Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning and Zoning Commission-Minutes-11/22/2004 CDern" Texas PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 22, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Edwards called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioners Thomas Dolan, Dave Dudziak, Thomas Bartkowski, Luann Edwards, John Blassingame, and Denis Duffy were present. Commissioner Jeff Byerly was absent. Barry LeBaron, Clayton Husband, Amy Shelley and Fire Marshal Jeff Jones from staff were present. City Attorney, Ross Foster was also present. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Commissioner Dudziak. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES The corrections made for the November 8, 2004 minutes were as follows: Page 7, paragraph 6 - "where" changed to "were" Page 7, paragraph 8 - "stated to" changed to "asked" and in the second sentence 3rd word from end "is" changed to "are" Page 15, paragraph 10 - The whole paragraph was reworded and now states "Commissioner Edwards stated that looking at each subdivision case by case should not be, because Colleyville did not want a gated community upon a gated community. Those communities would take away from the rural atmosphere that so many people love and the reason for the way the ordinance is stated. What ever number is used for subdivisions, the City Council needs to stick to the ordinance stating that subdivision's number. Commissioner Duffy moved to approve the minutes of the November 8, 2004 meeting with suggested changes. Commissioner Dolan seconded. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Blassingame, Duffy and Edwards Nay: None Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 1 of 11 CITIZEN COMMENTS None AGENDA ITEMS 1. Case P-04-042 - Minor Plat of Sandlin Estates Addition, 4.88 acres located at 1801 Oak Knoll Clayton Husband presented the case and briefed the Commission. Commissioner Duffy stated according to the drawing there is an easement next to the creek; however, the property is not on the creek. Is this easement a requirement? Clayton Husband responded the property is not on the creek and the proper changes have been made on the plat. Commissioner Duffy made motion to approve Case P-04-042. Commissioner Bartkowski seconded The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Blassingame, Duffy and Edwards Nay: None 2. Case Z-04-039 - PUBLIC HEARING - Zoning change from AG to R40 on 4.69 acres located at 7300 John McCain Road Clayton Husband presented the case and briefed the Commission. Commissioner Duffy questioned Lot 2R, the upper lot, has to be 14 feet from the ROW of John McCain, but on the bottom, the plat does not show that. In driving the area, he did not see a variance in the road going through, same curb line or side line. Commissioner did receive a letter from David Bagwell, Old Grove Limited Partnership Ltd, in support of this request. The letter is also addressed to all members of the P&Z. On Lot 1 R, the southern lot along the creek, there seems to be a large drainage easement along the southeast corner. Will this be addressed at the time it is platted and permitted? Clayton Husband responded correct. They have not applied for the subdivision plat and at that time easements and ROWs will be reviewed. Commissioner Edwards stated there is a large amount of drainage that comes from the west. Commissioner Edwards opened the public hearing at 7:14 P.M. Grady Walker, 7309 John McCain- Stated he is in favor of the request. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 7:15 P.M. Commissioner Dolan made motion to approve Case Z-04-039. Commissioner Dudziak seconded. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Blassingame, Duffy and Edwards Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 2 of 11 Nay: None 3. Case Z-04-036 - PUBLIC HEARING - Amendment to the Land Development Code regarding community special event regulations Barry LeBaron presented the case and briefed the Commission. Commissioner Edwards questioned Section 2, number 4d, Real Estate Sales Office. What happens when there are three phases to a development? Barry LeBaron stated the temporary offices will be moved or use the same building till all phases are complete. Commissioner Edwards questioned Section 3, regarding Temporary School Classrooms, has that section been removed? Barry LeBaron responded correct, staff recommends removing the section because this process is taken directly to City Council. Commissioner Edwards questioned if the ordinance should state a minimum number of people for special events attendance or a cut off number instead of it stating "under 500". Barry LeBaron responded that having a special outdoor event on vacant lots or generating heavy traffic would trigger the need for a Special Event Permit. Commissioner Edwards questioned if staff feels this would this is sufficient? Barry LeBaron responded yes. Commissioner Dudziak questioned if this only applies to private property? Barry LeBaron responded this would apply any where in the community. Commissioner Dudziak stated public use, space, parks, and baseball diamonds are all these covered by this. Barry LeBaron stated, no, these events stated are all recreational events, not special events. Commissioner Dudziak questioned tournaments or special Olympic events, would these require the special event permit? Barry LeBaron responded correct, if these events are to be held on private property, not city owned then they would require the special events permit. Commissioner Dudziak stated the ordinance needs to be clearer on who would or would not need these special events permits. Barry LeBaron stated those changes can be made. Commissioner Duffy questioned staff about paragraph 6 on