Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 2002-04-25 Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HillS, TEXAS APRil 25, 2002 1. CAll TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Don Bowen at 7:05p.m. 2. ROll CAll PRESENT Chairman Don Bowen Tim Welch James Laubacher Scott Turnage ABSENT Alternate Doug Blue Ted Nehring George Tucker Don Pultz CITY STAFF Director of Development Director of Public Works Engineering Associate Planner Recording Secretary John Pitstick Mike Curtis Jon Lovell Dave Green Holly Blake 3. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF MARCH 28, 2002 APPROVED Tim Welch, seconded by James Laubacher, motioned to approve the minutes of March 28, 2002. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). Page I 4/25/02 P & Z Minutes 4. PS 2001-39 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM MAPLEWOOD BAPTIST CHURCH FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT OF LOTS 2-A, 2-B, AND 2-C, BLOCK 11A RICHLAND TERRACE ADDITION LOCATED AT 7708 MAPLEWOOD AVENUE (3.642 ACRES). APPROVED Planner Dave Green summarized the case. The purpose of the replat is to clean up existing nonconformities so that the Church can sell a portion of the current property and combine the remaining portions of the site into an more efficient platting configuration. Gary Curtis, the applicant's surveyor, has submitted requests to waive three Ordinance requirements on this plat. One request is to waive the requirement to provide a cul-de-sac termination for both Clenis Lane and Greenwood Way. Another request is the dedication of the R.O.W. requirement for the western half of Greenwood Way. Mr. Green stated that in the staffs opinion Greenwood Way was probably given away in a past replat but staff had no official record of the action. Staff supports all of the applicant's waiver requests. Mr. Green also noted that Roberta Street, south of Clenis Lane, was recently vacated and abandoned by the City Council in order to clear the replatting of this site. The City Council also granted a 50' x 50' tract of land to the church. This site was formerly a city water well. Currently there are no issues regarding drainage. Chairman Don Bowen inquired as to who owns the property west of Greenwood Way as shown on the plat? Mr. Green stated that the western half of Greenwood Way appears to have obtained by the church, however, no record of any official action has been found. Tim Welch wanted to make sure that if the eastern R.O.W. of Greenwood Way is abandoned in the future, that Lot 6 is not landlocked without access to a public street. Dave Green said it would be replatted to insure that the lot would not be landlocked. Scott Turnage, seconded by Tim Welch, motioned to approve PS 2001-39. The motion was approved unanimously (4-0). Page 2 4/25/02 P & Z Minutes 5. PS 2001-41 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM TRAC-WASH ENTERPRISES INC. FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1 TRAC- WASH ADDITION LOCATED IN THE 6800 BLOCK OF GLENVIEW DRIVE (1.020 ACRES). APPROVED Planner Dave Green summarized the case. Staff has reviewed the plat and has determined that it complies with both Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. Public Works also attached a memo concerning this plat. Mr. Green noted that the applicant has recently applied for a SUP and a PD for a self-serve car wash facility on this site. Both requests were denied. The site is unplatted and the applicant is requesting approval of the plat with no request to change zoning. There were no questions and the Chairman called for a motion. James Laubacher, seconded by Scott Turnage, motioned to approve PS 2001-41. The motion was approved unanimously (4-0). 6. PS 2002-17 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM MR. KO FOR APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1, TOWNE OAKS ADDITION LOCATED AT 8015 GLENVIEW DRIVE (0.81 ACRES). DENIED Planner Dave Green summarized the case. The applicant recently received approval of a PD for a convenient store and a self-serve gasoline facility with six pumps. The site is currently not platted and the applicant cannot get a building permit for his proposed improvements until platting has been finalized. Mr. Green noted that the applicant had not provided the staff with all the required information for review (drainage characteristics and base elevations). Mr. Green recommended that the applicant's request be postponed for 30-days to allow the applicant time to submit proper information and review by the staff. Chairman Don Bowen stated that Mr. Ko needs to make this request himself. Since Mr. Ko was not present, Chairman Bowen suggested denying this case due to lack of information request~d by staff. Scott Turnage, seconded by James Laubacher, motioned to deny PS 2002-17. