The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAM1998-06i MEMORANDUM CITY OF GRAPEVINE TEXAS MEMO TO: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS FROM: H.T. (TOMMY) HARDY, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEETING DATE: AUGUST 18, 1998 SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 47, SITE PLAN REVIEW; AMENDMENTS TO THE REQUIRED TREE LIST FOR AREA LANDSCAPING AND LANDSCAPE ISLANDS; ELIMINATION OF BUILDING SIDE YARD AND REAR YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTY ADJACENT TO DFW AIRPORT; AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 36, "PCD" PLANNED COMMERCE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT; AMEMDMENTS TO SECTION 56, OFF —STREET PARKING REGULATIONS Proposed amendments to Section 47, Site Plan Review—This request is generated by staff to recommend the elimination of the environmental assessment requirement for conditional and special uses as stated in Section 47.E.2 Site Plan Review, and the elimination of the waiver of this requirement as stated in Section 47.F. The environmental assessment requirement was instituted specifically for development that occurs on DFW International Airport property. With the passage of Senate Bill 348 that eliminates City planning authority over development that occurs on airport property, it seems appropriate to eliminate this requirement. Council will still have the ability through the conditional use or special use request process to require an environmental assessment when it is deemed necessary. 2. Proposed amendments to the required tree list for area landscaping and landscape islands—Section 52.1 Tree Replacement and Section 53.G.2 Landscaping Regulations allows the Director of Development Services to amend the required tree list with approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Staff recommends the addition of the Bradford Pear to both lists. A number of developments within the city, in particular, developments that are a part of Planned Commercial Centers, have landscape plans that were approved with Bradford Pears. These plans were approved prior to the establishment of the required tree list. As is typical in a Planned Commercial Center, pad site development within the center triggers a revised site plan submittal requirement, a part of which is a landscape plan that now has trees shown that are no longer allowed. Developers are now faced with having to redesign entire landscaping \\CH DN\SYS\DATA\COM M DEV\ZCU\PZ8-18.mem plans to account for the elimination of the Bradford Pear or remove them if they have already been planted. Although the Bradford Pear is generally classified as an ornamental tree with a stiff, "candelabra" type canopy, it is a very popular tree used commercially throughout the city; the City of Grapevine has also used this tree quite extensively on a number of City projects. Reintroduction of the Bradford Pear to the required tree list would eliminate virtually all conflicts with previously approved landscape plans and the current regulations regarding trees. 3. Elimination of building setback requirements for sites which have property lines adjacent to DFW International Airport—This request is generated by staff to recommend consideration of eliminating building side yard and/or rear yard setback requirements for all zoning districts with property lines adjacent to DFW International Airport. This amendment would eliminate only the side yard and/or rear yard that is contiguous with airport property. With the passage of Senate Bill 348 eliminating City zoning authority on airport property, maintenance of building setbacks from the property line adjacent to DFW International Airport is unnecessary given the development potential of the property on the airport side of the property line. 4. Proposed amendments to Section 36, "PCD" Planned Commerce Development District—This request is generated by staff to recommend changes to Section 36, "PCD" Planned Commerce Development District to improve the development potential of those parcels within the City that are zoned "PCD." 5. Proposed amendments to Section 56, Off -Street Parking Regulations—This request is generated by Polar Ice Entertainment, Incorporated who are seeking an amendment to Section 56, Off -Street Parking Regulations, specifically to reduce the number of required parking spaces necessary to be in compliance with the ordinance as it is currently written. The ordinance does not make any distinction between skating facilities and any other type of indoor commercial amusement—all of which are parked at a ratio of one space per 100 square feet of enclosed floor area. With a proposed floor area of approximately 78,000 square feet, Polar Ice Entertainment feels the required 780 parking spaces is too great a number, which would effectively prohibit them from developing on the site they have chosen in Grapevine. Polar Ice Entertainment has commissioned Kimley-Horn and Associates, Incorporated to conduct a traffic generation and parking study based on their indoor ice skating concept. The data for this study was collected from observations of three indoor ice skating facilities one of which is located in Addison and another in Plano. The results of the study concludes that a parking ratio of 3.42 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area is appropriate to park this type of use including peak weekend (Friday and Saturday) hours. Based on the results of their study, the proposed 78,000 square foot facility would require 267 parking spaces. A copy of the study has been included in your agenda packet. \\CHDN\SYS\DATA\COMMDEV\ZCU\PZ8-18.mem 2 Staff commissioned Mr. Dan Boutwell of Municipal Planning Resources Group, Incorporated to conduct a parking study on the indoor ice skating facility concept. A review of ordinances in the Metroplex area as well as selected sites throughout the country revealed that no city has a separate parking ratio for a indoor ice skating facility. Most cities relegated this use to a commercial recreational category. MPRG recommends two possible parking ratios: one parking space per 2.5 persons based on the design capacity (occupancy load) of the entire structure or, one parking space for each three seats of