BP 2012 01-19 PZag011912
Page 1 of 4
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING & AGENDA
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JANUARY 19, 2012
COMMISSIONERS:
Gregory Frnka – Chairman
Edmund Haas – Vice Chairman
Aaron Duncan
Anna Kittrell
Charles Sangerhausen
Craig Pritzlaff
Justin Goodale
MEETING TIME AND PLACE:
Pre-Session 6:00 p.m. 1st Floor Conference Room (Open to the Public)
Regular Session 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers (Open to the Public)
Notice is hereby given that the Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Coppell, Texas will
meet in pre-session at 6:00 p.m. and in regular session at 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, January 19, 2012, to
be held at Town Center, 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas.
As authorized by Section 551.071(2) of the Texas Government Code, this meeting may be convened
into closed Executive Session for the purpose of seeking confidential legal advice from the City
Attorney on any agenda item listed herein.
The purpose of the meeting is to consider the following items:
ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION
PRE-SESSION: (Open to the Public)
1. Briefing on the Agenda.
REGULAR SESSION: (Open to the Public)
2. Call to Order.
3. Nomination and Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman.
4. Consider approval of the minutes for December 15, 2011.
ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION
ag011912
Page 2 of 4
5. PUBLIC HEARING:
Consider approval of Case No. PD-246R-SF-12, Carter Addition PH III, a zoning change
request from SF-12 (Single Family-12) & A (Agricultural) to PD-246R-SF-12 (Planned
Development-246 Revised-Single Family-12), to attach a Detail Site Plan to permit 23 single-
family lots and one common area lot on 20.28 acres of property located on the south side of
Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road, at the request of Toll Brothers,
being represented by Matt Alexander, Dowdey, Anderson & Associates, Inc.
STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond
6. PUBLIC HEARING:
Consider approval of the Carter Addition PH III, Revised Replat, being a replat of the Carter
Addition Phase III to re-subdivide the existing 24 single-family lots and two common area lots
into 23 single-family lots and one common area lot on 20.28 acres of property located on the
south side of Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road, at the request of Toll
Brothers, being represented by Matt Alexander, Dowdey, Anderson & Associates, Inc.
STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond
7. PUBLIC HEARING:
Consider approval of Case No. PD-251R-SF-12, Rosebriar Estates, a zoning change request
from SF-12 (Single Family-12) to PD-251R-SF-12 (Planned Development-251 Revised-Single
Family-12), to allow the development of six (6) single-family lots, with a minimum lot size of
12,000 square feet and three (3) common area lots on 2.8 acres of property located south of
East Sandy Lake Road between Dobecka Drive and Castlebury Court, at the request of Brad
Meyer, Contrast Development.
STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond
8. Consider approval of the Rosebriar Estates, Preliminary Plat, to allow the subdivision of 2.8
acres of property into six (6) single-family lots and three (3) common area lots on property
located south of East Sandy Lake Road between Dobecka Drive and Castlebury Court, at the
request of Brad Meyer, Contrast Development.
STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond
9. PUBLIC HEARING;
Consider approval of Case No. S-1255-C, The Learning Experience, a zoning change request
from C (Commercial) to S-1255-C (Special Use Permit-1255-Commercial), to permit an
approximate 11,000-square-foot day care to be located within the existing two-story building,
removal of a portion of the parking lot to accommodate the addition of a 5,150-square-foot
outdoor play area with a rubber surface to be located at 123 East Sandy Lake Road,
approximately 600 feet east of Denton Tap Road, at the request of 3B Developers, Inc, being
represented by Bob Anderson, Plan Solution Architects.
STAFF REP.: Gary Sieb
10. CONTINUED:
Consider approval of the First Baptist Church of Coppell, Lot 1, Block A, Site Plan
Amendment, to allow Revised Elevations, the addition of a Covered Drop-off Area, Trellis
Structures and modifications to the landscaping and parking on 5.161 acres of property located
at 590 South Denton Tap Road, at the request of Tim Willis, HH Architects.
STAFF REP.: Gary Sieb
ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION
ag011912
Page 3 of 4
11. PUBLIC HEARING:
Consider approval of Case No. S-1256-R/O, Signature Living at Denton Creek, a zoning
change request from R (Retail) & O (Office) to S-1256-R/O (Special Use Permit-
Retail/Office), to allow a 57,708-square-foot (74 units, 79 beds) assisted living and memory
care facility on 5.3 acres of property located along the north side of East Sandy Lake Road, east
of Riverview Drive, at the request of Signature Senior Living, LLC, being represented by
Steven Homeyer, Homeyer Engineering, Inc.
STAFF REP.: Matt Steer
12. Consider approval of the Signature Living at Denton Creek, Lot 1 & 2, Block A, Minor
Plat, to establish a building site with required easements and fire lanes to allow a 57,708-
square-foot assisted living and memory care facility on Lot 1, Block A (5.3 acres of property)
with the remainder of vacant land being platted as Lot 2, Block A (6.1 acres of property)
located along the north side of East Sandy Lake Road, east of Riverview Drive, at the request
of Signature Senior Living, LLC, being represented by Steven Homeyer, Homeyer
Engineering, Inc.
STAFF REP.: Matt Steer
13. PUBLIC HEARING:
Consider approval of Case No. PD-214R5-C, Arbor Manors Retail, a zoning change request
from PD-214R2-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 2-Commercial) to PD-214R5-C
(Planned Development-214 Revision 5-Commercial) to attach a Detail Plan to allow the
development of an 11,000-square-foot retail building to contain retail and office uses including
two restaurants, one of which will have drive-thru service on 1.5 acres of property located at
143 South Denton Tap Road, approximately 145 feet north of West Braewood Drive, at the
request of Hermansen Land Development, Inc. being represented by Randi Rivera, G & A
Consultants.
STAFF REP.: Matt Steer
14. PUBLIC HEARING:
Consider approval of the Arbor Manors Addition, Lot 4R2R, Block A, Replat, being a replat
of Lot 4R2, Block A of the Arbor Manors Addition, to relocate the existing fire lane and
mutual access easement and to establish easements to allow the development of an 11,000-
square-foot retail building on 1.5 acres of property located at 143 South Denton Tap Road,
approximately 145 feet north of West Braewood Drive, at the request of Hermansen Land
Development, Inc., being represented by Randi Rivera, G&A Consultants.
STAFF REP.: Matt Steer
15. Update on Council action for planning agenda items on January 10, 2012:
A. An application submitted by Chesapeake Energy, to allow the drilling and operation of
five (5) additional wells and the re-issuance of one previously approved well on the
existing 3.013-acre pad site located north of Bethel Road, west of Creekview Drive,
known as the Fellowship Property.
B. An Ordinance for Case No. PD-241R-C, Red Hawk Office, a zoning change from PD-
241-C to PD-241R-C, to attach a Detail Plan on Lot 28R, to allow the construction of a
7,871-square-foot office building on 0.92 acres of property located at the northwest
corner of Denton Tap Road and Bethel School Road.
ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION
ag011912
Page 4 of 4
C. An Ordinance for Case No. PD-252-H, Allstate Insurance Office, a zoning change
from H to PD-252-H, to allow site modifications to support conversion of a residential
structure to an office use on 0.25 acres of property located at 709 South Coppell Road.
D. An Ordinance for a text amendment to revise Article 34, Landscaping Regulations of
the Zoning Ordinance (primarily Table 1, Plant Palette), to promote the use of
Xeriscaping.
16. Director’s Comments.
ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATE
I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City
of Coppell, Texas on this 13th day of January, 2012, at __________.
_________________________________
Juanita A. Miles
Planning Secretary
PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT FOR ADA COMPLIANCE
The City of Coppell acknowledges its responsibility to comply with the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990. Thus, in order to assist individuals with disabilities who require special services (i.e.,
sign interpretative services, alternative audio/visual devices, and amanuenses) for participation in or
access to the City of Coppell sponsored public programs, services and/or meetings, the City requests
that individuals make requests for these services forty-eight (48) hours ahead of the scheduled
program, service and/or meeting. To make arrangements, contact Vivyon V. Bowman, ADA
Coordinator or other designated official at (972) 462-0022, or (TDD 1-800-RELAY, TX, 1-800-735-
2989).
min121511
Page 1 of 3
MINUTES OF DECEMBER 15, 2011
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Coppell met in Pre-session at 6:00 p.m., and in
Regular session at 6:30 p.m., on Thursday, December 15, 2011, in the Council Chambers of Coppell
Town Center, 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas. The following Commissioners were
present:
COMMISSIONERS:
Gregory Frnka – Chairman
Edmund Haas – Vice Chairman
Aaron Duncan
Anna Kittrell
Charles Sangerhausen
Justin Goodale
Also present were Planning Director, Gary Sieb; Assistant Planning Director, Marcie Diamond; and
Secretary, Juanita Miles.
Commissioner Tankersley was not present.
ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION
PRE-SESSION: (Open to the Public)
1. Briefing on the Agenda.
The Planning Commission was briefed on each posted agenda item in the Workshop Session.
No vote was taken on any item discussed.
REGULAR SESSION: (Open to the Public)
2. Call to Order.
Chairman Frnka called the meeting to order.
3. Consider approval of the minutes for November 17, 2011.
Commissioner Sangerhausen made a motion to approve the minutes for November 17, 2011,
as written. Vice Chairman Haas seconded; motion carried (6-0), with Commissioners
Goodale, Frnka, Haas, Sangerhausen, Duncan and Kittrell voting in favor. None opposed.
4. Consider approval of the First Baptist Church of Coppell, Lot 1, Block A, SPA, to
allow a 740-square-foot building expansion, revised elevations, the addition of a
covered drop-off area, trellis structures and modifications to the landscaping and
parking on 5.161 acres of property located at 590 S. Denton Tap Road, at the request
of Tim Willis, HH Architects.
STAFF REP.: Gary Sieb
ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION
min121511
Page 2 of 3
Presentation:
Planning Director, Gary Sieb introduced this case to the Commission with exhibits, color
board and elevations. He stated concerns with the building materials and design proposed
which he read the into the record.
Clayton Coates, Pastor, First Baptist Church of Coppell, 590 S. Denton Tap Road, Coppell,
Texas, was present to represent this case before the Commission, to address any questions
and stated that he was not in agreement with staff’s recommendation for design changes.
Tom Willis, HH Architects. 5910 N. Central Expwy., Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas, was also
present to represent this case and addressed staff’s and Commission’s concerns about the
architectural style of the church.
Action:
After much discussion, Vice Chairman Haas made a motion to hold the First Baptist
Church of Coppell, Lot 1, Block A, Site Plan Amendment, under advisement until the
January 19, 2012, meeting and requested a Planning Subcommittee to be scheduled with the
Planning Director, Gary Sieb, the applicant’s architect, Commissioner Frnka and
Commissioner Goodale to address these concerns; Commissioner Goodale seconded; motion
carried (4-2), with Commissioners Goodale, Haas, Sangerhausen and Kittrell voting in favor
to hold case under advisement until the January 19th meeting. Commissioners Frnka and
Duncan voted in opposition.
5. Update on Council action for planning agenda items on December 13, 2011:
A. An Ordinance for Case No. PD-201R-TH-2, Riverchase Townhomes, a zoning
change from PD-201-TH-2 to PD-201R-TH-2, to allow a covered porch on
property located at 1115 Bethel School Court of Bethel Road.
B. An Ordinance for Case No. S-1254-SF-12, Cottonwood Estates, a zoning change
from SF-12 to S-1254-SF-12, to allow the construction of a residence with stucco
exterior located at 133 Cottonwood Drive
C. Case No. PD-252-H, Allstate Insurance Office/Cozby Addition, a zoning change
from H to PD-252-H, and a minor plat to allow site modifications to support the
conversion of a residential structure to an office on property located at 709
South Coppell Road.
D. Case No. PD-241R-C, Red Hawk Office/Addition, a zoning change from PD-
241-C to PD-241R-C, and a replat to allow the construction of a office building
on property located at the northwest corner of Denton Tap Road and Bethel
School Road.
E. A text amendment to revise Article 34, Landscaping Regulations of the Zoning
Ordinance (primarily Table 1, Plant Palette), to promote the use of Xeriscaping.
During the Pre-Session, Planning Director, Gary Sieb advised the Commission of Council’s
actions on December 13, 2011, and stated that Council approved all of the above-stated
items.
ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION
min121511
Page 3 of 3
6. Director’s Comments.
Planning Director, Gary Sieb mentioned for Commissioners to verify accuracy of the contact
list and submit changes to the Secretary, Juanita Miles. He also mentioned, we have a new
Commissioner for the 2012-2013 year - - Craig Pritzlaff. He then presented a slide wishing
Happy Holidays from staff.
ADJOURNMENT
With nothing further to discuss, the meeting adjourned at approximately 8:04 p.m.
__________________________________
Gregory Frnka, Chairman
__________________________________
Juanita A. Miles, Secretary
ITEM # 5
Page 1 of 6
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO.: PD-246R-SF-12, Carter Addition PH III
P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012
C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012
STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Planning Director
LOCATION: South side of Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road
SIZE OF AREA: 20.28 acres of property
CURRENT ZONING: SF-12 (Single-Family 12) & A (Agricultural)
REQUEST: A zoning change to PD-246R-SF-12 (Planned Development-246 Revised-Single
Family-12), to attach a Detail Site Plan to permit 23 single-family lots and one
common area lot.
APPLICANT: Owner: Civil Engineer:
Toll Dallas TX LLC Matt Alexander
2557 S.W. Grapevine Pkwy Dowdey, Anderson & Associates
Suite 100 5225 Village Creek Drive
Grapevine, Texas 76051 Plano, Texas 75093
817-329-8770 972-931-0694
HISTORY: The Carter Addition, a 30-lot subdivision, was established in 1972 and encircled
an existing 0.5-acre cemetery. Deed restrictions placed on the property expired on
January 1, 2001. In 1990, a replat of Lots 3 and 4 was denied by Council. On
June 17, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied a requested replat of
Lot 18, to reduce the front building line from 50 to 30 feet, at 509 East Bethel
School Road.
Lot 1 of the original Carter Estates subdivision is within the current request area
and contains 2.95 acres of the 20.3-acre subject property.
The Carter Addition, Phase II, which is a five-lot subdivision has a long replatting
history. The original Final Plat was approved by the Planning Commission on
November 21, 1996. That plat was not filed for record prior to its expiration date,
ITEM # 5
Page 2 of 6
and therefore was deemed null and void. In 1998, a Final Plat for a reconfigured
five-lot layout was approved, but again, never filed for record. In October of 1999,
Council approved a five-lot Final Plat which was filed with Dallas County in
December of that year. On August 8, 2000, City Council approved a replat for Lots
1 and 2 Carter Addition, Phase II; however, it also expired. This replat of Lots 1 and
2 was approved again in November 2001, and was filed within the statutory time
limit. Since that time, all five homes have been constructed in Phase II of this
development.
On September 16, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied a request for
a preliminary plat, with variances, for 23 residential lots and one area common lot
on this 20.28 acres of property.
On November 9, 2010, City Council followed the recommendation of the
Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a preliminary plat with no
variances for twenty-seven (27) single-family residential lots and two (2)
common area lots on this tract of land.
On March 8, 2011, Council approved a Replat/Final Plat with no variances for 24
lots and two common area lots on this 20-acre tract of land. This plat has been
filed with the county, and is essentially ready for development.
TRANSPORTATION: Carter Drive and Christi Lane are two-lane, asphalt streets, built within 50 feet of
right-of-way. These streets do not have curbs or sidewalks.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North - Single-family residences; Carter Addition, PD-248-SF-18 (Planned
Development-248-Single Family-18)
South – DART R.O.W. and Belt Line Road; A (Agriculture)
East - Single-family residences; Carter Addition, Phase II, PD-248-SF-18 (Planned
Development-248-Single Family-18)
West - single-family residences; Northlake Woodlands, Lots 5-10 SF-12 (Single
Family-12)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan of March 2011, shows the property as suitable for
Residential Neighborhood, which is defined as areas of low and medium density
single family, typically one to four dwelling units per acre.
DISCUSSION: This property is currently zoned, and platted for the development of 24 single
family lots under Single Family-12 District regulations. A Planned Development
zoning district is being requested to allow for several variances to the Subdivision
Ordinance, and to enhance several of the regulations in the base SF-12 zoning
district. The four variances to the Subdivision Ordinance being requested are;
the deletion of the alley requirement, the inclusion of a cul-de-sac which exceeds
ITEM # 5
Page 3 of 6
the 600-foot maximum length, the provision of mountable curbs and no sidewalks
along Carter Drive.
