Loading...
02-19-1987 (Planning & Zoning) Minutes MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY. FEBRUARY 19. 1987 The Planning and Zoning Commisi.on for the City of Wylie. Texas met in a Regular Meeting on Feoruary 19. 1987 in the Community Room at 800 Thomas 5T r- et. A quorum was present, notice of the meeting had beer, posted for the time and in • the manner required by law. Those present were: Vice- Chairman Brian Chaney, Fred Ouei .i.ette, R. P. Miller, Ken Mauk and Bill Chapman. Jay Davis :a.nd Ben Scholz were absent. Representing the city staff was uus H. Pappas, City Manager and Amanda Maples, Secretary. The meeting was called to order at 7: 00 p. m. by Vice- • Chairman Brian Chaney. ITEM NO. 1 - APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 5. 1987 — Bill Chapman made a motion to accept the minutes as presented. Ken Mauk seconded the motion. Motion carried 5- u. ITEM NO. 2 - ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN FOR P&Z - Ken Mauk made a motion to elect Vice-Chairman Brian Chaney as the new Chairman for F'&Z. Bill Chapman _seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. ITEM NO. 3 — ELECTION OF VICE-CHAIRMAN FOR P&Z - Bill Chapman made a motion to ele Ben Scholz as the Vice- Chairman for F'&Z. Ken Mauk. seonded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. ITEM NO. 4 - APPROVAL OF REF•LAT OF SECTION OF WYNDHAM ESTATES - This replat of W\. dham Estates involves the building line for the "0" lcc line houses in this PD section. The original replat al .led for the building line to be on the opposite lot lin : from that now shown. The reason for requesting the chanm was that the builder did not want windows of the homes to De facing the alley on lots 5B and 12A. One of the stipulaYlons of this zoning was that the side of the structure plac -i on the "ir" lot line side was to have no windows. Mr. Pappas stated that the dilsmma of granting this change was that in the case of lots 5B : nd 12A, approval would mean that these two houses would be paced right on the lot line of the alley. The builders fer.c ;. these yards however, what you would have is a wall right (::),i the alley. The City does allow fences of wood or brick to ue built right on the alley and the wall would be no closer- than a fence. If you move the set back off of the lot lir•= you would be creating dead space. Mr. Ouellette and 1 have been discussing_ the possibility of a 2 ' setback r . :auirment which wastes very little space and then the p..... .. ibility of a 6 ' setback: requirment which wastes a consicr'able amount of space. Fred Ouellette asked Mr. Pappa :i.f he was recommending the 2 ' setback. Mr. Pappas replied that he you • recommend a setback of or less. lJ Baron Cook stated that he was making this request for a lot line change at the request of the builder. Based on their marketing study they felt that shifting the lot line to the north and not having windows on the alley would make the homes more marketable. He suggested that instead of requiring the builder to fence the dead space that an extra 2 ' could be dedicated as part of the alley. Mr. Pappas replied that the City has enough little pieces of grass to mow now and it doesn ' t need any more. Bill Chapman asked Mr. Pappas what would happen if a 1 ' setback was granted. Mr. Pappas stated "all of the options are in your court, because this is a planned development you could even waive the fencing requirement. " Fred Ouellette stated that he felt uncomfortable about putting a citizen in a situation that their wall was only feet or so from the alley because of traffic. R. P. Miller asked Mr. Ouellette if he was concerned about the noise or about someone runninq into the house. Fred Ouellette said that his main concern was the noise. R. P. Miller replied that 6 ' of air would not help the noise at all. Brian Chaney stated that 2 of dead space would be impossible to mow if it were between the wall and a fence. Mr. Pappas brought up the question of the overhang of the house. If the house sits right on the line of the alley then the overhang would come out into the alley at least 18". Bill Chapman made a motion to allow the houses on lots 5B and 12A to be placed off the property line of the alley and that the fencing requirement be waived on the north side of the building where it abuts the alley and that the side yard setback be reduced to 8 on the south side of the building. Ken Mauk seconded the motion. Motion carried 5- o. ITEM NO. 5 - APPROVE FINAL PLAT OF NEWPORT HARBOR - This addition was previously know as Crescent Cove. That joint venture partnership has now