HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes
p&Z Minutes
11-4-82
page 3
:)
After further discussion, Mr. Bailey made amoti.on to approve thlsprellminary plat.
Mr. Miller seconded the motion. Mr. Hall said that it was his understanding that
approvalofaprel imlnaryplatwasa 11stampof approval'lwithminor changes ,and that
he believes there are too many problems to be resolved on thlspreliminary plat to get
approval. He named (1) sign problems, (2) private access easement, and (3) future
deslgnoftheSouthwestParkwayoverpass.
Mr. Bailey pointed out that historically the Commission has approved preliminary plats,
and then had received completely dIfferent Final Plats of the same property, and .a11
concerlismust betaken ca.reof before theF inal Plat is approved. Mr . Mayo po i nted
out that the FinalPlatsectlonof the Ordinance says the City in noway is obI igated
to approve aF inalPlat . simp I ybecausea pr'elimi nary plat has been approved. Mr. Ha 11
still felt he would be more comfortable in denyIng this preliminary plat which would
tell the devel operthat the Commission doesnl t like it..
Motion to approve the preliminary plat carried with 2 negative votes.
AGENDA ITEM NO.5: 82-316:
Crawford Burnett League
preliminary plat-Woodway West - 32.289 acres out of
the intersect..i:=on~ofLuther St.& Jones Butler Road.
)
-. . . -, .
Mr. Mayo presented this plat andindicated,s;taff recbmmends approval with the Presub-
mi ssionConferencerecommendat ions. Mr.Kel~tYJ1~kedwhowill bepavi ngthe road where
I.G.&N. is, and Mr>.Mayo said the City probably would. Mr. Kelly asked about cir-
cu 1 at ion and Mr. Mayo said the street' will be extended in the future, and the plans
might change to include paving from the existing Luther to the new Luther, but the
Director of Capital Improvements would have to take a look at this. Mr. Behling asked
why the developerdoesn1t make the street now, and was informed theydon~t own that
land. Mr. Kelly said that he is concerned with blocking the existing Luther Road and
who will do the paving between the existing Luther and the new Luther, and that he
recommends that the CIty or the developer pave that short strip to the new Luther to
provide access in to this new development.
Mike McClure, one of the engineers involved in the development of this project, came
forward and said the developers plan to include a street along .thel .G. & N. RR, which
will extend to the new location of Luther Street, and it is his understanding that
the City currently does not have a plan fortha.t'street to go to Holleman, but the
. j:Jf. .
developers do not own the property now and ~re-platting only the property they own,
and need to work out some legal problems on that short section of street. Ownership
of that right-of-way was discussed, with no answers reached. Mr. Kelly asked what
size street was planned, and Mr. McClure answered a 39 ft. street is planned.
Mr. Miller said he wants to make sure,thisstreet is extended to the new Luther Street,
anddoesn'twantto be put ina position of suggesting, by approval of a preliminary
plat, that the City is not going to require the extension of this street.
,)
Mr. Kelly made a motion to approve this preliminary plat with the understanding that
the developers and engineers are aware of the'situation of the City concerning extend-
ing this stretch of street from theexi'sting Luther to the proposed Luther for circu-
lation. Mr. Miller seconded. Mr. Behling then read an. excerpt from the minutes of
the 4-15-82 meetingconC?erning the ,extension of Hoi]leman and the directive that no
future platting would be done in that area, and 'no: future building permits issued 'there
until Holleman is completed. He wanted it to be on record that this particular platted
area falls into that area, and theCommi~sion can only approve thisPrelTminary Plat,
and no Final Plat can be approved until Holleman is completed. Mr. Mayo pointed out
that there already had been a prel iminaryplatapprovedon this at the time of the
4-15-82 ruling. Mr. Behling reiterated there will be no Final Plats or Building Permits
issued until Holleman is complete. Motion carried unanimously.
)
)
)
page 6
& Zoning Commission
April..IS',..1982
Commissioner Gardner moved to recommend 'totheCityCouncilapprovalasproposed
CommissioIlerFlelIling seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
AGENDA.......ITEMiNO.
Reimposition of
Apartments'.
EMERGENCY ADDITION TO AGENDA: Consideration of Removal and
conditions for Certificates of Occupancy on Doubletree'
Commissi.oner Behling explained reasonE) which constituted the Emergency Addition to
the Agenda. ' He indicated that 3 members of the'"Planning & Zoning Commission,
,3 members of the City Council, as/well as staff and landowners had met to consider
this. addition to theageIlda, and took into the fact that bank notes were involved
ill this problem.
ComrnissionerKellymadeamotiontorehea,rtherequest. Commissioner Bailey se-
Motion carried unanimously to reconsider the request concerning Certificates
on Doub'l e tree Apartments.
