HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-01-15 AGENDA
NEr3i31i1,`N"y &- Zof)ti)g
201 N. l?:otor .)rive
Euless, 'l.'(?xas
January= 15, 1985
7:00 p.m. - Pre-Commission Meeting
7:30 p,fn. - Fall to Order for Coirrnission Consideration of Sohi:-!d led ]tens
1 -VO1,,'AT1O'----,,
A PPYt,DVAL 01F i1egr lar E efT-;tin -Dattnd l:zeef:-'fnber 181 198,
NI W BUSINESS
1. CONSIDER 111,N171IN(3' 4P-34--51
Preffiininary Plat of Ma,es of Bear Creek Ph<wse TV, is (1 ated south anti
Std_f<dcent, to Harwood Ho`,ir.i, east and adjacent 't0 hoed, north and
?(il.t!e, to .?�'n'f?t?:'t �'r£'£'t^IF`'; F�€)Cl �'.'E'.St 3tlfa fi.3 �e(-,,ilt li3 �:ki�? £t, .¢ r`, ;�i£'�1 ?f�.!!�1.t�.'
of P"'uless City
'
11. CO Nh.'+111_s`B. 11J.:'ce 1li.0 CT
! s`plat of Lots 1, 2, & :3, Block l_, +antral Addit€o i, located soutll
wid ad-j r.f'.f.nt to Airport 'rr'.£?b°tT€3y, weFt and adjacent to Y'`'est,p(.rk b";t:iy, and
e:E.s t and €idj€icent to the Eu1es;Ilyc-,df:o.rd City f_<irrlits.
ITT. l'iJ l UAC t'f.t:'ARI G - M-85-01.
ll.c>quest of �: ,T:{..i:,�' . Inc., for a change of zoning on a. portion ,.',•' 7"'Tact A
Block 1.5, Oakwood 'l'e.'rrfee Addition, a total of 33.< IEr.; aereu-, of land, fronn. c
2 to C-2 v;, ST1'° or !;?Ernes^d height and area of shg' i. locats�d at the
southrz''ast t'.orner of �'' £ .Iles.. Y'l4'ra. and -7.imnioi?s. Dri e.. `
Request of Wiland D(_'velopownt, hic., Venture !€ for a Change l
fait: '3�i�,.i c.f
t!1ri.irig on portion's C..f 'T'rRcts 3; M, 3A2, 4, & .z f.3„it of tai:. S. 'i'uC., E,: Survey,
A-13E2, 3r?., Beres of land, from Con-m-m-nity Unit l ewJoprnent (1.6 ?.€nit;; per
to r-'`osn1-'1uf01L'yl *Unit >.1evel7firr Brit (8 iiriits per it' C,l, INc!'ated north of
'1J - adjacent to ifi f .f�-4 ; 1d ` K d n I 'Ak eSt ?riff
to proposed Sb.Ae Is. ghway 360; anfl for a cha.iip- of zcsnin]g on'
poi'Oms of Tract,--, 513, 6A, and 6B of the R. Crowley Survey, A-312. a total
of 34.1. acres of land, from, r;ofrilr,unit.y Unit Development (16 3,E€`;f per '-.re
to Coi-;irsii pity Unit Development (24 units, Per avreL located north and
adja .eji . to f ear°;<<<ood Road, east and a(Ijac:.nt to proposed Gi-ar Creek
ParkvvaEt, south of Ash Lane, and west of ,)linter
1.98 5--1)tl
V.
I e,,.--.uz st of Chelsea earl{ Joint Venture for t`€ L',htS:ge of zoning on Blocks A
L C Park f ,t. to a total cz 39.105 { f° f m ter;
through e.., iic.�Fs£;<S, a rs r .) F3d"£ s [)� 1.3; .�, t r`:. `)
Connn,il,mit;`y% ;_ nit 4}eva,tibpri"ent CR-,''r _
.-`a-iit✓ :t€$£ Ict1 to 111"aiSe
Development 0-3in 1c F: s y � t€ ; ?Edy l_ca d south
and €:irl fS.{°°nt to
" . E a j-� 'r v 5,,3.Op r
ei r % <. and adjacent to j ] < i
Subdivision, wid
vves>. and a£.ljcwent. to �Nt: rth
ZONING i) SI'2z.1.d.'T AMMEV3tATEi''!`'=.'s
- . S'ri3??`1.4; .'r.?rifriEs '�L=.`.t.Fl;',;i Ci l.Sl�r£�lliiZ'„ l)ist,t:i£'t
.1A >ingle. gamily Attacheii )istri:,..
