Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 2000-02-10 Minutes MINUTES OF THE PRE-SESSION MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS FEBRUARY10, 20006:30 P.M. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Don Bowen at 6:30 PM. PRESENT Chairman Don Bowen Joe Tolbert Tim Welch Ron Lueck Ted Nehring James Laubacher Doug Blue Richard Davis CITY STAFF Planning Director Director PW Staff Engineer Planner Recording Secy Marcy Ratcliff Greg Dickens Julia Skare Mark Johnson Valerie Taylor Staff presented a brief summary of the following cases: PZ 99-46 Public Hearing to Consider SUP Request for C-Store & Car Wash on Lot 1, Block 1, Vista Addition PS 99-33 Public Hearing to Consider Amendments to Article 3, Section 355 and Article 13 of the Subdivision Regulations Consider Request of Citizen Gwen Bain of Mercy House Ministries for a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Allow Maternity Homes in Single Family Residential Districts with a Special Use Permit Review Proposed Ordinance for Traffic Impact Analysis Requirements The Commission, after a few brief questions on each item, closed the Pre- Session Meeting and retired to the City Council Chambers to begin the Regular Meeting. P & Z Minutes February 10, 2000 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS FEBRUARY 10,2000 -7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Don Bowen at 7:00 PM. 2. ROLL CALL PRESENT Chairman Don Bowen Joe Tolbert Tim Welch Ron Lueck Ted Nehring Doug Blue James Laubacher CITY STAFF Planning Director Planner Recording Secy Marcy Ratcliff Mark Johnson Valerie Taylor 3. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 27,2000 MEETING. APPROVED Mr. Lueck, seconded by Mr. Welch, moved to approve the minutes of January 27,2000. The motion carried unanimously. P & Z Minutes February 10, 2000 2 4. PZ 99-46 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF THE VINCENT ASSOCIATION + ARCHITECTS FOR U.S. RESTAURANT PROPERTIES, INC. FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A CONVENIENCE STORE WITH A CAR WASH IN A C1-COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE 8500 BLOCK OF DAVIS BLVD. AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PRECINCT LINE ROAD ON PROPOSED LOT 1, BLOCK 1, VISTA ADDITION. The applicant requested the public hearing scheduled on January 27,2000 be tabled due to the inclement weather. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to table the public hearing to February 10, 2000. The Vincent Association + Architects is requesting a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a convenience store and car wash on proposed Lot 1, Block 1, Vista Addition. The subject property and the surrounding properties are zoned "C-1" Commercial. The proposed convenience store/car wash will be located on a lot containing 1.30 acres. The proposed total building will contain 4,571 square feet. The convenience store is proposed to contain 3,633 square feet and the car wash is proposed to contain 938 square feet. The site plan shows 15 off-street parking spaces are being provided and 15 spaces are required. The landscape plan shows approximately 26.7% of the total lot is devoted to landscaping and 15% is required. The proposed driveways have been reviewed, Public Works has recommended the driveway approach on Precinct Line Road be shared with the adjacent property owner to the south. The applicant is proposing a single monument sign that is in accordance with the Sign Regulations. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve PZ 99-46 for a Specific Use Permit for convenience store with a car wash on proposed Lot 1, Block 1, Vista Addition at the northeast corner of Davis Boulevard and Precinct Line Road. Chairman Bowen opened the public hearing and called the applicant forward. Mr. Scott Ballard, applicant, presented request stating that he did not have a problem moving the driveway should the Commission so desire. Seeing no additional proponents and no opponents, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Davis, seconded by Mr. Blue, moved to approve PZ 99-46 provided the driveway along Precinct Line Road is a shared drive with the adjoining property owner to the southeast and accepting the new elevations. The motion carried unanimously. P & Z Minutes February 10, 2000 3 5. PS 99-33 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 3, REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC AND SEMI PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, SECTION 355, MASONRY SCREENING WALL REQUIREMENTS (SEMI-PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS) AND ARTICLE 13, DEFINITIONS AND ANY OTHER ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS. Dan Sefko of Dunkin, Sefko & Associates presented draft amendments to the Subdivision Regulations relative to Masonry Screening Wall Requirements adjacent to thoroughfares for consideration to the Planning and Zoning Commission on September 9, and October 14, 1999. The public hearing was originally scheduled on October 26, 1999, but was tabled to the December 9, 1999 meeting at the request of Staff because of inconsistencies found. In summary the draft amendments to the Subdivision Regulations, Section 355 and the associated issues included: . To apply screening wall requirements to every residential subdivision that is adjacent to a thoroughfare of any size. Current regulations apply only to C4U thoroughfares or larger. C4U - collector street with four lanes undivided (68' wide - next to the smallest thoroughfare) C2U - collector street with two lanes undivided (60' wide - smallest thoroughfare) . Noted that screening walls shall be constructed on private property and within a five-foot wide "Screening and Landscaping Maintenance Easement". Neither existing nor new thoroughfares have enough space to accommodate the proposed landscaping requirements. The Subdivision Ordinance requires utility easements at the rear of all lots for franchise utilities. If the screening and landscaping maintenance easement is located at the rear of the yards backing up to the thoroughfare, the landscaping will conflict with the franchise utilities. Also, if the easement is on private property, it will require a homeowner's association to be formed to maintain the landscaping. If the homeowner's association does not take care of the landscaping, eventually the City will have to provide maintenance, which is a City Council budgetary decision. If the landscaping is put in the right-of-way it conflicts with City utilities due to space constraints. You can not ask for more right-of-way than the Thoroughfare Plan requires for landscaping. If we want the landscaping in the right-of-way area then we need to amend the Thoroughfare Plan to require more right-of-way and budget for maintenance. However, most of the thoroughfares are developed with the exception of the area in the north part of the City. P & Z Minutes February 10, 2000 4 · Gives four screening alternatives with criteria. As previously discussed the living screen alternative in the amendments proposed in the Zoning Ordinance, which were not approved because of maintenance issues. · Wood and other high-maintenance, weather sensitive material are not permitted as screening materials. · Provides a definition of Screening and Masonry in Article 3, Definitions. Another issue that is not addressed is possible conflicts with existing or proposed drainage, utility, or tap meter easements located where the proposed Screening and Landscaping Maintenance Easement is required? Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission give Staff direction on how to proceed with the proposed amendments to the Subdivision Regulations, Article 3, Requirements for Public and Semi Public Improvements, Section 355, Masonry Screening Wall Requirements and Article 13, Definitions. Chairman Bowen opened the public hearing and Ms. Ratcliff gave an overview of the proposed changes Mr. Nehring believes that Alternative NO.3 would create a problem in that a masonry wall could exist along side a living screen wall, which he doesn't believe would be appropriate. Ms. Ratcliff agreed that Alternate NO.3 could create a consistency problem. Additional conversation ensued regarding the maintenance of living screens and the maintenance of them. The possibility of Home Owners Associations (HOA) were discussed as well as the probability of the City eventually having to take over the maintenance when the HOA dies out. Seeing no proponents and no opponents, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Lueck agrees that Homeowners Associations die out and the City ultimately becomes responsible, and doesn't want the City picking up the responsibility in the end with tax dollars. Mr. Davis stated there are amendments that he would like to see: ... removing any language regarding landscaping or landscaping requirements ... if an easement is required it should be called a "wall maintenance easement" . P & Z Minutes February 10, 2000 5 ... Deleting Alternate No.3 ... Deleting Items D, G, 1& J ... Deleting the statement regarding trees should be deleted from Alternate NO.1. Ms. Ratcliff stated that if Alternate NO.4 is kept, then Item J should be left to allow the definition of the berm. Ms. Ratcliff stated that staff requests the P&Z table this item until the March 23, 2000 meeting to allow staff the opportunity to make requested revisions. Mr. Lueck, seconded by Mr. Nehring, moved to Table PS 99-33 until the March 23, 2000 meeting. The motion carried unanimously. P & Z Minutes February 10, 2000 6 CONSIDER CITIZEN REQUEST OF GWEN BAIN, MERCY HOUSE MINISTERIES, TO SCHEDULE CONSIDERATION OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW MATERNITY HOMES IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. Ms. Ratcliff stated that Ms. Bain is no longer interested in pursuing this request. Based on Ms. Bain's comments, staff requests the P&Z vote on whether to consider this item or not. Chairman Bowen stated that he would be opposed to an ordinance to this affect. Mr. Lueck, seconded by Mr. Laubacher, moved to deny the consideration of this request. The motion carried unanimously. P & Z Minutes February 10, 2000 7 REVIEW PROPOSED ORDINANCE FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS AND MAKE AN INFORMAL RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL. APPROVED In early 1999, City Administration expressed an interest in developing minimum criteria under which a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) would be required with applications for platting or zoning. The Planning & Zoning Commission, on October 14, 1999 requested Staff to draft a TIA Ordinance. The Public Works Department and the City Attorney drafted an ordinance requiring a TIA when a development is expected to generate 1,000 vehicle trips or more per day or an additional 1 00 vehicle trips or more in the peak direction (inbound or outbound) during the site's peak traffic hour. The proposed ordinance is a stand-alone ordinance that would not be a part of the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, or the Public Works Design Manual. Stand-alone ordinances are not required to have a recommendation from the Planning & Zoning Commission. Because the Commission requested the ordinance be drafted, staff is requesting an informal recommendation. Staff recommends the P&Z approve the proposed TIA Ordinance. Greg Dickens, Director of Public Works presented the proposed ordinance, explaining that the ordinance was drafted as short and simple as possible, while trying to make it clear in what triggers a TIA and what submittals are needed if it is determined that a TIA is required. He explained that the City Attorney has worked closely in the development of this ordinance and they believe they have compiled a reasonable ordinance. The application will have to be made by a licensed engineer. Responding to a question, Mr. Dickens stated that under Section 3, the first statement would be changed to reflect that "a licensed professional engineer with experience in transportation engineering" would be completing the application. The Commission asked about the necessity of the 2nd paragraph in Section 1 of the Ordinance. Mr. Dickens stated that he was not opposed to the deletion of the paragraph if they so desired and would certainly let the Council know the Commissions desire. Mr. Lueck, seconded by Mr. Welch, to approve the wording in the proposed TIA Ordinance of Traffic Impact Analysis Requirements, provided the 2nd paragraph in Section 1 is deleted; changing the word "registered" to "licensed" professional engineer in paragraph 1, Section 2, and changing the first statement in Section 3 to read "If a TIA is required, the study will be accomplished in accordance with the following outline and completed by a licensed professional engineer with experience in transportation engineering. The motion carried unanimously. P & Z Minutes February 10, 2000 8 8. MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION AND REPORTS Ms. Ratcliff stated that upon Commission instruction, she had contacted the City Attorney regarding the letter that was received from one of the Strummer Drive residents. The City Attorney has advised that no response to the letter be made. 9. ADJOURNMENT Having no additional b{Jsiness to conduct the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. R~~a~~ . / I Don Bowen, Chairman ed Nehring, Secretary P & Z Minutes February 10, 2000 9