page 5 in regards to tents - Can the Fire Department withdraw the permit if the Building Official has approved the permit? Barry LeBaron responded that if another municipal department does not approve with the issuing of the permit, then the Building Official may pull the permit at any time. All departments have the authority to disapprove of a permit. Commissioner Dolan questioned staff for clarity, in regards to the Real Estate Sales Office section on page 3, could a person who is building his house move a mobile home in on that property and live in that mobile home while his house is being constructed? Barry LeBaron responded no; in fact that language is in the ordinance already. Commissioner Dolan questioned if it restricts living quarters in those offices? Barry LeBaron responded to this point, there has not been an issue, but if needed, it can be stated clearer in the ordinance. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 3 of 11 Commissioner Edwards stated it does define the uses for these particular offices and would be enforced as such. Attorney Foster concurred. Commissioner Dudziak questioned the 70% rule in Section 4d, Real Estate Sales Office, and any particular reason for the 70%? Usually the builders want to keep those offices up until development is completed. Should the ordinance state the builders need to move into a spec home instead of 70% completion? Barry LeBaron stated not sure when the 70% rule became into effect. Commissioner Edwards responded it has been understood to the builders the permit would only be valid once they have 70% completion or the 18 months, which ever occurs first. This rule is a guide line to be used by the city so that the builders would have to come back and report as to why it is taking longer to complete the project. Commissioner Dudziak stated the language needs to be stated so that the builders will know exactly what they are supposed to do. Commissioner Duffy stated paragraph e of Section 4, Real Estate Sales Office, reads "model homes are exempt". Commissioner Dudziak responded, correct, however, we are letting them have the temporary building up through 70% of construction, why not let them have it up for 90% of construction? If we want to force the builder to have to build a model home, then the percentage should be much lower. Barry LeBaron stated this particular section has not been one for strike through. If the Commission wants to make modifications, I suggest taking out the 18 months and making the percentage 90. Because the market is not as stable and homes do not move as fast, it takes more time for a subdivision to be developed so to take out the 18 month time frame and change the percentage to 90%, is a fair adjustment. Commissioner Duffy questioned if there is any history available. Barry LeBaron responded no history is available. Commissioner Edwards stated the 90% seems to be a fair adjustment. Commissioner Duffy stated for clarity, this is the developer's office, not a real estate office? Barry LeBaron stated this is just for the temporary sales office. Commissioner Blassingame questioned if the 18 month time frame is taken away what is the likelihood we would have a temporary facility there for a longer period of time and then have issues of appearance? Commissioner Edwards opened the public hearing at 7:35 P.M. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 7:35 P.M. Commissioner Edwards stated if we have a subdivision and it has taken a long time to develop, keeping the 18 month time frame allows some flexibility for the city to be able to question the developer. Commissioner Edwards suggested leaving the 18 months and changing the 70% to 90%. Commissioner Dudziak questioned page 2, letter I, should this be reworded for clarity? Barry LeBaron responded no. Commissioner Dudziak stated for clarity to Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 4 of 11 make the language as clear as possible. Attorney Foster stated misrepresentation would have to be done intentionally. Commissioner Dudziak questioned if this ordinance would be the one to use for the landscaping of those temporary buildings? Barry LeBaron responded yes. Commissioner Dudziak stated there should be landscaping requirements to keep these temporary buildings from looking old and dingy. Commissioner Edwards stated most offices usually look nice, but that is probably a good idea. Barry LeBaron stated landscaping requirements could be added. Commissioner Dudziak questioned if other parts of the code cover the requirements for electrical permits and so forth. Barry LeBaron stated other parts of the code cover those issues. Commissioner Dudziak questioned Section 2c, "10 days"; the language should read "weather permitting". Commissioner Edwards responded 1 0 days is reasonable as long as it has not been raining for 1 0 days. Commissioner Dudziak concurred. Commissioner Dudziak questioned for clarity the non profit organizations for special events. Does this include Homeowner's Associations? Barry LeBaron responded only if a HOA wanted to have an event, with significant amount of people, or create traffic or safety issues. Commissioner Dudziak even if the event is held on a public piece of property? Barry LeBaron responded correct. Commissioner Dudziak stated that the 180 day rule as stated in Section 5 on page 4 of 6, would affect Ross Downs because they have events closer together than the 180 days. Commissioner Duffy questioned Commissioner Dudziak if permits are applied for those events? Commissioner Dudziak responded the HOA reserves Kimzey Park through the Parks Department. Commissioner Duffy questioned staff if this is considered a permit? Barry LeBaron responded that if the Parks Department approves the rental for this event, the