Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-06-01 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission June 1, 1982 CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:40 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Euless City Hall by Chairman John Deithloff. MEMBERS & STAFF PRESENT John Deithloff Norma Runyon John Lynch Bob Williamson Bob McMillon Sam Cotten Carl Tyson Rod Tyler - Planner Becky Null - Development Coordinator VISITORS Don R. Plunk Don A. Tipton Ron Addison Troy M. Fuller ® David C. Hughes, Jr. Kimberly A. Dahlgren Bob Hembree Allen F. Nickle Eiko Hembree Thomas C. Schwartz Marian Ciccarone Nick F. Ciccarone Prentiss Camp N. T. Hudson Mrs. N.T. Hudson Willie Mae McCormick Doris Walters Joyce Loessberg Bill Lightsey Wayne Fee Gary Yowlin Terry Allen W. M. Sustaire INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mr. Carl Tyson. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The approval of the minutes of the May 18th meeting were tabled until June 15, 1982. Page Two, Planning & Zoning Commission, June 1, 1982 CONSIDER PLATTING - REPLATTING OF TRACT 6 INTO TRACTS 6AR & 6BR, WEST- PARK CENTRAL ADDITION, LOCATED SOUTH OF AIRPORT FREEWAY, EAST OF WESTPARK WAY, AND NORTH OF WEST- PARK COURT Mr. David Hughes, Consulting Engineer for Mr. Ron Beneke and Dr. Capello, presented the request for replatting of Tract 6, Westpark Central Addition. Dr. Capello intends to build his medical office on one of the tracts, and hopefully, this will trigger the development of the other tracts in this addition. He stated that they have complied with all the rules and regulations of the City and all the stipulations imposed by Staff with one exception as stated in James Knight's letter dated May 28, 1982. The letter states that according to "Section 43, Article 2 of Euless Subdivision Ordinance that lot lines are to be radial or perpendicular to adjacent street rights-of-way. The lot line separating Tracts 6AR and 6BR is tangent to the street rights-of-way rather than radial...". He stated that James left out the wording, "insofar as practical". He asked the Commission to consider the "insofar as practical" for several reasons. He stated that the ownership of Tract 6 dictates that the tracts be platted as shown on this particular replat. He asked for Mr. Troy Fuller to explain the extenuating circumstances concerning this matter. Mr. Troy Fuller, 1004 W. Euless Blvd., stated that this is the way the bank has required that the property be divided. He felt that this requirement was nitpicking from Staff's point of view. He stated that the expense involved in delaying this project because of this requirement is a needless waste of funds in talking about whether that line is drawn perpendicular to the cul-de-sac or at an angle. He stated that if this lot line not being perpendicular to the right-of-way were to cause any other problems, he could understand it, but not just because the ordinance says. He could not understand that. Mr. Lynch stated that probably one of the reasons behind that particular requirement was location of property corners in the future. He asked Mr. Hughes if it might be possible to come up with some kind of detail to put on the plat so that where the tangent intersects the circle it could be located from the radial point. Mr. Hughes stated that it is 90° off the radius point. Mr. Lynch stated that it is not indicated on the plat. Mr. Hughes stated that a detail could be put on the plat. Mr. Cotten made a motion to recommend aproval subject to the City Engineer's letter dated May 28, 1982. C Page Three, Planning & Zoning Commission, June 1, 1982 Mrs. Runyon seconded the motion. Mr. Tyson questioned whether it should be subject to the letter since the letter required that the lot line be radial. Mr. Tyler stated that the plat is in compliance with everything in the Subdivision Ordinance with the exception of this one item. The letter does not state whether or not that has to occur. Mr. McMillon suggested the motion include Mr. Lynch's request. Mr. Tyson questioned whether the Commission has the authority to do something that deviates from the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. Tyler stated that the City Attorney had advised Staff in the past not to grant variances from the Subdivision Ordinance, but rather change the Subdivision Ordinance. He stated that the Commission can recommend approval of the plat subject to the City Engineer's letter with the additional comment that was made. After additional discussion, Mr. Cotten amended his motion to recommend approval of the replatting of Tract 6 into Tracts 6AR & 6BR, Westpark Central, as platted, with the condition that a detail of where the tangent intersects the circle be placed on the plat so that it could be located from the radial point. Mrs. Runyon seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Mrs. Runyon, and