BM 1993-02-18 PZMinutes of February 18, 1993
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Coppell met in pre -session at 7:00 p.m.,
and in regular session at 7:30 p.m., on Thursday, February 18, 1993, in the Coppell Town
Center, 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas 75019. The following members were present:
Chairman, Robert Green
Vice -Chairman, George Redford
Commissioner, Marsha Tunnell
Commissioner, Don Meador
Commissioner, Carl Thompson
Commissioner, Melvin Gross
Commissioner, Ray Hildebrand
Also present were Director of Planning and Community Services Gary L. Sieb, City Engineer,
Ken Griffin and Administrative Secretary Linda Glidewell.
Chairman Green called the meeting to order and everyone was asked to stand while
Commissioner Thompson gave the invocation.
Item 4: Approval of Minutes of January 21, 1993
Commissioner Gross moved to approve the minutes of January 21, 1993, with
one correction; on page 8, Item 11, after "Commissioner Gross moved to", add
the word approve. Commissioner Meador seconded the motion; motion carried
(6-0-1) with Chairman Green and Commissioners Meador, Thompson, Redford,
Hildebrand and Gross voting in favor of the motion, and Commissioner Tunnell
abstaining as she was not present at the January 21 hearing.
Item 5: PUBLIC HEARING: To consider approval of a zoning change, Case #PD -130,
(Austin Place), from (SF -12) Single -Family -12, to (PD -SF -7) Planned
Development Single -Family -7, located on the east side of Moore Road, 250'+
north of Sandy Lake Road, at the request of Barbara Austin.
Director of Planning Gary L. Sieb introduced the item to the Commission. Mr.
Sieb stated that this case was taken under advisement by the Commission at the
January 21, 1993 public hearing, to allow the applicant the opportunity to go back
and address some of staff and Commission concerns. He then stated that since
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 2
that time the applicant has met with City staff to work out some of these
concerns. However, the applicant is now having a problem with Lone Star Gas
regarding their new policy where they will not allow any structures to be located
within their right-of-way. Mr. Sieb further stated that the applicant has,
therefore, had to revise his proposal, and staff has not had a chance to review
the revision, having received it only 2 days ago.
Ms. Barbara Austin and Mr. George Gibson were present to represent this item
before the Commission and answer any questions.
Chairman Green then opened the public hearing and asked for persons wishing
to speak in favor of the request. There were none. He then asked for persons
wishing to speak in opposition to the request. Again there were none. The
public hearing was then declared closed.
Following discussion Commissioner Gross moved to take Case #PD -130 under
advisement until the March 18, 1993 Planning Commission meeting with the
public hearing left open. Commissioner Meador seconded the motion; motion
carried (7-0) with Chairman Green and Commissioners Meador, Thompson,
Tunnell, Redford, Hildebrand and Gross voting in favor of the motion.
Item 6: PUBLIC HEARING: To consider approval of a zoning change, Case # ZC-
545(A), (Round Oak Estates), from (SF -12) Single -Family -12 and (MF -2) Multi -
Family -2, to (SF -9) Single -Family -9 and (SF -7) Single -Family -7, located north
of Bethel School Road, along the west side of Harris Road, at the request of
Matthews Southwest.
Director of Planning Gary L. Sieb introduced the item to the Commission. Mr.
Sieb stated that the Council considered this item on January 12, and again on
January 26, at which time the applicant had already resubmitted the zoning case
to be considered by the Commission. Therefore, at that time, Council denied the
previous zoning case. Mr. Sieb stated that the new plan creates a more gentle
curve to the street. At the time Council considered this case there were numerous
citizens from Kaye Street who told Council they did not want Kaye Street to go
through, which Council concurred with. Mr. Sieb stated that it is still staff
recommendation that the street needs to go through. Mr. Sieb further stated that
if Commission feels the street should be a cul-de-sac, as opposed to straight
through, that at minimum, staff would recommend all houses in the development
be required to be sprinklered.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 3
Mr. Tim House of Matthews Southwest was present to represent this item before
the Commission and answer any questions.
