Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 2015-12-17 Regular PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION . Regular Meeting 1. The Regular Meeting was called to order at 7:00pm with the following people in attendance: Chairman David O’Farrell Commissioner Craig Lovell Commissioner Sally Branson Commissioner Rich Borghese Commissioner Tony Annan Commissioner Rhonda Neel Aubrey Harbin, City Planner Arnold Polanco, City Attorney Becky Summers, Development Coordinator Absent: Triplette 2. Communication from the public/committee liaisons (To comply with the provisions of the Open Meetings Act, the Commission may not deliberate on subjects discussed under this agenda item. However, the Commission may direct such subjects to be placed on a later regular Commission agenda for discussion and/or possible action.) None 3. Consent Agenda A. Approval of the minutes for the meeting held: 1) December 3, 2015 Motion to approve: Branson Second: Lovell Vote: 5 to 0 (unanimous) Motion Carried Borghese arrived at 7:01pm 4. Update from staff regarding duties and responsibilities of the Planning and Zoning Commission. MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING HELD THURSDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2015 AT 7:00 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 910 S. FRIENDSWOOD DRIVE FRIENDSWOOD, TEXAS 2 December 17, 2015 P & Z Meeting City Attorney, Arnold Polanco, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the duties and responsibilities of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 5. Consideration and possible action regarding site plan amendments for Friendswood Professional Building A located at 107 Woodlawn Dr. Motion to approve: Branson Second: Lovell Vote: 6 to 0 (unanimous) Scott Davis, developer, stated the owner was requesting to change screening material on the mechanical equipment due to budget constraints. He said due to a large amount of rain, the project had to spend extra money on lime stabilization. Chairman O’Farrell asked staff to provide background information on the project. Harbin explained the commercial site plan was approved in June 2014 with special permission from the Commission to install metal louvered screening for the mechanical equipment. Hector, representative of the architecture firm, stated the material they were now proposing was similar but perforated instead of louvered. He said the material was commonly used on high-rises because of the high windstorm rating. He said the material was also more available than the louvers which made them easier to purchase and more cost effective. O’Farrell asked staff what the screening requirement was in the Community Overlay District. Harbin answered the screening must be of the same material as the building or an alternate or better material could be approved by the Commission. Hector said stucco would be even more cost effective and easier to install than perforated metal. He said they would gladly install stucco screening since the original metal louvers cost around $100,000. Mr. Davis said they were trying to continue with quality products and give the building architectural presence. He said they wanted to economize without sacrificing style. O’Farrell asked Harbin if stucco would be in compliance to which she said it would be. He then asked Annan for his opinion on which material was better. Annan said stucco and metal were different materials. Neel asked what color the metal screening would be. Hector said the perforated metal screens came in many colors. Neel suggested making the metal color match the stucco building. O’Farrell asked if the metal was paintable. Hector said it could be painted be would need to be maintained. Lovell said he did not have an issue with the metal structurally but thought the original louvers looked better. Branson agreed. Annan said the request to change the metal screening was not unreasonable and was a small design change. He said he would support the amendment request. Neel said the perforated metal did not look as nice as the louvers but was not an objectionable design. She stated either metal was better than stucco screening. Hector explained the metal louvers were shown without knowing the cost of them. Chairman O’Farrell said the developer’s bottom line should not be considered when 3 December 17, 2015 P & Z Meeting discussing the quality of a development. Harbin said there were a couple other minor changes that she wanted to make the Commission aware of. She said the shape of the monument sign was no longer going to be arched and the courtyard walls were not being installed. Lovell asked how far back the mechanical equipment sat on the rooftop and Hector provided the measurements. Lovell opined a person would have to be pretty far from the building to be able to see the equipment. Borghese brought up that the material change was being discussed and wondered about the color being used. Annan said he thought the architect had done a great job so far and to let him decide the best color for the screening. Hector said a contrasting color would look nice. O’Farrell said the original louvers were aluminum/gray. Borghese said based on Annan’s comment, he would agree to let