Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-21-1990 Meeting • MINUTES PLANNING 8~ ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 21, 1990 Members Present: Chairman Janet Graves, Commissioners Inge Browder, Jack Gresham, Charlie Boyle. Members Absent: Commissioners Bobby Blackwell, Lola Phillips, Eugene Edmonds City Staff Present: Director of Community Development Joel H. Albrecht, Building Official Ervin J. Griffith, Community Development Secretary Nina Browning, Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong Other Present: Councilman B. Don Skelton, Thomas Rawls, Beth Rawls, Mark Powell, George McBroom, Sharon Powell, Virginia Palmer, Gary Palmer and 6 other citizens. 1) CALL TO ORDER ® Meeting was called to order by Janet Graves at 7:00 PM. 2) APPROVE MINUTES OF APRIL 19, 1990, PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING Inge Browder made a correction of the word 'property° on page 3, first paragraph, should read 'proper'. With this correction a motion was made by Charles Boyle and seconded by Jack Gresham to approve the minutes. All were in favor and the motion passed. 3) CALL PUBLIC HEARING TO ORDER Public Hearing was called to order at 7:05 PM SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #SCU90-004, SUBMITTED BY GRACE BAPTIST CHURCH, SEEKS A SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW CHURCH FACILITY TO BE LOCATED ON LOTS 7-12 AND 22-26 OF BLOCK NO.. 8 OF THE GREENDALE SUBDIVISION WHICH IS FURTHER DESCRIBED AS 11141 NORTH "L" STREET. Mr. Albrecht gave the Commission the staff's report concerning the Special Conditional Use Permit (SCUP) requested by the brace Baptist Church. The property on which brace Baptist Church is planning to build is located on North 'L' Street in Lomax approximately 200 feet west of Yalley Yiew Drive. The church property is zoned 'R-1', Low Density Residential. Zoning Ordinance Section 5-600, Table A requires that a SCUP be obtained before the construction or expansion of any religious facility in a Low Density Residential zone. • • • Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes of June 21, 1990 Page 2 of 7 The applicant has, in conjunction with this request, submitted a property survey and a hand drawn site plan. The site plan, as drawn, appears to accurately reflect the tract of property identified on the survey. It should also be noted that public notice for this request was based on an application that did not reference lots 27 and 28. The applicant is not proposing any development for these lots at this time. The documents submitted satisfy Zoning Ordinance requirements for SCUP requests. It must however, be clearly understood that should the requested SCUP be granted, a formal Certified Site Plan, indicating compliance with all applicable City requirements, will be required from the applicant. The minimum building setbacks for religious institutions located in residential zones are: 30 feet front; 20 feet rear; 10 feet side. The applicant s site plan indicated the following setbacks: 55 feet front; 70 feet rear; 10 feet west side; 200 feet east side. As proposed, the church building will meet City setback requirements. As far as screening, the City wi 11 requi re a planting plan which wi 11 ® intersperse trees and low plantings. The screening will count towards the six per cent (6~) landscaping requirement of Section 5- 200, Table B. A landscape plan, to be approved by the Director of Community Development is a normal component of the Certified Site Plan.. The City's Thoroughfare Plan classifies North "L" as a "secondary arterial" which is proposed for eventual linkage with Barbour's Cut Blvd. As such, the street should have adequate capacity to accommodate any traffic generated by this church. A condition which the Commission may wish to attach to this permit, is a prohibition against driveway entrances on Fieldcrest Drive. This prohibition would serve to limit traffic flow through the Greendale Subdivision. Size and location of driveway entrances will be subject to the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 10-605. Additionally, as North "L" is a Harris County right-of-way, County driveway permits will also be required. As far as compati bi 1 i ty with surrounding area, i t i s the Commi ss i on ~ s charge to determine whether or not thi s bui 1 di ng design i s compati bl e with the surrounding neighborhood. The building will be a single story, rectangular, with a metal roof, metal side and rear walls with a wood and brick facade on the front. Regarding parking, Rev. Rawls, in his application letter, states that • the sanctuary will have a maximum seating capacity of one hundred (100) persons. Based on this figure, the Zoning Ordinance requires parking for a minimum of thirty-five (35) vehicles. ~~ ~~ ® s . Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes of June 21, 1990 Page 3 of 7 Op ® 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) In conclusion, the request meets Zoning Ordinance prerequisites and is therefore eligible to be considered for a Special Conditional Use Permit. Should the Commission recommend approval of this request, staff would suggest that the following conditions be attached to the permit. 1) Parking: parking for a minimum of 35 vehicles shall be provided. Parking facilities shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 10-600, off street parking requirements. 2) Landscaping and Screening: a planting plan for the perimeter of the parking lot shall be submitted as a component of the applicant's landscape. The landscape planning plan shall be included on the applicant's Certified Site Plan. The landscape plan shall require approval by the Director of Community Development. 3) Driveway Access: all driveway access to this tract shall be located on North "L" street. There shall be no driveways accessing Fieldcrest or Valleyview Drives. tions for the Commission concerning this permit are: Approve as requested by applicant Approve with conditions suggested by staff Approve with additional or amended conditions Deny permit Table request for further consideration at a future date 1. PROPONENTS Thomas Rawls, Pastor - 11702 N. Ave. "L" - Grace Baptist Church is currently trying to secure a permit to build a church on the land located on Ave. "L" and Valleyview. We would also like to have access to entrance on Fieldcrest Dr. Concerning the parking, we would like to ask that we would be able to build as we grow, and the '1 andscapi ng i s a reasonable request and we find no problems with this. I would also ask that you view our permit unconditionally or without restrictions, since we are a small church and sole supporting and do not have the money of a large church, but we will abide with the zoning restrictions as set by the City Zoning Ordinance. Beth Rawls - 11702 N. Ave. "L", La Porte, Texas - in favor Mark A. Powell - 3210 Hayes, Pasadena, Texas - in favor George McBroom - 1129 E. Dartmouth, Deer Park - in favor Sharon Powell - 3210 Hayes, Pasadena, Texas - in favor • • Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes of 6-21-90 Page 4 of 7 2. OPPONENTS Virginia Palmer - 11201 N. Ave. °L°, La Porte, Texas - against Gary Palmer - 11201 N. Ave. 'L°, La Porte, Texas - against Both are against the entrance off of Fieldcrest Dr. due to the fact that there are no sidewalks and the children play on the street and their concern is the traffic that would be created. The Palmers also felt that their privacy would be reduced with the comings and goings of the members of the church using the rear entrance off of Fieldcrest Dr. 4. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Mrs. Graves declared the public hearing closed at 7:26 PM. 5. CONSIDER APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #SCU90-001 ® Mrs. Graves stated to the Commission that the change on the parking lot spaces was not an issue that the Commission could change or alter, this is set out in the Zoning Ordinance requirements. A motion was made by Charles Boyle and seconded by Jack Gresham to approve the permit as requested by applicant. In favor was Janet Graves, opposed was Inge Browder. Motion passed 3-1. Mrs. Graves stated that the request was approved as recommended and will go before City Council on July 23, 1990. 