Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - Planning and Zoning Commission - 2005 - 04/05 - RegularPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting April 5, 2005 CITY OF ALLEN ATTENDANCE: Commissioners Present: Gary Caplinger, Chair Alan Grimes Robert Wendland Douglas Dreggors James Rushing Darion Culbertson Robin Sedlacek Commissioners Absent: City Staff Present: David A. Hoover, Director of Planning Lee Battle, Senior Planner Sally L. Leeper, Planner Kellie Wilson, Planning Tech Dennis Abraham, Engineering Joe Gorfrda, City Attorney Regular Agenda Call to Order and Announce a Quorum is Present: With a quorum of the Commissioners present, Chairman Caplinger called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers at Allen City Hall, 305 Century Parkway. Director's Report on 3/22/05 and 3/29/05 City Council Action • There were no planning issues on the agenda. • On the 29th the City Council held a workshop on the Central Business District. Consent Agenda Item 1: Approve Minutes of March 1, 2005, Regular Meeting. Item 2: Request for Extension — Consider a 60 -day extension of approval for a Final Plat for Watters Road/Ridgeview Drive right-of-way plat, 17.889± acres located south of SH 121 and west of US75. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 2 APRIL 5, 2005 Item 3: Final Plat — Consider a Final Plat for Hidden Creek Addition, Lot 1, Block A, being 17498± acres of land located west of Watters Road and south of McDermott Drive. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Wendland and a second by Commissioner Culbertson, the Commission voted 6 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED with Commissioner Sedlacek abstaining, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion carried. Regular Agenda Item 4: Tabled Item — Consider an amendment to Tract 24 of PD Planned Development 54 from MF Multifamily to TH Townhome on 15.25± acres of land located north of McDermott Drive, west of Watters Crossing Drive. Mr. Hoover presented the request to the Commission. The proposal meets the requirements of the Townhome District of the Allen Land Development Code. This request if approved with the next item results in fewer units than currently allowed for this site alone. The Applicant added four (4) cul-de-sacs to the design, with a round -about at the entrance. Each unit provides four (4) parking spaces: two (2) per garage, and two (2) per driveway Visitor parking is provided at the rate of 1 space for each two (2) units. Mr. Hoover then presented a comparison table comparing the number of units that could be developed as it is currently zoned to the number of units if the request is approved. Commissioner Culbertson asked about the round -about. Was it functional or an amenity? Mr. Hoover responded that the round -about provides easier maneuvering for school buses, but it also serves as an amenity Commissioner Wendland asked if the open space that was between the buildings in the previous proposal had been removed. Mr. Hoover explained that the open space in those areas has been removed. The Plan shows 3.07 acres of open space being provided, with 1.68 acres required. Commissioner Sedlacek asked about the lack of an amenity center. Chairman Caplinger stated that it is not a requirement to provide an amenity center. The Commissioners also asked what the screening requirement was. Mr. Hoover stated that the minimum is 8 -ft , however the Commission can approve alternative designs. Mr. Waren Corwin addressed the Commission. He stated that they propose to use a wrought iron fence with a living screen — they do not desire to construct an 8-11. masonry wall. Chairman Caplinger re -opened the Public Hearing and received public comments. Shana Dumesnil (spoke — opposed) 1225 Greenway PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 3 APRIL 5, 2005 Presented a petition with 50 signatures with Raintree Residents opposing Kirk Wilson (spoke — opposed) 1216 Greenway David Robinson 1223 Shade Tree Tom Apligian (spoke — opposed) 6 Parkside Daniel Neice (spoke — opposed) 1111 Shade Tree Lane Helen Robinson (spoke — opposed) 1223 Shade Tree • No on-site management • Detriment to the quality of life • No school impact study done • Decline in property value • Increase in crime • McDermott is the gateway to the City — keep it attractive • Substandard development • What kind of separation will there be between this development and the Raintree Subdivision? • If developed, they want the same development standards that Raintree has in place • Density is a concern • Doesn't look like there is adequate turning radii for fire trucks • Screening is a concern — who will maintain after installed? • The Frisco site has an amenity center • Large buffer between neighboring residential neighborhood • Need better live screening • Why not single story in the back near Raintree? • Wants the developer to meet with residents of Raintree for their input • Wish Twin Creeks had provided this development plan to the residents of Raintree prior to submission • Townhomes