2016_08.18 PZ MinutesKENNEDALE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES
COMMISSIONERS - REGULAR MEETING
August 18, 2016
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 405 MUNICIPAL DRIVE
WORK SESSION - 6:00 PM
REGULAR SESSION - 7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M.
II. ROLL CALL
[A quorum was not present until 7:00 P.M.]
Staff present: Rachel Roberts (planning director).
Also present: Mike Bennett, city engineer (Shield Engineering) and Dave Jirousek, LSL Planning.
III. WORK SESSION
IV. REGULAR SESSION
V. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
VI. ROLL CALL
VII. MINUTES APPROVAL
A. Consider approval of minutes from June 16, 2016 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
Mr. Pirtle made a motion to approve the minutes as written, seconded by Ms. Williamson.
The motion passed with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained.
VI11. VISITOR/CITIZENS FORUM
No one registered to speak.
IX. REGULAR ITEMS
A. CASE # PZ 16 -09 To consider approval regarding a request by CHC Development for a final plat of
the Glen of Village Creek (formerly Swiney Estates, plat abandoned by instrument numbers D214210746
and D216057891, PRTC) for approximately 15.982 acres located on Bowman Springs Rd, generally
located south of Swiney Estates Block 1 Lot 4R, west of Bowman Springs Rd, north of Winding Creek Rd,
and east of 1141 Bowman Springs Rd. The plat will create 35 residential lots and 3 open space parcels.
Property addresses include 1201, 1305, & 1307 Bowman Springs Rd.
Ms. Roberts said the plat and plans conform to city regulations and recommended approval. Mr. Harvey
had a question about visibility corridor along Bowman Springs. Mike Bennett, engineer for the city, said
there was an open space there that would help; he added that he didn't see that anything would need to
be done by the developer. He said they could look at the visibility issue, and maybe if it came to it, put up
a warning sign. He said the question is, does someone see the intersection in time at the posted speed
limit? Mr. Harvey asked about the intersection width. Mr. Bennett said that usually the turn radius is set by
traffic you're going to get turning in, and there is a 30 -foot radius planned, which a larger radius.
Mr. Harvey asked about the roadway going through the floodplain. Mr. Bennett said that is looked at in
drainage calculations, and there will be a letter of map revision submitted to FEMA, but that is after
construction is completed. He said the developer will build up the dirt and compact it before they get to
the road and that the roadway design is not something really unique. Mr. Pirtle asked if there would be a
retaining wall, and. Bennett said there is a retaining wall to protect the road, so there would be no slope to
worry about in the road.
Mr. Pirtle made a motion to recommend approval but asked Ms. Roberts if the Commission could add
conditions. Ms. Roberts said the Commission could but Council cannot. Mr. Harvey said they can add
conditions but can't say that something has to be added to the development or the development
agreement between the city and the developer. Mr. Pirtle clarified that he recommended approval on the
condition that the City gets a response from the streets department on whether additional signage is
needed.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Browne, and the Commission voted to recommend approval, with all in
favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained.
B. CASE # PZ 16 -01 Public hearing and consideration of Ordinance approval regarding a request by
Adam Blow for a zoning change from "C -1 " General Commercial to "R-1" Single Family Residential
located on 0.5 acre at 600 Little School Rd. legal description of J M Lilly Survey, A 980 Tr 6A.
Ms. Roberts said the Commission had considered this case in March. The applicant had not submitted
information in his application supporting the city's approving a rezoning that does not conform to the
comprehensive land use plan, and he did not attend the hearing to provide any additional information, so
the Commission had postponed the case until August to allow the applicant time to provide something.
She said since then, the applicant had not been in touch with staff, and after talking with the property
owner, it appeared as though the applicant was no longer interested in buying the property.
The applicant was not present, and no one registered to speak at the public hearing.
Mr. Pirtle made a motion to deny Case PZ 16 -01, seconded by Mr. Browne. There was no discussion,
and the motion passed with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained.
