The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1984-06-19 1.9i3�-Il ti AG E N D A Planning ex Zoning Commission ion 2011 N. Fetch Drive Euless, Tvx.t y Jime 19, 1984 '.09 p.m. - Pre-Comr-fission to Discuss Agendla Items 7:30 p.m. -- Call to (hder for Commission Consideration of Scheduled lte l.'-s INVOCATION AI'.1'RUVAL OF �MIN TEAS -- Regular Meeting Dated June 5, 1984 OLD T31'SINESS 1. PUBLIC HEARING �orrirr ("iase #f;i .l.€ Request of James, F itjl er;ald for a change of ron-ing on Tract 31 1 and a portion of Tract 2B, J. P. ilallford Survey, A-711, 3.5 .acre,,; of land, frorr C-2 to PD for Mini--W.t.irehouses, located; eve st and vd acent to �crtl< ?vlarizr Street, sou and east of Midway .Park Addition and north- «f Fuller Street. PLIBLIC HEARING i:Cmink s Erase j�184-1`2 - Request of v4'esth aveD Interests for 3 Change of �i,oni'iy --------------- -------- on Tracts 1B t3 2, A Cash Survey, A.-28 0, RInd Tract 9E, T. Jasper Sur°vf>l, A-816, 3.0 nacres of hind, .f'rc?.m li-3 to C-1 U. C-2, located south of Airport Freeway, south and �r f'-.St of J. 1. Case ,! dditicm, nor'tth of Pc`,4rkwood ; dditiun' and east of westt,parl17 wny. NEW BUSINESS 1. Pt;:3LIC HEARING ronin Cast, -'?1184-15 -� Request of Gulf Oil Pi-oc-€ucts Company for ,a crY.€:.rrge: ..............:...............� of zoning on Lot -7 , Fuller Addition. €3.8111409 ;acre-;,; of land, frcrn C-2 to C-- 2 wW, SP 155) ;special Height and/or Area 5io-n, located north of Airport 1're:evS=a , west of North Y11air, Street, nt the southwest corner of Fuller Street, 11. i.ONC.}I.1J1' liATlO.N OF SIDEWALKS l-)iSC.'rta €Esrl of srdeev ally re`Lltalr£'rTrent in r'f'it r£r3r'i to c.°f3r`espondence from fVletr•o Equities, Inc., in Airport o3arsr.rFess .Park. 1 984-51 Z(-).id.l.N'G DISTRICT l ABBREXIT TIONS R--1 family Detached Dwelling District v af i Attached veIlii District i iciRJ S;ii ' R-21 Teti=o-F€;ii;ily Dwelling District R--3 - Nluiti--l<amhy Dwelling District, 12 Units to the Acre, R-°4 - Multi-Faimily Dwelling District, 16 Units to the _'acre R-5 Multi-Family Dwe,111ing District, 24 Units to the ;acre "--i - Ne.icnh'��orhood Business District C-2 - Community I_lii miess District 4-1-1 Limited Industrial- J.Mstrict I--I - Lin-ht Industrial District I-2 Heavy Industrial District CUD - t:orz r-unity Unit Development I'D - Plani e'd 1)eve l.opmerit SP - Specific Use Permit 1934 .8? Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission June 19, 1904 CALL T4 ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order at 7;30 p.rri. in the Council C'hafnhers of Euless City Had]. by Chairman John Deithloff. MEMBERS & STAFF PRES.f,'.N'-r MEMBERS ABSENT John Deithloff- None jack, Hill Carl Tyson John Lynch Carolyn lark Robert McM.illon U)rry Ingram James Knight, City Engineer Rod Tyler, Senior Planner Becky- Hull, Development Coordinator A nniece Vargas, Secretary VISITORS Marc 1'►affibte Huey H. Ball Jim Fitzgerald W, S. D Bose Dorothy Ci. Dubose Willie Mae �fc� 'oraa icl; Lauren lioraburg INVOC".A'IJOl The invocation was given by M.rs. Carolyn Park. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chair!nan Deithloff stated the approval of the minutes frofr: the, regular rfree.ting of June, 5 would be considered at the July 3, 1.9i1,4 niewting so the Con-in-dssioners could read over then). `T"wo Planjj ommis. sion. Meeting June 19, 1.984 1984-83 ........ .....-.... OLD BUSINESS ...................... T. PUBLIC HEARING ZONING C.NSE *84-11 - REQUEST OF JAMES FITZGEEi,ALD FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING' ON TRACT '21-31 AND A PORTION OF TRACT 2B, J. P. HALFORD SURVEY, A-711, 3.5 ACRES OF LAND, FROM C-2 TO PD FOR MINI- WAREHOUSES, LOCATED WEST AND ADJACENT TO NORTH MAIN STREET, SOUTI-I AND EAST OF MID*h,AY PARIS ADDITION AND NORTH OF FUIAXE. ST'REET Chairman Deithloff explained that this was a eontinuation of the last rneeting and that the public hearing was still open. Mr. Jim Fitzgerald, 590 Singleton Road, Midlothian, Texas, owner of the property, asked if there were any questions