do not sell • Raintree HOA wants to be responsible — not Twin Creeks HOA — they have no common boundaries. Edward Servigon (for) — Representing Meritage Homes (Legacy) 15264 Mountain View Lane PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 4 APRIL 5, 2005 Frisco, Texas COMMENTS • Attracts young professionals or empty nesters • No outside maintenance — the HOA will do all maintenance including painting and mowing • The development in Frisco has increased in appraised value over $10,000 in ten (10) months Charles Nies, Vice President of Bossy Boots and President of the Twin Creeks HOA, addressed the Commission - 813 Glen Rose • Bossy Boots has always been a part of Twin Creeks • We agreed that a 3 to 4 story apartment development backing up to Raintree Estates is not a good choice. • We are looking for empty nesters who may want to downgrade. • The land is under option for an apartment development • We insisted that this development be a part of the Twin Creeks HOA — they can use the amenity center at Twin Creeks, just as the Raintree Estates residents do. • We will ensure the quality and the maintenance of the product. • Twin Creeks has the finest common areas. Chairman Caplinger read into record the names of residents who e-mailed or mailed their comments prior to the meeting. The Commission asked about the rear yard setback. Mr. Hoover responded that Multi -Family is 20 -ft. and Townhome is 15 -ft. He also stated that this plan reduces the density by 2/3. Mr. Hoover responded to the concerns that the Townhomes back up to McDermott — he stated that only commercial and retail would face McDermott. All residential along that thoroughfare either backs or sides to it. Commission concerns/comments: • Townhomes and/or apartments are a mistake • Zoned multi -family for many years before the Raintree Estates was developed. Does sympathize with the residents, but the property owner does have the right to develop. • Has applicant met with the residents of Raintree Estates? Was there a logical settlement or conclusion. Mr. Corwin responded that they had not met with the residents. • Don't like the layout or concept. • Likes the idea that the Twin Creeks HOA will be responsible for the maintenance. • Too much in the area. • Consider increasing rear setback next to Raintree. • Applicant has done everything we've asked them to do and it does meet the standards. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Wendland and a second by Commissioner Culbertson the Commission voted 4 IN FAVOR, and 3 OPPOSED with PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 5 APRIL 5, 2005 Commissioners Grimes, Rushing, and Dreggors casting the opposing votes to recommend approval with the conditions that it be developed with the same standards and regulations as the Twin Creeks HOA, natural screening adjacent to the Raintree Estates Subdivision and McDermott Drive not to be less than 8 -ft., the material to be approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission at platting, and increase the rear building line adjacent to Raintree Estates to be no less than 25 -ft, and adjacent to McDermott no less than 20 -ft. The motion carried. Item 5: Tabled Item — Consider an amendment to Tract 12 of PD Planned Development 54 from IT Industrial Technology to TH Townhome on 27.613± acres of land located between Benton Drive, Bray Central Drive, Watters Road and Plainview Drive Mr. David Hoover presented the request to the Commission. The proposal meets the requirements of the Townhome District of the Allen Land Development Code The density is 9.1 units per acre. The number of proposed units is 222. The Commission discussed and agreed that this was a good plan and a good location. Chairman Caplinger re -opened the Public Hearing. No one was present to speak for or against the request, however Benton Pointe Apartments did mail in their statement opposing the request. Chairman Caplinger closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Wendland requested that staff prepare a report on the current Multi -Family and Townhome zoning in place, and compare it to other cities. He requested that this report be distnbuted at a future meeting. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Culbertson and a second by Commissioner Grimes, the Commission voted 6 IN FAVOR, and 1 OPPOSED with Commissioner Rushing casting the opposing vote to recommend approval item number 5. The motion carried. Agenda Item 6 General Development Plan — Consider a General Development Plan for the Ridgemont/75 Addition, being 16.307± acres of land located at the southeast comer of US75 and Ridgemont Drive. Mr. David Hoover presented the request to the Commission. The request represents two (2) Garden Offices. The third lot will be dedicated to the City for floodplain. In the front of the property is a 65" pecan tree that will be protected as an historical tree. Mark Stahl, representing the Applicant, addressed the Commission. This request includes a 50,000 sq. ft. 2 -story building. They already have a user who will use 30,000 