The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-10-06 AGENDA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION City of Euless Council Chambers---Building"B" 201 N. Ector Drive,Euless,Texas 76039 OCTOBER 6,l.998 5:30 P.M.-P e-Coin ussion Meeting,(Conference.Room--Building"C") TOO P.M,-Call to Carder(Council Chambers F3tiitding"B") PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE-C"orminssioner McMullan INVOCATION--Commissioner Ovmns APPROVAL OF MINUTES---Regular meetings of September 1, 1 908 AGENDA ITEMS: ITEM.I PUBLIC HEARING -- ZONING CHANGE - 998-29-W - 121 GATEWAY DISTRICT Public input regarding the request of the City of Euless for a manii:ts,change from their current zoning classifications Jdm H.Havitis Survey,Abstract 685,Traces 1, IE 1, 1E1A, 1.13I, IE, 1E2, ', 3, Jesse Doss Survey, Abstract 441, Tracts 2, 3, 3A, 313, 3C, 4AI, 4A IA, 4B, 4B 1, 482, 4C, 5, 6, 6A, 6AI, 6B, 6B1, 6BIA, 6B2; BBB & C RR Surrey, Abstract 204,Tracts 4B2B, 4B5, 5, 5.D;Bryant Harrington Survey, Abstract 808,Tracts. 2,2B,2C,3,3B,4,4A, 4B, 5, iB, 5B1, 50, Levy Franklin Survey,.Abstract 51.3,Tracts 2E, 3, 3B,4, 4A,4C,4D,4E,4E1,41?, 4F% Al-Ko Soutbvmst.Addifion,Block A,Last I to TX-121(121 Gat -way District) ITEM 2 RECOMMENDATION - ZONING CHANGE - 21,9-ZC - 121 GATEWAY DISTRICT Consider a remnmendation regarding the request of the City of Euless for a zonirig change from their current zoning John H. HaNins Survey, Abstract 685,Tracts 11 1E1, 1BI A, IDL IE, IE2, ?, :3, Jesse Doss Survey, Abstract 441, Tracts 21 3, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4AI, 4AIA, 4B, 4BI, 4B2, 4C, 5, 6, 6A, 6AI, OB, 6BI, 6BI A, 6B2; BBB & C RR Survey M%tract 204,Tracts 4B2B,4B5, 5,5Dr Bryant Harrington Sunny, Abstract 808, Tracts 2,213,2C:,3, 3B,4, 4A,413, 5, 5.13, 581, 5C;.Levy.Franklin Survey, Abstract 513, Tracts 2E,:3,3B,4,4A,4C,4D, 4E,4E1,4F,4F1,Al-Ko Southwest Addition, Block.A, Lot I to TX-121(121 Gateivay District) ITEM 3 CONSIDERATION -- LAND PLAN - #08-:15-LP - EULESS COMMERCE CEN l ER Consider the request of Sieve ';Magee:, Magee Leonard C€irponnion for a land plan of 24.24 acres,located in the Eduard Taylor Surrey,Abstract 1550. The proposed land use is for-office,commercial,and retaiL ITEM 4 CONSIDERATION -- PRELIMINARY PLAT - 8-01-PP - ROLLING HILLS ADDITION,BLOCK 1,LOT 2 Consider the Wiest of First Baptist Church of Euless, 1000 West Airport Freevay,for a Preliminary Aleut of Polling Hills Addition,Block 1,Lot 2; I lot located on 20.587 acres of land in the J.P. Hatford Survey, Abstract 711. The church is located in a C-2 (Community Business)zoning district_ Planning& Zoning Commission Agendz -2- October 6.1 ITEM 5 PUBLIC HEARING -- SPECIFIC USE PERMIT - #,98-29-SUP - 2151 S. INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD Public input regarding the request of Brian Powell,for a Specific Use Perinit to allow a tool rental center at The flame [depot which is in the€:'-2(Conunimity Business District) zoning district;Belchase Addition,Block.A, Lot l;251 S. Industrial Blvd- ITEM 6 RECOMMENDATION -- SPECI-FIC USE PERMIT - #95-29-SUP --- 2541 S. IlitDUSTRIAL,BOULEVARD Consider a recconimetislatio n for the request of Brian Powell,for a Specific Use Permit to alloy:a tool rental center at The Home Depot which is in the C-2(f"olut rtiziity Business District)zoning district;Belchase Addition,Block A,Last 1;251 S.Industrial.Blvd_ ITEM 7 PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIFIC USE :PERMIT - A98-31-SUP - 501 No MAIN STREET##106 AND#107 Public input regarding the request of James Burgoyne, Cornerstone Family Church for sa specific use permit to allow a church expansion in theC-1 (Neighborhood Business Districts zoning district,located within the Dorris Addition No. 1,Black 1.Lot L, 501. N. N. Tzin Street 91.06 and#107 IT.EM8 RECOMMENDATION - SPECIFIC USE PERMIT` - # 31-SUP 501 N. �dIAI'a§ STREET 4106 AND#107 Consider a recommendation for the request of James Burgoyne, Cornerstone Family Church for a specific use perrnit to allow a church exp ision in the C-1. (Neighborhood Business Distract)zoning district; located within the Dorris Addition No, J.,Block 1,Lot 1, X01 N,Ntdn Street#1.06 and#107 ITEM 9 PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - #"- -02-PD --- S. TUCKER SURVEY,AUSTRAC:T 159.2 Public input regarding the request of Mark.McHenry,UDR Western Residential, Inc.for a nnulti-family residential development. clianging the zoning from CUD 851 (Community Unit .Development for multi-Ruiaily %kritli varying densities) and 1C%2 (Community Business District) into Pfd (Planned De%Tlopnnent for multi-farntly with 17.2 units per at.te) in the S. Tanker Survey, Abstract 1512. Tracts :1A1, 3A2, 3C, and portions of Tracts 4 and 5 ITEM 10 RECOMMENDATION PLANNED DEVELOPMENT o#98-02-PD--&TUCKER SURVEY,ABSTRACT 1512 Consider a recommendation regarding the request of Niark McHenry, UDR. Western Residentkil, Inc,, for a multi-family residential development, changing the ziaiiing from CUD 851 (Coninutnity Unit Developa-vent for inulti-farmly with varying densities)mid C- 2 ',Community Business district) into PIS (Planned Development for multi-family with 17.2 units per acre) in tine S. Tucker Survey, .Abstract 1512, Tracts 3A1, 3A2, 3C, and portions of Tracts 4 and 5 Planning&Zoning;Commission Agenda e3a October 0, 1998 ITEM 14 PUBLIC. HEARING -- SPECIFIC` USE PERMIT -J0-SUP — UNITED DOMINION(DOMINION AT BEAR CREEK) Public input reprding the request of-Mark Nlc.Henry, UDR Western Residential,Inc. for a speeific use permit to allow a multi-fancily residential development a 17.2 units per acre located in the S. Tracker Survey, Abstract 1512,"Tracts 3A1, 3A/1., 3C, atxd portions of Tracts 4 and 5; currently in the CUD 851 %C':ommunity Unit Developemeni for raulti- fa azily v6th varying densities)and C-2(Community Business District)zmixxg district ITEM 12 RECOMM*ENBATION -- SPECIFIC USE PERMIT - 8-30-SUP — UNIT ED DOMINION(DOMINION AT BEAR CREEK) Corsider a reconznxe9zdatirsrx regarding the request of Mark McHenry, UDR Western Residential,Inc. for a specific use permit to allow a multi-farnily residential development of 17.2 units per acre located in the S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512,"Tracts 3A1, 3A2, 3C, and portions of Tracts 4 and 5, currently in the CUD 851 (Community Unit Development for multi-fancily vMb varying densities) mid C: 2 (Community Business District)zoning district. ITEM 1.3 CONSIDERATION — LAND PLAN a #98-14-LP — UNITED DOMINION (DOMINION AT BEAR CREEK) Consider the request of Mark.M.cHenry,UDR Western.Residential,hic for a land plan of 24.24 acres located in the Edward Taylor Satr�ey, Abstract .€55te, The Isr€tposed land is for multi-family residential. ITEM 1.4 PUBLIC.,HEAT UN -#9840-UDC-AMORTIZATION OF NON COMFORMING USES AND S'T'RUCTURES ,Public input regarding a request bs the City of Euless to amend Chapter 84 "Unified Development Code"to provide for the ternxination of non-conf'orzning uses mid structures by the Z(zing Board of Adjustment tlzro gh a plan of amortization by the additiotx of a new Section 84.59 ITEM 15 REC OMMENDA`T"ION a #98-08-UDC - AMORTIZATION OF NON COMF€ RMINC USES AND STRUCTURES Consider a recommendation regarding the request lw the City of Euless to ammnid Chapter 84 "Unified Development Code" to provide for the termir3abon of non- conforming uses and structures by the ,honing.lard of Adjustment through a plan of amortization by the addition of a new Section 84-59 ITEM 1+6 REPORTS ITEM 17 DIRECTOR'S REPORT POSTED THIS 2nd DAY QE OCTOBER,1998.. AT 4..00 P.M. Donna Brown _._.....___. Individual Posting Notes €€VM pbsr•b eW4 this s awl you ham a ds&A§xy tM ruins VecW wwigemwts at the nmt. .pk4se cc twt wf ofte at ;fit?}ffi&16.3.RemmsbL-wo-amods6ws Mi be mWe b east yrur Mods, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 6, 1898 MINUTES The Pre-Commission meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Ronald Young at 5:30 p.m. in the Building "C" Conference Room. Six members of the Planning and Zoning Commission were in attendance. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF SCHEDULED ITEMS - COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Chairman Young called the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. for the consideration of scheduled items. He stated 'here were six members of the Planning and Zoning Commission present and that Commissioner McMillan was absent and missed. MEMBERS AND STAFF PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Chairman Ron Young Robert McMillon Nancy Bright Billy Owens Joy Shuler Keith Eggers George Zahn Bob McFarland, City Attorney Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development Paul Kruckemeyer: City Engineer Kevin Mercer, Development Services Manager Michael Logan, Fire Marshal Andrea Baxter, Deputy Director of Public Works Tom Cox, Director of Administration Carl Tyson, Council Member Donna Brown, Office Technician Dolores Tijerina, Development Secretary VISITORS PRESENT James Burgoyne Elizabeth Burgoyne Nancy Sanchez Brenda Stafford Eugenia Anaya Aaron Brauer Wiley Hokett Guillermo Echevarria Sam Harrington Sean McCoy Kim Corbin D.R. Nolan Bernie Wadsworth Lou Arrietta Gary L. Hill Dan Kutsir Joe Alberg Treesa Alberg Jim Riley John Gist Annabel Dean Mark Moore Kellye Cox Robert Jebavy Mark McHenry Mike Grove Raul Martinez J. Scott Brooks PLANNING AND Iii` -'i CO MN€IWON MCA, 2 Ray Howell Rae Ann Lucash Dale Putrino Jan Putrino Stacia Hutson Fred Bowen John Hiser Kathy Grove Cory Mayden Elsa Caywood Dinah Hall Dave Bates Dana Morris Brenda Morris John M. Baze Don Harrington Michelle Greenough Peter Lewis Jennie Giles Dede Gentry Michael Coker Glen Hinckley Marcus Hiles David Hiles Paul Johnston Michael Clark Kirk Williams Gary Carr PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND INVOCATION: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chairman Ronald Young and the Invocation was given by Commissioner Owens. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Eggers moved to approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of September 1. 