regarding the Con-imission's previous concerns. Chairman Deithloff asked if the height limit on the site data wtas one story (12 feet) as it stated; he did-nit recall that it was 12 feet. Mr. Fitzgerald remarked tbat 12 feet was the height of the buildings in the middle of the project (height included the )gable and hip roofs). Chairman Deithloff asked if the perimeter buildings were 10 feet &nd interior buildings were no more than 12 feet. Mr. Fitzuerald answered that that was correct. Chairman Deithloff inquired as to how Mr. Fitzgerald arrived at the riairs.ic level of riot vreater than 65 decibels. Allir. Fitzgerald asked if Mr. Franke, the engineer, could address that issue. rel -ided th,,' Alp. Earnest Franke I spoi - -it 65 decibels was the level of normal conversation; this measure was needed to control sound. Mir. Knight stated that a, study by the Council of Governments determined that noises above 65 decibels should riot be used around single-family residential areas. That was how the noise tries were differentiated on the noise map. Chairrl-ian Deithloff asked for aTIV other proponents or opponents. Being none, he declared the public blearing closed. He� then opened diSCUSSiOTI arnong the P&Z �Men-nbers. Mrs. Park felt that Fitzgerald's request would not the best use of this land; she didn't �s,,ant the location used for mird-warebouses. NVIr. Hill felt that Mr, Fitzgerald was responsive to the P&Z Commission coneeras, he zl'� 'Vis. Park that fie didn't like mini'-warehouses either, but felt that this site aare , -ed with would be fine for them. Page Three - Planning 6. Zoning Coininission ��leeting =Tune 1 3, 1 A 1984-84 lr. 19f°?%Iil_lr,ri didn't tike mini—warehouses either, but felt this ?oc-tion was, satisfactory since the homeowner's didn't seem to object. fie felt that Mr. Fitzgerald was concerned with trying to protect the surrounding homeowners. Chairman Deithloff agreed with the other Comi-n- issioners, but commented that the property was locked in on all four sides. He suggested that the only alternative would be to CXt(-Md the townhornes at the south to the north. He felt that these would be above-, averrage ri?ini-warehouses (brick. .wall, etc.). fie also stated that al people were notified and no one opposed the play-}. Mr. Knight said that Mr. Fitzger }.1d had ;one door--to--door to talk with the neighbors. Mr. Lunch remarked that one or two other applications for rnini--rA aMhouses across the street had been denied. fie feels that Mr. Fitzgerald has addressed considerations that were not addressed previously {access, size, and location) and due to the fact that theme was no opposition from the property owners, he is in favor of granting tt:ie request. ir. Tyson felt that this might not be the best location for mini-warehouses; !)tit seeined to thinly the horiaeowners would Nave limited visibility of the property because of the fence. He remarked that since the homeowners had not opposed t#re plan, then he would approve the request. Chairman"} Deithloff entertained motions. Mr. Hill rriade a motion to recori'mond appro til of the development plan for Zoning Case #84-11 with tie stipulation that the heights of the interior building,. would be no greater than 12 feet and the perimeter buildings would be no greater than 10 feet. Mrs. Park seconded the motion, and the vote is. as follows. Ayes., Mrs. Park, Messrs. IIiII, 'ciklillon, Deithloff, Lynch, and Tyson Nays- None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion carried. 1l. PL"PLIC HEARING - ;r<t)NYNG CASE #84--12 - REQUEST** OF IVESTHAy'E.N INTERESTS - ------------------ 1 a xk C,.1-1:VNGF O ZONING Dad TRACTS IR. � 2, 'I. A. CASH SURVEY, A-280, AND "1'i3 ACT 5E, 1`. JASPER SURVEY, A--816, 8.0 ACRES OF LAND, f'.1 OA: R-3 TO --1 �;-2, LOCATED S;JUTxl 01.