2001-06-21 P&Z Meeting
REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING June 21, 2001
LOCATION: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, Texas
City Council Chambers of City Hall
WORK SESSION: 6:00 P.M.
1. Discussion of all items on tonight' s meeting agenda.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: If a need arises to seek the advice from the City Attorney as to the posted
subject matter of this Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the issues or matters will be
discussed in executive session.
1. Pursuant to Section 551.071, Texas Government Code, the Commission may meet in executive
session to consult with the City Attorney regarding matters authorized by Section 551.071,
including matters posted on this agenda.
2. Reconvene: Action necessary on items discussed in executive session.
REGULAR SESSION: 6:30 P.M.
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held on June 7, 2001.
3. Administrative Comments.
4. Planning and Zoning Commission Orientation.
REGULAR AGENDA:
5. Consider: ZA01-025, SITE PLAN FOR PANDA EXPRESS, on property legally described
as Lot 2, Block 1, Kimball 1709 Addition, and being 0.6559 acres. Location: On
the east side of North Kimball Avenue, approximately 400' north of East
Southlake Blvd.(FM1709), and approximately 150' south of State Hw.114_
Current Zoning: "C-3" General Commercial District. SPIN Neighborhood # 6.
Public Hearing.
6. Consider: ZA01-027, REZONING AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR HIDDEN CREEK
ESTATES (f.k.a. Haltom Creek Estates), on property legally described as Tracts
3A1G3, 3A1G, 3A1G5, 3A1G1, 3A1G2, 3A1G4, 3A1F1, 5133, 5B, 5132A, 5B2,
4E, and 4, Frances Throop Survey Abstract No. 1511 and being 95.9 acres.
Location: On the east side of North Carroll Avenue and the west side of Sunshine
Lane, approximately 500' south of East Dove Road. Current Zoning: "AG"
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA
JUNE 21, 2001
PAGE2
Agricultural and "SF-IA" Single Family Residential District. Requested Zoning:
"R-PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development. SPIN Neighborhood #5.
Public Hearing.
7. Consider: ZA01-046, PLAT REVISION FOR TIMARRON ADDITION - STRATHMORE,
LOT 3R, BLOCK 24, on property legally described as Lot 3, Block 24, Timarron
Addition-Strathmore, being 0.344 acres. Location: 1204 Strathmore Drive on the
west side approximately 300' south of E. Continental Blvd. Current Zoning: "R-
PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development. SPIN Neighborhood #9w.
Public Hearing.
8. Consider: ZA01-055, REVISED SITE PLAN FOR SABRE CORPORATE CAMPUS
BASEBALL FIELD ADDITION, on property legally described as being Tracts 1,
IAI, 1C, 2A1, 2A2, 2A3, 2A4, 2A5, 2A7, and portions of Tracts 2A and 2A6
situated in the U.P. Martin Survey, Abstract No. 1015; portions of Tracts 1 and
This Item has IC situated in the James B. Martin Survey, Abstract No. 1134; and portions of
been
withdrawn by Tracts 3A1, 3AIA, 3AIA2, 3A3A1, 413, 4131, 4132, situated in the Rees D. Price
the Applicant Survey, Abstract No. 1207, and being approximately 150.7244 acres. Location:
in the Sabre Group Corporate Campus bounded by State Highway 114 and
Kirkwood Boulevard, approximately 2500 feet north of W. Dove Street. Current
Zoning: "NR-PUD" Non-residential Planned Unit Development District. SPIN
Neighborhood #2
WITHDRAWN
9. Consider: ORDINANCE 480-LL OUTSIDE STORAGE AND SCREENING
10. Consider: Meeting Adjournment
CERTIFICATE
I hereby certify that the above agenda was posted on the official bulletin boards at Town Hall, 1400 Main
Street, Southlake, Texas, on Friday, June 1, 2001, at 6:00 p.m., pursuant to the Texas Government Code,
Chapter 551.
`,,aatuiaeacair:
f S~~~, at•
• 7 i
.
Sandra L. LeGrand 's
City Secretary *
If you plan to attend this public meeting and have a disability that requires special needs, please advise the
City Secretary 48 hours in advance at 481-1519, and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you.
I REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING
2 COMMISSION MEETING
3 June 21, 2001
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Jim Murphy; Vice-Chairman John Terrell; and
6 Commissioners, Bret Boren, Darrell Faglie, Pamela Muller, and Vernon Stansell.
7
8 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Jim Jones.