Behling explained that the copslderationwastwofold: (I) The
Holleman Drive optionwa$placed onthebp:ilderbythedeveloper. The builder and
developer' agreed on including consideration::of the completion of Holleman Drive
in the purchase price of the site. Due't.p..fi_n~ncial'consideration Jones-Butler
Street completion was never considered by the builder and' developer. At the time
of the agreement to complete Holleman Drive, approval from the railroad for right-
of-way at the crossing was understood to be agreeable with the railroad. The City
believed that the closing of the Luther Street crossing would make th.e Holleman
Street crossing acceptable to the railroad, and they further believed .they had
reached this agreement verbally. (2) That Sienna (a> proposed residential street)
would parallel Jones-Butler Street (a major street),ctndthat Caporina would begin
development after the Holleman Drive railroad crossing was complete. This would
mean that Luther Street, from Jones-Butler totheI.G.N. railroad right-of-way and
Sienna would provide circulation even if Jones~Butler would never be improved.
He further explained that the group which had met had agreed that all future building
permits and future platting would be held up until the Holleman Drive sections make
connection.
Commissioner Kelly explained that the spe~~'iai emergency addition to the agenda in
essence asked the Commission torecornrnend that the restrictions on the issuance of
the Certificates of Occupancy be lifted on the Doubletree Apartments, with a
Contractual Agreemen't by all parties with interest in the railroad to be crossed
by Holleman Drive, along with a an Irrevocable Letter of Guarantee or Letter of
Credit,from alocalbankthatfinancially.constructionof Holleman Drive to F.M.2l54
could be completed and finances would be made available for that project. Secon-
darily,thereweretobe no more plats approved and no more building permits
issued .inthatarea, with exception to 38 lots which are under cont.~act to be pur-
chased by Mr. Courtney. The third portion which should be considered is what con-
stitutesthecosts of~completion of HoIl~manDrive. That is, what costs in complet-
ingHollemanDriveandthe crossing at the railroad would be'bornby the developers
and builders. The committee has indicated it believE?s.thatall costs (including
signalization at the railroad crossing and paying) should be born by the developer.
At this special meeting, City Council was represented by Councilmen Halter, Ringer
and Jones. The Developers represented were Caporina, Wheelerand'Jones.
In this special meeting it was decided that all parties involved in the extension
of Holleman Drive will be parties to the Contractual Agreement.
Discussion followed with Commissioner Gardnerdiscussin~ the danger of the type
)
,J
page 7
& Zoning GolllIIiission
ApiillS,1982
of access to be available to this section without the completion of Holleman Drive.
Commissioner Kelly indicated that no exact time limit could be set for completion
becauseditwas completely unknown at this time. He further explained that our
Commission had been trapped into a bad situation, and that there actually is a
hardship on the builders now, and stated that he believed the City could live with
the above mentioned agreement with well defined limits on any future developments.
Mr. Jones has been "amenabl.e to no future plats and 'no future building permits being
issued until Holleman Drfve is completed.
Areas to be excluded from the restrictions on development would be all areas west
of Southwest Parkway with exception of the Courtney development which is already
committed.
Mayo indicated there could be two ways to handle this. (I) Have a Master Preliminary
Plan which includes the entire area with certain exceptions, or (2) Handle on a
plat-by-plat basis and deal with eac~pl~t as they come up.
Mr. Jones asked to ,be heard, andindicat;,ed.~hat; th~ completion of Holleman Drive
agreement he had made did not include th-e' c6stofsignalizationat the railroad
crossing. He further indicated that the other", developers involved were in agree-
ment to this point with him.
Mayo indicated that the cost of signalization cannotbeinc,luded by this Commission
inapprovaloftherequ.est. Commissioner Behling referred to the third item in
Commissioner Kelly's recommendation. Commissioner Kelly suggested that this
item now be left out,beeause only an elected body can determine what costs can be
covered, along with the City Engineer, the City Manager and the City Attorney.
Commissioner Kelly made amotion that the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
becoIlditioneduponthe Contractual Agreement and the Letter Of Gua'rantee,which
have been accepted by the City Attorney and the City Finances, and that the stipu-
lationthat the cost of the signalization be included, be removed from the motion.
Commissioner Hazen ~econded the motion. The motion carried with Commissioners
Gardner and Bailey voting "No".
AGENDA ITEM NO. IS: Other Business.
Commissioner Behling indicated the dates of the Planning & Zoning Workshop covering
the Plan 2000 would be on May 11th at 7 p.m., and that the dates leading up to the
workshop would be that on Monday, May 3rd,a rough draft including the text and
a map would be received..fr-om-".the consultants and the Commission would have a work-
shop to review this material on the 11th, so all members.of the Commission should
be prepared to discuss the proposed plan at that time. Vot'ing on ~.~.he Plan would
be on May 20th.'::'
AGENDA, ITEM NO .16: Adjournment.
Commissioner Fleming made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Gardner seconded the
motion. Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVED:
Chairman