HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 1979-07-26 Minutes
.
.
.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS
JULY 26, 1979
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by the
Chairman, Mary Jo Shaunty, at 7:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
CHAIRMAN
SECRETARY
MEMBERS
Mary Jo Shaunty
Forrest Grubb
Jack Knowles
Marjorie Nash
ABSENT:
Warren Eckhardt
CITY STAFF PRESENT:
DIRECTOR OF P. ~A] .
P & Z CLERKS
James Anderson
Pat Crum
Desi Smyth
RESIGNATION OF P & Z MEMBER
Mr. Grubb turned in his resignation since
he is moving to San Antonio, Texas. He
told how he had enjoyed serving on the
Commission and that he recommended to the
citizens to get involved in their City
Government.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES
OF JUNE 28, 1979
Mr. Grubb stated that on page 2, last
paragraph, should read "drafting" instead
of "grafting", and page 3, paragraph 2,
should read "comparable" instead of
"comfortable". Mr. Grubb moved,
seconded by Mrs. Nash, to approve
the minutes with these corrections.
Motion carried 4-0.
NEW BUSINESS
PZ 79-25
DENIED
Request of Northeast Const. Co. to rezone
Lot 25, Block 1R, Holiday West Addition,
from its present classification of 1F-8
to a proposed classification of Neighbor-
hood Retail.
This property is located on the West side
of Holiday Lane, approximately 260 feet
North of Meadow Park Blvd.
Mr. Terry Sisk represented Northeast Canst.
in their request. He stated this small
piece of land is directly across from
Commercial property. He stated it has
so many easements on it, it is not suitable
for building a residence on it. Mr. Sisk
.
.
.
Page 2
p & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
stated it has a pipeline behind it, three
easements in front and two on each side.
He stated they thought if they could
rezone it they could sell it and find
some use for this property.
Mr. Anderson stated, for the record,
the property is located across from
Local Retail zoning.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone
who wished to speak in favor or in
opposition of this request.
Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Sisk if they had
considered any other type of zoning for
this property.
Mr. Sisk stated they had, but than this
was the lowest type of zoning that would
be applicable.
Mr. Anderson stated that in his opinion
this would be spot zoning. He asked
Mr. Sisk who currently owns the lots
that backup to this property.
Mr. Sisk stated Marvin Smith ownes them.
Mr. Anderson asked if the lots were sold
and if families lived there.
Mr. Sisk stated he did not know.
Mr. Anderson asked if they were going to
put up a fence between it and the
residential housing.
Mr. Sisk stated they would be willing to
do that.
Mr. C. T, Beckham stated he owns 13 acres
east of this property north of the power
line on Holiday Lane. He stated he used
to own the property now owned by Mr. Sandlin.
~1r. Beckham stated that the property in
question was originally zoned Industrial,
but after being changed to Sing~ Family
Zoning, they were told it would always be
Single Family. Mr. Beckham stated that
since his property is Local Retail, he
is opposed to this rezoning.
.
.
.
Page 3
P & Z Meeting
July 26, 1979
Mr. Beckham stated that in his oplnlon,
the reason for this triangle piece of
property was the pipeline and the creek,
but he fèe1s it should stay with the
residential zoning around it. He stated
he had been déa1ing with this property
for about 9 years and he was shocked to
hear about this rezoning request.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone
else who wished to speak.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mr. Knowles,
to DENY PZ 79-25. Motion carried 4-0.
The Chairman told Mr. Sisk that the basic
reason for this denial was spot zoning.
She stated the Commission and the City
Council are against spot zoning.
PZ 79-26
TABLED
Request of E. D. Briggs to rezone Tract
12C1, Abstract 1266, from its present
classification of Agriculture to a
proposed classification of Commercial.
This property is located on the East side
of Davis Blvd., approximately 347 feet
North of Rumfie1d Road.
Mr. Briggs presented his request to the
Commission. He stated he does commercial
work and he would like to be able to keep
his equipment on his property when it is
not in use.
Mr. Knowles asked Mr. Briggs what kind of
equipment was he talking about.
Mr. Briggs stated he does demolition work
and he needs a place to leave his large
commercial trucks.
Mrs. Shaunty asked if he presently lives in
the house located on this property.
Mr. Briggs stated he did.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Anderson what this
would do to the residence if they passed
this zoning request.
Mr. Anderson stated that it would cause
the residence to become a non-conforming
building in Commercial zoning and could not
be used as a residence.
.
.
.
Page 4
p & Z Meeting
July 26, 1979
Mr. Grubb asked Mr. Briggs if Stoneybrooke
Addition joined him on the south side.
Mr. Briggs stated he was south of Rumfie1d
Road.
Mr. Knowles asked if Harrington's joined him.
Mr. Briggs stated he was south of
Harrington's.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor or in opposition
of this request.
The Chairman asked how many letters were
sent out.
Mr. Anderson stated there were 9 sent.
Mrs. Shaunty asked ~1r. Briggs if he still
resided in the house on the property.
Mr. Briggs stated he does.
Mrs. Shaunty stated he would not be
allowed to live in commercial zoning.
Mr. Anderson explained to Mr. Briggs that
if he zoned the whole tract of land
commercial, the house would be non-
conforming and he would not be able to
live there.
Mr. Briggs asked if he could zone part of it.
Mr. Anderson stated if it was in 2 lots he
could change the zoning on one of them.
