Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - Planning and Zoning Commission - 2007 - 02/06 - RegularPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting February 6, 2007 CITY OF ALLEN ATTENDANCE: Commissioners Present: Robert Wendland James Rushing Jeff Cocking Steve Shaffer Alan Grimes Douglas Dreggors Marcelle Jones Commissioners Absent: City Staff Present: David Hoover, Director of Planning & Development Lee Battle, Assistant Director of Planning & Development Mari Bailey, Senior Planner Kellie Wilson, Planning Technician Chris Flanagan, City Engineer Amber Slayton, Attorney Regular Agenda Call to Order and Announce a Quorum is Present: With a quorum of the Commissioners present, Chair Wendland called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers at Allen City Hall, 305 Century Parkway Consent Agenda Agenda Item 1: Approve Minutes of January 16, 2007, Regular Meeting. Agenda Item 2: Final Plat — Consider a Final Plat for Mary Evans Elementary School, being 13.492+ acres located at the southwest comer of Bridgewater Drive and Walnut Springs Drive. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Rushing and a second by Commissioner Grimes, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED, to approve t" the Consent Agenda. The motion carried. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 2 FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Regular Agenda Agenda Item 3: General Development Plan — Consider a General Development Plan for Watters Montessori Academy, being 1.80+ acres located at the northeast comer of Watters Road and Bossy Boots Drive. Mr. Hoover presented the request. He stated that staff recommends approval. The Commissioners had no questions, and felt that the request met all requirements provided in the Allen Land Development Code, Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Grimes and a second by Commissioner Rushing, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED, to approve Agenda Item 3. The motion carried. Agenda Item 4: Public Hearing - Consider an amendment to the Allen Land Development Code by amending the Allen Land Development Code Article IV, Section 4.08, District Purpose and Supplemental Use Regulations; Section 4.15, Height and Area Regulations; Article VI, Section 6.03, Geographic Locations; Article VII, Section 7.03 Non -Residential Design Standards; Section 7.04 Off -Street Parking and Loading; Section 7.05 Landscaping Requirements; Section 7.06, Tree Preservation Requirements; Section 7.07 Fences and Walls; Section 7.09 Sign Regulations; Article VIII, Section 8.03, Plat Regulations; Section 8.05 Subdivision Standards; Section 8.10, Extensions of Water & Wastewater Mains; Section 8.11, Street Lights; Section 8.13, Drainage Requirements; Appendix A, Definitions; Appendix C, Trees and Plants; Appendix F, Standard Construction Details - Paving; Appendix G, Standard Construction Details -Drainage, Appendix H, Standard Construction Details -Water; Appendix 1, Trail Design Standards; and adding Appendix M, Special Provisions to the North Central Texas Standard Specifications. Mr. Hoover reviewed the proposed changes with the Commission. The Commissioners discussed the changes and had some concerns and recommended some modifications to the proposal. • Mechanical Equipment on the ground will be required to be screened — presented example photos of how equipment on ground exists without screening — Commissioner Shaffer asked if this would be a requirement for residential development as well — Mr Hoover stated no it would not • Utilities must be located underground or escrow funds Commissioner Jones asked how Staff determines the escrow amount — Mr Hoover responded that the utility company does the work, therefore they determine the cost �"' • Staff recommends removing Retail from having to provide a loading space. a Commissioner Cocking asked J UPS was considered a delivery that would require a PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE loading space "dock. " Mr Hoover stated it would not. Commissioners discussed the use of the word "similarly" and its use being too broad. Mr. Hoover explained that 9 currently the Code requires all retail over 10,000 sq. ft. to provide a loading dock. It does not take into consideration that in some retail areas there are several single tenants in a building that meets this 10,000 sq. ft requirement. Commissioner Rushing asked what would happen if the business use changed — Mr. Hoover responded that it would most likely still be too small to be any other type of business requiring a loading dock but that no Certificate of Occupancy would be granted for a use that needed a dock. • 7.05.2 — This regulates the wheel stops used in landscaping in multi -family and non- residential — if they aren't used, a 2 -ft. paved area would be added adjacent to the curb. Commissioner Cocking asked if the Citv could provide an opportunity to do something decorative. Commissioner Grimes commented that the City has been trying tofind ways to cut back on paving — why would we allow them to add pavement to prevent the wheel stop? He stated he didn't want to give the developer the option to increase pavement to save money. Mr Hoover stated that this option is only available if the spaces were 18' instead of 20', so the paving would already be reduced • Parking lot diamonds will no longer be allowed — Mr. Hoover explained how these areas do not promote plant growth. Commissioner Grimes stated that with these fully planted islands, there may be a problem in the future when customers are trying to exit their vehicle With the increase of pedestrian traffic in these areas, plants will be replaced with gravel Mr. Hoover explained that the fully planted islands are currently required at the ends of parking rows and that it is not an apparent problem at this