sq. ft. of the PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 6 APRIL 5, 2005 ® building, bringing high-end jobs to Allen. They intend to treat the development as a gateway to the City. Commissioner Grimes stated that he liked the idea of dividing the parking in this area as opposed to the previously approved plan - appearance of less pavement. He did suggest a meandering sidewalk. Mr. Stahl responded that the applicant will try to accommodate this request; however they have the pecan tree to preserve which does dictate the layout of the sidewalk. Commissioner Wendland asked if a separate motion was needed addressing the sidewalk in front of the floodplain, or if approval of the General Development Plan (GDP) without the sidewalk would suffice. Mr. Hoover said that yes, approval of the GDP would be adequate to take to the Council as their recommendation of approval of the request. Mr. Hoover stated that applicant has escrowed funds for the trail that the City will construct in the future. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Grimes and a second by Commissioner Wendland, the Commission voted 7 I FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to approve item number 6. The motion carried. Agenda Item7: Preliminary Plat — Consider a Preliminary Plat for the Ridge at ® Montgomery Farm Addition, being 22.44+ acres of land located south of ® Bethany Drive and west of Bel Air Drive. Mr. David Hoover presented the plat to the Commission. The proposal is to develop the property as a residential subdivision with 47 residential lots and 3 reserve (open space lots). Applicant requested that the Commission consider waiving the requirement to construct a screening wall along Bethany Drive and Bel Air Drive because of the open space and berm that already screens the roadway from the proposed residential. Amy Monier addressed the Commission. She stated that there proposal is 43% of the allowed density. The builder with be Darling Homes, with the price starting at $400,000. The open space feeds into the Master Park Plan. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Wendland and a second by Commissioner Sedlacek, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to approve item number 7, approving staff's recommendation not to require a screening wall on Bethany and Bel Air Drives. The motion carried. Agenda Item 8: Preliminary Plat — Consider a Preliminary Plat for Angel Field East Addition, being 28.99+ acres of land located south of Bethany Drive and east of Bel Air Drive. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 5, 2005 PAGE Mr. David Hoover presented the plat to the Commission. The proposal is to develop a commercial wellness center. Engineering issues relating to the intersection of Bel Air and Bethany Drives will be resolved before final platting. Amy Monier addressed the Commission. The applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department are currently negotiating the Facilities Agreement. The Facilities Agreement will address floodplain dedication, establishment of a trail and trail easement, and will be approved before final platting. The Commissioners had no questions, and felt that the plat met all requirements provided in the Allen Land Development Code. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Wendland and a second by Commissioner Culbertson, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to approve item number 8 with the stipulation that the intersection width at Bethany and the distance to the median cut be resolved prior to final plat. The motion carried. Agenda Item 9: Public Hearing — Conduct a public hearing and consider an amendment to the Allen Land Development Code, Article IV, Section 4.15.3 Zoning Regulations, to amend the Height and Area Regulations in the CC Corridor Commercial District. Mr. David Hoover presented the recommended changes. If approved, there will be a limit on the height of additional structures in CC Corridor Commercial District to 45 feet or 3 stones. Staff is not recommending changing the height limit for the primary structure. Chairman Caplinger opened the Public Hearing. There was no one present to speak for or against the request. The Commission discussed the request and had concerns are possible parking structures. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Wendland and a second by Commissioner Culbertson, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to recommend approval of item number 9. The motion carried. Other Business Upcoming Agenda Items: • Two (2) General Development Plans • Two (2) Preliminary Plats • One (1) Final Plat PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 5, 2005 PAGE Adiournmen[ Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Wendland and a second by Commissioner Dreggors, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR and 0 OPPOSED to adjourn the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at 9:30 p.m. These inutes approved this —,;�V�day of 2005. l � Garyapling , Chairman Kellie Wilson, Planning Technician H