Jefferson/PP-AG 941011CITY COUNCIL ~EETIN~:
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
October 11, 1994
ITEM # _~_
ITEM CAPTION:
Consideration and approval of Jefferson at Riverchase, Preliminary
Plat, located east of MacArthur Boulevard, approximately 400 feet
north of Riverchase Drive, at the request of The Nelson Corporation.
SUBMITTED b
TITLE: ~qTIlX~ctor of Planning & Comm. Services
STAFF COMMENTS:
Date of P&Z Meeting: September 15,. 1994
Decision of Commission: Approval (4-1) with Commissioners Lowry,
Thompson, Tunnell and Redford voting in favor. Commissioner Wheeler
opposed. Commissioner Hildebrand was absent. One vacancy occurs.
APPROVED
?...:.~ , .... c-?,UN
DATE ,./~-/,- q ~ -.- -~
INITIALS~~'
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
EXPLANATION:
Approval ~
Please see attachment for conditions of approval.
Denial
BUDGET
FINANCIAL COMMENTS:
AMT. EST.8
+/- BUD:$
FINANCIAL REVIEW:4
Agenda Request Form - Revised 1/94
CITY MANAGER REVIEW:
AGENDA REQUEST NARRATIVE
JEFFERSON AT RIVERCHASE, PRELIMINARY PLAT
Conditions for approval:
If any drainage system encroaches into the TP&L right-of-way,
approval from Texas Utilities will need to be obtained prior to
construction. All off-site easements should be shown on the face
of the plat, along with a volume and page number;
an opticom system will be required;
a fence needs to be added that would border the proposed
configuration of the open space on the north side of the
proposal; and
all information concerning this site will be required to be
submitted to the City on computer diskette compatible with the
City's computer system.
Agenda Narrative - Revised 1/94
SpcllCl~ck and Savc Docum~ ~ It~nmnbcr to attach narratiw~ to migjnal Ag~da Keque~. ~
CASE:
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Jefferson at Riverchase, Preliminary Plat
P & Z HEARING DATE: September 15, 1994; last heard July 21, 1994
C. C. HEARING DATE: October 11, 1994
LOCATION:
Along the east side of MacArthur Boulevard, approximately 400 feet north
of Riverchase Drive
SIZE OF AREA: 21.0222 acres for a proposed 386 unit apartment complex
CURRENT
ZONING:
MF-2 (although Planning Commission has recommended Office zoning for
this parcel)
REQUEST:
Preliminary Plat Approval
APPLICANT:
HISTORY:
RPG Estates, Inc.
(owner)
8440 Walnut Hill
Dallas, 75231
373-6666
JPI Texas
(applican0
600 E. Las Colinas
Suite 1800
Irving, 75039
556-1700
Nelson Corp.
(planner/engineer)
5999 Summerside
Suite 202
Dallas, 75252
380-2605
This property is one of the parcels upon which a public heating was authorized
by the Planning Commission to determine proper zoning. On March 14, 1994,
the Commission unanimously recommended that (O) Office zoning was more
appropriate than MF-2. That recommendation was forwarded to Council on April
12 at which time the City Council elected to hold the recommendation under
advisement until June 14 so that the Planning Commission could consider
additional data which had been submitted to Council before their hearing. That
data is presented here as information, and later in this docket for additional
discussion. On May 19, the Planning Commission considered the additional data
Item 12
and denied the plat. On July 21 the Planning Commission again denied this
plat because it was determined by legal consul that the applicant needed
to appear before the Board of Adjustment and ask for variances to the site
plan before the Commission considered the plat. The applicant appeared
before the Board in August and was granted four variances including: the
elimination of the screening wall between single family and multi-family uses,
the 60 foot setback was reduced to 20 feet adjacent to single family zoning,
the dumpster location and number was adjusted, and the parking
requirements were reduced.
TRANSPORTATION: MacArthur Blvd. is a P6D containing 4 lanes in a 110 foot r.o.w.
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North -vacant and TU r.o.w.; A and MF-1 (rec. for O)
South - Riverchase Golf Course; SUP SF-12
East - Riverchase Golf Course; SUP SF-12
West -vacant; SF-9 and MF-2 (recommended for O)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Plan shows Office use as best for this site.
