Loading...
Min - Planning and Zoning Commission - 2015 - 01/20 - RegularJanuary 20, 2015 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting January 20, 2015 CITY OF ALLEN ATTENDANCE: Commissioners Present: Jeff Cocking, Chair Shirley Mangrum, I" Vice -Chair Ben Trahan, 2nd Vice -Chair Luke Hollingsworth Stephen Platt, Jr. Michael Orr John Ogrizovich Absent: Cite Staff Present: Ogden "Be" Bass, AICP, Director of Community Development Kevin Laughlin, City Attorney Shawn Poe, PE, Assistant Director of Engineering Tiffany McLeod, Senior Planner Madhuri Kulkarni, Planner Call to Order and Announce a Quorum is Present: With a quorum of the Commissioners present, Chairman Cocking called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers Room at Allen City Hall, 305 Century Parkway Director's Report I. Action taken on the Planning & Zoning Commission items by City Council at the January 13, 2015, regular meeting attached. Consent Aeenda 2. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Status Report. 3. Approve minutes from the January 6, 2015, regular meeting Motion: Upon a motion by 2"d Vice -Chair Trahan, and a second by V Vice -Chair Mangrum, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to approve the Consent Agenda, The motion carried. January 20, 2015 Regular Agenda 4. Public Hearing — Conduct a Public Hearing and consider a request to amend the development regulations and adopt a Concept Plan and Building Elevations for a10.04± acre portion of Planned Development PD No. 105 located in the David H. Nix Survey, Abstract No. 668, the T.G. Kennedy Survey, Abstract No 500, and the James H. Wilcox Survey, Abstract No 1017, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas, and generally located southeast of the intersection of Alma Drive and Bethany Drive. (Z-10/7/14-73) [Montgomery Urban Tree Farm Headquarters] Chairman Cocking rearranged the agenda and stated that the first item on the agenda will be number six. He stated that an official request was received from the applicant, Mr. Williams, to postpone this item until the February 17" meeting. Chairman Cocking opened the public hearing and requested a motion to table the item to February 17" Motion: Upon a motion by 1" Vice -Chair Mangrum, and a second by Commissioner Orr, the Commission voted 7 1N FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to table the public hearing until February 17, 2015, for the request to amend the development regulations and adopt a Concept Plan and Building Elevations for a 10.04± acre portion of Planned Development PD No. 105 located in the David H. Nix Survey, Abstract No. 668, the T.G. Kennedy Survey, Abstract No. 500, and the James H. Wilcox Survey, Abstract No. 1017, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; and generally located southeast of the intersection of Alma Drive and Bethany Drive, for Montgomery Urban Tree Farm Headquarters. The motion carried. 5. Floodplain Reconfiguration — Consider a request for Floodplain Reconfiguration for a portion of Montgomery Ridge, Phase 1; generally located south of Bethany Drive and west of Montgomery Boulevard. Mr. Shawn Poe, Assistant Director of Engineering, presented to the Commission. He stated this item is a Floodplain Reconfiguration for a portion of Montgomery Ridge, Phase 1. He stated the Preliminary Plat for this project was approved at the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Mr. Poe stated that Montgomery Ridge Phase 1 is located south of Bethany Drive and west of Montgomery Boulevard. The property to the north is zoned Planned Development PD No. 105 for Single - Family Residential R-5. The property to the east is zoned Planned Development PD No. 74 for Office O. The property to the south is zoned Planned Development PD No. 105 for Agriculture Open Space AO and Planned Development PD No. 74 for Office O. The property to the west is zoned Planned Development PD No. 105 for Agriculture Open Space AO. The portion of the property, related to the reconfiguration request, is located along Rowlett Creek on the southwestern portion of this phase. The FEMA Floodplain has been defined for Rowlett Creek, the largest tributary in Allen. This is a regulatory floodplain that's used to determine if a property is required to have insurance. That Floodplain delineation was done man}' years ago based on the existing flows within the drainage basin at that time. The ALDC states that properties with drainage basins over 160 acres need to develop a model to show the full}, developed urbanized floodplain to assume the whole watershed. The January 20, 2015 Code also states that area be left in its natural state. The Code states that the applicant can ask to reconfigure that fully developed floodplain after a study with I. Minimal impact to flom and fauna. 2 No net decrease in valley storage 3. No net rise in the fully -urbanized 100 -year base flood elevation 4. No increase in velocity Mr. Poe explained the floodplain map shown on the screen. The dashed line, he said, is the FEMA regulatory floodplain. The red line is the existing fully developed floodplain. The applicant is requesting to reconfigure the floodplain area where it follows the property lines along the five lots as shown. The hatched area is what will be reclaimed The applicant submitted a flood study, signed and sealed by a licensed professional engineer that meets the criteria listed above. L" Vice -Chair Mangrum asked if the buyers are informed that they are in a flood zone area when they purchase these lots. Mr. Poe answered the), are not informed in terms of the regulatory Floodplain because their property lines do not touch the regulatory floodplain which is within the common area. The fully developed floodplain that does affect those lots would take that encroachment out. The fully developed floodplain is also more restrictive that the City requires to be more conservative. The regulatory determines the insurance which is when homeowners are notified. Commissioner Orr asked about the reclamation area and what that entails — retaining walls or berms. Mr. Poe said he did not recall whether there was a retaining wall, but the amount of fill within the area in question will be excavated outside for a net balance Commissioner Ogrizovich stated it appears to be listed that a retaining wall is planned to be constructed along the property lines adjacent to the creek. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Ogrizovich, and a second by Commissioner Platt, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to approve the request for Floodplain Reconfiguration for a portion of Montgomery Ridge, Phase 1; generally located south of Bethany Drive and west of Montgomery Boulevard. The motion carried. 6. Public Hearing — Conduct a Public Hearing and consider a request to change the zoning of a 4.Ot acre tract in the David Wetsel Survey, Abstract No. 977 (located along Jupiter Road approximately 219 feet south of Main Street) and Lots 3R and 4 Parkview Addition, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas (located southeast of Main Street and Greenville Avenue) from Shopping Center -SC and PD -113 for Multifamily Residential MF -18 to a Planned Development with a base zoning of Townhome Residential District TH, and adopt a Concept Plan, Development Regulations, and Building Elevations. (Z-9/24/14-68)[Parkview Lane] Ms. Madhuri Kulkami, Planner, presented to the Commission. She stated this item is a Public Hearing and PD zoning for Parkview Lane. The property is generally located southeast of Greenville Avenue and Main Street. The property to the north is zoned Shopping Center SC. The property to the east (across Jupiter Road) is zoned Shopping Center SC and Planned Development PD No. 19 for Multi -Family MF To the south, the property is January 20, 2015 zoned Community Facilities CF for the Victoria Gardens nursing home. To the west, the property is zoned Community Facilities CF for a fioodway. Ms Kulkami stated that the property is currently zoned Planned Development PD No. 113 for Multi - Family MF -18 and Shopping Center SC. The applicant is requesting to change the zoning by creating a Planned Development for a townhome development, and adopting development regulations, a concept plan, and budding elevations for the property The proposed residential development is approximately 10.2f acres. The attached Concept Plan shows a total of 91 front -entry units (each 1,375 square feet), on 25' X 90' lots. With 91 units on about 10.2 acres, the density yields 8.8 units per acre. The plan also shows approximately 1.5t acres of open space, which exceeds the requirement of 1.38 acres Ms. Kulkami mentioned again that the applicant is requesting a Planned Development with a base zoning of Townhome Residential District TH. She went over the setbacks and stated that each unit will have a front yard setback of 20' and a rear yard setback of 15.' It will also include a side yard setback of 5' and a corner side yard setback of 10,' which are included in the Development Regulations. The lot width, lot depth, the minimum lot size, lot coverage, and parking, all meet ALDC requirements. There are three (3) access points into the development. There is one (1) access point on Jupiter Road and (1) access point on Greenville Avenue. A second access point, through an access easement, also exists on Greenville Avenue. This access easement will be replatted as a separate lot and owned and maintained by Lot 2R (Walgreens). 1 Tree plantings are established in the Development Regulations as well. Two shade trees are to be planted for each dwelling unit, which is the requirement. However, if one of the trees cannot fit within the front yard, then it can be planted within the open space areas of the Property Ms. Kulkarrti identified the screening of the property She said that the screening for the property will consist of an eight foot (8') masonry wall to the west (along Greenville), north, and east (along Jupiter) The screening to the south will be a six foot (6') board -on -board fence with masonry columns. Interior fencing will include six foot (6') board -on -board fences and six foot (6') wrought -iron fences (for the lots in the center of the development). The wrought -iron fences and five foot (5') maintenance easements are provided for egress, safety, and visibility The primary building materials, shown on the attached Building Elevations, are 100% masonry and primarily include brick, stone, and a composition shingle roof. Another requirement listed in the Development Regulations pertains to driveways, which shall be decorative and treated with exposed aggregate, stained concrete, or salt finished concrete. There is one last issue remaining to be resolved, and that is access onto Greenville Avenue Staff and the applicant have identified this issue and the applicant has been working to resolve it. While there is currently not definite proof of access to Greenville Avenue, staff is confident that the issue will be resolved. Staff thus recommends approval contingent upon the issue being resolved to the City Staff and the City Attorney's satisfaction prior to setting a date for the City Council agenda in the interest of moving the project forward. I" Vice -Chair Mangrum wanted to see the zoning of the surrounding property 1 Chairman Cocking asked if the floodplain area is already owned by the City. Mr. Laughlin, City Attorney, answered yes. Chairman Cocking then confirmed that the trails are the City's responsibility. January 20, 2015 Chairman Cocking then asked about fencing and if it will be taken care of by the HOA or each individual homeowner. Ms. Kulkami answered that it will be the responsibly of the HOA. Chairman Cocking then asked specifically about the wood fences Ms Kulkami stated that the wood fences will be the responsibility of each homeowner. Chairman Cocking then wondered about the wood fence with the masonry columns to the south. Shelby Griffin, applicant, answered that the perimeter screening will be maintained by the HOA and the individual wood fences will be maintained by the homeowners like any other, residential subdivision. Chairman Cocking asked specifically about whose responsibility the wood fence with the masonry columns will be. Ms. Griffin