Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 1997-11-13 Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICH LAND HILLS, TEXAS NOVEMBER 13, 1997 - 7:30 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman David Barfield at 7:30 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL PRESENT Chairman David Barfield Richard Davis Don Bowen Mark Wood Ted Nehring Don Ferguson ABSENT Paul Miller CITY STAFF Planning Director Recording Secretary Planner Assistant City Manager Ass't Director of PW Staff Engineer Barry LeBaron Valerie Taylor Christopher Baker Randy Shiflet Kevin Miller Julia Skare 3. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 21, 1997 APPROVED Mr. Wood made the motion to approve the minutes of the October 21 1997 meeting. Mr. Bowen seconded the motion and it carried 6 - o. Page 1 4. PS 97-26 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF KINGSGA TE CORPORATION FOR A REPLA T TO BE KNOWN AS LOTS 1 - 12, BLOCK 5, LOTS 1 - 9, BLOCK 3 AND LOTS 1 - 7, BLOCK 4 OF THE CULP ADDITION. (LOCATED IN THE 8200 BLOCK OF ODELL STREET TABLED Mr. LeBaron explained that this 4.5 acre tract of land is being replatted into 28 single family lots. This development was originally started in the 1980's and some public improvements currently exist however, development was never completed. Mr. LeBaron stated that one of the major issues associated with this replat is drainage. DART has indicated that they will not take any more drainage on there property which is to the south. Chairman Barfield opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward. Mr. Vernon Smith, Jr., owner and developer, presented this case. He stated the only unresolved issue is the drainage issue with DART and explained that if the Commissioners needed to table this item until a resolution has been obtained, he would certainly understand. He explained that DART's property already handles this drainage, but they are not willing to write the required Letter of Permission officially accepting this runoff. Discussion ensued regarding the drainage of this property. Kevin Miller, Assistant Director of Public Works explained that it wasn't until after this item had been placed on the agenda that DART's unexpected response was received, so alternate drainage methods have not been studied. Mr. Davis stated the Deed Restrictions regarding the tree issue need to be indicated on the plat. Chairman Barfield called for any additional proponents. Seeing none, he called for any opponents. Seeing none, the pubic hearing was closed. Mr. Davis made the motion to table PS 97-26, to allow the applicant time to get approval from DART or come up with an alternate plan for drainage. Mr. Ferguson seconded the motion and it carried 6 - O. Messrs. Barfield, Davis, Bowen, Wood, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this motion. Page 2 5. PS 97-41 REQUEST OF COOK CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 1, SILVERADO ADDITION. (LOCATED IN THE 8300 BLOCK OF HARWOOD ROAD) APPROVED Mr. LeBaron explained that this is a 27.7 acre tract that carries a Planned Development zoning, which allows multi-family dwellings. The eastern half of this property will be developed first. At the time of zoning this property the Commissioners requested that a traffic study been conducted and presented with the Preliminary Platting of this property. This study indicated that striping of Grapevine Highway and Harwood Road would need to be performed. Additionally, the study indicated that the "exit only" out of this site be gated as such to allow for only exiting traffic - no entering traffic should be able to go in it. Some additional issues exist which are detailed in the Commissioners cover sheets and the applicant is present for any questions they might have. Mr. Barry Knight presented this request. He stated that the screening wall along Harwood Road will be indicated on the building plans as it was shown on the approved site plan for the PD. Responding to a question, Mr. Knight stated he would bring a detailed site plan of the common entrance of this property at the Final Plat. Mr. Jack Cook, Cook Consultants, explained that it was not their intention to put a masonry fence along the southwest property line. They intended to use this area for landscaping. Mr. Davis stated that the Detailed Recreation Area Plan is not reflective of the approved site plan for the PD. Mr. Knight explained there has been extensive discussion regarding the issue of the concrete channel. He explained that his hydraulic engineer believes that the water velocity through this channel will be low because of the upstream flow. He stated that city staff concurred with this. He believes this development's effect on the floodplain will be minimal and believes a concrete channel is not necessary. Additionally, federal approval is required for concrete channelization when 500' or more of streambed is involved. Mr. Knight stated they are requesting a waiver of the concrete channel. Mr. Jim O'Brian, stated that no jurisdictional determination has been requested for determination of isolated wetlands. In his