spectator seating plus one space for each 200 square feet of floor area not used for spectator seating. With an approximate occupancy load of 2300 persons, the first recommended ratio would require approximately 920 parking spaces; the second recommended ratio would require approximately 464 parking spaces. Current City Requirements: 1 space/100 sq. ft. enclosed floor area = 780 parking spaces Polar Ice Recommendation: 3.42 spaces/1000 sq. ft. floor area = 267 parking spaces MPRG Recommendations: 1 space/2.5 persons = 920 parking spaces 1 space/3 seats plus 1 space/200 sq. ft. of floor area = 464 parking spaces A copy of the study conducted by MPRG, Incorporated is included in your packet. \\CHDN\SYS\DATA\COMMDEV\ZCU\PZ8-18.mem 3 Municipal Planning Resources Group, Inc. MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Stombaugh, City of Grapevine FROM: DeAnne McKenzie, Municipal Planning Resources Group SUBJECT: Parking Regulations Research DATE: July 20, 1998 1161 S.W. Wilshire Blvd. Suite 119 Burleson, TX 76028 Tele: (817) 295-2700 Fax: (817) 295-3049 BACKGROUND Upon request of the City of Grapevine Department of Development Services, MPRG, Inc. was requested to conduct research related to how other communities have dealt with the issue of parking requirements for an ice skating facility with spectator seating and the possibility of league play. MPRG, Inc. consulted the zoning ordinances of a number of cities in the north central Texas area and requested information from the Planning Advisory Service of the American Planning Association. The following material summarizes our findings. RESEARCH Zoning regulations of the following cities were consulted. For the sake of comparison, the following information is provided in a table appearing at the end of this report. Arlington: Arlington does not specifically refer to ice skating rinks in their ordinance. This use would fall under their provision for indoor commercial amusements. These uses are required to provide one parking space for each 100 square feet of floor area. Bedford: Ice skating rinks are considered with other indoor commercial amusements when determining parking regulations. The City of Bedford requires one parking space for each 100 square feet of floor area. GPV(J 100) Memorandum Parking Regulations Research July 20, 1998 Page 2 of 6 Benbrook: Benbrook does not provide specific parking regulations for ice skating rinks in their ordinance. Commercial amusement centers are required to provide one space for each 100 square feet or fraction thereof of floor area, with a minimum of four spaces. Burleson: Burleson's ordinance provides regulations for commercial amusements, which must provide ten parking spaces for a use such as an ice skating rink, plus one space for each 100 square feet of total floor area over 1,000 feet. Carrollton: Carrollton regulates indoor recreation or amusement uses by requiring one space for each 100 square feet of floor area. Colleyville: Ice skating rinks are classified as a commercial amusement establishment. These uses are required to provide a minimum of one space for each 100 square feet of floor area. Grand Prairie: Grand Prairie provides regulations in their ordinance for a skating rink, but does not differentiate between roller and ice skating rinks. These uses must provide one space for each 100 square feet of floor area. North Richland Hills: North Richland Hills provides for indoor commercial amusements by requiring one space for each 125 square feet of floor area Plano: Plano requires that gymnasiums, skating rinks, and martial arts schools provide one space for each three seats at a maximum seating capacity, plus one space for each 200 square feet. GPV(J 100) Memorandum Parking Regulations Research July 20, 1998 Page 3 of 6 In addition to researching area communities, we also contacted the Planning Advisory Service of the American Planning Association in Chicago, and requested that they supply us with any information they had on file regarding this issue. PAS provided information regarding the parking regulations for the cities of Albany, Oregon; Albemarle County, Virginia; Alpena, Michigan; Bozeman, Montana; Chicago, Illinois; Durham, North Carolina; Provo City, Utah; and Schaumburg, Delaware. A summary of their regulations follows. Albany, Oregon: Albany's regulation for skating rinks requires that one space be provided for each 200 square feet of floor area. Albemarle County, Virginia: Albemarle County requires that skating rinks provide one space for each 125 square feet or fraction thereof of skating rink area. Alpena, Michigan: The zoning ordinance regulates skating rinks by requiring one space for each six feet of benches, or one space for each 150 square feet of skating area, whichever is greater. Bozeman, Montana: Bozeman regulates this use by requiring skating rinks to provide one space for each 100 square feet of floor area or lot area Chicago, Illinois: Chicago regulates convention halls, dance halls, entertainment cabarets, skating rinks, exhibition halls, sports arenas, auditoriums, and gymnasiums in the same category, and requires parking spaces equal in number to ten percent of the capacity in persons. Durham, North Carolina: Durham mentions skating rinks in their ordinance, but does not distinguish between roller and ice skating rinks. These facilities must provide one space for each 250 square feet of floor area. GPV(J Look Memorandum Parking Regulations Research July 20, 1998 Page 4 of 6 Provo City, Utah: Provo City's requirements state that stadiums, sports arenas, auditoriums, and other places of public assembly, and clubs and lodges having no sleeping quarters provide one space for each six seats and/or one space for each 100 square feet of gross floor area used for assembly and not containing fixed seats. Schaumburg, Delaware: Stadiums, arenas, auditoriums, convention halls, skating rinks, and other similar places of assembly, private clubs and fraternal organizations without sleeping facilities but not including those with athletic equipment or facilities, banquet facilities, and dance halls must provide parking spaces equal to thirty percent capacity in persons. Capacity is defined by Fire Department regulations. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS No city that we researched provided parking regulations for an "ice skating facility with spectator seating and the possibility of league play" in their zoning ordinance. During our research it was made clear that most cities provide parking regulations for categories of commercial recreational uses, such as indoor and outdoor, rather than provide for specific uses. Those ordinances which did mention skating rinks specifically did not differentiate between roller and ice skating rinks. We found that parking for the various facilities was based on three characteristics: (1) capacity of the facility, (2) floor area of the facility in square feet, and (3) number of spectator seats. In most of the north central Texas area cities that we studied (Arlington, Bedford, Benbrook, Burleson, Colleyville, and North Richland Hills) an ice skating rink would be regulated as a "commercial amusement." All of the Texas cities in the study base their regulations on the floor area of the facility, with Burleson and Plano adding additional requirements of ten seats and one space for each three seats, respectively. Four of the eight remaining cities located across the country (Albany, Oregon; Albemarle County, Virginia; Bozeman, Montana; and Durham, North Carolina) base their requirements on the area of the facility. Two of the cities (Chicago, Illinois and Schaumburg, Delaware) relate their requirements to the capacity in persons of the facility. GPV(ltoo) Memorandum Parking Regulations Research July 20, 1998 Page 5 of 6 Finally, two cities (Alpena, Michigan and Provo City, Utah) require parking in accordance with both the number of spectator seats and the area of the facility. RECOMMENDATIONS An ice skating facility could generate a considerable amount of traffic in the City of Grapevine, if organized league sport activities are planned. Based on our research and consideration of a facility of this type, we offer two recommendations for an "ice skating facility with spectator seating and the possibility of league play": 1. One parking space for every 2.5 persons of design capacity of the entire structure (Design capacity is determined by the fire department). Relating the parking requirement to the design capacity of the building provides parking requirements for uses of the facility other than ice skating or hockey, such as concerts and conventions, and provides for accessory uses, such as restaurants and souvenir shops. This requirement would provide the necessary parking spaces for a full multi -use facility, regardless of the activity. 2. One parking space for each three seats of spectator and/or auditorium seating, plus one space for each 200 square feet of floor area not used for spectator and/or auditorium seating. This option would be appropriate for a facility planned primarily for ice skating and hockey with spectator seating. If the facility does not easily lend itself to other uses, this requirement would provide adequate parking regulations. Accessory uses such as restaurants and souvenir shops should be required to provide additional parking, as required by the City of Grapevine zoning ordinance. GPV(J 100) City llescription of Use Regulation Albany, Oregon Skating Rink One space per each 200 sq.ft. of floor area Albemarle County, Virginia Skating Rink One space for each 125 sq.ft. or fraction thereof of skating rink area. Arlington, Texas Commercial Amusement One space for each 100 sq. ft. of floor area One space for each seat or six feet of benches, Alpena, Michigan Skating Rink or one for each 150 sq.ft. of skating area, whichever is greater. Bedford, Texas Commercial Amusement One space for each 100 sq. ft. of floor area Benbrook, Texas Commercial Amusement One space for each 100 sq. ft. or fraction thereof of floor area Bozeman, Montana Skating Rink One space per each 100 sq.ft. of floor area or lot area. Burleson, Texas Commercial Amusement Ten spaces, plus one space for each 100 sq. ft. of floor area over 1,000 sq. ft. Carrollton, Texas Indoor Recreation or Amusement Use One space for each 100 sq. ft. of floor area Convention Halls, Dance Halls, Entertainment Cabarets, Skating Rinks, Ten percent of the capacity in persons shall be Chicago, Illinois Exhibition Halls, Sport Arenas, 1 provided. Auditoriums, and Gymnasiums (other than incidental to a school or other places of assembly) Colleyville, Texas Commercial Amusement One space for each 100 sq. ft. of floor area Durham, North Carolina Skating Rink One space for each 250 sq.ft. of floor area Grand Prairie, Texas Skating Rink One space for each 100 sq. ft. of floor area North Richland Hills, Texas Commercial Amusement One space for each 125 sq. ft. of floor area Gymnasium, skating rinks, and martial One space for each three seats at a maximum Plano, Texas arts schools or areas seating capacity, plus one space for each 200 square feet. Stadiums, sports arenas, auditoriums One space for each six seats and/or one space Provo City, Utah (including school auditoriums), and other for each onebumdred square feet of gross floor places of public assembly, and clubs and area used for assembly and not containing fixed lodges having no sleeping quarters seats. Stadiums, Arenas, Auditoriums (other Thirty percent capacity in persons. Capacity Schaumburg, Delaware than church, college, or institutional), being defined as per Fire Department convention halls, skating rinks and other regulations. similar places of assembly... MEMORANDUM CITY OF GRAPEVINE TEXAS MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS FROM: ROGER NELSON, CITY MANAGER N.T. HARDY, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 47, SITE PLAN REVIEW; AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 42, SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS; AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 36, "PCD" PLANNED COMMERCE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT; AMEMDMENTS TO SECTION 56, OFF–STREET PARKING REGULATIONS Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council consider the following amendments to the City of Grapevine's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 82-73 and take any action necessary. Proposed amendments to Section 47, Site Plan Review—This request is generated by staff to recommend the elimination of the environmental assessment requirement for conditional and special uses as stated in Section 47.E.2 Site Plan Review, and the elimination of the waiver of this requirement as stated in Section 475. The environmental assessment requirement was instituted specifically for development that occurs on DFW International Airport property. With the passage of Senate Bill 348 that eliminates City planning authority over development that occurs on airport property, it seems appropriate to eliminate this requirement. Council will still have the ability through the conditional use or special use request process to require an environmental assessment when it is deemed necessary. 