HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 1979-10-25 Minutes
.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CONSIDERATION OF DATE FOR THE
NOVEMBER P & Z MEETING
NEW BUSINESS
.
PS 79-74
APPROVED
PS 79-75
APPROVED
.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS,
OCTOBER 25, 1979
The meeting was called to order by the
Chairman, Mary Jo Shaunty, at 7:32 P.M.
PRESENT:
CHAIRMAN
SECRETARY
MEMBERS
Mary Jo Shaunty
Warren Eckhardt
Jack Knowles
Marjorie Nash
CITY STAFF PRESENT:
DIRECTOR OF P.W.
P & Z CLERKS
Jim Anderson
Wanda Calvert
Desi Smyth
The Chairman moved this to the last of the
agenda.
The Chairman stated the platting cases would
be heard first due to the controversial
zoning cases to be heard.
Request of Glen Buckner for replat of Lots
22R & 23R, Block 3, Briarwood Estates.
Mr. Buckner stated this was just a matter of
juggling some land. He stated he had a mishap
on this cul-de-sac and just needs to shift the
lot line a little.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor of or in opposition
to this request.
Mrs. Shaunty asked if the mistake was made
when the slab was poured over the line a
little bit.
Mr. Buckner stated that was what happened.
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mr. Eckhardt,
to APPROVE PS 79-74. Motion carried 4-0.
Request of Marvin D. Smith for final plat of
Maroaks Addition.
Doug Long, Consulting Engineer, represented
Mr. Smith in his request. He said he had
received the Engineer1s comments and that
Page 2
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
items 2 through 10 are minor and they would
be able to work them out before going to
council, but #1 regarding the drainage is a
problem. He said they will need to discuss
this with Mr. Anderson and the council.
.
Mr. Knowles asked Mr. Anderson if this would
affect the Morgan Meadows drainage problem.
Mr. Anderson stated it would. He said he
could not honestly recommend the approval of
any plat in the drainage basin that would
cause more drainage problem in Morgan Meadows.
He stated he realized this puts a hardship
on the developer owning the land upstream.
He said the size of Maroaks Addition is con-
siderably small compared to Windcrest Addition
which was approved in 1978. The flow rates
coming down on Morgan Meadows is extremely
high. When you count the total drainage area
draining through Morgan Meadows you are pro-
bably looking at 620 acres and the flow rates
are on the order of 900 cubic feet per second.
Mr. Anderson stated that is the reason he can
not recommend the approval of any development
until we get a handle on this drainage problem.
He stated the other Engineerls comments are
relatively minor and can be worked out. ~~
stated the only way that he could see this plat
could be handled, is to approve it with the
stipulation that the city not negotiate the
city developer agreement until this is solved.
Mr. Anderson said he had requested the dev-
eloper of Windcrest to provide a better drain-
age plan than he had originally had. In fact
he plans to channel the water down Hightower.
Mr. Anderson stated it won It be totally satis-
factory, it won It carry the 100 year flood,
and doubted it would carry the ~ year" flood,
but it will be better than previously planned.
Mr. Anderson stated he realizes Mr. Smith
shouldnlt be held responsible for this addition
that was developed many years ago in the flood
plain. The City is not responsible because it
was not in the City of North Richland Hills at
the time it was developed, but the people living
there now were not aware it was built in the
flood plain.
.
Mrs. Nash asked if Mr. Anderson had any idea
how long it would be before you can come up
with some kind of a solution.
~
Page 3
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Anderson stated a great deal will
depend on talking a developer into
developing the area west of Morgan Meadows
and we would require him to solve the
drainage problem. But, he said, the people
in Morgan Meadows would probably want 1F-12
houses and there is no market for 1F-12
housing now. He said he doubted you could
buy a 1F-12 house in North Richland Hills
for less than $100,000. Mr. Anderson stated
that the city will do what it can to make
some interim corrections especially the
elevation on that stock pond south of High-
tower. He said, maybe, we can encourage the
water to run back in the old channel on the
west side of Morgan Meadows.
.
Mr. Long stated they were paying interest
rate of 18% so they would like very much to
get this plat approved, and then they could
get with the city and see if we can get this
drainage problem worked out. Mr. Long stated
they have been talking with Foster Financial
who are coming in for the balance of their
property trying to work things out. Mr. Long
stated that a developer doesn't always start
at the Gulf and go to the hill, sometimes he
starts in the middle, and that's where they
are now, in the middle.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor of or in opposition
to this request.
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mr. Eckhardt,
to APPROVE PS 79-75 subject to having the
Engineer's comments resolved, particularly
item #1. Motion carried 4-0.
PS 79-76
This request was moved to the end of the
agenda since there was no one present to
present the request.
PS 79-77
APPROVED
PS 79-78
APPROVED
Request of William E. French for preliminary
plat of Lot 2, Block 1, Henry Addition.
Request of William E. French for final plat
of Lot 2, Block 1, Henry Addition.
.
Delbert Stembridge, Consulting Engineer,
represented Mr. French in his request. He
stated the property is presently zoned
Page 4
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Commercial and Mr. French now wants to plat
the property. Mr. Stembridge stated he had
received the Engineer's letter and they take
no exceptions, but Mr. French would like to
sign a covenant for the pro rata for the
future street improvement.
Mrs. Shaunty asked what this property is to
be used for.
Mr. Stembridge stated Mr. French plans to
sell it to Elmer Allison.
Mr. Anderson stated it would be used for a
maintenance storage facility.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor of or in opposition
to these requests.
Mr. Eckhardt moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash, to
APPROVE PS 79-77 subject to the Engineer's
comments. Motion carried 4-0.
.
Mr. Eckhardt moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash, to
APPROVE PS 79-78 subject to the Engineer's
comments. Motion carried 4-0.
PZ 79~40
APPROVED
Request of Winn-Dixie Texas, Inc. to rezone
a portion of Lot 1, North Park Plaza Addition,
from its present classification of Local Retail
to a proposed classification of Local Retail-
Specific Use-Sale of Beer for off-premise
consumption.
This property is located on the northeast
corner of Rufe Snow Drive and Watauga Road.
Mr. Buddy Oujesky represented Winn-Dixie in
their request. He stated they wnated to be
able to sell beer.
Mr. Anderson stated he had them to sharply
define by metes and bounds for the Winn-
Dixie only. He stated that he would request the
Commission, if they approve this request,
they should put it in the motion tnat it
will be granted to Winn-Dixie only.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor of or in opposition
to this request.
.
Page 5
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash,
to APPROVE PZ 79-40 with the stipulation
that the zoning be granted to Winn-Dixie
only. Motion carried 3-1 with Mr. Eckhardt
voting against.
PZ 79-41
APPROVED
Request of Charlie Davidson and Robert Noble
to rezone Tract 2A, Abstract 1625, and Lot 4,
E120'3, Block M, and Lot N165'23, Block N,
Smithfield Addition, from its present classi-
fication of Agriculture to a proposed classi-
fication of 2F-9-Two Family Dwellings.
This property is located on the north side of
Main Street just west of Glenann Addition.
.
