Loading...
05-16-1988 (Planning & Zoning) Agenda Packet DATE POSTED 5-13-88 TIME POSTED 9:30 A. M. AGENDA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MONDAY, MAY 16, 1988 7 :00 P. M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MUNICIPAL COMPLEX 2000 HWY. 78 NORTH CALL TO ORDER ORDER OF PAGE BUSINESS REFERENCE BUSINESS 1 1 - 5 Consider approval of minutes of May 2, 1988 meeting 2 6 - 7 Conduct Public Hearing on the request of Wylie Landscape and Exterminating Co. for a Specific Use Permit to operate a retail nursery with outside sales in a Retail District Lot 1 , Block 20, Railroad Addition (located on Hwy. 78 in Procks' old building) 3 8 - 10 Consider approval of recommendation to City Council for Wylie Landscape and Exterminating Co. to have a Specific Use Permit to operate a retail nursery with outside sales in a Retail District Lot 1, Block 20, Railroad Addition (located on Hwy. 78 in Procks' old building) 4 Adjourn PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING MINUTES MAY 2, 1988 The City of Wylie Planning and o ing Commission met in regular session on Monday, May 1988 at 7:00 R. M. in the Council Chambers of the Munici •al Complex. A Quorum was present and notice of the meet ng had been posted in the manner and time required by la . Those present were Brian Chaney, Chairman, Board Mernbe Bob Skipwith, Marty Stovall, Bart Peddico d and Cecelia Wo-ds, Secretary, Robin Belz, code Enforce -nt Officer, Roy Faires, City Manager, John Pitstick, Engi eer, Ron Homey -r. R. P. Miller and Ben Scholz were abs-nt. Chairman Chaney - 11ed the m -eting to order. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The m nutes submitted for approval were for the April 1 : , 1988 meeting. Chairman Chaney asked if there were any cor ectio s to be made. Mrs. Wood stated that the next to the 1 - st •-ragraph, next to the last sentence, it was recomm=nd=d to the Council that it be repealed not appealed. r Peddicord stated the sentence ahead of that if the word ..rdinance was taken out the sentence would make more s -nse. The last paragraph the first sentence Mr. Peddic-r. stated that "the" should be added to the sentence whe e r. Chaney stated that on the first two plates he was c nc- ned about the easements and exactly how they were gong to effect the builder. Then Mr. Peddicord stated that Mr Fair-- responded with an answer that "the easements had seen ci - ified". Mr. Chaney stated that before the next se tence th- e was a question by he and Cecelia that "there was concern about the Park being in the flood plane", and then •o on with . e rest of the paragraph. A motion was made by M . Peddicord t at the minutes be accepted as corrected. Seconded by M . Stovall. The Motion carried with all in f-vor. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARIN ON REQUEST FOR SP CIAL USE PERMIT FOR FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OR PORTABLE BUILD! Chairman Chaney asked staff before o„ening the public hear'ng if there were any mail-outs on thi - subject and if there ad been any replies from cancer ed citizens. Mr. Pitsti k stated we had received nothing bask from any concerned cite-ens at this time that he was aw=re of. Mr. Chaney asked f there was any additional comuents to made from the staff. Mr. Pitstick stated th - only problem that staff had would be if the request would only be two years and after th-t require them to come back after that time. Mr. Skipwith asked if it made any differe ce to staff or board whether it was used for storage or educational purposes because he was under the understanding that it was going to be gsed f • storage': Mr. r `1 \(\\\\:4: A //11 Pitstick replied that the staff would lean against the use for storage purposes. Mr. Chaney replied that there should be stipulations put on it that it be used for educational purposes only. Mrs. Wood stated that it has been the churches history through the years that they have maintained upkeep on most other dealings and agreements made with them. Mr. Pitstick said his concern was someone else wanting to come in and place a portable building at another location and using it for other purposes and the staff didn' t want to see this happen. Mr. Skipwith being a member of the church said that there should be stipulations that if they wanted to use it for anything other than educational or worship purposes only and if they wanted to use it for other purposes they needed to come back to the commission. Mr. Stovall questioned that what if someone else wanted to do this also. Mr. Pitstick replied that he felt that if it was just kept with churches and schools for expansions that there should not be any problems. After discussion with the staff and Board Chairman Chaney asked if there was anyone to speak for or against this item. There was no citizen response. Mr. Chaney then closed public hearing. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH: Mr. Chaney asked if there was any discussion on this item and if not to make a motion. Mr. Skipwith made a motion recommending approval to Council with the specifications to use for educational and worship purposes only, and only for a two year period. Seconded by Mr. Peddicord. The motion passed with all in favor. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL FOR A RE- PLATE OF TRACT 5 OF BUTLER ESTATES: Mr. Pitstick stated that the items were not common plates and were located outside our City but are in our E. T. J. and we require plating in our E. T. J. outside our city. Mr. Pitstick also stated that it may be a while before it is brought into our City. Staff stipulation that we have on this subject is that if it is ever brought into the City it is recommended that part of the motion be the road be brought up to standards before accepted within the City. Mr. Chaney asked if there was any more to be discussed on the item, there was none. He sought a motion to be made. Mr. Peddicord made a motion to recommend to Council of the re-plate of Tract S Butler Estates with the stipulations of not accepting roads because they do not meet existing city standards required. Seconded by Mr. Stovall. The motion passed with all in favor. