The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1988-01-19 .AGINTDA REGULAR MEETING Euless Planning & Zoning Commission 201 N. Ector Drive Euless, Texas January* 19, 1958 7: 15 p.m. - Pre-Commission Meeting :30 p,m. -- Call to ,"order for Comniss i.on Consideration of Scheduled Items PLEDGE OLD ALLEGIANCE - Mr, Carl Tyson INVOCATION ° Mr. Billy Owens APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting Dated January 5, 1988 N Y BUSINESS I. CONSIDER PIA.TTING - P-#88--01 Replat of a portion of Lot A, Block 1, Euless .Industrial Park into Lot A-R, Block 1, Euless industrial. Park, containing (h531 acres. The property is generally located on the west side of Stanley Drive, just south of S.H. 10. II. PUBLIC HEARING - ZC-#88-03 Request for a change of zoning on a portion of Tracts 1B & 01, of the E. Taylor Survey, A-1550, 11MMi R-1 (Single Family Detached Dwelling District) TO R.-1-A (Single Family Attached District.) & C--2 (Community Business Altrict), consisting of 13.46 :acres. The property is generally located south of Glade Road, north of Nutmeg Lane and west of Oak Hollow Addition. 111. REPORTS RECWLAR MERYING Planning & Zoning Conmission Jar nary 19, 1988 CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order at 7.30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Euless City Tall by Chairman Larry Ingram. MEMBERS & STAFF PRESENT iTRU RS ABSENT Larry Ingram. furl Tyson Jack Hill Ken Baisinger George Zahn .John Delthloff Billy Owens James might, City Engineer Rod Tyler, Senior Planner Valerie Keel.en, ,Staff Secretary VISITORS Sean Rowe Monte & Carol Ca es Jack & Wanda Gerard David Rowe David G. Hughes, Jr. Lisa Fei_tise Kim Bays Emily Rowe Paul & Diane Kerest:i.ne Seth Kolsling Tim & Angela, Ledbetter Nancy Lynn and other interested c:i.t:i.zeDs PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was led by Mr. Larry Ingram. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Air. Billy Owens. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the regular Meeting dated January 5, 1988, were approved as written. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 19 1388 PAGE TWO I. CONSIDER FLATTING - P-#88-01 -- REPLAT OF A PORTION OF LOT A, BLOCK 1, Ei1LESS INDUSTRIAI, PARK INTO LOT A-R, BLOCK 1, EULESS INDUSTRIAL PARK, CONTAINING 0.531 ACHES. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF STANLEY DRIVE, JUST SOUTH OF S.H. 10. Mr. David Hughes, Jr. , P.E. , Elliott & Hughes, Inc. , presented this request on behalf of Dell. Masonry, Inc. Mr. Hughes explained that Dell Masonry currently offices out of Richland Bills but was planning on moving 'this operation_ to Euless. He stated the only public improvements needing to be made were a water and sewer trip, and the contractor was prepared to start work on theses improvements as soon as this request received final approval. There teeing no questions for Mr, Hughes, Chairman Ingram called for a motion. Mr. Hill made a motion to approve P488-01. Mr. Zahn seconder: the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messer.s. Hill, Zahn, Owens & Ingram Nays: None Chairman Ingram declared the motion carried. IT. PUBLIC EAR-LNG - ZC-188-03 - REQUEST FOR A. CHANCE OF ZONING ON A PORTION OF TRACTS IB & .I.BI, OF THE E. TAYLOR SURVEY, A--1550, FROM R-I. (SINGLE FAMILY DETACH DWELLING DISTRICT) TO R-1-A (SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED DISTRICT) & C--2 (COMMUNITY BUSINE"SS�D:ISTRICT), CONSISTING OF 13.46 ACRES. THE PROPERTY IS CTWERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF C,I,ADF ROAD„ NORTH: OF NUT74EG LANE AND W�I?`:ST OF OAK HOLIDW ADDITION. Chairman Ingram explained the rules governing a public hearing and opened the public hearing. Mr. David C. Hughes, jr. , P.E. , Elliott & Hughes, Inc. , presented this re(poest- on behalf of First Baptist Church Of Euless. Mr. Hughes explained the R IA :-.mAng Ind beer, chosen to allow optii um flexibility, and the C-2 zoning fit into the city's future land use plan. Mr. Htrgries stated he would be glad to answer any questions the t:ornd issiorers might have and also reserved the right to answer any questions that may come up from any opposition to this request. There being no questions for Mr. Hughes, Chairman Ingram called for any additional proponents. (here being none, Chairman Ingram: called for any opponents. Mgr. David Rowe, 2901 Cli-ai.reinont, e-xplaiiied that it was his ur-rder- standi.ng when he purchased in the Oak Hollow area this property was church property and might possibly become a recreation center one day, He felt this change would lower the quality of the wholes area, 9' 7'LARNINC & ZONING COKKIS SION ll6CNIBER 152 1987 PACE THRKE Mr-. Dwight Thompson, 2908 Lemon Lane, expressed concern for the increased density. He felt this would bring more traff:i.c into the area, thus, bring down the value of the existing homes. Additionally, he stated that the church was only rezoning the land for speculative purposes, trying to up the value of tl-c+_ land to pay their debts, host at the expense of the neighborhood. Mrs. Emily Rowe, 2901 Clairemont, explained her main objection was the C-2 zoning. She felt there was a good bit of empty commercial areas existing at the corner of Glade load and Main Street, as