Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - Planning and Zoning Commission - 2016 - 06/21 - RegularJune 21, 2016 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting June 21, 2016 CITY OF ALLEN ATTENDANCE: Commissioners Present: Jeff Cocking, Chair Ben Trahan, Ix Vice -Chair Stephen Platt, Jr., 2"^ Vice -Chair Luke Hollingsworth Shirley Mangrum Absent: John Ogrizovich Michael Orr City Staff Present Ogden "Bo" Bass, AICP, Director of Community Development Shawn Poe, PE, Assistant Director of Engineering Brian Bristow, Assistant Director Parks and Recreation Madhuri Kulkami, AICP, Senior Planner Victoria Thomas, City Attorney 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 Renor[ 1. Action taken on the Planning & Zoning Commission items by City Council at the June 14, 2016, regular meeting, attached Consent Agenda (Routine P&Z busmess. Consent Agenda is approved by a single majority vote Items may be removed for open discussion by a request from a Commission member or member )fstaff) 2. Approve minutes from the June 7, 2016, regular meeting. 3. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Status Report. 4. Final Plat — Consider a request for a Final Plat for Allen Commerce Center, Lots 1-R2, 2-5, Block 1, being 69.073+/- acres out of the Joseph Dixon Survey, Abstract No 276, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas, generally located north of Stacy Road and west of US Highway 75. (FP -6/8/16-46) [Allen Commerce Center — Allen Premium Outlet Mall Expansion] June 21, 2016 Motion: Upon a motion by 2"d Vice -Chair Platt, and a second by Commissioner Hollingsworth, the Commission voted 5 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion carried. Regular Agenda 5. Preliminary Plat — Consider a request for a Preliminary Plat for Montgomery Farm Estates, being 74.601+/- acres out of the TG Kennedy Survey, Abstract No. 500, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; generally located south of Bethany Drive and east of Brett Drive. (PP -5/3/16-35) [Montgomery Farm Estates, Phases I & 2] Ms. Madhuri Kulkarni, Senior Planner, presented the item to the Commission. She stated that the item is a Preliminary Plat for Montgomery Farm Estates, Phases l & 2. The property is generally located south of Bethany Drive and east of Brett Drive. The property to the north (across Bethany Drive) is zoned Planned Development PD No. 76 Single -Family Residential R-5. The property to the west is zoned Planned Development PD No. 96 Single -Family Residential R-4 and Agriculture -Open Space AO. The property to the south is zoned Agriculture -Open Space AO. The properties to the east are zoned Planned Development PD No. 105 Single -Family Residential R-5 and Planned Development PD No. 74 Single -Family Residential R-7 Ms. Kulkami explained that a Planned Development amendment was approved earlier in the year for Montgomery Farm Estates, a proposed residential development offering diverse lot and housing sizes, architectural styles, and community reserve areas. Preliminary platting is the next phase in the development process. Ms. Kulkarni stated that the subject Preliminary Plat shows 74.601± acres of land and shows two phases of development. There are a total of 196 residential lots and fifteen Open Space/HOA lots. There are three access points into the development. There is one access point on Brett Drive (which connects to Bethany Drive) There is one access paint on Monica Drive from the property to the west (The Meadow at Montgomery Farm), and one access point on Spencer Street from the property to the east (Angel Field West). The plat also shows ROW dedication and various easements required for development. The Preliminary Plat has been reviewed by the Technical Review Committee, is generally consistent with the PD Concept Plan, and meets the requirements of the Allen Land Development Code. A citizen wanted to speak on the item. Chairman Cocking informed the citizen that the item is not a public hearing. If there was any apposition to the item, it should have been vetted during the public hearing at the zoning stage. Chairman Cocking emphasized that this item is a plat, which pertains to lines and easements and other similar matters He also mentioned that this is a Preliminary Plat, and there will still be a Final Plat that the citizen on which the citizen can work with the Developer or Planning Department. This item is an administrative function only. June 21, 2016 Motion: Upon a motion by 1st Vice -Chair Trahan and a second by Commissioner Mangrum, the Commission voted 5 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to approve the Preliminary Plat for Montgomery Farm Estates, being 74.601+/ - acres, generally located south of Bethany Drive and east of Brett Drive. The motion carried. 6. Tabled Item/Public Hearing — Conduct a Public Hearing and consider a request to amend the base zoning of Planned Development No. 104 from Community Facilities CF to Single Family Residential R-7, and adopt a Concept Plan, Development Regulations, and Building Elevations for the property known as Lot 1, Block I, Bethany Worship Addition, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; generally located on the northeast comer of the intersection of Rivercrest Boulevard and Greenville Avenue. (Z-1/5/16-3) [Rivercrest Park] Ms. Madhuri Kulkami, Senior Planner, presented the item to the Commission. She stated that the item is the continued public hearing for the PD Amendment for Rivercrest Park. She stated that this is a tabled item and was presented at the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on June 7th. The property is generally located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Rivercrest Boulevard and Greenville Avenue. The properties to the south (across Rivercrest Boulevard) are zoned Planned Development PD. No. 6 Shopping Center SC and Community Facilities CF The property to the west (across Greenville Avenue) is zoned Planned Development PD. No. 58 Community Facilities CF The properties to the north and east are zoned Single Family Residential District R-4. Ms. Kulkami noted that a citizen contacted the Planning Department regarding the R-4 zoning. The zoning was