opinion it is not a "wetland," however, stringent guidelines have recently gone into effect. Mr. O'Brian Page 3 explained these regulations in detail stating that the TNRCC can be a big hold up due to their extremely strict requirements. Mr. Wood stated the Subdivision Regulations do not "require" a concrete channel, it is an option. He explained if their plan sufficiently handles drainage, this does not have to be an issue. Mr. Davis stated that should a waiver of the concrete channel occur, he would like to see a Maintenance Agreement in place to avoid confusion later as to whose responsibility the maintenance belongs to. Mr. Davis made the motion to approve PS 97-41 subject to: engineers comments, allow the waiver of the concrete channel, require street lights, an exhibit showing the traffic flow patterns on Harwood Road and the main entrance that is being shared with the property to the west be presented at the time of final platting, that the amendments on the Recreation Area Plan be reflective of the approved PD - which should show the required wrought iron fence, and a proposed maintenance plan be presented at the final platting stage. Mr. Wood seconded the motion and it carried 6 - O. Messrs. Barfield, Davis, Bowen, Wood, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this item. 6. PS 97-48 REQUEST OF DOUGLAS JENNINGS & BILLY GRAHAM FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 1, HIGHTOWER PLAZA ADDITION. (LOCATED IN THE 7000 BLOCK OF RUFE SNOW DRIVE) APPROVED Mr. LeBaron explained that this 5.5 acre tract is zoned C-1 Commercial. It is being divided into 3 lots and the water and sewer lines are the only issues associated with this plat. Mr. Rod Eckren presented this request. He explained that they are proposing a looping of the system with the existing 8" water line along Hightower Drive. Much discussion ensued regarding the water line and looping of the water system. Mr. Wood made the motion to approve PS 97-48 subject to the engineer's comments, and with the alignment of the water line along the east side of the Blockbuster lot with a stub out at the southeast property line and running it back north to Hightower Drive. Page 4 Mr. Bowen seconded the motion and it carried 6 - O. Messrs. Barfield, Davis, Bowen, Wood, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this motion. 7. PS 97-50 REQUEST OF STEVEN HESTER, ROB MCCAULEY & VICKI THORNTON FOR A REPLA T TO BE KNOWN AS LOTS 3R1 - 3R3, BLOCK 2, WALKER BRANCH ADDITION. (LOCATED IN THE 8700 BLOCK OF GRAPEVINE HIGHWA Y) APPROVED Mr. Wood stated that due to a conflict of interest he would be abstaining from the discussion and voting of this item. Mr. LeBaron explained that this 18 acre tract is being divided into 3 lots. Lot 3R2 is zoned C-2 and is the future sight of the Weinersnitzel. The other two lots are zoned OC Outdoor Commercial. Mr. LeBaron stated that the applicant is requesting a waiver of the 30' drainage easement. Mr. Jim Bell presented this request. He explained they are requesting a waiver of the drainage easement along the southwest property line and the required sidewalks will be constructed when building permits are issued. Mr. Bowen made the motion to approve PS 97-50, waiving the 30' drainage easement along the west property line and subject to all other engineering comments. Mr. Nehring seconded the motion and it carried 5 - O. Messrs. Barfield, Davis, Bowen, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this motion, Mr. Wood abstained. 8. PS 97-52 REQUEST OF BARFIELD DICKINSON JOINT VENTURE FOR A FINAL PLAT OF LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 1, NOB HILL CENTRE ADDITION (LOCATED IN THE 6600 BLOCK OF PRECINCT LINE ROAD) APPROVED Chairman Barfield stated that since he owns this property, he would be abstaining from the discussion and voting of this item. Mr. LeBaron explained that this final plat involves 2 lots and the front lot is the future site of a Dairy Queen. Page 5 Mr. Doug Long presented this request. He explained that a drainage plan has been prepared for Lot 1 but not for Lot 2 since no plans currently exist for this lot. They have agreed to most of the engineer's comments. The radius of the drive approach on Precinct Line Road is not indicated on the plat because he believes that Dairy Queen should address that issue with their building plans. He explained that the drainage of Lot 2 remains undetermined at this time but they do have a Letter of Commitment from adjoining lot owners. Currently there are hay bails at the back of lot 2, which are maintaining sheet flow to the west and south; this was approved by Greg Dickens. Responding to a question, Mr. Long explained that they are only platting Lot 2 at this time in order to guarantee Dairy Queen looped access to Martin Drive. There is a 4 way reciprocal agreement for alternate access from Precinct Line Road. Mr. Long stated that no Letter of Agreement from adjacent property owners has been obtained. They have permission for an underground system from the south property owners but no permission for surface water. Mr. Long is not sure when this can be obtained and a note can be placed on the plat indicating that no development on Lot 2 will commence until this issue is resolved. Mr. Wood made the motion to approve PS 97-52 subject to engineer's comments, requiring the street lights, and requiring a note placed on the plat that no development will take place until such time that the drainage and utility issues are approved by public works regarding access and easements in place down to Martin Drive to the south. Mr. Ferguson seconded the motion and it carried 5 - O. Messrs. Davis, Bowen, Wood, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this motion, Mr. Barfield abstained. 