Loading...
2010 08 26 WS MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN August 26,2010 The City Council of the City of Baytown,Texas,met in a Regular Work Session on Thursday,August 26,2010 at 4:30 P.M.in the Council Chamber of the Baytown City Hall,2401 Market Street,Baytown,Texas with the following in attendance: Brandon Capetillo Council Member Lynn Caskey Council Member David McCartney Council Member Mercedes Renteria Council Member Terry Sain Council Member Scott Sheley Council Member Stephen DonCarlos Mayor Garrison C.Brumback City Manager Bob Leiper Deputy City Manager Kevin Troller Assistant City Manager Ignacio Ramirez City Attorney Leticia Garza City Clerk Keith Dougherty Sergeant at Arms Mayor DonCarlos convened the August 26,2010,City Council Regular Work Session witha quorum present at 4:30 P.M. 1.DISCUSSION Mayor DonCarlos called to move the agenda out of order and discuss item 1 b.first. Council Member David McCartney abstained from item 1 .b.due to a possible conflict. City Clerk,Leticia Garza stated that Council Member McCartney filed a Conflict of Interest Questionnaire as it relates to item l.b.with the City Clerk's Office. b.Amendments to Chapter 58,Manufactured Homes,Mobile Homes and Parks -Planning and Development Services. City Manager Garry Brumback presented the agenda item and stated that the City consulted with local R.V.Park owners to help establish standards for the development and operation of recreational vehicle parks and campgrounds. Page 2 of 6 Minutes of the August 26,2010 City Council Work Session Mr.Brumback stated that the original ordinance presented to Council was for new R.V. Parks going forward and grandfathered in existing parks;however,it was not clear and caused some misunderstandings with the R.V.community and was therefore,returned to staff for tweaking. Deputy City Manager,Bob Leiper and Planning Director,Ms.Kelly Carpenter presented to Council for their thoughts and guidance,an ordinance which resulted from the collaboration between City staff and a group of local R.V.Park owners.Mr.Leiper stated that it was his hope that all R.V.Park owners can support the proposed ordinance, which would be brought back in September for Council's approval. Mr.Leiper also stated that part of the problem with thecurrent Chapter 58of the Code of Ordinance ("Code")is that there are two (2)different entities (Manufactured Home Parks and R.V.Parks)that fall under two (2)separate sections of the Code,but are intermingled;the new ordinance is intended to clearly separate the two.Currently there are thirteen (13)licensed RV Parks within the City,of those,a number of them are not in compliance with current regulations,such as spacing and density,which causes the challenge in grandfathering;the keycomponents are: •Density standard (currently 7-per undeveloped acre)with most parks currently at 15; •Setbacks (currently 10'to the ROW,5'to property line regardless of the zone); •Defined parking spaces (currently -very narrow,such as side by side adjacent to space); •Allowing parking areas expanded; •Sidewalk requirements are more practical (currently -sidewalk connects to each stand); •Tenting (currently -can allow without sanitary facility);and •Recreation areas Mr.Leiper statedthat the new proposals are: •Replacing density standard with spacing requirement of 10'between units; •Setbacks are per zoning district; •Tandem parking spaces (one behind the other); •Sidewalks needed only if there is no other way to the office; •Adding sanitary facility that allows tenting;and •Recreation areas are better defined The three (3)areas being proposed for grandfathering are existing parks defined asbeing: 1.Licensed on the date the revised ordinance is adopted; 2.Licensed RV Park in the middle of expansion on modifications for which permits have already been issued;and 3.Licensed with an approved plate for future expansion (2 years)within life of plat Page 3 of 6 Minutes of the August 26,2010 City Council Work Session Mr.Leiper indicated that theregulations on existing parks are to include standards for: (1)drainage,(2)tenting,(3)lighting,(4)parking,(5)sidewalks,(6)water,(7) wastewater,(8)electrical,(9)fire protection,(10)maintenance,(11)campground,(12) cottage,and (12)cabins.Mr.Leiper also stated that regulations for new construction parks included all that apply to existing parks,plus:(1)spacing,(2)recreation area,(3) setbacks,(4)buffers,(5)driveway,(6)parking,and (7)washrooms. Initial license fees are: •25 spaces-$150 •25-50 spaces -$250 •51-75 spaces-$350 •76-100 spaces-$450 •Each in excess of 100 -$5 Annual license inspection and renewal fees are: •25 spaces -$90 •25-50 spaces-$110 •51-100 spaces-$120 •101-150 spaces-$170 •Over 150-$200 Mr.Leiper stated that RV Parks that previously received a Manufactured Home/RV Park License where a manufactured home is not permitted will now only receive an RV Park License. The Planning &Zoning Commission(P&Z)did not take action on this draft ordinance last week as they wanted Council's feedback,in order to develop the final ordinance,and resubmit it to P&Z at their September 01,2010,scheduled meeting;Council will then consider the ordinance at their September 09,2010,meeting as there is a new RV Park waiting to be developed. Council Member Sain inquired if pop trailers were included in the same standard as the tents;Mr.Leiper stated that those trailers would fall under the tent. Council Member Renteria inquired if staff obtained information regarding these standards from other cities;Ms.Carpenter stated that in comparison to other cities,the density and all weather surfaces were the primary differences. Council Member Capetillo inquired about the density and if 10'was the standard and the challenges regarding grandfathering;Mr.Leiper stated that 10'tends to be the standard, and the reason for setting the density is so that the park is not congested,which can be difficult to set due to the configuration of the park.' Page 4of6 Minutes of the August 26,2010 City Council Work Session Mr.Gordon,owner of Galveston Bay RV