Petterson Addn-CS040415CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE: Petterson Addition Lots 1-4, Block Replat
P & Z HEARING DATE:
C.C. HEAR1NG DATE:
April 15, 2004
May 11, 2004
STAFF REP.:
Matt Steer, City Planner
LOCATION:
Along the north side of Sandy Lake Road, approximately 120' west
of Summer Place Drive.
SIZE OF AREA:
2.27 acres of property.
CURRENT ZONING:
2F-9 (Two Family-9)
REQUEST:
Replat of Lots l&2 to allow the construction of four single-family
homes.
APPLICANT:
Owner:
Nancy J. Petterson
440 Leisure Lane
Coppell, Texas 75019
214~288-2295
214-853-9060
Representative:
Rupert Keeping
440 Leisure Lane
Coppell, Texas 75019
214-288-2295
Fax: 214-853-9060
Engineer:
Walter Nelson & Assoc.
1812 Carla Avenue
Arlington, Texas 76014
817-265-6738
Fax: 817-265-0206
HISTORY:
The property is currently zoned a 2F-9 district. City Council approved a plat on
December 8, 1998, for a two-lot subdivision, with each lot fronting a public street
(Sandy Lake). As shown on the attached, the approved Conceptual Site Plan
depicts two residences attached by a breezeway (duplex) on a lot commonly
referred to as a "flag lot." There was no Site Plan approved for the front lot. This
plat was approved with two exceptions to the Subdivision Ordinance. These were
stated as follows:
Page 1 of 4
Item #5
1. "The fire lane to be platted with a 24' wide easement. However, actual
width of fire lane can be 16 feet if the notation 'All residential
structures to be equipped with a functioning fully automatic fire
sprinkler system. If the fire sprinkler systems are removed or cease to
function, a full twenty-four feet (24') wide fire lane shall be installed.'
and
2. Gates shall be at each point of entry."
The Board of Adjustment met prior to the City Council meeting and granted two
additional variances.
1. Garage access shall not be from the adjacent alleyway.
2. A masonry wall is allowed at the front yard of property on Sandy Lake.
The Planning and Zoning Commission denied the replat for this property on
February 19, 2004, due to insufficient information necessary to approve the
zoning change.
TRANSPORTATION:
Sandy Lake Road currently is a substandard, two-lane asphalt road,
which is designated on the Thoroughfare Plan to be a four-lane
divided thoroughfare. The adjacent right-of-way is 100' and is
sufficient for the proposed expansion. No additional right-of-way
will be necessary.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North - single-family homes on approx. 4,000 sq. ft. lots; PD-148
South- single-family homes on approx. 15,350 sq. ft. lots; SF-7
East - single-family homes on approx. 4,000 sq. ft. lots; PD-148
West - single-family homes on an approx, five acre lots; SF-12
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan of May 1996 shows the property
as suitable for low-density residential development.
DISCUSSION:
Page 2 of 4
This is a proposed replat from a two-lot subdivision to a four-lot
subdivision. Concurrently, the applicant is requesting a rezoning of the
property from Two Family-9 district to Planned Development-Single
Family-12 district to allow the development of four homes on
approximately 'A-acre lots.
Staff views each development as a new case, and reevaluates the
previously granted exceptions/variances to ensure today's standards are
met. The exceptions previously approved for this property are listed above
Item #5
in the HISTORY section. The applicant is requesting two exceptions to
the Subdivision Ordinance at this time:
The public street frontage requirement - As an alternate to these lots
fronting on a dedicated street, a fire lane, utility, and access easement
will provide each lot with emergency access.
24' pavement of fire lane requirement - A 20'-width fire lane is
proposed. This private drive/fire lane is recommended for approval by
the Interim Fire Marshal, subject to a gated connection being made to
the alley to the north allowing emergency vehicles to exit, and not back
onto Sandy Lake Road. Because the fire lane is not a proposed
through street and only serves four units, the private drive was given
special consideration. This will not set precedence for any other fire
lane width variances within the City and is only relevant to this case.
The applicant has provided a 24'-fire lane within a 24'-easement to
satisfy the Fire Department's requirements. The public street
frontage exception is still requested.
Because the details of the Planned Development-Single Family-12
development are not clear at this time, staff cannot recommend granting
the exception to the public road frontage requirement of the Subdivision
Ordinance allowing for a private gated drive. We cannot recommend
denial of a rezoning application and turn around and recommend approval
ora plat, which reflects that same development pattern.
