Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 1981-05-28 Minutes . . . CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL OATH OF OFFICE CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 1981 CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF APRIL 30, 1981 NEW BUSINESS PS 81-22 ~ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, MAY 28, 1981, 7:30 P. M. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Carl Greenfield, at 7:38 P. M. PRESENT: CHAIRMAN SECRETARY MEMBERS Carl Greenfield Marjorie Nash Don Bowen George Tucker Mark Hannon COUNCILMAN CITY MANAGER CITY PLANNERS :Jim Ramsey Charles Williams Wayne Snyder Mike ~1onroe DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC ~JORKS/UT I L IT I ES PLANNING & ZONING COORDINATOR CLERK Cecil Forester Wanda Calvert Patricia Hutson The Chairman administered the oath of office to new member, Mark Hannon. Mrs. Nash moved, seconded by Mr. Bowen to approve the minutes as written. The motion carried 4-0 with Mr. Hannon abstaining since he was not present at the April 23rd meetinq. Mr. Bowen moved, seconded by Mr. Tucker, to approve the minutes as written. This motion carried 4-0 with ~r. Hannon abstaining since he was not present at the April 30th meeting. Request of Alan D. Arnold for final plat of Lot 2, Block 2, Henry Addition. Bart Largent came forward to represent Delbert Stembridge, Engineer, who was unable to attend. Mr. Largent read a letter from Mr. Stembridge dated May 26, 1981 in response to the City Engineer's letter of May 14, 1981. ~ Page 2 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 PS 81-22 APPROVED Mr. Tucker made a motion to approve PS 81-22 subject to the Engineerts comments. This motion was seconded by Mr. Bowen and the motion carried 5-0. PS 81-23 Request of Stephens-Owen for final plat of Lot 1, Block 4, Industrial Park Addition, 3rd Filing. Dick Perkins, Consulting Engineer, came forward to represent Stephens-Owen. He said he had received the City Engineer's letter and they were basically in agreement, but he would like to go over each item. Mr. Perkins said in regards to Item #1, the owner of that land is not their client. He said also that the company that owns the unplatted area is not a development type company. Mr. Perkins said Items 2,3, & 5, they have no problem with and that Item 6 was a City Staff function. Cecil Forester said he had no problem with Item 6. Mr. Perkins ~id they have no problems with Items 7 & 8; they agree to the payment of the pro rata share. Mr. Perkins said in regards to Item 9, because of the size of the tract of land, it can not be covered with fire protection at this time. He asked that the requirement be waived until such time as the tract of land develops as was done with Ohio Sealy and M & M Development. Regarding Item 10, Mr. Perkins showed a copy of the City's Master Sewer Map. He said they have provided sewer service to this lot and any other lots along Browning Drive. Mr. Perkins said to extend the sewer beyond Rufe Snow would bring it out of t~e ground. Mr. Perkins said in regards to Item 4, Browning Drive was not made 40 feet to be a collector street~ but to be able to carry the industrial traffic. He said the current Master Plan shows Industrial Park Blvd. as being the Page 5 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 Mr. Bowen asked if there was any fire protection there at all now. Mr. Largent said he was not sure how close the nearest fire hydrant was. Mr. Bowen said there were none on the 2 inch lines and that was what was in this area. Mr. Bowen said it does not meet the Sub- division Ordinance, and he doesn't see how they can approve it. Mr. Largent said if more fire protection is needed, he would request the Commission approve the plat on the condition that the owner will extend the water line. Mr. Greenfield said there was also a letter from the utility company requesting additional easements for utilities. Mr. Largent said this had already been taken care of~ Mr. Forester said the 6 inch line would not be large enough; it would not meet the code. He said an 8 inch line is the minimum for commercial and industrial. Mr. Forester said that would be quite a distance to take it. Mr. Greenfield asked if Mr. Forester was suggesting that Item 7 should include an 8 inch line. Mr. Forester said he suggests that an 8 inch be the minimum and might could even be larger. Mr. Largent said he was not sure if the owner would agree to this. Mr. Tucker said the Commission could postpone this request until such time as adequate fire protection could be submitted. Mr. Hannon asked if there was a study with the City Engineer showing what size lines are needed. Mr. Forester said not that he knew. He said it would be the developer's responsibility to provide that information. He said that in Page 7 p & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . land. He said it now appears that they are going to utilize that in their building and they have asked the utility company if it was acceptable for them to abandon the easement. Mr. Forester said he had no problem with this as long as they provide him with a letter from the utility company stating it is okay to abandon it. Mr. Bowen said that in Item 6, the developer agrees to participate in the paving and drainage improvements. He said he believes the city would like to have a covenant on this rather than a verbal agreement. Mr. Largent said they would agree to signing a covenant. PS 81-25 APPROVED Mr. Bowen made a motion to approve PS 81-25 subject to the Engineer's comments, specifically in regards to Item 6, request a letter of covenant to the city agreeing to participate in the paving and drainage improvements. . Mrs. Nash seconded the motion, and the motion carried 5-0. PS 81-28 Request of Tenneco for preliminary plat of Lot 1, Block 10, Snow Heights North Addition. Bart Largent came forward. He read a letter from Delbert Stembridge, Consulting Engineer for Tenneco, dated May 26, 1981. The letter was in response to a letter from the City Engineer dated May 20, 1981. . Mr. Largent said in regards to Item 2, the owner agrees to extend the proposed sanitary sewer in Lewis Drive to the west lot line of this tract, but in regards to the recommendation that this line be increased from a 6 inch to an 8 inch, we would like to point out that plans have previously been approved for this 6 inch which will be adequate for this tract. Mr. Largent said they would agree to increase the line to an 8 inch, but feel, however, that since the increase would be to serve possible future extension north of Rufe Snow Drive, the city should participate in the cost difference between the 6 inch and the 8 inch. He said Page 8 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . they recommended an 8 inch stubout across Rufe Snow Drive to provide service to an 18 acre area west of Rufe Snow which we feel is the city's responsibility. Mr. Forester said the city would participate. Mr. Tucker asked Mr. Forester if the city had in their files a written agreement from this developer that he is willing to pay the pro rata shares. Mr. Forester said they did not, but it would be in order for the Commission to request such a letter. He said he felt the developer was aware of the pro rata charges and assess- ments. PS 81-28 APPROVED Mr. Hannon made a motion to approve PS 81-28 subject to the Engineer's comments and to the modification of Item 2 that the city will participate in the oversizing, and will pay the cost for stubout across Rufe Snow Drive,..ì. and subject to the letters of agreement for the various pro rata charges listed in Items 8, 9, and 10. . This motion was seconded by Mr. Bowen and the motion carried 5-0. PZ 81-11 Request of T~ F. Abbott, Jr. and E. F. Abbott to rezone a portion of Block N, Town of Smith- field Addition, from the present classification of Agriculture to a proposed classification of 1F·- 9-1500. Th i s property i. s 1 oca ted on the south side of Main Street and approximately 120 feet west of Amundson Road. E. F. Abbott and T. F. Abbott, Jr. came forward. E. F. Abbott said they were partners in this rezoning request. He said they are requesting a rezoning from Agriculture to residential. The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to this request to please come forward. There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. . PZ 81-11 APPROVED Mr. Tucker moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash, to approve PZ 81-11 as requested. This motion carried 5-0. . Page 9 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 PS 81-20 Request of T. F. Abbott, Jr. & E. F. Abbott for preliminary plat of Lot 23C, Block N, Town of Smithfield Addition. PS 81-21 Request of T. F. Abbott, Jr. & E. F. Abbott for final plat of Lot 23C, Block N, Town of Smithfield Addition. Bart Largent came forward to ·represent the Abbott's in the absence of Delbert Stembridge. Mr. Largent said they had received the City Engineer's letter and they have no problem with any of the comments~ . Mr. Forester said there would be no pro rata charges on this property, but he did have some recommendations in regards to their sewer line. He said he would like to discuss with Mr. Abbott's engineer the changes the city proposes. Mr. Bowen said in Mr. Stembridge's letter, Item 4 reads IF-12; this should be IF-g. Mrs. Calvert said it was just a typographtäal error. PS 81-20 APPROVED Mr. Hannon said the Commission does not normally hear a preliminary and final plat at the same time, but they were this time because of the simplicity of the case. Mr. Bowen made a motion to approve PS 81-20 subject to the