Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-09-27STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT CITY OF GRAPEVINE The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Grapevine, Texas, met in Special Session on September 27, 1984, at 6:00 P.M. at the Concourse Center at 3800 Fairway Drive, with the following members of the Planning and Zoning Commission present, to wit: Sharron Spencer Ron Cook Harlen Joyce Peggy Engholm Richard Atkins Gerald Norman Shane Wilbanks Chairman Vice - Chairman Member Member Member Member Member constituting a quorum, with no absences, and the following City Staff, to wit: H.T. (Tommy) Hardy Director of Community Development J.R. Baddaker Director of Public Works Al Dugger Assistant Director of Public Works Sue Martinez Secretary Kevin Conklin Director of Parks and Recreation The members enjoyed a steak dinner prior to the beginning of the Special Session. CALL TO ORDER At approximately 7:00 P.M. Chairman Spencer called the meeting to order and explained the purposes and procedures thereof. NEW BUSINESS The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and made recommendations for the City Council to approve. Section 32 - General Industrial District Chairman Spencer advised that they had made a recommendation that an item for permission of Central mixing plants or batch plants be a Conditional Use under the General Industrial District. This item had been left out of the "LI" Light Industrial District by the typist, therefore, she proposed to make a formal recommendation to the City Council, that Section 32 - General Industrial District be repealed if it was included in the Ordinance. With no further discussion or comments, Gerald Norman made a motion to recommend approval of this amendment to Section 32, by the City Council and Vice - Chairman Cook seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Spencer, Cook, Joyce, Engholm, Atkins and Norman Nays: None Absent: Wi7banks Section 31 - Light Industrial District Chairman Spencer advised that in order to provide for batch plants, that this particular use would be added in under Conditional Use in the "LI" Light Industrial District, Section 31. P &Z Minutes September 27, 1984 Page 2 There being no further questions or discussion to this section, Harlen Joyce made a motion to recommend to the City Council for approval and Vice - Chairman Cook seconded the motion, which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Spencer, Cook, Joyce, Ehgholm, Atkins and Norman Nays: None Absent: Wilbanks TABLE OF CONTENTS Chairman Spencer advised that it was necessary to amend the Table of Contents to show Section 51, which is currently, (Reserved for Fencing), to be Section 50, Screening and Fencing; and Section 51 will be for Open Space Requirements. With no further discussion, a motion was made by Gerald Norman to recommend to the City Council that the proposed amendment to the Table of Contents be approved and Harlen Joyce seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Spencer, Cook, Joyce, Engholm, Atkins and Norman Nays: None Absent: Wilbanks Section 20 - R -TH Multifamily District Regulations Then, Chairman Spencer requested a formal motion be made that Section 50, currently Screening be amended to Screening and Fencing. The motion was rendered by Peggy Engholm and Vice - Chairman Cook seconded the motion which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Spencer, Cook, Joyce, Engholm, Atkins and Norman Nays: None Absent: Wilbanks Chairman Spencer proceeded with explaining the changes to Section 20, R -TH, Multi- family District Regulations and the reasoning behind it in comparison with the current wording of this Ordinance Section. The following changes were noted in the discussion: Item B - Accessory Uses, Number 4 - This is a new item, which permits off - street parking and private garages. Item F - Density Requirements, Number 1, Maximum Density, Has been changed from 9 dwelling units per acre to 8. Also there is an addition to this Item which is Number 7, Maximum Length of Structure. Then there was discussion concerning Item I - Height Regulations, Number 1, Being twenty -five (25) feet maximum on two (2) story structures as opposed to thirty -five (35) feet on one (1) story structures; which lead to the rewording of Number 1 as follows: Height of principal structure two (2) stories not to exceed twenty -five (25) feet for structures with three (3) or more dwelling units and height of principal structure two (2) stories not to exceed thirty -five (35) feet for structures with two (2) units. At approximately 7:30 P.M., the presence of Commission Member, Shane Wilbanks was acknowledged. The Commission proceeded with questions and further discussion to the Items under Section 20, with a question concerning Item G - Area Regulations, Number 3 (a) , for the referencing of reverse frontage lots. Chairman Spencer suggested rewording it as follows: Lots siding to a dedicated public street 15 feet except reverse frontage lots shall be a minimum of 25 feet. The next Item discussed was Item D - Limitation of Uses. The majority of concern was directed towards Number 2, for which there was some controversial discussion as to the number of persons unrelated by blood or marriage that should be allowed to occupy residences within an R -TH District. There being somewhat lengthy a discussion on changing the number, the Commission concluded to leave the number as is, (4) four, at P &Z Minutes September 27, 1984 Page 3 this particular time. Chairman Spencer proceeded with discussion and questions to Item H - Buffer Area Regulations. Mr. Baddaker suggested that the word developed be inserted before the words multi - family district, on line two. It was suggested by members also, that the word berms on the last line of the paragraph be eliminated. There was discussion on the minimum setback for principal buildings or structures, in which the Commission and Staff Members made a decision to change from (30) thirty feet to (40) forty feet. An addition was made to the end of the paragraph, the wording is as follows: In accordance with Alternate A,B, or E in Section 50. With no further discussion or questions to the Items under Section 20, R -TH, Multi- family District Regulations, a motion was made