Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 2017-06-01 Regular PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION . Regular Meeting 1. The Regular Meeting was called to order at 7:02pm with the following people in attendance: Chairman Craig Lovell Commissioner Brett Banfield Commissioner Rhonda Neel Commissioner Tony Annan Commissioner Rich Borghese Commissioner Richard Sasson Aubrey Harbin, Planner/CDD Deputy Director Morad Kabiri, Director of CDD Becky Summers, Development Coordinator 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.) Raul Espino asked the Commission to consider adding a category to the Permitted Use Table to permit Indoor Auto Sales as a use in the Community Shopping Center district. He said he currently owns a luxury, indoor car dealership in the Galleria and wanted to open another one in Friendswood where he and his son live. He said the property he was interested in was zoned CSC which did not allow automobile sales but his particular stores were high end and entirely indoors. 3. Consent agenda: a. Minutes from May 18, 2017 regular meeting b. Arbor Gate at West Ranch Section 6 Final Plat Motion to approve: Annan Second: Neel Vote: 6 to 0 Unanimous Motion passed MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING HELD THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 2017 AT 7:00 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 910 S. FRIENDSWOOD DRIVE FRIENDSWOOD, TEXAS 2 June 1, 2017 P & Z Meeting 4. Consideration and possible action regarding the site plan for Coward’s Creek Office Park located at 1110 S. Friendswood Dr. Motion to approve subject to staff comments: Neel Second: Borghese Vote: 6 to 0 Unanimous Motion passed Harbin explained staff had only comments regarding clerical corrections on the plans. She said the property was recently rezoned to the Downtown District and would install a section of 8-foot brick pavers required in that district. She said the building design meets the fenestration requirements and the applicant was mitigating for several trees. Annan asked how the detention pond was allowed to be removed. Harbin explained the applicant had purchased regional detention from the Galveston County Consolidated Drainage District. Annan asked why the sidewalk was not connected to the bridge to which Kabiri stated the bridge does not have a walkway to connect to. Annan said the plans depicted the sidewalk leading pedestrians into the street. Summers said the applicant had since changed the sidewalk configuration and provided a revised plan. 5. Consideration and possible action regarding the site plan for JJ’s Car Wash to be located at 2221 W. Parkwood Ave. Motion to discuss: Banfield Second: Borghese Vote: 6 to 0 Unanimous Motion passed Harbin explained the project would be located near Fountain Plaza close to San Joaquin Parkway. She said it would be a self-service drive thru wash with vacuum stalls and a small office for personnel and restrooms. She said the plan met the requirements for the Community Overlay District. JJ Stanford/applicant said this location would be an express wash for customers to use quickly and not take up much of their time. He said the facility would be staffed with a full time manager and several attendants. Lovell asked if the equipment would comply with the City’s noise ordinance to which Mr. Stanford said he did not have the noise information on hand but had recently performed a noise survey for a development in Dickinson. Stanford said he has three locations in process but wanted to build the Friendswood location first. Annan asked why the parking lot did not connect to the gas station’s stub out next door. Sel Thint/Everest Design Group stated the gas station did not want the connection. Summers said it would be a safety concern for staff to have a shared access point so near the wash drive thru. Sasson questioned if there would be a connecting sidewalk to the gas station. Thint said a 5-foot sidewalk is included on the site plan. Sasson asked how the site would be getting electricity. Stanford said there would be underground power lines. Motion to approve: Sasson 3 June 1, 2017 P & Z Meeting Second: Banfield Vote: 6 to 0 Unanimous Motion passed 6. Work Sessions: a. Proposed recommendation to City Council regarding changes to the Zoning Ordinance, Sections 8.A. and 8.B. Supplementary District Regulations and Section 20. Definitions Kabiri addressed the Commission and apologized for a miscommunication regarding changes to the fence ordinance. He said City Council met in September and gave distinct direction to staff and the Commission to change the threshold and include lot frontage as an allowance. Kabiri explained the existing ordinance and said the language was drafted in the 1990s and was outdated. He said the Commission’s progress on the ordinance change began to deviate from the direction given by Council and asked for a reset. He explained the Commission can draft alternatives to the language staff has provided and make a recommendation to Council. Neel explained the process the subcommittee had used to research changes to the fence ordinance. She said the subcommittee agreed with removing hedges as prohibited and updating the definition of fence. She said they also agreed with adding restrictions for fence materials. Neel stated there had been a lot of discussion regarding the addition of allowing 150-foot lots to fence past the front build line. She said the 150-foot addition was in the language because City Council requested it, not because the subcommittee agreed with it. Kabiri