1998. Commissioner Zahn seconded the notion. The vote was as follows'. Ayes: Chairman Young, Commissioners Zahn, Owens, Shuler, Eggers, Bright Nays: None Absent: Commissioner McMiilon The motion carried. REGULAR AGENDA Chairman Young opened the meeting and requested that Items 3 and Item 4 be considered =first. ITEM 3 CONSIDERATION - LAND PLAN o#99-15-LP - EULESS COMMERCE CENTER Consider the request of Steve Magee, Magee Leonard Corporation for a land plan of 24.24 acres located in the Edward Taylor Survey, abstract 1550. The proposed land use is for office, commercial, and retail. So Bass. Director of Planning and Development, gave a brief description of the proposed land plan by the request of Steve Magee, Magee Leonard Corporation, for 24.24 acres located in the Edward Taylor Survey, Abstract 1550. The proposed land uses are office, commercial, and retail. He stated the purpose of a land plan is two fold: it is a concept plan to show access and a concept plan to show general use and provision of public utilities. He stated the land plan is valid for one year. He stated this submittal meets all the requirements and the Development Review Committee recommended approval. f'I..AN,'N, f Ci AN'D A)NIN6 CONINIIS`iION PA<iF 3 III\r;I'I S Oi L?L'TOII .R 6. V-49S Chairman Young asked the City Engineer for his comments concerning the access; drainage and any other items that ='clay be pertinent to this case. Paul Kruckemeyer, City Engineer, stated the main concern for the development is the drainage situation. He stated the drainage system was inadequate for the entire site but that staff was working with the developer. He stated the developer had agreed to a temporary detention pond and would proceed through a couple of phases. He stated the drainage problems could be worked out through the phasing of the construction plans and that he recommended going forward with the land plan request. He stated he also recommended that the entrance area through the office spaces be kept a private street. Chairman Young stated there were concerns mentioned in pre-session regarding whether future drainage will be accommodated when this is developed. Mr. Kruckemeyer stated the majority of this site drains toward Glade Road and the City of Euless and the City of Grapevine have discussed the widening and improvement of Glade Road. He stated the detention pond would help the developer get by during phase one or two and certainly at a Eater date he could take advantage of the cities' installation of a storm sewer system with the street improvements. Commissioner Owens asked if the drainage system would be examined before construction or if the developer would be allowed to start building before the entire system had been installed. Mr. Kruckemeyer stated some drainage improvements must be started before any building takes place, for instance he must install some drainage improvements before putting in the parking lot. Commissioner Eggers made the motion to approve Land Plan #98-13-LP. Commissioner Shuler seconded the motion. The vote was as follows- Ayes: Chairman Young, Commissioners Zahn, Owens; Shuler, Eggers, Bright Nays. None Absent: Commissioner McMillon The motion carried. ITEM 4 CONSIDERATION -- PRELIMINARY PLAT - #98-01-PP - ROLLING HILLS ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 2 Consider the request of First Baptist Church of Euless, 1000 West Airport Freeway, for a Preliminary Plat of Rolling Hills Addition, Block 1, Lot 2; 1 lot located on 20.837 acres of land in the J.P. Halford Survey, Abstract 711. The church is located in a C-2 (Community Business) zoning district. Bo Bass; Director of Planning and Development, gave a brief description of the proposed preliminary plat. He stated that platting is a ministerial function and that the Development Review Committee recommended approval. Commissioner Owens asked the City Engineer if there was a set of construction plans on file. Mr. Kruckemeyer stated there was a set of approved plans on file. Commissioner Owens made the motion to approve preliminary plat #98-01-PP as presented. Commissioner Bright seconded the motion. NIINt.;rrrs OF 0C'"rl3IER F. 19988 The vote was as follows. Ayes: Chairman Young, Commissioners Zahn, Owens: Shuler, Eggers, Bright Nays: None Absent: Commissioner McMillon The motion carried. Chairman Young gave the rules for conducting a Public Hearing. ITEM 1 PUBLIC HEARING -ZONING CHANGE -##98-29-ZC - 121 GATEWAY DISTRICT Public input regarding the request of the City of Euless for a zoning change from their current zoning classifications John H. Havins Survey, Abstract 685, Tracts 1, 1 E1, 1 E 1A 1 D1, 1 E, 1 E2, 21 3; Jesse Doss Survey, Abstract 441, Tracts 2, 3: 3A, 3B: 3C, 4A1< 4A1A. 4B, 4B1, 4B21 4C, 5: 6, 6A; 6A1, 6B, 6B1, 6131A, 6B2, BBB & C RR Survey, Abstract 204, Tracts 4132B, 4B5, 5; 5D; Bryant Harrington Survey, Abstract 808, Tracts 2, 28, 2C, 3, 3B, 4, 4A, 4B, 5, 5B, 5B1, 5C; Levy Franklin Survey, Abstract 513, Tracts 2E, 3, 3B, 4, 4A, 4C, 4D. 4E, 4E1. 4F, 4F1; Al-Ko Southwest Addition, Block A, Lot 1 to TX-121 (121 Gateway District) Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development, gave an overview of the zoning change request of the City of Euless. Chairman Young opened the public hearing. Mr. Bass stated that for the past 1 to 2 years the City has been trying to redirect its destiny. He stated the City had modified the Comprehensive Land Plan to repaint the future of the City of Euless, and that the only way to achieve that future is through rezoning. He stated as a part of that massive rezoning, over seven hundred parcels of land throughout the City had been considered. He described the boundaries for the "121 Gateway" zoning district. He stated this was a mixed use district in which the developers have a lot of flexibility to put almost whatever they could market well on that particular tract. He asked the Commissioners to have a little faith by opening the door to the development market. He stated on September 8, 1998, the City Council approved the creation of the district through Ordinance #13101, which states what can be developed in that area. He stated tonight the Planning and Zoning Commission was going to determine what recommendation they would make to City Council in terms of what pieces of land ;would be rezoned. He stated there was an area that staff was not recommending to be included in the "121 Gateway.' zoning district: which is land owned by Univest Properties: Bryant Harrington Survey, Abstract 808: Tracts 2, 213, and 2C; portions of Bryant Harrington Survey, Abstract 808, Tracts 3 and 3B; and portions of Levy Franklin Survey, Abstract 513, Tracts 4D, 4F, and 41~1. Mr. Bass also requested that the Commission exclude a portion of Mr. Baze's property, currently zoned R-1. Mr. Bass stated the staff also recommended to exclude from this zoning change the Southland Corporation's 7-Eleven site located on the southwest corner of Glade Road and S.H, 121, and the Mansions by the Vineyards apartment complex located at 2400 S.H. 121. Mr. Bass stated if these two projects were included in the zoning change they would be legally existing non-conforming sites, so the most reasonable zoning change for the area would be to eliminate these two sites from the '121 Gateway" zoning district. He stated that a subcommittee had been created when Ordinance#1310, which contained the development standards and uses for the "121 Gateway" District, was tabled. He stated the subcommittee was made up of MIN[ ]I S OF OCrOB K 6, 1998 representatives of the City Council, staff, landowners, and adjacent residents and fed by the Mayor. He stated the subcommittee reached a resolution regarding the property he had just suggested eliminating from the zoning change. Chairman Young asked proponents and opponents to speak. Mr. Michael Coker, 5390 LBJ Freeway; Dallas, stated he represented Euless Property InvestorslOwners Cooperative, which consists of a number of property owners in the area under consideration for rezoning. He stated he also was representing Univest Properties as a separate entity. He stated staff had done a great job of paving the way for the rezoning of the property. He stated he was in support of the recommendation, and that the removal of the four properties mentioned by Mr. Bass earlier was what the subcommittee had recommended to staff. He stated that the Univest property development would be a very positive asset for the City, and asked Mr. Glen Hinckley to speak. Mr. Glen Hinckley, 12201 Merritt Drive, Dallas, stated he represented the ownership of Univest Property, which bought property in the area in 1971. He stated that in 1983 the property was zoned a combination of C-2 and CUD (R-4 and R-5 multi-family uses). He stated that Univest had contracted with Fairfield Development, which developed the Aviara Apartment Complex here in Euless. He stated the Mayor and the Committee had worked out that the Fairfield Development site would be adjoining the existing Mansions by the Vineyard site. He stated the importance of a multi-family development would be having some existing roof tops to join the 121 district profile. He stated there would be a new street called Gateway Boulevard that would not join Priest Lane, to prevent through traffic on Priest. He stated that Univest was asking the Commission to allow part of their property to stay out of the district. He stated they had the multi-family zoning and would like for it to remain so that they would be in compliance with their ongoing application of Land Plan, Planned Development with a Site Plan; and Specific Use Permit. Mr. Coker stated they had met twice with the homeowners on Tallow Lane and that he had a petition signed by most of the residents supporting Univest's request to remain out of the "121 Gateway" zoning district. He stated they were also trying to work with the homeowners in that area to provide the necessary amenities that they are interested in adjacent to their property. He stated they were in favor of staff recommendation to exclude the ?