The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1993-08-24STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT CITY OF GRAPEVINE The Planning and Zoning Commission Workshop Meeting of the City of Grapevine, Texas, met Tuesday, August 24, 1993, at 6:00 p.m., in the Police Training Room, Room 104, 307 West Dallas Road, Grapevine, Texas, with the following members present to wit: Ron Cook Larry Oliver Curtis Young Steve Stamos Marvin Balvin Cathy Martin Sharron Spencer Chairman Vice Chairman Member Member Member Member City Council Representative and visiting Mayor Pro -Tem, Ted Ware, constituting a quorum, with one member, Darlene Freed absent, and the following City Staff: H.T. (Tommy) Hardy Greg Wheeler Marcy Ratcliff Carol Baron Jerry Hodge Stan Laster Director of Community Development Building Official Planner Secretary Director of Public Works Assistant Director of Public Works After dinner, Chairman, Ron Cook called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. REVIEW AMENDMENTS TO DRIVEWAY PLACEMENT STANDARDS: First on the Agenda for the Commission to review were the amendments to driveway placement standards. The Planning and Zoning Commission asked the Public Works Staff to review the City's current Driveway Placement Standards to determine if there may be a means to improve the City's control over the number of drive cuts on collector and arterial thoroughfares. 1 Assistant Public Works Director, Stan Laster stated that staff has considered several different methods of improving control such as zoning and minimum lot size limitations, which can not be, because the minimum frontage for a lot on a public street is 20 feet. This minimum frontage could pose a problem in enforcing a proposed driveway standard intended to limit access points. Mr. Laster also mentioned building size limitations, which cannot be considered because the building size does not directly correlate with the traffic generated from the site, such as a restaurant with a drive-in window, which will always have more traffic than a restaurant of the same size, with no drive-in window. Block limitations and thoroughfare classifications were considered next. Mr. Laster stated, the number of driveway cuts can be controlled by limiting the number per average City block, length of approximately 300 feet, based upon the thoroughfare classification, and 200 feet minimum spacing for a driveway cut from an intersection. These methods would factor the design speed of the thoroughfare classifications and associated stopping distances for each design speed into a spacing limitation for each classification. Staff suggests this as a method of control over the number and location of access points onto heavily traveled roadways from apartment complexes, commercial facilities and industrial complexes. Commission members suggested that all preliminary plats and final plats of apartment property in the R -MF -1 and R -MF -2 districts, as well as commercial and industrial property, be accompanied by an Internal Traffic Circulation Pian. This plan shall be submitted as part of the Site Plan/Concept Plan submittal package. The suggested amendments to the appropriate sections of the city code are as follows: Paragraph (d) Driveway Radii, subparagraphs (1)(b)(c), will be amended to increase driveway radii on commercial and industrial property from 10 feet to 20 feet to improve the vehicle mobility in the turning movement at the driveway entrance. Paragraph (e) Driveway Spacing and Location in relation to other Drives, Figure 20.2, will be amended to reflect changes as follows: Curb radii will be increased to 20 feet. This will improve access to the driveway for vehicles entering from a heavily traveled roadway. Minimum spacings will be increased from the existing 100 - 150 feet range to 300 feet. 4 Minimum spacings from side lot lines will be increased from the existing 10 feet to 150 feet unless the drive is constructed on the side lot line as provided for in this Section 20-44. Minimum spacings from intersection will be increased from the existing 100-150- feet range to 200 feet. Commission members asked that some revisions be made in the wording relative to a minimum distance and the problems encountered with the shared drive. A motion by Larry Oliver, and a second by Cathy Martin, was to ask Staff to set these amendments for the next workshop, which is August 31, 1993 with the prevailing vote as follows: Ayes: Cook, Oliver, Martin, Stamos, Balvin and Young Nays: None Absent: Freed REVIEW AMENDMENTS TO ZONING ORDINANCE 82-73 BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENTS. SECTIONS 23, 24 25 26 27 28 29 AND 31 Next for the Commission to review were the amendments to Zoning Ordinance 82-73, Buffer Yard Requirements, Sections 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 31. Planner, Marcy Ratcliff suggested the Planning and Zoning Commission may recommend and the 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. Commission members were concerned this would be putting more restrictions on the developer, which is in conflict with what the city is trying to accomplish. Staff stated that overall this would be in the best interest of the City of Grapevine. It was suggested that trees be planted in the buffer area, and if possible, Staff should specify a kind of tree that does not loose its leaves in the winter. 3 A motion by Steve Stamos, and a second by Cathy Martin, was to set the amendments to Zoning Ordinance 82-73 for public hearing, with the prevailing vote as follows: Ayes: Cook, Oliver, Martin, Stamos, Balvin and Young Nays: None Absent: Freed REVIEW AMENDMENTS TO ZONING ORDINANCE 82-73, WIDTH OF LOT, SECTION 12.1.450: Next for the Commission to review were the Amendments to Zoning Ordinance 82- 73, Width of Lot, Section 12.1.450. Planner, Marcy Ratcliff stated Staff proposes amending Section 12, Definitions 448a as follows: Width of Lot shall mean the distance between the side property lines measures at a required building setback line, measuring parallel to the front property line, perpendicular to the side property line. At no time, however, shall the front property line be less than twenty (20) feet. Proposed Section 12. Definitions, 448b as follows: Width of Lot, Cul -De -Sac, shall mean the distance between the side property lines measured at a required building setback line, measuring parallel to a perpendicular line bisecting the angle between two (2) side property lines. At no time, however, shall the front property line be less than twenty (20) feet. A cul-de-sac street, one end of which is closed and consists of a circular turn around. Greg Wheeler, Building Official, stated that the above definitions were assembled to cover every lot in the City of Grapevine, including regular lots, cul-de-sac lots, and any irregular shaped lot. A Motion by Cathy Martin, and a second by Marvin Balvin, was to recommend these amendments be set for Public Hearing, with the prevailing vote as follows: Ayes: Cook, Oliver, Martin, Stamos, Balvin and Young Nays: None Absent: Freed 4 REVIEW AMENDMENTS TO ZONING ORDINANCE 82-73 CHURCH PARKING LOTS SECTION 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 20 21 AND 22 Next for the Commission to consider were the amendments to Zoning Ordinance 82- 73, Church Parking Lots, Section 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 22, as written: Off-street parking for churches, convents and other places of worship not located on the lot of record of the principal use. Director of Community Development, Tommy Hardy noted that the Commission had asked Staff to solve the problems with the church parking lots. He stated that if the parking lot is located off of the lot of record for the church it would require a conditional use. The Commissioners asked if a distance limit from the lot of record should be established for the conditional use request. The Commission was concerned that a church might jump over adjacent property into the next block to be used for parking. The following was proposed: Zoning Ordinance 82-73, church parking lots, Section 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 22. Off-street parking for churches, convents and other places of worship located within 300 feet of the lot of record of the principal use The P & Z Commission members decided that no motion would be made at this time and asked Staff to put this item on the next P & Z Workshop which is to be held August 31, 1993. Commission members asked that it be noted that the hearing is closed and there will be no testimony taken from anyone. With a motion by Larry Oliver, and an second by Cathy Martin, the meeting was adjourned. Ayes: Cook, Oliver, Martin, Stamos, Balvin and Young Nays: None Absent Freed 5 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, ON THIS THE ::,2-1DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1993. looll CHAIRMAN SECRETARY N9