Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 1991-04-11 Minutes r'" " · MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS APRIL 11, 1991 - 7:30 P. M. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Mark Wood at 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chairman Vice Chairman Secretary Members Alt. Member Dir. Community Dev. Building Official P & Z Coordinator Mark Wood James Brock David Barfield Don Bowen Ron Lueck Don Collins Pat Marin Paul Miller Barry LeBaron Steve Pence Wanda Calvert CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF MARCH 14, 1991 Mr. Lueck said that on Page 16, 5th paragraph, the word "most" should be changed to "must". · Ms. Marin made the motion to approve the minutes with the change. This motion was seconded by Mr. Lueck and the motion carried 7-0 with Chairman Wood abstaining since he was not present at the meeting. Chairman Wood said, since he has a conflict of interest in the first two cases, he would turn the meeting over to Vice Chairman Brock. He said, also, that Alternate Member Miller would vote in his place. Vice Chairman Brock said that since these two cases are for the same property, they would be heard together, but voted on separately. 1 . PZ 91-07 Public Hearing for request of Northridge II Joint Venture to rezone Lot 1R and Lots 27 thru 110, Block 4, Northridge Addition, from their present classification of R-6-T-PD Townhouse Planned Development to R-3 Single Family Residential. This property is located at the northeast corner of Harwood Road and Bob Drive. · ~ ~ ~ 1 Page 2 P & Z Minutes April 11, 1991 . 2. PS 91-06 Public Hearing for Replat of Lot lR and Lots 27R thru 48R, Block 4, Northridge Addition. This property is located at the northeast corner of Harwood Road and Bob Drive. Vice Chairman Brock opened the Public Hearing and called for those wishing to speak in favor of these two cases to please come forward. . Ernest Hedgcoth, Consulting Engineer, came forward to represent the developers for this project. He said they are request a zone change from R-6-T Townhomes to R-3 Single Family and feel this is a much better use of the land. Mr. Hedgcoth said the property is surrounded by residential on the east and north and there is an apartment complex on the west side of Bob. He said there are 86 platted lots now, but they wish to change it to 23 lots. He said, from the stand point of traffic, safety and maintenance, this would be better for the city and would serve as a buffer. Mr. Hedgcoth said it would enhance the neighborhood and add to the tax roll. Vice Chairman Brock called for anyone else wishing to speak in favor of these two requests to please come forward. There being no one, the Vice Chairman called for those wishing to speak in opposition to please come forward. There being no one wishing to speak, Vice Chairman Brock closed the Public Hearing. PZ 91-07 APPROVED Mr. Bowen moved, seconded by Mr. Barfield, to approve PZ 91-07. This motion carried 7-0. . Vice Chairman Brock said Mr. Barfield said he had a question about the plat. ~ ~ Page 3 P & Z Minutes April 11, 1991 . Mr. Barfield said there may incur a drainage problem to the north of Texas Street in trying to get an easement through the residential area. He asked could they possibly put inlets where both of their easements are at the north end of Texas Street and at the west end of San Jacinto to put the positive overflow to Bob Street. Mr. Hedgcoth said they would look into that, but the natural drainage would be to go through to Colorado Court. He said if they cannot do that, they will look at this alternative. He said there are two inlets on Bob, but they are not large enough for the 100 year storm. Mr. Hedgcoth said they had previously intended to go that way, but the city prefers us go to Colorado Court. . Vice Chairman Brock said they agreed to all the engineer's comments, but that one and number three regarding the side yard set-backs on three lots. Mr. Hedgcoth said the builders had requested this; they say their house plans would fit better. He said they considered moving the lot lines over in the cul de sacs, but that would have made the front of the lots smaller so you would have to set the front building line back further to get the required lot width. Mr. Hedgcoth said they can restrict the three lots so they will not face Texas Street and they would have rear entry garages. Mr. Barfield said P & Z is currently studying an ordinance to require masonry fences along collector streets and he asked if they would consider this. . ~ 1 Page 4 p & Z Minutes April 11, 1991 . Mr. Hedgcoth said they are planning on putting some kind of a masonry entry fence. He said right now, there is a masonry fence on the east side of this property for that subdivision and they will probably extend that one. Mr. Hedgcoth said they had not planned on anything but an entry fence, but they would consider one along Harwood Road. Mr. Bowen asked the people in the audience if they had any questions they wished to ask. Patrick Smith, 5340 Colorado Court, came forward. He wanted to know what type of houses are going to be built there and the square footage. . Mr. Hedgcoth said the square footage will meet the R-3 requirement which is 1600 square feet, but they plan to build 1600 to 1800 square foot homes. Vice Chairman Brock said, looking at the lots, R-3 has 7500 square foot lots and the present zoning has very small lots. Mr. Hedgcoth said these lots are well over the R-3 requirement. Mr. Wood said the minimum lot size for R-3, which is the zoning on Colorado, Colorado Court, and Lynda, is 7500 square feet, but these average 10,200 square feet. He said several are 13,000, 14,000, and 15,000 square feet on the cuI de sacs and they will be very comfortable with what is there. Mr. Lueck said it would be much better than the current R-6 zoning. Mr. Bowen said the R-6 has 3500 to 4,000 square foot lots. . Ruth Heidel came forward. She wanted to know more about the drainage. ~ ~ Page 5 P & Z Minutes April 11, 1991 . Mr. Hedgcoth said they will collect the water in a pipe underground and take it to Lynda to an existing storm sewer. Ms. Heidel asked about the drainage on Bob. Mr. Hedgcoth said that would be an alternative plan for the overflow for the 100 year flood. Vice Chairman Brock said that either way they go should releave most of the problem. Mr. Barfield asked Mr. LeBaron if they could address the issue of a masonry fence for this project. Mr. LeBaron said we do not have an ordinance on that at this time. . Mr. Wood said there will be no problem in putting in a masonry fence on Harwood all the way to Bob. PS 91-06 APPROVED Mr. Barfield made the motion to approve PS 91-06 with the stipulation that lots 41, 42, and 48 have rear entry garages, side building lines changed from 20 feet to 15 feet on lots 41, 42, and 48, and that a masonry sight barring and sound dampening fence be required along Harwood Road and designed by a structural engineer. This motion was seconded by Mr. Lueck and the motion carried 7-0. Chairman Wood returned to the Chair. He said the other items on the Agenda are only for discussion. 