Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAM1996-032- . MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS FROM: TRENT PETTY, CITY MANAGE. H.T. HARDY, DIRECTOR OF DE LOPMENT SERVICES MEETING DATE: MARCH 26, 1996 SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE GRAPEVINE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE 82-73 Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council consider the proposed amendments to Section 31, Light Industrial and Section 32, Business Park District relative to warehouse/distribution uses; Section 49, Special Use Permits and Section 60 Sign Regulations relative to neighborhood day care centers, ground, pole, portable and vehicle signs; and Section 52, Tree Preservation, Section 45, Concept Plans, Section 47, Site Plan Review, and Section 53, Landscaping relative to tree preservation and take any action deemed necessary. Attached are copies of eight sections of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance proposed to be amended. Listed below is a summary of the proposed amendments. Throughout these amendments the language reflects the revised title of Director of Community Development to Director of Development Services. • Warehouse Distribution Uses Section 31.A. and 31.C., Light Industrial District Section 32.A. and 32.C., Business Park District The Planning and Zoning Commission authorized Staff to set a public hearing to consider amending the industrial districts to change warehouse distribution from a permitted use to a conditional use. Ms. Spencer has expressed concern about industrial distribution development that could occur in the northeast part of Grapevine. With the proposed development of the Grapevine Mills Value Center Mall there may be substantial land use changes in this area from industrial to commercial. The amendments to Section 31.A. allow warehouse distribution as a permitted use on properties platted as a lot of record with concept plan approval prior to March 27, 1996. The amendments to Section 31.C. will require a conditional use for warehouse distribution on properties platted as a 0:\ZCU\AM03-26.96 1 March 21, 1996 9:31 am lot of record after March 27, 1996. Amendments to the Business Park District are the same, except there is no reference to platting. Only two lots are zoned and final platted or under construction at this time. The amendment, as drafted, is intended to address possible changes in development trends in northeast Grapevine. Consideration should be given to the effect of the amendment on all land in Grapevine zoned Planned Industrial Development, Light Industrial, and Business Park. Future development could be effected by the conditional use request and public hearing process. Cases could also be negatively impacted by comments received from adjoining property owners in a public hearing, as in the case of NTN Bearing recently proposed on Southwest Grapevine Parkway. An alternative to amending the zoning ordinance to address development in northeast Grapevine would be to initiate a zoning case for the area. The zone change could establish conditional use requirements for warehouse distribution type users for that specific area which would not effect other property zoned LI Light Industrial or BP Business Park in Grapevine. This process would be similar to past cases that were approved with deed restrictions. Some concerns exist as to how this amendment might have impacted large projects in Grapevine like Neostar and IDI. This would require IDI to adhere to the new requirements when they begin Phase II, something they had not expected to do. The alternative would still allow the areas that have already started to continue their developments unhindered. • Neighborhood Day Care Centers Section 49.B.14., Special Use Permits Section 60.F., Sign Regulations in Residential areas (page 14) The Commission at Council's request reviewed language, at the January 30, 1996 Workshop, providing an avenue to allow neighborhood day care centers in residential areas. The proposed language is the result of the zone change request of the Memorial Baptist Church from "R-7.5" to "R -MF -1 " Multifamily, and conditional use permit for a day care center. Section 49.13.14. defines a neighborhood day care center and its development restrictions relative to location and size. Proposed amendments to Section 60.F., Sign Regulations, allows neighborhood day care centers to request ground and wall signs along with the special use permit. • Tree Preservation 0:\ZCU\AM03-26.96 2 March 21, 1996 9:31 am Section 52, Tree Preservation Section 45.C., Concept Plans Section 47.E.1.b.24., Site Plan Review Section 53.G.2., Landscaping Regulations At the October 30, 1995 Workshop the Commission requested Staff to draft language for a Tree Preservation Permit to accompany zone change requests and concept plans for plats. The purpose of the proposed language is to provide a review process to preserve the existing natural environment whenever possible and to encourage the preservation of large specimen trees throughout any construction or land development. At the February 20, 1996 meeting, the Commission substituted language to state a Tree Preservation Permit may he required as Council or the Commission determine may be needed. Prior drafts required tree preservation review on all cases requested. No zoning districts are excluded from the Tree Preservation Permit requirements. The proposed language defines a Tree Preservation Permit and a Tree Removal