Mr. Davidson stated he was kinda subbing for
Bob Noble tonight and Mr. Noble subbed for
him last month while he was recovering from
surgery. He said Mr. Noble's Mother passed
away this week or he would have been here.
Mr. Davidson stated he might not be up to date
as he should be, but he and Mr. Nobles are
asking for 2F-9 zoning and hope that the
Committee will see fit to give them this zoning.
Mr. Davidson stated this is a rather unusual
piece of property and its kinda hard to work
it out into anything very satisfactory. He
said they had asked for Multi-Family zoning
last month and got turned down, so they would
like to go duplexes because they feel like the
area needs the duplexes. In fact, a while ago
a fellow said if you get this zoned, let him
know and he wants some of the lots.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Davidson if Tract A
was not included before.
Mr. Davidson stated that was right and they
are still leaving out Tract A.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Davidson what they
intend to do with it.
Mr. Davidson said: "it won't work into any-
thing right now and we are going to just
sit on it for a while, he guessed." He said
they had hoped that they could get it retailed
sometime later.
Mrs. Shaunty stated in other words, you would
come back in to change the zoning on it.
.
Page 6
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Davidson stated that was right, they
would come back in for zoning on Tract A
whenever they can work out something that
looks like it might be feasible for it.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor of or in opposition
to this request.
.
Tony Skurr stated he was one of the residents
of Glenann that lives further than 200 feet
from the proposed rezoning area. He said he
represents quite a few of the homeowners that
live outside the 200 ft. area and Larry Blalock
is here to represent those who live within the
200 ft. area. Mr. Skurr said: "I would like
to commend the homeowners of Glenann Addition
for showing up, for their actions and support
in our attempt to preserve the character of
our neighborhood. This maintenance of the
neighborhood character is our prime concern
and our goal. We are against the proposed
rezoning request for several reasons. One
concern is the placement of a high density
project at or near the entrance of one of the
two accesses to our area. The term "High
density" is a debatable one, one based on a
set of numbers assigned by a governmental
agency. When it comes to the numbers game, we
homeowners feel that our collective judqement
is just as good as some faceless bureaucrats.
Additionally, we homeowners suspect that we
are being fed only a portion of a plan that
will eventually give that triangular area,
bounded by Amundson Drive, Amundson Street, and
Main Street, a mixture of duplexes and commercial
businesses. We believe our fears are justified
by the fact of the exclusion of Tract A from
the rezoning request. We wonder what other
plans, what other'requests for rezoning are in
store for that area if this rezoning request
is approved. It makes sense to us that the
property owners west of the proposed rezoning
would want to take advantage of any precedent
setting action. In this regard, the results
of previous rezoning for duplexes in the triangle
area indicates the conspicuous absence of pride
in home ownership. The ground maintenance of
these units vividly presents the expected de-
terioration of the present neighborhood standards
with the addition of more duplexes. Another
reason for the homeowner's attitude against this
.
Page 7
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
rezoning request is the anticipated increase
in traffic congestion on Main Street where
the student-pedestrian traffic and the
vehicle traffic are already recognized safety
problems. It was pointed out at the last
Commission meeting that the congestion that
takes place daily could be partially relieved
with the placement of a traffic light and the
widening of Davis Blvd. It was also noted
that there are no funds available for these
improvements. No one on either side of this
rezoning issue can say that the addition of
70 cars, coming out of the only exit of that
project will do anything but add to the safety
problem. If there were to be a call for emergency
vehicles during the morning rush of students
and cars, the results could be disasterous.
At last month's commission meeting one of your
members stated that he normally makes up his
mind on rezoning requests prior to the meeting.
At first brush, it appeared that the 120 home-
owners present were being ignored, but in
retrospect, we feel that it is your responsibility
to visit the areas in question and to make a
judgement that will be in the best interest of
the community. We feel that your judgement should
also be tempered by the opinions of about 250
homeowners in the Glenann Addition whose homes
and land are assessed at 5.1 million dollars.
Our investment and our commitment to home owner-
ship was based on the character and physical
make up of the area. Attempts to so drastically
alter this neighborhood character appears as a
breach of trust that we have in City Planning.
At last month's meeting, the representative of
the proposed rezoning request asked: "What
do you want built there?1I The answer was and
still is more single dwelling units. To do so
would be a natural and complimentary extension
of the present neighborhood. This idea is
submitted to the Commission as the only viable
alternative that would allow a reasonable profit
for the developer, contribute insignificantly to
the traffic problems, and not disrupt the
continuity of the neighborhood's present
character. Thank you for your attention. II
.
.
Larry Blalock said: III live in the Glenann
Addition immediately across from the property
in question. And 1"m not an elected spokesman
for the people within 200 ft., but I have tried,
I have just got a copy of the list of people
who got the letters, yesterday, and I've tried
Page 8
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
to contact them. It's been kinda hard
because some of them don't have any listing
in the phone book and some of the addresses
are not in the Glenann Addition. The first
2 are apparently corporations, and I wasn't
able to contact them. I was able to contact
approximately 10 to 11 people, my wife contacted
a couple of those. Everyone we contacted were
in opposition to this rezoning. Mike Bowman
was sent 2 letters because he has 2 houses and
they were sent to the houses, which are rent
property, and I talked to Mike Bowman today
and he did not get the letters. He never got
them because, I guess the people renting the
property discarded them. II
Mrs. Shaunty stated it looks like if those
were rent houses, the letters would go to
him being he is the taxpayer, or is he just
leasing them for somebody.
Mrs. Calvert stated she has to go by what the
city tax records show, and that is where the
letters are sent. She said she is sorry, but
that is all she has to go on.
.
Mr. Blalock said: IIThey were sent to the
residences, but I talked to him today and he
is in opposition to it. Also, Tommy Abbott
and apparently his father got 2 of the letters.
I talked to Tommy just before I came over here
today, he's a medical doctor, I'm sure you
have heard of him, and he's in opposition of
it, and his father is in opposition if it. He
has written a letter to City Hall, and I don't
know who he specifically sent it to, but he
stated he is in opposition of it, and if it is
approved, he will get a lawyer and fight the
rezoning. One of the letters was sent to the
Birdville Ind. School Dist. because of the junior
high across the street, and I kinda doubt that
it would of gotten to anyone in a responsible
position that would come to a meeting. So, this
effectively brings the list down somewhat if you
el iminate these. II
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Blalock if these are the
ones within 200 ft.
Mr. Blalock said they were.
.
Mrs. Shaunty asked if any he contacted are
here tonight.
Page 9
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Blalock said: "Yes, I know their
number and you can request that later. I
guess thats all. I oppose this and I think
the majority of these people do. II
.
Ron Murdock 8725 Irongate, said: III am in
opposition of this rezoning. As the gentle-
man up here in the beginning said, this is an
unusual piece of property and rather undesir-
able. We are not looking forward to the type
of transit traffic that Multi-Family dwellings
would afford this neighborhood. We don't
look forward to the saturation, naturally,
that Multi-Family dwellings would offer this
area. And, oh, I would like to ask the same
consideration be given their request as would
be mine if I was asking, to say, rezone the
airport there, Manghum Field, a classification
that would alter the surrounding environment
as that would. And what 111m saying is that
we would like to see some continuity remain
in that area as for as the zoning goes. We
don't want to see the city services that we
receive deluted. The quality of those services.
