Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-06-19 Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission June 19, 1979 CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:40 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Euless City Hall by Chairman Neal Adams. Other members present were Messrs. John Deithloff, Bob Eden, Carl Tyson, Chris Jones, and Mrs. Helen Lightbody. (Absent was Mr. Bob Williamson) Also present were Planning and Zoning Coordinator Kent Flynn and Recording Secretary Becky Gunter. VISITORS Visitors in attendance were Messrs. Hugh M. Waite, John F. Stull , Walter A. Elliott, Jr. , Jay Forester, R. Dan Matkin, Tory M. Fuller, Melvin B. Shuler, Coy B. Moon, Bob Scott, Steven Crimm, and Mesdms. Willie Mae McCormick and Fran Johnson, and Ms. Sharon Johnson. 41) INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mr. Tyson. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Deithloff made a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting dated June 5, 1979, as written. Mr. Jones seconded the motion. Mr. Tyson stated a correction needs to be made on page five of the minutes. Mr. Adams did not abstain in the vote for the nomination of chairman. The corrected vote should read as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Deithloff, Eden, Jones, and Adams Nays: Mr. Tyson and Mrs. Lightbody Abstain: Mr. Williamson Mr. Deithloff amended his motion to reflect the correction. Mr. Jones accepted the amendment and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Deithloff, Jones, Eden, Tyson, and Adams Nays: None Chairman Adams declared the motion carried. (Page Two, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE 287. REQUEST OF MELVIN SHULER FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "R-1" SINGLE FAMILY TO "C-2" COMMUNITY BUSINESS ON LOT 7 AND THE EAST NINE FEET OF LOT 6, FULLER ADDITION LOCATED SOUTH OF FULLER STREET, NORTH OF SPUR 350, WEST OF NORTH MAIN STREET, AND EAST OF BYERS AVENUE Chairman Adams stated the rules of a public hearing; proponents will be heard first, and then opponents. He opened the public hearing. Mr. Shuler, of 2225 East Randol Mill Road in Arlington, stated he is the applicant in this zoning case and has the subject property under contract to purchase. The zoning change is requested to allow additional parking on Lot 7 and the east nine feet of Lot 6 for a proposed restaurant to be located on the large tract (approximately 130' x 190') on the corner of Fuller Drive and North Main Street. The reason they are looking for a restaurant tenant is because of the future Western 6 Motel site to be constructed immediately south of the subject property. The hotel 411) owners do not have an interest in the property. Without the additional parking space, the restaurant would be restricted to about 22,000 square feet which would indicate a fast-food type restaurant, whereas they prefer a sit-down type. The additional parking would allow a facility of about 35,000 square feet. It is also their intention to grant a cross-over easement to the motel who would also grant a cross-over easement to the restaurant. The restaurant, then, would have access to the service road, and the motel would have access to North Main Street. He asked if there were any questions. Chairman Adams stated it would be necessary for the three tracts to be replatted into one. Mr. Shuler stated this would be done. Chairman Adams asked if a specific restaurant has been decided upon. Mr. Shuler stated they prefer a sit- down type restaurant but do not have a specific restaurant under contract. Mr. Tyson asked Mr. Shuler if he was aware that a restaurant is allowed in the "C-1" category. Mr. Shuler stated he was. However, there are some uses allowed in the "C-1" district that made them decide that "C-2" would be the best category. Mr. Tyson stated that the restaurant use is not definite and, therefore, the "C-2" zoning would provide more flexibility. (Page Three, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Shuler stated this is correct. He stated the large tract is already zoned "C-2". Therefore, this would only be an extension to that lot. Mr. Tyson asked Mr. Shuler if he would object to rezoning the entire property, including the large tract, to "C-1" rather than "C-2" since a restaurant is allowed in "C-1". Mr. Shuler stated he would object. When researching the uses allowed in the different zoning categories, there was a definite reason "C-2" was decided upon. However, without having a zoning ordinance before him, he could not state the reason. He believes it had something to do with dirve-up windows. Chairman Adams stated "C-1" would only allow a sit-down type restaurant whereas "C-2" would allow a drive-in. Mr. Tyson stated a drive-through window would not classify a restaurant as a drive-in restaurant. Therefore, "C-1" would still allow a drive-through window. A restaurant such as Sonic would be classified as a drive-in restaurant, thereby requiring the "C-2" zoning. Mr. Tyson stated he would prefer the property be rezoned "C-1" rather than "C-2" since the subject property encroaches into the residential area. 41) Chairman Adams stated the front portion of the property is already zoned "C-2". Also, the houses in the area are rent houses. He asked if there were any other proponents. Mr. Fuller stated a Burger King represen- tative called the City of Euless and inquired about the possibility of locating at the old post office site. They were told a drive-in window would not be allowed due to the "C-1" zoning. Therefore, Burger King found another location. This is also the reason for the "C-2" zoning request rather than "C-1". Mr. Flynn stated he talked with the Burger King representative and informed him that he would have to check, but he did not believe a drive-in window was allowed in the "C-1" district. How- ever, after checking, he discovered it would be allowed, and then called the representative back and so informed him. Mr. Fuller stated the delay caused Burger King to relocate. He would prefer the zoning to be "C-2" rather than "C-1". There are