Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-08-21 P&Z CITY OF EULESS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 21, 2018 MINUTES A regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Richard McNeese at 5:30 p.m. on August 21 , 2018 in the Pre-Council Conference Room of City Hall, 201 North Ector Drive. Those present included Chairman Richard McNeese, Vice Chairman LuAnn Portugal, and Commission Members: Curtis Brown, Ronald Dunckel, Steve Ellis, and Warren Wilson. During the Pre-Session Meeting: Senior Planner Stephen Cook reviewed the regular agenda. Director of Planning and Economic Development Mike Collins presented the Development Update. PLANNING AND ZONING CONSIDERATION OF SCHEDULED ITEMS — PRE- COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM The Euless Planning and Zoning Commission continued their meeting in the Council Chambers at 6:30 p.m. for consideration of scheduled items. STAFF PRESENT: Mike Collins, Director of Planning and Economic Development Stephen Cook, Senior Planner Hal Cranor, Director of Public Works and Engineering Tesla Harlan, Administrative Secretary Don Sheffield, Building Official Paul Smith, Fire Marshal VISITORS: Yvette Counts Owen Gibbs Maggie Woolfolk William Woolfolk Robin Crowley Tina Mozer Jane Delane Sandy Ritchey Cheryl Moreland Sheryl Hanisko Dennis Jones Jan Allman Roy Allman Mark Lee Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 14 August 21, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 14 August 21, 2018 Joanna Redd Melissa Orsoro Kyle Wyatt Tim Windes Toni McCutchen Lloyd McCutchen Vaiola Eteaki Cindy Eteaki Valarie Hitt Anna Arias John Feltman Melanie Feltman Leonardo Rocha John Greco Joe Roberts John Brown Ab Caram Amy Caram Ajay Atodaria Aouti Atodaria James Lord Patti Lacen Justin Christ Dennis Jones Huang Shi Hua Shi Jack Rowe Kyle Salzman INVOCATION Commissioner Dunckel gave the invocation. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Ellis led the pledge of allegiance. ITEM 1. APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES Vice Chairman Portugal made a motion to approve the minutes for the regular meeting of August 7, 2018. Commissioner Wilson seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman McNeese, Vice Chairman Portugal and Commission Members: Brown, Dunckel, and Wilson. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 14 August 21, 2018 Nays: None Abstention: Ellis Chairman McNeese declared the motion carried. (5-0-1) ITEM 2. HELD A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NO. 18-04-SUP AND RECOMMENDED AN ORDINANCE Chairman McNeese opened the public hearing at 6:36 p.m. Senior Planner Stephen Cook gave a brief description of the case. QuikTrip Corporation is seeking a Specific Use Permit to construct a gasoline sales and convenience store within the southern entrance to Glade Parks. The proposed store would be located at the intersection of the southbound frontage road of SH 121 , Cheek-Sparger Road, and Rio Grande Boulevard. QuikTrip intends to construct a newer prototype store than the existing storefronts in the City of Euless. This location would be a 4,840 square foot building facing onto Cheek- Sparger Road. Because of the significant volumes of traffic in this area, providing access to this site in a manner that did not make circumstances worse was a major objective. The site layout provides two points of access. There will be one drive from the southbound frontage road of SH 121 , which will allow customer traffic and gasoline products trucks to access the site. A second access point on the opposite side of the parcel will intersect with Rio Grande Boulevard. This drive approach is located at a distance to the north of the intersection of Rio Grande Boulevard and Cheek-Sparger Road that should not slow traffic entering into Glade Parks. There are two northbound lanes on Rio Grande Boulevard. There will no direct access onto Cheek-Sparger Road. The sixteen (16) pump fuel island is located on the east side of the property. The store type has entrances on the front and both sides of the building. The site has sixty-one (61) parking spaces outside of the fuel island to accommodate the convenience store customers that QuikTrip generates. Glade Parks has an existing primary multi-tenant sign on the southeast corner of the site. A new secondary multi-tenant sign will be located at the southwest corner near Rio Grande Boulevard. This sign was contemplated within the Unified Sign Plan as part of the Glade Parks Planned Development. QuikTrip will have branding elements installed on this sign. Complying with the Glade Parks Planned Development, the structure will be a combination of stone and brick. The building facades and fuel island columns will have the same stone design as what was used to construct the Bear Creek bridge. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 14 August 21, 2018 New trees will be introduced to the frontage of the site. Additional landscaping will be provided around the building itself and surrounding the solid waste container along the western side of the site. Staff recommends the Specific Use Permit, with the following conditions: a. The Specific Use Permit is tied to the Business Owner: QuikTrip Corporation; and, b. The Specific Use Permit is tied to the Business Name: QuikTrip, and, c. The Specific Use Permit may be revoked if one or more of the conditions imposed by this permit has not been met or has been violated. John Pimentel, the applicant from QuikTrip, stated that this new location will be different from their other Euless sites. He stated that the common complaint is that the internal circulation in the store is not good, as the sites are too busy. He stated that this new prototype design would have more customer entrances into the store, which would allow for customers who are only there to purchase items inside would not have any traffic conflict with the customers needing to pay for gas sales. Chairman McNeese asked to hear from any proponents/opponents who wished to speak. Seeing none, Chairman McNeese closed the public hearing at 6:42 p.m. Commissioner Wilson asked if there was an existing plan for a building to the north of the site. Mr. Cook stated that there is not any development planned for that location, but the intent for the site plan is to allow for mutual access between the sites for future development. There were no further questions or comments presented by the Commission. Commissioner Ellis made a motion to recommend approval of Case No. 18-04-SUP for a Specific Use Permit on 2.746 acres of the Jesse Doss Survey, Abstract No. 441, Tracts 4B2, 6B2 and portions of Tracts 4B & 6B; BBB & CRR Survey, Abstract No. 204, Tracts 5, 5D and 5E; 3801 Cheek-Sparger Road for a Gasoline Sales/Convenience Store in Planned Development District (PD). Commissioner Dunckel seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman McNeese, Vice Chairman Portugal and Commission Members: Brown, Dunckel, Ellis, and Wilson. Nays: None Abstention: None Chairman McNeese declared the motion carried. (6-0-0) Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 14 August 21, 2018 ITEM 3. HELD A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NO. 18-08-SUP AND RECOMMENDED AN ORDINANCE Chairman McNeese opened the public hearing at 6:46 p.m. Senior Planner Stephen Cook gave a brief description of the case. The Motel 6 hotel, located at 110 W. Airport Freeway, was constructed before the City of Euless Unified Development Code was adopted requiring all hotels to be approved by a Specific Use Permit (SUP) in the C-2 zoning districts. TxDOT purchased property from Motel 6 for the Airport Freeway widening project. The acquisition directly impacted an emergency access easement on the south side of the property. In order to re-establish this easement, it would be necessary for Motel 6 to demolish the far east end building. This resulted in the loss of twenty-eight (28) units within a two-story building with a footprint of 3,646 square feet. Motel 6 corporate would ultimately conclude that since they were already going to complete these modifications to the property, they would evaluate the potential cost effectiveness of completing a renovation of the entire property. Recognizing that the hotel was a legally existing non- conforming use, Motel 6 corporate proposed that the City consider approval of a Specific Use Permit. Staff has worked with Motel 6 corporate for many months to evaluate the overall quality of the proposed interior and exterior renovations. Based on the level of investment that will be made to the property, staff recommends approval of the Specific Use Permit. The redevelopment of this site consists of the following elements. A new emergency access, drainage and utility easement will be constructed along the frontage of the building and have a turn-around area on the eastern portion of the site. The site of the former building will add four parking spaces. One parking space will be removed from the eastern boundary of the property to add additional parking lot lighting. A sidewalk and pedestrian crosswalk will be added to the site to the public sidewalk constructed with the frontage road. The office for the hotel was originally constructed at the southwest corner of the site. The new configuration would move the office to the easternmost side of the remaining structures on the site. The office square footage and room space would be switched between the buildings. Two (2) rooms would be removed from the east building and five (5) new rooms constructed on the west building. All of these rooms will be on the first floor. The buildings will have an exterior makeover with new hand railings, stairwell reconstruction, repair to existing building facades and repainting. Existing rooms will be refurnished and repainted. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 14 August 21, 2018 New trees will be introduced to the frontage of the site, including live oaks, cedar elms and crepe myrtles. Foundation planting will be introduced for the first time on the site, particularly around the new office location. The area of the demolished building will be landscaped with cedar elms and new Bermuda grass sod. A new fence will also be installed around the swimming pool located at the front of the building. The site plan also indicates that a new screening fence will be constructed along the back property line of the site separating the site from the residential homes located to the rear. Staff recommends the Specific Use Permit, with the following conditions: a. The Specific Use Permit is tied to the Property Owner: G6 Hospitality, LLC; and, b. The Specific Use Permit is tied to the Business Name: Motel 6, and, c. The hotel will be inspected by the City of Euless based on applicable provisions of the City of Euless Property Maintenance Code. Information about hotel inspection standards is provided to the owner and operator, and, d. The Specific Use Permit may be revoked if one or more of the conditions imposed by this permit has not been met or has been violated. Kyle Wyatt, design and construction principal for G6 Hospitality, stated that the company is under new ownership and aiming to change the perception of their properties by people who drive past the hotel. He stated that this Euless location would be the first property to undergo the new design remodel. Chairman McNeese asked to hear from any proponents/opponents who wished to speak. Robin Crowley of 201 W. Fuller Drive lives immediately to the west of the property, and her backyard is directly adjacent to the parking lot. She stated that she was initially against any support for this project, but after speaking to Mr. Collins about the proposed changes, changed her mind. She appreciates the new 8' wall surrounding the property to help ensure a safe and clean environment. She stated that she appreciated Mr. Collins and Mr. Cook explaining the project and considering her feedback. Seeing none, Chairman McNeese closed the public hearing at 6:58 p.m. Commissioner Ellis asked if the gated entrance on the west side of the property would be connected to a fence. Mr. Cook stated that there would be a fence just along the western side. Vice Chairman Portugal stated that she appreciated the City staff spending time with business owners of property along the highway who have lost property through the highway widening process, and looks forward to many more revitalized businesses. There were no further questions or comments presented by the Commission. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 14 August 21, 2018 Commissioner Dunckel made a motion to recommend approval of Case No. 18-08-SUP for a Specific Use Permit on Municipal Service Company of Texas Addition, Lot AR, 110 W. Airport Freeway for a Hotel in Community Business District (C-2). Vice Chairman Portugal seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman McNeese, Vice Chairman Portugal and Commission Members: Brown, Dunckel, Ellis, and Wilson. Nays: None Abstention: None Chairman McNeese declared the motion carried. (6-0-0) ITEM 4. HELD A PUBLIC HEARING FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 18-03-PD AND RECOMMENDED AN ORDINANCE Chairman McNeese opened the public hearing at 7:01 p.m. Senior Planner Stephen Cook gave a brief description of the case. The property is located on 36.288 acres located at Westpark Way and W. Pipeline Road. The property is currently zoned Single Family Detached Dwelling (R-1), Community Business (C-2) and Texas Highway 10 Multi-Use (TX-10) zoning districts. The request is to rezone the whole property into a Planned Development (PD) zoning district to allow single family detached dwellings. Lennar Homes is the developer and homebuilder of five (5) subdivisions within the Riverwalk Planned Development zoning district during the past several years. Due to the strong home sales within these subdivisions and the strong market in Euless, the company has acquired additional property. They are seeking approval of a Planned Development ordinance for a one hundred eight (108) lot single- family subdivision with similar design standards as was approved in the Riverwalk Planned Development Ordinance. There are two occupied homesteads on the parcels associated with the rezoning. Previously, on August 7, 2018, the Planning and Zoning Commission took public comment in a public hearing to discuss the impact on this project. Concerns brought forward through that meeting involved the level of traffic which may be generated by the development, drainage impact on upstream homes and the long-term preservation of a fifteen (15') foot buffer along the lots identified on Block A, Lots 1-14 of the development. The original Riverwalk Planned Development ordinance has been edited to create the proposed Planned Development zoning. Slight modifications have been made to the single-family development and design standards to increase the street widths. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 14 August 21, 2018 The lot type for the subdivision will be a R5 front-garage loaded product. Streets will be the R1 residential street widths with a minimum of thirty-one (31') feet of pavement. Sidewalks will be six (6) feet wide with a seven and one half (75) foot parkway with a variety of street tree types. Identical to Riverwalk, the setback distances for the front yards are set at a minimum of fifteen (15') feet. This creates an effective setback distance of twenty-eight and a half (285) feet from the curb to the front building line. Garages must be a further seven (7') feet from the building line allowing full parking of vehicles without encroachment on the sidewalk. The proposed subdivision contains 108 lots. Fifty-three (53) of these lots will be 7,800 SF or greater and have a lot dimension of sixty-five (65') feet in width and at least one hundred twenty (120') feet deep. The other fifty-five (55) lots will be 6,000 SF or greater and have a lot dimension of fifty-five (55') feet in width and at least one hundred twenty (120') feet deep. The lot layout is designed to accommodate the natural topography of the site. Therefore, the lots very in size from 6,000 SF to over 15,000 SF, while meeting the standard described above of half the lots being 7,800 SF or greater and half the lots being 6,000 SF or greater. The median lot size in the subdivision is 7,840 SF. Lots along the existing neighborhood to the north (Block A, Lots 1 — 14) are deeper to accommodate a similar character of that neighborhood. An additional fifteen (15') foot buffer is established to the rear setback to preserve as many trees along the existing property line as possible. The street in front of the Block A lots is ten (10') below the grade of the rear property line of the Block A lots. There are five (5) open space lots associated with this development. These lots are primarily designed to preserve existing drainage areas and trees. The easternmost open space lot will have additional landscaping and sidewalks internal to the site. Street trees of a variety of species will be planted throughout the parkway areas of the streets and maintained to accommodate emergency equipment. The subdivision will connect to existing neighborhoods with dead-end streets which were designed for future connectivity. Christopher Lane within the Park Hill Subdivision will be extended into the subdivision to the east. Coyote Drive in the Villas of Texas Star will be extended north. The subdivision will also connect to Westpark Way. The standards, with one exception, are the same as originally approved for the Riverwalk Planned Development including the single-family architectural standards. The exception is that any two-story structures will be single story at the rear elevations and will not have a second floor window that would face the home site behind a home. This provision would be of particular interest to the residents of the existing single-story residences to the north and any concerns about a loss of privacy. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 14 August 21, 2018 Feedback received from the previous meeting has been addressed in the following manner: • The developer will perform a traffic impact analysis of the proposed development as part of the engineering study associated with the platting of the project to assess the warrant of traffic control (traffic lights) for traffic interacting with Westpark Way. • A full drainage study is being performed as per City Standards to understand how development will affect the floodplain within Hurricane Creek and the open space along the eastern edge of the development. Additionally, the creek area to the southwest—while not officially designated as a floodway or floodplain, is intended to remain undeveloped to maintain capacity for runoff from the development. • The developer has agreed to place the fifteen (15') foot buffer along Block A as a reserved area from tree removal as part of the homeowner's association covenants. It would remain up to the homeowner's association in the future to enforce the preservation of the trees on individual properties. Staff recommends approval of the Planned Development Ordinance. Jack Rowe, land development manager for Lennar Homes, stated that Lennar has developed three communities in the City of Euless, and has had a great working relationship with the city. He stated that the intention for this new development is to enhance the area through this zoning change to beautify this neighborhood and put forth the best product possible. He stated that the company is requiring the 15' tree buffer to the north to address aesthetic and privacy concerns. Regarding visibility, he stated that there are two empty lots on the corner of McMullin Drive and Westpark Way that will never permit any building, to ensure visibility. He also stated that the land sits lower topographically than the neighboring homes, so the new homes will not be on higher land and able to look over their fences into the existing properties. Chairman McNeese requested that