Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-01-20 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission January 20, 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 Chair- man Deithloff. Members & Staff Present John Deithloff Bob Williamson Carl Tyson Robert McMillon Ralph Gibson Bob Eden (arrived 7:45 p.m.) Helen Lightbody Kent Flynn - Director of Planning Becky Null - Recording Secretary James Knight - City Engineer VISITORS Jan Jordan Leona Sibbett Charleen Benton Don Bass Barbara Narey Robert Hill L. A. Narey Maria Quattrepani Troy Manuel Robert M. McMillan Rita Manuel G. Petersen Duane Gibeau Kay Perkins Gina Morris Bern Perkins Lonnie Sibbett Jackie Edwards INVOCATION The invocation was given by Chairman John Deithloff. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Tyson made a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting dated December 16, 1980, as written. Mr. Williamson seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: C Ayes: Messrs. Tyson, Williamson, Gibson, McMillon, Deithloff & Lightbody Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. Page 2, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, January 20, 1981 100 I. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE #327 - REQUEST OF GENE WELCH FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM PD (R-3 DENSITY) & C-1 TO C-1 & R-5 W/CUD FOR CONFORMING HOUSING ON TRACTS 1B2, 6A1 & 6D1, S. HUITT SURVEY, A-705, AND TRACT A, SOMERSET PLACE ADDITION, LOCATED NORTH OF E. MIDWAY & EAST OF N. MAIN Chairman Deithloff opened the public hearing and explained that the proponents would be heard first and then opponents. Mr. Gene Welch, representing Mr. Wayne Barnett, stated they are requesting approval of basically the same development plan that was presented with Zoning Case #320. They are proposing to add 6.9 acres of C-1 adjacent and east of the existing C-1 and the remaining 12.8 acres are proposed for multi- family (R-5 density) uses. There would be a total of 3.4 acres designated as permanent community open space proposed for dedication as a City park. The basic difference between this plan and the previously submitted plan is the addition of a berm beginning approximately 50 feet east of the existing C-1 running east along the northern boundary of East Midway for approximately 700 feet with a depth of approximately 25 feet. The four foot high berm was added to provide a buffer between the proposed C-1 and the existing residen- ces and will be maintained by the developer. Mr. Welch stated that he and Mr. Barnett had met with a group of about 10 or 12 homeowners who concluded that this plan would be the best use for the property. Chairman Deithloff asked if the list of the ten conditions was a part of the development plan. It was confirmed by Mr. Welch. Mr. Williamson asked if the berm would be continuous or if there would be an entrance through it. Mr. Welch stated there would probably be a cut through the berm into the shopping center. In reference to condition #3, Chairman Deithloff asked what slope the developer will recommend. Mr. Welch stated the developers prefer not to cut a slope at all. He further stated that the developers' attorneys were informed by the IRS that the park should not be formally dedicated prior to the zoning of the property. It could be construed as an influence in the Commission and. Council's decision. He stated, however, that the property would be dedicated as a park after the zoning. Mr. Flynn explained that a CUD is the type of zoning whereby that area is set aside for that type of use only - permanent community open space. He stated that Mr. Welch has only proposed dedicating it as a City park. The actual acceptance of the park dedication will not occur until final platting, and it will be up to the City Council to decide if they want the park. The Page 3, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, January 20, 1981 property will not be allowed to be used for anything other than permanent community open space whether it is maintained privately or as a public park. In reference to condition #9, Mr. Flynn stated that the private recreational community center mentioned will be placed within the apartment project and not in the permanent community open space. Chairman Deithloff asked if there were any other proponents. There being none, he asked if there were any opponents. Mr. Troy Manuel, 413 Rambling Lane, presented petitions by homeowners against the zoning request. He stated he already has commercial property behind his home and this would put commercial to the side of his home. Mr. Bob Hill, 301 Sixpence, stated he does not really know what Mr. Welch is wanting to put on the property. He pointed out that there is already enough property zoned for apartments in the area. Mr. Don Bass, 208 Sixpence, stated this is basically the same plan that has been presented and rejected three or four times before. He sees no reason for it to be approved now. Mr. Lonnie Sibbett, 212 Sixpence, stated he lives within 250 feet of