only two private residences in the area. The remainder of the houses he either owns or represents. Mr. Fuller stated when the motel zoning was approved, they requested a concrete type fence be required behind the motel to screen between the residences and the motel , which Mr. Shuler agreed to. They now request the same type fence be extended between the pro- posed restaurant and residences. Mr. Tyson asked Mr. Fuller if he is involved in the sale of the subject property. (Page Four, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Fuller stated his brother-in-law is the present owner of Tract 112 located at the corner of Fuller and North Main Street. He stated the sale is contingent upon the "C-2" zoning. Chairman Adams asked if there were any other proponents. There were none. He asked if there were any opponents. There were none. He declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Tyson stated his opinions have already been made known. If a restaurant use is desired, which is allowed in the "C-1" zoning, "C-1" should be the zoning requested. This would not encroach upon the residential property to the west, even though it is rental property. Mr. Jones asked if the surrounding property is zoned "C-2". Chairman Adams stated the property south, east, and northeast is zoned "C-2". Mr. Eden stated he does not feel an additional sixty-five feet would make that much difference since there is other "C-2" property in the immediate area. 41) Mr. Tyson stated a restaurant use only requires a "C-1" zoning and this would eliminate the possibility of having an automotive repair shop or something similar located there. Mr. Tyson stated if "C-2" zoning is approved, any use allowed in the "C-2" district could be constructed on the property without an additional zoning request. Chairman Adams stated the property would have to be replatted before anything could be constructed on it. Also, the recent zoning request to "C-2" for a Western 6 Motel was approved without knowing for sure the motel would be constructed. He feels the rent houses will not always be there and the entire area will eventually become commercial property. Mr. Eden made a motion to recommend change of zoning from "R-1" Single Family to "C-2" Community Business on Lot 7 and the east nine feet of Lot 6, Fuller Addition as requested. Mr. Deithloff seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Eden, Deithloff, Adams, and Jones Nays: Mr. Tyson Abstain: Mrs. Lightbody Chairman Adams declared the motion carried. (Page Five, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Tyson stated he feels "C-1" zoning would be best for the area. Chairman Adams requested the Land Use Summary for Zoning Case 287 be made a part of the minutes. Mr. Fuller stated that, as the owner of eight lots in the area, he would not be in favor of a zoning change that would be detrimental to himself. He too feels the area will ultimately develop as commercial . II . PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE 288. REQUEST OF MAIN DEVELOPMENT CO. FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "PD" PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, "R-3" MULTI- FAMILY, AND "L-1" LIMITED INDUS- TRIAL, TO "R-1" SINGLE FAMILY ON A PORTION OF TRACTS 1A AND 1B1 , S. HUITT SURVEY, ABSTRACT 705 LOCATED SOUTH OF EAST MIDWAY DRIVE, EAST OF NEWPORT WAY, AND NORTH OF 4101 TOWN CREEK DRIVE Chairman Adams stated the same rules of a public hearing apply to this public hearing. He opened the public hearing. Mr. Waite stated he is representing his company which is Main Development Company, Inc. with headquarters in Dallas. He stated Main Development Company, Inc. bought the subject property in 1967. A portion of the property was rezoned to "R-3" to serve as a buffer between the "R-1" and "L-i" zoned properties. At the time the property was rezoned, their intent was to develop townhouses on the property. They now feel single family residences would be best for the property which is the reason for the request for change of zoning to "R-1" Single Family. They intend to develop forty-five lots with houses of about 1600 square feet. All of the utilities are available to the property. Chairman Adams stated the proposed International Drive will not be developed at this time. Mr. Waite stated this is correct. International Drive will be developed with the "L-i" portion of the property in Phase II . They want to wait until the "L-1" zoned property to the east is developed before they develop their "L-1" zoned property. Mr. Jones asked the owner of the "L-1" 41141) site. Mr. Waite stated Main Development Company, Inc. are the owners. (Page Six, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Tyson stated his concern that the potential homeowners would not be aware of the "L-1" zoning adjacent to them. Mr. Waite stated the "L-1" zoning has been existing for quite some time. Chairman Adams asked if there were any other proponents. There were none. He asked if there were any opponents. Mr. Matkin stated he is representing Mr. Kenneth Good, who owns property in the area. He is not speaking in opposition, however, he has a few points he would like to have clarified. One of the main concerns is seeing that International Drive is provided for its extension. They do not, however, have any objections to the zoning as requested. Chairman Adams stated this is a zoning request and, therefore, will have no bearing on International Drive. This would be discussed at the time the property is final platted, which would be in Phase II . According to the Master Plan of the city, International Drive is projected to be constructed. However, this is not certain, but is a definite indication. Mr. Matkin asked if they would be notified at the time of platting. Chairman Adams stated they would not be. He would have to check with the City Secretary to find out the date and time. Mr. Matkin asked if they can make a request to be notified of the date and time. Chairman Adams stated property owners are only required to be notified of requested zoning changes, not plat approvals. Mr. Elliott stated he