-Eleven, the Mansions by the Vineyards Apartments, and Univest Property. He stated that he hoped that the Planning and Zoning Commission would send forward to City Council this recommendation. Commissioner Owens asked Mr. Coker where the park would be located. Mr. Coker answered that it would be near the houses on Ansley. Mr. Marcus Hiles, principal owner of Mansions by the Vineyards; 2400 S.H. 121, stated that they were never notified or asked to be a part of the subcommittee for this zoning district. He stated he had for several years supported city staff and elected officials in their efforts to create this particular district and upgrade the City's building ordinance. He stated the Mansions was the model in developing the current multi-family ordinance. He stated he wanted the record to reflect that they supported the "121 Gateway' zoning district. However, he reminded the Commission that the proposed `121 Gateway' zoning district does not permit apartments. He stated that he had a petition signed by 580 residents of the City of Euless who strongly oppose the approval of any additional apartment zoning out of the exterior boundaries of the 121 Gateway" zoning district. He stated 39 of the residents were adjacent homeowners. He stated that the representation that all adjacent homeowners support this is untrue. He stated that in addition to this. 55 adjacent renters also oppose the request of Univest. He stated the petition states that they oppose the further construction of apartments. He stated that the request to leave the Univest Property with its current zoning would allow 12 units per acre and their Planned Development request is for 17 or 18 units per acre, and with several variances for construction. He asked members of the audience to stand if they were opposed to the request. He asked the Commission, "Do we want quality growth or just more rooftops?" David Hiles, 2400 S.H: 121 #705, Euless, stated he worked with Western Rim and Mansions by the Vineyards. He stated he helped canvas various local property owners concerning the proposed apartment land that could be excluded from the `121 Gateway" zoning district. He stated the 39 residents and 55 renters that are adjacent to the Univest land are strongly opposed. He stated 80% of the canvassed area oppose the construction of more apartments in this area. He distributed a petition. John Hiser, 2611 Tallow Drive stated he was on the subcommittee. He expressed concern about what would be built behind his house. He stated he wanted the lesser of all evils and supported the 121 Gateway" zoning district and was also in favor of the Univest property proposal because of the promises by the applicant to protect and consider the homeowners concerns about the 32 acres behind their homes. He stated they were in favor of the Baze's property coming out if it would remain zoned R-1. He stated the developer had plans to build 120 feet from his property line at a height of 36 feet. He explained that his property line would be the closest to any building, which means he would have reason to be the most upset over this plan. He also added that the developer will have a three story building at the rear of the project but that he was going to do what he could to keep the view from being in the horeowners rear yard. Mr. Hiser stated the developer would put in landscaping along the homeowners' property line. He stated the huge oak trees would stay there according to the developer. He stated the committee did not have a problem with the Baze property coming out of the district if it stays a single family district with the lot size remaining at 7500 sq. ft. minimum. He stated the developer interested in the project wants 5500 sq. ft, lots, which would be too small and would not be comparable to adjacent homes. He stated that he and his neighbors were in favor of the Baze property coming out of the district as long as it complied with R-1 zoning standards. Kim Corbin, 2619 Tallow Drive, stated she was in favor of taking this requested property out of the district. Ms. Corbin stated she had worked in property management for 8 years, and certainly understood the Mansions by the Vineyards not wanting competition right next door. She stated she was proud to live in Euless, and the Mansions do not even advertise that they are in Euless, they say they are in Colleyville. She stated the quality Mr. Hinckley is proposing is Af property. She stated she has friends who live in the Mansions and they are beautiful on the outside but they are not anything special on the inside. She stated she was for the park in the Hinckley proposal. She stated Mr. Hinckley had gone above and beyond to help the residents and to ensure the property values and that he did not have to do that. She expressed concerns as to how Mr. Hiles got his petition because he was seen on the Albertson's parking lot. She stated all but one of the residents on her street had signed the Hinckley petition and felt his names may have come from residents who live in Colleyvilie or Bedford. She informed the Commission that the homeowners felt that Mr. Hinckley had the best solution for the homeowners' satisfaction concerning the adjoining property. Fred Bowen, 2607 Tallow Drive, stated he was in favor of the Univest Property request and in favor of the 121 Gateway" zoning district boundaries excluding the properties mentioned. He apologized to his neighbors because his wife had signed the Mansions petition, but only because they said do you want apartments at your rear property line, and what person would say yes. MIN UIES Of 3CR'BER 6. I49& � Paul Johnston, Fairfield Residential, 2045 N. S.H. 350 #254, stated he was in favor of tile withdrawal of Univest Properties from the 121 Gateway" zoning district. He stated the development standards are a typical Fairfield product; which actually is much higher for this project than the development standards for the current project being built in Euless are Fuller Wiser and Harwood Road. He stated Fairfield Residential was a known entity and if anyone would like to meet with him or would like a tour he was available. He stated he was displeased with the letter that went out from the Mansions, however he was available to Mr. Hiles or anyone who would like a tour of the current project going up in Euless and would answer questions at any time night or day. Fie stated the Fairfield Development Company was a highly rated developer and was looking forward to working with the Univest Properties and the City of Euless. Kathy Grove, 2621 Tallow Drive, Euless, stated she and her husband were in favor of Mr. Hinckley's and Univest property being pulled out of the zoning change for "121 Gateway' zoning district. She stated Mr. Hinckley had taken the time to come out and keep the adjacent property owners aware of what was going on. Mrs. Grove stated she was somewhat concerned with the phone calls she had received from the Mansions stating that the developer would mislead the future use of this land. Mrs. Grove stated she wanted the developer to stay with the plan that had been presented to the subcommittee, and she felt the use was something the homeowners could live with although it was not the ideal plan. ITEM 2 RECOMMENDATION - ZONING CHANGE - #98-29-ZC - 121 GATEWAY DISTRICT Consider a recommendation regarding the .request of the City of Euless for a zoning change from their current zoning John H. Havins Survey, Abstraci 585, Tracts 1, 1 E 1, 1 E 1 A, 1 D 1: 1 E, 1 E2, 2, 3; Jesse Doss Survey, Abstract 441, Tracts 2, 3, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4A1, 4A1A, 48, 4131, 4B2. 4C. 5. 6. 6A, 6A1, 613, 681, 6B1A, 6B2; BBB & C RR Survey, Abstract 204, Tracts 413213. 4135, 5, 5D; Bryant Harrington Survey, Abstract 808, Tracts 2, 2B, 2C, 3, 3B, 41 4A, 4B, 5, 513, 5B1, 5C: Levy Franklin Survey: Abstract 513, Tracts 2E, 3, 3B, 4, 4A, 4C, 4D, 4E, 4E1, 4F, 4F1; Al-K;o Southwest Addition, Block A, Lot 1 to TX-121 (121 Gateway District) Commissioner George Zahn stated that this project had been going on for three months and the original plan had been to look at the entire tracts for the zoning district. He stated he may not have a problem with the Baze property being excluded because it has single family zoning and it abuts to single family zoning. He stated he did have a problem with the use of apartments in the 121 area. Commissioner Zahn stated the application on file for the PD Site Plan and Land Plan is not of importance here He stated the Hinckley project was on the record and will go forward regardless of what happens tonight. He stated he was in favor of leaving everything in the "121: Gateway' district except for the Baze tract, 7-Eleven, and the Mansions by the Vineyards. Commissioner Eggers stated he was not pleased with the lack of information given to the Planning and Zoning Commission from the subcommittee from this project of reviewing zoning standards for the proposed zoning district. He stated that the City may have created some of the problem when the City allowed the Mansions by the Vineyards to build in the 121 corridor. Commissioner Bright stated she agreed with the other Commissioners and preferred that apartment complexes remain on the east side of Euless. She staked that the uses originally €.# l\ i:^>.