Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - Planning and Zoning Commission - 1993 - 01/27 - WorkshopALLEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION L WORKSHOP MEETING JANUARY 27, 1993 ATTENDANCE: Commission Members Present: John Garcia, Chairman Harold Biggs, Vice -Chairman Kenneth Fulk, Secretary Douglas Gallagher Jeffery Kelley Steve Allen Noel Crume Commission Members Absent: City Staff Present: Bill Petty, Director of Community Development Tom Keener, Development Coordinator Sally Leeper, Secretary CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM: With a quorum of the Commissioners present, the Allen Planning & Zoning Com- mission was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman Garcia at the Allen Municipal Annex, City Council Chambers, One Butler Circle, Allen, Texas. WORKSHOP - TWIN CREEKS Chairman Garcia provided a list of issues that have been discussed in previous meetings which have either reached consensus or need action by the Commission and/or proponent. This list will be reviewed further at a later meeting. The items listed are as follows: 1. Should consider the issue of PC and R/PC locations. (See action item 15 s, t, u, v, w, and x) 2. Review the question of selling alcohol, beer, or wine in golf course. (See action item 15 v). 3. Consensus was reached that the above issues merit further review and consideration. 4. No problem with Green tract proposal. 5. No problem with Whisenant tract proposal. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION a JANUARY 27, 1993 PAGE 2 G. Consideration should be given to upcoming recommendation of the Zoning Ordinance Review Committee. 7. Language should be added stating that dual zoning on CF will require a state of refusal from school district to revert to secondary zoning designa- tion. 8. Smith agreed to above language but added that a timeframe should be added, possibly 5 or 10 years. 9. Tract 32F and the Community Facilities tract in the Green tract will be dedicated for the purposes of school, park, and fire station. (Terry Haines). Other tract dedications not indicated. 10. Consensus was that school sites proposed are appropriate with wording that is proposed regarding rejection by school district. ( See Item 19) 11. Further consideration should be given to Tract 9A uses (Kittyhawk compat- ibility). 12. Need was discussed for medium density housing. 13. Consensus of Commission was that the overall land use plan is appropriate. 14. Confirmation is needed regarding the number of multi -family units (inclu- sion of Green tract should be clarified). 15. Land Uses: a. Possibly change use of Office Building to General Office. b. Add antique shop in SC district. C. Add arcade in SC by SUP and in CCIE by SUP. d. Add auto glass, muffler, brake in SC by SUP. e. Add auto laundry in SC by SUP. I. List of uses in text should be eliminated, use charts only. g. Banks and financial should be allowed as accessory in RT. h. Add bicycle shop by right in SC. i. Add building material sales, outside display by SUP in CC. j. Add bus station or terminal in OT and TR by SUP. k. Consider adding Car Dealership and Repair in OT, Tract 3 only. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 27, 1993 PAGE 3 1. Add carnival or circus as a temporary use. District should be clarified. M. Additional parking should be required for clinic use. n. Add concrete batch plant as temporary use in all districts. o. Add SUP in SC and CCIE. P. Add SUP for freestanding buildings. Need definition to clarify the requirement for freestanding building. q. Definition for Day care for Disabled Andlor Elderly should be consis- tent with ordinance. r. Delete the word manufacturing from Drugs or Pharmaceutical Manu- facturing and change to Drugs or Pharmaceutical packaging and distribution. s. Add Restaurant/Private Club by right to CC/E. I. Add Restaurant/Private Club by accessory to OT. U. Add Restaurant/Private Club by SUP in CC,SC, and TR. V. Add Private Club to Golf Course. W. Add Private Club to OT by accessory use. X. Add Private Club to CC, SC, and TR by SUP. y. Add Churches to all districts by right or SUP. Z. Add Printing Plant or Newspaper Establishment to TR as. Delete Printing and Newspaper Establishment from OT. 16. Proponent will review the allowance of retail in industrial districts. 17. Consider adding text that outlines appeal process for "similar" uses. 18. Proponent will provide development standards that include proper screen- ing, buffering, and height restrictions for CF districts that may change to single family which would be adjacent to industrial. 19. Proponent shall provide language which indicates the process by which the school must be notified when properties adjacent to tracts 21b and 30 develop. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION i JANUARY 27, 1993 PAGE 4 20. Mr. Smith offered to provide information regarding the administration and enforcement of maximum density in single family. 21. Consensus was reached to eliminate the cumulative feature from the MF district, and restrict it to MF only. Proponent indicated they were not prepared to make this allowance, but would consider this issue. 