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CANTERBURY HILLS: In general discussion The staff stated that the biggest issues are the subdivisions in our E. T. J. and this particular plat may not be brought into the City for some time and is in our E. T. J. and we feel we need to set some general guide lines down. Mr. Skipwith asked if the City had any control on what can be put on the lots. Mr. Pitstick replies that their is no zoning control and that at this time plating is our only way to control it. The subject of water supply was brought up. The staff stated that Eastfork Water Supply was supplying water to that area. There is a 6" line which meets Eastfork standards and it is able to handle the existing lots. Under the City' s current subdivision regulations we require an 8" line and if the lots were ever brought into the City, the City would then require them at that time to be connected with our water lines. The sewer is at least a half a mile from City sewer lines and the staff feels that this is too far away at this time to tie in for the amount of lots we are discussing. Staff requests that if they stay within at least 1 acre lots septic tanks be accepted. But if it ever came into the City and it was within reasonable distance to a sewer line at that time the City would require that they hook up to the sewer lines. Staff suggested that for these reasons being at this time the water and the sewer be waived as long as they were 1 acre lots and not close enough to tie in with our sewer lines. The particular road we are discussing is a collectors road. Staff stated the road at this time is maintained by the County staff is recommending that some improvement be made on the road and be set at, at least 27' minimum requirements with curbs and gutters and that the street will last at least 20 years, due to the fact that when it is brought into the city we don' t have to maintain it for some time. Mr. Chaney had a concern on where to draw the line as far enforcing our street ordinances. He stated he did not want to regress back to asphalt streets. We have a lot of asphalt roads now that need many repairs and he felt if it was concrete it would have a longer life span. Mr. Peddicord agreed. Mr. Pitstick stated that any street can last long if it is built right, staff was just wanting something that they would not have to have immediate maintenance on. Mr. Cook the developer spoke and had an argument on tearing up a road that was perfectly fine at this time and he felt that it was a waste of money and time. He stated it was money spent unnecessarily. Mrs. Wood stated that due to the fact of the traffic on the road it needed to be widened, if it has a 20 year life span and at this time it is 14 years old it only has a life span of 6 years left. Mr. Cook' s argument was that it was maintained by the county at this time and there is no definite time when it will be corning into the City why make me tear it up, • when you just previously on the issue before this one - -approved it. Mrs. Wood replied that, that was a completely different situation. Mr. Chaney questioned Mr. Cook as to 14Tether-Tie-was tied to lots. Mr. Cook stated that it has been taken to North Texas for septic tank purposes. Mr. Chaney-stated to Mr. Cook in the future when the sewer was available he could go with smaller lots so he felt Mr. Cook was asking the City to ignore the ordinances. Mr. Cook replied no not at all. I just feel the Ordinances ought to be different outside of the City than inside. Mr. Stovall asked if it was possible to leave it as existing with an escrow account to help pay for the road later when it is in the City . He stated that if the road is a good road he would like to preserve it, but would like to see some protection for the City. Mr. Cook was not opposed to this. Most of the Board members are in favor of seeing the road built now due to the fact it would cost builder the same amount of money. Mr. Torn Fritzcall at 400 E. Gaston spoke as citizen in Wylie that has experience with both concrete and asphalt and in his experience with asphalt there is constant maintenance with asphalt. He does agree that a concrete road will last 20 years maintenance free only if it is built right. Asphalt will last 20 years only with ongoing maintenance. He stated that in his opinion if your going to buy a large home with a large lot your not going to want to drive down a road that has all kinds of pot holes in it to tear your yard up. He stated that concrete would be best as far as the City was concerned. After some discussion Mr. Chaney asked if there were anymore questions and if not that a motion be made. Mr. Chaney made a motion to recommend to Council with the stipulations that the Eastfork Water Supply be allowed to enforce their standards. That since these are 1 acre minimum lots that they not have to lay sewer lines and allow them to use septic tanks. That the draw used for drainage be straighten by Engineers. That the existing road be widened to 27' with curbs and gutters with an asphalt street, and that the 37' road be waived. Seconded by Mrs. Wood. The motion passed with 4 in favor and 1 abstention by Mr. Skipwith. GENERAL DISCUSSION: In the general discussion Mr. Chaney suggested that they set up a meeting with City Council to discuss some of the items talked about in meetings. He stated that there was going to be new members on the Council and that they needed to meet them. Mr. Chaney suggested doing it on an odd Monday