Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-04-06 PZ Agenda Packet i TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA APRIL 04, 2006 7:00 P.M. TOWN HALL BOARD ROOM 2650 J. To OTTINGER 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES OFT E PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING HELD DECEMBER 06,2005. 3. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE WATER WELL TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 9, BLOCK D OF THE VAQUERO ADDITION,2254 KING FISHER DRIVE. 4. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE WATER WELL TO DE LOCATED ON LOT 21, BLOCK L OF THE VAQUERO ADDITION, 1205 PERDENALES TRAIL. 5. ADJOURNMENT. CERTIFICATION I certify that the above notice was posted at the Town Hall of the Town of Westlake, 2650 J.T. Ottinger Road, Westlake, Texas, on Friday, March 31,2006, at 5:00 p.m. under the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. J an Dwinnell, TRMC, CMC, Town Secretary MINUTES OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TE S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 06, 2005 PRESENT: Chairman Bill Greenwood and Commissioners Larry Corson, Allen Heath, Stan Parchman, and Sharon Sanden ABSENT: None T. ERS SEl�T: Town Manager Trent Petty and Town Secretary Jean Dwinnell 1. CALL TO ORDER. Chairman Greenwood called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. 2. REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DELI? OCTOBER 13,2005. Commissioner Sanden moved, Commissioner Parchman seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held October 13, 2005. There was no discussion and Chairman Greenwood declared the motion carried unanimously. 3. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 102-154 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE CONCERNING RESIDENTIAL PARKING OF CERTAIN TYPES OF VEHICLES, AMENDING THE ALLOWABLE TIME VEHICLES ARE ALLOWED TO BE PARKED ON RESIDENTIAL LOTS FOR PURPOSES OF LOADING AND UNLOADING AND PROVIDING FOR A MINIMUM PERIOD IN WHICH THE TRAILER MAY BE USED FOR SLEEPING PURPOSES. Town Manager Trent Petty explained the proposed amendment, advising the Commission that this action is being recommended in order to clean-up the Code. He further advised that the Building Official is charged with the enforcement of the Code, but that this area is not a priority due to the inspection work load and that the Town is usually made aware of these types of Code violations when a neighbor complains. Mr. Petty reviewed the proposed wording that would be placed in the Ordinance. Mr. Petty advised the Commission that the Stagecoach Hills Addition should be addressed separately and a separate zoning classification be considered due to the air strip. He suggested that this be addressed during a work session of the Board of Aldermen at some future date. Chairman Greenwood opened the public hearing. Mr. Steve Knight, 13297 Roanoke Road, advised that he wants the Town to work with the citizens to accomplish what the Ordinance says. There were no others wishing to speak and Commissioner Corson moved, Commissioner Heath seconded the motion to close the public hearing. There was no discussion and Chairman Greenwood declared the motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Heath moved, Commissioner Corson seconded the motion to approve the proposed change, modifying the time limit for a certain types of vehicles to be parked on residential lots for purposes of loading and unloading to 72 continuous hours and providing for a maximum period in which the trailer may be used for sleeping purposes to ten(10) days. There was no discussion and Chairman Greenwood declared the motion carried unanimously. 4.' CONDUCT ` A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE WATER WELL TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 7 OF THE CARPENTER ADDITION, 5920 MAHOTEA BOONE TRAIL. Town Manager Trent Petty explained the proposed application for a special use permit for a private water well. He advised that this is a standard request. Dr. Joseph Hageman, applicant, was present to answer questions of the Commission. Discussion ensued regarding the water quality, depth of the proposed well, locations of sewer lines, Cable TV, fiber optics, Fios, and Bell wave. Chairman Greenwood opened the public hearing. There was no one present wishing to speak and Commissioner Heath moved, Commissioner Corson seconded the motion to close the public hearing. There was no discussion and Chairman Greenwood declared the motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Sanden moved, Commissioner Corson seconded the motion to approve the application for a special use permit for a private water well on Lot 7 of the Carpenter Addition, 5920 Mahotea Boone Trail. There was no discussion and Chairman Greenwood declared the motion carried unanimously. 5. ADJOURNMENT. Commissioner Sanden moved, Commissioner Parchman seconded the motion to adjourn. The motion carried and Chairman Greenwood declared the meeting adjourned at 8:18 p.m. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON THE DAY OF , 2006. Bill Greenwood, Chair ATTEST: Jean Dwinnell, TRMC, CMC, Town Secretary Town of Westlake Memo To: Chairman Bill Greenwood and Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission From: Trent Petty, Town Manager Subject: Regular meeting of April 4, 20 Date: March 28, 2006 ITEM Conduct a Public Hearing and take appropriate action regarding an application for a specific use permit for a private water well to be located at 2254 King Fisher Drive. COMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval. BACKGROUND The operation of private water wells supports the policy of the Town to provide for an aesthetic living _environment that promotes the development of green spaces, the preservation of trees, and the maintenance of a rural setting. The extensive landscaping, -tree preservation and mitigation policies of the Town are in fact dependent on the ability of the_development community to maintain the living material in a healthy state. This requires that an alternative source of water, other than public water supply,be utilized. From a planning perspective the siting of a water well should address land use considerations such as compatible land uses, adverse performance impacts, and accessibility. There is ample opportunity to screen the site from adjacent property. In fact, water wells of this type are normally very low in profile and are usually screened by natural trees and vegetation. We do not see the need for dedicated rights-of-way or easements for the access roads, however, the applicant should illustrate how the well will be serviced so as not to interrupt neighboring property owners. As the Town considers the application for a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a water well, it is important that we establish the appropriate standard of review. Specific Use Permits are generally applied to uses that encompass intensity levels of a type which require special treatment or location to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties and uses. As an example, a convenience store with high traffic volumes and significant outside lighting, should only be allowed adjacent to residential homes when its harmful elements can be alleviated or compensated for by landscape screening, access restrictions, low-glare lighting, or the like. Allowing such a use "by right" would not allow for individual consideration of those factors. Conversely, prohibiting the use entirely would result in certain necessary uses being located only in areas where the use is impractical. Matters such as those discussed above constitute the proper standard of review when considering this SUP application. As is explained below, however, concerns about the protection of the Town's underground water supply are not a permissible basis for the denial of an SUP for a water well. The State of Texas operates under the same rule of capture with respect to both its water and petroleum resources. That rule can be best summarized by the most definitive Texas Supreme Court case on the issue of water use when it ruled as follows: absent malice or willful waste, landowners have a right to take all the water they can capture under their land and do with it whatever they please, and they will not be liable for their neighbors even if in so doing they deprive their neighbors of the water's use. Sipriano v. Great Spring Waters of America, Inc., 1 S.W. 3d 75, 76 (Tex. 1999). That decision, which makes clear that neither the Town nor the courts can regulate the amount of water taken from wells, is based on the premise that the Texas legislature has specifically reserved to itself the authority to establish rules regarding groundwater. Id. At 77. The legislative structure regarding the rule of capture has been in place since 1904. Id. At 78. In light of the existing precedent on this matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board should limit their review to the compatibility of the proposed use with the surrounding properties and uses. In summary, the SUP application filed by Jim and Catherine Lancaster for 2254 King Fisher Drive should be considered based only on any potentially harmful impact its location and placement might have on adjacent properties and uses, exclusive of any consideration.of,groundwater conservation. Homeowner did indicate upon application submission that a protective structure would be constructed when they do move into the home. In light of the location of the subject water well, and its limited potential impact on surrounding properties and uses, staff recommends approval with adherence to set- back requirements for the construction and placement of the well/pump house structure. Town of Westlake Memo To: Chairman Bill Greenwood and Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission From: Trent Petty, Town Manager Subject: Regular meeting of April 4, 2fO6 Date: March 28, 2006 ITEM Conduct a Public Hearin- and take appropriate action regarding an application for a specific use permit for a private water well to be located at 1205 Perdenalas Trail. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval. BACKGROUND The operation of private water wells supports the policy of the Town to provide for an aesthetic living environment that promotes the development of green spaces, the preservation of trees, and the maintenance of a rural setting. The extensive landscaping, tree preservation and mitigation policies of the Town are in fact dependent on the ability of the,development community to maintain the living material in a healthy state. This requires that an alternative source of water, other than public water supply, be utilized. From a planning perspective the siting of a water well should address land use considerations such as compatible land uses, adverse performance impacts, and accessibility. There is ample opportunity to screen the site from adjacent property. In fact, water wells of this type are normally very low in profile and are usually screened by natural trees and vegetation. We do not see the need for dedicated rights-of-way or casements for the access roads, however, the applicant should illustrate how the well will be serviced so as not to interrupt neighboring property owners. As the Town considers the application for a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a water well, it is important that we establish the appropriate standard of review. Specific Use Permits are generally applied to uses that encompass intensity levels of a type which require special treatment or location to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties and uses. As an example, a convenience store with high traffic volumes and significant outside lighting, should only be allowed adjacent to residential homes when its harmful elements can be alleviated or compensated for by landscape screening, access restrictions, low-glare lighting, or the like. Allowing such a use "by right" would not allow for individual consideration of those factors. Conversely, prohibiting the use entirely would result in certain necessary uses being located only in areas where the use is impractical. Matters such as those discussed above constitute the proper standard of review when considering this SUP application. As is explained below, however, concerns about the protection of the Town's underground water supply are not a permissible basis for the denial of an SUP for a water well. The State of Texas operates under the same rule of capture with respect to both its water and petroleum resources. That rule can be best summarized by the most definitive Texas Supreme Court case on the issue of water use when it ruled as follows: absent malice or willful waste, landowners have a right to take all the water they can capture under their land and do with it whatever they please, and they will not be liable for their neighbors even if in so doing they deprive their neighbors of the water's use. Sipriano v. Great Spring Waters of America, Inc., 1 S.W. 3d 75, 76 (Tex. 1999). That decision, which makes clear that neither the Town nor the courts can regulate the amount of water taken from wells, is based on the premise that the Texas legislature has specifically reserved to itself the authority to establish rules regarding groundwater. Id. At 77. The legislative structure regarding the rule of capture has been in place since 1904. Id. At 78. In light of the existing precedent on this matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board should limit their review to the compatibility of the proposed use with the surrounding properties and uses. Ira summary, the SUP application filed by John and Gracie Miller for 1205 Perdenalas Trail.should be considered based only on any potentially harmful impact its location and placement might have on adjacent properties and uses, exclusive of any consideration of groundwater conservation. In light of the location of the subject water well, and its limited potential impact on surrounding properties and uses, staff recommends approval with the -condition that the well placement is outside of the drainage and utility easements. 44ms 56 M. ---Mn NG. FOR vI-r-ur BR G. R 11L d�7 (CAE 'iA r 2. �jf' ST_ li "A 13 01 1 xil I - 4 j mq'r -r - 74 -2)6-5 3r fKc 4 , T 24� It _A922.1f -1- M E� LOCAlloN MAC rLp - cl) VAQUERO ADDITION � Iti �� I �!�� / / / ,,t5.� � /� �� � • < ?qh.s / /� � � 4a f/ 43 ', \, I � \� / I m AREA MAP ol A PERDENALA FIN F S' a: WE ji rj iq,- TRAIL c D (Y :r r I b X SE�-71-Q A F 7. If. o' 41, -Fla. PA Iwo Pool- -VA VA -VA LOCATION MAP 'r Tw z .,ft 55 kqj Too • fit 012, PAW A- t4y 01,44 IVA, w If) r - .'m76 4. 3 A lw fit 'In mi"s. 12• .15 cA G C) ct) 0'.'." 182 ,0272 A% -zqe - 9 ff. III c. a iA IV 75 as -w— MIX -ALLAWADuE 46 nG 6.3. S'o Ines I�M " E 6121 - A fEm M T. (p. P7. . 4'9&4 Igoa In Ott Z' 14 4TOft Kmi- COST~ oti, rFwFwII--jj Lw- C) lit TIP o'"32 ,oaw M,78 Irlm 1"92 M-mmo IY' SITE PLAN 4 olg;m LOT �.l. BLOCK L VAQUERO WESTLAKE, TEXAS r"4 XufftlJtirzI burvrgs, Bar. rip- vAaoqlo 1 . 18 4,74 4.74 " 4- 69431 7 74 6�-, `3 I Wrought Iron fence 095 72 + L 0 L 9 4. -F6 C) V-4 tA I 9 m + 697.38 69597 ti + r.91 ,E.69 02.58 1;91? 09 kB n3 + (,'JL+4tl', I 1\ \1 , " 1, 1 + e,97.11 661 :> f Ver nn Vau 3 82 1 a 7095450 1 i 7uo.of, r N89>+43'49"W 2 1 v72'11 '14940 /Lot I 697.57 + bt 1,45 690. 112 7, 4 �K b08.71 .L� A C C. + 1113 -13 V 6-4 �ti L4` + +) 69L I + + tLl / IqLI.K;'Ll 7095450 1 i 7uo.of, r N89>+43'49"W 2 1 v72'11 '14940 /Lot I 697.57 + bt 1,45 690. 112 7, 4 �K b08.71 .L� A C C. + 1113 -13 V 6-4 �ti