22. Proponent stated they will identify certain tracts to include some allowance for medium density. 23. Consensus was reached that overall land use on single family with densities allowed in specific tracts with a 15% overage, but overall 4100 limitation, is appropriate. 24. Commissioner Fulk encouraged developer to consider issue of protecting the medium density. 25. Committee set up (Garcia, Fulk, Ferrara) to review remainder of land uses. 26. Proponent agreed to construct 8 -lanes on Exchange from US 75 to Alma Drive. It will become 6 lanes west of Alma and return to 8 lanes south of Ridgeview. 27. Proponent agreed to certain intersection improvements, to be reviewed by John Friebele. 28. The question regarding the dedication of eight lanes of right-of-way, but with six -lane pavement requirement from Alma to Ridgeview, needs clarifi- cation. 29. Proponent was asked to contact abutting property owners along Exchange and Bethany and receive letters of support for thoroughfare amendments. 30. Commission indicated that realignment of Bethany is appropriate in order to save trees and promote safety, and that the golf course has changed the need for access to the linear park. The intent is to maintain public access to the linear greenbelt area, which can be accomplished through residential collector streets. 31. Consensus reached that the impact of the CF on traffic generation is negligible. r PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 27, 1993 PAGE 5 FACILITIES AGREEMENTS Mr. Petty discussed the issue of facilities agreements and their timing. He stated that he feels that the facilities agreement method was the most fair method of financing thoroughfares and bridges. All roads on the property do not need to be constructed at the beginning of development. Thoroughfares and bridges, with median improvements, should be constructed with the two inside lanes being the City's responsibility when funds are available. These two lanes are built when future traffic warrants. The bridges are built to full capacity. The City is responsible for 26% of the cost of a 6 -lane bridge. The City agrees to reimburse the developer when funds are available. Only thoroughfares and bridges will be addressed through the facilities agreement. All interior streets will be construct- ed by the developer at the time of development. All thoroughfares, bridges and their costs must be identified and the developer's engineers will provide a cost analysis for review by the City's engineering department. These funds would be escrowed at the time of platting. Residential areas would be assessed per lot and commercial areas assessed per acre. Mr. Petty recommended that at the time of construction of each section, the escrowed funds should be disbursed. Commissioner Fulk questioned whether the 26% would be the correct portion for the City's participation on an 8 -lane bridge. Mr. Petty advised that the percent- age will change on the larger bridge. The inflation factor is generally covered by interest earned on the escrowed funds. Mr. Petty suggested that language be added that "prior to first plat being filed, a facilities agreement acceptable to the City of Allen should be in place." Chairman Garcia questioned the funding of McDermott Drive, and Mr. Petty advised that this project has not been indicated to be funded by the ISTEA program. When the recent Collin County bond election failed, the opportunity for funding by the County was eliminated. It appears to be the responsibility of the City to construct this thoroughfare. There was a discussion of the funding process through the ISTEA program. Mr. Bruce Smith stated that proponent's position is that McDermott is a State road and it should be on the ISTRA list. The City's position is that we must assume the State is not going to build it at this time. Mr. Petty advised that a facilities agreement has been completed for the Bon Terre property on the south side of McDermott which includes the escrow of funds for McDermott Drive. Language has been included in that agreement stating that "before McDermott is constructed, should the State fund the project, then the escrowed funds will be reimbursed." Mr. Ferrara discussed the need to lobby the State regarding the ISTEA projects. Mr. Smith stated that they have a major problem with participating in the funding of McDermott. They feel it is unfair to burden the frontage property with the PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 27, 1993 PAGE 6 cost when it is going to serve such a large area. This road is planned to go west all the way to the Tollway. Mr. Petty explained that the cost will be split on a per acre or per lot basis over the entire 2700 acres. Undeveloped properties along McDermott will be assessed at the time of construction after an enhancement study is completed per State law. Mr. Smith indicated that although he did not agree with participation on McDermott Drive, he did agree with the need for participation as outlined on the remaining thoroughfares. He suggested that proponent should receive credit for roads that are already constructed, and added that the facilities agreement should