Chairman Green then opened the public hearing and asked for persons wishing
to speak in favor of the request. Those persons speaking were:
David Tucker
211 Tara Court
Joe Fitch
304 Kaye Street
Diane Barber
215 Tara Court
Om Singla
529 Oakcrest
He then asked for persons wishing to speak in opposition to the request. Those
persons speaking were:
Barbara Bailey 222 Plantation
The public hearing was then declared closed.
Following discussion Commissioner Gross moved to approve Case #ZC-545(A)
with the following conditions:
1. that the number of lots be reduced by two
2. the cul-de-sac be allowed
3. all houses be required to be sprinklered
4. (SF -9) zoning be approved for the entire subdivision
(NOTE: The following is a transcribed account of Commission discussion, as requested at
the March 18 Commission meeting.)
Chairman Green: We have a motion, do we all understand the motion?
Commissioner Redford: No, if we create the park , I don't know that that changes the
density.
Commissioner Gross: We are not creating the park, I am just reducing the total number
of lots by two, and requiring all SF -9 zoning.
Commissioner Redford: Ok.
Commissioner Tunnell: Do we have to talk about how many we reduce to make it SF -9?
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 4
Chairman Green: The motion is to reduce the number of lots by two, keep the cul-de-
sac, require sprinklered houses, and make the entire subdivision
SF -9 zoning.
Motion died due to the lack of a second.
Commissioner Hildebrand then moved to approve Case #ZC-545(A) as submitted.
Commissioner Meador: Does that motion include or not include the recommendation for
sprinklers?
Commissioner Tunnell: No, it does not.
Chairman Green: No, the motion is to approve as submitted.
Commissioner Thompson: I have a question, is this something that would be handled in the
platting process or the zoning process?
Chairman Green: Yes, he has essentially made a zoning motion, he has made a
motion to approve as submitted.
Commissioner Thompson: Then we can deal with the other issues at the platting stage?
Chairman Green: Yes, that is what he said.
Commissioner Gross: The cul-de-sac and the sprinklers can be dealt with during the
platting process.
Gary L. Sieb: Sprinklered lots can not be dealt with during platting, it is a zoning
driven issue.
Commissioner Thompson: Ok, that was my question.
Chairman Green: My point was that his motion applied directly to the zoning, and
with no attachments as submitted. Ok we have a motion.
Commissioner Redford: There is something I don't understand now. When we are dealing
with this motion, are we dealing truly with zoning and not with the
cul-de-sac, which is a platting issue?
Chairman Green: That is correct.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 5
Commissioner Tunnell: But you can not deal with the sprinklers at the platting.
Chairman Green: That is correct. Now Gary, correct me if I'm treading on bad
water here, but sprinklers can be made a part of the motion on the
zoning case. Is that correct?
Gary L. Sieb: You are treading on thin ice, the issue of sprinklered houses is more
a zoning issue than a platting issue. The next item on the agenda
is a subdivision plat for this case, and I would think that you
would want the zoning that is recommended tonight to reflect as
closely as possible to what you intend to approve regarding the
plat. So that the business of the cul-de-sac is something that could
be mentioned while discussing the zoning case, but it really needs
to be dealt with at the platting stage. The issue of the sprinklered
houses needs to be dealt with as a zoning issue.
Commissioner Thompson: The way I see it, we are talking about a tract of land to be zoned
a particular way, with no lot dimensions or streets or anything
else.
Chairman Green: Correct, his motion is strictly a zoning motion, to change only the
zoning.
Commissioner Thompson: Then why, when we go to the plat with a street configuration, I
don't see why we have to put all those stipulations on the concept
of the zoning.
Gary L. Sieb: You don't have to put the concept of the shape of the street because
that will be resolved with the platting issue. You don't have to
talk about the cul-de-sac in the zoning case, because it will be
resolved in platting. But it is more appropriate to deal with the
sprinklered houses under the zoning issues, because that is not a
platting issue. Platting deals with dimensions of lots, drainage,
topography, etc., it does not have anything to do with the building.
Commissioner Thompson: Then we are assuming that we are going to have the cul-de-sac,
which we may not have.
Gary L. Sieb: Then you would want to deny the plat.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 6
Chairman Green: That is correct. Let's get on with this, we have got a motion on
the floor to approve the zoning case as submitted.