\C31,£}\1\s:�s i)b`P,€ISSIGnI I'<L6t: Y planned for the 121 Gateway" zoning district were for the best and that did not include apartments. Commissioner Shuler stated the City had spent a lot of time on the S.H. 121 Corridor-and that she was very excited about it. She stated she was proud of Euless and understood the homeowners not wanting commercial behind their homes, Commissioner Shuler asked why we have created a 121 district with what we wart if we are not going to try to get it. She stated that we say no apartments in the `121 Gateway' zoning district and here we already have one, Mansions by the Vineyards, which are very nice, even though they say they are in Colleyvil':e. She stated that she felt the Fairfield Development Mould build a fiery nice complex. She stated if we want the 121 corridor to be without apartments, we need to strive to go that direction. She stated leaving the Baze property P-1 would be okay, since the Commission could control how small or large the lots are when it comes before them again. She stated she would like to leave it like they had said and that would be to exclude 7-Eleven, Mansions, and the Baze property. Commissioner Owens stated the Commission was appointed to give recommendations to City Council_ He stated the City had numerous meeting on the Comprehensive Land Plan. He stated the City had numerous meetings for a complete update of the zoning district reap. He stated that now before the ink gets dry, we are saying maybe that is not what we meant. He stated that to him that was exactly what we meant. He stated the 121 corridor district was to have certain characteristics that would elevate what we have been trying to elevate in the fast 30 years that he had been in the City. He stated he felt bad for everyone present. He stated he was not for side agreements and that the only way to get this right would be to let the elected ones make the decision. He stated his vision was not what was presented by staff, but that it excluded 7-Eleven and Mansions by the Vineyards. He stated the Unified Development Code was the code book for the developer to go by. He stated that this had been going or for five years and he did not appreciate citizens saying that they had already made up their mind. He stated he felt the thing for the Commission to do was to adopt a high standard and make the developer bring plans to the City instead of having to go out and negotiate with the citizens. He stated he would recommend going with the same motion they had before. Chairman Young stated he appreciated the effort the staff and the EPIC subcommittee had gone through to get this far with an agreement on standards. Commissioner Zahn stated he concurred with Commissioner Owens and would suppor# that motion. Chairman Young stated that they were a recommending body to the City Council and they would have a full set of minutes of all deliberations and there would be a member or members of the Planning and Zoning Commission present at the City Council meeting to represent the Commission. Commissioner Eggers informed the audience that back in December there had been a study that contained three zones: retail office, office residential and residential, He stated if he could vote for that tonight he would vote for it. He stated it had gotten a lot more complicated. Commissioner Owens asked Bob McFarland, City Attorney if it was possible to give the boundaries of the "121 Gateway` zoning district. Bob McFarland; City Attorney stated the Planning and Zoning Commission is only recommending to City Council the zoning district. He stated he wanted to make clear there was not a parcel of land in the City that is currently zoned `121 Gateway' zoning district. He stated that Planning and Zoning Commission and the City PL, N'.-,"ING AND Y0''-,;iN ;(;C NUMISSION PAGE Council had recently established that potential category of zoning. Commissioner Owens stated that he wanted to be sure it was clear which tracts of land were being rezoned, and Mr. McFarland suggested that the motion could refer to the exhibit shown by staff. Commissioner Owens expressed opposition to diluting the set of standards that had been worked out and rude a part of the 121 district. Commissioner Owens made the motion to approve zoning change #98-29-ZC to include all properties as set forth in Exhibit "A", except the Mansions by the Vineyards and 7-Eleven, which were to be excluded. Commissioner Eggers seconded the motion. Chairman Young gestured to allow staff to speak. Mr. Bass stated that if it was the Commissioners' intent to leave out a portion of Mr. Hinckley's and Mr. Bane's properties, a metes and bounds description of the t_lnivest property was in the packet, and they could refer to the shading in Exhibit "A" to recommend exclusion of part of Mr. Baze's property. Mr. McFarland stated for clarification that in order to exclude these properties the motion should include the statement "with the exception of the iUnivest Properties as described in the Commissioners' Packet" and so forth. Commissioner Zahn asked whether Exhibit "A" the advertisement in the packet, included all the property except the Mansions and the Southland property. Mr. Bass affirmed that it did, and reminded hire that the Commissioners were not bound by that. Mr. McFarland asked that the motion be restated. Commissioner Owens stated that his motion included all properties except the Mansions and the Southland properties. Mr. McFarland restated this to say that this zoning case was recommended for approval with the exception of those two parcels of land, rafter discussion, it was determined that the Mansions and the Southland parcels were not advertised for rezoning. After further discussion; Chairman Young asked Donna Brown, Office Technician, to read the motion to the Commission. She stated that the motion was to approve Zoning Case #9 8-29-Z:C as shown on Exhibit "A" Chairman Yount confirmed with Commissioners Owens and Eggers that this was correct. The wrote was as follows: Ayes. Chairman Young, Commissioners Zahn, Owens, Shuler, Eggers, Bright Nays; bone Absent, Commissioner McMillon The motion carried. Chairman Young called for a ten minute recess at 8:50 p.m. The meeting resumed at 9:00 p m. ITEM 5 PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIFIC USE PERMIT - #98-29-SUP - 251 S. INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD Public input regarding the request of Brian Powell, for a Specific Use Permit to allow a tool rental center at The Home Depot which is in the C-2 (Community Business District;) zoning district; Belchase Addition, Block A, Lot 1,251 S. Industrial Blvd. PLA4WING AND/f.}ti€,''iii C:OMNIISSION VA G F, 10 MIINt_ I'I S GI'0( !t 3ER 6. 1 I Bo Bass, Director a¢ Planning and De+re:opr-lent, gave a brief overview of the Specific Use Per for a tool rental center at The Houle Depot, which is in a 0-2 (Community Business) zoning district. He stated the tool rental center would be located on the west side of the building near S. H. 157. He stated the staff was concerned about potential traffic problems and fire lane parking violations. However, the tool rental center would not work anywhere else on the site. He stated the Development Review Committee (DRC) recommended approval based on the narrowing of the fire lane. addition of a loading zone, and the prohibition of outside storage, sales, and display in the barest street yard, all of which were reflected in the attached set of plans. He stated that staff also strongly recommended that the remainder of The Home Depot be exempt frorn prohibitions against outside storage, sales; and display anywhere else on the lot. Chairman Young opened the Public Hearing, Michael Clark, ,,rinkelmann and Associates. 12800 Hillcrest #200, Dallas, stated he was representing The Horne Depot. Mr. Clark stated he would like to confirm that The Home Depot has volunteered to restrict outdoor storage and display from the west side of the building in an effort to clean up the property along S. H. 157. He stated there would be additional landscaping. He stated they were not looking to use the entire parking lot for outdoor storage even though it may look like it at times_ Bob McFarland, City Attorney, stated he would like to clarify that any outdoor storage may not violate the parking requirements, Elsa Caywood, 508 Caraway Lane. Euless, stated she had a problem with S. H. 157 traffic. She stated there was a local tool rental center just up the street and that she did not feel that Euless needed another tool rental center in a location that may increase traffic problems. Chairman Young closed the Public Hearing. ITEM 6 RECOMMENDATION - SPECIFIC USE PERMIT - #98-29-SUP - 251 S. INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD Consider a recommendation for the request of Brian Powell, for a Specific Use Permit to allow a tool rental center at The Home Depot which is in the C--2 (Community Business District; zoning district, Belchase Addition, Block A, Lot 1; 251 S. industrial Blvd. Commissioner Owens asked Mr. Bass if the DRC was 100% for this SUP. Mr. Bass replied they were not 1 CO% for this. He stated that there were concerns with traffic and suggested The Houle Depot look at their competitors as how they set up traffic flaw for the customer. He stated you can not get in unless you go all the way out to the east side. He stated he was a lazy person and wanted the convenience of parking close. He stated he thought there was a lot of dead space in the parking lotto the north so why not move the storage buildings from the south of the parking lot to the north. He stated his wife will not go there because of the parking situation. Commissioner Owens asked the City Engineer if there was a drainage problem. Paul Kruckemeyer; City Engineer, stated there was not a drainage problem, and this site had a very good drainage system. f'i,.4'��lNt;+i\I3 I,C?P•ef\i i'L7P€AII5SIC?'ti f%.�<=€: i 3 Commissioner Owens asked about the new lighting ordinance and how this property would be affected by it. Mr. Bass stated this Would not be affected because it was not a 51% increase to their building site. Commissioner Shuler stated she would like to ask Mr. Clam if the parking spaces would remain facing S. H. 157 as they are now. and how much space someone would have to load equipment With, the fire lane being even smaller than it is now, and she asked if it world be from the back or the side. Mr. Clark stated that the tool rental center would have a door on the west side of the building, that the loading zone would be 11' 4" and that most of the equipment would be either hand held or rolled out. Commissioner Shuler asked if the pallets would remain out ;here. Mr. Clark replied that they would eliminate storage on the west side of the building. Commissioner Eggers stated it appeared that the store manager had a plan of where to place all the items mentioned. Mr. Clark agreed. Commissioner Zahn clarified with Mr. Clark that there would not be cement mixers or large items such as that. Commissioner Zahn stated he was concerned about the loading zone and suggested that there may be a potential problem with loading. He asked if it would be passible to pick up these items at a different location, such as the south side of the building. Mr. Clark stated the loading zone should be adequate. Commissioner Zahn asked staff if the outside storage use was permitted. Mr. Bass stated it was not permitted. Commissioner Zahn expressed concerns regarding outside storage, and staff asking the