city council january 8, 2013 planning2

67
City Council January 8, 2013

Upload: city-of-san-angelo-texas

Post on 30-Oct-2014

271 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

City CouncilJanuary 8, 2013

Page 2: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Conditional Use

CU12-14: JP-RH, LLC.• An appeal of the denial of the original request or a

Conditional Use to specifically allow for “Household Living” as defined in Section 313.B of the Zoning Ordinance on the following property:

• An unaddressed tract of land on the northwest corner of Knickerbocker Road and Valleyview Boulevard. This Conditional Use will occupy the Southland Hills Addition, Section Four, Block 51, on proposed lots 3 through 10 in south central San Angelo.

• Thirty-one (31) notifications were sent, five in favor.

Page 3: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 4: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Zoning Map

Page 5: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Aerial Map

Page 6: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 7: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 8: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 9: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Subject Property looking North from Valleyview Boulevard

Page 10: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Residences North of subject property from Oak Hills Drive

Page 11: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Residences and Business looking Northeast across Oak Hills Drive from

subject property

Page 12: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Looking South of Valleyview Boulevard from Subject Property

Page 13: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Looking East from subject property beyond Knickerbocker Road

Page 14: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Looking West from subject property across alley

Page 15: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Intersection of Knickerbocker Road and Valleyview Boulevard looking West from Stripes’ Parking Lot

Page 16: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

OptionsIn considering this application, the City Council may:

• Overturn the Planning Commission’s decision, and approve this Conditional Use request, consistent with the staff recommendation, which would allow for the “Household Living” in a CG Zoning District; or

• Uphold the Planning Commission’s decision, and deny this Conditional Use request and not allow “Household Living” in a CG Zoning District.

Page 17: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Staff Recommendation• Planning staff recommends approving this Conditional

Use request.

• On November 19, 2012, the Planning Commission denied this request by a unanimous vote of 6-0

Page 18: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

History & BackgroundGeneral Information• General Commercial (CG);

• Vacant property;

• RS-1, CG, RM-1 zoning in the area including Single-family Residential dwellings, Stripes,

Raintree Apartments, Bank of San Angelo, Emeritus senior facility, Lace & Co Realty, Allstate, Acacia Day Spa and JBA Diversified Holdings.

Page 19: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Criteria of ApplicationIn order to approve this request, City Council members are

first required to consider the following criteria:

• Compatible with Plans and Policies

• Consistent with Zoning Ordinance

• Compatible with Surrounding Area

• Changed Conditions

Page 20: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Criteria of Application• Effect on Natural Environment

• Community Need

• Development Patterns

Page 21: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• The Planning Commission approved the replat for this

property earlier in the meeting on November 19, 2012.• They later heard Planning staff’s recommendation to

approve this CU request to allow for “Household Living” on a parcel currently zoned CG.

• Lots 3-10 are oriented on the west side of the property.• A proposed street is to be plaved down the center of

the property, running north to south, providing a main access to lots 3-10.

Page 22: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• Planning Staff received favorable letter from

neighboring properties.• Several neighbors attending the November 19, 2012

meeting spoke against the request. • The Planning Commission denied the CU request with

a 6-0 vote.• Staff continues to feel that a CU is consistent with

development patterns and conforms to the Zoning Ordinance.

Page 23: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation

• This CU request is also in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan by providing a right-of-way that separates uses and keeps commercial traffic from traveling through the center of the block; and

• Meets the required setbacks and development standards, providing a gentler transition between zones.

• The Zoning Ordinance calls for screening in CG zones.

Page 24: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• Overall proposal will provide a street between commercial

and residential uses (as opposed to an alleyway) which will provide a transitional buffer from CG to residential.

• Proposal will have minimal impacts on traffic circulation. Knickerbocker Road, as an important thoroughfare, is capable of handling increased traffic as is Valleyview Boulevard.

• Additional noise and visual impacts will be minimized by screening requirements and ensures compatibility.

Page 25: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• There is no wildlife on the property and no other

environmental concerns exist. Storm water runoff will be less than if area was entirely commercial and mostly paved.

• The Comprehensive Plan identifies better transitions between zones, particularly neighborhoods, as a community need. The development could provide a community need through increased housing, and;

• Provides a logical layout as an orderly development pattern which follows the Vision Plan map.

Page 26: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation

• Provides a logical layout as an orderly development pattern which follows the Vision Plan map.

Page 27: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 28: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Zone Change

Z 12–17: CSA Materials• A request for approval of a zone change from Ranch & Estate (R&E)

to Heavy Manufacturing (MH) to specifically allow “Manufacturing & Production” as defined in Section 316.B of the Zoning Ordinance on the following property:

• 3560 and 3578 Smith Boulevard, and 3744 and 3844 Porter Henderson Drive, collectively occupying a 92.768 acre tract near Smith Boulevard and Porter Henderson Drive, more specifically occupying the Paul Gregory Addition, Section 3, Tract H, the Paul Gregory Addition Section 2, Tracts E and F, and previously-vacated portions of Smith Boulevard and M.H. Morgan Trail in northeast San Angelo.

Thirteen (13) notifications were sent. None were received.

Page 29: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 30: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Aerial Map

Page 31: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 32: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Photographs of Subject PropertyLooking west at subject property from Smith

Page 33: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Photographs of Subject PropertyLooking west at subject property from Porter Henderson

Page 34: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Photographs of Subject PropertyLooking east on Tractor Trail from Smith

Page 35: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

OptionsIn considering this application, the Council may:

• Approve the proposed zone change as presented; or

• Remand the application to Planning Commission; or

• Deny the proposed zone change.