The Chairman asked Mr. Anderson if it would
be best to table this request and have
Mr. Briggs talk to the City Staff to see
what could be done.
Mr. Grubb stated the property would need
to be platted.
Mr. Anderson stated he felt postponing this
case would be best and he would like to get
with Mr. Briggs to discuss the possibility
of putting up screening to hide the view
from the street. He stated he felt in time
the area would go commercial, but at the
present time it is not.
~
Page 5
p & Z Meeting
July 26, 1979
.
The Chairman asked Mr. Briggs if postponing
this would be suitable with him.
Mr. Briggs stated it would.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash,
to TABLE PZ 79-26. Motion carried 4-0.
PZ 79-27
APPROVED
Request of Lavada Thompson to rezone
Tract 3B2, Abstract 1055, from its present
classification of Agriculture to a
proposed classification of 1F-9-0ne Family
Dwelling. This property is located
on the West side of Precinct Line Road,
approximately 1400 feet South of
Amundson Road.
PS 79-45
APPROVED
Request of Lavada Thompson for preliminary
plat of Lot 1, Block 1, Martin Addition.
PS 79-46
APPROVED
Request of Lavada Thompson for final plat
of Lot 1, Block 1, Martin Addition.
.
Mr. Delbert Stembridge, Consulting Engineer,
represented Ms. Thompson in her requests.
He stated Ms. Thompson has a one acre tract
she wishes to build a house on. Mr.
Stembridge stated that sinc.e theFe is no
sewer available, she has had a percolation
test run and the city has a copy of it.
Mr. Stembridge stated they had complied
with all the Engineer's comments except the
one regarding the paying of pro rata for
water and sewer. He stated a waterline
is available and a meter is on the
property next door. He stated he feels
this would be an unjust payment for
Ms. Thompson. Mr. Stembridge stated to
have to pay the pro rata on the sewer and
have to put in a septic tank also would
be heavy.
.
Mr. Anderson stated that there was indeed
a waterline there but it was only a 2 inch
line, and this would not support any
additional development. He stated this 2"
line would have to be replaced in the very
near future. Mr. Anderson stated there is
no sewer in this area due to the terrain
and the fact that it is in a different
drainage base. He stated that the sewer
will be put in the very near future by
installing a lift station and transporting
into the next plain, which is very
expensive. He stated that the city normally
Page 6
P & Z Meeting
July 26, 1979
.
waits for a developer to come in and bear
this expense since the city is not a
developer. Mr. Anderson stated due to the
sewer problem, the area is slow developing,
but on the Hurst side of Precinct Line,
there is rapid development. He stated he
did not feel the city was wrong in
requesting the pro rata on the water and
sewer because it will not be long before
this area is developed. Mr. Anderson
stated that there are plans in the future
to widen the street and we would probably
request a 25 ft. right of way.
Mr. Stembridge stated he talked to Mr.
Bronstad and he stated they would have
to have the pro rata for the water but
not the sewer since they were putting in
septic tank.
Mr. Anderson asked if Mr. Bronstad said
he would request they sign a convenant
for the sewer.
Mr. Stembridge stated he did not.
.
Mr. Anderson stated Mr. Bronstad would get
his money when they came in for a sewer tap
anyway, and he would agree to going along
with the payment of the water only at this
time.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor or in opposition
of these requests.
Mr. C. D. Rosenau asked why they had to
change the zoning in order to build a
house on it.
Mr. Anderson stated in order to be able :to
build on this property you would have to
have a 2 acre tract and 150 ft. road
frontage in Agricultural zoning.
Mr. Grubb asked Mr. Anderson if the letter
from Mr. Stembridge answering the comments
of Knowlton, English, Flowers, if these
satisfied the city, particularly the one
regarding the drainage.
.
Mr. Anderson stated all of Mr. Stembridge's
answers were correct except the one
regarding pro rata.
.
.
.
~
Page 7
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mr. Grubb,
to APPROVE PZ 79-27 as requested.
Motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash,
to APPROVE PS 79-45 subject to the
Engineer's comments, specifically in
regard to the water and sewer pro rata.
Motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Grubb stated he felt this should be a
council action if they did not require the
pro rata on the sewer. He then asked
Mrs. Nash to withdraw her second so he
could withdraw his motion and rephrase it.
Mrs. Nash withdrew her second.
Mr. Grubb made the motion to APPROVE PS 79-45
subject to the Engineer's comments
basically concerning the water pro rata
and to recommend that the sewer pro rata
be waived. This motion was seconded by
Mrs. Nash. Motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash, to
APPROVE PS 79-46, subject to the Engineer's
comments basically concerning the water
pro rata and to recommend that the sewer
pro rata be waived. Motion carried 4-0.
PZ 79-28
APPROVED
Request of Alton Isbell to rezone Tracts
3B1B, 3B1C, 3B, 3B6, 3B5, & 3B7, Abstract
1055, from iœ p~esent classification of
Agriculture to a proposed classification
of 1F-8-0ne Family Dwelling.
This property is located 200 ft. N.E. of
the intersection of Main St. & Crane Rd.
and runs east to Precinct Line Road.
Mr. Walter Elliott, Elliott & Hughes
Engineers, represented Mr. Isbell in his
requests.
There was a discussion with Mr. Elliott
and the Commission regarding the IF-8
zoning.
