front of the building will be used for retail, a classroom. office, vault and in-house gunsmith. The rear of the building will house the shooting range. The applicant states that the building will be constructed to minimize noise, fumes and the possibility of any bullets escaping. RCSS is requesting a modification to the landscaping screening requirements along the south property line. They show a 6'wide landscape strip. The property is zoned A-R. The property is owned by Mid -County Teachers Credit Union. Mr. Richardson recommended approval subject to providing an 8' tall wood screening fence and minimum 10' landscape strip along the east property line and a 6' wide landscape strip along the parking lot frontage. He also recommended approval of a modification of the landscaping'screening requirements alone the south property line. 4 notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet. One response in favor and one in opposition were returned. Slides of the subject property were shown. Chairman Leister opened the public hearing and asked for the applicant's comments. Joe Rasnick, 1005 Green Meadow, the applicant, addressed the Commr ission. Dennis Dickerson of Dura-Steel, 6440 Washington Boulevard, addressed the Commission. Mr. Dickerson is the contractor for the project. Chairman Leister asked for comments in favor or in opposition. Planning Commission June 21, 2004 Sam Parigi, 445 N. 14' Street; addressed the Commission on behalf of the owners of the 207 acres surrounding the subject property. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hurley made a motion to approve a specific use permit to allow an indoor shooting range and retail store in a GC-MD-2 District located approximately 1,000 feet south of the southeast comer of Major and the Folsom Extension as requested in File 1722-P subject to: 1. Providing an 8' tall wood screening fence and a minimum 10' landscape strip along the cast prope* rty line, 2. Providing a 6xvide landscape strip along the parking lot frontage; and with a modification to the landscapi ng,,screen ing requirements along the south property line. Commissioner Kyles seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 9:0. 6) File 1723-P: Request for a specific use permit to allow guest quarters in an RS (Residential Single Family D%velling) District. Location: 6012 V Street Applicant: David K. Faul The property owners. DaNid and Bonnie Faul. want to construct a new double car garage with a second story guest quarters on the rear of the property. A one car garage has been demolished to accommodate the new construction. Since the building is two stories, a 7 !,'2' setback is required on the north property line. The site plan shows 5 1/2', Mr. Richardson recommended approval subject to the guest quarters not being C� rented and moving the structure 1 1/2' to the south or getting a variance from the Board of Adjustment. Twenty-three notices were mailed to property owners within 200'. One response in favor and none in opposition were returned. Slides of the subject property were shown. Chairman Leister opened the public hearing and asked for the applicant's comments. David Faul, the applicant, addressed the Commission. He said that they would move the structure 1 1/2' to the south and would like to change the slab measurements from 28'x 28'to 28'x 30'. Planning Commission June 21. 2004 Chairman Leister asked for comments in favor or in opposition. No comments were made. The pubic hearing was closed. Commissioner LaBiche made a motion to approve a specific use permit to allow guest quarters in an RS District at 601 2 1 " Street as requested in File 1723-P, subject to: 1. No rental of the guest quarters; 2. Moving the structure 1.5' to the south or get a variance to the side setback from the Board of Adjustment. 3. A.modification of the structure size from 28'x 28'to 28'x 30'. Commissioner Bodwin seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried 9.0 7) File 1724-7,JP: Request for a zone change from RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling) to RM-M (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling -Medium Density) District and a specific use permit to allow a 12 child day care. Location: 4345 Cadillac Lane Applicant: Abundant Blessings Child Care This case was withdrawn by the applicant, 8) File 668-OB: Request for amendments to Section 30-23.1, Major/Dowlen/Gladys/Highway 105 Sign Overlay District Regulations. Applicant: City of Beaumont Planning Division * Since the adoption of the Majov'Dowlen Sign Overlay District. a number of issues have arisen that needed addressing. Staff met with the Sign Ordinance Review Committee to discuss tweaking the ordinance to address those issues. The majority of the changes are minor, such as adding definitions and bus benches which will be handled through the bench agreement instead of the ordinance. The existing ordinance prohibits bus benches, however, there have been some issues that have arisen recently due to the changes in bus routes in the overlay district that caused some concern with Mi. Alter, who owns a business that installs the bus benches. They have an agreement with the City and Tom Warner visited with Mr. Alter and will continue to allow Mr. Alter to address the changes in the bus routes that will be handled in the bench agreement versus having to amend the ordinance. There are two things that have significant impact 1) Single Tenant and Multi -tenant signs: The original ordinance did not take into consideration the size of a development. We have addressed that by adding wording to allow A Planning Commission June 21. 