HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1986-06-23 Agendas
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
PRE-COUNCIL AGENDA
JUNE 23, 1986 - 6:30 P.M.
For the Meeting conducted at the North Richland Hills City Hall Council Chambers,
7301 Northeast Loop 820.
NUMBER
ITEM
ACTION TAKEN
1.
Request of Brunswick Corporation
(Memo from Richard Royston)
2. GN 86-66 Municipal Liability Insurance
(Agenda Item No.17)
3.
Granbury Work Shop (Memo from
Rodger Line)
4.
Other Items
5.
*Executive Session to Discuss
Land, Personnel, and/or
Litigation
*Closed due to subject matter as provided by the
Open Meetings Law
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
JUNE 23, 1986
For the Meeting conducted at the North Richland Hills City Hall Council Chambers,
7301 Northeast Loop 820, at 7:30 p.m.
NUMBER
ITEM
ACTION TAKEN
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Invocation
4. Minutes of the Regular Meeting June 9, 1986
5. Removal of Item(s) from the Consent Agenda
6. Consent Agenda Item (s) indicated by
Asterisk (8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19 &
20)
7. PZ 85-69 Ordinance No. 1272, Request of
Earl McKinney, Trustee, to Rezone
a portion of Tracts 1 and IB, E.A.
Cross Survey, Abstract 281, and a
portion of Tract 3, William Cox
Survey, Abstract 321 from AG
(Agriculture) to C-l (Commercial)
(Public Hearing Closed - Ordinance
Tabled at the March 24, 1986
Meeting)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 2
NUMBER ITEM
ACTION TAKEN
* 8. PS 86-24 Request of Ricshon Development
Corporation for Final Plat of
Cars ton Court Addition (Located on
the west side of Rufe Snow Drive
between Marilyn Drive and Shauna
Drive)
* 9. PS 86-31 Request of David Barfield for
Replat of Lots 3RlA and 3R1B,
Block 1, Martin Addition (Located
on the north side of Nob Hill
Drive west of Precinct Line Road)
*10. PS 86-32 Request of Texas Electric Service
Department for Final Plat of Lot
1, Block 1, Northfield Park
Addition (Located on the east side
of Davis Boulevard at Cherokee
Trail)
11. SO 86-10 Request of DARSCO Inc. for
Variance to Section 6.3 of the
Sign Ordinance
*12. GN 86-61 Interlocal Assistance Agreement
with D/FW International Airport,
Resolution No. 86-28
*13. GN 86-62 Estimates of Population for
Trinity River Authority,
Resolution No. 86-26
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 3
NUMBER ITEM
ACTION TAKEN
14. GN 86-63 Request of Derald Evans for
Variance to Ordinance No. 1236,
Section 5.9 (Brick Ordinance)
15. GN 86-64 Appointment of a Charter
Commission, Resolution No. 86-27
*16. GN 86-65 Proposed Salary Range for
Assistant Director of Public Works
Position
*17. GN 86-66 Municipal Liability Insurance
*18. PU 86-18 Ratification of the Purchase for
One 1986 1 Ton Hi-Cube Van
*19. PU 86-19 Renewal of Property Insurance
*20. PAY 86-19 Partial Pay Estimate 86 and Final,
in the Amount of $50,074.57 to
Mid-Cities Utilities, Inc., for
the Cardinal Lane Water System
Extensions
21. Citizen Presentation
22. Adjournment
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
City of J(ðrth Richland Hills, Texas
j
~/~
~IF
MEMORANDUM
June 23, 1986
TO:
Rodger Line
City Manager ~ /
Richard Royston ldJV
Director of Planning and Development
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Request of Brunswick Corporation for hearing before City
Council
In March 1986 I was contacted by Mr. Barney Vehige of Brunswick
regarding the possible locating of a Bowling Alley in the City of
North Richland Hills. Mr. Vehige was dealing with the owners of
several different sites and had not made a decision as to the
specific location of his facility.
At the time he contacted me Mr. Vehige indicated that he would have
no problem meeting all of our Ordinance requirements with one
exception; the requirements of the liquor sales specific use permit.
His primary concern was the allocation of the three to two ratio of
food sales to liquor and/or beer sales. Brunswick Corporation had
been highly successful with a bowling alley configuration which
included a fairly large bar operation and a very small sandwich shop.
When I informed him that this configuration would be in direct
violation of the City of North Richland Hills Ordinances he asked if
a revision to the Ordinance would be considered. At that time we
suggested he discuss that possibility with the Planning and Zoning
Commission. A time was arranged for Mr. Vehige to appear at the
Planning and Zoning Commission's briefing session on April 23, 1986
to explore any possibility of changing the Ordinance which would
allow him to proceed with the development of the proposed bowling
alley. At the meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission Mr.
Vehige suggested two possible approaches. 1) A modification of the
required ratio of liquor sales to 50% or lower, or 2) A special
provision related only to the bowling alley use which would relieve
that particular business from the ratio provision. Neither of these
proposals were acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission and
they chose not to pursue a change in the Ordinance at this time.
(817) 281·0041/7301 N.E. LOOP 820/P.O. BOX 18609/NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TX 76118
I
Page 2
Ie
I
I
Mr. Vehige now has made application to appear before the City Council
at its briefing session on June 23, 1986. My assumption is that he
wishes to discuss the same issue with the Council and explore the
possibility of an Ordinance revision which would accommodate his
wishes regarding the liquor sales issue at his bowling alley.
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I"
I
~ Brunswick
Recreation
Centers
A BRUNSWICK COMPANY
June 11, 1986
Mr. Rodger Line
City Manager
P.O. Box 18609
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Rich1and Hills, TX 76118
Dear Mr. Line:
The Brunswick Corporation would like to be listed on
the Agenda for the Pre-Council Meeting of June 23rd.
I plan to call you on June 19th to confirm this Meet-
ing. Thanks for your Assistance.
(£:y,
Barney vthige
Senior Associate
New Business Development
BV/1t
Brunswick Corporation · 12311 Seal Beach Blvd. · Seal Beach, CA 90740 .
NEW TELEPHONE NO..
l213) .594-~734
DE:::
U ".,
BRUNSWICK
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS,
TEXAS, HELD IN THE CITY HALL, 7301 NORTHEAST
LOOP 820 - JUNE 9, 1986 - 7:30 P.M.
1.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Echols called the meeting to order June 9, 1986, at 7:30 p.m.
2.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Dan Echols
Richard Davis
Dick Fisher
Marie Hinkle
Mack Garvin
Virginia Moody
Harold Newman
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Councilman
Councilwoman
Councilman
Councilwoman
Councilman
Staff:
Rodger N. Line
Dennis Horvath
Jeanette Rewis
Rex McEntire
Lee Maness
Gene Riddle
John Whitney
Richard Royston
Richard Albin
Don Bowen
Jack Roseberry
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Secretary
Attorney
Finance Director
Public Works Director
Purchasing Agent
Director of Planning
City Engineer
Planning & Zoning Member
Board of Adjustment Member
Absent:
Jim Ramsey
Councilman
Members of the Press
3.
INVOCATION
Mayor Pro Tem Davis gave the invocation.
4.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING MAY 12, 1986
APPROVED
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved, seconded by Councilman Newman, to approve the
minutes of the May 12, 1986 meeting.
Councilwoma.n Moody stated that on Page 7, the name should be spelled "Peslu.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
June 9, 1986
Page 2
Motion carried 6-0.
5.
MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING JUNE 3, 1986
APPROVED
Mayor Pro Tern Davis moved, seconded by Councilwoman Moody, to approve the
minutes of the Joint Meeting June 3, 1986.
Motion carried 6-0.
6.
REMOVAL OF ITEM(S) FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
None
7.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEM (S) INDICATED BY
ASTERISK (25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34,
35, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, & 43)
APPROVED
Councilwoman Moody moved, seconded by Councilwoman Hinkle, to approve the
Consent Agenda.
Motion carried 6-0.
8.
PZ 86-9 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL HEARING _
REQUEST OF THE ESTATE OF
LOUIS ENGLER AND NETTYE FREEMAN ENGLER TO REZONE
TRACT 4, JOHN C. YATES SURVEY, ABSTRACT 1753,
TRACT 1, D.H. HIGHTOWER SURVEY, ABSTRACT 1891,
AND TRACT 2D, H.W. COOK SURVEY, ABSTRACT 366,
FROM AG (AGRICULTURE) TO C-2 (COMMERCIAL) (LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF WATAUGA ROAD AND ST. LOUIS AND SOUTHWESTERN RAILROAD)
Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak
in favor of this request to please come forward.
Mr. Horace Vale, representing the owner, appeared before the Council.
Mr. Vale asked for favorable consideration from the Council and stated he was
there to answer any questions the Council had.
Mr. McEntire advised that because of the uncertain time frame on the widening
of Watauga Road and the traffic associated with the street, the Planning &
Zoning Commission denied the request.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis asked what the plans were for the property.
Mr. Vale stated that at this time they did not have any plans for the
development of this property.
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
June 9, 1986
Page 3
Mayor Pro Tern Davis stated that previous cases of this type had been tabled
by the Council because there were no site plans.
Mr. Vale stated it seemed like a reasonable zoning.
Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this request
to please come forward.
There being no one wishing to speak Mayor Echols closed the Public Hearing.
9.
ORDINANCE NO. 1368
DENIED
Councilman Fisher moved, seconded by Councilwoman Moody, to deny Ordinance
No. 1368.
Councilwoman Moody stated this seemed like a considerable amount of C-2
zoning being asked for and it would make a difference if it was known what it
would be used for.
Motion for denial carried 6-0.
10.
PZ 86-14 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING _
REQUEST OF HARWOOD PLAZA APARTMENTS--JOINT VENTURE
TO REZONE A PORTION OF LOT 2, BLOCK 2,
WALKER'S BRANCH ADDITION FROM R-7 MF (MULTI-FAMILY)
TO C-1 (COMMERCIAL) (LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF EMERALD HILLS WAY AND GRAPEVINE HIGHWAY)
Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak
in favor of this request to please come forward.
Mr. Bob McMillan, representing Harwood Plaza Joint Venture, appeared before
the Council.
Mr. McMillan stated they were asking for 8.437 acres to be rezoned
commercial. Mr. McMillan stated that at the present time it was zoned
Multi-Family and they felt they had more multi-family land than they needed.
Mr. McMillan stated he felt commercial zoning would be the highest and best
use for the property. Mr. McMillan stated they planned to build Phase III of
their shopping center.
Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this request
to please come forward.
There being no one wishing to speak, Mayor Echols closed the Public Hearing.
11.
ORDINANCE NO. 1369
APPROVED
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
June 9, 1986
Page 4
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved, seconded by Councilwoman Hinkle, to approve
Ordinance No. 1369.
Motion carried 6-0.
12.
PZ 86-15 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING _
REQUEST OF SIGMOR CORPORATION TO REZONE A PORTION
OF LOTS 1, 2 AND 3, PARKERS SUBDIVISION FROM C-l (COMMERCIAL)
TO C-1-SU-SALE OF BEER FOR OFF-PREMISES CONSUMPTION
(LOCATED AT 6877 GRAPEVINE HIGHWAY)
Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak
in favor of this request to please come forward.
Ms. Barbara Gamache, representing Diamond Shamrock, appeared before the
Council.
Ms. Gamache stated this request was approved by the Planning & Zoning
Commission and she requested Council approval.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated he understood they were going to remodel and asked
the time frame.
Ms. Gamache stated approximately 60 days.
Councilman Fisher asked if this was the only Shamrock Station located in
North Richland Hills.
Ms. Gamache stated there was one more, but it was dealer owned.
Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this request
to please come forward.
There being no one wishing to speak, Mayor Echols closed the Public Hearing.
13.
ORDINANCE NO. 1370
APPROVED
Councilman Fisher moved, seconded by Councilman Garvin, to approve Ordinance
No. 1370 permit to be issued in the name of Joe V. Walden and
non-transferable.
Motion carried 6-0.
14.
PZ 86-16 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING _
REQUEST OF CAMBRIDGE CO., INC. TO REZONE
LOT 3, BLOCK 1, NORTHPARK PLAZA ADDITION
FROM C-I (COMMERCIAL) TO C-2 (COMMERCIAL)
(LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF RUFE SNOW DRIVE
NORTH OF WATAUGA ROAD)
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
June 9, 1986
Page 5
Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak
in favor of this request to please come forward.
Mr. Neal Cukerbaum, representing Cambridge Company, Inc., appeared before the
Council.
Mr. Cukerbaum stated this was part of North Park Plaza Shopping Center. Mr.
Cukerbaum stated that Winn Dixie had moved out of the center and the new
tenant planned for the Center would be Firestone Rubber Stores.
Councilman Fisher asked if they were going to renovate the shopping center.
Mr. Cukerbaum stated yes, the Firestone Store would be the third phase of the
shopping center.
Councilwoman Moody asked the time frame on renting the old Winn Dixie.
Mr. Cukerbaum stated two to four months.
Councilwoman Hinkle asked where the extension to the shopping center was
going to be.
Mr. Cukerbaum stated it would be on the north end of the property.
Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this request
to please come forward.
There being no one wishing to speak Mayor Echols closed the Public hearing.
15.
ORDINANCE NO. 1371
APPROVED
Councilwoman Moody moved, seconded by Councilman Newman, to approve Ordinance
No. 1371.
Motion carried 6-0.
16.
PZ 86-17 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING _
REQUEST OF FRANK B. HOLLAND TO REZONE
A PORTION OF TRACT 2, J. CONDRA SURVEY, ABSTRACT 310
FROM AG (AGRICULTURE) TO R-2 (SINGLE FAMILY)
(LOCATED NORTH OF STARNES ROAD IMMEDIATELY WEST
OF KINGSWOOD ADDITION AND SOUTH OF LONDONDERRY ADDITION)
POSTPONED
Mayor Echols advised that one council member was absent and this request
would require a three-fourths majority vote of the Council. Mayor Echols
asked if the applicant would like to postpone until a full Council was
present.
Mr. Doug Gilliland, representing Mr. Holland, appeared before the Council.
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 9, 1986
Page 6
Mr. Gilliland requested that the zoning request be postponed.
Mr. McEntire advised it would have to be postponed until the first meeting in
July.
Matter postponed by consensus of the Council.
17.
ORDINANCE NO. 1374
POSTPONED
18.
PZ 86-19 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING -
REQUEST OF JAMES WALKER TO REZONE
TRACT 4R, A.G. WALKER SURVEY, ABSTRACT 1630
FROM R-7 MF (MULTI-FAMILY) TO C-2 (COMMERCIAL)
(LOCATED ON-THE EAST SIDE OF FLORY STREET BETWEEN
HARMONSON ROAD AND GLENVIEW DRIVE)
Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak
in opposition to this request to please come forward.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis advised that he had received a call from Mr. Stembridge
who advised that a representative could not be present tonight. Mayor Pro
Tem Davis stated that Mr. Stembridge asked that the case be presented as it
was presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this request
to please come forward.
There being no one wishing to speak Mayor Echols closed the Public Hearing.
19.
ORDINANCE NO. 1372
APPROVED
Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilwoman Moody, to approve Ordinance
No. 1372.
Motion carried 6-0.
20.
PZ 86-20 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING -
REQUEST OF DAVID BARFIELD TO REZONE
A PORTION OF LOT 3R-1, BLOCK 1, MARTIN ADDITION
FROM AG (AGRICULTURE) TO R-2 (SINGLE FAMILY)
(LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF NOB HILL DRIVE)
Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak
in favor of this request to please come forward.
Mr. David Barfield, owner, appeared before the Council.
I
-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 9, 1986
Page 7
Mr. Barfield stated a section of the tract was zoned Agriculture. Mr.
Barfield stated he was requesting the zoning change so he could subdivide and
create a lot for development.
Councilman Newman asked what the square footage of the house would be that
would be permitted on this lot.
Mr. Barfield replied it would be 2500 square feet.
Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to please come
forward.
There being no one else wishing to speak Mayor Echols closed the Public
Hearing.
21.
ORDINANCE NO. 1373
APPROVED
Councilman Garvin moved, seconded by Councilwoman Hinkle, to approve
Ordinance No. 1373.
Motion carried 6-0.
22.
PZ 86-18 REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL HEARING ON PZ 86-18
GRANTED
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved, seconded by Councilman Newman, to grant the Appeal
Hearing on PZ 86-18 to be heard July 14, 1986.
Motion carried 6-0.
23.
PZ 86-22 REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL HEARING ON PZ 86-22
GRANTED
Councilwoman Hinkle moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Davis, to grant the
Appeal Hearing on PZ 86-22 to be heard July 14, 1986.
Motion carried 6-0.
24.
PZ 86-21 CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SECTION XX
OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE 1080, ORDINANCE NO. 1375
APPROVED
Mayor Pro Tern Davis moved, seconded by Councilwoman Hinkle, to approve
Ordinance No. 1375.
Motion carried 6-0.
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 9, 1986
Page 8
*25.
PS 86-17 REQUEST OF KENNETH C. WHITELY, TRUSTEE,
FOR REPLAT OF LOTS 24R AND 25 THROUGH 29,
BLOCK 1, OAK HILLS ADDITION (LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF AMUNDSON ROAD AND PRECINCT LINE ROAD)
APPROVED
*26.
PS 86-20 REQUEST OF JACK ROSEBERRY
FOR REPLAT OF LOTS 2R-2A AND 2R-2B,
BLOCK 13, MEADOWVIEW ESTATES (LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF DAVIS BOULEVARD AND RUMFIELD ROAD)
APPROVED
*27.
PS 86-21 REQUEST OF CHART DEVELOPMENT
FOR REPLAT OF TRACT 3A, 3B, AND 3C,
NRH INDUSTRIAL PARK ADDITION (LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF RUFE SNOW DRIVE SOUTH OF THE
ST. LOUIS AND SOUTHWESTERN RAILROAD)
APPROVED
*28.
PS 86-22 REQUEST OF JACK E. KING
FOR REPLAT OF LOT 9-R, BLOCK 4, DIAMOND LOCH ADDITION
(LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TABOR DRIVE
BETWEEN LARIAT DRIVE AND DIAMOND LOCH DRIVE)
APPROVED
*29.
PS 86-23 REQUEST OF DON WAYNE GUTHRIE
FOR REPLAT OF LOT 8R, BLOCK 4, DIAMOND LOCH ADDITION
(LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TABOR DRIVE
BETWEEN LARIAT DRIVE AND DIAMOND LOCH DRIVE)
APPROVED
*30.
PS 86-25 REQUEST OF IKE HARRIS & CO.
FOR FINAL PLAT OF WINDSOR PARK ADDITION
(LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CHAPMAN ROAD EAST OF RUFE SNOW DRIVE)
APPROVED
31.
SO 86-9 REQUEST OF EAGLE OUTDOOR
FOR APPROVAL OF BILLBOARD SIGN ON LOOP 820
(LOCATED ON SOUTH SIDE OF LOOP 820 APPROXIMATELY 1750 FEET
~ŒST OF RUFE SNOW DRIVE)
APPROVED
Mr. Stan Hall, representin~ Eagle Outdoor, appeared before the Council.
Mr. Hall stated they planned to build a 14 x 48 foot sign that would be 50
feet in height. Mr. Hall stated the request did meet the Ordinance. Mr.
I
-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,.
I
il
II
I
I
I
I
June 9, 1986
Page 9
Hall stated there were presently two signs located on the property that would
be moved.
Mayor Echols asked if the sign would be 100 feet from the church property.
Mr. Hall replied that it would.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis asked Mr. Hall if he could give the Council a landmark
where the exact location was.
Mr. Hall presented a map showing the location of the sign to the Council.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved, seconded by Councilman Fisher, to approve SO 86-9
contingent upon the removal of the two existing signs and the sign being
placed at least 100 feet east of the west property line of the subject tract.
Motion carried 6-0.
*32.
GN B6-50 CONTRACT WITH NORTH TEXAS COMMISSION
APPROVED
33.
GN 86-51 CONSIDERATION OF STREET NAME CHANGE
FROM RUMFIELD ROAD TO STARNES ROAD,
ORDINANCE NO. 1367
DENIED
Dr. Olen Tobias, 8800 Rumfield, appeared before the Council.
Dr. Tobias stated that it was his understanding that the name was being
changed because of confusion of it being Rumfield on one end and Starnes on
the other. Dr. Tobias stated he could see no real problem in leaving it
Rumfield Road. Dr. Tobias stated his letterheads and so forth were printed
with the address of Rumfield Road. Dr. Tobias stated there were several
other streets in the City that were the same way. Dr. Tobias stated he felt
the change was premature at this time.
Councilman Garvin moved, seconded by Councilman Newman, to deny Ordinance No.
1367.
Motion for denial carried 5-1; Mayor Pro Tem Davis, Councilwomen Hinkle and
Moody, and Councilmen Garvin, and Newman voting for denial and Councilman
Fisher voting against.
*34.
GN 86-52 FIRE DEPARTMENT REORGANIZATION PLAN
APPROVED
*35.
GN 86-53 SELECTION OF ARCHITECT
FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
APPROVED
I
~
~.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 9, 1986
Page 10
*36.
GN 86-54 APPOINTMENT OF DEPUTY CLERK,
RESOLUTION NO. 86-24
APPROVED
*37.
GN 86-55 PROPOSED SUPPORT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
APPROVED
*38.
GN 86-56 PROPOSED BOND SALE _
1986 SERIES GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
APPROVED
39.
GN 86-57 APPOINTMENT TO VARIOUS BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved, seconded by Councilwoman Moody, to make the
following appointments:
Board of Adjustment (2 year terms): David Barfield (Alternate), Jack
Roseberry, Billy Cypert, Ron Hubbard, Forrest Grubb (Alternate)
Board of Appeals (2 year terms): Orville Baker, Joe Coulson, John
Larriviere, Robert Skinner, Erick Hill
Cable TV (2 year terms): Gaye Ingram, Byron Sibbet, Dolly Gilliland
Library Board (2 year terms): Polly Brinkley, Jan Daniels, Lynn O'Day,
Mickey Oxford.
Park and Recreation Board (2 year term): Sharon Battles
Planning & Zoning Commission (2 year terms): Don Bowen, Carole Flippo
(Alternate), Mark Wood, John Schwinger.
Motion carried 6-0.
39a.
GN 86-58 RESOLUTION REGARDING HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION GRANT,
RESOLUTION NO. 86-25
APPROVED
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved, seconded by Councilman Fisher, to approve
Resolution No. 86-25.
Motion carried 6-0.
*40.
PU 86-17 RATIFICATION OF CONCESSIONAIRE CONTRACT
FOR NORTHFIELD PARK
APPROVED
*41.
PW 86-18 AUTHORIZATION FOR ENGINEERING
OF WATER AND SEWER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
APPROVED
I
-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 9, 1986
Page 11
*42.
PAY 86-17 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 06 & FINAL
IN THE AMOUNT OF $77,239.42 TO WALKER CONSTRUCTION
FOR FLORY STREET WATER, SEWER AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
APPROVED
*43.
PAY 86-18 MUNICIPAL COMPLEX PAY ESTIMATE #7
AND FINAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $36,901.33
APPROVED
44.
CITIZEN PRESENTATION
None
45.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved, seconded by Councilwoman Moody, to adjourn the
meeting.
Motion carried 6-0.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Secretary
IJ
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Planning and Development
Department:
Council Meeting Date:
6/23/86
SUbject:
Request of Earl McKinney, Trustee to Rezone PZ 85-69
a Portion ot Tract 1, and IH, ~.A. t;ross Survey Agenda Number:
Abstract 281, and Tract 3, Wm. Cox Survey, Abstract 1272
from AG to C-1
This Zoning Application is presented on the vacant tract located on the east side of
Davis Boulevard north of Odell Street. The requested rezoning is from AG Agriculture to
C-1 Commercial. The stated intent of the applicants is to construct a strip shopping
center on the site. This current hearing is the third time the applicant has made a
presentation before the City Council on this request. The application now under
consideration reduced the area of the Commercial request from previous applications.
At the last hearing for this proposal before the City Council on March 24, 1986 the
applicants indicated their intent was to construct a strip shopping center on the site.
They also mentioned the possibility of including some office uses in the center.
At the same meeting several citizens from the Stoneybrooke and Odell Additions adjacent
to the subject property appeared in opposition to the proposed rezoning. Their
contention was that the property was not suited to commercial uses and one opponent
suggested that the zoning be restricted to office use only. The opponents also
mentioned the problems with the existing drainage which would be magnified by the
development of the property.
After lengthy consideration the City Council tabled action on the rezoning request to
allow the applicant to revise his site plan of the proposed development to answer some
of the questions raised b( the citizens and the City Council. The attached land plan of
the site is the applicants response to the concerns expressed.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission had earlier recommended denial of Zoning Application
PZ 85-69 requesting rezoning on a portion of Tract 1 and 1B, E.A. Cross Survey, Abstract
281 and Tract 3, Wm. Cox Survey, Abstract 321 from AG to C-1. The City Council should
recall that the consideration of this is in appeal of that recommendation.