the architect decide without Commission input. O’Farrell commented the project rendering looks gorgeous and would be a great compliment to the City. 6. Discussion and possible action regarding amendments to Appendix C Zoning Ordinance Section 7.P.6. Permitted Use Table and Section 6. Non-Conforming uses, structures and lots Motion to discuss: Branson Second: Neel Vote: 6 to 0 (unanimous) Motion to recommend changes as proposed: Branson Second: Neel Vote: 4 to 2 (against Borghese and Annan) Harbin explained this agenda item was workshopped with City Council who raised concerns about how to protect existing businesses that would become non-conforming uses. She said staff did some research and presented their findings at the last Commission meeting but since several members were absent she would present again and proceeded with the PowerPoint show. Harbin stated the businesses in question seem established and comfortable. Branson commented that regardless of whether the use was allowed or non-conforming, if a business was destroyed by a natural disaster, the structure would be required to be built to current City codes. Borghese said he still thought the Rental and Leasing Services category was too broad and suggested expanding the NAICS codes. Neel said she was okay with the proposed changes. Annan said he would prefer making the uses require SUPs instead of not allowing them to avoid boxing the Commission in too much. Branson agreed with Neel. Lovell said he agreed with the proposed changes. Borghese said not allowing the uses could force property to sit vacant and the City would lose revenue. He suggested SUPs for gas stations, prohibiting storage facilities and expanding rental services. O’Farrell stated he liked the proposed language. 4 December 17, 2015 P & Z Meeting 7. Consideration and possible action regarding proposed amendments to Appendix C Zoning Ordinance Section 7.P.6. Permitted Use Table regarding large retail establishments Harbin explained the agenda item was requested by Councilman Rockey for the Commission to draft language requiring SUPs for large retail centers. Rockey stated big box retailers cause an enormous impact to cities, good and bad. He said he had received a lot of feedback from the public regarding the subject. Rockey asked the Commission to research and draft language for an ordinance that would require large retailers to apply for Specific Use Permits. Rockey said any vested projects would not be affected. Borghese asked if there were currently any vested projects in the City to which Rockey answered he would not speculate. Borghese stated he would have a big issue with the request if there was currently such a project happening. Rockey said if there is a big retailer in process, more will follow. He asked the Commission to not rush the ordinance but also to not take too long. O’Farrell reiterated that the ordinance change is a priority and Rockey said to work aggressively. Lovell said growth is the future of the City and this request seemed to be anti-business. He stated the City needs revenue. Lovell said a big box retailer may be scared off by the SUP requirement and just move to another City that does not require a City Council vote. He said the comments on social media lately regarding a rumored big box store in Friendswood have been pure snobbery. Annan asked what spurred the request for a SUP requirement. Rockey said there were concerns about the level of control City Council has over those types of businesses. O’Farrell said he read an article provided by Councilman Rockey regarding the square footages of retailers to which he would forward to the Commission. Annan said this seemed contrary to City Council promoting the “Year of the Business”. Rockey stated the change was not a ban but to give more control to Council. O’Farrell told the Commission they would draft the change then debate the pros and cons at the Commission level. Neel stated it seemed like a reasonable request. Borghese said he had some questions for staff in order to research the proposed change. Annan stated it seemed contrary to the CEDC bringing in businesses. Lovell reiterated he had concerns but agreed to research the request. He said the City needs to think about its future and not think small boutiques will sustain it forever. O’Farrell asked staff to gather information for the Commission as well as the Commission gather questions for staff. 8. Consideration and possible action regarding future Planning and Zoning Commission meeting dates Harbin suggested moving the next regular meeting to coincide with the Joint Public Hearing scheduled for January 11th. There was a consensus amongst the Commission to combine meetings. 5 December 17, 2015 P & Z Meeting 9. Communications from the Commission O’Farrell recounted how during the Bus Tour he compared several projects to “Pottersville” and “Bedford Falls.” He explained the references come from the movie, “It’s a Wonderful Life” and gave all the Commissioners a copy of the DVD as Christmas presents. 10. Reports A. Council Liaison – none B. Staff – none 11. The meeting was adjourned at 8:51pm. These minutes respectfully submitted by: Becky Summers Becky Summers Development Coordinator/P&Z Secretary