Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Commission Minutes 08-12-2015 CITY of CAPE GIRARDEAU PLANNING & ZONtNG COMMISSiON � PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 12, 2015 City Hall — Council Chambers Present: Trae Bertrand, Larry Dowdy, Jeff Glenn, William Hinckley, Randy Kluge, Patrick Koetting, Scott McClanahan, Thomas J. Welch Absent: Doug Spooler 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 July 8, 2015 meeting were unanimously approved upon motion made by Mr. Koetting and seconded by Mr. Kluge. REZONINGS, SPECIAL USE PERMITS, AND VARIANCES � 1. A public hearing was held on the request of Chao Xiang Lin to rezone property at 737/739 Themis Street from the C-1 (General Commercial) district to the RUMD (Residential Urban Mixed Density) district. Mr. Steven Thurman, representing the applicant, explained to the Commission that they purchased the property to make improvements to it in order to rent the property or possibly sell it. They were unaware that the property was zoned commercial and that the nonconforming residential use could not be expanded. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, he closed the public hearing. The staff report recommended approval. A motion was made by Mr. Koetting and seconded by Mr. Bertrand to recommend approval of the request to rezone property at 737/739 Themis Street from the C-1 (General Commercial) district to the RUMD (Residential Urban Mixed Density) district. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, Koetting, McClanahan, Welch) 2. A public hearing was held on the request of Dana King to rezone property at 2256 Kingsway Drive from the R-1 (Single-Family Suburban Residential) district to the C-1 (General Commercial) district. Ms. Shelly Watkins, representing the applicant, informed the Commission she would like to lease the space to operate a hair salon. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, he closed the public hearing. Mr. Bertrand explained it is not the City's common practice to rezone from a residential district to a commercial district, but given the fact the subject property already contains a commercial space and is situated between a commercial corridor and a residential neighborhood, the proposed zoning district is reasonable. The staff report recommended approval. A motion was made by Mr. Kluge and seconded by Mr. Glenn to � recommend approval of the request to rezone property at 2256 Kingsway Drive from the R-1 (Single-Family Suburban Residential) district to the C-1 (General Commercial) district. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, Koetting, McClanahan, Welch) City of Cape Girardeau Planning&Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes August 12,2015 Page 2 � 3. A public hearing was held on the request of Men's Wearhouse for a variance from Development Code Section 25-506(a), wall signs, at 155 Siemers Drive, Suite 2. Mr. Jerry Nunnally with Canedy Sign 8� Graphics, representing the applicant, informed the Commission that Men's Wearhouse would like to install a wall sign on the west elevation of the building, facing Walmart. Other tenants in the same building already have signage on the west elevation. A staff report was submitted to the Commission containing the following findings of fact: Criterion #1: The requested variance arises from a condition which is unique to the property in question and which is not ordinarily found, and is not created by an action or actions of the property owner, the applicant or predecessors in title. Findinq: The subject tenant space is in a commercial strip center and has one building frontage (east elevation) that is afforded wall signage per the Development Code. The rear of the building faces Walmart and Sam's Club. A private access drive runs through the Walmart and Sam's Club parcels adjacent to the subject property. The access drive functions as a collector for traffic generated by these businesses as well as a thoroughfare for drivers going from State Highway K to Lambert Drive/Shirley Drive and vice versa. As such, the rear of the building has exposure to traffic that is similar to that of a street. This is a unique condition which is not ordinarily found and not created by the developer, the property owner, or the applicant. � Criterion #2: The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the rights of adjacent property owners or residents. Findinq: The west (rear) elevation of the building faces existing commercial developments and as such, the display of wall signage will not adversely affect the rights of those property owners and tenants. In order to maintain a standard of fairness among properties, the variance should only be granted with a condition that the aggregate sign area of all wall signs for the subject tenant space shall not exceed the maximum permitted wall sign area per the Development Code. Since the entire wall sign area is based on the east (street-facing) elevation, granting a variance to allow wall signage on the west elevation will reduce the permitted wall sign area on the east elevation by the same amount. Thus, the tenant does not receive an increase in permitted sign area; instead, they are granted approval to transfer it to another elevation. Criterion #3: The strict application of the provisions of the Development Code from which the variance is requested will constitute unnecessary hardship upon the utilization of the property. Findin : The other tenants in the subject building have signs on the west (rear) elevation. Denial of the