--.' c1l.Rf'f.)RT FREEWAY, SOUTH AND WEST OF J. 1. CASE ADDITION. .NbR,'l'fl. OF PAf1KWOOD AD1;)IA 10N, AND EAST 6-V 1y i:S`I VX-1.li Chairrnari Deithloff pointed out that a motion was made at the last meeting to table this zoning rase until July :3rd. The P&Z has some comments in regard to this issue. VI r. Tvson stated that he had made the motion to table this zoning request until July :3rd so a less intensive PD request could be submitted by the developer.. He did not "eel this cease should 'ae heard at this time and wanted his irrotion to remain as it was ri�.arie. Page Four - Planning &: 'Zoning Commission sleeting - June 19, 1984 1984-85 Chairma-n Deithloff asked for any questions or comments by the staff. Nlr. Knight said the petitioner wanted to decrease the size of the straight--zoning request by eliminating the C-1. portion tviiieh banked tip to the single family homes to the south. He asked to be put back on the agenda as an itern of Old Business to see what the Cor.rrnission. felt regarding strictly the C'--2 portion of the request. Chairman Deithloff requested further di.scussiori. Mr. Lynch feels the City o," Euless demonstrates at willingness find az desire to work with developers and builders; lie thinks this area has been given an inordinate amount of attention and a lot of consideration in the recent past. Fie wants to continue to follow the trends and patterns that the Cornrnission. has set tip in the past through careful deliberation. He stated that the ;developer is looking for the groundwork that is necessary to develop the ;whole area (streets, drainage, etc.). Since the general trend has been set for the adjacent properties, Ile want:-, to see a I'D request. C"hairm.-an Deithloff asked for any further comments. Mr. Ball remarked that the petitioner has withdrawn the request for the southern portion of the subject property. Ile feels the developer can do what he needs to within the present zoning classification. He wants to deal with the portion that the Commission had no ob ections to at the last aneeting. Mr. Ball stated his willingness to have the request t:,ibled until the meeting on July 3rd. Mr. Lunch wanted 111r. Ball. to elaborate on a c=arnrnent made in the letter fro �� r.. Jerry Wall, Westhaven Interests, regarding Tract B !aeirig zoned R--3. Mr. Ball stated that the intention of his client is to put a professional center for offices in the R-3 area, lender the current zoning, medical offices could be placed there. This zoning ;would be .restricted to medical facilities and would also be restricted to a 23 foot further setback line along the boundaries. Re said that the owner of the property is anxious to start developing. Mr. Lynch asked ;Achy the petitioner requested to retain the C-2 request and not revise '!Tact B into a C:-1 1'D as requested by the Commission. Mr. Rall said that too much time would be involved--he wants to accomplish the objectives of his client as soon as possible. Mr. Lyrich stated that the client's go=als might not accomplish the goals of tine Commission. Mr. Ball's client had presented a master plan of this one little piece of property. Mr. Lynch was concerned with the height restrictions and minimal aesthetic: considerations that were dealt with for the area as it ,-abuts this residential area to the south. 4'sr. Ball commented tha€ his client will continue the quality development that is already started in that area. Chairman Deithloff listed two options: act on the request of Mr. Tyson, or act- oil the request of €Vlr. BeAl.. He then entertained nnotions. Page Five - Planning & Zoning Commission :Meeting -- June 19. 1984 1984--86 �' TvIr. T-v sori stated that a motion was only needed to open the zoning case for discussion, not to keep the request closed until <July 3rd. Since no motion was; made to consider Zoning Case #84-12, Chairman Ueithloff stated the original motion to table this request until the first: meeting in July still starrcis, 1`lr. Lynch was concerned with private deed restrictions or deed restrictions to run with the property. Since the City= has limited enforcement power, the adjacent property owners would be the ones who would benefit. He wanted to know what the recommendation of the legal staff was. Mr. Knight was not aware