9. PZ 97-42 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF KARL STAUSS TO REZONE BLOCK 11, SNOW HEIGHTS NORTH ADDITION FROM R-7 MUL TI- FAMILY TO C-1 COMMERCIAL. (LOCATED IN THE 6900 BLOCK OF DICK LEWIS DRIVE) ORDINANCE NO. 2253 APPROVED Chairman Barfield asked Mr. LeBaron to explain the rezoning request. Mr. LeBaron stated that this was 9.4 acres of land currently zoned for multi-family dwellings and the applicant had requested the property be rezoned to C-1 Commercial. He stated the property was undeveloped at this time. Chairman Page 6 Barfield opened the public hearing and asked those speaking in favor of the request to come forward. Mr. Karl Stauss came forward and stated he represented Spain Properties the owners of the site. Mr. Stauss stated he had visited with city staff about zoning options and felt that the Office District did not provide sufficient flexibility to meet their medical retail sales needs. The applicant proposed to develop the property into six lots with retail uses on the west side and office uses on the east side. They felt that they needed the broader range of uses allowed in the C-1 Commercial District. Mr. Barfield stated that due to the length of the meeting the Commission would take a five minute break. After the break, Mr. Barfield asked if there were others wanting to speak on this rezoning request. Mr. Harold Karner who lives on Meadow Oak spoke in favor of the proposed rezoning request because he felt it would be so much better than apartments at this location. He felt that the traffic generated by an apartment project would clash with all the high school traffic. Mr. Karner stated he had seen a development plan of the property and was happy with what was being proposed. Mr. Bowen told Mr. Karner that while he may have seen a development concept plan prepared by the developer no plan was being presented with the rezoning request and the approval of his rezoning request is not tied to any particular site plan and wanted Mr. Karner to understand that. Mr. Barfield asked if there was anyone interested in speaking against this rezoning request. There being none, the public hearing was closed and Mr. Barfield asked for discussion and a vote. Mr. Wood stated that the applicant's request for medical office could all be done under the 0-1 Office District classification. Mr. Wood stated that even a lot of retail uses are allowed in the 0- 1 District. Mr. Wood stated that there were a lot of uses allowed in the C-1 Commercial District that he didn't feel would be appropriate at this location because of the adjacent residential uses. Mr. Wood stated he would prefer changing the rezoning request to an 0-1 Office District request which is a more restrictive zoning than the C-1 Commercial and changing the request to a more restrictive zoning classification would not require additional notification. He stated that the Commission could consider changing the applicant's request if it was a more restrictive request. Mr. Barfield asked the applicant to return to the podium and respond to the 0-1 consideration. Mr. Stauss stated he would have to defer his response to allow him a little more detailed discussion with the Commission. He felt that he needed the C-1 District to meet the full list of contemplated uses proposed in his development. Mr. Stauss stated would be agreeable to a concept which might delete certain uses from the zone which are deemed a problem. Mr. Wood stated that we could not "cherry pick" the uses from each district. Mr. Wood stated the if a district is approved, you got all allowed uses in that particular zone. Mr. Stauss stated he would be willing to control the allowed uses with deed restrictions. Mr. Barfield stated that the city has allowed Special Use Permits for certain uses. Mr. Davis stated he had a Page 7 problem rezoning the tract to C-1 Commercial. He stated that the property could be rezoned to a Planned Development if the developer had a concept and wanted a mixed use development. Mr. Barfield stated he felt the C-1 District was just too broad for this location. Mr. Davis asked the applicant if they would consider changing the request to 0-1 Office. Mr. Stauss stated he would like a slight recess to discuss this option with his client. Mr. Barfield stated they would recess this item and come back to it at the end of the meeting. Mr. Barfield closed the public hearing and stated they would continue with the rest of the agenda items and come back for action on this item at the end