Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-11-06 AGENDA NOVEMBER 6, 1990 Planning & Zoning C,tJnxtission City of Euless 201 North Ector Drive Euless, Texas 7:!S - Pre-Commission Meeting 7:30 - Call to Order for consideration of Scheduled .items PLErX,- OF AlAY.G.1:ANCE? T Mr. George Cahn INVOCATION - Mr. C:ar.1. Tyson 1. R1?PI AT - OP-90--16 BACC.,ARAC INEEEISTRIAL PARK Request of Resolution Trust Corporation for a. replat of i_n t s 1--6 of the Baccarac Industrial Park II. ODNSIDKRANION OF WA#.1}I+EENT TO ZONING ORDINA,NCUE Consideration to amend Section 7-10116) of tho Euless Zoning ordinance which regulates accessory buildings MINUTES NOVEMBER 6, 1990 CITY OF EULESS PI,ANN_€:NG & WNTW3 (70MMI SIGN 203 NORTH ECTOR DRIVE E.€}LESS, TEXAS G,ALJ. 1`0 OPJ)R €'ie' meeting of tote PIa.nring & Zoning CCSiTeCE1iss-;on was c al.1-ed to order by Chairman Jack }Till aL 7:30 p.m. , in. the Council C}•.aml)ers f)JE the Euless P uflic.ir:al Buildi ng. MMERS & STAF7 PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT ;Tack. Hill, C1ia.i.rman fen Bal.>ing;:::t- Bill-y C-gents LarrV Tn;rart John Deith1cif-E Carl Tyson :l'ohn Craig, Di-rector of Development Rock Tyler, Assistant Director of -Dieveiopment AIr Mc;Karma, .E;. , Pro ect E.:zg.i_r:eer `peat. Culbertson, Recordinlg Secretary VISITORS Victor Blood PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ?`h.e pledge c:f al l.eg.i arce was J.pd. by Mr. . f,E:it:rge Zahn INVOCATION The invocation ;eras given by Per. Carl Tyson. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The miFiF:l±.es of the rciGti -i3r "itE:et:ing datl—ed Octu'r-er 2, 1990, were approved as w rit l en. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION, NOVEMBER 6 1990 PAGE TWO I. REQUEST OF RESOLUTION TRUST COMPt7RATI©N FOR A REP:LAT OF LOTS I-6 OF THE NG RAC INDUSTRIAL Pte. Mr. Victor Brood, Peebles & Associates, .F;''•`-p.I;esenting Resolution Trust i Corporation, stated they were applying for a rep lat of Lots 1--6 of the Bacca;rac industrial Park. The existing Lot 1 will be divided into two t 2f smaller .Lots; Lots 2 & 3 will be combined into a. single lot; Lot 4 will remain ?unchanged; and Lots 5 & 6 will be combined. He stated the reason for not changing the size of Lot 4, was that a contract for sale is now pending. Mr. Blood stated that at the request of the City of Euless, the utility easement at the .rear of Lots 2, 3 & 6 has been extended to S.H. 10 for easier access. The existing 30' drainage easement at the rear of prcpo d int.s I & 2 has been reduced tc, 15' which getter compl.i.ment:, the existing drainage improvements. Mr. i'al.c.-:od stated. that the current zoning requii.—as a larkds cape strip along Saec.arac Court and along S.H. 10 and to accomodate this, a 10 landscape easement had been included can the replat. Mr. 11son inquired as to the reasoning of changing the drainage easement from 30' to 15' . Mr. Blood explained that the Futilities behind proposed Lots i & 2 had been installed. That a. concrete drainage ditch had been redesigned with the development of the property to the south. He stated that he had spoken with the City's s Engineer who stated the 16' easement would be sufficient and would unencuF ber that section of the lots inhere the easement had been reduced. Fir. Deitzl_of.f inquired as to why the "as--built" was included i.rk packet. Per. McKanna Stater the "as-built" was provided to Show that no encroachments were being created by this repl.at. Chairman Hill asked for furt her comments or questions. There being none he called for a motion. Mr. Deith of: made a motion to approve repl.at AP-90-16 as ;presented. Air. Zahn seconded the motion and the vote was as follow: Ayes: Messers. Hilt, Owens, Deithloff, Zahn & Tyson Nays: None Chairman Hill declared t.?ski_: motion carried. PLANNING & SING COMMISSION, NtIWMER 6, :19901 PAGE `.TIREE CONSIDERATION OF AKENDKKNT TO WAdING OPWI:NAN I? Chairman Hill stated the next item on th; agenda was. consiAleration of a i-inding Section "7-101. (6) of time Zoning Ordinance whzc: re�ulate s accessory .bm ...ld Lngs. Mr. Owens moved to appro o the elraft resolution as presented in the Pl.z-Erining & Zoning Packet. chairman dill called for a second. Mr. `1'4rson & Air. Deith.loff asked for clar.i.fi.cat c;n oE t}le _proposed amendment :before ,approval. Mr. . Dei.th.l.c:ff recT, .-ted clarific:atio_r be r:i::Ede by Mr. Tyler. Mr. Tyler espl.a.i..red that due ti-_-) changes In con-hint-pity values, needs and desires, the Zoning Ordinance needs to be reviewed on a continuin bas..s to ensr;r• M?, tiP,.g tni:- nee 's & -Ent.erests of the ci.tizemrs. He stated t:ha'— a citizen's recenE -equest of i;ity "o, nc' . to rev:.'-kJ the re;l.; s uover.ni.nq acce: : =._,ry bu.ild_ng;s prompted this proposed Ewie xlment. Mr. Tyler stated that the gi-ne.::a.l complaint-s fro;E; "Ile public were th; t the requireirents for accessory buildings are too exc s: xve, 11e read Section -1L1tuf of the Zoning Orni:xanc:e which is now in force. 