Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-06-27I N AM MA SPECIAL BOARD • ZONING ADJUST iii 4T Dm=m THURSDAY, JUNE 27, 1985 AT 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHANMERS, CITY HALL, 413 MAIN STREET i II. OATH OF TRUTH A. Board of Zoning Adjustment to deliberate and review findings of the Vested Rights Public Hearing held May 28, 1985 relative to BZA 85-09, for the purpose of rendering a decision thereto. IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 6252-17, V.A.T.C.S., AS AMENDED BY CHAPTER 227, ACTS OF THE 61ST LEGISLATURE, REGULAR SESSION, THE SPECIAL BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTH24T MEETING AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THIS THE 21ST DAY • JUNE AT 5 PM. WNUA ; -1m I I#= i' • " LTA The Board of Zoning Adjustment of the City of Grapevine, Texas met in special session Thursday, June 27, 1985 at 6:00 P.M. in City Council Chambers, City Hall, 413 Main Street; with the following members present: Chairman: Doug Lamb Member Gerald Thompson Member Garry Tischler Member Bill Waldrip Member Ron Troy constituting a quorum, and with the following City Staff: H. T. (Tommy Hardy) Jim Van Treese Joy Carroll Mary Peddycoart John Boyle Adrienne Leonard Marlin Smith David Chance Director of Community Development Assistant Building Official Planning and Zoning Aide Secretary City Attorney Attorney, City Attorney's Office Special Legal Consultant Court Reporter Also in attendance was Ted Ware, Special City Council Representative to the Board of Zoning Adjustment. lvanfwi i'! �M- Chairman Lamb called the meeting to order at approximately 6:30 P.M. [SmUsKoymb Chairman Lamb spoke to all present and advised that he would administer the "Oath of Truth" on a one person basis if needed. WWWRINSIQUAW 1. !1,, /• "I " . a " oft The next order of business to be considered is the Vested Rights Case for Mr. Fred Brodsky. The Board of Zoning Adjustment is to review the findings of the public hearing on this case for the purpose of rendering a verdict. Chairman Lamb spoke regarding the "Staff Memorandum of Law" which was prepared, signed and submitted to the City Staff by Mr.john Boyle, City Attorney and Mr. R. Marlin Smith, Special Zoning Consultant for the City. After brief comments regarding the "Staff Memorandum of Law", Chairman Lamb began to outline from same beginning with page 2, referring to Section 69 of the Grapevine Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Lamb read number one, two and three of this portion of the outline. Chairman Lamb continued on under Section 69 having to do with standards and evidence offered by the applicant. Chairman Lamb noted that there are several sections in this ordinance to be dealt with, and began by reading section 1 of the ordinance. After reading this section, Chairman Lamb asked for any questions, and/or comments. There were none. At this point, Chairman Lamb asked Mr. John Boyle and Mr. Marlin Smith if the Members should adopt a decision at the end of their deliberations, or should they adopt each as they go along, by vote. To this question, Mr. Marlin Smith answered that he would recomrend that Chairman Lamb continue as he had been doing. Chairman Lamb then continued with section number 2, standards and evidence presented. Chairman Lamb then asked if there were any questions, or if anyone would like to make a point. There being no comment Chairman Lamb moved on to section number 3, standards and Board of Zoning Adjustment June 27, 1985 Page 2 evidence presented. Chairman Lamb again asked for questions and/or comments. There being none, Chairman Lamb continued to read from section number 4, standards and evidence presented, again asking for questions or comments. There were none. Chairman Lamb continued on to section number 5, standards and evidence presented. Again there were no questions or comments from the Members. Chairman Lamb moved on to section number 6, standards and evidence presented, and again asked for questions and comments. After a brief period of comments from the Board, Chairman Lamb continued on to section number 7, stndards and evidence presented, again asking for questions or comments. After a short discussion, Chairman Lamb moved on to the "Proposed Findings of Fact". (which is as follows) The Board could reasonably find the following matters of fact from the evidence: 1. The subject property consists of 131.341 acres and lies on the West side of Route 121 approximately one-half mile North of Interstate 635. 2. The applicant and a partner purchased the subject property in July of 1980. 3. The purchase price of the property is not in evidence. 4. The applicant purchased the interest of his partner in September, 1982. The percentage of the interest held by the applicant's partner and the price paid for it are not in evidence. 