Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-01-06 1987-001 AGENDA REGULAR SING Euless Planning & Zoning Commission 201 N. Ector Drive Euless, Texas January 6, 1987 7:00 p.m. - Pre-Cotm?iission Meeting 7:30 p.m. - Call to Dreier for Co3mniss:i.on Consideration of Scheduled Items P1.1MGE OF ALLEGIANCE - pit. Jack H ill TNVOCA`ION -- Mr-. John Deithloff APPROVAL OF NII+iTMES -- Regular Meeting Dated December 16, 1986 NEW BUSINESS I. 'CONSIDER PLAT ABANDONMENT Consideration of Plat: Abandonment of Lots 1.1-.%-1­_..8_8f B.Iock.A,- Arbor. Glen Addition, located on midway Drive between Fuller-Wiser Road and North :lain Street. Il. "CONSIDER PLATTING #P-86-32 Final plat for Arbor Ellen Addition, totaling 15.08 acres of land, located on Midway Drive between Fuller-Wiser- Rd. and N. Main Street. III. CONSIDER PLATTING - #P-86-.34 Replat of Midway Square-, Phase III, from Lot 2R, Block F into bets 2RA & 2RB, flock F, Midway Square, Phase III totaling 0.9159 acres, located at the southwest: corner of Harwood Road and Fuller-Wiser Road. IV. REPORTS Review of Proposed Zoning Ordinance. 198 7-002 RFLULAR HMTNG Planning & Zoning Comission January b, 1987 CALL TO ORDER The re.gul-ar meeting of the Planning Fx Zoning Comm-1ssicn was Called to order at 7:3£3 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Euless City Hall by Chairman Larry Ingram. MEMKF6 & ST"F PRFSFXT HERS ABSENT Larry Ingram John Deifhloff Jack Hill. Ken B lsinger Billy Owens Carl Tyson James Knight, City Engineer Bill. Hepworth, Assistant City Engineer Had Tyler., Senior Planner Jim Mckanna, Project Engineer Valerie Keel.en, Staff Secretary VI:SI:TO&S Reg Crump Jim O'Brien Steve Grude Pan 'young Glen Irby and other interested citizens PUgM OF AURGIANCE The pled-ge of allegiance was .led by Mr. .Jahn Deithlof .s. I:NVOCATTON The :i.3zvocation was given by Mr. Jack Hill.. APPROVAL OF HINUTK9 The minutes of the regular meeting dated December 16, 1.986, were approved as written. 1987-00218 REGULAR MEETII+' Planning A Zoning Commi.ss:ion. January 5, 1987 GALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to i Chambers of Euless City B�71 by ordr-r at 7.30 p.m. in the ConnC Chairman Larry Ingram. MEMBERS & STAFF PRESENT M BERS ABSENT Larry Ingram Johan Deithl.off Jack hill Kerr Balsinger. Billy Owens Carl Tyson James Knight, City Engineer Bill Hepworth, Assistant City Engineer Rod Tyler, Senior Planner Jim AicKanna, Project Engineer Valerie Keelen, Staff Secretary VISITORS Reg Crump Jim O'Brien Steve Coude Ron Young Glen Irby and other interested citizens PLEDGE OF ATJ.EGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was led by Air. Jack Bill, ROGATION The Invocation was given by Mr. John Deithloff. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting dated December 16, 1986, were approved as written. PLANNING & ZONING FISSION JANUARY 6 1987 PAGE TWO 1987-003 I. CONSIDER PLAT ABANDONKENT OF LOTS 1 - 88, BLOCK A, ARBOR GLFN ADDI- TADDI- TION., LOCATED ON MIDWAY DRS BETWEEN FULLER-WISER ROAD AND NORTH MAIN STRKE°T. Mr. Reg Crump of 16475 Dallas Parkway, Dallas, Teas, presented this request.. He stated that they were requesting the current plat be abandoned so that a new plat, in accordance with the current site plan, could be approved. There being no further comments from the Commission, Chairman Ingram stated lie would entertain a motion. Mr. Deithloff made a motion to approve the plat abandonment, as pre- sented, subect to the terms of Mr. McKanna's letter of December 31 , 1986. Mr. Dull seconded the motion and the vote was as follows- Ayes: Messers. Deithloff, Hill, Balsinger, Owens, Ingram & Tyson Nays: None Chairman Ingrate declared the motio¢x carried. II. CONSIDER PLA`9"T1NG - #P-86-32 - FINAL PLAT AND ENGINEERING PLANS FOR ARBOR GLEN ADDITION, TOTALING 15.08 ACRES OF LAND,, LOCATF.D ON MIDWAY DRIVE BETWEEN FULLER-WISER ROAD AND NORTH MAIN STREET Mr. Reg Crump of 16475 Dallas Parkway, Dallas, Texas, presented this -request. There being no questions nor comments from the Commission, Chairman Ingram stated he would entertain a motion. Mr. full made a motion to approve #P-86-32 as presented. Mr. Balsinge:r seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: .Ayes; Messers. Hill., Ba.lsinger, Owens, Deithloff, Ingrattt & Tyson Nays: None Chairman Ingrate declared the motion carried. 