Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-12-19 Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission December 19, 1978 CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:40 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Euless City Hall by Chairman Carl Tyson. Other members present were Messrs. John Deithloff, Bob Eden, Chris Jones, Sam Munir, and Mrs. Helen Lightbody. (Absent was Mr. Neal Adams) Also present were Director of Planning and Development Rick Barnes and Recording Secretary Becky Gunter. VISITORS Visitors in attendance were Messrs. Richard Harpole, Raymond Armstrong, W. G. Ragley, Richard J. Thomes, Robert F. Kobsun, and Mesdms. Inez Trigg, Sualice Armstrong, and Willie Mae McCormick. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mr. Deithloff. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Deithloff made a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting dated November 21 , 1978, as written. Mr. Munir seconded the motion and the vote was as follows : Ayes: Messrs. Deithloff, Munir, Eden, Tyson, Jones, and Mrs. Lightbody Nays: None Chairman Tyson declared the motion carried. Now (Page Two, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE NO. 276. REQUEST OF W. 0. FERGUSON FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "C-2" COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT TO "SP" SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT CENTER ON A PORTION OF LOTS 4, 5, AND 6, BLOCK 2, EULESS GARDENS ADDITION LOCATED EAST OF NORTH MAIN STREET AND SOUTH OF TOWN CREEK DRIVE. Chairman Tyson stated the rules of a public hearing; proponents will be heard first and then the opponents. He asked for a representative of Mr. Ferguson. Mr. Armstrong of 1828 Tremont in Fort Worth stated he is representing Mr. Ferguson as well as himself as the leasor. They are proposing a family restaurant with ice cream in the front of the build- ing with an arcade in the back. It will be similar to Crystals Pizza Parlor. They will have pin ball machines, video games and other amusement games. They will not, however, have pool tables. He stated the building is about 90% completed. He has personally gone around and talked with as many of the neigh- bors as possible, describing what they intend to put in. He has also talked with Reverend Draper of the Baptist church as well as people of other denomi- nations and all are in favor of the business. The business will be a place for the children and their parents to come. Concerning the parking, he feels there is sufficient space as they have access to the parking next to the build- ing as well as the space in front. Also, at night, they will have access to the parking in the remainder of the shopping center since none of the other businesses are open at night. Chairman Tyson inquired about the more detailed drawing showing the parking spaces that are reserved for this business requested by the city staff. Mr. Armstrong stated he has talked to the owner about this. He believes the zoning includes Lots 4, 5, and 6 which covers the parking lot North of the building between the U-Tote-M and the building as well as the old bank building and the parking in front of it. Also, at night, there would be additional parking within the shopping center. There are at least forty to fifty spaces and, depending on how it is arranged, there could possibly be more. Chairman Tyson stated he feels the zoning should be more specific. He does not feel the Specific Use zoning should include Lot 6 on which the U-Tote-M is located. (Page Three, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) Mr. Armstrong stated Mr. Ferguson is the owner of all three lots. However, only Lots 4 and 5 would be utilized for the business. Mr. Barnes stated the application re- quested the zoning change on Lots 4, 5, and 6. A survey is needed outlining the property the zoning change is requested for and the required parking, which is based on a 4000 square foot facility. According to the city' s park- ing requirements, one space is required per 1000 square feet of floor area, or approximately forty parking spaces. Before this request is heard by the City Council , exact field notes describing the property are needed. Mr. Armstrong stated the 4000 square feet of floor area is an estimate; they will get the exact footage. There are about forty spaces on the property north of the building as well as about eight in front of the building. They could get an additional ten spaces on the side of the building if necessary. Chairman Tyson stated he feels Lot 6 should be deleted from the zoning request and the parking requirements can be worked out with the city staff before the City Council public hearing. Mr. Armstrong stated this is fine with him. Chairman Tyson stated there are some restrictions that the Commission has requested in the past on businesses of this type. However, this particular business is somewhat unique in that there is an eating establishment in conjunction with the arcade. He read over the restric- tions as follows: 1 . No gambling 2. No drinking of alcoholic beverages on or near the premises 3. No drugs or narcotics on or near the premises 4. No loitering outside the building 5. No profanity 6. Minimum dress code: a. No short shorts for girls b. No thin T-shirts for girls c. Boys must wear shirts 7. Off-duty uniformed policeman from dark to closing on Friday and Saturday nights 8. No smoking 9. Hours of operation: School Time - Monday - Thursday 4 p.m. to 