Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-05-27Regular Meeting Euless City Council May 27, 1975 CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Euless City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chamber of Euless City Hall by Mayor Harold Samuels. Members present were Mrs. Willie Mae McCormick; Messrs. Ray Ozebek, Charles Hunt, and Wayne Wright. Also present were Assistant to the City Manager, Kenneth Taylor, City Attorney Bob McFarland, and Recording Secretary Bonnie O'Brien. VISITORS Messrs. Bob Getz, Billy F. Walker, Lynn Shackelford, M. A. Poslick, 0. S. Denham, Hal C. Ferguson, Bill Perry, George Guyners, Jan K. Boyd, H. R. Atkinson, Guy W. Van Dyke, Michael P. Flaherty, Richard Thomes, E. J. Thomes, Jerry L. Wisley, R. E. Fitzhugh, J. R. Payne, Pat Gilliland, Dick Welk, Edward Hertberg, Douglas G. Mayer, Gerald G. Maloney, Thomas E. Evans, Jerry Jennings, Carl Tyson, Marland Ernest, Bruce Greensmith, Terry Castleberry, Glenn D. Walker, James Ivy, and Walter Elliott, Jr.; Mesdms. Mary Ann Walker, Barbara Guyners, Richard Thomes, Pat Gilliland, Mel McReynolds, Susan Hertberg, Beverly A. Evans, C. D. Davis, Dena Anderson, and Alice Ernest. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mrs. Willie Mae McCormick. I CONSIDER SECOND AND FINAL READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 487 CREATING A MUNICIPAL DISASTER EMERGENCY SERVICES COMMITTEE Mrs. McCormick moved to approve second and final reading of Ordinance No. 487 creating a Municipal Disaster Emergency Services Committee. Mr. Hunt seconded the motion and the vote is as follows: Ayes: Mrs. McCormick, Mr. Hunt, Mr. Wright, and Mr. Ozebek Nays: None Mayor Samuels declared the motion carried. (Page Two, Regular Meeting,Eu.lesa. City Council, May 27, 1975) II PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE NO. 244 REQUEST OF DR, RICHARD J. THOMES FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "R -1" SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT TO "PD" PLANNEDD /ELOPMENT DISTRICT ON LOTS 9, 10, 11, AND PART OF 12, RAY SHELTON SUB- DIVISION (PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH. EAST. AND SOUTH OF ETEVATED WATER TAPER). Mayor Samuels stated there would be fifteen (15) minutes allowed for the propoenents and fifteen (15) minutes for the opponents with five (5) minutes rebuttal time each. Mayor Samuels recognized Mr. Walter Elliott, 604 Clebud Drive, who stated that he was representing the proponent, Dr. Richard Thomes. Mr. Elliott stated that they were request- ing change of zoning the same as the presentation that was presented to the Plan- ing and Zoning Commission on April 15, 1975. He stated the project would be developed in two stages: Phase I would consist of 232 apartments, plus ten (10) lots with five (5) houses constructed, and would cost approximately three (3) million dollars; Phase II would consist of 296 apartments and would cost approx- imately seven (7) million dollars. He stated that Phase I would start 90 to 120 days after final approval and Phase II would start in approximately 18 to 24 months after Phase I was completed. He stated that this plan was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on April 15, 1975. Mr. Hunt asked Mr. Elliott if the first phase would cost three (3) million dollars. Mr. Elliott replied in the negative, "that it would cost three (3) million plus the cost of the ten lots ". Dr. Thomes stated that three (3) million was the amount of the request for financing. Mayor Samuels recognized Mr. Seven Denham, 102 Walnut Way, who stated he was speaking for the opponents. Mr. Denham presented a petition to the Mayor and Council and stated that 100 percent of the residents within 200 feet of the proposed project were represented on the petition in protest of the project. Mr. Denham presented a second petition to the Mayor and Council and stated that 216 names of residents in the area surrounding the project were represented in the petition in protest of the proposed project. Mayor Samuels inquired of Mr. Denham if the names on the petitions were the same as those presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission. (Page Three, Regular Meeting, Euless City Council, May 27, 1975) Mr. Denham stated that they were the same names and were notarized. 27 Mr. Denham stated that he, and those he repre- sented, felt disillusioned in regard to two (2) matters: one, the manner in which Zoning Case No. 244 had been handled by City staff and officials; and secondly, by the breach of trust that had occurred regarding the changing of the density of apartments in the proposed project. He stated that the case had become to him, and those he represented, a matter of principle, and made the following comments regarding the case: All residents living within 200 feet of the proposed project were not notified when the case was originally scheduled for a hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The City had accepted one man's word that all residents had been contacted. Residents affected by the proposed project attempted to meet with Dr. Thomes to discuss the matter, but to no avail. Numerous residents of the area near the proposed project attended all Planning and Zoning meetings when the project was discussed to show their concern. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved a plan different from a compromise plan which both opponents and proponents had agreed to in a Planning and Zoning hearing two weeks prior. Dr. Thomes gained lower density of apartments by adding acreage to the project. Mr. Denham read a statement reflecting the negative sentiments of Royal Oaks residents. Mayor Samuels inquired i f there were questions concerning the City staff and elected officials. Mr. Denham replied yes, "he was concerned about the fact that residents living within 200 feet of the proposed project had not been contacted". Mayor Samuels asked Mr. Denham if the breach of trust which he referred to was in regard to this failure to contact all residents within 200 feet of the property. Mr. Denham stated it was not, but was in regard to the fact that after a four (4) hour meeting and hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission an agreement was reached with Dr. Thomes to lower the density to 16 units per acre including ten (10) lots, but to achieve this density Dr. Thomes added land to the project