HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-11-06 ' � I
C
Regular Meeting
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 6, 1979
CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Planning
and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:35 p.m. in the Council
Chambers of Euless City Hall by Acting Chairman Carl Tyson. Other
members present were Messrs. John Deithloff, Bob Eden, Chris Jones,
Bob Williamson, and Mrs. Helen Lightbody.
Also present were Director of Planning
and Development Kent Flynn and recording secretary Diana Lucas.
VISITORS
Visitors in attendance were Messrs.
Tommy Allsup, David Bagwell , Gregg Dickens, Ron Haynes , James Knight,
Jim Latham, Ronnie Latham, Jess Lewellyn, R. E. Millican, W. M. Sustaire,
Glenn Walker, Gene Welch, John Wier, and Msdms. Karen Allsup, Willie Mae
McCormick, Mrs. R. E. Millican, and Rose Ann Rice.
® INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Mr.
Williamson.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Deithloff made a motion to approve
the minutes of the regular meeting dated October 16, 1979.
Mrs. Lightbody seconded the motion,
and the vote was as follows:
Ayes: Messrs. Deithloff, Eden, Jones, Tyson, Williamson, and
Mrs. Lightbody.
Nays: None
Acting Chairman Tyson declared the
motion carried.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated that
Mr. David Bagwell prepared a letter of withdrawal for Zoning Case
C
IC) (Page Two, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
Numbers 295 and 296, which was presented to City Staff and the Planning and
Zoning Commission. Acting Chairman Tyson read the letter to be included
in the minutes of the meeting after Mr. Bagwell corrected the letter to
read "Zoning Case 295 and 296" rather than "Zoning Case 297".
PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE 297.
REQUEST OF DAVID BAGWELL FOR
CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "R-1"
SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO "R-1
WITH SP FOR C.U.D. (R-3 DENSITY)"
ON 31 .66 ACRES OF LAND ON THE
R. D. PRICE SURVEY, ABSTRACT
NUMBER 1206, LOCATED EAST OF
NORTH MAIN STREET, NORTH OF
BEAR CREEK, AND SOUTH OF
PROPOSED CHEEK-SPARGER ROAD.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated the rules
of a public hearing; proponents will be heard first, and then opponents.
He opened the public hearing.
Mr. Gene Welch, with Hank Dickerson
Company, stated he is a proponent of this zoning case and that he feels
confident that the petitioner, Crow Development Company, will build a
quality development if this zoning case is approved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission and City Council . He introduced Mr. David Bagwell .
Mr. David Bagwell , representing Crow
Development Company, explained that the recent economic difficulties and
the subsequent increase in the rate of interest by the Federal Reserve
had made financing very difficult. He stated that subject property is
a more appropriate location for multi-family rather than single-family
development due to the intersection of two major thoroughfares, North
Main Street and Cheek-Sparger Road, and due to the difficulties involving
topography for single-family development. He added that the requested
zoning is in harmony with nearby multi-family and commercial zoning
west on North Main Street. He stated that there are no adverse effects
on the Hurst-Euless-Bedford School District since this development would
be in the Grapevine School District. He pointed out that R-3 density
over a portion of the site north of the flood plain would allow a
maximum of sixteen units per acre under C.U.D. and that a special provision
in the form of a trade-off incorporated into C.U.D. provides for the
higher density (sixteen units per acre) with the stipulation that there
be a certain amount of permanent open space dedicated to the City to
compensate. He emphasized that any multi-family zoning project could
have portions which are a higher density than the average maximum allowed
density for the entire site. If the entire area, including the flood
plain, were considered part of the zoning request for figuring density,
this site would have less than eleven units per acre according to the
C
(Page Three, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
present proposal . He further stated that although Crow Development Company
cannot provide a site plan showing building locations at present, C.U.D.
zoning allows the Planning and Zoning Commission the option of requiring
a site plan before construction which would have to be approved by the
Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council . The site plan submitted
for approval at this time shows that a park must be deeded to the City
and that a street providing access to that park must be built and that
the building setback lines protecting trees on North Main Street must be
respected before development can occur on this site.
Mrs. Lightbody asked Mr. Bagwell if he
intends to donate the park area to the City and not develop it. She stated
that the City does not have the funds to develop the park at this time.