RECESS
The Chairman declared a 10 minute recess.
CALL TO ORDER
The Chairman called the meeting back
to order.
Page 8
p & Z Meeting
July 26, 1979
.
Mr. Elliott stated Mr. Isbell, owner of
the property and Mr. Garent, financer of
the property were in the audience if there
are any questions they need to answer.
Mr. Elliott stated that after receiving the
Engineer's letter, they revised the pre-
liminary plat to conform to the required
lot size. He stated the cul-de-sacs
have been eliminated. He said the zoning
of the property to the north was AG,
to the west was AG, and then 1F-9 in
G1enann Addition, and the property to
the east was in Hurst. Mr. Elliott stated
that the property directly to the south
was owned by James Rust and was zoned
Multiple Family. He said that Mr. Rust,
who is in the audience, plans to come
in next month with plans to develop his
property and possibly a joint venture
will be formed. Mr. Elliott stated
they would build homes with a minimum of
1500 sq. ft. floor space.
Mr. Grubb asked regarding item 1, if they
could go with a 60 ft. street on Toni Drive.
.
Mr. Elliott stated it would not present a
problem and they understood that since
Main St. does not have an outlet that Toni
Dr. could carry the traffic and they would
be willing to give the street 37 ft. back
to back. He stated that if they dedicated
a 60 ft. street it would take off 5 ft.
off lots on the north and 5 ft. of the lots
to the south, but these lots would still
meet the 1F-8 requirement. Mr. Elliott
stated Toni Drive to the east of Precinct
Line Rd. is a 50 ft. street going down to
the e1ementry school.
Mr. Anderson stated since Main St. dead ends
on Crane Road, he feels certain the flow
of traffic will go down Toni Dr.. to
Precinct Line Rd. and anything less than a
37 ft. street back to back with a 60 ft.
right of way would present a problem. Mr.
Anderson stated that the city would also
require sidewalks on this street.
.
Mr. Grubb asked Mr. Anderson if item 8 should
be corrected before the time the final
plat is approved.
Mr. Anderson stated the Commission could
approve the preliminary plat subject to
the Engineer's comments and the city would
take care of the rest.
~
Page 9
p & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone
who wished to speak in favor or in
opposition of these requests.
Mr. John McKes1er stated he owns 3 to 4
acres on Crane Rd. He stated he had
lived there 23 years. He stated since the
building of G1enann Addition 3 years ago
the traffic has quadrupled. He stated he
believed Mr. Anderson would agree that
Crane Rd. in its present state is unable
to handle that much traffic and is in need
of improvement before we even discuss
building any more houses. Mr. McKesler
stated that there is also a drainage
problem because the land in question is
considerably higher than the surrounding
area. He stated that if this plat was
approved, the taxes would sky rocket to the
point they might be unable to keep their
agricultural property. He stated he is.:
requesting the Commission reject this
request until improvements are completed
in drainage and streets.
.
Mr. Anderson asked Mr. McKesler to point
out where his property was located.
Mr. McKes1er stated his land was located
west of Crane and South of G1enann Addition.
.
Mr. Anderson stated the land is very high
and anytime you plant agricultural land with
streets and pavement, you increase the
runoff. He stated that in this case we
also have a problem with sewage. He said
there will have to be a lift station to
handle the sewage. Mr. Anderson stated it
was not feasible to try to handle it any
other way. Mr. Anderson stated the lift
station could possibly cause an overflow in
that the vertic1e street is the low point
where the lift station would be and thats
where the storm water would run. Should
there be a failure of the lift station,
there would be an overflow. Mr. Anderson
stated this would be a remote chance and
we have lift stations in NRH that have been
highly successful.
Mr. Anderson stated he concurs with Mr.
McKesler in regards to Crane Rd. although
he feels most of the traffic would turn on
Toni Dr. to go to Precinct Line Rd. instead
of continuing on Crane.
Page 10
p & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Anderson if this
would cause the adjacent property owners
any drainage problems.
~1r. Anderson stated there is a drainage
problem at Crane and Main on the west
side but the development of G1enann caused
this. He stated on the east there is a
good size drop outlet that takes care of
the flow on that side and what would runoff
Toni Dr. would go to the outlet on the east
side of Crane Rd. and the rest would flow
eastward to the vertical street and hit the
open channel. Mr. Anderson stated the
channel is capable of handling quite a
large flow. He stated it would increase
the erosion around the ditch.
Mr. Grubb told Mr. McKe1ser that in regards
to the raising of taxes on his property,
they would raise only if the value of the
land increased.
.
Mr. McKe1ser stated he was not interested
in selling his property for a profit, but
wants to keep it. He asked Mr. Anderson
if a pump station was necessary where would
it be.
~1r. Anderson stated it would be at the south
of the verticle street and it would
probably be a double pump in case of
malfunction. He stated he did not feel
the lift station would be a permanent
situation because in time when the city
puts sewer up there, they would probably
want to tap on to it.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone else
who wished to speak.
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mr. Grubb,
to APPROVE PZ 79-28 for 1F-8 zoning with a
stipulation that the minimum floor space
be 1500 sq. ft. Motion carried 4-0.
PS 79-48
APPROVED
Request of Alton Isbell for preliminary plat
of Le Garent Estates.
.
