HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-5-98 PC MinutesJOINT PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION AND
CITY COUNCIL
January 5, 1998
City Council Chambers
A Joint Public Hearing of the Planning Commission and City Council was held on January
5, 1998 with the following members present:
Commission members present: Chairman Laurie Leister
Vice -Chairman Marva Provo
Commissioner Sally Bundy
Commissioner Bessie Chisum
Commissioner Greg Dykeman
Commissioner Dale Hallmark
Commissioner Dohn LaBiche
Commissioner Bill Lucas
Commissioner Cleveland Nisby
Councilmembers present: Mayor David W. Moore
Mayor Pro-Tem Becky Ames
Councilmember-at-Large Andrew Cokinos
Councilmember Lulu Smith
Councilmember Guy Goodson
Councilmember John Davis
Councilmembers absent: Councilmember Bobbie Patterson
Also present: Stephen Richardson, Planning Director; Murray Duren, Senior Planner;
Tyrone Cooper, First Assistant City Attorney; and Jill Cole, Recording
Secretary
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Commissioner Bundy made a motion to approve the minutes of the December 15, 1997 Joint
Public Hearings. Motion was seconded by Commissioner LaBiche. Motion to approve
carried 7:0.
Planning Commission
January 5, 1998
JOINT PUBLIC HEARINGS
Mayor Moore called the Joint Public Hearing of January 5, 1998 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.
1) File 571-OB: Changes to the following sections of the Beaumont Zoning Ordinance:
1. Article II, Section 30-5 (a), Zoning District Establishment, to add GC-MD-2,
General Commercial Multiple -Family Dwelling District and GC-MD-3,
General Commercial Multiple -Family Dwelling District;
2. Article II, Section 30-5 (a), Zoning District Establishment, Article II, Section
30-14 and Article II, Section 30.24 (b), District Regulations, to delete CSC,
Community Shopping Center, District Regulations;
3. Article I1, Section 30-15.1 and Article II, Section 30-24 (b), District
Regulations, to add GC-MD-2, General Commercial -Multiple Family
Dwelling-2, District Regulations;
4. Article II, Section 30-15.2 and Article II, Section 30-24 (b), District
Regulations, to add GC-MD-3, General Commercial Multiple Family
Dwelling-3, District Regulations;
5. Article II, Section 30-24 (b), Permitted Use Table, to add or delete uses now
permitted by right or with a specific use permit in certain zoning categories;
6. Article II, Section 30-25 (b), (c) 3, (c)16, District Area and Height
Regulations, to add area and height regulations for GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3;
7. Article III, Section 30-26 (g), Specific Use Permits - Time Limits, to amend
when a use shall be allowed to commence and to allow the change of one
specific use permit to another without obtaining another specific use permit
under certain conditions in all districts except RCR;
8. Article III, Section 30-28 (c) 3, Owner Identification Signs in Commercial and
Industrial Districts, to add GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3;
9. Article III, Section 30-29 (a), Planned Unit Development Standards and
Requirements - General Plan, to remove or amend the required three-quarter
(3/4) City Council vote in order to approve a PUD site plan that was
disapproved by the Planning Commission;
10. Article III, Section 30-30 (d) 3, Non -Conforming Uses - Exemption, to delete
this section which allows one specific use permit to be changed to another
without obtaining another specific use permit in the RCR District;
11. Article III, Section 30-31(b) 1, Perimeter Landscaping and Screening, to delete
the exemption of perimeter landscaping and screening when districts are
separated by railroad right-of-way, drainage ditch or canal with a minimum
easement of thirty (30) feet;
12. Article III, Section 30-31 (d) 1, Landscaping Bonus Provisions, to add GC-
MD-2 and GC-MD-3 Districts;
2
Planning Commission
January 5. 1998
13. Article III, Section 30-33 (b) 2d, Special Conditions, to delete this section
concerning requiring a specific use permit in a GC -MD District;
14. Article III, Section 30-33 (b) 17, Special Conditions, to add GC-MD-2 and
GC-MD-3;
15. Article III, Section 30-33 (b) 23, Special Conditions, to add that SIC Group
numbers 15, 16 and 17 are permitted by right if there is no fabrication or
outside storage or repair.
16. Article III, Section 30-33 (b) 19, Special Conditions, to add GC-MD-2 and
GC-MD-3;
17. Article IV, Section 3040 (f), Changes, Amendments and Specific Use Permits
- Time for Action - to delete the automatic approval process of a specific use
permit if City Council takes no action within 60 days;
Mr. Richardson said that because there are instances when the Planning Commission
and City Council and possibly even surrounding neighborhoods are uncomfortable
with a proposed land use, staff proposed some changes to the Zoning Ordinance that
hopefully would address that problem. Due to some opposition at that time to the
proposed changes, City Council appointed a 15 member committee - the Zoning
Development Review Committee - to work with staff in developing some
recommendations. After a number of meetings over several months and many hours
of discussion, the Committee came up with some recommendations. The Committee
wanted to provide some options for all parties involved when a property is proposed
to be developed. The recommended solution was to create two new commercial
districts that would allow flexibility for both the property owner and the Planning
Commission and Council. The GC -MD district that is now in the Zoning Ordinance
will be left intact. However, if the property owner is advised that they might meet
some opposition from the neighbors or the Planning Commission or City Council in
a zone change request, they would have the option to go with one of the other two
GC -MD districts or if so desired, they could even request NC (Neighborhood
Commercial), OP (Office Park) or NSC (Neighborhood Shopping Center) Districts.