Mr. Bagwell stated he could not promise
that Crow Development Company will develop the park area, but that access
will be provided. He further stated that the property maintains itself
since the large number of trees provides shade and no high grass grows
on it. He stated that Crow Development's problem with developing the
park is the cost. He suggested that a City should acquire land during
its growth period, even if it is unimproved, and when the City is
developed and financially independent, improvements can be made.
Mrs. Lightbody stated the point she is
trying to make is that if Crow Development Company went with R-3 zoning
and it conforms to standards , the Commission could not turn them down
but that Crow Development would build the area to their advantage and
put it to work now and the City would not have the burden of developing
the park.
Mr. Bagwell stated that, under this
plan, density would be lower, the City would acquire a park and access
to it, and that Crow Development Company will improve the park to the
extent it can, although they make no promises.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated that
Crow Development Company will reclaim some land under the one-hundred
year flood plain, so improvements must be made to Little Bear Creek,
including improving the channel in the park area.
Mr. Bagwell stated they use a national
engineering firm headquartered in Wisconsin, whom they flew in to study
the property. The engineer assured him that the land can be reclaimed
through channelization of certain areas.
Mr. Flynn stated that if flood plain
property is reclaimed, then Crow Development Company will have to make
C
(Page Four, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
the improvements required on Bear Creek at time of platting regardless of
the dedication of a park. He stated that City has a Park Plan, which
shows a linear park or natural park here so other improvements may not
be wanted.
There being not further questions of
Mr. Bagwell nor additional proponents, Acting Chairman Tyson asked if
there were any opponents . There being no opponents, Acting Chairman
Tyson declared the public hearing closed and opened the discussion to
Planning and Zoning members only.
Mr. Jones asked if density can be
limited through a site plan.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated this is
correct. The ordinance allows a general plan and then a specific plan
at a later date could be required.
Mr. Flynn stated this is correct.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated that
a site plan can be required at a later date to be presented to the
Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council and that this flexibility
solves many problems the Planning and Zoning Commission had previously.
Mr. Deithloff asked which definition
on page forty-eight of the Zoning Ordinance is referred to, "C.U.D.
conforming housing" or "C.U.D. variable housing".
Mr. Flynn stated that reference is
made to variable housing because multi-family in a single-family neigh-
borhood is being requested.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated he still
has a problem with the extension of Main Street.
Mr. Flynn stated that zoning refers
to the use of the land only but that improvements are governed by
Sub-division Rules and Regulations with regard to public improvements,
and Main Street is a public improvement. Zoning can only show setbacks ,
whereas public improvements are regulated at time of platting. If a
site plan is approved with setbacks, the developer cannot build and knock
the trees down with buildings. The site plan can show a street serving
proposed uses, but details on how that road is constructed is regulated
by Sub-division Rules and Regulations .
Mr. Eden stated the developer must
comply with platting regulations before the addition and road can be
C
(Page Five, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
built. If the developer must acquire property from someone else, that
is their concern.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated he might
not be forced to obtain part of that property.
Mr. Flynn stated that some restrictions
have been made on that road on the previous plat, but that the Planning and
Zoning Commission must look at a new preliminary plat now and can consider
the road at that time.
Mr. Eden stated that subject property
is ideally situated for apartments. He stated that perhaps improvements
will not have to be made on the park land by the City or developer because
it is naturally beautiful .
Mr. Jones stated that reclaiming the
property and the channelization would probably make the park site
suitable for the City to accept after guidelines have been proposed
by City Council .
Acting Chairman Tyson stated he thought
guidelines for the park should be included in the motion.
II) Mr. Eden stated that nothing is prettier
than open land that has been mowed and that the park would be an asset to
the northern part of the City.
Mr. Jones asked if the property were
to be sold by Crow Development Company to another company, is there any
way of insuring that the large trees will be retained.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated that
whoever develops this project must come back to the Planning and Zoning
Commission with a site plan before building and the decision on whether
or not the trees would have to be saved could be made then, depending on
the feeling of the community at that time.
Mr. Flynn stated that a site plan will
show trees and that the Commission can request anything they want to be
included on the site plan.
Mr. Deithloff stated that the twenty-
five-foot setback follows the contour of the trees now.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated that the
problem is the location of North Main Street and that the required R.O.W.
is not on subject property. He asked Mr. Bagwell to comment on the R.O.W.
drawn on the site plan for North Main Street.