is the engineer working with Mr. Waite. The existing portion of International Drive was con- structed without adequate storm drainage. Therefore, at the time Mr. Waite develops the remainder of International Drive, he will go back and alleviate the drainage problem. They will , however, assess the property owners their portion of the drainage work necessary to do so. Chairman Adams asked Mr. Elliott if he is in favor of the zoning request. Mr. Elliott stated he is in favor of the zoning as requested. Chairman Adams asked if there were any other opponents. There were none. He declared the public hearing closed. He read the letter, which is to be made a part of the minutes, from Mr. Denison of American Diversified Properties, Inc. , owners of the property south of the subject property stating they are not in opposition to the zoning change as requested. He requested the Land Use Summary for Zoning Case 288 be made a part of the minutes. (Page Seven, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Tyson stated he is in favor of the requested zoning. However, he feels International Drive should be included in the platting of Phase I . When the residential lots along International Drive are sold, the potential homeowners will not be aware of the assessment due from them for the installation of International Drive. Chairman Adams stated the developer of the "L-1" zoned property will be required to put in all of the street; the property owners will not be assessed. Mr. Flynn stated that the procedural requirements regarding assessments for International Drive were subdivision ordinances and these would govern the platting of this tract at the time of plat review. Mr. Deithloff made a motion to recommend change of zoning from "PD" Planned Development, "R-3" Multi-Family, and "L-1" Limited Industrial , to "R-1" Single Family on a portion of Tracts 1A and 1B1 , S. Huitt Survey, Abstract 705 as requested. Mr. Jones seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Deithloff, Jones, Eden, Tyson, Adams, and Mrs. Lightbody Nays: None Chairman Adams declared the motion carried. (Mr. Jones left at this time.) III . CONSIDER PLATTING - PRELIMINARY PLATTING OF BAVARIAN VILLAGE LOCATED EAST OF F.M. 157, WEST OF SOUTH SHEPPARD DRIVE, SOUTH OF THE SPUR 350 SERVICE ROAD, AND NORTH OF VILLA DRIVE Mr. Forester stated he is the Project Program Coordinator for La Quinta Motor Inns in San Antonio. He stated the gentleman that usually takes care of these matters was indisposed and could not attend. Therefore, he is attending the meeting in his place. He asked if there were any questions. Mr. Tyson asked if La Quinta is the owner of the entire tract being preliminary platted, or just Lot C. Chairman Adams stated the property being preliminary platted includes what is indicated as Lot C and the remain- der of the area on the plat. IC) (Page Eight, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Stull , with Goodson Engineers in Dallas, stated he is representing the Belchase Company, who are the owners of the entire tract of land. Belchase would like to preliminary plat the entire tract with the intent of selling Lot C to La Quinta. Belchase has plans to develop the western portion of the tract as a shopping center, and the south- eastern portion as apartments and warehouses. Chairman Adams asked Mr. Stull if La Quinta is involved in the restaurant site to the east of the La Quinta site. Mr. Stull stated La Quinta is not involved in the restaurant. Chairman Adams asked if Belchase in- tends to develop the property themselves or sell the property to be developed by someone else. Mr. Stull stated at this time, to his knowledge, they intend to develop the property themselves. There is, however, a possibility that the restaurant site could be sold. Mr. Tyson asked the zoning on the tracts designated for the shopping center and apartment/warehouse uses. 41) Mr. Flynn stated the entire tract is zoned "C-2" Community Business District at this time. Chairman Adams stated the zoning of the property is not to be considered at this time; only the platting of the property. He stated there is no indication on the preliminary plat of ingress/egress, fire lanes, or utilities. Mr. Flynn stated there are separate plans submitted to the staff which reflect the drainage calculations and proposed utilities which are not sent to the Commission members. The city staff and engineering staff have reviewed these plans and found that they meet the engineering requirements and subdivision rules and regulations. Mr. Tyson stated that, in the past, a letter was mailed to the Commission from the engineer stating that these items comply with the requirements. The drainage is of particular importance on this tract due to the drastic changes it has on the plat. Chairman Adams stated one reason there • was no letter submitted is that Mr. Lynch is no longer on the staff. Mr. Flynn stated he acts as the Planning and Zoning Coordinator and, therefore, meets with the Development Review Com- mittee which includes all involved staff members as well as the City's consul- tant engineer, Mr. Flowers. Mr. Flowers did generate a letter. However, since the time the letter was submitted, several of the problems have been worked out with the developers to clear up as many problems as possible prior to the Plan- ning and Zoning meeting. Therefore, all of the drainage and engineering has been reviewed by an engineer, Mr. Flowers, and is in compliance with his review. 