3. PS 90-30 Discussion regarding masonry screening wall requirements for new subdivisions. . ~ " Page 6 P & Z Minutes April 11, 1991 . Chairman Wood stated this is not an action item, but is an issue the Commission has been studying for some time whether to require masonry fences on new subdivisions being developed in the city specificly on certain size roads. He said we need to decide what size roads and what locations; if we do require fences, what type of fences; if masonry, what type of structural design and be certified by an engineer. Chairman Wood stated that Mr. LeBaron has been conducting a study on what other cities are doing and what types of fencing they require. . Mr. LeBaron stated that last fall he drafted a preliminary ordinance which would require fences only on a P6D thoroughfare, but since then P & Z has requested more study and he gave the following steps to consider: 1. What type of construction specifications you feel are important, such as pour in place concrete, pre-fab concrete, masonry construction, height, what color. 2. Where would these masonry walls be constructed; on the right of way side of the property line, the private property side of the line, or would they want to provide an easement for this. 3. Who is going to maintain these screening fences; would they be maintained by the city, a homeowner's association or a property owner. 4. How would you apply this regulation; to all new subdivisions, all existing undeveloped lots; would it be a prerequsite to obtaining a building permit or should it be done when putting in water and sewer. . ~ ~ ~ ~ Page 7 p & Z Minutes April 11, 1991 . Chairman Wood stated the first thing they need to decide is where it needs to go-what size street. Mr. Barfield said he felt the first thing they need to talk about is the design of the fence, whether sight barring or sound dampening. Mr. Lueck said to tie it to a traffic count on the street. Mr. Brock asked wouldn't any masonry fence be sound dampening. Mr. Barfield said it would not be if it had wrought iron on top of it. He said you need to consider the decibel rating. . Chairman Wood said he felt the fences are needed on collector streets or above. Mr. Lueck asked about the cost per foot to build this type of fence. Chairman Wood said they had been given an estimate of $50 per foot for a 6 foot high fence. Mr. Barfield asked what about existing subdivisions where fences are falling down and decaying. Chairman Wood said this is a whole different situation. Mr. Barfield said the city did this with sidewalks. Mr. Pence said if the subdivision is less than one fourth developed, they have to put in sidewalks. Mr. LeBaron said if you require this for all new subdivisions, would you also consider it on a replat. . ~ ~ ~ " Page 8 P & Z Minutes April 11, 1991 · Chairman Wood said he would hate to see the city have to maintain these fences. He said they need to have a homeowner's association or the developer should be responsible. Mr. Collins was in favor of having a homeowner's association. Chairman Wood said the fence could become the property of the owner of the lot it sets on. Chairman Wood said they need to contact other cities and get copies of their ordinances. Mr. Barfield said they need to contact some engineers for different designs for fencing. · Chairman Wood said they could contact Schricle, Rollins who is doing the Parkland Plan for the city. 4 . PS 90-39 Discussion of citizens survey for area adjacent to Bedford-Euless Road. Chairman Wood stated that P & Z has held two public hearings regarding an effort to keep this area from deteriorating. He said they plan to send out a survey to the property owners in the area. It was discussed that the questionaire should be broadened, leave a place for comments, send a stamped return envelope, and a map for closing streets or not closing streets. 5. PZ 91-08 Discussion of proposed regulations regarding parking area requirements. · Mr. LeBaron said angle parking for commercial areas is presenting a problem. He said footnotes listed do not exist. He suggested a list and diagram which will make it easier to advise people. ~ ~ Page 9 P & Z Minutes April 11, 1991 . They also discussed the requirement for compact car parking and handicap parking. They asked Mr. LeBaron to do more study on this and bring back at the next meeting. 6. PZ 91-09 Discussion of proposed regulations regarding carnivals and other special events. Chairman Wood stated that the way the Zoning Ordinance is written, it does not allow carnivals. . It was discussed that they should be allowed in some zoning district and give latitude to the staff to enforce the requirements, but not to give the responsibility to the City Council. It was also discussed that they could be in City parks and this could be coordinated with the recreation department. 7. PZ 91-10 Discussion regarding the rezoning of an area in the Diamond Loch Subdivision from Duplex to a Single Family Zoning District. Chairman Wood stated that a portion of Diamond Loch Addition was zoned for duplexes, R-5-D, but only one duplex was built, the others were built as single family R-1 like the rest of Diamond Loch. He asked if P & Z would want to initiate a zoning change to R-l and contact all property owners within 200 feet of this property. . Mr. LeBaron said the Zoning Ordinance says that the City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission, or an owner of property or agent of the owner of property may initiate a zoning change. He said this zoning classification was done many years ago and the purpose of requesting a zone change would be to clean up the map. Page 10 P & Z Minutes April 11, 1991 · ADJOURNMENT ~~- Secretary Planning & Zoning Commission · · The Commission agreed this should be done. The meeting adjourned at 8:38 P.M. Chairm