All of the 23 single family lots proposed exceed the minimum size as required by
the SF-12 district zoning, ranging in size from 13,175 square feet along the
western property line abutting Northlake Woodlands, to over one acre along the
southern portion of the property. These southern oversized lots incorporate the
flood plain area, similar to the lots in Phase II of Carter Estates.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY
While certain development rights are enjoyed by a tract of land that is already
zoned and platted for single family, compatibility and sensitivity to the existing
environment (development patterns, existing trees, etc.) must be considered when
evaluating any development request. North and east of the subject property are
Phases I and II of Carter Estates. These properties have recently been rezoned to
a PD-248-SF-18, to be more reflective of the existing development patterns. To
the west are Lots 5-10 Block 1, of the Northlake Woodlands subdivision, which is
zoned SF-12. These lots along Rolling Hills Road, abutting the area of request,
exceed 27,000 square feet (0.6 of an acre).
Carter Road Frontage
To be compatible with the homes/lots fronting on Carter Drive, two lots are
planned east of Heritage Oak Court and one lot to the west, all of which face
Carter Drive. Setbacks have been established which are reflective of the abutting
existing zoning patterns, specifically, a 30-foot front yard setback on the lot
abutting Carter Estates Phase II, (Lot 23) and a 50-foot front yard setback on the
lot abutting Carter Estates Phase I (Lot 1). To continue the streetscape as
established in this neighborhood, sidewalks, curbs and gutters are not being
proposed along Carter Drive.
West Property Line
As stated, this property abuts Lots 5-10, Block 1, of the Northlake Woodlands
subdivision. The existing lots abutting the area of request are generally just over
27,000 square feet, which is significantly larger than the 13,175-square-foot lots
proposed for this property.
The applicant has offered an increased rear yard setback on those lots abutting
Northlake Woodlands, from the minimum of 20 feet, as prescribed in the Zoning
Ordinance, to 35 feet. This essentially reflects the typical 20-foot required
setback plus the additional 15 feet in width that would have been equivalent to an
alley width, if not waived. This 35-foot building line would only be applicable to
the main structure, whereas pools, arbors and accessory buildings would still be
permitted within this area, which is throughout the city.
COMMON OPEN SPACE LOT
This plan includes an 11,148 square-foot common area lot in the center of the
property. This lot contains fifteen overstory trees (148 caliper inches), ranging in
size from eight to 17 caliper inches. It is the intent of the developer to retain this
lot in its natural state, except for the cleaning of the underbrush. This lot will be
fully irrigated and serve as an open space focal point for this neighborhood.
ITEM # 5
Page 4 of 6
NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT
On January 6th, staff received correspondence from Mr. Dean Wilkerson,
representing the Rolling Hills neighborhood and Carter Estates, Phases I and II,
requesting that Toll Brothers delay this request for 30 days, as well as consider
the following items:
1. reduction of one lot adjacent to Rolling Hills
2. eight-foot masonry wall along the western property line
3. homes fronting on Carter to have to have side or rear entry garages - and
no board on board fences on these lots
4. provision of an additional open space (x-lot) along Carter Drive
5. do more to save trees - save all trees greater than 20-inch caliper that are
not within the roads or building pads
6. Minimum house size of 3,200 square feet
7. require an HOA.
8. asphalt streets, and
9. no sidewalks along Carter Drive.
Attached to this Staff Report is the e-mail from Mr. Wilkerson and the response to
his requests by the applicant. Obviously, they did not agree to a delay or items 1
though 5. They did agree to a minimum house size of 3,200 square feet,
establishment of an HOA, asphalt streets and no sidewalks along Carter Drive.
Staff can not support asphalt streets, however no sidewalks, curbs or gutters along
Carter Drive is appropriate to be more compatible with the established
development pattern in this neighborhood. Staff can also support mountable curbs
(with sidewalks) along the new streets proposed within this development. The
paving width will be increased to 30 feet (back to back), within the 50 foot right-
of-way accommodate this street type. A follow-up e-mail from Dean Wilkerson
is also attached which reiterates their concern with the increased number of homes
backing to the homes along Rolling Hills.
On January 12, 2012, Staff received responses in opposition, from 26 of the
homeowners in Carter Estates, Phases I and II. All responses contained the same
attachments, including a letter, signed by each property owner stating that they
prefer the existing 24-lot plan (approved plat), because it provides: two
entrances and better traffic flow, fewer lots adjacent to the homes on Rolling
Hills, rear entry homes which will result in less cars parked on the street, an alley
which will provide a hard separation between neighborhoods, and a significant
more public green space in the 24-lot plan. A copy of the letter and all exhibits
are also attached to this Staff Report.
ITEM # 5
Page 5 of 6
Staff analyzed this request in comparison to the development rights which are
vested in virtue of having a 24-lot filed, and development-ready subdivision plat.
From a planning perspective, this current request:
• Is more compatible with development patterns along Carter Drive, whereas the
approved plat has three lots that side onto Carter, which would permit wood
fences along the street, standard curb, gutter and sidewalks. Open space is
being provided internal to the tract.
• Preserves significantly more trees (approximately 1,818 caliper inches)
• The minimum house size has increased from 1,800 square feet, to 3,200 square
feet.
• Retains the existing decorative metal fencing along the east and west property
lines. However, the location of this fence needs to be shown on the Detail Site
Plan and its maintenance defined.
• Homeowners Association will be established, as required with all subdivisions
where there is common property.
• On both proposals, there are smaller lots adjacent to the west property line than
the existing homes along Rolling Hills. The approved plat calls for a 15-foot
alley, and a 20-foot rear yard setback, with no other requirements. The PD
currently being requested includes a 35-foot setback for all main structures, and
the retention of the existing decorative metal fence. While the neighborhood is
requesting a construction of a masonry wall between these two developments,
staff cannot support that request because masonry walls are only required along
thoroughfares and between residential and non-residential uses.
• The applicant has offered to limit the garage doors facing the street to a
maximum of two, throughout the entire development.
• And, it reduces the number of lots from 24 to 23.
Staff recognizes the overwhelming opposition to this request by virtually all of the
abutting property owners, which exceeds the 20% threshold, requiring a super-
majority vote (6 out of 7) vote of Council to grant this change in zoning.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending APPROVAL of PD-246R-SF-12, Carter Addition PH III subject to the
PD Conditions as offered by the applicant including, the 35’ rear yard setback along the west
property line, increased front yard setbacks, no curb, gutter or sidewalks along Carter Drive,
maximum of two garage doors facing the street, preservation of trees, and subject to the
following revisions:
1. Revise the PD Conditions on the Detail Plan to reflect the minimum house
size of 3,200 square feet.
2. Revise the Detail Plan to indicate the location and define maintenance of
retained decorative metal fencing.
ITEM # 5
Page 6 of 6
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the request
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date
ATTACHMENTS:
1. E-Mail from Dean Wilkerson, dated 1/5/12
2. Response Memo from Matthew Alexander, dated 1/11/12
3. E-mail from Andy Louis, dated 1/11/12
4. Attachments to letters in opposition from 26 property owners in Carter Estates.
5. E-Mail from Dean Wilkerson, dated 1/12/12
6. Detail Site Plan
7. Tree Survey
>>> On 1/5/2012 at 5:30 PM, in message
<1B59BAE71B668F4DB0A483C0CE9850B202F7A0@EXCH.acepnatl.org>, Dean Wilkerson
<dwilkerson@acep.org> wrote:
Dear Clay and Gary,
Homeowners in our Rolling Hills neighborhood and those in the Carter Estates received
the attached letter concerning a request to change the SF-12 zoning (24 lots) on the
Carter/Foss property to a planned development (PD) (23 lots) with the same
specifications as were previously submitted and rejected by the Coppell P&Z. We
understand Coppell staff is to issue its recommendation on January 13 and the matter is
to be considered by the P&Z on January 19.
On behalf of the neighbors that will be affected, I respectfully ask for a one-month
extension and that the staff recommendation and P&Z consideration be postponed until
February.
As I discussed briefly with Clay this morning, our neighborhoods have assumed that the
SF-12 zoning was going to be adhered to. Many neighbors support this even with the
alleys because it results in less density on the west side, creates some buffer between
property lines and the building area of the new homes, and there are aspects of the PD
they don't like. The request by Toll Brothers to now simply approve the original PD
with no changes strikes some as a bait-and-switch. In addition, this request has come
fairly quickly and homeowners have not had time to absorb, sufficiently discuss among
ourselves, and suggest to Coppell staff and the Toll Brothers ways in which the PD
could reasonably be improved and be supported by many if not all homeowners in the
area.
A few homeowners from Rolling Hills met last night with many of the homeowners
from Carter Estates. There are still some differing views as to which plan is preferred
and what might make the PD supportable over the existing zoning. I believe there may
be enough consensus that we could propose modifications to the PD that might be
deemed reasonable by the staff and some of which might be acceptable to the Toll
Brothers. It would be highly preferable, in my opinion, if a win-win-win could be
worked out that the city, Toll Brothers, and the homeowners could live with.
An important reason for the one-month delay is to give our homeowners time to agree
on what are reasonable requests for improvement of the PD. It may be that the Rolling
Hills neighborhood has some different viewpoints than the Carter Estates, but based on
the conversations last night, I think there is a list of items that might get support from
virtually all homeowners, some of which might be acceptable to Toll Brothers and
would improve the PD from our standpoint.
Some of these items that would garner support of the Rolling Hills neighborhood for the
PD include:
1.Reduce the density on the west side by one lot. This would be consistent with the
number of lots on the west side under the SF-12 plan; the PD increases density on the
Rolling Hills side.
2.Require an 8-foot stone or brick wall around most of the property, although not
necessarily homes that back up to the flood plain. This would preserve some measure
of privacy for our neighborhoods and for homeowners in the new subdivision.
Some additional items that our neighborhood supports and are important to the Carter
Estates homeowners include:
1.Have homes that are adjacent to Carter Drive face Carter Drive, require side or rear
entry garages, and specify that board-on-board fences would not be allowed for the
homes adjacent to Carter Drive.
2.Provide two green spaces in the new subdivision, which the SF-12 plan provides,
rather than the one green space in the proposed PD. If positioned near the Carter
Estates homes this would allow existing neighbors as well as future neighbors to enjoy
more green space.
3.Do more to save some trees. Specify that any tree of 20 inches or more in diameter
on the specific acreage outside the flood plain be saved (unless the tree is within
specific road or home building lines).
4.Require a minimum house square footage of 3,200 square feet.
5.Require a strict HOA with the City of Coppell’s review and approval.
Suggested cost-saving ideas for Toll Brothers could include asphalt streets in lieu of
concrete and no sidewalks along Carter Drive to allow continuity with the existing
neighborhood.
We respectfully ask for a one-month extension to allow time for us to discuss these
issues further among our neighbors, with Toll Brothers and with city staff. This is an
extremely important issue that profoundly affects our home values and enjoyment of
our homes. I hope you will agree to give us just a little more time with this. Thank you
for your consideration. –Dean
Dean Wilkerson
538 Rolling Hills Road
Coppell, TX 75019
(H)972-393-1682
(O)800-798-1822, ext. 3200
R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx
MEMO FOR RECORD
DAA JOB NO. 07111C
1/11/12
TO: Marcie Diamond – Coppell Planning
Coppell Planning & Zoning Commission
Coppell City Council
Rolling Hill/Carter Estate HOA’s
CC: Toll Bros.; file
FROM: Matthew Alexander, P.E.
RE: Carter Addition – Phase III
Coppell, Texas
As requested, Dowdey, Anderson & Associates has relayed the list of requests made by the
Carter Estates/Rolling Hills neighborhoods to Toll Bros. Together we have evaluated the merits
of each request as well as our ability to accommodate each request. Below we have provided a
response and explanation to those requests:
Neighborhood Request:
1. Reduction of 1 lot adjacent to Rolling Hills – Toll Bros. purchased the land with the
anticipation of constructing 24 single-family lots as approved and platted. The proposed
plan only has 23 lots which already results in a 1 lot reduction. Unfortunately the loss of
another lot is no longer practical due to the financial impacts to the development and
thus respectfully Toll Bros. cannot agree to this request.
2. 8-foot Masonry Wall between Rolling Hills and Carter Addition III - This request is a
difficult request on many levels and is not an acceptable request for the following
reasons: 1) this is not consistent with the Coppell Land Development Code or the
existing residents in the area. Furthermore, it is not believed that staff would support this
request. In addition, masonry walls are usually constructed to separate residential and
non-residential uses and thus are not appropriate in our opinion; 2) The perpetual
maintenance of such a wall would truly be challenging. Masonry walls are traditionally
perimeter walls and are owned and maintained by the HOA. In this situation the wall
would be situated across multiple lots and the access to and the perpetual maintenance
of this wall would be difficult over time. Therefore, Toll Bros. does not agree with this
request and thus respectfully we cannot agree to this request.
3. Homes fronting on Carter Drive shall have side or rear entry garages - After receiving this
request, we evaluated it to determine if this request was a consistent characteristic
within the existing additions of Carter Estates. After driving the sub-division again, we
found that this was not a consistent characteristic to all of the homes within the Carter
Addition. To the contrary, we found multiple instances where existing garage doors,
metal and wood, either face the streets or are clearly visible from the street within Carter
Estates. Therefore, for these reasons we believe it is not rational to arbitrarily restrict our
R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx
future residents to a standard not consistently found or enforced within the existing
additions of Carter Estates. Please refer to the pictures attached.
4. No Board-on-Board Fencing on these lots or facing the street - After receiving this request,
we evaluated it to determine if this request was a consistent characteristic within the
existing additions of Carter Estates. After driving the sub-division again we found that this
was not a consistent characteristic to all of the homes within the Carter additions. To the
contrary, we found multiple instances where existing wood fencing (board-on-board or
otherwise) either faces the streets or is clearly visible from the street within Carter
Estates. Therefore, for these reasons we believe it is not rational to arbitrarily restrict our
future residents to a standard not consistently found or enforced within the existing
additions of Carter Estates. Please refer to the pictures attached in Exhibit “A.”
5. Provision for an Additional Open Space Lot along Carter Drive - This plan proposes 3 lots
that face Carter Drive. The approximate lots width at the building line are as follows: Lot
1 - 150’, Lot 22 – 150’, and Lot 23 – 143’. We believe that the additional set-back along
Carter Drive created by the proposed 50-30-foot front yard set-back should be a
dramatic improvement to the 15-foot side yard along Carter Drive currently approved
and platted with the 24-lot plan. In our opinion, the proposed 23-lot plan and the
associated front yard set-backs proposed that would be free of buildings or wood fences
allowed by the current 24-Lot plan will provide the neighborhood with the open space
lot “feel” that they have requested without adding an additional burden to the Phase III
Addition HOA. Therefore, we respectfully decline to agree to this request.
6. Do more to save trees and save all trees greater than 20-inches in caliper that do not fall
within roads or building pads - We have stated all along that we value the trees on this
site and we view them as an asset to this addition. The reason we are bringing this
application back to the City for their consideration is we believe the proposed 23-Lot
plan is a better plan and is the right all-around plan for this site. Thus Toll Bros. is willing
to forfeit development cost they have spent with us and others in an attempt to develop
the right plan, recommended by staff, for this tract. This proposed plan is more
consistent with other single-family development in the area and preserves more trees.
This proposed 23-lot plan preserves approximately 2100 more inches than the approved
24-lot plan because of the elimination of alleys and the creation of an internal open
space lot. That being said, while we cannot agree to save all trees 20-inches or greater
not in the building pads or roadways due to other considerations and restrictions like
utility construction and lot grading we do share a common value the existing residents in
that we are significantly preserving more trees with this proposal.
7. Minimum House Size of 3,200 square feet – Toll Bros. is pleased to be able to honor this
request.
8. Require an HOA – Toll Bros. is pleased to honor this request.
9. Suggesting Asphalt Streets and no Sidewalks along Carter Drive – Toll Bros. has always
been open to these requests, but these requests are not consistent with the
requirements of the Coppell Development Code and thus we believe Staff may not
support or allow them.
R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx
Exhibit “A”
(Examples: Garage doors facing Street within Carter Addition)
R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx
(Examples: Garage doors facing Street within Carter Addition)
R:\Data\2007\07111\Correspondence\Memo's\07111C-2012-01-11-response memo to neighborhood zoning request.dotx
(Examples: Wood fencing facing Street within Carter Addition)
Marcie Diamond - Carter Addition Phase III
Ms. Diamond,
Thank you for forwarding the attached response of Dowdy, Anderson & Associates, Inc. on
behalf of Toll Dallas Texas LLC denying all the requested changes proposed by the adjacent
neighbors in Carter Estates and Rolling Hills Road regarding the planned development proposed
for Carter Addition Phase III of 23 residential lots, 1 common area on 20.269 acres.
From the Rolling Hills perspective, I and my neighbors on the south part of Rolling Hills most
affected by the greatest density of the proposed planned development are in agreement. While
the proposed planned development reduces the total number of lots by one, it increases the
density by one lot for the row of houses adjacent to the Rolling Hills Road lots. I do not
understand how the city would support such an inequitable treatment for me and my neighbors.
There is little incentive for us to support the proposed planned development without any
concessions by the developer.
I believe the developer has a lot to gain from the proposed planned development or the developer
would already be building on the proposed 24 residential lot plan that does not require any
variances from the current zoning restrictions. The fact the proposed planned development does
not have alleys may be more valuable to the developer than to the residents on Rolling Hills.