Page 36: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Recommendation

• Planning staff recommends approving the proposed zone change.

• Planning Commission recommended approval of this request by a vote of 5-0 on December 17, 2012.

Page 37: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

History & BackgroundGeneral Information• Ranch & Estate (R&E) zoning;

• Default holding zone for new annexations

• Vacant parcels, businesses, industrial uses;

• Annexed in December of 2011

Page 38: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Criteria of Application• Compatible with Plans and Policies

• Consistent with Zoning Ordinance

• Compatible with Surrounding Area

• Changed Conditions

Page 39: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Criteria of Application• Effect on Natural Environment

• Community Need

• Development Patterns

Page 40: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• "Organize LULUs (Locally Undesirable Land Uses)

into clusters.”… isolated areas will minimize negative effects on residential areas, while balancing access to these businesses within the region, rather than putting all of them into one location.“

• “Require a buffer separating commercial, industrial, or agricultural zoned lands from neighborhoods.”

• “Establish transition areas between commercial areas and nearby neighborhoods.”

Page 41: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• Consistent and compatible with the “Vision Plan” Map

for the area;

• Isolated from highway and residential properties;

• Consistent with development patterns;

• Intense uses will not detrimentally effect nearby properties;

Page 42: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• Vision Plan map of the 2009 Comprehensive Plan;

• Compatible with Zoning Ordinance Intent;

• Neighboring Properties are predominately vacant;

• Majority of existing uses are industrial in nature.

Page 43: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 44: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Zone Change

Z 12-18: David Mazur & Z 12-19: COSA Planning• A request for approval of a zone change from General

Commercial/Heavy Commercial (CG/CH) to Central Business District (CBD), to allow "household living" - AND - a request for approval of a zone change from General Commercial/Heavy Commercial (CG/CH) to Central Business District (CBD), to maintain a contiguous boundary for CBD zoning and in recognition of the historical type of development on the following properties:

Page 45: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Zone Change

• Evenly addressed properties on the east side of the 300 block of North Chadbourne between East 4th and East 3rd Streets, more specifically occupying the Kleck Subdivision, Block 2, Lots 11-12 & Lots 16 - 17 in downtown San Angelo.

Eighteen (18) notifications sent. 4 received in favor, none in opposition.

Page 46: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 47: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 48: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Zoning Map

Page 49: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Aerial Map

Page 50: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2
Page 51: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Photographs of Subject PropertyLooking east at on East 3rd Street

Page 52: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Photographs of Subject PropertyLooking north on N. Chadbourne from East 3rd Street

Page 53: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Photographs of Subject PropertyLooking west on East 3rd Street

Page 54: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Photographs of Subject PropertyLooking south on N. Chadbourne from 3rd Street

Page 55: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Photographs of Subject PropertyLooking east at the subject properties

Page 56: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Photographs of Subject PropertyLooking west across N. Chadbourne

Page 57: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

OptionsIn considering this application, the Council may:

• Approve the proposed zone change as presented; or

• Remand the application to Planning Commission; or

• Deny the proposed zone change.

Page 58: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Recommendation

• Planning staff recommends approving the proposed zone changes.

• Planning Commission recommended approval of both requests by a vote of 5-0 on December 17, 2012

Page 59: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

History & BackgroundGeneral Information• General Commercial/Heavy Commercial (CG/CH)

Zoning;

• Vacant buildings, retail uses, display spaces;

• Historical Character readily prevalent in the area; and

• Past CBD Expansion.

Page 60: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Criteria of Application• Compatible with Plans and Policies

• Consistent with Zoning Ordinance

• Compatible with Surrounding Area

• Changed Conditions

Page 61: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Criteria of Application• Effect on Natural Environment

• Community Need

• Development Patterns

Page 62: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• "There is a place where “traffic” and “congestion” are

welcome, where there is a need for more traffic, where commuting times rise slightly, and that place is -- downtown. The success of a downtown depends on hustle and bustle. People are attracted to it and businesses thrive in it. Potential exists in the community for roads to be narrowed, sidewalks added, street trees incorporated, on-street parking configured and the experience created."

Page 63: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• "Eliminate CG/CH zoning inappropriate and

incompatible within downtown, encouraging many of the more intensive business-to-business uses allowed therein to relocate into commercial and industrial areas as designated on the Vision Plan map."

• The downtown section of the 2009 Comprehensive Plan update states "Encourage, participate in, and streamline the process for renovating historic structures into unique residential opportunities."

Page 64: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• Goal one of the Downtown Section of the

Comprehensive Plan is to, "Increase the permanent downtown residential population of downtown San Angelo.“

• "Downtown is the strongest point of reference for San Angelo. Including the riverfront, it is considered the “heart” of the community. As such, the City appropriately mandated that this strategic plan update include an emphasis on restoring and stabilizing Downtown

Page 65: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• Consistent with Comprehensive Plan & Zoning

Ordinance;

• Compatible with the surrounding area;

• Initially recommended during CBD expansion;• Historical character & development

• Consistent with the Development Patterns of the area;

Page 66: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2

Analysis – Basis for Recommendation• Meets development goals of the “Downtown” Section

of the Comprehensive Plan;• Increase permanent residential population downtown• Encourage re-development of historical properties

• Industrial uses allowed through Conditional Use; • Promote “Downtown” goals of Comprehensive Plan

• Little to no additional impact on the natural environment;

Page 67: City council january 8, 2013 Planning2