been dissolved and this portion is now in the hand of Baron COOK. The Preliminary Flat was recently apporved. The Engineering Department has reviewed the Final Flat and recommends approval . Mr. Pappas addressed the Planning and Zoning Commission stating that the Final Flat had not changed from the Preliminary Flat but that the developer was concerned about Anchor Drive. It was originally platted as a 65 ' R. O. W. with a 37 ' concrete street. This was to tie into Mr. Moussa 's plans for development in St. Paul . Mr. Cook feels that there would be no benefit to him to go to the expense of having this replated but he would like to request that the paving of the street be reduced to a standard 27 ' residential street. Bill Chapman made a motion to accept the Final Flat and grant the request that Anchor Drive be reduced to a. 27 ' standard residential street. Ken Mauk: seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 2 ITEM NO. 6 - APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR WOODLAKE VILLAGE - This subdivision is located on the property adjacent to the new City Hall . The developer is Baron Cook representing the joint venture Centennial-Arapaho East. The Engineering Department met with the developers and their engineer on Friday of last week and now recommend your approval . Mr. Pappas stated that this was a very simple Preliminary Plat because it is not at all unusual to divide a large tract of land. The tract around the City Hall site was approximately 300 acres. We subdivided it once to take out the City Hall tract. Now the developer wants to dedicate some road R. O. W. and divide his Property into phases that he can work with. The only point .-7v concern is the large storm drainage channel that runs across the property. The City needs some improvement to that storm drainage. Right now the improvment can be an eartnn channel. This is on a temporary basis, until the property is developed further. The permanent drainage improvement will be regulated at either replat the building permit level in order to protect the City. Fred Ouellette asked Mr. Pappas what denoted "temporary, " what would be the difference beeen a temporary channel and a permanent channel . Mr. Pappas replied that an earthen channel had been approved as temporary and that the permanent channel would be underground and made of concrete. Bill Chapman made a motion to accept the Preliminary Plat. R. P. Miller seconded the motion . Motion carried 5-0. ITEM NO. 7 - PUBLIC HEARING ON REZONING OF SECTIONS OF WESTGATE ADDITION - Westgate Addition is located on W. Brown Avenue (FM3412) adjacent to and oirectly west of Rustic Oaks Addition. The developer is : skiing for a rezoning of a section of the development previously zoned for townhomes to SF3. Mr. Pappas stated that if this: request is approved the property will have to be replatei but that is fairly simple. Chairman Brian Chaney asked wh A kind of zoning is around this area to be rezoned. Mr. Pappas said that is was SF3. Chairman Brian Chaney said that this would be simply extending the SF3 all the way ujr to Rustic Oaks. Mr. Pappas replied that "yes" the SF3 would be extended to Rustic Oaks Retail . Ken Mauk asked how many houses uneir would be as opposed to the townhomes. The developer said that their would be 16 lots for SF=; as opposed to 20 MF lots. Ken Mauk: made a motion to accept the proposal for rezoning of the townhomes to SF3. Bill L.napman seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. ITEM NO. B — PLANNING RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR LONGTERM TRAFFIC FLOW IN THE AREA OF AKIN LANE, DOGWOOD AND BUTLER STS. - Over the past several months, the City staff has been engaged in conversation = with property owners along Akin Lane, in the Rush Creek. Dogwood Ct. area. There exists a lot in that area, wh' c_n is not large enough for building and an individual who i .'nted to build on the lot. Small pieces of property needed be transferred, easements needed to be abandoned, and de : cated rights-of-way, which are currently in use. needed tc :. e firmed up. It appeared that because of mutual interest on all the part of all parties concerned, that a so : i ,tion to the dilemma was eminent and that the property ov.