Finance Review
Source of Funds:
Bonds (GO/Rev.)
Operating Budget
o
Acct. Number
Sufficient Funds Available
f!-11/~
City Manager
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
, Finance Director
Page 1 of
1
~'¡":;.
~f~t . . '. : I
- R., embr,i~p.E.
I
I
4028 Daley, Suite 103 . North Richland Hills, Texas 76118 .
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
(
~ March 24, 1986
Page 3
Councilwoman Moody expressed her gratitude
the Master Plan.
ens that helped with
8a.
PZ 85-69 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING _
RECONSIDERATION OF PZ 85-69 -
REQUEST OF EARL MCKINNEY, TRUSTEE, TO REZONE
A PORTION OF TRACTS 1 AND 1B, E.A. CROSS SURVEY, ABSTRACT 281,
AND A PORTION OF TRACT 3, WILLIAM COX SURVEY, ABSTRACT 321
FROM AG (AGRICULTURE) to C-I (COMMERCIAL)
(LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD NORTH OF ODELL STREET)
(DENIED AT THE FEBRUARY 10, 1986 MEETING)
Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak
in favor of this request to please come forward.
Mr. Glen Schneider, President of Diversified Land Service, appeared before
the Council.
Mr. Schneider stated he felt this request was denied due to a lack of
communication. Mr. Schneider asked for rebuttal time. Mr. Schneider stated
that the original request was for all commercial zoning and in a spirit of
compromise with the neighbors and the City, they changed the request for
zoning on the eastern 4 1/2 acres to single family zoning. Mr. Schneider
stated that in addition, on the south side there was a 15 foot wide, 1,000
foot long sewer easement. Mr. Schneider stated that the surrounding zoning
was single family to the west, two tracts of commercial zoning due north, and
east of those tracts was single family zoning. Mr. Schneider stated that
east of their proposed C-1 zoning request was R-3 zoning. Mr. Schneider
stated that Odell Addition was south of their addition and it was zoned R-3.
Mr. Schneider stated that they would be placing a new street, Stephanie
Drive, through the center of their new subdivision which would enter into
Stonybrooke. Mr. Schneider stated that the new street would be extra wide to
allow traffic to exit safely from Davis Boulevard. Mr. Schneider stated the
proposed street would alleviate two major problems for the residents in
Stonybrooke and on Odell Street. Mr. Schneider stated that they were aware
of the City's ordinance requiring a site barring fence and the drainage
requirements would be met.
Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this request
to please come forward.
Mr. Don Chaille, 8405 Timberline Court, appeared before the Council.
Mr. Chaille stated their position was still the same. Mr. Chaille stated
that on February 10, 1986 the City Council heard arguments for and against
this request. Mr. Chaille stated he would admit that it was not feasible to
have residential facing Davis Boulevard, but why did it always have to be
commercial zoning that was requested.
Councilwoman Moody stated that Mr. Chaille agreed that residential did not
belong on Davis Boulevard, therefore what would he suggest.
Mr. Chaille stated he would suggest office bUildings.
~
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
(
( March 24, 1986
Page 4
Councilwoman Moody stated that an office could be built in commercial.
Mr. Chaille stated he would suggest something other than residential zoning
and request that it be restricted to office structures.
Mr. V. L. Gibson, 8333 Odell, appeared before the Council.
Mr. Gibson stated the tracts in question adjoined his property on the north
and he objected because he felt there should not be any commercial zoning
adjoining their homes. Mr. Gibson stated there was too much industrial and
commercial zoning in the area. Mr. Gibson stated that he believed it should
remain a residential area and asked the Council to keep it as such by voting
against this request. Mr. Gibson stated there was not a buffer and they were
completely surrounded by commercial.
Councilman Fisher stated that there would be a fence between the commercial
and residential property and before any commercial building could be
constructed, it would have to be set back 65 feet behind the fence.
Councilman Fisher asked if that was not enough buffer.
Mr. Gibson stated he did not feel like it was a large enough buffer.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated that Stonybrooke was buffered with single family
residences and this property was not as deep as the one to the north. Mayor
Pro Tem Davis stated that Mr. Gibson was not completely surrounded by
commercial zoning; there was some single family zoning to the east. Mayor
Pro Tem Davis stated there was a problem at the present time in trying to get
in and out of Stonybrooke. Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated this development would
alleviate some of the traffic. Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated that Mr. Gibson
had said 65 feet was not enough, what was.
Mr. Gibson stated that a 270 foot set back would be fine.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated that residential would then front Davis Boulevard.
Councilwoman Hinkle stated that there was industrial to the south and
proposed commercial to the north. Councilwoman Hinkle stated that she
understood Mr. Gibson's concern but felt commercial would be better than
industrial.
Mr. Gibson stated he felt there was too much commercial in the area.
Mayor Echols asked Mr. Gibson if he was speaking for the neighbors because
Mr. Gibson's property was buffered by residential.
Mr. Gibson stated he was representing his neighbors and would ask that they
be given more of a buffer and a masonry fence.
Mr. Gerald Stewart, 8840 Main, appeared before the Council.
Mr. Stewart stated that he felt that Davis Boulevard did warrant commercial.
Mr. Stewart stated that if you look at this property, sooner or later Odell
Street would have to be looked at as commercial. Mr. Stewart stated there
had to be something to equalize the area or it would get larger. Mr. Stewart
~
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
(
~ March 24, 1986
Page 5
stated he wanted the Council to consider that with this much zoning down the
back of Odell Street, someday the Council would have to reconsider the fact
that there would be 750 feet of commercial down Odell Street.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated that if the homeowners wanted to sell and they
wanted it zoned commercial, he felt they had every right to do so.
Mr. Stewart stated he agreed.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis asked what was so bad about the property owners wanting
to sell their commercial property.
Mr. Stewart stated that some day it would be commercial and he was asking if
the City wanted that much commercial.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated that this Council's objectives were to look at the_
best use for the property.
Mayor Echols granted Mr. Schneider rebuttal time.
Mr. Schneider stated that the first speaker mentioned that an alternative
could be residential. Mr. Schneider stated the alternatives were industrial
or multi-family zoning. Mr. Schneider stated that he had considered an
office building but at this late date it was not feasible for a new site plan
to be drawn up. Mr. Schneider stated they would have to meet with their
architects and decide what type of building they were going to put on the
property and the location of the bUildings. Mr. Schneider stated that Mr.
Gibson did not adjoin the commercial, but abutted R-3 zoning. Mr. Schneider
stated that Mr. Gibson had also mentioned a masonry fence, but they felt a
redwood or stockade-type was more feasible. Mr. Schneider stated he did not
feel commercial zoning would be detrimental to the surrounding property.
Councilman Fisher stated that he was hearing deviations that possibly some
offices would be put in behind the retail and he was very confused as to what
it would look like. Councilman Fisher stated he was in favor of the previous
design because it provided for a wide street accessing Davis Boulevard.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis asked if offices were built, would it be the same layout.
Mr. Schneider stated that basically it would be the same plan, they would put
office buildings next to residential with the retail portion fronting on
Davis Boulevard.
Councilman Fisher stated he was still a bit confused. Councilman Fisher
stated that once it was zoned, how would the City control it and know whether
or not it would appease the neighborhood.
Councilman Ramsey stated that the last time this request was heard, the vote
was 4-3 for denial. Councilman Ramsey stated the fact that it was brought up
again was obvious that someone was going to change their vote and he being in
oPposition to the request decided to check further into it. Councilman
Ramsey stated that in his opinion most of the things that they had discussed
Saturday morning had changed. Councilman Ramsey stated he did not believe
that office zoning was mentioned in the conversation and also that everyone
~
I.
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
(
(
March 24, 1986
Page 6
was in agreement to a masonry fence. Councilman Ramsey stated that since
there was a confusion factor he felt it should be denied again until it could
be worked out and the Council knew exactly what they were dealing with.
Mr. Schneider stated an office building was a thought; this was going to be a
mixed-use project within the guidelines of C-1 use.
Councilman Ramsey stated he did not appreciate meeting on Saturday morning,
thinking an agreement had been reached, and show up on Monday night to
discover the applicants explored on what was agreed to and then find out that
it could not be done.
Councilwoman Moody stated she was the one that was concerned with her vote.
Councilwoman Moody stated she felt that perhaps she had cast an emotional
vote as opposed to a business vote. Councilwoman Moody stated that after
hearing the confusion tonight, she felt that perhaps she probably voted right _
the first time. Councilwoman Moody stated she felt the applicants needed to
come back with a site plan that the City could bind them to and one the
neighbors could live with.
Mr. Schneider stated they would be willing to stay with the present site
plan. Mr. Schneider stated that he was only trying to offer an alternative
to the neighbors.
Ms. Coleen Daisy appeared before the Council.
Ms. Daisy stated there was a misunderstanding when Mr. Schneider was talking
about offices. Ms. Daisy stated they would be willing to consider putting
offices in if the Council wanted that. Ms. Daisy stated the site plan
brought before the Council tonight was exactly what was planned for the site.
There being no one else wishing to speak Mayor Echols closed the Public
Hearing.
Bb.
ORDINANCE NO. 1272
TABLED
Councilman Ramsey moved, seconded by Councilman Fisher, to deny PZ 85-69.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis asked if the request could possibly be tabled because the
site plan was close and he felt the masonry fence could be dealt with by
leaving inlets in the fence. Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated he would like to
table the request subject to a revised site plan and make it a part of the
ordinance.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved. seconded by Councilman Kenna. to table PZ 85-69
subject to a revised site plan being submitted at a later date.
Motion carried 5-2; Mayor Pro Tem Davis, Councilwoman Hinkle, Councilmen
Fisher, Newman, and Kenna voting for; and Councilwoman Moody and Councilman
Ramsey voting against.
~
I,
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
(
~ February 24, 1986
Page 4
10.
PZ 85-69 POSSIBLE RECONSIDERATION OF PZ 85-69
APPROVED
Councilwoman Moody moved, seconded by Councilman Fisher, to set a Public
Hearing for the reconsideration of PZ 85-69 for March 24, 1986.
Councilman Fisher stated that after action was taken on this item he looked
at the land use map and felt the property should be commercial; therefore, he
felt the Council should hear it again.
Councilman Ramsey stated he felt that there were two issues that needed to be
cleared up. Councilman Ramsey stated one was the right of a council person
to resurrect an issue they wanted to be reconsidered. Councilman Ramsey
stated he felt it was admirable that someone wanted to do this when they knew
what they would have to face.
Motion carried 6-0.
II.
PS 85-80 REQUEST BY RICHMOND BAY DEVELOPMENT INC.
FOR REPLAT OF BLOCK 9, MEADOW LAKES ADDITION
(LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
MEADOW LAKES DRIVE WEST OF RUFE SNOW DRIVE)
APPROVED
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved, seconded by Councilwoman Moody, to ap ove PS 85-
80 subject to the engineers comments and a stipulation that 2, 0 square foot
houses, *10,000 square foot lots and rear entry garages be p. aced on the plat.
Motion carried 6-0.
*12.
PS 86-1 REQUEST OF JIM WARREN A CAREY BECK
FOR REPLAT OF LOT 3R, CALLOW ACRES ADDITION
(LOCATED ON THE WE SIDE OF
PARCHMAN STREET NORTH 0 GRAPEVINE HIGHWAY)
APPROV:
*13.
PS 86-3 RE ST OF HANSON PROPERTIES
FOR REPLAT OF LOTS 7 , 8R, AND 9R, BLOCK 3, NOB HILL ADDITION
CATED ON LOMBARD STREET)
APPROVED
14.
SO 86-2 REQUEST OF MAY ADVERTISING
TO LOCATE A BILLBOARD SIGN ON
NORTHEAST LOOP 820 WEST OF EDISON DRIVE
APPROVED
Mayor chols advised that at the present time there were four nonconforming
oards on the property. Mayor Echols stated that in addition there was a
*Corrected 3/24/86 to 10,400 square foot lots
--
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
(
r
February 10, 1986
Page 7
Councilwoman Moody stated the houses would be the same as in Stonybrooke only-
the lots would be smaller.
Mr. Don Chaille, 8405 Timberline,
appeared before the Council.
Mr. Chaille stated he strongly opposed R-2
There being no one
Hearing.
Public
10.
ORDINANCE NO. 1271
APPROVED
avis moved, seconded by Councilwoman Hinkle, to approve
the stipulation of 1600 square foot houses.
carried 7-0.
11.
PZ 85-69 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL HEARING _
REQUEST OF EARL MCKINNEY, TRUSTEE, TO REZONE
A PORTION OF TRACTS 1 AND 1B, E.A. CROSS SURVEY,
ABSTRACT 281 AND A PORTION OF TRACT 3, WILLIAM COX SURVEY,
ABSTRACT 321, FROM AG (AGRICULTURE) TO C-1 (COMMERCIAL)
(LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD NORTH OF ODELL STREET)
Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak
in favor of this request to please come forward.
Mr. Delbert Stembridge, Engineer, appeared before the Council.
Mr. Stembridge stated that this property was bounded by commercial on the
north and west. Mr. Stembridge stated that Davis Boulevard was a major
thoroughfare and you would not want to build a home that backed up to Davis.
Mr. Stembridge stated he felt the highest and best use for the property was
commercial.
Councilman Kenna asked if a sight barring fence on the south and east would
be installed.
Mr. Stembridge replied yes.
Councilwoman Hinkle asked if there would be no access to the residential
areas from the property.
Mr. Stembridge replied no.
Mr. Stembridge asked the Council for rebuttal time.
Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this request
to please come forward.
~
.
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
..
(
(
February 10, 1986
Page 8
Mr. V.L. Gibson, 8333 Odell, appeared before the Council.
Mr. Gibson stated that commercial zoning would increase traffic and devalue
property in the area and he felt it should be zoned residential. Mr. Gibson
stated there was already enough commercial in the area and this would not be
in the best interest for the city. Mr. Gibson asked that the Council vote
against this request.
Mr. Don Chaille, 8405 Timberline, appeared before the Council.
Mr. Chaille stated it would devalue his property and he felt additional
commercial in the area was not needed.
Mayor Echols granted rebuttal time.
Mr. Stembridge reappeared before the Council.
Mr. Stembridge stated that Mr. Chaille's property backed up to existing
commercial and was not within 200 feet of this request.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated there was an existing 15 foot easement along the
south line of the property. Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated there was a
possibility a drainage channel would be put there and asked how wide the
easement would be.
Mr. Stembridge stated the Master Drainage Plan called for a 20 to 30 foot
concrete channel.
Mayor Pro Tem Davis stated that Mr. Stembridge would be required to erect a
sight barring fence.
Mr. Stembridge stated he was aware of the requirement for the fence.
There being no one else Wishing to speak, Mayor Echols closed the Public
hearing.
12.
ORDINANCE NO. 1272
DENIED
Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved, seconded by Councilwoman Hinkle to approve
Ordinance No. 1272.
Councilman Ramsey stated he felt the residential area was being encroached
upon and he did not believe that commercial would be the best use.
Motion failed 4-3; Mayor Pro Tem Davis, Councilman Newman, and Councilwoman
Hinkle voting for and Councilwoman Moody, Councilmen Ramsey, Kenna and Fisher
voting against.
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
.....
Page 20
P & Z Minutes
June 13, 1985
14. PZ 85-67
/
PZ 85-67
APPROVED
(
(
Chairman Bowen stated it does better
fit the zero lot line zoning. This
gives more protection, but it allows
homes with small lots and puts a 1,2
square foot minimum instead of the
1,000, requires them to have gar es,
and they can be attached or de ched.
The motion carried 4-0.
Request of Clifford A.
rezone Tract lA, Tho s Sprouse
Survey, Abstract 1 9, from its
present classifi ation of AG
(Agriculture) 0 R-3 (Single Family).
This proper is located on the south
side of B sey Road and the west side
of Doug sLane.
/
Cha~an Bowen opened the Public
Heáring and called for those wishing
~o speak in favor of this request to
~ please come forward.
/ Delbert Stembridge, Consulting
Engineer, came forward. He said to
the south of this property is R-3
zoning, to the west is Commercial, and
across the street is in Keller and
they request a zoning change to R-3.
Chairman Bowen called for those
wishing to speak in opposition to this
request to please come forward.
There being no one wishing to speak,
the Chairman closed the Public
Hearing.
Mr. Tucker made the motion to approve
PZ 85-67. This motion was seconded by
Mr. Schwinger and the motion carried
4-0.
Chairman Bowen stated the next two
requests would be heard together but
would be voted on separately.
~
I
Page 21
P & Z Minutes
June 13, 1985
Ie
I
15. PZ 85-68
I
I
I
I
16. PZ 85-69
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
-
(
(
Request of Earl McKinney, Trustee to
rezone a portion of Tracts 1 & 1B, E.
A. Cross Survey, Abstract 281, and a
portion of Tract 3, William Cox
Survey, Abstract 321, from their
present classification of AG
(Agriculture) to R-3 (Single Family),
This property is located east of Davis
Boulevard and bounded on the east by
Stonybrooke Addition.
Request of Earl McKinney, Trustee, to
rezone a portion of Tracts 1 & IB, E.-
A. Cross Survey, Abstract 281, _and a
portion of Tract 3, William Cox
Survey, Abstract 321, from their
present classification of AG
(Agriculture) to C-l (Commercial).
This property is located on the east
side of Davis Boulevard and west of
Stonybrooke Addition.
Chairman Bowen opened the Public
Hearing and called for those wishing
to speak in favor of these requests to
please come forward.
Delbert Stembridge, Consulting
Engineer, came forward. He stated
this tract fronts on a a major
highway, Davis Boulevard. He said
they have requested a buffer of R-3
between Stonybrooke and the request
for Commercial. Mr. Stembridge said
the area requested for Commercial has
a lot of drainage problems and would
not be suitable for single family.
Chairman Bowen called for those
wishing to speak in opposition to this
request to please come forward.
Donald Chaille, 8405 Timberline Court,
came forward. He said he was speaking
for the residences in Stonybrooke and
on Odell Street. He stated that they
previously asked for Commercial on the
entire tract.
~
I Page 22 (
P & Z Minutes
June 13, 1985
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
....
(
Mr. Chaille said the property owners
are against these requests because
they want to protect their property
value. He said there is already
enough Commercial on Davis Boulevard,
plus the traffic is bad now and this
would make it worse. Mr. Chaille said
nothing has changed, the neighbors
protest both requests and request the
entire 15 acres be restricted to R-2,
residential. He said R-3 will not be
good enough, 7500 square foot lots
instead of 9000 and 1400 square foot- ~
houses instead of 1600. Mr. CQaille
read an article from the Star Telegram
regarding problems in North Richland
Hills. He said he felt this would be
spot zoning. Mr. Chaille asked what
the Master Plan shows for this area
and asked why couldn't this area be
developed as R-2 Single Family. He
said he had submitted petitions on
both cases and requested a show of
hands of those who were in opposition
to these requests.
P. C. McGreggor came forward. He said
the only reason Davis Boulevard is
going Commercial is the Commission is
granting it. He said it will soon be
another Belknap Street. Mr. McGreggor
said in Dallas and Fort Worth there
are busy highways with nice homes on
both sides so why can't they build R-2
Single Family homes on this entire
tract.
Mr. McGreggor said Mr. Burk Collins
was in previously with property to the
south of this property and he was told
he would have to take care of the
drainage; will this property drain
onto the property Mr. Collins had.
Mr. Royston said the developer must
take care of the drainage on his site
and the adjacent area.
Mr. McGreggor said he is against these
requests.
~
I
Page 23
P & Z Minutes
June 13, 1985
(
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
lit
I
I
PZ 85-68
DENIED
I
PZ 85-69
DENIED
I
I
(
Chairman Bowen said he does not feel
this would be spot zoning because
there is Commercial all along Davis
Boulevard.
v. L. Gibson, 8333 Odell Street, came
forward. He said he had lived here
for 33 years and he believes it is
spot zoning and feel they should keep
Commercial away from residential. Mr.
Gibson said they have 28 acres of
Heavy Industrial to the south of his
property and this would make
Commercial to the north. He said they
have retail across the street and in ---
between is residential. Mr. Gibson
said they are only asking R-3 for 270
feet of the 1000 feet which is no
buffer. He said he felt this was
going against the Master Plan.
Chairman Bowen closed the Public
Hearing.
Chairman Bowen said he was not sure
R-3 was a good plan for the small
tract because there was no entrance to
it.
Ms. Nash made the motion to deny
PZ 85-68. This motion was seconded by
Mr. Schwinger and the motion to deny
carried 3-1 with Mr. Tucker voting
against denial.
Ms. Nash made the motion to deny
PZ 85-69. This motion was seconded by
Mr. Schwinger and the motion to deny
carried 3-1 with Chairman Bowen voting
against denial.
Chairman Bowen stated the next tw
requests would be heard to er but
voted on separatel
· .. . ~.J
c·
I
I
Ie
I
17. PZ 85-70
.
Roger & Joan Hanson to
zone Lot 4, Block 1, Martin
Addition, from its present
classification of AG (Agriculture) to
R-2 (Single Family). This property is
located west of Precinct Line Road and
adjacent to Nob Hill Addition.
~
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
-
(
(
)
KNOWl TON-E NGlISH-FlOWERS, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS / Fort Worth- Dallas
May 22, 1985
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Richland Hills, Texas 76118
RE: 3-002, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
ZON!~G ~ASE PZ 85-69 REVIEW LETTER,
ZONING FROM AG TO C-1
REF. UTILITY SYSTEM GRID SHEET NO. 70
We have received the referenced zoning case for our review and
find that we could adequately locate this property on the Zoning
Map as required for updating should this case be passed by both
the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council.
ta~
RWA/ra
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
Mr. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Works
Mr. Allen Bronstad, Assistant Director of Public Works
Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development
Zoning Review PZ 85-69 Page 1
1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021 . 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367
.
I.
.~ "-
... ( '.
Ie
1
1
SIGNlTURE DATE ADDRES~
~-- _.- ----. --.------ -_._-_.~-~~~.~~ ~~-~~-
(}~~~ .. .7A.. -.,.-..--_-.-__k.-=-:L:5'.S- M ...~26 L/ ~ ~.
II<.~. Lt-_a~~4~--.._.-___~~_Z' - _~~____.__ .ß 9¿~~_..___..___.__
l~ ------·--~!nl~ - mj-~)~.. --
t· t/5{:'ß· '-'-".'--- 4-IÀ~55, YJ:1:i {)r/t:~4. ~7
1 ~fC:4.:J~1 ~~9&:-~3-,."k~I~/¡-~·5~~ __~~~~~-~~~~~¡;....----...-
.. ..._!!f:.{/' /~.~/J/~:(/;; to - _q:. ~ _ _ _
oK /l C/. '/J . ~.-< ~I h r-
' -/~~~~/~4.l!"-.~'l- .." , "";"'~",,~ .' ~-. ,,/ 2. - / ~
.7~~.3;~
,/ ,- / .."-~---
r - - (¡l~--:)u;>'-P c. .., -. - -" ...,,'
// (
'.'- _.~-" -. - - :e. _
1
1 .- .-... "---'''- '
1 ----.-..-
1 -----... .'.:.-- ,- ..... ... --.. -,. " --.- .-". - .... .----..-, -.---. ------.- --- .---.-- -.-..---.---~- -~
1
1 ~----.-.--..- ,'."^. '", . . .-..-...... -""-'-"0-' .-..--------
- -....--.--.-----..-- -., .._....._---..._--~._~_.__. -..-.-... .""--.,- '"
I~
1
t1 ,?'1 /1
To: City Council ( /î,q% ( Date:
City of North Richland Hills Case: # 85-69
We, the residents living within 200- of subject property in PZ 85-69, object
to the rezoning of said tract to C-l Commercial for the following reasons:
This rezoning would not be conductive to public safety, health,
convenience, cOmfort, prosperity, or general welfare of the present
neighborhood.
¿ -/3 - y
~ " .,J-l·
~
~ r' ... ~ ? /''':.). '7~-J /...y
-- ,~ ...~.., .,.....~~-<-
'-...,;,r ~ tI"""'" .. '. :.;. .. ....:... ..... ...... .". ....................,...,.,.................. .________-.
~ --/;2 ,/ >
ff...? " /... ~"k-__.____~_ ,
, ". . .~
:'
. ~_.. .~.._.- . --.-. --_...:.._.:... . _.._..__.._2_'~·':.'-"'·~·:~';~:£·¿'~~__~._M.___
. . ...... .-...-.....-,-..... ,..
. ... ~ . -.. .~ -.
,....... ....--...-..,...- .......- -" ..-.-...-.
.... '" - '-.-"'.- -..--
, --....-.. --- . _., . .. .. ~.
# . _I.;,. -.._............-___.....-....-__......._
....................... J
-_... ..-...--..---....... ..-.--....-. .-_...
_...~--.- --.----.........
...
