HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 7928 ORDINANCE NO .
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDI-
NANCE, ORDINANCE NO . 3011 , AS AMENDED, SAME BEING AN
ORDINANCE REGULATING AND RESTRICTING THE LOCATION AND
USE OF BUILDINGS , STRUCTURES , AND LAND FOR TRADE,
INDUSTRY, RESIDENCE OR OTHER PURPOSES, THE HEIGHT,
NUMBER OF STORIES AND SIZE OF BUILDINGS AND OTHER
STRUCTURES, THE SIZE OF YARDS AND OTHER OPEN SPACES,
OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING, AND THE DENSITY OF
POPULATION, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSES DIVIDING THE MUNICI-
PALITY INTO DISTRICTS OF SUCH NUMBER, SHAPE AND AREA AS
MAY BE DEEMED BEST SUITED TO CARRY OUT THESE REGUL-
ATIONS AND SHOWING SUCH DISTRICT AND THE BOUNDARIES
THEREOF UPON "DISTRICT MAPS" , PROVIDING FOR INTERPRETA-
TION, PURPOSE AND CONFLICT; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDI-
NANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES AFFECTING
ZONING; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERA-
BILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENAL CLAUSE; AND NAMING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
WORTH, TEXAS :
SECTION 1 .
That Ordinance No . 3011 be and is hereby amended so that permitted uses in
the hereinafter described area be altered, changed, and amended as follows :
Z-79-41 Being a 1 .0136 Acre Tract in the JACOB BROCKMAN SURVEY A-102
commencing at a point , said point being S 0014 ' E 41 . 1 feet from
the center of the pavement of Randol Mill Road and being an iron
rod in the south line of Randol Mill Road, and in the west line
of a tract of land conveyed to Woodhaven Development Co . , Inc . by
deed recorded in volume 5799 at page 396 of the deed records of
Tarrant County, Texas :
THENCE S 001 -' E, 349 . 1 ' to a point ;
THENCE S 89046 ' W, 153 . 0 ' to a point ;
THENCE N 74046 ' W, 56 .0 ' to the point of beginning;
THENCE N 15014 ' E, 20 . 0 ' to a point (2) ;
THENCE N 74046 , W, 30 .0 ' to a point (3) ;
THENCE S 74046 ' W, 30 .0 ' to a point (4) ;
THENCE S 14046 ' E , 20 .0 ' to a point ( 5) ;
THENCE S 74046 ' W, 56 .0 ' to a point (6) ;
THENCE N 14046 , W, 75 .0 ' to a point (7) ;
THENCE S 74046 ' W, 100. 0 ' to a point (8) ;
THENCE S 001 - ' E , 215 .0 ' to a point (9) ;
THENCE S 74046 ' E , 100 . 0 ' to a point (10) ;
THENCE N 14046 ' E, 75 .0 ' to a point (11 ) ;
Continued
-2-
Z-79-41 THENCE S 74046 ' E, 56 .0 ' to a point (12) ;
( Cont . )
THENCE S 14046 ' W, 20.0 ' to a point (13 ) ;
THENCE S 74046 ' E, 30 .0 ' to a point (14) ;
THENCE N 74046 ' E, 30 .0 ' to a point (15) ;
THENCE N 14046 ' W, 20.0 ' to a point (16) ;
THENCE N 0014' W, 152 .0 ' to the point of beginning.
( 5100 Randol Mill Road)
From "A" One-Family to "CF" Community Facilities
SECTION 2 .
That the zoning regulations and districts , as herein established, have been
made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting
the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. They have
been designed to lessen congestion in the streets ; to secure safety from
fire, panic , flood and other dangers ; to provide adequate light and air; to
prevent overcrowding of land, to avoid undue concentration of population;
to facilitate the adequate provisions of transportation, water, sewerage,
parks and other public requirements . They have been made after a full and
complete public hearing, with reasonable consideration, among other things ,
of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the
particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of building and
encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community.
SECTION 3 .
That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City
of Fort Worth affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions
of such ordinances , except in those instances where provisions of such
ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance .
SECTION 4.
That all rights or remedies of the City of Fort Worth, Texas , are expressly
saved as to any and all violations or Ordinance No . 3011 or of any
amendments thereto of said City of Fort Worth, Texas , that have accrued at
the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued
violations , the court shall have all of the powers which existed prior to
the effective date of this ordinance .