�._ er^s would receive what they needed and the City would rece ! .e a bonafide right-of-way for Akin Lane in which improvem.:r;ts could be made and a old problem finally settled. In tHe bottom half of the ninth inning, conditions were added tht significantly changed the palatability of the negotiaticil . The request certainly exceeds the authority of the C) t7 staff and. as requested, 'may even exceed the legal author rty of the City and of the City Council. The original pla. sought by the City Staff, merely cleared up some ambiguity. :_bout Akin Lane so that the City could enter the property ar make improvements. both to the street and by removing som. visual dangers, so long as those costs were minimal , that rtainly appeared to be the best solution. Now the costs are beginning to accelerate and the staff feels that commeH t need to be made by the Planning & Zoning Commission nd the City Council as to whether or not there might i better solutions. For example, is it in the City 's long range interests to improve Akin Lane? Given the tri .sting nature of the street, will it ever be a good road? right not it be better, to abandon the road altogether and reroute traffic along completely new approaches. The taff would like to have the opportunity, at this meeting, o discuss alternate plans before proceeding further with the negotiations. Mr. Pappas stated that Akin Lane is a street full of problems some of which are; drt::rnage, the need for roadway improvements, potential traffic hazards and Akin Lane has no R. O.W. dedications. The City began working with Hr. Minihan who wanted to purchase lot 5 of Wylwood Estates from Mr. Cooper in order to build a house. The lot was not large enough to build on so the City examined the area :a.nd found that by replatinq and moving Akin Lane and by abandoning some old sewer easements that the lot could be made large enough to build on and we cound obtain the much needed R. O. W. dedication for Akin Lane. We talked with Mr. Westerhof about a R. O. W. dedication and finally with kr- . Cooper. Mr. Cooper delivered a set of conditions wflich I could not support and we began to feel that the poss : ., ility of this solution was drifting away from us. We have always felt that Akin L.:,Fie is a bad street. It has several elevation changes thror. qn its length that even and improved Akin Lane might not bE able to overcome. For this reason, we tried to find other ,:aolutions to handle traffic problems in this area with an eye toward no longer using Akin Lane. A. Instead of Mr. Minihan using the lot. ask him to allow the City to buy the lot. The City would pave a concrete street adjoining Lot 1 of Wvinc:jod 5 which would connect Rush Creek Drive to dogwood Cir' B. Rip out the existing stre between Mr. Westerhof and the Cemetary through Ouailhollc - The property lines would essentially stay the same excer . that Mr. Westerhof and Lot 1 of Rush Creek would be enter d by a small amount. Rush Creek Dr. would be a through st! _ at to Dogwood Cir. // C. Straighten and reduce Akin Lane in size along the Cemetary to a 20' R.O. W. Inforrn the utility companies to move the utilities into what would then be an alley. D. Extend 5th Street to Butlr making a right angle at that corner and thereby allowing drainage to flow along 5th Street to Dogwood and Butler CirLie. E. Use the existing drainage asement to create a street that would connect Dogwood Circe and Butler Circle. The total cost for constructing ;ill proposals A through E is $73,800. 00. The cost of the improvements to Akin Lane are $61 , 794. 00. I have had comments made to me from several of these property owners that they would he willing to dedicate right of ways for Akin Lane; however . if we don ' t secure all of ' them then obviously we have anon:;i,er dilemma. Bill Chapman asked if we extennied Rush Creek to Dogwood, could Dogwood carry the increase:=: traffic. Mr. Pappas replied that the on traffic it would have to handle is traffic going in and f:git of Rush Creek. He added that as Quailhollow and Stone C:rove complete, there will be through streets connecting with Rush Creek III . Chairman Brian Chaney asked Mr. Pappas if the City had received any complaints concerning this. Mr. Pappas said that the City had recieved numerous complaints concerning drainage ;:;.round the 5th Street area. Mr. Crane believes that the drainage problem is not created by the water that falls directly on the area but that other areas drain toward this area and that is the source of the problem. Raymond Cooper of 301 Dogwood addressed the Planning and Zoning Commission stating that if the City wanted to stop the traffic problem on Akin Lane- all they had to do is close off the street and that would not cost a dime. Further, concerning the easement, there nave been 3 or 4 attempts to solve this problem in the 1a't few years. My first conversation with Mr. Pappas wa<.:: last summer. I do not want to be assesed for improvements: to a street that I don ' t really