CC approval on 12/13/88SUBMISSION DEADLINE: 5:00 p.m. Monday - 8 Days Preceding City Conncil Meeting _.~
AGENDA REQUEST FORM A~
FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETING: December 13, 1988~.__'~J~ ~JJ
I. NUMBER : S-10~8
II. CAPTION : PUBLIC HEARING: To consider approval of a Zoning
Case ~S-1038, from (C) Commercial to (C-S.U.P.) , to allow the operation of a
~ce store amd Gasoline sales located at 9Z8 S. Belt Line Road at the request of Texaco.
III. ACTION RE( : Date of Plm,ning & Zoning Meeting: November 17, 1988
Decision of Zoning Commission: Apl~roval (6-1) with the deletion of the signage on the
site plan; and with that the applicant work with staff to work toward a
resolution of the metal pm on the structure, and with the condition that the columns
supporting the canopy be
IV. REP. IN ATTENDANCE ]Bowman, P&Z'~oord~nator
B: £ CR -
V. NOTIFICATION TO : All 988-8Z74
METHOD OF CONTACT : Letter
DATE : 11/Z1/88
VI. FINANCIAL REVIEW : 1. BUDGETED ITEM N/A : YES NO
2. BUDGET AMOUNT :
3. ESTIMATED AMOUNT FOR THIS ITEM :
4. AMOUNT OVER OR UNDER BUDGET
5. LOW BIDDER RECOMMENDED YES NO
SOURCE OF FUNDING
CO'S OR BONDS FUNDS :
(Series or year authorized) :
OPERATING BUDGET (Account Number) :
OTHER :
APPROVED BY CITY MANAGER :
ITEM NUMBER___~___
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
DMEMOI
SUPPORT DOCL~ENTATION FOR AGENDA ITEM
* RECET
DATE , ,~. ~ .~~ *
* TIME *
* To be complete~ by City Manager Dept.*
/
****************************************
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED AMOUNT PER/SET NO. OF PAGES DATE SU.~ITTED
MEMORANDUMS ....................... :
REPORTS ........................... :
BILLS ............................. :
BID ............................... :
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT ................ :
MINUTES ........................... :
ORDINANCE ......................... ;
RESOLUTION ........................ :
PROCLAMATION ...................... : ."
MAPS .............................. :
ZONING PLANS ...................... :
PRELIMINARY PLATS ................. :
FINAL PLATS ....................... : ·
LANDSCAPE PLANS ................... :
ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS .......... :
OTHER ............................. :
REVIEWED BY (If applicable) SIGNATURE DATE REVIEWED
CITY ATTORNEY ................. ;~...:
FINANCE DIRECTOR ............ t ..... :
OTHER ............................. :
SUBMITTED BY SIGNATURE DATE SUBMITTED
APPROVED BY G/SIGNATURE -- DATE APPROVED
CITY MANAGER ...................... :
DENIED BY SIGNATURE
CITY MANAGER ...................... :
Additional documentation required
.' Need for further discussion
~ Submitted after deadline
~ "' ' At the request of
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATION FOR AGENDA ITEM
I. Item #13 City Council Agenda Dated: 12-13-88
II. COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATION:
You may have noticed that the staff report has a new look
and format. In an effort to continually improve the system,
staff is now providing the Planning and Zoning Commission
and the City Council with a more informative and
professional appearing report, as well as providing
comprehensive information vital to both decision making
bodies.
The new format includes new information that was previously
presented in the oral staff presentation, i.e., Surrounding
Land Use & Zoning; Transportation; History (background on
each case); and a Summary. Please note that the category
titled Alternatives offers the options available to the
P & Z Commission and the City Council in rendering a
decision. Finally, a new section titled Attachments has
been added so you will know what type additional information
has been submitted as a part of each report.
CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 13, 1988
RE: Case #S-1038
LOCATION: 928 S. Beltline Road
APPLICANT: Texaco
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
East - (C) Commercial zoning; vacant
West - (LI) Light Industrial zoning; vacant
North - (R) Retail zoning; Day Care Center
South - (C) Commercial zoning; Commercial Use
TRANSPORTATION:
Be]tline Road (north & south) is presently being expanded
to a six-lane thoroughfare. Transportation and access
should not be a problem.
HISTORY: A structure presently exists on this site, which will be
remodeled as indicated by the applicant's representative.
