Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD 1987-011 CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS OftDINANCE NO. 87-11 A?�T OR�:�SJANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 81-61, WHICH ADOPTED THE COMPREHENSIYE MASTER PLAN 1974-1994 UPDATED 1980 OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS; ADOPTING THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN 1987 OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS; PKOVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on September 15, 1981, after public notice and hearing, the City Council of the City of Gra.pevine, Texas (the "City") adopted the Comprehensive Master � Land Use Plan 1974-1994 update 1980 by the passage of Ordinance No. 81-61; and WHEREAS, after substantial study and numerous public hearings and meetings of the City were conducted, a new comprehensive master land use plan (the "Comprehensive Master Plan 1987") was prepared; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and coneludes that it is in the best interest of the public and in support of the health, safety, mora.ls and general welfare of the City that Comprehensive Master Plan 1987 be adopted and used as a guide to manage the growth and development of the City from the effective date of the adoption of this ordinance forward; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS: Section l. That all of the above premises are found to be true a.nd correct and are incorpora.ted into the body of this ordinance as if copied in their entirety. Section 2. That Ordinance No. 81-61 passed by the City Council on September 15, 1981, which adopted the Comprehensive Master Plan 1974-1994 update 1980 of the City of Gra.pevine, Texas is hereby amended by the adoption of the Comprehensive Master Plan 1987 of the City of Grapevine, Texas. Section 3. The Comprehensive Master Plan 198? of the City of Grapevine, � -� Texas, a true and correct copy of which is on file with the City Secretary of the City of Grapevine, Texas, is hereby adopted by the City of Grapevine, Texas, and from the effective date of the adoption of this ordinance forward shall supersede the Comprehensive Master Plan 1974-1994 update 1980 and shall be used as the Comprehensive Master Plan of the City of Grapevine, Texas. Seetion 4. If any section, artiele, paragraph, sentenee, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereto any person or eircumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional by a Co�rt of competent jurisdietion, sueh holding shall not affeet the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the City Council hereby deelares it would have passed such remaining portions of the ordinance despite such invalidity, whieh remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect. Section 5. The fact that the present ordinances and regulations of the City of Grapevine, Texas, are inadequate to properly safeguard the health, safety, moraLs, peace, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the City of Gra.pevine, Texas, creates an emergency for the immediate preservation of the public business, property, health, safety and general welfare of the public which requires that this ordinance become effeetive from and after the date of its passage and it is accordingly so orda.ined. PASSED AND ADOPTED this the 17th day of , 1987. �..,m Mayor, City of Grapevine� iexas �°� ATTEST: . City Secretary, City of Grapevine, T x [SEAL] APPROVED: ��i��►'��2 City Attorney, City of Gra.pevine, Texas 0516T/1 EXHIBIT "A" TO ORDINANCE NO. 87-11 CITY OF GRAPEVINE, T�AS ,� - CC�REHENSIVE I�STER PLAN: 1974 - 1994 �. � tJPDATE 1980 TABLE OF CON'i�NTS I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Purpose of the Ccanprehensive Plan Update 1 B. S�¢nary of Major Policies 2 �,,.� II. BASE STqDIES 4 A. C�,irrent Population Trends 4 ,�. :, B. E�isting Land Use 12 III. GUIDE TO NIANAGID G�H 20 A. Grawth Choices 20 B. Develo�nent Constraints 21 C. Urban Form Ali:ernatives 22 D. Grawth Management and Poliices 27 N. LAND USE 56 A. General 56 B. Needs Identification 57 C. Urban Form Goals 64 D. Land Use Goals, Objectives and Policies 65 1. Residential Develo�anent 66 2. Canmercial Develo�xit 74 3. Industrial Development 79 E. Future Land Use 82 ��� � V. TRANSPORTATION A. �isting Conditions 1. E�isting Transportation Network „� B. Needs Identification C. Transportation Goals D. Objectives and Policies `�'"' E. Thoroughfare Plan 1. The F�inctional Street System 2. The Advantage of a F�inctional Street System 3. Design Features of a �.inctional Street Classification System a. Major Arterials b. Minor Arterials � c. Collectors d. Local Streets 4. The Ftiiture Thoroughfare Plan LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Population Projections fran the 1974 Ccar.prehensive Master Plan 4 � Table 2 Revised Population Projections: Update 1980 8 ', Table 2A Revised Population Projections: Update 1985 8 Table 3 Acreages of C�zrrent I��nd Uses by Planning Unit 9 Table 4 Characteristics of Land Use in the Planning Area: 1980 vs. 1974 10 Table 4A Acreages of C�rrent Platted Zoning Districts: by Planning Unit 11 Table 5 Ctiarrent Approximate Housing Unit Mix 13 Table 6 Densities (Dwelling Units/Acre) 1980 14 # Table 7 Estimated Average Household Size 15 Table 8 Occupied Housing Units and Population by Planning Units 16 Table 9 SiuYunary of Design Features for a �nctionally , Designed Street`System � a:.��; LIST OF FIGURF,S Figure 1 Revised Population Projections 6 ,„. Figure 2 Conceptual Diagram of Combination of Centers Concept/Corridors Concept 26 �• y Figure 3 F�nctional Hierarchy of Streets Figure 4 Major Arterials . Figure 5 Minor Arterials Figure 6 Collector Streets - Figure 7 Local Streets LIST OF MAPS Map 1 1974 and 1980 Planning Units 7 Map 2 Future Land Use Plan Map 3 F�iture Thoroughfare Plan � . ,� , ,�:.. ' � I. IlVTF�fJDUCrION A. Purpose of the Can�rehensive Plan Update � A ccanprehensive plan was prepared by Freese and Nichols for the � City of Grapevine in 1974 to assist public officials in making decisions regarding the future growth of the city. The information contained in the comprehensive plan is intended to provide basic data, formulated in a convenient way, that can be used to acccanplish the follawing objectives: 1. Zb delineate a guide to be used in making day-to-day develognent and zoning decisions. , 2. To foster cca�arn�nication between citizens and their government kyy placing the government's intentions on display. 3. To provide a coordinating mechanism between city departsnents. 4. To establish a basis for develoFanent of land use and other regulations which govern the grawth of the city. � The Ccanprehensive Plan for the City of Grapevine is written with a twenty-year scope looking to�rard 1994. As with all long-range planning, predictions and projections are only educated estimates about the future based on historical trends and current circ�nstances. As circtunstances change with time, past predictions and projections must be evaluated for their accuracy and adjusted to fit reality. While the base studies and goals of a long-range plan may remain valid and useful for the duration of the projected scope of the plan, circtunstances within the time � frame of the plan may require new objectives and policies to achieve the desired goals. .�•.. �, ..,� 1 As an update of The Grapevine Comprehensive Master Plan: 1974-1994, this d�nt examines population, development, and land use � trends since 1974 and provides current land use and housing data and revised future land use and thoroughfare plans that reflect the adjusted «�� �. population projections. This dociunent emphasizes planning as a process by � including goals, objectives, and policies that continue to be revised throughout the planning period to guide political decision-making and the implementation of the plan by city staff and private developers. In updating the land use and transportation elements of the ccenprehensive plan this docLm�ent incorporates the entire existing plan by reference, including the envirorunental, historical, and economic setting, with only enough of that inforniation stmmk-�rized to allaw ccanparisons with . the current situation. ��°- B. Stimmary of Major Policies ;�,.,P The plan should be updated annually with major revisions approximately every five years. This report and the acccxnpanying maps are intended to be working doctm��nts that keep up with continuous urban change. "Goals", "objectives", and "policies", as used in this ccxnprehensive plan, are defined as follows: 1. Goals: A planning goal is a general statement of the ccargrnlnity's desired ultimate physical, social, or econcxnic environment. Goals set the tone for development decisions in terms of the ca�nunity's desired qualities of life. �� � 2 2. Objectives: Objectives are the approaches taward achieving the type of quality living environment expressed by the cca�cnznity's goals. They identify the things or actions that should be changed to set the course toward achieving goals. � 3. Policies: A policy is a directive adopted by the city council that establishes an official means by which objectives are carried out taward the achiev�nent of the ultimate goal. A policy specifies the steps that are necessary to make objectives operative. Policies are as specific and as measurable as possible so that they can be put into action with consistency to the council's intent and their effectiveness evaluated. The goals in this plan are written for general application, but policies are written as direct implementation procedures for the objectives. � Overall develoFanent goals, objectives, and policies for grcx�th choices and urban form alternatives are located i.n separate sections which precede the reconmended actions that are listed in each element of the plan. The effectiveness of policies should be evaluated yearly. Goals and objectives should be evaluated at least every five years. In order to make this ccnnprehensive plan as effective as � ' possible, it should be adopted by the Planning Cca�unission and the City ' Council and should be used as a day-to-day guide in decision-maki.ng. � ,�..,� 3 II. Base Studies � A. Ctiirrent Population Trends � �` � Section II Re rt 2 of the Gra vine Co , po , pe mprehensive Master Plan: 1974-1994 (1974) describes the factors influencing population change in the Grapevine area prior to 1974 (pages II-1 and II-2) . Grapevine grew from a population of 1,824 in 1950 to 2,821 in I960 and 7,023 in 1970, according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census. In 1974, Freese and Nichols conducted a land use and housing� survey for the city. Frcan that survey, it was determined that there were 2,587 occupied dwelling units within the city limits and the city's limited extraterritorial jurisdiction with an estimated 9,055 persons in the planning area. This 1974 population was based on a projected increase in the average household size frcqn 3.14 persons per household in 1960 and 3.26 persons per household in 1970 to 3.5 in 1974. ,� �.,,, Fram these population counts and estimates, Freese and Nichols projected the population in the Grapevine planning area to the year 1994. The projected population figures are listed in Table 1. TARI� 1 POPUI,ATION PRQTECTIONS F'��'I THE 1974 C'�'�REI�TSIVE MASTER PLAN 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 9,055 14,224 22,408 35,250 55,451 ..�,.. � 4 Fran these figures, the interpolated population projected in 1974 for 1980 is approximately 16,000 persons. Data frcan the 1980 Census, a recent housing and land use survey, and population est�mates based on ,,� projected water usage indicate that the projections made in 1974 are too high. The preliminary results of the 1980 Census indicate that there were, 4,608 occupied dwelling units in April 1980 housing 12,303 persons at an average of 2.67 persons per household. The major difference between this population figure and the one projected for 1980 in the 1974 plan is the rnmiber used for the average household size. If, for example, 3.5 ', persons per household were applied to the rnunber of households counted in the census, the camputed population for 1980 w�uld be 16,128, which is almost exactly what was projected in 1974. The dramatic decrease in the average family size has caused a shift in the population projections for � Grapevine. Freese and Nichols conducted a land use and housing survey in August 1980 and prepared population projections based on historical data, including water meter and housing counts. The 1980 populations derived fran those studies support e��ch other and the April 1980 Census data. The land use and housing survey indicates that there were 5,171 occupied dwelling units in the planning area. At 2.67 persons per household, the estimated population in the planning area (on the basis of occupied housing units) , for August 1980 was 13,807. By ccanparison, the census figure for April 1980 is 11,801, and the estimate for October 1980, based on historical projections, is 14,610. � �,� 5 o .. 0 0 N �� W „�,,,,.., tn W � Q � - -- W � � p) w�; :. � a r" � � �I � O � �� � r � . . - O Z � � Q rn � T U � w � O � Z � � T Z _1 � W O n" � oc — ' W rn � �- , > � ¢ _ J � � � Z a- w O ,�. = o.. ' - w o °C w �,:,, 4 0 � � � O T' > U w � , �t ti rn T � � � , T � � � T � 0 � � � � O � � O � � � � Q � � � � �iiaa � w �. ' � � � � � � 0 0 � (fl 1,() �7 M N �' � 6 �� �'��� _�—.-- 8 : �..., r - �'r-�r• � ,� a..�.. , '�"� � �� � . - : ; 5 � �� 1 r %r '�'^'1�... �� .✓ -. ,� � tt=.:lWi' �J ^\ � C'\: `. .. ;�.''3 � ...�' s �- _ � ���:� �." fi�. - : 9 �,. : 3 .��;'� , ,y:�.; �` , ; � -'� 4 1..:,. - ; . � � . � ,� � •�3* � � � � i�• s,� "�`Wr � . r•'.. � t 1 _ � r , _ 1 t s �f � — � 5 �� � _ , ,.• > - � ; � � _ � .....•- -1 � � 4 1 1� ' . ; - , �1. et 16 ,. ► 14 ;`15 �"� � . � � ' ' :! �� a i f � ;• 1? � 1 i 4 � I . l 1 O � �` � � ' W�LLA�-/Owf YrORM I � 1 � 19 ��.�,....�, � i . , J / a � .�r,� C ; �`� j o \��� J 2 0 � `� � � � . � �—, . 21 ' � . . . ti � `� � �� � � �;� _ _ ; �� '-1 � ���� ► a� CI1T OF 6RAPEYIAE.TEZAS , CONPAElEMSfYE NISTER �LAA 1914•1991 �- I PLANNiNG DISTRICTS ""�" UPDATE 1980 � __ ���'� . � NAP 1 .�.,...,,av 7 The analysis of 1980 population trends for the purpose of updating the Ccanprehensive Master Plan indicated that the population ,�...,,, projections developed for the 1980 water system analysis were valid and were used for guiding future land use until the 1985 Water Distribution - -- �,� System Master Plan was adopted. Those updated population projections are simmarized in Table 2 and are presented graphically in Figure 1 along with the 1974 and 1985 projections. TABLE 2 REVI�ED POPUI�F,TION PRQ7ECTIONS: UPDATE 1980 1980 1985 1990 ' 1995 2000 13,807 21,000 29,550 40,610 54,680 In 1984, the City of Grapevine ccxnpleted a process of rezoning all � � the land within its City limits. The 1985 population projection is based � �. on the current zoning density regulations to predict ultimate population. The 1985 population projection,s are sunmarized in Table 2A and are presented graphically in Figure 1 along with the 1974 and 1980 projections. ' TABLE 2A REVISID POPUI�ATION PRQ7EGTIONS: UPDATE 1985 ' 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 22,026 39,316 49,718 62,873 62,873 ,,,�,�. �► 8 F,Z, N N �'1 d O O OD O� .� � P1 PI Q� t'1 1'1 W N a0 00 �t �-+ N � d o� .T .7 O O� v1 .T O� O �t �+ vl a0 O O O N �O oD a0 � vt U �T �T �'1 Vl �1 1� N O 40 �-+ [�1 N O � O N O� O� W � 1� �O Q N .�+ �'] � .T N d .-� tV .Y � N � N e'f N n �/1 O CO J � � � � U • H .a a U � N a0 �O e�1 �'1 t0 CD �G .r a0 vl O P1 H1 � ri W 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 c�1 O u1 PO 1-1 O � e`1 � 1� �O e�1 N N .r �/1 t� w w �' N � . y y � Oo � 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 � O O � 1 � I 1 � I 1 I I � UW .r 1� O� N 'yy ' O.' y� H > v� �D v1 r+ � Q 1 : 1 t 1 I I N r� N N �- � ,� � � � 1 1 I 1 1 � S Z N .r N W N '�+ �1C P�. F E H ' r+ �n .r v co rn �n- rn t� s e� Z C9 a 1 1 1 I I • 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 • � a N `" � �' o ; � ��., � o Z N Z � d a � a M Rl fy� O �O t�1 t�l .