6. CONSIDER SETTING DATE TO MEET WITH MEMBERS OF THE LA PORTE MAIN STREET ASSOCIATION TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE REZONING OF THE MAIN STREET AREA. Mr. Albrecht stated to the Commission that during the 1 ast couple of months there had been some meetings with the Main Street Association discussing some of the desires and needs the Association felt the P & Z Commission should consider. Mr. Albrecht felt that they were at the point now that a meeting with the Commission would be the next step in discussions. A workshop was scheduled for July 19, 1990. • • • Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes of 6-21-90 Page 5 of 7 7. MR. DENNIS DUNHAM ADDRESSED THE COMMISSION REGARDING THE SIGN REGULATIONS OF ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 10-1000. NO COMMISSION ACTION IS REQUIRED REGARDING THIS ITEM. Mr. Dennis Dunham - 816 S. 1st, La Porte, Texas. Mr. Dunham stated that no one or the business people he talked to wanted to change the Sign Ordinance in its entirety, only that part that discriminates against a business person. Mr. Dunham said for an example, would be the real estate signs, which are definitely advertising. These signs say "for sale, financing available, other properties available" and list several phone numbers, in other words "all the advertising in the world". Why can't Dennis Dunham's say "Dunham Tax Service?" Mr. Dunham stated that he is asking the P & Z Commission to simply review the ordinance and see if they did not give any credit or think about hurting the small business person. Mr. Dunham stated that he had talked to Mrs. Lola Phillips and she advised me that the P & Z was going to review...time had come to review... the ordinance. If Mrs. Phillips was correct, that is all we ask that the Commission review the ordinance and look at that one section and see if you are not discriminating against the business person on that one issue. The Council gave the mandate to P & Z...which we know is true fact... and we shoul d have a s i gn ordinance, al l I am saying i s that smal 1 portion that discriminated against the businessman of advertising his product/service off of his property. I ask last time what "aesthetic value" was, but have yet to get an answer from anyone. I would still like to have an answer, as it quotes it in the ordinance. I ask other city Inspection Dept. what "aesthetic value" was and some of the answer were, "ugly", "not meeting with the standards of other signs" and that type thing. Mr. Dunham ask Mrs. Graves what the comparison was to real estate signs and Mrs. Graves said she did not see a comparison for a for sale sign in front of a piece of property....Mr. Dunham interrupted and stated.... He was not talking about a "for sale" sign, but listed the things that are on signs out there today...multiple listings, financing available, other lots available, real estate - 10 blocks away. If this is not advertising, I have not been in business for as long as I have. Isn't that advertising? Mr. Dunham stated that he did not have a quarrel with Mrs. Graves, but he had talked to Council :people, where that part of the ordinance needs to be addressed. There was 'not any room made for a temporary sign of any kind. "You can not even allow this City to advertise the four things that ® are in the paper every week, golf course, wave pool, historical downtown and Sylvan beach." I don't think the sign ordinance was meant to be that way, we need to advertise to get people to come to this town. ® • • Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes of June 21, 1990 Page 6 of 7 Mr. Dunham stated we should look into the sign ordinance and the other Board member, Mrs . Phi 11 i ps, said there would be a revi ew of the ordinance. Mrs. Graves told Mr. Dunham that there is a mandatory periodical review of the ordinance, which we have just completed, we are not due another review for sometime. Mr. Dunham then ask Mrs. Graves if it would take Council action to rescind any part of that ordinance or change any part of an ordinance that P & Z passed? Mr. Armstrong stated that first the ordinance comes from the P & Z Commission as a recommendation to City Council. Mr. Boyle ask the question, "Joel , we reviewed the ordinance and everything and I was told way back there, that it would be sent to Council in December to review, has that ever been to Council yet?" Mr. Albrecht stated "after the P & Z Commission completed their review and recommendation to City Council in December, we sent copies of it to the Chamber of Commerce requesting their comments back prior to taking it to City Council to get their input from the businesses." Mr. Albrecht said the request for agenda is in the City Secretary's office, we had tentatively a study session scheduled for last Monday on this item, it was cancelled because of not having a quorum, it will be rescheduled. Mr. Gresham asked if any changes were made prior going to Council and Mr. Albrecht stated that it was just as P & Z had recommended. Mrs. Browder ask if there had been any response from