Commission to recommend approval of an illegal use for The Home Depot. He stated that it bothered him when the small businessman cannot put his bicycles in front of his location since the City would cite people for the illegal adveffisement or selling of an item when the owners might ust be trying to recover tide money they had spent o:, it. However, he said, the City turns the other way when Home Depot has illegal storage;. Chairman Young stated he would like the Engineering Department to describe the comments made in DRC on the access in this layout. Mr. Kruckemeyer stated there was an existing pick-up lane beside the fire lane and that it was not being policed adequately. He stated it had been their observation that this area is the busiest driveway they have. Mr. Bass stated the area would be monitored by the Polioe, and a citation would be issued if people were caught in the fire lane. Commissioner Zahn made the motion to recommend approval of #98-29-SUP with the condition that no outdoor display, sales, or storage occur in the west street yard, and he also recommended that City Council consider an exemption for the remainder of the Home Depot site to permit outdoor display, sales and storage. Commissioner Bright seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes; Chairman Young, Commissioners Zahn, Shuler, Eggers, Bright Nays' Commissioner Owens Absent: Commissioner McMillon Commissioner Owens stated he was against the outside storage on the north side of the building. The motion carried. F'I.ANNI•,iCsAND f.ONT\t. PA, (-; 12 N11\t 11-S Or OCTOBER F. i99s ITEM 7 PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIFIC USE PERMIT - #98-31-SUP - 501 N. MAIN STREET#106 AND#107 Public input regarding the request of James Burgoyne, Cornerstone Family Church for a specific use permit to allow a church expansion in theC-1 (Neighborhood Business District) zoning district; located within the Dorris Addition tale, 1, Block 1, Lot 1, 501 N. Main Street#106 and#107 Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development gave a brief overview of the request of James Burgoyne, Cornerstone Family Church for a specific use permit to allow a church expansion in a C-1 (Neighborhood Business) zoning district. He stated the Development Review Committee recommended approval. Chairman Young opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Kirk Williams, 5400 Renaissance Tower; representing the Cornerstone Church, stated the intention of the church is to find a location to purchase within the City. He stated the church had about 80 members at this point in time. He stated about one and a half years ago the church had come before the Cornm.ssion to renew their Specific Use Permit (SUP) and there were about 50 members at that time. He stated there had been a growth pattern. He stated the space they needed in addition to what they have is small. about. 1,299 square feet. He stated they were not opposed to the sale of alcohol by nearby tenants. He stated that plenty of parking spaces were available on Sunday mornings and Wednesday nights; approximately 74 spas. He asked the Commission to renew the current SUP with approval of this SUP request, to expire in two years. Gary Carr, 104 Pinion, Euless, stated he was a member of the church and was in favor of the SUP request. He stated the church needed the extra space for the children. He stated the children are in one small roan and need to be divided into age groups. Chairman Young closed the Public Hearing. ITEM 6 RECOMMENDATION - SPECIFIC USE PERMIT - #98-31-SUP - 501 N. MAIN STREET#106 AND#107 Consider a recommendation for the request of ,lames Burgoyne, Cornerstone Family Church for a specific use permit to allow a church expansion in the C-1 (Neighborhood Business District) zoning district; located within the Dorris Addition No. 1, Block 1, Lot 1; 501 N. Main Street#106 and#107 Commissioner Zahn stated he was in favor of a recommendation for approval. Chairman Young concurred with Commissioner Zahn that the church needed the expansion and stated he had no problem with renewing the current SUP along with the new SUP for two years. Commissioner Bright stated she was in favor- of the recommendation, and Commissioner Shuler agreed. PIA #\i x\t)!£:T;'di. £:L'O1#t{IS3i)CJ PA<r# l:; I iii" FSO £J{`lC>{3# Cornmissirner Owens stated he agreed with the others. He asked if the church had a building fund so the desire to purchase their own building would become a reality. Mr. �Afillrams stated they had a building fund. Commissioner Eggers made the notion to approve the recommendation of#98-31-SUP, for a two year period from the date of approval for both lease spares #196 and #107. Commissioner Zahn seconded the motion, The vote was as follows'. Ayes; Chairman Young, Commissioners Zahn, Owens, Shuler, Eggers, Bright Pays. hone Absent: Commissioner McMillon The motion carried. ITEM 9 PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - #98-02-PB • Se TUCKER SURVEY, ABSTRACT 1512 Public input regarding the request of Mark McHenry. UDR �Alestern Residential. Inc. for a multi-family residential development, changing the zoning from CUD 81,511 (Community Unit Development for multi-family with varying densities) and C-2 (Community Business District) into PD (Planned Development for multi-family with 17.2 units per acre) in the S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tracts 3A1, 3A2, 3C, and portions of Tracts 4 and 5 Bo Bass. Director of Planning and Development gave a brief overview of the proposed Planned Development, #98-02-PD. Chairman Ronald Young opened the Public Hearing and asked the applicant or a representative to give a short presentation. John Gist, 2211 N. Lamar, Dallas, Texas stated he was representing United Dominion. He stated that they are one of the oldest and largest real estate investment trust companies in the country. They own and operate over 770,000 properties; by their nature they are long term owners,, they use extensive landscaping, and they have a cor:mitment to the community. Mr. Gist stated United Dominion had a previous history in the City of Euless, that included the renovations to Oak Park, Park Plaza and IvVoodcreek Condominium. Mr. Gist stated the current project has 486 Class A multi-family apartment homes on 28.15 acres resulting in 17.2 units per acre. He stated there would be 32 buildings and those buildings are 2 story. 2 and 3 story, and some 3 story. He stated that all the buildings along Fuller-Wiser will be 2-story buildings. He stated they tried to be Extremely sensitive to this particular site plan. He stated there were 16 acres of open space, or 5,6% of the site, which substantially exceeds requirements. He stated the useable open span is well over 500,000 square feet and this allowed more trees to be, saved. He stated some of the amenities included salvaging as many trees as they could, two pools; putting green. sports court, picnic areas and other outdoor features. He expressed concerns regarding the traffic flow but pointed ouq that there would be access on S. H. 360 and that the complex will be located oil the northern end of I~uller-Wser. He mentioned they would not be impacting the Hurst-Euless- Bedford Independent School District because the area is Grapevine--Colleyville School District. He stated the apartment sizes range from 800 to 1260 square feet. He stated their request was PL A.INiN N6, AND LONIING COMMISSION Y.ACSF. J4 for what they felt was best for this site. Dana Morris, 2511 Poppy Lane, stated he was not in favor of the Planned Development zoning change. He stated he was concerned about the traffic {low due to the Airport. He stated apartments would not be his choice for that piece of property. Elsa Caywood, 1508 Caraway Lane, stated she was not in favor of the zoning change. She stated that she wou€d like to see it made into a business with great landscaping. Guillermo Echevarria, 509 Caraway Lane, stated he had always felt that the biggest investment was your property, your house. He asked how this complex would benefit him or anyone in the neighborhood. He stated he was not in favor of the apartment complex going in across the street from him. He expressed his concerns about apartments tip and down Fuller !!Miser Road. He stated he moved to Euless 18 years ago and is being a taxed to the extreme because he is single. He stated he and his neighbors do not have the money or the power to change the decision of the committee. He stated that was the way the system works. He stated the developer should go to Moscow if they want to build apartments because that was where they were needed. He asked how much is too much and why we cannot build homes in place of apartments. He stated he totally opposed the building of more apartments. Michelle Greenough, 2515 Poppy Lane, stated she was not in favor of the Planned Development for apartments. She asked if we need more apartments. She stated that she takes her daughter walking in the area and they enjoy the trees as well as watching the owls and hawks in the fie€d. She stated she would like to see a park in the area in place of apartments. She stated the children in the area need to see the wildlife on this lot. She stated apartments would increase the traffic, confining children to the backyard. DeDe Gentry, 505 Basswood, stated she moved to Euless for the small town neighborhood feel. She stated she was concerned about her children and would not stay in the area if apartments go up on this lot. She stated she was opposed to the Planned Development. Aaron Brauer, 507 Basswood, stated he had three issues regarding this request: traffic, trees and wildlife. He stated traffic would get worse because of DFW airport employees who live in most of the apartments along Fuller-Wiser Road. He stated his children would be in danger with so much traffic. He expressed his enthusiasm for the birds in the area, even the crows going through his garbage. He stated the children enjoy watching the birds. He commented about the trees on the lot having pink ribbons tied to them, and asked how many were corning down. Brenda Morris, 2511 Poppy Lane, stated that she was concerned about traffic or, Mid-Cities Boulevard. She stated that the apartment residents