-% - T;i'o 1:ain-1 l y
1 a r' r' t r `! Units t- die ,5
;, .. .`.�.tilti--.t arr;#.1:,% S ac=f.liril�� 3ist.i°ici9 1, l_Ji�i_ , tt;�. ��t,v.€,
R-4 .s'.`miti-Famil y i-X 1vellr i_ Mstr'iet., 16 Wits to Me Acre
:is-5 Multi-Family silk'et..ing Mstr'ict, 241 Units to 'die Acre
Ms.trict
:`£3mIT.,till.ity l:li.isiness I?i Aric;'t.
3.-'l. Limited Industrial i)str c't
1-2 - 'riewy Ire€li'Mr.4.11 i)istr•iet
Specific U,--.e Permi.t
plrietT ing, u` lafSF3ing Commission
Jai1t.iar;d 15, 1.9185
rognilar ^ti'v LF{sue 01 the 'lf3{ii1F{)u ix :t?{)1.)'3 ` :T 3€ `Sq € L3 d 7s'.32
{z), in the (�;,`.?I.Fi)C'3l Chamli3ers of 3'.3_Eless tCit� 4:s.$:'eI I by Cha1Y.'{i1a3t J(3h{i Lt%{}L'.11o
MEMBERS & STAFF PRESENT NI.3NSiRS < 171 "T
""'on .�.�litt��i� C��t�il.i`nian ��$I'.� `.�'f�t't{t
C,aroi o st Park
vuemillon
john Deithloff
Jack ..-gilt
U€131i Ces ;:s.n ght, City
l'ir ;'.%Cki8 i3i"{?:. f'rt? t;i;t TlgiTFeer
1--lecky Of fice Coordinator
V1.. ?1,€'€3:rt S
David C, Jr. �-,Iichael Love
Viillian-i .r,.�.oper Marilyn Johnson
Kevin White 11n Hayes
Holm 3. Henley vouliam G. Nelson
Tim Warren john
David H. Tubbs Peter S t(3,ks
<;'f.'r3Tf.'<. 'E.o Siii & David .C:::hriskie
SVd ? Jb3, Cronin btiE? c�4.�.FF�'.'3find
Dennis Ford
€` .. .-
'i'r`e i{lvtSc'rk"£ion was given by :ire 3?i�le
Z sP t Q 'f f� r r TI f�
s{. s. ��"::..i S: S.. a..�.` 1:%3. i"L..F 3'.,c_'s
,f'he FT;1."•i1.tes, of the regular meeting dated Df>iss'{t;eS£--`r 18, 1984, were €3[trit"Z?vei a3 .-s
writtem
t<
t,�3;tj"IE {V PLA f, N'N(, -- 2-.84_.51 1111-:LH,1 A!Y PT.:,V ' 1011' VUA,A.+.ts i OF B ?22 i,
'la IV -t{\'1' •t t a��..�41 � i' �2�t� 3_�J i4£,i.ai+ 1 3� 4i. �'+ � Y
+�\ 'T q ,.,r.)y C'[�-r�. tt�� ii ;! ..9-af-2 �t Sq qq t 'f 1l Y. pq r'+F'} tf il. :.Tin
r. .% 1t_r E.t.;.f, rS3:)S,.3ti �.L�A ..v5 ,i t,`.�: ;list.t /'A.t�tf�4 t. 1.2.€ � s,_i .''kF C. � ;:<,
MEEWAY, A.Ni-) VV EST A,',11.)
.
t'ane TWO -- Plannim & 7ora.irao. cor a-tission - Januflry 1 ), 1.985 19 :-004
NIT-, .11�c�rt Hall, Washington/Wallace xn�,rraE:f rs, representing 'l'ril aradevelopr:; nt, Inc.,
presented the request for Prel.irninary Platting of Villa-,ges of Bear Creek Phase IV.
stating that thi's is a. continuation of the Villages of f?e ar Creek project.
("hairmam Lynch asked if he had received a copy of the letter froin Jim McRarara).
r. llall stated that he had, and that they la;:ad no problems with the con?momts in the,
Ie:tt(-;r.
rl.r.. ;�Ifa lill.ry,. made: a motion to recommend approval of the Preliraimtry Flat of Villfq es
of Bear ,'"f.'ek Phase IV, subject to Ji ft 1M.ct rat na's letter dated January 8, 1 985,
Is.`, t i.11 se sonde the motion, and tir+ vote is ;>> .Col:lr�v7s:
Ayes: y rs. lark, N'lessrs. Lynch, hill, 1:)eithloff, Ingram, 7VIC lillon
Nays-
;hair°man Lynch declared the notion carried.