2. Proposed amendments to Section 42, Supplementary District Regulations—This request is generated by staff to recommend consideration of eliminating building side yard and/or rear yard setback requirements for all zoning districts with property lines adjacent to DFW International Airport. This amendment would eliminate only the side yard and/or rear yard that is contiguous with airport property. With the passage of Senate Bill 348 eliminating City zoning authority on airport property, maintenance of building setbacks from the property line adjacent to DFW International Airport is unnecessary given the development potential of the property on the airport side of the property line. 0AZMAM98-06.411 3. Proposed amendments to Section 36. "PCD" Planned Commerce Development District—This request is generated by staff to recommend changes to Section 36, "PCD" Planned Commerce Development District to improve the development potential of those parcels within the City that are zoned "PCD." The proposed amendment would permit hotel development in excess of 500 guest rooms in the Standard Development option as a conditional use. 4. Proposed amendments to Section 56, Off -Street Parking Regulations—This request is generated by Polar Ice Entertainment, Incorporated who are seeking an amendment to Section 56, Off -Street Parking Regulations, specifically to reduce the number of required parking spaces necessary to be in compliance with the ordinance. Currently the ordinance does not make any distinction between skating facilities and any other type of indoor commercial amusement— all of which are parked at a ratio of one space per 100 square feet of enclosed floor area. With a proposed floor area of approximately 78,000 square feet, Polar Ice Entertainment feels the required 780 parking spaces is too great a number, which would effectively prohibit them from developing on the site they have chosen in Grapevine. Polar Ice Entertainment commissioned Kimley-Horn and Associates, Incorporated to conduct a traffic generation and parking study based on their indoor ice skating concept. The data for this study was collected from observations of three indoor ice skating facilities one of which is located in Addison and another in Plano. The results of the study concluded that a parking ratio of 3.42 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area is appropriate to park this type of use including peak weekend (Friday and Saturday) hours. Based on the results of their study, the proposed 78,000 square foot facility would require 267 parking spaces. Staff commissioned Mr. Dan Boutwell of Municipal Planning Resources Group, Incorporated to conduct a parking study on the indoor ice skating facility concept. A review of ordinances in the Metroplex area as well as selected sites throughout the country revealed that no city has a separate parking ratio for an indoor ice skating facility. Most cities relegated this use to a commercial recreational category. MPRG recommended two possible parking ratios: one parking space per 2.5 persons based on the design capacity (occupancy load) of the entire structure or, one parking space for each three seats of spectator seating plus one space for each 200 square feet of floor area not used for spectator seating. With an approximate occupancy load of 2300 persons, the first recommended ratio would require approximately 920 parking spaces; the second recommended ratio would require approximately 464 parking spaces. Current City Requirements: 1 space/100 sq. ft. enclosed floor area = 780 parking spaces 0:\ZCU\AM98-06.411 2 Polar Ice Recommendation: 3.42 spaces/1000 sq. ft. floor area = 267 parking spaces MPRG Recommendations: 1 space/2.5 persons = 920 parking spaces 1 space/3 seats plus 1 space/200 sq. ft. of floor area = 464 parking spaces At the August 18, 1998 Planning and Zoning Commission deliberation session, representatives of Polar Ice Entertainment and Kimley-Horn and Associates made a brief presentation stating their position on the need to revise the parking standards for indoor skating facilities. Although it was generally agreed by the Commission that the current ratio of one space per 100 square feet of enclosed floor area was excessive, they were not convinced that Polar Ice Entertainment's recommendation was appropriate either. The Commission tasked Staff with determining an appropriate ratio that could be applied befitting any type of indoor skating facility within the City. Staff recommends a ratio of one parking space per 2.5 persons based on the occupant load of all skating surfaces plus one parking space per 3 persons based on spectator seating. Staff Recommendation: 1 space/2.5 persons (based on occupant load of ice surface) plus 1 space/3 persons (based on spectator seating) = 364 parking spaces This ratio establishes a parking requirement that is significantly less than our current standard but is more appropriate for this type of use; it also creates a parking requirement greater than that determined by Polar Ice Entertainment. Representatives of Polar Ice Entertainment support Staff's recommendation. If Staff's recommended parking ratio were to be applied to the only indoor skating facility currently in operation (Skatetown) within the City, 181 off-street parking spaces would be required rather than the 157 spaces that are currently approved for the site. TH/rs 0:\ZCUWM98-06.411 3 DRAFT COPY SECTION 47 AUGUST 27, 1998 Development Services to determine that the application is in compliance with the Codes and Ordinances of the City. 21. Parking for disabled persons should be designated according to Chapter 23, Section 23-64 through 23-69 of the Code of Ordinances. 