Loading...
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'ULYH6XLWH‡5RDQRNH7;‡3‡) TBPE FirmNo. 1798016'5$GCTKPIUDCUGFQPHKPCNRNCVQH#TDQT/CPQTUTGEQTFGFKPKPUVPQ0QHNQQF\QPGCTGCCPCN[UKUJCUDGGPRGTHQTOGFD[) #%QPUWNVCPVU+PEQPVJGUWDLGEVRTQRGTV[5WTXG[QTJCUOCFGPQKPXGUVKICVKQPQTKPFGRGPFGPVUGCTEJHQTGCUGOGPVUQHTGEQTFGPEWODTCPEGUTGUVTKEVKXGEQXGPCPVUQYPGTUJKRVKVNGGXKFGPEGQTCP[QVJGTHCEVUVJCVCPCEEWTCVGCDUVTCEVQHVKVNGOC[FKUENQUG190'4ž5%'46+(+%#6'#0&&'&+%#6+1056#6'1(6':#5%1706;1(&#..#59*'4'#59'#TFKPIGT2TQRGTVKGU..%CTGVJGQYPGTUQHRTQRGTV[UKVWCVGFKPVJG%KV[QH%QRRGNNFGUETKDGFCUHQNNQYU$GKPI.QV4$NQEM##TDQT/CPQTUCPCFFKVKQPVQVJG%KV[QH%QRRGNN&CNNCU%QWPV[6GZCUCEEQTFKPIVQVJGTGRNCVVJGTGQHTGEQTFGFKP+PUVTWOGPV0WODGTQHVJG/CR4GEQTFUQH&CNNCU%QWPV[6GZCU0196*'4'(14'-019#../'0$;6*'5'24'5'0656*#69'#TFKPIGT2TQRGTVKGU..%FQJGTGD[CFQRVVJKU4GRNCVFGUKIPCVKPIVJGJGTGKPCDQXGFGUETKDGFRTQRGTV[CU.QV44$NQEM##TDQT/CPQTUCPCFFKVKQPVQVJG%KV[QH%QRRGNN&CNNCU%QWPV[6GZCU6JGGCUGOGPVUUJQYPJGTGQPCTGJGTGD[TGUGTXGFHQTVJGRWTRQUGUKPFKECVGF#NNUVTGGVUCNNG[UCPFTKIJVUÄQHÄ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ž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icinity Map 1"=1000'7VKNKV[%QORCP[4GEGKRV#EMPQYNGFIGOGPV1PEQTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA#VOQU'PGTI[AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA6KOG9CTPGTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA8GTK\QPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADetail"A"Detail"A"(NQQFRNCKP&GXGNQROGPV2GTOKV#RRNKECVKQP0QJCUDGGPHKNGFYKVJVJG%KV[QH%QRRGNN(NQQFRNCKP#FOKPKUVTCVQTQP(NQQFRNCKP#FOKPKUVTCVQT&CVG