be tailored to encourage ISTFA funding on McDermott. Mr. Smith discussed the fact that the requirement of LOS C is the reason an 8 - lane divided road is indicated on Exchange. If LOS D (as is required in other cities in this area) was required, then a 6 -lane divided road would be in order. Mr. Ferrara advised that his staff is reviewing the traffic analysis and their proposal for street improvements. Mr. Petty again stated that a facilities agreement for funding the thoroughfares and bridges acceptable to the City of Allen should be completed prior to the time of platting any property. Mr. Smith stated that a plan can be agreed upon, but the plan may not be economically feasible to implement. COMMUNITY FACILITIES Mr. Ferrara discussed the Community Facilities plan. Representatives from the Park Board and the Allen School District were present in the audience. Mr. Ferrara presented the latest school proposal. The plan addresses the flexibility needed to move student population around. Proponent is in the process of completing the sites and receiving consensus from the School Board regarding acceptance of the proposed sites. Mr. Petty stated that his understanding is that the Alma school site is being dedicated to the school. This site is being described also as a park and fire station site. Mr. Bobby Curtis, AISD, stated that they will need 10 acres for the school. There is a question as to whether the park and school acreage is being combined. The Fire Chief has stated his preference is for the two acres previ- ously defined to be dedicated for the fire station in order to maintain room for classrooms, expansion, etc. Mr. Ferrara stated that if the Fire Chief needs the entire two acres, they would request a commitment from the City that something will be done with these two acres. The question that needs to be answered is how much is left for park in this area? There appears to be 10 acres for the school, 2 acres for the fire station, leaving only 3.8 acres for the park site. Mr. Ferrara discussed the school site on Watters Creek and discussed the fact that if that property does not develop as a school, it would revert to MF zoning. Also, the tract identified for the high school, would revert to single family zoning PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 27, 1993 PAGE 7 if the school rejects this site. He reviewed the following language, proposed at the last meeting, clarifying the method for this to happen. Tract 21B: Tract 21B shall not be built upon for any use other than an elementary school (AISD) until such time that tracts 19, 20, 22, and 23 have been platted, building permits acquired, and structures are being built (or are completed as the case may be) within all four tracts. The owner of Tract 21B must notify AISD that the school district has twelve (12) months from the receipt of said notification to complete acquisition of Tract 21B. Said notification shall not be sent prior to commencement of construction within the last tract to be developed of the four (4) tracts listed. Likewise tracts 21A, 25B, and 26 shall have been dedicated to the City of Allen. In the event AISD does not acquire Tract 21B, it may be developed under the MF district regulations outlined in this ordinance. Tract 30: Tract 30 shall not be built upon for any use other than a high school (AISD) until such time that tracts 18 and 27 have been platted (all or in part) and that building permits have been acquired and structures are being built (or are completed as the case may be) within both tracts. The owner of Tract 30 must notify AISD that the school district has twelve (12) months from the receipt of said notification to complete acquisition of Tract 30. Said notification shall not be sent prior to commencement of construction within the last tract to be developed of the two (2) tracts listed. In the event AISD does not acquire Tract 30, it may be developed under the SF -2 district regulations outlined in this ordinance." Mr. Ferrara referred to the land owned by Park Cities Baptist Church, and suggested that the City might be able to acquire this land for inclusion in the park system. OPEN SPACE Mr. Ferrara stated that the proponent is proposing a 15 -foot landscape easement on all streets with rights-of-way greater than 100 feet. This would include Alma, McDermott, Exchange, and U.S. 75. This 15 feet is in addition to the 10 feet required. They are including a statement that with this 40 -foot landscaped ease- ment, the sidewalk cannot be in a straight line, but rather would be meandering with landscape treatments. This dedication amounts to 32 acres of open space. Mr. Ferrara questioned whether the high school site was considered as a contri- bution to park needs. He added that 10 acres are set aside in the Whisenant j tract. Previous zoning set aside 1112 acres as a wooded site near Ridgeview and Exchange. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION i JANUARY 27, 1993 PAGE 8 Mr. Ferrara stated that the golf course includes 217 acres, and proponent is indicating a community park to be designated at the split of the twin creeks. To the east of the golf course is one of the 28 -acre private facilities. The entire golf course and the private facilities will be built in Phase 1. He discussed the conflict between the Comprehensive Plan regarding the Rowlett Creek corridor and the golf course. With the public and private parks, open space, and greenbelts, proponent is showing a total of 474 acres, or 17.5% of total land area. Mr. Bruce Smith stated that Arvida's developments are centered around the recreation needs of the area. This includes pools, baseball fields, soccer fields, hike and bike trails with jogging path, and the golf course. They have given considerable attention to the need to save the tree stands. Their plan includes the saving of approximately 90% of the existing trees. All houses backing to the golf course greenbelt or major thoroughfares are proposed to be constructed without alleys in order to save the trees and allow for greenbelts instead of walls. Any fences backing to greenbelts will be required to be of an open, wrought iron type. The golf course will include different types of grasses and will not be totally manicured. Mr. Smith discussed the fact that they are giving consideration to designing trails along the greenbelts outside the golf course. They have a liability problem with constructing a path through the golf course. They are showing public i access through the middle of the golf course to the north and around the course, creating a concentration of recreation area in the "V" of the creeks. He stated that there are other variations that could be developed for the trail system. Some compromise will be necessary at certain points in the course. Mr. Smith stated that the development includes two swimming pools; one on each side of the golf course. The golf course is privately owned, but open to the public. However, proponent cannot commit that it will always be public. No preference will be given to residents of Twin Creeks on the cost of golf. He added that it is his assumption that the Twin Creeks residents will use other Allen ballfields, as well as other Allen residents will use the Twin Creeks ballfields. The pools will be owned by the homeowner's association, and will be private. The golf course club house will be owned by the developer. TRAIL SYSTEM Commissioner Crume questioned whether the trail system through the golf course would be dedicated to the City and Mr. Smith stated that they prefer to maintain control of the area because of the adjacent homes. The trail is being proposed on both the east and west branches of Rowlett Creek; however, it will need to work around the course itself. He stated that the eastern path will need to be routed away from the course. The Commission and proponent discussed the acres being proposed for open space, for golf course, for park land, etc. Mr. Smith stated that most of the neighborhood recreation needs are met by the private park areas. Commissioner Crume suggested possible deed restrictions which would allow the City of Allen to use the private facilities for a certain number of years. He further asked if the PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 27, 1993 IYAHOF] proponent was willing to dedicate a certain amount of land for a community park? Mr. Smith stated that no, with the exception of the acreage he had shown in the "V" of the creeks. Chairman Garcia requested clarification of the following questions: 1. What amount of park land is called for in the Comprehensive Plan? 2. What does the proposal include? Public versus private? 3. What does the existing zoning provide? Mr. Ferrara advised that 33.4 acres are committed for park land by existing zoning plus 183 acres from the old Baker planned development. He stated that the trail system is presently interrupted twice by golf courses. The safety of pedestrians is the reason for this. Proponent is attempting to satisfy this issue. The location of the Chase Oaks paths were discussed. Mr. Smith discussed the alternatives to the location of the path along the golf course. There are areas where the path will need to move around the course because of the liability. They are providing the link; however, there is approximately 1000 feet that will need to move away from the course. Commissioner Crume presented the following questions that have been asked by the Park Board and requested the proponent to review these: 1. Does the development of a golf course satisfy the need for a Special Use Park. If so, can we guarantee its availability to the general public? 2. How does the proposed zoning affect the areas zoned Community Facility? 3. How many acres of floodplain will be dedicated under existing zoning requirements versus proposed zoning for: A. Rowlett Creek B. Watters Branch 4. What alternative designs have been considered to enable golf course layout and preservation of the linear park system? Has location of the golf course along one side of the creek only been studied? This would allow the other side of the creek to be pre- served for linear park. b. How could the course be planned outside the floodplain? C. How much additional space along the creek would be needed to include a linear park trail and adequate buffer zone?