HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 1993-11-04 Regular[
I :
l
REGULAR MEETING
PLANNING AND ZONING ca.,MISSION
NOVEMBER 4, 1993
A REGULAR MEm'ING OF THE FRIENDffi'X:OD PLANNING AND ZONING CCM•1ISSION WAS
HEID ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1993, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE FOLLCWING MEMBERS WERE PRFSENT:
BAJ<ER -CHAIRMAN
DICKSON
FINGER
JORDAN
McHUGH
WASSON
CRESS
THCMPSON -CITY ENGINEER
HOOVER -CITY PLANNER
HENRY -DEVELOPMENr COORDINA'roR
BRINI<MAN -SOCRID'ARY
STEWARI' -ATTORNEY
MEASELES •· LIAISON
WITH A QUORUM PRESENT AND NONE ABSENT, CHAIRMAN BAKER CALLED THE
MEETING OF THF. PLANNING AND ZONING CCM-1ISSION 'ID ORDER AND OPENED THE
� PUBLIC HEARING 'ID REX;EIVE PUBLIC INPUI', BOrH ORATJ AND WRI'ITEN,
REGARDING THE PROPOSED REPLAT OF LOI' 1 OF POLLY RANCH SUBDIVISION.
CHAIRMAN BAI<ER STATED THAT THE CCM,1ISSION HAD RECEIVED 'IW) LEITF.:RS FOR
THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AND 'IW) LETI'ERS IN OPPOSITION. LAWRENCE
BERRYMAN, ATTORNEY FOR CHARLETI'A DUNN, STATED THAT HE HAD LISTENED 'ID
TAPES OF THE PREVIOUS MEID'INGS AND REx::OUNTED THE PROBLEMS DR. DUNN HAD
ENCOUNTERED WITH THE HOOE avNERS ASSOCIATION PRIOR 'ID THE SUBDIVISION
A'ITEMPT. HE PRESENTED 'IW) SETS OF DEED RESTRICTIONS, ONE DATED 1954
AND THE arHER DATED 1973 WHEN POLLY RANCH WAS REPJ.A'ITED. HE STATED
THAT THE CLAUSE, PROHIBITING REPLA'ITING, WAS <l-1ITI'ED FRCM THE DEED
RESTRICTIONS FILED IN 1973. BERRYMAN CITED LOI' SIZES, AND PREVIOUS
COURT CASES THAT IN HIS OPINION, WOUID 'ALI/J.iJ RE'.PLA'ITING. HE ALSO
CCMMENl'ED THAT UNDER THE NEWER SET OF DEED RESTRICTIONS, SUBDIVISION
HAD BEEN A'ITEMPTED AND APPROVED. CCM,1ISSIONER DICKSON CC'M1ENTED THAT
THE CASE IN QUESTION WAS WHERE THREE Im'S WERE DIVIDED IN.ID '1W) Im'S.
MARILYN MIESZKUC, A'I'IDRNEY FOR THE POLLY RANCH H�R'S ASSOCIATIOO,
STATED THAT SUBDIVISION OF THE PROPERTY IDlJLD, IN HER OPINION, BE IN
VIOLATION OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND WHILE IT HAD BEEN PERMI'ITED ONCE
DID NCYI' MEAN THAT SUBDIVISION IDlJLD HAVE 'ID BE PERMI'ITED AGAIN. SHE
STATED THAT IT WAS THE INTENT OF THE DEVELOPER OF THE SUBDIVISION 'ID
HAVE LARGE LCYI'S AND FURI'HER STATED THAT SHE DISAGREED WITH CITY
ATTORNEY, JOHN OLSON, REGARDING THE LEGALITY OF THE PROPOSED
SUBDIVISION. THERE WERE NUMEROUS arHER ca-1MENTS IN OPPOSITION 'ID THE
SUBDIVISION REX)UEST. MR. McANNISH CCMMENTED THAT THE EXISTING POLLY
RANCH WAS A DIRECI' RESULT OF A JUDGEMENT ISSUED BY A GALVF'.,S'TON COUNTY
DISTRICT COURT 20 YEARS PREVIOUS 'ID THIS DATE. HE PRESENTED A COPY OF
THIS JUDGEMENT 'ID THE CCM-1ISSION FOR THEIR REVIEW.
MS DUNN ADDRESSED THE CCMMISSION AND STATED THAT HER wr WOUID BE
LARGER THAN 103 OTHER LCfl'S IN THE SUBDIVISION. WITH NO FURTHER CC1-1MENI'
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
r ;
I
[
P&Z
11/4/93
Page 2
1.CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION RffiARDING THE PROPOSED REPLAT OF
I.OT 1 OF POLLY RANCH SUBDIVISION.
CCMMISSIONER CRESS MADE A Mal'ION THAT THE REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION
BE DENIED.