ANALYSIS:
This parcel has been recommended by the Planning Commission for Office use,
in conformance with the Master Plan. If Office zoning is granted, of course, this
plat would necessitate a denial because the plat would not conform to the
appropriate platting requirements. However, on April 12 the Council failed to act
on the Commission recommendation, electing to hold any rezoning action until
June 14. This was done to allow the Commission time to consider a letter
submitted to the City by RPG (attached) which suggests that if the current zoning
(MF-2) is allowed to remain unchanged, PPG would be willing to "...develop one
and two story.., townhomes..." on a 40 acre parcel RPG owns south of
Riverchase Blvd, and currently zoned MF-2. After approximately 45 homes had
been constructed, RPG would decide if the market was right for additional units;
if not, then it is presumed that the remainder of the parcel would be developed
as currently zoned (MF-2). Because of the complicated nature of this letter,
recognizing that Commission has recommended Office zoning, and the fact that
the Commission needs to exercise caution in considering anything that might even
remotely suggest "contract zoning", it was suggested that a separate item be
placed on the May 19 docket to discuss all ramifications of this proposal.
Although the letter does not directly address the platting issue, eventual use of
land does dictate how property can be subdivided, so the letter is provided here
for your information. Staff has prepared a separate agenda item for a thorough
discussion of the letter and will address the issue at that time. At that meeting,
our City Attorney advised the Planning Commission that the letter should not be
used to make any determination regarding any rezoning and further stated that
the merits of the townhouse use should be discussed if/when the townhouse
proposal was submitted. That proposal has now been submitted and staff will
discuss it in detail under that case number.
Relative to the plat itself, there are several concerns which are outlined most
specifically by Engineering's DRC comments of May 2, 1994, and the applicant's
response to some of the issues raised in our DRC meetings of April 28 and May
5. Those letters are included here for your information. Although many of the
staff concerns are satisfactorily resolved, there are some which have not been
addressed including comments to be made at the hearing regarding the traffic
study (access, deceleration lanes, gates, etc.), variance requests involving
screening walls and dumpster locations, pavers needing to be shown at the second
entrance, the "linear park" designation in the TU Electric r.o.w, needs to be
taken off the plans, the question regarding EMF and residential building location
should be addressed, we presume all buildings meet height requirements although
no note is included on the plans, streetscape/landscape plans need refinement
(botanical names, groundcover identification, plant material, etc.).
To summarize, if Council were to follow the Commission's recommendation
regarding zoning to "O", this plat will not meet "O" platting requirements, and
should be denied. If Commission has concern with the issues not addressed by
this plat (and assuming the land will remain zoned MF-2), and prefers to have
those concerns addressed before recommending the plat, then it should be denied.
If, however, Commission rethinks its earlier recommendation to "O" zoning, or
has no concern with the plat specifically addressing all issues prior to approval
(for example, recommending approval subject to certain changes to the plat), then
the plat would warrant an approval. Staff does not believe, at this time, all
concerns can be properly addressed. If they can not, denial would be in order.
On June 14, the City Council elected to not follow the Planning Commission's
recommendation to rezone this land for office uses, and instead, left the MF-2
zoning on the parcel. That being the case, Commission must look at this plat as
reflective of the zoning on it today--MF-2. With an apartment development
proposed for this site, staff comments are as follows:
botanical as well as common names must be included on the landscape
plan
floodplain (after reclamation) needs to be shown on the plat
traffic issues must be addressed and resolved
internal circulation needs re-analysis (no easy way through the project)
RCP encroaching into TU r.o.w, and needs TU's written approval (it is
our understanding TU will not allow such encroachment)
northern access gate needs a minimum 60foot set-back
all plans need to track with one another
all off-site easements need to be shown on the plat with volume and page
number
In addition, issues such as the EMF question, potential drainage problems,
screening requirements, parking reduction, dumpster location, setbacks adjacent
to single family zoning, height limitations, and other issues all need to be
discussed prior to taking action on this preliminary plat. Of particular concern
to staff is the large number of potential variances proposed for this development.
Because standards of development should be met through the platting process, and
the fact that the Board of Adjustment has not granted any variances regarding this
case, Commission needs to consider carefully this proposal, and should only
recommend approval -- among other reasons -- if the variances requested make
logical sense, lf they don't, and there are other platting concerns, denial would
be in order.
