MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 7, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Announcements/Comments
Under Old Business
3350, 3400 & 3605 North Highway 67
Florissant Development LLC
Wal-Mart Page 2
Under New Business
700 St. Judith Lane
Residential Property Page 3-5
12735 New Halls Ferry
Papa John's Pizza Page 5-6
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
Future Meetings Page 6
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
The Planning and Zoning Commission for the City of Florissant met at the Florissant City Hall Council Chambers on Monday, March 7, 2011 at 7:00 p.m., with Jim Ross presiding.
On roll call the following members were present: Jim Ross, Paul Stock, Daniel Call, Jane Boyle, Dick Weller, Lee Baranowski and Jim Hessel. Also present was Julia Bennett, Court Reporter and Phil Lum, Building Commissioner.
A quorum being present the Chair declared the Planning and Zoning Commission was in session for the transaction of business.
ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENTS
Jim Ross stated that the next order of business would be approval of minutes for the February 22, 2010 meeting.
Hearing no objections Jim Ross made a motion to approve the minutes as written. Seconded by Jane Boyle, all parties concur and the motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS:
Item 1 3350, 3400 & 3605 North Highway 67
PZ022211-3 Florissant Development LLC (Wal-Mart)
CONTINUED - Ward 9
Request Recommended Approval to Rezone
Property From M-2 and B-3 Zoning to a
B-5 Zoning to Allow for a Planned
Commercial Development.
The Chair stated Item Number One on the Agenda, Wal-Mart located at 3350, 3400 & 3605 North Highway 67, Florissant Development LLC; request recommended approval to rezone property from M-2 and B-3 zoning to a B-5 zoning to allow for a Planned Commercial Development.
Jim Ross announced that City Staff had made a recommendation that this Petition be continued to the April 4, 2011.
Jim Ross asked if there were any further questions or comments? Being no further questions or comments, Jim Ross made a motion to continue the Petition
to April 4th. Seconded by Daniel Call. All parties concur and the motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS:
Item 2 700 St. Judith Lane
PZ030711-2 Residential Property
CONTINUED - Ward 7
Request Recommended Approval to
Rezone Property From R-4 Residential
to a B-3 Extensive Business District
to Allow for an Office.
The Chair stated Item Number Two on the Agenda, residential property located at 700 St. Judith Lane; request recommended approval to rezone property from R-4 residential to a B-3 Extensive Business District to allow for an office.
John C. Engelmeyer appeared before the Commission.
Jim Ross informed the Petitioner that the only thing before this Commission was a recommendation to rezone the property. Therefore tonight's presentation should be limited to why this property should be rezoned.
Mr. Engelmeyer stated that the property is located at the end of his street and as he watched it sit vacant for many months he saw the opportunity of possibly moving his office to this location. He stated that when he first looked at the rezoning ordinance he did feel uncomfortable making the request since a B-3 District incorporates an extensive list of occupational uses. However because this property is located behind one commercial district and adjacent to another, St. Judith has almost turned into a commercial rather than residential street. As a result, Mr. Engelmeyer stated that his belief was that this was a good fit and an excellent opportunity.
Jim Ross explained to the Petitioner that this would be a two-pronged approach; number one, rezoning the property and number two, requesting a Special Use Permit to operate the business.
Phil Lum advised Commissioner Ross that the Petitioner intends to use the property as a permitted use if the rezoning is successful and therefore no consideration would be needed for a Special Use Permit.
Jim Ross asked Mr. Lum if he had talked with the Petitioner about amending his request? Mr. Lum stated that one of the things he had wanted to say previously was that because information had not been obtained to make this a complete package staff's recommendation would be that both parties merely engage in dialogue regarding the rezoning. He added that such a conversation would not be binding to either party.
Mr. Lum then advised the Petitioner that after looking at the property lines in detail there is a strip of property on three sides that is zoned residentially and requires a setback line of 35 feet in addition to the 40 foot front setback line. Therefore if you were to impose those setbacks on this structure it would not meet either of them.
Jim Ross asked Mr. Lum if the Petition would first have to be presented to the Board of Adjustments? Mr. Lum stated that it did not, although his report may have suggested that it did. He continued by stating that what you would be creating by rezoning the property is a non-conforming use, because the building is too big for the setbacks. Therefore rezoning this as a business would negate the need for a review by the Board of Adjustments, which then kicks it back to this Commission to decide whether the setbacks are appropriate. He stated that at this point the only way that the Petitioner could meet the required setbacks would be to construct a new building on the site.