9
10 CITY STAFF PRESENT: Bruce Payne, Director of Planning; Ken Baker, Senior Planner; Charlie
11 Thomas, City Engineer; Angela Turner, Graduate Engineer; Chris Carpenter, Parks Senior Planner;
12 and Lorrie Herrick, Administrative Secretary.
13
14 Chairman Murphy called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m.
15
16 AGENDA ITEM #2, APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
17 Chairman Murphy opened discussion of the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission
18 meeting held on June 7, 2001.
19
20 Motion was made to approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held
21 on June 7, 2001, subject to corrections on Page 2, Line 15, Second was made by Commissioner
22 Terrell; and Page 2, Line 19, vote should read 4-0-3.
23
24 Motion: Stansell
25 Second: Terrell
26 Ayes: Stansell, Terrell, Boren, Muller, Faglie, Murphy
27 Nays: None
28 Approved: 6-0
29 Motion carried.
30
31 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 6:42:40)
32
33 AGENDA ITEM #3, ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS:
34
35 ■ Chairman Murphy moved Agenda Item #7 ZA01-046 to be heard first.
36
37 ■ Agenda Item #4 Planning and Zoning Commission Orientation was moved to the end of the
38 Agenda.
39
40
41 AGENDA ITEM #7, ZA01-046, PLAT REVISION FOR TIMARRON ADDITION -
42 STRATHMORE, LOT 3R, BLOCK 24:
43 Senior Planner Ken Baker presented this item to the Commission for a Plat Revision for Timarron
44 Addition - Strathmore, Lot 3R, Block 24, on property legally described as Lot 3, Block 24,
45 Timarron Addition - Strathmore, being 0.344 acres. The property is located at 1204 Strathmore
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 1
I Drive on the west side approximately 300' south of E. Continental Blvd. The Current Zoning is "R-
2 PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development. SPIN Neighborhood # 9w. The Owner of the property
3 is Westerra Timarron, L.P. The Applicant is Carter & Burgess. Thirteen (13) written notices were
4 sent to property owners within the 200' notification area and one (1) response was received being
5 opposed. One (1) letter of opposition was received June 21, 2001.
6
7 Kacy Flemmons, (Carter & Burgess) presented this item to the Commission.
8
9 Chairman Murphy opened the Public Hearing.
10
11 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 6:50:53)
12
13 Garnet Murphy, 1202 Strathmore Drive, Southlake, Texas: stated her concern for the flooding
14 problem. She showed the Commission a picture of her backyard flooded.
15
16 James Turner, 1206 Strathmore Drive, Southlake, Texas: stated his concern for flooding and what
17 would happen when the retaining wall goes up and the diversion of the water occurs.
18
19 Chairman Murphy closed the Public Hearing.
20
21 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 7:03:33)
22
23 Due to the concerns for flooding in this area, Chairman Murphy suggested the Applicant table this
24 item in order for them to get their Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency
25 Management Agency (FEMA).
26
27 Mr. Flemmons requested to table this item until July 5, 2001, with the understanding that even with
28 the letter of approval from FEMA, there is still a drainage and utility easement that is going to have
29 some concerns associated with it based on the testimony of the residents who spoke.
30
31 Motion was made to table ZA01-046 to the July 5, 2001 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting.
32
33 Motion: Stansell
34 Second: Terrell
35 Ayes: Terrell, Boren Muller, Faglie, Stansell, Murphy
36 Nays: None
37 Approved: 6-0
38 Motion to table carried.
39
40 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 7:11:52)
41
42
43 AGENDA ITEM #5, ZA01-025, SITE PLAN FOR PANDA EXPRESS:
44 Senior Planner Ken Baker presented this item to the Commission for a Site Plan for Panda Express
45 on property legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Kimball 1709 Addition, and being.06559 acres. The
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 2
I location of this property is on the east side of North Kimball Avenue, approximately 400' north of
2 East Southlake Blvd. (FM 1709), and approximately 150' south of State Hwy 114. The Current
3 Zoning is "C-3" General Commercial District. SPIN Neighborhood #6. The Owner of the property
4 is Panda Management, Inc. The Applicant is Adams Consulting Engineers. Six (6) written notices
5 were sent to property owners within 200' notification area and no responses were received.