Engineer's comments. This motion was seconded by Mrs. Nash, and the motion carried 5-0. PS 81-21 APPROVED Mrs. Nash made a motion to approve PS 81-21 subject to the Engineer's comments. This motion was seconded by Mr. Hannon and the motion carried 5-0. PZ 81-13 Request of Key Branch Industries to rezone Tract 3U, Abstract 1055, T. K. Martin Survey, from the present classification of Agriculture to a proposed classification of Local Retail- Specific Use-Office Building. This property is located on the west side of Precinct Line Road and approximately 1,150 feet south of Amundson Drive. . ~ Page 10 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . David Barfield came forward to represent Key Branch Industries. He said the Commission would recall that they applied at the last session for Planned Development and was told that Planned Development was not acceptable. He said all they want to do is build this office building. He showed the Commi ss i on a rep 1 i ca of the bÜfl di ng.: He said it was strictly an office type building. Mr. Barfield showed the Commission their site plan showing where the parking space would be. Mr. Barfield said the reason he wants to tie the land down to this particular zoning is because he plans to build his home next to this property. He said the property has a lot of trees which he wants to leave unharmed. He said he wants to leave the back of this lot undisturbed. . Mr. Barfield said he feels this proposed building would be a nice addition to the city. He said it would be a $300,000 to $500,000 building. He said it would house ICS Computer Service and his office. Mr. Barfield said there would probably be 30 to 40 people working there. He said there would be covered parking on the back for six to seven cars and then an additional parking for approximately 70 cars. Mr. Bowen said in this particular request, the Commission does not need to take the plans into consideration. Mr. Greenfield said the plans are not a matter that this Commission needs to consider. The Chairman asked Mr. Forester if it can be specified how a building will be used in Specific Use zoning. Mr. Forester said he did not think you could in Specific Use, but you could in Planned Develop- men t. . Mrs. Calvert said Mr. Barfield was told that if he came in for Local Retail-Specific Use, it could be tied down to an office building. Page 11 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . Mr. Forester said they can tie it to an office building, but does not know if they can tie it to this particular building. He said Specific Use in this case means the type of activity, not the type of building. The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to this request to please come forward. There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. PZ 81-13 APPROVED Mr. Bowen moved, seconded by Mr. Tucker, to approve PZ 81-13 as requested. This motion carried 4-1 with Mrs. Nash voting against. PS 81-17 Request of Key Branch Industries for preliminary plat of Lot 2, Block 1, Martin Addition. . David Barfield came forward. He said they had received the Engineer's letter and have no preblem with any of the comments. Mr. Bowen asked about Item 4. Mr. Forester said Item 4 did not apply since it pertained to Planned Development zoning. He said in regards to Item 3 of the Engineer's letter dated April 13th, the Engineer made reference to the 6 inch water line. He said it was to extend from Amundson and that the City's long range plans calls for a 12 inch line. He said their Engineer indicated the 6 inch line would be adequate so the city will participate in the oversizing of the line. PS 81-17 APPROVED Mr. Bowen made a motion to approve PS 81-17 subject to the Engineer's comments in the letter dated April 13, 1981. Mr. Tucker seconded the motion and the motion carried 4-1 with Mrs. Nash voting against. . RECESS Mr. Forester said that in regards to the private right of way, it should be shown on the plat as private. The Chairman call a recess at 9:00. ~ . Page 12 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 BACK TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting back to order with the same members present. PZ 81-17 Request of Miller of Texas to rezone portions of Tracts 3 & 4A, Abstract 1399, Thomas Spronce Survey, from the present classification of IF-9 to a proposed classification of Multi-Family. This property is located on the east side of Rufe Snow Drive extending approximately 1,016 feet east and is approximately 1,000 feet south of Bursey Road. . Ernest Hedgcoth, Consulting Engineer, came forward to represent Miller of Texas. He said they own the tract of land from Rufe Snow Drive all the way to Douglas Lane which is approximately 85 acres. Mr. Hedgcoth said they are requesting a change in zoning from IF-9 to Multi-Family