Last of all, I just would like to say that
just having moved here a couple of months ago,
I gave it a great deal of consideration in
planning to choose that area, and again, we
would just like to see the continuity of the
neighborhood remain there. I think again it
would delute the quality of our education,
specifically in that junior high school and
the surrounding elementary school. I just
don't think that it would be in the best
interest of the citizens that live in that
area. And I think this is what your jobs
are-to look out for our best interests and
we have to put that trust in you. II
Mr. Blalock said: III just want to add one
thing, one of the 19 letters was returned
undelivered also. II
Mrs. Shaunty asked if he knew who it was to.
Mr. Blalock said: IIMichael W. Allen.1I
Mrs. Shaunty said we might ought to check the
records on that.
.
Mrs. Calvert stated she did and the tax office
still shows that information.
Page 10
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Alice Williams said: "111m a resident of
Glenann Addition. I want to speak on behalf
of a few people on my street that are very
much in opposition to multi-dwelling homes
even if they are duplexes, in our area be-
cause we do not have very much access in and
out of Glenann Addition. We have Simmons
Street and Main Street which makes it very
difficult getting to and from work and other
places. Also, we moved there to get away
from the Watauga area which are mostly
.rent homes. The deterioration of the areas
are somewhat bad and we moved into Glenann
hoping to be an area that would grow and
people would take pride in their homes, and
I feel that duplexes would be rent property
that people would not take care of it as
well as homeowners. II
.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Davidson if he proposes
these duplexes to be owner occupied or does
he plan to sell them.
Mr. Davidson stated that about the only type
of financing available now for duplexes are
owner occupied where the owner lives on one
side and rents the other side.
Mr. Anderson stated that he doesn't believe
that Mr. Davidson is in a position to
guarantee this.
Mr. Davidson stated that there was no way
they could guarantee this, if there is any
other type of financing available, he'd be
happy to find some, but right now that is
all that is available.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone else
who wished to speak.
.
Robert Murkey, 6532 Sherry Lane, said: "I 1m
against this rezoning because we already
have 3 examples of what these are going to
bring. Those 2 duplexes that were built
last year. I drive by them every morning and
they are already looking like a mess. They
have done nothing to the lawns, they don't
even want to chop the weeds down. I don't
see where this is going to be beneficial to
the homeowners in the area already. I think
that if they wanted to make this a Multi-
Family unit they should have started with
Page 11
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Multi-family units, then built these homes
later and then tried to sell them to us
with 30 year mortgages on their homes. II
Ron Murdock said: III would like to ask a
question. Before decisions are made of this
nature, are present conditions of like pro-
perty checked by the Board Members or the
rezoning Committee members before consideration?
There is a couple of duplexes that are presently
there and as the gentleman just noted, the
bad condition that they are in and the lack of
maintenance that they receive. I think that
you should see that. II
Mrs. Shaunty stated that usually they go to
look at the surrounding area that borders the
property in question, but would have to admit
that this time, she failed to look at that,
but did last time. She asked if any other
member checked this out.
They had.
.
Mr. Murdock said: IIWe would like to have
that consideration. II
Charlene McKeever, 6433 Simmons, said: III
have a question, 111m a little confused,
there has been talk about Davis Blvd. What
are the plans. The last session, we talked
about traffic lights. A traffic light would
help, but it still would not cut down on the
traffic thats going down Davis and Main."
Mr. Anderson stated that right now, the
current plans call for the widening of Davis
Blvd. to 7 lanes up to Emeral Hills Way.
Mrs. McKeever asked: IIWhats the time limit
on that?"
.
Mr. Anderson stated that we are in the process
of moving the utilities for that project right
now and the contract should be let for the
street in the month of February. That will
take it up to Emerald Hills. He said he knows
that is not very far. Two of those 7 lanes
will probably be for parking lanes. There
is obviously no requirement for 7 lanes
particularly when you are going to transition
down to 2 lanes. Mr. Anderson said, hopefully,
Page 12
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
in the future it will be widened all the
way out, but when that is going to happen
depends largely on how many federal funds
are made available and how much the city can
supplement these funds. Not for the feasible
future is it going to be widened any further
than Emerald Hills Way.
.
Mrs. McKeever said: "Well, I think this is
one problem. We live right on the corner of
Simmons and Main and with the duplexes with
all the traffic filtering out on Main, there
are only 3 ways to go. You can go down Davis,
come down Simmons, or go all the way to Crane.
In the mornings and afternoons during the
school time, we have terrific traffic problems,
its hard for us to get out of our driveways.
And with adding the duplexes with this many
more people its going to really make it more
complicated for us to get around in our neigh-
borhood and get out. I don't know if you '_ve
driven down Crane Road or the airport road
lately, but they are in terrible condition.
So if we were to put this many more people
trying to go out Davis, even with the traffic
light, there's still going to be all these
people coming from Stoneybrooke and all the
areas out there. II
Mr. Anderson asked how many people do you
think we're talking about.
Mrs. McKeever said: IIWell, isn't there some-
thing like 30 to 40 units?1I
Mr. Anderson stated there would be 34 units.
Mrs. Mc Keever sa i d : IIvJe 11 , what I s the
occupancy rate, about 2 something?1I
Mr. Anderson stated it varies, but he
imagined in duplexes it would be around 2.5
some of which are children.
Mrs. ~1cKeever said: IIOK-at least 1 or 2
cars per each one. II
Mr. Anderson stated at least 2 per unit.
.
Mrs. McKeever said: "Sometimes even more.
So that's a lot of traffic. Plus the schools,
they are going to be adding on to the schools,
Smithfield Jr. High, that's more people
Page 13
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
coming in to bring their children. So we
are really concerned. Like on Simmons, its
just a thoroughfare through there all the
time and there are a lot of children. I
think thats one thing we are concerned about.
The children going to school, the children
thats one thing we are concerned about. The
children going to school, the children that
live in the neighborhood adding so many more
cars without any additional outlets is really
causing a traffic problem in our area. II
.
Dennis Denson, 6524 Riddle Dr., said: III
represent around 6 families that were at the
last meeting but were unable to make it to-
night. I just want to reitirate what has
already been said. The main thing is the
traffic problem. As everyone has mentioned,
Davis Blvd., but also there is only 2 ways
into that neighborhood. The back route down
Precinct Line Road, and its really unbearable
now because I guess other developments or
additions up and down Davis Blvd. are using
the back route also. 111m against the apart-
ments for the main reason, traffic problems,
and also the congestion of people there and
also if you stop and think about the tax
dollars, we have homes in there anywhere from
$55,000 to $70,000, probably. Tax dollars
that we Ire paying on that, you get $90,000
duplexes in there and cut the taxes in half.
All of our tax dollars are being diluted for
their same use as the homeowners there. Also,
I've just noticed back about a mile on this
side of our addition, there is a 15 acre tract
that has been zoned for Multi-Family use on
Davis Blvd. which would have a bearing on
access to our addition. That's my main
contention is the traffic problem and also
there's just a heavy density of people in
that area.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Anderson if there are
any plans to do any widening on Main Street.
