Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesAGENDA ITEM N0. 6: Consideration of a final plat of Springbrook Hidden Hollow Subdivision.. {94-230) Assistant City. Engineer Morgan presented the staff report and`' recommended approval with the condition that a 10' .public utility easement along the street frontage of lots 5, 6, 7, 8 and. 9 is required for electrical service and parkland dedication in the amount of $2,025 will be required prior to filing the plat for record. The proposed final plat matches the preliminary plat that was previously approved. by the City Council. Commissioner Grbou moved to recommend approval`. of the final plat for the Springbrook Hidden Hollow Subdivision with the staff recommendations.. Commissioner Smith .seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Consideration of a final replat of Pebble Creek Phase 2A Subdivision. (94-230) Assistant City Engineer Morgan presented the. staff report and stated. that the _purpose of the subject plat is to adjust the lot lines of lots 31, 32 and the common .area between them. Lots 3I and 32 have been expanded to provide additional side clearance for the'. construction of homes, and the common area has been reduced accordingly. Staff recommended approval of thefinal amending plat as submitted.. Commissioner Lightfoot moved to recommend approval of the final amending plat of Pebble Creek Phase. 2A, lots 31 and 32 as submitted. Commi,~sioner Lane seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Public hearing. to consider~~g Ordinance amendment to Section 12.3-B and Table II pertaining to subdivision sign regulations. Staff Planner Dunn presented the Zoning. Ordinance Amendment and stated that .the Myrad Development Group requested the review and revision of subdivision and area identification. sign regulations to provide more flexibility for their location. The current ordinance allows ouch signs to be placed only on private property with a 10' setback distance. from .the city right-of-way. Staff has no problem with this. request and has drafted an amendment to allow subdivision and area identification signs in the right-of-way with City Engineer approval. In addition, Table-II has been altered to remove the 10' setback requirement. Commissioner Lightfoot expressed concern with placing signs. in the right-of-way_and creating sight distance problems. in the future. Commissioner Gribou `.expressed concern with the maintenance of the signage and .landscaping if placed in the right-of-way. The sign could be placed up to the right-of-way so that it is still on private property. Chairman' Hawthorne :opened he public hearing; Seeing no one. present to speak in favor of or in opposition to the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner. Halle moved to table the item. until the next available Commission meeting.. Commissioner Garner seconded the motion which passed. (5 - 2); Chairman Hawthorne and Commissioner Lane voted in opposition to the motion. Commission Gribou requested that staff research xhe reasoning behind the original 10' setback requirement and why those reasons are not valid today.. He expressed concern that the Commission may be overlooking goodreasons as to why the. original requirement was put in place.. AGENDA ITEM NO. 9: Discussion of a possible wnsent agenda for the Planning-and Zoning Commission. City. Planner Kee suggested-that the Commission utilize a consent agenda which consists of non-controversial or "housekeeping" items required by law. Items may be removed from xhe consent agenda by any citizen, City staff member of Commission member. by making such a request prior to a motion :and. vote. on the consent agenda. This consent. agenda would save time and prevent staff-from reiterating what is, outlined in the staff report on routine cases. The Commission agreed that a consent agenda would he effective in future meetings .especially with regard to preliminary and final plat`s. P ~ Z Minutes Jul}~ 21 199 Page 3 ~t~ P&Z Draft Minutes Augusf 4, 1994 Page 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration of a previously tabled Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Section 12.3B and Table II, pertaining to the regulation of subdivision signs. (94 Commissioner Hall moved to remove the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment pertaining to subdivision signage off the table. Commissioner Gribou seconded the motion which passed unopposed (7 - 0). Staff Planner Kuenzel informed the Commission that after. researching the original Section 12 bf the Zoning Ordinance, .nothing specific was found that dealt with the 10' setback. requirement for subdivision.. signs. As the Streetscape regulations allow for planting within the right-of-way and the sign. regulations call for landscaping to be placed around subdivision signs, it makes sense that someone would want to incorporate the two. The proposed. ordinance amendment does not allow placement within-the.right-of-way without the City's approval It merely removes the 10' setback requirement. The :City will not approve a subdivision. sign in any location that. would impair visibility or interfere with utilities. The ,proposed .amendment allows the developer and the City some flexibility in sign placement. Commissioner Hall stated that he is sth concerned with signage being placed in the right-of-way. When the ign is placed on private property it is clear who is :responsible for maintenance; however, if signs are allowed in the 'right-of-way, xhe maintenance responsibility is novas clear. The subdivision signs for Woodcreek and Emerald Forest Subdivisions are examples of signs placed in the right-of-way. Staff Planner Kuenzel stated that the maintenance is .still the responsibility of the homeowner or possibly a homeowner's association if placed in the right-of-way. Bven on a residential lot the property owner is responsible for maintenance to the curb line and not the right-of-way line. Chairman Hawthorne stated that he is still unclear as to why the ordinance should be changed. From an economic standpoint, the ordinance amendment will allow. the: signs to be taken off an individual lot thus increasing the value of that lot. However, there are going to be variance requests regardless of how the ordinance is amended.. Some consistency should be established about where subdivision signs have to be located especially in relation to an intersection. Commissioner Gribou stated that he does not see a problem with eliminating the existing 10' setback requirement; however, he is concerned with placing signage in the right-of-way. Commissioner Gribou moved to recommend approval of the Zoning Ordinance amendment as presented with the replacement of the following paragraph for the third paragraph in Section 12.3 B, Subdivision and Area Identification Sign: "Both .area identification and subdivision signs must be located on the premises as identified by a preliminary or master preliminary' plat of the subdivision. Subdivision signs will be permitted only at intersections on the .perimeter of the subdivision. At each intersection either one. or two subdivision .signs may be permitted so long as the total. area of the signs .does not exceed 150 square feet. Banners or flags may be utilized as subdivision identification signs but the overall height shall not .exceed sixty (60) feet." Commissioner Hall seconded .the motion which failed (3 - 4); Commissioners Lane, Lightfoot, Smith and Hawthorne voted in opposition to the motion. Commissioner Lane moved to recommend that the Section 12.3 and Table II of the. Zoning Ordinance remain as is without the .proposed changes. Commissioner Lightfoot seconded the motion which passed (5 - 2); Commissioners Gribou and Garner voted in opposition to the motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Other business. There was no other business.