identified in the GIS map as "R-5." After checking the original zoning and ordinance, the error has been corrected in the GIS map. She clarified that the zoning was presented as R-5 last time; it is actually R-4. Ms. Kulkami explained that the property is currently zoned Planned Development PD No. 104 Community Facilities CF The applicant is requesting to change the base zoning from Community Facilities CF to Single Family Residential District R-7 for a single-family residential subdivision, and to adopt development regulations, a concept plan, and building elevations for the property. The proposed development is approximately 6.9f acres. The Concept Plan shows 35 front -entry lots with a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and a minimum lot dimension of 50' x 90' The minimum dwelling unit size will be 2,200 square feet Ms. Kulkarm said that there are two access points for the property The primary access point for the development is located on Rivercrest Boulevard. There is also a gated emergency access drive on the northwestern end of the property on Greenville Avenue. A 5' sidewalk is required along Rivercrest Boulevard and Greenville Avenue; the developer will reconstruct and widen the existing sidewalks. Screening for the property will consist of an 8' masonry screening wall along Greenville Avenue, except for the emergency access area which will include sliding wrought iron gates. An 8' masonry screening wall will also be constructed along Rivercrest Boulevard. The screening on the eastern side of the property (along the existing alley) will consist of a 6' board on board fence. The screening along the northern property line will consist of a 6' board on board fence with brick columns. Ms. Kulkarni explained that the Concept Plan and Landscape Plan show eight Home Owner Association areas, with six interior open space lots totaling 0.47± acres of open space, meeting the open space requirement. June 21, 2016 An agreement has been made between the Parks Department and the applicant regarding tree mitigation. Ms. Kulkami said this was not discussed last time as the agreement has been vetted with the Parks Department, but briefly went over the agreement, and explained that the agreement includes the specific number of replacement trees (391 trees) to be delivered to the Allen Tree Farm with two different delivery times, the species and quantities of the trees to be provided; and the size and health of trees to be provided. The agreement also includes a stipulation that building permits will be withheld up to 75% until all trees are delivered. Ms. Kulkarni presented the building elevations and stated that they have not changed from the last presentation The primary exterior building materials consist of brick, cement fiber board, and composition shingle roofing There will be variation in architecture and house style. Garages will be carriage hardware design and driveways will be washed aggregate or salt finish. Ms. Kulkami said the rear elevations are new, and are now included to address the concerns from the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. To mitigate concerns of the two story houses, the developer has submitted floor plans and rear elevations. The developer has stipulated that any windows on the second floor of the rear elevations of Lots 1-14, Block B, must either be transom windows (clearstory windows) or made of opaque glass This condition is also listed in the development regulations. Ms. Kulkami discussed the changes to the development regulations: - Tree Planting: Two shade trees to be planted on each dwelling unit; both trees to be planted in the front yard. If both shade trees cannot be planted within the front yard, one shall be planted within the rear yard of the same lot. Additionally, each tree is to have a trunk diameter of not less than 4 caliper inches measured 3' above the base of the trunk at time of planting (this is a 33% increase in tree sizes over the standard requirement) Budding Elevations: Any windows on a second floor of the rear elevation of Lots 1-14, Block B, must be one or both of the following (to be developed in general conformance with the floorplan and elevations) —Transom windows or Opaque Glass Ms. Kulkami said that staff believes the applicant has satisfied the citizen and commission concerns from the previous meeting Commissioner Mangmm asked if the applicant has had a chance to meet the residents since the last meeting. Shane Jordan, Developer, 16475 Dallas Parkway Suite 540, Dallas, Texas, addressed the Commission. He said there was one speaker last time - Mr. Nelson. After the floorplans and elevations were sent to staff to review, he delivered a package to the applicant's home. He did not send any information to anyone else as nobody else spoke at the meeting. He said the package was left at their front door and he has not heard back. Chairman Cocking continued the public hearing. Mr. Timothy Bell, 819 Rush Creek, Allen, Texas, addressed the commission. He said he lives in the Fountain Park Estates subdivision and has lived there for 17 years. He has seen many changes, but this rezoning is concerning. Rivercrest Boulevard is a major arterial. He does not have any traffic study 1 information, but said this is a major thoroughfare through multiple subdivisions. At any given day, from about 6:30 am to after 9 am, the traffic is backed up Construction at the intersection would have a major impact on traffic. Post -construction would also be problematic for the existing residents. He also wanted to reiterate one of the comments made by Mr Nelson at the last meeting that was not addressed. He said June 21, 2016 [he proposed home values are not in alignment with other properties in the area. He said the homes in this area would be 115% higher than the existing homes. He wanted this concern to be discussed. Mr. Bill Nelson, 601 Lake Ridge Drive, Allen, Texas, addressed the commission. He lives on the eastern side of the alley. He is still strongly against the rezoning. He has lived in his home for 32 years. This property has been zoned CF district. When the Church was being planned, he attended meetings. The trees and landscape were a big issue at that