Rejoice-CS 941020 CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE #: S-1086, SF-12 to SF-12,S.U.P.,
RKIOICE LUTHERAN CHURCH
P & Z HEARING DATE: October 20, 1994
C. C. HEARING DATE: November 8, 1994
LOCATION: North side of Sandy Lake Road, approximately 600' east of Lodge
Road
SIZE OF AREA: 3.9 acres to build a church of approximately 9500 sq. ft.
CURRENT
ZONING: SF-12
REQUEST: SUP for a church
APPLICANT: Rejoice Lutheran Church Halff and Associates
(Owner) (Engineer)
Ken Hovland Jerry Roberts
720 Michelle Place 4000 Fossil Creek Blvd.
Coppell, Tx. 75019 Ft. Worth, Tx. 76137
393-5776 (817) 429-9975
HISTORY: There has been no recent zoning history in the immediate area.
TRANSPORTATION: Sandy Lake Road is projected to be a four-lane divided road in a
110 foot right of way (C4D/6)
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North - developed single-family; PD SF-9
South - developed single-family; SF-12
East - church building; SF-12
West - older rental single family units; SF-12
Item 14
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Plan shows single-family uses as most appropriate here.
ANALYSIS: This request for a church SUP generally meets all our requirements with
the exception of two: screening, and fire protection requirements.
Because the building initially has less than 10,000 square feet, it is not
required to be sprinklered. The church will, however, be required to
place fire hydrants at locations suggested by the Fire Department, and is
agreeable to that being a condition of approval. Screening is a bit more
complicated. Because this use is defined as being a non-residential use in
a residential zoning district, it is required to screen against any adjacent
residential use. Because there is an existing wooden fence which
separates this site from the residential subdivision to the north (put in by
the residential developer) the church feels the requirement for a solid
masonry screening fence along the common property line is not needed.
In similar fashion, the church feels a masonry fence to its west should not
be required. Although Council is the only body which can modify the
fencing requirement, the applicant wanted the Commission to know that
such variances would be requested when this case is presented to
Council.
The site plan is acceptable and strives to protect the existing tree cover,
parking meets code, landscaping is in conformance with the streetscape
plan, the proposed entry lines up with the future median cut in Sandy
Lake Road, the elevations of the church building are striking, the siting
of the building complements the drive up appeal of the facility and the
setbacks are generous.
Assuming the Fire Department concerns and the screening wall questions
are resolved, the case would warrant approval subject to the attached site
plan, landscape plan (with botanical names and quantities noted),
streetscape provisions, and all other City requirements being met.
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the SUP
2) Deny the SUP
3) Modify the SUP
ATFACHMENTS: 1) Zoning Exhibit
2) SUP Site Plan
3) Front Elevation
4) Floor Plan
5) Monument Sign
6) Landscape Plan
7) Irrigation Plan
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE: RKIOICE LUTHERAN CHURCH,
PRELIMINARY PLAT
P & Z HEARING DATE: October 20, 1994
C. C. HEARING DATE: November 8, 1994
LOCATION: North side of Sandy Lake Road, approximately 600' east of Lodge
Road
SIZE OF AREA: 3.9 acres for an approximate 9500 sq. ft. church
CURRENT
ZONING: SF-12
REQUEST: Approval of a preliminary plat
APPLICANT: Rejoice Lutheran Church Halff and Associates
(Owner) (Engineer)
Ken Hovland Jerry Roberts
720 Michelle Place 4000 Fossil Creek Blvd.
Coppell, Tx. 75019 Ft. Worth, Tx. 76137
393-5776 (817) 429-9975
HISTORY: There has been no recent platting history in the area.
TRANSPORTATION: Sandy Lake Road is projected to be a four-lane divided road in a
110 foot right-of-way (C4D/6)
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North - developed single-family; PD SF-9
South - developed single-family; SF-12
East church building; SF-12
West - older rental single-family units; SF-12
Item 15
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Plan shows single-family uses as most appropriate here.
ANALYSIS: This request to plat runs in conjunction with the SUP zoning case, and many of
the same comments apply to both processes. In addition, there were some concerns regarding
drainage and provision of escrow. In a letter which accompanied the platting application
(attached) the church is asking that the escrow be waived as well as sewer-water impact fees.
Staff has consistently recommended that no fees be waived. In that the Commission can not
waive fees--this is a responsibility delegated to only the Council--it cannot be granted at
Commission level.
Therefore, staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat provided drainage problems are
resolved prior to final plat submittal, and no fees be waived.
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the preliminary plat
2) Deny the preliminary plat
3) Modify the preliminary plat
ATTACHMENTS: 1) Preliminary Plat document
2) Letters requesting waivers
3) Departmental comments