Lakes of C/PP-CS 840419The City With A Beautiful Future
P. O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
214 - 462 - 0022
STAFF REPORT
APRIL 19, 1984
Scott Barnett, Planning Co-Ordinator
RE:
Case #84-03-20/Lakes of Coppell
LOCATION:
North of Sandy Lake Road, South of
Deforest Road, east of Samuel Boulevard,
west of Denton Creek
REQUEST:
Requesting rezoning of approximately
412.1 acres with a breakdown of indivi-
dual districts as follows:
1 ) SF-9
2) SF-O
3) TH-1
~LjqF-2
6) Co~.~
89.73 acres
111.04 acres
57.05 acres
138.43 acres
..... --J--- 9.68 acres
412.15 net acres
APPLICANT:
Triland Development Inc. represented by
Tim House
The requests consist of the same general area as the request made by Lomas and Nettleton
Corporation in September, 1983. There are some differences in unit and acreage break-
down comparisons and those specific are incorporated in the report submitted by
J.T. Dunkin and Associates. The report and statistics submitted by Dunkin's firm
constitutes the review comments by the staff. In regard to the throughfare design
and utility design, Mr. Wayne Ginn will be available for the hearing to answer any
questions relating to these areas, in addition, Dan Sefko, of J.T. Dunkin's office, wil
also be available for comments.
In summation, this request by Triland is similiar, in most respects, to the Lomas and
Nettleton request. The major differences from the two requests are:
1. Lomas and Nettleton submitted under Planned Development where as Triland
submittal is on an individual basis.
2. The increase of MF-2 acreage, 151 acres compared to 83.3 submitted by
Lomas and Nettleton.
3. The SF-O lot line zoning district committed to one specific area totaling
104 acres.
SB/asm
The City With A Beautiful Future
P. O. Box 478
Coppell0 Texas 75019
214 - 462 - 0022
PLArlIiIIIG AI~D ZOI;ING COHI-I1SSIOI,I:
Case ~84-03-20/LAKES OF COPPELL
On April 26th, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission received tile request submitted
by Triland Land Corporation for the Lakes of Coppell project. Since this development
encompasses the same general area as the Lomas and ~lettleton submittal in September,
1983, a comparison review was made of the two submittals. The Triland submittal,
in most respects, is similiar to the Lomas and Nettleton request with the major
differences as follows:
1. The increase of HF-2 acreage, 138.4 compared to 83.3 submitted by Lomas
and Nettleton.
2. The SF-O lot lone zoning district being con:nitted to one specific area
totaling 104 acres.
3. Lomas and Nettleton submitted under Planned Development whereas Triland
submission is on an individual basis.
Attached to the staff report are comments submitted by J.T. Dunkins' office per-
taining to this request, which constitutes the review .co~::~ents by the staff.
The Planning and Zoning Commission denied the request by a 3-1 vote after three
(3) motions were made, a copy of those minutes are attached, for the reason of the
increase of approximately 1000 units over the Lomas and Nettleton submittal.
SB/asm
urban planning / landscape architecture
April 12, 1984
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Coppell
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
Re: Lakes of Coppell Zoning Request
Dear Commissioners:
We have reviewed the above referenced zoning request by Triland Develop-
ment, Inc. and have the following comments:
This request encompasses the same general area as the request made
by Lomas & Nettleton in September 1983, with one or two exceptions.
An additional 20± acres has been included north of Sandy Lake Road,
east of and adjacent to the extension of Allen Road. Another
parcel of approximately 20 acres along Samuel Boulevard has not
been included in the Triland request.
2. Comparison of residential densities:
Triland
Lomas & Nettleton
Zoning Number Number Number Number
District of Net Acres of Units of Net Acres of Units
SF-7 0 0 63.0 252
SF-9 72 216 17.0 51
SF-0 104 624 108.8 653
TH-I 42 672 53.4 534
MF-2 151 2462 83.3 1499
369 3974 325.5 2989
The Lomas & Nettleton request designated more areas for water or
lake features than is designated in the Triland request.
13600 Li~J. freeway 1540 eastgate plaza suite mo6
p~l~ox 472766 garland, texas 75047 214 270 766'
Page 2 Planning and Zoning Commission
Be
Triland is submitting all of the tracts under "straight" zoning.
Ail of the Lomas & Nettieton districts were submitted under the PD
designation.