41) (Page Nine, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Eden stated he is concerned with the plat indicating the intentions of the developers of having apartments and warehouses which are not allowed in "C-2" zoning. Chairman Adams stated the zoning is not a consideration at this time. However, if the property is developed as indi- cated on the plat, a request for rezoning will be required. The property will also have to be final platted. Chairman Adams stated the drainage items will be taken care of between the engineer, the staff, and the developer before it comes to the Commission unless there is a problem. They only thing the Commission will be addressing will be the plat configuration, the easement dedication, the ingress/egress, etc. Mr. Eden stated the indicated uses are showing the intent of what they propose at a later date and asked if the uses would also be considered approved if the plat is approved. Chairman Adams stated the Commission is not necessarily agreeing to the uses indicated; they are only indicated for the information of the Commission and City Council . Mr. Flynn stated Mr. Eden's concern is a valid one. If the uses indicated are not agreeable to the Commission, it should be so stated. Mr. Eden stated he does not necessarily agree or disagree. However, it appears that consent would be given to the uses if the plat is approved. Chairman Adams stated for clarification, the designation of the areas for proposed sites should be eliminated from the plat. Mr. Deithloff stated a letter was generated with the subject being the preliminary and final plat of Bavarian Village. He asked what portion of the letter pertains to the preliminary. Mr. Flynn stated the item for consider- ation outlined in the letter is the drainage improvements and drive approaches along Huffman Road, off State Highway 350 which will effect both the preliminary and final plats. Also, there are drainage improvements, ingress/egress, and drive approaches required on State Highway 157 which must be approved by the State Highway Department. As far as this preliminary plat complying with the city ordinances, it does. Page seven of the subdivision ordinance under Section 16, Effect of Approval for Preliminary Plats" states "It is to be understood that the approval of the preliminary plat by the city planning commission does not constitute official acceptance of the proposed subdivision by the city, but does constitute an authorization to begin and proceed with the preparation of the final subdivision plat." Therefore, the intent of a preliminary plat is to work out any preliminary problems, especially with regard to adjacent sites, so that a developer can begin working on a final plat of that portion he is developing. 41) (Page Ten, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Chairman Adams requested the June 19th letter from Mr. Flynn be made a part of the minutes. Mr. Tyson made a motion to recommend preliminary plat approval of Bavarian Village subject to the staff letter of June 19, 1979. Mr. Deithloff seconded the motion. He requested the motion be amended to eliminate the designations of "apartment/ warehouse site", "shopping center site", and "restaurant site" from the prelim- inary plat. Mr. Tyson accepted the amendment. The vote on Mr. Tyson's motion was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Tyson, Deithloff, Eden, Adams, and Mrs. Lightbody Nays: None Chairman Adams declared the motion carried. IV. CONSIDER PLATTING - FINAL PLATTING OF LOT C, BAVARIAN VILLAGE LOCATED EAST OF F.M. 157, WEST OF SOUTH SHEPPARD DRIVE, SOUTH OF THE SPUR 350 SERVICE ROAD, AND NORTH OF VILLA DRIVE Mr. Stull stated the final plat is of Lot C only. The engineering plans have been submitted to the city and have been preliminarily approved. Chairman Adams asked the proposed number of units for the hotel . Mr. Forester stated there are 130 units proposed. Chairman Adams asked the proposed number of parking spaces. Mr. Forester stated 135 spaces are proposed. Chairman Adams stated this does not meet the city requirements for parking. Mr. Deithloff stated 156 parking spaces would be required for 130 units to meet the city's requirement of 1 .2 spaces per unit. (Page Eleven, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Chairman Adams asked Mr. Forester if he was aware of the requirement of 156 spaces. He asked if there is sufficient land to construct the 130 units with 156 parking spaces. Mr. Forester stated he was aware of the 1 .2 parking space per unit requirement. However, he has been informed by an architect on their staff a variance to this requirement is possible. Chairman Adams asked if La Quinta in- tends to build the restaurant to the east of the hotel . Mr. Forester stated there will be a thirty-foot access easement between the hotel and restaurant. Denny's restau- rants work very closely with La Quinta in accommodating both the diner and motel guests with sufficient parking. However, this would be contingent upon the municipality. Chairman Adams stated the ordinance requires 1 .2 spaces per unit. Therefore, if the plat is approved, it will be approved on the basis of this requirement. If a variance is desired, it must be taken before the Zoning Board of Adjustments. Chairman Adams stated there is a 150- foot strip between the proposed La Quinta and the Denny's restaurant. He asked if they intend to come back at a later date to obtain ingress/egress across that strip. Mr. Forester stated not necessarily. The restaurant has more than adequate space for parking. Because of a common easement and usage, they would, if the city would allow, have a joint parking agreement for an additional twenty to thirty spaces if necessary. Chairman Adams stated an easement is shown for water across the 150-foot tract between the proposed hotel and Denny's with water extending across the subject tract. However, there is nothing on the plat indicating an easement for water to the rear of the property. Mr. Flynn stated an eight-inch water line will be extended parallel to the twenty-four inch line across the front of the property which meets with the Public Works Director's policy. There would be no water line across the rear of this tract. Chairman Adams asked if this is sufficient fire protection coverage. Mr. Flynn stated it meets ordinance re- quirements. The city ordinance requires a 350-foot radius. There is a fire plug immediately north of the far eastern portion of this property as well as to the east end of the east juncture of this property. Therefore, the building is covered for fire proection. Mr. Tyson stated the Fire Marshal usually submits a letter with his comments concerning fire protection. (Page