HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-03-02 Regular Meeting
Planning & Zoning Commission
March 2, 1982
CALL TO ORDER
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 MEMBERS ABSENT
John Deithloff Norma Runyon
Bob Williamson
Carl Tyson
Ralph Gibson
Sam Huston
Robert McMillon
Kent Flynn - Director of Planning
Becky Null - Development Coordinator
James Knight - City Engineer
VISITORS
Jim Packer Ron Addison
Mike Stewart Mike Patterson
Neal Adams Rick Barnes
Betsy Bloxom John Lynch
Willie Mae McCormick
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Mr. Robert McMillon.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting dated February 16, 1982, were approved as
written.
FURTHER CONSIDERATION - ZONING CASE #358
REQUEST OF MIKE STEWART FOR GEORGE MIDGLEY
AND JAMES PACKER FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM
C-2 TO R-4 ON TRACTS lAl AND IAIA, JOHN GROVES
SURVEY, A-599, LOCATED EAST OF RAIDER, NORTH
OF W. EULESS BLVD., AND SOUTH OF NEEDLES
Chairman Deithloff stated that the public hearing was closed at the February 2,
1982, meeting and that the Commission will be making their decision tonight
concerning this zoning case. He further stated that the Commission could direct
questions to the applicant if more information was needed to help the Commission
in making their decision.
Page Two, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, March 2, 1982
There being no questions, Mr. Williamson made a motion to recommend denial of
Zoning Case #358.
Mr. Huston seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows:
Ayes: Messrs. Williamson, Huston, and Tyson
Nays: Messrs. McMillon and Deithloff
Abstention: Mr. Gibson
Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried.
II.
PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE #362 -
REQUEST OF JOHN LYNCH FOR CHANGE
OF ZONING FROM R1 TO PD FOR SINGLE
FAMILY ATTACHED AND TOWNHOME
DWELLINGS WITH VARIABLE YARDS AND
BUILDING STANDARDS ON THE WESTERN
PORTION OF TRACT 3H, A.J. HUITT SURVEY
A-709, LOCATED EAST OF SOUTH MAIN
STREET, SOUTH OF E. HUITT LANE, AND
NORTH OF SOUTH EULESS ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
Chairman Deithloff opened the public hearing and explained that the proponents
would be heard first and then opponents.
Mr. John Lynch, 400 Canyon Ridge, presented his request for rezoning to allow the
construction of 26 single family attached units with variable yards and building
standards and 4 townhome units on 4.2 acres out of an 11 acre tract. He stated that
they plan to construct large tract single family dwelling units on the remainder of
the 11 acres. He stated that the overall density on the 11 acres will be
approximately 3.5 units per acre, which is less than your typical R-1 density.
Mr. Tyson asked what is planned for the tract in the middle.
Mr. Lynch stated that the owner, Mrs. Annie Fuller, has decided to remain on that
portion of the property. It is possible that that portion might be incorporated into
the development in the future.
Chairman Deithloff asked if there were any additional proponents. There being
none, he asked for any opponents.
Mr. Ed Williams, 401 McCormick Court, stated his concerns about the traffic
problem in the area. He mentioned the names of owners in the area that he knew
were opposed to the rezoning and said he had a petition of signatures of residents
opposed to the rezoning.
Betty Fuller stated that she was not opposed to the zoning request, but had some
questions. She inquired as to whether land use could be regulated via plat approval.
Page Three, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, March 2, 1982
Mr. Flynn stated that platting was for the purpose of reviewing subdivision design
and public improvements to see that they conform to the Subdivision Ordinance and
that a plat could not be turned down in order to restrict land usage, if the property
was zoned properly for the proposed use.
Chairman Deithloff asked if there were any additional opponents. There were none.
Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. Lynch if he had any problems with the Staff letter
dated February 25th.
Mr. Lynch stated that increasing the street width will eliminate too many trees. He
stated that they are trying to save as many trees as possible and are designing the
buildings to be constructed around the trees. He stated that additional off-street
parking had been provided on a third of the lots via long driveways.
Chairman Deithloff explained that the City Engineer had addressed an additional
letter to the P&Z dated March 1st and asked Mr. Lynch if he had received a copy
of this letter.
Mr. Lynch stated that he had not, whereupon Chairman Deithloff furnished him a
copy of the March 1st letter from the City Engineer.
Chairman Deithloff asked Mr. Lynch if he had any problems with the comments in
the letter from the City Engineer dated March 1st.
Mr. Lynch stated that he would need a moment to look it over, since he had not
seen it before.
Mr. Tyson stated that he is concerned about the items in the letter.
Mr. Lynch commented in regard to item #1 that they will lose two lots if the radius
of the cul-de-sac is increased. He pointed out that the radius conforms to the
Subdivison Ordinance. He also stated that those units will have parking in the rear
that will provide additional off-street parking via long driveways.
In regards to item ##2, Mr. Lynch stated that the comment addresses a platting
matter, but that there are several options in looping the water lines and is not sure
which is best at this time. He stated that there were 8' side yards adjacent to each
zoning district boundary and that should be ample for any easement required.
Chairman Deithloff asked James Knight to explain comment number 2 of his March
1st letter, since there seemed to be some confusion regarding this matter.
Mr. Knight explained that if a 7-1/2 foot easement could be provided on either side
of the district boundary property line that that width would be acceptable and would
assure the necessary total width of 15' for the easement.
Concerning item #3, Mr. Lynch stated that they desire to leave the creek in its
natural state; that to channelize it would remove almost all of the trees. Mr. Lynch
explained that the developer and the home builder both considered the natural
beauty of the site to be its prime selling point. He explained that they would not
consider rezoning this property if they had to channelize the creek because it would
destroy the natural buffer, which is provided for the higher density by the trees.
Page Four, Regular Meeting, Planning & Zoning Commission, March 2, 1982
Chairman Deithloff asked to see Mr. William's petition.
Mr. McMillon explained our public notice procedures to Mr. Williams.
In regards to the owners that Mr. Williams mentioned as being opposed to the
rezoning, Mrs. Annie Fuller stated that Mr. Weldon Cannon personally told her that
she should sell her property if she could get the price that she said she could get.
There being no additional opponents or comments, Chairman Deithloff declared the
public hearing closed.
Mr. Williamson asked Mr. Flynn if the R1A4.3 has been approved by the City
Council.
Mr. Flynn stated that it has been approved on the first reading and is pending
second reading.
Mr. Huston said he was concerned with the traffic problems that might occur on
South Main being so close to a school and all. Mr. Huston asked if staff had looked
into this area of concern .
Mr. Flynn stated that the Traffic Safety Coordinator received a copy of the
development plan as a member of the DRC and that he had not received any
comments back from him. He stated that S. Main was a thoroughfare designed for
heavier capacities than just single family and that the South part of town was
pretty well developed except for a few tracts so that there would not be the
additional loads from future growth on S. Main that we will see on N. Main.
Mr. Williamson stated that he objects to the reduced floor area requirements.
Mr. Tyson stated that the subject tract is a difficult piece of property. He feels
that the problems could be worked out in a better manner than the developer has
proposed however. He stated that with a little more work a better plan could be
developed.
There being no further discussion, Mr. Tyson made a motion to recommend denial
of Zoning Case #362.
Mr. Gibson seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows:
Ayes: Messrs. Tyson, Gibson, Huston, and Williamson
Nays: Messrs. Deithloff and McMillon
Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried.
III.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
/ 7 rd-x
airman //