(Please see attached memo). A Special Use Permit request
was submitted in May of 1987, to allow the use of an auto
parts facility; however, the request was denied by the
City.
SUMMARY: Applicant is requesting approval of a S.U.P. to allow the
operation of a gasoline service station and convenience
store. Please note that the signage as shown on the site
plan has not been approved, and the applicant is submit-
ting a separate request for a sign variance regarding a
monument sign.
The P&Z Commission met on November 17, 1988, to review
this item, and after much discussion regarding the metal
fascia, and brick columns, the Commission recommended
approval with the condition that applicant work out these
issues with staff.
Staff met with the owner and his representative regarding
issues such as signage, metal fascias, and variances to
the ordinances. Staff feels comfortable that questions
raised by the P&Z Commission have been resolved. The
attached letter from Mr. Alf Bumgardner was prepared in
advance to provide the City Council with additional
information prior to the Council meeting. Contained
within this letter is a request for several variances to
the City Ordinances. They are in reference to comment.
#1: Staff has no objections to the applicant placing
masonry around the structural columns at the gas
island.
#2: The owner has agreed to remove the existing stucco
stone on either side of the building storefront and
replace it with masonry. Staff has no objections.
This will allow the building to be brought up to
code in order to meet the 80% masonry requirement.
#3: Metal roof variance - Staff has no objection to this
request; however, we would like to add that the
existing roof will not support the additional weight
of a new roof that would be placed on top of the
existing roof.
#4: Because the spacing between driveways as shown on
the site plan is existing, this item is not a true
variance. Staff requested the applicant to discuss
it primarily for the Council's information.
#5: Staff has no objections to the variance request
regarding sideyard setback requirements.
#6: This ~tem is to be addressed separately, as a sign
variance request.
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the S.U.P. with conditions.
2) Deny the S.U.P.
ATTACHMENTS: DRC comments
Site Plan
Letter from applicant
Architectural rendering
S-1038.STF.RPT
ARCHITECTURAL INNOVATIONS
Architects Planners Interior Designers
Decembe~ 1, 1988
Mrs. Taryon Paster Bowman
Planning & Zoning Coordinator
CiTY OF COPPELL
255 Parkway Blvd.
Coppell, Texas 75019
RE: CASE ~ S-1038
Dear Taryon,
This letter is in response to a meeting held at your office
on November 22, 1988, with you, Mr. Dale Jackson, Mr. Bill
Sladovnik ( client ] and myself, where we discussed the above
referenced case, at the Planning and Zoning Commission's
request. It is my understanding from the above referenced
meeting, that the following was agreed upon by all parties
pr esent:
i. My client has agreed to put masonry around the
structural columns at the gas island as suggested
by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
2. My client has agree~ to remove the existing stucco
stone on either side of the building storefront and
replace it with masonry.
3. The current Metal Roof Ordinance excludes the use
of metal ~-oofs on buildings with the exception of
standing seam metal roofs on a minimum pitch of
5:12. Since the existing metal roof is a 1:12
pitch, an additional structural framing system
would have to be constructed on top of the existing
one, to accommodate a new 5:12 roof pitch. The
existing structure will not support the additional
framing required to achieve this goal.
In addition, the same situation applies when
considering a built-up roof system. The existing
building would require a heavier base material for
this type of roofing system to be installed. This
cption would ~-equire additional framing that the
existing structure cannot support.
To comply with the intent of the ordinance, we have
extended the canopy structure from the front of the
building around the north and south sides, creatin9
a parapet wall t_-~ conceal the existing roof system.
P.¢~. B¢~X 110537 ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76007 (214) 988-8274
4. Although the current Sub-division Ordinance
requires a minimum distance between drive
entrances, the existing drive entrances at the site
were placed 30'-0" apart during the development of
Belt Line Road by the City of Coppell., Therefor, we
assume that. this existing condition is acceptable.
Because our lot width is only 100'-0", it would be
impossible for us to comply with this part of the
ordinance since the use of two drive entrances is
imperative for the operation of the proposed
facility.
5. We discussed the current Zoning Ordinance's
requirement for a 30'-0" side yard setback off of
the north and south boundaries of this site. In
order to comply with this part of the ordinance, we
would have to demolish 13'-0" off of the north and
south ends of the existing building. If we were
required to comply with these setbacks, a total of
1,040 square feet would be lost from the building.