on a portion of the land which runs from Rufe Snow back to the Lone Star Gas Pipeline. He said the pipeline would act as a buffer for their project. Mr. Hedgcoth said the plan to develop this into a condomenium type development and utilize the existing 4.8 acres as a support facility providing shops and retail outlets to support the condomenium area and also any other future development. Mr. Hedgcoth said under the present economic conditions, the IF-9 zoning is no longer feasible. He sai'd the condomenium zoning provides conviences for the owners, lack of maintenance along with taxing of home owner- ship. Mr. Hedgcoth said they would cost $45,000 to $80,000 per unit and will consist of 1 & 2 bedroom units. He said the property is approximately two tents of a mile from Bursey Road and 1.8 miles to the Denton Hwy. which will probably be the principal access to the property. Mr~ Hedgcoth said they feel this is the best use for this property and requests approval. The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in favor of this request to please come forward. . . . . ~ Page 13 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 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. Don Hawkins came forward. He said he was speaking for himself and his father. Mr. Hawkins said they have lived here for many years and are opposed to this request. He said they own the land that joins this property. Mr. Hawkins said this rezoning would be a discredit to the area; they have picked out the most beautiful area where homes could be built for this project. He said it would not be an asset to the community or the city. Mr. Hawkins said there would be more taxes, but there is a lot more to be said for some nice, beautiful homes. He said this property is located on the east side of Rufe Snow, north of the Foster Village development which are fairly expensive homes and is south of Bursey Road. Mr. Hawkins said it is not 200 feet from a thoroughfare and Bursey Road is no outlet for the added flow of traffic it would create. He said Bursey Road has a hard time handling the traffic it has now and Rufe Snow is an almost impossible situation, especially with the Watauga controversy. Mr. Hawkins said he was not against progress, but he does not feel this would be proper for this area. The Chairman called for anyone else wishing to speak to please come forward. There being no one else wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Tucker said to change a zoning there should be a clear reason and that reason should be showed by the property owner or his representative so the Commission could make a decision. He said it should be demonstrated fully that the present zoning is not useful. He said he did not feel that this case has been made. Mrs. Nash said she agreed with Mr. Tucker. . Page 14 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 PZ 81-17 DENIED Mr. Hannon moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash, deny PZ 81-17. The motion carried 5-0 for denial. PZ 81-18 Req~est of Rose J. Wilson to rezone a portion of Lot 6, Dawn King Addition, from the present classification pf Agriculture to a proposed classification of IF-9. This property is located at the southwest corner of Amundson Drive and Crane Road. Bart Largent came forward in the absence of Delbert Stembridge, Consulting Engineer for Ms. Wilson. Mr. Bowen asked Mrs. Calvert if in IF-9 zoning would they meet the minimum square footage. Mrs. Calvert said for IF-9 zoning the minimum is a 1300 sq. ft. house. She said if the Commission wishes, they may stipulate a larger house if they feel it necessary. . Mr. Bowen asked Mr. Largent if he knew what size house Ms. Wilson his in mind. Mr. Largent said he did not. There was a discussion as to the size needed for this area. Mr. Tucker recommended that the Commission approve the IF-9 zoning and not specify any larger size. The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to this request to please come forward. There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Bowen said the Commission has three options: to approve as is, to deny, or to postpone this request until the size of the house is determined. PZ 81-18 APPROVED Mr. Tucker moved, seconded by Mr. Hannon, to approve PZ 81-18 as requested. . ~ Page 15 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . The motion carried 4-0 with Mrs. Nash abstaining since she felt there was not sufficient information regarding the size of the house. PS 81-27 Request of Rose J. Wilson for replat of Lot 6A, Dawn King Addition. Mr. Bart Largent came forward. He said they had received the City Engineer1s letter and they have no problem with them. Mr. Largent read Item #4 of a letter from Delbert Stembridge, Consulting Engineer for Ms. Wilson"dated May 26, 1981:' IIThere is no sewer