Mr. Anderson stated that Main St. is already
quite wide, it is at thoroughfare width right
now. He said he believes it's 41 ft. back of
curb to back of curb on Main St. so it is
very wide.
.
George Richardson, 8401 Main St., right on
the corner of the proposed property, said:
Page 14
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
"I have only 2 things to add that I don't
think has been mentioned. The facilities
at the Jr. High school are used nearly 24
hours a day now by people after school.
There's Junior football, baseball. I've
even seen them play some adult ball out
there and when all of this is taking place,
and traffic out there during this period of
time, normally these people don't bother
me because I think 11m out of the area, but
the traffic gets down to 1 lane and almost
no lane during this period of time. In
other words, if you come through there with
anything over a standard vehicle, youlve g :
a problem. Even my pickup won't come down
there sometimes. With students, kids, small
kids, running across the street its really a
bad situation. Now I do have one question
that relates not only to our area, but the
total overall picture. Its our water problem.
I want to touch on this one more time. I'm
aware that North Richland Hills has tried to
buy from Hurst through Tarrant County Jr.
College system a considerable amount of water,
like in the hundreds of thousands of gallons
per day, if I'm not mistaken. I cannot give
an exact quote but this originally was brought
up for the apartment complex which is going in
across the street directly to the south of the
NE campus. What is going to happen when we
have all of those apartments and then we're
adding on out in our area and we're going to be
back in the same hole again, aren't we9 without
water. Well, I guess what my concern was not
only that, but with us adding on and on, there
have been conversations that the council was
going to cut back on new construction until
at such time you were capable of supplying
water.
.
.
Mr. Anderson stated that was correct and they
have done so. There is a limitation in force
at this time. Not more than 10 permits per
builder per month and only 100 apartment units
to be constructed between now and when the
TRA is complete. So you are talking about
200 apartment units, multi-family type units,
between now and 1982 or 1983. So that is a
severe limitation on construction. But, Mr.
Anderson said that the city is not just rely-
ing totally on that. We have contractors work-
ing right now removing bottlenecks around the
Page 1 5
P & Z ~1i nutes
October 25, 1979
.
system. He said he thinks everyone realizes
that there is plenty of water. There is no
problem with the water, it's just that the
lines are too small and we just can It pack
it through those small lines, so we are in
the process of removing those bottlenecks.
Mr. Anderson said he was not here a year ago
last summer when it got pretty grim around
here. But he did not think anyone went with-
out water this summer, it wasn't even necessary
to put any restrictions on in terms of water
usage.
~~r. Richardson said: "Well, I think that's
what everyone's concerned about as far as
water is concerned is-oh, we've got out of
it now, or we're getting ready to stick our-
selves right back into the same hole we came
out of. II
.
Mr. Anderson stated he believed that the
changes that have been made to the oioinq
system are going to be quite beneficial,
but said he was not in any position to give
any guarantees. He said he wasn't sure what
would happen if we had a prolonged drought
next summer.
Mr. Richardson said: "We're not talking
about that type of thing, I don't think. I
think what we're talking about is over loading
ourselves. With those apartments, if they
do not get the approval by Tarrant County Jr.
College to supply them with water, then will
North Richland Hills pick up the ball and
carry it or what happens there or do they
sit there with dry wells?"
Mr. Anderson stated the apartments that you
are referring to are really different apart-
ments. The apartments that we have approached
Tarrant County Jr. College on are the apart-
ments immediately to the west of the ones you
see under construction.
~1r. Richardson said: Ills it down there
where the brush and everything is down there
on the corner?1I
.
Mr. Anderson stated that it is the Kanter
property, immediately west of University
Plaza. Thats where they wanted to build
~
Page 16
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
apartments and we said we don't have the
water for them and they said what if they
can get the water from Hurst, would North
Richland Hills have any objections. Mr.
Anderson stated the Haystack apartments and
University Plaza apartments are slated for
North Richland Hills water. The lines are
quite large in that area and there shouldn't
be any type of problem.
Mr. Richardson said: IIThats what I wanted
to clarify because I knew there was a large
quanity of construction going on. And I
understand thats directly behind all of thät.
I quess what you Ire talking about, new con-
struction in that area was designated as to
be apartment conplexes. Is that correct?1I
.
Mr. Anderson stated that part of it is zoned
Multi-Family and part of it is zoned Local
Retail. Theoretically, you can build Multi-
Family apartments in Local Retail zoning.
But nobody is going to build apartments in
the City of North Richland Hills other than
the 100 units between now and next June or
July, then there can be another 100. Mr.
Anderson said the size of this project is so
small that it is simply not economic. So in
effect, you might say that there's not going
to be much apartment construction in this city.
Mr. Anderson stated that they may build Local
Retail, but they are not going to build apart-
ments unless we figure out someplace to get
some more water.
Mr. Richardson said: "Thank you. II
David Rose, 8400 Donna Dr., said: "I live
directly across the street from the recently
constructed duplexes. I was here last year
in opposition to the rezoning of that property
at the time. My statement is that I'm opposed
to this rezoning proposal. I look out my
dining room window at least twice a day. At
breakfast and at dinner, and I see a pile of
rubbish that was put there by the contractor,
I suppose, and it has been there for several
months. II
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mrs. Calvert to make a note
of this and have it checked out.
.
Page 17
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Rose said: IIput in there the johnson
grass is as high as the podium. II
Mr. Anderson stated they can be cited for
that and we will look into it.
Mrs. Shaunty told the audience that when
things like this happens, to call the city
and they will send an inspector out and
then send them a notice and give them a
certain number of days to clean it up or
they will be fined.
Bill Gragg, 6520 Collard Ct., said: III'd
like to say that these people have stated
their feelings rather well tonight and I
agree with them. I have 1 question for Mr.
Anderson. I had a discussion with him here
not too long ago, and he mentioned that the
drainage in that area was not so good. Is
this going to add to that problem?1I
Mr. Anderson stated the proper answer has to
be that he is not sure because he has not
got to study the contour lines in detail.
.
Mr. Gragg said: IISince you and I discussed
that I"ve looked at it. It appears to me as
though it wi 11 . II
Mr. Anderson stated one of the major flood
plains in North Richland Hills goes through
that subdivision, Walker Branch.
Mr. Gragg said: "Yes, that's what you were
saying, and that concerns all of us, 111m
sure. And to add to it. II
Mr. Anderson stated he would imagine that
any water flow out of that subdivision would
probably be on Main St. The serious problem
as you probably are aware, is between Main
and the railroad where it gets severe.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Anderson if Amundson
would ever be opened up to the south.
Mr. Anderson stated he was not sure, he would
have to consult the Master Plan and he doesn't
have a copy here tonight, but he rather doubted
it.
.
Page 18
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mrs. Shaunty stated it sure would alleviate
some of the problem.
Dennis Dudson said: IISpeaking of drainage
problems, I noticed those 2 duplexes that
are there right behind them between the
railroad tracks there is a culvert coming
under the railroad tracks with a big drain-
age deal there. I don't know if that will
have to be all along that road there be-
cause of the drainage. Cause evidently there
is a drainage problem around the duplexes.
