Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-21 AGENDA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION City of Euless Council Chambers — Building "B" 201 N. Ector Drive, Euless; Texas 76039 September 21, 1999 5:30 P,M. — Pre-Commission Meeting (Conference Room — Building "C") 7:00 P.M. — Call to Order (Council Chambers — Building "B') PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -- Commissioner McNeese INVOCATION — Commissioner Houk APPROVAL OF MINUTES — Regular meeting of August 17, 1999 AGENDA ITEMS. ITEM 1 CASE #99-08-PD - PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Receive public input regarding a request for a Planned Development, changing the zoning of 21.3 acres located in the Flight Instrument Addition, Block 1, Lot 1 with adjoining street right of way, (recently disannexed from the City of Foil !North, Texas) from R-1 (Single Family Detached Dwelling District) into PD (Planned Development for an Indoor and Outdoor Public Recreational Facility based on C-2 Community Business District zoning). The City of Euless has proposed annexing this property, on which site a City owned ice hockey arena may be built. This property is bounded on the north and west by South Pipeline Road and is approximately 1,600 feet west F.M. 157. ITEM 2 CASE #99-06-PD - RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Planned Development, changing the zoning of 21.3 acres located in the Flight Instrument Addition, Block 1, Lot 1 with adjoining street right of way, (recently disannexed from the City of Fort Worth, Texas) from R-1 (Single Family Detached Dwelling District) into PD (Planned Development for an Indoor and Outdoor Public Recreational Facility based or, C-2 Community .Business District zoning). The City of Euless has proposed annexing this property, on which site a City owned ice hockey arena may be built. This property is bounder( on the north and west by South Pipeline Road and is approximately 1,600 feet west F.M. 157. Plann:ny&Zoninz,Conamission Agenda September 21, 1999 ITEM 3 CASE #99-14-SUP — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Receive public input regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for 6.17 acres located in the Flight Instrument Addition, Block 1, Lot 1, recently disannexed from the City of Fort Worth, Texas, for a Publicly Owned Recreational Site with Limited Alcohol Sales and Consumption in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for an Indoor and Outdoor Public Recreational Facility based on C-2 Community Business District zoning). The City of Euless has proposed annexing this property, on which site a City owned ice hockey arena may be built. This property is bounded on the north and west by South Pipeline Road and is approximately 1,600 feet west F.M. 157. ITEM 4 CASE #99-14-SUP — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Consider a recommendation regarding the request for a Specific Use Permit for 6.17 acres located in the Flight Instrument Addition, Block 1, Lot 1, recently disannexed from the City of Fort Worth, Texas, for a Publicly Owned Recreational Site with Limited Alcohol Sales and Consumption in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for an Indoor and Outdoor Public Recreational Facility based on C-2 Community Business District zoning). The C: of Euless has proposed annexing this property, on which site a City owned ice hockey arena may be built. This property is bounded on the north and west by South Pipeline Road and is approximately 1,600 feet west F.M. 157, ITEM 5 CASE #99-06-PD — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Receive public input regarding a request for a Planned Development changing the zoning of S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey, Abstract 512., Tract 2. This request is for changing the zoning from CUD 678 (Community Unit Development for Multi-family at various densities and Community Business District) and CUD 754 (Community Unit Development for C-1 Neighborhood Business District, C- 2 Community Business District, Multi-family at various densities, and 1-1 Light Industrial District) into PD (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-3 Multiple-Family Low Density Dwelling District), This property is located at the southwest corner of Bear Creek Parkway and Hill Trail Drive. Planning&Zoning Cornmission .".genda Q September 21, 1999 ITEM 6 CASE #99-06-PD — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Planned Development changing the zoning of S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey, Abstract 512, Tract 2. This request is for changing the zoning from CUD 678 (Community Unit Development for Multi-family at various densities and Community Business District) and CUD 754 (Community Unit Development for C-1 Neighborhood Business District, C-2 Community Business District, Multi-family at various densities, and 1-1 Light Industrial District) into PD (Planned Development for multi- family based on R-3 Multiple-Family Low Density Dwelling District), This property is located at the southwest corner of Bear Creek Parkway and Hill Trail Drive. ITEM 7 CASE #99-09-SUP — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Receive public input regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey, Abstract 512, Tract 2 for a multi-family residential development in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-3 Multiple-Family Low Density Dwelling District). This property is located at the southwest corner of Bear Creek Parkway and Hill Trail Drive, ITEM 8 CASE #99-09-SUP ® RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey, Abstract 512, Tract, 2 for a multi-family residential development in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-3 Multiple-Family Low Density Dwelling District).. This property is located at the southwest corner of Bear Creek Parkway and Hill Trail Drive. ITEM 9 CASE #99-09-SP — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SITE PLAN Consider a recommendation regarding the request for a Site Plan for a multi-family complex proposed to be located in the S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey, Abstract 512, Tract 2, at the southwest corner of Bear Creek Parkway and Hill Trail Drive. Plaming& Zoning Commission Anada S,-Dternber 21. 1999 ITEM 10 CASE #99-07-PD — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Receive public input regarding a request for a Planned Development changing the zoning of Villages of Bear Creek, Block 11, Lot 2, from CUD 754 (Community Unit Development for C-1 Neighborhood Business District, C-2 Community Business District, Multi-family at various densities, and 1-1 Light Industrial District) into PD (Planned Development for multi- family based on R-4 Multiple-Family Medium Density Dwelling District)- This property is located south of Ash Lane on the east side of Bear Creek Parkway. ITEM 11 CASE #99-07-PD — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Planned Development changing the zoning of Villages of Bear Creek, Block 11, Lot 2, from CUD 754 (Community Unit Development for C-1 Neighborhood Business District, C-2 Community Business District, Multi-family at various densities, and 1-1 Light Industrial District) into PD (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-4 Multiple-Family Medium Density Dwelling District). This property is located south of Ash Lane on the east, side of Bear Creek Parkway. ITEM 12 CASE #99-12-SUP — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Receive public input regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for Villages of Bear Creek, Block 11, Lot 2, for a multi-family residential development in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for multi family based on R-4 Multiple-Family Medium Density Dwelling District). This property is located south of Ash Lane on the east side of Bear Creek Parkway. ITEM 13 CASE #99-12-SUP — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for Villages of Bear Creek, Block 11, Lot 2, for a multi-family residential development in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-4 Multiple-Family Medium Density Dwelling District). This property is located south of Ash Lane on the east side of Bear Creek Parkway, '1annin 4&Zon;t:g Com-mission Agenda 5 September?1. 