�r �D a0 N ' .T n O� W ' .r .r ' vl .T �O '� � . �Y O O O N Pl v� �O f� .� O� O N vl �'1 �O N �O H �y O� .-1 .-a .� � . . � W .c. N c"1 v� O � U C7 acq c • 6 6 H .] H .W-7 cn •r "� rn v c7� o� t v ' ' r� ' .n s ' c� i e� � e+� W � � � O I N I � .7 O O O N O �+ '+ �-+ O � � � v � � U W �.. O �:�AIW ����. - v� r a a ` _ � W F H ap N O �r1 u1 r� n tn e� P'1 t� c� a � i i i � • � � • i • • i i i � w � w . ^ °D v o o �n o� o o � o� a ev �o U � O y [A W O� �� � a � � � ( � O � � � O � � O � �' � � r' � � � � . a O O vl A W � v) �O O �p �I I 1 1 ^ � I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I � H 5 .. a al e7 0. a� � rn co a co e1 .. M en a �n m cr o d rnl r+ . . . U H 1� �l1 �T .-1 �7 �O �1 O� ti .-1 � 1�1 1� 1 .-1 i� , v • • • �'.. � .y .�-1 f� f'1 .r �O t7 �D N t"1 �T I� Cl .--� � t`l N t•1 H N ti .�-1 N .�-1 <'1 N Gy ,.y C G I" �G a0 I� N �O N O� �'1 V1 �"'1 EO �'1 N f"1 M c0 O� I� N (� 1� O .-1 F W v o o� v� t�l rn u'f �7 �'1 m O O c7 O �c n c�1 n �7 t'f .-+I �1 W O W' GO �O O �7 1� 1� I� Yl CO N T Q� N OD N �O �-+ v'1 O� �O O N 6 F d N af v c� �n � � � N �n .-. e-1 .-. � vt �l � �n � a� o .'��. � O • F � Iqyg�y [:] C� w rz-� H W a ,7. H .-a N e'1 �7 �/1 �O t� 00 O� O � N 1'1 d vl �D 1� a0 C� O � . Z Z .-� .�1 .-� .r ..� .r .�r .-' .� .r N N it a � a. . �_:� 9 E. eV p �7 `� � I 1 ¢ � O O� � O� .-r 1 I V �p O� 00 . O+ �O , 7 ? � U aa N a CJ C� � ^ p v1 •-� n H � � - � �• v� o o ,.., o rn ri � N r a <. � m �„..,a b V1 N � I� O� � � � � ._ 'a • � 's O d C� O O O O �,,�„ x o. c+ U N �j+ � � H � N a0 N �D .� O 6 a r+ O O O O e� v W A � S 2 H �` 6'' Nl �O �'1 1!1 �O N � y cFi� n � p p p N c'i C.� a � ty C] �G m a z � N O � � o. a r. a M � � p v� W O U � • a `p O N •--� •-� aO O `rdj � O a N 6 v ' c� z H . . 6 W � . O� O O a0 r+ d . ,a a c:� • o ,,., .� o c+ �n • � a H F � m o -+ a Y � 5 ~ a z a F z a H [:7 N a H �m��a. � H N x Z i a �¢w' ^ `". ^ `h „' ? �o ``-� �„d,i � N �'1 � � � � N � 6' . n � � w Aa � � U � v � H � � ~ W � � � � ~ I � � p; � V7 � � � � p 1 O ,� F W E' � Z N y y U �,.> >,, ,.., oo r� a n 'c m 3 � � � � V �"'� ,n �n .cv- �O o+ � � W w' pw ►�-� 6 �"� �j 6 � N W , . � F � � � � N Q. � C_� G a 1 1 � � 0 � p u'f I 1 � � a cn � � p p ^'� � W d C cV ..-� ..r ' ^� a' F H � H p � � H N � H v7 Z ❑z W O 6 � O �a'-7 � d F � * � a a o .. ,� a ao d O M � � l�+ O � V � P+ r+ u � C � .-�i (�11 H � P.v V C � tn Z Z z v o � _ � w o 0 H s+ F p" � � u > � � v G Z �'-' '• � . W O � � Q caj w v� �,..,.� W � O Csd] * � C v� t ¢ % H d �. � -. O F s � �-z+ c�i C � � � a t:C7 � W Z > r� o� Z r oO O Z fA :.. rn � ' :, Q,` � U ..rn. .��. � tA 1+ W vl rn rn N :J [n C U [A ^ � � ic � -� � � � � a CO •_• = � � (�v P+ C� U .., L v 0. � l� en o rn .o rn •.. �n -+ v� o� o o •-. m r� c� n n o n� [,7�., N OD O N �D �T 1� �O �/'1 J .-a t'1 N h 1� 00 N O e'1 W e�1.7 �y rn N O O 1� CO ^� V1 ^' C` �1 O N N O �O O 1� .T �"1 �O�O U .T N O .7 �D f� vl Q� t0 •� O O� �T �O .r O .Y O� tf1 u'1 -+ W Q N .•� N .-� N .-� O N f'1 .-� N .-� N t'1 N d �/1 O� �D CO > .-� �D .-r n1 �T � O �O t� ra N �7 [� �I . v1 J n c? °? ' u; � �`: 1 1 � I 1 1 � � O = 1 1 � � 1 � t 1 1 � n � � N � � . � N E,.� a rn rn ao s n n � e� .o � rn �n v rn of .y �o ao �o� � N a 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 � � � � 1 1 t � m a � � N ao . a Q . ,n .. c1 �o .t o, ...r� � N N i[ �D CA � ' � N th t� v'1 O� d c'1 �D N O .�-1 �T�O ^� .� N �O �''1 �T ^� .7 J ✓1 O OD(� .�y U� � 1 1 1 N u1 d a0 ' v1 .� �c N ( �O , vl o� ' i �-+N - ~ (xi N .1 CO �l �'1 e7 c'1 •r �O .�N H � � N . z o p U � Z H � . N N .-1 �O � . pa., � � „�„� 1 1 I 1 1 .�r 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 I � 1 I 1 c0 � � S . • ~ � E U . H FN r� �c a� e� O � o+ , H E+ �1 1 I I � N � ^ 1 1 1 1 1 r- 1 1 I 1. � 1 1 1 0 c� � �I � � � � � �n o d N � � W N a z . va o d c� F w w r� �n .o -+ rn � (-H+ W 1 1 1 1 � 1 � 1 1 n N 1 1 1 1 I I N 1 1 1 � - d ,.a � a �n t�t � � . a a N --+ -+ . r' `° a Q F Z W . • a x �o rn .., ao r �+ •,s V N O N O �O �/1 N CO`O o � o I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I ..+� . F y � N .�-i � � � N N N � W C7 4 k7 C . U �1 6 y � p . � . a .~..1 1 1 1 � ~ I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 � W N r� a� N H v1 N n O a 1� O� aD O •Y O� N t'1 I� O� O� O O� O N Cp rW-7 '-N-1 C�1 O� •-1 ta �O � C'1 ' ' a0 ' N N 1� 1� �O 1 �D ' •-1 O O� C7 H 1� t� N M N 00 N O O� c�l 1� �O �7 O �7 O� p y `�y .�-i [�l Q� pp �O O� N1 O� �7 v'f .-� f� �T vl 00 �''1 u'1 M 6 N .-1 .-1 N •-1 1'1 �T N � . fA {a� N O � � d I �O a0 t� N �O N Q� �"1 �/1 e''1 a0 �''1 N [�1 e�l CO O� t� N O� 1�N F W v O o� �n c� rn �l r �"� co O o �'1 O � r c� � � � �-+a� O 0.'� � � O J I� n I� Vl CO N 01 Q1 N 07 N a0 � vl O� Pl O T ,e.. F a. N ['7 �T c'1 �/1 �t �T �-+ N b'1 � �'1 ^� Pl t"1 Nl .--� �/'1 .7 O�I� � , � ~ O H .-y GG W U �" W r�+ H � � Z H Ty Z .y N l*1 v �n �o n a0 m O -� N t'1 .T �n .o r� ao rn O --� ic .� .� .-i ..-' .-+ ..r .ti ..r 'a N N it 6 � i� ic �K w ��.� 11 Figure 1 indicates the 1980 population projections predict that the City of Grapevine will not reach a population of 55,000 until the year ,�_e 2000, as opposed to 1994 as was predicted in the 1974 plan. However, the 1985 population projections predicts that the City of Grapevine will not -- '`"'� reach a population of 55,000 until the year 1997. The ultimate population is projected to be 62,873 in the year 2000. The 1985 and 1974 population estimate shown on Figure 1 indicates a consistant population grawth to the year 1990. The 1985 population shaws an-average grawth to the year 2000 between the 1974 and 1980 update estimates. Although the shift in the population curv� gives the city valuable t�me to construct the capital improvements that will be needed, develo�anent in Grapevine continues at a booming pace that will keep the city busy tzying to maintain its current level of service. B. Existing Land Use �: . The amount of developed land in the Grapevine planning area �`""" doubled between 1974 and 1980. At that time, approximately 20 percent of the total area had been developed. Table 3 indicates the acreages of land uses by planning unit as of the adoption of the 1980 update, and Table 4 examined the characteristics of the existing land use in Grapevine versus the situation in 1974. Table 4A indicates acreages of current land uses by planning units which have resulted frcan zone changes since the 1980 update. � Although the national trend for single family housing appears to be toward smaller lots, the overall single family residential lot sizes .,�.., continue to increase in Grapevine. The lot sizes of new housing developments in Grapevine continue to be much larger than those lots of 12 the original tawnsite in the fisst half of this century. Therefore, overall residential densities continue to decrease in Grapevine. � Grapevine has experienced growth in its cca��ercial, and light industrial base in the """� , past twelve years, which illustrates a change from the predcaninant residential land use in 1974. Mobile hcgnes, canprised 9.1 percent in 1974 and 5.4 percent in 1980 of the developed area. Public and semi-public land uses, and schools and parks, also occupy a smaller share of total urban land development in 1980. These land uses comprised 16.4 percent of total urban land developn�ent in 1980, in camparison to 8.5 percent in 1974. (See Table 4) II' TABLE 5 CURRENT APPROXIMATE HOUSING UDTIT MIX Single Town Duplex & Mobile � Fami.ly House Multi-family Homes Percent of Total Units 57 2 31 10 � Percent of Res. Land Area 87 1 5 7 Table 6 shaws the current densities of development by planning unit in terms of dwelling units per acre. As is indicated in Table 5, most of the existing residential land area has been developed in single family houses. � �..,.� 13 TABLE 6 DII�TSITIES (DWELZING UNITS/ACRE) ,�,�...,, PLANNING SINGLE TOWN MULTI- MOBII�E AVERA(� UNIT FAMII,Y HOUSE FAMILY . HOME �� 1 1.62 4.75 3.03 2 1.36 10.00 1.36 3 2.07 2.07 4 2.98 11.97 28.72 2.08 4.37 5 2.39 5.25 2.49 � 6 4.03 15.78 3.58 5.15 7 1.83 • 11.50 6.28 3.19 8 1.53 1.11 1.50 9 0.77 0.77 10 2.93 15.38 5.00 3.20 ""'"�� 11 2.93 9.71 4.79 ,� 12 2,72 16.60 4.44 13 3.05 22.71 1.43 6.58 14 - - - ' ' 15 3.97 20.91 10.80 4.45 16 4.21 5.71 2.50 4.22 1� - - - - - 18 2.11 33.14 7.59 5.55 19 1.20 1.20 � 20 1.22 10.00 1.30 21 1.18 1.43 1.19 "`�" TOR'AL AREA 2.32 9.66 22.65 5.16 3.56 � 14 �B� � ESTIl�,TED AVF�2�C� HOUSE�iOLD SIZE (persons per household) �s Single Tawn- Duplex & Mobile � Average Family house Multi-Fam. Hcenes .� 3.25 2.0 1.75 2.0 2.67 These densities and relative percentages of development by type of residential unit are useful for allocating population to each planning unit and for predicting future demands on public services. Table 8, therefore, shows population allocated to each plann;r,g unit, based on the average household size for each dwelling unit type, and the average population density in each planning unit. The "Future I�and Use Plan" in the 1974 Comprehensive Master Plan defined low density r�sidential develognent as 10 to 20 persons � per acre and mediLun to high density as 21 to 80 persons per acre. None � ' of the then-existing single family, law density residential developments in Grapevine had a population density as high as 10 persons per residential acre. Eben in planning units with a large rnmiber of multifamily units, the average residential densities were below 15 persons per acre. The average population density for the entire city was only 9.02 persons per residential acre (Table 8) . � Because of the variability of household sizes frcan generation to generation, this update of the Comprehensive Master Plan defines density in terms of dwelling units per acre. Thus, law density � 15 �� TABLE 8 OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS AND POPUI�ATION BY PIIINNING UNITS * �,,,�, �A SINC�E TdWrT MULTI MOBILE POPUI,ATION PI�NNING FAMILY HOUSE DUPLEX FAM]ZY HC1�4E.S POPU- DEDISITY (PERSON/ t7NITS (DUs) (DUs) (DUs) (DUs) (DUs) LATION RFSIDENTIAL ACRE) 1 25 0 0 0 _ 67 250 7.96 2 286 0 0 0 1 937 4.34 3 86 0 0 0 0 281 3.74 4 378 91 0 224 60 1,963 11.17 5 212 21 0 0 0 735 6.18 6 252 0 8 134 48 1,194 13.39 7 56 0 0 46 27 332 7.78 8 14 0 0 0 1 48 4.49 9 1 0 0 0 0 3 2.30 10 170 0 8 12 2 596 9.49 ,�:.� 11 81 0 0 102 1 446 11.49 12 92 0 14 69 0 446 11.07 ;,�,�, 13 138 0 10 233 1 880 14.84 14 - - - - - - 0 15 279 0 12 11 27 1,020 13.65 16 158 0 0 4 1 526 13.52 17 - - - - - - 0 18 390 0 4 778 318 3,448 12.33 19 6 0 0 0 0 20 3.70 � 20 164 0 0 0 13 569 4.07 21 33 0 0 0 2 113 3.73 TOTAL AREA 2,821 112 56 1,613 569 13,807 9.02 ' * Results of the 1980 Land Use Survey ��� ** DUs - Dwelling Units �"" 16 residential is hereby defined as zero through four dwelling units per acre; medi�n density is over four through 12 units per acre; and high density is over 12 through 20 units per acre, in accordance with the � density policies of the City of Grapevine. These definitions fit the - existing relative develoFxnent densities that exist in Grapevine and that „� are i.ndicated on Map 2, "Land Use Plan" in the 1987 Ccanprehensive Master Plan. A problem for the pravision of adequate city services, are the instances in which medi�n to high density develoFxnent has occurred in areas designated for low density residential develognent. This problem is exenplified by the developmerit of duplexes and apartrr�nts just east of dawntawn in an area that was originally subdivided for single family houses. As a result, the local streets and utilities have become inadequate to serve these higher density developments. � One of the major problems with more intense use of land in �r single family residential areas is the impact of traffic. Traffic frcan intense land uses that must flow through single family residential neighborhoods disrupts those neighborhoods and clogs local streets. In the future traffic generating land uses should be located on arterials and collector streets to alleviate this probl�n. Recent develoFanent has already eliminated the option to construct needed arterials that were proposed in the 1974 plan to run along and across Big Bear Creek in the southern portion of Grapevine. When this area is fully developed, traffic congestion will be a serious probl�n on the existing street system, unless alternative arterial locations can be found. � 17 '"� Conmercial developm�rit in Grapevine has tended to expand in strips along Main Street and Northwest Highway. �gulation of ,�,.,,, camnercial development has been controlled to limit the amount of access points or driveways to these thoroughfares. Regulations are necessary "�"� to eliminate conflicts with turning traffic all along these streets, which slows down arterial traffic and reduces the street's capacity. Land uses surrounding the City" also influence the existing conditions. The Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport impacts the surroundi.ng area with noise and other potential hazards. Although most of the residential development in Grapevine lies outside the noise impact zone, the single family develognent off East Dallas Street southeast of the CBD does lie within that zone. There are other areas that have the potential of developing residentially within the higher noise level contours. .�� "'� Finally, Grapevine is part of the regional Dallas/Fort Worth "metroplex" which i.ncludes many other small and meditun sized cities surrounding Grapevine. As a result, Grapevine's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) is very limited; and the incorporated areas of other cities dovetail into Grapevine's own area. Grapevine reservoir to the north of the city, with its park land and marinas, attracts people fram all aver the metroplex. This situation gives Grapevine regional problems and responsibilities in ternns of population grawth, housing, and industrial and co�rcial development that it would not have if the city were not part of this ccanplex metropolitan area. In this context, a grawing demand for apartment living has raised the issue of where to � locate new apartment ccsnplexes so that they will not disrupt the single � 18 family character of existing residential neighborhoods. The Ccanprehensive Master Plan addresses this issue and the others that have been mentioned above or will be defined in the needs identification � sections. - - � � � � � �-� 19 III. G�iide to Managed Growth "�"" "` A. Grawth Choices Growth has been accepted and welcaned ca�anunity-wide in �..,, Grapevine. From the perspective of the advantages of grcxath, this attitude is understandable. Growt�h causes retail sales to increase, land values to rise, the tax base to broaden, and increases the variety of goods and services that are available. Growth has a few disadvantages as well. With grawth canes increased traffic, air pollution, noise, urbanization of prime agricultural lands, increased develo�xnent costs, and increasing demands on existing urban services and for new ones. The people of Grapevine must consider both the advantages and disadvantages of grawth and should develop a ccanprehensive growth policy to maximize the advantages while minimizing the disadvantages. �,.. The public official ult�mately bears the responsi.bility to �,,;, implement a grawth policy and must make decisions concerning the desirability of different types of growth. The decisions basic to the delineation of development policy are siutmarized in the following steps. First, deternline whether growth is desirable and at what rate it is desirable. Second, define the role that the city should have in develo�anent in terms of master planning, site planning, and subdivision review and regulation. Last, but not least, determine the quality of growth relative to the quantity of grawth that is desired. The constitutional right to awn and use property cannot be �,� taken from anyone without due process of law and then only with just canpensation, even when the act is for the public good. Nevertheless, � 20 the courts have upheld efforts to regulate the t�mi.ng and location of grc�wth when such regulations are applied consistently according to a cc�►prehensive plan and the ability of the City to finance and provide � adequate public facilities and services as prescribed in a capital improv�nents plan. This ccxnprehensive plan update and the new plans � that succeed the existing 1980 Ccgnprehensive Plan are the basis for grawth choices and the protection of the quality of life in Grapevine for the entire ca�rninity. B. Develo�-nt Constraints , The factors that influence development decisions in ' Grapevine are the proximity of the Dallas/Fort Worth International ' Airport: its land awnership, airplane crash hazard potential, and noise impacts; federal ownership of the land surrounding Grapevine Reservois; flood prone areas along the creeks in the area; . and expansive soils in � primarily the southeast portion of the city. The updated Land Use Plari that follaws in Section IV of this doc�nent responds to these development constraints in its land use proposals. Airport and federal lands are not part of the Grapevine planning area as far as development potential goes. Those areas are controlled by separate plans that should be coordinated with the Grapevine Ccenprehensive Plan on a continuing basis. Map 2, Land Use Plan, reflects the planning of adjacent governmental jurisdictions. The f airport noise impact zones, which correspond with the crash hazard zones, are shown on the North Central Texas Council of Governments Aircraft Sound Exposure: Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport and � E�virons Map. �,:,.