10 p.m. Friday 4 p.m. to 12 a.m. Saturday 10 a.m. to 12 a.m. Sunday 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. Summer - Monday - Thursday 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. Friday 2 p.m. to 12 a.m. Saturday 10 a.m. to 12 a.m. Sunday 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. (Page Four, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) Mr. Eden stated he feels some of the restrictions would not apply since the primary use is an eating establishment. Chairman Tyson stated the hours of operation possibly could be deleted. However, he feels the requirement of no alcoholic beverages should remain as protection in the event Mr. Armstrong sells the business. Mr. Eden questioned the need for a uniformed policeman and also the legality of zoning "no smoking". Mr. Armstrong stated they planned to have no smoking in the back half which is the arcade but allow smoking in the restaurant portion of the building. There will be a door and windows separating the restaurant from the arcade area. Mr. Eden stated smoking is allowed in most restaurants and he does not feel this could be regulated. Chairman Tyson inquired about the hours of operation. Mr. Armstrong stated they plan to be open from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and from 10 a.m. to 12 a.m. on Friday and Saturday. Chairman Tyson stated, in reference to the uniformed officer, Crystals has a policeman from dusk until closing, not just on weekends, but every day. Mr. Armstrong stated if he had a prob- lem he would do whatever was necessary to correct it. However, he does not feel it is necessary and would like to have the opportunity to wait and see before hireing an officer. They will have an adult supervisor on the premises at all times and feels this will be sufficient. Chairman Tyson asked Mr. Armstrong if he would like to discuss any of the other restrictions. Mr. Armstrong stated he is not sure how to measure the shorts; he may not consider them too short whereas someone else may. He feels a dress code would be hard to enforce. Chairman Tyson stated he feels it would be easier to enforce if it was a requirement of the City as opposed to a reg- ulation of the business only. Mr. Armstrong asked which items the Commission feels most necessary; he does not have a list of the items. (Page Five, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) Chairman Tyson stated he personally feels all of the items should be included, with the possible exception of the hours of operation. Mr. Armstrong stated he agrees to items one through four. Chairman Tyson stated item five, "no profanity", may be difficult to enforce. Mr. Armstrong stated this is true; he intends to run a clean establishment but is not sure if he can enforce some of the restrictions. Chairman Tyson stated "No Loitering" and "No Profanity" signs may help the enforcement. Mr. Barnes stated he realizes these would be difficult to enforce but this would make it easier to take action if a problem arose. Mr. Armstrong stated they will purchase the necessary signs. Mr. Eden stated his fear of restricting Mr. Armstrong out of business. Chairman Tyson stated the restrictions will give Mr. Armstrong the leverage if it is needed to take action. Also, Mr. Armstrong may not be the owner six months from now and this is what the Commission needs to be concerned about. Mrs. Lightbody asked if the Specific Use Permit will remain on the property if another person purchases the business. Chairman Tyson stated the Specific Use Permit will remain; another person could have the same type of operation without a change of zoning. Mr. Armstrong stated he was under the assumption that the Specific Use Permit was for his corporation only and if the property was sold, a change of zoning would be required. Mrs. McCormick stated the Specific Use Permit remains on the property and would not require a change of zoning if the exact type of use was put in. (Page Six, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) Mr. Armstrong stated they will not have liquor or gambling; therefore this requirement will not be a problem. However, he does not want to commit himself to something he cannot live up to; if smoking is not allowed and someone sneaks out and lights a cigarette, he could lose his license. He will do everything possible to run a clean business. Mr. Barnes stated gambling is illegal and therefore could be enforced by the police department; drinking alcoholic beverages requires a Specific Use Permit for a tavern or establishment which sells alcoholic beverages, which is not being requested; drugs and nar- cotics are illegal ; loitering is probably controlable under the City' s nui- sance ordinances; he is not sure if "no profanity" can legally be enforced; the dress code probably could be enforced; "no smoking" requirements have been contested in various court cases and, therefore he is not sure if this could be legally enforced. Therefore, the only items he feels need to be addressed are the "hours of operation", the "dress code", and the "uniformed police officer". Mrs. Lightbody inquired about the Health Department dress code. Mr. Barnes stated this is a code for restaurants set by the Health Department. Mr. Armstrong stated he would put up the signs required for no loitering and no profanity. Concerning the hours of operation, he would like to have the option of staying open until possibly 1 a.m. for special occasions such as a Valentine's Day party. The regular