Loading...
PD115-CS 910221 (2)CITY OF COPPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT CASE #: PD 115 P & Z HEARING DATE: Febz~ry 21, 1991 C. C. HEARING DATE: March 12, 1991 LOCATION: Approximately 1,047 feet south of Sandy Lake Road, with 892 feet fronting on the west side of Denton Tap Road. SIZE OF AREA: 20.377 acres REQUEST: Applicant is requesting a change of zoning from "C" Cc~nercial to PD SF-7 for single-familydetached residential construction. APPLICANT: Siepiela Interests, Inc. (Jim Siepiela, Developer) 5001 LBJ Freeway, Suite 830 Dallas, Texas 75244 (214) 960-2777 Unzicker-Schmerbusch & Assoc. (Engineer) 8700 Stenmons Freeway, Suite 400 Dallas, Texas 75247 (214) 634-3300 HISTORY: This is a parcel of land owned byBluebonnet Savings Bank F.S.B. of Dallas. There has been no recent zoning activity on this property, partially due to the fact that it has been foreclosed on by the FDIC. In fact, discussion regarding rezoning to residential has been going on for over one year. TRANSPORTATION: Denton Tap Road, the means of access to the land, is a six-lane divided thoroughfare contained within a 120' wide right of way. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: Property to the north and south is vacant, "C" zoning. To the west is PD SF-9, the Shadow Ridge development. Across Denton Tap Road to the east is vacant "C" zoning. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan shows this area to be developed with retail uses. ITEM 5 ANALYSIS: Staff, developer, and area homeowners have spent a considerable amount of time attempting to reach concensus on this zoning request before it reaches the public hearing forth. Issues discussed among these groups in two separate meetings included, among others: · appropriateness of the zoning request · use, density, dwelling unit size · height of structures · screening provisions · drainage · alley requirements · access Support of rezoning from "C" to ?D SF-7 was agreed; residential use was accepted provided minimum lot size was 7,400 square feet, 25 foot front yards were shown, a maxirman of 78 lots was developed, a 35 foot height limit was imposed, and a minirm~nbuilding size of 1,850 s~are feet was offered. All these conditions are shown on the PD plan and will be made conditions of approval. The developer has also agreed to construct a six foot, wooden fence with decorative cap, robe supported by metal poles, along the c~N¥~n western property line, running the length of the property. This fence will be maintained by a hc~eowners association which the developer will establish· The applicant has also agreed to construct a similar screening fence on the southern property line, also to be maintained by the association. The developer has indicated that the poles to support this screening fence will be located on the developer's side of the southern fence· The neighborhood has also expressed great concern regarding potential drainage problems with develo~nent of this tract. Although drainage is an issue which is resolved at subdivision platting, this neighbor- hood does not appear willing to accept thatprocess and may express concern at the public hearing. Staff position is one of noting the neighborhood concern, addressing the issue at its proper place -- when the subdivision plat is submitted for review· The developer has agreed (although no plans have been submitted) to landscape the access from Denton Tap into this subdivision and will provide a point of contact with the property to the north as shown on the PD plan. Perhaps the most volatile issue which was not resolved to the hcme- owner~ satisfaction in our meetings concerns the alley shown on the western boundary. Allegations were raised that City staff had promised a park would be located here. The Comprehensive Plan does not show such a park. Con~nents suggested that a strip as much as 200 feet wide would remain open space. Staff has been unable to locate the source of such an inaccurate statement. The neighborhood apparently does not support this required alley· We, however, strongly urge the placement of a 15-foot alley on the western boundary. We currently have a 15-foot sanitary sewer easement here, and our alley requirement would merely overlay this existing utility· The alley would assist in directing the flow of storm water and would decrease the flow of water on the homeowners along Southern Belle, as well as control the velocity of water which would, flay into the drainage channel to the south. In addition, the subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance mandate alleys in new subdivisions. Our Public Works, Engineering and Planning staff cannot over emphasize the importance of this alley· Finally, the homeowners have requested no two-story houses be built on the western or southern tier of lots contained within the zoning application· The developer is reviewing the economic feasibility of such a restriction and will address this issue at the public hearing. Staff is ~nbivalent regarding the southern lots, feels such a re- striction would assure the privacy of the Southern Belle homeowners. In s~then, staff recon~nds approval of this PD subject to: · 7,400 square foot minim~ lot size · 66 foot minirmxn lot width · 6 foot minimum side yard · 25 foot minirmxn front yard · 78 lots maximin · 1,850 s~,~re foot minim~n air conditioned house size · 6 foot wooden screening fence with cap on western boundary · 6 foot wooden screening fence with cap on the southern boundary · 6 foot masonry screening fence on eastern residential boundary · landscaping as shown on plan · establishment of homeowners association to maintain landscap- ing and walls · height limitations as determined by Planning Ccnxnission · alleys throughout subdivision