Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZmin2020-01-06MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION January 6, 2019 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Anna held a meeting at 7:00 p.m. on January 6, 2020, at the Anna City Hall Administration Building located, 111 North Powell Parkway, to consider the following items. Call to Order and Establishment of Quorum The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm. Members present were Daniel Moody, Don Callaham, Wayne Barton, Alonzo Tutson, Donald Henke, Danny Ussery, and Leslie Voss. Staff present were Ross Altobelli, Lauren Mecke, and Olivia Heard. 2. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance Commissioner Barton gave the invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Citizen Comments: At this time, any person may address the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding an item on this meeting agenda that is not scheduled for public hearing. Also, at this time any person may address the Commission regarding an item that is not on this meeting agenda. Each person will be allowed up to three (3) minutes to speak. No discussion or action may be taken at this meeting on items not listed on this agenda, other than to make statements of specific factual information in response to a citizen's inquiry or to recite existing policy in response to the inquiry. There were no citizen comments. Chairman Tutson wished everyone a Happy New Year. 4. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the Morales Estates, Block A, Lot 1 Development Plat. Mr. Altobelli gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. The development plat is proposing a future home site and storage. Due to insufficient information and the requirement to act within 30 days of submittal staff recommended denial. Required ownership and utilities information were not provided by the applicant, nor was a 30-day extension requested by the applicant. Commissioner Barton questioned if the plat was denied was Morales restricted on when she could resubmit. Mr. Altobelli clarified that there is no time restriction and no additional payment would be required. Commissioner Callahm asked if there was a clear checklist of what is required of the applicant. Mr. Altobelli answered yes, there is an adopted checklist and the applicant was contacted about returning the corrections, further stating that the requirement for proof of utilities is a safe guard for the city. A motion was made by Commissioner Barton and seconded by Commissioner Henke to recommend denial of the development plat. The vote was unanimous. 5. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the Quail Creek Run Place, Block A, Lots 1, 2, 3, & 4 Minor Plat. Mr. Altobelli gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. The development plat was proposing the subdivision of 4.5 acres into 4 residential lots in the ETJ. The applicant was additionally proposing utility improvements to the site. Commissioner Ussery wondered if the applicant would be interested in voluntarily annexing into the city. Page 1 of 5 Applicant was available to provide response. Steve DePriest 9150 Quail Creek Run clarified that the utility improvements were for water, not sewer, and there were no plans for annexation. A motion was made by Commissioner Callaham and seconded by Commissioner Ussery to recommend approval of the minor plat. The vote was unanimous. 6. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the Anna Town Center Addition, Block A, Lots 6R, 9, 10, & 11 Preliminary Plat. Mr. Altobelli gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the Commission. Agenda item number six was labeled incorrectly, it should have read Preliminary Replat, which would require a public discussion. Despite the error, the item was required to be acted on as submitted due to the 30-day time limit. Mr. Altobelli described the commission's action option regarding the misprint, which was to take no action and it would be sent to the next City Council meeting and allow for a public hearing. A motion was made by Commissioner Henke seconded by Commissioner Callaham to take no action on the preliminary plat. The vote was unanimous 7. Consider/Discuss/Action on recommendation regarding the Anna Town Center Addition, Block A, Lots 6R, 9, 10, & 11 Site Plan. Mr. Altobelli gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the commission. The site plan showed proposed site improvements and staff recommended approval. Commissioner Barton questioned if drainage would be addressed in the final plat. Mr. Altobelli answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Barton also asked if any tenants had been discussed for the lot. Mr. Altobelli said a drive -through restaurant had been discussed, possibly a Panda Express. Commissioner Henke wondered what would be developed in the back of the site. Mr. Altobelli clarified that the site had C-2 base zoning and meetings had only been held so far with possible front lot tenants. A motion was made by Commissioner Henke and seconded by Commissioner Ussery to recommend approval of the site plan. The vote was unanimous. 8. A) Conduct a public hearing to consider public comments to rezone 20.8± acres located on the west side of State Highway 5, 1,420 feet south of West White Street from Agricultural District (AG) to Planned Development -Multiple -Family Residential - High Density (PD-MF-2) with modified development standards. The public hearing opened at 7:26 p.m. Mr. Altobelli gave a brief presentation and answered questions from the commission. Item was initially tabled at the December 2"d meeting. Some of the surrounding sites are Single Family Estate, religious buildings, automotive businesses and a planned development to the west with Multi -Family rights. The zoning change is in conformance with several tenets of the Strategic Plan. The Planned Development has a base zoning of Multi -Family Residential — High Density. The Planned Development is proposing new height requirements and a maximum of 325 units. All other design standards will meet base zoning. Additionally, there are unique site features, including existing ponds. The actual product will be limited to what is shown in the concept plan. Page 2 of 5 Commissioner Henke asked if the submittal addressed the reasons for denial at a previous City Council meeting. Don Collins, applicant, gave a brief presentation. Mr. Collins answered that yes, the presentation and concept plan were more detailed to answer questions raised at Council. Mr. Collins spoke about how he came to be newest owner of the property. He acknowledged the need for the hydrology study and pointed out water features on the site. He further stated that they may gain or lose units based on the hydrology study findings, but they would maintain a maximum of 325 units. Mr. Collins presented images of the views future residence would have of tree lines and pictures of previous projects from the builder. Chairman Tutson