The remaining 1,560 square feet of building could
not accommodate the proposed facility. It would
also require an extensive remodel to the existing
concrete foundation, structural and roof systems,
thereby making this part of the work cost
prohibitive. In addition, it would be very
difficult to find a user for this site due to the
size of the building in relationship to the size of
the lot. Therefor we request that a variance to
this part of the existing ordinance be granted.
6. Due to the existing 100'-0" existing property width
we are unable to comply with the portion of the
sign ordinance that requires a minimum distance
between monument signs of 150'-0". Therefor we have
applied for a variance on the location of the
monument sign as shown on the enclosed site plan.
We feel that a variance should be granted, since we
a~e not allowed by ordinance, to have any building
identification signage on the gas island canopy
structure, and due to the £ront yard setback
allowed to the Property Owner south of us ( by its
non-conforming use status ), our' building cannot be
seen by north bound traffic until they are 50'-0"
to 75'-0" from our southern property line. A
monument sign at the front property line is the
only effective location for building
identification.
! feel that my client has made a diligent effort to meet the
standards set by the City of Coppell, within the constraints
the current ordinance has a~ded to this site. We have also
worked with the staff of the City in addressing the issues
mentioned by the Planning and Zoning Commission. We have
tried to provide a cost effective retrofit of the existing
facilities for the Owner's use, as well as providing an
attractive addition to the City of Coppell.
I hope you will agree that the enclosed design is an
attractive, sensible solution to the City of Coppell and the
and the Owner's concerns on this pro.ject.
If there is anything we can provi~.e in a~tdition to the
enclosed to clarify this matter, please do not hesitate to
let me know. We will provide a color rendering for the City
Council and Staff review next Wednesday as we discussed on
the phone today.
Thank you for your help throughout this submittal.
Si~ce~e~, /~
A1 AIA
AB/ms
cc: file Mr. Bill Sladovnik
Mr. Homer McGinnis
Mr. Jack Stark
Mr. Kirk P. Jockel
enclosures
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Item 5: To consider approval of a zoning change, ~Case #S-1038, from
(C) Commercial, to (C.S.U.P.) Commercial Special Use Permit,
for the operation of a convenience store and gasoline sales,
located at 928 South Beltline Road, at the request of Texaco.
P&Z Coordinator Taryon Bowman introduced the item to the
Commission, and stated that if approved, the S.U.P. will allow
the operation of a gasoline service station and a convenience
store. She also stated that there is an existing structure on
the subject site, which is to be remodeled as indicated by the
applicant's representative. A previous application was
submitted in May, 1987, for a S.U.P. to allow the operation of
an auto maintenance facility; however, the request was denied
by the City. Ms. Bowman further stated that all DRC comments
had been addressed; however, staff asks that the Commission
please note that the signage as shown on the site plan is not
to be considered as a part of this S.U.P. request. Ail
signage must follow the guidelines as established by the
Coppell Sign Ordinance. She then stated that staff requests
that the Commission consider approval of the S.U.P. with the
deletion of the signage on the site plan.
Ali Bumgardner was present to represent this item before the
Commission.
Chairman Hunsch opened the public hearing and asked for
persons wishing to speak in opposition to this change. There
were none. He then asked for persons wishing to speak in
favor of this change, again there were none. The public
hearing was then declared closed.
Following discussion Commissioner Thomas moved to approve Case
#S-1038 with the deletion of the signage on the site plan; and
w~th the condition that the applicant work with staff to work
toward a resolution of the metal fascia part on the structure,
and with the condition that the columns supporting the canopy
be masonry. Commissioner Redford seconded the motion; motion
carried (6-1) with Chairman Munsch and Commissioners Johnson,
Redford, Thomas, Tunnell and Weaver voting in favor of the
motion, and Commissioner Green voting against the motion.
Item 6: To consider approval of a zoning change, Case #S-1039, from
(C) Commercial, to (C.S.U.P.) Commercial Special Use Permit,
for the operation of a restaurant, "I Love Yogurt", located at
110 W. Sandy Lake Road, Suite #114 of the Woodside Village
Shopping Center, (northwest corner of Denton Tap Road and
Sandy Lake Road), at the request of "I Love Yogurt Stores".
Commissioner Thomas excused himself from the Commission at
this time due to a possible conflict of interest.