pc_04 22 1991PLANS HERRING
ITEN Pl
XIX':1991 ordinance Amendments (Part 1)
E)lSlQEQX:Planning Commission Review and Hold a Public
Hearing on Part One of Proposals Recommended bythePlansCommittee
STAPP REPORT:(See accompanying ini'ormation)
I (APRII 23,1991)
The staff briefly updated the Planning Commission on the statusofthefirstofthreephasesofdevelopmentfor1991Ordinance
Amendments.
The schedule was discussed.Richard wood of staff commentedthattherewaresomeminoradjustmentstobesadeinthetext asaresultofthestaffmeetingswiththecityattorney.EoodpointedouttheplanatthispointistogainpermissionfromtheCoamissiontoplacedraftP3ofthefirstphaseonholdandproceedwithPhaseII.
A copy of the Plans Committee tentative seating schedule waspresentedtothecommitteeinthesessionprecedingthispublichearing.Im .Leek,the chairman,is to respond as tc theappropriatenessofconcludingPhaseIIhythePlanscommittee
meeting on June 4th.
The chairman,Nr.Perkins,ask for comaents from the Commission
on the staff's proposal and although a vote was not taken.TheconsensusappearedtobethatthefullCommissionagreedwith'the staffis approach.
Woad stated that he was again disappointed this year in the
number of responses received from the 40 plus persons whoreceivedmailingofPhaseIproposals.A discussion followed
Which resulted in a motion to direct staff to mail each persononthelistaninvitationtoreviewandcommentandofferthosepersonsacopyoi'he proposals if desired.The product cf thisnoticechangeisareductioninpostagecosttopersonswhodonotrespond.This motion passed by a vote of 6 eyes 0 nays6absent.
1
APril 23,1991
PLANNING HEARING
ITEN NO.:2
XIX':Hillcrest Commercial Overlay
Kavanaugh from Walnut to Monroe
STAPF REPORT:
As Part of the review of the Hillcrest area requested by the Hillcrest
Residents Association,Staff'eviewed the special concerns expressed
about the Kavanaugh coaaercial district in Hillcrest.There was aspecificrequesttochangetheoitylsstandardstobetteraddressthe
needs of an eurban commercial district"as opposed to a suburban
commercial area.staff met several times with the property owners in
the winter and spring of 1990 to discuss various requireaents and
standards.A meeting was then held to discuss the draft overlay with
the immediately surrounding residents.Further revisions were made
and discussed with property owners,and a neighborhood seating was
held to receive comments from the larger Hillcrest area.
In early November 1990 property owners once again asked for comments
and the Plans committee was asked to review the draft as revised byallparties.After two meetings of the Plans Committee,more minorrevisionsweremadetothedraft.This document has been sant tc each
property owner (mailed March 22)ior their review.In the letter,the
owners were inforsed of this meeting and invited to attend and address
the Commission.
STAFF RECONNENOATION:
APPROVAL
I CT0 (APRIL 23,1991)
Ron Newaan,Planning Reneger,reviewed the history of this itemstartingoverayearagowitharequestfroatheHillcrestResident's
Association Board (HRA).The concern expressed at the time was that
"suburbane standards were being forced on an "urban"area.Iteas
which were requested for review included reduced parking,setbacks,storefronts,etc.The property owners were contacted and asked fortheirinput.After meetings with property owners,surroundingresidentialresidentswereaskedtoattendameetingtodisouss thedraftregulationsandtoexpresstheirconcerns.staff next arranged
a neighborhood meeting and finally took the draft to the PlansComaittee.At each step,property owners were mailed the currentdraftfortheirreviewandcomment.
1
ITEN NO.!2
Nr.Newman asked if the Comnd.salon would like a detailed review of thadraftwiththeCommissionindicatingthatwasdesired.Starting withSectionC,Fh.Newman reviewed the major points as follows:
SECTION C:Maximum 5,000 sq.ft.per business,
Not including Rl,R2,R3 or R4 property
SECTION D:~—SerO On Kavanaugh,front and aide yards
14NNjssBRR -MEKARAEsh:street trees and planters
keep a 4 to 6 foot sidewalk clearance
ESSSRMRRq:Retain 2 to 4 foot
landscape between sidewalk and curb
HjHBSSS -klLJZRSS:Combined total 55 facade area
QXQRSLJLSRRESd3 Face 12 sq.ft.
Ru}jSSKABH:Height 9 ft.clearance
EAKkjRH —suqgesting 1/2 standard for
neighborhood commercial use
shared parking encouraged
Kavanaugh sideyard
Beechwood front yard discouraged
maximum 502 impermeable suri'ace
The commission asked several questions about sign and parkingsections.Mr.Imwson indicated that the draft is an attempt torespondtoneighborhoodandamerconcernsthatbusinessisavoidingHillorestbecauseoftheneedtogatBoardofAdjustmentrelief.Theneighborhood,owners and City want a viable area.The overlay concept
was not conceived to create an overlay which will be reuseda~re,but rather to look at each area and encourage the uniquecharacterofthatarea.
There was discussion about a parkinq garage and the balance betweensorecommercial,and damage to surrounding residential.At this pointMr.Newman continued his review.
Included at the suggestion of Harvest poodsfdiscussionofthelightheight,type,etc.)
SECTION 5:MRRjgsREjIti:Allowed by right on second floor.