'r-he primary c-omplaint from the builders is that the required 5(e' front set back is becoming iIncreasing.l.y more Jiff -cult to comply wit« as l.c,ts are gc-..Uif g slnal=er. Mr. Tyler staved that the .ntent •:) t- ,e 80' set-back is to keep the acces-s-ory b,3 illinq be mif_d the Em,air: structure; therefore, to alleviate the problemn of complying w.i.t.€: this requ.i.rement. and shri-nking lot ,.:.ze. l-..e�_ff prc,v:_.res trE;af a_:cessory buildings be required to, be setbacks 80' or behind the main st-ucture. Mr. Tyler stated that another cca'amon comp.lalmlt. 7.s fix' Side yard seti::ack. Ho ;>ard, th{: minimum side setbacks for sinale family un is are t on one side and `9' on r�Ac Other. �`i1.i.S :l i rEC:{�Im i L:t rit wi h the a' :etbac"K from the s c;.e and rear property I-nes for accessory buildings. The, prinmry concern regarding the E,' setback .f.ro.m the property owners d that whe-n the accessory build-ing, is placed 6' from. the property _ire, it is quite often: !.n the mi.d.al.e_ of the rear vard which reduces ­�'.cre$.t:ional spa 'e. 0,ne solLiLion the Commission could consider 1> to reduce or el urinate the s-Lde setback requirements for accessory :::1i.l.d.i.r•gs. Mr. Craig e xpla.fined that any building over 400 square feet must .meet the Uniform -Building Code and mast be on a permanent fou dation. Mr. Deft doff incraireµ as to how many requests to t:h-Mge t-his section of the ordinance hE;d been :ivade. PLANNIhQ & ZONING COMMISSIO2$, NO ER 6, 1990 - RAGE POUR Mr. Craig approximated V requests per year. Mr. Tyler stated that we have had only one formal request; however, The majority of complaints are dropped when the citizen becomee a aware of City Council's involvement. Mr. Deithloff asked if the number of requests justified amending the ordinance. Chairman Hill inquired as to how many violations would, be .lea-red up if the amendment were adopted. Air. Craig_ stated that if the ordinance were amended to 3' setback for accessory buildings, it would be comparable to the surrounding city's ordinances and approximately 50 known existing violations would be cleared. € ey :stated that quite often no action is taken on these violations unless a complaint has been filed. After some discussion, Mr. `€`yson stated he felt the current 6' setback for accessory buildings should he changed t o 4' to be consistent with the 4' minimum setback for main structures in the h--J. district. €-I£e also did not see a need tt-) prohibit certain accessory buildings that are 3 ' from the property line from being on permanent foundation, but rather a requirement to have accessory buildings located within utility easements be of a portable nature. Mr. Owens suggested the ordinance be ..ef._ as it currently reaps because. of the few IYLY££J"�:er of complaints that. have been received, an the buildings currently not in compliance have eitlie r been "grand£athered" or can be torn down. Chairman Hill stated he felt the matter needed to be addressed. 'fir. Owens stated that the staff had done a tremendous job and this was undoubtedly a "canned" resolution that ?ether. cities EiSt::. Cleo stage'' that he felt the lawyer took it off a shelf and nave it to the City staff which was then presented to this Commission�as sxorkir:g well in other cities and should work well in Euless. Mr. Tyner stated that this proposed resolution is similar to the City's current ordinance with few changes ,made to .accolri nodate the needs of the community. . Mr. Tyson suggested the resolution be changed to allow accessory buildings to be placed up to the 4' side and rear ;_property lines. He also suggested the resolution be changed to allow one-story accessory buildings Less than 300 square feet within 3' the s.idie art..] rear- -e lines and to allow the accessory building to be located within easements if they are portable. Chairman Hill called for a rroti.on. YLANNING ZONING COMMISSION,SSION, NOVEMBER 6, 1990 - PAGE FIVE Mr. Owens r:10ved to %prove the resolu ion wl'Uh the following changes: Allow all accessory bu-1.,.Gings to. be w .thIn 4° -.:)f the ;...:r and rear proper :y line. 2. Allow access bu d ng g c eater tha, i` i?:t less - r thus the 4' from the side or rear property lire to be on a permanent foundation vml.e>s t{xE:y a.re 1ocati-d wit iin ar; easenent; in such case they rust be portable buildings. Mr, Tyson seconded the motion and the vote was as fol'ows_ Ayes: MesseAs. Hill, Owens, Deithloff, Zahn and Tyson Nays: None Chairman F :l .. declared the motion carried. RlE?PEJWI"3 & AIXJOURNMF-Wf The C:o1mi is ion was urged to attend the C(Yi P .anning k Zoning `.;'raining Seri;? _3' th'_ City's eKpom ... They 'viler£: also reminded o1 the Boards C'oimission Orientation 4 Appreciation meeting on November. '12, 1.990. There being no further business to conduct, the meeting adjourned at- =i) p.m. `,,lc.minutes\I A-6-9G.P&Z