PD133-CS 940616 CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE #: PD-133, COPPELL 200 SOUTH ADDITION
P & Z HEARING DATE: June 16, 1994 (originally); to be reheard on July 19, 1994
C. C. HEARING DATE: July 12, 1994 (originally); now to be heard on August 9, 1994
LOCATION: West of Denton Tap Road, just north of Denton
SIZE OF AREA: 87 acres .. ~ ~ ~'~{~ , ,, ~'STA'Z:
ZONIN6: PD-FP, LI, HC
REQUEST: Planned Development for Residential, Commercial, and Flood Plain Uses
with 26 acres of FP, 10 acres of HC, 51 acres of SF (28 acres with 77
lots; 8 acres with 21 lots--both essentially SF-91now 37 ac. with 100
lots l; 15 acres with 21 lots--essentially SF-12[now 14 ac. with 12 lots l).
APPLICANT: Coppell 200 Joint Vent. Dowdey, Anderson and Assoc.
(Owner) (Engineer)
101 Renner Road, Ste. 170 16250 Dallas Pkwy, Suite 100
Richardson, Tx. 75082 Dallas, Tx. 75248
907-1907 931-0694
HISTORY: There has been no recent zoning history on this parcel although a zoning
case was submitted in 1991 and looked at again in 1992. On June 16,
the Planning Commission took this case under advisement with the hearing
left open in order that the applicant could redesign the development to
better fit the aspirations of the Commission.
TRANSPORTATION: Denton Tap Road is a P6D, six lane divided (120 foot r.o.w.);
currently a two lane roadway; the 121 Bypass will be built to
Freeway standards with access roads in 450 feet of r.o.w.
Item 5
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North - vacant; HC
South - Andrew Brown Park; TC
East - vacant; LI and C
West - vacant; R
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Plan indicates open space and mixed use with commercial
development as most appropriate here.
ANALYSIS: The Planning Commission spent many hours determining what it felt was the best
use for this land in the land analysis exercise. After several sessions, the
Commission came to the conclusion that single-family residential, open space, and
highway commercial uses was most appropriate. This recommendation was
arrived at after much discussion, research, and review of several earlier plans for
this parcel.
Since 1985, every potential developer of this tract has agreed to dedicate an
approximate 30 acre land area adjacent to Denton Creek for park purposes. In
addition, every former zoning applicant had also agreed to contribute
approximately $300,000 for park land improvements (see attached plan and fee
allocation document). It is not clear from this application what financial
responsibility and park plan is contemplated--that needs to be determined.
Of additional concern to staff is the proposed single-family uses adjacent to the
Bypass. As discussed in the land use exercise, the Commission's position was
that no residential use should abut the Bypass, and a recommendation of HC
along the entire length on both sides was the consensus of Commission members.
This plan ignores that proposal. The plan submitted does show a 50 foot buffer,
with landscaping and a wall, but it remains to be seen if such proposal alleviates
Commission's concern with traffic and residential adjacency.
This plan does have some positive elements. The proposed entrance is to be
commended in that several existing trees will be preserved in the common area;
this plan does show approximately 30 acres being dedicated for park purposes
(although staff has concerns regarding specific plans and financial obligations as
mentioned above), the overall density is comparable to the earlier plans submitted
(this plan shows 119 dwelling units, the earlier showed 125 and 170), there is a
common area which addresses the drainage of the Bypass.
Overall, however, this submittal does not reflect the land uses propose by the
Commission when a heating was authorized to determine proper zoning for this
tract. There are major questions regarding the park, a plan for it, and financing
of the park improvements; residential zoning adjacent to the 121 Bypass has been
questioned by the Commission; more detail is needed for development of the
common open spaces; with one point of access, a traffic impact analysis may be
needed at platting, among others.
Because the Commission took the originally called hearing under advisement for
the land owner to address issues which were discussed in some detail at that
hearing, the fact that the plan before you is not comprehensive in form with
several PD issues left unresolved, and the fact that the land use pattern suggested
by the developer's proposal do not reflect the suggestions of the Commission,
staff would recommend that this property be rezoned to HC along the proposed
121 Bypass (with a 250 foot depth), 30 acres be designated FP for public park
purposes along Denton Creek, the remainder of the parcel be rezoned single
family, (density to be determined at the hearing) with a minimum lot size of SF-
12 along the park boundary.
At the June 16 meeting several issues were discuxsed. Among them:
park land dedication
park land improvements and this developer's obligations/intentions
this proposal not tracking with the Commission's zoning recommendations
residential uses adjacent to the Bypass
a plan for the park
the desire for an access road adjacent to the park
This revised plan only addresses the issue regarding access to the park, and
although the applicant has responded to that concern, the other remaining issues
have not been satisfactorily resolved. Until they are, staff can not support the PD
as submitted. If Commission elects to approve the PD, however, there are several
mod~cations which need to be made to the notes on the face of the plan such as
lot depths, sideyards provided, etc. (SF-12 standards, for example, do not allow
the yards shown on the plan).
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the suggested PD
2) Deny the PD
3) Modify the PD
4) Recommend rezoning based upon Commission study and research
ATTACHMENTS: 1) PD site plan
2) Detail of entry features
3) Additional landscaping details
4) Plan of approved park development
5) Park development cost allocation
6~ Revised Plan
Note: items 1-5 were submitted with the original application, only item 6, the
revised plan is included here