1999 ITEM 14 CASE #99-15-SP — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SITE PLAN Consider a recommendation regarding the request for a Site Plan for Phase 11 of an existing multi-family complex (Sandstone Apartments). This property is located in the Villages of Bear Creek, Block 11. Lot 2: south of Ash Lane on the east side of Bear Creek Parkway. ITEM 15 CASE #99-03-LP — CONSIDERATION OF A LAND PLAN Consider a request for a Land Plan of 21.4 acres located in the Terrell Jasper Survey, Abstract Igo. 861, Tracts 5A, 5A2, 5A2A, and 5A3 in the 1766 block of S. H, 183 ( 'Jest Airport Freeway) on the south side of the freeway. ITEM 16 CASE #99-10-SUP — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Receive public input regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for portions of Terrell Jasper Survey, Abstract No. 861, Tract 5A2A and Tract 5A2, for an automotive general repair and automotive paint and body repair business in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development based on C-2 Community Business District zoning, with private drives allowed by right). This property is located in the 1760 block of S. H. 183 (West Airport Freeway) on the south side of the freeway. ITEM 17 CASE #99-10-SUP — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for portions of Terrell Jasper Survey, Abstract No. 861, Tract 5A2A and Tract 5A2, for an automotive general repair and automotive paint and body repair business in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development based on C-2 Community Business District zoning, with private drives allowed by right). This property is located in the 1700 block of S. H. 183 (West Airport Freeway) on the south side of the freeway. ITEM 18 CASE #99-10-SP ® RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SITE PLAN Consider a recommendation regarding the request for a Site Plan for an automotive general repair and automotive paint and body repair business proposed to be located on portions of Terrell Jasper Survey, Abstract No. 861, Tract 5A2A and Tract 5A2, in the 1700 block of S. H. 183 (West Airport Freeway) on the south side of the freeway. Plan 3i-3g fit Zoning Cob i.m.ission A�„enda 6 Sgntembe:21, 199,) ITEM 19 REPORTS ITEM 20 DIRECTOR'S REPORT POSTED THIS 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1999, AT 400 P.M. ------------- WAL. — Gi a Individual Posting�Notice It you plan to attend this public meeting and you have a disabiiity that requires special arrangements at the meeting, please contact our off r at;8'?;585-1&23. Reasonable accomm iodations will be made to asst your needs. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 21, 1999 MINUTES The Pre-Commission meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Commissioner Zahn at 5:30 p.m. in the Building "C' Conference Room. Five members of the Planning and Zoning Commission were in aftendance. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF SCHEDULED ITEMS -- COUNCIL. CHAMBERS Commissioner Zahn called the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. for the consideration of scheduled items. He stated there were 5 members of the Planning and Zoning Commission present and that Commissioner Bright was absent. MEMBERS AND STAFF PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Katherine Houk Nancy Bright Richard McNeese George Zahn Billy Owens Robert McMiilon Cara Tyson; City Council Member Paul Wieneskie, City Attorney Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development Carol Griffith, Planning Services Manager Donna Brown, Administrative Secretary Andrea Baxter, Director of Economic Development Ron Young, Assistant Director of Public Works and City Engineer Gary Johnson, Senior Civil Engineer Michael Logan, Fire Marshal VISITORS PRESENT Helen Humphrey Patricia Rubeck Billy R. Humphrey Mary Kusi Bob Welty Pam Froelich Daniel Lim Stacy Smith Mark Welty Eric Wilhite Scott Elfstrorn Donna Hooker Nancy Hart Thomas L. Hoover Patricia A. King Bryan D. Klein At Patel PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND INVOCATION: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner McNeese and the Invocation was given by Commissioner Houk. Commissioner Zahn stated that City COUncil has accepted the resignation of Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman Ron Young and that he is the Vice-Chairman. He opened the floor for a nomination for Temporary Chairman for this meeting. Commissioner Owens moved PLAWNG AND ZONING COPS MISSiGN PAGE 2 MINUTES OF SEPTEMP ER 21. 1999 to appoint Robert McMillon to serve as Temporary Chairman until the next election of officers, Comrnissioner McNeese seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Zahn, McNeese., Owens, McMillon, Houk. Nays: None The motion carried. Acting Chairman McMillon stated the rules for a Public Hearing. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM I CASE #99-08-PD — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Receive public input regarding a request for a Planned Development, changing the zoning of 21.3 acres located in the Flight Instrument Addition, Block 1, Lot I with adjoining street right of way, (recently disannexed from the City of Fort '01orth, Texas) from R-1 (Single Family Detached Dwelling District) into PD (Planned Development for an Indoor and Outdoor Public Recreational Facility based on C-2 Community Business District zoning). The City of Euless has proposed annexing this property, on which site a City owned ice hockey arena may be buift. This property is bounded on the north and west by South Pipeline Road and is approximately 1,600 feet west F.M. 157, Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development, introduced the case and stated that the City of Fort 'Worth had disannexed 21.3 acres from its corporate limits, making it possible for the City of Euless to annex it into our corporate limits. He stated that the City Council would be annexing this land officially on October 12, 1999 as well as changing the zoning. He stated that the change in zoning is necessary because our code specifically says that any land that is annexed into the city must come in as R-1 single family, and that the code also says that public recreational facilities may not be built on R-1 zoning'. therefore, it is necessary to change the zoning. Acting Chairman McMillon opened the Public Hearing and seeing there were no speakers, he closed the Public Hearing, ITEM 2 CASE #99-08-PD - RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Planned Development, changing the zoning of 21.3 acres located in the Flight Instrument Addition, Block 1, Lot I with adjoining street right of way, (recently disannexed from the City of Fort Worth, Texas', from R--1 (Single Family Detached Dwelling District) into PD (Planned Development for an Indoor and Outdoor Public Recreational Facility based on C-2 Community Business District zoning). The City of Euless has proposed annexing this property, on which site a City owned ice hockey arena may be built. This property is bounded on the north and west by South Pipeline Road and is approximately 1,600 feet west F.M. 157, PLANNING AND ZONING COPS PAGE 3 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21, 1999 Commissioner Zahn stated he thought it is a good project for the City, and he was in favor. Commissioner McNeese stated he wanted to understand the lease purchase agreement between the City and the Stars organization, He asked if it would be a 20 year lease financed by public bonds sold by the City and if the Stars through their lease payments would retire the bond indebtedness. Mr. Bass stated that was the plan but that the Stars would also operate and manage the facility. Commissioner McNeese asked if there would be any kind of revenue split in the agreement. Mr. Bass asked Andrea Baxter, Director of Economic Development, if she knew . of any revenue split. Ms, Baxter answered no, Commissioner McNeese then asked if there would be two 5 year options after the 20 years, to which Mr. Bass answered that was correct. Commissioner McNeese stated he thought this center was a great idea to get the youth involved and a very good project for the City of Euless, and that the only thing he wanted to know was what the City would do about the future plans for soccer, Commissioner Houk stated she was strongly in support of this project but that she had a suggestion. She stated the City could build the ice skating rink on S.H. 183 on the South side and build the soccer fields also. Commissioner Houk asked if the annexation would be a friendly one., to which Mr. Bass answered yes, and then Commissioner Houk asked Mr. Bass to go through the logistics of the timetable. Mr. Bass described the legal timetable for annexation, which would take 90 days. Commissioner Owens stated he was for this project all the way and that he was glad the area was beginning to look like an entertainment district. Acting Chairman McMillon stated he too supported the case. Commissioner Zahn moved to approve Planned Development Case #99-08-PD. Commissioner McNeese seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Zahn, McNeese, Owens, McMillon, Houk. Nays-. None The motion carried. ITEM 3 CASE #99-14-SUP — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Receive public input regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for 6.17 acres located in the Flight Instrument Addition, Block 1, Lot 1, recently disannexed from