The developer benefits from the proposed planned development by, among other things, the cost
savings of not having to pour a cement alley and the increased value of certain lots not having an
alley cut them off from a bucolic view of the flood zone. I believe the reduction of one of the
smaller lots adjacent to the Rolling Hills lots is a very reasonable request because it returns the
density to us that was in the prior 24 lot proposal.
Since the developer has rejected the reduction in density (and I may add all our other requests),
we will be forced to plead the inequitable treatment to us of the planned development to the
Planning and Zoning Commission and will risk living with the prior 24 lot proposal. I believe the
inequity will resonate with the commission. I need not remind you that the last variance requests
by the developer were denied by the commission even though the city staff supported the
variance requests.
Please put me on the list of persons who would like to speak before the Planning and Zoning
Commission at the hearing next week.
I appreciate your working for the city and believe we have a common goal of doing what is best
for Coppell. I am not against the development, but want more equitable treatment from the
developer who gains financially from the proposed planned development (perhaps even without
From: "Andy Louis (Legal)" <alouis@valhi.net>
To: "'mdiamond@coppelltx.gov'" <mdiamond@coppelltx.gov>
Date: 1/11/2012 5:47 PM
Subject: Carter Addition Phase III
CC: "'gsieb@coppelltx.gov'" <gsieb@coppelltx.gov>,
"'cphillips@coppelltx.gov...
Attachments: Re: Toll Brothers matter
Page 1 of 2
1/12/2012file://C:\Documents and Settings\mdiamond\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F0DCB49...
one of its proposed smallest lots). Please note that in denying the request for a reduction in the
lots, the developer cited the “financial impacts” and not “reduced profits” or a “financial loss.”
I hope you can provide the support of the city staff in recommending a reduction in the planned
development density as I have requested.
Regards,
Andy Louis
546 Rolling Hills Road
Coppell, Texas 75019
Page 2 of 2
1/12/2012file://C:\Documents and Settings\mdiamond\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F0DCB49...
Attached are the Exhibits that are
attached to each Response in
Opposition from the 26
homeowners in Carter Estates,
Phases I and II
Received
January 12, 2012
Marcie Diamond - Toll Brothers PD Request
Dear Marcie,
We wish to register our strong objection to the planned development (PD) by the Toll Brothers behind our
home. This is the identical plan the Coppell Planning & Zoning Commission rejected last year. We are not
opposed to development behind our home, but we oppose this plan that adds more density than current zoning.
The PD increases the density along the fence line next to the homes on Rolling Hills. When this PD was rejected
before, we were reconciled to a plan under the current SF‐12 zoning that would have fewer houses across our
fence line, while the development was more evenly distributed elsewhere on the Toll Brothers’ property. To
now be considering a narrowing of the lots and an increase in the density is a much worse plan. We would
prefer to have the alley and the buffer it would create with fewer houses next to us than to pack more in on
cookie‐cutter lots with the rooftops practically touching each other like their Denton Tap development.
The reason Toll Brothers wants to do the PD with 23 lots instead of the SF‐12 with 24 lots is that they can make
more money with this PD. If they don’t want to reduce a lot from their overall number, PLEASE make them
revise their plan to reapportion their lot sizes to reduce the density on this side. The SF‐12 plan has seven lots
facing the homes of the Wilkersons, Capps, Louises, and Briscoes. The PD increases that to eight homes on
narrow lots. They could still build their 23 homes but change the lot sizes elsewhere. If they are not willing to
do this, we ask for the protections of the current zoning.
Notwithstanding my recent letter to you listing eight items various homeowners in this area think are
reasonable, there is only one thing that is critically important to me and my immediate neighbors. We will not
oppose the PD if Toll Brothers changes their plan to have only seven houses facing the four homes stretching
from my house south on Rolling Hills instead of the eight shown on their PD. This is a reasonable request. If
staff cannot recommend that, we would be very disappointed and feel as though our neighborhood was not
fairly considered by staff in its recommendation. If Toll Brothers does not adjust their lots elsewhere in the PD
so as to meet this reasonable request, we will work to defeat the PD request.
Yours truly,
Dean and Pam Wilkerson
538 Rolling Hills Road
Coppell, TX 75019
From: "Dean Wilkerson" <deanwilk@gmail.com>
To: <mdiamond@coppelltx.gov>
Date: 1/12/2012 8:42 PM
Subject: Toll Brothers PD Request
CC: <cphillips@coppelltx.gov>, <gsieb@coppelltx.gov>, <pamwilk@gmail.com>
Page 1 of 1
1/13/2012file://C:\Documents and Settings\mdiamond\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F0F45C4Ci...
ITEM # 6
Page 1 of 3
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Carter Addition PH III, Revised Replat
P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012
C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012
STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Planning Director
LOCATION: South side of Carter Drive, approximately 925 feet west of Moore Road
SIZE OF AREA: 20.28 acres of property
CURRENT ZONING: SF-12 (Single-Family 12) and A (Agriculture)
REQUEST: A replat to re-subdivide the existing 24 single-family lots and two common area
lots (Carter Addition PH III) into 23 single-family lots and one common area lot.
APPLICANT: Owner: Civil Engineer:
Toll Dallas TX LLC Matt Alexander
2557 S.W. Grapevine Pkwy Dowdey, Anderson & Associates
Suite 100 5225 Village Creek Drive
Grapevine, Texas 76051 Plano, Texas 75093
817-329-8770 972-931-0694
HISTORY: The Carter Addition, a 30-lot subdivision, was established in 1972 and encircled
an existing 0.5-acre cemetery. Deed restrictions placed on the property expired on
January 1, 2001. In 1990, a replat of Lots 3 and 4 was denied by Council. On
June 17, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied a requested replat of
Lot 18, to reduce the front building line from 50 to 30 feet, at 509 East Bethel
School Road.
Lot 1 of the original Carter Estates subdivision is within the current request area
and contains 2.95 acres of the 20.3-acre subject property.
The Carter Addition, Phase II, which is a five-lot subdivision has a long replatting
history. The original Final Plat was approved by the Planning Commission on
November 21, 1996. That plat was not filed for record prior to its expiration date,
and therefore was deemed null and void. In 1998, a Final Plat for a reconfigured
ITEM # 6
Page 2 of 3
five-lot layout was approved, but again, never filed for record. In October of 1999,
Council approved a five-lot Final Plat which was filed with Dallas County in
December of that year. On August 8, 2000, City Council approved a replat for Lots
1 and 2 Carter Addition, Phase II, however, it also expired. This replat of Lots 1 and
2 was approved again in November 2001, and was filed within the statutory time
limit. Since that time, all five homes have been constructed in Phase II of this
development.
On September 16, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied a request for
a preliminary plat, with variances, for 23 residential lots and one area common lot
on this 20.28 acres of property.
November 9, 2010 City Council followed the recommendation of the Planning
and Zoning Commission and approved a preliminary plat with no variances for
twenty-seven (27) single-family residential lots and two (2) common area lots on
this tract of land.
On March 8, 2011 Council approved a Replat/Final Plat with no variances for 24
lots and two common area lots on this 20 acre tract of land. This plat has been
filed with the county, and is essentially ready for development.
TRANSPORTATION: Carter Drive and Christi Lane are two-lane, asphalt streets, built within 50 feet of
right-of-way. These streets do not have curbs or sidewalks.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North - Single-family residences; Carter Addition, PD-248-SF-18 (Planned
Development-248-Single Family-18)
South – DART R.O.W. and Belt Line Road; A (Agriculture)
East - Single-family residences; Carter Addition, Phase II, PD-248-SF-18 (Planned
Development-248-Single Family-18)
West - single-family residences; Northlake Woodlands, Lots 5-10 SF-12 (Single
Family-12)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan of March 2011, shows the property as suitable for
Residential Neighborhood, which is defined as areas of low and medium density
single family, typically one to four dwelling units per acre.
DISCUSSION: As stated in the History Section of this report, this property is currently platted as
a 24-lot subdivision in compliance with the regulations of the Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinances. This request is to replat this subdivision into 23 lots,
with one common lot to conform with the PD zoning district which is a
companion to this Replat request. The following variances to the Subdivision
Ordinance are being requested as part of the approval of this revised Replat: cul-
de-sac length exceeding 600 feet, no alleys, mountable curbs (requiring 30 foot
paving width) and no curbs, gutters or sidewalks along Carter Drive.
ITEM # 6
Page 3 of 3
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending APPROVAL of Carter Estates, Phase III Revised Replat, subject to:
1. Revise the notes on the Replat to only reflect those relating to the Subdivision (not
Zoning) Ordinance.
2. Include the floodplain note on the plat that states, "The City of Coppell will have no
responsibility for maintenance of the floodway/floodplain areas as shown hereon;
however, the City does have the authority to regulate activity in the floodway/floodplain
as per the City’s Floodplain Ordinance. The maintenance of these areas shall be the sole
responsibility of the individual lot owner(s), adjacent to said areas. There areas are to
remain free of improvements that may obstruct the flow of storm water and protected
from potential erosion by the owners. No fences will be allowed in the floodplain, along
with any other structures as per the City’s Floodplain Ordinance”.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the request
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Replat
ITEM # 7
Page 1 of 4
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO.: PD-251R-SF-12, Rosebriar Estates
P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012
C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012
STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Planning Director
LOCATION: South of East Sandy Lake Road between Dobecka Drive and Castlebury Court
SIZE OF AREA: 2.8 acres of property
CURRENT ZONING: SF-12 (Single Family-12)
REQUEST: A zoning change to PD-251R-SF-12 (Planned Development-251 Revised-Single
Family-12), to allow the development of six (6) single-family lots, with a
minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet and three (3) common area lots.
APPLICANT: Brad Meyer, Principal
Contrast Development, LLC
300 E. John Carpenter Freeway, Suite 940
Irving, Texas 75062
972-793-7685
E-mail: Brad.meyer@contrastdevelopment.com
HISTORY: This property has been owned by TU Electric for over 25 years. An electrical
substation was envisioned for this site. It was eventually determined to be excess
property for TU, which lead to its potential sale. An application for residential use
was subsequently submitted.
On August 9, 2011 Council overruled the recommendations of the Planning Staff
and Planning and Zoning Commission and denied a request for a Planned
Development for six single family, SF-12 lots and three common area lots on this
property. That proposal included the street aligning with Trailwood Lane on the
north side of Sandy Lake and the preservation of all the trees on the site. The
request, as revised for Council, included restrictions on transparency of west-
facing second story windows and additional landscaping along the west property
line. Due to opposition from the homeowners west of this property, at the August
9th public hearing, Council denied this application and requested that the applicant
ITEM # 7
Page 2 of 4
bring back a revised plan, with the street relocated to the west side of the
property, and instructed staff to waive all filing fees for the re-submittal.
TRANSPORTATION: Sandy Lake Road is designated as a four-lane divided thoroughfare and is built to
standard within a 110-foot right-of-way.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North: Pecan Ridge Estates; PD-113-SF-9
South: Willowood No. 2; SF-7
East: Castlebury Court; PD-170-SF-7
West: Dobecka Addition; SF-12
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan of March 2011, shows the property as suitable
for Residential Neighborhood, which is defined as areas of low and
medium density single family, typically one to four dwelling units per
acre.
DISCUSSION: This property is currently zoned SF-12, which permits single family homes with a
minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet. The six-lot subdivision planned for this
property exceeds the minimum lot size requirement, with an average lot size of
approximately 13,500 square feet; however, a Planned Development district
zoning is being requested to allow for several variances to the Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinances. This PD also includes three landscaped, common area
lots, eight-foot tall cedar fencing along the property lines adjacent to the common
areas and a seven-foot tall brick wall along Sandy Lake Road. All common areas
will be maintained by a Homeowners Association.
The first variance requested is to a development regulation in the Zoning
Ordinance. Single Family-12 District regulations require a minimum front yard
setback of 30 feet. This request is to reduce this to a minimum of 25 feet for all
six lots. Given that this is a single-loaded street, and the lots will front on a
landscaped buffer strip, this variance can be supported.
The second variance being requested is to the Subdivision Ordinance, which is to
provide relief to the sidewalk requirement along the west side of the street. This
variance is appropriate as no lots will be abutting the west side of the street. An
11-foot wide landscape strip (common area and R.O.W.) and an eight-foot cedar
fence are also proposed along this west side of the street. This buffer strip will be
landscaped with ten Live Oak trees and the five existing trees (Pines, Cedars and
one Hackberry) are to be preserved. The installation of a sidewalk could
potentially impact the tree preservation efforts along this property line. However,
in the event that these trees do not survive the construction activities, then
additional mitigation may be required.
The third variance relates to the access to alleys. Lots 1 through 4 will abut the
existing alley serving the homes along Castlebury Court. The southern two lots
(Lots 5 and 6) will back to the existing alley serving the Willowood No. 2
ITEM # 7
Page 3 of 4
Addition. The Subdivision Ordinance requires the construction of alleys, and the
Zoning Ordinance requires that access be from the alley. The applicant is
requesting an option to build homes with either front facing garages or rear access
homes. Therefore, included in this PD is a condition that alley access be at the
builder’s option.
The final variance relates to the provision of overstory trees within the common
area (Lot 1X) along Sandy Lake Road. The Landscape and the Streetscape
Ordinances require overstory trees along this Primary Image Zone. This property
is currently owned by Oncor Electric Delivery Company who has a blanket
easement over the entire property. Included on the Preliminary Plat for this
property is the establishment of a 25-foot wide Oncor Electric easement abutting
Sandy Lake Road which is common area Lot 1X of this PD. The easement
agreement includes the prohibition of overstory trees within this 25-foot wide
area. In lieu of the three overstory trees, the applicant is proposing six ornamental
trees, as well as seasonal color at the intersection. However, staff is
recommending that the number of ornamental trees be increased to a total of nine
trees to provide for the ratio of three ornamental trees to fulfill the requirement of
one overstory tree.
As discussed above, there will be lots on only one side of the street. The Fire
Marshal has requested that no parking be allowed on the common area lot side
(west) of the street, to provide for adequate access for emergency vehicles. In lieu
of this parking prohibition, the applicant has offered a condition that there will be
no parking adjacent to Lot 1, which is the closest to Sandy Lake Road. However,
this does not provide the maneuverability needed, and therefore staff is
recommending that parking only be permitted on the portions of the street with
homes fronting.
The final issue is street alignment. As detailed in the History Section of this
report, in the previous PD request, the proposal was to align the street with
Trailwood Drive, and a left turn storage lane was to be provided in the existing
median in Sandy Lake Road to promote safe left turn movements into this
subdivision and safer U-turn movements for homes along Castlebury Court.
While preferable from a vehicular safety perspective, the homeowners along
Dobecka Drive and Council determined that a misalignment in the streets was
more desirable for neighborhood compatibility reasons.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending APPROVAL of PD-251R-SF-12, Rosebriar Estates subject
to:
1. Revise the note on the plat prohibiting parking adjacent to Lot 1 to “No
Parking shall be permitted along the west side of the street, adjacent to
Common Area Lot 3X”.
2. Revision of the Landscape Plan to add three ornamental trees within the
common area Lot 1X.
ITEM # 7
Page 4 of 4
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the request
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Site Plan
2. Tree Survey
3. Landscape Plan with Wall Elevations
ROSEBRIAR ESTATES
TOTAL 2.826– GROSS ACRES
EXISTING ’SF-12’ ZONING
SITUATED IN COPPELL, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
ABSTRACT NO. 629
IN THE SIBERED B. HENDERSON SURVEY,
BEING A 2.826 ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED
SITE PLAN FOR
NORTH
0 40’80’120’
GRAPHIC SCALE
REVISIONSDATE
RRPREVIEWED BY
G:JOB\ 11-CDP001\ENT\PPLATFILE PATH
JWRDRAWN BY
SOLUTIONS, LLLP
PELOTON LAND
PHONE: 817-562-3350
KELLER, TX 76244
SUITE 185
5751 KROGER DRIVE
DEVELOPEROWNER ENGINEER
PLANNER /
F: (817) 215-6600
PH: (817) 215-6607
DALLAS, TEXAS 75202
1616 WOODALL ROGERS FRWY.
COMPANY, LLC
ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY
(972) 793-7685
IRVING, TEXAS 75062
# 940
300 E. JOHN CARPENTER FRWY
CONTRAST DEVELOPMENT
ZONING CASE #PD-251R-SF-12
G:\JOB\11-CDP001-Oncor Tract\Ent\PPLAT\CDP001 pSITE.sht11-CDP001.1PROJECT NO.
BLOCK A / LOTS 1 - 6, 1X, 2X, 3X
6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, 3 COMMON AREAS
DATE 510510510
510512512512510508506498504508506508512512514514512TBM
1/2"FIR
1/2"FIR
1/2"FIR
1/2"FIR 1/2"FIR1/2"FIR
3/8"FIR
1/2"FIR
TBM
WV
TB
TELP
CATV
TELP
CATV
C1
10 11 12 2 198
2345678
9
37
38
39
40
41
36
1
D.R.D.C.T.