The information is divided into three parts: Part I shows the proposed changes to the
text of the Zoning Ordinance; Part 11 shows the proposed changes to the Permitted
Use Table and Part III is an explanation of those proposed changes to the Permitted
Use Table.
Mr. Richardson reviewed the proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance text as
written in Part I.
PART I
1) Article 11, Section 30-5 (a): Zoning District Establishment
RECOMMENDATION: Add GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3 to the list
of zoning districts. Delete CSC from the
list of zoning districts.
3
Planning Commission
January S, 1998
2) Article II, Section 30-14: District Regulations
RECOMMENDATION: Delete CSC from the definitions of zoning
districts.
3) Article II, Section 30-15.1: District Regulations
RECOMMENDATION: Add GC-MD-2 to the definitions of zoning
districts.
4) Article 1I, Section 30-15.2: District Regulations
RECOMMENDATION: Add GC-MD-3 to the definitions of zoning
districts.
5) Article II, Section 30-24 (b): Permitted Use Table
RECOMMENDATION: Delete CSC and all permitted uses in this
district from the Permitted Use Table (See
Part 2).
6) Article II, Section 30-24 (b): Permitted Use Table
RECOMMENDATION: Add GC-MD-2 and all permitted uses in
this district to the Permitted Use Table
(See Part 2).
7) Article II, Section 30-24 (b): Permitted Use Table
RECOMMENDATION: Add GC-MD-3 and all permitted uses in
this district to the Permitted Use Table
(See Part 2).
S) Article II, Section 30-24 (b): Permitted Use Table
RECOMMENDATION: Added or deleted uses now permitted by
right or with a specific use permit in
certain zoning districts (See Part 2).
9) Article II, Section 30-25 (b): District Area and Height Regulations
RECOMMENDATION: if GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3 are added to
the Zoning Ordinance, then they also need
4
Planning Commission
January 5, 1998
to be added to the area and height
regulations. NOTE: Currently, in GC -
MD and the proposed GC-MD-2, there
would be no height limitation. Under GC-
MD-3, there would be a 35' height
limitation.
10) Section 30-26 (g): Time Limit
Mr. Richardson said that the way the ordinance is written now, the applicant
has up to two years to substantially meet all the conditions for a specific use
permit. There have been instances where an applicant has received a
specific use permit and a certificate of occupancy to operate a business and
up to two years there are still some conditions that he maybe has not met.
The recommendation is that the ordinance be amended to read that prior to
commencement of the use and the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, all
conditions of the specific use permit must be met.
The second part of the section reads that once a specific use permit is either
vacated or is closed for a period of two years or is changed to a different
use, the specific use permit becomes null and void. The Zoning
Development Committee had many discussions on this and members in the
financial community expressed concern that if money is lent for businesses
requiring specific use permits what would happen if those uses are stopped
and another use is put in the building. The way the ordinance reads now is
that they would have to go back before Council and get another specific use
permit. The Committee recommended if the use is closed or vacated for a
period of two or more years then it has to go back through the process. In
addition, if a use changes to another and is not substantially different, then
they would not have to go back through the process.
11) Article III, Section 30-28 (c) 3: Owner Identification Signs in Commercial
and Industrial Districts
RECOMMENDATION: If GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3 are added to
the zoning districts, they need to be added
to this sign section.
12) Section 30-29 (a): General Plan
RECOMMENDATION: Currently in this section for a Planned
Unit Development, it now states that
Council cannot approve a general plan that
has not been recommended by the
5
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
Planning Commission
January 5, 1998
Planning Commission except by a
favorable vote of 3/4 of all members of
Council. The Committee recommended
that the 3/4 favorable vote be deleted.
Section 30-30 (d) 3: RCR
Mr. Richardson said that currently the ordinance states that in an RCR
district, a use that is permitted with a specific use permit can change to
another use with a specific use permit without having to go through the
process. The recommendation is that this section be deleted, so if you are
in a RCR district, you would have to go back through the process each time
if you were changing uses.
Section 30-31 (b) 1: Perimeter Landscaping and Screening
RECOMMENDATION: (b) 1. Perimeter Landscaping and
Screening:
It was recommended that the part stating
that "The provisions of this paragraph
stated within this section shall not apply
where districts are separated by a railroad
right -of --way, drainage ditch or canal with
a minimum easement of 30 feet.
Article III, Section 30-31 (d) 1: Landscaping Bonus Provisions
RECOMMENDATION: If GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3 are added to
the zoning districts, they also need to be
added to the Landscaping Bonus
Provisions.
Article III, Section 30-33 (b) 2d: Special Conditions
RECOMMENDATION: Delete adult entertainment uses permitted
with a specific use permit in GC -MD,
CBD and PUD districts.