Commissioner Thompson: But how we vote on this ...
Commissioner Gross: So the big problem is whether we have the cul-de-sac in with
sprinklers or whether we have a through street, is that right?
Commissioner Thompson: It sounds like that is what we are having to decide right now, is
how this is going to be platted.
Commissioner Tunnell: Then that would be the next motion.
Commissioner Thompson: But he's saying we can't tie in the sprinklers.
Commissioner Tunnell: If this motion fails we can.
Gary L. Sieb: No, I'm saying tie the sprinklered lots into whatever zoning motion
you make, not with whatever subdivision motion you make, that's
all I'm saying. We'd be delighted if you said the street goes
straight through. We do want sprinklered houses if the street is
cul-de-saced.
Chairman Green: Now, Gary is saying that it's probably appropriate, you can make
a motion in the platting case to have the sprinklers in there.
Commissioner Thompson: But he said you can't.
Gary L. Sieb: Sprinklered houses is not a subdivision issue.
Commissioner Thompson: But see, you're telling us that we have to tie the sprinklered houses
into the zoning case, which pre -assumes that we will have a cul-
de-sac street.
Commissioner Tunnell: Ok, here's the deal. We have a motion that doesn't have any
sprinklers. If you want sprinklers, don't vote for this motion. If
you want to say Ok if we don't have a through street when we do
the plat, then I want sprinklers ...
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 7
Commissioner Thompson: I understand that.
Commissioner Tunnell: Well then, let's vote.
Chairman Green: I was trying to bring that point to the table. We have a motion,
do we have a second?
Commissioner Redford seconded the motion.
Motion failed (3-4) with Chairman Green and Commissioners Redford and
Hildebrand voting in favor of the motion, and Commissioners Meador,
Thompson, Tunnell and Gross voting against the motion.
Commissioner Meador: Well Marsha, let me try it then.
Commissioner Meador moved to approve Case #ZC-545(A) with the following
condition:
1. that all homes in the development be sprinklered
Commissioner Gross: With or without the cul-de-sac?
Commissioner Meador: I did not say anything about that.
Chairman Green: He doesn't have to say that.
Commissioner Tunnell: But he could?
Chairman Green: But he could! Ok, we have a motion, do we have a second?
Commissioner Tunnell seconded the motion, motion failed (2-5) with
Commissioners Meador and Tunnell voting in favor of the motion, and Chairman
Green and Commissioners Thompson, Redford, Hildebrand and Gross voting
against the motion.
Chairman Green: Ok, this is where we were last time on this thing. Ok, the floor
is open for a motion or further discussion to resolve this problem.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 8
Commissioner Redford: I think we need to hear a motion from Commissioner Thompson.
Commissioner Thompson: I - well I'm sorry Gary.
Chairman Green: You can make the motion however you want to number one.
Commissioner Thompson: Well, Ok, these are my feelings. I have no problem with changing
the zoning to SF -7 and SF -9, I have no problem with that at all.
So I have no problem with the first motion. Where I have the
problem is stipulating right now - is tying in the sprinklers to the
zoning issue.
Chairman Green: Ok, let me understand what you just said - you don't have a
problem with the first motion made by Commissioner Gross?
Commissioner Thompson: That's correct, but staff told me that -
Commissioner Tunnell: Wait a second -
Chairman Green: His motion was to go straight SF -9.
Commissioner Thompson: Oh, I'm sorry then it's the second motion, to change the zoning as
submitted by the applicant, I have no problem with that in any -
but Mr. Sieb is telling me that part of that decision on the zoning
has to include sprinkler systems.
Gary L. Sieb: No, no I didn't say that. I said that if you want to make the
sprinkler issue a condition of approval, then it needs to be attached
to the zoning request, not the platting. It is more appropriate to
put that condition on the zoning case than it is on the subdivision
case.
Commissioner Redford: Apparently where we're split right now is whether we want the
sprinklers in with the cul-de-sac, or sprinklers in without the cul-
de-sac. And some of us are thinking that they are mutually
exclusive, and some of us would like to have both.