Mr. Elliott stated they had revised th~
preliminary plat because they had some
lots that did not meet the qualifications
along the cul-de-sacs. He stated they
eliminated the cul-de-sacs and made the lots
larger which would enhance the project and
would make them more favorable to the
prospective buyers. Mr. Elliott stated he
did not see any of the Engineer's comments
that could not be worked out.
~
Page 11
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Elliott if they
were asking for the revised plat to be
the one for approval instead of the original
one that was submitted.
Mr. Elliott stated that was correct.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone
who wished to speak in favor or in opposition
of this request.
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash,
to APPROVE PS 79-48, subject to the revised
plat and the Engineer's comments.
Motion carried 4-0.
PZ 79-29
APPROVED
Request of Dos Gringos, Inc., to rezone
a portion of Tract 11, Abstract 1606, from
its present classification of Commercial
to a proposed classification of Commerica1-
Specific Use-Sale of Alcoholic Beverages.
This property is located on the South side
of Bedford-Eu1ess Road, just East of
J. C. Penney Co. warehouse.
.
Mr. Don Bowden represented Dos Gringos in
their request. He stated they were planning
to build a 6000 to 7000 sq. ft. Mexican
restaurant next to the Penney's warehouse
on Bedford-Eu1ess Road. He said it would
basically be like the Dos Gringos
restaurants in Dallas and Ft. Worth.
Mr. Bowden stated it would be family
oriented. He stated they were asking for
a permit to sell alcoholic beverages but
they would sell approximately 85 to 87%
food. He said they anticipate doing around
1 million in volume. He showed the
Commission on the plat where their
restaurant would be located.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor or in opposition
of this request.
Mrs. Nash moved, seconded by Mr. Grubb, to
APPROVE PZ 79-29 as requested. Motion
carried 4-0.
PS 79-52
APPROVED
Request of Bedford-Eu1ess Joint Venture for
preliminary plat of Lots 1, 2, 3, & 4,
Block 1, Cochran Addition.
.
PS 79-53
APPROVED
Request of Bedford-Euless joint venture for
final plat of Lots 1,2,3, & 4, Block 1,
Cochran Addition.
page 12
p & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
Mr. Fielding Cochran presented his requests
to the Commission. He stated all he
wishes to do is plat his property so he
can sell it to different restaurants and
shops. Mr. Cochran stated he is not a
developer, only the owner and he wants
to fix it so he can sell the property.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone
who wished to speak in favor or in
opposition of these requests.
Mr. Grubb asked Mr. Cochran if there were
any of the Engineer's comments that he
objected to.
Mr. Cochran stated he did not know much
about the Engineer's comments and that
his Engineer, Mr. Long, after taking this
project went on a fishing trip. He stated
he did feel that items 6 & 7 should refer
to the people occupying the property.
Mr. Grubb stated Mr. Cochran would have to
satisfy the pro rata before he could sell
the property.
.
Mr. Anderson stated that was correct. He
stated Mr. Cochran would be considered the
developer since he was platting the property.
Mr. Cochran stated Mr. Long told him that
the city signed an agreement with
Somerset National Corp. in 1974 to put in
a 8" sewer instead of the required 6"
and the city would pay the difference
between the 6" & 8" line, and that Mr. Long
said he would supply a copy of this
agreement to the City Engineer.
Mr. Anderson stated the city would respect
any agreement made to this. He stated if
the Commission approves this subject to the
Engineer's comments they would work it out.
Mr. Grubb asked since the final plat is
being requested at the same time, can the
items be corrected prior to going to council
by making this passing subject to this.
.
Mr. Anderson stated that if the Commission
would make it approved subject to the
Engineer's comments, we will insist they
get these things squared away before going
to council.
~
Page 13
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
t-lr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mr. Kno'wles
to APPROVE PS 79-52 subject to the
Engineer's comments. Motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mr. Knowles,
to APPROVE PS 79-53, subject to the
Engineer's comments being corrected
prior to going to council. Motion carried
4-0.
PS 79-42
APPROVED
Request of Ralph Robinson for rep1at of
Lot 16R, Block 6, Holiday Hills Addition.
.
Mr. Delbert Stembridge represented Mr.
Robinson in his request. He stated that
Mr. Robinson owns Lot 16 on the corner
of Victoria and Lariat and Lot 17 to
the west of him. He said Mr. Robinson is
enlarging his house, he is building a
garage and driveway. Mr. Stembridge stated
Mr. Robinson wants the driveway on Lot 17,
but he found out that he could only build
another house on this lot in residential
zoning unless he rep1atted them into one
lot. Mr. Stembridge stated Mr. Robinson
plans to use this other lot for his
backyard.
Mr. Grubb asked about item #1 of the
Engineer's comments.
Mr. Stembridge stated the Engineer listed
4 comments and he would take care of
2, 3, & 4, but that item 1 referred to
the utilities being notified. He stated
that was the City's responsibility so he
didn't address that one.
Mr. Anderson stated that was correct~
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Stembridge if
Mr. Robinson would be willing to have
a setback of 25 ft.
Mr. Stembridge stated he had shown a 25 ft.
building line on the rep1at facing Victoria.
.