�, 21 Policies guiding develognent in or near these constrained areas have been included i.n Section III. D. , "Overall Development Goals, ""� " Objectives, and Policies," in Section IV. D. , "Objectives and Policies," in the Land Use Plan, and in Section V.C. , "Transportation Goals", in � the Thoroughfare Plan. C. Urban Form Alternatives The land use and grawth policies imply active municipal participation i.n the develoFanent of urban form through public works projects and land use controls. This role is traditional for city goverrm�ent. The city's use of zoning, subdivision controls, and annexation policies affect the transportation system, the utility syste�n, existing development, and private develo�ient attitudes to define the character of Grapevine. , .,�,..,� Trying to guide a city's grc�rth is a ccxnplex task, and it is � difficult to predict the effectiveness and side effects of a municipality's attempts to guide this grawth. Policies and ordinances to direct growth should be developed carefully, and limited at first to a general gravth and land use pattern. As the selected growth pattern evolves, additional policies can and should be adopted to meet the needs of the city. There are a n�snber of concepts that have been developed to try to direct grc�wth into an efficient and functional urban form. There are two develognent concepts, the "corridors concept" and the "centers ,�,;.�, concept", that can be applied to Grapevine's existing develognent � 22 pattern with sufficient fle.�tibility to efficiently accc�modate anticipated grc.�vth needs. � Both concepts can be applied to reflect current residential densities as the predcaninant land use. In each case residential land uses are interspersed with retail businesses, churches, schools, parks and other supporting land uses. Both concepts are suitable for autanobiles as the primary means of transportation, but also pravide for other forms of transportation. Both concepts are efficient to serve with public services, and they are less of a burden on the city than �, many other forms of develo�xnent. There are some differences in the two concepts, hawever. 1. The Centers Concept The centers concept tries to direct high intensity land � uses such as high density multifamily, co�nercial or industrial uses, � into "centers" or nodes of activity at carefully selected locations where transportation facilities can support them, such as the intersection of major arter•ials. The lawer intensity uses are then located along the rest of the thoroughfares and in those areas lying between thoroughfares. Actual application of the concept to an existing urban area usually consists of the designation of certain major centers of activity and the systematic distribution of shopping center ccxnplexes at arterial street intersections. � �, � 23 2. The Corridors Concept �°^ The corridors concept directs multifamily residential, coimiercial, and industrial land uses into a linear configuration (or �.�� corridor) of activity along the major arterials of the transportation network. The concept locates the most intense develo�.anent along the major transportation corridors, with less intensive uses in between the corridors. This concept aclmawledges the relationship between the thoroughfare system and the intensity of land uses, but it dces create sane difficulties in the transition frcgn higher to lower land uses. While the corridor concept as described does offer the opportunity to establish limited use corridors for specific land use application such as ccar�iercial or multifamily uses, such designations must not be ,�,.x„ abused or uncontrolled, or the concept will be lost and strip develo�anent will occur. With this in mind, then, it is mandatory in ��. creating limited use corridors to specify allowable uses and densities permitted in very precise and understandable terms. 3. The Ccanbined Centers and Corridors Concept This land Use Plan update proposes a practical ccxnbination of the best aspects of both the centers and the corridors concepts for urban form. This canbined concept is shown graphically in Figure 2. It calls for a hierarchy of ccgrrtnercial and industrial centers with possibly sane high density residential develognent located at the intersections of major arterials. Most of the high density residential development, � haaever, would be located along the major traffic corridors. �isting ccarrnercial and industrial development would continue to be located along � 24 pr�mary transportation thoroughfares in addition to the activity nodes. For any develoFanent along these major traffic corridors, access would be strictly controlled to avoid excessive traffic conflicts. Finally, as """" with the two concepts in pure form, the areas at the interior of this framework would be the lawer density residential land uses. � The Land Use Plan utilizes the ccanbined centers and corridors concept and applies it to the City of Grapevine. The existing land uses are already follawing an uncontrolled strip comnercial concept, as defined in Section IV. Therefore, most of the new development should be focused around activity centers. In addition, the city should work to unify the strip develoFanent into linear groupings with controlled access and landscape buffers. For example, Main Street, and parts of Dallas Road (Highway 121) and Northwest Highway (Loop 382) are designated as cam�ercial corridors, primarily because they already exist. Other � ca�iercial development will be located in a c�unercial center or node. High density residential development (over 12 through 20 dwelling units per acre) will locate between the new Highway 121 and proposed arterials, or in high density corridors not more then 600 feet in depth along the major thoroughfares as indicated in Figure 2. The residential areas within the framework will be low density, single family, detached houses (not more than four units per acre) . The canbined effort of this application of the best of both the centers and the corridors concepts is to develop an overall c�nity structure made up of snaller, identifiable subareas, each with its owncharacteristics and appropriate cc�arn�nity services, yet each an integral part of the total co�nunity. � � <� „� 25 FIGURE 2 CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAM OF COMBINATION OF CENTERS CONCEPT/CORRIDORS CONCEPT �°�� Sma71 neighborhood Commercial Nodes Designated at the intersection of minor arterials Commercial Nodes within 1/4 mile of any residence outside of C.B.D. �,.� . ' Major Arterial � N.M�..v!���a.a�ww;(W�.�!:M•.Mn^!N!N'A�?;:;-0::ip?�;'aV:i9 �.�= i�. ..�!C;•.v.. K. .�f . .. �.��.� ••!M:^:M .�:'.'f�n:b%KSP- ":i.F.`�'..1"W:. :::::t:'.i.i:.:i.. f,L'�:•'.4i �?i ....... ... •U:!�9P�Y+M" •i�:7�":T.,-,-:.. p:5!v'.T. ::v?i: .�4v:'i . �. � � :n� .,� :w:.:i: �::�v: ���. .... ..::nu.[v:x••:::. 'v.....:v.nw.: •.• _ :;. ?`i:A av,i:f ..<. :.� :ii HrJ::;f<:..:�..>:.:�..:•:`^?� ... .... .....::.: �::.�. ::�i:;r+' :.+..... vrv .;y:;�,.;•;;;:>:x:�..;c: . ..... :�>.;-..... :::,.. . :: . .. ....;:::;.;-.,:.:.::....... .... . ::.,:.::-•:::.:s �:.:��,:�... �:::::;::_ <:> ,. v.,-,. :...__. wa:�° :.1:y;...:::.v..: .�... m. };\�.:. :J#:. :v:Y ?:i` z::f . ... .c............ :�.;. ..:::::G .::::��.:;<.:;'.::� µ� ..:.. ..... .:.,:;�:.:.:;::;:;; ,u:;�:^�' _ . .. .:_:... .. .....:... :. %r':::.=' .;y>,: �:�>. �;.3:: ���`• ':g:,.:,, <rii • .. .... �.. .::.. ':f:..:!:v;,'�:�: :Y:::;.y.:-: •J RJ: %d :..4 r�ifjr'.:j:?ri:.7!,^.,j%;';�::P: r�.... ;;.> . ::i\::v-::`y:i..x�:,�:•�6.. :'r...:.. :..k%>_:....., :>F:i::�::::.: � .. .. ... :i�A;.,-,-..>:;';;ij;: :..,.... • . ... :.>:::::; .»�,. :::.::: ... .. .:::...:...v::y..:: ..�..:..... .; ,::.r.::;:5:: :.>:: .:..:.:::;..:��. :: .;��;,iv:<i:p}.: .. �:>:. ..t,. .a.u;::`�::'.%: ;xui`�::.::.:::.�;, o:'O.. ;`a�:;,.+..,;G:;::a. .... .. n..::..... .... ....;.:.....�:�,.�::. :;�'av:;•: ':.::�'- .... .... .._::.:.:.: ::..:::.': ;C9 . ... ..+.'o:i:�::'r�:::;:. :.�::_;;�;� ..:::' . . . :::.�. ..:::.:;.:: :A.. :}: ..o::.. • ... -...:.....,.:�: .... ..: ::.. ::. �::..;::�::. ::.::. .. :,.:::: ... . .. ...........:.:. ..... .. .. .a.:.. .�.��;,;�� o`.;�:""::'��"w:i.:k{`::%�3'S.v. J.-. .... .. ':..��:wi. ....:::i::::. .....: •..• .. ..... .i'f.-iti:......::: .........: .. :::::::i.i `::. �.:�.:�..nv.... .:i.,v,•i::.: ...:. '. � i.. . . nii:C'.,-, :.:::. .::::.^::.':!n:i.ii:ni.. .... ..�. .. .. .... ... v.:::::...... ..... ....h.?:. ... •:: ..K.. .. �y�i::i:-: ... .�.. . ... :.r:�i.i'•:._ .. :.L:.:::::av.i:::� .:::.:::.:: ::'vi:.: .:.�.:+:::... .• :j'4:,v,:�?;y:<�J��:w i.t::✓ ;;� ::..r:..:.,., <:.�:s: .. :�:::.v.:;>. :?.s :::F ^'-:�:'r,.'c`:: ::.:u - '�.:f. .:j�,'�:;:; i'Sa�:�:� :X:;� .::'v�ti • ... .... ....: :�iG':ii'..' ..r.':;:.::>�:�:�' w::"Gx:::::.. • .. .... :.,.:: .. . ..... .::..^n.....,:. ;:::;:::: .,�1.. ... ':� .;'r .. :::.;. .... .... :.,.o;<:.:v:::' ... ..¢::::ii.� . . .. .::...,�;.�....... ..... .... .,...�:... .<�.:: .:.... ,..::�:.,:.x.:.;:::• .... :: ;;:r::.�:;Ei::�;:°ro Y,Y�:;:�'. :i • ;:tr: <>.g?:s;.>:<•; L2� i `::c`�i�i:<' :,iti.nh ��:..i. i�:?. :::)::.: U��i.nv.�-.... Y iji�:'+• �r�jt+:�,.i:4. •v�,.}.:i .K..� 'iJ\'v�`, .�}v.v.�!�'M�.S'..i'.:i:. ^Qvn:. .ari:. :.?.:.• �:..:.: �..:ff � `:c:a»:::w::: �. :<:S:`:':: �Y�Y::�ni: ::i}:;y-".<:<:"a... __ — ..'�x',�� � :}% A:� ... .i. .�:::� _ :�:i�:' �`i?�'. v..��:r. ..,:v. r . :.... . �.::�: :: .. �::: . : .�:.. :.:: ,�:;::.�... . �::.�: :� .::: ` .... . ,-..... >::.:: , ::-::;"r,`:; . . ..7.`.�:•..:-r.:cr •.;i;.. ;`i;,;.;:.�:c::"::,.:..� ::::., , .,-:., . ..:. w: .`v+.`%i.'! :i,k::' :::,`.,4 :'i:: �:$.Q ;Y . Mi nor ^ ,>�� .. - -- � %. . �.-:4 � . h �;� �v� - y�Ff� � • Arterial ----- --- L .:2.�'�� f .... .:::: �„ :.v^;9 v, > � � r� <. ,�. 'd 3�' �4T 'F N t c w '� � ;��y:.;:a 2 R .v}m �xV^}a:h�:: 9:��� '�+\ ;'.J: �cK;.0 ::D A;.,. v;r`S:'.o.. .k.i:iti>i:«:;?..�:x."' .... . .. ..... .. .. '::o:: ;::'t>..: ..:az... . ::A'%::�. �`»%:?v'. :i:4:i:i�C'�:'J.Li:..:i: .... ... n�rvf;{n.._„ •..�. ..�.� nt.:�:.?.::. •. .. :� .... .... � .. n: '�^� •��. Y::.'v:..x.i Y--.. ... ..w•:�:v�.i;v!i�j� :.vnnN:�.:�^.. n;\i<ry �J Y`:? :v;f� i)'i��4:t>iiii�TY.++F'�vi��� •.�.• � .:Y': ��.; ... n..:...vt....Gri:.b:v�:::::-y; .... . •. v.x�:.i�:. ::: i..n:Tv:.,-},n• v:::: ' .....,C.r}.v... �. •.... .• .. v.i�..nvv.ir.i:�4Yi::iif•ir..�:: . i:?�':i::��::t}'>��iv:in.;:n� •.w., •. v... •. >C^.. .. 'SC<4:i4iJ: i�i!�(vs:i` `..,tC.: � • .... ... ...v:v..:Li:w:S..:...m�: ..n...:.v.:��.;�..•.N. .. ..\�:::...;0:. .. .. ... •... �� }•."v.:: .��. ....r ....:.....:::p........:n:.::.::v:.:�:.. .n:.... .....: i�:: .:'.:: ::i\:n�!i......� :1;<%^Fi.'. :ii:`J+ � d::, .... :::�:.•n1$�:i�?:;^i'."y ...K .i\•ni;IS�C,v,•n/A:v'�....: i:!i:�v):i,�i,:�;�:�';>.w'..� ::%"'v: :.A..:� '�4Y$'iY�:' .,.;q,, :.Q�k<:»:i;� :?x:v;>:u�::�:;>:::;:�'�:;::v. l+ ..... ,.. .w:::�::,.:>:::::.y:......-�._.:::... n S l. .... .. . .:..•..:::. � e :�:� H� h D »n Y �:�:�'�. 9 >:> ><�:>:v::>:<:::::A:�:�>:.:>:.. ..... .-• . .:�;.,..:::h:.:;::,:: .... .......::... ;;i;>;��.r<':;<;:: ::�.... .... .... .�:...:::,::::.,. :: ... ,_... ..... ..::.....:.:•>:;:.,: :::.: .. ...�.;::: ....k:;:;:<......:........ >.::::,;..:;:;;s>:;,:-.:�<::... , . .... . .....::...,;.::.:. .,.,.,:>:.:�;.....:;<._;, ..tiH ..... ... ... .... .... •. :h<:. .... .... d,: :.......,:<;;;.... .>.00}ii%�::�.:'� .:.4t:: . .... ... :::....... .....::.; ....... ,::.....,......:.. . ..x :.:�. . . ........ . , .. ............<... ..,.:.:�:::..... .....�:_.:::..,..:.. .... ..... ., :.;::,.:.:::>�;:^"°" . ... �......... .... ..;.ri.;.:.. �:.�, :�.' ::w;:>?i;> _ ... ... ...:..,::•.;...._....:s:�:::::.:.,.:. ;.;;:,:. . . ::..,.....:..:.:..�::cx-�.�:,... ....,..o>.�:.:::::::::• ... • «::,..:..... ':`8::5 .... .. .....::.. .....:::., .:...:...... .�.,:..:,.,.�.x::.::::::� .... ..... .:...::c.:+;`::�:;`: �o:::.;. . mi 1 ..... �H:�:<>: �:<�,�a'.;.!!:;.�): ... ... ..:.........:::............... ::............x.. �... ;<.<:w,. f a . .. ..._..::.:::>:.:::::..::::... ,....:..� ..... .... w.,:;.;,:::..��:.:.,<:>:<<.:<:<>: Mu 1 ti Y .. .. «.:::.�:.,..,.::.._....:.:....... ... ......:,>.�:::.::::. .�M ;..:;. .. . ......r. ......<. ......... �>::::.. ... ..... ..,�... .....::.�.;:.:.:...;:;>.., :..,:::,:<;;�>;;.::..:.:. i�? �n�>�Yai::��:[•• ^:SY:'.'% -�:k.;<. :;.> � ;.:}":i Qvx%....: . '"��i:•bb :'%aH�%i�..:enJ JS:£.:�� .. .o i't::� .i:� .. '"i:�'�` .. . ;:,:or ... .... .._. .. '•'':sti:�;5ii:+'a'i' .O:'��'�WYM . 0 r . �. .'y . 'd _. rr � _ C o - ;.�°,A>�;:x <:� .;>:�: �..,w.�.....�::�:. •-- --- _.v.._ �� I -- � � .. _ �......... ::.. ..- •ti.�YA`f-.:s.i.y> - ............. .ye,S,.3,"._".",',?':??°o':?g3�' ':>:;.: 'al :b'. i �.:..... � e rc ,�. o -�� ,���� .�:�. �. � ;�. ... .... ..�>... :.,.... . •• :..:::..,.,. :::.:.........; .... ... .... . .... .. .. , .... .._. . .. ..... �,�.:,�ry.�<. ..:..... _ ..... ... . ::.,.......... ...:. ..... .::::.�:::. ..�... .:,�.:�.�. ;;.:....; .... .. . .. .. ..... ........:.:::::<. .....:;.;.. .... ..:...:::.:::..:..:...:::.. .:.:. .... ... _r....... ...:.:.............:... ........ .....�... .. .... .... v:: . . .;::;....v..:..,. ::.5....;qW.\: . .......... ............. ............ ..n.......u.,...,.:v,i ::.::�: .,:�::.::+t�:.:::!:::>::'s.'v:.'E;i.:::...;.i�>:;4�ii:.'.:E:;:i;; ..>....... :�c;<:�::% s at th e >iT``::,��i... °"�de .�� <���;�A,a.<;;,;<<.>;;.v .... ..... .... ..... ....:...:.. ... ....::.:::::. .... .:.... ..::::..::::.. .... .. ...::.::.:.:...: :>> .::::::: .::.:::. ..;�:.•. <Qec: , r.h.. .... .._ . .:..:;<:.;<: ..>.•.::.: :::#... A��: <:,,:<:.:..>:..:�. ;o».;" ;'fi8.... yr „ ::iY......._nv:??n:V+�'�....:.^ te r s ec y �O 11 .... . .... ..... .�:.�.;..;.::, .... ..... ..:. :�::.::.;:::>,::;., � .... ..... :..::..:::>:::.::.:::A:>: :<� �� <:.,,.::>x:;=>.::<v.;:a�-> ,..r..:.,�.,•x��'� � S'I;;: .... ..... .:..:;•;._:.., ;;;:;^ .� .... ..:::. :::.:�,.:.;:::;;»;.:::x><:>;�:<: :..; ;:w. :: :•:: :.--- �::::.<.::...::::>�<:<s:::,.,.;:::.:.r.>:.::::...,.;:.::.:.;.:...:..v. .. ��. . _ ::>,�<<:<«: a<::�: ,:�IY<�. <.:.,:: >F:;<:::>:; . • �-:.,.:<.:;.:..>...„:.::.y�. v:r::. .... ..... .:::.... . :::<<�:<�> ._.. .... :::.:..:::>h-::.:;.:::,<.::;:...�.. :, :.::.�......:. :.;::.:;:.:,:,.;.;.� . ..:: . .. ........:.... ..;;.: ,.::.<.. _:. -- m a 0 r '::4ii: `:x:<:��:;¢;<�>�:::>;:�<��:::s J . �:�; <:x • .:,�t.��. ;>:�z:?.,.>:>.:>:x;;<::i' . `jl:.� •--- •:::: .:.;:,>,:..:,:,.. . �...:�..::.....:..:::,: .... . ::. ;>:;«:<:»> ._.. ..... ::::.:::... . •.,<,^%>.:•:::.....; .,,....... . ..•. ,,.%;;><�;<s:. .. .. .... ..... :::::.::.:,:::- >.: :�;::<«�.:s;;:<nS::,:>z<:::.`:.... . ���' ..a...... i•r'<:: � :�;>- ' ::xzv: :::�;:;:::���" ::3 _. �� " '';v:a: ;�r — i3%?:�-i$i....s......:.:.. . .. ::..�.�::��..:::±..:�:: .....