Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - Planning and Zoning Commission - 1986 - 04/16 - WorkshopALLEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING APRIL 16, 1986 Present: Commissioners: Bobby Glass, Chairman Charles Akin Eileen Karlsruher Wayne Armand John Garcia Chuck Lee (arrived 7:95 p.m.) Commissioners Absent: Ken Browning Staff Present: Bill Petty, Director of Community Development Tom Keener, Development Coordinator Mark Thornton, Director of Parks and Recreation Sally Leeper, Secretary The Workshop meeting of the Allen Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Glass at 7:35 p.m, at the Allen Municipal Annex, One Butler Circle, Allen, Texas. Workshop Folsom-Whisenant (Agenda Item II) Mr. J. T. Dunkin presented the land use plan for this property. He stated that he understood the alignment of the thoroughfare had been agreed to at a previous Planning & Zoning meeting. He stated he intended to address the Shopping Center in Tracts 10 and 5; the church site; and the park and school sites. He stated that they are aware of the open space requirement of 19 to 16 acres and questioned whether the land for the parks should be dedicated or if the City would share in the cost of the land. Mr. Mark Thornton stated that of the 29 acres of open space that is required, approximately six are in the flood fringe, leaving the location of 18 acres to be determined. Ten acres in the Single Family tract 13 and eight acres in Single Family Tract 1 would provide basic neighborhood park facilities for these districts. He stated that this would satisfy the requirements in the two Neighborhood Districts involved. 65 ALLEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION April 16, 1986 Page Two Workshop Folsom-Whisenant (Cont.) Mr. Dunkin stated that he felt a public facility used by everyone in the community should be purchased by funds brought in by everyone in the community. Mr. Bill Petty stated he advocated the idea of not putting the burden of development on the new residents. He stated he would advise Mr. Dunkin that the City was not requiring dedication of park land. The Planned Development zoning requires a certain amount of open space. The question here is satisfaction of the Planned Development Ordinance for open space. One way to accomplish this is through a homeowner maintenance association; another is park land that would be maintained by the City. He reiterated that the City does not have a dedication requirement for park land. Mr. Denny Holman stated that he would like to look at a hike and bike trail along the creek, and a five-foot concrete path. He stated he feels some type of compensation for the park land would be fair. An alternative would be for them to develop the open space themselves as outlined above in the way of a hike and bike trail. Mr. Thornton stated the City only needs to be comfortable that the residents of the neighborhood would be served appropriately. He stated further that the City does plan to purchase the larger, community park sites. Mr. Petty discussed the flexibility of the Planned Development ordinance. Mr. Ben Whisenant asked if the City in fact ultimately wanted the park site. Staff answered that the City wants the needs of the neighborhood to be met. The City had only suggested the park as an accommodation to the developer. Staff is asking the developer to tell us what they want to do with the open space that is required. Discussion followed as to when a park would be developed by the City, if dedication of the land would take place. Staff stated that development would probably occur as the need arose. Mr. Dunkin stated a school site would probably be taken from the Folsom tract, if the school desires one. Mr. Holman added that there would be no problem with allowing the school to purchase land at their cost plus carry. :a� ALLEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 16, 1986 Page Three Workshop Folsom-Whisenant (Cont.) Mr. Holman suggested the City could give developers some incentive to develop the open space and then convey it over to the City. Mr. Petty discussed the fact that the density that would be in the open space can be transferred to the remainder of the development. Mr. Thornton explained the difference between the terms "flood plain," "flood way," and "flood fringe." The flood plain is the entire portion of the 100 -year flood plain. The flood way is the portion that actually carries the water and flood fringe is the portion where excess water would be stored. In other words, the flood fringe is the outside area of the flood way, where the flood fringe and the flood way together make up the flood plain. Mr. Tom Keener discussed the calculations for density based on the flood fringe. The Planned Development requires 24 acres of open space, allowing the flood fringe to be a part of that. The density calculated for the flood fringe is appropriate to be transferred. Depending on the use of the remainder of the open space, that would decide whether the transfer of density would be allowed. If the open space is dedicated, the City would necessarily transfer the density. Mr. Charles Akin questioned Mr. Thornton's recommendation as to where the additional 18 acres of open space should be. Mr. Thornton stated that 10 acres would be appropriate in the southern part of Tract 13 and the