6
7 Rob Adams (Adams Consulting Engineers) and Alex Felps (Panda Express) presented this item to
8 the Commission.
9
10 Mr. Felps reviewed the requested variances stating Chinese cooking requires equipment on the roof
11 that is not compatible with a pitched roof, however, a hollowed out section and screening would be
12 used to block the view from the public. The other variance request was for the use of materials other
13 than masonry for the columns outlining the outdoor patio. The wooden material requested is for a
14 more aesthetically pleasing look.
15
16 Chairman Murphy opened the public hearing
17
18 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 7:20:50)
19
20 No one in the audience came forward to speak.
21
22 Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing
23
24 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 7:21:08)
25
26 Commissioner Muller expressed her concern for granting the variance for the wooden posts. She
27 stated the Commission needed to be careful about granting too many variances because eventually
28 the ordinance would go away.
29
30 Vice-Chairman Terrell commented the patio design looked nice but would like to see the same
31 material that is used for the structure being used for the columns.
32
33 Commissioner Stansell agreed that the building material should be the same.
34
35 Motion was made to approve ZA01-025 subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. Four, dated June
36 1, 2001, specifically granting the variances for the pitched roof requirement as well as the masonry
37 requirement for the patio structure.
38
39 Commissioner Muller stated she felt it was a mistake granting the variance from the masonry
40 requirement.
41
42 Motion: Stansell
43 Second: Terrell
44 Ayes: Boren, Faglie, Stansell, Terrell, Murphy
45 Nays: Muller
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 3
1 Approved: 5-1
2 Motion carried.
3
4 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 7:25:38)
5
6
7 AGENDA ITEM #5, ZA01-027 REZONING AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR HIDDEN
8 CREEK ESTATES:
9 Senior Planner Ken Baker presented this item to the Commission for a Rezoning and Development
10 Plan for Hidden Creek Estates on property legally described as Tracts 3A1G3, 3A1G, 3A1G1,
11 3A1G4, 3A1F1, 5B3, 5B, 5B2A, 5B2, 4E, and 4, Frances Throop Survey Abstract No. 1511 and
12 being 95.9 acres. The location of this property is on the east side of North Carroll Avenue and the
13 west side of Sunshine Lane, approximately 500' south of East Dove Road. The Current Zoning is
14 "AG" Agricultural and "SF-IA" Single Family Residential District. The Requested Zoning is "R-
15 PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development. SPIN Neighborhood #5. The Owners of the property
16 are James C. Haltom, Brenda J. Haltom, James C. Haltom 1999 GRAT. The Applicant is Four Peaks
17 Development. Forty-eight (48) written notices were sent to property owners within the 200'
18 notification area and twelve (17) were received, eleven (11) being opposed and one (1) being
19 undecided. A Petition of Opposition was received bearing twenty-nine (29) signatures. Seven (7)
20 letters of opposition were received.
21
22 Staff recommends: That the low water crossing be eliminated or constructed to keep the street above
23 the 100-year flood plain; show the street stub to the north as a dedication instead of a reservation;
24 show and label R.O.W. dedication along Carroll Avenue and Sunshine Lane; and if the crossing is
25 eliminated, provide an emergency access easement onto Carroll Avenue. Also, a drainage and flood
26 study will be required to be submitted as part of the preliminary plat (if the stream will not handle
27 the increased runoff, the developer will be required by ordinance to detain the runoff on site.
28
29 Park Board recommends: Accept the 20' pedestrian access dedication (linear park) as shown on the
30 Pedestrian Access Plan Revision, including the 8' trail be built at the applicant's expense within that
31 dedication; and accepting the waiver for the required installation of the 6' trail on the East side of
32 Carroll Avenue.
33
34 Commissioner Stansell asked for clarification of the traffic count on Carroll Avenue.
35
36 Mr. Baker responded the projection for the area west of the creek will generate 593 vehicle trips per
37 day. During the A..M. Peak Hour, there will be 47 vehicle trips most likely added on to Carroll
38 Avenue from that particular area because most people will be headed south to State Hwy. 114. The
39 majority of the 593 vehicle trips per day will use Carroll Avenue.