of circumstances, where the City was involved with or was ,a party to private deed .restrictions. He stated that sorne cities have accc;pted deed restrictions as a [Means of zoning. Mr. Tyson was concerned with deed restrictions in the Villages of Bear Creek that the City is not party of. He suggested that. the Commission discuss decd restrictions as a. method of handling tliis case at the next meeting. Mr. Knight stated that deed restriction: are only enforceable by tare owners of the property within that development. I-le further Commented that it would not be enforceable by the residents of TV61shire or Parkwood because they would not be within the same addition as the subject property. Mr. Tyson stated that he wants a PD as inentioned at the last meeting. If deed restrictions are not the way to work out this problem, then be knows of no way other than PD. Chairman Deithloff then. declared this request remains tabled until the meeting on July 3rd. NEW BUSINESS L PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE 484-15 - REQUEST OF C ULP OIL. PRODUCTS Ct ;EiPA.I\Y FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING ON LOT 7R, FULLER ADDITION, 6.81405 :ACRES OF I3A1'�D, FROM C--2 TO C-2 with SP 5v SPI L;it1I., I'iEl(siIT �'�i�Dr`'011 AI . EA SIGN, LOCATED NORTH O [AIRPORT 1�13.k I�T AY, 14ES`F` OF NO.'. I`I p�`I<�I'_rl STIdI;.IT 11 AT THE. SOtI''if-VVEST C'ORN., ER OF .FULLER STREET Chairman Delthlof.f gave the rtdes for a public hearing; then he declared the public hearing open. `.Mr. Marc Waniff-Ae, Gulf Oil, 1221 C;anrpbell Road, Richardson, Texas, represented the pe,titione°r. He was concerned with the need of Gulf Oil Company to identify their services to motorists on Highway 183 and local traffic. Mr. Tyson. inquired about the size of the proposed sign in relation, to other Gulf signs in the area. Page Six - Planning � Zoning Con mission Meeting - June 29, 1984 1984-�87 Mr. Wamble stated that it would be larger than any other Gulf sign in the area because- it is the onto Gulf station near 283. Mr. Tyson asked how the design of the sign wns arrived at. Mr. Wamble said it was based on the, distance from the highway an€ the size and height of tiie existing sign of their competitor (Exxon). He then passed out photographs showing the area in question. Mr. Tyson inquired as to how the proposed sign compared to the existing Exxon sign. Mr. Warnble stated that the Exxon's sign was approxifriate:ly 50 feet in height and :180- 200 square feet.. '-['heir sign would be approximately 64 feet izl height and 200 sgUare feet; slightly higher due to the farther distance; from the highway. Lynch inquired hour high. the Wendy's sign was. Mr. knight co.mment.ed that it was probably 80-100 feet tall. Mr. Tyson remarked that the exit at Main Street was a considerable distance from the location in question. There being no further discussion, Mr. Deithloff declared that the public hearing was closed. He then asked for a discussion ,:among the Commissioners. Irs. Park stated that the proposed sign was needed for visibility. Mr. hill inquired if the sign could have been moved to the youth side of the property and been made snia3.3.er- Mr. Wamble said it rnight have been possible, but they already have two standard-sized signs. Mr. Tyson Tasked about the size of the others. Mr. Wamble said that Gulf uses a six-foot, ter,-loot, and sixteen-foot disk. 'There is a ten foot disk at the CTulf station izt HigBicvay 15'? and Harwood, but they lsre.€ez a. sixteen-foot disl•C for highways because of distance involved. Mr. -NIcMillon yt.,.ted that tie had no problems with the request. Cbairman Deithloff shared the same: opinion. Mr. Lynch had no comments. Mr. 