They did build a big drainage deal up behind
the duplexes cause a big old culvert comes up
behind the road there right at the back door
of the duplexes. And if you don't watch
there, its really going to be a concentration
of water right there at the drainage. II
Mrs. Shaunty stated the Engineer1s comments
didn't say it would create a drainage problem
on his comments regarding the preliminary plat.
.
Mr. Anderson stated he believes the reason
he hasn't commented is a big problem depends
on your point of view of it. If it gets in
your back door, its a big problem. He said
he thinks what he's saying here by not com-
menting on it is that the amount of the area
is so small that the maximum contribution,
even if at the 100 year flood rates, couldn't
be more than 17 cubic feet per second. Some-
thing like that would be the maximum con-
tribution to the flooding, and that's only
got the chance of occuring 1% of any given
year. Mr. Anderson stated that if the runoff
from the area were designed to all go to the
back of the property, he would imagine at
least half of it would come to Main Street
and probably would add about 8 cubic feet
per second at the 100 year flood rate. He
said if we get the 100 year flood in that
particular area, he doubts if you would notice
it because there would be so much water on you
anyway, it would probably be going into your
house. Mr. Anderson stated that this 6 point
something acres could possibly contribute 6 or
8 cubic feet a second, which is only minor.
The Chairman closed the public hearing and the
Commission members discussed this request.
.
Page 19
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mr. Eckhardt,
to APPROVE PZ 79-41 as requested. Motion
carried 3-1 with Mrs. Nash voting against.
Mrs. Shaunty told Mr. Davidson that although
this is only a recommendation to the Council
and these people will be going to the Council
stating exactly what they have stated here,
we just wanted you to know that there is no
way that this Board will ever go along with
any type of Commercial on Tract A. She said
you've got a preliminary plat fdr the next
item, would you like to hold up on it and
come back in with Tract A platted with 2F-9.
Mrs. Shaunty stated she just wants Mr. David-
son to understand that we are strictly against
any Commercial or Local Retail coming in on
that corner.
.
Mr. Davidson said: III appreciate that, but
really what we got into was that little corner
was going to cost us another street in there.
The only thing that we could come up with now.
We've had engineers working on this. We can't
come up with anything without putting in another
street in there to take care of that unless we
make some awful large lots.
Mrs. Shaunty stated maybe they could back
them up to that and have a nice corner greenery.
Mr. Davidson said: "Originally we had planned
on four plexes only in that particular area
because we were going to build kind of a
boulevard type of thing in there so that we
could do that. And thats where we wanted the
fourplexes with duplexes on the rest of the
area because that would put them in a much
larger lot. That was the original plan, then
whenever we got turned down on that particular
zoning, we came back and we don't know what
to do wi th Tract A. II
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Davidson if he would
like to take this plat back and rework it.
She said it was strickly up to him, but she
just wanted him to understand that if later
he wanted to come back in to zone Tract A
to Local Retail or Commercial, the Commission
would be against it.
.
Page 2 0
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Davidson said: 'I I can understand
your thinking on that and you would approve
the zoning, but subject to a plat change,
is that correct?'1
Mrs. Shaunty stated what the Commission is
saying is that they will approve the zoning
because Tract A is in the zoning for 2F-9,
but if someday you don't develop it, and
you come back in and want Tract A zoned for
Local Retail or Commercial, we will not go
along with that. She asked Mr. Davidson if
he wanted to hold up on the platting and see
what you can do to rework it.
Mr. Anderson stated that Mr. Davidson does
not have the ownership of that little triangle
where the duplexes are sitting now, so he
doesnlt have any access into that tract. He
couldn't do anything with it if he wanted to
at this point and time. Mr. Anderson stated
that it is really dead spack and the lot is
too wide for one street and as he pointed out
it is too narrow for 2 streets. It's a real
problem, an awkward piece of land.
.
Mr. Davidson said: "We have had engineers
working on it, but they haven't come up with
anything. II
Mr. Anderson stated it is essentially dead
at this point and time. If he wants to do
anything with it in the future, he will have
to come back in and request a zoning change.
Mr. Davidson said: IIAt this point and time,
we don It know what we are going to do with it. II
The Chairman stated to the people involved
in this case, it will be heard by the council
on December 10th at 7:00 P.M.
Ron Murdock said: "I would like to ask a
question. He can you in good faith make
this recommendation when you said in your
statement a while ago that rezoning of this
Tract A would further add to the problems
that exist now. II
.
Mrs. Shaunty stated that the Commission doesn't
feel that Tract A is an appropriate place for
Local Retail or Commercial.
Page 21
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Murdock said: "But you said this would
add to the problem. You admitted we have
problems. Why would you want to further
complicate them. II
Mrs. Shaunty stated she thinks there are
traffic problems out there and there is
always going to be. She said we are never
going to be able to get rid of the traffic.
Mr. Murdock said: IIHhy add to it? \~hy
would you take the preference or side with
a developer that would only enhance his
profits?"
Mrs. Shaunty stated the Commission turned
down Multi-Family on the last request. She
said they came through last month wanting
Multi-Family only because he wanted a few
in there that were going to be Multi-Family.
She said he could of turned around and sold
it to somebody and they could come in with
Multi-Family on the whole thing.
.
Mr. Murdock said: IIYou are basing your
statement relatively on what happened before.
11m just stating my point of view relative
to what welre living in now. And all I was
saying is, why further complicate our lives
out there. You're putting the profits of a
developer ahead of the people that live in
thi s communi ty. II
Mr. Knowles stated the Commission understands
the problems the people have out there be-
cause he said he has to go to work out there
every day.
Several in the audience asked why he voted
for it, then.
Mr. Anderson asked for order.
.
,AI. ,
Mr. Knowles said he would like to answer
that if they would listen. He said this
Board feels like we certainly have an
obligation to listen to the homeowners. He
said he could assure them that had they not
been here last time, we would have voted for
Multi-Family. He said the land has to be used
someway. He said the Commission does not only
consider the local community, that is Glenann,
Page 22
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
but we also consider the best use for this
property in relationship to the City of
North Richland Hills. And it is the view
of this Board that this land is not suitable
for single family dwellings. He said it
would not be fair to you to put in Multi-
Family dwellings, and we realize you don't
think it's fair to put 2 family dwellings,
but the Commission feels like that IS the
best use for that land consideraing the pro-
blems that exist there now and the problems
that might exist with other zoning. That is
how the Board based their decision.
Mr. Murdock said: IIThat's the best use----,
it's in the best interest of the developer,
not the people that live there. II
Mr. Knowles stated the best use might have
been for Multi-Family dwellings.
.
Mr. Murdock said: IIRight then you just said
and add to the problems we have now. That's
2 people that have admitted that we have
problems traffic wise and still the decision
reflects just something that would promote
further prob 1 ems. II
Mr. Knowles stated that if you put single
family dwellings there, you are going to add
to the problems you have now also.
Mr. Murdock sa i d : liTe 11 me about it. II
Mrs. Shaunty told the people to go to the
Council and the Council will have all the
minutes of our meeting, and the Council members
will read everything that has gone into the
minutes.
Mr. Murdock said: IIWell, wait a minute, why
don~t we just settle it now where they don't
have to. II
.