the Chamber of Commerce with respect to this sign ordinance? Mr. Albrecht stated that this was correct, no response had been received from the Chamber. Mrs. Browder said that they are telling Mr. Dunham that they are very upset with our business regulations and yet they are not responding to the City. Mr. Albrecht stated that that was correct. Councilman Skelton ask to address the Commission, Mrs. Graves recognized him to speak. Councilman Skelton stated "he did not get involved in the sign ordinance back when the business people and all the others were out here fighting to get the signs one way or the other, and I thought if I set back and I woul d have a chance to vote on i t one way or the other sooner or later, but sometime you wait too long till all the work has been done and it's hard to back up and get to the point that you were at the beginning. I think that a lot of the things that Mr. Dunham has said is true in certain respects, I don't believe that all the real estate signs are off-premise, in fact, I'm not aware of any. I think if we could set some specifications for these portable signs and have them so they are not close together...perhaps two lots for a sign...and keep them manicured and the sign in good repair, allow them to be taken down by the City or inspector if they were not kept up." "If you want to get rid of all the portable signs, I'm for that too, I have already sold mine." ~~ i • Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes of 6-21-90 Page 7 of 7 Mrs. Browder ask how could we enforce regulations on portable signs if we allow them "off-premise"? Councilman Skelton stated that he thought we could write specifications and spell out what has to be done with the sign and what has to be complied with and if you don't comply, you would loose your permit for good or be fined. Mrs. Browder stated that all these things were taken into consideration at the time we were discussing the sign ordinance. Mr. Boyle stated that he would like to see the Commission review the sign ordinance. Mr. Gresham agreed with Mr. Boyle on reviewing the sign ordinance (portable section). Mr. Albrecht ask if he was speaking specifically of portable signs only and Mr. Boyle stated it was. Mrs . Graves sai d she woul d 1 i ke to see the Commission wai t unti 1 the normal ordinance review, she did not think it had been given an opportunity to work yet. Mr. Boyle stated he did not think it had worked, or would work and he wanted to review it. He felt like they could come up with some fair regulations on the portable signs that would work for the business people. Mrs. Graves stated that review of the sign ordinance was not on the agenda at this time. Mr. Boyle ask that it be put on the agenda for the next meeting. Mrs. Graves stated that it would be put on the agenda for the next P & Z Meeting. There was no further business. 8. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Charles Boyle and seconded by Jack Gresham to adjourn . All were in favor and the motion passed. The meeting adjourned at 8:05 PM. Respectfully bmitted, Nina Browning, Secretary Community Development Approved on this the 19th day of July, 1990. Ja t Graves, Chairman P1 Wing & Zoning Commission 6/25/90 'i f • ® • BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING MINUTES FLOW CHART Minutes taken at meeting ~llq~9o -'rig Minutes typed by ~/ao~9d -'~ Secretary Preliminary Draft Copy to ~~ae~go- ~- Appropriate Director ~~ ~!/~0/90 ~i~ Final draft copy typed I ~~3a~9o -71f~. • Final draft copy City Manager/Asst City Manager for their review City Secretary for distribution to City Council Minutes approved & signed at next meeting ~~ 9n ~G I ~ 1 ~~ .s~8/9o ~~~~y'D dfa~lq~~ Approporiate Dept. files ~ ~/o~~`f0 `~'~,~. original with agenda packet At end of one (1) calendar year approved minutes with agenda packet forwarded to City Secretary SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #SCU90-004 CITY OF LA PORTE APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A ~ ~ 1 i ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ - N ~ ~ ~ - - - rei - - o~-;; -- OFF ICE USE 0 N L Y : Fee: $ 1 00 . 00 D ate R e c e i v e d : {)5 - / ~- - Cj' 0 R e c e i p t No.: :::It L'/ g J~ 0 7 .S( Cer1ified Plans Submitted: (~ General Plan () Major Development Site Plan ( ) Minor Development Site Plan () Preliminary Plat ;~;~~~-M~ki~;-R~~~~~~~----A~~~-2Jh~~~-~~~~-------------------- !.