Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

City Council May 3, 2011 Planning Presentation

373

Published on

Published in: News & Politics
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
373
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. City Council<br />May 3, 2011<br />
  • 2. Request for appeal from previously-granted Conditional Use<br />CU 11-03: Sherri H. and John W. Jones, Jr.<br /> consideration of appeal of approved Conditional Use allowing sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption at following property:<br /> 6005-6007 Knickerbocker Road at southwest corner of Red Bluff and Knickerbocker Roads in southern San Angelo, specifically on Lot 2 in Block 2 of Lake Nasworthy Addition Group 21<br />
  • 3. Regulatory Framework<br />Conditional Use requests are heard by the Planning Commission, who has final approval;<br />Commission considers application, City staff comments, relevant support materials & testimony;<br />Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny;<br />Conditions used to minimize adverse effects.<br />
  • 4. Regulatory Framework<br />If appealed, Council hears the case and renders a judgment;<br />If appealed again, a state District Court hears the case and renders a judgment;<br />This is the final level of appeal for this type of request.<br />
  • 5. Regulatory Framework<br />In reviewing an appeal, the Council shall review the decision in light of the following:<br />Comprehensive Plan<br />Zoning Ordinance<br />Official Zoning Map<br />Article 207.H: Council shall modify or reject the decision only if it is not supported by substantial competent evidence or is contrary to those documents.<br />
  • 6. Background<br />3 notifications required;<br />1 returned in favor;<br />0 returned in opposition;<br />Article 214.A: An appeal may be initiated by any owner, applicant, affected adjacent property owner, or resident;<br />Appeal received from citizens on April 19th;<br />
  • 7. Background<br />Property annexed in 1984;<br />Packsaddle Barbeque occupies remainder of building and sells alcohol under a food & beverage certificate;<br />In order to serve alcohol for on-premise consumption at this location, two things are required: a zone change (in this case, to CG) and approval of a conditional use;<br />
  • 8.
  • 9.
  • 10. LOOKING NORTHWEST AT SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM KNICKERBOCKER RD<br />
  • 11. LOOKING EAST FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY AT NEARBY CHURCH FACILITY<br />
  • 12. LOOKING EAST FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY AT INTERSECTION<br />
  • 13. LOOKING SOUTHWEST DOWN KNICKERBOCKER FROM RED BLUFF RD<br />
  • 14. LOOKING SOUTHWEST AT SUBJECT PROPERTY<br />
  • 15. LOOKING WEST AT SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM ACROSS KNICKERBOCKER RD<br />
  • 16. Criteria for Conditional Use Approval (208.F)<br />Basis, but not all must apply;<br />Impacts minimized.<br />Occupying of a commercial building already in place;<br />Street network necessary for such traffic exists;<br />Both 2003 & 2009 Comprehensive Plans suggest clustering of commercial (as in this case) to minimize impacts caused by strip commercial;<br />Consistent with neighboring restaurant use;<br />
  • 17. Criteria for Conditional Use Approval (208.F)<br />Consistent with Zoning Ordinance.<br />Follows regulatory approval process to allow such a use;<br />CG Intent: provide opportunities for commercial establishments of higher intensity with larger trade area, floor area & traffic generation;<br />
  • 18. Criteria for Conditional Use Approval (208.F)<br />Compatible with Surrounding Area.<br />Existing – separated from nearest residential area by high-speed arterial & roughly 200’;<br />Existing – part of larger commercial cluster stretching from this intersection past Twin Mountain;<br />Existing – Red Bluff is a collector street;<br />Anticipated – compatible with Vision Plan map’s call for commercial in this same area;<br />
  • 19. Criteria for Conditional Use Approval (208.F)<br />Effect on Natural Environment.<br />Water and air quality are not negatively impacted;<br />There are no immediate environmental concerns;<br />Stormwater management will be required of this business just as others is;<br />
  • 20. Criteria for Conditional Use Approval (208.F)<br />Community Need.<br />Provides commercial use in an area where extensive research in preparation of both ‘03 and ‘09 Plan identifies it to be the highest and best use;<br />
  • 21. Criteria for Conditional Use Approval (208.F)<br />Development Patterns.<br />Results in logical and orderly pattern of development;<br />Utilizes road infrastructure in place;<br />Places commercial usage in an appropriate location;<br />Conditions placed on approval met 2003 Comp Plan concern of using coordinated driveways and appropriate measures to circulate traffic for uses adjacent to major thoroughfares;<br />
  • 22. City staff recommends affirming the decision of the Planning Commission;<br />On March 21st, Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of this request, subject to conditions;<br />These conditions were imposed to provide an extra measure of automotive safety, the same as if this building were being built new;<br />Recommendation<br />
  • 23. Recommendation<br />City Council approval of CG zoning on same property, within period of no more than one year; and<br />Separation of paved parking/maneuvering areas on subject property from public rights-of-way by physical barrier, except at designated driveway entrances.<br />No more than 2 driveway entrances along Red Bluff Road, no more than 30 feet wide and at specific locations approved by City Engineer.<br />Use of concrete, pipe, or post-and-cable barriers;<br />