22. Designate all refuse storage areas according to Section 50.13.3. 23. A letter from the Public Works Department accepting all subdivision improvements (i.e., drainage, sewage, utilities and street improvements). 24. In the case of any use requiring a Conditional Use Permit or a Special use Permit, a Tree Preservation Permit may be required by the City Council in accordance with Section 52.D.1. The Tree Preservation Permit shall be in accordance with Section 52.E. 032398 6 Section 47 . . •. Mll.. .. ._ �d4MF.,kdl M- .. 032398 6 Section 47 DRAFT COPY SECTION 47 AUGUST 27, 1998 032398 7 Section 47 slim.103.1 IN !.--- _. e MW! pUbIiG stFuGtwes iR GGRReGtien with the .. - A EM - -• --- -- IB Aq F MAI _ . .. 032398 7 Section 47 DRAFT COPY SECTION 47 AUGUST 27, 1998 F.G-. PROCEDURE FOR PROCESSING SITE PLANS: The following procedures shall govern the processing and approval of Site Plan applications. PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE: Prior to filing a formal site plan application, the applicant may request a pre -application conference with the Director of Development Services or his designee. The purpose of the pre -application conference shall be to assist the applicant in bringing the Site Plan into conformity with these and other regulations applying to the subject property and to define the specific submission requirements for Site Plan applications. 032398 8 Section 47 1 10.0 . .. .. F.G-. PROCEDURE FOR PROCESSING SITE PLANS: The following procedures shall govern the processing and approval of Site Plan applications. PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE: Prior to filing a formal site plan application, the applicant may request a pre -application conference with the Director of Development Services or his designee. The purpose of the pre -application conference shall be to assist the applicant in bringing the Site Plan into conformity with these and other regulations applying to the subject property and to define the specific submission requirements for Site Plan applications. 032398 8 Section 47 .. ._. ... .. .. F.G-. PROCEDURE FOR PROCESSING SITE PLANS: The following procedures shall govern the processing and approval of Site Plan applications. PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE: Prior to filing a formal site plan application, the applicant may request a pre -application conference with the Director of Development Services or his designee. The purpose of the pre -application conference shall be to assist the applicant in bringing the Site Plan into conformity with these and other regulations applying to the subject property and to define the specific submission requirements for Site Plan applications. 032398 8 Section 47 DRAFT COPY SECTION 47 AUGUST 27, 1998 processing of applications for any further permits or approvals which may be required by the Codes and Ordinances of the City, including any approvals such as a building permit, a certificate of occupancy or subdivision approval. I.�- LIMITATIONS ON SITE PLAN APPROVAL: No site plan approval shall be valid for a period longer than one (1) year from the date such approval is issued, unless a building permit is issued and construction is actually begun within that period, and is thereafter diligently pursued to completion or an occupancy permit is obtained and a use commenced within that period. Approval of an application does not authorize any work in conflict with any Codes or Ordinances of the City of Grapevine. J.44 AMENDMENT: An approved site plan may be amended at any time in the same manner and subject to the same standards and limitations as provided in this Section for original site plan approval. 032398 12 Section 47 DRAFT COPY SECTION 42 SEPTEMBER 8, 1998 requirements be violated and no more than one principal structure plus those accessory uses set forth in the above residential zoning districts shall ever be constructed upon two (2) or more lots which have been combined pursuant to this section. Should any excess portion of a combined lot be conveyed to another owner, no structure shall be constructed thereon nor shall it be added to another lot until it has been replatted to combine it with another lot or lots as permitted by Article 974a, Vernon's Annotated Texas Civil Statutes. 7. The side and rear yard requirements for buildings or structures in any district adjacent to Dallas/Fort Worth Airport property shall be waved. G. PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS: Certain architectural features, fences, walls, and hedges may project into or be located in required yards as follows: 1. Cornices, eaves and sills not more than two (2) feet into any required yard. 2. Balconies, bay windows, and chimneys not more than three (3) feet into front yards, or two (2) feet into side and rear yards. 3. Unenclosed covered patios used only for outdoor, recreational purposes and not as carports, garages, storage rooms, or habitable rooms in the "R-7.5", "R-12.5", "R-20", and the "R-TH" Districts may be located no closer than six (6) feet to any side yard property line nor closer than six (6) feet to the rear property line. Unenclosed covered patios used only for outdoor, recreational purposes and not as carports, garages, storage rooms or habitable rooms in the "R-5.0" District may be located no closer than six (6) feet to the rear property line and shall have the side yard setbacks as required in Section 16.G.3. Unenclosed covered patios constructed within the required twenty- five (25) foot rear yard setback of each district shall not be used as second story patios. The height of an unenclosed patio cover shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet. The height of an unenclosed patio cover shall be measured from the finished first floor of the residence to the highest point of the roofs surface, if a flat surface, to the deck line of a mansard roof, and the main height level between eaves and ridge for hip and gable roofs. In the case of a corner lot, patios shall be subject to the regular street side yard requirements of the district. Openings may be enclosed with insect mesh screening or plastic that is readily removable translucent or transparent plastic not more than 0.125 inch in thickness. 