the City of Fort Worth, Texas, for a Publicly Owned Recreational Site with Limited Alcohol Sales and Consumption in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for an Indoor and Outdoor Public Recreational Facility based on C-2 Community Business District zoning). The City of Euless has proposed annexing this property, on which site a City owned ice hockey arena may be built. This property is bounded on the north and west by South Pipeline Road and is approximately 1,600 feet west F.M. 157, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 4 %?INl}4ES OF SEPTEMBER 23, 1999 Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development, gave a description of the case and the rules regarding alcoholic beverage sales and consumption in the City of Euless. He stated that alcohol could be consumed in this city if a business is in the appropriate zoning and has a TABC, [Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission]. He continued that the City requires a Specific Use Permit if the gross dollar amount received from alcohol sales exceeds the amount received from food sales. Mr. Bass stated as an aspect of the operation of this facility the Dallas Stars has requested and City Council is most interested in allowing limited alcohol consumption and sales on this site. Mr. Bass stated that staff recommended approval of the Specific Use Permit for this site and that the SUP that allows alcohol sales on property would be limited specifically to the Dallas Stars arena. He continued that there is a note on the face of the SUP to be approved that specifically says that alcohol sales and consumption would be exclusively limited to the confines of the building proper, i.e., you can only drink inside, not outside. Acting Chairman McMillon opened the Public Hearing but seeing no speakers, he closed the Public Hearing. ITEM 4 CASE #99-14-SUP — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Consider a recommendation regarding the request for a Specific Use Permit for 6.17 acres located in the Plight Instrument Addition. Bloch 'I, Lot 1, recently disannexed from the City of Fort Worth, Texas, for a Publicly Owned Recreational Site with Limited Alcohol Sales and Consumption in Planned Development Zoning (Planned Development for an Indoor and Outdoor Public Recreational Facility Lased on C-2 Community Business District zoning). The City of Euless has proposed annexing this property; on which site a City owned ice hockey arena may be built. This property is bounded on the north and west by South Pipeline Road and is approximately 1,600 feet west E.M. 157. commissioner Owens stated he had no reservations about approving this Case but he asked Mr. Bass to identify the attachments, Mr. Bass answered there are two ordinances: one associated with the PD and one associated with the SUP. He stated that these have not been reviewed by the City Attorney but because the annexation is compressed within the 00 day period, staff is really pressed for time, therefore both the PD and SUP ordinances are drafts only. He asked for the commissioners' understanding since City Council only reached an agreement with the Stars last Tuesday. Mr. Bass stated staff's recommendation for approval was conditional to both the City Attorney's approval of the two ordinances as well as Council's approval of the two ordinances. Mr. Bass stated that he wanted to clarify the misunderstanding that the public was going to put in infrastructure. He said that the Dallas Stars are putting in a lot of waste water and drainage facilities, as well as parking improvements, and that the Dallas Stars plan to have a concession stand inside the building. Commissioner Owens asked for more information on the parking lot. Andrea Baxter, Director of Economic Development, answered that the Stars would be providing 125 parking spaces that the City had been planning for Phase 11 of the Parrs at Texas Star. She stated that the Stars will install a water line from Pipeline Road all the way past the soccer field and tie into the City's existing complex to the wrest. In addition the Stars are adding a sanitary sewer main up east and north to their facility, plus the Stars are installing approximately $150,000 worth of drainage improvements that the City would have had to install as part of the master plan. Ms. Baxter stated that a parks master plan drawing shows a free standing concession stand approximately at this location, but because the Stars have agreed to locate a concession stand at the southeast corner of their- PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 5 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 2:, 1999 faCi'ity with a door or a window to the outside, the City would not have to bear the cost of installing the concession stand that had been planned. Commissioner Owens asked what the City's participation in this project would be. Ms. Baxter answered that the City of Euless would be constructing 286 parking spaces and purchasing the land. Acting Chairman McMillon asked for a motion. Commissioner Zahn made the motion to approve Specific Use Permit Case #99-14-SUP. Commissioner McNeese seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Zahn, McNeese, Owens, McMillon, Houk, Nays: None The motion carried. ITEM 5 CASE #99-06-PD — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Receive public input regarding a request for a Planned Development chancing the zoning of S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512; Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey, Abstract 512; Tract 2. This request is for changing the zoning from CUD 6673 {Community Unit Development for Multi-family- at various densities and Community Business District) and CUD 754 (Community Unit Development for C-1 Neighborhood Business District, C-2 Community Business District, Multi- family at various densities, and I-1 Light Industrial District) into PD (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-3 Multiple-Family Low Density Dwelling District). This property is located at the southwest corner of Bear Creek Parkway and Hill Trail Drive. Bo Bass: Director of Planning and Development: introduced the case giving location and current zoning. Mr. Bass stated that this PD is surrounded by multi-family zoning and parr property, with single family across Fuller Wiser. He continued that most of the Planning and Zoning Commissioners as well as Cite Council through a variety of public hearings over the last two and a half years has decided the City will have multi-family whether we like it or not along S.H. 360, but that it would meet a very high standard. He stated the site is heavily impacted by flood plain frorn Little Bear Creek and is a very hard spot to develop. Mr. Bass stated this site could not be single family because of the airport and that it is too far to be commercial. Mr. Bass stated that the nature of a PD itself involves Changes from existing standards, and that we would not have Planned Developments if everyone could build within the standards established by the Code which is the starting point. He stated this project meets and exceeds most of the City's landscape standards but does not meet the minirnum standards established in the new Ordinance on parking; nevertheless, staff feels the design warrants some exceptions. He also stated there are some other elements of concern, for example, the significant flood plain associated with Little Bear Greer, but that this project is proposing shifting the flood plain down or south. Commissioner Houk asked what would happen to the Euless Tree Nursery. Mr. Bass answered it stays intact because it is further south. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 6 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21, 1999 Acting Chairman McMillon opened the Public Hearing. Bob Welty, 5207 McKinney, Dallas, Texas, of Welty and Associates stated he was representing the applicant on this Case. Mr. Welty pointed out that this project is about an 18 Y2 acre site and due to the topography of the land it uses only about half of that site, and that the owner had agreed to deed the remainder of about 9 acres to the City as an extension of Little Bear Creek Park. Patricia King, 2198 Erwin Drive, Euless, Texas, stated she is not in favor of this apartment complex on such a small piece of land and that she would rather have the park extended, Mary Kusi, 2199 Erwin Drive, Euless, Texas, stated she has lived in Euless for 16 years and that she agreed with Ms. King that she would rather have a bigger park, Mr. Welty came back to the podium to explain that the owners of this project i also owned and developed the Stonebridge property across the street from this site as well as the Oakmont property adjacent to that, with the intent of keeping these properties. He stated Stonebridge has been 98% full and Oakmont will all be leased by opening day" these two properties offer no giveaways but are considered very good products. Acting Chairman McMillon closed the Public Hearing, ITEM 6 CASE #99-06-PD — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Planned Development changing the zoning of S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey, Abstract 512, Tract 2, This request is for changing the zoning from CUD 678 (Community Unit Development for Multi-family at various densities and Community Business District) and CUD 754 (Community Unit Development for C-1 Neighborhood Business District, C-2 Community Business District, Multi-family at various densities, and 1-1 Light Industrial District) into PD (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-3 Multiple-Family Low Density Dwelling District". This property is located at the southwest corner of Bear Creek Parkway and Hill Trail Drive. Commissioner Zahn stated it appeared to him the applicant had done a great job of putting a projects on that piece of property and that he was in favor of this PD. Acting Chairman McMillon asked staff to point out the location of the 9 acres to be given to the City of Euless. Mr. Bass answered they are on the south property line running parallel to the end of the construction. He stated Rick Herold, Director of Community Services, is most interested in acquiring the property. Commissioner McNeese asked if this Project Would be a gated community. Mr. Welty answered yes, Commissioner McNeese also asked if there would be any on-site security: to which Mr. Welty answered no. Commissioner McNeese then asked what the rent range would be for this project. Mr. Welty answered it would probably be from $0.93 to $0.97 per square foot. Commissioner McNeese asked if the owners are planning long term ownership of this PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 2 . 1999 project as with the other two, to which mentioned before to what Mr. Welty answered yes. Commissioner McNeese stated he was not sure what the City is getting on the 9 acres. Mr. Bass pointed out on the map where the tree farm and trails are and stated that there are already soccer fields on private property. Commissioner McNeese stated another concern he has is the tremendous erosion of the channel. Mr. Welty answered that when the same owner developed the Oakmont property he extended the easement line which extended the storm sewer line at the south end, and that he had actually built an erosion proof structure to handle all that water. Commissioner McNeese also stated he has a problem} with all the exceptions to the code. He said that even though staff feels they are reasonable, he was not convinced they are, for example the density of the project. Commissioner Houk asked if there was any historical significance about an old roadway that goes through the northwest corner with a bridge over the culvert. She stated the other concern she had is the addition of more people to the park. She asked what the City could do to preserve the integrity of the park and not have the trails over walked. Mr. Bass answered perhaps the maintenance could be increased over a period of time. Commissioner Owens stated he appreciated the fact that the applicant wanted to give the City the 9 acres but in his opinion the City has enough parks. He then asked the City Attorney if the Planning and Zoning Commission has the authority to approve accepting any donations of the land perhaps when this project reached the platting stage. Paul Wieneskie, City Attorney, answered that the Commission does not have the authority to accept that kind of dedication. Commissioner Owens stated that one of the things that really bothered him was some deviations from standard stuff, for example masonry, parking spaces and setbacks: and that unless the applicant could come up with some alternatives litre reducing the density to 12 units, he could not support the project. Mr. Welty told Commissioner Owens that the project would have 50% red brick. 40% plaster and 10% siding which complies with the new ordinance standards. He continued that the ordinance requesting 6 units per building is not very reasonable. He said that regarding direct access garages, they went half way by designing some units with garages and some units without direct access garages which would lower the rent probably 10 cents per square feet on average, Commissioner Owens asked the applicant if there was anything he could change for the Commission to look at it in a different way. Mr. Welty answered that it is the owner's intention to have trash pickup twice a week but that to have only one trash receptacle is very impractical for this particular site. Commissioner Owens asked the applicant if he had to have 12 units per building, to which Mr. Welty answered that from a density stand point they tried: to use as much of the buildable land as possible and that if the City did not want 9 acres of land for a park that was fine; but they could change the density based on that. Commissioner Houk advised the applicant not to deviate from the building coverage of 14,5% and that given the topography and terrain what the applicant is trying to do is the best way possible. Commissioner McNeese asked for some clarification on the percentage of masonry because there seemed to be a discrepancy. Mr. Welty answered that the ordinance requires 90% masonry and that he could guarantee the project would be in excess of 90% masonry on all buildings. He said that some of the patios, balconies, and corridors may end up as "hardiplank" which is a cement siding material. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION `AGE 8 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21. 1,999 Acting Chairman McMillon stated that the density on this property is about 10 units per acre over the whole site. He continued that he was unclear about the fencing on the property. Mr. Welty stated there would be a wrought iron fence around the entire property. Commissioner Zahn made the )notion to recommend approval of Planned Development Case #99-06-PD with the understanding that the fence shall be as shown on sheet 3 of the submitted plans. Commissioner Houk seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Zahn, Owens, McMillon. Houk. Nays: McNeese The motion carried. ITEM 7 CASE #99-09-SUP -- PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Receive public input regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey, Abstract 512, Tract 2 for a multi-farnily residential development in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-3 Multiple-Family Low Density Dwelling District). This property is located at the southwest corner of Bear Creek Parkway and Hill Trail Drive. Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development, introduced the case and stated that a Specific Use Permit is to mitigate any potential on or off site negative impacts caused by this development. Mr. Bass pointed out that the existing single family homes back: onto Fuller Wiser, so there is at least one half road section plus an additional 100 feet from where the actual buildings begin, making a large visual barrier. He suggested the applicant should discuss how many trees would be saved on this site to serve as a buffer for the property and stated that he was encouraged by the required condition that there )mould be a wrought iron fence with masonry columns on the entire perimeter of the property. Bob Welty. 5207 McKinney, Dallas, Texas, of Welty and Associates, responded to Mr. Bass by pointing out that Hill Trail is actually higher in elevation and that most of the site falls down into the park area and that it is their intention and desire to save just as many of the trees as possible in that area between the street and the site. He also pointed out that right now there is a 60" round concrete pipe, possibly 72" that runs underneath Hill Trail that handles runoff from the Stonebridge project and further projects to the north and that the Engineering Division had requested that the applicant tie into that line past the bridge structure underground which they would do, although this will affect some trees. Patricia King, 2198 Erwin Drive, Euless. Texas; thanked Commissioner McNeese for voting against this project. She stated that her back yard faces Fuller Iniser and the overhead lights from Stonebridge reflect directly into it. She stated she is not in favor of this development, because the developer is putting too much into a small area. Seeing no other speakers, Acting Chairman McMillon closed the Public Hearing. PUNNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 9 I'ViNUTES OF SEPTEMBER !. 