�.: .. ..::: o>;:.>::.:,.c:::::.....:.::;;.::��... ;;;:;:�;•.- _.. .. .............:.::.:.,::::::...::.::.:::.:..<: •...- ,.::::.:;x::.....::.:::.,:.:::. ,...�r.;::.;v....... ..:�"�.,:;rc .: . . ...... ...,+. . x�:•� .;:.��:c:.4`.. ...�.....:..;: .. ..:.nc:a:::�r.'' :.::` ,.. ..: :... ^:t.+.::>':;5:�::::::::.....::o-:t. i::?;c:'�::.,:.3��;�:i�r 1 s .....::<.::....:....:.. :>�.::'u.. r i a ;t.y.;:.. ;,,� : ar te �:.:�:.:;.>:...:..v.. ,>�.>�. . �:.::::..... ...�.. :::..�:::,;:.. :«<__::;.�>.� :,.::::;:.;:<;.,:...- ._ ,:.::.;::.:::::.::.:.::;:>::�:<.: �.::.:.::.> . :�:::�:::��... ,._:.::.:...:..x.::...:.::;.::.>;.;:.. _:,,....;< ....... . >....:. ;;ri:::. <>,..:;... <�=:ww<:>; :<::>:>:.:::::,. ':<�`:; t;:<;.:=�>:>��:.. v��:�: «�::>: : ; >.� . . _ .. .. . . . ... :; :"�s . _ ... ..:. . . .: •.;:.: , z r-:>�:� . . �'..:;;.�� n a.r "` F ,''�'r° � °a i:v:ip^'. � .::a.....:;...�.p...... ,-:w;i<""b::°;.....::�. ::.$:k���''`�%.� ...).. :5:24':;:;::i;:..;:' . t:'<�jt:. .>C.kh. .. ....�. ..`T$ '::<:� ;�I#:;:;:: :;'i •<`v.:S?�:'<' . • ..•....... .. . _ . ._... , .�::::.�::::.:: . .. .. ..... �..:�.�::�::::� •- ...... :.,.::....... ;;%'.?::-:,.. .:� .....:•_..... . ^ v.:::...<a.. • ...... �. ..�:,..�:.:.«.�...:;..r.::::c�::;:,:..:��.�::.� . .... ... ;:..., .... .... .r._ . zs;"::::: ..v.. E::.�`ci'G3:ti:, . ..�.: ..........�;.::�:.::t. . .... -•::: 4.:5,::::�;::::�:.:�::::,: 'e�i;iiF•;: ;iiE �;i�:L'� ?:yii:,v`: +'S yY.:;::h `::�`}$'v ^';Y�:;k:r,4.. y:Y;::" :.I�:A .•..t •:::i::_':.4, i:.yj.i:.v •`R;>ir 'c:.....'`f::y:S:�'ti ' :.... ...... �::. ..s::..:;.:.:•... ...'::� ,..,,; .... .... .. ,�:::. .... .:. .. o....:..: .... .' :' :. .;:','^xi;;:wi::` :.d%:'�.:.<:Y..; ?^:� �.:%.C;,. .:�°� �:.a'.::;i {.::};'k3: ii+S... w.�.r :ti:': y'<?i>':...„ .....:,w:>::,. ..... 'k'�.�;::;� �:a,"�: �"�., >::�;S;ii:� '�iz,.. .. ��::ar::::i�a:iF:'w;r`i:.. .�.aia3v:':�k:�'u6iow:�'.6.w. . . • `•'•'� ' • Designated Commercial Corridor (Existing) Central Business District, Designated Business Center o ii2 1 ,.�.,,� . i �ource: Freese and Nichols, Inc. GEAPHIC $CALE IN MILES 26 D. Grc�cath Management and Policies The growth manag�nent policies contained in this plan will direct the develognent and use of land. The map represents haw the land � may be developed to meet the policies. The policies as well as the land use plan must be consulted before deciding whether a zoning request or � development plan is in conformance with the Ccxnprehensive Master Plan. As the council changes the city's policies, the land use plan should be amended to reflect those changes. The map should also be amended as new studies provide additional information. Studies such as water and wastewater system analyses, transportation plans, and drainage system analyses may or may not indicate the need for changes in policy, but ' li will almost certainly generate the need for a change in the land use plan to reflect more accurately the physical features and develognent constraints in Grapevine. � Based on information presented at public hearings, Planning and Zoning Conmission meetings, and City Council meetings, the city staff and public officials have shaped this plan to represent the ccanmznity's attitudes toward grawth and intend to be consistent in their future decisions with the precedents that have been set. City officials = recognize that there is a need to provide housing for existing and future residents of all inco:ne levels; but, at the same time they do not want the city to beccane predcaninantly an apartment or bedrocan cce�arnznity. Through public hearings and neighborhood meetings the citizens of Grapevine have indicated that they want to preserve the single family residential character of their neighborhoods. To avoid making Grapevine a bedroan c�arn�nity, haaever, employment opportunities � need to increase in proportion with the population. City officials, 4,.,;� 27 therefore, recognize the need to maintain a diversified econcanic base, rather than to beccgne dependent on just a few businesses or industries. � r� Grapevine has experienced a few problems directly attributable to the amount of grawth that has occurred in the past.. There is roan for new �� development, but because of eventual constraints, there is a limit to the amount that can take place. There are advantages to be gained by continued growth that will offset the disadvantages. Hawever, care must be exercised to insure that the distribution of the new develo�anent does not magnify the disadvantages inherent in grawth. �.� „�..,, � 28 l]l.l[]J_�.7� OLT.7J.:'�..11 V•�_� L]LWJ rV�I.�J L7�7 rtr'V 1S� [-fLV1J L1Wr1r-•�� BY THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE � 'Ib delineate the city's position regarding future develoFanent in areas that have physical features that reduce their suitability for any �� develoFanent or for certain types of uses and to delineate the city's position regarding future develo�xnent, the following goals, objectives and policies are reco�nended. 1. GOALS GOAL 1 To acl�awledge that continuing increases in population and land ' develolanent are 'in the best interest of the ca�nunity as a whole. Goal 1 -Objective 1 To provide enough land for all types of land uses and housing for .�.�► residents of all incane levels. �._� Goal 1 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-1 The Comprehensive Plan will attempt to shaw land uses sufficient to support the ultimate population that maxim�,un development at the current densities and land use intensities can acc�modate. Residential land uses will maintain the desi.red relative proportions of the n�ibers of dwelling units by type as follaws: Single Family Low Density 50e 0 through 4 units per acre Zbwnhouses Duplexes Meditun density 250 & Zero Lot line over 4 through 12 units per acre Apartrnents High density 25� over 12 through 20 units per acre '"�'" y...-.�,.�,�j. 29 Goal 1 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-2 The City will monitor the amount of land developed and/or rezoned for ��� residences by type of dwelling units proposed and will deny those requests that will disrupt the ultimate housing mix. � � Goal 1 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-3 Al1 develogxnent and zoning designations proposals sutmitted after the adoption of the Ccmprehensive Master Plan either must be consistent with the adopted Map 2, Land Use Plan, or must show that they meet the policies contained in the plan, or must include a proposal to amend the plan. Ccmprehensive plan amenc�nents must be processed prior to and separate frcgn rezone and project approval applications. Amendments to the Land Use Plan Map that increase the area allotted to any land use aver what is shown in the ca�rehensive plan shall require an offsetting decrease of the area for that land use in another location on the map such that the adopted „�,.�, land use mix is maintai.ned city wide unless the City Council adopts a different land use mix as an amendment to the cc�ttprehensive plan. a� Goal 1 - Objective 2 To use the City's statutory pawers to prohi.bit substandard develognent as determined by the City Council from occurri.ng within the city or its extraterritorial jurisdiction. Goal 1 - Objective 2 - Policy 2-1 The City shall not allow substandard subdivisions or any develoFanent on property that meets the definition of subdivided property but has not had a plat approved by the City and recorded. The City's major statutozy powers include: �.. 30 a. denial of plat approval b. withholding of utilities and sezvices c. denial of access � d. refusal to issue builcling permits e. court injunctions ``"�` Goal 1 - Objective 3 To direct and encourage growth so that it occurs as a logical and contiguous addition to the existing c�rninity. Goal 1 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-1 The City will require develo�anent that is not adjacent to existing utility lines or streets to pay for the utility and street extensions under a uniform rate setting procedure to be established and adopted by the City Council. Goal 1 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-2 � The City will refuse services or utility extensions to develo�.anent that is premature based on the phasing in the City's capital improvements program '��" and which would place an ur.due burden on city services, unless developer will bear the total related cost. Goal 1 - Objective 3 - Poli�� 3-3 The City shall require a concept plan of all develo�anent except lvw density residential as to the layout or the proposed development's impact on existing or future develo�xnent. A concept plan may be required for laa density development whenever there is sane doubt as to the impact on existing or future development. � �: 31 GQAL 2 To acknowledge that the City should encourage new develognent provided, �°� hawever, that each new development makes a positive contribution to its neighbors and the cca�arninity. . �.� Goal 2 - Objective 1 To provide enough land for all types of land uses and housing for residents of all inccane levels. Goal 2 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-1 The Comprehensive Plan will attempt to show land uses sufficient to support the ultimate population that maximiun development at the current densities and land use intensities can acc�unodate. Residential land uses will maintain the desired relative proportions of the ntIInbers of dwelling units by type as follaws: '��` Single Family Ipw Density 50$ 0 through 4 units per acre � Zbwnhouses, Duplexes Medi�n density 250 & Zero Lot Line over 4 through 12 units per acre Apartments High density 25$ over 12 through 20 units per acre Goal 2 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-2 The City will monitor the amount of land developed and/or rezoned for residences by type of dwelling units proposed and will deny those requests that will disrupt the ultimate housing mix. �._. � 32 Goal 2 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-3 All develo�xnent and zoning designations proposals submitted after the adoption of the Ccamprehensive Master Plan either must be consistent with � the adopted Map 2, Land Use Plan, or must shaw that they meet the policies contained in the plan, or must include a proposal to amend the plan. Comprehensive plan amendments must be processed prior to and separate frcan rezone and project approval applications. Amenc�hnents to Map 2, Land Use Plan that increases the area allotted to any land use aver what is. shawn in the Ccxnprehensive Plan shall require an offsetting decrease of the area for that land use in another location on the map such that the adopted land use mix is maintained city wide unless the City Council adopts a different land use mix an an amendment to the ccgnprehensive plan. Goal 2 - Objective 2 To use the City's statutory paaers to prohibit substandard develoFanent as detezmined by the City Council fram occurring within the city or its � e.xtraterritorial jurisdiction. Goal 2 - Objective 2 - Policy 2-1 � The City shall not allaw substandard subdivisions or any develo�.anent on property that meets the definition of subdivided property but has not had a plat approved by the Cit.y and recorded. The City's major statutory pawers include: . a. denial of plat approval b. withholding of utilities and sezvices c. denial of access d. refusal to issue building permits e. court injunctions � �,� 33 Goal 2 - Objective 3 To direct and encourage grc7wth so that it occurs as a logical and ��� contiguous addition to the existing cca�munity. Goal 2 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-1 . � The City will require develoFxnent that is not adjacent to existing utility lines or streets to pay for the utility and street extensions under a uniform rate setting procedure to be established and adopted by the City Council. Goal 2 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-2 The City will refuse services or utility extensions to develoFanent that is premature based on the phasing in the City's capital improvements program and which would place an undue burden on city services, unless developer will bear the total related cost. Goal 2 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-3 The City shall require a concept plan of all develo�anent except Iaw Desity �� Residential as to the layout or the proposed development's �mpact on � existing or future develo�anent. A concept plan may be required for law density develoFar.ent whenever there is sane doubt as to the impact on existing or future develognent. Goal 2 -Objective 4 To require new develo�nent to pay as many direct and indirect costs created by that development as possible, thereby reducing the tax load on the existing residents. Goal 2 - Objective 4 - Policy 4-1 Developers will be required to pay for any costs that can be identified as being created by their development, including administrative costs. �� � 34 Goal 2 - Objective 5 To require develo�anent in accordance to Chapter 7, Article IX, of the � Grapevine Code of Ordinances, to reduce or E'l�minatg entirely, development � in the flood plain that exposes persons or property to the hazard of flooding, or increases the possibility of floocling downstream. Goal 2 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-1 The City will prohibit development in areas that the City determines is subject to flooding, with the exception of develoFanent that can utilize the flood plain and not substantially alter it. Goal 2 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-2 The City will utilize as much of the flood plains as possible, for public open space, parks, golf courses and other uses that are ccanpatible with the flood hazard. Goal 2 - Objective 6 _ � To recognize that the proximity of the Dallas/Ft. Worth Airport creates a �� noise and height constraint to development in Grapevine, and to protect the future population accordingly by development controls and positive sound-proofing development t�chniques. Goal 2 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-1 The City will enforce the Airport Hazard Zoning Ordinance. Goal 2 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-2 In Zone A, defined on the North Central Texas Council of Goverrunents Aircraft Sound Ex�osure: Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport as the zone of min�mal noise effect, activities that are sound sensitive, such as auditori�ns, churches, schools, hospitals, theaters and open air activities, will be discouraged, and other activities will be required to � use sane type of sound control in their building design. �- � 35 Goal 2 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-3 �°� In Zone B, the middle zone of noise effect, residential develognent will not be considered a suitable use. The construction of auditorituns, �� schools, churches, hospitals, theaters, and like activities shall be avoided wherever possible. Activities where uninterrupted commznication is essential shall utilize sound exposure control. Goal 2 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-4 In Zone C, land will be reserved for activities that can tolerate a high level of sound exposure such as scxne agricultural, industrial and c�rcial uses. All regularly occupied structures shall utilize sound control in the design. Residential and sound sensitive activities will not be allowed to locate in this area. ,� ;, GOAL 3 To encourage a level and type of develognent that will sustain the quality �� of life desired in the city. Goal 3 - Objective 1 To provide enough land for all types of land uses and housing for residents of all income levels. . Goal 3 - Objective 1 -Policy 1-1 The Comprehensive Plan will attempt to shaa land uses sufficient to support the ultimate population that maximtun develoFanent at the current densities and land use intensities can acco�nodate. Residential land uses will maintain the desired relative proportions of the rn��bers of dwelling ,�w,> units by type as follavs: � 36 Single Family Low density 50� 0 through 4 units per acre Townhouses, Duplexes Meditun density 25g Zero Lot Line over 4 through 12 units per •�► acre Apartments High density 