'Tyson was concerned with possible deviation from the City's ordinance regarding height of signs. There beinfY no further discussion aniong the Members, Chairman Deit_hloff entertained a motion. Page Seven - Planning e< Zoning Commission Meeting - June 19, 1.98# 1984-88 Mr. i' clMillon made a motion to recommend approval of the site Mar€ for ZC484-15 as submitted. �Vfr. Hill seconded the notion, and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Mrs. Paris, Messrs. Hill, McMillon, Deithloff, and Tyson Nays: Mr. :Lynch Chairalan Deithloff declared the motion curried. Chairman Deithloff recognized and welcomed Mr. Larry Ingrain, the newest member of the Commission. who has taken the place of -Mar. Sam Cotten. II. CONSIDERATION OF -,IDi WALKS - DISCITSSION OF SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS ll. REFERENCE TO CORRESPONDENCE FROM �iE'PRO EQUITIES, 1N(�., 1N AIRPORT' : -- I:3C:€SINESS PARK Chairman Deithloff asked for €z representative from 4ietro Equities, .Tne., to come forward. Mr. Bill I:)uBose, who lives in Fort Worth, President. of Metro Equities, Inc., presented the request in the absence of Mr. Dennis R. D. Scifres. fie stated that Metro Equities is the owner and developer of the Airport Business Park. He feels that the area is well landscaped and designed without the construction of sidewalks. In Phase 1. there were no sidewalks constructed; during Development of Phase 11 he was notified by staff that there is .a sidewalk ordinance. After discussing the design of the industrial park, he contends that no sidewalks are needed. Ile knows of no other city in the area that has such an ordinance. He does not want foot traffic in the business park because it Haight encourage children to play there. He suggested that an ordinance should be established that would require color coordination, landscaping, irrigation s4ster etc. He knows of other states with similar ordinances that are strictly: enforced. He feels that his development is quite attractive its compared to other industrial panes in this area and should not be required to construct sidewalks. Chairman Deithloff reiterated that this is not a zoning case. Mr. DuBose wanted to know what procedure; he should try to follow to make this a city ordinance. .-Mr. Knight stated that the letter from Mr. Scifres was submitted to the Pre-Council meeting last Tuesday to get their reaction. The City Council referred it to the P&Z Commission for study and recommendation. If the Commission feels that this proposal rne,rits consideration, staff would proceed with working tai a proposed Tamer daient to the Subdivision Ordinance in the direction the Corr:rrrissio�a would like to pursue. Ile further stated that the Cornmission's recommendation would then be. forwarded to the City Council in the form of a resolution stating that the ardinurrce rernain as is or be amended. Pie Eight ° Planning S Zoning Commission Xleeti.ng ,.tune 19, 1,984 1984_.89 Mr. Dubose invited the Commission to visit and view his development. {'hrirnnaia Deithloff thank hire and asked for any other comments or questions. He stated that the City of Richardson requires sidewalks. He feels them: is no real use for sidewalks because people park in the off-street parking areas and walk from their cars into the buildings. 'Even though lie; considers it to be a wasted expense, he feels that it allows you to put a perinanent fixture that would require no maintenance or landscaping. Mr, Hill asked if they allow on-street parking. Chairman Deithloff stated that it depends on the thoroughfare--different types of buildings have different parking requirements. kim Knigbt stated that the ordinance in Euless is basically the same---there are certain number of truck-loading bays that are required in industrial areas and the amount of parl:.ing that is requires] depends on the floor area of the building. Mr. DuBose stated that requiring sidewalks in industrial districts it puts the City= at an economic disadvantage and forces competition with other cities in the area. Chairman Deithloff reiterated that sidewalks shrOUld be required in residential but not in industrial areas. Mr. `i'��son referred to the staff survey' tlar�.t stated that Hurst and Bedford require sidewalks. '1r. Knight remarked that Hurst requires them, but Medford looks at each situation (if sidewalks are in the area, then