Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-01-1996 Planning Commission MinutesThe Planning & Zoning Commission meeting was held Monday, July 1, 1996 at 5.00 PM at the City Administration Building, 161 N. Section Street Present: Cindy McBrearty, Vice -Chairman; members Larry Green, Debbie Quinn, Cecil Pitman, Jeanette Puckett, William Richmond, Tim Kant, Bob Lunsford, Zoning Officer and Brenda Hoffman, Secretary The minutes of the June 3, 1996 meeting were duly approved as written. Belle Chase -Phase 1 Final plat approval, 32 lots. Mr. Lunsford was asked to read his comments and he noted that this development was part of that submitted by Charlie Earle as Belle Chase, 74 lots for preliminary approval granted at the January 4, 1996 meeting. The development has been sold to Mitchell who has preliminary approval on this and what will likely become Phase II of Unit I. Phase II preliminary will expire if not acted upon by January 1998. Lands lying east of Earle's preliminary submittal are not eligible for consideration until the question of impact of stormwater outflow eastward toward Booth Road has been satisfactorily resolved. As built plans and test reports have been submitted, improvements have been inspected by the city and found to be substantially in place and conforming. A maintenance bond for two years is required and has been submitted for the council's acceptance for maintenance. Recommendation was made for final plat approval for Belle Chase Unit I, Phase with the stipulation that foundation design must be based on soil tests for the buildings designed, due to questionable soils. These to be submitted at the time of permitting. Sam Robinson, an adjacent property owner, spoke in regard to the "tricky drainage" in that area. He stated that over the period of construction, he has on many occasions spoken to the engineer, Don Coleman, and workers on the site. They have always been responsive and helpful. A dike, which was not shown on the plans appeared a few days ago, restricting the water flow from his property into the holding pond. He spoke to Mr. Coleman after calling Bob Lunsford at 4:30 and it was looking good. By 4:45 the bulldozer had once again rearranged it. Bob requested that Mr. Coleman, who was present, speak to the concerns of Mr. Robinson. Mr. Coleman assured Mr. Robinson that there would be no deviation from the plans in regard to the flow of water to the holding pond. He will continue to monitor the situation and see that no blockage occurs which restricts the flow of water from Mr. Robinson's land. Larry Green moved for final plat approval, seconded by Jeanette Puckett motion carried unanimously. A public hearing was held, a re -zone request from R-4 Low Density Multi -family to B2 General Business, for the property of Jay and Mary Ann Lapeze, lots 2 and 5 of the Swift Tract on the west side of N. Church Street. Bob read his comments into the record.. (attached), adding that although commercial zoning is designated for some of the properties around the property submitted for rezoning, no commercial uses were in effect with the exception of bed and breakfast which is a use permitted on appeal in a residential zone. Ms. Lapeze Planning & Zoning Commission July 1, 1996 - Page 2 was recognized by the commission -she stated that she had come in to city hall three years ago and spoke to Mr. Lunsford about the possibility of rezoning her property. She was told that SARPC was to begin work with the city on a new comprehensive plan which might affect the zoning. She was advised to wait until the new plan was completed. She waited and her zoning was not affected. She indicated that she has spoken with Mr. Johnson, who has purchased the property at Magnolia and Church and he told her his intention is to build one patio garden home and another building with four shops below and his residence above. She felt the street was not safe for children being a mixed use neighborhood. During holidays, Mardi Gras parades, July 4th, and arts & crafts, residents were locked into their yards. They didn't mind, however, it was not residential. She has 1/3 acre and with the need for parking in the CBD, it could be provided for a business zoned B-2. Their R-4 property and one R-2 were all that was left of residential zoning on the block. She asked that her real estate agent speak to the problem she was having selling her property with the limited uses versus the neighboring properties which were commercially listed for sale. Tipper Williams, Century 21 Sterling Properties, spoke of the disadvantage of nonconforming neighboring properties. Potential buyers don't understand the difference in uses. She passed out pictures of For Sale listings and a print out of the difference in market value between the homes on the same street based on the zoning. She suggested that it should all conform to the same zoning. Cindy McBrearty spoke in regard to the Master Plan and the purpose for it. It is not intended to rezone private property. That is done only upon the request of the property oviner. The Master Plan looks toward the zoning of unzoned land for potential growth. The zoning in place for this property has been in place for twenty years. The Municipal Complex was once a Delchamps store and other B-2 uses were here. The zoning did not change when the use changed. Becky Lundberg of 110 N. Summit spoke objecting to the zoning change. She has children and doesn't want to see it lose its residential use. Pauline Anders who lives behind the property also protested the zoning change. A B-2 zone might open the way for a restaurant with a band playing late into the night. A bed and breakfast might not be so bad. Beth Outzen of 116 Oak Avenue spoke saying she and the Lapezes are friends and she didn't want to cause them any harm. She understands Mary Ann's problem, but traffic is already a problem on Summit. There have been 3 dead cats in the road in only a week. While growth is inevitable, she does not want her neighborhood ruined by business. B-2 zoning could allow in an auto parts store.. B-2 is too broad. Norm Wachtl of Church Street spoke in support of the zoning requested. Linda Garrett of 112 Oak Street Fpoke in regard to her concerns for the changing character of her neighborhood. Would like to see some sort of buffer zone in place. Carl Lundberg spoke opposing the rezoning..a mistake may have been made twenty Planning & Zoning Commission July 1, 1996 - Page 3 years ago ... why increase the mistake? He has no problem with a B&B but nothing broader. There are no business uses in effect now with the exception of maybe the apartments and the B&B's. Debbie Quinn said she grew up on this street. A change to B-2 in her opinion was too drastic. Since no B-2 uses were in effect, maybe those neighbors with this zoning could be contacted to decrease to a more restrictive use. This would make the area more conforming. Ms Lapeze wanted to know how this would affect her existing structure. If anything, it would become a nonconforming use per Cindy McBrearty. Cecil Pitman moved that this hearing be held in abeyance for 30 days until the matter could be studied. Jeanette Puckett seconded the motion and it was unanimously carried. A letter from a property owner Hollin, ecerr was made a part of the official record as opposing the rezoning. There being no further business, meeting was duly adjourned.