sometime. Mr. Stovall mentioned that there was a street with a bad dip in it on Douglas and when people drive down the road most of the time they bottom out due to this, and was wondering if we could do anything about it. He asked if someone could look at records and see when street was inspected for approval. Mr. Pitstick replied that in 1986 was when standards were updated. Mr. Stovall asked that we look at the records that show there was needed repairs at that time. Mrs. Wood asked if there was anything that could be done about the electricity company coming out and putting in T- Poles and not covering the holes up. Mr. Pitstick replied that they should be doing that and staff would check it out. He stated that it should be grated back. Mr. Peddicord stated he notice a number of pockets that are not in the City Limits that need to be cleaned up, and wanted to know what we could do about it or what can we start to annex to be able to clean it up. Mr. Pitstick replied that Council is working on filling those doughnut holes right now. Mr. Chaney stated that, that would be a good item to discuss at the meeting with Council. Mrs. Wood asked if anytime anyone in our E. T. J. was developing something did they have to come to us. Mr. Faires stated that we could file a violation on them if they don' t. Mr. Pitstick also replied stating if we see development we can question it and have them bring it to Council. Mr. Skipwith asked about running a mechanics business in a residential area. Mr. Faires replied that you would have to prove it and it is very hard to do. There being no other business a motion was made with all in favor. Brian Chaney, Chairman Respectfully Submitted Robin Belz, Secretary • APPLICATION TO 1111 Board of Adjustment and Appeals (Building) ORDINANCE 83-15 III Board of Adjustment and Appeals (Zoning) ORDINANCE 81-5 Planning and Zoning Commission ORDINANCE 81-5 NAME Gv 'G l�cnd-C G cyc Zk/Ell,. e47 ADDRESS /lo 4e /V/3 LOT I BLOCK , c0 SUBDIVISION f%0L),!,,,eLaidGat,/ .fogij BASIS OF APPLICATION: • Interpretation Special exception for use or development LiVariance nRezoning Exception to Building Code EXPLANATION: ,ef,,e57-7- Scm&;,4_ c,‘c. /7c-r.e;-,‘ G /C'/4i/ /Zv/S�� a,;12 r nv75iG4 S47t1 ;? J a- re' /e// ,�s•/e-A"" " o,/c /cam j c.-� ay., /77 2A) SIGNITURE of APPLICANT / DATE Must be accompanied by filing fee of $ /' !Nt Received: Date: '—z /— %Pr CODE NFORCEMENT OFFICER i i t r IT 1 �' 1S je Al 14 , i ' AMEN 13 NO S 4c' 111 T W C 9 O 12 I I 10 9 8 I- '� 4, •00' MASTERS ••'I • Ee li .' I i •• ti • 9 8 7 6 5 4 32 I ii 6 5 0 /7-- 8CD Z IT 6 10 0,7 `V 10 16 4 15 T I II 16 ' 11 I I 14 ! ,_ I to 13 8 C. 12 15 12 12 I 9 13 14 13 0 BUTLER 1 I I 19 1 2 20 2 2 2 3 21 3 3 3 4 22 4 1 4 4 W Ij1 5 5 I cc 23 5 5 • I N 1 I • • 7 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WYLIE, TEXAS AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WYLIE, TEXAS, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED (ORDINANCE NO 81-5) , TO CHANGE THE ZONING ON THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED PROPERTY TO THE NEW ZONING CLASSIFICA- TION HEREIN STATED; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO HUNDRED ($200.80) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Zoning Commission and the City Council of the City of Wylie, Texas, in compliance with the laws of the State of Texas with reference to the granting of zoning changes under the zoning ordinance and zoning map, have given requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally, the said Governing Body is of the opinion that the said change of zoning which is on application of Wylie Nursey & Exterminating should be granted and the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Wylie should be amended in the exercise of its legislative discretion: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WYLIE, TEXAS: SECTION 1 .That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Wylie, Texas, be and the same is hereby amended by amending the Zoning Map of the City of Wylie, to give the hereinafter described property a new zoning district classification to-wit: Specific Use Permit - Outside Sales Said property being described as follows : Lot 1, Block 20 Railroad Addition SECTION 2.?hat all ordinances of the City in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other ordinances of the City not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect . SECTION 3.That the above described property shall be used only in the manner and for the purposes provided for in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City as amended herein by the granting of this zoning classification. SECTION 4.That should any paragraph, sentence, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional , illegal or invlaid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or any part or provision thereof other than the part so decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional and shall not affect the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole. SECTION 5.That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City, as heretofore amended, and upon conviction shall be punished by fine not to exceed the sum of two hundred dollars ($200.00) for each offense, and that each day such violation shall continue to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 6 . It is necessary to give the property described herein the above mentioned zoning classification in order to permit its proper development and in order to protect the public interest, comfort and general welfare fo the City. Therefore, this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage, as the law in such cases provides. DULLY PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WYLIE, TEXAS, this the day of 198 Chuck Trimble, Mayor ATTEST : Carolyn Jones, City Secretary