The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes Commissioner Hall stated that the City requires other . property owners to have joint access easements. and driveways to relieve traffic congestion. . There are alternatives available to the applicant and upholding. the ordinance is. a continuation of what is being done throughout the City. The motion. to deny. the appeal passed unopposed (5 -.0). Commissioner Mariott moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion which pa.ssedunopposed (5 .- .0). PRomcr RBVIEW'COMMITTEE REPORT December 23, 1993 FROM: Joe Castillo, ,CastillolWattsAssociates 16500NorthSanPedroSte291,San Antonio; TX 78232 Texas Food ,Concepts 12019 Colwik,SanAntonio,TX78232 Project Review Connuittee \~ Sabine Kuenzel, Staff Planner t} . David.Pull~n,CityEngineer Mary Elizabeth Herring, P& ZRepresentative Others Attending '" ' Shirley Yolk, ,Development Coordinator ' Tony Michalsky, Electrical Operations Coordinator Samantha. Smith, Engineering Assistant Pete Vanacel<, Parl{sSenior Planner George Spain,. Fire Marshal Laverne Akin, GTE Representative Mike "Lavender, TCACable Representative Don Fazzino, Lone Star Gas Representative Parl(Jng Lot Plan '~,City SJickers;proposedrestaurant ,to be located on lot A2 in 'theD.A. Smith Subdivision 'on Live' Oal{ Street between Taco Cabana and La Quinta Inn. (93~425) A PresubmissionConference was held Wednesday, December 22, 1993 to discuss the above. mentioned parking lot plan. City. Engineer David Pullen moved to deny the plan as subrnitteddue to numerous areas of non-compliance including inadequate, parking, non-compliance with access ordinance, ,parking island sizes ,and lack of dumpster. Planning'and' Zoning' ,Colllmissioner Herring seconded the motion'" which passed unopposed (3 ~O). The fol1owingcolnmentswere made by the. various reviewing agents: SUBJECT: TO: COMMENTS/CONCERNS: A. total of 77 parking spaces are required for the. proposed building. The parking shown on the. Taco Cabana site cannot. be used for the proposed restaurant. According to City planning case files, the existing Taco Cabana site is non- conforming due toa Iacl< ofparl<ing with respect to the square footage of the building. The proposed combined end row parI<ing lot islands must be a minimum of 360 square feet. The islands shown on the site plan are inadequate. PRCReport City Slickers Case #93-425 Page 2 Show the dumpster loeation and proposed screening. Any off-site facilities must be covered through a' perpetual ,easement or the owner may have the' option ofreplatting .theproperty into one lot under common ownership. The proposeddrivewaylocatiol1 is not acceptable and not in compliance with the City'sdrive'way ,access ordinance. The 25' private access easement,must remain clear and parking islands cannot encroach 'into that .easement Existing dumpster and pad on the Taco Cabana site cannot be ' shared with the proposed restaurant without a . perpetual easement arrangment for additional pickup. Show the proposed curbing along the south side of the property. The proposed one. way aCCesS along. the. southwest corner of the property must be two way access and the drive remain a total 23 feet in width. Replace theparl<:ing spaces being deleted on the Taco Cabana site. Show existing and proposed water and sanitary sewer mains including the sizes of the lines. Show the...ease111ent along the. south side of the property to cover utility lines. Provide, electrical load data and service size. An easement will be required from the service to the building. It is the developer's responsibility to place conduit to the building. Coordinate telephone service with G.T.E.RepresentativeLaverne Akin at (409) 821-4723. Handicap. parking spaces are required, If seventy-six spaces are required, only four of them must be designated as handicapped. Show handicap ramp details. If the western most driveway is closed, an additional fire hydrant may be required. APPEAL PROCESS:. An applicant may appeal, the decision of the Project Review Committee to the Planni!1gand Zoning Commission, within five days after thePRC Committee meeting. Failure to appeal. the PRe action . shall constitute a contractual acceptance of all conditions imposed, and a waiver and surrender of, all complaints, defects, or potential invalidity,. whether