HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 07-17-06
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
MINUTES
July 17, 2006
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park met on Monday,
July 17, 2006 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3800 University Blvd.
University Park, Texas. The following are minutes ofthat meeting.
Commission Members Attending
Staff Members Attending
Robert H. West - Chairman
Randy Biddle
Bill Foose
Reed Shawver, III
Doug Roach
Harry Persaud - Community Dev. Mgr
Rob Dillard - City Attorney
Jennifer Deaver- Administrative Assistant
Bud Smallwood- Director of Public Works
Present & Seated
Ed Freeman
Absent and Excused
Bea Humann
Jerry Jordan
Mr. West opened the public hearing and then read the specifics of the first case.
PZ 06-004 - Hold a public hearing and consider a request by Winstead, Sechrest &
Minick, representing Legacy Hillcrest Investments, LP, fora change of zoning from
Multi family "MF-2", Parking "P" and Office "0-2" zoning district classification to
Planned Development District and approval of a PD concept plan. The subject tract is
approx. 2.0696 acres more or less, situated between Daniel and Haynie Avenues and
West of Hillcrest Ave., and described as lots 5 thru 12, Block 3, University Park
Addition, City of University Park. The said tract is zoned MF-2, P and 0-2 and owned
by Legacy Hillcrest Investments, LP.
Mr. Persaud gave a brief over view of the specifics via a power point presentation.
Mr. West inquired if there was any favoring I opposing parties that wished to speak.
Mr.Art Anderson representing Legacy Hillcrest Investments, LP came forward
He briefed the audience and commission members on the history of the case, stating that
there was a neighborhood meeting reviewing the site plan the proposed changes. He
stated that the neighbors were in favor of the changes at the time and were not focused on
the square footage but primarily on the adverse effects of the traffic. He stated that the
traffic studies decided that there was not degradation in the level of service. He stated that
after the April meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission he sent Jeremy Windam
of Jacobs Engineering, back for additional studies of the access at Haynie. He then stated
1
the leasable space would be 147,500 square feet, excluding hallways and elevators, etc.,
175,000 square feet oflibrary, retail, and restaurant space. He reminded the commission
that Danny Cummings had suggested a 25% reduction of square footage of restaurant
space and that there was already a reduction of 63,000 square feet in the 2001 conceptual
plan. Town houses were added at the request of the neighborhood and another change in
the reduction of height and putting in a penthouse suite that would be setback. He stated
that they wanted to make this a community based project. He stated that an advisory
committee was made up of residents in the neighborhood to fashion the design standards.
He expressed concerns of an increase in density and that the intersection was still at a
LOS of a C. He then urged the commission to approve his request.
Mr. West inquired if there were any opposing parties that wished to speak.
Mr. Wayne Johnson, resident / owner of the property situated at 3601 Haynie introduced
himself and stated that the traffic study performed seems vague and that most cars would
cut through at Haynie. He then stated that with the five to eight (MF) Multi Family units
being included in the proposed plan, there would be an increase in the trips per day that
were estimated in the traffic study. He stated that this plan is too large and then urged the
commission to deny the planas requested.
Mr. Jim Tubb, resident / owner of the property situated at 3407 Haynie, came forward.
He stated that his property is located across the street from the parking lot of the bank
building. He then stated that the dumpsters and the loading docks were moved due to the
obvious traffic issues, and that the trips per day calculated in the traffic study allow very
little time for crossing the street. He then expressed concerns of the size of this building
and read parts of the letter from Mr. Huddleston and stated that the design was just a
giant and uncharacteristic of the residential area. He then urged the commission to deny
the request.
Ms. Mary Neil, resident / owner of the property situated at 3421 Haynie, came forward.
She introduced herself and stated that there was no need to again list the reasons as to
why this plan should be denied but wanted to be able to turn to the city for health and
protection. She expressed concerns of property values plummeting and that she can not
depend on the city for this protection and she then urged the commission to deny the
request.
Mr. Anderson introduced Jeremy Windham of Jacobs Engineering. Mr. Windham
reviewed the changed results of the traffic study preformed with the development being
at217,000 square feet.
Mr. Roach inquired if, with these changes, were the trips per day were increased by 6200
total trips per day.
Mr. Windham stated yes.
2
Mr. Craig Melde, architect representing Legacy Hillcrest, LP, and resident / owner of
3415 University, came forward. He stated that the main building stands at applicable
height with the penthouse level being a leasable space.
Mr. Biddle inquired as to why the decorative columns were so tall.
Mr. Melde stated that it was an architectural element.
Mr. Melde stated that it could be looked into, adding that there would be two floors of
office space, one floor of retail space and some multi-family use space in order to provide
a buffer to the neighborhood.
Mr. Foose inquired how many floors there were total.
Mr. Melde stated three.
Mr. West stated that the city does not recommend parallel parking because of the
problems that would result from cars waiting in the street to pull in.
Mr. Melde assured him that it could be worked out.
Mr. Biddle inquired if the education uses listed were pertaining to the library.
Mr. Melde stated yes.
Mr. Roach expressed concerns of the traffic study predicting 6200 trips per day.