25� over 12 through 20 units per acre Goal 3 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-2 The City will monitor the amount of Iand developed and/or rezoned for residences by type of dwelling units proposed and will deny those requests that will disrupt the ultimate housing mix. Goal 3 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-3 ' All development and zoning designations proposals su�nitted after the adoption of the Ccgnprehensive Master Plan either must be consistent with the adopted Map 2, Land Use Plan, or must shaw that they meet the policies contained in the plan, or must include a proposal to amend the plan. � Ccanprehensive plan amendments must be processed prior to and separate fran � rezone and project approval applications. Amendments to the Land Use Plan Map that increase the area allotted to any land use over what is shown in the ccgnprehensive plan shall require an offsetting decrease of the area for that land use in another location on the map such that the adopted land use mix is maintained citywide unless the City Council adopts a different land use mix as an amenc�nent to the ccxnprehensive plan. Goal 3 - Objective 2 To use the City's statutory powers to prohibit substandard develo�nt as determined by the City Council fram occurring within the city or its extraterritorial jurisdiction. � v.,:,� 37 Goal 3 - Objective 2 - Policy 2-1 The City shall not allaw substandard subdivisions or any develognent on �� property that meets the definition of subdivided property but has not had a plat approved by the City and recorded. The City's major statutozy � powers include: a. denial of plat approval b. withholding of utilities and services c. denial of access d. refusal to issue building permits e. court injunctions Goal 3 - Objective 3 To direct and encourage growth so that is occurs as a logical and contiguous addition to the existing canrnuz.ity. Goal 3 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-1 The City will require develo�nent that is not adjacent to existing utility �•� lines or streets to pay for the utility and street �tensions under a � uniform rate setting procedure to be established and adopted by the City Council. Goal 3 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-2 The City shall require a concept plan of all develo�anent except Iaw Density Residential as to the layout or the proposed developments impact on existing or future developm�azt. A concept plan may be required for law density development whenever there is sane doubt as to the impact on �isting or future develo�xnent. !A�""::�se, . 38 Goal 3 - Objective 4 To require new develo�anent to pay as many direct �-and indirect costs created by that develo�xnent as possible, thereby reducing the tax load on +�•�, the existing residents. • «�+� Goal 3 - Objective 4 - Policy 4-1 Developers will be required to pay for any costs that can be identified as being created by their development, including administrative costs. Goal 3 - Objective 5 To require development in accordance to Chapter 7, Article IX of the Grapevine Code of Ordinances to reduce or eliminate entirely, development in the flood plain that exposes persons or property to the hazard of flooding, or increases the possibility of flooding dc�mstream. Goal 3 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-1 The City will prohibit develo�.anent in areas that the City dete�nines is subject to flooding, with the exception of develoFanent that can utilize � the flood plain and not substantially alter it. Goal 3 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-2 The City will utilize as much of the flood plains as possible for public open space, parks, golf courses and other uses that are ccanpatible with the flood hazard. Goal 3 - Objective 6 - To recognize that the proximity of the Dallas/Ft. Worth Airport creates a noise and height constraint to development in Grapevine and to protect the future population accordingly by develo�anent controls and positive sound-proofing develognent techniques. Goal 3 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-1 The City will enforce the Airport Hazard Zoning Ordinance. � ,..:� 39 Goal 3 - Qbjective 6 - Policy 6-2 �"~ In Zone A, defined on the North Central Texas Council of Governments Aircraft Sound Exposure: Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport and Environs � Map as the zone of minimal noise effect, activities that are sound sensitive, such as auditorit�ns, churches, schools, hospitals, theaters and open air activities, will be discouraged, and other activities will be required to use some type of sound control in theis building design. Goal 3 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-3 In Zone B, the middle zone of noise effect, residential develo�anent will not be considered a suitable use. The construction of auditori�ns, schools, churches, hospitals, theaters, and like activities shall be avoided wherever possible. Activities where uninterrupted co�nunication is essential shall utilize sound exposure control. �-,,,� Goal 3 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-4 In Zone C, land will be reserved for activities that can tolerate a high � level of sound exposure such as scsne agricultural, industrial and co�nercial uses. Al1 regularly occupied structures shall utilize sound control in the design. Residential and sound sensitive activities will not be allowed to locate in this area. GOAL 4 To encourage a level of growth that pravides housing opportunities to meet the different housing needs of all inccare groups of the city's present and future populations. �,,.# 40 Goal 4 - Objective 1 To provide enough land for all types of land uses and housing for .�, residents of all incane levels. . Goal 4 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-1 � The Comprehensive Plan will attempt to shaw land uses sufficient to support the ultimate population that maxitrnun develo�xnent at the current densities and land use intensities can acccxm�odate. Residential land uses will maintain the desired relative proportions of the rnm�bers of dwelling units by type as follows: Single Family . Low density 50� 0 through 4 units per acre Townhouses, Duplex Medium density 25� & Zero Lot Line over 4 through 12 units per acre Apartrnents High density 25g over 12 through 20 units per � acre � Goal 4 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-2 The City will monitor the amount of land developed and/or rezoned for residences by type of dwelling units proposed and will deny those requests that will disrupt the ultimate housing mix. Goal 4 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-3 All development and zoning designations proposals sukxnitted after the adoption of the Ccxnprehensive Master Plan either must be consistent with £ the adopted Map 2, Land Use Plan, or must show that they meet the policies contained in the plan, or must include a proposal to amend the plan. Ccxnprehensive plan amendments must be processed prior to and separate frcan rezone and project approval applications. Amendments to the Land Use Plan �"' �..:� 41 Map that increase the area allotted to any land use over what is shawn in the canprehensive plan shall require an offsetting decrease of the area �'°'� for that land use in another location on the map such that the adopted land use m:i.x is maintained citywide unless the City Council adopts a � different land use mix as an amenchnent to the ccanprehensive plan. Goal 4 - Objective 2 To use the City's statutozy pawers to prohibit substandard develo�xnent as determined by the City Council from occurring within the city or its extraterritorial jurisdiction. Goal 4 - Objective 2 - Policy 2-1 The City shall not allow substandard subdivisions or any develo�anent on property that meets the definition of subdivided property but has not had a plat approved by the City and recorded. The City's major statutozy pawers include: �� a. denial of plat approval b. withholding of utilities and services � c. denial of access d. refusal to issue building permits e. court injunctions Goal 4 - Objective 3 To direct and encourage grcxvth so that it occurs as a logical and contiguous addition to the e.�isting ccamiunity. Goal 4 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-1 The City will require develo�nent that is not adjacent to existing utility lines or streets to pay for the utility and street extensions under a uniform rate setting procedure to be established and adopted by the City ,�.,� Council. � 42 Goal 4 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-2 The City will refuse services or utility extensions to develoFanent that is � pr�nature based on the phasing in the City's capital improvements program and which would place an undue burden on city services, unless developer will bear the total related cost. Goal 4 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-3 The City shall require a concept plan of all develognent except Iaw Density Residential as to the layout or the porposed developments impact on existing or future development. A concept plan may be required for law density develo�anent whenever there is scgne doubt as to the imnact on , existing or future develo�anent. Goal 4 - Objective 4 To require new develognent to pay as many direct and indirect costs created by that develoFxnent as possible, thereby reducing the tax load on �•w the �isting residents. Goal 4 - Policy 4-1 Developers will be required to pay for any costs that can be identified as being created by their develo�xnent, including administrative costs. Goal 4 - Objective 5 To require develoFanent in accordance to Chapter =7, Article IX, of the Grapevine Code of Ordinances. Zb reduce or eliminate entirely development in the flood plain that exposes� persons or property to the hazard of � flooding, or increases the possibility of flooding downstream. Goal 4 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-1 The City will prohibit develo�anent in areas that the City determines is subject to flooding, with the exception of develoFxnent that can utilize � the flood plain and not substantially alter it. �� 43 Goal 4 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-2 � The City will utilize as much of the flood plains as possi.ble, for public open space, parks, golf courses and other uses that are campatible with � the flood hazard. Goal 4 - Objective 6 To recognize that the proximity of the Dallas/Ft. Worth Airport creates a noise and height constraint to development in Grapevine, and to protect the future population accordi.ngly by develo�anent controls and positive sound-proofing development technigues. Goal 4 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-1 The City will enforce the Airport Hazard Zoning Ordinance. Goal 4 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-2 In Zone A, defined on the North Central Texas Council of Goverr�nents �.� Aircraft Sound ��osure: Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport and Environs Map, as the zone of minimal noise effect, activities that are sound � sensitive, such as auditoritm�s, churches, schools, hospitals, theaters and open air activities, will be discouraged, and other activities will be required to use sane type of sound control in their building design. Goal 4 - Objective 6 - Policv 6-3 In Zone =B, the middle zone of noise effect, residential develo�zt will not be considered a suitable use. The construction of auditoriluns, schools, churches, hospitals, theaters, and like activities shall be avoided wherever possible. Activities where uninterrupted cc�anunication is essential shall utilize sc�und exposure control. Goal 4 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-4 � In Zone C, land will be reserved for activities that can tolerate a high level of sound exposure such as sane agricultural, industrial and � 44 c�rcial uses. Al1 regularly occupied structures shall utilize sound control in the design. Residential and sound sensitive activities will not be allawed to locate in this area. � GOAL 5 'Ib encourage a level of growth that provides sufficient catunercial and industrial develo�xnent to provide a diversified econcenic base and employment opportunities for the future population of the city. Goal 5 - Object�ve 1 To use the City's statutory powers to prohibit substandard develoFanent as detezmined by the City Council frcgn occurring within the city or its extraterritorial jurisdiction. Goal 5 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-1 The City shall not allow substandard subdivisions or any development on � property that meets the definition of subdivided property but has not had ' a plat approved by the City and recorded. The City's major statutory `�"' , powers include: a. denial of plat approval b. withholding of utilities and services c. denial of access d, refusal to issue building permits e. court injunctions Goal 5 - Objective 2 To direct and encourage grawth so that it occurs as a logical and contiguous addition to the existing coim�unity. � p.,.� 45 Goal 5 - Objective 2 - Policy 2-1 '`"� 'I"he City will require develognent that is not adjacent to existing utility lines or streets to pay for the utility and street extensions under a � uniform rate setting procedure to be established and adopted by the City Council. Goal 5 - Objective 2 - Policy 2-2 The City will refuse services or utility extensions to develoFanent that is premature based on the phasing in the City's capital improvesnents program and which would place an undue burden on city services, unless developer will bear the total related cost. Goal 5 - Objective 2 - Policy 2-3 The City shall require a cancept plan of an entire area whenever there is scane doubt as to the layout or the proposed development's inipact on ,,,,�.� existing or future develo�nt. A concept plan may be rc�rn,;red for law density develoFanent whenever there is scxne doubt as to the impact on � existing or future develo�anent. Goal 5 - Objective 3 To require new develognent to pay as many direct and indirect costs created by that develoFsnent as possible, thereby reducing the tax load on the existing residents. . Goal 5 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-1 Developers will be required to pay for any costs that can be identified as being created by thei.r development, including achninistrative costs. Goal 5 - Objective 4 To r��;re development in accordance to Chapter 7, Article IX of the ,,.�. GYapevine Code of Ordinances to reduce or eliminate entirely, development � 46 in the flood plain that exposes persons or property to the hazard of flooding, or increases the possibility of flooding downstream. Goal 5 - Objective 4 - Policy 4-1 """"�" The City will prohibit develognent in areas that the City detexmines is subject to flooding, with the exception of development that can utilize the flood plain and not substantially alter it. Goal 5 - Objective 4 - Policy 4-2 The City will utilize as much of the flood plains as possible, for public open space, parks, golf courses and other uses that are compatible with the flaxl hazard. Goal 5 - Objective 5 Zb recognize that the proximity of the Dallas/Ft. Worth Airport creates a noise and height constraint to cleveloFxnent in Grapevine, and to protect the future population accordingly by development controls and positive sound-proofing develoFanent techniques. � Goal 5 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-1 - � The City will enforce the Airport Hazard Zoning Ordinance. Goal 5 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-2 In Zone A, defined on the North Central Texas Council of Governments Aircraft Sound �posure: Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport and �virons Map as the zone of minimal noise effect, activities that are sound sensitive, such as auditori�ns, churches, schools, hospitals, theaters and open air activities, will be discouraged, and other activities will be . required to use scane type of sound control in their building design. Goal 5 - Objective 5 -Policy 5-3 In Zone B, the middle zone of noise effect, residential develo�anent will not be considered a suitable use. The construction of auditoriLuns, � schools, churches, hospitals, theaters, and like activities shall be �.:� 47 avoided wherever possible. Activities where uninterrupted camrn.lnication is essential sha.11 utilize sound exposure control. ,,�.