well as empty buildings, and did not see a need for additional commercially zoned land until these vacant areas were built on and occupied. In response to a question by Mr. Hill, Mrs. Rowe explained that she was not aware that a good portion of the vacant land at the entrance and to the east of Oak Hollow Addition was its fact already zoned commercial. Mr. Jeffrey M-i.11i_man, 318 Kessler Drive, expressed concerns for the increased traffic that accompanied increased density. He expl.ai_ned there were a lot of children in this area and did not feel this would be a safe situation. He also expressed concern with the ;-2 zoning and stated that Fie, as with Mrs. Howe, was toot aware of the. current C-2 zoning around the teak Hollow Addition. He felt commercial zoning had reached. a saturation paint in the area and did not feel that additional C-2 zoning would be a wise decision. Mr. `Tim Ledbetter, 311 K.ess-1 -r Drive, also objected to the. proposed zoning change, citing that statistics show the higher the density, the higher the ;:-r.i.aaze rate. Mr. Ledbetter was also concerned about the decline in the property values due to adjacent commercial property and increased residential densities. Mr. Jim Sturges, 108 Nutmeg Lane and Mrs. Wanda Gerard, 2411 Claire:- mont Drive, stated they were opposed to this request because of the increased traffic and the reasons stated by others before them. Chairman Tngram c_-alle-d f:,r a shoo of hands from the audience for everyone who was opposed to the request and agreed with the issue: raised by the opponents of the request; there were approximately 25 hands raised. Chairman Ingram asked if there was any one representing the church present that right be able to address the concerns and questions raised by the residents of the area. Mr. :veal. Adams, 201 'Tra:i..l.wood, attorney for the church, explained it has always been the intent of the church to resale approximately half of the 19 acres they currently own. He explained the reason for the zoning change request was to allow for the maximum flexibility in terns of future use options. in response to a question by Mr. Owens, Mr. Adams stated be had never heard of anyone with any authority to speak for the church state that any of the 19 acres would be donated. to the city for a recreational facility. Chairman Ingram then closed the public hearing and opened the discussion amongst the Commissioners. PLANNING & 7AMW—, COMMISSION JANUARY 19 1388 PAGE FOUR Mr. Owens felt that although the possibilities of such zoning were appealing, he had reservations because not enough information had been established for the intended use. :'qtr. Zahn had no problem wit], the. request for the C-2 zoning because sometiarie in the near future Glade Road would. become a major traffic carrier. He also felt that the R-14 classification would give the flexibility the developer was looking for yet, protect the neighboring citizens from the multi-family use of apartments. Mr. Tngram felt the VIA classification was a considerate more on the churches part since this is :a more desirable use than the H-2 classi- fication, Mr. il:i.l.l had no problem with the C-2 area or the g.OA except, he would prefer a CUD classification. Discussion then ensued regarding ng the purpose and use of Community Unit Development #;,CUD 3. Due. to the site plan requ:i rement. of the CUD zoning greatly reducing the Flexibility the church was looking for, this idea was abandoned, At sir. Owens request, Chairman Ingram c,a11r.d for a show of hands of the people in the audience who were against this type of development in particular, or any development at .all. The results were that everyone was opposed to this particular type of deve:slopmeot and nct just development of the property in general, There being no further discussion between the Commissioners, Chairman Ingram stated he wo.a.ld entertain a motion. Mr. Hill made a motion to approve ZC-488-03 as presented. The motion died for a lack of a second. The e::c]aaa Assioners them discussed other possible ;toning alternatives for the property. It was determined that the 'R-1A zoning elassifi cation was compatible with the surrounding area, arid, in the future, the next request on this property could be for a much greater density if this request was not approved.. Questions arose as to =whether a portion of the request could be approved and another portion tabled until all the Commissioners were present, or the possibilities of approving a portion of the request and denying the remainder. After more discussion, On was determined that voting on only a portion of this item was not in the best inte- rest of the City or applicant. At this point the Commission took a five. minute :recess. Upon returning, there was further discussion amont the Commission after which Chairman Ingram stated he would entertain another motion. PLAI+i#+TNG & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 19 1988 PAGE F VF Mr. Zahn made a motion to approve ZC- 88-03 as presented. Mr. Hill. seconded the motion and the vote was as follows- Ayes: Messers. Zahn, Pill, Ingram Nays: ?fir. Owens III. RKPORT There was noth_i.ng to ri-sport. IV. ADJOURNMENT Them no further busitiess to conduct, the meeting adjourned at 9. 11. p.m. It