permit is not applicable because a city department can deem, where necessary, reasons for permits for city property. Barry LeBaron questioned Commissioner Dudziak if the HOA coordinates with the Fire or Police departments when such a large crowd attends? Commissioner Dudziak responded no, but should they? Barry LeBaron responded it being a good idea to coordinate with those departments to insure public safety. Commissioner Dudziak stated these departments were invited to attend. Barry LeBaron stated then they knew about the event. Attorney Foster stated that when a city department has authorized an organization to use city property for an event then this ordinance does not govern this particular use, the event will be governed by what ever the city deems appropriate for that event. Commissioner Dudziak questioned Attorney Foster if the reservation of city property is the same as a permit? Attorney Foster responded what ever process you go through with the city and they authorize the event, then yes. This ordinance does not govern those particular uses. The ordinance governs uses out side of that purview. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 5 of 11 Barry LeBaron questioned Attorney Foster if the language should state excluding municipal property. Attorney Foster responded could for purposes of clarity. Commissioner Dolan questioned staff if this ordinance would apply to a developer in a high scale development with the intention to turn the temporary sales office building to a club house, maybe even add a swimming pool? Would he still have to remove the building? Barry LeBaron stated the building would then be considered a permanent building. Therefore, the building would have to be outlined in the PUD, which is not part of the permitted use in a straight zoning case. Commissioner Dudziak questioned staff about the other city departments being involved in the approval of a permit. Barry LeBaron responded it is an administrative process. Commissioner Dudziak questioned staff if this process needs to be stated in this ordinance? Barry LeBaron responded the language is that the building official is authorized to prescribe reasonable conditions upon a temporary use to protect the public's general safety and as part of that process; he will be contacting the other departments. Commissioner Dudziak questioned if this process is written down? Barry LeBaron stated no, this is the first time we will have a clear policy. Commissioner Dudziak stated there needs to be a clear format for applying for these permits. Barry LeBaron stated the city has a lengthy ordinance for events over 500 people that was developed in the 70's and now that Colleyville has developed, the open land is not available to accommodate these events. This ordinance is for smaller events because larger events go directly to city council. Commissioner Dudziak questioned Attorney Foster if this ordinance applies only to organizations within the city and what happens if organizations out side the city apply? Attorney Foster stated it appears there are no provisions in this ordinance for someone outside the city to apply. Commissioner Dudziak stated it would be allowed. Attorney Foster responded no, it would not be permitted unless it was allowed. Therefore, if no procedure is outlined, it is not allowed. Commissioner Blassingame questioned for clarity on page 4 of 6, the first paragraph states "public entity, civic or non-profit organization located within the city" does that mean the event located in the city or the organization located in the city? Barry LeBaron responded the organization must be located in the city. Commissioner Blassingame stated then that sentence clarifies whether or not the event could be held in the city. Barry LeBaron responded the Building Official can tell the group, located outside the city, to go to city council for approval. Commissioner Dudziak questioned staff if this ordinance should organizations, outside the city, approach the city council for approval? Barry LeBaron responded the language is in this ordinance, on page 2 paragraph 2. Commissioner Edwards made motion to approve Case Z-04-036 stating the changes as follows: Paragraph 4d, 70% to 90%; Section 2c add "weather permits", to add language excluding municipal property and the reasonable landscaping for temporary buildings. Commissioner Duffy seconded with amendments. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 6 of 11 The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Blassingame, Duffy and Edwards Nay: None 4. Case Z-04-035 - TABLED ITEM - Zoning change from AG and R40 to PUD-R on 10.2 acres located at 909-1009 Lavaca Trail Commissioner Bartkowski made motion to remove this item from table. Commissioner Edwards seconded. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Bartkowski, Blassingame, Duffy and Edwards Nay: Dudziak Clayton Husband presented the case and briefed the Commission. Commissioner Dudziak stated wanting to hear from applicant. Mark Comis applicant, 7420 Comis Dr, North Richland Hills came forward for questioning. Commissioner Duffy questioned Mr. Comis based on the drawing, which Lot does the water impose upon Mr. Mittag's lot? Mr. Comis stated the water on Lots 22, 23 and Lots 17, 18. We assured the neighbors we would address all drainage issues. Commissioner Duffy questioned how does the water get to the detention ponds? Mr. Comis responded he has discussed with the Emerald property owners an easement. Commissioner Duffy questioned Mr. Comis, do you have an easement? Mr. Comis stated we have one verbally. There is already an easement; we just need a larger one. Commissioner Duffy stated he wants to see a hydrology report to see how the water gets to the detention pond and then how it