Mr. Wilson explained that improvements would have to be inclusive oflooking at the
previous square footage. He stated that the cuing was looked at on a peak hour and that
the biggest bottle neck was at Daniel and Haynie and the conditions should improve with
timing and with the change in square footage.
Mr. Anderson stated that most people employed in this building would not be driving out
to eat and that with the 8-5 people the traffic will work even better than what the study
shows.
A discussion ensued regarding the possibility of widening the road and creating a left turn
lane on the east bound side of Haynie and a right yield for the east bound side of Daniel.
Mr. West inquired ifthere was anyone else who wished to speak. When no one came
forward he closed the public hearing.
Mr. West suggested that someone make a motion to table the item for a future meeting
until the square footage could be revised.
3
Mr. Roach stated that he would not like to see that happen as it has already come before
the Planning and Zoning Commission four times, he then suggested approval with a limit
on the amount of square footage and a limit to the number of spaces dedicated for each
use.
Mr. Shawver made a motion to deny the request.
The motion was not seconded.
Mr. Biddle made a motion to table the item until the August 21 st meeting of the Planning
and Zoning Commission proposing a work shop to meet with the developer.
The motion was not seconded.
At this point Mr. Roach stated that he would not support any building larger than
135,000 sq. ft.
Mr. Foose made a motion to approve the PD Concept Plan with a total of 135,000 sq. ft.
gross floor area, excluding the 8 units of town homes, subject to the following conditions:
(1) Height of the proposed building on the 0-2 site shall be limited to the height of the
existing building (2) A maximum of22,000 square feet for restaurant /retail space and
(3) Building height west of the common area shall not exceed 35 feet.
Mr. Roach move to amend the motion as follows: (1) Parking to be provided at the rate of
1 :200 square feet for retail and restaurant, and 1 :300 square feet for office space and (2)
with 19 staff conditions. Mr. Foose agreed to the changes made by Mr. Roach and
further amended the original motion to allow for Restaurant/retail space not to exceed
25,000 square feet.
Mr. Roach then seconded the motion as amended.
The motion was approved 3-2.
Mr. West then read the specifics of the second case.
PZ 06-011 - Hold a public hearing and consider a request by Frank Blanchard
representing the property owner, for approval of a replat for Lot 14, Block B, University
Annex, 2nd Installment, being an Addition ofthe City of University Park, Dallas County,
Texas, and more commonly known as 3501 Asbury. The replat will subdivide the lot
into two single family attached.lots located in Planned Development District PD-6 zoned
for Single Family Attached housing development. A variance is not required for the
approval of this replat.
Mr. Persaud gave a brief over view of the specifics and confirmed that this replat met all
of the city requirements.
4
Mr. West inquired if there was any favoring / opposing parties that wished to speak, none
came forward.
Mr. Foose made a motion to approve the replat, with a second from Mr. Shawver the
motion was approved unanimously 5~0.
Mr. West then read the specifics ofthe third case.
PZ 06-012: Hold a public hearing and consider a request by Agnich Ventures LP, for
approval of a site plan for a tract of land being part of Lot 2, Block C of IDLEWILD NO.
2 Addition and located at 4520 West Lovers lane. The subject tract is zoned Planned
Development PD-2-R for uses permitted in the General Retail District. The site plan
proposes to add approx. 1110 sq. ft. to the existing building.
Mr. Persaud gave a brief overview of the case.
Mr. West inquired if there was any favoring / opposing parties that wished to speak.
Mr. Taylor Armstrong, resident / owner of the property situated at 3801 Centenary, also
representing Agnich Venture, LP. came forward. He stated that this building was
originally an animal clinic with chain link kennels in the rear and the plan was to extend
the building at Lovers Lane, closer to Chips. He stated that it is currently 1530 square feet
with 485 square feet of second floor space and he proposes to add 1110 square feet to
bring it to the line of the adjacent properties, in addition adding two parking spaces to the
rear (alley) of the property. Currently no tenants are leasing this facility but the money
involved in the project should definitely bring an upper end, high quality tenant.
Construction would begin at the time of approval. He then urged the commission to
approve the request as written.
A discussion ensued regarding the parking spaces in the right of way
Mr. West inquired ofMr. Persaud, the ratio for parking spaces required.
Mr. Persaud stated that there must be one space for every 3,000 square foot of added
space.
Mr. Armstrong stated that with the addition of the square footage there will not be
adequate room for additional parking and that it is common of most all of the other
merchants to use the alleyway for employee parking.
Mr. West inquired if there was any favoring / opposing parties that wished to speak.
None came forward.
Mr. West then closed the public hearing.
5
Mr. Dillard stated that even though other merchants are using the alley ways to park, the
city has been making efforts to clean up those alley ways.
Mr. Foose inquired if the plan could be cut back 10 feet by shaving off 300 square feet of
the plan.
Mr. Armstrong stated that he was not asking for anymore than the neighboring spaces.