'l.y.Yl`2kWl.l.iET" .PL TJ.'UNG ... 1]...85-04 .'.
L P1 } 1 OF LOTS 1. 3, , 111,O\K .1.
..............................._.
C E � l3L � D'DIttP , IlV l.R., i & 3R, BLOCK ; a31'A»
M;'i'1 Af
A fllat`a-`l ?`�l. 1.,C3�::,. 1`ED ;`,C3„'I H AND .�s�ktl�t:.`3 ll �:J :�,lx�e?C.3RT .F-?!E VV r
!'�� ai,. 54 '. #l� �Yl�l�' ''s�'rx`?', r� �t`1.D l� k.S cidl.? tl}S'f�( <x `�` Y{ .W. r,l ..l
I:-1~`,I.l:`��,%}3i-.Ib1.I-3IZ1.1 C.',"•.'1"�' l,I�'T1`<'
(Chairrn ar-t Lyn,eh stepped down, an Vice-C'hairmr .-m 1 c-.-!thloff presided.)
1r. David Hughes, l',l.t.iot#. & sl�.�-hes, Inc,: representing ?pest ('reek Joint Venture Lind
Wes i,.rne' Ltd., resented the request for R,.eplatting of Tots t, 3, 13lock. 7.,
?'Vest a.rk Central Addition. I-le stated that the replattin was raf�cessitated hrcealusil�' the
;:state ztig;h=fFay T:3epartm-font would not approve the original location of the iingress/egress
1'r°orn . .J, 183 Service Road rebriofaslyapr)s.•vvecl c-era the final fiat Ile farthf>r raf?tec?
that they €gyres in the process of requesting that the origin,,J. sixty foot (60")
lmp.'res:/egress easerpent be abandoned z y the City.
'Mrs. Park r? ade a totion to recommend approval of the k
Replat of Lots 1, �, & 3, Bloc
T, V,'estp ark Cent.;"al Addition into Lots 11.1, �.R., & 3R, (Pik 1. We park c)
Addition, Subject to City Council approval of the abandonment of the si\t foot E.301j
ingress/egress e•-asemerIt.
In 'roan seconded the r1lotion, €ar-,c the vote is as follows:
Ayes-, lrs. Park, 5�;essrs, Ingram, dill. ,1eit.hloff, and iN-104i?lon
Mays: Nofle
Vice-C.haaimn an Deithloff deo-hared the motion carried.
Page Three Planning Zofiin Commission - <) 2i1if$.f y I5, 1985 1985-005
PUBLIC IIa ��tif.G ZC-:?5-it2 €�r,K l l?�,'l' O J.RILAND D �-EL O R,E.� T. INC.,
.......
�%l.'fa"1,",'JP,T!. 0.A €AGE , FOR A C HAi�GT OF ZONING ON PORTIONS Cl�l; TRACTS :3,
--- - i5 -
�� qq pp ff ee s f� ( 7 r q I 4 ACRES �y ----- ----
3AJ 3M., <3 7C�r.L \J e, .� _II', �3. -€t.�I`f:..t 1. SURVEY, I-'s-'. .�.f G.. J.i.'f ?1 .I.11:i7 L-.+ ' LAND,
...____.�._.W�.... A.................. .. ... ..
'z�l O'I'll' C;
Pav3 c l`i1ur - l}ltinning & Zoning Commission - January 15, 1:Mz-1 14 1,185-006
IV.