answered that since it is perimeter fencing, it will be FICA's responsibility Commissioner Ogrizovich asked about the outstanding comment remaining on Greenville Avenue. Bo Bass, Director of Community Development, answered that the State Highway acquired a slope easement. In the past, when this property was developed, it wasn't realized that this sliver of land belonged to a different owner. There is documentation in 2004 that this owner always intended to deed this sliver to the property in question to guarantee access. However, the sliver is not currently owned by the applicant. Staff is confident that the applicant will either provide a deed filed of record that shows that it's owned fee and simple or show that there is an easement right adequate to dedicate a public street He stated that it should have been resolved by now, but with staff's confidence, the project can move forward. A date to Council will not be set Therefore, if nothing works out, the zoning would not be changed as the Planning and Zoning Commission is only a recommending body Commissioner Ogrizovich clarified that the contingency is to be put into the motion Mr Bass agreed and 1 stated that the motion should include the contingency that the issue be resolved to the satisfaction of City staff and the City Attorney and that the project will not be set for Council until this is satisfied Commissioner Orr asked if there was a study regarding potential impact on the school (Roundtree Elementary) from the development Ms. Kulkami answered that the school representative from the Technical Review Committee meetings and did not express any concerns. Chairman Cocking opened the public hearing. Shelby Griffin, 5225 Spring Creek Drive, Plano, Texas 75093, applicant, spoke to the Commission She went through the land plan for Parkview Lane. She stated that the project has been worked on since June or July 2014. The project is 10.2 acres at Greenville, Main Street, and Jupiter. The site is next to a floodplain and has great potential for development. There was a rezoning request about two years ago for the Huntington at Greenville which took about half of the property on the western portion. She believes this is a better use of the property as it takes up the entire property Ms. Griffin then went through the land uses. On the north side are commercial uses. Some single family is adjacent to Greenville near the floodway Multi -family is to the east and Victoria Garden is to the south Finally, there are townhomes further to the south. There is a view corridor to the south towards the floodplain. She believes it is a huge selling point to have a trail for these homeowners within that floodplain. Another plus for the property is trees. She explained a few negatives to the site which include being adjacent to the commercial area to the north and sharing the firelane as well as having to provide screening to the south adjacent to Victoria Garden. The single-family attached buyer in a suburban environment prefers a small rear yard. To include that, there are front -entry townhomes, and to offset that, driveways, garages, and elevations are being enhanced. People want trails and open space — there is a hike and bike trail for this property, and 1 eventually the trails will be connected with this project. Open space has been included in this plan as well as parking for guests. Existing trees will be maintained when possible along the northern side. Elevations have been enhanced through review and feedback from staff. The site was made "better," in her opinion, January 20, 2015 with regards to the buyer preference, product types, driveways, fencing types, pavement widths, parking, and connectivity Chairman Cocking closed the public hearing. Chairman Cocking stated that no letters were received for this item. Commissioner Platt asked about the Greenville access issue. Chairman Cocking explained that the motion can be made with the contingency that the issue is to be resolved to satisfaction of City Staff and the City Attorney before the item can be set for a Council Agenda. The project will be in limbo until it passes the hurdle regarding access. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Platt, and a second by I" Vice -Chair Mangrum, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to recommend approval of the request to create a Planned Development and adopt development regulations, a concept plan and building elevations for Lots 3R and 4 Parkview Addition and a 4.Ot acre tract in the David Wetsel Survey, Abstract No. 977, generally located southeast of Greenville Avenue and Main Street, for Parkview Lane, with the contingency that access to Greenville Avenue has to be resolved to the satisfaction of City Staff and the City Attorney before the item is scheduled for a City Council meeting. The motion carried 1 Adiournment After the Boy Scouts spoke to the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 7'37 p m. II i These dinutes approved this _P--dav of r'An j 2015. e Cocking, Chairman Madhun u carni, Planner I January 20, 2015 Director's Report from 1111111111 City Council Meeting • The request to adopt an ordinance amending the Allen Land Development Code amending Sec. 4.20.4 adding "Private Park" as a use, amending 7.09 by amending the definitions of "Vehicle Signs," and "Electronic Message Board;" and amending Appendix A by amending the definition of "Park or Playground (Public)" and adding definition of "Private Park," was approved. • The request to adopt an ordinance to change the zoning to Community Facility "CF" for Public Park use for Watters Branch Community Park, Rowlett Creek Park, Allen Historic Dam, Custer- Ridgeview Park, Bolin Park, and Molsen Farms, was approved. • The request to adopt an ordinance to create Planned Development No. 119, for single-family residential R-6 uses, and approve a Concept Plan, Building Elevations and Development Regulations for Lot 1, Block A, Fellowship Christian Center Church Addition, generally located northeast of Malone Road and Lake Travis Drive (Malone Meadows), was continued to the February 10, 2015 City Council meeting. P