HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-12-20 19B3459
AG1..N l_)!
Pk-:r":ning & Zoning Commission
2031 N. Er}.er.r f-Xi ve:
1::.i.iles: ;, Texas
December b ei 20, .9,1:1.3
-00 €e.r-n. P-0-Commission mission Meeting to 1_Zisci.iss ':chedulCed Item--is
7:30 p.in. - kli to Order for Commission Consideration of `.:,.='hr'dLlled 1tCrns
11,.M.)CATION
OF MIINl- I'E:S -- Re:guiieir• Meeting Dated Decen.-her r:, 1983
OLD BUSINESS
1. €_1€; j 'i ..E''. 1C.O £S_Di=:.RAT ON #426
fC�r1.e-1j ca'ge it'4�26 - l^equest of Robert Carlin of- --1 .:€`n i. e of Z ;i"iEElg on
_..... .' ._ r V
Tract,.3 i>;s E c'. 64', S. j--uitt Suv vey, A-705, a total of 15 fr:; -1 R--1
to C--2, lor-, ited on the southeast" corrier 011
l"
3lve and north of t.l"ee ti oodcreek Addition.
OF P Jk:+tAC, HD^1 ?IN..'C�
RequeA of lien Davis for V'r ridlfali lncf for
a char-tge on Tracts `B1A, 5C, 5C1> 50A & '57 T. Jas ,.
86L e Lotal of 27071 acres, from FA-1, C-2 fs P to -.,--2 .!�. P-T" for �sn office
park and warehouse use storage, located on the east & sUllLh side of .l, 1. Case
Co, , nd north o Ky;iettee Street.
NEW BUSINESS
11111. CGNS DIF.-J' 1=1_.1TT?NG
Re p.iat.ting of EUle'Ss Clarde::ns A.dditkiiinj Lots, 1-7, BloLk 1, a,'et.e j_;,£: 1, Block l>
Jones-Lade'F-}i=e"ger r:ddibon, located south & adjacent to ANT 183 and norH--..
TV, PUBLIC--' HEARING
Zoning Cap j !a"1; -- Request of L'°2ii1iam 3._.. Past.ef_ir for n f:ti:`:inL?e of ZE:ntr"'s
an l_cet 20, Block 13, Bell Ranch. Terrace, a t.i-etal of .227 ncres, fr'of-n j?.-1 to
C--2, located north & adjacent, to Toplea StrfJen west. of M. 157 and sauM
of Signet 'Street.
19 j._`
1963
SAE.. { t. tEr> :`ti
The re.,gular rm,"t- ,inn of the Manning a Zoning Commission was ti--) urder at 7:3'
1-i.n-:. in ti-ie Council Charr.h„rs of Euless City Wl. My chair-n-ian johr'.
<) S"l`,4 Y E RESE„i $T MEMBERS ABSENT
John 1_)eithlof f John Lyno,,
Carl Tyson
Jack F }11
San; Cotten
f an:!lyn Park
Julie Secretary
Huey BA Harold,
Viillie 1Aa -, "3r-owning
Roy Cdesham. Steve Blasdell
Wi{l ann Ff. With lay Bromm
Ron ones [1. Lou E--iornE
-Iillian—i E. PaE%teur l=aud & fay Tylej-
r- nd E�Jurne.rous Concerned Eitizens
The invocation, was givAn 1:-,- :]�-ick Hill”.
.APPROVAL OF
The a inutes of the requla.r d nted, rDecernbef, F, 1983, vve'f'e a€ pro,"'ed as written.
0L D BUSINESS
f"C. .R T,�--if=:R t. .;E\{., JET..AT?ON_t.�F CASE. }�_ (; -_- {'\lwA_{::_.:; OF
-
f.if- ZON€t\iG ;.__,`iii t!\H...,ft:; :f._l9 _.6E 1--i..i€:.f..S.'