4. RESERVED 071691 7 Section 42 DRAFT COPY SECTION 36 JULY 28, 1998 Section 36. PCD Planned Commerce Development Districts A. PREAMBLE: The Planned Commerce Development (PCD) District is designed to accommodate commercial, noise -proof industrial and commercial and low intensity office -commercial development in accordance with the Comprehensive Master Plan. The district provides for two (2) methods of development: 1. STANDARD DEVELOPMENT permits commercial development subject to the same restrictions as apply in the CC Community Commercial District on tracts of at least two (2) acres in size, and hotel development exceeding five (500) hundred guest rooms approved pursuant to a conditional use permit subject to the same restrictions as apply in the HCO Hotel/Corporate Office District and any additional restrictions included in the conditional use permit. In the event of a conflict between the HCO requirements and the requirements included in the conditional use permit the requirements in the conditional use permit shall prevail 2. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT is an optional form of development which may be permitted provided an applicant submits and the City Council approved a Master Development Plan for the property. In a planned commercial development, mixed commercial developments are permitted. B. PURPOSE: The purpose of the standard form of development in the PCD District is to permit an owner, as a matter of right, to develop retail space and commercial uses on lots not less than two (2) acres in area. The purpose of the Optional Planned Development methods, within the PCD District is to provide a method for the coordination of retail, office, hotel, commercial, and similar uses in a park like setting. Approval of the Planned Development Option will provide a mechanism to achieve development which will contribute to the diversification of the City's economic base in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Master Plan. The purpose of the PCD District is to provide a unique new zone for the coordination of industrial, retail, office, commercial, and government uses in a park- like setting. These regulations are also designed to facilitate a mix of land uses not provided for in other zoning districts. It is intended that these regulations protect adjacent development from adverse impacts, associated with economic development, and promote efficient and economic land use. The district requirements achieve this 052185 1 Section 36 DRAFT COPY SECTION 56 August 27, 1998 establishments in shopping of food or drinking centers, malls & multi- establishment. occupancy having 200,000 sq. ft., but less than 600,000 sq. ft. of total GLA. 8. RECREATION, SOCIAL AND ENTERTAINMENT USES: Indoor commercial 1 100 sq. ft. enclosed amusements floor area. Outdoor commercial 20 plus 1 6 seats amustments Bowling alley 20 plus 3 Lane Theaters/cinemas 1 4 seats Outdoor theater 1 2 seats Golf Course (public & private) 5 hole 1 10 linear ft. of a driving area. plus 50% of For each any required additional use. parking Indoor Skating Facilities 1 per 2.5 persons based on occupant load of skating surfaces plus 1 per 3 persons based on spectator seating 101993 7 Section 56 Ms. Janice Gregory Fort Worth Star Telegram P.O. Box 1870 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 A Future With A Past RE: Grapevine Account # CIT 25 Dear Ms. Gregory, August 28, 1998 Please find enclosed the following for publication on Sunday, August 30, 1998, in the Northeast Edition of the Neighborhood Extra Section of the Fort Worth Star Telegram. (One time only) Item Meeting Date Notice of Public Hearing Z98-20 — Birdsong Addition September 15, 1998 Notice of Public Hearing CU98-39 — Magic Mike's September 15, 1998 Notice of Public Hearing CU98-40 — Club Concepts I, Ltd September 15, 1998 Notice of Public Hearing CU98-41 — TEAM Joint Venture September 15, 1998 Notice of Public Hearing CU98-44 — Randall's Properties September 15, 1998 Notice of Pubic Hearing CU98-45 — Taco Bueno September 15, 1998 Notice of Public Hearing CU98-47 — Brinker International September 15, 1998 Notice of Public Hearing CU98-48 — Mason Jar Development September 15, 1998 Notice of Public Hearing CU98-49 — AMC Theater September 15, 1998 Notice of Public Hearing Zoning Ordinance No. 82-73 September 15, 1998 As always, your assistance is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions please contact me at (817) 410- 3155. Sincerely, i2( -45-{v.- Ron Stombaugh, Planner II THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES P.O. Box 95104 • grapevine, Texas 76099 • Phone Metro 817/410-3154 i Fax Number 817/410-3012 CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS On Tuesday evening, September 15, 1998, at 7:30 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 200 South Main Street, Grapevine, Texas, the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Grapevine will hold a public hearing to consider the following items: Case Number/Name: Z98-20 — Birdsong Addition Applicant: M.M.D.A. Development Company, LLC Location: 3056 Hall-Johnson Road, Lots 1-10, Block 1, Birdsong Addition. Current Zoning: "R-12.5" Single Family District Proposal: The applicant is requesting to amend the deed restrictions associated with this addition. A copy of the deed restrictions is on file at the Department of Development Services. The property is owned by M.M.D.A. Development Company. Case Number/Name: CU98-39 — Magic Mike's Applicant: Paul Tamasi of CMPA, Inc. Location: 3501 Grapevine Mills Parkway, Lot 1, Block A, Magic Mike's Addition Current Zoning: "CC" Community Commercial District Proposal: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit, specifically to revise the site plan, floor plan, elevations, the addition of a monument sign, and a waiver to Section 47.E.2. in accordance with Section 47.F. A copy of the site plan is on file at the Department of Development Services. The property is owned by Farhat Brothers, Inc. Case Number/Name: CU98-40 — Club Concepts I, Ltd Applicant: Club Concepts I, Ltd. Location: 