40
41 Tom Matthews (Four Peaks Development) presented this item to the Commission and reviewed the
42 requested variances. He introduced the members of the development team: Tom Matthews and
43 David McMahan representing Four Peaks Development; Dale Clark, President of Warren Clark
44 Development; John McFarland, Club Park Development (developer of the property on the east
45 side); Ocee Vest, Huitt-Zollars Civil Engineers; Bill Dahlstrom, Jenkins and Gihlcrest (Land Use
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 4
1 Attorney).
2
3 Ocee Vest (Huitt-Zollars Civil Engineers) addressed the drainage issue, stating the water study
4 would be done when submitting the preliminary plat. However, there were two studies done
5 previously on Dove Creek, which have been looked at extensively. He explained why the residents
6 show ponding on their property. He proposed improvements using berms and swells directing
7 drainage away from the residences.
8
9 Vice-Chairman Terrell stated at the last presentation of this project to the Planning and Zoning
10 Commission, two main issues were brought up: Drainage and Density. Why wasn't there a drainage
11 study done previous to this presentation?
12
13 Mr. Vest stated that a detailed drainage study for a creek like this is very time consuming and very
14 expensive. Normally, that is not a study that is done during the zoning approval phase of a
15 development project. He assured the Commission that they would meet the requirements of the City
16 of Southlake as well as the requirements for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
17
18 Dale Clark (Warren Clark Development) discussed the changes that were made to the original plan.
19 He addressed # 9 in the Development Plan Review Summary where it states Staff's recommendation
20 for the low water crossing elimination or construction above the 100-year flood plain. He said that
21 he preferred the original plan where the two sides of the creek did not connect. Building a bridge
22 according to the recommendations would be too costly.
23
24 Commissioner Stansell commented on the previous Minutes and the Council's action to refer this
25 item back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. He stated he was disappointed with their
26 approach to the bridge. He asked how many lots were one or more acres in the original plan verses
27 how many are one or more acres in this plan.
28
29 Mr. Clark responded there were 74 lots previously on the west side, three of those at that point were
30 one acre. There are now 23 lots on the west side that are one acre and on the east side there are 22
31 lots that are one acre.
32
33 Chairman Murphy clarified the question stating 15 lots on the west side last time and three on the
34 east side totaling 18.
35
36 Commissioner Stansell made clear there were 18 lots of one or more acre on the previous plan and
37 44 lots of one or more acres on this plan. He also stated the reduction of total lots from 94 to 84.
38
39 Commissioner Stansell stated Council's request that they provide an exit or entrance to Dove Road
40 and their current proposal shows a 30' right of way reservation. He pointed out staff's comments.
41
42 Mr. Clark responded they have been back and forth on that issue and staff wants them to build that
43 road, and they are willing to comply. He stated their major concern was for the construction of the
44 recommended bridge.
45
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 5
I Chairman Murphy called for a break (8:30).
2
3 Chairman Murphy called the meeting back to order (8:40).
4
5 Chairman Murphy opened the public hearing.
6
7 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 8:45:53)
8
9 Chairman Murphy stated the following names of those who oppose this item but did not wish to
10 speak:
11
12 Jolin McCloskey, 1416 Whispering Dell Ct., Southlake, Texas
13 Lee Dodson, 1020 Carroll Meadows Ct., Southlake, Texas
14 Edward Cobb, 1045 Carroll Meadows Ct., Southlake, Texas
15 Elaine Ensenberger, 1505 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas
16 Paulette Bonchak, 1820 Hunters Creek, Southlake, Texas
17
18 Dale Crane, 1469 Sunshine Lane, Southlake, Texas: stated he was in favor of this item with one
19 major modification. His request was that a bridge not be required. He said the bridge would invite
20 traffic to cut through the subdivision.
21
22 Commissioner Muller explained how the PUD reads and that Council stated Tracts needed to be
23 connected.
24
25 Bob Sarpalius, 1790 Hunters Creek, Southlake, Texas: stated his concern was the lot sizes. He
26 believed this project still looked like two developments. He was also concerned about the traffic
27 count being inaccurate.
28
29 Wayne Moffat, 1414 Whispering Dell Ct., Southlake, Texas: stated that the PUD still fails to comply
30 to Low Density Residential as written in the Land Use Plan. He sited the definition of net density.
31 He also addressed the drainage issue.
32
33 Fran Hutchins, 1412 Whispering Dell Ct., Southlake, Texas: talked about the flooding problem and
34 the displacement of wildlife.