CASTLEBURY COURT ADDITION
Vol. 99141, Pg. 88,
D.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 73095, Pg. 746,
BLOCK A
BLOCK D
5/8"SIRSet"X"
5/8"SIR
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY
Vol. 99081, Pg. 26, D.R.D.C.T.15’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER,FENCE AND SIDEWALK EASEMENTVol. 99141, Pg. 88, D.R.D.C.T.Concrete WalkTELP
35
7
D.R.D.C.T.
DOBECKA ADDITION
Vol. 82084, Pg. 1226
BLOCK A D.R.D.C.T.
DOBECKA ADDITION, PHASE II
CC Inst. No,. 20070172592
20’ DRAINAGE EASEMENT
CC Inst. No,. 2007017592, D.R.D.C.T.10 UTILITY EASEMENT
Vol. 82084, Pg. 1233, D.R.D.C.T.15’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER,CC Inst. No,. 2007017592D.R.D.C.T.5’ UTILITY EASEMENT
Vol. 99141, Pg. 88,
D.R.D.C.T.30"WTR8"SSG G GG16"WTRWWW8"WTR175.90’701.89’175.97’698.36’
A
ROSEBRIAR COURT
DOBECKA DRIVE
CASTLEBURY COURT SANDY LAKE ROADBLOCK B
SF-12
SF-7
SF-7
SF-9
SF-9
9
11
14
13
SPLIT BD.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 92043, Pg. 0136
D.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 91226, Pg. 4401
SAND POINT ESTATES
PECAN RIDGE ESTATES
TRAILWOOD LANELot 1X (Common Area)
ABSTRACT NO. 629
SIBERED B. HENDERSON SURVEY
No. 2 ADDITION
WILLOWOOD 87.5’100’100’
4 3 2 15
6
100’100’
510.54’
5.0’519.19’
179.17’88.38’191.46’111.23’105.05’
35.03’120.93’28.02’30"WTR8"WTR
EX 8"SSEX 8"SSMH
SS
MH
SS
MH
SS
WWEX 8"WATERMH
SS
N8929’18"W120.83N8806’54"EN8929’18"W120.83N8929’18"W120.84N8929’29"WN00 30’42"E
S8929’29"E54.23’127’–50’R39’R
25’R
200’R
71.12’14’R
FRONT 25’ BUILDING LINE25’ FRONT BUILDING LI
NE
31.18’
S6650’33"W
48.49’110.92’14.44’
N44 18’48"E
(Common Area)
Lot 2X
Area)
Lot 3X (Common
161.62’95.36’15’ B.L.66.13’
89.27’
89.98’
ESMT
UTILITY
20’
97.09’
EASEMENT
ELECTRIC
25’ ONCOR
PROPOSED
635 HOLLYMOCKINBIRDBETHEL
SANDERS LOOPST LOUIS
R
IVERCHASE
RODEOVALLEY
RANCHRANCHVIEWCottonwood
NORTH
LIMITCLEARCREEK
SANDY KNOLLWILLOW
SPRINGS
BETHEL SCHOOL
MOOREROLLINGHILLSNORTH LAKESANDY LAKE LODGEDENTON TAPDENTON TAPBELT LINECOPPELL
COWBOY
VAN ZANDT
BELT LINEM
EADOW CREEK
BELTSAMUEL CI
TYGrapevine
Creek
LAKE
Grapevine
Creek
CIT
Y
LI
MIT
ST L SW RY
CIT
Y
LI
MITCOTTONWOODCOPPELLCOPPELLRUBY
BETHEL
COTTON WIND ING HOL L OWT
H
WE
AT
BranchSANDY LAKE
COPPELLSOUTHWESTERN
AIRLINEFREEPORTPIKWY
ESTERS REGENTPKWYIRVING TRAILWOOD LNDOBECKACASTLEBURYMcARTHURLOCATION
SITE
PD-170
25’1’50’ ROWB-B28’25’25’87.5’LOT WIDTHMEASURE OF87.5’LOT WIDTHMEASURE OF PROP. 4’ SIDEWALK
8’ SCREEN WALL
PROPOSED
CROSSING
CONCRETE
STAMPED
8’ WIDE
PROPOSED
R.O.W.R.O.W.6’4’
1’PROPERTY BOUNDARY1.5’ FENCE8’ WOOD FENCE
PROPOSED
MAY 16, 2011 LOT LAYOUT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2011
SECTION A-A
NTS
50’ ROW STREET
PVMT
28’
x
x
x
x
5’6’
& SLOPE
LANDSCAPE2.5’2.5’ INSIDE PL
BY DEVELOPER
8’ WOOD FENCE
ON PROPERTY LINE
BY DEVELOPER
8’ WOOD FENCE
111.04’
MEASURE OF LOT WIDTH
OCT. 24, 2011 Revise Lot Layout
COMMON AREA TABLE
LOT BLOCK AREA (SF)
1X
2X
A
A
LOT AREA TABLE
LOT BLOCK AREA (SF)
1
2
3
4
5
6
A
A
A
A
A
A
3X A
12,336.58 sf
12,083.06 sf
12,083.59 sf
13,394.14 sf
15,951.60 sf
15,140.50 sf
3,435.98 sf
3,935.98 sf
3,480.52 sf
326.36 SQ. FT.
WITH THIS PLAT
R.O.W. DEDICATION
A
A
AREA
COMMON
5’
COURT ADJACENT TO LOT 1.
ALLOWED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ROSEBRIAR
RESPONSE TIME, PARKING WILL NOT BE
IN ORDER TO ALLOW BETTER EMERGENCY
NOTES:
ROSEBRIAR ESTATES
TOTAL 2.826– GROSS ACRES
EXISTING ’SF-12’ ZONING
SITUATED IN COPPELL, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
ABSTRACT NO. 629
IN THE SIBERED B. HENDERSON SURVEY,
BEING A 2.826 ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED
NORTH
0 40’80’120’
GRAPHIC SCALE
REVISIONSDATE
RRPREVIEWED BY
G:JOB\ 11-CDP001\ENT\PPLATFILE PATH
JWRDRAWN BY
SOLUTIONS, LLLP
PELOTON LAND
PHONE: 817-562-3350
KELLER, TX 76244
SUITE 185
5751 KROGER DRIVE
DEVELOPEROWNER ENGINEER
PLANNER /
F: (817) 215-6600
PH: (817) 215-6607
DALLAS, TEXAS 75202
1616 WOODALL ROGERS FRWY.
COMPANY, LLC
ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY
(972) 793-7685
IRVING, TEXAS 75062
# 940
300 E. JOHN CARPENTER FRWY
CONTRAST DEVELOPMENT
TREE SURVEY EXHIBIT
ZONING CASE #PD-251R-SF-12
G:\JOB\11-CDP001-Oncor Tract\Ent\PPLAT\CDP001 pTrees.sht11-CDP001.1PROJECT NO.
BLOCK A / LOTS 1 - 6, 1X, 2X, 3X
6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, 3 COMMON AREAS
DATE
Tree #168
Tree #167
Tree #166
Tree #165
Tree #164
Tree #163
Tree #162
Tree #161
Tree #159
Tree #160
Tree #158
Tree #157
TBM
TBM
10 11 12 2 198
2345678
9
37
38
39
40
41
36
1
D.R.D.C.T.
CASTLEBURY COURT ADDITION
Vol. 99141, Pg. 88,
D.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 73095, Pg. 746,
BLOCK A
BLOCK D Concrete Walk7
D.R.D.C.T.
DOBECKA ADDITION
Vol. 82084, Pg. 1226
BLOCK A D.R.D.C.T.
DOBECKA ADDITION, PHASE II
CC Inst. No,. 20070172592
G G GGA
ROSEBRIAR COURT
CASTLEBURY COURT SANDY LAKE ROADBLOCK B
11
13
SPLIT BD.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 92043, Pg. 0136
D.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 91226, Pg. 4401
SAND POINT ESTATES
PECAN RIDGE ESTATES
TRAILWOOD LANELot 1X (Common Area)ABSTRACT NO. 629
SIBERED B. HENDERSON SURVEY
No. 2 ADDITION
WILLOWOOD
4 3 2 15
6
FRONT 25’ BUILDING LINE25’ FRONT BUILDING LI
NE
(Common Area)
Lot 2X
Area)
Lot 3X (Common 15’ B.L.28’ B-B PAVEMENT
4’ SIDEWALK
1’PROPOSED REMOVAL
PROPOSED REPLACEMENT
SAND POINT ESTATES
PECAN RIDGE ESTATES
CASTLEBURY COURT ADDITION
DOBECKA ADDITION, PHASE II
DOBECKA ADDITION
X
X
TRAILWOOD LANE
Vol. 91226, Pg. 4401
D.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 92043, Pg. 0136
D.R.D.C.T.
No. 2 ADDITION
WILLOWOOD
Vol. 73095, Pg. 746,
D.R.D.C.T.
X- TREE TO BE REMOVED
SEPTEMBER 12, 2011
MAY 20, 2011 Lot Layout
OCT. 24, 2011 Revise Lot Layout
56"
2 - 4" CEDAR ELM
12 - 4" LIVE OAK
X
X
47"
# 166 6"
# 165 13"
# 159 16"
# 158 12"
MITIGATION MAY BE REQUIRED.
ACTIVITIES ON THIS PROPERTY, ADDITIONAL
TO BE REMOVED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION
IN THE EVENT THAT ADDITIONAL TREES NEED
PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF ANY TREES.
A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED
NOTE:
ITEM # 8
Page 1 of 2
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Rosebriar Estates, Preliminary Plat
P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012
C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012
STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Planning Director
LOCATION: South of East Sandy Lake Road between Dobecka Drive and Castlebury Court
SIZE OF AREA: 2.8 acres of property
CURRENT ZONING: SF-12 (Single-Family 12)
REQUEST: A preliminary plat to allow the subdivision of 2.8 acres of property into six (6)
single-family lots and three (3) common area lots.
APPLICANT: Brad Meyer, Principal
Contrast Development, LLC
300 E. John Carpenter Freeway, Suite 940
Irving, Texas 75062
972-793-7685
E-mail: Brad.meyer@contrastdevelopment.com
HISTORY: This property has been owned by TU Electric for over 25 years. An electrical
substation was envisioned for this site. It was eventually determined to be excess
property for TU development which lead to its potential sale. An application for
residential use was subsequently submitted.
On August 9, 2011, Council overruled the recommendations of the Planning Staff
and Planning and Zoning Commission and denied a request for a Planned
Development for six single family, SF-12 lots and three common area lots on this
property. That proposal included the street aligning with Trailwood Lane on the
north side of Sandy Lake and the preservation of all the trees on the site. The
request, as revised for Council, included restrictions on transparency of west
facing second story windows and additional landscaping along the west property
line. Due to opposition from the homeowners west of this property, at the August
9th public hearing, Council denied this application and requested that the applicant
bring back a revised plan, with the street relocated to the west side of the
property, and instructed staff to waive all filing fees for the re-submittal.
ITEM # 8
Page 2 of 2
TRANSPORTATION: Sandy Lake Road is designated as a 4-lane divided thoroughfare and is built to
standard within a 110-foot right-of-way.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North: Pecan Ridge Estates; PD-113-SF-9
South: Willowood No. 2; SF-7
East: Castlebury Court; PD-170-SF-7
West: Dobecka Addition; SF-12
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan of March 2011, shows the property as suitable
for Residential Neighborhood, which is defined as areas of low and
medium density single family, typically one to four dwelling units per
acre.
DISCUSSION: This is a companion request to PD-251R-SF-12, which establishes the
development regulations and incorporates several variances to the
Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of six single family lots
and three common area lots on this 2.8 acre tract of land.
As discussed in the review of the zoning request, this property is currently
owned by Oncor Electric Delivery Company who has a blanket easement
over the entire property. As part of the sale of this property for private
development, Oncor is requiring a 25’ wide easement abutting Sandy Lake
Road. This easement is indicated on the Preliminary Plat and is
designated as a common area lot in the PD.
As detailed in the PD request, the applicant is requesting a relief from the
sidewalk requirement on the west side of the street, which is being
supported by staff. The only outstanding issue is the prohibition of
parking on the west side of the street, adjacent to Common Area Lot 3X.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending APPROVAL of Rosebriar Estates, Preliminary Plat, subject to:
1. Revise the note on the plat prohibiting parking adjacent to Lot 1 to “No
Parking shall be permitted along the west side of the street, adjacent to
Common Area Lot 3X”.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the request
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Preliminary Plat
ROSEBRIAR ESTATES
TOTAL 2.826– GROSS ACRES
EXISTING ’SF-12’ ZONING
SITUATED IN COPPELL, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
ABSTRACT NO. 629
IN THE SIBERED B. HENDERSON SURVEY,
BEING A 2.826 ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED
PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR REVIEW ONLY
NORTH
0 40’80’120’
GRAPHIC SCALE
REVISIONSDATE
RRPREVIEWED BY
G:JOB\ 11-CDP001\ENT\PPLATFILE PATH
JWRDRAWN BY
SOLUTIONS, LLLP
PELOTON LAND
PHONE: 817-562-3350
KELLER, TX 76244
SUITE 185
5751 KROGER DRIVE
DEVELOPEROWNER ENGINEER
PLANNER /
F: (817) 215-6600
PH: (817) 215-6607
DALLAS, TEXAS 75202
1616 WOODALL ROGERS FRWY.
COMPANY, LLC
ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY
(972) 793-7685
IRVING, TEXAS 75062
# 940
300 E. JOHN CARPENTER FRWY
CONTRAST DEVELOPMENT
G:\JOB\11-CDP001-Oncor Tract\Ent\PPLAT\CDP001 pPLAT.sht11-CDP001.1PROJECT NO.
BLOCK A / LOTS 1 - 6, 1X, 2X, 3X
6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, 3 COMMON AREAS
DATE 510510510
510512512512510508506504508506508512512514514512TBM
1/2"FIR
1/2"FIR
1/2"FIR
1/2"FIR 1/2"FIR1/2"FIR
3/8"FIR
1/2"FIR
TBM
WV
TB
TELP
CATV
TELP
CATV
C1
10 11 12 2 198
2345678
9
37
38
39
40
41
36
1
D.R.D.C.T.
CASTLEBURY COURT ADDITION
Vol. 99141, Pg. 88,
D.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 73095, Pg. 746,
BLOCK A
BLOCK D
5/8"SIRSet"X"
5/8"SIR
EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY
Vol. 99081, Pg. 26, D.R.D.C.T.15’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER,FENCE AND SIDEWALK EASEMENTVol. 99141, Pg. 88, D.R.D.C.T.Concrete WalkTELP
35
7
D.R.D.C.T.
DOBECKA ADDITION
Vol. 82084, Pg. 1226
BLOCK A D.R.D.C.T.
DOBECKA ADDITION, PHASE II
CC Inst. No,. 20070172592
20’ DRAINAGE EASEMENT
CC Inst. No,. 2007017592, D.R.D.C.T.10 UTILITY EASEMENT
Vol. 82084, Pg. 1233, D.R.D.C.T.15’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER,CC Inst. No,. 2007017592D.R.D.C.T.5’ UTILITY EASEMENT
Vol. 99141, Pg. 88,
D.R.D.C.T.30"WTR8"SSG G GG16"WTRWWW8"WTR175.90’701.89’175.97’698.36’
A
ROSEBRIAR COURT
DOBECKA DRIVE
CASTLEBURY COURT SANDY LAKE ROADBLOCK B
SF-12
SF-7
SF-7
SF-9
SF-9
9
11
14
13
SPLIT BD.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 92043, Pg. 0136
D.R.D.C.T.
Vol. 91226, Pg. 4401
SAND POINT ESTATES
PECAN RIDGE ESTATES
TRAILWOOD LANELot 1X (Common Area)
ABSTRACT NO. 629
SIBERED B. HENDERSON SURVEY
No. 2 ADDITION
WILLOWOOD 87.5’100’100’
4 3 2 15
6
100’100’
510.54’
5.0’519.19’
179.17’88.38’191.46’111.23’105.05’
35.03’120.93’28.02’30"WTR8"WTR
EX 8"SSEX 8"SSMH
SS
MH
SS
MH
SS
WWEX 8"WATERMH
SS
N8929’18"W120.83N8806’54"EN8929’18"W120.83N8929’18"W120.84N8929’29"WN00 30’42"E
S8929’29"E54.23’127’–50’R39’R
25’R
200’R
71.12’14’R
FRONT 25’ BUILDING LINE25’ FRONT BUILDING LI
NE
31.18’
S6650’33"W
48.49’110.92’14.44’
N44 18’48"E
(Common Area)
Lot 2X
Area)
Lot 3X (Common
161.62’95.36’15’ B.L.66.13’
89.27’
89.98’
ESMT
UTILITY
20’
97.09’
EASEMENT
ELECTRIC
25’ ONCOR
PROPOSED
SITE DATA
NO. OF RESIDENTIAL LOTS = 6
TOTAL AREA = 2.826 AC.