� Goal 5 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-4 In Zone C, land will be reserved for activities that can tolerate a high "�" level of sound exposure such as scane agricultural, industrial and c��ercial uses. All regularly occupied structures shall utilize sound control in the design. Residential and sound sensitive activities will not be allowed to locate in this are. GUAL 6 To recognize that land is a valuable and limited resource, and to acknowledge that there is a limited amount of land in the city that can be developed, and that the use of that land must be planr.ed and developed with careful consideration given to the conservation of land resources. �� Goal 6 - Objective 1 To provide enough land for all types of land uses and housing for residents of all income levels. Goal 6 - Objective 1 -Policy 1-1 _ The Comprehensive Plan wi]_1 attempt to shaw land uses sufficient to support the ultimate population that maxim�n develoFxnent at the current densities and land use intensities can accanmodate. Residential land uses will maintain the desired relative proportions of the rnm�bers of dwelling units by type as follaws: �.� � 48 Single Family Low Density 50$ 0 through 4 uni.ts per acre +�* Zbwnhouses, Duplexes Meditun density 250 and Zero Lot Line over 4 through 12 units per acre _ Apartments High density 25$ over 12 through 20 units per acre Goal 6 - Objective 1 -Policy 1-2 The City will monitor the amount of land developed and/or rezoned for residences by type of dwelling units proposed and will deny those requests that will disrupt the ultimate housing mix. Goal 6 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-3 All develoFxnent and zoning designations proposals sul�nitted after the adoption of the Ccanprehensive Master Plan either irnzst be consistent with the adopted Map 2, Land Use Plan, or must shaw that they meet the policies contained in the plan, or must include a proposal to amend the plan. � Ccanprehensive plan amendments must be processed prior to and separate fran rezone and project approval applications. Amendments to the Land Use Plan Map that increase the area allotted to any land use over what is shawn in the ccanprehensive plan shall require an offsetting decrease of the area for that land use in another location on the map such that the adopted land use mix is maintai.ned citywide unless the City Council adopts a different land use mix as an amenc�ment to the ccanprehensive plan. Goal 6 - Objective 2 To use the City's statutory pc7wers to prohibit substandard develognent as determined by the City Council fran occurring within the city or its extraterritorial jurisdiction. � 4;,m� 49 Goal 6 - Objective 2 - Policy 2-1 �`°` The City shall not allaw substandard subdivisions or any develognent on property that meets the definition of subdivided property but has not had �,� a plat approved by the City and recorded. The City's major statutory pawers include: a. denial of plat approval b. withholding of utilities and services c. denial of access d. refusal to issue building pezmits e. court injunctions Goal 6 - Objective 3 To direct and encourage grawth so that is occurs as a logical and contiguous addition to the existing c�nity. �� Goal 6 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-1 The City will requixe develognent that is not adjacent to existing utility � lines or streets to pay for the utility and street extensions under a uniform rate setting procedure to be established and adopted by the City Council. Goal 6 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-2 The City will refuse services or utility extensions to develognent that is premature based on the phasing in the City's capital improvements program and which would place an undue burden on city sezvices, unless developer will bear the total related cost. Goal 6 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-3 The City shall require a concept plan of all develo�anent except Low ,�,-� Density Residential as to the layout or the proposed develoFxnents impact on existing or future develognent. A concept plan may be required for law � 50 density develognent whenever there is sane doubt as to the impact on existing or future develoFxnent. Goal 6 - Objective 4 ,,,� To require new develognent to pay as many direct and indirect costs created by that develo�nent as possi.ble, thereby reduci.ng the tax load on �� the existing residents. Goal 6 - Objective 4 - Policy 4-1 Developers will be required to pay for any costs that can be identified as being created by their development, including ac�ni.nistrative costs. Goal 6 - Objective 5 To require develoFxnent i.n accordance to Chapter 7, Article IX of the Grapevine Code of Ordinances to reduce or eliminate entirely, develo�xnent in the flood plain that exposes persons or property to the hazard of flooding or increases the possibility of flooding dawnstream. Goal 6 - Objective 5 - Policy 5-1 �w. The City will prohibit develo�anent in areas that the City determi.nes is ', subject to flooding, with the exception of develoFxnent that can utilize �`�'� the flood plain and not substantially alter it. Goal 6 - Objective 5 - Polic�� 5-2 The City will utilize as muc;h of the floocl plains as possible, for public open space, parks, golf courses and other uses that :are canpatible with the flood hazard. Goal 6 - Objective 6 To recognize that the proximity of the Dallas/Ft. Worth Airport creates a noise and height constraint to develo�.anent in Grapevine, and to protect the future population accordingly by develoFanent controls and positive sound-proofing development techniques. ,�.� �. :,�, 51 Goal 6 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-1 �"'`�° The City will enforce the Airport Hazard Zoning Ordinance. Goal 6 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-2 � �,� In Zone A, defined on the North Central Texas Council of Governments Aircraft Sound E�posure: Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport and �virons Map, as the zone of minimal noise effect, activities that are sound sensitive, such as auditorituns, churches, schools, hospitals, theaters and open air activities, will be discouraged, and other activities will be required to use \same type of sound control in their building design. Goal 6 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-3 In Zone B, the mi.ddle zone of noise effect, residential develoFanent will not be considered a suitable use. The construction of auditoritm�s, schools, churches, hospitals, theaters, and like activities shall be ,�,�. avoided wherever possible. Activities where uninterrupted cornrn�nication is essential shall utilize sound exposure control. �,_� Goal 6 - Objective 6 - Policy 6-4 In Zone C, land will be reserved for activities that can tolerate a high level of sound exposure such as s�ne agricultural, industrial and c��ercial uses. All regularly occupied structures shall utilize sound control in= the design. Residential and sound sensitive activities will not be allowed to locate in this area. GQAL 7 To discourage and prevent, as appropriate, the development of land uses in flood prone areas or in other environmentally sensitive or hazardous areas �� in such cases that the health, safety or welfare of the local citizens or the natural environment is threatened. 52 Goal 7 - Objective 1 To use the City's statutory paaers to prohibit substandard development as detezmined by the City Council frcen occurring within the city or its ""`� extraterritorial jurisdiction. � Goal 7 - Objective 1 - Policy 1-1 The City shall not allaw substandard subdivisions or any development on property that meets the definition of subdivided property but has not had a plat approved by the City and recorded. The City's major statutory powers include: a. denial of plat approval b. withholding of utilities and services c. denial of access d. refusal to issue building permits e. court injunctions Goal 7 - Objective 2 � 'Ib require r_ew develoFanent to pay as many direct and indirect costs �� created by that develoFxnent as possi.ble, thereby reducing the tax load on the existing residents. Goal 7 - Objective 2 - Policy 2-1 Developers will be required to pay for any costs that can be identified as being created by their development, including administxative costs. Goal 7 - Objective 3 To require develoFxnent in accordance to Chapter 7, Article IX of the Grapevine Code of Ordinances to reduce or eliminate entirely, develo�nent in the flood plain that exposes persons or property to the hazard of flooding, or increases the possibility of flooding downstream. � ,�.�, 53 Goal 7 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-1 °"�� The City will prohibit development in areas that the City determines is subject to flooding, with the exception of develaFanent that can utilize the flood plain and not substantially alter it. Goal 7 - Objective 3 - Policy 3-2 The City will utilize as much of the flood plains as possible, for public open space, parks, golf courses and other uses that are cca��atible with the flood hazard. Goal 7 - Objective 4 To recognize that the proximity of the Dallas/F`t. Worth Airport creates a noise and height constraint to development in Grapevine, and to protect the future population accordingly by developm�nt controls and positive sound-proofing develoFxnent techniques. ,�,:.� Goal 7 - Objective 4 - Policy 4-1 The City will enforce the Airport Hazard Zoning Ordinance. � Goal 7 - Objective 4 - Policy 4-2 In Zone A, defined on the North Central Texas Council of Governments Aircraft Sound �posure: Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport and Environs Map, as the zone of minimal noise effect, activities that are sound sensitive, such as auditorituns, churches, schools, hospitals, theaters and open air activities, will be discouraged, and other activities will be required to use same type of sound control in their building design. Goal 7 -Objective 4 - Policy 4-3 In Zone B, the middle zone of noise effect, residential develoFanent will not be considered a suitable use. The construction of auditoriums, ,�.��. schools, churches, hospitals, theaters, and like activities shall be � 54 avoided wherever possible. Activities where uninterrupted ca�arnxnication is essential shall utilize sound exposure control. Goal 7 - Objective 4 - Policy 4-4 � In Zone C, land will be reserved for activities that can tolerate a high level of sound exposure such as scene agricultural, industrial and � caninercial uses. All regularly occupied structures shall utilize sound control in the design. Residential and sound sensitive activities will not be allowed to locate in this area. � �..,.,,� � 55 � IV. LAND USE �"'�^ A. GENERAL � The Land Use Plan reflects current circ�unstances in the City of Grapevine that were not foreseeable when the Ccxc�prehen�ive Master Plan was prepared in 1974 and 1980. This Cc�mprehensive Plan reflects the revised population projections which moderate those made in 1974 and 1980 because of the trend toward smaller families and an increasing ntunber of single person households. This Plan looks at maximt4n potential build-out of the city, which, according to the projections herein, could occur by the year 2000 when the city reaches a population of approximately 62,873 persons. Since � �. this is an update of an existing plan, the primary purpose is to adjust planning practice as deemed necessary by the trends of the last decade, the 1984 City wide rezoning and current circtunstances. This update am�ends the existing Comprehensive Master Plan and adds new goals, objectives, and policies which have been added to meet the planning challenges through the year 1994. The Land Use Plan takes a ccxnprehensive approach in its land use reco�nendations. Land use plans fran adjacent co�rninities have been considered in developing this Plan. With such explosive population grawth and because of the rapid econcanic develo�ient of the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex, however, it is extremely important that population growth � and development trends be monitored closely and the Ccmprehensive Master Plan be updated every five to ten years. Also, as Grapevine graws and becomes more ccxnplex, the city will need and will want to add more 56 elements to its plan, especially in the general area of catuminity facilities and services. � Map 2, the Land Use Plan is a graphic representation of the city's adopted land use policies as they relate to the physical characteristics of Grapevine. 'I'hese policies establish the reasoning and set the design standards for the type and density of development shawn on the map. The land use patterns of the map cannot be achieved without adopted policies directed toward that end. Unlike other land use plans in which projections are made as to what the most li.kely development of property will be, no such projection is made here. All land is shown as being developed, and no land is being left out as agricultural or for future development. This does not mean that Grapevine will develop all the land in the planning �. area by the year 2000. This means that any tract of land may be developed in the lannin area at an time as lon as the develo �"''� P g Y g per meets the conditions imposed by the plan. B. Needs Identification 1. The need to keep dwelling unit densities consistent with the Plan. The residential lots in some areas of Grapevine are overcrawded due to multiple single family dwellings or mobile homes on lots subdivided for one single family house. The problem is not density per se. Rather the problem is that when the subdivision was approved, only one house per lot was anticipated and public. facilities and services were �.. sized and allocated based on that asstm�ption. The City shall not rezone to a more intense use, single family subd.ivisions with streets, water, and x 57 sewage lines sized and in place to serve only a fraction of the average daily load that would be generated by the more intense use. In the same ,,�� manner, crawding several dwelling units on one single family lot or converting a single family neighborhood to multifamily usage tends to �' overload water and wastewater lines, to i.ncrease traffic disproportionately, and to create access and parking problems. With the rezoning in 1984, the areas disproportionately zoned were rezoned to fit within the density constrai.nts of the surrounding areas. 2. Ttie need to protect residential land values without overly restricting access to carQnercial and industrial areas. Conventional zoning ordinances are based on the principle that land uses should be segregated into single use districts in order to preserve property values. However, a mixture of land uses can be ccxnplementary in the �.,...�, proper proportions, on the proper scale, and depending on the type of activity and the hours of that activity. For example, neighborhood � shopping centers that include medical and professional services, restaurants, and other sources of entertainment can be quite ccgnplementary to a residential neighborhood. On the other hand, industrial and cc�gnercial uses that generate noise, noxious odors, or fumes, or heavy truck traffic, are not cca�rpatible with residential neighborhoods. These sources of employment should be readily accessible to residents; but they should be physically buffered fran residential areas. The mixture of land uses that are ccanplementary to one another were accomplished in the adoption of the Appendix D Zoning Ordinance which created well defined principal uses for each zoning district. �� 3. The need to encourage redevelopment under current standards � along the Northwest Highway corridor. Grapevine has sane heavy cc�anercial 58 and industrial land uses, especially along Northwest Highway, that do not mix well with surrounding residential development. The deterioration of scxne of the con�nercial and industrial structures adds to the "blighting" �,,, influence on the neighborhoods. The outside storage of equiFanent, junk, and possibly flanmable or otherwise hazardous materials is not ��`� aesthetically pleasing and is a potential health hazard in a residential neighborhood. The 1984 rezoning of the Northwest Highway corridor to "HC", Highway Camt�ercial and subsequent amendments to the Highway C�rcial District requiresnents were acccmplished to work taward eliminating these problems. Redevelo�lt of the Northwest Highway ' corridor is essential to improve the image of one of the main doozways to the City of Grapevine. 