Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Commission Minutes 05-13-2015 CITY Of CAPE GIRARDEAU PLANNING & ZONIFIG COMMiSSiON � PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 13, 2015 City Hall — Council Chambers Present: Trae Bertrand, Larry Dowdy, Jeff Glenn, William Hinckley, Randy Kluge, Scott McClanahan, Doug Spooler, Thomas J. Welch Absent: Patrick Koetting 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 April 8, 2015 meeting were unanimously approved upon motion made by Mr. Hinckley and seconded by Mr. Dowdy. REZONINGS, SPECIAL USE PERMITS. AND VARIANCES 1. A public hearing was held on the request of Richard E. LaFont to rezone property at 306 � South Henderson Avenue and 1121 Good Hope Street from the R-4 (Medium Density Multi- Family Residential) district to the R-3 (High Density Single-Family Residential) district. No one appeared before the Commission to present the request. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, closed the public hearing. The staff report recommended approval. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Spooler to recommend approval of the request to rezone property at 306 South Henderson Avenue and 1121 Good Hope Street from the R-4 (Medium Density Multi-Family Residential) district to the R-3 (High Density Single-Family Residential) district. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) 2. A public hearing was held on the request of R. Hetzel Properties, LLC to rezone property at 1304 Broadway from the R-2 (Single-Family Urban Residential) district to the CBD (Central Business) district. Mr. Rick Hetzel, the applicant, 3107 Kage Road, informed the Commission that he plans to convert the lower level of the building into office space while retaining a residential use on the upper floor. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing. Mr. Mike Sheehan, 510 North West End Boulevard, stated because the property is located in the Boulevard Local Historic District, any exterior changes would need the approval of the Historic Preservation Commission. Mr. Hetzel responded by stating he was aware of the Certificate of Appropriateness approval process. Chairman McClanahan closed the public hearing. The staff report recommended approval. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Hinckley to recommend approval of the request to rezone property at 1304 Broadway from the R-2 (Single-Family Urban Residential) district to the CBD (Central Business) district. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, McClanahan, � Spoo/er, Welch) 3. A public hearing was held on the request of the City of Cape Girardeau to rezone property at 338 Limbaugh Lane from the R-1 (Single-Family Suburban Residential) district to the C-1 City of Cape Girardeau Planning&Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes May 13, 2015 Page 2 � (General Commercial) district. Mr. Shrimplin stated the property was annexed into the city in 1998. At the time of annexation, the existing alarm business was already operating on the property. Upon annexation, the property was automatically zoned R-1 as was required by the zoning code at the time. Mr. Shrimplin was recently contacted by the property owner, who claimed he did not know the property was still zoned residential and questioned why the City never rezoned it to a district that permits his business by right. In response, the City has initiated this rezoning. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, closed the public hearing. The staff report recommended approval. A motion was made by Mr. Kluge and seconded by Mr. Spooler to recommend approval of the request to rezone property at 338 Limbaugh Lane 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, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) 4. A public hearing was held on the request of Teen Challenge Mid America for a Special Use Permit to construct and operate a car wash in the C-2 (Highway Commercial) district at 16 South West End Boulevard. Mr. Chad Beebe, the applicant, stated that the Commission recommended approval of the Special Use Permit request at its last meeting. Since that time, the plans have changed due to increasing costs. The portable office containing the restroom has been replaced with a payment booth. Instead of using valet drivers, the car wash customers will remain in their cars and an attendant from the booth will collect payment. The customers will then be lead through the car wash by a series of employees. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing and seeing no appearances to speak, closed the public hearing. A staff report addendum was submitted to the Commission, � recommending approval of the revised Special Use Permit request with the following conditions: 1. Except for the landscaping variance granted as part of this permit, the special use shall meet all applicable requirements of the Zoning and Development Codes. 2. This permit shall automaticalfy expire twelve (12) months from the date of issuance if the use for which it was granted has not commenced. 3. Major modifications to the special use shall require the approval of the City Council. 4. This permit is not transferable without the consent of the City Council. 5. The buitdings and structures associated with the special use shall have a uniform color scheme and be compatible in their materials, with the final design subject to approval by the City staff. 6. This approval does not include signage. A sign permit application shall be submitted for any proposed signs. 