DENSITY = 2.1 UNITS / ACRE
635 HOLLYMOCKINBIRDBETHEL
SANDERS LOOPST LOUIS
R
IVERCHASE
RODEOVALLEY
RANCHRANCHVIEWCottonwood
NORTH
LIMITCLEARCREEK
SANDY KNOLLWILLOW
SPRINGS
BETHEL SCHOOL
MOOREROLLINGHILLSNORTH LAKESANDY LAKE LODGEDENTON TAPDENTON TAPBELT LINECOPPELL
COWBOY
VAN ZANDT
BELT LINEM
EADOW CREEK
BELTSAMUEL CI
TYGrapevine
Creek
LAKE
Grapevine
Creek
CIT
Y
LI
MIT
ST L SW RY
CIT
Y
LI
MITCOTTONWOODCOPPELLCOPPELLRUBY
BETHEL
COTTON WIND ING HOL L OWT
H
WE
AT
BranchSANDY LAKE
COPPELLSOUTHWESTERN
AIRLINEFREEPORTPIKWY
ESTERS REGENTPKWYIRVING TRAILWOOD LNDOBECKACASTLEBURYMcARTHURLOCATION
SITE
PD-170 159’CASTLEBURY COURT
PROP. 4’ SIDEWALK
25’1’50’ ROWB-B28’25’CROSSING
CONCRETE
STAMPED
8’ WIDE
PROPOSED
8’ SCREEN WALL
PROPOSED
25’
SEPTEMBER 12, 2011
APRIL 20, 2011 Lot Layout
COMMON AREA TABLE
LOT BLOCK AREA (SF)
1X
2X
A
A
LOT AREA TABLE
LOT BLOCK AREA (SF)
1
2
3
4
5
6
A
A
A
A
A
A
3X A
12,336.58 sf
12,083.06 sf
12,083.59 sf
13,394.14 sf
15,951.60 sf
15,140.50 sf
3,435.98 sf
3,935.98 sf
3,480.52 sf
R.O.W.R.O.W.6’4’
1’PROPERTY BOUNDARY8’ WOOD FENCE
PROPOSED
SECTION A-A
NTS
50’ ROW STREET
PVMT
28’
x
x
x
x
5’6’
& SLOPE
LANDSCAPE
A
A
2.5’2.5’ INSIDE PL
BY DEVELOPER
8’ WOOD FENCE
ON PROPERTY LINE
BY DEVELOPER
8’ WOOD FENCE
(CASE #PD-251R-SF-12)
ZONING = PD-SF-12
OCT. 24, 2011 Revise Lot Layout
326.36 SQ. FT.
WITH THIS PLAT
R.O.W. DEDICATION
AREA
COMMON
5’
COURT ADJACENT TO LOT 1.
ALLOWED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ROSEBRIAR
RESPONSE TIME, PARKING WILL NOT BE
IN ORDER TO ALLOW BETTER EMERGENCY
BY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
ALL COMMON AREAS TO BE MAINTAINED
IMPROVEMENTS.
PRIOR TO CITY ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC
CONSTRUCTED BY THE DEVELOPER
COMMON AREA LOTS 1X AND 2X TO BE
CONSTRUCTION. SIDEWALKS ALONG
HOMEBUILDER AT TIME OF HOUSE
LOTS 1-6 TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY
SIDEWALKS ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF
NOTES:
ITEM # 9
Page 1 of 3
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO.: S-1255-C, The Learning Experience
P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012
C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012
STAFF REP.: Gary L. Sieb, Director of Planning
LOCATION: 123 East Sandy Lake Road
SIZE OF AREA: .94 acres of property
CURRENT ZONING: C (Commercial)
REQUEST: A zoning change to S-1255-C (Special Use Permit-1255-Commercial), to permit
an approximate 11,000-square-foot day care to be located within the existing two-
story building, removal of a portion of the parking lot to accommodate the
addition of a 5,150-square-foot outdoor play area with a rubber surface.
APPLICANT: Owner Architect
Peter Buell/3B Developers, Inc. Bob Anderson
3308 Shorecrest Dr. Plan Solutions Architects
Dallas, TX. 75235 400 E. Royal Lane, Suite 213
(214) 794-3722 Irving, TX. 75039
Email: pbuell@elfdinstall.com (972) 373-9999
Fax: (972) 373-9001
Email: bob@plansolutions.net
HISTORY: This property was developed with a two-story office building approximately three
years ago, and has been vacant since completion. Although several attempts to
occupy the building were undertaken, no contract for occupancy was ever
accomplished, hence, the request for this rezoning application.
TRANSPORTATION: Sandy Lake Road is an improved, concrete, four-lane divided thoroughfare built to
standard, within a 90-foot right of way.
ITEM # 9
Page 2 of 3
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North: Commercial and Single-Family; Town Center (TC) and Planned Dev. 116-
SF-7 (PD-116-SF-7)
South: Single family residential; (SF-7)
East: Single family residential; (SF-7)
West: Commercial; (PD-209-R4)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan of March 2011, shows the property as suitable for urban
residential neighborhood and residential neighborhood.
DISCUSSION: As pointed out in the HISTORY section of our staff report, this building was
constructed some time ago, and has remained vacant since completion. Although
several attempts were made to occupy it, those efforts failed and the structure
remains with no tenants. We have been approached by the property owner who
has a potential tenant wishing to occupy the entire building with a day care
facility. As staff understands, this is a national company that looks for these types
of buildings and transforms them to day cares. We have been advised that this
company has over 160 facilities spread throughout the country. Although the
exterior of the building will remain intact, changes to the site plan include the
addition of a new, six-foot high TREX fence at the rear of the building enclosing
the play area, removal of eight parking spaces to be replaced with a poured-in-
place rubberized material within the requested fenced area for play space, new
curbing, a sign package, and construction of a trash bin. Generally we require a
circular drive for day care users, but that recommendation is handled on a case-
by-case basis. Therefore, we are very much interested in how this facility will
address that issue. Parking requirements are one parking space for each ten
students. In addition, the application indicates 20 staff positions (which generally
means 20 parking spaces), and with 183 student positions, that totals 38 parking
spaces. The plan shows 39 total spaces, and we have some concern that enough
parking is being provided. To quell that concern, the applicant has indicated that
the facility is used on a sliding arrival schedule. That schedule could modify our
concerns, but the applicant needs to explain how that arrival schedule actually
works—what determines number of children per time schedule, is the schedule
based upon age specific data, how and where children enter the building, what
happens if all parking spaces are taken, etc.
In that this use is generally compatible with the neighborhood, it would occupy an
existing building that has been vacant for years, does not conflict with the
Comprehensive Master Plan, and complies with our regulations relative to Site
Plan, parking requirements, and signage; staff can support this use with
conditions.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending APPROVAL of this request subject to the following conditions:
1. Agreement regarding how the traffic drop-off system works to insure no parking/circulation
problems.
2. A colored example of the logo
ITEM # 9
Page 3 of 3
3. Show location of existing trash enclosure (dashed line will suffice)
4. Insure brick used on proposed trash enclosure matches brick on main building (state on Sheet A-2)
5. Dimension overall size of monument sign on Sheet A-2
6. Need as-builts from engineer prior to CO
7. Note: Planning Commission meeting is 1-19, not 1-9 on Sheet A-1
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the request
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Site Plan (Sheet A-1)
2. Trash/Signage Exhibit (Sheet A-2)
3. Photo of proposed screening fence
Item # 10
Page 1 of 4
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE: First Baptist Church of Coppell, Lot 1, Block A,
Site Plan Amendment
P & Z HEARING DATE: December 15, 2011 (postponed to the January 19, 2012 meeting with a
request to continue to the February 16 meeting—see attached letter;
staff recommends continuance)
C.C. HEARING DATE: January 10, 2012 (February 14, 2012—if request to continue is
approved, the Council meeting is March 13, 2012))
STAFF REP.: Gary L. Sieb, Planning Director
LOCATION: 590 S. Denton Tap Road.
SIZE OF AREA: 5.161 acres of property.
CURRENT ZONING: C and SF-9 (Commercial and Single Family-9)
REQUEST: Site Plan Amendment to allow a 740-square-foot building expansion,
revised elevations, the addition of a covered drop-off area, trellis
structures and modifications to the landscaping and parking.
APPLICANT: Owner: Architect:
First Baptist Church of Coppell James Thomas Willis, AIA
590 S. Denton Tap Road HH Architects
Coppell, Texas 75019 5910 N. Central Expwy.
(972) 462-1643 Suite 1200
FAX: (972) 304-0100 Dallas, TX. 75206
(972) 404-1034
Fax: (972) 404-1036
Email: twillis@hharchitects.com
HISTORY: The existing church facility was built in the early 70’s under the existing Commercial and
Single Family-9 District regulations. The rear 20 feet of the area was zoned PD-106-SF-9
Item # 10
Page 2 of 4
in 1988; however, the property was never platted for SF-9 uses. The extension of the
parking area into this residentially-zoned area was accommodated in March of 2003. A
Minor Plat was approved at the same time. In October of the same year, the church asked
for and received administrative approval from the Planning Director to construct a free
standing monument sign of approximately 55 square feet. That sign exists today with the
message that was approved in 2003. In 2004, a request to provide stealth antennas within
the steeple of the church was submitted by Verizon Wireless for approval. Since the
antenna would be totally shielded from view, it was administratively approved in
September, 2004.
TRANSPORTATION:
Denton Tap Road is a concrete, six-lane divided roadway, built to standard, within 100 feet
of right-of-way.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North Medical office/retail, Single Family; C (Commercial), SF-9
(Single Family-9)
South Office, Single Family; C (Commercial), SF-12 (Single Family-12)
East Single Family; PD-106, SF-9 (Planned Development-106, Single Family-9
West Undeveloped; C (Commercial)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan of March 2011 shows this property as suitable for religious
use.
DISCUSSION:
At first glance, this request appears to be pretty straight-forward with little reason to
discuss the proposed physical alterations to the existing building. The applicant
proposes to add 740 square feet to the existing structure, resulting in a 64,000-square-
foot church. Also proposed is a covered drop-off at the front of the church and a
number of façade changes. Upon closer observation of these façade changes however,
there are questions regarding the architectural design of the proposal, especially as it
relates to the “old world architectural style” which we have encouraged over the years.
There is no question that the proposal will significantly change the appearance of the
church and give it a modernistic feel with the use of glass, the introduction of metal
“grids“ as a design element on the face of the building, and the highly contemporary
“floating” horizontal elements attached to the steeple structure. Absent from the
applicant’s submittal is the provision of calculations showing that the steeple height
complies with zoning requirements—a request staff made during the Development
Review Committee meeting with the applicant.
Notwithstanding the inclusion of this information on the submittal exhibits, what this
review boils down to is whether the existing “look” of Coppell is to be preserved
(especially along a Primary Image zone), or the remodeling of an existing structure in
an attempt to create a more contemporary building is to be permitted.
As the Planning Department strives to preserve and encourage our existing architectural
style, this form of Site Plan Amendment raises the question of where the community is
Item # 10
Page 3 of 4
headed relative to its architectural design and heritage. As pointed out in our award
winning Comprehensive Plan:
“…preserving the integrity of what is good in the city” (pg. 3)
“The philosophy of the Plan is to preserve the character and quality of
…neighborhoods” (pg. 7)
“…built on the special aspects of the city’s existing character” (pg. 29)
“…a unique identity with …architecture reflecting local history, culture, and
other sense of community pride” (pg. 30)
“Encourage the use of materials…which reinforce the sense of Coppell as one
that is built for beauty…” (pg. 50)
Mentioned throughout the Plan are suggestions that major alterations which
significantly alter the appearance of recognized good urban design should be carefully
defined and enhance the beauty and character of the structure, not change it.
There is no question that the proposed modification to the church dramatically changes
the architectural character of the building. This proposal not only signifies a major
change in the appearance of a well-known church in this community, but also
introduces a number of questionable building materials that have value in certain areas
of the city such as the industrial and office districts, but certainly not on a landmark
church.
ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION:
At the December 15, 2011 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
continued this case to January so that a committee made up of Chairman Greg
Frnka, Commissioner Justin Goodale, and Planning Director Gary Sieb could
meet with the applicant and revise some elements of the façade—specifically the
areas shown with the metal material. The committee met on Friday, January 6,
2012. Conceptually, the proposed façade gained initial support of the committee,
but the applicant has asked for a continuance of the case until the February
Commission meeting in order for all back up material (specifications of the façade
replacement, elevations, a new color board, approval of the church elders, etc.) to
be provided for Commission consideration. Staff recommends CONTINUANCE
of this case until February 16.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
The Zoning Ordinance states that churches and their improvements shall not be denied
unless the health, safety, and general welfare of the community is in danger (Sec. 12-30-
15). It is obvious these proposed alterations to the church do not threaten this community;
however, staff cannot support this site plan amendment for the First Baptist Church of
Coppell. It changes the character of the church, introduces a number of building materials
that are not compatible with the existing building, and ignores several vision statements
contained within the Comprehensive Plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
Item # 10
Page 4 of 4
1. Recommend approval of the request.
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Site Plan
2. Elevations
3. Letter requesting continuance
ITEM # 11
Page 1 of 4
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO.: S-1256-R/O, Signature Living at Denton Creek
P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012
C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012
STAFF REP.: Matt Steer, City Planner
LOCATION: North side of East Sandy Lake Road, east of Riverview Drive
SIZE OF AREA: 5.3 acres of property
CURRENT ZONING: R (Retail) & O (Office)
REQUEST: A zoning change to S-1256-R/O (Special Use Permit-Retail/Office), to allow a
57,708-square-foot (74 unit, 79 bed) assisted living and memory care facility.
APPLICANT: Owner: Developer: Engineer:
Peter Park Pete Russell Steven Homeyer, P.E.
P.O. Box 141179 Signature Senior Living, LLC. Homeyer Engineering, Inc.
Irving, Texas 75014 106 Decker Court #200 P.O. Box 294527
214-649-1226 Irving, Texas 75062 Lewisville, Texas 75029
214-417-2408 972-906-9985
FAX: N/A FAX: 972-906-9987
HISTORY: This is a vacant piece of property that has been filled over the last several years.
In March of 2007, the Planning Commission denied a request for a 95-lot
subdivision on 18.86 acres of property, a portion of which included the subject
property (5.3 acres), the vacant tract to the east (6.1 acres) and what is now the
nursing home facility on the 6.5 acres to the west. The applicant did not appeal
that recommendation to Council and reapplied for a 78-lot subdivision. This
second request was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning
Commission subject to 22 conditions. Prior to Council consideration, the
applicant withdrew the request. A Planned Development was later approved in
March 2009 for a 52,317-square-foot (123 bed) Nursing and Rehabilitation
Facility on a 6.4-acre lot to the west.
TRANSPORTATION: East Sandy Lake Road is a C4D, collector, four-lane divided concrete roadway
contained within a 110-foot right-of-way.
ITEM # 11
Page 2 of 4
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North – vacant, flood land; City of Carrollton
South – retail and vacant; PD-245-R (Planned Development-245-Retail) and PD-243-R
Planned Development-243-Retail)
East – vacant; O (Office)
West –Assisted Living Facility; PD-239-R (Planned Development-239-Retail)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Coppell Comprehensive Plan shows the property as suitable for urban
residential neighborhood.
DISCUSSION: This request is to allow an assisted living and memory care facility. The land use
is compatible with the assisted living use approved in 2009 on the property to the
west and fulfills the goal of supporting “housing for all stages of life” outlined in
the Coppell 2030 Master Plan; therefore staff is in support of the land use.
Site Plan:
Specially, this proposal is for a one-story 57,708-square-foot building with two
well-landscaped courtyards which are only accessible from the interior of the
building. This will be a 74 unit, 79 bed facility with dining facilities, a game
room, a salon, an ice cream parlor and various other common areas and amenities.
Parking is required at a ratio of one space per five beds plus one per day staff, for
a total of 28 spaces. The applicant is proposing 63 parking spaces which will be
located on the west and east sides of the building. Two access points are provided
to Sandy Lake Road with full median access for the western most driveway at
Riverview Drive. A 20 to 24-foot fire lane encircles the building.
Landscaping:
The Landscape Plan exceeds the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance
where 49% of the property is devoted to landscaping and open areas. There is a
47-foot wide landscaped buffer along Sandy Lake Road, a 70 to 100-foot wide
heavily wooded flood plain area to the north where all existing trees are to be
preserved. On the west perimeter, the minimum ten foot buffer is provided. On
the east, a shared drive is proposed, shifting the required ten foot buffer between
the sidewalk and the building. The Landscape Plan includes 67 overstory trees, 17
accent trees, evergreen hedge rows screening the parking along Sandy Lake and
various ornamental grasses, ground covers and perennials. The two court yards,
internal to the building, add 8,900(+/-) square feet of landscaped area for the use
and enjoyment of its residents.
