Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-01-28Susan Howard Planning Secretary AGENDA CITY OF GRAPEVINE FIRST TRI -ANNUAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1996 AT 6:00 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM - ROOM #204 307 WEST DALLAS ROAD, GRAPEVINE, TEXAS A. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO DISCUSS ANTENNAS, SUPPORT AND EQUIPMENT STRUCTURES. B. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER SECTION 49, SPECIAL USE PERMITS RELATIVE TO THE LOCATION OF ACCESSORY EQUIPMENT BUILDING AND TAKE ANY NECESSARY ACTION. • 10 -1-0611101 A. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER SECTION 53, LANDSCAPE REGULATIONS RELATIVE TO TREE SIZE AND PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING REGULATIONS. • ••• • •- I OWNF81114 A. DISCUSSION OF REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION. B. DISCUSSION OF THE NATIONAL AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE APRIL 5-9, 1997. VI. ADJOURNMENT IF YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND YOU HAVE A DISABILITY THAT REQUIRES SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS AT THE MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AT (817) 481-0377 AT LEAST 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE. REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS WILL BE MADE TO ASSIST YOUR NEEDS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551.001 et. seq. ACTS OF THE 1993 TEXAS LEGISLATURE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING WORKSHOP AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1997 AT 5:00 P.M. DIRECTOR OF b -EV LOPMENT SERVICES MEMO TO: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS FROM: H.T. HARDY, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Vvp MARCY RATCLIFF, PLANNER.74'R MEETING DATE: JANUARY 28, 1997 SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF WORKSHOP AGENDA ITEMS 1. Discussion of Antennas, Support and Equipment Structures - The Planning and Zoning Commission tabled three Special Use Permit requests for communication uses to the February 18, 1997 meeting to allow the City Manager's Office to research the possibility of franchise fees. Attached is a letter from the City Manager's Office summarizing the gathered information. 2. Consideration of Section 49, Special Use Permits Relative to the Location of Accessory Equipment Buildings - Staff has noted the Commission is continually interested in asking the applicants of Special Use Permits for communication uses to put their accessory equipment buildings underground. Consideration of this item would give the Commission and Staff the ability to discuss if any revisions to Section 49 were necessary. Old Business 1. Consideration of Proposed Amendments to Section 53, Landscaping Regulations - A public hearing to consider amendments to Section 53 Landscaping Regulations relative to tree size requirements was held on March 26, 1996 in conjunction with amendments to Section 52, Tree Preservation. The amendments to Section 52, Tree Preservation were approved August 8,1996. Section 53, Landscaping Regulations was tabled to further discuss minimum tree size requirements and comparison of costs of balled or containerize trees. Discussion to date has been regarding whether or not it is more prudent to plant a smaller sized tree which will grow faster or plant a more mature sized tree that will have a greater aesthetic appearance yet grow at a slower pace. 0:\ZC1J\PWS01-28.97 January 20, 1997 8:36am TO: HONORABLE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FROM: TRENT PETTY, CITY MANAGER DATE: JANUARY 28, 1997 Staff has researched the backhaul provider issue and has determined that the potential to charge a use fee to the wireless services providers is minimal. The most current research on this issue is addressed in the recently completed Model Telecommunications Ordinance (MTO) developed by the Texas Coalition of Cities on Franchise Utility Issues (TCCFUI). Under Section Four (4) " Compensation Books and Records" the MTO differentiates between three (3) types of possible compensation to the City, based on the extent of use of the public right-of-way. The three (3) use fees identified in the MTO are as follows: City -Wide User - defined as a telecommunications provider with city-wide use of the public rights of way including the provision of service city-wide. The provider in this instance would pay a percentage of its gross receipts as a fee. (See attached summary of the MTO) Street Crossing Use Fee - defined as a telecommunications provider who occupies only specific routes and streets and offers local service. The fee structure would consist of the fair market rental value of the property, annually a per linear foot fee and a street crossing fee. Administrative Public Rights -of -Way Charge - defined as a telecommunications provider who occupies a specific route but provides no local service within the