of the meeting. After the Commission had completed action on all other agenda items, the Commission continued with discussion on PZ 97-42. Mr. Davis asked Mr. Stauss if he would consider 0-1 zoning for his property. Mr. Stauss responded by stating he was concerned about obtaining special use permits in the Office District for some of the uses he proposes because the zoning regulations don't allow special use permits for items such as computer sales. Mr. Wood stated that special use permits are only allowed in those districts where the ordinance indicates the use as permitted. Mr. Wood stated that the property in question is not an appropriate retail location. Mr. Davis said that possibly the corner near the car wash might be appropriate for retail use. Mr. Barfield stated that there was nothing that would prevent the applicant from coming back later on and asking for a particular special use permit. Mr. Stauss stated that he would agree to amend his rezoning request to the 0-1 District and might come back later on with a commercial rezoning on a particular site. Mr. Davis encouraged the applicant to not come back with a hodge-podge arrangement for future rezoning. Mr. Davis proposed a motion to approve PZ 97-42 at the request of the applicant that the rezoning be amended to 0-1 Office. Motion was seconded by Mr. Wood and the motion carried 6-0. Messrs. Barfield, Davis, Bowen, Wood, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this motion. 10. PZ 97-43 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDING THE ZONING REGULATIONS TO REGULATE THE PLACEMENT OF AUTO SHADE COVERS FOR AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIPS. ORDINANCE NO. 2247 DENIED Mr. LeBaron explained that several months ago the city manager's office had requested that staff develop an ordinance to help regulate Auto Shade Covers. This came after one of the local dealerships applied for a permit for these shade covers and was denied because they crossed the front building line. Page 8 Mr. LeBaron explained that this proposed ordinance allowed for solid, subdued colors only, that consideration be considered for fire lanes and other safety issues and that no advertising, signs or logos be allowed on these canopies. A sample of material was distributed for the Commissioners to review. Chairman Barfield opened the public hearing and called for any proponents. Mr. Bowen stated that should this item be approved, he believes a maximum height limit should be enforced. He has seen a shade cover in Arlington that he believes is too large and wants to ensure that size would not be allowed. At the same time Mr. Bowen stated that he wasn't sure how you would actually determine the maximum height it should be. Mr. Randy Shiflet, Assistant City Manager, explained that they had given this directive after local dealerships complained that current regulations do not allow for this type structure. He explained that the dealerships are having a hard time with insurance due to the extremes of the North Texas weather. Mr. Shiflet believes that given some time, further research could be conducted to help in a maximum height determination. Seeing no additional proponents, Chairman Barfield called for any opponents. Seeing none he closed the public hearing. It was the general consensus of the Commissioners that this was not a direction they wanted the city to take. Mr. Davis believes these shade covers are unsightly and that if the dealerships want to protect their stock from the elements of the weather they should build a structure that meets city requirements. Mr. Davis made the motion to deny PZ 97-43. Mr. Wood seconded the motion and it carried 5 - 1 with Messrs. Barfield, Davis, Wood, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this motion, Mr. Bowen was opposed to this motion. Page 9 11. PZ 97-44 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF JOE DORRIS FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN HV AC CONTRACTORS OFFICE WITH SHOP AND GARAGE ON A PORTION OF LOT 1 R, BLOCK 33, COLLEGE HILLS ADDITION. (LOCATED AT 5949 ROSS ROAD) ORDINANCE NO. 2254 APPROVED Mr. LeBaron explained that Ross Road was originally abandoned and given to the adjacent property owner, which became a part of the plat when this property was platted last year. In order to retain some type of access to the adjacent properties an Access Easement was retained across this property. Mr. LeBaron also explained that an $8,000 sewer assessment remains against this property and it will need to be paid prior to City Council hearing this item. Chairman Barfield opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward. Mr. Joe Dorris, Texas Building Systems presented this request. He explained this is the future site of A-Arctic Air and would answer any questions the Commissioners might have. Responding to a question, Mr. Dorris explained that this is platted as 1 lot, but is divided into 2 parcels. The west parcel will be developed and the east parcel will remain undeveloped for the time being. Ross Road will be removed from the plat and will be constructed as a driveway. Additionally