HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes COM 06-01-21 Randall Dr. I can't get involved in that.You can use public roads.
• I don't see any of the other issues as a reason to bring this back to Committee a month from now. Is there
really a reason to bring everyone back here?Rachel Keesling: Typically,when we get stuff back on the day
off,we like to have time to review everything.Kevin Rider: We have time between now and Commission.
Rachel Keesling: Yes we do. We also have number of comments on ProjectDox that have not been
addressed by the other departments.Nobody has motioned for a favorable recommendation yet. I don't
think it is there yet.
Alan Potasnik:
• With regards to the general use of the facility,cars are delivered and detailed here to be ready for sale. They
are parked and then they are sent to a specific dealer?Or are they inventoried here?Rick Randstad: If there
is an excess of inventory or a significant number of cars jammed into the parking lot. We may have 7 white
identical Hyundai Sonata and we don't necessarily want them all sitting on the dealership parking lot,we
want 2 or 3.There is a car shortage today so that isn't an issue currently. The rest go into this lot. There will
be a car wash and photo booth. This gets secondary operations of the dealership off of the lot. Takes away
from service area where Staff is present to just service the cars.Alan Potasnik: Rather than being just a
detail center, it is also a detail center and new inventory. Rick Randstad: Absolutely,that is why there are
700 parking spots on the site. I can't imagine all 700 will be filled but it is setup that way in case there is an
additional dealership in the south.In the future, if there is an additional dealership to the south then we will
be back here.The northern portion will be storage after that transpires.
• What effect does lowering the light poles to 15-ft. from 24-ft,have with regards to coverage?Bill Butz: It
will drop coverage but not substantially. The light is still going where you want it.Jon Dobosiewicz: The
LEDs do more to restrict lighting that the pole height.Jon Dobosiewicz: If it is dropped to that height then
it will not make any affect with regards to safety?I assume that is why you have lights there.Jon
Dobosiewicz: We are still zero footcandles at the north property line.It is lighting the parking field for
security. It is more about the LED fixtures. They are shorter along this edge out of respect for the residential
use to the north.
• Does Staff feel comfortable with the proposed truck vehicle drop off and movement?Rachel Keesling: I do
because they widened that portion of the path and there is a designated space. There is enough room in the
main drive aisle. They can pull of there and I think this will work. They did lose parking to make this
happen.
• It sounds like there are at least issues that we need to go over and some will be address with Staff. We will
just have to come back in July for Committee.Kevin Rider: Is there anybody here actually from Napleton?
I want somebody who works there to attend the July Committee meeting.
Docket No.PZ-2021-00048 DP/ADLS continued to the July 6,2021 Commercial Committee.
4. Docket No.PZ-2021-00062 OA: Gas Station Setback& Standards Amendment
The applicant seeks to amend the Unified Development Ordinance in order to amend the standards for Automobile
Service Stations and associated definitions. Filed by the Department of Community Services on behalf of the
Cannel Plan Commission.
Petitioner: Adrienne Keeling(DOCS):
• At Commission there were three general categories of discussion regarding the proposed amendment. To
recap currently the Unified Development Ordinance(UDO)has an 80-ft. setback from residentially zoned
or used properties.We are proposing to increase that standard to 500-ft. as well as adding a matching
setback for vent pipes for underground storage tanks.The three categories are:
• First, lighting regulations.We have proposed an amendment to that on page 3 of the Submitted Packet(Line
60-61)to be clearer. It would read"Under-canopy lighting shall use full cut-off,recessed luminaires with
flat lenses to minimize glare and light trespass."This should cover concerns about the difference between
flush mounted and recessed mounting under the canopies. Nick Kestner: Can you clarify that a little more?
Adrienne Keesling: Full cut-off recessed with a flat lens,meaning that it needs to be recessed and a flat
lens would keep the lens from curving down and creating glare. Full cut-off means that there would be no
light emitted upward. It would all be oriented downward.