understate or federal law. An applicant appealing the decision of the PRC shall file ten copies of the final site plan as approved by the PRC, showing all. changes and requirements imposed .by the PRC, and accompanied by a written explanation of, those items being appealed. ' Until said copies are on file, no further development approval shall occur, and. no; further action by the Commission shall take place. An applicant ilJ1ay .appeal.only certain aspects of site plan review, and in the absence of discretionClry review by . the Commission, or review pursuant .. to a petition,. all other aspects . of, the site plan shall .be. final. Any notice of appeal shall state with particularity theasp~cts Which are to be appealed. Coordinate appeal process through Development Coordinator Shirley Volkat(4CJ9) 764-3741. PROJECfREVIEWC01\1MI'ITE:E REPORT Joe CastilIo,....CastiIlo/Watts Associates . 16500 ',North San Pedro. 'Ste291"SanAntonio,'TX "18232 Texas Food Concepts 12019,'."Colwik".",San"'Antonio.,,TX, ,',18232 Project Review Committee\~ Sabine Kuenzel, Staff Plannertl.... ... David Pullen, City Engineer Mary", Elizabeth , Herring,.,,'P& Z ,Representative Others.' Attending ShirleyVolk,DevelopmentCoordinator ' Tony Michalsky, Electrical Operations Coordinator Samantha Sll1ith,Engirieering Assistant Pete Vanacek, Parks'. Senior Planner George"Spain,Fire 'Marshal Laverne Akin, GTE Representative Mike Lavender, TCACable Representative Don Fazzino, Lone Star Gas RepreseI1tative Parking LotPlan. - City Slickers; proposecf restaurant to be Jocated on Jot A2" in "",the "D.A.Smith'Subdivision on' Live Oak Street between Taco Caban,a and La Quinta Inn. >(93-425) APresubnlission Conference. was held Wednesday, . December 22, 1993 to discuss the above IllentioIled . parking lot plan. City Engineer David Pullen moved to deny the plan assubmitted.due tonuJnerous areas of non-complianceincluqing inadequate parking, non-coJnpliance. with access ordinance,. parking island ... sizes. and lack. of. dumpster. Planning. and ZoningColl1missionerHerring seconded the motion which passed unopposed(3- 0). . The<fqllowingcomments\\,eremadeiby . the various reviewing agents: A totalof 77 parkingsJ2acesarerequired fOftheproposed building. . The parking shown on the . 'facoCabanasite cannot be used for. the proposed restaurant According to City planning case . files, the existing Taco Cabana. site is non- conforming duetoa lack of parking with respect to the square footage of the building. The proposed combined end row . parking lot islanqsmust bea minimum of 360 square feetoTheislandsshownonthe site plan are inadequate. ~ Any off-site facilities must be covered ,through a perpetual easement ,or the owner may have ,the, option of replatting ,the'" property into'one lot under common ownership. The 25' ,private ,access easement must remain clear' and parking islands cannot encroach into that easement. . Handicap parking ,spaces are required, if seventy-six spaces are. required, only four of' them must be designated as handicapped. Show handicap ramp details. most driveway is closed,' an additional fire hydrant maybe APPEAL PROCESS: An applicant may. appeal the decision of the, Project Review Committee to the. Planning and Zoning Commission within five days after the PRe Committee meeting.. Failure to appeal the PRC action . shall constitute. a contractual acceptance of all ,conditions imposed, . and., a,' waiver and.'"surrender of all complaints, defects, or potential invalidity, ,whether ,under state or federal law. ,An applicant appealing the decision of the PRCshall file ten copies of the final site .planasapproved by thePRC, ,showing all changes and requirements imposed by the PRe, and accompanied by a. written explanation of those items being appealed. Until said copies are on file, no further development approval. shall occur, and no further action by the Commission shall take place. An applicant may appeal only certain aspects of site plan review, and in the absence of discretionary review by the Commission, or review pursuant to a petition, all other aspects of the site plan shall be final. Any notice of appeal shall state with particularity the aspects which are to be appealed.. Coordinate appeal process through Development Coordinator Shirley Yolk at (409) 764-3741.