Mr. Dorris explained that the public access easement would be improved with development. Chairman Barfield called for any additional proponents. Seeing none he called for any opponents. Seeing none the public hearing was closed. Mr. Bowen made the motion to approve PZ 97-44 requiring that the $8,000.00 sewer assessment be paid prior to City Council hearing this item, that the public easement commonly called Ross Road be brought up to city standards and that the access to Davis Boulevard be redesigned to meet city standards, that the site plan be amended to show grading on the entire lot, and that Ross Road is deleted from the plat. Mr. Wood seconded the motion and it carried 6 - o. Messrs. Barfield, Davis, Bowen, Wood, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this motion. Page 10 12. PZ 97-45 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF JIM BROWN FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN HV AC CONTRACTORS OFFICE WITH SHOP AND GARAGE ON LOT 14, BLOCK 3, J.L. AUTREY ADDITION. (LOCATED AT 4019 RUFE SNOW DRIVE) ORDINANCE NO. 2255 APPROVED Mr. LeBaron explained that this property owner has 2 lots; an existing building sits on one of these and he proposes to build a new facility on the other. Mr. LeBaron stated that access to an overhead door, which is indicated on the site plan could be a potential problem if the 2nd portion of this lot is sold. Chairman Barfield opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward. Mr. Robert Stuckey presented this request. He explained that should Lot 14 sell, the overhead door would be used as ventilation purposes. Chairman Barfield called for any additional proponents. Seeing none, he called for any opponents. Seeing none the public hearing was closed. Mr. Wood made the motion to approve PZ 97-45. Mr. Ferguson seconded the motion and it carried 6 - O. Messrs. Barfield, Davis, Bowen, Wood, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this motion. 13. PZ 97-46 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDING THE NRH MASTER PLAN WITHIN THE MID-CITIES OVERLAY ZONE. ORDINANCE NO. 2256 APPROVED Mr. Barfield stated that a letter had been received from Bill Souder asking that all his property on Mid-Cities Blvd. be included as commercial in the future land use plan rather than show his property as having two different land use characteristics. Mr. Barfield then asked Mr. LeBaron to explain the Mid-Cities Corridor Study. Mr. LeBaron explained that the City Council had adopted a new master plan in 1992, which covered the entire city. Mr. LeBaron explained that in Texas, zoning laws require cities to zone property in accordance with a master plan. The master plan represents the best crystal ball as to what the city will look like in the Page 11 future. The current master plan has worked fine for a number of years but as Mid-Cities Blvd. and Precinct Line Rd. was completed the city was faced with a number of rezoning requests which indicated that the master plan was in need of updating. However, since funds were not available to update the entire city master plan, only the area along Mid-Cities Blvd. and Precinct Line Rd. was included in the recent study for updating. The Mid-Cities Corridor Study was completed by Municipal Planning Resources Group and generally contains recommendations in three major areas, (1) revise the future land use in the Mid- Cities Overlay Zone area, (2) adopt landscaping enhancements in this area, and (3) consider architectural design criteria within the overlay zone. Mr. LeBaron stated that tonight's consideration only looked at revising the future land use within the overlay zone. He stated that landscaping and architectural design would be considered at a future meeting, hopefully next month. The land use component of the study pointed out that the current zoning of many properties is not consistent with the proposed land use plan for the area. The study also suggested that (1) no future rezoning to industrial be approved within the overlay zone, (2) consideration be given to initiate rezoning within the overlay zone so that consistency with the future land use plan can be assured, and (3) consideration be given to revise the permitted use table within the overlay zone to delete uses not considered compatible with quality development. Mr. LeBaron stated that notices of this public hearing were sent over 200 property owners within the overlay zone advising them of the proposed master plan amendment. Mr. LeBaron stated that approval of the master plan amendment doesn't change anyone's current zoning and doesn't prevent the city from making subsequent amendments in the future. Mr. Barfield asked if a stipulation could be placed on the overlay zone so that future rezoning requests could only be considered as a planned development. Mr. LeBaron stated that there is nothing illegal about a city rezoning its entire city as a planned development. Mr. LeBaron stated that some cities have gotten carried away in the past with the planned development concept and lost sight of the compatibility issues. Those cities have since returned to the traditional