__._..... ...................... ... _ ............... ._ l
t
`f, '�• `'Ci`>o f� TCTAL_ C)f:: L; tiC:€- f=:�i, f f=ti.)t:I I�...{ O ��-�_. I...C:ii::�
�_%t.1` ? 1'IL.r+, T C .L31-:€ •:1:.{'. i_if' iDRTFA MAIN d T RZE T f''DAD At,-..JD
THE VaOOE_%f ,R EK
Chairman ._fi3khloff stated that at the last regularly sche(ri} ed Rannhg (r, Zt)rt nq
C:Etrnrr'ri5.>lc3i", r'i3et'tiE3g this tt:?rn was tcil3€L'C. iii._i{ 1:hw DF.C'E:.r3?c1:3r LfJt ff-t'? t.
he .;inq close? lie opened the Lh, C_t3rMIIiSSiOn r'."38f7 s,
.er...
1'ha. Ark ,iLa ed that in considering this item furLhl,£', sh fell, t` A property was not
s:ondu iv= to R--€ development and W€ at sorne time in the futuve be rezoned;
- therefore, h feels .:hat, it. `ei.ild be to the harne v,,ri r':i %:Idvni:t"q to work with the
deV .l'op'r, in i.his project and to in favor, of this unincJ
Two - Plarming i.Cornmission - f-December 20, 1983 19 ff-*5-I(-,.I
.............. ....
Mr. Cotten Stated that since the development will be rntore i.r.han 200 feet fi-orl) the
07- hornes of Woodcreek, he had no objec.tion to rezoni..r.q.
-ie ha i wi -iis zoning cha-i-ge.
W l--111 stated thal- I -d no prohle.,T th 0
Mr. MiCtAiflni-1 s-at'e'd that at the Jast rneetiriq he was in favor n-' thi-,, project becaune
t C-
ie felt i was a very bem-,ficial project, to the ,ity and is WH i,n fav(-ir of this zioining
change.
Mr. TyLon reiterated that. the City already to a problem with traffic along Main Street
and in partii-"ular inter""--'etJon. He believes that tnN project W! open up this
intemecnon allowing better traffic movement and be an asset to the City and the
hnmeown�--,,rs. Hille also stated that the buffer described by the deve.".oper Is good and tie
is in favor of this zonin.q. change.
[Dfeitrioff stated that the intervaction QH be too cro-,.vded with this,
dr:t-ve,lopriwnt and would prefer to see some type of -residential go in this rather
than -I shopping center.
With finished, Char-nan Deltldoff erite.-tained a rnotion frorn li
Comminsion.
Mr. Cotten rri,ide a -rintion to recornmend approval of Zoning Case f"426.
r."irs. P'10' seconded n-IoLion.
AL this tiin-ie, the audience ramed sonne questions and were, quite irate that the pu`,-)hC
hearing had been Hosed and that they v,,ould riot be gwen an oppartuinit.y to speak.
Chairninn Deithloff ex0ained that at the last imenting thc--. public cin this itern
had beeri close ,,J and then tabled. He, however, asked wished
to hear any addYtional cornments from the amkence, There beirig, no responsc-,,,
Cl"ai.."nian C)f- jthloff explained that the Wy way the pi olio hE:-'orinq ci:juid be
is if the. waint.e'd to, and Secondfly, if the cr-imn-iissicin had any
questions of thoF,- people who. had appeared before at the iast. n-leetii-i'...j.
At this time, Mr. Knight pointed out to the OWence that the Planning it Zoning
Commission is not the I'Val autharity an a change of zoAng, that only make a
rearmiiniendation to the City Council. l-e a1"7."-:- state."', thiat thee wi.il be a fu.'fhL-!r public
twahng at the City Council and ariy adrfitional inform-ution that Lhould be brouq..'ht
to the CAN Couricii'.'s aW,,,rition shf-iuld be dc-me su at that Llmie.
that aftor Lhe C-*,i-,y C.ounci' sets ".he date of To quit lic hearing for this case, it WH
be published in the paper. At that tirne, the City (101HIcil ::h"-) has the firial Bay rin
zordrig, will make the final detem5nation as to wheUwr the zuriing will be appi,oved or
not.