\ailing Address: 1['702- N. JL}U2... P City/State: lA Po~ IEXA~ Phone: 47/-4/0f.o BUSINESS NAHE: (1r-Ac.E. ~Ap-il<;'''- C-HUR-c..\-\ 7J /j/)~ l(;;( 'l L c -f s f7 - 1;2 -+ .;29 - ,~:? ~, l G R EL-t!l> H Ie:. ) ,su. e'\u: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ///If/ 13 II~L 8 ; PROPERTY ADDRESS: ZONE: 'R- / SIC USE CATEGORY: TYPE OF BUSINESS: c l+uRc8 Lf-?-4-ClO Date Rw. ..:Jhum~ R~ Owner or Authorized Agent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- OFFICE USE ONLY Date of P & Z Public Hearing: Recommendation: Y or N Date of City Council Meeting: Zone: K. - I Approved: Y or N This application is: Approved ( ) Permit 11 Denied ( ) CLP JOB :fJ (If Assigned Yet) Conditions: Zoning Administrator Date CED/1-'87 RECEIVED May 17 1990 CODE fJlFORCEMEI(r 11ay 8, 1990 To Whom It May Concern: Re: Lots 7,8,9,26; Block 8; Greendale La Porte, Texas 77571 We the present owners of the above mentioned property have no objections to Mr. Thomas Rawls (Grace Baptist Church) request to have the property usage changed for his specific purpose of building a church on the property. Yours very truly. (?~u - ;(7~~ J/;B7Linney ~/,' ( / '-1- "\, t'Ld-~ ---..........., April 25, 1990 To Khom It May Concern: HE: Lots 10,11,12,~7,28; Block 8; Greendale La Porte, Texas 77571 I the ~resent owner of the above referenced property have no obj ect ions to Mr. Thomas Rawls (Grace Bapt ist Chur.ch) request to have the property usage changed for his specific purpose of building a church on the property. Yours very truly, //-/ ,/ //U/ .<1 /("'~C..-? Augusta/" Johnson v ~-,L -:>'.:> (" - A -V.L.tlY<- (/ . April 25, 1990 To ~hom It May Concern: RE: Lots 22,23,24,25; Block 8; Greendale La Porte, Texas 77571 We the present owners of the above referenced prop~rty have no objections to Mr. Thomas Rawls (Grace Baptist Church) request to have the property usage changed for his specific purpose of building a church on the property. l r' . , /~ I . ,-_' i i \ . ,(..( ( Arde.ll Fleck --I, r-j ...-. ,. .~ / / /L -( /; TO PLANNING AND ZONING MEMBERS OF COUNCIL This letter is to inform all parties concerned about Grace Baptist Church and its intentions. Grace Baptist was organ- ized on Wednesday,January 24,1990 A.D. The Paster Thomas E. Rawls was lic~enced by the congeration of Central Baptist Church,Deer Park Texas,of which he has a- ttended since 1959 and was called into the ministry. The con- geration of which he has many long standing friends. Our Pas- ter was ordained by Rev.Russel Ore of Grace Baptist, Medilot- ian Texas. The purpose of Grace Baptist Church is to serve our community as a Baptist Church by reaching lost souls and bapt- ising them in the name of Jesus Christ. Grace Baptist applied for and recieved incorporation statis on April 12,1990,also we applied for and recieved non-profit exempt statis on March 6,1990. Grace Baptist is currently trying to secure a sp~cial use pe- rmit to build a church in the future on land located on ave Land Valleyview,before our closing date on July31,1990. It is the intent of our church to build a buliding that will meet and exceed the requirements of the City of La Porte,on a building that is designed by Morton Buildings,Waco Texas the buildings size is 42'x 75' of which the max. seatinh is 100. At present time we have only a congeration of 23 people of which 11 are children. We the members of Grace Baptist Church hope and pray that the information freely given will aid you in your process. Please let us know as soon as possible, July 31, will be upon us before we know it Sincerly, ;<L)) JJLEm40 e f2a-l-L~ Rev.Thomas E.Rawls SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST #SCU90-004 Reauested For: Grace Baptist Church Leqal Description: Lts 7-12 & 22-26 of Blk 8; Greendale Subdivision which is further described as 11141 North "L" street (See Exhibit A) Zoninq: R-1, Low Exhibit B) Density Residential (See Reouested Bv: Reverend Thomas Rawls, Pastor, Grace Baptist Church Purpose of Reouest: To secure a Special Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a new church and accessory parking facilities. Backaround: The property on which Grace Baptist is planning to build is located on North "L" street in Lomax approximately 200 feet west of Valley View Drive. The church property is zoned R-1 Low Density Residential. Zoning Ordinance Section 5-600, Table A requires that a Special Conditional Use Permit be obtained before the construction or expansion of any religious facility in a Low