want. I will dedicE, R the land. It is not impossible to secure this R. O. W. dedication but fair is fair and the City should give me s::.me consideration of it not costing me money to give them a r:. O. W. dedication. Chairman Brian Chaney asked Mr. Looper how he felt about the proposal of 5th Street as far ar the drainage was concerned. Mr. Cooper felt that making 5th Street a through street to Butler would not help the drainage. He added that Mr. Pappas might find himself buyin ::: some expensive homes. "We bought and paid a premium to li on a cul-de-sac because we didn ' t want through traffic. am sympathic to improving Akin Lane and the R. O. W. is not impossible to secure from me. Bill Chapman asked Mr. Cooper v , _ t concessions he wanted in order for the City to secure a J. W. dedication from him. Mr. Cooper replied that he dia not want to be assesed for the cost of the improvements to Hkin Lane. That a retaining wall be built if there is a s :.•::,nificant difference in the elevation of the new street an.: my lot. That there be no significant changes made in r : .ards to trees and shrubs. except by mutual agreement, un't l t the new street is put in. I also asked that the City wou:f . guarantee that there would never be a through alley from ALi.n Lane to Dogwood Cir. R. P. Miller asked Mr. Cooper 17 there would be a problem with cutting down the trees on the west side of Lot 1 , Akin Lane that cause a traffic hazard. Mr. Cooper replied, "no, " I h -;e discussed this with Mr. Pappas before. P. P. Miller asked Mr. Cooper i - those trees were to be cut down and then Akin Lane aban ,oned would that hurt your property. Mr. Cooper said that if the trE•::a that were mutually agreed upon were the only ones cut own it would not hurt his property. Mr. Pat Minihan, owner of Lot #: under discussion, addressed the Planning and Zoning Commis•. .on saying that he did not feel that Akin Lane would ever ue a heavily traveled street because as it is now Rush Creer is the only traffic that uses Akin as a through street to get out of town and as Quailhollow and Stone Grove developed there will be other streets that will be me:r- � easily accessed by Rush Creek. So, I don ' t believe Ak: n Lane will ever be a major throughofare. I don ' t see any problem with grading Akin Lane, though you may want to give those hom:: _: along there options for a rear entry access. I do not believe that you will solve the problem by taking Rush Creek through to Dogwood. Ken Mauk asked Mr. Minihan :,hen W. A. Allen would be completed to Stone Street. Mr. Minihan replied that he e ;-•ected completion some time this summer. Chairman Brian Chaney asked Mr . Minihan if he wanted the improvements done to Akin Lane .: : ;d an option for rear access or if he would rather have it a an alley. Mr. Minihan said that he view, Akin Lane as a two lane street so the improvements srlould be done but that he doesn ' t see it as a heavily tra' •:;:led street and that in fact a year from now the street wou.i ::, not carry as much traffic as it currently does. Mr. Ronald F'i lkington of 309 Dc_.:�Nood addressed the Planning and Zoning Commission with two :3ncerns. At the moment. on Akin Lane comming from Hwy. 76, I am the next to the last rear entrance home on that roac • As far as the dedication of land for a R.O. W. , I see o problem with that. My concern does arise when your i :. lk: inq about putting a road between Dogwood and Butler. 6u- houses are less than 37 ' apart. Another concern is the r tch of the proposed road. I have difficulty in getting out L my driveway in bad weather as it is. I fear that we would LTIly be creating another ice arena for our children in the w Hter months. On the proposed road from Rusr, Creek to Dogwood. Travel along Dogwood to Woodhollow is difficult now if cars are parked on either side of the r , •.,d. The road is at best cars wide. I feel that improvements can anf:::, should be made to Akin Lane such as the blind corner which Ir. Cooper discussed moving some trees. The majority of the water comes from Master and Butler in that area. In short with the regrading and relocating of Akin Lane the ma..,ority of those problems can be alleviated. Chairman Brian Chaney stated to the Planning and Zoning Commission that the views hear :J on Dogwood connecting to Rush Creek were all negative 1 the views on the drainage varried. But, all of the vie: l',,s for improving Akin Lane seemed to be positive. R. P. Miller stated that he felr that he was at a loss and would like to have some time to Look at the area. Fred Ouellette felt that he wod like to table this motion -for