9999 ITEM 8 CASE #99-09-SUP --- RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey, Abstract 512, Tract 2 for a multi-family residential development in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-3 Multiple-Family Low Density Dwelling District). This property is located at the southwest corner of Bear Creep Parkway and Hill Trail Drive, Commissioner M--Neese thanked the owners and Mr. Welty for giving the Commissioners the opportunity to look at an additional development, and he also thanked the homeowners who came this evening. He stated the reason he is against the project is that he has lived in this city 31 years and personally he thinks there are enough apartments and also that he would like the standards met and that he is opposed to all the variances that are being requested. Commissioner Houk stated she sides with staff on this as far- as the variance from the standards is concerned. She stated the higher land use value here would come from minimizing the amount of land that is put under concrete. Commissioner Owens referred to a letter dated June 22. 1999, written by the Building Official regarding use and density on an exhibit. He summarized the contents of the letter: An exhibit should reference compliance to R3. R4 and R5 standards depending on the density requested and should also list any specific standards which are modified by the Planned Development conforming to R3 standards. 1) 12 units per building 2) 100% masonry 3) two parking spaces per unit 4) 60% required parking within garages with direct access to the unit. He also mentioned a letter received from the Development Review Committee where Public Works said to affix legal descriptions of the length of the curve. Commissioner Owens stated he had to rely. basically even though he is against this project with the density that is in it, on these folks who make a living and have been to school. He continued that the Commission had worked hard to get the standards to where they are now and that due to the airport there could not be anything else in that area, and that is the reason all the apartments are being built. Commissioner McNeese stated he was there to voice the opinion of the citizens and that he would probably disagree with staff but that he would still respect staff. He stated that this project would probably be a great project but the way it was presented he was opposed to it. Acting Chairman McMillon asked the City Engineer if there were any concerns about tying into the existing channel for drainage. Ron Young, City Engineer. answered that the Engineering Division had a meeting scheduled for the following week to review the drainage issues with the applicant. He responded to Commissioner McNeese about upstream drainage by saying that the City cannot do anything about the water coming from up stream now but that the City would do whatever it takes to mitigate and minimize any damage from water coming from this particular development. Commissioner McNeese stated that he knows there is nothing the City can do about the development up stream but that his point was simply that erosion exists, and it stands to reason PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGI' 10 i`r11NUTES OF SEEPTEMBER 21, 1999 the water will run faster off this development into the creek and it will contrib <te to the problem that the City will have to face some day. Acting Chairman McMillon advised Ms. King that the Fire Marshal would like to speak with her about her lighting concerns and that this property does set back 199 feet for the first building off Fuller Wiser making it far enough from her home that hopefully the lighting would not be a major impact. Commissioner Zahn made the motion to recommend approval of Specific Use Permit Case #99-09-SUP referencing sheet 3 regarding the fence. Commissioner Owens seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Zahn, Owens, McMillon, Houk Nays: McNeese The motion carried. ITEM 9 CASE #99-09-SP-- RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SITE PLAN Consider a recommendation regarding the request for a Site Plan for a multi- family complex proposed to be located in the S. Tucker Survey, Abstract 1512, Tract 6D, and the R. Crowley Survey; Abstract 512, Tract 2, at the southwest corner of Bear Creek Parkway and Hill Trail Drive. Commissioner Owens made the motion to recommend approval of Site Plan Case #99-09-SP as presented. Commissioner Houk seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Zahn, Owens, McMillon, Houk Nays: McNeese The motion carried. ITEM 10 CASE #99-07-PD --- PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Receive public input regarding a request for a Planned Development changing the zoning of Villages of Bear Greek, Block 11, Lot 2, from CUD 754 (Community Unit Development for C-1 Neighborhood Business District, C-2 Community Business District; Multi-family at various densities, and 1-1 Light Industrial District) into PD (Planned Development for multi-family Lased on R--4 Multiple- Family Medium Density Dwelling District). This property is located south of Ash Lane on the east side of Bear Creek Parkway. Bo Sass, Director of Planning and Development, introduced the case and explained this is an extension of an existing project and that the applicant is requesting approval to complete their PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 1 I MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 2'1, 1999 original plans. He stated staff feels it meets all the regUirements and warrants approval and strongly recommends it. Bob 'Alelty, 5207 McKinney, Dallas, Texas, of Welty and .Associates; stated this project was originally planned in 1985 for 80 units and that now they are requesting 40 additional units to bring it to a total of 80 units. He said it is a project with 1 and 2 story buildings, well landscaped, and with very low density. He continued that it was originally constructed with no covered parking but that now they are adding one covered parking space per unit both on the new unit construction and the old unit construction He continued that this project does not comply with the current ordinance as far as building set backs are concerned because the streets as well as the utilities and the pads were built as part of phase 1, and there is no dept; of site to create new rear and side setbacks. He stated they are also adding a bay of 24 garages and that their attempt was to get as close to the new ordinance as passible. Mr. Welty continued that the first floors would be brick and the second floors would have "hardiplank' siding instead of the masonite siding and that It was the owner's intent to update the existing Units. Mr. Welty stated that there is not an entry feature as such but that there are large trees and significant landscaping He stated that they are planning on fencing the project entirely by leaving the existing 8 feet wood fence along the north property line and building a new wrought iron fence along Bear Creek Parkway. He stated that this project would be a gated community. He continued that the only other area that this project does not comply right now with the ordinance is that there are probably 4 trash enclosures on that property but they intend to Cut back to 2 enclosures and 1 recycling area, which exceeds the requirement of a singular space. Mr. Welty stated he was hoping the commissioners would recognize the fact that they do comply with the standards whenever possible. Seeing no other speakers, Acting Chairman McMillon closed the Public Hearing. ITEM 11 CASE #99-07-PD — RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Planned Development changing the zoning of Villages of Bear Creek, Block 11, Lot 2, from CUD 754 (Community Unit Development for C-1 Neighborhood Business District; C-2 Community Business District, Multi-family at various densities, and 1 Light Industrial District) into PD (Planned Development for mufti-family based on R-4 Multiple-Family Medium Density Dwelling District). This property is located south of Ash Lane on the east side of Bear Creek Parkway, Commissioner Owens stated he thought stucco would have looked better than brick. Commissioner McNeese asked the applicant if he had said there would be a wrought iron fence along the front. that on the north of the property the existing wood fence would stay, and on the east and south property line you will put up a 8 feet wood fence. Mr. Welty answered those were their intentions. Commissioner McNeese then asked if the ownership is responsible for the on going maintenance on this property now; to which Mr. Welty answered yes. Commissioner McNeese stated his concern is having 70% masonry. Commissioner Zahn stated he shared the same concern as Commissioner McNeese with the 70% masonry. PUNNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 12 r1NUTES OF SF..PiEV'BEF?21,19 9 Commissioner Zahn made the motion to recommend approval of Planned Development Case #99-07-PD. Commissioner Houk seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Zahn, Owens, McMillon, Houk; McNeese