4. The need to continually review the zoning ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance shall continually be revised to address the needs and � goals of the Ccxnprehensive Master Plan. The Appenclix D Zoning Ordinance was totally rewritten in 1984 following the completion of the City wide �� rezoning. The development guidelines established by conti.nual Ordinance revisions will provide a workable tool for implementation of the Ccan�rehensive Master Plan. 5. The need for controls on corridor develoFanent. The tendency to establish cca�nercial retail developir�ent along traffic corridors creates the potential for strip co�nercial develo�anent of i.nadequate design that creates traffic problems with visual obstructions and distractions, and with rnmierous entrances and exits. � � Strip or ribbon canIInercial develoFanent is spreading in Grapevine. Coqmiercial development along a major thoroughfare does not have to be �- � 59 hazardous or unsightly. In order to avoid the negative connotations of the terms "strip" or "ribbon" corm�ercial development, this plan uses the �-�{ terms "corridor" or "linear" c�rcial develognent along thoroughfares. For further clarification, undesirable strip conmercial devloFxnent can be �� characterized by the following problems: a. shallaw lots, usually between 100 and 200 feet deep b. rnmierous small awnerships c. nLm�erous curb cuts for entrances d. rnunerous snall buildings with no architectural unity e. �ittle or no landscaping in and around the parking lots f. limited parking usually restricted to the front setback area or along the street, and sametimes backing into the street g. building entrances directly faci.ng the major thoroughfare �.,,� h. the lack of landscaping or other buffers especially in the rear. In contrast with the above indicators of strip cca�anercial develo�nent, a properly planned linear cca�mercial development is often characterized by ownership by a single group, large amounts of ccs�pnly owned parking, preferably in the rear, architectural unity or consistency of building styles and bulk, controlled ar.d limited access and egress points, and landscaped buffers separating the ccamiercial development from adjacent residential develoFxnent. This is not to say that small, independent retailers cannot create appropriate linear c�rcial develoFanent. Nevertheless, there is �:�:m a need to provide a mechanism to establish cooperation, organization, and unity among independently owned small businesses along a major '�' thoroughfare.� 60 Atteqnpts were made to solve probl�ns, a through h, of "strip" or "ribbon" ccem�ercial develo�anent through the 1984 rezoning and adoption of the Appendix D Zoning Ordinance. Regulations naw in place prevent the "�'* majority of the problems mentioned. It should be noted that there are �.� still potential problems with the Highway Comnercial District and the Central Business District which are special districts created to acc�date existing developed areas. Rezoning to "HC" or "CBD" could result in further "strip" or "ribbon" conmercial develoFxnent. 6. The need for buffering between incompatible land uses. For those cca��ercial land uses that are incompatible with surrounding or ' adjacent residential or other land uses, visual and sound buffers, shall be used. Multifamily housing in itself is not a suitable buffer between law density residential and more intense land uses, and actually needs the same buffering that single family neighborhoods do. Buffering � was added to the various zoning districts of the Appendix D Zoning �-� ' Ordinance to acccanplish this need. 7. The need to protect the character of existing neighborhoods and encourage rehabilitat:ion. As older single family residential neighborhoods begin to deteriorate, valuable housing stock, much af which is available at a low cost, is subject to transition to more intensive residential, conIInercial, or even industrial uses. S�ich is the case in residential areas around the CBD in Grapevine. These neighborhoods do have opportunities for cam�atible mixed uses that can provide a range of housing types and prices; but the mix must be stable, the character of the neighborhood reaffirmed, and land values protected. This situation can be achieved through proper buffering, increased code enforcement, and incentives, such as a public or private loan program or assistance, for " '`�' 61 rehabilitati.ng hanes. Also, thoroughfares should be established to handle through traffic from apartments and c�xcial uses without impacting low �°� density residential areas. 8. The need to segregate light cca�anercial activities fr�n heavy c�rcial and industrial land uses. Retail and some wholesale establishments have very different needs than and are often incampatible with warehousing and industrial land uses. Yet, in Grapevine, there are several instances in which these land uses ccxne into contact with each other. � 9. The need to facilitate through traffic and truck traffic on arterials away from local ar.d residential collector streets. In certain instances, industrial and commercial land uses generate truck traffic that must use residential streets. There is a need to provide designated truck �� routes within the city. � 10. The need for historic preservation and conservation policies. Whereas many r�sidents of Grapevine recognize the historic value of the CBD, there is no City policy that insures the preservation and conservation of the historic resources in the downtawn area. The City should adopt a historical preservation district for the protection of existing buildings which would include the CBD and any area deemed historical by the City. Z'he City should use and encourage the use of zoni.ng controls, deed restrictions, or merely a requirement for council review of all proposals within a defined hi.storical district, which should � include Main Street fran the railroad tracks to Northwest Highway. � 62 11. The need to coordinate the plann;ng efforts in Grapevine with the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport master plan, the COG regional plan, and the ccmprehensive plans of the surroundinq ,�, comnunities. There are residential, c�rcial and industrial uses within the jurisdictions of the U.S. Ari�y Cozps of Engineers, the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, the cities of Southlake, Colleyville, and E�less, and other surrounding c�munities that have impacts on land use and the thoroughfare system in Grapevine. Particular attention should be given to the interfacing land use activities among these jurisdictions. � � �..� 63 GOAIS, O&7'F�C.'TIVES AND POLICIES AS REVISID AND ADOP'I'ED ""�" BY THE CITY OF GR�'EVINE � C. Urban Standards Goals The goals that follow are oriented taward utilization of the combined corridors/centers concept as the means of systematically directing the city`s urban form (see Figure 2) . GOAL 1 To recognize that the physical envisonment is the single most important element in determi.ning a city's desirability and efficiency �.,_,q GOAL 2 Zb disect that the corridors/centers concept as defined be utilized to �� guide the city's future develo�xnent. GOAL 3 To develop an overall c�rnulity structure made up of smaller, identifiable subareas, each with its c�m characteristics and appropriate cc�urn�nity ; services, yet each an integral part of the total ccatnnanity. GOAL 4 To plan land uses in such a manner as to produce an efficient, convenient, and harmonious land use pattern, eliminating mixtures of incc��atible and conflicting uses. � � 64 GOAL 5 To promote the identity of the city by emphasizing significant physical features and providing better boundary definitions between neighborhoods. .�„ GOAL 6 _ To pranote orderly, timely, econcan.ical grawth and to recognize current land use patterns. GOAL 7 To provide for the health, safety and welfare of the people of the city through effective land use planning. GOAL 8 � To establish a living environment that is aesthetically pleasi.ng, as well , as functionally efficient and practical. Because managed growth has been determined to be desirable in the city and because the corridors/centers concept has been adopted as the urban � standards most desirable, the objectives and policies have been incorporated into their respective sections under land use, housing, and � transportation. D. Land Use Goals The overall development goals, objectives, and policies in Chapter III, "Guide to Managed Grawth," and the urban standards in the preceding section set the tone for the residential, carBnercial, and industrial development goals that follaa. This package of goals, in turn, provides a framework within which to interpret haw the more specific land use objectives and policies should be implemented. � �. .�« 65 1. Residential Develo�snent GOAL 1 �� To provide sufficient and adequate space in appropriate locations for residential develo�anent in order to provide safe and sanitary housing, to meet the housing and social needs for a desired standard of living for the city's present and future population, and to meet the housing mix ratio as ' previously defined in Policy 1-1, Section III D. which are the overall grcywth policies. GOAL 2 To provide within the framevaork of the residential land use plan a wide choice of owner-occupied and rental housing types that will give adequate housing to families and individuals of all incane levels. GOAL 3 To allow residential densities that reflect not only the desired lifestyle �A;� of the citizens but also the fact that housing demand is sensitive to price, which is based on land values, and that density and site design � flexi.bility can cc�ipensate for rising land values. GOAL 4 To plan and develop public facilities and services consistent with the residential densities designated on the land use plan and to recognize and uphold the principles that different residential densities require different housing solutions and that land designated for one density on the land use plan may not be suitable for a different density �aithout substantial modifications in existing or planned public facilities and services. � � 66 GOAL 5 To encourage the protection of residential neighborhoods or structures with historical or cultural value to the camnunity. � GOAL 6 _. To prevent, as appropriate, the develo�anent of residences in flood prone �" areas or in other environmentally sensitive or hazardous areas such that the health, safety, or welfare of the residents or the natural environment is threatened. Objectives and �olicies of Residential Develognent ORIECrIVE 1 To utilize the corridors/centers concept as herein defined, and the neighborhood concept as defined in the 1974 plan to create as many neighborhoods as r_eeded to accca�anodate the cca�Hnunity's future population. � POLICY 1-1 The City will encourage the develognent of quiet, safe, clearly defined neighborhoods with an inwardly oriented atn�sphere. POLICY 1-2 Developers will be encouraged to utilize thoroughfares, water bodies and creeks, and other topographic or physical features to define the boundary of a neighborhood clearly, and to orient their developments inward from such boundaries. POLICY 1-3 . The City will encourage land use patterns that reflect this inward function of a neighborhood. The interior of the unit will generally contain law and mediiun density uses. Heavy traffic generators, such as AMMMa apart�nents or conmercial uses will be located on the periphery of the �..�. 67 neighborhood along the designated arterials in corridors of intensified development. �`°~ POLICY 1-4 �isting stable residential neighborhoods shall be protected frcan � encroachment of comnercial or higher density residential uses. POLICY 1-5 Land uses which support the neighborhoocl, such as neighborhood shopping centers and churches, are im�ortant elements for a neighborhood's develoFxnent and shall be located on the periphery of the neighborhood. POLICY 1-6 Schools and parks shall be encouraged to locate centrally within walking distance of any section of the neighborhood. This will also give the neighborhood a central focal point, a center of interest. POLICY 1-7 �.,,� The concept plan, and neighborhood planning should be used as often as feasible to address the c�m�ulative effects of grcywth and residential develoFanent and to provide adeqtaate social amenities through cc�nplementary land uses on the neighborhoai level. POLICY 1-8 Residential development wil:l be discouraged in areas that do not have adequate public facilities and services. Adequate public facilities and services include, but should not be limited to roads and streets, police and fire protection, sewage disposal, water supply and pressure, telephone, gas, electricity, schools, parks, and sidewalks. OBJECTIVE 2 , To discourage the concentration of any type of multi-family or single � family residential develoFxnent in such concentrations and expanses that, � 68 by accepted planning standards and in the opinion of the city council, there are not sufficient amenities to support such development and additional development of samilar kind would diminish the quality of life *'"'* in the area. . �.h� POLICY 2-1 Residential areas, especially higher density uses, should have access to shopping, recreation, and work places that are convenient not only for autamobile traffic but also for foot and bicycle traffic in order to minimize energy const4nption, air pollution, and traffic congestion. POLICY 2-2 � Public facilities and services should be scaled to match different residential densities. POLICY 2-3 Multi-family and other meditun and high density housing shall not be allowed in areas planned for single fanu.ly or etherwise low density � residential dwelling units. �_.� O&7ECTIVE 3 To use open space or other natural or structural buffers between land uses or residential densities where appropriate but not to preclude a mixture of land uses and densities when advantageous and not disruptive to the social unity of the neighborhood. POLICY 3-1 Physical buffers, such as permanent open space, land uses that are transitional and unobtrusive, landscaping, fencing, or walls should be � used as appropriate between residential areas and non-residential areas and between residential areas of different densities except where mixed land uses are desired in specific circ�nstances. �. 69 POISCY 3-2 "� Residential uses shall provide adequate buffering. POLICY 3-3 � � The City and developers should recognize that higher density dwelling units and mobile hanes require the same buffering fran inccanpatible land uses as law density, single family housing and that such residential development shall not be used as a buffer between single family and c�rcial and industrial areas. � POLICY 3-4 Different housing densities may abut one another as long as a proper buffer is provided and traffic generated by each use does not mix within the neighborhood. 