. .~-~..:....-..., ".,"',' '....._......~.......-.......... ~...-. .....-.:;-............................."-
-"'''~''''''''". "'." ~--. ..-....-
._~.".. .-------.,. "_.-..,
_._...".._.~,.- .....__....-.._-~--_.... -.......
.....-....-....... ..... ~ ~
. ."'" "_" _....... .._._..iI&o...,,_~.........-._... .~......... ~..-...-~..........-...-.~_...................___.-----....~..-._.-.-...~................,,,............
.......... 1_· ..........'.-. ~..............._ .............. .............-......
v- ...,-.---".- - .....,.
.... ..................... .................................~ ~......................
... ~~. ~....~_.. ~..............~ .....
~-. -_....-...........~.. .....-......-........-----.~--. .----, ......... -~ -.....,'.. "........-. _.... ...__ _. #f .__. ._....._..._........_......_.-.................
\
-
--- ...-.............----..............-~.,....-~--... ..-..-..-...,................~.. .. ....,. "~r .....~
A "......-...,...................... .........__. ..... ~_ .......,., ........_.. ~_ __. ....-. ,.~_ _. ...
~
I· ,'" '
... J
Ie
I
1
1
I
. .
I . ··_£,qz~~~'Ï6~'---' ,_e_~}- ~~~~cbZ
1 ..u O'H .------.. ,---- -,-,-_,__--.f0..{)..d~-----
_ "QIi'l'¡;¿:&'7i2-.~~~7 ',.' . b-c?~J~. .._ {771 {~:T /&~'-~,._-.______-
1 ,,~¿d~L (:L~~~:¿'(l'1-;~/1-~ ~'.- - .___0..-:?~.S~.. . -.Þ . ~2,z.!_~~x~~£-
~.~~.__,________f~.J[J~_I.~_____ß1 {0 __,~.¿~.~~ .~ êd
Ie ., .-"'- ,._-:LL.::EL ~lf..2l/JJ~W!~~__
. (=/':(..,fr .. .ðv! L -¡;~/$G?:?5:-/~ç ~
1 _.__~_._l1o-r~.. .' ._..,. ........ t_.=/.c.-~J=_.._!'i3.k.~L¥~,. e;/-;_.__..
1 J41J7....tf). ßM/l//Uß .....,. 1,.'=/1-. fls-:._J!.r¡3$ -çJ~,~-:,~~...~-
-Ch: j.-~Q~ .. ,~.__!/._~tJ.'~//cJ£~~&~Þ-.~~ _...~~._._o
1 ---. . .. 6 ~//=,iJ-...._....kL?:LÞ-~ ~ (?~--~
1þJ-_~~""'" .. .....__.._.__-'-JL-,.~s- 91./;)./ c1~~~..
1 ~ 'l~:;~? r __J~,_.____.__b_-.:..l/ is- fl/~ rß./u!tJ~{fr:L~u f)L
()J
1 ~~- ~---_....__._~-~...!~_~ - ~~!~ 4<;~F;;../d-1r---'~
-Z . -"'- -õ-2f; .-Ú._i~,_._, .-----.--- .-
¡ / 1 / ~ r f)
1 .:.. .) . \. ¡'. --- f? - I' 1:.7 þ 4-c) I " ~~,.,.... ~ß_,-~ .J tit'. ____
v/ ;¿ ~ n
-LjZ y.,;L~----.----_.__L=J/:?~ 7~ ~ _.' _-ÞL.._._
~~/~A~______~~:¿~~__~ ~~_
,., . :r.¿f'J'~-£:~~-----~-'" ~~.L--=-_--:~)r C-~.S /.::..~ ¡p~~o~ --!--.__
I -46/ /- ",4.¿fit."7 /. ",'.é:::." 6 - // - ?.:5" ¿.4Ú--b v$r ()~l~ l? 4 (/~-.t.~ \l,.\-
711 ji?)" /1 .13 -:-i/ } -.' .\-..- 9." r¡' B Ùt d
l.jLl4..,/~_:,.¿,_~~~.v:. .-" .._..f.2...-:-/-;_.~~_____º_2.~ ð;_.. ./J-trH (..ðu-'~ 0
t -/~_~/~
3.' ~/
Datel- ~
Case: PZ -85-68 &
85-69
We object to the rezoning of said tract in PZ85-68 to R-3 for the following
reason;
(
(
To: City COW1cil
City of North Richland Hills
An R-3 designation will adversely affect the property values of
residents nearby where classification is R-2
We also object to the reclassification of property in PZ85-69 to C-1
for the following reasons:
This rezoning would not be conductive to public safety, health,
convenience, comfort, prosperity, or general welfare of the
present neighborhood.
SIGNITURE .
DATE
ADDRESS
. .~.-
~. ~
t-/~-I:,
I .~" · ( ( 1:;lI
. '~4TO: City Council Dùte:- ~
~ ,..11 Ci ty of North Richland Hills Ca,s.3: p¿ -85-68 &
r-a 85-69
. r 'l4 tve object to the rezoning of said tract in 1>7.35-68 to R-3 :for thc~ follo'~Jing
,/~ . J \ reason;
I ~trrl'~l An R-3 designation will aàversely a:ffcct the prop~rty valu~s of
~o~ f? residents nearby where classification is R-2
I ~...d)-r· vie also object to the reclassification of lwoperty in PZB~¡-6') to C-l
',9\~~ for the following reasons:
-1 /'Ø¡..t] This rezoning \<Jould not be conductive to public safety, hf~alth,
I ~ e'" .. ,1-' convenience, comfort, prosperity, or yeneral welfare of tÌ1'~
~. present neighborhood.
11-'\ SIG ~__... t~;~;~ ~J:J~~KS:3
1". flJ~fl19t~ b-/o-/?S- ?t).s-.s~yj:JiQQke-
I r'-' -:D! - :~~~~\ . ~&-~(:-/~~~/~ ~7;? t:1 ~-.
I ~~ t-/ò-ð'S- c?t//6 ~~ÆÞ
~1G- 111/ ~hlt/~
Ie~'--' :~/.I
I ~~-L
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
(;.-/o-:?:5
b -It!? s-~
t --/ö-t-ç
6--/0 -f)
b- /;Z - ð-S-
.. 7/~ ðTcN tE{ /ß1'ðo~
~~r~~Ør~~
7 ¿p-e? S T é7 Y ß' j/1 ¿;-e.k
1(~Y' '5TONY~vK Òr,
7/2/ S::7:/lkÄ!~6- 44
~--_.. .. -.-".~, ...
_. ......, -...... .. .
...--. ---..------------- -- '-~""" ~
- --..- ---....._-..... -.-. ..------..-- ." - - -- .- .-
-."-"- - ....
....~---........~.-__.. ...-.- -.-...-...----..--..... -
. ---.-. _......
---......--.-- .......-. ....
... . ~.. .. .
..~.....__..-...~-- -....... ---....
..... .~. .......-..- ----..---~. ~--- - .. ... ,- .. ------. -. . . .
--..--.-------....-.. ~ ~-- '-' -- ...------..---.. ---
~
I" ' .~. :,
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
.~
I
le-
I ---.-.. ..-. -" --..- -- -....
I --..---
I ----...
I --.-.--~-..-------.--......-.-----.
I
I
I~
I
I
& . .~--
(1 · ; Jf "
· 4~<:;?:~~t ':~~ ,J . ". _~_ -=LL :L~ ---.ff :2(al ,4:-U-../k«..~ y¿, )",,-U
-", \ -11- ?"'S c/ q z.. 7. ,~y 1-I.J'4/='~/' F4--
.,4--":fr . ~.,..- .... ..& ...----.-.. ,---,_._-.f).__U_jJ~¥ .. -.. ~f\
/,-e~-~ 'I --- -- . \ ~ (, t:.r- 7 / :J J¿~ o. lb r~
~-U¿~-C-~~~~::~!~:)~-1-tof'__;/0 .. - J ! ~ .~ '" 7/ ,ð i ~~.' ~~~~~ß..LJ
~ \ »4' ~f \ ,/J- /'! . ~
y. '. . /.- - ,;' - . ~ -. . - -- .. J' ..... .-'. ..
' · ., · . , ~ ·.F.. ___~.., "'. _., ,
. , "'. · . , -, - ,. · r.. . _ __,
....tJ \, - " J' ... oJ' / "~'" t : ... ,/~... '.' .,'. ,f ~! . .... J.. _I- ~ (
, . . '.'-'/~'''-'''''''' '-.::: /- ,.:,'" ··/-<.J"'_H' _.__~"_._____;_;~~_._ ___..:,~~~=:-::~~-;.__~ ._
' t':"'o. <:s' t""'\ ~ .. \ '" (, , ~ -... ~ \ _ __ . ; \."' ... (}......... __... ~ I' ,... ~_ )",\
. ,--- J -,..., ,- "~". ...... "" <=.' .. _. ." .)0 ,. r \_., '..-
-:--~~------- -:.: -""-,,,--~_...._----. - -- .. - - -. ------_. ~ .
{
(
(-/5-1:.
~.' þl
Date:- ~
Case: PZ -85-68 &
85-69
for the following
To:
Ci ty Council
City of North Richland Hills
We object to the rezoning of said tract in PZ85-68 to R-3
reason;
An R-3 designation will adversely affect the property values of
residents nearby where classification is R-2
We also object to the reclassification of property in PZ85-69 to C-1
for the following reasons:
This rezoning would not be conductive to public safety, health,
convenience, COmfort, prosperity, or general welfare of the
present neighborhood.
SIGNlTURE .
DATE
ADDRESS
.-.------------.---..--...- -----.------ -..---.... ,
---.--
" ~ .--.........-...~
-a
.. -...-..... --.... - ..
... e....~ ~,.... ',r-.---. __ __--...........
-.., ~-_.-......... -... "'_.._--_.....~..... .-.......~..._-~
.,.. ,...... ...-..-.._~'....' I ....·.................I.~....~~.
......A ...~.__ ~.,..........__.... _---.... .. ..,..... ..~........,...
--- .-----.......- --- - -. -.. ...'." -- ....
.- -.. --.- --.-.. -- -.--.--.....--.----. -_.._..~---.._.._--....._.__.._~
·e_.. ._.... __. .
. ~ -_. .....~.. -.-------.........-.- -..~~-.. '--~ --... .....,. .......-" ........,........~
- ..."
,....-....-.... --................-. .....
... - .-.--..............................................-..
,.--....-..."'.. ""---- ..........-.....~...- -...... ~..................
~ ---- -..._. ... c ........._ ---........ ........-...--.~... _....--. ~
---.-- ----- --..-- ---.-..----. -..
..~ .,
~._-
----..._~... -- -.._~
..
---~ - -.
--- ..---. .-- --, - ....... -..--.---..-------------..-
.-----
--
------...-
-----,--.---. ......._-_.~-----_._- --.. . ------------ -...-
-
~
I ~.
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
ORDINANCE NO. 1272
AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE
WITH SECTION XXVIII, AMENDMENTS, OF ZONING
ORDINANCE #1080 OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND
HILLS, TEXAS, PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED
BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND
HILLS, JANUARY 9, 1984
AFTER APPROPRIATE NOTICE AND PUBLIC HEARING THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION
IS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS BY
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
RESOLVED that on Case No. PZ-85-69 the following described property shall
be rezoned from AG to c-1.
BEING a tract of land situated in the City of North Richland Hills, Tarrant
County, Texas, and being part of the E. A. Cross Survey, Abstract 281, and
the William Cox Survey, Abstract 321, and being more particularly described
by metes and bounds as follows:
COMMENCING at the southeast corner of the E. A. Cross Survey, Thence North
89 degrees 36 minutes West, a distance of 270.00 feet to the point of
beginning of the herein described tract;
THENCE North 89 degrees 36 minutes West a distance of 757.30 feet to a
point for corner in the east right-of-way of Davis Blvd. (F.M. 1938);
THENCE North 18 degrees 27 minutes East along the said east R.O.W. of Davis
Blvd. for a distance of 240.00 feet to an angle point;
THENCE North 18 degrees 11 minutes East for a distance of 5.30 feet to a
point at the beginning of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius
of 1848.99 feet;
THENCE along said curve to the right and with the east R.O.W. line of Davis
Blvd. for a distance of 561.75 feet to a point for corner;
THENCE South 89 degrees 36 minutes East for a distance of 439.80 feet to a
point for corner;
THENCE South 01 degrees 12 minutes 41 seconds West, a distance of 733.00
feet to the point of beginning and containing 10.4925 acres of land, more
or less.
~
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
~ .
Page 2
This property is located on the east side of Davis Boulevard and west of
Stonybrooke Addition.
DENIED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THIS 13th DAY OF JUNE, 1985.
ZONING COMMISSION
ISSION
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
ACTING IN REGULAR SESSION THAT THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY IN CASE NO.
PZ-85-69 IS HEREBY REZONED C-l THIS 26th DAY OF AUGUST, 1985.
MAYOR
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
ATTEST:
JEANETTE REWIS, CITY SECRETARY
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
REX McENTIRE, CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
~
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Planning and Development
Department:
Council Meeting Date:
6/23/86
Subject:
Request of Richson Development Corporation
tor Final Piat or Carston Court ~ubd1v1sion.
PS 86-24
Agenda Number:
This Final Plat Application is presented on the Carston Court Subdivision. The property
is located on the west side of Rufe Snow Drive between Marilyn Drive and Shauna Drive.
The purpose for the requested plat approval is to create a single family subdivision for
development.
The proposed plat had previously been considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
At that time the consideration was tabled in order to allow the applicant to work out
the technical details of a drainage problem along the western boundary of the property.
Also the applicant was required to submit to the Staff a copy of his proposed homeowners
association agreement covering the maintenance and upkeep of the common property areas
at the entrance to the subdivision. The applicant's engineer has now provided the
necessary drainage design which the City's engineer has approved. The applicant has
submitted for review the association documents and the City Attorney has reviewed these
documents and returned them to the applicant for revision.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission approved Plat Application PS 86-24 requesting Final
Plat Approval of Carston Court Addition.
Finance Review
Acct. Number
Sufficient Funds Available
K !{/-~
City Manager
. Finance Director
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
PaQe 1 of 1
I
R-7-MF
C-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
'5 S,,-I
c:..t.c.øWA~ AC~SS
L. 31t
ÞP. Z -24 -8t..
...
1
L- ----
e --____u
I
Page 2
p & Z Minutes
June 12, 1986
. -'-'. ~- --..-. -----....... . ~ -
.. ~. ._,"" --- --- --...
-----.---
Mr. Freeman stated the l~ r was
being typed and w~ve it Monday.
Mr. TUC~~he motion to approve
PS ß~~3 subject to the Engineer's
________/~mments. This motion was seconded by
-~ Ms. Nash and the motion carried 5-0.
--------~
I PS 86-32 ______-/
APPROVED--
I ~--
~
1
I
I
PS 85-93
APPROVED
Mr. Schwinger made the motion to
approve PS 86-32 subject to receiving
the letter regarding the drainage of
Little Bear Creek. This motion was
seconded by Ms. Flippo and the motion
carried 5-0.
3.
PS 86-24
Request of Rischon Development Corp.
for final plat of Carston Court
Addition.
I
II
Chairman Bowen stated the problems had
been worked out.
PS 86-24
APPROVED
Mr. Tucker made the motion to approve
PS 86-24. This motion was seconded by
Ms. Nash and the motion carried 5-0.
4.
PS 86-31
--------....----":: .....-------..._-_..~...._--..~_--.---,_.------...~_...& ~:------".
I
Request of David Barfield for replat
of Lots 3R1A & 3RIB, Block 1, Martin
Addition.
I
PS 86-31
APPROVED
Mr. Schwinger made the motio~ 0
approve PS 86-31. This mríon was
seconded by Ms. Nash the motion
carried 5-0.
I
Chairman B wên stated since it was a
platti matter, they would move item
III 0 item 114a.
I
I
4a. PS 85-100
Request of Ellis & Pittman, Inc. for
preliminary plat of Block 81, Foster
Village Addition.
Mark Hannon, Engineer, came forward.
He said he would like to discuss
several items of the Engineer's
letter: U8-The owner agrees to pay
his prorata share of the water line in
Rufe Snow, but he requests he not be
required to pay any prorata on the
sewer line in Hightower since he has
been denied access to this line.
I
......
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
-.
I
I
/
~
JOHN E. LEVITT ENGINEERS, INC.
ENGINEERS · PLANNERS
3921 VANCE ROAD · FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76118
.
284-0981
June 9, 1986
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Richland Hills, Texas 76118
Re: CARSTON COURT Addition
Lots 1 through 16, Block 1
Dear Mrs. Calvert:
In response to the City Engineer's letter dated June 5, 1986, we have added the
additional requested drop inlet at the southwest corner of Lot 12.
Should you need additional information or prints, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
JOHN E. LEVITT ENGINEERS, INC.
cV~·
/
S. Scott Stewart, P.E.
cc Mr. John L. Hawkins
Mr. Rodger N. Line
Mr. Richard Albin
Files
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
(
(-
K NOWL TON-E NG LI 5 H-F LOWE RS, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS I Fort Worth- Dallas
June 5, 1986
Pl an~,ar,d .l~n i ng CC$!tffn:í;ss To.1JO¡
L I l.,y n f r~b R ì to 11 a~d ~, i 1 ,( s
7JO~. N" E. looþ Q20
;~tm'rttl R ic h 1 and H ì)l ~ > Te)(3. s. r5:1 ! 8
RE : ~~ q:rl ~ [r TV nF ~~ORfH RiICl1lAfJD HILLS
CARSì~ COTIRT-;~----
FIRST F ITIijG-'
REVISED DRAÎÑRG£ PlANS~
PS 86 - 24, GRID MAP 129
We have reviewed the referenced materials for this subdivision and offer the
following comments:
1 Please refer to item 2 of our review letter dated May 16, 1986, regarding
our recommendation that the developer provide a concrete drainage flume
along the west side of this proposed development. The developer and his
engineer have proposed an alternate design for intercepting runoff from
the area as required to discharge stonnwater underground into the existing
off-site storm drainage system. The proposed system should accomplish two
main functions: (a) protect the existing adjacent property owners west
(downstream) from this proposed development from potential flooding, and
(b) prevent water from rising in the back yards of lots 10, 11, and 12, to
a level which could cause on-site flooding. The developer is proposing to
construct an underground storm drain parallel to the existing underground
storm drain at the west end of this proposed subdivision with drop inlets
in each of the three lots to intercept and discharge runoff before it can
cause either off-site or on-site flooding. Although we would prefer the
concrete flume, we would not object to this proposed alternate solution.
2 We would recommend that an additional drop inlet be provided at the
southwest corner of lot 12. The proposed drop inlet at the northwest
corner of lot 12 would serve mainly to pick up off-site flow corning onto
the lot from the north. The additional drop inlet at the southwest corner
of the lot would serve to pick up other on-site runoff which does not
drain to the northwest inlet.
3 If this drainage plan is approved, we would recommend that City forces
monitor the situation after the westerly lots are developed to see if fill
placed within the drainage easement causes adjacent flooding. If this
occurs future corrective action by the Public Works Department may be
required.
Please call if you have any questions.
1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021 . 817l283-6211 . METRO/267-3367
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
Ie
I
Subdivision Review Le~er continued
~~
RICHARD W. ALBIN, P.E.
RW A / r a
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
Mr. Gene Riddle, D.irector of Publ ic Works
Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development
June 5, 1986
PS 86 - 24
(
CARSTON COURT
PAGE 2
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
II
Ie
I
I
(
JOHN E. LEVITT ENGINEERS, INC.
ENGINEERS · PLANNERS
3921 VANCE ROAD · FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76118
.
284-0981
June 3, 1986
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Rich1and Hills, Texas 76118
Re: CARSTON COURT Addition
Lots 1 through 16, Block 1
Dear Mrs. Calvert:
Transmitted with this letter are ten (10) copies of the Final Plat for the
above referenced project for use and review by the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
There has been one change made to the drainage easement on and between Lots 10
and 11. This change was necessitated for storm drainage revisions presently
being completed by our office, as per our meeting with City staff on May 27,
1986.
Should need additional information or prints, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
JOHN E. LEVITT ENGINEERS, INC.
S. Scott Stewart, P.E.
Enclosures
cc Mr. John L. Hawkins
Mr. ROdger N. Line
Mr. Richard Albin
Files
..
I
Page 2
P & Z Minutes
May 22, 1986
(
(
Ie
I
There being no one wishing to speak,
the Chairman called for those wishin
to speak in opposition to this re est
to please come forward.
I
I
There being no one wishing
the Chairman closed the P
Hearing.
I
I
PS 86-22
APPROVED
Mr. Hallford made t
approve PS 86-22. his motion was
seconded by Mr. chwinger and the
motion carrie 5-0.
I
3.
PS 86-23
Don Wayne Guthrie for
Lot 8-R, Block 4, Diamond
rth Addition.
I
--
irman Bowen stated that since this
s a replat in residential zoning
there would be a Public Hearing.
I
Chairman Bowen opened the Public
Hearing and called for those wishing
to speak in favor of this request to
please come forward.
I
There being no one wishing to speak in
favor of this request, the Chairman
called for those wishing to speak in
opposition to this request to please
come forward.
I
There being no one wishing to speak,
the Chairman closed the Public
Hearing.
I
PS 86-23
APPROVED
Mr. Wood made the motion to approve
PS 86-23. This motion was seconded by
Ms. Nash and the motion carried 5-0.
I
4.
PS 86-24
Request of Rischon Development
Corporation for final plat of Carston
Court Addition.
I
--
I
I
Scott Stewart with Levitt Engineers
came forward to represent Rischon
Development.
~
I Page 3 (
P & Z Minutes
~ May 22, 1986
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
(
Chairman Bowen stated that since they
still have the common property on the
entrance of the plat he would not be
in opposition to it as long as they
have legal documents in place so that
the city would not be saddled with the
upkeep of the property, but the
drainage problem is another issue. He
said the developers must get with the
city engineer and city staff and work
out a solution to the matter.
Chairman Bowen said the Commission
might table the plat until the matter
is resolved.
Mr. Stewart said they feel the
drainage is not a requirement because
they are not moving the water over
more than two lots. He stated there
are other areas in the city like this.
Mr. Stewart said they request they be
allowed to go on to the City Council.
Chairman Bowen stated this has not
been resolved and the Commission feels
they cannot bypass this.
Mr. Stewart said to let the City
Council decide. He said if the City
Council says to put them in, we will
have to put them in. Mr. Stewart said
the City Engineer stated that you
could not move water over more than
two lots and we only have 3 lots there
and it would not flow over more than
two lots.
Mr. Stewart stated they had been on
this job for 7 months and if the
Commission tables this request and not
let us appeal to the City Council, he
feels would be unfair.
Mr. Wood stated he felt that if the
Commission passed this on the the City
Council, the Commission would be
shirking their responsibility. He
said the City hires a City Engineer to
recommend what is needed and the
Commission should listen to him.
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
Page 4
P & Z Minutes
May 22, 1986
PS 86-24
TABLED
5.
PS 86-25
(
~
(
Mr. Stewart said he did not feel this
is what the ordinance states. He said
they are asking for a variance or
relief of this ordinance.
Mr. Wood said a variance from the lot
size does not have the same impact as
allowing water to go over lots.
Mr. Stewart said they are requesting
that they be put on the next City
Council agenda.
Chairman Bowen stated the Commission
has been charged to review these
requests and until they are satisfied,
they will not send it on to the
Council.
Mr. John Hawkins came forward. He
asked if the Commission would pass
this plat subject to getting this
worked out with the City Engineer and
City Staff.
Chairman Bowen stated he felt it
should be resolved before it is passed
on to the Council.
Ms. Nash made the motion to table
PS 86-24 until such time as the Staff,
City Engineer and Rischon Development
Corporation can attain a compromise or
resolve the differences. This motion
was seconded by Mr. Schwinger and the
motion carried 5-0.
Mr. Wood made the motion to approve
PS 86-25. This motion was seconded by
Ms. Nash and the motion carried 5-0.
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
( (
JOHN E. LEVITT ENGINEERS, INC.
ENGI NEERS · PLANNERS
3921 VANCE ROAD · FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76118
.
284-0981
May 12, 1986
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Nortn Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Richland Hills, Texas 76118
Re: CARSTON COURT Addition
Lots 1 through 16, Block 1
Dear Mrs. Calvert:
We are in receipt of the City Engineer1s letter dated May 7, 1986, and would
like to offer the following responses:
1. The Owner1s Acknowledgement and Dedication and Notary Certification will
be fully executed prior to presentation to the City Council.
2. #1
Lot calculations had been previously sent to the City staff by
transmittal on March 5, 1986. Additional copies are being sent as
requested.
#2.2 On March 17, 1986, a meeting was held with City Staff and Rischon
Development in an attempt to resolve the drainage problem that
exists along the western boundary of this proposed subdivision. At
that time, we were in general agreement with the City Engineer1s
recommendation concerning concrete flumes along the western
boundary, but that calculations needed to be performed to verify
the amount of water involved and the size of any requested swale.