city. The fee for this scenario would be based on the per linear foot of wiring and the number of street crossings. The backhaul issue would most likely fall under the Street Crossing Use fee. However, the fee would only be applicable to those wireless providers that are utilizing a company which does not have a franchise to occupy the right -of way within Grapevine. The wireless providers which presently have zoning applications pending before the City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission typically utilize telecommunications companies such as GTE or SBC which already have been granted franchises within Grapevine to occupy the public -right-of-way and are regulated by the Public Utility Commission (PUC). It is for this reason that the staff recommendation is that the City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission move forward with their consideration of zoning applications SU 96-12, SU 96-13, SU 96-15 and SU 96-16 which were tabled at the December 17th meeting. Staff has been directed to have all future wireless providers disclose the appropriate backhaul provider information. attachments TEXAS COALITION OF CITIES FOR UTILITY ISSUES COMMENTS ON MODEL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ORDINANCE General overview: The Model Telecommunications Ordinance (MTO) and the Public Rights -of -Way Use Agreement ("PRWUA") that implements the MTO (Model Telecommunications Ordinance) are the product of a joint effort between a coalition of over 70 Texas cities - (Texas Coalition of Cities for Franchise Utility Issues - TCCFUI). The MTO was developed in response to concerns about the growing number of firms seeking to use public rights-of-way, and the need for cities to apply non- discriminatory, competitively neutral standards to similarly situation and telecommunications entities, as required by state and federal law. The MTO and the PRWUA should provide a legal framework and blueprint, with consistent clear ground rules, for dealing with telecommunication providers seeking to place facilities in your public rights-of-way. The TCCFUI Model Ordinance Subcommittee reviewed the MTO and the PRWUA, and their comments are reflected here. They advise first, that like any model policies, they are advisory in nature and should be tailored to local circumstances. Second, each community should consult with its own legal counsel prior to adapting the MTO and PRWUA to reflect each community's needs. Third, the FCC, and PUC are still promulgating regulations that may affect the scope of the MTO. However, as drafted, the MTO and PRWUA are consistent with current federal and state legislation, as best as can be predicted. The MTO and PRWUA are available on diskette. If you would like a copy or have any questions, please contact at Analysis of Model Telecommunications Ordinance Section by Section The MTO as drafted, applies only to "facility" based telecommunication service providers, i.e. one who places transmission facilities in the rights of way. However, it has footnoted inserts for application of the MTO to non -facility based entities, such as SPCOAs or a reseller which "use" the transmission facilities of others but do not own such facilities. The PUC has granted certificates for SPOCAs to operate and provide services without any consent, agreement or a franchise from cities. The PUC has, inherent in that grant determined (apparently) that no such consent, agreement or franchise is required, each city must make a determination if this is the correct application of the law. -1- The consent and PUC jurisdictional issue to even determine that such consent is required has been the subject of recent litigation (City of Plano). TCCFUI has a brief on this issue. The MTO provides generally for a 5% fee on retail Gross Revenues and a 6% fee on wholesale telecommunication service revenue, with an intended constant effective payment to the City of 5% of retail gross revenue. The users of a finite number of streets pay fair market value for those streets used if services are provided in the city. If no services are provided in the city, an administration change is imposed. The Ordinance as drafted has fourteen (14) Sections. They generally provide: Section 1. Purpose. This Section provides for the legislative purposes of the MTO and lays a legal predicate for the authority of the City to grant consent for the use of Public Rights -of -Way and to receive compensation for that use. Section 2. Definitions. All of these definitions should be reviewed carefully. The key definitions which are typically most sensitive to negotiations would be "Affiliate," "Applicant," "Certificated Telecommunications Utility," "Control,""Public Rights -of -Way Use Agreement (PRWUA)." "Telecommunications Services," "Telecommunications Provider" and "Gross Revenues" and "Wholesale Telecommunication Services Revenue". Also included in the Definitions Section are footnotes or bracketed language which could be included