The alignment of Allen Road has also changed somewhat from the
Lomas & Nettleton request. The Triland alignment has been shifted
slightly to the southwest. This appears to be a more appropriate
alignment to facilitate a connection into Lewisville at Samuel Road
as it intersects with Denton Creek. The minimum right-of-way for
Allen Road should be 110'. Provisions should be made for the
extension of Allen (MacArthur) Road to Denton Creek and clarifica-
tion of bridge construction responsibilities.
The land use concept of the Triland request is similar to the Lomas
& Nettleton request in that the higher density districts are
between the Allen-MacArthur Road extension and Denton Creek.
e
The Triland application shows approximately 104 contiguous acres of
SF-O. Patio home type development is more commonly effective and
pleasing in smaller parcels or tracts. Large acreages of patio
homes can create undesirable concentrations of one dwelling unit
type if other amenities are not incorporated into the development.
To alleviate this perception, the Planning and Zoning Commission
may consider a distribution of patio home tracts throughout the
project.
A planned development or SUP designation should be attached to
major private recreational areas or centers.
The multi-family density requested by TCiland is 22 dwelling units
per acre; the density requested by Lomas & Nettleton was 18 dwell-
ing units per acre.
Summary - The Triland request, in many respects, is similar to the Lomas
& Nettleton request. The major differences are an increase in residen-
tial (MF-2) density and the 104 acres of contiguous zero lot line type
development.
Sincerely, .!
4
Dan G. Sefko, AICP
Minutes of April 26, 1984
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Coppell met in special
called session at 6:30 p.m. on the 26th day of April, 1984, in the'Coppell
High School Administration Building.
The following members were present:
R. W. Smedul, Chairman
Peyton Weaver, Co~nissioner
Gary Adams, Commissioner
Frank Pope, Commissioner
Co-Chairman Geren Burton was not present. Also present were Planning Coordinator
Scott Barnett and Secretary Debbie Layton.
The meeting was called to order and everyone asked to stand while Commissioner
Adams gave the invocation. ~
Item No. 3: Public hearing to consider a zoning change request of Triland
Investment Group on property generally located north of Sandy Lake Road, east
of The Meadows Subdivision, south of DeForest Road, and west of Denton Creek to
the following zoning classifications:
A. "SF-12", Single Family 12 to "SF-9", Single Family 9
B. "SF-12", Single Family 12 and "C", Commercial to "TH-i", Townhouse 1
C. "SF-12", Single Family 12 to "C", Co~ercial
D. "SF-12", Single Family 12 and "MF-2", Multi-Family 2 to "SF-0", Single
Family 0
E. "C", Commercial to "SUP", Specific Use Permit
F. "SF-12", Single Family 12, "C", Commercial and "R", Retail to '5~F-2",
Multi-Family 2
Mr. Tim House representing Triland made the presentation. He stated that
this development contains approximately 412 acres, 338 of which are developable.
It is bounded on the south by Sandy Lake Road, on the west by Samuel Blvd.,
on the north by De Forestj and on the east by Denton Creek. The major North/
South thoroughfare through the development would be MacArthur Blvd. (Allen Road
presently). The development would have canal type lakes with an average of 150'
width. Mr. Cliff Taylor, engineer for the development, was present to answer
some engineering questions concerning the lake system. The lakes would be
4 to 7 feet deep. and will be maintained by a Homeowners Association. Following
the presentation, Chairman Smedul announced to the audience that the public
hearing was officially closed; however, since he was not at the last meeting
he would hear any comments from the audience. Those persons in the audience
speaking were Elsie Edwards, Betty Byrd, Johnny Burns and Ray Warren. Following
these comments, Mr. Dan Sefko, representing J. T. Dunkin and Associates, then
gave a brief review of this zoning change including a comparison of this request
to the previous L & N zoning change request. Following discussion by the Commission
Commissioner Pope moved that the zoning change be recommended for approval as
presented in Items A, B, C, D, E and F; Motion died for lack of second.
Commissioner Weaver then moved that Items A through F be recommended for denial;
Commissioner Adams seconded and motion was tied with Commissioners Adams and
Weaver voting for the motion and Chairman Smedul and Commissioner Pope voting
against the motion. Commissioner Weaver then moved again that Items A through
F be recommended for denial; Commissioner Adams seconded and motion carried 3-1
with Chairman Smedul voting against the motion.
The meeting was then adjourned.
ATTEST: /?
..'?') ,-.' ....
Debbie Layton, Secretary
R. W. Smedul, Chairman