7. This approval does not include e�erior lighting. If exterior lighting is proposed, a photometric plan and specification sheets for the proposed exterior light fixtures shall be submitted as part of the building permit application. � Mr. Hinckley asked if the building code requires the applicant to provide a restroom. Mr. Beebe indicated the applicant has an agreement with the owner of the adjacent Rhodes 101 convenience store allowing their employees and customers to use the store's restrooms. City of Cape Girardeau Planning&Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes May 13,2015 � Page 3 Mr. Shrimplin stated the agreement will need to be in writing and submitted to the City staff for review. A motion was made by Mr. Kluge and seconded by Mr. Spooler to recommend approval of the request for a Special Use Permit to construct and operate a car wash in the C-2 (Highway Commercial) district at 16 South West End Boulevard, with the conditions listed in the staff report. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) 5. A public hearing was held on the request of American Tower Corporation for a Special Use Permit to construct and operate a telecommunication tower in the C-2 (Highway Commercial) district at 202 North Kingshighway. Mr. Mike Bieniek, the applicant, explained the existing 195 foot high telecommunication tower on the site is rusting from the inside out and needs to be replaced. The applicant is proposing to construct a new tower of the same height within the existing compound, approximately 20 feet to the north of the existing tower. Once the new tower is operating, the existing tower will be removed. This "drop and swap" approach is common in the wireless communications industry because it minimizes the disruption to the carriers. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing. Mr. Charles Williams, 204 North Kingshighway, expressed concern about the damage that would be caused to his property by construction traffic since the only vehicular access to the site is via an existing access easement across his property. He indicated the easement does not contain any provisions for compensation due to damage. Chairman McClanahan informed Mr. Williams that the � easement issue is a private matter, and encouraged him to work with the applicant to reach a solution. Mr. Williams also expressed his concern with the proximity of the new tower to one of the buildings on his property. Mr. Shrimplin stated the proposed location of the tower is one of two variance requests as part of the Special Use Permit request. Per the Zoning Code, telecommunication towers must be set back from the nearest structure a distance equal to one and one-half times the height of the tower. They must also be set back from the nearest public right of way a distance equal to the height of the tower. City staff supports both variances due to the fact that there is an existing telecommunication tower on the property that also does not meet these setback requirements and was approved by a Special Use Permit. Chairman McClanahan thanked Mr. Williams for coming to the meeting to express his concerns and reiterated that he should work with the applicant to resolve the issues with the access easement. Chairman McClanahan closed the public hearing. A staff report was submitted to the Commission containing the following findings of fact: Criterion #1: The proposed special use will not substantially increase traffic hazards or congestion. Findin : Telecommunication towers only generate occasional traffic, primarily for construction, maintenance, repair, and upgrades. Therefore, the new tower will not substantially increase traffic hazards or congestion. Criterion #2: The proposed special use will not substantially increase fire hazards. Findin : The new tower will be constructed in accordance with the aforementioned safety standards as well as City codes, making it as safe as the existing tower or � safer, which will not substantially increase fire hazards. Criterion #3: The proposed special use will not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. Ciry of Cape Girardeau Planning&Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes May 13,2015 Page 4 � Findinq: The existing tower is located in a commercial area along a state highway. There are several communication towers in the area. The new tower will have a similar appearance to the existing tower but will have one less antenna platForm. The new platforms will be low profile, resulting in a slight visual improvement over the existing tower. As such, the new tower will not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. Criterion #4: The proposed special use will not adversely affect the general welfare of the community. Findin : The new tower will improve the functionality of the wireless system and benefit the carriers and their customers. From a development standpoint, the impact of the tower replacement will be marginal, amounting to a few minor improvements. This will not adversely affect the general welfare of the community. Criterion #5: The proposed special use will not overtax public utilities. Findinq: The new tower will re-use the existing electric and telephone connections and as such, it will not overtax public utilities. Based on the above findings, City staff recommended approval of the Special Use Permit request with the following conditions: � 1. Except for the setback variances granted as part of this permit, the special use shall meet all applicable requirements of the Zoning and Development Codes. 2. This permit shall automatically expire twelve (12) months from the date of issuance if the use for which it was granted has not commenced. 3. Major modifications to the special use shall require the approval of the City Council. 4. This permit is not transferable without the consent of the City Council. A motion was made by Mr. Hinckley and seconded by Mr. Dowdy to recommend approval of the request for a Special Use Permit to construct and operate a telecommunication tower in the C-2 (Highway Commercial) district at 202 North Kingshighway, with the conditions listed in the staff report. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, McClanahan, Spoo/er, Welch) 6. A public hearing was held on the request of Lee W. Flanagan for a variance from Development Code Section 25-604, fence location, type and height, at 1241 Marilyn Drive. Mr. Mike Smith, the property owner, explained the request is to install a four (4) foot high chain link fence in the front yard adjacent to Kingshighway in order to enclose the yard for small children and pets. There was previously a chain link fence in this location. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing. He acknowledged receipt of an email from Harry and Dorothy Bertrand, 1245 Marilyn Drive, who were opposed to the variance. Seeing no appearances to speak, Chairman McClanahan closed the public hearing. Mr. Bertrand �,;� recused himself from the discussion and vote for personal reasons. A staff report was submitted to the Commission containing the following findings of fact: City of Cape Girardeau Planning&Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes � May 13,2015 Page 5 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. Findin : The subject property is rectangular and has street frontage on the two shorter sides, resulting in two front yards and no rear yard. Due to the width of the lot, the side yards are minimal. These characteristics constitute a unique condition of the subject property which was not self-imposed by 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 applicant is requesting the variance in order to enclose the yard facing North Kingshighway with a fence that is adequate to keep small children and pets from entering the highway. Due to the unique condition, the property owner does not have a viable alternate yard to erect the fence in compliance with the maximum fence height requirement. This constitutes an unnecessary hardship and therefore approval of the variance will not adversely affect the rights of adjacent property owners or residents. 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. Findinp: Denial of the variance will constitute an unnecessary hardship, per the previous response. Criterion #4: The requested variance will not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity, or general welfare. Findinq: Approval of the variance will allow the property owner to have a fence that will prevent small children and pets from entering the highway, which will not adversely affect the public. Criterion #5: Granting the requested variance will not undermine the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Findinq: The variance request arises from a unique condition of the subject property, which creates an unnecessary hardship unless the variance is approved. Doing so will not adversely affect the rights of adjacent property owners or residents, nor will it adversely affect the public. Therefore, approval of the variance will not undermine the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Based on the above findings, City staff recommended approval of the variance request. � A motion was made by Mr. Hinckley and seconded by Mr. Dowdy to approve the variance request for a four (4) high fence in the front yard at 1241 Marilyn Drive. The motion passed with a vote of 7 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 1 abstaining. (Aye: Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch;Abstain: Bertrand) City of Cape Girardeau Planning 8�Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes May 13, 2015 Page 6 � 7. A public hearing was held on the request of Tyson and Catherine Shoemaker for a variance from Development Code Section 25-604, fence location, type and height, at 3274 Lakewood Drive. Mrs. Leigh Shoemaker, the property owner, explained the property is completely surrounded by trees and has frontage on three streets. She and her husband would like to install a six (6) foot high privacy fence in the front yard adjacent to Putters Lane to protect their dogs from the wildlife in the area. Chairman McClanahan opened the public hearing. He acknowledged receipt of a letter from Dan and Dianna Todt, 1704 Putters Lane, who had no issues with the variance. Seeing no appearances to speak, Chairman McClanahan closed the public hearing. 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 property has street frontage on three of its four sides, resulting in three front yards and one rear yard. The front yards occupy a majority of the property, leaving the property owner with a relatively small area on which to locate her privacy fence. This constitutes a unique condition of the property that is not self- imposed. Criterion #2: The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the rights of adjacent property owners or residents. � Findin : Due to the unique condition, the strict application of the above fence requirements disproportionately affects the property owner. Approval of the variance will allow the property owner to have a privacy fence that is comparable to what her neighbors are permitted by the code and therefore will not adversely affect the rights of adjacent property owners or residents. 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. Findinq: Denial of the variance will constitute an unnecessary hardship because the property owner will continue to be disproportionately affected by the above fence requirements. Criterion #4: The requested variance will not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity, or general welfare. � Findinq: Approval of the variance will allow the property owner to have a privacy fence in one of the three front yards on her property, which will not adversely affect the public. Criterion #5: Granting the requested variance will not undermine the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. � FindinQ: The variance request arises from a unique condition of the subject property, which creates an unnecessary hardship unless the variance is approved. Doing so will not adversely affect the rights of adjacent property owners or residents, nor will it City of Cape Girardeau Planning&Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes � May 13,2015 Page 7 adversely affect the public. Therefore, approval of the variance will not undermine the general spirit and intent of the Development Code. Based on the above findings, City staff recommended approval of the variance request. A motion was made by Mr. Dowdy and seconded by Mr. Spooler to approve the variance request for a six (6) foot high fence in the front yard at 3274 Lakewood Drive. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, K/uge, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) SUBDIVISION PLATS 8. The record plat of Dodson Farm Second Subdivision was reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Bruce Jateff, the applicant, 3614 Old Hopper Road, explained the plat is to subdivide a lot into two (2) new lots at the northeast corner of Kage Road and Hopper Road. The staff report recommended approval as submitted. A motion was made by Mr. Kluge and seconded by Mr. Glenn to recommend approval of the Dodson Farm Second Subdivision record plat as submitted. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) 9. The record plat of JRN Subdivision was reviewed by the Commission. No one appeared before the Commission to present the request. Mr. Shrimplin explained the plat combines � five (5) parcels into one (1) new lot at the southwest corner of William Street and Sheridan Drive. The staff report recommended approval of the plat as submitted. Mr. Shrimplin indicated the parcels are currently under separate ownership. The applicant has contracts to purchase the parcels in order to combine them as shown on the plat. If the Commission recommends approval, the plat will be held from City Council review until the applicant submits one set of copies of the recorded deeds conveying the parcels to the applicant along with the updated plat showing the document numbers for the deeds. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Spooler to recommend approval of the JRN Subdivision record plat as submitted. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) 10. The record plat of Ricky's First Subdivision was reviewed by the Commission. No one appeared before the Commission to present the request. Mr. Shrimplin explained the plat reconfigures one lot and part of another lot into two (2) new lots at the southeast corner of South Henderson Avenue and Good Hope Street. He further explained there are currently two (2) single-family dwellings on the same lot, which constitutes a nonconforming use. The intent of the record plat is to place the dwellings on separate lots. Due to the locations of the two dwellings, several variances are shown on the plat and noted. The plat reflects the R-3 zoning district regulations, which is predicated upon approval of the rezoning that was heard earlier on the agenda. If the Commission recommends approval, the plat will be held from City Council review until the Council votes on the first reading of the rezoning ordinance. The staff report recommended approval of the plat as submitted, including the variances. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Spooler to recommend � approval of the Ricky's First Subdivision record plat as submitted, including the variances. The motion passed with a vote of 8 in favor, 0 in opposition, and 0 abstaining. (Aye: Bertrand, Dowdy, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) City of Cape Girardeau Planning&Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes May 13, 2015 Page 8 { � V 11. The record plat of Emerald Woods Subdivision was reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Ryan Roth, Koehler Engineering & Surveying, appeared before the Commission on behatf of the property owner. He explained the plat subdivides Lot 10 of Giboney Woods 1 St Subdivision Amended into four (4) new lots. Mr. Shrimplin noted a sewer main extension is planned as part of the development. Because the plat involves public improvements, it will be held from City Council review until the improvements are completed and ready to be accepted by the City or until an escrow agreement is executed by the developer. The staff report recommended approval subject to the corrections listed in the staff review letter. A motion was made by Mr. Glenn and seconded by Mr. Spooler to recommend approval of the Emerald Woods 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, Glenn, Hinckley, Kluge, McClanahan, Spooler, Welch) OTHER ITEMS AND COMMUNICATION Commission and Staff Communications Chairman McClanahan informed the Commission that the City Council finalized the proposed project list for TTF 5. Staff distributed a copy of the list to each Commissioner. Mr. Shrimplin stated the list contains all of the projects on the Subcommittee's recommended project list except for the reconstruction of New Madrid Street between Clark Avenue to Perry Avenue. The Council's list contains a near 50/50 split between specific projects and general projects. Additional funding is proposed for maintenance and enl�ancement projects including paving overlay, street/curb/gutter repair, new sidewalks and sidewalk repair, and new street lights. In ��,,} addition, the Council decided to propose repurposing the funds that were allocated to the Armstrong Drive extension, a TTF 3 project that did not move forward due to excessively high acquisition costs. The funds are proposed to be used for neighborhood street repairs. Mr. Glenn stated the current session of the Missouri General Assembly ends this week. Several bills have not made it out of committee and are not likely to be passed this session. He also gave an update on the Route 66 corridor study. The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet has indicated that it is not interested in having the highway run th�ough Kentucky. Adiournment Upon motion made by Mr. Kluge and seconded by Mr. Bertrand, the Commission voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitt , Randy Kluge Secretary �