Nays- None The motion carried. ITEM 12 CASE #99-12-SUP — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Receive public input regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for`tillages of Bear Creek, Block 11, Lot 2, for a multi-family residential development in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development for multi-family based on R-4 Multiple-Family Medium Density Dwelling District). This property is located south of Ash Lane on the east side of Bear Creek Parkway. Acting Chairman McMillon opened the Public Hearing but seeing no speakers he closed the Public Hearing. ITEM 13 CASE #99-12-SUP -- RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for Villages of Bear Creek, Block 11, Lot 2, for a multi-farnily residential development in Planned Development zoning {Planned Development for multi-family based on R-4 Multiple-Family Medium Density Dwelling Distric#,. This property is located south of Ash Lane on the east side of Bear Creek Parkway, Commissioner Owens made the motion to recommend approval of Specific Use Permit Case #99-12-SUP. Commissioner Hour seconded the motion. Commissioner McNeese asked if this case was being recommended for approval as presented with 70% masonry and he was told yes. Commissioner McNeese requested an arnendment to the motion to include 90% masonry, replacing existing deteriorated masonite boards. and repainting the entire project. Commissioners Owens and Houk accepted the amendments, The vote was as follows: Ayes: Commissioners Zahn, Owens, McMillon, Houk, McNeese Nays: None The motion carried. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 13 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21. 1999 ITEM 14 CASE#99-15-SP—RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SITE PLAN Consider a recommendation regarding the request for a Site Plan for Phase 11 of an existing multi-family complex (Sandstone Apartments). This property is located in the Villages of Bear Creek, Block 11, Lot 2, south of Ash Lane on the east side of Bear Creek Parkway. Commissioner Owens made the motion to approve Site Plan Case #9915-SP as presented, Commissioner McNeese seconded the motion. The vote was as follows., Ayes, Commissioners Zahn, Owens, McMillon, Houk, McNeese Nays: None The motion carried. ITEM 15 CASE #99-03-LP— CONSIDERATION OF A LAND PLAN Consider a request for a Land Plan of 21.4 acres located in the Terrell Jasper Survey, Abstract No. 861, Tracts 5A, 5A2, 5A2A, and 5A3 in the 1700 block of S. H. 183 (West Airport Freeway) on the south side of the freeway. Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development, gave a brief description of the case and stated the purpose of a Land Plan. He stated that staff recommended approval. Commissioner McMillon asked if there is adequate drainage on this property and if riot how would it be taken care of, when and by whom, Ron Young, City Engineer, answered that conceptUallV it does have adequate drainage. Commissioner Owens stated that the Commissioners had received a Development Reimbursement Agreement between Mr. Al Patel and the City Council which was approved September 14, 1999, indicating when everything would happen, Commissioner Owens asked Andrea Baxter, Director of Economic Development, to explain what will happen with Wilshire Park, Ms. Baxter stated that before anything would happen the list of items labeled Exhibit A to the Development Reimbursement Agreement would be completed. She pointed out that Mr. Patel has been asking her for a final grading plan on the pond for quite some time and that she had seen it before she moved from building C to building A but that she could not locate it. Ms. Baxter stated that Mr. Patel would be digging out the pond to a depth that is suitable for fish and that he would be using that. dirt to bring the site up to grade and also completing all the paperwork necessary to gain final acceptance of the existing public -improvements. Ms. Baxter continued that Mr. Patel would be deeding fee simple title to the City of Euless, which would then be constructing trail lighting. She also stated that as par-It' of the agreement Mr. Patel would be responsible for placing 94 trees within the development to mitigate the loss of trees that were taken out for the construction of the detention pond and that he would be responsible for making sure that during development his development does not cause the pond to silt in. Commissioner Owens asked if the steps going down to the park on the old plan were going to be the same or if that would that change. Ms. Baxter answered there Would be a trail around the perimeter of the pond and back into the parking lot: along with grass and tr ees, and that there are some picnic tables in already that the Parks Department put in. Commissioner Owens PLANNING AND ZONING CrAWISSION PAGE 14 WWI,ES OF SEPTEMBER 23, 1999 also asked where it says "as soon as possible" if the Commission could hold up anything Mr. Patel does until all this is done. Paul VVieneskie; City Attorney; answered as far as he was concerned yes. Commissioner Owens stated that the reimbursement would be over 7 years and the Commission hopes the improvements on the park would not take that long. Ms, Baxter stated Mr. Patel has the potential for recognizing 5 years but that there is a different set up for the retail portion of it. She stated that no one tract would ever get more than 5 years worih of funds. Commissioner Owens asked if the park would be separated from the commercial area. Ms. Baxter stated if there was an assisted living unit in this area, it would be appropriate for those people to have access to the park so it depends on what the use is. Commissioner Mchleese if the drainage from the proposed Specific Use Permit site would flow into the detention pond. Ms. Baxter said yes. Commissioner McNeese then asked if all had to tie together and she answered yes. Commissioner Owens made the motion to approve Land Plan, Case #99-03-LP with the condition that the Development Reimbursement Agreement be signed and executed by the City and Mr. Patel. Acting Chairman McMillon declared that the motion failed due to lack of a second. Commissioner Zahn stated he intended to abstain from voting because he was not comfortable with the process of the Land Plan and that the only motion he thinks is appropriate would be one to approve and in his estimation that rendered the Land Plan meaningless. Commissioner Owens made the motion to approve Land Plan Case #99-03-LP as presented. Ms, Baxter requested that this case be tabled until execution of the Development Reimbursement Agreement. Commissioner Zahn stated he did not think that was necessary because the only thing on which the Commission can vote is the Land Plan drawing, no attachments, not anything else. Mr, °,lifieneskie stated that what he thought Ms. Baxter had in mind was that if some of the concerns cf some of the commissioners are that they want that document executed and enforced before they are willing to vote in favor of the Land Plan with the understanding that this cannot be a condition for approval of the Land Plan then perhaps the solution would be to simply table this item until that document has been fully executed by both parties and everyone knows that there is an agreement in place which then may salve some of the concerns some of the commissioners with reference to getting that enforced before the Land Plan is adopted. Acting Chairman McMillan seconded the motion. Commissioner Owens asked for a discussion. Acting Chairman McMillon stated there was a motion on the floor and there could be additional discussion if needed or the Commissioners could vote. Mr. Wieneskie stated that if somebody made a motion to table at this point that motion under Robert's Rules and Order would take precedence over the made motion that is on the table and PLANNING AND ZOWNG COMMISSION PAGE 16 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21, 199' they would have a first vote on the motion to table and if that motion prevailed then they would not have to worry about the underlying motion to approve. Commissioner Owens stated he might be wrong about this but that he did not think the real question is as much on the Land Plan because the commissioners know it is a ministerial function but he thought the challenge before the Commission is whether what would be built on this property is in the packet. Mr Bass stated the reason staff recommended to table was that they did not want to see a denial teased on some grounds that should not be considered. Acting Chairman McMillon suggested that the commissioners think through what Mr. Bass had told the commissioners previously. He stated the Land Plan entails three things: that there is adequate ingress and egress; that drainage has been addressed; and that water and sewer