Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-07-06 I i Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission July 6, 1982 CALL TO ORDER I The regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Euless City Hall by Chairman John Deithloff. MEMBERS & STAFF PRESENT John Deithloff Norma Runyon Carl Tyson Robert McMillon Bob Williamson 1 John Lynch Sam Cotten James Knight, City Engineer Julie Harmon, Secretary VISITORS Bob Eden Willie Mae McCormick Rick Barnes Mike Patterson Terry Stewart Kent Flynn Gerald Lemons Ron Haynes INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mr. Sam Cotten. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting dated June 1, 1982, were approved with the following corrections: On page one under Members Present section, the name Bob Williamson should be substituted for Ralph Gibson. On the last page under Item IV the name of Williamson should be substituted in place of Gibson. The minutes of the regular meeting dated June 15, 1982, were approved as written. c Page Two, Planning and Zoning Commission, July 6, 1982 CONSIDER PLATTING - FINAL PLAT- TING OF CARLISLE PINES ADDITION, LOCATED WEST OF BAZE DRIVE, NORTH THOUSAND OAKS ESTATES AND SOUTH OF GLADE ROAD Mr. Ron Haynes representing Crow Development, 2001 Bryan Tower, Dallas, Texas presented the request for Final Platting of Carlisle Pines. Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. Haynes if he was in receipt of Mr. James Knight's letter dated July 1, 1982. Mr. Haynes stated that he was and would like to comment on the items included in this letter. Mr. Haynes addressed item #1 of Mr. Knight's letter by stating that they will comply with this request for fully executed copies of off-site easements by furnishing these easements to the City prior to start of construction of improvements within this addition. Item #2 & ##8, regard a fully executed Perpetual Maintenance Agreement for those lots that back up to the west side of the property line, there being a drainage way that runs II north and south on the west side of the property, and proposed to be an earthen channel that has a concrete flume at the bottom. Mr. Haynes stated that their engineers have been instructed to redesign this so that there will be a concrete channel running from the far north end all the way to the south and in doing so it would not require a Perpetual Maintenance Agreement. However, at the present time the plans do show that it is an earthen channel requiring a Perpetual Maintenance Agreement. Mr. Haynes further stated that if it was left as shown on the plans, he would then agree that a Perpetual Maintenance Agreement would be necessary. Item #3, regards an access easement & a slight revision in the plat before the Commission. The Site Plan shows that Block 3 would be of a slightly different configuration than what is seen on the final plat. Mr. Haynes admits that it is a change, but he feels that it is a change for the better. Mr. Haynes stated that they previously had four lots that faced on Glade Road and showed a short street that comes in to serve those lots so they would not directly face on Glade Road. They have now changed that plan and those lots that did face north now face east so that they do not front on Glade Road. Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. Haynes if he planned to address each item individually. Mr. Haynes stated that he would do so. Mr. Haynes continued with item #4 regarding utility easements and Mr. Haynes stated that this final plat would be submitted to TP&L with a request that all necessary easements be shown on the final plat before this plat is recorded. Item #5 regards right-of-way for Glade Road. Mr. Haynes stated that they need to dedicate an additional 15' of right-of-way for Glade Road so that in its fullest extent there would be 80' of right-of-way. Mr. Haynes again stated that they will make the change to show an additional 15' of dedicated right-of-way before the final plat is recorded. F Page Three, Planning and Zoning Commission, July 6, 1982 Mr. Haynes stated that they would comply with item #6 regarding an additional utility 1 C easement needed across the front of Lots 49 & 50, Block 2. I Mr. Haynes stated that they would comply with item #7 regarding the provision of a 1 cleanout rather than using a plug at the end of sewer line "E-1". Mr. Haynes, having referred to item #8 at an earlier time, summarized by stating that in compliance with Mr. Knight's recommendation, they intend to fully concrete line the proposed channel. a 1 Item #9 regards the easement at the southwest corner of the property. Mr. Haynes stated that they would reduce the velocity of the water to a point that erosion does not occur to the property to the south. Item #10 regards the proposed storm drainage channel "B" located within the right-of-way proposed for dedication for future Glade Road improvements. Mr. Haynes stated that at this time they are proposing an earthen channel in order to handle the