C
(PageIC) Six, Regular Meeting, Planningand ZoningCommission, November 6,
9 9� 1979)
Mr. Bagwell stated that Crow Development
Company will either trade Mr. Reaves some property on the north to move the
road partially on to Mr. Reaves ' property or purchase the land outright to
accommodate the road. He further stated that the property owner, Mr.
Reaves, is willing to cooperate with the developer regarding the R.O.W.
on North Main Street. He stated that the location of the road would be
swung west to avoid the trees as a stipulation in the preliminary plat.
He added that a few of the cottonwood and post oak trees may have to be
cut down, but that all pecan trees can be saved.
Mr. Eden made a motion to recommend to
the City Council that Zoning Case Number 297 be approved as presented with
the stipulation that before construction, a site plan must be presented and
approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council and that
the condition of the proposed park be acceptable to the City.
Mr. Jones seconded the motion and the
vote was as follows:
Ayes: Messrs. Eden, Jones, Deithloff, Tyson, Williamson, and Mrs.
Lightbody.
Nays: None
Acting Chairman Tyson declared the
motion carried.
II .
PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE 298.
REQUEST OF HUNG YEUNG SIU FOR CHANGE
OF ZONING FROM "C-2" COMMUNITY
BUSINESS DISTRICT TO "C-2 WITH SP"
COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT WITH
SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR NIGHTCLUB
ON 1 .545 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED
NORTH OF WEST EULESS BOULEVARD,
SOUTH OF SAGEBRUSH TRAIL, AND
EAST OF WILSHIRE DRIVE.
Acting Chairman Tyson repeated the
rules of a public hearing; proponents will be heard first, and then
opponents. He opened the public hearing.
Mr. Tommy Allsup of Mansfield, Texas,
stated he represents a partnership composed of himself and persons in
West Texas, and that they are proposing opening a country/western night-
club in an empty building in Wilshire Village Shopping Center. He stated
that the building has never been completed or occupied and if this zoning
case is approved, a considerable amount of money will be used to upgrade
C
® (Page Seven, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
the proposed club to the standards of his other clubs. He stated he has
been in the record business for twenty years, that he will be a full partner
and manage the club himself, that forty to fifty people will be employed,
that fifteen-thousand square feet have been leased, and that it will
probably be closed on Sunday nights.
Mr. Eden asked if this will be a private
club.
Mr. Allsup stated it would be open to
the public. He would feature live music and bring in name-recording artists
two to four times a month.
Mr. Eden asked Mr. Allsup what adverse
conditions he had considered regarding parking and noise.
Mr. Allsup stated there would be no
noise and that when they are open, all other businesses in the shopping
center would be closed, with the exception of the bowling alley.
Acting Chairman Tyson asked what the
anticipated hours of operation are.
Mr. Allsup stated that hours of
operation would be regulated by what the City Ordinance says.
Mrs. Lightbody asked if he will be
serving food and alcoholic beverages.
Mr. Allsup stated he will have a
snack bar, serve alcoholic beverages, and have a dance floor. He
stated that, if allowed, off-duty policemen will be used for door
people. He stated that his partner, Graham and Associates, Odessa,
Texas, has twenty-five clubs in Texas.
Acting Chairman Tyson asked Mr.
Allsup if he had any experience in running this type of nightclub.
Mr. Allsup stated he has been in
the music business for thirty years and that in the last fifteen years
he has lived in Nashville, where he was in the record business. He
added that he has experience in managing nightclubs and is also
participating in special management training courses.
Mr. Deithloff asked Mr. Allsup how
far the bowling alley is from subject property.
Mr. Allsup stated he is probably
three-hundred feet from the bowling alley and that he is closer to the
furniture store.
•
(Page Eight, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
Mrs. Lightbody asked if the City has
any regulations on policing.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated that
under a Specific Use permit, the Planning and Zoning Commission could
require some type of policing, but this decision is ultimately left
to the City Council . He stated there are one-hundred and fifty proposed
parking spaces.
Mr. Flynn stated Mr. Allsup more than
satisfies the requirement for the number of parking spaces.
Mrs. Karen Allsup stated she is a
proponent of this zoning case and that if it is approved, the club will
bring in revenue to the City from sales tax, salaries, property tax, and
improvements to the shopping center.