Mr. Lum stated that he had also reviewed this issue with the City Attorney and neither of them had been able to come up with an instance where the City has ever approved the rezoning of a property that would result in a non-conforming building.
Jim Ross asked Mr. Lum if this Petition would be similar to the Charbonier Petition? Mr. Lum stated that it would be, although he would urge the Commission not to make a recommendation on this proposal until there was a fully completed presentation, to include the survey and proposed building use.
Based on the aforementioned comments, Jim Ross asked the Petitioner if he was ready to proceed? Mr. Engelmeyer stated that he was. He stated that he had conducted a survey and now it was simply a matter of getting the files.
Jim Ross advised Mr. Lum that he was unclear as to why a survey was needed? Mr. Lum stated that in a submittal for a rezoning certain documents, which are listed at the end of his report, need to be presented.
Jim Ross stated that in spite of the fact that this package is incomplete the primary concern of this Commission would be the fact that the zoning follows the property. And since the B-3 allows for 102 permitted uses a rezoning of this property would mean that any of those uses would be allowed if you relocate or close your business.
Mr. Engelmeyer stated that he understood that fact and as a result had sought to obtain a Special Use Permit to prevent that from happening and compromising the integrity of his neighborhood.
Jim Hessel concurred with the comments made by Commissioner Ross.
Daniel Call explained that the reason no Special Use Permit was required is because the permitted use that he was seeking falls within the 102 permitted uses. Mr. Engelmeyer stated that his understanding of a Special Use Permit is that limits the use of a property to specific businesses. Mr. Call stated that to do so under the B-3 would require a revision to the Ordinance. Mr. Engelmeyer questioned whether City Council had the authority to impose such a restriction? Mr. Call stated that they could not.
Jane Boyle stated that her belief is that the reason the City developed a Comprehensive Plan a number of years ago is to prevent this very thing from happening. This City values the integrity of their neighborhoods, and to spot zone as this Petition is requesting is something that this Commission frowns upon. As a result, Ms. Boyle advised the Petitioner that she would be unable to support this Petition.
Lee Baranowski concurred with the comments made by Commissioner Boyle. He then asked Mr. Lum if this Petition would have been more feasible under a B-5 Zoning? Mr. Lum stated that the B-5 is a Planned Commercial District and since the Petitioner expressed a desire to reuse the existing building rather than rebuild, it was not applicable.
Jim Ross suggested that the Petitioner discuss this further with Mr. Lum and that the Petition be continued until such time as he had filed all of the necessary documentation.
Jim Ross asked if there were any further questions or comments to the Petitioner? Being no further questions or comments, Jim Ross made a motion to continue the Petition until further notice by the Building Commissioner. Seconded by Daniel Call. On roll call the Commission voted: Ross yes, Stock yes, Boyle yes, Call yes, Hessel yes, Weller yes and Baranowski yes. Motion carried.
Item 3 12735 New Halls Ferry
PZ030711-3 Papa John's Pizza
CONTINUED - Ward 8
Request Recommended Approval of
a Special Use Permit to Allow for
a Sit-Down, Carry-Out Restaurant
in a B-2 District.
The Chair stated Item Number Three on the Agenda, Papa John's Pizza located at 12735 New Halls Ferry; request recommended approval of a Special Use Permit to allow for a sit-down, carry-out restaurant in a B-2 District.
Jim Ross informed Mr. Lum that the Staff Report contained in the packets did not correlate with the information provided for the Petition. Mr. Lum stated that the second page of the report should be deleted.
The Petitioner does not appear and Jim Ross made a motion to continue the Petition to the March 21, 2011 meeting. Seconded by Jim Hessel. All parties concur and the motion carried.
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
Item 5 Future Meetings
The next Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting will be held on Monday, March 21, 2011.
The next City Council Meeting will be held on March 14, 2011, Paul Stock is scheduled to represent the Commission.
Jim Ross asked if there were any further questions or comments? Being no further questions or comments, Jim Ross made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Daniel Call. All parties concur and the meeting is adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