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). Page 3 4/25/02 P & Z Minutes 7. PS 2002-18 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST BY REBEL PROPERTIES III LTD. FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LOTS 1-15, BLOCK 1, GLENWICK VILLAS PHASE II ADDITION LOCATED IN THE 6600 BLOCK OF HARMONSON ROAD (3.750 ACRES). APPROVED Planner Dave Green summarized the case. This is a preliminary plat for an R-3 residential subdivision. The site is located near other residential developments by the same ownership. This Phase II of Glenwyck Villas is located on 3.750 acres and proposes 15 lots along a single cul-de-sac street north of Harmonson Road. Chairman Don Bowen stated to the developer that he was happy to see this request. Tim Welch, seconded by Scott Turnage, motioned to approve PS 2002-18. The motion was approved unanimously (4-0). 8. PS 2002-19 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM RUSSELL BRUCE FOR APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1 LlL WYO ADDITION LOCATED IN THE 6900 BLOCK OF SMITHFIELD ROAD (2.024 ACRES). APPROVED Planner Dave Green summarized the case. The purpose of the replat is to combine two tracts of land into one for the purpose of constructing a single family residence, guest house, and pool on R-2 zoned property. Tim Welch asked if the applicant knows that just the plat is being approved, not the site plan? Dave Green replied in the affirmative, but noted that the site plan was valuable because it showed staff that the applicant was proposing a guest house and that a SUP would be required for such a use in this district. James Laubacher, seconded by Scott Turnage, motioned to approve PS 2002- 19. The motion was approved unanimously (4-0). Page 4 4/25/02 P & Z Minutes 9. PZ 2002-04 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUP) REQUEST FROM VINCENT JARRARD OF EDG ARCHITECTS FOR A CAR WASH IN A C-2 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 6450 AND 6500 RUFE SNOW DRIVE (1.6 ACRES). Dave Green stated that this is a request for a car wash development on property that is currently zoned C-2 Commercial requiring a Special Use Permit (SUP). The proposed development is divided into two car wash facilities. One facility, located on the north half of the site, is an automatic, completely enclosed, wash facility. The other facility, located on the south half of the site, is proposed as a six bay self-serve facility with vacuuming stations. Both facilities will access Rufe Snow Drive from a single ingress/egress point. Parallel to the entire east boundary line of this site is an Exxon/Mobile gas pipeline easement, located partially on applicant's property and partially on the adjacent single family property to the east. Because of the residential adjacency along this border, a 6' masonry screening wall with a 15' landscape buffer is required. Exxon/Mobil, however, will not permit a masonry wall on their easement and they require all landscaping to be limited to a maximum of 3' in height and located at least 10' off of the pipeline location. In response to these requirements, the applicant has limited all proposed landscaping to a maximum height of 3' and has located it along the west side of the easement. In addition, the applicant has proposed a 6' cedar fence (with cap) for a screening wall. This proposed fence would replace the existing rear fences of the adjacent residences along the site's east boundary line. Mr. Green noted that the property owner of the existing, adjacent retail building located to the south of the self-serve wash facility had expressed some concerns about the proposed architecture of the development. The property owner, Mr. Rudd, has submitted a letter requesting additional time to review the applicant's proposal. Scott Turnage asked how far north and south are existing access points from this property? Mike Curtis, Director of Public Works, stated that there are other access points to this retail area located to the south of the applicant's property and that an access point, as shown, would be permitted. Scott Turnage asked if the right and left turnout was in compliance with our traffic consultant? Mr. Curtis affirmed that the City's traffic consultant is in agreement with the design. Chairman Don Bowen opened the public hearing. Page 5 4/25/02 P & Z Minutes Vincent Jarrard addressed the issues that came up on behalf of Cavillino Properties Ltd. The driveway location has an existing easement, which corresponds with the current driveway. The developer designed the plans with the driveway in mind. On the parking agreement issue, Mr. Jarrard has been in contact with their attorney regarding any existing parking agreements with adjacent properties. Regarding the adjacent owner and his concerns, Mr. Jarrard said that his questions were raised at the last minute, but does not believe they are serious in nature. Mr. Jarrard continued to explain the project with regards to building materials, parking, and orientation with adjacent retail uses. Mr. Jarrard noted that the applicant would like to place a monument sign on each lot because it was felt that the project consisted of two facilities. Regarding the