Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - Planning and Zoning Commission - 1998 - 09/10 - RegularALLEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 ATTENDANCE Commission Members Present Jeffrey Kelley, Chairman Ross Obermeyer, Vice -Chairman Pamela Smith, Secretary Mark Pacheco Jeff McGregor Steven Haynes Commission Members Absent: Kevin M. Kerr CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A OUORUM With a quorum of the Commission Members present, the Allen Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:09 p.m., by Chairman Kelley, at the City Council Chambers, Allen Public Library, Two Allen Civic Plaza, Allen, Texas. The purpose of the workshop is not to discuss the merits of the case before the regular meeting is called to order; it is to ask questions concerning technical issues and clarifications on the agenda items. Commission Member McGregor noted that Commission Member Smith's time was omitted from of the August 27, 1998 minutes on page 1, last paragraph. Ms. Diamond stated that the minutes would be amended. Commission Member Pacheco noted that on the final plat for Brookside Phase 2, on Elmbrook Ct. the time change diamond is in the wrong place. Ms. Diamond added that that would be adjusted. He also questioned if the strip of land east of the connector will be maintained by the Home Owners Association Ms. Diamond suggested the Commission remove this item from the consent agenda and discuss it with the applicant during the regular meeting. Commission Member Pacheco questioned Mr. Conner about an alley turnaround. Mr. Conner stated that it is actually a temporary turn -out. Ms. Diamond stated that there is temporary asphalt pavement and a separate easement. There will not be a house on lot 14 until another access point is provided and this temporary access is abandoned. City Staff Present: Ms. Diamond Diamond, Senior Planner George Conner, Director of Public Works Don Horton, Director Parks & Recreation Dan Tracy, Civil Engineer Pam Conway, Secretary WORKSHOP MEETING CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A OUORUM With a quorum of the Commission Members present, the Allen Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:09 p.m., by Chairman Kelley, at the City Council Chambers, Allen Public Library, Two Allen Civic Plaza, Allen, Texas. The purpose of the workshop is not to discuss the merits of the case before the regular meeting is called to order; it is to ask questions concerning technical issues and clarifications on the agenda items. Commission Member McGregor noted that Commission Member Smith's time was omitted from of the August 27, 1998 minutes on page 1, last paragraph. Ms. Diamond stated that the minutes would be amended. Commission Member Pacheco noted that on the final plat for Brookside Phase 2, on Elmbrook Ct. the time change diamond is in the wrong place. Ms. Diamond added that that would be adjusted. He also questioned if the strip of land east of the connector will be maintained by the Home Owners Association Ms. Diamond suggested the Commission remove this item from the consent agenda and discuss it with the applicant during the regular meeting. Commission Member Pacheco questioned Mr. Conner about an alley turnaround. Mr. Conner stated that it is actually a temporary turn -out. Ms. Diamond stated that there is temporary asphalt pavement and a separate easement. There will not be a house on lot 14 until another access point is provided and this temporary access is abandoned. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 PAGE Commission Member Pacheco asked if any lots in Twin Creeks 5A were sold. Ms Diamond stated that the tax rolls indicated that lots have not been sold as of the current tax rolls. At this time Ms. Diamond directed the Commission's attention to the Cameron property case. She stated that Mr. Horton has requested 4.7 acres for open space and the proponent is agreeable to amending his request to increase the open space from 4.4 to 4.7 acres of land. Ms. Diamond also stated that the 1998 Comprehensive Plans are now available for sale, and will also be available for check out at the library. Ms. Diamond summarized the items in the packet regarding Home Occupations. Commission Member Haynes questioned if the Chamber of Commerce planned on doing a presentation. Ms. Diamond stated that she will notify them again. REGULAR MEETING Consent Agenda Chairman Kelley read the consent agenda into the record as follows. "Consent Agenda A. Approve Minutes of August 27, 1998, Regular Meeting. B. Final Plat — Consider a Final Plat for Brookside Phase 2 for Centex Development Company, L.P., containing 15.626 acres of land out of the R.C. Whisenam Survey, in Abstract No. 1012, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas, further described as being located north of the northwest corner of Allen Heights Drive and Chaparral Road." Motion: Upon a motion by Commission Member Obermeyer and a second by Commission Member Pacheco, the Commission voted 6 FOR and 0 OPPOSED to remove the Final Plat for Brookside Phase 2 from the Consent agenda, and approve Item A. Consent Agenda —Item B Brookside Phase 2, Final Pla[ Ms. Diamond stated that this subdivision contains 68 lots on 15.6 acres. Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve this final plat. Commission Member Pacheco questioned the proponent, Mr. Brad Meyer, Carter & Burgess, regarding the possible H.O A lot. Mr. Meyer indicated that it is indeed an H.O.A. lot Commission Member Pacheco stated that it should be noted as such on the plat. Also, that the name change diamond on Elmbrook Court should be adjusted. Motion: Upon a motion by Commission Member Pacheco and a second by Commission Member McGregor, the Commission voted 6 FOR and 0 OPPOSED to approve the Final Plat for Brookside Phase 2 with the amendments noted above. L PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 1995 PAGE PUBLIC HEARING Twin Creeks 5A — Reolat Agenda Item III Chairman Kelley read the agenda item into the record as follows: "Public Hearing — Consider a replat by Twin Creeks Partners, LT for Lot 192, block G, Lot 32, block D, Lot 35, Lot N, in the Twin Creeks Phase 5A subdivision, out of the David M. Tucker Survey, Abstract No. 914, in the City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; further described as being located south of Exchange Parkway and west of Alma Drive." Ms. Diamond stated that this is a residential replat, thereby requiring a public hearing. She stated that the proponents are requesting a reduction of the platted side yard building lines to be as allowed by zoning. These lots originally contained side yard building lines that were delineated as 25 feet. The Planned Development Zoning allows for side yards of 15 feet. Mr. Brad Meyer, Carter & Burgess, stated that on the original plat the side yard was not designated as such Now they would like to designate a front yard and a side yard. Chairman Kelley opened the public hearing With no one wishing to speak, Chairman Kelley closed the Public Hearing Commission Member Pacheco questioned Lot 192, and expressed concern about the appearance along the street. Mr. Meyer stated that the Twin Creeks architectural Control Committee will assure that this will not negatively impact the appearance of this street. Commission Member Smith questioned the other lots that fall into the category of having 25' side yards in this same subdivision. Mr. Meyer stated that the other lots already have homes build on them. Ms. Diamond stated that these lots were platted with 2 front yards and now they are designating a front yard and a side yard. The City's attorney has stated that a replat and the public hearing is the only way to accomplish this change. Commission Member Smith clarified what is allowed in our zoning. Commission Member Smith indicated that she would prefer to see consistency within the development, but will support this because it is allowed in the zoning. Motion: Upon a motion by Commission Member McGregor and a second by Commission Member Haynes, the Commission voted 6 FOR and 0 OPPOSED to approve the Replat for Twin Creeks 5A. PUBLIC HEARING Brookside Phase 1 — Real at Agenda Item IV Chairman Kelley read the agenda item into the record as follows: "Public Hearing — Consider a replat by Centex Development Company, L.P for Lot IR, and 40R, Block D and Lot I IR and 17R, Block E in the Brookside Phase 1 subdivision, out of the R.C. Whisenam Survey, Abstract No. 1012 in the City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; further described as being located north of Chaparral Road and west of Allen Heights Drive " PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PACE 4 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 Ms. Diamond indicated that this is the same issue as the previous item It is in conformance with the zoning Mr. Brad Meyer, Carter & Burgess stated that as before, they now desire to designate a front yard and a side yard. Chairman Kelley asked how much is already built out Mr. Conner stated that less than half of the lots are under construction Ms. Diamond noted that all property owners within 200 feet were notified. Commission Member smith stated that she won't support it, she feels that the Zoning Ordinance overrides the P.D. regulations. Ms. Diamond stated that the PD established allows for this setback of 10 feet. Commission Member Pacheco stated that many of the lots have been platted with 10' side yards. Chairman Kelley opened the public hearing With no one wishing to speak the public hearing was closed. Commission Member Smith stated that she is unsure of the history on this property Her position to not support it remains the same. Commission Member Obermeyer stated he feels the same. Commission Member Obermeyer expressed a concerned because the zoning is 12 years old. Ms. Diamond stated that the zoning is already established and this is a platting issue. Commission Member McGregor agrees. The zoning is already established. Commission Member Haynes agrees, and he will support it based on the fact that most of the subdivision is already platted with 10' side yards Motion: Upon a motion by Commission Member Haynes and a second by Commission Member McGregor, the Commission voted 5 FOR and 1 OPPOSED to