For the Planning Commission meeting of September 15, the majority of our
earlier concerns have been satisfactorily addressed by the applicant. One f'mai
concern relates to parking structures being placed in front of the buildings
adjacent to MacArthur Blvd. Although parking spaces are allowed behind
the required building line (and that is what is shown on the plans before
Commission), it is our understanding that the applicant wants to place
parking structures within that same area. They are not allowed there,
therefore, the builder must again appear before the Board of Adjustment
and ask for setback relief. Although normally we would request the
applicant to appear before the Board before going before the Planning
Commission, in this case, because the applicant has been delayed in
proceeding with this project for a considerable length of time, staff
recommends Commission approve the plat as submitted, we will take to
Council the Commission recommendation as well as what ever action the
Board takes at its October hearing. The final staff comment is to direct
Commission's attention to the comments of our Engineering Department,
attached.
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the preliminary plat
2) Deny the preliminary plat
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Preliminary plat document
2) landscape plan
3) Republic Property Group April 8th letter (not in resubmittal)
4) staff DRC comments (not in resubmittal)
5) applicant's response to DRC comments (not in resubmittal)
6) traffic study (not in resubmittal)
Items 1-6 were included in the earlier Commission packet, included
here is the Conceptual Landscape Plan, Site Plan, and Preliminary Plat
document.
7) Departmental comments
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMI
ENGINEER2NG COMMENTS
ITEM: Jefferson at Riverchase, Preliminary_ Plat, located east of MacArthur
Blvd. and approximate~ 400 feet north of Rivercimse Drive, at the
request of The Nelson Corporation.
DRC DATE: August 25, 1994 and September 1, 1994
CONTACT: Ken Griffin, P.E., Assistant City Manager/City Engineer (395-1016)
If any drainage system encroaches into the TP&L right-of-way, you will need approval
from Texas Utilities prior to construction. All off-site easements should be shown on the
face of the plat, along with a volume and page number.
All information concerning this site will be required to be submitted to the City on
computer diskette compatible with the City's computer system. Please contact Doug
Steven at 393-1016 to obtain additional information.
motion; the motion carded 6-0 with Mayor Pro Tem Robertson and Councilmembers Alexander,
Stahly, Watson, Reitman, and Sheehan voting in favor of the motion.
18.
Consideration and approval of Jefferson at Riverchase, Preliminary Plat,
located east of MacArthur Boulevard, approximately 400 feet north of
Riverchase Drive, at the request of The Nelson Corporation.
Gary Sieb, Director of Planning and Community Services, made a presentation to the Council.
After lengthy discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Robertson moved to approve Jefferson at Riverchase,
Preliminary Plat, located east of MacArthur, approximately 400 feet north of Riverchase Drive
with the following conditions: 1) if any drainage system encroaches into the TP&L right-of-
way, approval from Texas Utilities will need to be obtained prior to construction. All off-site
easements should be shown on the face of the plat, along with a volume and page number; 2)
an opticom system will be required; and 3) all information concerning this site will be required
to be submitted to the City on computer diskette compatible with the City's computer system.
Councilmember Reitman seconded the motion; the motion carried 6-0 with Mayor Pro Tern
Robertson and Councilmembers Alexander, Stahly, Watson, Reitman, and Sheehan voting in
favor of the motion.
19.
Discussion and consideration of authorizing Dallas County to design Beltline
Road from MacArthur to Denton Tap to accommodate an onstreet bike path.
Ken Griffin, Assistant City Manager/City Engineer, made a presentation to Council.
Councilmember Watson moved to deny authorization for Dallas County to design Beltline Road
from MacArthur to Denton Tap to accommodate an onstreet bike path. Mayor Pro Tern
Robertson seconded the motion; the motion to deny carried 6-0 with Mayor Pro Tem Robertson
and Councilmembers Alexander, Stahly, Watson, Reitman, and Sheehan voting in favor of the
motion.
At this time Mayor Morton announced that the applicant for Item 12 had requested Council to
reconsider his agenda item. See Item 12 above for minutes.
20. Necessary action resulting from Executive Session.
There was no action taken under this item.
21. City Manager's Report.
There was no report from the City Manager.
22.
Mayor's Report.
Mayor Morton announced that a meeting had been held by the Dallas Regional Mobility
Coalition and that the Coalition would be coming to the City in the near future with a
marketing plan for our area to take to the Texas Highway Department to increase funding
for the Dallas/Fort Worth area.
23. Liaison Report
Library Board -- Councilmember Alexander announced that there would be a Library Board
meeting on Thursday, October 13, 1994.
CM101194
Page 7 of 8