when proponents and opponents of the case speak, they all take their turn at the podium consecutively. Once everyone in the audience has had their turn, staff and the applicants will address the list of questions. Mr. Collins stated that the intention is to gather everyone's comments and questions at once, with the expectation that multiple people will have the same concerns, and they will all be addressed at the end in a logical order. Chairman McNeese asked to hear from any proponents/opponents who wished to speak. Abdul Caram, of 701 Park Hill Drive, stated that he was in favor of the proposed development, and believes there is potential to beautify the area. He asked for the location of points of access to the site that construction trucks will use to enter the development, as the residents would prefer that access not be made through their neighborhood. He also asked if Lennar had considered improving the existing fencing along Westpark Way. Owens Gibbs, of 2146 Eva Lane, stated that he was not opposed to the project. He stated that his main concern was to minimize the effects of the construction on the existing Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 10 of 14 August 21, 2018 adjacent homeowners. He asked if water from the new development causes flooding to the neighborhood to the north, who would have the legal liability for the damages. He also asked if a hydrology or environmental impact study had been performed. He expressed his concern with the increased traffic in the area. He asked how many homes would have been allowed to be built under the R-1 zoning, and how many will be built under the PD zoning. He also asked for the sideyard setbacks between the homes. He stated that he would like the Park Hill neighborhood to be able to have input in the homeowner's association's regulation of the new neighborhood's 15' tree buffer. Chairman McNeese stated that they needed to be mindful of private property owner's rights in regards to the neighbors wishing to have control over what the new homeowners do with their property. Yvette Counts, of 2103 Reveille Circle, requested that Coyote Drive not be connected into the new development. She stated that she has concerns over the increased traffic on that road in regards to children's safety in the neighborhood. She stated that erosion is a concern as well. Joe Roberts, of 2444 Eva Lane, stated that he would like clarification on floodplain issues. He asked for a further description of the green space areas. He also asked for a timeline on the development of phase two, and more information on the regulations on the existing home on the property. Maggie Woolfolk, of 1000 Coyote Drive, stated that she had concerns about the difference in grading between her property and the property to be developed adjacent to hers. John Feltman, of 805 Park Hill Drive, requested that the current end of Christopher Lane be blocked off with fire access gates, to not allow access for the new development's residents. He stated that he was in favor of the zoning change. Dennis Jones, of 2304 Christopher Lane, reiterated multiple concerns previously addressed. Huang Shi, of 2102 Presidio Circle, stated that he has terrain and grading concerns about lot 22 and lot 14, and wanted to know if he would have to trim back his trees that hang over into lot 22. James Lord, of 2207 Eva Lane, asked for clarification about the 15' tree buffer and the circumstances by which the new property owners would be allowed to remove the trees. Roy Allman, of 2148 Eva Lane, asked who mandated that the creek was concrete, and if the new development would be required to concrete the sides of the creek in their neighborhood. Sheryl Hanisko, of 2304 Christopher Lane, stated that she opposed connecting Christopher Lane into the new neighborhood. She requested that a lower speed limit sign Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 11 of 14 August 21, 2018 be installed in the event that traffic on that road increases because people already travel on it at high speeds. Chairman McNeese closed the public hearing at 8:00 p.m. Mr. Collins stated that Lennar will speak about the list of concerns, and give a description about the drainage design of this development. He stated that he observes that there are some strong concerns and issues with the drainage as it stands today for the existing neighborhood, regardless of the new subdivision. He proposed a separate conversation outside of the context of this new development with the current homeowners. He stated that Lennar only has to establish that they will not adversely contribute to the existing drainage condition. He stated that the hope would be that if possible, improvements could be made through this process, but the only requirement would be that the situation not be made worse. He expressed that Lennar should not be shouldered with the burden of resolving issues that exist with or without this new subdivision. He stated that the current property owner has the right to develop this