to apply the MTO to non -facilities based Telecommunications Providers, such as a "wireless" or SPCOA providers, see particularly the definition of "Use of'. Section 3. Application For a Public Rights -of -Way Use Agreement. This Section describes the application procedures to place a Telecommunications Network in the City. It specifically gives the authority to the Director, whomever that may be at the City's discretion, to process applications for the Public Rights -of -Way Use Agreement. It is specifically provided that any Telecommunications Provider who places in the Public Rights -of -Ways [or uses or a "Certificated Telecommunications Utility" (including a SPCOA)] a Telecommunications Network must have a Public Rights -of -Way Use Agreement, as approved by the City Council. -2- The specific items of information required for the PRWUA application are not essential to the legality of the MTO, however they do provide guidelines as to reasonable information requests for those who apply to use the Public Rights -of -Way. 4. Compensation and Books and Records. In addition to initial administrative fees, this Section provides for three types of annual compensation to the City, depending upon the extent of use of Public Rights -of -Way by the Telecommunications Providers. These are: a. City -Wide User. A Telecommunications Provider with city-wide use of the Public Rights -of -Way and service city wide would pay a percentage of its gross receipts as a fee. (5% on Retail Revenue, 6% on Wholesale Revenue.) This fee would be paid on a quarterly basis. b. Street Crossing Use Fee. A Telecommunications Provider who only occupies specific routes and streets and who provides local service, would pay the City, based on the fair market rental value on that property, annually a per linear foot fee and a street crossing fee. C. Administrative Public Rights -of -Way Change. A Telecommunications Provider who occupies a specific route but provides no local service within the City and is only "passing through" would pay an administrative fee on an annual basis based upon the per linear foot of wiring in the Public Rights-of- way and an amount based upon the number of street crossings. d. This Section also provides for books and records to be provided to the City upon request, with auditing rights. It expressly allows for the expense of those audits to be repaid to the City if there are deficiencies in the payment schedule. It also provides for late payment fees with interest. Section 5. Transfers of PRWUA's. This Section prohibits transfers of Public Rights -of -Way Agreements without consent of the City Council. Section 6. Obligations of Providers Regarding the Public Rights -of -Way. This section addresses construction techniques, the provision of maps and records to the City, and the relocation of facilities at the Provider's expense in the event required by the City or other governmental authorities. =3- Section 7. Insurance Requirements. This provision sets forth a reasonable insurance requirement which may be required of the Telecommunications Provider. Included is a provision that permits the Provider to be self- insured, at the City's discretion. Section 8. Term of PRWUAs. This section provides that the term of a Public Rights -of -Way Use Agreement shall not exceed ten (10) years. Section 9. Indemnity. This provision provides for indemnification of the City by the Telecommunications Provider. Section 10. Bond, Letter of Credit and Liquidated Damages in PRWUA. This section specifically provides that in a Public Rights -of -Way Use Agreement to ensure compliance with the MTO and the Public Rights -of -Way Use Agreement there shall be included a bond and a letter of credit which can be drawn upon for noncompliance in accordance with a liquidated damages schedule. The detail for the Bond, Letter of Credit and Liquidated Damages is included in the Attached PRWUA. Section 11. Termination of PRWUA. This section provides a procedure for termination of a PRWUA for material breaches, with a due process hearing for the Provider. Section 12. Unauthorized Use of Public Rights -of -Way. This provision specifically states that non-compliance with the MTO and use of Public Rights - of -Way without city authorization is unlawful and specifically states that it is a misdemeanor offense under the applicable City Code. Section 13. Preemption. This Section provides that the MTO would not be deemed preempted by state or federal law until a court or the agency with such authority declares it to be preempted. Section 14. Emergency Number (911) Compliant. Provides for compliance with state law and PUC Rules on 911 interconnections. 