Messrs. Cotten, Williamson, Tyson, McMillon, • Lynch and Deithloff Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. II. CONSIDER PLATTING - REPLATTING OF LOTS 1, 2AR, & 2BR, BLOCK 1, INTO LOTS 1R & 2AR1, BLOCK 1, WESTPARK MEDICAL PLAZA ADDI- TION, LOCATED SOUTH OF SILVER CREEK DRIVE, AND EAST OF WEST- PARK WAY DRIVE Mr. Ron Addison, Attorney with Neal Adams & Associates, presented the request for the subject replatting to combine three lots previously platted into two lots and remove utility easements. He explained that the utility easement to be abandoned is a five foot easement located south of Lot 1R on Lot 2AR1. He stated he received a copy of James Knight's letter dated May 28th in which Mr. Knight was uncertain whether or not utilities have been established in the easements being vacated. He further stated that the City did not have any utilities within these easements nor were there any from other utility companies. He stated that the Vacation of Utility Easement forms will be forthcoming. Page Four, Planning & Zoning Commission, June 1, 1982 Mr. Tyson asked why the easement on the northern boundary of Lot 1R was not carried all the way across the property line. Mr. Addison stated he did not know, but that these lots could be served with utilities from the 7 1/2 foot utility easements on the eastern side of these lots. Mr. Lynch stated that it was his understanding that such abandonment requires a public hearing which would be different from the platting procedure. Mr. Addison stated that he had with him the abandonment forms and that they will comply with City ordinances regarding such abandonments, however, he was not aware of such a requirement. Mr. Tyson stated his concern regarding the easement that runs partially across the northern boundary of Lot IR. Mr. Tyler stated that Staff has reviewed the plat and it met with their approval. Mr. Lynch made a motion to recommend approval of the replatting of Lots 1, 2AR & 2BR, Block 1, into Lots 1R & 2AR1, Block 1, Westpark Medical Plaza Addition subject to all of the City's procedures relative to abandonment being submitted prior to filing and also subject to the City Engineer's letter dated May 28, 1982. Mr. Cotten seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Lynch, Cotten, McMillon, Tyson, Williamson, and Deithloff, and Mrs. Runyon Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. III. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE #368 REQUEST OF DON A. TIPTON FOR BRODSKY/ OLPERTON EULESS JOINT VENTURE FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM PD (C2,RI,R2, R4,R5, OPEN SPACE) TO C2,R1,R2,R3,R4, R5 ON TRACTS A,B,C AND PORTION OF TRACT 2, LEVI FRANKLIN SUR- VEY, A-513 LOCATED SOUTH OF BEAR CREEK DRIVE, WEST OF NORTH MAIN STREET, AND NORTH OF PROPOSED CHEEK SPARGER RD. Chairman Deithloff explained the rules of the public hearing by stating that the proponents would be heard first and then the opponents. C Page Five, Planning & Zoning Commission, June 1, 1982 Mr. Don Plunk, 16901 Dallas Parkway, representing Mr. Fred Brodsky, the owner of the remaining undeveloped portion of Bear Creek Estates stated that the primary purpose of this request is to relocate Cheek Sparger Road and to rezone those tracts that are located between the current location of Cheek Sparger and the proposed location. He further explained that Cheek Sparger Road is the main thoroughfare which would service this proposed project. However, Mr. Plunk stated that they are requesting one basic change in the Planned Development designation of the entire Bear Creek Estates. Mr. Tyson asked if the open space would still have a golf course. Mr. Plunk stated that there would be room for the golf course after channelization. He further stated that the open space would be dedicated to the City. Mr. Plunk stated that Tract 4 would be changed from Planned Development duplex to straight R-2 zoning. Tract 5 is currently zoned for Planned Development Multi- Family use and it would be changed to R-5. Tract 6 is currently zoned for Planned Development Multi-Family and would be changed to a straight R-4. Tract 7 is now zoned for Planned Development Shopping Center and would be changed to C-2. Tract 8 now zoned Planned Development Office Tower with a limitation for a six story office building, would be changed to a residential use of R-3 zoning. Chairman Deithloff asked for any proponents, there being none he asked for any opponents. Mr. Allen Nickle, lot 1, block 4, stated that he was not notified of this meeting. Chairman Deithloff stated that Mr. Roy Busby was identified as being the owner of that property and notification was sent to him. Mr. Bob Hembree, lot 17, block 2, stated that his address is supposed to be 402 Cherry Ann instead of 402 Christine Court. Mr. Hembree asked that if this straight R-5 is approved if they would be notified