SECTION 5 .
It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the
sections , paragraphs , sentences , clauses and phrases of this ordinance are
severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence , paragraph or section of
this ordinance shall be declared void, ineffective or unconstitutional by
the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such
voidness , ineffectiveness or unconstitutionality shall not affect any of
the remaining phrases , clauses, sentences , paragraphs or section of this
ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council
without the incorporation herein of any such void, ineffective or unconsti-
tutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section.
SECTION 6 .
That any person, firm or corporation who violates , disobeys , omits ,
neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of
the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not less than Five Dollars
( $5 .00) , nor more than Two Hundred Dollars ($200 .00) for each offense . Each
day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate
offense .
SECTION 7.
That this ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect
from and after the date of its passage and publications , as required by
law, and it is so ordained.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGALITY:
City Attorney
Adopted
��•�p��� J. BROCKMAN SUR.
TR.1
TR.3 .
S.
?A DOL A( C,
r4 . •, MILL � += O k, .
TR
17 •�..
E 4 q r>•,
L9 �Z
- NI 6 o 0 11 ze ri i H. ROBINSC •
I z7 rs Z
10' TR.2A
3B • a 3 9
3
40I
of
TR � .G.B.
41 r 9F _
az ti L� �I 1 .j— TR�2G r
ci I TR l A C> G/I L L I AMS
O N,.cwwT i
,10022 O + 'i v�.Ci.�lTi � r
SUGAR LAKE 3 TR.2F
m
�Ae-.act G
18 20 21 23 11
1 1 BROC�KMAN SUR a 1� SUR.
6
19 5 4 3 2 1 1 TR.2E 4 A`'
N
� n TR 2D V�
i I 20 21 23 24 25 1 -..®�• w0ov20
�`
i
7 6 5 4 3 2
ARB F L1
i21 22 2 24 25 26 .9 �D -- _ u�(�:y CL
. s
I - cd
6 5 3 2 0, TR.1A TR.2 E i
�n 2j 23 a _ E. JONES SUR.
^(p,T
SCALE 1'.X00' rA
0 t00 400 NORTH
APPLICANT
ADDRESS OVERCASH GOODMAN ENTERPRISES LEGEND
—
5100 Randol Mill Road tii' :''� _ ZONE BOUNDARY
PROPOSED CHANGE 'C'
FROMN An ONE-FAMILY PROPOSED CHANGE
AREA To"CF" COMMUNITY�, FACILITIL `'
STREET FRONTAGE
1 T"
136 acres MAP
COMMISSION HEARING DATE none 26~7 AWQ
- May 16, 1979 SWeaogowbrook "" � '�
CITY PLANNtN0 DEIARTME -
NT
FORT WORTH, TE%A3
Zoning Commission 5/16/79
-4-
Z-79-41 OVERCASH GOODMAN ENTERPRISES
5100 Ranaol Mill Roa
"A" One-Family to "CF" Community Facilities
Mr. Taylor Gandy, Attorney representing the applicant, presented a
brochure and reviewed the history of the subject site. He reminded
— the Zoning Commission that the Plan Commission had approved the
unified residential development site plan for the total 48 acre tract
in July, 1978. The approvt�d site plan outlined the subject property
involved in this zoning application as the site for the proposed
Health Center. He pointed out that, about that same time, the City
Council zoned the aforementioned 48 acre tract "A" One-Family, this
action following an amendment by the applicants. Thus, the current
zoning application requests that the proposed Health Center site
be zoned "CF" in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. Further ex-
plaining the need for "CF" zoning, he stated that the proposed Health
-- Center and Nursing Home has always been a part of the plan; however,
it was the applicants understanding that the Center would be an
ancillary or accessory use, rather than a primary use for which zoning
y would be required.
Mr. Gandy presented photographs and described surrounding land use,
zoning and physical conditions, and noted that, due to existing
topography, and based on the proposed development, it would be
difficult, if not impossible for surrounding residents to see the
proposed Nursing Home and Health Center. Discussing more specifically
the details of the proposal , Mr. Gandy stated that the proposed
Health Facility is an integral part of the retirement complex. The
only patients at the Health Center or the Nursing Home would be per-
manent residents of the retirement village. In other words, the 60-bed
Health Center will not be open to the general public and, thus, there
will be no additional traffic.