Dt,ithloff stated that a motion For approv�.l h,i . been made and seeonderd and
the vote & as Wows:
Ayes: Mrs. Park & Wssr,,I, Tyson, Hill &
Mr.
Chairrnan declared the rnotion carried.
Pane Wee Decernbejjn 1903 19834622
................. .......
IT.
C10NT1NL_jAT10r-..,"- 0F RiBLIC: HEAF`-ZING - ZONM CASE #42_5 Of- DON
�F
0 R %`,A N,'.-.)F-A i-,L R E 'T -'N A
s F'If_ f -it,
__5, T. E A TOTAL CF 27j71
AE I T,`J'_C�2 e.",- FC)'R AN --' (--,E l:'Ar-,K AND
E S, r--R 0 R C-2 R . r I
YO ------ ",_,,"-".TED 0N 'THf-, T"�_AST S-DE OF 3. I. CAS"E'
i-_FR_'UsE_ A`,__�__
C"P'.P A'. 'MM OF UNTAK STREE'Y
Chairman Deithloff stated that this zoning change request was Labled due to riew
infonnatirnn recAved and that the pulblic hearinij, i.j still open. He �taLed tha�. the
Commission has to revised Ate plan and has also receNed a letter, from Mr, B,:dl and
by the staff.
-3tion of what was stated at the Jait mee-.-,ing. He
Ar, Huey Ball gave a brief
also sLal-e✓ that nhwe the last rneevin.,,) they have worked %vitlri *,h(-.-,, ppriperty ov.,ners and
hav,,-, corne back with thie site [Ian that the Cornrrdssion had re—ceived in their packeis•and will tie preserAed tonigt& The n.,Iin diflerence� in Uhis piran an-d the or w,, prr?�-ented
December 6, 1983, is aiat they have taken the Manned Develorwrierit into a tract thong
thi,-, soutili bound,,,.y' of the propehy Mt tarders thee honieov-,,ners property wit-h whann
they have been workirig with., for the past 5e-ver�-Ij weel<s,
Ball then adc-Tressed t1he property owners list of requesU,,. ao st-rated in letter of
Decen-iber 16 1983, to Mm J,,_�mies Krijght (the same letter is attached and h-.i be ri-iade
a part of the
Messrs, Hill, De.0-dofQ and Tyson que�Aioned Ivir. Ball concerning the type of Screening
fence he Wans to bu-ild, if it will be painted, end if he had clic-"cker." With the pruperty
owqevs to ',fin dl ou t! what their choice was regardirig this fenr-'e.
'lr. ,'-!.nll stated that he wanted a masonry or concrete wall, ,vhich would !--..e better for
the note aboternent level. lie stated that if he had a choice he ,vould JH'm? r.4 tilt w_--dl
c.onstructiori; that tie would pre-fer not to paint the 'o"aH, that lie did nii-eut with Uhe
homeowriurs to his plan for a wall but at Vint thno they did not shomi a
for masonry ar concrl-.te.
for any additional propononLs; there heing none tie asked for
any opponents.
POP. David Bromaiing, 1903 Euless, be mWority of the homeowneri_--:
on Kynotte Drive, enlip hadzed the willingness of the horneowners tiu give up the
FAA zoning and that they do mcknowledge kA/indfalM allempt to work Yrith the
however, they have sonic additional reservations arid changes that they Qsh to he
into prop'os;-M.
1. They vvere concerned nhiiout the type and height of the bufldirigs that could
be construct,ed in the C-2 swea to the rwrM of the Ranni_dl He
consented that a Mur-swory buikHng, Mich nvouid be allowwe"', ir! the
district, WULdd be able to Joi--ik into their r_---,1ck yards.