Mr. Anderson stated Mr. Robinson's house
was built over the building line. He said
it was supposed to have a 25 ft. building
line on Victoria, but the builder built it
using a 15 ft. building line without
proper authority of the Zoning Board of
Adjustments. Mr. Anderson stated that
Mr. Britton gave the builder permission
~
Page 14
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
to do that. Then the Robinsons had a bit of
a problem with the fence going in on the
city's right of way but we finally got
that taken care of. Mr. Anderson stated
then Mr. Robinson came in with the request
to turn his garage into a gameroom and
build another garage. He stated the
Zoning Board of Adjustments granted
Mr. Robinson a variance to use the
same building line as his house for the
garage.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Anderson if what
he was saying was where he is building
the garage is OK on the one lot.
Mr. Anderson stated the garage was OK but
the driveway was on the other lot and
the city stopped the construction. He
said you have to abide by the lot line
and Mr. Robinson was not doing that.
Mrs. Shaunty stated that it looked like
to her that Mr. Robinson does things
backwards. He does it and then comes in
to the city for permission.
.
Mr. Anderson stated this has been his
problem all along. He said we did stop
construction when we found out he was
building over the lot line.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone
who wished to speak in favor or in
opposition of this request.
.
Mr. E. W. French, 6533 Victoria, stated his
lot is 18 and it is parallel and adjacent
to Mr. Robinson's back lot, 17.
Mr. French stated that when he moved there
he though the lot next to him would have a
house on it with a front yard. He stated
that now he will have a backyard next to
his house and people do things in their
backyard that they don't do in their front
yard. He said this would be next to his
2 east bedrooms and in his opinion it would
degrade the appearance of Victoria St.
Mr. French stated that Mr. Robinson might
have good intentions now but he could
change his mind or sell the property later
and this could cause problems next to
his bedroom windows.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Anderson if a fence
could be put up with a setback to
accommodate Mr. French.
.
.
.
~
Page 15
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
Mr. Anderson stated that in order to
protect the property owner of lot 18,
Mr. Robinson would have to fence the entire
area and the fence would have to be put
on the building line, but he was not sure
if this would be acceptable to him.
There was much discussion between the
Commission, Mr. Robinson, and Mr. French
regarding where to put the fence.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone
else who wished to speak.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mr. Knowles,
to APPROVE PS 79-42, subject to the change
of the building line of lot 17 to
approximately 40 ft. from the curb and
a 6 ft. stockard fence be put up across
lot 17 parallel to Victoria St. to match
the fence on lot 18. Motion carried 4-0.
PS 79-43
APPROVED
Request of John M. Hall for preliminary
plat of Lot 13, Block 12, Richland
Terrace Addition.
PS 79-44
APPROVED
Request of John M. Hall for final plat of
Lot 13, Block 12, Rich1and Terrace
Addition.
Mr. Delbert Stembridge represented Mr. Hall
in his requests. He stated Mr. Hall owns
the tract of land south of Jack Roseberry's
Century 21 on Davis Blvd. He said Mr. Hall
plans to build office buildings on this
property. Mr. Stembridge stated they take
exception to item 6 of the Engineer's
comments regarding the sewer line. Mr.
Stembridge stated there is an existing
sewer which runs along the west side of this
property which serves the existing building
on this property. He stated they do; '.not
feel there is a need for a 6" sewer line
when the present one is satisfactory for
one office building. He sàid a 6" line
serves several hundred residences.
Mr. Anderson stated he believed what he is
saying is that all commercial buildings are
required to have a 6" line.
.
.
.
Page 16
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
Mr. Stembridge stated they are opposed
to this.
Mr. Anderson stated he wasn't sure what
was meant by this, but they would try to
work something out.
Mr. Stembridge stated it was usually the
city's policy that if the property already
had water and sewer services, they were not
required to pay the pro rata.
Mr. Anderson stated that since this is a
2" line which will be abandoned in the
near future on Davis Blvd., that is the
reason the pro rata needs to be paid.
He stated they just had one on Precinct
Line Road and they required the pro rata.
Mr. Stembridge stated that one was
different because the person on Precinct
Line Rd. did not have any water service
already there, but on this property,
they do.
Mr. Grubb stated that had been the policy
previously.
Mr. Anderson stated if the Commission wanted
to approve this subject to the Engineer's
comments, he would check into this matter.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor or in opposition
of these requests.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mr. Knowles,
to APPROVE PS 79-43, subject to the
Engineer's comments and with the
recommendation that the pro rata for the
water and sewer be waived. Motion carried
4-0.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mr. Knowles,
to APPROVE PS 79-44, subject to the
Engineer's comments and with the
recommendation that the pro rata for the
water and sewer be waived. Motion
carried 4-0.
~
Page 17
p & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
PS 79-47
APPROVED
Request of Dal-Worth. DevelQpers fQr
preliminary' plat of Holidar Weat,
Section 7.
Mr. Bob Brady, realtor~ represented the
buyer and seller o~ this property. He
stated that Dal-Worth. Dev. CQ~ proposes
a 3 phase development with phase 1 having
104 apartment units on a 134 acre tract
which was purchased from Dr. & Mrs.
Penticost.
Mr~ Grubb asked if they were bringing
Circle Drive north.
Mr. Anderson stated Circle Dr. goes from
North Richland Blvd. to Fieldstone Dr.
already and it would then be continued on.
.
Mr. Brady stated this is an extension of
the original plan John Sandlin had several
years ago for Holiday North Addition.
He stated that Phase I is scheduled
to start this fall and Phase II would
start approximately 18 months from now.
Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Brady if he was
aware of the limitations of 100 water
meters designated by the council til the
water tank is completed next summer.