Commissioner Tunnell: But I think there is also another issue of whether it is SF -7 or SF -
9.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 9
Gary L. Sieb: Well, but I think the bigger issue here is, I think Mr. Thompson's
concern is, if he recommends approval of the zoning with the
sprinklered houses, does that force him into approving the
subdivision plat with the cul-de-sac.
Commissioner Thompson: Exactly.
Commissioner Tunnell: Then you say you want sprinklered houses if the street doesn't go
through.
Gary L. Sieb: Well -
Commissioner Tunnell: No ?
Commissioner Thompson: See what you're telling me Gary is that - you're exactly right - if
we approve the zoning and require sprinkler systems - they have
to put in sprinkler systems whether it is a through street or a cul-
de-sac.
Gary L. Sieb:
That's right.
Commissioner Thompson: See that's what I am saying - we are pre-supposingthat that is
going to be a cul-de-sac, and I haven't made that decision yet.
Gary L. Sieb: I understand that.
Commissioner Gross: And that can be over -turned by City Council, too.
Commissioner Tunnell: And probably will be.
Gary L. Sieb: Well, I think where Mr. Thompson is coming from is that he
doesn't have a problem with the zoning, he has a problem with the
plat. Then approve the zoning and deny the plat, and forget about
sprinklers or house sizes or anything.
Commissioner Meador: Here's my difficulty - we've heard our staff say there is a safety
problem associated with a subdivision with a street of this length
if it doesn't go straight through or it doesn't have sprinklers. So,
I am unwilling to sit here and approve something that the City staff
is saying is going to present a safety hazard.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 10
Chairman Green: Well let me say this, very rarely - on rare occasions I do disagree
with Mr. Sieb and his procedures on how to handle things. It is
my opinion that when we talk about in platting issues, turning
radius', drainage, how certain intersections intersect with each
other, etc..., we are talking about life safety issues. So in my
opinion, there is no reason why you can not address another life
safety issue in the platting process, being sprinkler systems.
Commissioner Thompson: In the platting process yes, but Mr. Sieb wants us to put it in
the zoning process.
Chairman Green: I understand that, that's what I just said, I'm saying I don't agree
with Mr. Sieb.
Commissioner Meador: So our Chairman is saying to ignore Mr. Sieb.
Gary L. Sieb: That's exactly what he said.
Commissioner Thompson: That is what I have been trying to say. I disagree with the way Mr.
Sieb says to handle this.
Gary L. Sieb: That's Ok, I've been in this business twenty-five years - I
understand what you are saying.
Commissioner Thompson: Maybe we are doing it wrong, but -
Gary L. Sieb: That's Ok, I'll visit you in jail - don't worry about it.
Commissioner Tunnell: No, we'll visit you.
Commissioner Thompson: I just want to know, will we have the option of sprinklers in the
platting process.
Chairman Green: I think we can.
Commissioner Redford: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion and you can let me know
if this is appropriate or not. Can we set this item aside and move
ahead to the plat - and then -
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 11
Chairman Green: No.
Commissioner Redford: Ok - I understand why - it was just a thought.
Commissioner Gross moved to approve Case #ZC-545(A) with the following
conditions:
1. with the street being a cul-de-sac, and
2. that all homes in the development be sprinklered
Chairman Green: Ok - I think we had that motion already didn't we?
Commissioner Tunnell: No.
Commissioner Thompson: No -- we've had A and B, but not C.
Commissioner Gross: No. This is SF -9 and SF -7.
Commissioner Tunnell: So you are saying as presented, not taking out two lots as on your
previous motion?
Commissioner Meador: But you are making a provision that it will be cul -de -sated and it
will have sprinklers?
Commissioner Gross: Yes, that is correct.
Commissioner Meador seconded the motion.
Chairman Green: Mr. Sieb, I can tell you are sitting there wanting to say something.
Gary L. Sieb: No, no go ahead.
Chairman Green: I don't have a problem with that motion in it's technical merits, Ok
- we do have a motion and a second.
Motion failed (2-5) with Commissioners Meador and Gross voting in favor of the
motion, and Chairman Green and Commissioners Thompson, Tunnell, Redford
and Hildebrand voting against the motion.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 12
Gary L. Sieb: Ok, now I will say something. Maybe you should go ahead and
make a motion to recommend approval of the zoning with
sprinklered houses, and don't even talk about the cul-de-sac now.