1087-004 PNG & ION NG Q ISSICIN 100ARY 5 1987 PAGE THREE TTI. CONSIDER PLATTING #P-86-34 - REPLAT OF MIDWAY SQUARE PRASE TIT:, FROM LOT 2R, Ply_ F, INTO IS.`S 2RA die 2RR, BLOCK F, TOTALING 0.9 159 ACRES, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CCRKKR OF BARWOOD ROAD AND F1 IJYR-WISER ROAD Mr. Ron Young, Redd/Young Engineering & Surveying, Inc. , and Mr.. Glen Irby, National Convenience Stores, .Inc. . presented this request. Mr. Irby stated that the lot being created behind the Stop and Go was being planned for a 4-bay car Wash. Chairman Ingram stated that if the Commissioners had no further questions or comments, he would entertain a motion. Mr. Deithloff made a motion to approve #P-86-34 as presented. Mr. Hill seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messers. Deithloff, Hill, Tiaisinnger, Ingram & Tyson Nays; Mr. Owens Chairman .Ingram declared the motion carried. Pair. Owens stated that he was not in favor of granting the r•eplat because he dad not think a car wash was the hest use at this location. V. REPORTS Chairman Ingram opened the discussion of the proposed zoning ordinance which had been included in their packet. Per. Rod Tyler, Senior Planner for the City of Euless, presented the Commission with a report which sumr<narized and discussed the major differences between the proposed ordinance and the current ordinance. Beginning with the P.ha med Development section, Mr. Tyler explained that the PD district being proposed by than City's consultant was very; similar to the curretnt. PD in many respects; however, there were some major differences, For example, the proposed PD district requires a less detailed site plan than currently required; however, the proposed PD district also requires a Specific Use Permit be approved by the City Council before any building permit can be :issued. He stated that the proposed Specific Use Permit: requires a very detailed site plan. He stated that notice of public hearing would be required to be sent to property) owners at both the initial planned development zoning stage and at the specific use permit stage. 1987-005 PLANNII+TG FOUR Mr. Tyler there want over the proposed "Specific Use Permits" section by stating that SP's would be handled similarly to how they are handled now; however, because SP's are permits that are issued by the Council, the City Council would have to find that the eight conditions specifically stated in the SP ordinance had been satisfied before they could grant the permit. Additionally, if any one of the eight condi- tions had not been satisfied, the Council would have no alternative but to deny the permit. Mr. Tyler stated that there were certain t bings that needed to be changed within the "Specific Conditions by Use Types" section and certain areas needing discussion by the Commission. The Commission agreed to the corrections Mr. Tyler pointed out, and discussed at. great length some of the other conditions that were to be imposed on various .Land uses. It was decided wording should be added that would dictate hoer much and where vehicles waiting to be serviced may be stored for auto service and repair garages. Mr. Owens stated a deep concern that such re- quirements may be too restrictive and may force out some of the less expensive garage operations. Mr. Tyler pointed nut that the consultants shad. proposed requiring 1,0€30 square .feet of common open space for each townhome dwelling. He state: that currently the City had no such requirement. The Conimis- sion felt ghat, though this requirement seemed quite stiff, it should N2, retained., the Commission, however., requested Lode Technology to look at reducing the amount of open space required per dwelling unit to a .less stringent amount. Another major difference pointed out by Mr. 