they will have to bs-r etterided). Mr. Tyson feels that the ordinance should riot be changed based on a specific incident rather than looking at the industry as a whole. Chairman Deithloff stated it is customary to prat sidewalks where the parking lot adjoins the building, A` t% 'Tyson commented that joggers and the like: rag- use side;Walks primarily in industrial areas during the lunch hour; he does not warit to change the ordinance because people will use the sidewalks rather than walk in the streets where there is a heavy arnomit of truck: traffic. Mrs. Park stated Borne fle-xibility is needed. In regard to whether the Zoning Board of Adjustments could grant a variance, Mr. Knight stated that the ZBA might not have jurisdiction unless it was proved that is was an unnecessary, or economic hardship. Mr. Lynch .Mated that economic reasons would riot be a valid argument. k1r. Knight felt that the City Attorney would say that the LBF1 ;would riot have jurisdiction. The developer would have to prove that this portion of land would be different from other ones in the same district. lie then react a portion from� the Zoning Ordinance regarding the BA's authority. Page Nine - Planning &...Zoning Commission Meeting..- June 114, 1984 1984-90 .. .................. Mr. Tyson feels that it is the City's responsibility to protect the safety 01C its citizens- -sidewalks would do that. Air. In rare commeiited that sidewalks in residential areas were. there for a specific safety reason. He inquired if there was a safety reason that should be considered for industrial areas. Chairman Deithloff stated that it must be on a case by case basis. Warehouses would not need them, but office buildings would. There would be a safety reason involved. NIP. Lynch suggested that the issue is debatable due to some areas having- a large volume of truck traffic and fenced in. storage areas that would 'limit the visibility around corner,. Pedestrian traffic would then. need to be disvouraged. He feeh, the area should lie considered on a ease by case basis. Mr. .Ingram stated that it might pose an undue burder, on the developer unless safety was involved. 'Vir. Tyson suggested that flexiblity would discriminate against developers--polities would be involved. He feels that sidewalks add quality to the development of the industry and does not want to see the ordinance changed. Chairman Deithloff suggested that the ordinance remain as is unless the City Council r e . .commends, further investigation. Air. Lynch made a motion that the staff draft guidelines that would selectively require sidewalks in industrial areas where safety might be the ptbuary consideration insofar as that there is no variance process L,,J.thin the existing ordinance. 11.1r. Knight stated that the ordinances of Bedford, Grapevine, and Arlington shOUld be studied in detail to see how they build flexibility into it. Mr. Tvs(-)ri wanted to see an amendment to the motion to say that they come back with a discussion draft rather than a fully--prepared ordinance. There may be options ,available that the Cominission might want to discuss. Mr. Lynch wanted the staff to further research the issue bewause be feels that flexibility,- should be an alternative, if it does not sacrifice safety. He wanted to see altermative resolutions ibefore a recommendation was made to the City Council. "Jr. Ingram SeCOD.ded the motion, and the vote is as follows- Ayes: Mrs. Park-, Messrs. hill, McMillon, Deithloff, Tyson, Lynch, and Ingram Nays. ;None Chairman Deithloff declared the motion passed. C,hairman Deithlofff asked if there was anything, else the staff would want to bring up. M,. Knight welcomed Larry Tngnomi to the P&Z Commission, and introduced the newest inembe-rs of his staff: Anniece: Vargas, secreAary in the Public Works Departi-nent, and Jim NIeKcanna, an engineer. Fare Ton Panning Zoning CnmrniSsi031 Meeting - June 19 1984 1984-91 V. ADJOURN�iI',NT There being no further ba.►smess tO eo nduct, the meeting adjourned ,a t. 8.45 p.m. all - d f F