C. CASE # PZ 16 -10 To receive public comments and consider Ordinance No. 605, adopting a Unified
Development Code to regulate land use within the City of Kennedale; establishing zoning districts to
regulate and restrict the use of property for residential, commercial, industrial and other purposes;
regulating parking, landscaping, screening, lighting, signs, building design and materials; providing for the
submission of site plans, subdivision plats and other development applications; providing regulations for
flood damage prevention, stormwater protection, erosion and sediment control; and providing for
procedures for review, approval and administration of these regulations.
Ms. Roberts gave a brief overview and then added there was one more item they were proposing to
change from the version the Commission had received already, which is to require all monument sign
bases to have a minimum height of 18 inches to make the requirement consistent between both single -
family residential and commercial districts. Then, with additional comments from Mr. Jirousek, she talked
about input from the public forum and discussed how to resolve issues raised at that forum concerning
the proposed center neighborhood village. For example, the city could adopt mapped village districts as
regulating plans rather than going ahead and rezoning them.
The Commission discussed the pros and cons of the different options and the different perspectives, from
property owner concerns about value and being able to sell, and developer concerns about predictability.
Mr. Jirousek said the UDC adoption is ahead of rezoning property, so one way or another, rezoning is
happening after the UDC is adopted. Adopting regulating plans would solidify the city's position a bit more
by adopting language that the maps will be general guidance on rezoning, whether that's one month for
now or six months from now. He said that adopting the maps as exhibits embraces the concepts in
general but does not tie the City into these specific boundaries.
Mr. Jirousek then gave a presentation to the Commission covering the UDC process from start to finish,
the background of the project, and information on major changes since the last draft the Commission had
seen. He also gave more details about the proposed regulations for the Neighborhood and Urban Village
districts.
Ms. Roberts showed the Commissioners a list of ordinances that were proposed to be repealed from the
city code and included in the UDC.
Mr. Browne asked if the City adopted the village district maps, did that set the boundaries for those
districts. Mr. Jirousek said that if the maps are adopted as part of the UDC, then they would serve as
guidelines, but the City could work the boundaries on a case by case basis. He added that the City could
build in flexibility.
Mr. Jirousek pointed out the new maximum setback proposed for buildings in the Urban Corridor overlay
district, stating that the steering committee thought it was important to limit parking in front of some
buildings along the urban corridor so you don't have buildings pushed way back with a sea of parking. He
said the regulations also promote cross access easements to promote traffic management while cars are
moving with greater speeds.
Mr. Harvey noted that the proposed Employment Center regulations don't have a green belt. Mr. Jirousek
said LSL suggested removing the green belt district and replacing it with steep slope regulations instead
so that the City doesn't have a district type that doesn't allow development.
Mr. Jirousek said they hadn't removed a lot of regulations, but had mainly moved around and
consolidated existing regulations. They also applied good regulations done recently to city -wide
regulations.
The chairman opened the public hearing.
Cecil Bedford, who owns 600 Little School Rd, addressed the Commission. He said he'd had a contract
for someone to buy his property, but that person backed out because he wanted to build and didn't want
to wait until August. He asked if what LSL had done [proposed through the mapping] is the way it's going
to be done. Mr. Harvey said he thinks the Commission's stance is through using a regulating plan, and
not changing what it is today, then if Mr. Bedford wanted to submit for a rezoning again, the desire is that
to be based on the regulating plan, but the Commission would have an opportunity to hear his justification
for why it shouldn't be C -1 or what the regulating plan. He said that's kind of what their decision earlier
[PZ 16 -01] was, they needed to hear why it shouldn't be C -1, and then the Commission can make a
decision.
Mr. Bedford asked why the previous applicant [Mr. Blow] was told it couldn't be rezoned. Mr. Harvey said
he couldn't answer why he would have been told that, but that if Mr. Bedford and other property owners
see an opportunity to come in together to say why they think it should be rezoned, if various property
owners want different zoning, if there are competing factions, the Commission has a harder time making
that decision, and it's probably a better opportunity if they could provide a view of a better plan.
Mr. Bedford said that the property owners around his property don't live in Kennedale, so how do they all
get down to City Hall for the hearing. Ms. Roberts said they could use an owner affidavit, which would be
signed by the property owners and notarized, and one person could represent all the property owners.
