Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 2006-09-07 Minutes MINUTES OF THE WORKSESSION MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS SEPTEMBER 7, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Randy Shiflet at 6:01 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Ex Officio Randy Shiflet Don Bowen Mike Benton Bill Schopper Steven Cooper Kelly Gent PRESENT Chairman Secretary ABSENT Mark Haynes Brenda Cole CITY STAFF Dir. of Planning & Development John Pitstick Chief Planner Eric Wilhite Planning Assistant Carolyn Huggins 3. GENERAL DISCUSSION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO SITE PLANS, SPECIAL USE PERMITS AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS. Eric Wilhite provided reference in the form of a copy of the zoning ordinance. He also handed out the planned development ordinance. Mr. Wilhite then began the discussion by addressing the basics of a site plan. He defined it straight out of the ordinance, stating that it is a detailed line drawing clearly describing the project showing sufficient information to determine the nature of the proposed development and providing adequate information to determine compliance with ordinances. Mr. Wilhite said that the site plan is an administerial function. Before it is brought before the Planning and Zoning Commission, it must meet all regulations. This usually requires going back and forth with the consultants and the applicant to make sure that everything Page 1 of 5; 9/7/06 P & Z Minutes is correct. For example, if a dumpster is located on a site plan in a spot that is prohibited by ordinance, then that must be fixed before Staff will bring the plan to Planning and Zoning. There is a checklist in the site plan application that thoroughly identifies what is required of a site plan. Staff has the ability to make recommendations that follow along the lines of this checklist. However, they do not have the authority to require over the minimum of the ordinance. For example, if only a six-foot fence is required on a site plan, Staff cannot require the applicant to have an eight-foot fence. Mr. Schopper asked for an explanation of the primary goal of those on this board. John Pitstick stated, in terms of a site plan, that the only reason to look at one is to make sure that one hundred percent of regulations are met. If something is missed by Staff, then it is certainly the responsibility of the Planning and Zoning Commission to bring that to the surface. However, beyond meeting required guidelines, there is no requirement of the commission to negotiate any other possible suggestions. Mr. Schopper then asked what the point of a motion was if there was really nothing that could be done if requirements are met. Mr. Wilhite stated that a motion, in this sense, is only needed to prove that the Board has seen and agrees that the applicant has met the needed requirements for a site plan. Chairman Shiflet interjected. Even though requirements have been met, further suggestions can be made, but cannot be tied to the motion. The motion is administerial. After the Planning and Zoning Commission approves the site plan, it goes to the City Council for final review. Mr. Schopper wondered if there was a situation where the Commission could make a m'otion against a site plan and it would be taken into account. Mr. Wilhite said ;yes. If there is a plan that, for some unknown reason, has many mistakes that were missed by Staff, then a recommendation for denial could be passed. Mr. Wilhite then transitioned into an explanation of the special use permit. It looks like a site plan, however, when the issue of land use is introduced, some land uses that do require site plans are going to also require special use permits as part of their zoning. In this case, such site plans, though still administerial, allow functions where the commission can go above and beyond the basic requirements of the ordinance to mitigate. Mr. Wilhite then referred to a sheet he passed out (CH 118-238) in which a list of twenty-one criteria for a special use permit was available. He then gave an example of when the commission could use their authority to make changes to a submitted special use permit. If the special use permit is that of a place that specializes in automotive services (therefore being loud) and surrounding properties have different zonings, some of which would obviously not be pleased with such noise pollution, the commission can require increased land buffers or screening wall heights. However, Mr. Wilhite wanted to make it clear that consistency between special use permit cases must always be a priority, as it helps guide Staff in their own dealings with Page 2 of 5; 9/7/06 P & Z Minutes applicants. They can know ahead of time, with more certainty, what the odds of a special use permit being approved will be. Mr. Pitstick agreed with this insight. Mr. Cooper wished to understand more of what a special use permit is for. Mr. Pitstick told him to emphasize the word "use" when contemplating its purpose. It will be tied to the land usage and those land usages around it. Chairman Shiflet used an example of a current project, a vet clinic that was submitted as a special use permit, because of its location. If it were to be moved either one block north or one block south, it might have not been approved because of surrounding properties and the usages tied to those pieces of land. Basically, with a special use permit, the Planning and Zoning Commission may add conditions, if they seem necessary, or deny it altogether. Chairman Shiflet made note that with so much redevelopment and experience from past developments that were later not what had been originally expected, many special use permits had been added to the permitted use tables allowing the Planning and Zoning Commission to essentially raise the bar. In essence, the Planning and Zoning Commission is only a recommending body. This work session is designed to help this committee understand their purpose so they do not in turn confuse the City Council. Mr. Wilhite added that most of the mitigation efforts will be presented and discussed by Staff and then conveyed to the commission in the Staff reports. So the commission will know ahead of time what the applicant is prepared to do in order to get his or her permit approved. Mr. Pitstick also added that with a few examples of special use permits available in the city to look at, applicants are more willing to accept alterations to their permit because they