Mr. Eden asked if neighboring properties
were notified of this zoning case.
Mr. Flynn stated that property owners
within two-hundred feet were notified, numbering approximately twelve.
There being no additional proponents
41) and no opponents, Acting Chairman Tyson declared the public hearing closed
and opened the discussion to Planning and Zoning members only.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated he is
concerned about traffic that will be generated by the club and the welfare
of other establishments within the shopping center.
Mr. Jones stated that since occupancy
of the shopping center is almost nil , he did not think traffic from the
nightclub should have a bearing on the decision.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated that
subject building is directly across from the Bonanza Restaurant and that
he personally feels a nightclub would be detrimental to Bonanza and the
movie theater located in that shopping center.
Mr. Eden stated his concern lies in
the residential area surrounding the shopping center.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated he thinks
that this location is not appropriate for a nightclub but should be located
away from congested business.
C
(Page Nine, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
Mr. Jones asked if there were any other
drinking establishments in the area along West Euless Boulevard.
Mr. Allsup stated the bowling alley and
the Italian restaurant in the shopping center serve mixed drinks. The
Jolly Roger Motel also serves drinks. He added that he has other nightclubs
throughout Texas and that customers who go in the clubs are usually there
for three or four hours , thus not creating a traffic problem.
Acting Chairman Tyson restated his concern
for a nightclub located in a shopping center and that he feels a shopping
center should have retail stores for shopping.
Mr. Eden made a motion to deny Zoning
Case Number 298.
Mr. Williamson seconded the motion and
the vote was as follows:
Ayes: Messrs. Eden, Williamson, Deithloff, Tyson, and Mrs. Lightbody.
Nays: Mr. Jones
Acting Chairman Tyson declared the
motion carried.
® III .
CONSIDER PLATTING - PRELIMINARY
AND FINAL PLATTING OF OAKWOOD
TERRACE ADDITION, LOT A-1R,
BLOCK 1 , LOCATED SOUTH OF WEST
EULESS BOULEVARD, EAST OF NORMAN
DRIVE, AND WEST OF VINE STREET.
Mr. Gregg Dickens, Civil Engineer with
Wier, Brittain, and Associates, Fort Worth, Texas, stated he represents
Mr. R. E. Millican, Jr. on this plat.
Acting Chairman Tyson asked if the
proposed land use of R-5 multi-family is correct.
Mr. Dickens stated this is correct.
Acting Chairman Tyson asked how many
units and what size units will be in the project.
Mr. Dickens stated there will be one-
hundred units with an average of seven-hundred and sixty-one square feet.
There are thirty-six two-bedroom, forty-eight one-bedroom, and sixteen
efficiency units. He presented a site plan, giving the Commission an
idea of the appearance.
® (Page Ten, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
Mr. Jones asked what type market they
are attempting to reach.
Mr. R. E. Millican stated there will
be a mixed group of people and that they have not catered to the needs
of just one group.
Acting Chairman Tyson read the letter
from Mr. Flynn stating Staff approval of plats and asking the Commission
to consider the plats. He requested the letter be made a part of the
minutes.
Mr. Deithloff made a motion to accept
and approve the preliminary and final plat and the letter from Mr. Flynn
dated November 2, 1979.
Mr. Jones seconded the motion and
the vote was as follows:
Ayes: Messrs. Deithloff, Jones, Eden, Tyson, Williamson, and
Mrs. Lightbody.
Nays: None
Acting Chairman Tyson declared the
motion carried.
IV.
CONSIDER PLATTING - PRELIMINARY
PLATTING OF J. W. LEWELLYN
ADDITION, LOTS 1 , 2, AND 3
AND FINAL PLATTING OF J. W.
LEWELLYN ADDITION, PHASE 1 ,
LOT 1 , LOCATED SOUTH OF WEST
EULESS BOULEVARD, NORTH OF
SOUTH PIPELINE ROAD, EAST OF
RAIDER DRIVE, AND WEST OF
WESTPARK WAY.
Mr. Jess Lewellyn stated he represents
said preliminary and final plats.
Acting Chairman Tyson asked Mr. Lewellyn
his plans for subject property.
