Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Commission Minutes 12-09-2015 CITY Of CAPE GIRARDEAU PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION � PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES December 9, 2015 City Hall — Council Chambers Present: Trae Bertrand, Larry Dowdy, Jeff Glenn, William Hinckley, Patrick Koetting, Scott McClanahan, Doug Spooler, Thomas J. Welch Absent: Randy Kluge Staff Present: Carol Peters, Ryan Shrimplin Call to Order: Chairman McClanahan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The minutes of the November 17, 2015 meeting were unanimously approved upon motion made by Mr. Koetting and seconded by Mr. Spooler. REZONINGS, SPECIAL USE PERMITS. AND EXCEPTIONS � 1. The Commission resumed discussion of the request of Gary Arnold to rezone property at 2930 Hawthorne Road, formerly addressed as 2861 Hopper Road, from the R-1 (Single- Family Suburban Residential) district to the PD (Planned Development) district and for the approval of a Preliminary Development Plan, which was tabled at the November 17, 2015 meeting. Mr. Gary Arnold, applicant, and Mr. Chris Koehler, Koehler Engineering & Land Surveying, informed the Commission that a meeting with the neighbors and the City has not yet been scheduled because the engineering firm hired by the neighbors has not completed its work. Mr. Tom O'Loughlin, representing the neighbors, reiterated that Bowen Engineering & Surveying had not had enough time to gather information regarding the project in order to have a meeting with the developer and the City to discuss the impact of the development on the adjacent properties. Chairman McClanahan re-opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, he closed the public hearing. Mr. Shrimplin reviewed the process for rezoning property to a Planned Development district again and reminded the Commissioners that they would only be voting on the request to rezone the property and the approval of the preliminary development plan. The staff report recommended approval, subject to several staff review comments being addressed. A motion was made by Mr. Hinckley and seconded by Mr. Welch to recommend approval of the request to rezone property at 2930 Hawthorne Road from the R-1 (Single-Family Suburban Residential) district to the PD (Planned Development) district and approval of the preliminary development plan subject to the staff review comments being addressed. Mr. Dowdy abstained from the discussion and vote. The motion passed with a vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 1 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, G/enn, Hinckley, Koetting, McC/anahan, Spooler, Welch;Abstain: Dowdy) � 2. No one was in attendance to answer questions regarding the request of Tony LaForest for an exception from Development Code Section 25-604, fence location, type and height, at 1931 North Kingshighway, which was tabled at the November 17, 2015 meeting. The item remained on the table. City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 9, 2015 Page 2 of 4 � 3. A public hearing was held on the request of Austin Crowe for two exceptions from Development Code Sections 25-603(g), fence general standards and 25-604, fence location, type and height, at 3311 Kage Road, which is zoned R-1 (Single-Family Suburban Residential). Mr. Kevin Spaeth, representing the applicant and the property owner, explained that the home at 3317 Kage Road sits quite a bit higher than the home at 3311 Kage Road. Wanting some privacy, the owner of 3311 Kage Road hired a contractor to construct a fence ranging from eight (8) to twelve (12) feet tall due to the slope of the ground, with the finished side facing in (per the City Code, the maximum fence height is six (6) feet and the finished side must face outward from the property). The owner was under the impression the contractor had obtained a fence permit until she was contacted by the City. She then spoke with the owners of 3317 Kage Road, who indicated they do not have an issue with the fence as long as it is covered or screened. Mr. Spaeth added that the owner of 3311 Kage Road is proposing to add a lattice to the side of the fence facing 3317 Kage Road and cover it with ivy; she also plans to plant shrubs. She is prepared to finish that side of the fence with the same materials as the other side, however, if required to do so. A staff report was submitted to the Commission containing the following findings of fact: Reauest for fence front/finished side to face inward 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 indicates the fence owner is proposing shrubs and ivy as a � substantial equivalent. Staff does not believe the plantings meet the standard for a substantial equivalent. They would serve to cover and screen the rear or unfinished side of the fence. The intent of the code requirement is to ensure the side of the fence facing outward has the appearance of a "front" rather than a "rear". In comparing the two sides of the fence, Staff cannot conclude the side facing outward, even with the plantings, is in any way a "fronY'. Criterion #2: Approval of the exception request is consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Findinq: Based on Staff's interpretation of the code requirement, the exception request does not meet the standard for a substantial equivalent; therefore, approval of the exception request