Loading...
PD108R-DR 951130 City of Coppell Development Review Committee Comments Planning Department PD-10$R, The Springs of Coppell DRC Date: November 30, 1995 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting: December 21, 1995 City Council Meeting: January 9, 1996 1. You may want to consider including in the HOA that the Architectural Control Committee regulate fences, especially in connection with corner lots. 2. Alley layout needs further study. With arrangement as shown, Lots 5, 14, and 36 of the perimeter block face potentially unsightly situations. -Lots 14 and 36 look down the alley. -LOt 5 faces the garage and backyard fence likely to be built on Lot 1 of the interior block. -An alley starting on the south opposite the property line between Lots 20 and 21 of the perimeter block continuing northward and exiting near the west side of LOt 1 of the 2-lot block would create fewer visual problems. -LOt 34 of the perimeter block is likely to face backyard fences on Lots 25 and 26, so that potential problem needs to be solved. -Lots 39 and 45 of the perimeter block are large enough to take a front yard setback on both street frontages, so the final plan should reflect that. 3. There may be a justification for waiving alley requirements along Grapevine Creek. There is insufficient justification for waiving them alongside the railroad and church property. 4. Show the transmission line. 5. Out of the 15 most southerly lots proposed, 6 lots adjoin the railroad and power transmission line. Gaining these lots requires paving 3 cul-de-sacs. Without the 3 cul-de-sacs, the most southerly street would accommodate 12 lots, all removed from the railroad and transmission line by 100 feet or more. A cost/revenue analysis may prove that a 3-lot gain does not justify the cost and that extending open spaces between the park site and the church site would be a better alternative. 6. Provide additional access to the City's Hike and Bike trail system. Note: A. Staff written comments will be faxed to each applicant. B. Please revlse plats, landscape plans, and utility plans based on staff recommendations provide reasons why our comments should not be followed when you attend the December 7, 1995 Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting. C Each applicant will bring one new set of revised plats and plans to the December 7th DRC meeting. Applicants will be asked to show, explain and defend any revision. An Engineer for the project or other representative is urged to attend the meeting. D. Applicant will have till noon Tuesday, December 12th to resubmit twenty-eight (28) folded copies of revised plans, three 0) reduced paper copies (8 1/2 X 11) and one (1) transparency (8 1/2 x 11) of each exhibit to the Planning Department. END · ~ Existing significant trees L~ 6" caliper or greater ~:=~~; Areas to be maintained ~~:.~ by the Home Owners D~}c~~ ~ Association 74 Number of lots in ~~~ ~b ~Subiect Tract 29.884 Acreage in Subject Tract