Use of the rational formula for determining run-off indicates the
amounts expected to be generated during a storm of 100 year
intensity are 22 cfs and 13.5 cfs from the southern and northern
sides respectively. For a storm of 5 year intensity, these numbers
calculate to be 12.6 and 7.8 cfs.
Presently, this run-off reaches the existing storm drainage system
by sheet flow to the west line and then into the existing storm
drain inlet. While the run-off will slightly increase over what is
presently being generated, the time which it will take to reach the
inlet will be greatly increased, and its velocity substancially
reduced due to the impedance to flow created by fences and other
structures which will be built in its path. We feel that through
proper lot grading, this water can be channeled into the existing
inlet sUfficiently.
.
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
(
(
Mrs. Wanda Calvert
May 9, 1986
Page Two
2. #4 The pro-rata will be paid as required.
3. Due to the liabilities involved in the construction of the proposed
off-site storm drain facilities, we would object to the inclusion of the
referenced plans.
4. The plans have been revised to indicate all sanitary sewer services
connecting to the sanitary sewer line.
5. As mentioned in the City Engineer's letter, the platting of North
Richland Junior High School indicates an approximate right-of-way width
of 30 feet. A records search of the surroundlng additions and location
of existing iron pin property corners has been made by the surveyor of
record with all indications pointing towards a right-of-way width of 68
feet.
6. Lime series test will be forwarded to the City at the time they are
completed.
7. The grades in the mentioned section of Carston Court have been designed
with required stopping sight distances taken into consideration.
8. No exceptions taken.
We trust that these comments are sufficient to allow the City to process our
application for Final Plat approval.
Should you need any further information, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
JOHN E. LEVITT ENGINEERS, INC.
'~'7
~
" ~
\ /' ...
Enclosures
cc Mr. John L. Hawkins
Mr. ROdger N. Line
Mr. Richard Albin
~
1
IiATE (>5/()r:;/f36
~OJEC:T FILE =CC
~TCH LOT FILE=CC-l
1 BLOCK 1 LOT
,J [iHhl E. ('''~ol I T·"· Er~G I t\JEEf\S" I t\~C:.
." ~21 J\o,'ar-.ce RClad
For" t {,lJ CI f" t f1 If 'T' e}~ a s ~7 t) 1 1 t'3
8l 7' -284,-()(i81
BATCH LOT LISTING
# TC] 13LOC:I<
I '1(-***********************.** BLOCK
-------------- BNDRY
1 FROM BEAR I t'~G
r\ S (i (>4 42L:J
7
I 381 t\!89 ,..,,.., 52W
Co. 4C..
382 S l> (>4 ii- 2 L\J
..:;. 8 ..:;. t'~89 48 3 ~5 ~\l
I 514· 5 (j ()·4 42L\l
515 S8C} 49 (>6 E:
38iJ. S () (>4 ·':'J.2W
3E.t5 t,J EJ 9 57 37~\I
I 1 i+'::¡ 1\.1 89 44 () :5 {;J
4.{~ ;2 t·,J 44 4J:} (> ~5 W
,(+43 t',J 8 9 44· () 5 ~t.J
1 44iJ. 845 1 ~) 55þJ
~)~15 t~89 44 (>5W
3 iJ.l.;) t\J (> (}(j ~.i 1 {,\J
2 <:.f 1 S ':-; () ()C) (i (i E
II 1 q S8D c:- ~ C'-'E
.. ,_ '.' ,-I J "H.I,
"'JDR'{ AREp·¡=
1---------·------
F'ROt¡1 BEAR I t'~G
1 434 t'~8(i () 1 (i-;TL~J
4121\J31 16 42L\I
CPi= 31 4 -=!" 1 (;>
1 CHORD= 54 · 66
4(>2 S,~:: ()() ()~)E
I .i:J.()iJ. t\f2ì" (jt) ()()E
iJ.14, 863 (}() ()(}E
CA= ~~3 (j()
1 CHORD=:
4 1 6 I\J (j
iJ. 1 8 S ()
()(>
J:" '""\ .'¡ 1:.-
,.3 a:::. . .::=. ,-.'
(ï(ï
(i(l
(i (> E
() () E
I
CA= 4, '_' $ 21
-;;;D;
ILOT
c::- -:r .'-~ '-:..
,-c ...;, . ¿. ...:'
iJ. 3~7 21E
() () 4 iJ. ~2 ~\j
{.~ F\ E A ::::
-------------- LOT
IFRO!"I
BEt~F~ I t'~G
(
F'I';GE
1
LO'T
1
CF'2
# OF BLOC~<
1 ************************
D I STPit\JCE
83. 1 (i
2 1 2 It (j 1
118. ~11
21.18
'=j '::; .. 9 ()
21.1.8
99 . ~53
1 ()8 II :~()
118" J:'J.2
21.21
·'~9. 68
21.21
.....4' ..........
. , .
...;, b. ...;. ...:'
1 --_.~-------~---~----
t'~oR-rt~1
9 1 6. ~f ()
91<;>.1(1
B(}(>. ·4 '7
8(i(i. ~;4
7(i(>. 64
'7(>C> . ;57
tj (i 1 . () 5
,'S(> 1 . .1.;2
6 (i 1 . ¿:':7
,S ll:).. 7' J~
¿\ 1 é.. Cj 'ì
,S (i ~2 II () ,{+
\:J ~_ '~'" i:> 4
396.64 1000.28
704.04 1000.28
1 t.\ 1 .. ;.53 :I. (),:)(} II ()()
274394.880 SQ FT OR
L.CJT
1 OF
D I S'T ¡.~t\JCE
153. \;14
1 (>(i . ()()
f~R{:= 55 II 37
C~-IORI) BEAR I t'JG
1 (lei" (}(}
:3ï u 15
;:i(i . (j ()
Ç¡RC= ~S,¿l· " ::;>8
C; ,.-j (} ¡:;: D E~ E ;; F: I t°.J G
~5 (>. () ()
<~\ {:) (i " () ()
¡.; R (: ;:::;
~:) :~:. . 2 5
c; ~-I (] J=;: [1 E{ E: P1 f~: I Ì'.J (3
66(i It (i()
1 25. (j ()
1 3(> 1 (i. 98() sa FT
E{':'S1·
t~99 . 89
7·S:7.89
~l8'7 . 73
:7 l~l:J. ~i4
'7 \~}¿}. -41
'7 EJ'7 " ~.) 9
-.,. 8 --v 4·'
/ ~ '/. c}
6 :'-;' 8 " I::;> ,~}
~:;¿,(). 54
~5 J~ 5 u ,~) 1
iJ.95. 9~?
48(i u ~3<S
1 3 if. . ~j ::;:
1 -.. "f -1 .....
~ ..::' ..iT It J1"...:;,
838. L~7
1 (j(}(i " ()()
<.S.. 2~~9~~if ?;CF;~ES
[-tl_ (JCt<
TO
:381.
::.\82
.,::, 8 ..::'
514
~515
:384
:38~)
149
.q_l~ ;2
J1,4 ::
·4 iJ. J~
3'7~i
:::: "'+ 6
291
l'~f
::;>
,...~ 0 ¡=< 1M 1--1
1. ---.----.--~.~_._._.._._._-------~.--
8·il~;' . l~2
935. ;;?8
T At·,J:=
= I\J42 ~51
28. ·41
39E
88 i-j . EH:¡
922. ~;>8
I:;> () i.) . ~~ t!
-r P'i"" ;:::: ::) (j. 6 Jf
::: f\J ~:.¡ 8 ::: () (i () E
EAS1" -rc)
C) .~:. <:>. 1. .q. i]. 1 2
~ë8,4 .. 22 4(>;2
6 7'::~" 33 ·(f().q.
\.~) ~j>~). 1 9 4 1 4,
~;r :~:: .\.1- II 7' .1+ ·4 1 ,,:)
950.28 734.74
290.28 734"74
or {~I\J:= 2 t.~.. .S,4
== 887- 41 ;2 (>f:::
948.14 787.93
823.13 787.76
D 1ST At\JCE
2 OF E<Le]CI<
OR 0.29869 ACRES
·418
i~22
4 -or -r
.. .., . ..,
·\+34
¡-\J 0 F< 'r ~-I
:1. -- -----. -- -- -- -- ---- - -- -- ---.--. ..-
Er-iST
..
TO
I
I¡~~K 05/09~86 LOT
1
I
434 S (j (>.l+ 42W
383 t~89 ·48 35~v
51 if 5 (i i)J+ iJ. 2W
51 7 t'-'74· 5(i 37~\I
436 N74 47 26(,1J
I CA= 68 45 18
Cl-~ORD= 56.4é.\
I 4()9 t'-'36 27 1 7E
41() t\136 27 l7E
CA=ll2 16 (>2
I CHORD= 4::':;. 18
411 r~31 1 tJ ·4·2L\I
I 412 S8C> ()1 C)'7E
LO'" ARE,=;=
1-------------------
FROr·1 E{EAR I t~G
517 S (¡ (iJ+ 42W
--15 S8'::? 49 (>bE
~84 S () (i4 ·42('\J
385 1'~89 57 :;7~\I
I 4·~ 1 t\!28 56 5~5W
4::8 t'~28 57 l·!+W
Ct~= 45 5() 12
ICHORD= 38. 94
4·()9
1 436
J_(IT
874 4ï' 26E~
87·4 5() :;7E
f.) ¡:;: E fi ==
I ::::---::::~::
44:l t,J89 57 37L\I
I 149 N89 44 05W
442 t'~44 i~4· ()5L\I
4-'1-::: t',J2(> 56 5(iE
I 439 N22 ~b 45E
CA=--= 51 .\.\ 58
C}-fOR D= J+ 3. 5(i
I~): S2li 57 14E
',8 828 5l:,\ ~55E
IL JT AREA=
-------------- LOT
IFRol'1
BEAR I t'~(3
\J Ol-lt'J En r-'>J I 'r'r Et·~C- I t~EE¡:;:~3. I t···J(~"
\ .' a::~ 1 I) a n c: £-? F-\ 0 ë\ d
Fccr·t ÞJor·tt1" 1·Er;'; ..as 7'/:') 118
81 7' -';28-'-1-()981
BATCH LOT LISTING
# l"(J :BL.CIC~<
2;';:. 66
8(>(> II .i+ -/
8(i(i . ~)il·
2l.18
77.99
722 " 5~=':i
1 1 ~, II 8 ()
~5(). C)()
~7~53. 35
7 \S l.:}. j:J.'7
ARC= 60.00 TAN= 34.21
CHORD BEARING = N19 10 05W
(
F'PiGE~ '""'
c:
1 l_CiT CF;2
~'8~7 . ........ ...... :::: {3 3
." ...:'
-~ I ,- 5·4 5 1 .i:J,
l c.\ \:.\ .
~." , 4·4 ,.-. 1 -
/ 0 (=> II ;:.c . ./
652. .-" -.- Jf36
J '_'
6().i+ . .il f.;> 4(>9
50.00 806.68 634.19
26.00 827.60 649.64
ARC= 50"95 TAN= 38.74
CHORD BEARING = N 2 35 l8E
41 (i
411
26.00 849.82 636.14
153.94 823.13 787.76
412
iJ·34
LOT
13018.634 SQ FT OR 0.29887 ACRES
-..
...:'
OF
E{LO[~f<
1\1 0 F< 'r l..i
1. -.---.---,-..---..-.-------.-
I) I Sl"At~CE
~~1. 91
21.18
·7eiC>., 6·¿~
7(i() . ~5 7
99 . ~:;3
6() 1. . (j~~
'-::; 1. . ~5 ()
6 (i 1 II 1 1
1~:~8" S>7
7' 2;-2. ~7 ~~~
5() II ()(>
7 6l;:). .i~.·7
ARC= 40.00 TAN= 21.14
CHORD BEARING = N38 07 40E
5(i ., (H)
1 1 '7 . 8 (>
16'75E1.49()
7~5::~. 35
:722 . 55
Sf:J F'-
(JR
EAS1- TO
766. .!~ 1 51 ~;
-... C'" -.., 59 384
j OJ' . 78']'. .ÿ.¿) 38~~
~ ,.... c:- 9tJ .if 4 1
\":> 7 'L...c . \'S28" 6 ':;> ·438
t)()if. ·(+9 -4 (> c.i
¿\~)2 n :73
43¿)
~7 t:.,6. 4·~~
51'7
() It 3 E1J:]. 72 ¡;~C~F~E~~3
LOT
4
OF=-
BL.O(~~<
t,~ (] F~ ,.. J-~
1 -------------------
I) I ~3·rAI\~c:E
1. 7 .. () ()
11 E$. ·4:;-~
21.21
1 1 (i . (j> (i
\~,(i 1 . 1 :~~
é~ () 1 . <S'7
¿jib. ~7.i1
:72 (i. ::: 1.
5() It () (i
)" {::.\ is. if ~?
Af~(:::= 4;.5 It i,)(j
C I--J 0 F-~ D E{ 1::: {~R I t'-' (3
'f f~ I"~ ::::
::: I'''' 8 b .q C.?
;;:~ ·4·. 1 ~5
lt~~E
~;().. (}()
1 :::8. t:j ~7
11<S91.552 SQ FT
-., 'Ï ~.... -,.. ..-,
.,' ,=.:. a:::. i .::;.
EPiE;'r -rfJ
~) :7 Et., (':j 1::., 1 oi} ~?
56 () It ~::; .(:~ .i+ 4 2
~:¡ J~. ~5., (:) 1 4 if :3
58~') N ;~:t) ·'+:~:9
6 (i it ., ·4 '~i lj. (> '~~
6 i) 1 . 1 1
(JF:
62EL, t}';>
<;; ~;>5.. '-::,; 6
(j . ~\~\84() t:;C:J~ES
441
~3 OF BL.OC~<
.i+38
DISTAt-"CE
t-~ 0 R "'1-1
1 -------------------
EAST ~
TO
1
-,A T E .-. c::- ' ....,.... .' r, /
~.. 1....1...:1/ 1...1.., ./ 0,,::\
OC~:.. 1 L.lJT
I 443 N89
-,+,(:+4 8·45
375 t\lSC:i
1 445 N (I
437 1\168
44() N7(i
I CA= 48 07
CHORD= 4(). 7'8
I 409 522 36 45W
439 S2(j 56 59W
i+-4 () 5 ~IJ
1 1:::- ~55W
\.3
44 ()5W
(>() () (> W
28 46E
.I~~ 4 "'--E
.:-':. l
42
LOT ARE?~::=
1__.______________
IFROM BEARING
437 J"~ (> (}(j (}()E
·4·4 7 S~'(j (>() ()()E
I 406 5 0 00 OOW
CH= 1..:;,4 12 58
~ORD= 36..85
~07 545 47
4·(>8 S4~.:ï 4:7
1 CA:= 63 28 31
(:~~()RD= 52 II 6()
~J OI-It·..J E. r·· f~/ I 'r -r E ì\J G I t~J E E:: F\ ~3 .. I ¡\J [~ .
.. 2 1 \,1 Î:{ 1-, C t? f-< 0 a ,j
Fort Worth~ Texas 76118
817--28·4-()(i~31
BATCH LOT LISTING
:1:1: 'TO BL.(jCI<
4C?68
21..21
31.84
1 (j 5 It 1 ()
116.38
6 1 t,. ,":) ~7
\S (};'2 .. (}.q
,L.-J () ~~. 1 ~f
7(1"7 It 2~3
:,7·49.. ~t8
(
1
F'P.GE
L_OT
-
CF'2
.it 4 ¡~
::::~ 7 5
·4·45
4 :~~ '7
.it if (>
·4· () f::;
4· 3 S")
.if 4 3
L.OT
OF' Bl_OC~:::
1 - -- - - - -- -- -. -- --. -..- - - -- - -. -..-
ARC= 55.39 TAN= 30.93
CHORD BEARING = 812 28 42W
50.00 749.98
116.38 707,.28
12040..344 SO FT OR
4 c15. \-i2
·48() . {-3<~
'+i+9.. (i2
4· J+ '::; . (j 2
~557 . 28
t\(i4· u 4 f.':}
616. 7·4
(). :: 1 733 ACRES
585.26
~:,45" t> 1.
5C> . (>(>
1 1 (>" 9 ()
13822. 8~~6
SQ FT (JR
TtJ
1+4·7
LJ (j 6
.i+ (j 7
(>2E 2(i. ()(i f:3 (i 1 3'<":J. 568. ..' r::- 4·(;8
. C'\.J
()2E ~:5 (> " ()() ./ {3Ò . .<.1- ~J 6 (>·4 . .<+ '::i1 .<+ (i 9
I FR()tt'j E{El~R 11\18
.lJ. 4 7 S () () (> (i (> (,lJ
446 J\J,~8 4() 42~tJ
.1+48 r~¿\~:} 21 l·q·W
IcA= 64 14 44
C~-IORI)= 53. 1 ~7
I 386 N47 24 02E
3~;> 1 t\l4'7 24 ();'"2E
I CA= 1 :32 35 58
_ORD= 3/:..63
I 392 t·~ () (>(> (i(iE
3S):::: S9(i ()() ()(iE
LOT f~REA=
1--------------- LOT
5(i" i.)()
-,., 4_'"
./ <~\~" . l
I 409 570 44 27W
J:+4(> 868 28 .li-6W
L..OT AREP,=
1-----------------
ARC= 42. (>(>
CHOF~D f)[::t~F: I NG
1· Pit~==
r¡ '-ï ..,. ..,.
,::: ¿ . ...:' ...:'
= 543
j s~ :2 -4E:
7'2(>. 31
6
DISTANCE NORTH EAST
128. (H) 8:)~5" ~~Et 4.4{i.. (;~:
105.30 835,,28 554..32
;~:(i . (H) ~31 :=.:.;. 28 55.if .. :~:¿~
ARC= 46.85 TAN= 47.37
CHORD BEARING = 522 53 31E
~)5~7 . 28 i~·4() .
4 ·4~';> . (> 2 .\:]. :3~ 7
(j. :~7 6·41 l~CRES
L~OT
7 (JF' EeL.OCI<
1 -----------------~-
DISTANCE NORTH EAST
1 ~2 8. (> (> 7 (j 7 It 28 .4 if. (1 " ();;;~
115..99 749.46 340,,96
5().OO 767..90 294.49
ARC= 56.06 TAN= 31.39
C~'1(}RD E{f~t~I:;~ I t'~J(:; :::: f\I 1 (> ~~8 36W
50.00 801.75 331.29
20.00 815.28 346.02
ARC= 46.29 TAN=
CHORD BEARING = N23 42
·(f~5. 56
(i 1 E:
20.00 835.28
103.00 835.28
11922.241 SQ FT OR
'ra
4 il· 1:..\
·(~·48
~~: f3 6
391
:~ '-"12
:) ·4 t\ . () 2 .~. 9 ..:;,
4lJ 9 . (;2 iJ..l+ 7
(>. 2737(> P.CRES
fl tJF' E<LlJCI<
] -------------------
. .
---......---.....-------- LOT 1 (i tJF' E{ L (J (:~:::
I FR~~ BEl~R I r,JG D I ST f)t~CE hi 0 F; T JM1
4 ,_1.:-;. r,J 8 ~;> 44 (j5W 5~5.21. lJ(>3" t.\4
346 1\1 () (i() 51W 13(). 5.(1- 7::~4 .. 1 ~3
I 455 t'~78 (>() () () E :[ 1 :3. 51 7~5·7.. 78
4~)4 hi ~7 8 19 24E ~ê(> " (>(i :767 . ':.i(>
I
I pATE 0" 05/09/86
,"OD:, 1
I FROM BEARING
446 t"-l (i ()(i (i(>E
I 4443~ 8 0 00 OOE
::-.. t\J E' '=t 4 4 (} 5 L\I
45(> r'J21 59 15W
449 r·'J22 ~..=:: 1 (>2L\J
I CA= 45 50 12
CHORD:::: 38.9.l+
I 386 868 21 14E
448 568 4(> 42E
LOT AF:E?'i=
1______--------
I FROM BEAR I f"JG
45(> N89 4.1+ (}5W
452 t'~32 29 ()9E
I 453 N32 29 12E
CA= 55 (H) 14
~ORD= 46.18
~86 822 31 02E
449 821 59 15E
I LOT AREA:::::
ICA= 45 5(i 12
CHORD:::: ~58. 9·4
386 S3~2 29 12vJ
I 4 r.:- -:eo r' -:r 'ï r") 9 .- n fJ
...3 '.':' \::\ ...;, ¿. .::.:.. lJ '-I y\
LOT ÇiREA=
1-------------- LOT
FF~OM E{EA¡:;~ I r,JG
I 455 N 0 00 51W
456 S7~~ 58 39E
tþ57 875 56 24E
ICA: .1:],8 13 12
CHORD= 4(i. 85
~J [il-II"~ E.. (-:'f:~' I TT Et\JG I t-~EEr;~~) ~ I ¡-',JC. (
./ ::::~ 1 ',i an c e f, () a (j
Fort Worth~ Te>~as 76118
t.~ 1 ~7 -~~~34·-H()'781
BPi 'Tr:~-I L.O·r LIST I I\IC:~ F/{)f3E 4
t_ (} T' *~ 'Tt] BL.(]C~I< 1 l_O'r c: F: ;;;~
D 1ST ?'it·,JCE f',J 0 R 'r "1 Et::.S·r l'O
() . (i(i ./ ~.)./ If ~:E{ 449" (j;:~ ·\+37
1 () 5 " 1 () 6()2. 1 s~~ ·449. ()~~ 44~ê
87 " 2El i~ (} ~2 " 5';> 361 " 7·4 ·45 ()
128. 4·7' 7'21. . ~7l 313. t., .l~ ·44·9
r.- .M. (l(i /0/ 9(} 294. 4·9 386
.j ~.1 . II
ARC::::: 40.00 TAN= 21.14
CHORD BEARING = N44 ~~ 52E
50.00 749.46 340.96 448
115.99 707.28 449..02 446
14274.662 SQ FT OR 0.32770 ACRES
L (J 1"
!':; OF E{LOC~:::
.:I. - - -- --- - -- ..- -- -- -.- -- -- -- -- - - - ..... -
DIS'TAr~CE
r~J II R T I-·f
E¡:¡ST
189 . '7·4
-ra
1 72 . (H)
1 4 ~5. (> 3
~1(). (i()
6 () ::~" ::~ r:-i
ÆJ ~; ~~
7;25. ~73
'""' ~ -.'/' I..,.
.:::. \:.\ / .. \'::\ ...:,
4 1::0" ..,.
....J '.=-
:386
'767 " (j>()
29J+ " ·4·9
;:~ R C>::;
.l:]. 8 . (> ()
Mr At"':::::
26. (i3
55E
C: 1--1 [} F: D E( E:: Pi F~ I I\~ G
::-.: S8~ê (H)
~j() . ()(j
1 2 E1. .i+"7
1 ~) () 1 1:;> . ~) 9 '7 S f:.~ r-- T
~l21 . ~J 1
~513.. 6.lt
4 J~. E~i
.if 5 (i
t\(i2. 59
::::61 " 7·il
(). 29889 f~CRES
()F~
1 .... -..- - -- -- -- -..- -. _H - - - -.. - - -.-.
EAST -r't]
1 :::: .\~ . ~:'i::~ :3·,1- é)
1 :::'4. ~~(i .if~55
~2 J~ ~~. 5 ;~~ .4 ~i J+
29·;+. .fi-9 386
ARC= 40,,00 TAN= 21.14
CHORD BEARING = 834 35 42E
50.00 725.73 267.63
·453
145.03 603.39 189..74
14014.062 SQ FT OR 0..32172 ACRES
4~32
11 C}F BL()Ct<
1 .,-. - 'H_ - M_ '- __a __a -- ._ ._. ..._ _ ..._ __ ._ _ _.. _M
D I ~:)1" ril\JC;E t\lOF:T"H
141.10 875.28
114.95 84./,,4~
E~PfE}Mr -ro
1 :~~"'l. ·46 4~;t\
2 ·4 ~;5 II .;:; a::; 4 ~i '7
;29J1·.49 387
50.00 835.28
ARC= 42.08 TAN=
CHORD BEARING = 510 03
....., ....\ ..,. f....,
r-:...-::.. ...:' \::.\
(> () E
1 387 855 5(i 24 {.tJ ~;(). (>() Be>7" 21 .., c=- -:or 1 1 38t:s
c: ,J '_'" .