i- i*B1.TC I3EC1AV„N(! ._. f_+`f1YING .ASE NO. 85-04 — T-1E QflE0.!'`s.` OF e1`1 IMSEi A PARK JOIN17
q �t f '[ i TO-RA q� 3� ...d...... _2 is �( ?��. +s ( '( {� n !''� {�/�7 y7 Iii L .4
i!'l..f,�:/E`I�3�E, CflTAlV+C,E f P.� Iw�l' 3.•.��f�.7 ( �i l's}.l��CKS f.'3. 3'��.iLt....+iT611. 3-�, \.f1- , _::.SEA
01" 31°.1055 At RRES CJF' LAND` F1i.�)it1 i;�s�' �'Tt-I4II� UNIT
.._.... 7 q q 3 _ys-------FA---- !t -7--(----+t-,-- -q------s----q--(------- }} �s,1 ry `S{ F t--2- --a-----}----p--s-�----`-x--r-
l:lE'FLE.�l' .�llsM.' . !Z-3 ` .fi.i: i�ali.. 1 \.„i.iS`. 1 1J lLi I��'e��I�.i�3:�i I-A.b�LO -_1EYfE1' T
tit.zT.E .l'A�liis°Y A"I"TA.t;1-IED), LOCATED SOUTH AND Al.>>_tAcE ITT TO Qu
,.�ATT., llLli`
I� -�+ ( 1. q C� [ --q- \ ---s-----------------------•--------......------Ly---q----ry---q--�•-�--- tt"�e2 x T f ---------------'2------------=----..i(_--+�-,--r-�-'----F-
L.uiAT.-;S, EAST ?�Nl) .:\i.f,1%3;..� ,)ti�fl' `.1�.� I3AZI F,,OLS.1.J, NO 11TH T-i rt ly i.t Ai.?.�i�E\YLi l.'< 1 'F{J
fy.,'i.(.;l;POIN SUBDI'VISIOI�I, All:? I`'i?c'1` ,G ;SAP .AT)J'.t'�,��1��1`�'.. its �I��It�'I1 ltif�(.� z;.i'€:.# }.'l
Chairman Lynch explained the rules Land opened the pt,blic� YiF.<�,`'r>
Mr. `l'i.-n A;arren, Bayer & Associates, Pf;pr(--.,stinted Chelsea Park Joint Venture in X1;is
request. 14e stated t-.lu7. property has alroady= been platted for single f imilv ,,.tt lehed
units. The developer now waaits to increase the size of tile hoi-ne,`"s and reOluce the front
yards. He noted that they wished to an-iend their proposed developn..ent plan by
incre,asing the mulimu-n sq;.are footage of the units front 1,050 to 1,100 <<clUare feet.
Differences o= thi-� eur•rent CUD and the proposed I'D include inerew;ing 'tilt, ri-ininwal,
unit size; fron? ',50 SCw.lre feet to 1,100 square feet hilt the ntininni. m i'ouplet size to
be not less than 21250 Square feet; reducing the rninl I'll.i ;l side yard from 12 feed to
10 feet-, r'edue.iric the front buildint lime froln 25 feet to 15 filet on some lots; and
e.liminatinga the tuwnciround, parking in tile rear and allowing, the 'i?i';: tC'til;t.if3Ti Of
on ¢.he side. property line. He also x)inted out that r?L4rkin in the rear vards oi lots
l is ck 1.1. and 34 �� 35, !li£?el< 1) Fill not be; screeiic,fl or r^f>v£3t`ed f.�ee<:�i�se o#' €� rsf r�?t;t u�il
3taint<:!nt ace Agreeir--ent On a dr:iinaire
d:ha-'ra.,an Lynch pointed out that there ;i .note on the plans soiling `hat screening
will ti'e provided except r."hE'i'e noted.
There t eiri g no ,Addit.ii:m- l rpro onents. Chfl.ir la.-i Lynch asked- if there were- any
opponent S.
;, r, `olon Henley, 61,4 Kuy.l.i, -stated his cotleern olf the fw2t that the eievatior; behind
his fen.ye; i equal to the top of his fenee.
'i'v�i li.,tini N(--Anon, 2612 Kayli; and j'-;ear; S reet, 600 Cantevbury, C,38ked for
cat ion of the C"Irports in venation to tile`, current zoning and th-e ariariet; being
requested.
Chairman Lynch explf).ine l that the planned deve;lopnlent rec ueit t rel.aies more to ;turd
sntba 'ifs rind i':ninii-n--mm,m, sgimre 1oobige. ale stated that Sin"tilar !}.lnits could be
eonstr;ietf_�fl Bider the current zoning.. Tt t'fas further noted tlti-it the i,;s-ue re ardint; the
(_�flrpovts rel�ites to the eonstruet:ion of the .�arpc+vt I-)ein,:; perynitted on the sire property
line €In"-I does not "iff£:ct the rear propert, line. i'e asl•.:ed the do-veIO�E i'� f;nf�ifiE E'i' to
E:E}u.l$i.iii t.hE? ntb$.E' on the C}eveiopii1f31it rGE arding li at<'hing g,,r .f es.
'n r. �i`•m,rert stated they note is to .let contractors know that tie c;.ev Ioper Wants to Jkteep
the e':evations, down, It is intended thflt ttte yards sdope downvjJ)rd 1'14•on"i t:;zultE'£`i}ilxy t£s
tlle rear y:irElS. 3l i`liI'tirer Stated that tl�e f irthest par` :ii;ir pac will Y}f t+ n feet frai�
the rc?>,tI' property line.