0:1WPDOCS\109048\00011MTOIMP04.CAW DRAFT COPY 10/24/96 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT Section 28 CBD Central Business District PURPOSE: The CBD Central Business District is designed to accommodate the types of business and commercial uses that have historically been located in the Grapevine Central Business area. A. PERMITTED USES: No building or structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered, or used, in whole or in part, for other than one or more of the following specified uses: 1. Personal service establishments including beauty and barber shops, cleaning, shoe repair, art and instructional studios, photography, and newsstands. 2. Drugstores. 3. Offices, including professional, business, governmental and administrative. 4. Retail stores and sales, including antique, art supply, automotive accessories, sporting goods, business machine shops, clothing, dry goods, music, TV sales and repair, cards, home appliances, jewelry, leather goods and luggage, linens, fabrics and draperies, optical goods, wallpaper and paint, dairy supplies, carpeting. 5. Furniture, including office furniture and equipment. 6. Restaurants including outside dining, delicatessens, and bakeries. 7. Clubs and lodges. 8. Museums. 9. Movie theaters and opera houses. 1 Section 28 DRAFT COPY 10/24/96 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT 10. Publicly operated parking facilities. 11. Outdoor sales of merchandise are prohibited during all sanctioned festivals, except the holder of a special permit issued by the Grapevine Heritage Foundation authorizing outdoor sales of merchandise. 12. Bed and breakfast facility. B. ACCESSORY USES: The following uses shall be permitted as accessory uses to a principal use provided that none shall be a source of income to the owner or user of the principal use: 1. Uses normally incidental to the above permitted uses. 2. Off-street parking in conjunction with a permitted use. 3. Signs, in accordance with Section 60 of this Ordinance. C. CONDITIONAL USE: The following conditional uses may be permitted provided they meet the provisions of Section 48 and a Conditional Use Permit is issued pursuant to Section 48 of the Ordinance. 1. Alcoholic beverage sales provided a special permit is issued in accordance with Section 42.13 of this Ordinance. 2. Drive-through restaurants. 3. Automotive repair garages, within a completely enclosed building. Salvage and/or wrecking yards are prohibited. All storage areas must be surfaced and screening shall be provided in accordance with Section 58 and Section 50. 4. Studios for the creations of crafts, furniture, and heritage arts which are handmade or handcrafted, that do not exceed 20% of the total floor area of a permitted use listed in Section 28.A of this Ordinance. 062095 2 Section 28 DRAFT COPY 10/24/96 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT D. LIMITATION OF USES: No uses, other than uses existing at the date of this Ordinance, which require extensive off-street parking shall be permitted unless adequate off-street parking, consistent with Section 56 of this Ordinance, is provided. E. PLAN REQUIREMENTS: Any new development in the CBD District shall require a Site Plan in accordance with the provisions of Section 47 of this Ordinance. F. DENSITY REQUIREMENTS: The following density requirements shall apply: 1. MAXIMUM DENSITY - The maximum density within the CBD District shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 3.0. 2. LOT SIZE - Lots for any permitted use shall have a minimum area of fifteen hundred (1,500) square feet. 3. MINIMUM OPEN SPACE - None required. 4. MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE - The combined area occupied by all main and accessory buildings and structures may cover one hundred (100) percent of the total lot area. 5. MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS ARES - The combined area occupied by all buildings, structures, off-street parking and paved areas may cover one hundred (100) percent of the total lot area. G. AREA REGULATIONS: The following minimum standards shall be required: 1. LOT WIDTH - Every lot shall have a minimum width not less than twenty (20) feet. 062095 3 Section 28 DRAFT COPY 10/24/96 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT 2. LOT DEPTH - Every lot shall have a minimum depth not less than seventy-five (75) feet. 3. FRONT YARD - None required. 4. SIDE YARD - None required. 5. REAR YARD - None required. 6. DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS - None required. H. BUFFER AREA REGULATIONS: None required. I. HEIGHT: (a) No principal structure shall be erected or altered to a height exceeding thirty (30) feet. (b) No accessory structure shall be erected or altered to a height exceeding thirty (30) feet. J. LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS: None required for individual lots. K. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING: Due to the development nature of the CBD, it is recognized that conventional off-street parking and loading for individual lots may be difficult to provide. Any new uses proposed in the CBD shall present a plan for parking to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall establish the amount and method of off-street parking to be provided for this District. L. MASONRY REQUIREMENTS: The masonry requirements of Section 54 shall be met. M. ADDITIONAL BUFFERING, SCREENING, FENCING, & LANDSCAPING. The Planning and Zoning Commission may recommend 062095 4 Section 28 DRAFT COPY 10/24/96 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT and tle City Council may require buffering, screening, fencing and landscaping requirements on any zone change, conditional use, or special use case or concept plan in addition to or in lieu of screening or fencing requirements set out specifically in each use district when the nature and character of surrounding or adjacent property dictate a need to require such methods in order to protect such property and to further provide protection for the general health, welfare and morals of the community in general. 062095 5 Section 28 El DRAFT COPY 11/4/96 HISTORIC GRAPEVINE REVITALIZATION Section 28A. HGR Historic Grapevine Revitalization District PURPOSE: The HGR Historic Grapevine Revitalization District is established to accommodate limited commercial and residential uses in the historically significant original town of Grapevine area. The limited commercial uses in the Historic Grapevine Revitalization District are intended to allow the mixture single family residential uses with limitations of compatible commercial uses such as professional or business offices, instructional studios, and limited retail sales to maintain the vitality of the original town area. USES GENERALLY: In a HGR Historic Grapevine Revitalization District no land shall be used and no building shall be erected for or converted to any use other than as hereinafter provided. A. PERMITTED USES: The following uses shall be permitted as principal uses. All permitted uses listed shall be within a completely enclosed building or structure. 1. Administrative, executive and editorial offices for business and professional organizations. 2. Professional offices for the conduct of the following professional and semiprofessional occupations: Accountant, architect, attorney, engineer, insurance agent, and real estate sales. 3. 4. 5. 6. 102196 Instructional studios for drama, music, dancing, art, and photography studios. Public utility uses required to service the district. Bed and Breakfast facility. Single Family Residential. 1 Section 28A DRAFT COPY 11/4/96 HISTORIC GRAPEVINE REVITALIZATION 7. Beauty shop 8. Barber shop 9. Dry cleaners and laundry pick up 10. Shoe repair. B. ACCESSORY USES: The following uses shall be permitted as accessory uses in a HGR Historic Grapevine Revitalization District provided that none shall be a source of income to the owner or user of the principal structure. 1. Off-street parking in conjunction with any permitted use in this district. The off-street parking areas shall be separated from said lot by a blind fence or wall at least six (6) feet high. The blind fence requirement may be waived by City Council after receiving a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. 2. Signs advertising uses on the premises, in accordance with Section 60 of this Ordinance. *(Note: changes to Section 60 allow only ground signs)* 3. Mechanical and electrical equipment, including air conditioning units, shall be designed, installed and operated to minimize noise impact on surrounding property. All such equipment shall be screened from public view. 4. Outdoor refuse storage areas shall be landscaped and screened in accordance with Section 50.B.3. Outdoor refuse storage areas shall not be located between the front of the building and any right-of-way. 5. Living quarters in conjunction with uses permitted in Section 28A.A.and 28A.C. 102196 2 Section 28A DRAFT COPY 11/4/96 HISTORIC GRAPEVINE REVITALIZATION C. CONDITIONAL USES: The following uses may be permitted provided they meet the provisions of, and a Conditional Use Permit is issued pursuant to, Section 48 of the Ordinance. 1. Retail sales for the following: bakery, book, dairy products, drugs, camera and photo development shop, gift and antique shops. D. LIMITATION Of USES: 1. All activities of permitted uses except automobile parking lots, shall be conducted entirely within a completely enclosed building. E. PLAN REQUIREMENTS: No application for a building permit for construction of a principal building shall be approved unless: 1. A Plat meeting all requirements of the City of Grapevine has been approved by the City Council and recorded in the official records of Tarrant County. 2. A Concept Plan meeting the requirements of Section 45 with a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. The Commission may require additional criteria to ensure the historic integrity of the area. 3. A Site Plan meeting the requirements of Section 47 has been approved. Such Site Plan shall be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. The Commission may require additional criteria to ensure the historic integrity of the area. 4. A Landscape Plan is required of the required front yard setback, unless already in existence. 