Mr. Bedford asked about the rezoning application fee, and Ms. Roberts said that if all the property owners
applied together on one application, they would have one fee.
Mr. Bedford asked if the UDC was all decided on, and Mr. Harvey said they hadn't voted yet. He said if
the Commission approved it, it will go to City Council, and Mr. Bedford would have another opportunity to
give comments.
Brett Clifton, who owns property behind Mr. Bedford's, also 600 Little School Rd, addressed the
Commission. He had a copy of the Center neighborhood village proposed by LSL Planning and asked
what the "general" area is, and Mr. Jirousek said the general area is a sub -area of the village district, and
it's the most flexible area. He said it allows residential buildings, office buildings, commercial buildings, or
a mix within the same structure. He said the more restrictive are transition and center sub - areas.
Mr. Clifton asked if there are restrictions for the residential buildings. Mr. Harvey asked if Mr. Jirousek was
talking multi -unit, and Mr. Clifton asked if meant duplex. Mr. Jirousek said yes, and Ms. Roberts added
that townhomes would be an example. Mr. Harvey explained by saying if someone had an acre, he could
build multiple condominium homes within that acre and create some density but also create a buffer next
to the adjacent neighborhoods.
Mr. Clifton asked what the projected timeline was in terms of going from current zoning to rezoning. Mr.
Harvey said first the unified development code has to be passed. Mr. Jirousek said it was up to the city's
discretion. The maps regulating maps will be available, but the timing is up to the city or to someone who
wants to request the rezoning.
Mr. Havey ask Mr. Jirousek if he had any response to comments from LSL the public hearing. Mr.
Jirousek said that in terms of access management concerns raised by some property owners in the
Central Neighborhood Village, you'll have a lot of the same issues and issues of assembling property in
any zoning district, whether it's C -1, C -2, or village districts. This code provides more predictability, which
makes it more attractive to developers.
Ms. Roberts recommend approval of the UDC and also adopting maps as either regulating plans or
guidance documents. She said the city had been working on this document for a long time, and she was
very excited to bring this before the Commission. She said she is hoping it will provide flexibility for
property owners but also predictability for the city and developers.
Mr. Pirtle described the nice walkable downtown of Fredericksburg and said that's what they were
working toward. Mr. Harvey agreed but added that Kennedale is working from a downtown that burned
down, and that's what we're struggling with, getting residents to see the vision. He said Fredericksburg
was able to embrace their downtown, and they've done a tremendous job, but they had a structure to
build from.
Mr. Pirtle said the UDC is easy to read. He said as an architect, he hates going through code, and this is
pretty to- the - point. He said he liked its organization and simplicity. Mr. Harvey said it will be hyperlinked
and online, and even a pdf version online will be hyperlinked, and he thought it was going to be a very
useful document.
Mr. Browne made a motion to adopt the UDC pending review by the city attorney and recommending the
Village District maps be adopted as regulatory plans. The motion was seconded by Ms. Williamson.
Mr. Pirtle said he would like to add to the motion that all of the areas marked in yellow in the UDC [edits to
be done] get completed prior to recommendation to City Council. Ms. Williamson seconded the
amendment.
The motion passed with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained.
X. REPORTS /ANNOUNCEMENTS
Ms. Roberts said a groundbreaking for Dickey's BBQ was held earlier this month. She said coming up in
October will be the beginner's bird workshop and a historical society event with Melvin Cooper as the
speaker, talking about the Cooper family history in Kennedale. She said the Council will hold budget
hearings in September, and coming up is the 6" annual Brooke Hester Hustle. She also said that on
October 22 will be KKB's Bring It! Recycling Event, the KPD Drug Takeback, and the Public Safety
Open House.
Mr. Browne asked if there was a way to put out information about citizens, since there was a resident who
recently saved a couple in Joe Pool Lake. Ms. Roberts said there might be a way to put the information in
the city newsletter, and she could give the information to the communications coordinator.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Pirtle made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Ms. Williamson. The motion passed with all in favor
except M;,�iarvey, who abstained. The meeting adjourned at 9:06 P.M.
Chair
A'
(916
Date
uw" Z;-
Rachel Roberts, Planning Director