and reduced the number of apartments. (Page Four, Regular Meeting Euless City Council, May 27, 1975) Mr. Hunt asked Mr. Denham how many names were on the petition presented to the Mayor and Council. Mr. Denham stated that the names of all residents living within 200 feet of the proposed project were on the petition. Mayor Samuels stated that the number of names on the petition did exceed the twenty (20) percent requirement. Mayor Samuels recognized Mr. Hal Ferguson, 101 Walnut Way, who stated that he was speaking for the opponents. Mr. Ferguson stated that he opposed apartment units in the area; that he felt this was a residential area; that high density was not desirable; that apartments degrade rapidly and that an inadequate buffer zone is provided. He stated that Dr. Thomes agreed to 16 units per acre and the fact that he increased the acreage to achieve this density represented only a minimal change. Mr. Ferguson distributed handouts to the Mayor and Council and stated that they contained information shaaing the difference between the plan approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the compromise plan agreed to in the Planning and Zoning hearing two weeks prior. Mr. Ferguson displayed a map marked in such a manner as to graphically display the information contained in the handouts, and explained the material to the Mayor and Council. Mayor Samuels informed Mr. Ferguson that he had run out of his allotted time, but that if he, or those he represented, wished to use their allotted five (5) minute rebuttal time to continue, it would be permitted. Mr. Ferguson stated that he would take part of the time to conclude his presentation. Mr. Ferguson concluded his remarks by referring to the 2.05 acres which were added to the project to achieve the re- quired density and stated the result of this action was an actual reduction of only 40 units rather than 73 units which would be required if the lower density were achieved via simple reduction of units. Mr. Walter Elliott addressed the Mayor and Council on behalf of the proponents and expressed the sentiments that he regret- ted than any ill will had been created by the proposed project, and that he was pleased that the error regarding failure to contact all residents within 200 feet had been corrected. Mayor Samuels pointed out the fact that as a result of this failure to notify everyone on the original mailout, that it did give additional time for eveyone concerned to familiarize themselves with the project. Mayor Samuels recognized Mr. H. R. Atkinson, 202 Walnut Way, who stated that he would like to see the present zoning in the area remain as it is. He questioned whether school facilities would be adequate to serve the project, and asked if a school survey had been done. He asked that if the tax base must be expanded, why must it be done at the expense of the residents of Royal Oaks. 29 (page Five, Regular Meeting, Euless City Council, May 27, 1975) Mayor Samuels stated that the City had not made a school survey. Mr. Atkinson stated he felt that the City could increase their tax revenue in a better way than through apartments and that if people could not come to the City Council and express their concern and see results, where could they go. Mayor Samuels recognized Mr. R. Fitzhugh, 1503 Cedar Ridge, who referred to a publication b y the Texas Municipal League concerning the high rate of burglaries in apartment complexes. Mayor Samuels recognized Ms. Beverly Evans, 107 Ash Lane, who stated she was an opponent and that the fact that Dr. Thomes had added 2.05 acres to his original plan, the project should not be considered by the Council. She further stated that only 40 apartments had been lost by this method of reducing the density of the project, rather than the 73 apartments which would have been lost by simple reduction of units to achieve the required density. Mayor Samuels stated that the time allotted for discussion had ended and asked if anyone on the Council wished to make any comments. Mr. Hunt stated he felt that the density of this planned development wastoohigh, based on a number of factors. He stated that the future land use map proposes 12 units per acre; that he proposes this future land use map be very closely looked at before future development of the City. He stated that he felt that petitions from citizens must be considered. Mr. Hunt further stated that the City is an independent entity capable of making its own decisions regarding future development without the influence of outside business interests. *This paragraph corrected by minutes of June 10, 1975. Mr. Hunt referred to past Council minutes citing cases regarding proposed developments that were denied approval. He stated that from the beginning of Zoning Case No. 244, he felt that the developers were not as eager for high density apartments as were the money lenders. Mr. Wayne Wright moved to concur with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approve the request for change of zoning in Zoning Case No. 244 as submitted, from "R -1" Single Family Dwelling District to "PD" Planned Development District on Lots 9, 10, 11, and Part of 12, Ray Shelton Sub - Division. Mr. Ozebek seconded the motion and the vote is as follows: Ayes: Mr. Wright, Mr. Ozebek, and Mrs. McCormick Nays: Mr. Hunt Mayor Samuels declared the motion carried. (Page Six, Regular Meet ng, Euless City Council, May 27, 1975) Mr. Denham stated that the Council needed a four- fifths (4/5) Majority to pass a motion. City Attorney Bob McFarland stated that a three-fourths (3/4) majority was required. Mayor Samuels stated that a second and final reading on Zoning Case No. 244 will be set for June 10, 1975. (Copies of materials distributed on file in Council Exhibit Folder in office of City Secretary). III CONSIDER RESOLUTION NO. 363 AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF EULESS TO PURCHASE EQUIPMENT RR AN EXPANDED IDENTIFICATION CRIME SCENE SEARCH SECTION Mr. Hunt made a motion to pass Resolution No. 363, authorizing the City of Euless to purchase equipment for an Expanded Identification Crime Scene Search Section. Mrs. McCormick seconded the motion and the vote is as follows: Ayes: Mr. Hunt, Mrs. McCormick, Mr. Wright, and Mr. Ozebek Nays: None ADJOURNMENT ATTEST : City Secretary Mayor Samuels declared the motion carried. Iv The meeting adjourned at 7:40 P.M. APPROVAL : Mayor