by Vice - Chairman Cook to recommend that the City Council adopt this Section as amended and Peggy Engholm seconded the motion, which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Spencer, Cook, Joyce, Engholm, Atkins, Norman and Wilbanks Nays: None At approximately 8:00 P.M. a short recess was called, which reconvened at approximately 8:15 P.M. Section 51 - Open Space Requirements Chairman Spencer, then moved onward to discuss Items under Section 51 - Open Space Requirements, noting that Item B - Application, has the second and third paragraphs as new additions. Item H - Maintenance, On the last line of the first paragraph it was suggested that the word common be eliminated. After a brief discussion of the Items under Section 51 - Open Space Requirements, Mr. Kevin Conklin, Director of Parks and Recreation made a presentation to the Planning and Zoning Commission for the acquisition of open space for utilization as parks. Mr. Conklin showed members a plan for playground facilities. His concerns, are that more park space is necessary in different areas of the City; and he noted that not (1) one acre of park land has been acquired in the City since 1978. Following Mr. Conklin's presentation, suggestions for possible solutions to the problem of more open space were rendered, such as, the possibility of laying part of the responsibility of land dedication on commercial developments as well as residential developments. Other possibilities included requiring a park fee, for which monies would be put into a fund for park land acquisition. Also discussed was the support of bond elections, which would be helpful to the park situation. Mr. Conklin then proceeded the discussions showing plans for parks with playground equipment or tennis courts and basketball facilities, in which the members viewed and made comments on. In the conclusion of the discussion, Mr. Conklin commented that because of increase in population growth throughout the City, the abundance of open space is becoming smaller and that the consideration of this situation should be in attention as the City's growth progresses. With no further discussion or questions to Section 51, a motion was made by Vice - Chairman Cook to recommend that the City Council approve as amended and Gerald Norman seconded the motion, which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Spencer, Cook, Engholm, Atkins, Wilbanks and Norman Nays: Joyce Section 52 - Tree Preservation Chairman Spencer then proceeded to discuss and make necessary amendments to Items under Section 52 - Tree Preservation. Item B - Definitions, Number 2, Dripline, There should be a period (.) after the word ground, on line two. P &Z Minutes September 27, 1984 Page 4 Item G - Issuance of Permits, Number 2, There was an inquiry concerning the time of replacement, of trees that had been removed. Then, Mr. Baddaker made a suggestion that when, where, and who would replace trees, should be dealt with at the time of filing for application. With this suggestion, a sentence stating as follows was added to the end of the first paragraph: At the time of application review, the person responsible for the replacement of the tree, the type of replacement, and the location of replacement will be determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Then there was discussion relative to the City receiving tree plans on final plats already submitted, prior to issuance of building permits. The Ccundssion and Staff discussed different developments in Grapevine, which have been platted, to see which ones could be checked out for trees. Further discussion was relative to Number 5, Exemption, in which those developments that already had construction plans on file with the City, could be exempt from showing trees on plat. The reasoning behind this, is so that the developments that have plans in process and finances in line already would not have to increase costs by having to make changes in their construction plans. Further discussion was relative to the list of selected available trees, approved as replacement trees when any tree must be planted as a requirement of any Ordinance, or section thereof, of the City of Grapevine. These include the following: SHUMARD •E• •• LIVE •• WATER •. WILLOW •• CYPRESS BAID CEDAR ELM PECAN DEODARE CEDAR CHINESE PISTACHIO GOLDEN RAINTREE FLOWERING PEAR CRABAPPLE JAPANESE BLACK PINE CHINESE TALLOW ATLAS CEDAR The above list was amended by the addition of the American Elm tree. Also changed was some wording in the second paragraph, the second sentence, which presently says: Changes to the above list must be approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission, and must be selected from the recommendations of the County Extension Service for trees twenty (20) feet and over. The wording, from the recommendations, was changed to read, after considering recormlendations . With no further discussion relative to the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a motion was made to adopt as amended and recommend to the City Council for approval. The motion was made by Peggy Engholm and Vice - Chairman Cook seconded the motion, which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Spencer, Cook, Joyce, Engholm, Atkins, Wilbanks and Norman Nays: None Following the vote of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a motion was rendered for City Council approval, to pass a resolution that the list of approved replacement trees, as amended for purposes of City Staff use, be adopted. The motion was made by Peggy Engholm and Harlen Joyce seconded the motion, which prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Spencer, Cook, Joyce, Engholm, Atkins, Wilbanks and Norman Nays: None i •: 1: ►W12►H There being no further discussions or questions to the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, a motion was made by Shane Wilbanks to adjourn the evening's session and Richard Atkins seconded the motion, which prevailed by the following vote: P &Z Minutes September 27, 1984 Page 5 Ayes: Spencer, Cook, Joyce, Engholm, Atkins, Wilbanks and Norman Nays: None PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING CC MiISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS ON THE °? DAY OF ,1986: FA- - -���� Chairman ATTEST: Sec ary