1000 International Parkway, Terminal 2W, Columns A2-A9 Current Zoning: "GU" Governmental Use Proposal: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow the possession, storage, retail sales and on-premise consumption of alcoholic beverages (beer, wine and mixed beverages) in conjunction with the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, and a waiver to Section 47.E.2. in accordance with Section 47.F. A copy of the site plan is on file at the Department of Development Services. The property is owned by Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Case Number/Name: CU98-41 — TEAM Joint Venture N Applicant: TEAM Joint Venture Location: 1000 International Parkway, Terminal 2W, Columns 12-14 Current Zoning: "GU" Governmental Use Proposal: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow the possession, storage, retail sales and on -premise consumption of alcoholic beverages (beer, wine and mixed beverages) in conjunction with the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, and a waiver to Section 47.E.2. in accordance with Section 47.F. A copy of the site plan is on file at the Department of Development Services. The property is owned by Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Case Number/Name: CU98-44 — Randall's Properties Applicant: Michael Twichell Location: 4000 William D. Tate Avenue, Lots 1-3, Block 1, Tom Thumb Addition No. 1 Current Zoning: "CC" Community Commercial Proposal: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to amend the approved site plan of CU98-23 (Ord. 98-75) to revise signage, and a waiver to Section 47.E.2. in accordance with Section 47.F. A copy of the site plan is on file at the Department of Development Services. The property is owned by Randall's Properties, Inc. Case Number/Name: CU98-45 — Taco Bueno Applicant: Lawrence Cates Location: 5341 William D. Tate Avenue, Lot 4R, Block 1, Mulberry Square Current Zoning: "CC" Community Commercial Proposal: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to amend the approved site plan of CU98-32 (Ord. 98-93) to allow a drive through restaurant, and a waiver to Section 47.E.2. in accordance with Section 47.F. A copy of the site plan is on file at the Department of Development Services. The property is owned by Vineyard Marketplace L.P. Case Number/Name: CU98-47 — Brinker International Applicant: Wendy Hunter Location: 2655 Grapevine Mills Circle East, Lot 3, Block 2, Grapevine Mills Addition Phase 1 Current Zoning: "CC" Community Commercial 3 Proposal: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to amend the approved site plan of CU98-76 (Ord. 98-11) to revise the approved floor plan for the possession, storage, retail sales and on -premise consumption of alcoholic beverages (beer, wine and mixed beverages) in conjunction with a restaurant, and a waiver to Section 47.E.2. in accordance with Section 47.F. A copy of the site plan is on file at the Department of Development Services. The property is owned by Brinker International. Case Number/Name: CU98-48 — Mason Jar Development Applicant: Carl Reed Location: 2605 Grapevine Mills Circle East, Lot 3, Block 4, Grapevine Mills Addition Phase 1 Current Zoning: "CC" Community Commercial Proposal: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to amend the approved site plan of Cu98-21 (Ord. 98-74) to allow for the possession, storage, retail sales and on -premise consumption of alcoholic beverages (beer, wine and mixed beverages) in conjunction with a restaurant, and a waiver to Section 47.E.2. in accordance with Section 47.F. A copy of the site plan is on file at the Department of Development Services. The property is owned by Grapevine Mills Residual L.P. Case Number/Name: CU98-49 — AMC Theater Applicant: Mike Winter Location: 3150 Grapevine Mills Parkway, Lot 1, Block 1, Grapevine Mills Addition Phase 1 Current Zoning: "CC" Community Commercial Proposal: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to amend the approved site plan of CU98-21 (Ord. 98-74) to revise the canopies over the ticket booths, and a waiver to Section 47.E.2. in accordance with Section 47.F. A copy of the site plan is on file at the Department of Development Services. The property is owned by Grapevine Mills Residual L.P. The City Council and the Commission will consider amendments and changes to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, No. 82-73, same being Appendix D of the Code of Ordinances, specifically amending Section 36, "PCD" Planned Commerce Development; Section 42, Supplementary District Regulations; Section 47, Site Plan Review; and Section 4 56, Off -Street Parking Regulations and any other additions, deletions or changes to various sections, articles and provisions contained in said Ordinance No. 82-73. After all parties have been given an opportunity to speak, the public hearing will be closed and the Commission and the City Council will deliberate the pending matters. Please contact the Department of Development Services concerning any questions, 200 South Main Street, Grapevine, Texas, 76051 or P.O. Box 95104, Grapevine, Texas, 76099, 817- 410-3155. 5 HP OfficeJet Personal Printer/Fax/Copier Identification 93907520 1.3.0 28 Fax Log Report for Development Services 817 410 3018 Aug -28-98 02:20 PM Result Pages Tyne Date Time Duration Diagnostic OK 05 Sent Aug -28 02:17P 00:02:19 002586030022 -Telegram AD ORDER NO. 13627310 400 W. SEVENTH STREET • FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102 ACCOUNT NO. CIT 2 5 THE STATE OF TEXAS I County of Tarrant Before me, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, this day, Tammie Bryant personally a P Y eared PP Billing Specialist for the Star -Telegram, ublishE 9 p 'dance whh section 47.F. ^ to p„ of.the .site plan Ison file the De de- permit to '^,e„° 'f,e aap� roved site plan ofCU9876 ebsed•.nd the'eomrnis�lonl andtheCityCouhctl.adeMb arrant County, Texas; and who, after being duly of of vclowneM The h owned by Dallas/ (Ord. 98-111 to revise the ap- , roved.tloorplanf«tfreoos erate the pend' matt Please («tact' e e?e of an advertisement was Development Servk g published in the above n �ope . f.Ot't Wrt''offh.Jntematiorst Air- session; .. storage, eptai sales and orWemise:car sumption ment'of - .er tanterning .ar�y quer 200: port! . - .. . -. -' - Number me /♦•41- of atcota6c Bever - ages .