102196 3 Section 28A DRAFT COPY 11/4/96 HISTORIC GRAPEVINE REVITALIZATION F. DENSITY REQUIREMENTS: The following bulk and intensity of use requirements shall apply. 1. LOT SIZE - None required. 2. MAXIMUM DISTRICT SIZE - None required. 3. MINIMUM OPEN SPACE - The established front yard as determined by the existing structure or by adjacent development. 4. MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE - None required. 5. MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE - None required. G. AREA REGULATIONS: The following minimum standards shall be required: 1. LOT WIDTH - Every lot shall have a minimum width of twenty (20) feet. 2. LOT DEPTH - None required. 3. FRONT YARD - Every lot shall have a front yard setback as established by the existing building or by the adjacent development and shall be utilized as a landscaped setback area. Front yards shall not be used for any building, structure, fence, wall or storage area, except that signs may be permitted in this area. Front yards shall be landscaped with grass, shrubbery, vines or trees, and no part shall be paved or surfaced except for minimum access, driveways, and sidewalks in accordance with Section 53 of this Ordinance. 4. SIDE YARDS - None required. 5. REAR YARD - None required. 102196 4 Section 28A DRAFT COPY 11/4/96 HISTORIC GRAPEVINE REVITALIZATION 6. DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS - None required. H. BUFFER AREA REGULATIONS: 1. BUFFER AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS: Whenever a HGR District abuts a residential district, a wall, fence, or berm at least six (6) feet in height, shall be erected to effectively screen the HGR District from the residential area. The wall, fence or berm requirement may be waived by City Council after receiving a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. 2. ADDITIONAL SCREENING, FENCING AND LANDSCAPING: The Planning and Zoning Commission may recommend, and the City Council may require, additional buffering, screening, fencing and landscaping requirements on any zone change, conditional use or special use case or concept plan in addition to or in lieu of buffering, screening, fencing, or landscaping requirements set out specifically in each use district when the nature and character of surrounding or adjacent property dictate a need to require such methods in order to protect such property, and to further provide protection for the general health, welfare, and morals of the community in general. I. HEIGHT: 1. No principal structure shall be erected or altered to a height exceeding two (2) stories or thirty-five (35) feet. 2. No accessory structure shall be erected or altered to a height exceeding fifteen (15) feet. J. LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS: The established front yard as determined by the existing development or by adjacent development shall be landscaped. 102196 5 Section 28A DRAFT COPY 11/4/96 HISTORIC GRAPEVINE REVITALIZATION K. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING: Due to the development nature of the HGR District, it is recognized that conventional off-street parking and loading for individual lots may be difficult to provide. Any new uses proposed in the HGR District shall present a plan for parking to the Planning and Zoning Commission; and, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall establish the amount and method of off-street parking to be provided for this District. L. MASONRY REQUIREMENTS: None required. M. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS: The following design requirements shall apply in the HGR District: 1. No outdoor storage, except for refuse disposal, shall be permitted. Refuse disposal areas shall be landscaped and screened from view. 2. Mechanical and electrical equipment, including air conditioning units, shall be designed, installed and operated to minimize noise impact on surrounding property. All such equipment shall be screened from public view. 3. Lighting shall be designed to reflect away from any adjacent residential area. 102196 6 Section 28A STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT CITY OF GRAPEVINE The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Grapevine, Texas, met in Workshop, on this the 28th day of January, 1997, in the Conference Room #204, 307 West Dallas Road, Grapevine, Texas, with the following members present to wit: Larry Oliver Darlene Freed Marvin Balvin Chris Coy Kathy Martinez Steve Newby Herb Fry Greg Czapanskiy Sharon Spencer Chairman Vice Chairman Member Member Member Member 1 st Alternate 2nd Alternate Council Representative with Steve Stamos absent, constituting a quorum, and the following City Staff: H.T.