Mr. Gandy concluded his presentation, stating that if the Health
Center and Nursing Home (and retirement village) is not constructed,
his clients will voluntarily request that the zoning be changed back
to "A" One-Family.
In answer to Mr. Sherwood's question, Mr. Gandy confirmed that each
occupant of the retirement village will own a "life estate" and, thus,
will retain permanent occupancy in the village.
Ms. Mariann Harris read the following statement: 'Lat��
� �� �
-- k��"I live at 309 Willow Ridge Road in the Whiteil1 r `Fort Worth. My home adjoins the proposed prof ° ° ` �"
continued
Zoning Commission 5/16/79
-5-
Z-79-41 cont'd
"During the past year, this proposal has been before the Planning
Commission two times, the Zoning Commission tice, and the City
- Council twice. At the first meeting of the Planning Commission,
Associated Christian Living, Inc. presented plans for a complex
which would include 112 duplexes, a 60 bed health care unit, and
_ a 3-story building of 240 residences. This plan was countered with
extensive opposition due to the proposal.'s tax exempt status and
its zoning classification (it was to be built under A One-Family
unified residential housing and CF Community Facilities). As a
result of this opposition, a 30 day postponment was granted in which
the proponents were asked to meet with the opponents in order to
solve existing problems. Following 28 days of no contact, represen-
tatives of Associated Christian Living finally called a few people
a few days prior to the second hearing of the Planning Commission,
and the result of this meeting was an exercise in futility. At the
y second meeting of the Planning Commission, the projects supporters
reported that they had moved the location of the planned 3-story
residential building from the west side of the property (near White
Lake Hills) to the east side of the property (near Woodhaven. )
The Planning Commission then passed the proposal. In preparation
for an appearance before the Zoning Commission, the request for
CF zoning was dropped, and Associated Christian Living applied for
only A One-Family zoning status. Due to the A classification being
the most restrictive zoning obtainable, the Zoning Commission granted
the request. Z Zoning Commission member was then quoted as saying
"It looks like apartments, it smells like apartments, and it is
apartments, and it is apartments going in under A One-Family zoning.
This is very dangerous! " After being passed by both the Planning
and Zoning Commissions, the request was presented to the City Council.
�- Numerous opponents opposed this proposition because of its tax exempt
status and undesirable location. Why strand elderly citizens in an
area far removed from convenient shopping, eating, transportation, etc.
_ The City Council , realizing the merits of the counter arguments, re-
jected the proposal.
Not readily willing to abandon this financially promising venture,
Associated Christian Living changed its name to Overcash and Good-
man and resubmitted its request to the Zoning Commission. Taylor
Gandy, attorney for the project, asked for a postponement due to the
improper location of the zoning request sign, and it was granted.
Within the past week, the City of Fort Worth's Tax Office sent me a
notice of a property re-valuation--an increase, of course! The
project in question is located on prime property which should be
taxable. Why should myself and my neighbors be forced
for a large area of tax-exempt land? - --- compensate
" 1 dna atm. IL ,�_S s
c V
. f
ILA.
continu d^ r
Zoning Commission 5/16/79
-6-
"This proposal has been rejected by the Fort Worth City Council.
A name change will not make a skunk smell sweeter. Accept it--
we don't want your project! Because the zoning request sign is
presently located on a vacant lot next door to me and not on the
proposed project's property,' I would like to request a delay in
the final decision. When the proposal reappears, no matter under
what name, please reject it! "
Mr. Tom Williams, Attorney representing the White Lake Hills Association
(with a membership of E00), spoke in opposition. He reviewed the history
of this proposal and stated that, in his opinion, this is bad policy and
bad zoning. He stated that this specific application comes dangerously
close to spot zoning. Referring to the zoning of the surrounding area,
he pointed out that it is a one-acre island completely surrounded by
single-family housing; this will be a dangerous precedent. He noted also
that the proposal is in conflict with the Meadowbrook Sector Plan.
