River Ridge Add-CS 931118 CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE #: River Ridge Addition, Final Plat
P & Z HEARING DATE: November 18, 1993
C. C. HEARING DATE: December 14, 1993
LOCATION: South of Sandy Lake Road, west of Riverchase Drive.
SIZE OF AREA: 18.578 acre
CURRENT SF-7
ZONING:
REQUEST: Approval of a final plat reflecting 61 lots (3.3 du/a¢.) and variances.
I) A minimum street radius of 200';
2) A cul-de-sac length of 789';
3) No alleys to Lots 1 - 18, Block A and Lot 11, Block D.
APPLICANT: R.B.R. Properties, Inc. C.C.M. Engineering Corp.
(owner) (Engineer)
P. O. Box 796303 1120 Empire Central Place
Dallas, TX 75379 Suite 308
(214) 788-0797 Dallas, TX 75247
(214) 630-5200
HISTORY: In the early hist0nj of Coppell as a City (mid 19g0's), this property was
zoned SF-12. By the late gO's, and the introduction of the Riverchase
development, this parcel was rezoned to MF-2. In late 1991, the property
was rezoned again, this time to SF-7. The final plat presented in this
packet reflects SF-7 development.
Item 5
Page 2 of 3
TRANSPORTATION:
Riverchase Boulevard is an existing four lane undivided street contained
within a 60-foot right-of-way.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North - Undeveloped PD SF-7; developing SF-7
South - Riverchase Golf Course; SF-12, S.U.P.
East - Developing residential; SF-7
West - Utility line R.O.W., undeveloped land; PD SF-7
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The existing Comprehensive Plan shows multi-family development; the
Plan under revision suggests single-family use as most appropriate for this
parcel.
ANALYSIS:
This property is adjacent on the west to a 130 foot T.U. Electric
easement, and the lotting arrangement at first glance appears to be
somewhat unusual.
It is recognized that this plat attempts to place a few lots along the
common utility easement by extending the cul-de-sacs to the easement
line. On the other hand, by extending the cul-de-sacs to that line, one's
focal point from the street into a rather unsightly and aesthetically
displeasing easement right-of-way are not blocked by structures. Five-
foot wide common landscaped areas, maintained by a homeowner's
association between the street right-of-way and the utility easement have
been added to the final plat and should serve to screen an unattractive
view, at the street level.
Another issue to be addressed is that the overall Riverchase development
plan has advocated screening walls and landscaping adjacent to Riverchase
Boulevard. Not only does this development propose a screening wall
adjacent to the lots along Riverchase, the northern 400 feet (near Sandy
Lake Road) now includes a common area (#1) which is to be maintained
by the homeowner association. Future placement of this wall will provide
continuity of screening walls and landscaping in the Riverchase
development.
Page 3 of 3
Finally, there are two engineering c. oncems that must be addressed
including:
1. A floodplain development permit is required;
2. escrow for Sandy Lake frontage (approximately $1,600) is
required.
The developer has also agreed to build a brick screening wall along
Riverchase Blvd. and is currently working with the city and TU Electric
to obtain an easement to construct the Riverchase wall.
If the developer addresses these issues to the satisfaction of staff, approval
of the final plat along with variances, would be in order.
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the final plat.
2) Deny the final plat.
3) Modify the final plat.
ATTACHMENTS: 1) Final plat document