(Tommy) Hardy Marcy Ratcliff Ron Stombaugh Susan Howard Director of Development Services Planner Planner Planning Secretary Chairman Larry Oliver called the Workshop to order at 6:35 P.M. DISCUSSION OF ANTENNAS, SUPPORT AND EQUIPMENT STRUCTURES David Freed was present to discuss cellular antennas and the need for their locations. Mr. Freed was very informative and answered questions from the Commission. DISCUSSION OF THE HISTORIC GRAPEVINE REVITALIZATION DISTRICT Trent Petty introduced the Commission to the "HGR" Historic Grapevine Revitalization District and the potential locations for the district. The purpose of this district would be to establish limited commercial and residential uses in the historically significant original town of Grapevine area. The limited commercial uses in the historic Grapevine Revitalization District are intended to allow the mixture single family residential uses with limitations of compatible commercial uses such as professional or business offices, instructional studios, and limited retail sales to maintain the vitality of the original town area. Future meetings would be held to discuss in detail the proposed Historic Grapevine Revitalization District uses and design criteria. Additionally, discussed the proposal to allow Bed and Breakfast uses within the Central Business District. oAzcu\minwk-ja.97 CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF ANTENNAS, SUPPORT AND EQUIPMENT STRUCTURES Chris Hooper explained the backhaul provider issue that the potential to charge a use fee to the wireless services providers is minimal. The backhaul issue would most likely fall under the Street Crossing Use fee. The fee would only be applicable to those wireless providers that are utilizing a company which does not have a franchise to occupy the right-of-way within Grapevine. Staff has been directed to have all future wireless providers disclose the appropriate backhaul provider information. The Commission discussed the possibility of the wireless providers co -locating their antennas and placing the equipment cabinets underground. CONSIDERATION OF SECTION 25 COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT RELATIVE TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR PLANNED COMMERCIAL CENTERS IN EXCESS OF 1,000,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS LEASABLE SPACE Staff requested the Planning and Zoning Commission authorize Staff to set a public hearing to consider amending Section 25, Community Commercial District relative to the height requirements for Planned Commercial Centers in excess of 1,000,000 square feet of gross leasable space relative to the maximum height requirement. Staff has spoken with users who are interested in locating around the Grapevine Mills Mall Planned Commercial Centers who exceed the maximum 50 -foot height regulation. After brief discussion Steve Newby moved, with a second by Darlene Freed to authorize Staff to set a public hearing to consider amending Section 25, Community Commercial District relative to the height requirements for Planned Commercial Centers in excess of 1,000,000 square feet of gross leasable space. The motion prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Oliver, Freed, Balvin, Coy Martinez, Newby, Fry and Czapanskiy Nays: None CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 53 LANDSCAPING REGULATIONS Discussion was held regarding the minimum tree size requirements and comparison of costs of balled or containerize trees. The Commission further discussed rather a small caliber tree, which is fast growing, or a large caliber tree would be more preferred. Greg Czapanskiy volunteered to gather information on the cost of balled and containerized trees. Also, Marvin Balvin volunteered to take pictures of newly landscaped developments for comparisons. The gathered information would be discussed at a special workshop to be scheduled. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Larry Oliver asked if anyone would be interested in representing the Planning and Zoning Commission at these meetings. olzcu\minwk ja.97 2 NATIONAL AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE Ron Stombaugh informed the Commission of the upcoming Conference in San Diego, CA to be held April 5-9, 1997. Darlene Freed will attend the conference as the Commission representative. MISCELLANEOUS Tommy Hardy informed the Commission that the billboard on the Tigue Addition has been taken down as directed by the Council and Commission. Also, the Sequoia Lumber Yard has completed its demolition along Northwest Highway. Sharon Spencer reported on the opening of City Hall. The Open House will be held on Tuesday, February 18, 1997 from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. followed by the Joint City Council and Planning and Zoning Meeting. ADJOURNMENT With nothing further, Marvin Balvin moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:55 p.m. Kathy Martinez seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Oliver, Freed, Balvin, Coy, Martinez, Newby, Fry and Czapanskiy Nays: None PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, ON THIS THE 18TH AY OF FE ARY, 1997. CHAIRMAN ATTEST , A ",/ ECRETARY oAzcu\minwk ja.97 3