Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-07-01 Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission July 1, 1980 CALL TO ORDER 1 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 Chairman John Deithloff. Other members present were Messrs. Bob Williamson, Ralph Gibson, Robert McMillon and Carl Tyson. Members absent were Mrs. Helen Lightbody and Mr. Bob Eden. Also present were Director of Planning and Development Kent Flynn and Recording Secretary Becky Null. VISITORS Visitors in attendance were Messrs: James Knight, John McDearman, Ed Thomes, Richard J. Thomes, David Hughes, Ron Sternfels, Walter Elliott, Neal Adams, Steve Crim, and Doyle Winters, and Mesdms: Mrs. Willie Mae McCormick, Harriet LaFoy, and Vera Hamilton. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mr. Bob Williamson. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. McMillon made a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting dated June 17, 1980, as written. Mr. Williamson seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. McMillon, Williamson, Gibson, Tyson and Deithloff Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. I. CONTINUATION - ZONING CASE 316 - REQUEST OF DR. RICHARD THOMES FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "R-1" TO "R-4" (16 UNITS PER ACRE) WITH "CUD" FOR CONFORMING HOUSING ON LOTS 15 & 16, RAY SHELTON SUBDIVISION, LOCATED WEST OF FULLER-WISER ROAD AND SOUTH OF PROPOSED EAST ASH LANE C Page Two, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 C Chairman Deithloff stated that this is a continuation of the public hearing held on June 17, 1980. Dr. Richard Thomes was recognized. Dr. Richard Thomes, 3934 Buckingham Drive, Irving, stated he has met with City Staff and has complied with the four stipulations requested at the last meeting. He stated that he received a letter dated June 26th from Mr. Kent Flynn adding two more stipulations. He stated that he had no problem with the comments stated in the letter. He stated that the Commission had required a twenty-five foot buffer zone along E. Ash Lane. He stated he had complied with that request, and that he also has added a twenty-five foot buffer zone along Fuller-Wiser Road. Mr. McMillon stated that it appears that Dr. Thomes has complied with the requests of the Commission. Mr. Flynn stated that he has complied with the comments generated at the last meeting by Staff. He stated that it was up to the Commission to decide whether they were in favor of the type of zoning. Mr. Tyson asked if Staff had the listing of the dwelling units that was mentioned in the letter of June 26th. Mr. Flynn stated that Staff is asking that the information be submitted with any application for building permit. Mr. Tyson asked if the density would be decided at the time of building permit. Mr. Flynn stated that the density is already determined; 16 units per acre times 19.09 acres. He stated that is the maxi- mum number of units allowed on this site. He stated that under a CUD, they can adjust where they put the units if they make up the increased density on one portion of the site with some open space in another. He stated that the number of units will be verified at the time of building permit application. Mr. Flynn stated that condition #1 will need to be modified slightly to include the statement that the 100-year flood plain will be indicated on the plat.' Mr. Flynn stated there will still have to be a variance granted to our Subdivision Ordinance at the time of platting to allow the proposed open space and drainage channel to remain in its natural state. He also stated that a perpetual maintenance agreement would be sub- mitted with the final plat. Mr. McMillon made a motion to recommend approval of Zoning Case #316 subject to the four previous items listed in the motion on June 17, 1980, and the Staff letter dated June 26, 1980. C Page Three, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 Mr. Tyson seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. McMillon, Tyson, Deithloff and McMillon Nays: None Abstentions: Mr. Williamson Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. II. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE 317 - REQUEST OF JOHN MCDEARMAN FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "R-1" TO "I-1" ON TRACT 6, R. CROWLEY SURVEY, A-312, LOCATED EAST OF FULLER- WISER ROAD, WEST OF MINTERS CHAPEL AND NORTH OF HARWOOD ROAD Chairman Deithloff opened the public hearing and explained that the proponents would be heard first and then opponents. Mr. Rusty McDearman was recognized. Mr. Rusty McDearman, Sherwood Blount & Co. , Dallas, stated he is representing the prospective purchaser of the subject property, a developing group by the name of Wycliff International from Toronto, Canada. He stated that the property is located in the "B" noise zone and would be suitable for an industrial type zoning. Mr. Tyson asked if they had any specific use for this property. Mr. McDearman stated they do not at this time. Chairman Deithloff asked if there were any other proponents. There being none, he asked if there were any opponents. Mr. Walter Elliott, 1004 W. Euless Blvd. , stated that he is not really opposed to the zoning. He stated that he is part owner in the residential subdivision to the west, and would like to see some type of buffer zone, primarily duplexes, along Fuller-Wiser Road. There being no opponents, Chairman Deithloff declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Flynn stated that the industrial zoning districts