Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-11-03 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission November 3, 1981 CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:35 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Euless City Hall by Chairman Deithloff. Members & Staff Present Members Absent John Deithloff Norma Runyon Sam Huston ** Bob Williamson Carl Tyson Robert McMillon ** Ralph Gibson Kent Flynn - Director of Planning Julie Harmon - Recording Secretary VISITORS Peter Paradise Willie Mae McCormick B. B. Hardy Brad Hardy INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mr. Sam Huston. 41) APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of October 6, 1981, were approved as written. The minutes of October 20, 1981, were approved as written. I. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE #356 REQUEST OF DR. RICHARD J. THOMES FOR CHANGE OF ZONING (SITE PLAN AMENDMENT) FROM R-2 AND R-4 WITH CUD FOR CONFORMING HOUSING TO SAME WITH NEW SITE PLAN ON TRACTS 15 & 16 OF THE RAY SHELTON SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ASH LANE AND FULLER-WISER ROAD Chairman Deithloff opened the public hearing and explained that the proponents would be heard first and then opponents. Mr. Brad Hardy, 1704 Deville, Ft. Worth, Texas, was here representing Dr. Richard Thomes. Mr. Hardy stated that the purpose of the zoning change is primarily a matter of 401) cleaning up the zoning site plan to get it in agreement with the preliminary plat, which was previously approved for the duplex lots facing Ash Lane. ** CORRECTION - Mr. Gibson should be shown as absent and Mr. Williamson should be shown as present. ,Page Two, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, November 3, 1981 Mr. Hardy stated that essentially what the developer was doing is straightening the line as shown on the map froma configuration where Dr. Thomes had previously requested R-2, R-3 and R-4. Mr. Flynn stated that R-2, R-3 and R-4 were originally requested by Dr. Thomes and it was amended to just R-2 and R-4 before approval by the City Council. Mr. Hardy stated that at the time this request was amended they did not correct the location boundaries of this specific zoning area to conform with what they wanted to develop on the property. He further stated that this change they were asked for tonight would not change the development plans in any regard. Mr. Hardy also stated that all they are doing is straightening the line which divides the R-2 and R-4 zoning. Mr. Flynn showed each member of the P & Z theplan which was approved by the Council after amending it to R-2 and R-4 only. Mr. Tyson asked about the proposed road that is perpendicular to and intersects with Ash Lane. Mr. Deithloff asked what the date was that we originally looked at this plan. Mr. Flynn stated that it was approved on February 10, 1981, by the City Council. Mr. Flynn used the site plan that was approved on February 10, 1981, to show that when the north-south street was located at the original position, the developer had a piece of R-2 Duplex Zoning fronting on it. Now that the proposed road has been moved to the west, there is no R-2 proposed to front on it. Therefore, the boundary between R-2 and R-4 is straight on the proposed site plan presented tonight. Mr. Tyson stated that this Commission did not see their plans for the zoning on the 20 acre tract to the south of the property which is the subject of tonights zoning request. Mr. Tyson recalled that there was no plan at the Commission meeting and that the Commission recommended denial to Council, however, Mr. Hardy went to Council anyway. Mr. Tyson mentioned that this was the first time he had seen the site plan for this property to the south. Mr. Flynn stated that the developer amended their request to be a CUD and submitted site plan and Council approved it. Mr. Tyson asked if this was a city dedicated road. Mr. Hardy stated that it was not at this time, but is a proposed city dedicated road. Mr. Tyson asked if it would be built to city standards. Mr. Hardy stated that this was correct. He said that it would be indicated on a final plat which is now in preparation. Mr. Tyson asked if there was a condition on these duplex lots that there are to be no driveway cuts onto Ash Lane. Mr. Hardy stated that this was correct. Page Three, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, November 3, 1981 Mr. Tyson asked if all the duplex lots in question tonight will not have an entrance onto Ash Lane and that you will have to get into them from behind. Mr. Hardy stated that this was correct. Mr. Tyson asked if they were putting in a service driveway, or something similar to the one on Main St. Mr. Hardy stated that it would be something similar. He stated that it was a 15 ft. alley way that would be paved and would be an access alley way. They would also be rear entrance dwellings. Mr. Tyson asked about the culdesac that they showed off the south property line of the property to the south of the request and if it was a condition of Council to put the culdesac here. Mr. Hardy stated that he thought it was. Mr. Flynn stated that this was the proposal that was made on their site plan to Council that was reviewed by Council. Mr. Flynn further stated that it was reviewed by staff and that we found no objections to it. Mr. Tyson asked if that left one lot. Mr. Flynn stated that this left room for one duplex building or single family attached building. Mr. Flynn further stated that the row of lots adjacent to Meadowview Addition is zoned for duplex or single family attached, R-2. IC) Mr. Tyson asked if the DRC reviewed this road allignment before g going to Council. Mr. Flynn stated that they did. He further stated that the subdivision ordinance requires that a dead end street which now exists on the north end of Meadowview Addition, either be carried on through or be terminated in a culdesac so that fire vehicles can turn around. Mr. Tyson asked if the developer thought the culdesac would be better than taking the road on through. Mr. Flynn stated that if the road was taken on through you would have the possibility of a multi-family dwelling district emptying into a single family dwelling district. Mr. Tyson asked if this was one zoning case. Mr. Flynn clarified by stating that the tract to the south that shows the community open space and the culdesac and the street that runs east and west is not in this zoning case. ** Mr. Gibson asked if these were one tract when originally zoned. Mr. Flynn answered no, that they have never been presented together. Mr. Deithloff asked if everyone has had a chance to read Mr. Flynn's letter, as it shows what is happening and that this is a clean-up item zoning request before the Commission tonight. ** CORRECTION - should read that Mr. Williamson asked if these were one tract when originally zoned. ' Page Four, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, November 3, 1981 There being no additional proponents or opponents, Chairman Deithloff declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Deithloff asked Mr. Flynn when the developers bring forth engineering plans for the DRC to look at. Mr. Flynn stated that they had submitted some preliminary plans. There will be a preliminary plat and an engineering plan accompanying these and then a final plat and engineering plan. Mr. Deithloff asked when this entire street would be put in. Mr. Flynn stated that it cannot be put in as a dead end over 400 ft. It has to either have a culdesac or be a through street. However, Mr. Flynn felt that the entire street would be done at once, unless they do just this section running parallel to the west boundary and only go a very short distance and terminate it with a culdesac. Mr. Tyson made the motion to recommend approval of Zoning Case #356. Mr. Huston seconded the motion, the vote was as follows: **1 Ayes: Messrs. Deithloff, Huston, Tyson and Gibson Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. **2 Chairman Deithloff stated that if there were no further comments, the public hearing was closed. II. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. 4 Ae7 ,w107yrman I ii **1 CORRECTION - Mr. Gibson's name should be replaced with Mr. Williamson's name. **2 CORRECTION - should read that Chairman Deithloff stated that if there were no further comments, the meeting was adjourned.