As described in the HISTORY section of this report, the Planning
Commission denied this plat in February. It was denied because of
inadequate information in the Planned Development zoning change
case. If all of the issues have been resolved, staff can recommend
approval of the replat.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONiNG COMMISSION:
Staff is recommending DENIAL of the requested replat due to inadequate
submittal of information. Staff is recommending APPROVAL of the
requested replat, subject to the following conditions:
1. Note zoning of property on plat.
2. Place the entire screening wall and gate within the Landscape
easement, and add the easement to the HOA maintenance note on
the plat.
3. Show a 64'-Building Line in the front yards of the proposed lots.
Page 3 of 4
Item #5
4. Present a draft copy of the Homeowners Association documents
for review by the City Attorney prior to submittal of the plat to the
City for signatures.
5. Refer to the attached Engineering comments for additional
requirements.
ALTERNATIVES
1)
2)
3)
Recommend approval of the request
Recommend disapproval of the request
Recommend modification of the request
ATTACHMENTS:
1)
2)
Engineering Comments
Replat
Page 4 of 4
Item #5
326 WEST SANDY LAKE ROAD
dO ~C~ay'u. lK~ pL& ~x)~-12/8/98
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO.: PD-200-SF-12 Petterson Addition Lots 1-4
Block A
P & Z HEARING DATE:
C.C. HEARING DATE:
April 15, 2004 (Continued from the Commission's February 19,
2004, meeting.)
May 11,2004
STAFF REP.:
Matt Steer, City Planner
LOCATION:
Along the north side of Sandy Lake Road, approximately 120' west
of Summer Place Drive.
SIZE OF AREA:
2.27 acres of property.
CURRENT ZONING:
2F-9 (Two Family-9)
REQUEST:
Planned Development District for construction of four detached
single-family residences.
APPLICANT:
Owner:
Nancy J. Petterson
440 Leisure Lane
Coppell, Texas 75019
214-288-2295
214-853-9060
Representative:
Rupert Keeping
440 Leisure Lane
Coppell, Texas 75019
214-288-2295
Fax: 214-853-9060
Engineer:
Walter Nelson & Assoc.
1812 Carla Avenue
Arlington, Texas 76014
817-265-6738
Fax: 817-265-0206
HISTORY:
The property is currently zoned a 2F-9 District. City Council approved the plat on
December 8, 1998, allowing for a two-lot subdivision, with each lot fronting a
public street (Sandy Lake). As shown on the attached, the approved Conceptual
Site Plan depicts two residences attached by a breezeway (duplex) on a lot
cmm-nonly referred to as a "flag lot." Them was no site plan approved for the
Page 1 of 6
Item #4
not front a public street. From a land-use perspective, the proposed SF-12
zoning would provide an appropriate transition from the zero-lot-line
development to the east and the large five-acre development to the west.
However, there are significant technical issues and insufficient information
that force staffto recommend denial of this request.
Staff views each development proposal as a new request, and reevaluates the
previously granted exceptions/variances to ensure today's standards are mel.
The exceptions previously approved are listed above in the HISTORY
section.
The applicant is requesting the following exceptions for this planned
development:
The public street frontage requirement - A fire lane, utility, and
access easement will provide each lot with emergency access.
24' pavement of fire lane requirement - A 20' width fire lane is
proposed. This private drive/fire lane is recoinmended for
approval by the Interim Fire Marshal, subject to a gated connection
being made to the alley to the north, allowing for emergency
vehicles to exit, and not back onto Sandy Lake Road. Because the
fire lane is not a proposed through street and only serves four units,
the private drive was given special consideration. This will not set
precedence for any other fire lane width variances within the City
and is only relevant to this case.
The applicant has provided a 24'-fire lane within a 24'-easement to
satisfy the Fire Department's requirements. The public street frontage
exception is still requested.
The details of the Planned Development are not clear at this time. The
plan for the gated entry, including queuing/stacking spaces, turnaround area,
paving and functionality of the gate was not submitted. The Streetscape
Plan calls for a 15'-landscape easement. This is shown on the plans, but the
actual Landscape Plan was not submitted. The color boards and elevations
for the proposed masonry walls and gate are not submitted.
The applicant included some and excluded some of the required
details of the Planned Development with this re-submittal. The plan
for the gated entry was included as a detail on the site plan. It depicts
the length and width dimensions, but does not include the
queuing/stacking spaces or turnaround area. The plan also presents
traffic conflicts between those entering and exiting, as the keypad is
shown on the western side of the drive. This would require a vehicle
entering the development to be on the wrong side of the road when
Page 3 of 6
Item #4
activating the keypad. The gate is proposed to swing inward,
presenting another potential conflict with vehicles waiting to exit. The
Streetscape Plan calls for a 15'-landscape easement along Sandy Lake,
which is shown on the Site Plan. A Landscape Plan and the elevations
for the proposed masonry wall were submitted. The gate elevations and
the color boards, however, were not.
