My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
4A Public Hearing 2014 0602
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2014
>
Packet 2014 0602
>
4A Public Hearing 2014 0602
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/11/2014 1:08:09 PM
Creation date
5/28/2014 11:30:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Staff Report
Document Date (6)
6/2/2014
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2014 0602 RG
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2014\Packet 2014 0602
PowerPoint 4A Public Hearing 2014 0602 Zoning Code Amendments
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2014\Packet 2014 0602
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
332
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
<br />Exhibit D: Excerpt of the Board of Zoning Adjustments Regular Meeting Minutes, April 3, 2014 Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br />to the C-RM District. She also pointed out that the new uses fall into three groups: 1) some to be <br />permitted outright; 2) some that may be permitted by the ZEO after Administrative Review; and 3) those <br />subject to a BZA-approved CUP. She said the purpose of the additions is to give Bayfair the flexibility of <br />bringing new uses to the Center. <br />In response to a follow-up question from Member Daly, Planner Barros said that the C-RM District <br />corresponds exactly with the Bayfair Center and the King Family Trust’s 3.7 acres, which is used for <br />parking. The nearby Fairmont Square Shopping Center (location of Lucky’s) and Fashion Faire Plaza <br />(location of the new BevMo!) are both zoned CC(PD). <br />Retail Services: Addressing the issue of tattoo studios, Member Houston said she opposes the idea of <br />confining tattoos to cosmetic services (e.g., permanent makeup). <br />After some discussion, members agreed that Retail Services should be defined as: <br />Provision of recurrently needed services of a personal nature. This classification includes barber and <br />beauty shops, tattoo studios, seamstresses, tailors, shoe repair shops, dry cleaning businesses <br />(excluding large-scale plants), photocopying and self-service laundries. Tattoo studios are <br />establishments principally engaged in the business of creating indelible marks or figures fixed upon <br />the body by insertion of pigment under the skin or by production of scars for pay. Retail Services <br />excludes coin-operated self-service laundries and coin-operated dry cleaning businesses. <br />Tattoo Studios wouldn’t require CUPs, but be permitted outright along with other Retail Services except <br />in the SA-2 District due to the proximity to McKinley Elementary School). <br />When Member Houston asked how body piercings are addressed, Planner Barros said the City’s code is <br />silent on that, basically relying on state regulations applicable to those with cosmetology licenses. <br />Chair Mendieta asked whether someone working in a hair salon who has an appropriate license would <br />be able to perform permanent makeup tattooing services. Planner Barros said yes, as long as it’s explicit <br />in the facility’s business license as well, both artistic and cosmetic tattooing would be permissible. <br />Mobile Food Vending: Acknowledging that trailers aren’t necessarily motorized, Vice Chair Palma <br />asked whether pushcarts are included in the definition. Member Thomas noted that especially during <br />baseball season, ice cream vendors come by with pushcarts, which is a valuable service for teams and <br />their parents. In response, Planner Barros said she’d follow up to make the definition clear in regard to <br />pushcarts, and emphasized that the intent was to be more flexible, not more restrictive. In fact, she <br />explained that the Mobile Food Vending ordinance covers what is allowed in the public ROW, but staff <br />was seeking a definition applicable to private property and supportive of an Administrative Review <br />process for approving events that include Mobile Food Vending in more districts throughout the City <br />(e.g., industrial areas and Bayfair Center). She also made it clear that pushcarts would still be allowed in <br />the ROW. <br />Massage Therapy: Chair Mendieta said we need to do everything possible to stem or stop human <br />trafficking and prostitution. Member Hudson agreed, pointing out that there’s quite a problem in the <br />North Area, and it’s not being handled well. She said these facilities are not ready to be either self- <br />regulated or state-regulated, but need city oversight. <br />Community Gardens: Member Hudson questioned part of Article 16.4-1690. She noted that B.2 reads, <br />“If the Community Garden is enclosed by fencing, the fencing must be . . . covered by plant material or <br />other vegetative screening within three years . . . ” She asked whether that means it must be covered with <br />vegetation within three years’ time. Planner Barros said yes, that’s a typical requirement designed to <br />“soften” a fence. Member Hudson also asked about the height of the fencing. Planner Barros said in the <br />front or side yard, it could be no more than three feet in height; outside of the required setbacks, fences <br />could reach up to seven feet in residential districts and eight feet for commercial and industrial zones.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.