Twelve, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Flynn stated in the recent past, the only letter generated has been from the city engineer who has met with all of the different people involved and he includes their comments in his letter. However, he is now compiling the information from the different people and his letter would include any comments they may have. In this instance, there were no comments other than the one item concerning the drainage improve- ments and drive approaches. Chairman Adams asked if there were any other comments. Mrs. Lightbody stated she is having a problem with the new system. The problem is not the lack of understanding; it is the lack of information. She stated if the staff and city engineer are going to approve the majority of the plat requirements, what is the purpose of having a Planning and Zoning Commission. This puts the Commission in a position of approving items which have been decided upon by someone else without the Commission knowing what was decided. Chairman Adams stated the Planning and Zoning Commission aspect is not to approve drainage and this type of improve- ments. Mrs. Lightbody stated a letter has been submitted in the past that the drainage meets the city requirements or, if not, what the problems are. Mr. Flynn stated a letter was sent out on the other plats but was not on this plat. The reason was that he was working with the developer who submitted the plat close to the deadline, to get as much taken care of as possible prior to the Commission meeting. Plans were reviewed by the city's consultant engineer a week prior to the meeting and he generated a letter at that time. However, upon notification, the developer made the re- quired changes to comply with the engineer's letter and submitted new plans Monday the 18th reflecting this compliance. For this reason, the new June 19th letter was distributed at the meeting rather than sending out the previous engi- neer's letter with the plat and agenda to the members as is normally the practice. Mrs. Lightbody stated developers sub- mitting plats at the last minute is not a new problem. However, she does not see the need of voting on something with insufficient information. Chairman Adams stated in this case, the vote would be on the configuration of the layout and the ingress/egress only; the staff has indicated that the engineering has met all of the requirements of the city. Therefore, he has no objection to voting on the plat since the staff is satisfied with it. Mrs. Lightbody asked what the Commission is determining if the staff is approving all of the engineering. Chairman Adams stated the Commission is determining the layout of the tract, the ingress/egress, as well as requiring approval by the State Highway Department of the drainage improvements as stip- ulated in the June 19th staff letter. The Commission would also be approving the layout of any easements required to service the tract. (Page Thirteen, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mrs. Lightbody stated she would like a letter from the engineer stating any problems there may be on the property. Chairman Adams stated there would be such a letter submitted if there was a problem. However, in this case, there were no problems. Mrs. Lightbody asked how the Commission is to be aware of this if there is not a letter so stating. Chairman Adams stated the staff has indicated there are no questions and he takes their word for it. Mr. Flynn stated the staff reviews the plat several times before it goes to the Planning and Zoning Commission. It is reviewed for engineering and to see that it meets the Subdivision Ordinance re- quirements. The staff could provide the Commission with the entire set of plans if desired. Mrs. Lightbody stated this is not neces- sary. However, she feels the staff should provide the Commission with enough information so that they will not feel they are totally unfamiliar with the plat. 410) Mr. Flynn stated the letter should have been sent out with the agenda. Mr. Eden made a motion, based on the staff recommendation that all information is in order and that all requirements have been met, to recommend final plat approval of Lot C, Bavarian Village subject to the staff letter of June 19, 1979. Mrs. Lightbody seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Mr. Eden, Mrs. Lightbody, Messrs. Deithloff, Tyson and Adams Nays: None Chairman Adams declared the motion carried. Mr. Tyson stated he shares Mrs. Light- body's concern. He would like to know the liabilities involved. Chairman Adams called a five-minute recess. V. 4100 CONSIDER PLATTING - Fl-NAt PLATTING OF MIDWAY SQUARE ADDITION, PHASE I , LOCATED SOUTH OF EAST HARWOOD ROAD, NORTH OF SPUR 350, AND EAST OF INTERNATIONAL DRIVE (Page Fourteen, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Grimm stated he is with L & N Consultants, a subsidiary of Lomas and Nettleton Mortgage Bankers in Dallas. Lomas and Nettleton acquired the 109 acres several years ago from the previous owner with whom they had made a land loan and subsequently had to take the property back. Therefore, they are the owners and have decided to go ahead and develop the property as a means of selling it. He displayed a diagram of the subject property showing the portion on which preliminary platting is being requested, as well as the portion on which final platting is to be requested. Mr. Tyson asked the boundary of the property on which final platting is to be requested. Mr. Crimm stated the final plat, which will be Phase I , will include the section of Fuller-Wiser from Spur 350 to the north side of Midway Drive, the street known as Midpark Lane, and Midway Drive all the way across the tract. The preliminary plat includes the utilities for the entire 109 acres, which will include the utilities within the final plat as well as the extension of Fuller-Wiser Road to Harwood Road. There is a sewer line just north of Blessing Branch which is in place now that serves the development to the north. They recently obtained an easement off of the property to serve the sanitary sewer outfall . Water is located