do not allow residential development. He stated that if the idea of amending the request is to be considered, property owners would have to be renotified, and that would only happen in the event that the petitioner were to request an amendment. He stated that the Commission has approved down- zoned amendments to the zoning application at the meeting, however, the uses had to be allowed in the higher use district. Page Four, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 C Mr. Tyson stated that on the Future Land Use Map, this subject property is intended for limited industrial uses. He stated that there is a significant difference between limited industrial and light industrial. Mr. McMillon asked Mr. McDearman if he has considered the light industrial as opposed to the limited industrial. Mr. McDearman said he has. He stated that the property is 2,617 feet long and 405 feet deep. He stated that when Harwood Road is improved and widened that will remove 25 feet from the 405 feet. He stated that under limited industrial there is a minimum setback of 50 feet. He stated that the only problem with the limited industrial zoning is the setback requirements, not the uses allowed. He asked if the Commission could amend the setback requirements in regard to the subject property. Mr. Flynn stated that the Planning & Zoning Commission does not have the authority. He stated that whether it could be amended or not would have to be reviewed by the City Attorney. He stated that it is his understanding that the Council could possibly amend the set- back requirements, but it would have to be in the form of changing the ordinance. Mr. McDearman asked if a site plan would have to be approved. Mr. Flynn stated that a site plan would have to be approved with any limited industrial zoning case. He stated that a site plan is not required for light industrial zoning. Mr. McDearman stated that he will have to stick with his request for light industrial because of the setback require- ments. Mr. Flynn stated that he has consulted with the City Attorney regarding amendments to zoning applications by the Com- mission. He stated that he was advised that the Commission can amend the application only if the applicant requests it. Mr. McDearman asked if it was possible to request a limited industrial use on the western end next to the residential area. Mr. Flynn stated that Mr. McDearman could make that request, but a site plan would have to be approved by the Commission prior to issuance of the building permit. He stated that Staff would request a metes and bounds description of the area proposed for limited industrial_and light industrial before going to the City Council. Mr. Tyson stated that there are too many Cuses in the light industrial zoning that would be objectionable. Page Five, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 C Mr. McDearman amended his request from light industrial on the total piece of property to limited industrial on the western end and light industrial on the remaining portion of the property. Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. McDearman what depth he would agree to for the limited industrial area. Mr. McDearman stated that he would request limited industrial from Fuller-Wiser (north of Harwood) extending east to the centerline of proposed Fuller-Wiser (south of Harwood) . Mr. Flynn stated that it would be approxi- mately 200 feet from centerline to centerline. Mr. Tyson stated his concern about having the light industrial zoning on any portion of the property. Mr. McMillon stated his concern about rezoning the property without knowing what it is going to be used for; how- ever, he felt that industrial zoning was best suited for this property. Mr. McMillon made a motion to recommend approval of the amended request for Zoning Case 317 for limited industrial on the western portion to the centerline of proposed Fuller-Wiser extension (approximately 200 feet) and light industrial on the eastern portion of the property, and that the final dividing line will be determined by a metes and bounds description prior to going to the City Council. Chairman Deithloff declared that the motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Tyson made a motion to recommend denial of the amended request for Zoning Case 317 for limited industrial on the western portion to the centerline of proposed Fuller-Wiser extension (approxi- mately 200 feet) and light industrial on the eastern portion of the property. Mr. Gibson seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Tyson and Gibson Nays: Mr. Deithloff Abstentions: Messrs. McMillon and Williamson Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. Chairman Deithloff stated that Mr. McDearman may reapply for another zoning change if he so desires. Mr. McDearman asked if the zoning case could be tabled since time would not allow him to reapply. CChairman Deithloff stated that it could not be tabled now. He stated that the Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council, and the City Council has the authority to overrule the Commission's decision. Page Six, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 Mrs. McCormick stated that if Mr. McDearman wants it tabled, the Commission can vote to reconsider and then vote to table the request if the Commission wants to reconsider their last motion. Mr. Tyson asked Mr. McDearman what tabling the zoning request would do. Mr. McDearman stated that he would be able to discuss it with the prospective purchaser. He stated that he does