will get to the Emerald Park detention areas. Delbert Steinbridge- Engineer for Mr. Comis stated they will address all drainage requirements when it is time to finish the final design and those designs will meet all city specifications. Commissioner Duffy questioned Mr. Stein bridge about the detention pond in the southwest corner, of the 13.52 percentage of open space, how much of that is pond? Mr. Steinbridge responded he did not know what the actual percentage is. Commissioner Dudziak questioned Mr. Steinbridge the percentage of open space that is in the medians? Mr. Steinbridge responded 1.1 acres. Commissioner Dudziak stated the plan shows 1.38 acres total. Mr. Stein bridge responded he thinks that is what staff, Clayton Husband calculated. Commissioner Edwards questioned staff if they calculated the 1 .38 acres? Clayton Husband responded correct. The medians account for 40% of the open space and the lot at the bottom accounts for 60% of the open space. Commissioner Dudziak questioned Mr. Comis if there is some reason why he cannot get the 20% open space requirement stated in the PUD ordinance? Mr. Comis Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 7 of 11 stated they feel they could, but those plans are not as desirable as the layout being proposed. We would like to offer our customers larger lots, if feasible. Commissioner Dudziak questioned Mr. Comis if maybe they are planning to shorten up the lots or widen the medians along the perimeters. Mr. Comis stated correct. Commissioner Dudziak questioned Mr. Comis' reading of the PUD open space ordinance not to be congruent open space for public use? Mr. Comis responded it is congruent. We can place brick pathways between some of the medians with benches that would lead to the picnic park are in the southwest corner. Commissioner Dudziak questioned Mr. Comis as to the width of the medians? Mr. Comis responded the medians are 39 feet. Commissioner Bartkowski questioned Mr. Comis if this plan shows one street or two? Mr. Comis responded one street, but wide. Commissioner Bartkowski questioned one way down and one way back up? Mr. Comis responded correct with cross over. Commissioner Bartkowski questioned the width of street? Mr. Comis responded the street is 31 feet on each side. Commissioner Bartkowski questioned if that is a typical size? Mr. Comis responded yes. Commissioner Edwards stated since the streets are not together, parking has to be allotted on each side of the street. Commissioner Bartkowski questioned Mr. Comis about the depth of the cul-de-sac? Mr. Comis responded overall somewhere between 1,000 and 1,020 feet. Commissioner Bartkowski questioned Mr. Comis why are you trying to get this zoned PUD-R, why not do a straight zoning? Mr. Comis responded we like the PUD because we can get a better lot yield and could take the home and push them to one side so that they could have rear entry garages. Commissioner Bartkowski questioned staff if that particular design for a garage is restricted in any other zoning? Clayton Husband responded there are no restrictions for the placement of the garage. Commissioner Bartkowski questioned Mr. Comis if there were any other reasons why wanting the PUD-R. Mr. Comis responded it allows for us to do so with the garage placement and also maximize the lots. Commissioner Bartkowski stated the PUD-R allows for mixed land use, different sized lots. All of your lots are basically the same. Mr. Comis responded no, on the court they are different, but the majority are the same size. Commissioner Edwards questioned staff about the drainage issue on the lot at the bottom. Clayton Husband responded the drainage issue will have to be addressed; however those reports are usually not done until after the zoning case is approved. Commissioner Dudziak stated the calculations, on the detention pond area, have a great deal of weight on whether or not this case is approved, because the bigger the detention pond the smaller the recreational space that will be available. Therefore, it is not fair to Mr. Comis if we do not have calculations on those detention ponds, to make a fair decision. Commissioner Edwards stated having issue about where this zoning is being Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 8 of 11 requested. This is a very dense community wanting to be placed in an area that is essentially estate properties. Commissioner Bartkowski concurred with Commissioner Edwards. Commissioner Edwards stated if the community were pushed more to the west where the proposed buffer zone is going to be, then she would consider this community. However, as it is requested, it cannot be considered. Commissioner Dudziak made motion to open this case into a public hearing and Commissioner Dolan seconded. The vote was unanimous by acclamation. Commissioner Edwards opened the public hearing at 8:15 P.M. Judy Ruggere, 1013 West Lavaca Trail, I have no objections as to what the neighbors are trying to do. We do have concerns with the water shed and have for many years. I have no objections as to improvements for this area. Danny Ogle, 1009 West Lavaca Trail, I believe the Master Plan has this area as a transitional area. We knew development was coming 25 years ago and now it is here. I want a smaller spot to retire to. Andrew Mittag, 901 West Lavaca Trail, questioned the noticing of meetings because he did not receive notice until 2 days before the meeting. First, the Commission wanted to see what the city council wanted to do with the master plan; second wanted the developer to meet with the neighbors. At the city council meeting on 10- 19-04, some wanted mutually agreeable transitional areas and the master plan was approved. 