'Tyler was in the sub- section of "Crops & Livestock". He stated that the proposed ordinance was much stricter than the current ordinance in that it does not allow the keeping of livestock, or poultry within 100 feet of any property line on panels containing less than five (5) acres. He stated that the current ordinance only prohibits the housin of livestock within 10+0 feet of any property line. Mr. Tyson stated a concern that such a restriction would not prevent livestock on large parcels from congregating next to adjacent resi- dents. After further discussion, the Commission decided the proposed restriction on livestock was adequate and would solve the problem currently being experienced. The next section Mr. Tyler reviewed with the- Commission dealt with private recreational facilities such as pools and clubhouses for apartments. He asked the Commission whether or not they felt it was important to -require private recreational facilities for all apart- ments and/or toynhomes. lie stated that, currently, there. were roc} requirements for these types of uses W apartments. Again, after :lengthy discussion by the Commission, it was decided that requirements for private recreational facilities should be placed on all apartments 1987-006 T7�i & yLG /TW7 ON O l3yE F33LtJAR3 arid, Mr. Tyler should instruct Code Trichnology to prepare wording to require such. Mr. Tyler went on to explain the way the current and proposed ord-i- nances were structured, satc�liite reception dishes were allowed within all distr:i -ts provided they met certain requirements. One major difference between the cirrrent and proposed ordinances is that the proposed ordinance does not provide a mechanism, that would give the C:r.ty Couicil authority to override the setback and height requirements as provided in the current ordinance. Should. the satellite dish requirements in the proposed ordinance be deemed unfair, the only recourse would be to amend the ordinance. During the discussion about masonry requirements, ?fir. Tyler pointed out that the proposed ordinance, after some adjustment, would be virtually the same. as the current ordinance. Mr. Ingram Stated hay had been made award that there was some Council concern that even our current ordinance ,was too lax. He asked the Commission how they felt about our current masonry requirement. fir. Tyson stated he felt thee. masonry requirements s1lould be _irc:reased, but whether an :Lncreased amount of :masonry was needed or all the sides of the building should bri iraasonry he slid not know. After further discussion by the Commis- sion, it was determined that the minimum masonry requi rt_imencs were adequate and should be left. alone. Mr. Tyler briefly went over the performance standards stating this section primarily provided profectio:n to properties that are adjacexrt to such uses that may create noise, vibration, glare or smr�ke. He stated this section specifies the maximum limits that rises may emit such nuisances. Mr. Tyler stated that. the parking requirements proposed by Code 1ec_hirioloa,y were basically the sar[rri as our current ordinance, but were much :noire clear and concise. fie further staund that fewer parking gxoups were proposed than are found in our current ordinance, which was primarily due to removal of redundant: requirements. fie stated that the onlyP major- eb.ange the consultants were pr<rpc sing in this section was a change in the number- of parking spaces rrtquired per dwelling unit for multi-family units. Current requirements are two (2') parking space; per unit, but Coda Technology proposes one {1� parking spa,Ce per dwelling unit, plus one-half space per bedroom; and one guest parking space per fire (5) dwelling units. He stated that. this formula was more complicated, but more directly corresponds to the demand for parking. Mr. Balsinger asked if the proposed parking ordinance would prohibit parking on unpaved areas. If not., he wanted Code: Technology to look at the possibility of irrtc:grating such requirements into these ordi- nances. Mr. Tyler briefly went. over the landscape requirements stating that the Consultants. had completely rewritten this section from what had been provided earlier in order to more closely align with the comments P�T £] G �t�:5,S�0 ,iATtIt4ti' 197Ai six made by the Commission at their last meeting. He stated the proposed ordinance requires 202 of the street ward (i.e. that area between the building and the street) to be landscaped, and contain orate 12-foot: tree per 1,000 square foot of street yard. Concern was raised by the Commission as to whether or not this require- ment would be too strict and much discussion ensued. Mr. Tyler stated that he would Look at a few office buildings and developments in the area and report back to the Commission on how they compared with this proposed, ordinance. There, being no further discussion between the Commissioners or Mr. Eyler, the meeting was adjourned at 9;22 p.m. Chairman A, �r I tea` - - - - - - - - - - - - - -