zoning district concept as being the most appropriate method of establishing compatible land uses. Mr. Barfield stated that until landscaping regulations and architectural design criteria are established the city still has limited control over what occurs in the overlay zone. Mr. Davis asked about the possibility of establishing site plan review requirements on commercial development. Mr. Davis explained that with site plan approval on all new commercial projects the city would be in a better position to get quality development. Mr. LeBaron stated that if the city adopted site plan review, then some form of criteria needs to be developed to avoid being arbitrary. Mr. Davis continued discussion about establishing site plan review requirements for commercial projects in the overlay zone. Mr. Wood expressed Page 12 concerns over requiring all future projects in the overlay zone to be submitted as planned developments because it would in effect is taking away everybody's zoning rights currently guaranteed under existing regulations. Mr. Barfield then opened the hearing up to comments from interested citizens. Mr. Owen Long spoke by stating he had property at Holiday Lane and Mid-Cities Blvd. and was bitterly opposed to labeling all properties as planned developments and establishing architectural controls. He stated he didn't like someone telling him how buildings on his property were going to look. He favored a variety of building styles. He opposed additional landscaping requirements because it took away property that could be used for parking and buildings. Mr. Barfield stated that the property in this area is the last chance this city had of establishing good quality development. Mr. Glen Willis, Arthur St. asked when the land use plan would go into effect? He stated that he had a friend that had a piece of property that his house was zoned residential and his adjacent vacant lot was zoned agriculture and wanted to know if his friend could build a barn. He wanted to know if it was going to change what people could do with their property. Mr. Davis stated it did not change existing zoning of existing properties. Mr. Davis stated that adoption of the land use plan was simply a tool for reviewing future zoning requests it did not force rezoning on anyone. Mr. Willis stated he thought monument signs would be better on Mid-Cities Blvd. He was concerned about access on Mid-Cities Blvd. Mr. Jim Makens, Colleyville, stated his concerns about the study because it was vague and he really couldn't tell what he could use his property for. He also wanted to know if by adopting the land use plan if that didn't open itself up to the city coming in and rezoning everyone's property. Mr. Davis responded by stating that it could be done, but it was not the intention of the city to start rezoning. Mr. LeBaron stated that rezoning under Texas statutes could be initiated by the City Council, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the property owner. Mr. Wood stated that North Richland Hills has not in the past and wouldn't in the future initiate rezoning of property. Mr. Barfield then opened the floor to those who are opposed. Mr. Bill Delp, 8400 Cardinal Lane asked if this would have any effect on his taxes. He stated he was in favor of improving the standards in the city. He stated that one of his concerns was if this plan had the flexibility to be changed if some property owner came along and changed everything to apartments. He didn't want to give E- Systems the right to build anything that may hurt the neighborhood. Mr. Wood stated that the intent that this plan would not add additional lands for multi-family since there were adequate land available that are currently zoned for multi- family. Mr. Bobby Osborne, Cardinal Lane, expressed concern that once this Page 13 was adopted, the city would start rezoning everyone's property. Mr. Barfield stated that most zoning changes are market driven. Mr. Barfield closed the public hearing and asked for discussion. Mr. Davis stated that this study was a big step forward and that landscaping and building design may be coming forward in the near future. Mr. Davis stated that approval of the master plan update might make more property marketable because people will know what is planned for the area. Motion was made by Ted Nehring and seconded by Mark Wood to approve PZ 97-46 as presented incorporating the request of Mr. Souder. Motion passed by a vote of 6-0. Mr. Ferguson asked about a tract shown as residential near the fire station. He expressed concern about it being single family. After general discussion it was decided to leave it as shown on the master plan. Messrs. Barfield, Davis, Wood, Bowen, Nehring & Ferguson voted in favor of this motion. Page 14 14. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were none. 15. STAFF REPORT Mr. LeBaron reminded the Commission about the joint workshop with the City Council scheduled for Tuesday, November 18, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. 16. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct the meeting adjourned at 11 :00 p.m. ~ Page 15