Elevations:
The elevations of the building indicate close to 100% masonry exterior, utilizing a
combination of brick and stone. A small amount of grey hardisiding is proposed
on the northern tower. Staff recommends using the same stone on this tower as is
used on the chimneys and on the main tower. This is listed as a condition of
approval.
ITEM # 11
Page 3 of 4
With the first submittal, the color elevations appeared to have a dark grayish
brown brick with a grey complimentary stone color. At the development review
committee meeting a color board and a photograph of a façade using the actual
cultured stone and brick were presented. These were not well received. The
cultured stone had too many color variations and did not match the brick color.
After a brief discussion with staff, the Architect offered to change the colors to a
darker tone as initially indicated on the color elevations. Subsequently, the color
elevations were resubmitted. The brick appears redder and the stone has fewer
variations in colors and is of a brown/tan tone. Staff has yet to receive the color
board showing the actual colors and materials to date; therefore, the stone/brick
color will need to be finalized at the Planning Commission Meeting.
The only remaining architectural concern is the metal awnings. This proposal
includes red standing seam metal awnings on three facades. Metal awnings are
specifically prohibited by the Zoning Ordinance:
“Sec. 12-20-5. Type of exterior construction. Awnings are limited to
canvas, or a lusterless, non-metal material that closely resembles canvas,
at least 98 percent of which is a single deep or neutral solid color. The
remaining up to 2 percent, if different, shall be contrasting. Awnings shall
not be backlit.”
The prohibition of metal awnings was part of the 1997 CIVIC Report which
guided the new development in Coppell, and was codified as part of the Zoning
Ordinance in 2002. Fabric awnings were specifically required to soften the
appearance of the facades of the buildings due to the heavy masonry requirement.
As with the other metal awning requests, staff does not see a justification for their
inclusion here and is recommending that they be of a sunbrella material that does
not wear or fade as quickly as the canvas.
No attached signage is proposed with this development. However, a 60-square
foot monument sign conforming to the Zoning Ordinance is proposed in front of
the building. The detail is included within the attached.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending APPROVAL of S-1256-R/O, Signature Living at Denton Creek subject to the
following conditions:
1. The materials and colors shall be representative of the initial color rendering submittal. All
plans and the color board should be revised accordingly.
2. The awnings shall be constructed of a sunbrella fabric, not metal.
3. The smaller hardisiding tower shall be constructed of the same stone as the other towers and
chimneys.
4. The dumpster enclosure, monument sign and decorative fence details shall be included on the
2nd sheet of the elevations.
5. Revise the Landscape Plan to include Cedar Elms as the dominant street tree along E Sandy
Lake.
6. Consider using a different species of overstory tree in place of the 13 Red Maples proposed.
7. There will be additional comments during detailed Engineering Plan review.
ITEM # 11
Page 4 of 4
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the request
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Site Details (8.5x11)
2. Color Renderings (3 pages, 11x17)
3. Site Plan
4. Rezoning Exhibit
5. Landscape Plan (4 pages)
6. Floor Plan
7. Elevations
EXISTING TREES
P.R.D.C.T.Denton Creek
enton Cree
k
ZONED RETAILa Texas Municipal Corporation
Volume 91226, Page 332
D.R.D.C.T.
City of Carrollton
EXISTING TREES
KR
26
ANN
69
MC
6
SHO
1
SHO
1
SHO
1
SHO
1
SHO
1
CMT
2
SHO
4
SHO
1
MF
6
RH
6
KR
3
RP
6
RH
4
NSH
4
NSH
4
RH
5 MF
3
RP
6
RH
3
NSH
7
RH
3
NSH
8
MF
4
AJ
192
AJ
276
3" OWNER
APPROVED
GRAVEL LB
213
NSH
10
MC
5
IN
7
BF
7
PL
14
MC
19
NSH
3 IN
9
RP
20
KR
10
KR
8
MC
8
MF
8
KR
10
MC
5
MF
8
IN
9 PL
10 BF
9
SS
15
NG
10
PL
15
RH
7
MC
4
MC
6
SS
16
SS
17
KR
8
MF
6
KR
10
NSH
12LR
6
MF
3
RH
11
NSH
12
LR
6
MF
3
MF
5
KR
10
SS
9
SS
6
IN
7
NSH
12
MF
6KR
5
MF
5
RP
13
BF
8
RP
7
KR
16
IN
9
NSH
6
IN
5
MF
4
MF
4
PL
13
IN
6
MC
23
RH
67
IN
6
MF
9
QV
1
SHO
1 SHO
1
NSH
5
MC
29
10' LAND BUFFERMF
5
QV
7
CMT
3
MC
28
SHO
2
QV
7
CMT
6
QV
2
CT
2KR
8
UL
6 AR
6
SHO
4
QV
2
AR
1
AR
3
SHO
2
QV
1
QV
3 QV
2
NSH
4MF
6
NSH
6
NSH
3
MF
9
TREES CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT CAL SIZE QTY
AR Red Maple / Acer rubrum CONT.3"Cal 10-12` ht.13
CT Texas Redbud / Cercis canadensis texensis CONT.1.5"Cal 6` ht.6
IV Yaupon Holly / Ilex vomitoria CONT.1.5"Cal 6` ht.3
min. 3 trunks total 1.5" cal.
CMT Crape Myrtle / Lagerstroemia indica `Watermelon Red`CONT.3"Cal 8-10` ht 17
min. 4 trunks; total 3" caliper
WM Wax Myrtle / Myrica cerifera CONT.1.5"Cal 6` ht.3
min. 3 trunks total 1.5"
SHO Shumard Red Oak / Quercus shumardii CONT.3"Cal min. 12` ht. 23
QV Southern Live Oak / Quercus virginiana CONT.3"Cal 10-12` ht.25
UL Lacebark Elm / Ulmus parvifolia `Lacebark`CONT.3"Cal min. 12` ht. 6
SHRUBS CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT QTY
GA Glossy Abelia / Abelia grandiflora 3 gal 9
36"o.c.
BB American Beauty Berry / Callicarpa americana 5 gal 20
FJ Japanese Fatsia / Fatsia japonica 5 gal 14
HH Variegated Hosta / Hosta undulata 1 gal 53
HQ Oakleaf Hydrangea / Hydrangea quercifolia 5 gal 7
IN Dwarf Yaupon / Ilex vomitoria `Nana`5 gal 108
30" o.c.
NSH Nellie Stevens Holly / Ilex x `Nellie R Stevens`5 gal 96
WXL Japanese Privet / Ligustrum japonicum 5 gal 7
LR Fringe Flower / Loropetalum chinense rubrum 5 gal 36
42" o.c.
MV Turk`s Cap / Malvaviscus arboreus `drummondii`1 gal 18
MC Dwf. Wax Myrtle / Myrica pusilla 5 gal 133
36" o.c.
RH Indian Hawthorn / Raphiolepsis Indica `Clara`5 gal 109
42" o.c.
KR Knock Out Rose / Rosa acicularis `Knock Out`3 gal 136
RP Carpet Rose / Rosa x `Pink Supremet`5 gal 52
RM Rosemary / Rosmarinus officinalis 3 gal 2
MF Mexican Feather Grass / Stipa tenacissima 1 gal 94
30" o.c.
CRL Coralberry / Symphoricarpos orbiculatus 3 gal 13
SHRUB AREAS CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT QTY
RC Wild Red Columbine / Aquilegia canadensis 1 gal@ 12" oc 38
YC Columbine / Aquilegia chrysantha `Yellow Queen`1 gal@ 12" oc 45
NG New Gold Lantana / Lantana camara `New Gold`1 gal@ 18" oc 10
PL Purple Lantana / Lantana montevidensis 1 gal@ 21" oc 159
BF Blackfoot Daisy / Melampodium leucanthum 1 gal@ 24" oc 24
SS Pink Skullcap / Scutellaria suffrutescens 1 gal@ 18" oc 63
ANN Annual Color / seasonal interest flat @ 18" oc 69
GROUND COVERS CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT QTY
AG Blue Bugle / Ajuga genevensis flat @ 12" oc 618
LA Aztec Grass / Liriope muscari `Aztec`1 gal@ 18" oc 653
LB Giant Liriope / Liriope muscari `Evergreen Giant`1 gal@ 18" oc 271
AJ Asian Jasmine / Trachelospermum asiaticum 4"pot@ 12" oc 468
SOD/SEED CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT QTY
CD Bermuda Grass / Cynodon dactylon `tif 419`sod 54,309 sf
PLANT SCHEDULE
*
- Denotes plant does not appear on City of Coppell, Texas Plant Palette and is provided above and beyond
minimum landscape requirements (i.e. plant not used for landscape compliance).
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
LNI R
ASADETST
A
61
O F
9 8 ET XEE
E
CELP1
1/9/12
Landscape Designers & Consultants
1 (800) 680 6630
15305 Dallas Pkwy., Ste 300
Addison, TX 75001
www.landscape-consultants.net
DATE: 11/11/11
HEI #: 11-121
SHEET NO:
DRAWN: SRHHOMEYERENGINEERING, INC.TBPE FIRM REGISTRATION NO. F-8440P.O. BOX 294527ƇLEWISVILLEƇ TEXASƇ 75029972-906-9985 PHONEƇ 972-906-9987 FAXWWW.HEI.US.COMRIVER OAKS ASSISTED LIVINGAND MEMORY CARELOT 1, BLOCK ASIGNATURE LIVING ADDITIONCITY OF COPPELLDALLAS COUNTY, TEXASLANDSCAPE
PLAN
SECONDARY COURTYARD
(REF LP2)
PRIMARY COURTYARD
(REF LP2)
WM
1
LA
23
RC
6
LA
10
RC
3RC
3
YC
9
AR
1
AG
32
LA
15
LA
20
AG
16
FJ
4
FJ
6HH
39
IN
19
MV
18
FJ
4
BB
2
IV
1
LA
13
HQ
2
BB
6
IN
16
YC
10
RC
3
RC
6
YC
8
RC
3
HH
14
HQ
2
IV
1
LA
15 AG
36
AR
1YC
11
RC
7
RC
3
RC
4
YC
7
AR
1
IV
1
TREES CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT
AR Red Maple / Acer rubrum CONT.
CT Texas Redbud / Cercis canadensis texensis CONT.
IV Yaupon Holly / Ilex vomitoria CONT.
min. 3 trunks total 1.5" cal.
CMT Crape Myrtle / Lagerstroemia indica `Watermelon Red` CONT.
min. 4 trunks; total 3" caliper
WM Wax Myrtle / Myrica cerifera CONT.
min. 3 trunks total 1.5"
SHO Shumard Red Oak / Quercus shumardii CONT.
QV Southern Live Oak / Quercus virginiana CONT.
UL Lacebark Elm / Ulmus parvifolia `Lacebark`CONT.
SHRUBS CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT
GA Glossy Abelia / Abelia grandiflora 3 gal
36"o.c.
BB American Beauty Berry / Callicarpa americana 5 gal
FJ Japanese Fatsia / Fatsia japonica 5 gal
HH Variegated Hosta / Hosta undulata 1 gal
HQ Oakleaf Hydrangea / Hydrangea quercifolia 5 gal
IN Dwarf Yaupon / Ilex vomitoria `Nana`5 gal
30" o.c.
NSH Nellie Stevens Holly / Ilex x `Nellie R Stevens`5 gal
WXL Japanese Privet / Ligustrum japonicum 5 gal
LR Fringe Flower / Loropetalum chinense rubrum 5 gal
42" o.c.
MV Turk`s Cap / Malvaviscus arboreus `drummondii`1 gal
MC Dwf. Wax Myrtle / Myrica pusilla 5 gal
36" o.c.
RH Indian Hawthorn / Raphiolepsis Indica `Clara`5 gal
42" o.c.
KR Knock Out Rose / Rosa acicularis `Knock Out`3 gal
RP Carpet Rose / Rosa x `Pink Supremet`5 gal
RM Rosemary / Rosmarinus officinalis 3 gal
MF Mexican Feather Grass / Stipa tenacissima 1 gal
30" o.c.
CRL Coralberry / Symphoricarpos orbiculatus 3 gal
SHRUB AREAS CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT
RC Wild Red Columbine / Aquilegia canadensis 1 gal@ 12" oc
YC Columbine / Aquilegia chrysantha `Yellow Queen`1 gal@ 12" oc
NG New Gold Lantana / Lantana camara `New Gold`1 gal@ 18" oc
PL Purple Lantana / Lantana montevidensis 1 gal@ 21" oc
BF Blackfoot Daisy / Melampodium leucanthum 1 gal@ 24" oc
SS Pink Skullcap / Scutellaria suffrutescens 1 gal@ 18" oc
ANN Annual Color / seasonal interest flat @ 18" oc
GROUND COVERS CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT
AG Blue Bugle / Ajuga genevensis flat @ 12" oc
LA Aztec Grass / Liriope muscari `Aztec`1 gal@ 18" oc
LB Giant Liriope / Liriope muscari `Evergreen Giant`1 gal@ 18" oc
AJ Asian Jasmine / Trachelospermum asiaticum 4"pot@ 12" oc
SOD/SEED CODE COMMON NAME / BOTANICAL NAME CONT
CD Bermuda Grass / Cynodon dactylon `tif 419`sod
PLANT SCHEDULE
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
LR
8
KR
3 KR
3
AG
100
LA
27
AG
104
PL
90
LA
76
LA
159
WXL
7
LR
6
GA
9
RH
3
IN
11
IN
4
LA
7
LR
5 CT
3
KR
12
AG
80 AG
22
LA
180
PL
17
CRL
10
BB
7
RM
2
LR
5
CT
1
SHO
1
LA
108
HQ
3
CRL
3
BB
5
SHO
1
AG
73
AG
75
KR
3
AG
80
GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES :
1. The General Contractor is responsible for removing all vegetation and leaving all landscape areas
inches below final grade. The Landscape Contractor will provide and spread a compacted four inch
loamy topsoil to all turf areas - bringing these areas to top of curb / final grade (compacted). The
specification is not required for the large turf area on the West side of the parcel, or within the po
The Landscape Contractor will provide and install a six inch depth of planting mix to all planting bed
for proper drainage. (See specifications for more detailed instruction on turf area and planting bed
preparation).
2. A three inch depth of fine shredded hardwood mulch will be used as a topdressing for all planti
tree rings.
3. Landscape Contractor shall make own plant quantity take-offs using drawings, specifications, an
schedule. Plant schedule requirements (i.e. spacing) dictate, unless otherwise directed by the land
designer. Landscape Contractor to verify bed measurements and install appropriate quantities as g
the plant spacing per the schedule. Ensure all minimum requirements of the local governing authori
(i.e. minimum plant quantities).
4. No substitutions of plant materials will be allowed. If plants are not available, the Landscape Co
shall notify the Landscape Designer in writing (via proper channels). Plants may be inspected and a
rejected on the jobsite by the Owner or Owner's Representative.
5. Sod all disturbed turf areas within and outside of property limits, and add 3” of mulch to all dis
planting beds and tree rings.
6. Landscape Contractor is responsible for the landscape maintenance of this project for 90 days
acceptance of landscaping. Landscape maintenance to include WEEKLY site visits to mow turf area
mulched areas, prune shrubs and groundcovers, treat for insects and diseases, and monitor/adjust
irrigation system.
7. Should areas not be covered by an automatic irrigation system, Landscape Contractor is respo
watering these areas and obtaining a full stand of grass at no additional cost to the Owner. To ach
acceptance, a full stand of grass must reach a minimum height of 1 1/2 inches and there shall be n
larger than twelve square inches.
8. All drainage (surface and subsurface) of all landscape areas within the project limits shall be the
responsibility of the Landscape Contractor. All grading of areas along all building areas must absol
positive slope away from the building. In no case shall any planting bed be constructed along an ed
building that will impede water flow away from the building. If planting beds are located at the edg
building, the Landscape Contractor shall make sure that these areas drain properly (surface and sub
Contractor shall install moisture barrier along building as necessary to keep water from penetrating
building slab.
CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS
LANDSCAPE REGULATIONS
Interior Landscape:
Internal landscape must be min. 10% parking lot
45,240 X .10 =4,524 sf Required
4,699 sf Provided
Min. 1 tree per 400 sf of required landscape area
4,524 / 400 =11 Required
11 Provided
Min. islands = 12% number of parking spaces
70 X .12 =8 Required
10 Provided
Perimeter Landscape:
Landscape screen required and provided along street
frontage and adjacent parcel
Min. 1 tree per 40 or 50 lf of screen frontage
West: 373 / 50 =8 Required
8 Provided
East: 325 / 50 =7 Required
7 Provided
North: 505 / 50 =10 Required
10 Provided
South: 537 / 40 =14 Required
14 Provided
Feature Landscaping:
Min. 15% of site area less building area
231,104 - 57,708 X .15 = 26,009 sf Required
47,413 sf Provided
Min. 50% required feature landscape @ frontage
65,160 / 2 =13,005 sf Required
29,761 sf Provided
1 Tree per 2500 sf landscape area:
47,413 / 2500 =19 Required
20 Proposed*
* Includes 16 Canopy Trees + 12 Crepe Myrtles @ 3:1
ratio
LNI R
ASADETST
A
61
O F
9 8 ET XEE
E
CELP2
1/9/12
DATE: 11/11/11
HEI #: 11-121
SHEET NO:
DRAWN: SRHHOMEYERENGINEERING, INC.TBPE FIRM REGISTRATION NO. F-8440P.O. BOX 294527ƇLEWISVILLEƇ TEXASƇ 75029972-906-9985 PHONEƇ 972-906-9987 FAXWWW.HEI.US.COMRIVER OAKS ASSISTED LIVINGAND MEMORY CARELOT 1, BLOCK ASIGNATURE LIVING ADDITIONCITY OF COPPELLDALLAS COUNTY, TEXASCOURTYARD
LANDSCAPE
PLAN
SECONDARY COURTYARD LANDSCAPE PLAN
SCALE: 1"=10'
PRIMARY COURTYARD LANDSCAPE PLAN
SCALE: 1"=10'
Landscape Designers & Consultants
1 (800) 680 6630
15305 Dallas Pkwy., Ste 300
Addison, TX 75001
www.landscape-consultants.net
LANDSCAPE PLANTING NOTES
QUALIFICATIONS OF LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR
1. The landscaping shall be performed by a single firm specializing in landscape
planting.
2. A list of successfully completed projects of this type, size and nature may be
requested by the Owner for further qualification measures.
3. The Landscape Contractor must hold a valid Nursery and Floral Certificate
issued by the Texas Department of Agriculture, as well as operate under a
Commercial Pesticide Applicator License - issued by either the Texas Department
of Agriculture or the Texas Structural Pest Control Board.
SCOPE OF WORK
1. Work covered by these sections includes the furnishing of any paying for all
materials, labor, services, equipment, licenses, taxes and any other items that are
necessary for the execution, installation and completion of all work, specified herein
and / or shown on the Landscape Plan.
2. All work shall be performed in accordance with all applicable laws, codes and
regulations required by authorities having jurisdiction over such work and provide
all inspections and permits required by federal, state and local authorities in supply,
transportation and installation of materials.
3. The Landscape Contractor is responsible for the verification of all underground
utility lines (telephone, gas, water, electrical, cable, television, etc...) prior to the
start of any work.
PLANT MATERIALS
1. Provide plants typical of their species or variety, with normal, densely developed
branches and vigorous, fibrous root systems.
2. Provide only sound, healthy, vigorous plants free from defects, disfiguring knots,
sunscald injuries, frost cracks, abrasions of the bark, plant disease, insect eggs,
borers and all other forms of infestation.
3. All plants shall be balled and burlapped or container grown as specified. No
container grown stock will be accepted if it is root bound. All root wrapping material
made of synthetics shall be removed at time of planting.
4. All material shall conform to the guidelines established by the American
Association of Nurseryman.
5. Cracked or mushroomed rootballs are not acceptable.
6. Caliper measurement for standard (single trunk) trees shall be taken as follows:
Six inches above the natural grade line for trees up to and including four inches in
caliper; and twelve inches above the natural grade line for trees exceeding four
inches in caliper - unless specified differently on the Landscape Plan.
7. Multi-trunk trees shall be measured by their overall planted height.
PRODUCTS
1. All manufactured products will be new.
2. Topsoil: A friable, loamy topsoil (or silty sand) with minimal clay clods.
3. Planting Mix: An equal part mixture of topsoil, sand and compost.
4. Starter Fertilizer: A 13-13-13 ratio with 25% scu, 5% sulfur, 2% iron and
additional micronutrients.
5. Palm Maintenance Spikes: As manufactured by the Lutz Corp. Phone (800)
203-7740 - or approved equal.
6. Pre-Emrgence: Any granular, non-staining pre-emergence that is labeled for the
specific ornamentals or turf it will be utilized on. A pre-emergence herbicide is to
be applied per the manufacturer's labeled rates.
7. Mulch: As specified on the planting plan - well decomposed.
8. Steel Edging: Professional steel edging, 14 gauge thick x 4 inches wide factory
painted dark green. Acceptable manufacturers include Col-Met or approved equal.
9. Weed Barrier: A 5 ounce, woven, needle-punched fabric. Acceptable product
includes DeWitt' Pro 5, or approved equal.
10. Tree Stakes: 6' green metal t-posts
11. Tree Chain: 1" wide plastic tree chain
TREE PLANTING
1. Tree holes shall be excavated to a width of two times the width of the rootball,
and to a depth equal to the depth of the rootball (less two inches).
2. Scarify the sides and bottom of the tree hole prior to the placement of the tree.
Remove any glazing that may have been caused during the excavation of the hole.
3. Install the tree so the top of the rootball is one to two inches above the
surrounding grade.
4. Backfill the tree hole utilizing the existing topsoil from on-site. Clay, rocks and
other debris shall be removed from the soil prior to the backfill. Should additional
soil be required to accomplish this task, import additional topsoil from off-site, add
no additional cost to the Owner.
5. The total number of tree stakes (beyond the minimum's listed below) will be left
to the Landscape Contractor's discretion. Should any trees fall or lean, it will be the
responsibility of the Landscape Contractor to straighten the tree, or replace it
should it become damaged. Tree staking will consists of, at a minimum:
15 - 30 gal Trees (2) Stakes per Tree
45 - 100 gal Trees (3) Stakes per Tree
Multi-Trunk Trees No Minimum
6. Upon completion of the planting, an earth watering basin will be constructed
around the tree. The interior of the tree ring will then be covered with the weed
barrier cloth, and topdressed with a three inch layer of mulch.
PALM PLANTING
1. Dig the hole the same size as the rootball.
2. Use bank sand mixed with the existing soil (75% bank sand and 25% existing
soil) as the backfill.
3. Begin to backfill around the rootball with the new soil mixture until you are about
one-third from the top of the rootball.
4. Apply the Palm Maintenance Spikes per the manufacturer's directions.
5. Brace the palms using palm braces. Nail the 2 x 4 into the adjustable palm
brace. DO NOT nail the 2 x 4 into the palm itself.
6. Upon completion of the planting, an earth watering basin will be constructed
around the palm. The interior of the watering basis will then be covered with the
weed barrier cloth, and topdressed with a three inch layer of mulch.
SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER PLANTING
1. Upon approval of the grade left by the General Contractor, the Landscape
Contractor will rototill the proposed bed locations (BEFORE adding the
imported soil). A six inch depth of the specified planting mix will then be evenly
spread over the designated bed area. The planting bed will then be rototilled
AGAIN , and a pre-emergence and starter fertilizer will be applied.
2. The planting bed will then be hand raked smooth and crowned for proper
drainage.
3. Dig the hold twice as wide as the plant's rootball. Install the plant in the
hole. Backfill around the plant.
4. Install the weed barrier cloth, overlapping it at the ends. Utilize steel
staples to keep the weed barrier cloth in place.
5. A three inch depth of mulch will then be installed as a top dressing, covering
the entire planting area.
TURF AREA PREPARATION
1. The General Contractor will leave all turf areas (excluding the detention
ponds) at two (4) inches below final grade. The Landscape Contractor shall
import and spread a compacted four inch depth of loamy topsoil - ensuring the
soil is compacted.
2. Landscape Contractor will ensure all areas are crowned for proper drainage
3. Apply the starter fertilizer.
SODDING
1. Sod variety to be as specified on the Landscape Plan.
2. Lay sod within 24 hours from the time of stripping. Do not lay if the ground
is frozen.
3. Lay the sod to form a solid mass with tightly fitted joints. Butt ends and
sides of sod strips - do not overlap. Stagger strips to offset joints in adjacent
courses.
4. Water the sod thoroughly with a fine spray immediately after planting to
obtain at least six inches of penetration into the soil below the sod.
5. Roll the sod to ensure good contact of the sod's root system with the soil
underneath.
HYDROMULCHING
1. The hydromulch mix (per 1,000 sf) shall be as follows:
WINTER MIX (October 1 - March 31)
50# Cellulose Fiber Mulch
2#Unhulled Bermuda Seed
2#Annual Rye Seed
15# 15-15-15 Water Soluble Fertilizer
SUMMER MIX (April 1 - September 30)
50# Cellulose Fiber Mulch
2#Hulled Bermuda Seed
15# 15-15-15 Water Soluble Fertilizer
CLEAN UP
1. During landscape preparation and planting, keep all pavement clean and all
work areas in a neat, orderly condition.
2. All excavated materials will be disposed of legally off the project site.
INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE
1. Upon completion of the work, provide the site clean and free of materials
and suitable for use as intended.
2. When the planting work is completed, the Owner will make an inspection to
determine acceptability.
3. When the inspected planting work does not comply with the contract
documents, replace the rejected work within 24 hours.
4. Landscape maintenance will continue until re-inspected by the Owner and
found to be acceptable. Once acceptable, Final Acceptance will be issued,
and the required maintenance period will commence.
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
1. The maintenance period shall commence once Final Acceptance has been
issued by the Owner, and shall continue for a period of ninety (90) days.
2. The monitoring and scheduling of the irrigation system will be the
responsibility of the Landscape Contractor during this time. Coordinate all
scheduling and any access requirements with the Owner.
3. Landscape maintenance shall include, but not be limited to: WEEKLY SITE
VISITS FOR mowing, edging, blowing, weeding, trimming, pruning, fertilizing,
weed control, insect control, disease control, re-staking, re-setting of plants to
their proper grade or their upright position, and any other means to keep the
plantings healthy, free of insects and diseases, and in a continual thriving
condition.
WARRANTY PERIOD, PLANT GUARANTEE AND REPLACEMENTS
1. Plant materials supplied shall be warranted to remain alive and healthy for a
period of twelve (12) months after the date of Final Acceptance by Owner
{seasonal annuals for 90 days from Final Acceptance}. Plants in an impaired,
dead or dying condition after initial acceptance or within the warranty period
shall be removed and replaced immediately to the satisfaction of the Owner.
RECORD DRAWINGS
1. Provide a minimum of (2) copies of record drawings to the Owner upon
completion of work. A record drawing is a record of all changes that occurred
in the field and that are documented through change orders, addenda, or
contractor/consultant drawing markups.
LNI R
ASADETST
A
61
O F
9 8 ET XEE
E
CELP3
12/8/11
DATE: 11/11/11
HEI #: 11-121
SHEET NO:
DRAWN: SRHHOMEYERENGINEERING, INC.TBPE FIRM REGISTRATION NO. F-8440P.O. BOX 294527ƇLEWISVILLEƇ TEXASƇ 75029972-906-9985 PHONEƇ 972-906-9987 FAXWWW.HEI.US.COMRIVER OAKS ASSISTED LIVINGAND MEMORY CARELOT 1, BLOCK ASIGNATURE LIVING ADDITIONCITY OF COPPELLDALLAS COUNTY, TEXASLANDSCAPE
DETAILS
Landscape Designers & Consultants
1 (800) 680 6630
15305 Dallas Pkwy., Ste 300
Addison, TX 75001
www.landscape-consultants.net
P.R.D.C.T.Denton Creek
enton Cree
k
ZONED RETAILa Texas Municipal Corporation
Volume 91226, Page 332
D.R.D.C.T.
City of Carrollton
Internal Landscape
Perimeter Landscape
Nonvehicular (Feature) Landscape
47,413 sf
5,413 sf
7,581 sf
LNI R
ASADETST
A
61
O F
9 8 ET XEE
E
CELP4
1/5/12
Landscape Designers & Consultants
1 (800) 680 6630
15305 Dallas Pkwy., Ste 300
Addison, TX 75001
www.landscape-consultants.net
DATE: 11/11/11
HEI #: 11-121
SHEET NO:
DRAWN: SRHHOMEYERENGINEERING, INC.TBPE FIRM REGISTRATION NO. F-8440P.O. BOX 294527ƇLEWISVILLEƇ TEXASƇ 75029972-906-9985 PHONEƇ 972-906-9987 FAXWWW.HEI.US.COMRIVER OAKS ASSISTED LIVINGAND MEMORY CARELOT 1, BLOCK ASIGNATURE LIVING ADDITIONCITY OF COPPELLDALLAS COUNTY, TEXASLANDSCAPE
AREAS
ITEM # 12
Page 1 of 2
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Signature Living at Denton Creek, Lots 1 & 2, Block A, Minor Plat
P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012
C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012
STAFF REP.: Matt Steer, City Planner
LOCATION: North side of East Sandy Lake Road, east of Riverview Drive
SIZE OF AREA: 11.4 acres of property
CURRENT ZONING: R (Retail) & O (Office)
REQUEST: A minor plat to establish a building site with required easements and fire lanes on
Lot 1, Block A, with the remainder of vacant land being platted as Lot 2, Block A.
APPLICANT: Owner: Developer: Engineer:
Peter Park Pete Russell Steven Homeyer, P.E.
P.O. Box 141179 Signature Senior Living, LLC. Homeyer Engineering, Inc.
Irving, Texas 75014 106 Decker Court #200 P.O. Box 294527
214-649-1226 Irving, Texas 75062 Lewisville, Texas 75029
214-417-2408 972-906-9985
FAX: N/A FAX: 972-906-9987
HISTORY: This is a vacant piece of property that has been filled over the last several years.
In March of 2007, the Planning Commission denied a request for a 95-lot
subdivision on 18.86 acres of property, a portion of which included the subject
property (5.3 acres), the vacant tract to the east (6.1 acres) and what is now the
nursing home facility on the 6.5 acres to the west. The applicant did not appeal
that recommendation to Council and reapplied for a 78-lot subdivision. This
second request was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning
Commission subject to 22 conditions. Prior to Council consideration, the
applicant withdrew the request. A Planned Development was later approved in
March 2009 for a 52,317-square-foot (123 bed) Nursing and Rehabilitation
Facility on a 6.4-acre lot to the west.
ITEM # 12
Page 2 of 2
TRANSPORTATION: East Sandy Lake Road is a C4D, collector, four-lane divided concrete roadway
contained within a 110-foot right-of-way.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North – vacant, flood land; City of Carrollton
South – retail and vacant; PD-245-R (Planned Development-245-Retail) and PD-243-R
Planned Development-243-Retail)
East – vacant; O (Office)
West –Assisted Living Facility; PD-239-R (Planned Development-239-Retail)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Coppell Comprehensive Plan shows the property as suitable for urban
residential neighborhood.
DISCUSSION: This is a companion request to the establishment of the Special Use Permit to
allow the development of a 74-unit, 79-bed assisted living and memory care
facility on 5.3 acres (proposed Lot 1, Block A). Lot 2, containing 6.1 acres, is
included in this plat but no development is proposed at this time. The property is
impacted by several existing easements, including: water, utility and drainage
easements running parallel to Sandy Lake Road. A 20-foot drainage easement is
proposed to be dedicated parallel to the western property line of Lot 1. Encircling
the proposed building on Lot 1 is a mutual access and fire lane easement, ranging
in width from 20 to 24 feet. This easement shares the common lot line between
Lots 1 and 2 providing mutual access from Sandy Lake. Various flood plain
boundaries are also being depicted. The first is the existing 100-year floodplain
per FEMA on August 23, 2001. The second is a preliminary 100-year floodplain
boundary dated June 22, 2007 and the third is a proposed 100-year floodplain
pending a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending APPROVAL of the Signature Living at Denton Creek Addition Lot 1 & 2, Block A
Minor Plat, subject to the following condition:
1. There will be additional comments during detailed Engineering Plan review.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the request
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Minor Plat
ITEM # 13
Page 1 of 6
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO.: PD-214R5-C, Arbor Manors Addition Retail
P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012
C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012
STAFF REP.: Matt Steer, City Planner
LOCATION: 143 South Denton Tap Road
SIZE OF AREA: 1.5 acres of property
CURRENT ZONING: PD-214R2-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 2-Commercial)
REQUEST: A zoning change to PD-214R5-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 5-
Commercial) to attach a Detail Plan to allow the development of an approximate
11,000 square foot retail building to contain retail and office uses including two
restaurants, one of which will have drive-thru service.
APPLICANT: Developer: Representative: Architect:
Hermansen Laned Development G&A Constultants, inc. NCA Partners Architecture
Mitch Linnabary Randi Rivera Lance Rose
5944 Luther Lane, Ste. 725 111 Hillside Drive 5646 Milton Street, Ste. 610
Dallas, Texas 75225 Lewisville, Texas 75057 Dallas, Texas 75206
Phone: (214) 373-4202 (972) 436-9712 (214) 361-9901 ext. 118
mitch@hermansenlanddevelopment.com randi@gacon.com lance@ncapartners.com
Landscape Architect:
Ron Stewart
Environs Group Landscape Architecture
111 Hillside Drive
Lewisville, Texas 75057
(972) 317-0276
ron@gacon.com
HISTORY: On May 8, 2007, PD-214R2-SF-9&C (Planned Development-214 Revision-2-
Single-Family-9 & Commercial) was approved allowing for a Concept Site Plan
for the development of 73 single-family homes on approximately 24 acres and
ITEM # 13
Page 2 of 6
commercial uses on approximately five acres of property located south of Sandy
Lake Road; west of Denton Tap Road. Tree mitigation and retribution for the
overall tract was determined at that time. On October 12, 2010, Council approved
a Detail Plan to allow the construction of a 4,639-square-foot medical office
building on the first commercial component of the conceptual planned
development for Arbor Manors. The only access granted was from Bethel School
Road. A dead end fire lane and mutual access drive were extended to the subject
property.