• The second category of questions related to consideration of additional uses and clarifying how those uses
Commercial Committee Minutes 06-01-21 5
would be affected, including schools,long term care facilities, such as nursing homes,retirement homes,
and CCRC uses,grocery store gas stations,and non-retail dispensing of fuels. Schools specifically,each
Cannel-Clay school building is within a residentially zoned building. They would all fall under the
increased setback. Each of the continuing care uses are categorized as a residential use. In those instances,
regardless of the zoning district,those would also be protected by the increased setback distance.Regardin
grocery store gas stations there was a question as to whether the gas station would be an ancillary use. We
believe that in the defmitions of Automobile Service Station and Automobile Filling Station,with the phrase
"Any place of business..."we feel comfortable that those stations are places that we would consider new
stations and would fall under the increased setback distances, if something like a station at Kroger and
Meijer were proposed. There are some instances where gas pumps are used. Staff acknowledges that they
exist for mostly fleet purposes such as school fueling or an auto dealership with gas on site. The charge of
this proposal was for the retail installations and those presumably have the largest volumes of fuel to
dispense. This ordinance does cover retail dispensing uses.
• The third category of questions revolved around the structure or applicability of the UDO across the City.
There were several questions regarding the various districts listed and again to recap the B-1/Business,B-2,
B-3,B-6,B-8,&I1/Industrial zoning districts are the only districts where new gas stations are permitted.It
was pointed out that there are gas stations in other districts. One at 146th St. and Gray Rd. That received
Board of Zoning Appeals(BZA)approval.A second one is at Main St. and Guilford Rd.within the
UC/Urban Core district,which would not permit a gas station today. However,when that was built the
zoning was business.The UDO can only do so much.It regulates districts and Staff does not want to be put
into a position where we are adding residential districts to this list which may cause confusion that gas
stations are permitted uses in residential districts. Staff believes that this covers most of the scenarios where
service stations could be proposed.Any other scenarios in the case of Use Variances or Planned Unit
Developments(PUD),there are solutions during those public hearings to ensure those instances can be
covered as well.If a proposal comes through the BZA that is fewer than 500-ft. from a residential district
that is certainly something that the BZA can consider as a part of their approval or denial of the gas station.
Regarding new PUDs,there are decision criteria in the processes for PUDs. Staff agrees that Commission
and City Council(Council)definitely need to pay reasonable regard to the decision criteria in terms of
setbacks. That can be included as part of the PUD approval process.I want to repeat that if we are proposin
that these setbacks be automatically applied to a PUD,doing so would single out that 500-ft. setback as the
only development standard that is a prerequisite for a PUD in the entire UDO.Kevin Rider: Are you
pointing it out as a positive or a negative?Adriene Keeling: I am pointing it out because when the PUD
districts were contemplated 5 or 6 years ago there was a lot of discussion about adding prerequisites and
whether that is a density cap or open space minimums.It was discussed and adopted that the PUD ordinance
was meant to be flexible,and Staff didn't want a blanket requirement because every site and context is
different. The decision at the time was there would be no prerequisites other than that the applicant had to
be the owner and there would be no development standards required. This would be the first if we required
it.
Committee Comments:
Kevin Rider:
• I agree with not having prerequisites in the PUDs because they are their own entity.But I also don't know if
any of the prerequisites had to do with safety. This is a safety issue. I understand the logic and don't
disagree with it,but Staff does this every day,I do it parttime,and the public doesn't do it at all. Sometimes
we do things, if it causes no harm but puts comfort in people's world, sometimes we make decisions that
way. If we did this City wide would it cause harm?I know you think it might confuse things but that's not
harm.Adrienne Keeling: It would be a very different section or scenario based on the whole UDO format
to add these extra districts.I am not sure what you mean by harm. It is just breaking with the format and
every other use specific standard,which would cause confusion.Kevin Rider: Can we not just say,"This
applies to our entire boundary."Do we have to list every zoning district?Paul Reis: Correct.What the
current draft talks about is the districts where one would have a gas station. If I am in any other zoning
district City wide,I would have to come in and either rezone the land or apply for a variance.You could
state in the current ordinance, in addition to current districts,you could say,"Pr such other districts in
which a parcel/the use has been granted by either variance or rezoning."When it is rezoned it is in the PUD.