almost adjacent to the subject property on Midway Drive. A plat of this property was approved in 1973. However, the previous owners did not proceed with the development. Therefore, 41) in accordance with the ordinance, the plat lapsed. They are, then, requesting a reinstatement of the preliminary plat and then they will proceed with the final plat. Chairman Adams stated Fuller-Wiser Road will not be improved from Midway to Harwood at this time. Mr. Crimm stated it would be on a pre- liminary plat basis which ties it down, but would not actually be built now. Chairman Adams asked Mr. Crimm if he was aware of the staff letter from Mr. Flynn dated June 15th. Mr. Crimm stated he was. He stated there is no problem with the additional fire coverage as well as other subid- vision requirements requested in item one. The platting is requested on the streets and utilities only at this time to expedite the sale of the property. There will , therefore, be large tracts of land which are not platted for de- velopment. The new owner of these lots will be required to final plat his property. Chairman Adams asked Mr. Grimm if he had any objections to item two. Mr. Grimm stated there have been several discussions with the staff concerning the sixty-eight foot street width. At the time the property was platted several years ago, it was approved with the sixty-eight foot street width. Therefore, since much of the land is zoned "L-1" Limited Industrial which requires a fifty-foot setback, the buildings would be set back sixty-six feet from the street. The actual pavement width would be the same (48 feet) whether there is eighty feet of right-of-way or sixty-eight (Page Fifteen, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) feet of right-of-way. A sixty-eight foot r.o.w. would have ten feet of park- way on each side of the paving as opposed to the sixteen feet of parkway with an eighty-foot r.o.w. They are, therefore, respectfully requesting the Commis- sion's consideration in allowing the street right-of-way to remain sixty-eight feet. Chairman Adams stated they would go back to item two later. He asked if there were any objections to item three. Mr. Crimm stated there have also been several discussions with the staff concerning the open channel which is not to be a part of the final plat. They would, however, like to establish at this time a request for the variance so they will not have to cut down all of the trees along Blessing Branch and put in a fully concrete-lined channel . The property on which the channel would be located is zoned "R-5" and they have dis- cussed the possibility of building patio-homes or apartments on the property. Therefore, since it is residential on each side of the channel , they would prefer not to cut down all of the trees to concrete-line the full channel section but would rather leave it in a natural state. Mr. Flynn stated that there would be a pilot-channel as proposed in the plans. 41) Mr. Crimm stated this is correct. Chairman Adams stated then that there are no objections to the requirements in item three if the open-channel is allowed. Mr. Crimm stated this is correct. An easement sixty-eight feet wide has been prepared to facilitate the sanitary sewer and storm drainage from Midway, north to the ditch and sanitary sewer line at the Blessing Branch. The outfall will be dedicated in an easement which will later become the street when it is dedicated and final platted. Mr. Crimm stated they are developing an office showroom business park in Irving called Texas Center which is the type of business proposed for this property. Chairman Adams asked if there were any comments from the Commission concerning item two. He also requested Mr. Flynn to comment on the curb-to-curb distances for sixty-eight foot versus eighty- foot of right-of-way. Mr. Flynn stated there was a plat called 109 Place submitted in the early 1970's which was approved by the City Council that showed the same street configuration seen on this preliminary plat from Harwood to Spur 350 and also the same width. After researching the minutes of the meetings for both City Council and Planning and Zoning, no mention could 41110. be found of the variance to the eighty-foot r.o.w. requirement of the ordinance. The ordinance states that, for "C-2", "C-1" and industrial zoning districts, paving face-to-face of curb of forty-eight feet to sixty-six feet is required with an eighty-foot dedication. This is the reason for the comment. If there had been something in the minutes telling why there was a deviation from the or- dinance, this could be considered. However, there was not. Therefore, since the ordinance requires eighty feet of r.o.w. , the staff comment was necessary. 4141) (Page Sixteen, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Chairman Adams stated the previous plat was never recorded at the courthouse since it was never developed. Therefore, this is a completely new plat all together. Mr. Flynn stated this is correct. If construction is not begun within nine months of the final plat, it is not filed with the county, and it no longer exists. Mr. Crimm stated the reason it was not recorded is that monies must be escrowed with the city for the entire amount of all of the improvements prior to filing. This is one reason they are only final platting a portion of the property. Chairman Adams asked Mr. Flynn what the master plan shows for Fuller-Wiser Road. Mr. Flynn stated the Future Land Use Plan shows Fuller-Wiser to be a thoroughfare from Spur 350 to Harwood Drive. From that point north to Glade Road, it is shown to be a collector street. Midway Drive is shown as a collector street and Harwood Drive is shown as a thoroughfare. Mr. Tyson asked Mr. Crimm if his main 41) objection to the eighty-foot right-of-way is the fifty-foot setback require- ment. He stated the setback required by the ordinance is only twenty feet. Mr. Flynn stated the setback required in "L-1" is fifty feet; the twenty-foot requirement is in another zoning district. Chairman Adams stated the city could require anything from forty-eight feet