time. He also El stated that the City of Allen requires wider parking spaces than some of the other surrounding Cities. • Signs not requiring a permit — Commissioner Jones and Cocking stated they would like to see a size limit for fags. Commissioner Cocking stated that under heavy wind conditions, the sound of the fag blowing can disturb neighboring residential • Section 7.09.9.1 Freestanding Signs — Mr. Hoover asked the Commission to consider allowing businesses with two street frontages to have two (2) monument signs. Commissioner Grimes asked if the two (2) signs would be the some size Mr. Hoover stated the intent was to allow two (2) signs of the same square footage. This change would allow for a single business (such as the new Kroger store at Exchange and Greenville) to have two (2) signs if it had frontage on two separate streets. Commissioner Grimes stated he could not support the request. The Sign Ordinance was adopted to reduce the number of signs The design of the development was the developer's choice — they should not be allowed two (2) signs. Commissioner Jones asked for additional examples. Mr. Battle stated that on Greenville Were is a church that has two (2) entrances — one from Jupiter and one from Greenville. Without the second monument sign, it is difficult for someone to find the church from the Jupiter entrance. Mr. Battle stated that the same scenario is true for the Holiday Inn Express — they also have two entrances — only one (1) sign has been allowed. Chairman Wendland stated he could support these scenarios, but would not support a second L monument given to the Kroger example. Commissioner Dreggors stated that if you can stand by one sign and see the second sign, there are too many signs on the site PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE • Section 7 09.1 — Commissioner Cocking stated that with the definition of an electronic sign it appears that time and temperature would not be allowed. Mr. Battle responded that the Code already has an exemption for time and temperature. • Section 8.05 — Subdivision Standards — Commissioner Jones stated the paragraph referring to the Maintenance Bond needed additional wording or additional clarification She stated that Liquidated Damages are usually used in a contract. Because the City does not have a contract with these individuals, they should reword it and use the word "penalty" instead There was discussion on using "may be assessed." Chairman Wendland stated that enforcement is easier with an absolute Commissioner Jones stated the paragraph that listed under what circumstances a variance would be considered is confusing • Section 8.10 Extensions of Water and Wasterwater Mains — Commissioner Jones asked that "Utilities" be added to the heading or move item (Q to another section. She stated that if you were looking for the section that discussed underground utilities, it would be difficult to locate here. It was decided to remove this item from this location as it is already in the Code in another location. • Appendix A — Definitions, Tree, Hazardous - Commissioner Grimes asked that the word "imminent" be added to potential to fail. Mr. Hoover stated that the potential to fail does not have to be imminent. He stated that the City's Urban Forester visits the site and determines what trees could fail. This would prevent someone from having to mitigate for the tree at the beginning of the project. The consensus was the wording was too vague and staff needs to revisit the definition • Section 8.05.2 — Table — Add the text "up to" in front of 35% when referencing the City Engineer may grant a variance. Chairman Wendland opened the Public Hearing. Charles Nies (spoke in opposition) 813 Glen Rose Mr. Nies stated he objected to the proposed change to require developers to bury electric services on arterials as long as utility companies did not have to do so in the same locations. At the present time, City's have no authority over the Public Utilities. This means if the utility company wants to come back and build more lines on top of the buried lines — they can. He stated he supported burying the utilities, but the City needs the authority to regulate the utility companies Mr. Nies requested that the Commission consider exempting burying lines on arterial and collector streets. Chairman Wendland closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Cocking listed the items that would be pulled from consideration, and asked that Staff rework these items and resubmit for consideration at the next scheduled meeting. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Cocking and a second by Commissioner Grimes, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED, to recommend approval of Agenda Item 4 with the following exceptions: PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 5 FEBRUARY 6, 2007 7.03.5; 7.05.2.iv Wheel Stops; 7.09.9.1 Free Standing Signs; 8.05 Subdivision Design Standards (h) — subject to legal review of the use of Liquidated Damages; 8.05.4 Design Detail Variances — remove from consideration; Appendix A — Definitions, Tree, Hazardous — expand on the definition of "potential to fail"; and add "up to" 35% when referencing the reduction City Engineer can approve in 8.05.2. These exceptions are to be revisited at the next meeting with clarifications. The motion carried. Upcoming Agenda Items: o Tonight's Code changes. o Special Called meeting, Friday, February 9, 2007 — Allen Towne Square Preliminary Plat. Adjournment Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Dreggors and a second by Commissioner Rushing. The Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR and 0 OPPOSED to adjourn the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at 10:05 p.m. These minutes apoved is day of 2007 ert WendlaAd, First Vice -Chair Kellie Wilson, Planning Technician I