Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Commission Minutes 06-14-2017 CITY Of CAPE GIRARDEAU PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION � PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 14, 2017 City Hall — Council Chambers Present: Trae Bertrand, Jeff Glenn, Kevin Greaser, Scott McClanahan, Bruce Skinner, Doug Spooler, Thomas J. Welch Absent: Larry Dowdy, Patrick Koetting Staff Present: Carol Peters, Ryan Shrimplin Call to Order Chairman Bertrand called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the May 10, 2017 meeting were unanimously approved upon motion made by Mr. Greaser and seconded by Mr. Spooler. � REZONINGS. SPECIAL USE PERMITS. AND EXCEPTIONS 1. A public hearing was held on the request of Adam Kidd for a Special Use Permit to allow a vehicle fueling station in the C-1 (General Commercial) district at 1325 Broadway. Mr. Wade Metcalf, Bowen Engineering & Surveying, represented the applicant. He explained that the existing convenience store and fuel pumps will be completely demolished to make way for a new fueling station, including a canopy, and a convenience store. Staff reviewed the development plans and identified exceptions and variances which are being requested as part of the Special Use Permit. A staff report was submitted to the Commission, which addressed the following variances and exceptions included as part of the Special Use Permit request: • Variance for fueling station canopy setback per Section 30-413(d)(6) (minimum of 15 feet required; range from 13.85 feet to 11.05 feet proposed). Staff supports this variance because there is not sufficient area on the site to push back the canopy without adversely affecting traffic circulation, which constitutes a unique condition and an unnecessary hardship. It should be noted that the proposed setback for the new canopy is greater than the existing setback for the current canopy. • Variance for percent open space per Section 30-333(fl(5) (minimum of 15% required; 5% proposed). Staff supports this variance because there is not sufficient area on the site to provide additional open space (landscaping and other pervious surfaces) without adversely affecting traffic circulation, which constitutes a unique condition � and an unnecessary hardship. • Exception for percent overall site landscaping per Section 25-803(a) (minimum of 15% required; 5% proposed). Staff supports this exception because the applicant is City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes June 14, 2017 Page 2 of 10 � proposing to provide a public art sculpture in the landscaping area near the intersection as a substantial equivalent. • Exception for width of street landscaping strip per Section 25-804(a) (minimum of 10 feet required; 3.65 feet proposed). Staff supports this exception because the applicant is proposing to provide a public art sculpture in the landscaping area near the intersection as a substantial equivalent. • Exception for percent parking lot interior landscaping per Section 25-804(b)(1) (minimum of 15% required; none proposed). Staff supports this exception because the applicant is proposing to provide a public art sculpture in the landscaping area near the intersection as a substantial equivalent. • Exception for fence surFace in the front yard of a commercial property per Section 25-604 (minimum of 50% open surface required; 0% open surface proposed). Staff supports this exception because the fence will screen the residential property to the south from headlights and will be located far enough from the street so as to not create a sight distance obstruction, which qualifies as a substantial equivalent. • Exception for driveway width per Section 25-102 and the City's Standard Specifications and Drawings (maximum of 30 feet required; 40 feet proposed for each of the three driveways). Staff supports this exception because the applicant is reducing the number of driveways (from four to three) as a substantial equivalent. � • Exception for driveway distance from an intersection per Section 25-102 and the City's Standard Specifications and Drawings (minimum of 50 feet; 36.89 feet proposed). Staff supports this exception because the applicant is reducing the number of driveways (from four to three) as a substantial equivalent. • Exception for wall signage per Section 25-506(a) (wall signage limited to street- facing elevations; wall sign proposed on east elevation which does not face a street). Staff supports this exception with the condition that the aggregate area of all wall signs for the building does not exceed the maximum wall sign area per the City's sign regulations. This condition of approval permits the applicant to transfer allowable wall sign area from the north and west (street-facing) elevations to the east elevation without an increase in allowable wall sign area, which qualifies as a substantial equivalent. The staff report also reviewed the Special Use Permit criteria and made the following determinations: Criterion #1: The proposed special use will not substantially increase traffic hazards or congestion. Findinq: This criterion is met. The proposed site plan provides sufficient access and circulation, which will not adversely affect traffic. It also eliminates or reduces the current problem with drive-thru stacking extending onto the street. f�i City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes � June 14, 2017 Page 3 of 10 Criterion #2: The proposed special use will not substantially increase fire hazards. Findinq: This criterion is met. The proposed special use will be developed in compliance with the City's Building and Fire Codes, and will operate in compliance with local, state, and federal laws governing vehicle fueling stations. Criterion #3: The proposed special use will not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. FindinQ: This criterion is met. The proposed development will be a significant