Park,stated that the grandfathering clause needs to be clear cut,and using the all weather surface is an example.Mr.Gordon stated that his concern was that the regulation being proposed in regards to grandfathering existing parks holds the existing parks owners responsible for all rules and regulations that apply now that did not apply before.Mr.Brumback stated thatin regards to all weather surfacing the challenge is staff can not think of every conceivable circumstance to set a standard so the language has to give room.Mr.Gordon falls under the existing code,which is stricter than the proposed code and is unworkable. Mr.Leiper stated that the items being discussed are referenced to thestandards in Chapter 58.Mayor DonCarlos suggested that in regards to the all weather surface,when applicants apply for permits that they be given a list of the approved surfaces.Mr.Leiper stated that more examples can be listed in the code but to include the statement approved surfaces,in case a new inventive comes up later. Mr.John Bazzick,owner of the Baytown RV Park stated that his concern is that he has been in operation for 7 1/2 years since 1980,and stated that he uses crushed concrete for patching,limestone,and rock for surface and wants to know where that puts him under the existing owner.Mr.Brumback stated that he should bring the park up to all weather standards.Council Member Caskey inquired that if an existing park has a crushed driveway,will the owner have to redo the driveway to the new standards once the new ordinance is passed?Mr.Leiper stated that if the existing driveway develops muddy ruts then they will have to fix it but it doesn't have to be what it was prior. a.Downtown Plan Guidelines and Draft Downtown Overlay District -Planning and Development Services. Council Member McCartney stated that he owned the property at Texas Avenue and 204 W.Texas that he does not feel that the discussion will have any material affect on the value and wanted to dispel a rumor that he used inside information to get a good real estate deal,but he is only trying to help in the redevelopment of the area. The overlay district can be considered and adopted now by using the existing overlay process in the Zoning Code Section 130-626.The only downside is that council would have to wait for the new code if they wanted to overlay on the new zoning category that doesn't exist yet.Some of the implementation efforts so far are the Downtown Facade Improvement Program,the Texas Avenue Streetscape Project which will be awarded in September 2010,a new bar and restaurant has been built,and a temporary parking lot is scheduled to be built across the street from the Dirty Bay Bar. Planning Director,Kelly Carpenter presented the agenda item and stated that the Design Guidelines could be implemented through an overlay zoning district and that City Counciladopted the Downtown Plan,prepared by a consultant and extensively vetted in the community,in November 2004.Ms.Carpenter stated that the district is not on the street side but goes mid-block along Pearce,Gulf,and Main and close attention to this may be needed as it breaks platted property and ownerships;a consultant prepared the Page 5 of 6 Minutes of the August 26,2010 City Council Work Session Downtown Plan Development Guidelines in 2005 but these were not adopted by the City Council,although they are cited as the direct guidance for the Downtown Facade Improvement Program.Ms.Carpenter statedthat the plan describes the boundary of the plan and gives guidance to public investment,regulatory strategies,and use limitations. An example of public investments is the streetscape or a parking lot.Council Member Renteria stated that his recollection was that more private investments were discussed. Mr.Brumback stated that the hope is to public invest so that the private investors will have incentives to invest. Ms.Carpenter stated that the goals of the plan are to create:well-defined neighborhoods, great commercial and residential streets,a vibrant walkable mixed-use downtown district, a series of Business and Redevelopment Incentive Programs,and develop private/public partnerships to implement the master plan.Council Member Capetillo inquired of the historical buildings downtown.During the discussion the historical buildings downtown were not definitely identified.Council Member Renteria inquired if it is advantageous to make a historical structure more sound than to tear it down and rebuild it and who makes the decision on what buildings are considered historical.Mr.Brumback stated that it is routinely more expensive to rehabilitate a historical structure than it is to start over which is one of reasons of being fairly selective when choosing buildings as historical significant.Ms.Carpenter stated that experts such asthe State Historic Preservation Officer (SHIPO),the Historic Preservation Society of Houston and a structural engineer arecalled in when considering a building historical. Council Member McCartney inquired if balconies were included in the overhang and if the pole support can be out in the front.Ms.Carpenter stated that the balcony is included in the overhang,but it would be up to the owner to decide if the balcony would be occupied or for decorations and suggested discussion on the license language for the poles in the right of way. Ms.Carpenter stated that some issues with the overlay that need to be addressed include: uses to be allowed and prohibited downtown;the area to be covered by a downtown overlay zoning district;and the design standards. Council Member Capetillo inquired if the standards can be broken down to specifically reflect the overlay district but not the other connecting street.Ms.Carpenter stated that it can be done,but recommends not being too specific,that it damages the market. Mr.Brumback suggested another work session regarding this item. Page 6 of6 Minutes of the August 26,2010 City Council Work Session 2.ADJOURN Mayor DonCarlos adjourned the August 26,2010,City Council Regular Work Session at 6:14 P.M. Leticia Gar&gpty City of Baytown