The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes asked how. a duplex could be located in a single family residential district and Mr. Callaway .repliedt4at.....pa:rticularstructure ....preda tes .. the .. zoning ordinance and is therefore.anon__confo.nningstructllre. Mr. MacGilvrayasked how a second residence could be built. ,on. this land wi thout. replatting.. and Mr. Callaway replied that as .10ng as all setbacks . are met and the land is under one ownership, more than one principal res idence '.. can be built . Mr. . Dre,sser . stated that altl1ot.l!{hnothingbeing. proposed. on this resubdi vision plat is against any regulations,hepersonal1ya!!reeswiththe residents opposing this who haveexpre~sedadesire to preserve the neighborhood as it is,.and po~nted out there a,re several places in. the .an~awherethis couldhappeIl again and if it does, the character of theneighborhQodwillbe changed. Mr. Kaiser stated. that the applicant is not proposing todoanythingother.thanto meet legal requirements, fiDd since a second house could be buil t on this land apyway ,it is likely that if that were done witho~tthecitYhavingany controlip the matter, an application would someday follow~orreplatting so a legal sale could be made. He added that although he is sYJDpatheitic to the voicedconcern~, he thinks in this particular case, what .is being propo~edi. is good. Mr. MacGilvraystated that there ,will be 2 lots and 2 houses on the lots which are verysimil~.rin. size, . therefore the character will not be changed . very much. Mr. Wendler stated that because an additional house couldbe.buil t by the owner of thepropert;ywithout prpper plattipg, and th~n replattingwould probably follow afterthefact,hethinksthisisproper,adding that. he does not thirlkthis Commissiop should restrictsomeorie's use of his property if there is compliance with all City codes and ordinances. Mr. MacGilvray then made amotion to approve this resubdivision plat being proposed. Mr. Brochu seconded the motion which carried >by a vote of 6-1 (Dresser opposing) . AGENDA .. 1, TE~.n(): i5. ....~'77400: .Consici~rat ion()f. e,stabl ~sb.ing min imum pa rki ng, .r~<I1J.iIj~Dl~Il't~iI.~rt'~lliJ:"~ci.b~Sec t iC)119.3()if... ...Or<iin~nc ~... .. .1638 {the, .Zof'ingOrdipanc~)fpI:' J:I, "hosp~tal .( Sliln<ist one Cent ~r)t.o .b e located'south ot Barron Road aJld east ofS.H.6inthe.BarronPark s,l1bdi vi.sion . Mr. Calla\Vayexplained tha.t the zonin!!or-~inapceiswrittentogive authorization for establishing parking requirements. for hospitals to the Planning &.Zoning Commission. He further explained. that the P.R.C., reviewed and approved the site plan, pending approval ,by th~<.P&Z.....of the proposed parking. He stated that staff has reviewed requirements ,from 10 different Texas Gities, apdnonereqtiire as many spaces as are beingproposedbythi~applicant. - Mr. Callaway then explained> that the Commission can now establish minimum requirements.forhospitalswhich canbe.use<i.for.anyfu1:ureh()spital pr()jects, or it can act on. this, specific project and require thatfiDY future projects come back before the Commission to be reviewed on an individual. basis. He pointed out that theproposalbein~ made <for this ..facilityexcee<isState,stan(iards (as is pOinted out in the letter from,the architect), as wella.s ,standards of the other Texas cities studied. Discussion followed r~gardingtheext,rem~s represeIltedinstaff's study which range from 12 to 108 .spacesb~ing . required. for;.. thi~, .. facility, ..with Mr . Callaway . indicat ing that alth<>ughhe doe.s not know the exact rea.son for>thevariation of requirements, he would speculate that per-haps some of the ordinfiDceswereoldandoutdated, or perhaps the size of the.Ci tyqrthe availability. of., public transportation may have had some bearing on establishing.....the.....requiremen.ts. P&Z Minutes 1-15-87 Page 3 <~. "...... Mr. Stewart stated that perhaps this])roject is propos.ingto include more than enough parking spaces, but since<nobody seemstQbe s.ure, .hedoes not see how this Conunission . could. PossiblYiseta.standard . :for all future similar projects, and perhaps it would bewiseifth~COnnnissionwere to consider each project on an individual basis. Mr. MaqGilvraystatedthathewoUldlike to see less parking aIld more landscaping, adding that he believes there is an over abundanceo:f parking in this City already. The architect for the proj~ct, Herman Lee, was invited forward to clarify reasons for the .mnnber of parking . spaces being proposed for this project, and he stated that because 36 of the bedsinithis facility will be for adolescents and children, it has been determinedthatmorevisitQrs will be expected than for a normal psychiatric hospital. which hOllses.onlyadult~atients. Another. person from the audience explained that a complete drive-around. is required for fire protection, so removal of a few parking spaces wouldnotgl1eatlyaffectthe amount of pavement at this facility. After moregeneraldiscuss~onaboutth,e differences in parking reqllirements in various cities, Mrs.Sawt~lle madeamotiQn to approve the parking proposed for this facHity. Mr. stewartseqqndedthe motion which carrJed by a vote of 6-1 (MacG ilvray ). A.GENDAITEM NO.6. Mr. Callaway stated he wouldHk~ to bring theConnniss.ion up-to-date on the status of the work done on the Compreh,ensive planaIld Mr. Kais.erasked him to wait for this discussion until.. after all other business had been addressed. Mr..Wendler asked that consideration to be given to hospitals and similar types of facilities on an . individual basis rather. than to set a standard to follow. Others agreed. Mr. MacGilvray stated> that he did not want to let this meeting end without taking the opportunity to publicly thank former Director of Planning Al Mayo, who had recently resigned, for his many years of service to both the City and this Conunission. He then so moved to make amotion.to>express thispubHcly. Mr. Wendler seconded the motion. Mr. Kaiser then reiterated the motion aIld expaIlded it as follows : "To express appreciation. from the Plannil1g and Zoning Commission for the pleasure it has had in relying upon Mr. ..Mayo'sexpertise, gO?d judgment, and sincere reconunendations, notwi thstandingsome of the interesting discussions. .and sidebar conunents which have taken place".. Votes Were. cast and th,e motion to publicly express the above stated appreciation to Mr. MayocarriedunaIlimously(7-0). No one else had. any othe~ business,. so Mr. Kaiser turned the.floor over to Mr. Callaway for. discussion of the updating of the Compreh~nsivePlan... Mr. Callaway stated that drafts of . the.sections eoveringp()pulation, goals.aIld objectives. have beendistri,buted.. t() the .90nunissioner~j.. <ir0~:f~~ of the cOmme~qial development. and industrial. development sections . are ...complet~..~d . being . review~<l by .the. staff at.. this timejwork iSUI)derway Qll thehousin~sectionaIl4shouldbecomplete by the end of Janu,aryjand informat ion is nOw being gatl1er.ed. fora review o:f the. Capi tal Improvements sectionC\1}dthe Thoroughfare s~ction. In DeqeJllber asch~dulewas prepared and distribu~edbYl\1r.Mayo,bllt Mr. Call~way:.s.tated.he is not sure if this is the best schedule to follow in reviewing the pilan.,andaskedif the .Cpnunission wanted to discuss the. best approach to take at this meeting, or t.oset.aside sometime at the next meeting for that dis.cussion~ He added that he. would like to receive some input from the.Conunission regarding the form and/or scope the review and subsequent P&Z Minutes 1-15-87 Page 4