388 cc-c- 5() 24W 1 () . (> () B() 1 . ~)9 244.84 389
,-I .._I ,-C
~
I
IEATE 05/09/86
YOCK 1 L.OT
ICA= 68 19 12
CHORD= 11,,23
I 389 555 50 24E
39(i 855 5() 2·4E
I CA= 45 5(i 12
CHORD= 38" :~4
I 386 578 1 9 2·4W
454 S78 ()() (>(>W
LOT AREA=
1-------------- L.OT
FROr~1 BEAR I r'4G
I 456 t\J (j (H) ~; 1 Lv
291 S9() lit; i.J(>E
45';> S3() 35 43E
I 458 830 06 12E
CA== 45 5(i 12
~OR[)= 38" (foil
~87 N75 56 24W
457 t'"J75 58 ::::9W
AREA=
I L.OT
--------------.-. L{J·r
l' 0 Ll....1 t::" r t,. J J. -r·1· E":' h.I'"" I t" I E E:: F'r ~=\. I f'·. I '-~
\..; 1-1 I ... '-.. ". ) _. Pol \.:3. ... _. _ "\ \oM . . S \f L .
. ~ 21 \,1 ar1 C í-? 1::;~Ccdd
For·t Wc)r·t.h. 'Te:>~ a!:; 7't\11li
81 ~1-284-(i981
BATCH LOT LISTING
# -ro E:I_Ot:~<
f;RC:= 11 . (1;;::
Ci-·IORD E:Et:;F~ I i"~lG
"r ¡::; t"J :::;
<S. 7'=;)
::;.-; S ()
(H) (H) ~J
1 () . () ()
5() . ()(}
'7 ~1 ~5" ';, Es
~7 6 7 . ~.f ()
ARC= 40.00 TAN= 21u14
CHORD BEARING = 811 14 30W
(
1
F'AGE
LOT
253..11
;29Æ"j. . ·49
50.00 757w78 245.52
113,,51 734.18 134.50
13000.310 SQ FT OR 0.29845 ACRES
12 OF BL.OCI<
Co
,_$
C:F'2
39(i
386
4 ~.:ê 4
455
D I Ë\l-Ar~(~E
t,JOR1-H
1 ---.----~"~---~------
125. (H)
l (>()(>. 28
1 (i(i(i., 2~3
878. ~5·4
62.99
1·41.43
~i(> . (i()
t:l :::;: ~ê. 28
ARC= 40.00 TAN= 21.14
CHORD BEARING = 536 58 42W
5(> . (>()
114 ., S)~.i
8 it 7 II .i:}::::
l~7·5. ;28
(i. 32¿\6(i tiC:f~Ef3
134 " ·4é~
14226,,685 SQ FT OR
1 3 OF BL.. (lCt:::
E¡'~f)T
1 3·i:} . ·4:3
1 ~~ 7 . ~+ :~::
269 " ,41
2 ':; .if u "4 ~;)
2·45. 99
-ra
¿~91
·4~)9
.l~58
387
.l+ ~; 7
~+ ~.ê <:\
j. -- - -- - -- -- -- -.- -.- - --- .-- -- -- - ~ - -.. -
I FRON BEAR I t\lG D I S'T At\JCE j"'~ (t F~ ,.. ~1
45 {;> S9(i (>() () () E 14·\~\. Ji-6 1 () () (> " ;.-~ 8
4 f.:> () S () (>() () (> W 1 1 ~). (H) f3 8 ~5 . ~~~ f3
1 461 t·" l=t () ()() (ï () W 4 I:;> . .4 i) *3fj~:;" 2Ej
3 I=} 8 c () (>(i () (> W 5(> . ()(> 835,,28
\oJ
I (" r\ -r .-¡
C~;R~;~
(i t) 1 2
25. Sl7
387 t¡J3(¡ (i6 12W
I 4' t::",ï 1-,I~iM) ~C" 4' ~w
....J 0 \f '_'"oM '_' ,-I '_'
L.OT Ps¡:;~EA=
1-------------- LOT
F~:Ot~·1 BEAR I r~G
1 460 590 00 aOE
464 S i) ()() (}()W
, _b," 2 t'''9(; i)() (>(>W
~,~ 1 t·" (i ()() ()i)E
1 LOT AREA=
-------------- LOT
IFRON
BEAR I r-~G
f:~RC::: 26 It 27'
C~'10F\I) BE~iR I rJ(~
or ~; 1\1 ::::;
:[ :~~~. ·4 ~.~
5 ,S ~~~ .<+ t,ÿ
::= S'7 .If
EAS'r TO
34::; " ~-3Ej .l+<:)()
:343. f38 ·461
~? 9.i+ .. -'t (;) ::::: r:.; [-i
;2 ~f ·4· ,. 4 c.~ ::~ 87
50.00 878,,54 269,,41
141.43 1000,,28 197..42
13001.214 SO FT OR 0.29847 ACRES
l.if ()F f3L.()C;~<
.l~ ~5 8
i+5~~
1 .- -- -- _M - -.. --. ..- ...- ..... ...- -- ._ _ _ _M_ _ -- .-..
DISTANCE NORTH
95.67 1000.28
115.00 885.28
95.67 885.28
115. (i(i 1 (i()()" 28
11002.050 SQ FT OR
E::psE;'r TC)
i~ ::::: 9 " 5 5 iJ. t:, LJ.
.1+ 39 " 5~:; 4,S2
15 OF Bl_(]f:l<
(1 It ~:: ~~ 2 ~::,ë7 Pi c J~ f:~ ~-3
=~:4~:!:. 8[-3 4 (~ 1
~:. .~~ :::~ w 8 8 ...~ ,S (i
[I I ST Pit-\JCE
~,j(}R TJ"~
1. --.-.-------------.--..-----.-,
EAST ~
TO
I
IëA'rE c}!=~ / "'}q / lri ;:'.,
. .... \. . . \,..; 'L..
OC~< 1 l_OT
I 464 890 00 OOE
465 S (> (ï() ()()~\J
I 463 N90 00 OOW
462 t·~ () ()(> (i(>E
L.O·r AREA==
1--------------
FF:OM BEAr=;: I f'''G
I 465 S9(> (}(j (j()E
41 7 S i) (>() (>(iW
I C~HH'" ::.O·ROD' ~ 00 00
- 1 () 4 . 5 (>
41 6 t'''63
I 4·15 827
4 (> 3 hi t:, .~,
'T 0 t J:-. I ,_., ('-'} I·...· 'T' ¡:. h r r' J' ¡·..I r:"-"-' !.... I ,-. 1 ..."
\.' - r'l J '-4 c.. . "\,~,, . f I 1 _. ~. J~" ~~$ . ~~. S~~. J:~ ,-=, . . \.f L.. "
. .- .:::' 1. \I dr. c.. t: f, CI ~ d
For' t {,iJ C$ r· t. h " 'r e >~ a 5 7' ,S 1. 1 8
Ell 7 ·,-;;~8·4-()c.;)f31
BA 1-(:t·~ L_OT L I Sj' I t\Jl:¡
# '·0 BL.OCt<
(
1
F'Pt(3E~
1_ CfT
95.67 1()OO.28 535.22
6
CF'2
lJ, t:) ~~
-'-163
.lj. <.:; 2
·q·614-
l..OT
BLOC~<
1 -------------------
ARC= 54.98 TAN= 30"64
CHORD BEARING = 558 30 OOW
5(). ()()
4 c.~ . ()()
1 1 ::.~. (}(}
1 :)()()() . i:¡' 9 ~J
~38~5., 28
88~;. ;;?8
1 (}(}(ì . ;';~8
~3(::J FT ()R
(i . :.;:~;> f3 4 ~; A C~ ¡:;~ E S
~:.:.; ::::~) .. ¿~ 2 ·4 t.' :3
L. (} 'T
CF'l
[t f= E{ l.. () C~ 1<
.:I. -- -- -- - - .- .- --. -- -- - .-- - -- -- - .-. -.-
I) IS'" f.:.r~JCE
"'J(JF~T~'1
94ft. 1·¿~
115.00 885.28 535.22
95.67 885.28 439.55
115uOO 1000.28 439.55
11002.05() SQ FT OR 0.25257 ACRES
16
OF
DISTANCE
tiJ (} R 'r I-·f
1 (¡(i(>. 28
r:;()(). 28
E ~ì Err
~73·4" 7 4
7 ::::,'+,. 74
TO
41 -:l
L~l<S
()(> () () µJ 1 () (i . ()() 945. t.\ f3 t:\.ï'+ ~S . \7.>4 41 L'::'
,._1
(i(> (j (> W ...,. ...... 1 I:~ ~7 1 .'-' r:.- r' .' ..., lï '7('3 J+ (i 3
...;, i . ,,3 .::;. . \_ß c$ o c':, (:.; .
(i() () (i ~'J 5(). ()(i i"l -:r r= 28 ~:) ~:3 ·4 '-ï'ï ·4(i2
.., ...;, ,,_I .. II ':::. c:'
I CA= (-:>:3 ()() (H)
CH(JRD= 52 u 25
4()2 S () (i(i ()(>W
..()() t"9() ()() ()(iW
~f:)3 t" i) ()(> (i(iE
Lor' AREA=
1----------------
¡:'-RC)tv1 E:EAR I I'~G
I 382 N 0 04 42E
433 S 4 37 21L~
Ig~~RD~ 31
;21
63n59
4 .., ..., ", 1 1,-· , ) r, '1 1 E
I I r:::. (::. J \4 ,,_1 (<..~ .ii·
4;:~4 f'J 1 () ()8 4¿-:E
C;A== 1 (i (}4 ()()
ICHORD: 71 n 94
·431 r' t> (>4 42~J
;:>
1 4;~6 ¡-. () ()4 ·42W
~,
C~A= 11 (i·4 4{-3
ICHORD: 69.51
_25 t" 11 (i9 :2':;>E
_""7 S 1 1 (i9 21~W
ICA:l79 04 51
CHO~:D:;:: 12. 73
I 428 889 45 /fOE
1 99 . ~52
1 i)() . (il)
ARC= 109.96 TAN= 61.28
CHORD BEARING == 858 30 OOW
;2~3. '?J5
661.)" (i()
~21:;>(). 2f3
~1RC= ¿)3" é~ 1
CHC¡R[) f3EAR I t.JG
1- t-1 t"\J ;:::: :::::1. II ~3 ::::~
== S8:';~ 3¿, ~59E
,~é~(i " ()i)
9 ~~~ ~i . (j'.' <:)
4 1 (). (> ()
:1. ::~ -'l3. ~::; 5
?'i R C == -;7;;~ " () l~.
C; 1-1 0 ¡::;: I) E: E (~F~ I 1\.1 G
j' p~ ¡-·oJ :=;;
-r.' 11
.~:' \:) "
l8E
==: 584
r.::- -:..
\-1 ...;,
.q 1 (>. (j (j
36(). ()i)
(j' ~~ :::. 5 ~:,~
r. ==- '- '"7" r:7' r.::'
..J i ,.,). \,..' ,..1
ARC= 69,,62 TAN= 34»92
Ct-IOr~rJ BE{.;R II\JC3 ::=: S(~4 :;~2 5llE
~.5 8 oft It ;2~? .i+ (; (;
~5 :3 ~:~;. 2;¿~ 4· ,~) ::.;
EPts·r
'787 u (;>3
~i :)1+.. 7' 4
~3 ~:; () " ':;) l=jl
':.f ;2 3 . ;~:: 1
9 ;~ ~~ Il <:' ~~,
~i;?2. 1,S
:::: \'S (i. () (i (j) ;;~ ¿'. '7 5 ~:; 9 :1 n E.t ;.~~
10.00 916.94 989.89
ARC:::: 1. :3" 8(; 'rAI'",~;:;; 8. 26
CHORD BEARING = 839 18 05E
10.00 916.90 999.89 ~
TO
,if 3 ::::
4 2 ~:~
.it ;.~~ .i.'f.
·4·:; 1
iJ. ;-:~ é)
4 ~~ ~:;
·4 ;~:: 7
·~l2 f3
~::: 8 1
I
~ "
I¡Aì'E - 1::, , - (~ ,,......,
l')·..· J') . I ¡ '-..
_ ~_, J ...... ",' Q \..}
DCI-::: 1 L,OT
I 781 1~18~ ~~ ~~W
...:. W \f -, .::.:.. .:::.. .,_'':::'
l_OT A~:EA=
I -------------- LOT
FF:Ot"1
I 41~
BEl~R I t'JG
589 56 21E
S8S) 55 (>4W
I CA '-yn·- 4 c:--
.' == /"7 lJ \-,(J
CHORD= 12.73
429 811 (H) ()6E
I 430 N11 00 06W
(:':4= 21 (i8 .i1~!
I CHOHD== 1 :::;;2. 11
4 ~~; 1 S 1 (j
I 423 510
CA== 1 (> ()8 41
~Of~D= 125. 55
IIIII!! 2 2 f-4 (i () (ï (i (ï E
I_OT AREf';=
I LOT sur'"1==
1 0 1..1 t·,1 c' ('- \¡' I 1· 'T' '::. ". I ",: I .....1 C' E7 f:' c:\ 'r f\ I {":
u .-. 'I f:.... . L. t 'f L.' ,., r.::. _ ~...... .l t of ._ "
.~' 2 1 \,1 a n c: e I::;: Ci (:\ d
F= (.1 r· t ~J() f" t h .. T' e;.{ é:i S ~! .::) 1 1 EJ
(
81 7 -. ¿: 8-'+ -() (j' ~3 :J.
B {.; -r C 1-1 L, 0 -r L. I ~3 'f I t'~ G
=» 1-[1 E(L_OC~I<
F'AGE
L_ (..1 ,.
i
1.
C:F'2
2 1 ;;~ ,. () 1
('? 1 ("". 1 {:f
'7f:17 . (3~f :382
:39 (i 4· . t} ':;> 3 ~3 (] ¡=. 'f C} f~~
i.) " (i{-3 '7> \~j4 AC.~RE:S
(:F'~~ OF' BL.(](:I<
1 -, .-.. ,- .,.- - -..- -- ._, _H. -. - -- - - - __ _, ,_
DIS'rAt~[:E
t·~ {J f~~ 'r J·..I
E,:'~E)T
1. (i()(i. ()(i
9 9(). (j()
're}
''::}
·429
r¡ .1 r.::- r¡ ..'
¿, 0 \..-'. ..-..:. \.~
1 ()()(j . (i()
1 () . (i (j
r:; 9 (j) . ':;> (~;
ARC= 13.80 TAN= 8.26
CHORD BEARING ::: 539 27 29W
1 (),. (i ()
36(i. ()()
99 (j. 1 ~7
1 :3·if :~~. ~;5
c,~ Cj> 1 ,. 9 1
,43(>
.if:::: 1
9~:~:3. ~21
ARC= 132.87 TAN= 67.20
CHORD BEARING = 889 34 l8W
(}s iJ. 1 (,\ :3t:.() . (i(j 98';> .. 1 f3 f35'=t . f3() Ÿ "-1""
. . ,;:... --'
(>8 ll-lW :7 1 () . (; i.) 29 () If 28 --.....4 "7 ..." i~ :::~ 2
.... .~:,. .
I BDUNDARY
L01'S
I
I
I
1
I
Ie
I
ARC= 125.71 TAN= 63.02
C:l-iORD E<EAR I t"H3 ::: f1H34· 5~i 39l"J
710.00 1000.28 734.74
2426.346 sa FT OR 0.05570 ACRES
i~ 1 ~,'!
215137.303 SQ FT OR 4.93887 ACRES
ARE A TOT A L S
274394.880 SO FT OR
215137.303 SQ FT OR
é).. 2~~\j'24 {.~(:F;~E:E~
.{~ If 9 :::; f3 8 7 ~~ C I:~: E S
..
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
(
(
KNOWL TON-E NGLlSH-FLOWERS, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS I Fort Worth- Dallas
~~ay 7, 1986
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Richland Hills, Texas 76118
RE: 3-932, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
CARSTON COURT ADDITION,
BLOCK 1,
FINAL PLAT,
PS 86 - 24, GRID MAP 129
We have reviewed the referenced materials for this subdivision and offer the
following comments:
1 The Owner's ACknowledgement and Dedication Statement and the Notary
Certification should be fully executed before approval of this plat.
2 Please see our letter dated March 3, 1986, PS 85-98; #1, regarding lot
sizes; #2.2, regarding concrete drainage flume; and #4, regarding
prorata for existing 8-inch water line. The developer's engineer should
furnish us with the latest computer printout of the lot dimensions and
areas to verify compliance with zoning requirements. The plans do not
show construction details of the recommended concrete flumes covered in
item 2.2 as noted above.
3 We would recommend that plans which we prepared for paralleling the
existing off-site storm drain, as noted in item 2.4 of our March 3 letter,
be included in this contract. City participation in this off-site
construction is in order.
4 Sanitary sewer services should connect on the sanitary sewer line and not
at the manholes.
5 We cannot confirm the right-of-way width of 68-feet as shown on this
platting. The plat of North Richland Junior High School; Block 26, Snow
Heights Addition, as filed in Volume 38-126, Page 78; to the east of this
property shows an approximate 3D-foot width between the east line to the
center line of Rufe Snow Drive with a total right-of-way width of 60 feet.
6 Lime series tests should be performed to determine the quantity of lime
required for proposed street subgrade stabilization. Test results should
be furnished to the City for review.
1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021 . 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367
~
I
--
1
1
I
I
1
1
I
Ie
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I"
I
Subdivision Review Le~er continued
(~ARSTOtJ COURT ADDITION
7 We would note that the proposed curb grade in one section of Carston
Court exceeds the maximum desirable grade of 6.0-percent. We would
recommend that this grade be flattened out if possible.
8 As a general reminder, the Developer or Owner should be made aware that
he is responsible for all provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance, Zoning
Ordinance, Water and Sewer Policies and Procedures, and all other
applicable City Development Codes unless specific discretionary variances
and exceptions are made and agreed upon by the Planning and Zoning
Commission and City Council, and covered in writing in the City-Developer
Agree~ent, if this proposed plat is approved. If no such specific
variances are provided then the Developer or Owner remains responsible for
all other Ordinance and Policy requirements as written in the regulatory
codes.
Please call if you have any questions.
~tfJ
RICHARD W. ALBIN, P.E.
R\'¡ A / r a
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
Mr. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Works
Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development
,
May 7, 1986
PS 86 - 24
PAGE
2
~
,I. ~
1 . /.- "
';
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
1 .
_·~.............._t.:.A~.,¡::"'..........-, _..,,..... ....."...__"'.............. ".)-_ .... _
March 3,,1986
,
(..
(~
KNOWL TON-ENGLISH-FLOWERS, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS I Fort Worth- Dallas
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Richland Hills, Texas 76118
RE:
3-932, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
CARSTON COURT ADDITION,
BLOCK 1,
PRELlr~INARY PLAT,
PS 85 - 98, GRID MAP 129
We have reviewed the referenced materials for this subdivision and offer the
following comments:
1
Lots 1, 4,6,7, 9, 11, 13, 14, and 15 are less than the 13,000 square
foot minimum required for R-1 zoning, according to the calculations
submitted by John E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. with their letter dated -
January 15, 1985. Irregular lots should be a minimum 85-feet along the
front building line and a minimum 120-feet average depth for R-1 zoning.
Only Lot 2 Block 1 meets all size requirements.
2
Please refer to developer engineer1s letter dated January 15, 1985,
regarding item no. 4. Also see attached drainage area map sketch:
2.1
2.2
The developer is proposing to carry the full 100-year discharge
from Carston Court underground in a proposed 21-inch storm
drain, thus eliminating the requirement for an overflow swale
over the pipe. We have no objection to this option if the
proposed 21-inch pipe can be constructed on the 2-percent grade
indicated, otherwise a larger pipe may be required. Profiles
should be presented in the final plans.
Upon inspection of the site on the ground, we noted an open
ditch over the existing storm drain which runs north and south
at the west side of this proposed development. We would
recommend that a concrete flume be constructed over the top of
this storm drain within the existing drainage easement to
channel local runoff into the drop inlet located at the upstream
end of the existing 42-inch east-west storm drain. We would
recommend that the developers of this proposed subdivision
participate in the cost of construction of this concrete flume
since this development will increase the surface water flow to
the existing easement and create an increased potential for
flooding along the west end of this proposed subdivision.
1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 7602l . 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367
~
I
I
I ., . ,
,Þ
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
1
-......~..-....;..~ .'
Subdivision Review~ter continued
~ CARSTON COURT ADDITION
2.3 With reference to the attached drainage area map, the 42-inch
was originally designed to handle the yellow area, and the
24-inch designed to handle the blue area, which includes the
pink Parkridge Estates area. The developer1s engineer noted in
his January 15 letter that development of the Parkridge Estates
resulted in a larger drainage area being diverted into the
42-;nch storm drain than was originally included in the 42-inch
design with the Fossil Creek Trails Addition. The Fossil Creek
Trails plan was to discharge the Parkridge Estates runoff (pink
area) into a storm drain in Lariat Trail which then enters a
54-inch off-site storm drain just downstream from the 42-inch
stonn drain. .The 24-inch line was supposed to handle the blue
area shown on the attached map. At the time of the Parkridge
Estates drainage study, it was discovered that the existing
24-inch storm drain jo_Lariat Trail did not have sufficient
capacity to handle all of the Parkridge Estates area so a .
parallel 27-inch storm drain was constructed along the west end
of the future Carston Court Subdivision and connected to the
42-inch off-site line. Since the 42-inch storm drain is located
more than lOO-feet downstream from the Parkridge Estates, the
developer of the Parkridge Estates was not required to parallel
the 42-inch line or construct an overflow swale over the pipe.
Although diversion of the Parkridge Estates drainage area into
the 42-inch pipe increased the potential for flooding between
the homes located on either side of the 42-inch pipe, an even
greater potential for flooding will be created with developement
of the Carston Addition.
2.4 Since the 42-inch storm drain is located immediately downstream
from the proposed Carston Court Addition, within the IOO-foot
limit, this developer should be required to either construct an
off-site parallel underground storm drain and/or overland
concrete flume to increase the off-site capacity to at least a
IO-year storm for a distance of at least IOO-feet from the west
end of the Carston Court Addition property line. We would
recommend that the City participate in extending the parallel
underground storm drain and or overflow flume beyond the
IOO-year distance an additional 50-feet to Lar;at Trail.
Presently an existing concrete driveway ;s located over the
42-inch storm drain, and replacement of the driveway with a
concrete discharge flume could be accomplished. A detailed
field survey of the drainage easement between the houses and
subsequent detailed engineering design is required.
2.5 Due to the complexity of this drainage problem we would suggest
that a meeting of the City staff and developer's engineers at
the project site be scheduled to help resolve the problem.
March 3, 1986
PS 85 - 98 .
PAGE
2
'-~..:>'. '. .
..c::."_ tþ... _'-" r
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
-........~ Ö<Á~~_,_ ,___
It-
,
. t-.,
,"
Subdivision Review~~ter continued
(~ CARSTON COURT ADDITION
3 The devloper is providing I5-foot of right-of-way dedication on Rufe Snow
Drive for future widening. Additional right-of-way from the other side of
Rufe Snow will be required for future widening to an M5U section. We
would note, for the record ,based on a very preliminary study of Rufe Snow
between Glenview Drive and I.H. 820 that all of the future widening may
have to come off the west side since several existing homes are very close
to the existing curb and gutter on the east side. If this is the case
then additional right-of-way from the west side will be required in
addition to the proposed I5-feet dedication. A minimum of 80-foot of
right-of-way width is required for an M5U section. If the existing
right-af-way width is 55-feet then a total af 25-feet of additional
right-of-way should be dedicated if widening is allan the west side.
4 The developer should be required to pay his prorata share of the existing
8-inch water line in Rufe Snow Drive. We would estimate prorata at $5.50
per linear foot for one half of the existing 8-inch line for a total
length of 83.1 feet.
5 As a general reminder, the Developer or Owner should be made aware that
he is responsible for all provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance, Zoning
Ordinance, Water and Sewer Policies and Procedures, and all other
applicable City Development Codes unless specific discretionary variances
and exceptions are made and agreed upon by the Planning and Zoning -
Commission and City Council, and covered in writing in the City-Developer
Agreement, if this proposed plat is approved. If no such specific
variances are provided then the Developer or Owner remains responsible for
all other Ordinance and Policy requirements as written in the regulatory
codes.
Pl : :
RI H till w. ALfj 1 N, P. .
R\-JA/ra
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
Mr. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Works
Mr. Allen Bronstad, Assistant Director of Public Works
Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development
March 3, 1986
PS 85 - 98 .
PAGE
3
-. . .--c.-..r'....;.~~." ~ _~., _._ :~.:..~~,¿.... _.:......
~
I~
I . þ "
I'
Ie
I
'. .3-
- --:- - 1:'
~ I ~ I¡,C-l . '-=
(, £ I r '_Jl ~n2l' I" I I I
n R . V I=' _I I I
-;rrTT1 I , .,...1rn JUt.ð Jar II
-"-"'~ T1LLL I.. -1 r, if c!.L
¡:()SS/L.. , , .' . _~: r ]))
. . GReEJ<. . _. ~
:"{~. -,.;.,.~ / ,J oj ~ "" n---- ill lij
-( ~r .:S-r()~ M ~L'~ ~ 0 IJ _ -""ITR "
~t ~ ~~ ~~r:m=~ J LU~; - I
'-- ~~ l-r-- I I I II I N _
~~'" ~ L ~ 'Ð'''r-côUlf.!...... r---tt -rrli;R I T
~? ~ 4 4ER iW o~ \ TI". }"', .~ ~
\,..~ · o\) ~R I.L - J:; 0. <: . ~': . . ':.::.> ~~.,.: I . .