• I know our current BZA,and if they granted a Use Variance they would look at this as a safety issue and not
Commercial Committee Minutes 06-01-21 6
grant it less than 500-ft. I am pretty comfortable with that. But I know them all now. I might not know them
in 10 years.I want to give as much guidance to the future as possible. The BZA is the only place where you
can circumvent this,because the BZA can circumvent anything. Correct?Paul Reis: If someone brings
through a PUD,a standalone ordinance, it is in fact amending the UDO.As Adrienne said, if you put
something in there, it is just consideration anyway.It can be stated in the zoning districts that would
basically say,"It shall apply to any parcel in any zoning district,which this use is approved."That would
open it up and say this applies to that.The issue is,even if it is inserted, it would cover the BZA and be in
the Department Report. Somebody could come in and say,"We understand the 500-ft. We have a plan that
shows 450-ft.Kevin Rider: I am going to vote no,but not everybody will.Paul Reis: The whole point of
PUDs and why PUDs have become is because there are development standards that somebody can't live
with.Kevin Rider: Development Standards aren't harmful to anybody's health.Paul Reis: Some of them
could be. Let's say I have a PUD and I have light fixtures which are 24-ft.tall. Well,that light may have an
impact on the well being of an adjacent property. I think that Staff and I could add something regarding the
districts. We can look into adding language in paragraph 2 about the districts,"All PUDs must take into
consideration the restrictions of the UDO"for this section. Kevin Rider: Mike,we have done no
restrictions on PUDs. Would this create harm if we did on this one topic because it is a safety issue?Mike
Hollibaugh: The harm is not having the standard.Does it prevent further development?Is that what you
mean?Kevin Rider: Yeah.I totally agree with not putting restrictions on PUDs ahead of time.But that is
for other development standards. We want it to be a clean slate.I don't want this to be a clean slate.Paul
Reis: But at Council,if I bring in a PUD notwithstanding what is written here,because it is a standalone
ordinance and a future Commission and ultimately Council will have the final say.Kevin Rider: I want to
give guidance, similar to when Council created US 31.Mike Hollibaugh: What it does is it is the first one
and then there will be a second and then a third. This is a particularly sensitive issue.The odds of getting
additional gas stations,with the movement towards EVs and hybrids are low. We can micromanage this to
death with only the potential of one at the Village of WestClay,we aren't going to get more gas stations.
They will go to Westfield or 96th St.Alan Potasnik: I wondered why it wasn't considered to begin with.
Would doing what Kevin suggested hurt the intent of what was brought to us?You don't have to worry
about saying the wrong thing.Adrienne Keeling: I think it is a matter of figuring out how we add the
language. I am trying not to argue against the intent of the setback.As the individual who maintains this
document,I have stayed resolute in terms of keeping things consistent. I can work with Paul Reis or Council
to add language for the districts.Kevin Rider:You don't have to list all the districts,just say"City wide".
Alan Potasnik: Is it possible if you and whoever come up with something that was said this evening.And
bring this back, is that agreeable?Adrienne Keesling: Yes.Kevin Rider: Could we send it back with a
positive recommendation contingent upon the language of the amendment?Alan Potasnik: I don't think
that would be a problem,but I think if there is no urgency. Is there an urgency?Adrienne Keesling: There
is not.Looking at the deadlines for the Commission,the new packet would be due this coming Friday,
however I don't have control over Counsel's schedules.Alan Potasnik: Anything is possible,but is this
something that could be done?Paul Reis: We can certainly get together. One thing to make it City wide is
to look at City Code and there may be a place in the City Code,where it lists different standards for
construction.Typically,that language is not in the code,but we can look into that.If you look at the way the
UDO is set up,if I want to build a gas station, I then trigger the code. The only instance where one could
circumvent is through a Use Variance.Kevin Rider: That is the only reason I am looking for guidance,the
Use Variance.Even putting that language in,the BZA could still grant a Use Variance. It is still kind of a
guidance to show intent.Paul Reis: In the variance scenario, one has to approve why it is unique and an
undue hardship. It has a higher standard than just negotiating.Kevin Rider: Plus,from a legal standpoint,
this gives the BZA something to hang their hat on.Paul Reis: Correct.Alan Potasnik: Would you feel
more comfortable in doing that so we could act on this,this evening?Mike Hollibaugh: We are not in a
hurry.
Docket No. PZ-2021-00048 DP/ADLS continued to the July 6,2021 Commercial Committee.
eeting adjourned at 7:18 PM.
n
Nathan Chavez Recording Secretary Alan Pota ik Committee Chairman
Commercial Committee Minutes 06-01-21 7