curb-to-curb up to sixty-six feet curb- to-curb, which would provide for a center turn lane. He asked the staff recom- mendation in this area. Mr. Flynn stated he has not discussed this with the engineer. However, he does not feel a turn lane is that critical and, therefore feels the forty-eight feet would be sufficient. He would, however, need to discuss this with the engineer to be sure. Mr. Deithloff asked if parking is allowed in the fity feet of setback. Mr. Flynn stated in the "L-1" district, the first ten feet is required for landscaping, but parking is allowed in the remaining forty feet. Chairman Adams requested the staff letter of June 15, 1979 be made a part of the minutes. He stated he would like to discuss the north end of Fuller-Wiser at its juncture with Harwood Drive. There would be an off-set to the west where Fuller-Wiser picks up again north of Harwood. This will create an intersection of two proposed major thorough- fares with about a 250-foot off-set. However, this should be a sufficient distance not to create a problem with cars stacking up along Harwood. (Page Seventeen, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Eden stated Fuller-Wiser north of Harwood was projected as a collector street prior to the closing of Minters Chapel Road. Therefore, there could possibly be more traffic than expected. Chairman Adams stated this is correct. However, Minters Chapel Road would have probably closed at the time Harwood Road extended into the airport. He asked Mr. Flynn if there had been any dis- cussion at the staff level of changing the designation of Fuller-Wiser north of Harwood from a collector to a thoroughfare. Mr. Flynn stated this has been discussed with the engineering staff. The feeling is that the traffic will never be generated on Fuller-Wiser north of Harwood Road to require a thoroughfare status. They feel that Fuller-Wiser will be serving the area to the south and that if there is a need of going to Glade Road from that point, they will do so by way of Main Street. Chairman Adams stated he personally would prefer the width be allowed to remain sixty-eight feet. He stated the prelim- inary plat indicates a sixty-eight foot r.o.w. Therefore, if the Commission desires to require the eighty-foot r.o.w. , this must be included in the motion. The easements are also being dedicated for water and sewer but there are apparently no problems with this as there was no mention of it in the staff 410 letter. Again, to clarify, the only things being considered on the plat are the streets and utility easements. The lots themselves are not being platted. Mr. Eden stated there is an ordinance to contend with concerning item two and he feels if the ordinance requires eighty feet, this should be adhered to. If the eighty-foot requirement is not for the best, possibly the ordinance should be changed. Mr. Deithloff stated that, from his experience in building, the eighty-foot requirement is detrimental to the builders. It is not providing them enough building area for the land. Mr. Tyson asked the amount of land that would be effected. Mr. Crimm stated the additional twelve feet of r.o.w. would involve about 36,000 square feet. Chairman Adams stated that since the eighty-foot requirement is an ordinance requirement, the only thing the Planning and Zoning Commission could do is approve the plat with an eighty-foot r.o.w. up to the south end of the "R-5" zoned property and then, if a variance is de- sired, such a request should be made before the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Mr. Tyson stated he feels the purpose of the eighty-foot r.o.w. is to provide sufficient r.o.w. if at a later date an additional lane is needed. Mr. Crimm stated he understands that the variance from the eighty feet to the sixty-eight feet would not be a Zoning Board of Adjustment matter, but a council matter. (Page Eighteen, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Flynn stated this is correct; only the City Council has the authority to alter the requirement from eighty to sixty-eight feet. Chairman Adams stated the only purpose he can see is to provide additional space for a turn lane. Mr. Tyson asked the probability of needing a turn lane at a future date. Mr. Flynn stated that since it is not a thoroughfare all the way to Glade Road, he feels that additional lanes would probably not be necessary, nor the center turn lane. Mr. Tyson stated that, depending on the number of cuts into the "L-1" zoned property, a turn lane may be necessary. Mr. Flynn stated that this was a good point and agreed with Mr. Tyson. Also, there will be truck traffic here and the acquisition of the extra r.o.w. would cost the city if eighty feet is not required now and the road width needs to be increased in the future to accomo- date this traffic. 41) Chairman Adams asked if anyone else would like to speak concerning the plat. Mr. Matkin stated he is representing Mr. Good who owns the adjoining tract. Mr. Crimm has visited with Mr. Good and himself concerning the subject property and asked if they would support it. Principally, one concern was in the area of the modifications to the exit ramp off of Spur 350, and how this would affect the adjoining property. However, they feel the installation of the street would be very beneficial to the entire area. They also request more east-west access be provided to Fuller-Wiser north of Midway Drive. Chairman Adams stated this would be considered at the time of final platting of Phase II . Mr. Matkin stated he understands that this would be a consideration at the time of final platting. However, he would like it mentioned at this time also. They feel very strongly about the necessity of more access to the west to allow access to the adjacent properties. Chairman Adams stated the Commission is not restricted to the indicated street configuration with the preliminary plat; it could be altered at the time of final platting. Mr. Waite stated he is in favor of the subject plat. He feels anything that would generate development in the area would be beneficial . He also feels the sixty-eight foot r.o.w. width is sufficient. Chairman Adams asked if there were any other comments. 