~o" ÆIL: .J11, '~";"ÇAR~í0Îf< NORTH RICHLAND
¥~ ~ L
-. . R ..... \ t -':'1"" 'A D.Þ H..""\. "". . I I
~ ~~ ;Œ ~~.i~rn· _1-' ~ ~ "'Ii ~-L -.1
I ~ bL.. I r '''! ~.)..,. ~ .~. ('Y' ' , ~ r . I \.,. .~I
~ . j nRIVE --17-[: i)!t:+--rr ~. ~. ~~ ". .
I ~.1 lJi -¡;;¡-.JJ. R1DjC.Fn~ .1 I~IAI.J ..
~ ~ · ~: 1 '!.I · l b! .1. ~ ~
I =5o_0 - T , I :r.:-t' ,.It-L 1. '.' I~. ~
- \ -I-f'Ir-.~ 4... ~ I
'I . h"~~~19- ~~~ . Till
Io.J _..,~ ..=TTTrT B' - r . J
- \ = ~. rhlJ 'r- .' _ . JIJ.i...lJ. 1-
~ _. -~, 'ï ¡- r~r µ.J.:..:-J I . -'-
· .~ . ::- .aJ,=t:] L I I I \ ICT~JtI~ ,-1W - E:?-1 IT
~--&J *H . _ ~
; r:--Lm.'. . _
I · .- '''-- írl -- I
· -' It->. I, -_ II ___
'r: r-t:- - I~ ..-'ÿf"", ~~ ~. Ài . -. Fl 1 I I I
. m~ I ~~r "WrIl]]~ .I~ I ~I
L- r_ 1 ~I~, ~- ~~~Y'1l- 11~ 1 ~ ~ \
- I I ~~1 :"'ÿ ,- ~ - . rE! I n I _I' /-1-, 1 1
. .. ÍIII . L.J -ì'^ - - c:.T - EE~T" I
'\ G". - ~ ~ ~LHtJT'I~ ûl~ LL cq . ,-11
'...1 -}-,.... -..... 1ft ~ ~ ~ I.. . -.I ---'"'7.. ï:
-.J~~ "~- I ~~ ..~ I I ---r T.. I
1
I
I
r
.,
~
.0' . r- _ / .' '''Oeçember-31, 1985 ," _..,----=--===--::~=-..,'-
. .~.. I",r. .---tI -
I:~,~-:C~ '~an~i ng and"ž.~~ i nQ--~Ôrmñ~'S-Sî8~~-=' :--"'__~__
----: .~.~:..~- ~.C ,·tyof..' North 2 ~1 chl a-nd _H"ll ¡S-. .
.,' . ...,'- 7301'~. E. Loop '820 --:. -- _. ...
-.------ ~-North Ri~chl and Hi] 1 s, Têx'ás--76118'
I·
ie
I
I
I.. ..' '"'=.
..J
.--', /'~;
I
I
I
--
-....' - -- -.--....----. _.._.~..
. -. -...... --- ....... -- -. .......-. .....".. -_. ...~ --....-..,
....:-"'-... ..~ ..l.,....,..."." . -'....~.' .-'. . -ç .-
(
--- -....- .-...-.- .._--c
.....--....:; '---.~...- ·4-.... ""......... ~__..-....-.....-,
...~~...
~~...................-..........._- ...~."t" _........,.~...-,.._
K~OW-LiõÑ~-ENCLlSH-F-LOWERî-ìÑc .
." ..- ':'..... .;....".-.._ .'....,0.. ...... .." .: ~
_-~--C~NSUlTI~G~GlJ'!fERS I Fort Worth- Dallas _---- __
, .
. .
....-.. ~....... .....
- -----............-..--..."...
. ~
.............. .... -... - .......... ..".-.--.
.._--_..--..._~~....~-
.. ~. ... .
, .., .... I..t:;,.~
.. .-.
- .-'-"-^
--~~
-',-
..........- .-
~~.,_.~_.....
. ,""'" ~~...
"t~.~....... ei...~~. ~#. f ""_
. .
~~..'~---
....
.... _-#' .....----..-:,-
--
-.----.. -- "~~." ----.- ~ . - - --
-,
~.....~...- ......_,.~........... ~.............. --.
$- .. , ....
~,.~........-._~~..
.---
. ~.
,........-----.--.____.._--..r.-~ .-... ___ ...._A._~.____
-. -'.......': ------~.-....._.....
_."4-"_'.., _ ___..._
, ;.4....~....--=..........~..~_
,.." ,. ~E
.... . .-' ~ .""- -.-.' ....-.~_..--c......._..-.. ...............~~~
.<:-: RE: 3..~32-;-~C ilY lJF .N,º.RT~~'hB.I~.ttLAND,_.I:fILLS....
- - ...", e-ARSTOtt'· COURT-' ADD I T ION,
. ~. .....-;:- ·B·LeCK-i'·- ,,-~ - '-
, ,.Þ',~. ,.., . . _ , .
~. ,~AItÇ~~.;;::pRE:lI~ffiAAY·"·;PlAT, h
. .~..:--~_. ---E5-85 ·--.-~8·, ~RJD r4AP 129
,; ':,,: ~2 ~ ::.' ~ .
.. r ...~_ ........ '-
L'
,....,' . .~-::~ ----- - "
.-
. ...
~~~.
. . .~. .. ~
~_.- -
'.,.
~. --
...-............
. -, .' ""
We have reviewed tb~__Le_fe.r.eru:.ecLmateriãls for this subdivision antt~f.~!",~he------
fo 11 owi ng comments: - -.. --~.:-.:.. _ _",~---...,.--"-- ._
..~~~................:-~ --.,~
.:-=:.. ...-~ -......-.... -,-
......-........ --..~....... -...n-:":-:::::"'~''';:_ __ ._
1
Si nce' th i s-' proposectrmT-;-š-ëõñtigÜ-õûšWi ttrt?r~:-*t:pð"rfffge' E'stàfeS _~~::.:~_~.~,~"' .
Add i t ion", we wo ul ,d_r...E~ç_ºJI1J1]E~JLd_tlLa t -ttre-stJbd-i-IJ-iS-ion-ni1me'''be chftnged-fr0'!l-..------
"Cars ton Court Addition" to the ~.IParkr-idge·-ESt:ãtëš-Äda:;.tion"-aT1d 'the lot
and block numbers..,r:..~~vt~~.Çtà-G-ç~01:1tî.ng.¡-:Y ~~_., --~ ___.~,,~._.-~-__.___eoo.~
..-........................................--..-.-_., ___ .__....._........._ - .0 _ ..'
tp.~-~
, :;- ~ -.-- -- =--
~.; .... .r, . , : __'_.~'" . ... , tJ~~"",__~.~._: _"r' .r......
-- -~;;;'_A surveyor IS seal,,-c.er..tif.-ica.t-ion. and signatur~e'::shÔù]d~be-:-afH}(-ed~'---.~,-,-
. ..- p 1 at. - ...:::- ~~--- : ._.' ._ .~ _.._. ._._~__.._._.___,,",-_,,-=-__
~ ~,"-l .... ,." ". .~-·~-----;#·7~~:;;-::7" . .._.__.~-- ~~'-_.- ;~-=_.. ':~"'-'
- 3-- In accordance witt1Tfiêsu:bèf1vlsion -Ordinance-requirements thë·Öëvë'rõper's---·--
~I--_.:~~_ ..:" ~'/Jng inf~r_~..bQu.1.cl.iiffLX...ihe_-_fOll~Wi~~::-~:~rti _f,i.~~-tì~~,_~the_~r a i n ~ge__~l an ~'=-::~-:...
- -- ~;:~.-:-r-¡:-~-·_-:-:===:_=--===-=;:a profess i Clnª-l~ngtl1eer-.r_egi stered in the
State of Texas, have .pr-·epa.r-ed tbi-s--drà:inage-·.g-1;udy incompliance
- -.".. 'wi th-the-1-a-test--pub-li s'hed_ ..r..equ trementsand-cri teri a"of-tñe -Cft.{ _.- - -
-. óf North Richland Hills, aJ1d..hav.e__verjf.jed that the--topographic---,-...
-- ,- ·íñJ'ñrrñát.io:D_.jj~s.ed·__ìÍ1~..]:h·i s -sttld-y~-;'s'--;'Tr"camp--ìîåtìc é wi t1\-sa.-td·-·--~---- ~~
requ; rements and ; s otherw45e.__S.ujtab 1 e for devel oping.,tbi s .-, __,_,__.
wor~a'b-l-e'-O"Vêr'â'llJ"Pl-â'n of Drainage which can be implemented "'-.-..
. t-hrou~h-"pr(}per·--subseque.nt deta-il ed ..construction pl aññïng:--"--":~==~._ .
.~ .......--......~........1._............._.....~~..-..........".4_.~ .~~__. . ___ _ ._._ ___.... ~_...
't"..--,,-- -" .' . .'
I
I ,.., .. '-'-'--"':~.......-' - ~.- ................... --.-
-. -- . -.--
_~_ .~" ..-- ..,.,a.-Þ'"..,........... ...._ _ ._.~ . _....... _._ ..
'v.IfT~~_~~~~~- - -_. -~--SrGNATURE ------, -_. -~.-- -- , ·-P·~-t.~- --SEAL'-'
I . -- 4-fhe o~veloPèrlS=Engìnëër~~shõu-íd-~-ë;:ifY=thâ;:-~;;t:fi~ie-nt ov'erl añd·;ërief--=-:==':~"::
" ãbòve_the proposed 21-inch dið!!)_~!e!'_~t.Qr.IIuir:..aJfl..j~...JJ,yajlable to contain
the 100.-:yeat.:-frequeñcy-dïscharge (excluding the storm drain cäþ-á"Eìtyl------'---
I W.1 th in the pr.opa.sed_ dr..a.j nage- easement.·..- Secti ons- along the stm:IlLdr.-ain........" ....
---'w-i-thin the easement's-h01J1-d-be' sh-own-'on tn-é' plans'-aTong with conveyanc'E:H--"
----ca 1 c~ 1 at~ons. ___Çomb tiled. underground and over 1 and-capacity .of the._9.tf.=.$Jte_
Ie
I
I
-J.;,:....-.~.,~-=...,;, ...
.......:-.......,...,....- -,-..._- .~".
. ...~..............-.~, ...... - c:__.....,,,..-.... ... _. . _....~;..'!t.: _ _ .'.'!Þ_' _ ,
~..__.... r...~_..··_._.__
-... - ----- ...- .....-. -..--...... ---
. ..-...........-.. _._-. . -_.__....~_.---.... _--...·.v___ _ ...-....__...
-..... -. .., ......---.... -....... ~
.................. -...... '-~ -....- ......
............-.-.._--~._.. --.---
.,-.. ..-' - ~~. . _._~_.. -
. . _.,., - ..... -
.-- . - _. .-.- -
---"'-.-. _...-
- -~ - -- -~---
..- -...... ....-- - -
____- 6·"~,~,,,,_~._ __ _ ....-...._... _.......
--.--.-...
190LCENTRA1- DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021:..!.~J.-:712~1_~E.IRO/267-3367
~
I" ·
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
.-,~.. ~~,~-
(
c
(~~-..-:-Subdivision Review Letter continued
CARSTON COURT ADDITION
L
!: storm drain"""C42-inch) arrd swale should have at least a lO-year capacity,
r and the Developer's Engineer should verify this as well. If sufficient
"",:·..c:..--overland relief capacity is not available then the proposed underground
storm drain shall be upsized until the combined underground and overland
capacity within the easement equals the 100-year value or greater. The
Subdivision Ordinance requires that the overland relief swale or flume be
concrete lined or otherwise lined with materials approved by the Public
Works Department. In any event, the minimum finished floor elevation
within the proposed development site should be at least 1.5 feet above the
computed IOO-year water surface elevation throughout the site.
~. - ~..
5 The topographic contours of the project siteindicate.that the back yards
of the lots located alõrigO-the -west side of the propo'sed subdivision slope
steeply toward the rear of the" "lofs and surface runoff will apparently
discharge onto the adjacenf lots potentially causing severe erosion and
possibly other flooding-dëiinàgë--during high intensity storms. We would _
recommend that inlet sfrÚEfures{such as "Y" type inlets) be constructed
at the low point at the rear of each of the lots on the west end of this
proposed development as required to intercept this surface flow and
discharge it into the existing underground storm drain pipes located along
the west end of the proposed subdivision.
6 Is zoning to be changed from R-1? Lot size~ do not meet minimum
requirements for R-1 zoning. Are Lots CP1 and CP2 to be commonly owned by
the owners of Lots 1 through 16?
7 We would note that adequate fire hydrant coverage protection has not been
provided for these lots based on the 500 foot radius requirement for
residential zoning.
8 Water services should not be located on an easement. Move these services
toward the ce~~er of the lot, 10 feet from the sanitary sewer service.
9 The clean-outs in the streets should be changed to manholes.
10 'Our grid maps show the water line in Rufe Snow Drive to be an 8-inch
line, rather than 6-inch as shown on these plans. The owner should be
required to pay his prorata share for this water line, if it has not
already been paid. We would estimate the prorata at $5.50 per linear foot
for one-half of existing line for a total length of 83.10 feet.
11 'Rufe Snow is designated as a M5U, minor arterial street, with an a5-foot
right-of-way width in the Thorougfare Master Plan. An additional 15.0
feet for future widening is needed on each side.
12 'As a general reminder, the Developer or Owner should be made aware that
he is responsible for all provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance, Zoning
Ordinance, Water and Sewer Policies and Procedures, and all other
applicable City Development Codes unless specific discretionary variances
January 2, 1986
PS 85 - 98
PAGE
2
'.' .- ....'~......... ...,i.;r _ .-
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I.,.,. .
~.~ _,~,." '-.'~., :,' ·,.'-c.......... ',.
(
c
Subdivision Review Letter continued
CARSTON COURT ADDITION
and exceptions are made and agreed upon by the Planning and Zoning
COmmission and City Council s and covered in writing in the City-Developer
Agreement, 'if this proposed plat is approved. If no such specific
variances are provided then the Developer or Owner remains responsible for
all other Ordinance and Policy requirements as written in the regulatory
codes.
Pl an&.:
RI H till \. A BINs' . . '
RWA/ra
Enclosures
cc: -Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
Mr. 'Gene Riddle, Director of Public Works
Mr. Allen Bronstad, Assistant Director of Public Works
Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development
January 2, 1986
PS 85 - 98
PAGE
3
..
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I -
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
(
(
KNOWL TON-E NGLlSH-FLOWERS, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS I Fort Worth- Dallas
May 16, 1986
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Richland Hills, Texas 76118
RE: 3-932, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
CARSTON COURT ADDITION,
BLOCK 1,
FI NAL PLAT,
PS 86 - 24, GRID MAP 129
~
This letter is in response to letter dated May 12, 1986, from John Levitt
Engineers to you regarding our review letter dated May 7, 1986:
1 Lots 4, 6, 7, 14, and 15 are less than the 13,000 square foot minimum
required for R-l zoning, according to the calculations submitted by John
E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. with their letter dated May 12, 1986. Lots 3,
4, 5, 8, 9, 10, and 12 are less than the 85-foot width at the front
building line as required for R-l zoning. Lots 1, 6, 7, 11, 13, 14, 15,
and 16 are less than the minimum 120-foot average depth required for R-l
zoning. Lot 2 is the only lot in this addition that meets all size
requirements for R-l zoning.
2 Regarding item 2.2, we are still recommending construction of the
concrete drainage flume at the west end of this proposed development for
the reasons presented in our March 3, 1986, letter. As noted in paragraph
14, of Ordinance 1207, page 7 of the Subdivision Ordinancnce, lIall open
ditches in all subdivisions that are used to carry surface runoff across
more than two lots shall be fully concrete lined across the entire areas
of each subdivision being developedll. In addition to the requirement to
handle on-site flow within this proposed flume, the flume is also required
to accommodate off-site runoff from the north and south onto this proposed
subdivision along the west end of the development.
3 Regarding item 3, where we recommended that the off-site parallel storm
drain be included in this development project, the think the cost to the
City will be cheaper if the work is done as part of this development
contract rather than as a separate contract. We cannot comment on the
liability concerns of the devloper-- we would defer comment on this item
to the City Attorney.
Please call if you have any questions.
~~W,~
RICHARD W. ALBIN, P.E.
1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021 . 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367
~
I"
Ie
I
1
I
1
I
I
1
--
1
I
1
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
.6' .,
Subdivision Review LJC~er continued
RWA/ra
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
Mr. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Works
Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development
t1ay 16, 1986
PS 86 - 24
(~ARSTON COURT ADDITION
P AG E 2
~
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
1
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Planning and Development
Department:
6/23/86
Council Meeting Date:
PS 86-31
Agenda Number:
Subject:
Request of David Barfield for Replat of
Lots 3RIA and 3RIB, Block 1, Martín Addicion
This Replat Application is presented for consideration of Lots 3RIA and 3RIB, Block 1,
Martin Addition. The property is located on the north side of Nob Hill Drive west of
Precinct Line Road the purpose for the replat is to subdivide the existing lot to create
an additional lot. There is currently a residence under construction on Lot 3RIA. The
replat will allow the applicant to construct a second residence on the second proposed
lot.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission approved Replat Application PS 86-31 requesting
platting on Lot 3RIA, and 3RIB, Block 1, Martin Addition as submitted.
Finance Review
Acct. Number
Sufficient Funds Available
t< 11 /~
nt Head Signature City Manager
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
. Finance Director
Page 1 of
I-I
R-3
1090
I I
I I
, I
, I
I '
\ \,
, , I-I
" " SU
, '
\ '
, \
\ \F. P.
I ,
I ·
I I
I '
I /
AG
..
R-3
I
(
Page 2
p & Z Minutes
June 12, 1986
-
I
I PS 85-93
APPROVED
I PS 86-32
APPROVED
I
I 3. PS 86-24
II
I PS 86-24
APPROVED
4. PS 86-31
I
'PS 86-31
I APPROVED
I
I
I
I
Ie
4a. PS 85-100
(~
Mr. Freeman
being typed
ter was
ve it Monday.
Mr. Tucker made to approve
PS 85-93 sub- t to the Engineer's
comments. his motion was seconded by
Ms. Na and the motion carried 5-0.
· Schwinger made the motion to
approve PS 86-32 subject to receiving
the letter regarding the drainage of
Little Bear Creek. This motion was
seconded by Ms. Flippo and the motion
carried 5-0.
. .
/"
~-/
Request of Rischon Development Corp.
for final plat of Carston Court
Addition.
Chairman Bowen stated the problems had
been worked out.
Mr. Tucker made the motion to approve
PS 86-24. This motion was seconded by
Ms. Nash and the motion carried 5-0.
Request of David Barfield for replat
of Lots 3RIA & 3RIB, Block 1, Martin
Addition.
Mr. Schwinger made the motion to
approve PS 86-31. This motion was
seconded by Ms. Nash and the motion
carried 5-0. .
Chairman Bowen stated since it was a
platting matter, they would move item
1112 to item 114a.
Request of Ellis
preliminary plat
Village Additio
Mark Ha n, Engineer, came forward.
He d he would like to discuss
everal items of the Engineer's
letter: U8-The owner agrees to pay
his prorata share of the water line in
Rufe Snow, but he requests he not be
required to pay any prorata on the
sewer line in Hightower since he has
been denied access to this line.
,
I
I.,.
I
I
I
11
(
(
: .~:;'ì ::' .'::l ";. "
!.,\,' ''', (,,', !""":;":~I;":;:¡'
~ I" ' , ¡ ..:' .;' ~," '
, , J ." ~ :: .;.~,:~..:;~,y "F ,; :: '.'
'..i,' i :,:j,¡.'~"" ..:j
Stembridge & Associates, Inc.
Consulting Engineers
; 4 ~ i .~;~ :~:;~"_'~'~~; , ;
¡ij,::!;:,:ië; "
:;¡;J;~j;:~~g~: ]
3,
1986
. '':i,¡:''';,;:,:i¡;),b~} :"~' ,:
'.,¡'r~lfl~riing «,Zoning Commission
1'¡¡J~,;i't~tj):~;J;i0~~§X{);.:~ ~o~~~p R~~~l~nd Hi 1,1~
': v:'.~i·:\'!t", i:·~¡:·.':'í4.~Q:r"th,< RJ.chland Hi 11 s, .:Tx _, :\16118
I¡JJl¡\!';¡)r~;!:;,:~![!'~,¡~li~',¡J;¡!¡~~);",,' '.', RE: ~~~ ~ a ~~ 1; ~;,: ~: ~ i B ,
::. ":, " ,; ,',~~ ,~~ . ~ !. ';-'\'-':-: .,
I:::;'^·':!:"".:,;,!.;·~.':.···.~.'."':..'...'.',....,. ';,'ï;;Inresponse to Knowl ton-English-Flowers
,:}¡Jf'1986, we offer the following comme~ts:
;,i: '<~ >.,;i j :-,;:,:,21
:,~/'j'~~N
Ini::'11Ú),'r:,+:·'¡ 'A Vicinity Map has been added to the
;~~:' ,¡'¡.:', 2~ All contiguous platting
Property corner monument at ion has been shown on the Plat.
The surveyor's signature has been affixed to
certification.
This property was originally platted 'several year~ ago
,when the only frontage was on Precinct Line Road~ The
'.structures shown on the plat are existing structures or
'structures that were begun before theright~of~way of Nob
Hill Drive existed. When the permit was issued'~he
structure was more than 25 feet from the~outh'property
'line. .When Nab Hill Drive was dedicated., l~"feet, of the
O~errs south property was required for this dedication,
therefore the existing structure is now closer. than the
25-foot building requirement. When the permit was issued
'the requirement for the set back for the side property
line (now the front prop~rty line) was only 6 feet. To
accommodate a 25-foot building line would require the
owner to completely reconstruct his house.
6. Lot 3Rl-B has been correctly designated in the Owner's
ACknowledgment and Dedication.
7.
The distance and curve data from the point of beginning
to the southerly southeast corner of Lot 3Rl-A has been
shown on the Plat.
- -------
4028 Daley, Suite 103 . North Richland Hills, Texas 76118 . (817) 284-1363
..
I
Ie
I
I
I
I;
I,
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
~
(
(
, ",~().<;;¡he Owner is aware that he is responsible for all
,·.,,'.:,¡f::':f';»r~¿'provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance, Zoning
,i'·';2,;',;if"'i·,~:¡,/Jt~t,;Prdinance, Water and Sewer Policies and Procedures,
01 ~~b::~: ~~::~:~t Codes. '
. ,{"., -'- . - - ~ .
PS 86-31
'Page 2
~
. r -~ .
',,' Lots 3Rl-A « 3R1-B, Blk. 1
Martin Addition
8 . "The right-of-way width of Precinct Line and Nob Hill
:, . Dr i ve have been shown.
;¡:>~~ .,The utility companies have been notified by
':j,fL;í!&,Jt:·;·~taff ,and all requested easements have been
" "j::,<!~}',"'<:':',',".' '.: r.:" ,
.~,
:"""".','"."',',.',,'.,,."',",...".'....,'.',",","",.,..','"'",,',,'!JfJ",',.,,,,"",.',',',',,'::,"::, f. '",""",' "."":"0ti'",,'.,' ,', ':,:,' .' , ',.,','"," ' ,
·"\'·;'tif!!t{ ~~mbrid~~'t'l~ ~
DRS/et
cc:
Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
Mr. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Works
Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
(
(
K NOWL TON-E NG LI SH-F LOWE RS, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS / Fort Worth- Dallas
June 2, 1986
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Richland Hills, Texas 76118
RE: 3-941, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
MARTI N ADD I TI ON ,
LOTS 3RIA AND 3R1B, BLOCK 1,
REPLAT,
PS 86 - 31, GRID MAP 72
We have reviewed the referenced materials for this subdivision and offer the
following comments:
1 A small scale vicinity map should be included on the plat showing the
general location of the development.
2 All contiguous platting and/or ownership should be shown on the plat.
3 In accordance with County requirements, property corner monumentation
should be noted on the plat.
4 The surveyor1s signature should be affixed to the certification.
5 A 25-foot building line should be added to Lot 3R1-A along Nab Hill
Drive.
6 Lot 3R1-B is not correctly designated in the Owner1s Acknowledgment and
Dedication.
7 The distance and curve data from the point of beginning to the southerly
southwest corner of Lot 3Rl-A are not shown on the plat.
a The right-of-way width of Precinct Line Road and Nob Hill Drive should be
shown on the plat.
9 All utility companies should be advised of this proposed replat in
accordance with standard City procedures. Any proposed construction on or
across the existing lO-foot electric easement shown on the plat should be
approved by TESCO.