Also in opposition, Mrs. Billie King, 601 Oakmont Lane, read the following
statement:
"As you know, the pros and cons of this property was presented to
You to change it from "AG" to "A" zoning. I am sure that you used your
best judgment and acted in good faith at that time in approving the
owners request for "A" zoning. The plans they have today are
identical to the plans they presented before. I hope you will ask
yourself why this project is even on the agenda today, since you gave
them what they asked for the last time around. When a denial is made,
it is a year before a request for change can be made, and it has only
been 8 months since you gave the same owners what they asked for.
Were they trying to circumvent the intent of our City's Zoning Ordin-
ance that you are h_�re to uphold? When this
project
originally before tie Planning Commission, they stated athey eintended
to ask you for "A" and "CF" zoning. Why then was the "CF" request
dropped when the community facility remained a part of the plans when
it was presented to this body? Even before the City Council , the
speakers for the developer stated in answer to a direct question that
the project could not be built without the 3-story medical tower„ The
last request was, admittedly by Staff, the most flagrant violation of
the intent of our Zoning Ordinance.
The other problem with granting approval of this request is that this
valuable property would be removed from the tax rolls of our City. The
citizens of Fort Wo ,th voted overwhelmingly last month to place 4
pieces of property chat the City owned back on the tax rolls to create
additional revenue. Is it really prudent for one hand to giveth and
the other to taketh away? I am sure you will want" to---da what--i in
.T�
�
continued °
Zoning Commission 5/16/79
-7-
Z-79-41 conV d
"best interest of the majority of the citizens on whose behalf ;/ou are
serving on this Commission. Your time and efforts are greatly �-ip-
preciated by all of us. Much has been accomplished to build up our tax
base and lessen the burden on the home owners. Is it right for the
rest of the community to support this project as long as it is in
existance?
_ I request that you deny this zoning change, and u
of last August for "A" zoning," uphold
Your decision
In response to a question from the Commission, 30 persons stood
indicating their presence in opposition to this request. The
following persons were present (in opposition) , but did not speak:
Paula H. Duckering, 312 Cedar Creek Court
_ Barry Smith, 4516 Granite Shoals
Mrs. Harry Spicer, 405 Cedar Creek Court
Gisela Techt, 300 Cedar Creek Court
Dr. James H. Kincaid, 4901 Granite Shoals
LaMonte A. Tucker, 4900 Granite Shoals Avenue
Michael Clare, 5016 Marble Falls Road
H. E. Farrell , 812 Lake Charles
Mrs. John R. Bishop, Jr. , 5017 Granite Shoals
Ann Rogers, 4905 Granite Shoals
Martha Clare, 5216 Marble Falls Road
J. Frank Keeton, 321 Green River Trail
Vernon W. Smith, 4916 Granite Shoals
Manfred Techt, 300 Cedar Creek Court
Jack White, 704 CandleWood Road
Mrs. Ralph K. Allen, 5024 Granite Shoals
Judith Jameson, 6240 Jacksboro Highway
Al Jameson, 6240 Jacksboro Highway
Weldon Cole, 716 CandleWood
In proponent rebuttal , Mr. Tipps stated that the proposed zoning is
requested for a medical facility to be used exclusively for residents
of the retirement village; it will enable them to provide continual
care necessary for this segment of our society. He noted that the
-- only question before the Zoning Commission is the area requested for
"CF" zoning. He stated that they did not ask for the "CF" zoning at
the beginning because they wanted to keep the zoning as simple as
Possible. In his opinion, this is a cumbersome piece of property
and one not suited for "A" One-Family development.
continued
Zoning Commission 5/16/69 -8-
Z-79-41 cont'd
In response to Mr. Payne's question, Mr. Gandy stated that the deed
restriction will be established so that it will be binding on any
future owners also.
In opponent rebuttal , Mrs. Paula Duckering, realtor on the east side
of Fort Worth, noted that the north part of White Lake has recently
been developed, and is far more hilly than the subject location.
Following discussion, the Commission, on a motion by Mr. Martin,
seconded by Mr. Johnson, on a vote of 6-2, with Mrs. McConnico and
Mr. Briscoe voting "no" ,
VOTED: To recommend that the City Council APPROVE Z-79-41, the request
of Overcash Goodman Enterprises to rezone property at 5100
Randol Mill Road from "A" One-Family to "CF" Community Facilities.