approve the Replat for Brookside Phase I, with Commission Member Smith Opposed. PRELIMINARY PLAT Villages at Maxwell Creek Ph. I Agenda Item V Chairman Kelley read the agenda item into the record as follows: "Preliminary Plat — Consider a request by Sowell Property Partners -Allen, L.P for Villages at Maxwell Creek, Phase 1, containing 32.1471 acres out of the D B. Hearne Survey, Abstract No 427, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; further described as being located southeast of Bethany Drive and Malone Road." Ms. Diamond stated that this is the I" phase of development for the Shelley tract. A survey is enclosed which identifies the trees on this site. The property is zoned PD -65-R7, which requires a 5,500 minimum lot size. City Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve this preliminary plat with the following stipulations: 1. An HOA be established to maintain any entry features and the ten foot buffer that is located Calong Bethany Drive. L2. The next phase contain a street connection to the adjacent subdivision to the east. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 5 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 1, Three lots on Woodstream Lane must meet the minimum lot width requirements (lots 57, 58, 59). Mr. Lonnie Sikes, PBSJ, 5999 Summerside, Dallas, representing Sowell, stated that he would answer any questions the Commission Members may have Commission Member McGregor questioned Mr. Conner about median cuts Mr. Conner indicated that he has reviewed the proposed openings, and they are appropriately spaced and will provide access to both the north and south sides of Bethany. There will be a median opening on Malone and on Oakbrook, and one more before you get to FM 2551 Mr. Conner then stated that Malone Road is a County Road. Malone Road will be need to be paved to support this development. Negations are underway to obtain that ROW Commission Member Smith questioned the fence row on the tree survey She questioned if the proponent would consider moving the alley to protect the fence row trees. Ms. Diamond stated that there is some question if this is indeed a true fence row. Commission Member Smith read the provision of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the fence row trees Mr. Sikes stated that upon his observation of the trees, the trees consist of 2 large clusters and a few scattered trees. These are unprotected trees and appeared not to warrant preservation. They are considered by the Ordinance to be undesirable trees. Commission Member Smith indicated that the tree survey that was done indicated that it is a fence row Ms. Diamond reiterated that staff did make �^ the interpretation that it is not a true fence row. Commission Member Smith stated that it is indeed a fence row and that the fence row should be preserved, per the ordinance Chairman Kelley stated that the commission should possibly revisit the tree preservation section of the ordinance, because it appears that due to other development requirements, in reality, it does not preserve the trees. Commission Member Pacheco stated that the tree line is fairly intermittent and not necessarily applicable in this case. Chairman Kelley asked the proponent about Lots 57, 58, 59 The proponent stated that they will be recalculated to reflect proper lot size on the final plat. Motion: Upon a motion by Commission Member Pacheco and a second by Commission Member Obermeyer, the Commission voted 5 FOR and 1 OPPOSED, with Commission Member Smith Opposed, to approve the Preliminary Plat for Villages at Maxwell Creek with the following amendments: 1. An HOA be established to maintain any entry features and the ten foot buffer that is located along Bethany Drive. 2. The next phase contain a street connection to the adjacent subdivision to the [" east. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 6 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 3. Three lots on Woodstream Lane must meet the minimum lot requirements (lots 57, 58, 59). PUBLIC HEARING Millennium Office Park Aeenda Item VI Chairman Kelley read the agenda item into the record as follows: "Public Hearing — Consider a request by Allen Economic Development Corporation (AEDC) for Millennium Office Park, to amend the allowable uses in Tract 10 of P.D. 55 to include light technical manufacturing/distribution and limited commercial uses. The property is located in the Michael See Survey, Abstract No. 543 and the William Perrin Survey, Abstract No. 708, in the City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; further described as being located at the northwest comer of Bethany Drive and U.S 75." Ms. Diamond stated that the subject property is Ta 10, of PD -55 that was zoned in 1987 for Hospital and Commercial Uses. The request is to divide this 553 acre parcel into three tracts. Tract I OC is proposed for light technical manufacturing/distribution and office uses, and Tracts I OA and B for Office and Hotel Uses with retail being limited to being located within an office building. The current plans indicate two collector thoroughfares within this tract. Therefore, at the time of