variance will constitute an unnecessary hardship because the applicant will be the only tenant that is not permitted to display wall signage on the rear of the building. � Criterion #4: The requested variance will not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity, or general welfare. City of Cape Girardeau Planning&Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes � August 12,2015 Page 3 Findinq: If the variance is granted with the recommended condition of approval, it will not adversely affect the public. Criterion #5: Granting the requested variance will not undermine the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Findinct: The variance request is based on a unique condition pertaining to the subject building and property, and the applicant will experience an unnecessary hardship if the variance is denied. As such, granting the variance will not undermine the general spirit and intent of the Development Code as long as the recommended condition of approval is included. Based on the above findings, staff recommended approval of the variance request, subject to the following condition: 1. The aggregate sign area of all wall signs for the subject tenant space shall not exceed the maximum permitted wall sign area per the Development Code. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, he closed the public hearing. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Koetting to approve the variance for signage on the west building elevation at 155 Siemers Drive, Suite 2 with the staff recommended condition. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, Koetting, � McClanahan, Welch) SUBDIVISION PLATS 1. The record plat of Williamsburg Phase 3 was reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Shrimplin explained that the plat is a continuation of the Williamsburg Subdivision. The staff report recommended approval of the plat, subject to the corrections in the staff review letter. A motion was made by Mr. Bertrand and seconded by Mr. Koetting to recommend approval of the Williamsburg Phase 3 record plat, subject to the corrections in the staff review letter. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, Koetting, McClanahan, Welch) 2. The record plat of P. and S. Subdivision was reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Frank Stoffregen, the applicant, explained that the plat would divide one lot into two lots. Mr. Shrimplin stated the plat shows a variance for the omission of the required 10' utility easement adjacent to the rear (north) lot line of Lot #1. The staff report recommended approval of the plat as submitted, including the variance. A motion was made by Mr. Bertrand and seconded by Mr. Koetting to recommend approval of the P. and S. Subdivision record plat as submitted, including the variance. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, Koetting, McClanahan, Welch) 3. The record plat of DKR 11th Subdivision was reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Keith Deimund with DKR Properties, the applicant, stated he was available for questions from the � Commission. The staff report recommended approval of the plat as submitted. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Dowdy to recommend approval of the DKR 11th Subdivision record plat as submitted. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in City of Cape Girardeau Planning&Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes August 12,2015 Page 4 E � �rr opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, Koetting, McClanahan, Welch) OTHER ITEMS AND COMMUNICATION Chairman McClanahan thanked everyone for their efforts in encouraging citizens to vote on the Transportation Trust Fund 5 ballot issue. The issue passed with a 76% approval of the voters. Mr. Shrimplin stated the City is in the process of completing the remaining TTF 4 projects and will begin on the TTF 5 projects early next year. Amendments to R-4 District requlations Mr. Shrimplin presented the Commissioners with proposed amendments to the R-4 (Medium Density Multifamily Residential) district regulations. He explained that the previous Zoning Code permitted single-family and two-family (duplex) dwellings in the R-4 district by right. These uses were dropped from the district when the current code was adopted in 2010. The code adoption changed these uses from being permitted to nonconforming, which has created a number of issues due to the restrictions on nonconforming uses. Staff is proposing to re-add single-family and two-family dwellings to the R-4 district as permitted uses, but prohibit new single-family and two-family subdivisions since the change is intended to address existing situations. Staff believes this change is preferable to rezoning properties on a case-by-case basis. A motion was made by Mr. Hinckley and seconded by Mr. Bertrand to recommend approval of the proposed amendments to the R-4 (Medium Density Multifamily Residential) district regulations. The motion passed by a unanimous vote. � Mr. Shrimplin informed the Commission of pending annexation requests, which wilf be presented to them for review in the coming months, for areas around LaSalle Avenue and along Bloomfield Road. He explained that the Commission's role in reviewing annexation requests is to recommend an appropriate zoning district for the property to be added to the city limits. Adjournment Upon motion made by Mr. Koetting and seconded by Mr. Hinckley, the Commission voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully s mitt , Randy KI ge Secretary �