remainder would be appropriate in the southern part of Tract 1. Mr. Holman questioned whether the development of a school site would count for open space. Mr. Dunkin asked if one to two acres of open space can be reserved in a multi -family tract. The answer was that yes, but there would be no transfer of density. Commission discussed the thoroughfares. The consensus was that Alma and Exchange should cross at a perpendicular angle. Mr. Keener discussed with the Commission the analysis of the zoning. He stated that the northerly location of Exchange increases the retail use of that intersection. He stated the church site should be addressed. The shopping center on the east of Alma is 11 to 16 acres larger than designed in the Comprehensive Plan. As shown, the area not designated 67 ALLEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 16, 1986 Page Four Workshop Folsom-Whisenant (Cont.) in this plan at the northeast corner of Alma and Rowlett would probably be zoned shopping center if this plan is approved. He stated that the densities are slightly over that in the Comprehensive Plan. The single family and townhome tracts are in desired locations. The office tract is probably a good location since it is adjacent to a creek. The office tract would not be desirable for single family as it is too small. Mr. Keener discussed the multi family allowed in Neighborhood District 8. Proponents are showing more than would be allowed. He stated Tract 7 is in compliance. Tract 9 is also in compliance. Mr. Keener reiterated that the main problem appears to be the two shopping center tracts. In Neighborhood District 8, the Comprehensive Plan would allow 7 acres of multi -family, with the balance single family. In Neighborhood District 9, the Comprehensive Plan does not reflect Rowlett Road as an arterial. It will need to be allowed if the office and multi -family in Neighborhood District 16 is allowed. If this is done, then Rowlett and Alma will become a major intersection, and therefore entitled to retail use. In Neighborhood District 16, all 31 acres remaining for Shopping Center have been included in this submission. Mr. Dunkin suggested moving the multi -family that is shown south of the shopping center area up into the shopping center area and move some of the retail south of Rowlett. The multi -family would become single family. One solution would be to reduce the shopping center, prezone the northeast corner of Alma and Rowlett as Office or Multi -family, and change the Office and Multi -Family to Single Family. The consensus of the commission was that the secondary arterial of Rowlett and Alma was a good decision. Mr. Holman stated that he disagreed with the idea of the southeast corner of Rowlett and Alma being Single Family. He feels that this should be a retail corner. Mr. Keener suggested that there was flexibility in the Single Family to use townhomes. Mr. Gary Yost of Barton-Aschmann addressed the Commission in regard to the traffic study. He stated Mr. Morris of North Central Texas Council of Governments has apparently found a M C ALLEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 16, 1986 Page Five Workshop Folsom-Whisenant (Cont.) problem with the traffic at Exchange and Hwy. 75. It appears it will be below a Level C. Mr. Petty stated the Comprehensive Plan was based on existing Planned Developments and uses. This, combined with what is shown on the plan and in the tables we are still supposed to maintain a Level C of traffic. This does not appear to be the case. Level of service F is now being shown from Raintree Circle to Hwy. 75 by the COG. Commissioner Garcia stated he would like to discuss area regulations at the next opportunity. Commission directed proponents to give consideration to the following items: 1. Alignment of Exchange. 2. Creation of a secondary arterial. 3. The inclusion of shopping center in District 8, not shown on the tables. 9. Traffic report needed from COG. 5. Outparcel at the northeast corner of Rowlett and Alma in relation to future zoning and the size of the shopping center. 6. Location of the open space. The question remains whether the property for the school will count toward the open space. Mr. Petty read from the zoning ordinance the definition of open space as being open land intended to stay in its natural state. Therefore, it is interpreted that a school would not count as open space. Chairman Glass asked if the proponent would request another workshop or want to come back with another submission. Mr. Petty suggested this be placed on the next agenda as an item for discussion which would lead to a final decision. The consensus of the Commission was that this should appear on the agenda for May 8 as a discussion item. M F ALLEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 16, 1986 Page Six Workshop Folsom-Whisenant (Cont.) Mr. Whisenant stated the church will probably be moved to the west of the Shopping Center tract in Area 12, and this will also allow a buffer from the Shopping Center tract to the Single Family. MOTION: Upon a motion by Commissioner Garcia and a second by Commissioner Armand, Commission voted 6 FOR and 0 AGAINST to adjourn the April 16, 1986, workshop meeting of the Allen Planning & Zoning Commission at 10:00 p.m. The motion. These minutes approved this day of 1986. [Qayn L. Armand, Secretary 70