2004 establishments with 80.000 sq. ft. or greater or with 600'of frontage an additional sign per street frontage. 2) Banners: The original ordinance regulated both banner signs attached to the building and detached. The recommended changes will allow attached banners without permits and with no size or time limitations. Detached banners will be permitted for longer periods of time. These longer time periods will allow establishments to advertise promotionals more efficiently. The staff recommendation is fors times per calendar year for thirty consecutive days at one time with one renewal period for another 30 consecutive days. The sign committee recommendation is for 6 times per calendar year. The sign committee also recommends that detached banners not exceeding 50 sq. ft. and 6' tall be allowed. Staff recommends that the ordinance remain at I I sq. ft. and Ytall. A SSO permit fee will be charged. Mr. Richardson recommended approval of the following changes. Definitions (30-23 Sec. I(b)): Definitions for attention getting devices, frontage, advertising sign, banner sign. owner identification sign and pennant sign were added for clarification purposes.(Pages I - 3) 2. Prohibited Signs (30-23 Sec. 1 (02): The words "In addition to the prohibited signs listed in 3 )0-28(f)" were added to cross-reference the overlay regulations Nvith the overall city regulations.(Page 6) 3. Prohibited Signs (30-23 Sec. I(f)2): The words "off premise" were deleted to make the section consistent with the rest of the Zoning Ordinance.(Page 6) 4. Prohibited Signs (30-23 Sec. I (f)2: The visible after -hour parking of vehicles with owner identification signs on them would be allowed. Therefore, they are being struck from the prohibited sign section.(Page 7) Single Tenant Signs (30-23 Sec. 1(05): To allow business establishments the ability to adequately identify themselves to the traveling public, wording was added to allow establishments with 1 80,000 sq. ft. or greater or with 600'of frontage an additional sign per street frontage.(Page 9) Planning Commission tune 21, 2004 6. Multi -tenant Signs (30-23 Sec. I(f)5): To allow business establishments the ability to adequately identify themselves to the traveling public, wording was added to allow establishments with 80,000 sq. ft. or greater or with 600'of frontage an additional sign per street frontage.(Page 10) 7. Exemptions (30-23 Sec. I (g)): The words "These vehicles shall not be parked after hours so as to be seen from the street." have been struck. This would allow a vehicle with the businesses name printed on it to be visibly parked after hours.(Page t2) 8. Exemptions (30-23 Sec. I(-)): The words -or runoff election, if applicable" have been added to allow runoff election signs to remain until 10 days after the final election.(Pagc 13) 9. Exemptions (30-23 Sec. I (g)): Banner signs attached to a building Nvill be permitted without permits and with no size or time limitations. Currently, attached banners are limited as to size and display time. Detached banner signs Nvould be permitted for longer time periods. These longer periods of time would allow an establishment to advertise promotionals more efficiently. The staff recommendation is for five (5) times per calendar year for thirty (30) consecutive days at a time with one renewal period allowed. The sign committee recommendation is for six (6) times per calendar year. The sign committee also recommends that a detached banner not exceeding fifty (50) sq. ft. in area and not exceeding six (6) feet tall be allowed. The staff recommends that the ordinance remain as is. The current ordinance allows a detached banner not exceeding tv.-enry-one (2 1) sq. ft. in area and not exceeding five (5) feet tall. For each permit, a fifty (50) dollar fee will be charged. No banner sign shall be placed on city right-of-way. Banner signs shall be supported by non -permanent supports that are not permanently set in the ground. The supports shall be removed with the sign at the expiration of each allowed time period.(Page 14) 10. Exemptions (30-23 Sec. I (g)): Wording was added to allow attached advertising signs that are located on non-profit recreational facilities.(Page 13) Discussion followed between staff and the Commission. Chairman Leister opened the public hearing and asked for comments. 12 Planning Commission June 21. -VN Sam Parigi spoke in favor of allowing larger banner signs. Chairman Leister closed the public hearing. Commissioner LaBiche made a motion to approve the amendments to Section 30- 23.1, Mai or/Dowlen/Gladys/H ighway 105 Sign Overlay District Regulations as requested in File 668-OB, Commissioner Moor seconded the motion. Vice -Chairman Dykeman amended the motion to rephrase the section on banners to read "-30 consecutive days with an additional consecutive 30 day period allowed one time." The amended motion to approve carried 9:0. OTHER BUSINESS THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING WAS ADJOULNED AT 5:45 P. M. 13