4 (Page Nineteen, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Tyson asked Mr. Flynn if the items of the staff letter were actual recommendations, or just items for discussion. Mr. Flynn stated they are recommendations of the staff based on the joint comments of the staff and engineer. Mr. Tyson made a motion to recommend preliminary plat approval of Midway Square Addition subject to the staff letter of June 15, 1979. Mr. Eden seconded the motion. He asked if the Commission could respectfully submit to the staff the possibility of the necessity of the eighty-foot r.o.w. before it goes to the Council . Chairman Adams stated the Council will be aware of the Commission discussion concerning the r.o.w. width and can take this into consideration. Mr. Deithloff stated he would like to amend the motion to eliminate item two of the staff letter to allow the sixty- eight foot r.o.w. Mr. Tyson did not accept the amendment and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Tyson, Eden, and Mrs. Lightbody Nays: Messrs. Deithloff and Adams Chairman Adams declared the motion carried. Chairman Adams stated the only reason for his not voting in favor of the preliminary plat was the eighty-foot r.o.w. requirement included in the motion. He feels sixty-eight feet is sufficient. Otherwise, he is in favor of the plat. Mr. Deithloff stated this was also the reason he did not vote in favor of the preliminary plat. VI . CONSIDER PLATTING - FINAL PLATTING OF MIDWAY SQUARE ADDITION, PHASE I , LOCATED SOUTH OF EAST HARWOOD ROAD, NORTH OF SPUR 350, AND EAST OF INTERNATIONAL DRIVE Mr. Flynn stated there was a separate instrument submitted for an off-site easement for the road width of Midway Drive C down to Blessing Branch Creek for the drainage of the sewer. Chairman Adams stated this will be in- cluded in the motion. He requested the staff letter of June 15, 1979 be made a part of the minutes. (Page Twenty, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Mr. Tyson made a motion to recommend final plat approval of Midway Square Addition, Phase I , subject to the staff letter of June 15, 1979 and the granting and filing with the city an instru- ment recording the off-site drainage and utility easement. Mr. Eden seconded the motion. Mr. Deithloff stated he would like to amend the motion to eliminate item two of the staff letter to allow the sixty- eight foot r.o.w. Mr. Tyson did not accept the amendment and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Tyson, Eden, and Mrs. Lightbody Nays: Messrs. Deithloff and Adams Chairman Adams declared the motion carried. Chairman Adams stated the reason for his not voting in favor of the final plat was the eighty-foot r.o.w. require- ment included in the motion. He feels sixty-eight feet is sufficient. 41) Mr. Deithloff stated this was also the reason he did not vote in favor of the final plat. Mr. Eden stated he would have no ob- jection to the City Council allowing the sixty-eight foot r.o.w. However, he feels the Council should be the ones to make the change if it is done. VII . FULLER-WISER REALIGNMENT Mr. Flynn stated the consideration to be discussed is the access to Fuller-Wiser Road from Spur 350 which would involve an exit ramp revision located entirely within the State right-of-way. There are three lanes going east to Dallas on Spur 350 and three lanes going west to Euless on Spur 350. There is also a ramp which is elevated that crosses Spur 350 to go to State Highway 183. Off of this ramp, there is another exit ramp which inter- sects two-way traffic on the frontage road. This intersection is west of the proposed Fuller-Wiser. The right turn required at this intersection to get to Fuller-Wiser would be unsafe and unfeasible. Therefore, Fuller-Wiser is unaccess- able from Spur 350 at this time. The staff is recommending the Planning and Zoning Commission discuss this and make a recommendation to the City Council that the intersection of the exit ramp and Frontage Road be moved eastward to allow access to the proposed Fuller-Wiser Road. The success of the proposed develop- ment, Midway Square, is contingent on this realignment. The developers intend to provide the r.o.w. and construction costs for doing the work. However, since this is part of the Federal Highway System, a public meeting will be required according to the State Highway Department. Fuller-Wiser is a proposed thorough- fare and, therefore, it is unthinkable from a functioning standpoint that it not have access from Spur 350. 1 (Page Twenty-One, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, June 19, 1979) Discussion Mr. Elliott stated he feels the pro- posed realignment would be beneficial to the area. Mr. Crimm stated the proposed revision was designed by the State Highway Department. Therefore, it would not be necessary to get their approval as would be required on a new design. Mr. Waite stated the realignment would make it difficult to get to International Drive, which would require a sharp left turn at the intersection. International Drive was established at this lo- cation by the City prior to the development of the proposed realignment design. Chairman Adams stated the realignment would provide access to International Drive as well as Fuller-Wiser Road. Mr. Tyson asked how the proposed American Airlines Blvd. would tie in. Mr. Flynn stated that the staff would research this subject further prior to the Council meeting. Mr. Flynn stated the City Traffic Safety Coordinator has reviewed the proposed realignment and stated it is safe as proposed. Mr. Eden made a motion to recommend to the City Council that they request the realignment of the intersection of the exit ramp and Frontage Road as presented. Mr. Deithloff seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Eden, Deithloff, Tyson, Adams, and Mrs. Lightbody Nays: None Chairman Adams declared the motion carried. VIII . A brief discussion amongst the Commission members followed. IX. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. AP•�;s ! D: Chairman