Loading...
Coppell Greens 1-CS 940616 (2) CITY OF COPPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT CASE #: PD-134, COPPELL 200 NORTH ADDITION P & Z HEARING DATE: lune 16, 1994 (originally); to be reheard on July 19, 1994 C. C. HEARING DATE: July 12, 1994 (originally); now to be heard on August 9, 1994 LOCATION: West of Denton Tap Road, north of 121 Bypass SIZE OF AREA: 86 acres CURRENT ZONING: HC and LI REQUEST: PD-SF-7 on 49 acres; MF-1 on 20 acres; HC on 17 acres,' now modified to show MF-1 on 19 ac., PD-SF-7 on 47 ac., HC on 20 ac. APPLICANT: Coppell 200 Joint Venture (Owner) 101 Renner Rd, Suite 170 Richardson, Tx. 75082 907-1907 Dowdey, Anderson, and Assoc. (Engineer) 16250 Dallas Pkwy., Suite 100 Dallas, Tx. 75248 931-0694 HISTORY: There has been no recent zoning history on this parcel although a zoning case was submitted in 1991 and looked at again in 1992. On June 16, the Planning Commission took this case under advisement with the hearing left open in order that the applicant could redesign the development to better fit the aspirations of the Commission and comply with the requirements of PD zoning. TRANSPORTATION: Denton Tap Road is a P6D, six-lane divided (120 foot r.o.w.); currently a two lane roadway; the 121 Bypass will be built to Freeway standards with access roads in 450 feet of r.o.w. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North - vacant, City of Lewisville and zoned for light industrial uses South - vacant; HC and LI East - vacant; HC and City of Lewisville (recently rezoned residential) West - vacant; LI Item 6 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Plan shows a portion of this tract to be utilized for HC uses, the remainder was not in the city when the Plan was done. ANALYSIS: This proposal is not in conformance with the PD zoning requirements, and as such can not be evaluated as a PD. Looking at this application from a zoning perspective, and relating to the Commission workshops and meetings which suggested a land use pattern for this parcel, there is very little which can be supported by staff. We can not endorse the request for MF. The HC area does not extend along the entire frontage of the Bypass, so that proposal can not be supported. The request for Zone "A" and "B" residential is vague -- there is no street layout, we have no information on lot sizes, setbacks are minimal, etc. Therefore, staff would recommend to Commission that this area advertised for public hearing be rezoned to HC along the 121 Bypass and Denton Tap Road a depth of 250 feet; the remainder of the property be rezoned SF-7. The July revision of the original PD meets some of our zoning requirements although landscaping or some type of buffer between the Bypass and the proposed apartments is desirable and is not provided, landscaping along Denton Tap needs more detail, dedication for additional r.o.w, should be shown, access limitations between the residential and commercial uses needs study, Denton Tap and 121 Bypass r.o. w needs to be shown, street widths are required, Zone ~A n and ~B ~ need explanation, and so on. Because staff did not receive these plans until Wednesday, a complete DRC review has not been performed, and additional staff concerns would likely result from such a review. Our cursory examination, however, points out that this proposal does not reflect the desires of the Planning Commission regarding an HC buffer along Denton Tap, the same buffer along the Bypass, a rather awkward division between the apartments and single-family uses needs more work, the entire land use plan submitted requires refinement. Because of these concerns, staff would recommend denial without prejudice (which should indicate to this developer that the plan submitted is not totally without merit) and allow resubmittal after a more comprehensive analysis of the aspirations of the Commission, careful delineation of different land uses/densities, clarification of Zone 'A ~ and ~B ~ (what's the difference between the two D, if a park site is to be dedicated, size of park, plans for development of same need to be articulated, etc. This case is just not ready for submittal, and staff recommends denial without prejudice. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the PD 2) Deny the PD 3) Modify the PD 4) Recommend rezoning based upon Commission study and research ATTACHMENTS: 1) Zoning Exhibit