Density Residential Zone. Requirements to be considered when reviewing a S. C. U. Permit are: I . Section 5-800 Special Use Performance Standards A. Screening B. Traffic Control C. Compatibility with Surrounding Area D. Required Licenses Obtained E. Compatible Alterations and Adequate Parking I I . Section 10-202. Conditions for Approval [of a S. C. U. PermitJ A. That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property, nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity. Page -2- B. That the conditions placed on such use as specified in each district have been met by the applicant. C. That the applicant has agreed to meet additional conditions imposed, based specific site constraints, and necessary protect the public interest and velfare the community. any on to of These issues viII be discussed in the next section of this document. Analysis: The applicant has, in conjunction vith this request, submitted a property survey and a hand dravn site plan. (See Exhibit C). The site plan, as dravn, appears to accurately reflect the tract of property identified on the survey. (The survey does include tvo additional lots). It should also be noted that public notice for this request vas based on an application that did not reference lots 27 and 28. The applicant is not proposing any development for these lots at this time. They viII not be covered by any S. C. U. permit granted based on this request. The documents submitted satisfy Zoning Ordinance requirements for S. C. U. requests. It must hovever, be clearly understood that should the requested S. C. U. permit be granted, a formal Certified Site Plan, indicating compliance vith all applicable City requirements, viII be required from the applicant. A Certified Site Plan is essentially a survey of tract of property vhich indicates the dimension and location of all existing and proposed improvements to be located on the property. Items typically noted on a Certified Site Plan include (but are not limited to) building and parking foot prints, landscape plans, location of utilities and setback lines. The minimum building setbacks for religious institutions located in residential zones are: Thirty (30) feet front; tventy (20) feet rear; ten (10) feet side. The applicant's site plan indicates the folloving building setbacks: Fifty five (55) feet front; seventy (70) feet rear; ten (10) feet vest side; tvo hundred (200) feet east side. As proposed, the church building viII meet City setback requirements. (See Exhibit C). Page -3- This property fronts on both North "L" street and Fieldcrest Drive. Both faces of this property will be subject to front setback requirements. As drawn on the site plan, the "future Sunday School Annex" has a "front" setback of twenty (20) feet. There is more than adequate room to shift all the proposed improvements ten (10) feet south in order to achieve setback compliance for the Sunday School Annex. (See Exhibit C). Setback compliance will be confirmed by the Certified Site Plan. Regarding the specific conditions listed in the background section of this report. Section 5-800: Screen~ The purpose of the ordinance's screening requirements is to improve the aesthetic appearance of a site by obscuring from view buildings and areas, that are unsightly or architecturally incompatible with the surrounding area. Parking lots of religious facilities are subject to screening requirements. Rather than requiring a solid landscape screen which could lead to security problems, the City will require a planting plan which will intersperse trees and low plantings. The "screening" will count towards the six per cent (696) landscaping requirement of Section 5-200, Table B. A landscape plan, to be approved by the Director of Community Development is a normal component of the Certified Site Plan. Traffic Control: This paragraph states: The traffic generated by a use shall be channelized and controlled in a manner that will avoid congestion on public streets, safety hazards, or excessive traffic through low density residential areas. The traffic generated will not raise traffic volumes beyond the capacity of the surrounding streets. Vehicular access points shall be limited, to create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movements, and shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. Page -4- The City's Thoroughfare Plan classifies North "L" street as a "secondary arterial" 'Which is proposed for eventual