Mr. Brady stated he was aware of that and
they would recogonize the 100 as being
their limit this year. He stated that
during Phase II they plan to rechannel
Calloway Creek. He said they feel this
would releave the flood plain designation.
Mr. Grubb asked Mr. Brady if they were
going to clear out Calloway Creek up to
where they have excavated.
Mr. Brady stated there is limited
excavation in that area.
Mr. Anderson stated there had not been any
excavation in this area but to the north.
.
Mr. Grubb asked Mr. Brady if he was saying
there was a section of Calloway Creek that
would not be excavated. He said when these
I04 units are built they would cause an
enormous amount of water to flow.
~
Page 18
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
Mr. Anderson stated it would definitely
go into Calloway Branch. He said it
would be up to the developer to show
on his plans what would handle the additional
runoff.
Mr. Brady stated Phase III will see the
development of the remaining 15 acres.
He stated that at this point they don't
know how many retail units will be there,
but they will conform to the present
Local Retail zoning.
Mr. Brady stated these apartments will be
constructed of blind walls next to the
residential area. There will be no
windows, no balconies, and no patios
overlooking the nearby residences. He
showed floor plans of the apartments
and also the building elevations.
Mr. Brady stated there are 1 and 2
bedroom apartments on 2 floors for a total
of 8 units in each building. He stated the
exterior would be stucco and redwood
siding.
.
Mr. Anderson stated he didn't think that
was legal. He said they would have to
research this.
Mr. Brady stated they had reviewed the
Engineer's comments and they have no
objections or exceptions and they will
make the appropriate changes prior to
submitting the final plat for approval.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone
who wished to speak in favor or in
opposition of this request.
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mr. Grubb,
to APPROVE PS 79-47 subject to the
Engineer's comments. Motion carried 4-0.
PS 79-49
APPROVED
Request of Wm. A. Helfman for rep1at of
Lot 1R, Block 1, Helfman Addition.
.
Mr. Richard Bruse, attorney for Mr. Helfman,
and Mr. Ben Nash, general manager of
Helfman Motors, represented Mr. Helfman
in his request. Mr. Bruse stated they
plan to build an expansion phase of their
building. He stated this would be a
2 story single addition onto the original
~
Page 19
p & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
building. He said they must replat the
lots into one lot so they would not
build over the lot line. Mr. Bruse
stated the cost will be approximately
$174,000 for building on this lot.
He stated Mr. Helfman had improved
the street running behind the area by
spending $25,000 and it was donated to
the city as a public street rather than a
private street. Mr. Bruse stated that
there is church property on the other
side of the street and since the church
wanted to use the street they also
donated the street to the city. He stated
that Helfman has parking on his side and
the church has parking on their side.
Mr. Bruse stated there will be added parking
in the lot to accommodate additional customers
drawn by the extension of the new building.
.
Tommy Thompson, surveyor;, stated he
platted the property which is commercial
zoning on both lots 1 and 2 and removing
the lot line would allow them to build
a continuation of the building without
leaving a space between the 2 buildings.
He stated the way it is now they could
build a building on the other lot but
couldn't join it to the existing building.
Mr. Bruse stated there were 2 comments by
the Engineer-l was to notify all utilities
which the city does and the other was to
add the type of zoning to the plat. This
had been done.
Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Nash how many
maintenance spaces are we talking about
adding as a result of construction.
Mr. Nash stated they are not planning on
adding any spaces for this phase. This
will be a 2 story, glass enclosed showroom
which will be on the northeast end of the
building.
Mr. Anderson asked where they were going
to handle their new car make-ready
operations.
.
Mr. Nash stated it would be inside the 50
ft. section of which they already have
the slab poured at this time which is on
the southwest corner of the building.
Mr. Anderson asked would this result in an
expansion of new car operations.
~
Page 20
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
Mr. Nash asked Mr. Anderson from which
aspect.
Mr. Anderson asked if they were going to be
handling more cars through the business.
Mr. Nash stated there would probably be a
20% increase in business, however, with the
addition of the new 50 ft. section where
the curb will be busted out on the
southwest corner of the street to allow
access and eliminate all parking totally
on that end of the street. He stated
he has allocated 25 spaces in the northeast
corner of the used car lot for employees
parking. This will decongest the street
and will improve the appearance of Blackman.
.
Mr. Anderson stated for the record, the
church does not have the parking on the
south side of the street. That area is
a No Parking zone. He stated there has
been problems with double parking, cars
waiting to be serviced, transports
unloading in the street. Mr. Anderson
stated that there is a site distance
problem on the southeast end, it is
difficult to see traffic approaching on the
frontage road. He stated he feels this
problem can be solved with a mirror
installation. Mr. Anderson as-.ked if they
are adding anymore parking spaces by paving
a new lot or are they taking from their
present parking area for the employees.
Mr. Nash stated that temporarily they are
taking space from the used carlot, but after
completion, there will be 35 spaces for
parking on the roof.
Mr. Anderson asked if they were counting the
spaces on the city right of way.
Mr. Nash stated they were not. He stated
he carried several vehicles down the street
that day and he found the view would be
obstructed whether there was a building
or not, but he would agree to the mirror.
.
Mr. Grubb asked if the problem was with the
access road or the road that enters the
access road.
Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Grubb if he was
talking about the site distance problem.
Mr. Grubb stated he was.