Mrs. Shaunty stated it has been settled. The
Board has made a recommendation, but it is
strictly a recommendation to the Council.
they go by what they feel like after listening
to everybody like we did. She said it was
said last time, our minds are made up. Mrs.
Shaunty stated that a lot of times we don't
even know what they are going to do with the
Page 23
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
property. She said just like the one we
asked about earlier. They said they were
going to build a storage yard to store stuff,
etc. The Commission doesn't know a lot of
times what they are going to do with it,
because many things can go under a certain
type of zoning. Mrs. Shaunty stated that is
why when they come up here, we listen to
what they are going to do. She said the
Board felt like 2F-9 was the highest and best
use for this land. Mrs. Shaunty stated that
there were some duplexes in the city that are
very nice, some of Sandlins are 200 sq. ft.,
with the garage in the back, and rear entry
to the yards. They are very attractive to the
area in Holiday Heights. She said this is why
the Commission voted for this, but it is
strictly a recommendation, we are not telling
the council what to do. Mrs. Shaunty said that
when someone has some land they are paying taxes
on, they do have the right to come in and ask
for something to be done to it.
Some lady in the audience said they pay taxes,
too.
.
A man in the audience asked if the minutes will
contain the things that has happened here.
Mrs. Shaunty stated that the minutes go to
all the Council Members.
The man said: II I wonder if it \\lill contain
the lividity' with ~hich Mr. Eckhardt and Mr.
Kno\^!les considered the property in .que.stio_n.
They thought it was practically hilarious over
there."
Mr. Knowles said he objected to that.
The Chairman said 'she didn't .think we are
getting anywhere with this, this needs to
be taken to the Council.
Mr. Murdock said: III think somebody, some-
where is bought and paid for. I don It know
who it is."
Mr. Anderson said: IISir, I thoroughly resent
that and if you make that charge again, I
will take you to court. Do you hear me?"
.
Page 24
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Davidson said: "I never saw ~1r. Anderson
before tonight. II
Mr. Anderson said: IIHhat you've said slanders
everyone sitting at this table, and sir, that
is against the law. II
Mr. ~1urdock said: "I apoligize for that. I
still don't think the Board is acting in the
best interest of the citizens in the city.11
Mrs. Shaunty said then that's what you need
to tell the Council. It will go into the
minutes.
Mr. B 1 a 1 0 c k sa i d : II May I ask 1 que s t ion.
What is the purpose of sending out the 19
letters?"
Mrs. Shaunty said they were to notify the
people to come up here.
Mr. Blalock said: IIWhy? If it doesn't
make any difference. II
.
Mrs. Shaunty stated that it does make a
difference. One voted against it and 3 voted
for it.
Mr. Blalock said: IILast time you asked how
many people got the letters are here. This
time you didn't. I think you would have
found more. II
Mrs. Shaunty stated it was the same amount
that got them this time.
Mr. Blalock said: IIThats right, the same
amount got them, but I think you would have
found out that there was more here this time
than last time if you would have asked before
they all 1 eft. II
Mr. Eckhardt stated that if they hadn-t
come last time, we might have passed the
Multi-Family zoning.
Mr. Blalock said: IIShe said last time that
she had decided before she came in that she
was going to do that. II
.
Mrs. Shaunty stated she did not say that.
f3age 2 5
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Eckhardt stated that what was said was,
when he came in the door at night, he had
looked at his packet either during the week
before, and most of the time, he at least
looks back through it sometimes Thursday to
familiarize himself with it. He said he
tries to go out and look at the piece of
property so that when he walks through that
door, he can have on his mind a particular
way he will probably vote. Mr. Eckhardt
said that more times than not, his mind has
been changed after either someone has made a
presentation, or someone objects. He said
he could not just walk in here without know-
ing what direction he's heading, but that does
not mean that his mind is totally made up.
Mrs. Shaunty said that you never know what
they are going to do with the property.
That's why we ask them what they are going
to do with it. It goes into the records.
Mr. Blalock said: IIRight, but I recall last
time you said that after you drove through
the property, you decided you'd turn it down.
I believe you can check the minutes. II
.
Mrs. Shaunty said: "I didn't say that. I
said there was a traffic problem but I didn't
say that. II
Mr. Blalock said: III was thinking you did.11
Mrs. Shaunty stated she did say that if they
would bring it back through for 2F-9, she
might consider it.
PS 79-73
APPROVED
The Chairman said they would now take up the
preliminary plat of this property.
Request of Charlie Davidson and Robert Noble
for preliminary plat of Glenann Addition,
5th Filing.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Davidson if he had any-
thing else to add to this.
Mr. Davidson stated he did not.
.
Tony Skurr said: liOn that particular layout
that is being submitted for consideration, I
feel that having a cul-de-sac there with one
Page 26
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
entrance and and exit right in the middle
of Main Street for all that congestion in
the morning, putting the kids at Smithfield
Jr. High school and the elementary school
there in jeopardy. I think if the developers
want to save dollars, it shouldn't be at the
expense of those kids or at the expense of
the frustrations of all the people that have
to use that road to go to work. I think the
Commission here should request that they go
back and find a way to develop that area where
there is equitable distribution of the traffic
there. All of them coming out the same time
everybody is coming out thats going to mingle
with the kids and its going to create a heart-
ache, probably a disaster. II
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Davidson if he could
add anything to that.
Mr. Davidson said: liThe more streets you
have, the more traffic problems you have,
Correct?1I
.
Mrs. Shaunty stated that she can see that he
is trying to contain it more by having a
cul-de-sac.
Mr. Davidson said: IIYes, we are trying to
contain it. The gentleman here says its
going to add to his problem, but itls going
to help his problem because if we put 2
streets there then he's going to have to
worry about 2 lanes of traffic coming out
instead of one. We felt that the best thing
to do was to put the one street in there and
the other thing is, the way the property is
laid out, what else are you going to do with
it.
Someone in the audience said why not make a
street out to Amundson Drive.
~1r. Davidson said: IIThen everybody in Glenann
is going to jump up and down even more, be-
cause we are putting traffic right out in the
mi ddl e of Gl enann. II
Mrs. Shaunty said they're talking about
Amundson Drive.
.
Page 2 7
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Knowles asked Mr. Davidson to come up
to the podium.
There was discussion between the Board, Mr.
Anderson, and Mr. Davidson.
Mrs. Shaunty told the audience that the
Commission realizes now that when he was
talking that he said those lots that back
up will have rear entry garages and have
about 2000 sq. ft. floor space. She said
we talked about if that street was going
to permanent or not and if he had to pay
the pro rata for the whole length of
Amundson Road, and we found out that it's
not going to be a permanent road and they
are going to close it.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Anderson if the
Engineers were going to work on the Master
Plan. That might be a way out.
.
Mr. Anderson stated that we are in the pro-
cess of updating the thoroughfare Master
plan right now, but he doesn't know what
we are going to do with Amundson Drive. He
said that he knows that Amundson Drive where
the duplexes are will stay open, but thats
all we are sure of. It's that part that goes
on behind your property that we are not sure
of.
Mr. Davidson said: liThe guy that built the
duplexes next door, there's nothing we can
do about him, just like there's nothing you
can do about your neighbors. If we leave
trash, there's nothing you can do to us.