improvement over the prior development in terms of architecture, landscaping, and screening. Criterion #4: The proposed special use will not adversely affect the general welfare of the community. Findinq: This criterion is met. As stated above, the proposed development will result in an improvement. Furthermore, the proposed number of pump islands (four) will increase capacity and provide more e�cient service for customers. Criterion #5: The proposed special use will not overtax public utilities. � Findinq: This criterion is met. All utilities are existing due to the prior development. The utility demands of the proposed special use will be similar to those of the previous use. Based on the above findings, staff recommended approval of the Special Use Permit request, subject to the following conditions: 1. This special use shall meet all applicable requirements of the Zoning and Development Codes except for the variances and exceptions granted herein. 2. Major modifications to this special use, including but not limited to the site plan, shall require the approval of the City Council. 3. This permit shall automatically expire twelve (12) months from the date of issuance if the use for which it was granted has not commenced. 4. This permit is not transferable without the consent of the City Council. 5. Truck deliveries from the street shall be prohibited. 6. Canopy light fixtures shall have a flush or recessed lens. 7. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened on all sides. � 8. Dumpster screening shall consist of decorative masonry, wood, vinyl, and/or other materials as approved by the City staff. Smooth face concrete block shall be prohibited. City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes June 14, 2017 Page 4 of 10 � 9. A base for the public art sculpture shall be installed at the time the other site improvements are made. The scutpture itself shall be installed at a later date to be determined and agreed upon by the applicant and the City staff. 10. The nature and design of the public art sculpture shall be subject to approval by the City staff. 11. The aggregate area of all wall signs for the building shall not exceed the maximum wall sign area per the City's sign regulations. 12. Except for the sign exception noted above, signage is not approved as part of this permit. A sign permit application shall be submitted separately for the proposed signs. Chairman Bertrand opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, he closed the public hearing. Chairman Bertrand confirmed with Mr. Metcalf that the applicant was aware of the conditions listed in the staff report. A motion was made by Mr. Skinner and seconded by Mr. Glenn to recommend approval of the request of Adam Kidd for a Special Use Permit to allow a vehicle fueling station in the C-1 (General Commercial) district at 1325 Broadway, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. The motion passed with a vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Glenn, Greaser, McC/anahan, Skinner, Spoo/er, Welch) 2. A public hearing was held on the request of Jerry Feng for an exception from Development �`"� Code Section 25-506(fl(2), roof signs, at 329 South Kingshighway. Mr. Robert Edwards, 2128 William Street, represented the applicant. He stated a sign above the roof line is proposed for the China Crown restaurant that recently moved to this location. He explained that without the exception, a parapet wall will have to be constructed for the proposed sign. According to their engineer, doing so would add too much weight and wind resistance to the building. A staff report was submitted to the Commission, containing the following findings of fact: Criterion #1: As part of the exception request, a "substantial equivalent" is proposed. "Substantial equivalent" means an alternate design, method or feature that accomplishes the same purpose as the applicable Development Code requirement. Findinq: The application does not propose a substantial equivalent; instead, it indicates if the exception is denied, a parapet wall will have to be constructed for the proposed sign. There are no existing parapet walls on the building, but staff would prefer they be added because they would help screen the existing mechanical units on the top of the roof. In lieu of a parapet, the mechanical units could be individually screened, which would serve as a substantial equivalent. Criterion #2: Approval of the exception request is consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Findin : Approval of the exception request is consistent with the general spirit and � intent of the Development Code if the aforementioned substantial equivalent is made a condition of approval. City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes � June 14, 2017 Page 5 of 10 Based on the above findings, staff recommended approval of the exception request, with the following condition: 1. The mechanical units on top of the roof shall be individually screened. The design of the screening shall be subject to approval by the City staff. Chairman Bertrand opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, he closed the public hearing. Chairman Bertrand asked if the applicant accepts the staff condition to screen the rooftop mechanical units. Mr. Edwards explained that the units are not currently screened, but they could screen them if necessary. Mr. Skinner questioned how screening the rooftop units related to approving the sign exception request. Mr. Shrimplin explained that screening the mechanical units serves as a substantial equivalent in lieu of a parapet. A motion was made by Mr. Welch and seconded by Mr. Spooler to approve the request of Jerry Feng for an exception from Section 25-506(fl(2), roof signs, at 329 South Kingshighway, subject to the condition listed in the staff report. The motion passed with a roll call vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, G/enn, Greaser, McC/anahan, Skinner, Spooler, We/ch) 3. A public hearing was held on the request of SEMO Legends, LLC for an exception from Development Code Section 25-604, fence location, type & height, at 2070 North Sprigg Street. Mr. Mark Guess, Koehler Engineering and Land Surveying, represented the applicant. He explained that the exception request is for a six (6) foot high black powder- � coated ornamental fence in the front yard along North Sprigg Street and Lexington Avenue. A staff report was submitted to the Commission, containing the following findings of fact: Criterion #1: As part of the exception request, a "substantial equivalenY' is proposed. "Substantial equivalent" means an alternate design, method or feature that accomplishes the same purpose as the applicable Development Code requirement. Findina: The applicant is proposing a powder-coated black ornamental fence that is more than 50% open as a substantial equivalent. The intent of the height restriction is to prevent fences that create a visual barrier in the front yard. Due to its predominantly open surface, the fence will not create a visual barrier; instead, it will serve as an attractive means of enclosing the property for security purposes while allowing full visibility of the development. Criterion #2: Approval of the exception request is consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Findinq: The substantial equivalent proposed by the applicant ensures fairness among property owners and tenants, which makes approval of the exception request consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Based on the above findings, staff recommended approval of the exception request. Chairman Bertrand opened the public hearing. Mr. Howard Mclntyre, 735 Lexington � Avenue, questioned the location of the fence and if it would offer any screening or barrier from the proposed detention basin to the south of his property. Mr. Shrimplin showed Mr. Mclntyre a site plan and pointed out the location of the proposed fence as well as the City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes June 14, 2017 Page 6 of 10 1� bufferyard plantings. Mr. Mclntyre stated had no further concerns. Seeing no other appearances to speak, Chairman Bertrand closed the public hearing. A motion was made by Mr. McClanahan and seconded by Mr. Spooler to approve the request of SEMO Legends, LLC for an exception from Section 25-604, fence location, type & height, at 2070 North Sprigg Street. The motion passed with a roll call vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye:Bertrand, G/enn, Greaser, McC/anahan, Skinner, Spooler, Welch) 4. A public hearing was held on the request of SEMO Legends, LLC for an exception from Development Code Section 25-102, driveway width (per the City's standard specifications and drawings), at 2070 North Sprigg Street. Mr. Mark Guess, Koehler Engineering and Land Surveying, represented the applicant. He explained that the exception request is for a 70 foot wide driveway and 130 foot wide curb drop on North Sprigg Street. He explained there will be one driveway on North Sprigg Street and one driveway on Lexington Avenue. The driveway on North Sprigg Street will have two entrance lanes and one exit lane. The inside entrance lane will be utilized by visitors who will need to request access through the gate from the resident. The outside entrance lane will be for residents. A staff report was submitted to the Commission, containing the following findings of fact: Criterion #1: As part of the exception request, a "substantial equivalent" is proposed. "Substantial equivalent" means an alternate design, method or feature that accomplishes the same purpose as the applicable Development Code requirement. Findinq: Section 25-1003 of the Development Code allows multifamily developments � with at least 300 feet of street frontage to have up to finro (2) driveways along that frontage. The subject property has frontage on finro (2) streets — North Sprigg Street and Lexington Avenue — each of which is at least 300 feet in length. As such, the applicant's proposed multifamily development is allowed up to two (2) driveways on each street. The site plan for the proposed development shows one (1) driveway on each street. The Lexington Avenue driveway and curb drop do not exceed the maximum widths per the code whereas the North Sprigg Street driveway and curb drop do exceed the maximum widths. The fact that the applicant is only proposing two (2) driveways (one on each street) when he is allowed up to four (4) driveways serves as a substantial equivalent because he is essentially consolidating driveways in order to receive approval for a wider driveway and curb drop on North Sprigg Street. The additional width is needed due to the fact that there are finro entrance lanes for the driveway. One lane is for guests who must stop to use the call box (the development will have gates at the drives leading to the apartment buildings). The other lane is for residents so they don't have to stop and wait behind guests, which could cause traffic to back up onto the street. Criterion #2: Approval of the exception request is consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Findinq: The substantiat equivalent proposed by the applicant ensures fairness among property owners and tenants, which makes approval of the exception request consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Based on the above findings, staff recommended approval of the exception request. � City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes � June 14, 2017 Page 7 of 10 Chairman Bertrand opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, he closed the public hearing. A motion was made by Mr. Greaser and seconded by Mr. Welch to approve the request of SEMO Legends, LLC for an exception from Section 25-102, driveway width (per the City's standard specifications