~
Page 21
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
Mr. Anderson stated there are several
streets that come together there and it
is difficult to see traffic coming from
the frontage road on the left. He stated
it would be difficult under the best
circumstances because of the poor angle.
Mr. Nash stated Blackman Street was
primarily used by them and the church
only.
Mr. Anderson stated that was cOLrect,
however, the church is used as a commercial
operation since it operates a day care center.
Mr. Grubb suggested that Blackman Street be
made a One-way street to the west.
Mr. Anderson stated he was not sure if
that would work, he would have to consult
the users of the street.
.
Mr. Bruse stated the portion being
rep1atted was on the other end of the
street and the problem would be there
whether the building was there or not.
Mr. Anderson stated that if you 'are
expanding your operation, there would be
a need for more parking. He said the
city does not have a parking requirement for
an auto dealer, which is bad. He said we
should have one because these dealerships
have customers leaving their cars to be
fixed, then after they are fixed, there is
not a place to park them till they are
picked up. Mr. Anderson stated there has
been problems with vendors and customers
who are not aware of the problems and
th~park on the south side of Blackman
where its strictly marked "No Parking".
.
Mr. Bill Helfman, owner of Helfman Motors,
stated that originally when they were in
the construction of the original building,
he was confronted by Ray Britton stating
they had made a mistake, that they were
supposed to pave the street and put in the
water and sewer. He said this cost him
$25,000 to $27,000 which he didn't have.
He said this could have been prevented by
going to a private street of which the
church refused to go along with. Mr.
Helfman stated to increase his dealership
he bought the land next door for
$175,000 for 40,000 sq. ft. He said
~
Page 22
p & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
they now want to clean it up. He said
they will not add any service stalls, they
are only trying to take care of the business
they now have. He said they have rooftop
parking which is very expensive.
Mr. Helfman stated they brought the water
and sewer up from Chrysler which cost
them $25,000 although they could have
brought it from the other way at a cheaper
price. He said no one told him 2 or 3 years
ago that when he wanted to build onto the
showroom that he would have to replat and
erase the lot line. He said he has had to
spend another $1,000 surveying this. He
said everyone said to just bring up the
water and sewer lines, spend the $25,000
which we didn't say you had to in the first
place except we won't turn on your
utilities until you do. He said his
building was already finished and he was
ready to open when he found this out.
Mr. Helfman stated he would agree with
the mirror theory. He stated there is a
situation with the traffic, but no more
than the Volkswagen created or anybody else.
He stated they are trying to make their place
a beautiful and clean place that is a credit
to North Richland Hills. He said if his
business expands, they will be able to
handle what they have now. They have 220
parking spaces including the lot and the
upstairs parking. He said if they build
another service dept. they will go upstairs
which they would loose no parking. He said
they try to keep vendors and customers off
the North Parking side of the street. He
said they had even tried to rent the church
parking lot but were refused. He said that
all they want to do is rep1at so they can
abutt one building to the other. Mr. Helfman
stated he knew the minister would have a
cleaner operation if he didn't have a car
dealership in front of him and he is sorry
but the city would not have $10,000 in
taxes either. He sàid he paid $10,000 in
taxes last year and the church paid none. He
said if he needs more parking space, he will
rent some from Kircher or someone else.
He said he plans in time to put in an
additional dealership in North Richland
Hills, but not at this time. Mr. Helfman
stated the minister should have bought
this land when he said he had a chance to.
.
.
~
Page 23
p & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
Mr. Anderson stated in regards to lot
lines - it is very important not to build
over the lot line. But he said, Mr. Helfman
can build on this lot the way it is, but
he wants to attach it to the existing
building.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor or in opposition
of this request.
.
Rev. Elbert Wilkinson stated he was the
pastor of the church that doesn't pay any
taxes. He stated that the church had run
into the same problems and expenses that
Mr. Helfman had. He said when we first
came out here, it wasn't very well organized
and as development increased, we incurred
new problems. Rev. Wilkinson stated he was
sorry that there was a feeling that the
church doesn't count because they don't pay
taxes. He stated they have approximately
1081 members, many who are businessmen and
residents of North Richland Hills who pay
taxes and attend church here. He said he
would like to make 1 correction to the
attorney-neither of them gave Blackman St.
to the city, it was already there, and when
we started to build, we paid $17,000.00.
Rev. Wilkinson stated the primary reason
for him being here was to ask the question
would this additional building compound or
alleviate the problem. He stated we have
several other problems that have not been
mentioned such as fire protection and ingress-
egress to our facilities with blocked drive-
ways by transports and the city ordinance
states those should be loaded on the property.
Rev. Wilkinson stated if we can have some
assurance with us and the general public
that we can use the street to allow our school
buses to leave our driveway and go to Booth
Calloway Road. This is where he plans to do
his building where they park regularly on the
city right of way. He said this is the area
of greatest concern to us rather than the
other end which is the traffic hazzard, which
none of us can rectify here tonight. Its
the west end where the transports load ànd
unload, where vendors and other suppliers
create a problem with our pàtrons getting in
and out of our drive to our day care and
church.
.
~
Page 24
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone
else who wished to speak.
Mr. Bruse stated he just wanted to remind
everyone that the main issue is not whether
Mr. Helfman can or cannot build a building,
but can he join the buildings or does he
have to build it 5 ft. away.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded þy_ Mr. Knowleq,
to APPROVE PS 79-49 as requested and request
that Mr. Helfman cooperate as much as pos-
sible to alleviate as many of the problems
as he can. Motion carried 4-0.
