HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 1970-12-16 Minutes
·
·
·
CAlJ., TO ORDER
CONSIDERATIOI\I
OF }íINUTES OF
THE PREVIOUS
1..ŒETING
ROLL CALL
STAFF PRESEÎ\J~:
ITE21S orJ AGENDA
FOR REGULAR
PLA.:N}JI~JG ArID
ZOI~nJG 1·ŒETI~JG
l-IINUTES OF THE r.-TEETTIJG OF THE
PLAmJING AND ZarJING CO}ír·íISSION
OF THE CITY OF ~JORTH RICHLAf,ID
HILIS, TEXl\.S, HELD AT THE CITY
HALL, 4101 liORGAr·I CIRCLE, ~'lEDNES-
DAY, DECEIIBER 16, 1970 - 7:30 P .1T.
The regular meeting of the Planning and
Zoning Com~ission was called to order by
Chairman, \~lm. N. Ratcliff
}fotion of approval was made by Dr. Hager, seconded by 1v'fr. Peters.
Ivlotion carried unanimously.
PfiliSENT :
Chairman
Vice Chairman
~^kn. N. Ratcliff
Dr. Charles Hager
H.P. Peters
Louis E. Rinn
ABSID,IT :
l'·lrs. J . \v . Shaunty
C.R. Ballenger, Director of Public
tlorks, Betty Terrell, OitJ7 Clerk
PS 70-9 Purvis & York - Dedication of Eldorado. 1·1"r. Jack York came
forward to present his case to the Commission. l·fr. York
stated that with the dedication of this portion of El-
dorado they would in effect have a subdivided piece of
property. After much discussion with the City Engineers
and property owners to the North, the location of the
street was determined so that it could continue in a
Northerly direction. This would be a secondary collector.
~~. York stated that right of way had been granted for
Harwood Road, and money was escrowed for building of same.
Members of the COmIT~ssion read and discussed the dedication
documents, and questioned 1\¡lr. Ballenger as to the language
of the document regarding under-ground utilities and air
space reservations. Members of the Commission questioned
the extension of Eldorado to the South. l~ír. Ballenger ex-
plained there were no immediate plans to require the ex-
tension of this street to the South. f'œ. Peters stated
that he felt that the information shown on the plat was
incomplete. After much further discussion Dr. Hager made
the Taotion to table the application and request the City
Attorney's opinion as to the context of the dedication
instrument, seconded b~T IJJr. Peters. Ì"lotion carried
unanimou s 1:)' .
~
.
On a motion b:>' l<~. Peters the requirements were amended
to include a plat correction, and require the City Engi-
neers to clairfy the routing of the street thru the
Emerald Hills Addition~ and on to the }¡orth and South.
}'~otion seconded by Dr. Hager. J.fotion carried unanimously.
l"íotion to table until the next regularly scheduled meeting
was made b~y Dr. Hager, seconded by lCr. Peters. 11otion
carried unanimously.
.
PS 70-11 College I-tills Prelirninary Replat - 5th Filing. Dr. Curtis
E. Ramey came fon~ard to present the case to the Commission.
Dr. Ramey represented Educators Development Corporation the
directors of which are the same as the Board of Trustees
for Fort ~'¡orth Christian College. Dr. Ramey stated that this
land was being replatted so that it might be sold and de-
veloped. He further stated that persons owning land adjacent
to the tract were aware of the intent and voiced no ob-
jection. Dr. Ramey pointed out that Jamie Lane would be
closed leaving one lot land bound, however this lot would
be purchased by the individual ovming land direct~ in
front of it and would be replatted into one lot. Dr. fIager
questioned the lot sizes. lIre Peters stated that he was not
in favor of closing College Circle South. 1¡¡1r. Ratcliff
stated that he was not in favor of the indicated culdesac
on Holiday Lane. lJr. Peters questioned the legal discription
as submitted by the Engineers stating he did not believe it
covered all of the land in question. l'Ir. PtAtcliff asked l-fr.
Eallenger to produce the plat of Holiday I'Jorth Addition and
questioned the drainage of the area in general. l-1r. Ballenger
explained to the Commission that the drainage channel would
be located across Holiday Lane West of. this property. Letter
of approval from the City Engineers was reviewed. It was
pointed out tl1at lots could be used on l'Iaple Drive as
platted. l::otion of denial was made by Dr. Hager, seconded
b:¡ lc~. Peters. l/Iotion carried uIlanimously. The Commission
gave as its reasons for denial that they disagreed with
the proposed plat design, ~~d stated that they needed more
in detail plans, and Lot 2lR and 22R, Block 17 be replatted
into one lot. In general they felt that the information
submitted was insufficient.
OLD BUSINESS
~None
JiDJ OU1ìNl\I1IDIT
}lotion to adjourn was made by Dr. Hager, seconded by 1.1r.
Rinn. Ivl0tion carried unanimously. lleeting adjourned 9:45
p .f~. December 16, 1970.
.
~'~
· :d/ //.
Chairman, L\ln1.
Hager