linkage 'With Barbour's Cut Blvd. (Comprehensive Plan Vol. I). As such, the street should have adequate capacity to accommodate any traffic generated by this church. A condition 'Which the Commission may 'Wish to attach to this permit, is a prohibition against drive'Way entrances on Fieldcrest Drive. This prohibition 'Would serve to limit traffic flo'W through the Greendale Subdivision. Size and location of drive'Way entrances ('Which must be noted on the Certified Site Plan), 'Will be subject to the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 10-605. Additionally, as North "L" Street is a Harris County right-of-'Way, county drive'Way permits 'Will also be required. Compatibility 'With Surroundinq Area: This section states that a building "shall not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause impairment in property values or constitute a blighting influence 'Within a reasonable distance of the development." The applicant is proposing to construct a rectangular, single story church building. The building is to have a metal roof, metal side and rear 'Walls 'With a 'Wood and brick facade on the front. (See Exhibit D). It is the Commission's charge to determine 'Whether or not this building design is compatible 'With the surrounding neighborhood. Required License Obtained: This item is not applicable to this request. Compatible Alterations and Adequate Parkinq: The issue of compatible alterations is not applicable to this request. Regarding parking, Reverend Ra'Wls, in his application letter, states that the sanctuary 'Will have a maximum seating capacity of one hundred (100) persons. Based on this figure, the zoning Ordinance requires parking for a minimum of thirty five (35) vehicles. The applicant's site plan indicates a 5,000 square foot parking lot 'With an additional adjacent 5,000 square feet dedicated for future parking. Based on a standard square footage per vehicle formula, parking spaces and maneuvering aisles for thirty five vehicles 'Will occupy at least 9,000 square feet. There is an adequate area dedicated for parking but, the applicant 'Will have to construct full parking facilities at the onset of the project rather than developing it in phases. Page -5- Section 10-202: This section sets three conditions which must be met by the applicant. The first of these conditions requires that the use be "compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment" of surrounding property. The Commission must determine whether or not the application can satisfy this condition. The next condition states, "the conditions placed on such use. . have been met by the appl icant". Should this permi t be approved, it will be staff's responsibility to insure compliance on the part of the applicant. The Certified Site Plan will be one of the staff's primary tools to insure the applicant's compliance. The final condition, "that the applicant has agreed to meet any additional conditions imposed," must be attested to by the applicant in the course of the Commission and City Council Public Hearings. Conclusion: The request (SCU90-004) meets Zoning Ordinance prerequisites and is therefore eligible to be considered for a Special Conditional Use Permit. Should the Commission recommend approval of this request, staff would suggest that the following conditions be attached to the permit. 1) Parkina: Parking for a minimum of thirty five (35) vehicles shall be provided. Parking facilities shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 10-600, off street parking requirements. 2) LandscaDinq and Screeninq: A planting plan for the perimeter of the parking lot shall be submitted as a component of the applicant's landscape. The landscape planing plan shall be included on the applicant's Certified Site Plan. The landscape plan shall require approval by the Director of Community Development. 3) Driveway Access: All driveway access to this tract shall be located on North "L" Street. There shall be no driveways accessing Fieldcrest or Valleyview Drives. Page -6- ODtions: 1) Approve permit A) As requested by applicant B) With conditions suggested by staff C) with additional or amended conditions I II ) II) Deny permit Table request for further consideration at a future date. z ~ ~;;l ~ 2:.; ~ . fll, '" . <: =0 . c;.: 3 ..en ,,~ = ~ - ~. 7'l- '" - ..,. '" . ...>. z_ '" 0 . .("'10 ... " ,... . 1J_ :: -'" ~ .". Z c .h.~ > f"'w"\(I!l Dl ' 13l- ~ n .b.g i: I:: ~~ ~ : \ >- It' '< : = ~ 80 ~ 0 5g;; . ..." '" "'- <: ~~ :: ~;c : . 