11-04 developer sent letter to me and we set up a meeting. We met for 2 hours, discussed the drainage and master plan. Not being from Colleyville, they are not aware of some of the issues. 11-16 met with developers, 50 min. meeting but we didn't hear any feed back from them. I am surprised the developer has met with the development office and we the neighbors were not notified of those meetings. Item should be tabled so entire neighborhood could be present. We intend to stay here but want to maintain the rural quality of life. People care about where they live. Colleyville is focused on larger lots. Density has been an issue on several cases in the past. Mr. Mittag stated Commissioner Edwards stated if this community were moved further to the west it would be more congruent with the area of transition on the master plan. The master plan clearly suggests keeping the rural feel. We have talked with the developer about a barrier and his suggestions for a barrier will not work. Once again we are looking to stay citizens of Colleyville. Loraine Gore, 809 West Lavaca Trail, we came here from Michigan so that we could have some land and horses. We very much treasure our 5 acres of paradise. We want to stay here and we love the rural feel. We looked at the master plan and we did envision the transition of growth. We see this high density development as a beginning to an end of the rural atmosphere. Lisa Stajduhar, 101 Williamsburg Court, but owns land that backs up to Mr. Mittag's land, 816 LD Lockett. We love this area and want to build an estate lot on our LD Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 9 of 11 Lockett property. As I look at what is being proposed and according to what the master plan proposes, I feel you need to stick with the master plan. These lots on Lavaca are 5 acre lots and we need that space for our horses. The developer's have not addressed the open space and water issues. If this type of community is allowed, it would be a clash of lifestyles. These people will be surrounded by horses and farm animals. Marty Stajduhar, 101 Williamsburg Court, but owns land that backs up to Mr. Mittag's land, 816 LD Lockett. The name Bailey Draper comes to mind as he tried to do the same thing on John McCain. His case was defeated so I think precedence has already been set. The transitional area would then be violated by this high density community. The developer's did not compromise any thing we as the neighbors suggested. Ruth A. Plain, 909 West Lavaca Trail, and bought this property over 16 years ago. Progress is here and I am surprised that it did not get here sooner. People who have moved here in the most recent years, they will see most of these properties will be developed. Most cities need tax revenue and this community would be an asset to the community. The drainage issues would be helped greatly by development with the right kind of drainage system. I am proud to be a citizen of Colleyville and we are so confident in this community that we want to build our home back in the development. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 8:40 P.M. Barry LeBaron stated that notification of the official public hearing was complied with in accordance to the State law for the October 15, 2004 meeting. This was a courtesy notification that did not require the 15 day notification we had already complied. Commissioner Bartkowski stated the PUD-R density shall not exceed the existing zoning classification however some exceptions can be made. The developer could increase the open space and decrease the density. This developer is decreasing the open space and increasing the density, not complying with the Land Development Code. The density is too high, the open space is too low, the lots are too narrow, and therefore, this plan is not appropriate for a PUD. There have been no changes to the open space on this site plan; there are not any drainage easements, the standards for an entrance into a subdivision are not met, the streets are too narrow and there are too many houses on the cul-de-sac. It appears this developer has neglected to read the Land Development Code. Commissioner Bartkowski made motion to deny case Z-04-035. Commissioner Blassingame seconded. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Blassingame, Duffy and Edwards Nay: 5. Case G-04-020 - TABLED ITEM - Review and discussion of regulations for Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 10 of 11 private streets and entrance gates Commissioner Duffy made motion to remove this item from table. Commissioner Dolan seconded. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Blassingame, Duffy and Edwards Nay: Barry LeBaron presented the case and briefed the Commission. Commissioner Duffy made motion to approve case G-04-020 as presented. Commissioner Dolan seconded. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Blassingame, Duffy and Edwards Nay: STAFF REPORTS Barry LeBaron stated a copy of the Master Plan was provided to you tonight and we will be updating the document on the website. Staff would like for you to consider canceling the December 27, 2004 meeting since there is nothing scheduled at this time. Commissioner Edwards stated in the past this meeting has been cancelled because of the holidays. Commissioners concurred with Commissioner Edwards. Commissioners were reminded of the November 29,2004 workshop. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner Edwards thanked the staff for the master plan document, it looks really great. Commissioner Duffy thanked the staff for amending those documents with all of the Commissioners' comments. ADJOURNMENT The Commission adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. by acclamation. Approved on: December 13, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - November 22, 2004 Page 11 of 11