the subject property and was not informed of the meeting Mr. Welch had with the property owners. He asked Mr. Welch when the meeting was held and who was in attendance. Mr. Welch stated the meeting was held around the first of December in the home of Mr. & Mrs. Morris. He stated there were about 10 or 12 homeowners in all. Mr. Bern Perkins, 305 Sixpence, wanted to clarify some statements that were made regarding the meeting. He stated there were only four families repre- sented; about 7 people. He stated the homeowners had asked for the name of the developer, other property the developer had constructed, etc. , and the homeowners did not receive any answers. Mr. Welch had said he would bring his plan out to the homeowners, which he did about four days ago. Mrs. Jackie Edwards, 215 Sixpence, stated she was not informed of the meeting with Mr. Welch. Chairman Deithloff asked if there were any other opponents. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. Mrs. Lightbody asked Mr. Perkins his feelings about Mr. Welch's presentation at the meeting of the homeowners. Mr. Perkins stated he was still not satisfied. He did not feel that a shopping center should go next to homes. He is still opposed to the density. Mr. Tyson asked Mr. Perkins who was at the meeting, and if there were any agreements reached. t ' Page 4, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, January 20, 1981 C Mr. Perkins stated the homeowners were Mr. & Mrs. Morris, Mr. & Mrs. Jack Connell, Gene Fiaccone and his wife and himself. He stated there were no agreements reached that he knew of. In response to Mr. Perkins' statements, Mr. Welch stated he was told at the meeting that if they would bring back this plan with the berm the homeowners would be supportive. He was shocked that the homeowners would now stand up and say they did not agree to anything. Mr. Bob Hill, 301 Sixpence, stated he was aware of the meeting, but was unable to attend. He felt that the berm only protected about three houses. Mr. Tyson stated he did not see a significant change in this plan from the previous plans submitted. He had a problem with the fact that there were no agreements reached between the homeowners and Mr. Welch. Mr. Williamson concurred. Mr. Eden asked what could be done to make it better zoning. Mr. Tyson felt the density should be lower along Midway. Mr. McMillon stated that the Commission has asked for lesser density before and the developer feels he cannot go with lesser density. The options the Commission has are mainly acceptance or denial. Mr. Tyson asked about signalization at Midway and Main. Mr. Knight stated that Staff was studying the cost of a signal for that location. After discussion, Mr. Welch asked to amend his zoning request by reducing the permitted density from R-5 to R-3 on an area of approximately 2.8 acres laying adjacent to Midway Drive and bound on the west by the proposed C-1 zoning and on the east by the existing sanitary sewer easement. The northern boundary of the area would be defined by a line drawn parallel to Midway Drive and 200 feet north of the northern right-of-way line of Midway. Mr. Flynn asked Mr. Welch if he was willing to amend condition #1 to corres- pond to the amended request which would change the usable R-5 multi-family acreage from 12.8 to approximately 10 acres. Mr. Welch was agreeable. Mr. Eden made a motion to approve the amended request for Zoning Case #327 with the berm to be maintained by the developer, reducing the R-5 area to R-3 parallel to Midway from the eastern edge of the proposed C-1 to the sanitary sewer easement, 200 feet deep, containing approximately 2.8 acres with the ten conditions included, and requiring that the berm be unbroken by curb cuts onto Midway Drive. CMrs. Lightbody seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Page 5, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, January 20, 1981 Ayes: Mrs. Lightbody and Messrs. Tyson, McMillon, Eden, Williamson & Gibson Nays: Mr. Deithloff • Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. III. OLD BUSINESS Chairman Deithloff stated that Mr. Andy Kidd, petitioner for Zoning Case #326, has again asked the Commission to table consideration and continue the public hearing at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Mr. Tyson stated he felt that it should only be done at Mr. Kidd's expense to renotify the property owners since he has missed two meeting dates. Mr. Flynn stated that he would check out the legality of having Mr. Kidd pay for the renotification. Mr. Tyson made a motion that Zoning Case #326 be tabled until the petitioner has the information available, and that the petitioner reimburse the City for the cost involved in renotification of the property owners within 200 feet. Mr. Williamson seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Tyson, Williamson, Eden, Gibson, McMillon & Deithloff and Mrs. Lightbody Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. III. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. /i 11111 if a 1162 ifirman ,'