action after further study the area. ' Chairman Brian Chaney agreed a: asked Mr. Pappas if it was proper to notify all of the pr . ertv owners in this area of these proposals so that they ma - be present to discuss it at another meeting. Mr. Pappas said that he could do that. Fred Ouellette made a motion to table this item for further study. Ken Mauk seconded the mo ion. Mr. Pappas addressed the Planning and Zoning Commission stating that tableing this iten creates a problem that you should be make aware of. The t r'ms of Mr. Coopers proposals need to be either accepted or r ojected at the City Council level. If you table this i em it will postpone this. pending your action. The provi !.on concerning the retaining wall we did agree on, that is ::.n engineering necessity. We talked about the trees, I would :nark certain ones and if Mr. Cooper agreed, we would cut th€ i down. I think that all of the other provisions can only I: s decided on by the Council . I don ' t believe that this councLL can make an agreement that will bind a future council. Only the City Council can negotiate or decide on these pro - isions. Chairman Brian Chaney asked Ouellette to amend his motion to put this on the next -_1enda. Mr. Pappas said that the Cit could give up part of the alley easement that could mak it more difficult for the alley to ever become a thru , ley connecting Dogwood and Akin Lane. The dilemma is tha. : there are 3 homeowner's who might be done a disservice by :'n_ying them access to their homes. Mr. Cooper stated that the prop ty owner's would have access across his property, he had not Henyed access in three years and now it is too late for him do that. Mr. Pappas stated that F'rovisic No. 1 - Mr. Cooper not being_ charged for a building permit, 5 agreed to be removed. Provision No. 2 - The City guar• : tee not to connect Dogwood and Akin Lane. the City would give up half of the alley easement to make it more diffi - �lt for a thru alley to be made of the alley easement. Provision No. 3 - The retaining all , was agreed on. Provision No. 4 - Not altering trees or schrubs until the new street is constructed, was greed to be removed. // ' Provision No. 5 - Nonassesment �or the street improvements to Akin Lane, was agreed to be removed. Fred Ouellette asked if the Planning and Zoning Commission was agreeing to the replatinq anu not the proposed routs? Mr. Cooper stated that if this s replated and Akin Lane is improved the rest of it is moot . Fred Ouellette said he would l , ':e to resend his motion to table this item. He then ma , ` a motion to forward the replating of Akin Lane tc the City Council with recommendation for approval wit. , the revisions stated to Mr' Coopers provisions for grantin� a R. O.W. dedication. Bill Chapman seconded the motion. M'` ion carried 5-0. .ITEM NO. 9 - ADJOURN - Bill Cha``' .an made a motion to adjourn the February 19, 1987 meeting ,f the Planning and Zoning Commission. R.P. Miller seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Brian Chaney, Vice-Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Respectfully Submitted: Z_��__�_ 14�f Amanda Maples, Smcretary ~- MIWUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING THURS0AV MARCH 5, 19S7 The Planning and Zoning Commission for the City of Wylie, lexas met in a Regular Meeting on March 5, 1987 in the Community Room at 800 Thomas Street. A quorum was present, notice of the meeting had been posted for the time and in the manner required by law. Those present were: Chairman Brian Chaney, Vice-Chairman Ben Scholz, Fred Ouellette, R. P. Miller, Ken Mauk, Jay Davis and Bill Chapman. Representing the city staff was Gus H. Pappas. City Manager; Roy Faires, Code Enforcement Officer and Amanda Maples, Secretary. The meeting was called to order at 7: 00 p . m. by Chairman Brian Chaney. IjEV-NQ 1 - APPROVAL E QQ - Item No. en, second paraqraph, last sentence, should have stated that the permanent drainage improvement will be regulated at .~ either the replat or the building permit level in order to protect the City. Item No. G, fourth paragraph, second line, the word "and" should be changed to "an. " Also, Fred Ouellette asked Mr. Pappas if the Park Land Dedication Ordinance would apply to this subdivision. Mr. Pappas replied that he would check into that. Upon further investigation Mr. Pappas said that he believed that this plat would be responsible for a park dedication and ne would persue that if that was what the board had intended. Fred Ouellette made a motion to accept the minutes of February 19, 1987 as amended. Bill Chapman seconded the motion. Motion carried 7-0.