The cimular drives for each lot, as discussed in previous meetings with the
applicant, are not shown. These would provide an area for visitors to park,
giving an alternate to parking within the proposed fimlane, which is
prohibited.
The concern regarding parking within the fire lane was addressed by
the applicant in noting that three parking spaces will be required for
each lot off of the fire, utility, and access easement. These would
provide an area for visitors to park, giving an alternate to parking
within the proposed fire lane, which is prohibited. Staff suggested
circular drives for each lot, but the applicant wants to leave that
decision up to the individual homebuilder.
The planned development does not show sufficient front-yard setback lines
from the tim lane, access, and utility easement. These were recommended to
be the same as single-family frontage along a public road. The base zoning
district requested is SF-12; therefore, 30' was recommended to be shown in
accordance with the district's requirements. The applicant did not provide
the recommended setback.
There were discussions with the applicant regarding screening along the
western boundary. Them is a tree row containing a few gaps located on or
near the westem boundary. The tree survey (taken from 1998) submitted
shows that none of these are on the applicant's property. In a site visit, it
appeared that the trees were directly on the property line (aligning with the
wooden survey stakes). An up-to-date tree survey needs to be submitted,
which was also missing from the application. Them needs to be some sort
of solid screen due to the irregular placement of houses on these lots
(frontage to the backyards of the large lots to the west). Staff recommends a
solid landscaping screen along the western boundary. A Landscape Plan for
this area would need to be submitted.
Since the previous submission, the tree survey was updated and
includes the tree row spanning the western boundary. No trees were
proposed to fill in the gaps. Staff still has concerns and recommends a
plan be determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission requiring
"fill-in" trees.
Page 4 of 6
Item #4
RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
At the February 19, 2004, meeting, staff recommended DENIAL of the
requested rezoning due to an insufficient planned development submittal
package. The package did not conta'm the following information that is
required to make a prudent recommendation:
After reconsideration, staff is now recommending APPROVAL of the
rezoning, subject to the following conditions (in bold) being addressed:
1. Details of the gated entry, including queuing/stacking spaces,
tumaround area, paving and functionality of the gate. Dimensions
shown within a detail. Show queuing/staeking spaces, and
demonstrate how turnaround will function. Address traffic
conflict with the keypad being on the western side of the drive.
Coordinate the exact location and specifications for the stained
stamped concrete entryway relative to the proposed widening
of Sandy Lake Road with Engineering.
2. Overall Landscape Plan including landscaping for the 15'-landscape
easement. Landscape Plan submitted. Revise to include Cedar
Elms as the dominant street tree per the Streetseape Plan.
3. Color boards and elevations of masonry walls (including gate)
proposed. Elevations of the masonry wall were submitted. The
plans still lack the masonry wall brick color, its tie-in at the
Summer Place wall and the gate elevations.
4. Circular drives on each lot for guest parking. These were not
shown. A note was added to the site plan requiring 3 parking
spaces per lot off of the fire lane.
5. Front yard building line for each lot, being measured from the
eastern boundary of the fire lane, utility, and access easement, as
well as Sandy Lake Road. Revise building footprint accordingly.
This was intentionally left at a 45'-building line measured from
the western property line. Staff recommends a 64'-building line,
which would reduce our coneern with inadequate setbacks.
6. Details on a visual buffer between the subdivision and the western
properties as the proposed lots front to the backyards of the existing
large lots to the west. Visual buffer not shown. Show proposed
trees to fill gaps within tree row on western boundary of
subdivision.
7. Current tree survey. Tree Survey submitted. Revise to reflect all
requirements of Section 34-2-8 of the Tree Ordinance.
8.Note garage access shall only be from the existing alleys.
9. Refer to the attached Engineering comments for additional
requirements.
Page 5 of 6
Item #4
ALTERNATIVES
1)
2)
3)
4)
Recommend approval of the request
Recommend disapproval of the request
Recommend modification of the request
Take under advisemem for reconsideration at a later date.
ATTACHMENTS:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Previously Approved Conceptual Site Plan
Proposed Site Plan
Updated Tree Survey
Landscape Plan
Screening Wall Elevations
Screening Wall Layout
Engineering Comments
Page 6 of 6
Item#4