Mr. Robert Agnich, owner / applicant of the property in question, came forward and
introduced himself. He referred to the power point presentation and stated that if the city
did not want to allow the employee parking in the rear that was okay but that his thoughts
were that the city would benefit from this more so than the tenants
.Mr. stated that the deal was tight, and that if the dumpster is shared and could be moved
in order to provide more parking spaces.
Mr. West inquired if the city could provide staff direction.
Mr. Persaud stated that there must be one parking space for every 300 square foot and the
stepping the building back and using the rear for parking would be middle ground.
Mr. Biddle made a motion to table the item to come back for the August 21 st meeting of
the Planning and Zoning Commission with the site plan showing three spaces in the rear
of the structure and a revision of shaving 110 square feet of the addition.
Mr. Roach amended the motion requiring that the approval be subject to a revised site
plan showing three on-site parking spaces in the rear within the property line and a net
increase of 900 square feet or less. He then seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 5-0.
Mr. West then read the specifics of the fourth case.
PZ 06-013: Hold a public hearing and consider a request by Intercity Investments, Inc.
for a zoning change on a tract of approx. 2.98 acres more or less including certain
alleyway right of ways, from Multi family MF-2 to Planned Development District and
approval of a PD concept and detailed site plan to allow for multi family development.
The subject tract include Lots 4113 Lovers Lane, 4112 and 4113 Hyer Street and 4102
Grassmere and being lots 9-11 and 18 -20, Block 1, Troth and Boswell Subdivision and
lots 7-11 and 18-22, Block 2, Troth and Boswell Subdivision located in the City of
University Park.
Mr. Persaud gave a brief overview of the proposed project, via a power point
presentation. He showed the site plan from all angles and a map of the notification area.
Mr. Bill Blackburn, representing Intercity Investments, Inc. came forward and introduced
6
himself. He gave a run down of the history behind the existing building, specifically that
it was constructed in 1940, owned and operated by family, and that there are 91
antiquated units each approximately 500 square feet in size. The proposed plan includes
10ft ceilings, larger living space and below grade parking. He then elucidated that the
relocation of utility meters has been approved by the utility companies.
Mr. Matt Mooney of Corgan & Associates, architectural firm contracted for the proposed
plan, came forward and introduced himself. He stated that currently there are 109 parking
spaces to accommodate 91 units on the existing property; he proposes to have 212
parking spaces, 85% at below grade level, for 88 units, where 176 are required. He stated
that the setback requirements would be met or exceeded and that the access for parking
would be away from Grassmere and Lovers. He then stressed that the development is
tasteful for the neighborhood and urged the commission to approve the request as written.
Mr. West inquired ifthere were any opposing parties that wished to speak.
Mr. Bryan Sargent, resident / owner of 4145 Hyer came forward. He stated that the traffic
is significantly concentrated at Hyer and that he is pleases with all aspects of the
proposed plan but would like to see the traffic issues better addressed.
Mary Lehner, owner / resident of 4137-39 Grassmere came forward. She stated that she is
very pleased with the plan but the turn around area at the end of the alley at Grassmere
and expressed concerns of parking on Grassmere would be lost due to this development.
Mr. Smallwood stated that emergency vehicles do not access the alleyways.
Mr. John Gillett, Fire Marshall for the City of University Park came forward. He stated
that in the event that there was a fire, it would be approached from the street. He then
stated that the plans can still be worked on but there are minimum requirements that must
be met.
Mr. West then closed the public hearing.
Mr. West stated that the existing building is old and therefore non-conforming. He then
raised questions regarding the density.
Mr. Mooney stated that MF-2 requires 1800 square feet of living space and should be a
PD in order to make sense. He then explained that the property would have a grand
entrance and be a beautiful addition to the area and the city.
Mr. Foose inquired ifthese were condo units and how many were allowed.
Mr. Persaud stated yes and added that the MF-2 and MF-3 allows 69 units total.
Mr. Smallwood introduced Mr. Danny Cummings and invited him to share some of the
findings of the traffic study preformed.
7
Mr. Cummings came forward. He stated that his findings do not reveal a great impact on
traffic, West on Hyer with 39 trips per day at a.m. peak hours.
Mr. Sargent suggested that the traffic study should have been preformed during football
games and it show a substantial amount of traffic issues at Hyer.
Mr. Mooney stated that those issues are being addressed and the underground parking
should be effective in resolving the problem at Hyer.
Mr. Shawver added that this development is attractive but it will add approximately 100
kids to the area and the traffic issued indeed needed to be addressed, specifically at
Grassmere.
Mr. Foose stated that with retail to the east and the school to the west the improvement
would set precedence for other MF property owners to bring their units to code, He stated
that the traffic issues definitely need attention. He then made. a motion to approve the
request for a zoning change with the understanding that the ingress and egress at
Grassmere would be addressed.
With a second from Mr. Biddle the motion was approved 5-0.
Mr. Biddle made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 15th meeting, with a second
from Mr. Roach, the minutes were approved unanimously 5-0.
There being no further business before the Commission, Mr. West adjourned the meeting.
Approved by:
:::f~# ~
Robert H. West, Chairman
Planning & Zoning Commission
?h'f-hl
Date / I
8