not have the authority to change the request from light industrial to limited industrial on the total piece of property at this time. Mr. Tyson made a motion to reconsider the last motion made on Zoning Case 317. Mr. Gibson seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Tyson, Gibson, Williamson, Deithloff and McMillon Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. Mr. Tyson made a motion to table Zoning Case 317 until the July 15th Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Mr. Gibson seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Tyson, Gibson, Williamson, Deithloff and McMillon Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. III. CONSIDER PLATTING - PRELIMINARY PLATTING OF TRAIL CREEK PROFESSIONAL CENTER, LOTS 1, 2 & 3, BLOCK 1, LOCATED WEST OF WEST- PARK WAY AND SOUTH OF TIBBETS DRIVE Mr. David Hughes, Elliott & Hughes, Inc. , 1004 W. Euless Blvd. , stated he is representing the Trail Creek Joint Venture comprised of a group of doctors and an investor. He stated that the property being platted is approximately 11.8 acres, and that 50% of the 11.8 acres is situated in a flood hazard area. He stated that the property is heavily wooded, and rather than destroy the vegetation and spend a considerable amount of money to concrete line the creek, they decided to divide the property into three lots. He stated that on one of the lots they intended to build a doctor's office complex, the second lot would have another professional office Page Seven, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 building, and the third lot would have a medically oriented aerobic center. He stated that in addition to the platting, they are requesting to leave the creek in its natural state. He stated they will reduce the flood plain somewhat through fill in accordance with the Federal Insurance Administra- tion's rules and regulations for encroachment in a flood plain area. He stated that there will be a perpetual maintenance agreement that will take care of the green area. Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. Hughes if he was aware of the letter dated June 26th from Mr. Kent Flynn. Mr. Hughes stated he was aware of the letter, and they had no problems with the comments. Mr. Tyson asked when the construction is to begin. Mr. Hughes stated that on the plat there are three lots shown. He stated that in the end they may end up with only two lots. He stated the doctors may combine Lot 2 and a major portion of Lot 1 and build one large building instead of two groups of three buildings each. He stated that if everything goes well, construction should begin before the end of the year. He stated that they have a good prospect they believe will take the third lot and build the aerobic center. He stated he did not know when construction of the aerobic center would begin. Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. Hughes if he was aware of the June 23rd letter from Knowlton-English-Flowers. Mr. Hughes stated he was aware of the letter. Mr. Tyson asked Mr. Flynn if the sanitary sewer easement is in the middle of the channel. Mr. Flynn stated that it is closer to the eastern boundary on the lower end, and that on the northern end it is down the center. Mr. Flynn stated that in order to leave the creek natural, a variance to the subdivision ordinance has to be granted. He stated that certain requirements have to be met and submitted prior to coming before the Planning & Zoning Commission, and they have been submitted and reviewed and do conform. Mr. Williamson made a motion to approve the preliminary platting of Trail Creek Professional Center subject to the Planning & Zoning Commission letter dated June 26th and the letter from Knowlton-English-Flowers dated June 23rd. Mr. McMillon seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Williamson, McMillon, Gibson, Deithloff and Tyson son Y Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. Page Eight, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 IV. CONSIDER PLATTING - PRELIMINARY PLATTING OF WOODCREEK ADDITION, BLOCKS A THROUGH I, LOCATED EAST OF NORTH MAIN, SOUTH OF HARWOOD AND NORTH OF EAST MIDWAY DRIVE Mr. Steve Crim, L & N Land, Inc. , 2001 Bryan Tower, Dallas, stated the property will contain single family attached housing and multi-family housing. He stated they decided to locate the street approxi- mately 110 feet off of the 100-year flood plain and to put fourplexes between the street and the park. He stated they are asking for approval of the pre- liminary plat and approval of the variance to allow the creek to remain in its natural state. Mr. Tyson asked if the Parks Director had seen the plat. He also asked about the access to this park. Mr. Flynn stated that he met with the Parks Director today, and that access is adequately provided as shown on the site plan. Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. Crim if he had any comments about the Planning & Zoning letter dated June 26th and the Knowlton-English-Flowers letter dated June 25th. Mr. Crim stated that he had no problems with either of the letters. Chairman Deithloff read the Planning & Zoning letter dated July 1st. Mr. Crim asked what was meant by large obstructions. Mr. Flynn stated the letter meant clearing underbrush, junk, fallen trees, etc. , that would keep the Parks Department from being able to mow. Mr. Crim agreed to comments #1 & #2. He asked what Section 10-104 says in regard to comment #3. Mr. Flynn stated it requires a screening fence that screens vision and has to be constructed on either a masonry or metal base. He stated that it can be wood as long as it does not have any openings of a certain size. He stated that it would need to be a minimum height of six feet. Mr. Crim stated that he was not sure it would be acceptable to them. CMr. Flynn stated that the Parks Department is having some problems with some of the multi-family areas that back up to parks with vehicles, etc. , Page Nine, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 C Mr. Crim stated that along the creek they were thinking of something different. He stated they might be willing to put a three foot fence that would keep cars from going down into the park, but would also allow a view of the park from the fourplex units. Mr. Flynn stated he wrote comment #3 by referring to the only standards that exist now; those governing screening fences between multi-family and single family districts. He stated that he did not feel that the height would be a prime consideration to the Parks Department. He stated that as far as Staff was concerned, as long as the fence was of sturdy construction, either masonry base or metal frame, a three foot fence would satisfy Staff's problem. Mr. Knight stated that Staff is also concerned that it be of uniform height. Mr. Tyson asked how that would be maintained in the future. Mr. Flynn stated that there could be a restriction placed on the plat at the time of final platting. He stated that it would then be up to Staff to keep track of that at time of issuing fence permits. Mr. Crim stated that he did want to study the idea of a three foot fence and would also like to meet with the Parks Director. Mr. McMillan made a motion to approve the preliminary platting of Woodcreek Addition subject to the Planning & Zoning letters dated June 26th and July 1st and the letter of Knowlton-English- Flowers dated June 25th, with comment #3 being more definitive based on discussions between the developer, Parks Department and City Staff. Mr. Williamson seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. McMillan, Williamson, Gibson, Deithloff and Tyson Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. V. CONSIDER PLATTING - KNOB HILL MOBILE HOME PARK, LOCATED EAST OF SOUTH MAIN, SOUTH OF WHITENER DRIVE AND NORTH OF SOUTH PIPELINE ROAD Mr. Neal Adams, Attorney, 301 Westpark Way, stated that he is representing Knob Hill Mobile Home Sales, Inc. , which is a Ccorporation wholly owned by Mr. Doyle Winters. He stated that in 1969, the Page Ten, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 C Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council approved a plat for Knob Hill Mobile Home Park, but the lots themselves were not platted. He stated that the only thing filed of record was the platting of the utility easements and the private ingress, egress easements; the streets were not platted as public streets. He stated the streets will remain private streets. He stated when the property was developed as a mobile home park, it was Mr. Winters' intent to lease the spaces. He stated that in 1973, because of the economy being down and not much leasing activity, Mr. Winters decided to convert the park to homeowned type property. He stated that Mr. Winters began selling the lots on a contract for deed basis which made a provision for the people to pay a purchase price for their lots, and over a period of time, pay them off. He stated that once the contracts were paid in full, they would receive a deed. He stated that there are now approximately 110 families that have contracts of deeds which provide that they will receive a deed from Knob Hill Mobile Home Sales, Inc. , in one of two forms: (1) they will receive an undivided 118th interest in the park, or (2) they will receive a platted lot. He stated that if they receive an undivided interest, it makes it difficult to sell and it makes it almost impossible to finance. Mr. Adams reviewed comments of the City Attorney's letter dated June 4th which responded to the violations listed in the Development Review Committee's letter dated January 18th. Mr. Adams stated that the hold harmless agreement and perpetual maintenance agreement have been signed, reviewed and accepted by the City Attorney. He further stated that when the lots are platted and the lot lines are drawn as shown on the plat, there may not be enough off-street parking. He stated that Mr. Winters is willing to pour additional concrete to meet that additional requirement prior to filing of the plat. Mr. Tyson asked if this is a final plat. Mr. Flynn stated that it was. Mr. Williamson made a motion to approve the replatting of Knob Hill Mobile Home Park subject to the Development Review Committee's letters dated January 18th and June 26th, the City Attorney's letter dated June 4th, and that additional off-street parking be provided prior to filing of the plat. Mr. McMillon seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Williamson, McMillon, Gibson, Deithloff and Tyson Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. C • Page Eleven, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, July 1, 1980 C VI. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Flynn stated at the last City Council meeting the City Council authorized City Staff to proceed with the placement of signs that will advertize zoning cases. He stated that it will be in effect as soon as the signs are made, and that the zoning filing fee will be increased by $15.00. VII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. 4 / airman / --, 116a;irC