0&7F,CTIVE 4 ,�,,,� To protect single family residential areas frcan truck traffic, traffic congestion and all through traffic, inclucling traffic generated by � ccmmercial, industrial, and multi-family uses. POLICY 4-1 To prohibit residential developments that, because of design or location, will expose the residents to through traffic or heavy traffic frcan other types of land uses. POLICY 4-2 Residential lots along major thoroughfares shall be designed in one of the follawing ways: a. Deep lots shall be designed such that the houses back onto the major thoroughfare and are screened fr�n the traffic by a fence or a � wall as part of the site develo�xnent. When high noise levels fran traffic are anticipated on the property,. a masonry wall or other suitable noise � 70 dampeni.ng device or design standard shall be used on the site to provide adequate outdoor living space that is not impacted by excessive noise levels. � b. If houses are to face a major thoroughfare, they shall be � given access via a frontage road or service street that will give the house an additional setback from the highway. c. Whenever possible, the developer shall construct short cul-de-sacs or loop streets, extending from the arterial into the subdivision so that the lots front on that local residential street and houses do not directly face the arterial and all outdoor living spaces are protected fran traffic noise by the same standards mentioned abave. d. Houses may face a major thoroughfare without the pravision of access fram a sezvice road if they are sufficiently set back, are protected from traffic noise in the same manner as mentioned above, and are given access from rear alleys or drives such that direct access to the � highway is limited or prohibited. If access to the arterial must be , ' provided, then ciscular drives shall be required so that vehicles will not back into the arterial. POLICY 4-3 High density residential develognent shall have direct access to developed four-lane streets, excluding parking, to acca��odate the traffic volimies and turning patterns generated by high concentrations of people. They shall be located on arterials such that law density residential develo�anent is not impacted by heavy traffic. POLICY 4-4 Medi�n density residential development shall have direct access to collector width (40 feet of pavement width or more) streets to acco�nodate �, �.�� 71 the traffic voltm�es generated. Their traffic should not be routed through single family neighborhoods. �� POLICY 4-5 Through traffic should be limited to arterials .and away fr�n residential � develoFxnent as much as possible. Local truck traffic should be limited to specifically designated truck routes except for deliveries, in which case the shortest and least disruptive route over local streets should be designated and used. POISCY 4-6 Residential su23d.ivisions should be designed to include loop streets and cul-de-sacs to discourage througYi traffic on residential streets. OBJECTIVE 5 To provide, within residential areas, open areas for relaxation, recreation , and visual enjoyment. POLICY 5-1 �:;;,� The approved Parks and Recreation Master Plan shall be an el�nent to the city's ccanprehensive plan. POLICY 5-2 Land should be acquired for parks in advance of develoFxnent or dedicated with development, and land in the flood plain and other areas where development is constrained should be given highest priority for public use. OBJEGTIVE 6 To recognize that different types of residential uses have different requirements, and that land developed for one density requires more than rezoning to make it suitable for another density. POLICY 6-1 Meditun and high density residential develognents shall be located on � 72 larger sites of sufficient size to allow for proper buffering, adequate parking and landscaping, and enough flexibility in design and layout to insure adequate develognent. „�1 POLICY 6-2 Meditun and high density develognents will be required to have wider �»�� internal streets, increased utility and drainage capacity, increased fire protection, and more facilities than a single family type develo�anent. POI,ICY 6-3 �isting neighborhoods designed for single family use that, because of age or other factors, are in transition to other uses, wi.11 not be rezoned without meeting current standards. I POLICY 6-4 The City will not rezone property to a more intensive residential district without detennination that the street system, utilities, drainage and other requirements are adequate for that density. � POLICY 6-5 �:.� The City will not rezone property to a residential use that is not in accordance with the ccsnprehensive plan without a prior amenc�ment to that plan. 0&TECTIVE 7 To revise the zoning and siibdivision ordi.nances and capital improv�nents program, as necessary, and utilize the ordinances to implesnent the abave policies. POLICY 7-1 The zoning ordinance shall be enforced and revised as needed. POLICY 7-2 The subdivision ordinance shall be enforced and revised as needed. � ,...» 73 POLICY 7-3 �, A capital improvelnents plan will be developed and implemented to meet the facilities and service de�nands of existing and proposed residential � develoFanents. 2. Conmercial Develo�xnent GOAL 1 To provide an econcanic climate for the City that will encourage the improvement of traditional and other existing businesses and the establishment of new businesses that will be of benefit to the ccatarnznity. GOAL 2 To prcgnote the use of a corridors/centers concept for the most desirable use of land and to influence the direction of develo�.anent as part of a ��.�� ccxnprehensive grawth policy. GOAL 3 � To prcanote stability of co��ercial develognent and to strengthen the econcanic base of the city. Objectives and Policies of Comnercial Develognent OBJECTIVE 1 To maintain our sufficient amount of ccamiercially zoned land to meet the existing and future shopping and employment needs of the citizens and to encourage the clustering of like cc�IInercial and accessory uses as appropriate and a diversity of uses where ccnnplementary. � � 74 POLICY 1-1 The City shall mai.ntain enough land designated for commercial areas to ""�"" meet the econani.c demand, but should at the same time direct the location �,,��d of cca�IInercial develo�anent so that all land uses, whether mixed or segregated, are compatible with each other. POLICY 1-2 The City shall allow develo�anent of cca�¢r�ercial land in the future, in approximately the same ratio as it currently exists in comparison with other land uses, unless there is a substantial change in the land use trends, as determined by the city council. POLICY 1-3 The City shall discourage the zoning or rezoning of property solely for the intent of inflating the property's market value or where the zoning is to the benefit of the applicant and to the detriment of the adjacent � property owners. �,,.�, POLICY 1-4 The City recognizes that retail uses may or may not be cca��pati.ble with other types of conmercial or industrial uses, and will provide for the separation of the various ccnanercial enterprises that are incanpatible and the clustering of those that are cc�ipatible, and shall approve properly zoned land in which those types of ccannercial activities can conduct business. f POLICY 1-5 The City recognizes that co�nercial and residential uses are not necessarily c�Tpatible and shall prohibit residential usage of land in cc��rcial districts. These, considerations include giving close „� neighborhood access to only those co��rcial establishments, such as 75 � convenience stores, that have a direct relationship with the neighborhood. In all cases, truck traffic should not use local � residential streets, and local retail traffic should not mix with wholesalers' trucking operations. POLICY 1-6 The City will rezone land for more intensive (non-residential) c�rcial purposes only in areas that meet the following criteria: a. are along a designated activity corridor b. are central to the market that is served c. are sufficiently large to allow adequate buffering frcan adjacent land uses, adequate parking, truck loading areas and landscaping, and flexible enough in design to meet city staff approval based on accepted design standards. d. will not cause traffic to be routed through residential neighborhoods or force c��rcial traffic onto residential sized streets �� e. have an adequate overall transportation system to handle � the additional traffic f. have adequate public facilities, inclucling sewer, water, electricity, and fire protection, to support such develo�anent g, have sufficient drainage for a high percentage of im�ervious cover. 0&7ECTIVE 2 To encourage ca�nercial land uses to develop in accordance with the corridors concept as defined herein, and to discourage developr.ent that is "strip ca��ercial" as herein defined. � 76 POLICY 2-1 The City will discourage the zoning or ca�t�rcial usage of land that has ..�.,� the potential of becaning undesirable strip cca�anercial development, which is characterized by one or more of the follawing problems: ,.�,.;� a. shallaw lots, usually between 100 and 200 feet deep b. rnmierous small awnerships c. ntIInerous curb cuts for entrances d. rnunerous small buildings with no architectural unity e. little or no landscaping in and around the parking lots f. limited parking usually restricted to the front setback area or along the street g. the lack of landscape or other buffers, especially in the rear, with the adjacent residential areas exposed to a blighting influence. POLICY 2-2 �w, Land that is currently zoned or cannot be used for anything but ca�nercial usage and falls under one or more of the conditions in Policy 2-1 will be �� encouraged to develop as law traffic generating uses, such as professional or neighborhood services, that support the residential uses rather than creating instability and transition fram residential to conmercial use. POLICY 2-3 Linear ccmmercial districts shall be located based on the follawing criteria: a. only on designated corridors on the land use plan b. with lots deeper than 200 feet c. on large parcels with single ownership or on smaller parcels whose owners are organized i.nto an association and have the � ability to share parking or entrances ,..�,; 77 d. where the curb cuts are minimized and/or shared while still � maintaining adequate traffic circulation on parking lots e. where adequate parking is provided, preferably to the side and/or in the rear f. where adequate landscapi.ng and/or open space is provided for visual buffers fran adjacent residential development g. where nearby residential areas are adequately buffered fran nose, traffic, and air pollution h. where the proposed develoFxnent will not disrupt the orderly develognent of adjacent residential neighborhoods. POLICY Z-4 The City will designate sufficient space in residential areas for c�rcial services on a scale that is ccxnpatible with and caters to the convenience needs of the neighborhood. POLICY 2-5 "� Major shopping centers shall be encouraged to be located in cc�nercial nodes at the intersecti�n of major arterials, meeting the same requirements as Policy 2-3. This policy shall not be interpreted to warrant corm�ercial develo�xnent at all arterial i.ntersections. POLICY 2-6 � The City shall require a concept plan of the layout or the proposed development's inrpact on existing or future development. OBJECTIVE 3 , To preserve the integrity of those existing cc�anercial areas, especially the central business district, which have made significant contributions to the well-being of the citizens. � �"" 78 POLICY 3-1 The City shall update and revise its plans for the central business .�. district and shall plan to maintain and increase the viability of the CBD - as a ccsm�rcial center. ���y� POLICY 3-2 The City should seek any funding sources available to enhance the attractiveness of the urban street-scape and the viability of the CBD. POLICY 3-3 The City shouZd designate as nonconforming uses those that are not ccxnpatible with established co�iercial land uses. POLICY 3-4 The City will encourage proposed ccmn�rcial development to consider the central business district first among alternative sites for proposed ca�nercial develo�anent. �,., 3. Industrial Develo�xnent k� �' GOAL 1 To maintain a sufficient amount of appropriate land areas within the City for existing and future industrial and heavy ccrnnercial activities. GC1AL 2 - To guide land development in a desirable pattern and i.n a manr.er that utilizes efficiently City facilities and services, while protecting the City's employment base, the character of industrial areas, accc�npanying � land values, and the City's t� base. � , � 79 Objectives and Policies of Industrial Develo�xnent ��� OBJECTIVE 1 To provide enough industrially zoned land to meet the existing and future manufacturing and employment needs of the City. POLICY 1-1 The City should provide enough land designated foz industrial uses to meet the econcsnic demand, but should at the same time direct the location of industrial develognent so that all land uses, whether mixed or segregated, are ccanpatible with each other. POLICY 1-2 The City shall not rezone land to industrial other than in the airport noise zones or in proximity to the airport. POLICY 1-3 �� The City will discourage the zoning or rezoning of property solely for the intent of inflating the property's market value or where the zoning is to the benefit of the applicant and to the detriment of the adjacent property awners. POLICY 1-4 - The city recognizes that in3ustrial, ca�nercial and residential uses are not ccanpatible. The City shall prohibit residential and sane types of comrercial use of land in industrial districts, unless they are a Planned Industrial Development that has taken the basic difference of the two uses into account. POLICY 1-5 Industrial areas will be protected from the encroachment of residential or � commercial land uses that could i.nhibit the full expansion of the district 80 through the use of specific industrial land use designations and the use of open space buffers at the edge of the industrial district. OBJFK.TIVE 2 �� To encourage industrial develo�anent on sites that are large enough to be planned as unified, fully integrated industrial districts, that are ��' located with access to major highways and away fran residential areas. The City shall r��ire landscaped or natural buffers separating Light Industrial Districts fran adjacent residential or c�rcial districts and offer a variety of locations and site configurations to meet the needs of local industries. POLICY 2-1 Industrial districts shall be located based on the follawing criteria: a. the site has appropriate transportation access, and routes for the types of activities proposed including truck routes and/or rail access �� b. the traffic generated by the proposed develo�anent will not go through residential or light cca�iercial areas, or other areas that �°��' would be adversely impacted by such traffic c. the public services and facilities are or can be made available in sufficient quantities or capacity to support the proposed development, including: 1. extra width and strengthened streets for truck traffic 2. oversized utilities 3. sufficient drainage for a high percentage of impervious cover 4. extra fire protection � ,, .,� 81 d. on sites large enough to be planned as a unified, fully """� integrated industrial district or unit, capable of acca��odating buffer zones, accessory land uses, parking, truck loading, and other amenities � necessary for viable development. POLICY 2-2 Truck traffic shall be routed to avoid residential areas and industrial and heavy cc�anercial land uses shall not be located at the er_d of collectors that serve or pass through residential areas. E. �JRE LAND USE Map 2 is the Land Use Plan for the City of Grapevine, and is the a hic representation of the goals, objectives and policies of the City of Grapevine, as adopted by the City Council. The land use policies � establish the reasoning and set the design standards for the type, amount, and density of develoFanent shc�m on the map. The land use patterns of the � map cannot be achieved without adopted policies directed toward that end, and when the map is in conflict with the policies, the map should be revised to meet those policies. Likewise, when a develo�anent proposal is in conformance with the policies but in conflict with the map, it is in accordance with the comprehensive plan as the map is nothing more than a graphic representation of those polices. � � 82