5. At the time the applicant purchased the property it was classified in the I-1 Industrial District under the Grapevine Zoning Ordinance. i. In February of 1983 the applicant retained the planning services of Hellmutt, •• atta & Kassa•aum (HOK). HOK was requested to perform a site analysis, a location evaluation, a topographic study focusing on drainage, and to evaluate site access and review the standards in the I-1 District of the Grapevine Zoning Ordinance. HOK was also requested to prepare a preliminary concept plan known as a "massing study". 7. HOK prepared a master plan and site analysis for a mixed use development of offices, hotels and residential condo- minium that dealt with matters of site coverage, density and site circulation. 8. The applicant plans to develop the property over a 20 to 25 year period. His plans are not definite and the project may change from time to time. 9. The residential condominiums shown in the applicant's master plan were not a permitted use in the I-1 -Industrial District. 10. The applicant retained traffic and civil engineering consultants to do site access and thoroughfare alignments, and to study soils, analyze drainage and review the availability of utilities. 11. The applicant retained Laventhal & Horvath to do an econcmic and marketing analysis. Board of Zoning Adjustment June 27, 1985 Page 3. 12. Prior to August 3, representatives me Those dates were: February 18, November 24, December 11, 1983, the applicant or his t six times with officials of the City. 1981 1981 1981 June 9, 1983 (with Mr. Hancock "to discuss plan") June 14, 1983 (with L & H and Mr. Hancock "to dis- cuss City Hall possibility." meeting was the same day as public hearing on F.M. 2499) July 20, 1983 13. The applicant does not claim that he either requested or received from any city official a permit, or approval, or other action with respect to his proposed develogwnt. It does appear that one or more city officials or staff knew of the applicant's concept plan. 14. Prior to August 2, 1983, the applicant wrote 50 letters with respect to his proposed development. None were written to city officials or members of the city staff. Four were written to HOK and dealt with development studies, two were efforts to secure a hotel for the project, and the remaining 44 letters were solicitations of investment in the proposed development. 15. In October of 1983 the applicant declined an offer of $17 million for the subject property. 16. On June 7, 1984, the subject property was reclassified in the HCO Hotel-Corporate Office District under the Grapevine Zoning Sordinance. 17. On December 26, 1984, the applicant posted with the City a letter of credit in the amount of $235,834.06 to secure a reservation of 2,000 gallons of water service and 2,000 gallons of sewer service for the subject property. This reservation of capacity will be available to the applicant irrespective of how the subject property is developed. 18. The applicant has expended the following sums: Hellmutt, Obata & Kassabaum $50,953.78 Laventhal & Horvath 28,750.00 PAWA Winhelman & Associates 9,711.74 Graham. Associates 7,052.50 Soil Tests 5,500.00 Letter of Credit Fee -5,000.00 $106,968.02 The applicant has not endeavored to identify the portions of the above expenditures that would have had to have been incurred in connection with any development of the subject property. Board of Zoning Adjustment June 27, 1985 Page 4. 25. The applicant seeks an exemption from the requirement in §69.K. of the Zoning Ordinance which requires that construction commence in one year. 26. The applicant does not seek a special exception for a specific development. Instead he seeks to have the Board restore the I-1 classification to the subject property. At this point, Chairman Lamb asked for a motion to either accept or deny this vested rights case. A motion was made by Member Bill Waldrip to deny the applicant the Vested Rights that he is seeking per his application, and to accept the "Findings of Fact" and Conclusions as written and read at this meting. This motion was seconded • Member Ron Troy and prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Waldrip, Troy, Lamb, Thonpson and Tischler Nays: None As there was no other business pending for the consideration of Board, Chairman Lamb reminded the Members that the the next meeting wou be held at 6:00 P.M. in the usual place on July 11, 1985. He then ask]* for a motion to adjourn. Gerald Thcxnpson made a motion to adjourn this special meting of the Board of Zoning Adjustment. This motion was seconded by Bill Waldrip and ,#revailed • the following vote: Ayes: Thcmpson, Waldrip, Lamb, Troy and Tischler Nays: None Board of Zoning Adjustment June 27, 1985 Page 5. Meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:30 P.M. PASSED AND APPR'W-149- BY THE E! OF OF TBE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, ON THIS THE iA • F!_ 1985. PJAMM-M 86cret, y /p zo