system to serve this lot. A septic system would be required. The owner will furnish the City with percolation test results and satisfy City and Health Dept. standards prior to construction of any dwelling. II Mr. Greenfield asked Mrs. Calvert what size the lot had to be for IF-9 zoning. . Mrs. Calvert said the lot has to have a minimum of 9500 sq. ft. and this one is much larger. Mr. Greenfield asked how large the lot had to be to handle a septic tank. PS 81-27 APPROVED Mrs. Calvert said she was not sure, they would have to get it approved by the County and then bring it to the City before a building permit could be issued. Mr. Bowen made a motion to approve PS 81-27 subject to the Engineerts comments and to the addition of the utility easements. This motion was seconded by Mr. Tucker and the motion carried 4-0 with Mrs. Nash abstaining. PZ 81-19 Request of Aubrey Brothers to rezone Tract 3A, Abstract 1150, David Moses Survey, from the present classification of Agriculture to a proposed classification of IF-8. This property is located on the east side of Eden Road and is north of the railroad track. . ~ Page 16 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . Aubrey Brothers came forward. He said he had submitted a letter tonight requesting a change in this zoning request from IF-8 to IF-9. He said it was a typographical error. He said it really wasn't a typo- graphical at the time he submitted the request. Mr. Brothers said there were some lots in the area that were IF-8 so he thought he might have a chance to get this zoning, but since he had some feedback from the residents and from some people within the City, he had decided to change the zoning request to IF-9. Mr. Tucker asked Mrs. Calvert if Public Notice had gone out for IF-8 zoning. Mrs. Calvert said the letters sent to the property owners said he was requesting the IF-8 zoning. Mr. Tucker said the Commission cannot take this request up since proper notice has not been sent out. PZ 81-19 WITHDRAWN Mr. Greenfield said the Commission can only hear the request as IF-8 zoning. Mr. Monroe said it was up to the applicant to withdraw his application or to continue the request for IF-8 zoning. Mr. Brothers said he requests to withdraw the IF-8 and act on the 1F-9. . Mr. ~1onroe said if Mr. Brothers does withdraw, it is the progrative of the Chair to go ahead and hear the people. Mr. Greenfield said because of the large number of people here tonight, he would like to give them a chance to express their views so Mr. Brothers would have some insight on their feelings. Mr. Greenfield asked if the people had a spokesperson. . Jean Wollenschlager, 7308 Eden Road, came forward. She said she recently moved into this area and she was the one who took a petition around for signatures. ~ Page 17 p & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . She said most of the ones that signed the petition are here, some had to go to graduation exercises. Ms. Wollenschlager said what they were objectionable to was the IF-8 with a 1200 sq. ft. house. She said the neighbors had from one to five pJus acres. She said the reason they moved into this area was the country atmosphere and the environment. She said even if it was changed to IF-9, that would not be large enough. She said they want to keep the same standard of living as they have now. Ms. Wollenschlager said Eden Road is in bad shape and with the added 40 to 60 homes, there would be 80 to 120 extra cars. Ms. Wollenschlaaer said she wanted to remind the Commission that about two years ago or less, this same property was up for rezoning for IF-9-1500 and was turned down. . Mr.,James Pearson came forward. He said he would like to ask that more proper notice be given. He said most of the property owners own one acre or more and would not be within the 200 ft. radius. He said it is necessary for them to stand by each other to find out what was going on. He said he would like to see more notices sent out. He said it would still affect the property owners who do not live within the 200 ft. of the zoning request. He said he also agrees with Ms. Wollenschlager. Mr. Greenfield said 200 feet is the legal requirement. Mrs. Calvert said the Ordinance stated that she is to notify everyone within 200 feet of the property in question. She said she took the outlying area and measured 200 feet and sent notices out to everyone who fell within that distance. She said she sent out 21 letters for this request. . Mr. Monroe said a zoning change sign could be put out on the property stating that an application for a zoning change has been made. Page 18 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . Mrs. Calvert said the city used to do this but vandals stole the signs so they don't put them out anymore. Mr. Greenfield asked if there was any possibility that the