Then when you get to the platting issue, and you can talk about the
street form, and maybe that is when you can resolve that part of
it.
Commissioner Thompson: Ok, I have a question. If we make it a through street - can we at
that time remove the requirement that the houses be sprinklered?
Gary L. Sieb: No.
Commissioner Thompson: So, there is really no way to resolve -
Gary L. Sieb: No, even if you make the recommendation for a through street on
the platting issue - the zoning has already been decided.
Commissioner Thompson: So there is no way to resolve the sprinklered houses after we have
approved the zoning with sprinklered houses.
Gary L. Sieb: Well, you could. recommend that the zoning be approved as
submitted and don't address the sprinkler issue at all - and when
you get to the plat make a judgement call as to whether it is more
important to have the street go through or have the houses
sprinklered, recalling what Chief Phillips' comments and the staff
recommendation were.
Commissioner Redford: We had a motion earlier that reflected that.
Commissioner Thompson: Then it's an either or - you're saying after we do the zoning without
sprinklers we don't have the option of requiring houses to be
sprinklered.
Gary L. Sieb: I'm saying that if you have an option between getting sprinklered
houses through a zoning case versus through a subdivision case -
you better do it through zoning - because you have a better chance
of being supported in a lawsuit with regard to zoning than you do
with regard to platting, because I still come back and say a
sprinklered house has nothing to do with a subdivision issue.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 13
Commissioner Meador: I think the dilemma here is that I'm not sure what my colleagues
are looking for.
Commissioner Redford: I'll tell you what I'm looking for if that will help.
Commissioner Meador: Yes, if we can just talk about what we're looking for then maybe
we can propose a motion that gets the majority of us.
Commissioner Redford: I'd like to have it zoned SF -7 and SF -9 as presented. I'd like to
have the street go straight through, thereby deleting the necessity
for sprinklered homes.
Commissioner Thompson: Can I make a comment, and the gentleman that lives on Kaye Street
- I think he had a very good point about this being a through
street, because right now that is a very narrow street, and it does
have a character of where children can walk and play on the
streets with some degree of safety. And on the other hand I do
recognize Chief Phillips' comments on fire safety. But I do think
that if Kaye Street becomes a through street it will become a major
corridor for people trying to get between those two streets, and I
think I have more concern about the safety of children on that
street than I do about getting fire equipment down there - because
if it got down to it, you could drive a fire truck through
somebody's yard or whatever.
Gary L. Sieb: Just one point - and that is the fact that I went out and physically
measured Kaye Street - it is 26' wide - face of curb to face of
curb. All of old Northlake Woodlands is not as wide as Kaye,
does not have curb and gutter, does not have sidewalks, and the
streets are even longer than Kaye Street. So I really take
exception to what Mr. Fitch said about that being a very narrow
street. That is a typical street width anywhere in the City.
Commissioner Thompson: Well I realize that - but I don't think the width of the street is an
issue. I think the issue is that Kaye Street is a dead end street -
people don't go down there unless they are going to Kaye Street -
they don't go through there to go somewhere else.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 14
Gary L. Sieb: Well, I guess you could make that argument about any street, or
that that is how it is and how it should always be. But we have to
look at the global perspective, and say from a traffic circulation
standpoint this street needs to go through for the benefit of all the
citizens of Coppell, not for only 38 property owners. That was
my point.
Commissioner Thompson: But - we do have the fact that if it is a dead-end street, it will
reduce street traffic.
Gary L. Sieb: Absolutely, and our point was we need it for circulation, we need
it for traffic safety.
Commissioner Thompson: But - say what if that circulation makes that a less safe street?
Gary L. Sieb: Well - I guess it does - but what are streets supposed to serve -
abutting property owners and circulation through your community.
Commissioner Thompson: But then look at some of the subdivisions that are laid out so that -
proposition to go through the subdivision - yes they do have
circulation - so that - well we can go philosophical - I mean I
understand what you are saying -
Gary L. Sieb: Well, do you also understand that we already have the dedication
all the way through Harris Street?