2. The issuce of t.."!e trees along the southern pi,or-,e.rty edge, which at this tinic-
represent. as infvej:.tnimnt of 50-60 years, and in thed qhnion, a beiAer buM.-
Cckiild n-ou be ni.a.-de. He staiLed thot it is his that ci survey is
0 process which vvill 9h{-?w the allgnmei-it --,f the wall in relation to ti,ees
and the impact of that wall upon the trees and asked that Win survey be
comrJeted Wore they accept Mr. Ball's proposal.
iDage F-Ilannhq & Zoning Commission - December 20, 1983 1983-163
-Lour - ------------
I Hen though Win fall InvestmeriLs has agreed to place the wall on the
northern edge of Lhe AM.-ty •asernent+ ffi:,.fs donat-ing five feet (51) of land to
the property owners along that side, thi.ty ar, rnore concerned about
Wes than the ex Na five feet (5 In their opininn, fa jag-i-jed ,A/a!,. wo,-:'IcJ ne
pr: fu to a straight, wall, if it would save, the trees,
4. Many of the hr.,,,-neowners feel that the design conisisterley of
green space on the nor'h side of th, vvall is not an adequate green space
buffer at this We. They -would like an KAMM fifteen feet (159
ivairaabed for a twal of twenty-Eve feet (27) of planLed green space, on the
northerri aide of the wal-
I Their concerns about the location of office along Uht; sr.,,uthern,
property edge aria related specifically to the height. of the buildin.g. They
feel that any building over fourteen feet high (kV,', posi,_Joned 100 feet, frorn
the Yvall Would be visible to any person in their borne Mang that avu,e_
6. They request that the ofqce buildkNs shown on the ,astern side of the plan
he relocated to More the himiness stmage buiWings are Wing proposed.
recognition that an AM AM-;; alone mmi Lie' uilt to a lower heQhL Van
a building that contains viareho,.,...,e �ind storage space. Adso, if these buildings
nwst be taller than fifteem feet (159, they wou!"d lif<e Lo see an architectural
style Wat is with re5idential hnmes.
W. T• 3on asked Nin Bromiong if the homeowners had addressed the rnake-up of the
wall to th-C, !.-,ac .,
Mr. BrowAng stated that it is assurned that the wall will he finished an both sjdes,
I-ioweveq an unt'hished concrete, vvill -vio.--ild riot lie acceptable.
PA" Roy Greshrinq 1916 Kynette, Euless, reexThasized the iimpmrtaric�e- o-11' and
that the ,,hnuid be the type to res&L Wy I-ie also stress E.
the need to use a piLch roof so that the developm-eniii: Wo"Id bl�_--nd in With file
ne ighbortmod.
`IN Steve Blasdell, 1908 Kync-,Ue, F::uless, stated he would prefer single family on this
property; he i'eels that the plan submMed by k4r. Ball"I is an land use as
it is not corn•atible with single family resWentiel and does not, provide -an. adeq-i'-itc,
buffer to the homeowrlers. tie also feels that Lhi-s devt,-,oprnen will reduce UI-i-e
sales: Hity of his property. He also stated that. he, wi_-iuld like the, qween. aFe i to ot-.
be less then twenty-five Met (25') '-_md that the maswwy wall ho located an not W.
da.magu' trees.
Mrs:, Plark ask(--,d Mr. EMil if the majority of the tree- ; that are in jeop,lTdy fall vvithii-i
the five feet -,.51,, of
IN/Ir. B"'all Aated that. r-nf_,!s-,t of the �ubjecl do definitely fall withir, tl.. five focA
ZoL�iqLA C-orrirnission - D. cernbe.r 20, J-963 3-.64
19 B.
At this tirruv ',N4r. Ball introducK Mr. William Ff. Smith, Mce FWAdent of Weahaveri
i-.'it th"-'Y v"' i -v, -,;-F -,.( --y
Inte.rests. Mr. Smith stated H r-"ald We to per forfr a suf L� prop-a-,t
anal locate the trees along that rwoperty line and 3it-L.- the :.nctual of
OV011 -whel'L th�?Y W01JEJ miss the rnost. tr,-.es. They 106 1AW they have Eve feet
'th , ' n �
ti:i pla'f "'vi arid be happy to locate tN? any-where Wit." Iniat, five feet
where they can do the least an-iount of darna--,je.