sign policy could be reinstituted. He said he would also like to mention to the audience that the Commission does go out and look at every piece of property that is delt with. Mr. Forester said that the city has discussed the signs before, but have not actually come to a decision. He said he has used them in other cities, but the vandalism problem does exist. Mr. Forester said if the Commission wishes him to explore it further, he will be happy to do so. Mr. Greenfield said the Commission would like to see this done. . Dr. O. G. Tobias, 8800 Rumfield Road, came forward. He said they were a commynity of larger homes and plots. He said they hate to see this community broken up into smaller homes. which would be a deterrent to all of their property values. Mr. Bowen said we are talking about an undeveloped area and we are in the process of reviewing and redoing the Master Plan for the City. He said, personally, he was not sure what should be done in this area. He said until the Commission gets a reading from the Master Plan, it would be hard to do anything with this area. Mr. Hannon said he felt the same as Mr. Bowen. He said there are quite a few things that could be done with this area. Mr. Greenfield said there will be neighbor- hood meetings held during this Master Plan study and the property owners can participate in them. . Mr. Greenfield said he is having difficulty committing such a large piece of land. He asked the Commission if the change to IF-9 would alter their views. Page 19 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . . . ~ ~1r. Tucker sa i d he had ra ther not comment at this time. Mr. Hannon said Mr. Brothers has not been given an opportunity to present his views, yet. Mr. Tucker said the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Planners would like to ask the citizens to get involved and participate in the neighborhood meetings. He said for more information, get in touch with the City Staff. Mr. Tucker said the economic times of today is totally different and it is becoming very difficult for people to buy large tracts of land. He said revenue comes from developed land, not undeveloped land. Mr. Tucker said the trend is leaning toward smaller lots with larger homes. He said this brings in more revenue to the cities and keeps the tax base the same. He said if North Richland Hills had all 2-acre tracts with nice homes people could not afford to live here. Mr. Bowen said he agrees with Mr. Tucker. He said the Commission's purpose is not to make more money, but to try and develop the city the best way possible. Mabel Robertson came forward. She said she owns property on Eden Road. She asked if the homeowners would have a say in what was being decided for their area. Mr. Bowen said they would be able to convey their feelings at these meetings. Mr. Tucker said there is an old Master Plan on record and a new one being drawn up. He said the city needs the citizens input for the new plan. Ms. Robertson asked if there were enough votes, could the neighborhood stay the way it is now. Mr. Greenfield said there would be no voting. He said the Commission was just saying that they need the citizen's input to see that it happens as much the way the citizens want it as possible. Page 20 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . PZ 81-20 WITHDREW PZ 81-21 . . The Chairman thanked the property owners for attending and stated they would be notified if they were within 200 feet of Mr. Brother's property when he comes back in for a different zoning request. Request of Dr. Robert Chisolm & Jack Rose- berry to rezone a portion of Lot 2, Block 19, Clearview Addition, from the present classification of Commercial to a proposed classification of Commercial-Specific Use- Sale of Snowcones. This property is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. and Harwood Road. The Chairman stated that this request had been cancelled,and would not be heard. Request of Bates Container to rezone liots 17,18,19,20, & 21, Block IIJII, Smithfield Addition, from their present classification of Local Retail and IF-9 to a proposed classification of Industrial. This property is located on the west side of Davis Blvd. and bounded on the north by Bates Container Corporation. Bart Largent came forward and said he would answer any questions. The Chairman called for those wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to this request to please come forward. Hazel Perry, 7033 Crabtree, came forward. She said she was not sure if she was for or against this request. She said someone told her that Bates Container was putting in a Solar System and she didn't know what it would look like. She said someone from Bates said they would bring some pictures tonight to show her, but no one is here. Mr. Largent said he could show her what it would