PS 79-50
APPROVED
Request of Birdvi1le I.S.D. for preliminary
plat of Lot 1, Block 47, and Lot 1, Block 48,
Rich1and Terrace Addition.
PS 79-51
APPROVED
Request of Birdvi1le I.S.D. for final plat of
Lot 1, Block 47, and Lot 1, Block 48, Rich1and
Terrace Addition.
.
Mr. Gary Teague with Teague, NaIl & Perkins
Consulting Engineers represented the School
Dist. in their requests. He stated that
items 1, 2, & 7 of the Engineer's comments
relating to additional information needed
on the plat will be taken care of before
going to council; #3 & 5 related to the
pro rata on the existing water and existing
sewer. He stated that they request that the
Commission waive these requirements since
Richland High School was built in 1962 and
all the requirements for water and sewer
were taken care of at that time. Mr. Teague
stated it has been the action of the council
previously to waive these requirements when
existing water and sewer lines have been in
existance for sometime. Mr. Teague stated
that #4 relates to future pro rata on future
water lines to be constructed. He stated the
school is a non profit organization and all
they are doing is building onto the exist-
ing building. There will be no need for
additional water taps. Mr. Teague stated
the new line will be for new development so
why not let the developer pay for it. Mr.
Teague stated that they request the Planning
and Zoning Commission request the City Council
waive the water pro rata for future develop-
ment. Mr. Teague stated that #6 relates
to future sewer lines
.
~
Page 25
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
.
and the possibility of requesting a sewer
easement along one of the lots platted
here. He stated the school would cooperate
in dedicating an easement at such time when
it is needed if Tesco does not give the
needed easement. Mr. Teague stated they
ask that the Commission not require the
easement at this time.
Mr. Grubb stated it was his understanding
that Mr. Teague feels that the city
should be responsible for furnishing
Birdvi1le I.S.D. with water and sewer.
Mr. Grubb stated he objected to that sort
of attitude because he pays a lot more
school taxes than city taxes each year
and the school is going to have to pick up:
some of the expense because they serve
more than one city.
Mr. Teague stated that maybe Mr. Grubb mis-
understood what he said. He said that
since the school had already paid for the
water and sewer, they should not have to pay
this pro rata.
.
Mr. Grubb stated he felt that the school
should satisfy part of that cost. He said
the school should not ride the city.
Mr. Teague stated that was not their
intention at all, they just felt that since
they were already being served with water
and sewer, they should not have to pay this
pro rata.
Mr. Grubb stated they were also requesting
to waive the fire protection.
Mr. Teague stated they did not intend that
to be waived because that would
be beneficial to the school.
.
Mr. Anderson stated that since there are
developers in the area of the school,
you: not only have to handle the utilities
in front of your property, but you have to
bring it all the way up past the school for
a substantial difference. He stated he
was not sure how that is going to effect the
developer of the property. He said he
imagined it will make it extremely
expensive, and on the other hand it looks
like taking from one pocket and putting it
in another.
.
.
.
Page 26
p & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
Mr. Grubb stated that it is not like
robbing Peter to pay Paul because other
cities are involved.
Mr. Teague stated he did not mean to
indicate the school was looking for a
free ride, that is not their attitude at
all. He said they do not want to be paying
just to benefit someone else. Mr. Teague
said they want to pay where there will
be a mutual benefit being received by them,
and there is some question about a water
line over here on Loop 820 which is on
the far end of where any school facilities
are located.
Mr. Grubb stated that someone has to pay
for that space if that school and the
developer is not going to do it, its going
to be the city of North Richland Hills or
the school one who will pay for it.
Mr. Teague stated that traditionally the
benefiters would pay and then when
the property would develop and then that
individual would pay for it.
Mr. Grubb stated that that's not the way it
works although that might be the way it
ought to be.
Mr. Teague stated the key items were on
the future pro ratas but he would like for
the Commission to take into consideration
the fact that the school paid whatever
fees that were required back in 1962 when
the school first requested water and sewer.
Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Teague if he had any
evidence of that.
Mr. Teague stated he did not.
Mr. Anderson stated that frankly up until
recently, the school had not platted, they
just pretty much went their own merry way,
and considered themselves exempt from all
city regulations. He stated the city now
requires all schools to be platted.
Mr. Anderson stated that Birdville I.S.D. has
been creating a lot of problems for neighbors
.
.
.
Page 27
P & Z Minutes
July 26, 1979
ADJOURNMENT
tJ~¡c ~
SECRETARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
because they haven't been handling their
drainage, they just dump their water
indiscriminat1y upon their neighbors
without a please or a thank you and they
felt that was alright to do it. That is
why 'the council issued the policy and
instructed the staff to not issue any
building permits to ì,the school without
platting. Mr. Anderson stated that the
platting is a method of controlling such
things.
Mr. Teague stated that is very much in
order, and he thinks that's an excellent move
on the city's part in that regard.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor or in opposition
of these requests.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash, to
APPROVE PS 79-50, subject to the Engineer's
comments. Motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Grubb moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash, to
APPROVE PS 79-51, subject to the Engineer's
comments. Motion carried 4-0.
The meeting adjourned at 10:28 P.M.
~.~ ~.~
CHAI PL ING AND ZONING CO ISSION