Loading...
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?