look like. The Chairman called for anyone else wishing to speak to please come forward. There being no one else wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. . . . Page 21 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 PZ 81-21 APPROVED Mr. Bowen moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash, to approve PZ 81-21 as requested. The motion carried 5-0. PS 81-26 Request of Bates Container Corp. for replat of Lot 17R, Block J, Smithfield Addition. Bart Largent came forward. He said they had received the Engineer's letter and would like to read Items 2 & 7 of a letter from Delbert Stembridge, Consulting Engineer for Bates Container: "2. This property is being developed solely for the purpose of constructing Solar Collector Panels. Additional utility service to this area is not desired by the Owner who feels that the extra cost of such utilities is unnecessary. 7. The Owner does not intend to enter a claim on this 19.4 foot strip and agrees that the fence line is the new property line. Any plat revision or legal instrument required should be initiated by the City. II Mr. Forester said in regards to Item 2, our Subdivision Ordinance states on page 30, Section 2-02, B: "All supply and distribution mains installed within a subdivision must extend to the borders of the subdivision as required for future extensions of the system, regardless of whether or not such extensions are required for service within the subdivision. II Mr. Forester requested that the extension of the water main be included in the plans as it is necessary for the looping of the system at a future date. Mr. Largent said they would agree to this. Mr. Hannon said in regards to Item 7, he assumes the fence line would make him the owner and he-would give the owners of the other lots the right to plat that piece of property. He said the title use transferred by means of adverse possession. Mr. Largent said that was right. He said he couldn't say who owns that piece of property, only that Bates Container does not want it included in this plat. . Page 22 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 PS 81-26 APPROVED Mr. Hannon made the motion to approve PS 81-26 subject to the Engineer's comments with the exception of Item 7. Mr. Tucker seconded the motion and the motion carried 5-0. PS 81-16 Request of Dr. Thomas Duer, D.V.M. for preliminary plat of Lot 2, Block 25, Clearview Addition. PS 81-29 Request of Dr. Thomas Duer, D.V.M. for final plat of Lot 2, Block 25, Clearview Addition. Dr. Duer came forward. He said the was currently the owner of this peice of property and would answer the Commission's questions. Dr. Duer said they had received the City Engineer's comments and agree to them. . The Chairman said Dr. Duer had an appeal hearing by the City Council and was granted Planned Unit Development zoning. He said the Commission is now considering the platting. Mr. Tucker asked about the 3/4 inch water line. Mr. Duer said the line had been changed to a one inch. Mr. Hannon asked why there were two surveyors I names on the plat. Dr. Duer said the survey was done by the previous owner of the property before it was purchased by him and then he hired Delbert Stembridge to do what else was needed. PS 81-16 APPROVED Mr. Bowen made a motion to approve PS 81-16 subject to the Engineer's comments. Mrs. Nash seconded the motion and the motion carried 5-0. PS 81-29 APPROVED Mr. Bowen made a motion to approve PS 81-29 subject to the Engineer's comments. . ~ Page 23 P & Z Minutes May 28, 1981 . The motion was seconded by Mrs. Nash and the motion carried 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE #179 APPROVED Amendment regarding Individual Ownership of duplexes, etc. The Chairman asked the Commission members if they had read the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission members said they had. Mr. Tucker made a motion to recommend to the City Council for approval of this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance #179. This motion was seconded by Mr. Bowen and the motion carried 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE #195 POSTPONED Amendment regarding replats. . Mr. Hannon said he understood this amendment was to comply to a new state law. He said the members of the Commission have reviewed it and there seems to be a good deal of confusion as to what it means. Mr. Hannon said he would like to see it postponed and have the City Attorney put it in layman's language. Mr. Hannon made a motion to postpone the amendment to the Subdiv,ision Ordinance #195 subject to it being rewritten in layman's terms and the City Attorney IS comments. Mr. Bowen seconded the motion and the motion carried 5-0. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:35 P. M. ~ 7?;~~~~ Gf: 7?~ SECRETARY P~ NING AND ZONING COMMISSION .