Article III, Section 30-33 (b) 17: Special Conditions
RECOMMENDATION: If GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3 are added to
the Zoning Ordinance, they also needed to
be added to this section dealing with
veterinary services and clinics.
Z
18)
19)
20)
Planning Commission
January 5, 1998
Section 30-33 (b) 19e: Special Conditions
RECOMMENDATION: If GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3 are added to
the Zoning Ordinance, GC-MD-2 only
would need to be inserted into this section
dealing with residential care facilities. It
was recommended that residential care
facilities not be allowed in GC-MD-3
districts.
Section 30-33 (b) 23: Special Conditions
RECOMMENDATION: Add special condition 23 dealing with the
SIC Groupsl5-17 which relate to
contracting and building construction type
businesses. The Committee wanted to
create a new condition that would permit
them by right when there is no outside
fabrication or repair.
Section 30-40 (f): Time for Action
RECOMMENDATION: Currently the ordinance states that if no
action is taken by City Council within 60
days of a public hearing on a specific use
permit then it is automatically approved.
For zone changes, the ordinance now
states that if no action is taken by Council
within 60 days of the public hearing it is
automatically denied.
OA
It is recommended that both zone changes
and specific use permits be made the same
- where the ordinance would state that if
be no action is taken by Council within 60
days of the public hearings on either
specific use permits or zone changes, they
would be denied.
Planning Commission
January 5, 1998
PART II
Mr. Richardson reviewed the changes made to the SIC table:
SIC Groups 15 - 17 (page 2) - Building construction- General contractors: Added
Special Condition 23 to read that if there was no outside activity or fabrication, then
that use would be permitted by right.
SIC Group 4724 (page 7) - Travel agencies: Currently they fall under the
Transportation Services group (#47); changed to separate them into a separate
category.
SIC Group 5942 (page 10) - Book Stores (Adult): Amended to include gifts and
novelties.
SIC Group 702 (page 11) - Rooming and Boarding Houses: Change to require a
specific use permit under RM-M, RM-H and RCR districts.
SIC Group 8361 (page 19) - Residential care facilities: Added to require a specific
use permit in RM-H, RCR, GC-MD-2 and PUD Districts for halfway homes for
delinquents and offenders.
Mr. Richardson introduced Rob Clark, Chairman of the Zoning Development
Committee.
Rob Clark addressed the Planning Commission and City Council.
Chairman Leister opened the public hearing and asked for comments in favor or in
opposition.
Mr. Sam Parigi, Zoning Development Committee member, clarified that the 60 day
time limit can be extended.
Mr. C. L. Sherman, 3010 Washington Blvd., asked where in the City are the new
GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3 areas. Mr. Richardson replied that it is not the intent of
the City to rezone areas to GC-MD-2 and GC-MD-3, but rather have it available for
when a applicant so desires.
Discussion between Council, Planning Commission and staff regarding the term
"substantially different".
Mr. Don DeCordova, Zoning Development Committee member, addressed the
Planning Commission. He said that the Committee felt comfortable with letting the
Planning Director decide whether or not a use was close enough in character and
93
Planning Commission
January 5, 1998
scope to operate under a previously granted specific use permit to use the word
"substantial" in connection with different. The Planning Director is given authority
in the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance to approve minor plats and
minor variances in specific use permits. Mr. DeCordova said that the development
community feels comfortable that they can talk to Mr. Richardson if they have a
slightly different use for a property than the one for which the permit was granted.
Mr. Sam Parigi said that he agreed with Mr. DeCordova and he thinks that the word
substantial should be approved.
Commissioner Lucas agreed with the Committee on the phrase "substantially
different" and added that an applicant always has the right to appeal.
Mr. Lynn DeMary addressed the Commission.
Further discussion between the Commission followed.
The Planning Commission voiced their trust in the Planning Director and his
judgement.
Councilman Davis said that even though he feels comfortable with Mr. Richardson's
judgement and discretion, he feels that the position has a lot of authority and raised
the question of possibly a new Planning Director coming in and not having the same
thoughts and judgement.
Mayor Moore added that an appeal process is available and our job is to encourage
and promote business.
Chairman Leister closed the public hearing
Commissioner Bundy made a motion to approve the recommendations to the Zoning
Ordinance as requested in File 571-OB. Commissioner LaBiche seconded the
motion.
Discussion between staff and the Commission clarifying some of the proposed
recommendations.
Motion to approve carried 9:0.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Richardson introduced a map exhibit showing four specific areas in the ET.I that
were under consideration for possible annexation. Staff has been working on
0
Planning Commission
Jamary 5, 1998
defining the areas and writing legal descriptions. One of the areas being considered,
at the request of the property owner, is at the southeast corner outside the city and
includes a tract which contains the "Baby Dolls" adult entertainment club. The entire
area from Highway 69 to West Port Arthur Road is being looked at. Also, the DDN6
property and spoil area between Dishman and Phelan along Keith Road, city owned
tracts south of the landfill to the middle of the Neches River. Discussion followed.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED.
10