would cut through the neighborhood to avoid the red light on Fuller-Miser when returning to their apartments after work. She stated that this already happens with residents of the current apartments, and that she imagines it will triple or quadruple if these apartments come in. She requested that the Commission consider this for the safety of the children in the neighborhood. Mr. Gist and applicant l'ittark McHenry provided a reply to the statements of the citizens. Mr. Gist stated that he had been in the business for over thirty years and had done over 600,000 dwelling units in single family and multifamily, in 32 states. He assured the audience that the trees they save with this plan will exceed any single family development that is comparable to the neighborhood; since they are not paving as much and they have spacing between the buildings PLA,NNINGAND ZONING COMMISSION P,AGJ_-'. J5 that allows tree saving. He stated that they will save more trees by doing a concept of this nature than virtually anything else, because buildings have been spaced very far apart. Some of the courtyards exceed 100 feet, and that has been done to save trees. The ribbons have been placed on the trees for tree location as part of the tree surrey, not for cutting them down. Mark McHenry, 3517 High Timber Drive, Grapevine, Texas, Senior Development Manager with UDR Western Residential, Inc., stated that in terms of the zoning and land use, this site had been a multi-family site for a long period of time. It had varying densities on it; they are proposing a density of 1�.2 units per acre, which is much lower than a lot of the comparable developments in the area. He stated that development is going to happen, and that there is a lot of employment growth in the area that is driving the need for additional housing. He stated that multi-family housing serves a need, and reminded the audience that they are proposing a high-end multi- family complex, with rents ranging from $800410020 a unit. He said they have done extensive analysis to make sure these numbers will work in this area. He stated that a traffic impact study has been provided to staff, and that it indicated a negligible impact on traffic in the area. He said that there is no question that traffic will increase in the area; but that most of the traffic will feed out onto S.H. 350, He also mentioned that the project will be built in two phases, so the portion of the property near Fuller-Wiser will not have residents for 3-4 years. In reference to this company s experience in this area, Mr. McHenry stated that they had taken Oak Park, a run down complex, and gated it, added 80 units, redid the clubhouse, added fitness centers and landscaping, and really made it a nice community. He also stated that the company had recently acquired the Park Plaza apartments and Woodcreek Condominiums and were doing similar procedures there to upgrade those. He stated that the company is a long-terra owner/operator that will be a good community citizen. To reply to the question of hair this benefits the neighborhood, Mr. McHenry said that this multi-family development is bringing a high income profile resident to the area. He stated that several of the new developments that have come in are also higher end developments, which wilt eventually spur retail and commercial development that is needed along the S.H. 300 corridor. He said this additional retail and commercial development along the corridor would benefit the residents, although he does not know when it will happen. In reply to a comment regarding the look of the building, he stated that a stucco and stone exterior is proposed for the project, elevations of which were provided in the packet. Regarding taxes; he stated that this project will be a big taxpayer to the City of Euless. Regarding impact on schools, he stated that typically a complex of this nature has very little impact on the schools. He said there will be some school children there, but most of the residents will be medium age; upper- to middle-incorne residents without children. He stated that his children are in the Grape vine-Colleyville school district and that he has no concern about the impact of this additional apartment complex on the schools. He stated that the demographics of other complexes in the area support that there really is a minimal impact on the schools. Chairman Young closed the Public Hearing. ITEM 14 RECOMMENDATION - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT a #98-42-PD - S. TUCKER SURVEY,ABSTRACT 1512 Consider a recommendation regarding the request of Mary McHenry, UDR Western Residential, Inc. for a multi-family residential development, changing the zoning from CUD 851 (Community Unit Development for multi-family with varying densities) and C-2 (Community Business District) into PD (Planned Development for multi-family with 17,2 units per acre) in the S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tracts 3A1, 3A2, 3C, and portions of Tracts 4 and 5 AND ZOMNN(f(Ok"MISSlON PAGE 16 Nil NUl 'S OF(K-F BE R.<i 1998 Chairman Young asked Mr. Bass to address the Commission concerning some of these :sues and any others he Enright want to bring out. He specifically asked for comparison between the current multi-family code and this complex, for information on traffic issues, and for the City`s perspective on what the anticipated tree loss or savings will be. Mr. Bass stated that this property had been zoned for multi-family since the early 1980's. He also stated that based on the Commission's recommendation the City Council approved a Comprehensive Land Development Plait En early 1997 that basically said that the City would rather not have more apartments. He asked what else can be put on S. H. 360 now that the wrest runway has been approved. He stated that City Council had passed an ordinance several years ago forbidding additional single family development east of Fuller-Wiser because of the runway. He stated that until a year and a half ago a portion of this property was indeed zoned single family, but it was changed to multi- farnily zoning to comply with the Comprehensive Plant. He also stated that a city can only have so much commercial, and that a system will only support "x" amount. He continued that it is therefore unreasonable to expect that the entire S. H. 360 corridor could be developed into commercial. He agreed with Mr. Gist that the average cunt linear single family development would cut down more trees than this project will, and said he guarantees any average commercial project would cut down more than that. He said staff is concerned about trees and is extremely proud of being a Tree City USA, Mr. Bass repeated that this property had largely been zoned for multi-family since the early 1980 s, He stated that the staff would love, and he knew the audience would love. to see this entire thing become a huge park; but unless we can compensate the owner for that property, we cannot expect a park to be. placed there. He asked the audience if they as individuals would be willing to place money into an account so that the City could buy the land. He stated that in an urban area with four Trillion people you must expect that land will transition front native conditions to developed conditions. Mr. Bass stated that S.H. 360 is the logical location for this project. He stated that the density proposed is about average for the complexes along S. H. 360, and that some other complexes have densities of 22 and 24 dwelling units per acre. Chairman Young asked for examples of complexes of higher densities. Kevin Mercer, Development Services Manager, gave as examples Norstar and Ash Lane apartments. Mr. Sass stated that more trees have been cut down on recent projects than will be done with this project because the staff and City Council are maturing in terms of trying to protect the resources by requesting Site Plan modifications from developers to save more trees. He stated that this is what had occurred in the six or seven revisions that Mr. Gist had referred to earlier. He stated that Engineering, for example, was most concerned about drainage facilities that were originally placed within the tree resource. He said that the applicant had understood staff's position and voluntarily moved them. He said this project is a good fit for this site. He reminded the Commission that this project will have 56% open space, which he said far exceeds current code requirements. He described some of the project's features, and pointed out that, for example, 243 shrubs were required and 534 were provided. He said that one of every two units will have a covered parking space. He also stated that the City of Euless has a very unusual set of apartments -some along S.H. 360 renting for$1600 a month. Mr. Bass stated that this PD does request certain deviations to the code, but reminded the Commission that every PD does this, since this is the essence of a PD. He stated that on a case by case basis, some have good reason to get certain deviations from the code. He stated that he would answer questions about these, and that staff recommends approval of the project. €11,ANN€"4`6 NDZON€N( C+ NIN-111SSION, PAGE 17 MINUTES C*OCTOBER 6, "M Commissioner Owens asked Mr. Mercer on what size lots most of the R-1 Single Family development had been placed in the past five years. Mr. Mercer replied that the trend has been 4000-5000 square foot lots. Mr. Owens asked if what stuff was saying was that with zero lot line house there would be a lot of tree devastation. Mr. Owens pointed out that the applicant was conducting a tree survey. He stated that he is against more apartments, but that property owners like himseq Who have been paying taxes for fifty years understand that these projects are not all evil when it conies to tax payment. He said that he has an idea hoer much apartments pay if) school taxes. He stated that if the land has to be developed, there are a lot Worse things that upscale apartments. He stated that we have a set of codes and yearly inspections that mean the owners will have to keep the apartments up. Chairman Young asked City Engineer Paul Kruckemeyer to address traffic issues. Mr. Kruckemeyer stated that he would also like to add