Tysori stated that before he vot,ed, he waraed W. Bal-1,11 to to the Lype� 017
wal. he would build, whether it be a tilt wall or exposed aggregate wal on the
side.
lair. -Bull stated that. he would rnal<e a cni-ninitUnent at this, point, how'--'Ver, he, fecs that
there -3..--e many opUnns to consi.-Je.r. F-iowever, Ulh(� con-irriissi'-m need�" a
on, the wall. he W con-in-fit to build an exposed aggregate an the
homeowners side of the -vva.*I.
s4r, Fkj iraylar, 1620 Kynettn Euless, stated that he has a t god y ie'vi of the prop.ert-y
rorr, I
his horne and sees no way to construct a wall arid save the troes aA t-he
tir-ne,.
W. Kay Brown, 1904 KyneUc-.,, Euless, stated tier concern abo;-'t the he,it frorn ui, v',"-JJ
ar-.d ould -.1<, t o se larg bffer zoe than th i v.: fe
-!t CY).
Ni r. Ron Jones 1821 Kynette, Euless, wotAd prukr that the development that Wes the
property owners have the took of residential hoime.s.
There being no additknal opponents, Chairman Deithloff closed the PLIbliC hearing.
*Mr, Tyson stated that he felt lAr, Ball ha:, -Jone a -fine trying to ilio"'j the
Commission whal. de -eioprner:t like. He is not if) favor the wall being
staggered and would be in favor of wall being ii-i a straight tine, arid wil.hin the five
foot (51 uthity easement. Fie is in favor of this zoruing case With, the con£--Iitioris that
IiaL,, forth revising Rern 1#1 to 1-..e a Lilt wall fence on the souYepri edge of
the v�.Lh a minimum exposed nggrega.te on the -�outh side that the Wa.l.
would be an the r-tord-tern utility ease.rnerit line.
stated that tic Ws every consident.jon. :,3hould be t-liven to the
liomeowners and Uh,,L Mr-. Bf-ill hw3 ,vork(-,s d to provide as much buffer as possIde;
-% :) - ,-,f this .-, �riinq ch-r e
herefo-e, tie is in fa if i C -1 Ig ,
Mr. 1-411 stated that widi the made here tork-ifit in regard to etc.,
he is K favor of this, zoning ciiamge.
Mr. Cotten stated that tie would like Mm Ball to consider in Ws final desQn that they
Lake into considi'ration rnal6rii.j. the more of a home-like structul.,'. i--ie has
no proble.,i) with- the buffer wine ar the fencii.-.,., 'i",.d is in favor of z-o'ning.
Mrs. Park & Mr. Deithloff were in 8greenW1 i---tWj-:h the other rnernbers- and al",.; in
of this
zoning
R"'n- 0115 with the
NIr. Cotten made a mation to recat-nmencl rympoval al 0ming -a—, 'f
stipulation that the screening wall aIong 'O he -.outhern edge be tilt wall.
ON exposed aggregate facing the 'hollieov"iners to the ,;o-i-itti; that. the frnc�o b,:." aligried
on the '!iorth utihty posemen", subjec.": to t-Alr. Ball',,. letter of )ec„O`Iber 16, 1983; and
that Mm con-irnit. to Dd eightt tw,-rW - �irjht. fofA uB
7
l:)aqe Six Plarinin(,; & - o"i-c Corriminsion - [.)f-,cember 2-0;, J-�98,3
-..........------ j.......................
!'Ar- Hill s'e-conded. tllhe aniA the vote is as follows.
Ayes: I'Ars. Park & Messm. Tyson� E)eifhloff, PvIeNlifl.i.in, Hill Cotten
Nnys- None
Chairrrian.. Deithlol'i declared the niotion carried.
took -, 5-i-ninute br�=;--lk.)