35
36 Jan Francis, 1211 Ashmoore Ct.,Southlake, Texas: also speaking on behalf of Ms. Wallace, 1780
37 North Sunshine Lane, Southlake, Texas: stated Ms. Wallace was concerned about getting a fence
38 built to protect her animals. She was also extremely concerned about the drainage on her property.
39 Ms. Francis concerns were for the corruption of the Land Use Plan; the low water crossing; and the
40 density of the development. She also pointed out the need for a trail or sidewalk for the children
41 walking to school.
42
43 Kim Pannell, 1418 Whispering Dell Ct., Southlake, Texas: stated she was the SPIN liaison for her
44 Homeowner's Association and proceeded to state their concerns as drainage and flooding; the
45 recreation area maintenance; and the "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District definition. She said
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 6
I her personal concerns were for a privacy fence along her property and the adjacent property, and Lot
2 # 17 was too shallow stating that the house would sit too close to her property line.
3
4 Nancy Moffat, 1414 Whispering Dell Ct., Southlake, Texas: felt the traffic study done was inaccurate
5 since it did not include the four schools in the area. She asked why an additional developer was
6 brought in for Product B. She stated this project appears to be two developments.
7
8 Rhonda Chambers, 1810 Hunters Creek, Southlake, Texas: concerned that approval would set a
9 precedence allowing less than one acre lots in Low Density designated areas. She was also
10 concerned about the wildlife displacement and the condition of the property where the park is
I 1 proposed to go. She stated the traffic count was inaccurate.
12
13 Paul Soulier, 1005 Carroll Meadows Ct., Southlake, Texas: in opposition of this item but did not
14 wish to speak.
15
16 Harold Kruckenberg, 1730 Hunters Creek, Southlake, Texas: stated his concern for flooding. He
17 said he would like to see a flood study done before the location of the lots are designated. If this
18 development showed one acre lots and an accurate drainage study proving surrounding property
19 security from excessive flooding, he would be in favor.
20
21 Chairman Murphy assured the residents that an extensive drainage study would be required when
22 submitting the preliminary plat and the final location of the lots would not be determined until that
23 study was done.
24
25 Vice-Chairman Terrell sited from the Zoning Ordinance - under the Residential Planned Unit
26 Development (R-PUD) it states: For development projects influenced by impacting of flood prone
27 areas or containing major drainage ways or areas flood prone by definition of the City Engineer,
28 a preliminary drainage plan shall be a part of the development plan. He confirmed with staff that
29 this requirement had been waived by the City Engineer prior to the first presentation of this project.
30 He stated that the development plan has changed and asked, "Does the preliminary drainage plan
31 that we have reflect what is happening as they have it shown now?"
32
33 Mr. Vest responded, "yes" the preliminary drainage plan does address the current development plan.
34
35 Kay Zimmerman, 1420 Whispering Dell Ct., Southlake, Texas: addressed the PUD. She felt the plan
36 was unattractive and the "park" would take a lot of work to look like a park. She said she would also
37 like to see a nice, tall privacy fence built.
38 F. C. LaVrier, 1515 East Dove Road, Southlake, Texas: stated that although he is not in the same
39 neighborhood as the surrounding property owners who spoke, he is concerned about the drainage.
40 He lives at the end of the creek and claimed that the impact of this development could reach as far
41 north as Grapevine. He commented on the lot sizes and stated that the general consensus was this
42 is two developments.
43
44 Julie McKleski, 1416 Whispering Dell Ct., Southlake, Texas: addressed the drainage issue. She
45 asked that a privacy fence be built to protect her liability. She pointed out that the petition shows
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 7
1 50% of surrounding property owners have signed in opposition. She also discussed the traffic issue.
2
3 Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing.
4
5 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 10:07:27)
6
7 Commissioner Muller stated this development plan still looks like two products.
8
9 Commissioner Faglie disagreed with Commissioner Muller's statement saying in the Residential
10 Planned Unit Developments ("R-PUD") it states dwelling units grouped into clusters. He felt this
11 is what was done with this proposal. The PUD doesn't state that the properties need to be tied
12 together with streets or anything else.
13
14 Commissioner Muller stated that clusters were more like what we see in Timarron with the clusters
15 of condominiums, the medium density, and the golf course, tying them all together. The PUD is to
16 be used for unique situations in the community, where it complies basically with the Master Plan.