Prank Whitbeck,property owner,indicated his family has bean involvedinHillcrestforover50years.He discussed his efforts to keep thepostofficeinthearea.The businesses and owners hope to attractcustomersfromtheneighborhoodandthroughtheCity.Originally hewasexcitedabouttheproposaltohelprevitaliaathearea,but moreresidentialownersthancommercialownersworkedontheplan.Herequestedadelaytofurtherstudythedraft.A six month delay vas
recommended by Mr.Whitback.He stated that the proposal should notmakehealthybusinessesunhealthy.The final document should be goodforeveryoneandencouragenewbusinesses.Tha current draft is toorestrictiveandburdensome.Major concerns are with signage andparking.Nr.Whitbeck stated he would try to be reasonable and findagoodmiddleqround.
2
ITEM NO.:3
Mr.Richard Boles,owner of Kasuko,stated hs enjoyed traffic fromallareas.His structure ia approximately 9,000 eq.ft,and was anearlysuburbancenterattempt.Nr.Boles exprasse&concerns aboutputtingrestrictionsonparkingan&the affect that it often has onbusinesses.
Nr.Robert Friedl,owner of Hillcrest Bquara,stated that his20businesseshadonlythreespaceswithanadditional40rents&.
While the parking needs to be relaxe&,sass parking must be provided.
Mr.Friedl expressed concern about the height limit on parking lotlighting.He requested more time to review the ordinanoe.
There was discussion about deferral and the parking related issues,lightinq,location and amount.Mr.Whitbeck indicated the parkingissuesandsignagewerethema]or issues needing discussion.TheP.U.D.section was mentioned as a way to get larger projects in theareaoraddressotherissues.
Nr.Tom Johnson,President HRa,state&that the City needed torecognisedthatKavanaughisnotHighway10orRodneyParhamandshoul&have different regulations.He stated that sama balance mustbefoundfortheparkingquestionbetweenneighborhoodandbusinessconcerns.The HRa has no problem with a &efenal to allow for morediscussionontheissues.However signage requirements areappropriatetotheareaintheopinionoftheassociation.Inaddition,Mr.Johnson asked if the frontyar&parking on Beechwoodcouldnotberestricted.
There was more discussion about the meeting process and parking issues
(where,when and how).The commission stated that parking optionsneededtobeexPlored.
commissioner Leek made a motion to dei'er the issue until June 4th.Byavoteof8for0against3absent(Hi&dick,walls,walker)the motion
was approved.
3
April 23r 1991
PLANNING NEARING
ITEM 3
XXXLE:12th Street Study
Fair Park to Battery
EEQQEEX:Board of Directors
STAPF REPORT:
At the request of the Board of Directors,staff began a
review of the 12th street Corridor,during the sumaer of1990.The Board's request came as a result of a zoning caseforabeautyshoponthenorthsideof12thStreet,sidblock
between Peyton and Lewis.
Staff has reviewed the zoning pattern on the 12th Street
corridor and is requesting direction from the Planning
Commission on how to address the concerns of the Board ofDirectors.(See attachaent)
PIANNING CONNISSION ACTION APRIL 23,1991
Ron Newman,Planning Manager,indicated that approximately a
year ago the staff began a review of 12th Street at the
request of the City Board of Directors.The instructions
were to look for ways to improve the area and prevent strip
commercial.Today,the staff requests direction from the
Commission on this study.
Two options have been identified.One ie to have the Cityinitiaterezoningandlanduseplanchanges.If this optionisfollowedtherecouldbenooptingout,either we do it or
we don'.
There was some discussion about the boundaries of the study.
The western terminus was of greatest concern.Also the
Commission asked about voluntary rezoning
Option 2 would be some kind of overlay to address thespecificconcernsandissuesalong12thStreet.
The Commission asked about the institutional uses (groupquartersliving)in the area.The issue was then referredtothePlansCommitteewithaprogressreporttothefull
Commission in six weeks.
1
]
J
h
L
I
I
I
S
I
R
E
5
5
1
I
I
5
8
1
5
%
5
5
5
E
R
Q
R
I
R
I
I
I
I
E
S
Q
H
I
I
R
Q
R
R
'
-
'
.
1
1
1
1
1
K
,
.
t
l
9
5
l
t
M
5
5
I
I
1
Q
1
5
3
5
R
U
H
5
1
"
I
N
l
l
l
l
t
l
1
l
l
I
l
l
l
i
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
S
I
I
I
I
S
Q
S
l
l
I
I
I
I
C
I
I
S
I
I
N
-
R
I
S
I
I
E
I
R
W
U
E
I
1
E
I
I
I
S
I
E
I
I
I
E
'
:
~
I
S
I
I
I
I
I
R
S
I
I
I
l
l
l
5
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
R
I
N
R
I
I
I
R
R
I
N
l
l
l
N
R
l
l
l
l
l
l
~
I
W
I
I
I
I
S
H
H
S
I
I
I
I
I
R
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
5
N
I
I
I
I
5
8
8
l
l
I
R
I
I
S
I
N
R
l
l
l
R
I
U
I
I
I
I
R
P
Q
I
I
I
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
~
I
H
E
I
I
I
Q
H
H
I
I
I
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
~
a
i
n
a
u
a
a
u
n
a
n
~
F
A
I
I
I
I
R
I
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
I
R
P
I
I
M
5
5
1
5
l
l
l
l
l
5
l
l
l
l
i
l
l
J
~
.
4
~
p
April 22,1991
PZANNING
QXBE~RRBk:
There heing no further husinass hefore the Commission,the
meeting was adjourned at 3:35 P.M.
Date:9 (
etary a rman