NEW BUSINESS
HL
P R EULESS RDE
01'��- GAM ADDITION LOTS
LATTINIG -
EPLA'
T i CK
OCK C A'fE-,.)
.....TT-'j.... 'F".
........ ..........
Mir. H. Lou 1--lorne. 11208 Garland Road, r-')aJlas, preseritc-d the re-.que5,t for replat1ing
of Euless Gardens Addition, trots 147, Block 1, into Lnt 4 :lock 4 Jones•Laderiberger
Asidition.
NW. Tyson asked m0y they plan to the property.
1--1,-,rne that t"'he owner had thenn Lo repl,,it. th-i-? propertyso U--,-at itwoold
be in a morn sakaWe condit,ioii to prosper-,rive, tiuyer5.
Mr. KnIght WWI that the original Euless Gardwis Addition w;-3,,,, platted inLo single.
reside'ntial Ue property is curTendy zoned a C.")mnlercial type. uso
the" sm.-aller lots are not, conducive to developf-nent- in.. order ti--) Lmildl, on it, fie needs
to eliahnate the old Int. lines mid make one J..�.-rge J. Pt out of whiat. W'---is 2 nurli!:!er or snialt
parcels.
Chairman DeRthuff asked 141r. Hunie if lie had received Mr. KQVA's letter of
Mr. i--iorne sta-Led thiat,
Mr. 1\-10"Aillon emade a rn-otion to recommiend approval of the Rephtdng of ELdeMs
Gardens Addition, Lots 1-7 Filock 1, into Lot 4 Block 4 Jones-Laderibe rger Addition.
Mr. Cotten seconded the motion, and the voLe is r,s follows.
Ayes: FArs. Park 6: Messrs. T',yson, [.)eithlorfo 1'Ad-I'Aill-Hon, 1--fill 1,' C'OtLen
Chairman Deithloff delc-wed-- Ul,!e moti.o.n.. carried.
1983-166
aq c
�even Planiininq Zo.-iffir; Decorriber
..........
iv.
E 5 T C,
PUBLIC ;HEA-;'[NG CA'SIE17' J)I,12 REQUE 'F' VALL e='-,�A E. P:AS JR FOR
..................... ........... ........... - —-_---__- ..........I..........
C)N 13� BD L TER'P C r:i ft E OF ZO-NING -0-1 M Bl.. A
A, C I
................. ...... .............. ...................
0," .... ...I..
D VVI J AC
TO L..07' ATED -i & AL `.NT TO 01DUEA
..... ....................... ....:.................
E.,;"
MEST OF- 157 ANIC, SOITP-1 C)F SIGNET Ji'?E'':-------------- ............ --------------------
-——------------------
-ini]: explaine�d that. the, pior.",,.ments would
Chairm-an Diethlaff o...ened U-C public hearing
he heard :`ir,_,:. and then tiro? opponunt"'.
lv,.r. wi;fiilrn E. J.0-1.14 W. Fu-Ic-,ss. D.Jess., Passed out copies of the plat that, thev
propose to rezone and qt.,ated that this rel-uning •ias. b-, aczommod ,,-,e SOME' larr;er ret.-ii!
r ju j e C
Chairn,w, E_eithloff asked for -my a lditional prop-nents, Uhure b?:.q nom? he asked far
ow, . :1 'T he, I nn '_') i
, v opp�,.ne�,,'s. Flier= being opponprits, ""hairm, eithhuff closed the Public
hea I.i
Mr. Cotten nade a rnot-ion to rc;l piiiiii iltt approval of /Zoning Case #427.
Park :Iecon.jed 'he i-notion, and the vte is w) F olliows-
kAirs. F-lark Tvson, F)eithh_-ifl, md"li I n. 1-1.ifl
IN',ovs: No,-:I--:
Deiti-iloff -;ecl,ared the rnot �m 8mied�
V.
............
T'I.
Therc no furt.N. bus-iness, to dise-us-, Ue r-ner-tinq was ad:n;.:rnf_A at 9.3;,-! P I`
Ile
4�e
-----------------