informed the applicant that all the questions he had as a council member had been addressed and that the project had been recommend for approval at the previous Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Henke asked about ground height near State Highway 5. The applicant responded that the highest point was in the center and referred to the image of the tree line view, as well as, confirmed that the buildings would be set back far enough from State Highway 5to avoid the negatives of its proximity. Chairman Tutson commended the applicant for his presentation. Commissioner Barton asked if the individual who submitted an objection in the packet had provided any reasoning. They had not. Commissioner Callaham asked if the zoning change would limit the density. Mr. Altobelli responded that the Planned Development limits the number of units, therefore limiting density. Commissioner Ussery stated that the issues raised of council, as he understood, were the lack of a water study and a road study. Mr. Altobelli clarified that action was being taken on a Zoning Request, not the Final Plat. The Platting process will address these topics. Commissioner Barton provided further clarification that drainage was discussed at the time of platting, not zoning. David Kalhoefer, planner for the project, answered a few additional questions from Commissioner Ussery regarding drainage, stating that the hydrology study would provide more insight. Chairman Tutson thanked the applicants for showing a positive attitude throughout the process. There were no citizen comments. The public hearing closed at 7:51 p.m. B) Consider/Discuss/Action on a recommendation regarding the request to rezone 20.8± acres from AG to PD-MF-2 with modified development standards. The rezone was recommended for approval by staff. A motion was made by Commissioner Tutson seconded by Commissioner Callaham to recommend approval of the rezoning request. The vote was unanimous. C) Consider/Discuss/Action on a recommendation regarding the Concept Plan, Waterview, Block A, Lot 1, associated with the rezoning request. Page 3 of 5 The concept plan was recommended for approval by staff. A motion was made by Commissioner Tutson seconded by Commissioner Callaham to recommend approval of the concept plan. The vote was unanimous. 9. A) Conduct a public hearing to consider public comments to amend Planned Development-765-2018 on 81.8± acres in order to allow the additional land use of multiple -family residence on 9.1± acres located at the southeast corner of future Standridge Boulevard and Suzie Lane. The public hearing opened at 8:15 p.m. Mr. Altobelli gave a brief presentation. The applicant was requesting to amend a planned development to allow for multifamily development on roughly nine acres of the property. Staff presented that this change was in conformance with the strategic plan and the applicant was working on a development agreement and design standards. Additionally, the site was in line with the future land use map, as some commercial areas would be maintained. Issues of the project were safety concerns with the adjacent expressway and open space requirements. To address safety, the set back from the expressway was increased to 520 feet and a stipulation was included to address noise concerns. Furthermore, balconies facing the commercial sites will be limited. Commissioner Henke wanted to know why true mixed use was not being utilized. He was very concerned that the original plans, discussed by Council, to have this area be zoned commercial with medical facility uses were being ignored. He expressed worry that approval would set a precedence that would take away key commercial space that could never be gained back. Commissioner Henke didn't believe this zoning change to be in conformance with the master plan. Commissioner Callaham asked to the U.S. Highway 75 on the visuals. Nathan McCarthey, applicant, gave a presentation. He presented his product as an up -town look that would be visually pleasing and dog friendly. He commented that apartment housing was needed for the workforce. He highlighted a water feature, open space, and plenty of parking. Retail space will remain on a portion of the property. Commissioner Barton noted that on the staff report it indicated that multi -family units would address life - cycle housing and wondered if there was a senior citizen aspect to the property. The applicant commented that it will be accessible by elevator so senior citizens could utilize the property. Mr. Altobelli noted that it would also provide housing for young professionals and homeowners who wish to down -size. Commissioner Barton asked if the design limitations were addressing balconies facing U.S. Highway 75 and if the fire department had the capabilities to serve a four-story building. Mr. Altobelli responded that the fire department was able to view plans and had made any needed recommendations. Commissioner Ussery asked what the price point was for the project. Mr. McCarthey responded $130 per square foot and a total of $35 million for the project. Commissioner Callaham voiced his agreement with Commissioner Henke that commercial uses had been discussed for this property. Commissioner Callaham and Commissioner Ussery noted that the Multi -Family would be contained to only nine acres of the property. Commissioner Henke stated that he agreed more multifamily units were needed in the city, but this was not the proper place. There were no public comments. Page 4 of 5 The public hearing closed at 8:25 p.m 8) Consider/Discuss/Action on a recommendation regarding the request to amend the zoning of Planned Development-765-2018 to allow for the additional land use of multiple -family residence with modified development standards. A motion was made by Commissioner Callaham seconded by Commissioner Moody to recommend approval of the rezoning request. The vote was in favor of approval 6-1, with Chairman Tutson, and Commissioners Barton, Callaham, Voss, Moody, and Ussery voting yes. Commissioner Henke was opposed. C) Consider/Discuss/Action on a recommendation regarding the Concept Plan, MR HiPoint, Block A, Lots 1 & 2, associated with the rezoning request. A motion was made by Chairman Tutson seconded by Commissioner Voss to recommend approval of the concept plan. The vote was in favor of approval 6-1, with Chairman Tutson, and Commissioners Barton, Callaham, Voss, Moody, and Ussery voting yes. Commissioner Henke was opposed. 10. Consider action to approve minutes of the December 2, 2019 Planning and Zoning meeting. Chairman Tutson thanked staff for detailed December 2"d minutes. A motion was made by Commissioner Ussery to approve the minutes, seconded by Commissioner Callaham. The vote was unanimous. 11. Adjourn A motion was made by Commissioner Henke seconded by Commissioner Voss to adjourn the meeting. The vote was unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 8:3g {fin. �y ATTEST: Alonzo T,titson Plannin and Zoning Commission Chairman Page 5 of 5