and drawings), at 2070 North Sprigg Street. The motion passed with a roll call vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, G/enn, Greaser, McC/anahan, Skinner, Spoo/er, Welch) 5. A public hearing was held on the request of SEMO Legends, LLC for an exception from Development Code Section 805, bufferyards, at 2070 North Sprigg Street. Mr. Mark Guess, Koehler Engineering and Land Surveying, represented the applicant. He explained that the exception request is for a six (6) foot high board-on-board fence in lieu of plantings and for reduced bufferyard width in the rear yard along a portion of the development. He further explained that the fence is proposed due to a force main in the area of the bufferyard and the change in grade from the adjacent property. A staff report was submitted to the Commission, containing the following findings of fact: Criterion #1: As part of the exception request, a "substantial equivalenY' is proposed. "Substantial equivalent" means an alternate design, method or feature that accomplishes the same purpose as the applicable Development Code requirement. Findinq: The applicant is proposing a 6 foot high board-on-board fence in the bufferyard along a portion of the development adjacent to a single-family residential � property. This qualifies as a substantial equivalent because the code does not require a fence for Type A bufferyards. The fence will serve as a visual and noise barrier to screen the multifamily development from the adjacent property. Criterion #2: Approval of the exception request is consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Findina: The substantial equivalent proposed by the applicant ensures fairness among property owners and tenants, which makes approval of the exception request consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Based on the above findings, staff recommended approval of the exception request. Chairman Bertrand opened the public hearing. Mr. Eric Marquart, developer of the adjacent Forest Hills Estates subdivision, inquired about the amount of the proposed reduction in the bufferyard. Mr. Shrimplin stated the request is for a portion of the bufferyard to be reduced from the required twenty (20) feet down to fifteen (15) feet and a small portion near the dumpster to be reduced further down to five (5) feet along the south property line adjacent to the property at 1975 Big Bend Road. Mr. Shrimplin showed Mr. Marquart a site plan and pointed out the location of the proposed reduced bufferyard. Mr. Marquart stated he had no further concerns. Seeing no other appearances to speak, Chairman Bertrand closed the public hearing. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Greaser to approve the request of SEMO Legends, LLC for an exception from Section 805, bufferyards, at 2070 North Sprigg Street. The motion passed with a roll call vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, � and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Glenn, Greaser, McC/anahan, Skinner, Spoo/er, We/ch) City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes June 14, 2017 Page 8 of 10 i� SUBDIVISION PLATS 6. The record plat of Cape West Village Fourth Subdivision was reviewed by the Commission. Ms. Adrienne Henry, Drury Southwest, Inc., represented the applicant. She explained that the subdivision was originally platted as a mobile home park. This plat resubdivides five (5) lots into four (4) lots to accommodate future duplexes. The staff report recommended approval as submitted. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Skinner to recommend approval of the record plat of Cape West Village Fourth Subdivision. The motion passed with a roll call vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, G/enn, Greaser, McC/anahan, Skinner, Spooler, Welch) 7. The record plat of Redhawk Commons Phase 3 was reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Wade Metcalf, Bowen Engineering & Surveying, represented the applicant. He explained that this is a continuation of the Redhawk Commons multi-family residential development. The plat establishes the last twelve (12) lots in the final phase of the development. The staff report recommended approval as submitted. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Welch to recommend approval of the record plat of Redhawk Commons Phase 3. The motion passed with a roll call vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Glenn, Greaser, McC/anahan, Skinner, Spoo/er, We/ch) 8. The record plat of Route K North Third Subdivision was reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Preston Amos, Pickett, Ray & Silver, Inc., represented the applicant. He explained that the plat subdivides a tract into two lots in order to develop one for a dental office at the � southeast corner of St. Francis Drive and Gordonville Road. The staff report recommended approval, subject to staff's comments being addressed. Mr. Shrimplin stated a revised plat had been submitted, and staff was in the process of reviewing it to see if any additional corrections are needed. A motion was made by Mr. Skinner and seconded by Mr. McClanahan to recommend approval of the record plat of Route K North Third Subdivision, subject to staff's comments being addressed. The motion passed with a roll call vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, G/enn, Greaser, McClanahan, Skinner, Spoo/er, We/ch) 9. The record plat of Edgewood Highlands Subdivision Phase 9 was reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Grady Wooten, Keystone Design, represented the applicant. He explained that the plat removes an existing lot line, thus combining two (2) tracts into one (1) lot. The staff report recommended approval as submitted. A motion was made by Mr. Greaser and seconded by Mr. Welch to recommend approval of the record plat of Edgewood Highlands Subdivision Phase 9. The motion passed with a roll call vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, G/enn, Greaser, McC/anahan, Skinner, Spooler, Welch) OTHER ITEMS AND COMMUNICATION Public Hearinq on Amendment to Chaqter 30 ReqardinQ Shippinq Containers Chairman Bertrand explained that the City Council asked for input from the Planning and Zoning Commission on the use of shipping containers as buildings materials. The Commission � discussed the topic at its May 10, 2017 meeting, and a poll was taken on two categories: 1) shipping containers used for occupancy purposes, and 2) shipping containers used for non- City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes � June 14, 2017 Page 9 of 10 occupancy purposes involving public access. A majority of the Commission members present at that meeting supported prohibiting the use of shipping containers for occupancy purposes, and allowing the use of shipping containers for non-occupancy purposes involving public access in commercial and industrial zoning districts only, as a special use. Staff shared this input with the City Council, and was directed to prepare an amendment accordingly. The amendment has been prepared and is before the Commission tonight for a recommendation to the Council. Chairman Bertrand opened the public hearing. Mr. Quinn Strong with Greenproject, Casa Properties, Poolhouse Apartments, and Little City Development stated he is opposed to the proposed prohibition on the use of shipping containers for occupancy purposes. He currently has plans in review with the City's Inspection Services Division for a duplex made of shipping containers. He suggested that rather than prohibit them, the City should work with him to develop appropriate regulations to address the safety and aesthetic concerns. He then discussed the versatility and durability of shipping container buildings, noting that they are used by the U.S. military to house troops and that they are constructed of strong steel which would withstand an F-4 tornado. He also mentioned that they can be very energy efficient. Mr. Strong added that he has a waiting list of prospective tenants wanting to rent a duplex made from shipping containers. Chairman Bertrand commented that it was obvious that Mr. Strong is very passionate about shipping container developments and has put a lot of work into his presentation. The Commission has already provided its input to the City Council, however, and the Commission's task tonight is to make a recommendation on the proposed amendment. He reminded Mr. Strong that the Commission is an advisory body and that it only makes � recommendations to the City Council. The Council will make the decision on whether or not shipping containers are allowed to be used as building materials. Seeing no other appearances to speak, Chairman Bertrand closed the public hearing. Mr. Glenn stated he was not at the previous meeting when this topic was first discussed. He asked if the proposed language would also prohibit using parts of shipping containers to construct a building for occupancy. Mr. Skinner asked at what point does it go from a shipping container to just being building materials. Mr. Glenn indicated that anyone who has environmental concerns about using shipping containers for occupancy purposes would probably have the same concern whether it is an entire shipping container or just parts of one. Mr. Shrimplin suggested adding "in whole or in part" to the proposed definition of shipping container for clarity. Mr. McClanahan stated he thinks shipping containers should be allowed for certain occupancy uses, such as offices in warehouses and temporary construction contractor offices. Mr. Strong agreed and noted that many construction contractors now use shipping containers as on-site offices because they can't be stolen like mobile office trailers. Chairman Bertrand polled the Commission members on the question of allowing shipping containers for permanent and temporary occupancy purposes in commercial and industrial districts. Six (6) of the seven (7) Commission members present were in favor of allowing them in the C-1, C-2, M-1 and M-2 districts, as a special use. Mr. Skinner indicated that he was not in attendance at the previous meeting, but based on his own research, he is in favor of allowing shipping containers for occupancy purposes. Mr. Glenn stated he is undecided right now, but is leaning toward allowing shipping containers for occupancy purposes in some manner. Chairman Bertrand noted that based on the discussion, it appeared that further discussion will � be needed at the next meeting. A motion was made by Mr. Skinner and seconded by Mr. Glenn to table the discussion and vote on a recommendation on the proposed amendment to Chapter City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes June 14, 2017 Page 10 of 10 � 30 regarding shipping containers. The motion passed unanimously. Chairman Bertrand stated he will give a report on the discussion to the City Council on June 19, 2017. Staff Communication Mr. Shrimplin announced that the Southeast Metropolitan Planning Organization (SEMPO) wilt be holding finro Community Workshops on June 21, 2017 to obtain input for developing the Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. The first workshop will be 3:30-5:00 p.m. at the Osage Centre in Cape Girardeau and the second workshop will be 6:00-7:30 p.m. at the Jackson Civic Center in Jackson. Mr. Shrimplin reported that the City has executed a contract with Teska Associates for the comprehensive plan update. The Teska team wil� make its first trip to Cape Girardeau in late July/early August to meet with staff and the Comprehensive Plan Oversight Committee as well as conduct stakeholder interviews and site visits. Adiournment Upon motion made by Mr. McClanahan and seconded by Mr. Glenn, the Commission voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:50 p.m. RespectFully submitted, � r �—�-- Trae Bertrand C hair m an V