are adequately provided on the site. He stated that staff says those three conditions have been met and that there was a motion and a second on the floor. After discussion among the commissioners regarding the requirements of a Land Plan and what could be regulated on a Land Plan, Acting Chairman McMillon asked for a vote. The vote was as follows-, Ayes: Acting Chairman McMillon, Commissioner Owens Nays: None Abstain: Commissioners Houk, McNeese, Zahn The motion failed. Acting Chairman McMillon asked for a motion. Commissioner Owens asked for discussion because he could not see any good in tabling the Land Plan. Acting Chairman McMillon stated this is an available piece of property with a high profile for the City with some good developments there, and that the commissioners have a Land Plan with which City staff feels comfortable. He continued that there is an agreement being circulated through between the City Council, the developer, and the owner of the property. Staff had told the commissioners that it met the primary conditions of a Land Plan, therefore the Commission should either approve or deny the Land Plan and specify the reason for denial. Ms. Baxter stated she did not understand what negative difference there was beween the previous Land Plan and the one the Commission was considering tonight. Commissioner Houk stated she thought that the difference between this Land Plan and that one was the credibility of the developer, which the Commission found does not follow through. She also stated that this Land Plan introduced an industrial use into a commercial corridor, Ms. Banter stated that Mr. Patel had spent a significant amount of money on the drainage Lip front and on a masonry screening wall which was not even necessary at this stage. PLANNING AND LOWNG COMMISSION PAGE 16 MINUTES of SEPTEMSEP 21, 1999 Cormn issioner Houk stated he could have saved himself that by following through on the original Land Plan. Mr, Wieneskie stated that the duty of the Commission on a Land Plan is either to vote to approve it, vote to deny it, or vote to table it. He stated that it is a ministerial act and as far as he could tell, it is if not the legal duty certainly the :moral duty of the members of the Commission to vote yes or no unless they have a conflict of interest which requires them to abstain on the issue. Ms. Baxter stated that if there is a denial staff would like to have direction as to what the Commission would like to see on a future Land Plan that is not shown on this one. Mr. Bass pointed out that anything else that added exceeds the standards required by the code, that everything the standards require is there, and just because a previous Land Plan included a hotel is no reason to deny this current Land Plan. He stated that he understood why someone at the Land Plan level does not commit to a footprint and that we all know there is a potential project working right now and that is why there is a particular foot print right there and the rest is vague. He continued stating the applicant does not know what he is going to build, and staff does not either, but that all know this, that it ;mould be office; commercial or retail. Commissioner Owens stated that he wanted to be able to talk to the developer to know exactly what was going on in that site, and that he needed somebody to tell him that the Land Plan would be more than a bunch more office spaces that do not bring any money in to the City. Commissioner Zahn stated that if he understood it correctly, the Land Plan is to outline the orderly development of the tract of land. He stated that he still contended that the Land Plan before him shoes one ingress road and a cul-de-sac but does not have any other layout of streets on it, but the one Ms. Houk has [the former Land Plan] does show traffic flow around it. Acting Chairman MoMillon suggested that Commissioner Zahn entertain a motion to table this Land Plan and have staff work with the developer to come back. with something more. Bryan Klein, 1361 W. Euless Boulevard, Euless, Texas, representing the land owner and developer, stated there were a couple of things to consider about why we are here tonight. He stated there are two reasons why the Land Plan was before the Commission tonight: 1) The old Land Plan had expired, therefore a new Land Plan was needed. 2} There is a Specific Use for a particular parcel on the Land Plan. The Land Plan that was done before had some uses in mind but as the market changes and other things come into focus, Land Plans will inherently change. Mr. Klein continued that the other thing that is important is that it is rood to talk about detail when we have the detail. A Land Plan does not provide detail because there is .no detail for a lot of the site at this point, but there is detail for the portion that we are about to talk about - the Service King Site Plan, A Site Plan is very detailed, showing drainage and specific utilities, but a Land Plan shows general things; for example, general access; general utilities and things of that nature. Mr, Klein continued that generally this Land Plan is not materially different frorm the one that had been on record before except that when we put a new one together, we put it together with new information. He stated he just wanted to offer this to the Commission because hopefully in that context it shows a little more light on this and we can move forward. Donna Hooker, 405 Wilshire, Euless, Texas, stated she, was there representing the Wilshire Neighborhood Association with roughly 1300 households, 3 apartment complexes, and duplex P.ANNiNG AND ZONING COMM1SWN PAGE 17 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21. '999 homes in front of the park. She continued that there was no way the City would have any other streets except coming from the access road since the land is surrounded by development and You could not have streets unless you got rid of the park and came onto Kynette; therefore there cannot be any accessibility as far as streets unless it is onto the access road. Ms. Hooker continued that the Wilshire area has no qualms about a paint and body shop or some kind of business like that on that tract of land. She stated the Wilshire Association does have a qualm; about the park and that they had received promises that the park would not be destroyed but that almost every tree in the park was bulldozed down by this developer. The association has not seen any improvements in that area except for Grubbs and the investment business. Ms. Hooker continued that the association agreed and disagreed with a lot of what was said, and that they agreed with what Mr. Klein said. Al Patel, 3840 Bellaire Circle, Fort Worth. Texas, land owner, stated that about a year and a half ago he took a piece of property that was nothing but a big drain hole full of trash, tires, etc. with no hope for that property to bring in to the City any decent look or revenue. He continued that he had spent millions of dollars on this property, taking a gamble on it, and with the Commission's support and approval we can work together. He continued that the park project was not included in his original design because he was just going to do the drainageldetention pond only, but the City wanted to see a fish pond there and have the park. He stated he is therefore going to donate the land and provide the facility. He stated he already has the detention pond which would accommodate the drainage from all 27 acres. Mr. Patel stated he has done more than he had promised and that the City has not done several things that they needed to do. He stated that after the agreement was reached he had requested a drawing to finish the pond and that it had been three weeks and he has not been able to get a copy of the approved drawings. He asked how the City expects him to do something whey} they do not hold up their end of things. Mr. Patel stated that the park and pond were promised and that is exactly what will happen once the City gets going. He stated he was sorry to say such a thing but that it is a fact and that he was not going to hold it any longer. He continued by saying the City was telling him the multi-million dollars tied in the project are not costing him an arm and a leg or that he is not interested in getting it done, but that all of that is rot the truth. He stated that every time someone tries to get something done, it gets postponed and postponed, with meetings and committees, and approved and not approved and it goes on and ore. He stated that he had been after the agreement for a year and until that gets done, he could do nothing and that he did not know why it took the City a whole year to write a 3 page agreement. Mr. Patel continued that he had been begging, asking, and bothering the staff, but it seemed it was all his fault. Commissioner Owens stated he remembered when