10 As a general reminder, the Developer or Owner should be made aware that
he is responsible for all provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance, Zoning
Ordinance, Water and Sewer Policies and Procedures, and all other
applicable City Development Codes unless specific discretionary variances
and exceptions are made and agreed upon by the Planning and Zoning
1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 .. BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021 . 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
Subdivision Review Le~er continued
(
r~ARTI N ADD I TI ON
Commission and City Council, and covered in writing in the City-Developer
Agreement, if this proposed plat is approved. If no such specific
variances are provided then the Developer or Owner remains responsible for
all other Ordinance and Policy requirements as written in the regulatory
codes.
Please call if you have any questions.
&dv~U/
RICHARD W. ALBIN, P.E.
r
RWA/ra
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
Mr. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Works
Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development
June 2, 1986
PS 86 - 31
PAGE
2
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
Ie
I
(
(
Mr. R. S. Williams
TESCO Region Engr. Supervisor
P.O. Box 970
Fort Worth, TX 76101
RE: City File Reference Number: PS 86-31
Martin Addition, Block 1, Lots 3RIA & 3RIB,
Address or Location: North side of Nob Hill Drive, west of Precinct
Line Road
Attached is a print of the above named subdivision for review of the
proposed layout in terms of the requirements of your office.
Please return your comments to Wanda Calvert. Planning and Zoning
Coordinator, City of North Richland Hills, P.O. Box 18609, North Richland
Hills, Texas, 76118 on one (1) copy of this form no later than 6/4/86.
Layout fully satisfies requirements of this office.
~Layout is satisfactory subject to additional information or minor
corrections being shown on attached plat. (See Comments)
Layout requires major revision before proper evaluation can be
made. (See Comments)
COMMENTS:
TESCO:
( 0 FOOT EASEMENT FOR ELECTRIC
DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES, AS SHOvVN
ON T~f--~TACHED SKETCH.
DATE: /¿CJ ¡/4rA'
¿/
SIGNATURE
CITY:
2J~ {}~
DATE: 5/30/86
SIGNATURE
~
·~ .
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Department: _ Council Meeting Date:
Request of Texas Electric Service Company for A d N b PS 86-32
Final Plat ot Lot 1, Block 1, Northfl.eld Park Add1t:1on. gen a urn er:
Planning and Development
6/23/86
This Final Plat Application is presented for consideration of Lot 1, Block 1,
Northfield Park Addition. The property is located on the east side of Davis Boulevard
at Cherokee Trail. The applicant is Texas Electric Service Company. The purpose for
the proposed plat is to identify the property by lot and block to allow the power
company to construct an electrical power substation on the site.
In the Engineer's letter the observation is noted that the proposed lot is not shown to
have the necessary development items as dictated by the Subdivision Ordinance. However,
the proposed construction on the site will not be building-oriented. The property was
recently zoned U-Institutional for the Utility Company use. Therefore it is the Staff's
opinion that the two major items, Fire Hydrant locations and dedication of a City Street _
along the alignment of the existing private drive, will not be necessary to the
development of the property for this use. The proposed lot does have a section of~
Little Bear Creek running through the northern portion of the lot. The applicants have
agreett, although their proposed construction will not be in the flood plain, to
participate with the adjacent property owners in the required improvements to the creek
at such time as the other properties are developed. The applicant has provided a letter
of commitment stipulating this agreement to the Staff.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the Final Plat Application for Lot 1,
Block 1, Northfield Park Addition as submitted.
Source of Funds:
Bonds (GO/Rev.)
Oper . g Budget
e 0 er
Finance Review
Acct. Number
Sufficient Funds Available
I
I
. Frnance Director
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
Page 1 of
1
I·
I
~I
C-I
1198
AG
I
AG
I
ae·
I
c-,
SU
R-3
~03
\.
I
AG
0-'
AG
..
AG
.6
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
(
r
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS,
JUNE 12, 1986'- 7:30 P. M.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUT
OF MAY 22, 1986
1.
PS 85-93
2.
PS 86-32
The meeting was called to order y
Chairman, Don Bowen, at 7:30 . M.
PRESENT:
Chairman
Secretary
Member
Alt. Member
ABSENT:
Don Bowen
John Schwinger
Marjorie Nash
Carole Flippo
George Tucker .
Richard Roysto~//· ?
Wanda Calvert
. ::~,
,.
Mark Wood
Joe Hallford
Ms. Nash made the motion to approve
the minutes as written. This motion
was seconded by Mr. Schwinger and the
motion carried 4-0 with Ms. Flippo
abstaining since she was not present
at the meeting.
Chairman Bowen stated that due to the
approval of an ordinance by the City
Council regarding Specific Use
Permits, items 7, 8, & 11 will not be
heard. He stated this would be a
Staff function now.
Chairman Bowen stated the first two
requests would be heard together.
Request of Texas Electric Service Co.
for preliminary plat of Lot 1, Block
1, Northfield Park Addition.
Request of Texas Electric Service Co.
for final plat of Lot 1, Block 1,
Northfield Park Addition.
Dwayne Freeman with TESCO came
forward.
Mr. Tucker asked if he had a letter
for the Commission regarding Little
Bear Creek.
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
II
I
Ie
I
I
Page 2
P & Z Minutes
June 12, 1986
PS 85-93
APPROVED
PS 86-32
APPROVED
3. PS 86-24
PS 86-24
APPROVED
4. PS 86-31
:. PS 86-31
APPROVED
4a. PS 85-100
(
(
Mr. Freeman stated the letter was
being typed and would have it Monday.
Mr. Tucker made the motion to approve
PS 85-93 subject to the Engineer's
comments. This motion was seconded by
Ms. Nash and the motion carried 5-0.
Mr. Schwinger made the motion to
approve PS 86-32 subject to receiving
the letter regarding the drainage of
Little Bear Creek. This motion was
seconded by Ms. Flippo and the motion
carried 5-0.
</~..
;'",
-::::;..-/-'
Request of Rischon Development Corp.
for final plat of Carston Court
Addition.
Chairman Bowen stated
been worked out.
Mr. Tucker made the motion
PS 86-24. This motion w seconded by
Ms. Nash and the motio carried 5-0.
Request of David B field for replat
of Lots 3RIA & 3 B, Block 1, Martin
Addition.
Mr. Schwi er made the motion to
approv S 86-31. This motion was
seco ed by Ms. Nash and the motion
ca ied 5-0. .
Chairman Bowen stated since it was a
platting matter, they would move item
1/12 to item 114a.
Request of Ellis & Pittman, Inc. for
preliminary plat of Block 81, Foster
Village Addition.
Mark Hannon, Engineer, came forward.
He said he would like to discuss
several items of the Engineer's
letter: D8-The owner agrees to pay
his prorata share of the water line in
Rufe Snow, but he requests he not be
required to pay any prorata on the
sewer line in Hightower since he has
been denied access to this line.
,
I·-
."
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
("
(
KNOWl TON-E NGlISH-FlOWERS, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS I Fort Worth- Dallas
December 31, 1985
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Richland Hills, Texas 76118
RE: 3-850, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
NORTHFIELD PARK ADDITION,
LOT 1, BLOCK 1,
PRELIMINARY PLAT,
PS 85 - 93, GRID MAP '34 '
We have reviewed the referenced materials for this subdivision and offer the
following comments:
1 Water, sewer, paving, and drainage plans should be submitted for review
which have been prepared and sealed by a Registered Professional Engineer.
2 In accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance requirements the Developer's
Engineer should affix the following certification to the drainage plan:
2.1 I, , a professional engineer registered in the
State of Texas, have prepared this drainage study in compliance
with the latest published requirements and criteria of the City
of North Richland Hills, and have verified that the topographic
information used in this study is in compliance with said
requirements and is otherwise suitable for developing this
workable overall Plan of Drainage which can be implemented
through proper subsequent detailed construction planning.
SIGNATURE
, P. E . SEA L
3 The metes amd bounds description should be included in an Owner's
Acknowledgement and Dedication Statement in the final plat.
4 The building set-back lines should be noted on the plat.
5 You may wish to require the developer to dedicate as a City street the
proposed "private 1 anell.
1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021 . 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367
~
."
I'
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
.
.
(
(
NORTHFIELD PARK ADDITION
Subdivision Review Letter continued
6 Fire hydrant coverage has not been shown.
7 The Flood Insurance Maps for the City of NRH indicate that part of this
lot is within the lOO-year flood plain. Channel and storm drain
improvements are required, and plans for such improvments should be
prepared and submitted for review by a Registered Professional Engineer.
8 Utility companies should be contacted to determine if any easements are
required to serve this lot.
9 This review is based on preliminary plat only, since water, sewer, paving
and drainage plans have not been submited to our office for review.
10 As a general reminder, the Developer or Owner should be made aware that
he is responsible for all provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance, Zoning
Ordinance, Water and Sewer Policies and Procedures, and all other .
applicable City Development Codes unless specific discretionary variances
and exceptions are made and agreed upon by the Planning and Zoning
Commission and City Council, and covered in writing in the City-Developer
Agreement, if this proposed plat is approved. If no such specific
variances are provided then the Developer or Owner remains responsible for
all other Ordinance and Policy requirements as written in the regulatory
codes.
Please call if you have any questions.
RIC&~I ~
R~A/A/r a
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
Mr. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Works
Mr. Allen Bronstad, Assistant Director of Public Works
Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development
December 31, 1985
PS 85 - 93
PAGE
2
to
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
~
TEXAI. .
ELECTRIC SERVICE
COMPANY
June 16, 1986
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Gentlemen:
Texas Electric Service Company is the owner in title to a tract
of land recently platted into the City as Lot 1, Block 1, Northfield
Park Addition to the City of North Richland Hills out of the S.
Richardson Survey; Abstract 1226, Tarrant County, Texas.
The Northern portion of this tract is crossed (approximately
2850 feet) by a natural creek described as Little Bear Creek and
it is our understanding that the City has design plans for the im-
provement and channelization of Little Bear Creek which will become
necessary as the surrounding area develops.
Due to the fact that the creek crossing on TESCO property is
a small part of the improvement project and that the facilities being
constructed on TESCO property will create little, if any, additional
drainage into the creek, we respectfully request that TESCO not be
required to make improvements to the creek at this time.
By this letter TESCO does hereby agree to participate in the
future improvement and channelization of Little Bear Creek insofar as
it crosses TESCO property and to the extent that the improvements con-
form to the City's present plans and specifications which we under-
stand to be a sloped earthen channel with an approximate 12 feet wide
concrete pilot channel at bottom. Should future development of the
surrounding area create the need for more extensive or elaborate im-
provements to the creek, TESCO would ·not be responsible for more than
is presently required by the City.
Respectfully,
~~.
Dewayne Freeman
Community Manager
P. O. BOX 970 · FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76101 . TELEPHONE (817) 336-9411
A DIVISION OF TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY
I
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
I _Department:
Subject:
I
I
I
I
Planning and Development
Request of DARSCO Inc. for Variance to
Section 6.3 of the Sign Ordinance
- Council Meeting Date:
Agenda Number: SO 86-10
6/23/86
DARSCO Inc. is currently developing single family residences in the Briarwood Addition
Fifth Filing Subdivision. The project is located on the northeast corner of Hightower
Drive and Meadow Road. At present the applicant has two residential units finished
which are being used as model homes. Several other units are in various stages of
construction.
The applicant has requested and received permission from the Building Inspection Office
to place a subdivision project sign on-site. They have also requested permission to
install an off-site project sign at the intersection of Hightower and Rufe Snow Drive.
This request was denied by the Staff on the basis of Section 6.3 of the Sign Ordinance
which requires that any off-site project sign be located in the same zone as the actual
development being advertised. The site on which the applicant wishes to locate his sign
is currently zoned C-l Commercial. This request for variance asks the City Council to
relieve the requirements of Section 6.3 of the Ordinance so that the sign can be located
on the intersection of Hightower Drive and Rufe Snow Drive.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council consider the requested variance to the Sign
Ordinance in light of the precedent which would be established. It is expected that if
~the one variance were to be granted many other builders who are currently developing in
~the same general area would also request the same variance.
Finance Review
Acct. Number
Sufficient Funds Available
Klftþ
City Manager
. Finance Director
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
~
Pace 1 of
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
nM\~ço
D.). ANDERSON
PRESIDENT
June 11, 1986
Ms. Jeanette Rewis, City Secretary
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N.E. Loop 820
North Richland Hills, TX 76118
RE: Agenda Time with City Council
Dear Ms. Rewis:
We are herein requesting Agenda time at the next City Council
meeting to discuss the existing Sign Ordinance.
Darsco, a Lewisville based building company, has for the last
eight years constructed quality homes in the Metroplex area.
In every city we have built in, we have consistently strived
to work with the City Government and support the community
as a whole.
The Briarwood Estates community in North Richland Hills is
our first subdivision in your city. This 64 home development
has just started and is located on the Northeast corner of
Hightower and Meadow Drive; some 1! miles East of Rufe Snow.
The price range of these homes is $100-120.000.
The success of our building efforts is predicated on "traffic"-
the number of potential Buyers we can attract to our model
homes. The marketing effort to attract these Buyers is a com-
bination of print media, signage and Real Estate Brokers. In
relation to the print media, we have a very extensive newspaper
campaign in progress. We are working with the area Realtors
to attract their business and will be conducting seminars for
their benefit.
Our signage program is just getting in place. We have a very
unique situation in that we are not located adjacent to a major
thoroughfare, i.e.; Rufe Snow or Chapman. As such, we have
addressed this factor and concluded that our community would
require a corner directional sign on Rufe Snow. This sign
would assist the media attracted Buyer in locating our Models.
3511 FAIRVIEW DRIVE · CoRINTH, T~ 76205 · 817/497-2030
..
l-
Ie
I
I
I
I, ""
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
June 11, 1986
Ms. Rewis
Page 2
As we are located at the "end" of Hightower, the most logical
location for an off-premises sign will be the corner of Rufe
Snow and Hightower. With this in mind, we contacted the owner
of the property on the Southeast corner of Rufe Snow and High-
tower asking for their permission for the placement of a tem-
porary 4' X 8' directional sign. They have given us written
permission to do so.
Before we constructed this signage we applied for a sign permit
':~with the City of North Richland Hills. Our application was
denied due to existing Sign Ordinance. This Ordinance states
that any off-premises sign must be located on compatable zoning
as the property which is being advertised. We reviewed the ---
current zoning map and discovered that there is no R-2 zoning
on any relative corner, therefore, the directional signage
could not be placed.
Our presentation to your City Council is to present the current
facts relative"to zoning, requesting a variance allowing us to
locate one directional sign on Commercial zoned property and
our commitment to remove said temporary signage within 18 months.
The success of the Briarwood Estates community is predicated on
our ability to get Buyers to our development and tour the new
model homes. Without adequate directional signage on this
major thoroughfare, Rufe Snow, we will have additional hardships
in the marketing of these homes.
·For your information, I am enclosing an artist's conception of
the proposed sign. This will be 4' X 8') double faced, and
located on the exact corner of Rufe Snow arid Hightower on the
Ellis property.
Please advise me as to the schedule and our request for the next
City Council meeting. We look forward to working with the City
of North Richland Hills.
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
. , I I' '
/ ~. .
~..,
. ._~. .........' -
. . ~
..
IJ
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Department:
Police
Council Meeting Date: 6-23-86
SUbject:
Interlocal Assistance Agreement with D/FW International
Airport. Resolution 86-28
Agenda Number: GN 86-61
I
The attached Interlocal Assistance Agreement authorizes law enforcement officers
from this City to provide mutual aid to the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport
and for their officers to provide mutual aid to this city as needed. The agreement
addresses call-out of personnel, liability, responsibility, assignment and compensation
of personnel. This agreement formalizes a previous verbal agreement and ensures
assistance from their personnel in the event of a major disaster. City Attorney
Rex McEntire has approved this agreement.
I
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Manager be authorized to execute the attached agreement
with the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport.
, Source of Funds:
.Ii Bonds (GO/Rev.)
, Operating Budget
! e Other
Finance Review
Acct. Number
Sufficient Funds Available
epartment Head Signature
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
K fj ;é~
, City Manager
t FInance Director
I
.~
Page 1 of
1
I·
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
;1
Resolution No. 86~
Be it resolved by the City Council of the City of North Richland
Hills, Texas that:
1.
The City Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to execute the attached
Interlocal Assistance Agreement with the Dallas-Fort Worth International
Airport Board as the act and deed of the City.
Passed and approved this
day of
, 1986.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Secretary
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 999b, Texas Revised Civil Statutes Annotated,
counties, municipalities and joint airports are authorized to execute mutual
assistance agreements to provide additional law enforcement officers to protect
health, life, and property against riot, threat of concealed explosives, unlawful
assembly accompanied by the use of force and violence, and during times of natural
disaster or man-made calamity; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to that same Article 999b, a county, municipality, or joint
airport may enter into an agreement with a neighboring municipality or joint airport
or contiguous county to form a mutual aid law enforcement task force to cooperate
in the investigation of criminal activity and enforcement of the laws of this state;
and
WHEREAS, the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport Board, a joint airport
created under the laws of the State of Texas, and the Citl of N. Richland Hi~s,
desire to enter into a mutual law enforcement assistance agreement in the manner
and to the extent authorized by Article 999b, Texas Revised Civil Statutes;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed as follows:
I.
The following terms shall have the following meanings when used in this
Agreement:
(a) "Law enforcement officer" as used herein shall have the same meaning as that
expressly given the term by Article 999b, Texas Revised Civil Statutes, now
and as that Article may be amended from time to time;
.
I·
ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
(b) "Chief law enforcement officer" means the chief of police of a municipality,
the sheriff of a county, or the Director of Public Safety of the Dallas-Fort
Worth International Airport;
(c) "Chief administrative officer" means the mayor or city manager of a
municipality or the county judge of a county, or the Executive Director of the
Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport.
II.
The Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport Board and the City of N. Richland Hills,
(the "parties") hereby form a mutual aid law enforcement task force to cooperate in
the investigation of criminal activity and enforcement of the laws of this state and
further agree to assist each other in providing law enforcement officers to protect
health, life, and property, subject to the following terms and conditions:
III.
Each of the parties hereto may assign its law enforcement officers to perform
law enforcement duties outside its territorial limits and inside the territorial limits
of the other party, when:
A) Requested by the chief administrative officer (or his designee) of the other
party; and
B) The chief law enforcement officer (or his designee) of the responding party in
his sole discretion determines that the assignment is necessary to protect the
health, life, and property of the requesting party, its inhabitants or visitors, by
reason of riot, threat of concealed explosives, unlawful assembly characterized
- 2-
.
I·
ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
by the use of force or violence, or threat thereof, by three or more persons
acting together or without lawful authority, or during time of natural disaster
or man-made calamity.
IV.
Each of the parties hereto may assign its law enforcement officers to
investigate criminal activity and enforce the laws of this State outside its territorial
limits and inside the territorial limits of the other party when and to the extent:
A) Requested by the Chief Administrative Officer (or his designee) of the other
party; and
B) The Chief Law Enforcement Officer (or his designee) of the responding party in
his sole discretion determines that the assignment is necessary for the
investigation of criminal activity and for enforcement of the laws of this state.
v.
Any request for aid under this Agreement shall include a statement of the
amount and type of equipment and number of personnel requested, and shall specify
the location to which the equipment and personnel are to be dispatched, but the
amount and type of equipment and number of personnel to be furnished shall be
determined by the responding party's chief law enforcement officer, or his designee.
VI.
Police personnel of the responding party shall report to the requesting party's
officer in tactical control at the location to which they have been assigned, and shall
be under the command of the requesting party's chief law enforcement officer.
- 3 -
.
I·
ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
VII.
Police personnel of the responding party will be released by the requesting
member when their services are no longer required.
VIII.
The chief law enforcement officer of the responding party or his designee, in
his sole discretion, may at any time withdraw his personnel or equipment or
discontinue participation in any activity initiated pursuant to this Agreement.
IX.
While any law enforcement officer regularly employed as such by a responding
party is in the service of the requesting party, he shall be a peace officer of the
requesting party and be under the command of the requesting party's chief law
enforcement officer, with all the powers, investigatory or otherwise, of a regular law
enforcement officer of the requesting party, as fully as though he were within the
territorial limits of the governmental entity where he is regularly employed, and his
qualifications, respectively, for office where regularly employed shall constitute his
qualifications for office within the territorial limits of the requesting party, and no
other oath, bond, or compensation need be made. Additionally, such law
enforcement officer shall have the same investigative authority as if he were
investigating criminal activity within the territorial limits of the governmental
entity where he is regularly employed.
x.
While acting pursuant to this Agreement, a law enforcement officer employed
by a party hereto may make arrests outside the territorial limits of the party by
whom he is regularly employed but within the territorial limits of the other party,
-4-
~
I·
ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
provided that the law enforcement agency of the other party is notified of such
arrest in the same manner as if said arrest were made by a member of the law
enforcement agency of that party.
XI.
Each party to this Agreement expressly waives the right granted by Article
999b, §5, Texas Revised Civil Statues Annotated, to request reimbursement for
services performed under this Agreement.
XII.
Any law enforcement officer or other person who is assigned, designated, or
ordered by the chief law enforcement officer of the party which regularly employs
him to perform police or peace officer duties pursuant to this Agreement shall
receive the same wage, salary, pension, and all other compensation and all other
rights for such service, including injury or death benefits, and worker's compensation
benefits, the same as though the service had been rendered within the limits of the
party where he is regularly employed. Moreover, all wage and disability payments,
including worker's compensation benefits, pension payments, damage to equipment
and clothing, medical expenses, and expenses of travel, food, and lodging, shall be
paid by the party which regularly employs such persons in the same manner as though
the service had been rendered within the limits of the party where he is regularly
employed.
XIII.
In the event that any person performing law enforcement services pursuant to
this Agreement shall be cited as a party to any civil lawsuit, state or federal, arising
out of the performance of those services, he shall be entitled to the same benefits
- 5 -
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
that he would be entitled to receive if such civil action had arisen out of the
performance of his duties as a member of the department where he is regularly
employed and in the jurisdiction of the party by which he is regularly employed.
XIV.
Each party to this Agreement expressly waives all claims against the other
party for compensation for any loss, damage, personal injury, or death occurring as a
consequence of the performance of this Agreement.
XV.
It is expressly understood and agreed that, in the execution of this Agreement,
no party waives, nor shall be deemed hereby to waive, any immunity or defense that
would otherwise be available to it against claims arising in the exercise of
governmental powers and functions.
XVI.
Each party to this Agreement agrees that if legal action is brought under this
Agreement, exclusive venue shall lie in the county in which the defendant party is
located, and if located in more than one county, in the county in which the principal
office of ,the defendant party is located.
XVII.
The validity of this Agreement and of any of its terms or provisions, as well as
the rights and duties of the parties hereunder, shall be governed by the laws of the
State of Texas.
- 6 -
.
I·
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
XVIII.
In case anyone or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall for
any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such
invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision thereof,
and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable
provision had never been contained herein.
XIX.
Any party to this Agreement may terminate this Agreement by giving thirty
(30) days written notice mailed by certified mail to the chief law enforcement
officer of the other party.
xx.
This Agreement shall become effective between the parties hereto on the day
after it is fully executed and shall continue in effect until it has been terminated
according to this Agreement.
XXI.
This Agreement may be amended or modified by the mutual agreement of the
parties hereto in writing to be attached to and incorporated into this Agreement.
XXII.
This instrument contains all commitments and agreements of the parties, and
oral or written commitments not contained herein shall have no force or effect to
alter any term or condition of this Agreement.
- 7 -
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
XXIII.
This Agreement shall be executed by the duly authorized officiaI(s) of the party
a copy of which is attached hereto.
as expressed in the approving resolution or order of the governing body of such party,
ATTEST:
ATTEST:
DA TED AND EFFECTIVE as of the
85-163
- 8 -
Executive Director
Dallas-Fort Worth
Interna tional Airport Board
Title:
day of
, 1985.
~
I
f
1
t
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4IIr ·
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Planning and Developing
Department:
6/23/86
Subject:
Council Meeting Date:
Estimates of Population for Trinity River Authority
Resolution No. Hó-2ó
Agenda Number: GN 86- 62
The City of North Richland Hills contracts with the Trinity River Authority for a
portion of the water supply for the City. This contract requires that we provide the
Trinity River Authority with current estimates of population and forecasts of the
expected number of customers to be serviced by the TRA facilities. Since the estimates
provided by the City are used by the TRA to plan its future construction and to
ascertain its system capacities, the TRA requires that the City Council place its
official approval on the estimates provided by enacting the accompanying Resolution.
The Council will note that the term of the estimates is through the year 2005. It is
the expectation of the Staff that the City will be fully developed at that time. The
estimate of the population and the number of customer connections is based on the TRA
Service Area being approximately 60% of the total City. The numbers provided correspond
to a full development population of 85,000 for the entire city.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the population estimates for the Trinity
River Authority Service Area by approving Resolution No. 86-26.
