Coppell Cross 1P-CS 980319CA~E:
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
COPPELL CROSSING, LOT 1. BLOCK 1,
FINAL PLAT AND SITE PLAN
P & Z HEARING DATE:
C.C. HEARING DATE:
March 19, 1998
April 14, 1998
LOCATION:
SIZE OF AREA:
CURRENT ZONING:
REQUEST:
APPLICANT:
361' north of Beltline Road, along the west side of MacArthur
Boulevard.
3.137 acres of property; proposed 12,000 s.f. building & 9,000
s.f. building for a total of 21,000 s.f.
C (Commercial)
Final Plat and Site Plan approval of two retail buildings.
Developer:
Mockingbird Management Co.
P. O. Box 293053
Lewisville TX 75029
(940) 241-2353
Fax (940) 241-2352
Engineer:
Kurtz-Bedford Associates, Inc.
4222 Rosehill Rd, Ste 2
Garland TX 75043
(972) 240-5999
Fax (972) 240-4466
HISTORY:
City Council rezoned the property to "C" Commercial in October of 1995,
in compliance with the terms of an agreement settling a lawsuit. The
Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council approved a
preliminary plat for the property early in 1998.
TRANSPORTATION:
MacArthur Boulevard is a 4-lane divided thoroughfare built in a
110'-wide right-of-way shown on the thoroughfare plan as a P6D,
&lane divided thoroughfare.
Item # 16
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North -
South -
East ~
West -
Undeveloped; C
Undeveloped; C
Commercial development; R and PD-R
Transmission line and undeveloped; A and TH-1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan shows the property suitable for regional
retail uses.
DISCUSSION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the preliminary plat of
Coppell Crossing in January of this year. The proposal involved a total of
almost 10 acres divided into 5 parcels. This 3.137-acre tract is the central
site. The use of driveways shared by adjoining parcels, coupled with the
need to comply with building setback regulations and vehicular lan~cape
buffer requirements, made the site layout a challenge. The planning staff
commends the applicant for achieving a workable site plan solution on this
portion without resorting to zoning change or variance request.
Staff is of the opinion that the quality of the site layout and development of
this 3 acres will upgrade the visual character of South MacArthur
Boulevard much in the same way that the 3.7-acre Valley Ranch Plaza
development at the southwest corner of MacArthur and Belt Line has
improved what the public sees upon first entering Coppell. Two items in
the applicant's submission, however, differ from the City's published
standards. Staff is quick to point out that these are not official standards,
but rather guidelines which the Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council may employ in the review of site plan submission materials. 1)
The sign packet which the applicant has submitted shows white, ivory,
red, orange, yellow and green as permitted sign colors. The guidelines
for shopping center signs, which the Commission and Council received
and endorsed in early 1997, suggest uniformity in color throughout, with
those colors limited to white, black, gray, beige, brown or other neutral
colors. Attached is a letter from the applicant to our City Manager which
expresses the applicant's displeasure with this policy. 2) In its guidelines
the City encourages the use of awnings and suggests a choice of either a
light neutral color or a deep color such as navy blue, burgundy, hunter
green or chocolate brown. The applicant's drawings indicate somewhat
livelier colors than these.
When a shopping center is new, everything looks better than it typically
does ten or fifteen years later. The planning staff is more concerned about
years from now than it is about today. Typically, when new tenants for
older space become hard to find, standards begin to deteriorate. The
resulting lower standards of appearance compound the problem. On the
other hand, shopping centers which maintain a high standard of
Item # 16
appearance can stay viable for many decades. Casa Linda, Lakewood and
Highland Park Village are classic examples right here in the Dallas area of
shopping centers which have maintained high standards both for signs and
for awnings for 50 to 75 years.
Changes in Coppell's commercial development
considered thoughtfully and carefully. They will
project, but also all future retail development.
guidelines should be
impact not only this
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
The planning staff recommends approval of the final plat and suggests that
the Commission discuss the proposed tenant sign regulations and awning
material selections with the applicant before approving the site plan. If the
applicant volunteers to modify those proposals to agree with design
suggestions published by the City, staff recommends approval of the site
plan, subject to certain minor conditions. If not, staff recommends that
the Commission take the site plan under advisement for later
reconsideration and, in the meantime, decide if it wants to reassess the
recommendations that came out of the C.I.V.I.C. report of February,
1997, endorsed by Council on the 25th of that month.
The minor conditions that should accompany a recommendation for
approval are:
1) Screening of rooftop mechanical equipment.
2)
No new overhead electric lines to be constructed in order to serve
the site.
3) Provision of all utility meters at the rear of the buildings.
4)
Off-site easements and fire lanes on Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, to be
dedicated by separate instrmnent (See Engineering Comments).
ALTERNATIVES:
1) Recommend approval of the request
2) Recommend disapproval of the request
3) Recommend approval of the final plat and modification of the site plan
4) Recommend approval of the final plat and take the site plan under
advisement for reconsideration at a later date
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Final plat
2) Site plan
3) Landscape planting
3) Elevations, Building A
4) Elevations, Building B
Item # 16
5) Perspective, Building A
6) Perspective, Building B
7) Letter from the applicant to the City Manager
8) Departmental Comments
Item# 16
Mockingbird Management Company
P.O. Box 293053
Lewisville, TX.
75029-3053
940-241-2353
fax 940-241-2352
www.mocl~m~_b, irdorop, com
March 4, 1998
Re: Coppell Crossing (Lot 1)
To:
Mr. Jim Witt, City Manager
City of CoppeIl
De~ ~r. Witt:
It is my understanding from Jim Kurtz, my Ci~,il Engineer, that the City has
requested that that above captioned project, be limited to a single color earth
tone sign criteria. Although I fully understand the need to limit certain types of
improperly designed signage, this area of Coppell does not justify nor warrant
such a harsh position from the City. The surrounding commercial retail
buildings utilize multi colored signage, and awnings, as allowed under the
Landlord's lease provisions, deed restrictions, and the City of Copped
ordinances. For my project, 1 expect no less.
As a Landlord who is developing a multi.million dollar complex, it is tn my best
interest to maintain a first class appearance. My track record for top qualits'
projects is impeccable and I can assure you that nothing will change.
I have asked Mr. Kurtz to express at the DRC meeting that we would not be held
to a different standard than that of our competition~
Trusting the above to be satisfactory, I romain
Sincerely Yours
~titcheLl Vexler, President
Mockingbird Management Company
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
ENGINEERING COM
ITEM: CotmeH Crossin~ Addition. Lot 1. Block 1. Final Plat and Site Plan
Review. to allow tke development of two retail buildings on 3.137 acres of
property located 361' north of Beltline Road, along the west side of
MacArthur Blvd., at the request of MocMngbird Management.
DRC DATE: February 26, 1998 and March 5, 1998
CONTACT: Mike Martin, P.E., Assistant City Engineer 004-3679)
COMMENT STATIlS: PP~LL~,~'~'?~,°.Y
1. Need to dedicate offsite easements and fire lanes on Lots 3, 4, and 5, Block 1 by separate
instrument.