Hopefully, we're not going to do that, at
least we don't plan to.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone else
that wants to speak.
Mr. Skurr said: IIHow can you approve that
plan right there? Why can't you, as the
Commission, force the staff to do their home-
work and make a decision?"
.
Mrs. Shaunty stated that she believes this
is going to fall under the engineers and the
city staff as to what is done to that road.
It doesn't have anything to do with us, isn't
that right? We don't make the decisions on
Page 28
p & Z ~1i nutes
October 25, 1979
.
the roads or anything like that.
Mr. Anderson stated that was correct. Thats
essentially the staff and the City Council's
decisions.
A man in the audience said: "You approve
plat plans which consists of streets and
roads. II
Mrs. Shaunty said: "But if the Engineer
says we've got a problem...."
The man in the audience said: IINow wait a
minute. II
Dick Berthiaume said: IIOne of your jobs is
in addition to approving zoning changes is
to approve plats. Right?"
Mrs. Shaunty stated that was right.
Mr. Berthiaume said: "Alright, plats consist
of streets. So you do have control over the
way our streets are laid out in our city. II
.
Mrs. Shaunty stated that we have a city
engineer that writes us comments and if he
feels theres a problem, we say subject to the
Engineer's comments and the Council looks at
that. The Engineer is at the meeting, and
if there is a problem, it is worked out before
they get a permit or anything like that.
Mr. Berthiaume said: II Alright, then our
dealing is with the City Engineer. 11m sure
Mr. Anderson works for....1I
Mrs. Shaunty stated he works for the City.
.
Mr. Berthiaume said: IIThere's one other
comment I would like to make. You approved
with conditions of one subdivision for Mr.
Smith with conditions as far as drainage. I
don It think that theres anybody here thats
ever been down Amundson, just one block past
Amundson Road to see that swamp that we've
got sitting right back there. Now I mean
literally a swamp. I used to lease the land
that Mr. Davidson owns right now, to keep my
horses on. When it rained, I had as much as
4 inches of water. And that was Mr. Zarcome
~
P age Z9
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
that I rented from. I'm the one that converted
the old backstop for the little league field
into stalls. Three or four inches of water
when we would get 2 or 3 inches of rain. That
land does not drain properly. The last 200 ft.
taking from Main St. going toward Amundson,
you get the last 200 ft. over there, there is
standing water over in that ditch all the way
from, I can't remember the gentleman's name,
but they all live right there at the edge of
Mr. Zarcome's land all the way down to, not
Amundson Road or Amundson Street, but the very
next street. There's a swamp back there that
consists of about 7 acres of land. I leased
that at one time and I moved my horses off
there because you would have 6,8, or 10 inches
of water in that land."
Mr. Anderson asked if that was right in the
middle of the Walker Flood Channel.
.
Mr. Berthiaume said: IIRight, but it also comes
back up to the land that Mr. Davidson owns now,
about 200 ft. You come 200 ft. south of
Amundson Road, you have water standing there
as much as 3 Qr 4 inches deep anytime you get
a rain. And if that isn't a drainage problem.
You know there is a drainage problem on that
back part of that property. Those 2 duplexes
that are sitting there, that one that is sitting
on the corner of Amundson Dr. & Amundson Road,
has that big drainage ditch there. You can
go over there right after a rain and you'll see
as much as 15 inches of water standing right
there by that culvert. As much as 15 inches of
water that has no place to go. II
Mr. Anderson stated that in his opinion that
is probably why the duplexes have not rented,
because of that setting there.
Mr. Berthiaume said: "Yes, one of them is
rented, one whole is rented, the other one has
been setting there ever since, and its empty.
Mr. Anderson said: "Wait till it rains. II
Mr. Berthiaume said: "That's right. And now
you're talking about adding that much more.
.You're talking about adding how many more-15
to 17 duplexes. That's a problem. II
.
Page 30
p & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Anderson stated that was relatively minor,
the drainage basin there is hundreds of acres.
Mr. Berthiaume said: "When you're talking
about 7 acres of land down there setting as
a swamp already, and you're talking about
200 ft. across the whole length of Amundson
there, 200 ft. deep. That's not a minor
problem when you're talking about 3 or 4
inches of water. And I mean that's when
you get a moderate rain. These rains we had
a couple of months ago, I bet you would of
had water that came up over your ankles
across that part of the property. And to me
that is not a minor problem. Where is that
water going to go? Is it going to go back
down into the swamp?"
Mr. Anderson stated that the drainage basin
upstream is probably on the order of about
1000 acres up to the drainage divide.
.
Mr. Berthiaume said: III'm worried about an
80 x 120 ft. lot. That's what everyone else
is worried about, an 80 x 120 ft. lot. We're
not worried about 1000 acres, we1re worried
about what we have invested in that property
right now. II
Mr. Anderson said: IIIf you are concerned about
a drainage problem, 1"m trying to give you an
idea of the magnitude that this 7 acres is
going to add to your problem. It's about 1%
or less.1I
Mr. Berthiaume said: IIThis is why we're here.
We are not concerned about a 1000 acres of
land somewhere else. We're concerned about
250 houses that sit in the Glenann subdivision
and what is this going to do to us. We're
concerned about the city, that's why we1re
here. We think you're making a mistake in
what you're doinq. We think it's wrong in
what you're doing. But our main concern is
our subdivision. ùur homes, our investments,
not 1000 acres that sits on the other side of
the railroad track. Later that will be a
problem. II
.
Mr. Anderson stated that it's a problem for
you right now because every rain drop that
falls there drains down through that subdivision.
Page 31
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mr. Berthiaume said: "Alright, so now
we're adding this much more to it because
we're filling in that land. It's got to
go somewhere. II
Mr. Anderson stated this lot is not in the
flood plain.
Mr. Berthiaume said: "t~ell, the next time
it rains, 11111 be glad to pick you up and
take you down there to see it.1I
Mr. Anderson stated that all he was saying
is that on the Federal Insurance Flood Maps
it does not show it to be in the flood plain.
How accurate they are, I don1t know.
Mr. Davidson said: "We are not going to
increase the water flow.1I
.
Mr. Berthiaume showed Mr. Davidson where
the problem would be.
Mrs. Nash stated that this is only a
recommendation to the City Council and they
can turn it down.
Mr. Davidson stated he felt the duplexes
would be nice enough that they would not
be ashamed of them.
Herb Hodges stated he has a kid that goes
to school there. He said they have a pro-
blem now and if we add more traffic and
more school children, there would be more
danger of accidents. He said the Commission
did not seem concerned.
Lawrence Flack, 8405 Glenann Drive, said:
liThe center of North Richland Hills is right
where we are. A railroad crossing there
and a Jr. High school. The congestion in
10 years will be terrible."
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mrs. Nash,
to APPROVE PS 79-73 subject to a more
comprehensive study concerning the flood plain
and the impact of drainage onto Glenann Addition.
Motion carried 4-0.
.
~
Page 32
P & Z M,nutes
October 25, 1979
.
PZ 79-42
APPROVED
Request of Charles Reynolds to rezone a
portion of Lots 6 & 7, Block B, Richland
Oaks Addition, from its present classi-
fication of 1F-12-0ne Family Dwellings to
a proposed classification of Commercial.