Finance Review
Source of Funds:
Bonds (GO/Rev.)
Operating Budget
eOt
I
Acct. Number
Sufficient Funds Available
R tILL~
I .
City Manager
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
. Finance Director
Page 1 of
1
· .
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
1//
I
I
Page 7
p & Z Minutes
June 12, 1986
(
(
Mietra Precht, daughter of Mr.
Shafipour, came forward. She stated
they wish this zoning change to have
more opportunity for more businesses.
Chairman Bowen asked where this
property was they wanted zoned.
Ms. Precht said they had thre tracts,
one a shopping center.
Chairman Bowen
the change.
Ms. Precht st ed they have a request
for a high ass pawn shop.
Mr. T
er asked why all three tracts.
· Precht said it was to get more use
of the property.
Chairman Bowen called for those
wishing to speak in opposition to this
request to please come forward.
There being no one wishing to speak,
the Chairman closed the Public
Hearing.
Mr. Tucker stated this property was
adjoining Industrial property to the
north and he could see no problem.
PZ 86-27
APPROVED
Mr. Tucker made the motion to approve
PZ 86-27. This motion was seconded by
Ms. Nash and the motion carried 4-1
with Mr. Schwinger voting against.
10. PROPOSED POPULATION FIGURES
Trinity River Authority Water System.
Ms. Flippo made the motion to approve
the Resolution setting forth the
proposed population figures. This
motion was seconded by Mr. Schwinger
and the motion carried 5-0.
I-
I
Reconsideration of an amendment to
Zoning Ordinance #1080, Section XX.
by the City Council
-_.- --~----
-
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
Ie
I
.~ .
Trinity River Authority of Texas
Northern Region Office
7002.101
February 21, 1986
Mr. Rodger Line
City Manager
City of North Richland Hills
P.O. Box 18609
North Richland Hills, Texas 76118
Dear Rodger:
SubJect: Trinity River Authority of Texas
Tarrant County Water Supply Project
Popu1ation Projection Data
The Authority is presently involved 1n continuing planning for future
expansions of the existing Tarrant County Water Supply Project. In order
to properly prepare planning documents, the Authority needs to obtain
accurate and current population projections from all Customer Cities.
Based upon previous information that we have received from the Customer
Cities and actual experienced demands on the System, we feel that it is
imperative that we obtain more current and accurate data. Without this in-
tormation it is difficult, if not impossible, to accurately plan for future
needs and expansion of the System.
In order to obtain this necessary and vital information, the Authority
requests all Contracting Customers ot the Tarrant County Water Supply
Project to initiate appropriate action in order to obtain accurate and
up-to-date population projections for the service area of the Tarrant
Count.y Water Supply Project. We urge all of the Cities to proceed as
quickly as possible with their own comprehensive demographic studies and
projections in order that we can have the best information available to
prepare our future planning.
Attached is a IIdraftll resolution that the Authority requests be prepared
and submittea to the Authority. With this information, the Authority can
provide better planning for future expansions of water supply facilities.
If you have any questions concerning this request, please contact me.
Sincerely,
ÁL(K
BILL R. SMITH, Manager
Water Resources Planning
/vtd
P.O. Box 240
Arlington, Texas 76010
(817) 467 -4223
~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
RESOLUTION NO. 86-26
A RESOLUTION FOR THE SOLUTION OF TRINTITY
RIVER AUTHORITY OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS TO
SUPPLY WATER NEEDS BASED ON CURRENT POPULATION,
RATE OF GROWTH AND FUTURE POPULATION SATURATION
OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS:
WHEREAS, the City of North Richland Hills working with assembled
census and demographic data studies and with concurrence of the Planning and
Zoning Commission as to existing and probable future land use area of the
City of North Richland Hills, Texas;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
North Rich1and Hills, Texas that:
The Trinity River Authority be requested to use the following
data in planning for the water supply for the City of North Richland Hills,
Texas.
NUMBER OF CUSTOMER
CONNECTIONS (FAMILY
OR BUSINESS UNITS)
EQUIVALENT
POPULATION
(INDIVIDUAL)
Experienced 1985
6000
19563
Projected 1990
8503
27635
Projected 1995
Projected 2000
Projected 2005
10987
35707
13470
43778
15954
51850
Assumed Future Saturated
Growth for Long Range
Planning
15954
51850
PASSED AND RESOLVED this
day of
, 1986
APPROVED:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Attorney
~
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Planning and Development
Department:
Council Meeting Date:
6/23/86
ubject:
Request of Derald Evans for Variance to Ordinance
1236 Section ~.Y (Brick urd1nance)
GN 86-63
Agenda Number:
Earlier this year the Code Enforcement Officer observed the construction of a
garage/workshop at 7009 Briley Drive. Investigation revealed that the owner, Derald
Evans, had undertaken this construction without benefit of a permit or any consultation
with the Building Inspection Office. Mr. Evans was informed that the construction could
not continue without his application for a building permit. When Mr. Evans contacted
the Building Official he was informed that the structure had to meet the current
Building Code which requires that all permanent structures on a residential lot must be
at least 75% brick or masonary on the first floor. He was also apprised of the variance
procedure which was available through the Building Code Board of Appeals. Mr. Evans
indicated that he wished to pursue his right of appeal regarding the masonary
requirement.
After several weeks passed without contact with the applicant regarding either the
building permit or appeal, a further investigation was made at the residence. The
investigation revealed that work was continuing on the garage. At that time Mr. Evans
was again informed that he was in violation. He responded by requesting and receiving a
permit to build a 16 foot by 24 foot garage. He was again informed that this
construction must be in compliance with the Ordinance.
When, after the passage of several more weeks, it was noted that no inspections were
requested on the permit a further investigation was made by the Building Inspection
Office. This inspection revealed that Mr. Evans had not only constructed the proposed
garage but had added a second story to the structure. At that point the Building
Official issued a formal "Stop Work Order" to be in effect until such time as Mr. Evans
had made his application for variance to the Building Code and had received his answer
at the hearing. The Building Code Board of Appeals considered the appeal at its meeting
June 10, 1986. The request for variance to Section 5.9 of the Ordinance requiring
masonary construction on the proposed garage was denied.
Mr. Evans is requesting that the City Council overturn the action of the Board of
Appeals and allow his variance to the requirements of the Building Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Building Code Board of Appeals denied the request for variance. The City Council
should consider the precedent-setting nature of allowing such a variance in this area of
the City.
Finance Review
Acct. Number
Sufficient Funds Available
Kf{/~
I City Manager
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
. Finance Director
Page 1 of
1
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I"
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
J
BUIL/J)N6
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
.
~E~~4LUU~ r~~11TS
PERMIT NO. Doe¡ q -v--- DATE~;-, \ -z. L¡ lì' lrÞ
TYPE OF PERMIT Q-þ ('9) ~ B v.::\ \~ r\;
OWNER ~(d. ~'<~IV-9- CONTRACTOR C~'€-r
ADDRESS -¡DO i ß('~f-e1 ~ ADDRESS· c..r~~
CITY & STATE ^-Jct¥\, ~~s CITY & STATE "5~~
I
PHONE NO. 4 î g--¡? I ~
JOB ADDRESS LCO Q c:r f)('~ ~ ~ Jr"r
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE DONE ~~i ~ -B~s. LU", -J. (0 V;:;¿4"
: -=
PHONE NO.
/~e
---.
ESTIMATED COST~ D D .. C2P
COMMENTS
=
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING IS CORRECT TO THE BEST OF }IT KNOWLEDGE
AND THAT THE SAID WORK WILL BE DO~E IN CONFOlU1ANCE tVITH THE INFORMATION
HEREIN SET FORTH AND IN COXPLI~VCE WITH THE CITY OF NORTH RICHL¡lliD HILLS
CODE REGL~ATING BUILDING CODES.
SIGNED~r) Qç;:(:~ ~
- -iNE- OR CONTRACTOR . - - - _
=-
APPROVED:
PER}lIT FEE: ft 'i3 00
=
DATE
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call
1. BBA 86-5
(
(
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CALLED MEETING
OF THE BUILDING CODE & ORDINANCE
COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND
HILLS, TX, JUNE 10, 1986.-7:00 P.M.
The meeting was called to order at
7:10 P.M. by acting Chairman Gerald
Stewart.
PRESENT:
Secretary
Members
Greg Wheeler
Orville Baker
John Larriviere
Gerald Stewart
ABSENT
Joe Coulson
Robert Skinner
Request of Derald Evans seeking a
variance from City Ordinance No.
1236 Section 5-9 which is the
masonary requirement of the build-
ing ordinance.
Gerald Stewart called forward the
representative for the building
at 7009 Briley Dr.
No representative came forward.
Gerald Stewart read the letter that
Derald Evans submitted requesting
the variance.
Orville Baker stated that he saw no
indication to the size of height of
the building that was there prè-
viously before the present build-
ing. He said that he did not see
any reson to change the Code for
a building that was larger than
200 square feet and two stories
high.
Gerald Stewart asked Greg Wheeler
to list the number of ordinances
Mr. Evans was in violation of prior
to applying for permit to continue
bUilding.
I
Page 2.
(
(
~
I
Greg Wheeler stated that Building
Ordinance No.1236 of the Uniform
Building Code is basically the
model code that has a few amend-
ments to it. He said that Mr. Evans
did not get a permit to start with
and has not had any inspections,
and did not want to conform to the
section 5-9 Amendment.The building
was larger than the 200 square feet
and taller than the 10 feet and is
therefore considered a permanent
building and is required to conform
to the brick ordinance.
I
I
I
I
Gerald Stewart asked that if Mr.
Evans file for a building permit
to conform to the code, could he
do it without tearing the building
down.
I
Greg Wheeler stated the Mr. Evans
may have built it properly, but
with no inspections he did not
know at this time. He said that
inspections of the building would
be required to make sure that it
has no violations. Mr. Evans was
told that there would be no inspec-
tions until the Board made its
decision to either make him conform
to the brick ordinance or let him
have siding.
I
.
I
I
Orville Baker made the motion to
deny the request of Derald Evans
for a variance from the brick
ordinance.
I
,I
I
I
I
f
I
John Larriviere seconded the
motion and the motion carried
3-0.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:20 P.M.
Chairman
Building Code and Ordinance Committee
Secretary
Building Code and Ordinance Committee
; ¡ J'r~rc.~.:
-
r- ~"\. ~r:1.:«'1'~~
(~.Æh~
~rct.l4 ~~,,~
(
Âf~\ \ -.::z.', ,'~~
I
I
I.____q - ~~rtc.:\~\--~I]\l~e~lg~--,~~~-~ .
L__. - - -~r(~, _1_c:..CÞt'~~Ç>f). --~-~~9fl~~--k~~~~~~ì___..___ ..
t---------H------- ______;~c-: --- +IQ ~~1-~d-e_'.) ___________
~--~~-:-:~~J~-- -. _:~:_~_~:~---~~~~~~_~~---~:~~ ~-~_~__~~~
rj~-:il-~--- I!---..-------~--------"'~---l\------ Q.; - -øc. ---, )- ------
--.......-.. -. -- "'-"""-""- t-.... k~_ - --- - -.~~\._\_ L~ - ----±-±kL-sJ--o-ttB=>h__~ \~~ ____.___ .
¡ ~ -;.;.;J
i i
I=:--~=~b~~n~le--;~~~~~ _~~_~~=~_
I- -,
.---.::------ ·---:-l¡~·-M~-._±~~;;~~~_~ * l~=; 1i~~__~~_.__=:_.
. 'i
--..----.-. --------- ----~...- --- -- - . --- - -- ---.--. ----..-- ---- o'
.---·..--H~~--e ..~P --~~\\-q~r-~~l~-~ty-~q~~--. _______._______.
.. 1
..-------
---.-. -..- '-'-'--...---.. ..-_.~ 4 --.--.-. ---..-.-.--.-.. .-,,_ _ ___.___._ ___._____
-
L iî (' '(.~..cJ l
..---- -'-- -·-----·-4('~\.~~c. N~ --l:\-~~__\.._~__~~.~~~~ ' ~_-'-~__~Ift ~_________ _
I-------------------+J -.. ..---.--- ------------.. _ . ----------- .
--- ---.--. -----~Ll Q-<:.ctf~ N ..- ~-~-!?~\à.J.\._\~__ ~_ ~ctc_1~~~_~_~_____________
i ¡
-1--------·· .------------ ·4·--------..-----------.- . -- .-.---------__ .. _ ______:._________ _______
----- ---------Jl ~.h",,<-. ---ÌY\.e.sº·~~~-~_J~__tCL_~S ~--=rHl._~i J t~,c~<r~(
I ¡ ! J
... i !
- --. -. -.. ------- ---t-+---- --.-. -_ __.__ __ __ _.__. __ __.___.._____. .. __ .
J------ -..------~~4~~-e{)-~:1.~~-.~~$-~'f.~ ~-~~~J.~~b.'C--l--~r
¡ I
----.----------- 4---________________.________ ___ ___.______.__
1---....----lf~c;.~~'1J-- Ih~-~~~il~~3-~~ ~-J~~-4'4k-------_
-------- -------._.-:-~._-------- --- ~ ---------- , ,
I --!
·i-~~1~-~--~~· - '-_ _ -
II
~---""--'.". ...-
~..._~ --.. .-..-....- -- "'-.-
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
City .f Xrth Richlan4 Hills, Texas
~ ~--- /:.
/~ ---
--- /""
-----
May 2', 19"
Dera1d Evans
7009 Briley Drive
North Richland Hills, Tx 76118
Re: Stor~ge ~u!~~ing
Dear Mr. Briley:
------------
.. This is a Stop Work Order for construction on the storage building
located at the rear of 7009 Briley Drive.
You have not received any inspections on this structure. Your
application indicates a one story building and you actually have a two
story bUilding.
You were asked to stop construction until a hearing was held on Section
5-9 of Ordinance 1236 which is the Bricking Requirement of the City. You
failed to have a request for variance into the Building Department when
requested in time for the May 13 Building Board of Abatement meetin~
The request will be heard at the next Board meeting June 10 at 7:00~
If any work is done on this structure while this Stop Work Order is in
effect, citations will be issued.
'4! ;
In reference to the missed inspection of the foundation, you are required __
to have, at your expense, a testing lab come out and take core samples--
for the City to inspect. You are required to dig to the bottom of one-
footing for inspection. If anything else that is required to be-
inspected and is found to be covered, you will expose it for inspection-
by the Building Department.
If yeu have any questions regarding this matter, yeu may come by er phene
me.
cc: Richard Royston
L.:..,,,_.:...~......~~;.¿~:~71_:'~_~-:~~7~01 N.E. LOOP 820/P.O. BOX 18609/NORTH RICHLAND HILL~~~X 76118
:ß:~
.=;;;,' .
~
~. u_
I . 'I ~ ~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
(
(
BBA 86-5 REQUEST OF DERALD EVANS FOR A VARIANCE OF SECTION
5-9 OF CITY ORDINANCE NO. 1236 (BRICK REQUIREMENT)
I recommend that YOU deny Mr. Evans request not to
have to adhere to the bUilding ordinance section
requiring the 75% brick.
REASON: Mr. Evans has not wanted to abide by any of
the city ordinances or bUilding codes of the City.
First, he didn't get a permit for his bUilding;
Second, when he did make application he didn't put
down that it was to be two story in height; and
Third, he has had no inspections on the structure
as of yet.
Enclosed is the request by Mr. Evans for his
variance and just because the structure was there
for a long time does not mean he can tear it down
and replace it with something else without regard
to city ordinances and codes.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
'!
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Department:
Administration
_ Council Meeting Date: 6/23/86
GN 86-64
Agenda Number:
Subject:
Appointment of a Charter Commission
Resolution No. Bó-21
I
I
I
The schedule agreed upon at the recent workshop called for appointment of a Charter
Commission at the last meeting in June, 1986. The latest information available to the
staff is that each Council Member will submit two names for appointment and that Mr. Jim
Kenna will be a concensus appointment by all members of the Council.
Recommendation:
Appoint members to the Charter Commission and approve Resolution No. 86-27.
Finance Review
Acct. Number
Sufficient Funds Available
Department Head Signature
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
, Finance Director
Page 10f 1
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
RESOLUTION NO. 86-27
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of North Richland
Hills, Texas, that:
1.
The persons named in this resolution are hereby appointed to a
Commission to review and suggest changes to the City Charter.
2.
The Commission shall report back to the City Council by March 15,
1987 with proposed changes to the Charter if it finds that changes are
needed.
3.
The following persons are appointed to said Commission:
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
Resolution No. 86-27
Page 2
4.
The Commission shall appoint its Chairman and Secretary and shall
conduct such hearings as it may deem advisable. The Commission is
empowered to adopt its o~m rules of procedure.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 23rd day of June, 1986.
Dan Echols, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jeanette Rewis, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
Rex McEntire, Attorney
I
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Department:
Personnel
Council Meeting Date: 6/23/86
SUbject: Proposed Salary Range for Asst. Director of Public Works Agenda Number: GN 86-65
Position
At the pre-council meeting on June 9, the City Council agreed to the proposal that
our Asst. Director of Public Works be a registered engineer. Since an engineering
requirement is an additional professional qualification for this position, it was
agreed upon that the current annual salary range of $26,171 - 37,668 should be
increased to $38,000 - 45.000. Formal action by the Council is required to amend
the current salary range for this position.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council amend the annual salary range for the Assistant
Director of Public Works position from$26.171 - 37,668 to $38,000 _ 45,000.
Finance Review
Source of Funds:
Bonds (GO/Rev.)
Operating Budget ~
_ Other _
., ~~..
Department HeQš¡gnature
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
Acct. Number 01-60-01-1010
SUff¡C~ Funds Available
-Ke~ /í1~
- IC¿t¿~
City Manager
. Finance Director
Page 1 of
1
I
~
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Personnel
Council Meeting Date: 6/23/86
Agenda Number: GN 86-66
Municipal Liability Insurance
We bid our General Liability Insurance for a June 23 renewal and received two bids.
The bids are from the Florida Insurance Exchange and were submitted by Alexander and
Alexander. Both bids, neither of which we recommend, are for $300,000 limits (which
is inadequate) at premiums of $61,395 and $53.387 (which are too costly). The bids
differed in that one offer~d less coverage than the other. Each includes a $25,000
deductible. The unavailability of adequate liability insurance at affordable premiums
has prompted our proposal that the City Council consider self-insuring the City for
all of our municipal liability coverages. At a council/staff workshop on June 16,
it was the consensus that the self-insuring of our municipal liability insurance
should be implemented.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions to implement a
self-insured municipal liability plan.
(1) To reject the General Liability insurance bids received from the Florida
Insurance Exchange for June 23, 1986 renewal.
(2) To approve self-insuring the City for General Liability effective June 23,
1986.
(3) To approve self-insuring the City for Auto. Police. Public Officials and
Paramedic liabilities upon the expiration or cancellation of our current
policies.
(4) To reserve $600,000 of the General Fund Unrestricted Reserves and $600,000
of the Utility Retained Earnings to fund the self-insured program.
(5) To increase our self-insurance reserves, in each subsequent fiscal year
every effort will be made to budget an amount equal to what our annual
premiums would otherwise have been.
Finance Review
Acct. Number See Recommendation 114.
SUff~~undS Available
/ll1Z~ ~
jf: 11 ~
City Manager
. Finance Director
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
Page 1 of
1
I
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Purchasing
Ratification of the Purchase for one 198ó
1 Ton Hi-Cube Van.
Council Meeting Date:
Agenda Number: PU 86-18
6-23-86
On June 5, 1986 Council approved the emergency purchase of (1) one 1986 1 Ton Hi-Cube
Van for utilization by City Cable.
This purchase has been consummated in the amount of $14,620. City Cable has already
taken delivery of the van.
I
I
I
I
Recommendation:
It is recommended that Council ratify purchase of one Hi-Cube Van from
Jack Williams Chevrolet in the amount of $14,620, and the transfer
of $14,620 from Budget Reserve for contingency to 01-50-05-6600.
Finance Review
Source of Funds:
Bonds (GO/Rev.)
operating~/ B get
Ot. . ~ _I
W~
Department Head Signature
, Finance Director
I
OUNCIL ACTION ITEM
...
Paqe 1 of
1
I
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Source of Funds:
Bonds (GO/Rev.)
Operating Budget -L
_Othe~ . _.
J ture
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
,
I
Personnel
Council Meeting Date: 6/23/86
Agenda Number: PU 86-19
Renewal of Property Insurance
We bid our Property Insurance for a June 23 renewal and received the following bids.
Bidder
Annual Premium
Deductible
Home Insurance Co.
Home Insurance Co.
North Brook Ins. Co.
$10,000
12,335
20,809
$3,000 per occurrence
1,000 per occurrence
1,000 per occurrence
Because of the high premium bid of North Brook Insurance Company they were eliminated
from further consideration. Of the two Home Insurance Company's bids, it has been
determined that their bid of $12.335 with a $1.000 deductible is more acceptable than
their lower premium of $10.000 with a higher deductible of $3,000.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the Home Insurance Company's bid of
$12,335 for our Property Insurance to be effective June 23, 1986.
Finance Review
Acct. Number 01-99-01-4550
SUff~undS Available
, Finance Director
Page 1 of
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
Utility
ubject: Parita1 Pay Estimate 116 and Final, in the Amount of
$50,074.57 to Mid-States Utilities Inc., for the
Cardinal Lane Water System Extensions
Council Meeting Date: 6-23-86
Agenda Number: PAY 86-19
This job also included the Glenann water line replacement. The job is
now 100% complete and the contract time allowance was exceeded by 22
days. Liquidated damages in the amount of $6,600 have been assessed.
Funding Source:
The following budgets were appropriated for Cardinal Lane listed as follows:
Budget Actual Increase (Decrease)
Engineering $46,000 $47,151.25 $ 1,151.25
Construction $448,000 $451,061.14 $ 3,061.14
Additional Funding $ 4,212.39
Required
Recommendation:
The staff recommends approval of payment in the amount of $50,074.57
to Mid-States Utilities Inc. and appropriation of an additional $4,212.39
to Cardinal Lane Projects from Unspecified Projects account 02-09-99-6700
to engineering and construction as listed above.
Finance Review
---ReY
...
""'\! l
;' ~-,/ ./ /
II~ { L'_{ ~- ' r
Department Head S'ignature
CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM
. Finance Director
~
City Manager
Page 1 of 1
I.
Ie'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
KNOWl TON-E NGlISH-FlOWERS, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS I Fort Worth- Dallas
~
June 12, 1986
Honorab 1 e t~ayor and C; ty Coun c;1
City of North Richland Hills
7301 N. E. Loop 820
North R;chland Hills, Texas 76118
Re: 3-548, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
CARDINAL LANE l.JATER SYSTEM EXTENSIONS
CONTR. PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE Nû. 6 & FINAL
Enclosed is one copy of Contractor's Partial Estimate 1\0. 6 & Final, dated
June 5, 1986, made payable to r~id-State -Utilities Inc., in the amount of
$50,074.57, for materials furnished and work performed on the referenced
proj ect as of May 23, 1986.
The quantities and condition of the project have been verifiro on-site by
your representative, Larry Jones, as indicated by signature' on the
original submittal, and we have checked the item extensions and additions.
This project includes construction of a 16-inch major water transmission
and distribution main frOOl SmithfieldRoad at Davis Blvd. along Cardinal
Lane and Proundson Road to Simmons Road. This project also includes water
line re.placements in the Glenann Addition.
The total Contractor earnings for this project based on as-built
quantities and contract unit prices, including extra work ordered in the
field, totals $451,061.44. The total project cost including engineering
is under the project budget of $523,672 for Account No. 02-09-16-0000. A
Project Status Report is attached which accounts for as-built versus
estimated quantities of construction.
The contractor was 22 days over the scheduled completion time and is
therefore assessed $6,600.pO in liquidated damages. The $6,600.00 is
deducted from pay item no. 35 and has already been accounted for, (see
attached 1 etter fran Mid-State dated June 2, 1986).
In accordance with Section 3.2.11(a) of the Contract Documents, the two
(2) year term of maintenance will begin on this date, and therefore, will
terminate on June 12, 1988. The maintenance obligation includes repair of
Continued next page ....
1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD,TEXAS 76021 . 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367
I·
Ie'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
June 12, 1986
Cardinal Lane Final Estimate
Page
2
all water line leaks and malfunctions of all valves, fire hydrants, and
other equipment furnished and installed under this Contract.
We recommend that this final payment, in the amount of $50,074.57, be made
to Mid-State Utilities Inc., P.O. Box 1160, Waco, Texas 76073.
We will be present at the next Council Meeting to answer any questions you
may have concerning this project.
W' ~
' \.:
P. E.
RWA: bvg
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager
'-7;.0 r~r. Gene R iddl e, Oi rec tor of Pub 1 i c . War k s
/ ~1r. Larry Jones, Utilities Inspector
Mr. Lee Maness, Director of Finance
Mid-State ut i1 ities Inc.