said Council had requested adding a lot frontage allowance and staff chose 150-feet to coincide with the SFR-E zoning district. Neel explained staff had surveyed around 1,500 lots and found less than 1% to be in violation. She stated the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBOA) had heard five variance requests in the past twenty years. She said the recommendation to include 150-foot lots would present roughly one hundred opportunities for front yard fences. Neel said if the frontage was increased to 200-feet, the opportunities would decrease to 2/3 of the one hundred opportunities. She said the creation of those opportunities and discontinuity were her concerns. Annan said areas throughout the City were governed by Homeowner Associations (HOA) which could have their own restrictions on fencing. He said the proposed ordinance changes would allow more lots to fence their front yard while alleviating existing, legal non-conforming structures. He added that the subcommittee had cleaned up the definition of fence and were happy with the new wording. Sasson said the two-acre minimum lot size should remain the lone requirement. He said he did not think citizens want to see fences all over town. Banfield asked staff for a rough, ten year history on variance requests. Kabiri said five requests had been denied by the ZBOA but plenty of citizens had requested fences from staff but never actually pursued variances. Banfield asked what prompted the request to change the ordinance. Kabiri stated a homeowner had been denied by ZBOA and then denied by the Commission so she approached a City Council member. Banfield agreed with Annan that HOAs would regulate a good portion of the neighborhoods. Banfield said he was okay with adding a 150-foot lot frontage allowance. 4 June 1, 2017 P & Z Meeting Borghese suggested an edit to the definition of fence. He said he felt 150-foot lots would be too small to allow a front yard fence. Lovell agreed that 150-foot lots were too small to allow front yard fences. He said the change would increase the opportunity for more fences and some HOAs were outdated and no longer valid. Lovell stated he was concerned with process and did not appreciate City staff’s directions for the ordinance change. Lovell expressed that the matter was not urgent and had already been going on for two years. Neel said she had not understood that City Council requested the ordinance be changed to allow lots with a certain amount of frontage to have front yard fences. Neel thought the request was similar to the recent large retail work the Commission had taken on where they researched and formulated suggestions. She said staff clarified the request for the subcommittee and provided the requested language. Annan asked for a consensus of the Commission regarding the lot frontage requirement and questioned what step came next. Lovell said the item could be placed on the next Commission agenda for further discussion. Neel said she saw it two ways: present Council with the requested ordinance changes and give a recommendation or create new ordinance language the Commission fully supported. She said staff’s recommendation was to present Council with the ordinance as written and give a negative recommendation if the Commission did not agree with the changes. Banfield clarified that if the intent was to reduce the number of non-compliant properties, the ordinance needed to be more lenient and said he understood the request for a frontage addition. Borghese said changing the ordinance to bring violators into compliance was ridiculous. Kabiri explained that leaving the ordinance “as is” would force the City to start issuing citations. Banfield commented that issuing citations in masse would pack City Hall with angry citizens. Kabiri confirmed that was the exact situation the City wanted to avoid. The Commission took an informal poll of those in favor of adding 150-foot lot frontage to the ordinance and Banfield was okay with the change; Borghese, Neel, Annan, Sasson, and Lovell were all against the change. Kabiri said the item was slated to be on the next Council agenda for a Joint Public Hearing. He said the Chairman could choose to postpone the item, though. Lovell said they would not wait any longer. 7. Consideration and possible action regarding future Planning and Zoning Commission meeting dates Harbin said the next regular meeting would be held Thursday, June 15th. 8. Communications from a. Commissioners – Annan said the Zoning Board of Adjustment approved a patio and carport that encroached on the building setbacks based on the unusual configuration of the house and lot. He commended ZBOA Chairman Hughes on how well he explains the hearing process to the public at the beginning of their meetings. b. Planning Subcommittee – Banfield said the Future Land Use map was being updated and was looking great. He said the next step was to present the changes to 5 June 1, 2017 P & Z Meeting the Commission then CEDC and GCCDD, etc. He said a work-session with Council would be held, as well as a town hall meeting. c. Ordinance Subcommittee – Neel said the subcommittee would continue to work on their outlined priorities. d. Council liaison – Councilman Hill attended in place of Councilman Rockey. Hill spoke to the Chairman and stated City Council did not have a right to attack City staff and neither did the Planning and Zoning Commission. e. Staff – none 9. The meeting was adjourned at 8:07pm. These minutes respectfully submitted by: Becky Summers Becky Summers Development Coordinator/P&Z Secretary