Mr. Lewellyn stated he will build an
eighteen-thousand square foot building on Lot 1 which will house the
Glass Center of Hurst, Metroplex Metal Products Company, and that twenty-
five percent will be leased to another firm. He stated he is preliminary
platting a portion of this property and final platting the portion on
which he will build.
,
(Page Eleven, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
Acting Chairman Tyson asked that the
letter from Mr. Flynn to the Commission regarding subject plats be made
part of the minutes.
Mr. Eden made a motion to approve
preliminary and final plat.
Mr. Deithloff seconded the motion and
the vote was as follows:
Ayes: Messrs. Eden, Deithloff, Jones , Tyson, Williamson, and Mrs.
Lightbody.
Nays: None
Acting Chairman Tyson declared the
motion carried.
V.
PRESENTATION OF ZONING CHANGE
SIGN POSTING REPORT.
Mr. Flynn stated that the report had
been initiated some time ago out of a request from City Council and the
Planning and Zoning Commissioners. He said that the report took the
approach that if there was a definite need for this kind of public
notification, then this report should serve the purpose of investigating
the practicality and feasibility of implementing the proposal . He stated
that the proposal was practically feasible as existing personnel could
incorporate the placing of signs into their daily routine. He stated
that although the report did not estimate the cost of manhours in
administering this proposal that the costs of the signs themselves could
be amortized over the number of zoning cases to which the signs could be
expected to be used. He stated that these costs amounted to only five
or six dollars per zoning case, a cost which could be recovered by in-
creasing the filing fee for change of zoning if the Council thought
appropriate.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated he likes
the appearance of Hurst' s zoning signs better because the type of zoning
applied for is actually placed on the sign.
Mr. Flynn stated it might be advantageous
to place the zoning applied for on the sign and allow the public to get
more information. He further stated the main purpose of placing a sign
is to let people know that something is happening on the site.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated he feels
that manhours involved in physically placing the signs should be included
(Page Twelve, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
in the cost of the signs.
Mr. Flynn stated that when the report
was prepared, he attempted to give only an indication of the general costs.
Mr. Eden stated that he personally does
not like the signs.
Mr. Deithloff asked if anyone besides
Planning and Zoning members requested these signs.
Mr. Flynn stated that several City
Council members requested the Staff to investigate the idea over a year
ago.
Mrs. Lightbody stated she hopes the
signs will reach those people who are not necessarily within the two-hundred
foot notification boundary.
Mr. Deithloff asked if anyone besides
Mr. Flynn could interpret the meaning of signs to those of the public who
want more information.
Mr. Flynn stated that the secretaries
111 understand the various zonings and they can help people if they have
questions. He further stated that he had not yet consulted the City
Attorney on the legality of the signs but that if it is decided there
is a definite need for the signs, it needs to be legally feasible, which
would require a change in the wording of the ordinance.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated the
Commission would have to recommend amending the Zoning Ordinance by
adding Section 16-106 and for the City Council to set a zoning change
filing fee in relation to costs involved and to incorporate the necessary
legal language.
Mr. Deithloff stated the Commission
could not establish the fee now, but the decision should be left to
City Council .
Mrs. Lightbody made a motion to
recommend to the City Council that the Zoning Ordinance be revised to
include Section 16-106 and that fees be decided upon by City Council
and Staff.
Mr. Jones seconded the motion and
the vote was as follows:
Ayes: Mrs. Lightbody, Messrs. Jones, Deithloff, Tyson, and Williamson.
Nays: Mr. Eden
Acting Chairman Tyson stated that a
majority of the Commission members feel that fees should be increased to
(Page Thirteen, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, November 6, 1979)
take care of additional costs.
There followed a brief discussion regarding
Headworld Imports in Wilshire Village Shopping Center.
Acting Chairman Tyson stated he felt the
business should be required to operate with a Specific Use permit, which
would allow the Commission and City Council to decide on its location.
Mr. Sustaire stated that the City Attorney
had discussed this possibility with the City Council and had recently been
in touch with the Attorney General and Governor Clements regarding the
legalities of such a proposal . The City Attorney has informed us that
this may not be legally possible and that this type of problem is a current
problem in other cities in Texas to the extent that the Governor's office
is looking into it. Mr. Sustaire assured the Commission that the City
Attorney was working on the problem and would keep the Commission advised.
There being no further discussion, the
meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
APPROVED:
11.1
Acting Chairman
C