(beer, Juke and mixed- beverages) .1n eooxryyxx c witha restaxXaM a wa' 1 tions.' ; South. Main Street, Grape=, •Texas, 76051 or P.O. Box 95104, Gra oe Texas- 76099, .)ant,VeMure Applicant: TEAM Joint Verdure .and ' er-to *Sectkm'':4j.E . )n`ae. :81 41D-:155. - liocation 1000rhternational Parkway r7ermnal yVAI, Col i_prdance wi�tSecaon A7 F -- i A;clipfi of the -site plan,f5�on tantts 1214 + r+ x, Current uZonIng;I°�Gll� Goyerth fife'at the geQa M of De , �'vebpmeW See- eS The. rtuerutalUse ,nn �.hh s Proposal The applicant Imre- nnxW Vandest:rionggDATE: ertyls propbyBriNcer' kKernatat On Tuesday.evenpemroafow,Jhec SPem • sew, TOTAL TOTAL RATEMN£1x9 orp}taosuasir0nele5pses parem2os'ned sttorageTetaieee9t tan atcohol)c 'beverages �spn3rr1a/RYr. 605 Grapevine; 8/30M bens; 2nd 20O. South asain C etCGirapevine -Tex rcrcyy i pf (beer wine and.mi xed.pever agesf in coryuncbon wrtti ffe �ocahgn , Jdxis, Crce1e East, Lot 3, `Block 4 Mils 2 6 ? L 26? 1.41 3 7 6 . 4 ? i andptan- nnnSg and Z "" rung CorrdnLssion of .the '' y ofGrapevine w+6 Oatlas/Fort< Worth 1{Kema to'Secaand --47.E'Z in.acx:or -old - "ditipnPhasea)' ` fold a public heararg'to eon- siderthe foiowing items x dance with Setbat 47 f3A •MtY.CkKnner)ctal Proposal the applicant Wse- --- CaseNumbe 820 copy bf the .site plan fYeatthe par�� of De Questx� ,p,:Eondmortaf ice. t pertNt Lo iAreM the aqp srt2 —._ — $irdsong App6cant . M M.DA Oevebp- ment MrlpaAy i1 C Location. veloPmeMs fire erty Is owned by Daltas/ o Worth •krtetnatwna.1 Ar port. 1 F "• proved Cu98 21 {Ord;_ 98-7 aor the o5 y ��.. ' ,sAles'S� 3awry.emise rCOn' �._.- .._..._._— $DS6�'ffaio�Of1f15011 Road, i its •3d0 Block 1 Bird Addition Current( Zodng: -'R 12.5'. SYr x .:': { • Case Number/Name . 44'RandaM's peva -"' s. gn'b(a coholic Never• agesgbeer jNire srd P*md aeveragesf jn �C ------ ------ - ---------- ---_ - ----- ' gle Fad- yDistrict - Proposal 'The applicantis rr App6cartC Michae�t TW+ct ea �' 3 Lotatan 4000 --William' 10 with 'a restaLrent an a w� er to'SecboA>4Y.E 2.`kr ac- questung tp �,d the. deed resb4cbons associated with Tate Avenue, Lots13 Stock 1. Tom Thumb No Cordance with`•Section�47S . A copy of tt*;Wte plan'is on this additioxc A copy of the deed restrictions is on file at Current Zonk+g•r 'CCtCortmw fde at the peDarbnera,of Dr veloPn+eM Services The the Departmentof Deve ment-Services� The proDebrtpy- rdtyCommerciat a xa-�; ProPosai::The app6caiK7S're• p is�owned ay Gcape- vine M Residual is owned by M.M DA Deve1-. opment Company - ., , questing a' condmor(at.:Use .� permit td amend ,The ap• psi »ci <w q Case-Number/Name S + K �.�s Case' Nurrltuer� ame kvAB roved site n of CU98-23 `Ord-' 98 7 lewse:. sig at9 r11MG>Theater ApptfcaaL, ikr Willer y . .39 -Magic Mikes ° a nage, and a wafter 10 Sec LocatioA ,3150 Grapevine Applicant; Paul iamasi of CM pA tnc tion 47 E.2. in accordance with Section 47 E A copy'of Mils Parkway Lot 1 Block 1 Mills /(dddion Location 3501 Grapevine Mills Parkway 'Lot •1' Stock S U B S G the site plan is onfile at the oepaKmeMof,OevelopmeM Piwse C)trreM2oxraxg .�CC'Cotnmu 1St AUGUST 1998 - A,-Magrc Mikers Addtion < CurrerK.Zoning_-'CC Cammtf Services. The . -pro is owned by Randall s Proper pity Commercial I Proposal The applicant is re DAY OF rate Commercial District ads; Inc.: ..- quesbng'I4 :condmonal :use Ptoposal The'apP6cant is�re-. questing a conditional use Case Numtier/Name 7t�r�8- 145'Taco8ueno L+' ' permit to amend '. roved site flan of 04). Public IU7AA 1,A ppeennd specificapy to revise the site plan: floor plan; ele- di ACPhtar to ^TenCe Catei: •(Ord, to revise-theIry car aeppii s:.,over the.,ticket vations -the' addiwn' of a monument sign and a'waiv Location: -5341 WilliaM O Tate Avenue Lot 4R,'Slock booths ;'s d awaiver .to Sec. tiat:41£.2..in accordance er-to $ect)omd7 E 2. in'ac . cordance'wittt lSection 47,F. I.. Mulberry Spuare Current Zorvng:• CC' Comma with Section- 47.F. A:eopyof. theifte plan -is on fide at the TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS A copyof tfe, site plan is on `.a at the De ppaartment of De- nity Commercial Proposal::The appricaM'is re- Department of Development ''Servicesy Tte yroperty is vperobpe K oMnree d 6y Farhat permit permiit�t a d the e e of owned 's LPr apevxnc Mills -Re - The PLE brothers k,c:' :.. pamet 11=9&93)-onallo�°na� 'a �r vorsidar MONTHLY STATEMENT. THANK YOU! Case'Number/ lame I'CU98- L .`through restaurant, ments**W, hanngger -s-to-the 40ACiub,Concepts I 'Cid'.. �6cant Club Coric'epts` 1 waiver to Section 4• .E2. Y►' accordance .with Section ' + �p�aartrtemmpent Com�rehensive'Zoning Orli nuance) No ,82-73 sane be O enan les, o�ptehtedCode ER PORTION WITH YOUR PAYMENT " y Location. 1000 International Parkwa"y�. Terminal 2W, Co4 a�tyttic of Development SmAcesi' The by of y - amend' Section SVP Planned Commerce Develop umns'�2-A9 Current Zdning: 'GU Govern-' owned Vineyard Marlxetplace L.P. ' meatSection 42, Supple-' mental Use Proposal:. The aPD6ceM.is re- - Case kV nber/Name C(J98 TW",Y. District - - Regula tions Section 47. Site Plan Star"questing a -conditional -lase ;perxryt tos,sllow the°posses .97- Brinker internatonal':. AppZcaxxC:WendvHurter T'.. Review- and, Section 56 ON- StreetZPprking Re6r>ra(iOns sion,+estorage,• retail'..saks and ortpreird i consume Location 2555 rtGraP*vine Mils Circle'. East ' Lot 3 ard-aryotheratfdxborts: de' letions or 'changes varF • 400 W. SEVENTH ST. •FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102 . tan: of ,alcohfilic beverages Block-2Slock-2it Grapevine Mitts Ad- `dition Phase. .0 .our 'sections, ar ictes . ibeer. wine:aAd mtzeqQ f�iever ages)In chtyunchon:iviUi the Dallas/Fort if Current Zatang:;'CC' Conimo- 1P6caM pprovisions"epMaeed in'76aid Ordnance 8273:-:.',- Aencart COUNT 13 tio ;a1 aorpp"��rtt",taxid aI wa vet Prooppo f is re 'questing �pwUxuty� t�oCspe (fie hearwrg; wJ1.• t)e. MBER CIT 2 5 376.47 to _Secban 47E 2.. in actor. a condrtanal-:tlse pubLc PAGE.1 { txy IF ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL (817) 390-7885 + CITY OF GRAPEVINE CITY SECRETARY PO BOX 95104 GRAPEVINE, TX 76099-9704 PLEASE PAY ` THIS AMOUNT I 376.47 PLEASE WRITE IN AMOUNT ENCLOSED