one more comment. He stated that this had been one of his favorite tracts of land because it is so heavily wooded, and that he had to commend the applicants because they have done an outstanding job of trying to save the trees. He also stated that they have done an admirable job of trying to Work with staff. He stated that he certainly could appreciate Mrs. Morris' comments about Poppy Drive, and that he Will be receiving plans for Mid-Cities Boulevard for review this week. He stated that he thinks Mrs. Morris' traffic concerns can be handled by the medians that will be placed along Mid-Cities to prevent the movement that she was concerned about. He agreed with her that without these rnedians that traffic could verso well become a problem. He stated that we are blessed by the fact that the majority of the traffic leaving this site would be going out on S. H. 360, Mid-Cities will be under construction some time next year, and when it is constructed he believes that United Dominion intends to push for an access point where the detention basin is right now. The sto.. sewer system is currently inadequate but will be upgraded when Mid-Cities is built 'and the detention pond can be removed]. Once access to Mid-Cities is granted: this will greatly relieve traffic on Fuller-Wiser. He noted that as Mr. McHenry had said, the section near Fuller-Wiser is in Phase Two, and said that hopefully these improvements can be made to Mid-Cities before traffic becomes a problem on Fuller-Wiser. Commissioner Owens asked if the State had authorized the opening onto S. H. 360. Mr. Kruckemeyer replied that staff does not have construction plans yet, and that will have to be approved by TxDOT, but there is no reason why this would not fit their standards. He stated that staff will probably require a deceleration lane, to be determined in the construction phase. Commissioner Owens stated that he is ready for some development to be out there. He stated that he wished it was not apartments, but that the property has limitations. He stated that the only thing that bothered him about the whole thing is the question of whether the City of Euless is gaining more than We are losing. For example, the garage doors will be smaller, but we are gaining some building material that will be like stone. He asked if the letter that would be coming to Mr. Bass regarding deviations to the code Would be enforced, and if it would be part of the motion, like a contract, not just a wish list, Mr. Bass replied that the PD Site Plan includes every one of those as a design feature, Mr. Owens asked the applicant if he understood that the letter is going to be a contract, and that it is going to be on the ground when they finish. Mr. McHenry stated that he fully understands that. Commissioner Owens asked City Attorney Bob McFarland if this was enough to 90 to court on, 11!#r. McFarland answered that the applicant does not get the deviations unless they are included in the PD. l`,llr. Kruckemeyer stated that in every one of the situations where just a corner of a building sticks t flint'ISSU)!` kIRNUTE"Is OF OCTOU-R.6, 19A over the building line it is for a major tree out there. Mr. Owens stated that he did not see much here about lighting, and that he is very concerned about beneficial lighting around these apartments. Mr. Bass stated that this project will conform to the lighting ordinance; and that we will see that at the construction plan phase. Commissioner Shuler stated that she appreciated the citizens that have cared enough about the City to come out and voice their opinion about their neighborhood. She stated that, like them, she would rather see single family homes here, but that it was not going to happen. So the best thing we can do is to get the best we can. She stated that she is a nature lover, but the people who own the property are not going to give it to us for a bargain, so the best advantage we can do is to get a good looking project. it is true that when you build a single family project, you would lose a lot more trees than will be lost with this project. She stated that she is not sure what they are offering is a „wash"with what we are giving away, but that she is satisfied with the project. Mr. Echevarrla asked Joy if She thought her house would sell if it was next to apartments. She replied that while a person would not list "is it next to apartments" as a criteria for buying a house, if they saw this perhaps they would. She stated that in that section of town there are some very nice looking apartment complexes, and the landscaping was as nice as the area where she lives. Mrs. Morris stated that she had not heard anything about the schools as far as the direct effect an population in their classrooms, and she said she wondered if this was because it was in the Grapevine-Colleyville school district. Commissioners Owens and Bright stated that Mr. Gist had answered that question. Mrs. Morris replied that she did not hear any numbers and stated that he was just speculating. Chairman Young asked Mr. Bass to address this question. Another member of the audience stated that the schools were overflowing, Mr. Bass stated that the audience should talk to the Grapevine-Colleyville ISIS abort this, because the school district has known since the early 1980's that this property was zoned multi-farrli€y. He stated that when the school district designs the capacities of their buildings, they base it on zoning. A member of the audience asked what was going to be done about the protection of a federally protected animal when this project would destroy its habitat. Mr. Bass stated that this would surely be a crncern if it was a fact, requested that the speaker show that it was a fact through federal documentation, and stated that he would welcome that. Chairman Young asked Commissioner Bright to continue the Commissioners' discussion. She stated that she understand how the audience feels, and reminded them that she had earlier stated that she does not want any more apartments. She said; however, that we cannot keep people from selling their lard for development. She stated that what they were trying therefore to do is get the best thing there is since the City cannot afford to buy it for a park. She said that maybe the audience members can get together and buy it for a park. A member of the audience interrupted Commissioner Bright. Mr. McFarland asked Chairman Young if he could crake a suggestion. He suggested that the audience understand that they were afforded an opportunity for a public hearing as the law provides, that the public hearing is closed, and that while it is the prerogative of the Chairman and the Commission to engage in one on one debate, the public hearing has been closed, and the rules of this Commission as they adopted them limit public input to the public hearing. He noted that Chairman Young has graciously extended that on occasion, and he has the right to do that, but he suggested to the Chairman that if he wished to continue allowing one on one debate into the night that it ought to be a Commission decision whether they want to deviate from their rules to that extent. Mr. Echevarria asked if he could infer from Mr. McFarland's statement that he was doing the audience a favor. Mr. McFarland replied no, that he was calling to the Commission's attention their own rules that they have adopted. P1,:1N I'�G.AND ZOINING CONW-MISSION Prif.:I: i N1.t':VIDT S OF fJCA Q BER 6, 1998 Commissioner Bright stated that the runway has impacted this area and that she thinks this is a great project for this area. Chairman Young c-ailed or, Commissioner Eggers to continue the discussion. Commissioner Eggers stated that he shared a lot of these people's feelings that this is a unique piece of property with a lot of beautiful trees on it. He stated that he lives can the north side of town, He asked the members of the audience if they owned that piece of property what they would do with it. He stated that he was open to one on one conversations, and asked Mr. Echevarria what he would do with the property if he owned it. Commissioner Eggers stated that Mr. Echevarria would probably do ghat was best for himself if he owned the property. Mr. Echevarria stated that if he owned the property he would build a large home on it. Commissioner Eggers stated that the reason single family residences are not allowed on the east side of Fuller-Wiser is because of DF`dU airport and the noise that comes out of that airport. Mr, Echevarria asked if that would stand in court. Commissioner Eggers replied that it has been tried in court to get the noise reduced. He stated that we do not want the trees to be torn down to build single family houses or a business e we all avant it left as a natural area, but we have to think of the individual or company that owns that property, paying taxes on it every year but getting no return on it, Chairman Young stated that to his way of thinking, apartments anywhere in Euless are not desirable, with the exception of land that we cannot do anything else with. He stated that it is not his first choice to have apartments here, and would agree that every blade of grass should be left in a natural state if he owned it. He stated that he concurred with Commissioner Eggers that the people who own the property are doing what is in their best interest under the guidelines and ordinances that the City of Euless have adopted. Commissioner Owens mentioned a petition submitted as part of the 121 Gateway District Rezoning, stating that the petition shows that it is not only the Corrlmission and the audience who want fewer apartments; it is people from all over the city. He stated, however, that these are upscale apartments and that he thinks that is the best we can do. Commissioner Zahn moved to recommend approval of Planned Development Case #98-02-PD. Commissioner Shuler seconded the motion. Chairman Young reminded the audience that the Commission is a recommending body; and that the City Council will make the final decision the next Tuesday night, the thirteenth, and he encouraged the audience to come back and make their desires known to the City Council at that tune, Commissioner Eggers, with Chairman Young's permission to speak, reiterated what the Chairman had said and thanked the audience members for staying that long. The vote was as fellows: Ayes: Commissioner Shuler, Bright, YOUng, Eggers, Zahn Nays: Commissioner Owens Abstain-, None Absent.