proposed landscaping, Mr. Jarrard noted that the city requires 15% of the site to be landscaped, the applicant currently has 22% on lot 7 and 52% on lot 3R. The site also complies with the 15' landscape setback along Rufe Snow Drive in addition to the 15' landscape buffer along the east boundary. Exterior building materials consists of smooth faced CMU with textured stone accents. He also noted that the site plan included a clock tower at the entrance to the development that he felt created a gateway to the site. Bill Mitchell, the developer, presented the concept of the proposed automatic car wash facility and stated that he had done this with other communities with positive results. A normal automatic car wash comes with about 30 employees. This car wash would require only 5 employees at a maximum. The customer stays in the car for the entire wash, lowering the liability on the car and the cost of the wash. Mr. Mitchell feels that the area needs some improvement with 1960's, 70's, and 80's architecture currently in place. Also, he wants visibility for the tenants and is placing the building a certain way to achieve this, as well as protect the fire lanes and the flow of traffic. Chairman Don Bowen closed the public hearing. Tim Welch stated that he likes the building architecture, but wanted to know if the applicant had talked to the residential neighbors behind them? Mr. Mitchell said no, due to the distance of the neighborhood. Tim Welch questioned the circulation of Rufe Snow and what the hours of operation would be. Mr. Mitchell stated that the drive through car wash will operate 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday and 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Sunday. Tim Welch asked about noise levels for the residential area? Mr. Mitchell stated that the car wash was self-contained with little noise especially because of the distance between them and the nearby neighborhood. Page 6 4/25/02 P & Z Minutes He stated that because of newer technology, any resulting noise would be minimal. Vincent Jarrard stated that the current traffic from Rufe Snow is noisy and that it could be argued that the facility would actually create a noise buffer. Tim Welch suggested an 8' vs. 6' wooden fence. Scott Turnage stated that there is nothing worse than a wooden fence when it rots. Is there any way we can do anything else such as masonry? Bill Mitchell explained that Exxon/Mobil said no to the masonry fence, however Mr. Mitchell would be more than happy to stain the wooden fence. Vincent Jarrard added that the original plan was with a masonry fence, but Exxon/Mobil said no from the beginning and that is when a 6' wooden fence was suggested and agreed upon. James Laubacher wanted to know if cities normally yield to Exxon/Mobil regarding easements and fences and other requirements? If so, does staff have any examples? Mr. Green gave an example from the City of Arlington regarding required landscaping for a PD development that crossed a Exxon/Mobil easement. Mr. Green stated that Exxon/Mobil's response was similar as in this situation. Mr. Green went on to note that it was his understanding that in past situations involving conflicts between gas pipeline companies and city regulations, the pipeline companies had usually prevailed. As pipelines currently run throughout the Metroplex, pipeline companies have an interest in making sure that consistent guidelines are followed. James Laubacher asked if anyone else on staff has run into anything similar with Exxon/Mobil? Mike Curtis stated that he has dealt with Exxon/Mobil regarding various utility crossings before. He stated that Exxon/Mobil was pretty stringent. He did note that Exxon/Mobil is more lenient, however, when improvements cross easements rather than paralleling them such as in this situation. Tim Welch asked if the residents behind the area were notified? Mr. Green replied by stating that the request was advertised to all property owners within 200' of the site as required by law and in fact there had been some calls to City Staff regarding the notification signs. There were no noted complaints. Page 7 4/25/02 P & Z Minutes James Laubacher asked if the lots were separated, would each, separately meet parking regulations? Mr. Green replied that the two properties are autonomous with regards to parking. Scott Turnage, seconded by James Laubacher, motioned to approve PZ 2002-04 with the stipulation that the applicant construct an 8 foot, stained, cedar fence (with cap). The motion was approved unanimously (4-0). Chairman Don Bowen asked if the ordinance will modify the Comprehensive Land Use Plan? John Pitstick, Director of Development responded yes and that the adopting Ordinance changing the zoning would note that approval of this request would amend the Comprehensive Plan. 10. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Don Bowen adjourned the meeting at 7:56 p.m. Chairman Secretary ~Q~ Don Bowen 1;) It/d · Ted Nehring r ~ Page 8 4/25/02 P & Z Minutes