Mr. Patel came to the commissioners and said he was going to do the things. Commissioner Owens stated he did not think the question here was whether or not the commissioners disapproved or blamed Mr, Patel, but that what the Commission was trying to say was that the previous Land Plan before the Commissioners showed office buildings. Mr. Patel answered yes this Board approved it but it took a year and a half to get the drainage done right and six months to get it approved. He said that the drainage is done and is twice the quality and that it had met a FEMA 500 year approval. Commissioner Zahn stated that if the City was holding it up the Commission needed to let therm go to work.. Commissioner Zahn made the motion to approve Land Plan Case #09-03-LP. Commissioner McNeese seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 18 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21, 4999 Ayes. Acting Chairman McMillon, Commissioners Owens, McNeese, Zahn Nays: Commissioner Houk The motion carried. ITEM 16 CASE #99-10-,SUP — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Receive public input regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for portions of Terrell Jasper Survey, Abstract No. 861, Tract 5A2A and Tract 5A2, for an automotive general repair and automotive paint and body repair business in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development based on C-2 Community Business District zoning, with private drives allowed by right). This property is located in the 1700 block of S. H. 183 (West Airport Freeway) on the south side of the freeway. Bo Bass, Director of Planning and Development, introduced the case and pointed out to the Commission that the City Council about a year and a half ago changed the ordinance to require Specific Use Permits for all automotive related uses because all the automotive uses and their operators are not created equally. He continued that staff felt that Service King has - by evidence of facilities throughout the Metroplex - a very strong standard and that in their design review process which took there a long time to complete, Service King did many things, such as changing their color scheme, specifically for this particular site. Mr. Bass stated that Mr. Patel required that the site be narrow and deep, and that traffic: travelling on S.H. 183 would not be able to see this facility because it is laid out in a very linear fashion parallel to the west property line. He stated that all parking would be near the rear and along the west property line adjacent to a commercial use and multi-family. Mr. Bass reminded the commissioners that a Specific Use Permit is to do the following: 1) To determine if this would be a general good fit. He stated that staff feels it is an excellent fit, since it is C-2 zoning with highway exposure. 2) To determine if it is a fit within this particular site. He stated that it is bordered by existing commercial, vacant land with commercial zoning, and existing multi-family. He pointed out that the building would have a linear nature with a 6 feet masonry wall and a single point of ingress and egress on the east side of the property, but based on the Land Plan there is a provision for a cross access easement and also additional access to the site through two future roads. He continued that in terms of screening there is a proposed 6 feet chain link fence with slats and a 10 feet wide landscape buffer between this property and the existing multi-family as per code. Tom Hoover, with the Hoover/Klein Group, 1361 W. Euless Boulevard, Euless, Texas, stated he is part of the firm that was hired by Service King to prepare the Site Plan and Specific Use Permit, that they had worked closely with staff, and that he was available to answer any questions. Donna Hooker, 405 Wilshire, Euless, Texas; asked if people would have access to their neighborhood through the park from the Service King area. Acting Chairman McMillon closed the Public Hearing. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 19 MINUTES OF SEPT£MBEh.21, 1999 ITEM 17 CASE #99-14-SUP ® RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT Consider a recommendation regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit for portions of Terrell Jasper Survey, Abstract No. 861; Tract 5A2A and Tract 5A2. for an automotive general repair and automotive paint and body repair business in Planned Development zoning (Planned Development based on C-2 Community Business District zoning, with private drives allowed by right). This property is located in the 1700 block of S. H. 183 (West. Airport Freeway) on the south side of the freeway. Commissioner Owens stated he was really concerned about economic development in that area and that no one had told him this project would bring in any money to the City. Stacy Smith, 1902 Trailwood Drive, Euless, Texas, stated he is the architect for Service King. He stated that the total development cost for Service King is $2,500,000, the land is $800,000, the building $1,410,000 and equipment $300,000 and the expected tax revenue when fully operational is approximately $225,000 per month. Al Patel, 3840 Bellaire Circle, Fort Worth, Texas, stated this particular tract would have been a 100 feet open drainage ditch but now 170 feet of frontage would provide tax revenue, still leaving 350 feet frontage for another retail use. Commissioner Owens asked if the chain link was there now. Mr. Patel explained that along the east side there would be a masonry fence. Acting Chairman McMillon asked Mr. Patel to address the access to the park to answer Ms. Hooker's question. Mr. Patel answered that there would be a 6 feet masonry wall around most of the project and that there would not be any access through Service King. Commissioner Zahn made the motion to recommend approval of Specific Use Permit Case #99-10-SUP and attach the results of the Development Reimbursement Agreement, Commissioner Owens seconded the motion. Commissioner McNeese requested a consideration to amend the motion and tie the length of the SUP to the ownership of that facility by Service King. Commissioners Zahn and Owens accepted the amendment to the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Acting Chairman McMillan, Commissioners Owens, McNeese, Zahn Mays: Commissioner Houk The motion carried. ITEM 18 CASE #99-10-SP - RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A SITE PLAN Consider a recommendation regarding the request for a Site Plan for an automotive general repair and automotive paint and body repair business proposed to be located on portions of Terrell Jasper Survey, Abstract No. 861, Tract 5A2A and Tract 5A2; in the 1700 block of S. H. 183 (West Airport Freeway) on the south side of the freeway. Pl.AWNG AND ZONING COrtiA.AAiSS ON PAGE 20 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBEP 21, 1999 Bo Bass. Director of Planning and Development, stated that a Site Plan is a ministerial function and that all Development Review Committee members had reviewed the Site Plan. He stated that staff recommended approval. Commissioner McNeese asked if the Site Flan in the packet for the record does show as regarding to drainage that the development of that site would include a pipe installed in that detention pond in a condition to accept the property. Mr. Bass stated that you can see the topo lines of the walls of the pond and pointed to a dark line which he explained is a drainage outfall. Commissioner McNeese stated that was his point, that when it is all leveled will the City have the mechanism in place that a building would not be built if the water wOUld just run off on the ground or over on the trench and not in that pond like planned. Mr. Bass stated that he could assure the Commission that the building world not get a final inspection for a Certificate of Occupancy unless is draining properly according to the Site Plan. Commissioner McNeese made the motion to recommend approval of Site Plan Case #99-10- SP. Commissioner Zahn seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: Acting Chairman McMillon, Commissioners Owens, McNeese, Zahn Nays: Commissioner Houk The motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Acting Chairman McMillon asked if there were any corrections to the minutes of AL!gust 17, 1999. Commissioner Owens moved to approve the minutes of the August '17, 1999, meeting. Commissioner McNeese seconded the motion. The vote was as follows. Ayes: Acting Chairman McMillon, Commissioners Zahn, McNeese, Owens, Houk. Nays: Noire The motion carried. ITEM '19 REPORTS Ron Young; Assistant Director of Public Works"City Engineer introduced Gary Johnson as the new Senior Civil Engineer. ITEM 20 DIRECTOR'S REPORT There was no report. There being no further business, Acting Chairman McMillon adjourned the meeting at 10,15p.m. Robert /Wilson Date Acting Chairman