water that comes from north of this property. Mr. Haynes stated that since this was an engineering a question he would like to refer it for further clarification to Mr. Gerald Lemons. Item #11 regards a sanitary sewer line in Baze Drive running north on from Essex Place. Mr. Haynes stated that this sanitary sewer line is designed to handle the majority of that j property. Mr. Haynes again referred this item to Mr. Gerald Lemons, an engineer with 1 Carter & Burgess. Mr. Gerald Lemons, representing Carter & Burgess, 1100 Macon, Ft. Worth, addressed the 1 question of the storm drainage channel. He stated that there were approximately 100 J acres in the City of Grapevine that drains down to Glade Road. The drainage way now is located in the center of the property. In order to catch the water as it flows across the road they decided to put the drainage ditch on the south side of Glade Road. Mr. Lynch asked if there was a culvert presently beneath Glade Road. Mr. Lemons stated that there is a 18-21" pipe. Mr. Lynch asked what the runoff was. Mr. Lemons stated that it is 200 cfs. Mr. McMillon asked if future improvements with enclosed pipe systems all hinge on the development of some type of drainage on the north side. He also asked what would happen if this did not evolve. Mr. Haynes stated that if this property is not developed, the runoff would be much less. Mr. Lemons addressed item #11 by stating that they did go back and deepen two sanitary sewer lines. He further stated that they made them as deep as possible without having to go back and deepen all the sanitary sewer lines within the development. Mr. Lemons stated that they would be able to accommodate everything except the last 100 ft. in the southwest corner of the property north of this addition and adjacent to Baze Drive. He showed the Commission that there was a high point that goes through the property and they have a sewer lines that serves that high point. Chairman Deithloff asked how the finished floor elevation shown on the plat relate to the top of the street. Mr. Lemons stated that the drainage system is designed so that the 25 year storm is contained within the channel. He further stated that they would be intercepting the water before it gets to Glade Road. Page Four, Planning and Zoning Commission, July 6, 1982 Mr. Tyson asked Mr. Knight to comment on items #10 and 11 and if we are to get funding for Glade Road improvements at this time or would it be necessary for the City to fund these improvements when the time comes. Mr. Knight stated that the City's policy is that on perimeter streets we9 ive the developer the option of either making the improvements or escrowing the money with the City for those improvements for which he is obligated. He further stated that according to our ordinance the City assesses for street paving in accordance with the type of zoning adjacent to it; in this case they would be responsible for one-half of a 37' back-to-back street with reference to both Glade Road and Baze Drive. Mr. Knight stated that his concern about the channel that parallels Glade Road is that we have no control over development within the City of Grapevine. If they do not direct the water so that it winds up at the box culvert that is proposed, water is still going to cross Glade Road, which would indicate that the channel would be necessary until such time the drainage improvements within Grapevine are completed. However, Mr. Knight stated that if drainage improvements within Grapevine are constructed to where it directs that water to the box culvert, then that is where the water will be; however, that is not the case at this time. Mr. Knight stated that he felt if the storm drainage system was not constructed at this time, it should be designed or the developer should escrow some portion of the money for future construction of it. Mr. Tyson asked that if we do not require some escrow of funds or construction at this time, would the City become responsible for the construction and improvement of the channel. Mr. Lynch stated that there is no way to control what happens on the north side of Glade Road, since that is in Grapevine. Mr. Lynch further stated that until we could decide a way to get the drainage ditch across, we would be looking at the drainage fir+' ditch paralleling Glade Road on the south until we could decide how to get it across and offset it over to tie in with the channel. Mr. Lynch stated that he felt the City's cost should be limited to what we would be facing if it was developed as it is now. Mr. Cotten asked what would prevent the City from raising the road at the point from where it is changed, to make the water flow to the channel. Mr. Knight stated that the City would probably face liability from the property owners in Grapevine for blocking the water and making water stand on their property. Mr. Lemons stated that he was not sure what the Commission was talking about. Mr. Knight clarified by stating•that either street inlets to