is not consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Reauest for fence heiqht to exceed 6 feet Criterion #1: As part of the exception request, a "substantial equivalent" is proposed. "Substantial equivalenY' means an alternate design, method or feature that accomplishes the same purpose as the applicable Development Code requirement. Findina: The application cites the relatively short length of the fence as a substantial equivalent. Staff does not believe the fence length meets the standard for a � substantial equivalent. The intent of the code requirement is to prevent fences in the City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 9, 2015 � Page 3 of 4 side yard that exceed the typical height of a privacy fence, which would create a visual obstruction above the normal fence line. Criterion #2: Approval of the exception request is consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Findina: Based on Staff's interpretation of the code requirement, the exception request does not meet the standard for a substantial equivalent; therefore, approval of the exception request is not consistent with the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Based on the above findings, staff recommended denial of both exception requests. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, he closed the public hearing. Staff distributed to the Commissioners copies of an email from Mrs. Kimberly Keillor, 3317 Kage Road, stating she and her husband have no objections to the fence as long as it is finished with the same cedar planks as the other side or lattice is hung on their side for vines or other types of climbing plants to grow on. Mr. Bertrand noted the amount of additional height being sought by the exception request is significant, but one must take into consideration the location and topography of the subject property and whether or not there is opposition from the neighbors. In this case, the subject property is a large wooded lot and the fence is not visible from the street or any adjacent property other � than 3317 Kage Road. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Bertrand to approve the exception request allowing an eight (8) foot to twelve (12) foot fence at 3311 Kage Road in its current location with the condition that the side of the fence facing 3317 Kage Road be finished with cedar planks to match the other side. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Koetting, McC/anahan, Spooler, Welch). A motion was made by Mr. Koetting and seconded by Mr. Glenn to approve the exception request to allow the finished side of the fence at 3311 Kage Road to face inward. The motion failed with a vote of 0 in favor, 8 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, G/enn, Hinckley, Koetting, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) SUBDIVISION PLATS 4. The record plat of American Landmark Properties Subdivision was reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Chris Koehler, Koehler Engineering & Land Surveying, representing the applicant, was available for questions from the Commission. The record plat divides a parcel addressed as 505 and 511 North Kingshighway into two (2) lots. The staff report recommended approval of the plat subject to the corrections in the staff review letter. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Dowdy to recommend approval of the American Landmark Properties Subdivision record plat, subject to the corrections listed in the staff review letter. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, G/enn, Hinckley, Koetting, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) � City of Cape Girardeau Planning &Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 9, 2015 Page 4 of 4 � OTHER ITEMS AND COMMUNICATION Amendments to Chaqter 25, Articles I & II Mr. Shrimplin explained that staff has been meeting for the past several months to review City Code Chapters 25 and 30 (Development Code and Zoning Code, respectively) for the purpose of determining what amendments are needed. This review is still in process; however, staff felt it would be a good idea to begin obtaining input from the Commission on the amendments that are being considered. He presented Chapter 25, Articles I and II for review. The Commission members asked questions and offered comments on the draft amendments. Mr. Shrimplin indicated the next amendments to be reviewed will be Articles IX to XI, which will be presented by Casey Brunke, City Engineer, at the Commission's January 13, 2016 meeting. While Articles I and II are not yet ready to be reviewed by the City Council, Articles IX to XI are ready and Mrs. Brunke would like a recommendation of approval at the January 13th meeting. Nomination of Officers Mr. Bertrand was nominated for Chairman, Mr. McClanahan for Vice-Chairman, and Mr. Spooler for Secretary. Election of Officers will be held at the January 13, 2016 meeting. Staff Communication Mr. Shrimplin informed the Commission that Mr. Alex McElroy has been hired as the new � Development Services Director. Ms. Molly Hood will remain with the City as Deputy City Manager. Mr. McElroy will begin his employment with the City on December 14, 2015. Adiournment Upon motion made by Mr. Koetting and seconded by Mr. Spooler, the Commission voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 2 - ��� _. l�tu �€��Iec- -I�an�y-141wge_ Secretary �