property under the current R-1 zoning as it stands today, without coming before the City. He explained that through this entire process, the City's intent has always been to work with Lennar to propose a development that would create a better subdivision than that which could be built under the existing R- 1 standards. Kyle Salzman, from Jacobs Engineering, stated that the floodplain and traffic concerns have been taken into consideration at the earliest possible planning stages in the project. He stated that a hydraulics and hydrology study would be performed that would show that the new development would cause no adverse impact on the existing conditions, which means that they would not cause a rise at the north or south end of the project, or on the east side of the creek. Mr. Salzman addressed the question about which governing bodies would be responsible for the floodplain. He explained that the floodplain in this case would be regulated by FEMA, after the City as the floodplain administrator has had the opportunity to review and confirm that it meets the local requirements. Mr. Collins stated that there is a current condition that exists on Westpark Way, in regards to visibility and traffic flow, and that irrespective of this subdivision, there is always an opportunity to evaluate the conditions of the streets to determine if there is adequate traffic control. In the event that the study shows no new traffic signal is warranted today, it does not mean that at any point in the future there cannot be another review completed and a new traffic control device installed if the data supports it. Mr. Salzman stated that a traffic impact analysis was completed in short order to provide some preliminary information for the purpose of this hearing. He stated that he recognizes that the development is impactful for the existing residents in the area, but in the scope of regional traffic, this is a relatively small traffic generator. He stated that based on the study, during peak p.m. conditions, 69 entering and 40 exiting trips would be generated. The study looks at distribution, in regards to access points to the external roadways, and there are four perimeter connections within this development: Christopher Lane, McMullin Drive, Reveille Circle, and Coyote Drive. It would be expected that the distribution of those Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 12 of 14 August 21, 2018 additional 109 trips during peak conditions would be uniformly split between the four access points. Concerning the Christopher Lane sight visibility condition, the traffic engineer visited the site and agreed that the visibility is problematic. It is understood that this issue was caused by the Park Hill neighborhood being constructed prior to the widening of Westpark Way. Mr. Salzman stated that the traffic engineer observed some solutions to the visibility issue. There is some tree overgrowth as you look to the north on Westpark Way while travelling westbound on Christopher Lane, and those trees are in public right of way, which means the city could trim them back. The engineer also identified the opportunity to place signage along Westpark Way to indicate the limited sight distances. Another solution proposed by the traffic engineer was to minimize the traffic movements at Christopher Lane to only allow for right turns in and out, and not have a left turn in or out opportunity since those are the more problematic movements. He stated that the new McMullin Drive access point does not pose the same visibility issues, and that one could predict that the current residents who currently use the Christopher Lane access point might choose to use McMullin Drive instead. Mr. Salzman also stated that the construction vehicle access points to the site are typically identified on the construction plans, and he would expect that the most logical point would be at the future location of McMullin Drive, rather than through the existing neighborhood. Mr. Collins asked Mr. Salzman if he would be able to speak about the grading concerns in regards to the property adjacent to Presidio Circle that would be developed in phase two. Mr. Salzman stated that Lennar has done a topography study at the site, and as is customary with residential developments, they intend to match the grade of their site to the adjacent edges. He stated that any grade transition that would need to happen would happen on the Lennar lot. He also addressed the concerns regarding the removal of trees, and indicated that it is not in his experience that new residents wish to remove trees preserved or planted for their benefit. Mr. Collins asked Mr. Salzman to speak to the question about lot density that would have occurred in the existing R-1 zoning versus the PD zoning for this development, as well as the setbacks. Mr. Salzman stated that under R-1 zoning there would be the opportunity to construct upon all of the open space areas protected by the PD zoning. He stated that 115 homes could be built under the R-1 zoning, while 