when building began and have an opportunity to speak up about the construction. Chairman Deithloff stated that if this zoning is approved they would be at liberty to build the apartments in that area without further discussion. Mr. Hembree then asked about the procedure for property owner notification. Mr. Tyler clarified the procedure for property owner notification to Mr. Hembree. Mrs. Elana Barstat, 404 Morrison Dr., asked how dropping the PD would affect them. Mr. Tyler stated that by dropping the PD the developer is relieving himself of a development plan which is currently on record. He further stated that by dropping the PD the only restrictions the developer would have on their site are those that are stated in the zoning ordinance for the applicable zoning district. Prentiss Camp, 407 Cherry Ann Drive, asked how they would be able to keep people from parking on the street. Mr. Tyler stated that the Police Department would be in charge of this, if parking on the street was illegal. Page Six, Planning & Zoning Commission, June 1, 1982 Wayne Fee, 302 Bear Creek Drive, stated that he would like the row of homes along Bear Creek Drive for a buffer. Mr. Terry Allen, 302 Morrison Court, stated that due to previous construction he has had problems with his backyard and he feels that another new developer might continue to damage his property. He further stated that he would like to study this plan in more detail before a decision is made. Ms. Pat Lightsey, 508 Cherry Ann Court, stated that she would like to see the existing Development Plan. Ms. Kimberly Dahlgren, 2503 Morrison, stated that she would like to keep the Planned Development and would like to see the zoning request tabled. Mr. Bill Lightsey, 508 Cherry Ann Court, stated that he was not in favor of the change of zoning. Mr. Plunk stated that their request to drop the Planned Development is not to lessen the caliber of the development, but to develop it in the manner to complement the existing housing. He further stated that there were some requirements of this Planned Development that cannot realisticly be provided for today, but that certainly does not mean that they are side-stepping any of the requirements. Mr. Stone, corner of Morrison & Cherry Ann, stated that he does not trust construction people and he would like to keep the Planned Development zoning. Ms. Joyce Loessberg, 2507 Driskill, stated that she agrees with the others. Mr. Vern Pickel, 509 Cherry Ann Court, stated that he would like to keep the zoning as a Planned Development. Mr. Gary Yowlin, 514 Cherry Ann Court, stated that he would like to have more time to study the proposal. Mr. Plunk stated that he has no problem with the Planned Development designation. He further stated that he will submit a development plan, but will not formally request a change to Planned Development. Mr. Tyler asked Mr. Plunk if he was requesting that Y q g his change be amended to PD. Mr. Plunk stated that he was. Mr. Tyler stated that Mr. Plunk would need to submit a development plan for staff review, meeting all submittal requirements including fee and it would have to be submitted to the Commission and Council. Mr. Plunk asked Chairman Deithloff if this request could be tabled until the site plan could be submitted. Chairman Deithloff stated that the Commission had a choice to approve, disapprove or table the request. Mr. Plunk stated that if the Commission, after the discussion with area homeowners determine that the site should be left as a Planned Development, the Commission could make that recommendation to the City Council rather than requiring a formal change in the application submittal. Page Seven, Planning & Zoning Commission, June 1, 1982 Mr. Tyler stated that for this Commission to make recommendation to the City Council of a Planned Development, that they would need to see the development plan accompanying such zoning. Chairman Deithloff stated that the Commission had not seen any Planned Develop- ment. He further stated that they needed to make a decision tonight on this zoning case for straight zoning and it cannot be changed from straight zoning. Mr. Plunk, after further discussion, withdrew his application for straight zoning. There being no further discussion, Chairman Deithloff declared the public hearing closed. IV. CONSIDERATION Chairman Deithloff, for the benefit of the new members, stated the names of the current officers: Mr. Bob Williamson, Vice Chairman; Mrs. Norma Runyon, Secretary; Mr. John Deithloff, Chairman. Mrs. Runyon made a motion to set the election date for the next regularly scheduled meeting. Mr. Williamson seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Lynch, Cotten, McMillon, Tyson, Williamson, Deithloff, and Mrs. Runyon Nays: None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. V. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. w • a l'Orairman