platting, various intersection improvements may be needed, depending upon the development densities. The proponent has committed to provide for these prior to development of any of the tracts through the re -platting process. Staff recommends approval subject to the Use and Area regulations and tract map as submitted. Charles Crook, Wier Engineering Assoc., representing the owner of the property, requested modifications in the Use Regulations for Tract IOC. 1. Revise the wording in Condition # I, to increase the floor area devoted to storage and warehousing from 75% to 85%, 2. To remove the words "high tech" in condition # 3 in the definition of Research and Development facilities, and 3 To remove the City's right to request additional right-of-way for right turn lanes except on Bethany Drive and Watters Road. Mr. Dave Nobel, Trammell Crow, prospective purchaser of Tract I OC presented a rendering of the proposed development for the Commission. Chairman Kelley asked about screening truck docks, noting that warehousing facilities are not permitted under the existing zoning, and expressed a concern about aesthetics from Watters Road. Mr. Noble stated that there will be a natural screen by the creek line. Mr. Noble stated that they are proposing to construct two structures that will be 115,000 and 105,000 square feet. Chairman Kelley opened the public hearing Mr. Jim Brazeal, Board Member of A.E.D.C. respectfully asked for the change in usage as submitted C PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 7 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 Mr. Dale Richey, 1210 Bel Air, questioned the trees and landscaping shown on the rendering presented. He is also concerned about the lighting. He can see the lights from the Plano ball fields and he wants the lighting to be controlled and pointing downward Chairman Kelley directed Mr. Richey to the ordinance referring to lighting Mr Richey indicated how the trees and creeks are very desirable, and indicated that U.S. 75 is very loud and the trees are a good sound barrier. With no one else wishing to speak the public hearing was closed. Mr. Crook addressed Mr. Richey's concerns. He indicated that the creek should remain the way it is. This was a concern with Trammel Crow also. Most of the major trees will not he disturbed, and the lighting will be maintained downward, toward the parking lots. Trees and landscaping is going to be substantial. Mr. Noble recommended that the Commission look at the Enterprise Park regarding lighting, and the landscaping at Peerless is an indication of the quality intended for this development. Commission Member McGregor stated that he thinks it's a great plan Commission Member Pacheco has a concern regarding the use and area restrictions on the right tum Imes on Venture and Epic. He stated that an engineering study needs to be conducted to determine if a right tum lane is needed Mr Crook stated that he has spoken with Mr. Conner about a traffic study that has already been completed. Mr. Crook stated that a deceleration lane or a right tum lane is not needed. He wants clarification about where lanes may be required. Mr. Conner stated that his concern is that the zoning allows mid to high rise office which could increase traffic. He needs to retain the right to require street improvements to support the traffic Commission Member Pacheco questioned the purpose of the city's committing to allowing no intersection improvements prior to a study. Ms. Diamond stated that under the existing office zoning, we could have significant development of office on that tract. We should have the right to ask for that right tum lane, if it is determined to be needed. Given the density permitted, she cautions closing the door on obtaining right tum lanes. We do not know the traffic impact at this time. Mr. Crook stated that he doesn't want any more constrictions on this project. Chairman Kelley noted that the city wouldn't ask for the right turn lane if it were not determined to be necessary. But the city would like to be able to get the Nm lanes if they are needed. Chairman Kelley questioned what provisions are there to screen the truck docks from view Mr. Crook stated he can obtain that information if this is an issue. The landscaping will provide the majority of the buffering. He's not sure if there will be a wall built Chairman Kelley wanted to be sure there is not an eyesore of trucks and loading facilities in this area that isn't there now Mr. Crook stated that there is a thick forest there that will be providing considerable buffer, and he r indicated that the topography of the land will also provide some screening. L, Chairman Kelley asked Mr. Crook if he would add some verbiage to add some level of comfort that the truck docks will be screened. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 8 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 Mr. Noble stated that only the back will have doors and all truck loading docks will face to the north. Commission Member Haynes asked about Angel Drive. Ms Diamond noted that Angel has already been abandoned. Mr. Crook indicated that the intent is to create a good visual effect Chairman Kelley continued to search for a comfort level on this. Mr. Crook stated that Trammel Crow will address this with some extra landscaping in this area Mr. Noble indicated that it is impossible to completely screen the truck docks from view from Watters Rd. Chairman Kelley stated that his intent is just to soften the view as much as possible. Mr. Noble stated that they will screen as much as possible. Commission Member McGregor stated that the past projects indicate that this proponent will do all they can to provide a quality visual appearance. Commission Member Smith also stated that she has confidence in this proponent and she believes our requirements are sufficient She doesn't want to add additional unnecessary requirements on this project. Commission Member Obermeyer stated he wants a statement added for truck screening where possible. Mr. Noble stated he does not want to over commit. Mr Brazel stated that the AEDC maintains a significant amount of architectural controls and they are very sensitive to these issues. Chairman Kelley questioned the position of AEDC on truck screening. Mr Brazeal assured Chairman Kelley that they are very sensitive to this issue. Chairman Kelley again stated that hejust wants some language to back these statements up. Commission Member Haynes' concern is the requirement regarding the right turn lane He doesn't want to give that away at this point. Commission Member Pacheco supports the request except for the turn lane modification, and agreed with the restriction of truck docks only at the back of the budding. Commission Member Obermeyer was opposed to not allowing the city to require the right tum lanes. Commission Member Smith continued to support the request as presented by the proponent She is confident with the proponent. Motion: Upon a motion by Commission Member Smith and a second by Commission Member McGregor, the Commission voted 2 FOR and 4 OPPOSED to approve the request as submitted and modified by the proponent. The motion failed. Motion: Upon a motion by Commission Member Haynes and a second by (° Commission Member Obermeyer, the Commission voted 4 FOR and 2 L OPPOSED to approve the request as amended: 1. Truck docks only on the north side of the building. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 9 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 2. Revise the wording in Condition # 1, to increase the floor area devoted to storage and warehousing from 75% to 85%; and 3. To remove the words "high tech" in condition # 3 in the definition of Research and Development facilities. Commission Members Smith and McGregor Opposing. FINDINGS Ma ori 1. Not willing to give up the option to request right-of-way for right turn lanes. Minori 1. Potential constraints on property expressed 2. Confidence in planning efforts of AEDC to provide satisfactory traffic flow 3. Development Standards exceeds straight zoning. PUBLIC HEARING Cameron Prove rtv Agenda Item VII Chairman Kelley read the agenda item into the record as follows: "Public Hearing — Consider a request by D.R Cameron & Associates, Inc., to place permanent zoning of Planned Development District for Single -Family Residential. The property is located in the George Fitzhugh Survey, Abstract No. 320 and the Gabriel Fitzhugh Survey, Abstract No. 318, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; further described as being located south of Stacy Road and west of FM 1378." Ms. Diamond stated that the property is on the eastern edge of the city. The City of Lucas is east of F.M 1378. This property has been recently annexed into our city and comes into the city as Agriculture Open Space (AO) zoning. All the surrounding properties are currently zoned A -O or are not within the city limits of Allen. Lovejoy School exists to the north of this property The request is for a Planned Development District for Single Family uses. The request includes 199 lots with a minimum lots size of 9,000 square feet, with a density of 2.9 dwelling units per acre. The density projected in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan is 2.7 dwelling units per acre. The concept plan is indicating 4.4 acres of park and open space. The proponent has agreed to increase the open space to 4.7 acres. This request is generally in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and staff is recommending approval of this request subject to the Land Use Plan and Use and Area regulations. Doyle R. Cameron, representing the owner, Lucille Smith, stated that they want a development that will be good for all concerned. Ron Morris, 3736 Interlocken Dr , Plano, discussed the 6 lane major thoroughfare and a secondary thoroughfare proposed along the east side of the property He also discussed a 60 foot sewer line easement running through the property. The only amenity is the creek. The remaining land is com pasture with no trees or significant features. A park is proposed on the south of the property Mr. Morris stated that they are attempting to provide special character by creating a series of smaller neighborhoods within the development. Traffic would not be an issue in the area at all due to the thoroughfare and secondary thoroughfare proposed. Mr. Morris noted that they want to achieve an E English Manor look for the neighborhood, with the value of the homes to be half a million dollars and up. Maintenance free environment is desired; a true estate neighborhood. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 10 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 Commission Member Obermeyer had a potential conflict of interest and left the room at 9:58 p.m. Chairman Kelley opened the public hearing. Brad Euing, Forest Grove Estates Rd., stated that traffic is bad at Lovejoy right now. Summerhill Farms are I acre minimum. Forest Grove area is also homes on acreage. He feels it doesn't conform to anything out there. His house is on the creek. It has never flooded but he'd like a study because of the additional concrete that would come with development. He questioned the commission members if this case could be approved without a flood study Ms. Diamond responded that prior to platting the property a flood study will have to be done; it is not required at the time of zoning. Terry Binyon, 2407 Forest Grove Estates Rd. stated that he has a signed petition he desired to distribute among the commissioners. He would make a copy and bring the petition by the city offices later this week. Mr. Binyon stated that they are proud to be part of Collin County They want to be sure to keep the balance. He lists a number of concerns: density; buffering; community and infrastructure impact. Densities of 2.7 and 2.9 have too small lots. Two to six acre lots is the standard in this area. He desires the rural living, and wanted to avoid the high density development. He also indicated that there is not enough buffer zone between the high density planned and the current residents' rural development. He also expressed concern about the Lovejoy school district and wondered if it can it absorb all the increased population. Mr. Binyon also would like to see an environmental impact study He is concerned about storm water runoff issues and questioned if they had been addressed. Mr. Binyon indicated that a 4.7 acre park is not large enough. Don Brazeal, 261 Country Club Road, read a copy of the attached comments, which have been made a part of these minutes. Mike Williams, 2303 Forest Grove Estates Rd. stated that he supports what all other speakers have said. He mentioned that there is livestock out there and how would these new residents feel about having livestock at their back door. Will it ever be a factor in the future causing the livestock to have to go away The development is great, just seems out of place. Needs to be more consistent with the existing larger lots. Sharon Brazeal, 261 Country Club Road, stated that she keeps livestock. She believes in property owner's rights and the zoning change tonight is not in the best interest of the citizens. As Allen grows and attracts high-level executives have we wondered why they are moving to Fairview and other rural areas. Allen has an opportunity to meet the needs with a high quality development of large lots, large homes on the east side of town. Ms. Brazeal then stated that the other issue is school children will have to cut through other property owner's property Fences may cut off that access totally She wants the safety of the children to be guarded. She also expressed concern regarding erosion problems and asked where the additional water would go. She feels this request has come up rather suddenly The reality is that we are people with families out there. Shane Sandormarozsam, 2101 Forest Grove Estates Rd., stated that he has lived there for 14 years. He had to elevate his property some due to the water and dug a pond He discussed the flooding and how it has affected his ducks and geese. It has taken him 10 years to get it right. He discussed how the rain water flows and how it floods his property He also discussed the soil condition. He strongly feels the water flow will be a problem. [' Robert Poster, Superintendent of Lovejoy School, 259 Country Club Rd., indicated that he has some L concerns. He stated that soon they will be constructing a new elementary school for the Lovejoy School District. He also discussed an 8" sewer line down F.M.1378 from the school and a watershed PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 11 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 area. He sees no design for removing that water in this development. He wants a buffer for the school from the residential. Mr. Poster would like a park site located near the school instead of to the south of the development. He stated the Mr. Cameron has expressed interest in working with them. Roy O'Neil, 2102 Forest Grove Estates, stated that he feels he will be negatively affected by this development This is a lifestyle of his choice (to live in the country). They have low water pressure, and septic problems. There are inconveniences to living in the country. He wants the planned development to be sensitive to the existing developments. Allen considers this development to be low