17
18 Vice-Chairman Terrell also felt that this plan was two separate products. He said this proposal is not
19 in the spirit of what was intended in the "R-PUD".
20
21 Commissioner Boren stated he sees two developments. He commented on the developer's request
22 to waive the bridge. He said the intent was for a Low Density area, rural in character.
23
24 Vice-Chairman Terrell stated for future meetings... He doesn't believe that a Residential Planned
25 Unit Development in the middle of one acre should ever be coming in, no matter how creative your
26 getting with the parks, with a large group of lots that are half acre. He believed the intent is to have
27 the open and rural spaces.
28
29 Chairman Murphy stated he didn't mind seeing smaller lots as long as the Net Density is met and
30 if there are characteristics of this particular piece of property that is being developed that are worth
31 saving and worth having the open space.
32
33 Commissioner Stansell said he sensed there were two planned developments. He agreed that the
34 Land Use Plan is a tool subject to flexibility. Going by the previous minutes, he said the developer
35 has made a reasonably good faith effort to comply with Council's recommendations. However, they
36 did not connect products A & B with a bridge.
37 Chairman Murphy presented the likely outcome to the applicant and asked what action they wanted
38 to proceed with.
39
40 Vice-Chairman Terrell restated the two major issues of this development... Drainage and Density.
41
42 Chairman Murphy called for a break.
43
44 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 10:24)
45
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 8
I Chairman Murphy called the meeting back to order.
2
3 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 10:32)
4
5 Dale Clark stated the development plan meets Low Density, however, he requested to table the item
6 to the July 19, 2001, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and said they would work on
7 shaving off some of the lots on the east side property.
8
9 Chairman Murphy addressed the issues that would need to be worked out before future presentation
10 of this development plan.
11
12 Vice-Chairman Terrell suggested that unless the developer can make significant changes to the plan,
13 tabling this item would not be in everyone's best interest.
14
15 Commissioner Faglie agreed.
16
17 Commissioner Stansell stated he would be open to looking at this development again if the tradeoff
18 of the smaller lots would show a significant benefit to the City.
19
20 Chairman Murphy agreed stating he would like to see a greater community gain.
21
22 Vice-Chairman Terrell felt the Commission should deny and send them back to Council for clear
23 direction.
24
25 Commissioner Boren stated he would not like to table this item ...send to Council.
26
27 Motion was made to deny ZA01-027 with the following comments for Council's consideration:
28
29 Commissioner Muller commented on the issues she hoped Council would address being drainage,
30 fencing, and the berm.
31
32 Commissioner Stansell stated the only thing separating him from yes and no was the bridge. They
33 are two separate developments until that bridge is built.
34
35 Vice-Chairman Terrell suggested that City Council and Staff come up with a definition of Net
36 Density prior to the next meeting. Defining the intent in the Land Use Plan for future development
37 proposals.
38
39 Motion: Muller
40 Second: Stansell
41 Ayes: Muller, Faglie, Stansell, Terrell, Boren, Murphy
42 Nays: None
43 Approved: 6-0
44 Motion to deny carried.
45
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 9
I (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 06-21-01, CD 1, 10:55)
2
3 AGENDA ITEM #9, ORDINANCE 480-LL OUTSIDE STORAGE AND SCREENING:
4 Director of Planning Bruce Payne presented this item to the Commission for approval of Ordinance
5 480-LL Outside Storage and Screening.
6
7 Chairman Murphy stated that a vote would be taken on this item at the July 5, 2001, Planning and
8 Zoning Commission meeting in order for the Commission to have ample time to review the material.
9
10 Chairman Murphy stated the public hearing would remain open to continue to the July 5, 2001,
11 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
12
13 AGENDA ITEM #4, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ORIENTATION:
14 Rescheduled to 5 p.m. July 5, 2001
15
16 AGENDA ITEM #10, MEETING ADJOURNMENT:
17 Chairman Murphy adjourned the meeting at 11:33:24 p.m. on June 21, 2001.
18
19
20
21
23
24 hairma Jim Murphy
25
26 ATTEST:
27
28
29
30
JI L
33 Lorne Herrick
34 Administrative Secretary
35
36 NACommunity Development\WP-FILES\MTG\MIN\2001\06-21-O1.DOC
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on June 21, 2001 10