Commissioner Thompson: Right.
Gary L. Sieb: The dedication is there that says the street is going through - it's
not like we are changing the name of the game for these people.
I mean I understand what they're saying - and probably if I lived
on Kaye Street I wouldn't want it to go through either. But I have
to look at it from the standpoint of what is better for the citizens
of Coppell, not just for the citizens of Kaye Street.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 15
Commissioner Redford: How about this discussion as an attempt to reach a compromise.
This street - and I don't know whether to call it a collector or what
it is - does the City have any kind of feel for what kind of traffic
is going to go through there - are we really facing a situation
where a road is going to get two or three times more and faster
traffic than before? I personally have the impression - we've had
the same fears in my neighborhood - people don't like to go down
a street where kids are playing and cars are parked. People don't
like to take a short cut where you're going to have to go twenty
miles per hour - so I'm just offering that opinion. It might be
substantiated if the City felt like there really was going to be that
kind of an increased traffic flow.
Gary L. Sieb: We're sure that there will be more traffic because people are going
to get from Coppell Road across to Denton Tap rather than just
using Bethel or Cooper or Plantation - but the question is, how
many people - we haven't done a traffic study. All residential
streets are designed to support thirty miles per hour.
Commissioner Redford: I'm not familiar with that neighborhood, but would these be people
from outside this neighborhood - not just the residents - but that
will now be using this as a through street?
Gary L. Sieb: I'm sure some people will be using all of these streets to get from
the east side of Coppell to D/FW Airport.
Commissioner Gross: Can I just reiterate the one fact that when this was brought up at
City Council, the Council essentially voted (5-2) that they would
not let this street go through - that they would cul-de-sac it. So,
regardless of what we do tonight -
Commissioner Tunnell: So vote your conscious.
Chairman Green: That's right - you have to vote your conscious - do what you think
it the right thing.
Commissioner Gross: That's why I want the sprinklers - because I'm sure it will be a cul-
de-sac.
Commissioner Thompson: No you are not - because if we deny it - Council could not over
turn it with a simple majority.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 16
Chairman Green: Well - if we still deny it as submitted and everyone is in agreement
with that and send it away - that's true, but that's not the way
these votes have gone.
Commissioner Thompson: You need to vote the way you think is right - not the way you think
someone else is going to vote.
Chairman Green: Ok, we've discussed this some more, and maybe we've had some
people make some other decisions, and other thoughts about it - I
know that I have.
Commissioner Tunnell:
Commissioner Thompson:
Several times.
Which one are you on now?
Chairman Green: This has been a tough one for me.
Commissioner Meador: To me the real key issue is we need to do a motion one way, and
if it doesn't pass, we need to do it the other way. The real issue
is whether or not we all think this ought to be a cul-de-sac or a
through street, that's obviously what the issue is here, so would
someone please make one - one way or the other.
Chairman Green: I have to admit I have really gone back and forth on this one in my
own mind. But the bottom line for me always boils down to what
does the community in the area want.
Commissioner Meador: Absolutely.
Chairman Green: Sometimes good planning sense isn't what is the best. It is a hard
one to decide.
Commissioner Meador: At the risk of destroying the halo I have created for myself with
the staff, I can't agree with Mr. Sieb on this one.
Chairman Green: Ok, we have discussed this, can we maybe get another motion here?
Commissioner Thompson: I'll make a shot at it.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 17
Commissioner Thompson moved to approve Case #ZC-545(A) with the following
conditions:
1. with the cul-de-sac as requested
2. that all houses in Round Oak Estates be required to be sprinklered
Chairman Green seconded the motion.
Commissioner Gross: That's the same motion I just made.
Commissioner Thompson: Well, hey, I'm slow - it takes me a while to get there - I'm sorry.
Motion carried (5-2) with Chairman Green and Commissioners Meador,
Thompson, Hildebrand and Gross voting in favor of the motion, and
Commissioners Tunnell and Redford voting against the motion.
Item 7: Consider approval of a preliminary plat of Round Oak Estates, located
approximately 450' north of Bethel School Road, along the west side of Harris
Road, at the request of Matthews Southwest.
Director of Planning Gary L. Sieb introduced the item to the Commission. Mr.