  • 24. request for approval of zone change<br />Z 11-04: Sherri H. and John W. Jones, Jr.<br /> request for approval of zone change from Neighborhood Commercial (CN) to General Commercial (CG) District, on following property:<br /> 6005-6007 Knickerbocker Road at southwest corner of Red Bluff and Knickerbocker Roads in southern San Angelo, specifically on Lot 2 in Block 2 of Lake Nasworthy Addition Group 21<br />
  • 25.
  • 26.
  • 27. Background<br />Surrounding land uses:<br />North – CN self-storage<br />East – RS-1 single-family, Glen Meadows<br />South - outside City limits (power station)<br />West – CN self-service storage<br />3 notifications – 2 in favor, 0 in opposition;<br />
  • 28. Background<br />While anyone may oppose the request, state and local laws require that the owners of 20% or more of the area within 200 feet give written protest to require a favorable vote of ¾ of the Council;<br />In this case, that has not occurred – therefore, only a vote by the majority of the Council is needed to approve;<br />
  • 29. Analysis<br />2003 Comprehensive Plan specifically called for CG zoning at this location;<br />2009 Comprehensive Plan calls for commercial zoning at this location;<br />2003 Comprehensive Plan encourages focusing commercial in areas where generated traffic can be accommodated;<br />
  • 30. Analysis<br />Both the 2003 and 2009 plans encourage this type of commercial use at major intersections such as this;<br />Both plans encourages reuse of existing buildings, consistent with zoning plans for the city;<br />
  • 31. Recommendation<br />Staff recommends approving this request for CG zoning;<br />Planning Commission unanimously approve this request for CG zoning;<br />
  • 32. Annexation Hearing<br />October 5, 2010 – City Council unanimously approved an initiation of annexation in the subject area;<br />State law requires two public hearings to give the public opportunity to speak for or against annexation of this area;<br />The next hearing will be May 17th;<br />
  • 33.
  • 34. Area Features<br />the site of Lake Nasworthy Power Station;<br />an adjacent substation of electric power transformers;<br />an approximately 500-foot wide strip of land occupied by parallel arrays of electric power transmission lines; and <br />an approximately 0.34-mile long segment of right-of-way for Red Bluff Road.<br />
  • 35. Rationale<br />Anticipated future annexation of land to the west, will leave a “hole” in the incorporated area of San Angelo;<br />When sold to WTU, agreement was that it would not be brought into City limits unless development for residential and other purposes has progressed continuously to such an extent that the area covered by this deed is substantially surrounded by land actually developed inside the City Limits;<br />Segment of Red Bluff Rd has been maintained by the City for over 60 years;<br />
  • 36. Public Comment<br />
  • 37. Background<br />Request by Council members Adams & Alexander;<br />December of 2003, draft ordinance which would prohibit parking in residential front yards; <br />Council took no action;<br />October of 2009, discussion by the Development Coordinator; Council members asked that staff continue to look into the matter.<br />
  • 38. Problems Noted:<br />blighting effect on appearance of neighborhoods;<br />lack of distinction in parking areas vs. green areas;<br />prevents growth of vegetation, contributing to sediment-laden, contaminated runoff; <br />reduces openess;<br />blocking of sight lines for vehicular traffic; <br />obstruction of access for emergency vehicle personnel; <br />diminished quality and value.<br />
  • 39. Draft Ordinance Proposal<br />Proposal is not a complete prohibition against parking in yards;<br />Presents conditions with which the practice can be continued;<br />Consistent with the 2009 discussion in which some members felt it should be regulated, but no one member seemed compelled to outlaw it entirely;<br />Also consistent in that it recognizes that some situations may call for or should allow the practice;<br />
  • 40. Exceptions which Allow Parking in a Yard:<br />Parking in an area screened from public view with a fence or wall 6’ in height;<br />Parking in a rear yard not adjacent to a street right-of-way;<br />Residential lots on streets 30’ wide or narrower;<br />Parking of a vehicle with a valid handicapped license plate or mirror hanger;<br />On an improved surface.<br />
  • 41. Advantages to This Approach:<br />Individuals living on narrow streets are allowed relief;<br />The vast majority of rear yards (which are generally adjacent to an alley right-of-way) are still available for parking;<br />Fenced side yards are still available for parking;<br />Renters of residential property doing the parking are penalized, and not the property owner(s);<br />Residents are given a six-month period to come into compliance before the ordinance goes into effect;<br />
  • 42. Advantages to this Approach:<br />The definition of paving allows a variety of approaches individuals can choose from:<br />hot mix over an appropriate base material;<br />two-course penetration (two layers of crushed stone and asphalt);<br />reinforced concrete;<br />interlocking concrete paving stones over an appropriate base; or<br />compacted gravel, caliche or crushed rock with a minimum depth.<br />
  • 43. Recommendation<br />City staff recommends approval of this draft ordinance;<br />

×