density. But this is 8 to 12 times greater density than the existing area. Mr. O'Neil presented a drawing of his area and stated that this development will be right in the center of it all. He feels it is wrong and senseless. He stated that he realizes this will not be an ugly development, but that it would stick out like a sore thumb in this area. He has two goals: he wants to be sensitive to needs and concerns; and wants all parties involved or affected to come out a winner. He is not anti - development. He knew it was coming. He considers himself part of Allen. He expects Allen to be sensitive to his concerns. He asks the Commission Members to please provide for all of the people instead of focusing on just some. AI Ward, 2306 Forest Grove Est. Rd., indicated that his whole family enjoys the country life. He wants to help preserve the "ranchette" style homes. Gary Rodenbaugh, wants the Commission to be sensitive to the buffer zone for the school and the existing properties. Robert Snider, 2215 Forest Grove Estates Rd, indicated that his property backs up to this proposed development. He feels he will have to build a fence to buffer his property from this development. Andrew Clideson, 2307 East Forest Grove, stated that his concerns have been addressed already by other speakers. There is a problem with the creek and flooding. This is a high maintenance area. The developer mentioned low/no maintenance. They have tried to get away from the high density area by moving to this location. Jessy Hensaring, 15 Highland Ct. stated that he is not next to this addition but the density is also his concern. He feels this is not just a concern for this addition, but the other developments that are sure to come. He also wants acre lots and graduated into perhaps half acre lots. Mary Benyon, Forest Grove Estates Road indicated that her observation is that there is no buffer at all — it has backyards backing up to backyards. Needs to be more private. Don Brazeal questioned what is a Planned Development (PD) versus zoning. Ms. Diamond responded that they want to set their own development standards, which is why they are requesting a P.D. Mr. Brazeal wondered how staff can recommend approval when the Comprehensive Plan recommends very low density. Ms. Diamond responds that it is not very low density, but it is low density Other issues are the abutting 6 lane divided thoroughfare, existing industrial uses to the east, provision of a neighborhood park, and curvilinear streets. Doyle Cameron, the proponent, responded to the concerns expressed by stating that he appreciates all the responses. He feels 10,000 square foot lots and quarter of a million dollar estates would be an asset in this area. He indicated that he will do a drainage study. He then described the streets that will be constructed. They are putting 4 million dollars worth of improvements on this property. The PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 12 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 park is to the south because they wanted to save the trees located there. The owner is anxious to close on the property and that's why the quick development He feels the buffering questions are platting questions. Acre lots are economically not feasible. Mr. Cameron wants to build large, quality homes in this area. He understands the soft sod. Storm sewer will be installed. A Flood study will be done on the entire area. The only thing he knows for sure is that he can handle the water and the water shed. There is a problem now because it can't get to the creek. He sees no environmental impact regarding the traffic. Chairman Kelley closed the public hearing Chairman Kelley asked Mr Conner to discuss the qty's standards. Mr. Conner then stated that there are some exceptions, like Buckingham We have a rural standard on roads with estate lots. But a subdivision would require that the Subdivision Ordinance be followed. Drainage requirements are that a Flood study of the creek area that would assume the land at total buildout. The city requires design for a 100 year storm. Mr. Conner stated that development to the City of Allen standards will cost more money Commission Member Haynes thanked everyone for speaking, and stated that he wants to represent all citizens. He questioned the proponent about the buffering of Forest Grove Estates and the southern edge of the development. The proponent stated that 10,000 to 12, 000 square foot homes are planned along the southern edge. Commission Member Pacheco stated that the undeveloped properties should be developed with the density recommended in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan. It should also consider the adjoining properties He isn't comfortable with density higher than 2 per acre. Commission Member McGreger echoed Commission Member Pacheco. The lot size is a factor. Use and Area regulations on the Land Use Plan note garages from the front entry and he is opposed to that. Commission Member Smith stated that she is sensitive to the existing rural development. She also wants a win /win situation. She stated that the Summerfield case was not granted approval as the proponent presented it. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval based on less density. Commission Member Smith supports the 18,000 sq. ft. lots. There are ordinances required by the city She asked Mr Conner about foregoing the curbs and maybe utilizing an open ditch situation. Mr. Conner stated that it is possible. Commission Member Smith indicated the need to be sensitive to the School District No lots should back up to the school. Traffic/safety needs to be noted in the development standards. She believes this property should have extensive development standards. Alleys should not parallel thoroughfares. Commission Member Smith also would like this addressed in the development standards. Commission Member Smith then shared how in the past, developers have met with the neighbors and come to some kind of agreement. She would encourage this. Chairman Kelley agreed with Commission Member Smith. He also shared the concern that it should be more compatible with the neighbors. He would like to see more of a compromise. He also wants a win/win situation. He cannot support this as is. �' Mr. Cameron then requested a 2 week delay for further review and discussion. I September 10, 1998 ALLEN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 ZONING CASE Z 8/19/98-72 (CAMERON PROPERTY) MY NAME IS DON BRAZEAL. I RESIDE AT 261 COUNTRY CLUB, ALL THE PROPOSED PROJECT JOINS ME AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF TI AND IS IDENTIFIED ON THE PLAT AS "AREA OUTSIDE OF ALLEN" ENCOMPASSES 28 ACRES WITH 3 HOMES MY SISTER'S HOME, MY HOME AND MY PERSONAL RESIDENCE THE FOLLOWING ARE MY C"ENTS REGARDING THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE 1) I BELIEVE THE PROJECT SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO COMPLIMENT THE SCHOOL RATHER THAN IGNORE IT. THE SCHOOL SHOULD NOT HAVE TO LOOK AT THE REAR OF THE PROPOSED HOUSES 2) I BELIEVE THERE SHOULD BE A STREET CONTRUCTED BETWEEN THE SCHOOL AND THE PROPOSED HOUSES. THIS WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE WAY OTHER SCHOOLS IN ALLEN HAVE BEEN DESIGNED AROUND 3) I BELIEVE THE PARK AREA SHOULD BE RELOCATED TO THE NORTHWEST OF THE PROPERTY TO JOIN THE SCHOOL PLAYGROUND AND TO BUFFER MY PROPERTY AGAIN, JOINING THE PARK WITH THE SCHOOL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WAY ALLEN HAS MAXIMIZED RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AT OTHER SCHOOL LOCATIONS. IT IS A WIN FOR THE SCHOOL AND A WIN FOR CITY. PERHAPS WHEN THE LAND TO THE WEST IS DEVELOPED AN ADDITIONAL PARK DEDICATION AT THIS SAME LOCATION COULD ENHANCED THIS AREA EVEN MORE 4) I BELIEVE FACING THE REAR OF THE HOUSES TO FM -1378 (COUNTRY CLUB RD) IS INCONSISTENT WITH OTHER DEVELOPEMENT STANDARDS ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN THE AREA. FROM FAIRVIEW THRU LUCAS THERE ARE NO OTHER HOUSES WITH THE REAR FACING THE ROAD I BELIEVE THIS PROJECT SHOULD CONFORM TO PRE-EXISTING DEVELOPEMENT STANDARDS AND NOT FACE THE REAR OF THE HOUSES TO THE ROADWAY 5) I BELIEVE THE PROJECT SHOULD HAVE SET BACKS AND BURMING WITH LANDSCAPING SIMILAR TO THE SUMMER HILL FARMS DEVELOPEMENT ACROSS FM -1378 FROM THE PROPOSED PROJECT, 6) DENSITY IS ABSOLUTELY INCONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. I BELIEVE IN FAIRNESS TO ALL SURROUNDING RESIDENTS C THIS PROPERTY SHOULD BE ZONED TO YOUR "VERY LOW DENSITY" WITH A MINIMUM OF 18000 SO FT LOTS AND 2600 SO FT HOMES. IN CLOSING, LET ME JUST SAY THAT WHAT YOU 00 TONIGHT WILL AFFECT THE LIVES OF ALL THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTS AND IT WILL BE EVERLASTING I WOULD JUST SIMPLY ASK THAT YOU THINK OF YOURSELF AS ONE OF THOSE sill NEIGHBORING RESIDENT WHEN YOU ARE CALLED UPON TO VOTE ON THIS PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE AND VOTE NO UNLESS THE AFOREMENTIONED ITEMS ARE AGREED UPON BY THE DEVELOPER. RE/SPECTFUL�LY SUBMITTED, /�- L/J'- DON BRAZEAL L IV' _ CITY OF ALLEN TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Pam Conway, Planning Secret�� DATE. September 18, 1998 SUBJECT Minutes from September 10, 1998 The petition referenced on Page 10 of the Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes, has not been received at this time. ONEBUTLERCIRCLE ALLEN, TEXAS 75013 972/727-0100 • FAX 9721727-0165 EMAIL. coa@ci.a11w a. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 13 SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 Motion: Upon a motion by Commission Member McGregor and a second by Commission Member Smith, the Commission voted 5 FOR and 0 OPPOSED to TABLE the request. Other Business Agenda Item VIII A. Discussion on Section 3.10 of the Zoning Ordinance as it pertains to Home Occupations. Commission Member Haynes requested that we be sure to contact the Chamber of Commerce regarding the Home Occupation Ordinance. Adiourn Motion: Upon a motion by Commission Member Haynes and a second by Commission Member McGregor, the Commission voted 5 FOR and 0 OPPOSED to Adjourn the September 10, 1998 meeting at 11:30 p.m. These minutes approved this 04 day of kelt' JeR 1998. 7 laf€Ye#lep,-2lmhmmt /�Os$ �hermUJPi^ Pamela Smith, Secretary Chairvncn J I