collect the water could be constructed or, until such time as the street is constructed, "V" inlets could be constructed on either side of the road that would collect the same amount of water as the channel. Mr. Lemons stated that he did not feel this would be possible due to the fact that there are over 200 cfs coming into that area and there would be no one place to pick it up. Mr. Lynch asked how much right-of-way there would be on the north side behind the pavement. Mr. Lemons stated that there is about 10 feet from fence to the existing pavement. Mr. Knight stated that on item #8 the comment was made that the channel at the west property line was designed for 25 year storm with the overflow for the 100 year runoff directed to Roxboro Road and in doing this the entire front yard has been dedicated as a 100 year overflow easement. Mr. Knight wanted to make the petitioners aware that all of the yard to the front building line is dedicated as an overflow easement on the plat as presented. Page Five, Planning and Zoning Commission, July 6, 1982 1 Mr. Lemons stated that they are carrying more water in the channel behind than is normal. Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. Knight to recap the eleven items of his letter of July 1, 1982, as follows: Item #1 - The developers have stated that they will comply with this request. Item #2 - The developers have stated that they will comply with City's requirements for drainage channels, that a fully concrete lined channel will be designed and constructed, would be dedicated to the City for maintenance and the Perpetual Maintenance Agreement would not be required. Item #3 - Clarifed to the P&Z Commission that some lots were slightly rearranged as opposed to what was presented on the site plan for the Planned Development zoning. Mr. Knight stated that he felt the changes made were an improvement. Item #4 - Need to get all easements shown on the plat, if possible, prior to it being filed. Item #5 - The developers have stated that an additional 15' of right-of-way will be dedicated in order to provide for future right-of-way requirements for Glade Road. i 1 Item #6 - This easement will be added per the developers of this property. i Item #7 - The developers have stated that a clean-out will be provided at the end of line "E-1". Item #8 - Chairman Deithloff asked what the dimensions of the fully concrete lined channel will be. Mr. Knight stated that he would like to see a 8' or greater width as the minimum bottom width. Item #9 - Petitioners have indicated that they would put some type of energy dissipaters at the lower end, rock rip-rap vs. just rock. Mr. Knight also recommends some type grass cover be established on the banks downstream to prevent erosion. Item #10 - Some type of interceptor channel would be the most effective means of collecting the water. Mr. Knight stated that the concern he has is that if the channel is included within the right-of-way of Glade Road and the City makes improvements prior to the time that the watershed within Grapevine is fully developed, the channel will have to be relocated or some other means of trapping water and collecting it provided. Chairman Deithloff asked if Mr. Knight was suggesting that funds need to be escrowed for this work at this time. Mr. Knight stated that would be one consideration. Item #11 - Mr. Knight stated his concern is that we not allow sanitary sewer facilities to be constructed that would not serve the entire drainage area. He feels that the facilities should be installed at such depth and of such size that they adequately serve all of the drainage area. Mr. Knight concluded by stating that his comments on the depth of the lines are based entirely from the topographic map included in these plans. Page Six, Planning and Zoning Commission, July 6, 1982 Mr. Haynes asked the Commission if it was their obligation to sewer other property owners property, as they are already extending sewer lines to their property and �r improving their property by doing so. He would like to know where their obligation stops. Mr. Knight stated that the lines extended to the property lines are not of sufficient depth so the property could sewer to it, so you might as well not have a line there. Mr. Haynes stated that they want to do the most adequate and complete job for the City and do not want to cut any corners. However, he feels that what is being proposed is good and sound engineering and will result in the betterment of the City. He further stated that they also do not want to do things that are not necessary and he feels that item #11 is not necessary. He feels that they are already extending sewer to the property owners and improving their property. However, if this is what it takes to have this plat approved, then they would do so. Mr. McMillon asked Mr. Haynes if he was willing to escrow some money for the relocation of this channel. Mr. Haynes stated that he was not sure what his requirements should be for perimeter street