Therc, be'in`; no t%ddi'€iont3l opponents, '_`t3? irniaCi ..j- E'.l% G:li; C'E, the pilh'.le hC;lrii-s-'.
Page Five - Planning & Zoning C!-ommission - January 15, 1985 1.985 7
-- 3�� .....�%....................—— ..................
The Commission meniibers o'enexally affreed that the proposed zoning would be an
C,
ad,var and there
�tage over the current coning because the �,omes wou.1d; be larger,
be more , rear --rd; wherewzz, the, curverit zoning would provide for
green space in the re, 1-1
par,Lzin- up to the Tear property line.
Mr. Deithloff made a motion to recommend approval of Zoning Case No. 85-04, subjec;
to !?or Tyler',-, letter dated January 11, 1.985, an the arnerided aiinifnum unit Size of
1,100 s(mare feet.
Mr. Ingram seconded the motion;, and the vote is as follows:
Ayes- Nlrs. Parl,, Messrs. Hill, Ingram, Deithloff, and
N av s- None
Abstenl-ions.- Chairman
Chairman Lynch (Jeclared the motion carrk-,A.
V.
PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE O. 85-01 - REQUEST OF Q.F—i-).C., INC., FOR
----------------------------------------------------------
HAiNGE 01' ZONING ON A. PORTION OF TIZAcT Vl BLOCR 15, OA WOOD
ADIL)ITION, A TOTAL OF 0.478 ACRES' OF LAND, FROINT C-2 110
U:�......... AND AREA OF SKIN, T.,0CAT-PL) Al TuT
........... ............------------------------------
................. ---------------...... D V
........................
SOUTI-1EAST C 0 R N E 0 F �V. E U L,E S B AN D ail 1 kl 0 N S
................
-j( -Lring and.. explained 'tile rule-s.
Chairman Lynch opened the public I -,�fj
'.:.:r. am Rozzen, representing Q.F.D.C., Ine.9 stated that the sign pole-s. have beer,.
u Willi,
on The property sinee 1,962. The station was originally a Shell Service Station. It later
became (,onoco arid is (3'uM The station was closed recently fo-, remodeling .,:-or
f1pproxiniatelay 19 Months. `11he.v 'have reopeiied the stntio,i and nt)w request to place
a on the existing Poles whic=h fire abOUt 30 ft,,et in height and would ble a total of
N-1.12 feet to the top of the proposed sign.
Chaim-. an Lvnch asked hirn why they felt a. sign of that height is tleededi at thz-it
M
location.
-�ary for visibility on W-'. Euless Blvd, and that
Mr. il,'.,ozzen state" the heivht is necess
mos' of the signs in that area were of a comparable height.
Thlere being no additional proponents, C1,8irman Lyfieh asked, for any opponerits,.
Mr. Bob Wood, -.507 Sirnnilons, stated he does not want traffic to be entice6 into the
-fie ig"llborhood.
M.r. Frank P)ouglass, 5302 Martin Lane, stated he is not really for or against the request.
0
1-111e felt there was a lot of hard work put into the current sign ordinawer,, and if it is
se A for that high of a sign
still valid, it shouid be adhered to. He could not the nee
on, filwy. -1.0.
Mr. I•Jiioht pointed: out that the Current sign ordliflan<'Q -allows sign- if a nmxim�um
height of 30 feet ;:md ,. niaxirnum area of 50 squmre feet. A Sp(?cific -U�e 1-lermit allows
for a greater hei�,.!-ht and/or area if approve(-i. If the variance is not approved, the poles
tvill liave to be rernoved.
Manning T
Pa,-.ye Six - Manning & Zoning (Commission - Jarluary 1.5, 1.985 19815-008
...........................I............................. ........-
There being no odditional opponents, Chziirman Lynch closed the public hearing.
The (`o-nmis.sion members were in general agreement that a Sign of tbat height i?"ras not
needed at that loe'ation.
T"Ir, lsi ra.irl made a -notion to recommend denial of Zoning, Case No. 85-01 as pres-ented.
m RA
r. '.,ill secorided the nlotion, and the vote is as follows:
ill-es: 'Ylzrs. Park, Pvlessrs. -Hill, Ingram, Dei.thloff. T-;ynch, & PlIcB.1illorl
Nays: None
C h a ir man Lynch declared the rnotion carried.
Vt.
ADJOURNMENT
Thern being no further busifiess to discuss, the meeting of the Plarming 6, Zoning
m 1a
mi"Siorl was cdjoutmed at 9:10 P.M.
..........................