Sieb stated that if Commission decides to approve the preliminary plat of Round
Oak Estates, staff would ask that the same requirement as the zoning case be
placed on the plat, as well as the requirements mentioned by staff in the staff
report.
Mr. Tim House of Matthews Southwest was present to represent this item before
the Commission and answer any questions.
Following discussion Commissioner Meador moved to approve the preliminary
plat of Round Oak Estates with the following conditions:
1. no alley requirement
2. cul-de-sac length exceeding 600 feet
3. allowance for less than standard minimum street centerline radius
4. drainage, sanitary sewer, water access, turn -around design, etc., all meet
City guidelines
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 18
Commissioner Hildebrand seconded the motion; motion carried (5-2) with
Chairman Green and Commissioners Meador, Thompson, Hildebrand and Gross
voting in favor of the motion, and Commissioners Tunnell and Redford voting
against the motion.
Item 8: PUBLIC HEARING: To consider approval of a zoning change, Case # S-1063,
(CiCi's Pizza), from (C) Commercial, to (C -SUP) Commercial Special Use
Permit, to allow the operation of a restaurant, located at 700 E. Sandy Lake Road
Suite #101, Georgetown Plaza Shopping Center, at the request of CiCi's Pizza.
Director of Planning Gary L. Sieb introduced the item to the Commission. Mr.
Sieb stated that this request is located on 3800 square feet, within the Georgetown
Plaza Shopping Center, and that staff recommends approval.
Mr. Mike Tolleson of CiCi's Pizza was present to represent this item before the
Commission and answer any questions.
Chairman Green then opened the public hearing and asked for persons wishing
to speak in favor of the request. There were none. He then asked for persons
wishing to speak in opposition to the request. Again there were none. The
public hearing was then declared closed.
Following discussion Commissioner Gross moved to approve Case #S-1063, as
submitted. Commissioner Tunnell seconded the motion; motion carried (7-0) with
Chairman Green and Commissioners Meador, Thompson, Tunnell, Redford,
Hildebrand and Gross voting in favor of the motion.
Item 9: PUBLIC HEARING: To consider approval of a zoning change, Case # S-1065
(Salsa Tex-Mex Restaurant), from (C) Commercial, to (C -SUP) Commercial
Special Use Permit, to allow the operation of a restaurant, located at 110 W.
Sandy Lake Road (near Denton Tap Road), Suite #130, at the request of Robert
Villa.
Director of Planning Gary L. Sieb introduced the item to the Commission. Mr.
Sieb stated that staff is basically supportive of this restaurant with the exception
of the outside tables, which staff does not feel is appropriate.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 19
Mr. Robert Villa of 106 Pinyon Lane was present to represent this item before
the Commission and answer any questions.
Chairman Green then opened the public hearing and asked for persons wishing
to speak in favor of the request. There were none. He then asked for persons
wishing to speak in opposition to the request. Again there were none. The
public hearing was then declared closed.
Following discussion Commissioner Redford moved to approve Case #S-1065, as
submitted. Commissioner Hildebrand seconded the motion; motion carried (4-3)
with Chairman Green and Commissioners Redford, Hildebrand and Gross voting
in favor of the motion, and Commissioners Meador, Thompson and Tunnell
voting against the motion.
DISCUSSION
Item 10: General discussion concerning platting and zoning issues.
Vice -Chairman Redford stated that he would like for the Commission to hold a
special called meeting once each year to go over various cases considered by the
Commission throughout the year. At the special meeting each Commissioner
would have the opportunity to discuss cases he or she felt were positive actions
or successful decisions made in the best interest of the City, by the Commission,
as well as those they felt were not as positive as others. It was the consensus of
the Commission that this special meeting should be held each year just before new
appointments are made to the Commission. It was then decided that
Commissioner Redford would work on establishing an outline for the first of
these meetings.
Item 11: Update on Comprehensive Planning process.
No report at this time, as minutes of the February 17 committee meeting were
distributed to the Commission.
Minutes of February 18, 1993
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 20
The meeting was then adjourned.
F041.lm
11 I. , _ 'A �/
Robert
ATTEST:
pz21893 . min