Loading...
Riverview Estates-CS 961121CASE: CITY OF COPPFJ.L PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT RIVERVIEW ESTATES, FINAL PLAT P & Z HEARING DATE: November 21, 1996 C.C. HEARING DATE: December 10, 1996 LOCATION: Along the south side of Sandy Lake Road, approx. 728.42 feet east of Riverchase Drive. SIZE OF AREA: 19.32acres - 66 lots CURRENT ZONING: SF-9 (Single Family-9). REQUEST: Final Plat approval APPLICANT: Owner: $ohnny Thompson 1780 East Beltline Coppeli, TX 75019 (972) 462-1660 Representative: CCM Engineering 1120 Empire Central Place, #308 Dallas, TX 75247 (214) 630-5200 HISTORY: City Council approved a Preliminary Plat for this property on October 8, 1991. It expired nine months later, in July of 1992. Three years thereafter, on November 14, 1995, Council approved a variance to the Subdivision Ordinance granting a 6-month extension of the previously approved Preliminary Plat. That extension expired in mid-May, 1996. TRANSPORTATION: Sandy Lake Road is a 2-lane road shown on the thoroughfare plan as a C4D/6, 4-lane divided thoroughfare to be built in a 100'-wide right-of-way. Item # 13 SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North South - East - West - vacant, "R" Retail zoning Eagle Point at Riverchase, "SF-7" Single-Family-7 zoning vacant, "R" Retail zoning Eagle Point at Riverchase, 'SF-7" Single-Family-7 zoning COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan shows the property to be in the floodplain. DISCUSSION: The layout of the streets, lots and alleys within this proposed subdivision is in substantial compliance with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. If submitted as a Preliminary Plat, the planning staff would recommend approval subject to engineering comments and subject to modifications on the 4 comer lots in Block B, so that the lots in Blocks A and C which face side yards across a street will not face fences close to the street right-of-way line. However, the applicant has submitted a Final Plat, even though it is five months after the expiration of a Council extension of a 3-year-old preliminary plat. In granting a waiver of the Subdivision Ordinance last year to allow a 6-month extension of the Preliminary Plat, Council was specific about its intentions. After the motion was made and seconded, Councilmember Tunnell asked: "If it doesn't come back in six months, does it have to start over as a Preliminary?". The mayor answered: "It's dead. It's dead. The six months will begin today. It starts ticking today." Council then voted unanimously to approve the motion. That was on November 14, 1995. The validity of the Preliminary Plat is highly relevant, because with no extension, development is subject to current roadway impact and park fees. The difference in what the City collects in fees today, over what it would have collected in 1991, is roughly $130,000. Staff has seen several instances where a prospective developer has attempted to plat property, discovered how costly the flood reclamation will be, and delayed or even abandoned the project. In this case, the applicant had ample opportunity to proceed with flood plain studies during 1992 and 1993, resubmit a preliminary plat and final plat, and develop the project prior to the enactment of the current fee structure. The Subdivision Ordinance requires approval of a preliminary plat prior to approval of a final plat. The Planning Commission is not authorized to vary the terms of the ordinance. There is not an approved and valid preliminary plat on file. Therefore, without Council action to waive Subdivision Ordinance requirements, the Commission is obligated to Item # 13 disapprove this final plat submission. The ordinance further states that, if the Commission disapproves the final plat, the plat will not be sent to the City Council for consideration and directs the Commission either to approve or disapprove the plat within 30 days of its filing (meaning no later than November 21, 1996). If the Commission believes that Council should waive the current roadway impact and park fees, the Commission can approve the final plat subject to Council granting a variance of the Subdivision Ordinance requirements to allow further extension of the validity of the now invalid Preliminary Plat. If the Commission thinks that Council should not waive the current fees, but believes that Council should have the opportunity to do so, the Commission can approve the final plat subject to Council's waiving the preliminary plat submission requirements and subject to previously suggested modifications on the four corner lots of Block B. The plat then would go to Council for it to do whatever it wants to do about the fees. The planning staff thinks that the City should deal straightforwardly with the fee issue. The amount of park fees collectible in 1991 was $150 per lot. The amount today is $1,285 per lot. The difference times 66 lots is almost $75,000. There were no roadway impact fees in 1991. Roadway impact fees today are $855 per lot. That figure times 66 lots is about $56,000. The planning staff sees no solid justification for the City to sacrifice nearly $75,000 in park fees from this development. The planning staff sees no solid justification for the City sacrificing the roadway impact fees; and sees no reason whatsoever for waiving the roadway impact fees on this residential development without the ability to collect, for the retail portion of the property fronting Sandy Lake Road, the amount that would have been collected under the previous policy. CThe previous policy required street assessments ultimately for over 1000 feet of frontage along Sandy Lake Road, but the City replaced that policy with its current roadway impact fees). And, most particularly, the planning staff sees no justification in waiving fees for 66 lots when only 61 lots were approved in 1991. RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Planning staff recommends giving the applicant full recourse and access to the City Council by approving the plat subject to the following 4 conditions: 1) Council waiver of Section VIH - Preliminary Plat and Plans - of the Subdivision Ordinance, and waiver of the requirement for approval of a preliminary plat, as found in Section IX - Final Plat and Plans. Item// 13 2) 3) 4) The 15' side building line shown on Lots 1, 13, 14 and 26 of Block B being shown as a building and fence setback line. Payment in full of all fees, including the current $1,285-per-lot park fee and the current $855-per-lot roadway impact fee. Compliance with Engineering Department recommendations. 1) Recommend disapproval of the Final Plat 2) Recommend approval of the Final Plat 3) Recommend approval of the Final Pht subject to conditions. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Final Plat 2) Departmental Comments Item# 13 · ~,'~ ~ ,: · //k\~ OCT ~ ~lC~_-~ 1~ ~'- LEISURE SERVICES DEPARTMENT CO~ ~ l~erv~w Estates, ~nal Plat October $1, 1996 R. D. Slayton, Superintendent of Leisure Services 214/304-3554 FAX 214/304-3547 C, OM~ STATU~: The developer will be responsible to participate in the City of Coppell's parkland dedication ordinance fee of $1,2815 per dwelling unit. ~$ELECTRIC CITY OF COPPELL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE October 31, 1996 SUBJECT: RIVERVIEW ESTATES FINAL PLAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. EASEMENTS WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSED ELECTRIC FACILITIES. A PLAT WITH EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE DEVELOPER. LOAD INFORMATION (SIZE OF A/C, HEAT LOAD) WILL BE REQUIRED FROM THE DEVELOPER BEFORE EASEMENTS CAN BE DETERMINED. PLEASE CALL ME AT 972-888-1307 IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. TIM BRANCHEAU