SEXX>ND: JORDAN
TODD STEWART STATED THAT THE IDI'ION SHOULD BE A POSITIVE MOTION
AND CCM-1ISSIONERS CRESS AND JORDAN WITHDREW THEIR MOI'ION AND
SOCOND. CCMMISSIONER FINGER MADE A IDI'ION THAT THE SUBDIVISION
REX)UF.,ST BE APPROVED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION.
SEX:OND: WASSON
THE <n-1MISSION REVIEWED THE FACTS. <n-1MISSIONER DICKSON STATED
THAT THE SUBDIVISION, REFERRED TO BY MR. BERRYMAN, WAS '1W) wrs
FRCT-1 THREE WHICH INCREASED THE I.OT SIZE INSI'EAD OF DOCREASING IT.
HE ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS HIS OPINION THAT THE CCMITSSION HAD
ERRED BY LE'ITING I/Jr 34 SUBDIVIDE, CD1MENTING THAT 'IW:> WRONC..S
DON'T MAKE A RIGHT. DICKSON SAID THAT HE HAD ABSTAINED FRCl4 THE
PREVIOUS · VOTE BUI' FELT THAT SINCE HE HAD NO FINANCIAL GAIN, IT
REALLY HAD NCYr BEEN NOCESSARY. HE EXPRESSED HIS OPPOSITION TO THE
SUBDIVISION OF rm ONE DUE TO THE GEX:J.1ETRIC SHAPE OF THE rm.
CCMMISSIONER JORDAN ALSO EXPRESSED HER OPPOSITION BOCAUSE SHE FELT
THAT PEOPLE HAD RELIED HEAVILY ON DEED RESTRICTIONS TO PRCf.I'ECT
THEM AND SCMETIMES TO THEIR DEI'RIMENT. A VOTE WAS CALLED AND THERE WAS NO ONE IN FAVOR OF THE IDI'ION 'IO APPROVE THE SUBDIVISION.
OPPOSED: UNANIMOUS .Mal'ION DENIED
MR. BERRYMAN ASKED THE ca-1MISSION TO ISSUE A CER!'IFIED LETTER
REGARDING '!'HEIR VOTE AND THE REASON FOR THE VOTE. THE CCM'1ISSION
AGREED TO PRESEN.r MS. DUNN WITH SUCH A LETTER.
2.CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION RffiARDING THE FINAL PLAT OF THE
DEAN'S SUBDIVISION.
THIS ITEM WAS Nar READY AND WAS WITHDRAWN.
3.PRE-APP FOR TACO BELL - FM 528
THE <rMMISSION REVIEWED THE PRE-APP. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED CSC
(CC1-1MUNITY SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT). THE CCMITSSION ASKED ABOlTI'
AN INTEX:;RATED SITE PLAN FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS, DIROC'I'ING THAT
TACO BELL REVIEW TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND THE OR DINANCE RffiARDING
LANDSCAPING. TACO BELL WILL BE BACK ON THE AGENDA FOR NOVEMBER
18, 1993.
4.PDD AMENDMENTS
5.OVERLAY DISTRICTS.
6.CCMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
DAVID HOOVER, CITY PLANNER SAID THERE WOULD BE A JOINT WORKSHOP
WITH THE CITY COUNCIL ON IDNDAY, l\UVEMBER 8, 1993 FOR THEM 'IO
REVIE.W THE PDD AMENDMENTS. CCMMISSIONER CRESS PRESENTED OVERHEAD
SLIDES FOR THE CCMv1ISSION TO REVIE.W TOGETHER WITH A PACKET OF
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR A LAND USE PLAN. HE ASKED THE CCM1ISSION
(
I
l
P&Z 11/4/93 Page 3
'TO REVIEW THE DRAFT AND REI'URN WITH '!'HEIR C<MIBNTS AND/OR
REX::CM-1ENDATIONS.
7.CO.'v1MUNICATIONS FRCM THE STAFF
DR. JONES HAD VISITED WITH HOOVER REGARDING THE FRIENDSHIP MANOR
NURSING HC:ME. HE WANTED TO MAKE SCME TO CHANGFS TO HIS SPECIFIC
USE PERMIT, DUE TO INVESTOR'S REQUIREMENTS. THE C(1,1MISSION
ADVISED HIM TO RETURN WITH PLANS FOR THEM TO VIEW.
8 • CQ'v1MUNICATIONS FRCM THE CCMMISSION
THE WAS NO OTHER COOMENT FR(l.1 THE CCMMISSION
9.MINUI'ES FOR APPROVAL -AUGUST 19, 1993; SEPI'EMBER 16, 1993;OCTOBER 4, 1993; OCTOBER 7, 1993; OCTOBER 11, 1993.
Au:;tJST 19, 1993 & OCTOBER 7, 1993 CORRECTED
��6,��•1993 & o=BER 11, 1993
fA L. B�ARY
-APPROVED AS