Permit and when or if either permit would be required to be submitted. A Tree Preservation Permit defines large specimen trees as 8 inches or larger when measured 4.5 feet above the ground level. A Tree Removal Permit defines a specimen tree as 3 inches or greater when measured 4.5 feet above ground level. Both permits require a Tree Replacement Plan and a Tree Protection Plan. Staff also proposed amendments to Section 53, Landscaping Regulations to define the minimum acceptable tree size. Currently, the Landscaping Regulations require trees to be a minimum height of seven feet. The new definition states the tree to be a minimum size of 3 caliper inches when measured 3 inches above ground, and a minimum height of 7 feet. Section 45, Concept Plans and Section 47, Site Plan Review were also amended to require Tree Preservation Permits to be a part of zoning cases or platting when Council or the Commission determine there is a need to consider existing specimen trees relative to a request. As proposed, an approved Tree Preservation Permit may be amended by City Council by resolution after receiving a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. This would not require a public hearing to amend the Tree Preservation Permit. • Ground, Pole and Portable and Vehicle Signage Section 60.B.2.b., Ground Sign Regulations (pages 3-4) Section 60.B.2.c.12., Conditional Use Pole Sign Regulations (pages 6-7) Section 60.C.13., Portable and Vehicle Sign Regulations (page 11) 0:\ZCU\AM03-26.96 3 March 21, 1996 9:31 am The proposed amendments for ground signs are new design standards to encourage developments to use ground signs in lieu of the standard 20 foot pole sign. The new design standards relate to increases in the overall height, maximum gross surface area and percentage of changeable copy. The amendments create separate criteria for residential and non-residential uses. The amendments redefine ground signs to be solid from the ground up with all poles or supports to be concealed. In a few instances the proposed amendment would create non -conformity in existing ground signs. In addition, especially near the lake, Corps of Engineers signs which are designed based on federal standards used by Parks & Wildlife and other government agencies, would still exist and because they are not regulated by the City would represent an obvious inconsistency with this amendment. To be compatible with the pole sign regulations, the amount of changeable copy for all ground signs was increased to 30% as a matter of right, a larger percentage of changeable copy would require a conditional use. Also included is the ability to increase the height of ground signs when they are placed on a two foot berm or a masonry planter box. The proposed amendments to pole signs, not exceeding 40 feet in height, relate primarily to permitted highway locations, establishment of design requirements for signs and supporting poles, and allowing 40 foot pole signs as a conditional use on any property zoned Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial and Highway Commercial along designated highways. Signs and supporting pole(s) would be required to be designed and constructed to be related or complementary with the architectural style of the primary structures. A good example of what this amendment would accomplish is the pole sign at the Red Robin Restaurant. Forty foot pole signs may be approved under current requirements on State Highways 114, 121, and 360. The proposed amendments would add S.H. 2499, but would eliminate signs along S.H. 360 and S.H. 121 south of the intersecting point of these two highways. Eliminating the ability to request 40 foot pole signs along S.H. 360 could effect development along the corridor in the future. In addition, it should be considered whether or not now is the best time to begin restricting the development of this corridor beyond its current zoning limitations. Staff expects development on S.H. 360 to be similar to that seen on S.H. 114. There would be little effect of 40 foot pole signs on residential areas along S.H. 360 since the only residential development in that area is largely adjacent to a city park area. Staff feels the development of S.H. 360 will begin to occur soon due to increased traffic and TXDOT's plans to move forward on the development of the freeway lanes from S.H. 183/ Airport Freeway to State Highway 121/William D. Tate Avenue. Staff expects these improvements will soon generate the need 0:\ZCU\AM03-26.96 4 March 21, 1996 2:24pm for signage along that corridor. An exhibit is attached outlining the areas 40 foot pole signs may be requested as a conditional use under present and proposed locations. The proposed amendments will permit 40 foot pole signs on any property along designated highways as a conditional use if the property is zoned Community Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, or Highway Commercial. Presently signs are permitted with a conditional use only along designated highways in Planned Commercial Centers. Council has requested the Planning & Zoning Commission consider this change to give all users along designated highways the ability to request 40 foot pole signs. The proposed amendments include language to specifically regulate portable and vehicle signs. Staff is currently unable to regulate those signs on a stationary vehicle. The proposed amendments would provide Staff the ability to eliminate these types of signs. 0:\ZCU\AM03-26.96 5 March 21, 1996 9:31 am