- Commissioner McMillon The motion carried. ' 1U r,S -011:�1V � €p ITEM 11 PUBLIC HEARING _ SPECIFIC USE PERMIT - #98-30-SUP - UNITED DOMINION (DOMINION AT BEAR CREEK) Public input regarding the request of Mark McHenry, UDR Western Residential, Inc. for a specific use permit to allow a multi-family residential development of 17.2 units per acre located in the S. TLIcker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tracts 3A1, 3A2, 3C, and portions of Tracts 4 and 5; currently in the CUD 351 (Community Unit Development for multi-family with varying densities; and C-2 (Community Business District)zoning district Mr. Bass gave a brief description of the case and stated that staff recommended approval. He stated that the principal purpose of a Specific Use Permit is to determine whether or not a project can adequately mitigate all of the on-site and off-site negative impacts. He said that the on-site negative impact of any project in a wooded area like this is the destruction of the woods, but that this applicant has done everything humanly possible to mitigate that tree resource lass. He stated that huller-Wiser has been developed to its fullest extent, that TxDOT will modify some of the medians on Mid-Cities Boulevard to prevent any cross traffic on Poppy; and that access is provided on S. H. 360. Chairman Young asked the applicant or a representative to give a snort presentation and opened the public hearing. Mr. McHenry asked that the Commission approve this SUP as presented and as recommended by staff. Seeing that there were. no other speakers, Chain Young closed the public hearing. ITEM 12 RECOMMENDATION - SPECIFIC USE PERMIT - #98-39-SUP - UNITED DOMINION (DOMINION AT BEAR CREEK) Consider a recommendation regarding the request of Mark McHenry, UDR Western Residential, Inc. for a specific use perm-nit to allow a mufti-family residential development of 17.2 units per acre located in the S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512: Tracts 3A1, 3A2, 3C. and portions of Tracts 4 and 5; Currently in the CUD 851 (Community Unit Development for multi-family with varying densities) and C-2 (Comirunity Business District) zoning district Commissioner Eggers moved to recommend approval for Specific Use Permit Case #98-30-SUP. Commissioner Shuler seconded the motion. Chairman Young called for discussion and asked Mr. Kruckemeyer if he had any comments. Mr. Kruckemeyer requested that the Commission add a comment to the motion that the approval of this SUP does not necessarily approve the utilities and public improvements as shown on the Exhibit, since that will be determined as part of the Construction Plans, Commissioner Eggers amended his motion: and Commissioner Bright accepted the amendment for her second. The vote was as follows-. Ayes: Commissioner Shuler, Bright, Young, Eggers, Zahn, Owens Nays: None Abstain: None Absent: Commissioner McMillon P1,AA; "IN i AND s7NIA:CsC'OINIMISSION R!"k E 2E MIN UTFS 01;OCT01-11:V, The motion carried. ITEM 13 CONSIDERATION - LAND PLAN -#98-14-LP - UNITED DOMINION (DOMINION AT BEAR CREEK) Consider the request of Mark McHenry, UDR Western Residential, Inc. for a land plan of 2424 acres located in the Edward Taylor Surrey, Abstract 1553. The proposed iand is for multi-family residential. Mr. Bass gave a brief description of the case. He stated that the Land Plan is a ministerial function, and that the Commission provides final approval. He stated that it meets the submission requirements for a Land Plan. He stated that the purpose of a Land Plan is to show the general configuration of the layout in terms of off-site access and the position of public improvements. He reminded the Commission that approval of the Land Plan gives the applicant permission to proceed with the Preliminary Plat and the Construction Plans for public Improvements. He stated that staff recommends approval, Chairman Young asked Mr. Kruckemeyer if he was satisfied with the water and sewer layout. Mr. Kruckemeyer replied that he was. He stated that he has some concerns with drainage, but the Land Plan is concept only. He stated that the concept will work, they just do not know the sizes of the drainage facilities yet Commissioner Zahn moved to approve Land Plan Case #98-14-LP_ Commissioner Owens seconded the motion. Commissioner Shuler asked if the DRC comment that detailed engineering and hydraulics plans may require a redesign� to meet City requirements should be part of the motion. Mr. Kruckemeyer stated that he thinks this was taken care of as part of the last motion. He stated that there has not been time to do a complete hydraulic study at this print, but that is part of the Construction Plans. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioner Shuler, Bright, Young, Eggers, Zahn, Owens Nays: none Abstain: None Absent: Commissioner McMillon The motion carried. NOTE: Commissioner Eggers left the meeting due to travel arrangements. ITEM 14 PUBLIC HEARING - #98-118-UDC - AMORTIZATION OF NON COMFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES Public input regarding a request by the City of Euless to amend Chapter 84 "Unified Development Code" to provide for the termination of non-conforming uses and structures by the Zoning Board of Adjustment through a plan of amortization by the addition of a new Section 84-59 ?.11\L'1'1=.�C.1F iin:ifii'i It�, i99t3 Mr. Bass gave a brig description of the case, He stated that the current Unified Development Code regulations provide some basic guidelines for the amortization of non-conforming ;and uses beta does not have the teeth to connect to state law. He stated that the version before the Commission is still being evaluated by Council for some minor changes. First, Council had asked Mr. McFarland to determine whether they or the Commission could be the body that determines the amortization period. Second, staff is very concerned that the wording of item (e) within the ordinance is too general; and has requested that this be reworded unless that wording is required by state law. He stated that because Council is most interested in getting this incorporated within the UDC as soon as possible, he was asking the Commission to recommend approval of it tonight while recognizing that there are unanswered questions. Chairman Young opened +he public hearing. There being no speakers, he closed the hearing. ITEM 15 RECOMMENDATION -#98-08-UDC -AMORTIZATION OF NON COMFORMINO USES AND STRUCTURES Consider a recommendation regarding the request by the City of Euless to amend Chapter 84 "Unified Development Code' to provide for the termination of non- conforming eases and structures by the Zoning Board of Adjustment through a plan of amortization by the addition of a new Section 84-59 Chairman Young asked Mr. McFarland if he had comments regarding this ordinance, Mr, McFarland stated that UDC already extends to the Zoning Board of Adjustrnent the authority to terminate nonconforming uses; it simply does not provide a procedure for that. He stated that the zoning codes of most of the area cities provide a specific procedure for the ZBA's termination of nonconforming uses. He stated that the only procedure the courts of Texas have authorized is to establish an amortization period in which the property owner can fully amortize their investment in the property, pleas certain other costs. He said the language used in item Eej was taken verbatim out os the most recent court opinions of the state appellate courts in construing aimortization ordinances and cases of other cities. He stated that the Texas courts have established certain standards. For example; there must be evidentiary hearings held to determine the owners investment in the property at the time it became nonconforming, and then a reasonable period of time must be established for the property owner to amortize that investment and obtain a return. Other than the cost of the expense of conducting the hearing, this should afford no additional cost to the city. He stated that item (e) can be modified to provide clarification of the court's meaning. Commissioner Zahn asked if single family residential properties could be excluded from this ordinance, expressing concern that this procedure might be used by neighbors for every carport and storage building that was nonconforming. Mr. McFarland replied that the ZBA also has toconsider the effect of the nonconforming use on surrounding property: and so on. He also stated that the burden of proof, and therefore the expense of the proof, is oil the applicant for all portions of the procedure. Commissioner Zahn moved to recommend approval of Ordinance No. 1841, and Commissioner Owens seconded the motion. Commissioner Shuier asked if she owned a nonconforming cleaners and she Was told that she had twenty years to get her money out of it, whether there would be anything to prevent her from neglecting the maintenance of the building toward the end of the Nventy years. Mr. McFarland stated that property owners will have to maintain code standards. R'1611 of:OCTOBER 6, 19A Council member Carl Tyson asked if the verbiage of the ordinance was going to be changed. Mr. McFarland replied that he will probably have one or more amendments to the ordinance for the Council to consider. He stated that he is trying to obtain a copy of the Dallas ordinance because it has probably been the subject of more court appeals than any ordinance i1n, the state, to see how they address the issue in question. He stated that the Council can consider amendments to an ordinance that is recommended for approval by the Commission. Mr. Bass mentioned that this ordinance goes before Council the next Tuesday. The vote was as follows- Ayes: Commissioner Shuler, Bright, Young, Zahn, Owens Nays: None Abstain: None Absent: Commissioner McMillon, Eggers The motion? carried. ITEM 16 REPORTS ITEM 17 DIRECTOR'S REPORT There was no Director's Report. ADJOURNMENT., There being no further business, Chairman Young adjourned the meeting at 11:35 p.m. Frf, Chairman Ronald,Y � ate