108 homes are being proposed for this PD zoning. He stated that their average lot size in this plan is larger than the required lot size under the R-1 zoning. In the R-1 zoning, the sideyard setbacks are 9' and 4' for a total of a 13' separation. He stated that the homes under the PD zoning would have a minimum 10' separation, with each home having a minimum 5' sideyard. He indicated that some of the larger lots could have larger sideyards depending on the home design. Mr. Collins stated that there were two remaining topics to discuss. The first was the question of Lennar offering to make improvements along Westpark Way to the fencing or screening walls. From a city standpoint, the City would not require that action to be taken, Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 13 of 14 August 21, 2018 and it would have to arise from contracts with each individual property owner. The second topic left to discuss was the issue of a new homeowner being out of compliance with the restrictive covenant agreement. In that event, the homeowner's association would be responsible as a private entity, and the municipal government would not be involved with those matters. He stated that the open space areas would be designated as such by plat, and the maintenance of those areas would be the responsibility of the homeowner's association. Chairman McNeese asked about the issue regarding the existing homeowner on the property, and if there are any time restrictions on their continued inhabitance. Mr. Salzman stated that he was not aware of the private contracts concerning that issue. He stated that the zoning case at hand includes the entire property, not for the purpose of indicating a timeframe, but to show how it would be developed cohesively in the future. Chairman McNeese asked Mr. Collins to explain the process and which stage is currently being discussed. Mr. Collins stated that this would be considered the entitlement stage, which determines the zoning and the property use. He stated that the plan presented indicates the number of lots and lot sizes for preliminary discussion in order to bring about the zoning change. He stated that if the commission and council voted to approve this, the project would then go on to the platting stage. The platting would produce more detailed civil engineering that would establish the drainage, location of water and sewer, and all of the infrastructure. The plat would also establish the lot dimensions, easements, and a reference to the 15' tree buffer. There were no further questions or comments presented by the Commission. Commissioner Wilson made a motion to approve Case No. 18-03-PD for a Planned Development to change the zoning of 36.288 acres in the James Matson Survey, Abstract No. 1080 located at Westpark Way and W. Pipeline Road from Single Family Detached Dwelling (R-1), Community Business (C-2), and Texas Highway 10 Multi-Use (TX-10) zoning districts to Planned Development (PD) zoning to allow single family residential. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman McNeese, Vice Chairman Portugal and Commission Members: Brown, Dunckel, Ellis, and Wilson. Nays: None Abstention: None Chairman McNeese declared the motion carried. (6-0-0) Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Page 14 of 14 August 21, 2018 ITEM 5. APPROVED FINAL PLAT NO. 18-05-FP Senior Planner Stephen Cook gave a brief description of the case. The property is located on 1.292 acres addressed at 2411 State Highway 121. The property is zoned Planned Development District (PD). The Unified Development Code requires that all property is to be platted in order to sell or convey the property appropriately. This property is along the frontage lots of the Glade Parks Development and will be developed as a stand-alone restaurant. The plat conforms to the standards of the zoning district. Once the restaurant is under full development, a replat will be brought forward which will establish the appropriate easements for the property. The Development Services Group (DSG) has reviewed and certified the application has met all of the information required for consideration by the City of Euless. Staff recommends approval of the final plat. The Development Services Group has reviewed the site plan and has certified that it meets City standards. There were no further questions or comments presented by the Commission. Commissioner Wilson made a motion to approve Case No. 18-05-FP for a Final Plat to be located on 1.292 acres out of the Jesse Doss Survey Abstract No. 441 , Portion of Tract 6A6, to be platted as Glade Parks Addition, Block C, Lot 4; located at 2411 State Highway 121 . Commissioner Owens seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Chairman McNeese, Vice Chairman Portugal and Commission Members: Brown, Dunckel, Ellis, and Wilson. Nays: None Abstention: None Chairman McNeese declared the motion carried. (6-0-0) ITEM 6. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:37 p.m ' s .0t 1.6 y airman Richard Mcbfeese Date