drainage improvements. Mr. Lynch stated that the Commission's purpose for exploring these situations is not to harass developers or to provide windfall benefits to adjacent property owners by providing them utilities. At the same time, before a decision is made, the Commission feels they should be totally informed of what the situation is out on the site so that an informed decision can be made. Mr. Cotten made a motion to recommend approval with the changes noted by Mr. Haynes and Mr. Knight and by striking item #11. Mr. Lynch stated that he would like to amend Mr. Cotten's motion to include the comment relative to meeting the escrow requirements for Glade Road and also that the overflow easement for the 100 year storm be shown on the plat. Mr. Lynch asked how the Commission stood on item #10. Mr. Knight stated that if as part of their escrow on Glade Road, the developers would agree to some dollar figure to be worked out to compensate for filling in the channel adjacent to Glade Road and relocating it, if needed, would seem to be a fair solution to this problem. Mr. Lynch stated that he would be willing to make that amendment to the motion for approval of this plat. Mr. Lynch proposed that they place the cost of constructing a ditch on the north side from the low point down to where the box culvert would be ultimately constructed and include whatever escrow funds that are within our perimeter street policy for the street and the inlets. Item #10 basically refers to the cost of the ditch on the north side and would have to require additional right-of-way on that side if Glade Road is ever improved. Mr. Cotten stated that his motion also included the comment relative to the escrow funds for building Glade Road within the perimeter street policy, which would also include the inlets that would ultimately be required for Glade Road. Page Seven, Planning and Zoning Commission, July 6, 1982 Mr. Tyson clarified this amendment by stating that only the amount of Glade Road including the drainage would be escrowed, thus making the motion of the Commission: To recommend approval of the subject plat with the changes noted by Mr. Haynes and Mr. Knight, as well as striking item #11 about the sanitary sewer and that monies be escrowed for Glade Road and its drainage. Mr. Lynch seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Mrs. Runyon and Messrs. Williamson, Lynch, Deithloff, McMillon, Cotten and Tyson Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. Before continuing with item II, Chairman Deithloff called a 5 minute break. Chairman Deithloff recalled the meeting back to order at 9:05 p.m. Chairman Deithloff noted for the record that Mr. Bob Williamson had left the meeting and that Mr. John Lynch would be stepping down due to a conflict of interests. II. CONSIDER PLATTING - PRELIMINARY PLATTING OF CULLUM PLACE ADDI- TION, LOCATED EAST OF SOUTH MAIN STREET, NORTH OF SOUTH EULESS EL- EMENTARY SCHOOL AND SOUTH OF HUITT DRIVE Mr. Rick Barnes, representing Cayman Development Co. presented the request for Preliminary Platting of an 11 acre tract located on South Main Street in Euless. He stated that they have complied with the Subdivision Ordinance requirements concerning drainage and also the two items in Mr. Knight's letter of July 1, 1982. Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. Barnes if he would care to address the two items in Mr. Knight's letter of July 1, 1982. Mr. Barnes stated that he would comply with these two items. Mr. Tyson asked if there was anything buildable on Lot 12. Mr. Barnes stated yes, on the very north-northeast side of this lot. Mr. Tyson asked if these single family lots were to be sold to individuals. Mr. Barnes stated that they would be sold to individuals and builders. Mr. Tyson asked if they planned to final plat the 16 lots at this time. Mr. Barnes stated they had not planned to final plat these lots at this time. Mr. Barnes commented on the maintenance of the creek area by stating that they do intend to make sure the creek is maintained from the beginning. Mr. Knight pointed out that by approval of the Preliminary Plat as it is, they are accepting leaving the creek in its natural state, and they have complied with all the requirements in order to do that. Page Eight, Planning and Zoning Commission, July 6, 1982 i Mr. Cotten recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat of Cullum Place Addition subject to the letter dated July 1, 1982. Mr. McMillon seconded the motion, and the vote is as follows: Ayes: Mrs. Runyon, and Messrs. Deithloff, McMillon, Cotten and Tyson Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. Mr. Tyson asked Mr. Kent Flynn to introduce his financee and to make a farewell speech. Mr. Flynn addressed the Commission from the audience and expressed his appreciation for their time in the past and complimented them on their hard work and interest in the community. III. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. ..1.—: / te-/1" / / irman