Champs Lagoon-CS 950420 CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE: CHAMPS LAGOON, LOT 1, BLOCK 1,
MINOR PLAT
P & Z HEARING DATE: April 20, 1995
C. C. HEARING DATE: May 9, 1995
LOCATION: South of Beltline Road; west of Ledbetter Road
SIZE OF AREA: 3.8 acres
CURRENT A (Agriculture)
ZONING:
REQUEST: Consideration and approval of a minor plat.
APPLICANT: R.D.L. Enterprises John D. Zimmerman,P.E., R.P.L.S.
(Developer) (Engineer)
3020 Country Squire Dr. 908 West Main Street
Suite 2119 Arlington, TX 76013
Dallas, TX 75006 (817) 461-0188
416-4759
Kamwell, Inc.
(Owner)
P. O. Box 586571
Dallas, Tx. 75258-6571
462-1660
HISTORY: The Planning and Zoning Commission denied this plat on February
16, 1995. The Commission instructed staff to place the item on
the March agenda, if the applicant chose to resubmit. The
applicant did not resubmit at that time, but has since requested
reconsideration.
Item 13
TRANSPORTATION: Belt Line Road is an existing 6-lane divided major arterial in a
120'-wide right-of-way. Ledbetter Road is an existing gravel road
in a 40'-wide right-of-way at its intersection with Belt Line Road.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North - Non-conforming private club CLongbranch Country
Club); A
South - Undeveloped land; A
East - Non-conforming private club (Lone Star Country
Club); A
West - Undeveloped industrial land; LI
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan currently shows the
property as suitable for mixed uses (no MF).
DISCUSSION: At the applicant's request this plat is submitted for your
reconsideration accompanied by a letter explaining the applicant's
position regarding screening walls, a tree survey, floodplain
requirements, utility extensions, landscape plans and a site plan.
As indicated in the letter, screening walls and tree preservation are
unlikely to be necessary. In addition, staff is willing to defer
floodplain issues until all other issues are resolved. However, the
Subdivision Ordinance requires preliminary plans to include
utilities, to show anticipated daily demand and flows, and to
provide a calculation of water and wastewater impact fees. The
Ordinance requires a site plan at both the preliminary and final plat
stage. It also specifies that landscape and irrigation plans shall
conform with the City of Coppell Streetscape Plan.
The property is near a location identified within the Subdivision
Ordinance as a major point of entry to the city (See Figure 2 of
the Streetscape Plan). The site also has frontage on a thoroughfare
designated as a primary city image zone. The streetscape plan
specifies plantings for Belt Line/R. R. Edge Treatment (See Figure
8). By requiring landscape and irrigation plans, the Subdivision
Ordinance is the principal means of implementing these street
improvements.
Chapter 212 of the Local Government Code of the State of Texas
designates the Planning Commission as the municipal authority
responsible for approving plats and requires it to approve a plat
that satisfies rules governing plats as adopted by the governing
body. Therefore, any applicant can gain approval of a plat simply
by adhering to the rules.
RECOMMENDATION: Nothing has changed since the last submission of this subdivision
plan. The Subdivision Ordinance requires landscape plans and a
site plan, among other items not included in the submission. Staff
recommends denial of the plat because of these deficiencies.
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the minor plat
2) Deny the minor plat
3) Modify the minor plat
ATI'ACHMENTS: 1) 8%"xl 1" Reduction of Minor plat
2) Previous departmental comments
3) Applicant letter
Johnm J. E Thompson
IqAR 3 0 1995 [, o Bo,,
9c~q' - ('oppcll. Texas 75O 19
March 6. 1 ~ ~i
I ..... ~ 14-462-1660
Mr. Ga~ Sieb ~ ....
Director of Planning & Communitx Dex elopment
City of Copp~ll
P.O. Box 478
Coppell. TX 75019
Dear Mr. Sieb:
! have met with Jim Witt. Citx Manager. to rev~cx~ xour concerns regarding thc platting of propea5 o~ncd bx
Kamxvell Inc. on East Belt Linc In response to xour concerns. I haxc the follo~mg statements ~luch [ hope you will
a~ach to the plat and consider during 3 our reviex~.
1. No screening walls are necessa~ for "A" distr~ct propcrt~ at this time
2. There are no trees of 8 tach caliper or are of am size on thc prope~ so a tree survex is not necessan'.
3. We do intend to meet all pro~ isions of the floodplain ordinance.
4 We are not requesting at this time extension of x~atcr and sc~cr facilities to this prope~y and. therefore, do
not feel that calculation of ~ater and se~wr impact fees is appropriate
No I~dscap~ plan is necessarx since construction ~s not imminent on this propcrt~ Wc will
submit proper landscaping plans m conformance to th~ Citx of Coppell treescape plan when and
if xve move fom'ard with regard to construction planned for this prope~3.
6. No site plan is necessan' for this propcn~ at this time since construction is not inmunent on this property.
We will submit proper site plans m conformance to thc City of Coppell snc plan ordinance when and
if ~vc move fom'ard with regard to construction planned for th~s propcn3
Gary. I believe that xve have the right as a property oxxner m all "_&" district to plot out a piece of ground for purposes
of legal description. We do not intend to do anything in terms Of development of the propcff5 until such time as it is
' II ....
econom~cauv feasible. I do not w~sh to cnga~e~ m another confrontational s~tuat~on. Wc x,,;~' ..... ~P,3~ xx~th all
applicable zoning and building requirements xxhcn and if it becomcs cconomtcallx feasible to dcxclop this propc~3. 1
xvould appreciate your prompt and immcdiatc consideration of thc points I have made m th~s Icucr. ! feel that xxc have
a valid right to move fomard and I hopc 3 ou xx'ill take this nndcr consideration.
Sincerely. ~.-. .... '~ ~ f~
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
ITEM: Champs I~goon, Lot 1, Block 1, Minor Plat, to allow the creation of a
building site on Approximately 3.8 acres of property located south of
Be!!!ine Road and west of Ledbetter Road, at the request of Johnny
Thompson.
DRC DATE: January 26, 1995 & February 2, 1995
CONTACT: Ken Griffin, P.E., Assistant City Manager/City Engineer 004-3679)
COMMENT STATUS: INITIAL PRELIMINARY /FINAL
1. The various fees associated with this site such as water, sewer and roadway impact fees
will be required.
2. The City is concerned about the visibility of the intersection of Ledbetter Road with
Beltline Road. Has any consideration been given to realigning Ledbetter Road to the west
to move it away from the bridge over the Elm Fork of the Trinity River. Obviously, this
will take coordination with the property owner to the north to insure proper ingress and
egress to both sides of Beltline Road.
3. Will there need to be sewer extended to this site?