hours of operation will be reasonable. He plans to open two or three more businesses like this within the next two or three years. Chairman Tyson asked if there were any other proponents. Mr. W. G. Ragley of 210 Shelmar stated that, as a resident in that area, he is in favor of the zoning request. Chairman Tyson asked if there were any other proponents. There were none. He asked if there were any opponents. Mr. Harpole of 205 Salem Drive, stated Mr. Armstrong stressed his willingness to cooperate with the religious denomi- nations. However, the hours of operation on Sunday are from 10 a.m. until 10 p.m. which conflicts with church activities. Usually, morning services are from about 10 a.m. until 12 p.m. and the evening service from 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. until about 8 p.m. (Page Seven, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) Mr. Armstrong stated they need to be open these hours for preparation of the food and equipment. Also, some churches have services on Saturday rather than Sunday. Mr. Harpole stated the majority of the churches have services on Sunday. Mr. Armstrong stated his church, as well as others, have early services which begin at 9 a.m. and are over by about 10:30 a.m. as well as the regular service beginning at 11 a.m. Mr. Harpole stated the property is already zoned to allow a restaurant. Therefore, the Specific Use Permit is for the arcade only. He personally objects to allowing smoking. However, this has already been discussed. Also, since the age group will mostly be between twelve and fifteen, most of them will be accompanied by their parents. Chairman Tyson stated there would also be older teenagers there. Mr. Harpole asked if the building is adequately insulated to prevent the noise from the pinball machines from being heard outside. Mr. Barnes stated the City has an anti-noise ordinance which would be enforced if this was a problem. Mr. Armstrong stated there is about 100 to 150 feet between the building and the homes and, therefore feels sure this would not be a problem. Chairman Tyson asked if there were any other opponents. There were none. He declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Barnes stated it might be best to include the stipulations such as no gambling even though it is illegal . This would allow the City Inspection Department to enforce a violation rather than waiting for other enforcement. Also, he had stated earlier that beer or mixed drinks would require a Specific Use Permit. However, after checking further, he has found that the sale of beer is allowed if it is incidental to the main use. Therefore, the restriction would be needed to prohibit the sale of beer. Mr. Armstrong stated he does not ob- ject to requirements one through five. However, he is not sure if he can en- force the dress code specified in item six. Mr. Munir stated he feels it would be best to restrict the dress code to the Health Department' s dress code which requires shirts and shoes. (Page Eight, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) Mr. Armstrong stated he would rather initially open the business without the uniformed officer requested in item seven. However, if he finds an officer is needed, he would take action to do whatever is necessary. Mr. Eden stated he feels it is Mr. Armstrong' s right to see if it would work without the officer. Mr. Jones stated he does not see the necessity of the officer. Mrs. Lightbody stated the request should be approved with as many of the restrictions as possible for future ownership. However, this should not go to the extreme that the present owner is unable to stay in business. Chairman Tyson stated a uniformed officer would give the proper atmosphere and also help control loitering. Mr. Jones asked if the Specific Use Permit would require the restaurant in conjunction with the arcade if the bus- iness is sold later or the present owner desires to eliminate the restaurant. Mr. Barnes stated the restaurant is allowed in the present zoning. The Specific Use Permit is for the arcade portion only. Therefore, the restaurant could be eliminated. Mr. Armstrong stated he wants to allow smoking in the restaurant but not in the arcade, rather than no smoking at all as requested in item eight. Chairman Tyson stated he does not feel the hours of operation for the restaurant should be restricted. However, a possible restriction could be placed on the arcade. Mr. Eden made a motion to recommend approval of change of zoning from "C-2" Community Business District to "SP" Specific Use Permit for a commercial amusement center on a portion of Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, Euless Gardens Addition with the following stipulations: 1 . Field notes as required by the city staff concerning the parking be provided 2. No gambling 3. No drinking of alcoholic beverages on or near the premises 4. No drugs or narcotics on or near the premises 5. No loitering outside the building 6. No profanity 7. No smoking in the arcade portion of the building 8. Minimum dress code per the Health Department dress code (Page Nine, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) Mr. Deithloff seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Eden, Deithloff, Tyson, Jones, Munir, and Mrs. Lightbody Nays: None Chairman Tyson declared the motion carried. II . PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CASE NO. 277 REQUEST OF RICHARD J. THOMES FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM "PD" PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (NO DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED) TO "PD" PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL FOR AN APARTMENT OFFICE/CLUBHOUSE AND GARAGES FOR OAKWOOD ACRES ESTATES) ON A PORTION OF TRACT 12, RAY SHELTON SUBDIVISION LOCATED EAST OF NORTH MAIN STREET ADJACENT TO THE OAKWOOD ACRES ESTATES APARTMENTS. Chairman Tyson stated the same rules of a public hearing apply to this public hearing. Mr. Thomes of 3934 Buckingham Drive in Irving, stated the subject property, located at the southwest corner of the second phase of Oakwood Acres Estates, is approximately 84' by 330' . The property will be utilized for an office/clubhouse, swimming pool and twenty- eight garage spaces for the Oakwood Acres apartments. Chairman Tyson inquired about the type of garages. Mr. Thomes stated they will be for autos, boats, etc. , and will be ten feet by twenty feet. Chairman Tyson asked if the existing Planned Development will be effected. Mr. Barnes stated it will not. Chairman Tyson asked if there were any other proponents. Chairman Tyson read a letter from Mr. Havener, owner of the property immediately south of the subject property, which stated he is in favor of the proposed zoning change. Mr. Havener' s letter is to be made a part of the minutes. (Page Ten, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) Chairman Tyson asked if there were any other proponents. There were none. He asked if there were any opponents. There were none. He declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Jones made a motion to recommend approval of change of zoning from "PD" Planned Development (no development plan approved) to "PD" Planned Development (development plan approval for an apartment office/clubhouse and garages for Oakwood Acres Estates) on a portion of Tract 12, Ray Shelton Subdivision as requested. Mr. Deithloff seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ayes: Messrs. Jones, Deithloff, Eden, Tyson, Munir, and Mrs. Lightbody Nays: None Chairman Tyson declared the motion carried. III . CONSULTANT EVALUATION Chairman Tyson stated he believes the City Council wants the Commission to recommend a consultant before their final decision. Mrs. McCormick stated the Council did not specifically request such a recommendation. However, she personally would prefer a recommendation before making a decision and feels other Council mem- bers would also like such a recommendation. Chairman Tyson stated he is not ready at this time to make a recommendation. Mr. Deithloff asked if a specific amount has been set aside for this project. Mr. Barnes stated up to $20,000.00 is available. Mr. Deithloff stated the consultant' s fees range in price from $8,000.00 to $20,000. Mr. Barnes stated the $20,000.00 is to cover the expense of the entire planning program. We desire at this time con- sultant services for only the "Goals Formulation" part of the program. Chairman Tyson asked the source of the $20,000. (Page Eleven, Regular Meeting, Planning and Zoning Commission, December 19, 1978) Mr. Barnes stated it is from revenue sharing. The consultant is needed at this time to help define community goals which is difficult but much needed in the planning process. Therefore, this is the area in which they plan to allocate part of the money. They hope to save at least half of the money for the remainder of the program. Therefore, part of the consideration given to each proposal was the cost factor. All of the consultants can provide help. It is then, a question of which firm can give the most help based on past experiences as well as cost. The consultants were not given a dollar amount as this would not allow flexibility. Therefore, the consultant decided upon should be the one that can provide the most for the least money, the money being secondary. Mr. Barnes stated an evaluation of the original six firms was made by himself as well as Messrs. Kent Flynn, Jack Bullard, and John Lynch. From these evaluations, three firms were chosen with whom it was felt the city staff could best work. Three of the four evaluations rated the Comprehensive Planning Institute highest, and the fourth rated them lower by only one point. Chairman Tyson stated he is not ready at this time to make a recommendation. He asked if another Planning and Zoning meeting is scheduled before the City Council meeting at which they will make their decision. Mr. Barnes stated the City Council plans to make a decision January 9th. There is a regular Planning and Zoning meeting scheduled for January 2nd if the Commission wishes to meet the day after New Years. Nothing else is on the agenda at this time. However, the meeting can be scheduled with only the consultant recommendation to consider. Mrs. McCormick stated she does not feel the Council will make a decision until they receive some input from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Chairman Tyson stated he feels this is of great enough importance to warrant scheduling the January 2nd meeting, even if this is the only item to consider. Mr. Deithloff stated he agrees with this. Mr. Munir stated he would be out of town. However, he has reviewed the three proposals and concurs with the staff recommendation of the Comprehensive Planning Institute. Chairman Tyson stated he would like to review the three proposals over the holiday and be better prepared for the January 2nd meeting. IV. ADJOURNMENT The meeting a 'ourned at 9:45 p.m. APPROU Chairman