TRANSPORTATION: Denton Tap Road is a P6D, improved, concrete, six-lane divided thoroughfare
contained within a 110-foot right-of-way.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North – restaurant; C (Commercial)
South – medical office; PD-214R4-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 4-
Commercial)
East – retail uses (Braewood Shopping Center); C, (Commercial)
West – residential uses (Arbor Manors); PD-214R2-SF-12 (Planned
Development-214-Revsion-2-Single Family-12)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Coppell Comprehensive Plan shows the property suitable for mixed use
neighborhood center.
DISCUSSION: This is the second commercial component of the conceptual planned development
for Arbor Manors approved in May 2007. This proposal is for a 10,750 square-
foot retail building on the westside of S. Denton Tap Road, between the newly
constructed Vision Source and Schlotsky’s Deli. Approval of this Planned
Development will also grant the right for two restaurant uses – Einstein Bros.
Bagels with a drive thru and Smashburger. The hours of operation of these two
restaurants are proposed everyday from 5 a.m. to 5 p.m. and 10 a.m. to 10 p.m.,
respectively.
Site Plan:
The proposed building is setback approximately 90 feet from S. Denton Tap and
50 feet from all other property lines meeting the setback requirements of the
Commercial District. The parking areas are proposed to be on each side of the
proposed structure with 45% angled parking on the west, off a one-way drive. A
drive-thru is proposed on the southwest portion of the site with the menu board on
the west side with an eight foot wide queuing area. The drive-thru window is on
the south side. A fire lane/mutual access easement with perpendicular parking
extends from the existing shared drive on the north property line to the proposed
shared drive on the south side. To allow the southern shared drive, an off-site fire
lane/mutual access easement will be required to be dedicated on the southern lot
and will be required to be filed by separate instrument.
ITEM # 13
Page 3 of 6
Given its residential adjacency, more detail is needed on the site lighting. The
color renderings depict street lamps in front of the building, but none are shown
on the site plan. A condition of approval is that the lighting be in conformance
with the glare and lighting standards of the Zoning Ordinance.
Parking:
The parking required for a retail use is one parking space per 200 square feet of
building area and for a restaurant use - one parking space per 100 square feet.
The applicant is proposing 5,100 square feet of restaurant (includes a 300 square
foot patio) and 5,950 square feet of retail space, exactly meeting the required
parking by providing 81 parking spaces. The applicant has requested as a PD
Condition on the site plan that “Retail establishments that sell to-go food only and
that do not have dining or sit down facilities, be permitted as a retail use.” Staff
opposes this request as this would be considered a restaurant per the Zoning
Ordinance definition and would need to provide one parking space per 100 square
feet. After further discussions with the applicant, the requested variance was
further defined as a “retail establishment that sells groceries, prepared food and
beverages. Package or prepared foods would be prepared in a commercial kitchen
or commissary, meeting NSF guidelines. The store or establishment will not have
in store dining, a seating area nor a kitchen.” Upon consultation with the City
Attorney, the use would not be considered a restaurant as long as the packaged
and prepared foods are prepared off site; therefore, staff is recommending that the
condition be removed from the site plan.
The irregular parking space configurations are a result of an attempt to provide
enough “green space” to meet the area requirements of the Landscape Section of
the Zoning Ordinance. This is a very innovative design and staff has requested
more detail as to the functionality of the spaces. This is listed as a condition. If
deemed acceptable, staff would recommend granting the landscape area gained
toward the landscape requirements.
Tree Survey/Landscape Plan:
There are approximately 249 caliper-inches of protected trees proposed to be
removed with this request. Of which, there are five significant Post Oaks (21”,
24”, 28”, 28” and 40”). Only 44.5” of trees are proposed to be preserved. The
most significant of these is a 14” Post Oak. No tree retribution is required at this
time, as the Conceptual Planned Development approved in May 2007 included
1.5 (+/-) acres of open space and the preservation of trees within the residential
lots to satisfy the future removal of any existing trees from the overall
development. In addition, the developer paid the City $101,000 to satisfy all tree
mitigation at that time.
The first submittal of the Landscape Plan was approximately 8,000 square feet
deficient in nonvehicular open space, the main category of landscaping.
Subsequently, the plans have been revised several times. The most recent
submittal is only 83 square feet deficient. Staff can support this plan, if two
variances to the ordinance are granted: 1) The landscape strip on the northwest
corner of the site shall contribute toward the nonvehicular area. Staff can support
this request, as the landscaping within this strip would technically be additional
ITEM # 13
Page 4 of 6
perimeter landscaping not benefiting this site. 2) The additional landscaping
gained at the end of the parking spaces is also recommended to contribute toward
the nonvehicular open space if the proposed parking spaces are proved to be
functional.
With the addition of these two areas to the landscape/enhanced sidewalk area in
front of and to the rear of the building, the site is only 83 square feet deficient in
total nonvehicular landscape area. The landscape area in front of the building will
consist of green areas, tree gates and a tan/brown enhanced sidewalk. A detail of
this area has been requested. The other two categories of landscape areas
(perimeter and interior) appear to be compliant if some drafting issues are
resolved. There are a total of 38 overstory and 15 accent trees proposed. The
perimeter area on the west is heavily landscaped and is proposed to provide a
buffer along with the existing masonry wall adjacent to the existing single family
neighborhood. The landscaping in this area consists of three different layers
between the wall and the parking area: a row of 23 Nellie R Stevens shrubs, eight
overstory trees (four Drake Elms & four Live Oaks) and 15 Yaupon Holly Trees.
Elevations/Signage:
The structure is proposed to be 31.5 feet in height (measured to the top of the
parapet). It is proposed to be constructed of a brown field brick with a dark gray
accent brick, a limestone base with a cast stone watertable. EIFS is proposed to
be used on the cornice detailing. Both fabric awnings (“muted-red” and “black”
color) and metal canopies are proposed above the storefronts. The colors,
materials and details of the elevations are impressive and staff can support the
look of the building.
A 40-square-foot monument sign is proposed to be located in the middle of the
site measured 15 feet from Denton Tap. It is proposed to be constructed of the
same brick as the building and shall be externally illuminated, if any lighting is
proposed. The applicant is requesting several variances to the sign requirements
of the Zoning Ordinance. These are listed below with staff’s recommendation in
bold after each one:
1) Each tenant is proposed to have one attached blade sign. The blade may
project 48 inches from the building and is limited to 15 square feet of sign area.
Blade signs may contain a logo at 100% of the sign area.
Staff recommends granting the two restaurants blade signs as
depicted on the 11x17 sheets. Staff is recommending that the other
lease spaces with storefronts also be allowed similar blade signs
perpendicular to the front façade.
2) The effective area of attached signs is proposed to be increased by 10%.
This is not recommended, but the blade signs outlined above are
recommended.
3) Logos are proposed to be up to 40% of the sign area.
Staff cannot support the increase in logo at this percentage and
recommends that the 20% requirement of the Zoning Ordinance be
required.
4) The end caps of the retail center may have attached signage on both facades
with the effective area of theses signs being one square foot allowed per lineal
foot of the façade width.
ITEM # 13
Page 5 of 6
Staff cannot recommend this. What has been done in the past- if a
tenant would like a sign on the end cap but does not have public road
frontage on that side, the tenant can divide up the allowable sign area
between front and side facades (while adhering to the 20% logo
requirement on both sides).
The overall attached signage is depicted on the color rendering of the building.
This proposes that all the channel letters will be a consistent white color. The
second and third color sheets show the exact proposals for the Einstein Bros.
Bagels and Smashburger restaurants. The proposed Einstein Bros. Bagels signage
on the front elevation, not including the blade sign, is 49.1 square feet. A 9.5
square foot logo, a yellow underline (approximately eight square feet) and drive-
thru pan (approximately four square feet) all count as logo area; therefore, the
logo is proposed to be 44% of the sign. Staff recommends granting the blade sign,
but asks the standard attached signage be revised to a maximum total size of
50.66 square feet with a maximum 11.32 square feet logo as required by
ordinance. The applicant is proposing the exact same signage on the side
elevation and staff would recommend against any signage on this elevation, as
long as it was not taken from the allowed sign area from the front.
The proposed Smashburger signage on the front elevation is 54 square feet with a
37% logo, not including the blade sign. Staff would recommend granting the
blade sign and that the signage be revised to a maximum total size of 56.6 square
feet of which a maximum 11.32 square feet can be attributed to logo. The
applicant is proposing a nearly identical sign on the south end cap. Staff would
recommend against any signage on this elevation as long as it was not accounted
for in the allowed sign area of the front façade.
Two menu boards are shown for Einstein Bros. Bagels. Proposed are a bronze
color preview board (20” wide and 74” high) and a bronze color full menu board
with speaker panel (96” wide and 74” high).
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending APPROVAL of the Detail Planned Development – 215 Revision 5 – Commercial
(Arbor Manors Retail) only if the following conditions are met.
1. Revise PD conditions notes to indicate:
a. A sit down restaurant with 300 square foot patio area (Smashburger) and a sit down restaurant
with drive thru (Einstein Bros. Bagels) are permitted.
b. 560 square feet of landscaping shown on the northwest corner is being attributed toward
nonvehicular landscape area requirement.
c. The triangular landscape areas at the end of each parking space are being attributed toward the
nonvehicular landscape area requirement.
d. An 83-square-foot exception to the nonvehicular landscape area requirements,
e. A maximum 15-square-foot blade sign shall be allowed for each tenant. This shall be in addition
to the total sign areas allowed (one square foot per lineal foot frontage on a dedicated street).
Remove all other conditions under “Development Standards” within the PD Conditions list
including the condition regarding retail establishments selling “to-go food only” and all other
sign variance requests as these are not supported.
ITEM # 13
Page 6 of 6
2. Submit a detail of the functionality of the parking abutting Denton Tap. Include dimensions of typical
car and truck with curb, overhang, door open, etc…
3. Depict loading area on site plan and note acceptable delivery times.
4. Include parking lot lighting on the site plan. Ensure compliance with the glare and lighting standards of
the Zoning Ordinance.
5. Include the enhanced sidewalk hatching on the site plan and provide a detail of this landscape/sidewalk
area on a separate landscape sheet.
6. Revise monument sign detail to ensure the stone cap extends over the multitenant sign area and note that
the sign shall be externally illuminated.
7. Include an overstory tree at the end of each parking row and account for this being a requirement in the
interior tree calculations.
8. Include trees to be preserved on the Landscape Plan.
9. Correct the discrepancies between the plant list, the landscape plan and the plant legend and ensure only
one symbol is used for each plant type.
10. Remove the “Site Landscaping” section from the landscape calculations as this is stating that only the
nonvehicular area is required. Revise the non-street perimeter required and provided areas.
11. Revise masonry percentage calculations on the Elevation sheets to exclude doors and windows.
12. An eight foot wide stamped concrete band is required at the proposed south mutual drive. Please depict
on the site plan.
13. There will be additional comments during detailed Engineering Plan review.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the request
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Overall Color Elevations (11x17)
2. Smash Burger Signage(11x17)
3. Einstein Bros. Bagels Signage (11x17)
4. Site Plan
5. Landscape Plan
6. Tree Survey
7. Elevations
8. Dumpster/Monument Sign Details
SITE PLAN11150C3
ARBOR MANORS RETAIL CENTER
ITEM #14
Page 1 of 3
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Arbor Manors Addition, Lot 4R2R, Block A, Replat
P&Z HEARING DATE: January 19, 2012
C.C. HEARING DATE: February 14, 2012
STAFF REP.: Matt Steer, City Planner
LOCATION: 143 South Denton Tap Road
SIZE OF AREA: 1.5 acres of property
CURRENT ZONING: PD-214R2-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 2-Commercial)
REQUEST: A replat of Lot 4R2, Block A of the Arbor Manors Addition, to relocate the
existing fire lane and mutual access easement and to establish easements to allow
the development of an 11,000-square-foot retail building.
APPLICANT: Developer: Representative: Architect:
Hermansen Laned Development G&A Constultants, inc. NCA Partners Architecture
Mitch Linnabary Randi Rivera Lance Rose
5944 Luther Lane, Ste. 725 111 Hillside Drive 5646 Milton Street, Ste. 610
Dallas, Texas 75225 Lewisville, Texas 75057 Dallas, Texas 75206
Phone: (214) 373-4202 (972) 436-9712 (214) 361-9901 ext. 118
mitch@hermansenlanddevelopment.com randi@gacon.com lance@ncapartners.com
Landscape Architect:
Ron Stewart
Environs Group Landscape Architecture
111 Hillside Drive
Lewisville, Texas 75057
(972) 317-0276
ron@gacon.com
HISTORY: On May 8, 2007, PD-214R2-SF-9&C (Planned Development-214 Revision-2-
Single-Family-9 & Commercial) was approved allowing for a Concept Site Plan
for the development of 73 single-family homes on approximately 24 acres and
commercial uses on approximately five acres of property located south of Sandy
ITEM #14
Page 2 of 3
Lake Road; west of Denton Tap Road. Tree mitigation and retribution for the
overall tract was determined at that time. On October 12, 2010, Council approved
a Detail Plan to allow the construction of a 4,639-square-foot medical office
building on the first commercial component of the conceptual planned
development for Arbor Manors. The only access granted was from Bethel School
Road. A dead end fire lane and mutual access drive were extended to the subject
property.
TRANSPORTATION: Denton Tap Road is a P6D, improved, concrete, six-lane divided thoroughfare
contained within a 110-foot right-of-way.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North – restaurant; C (Commercial)
South – medical office; PD-214R4-C (Planned Development-214 Revision 4-
Commercial)
East – retail uses (Braewood Shopping Center); C, (Commercial)
West – residential uses (Arbor Manors); PD-214R2-SF-12 (Planned
Development-214-Revsion-2-Single Family-12)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Coppell Comprehensive Plan shows the property suitable for mixed use
neighborhood center.
DISCUSSION: The purpose of this plat is to dedicate necessary easements for the development of
Lot 4R2R, which is the subject property of the previous Detail Planned
Development item (PD-214R5-C). The previously dedicated fire lane and mutual
access drive is proposed to be abandoned with this plat. The new fire lane and
mutual access easement is proposed to be shifted to the west in order to provide
enough room for perpendicular parking along both sides of the drive. An access
drive is proposed on the southern property line providing shared access for Lot
4R1 and 4R2. This is proposed to be dedicated as a fire lane and mutual access
easement (12 foot wide on each property). The adjacent property owner has given
permission for this mutual access in the form of a letter. The offsite easement will
need to be dedicated by separate instrument and the recording information
provided on this plat prior to recordation. This is listed as a condition of
approval. Two waterline easements are proposed extending west from Denton
Tap, one is 20 feet wide and the other is 15 feet. There is an existing 20-foot
drainage easement and a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement on the west property
line running north and south. The plat meets all technical requirements of the
Subdivision Ordinance, and therefore warrants approval.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending APPROVAL of Lot 4R2R, Block A, Arbor Manors Replat subject to the following
condition being met:
1. Show the offsite mutual access and fire lane easements and provide recording information on this plat
prior to recordation.
ITEM #14
Page 3 of 3
2. A Tree Removal Permit is required prior to the start of construction.
3. There may be additional comments during engineering plan review
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the request
2. Recommend disapproval of the request
3. Recommend modification of the request
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Replat
11150+LOOVLGH'ULYH/HZLVYLOOH7;3 ) 'DOODV'ULYH6XLWH5RDQRNH7;3 ) TBPE FirmNo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ÄQHÄYC[CTGJGTGD[FGFKECVGFKPHGGUKORNGVQVJG%KV[QH%QRRGNNHQTOWPKEKRCNRWTRQUGU6JGWVKNKV[CPFHKTGNCPGGCUGOGPVU
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�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icinity Map 1"=1000'7VKNKV[%QORCP[4GEGKRV#EMPQYNGFIGOGPV1PEQT AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA#VOQU'PGTI[ AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA6KOG9CTPGT AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA8GTK\QP AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADetail"A"Detail"A"(NQQFRNCKP&GXGNQROGPV2GTOKV#RRNKECVKQP0QJCUDGGPHKNGFYKVJVJG%KV[QH%QRRGNN(NQQFRNCKP#FOKPKUVTCVQTQP(NQQFRNCKP#FOKPKUVTCVQT&CVG