have visual references to help them understand what the commission really wants to do with the city. Mr. Wilhite then transitioned into the planned development discussion. All planned developments basically function the same way. He decided to begin by focusing on residential infill planned developments. RI-PDs have lots of detail in their site plans. Since so much has to go in to these types of planned developments - usually including many deviations from original zoning requirements, a pre-development meeting is required to help Staff understand what the applicant plans to do and to help the applicant understand what is required on his or her part. Mr. Pitstick stated that PDs are required to have a table on their site plan that shows the current zoning and its standards and how those standards are going to vary and deviate with the proposed development. Mr. Pitstick wished to know if the commission would like to have a section added to the Staff report that explained exactly what was expected, the duties, of the Planning and Zoning Commission in regards to each case that was to pass through their hands. It seemed that the commission liked this idea. Page 3 of 5; 9/7/06 P & Z Minutes 4. GENERAL DISCUSSION OF CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS CODE OF ORDINANCES TABLE OF PERMITTED LAND USES, SECTION 118-631 Mr. Pitstick then provided a PowerPoint presentation that included visually showing some changes that had be made to the City's permitted use tables. He made special note of one section that he needed the Planning and Zoning Commission to review, hospitals. He then explained other sections that had changed. A special use permit will be required on any development that has a private street incorporated. Entertainment usages are now more encouraged under outdoor commercial. Automotive uses have been taken out of this category. Automobile dealerships are going to be required to have a minimum of five acres, and under a special use permit. This is already supportive of the current auto dealerships in North Richland Hills. New definitions were also added, such as pet day care, wedding chapel, and weight loss center. Basically, the tables have been made easier to read. If there is a P in the box, the use is permitted. If there is an S, use is permitted under certain special conditions. And if the box is empty, use is not permitted. We added miniature golf course, health studios, recreation centers, swim centers, tennis centers, and feed stores to be allowed in outdoor commercial. Alcohol sales have been updated to reflect the changes already made at the state level. '. Mr. Pitstick then passed out Section 118-711 Alcoholic Beverages. Again, this was already in the requirements but it needed to be clarified. If a seller drives more than seventy-five percent of revenue from alcohol, the store would only be allowed in the C2, HC, or OC zoning areas under special use permit. And if there is also some sexually- oriented service included with the alcohol, the establishment must be more than 500 feet away from residents or another establishment that sells the same seventy-five percent revenue in alcohol. A finishing store has been in the ordinance since the 1980s but no one knows what one is, and thus, it has been eliminated from the ordinance. Let the record reflect that Mr. Bowen left early from the meeting at 7:17 p.m. Mr. Pitstick reiterated that the commission needed to talk about hospitals in the permitted use tables. Mr. Schopper suggested that because of the medical element of the request, and the fact that it seems to be "almost like a school," it should be simply permitted. Chairman Shiflet wanted to make sure that he understood the definition of hospital. For further clarification, Mr. Wilhite tried to delineate the difference between an emergency clinic and a hospital. Chairman Shiflet said that he would be inclined to permit hospitals in C-1, C-2, and industrial. Mr. Pitstick offered up his own proposal. He proposed that hospitals be permitted in C-2, HC, and industrial. But in C-1 and CS, there be only special use permits allowed for them. Mr. Schopper suggested that a special use permit be added to office zoning as well. Page 4 of 5; 9/7/06 P & Z Minutes Chairman Shiflet wished that the proposed changes be summed up and clarified. Therefore, in regards to the zoning for hospitals, 0-1 "Office" would be a special use permit. LRlNS "Local Retail/Neighborhood Services" would not be allowed. C-1/CS "Commercial/Commercial Services" would be a special use permit. C-2/HC "Commercial/Heavy Commercial" would be a permitted use. OC "Outdoor Commercial" would be not permitted. 1-1 and 1-2 "Industrial" would be permitted use. Chairman Shiflet wished to know if there was a need to keep emergency clinic and medical clinic separated. It would seem logical just to combine them. Mr. Schopper stated that because of the vast number of professions that were accounted for under the definition of medical clinic, he thought that the size of the establishment should be taken into account. Chairman Shiflet admitted that because of the Commission's discussion and confusion in this topic, the two areas should be kept separate and a definition for emergency clinic should be created. A definition of emergency clinic will be created later and brought before the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval. According to Mr. Pitstick, this new definition would be subjected to more special use permit procedures because of Commission concerns over what types of services should be allowed in those areas. Mr. Pitstick then summed up the permitted uses for a medical clinic. Special use permit under "Office." Special use permit under "Local RetaiL" Permitted use under "C-1." Permitted use under "C-2." Special use permit under "Neighborhood Services." Permitted use under "Commercial Services." Permitted use under "Heavy CommerciaL" And permitted use under "1-1" and "1-2." Mr. Pitstick suggested a way to solve the problem of defining a medical clinic and setting it apart from other medical-like establishments, if it were defined with a provision of having four or more doctors. And emergency clinic will have a provision that states it can be operational "after hours." There was a general consensus that what had been discussed was appropriate to take in front of the City Council. 5. ADJOURNMENT The chairman adjourned the meeting at 7:52 p.m. Chairman Secretary ~&~ fP- ()~ Randy Shiflet Don Bowen Page 5 of 5; 9/7/06 P & Z Minutes