This property is located on the East side
of Mesa Verde Trail at the intersection of
Airport Freeway Service Road.
Mr. Reynolds presented his request to the
Commission. He stated he was requesting
this zoning to Commercial because it is not
suitable for residential next to the State
Highway. He said that after the Highway
Dept. took some of the property, it left
this piece of property wedge shaped. Mr.
Reynolds stated that eventually, the whole
side of the street will become Commercial.
It may go peice by piece, but in time, it
will all go Commercial.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor of or in opposition
to this request.
.
Thomas Snodgrass, 4905 Mesa Verde, stated
he owns the property north of the property
in question. He said he is opposed to this
zoning request. He stated he had lived there
for 20 years and does not want it to go
Commercial.
Mr. Elmer James, 4912 Mesa Verde, stated he
owns the property across the street. He said
he did not receive a letter, but he is
against this zoning request. He stated this
property had come up before for rezoning, but
was turned down. Mr. James stated he feels
this rezoning will mess up this residential
area. He said they would not be able to sell
their property as residential nor would they be
able to sell as Commericla unless all the area
goes Commercial.
.
Robert Chadwell, 4912 Oakridge, stated he was
not within 200 ft. of the property in question,
but he would like to see something better for
this area. He said Mr. Reynolds states he
plans to buy this property regardless of the
zoning, but that is what he said last time
when it was turned down, and he hasn't bought
it yet. He stated that at the time they came
Page 3 3
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
in for the steak house next to this property,
they asked for Bridle Path street to be
opened since there is a lot of traffic on
Oakridge.
Mr. Anderson asked if this was because the
frontage road is one way.
Mr. Chadwell stated there is a sign stating
Oakridge Terrace is a dead-end street, but
people don't pay any attention to it. He
said the homeowners realize this property
has great potential, but if you break it up
in small areas, we will never be able to
develop the property. No one will buy it.
Mr. Anderson stated that if the homeowners
would stick around to hear the last item on
the agenda, IITransitional Zoning", he believes
it would be of interest to them. He stated
the Transitional Zoning would be for areas
1 i ke th is.
.
Mr. Chadwell stated he would appreciate it
if the Commission would consider the homeowners
view in this matter.
Mr. Reynolds stated he has been in the
Development business for 15 years, and when
you have problem land, the first one to sell
opens the door for the other property owners
to sell, piece by piece, and the property will
go up in price each time, but trying to get
several property owners together to do this
at one time is almost impossible. Mr. Reynolds
said he is in this for a long range investment.
He stated he had studied this area, and that
all will go Commercial before long.
Mr. Chadwell stated that basicly what Mr.
Reynolds said is true, but on the south side
there are no homes involved, just wide open
spaces. But if he changes this zoning, it
will hurt the homeowners bad. Mr. Chadwell
said Mr. Reynolds can come back in for more
and more. He said the church owns the pro-
perty now and they are wanting to sell so
they can build them a new building. Mr.
Chadwell said Northeast Mall did not start
out a piece at a time.
.
Page 34
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
PS 79-76
APPROVED
.
CONSIDERATION OF TRANSITIONAL
ZONING
.
Mrs. Nash moved, seconded by Mr. Knowles,
to APPROVE PZ 79-42 as requested. Motion
carried 3-1 with Mr. Eckhardt voting against.
Request of Northeast Construction Company
for final plat of Holiday West, Section III.
Gordon Swift, Consulting Engineer, represented
Northeast Construction, Mr. Sandlin and Mr.
Hamm, in their request. He stated he had
gone over the Engineer's comments with Mr.
Anderson and they are in full agreement with
all the comments.
Mr. Anderson stated he believes they are
in agreement with most of the comments, most
are minor. Mr. Anderson stated he was happy
with the revision of the subdivision con-
struction plans and believe it will drain
better. He said he feels this will be a
good subdivision, but he doesn't believe
they agree to all the comments, but he
believes we can work them out with them.
The Chairman asked- if there was anyone who
wished to speak in favor of or in opposition
to this request.
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by Mr. Eckhardt,
to APPROVE PS 79-76 subject to the Engineer's
comments. Motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Anderson stated the reason for Transitional
Zoning is we have several problem areas such
as on Glenview (6 homes), west of the Loop,
approximately 6 homes on Davis Blvd., south
of Nor East, on Glenview Drive west of Rufe
Snow, and on Flory Street. The property is
residential, but the proposed use is for
Commercial or Retail use. Many are needing
to sell. They could sell to a Commercial
speculator, but there is the chance they
would lose the zoning change, so they discount
the price of the land. If the property owner
zoned it Commercial, he couldn't live there
unless he went before the Zoning Board of
Adjustments for a variance, he would have to
move out.
Mrs. Shaunty asked Mr. Anderson if they were
living in the house, couldn't they go ahead
and live there.
Page 35
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
.
Mr. Anderson stated they could not. He
said this Transitional Zoning would make
it less painful for the homeowner to where
he could change the zoning, but still live
there in the house until he sold it. Mr.
Anderson stated the city could make this
zoning available to the people or the city
could rezone an area if appropriate hearings
are held. He said he doesn't feel the city
would have any protest from the property
owners, but the people owning the adjoining
property might. Mr. Anderson stated that
the city will guarantee that as long as the
property is used for residential, their taxes
would stay residential, but once it is sold,
a letter would have to be sent to the Planning
and Zoning Dept. The buyer would not have
to come in for a zoning change, therefore, he
would pay the owner/ seller a higher price
for the property. Mr. Anderson stated that
if the city has reason to believe a person is
running a business in their home, they would
be contacted by the city. Once this happens,
the taxes would go up.
Mr. Knowles asked how the city would go about
deciding on the areas to zone.
Mr. Anderson stated he would suggest to the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the City
Council certain areas that needs this zoning.
The people would be notified. He stated the
first one would be on Glenview where the
street widening is.
Mr. Reynolds stated he totally agrees with
Mr. Anderson regarding the need for the
Transitional Zoning. It is the greatest
thing for the homeowner, you let him live
there, but make the developer pay Commercial
prices.
Mr. Anderson stated that right now it would
control about 6 areas in North Richland Hills.
Mr. Chadwell asked if their area is one of
these areas.
.
Mr. Anderson stated it wasn't. He said the
underpass structure is so valuable. He said
he had talked to several land planners, and
they feel this area will be for high-rise
offices, hotels, etc.
Page 3'6
P & Z Minutes
October 25, 1979
.
Mrs. Shaunty asked if they thought the
property owners could get together and go
Commercial.
Mr. Anderson stated he would be against the
east side of Oakridge going Commercial unless
the other side goes Commercial also.
Mr. Knowles moved, seconded by ~1r. Eckhardt,
to recommend the approval of the Transitional
Zoning Amendment. Motion carried 4-0.
CONSIDERATION OF DATE FOR THE
NOVEMBER MEETING
ADJOURN~1ENT
The Chairman set the date of the November
meeting to November 29, 1979.
The meeting adjourned at 10:45 P.M.
/Jr¡Ad'<) ~.~
CHAIRMAN, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
.
cJ~!Z
SECRETARY, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
.