0 :; ~ 00 IS\ '-' -'" ("\ D{"\ -;:r ~ ~~ C o;:;Clm ()'" g. m :: -,;) f"'I '" X [) 2 ~):J mSJ ~+~ {"\ 5 )>:2;;:>-0- "'0 ~~ ~ V':<~ w "" <> ~ w w .... .....n....... :~~!~ ~".~: .......:1... ..eo. n ... n. ~:;~~ ;r:~~ - < ::"-... . -'< ~ n-< _ . 00 .,.... :l""C ,. c.. ... "C ... :~~:;: o. . . :II 0 . :II . ::~~:a 1II__::r,,< c. . .., :lI. lC ;: th=;-: "'C ... < n . . -.... :lI n _. "'0 ... = n;"O c.oc:o : ~~~ =".:7 Po:.... '" -" 'O...::r.. .0.0 ~.....~ '"*I:r....c. g. =. :.: ~~ : ~ "*0 .... ~ i1 ... ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ rn'" ~~ < ~0 r~ [l\ BO' "* ~~ ~ ~l\ ~5 .~ ~\S' ~ ~ ~ >>~ J ~(Jl "' ~' ~.? ~ ... - )- ~~ '1 >~- Gj;5 ~~ 'V Be' iD ,---- N 0 I i ::i ~ i ii I, , NORTH ICX} 00 '8 '" rV , I = I -- r :: '" , I..>' I I i - ~ iG rT1 rT1 -l ~ n. (j) -; ~ CP 0_ IJ CJ ~ 'r 'z \)- 1<Jl '" Ie!> is ..... -+~-- ,z ~ i~ ~ ,-< ; ~ 5' ~ l' 5 :>. :; '" 'I ~ ,:UTH ~ am"'" ' g ,~ -I ~ ~ ~ () ~ -;- ... .~ ' Vl :Il 1 NORTH 100 00 _\ I rv """" ,,---------- ~ ~ --. . "" -i ~ SOUTH 10000' I ~. , ~ I ,I -", t..: 1 i t- !t -i: ~ 100.00' o '" "'. -- ._ .OL- e: F <;1 z CiI '" o '\~ " fTI ~ r lfl r-.O -'-iz. tJj 0 () o~,., 0<' /V . {\ g~rrl - :;. (j) '-; ! ~ c ~O 1;:0 !- ~< [1l ~ ' LP ~ --.Jeco\----.~. ----~~ :., .. (') ~, Z ~ ' ~ \ tV ,. CP s: ()l i~. 1Jl' -; lJl IG> o --- .--;.- -.-_____ g 19 ,z tV .CiI 0-> I I !2co_.ool .....'.... z '" )> ... 1.._. --.I cr'I I.J1 ... -----1 .~ 10 8 1 I I l, r- u VALLEY VIEW (Go' RoW) c-:> 0 C '- :0 r"I"1 c: ", ~ Z 0 .." ~ '" Q c....: - :=0 < ("') -" fT1 ~ '" 31: ~ g ~ 0 .-4 N o ~ L_ N tV tV Vi ~ e tV IJl r.. I ~ ~~- I I---~- h- _CD__ ~ ~~ "" I _" .0 r-l- T-~ V'- '" -J 6'1 () }J () ~ DR. _(':iE. <.n Z fll EXHIBrr A' \ R-\ AI. "L".~ -- -- \ '..J -\ MH GC R-'2 pUD \ ~ . ~ R-2 r;. ---~.:;rG~ ~ /d'~' -~ ---- - NC GC R-\ ~ ~ R-\ R-~ ~t-\\a\" "E FO~M CI.47 lllol SETS 6.73 PLANT PIPE USED FOR UNIT PIPEFITTER SKETCH PAD SHEET No. DATE CHARGE W.O. No. TIME PIPE SHOULD BE COMPLETED PIPEFITTER SEND WHITE COPY TO WELDING SHOP MAINTENANCE KEEP YELLOW COPY. INSPECTOR N2 2470 ENGINEER i~ ,., '", A- -, ;u t"t._. ''-4 '"~t ;t;), ~: ~F" r- :- ~~ I ~' I I I' I J ,I -- or ~" , , ,-., ~,.,... \~ l 1 J . , ! \ _.._.n_~_"-'--l j I .J -.- --- ----I I \J\ .-t? ) 'S ~: ~ U-~.......J ~J (D I ' ';. V\ ('> r \."< 0 1 ' - I ! .._~..0~--~'---_.J~ 0' <? ~ :~ -V \\ ; ~ 1_. I '~ ,- ~ <;:. j q r- I 'f;:'" . 'd ,- 'l"'l: I P .-r:: "'. ~"'f<r-. "" I ,;, _. ""\ ' I..;L: 1:.. ('> ill : 'V' ~ \' ::~ - - - - - -::,....~:-;~:;-_-!.._-_~-=":;,.,.._.....__-:-...J _' :J"'""~ )) - u - '''''lf~ C :~ !"4 ~~----....-".~-~. l...: .~ 1 i T I k i ) , ! i __._~~L l \ ~) ._~ i , I I, i' , I I' J EXHIBIT C 0 . , " >>:'i1 I t , II _.~ $:) n . ' \" ~ V V <;:: "1 :\ ~ Q It,~ .... -r:- .....If. C"" ,~ a ~4 l;' --- ;.r r-- ~ ~ ~ ~ (t> V ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ...., ~. ........... "'b ~ '""i' -..... ~ ~ ('.,. -- '-. v' -.....c ~ - ... } "-......... ~ r ~ '- ~ ...... r. "'t /'0.' ........... -....L ~ ~ ~ v.< t ~ ~ 'S ". " "' ....... ....... ~ v ~ - () r: " ...... s:::: ..... < r.:. >- ':~~'~5~)/..-:'f~.~~r; . ' +' (-::' .. t:,..:' ,ts ,"~"", )1'. . "i , .. ~...-.. .- ~ ..~ ~ ... -~ ;'...:' ;1'"...... :~~"t~;::~ ~t.'~ ~ .' "'~~,~ 1;....-..:- ,.!~ -.r.r,. .. _: .~,,~~'v:r~. '.'" t -'" .,,,,,.,' -....'\ t"" , if' '. ,,'..-,"'!. ~ t~. ~ 1; -' . ;'1;) ';',~1.~: f~~;f.'<;;;~:~"~';:':~" '.' to.Jr-.....,~....~ '.: ''''''''.'.\ <'.' .'.' _..~.~~ :Jt~/' .' ...... < . ~ ."';P; ":-::I'b;"-"~""'" . _ . ; _ ~ .,;J.;....A~\.~;,"11 \:y'~: ~~~ ,.\:.;.'( .~. ".it. . . .,' ,...'. :.\ ~wt!f~t~~;.:';' ~~ '. ...,....,0," t. .' . "~t'?~~l'j~{t~~&~~ . ,...' ~.,'t'~''''''f.;'iif~,,"'d: " .,,;;;\!,tf1g~~l, '. ;,' ., .... _.J;. .... ~. "'J " ,,' . <?~~i '> . E~H\a\' D .~". }.i;~':' ..rft:- .,};;~,i4~~' .---.-------------..' .. ~ _~..., -' ",,_ 'If.' <'."....~' ...,.~;.,..~,-~ .. ~_._.... 111 CZ'~G ~~Gg~ '0 g ;'. .~ C'l ~ rJ'l r- -=c '$;. ~ '; ~ ~~?~- C' ~ rn ";'; ._ ~..,. "'~ P~g~ ~ ~;;: c; q % d -------\ ~ r \ ,; ~ ~\ c> <~. r\ \- 9 \ \ ;;. 0 -rt5 \ ~ ! \', " ~ ;; ",0" \Q, ~ ?- . ,... '" <g \ ~ ~ ~ ;; \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c \ ~ ~ \ \ \ \ \ s: --: ~ \ \ \ ~ ~ g <- ~ C) c: rn rn Z 0 t.2i ~ ~ cg ~ c:::. ~ - '" ~~O ~ ~ '" r;; '" ~ o c; ~ ~ ~ '2. ~ '" ~ <;; % Cl >" ~ ":' ~ ..., ~ ~ ;, ;;; e; o -<\ .... ~ ..., '1, ~ ,... ~ q o ;-. ..., '1, ;; r= ~\ \ .... ~ '" '" "" ~ ~ ". 3---.. c....~ ':: >Jl ~ . '" ~ '" c> .... . '" c> -;;; ~ ~ EX\-\\stt