time. He counted 231 mature trees on the property It is a beautiful piece of property, and there was a great concern over landscaping during the Church rezoning. He thought Allen was known as a "green place." He said this rezoning is a giant step down. The windows in the back of the houses are still a concern. If the windows are opaque, they can still be changed over time. These are still two story homes which would look into their backyards. He touched on traffic and said that the Harvest Church is expanding. Cars are currently parking on streets. He is concerned with safety as well and the kids walking to high school. Additional cars will lead to additional congestion. He concluded by stating that this plan is called "Rivercrest Park," but there is not much of park in this new development. There was distant conversation about the package that Mr. Jordan delivered to the home of Ms. Nelson Ms. Linda Nelson, 601 Lake Ridge Drive, Allen, Texas, spoke to the commission. She said when she looked out the window this afternoon before they left, she saw blue sky. When she will look out the window after this development is constructed, she will only see roofs, and not the sky and trees. Mr. Jeff Tate, 609 Lake Ridge Drive, Allen, Texas, addressed the commission. He said he is opposed to the rezoning, similar to several reasons already stated. He just wanted to add that he is concerned about the fence line at the alley The fence is too close to the alley and it will be nearly impossible to back out of his driveway. He also discussed congestion. He said one of the reasons he bought his house was due to this field of mature trees, which will now be cut He agrees that the trees are being mitigated, but said he did not buy his house to see a skyline of roofs with two homes looking into his single property. He said the properties are too small and are too congested for the area; even two trees may not be able to be planted in the front. He also mentioned property taxes He bought his house with the plan to be in the community for a while. He brought in 20 protests of people that do not want this piece rezoned, and only one person who was for the development. His property values will also increase, which is great, but he is not planning to sell his house. His property taxes will rise and it will be more expensive for him to live in the community Mr. Cartel Jungmann, 605 Lake Ridge Drive, Allen, Texas, addressed the commission. He has been at this location for 44 years. He thinks the R-7 zoning is a huge jump. His house is worth much less than what the proposed houses will be, and said that this is not compatible Regarding the trees, he agrees with what everyone says. The trees were there when he moved 44 yews ago. Someone said they were "trash" trees at the previous meeting. But the trees are still growing. The trees will be there 44 more years if they are not bulldozed. He said the windows on the two-story houses can be changed in the future. The biggest issue he has is with the fence. The fence will cause everyone to have a hard time backing up. The fence by the alley will get hit too much which is why he said he thinks the developer is putting up a cheaper fence. He says it will be tough to back up his truck. Be also said that it does not seem feasible for trash trucks to maneuver through the alley. Additionally, Mr. Jungmann asked about easements for cable companies. He wanted to know if the utilities would be relocated to his side of the street. He said he planted some wildflowers in the back, but that Code Enforcement mandates him to mow his flowers. He does not understand what the flowers interfere with. But now there would be a fence by the alley. He said he should have gotten a packet from the developer as well. June 21, 2016 Mr. Jeff Tate re -addressed the commission. He said he discovered the dam when he moved to Allen, and that he loves that place. He made the comparison to the mature trees in the park and said if those trees were destroyed and replaced with 34" saplings, it would not be the same Chairman Cocking closed the public hearing Chairman Cocking said one letter was received in opposition: Sandra and Tommie McDonald, 503 Lakendge Drive, Allen, Texas. Chairman Cocking asked about traffic concerns. Shawn Poe, Assistant Director of Engineering, addressed the Commission. He said he understands that there are traffic issues at peak hours at the Rivercrest Boulevard and Greenville Avenue intersection, especially during the school AM peak hours He said the City recently restriped one of the lanes to accommodate the traffic, but that they have not seen the outcome because the striping was done after school was out for the summer A traffic analysis was provided by the applicant. The way it is proposed, the development will bring under 400 trips/day. The existing roadway network with the improvements recently made will accommodate this development. Mr. Poe also discussed sidewalks and pedestrian safety The applicant is required to bring the sidewalk to ADA guidelines. If there is no sidewalk, they would be required to construct the sidewalk. Chairman Cocking said the biggest concerns of traffic is caused by the school speed limit set by the Police Department. He asked if the City is working with the school district for ingress/egress. Mr. Poe said the issue is mainly people trying to get into the performing arts parking lot. He stated that the main goal is to get people through the intersection and onto the other side This will require coordination with the Police Department Chairman Cocking asked about the alley, and if it a larger than normal alley. Mr. Poe said he has not measured it, but alleys are typically 12' wide with a 16' right-of-way It does appear that a large portion of the alley is on the property line. During the construction plans and final plat, a solution would have to be reached In his opinion, a fence on the edge of the alley does not make sense. An offset or some alley improvements will have to be made. Chairman Cocking said the alley is probably 14' There is not a grass easement on the edge. The previous developer appears to have paved it to the edge Chairman Cocking asked about trees He asked what the total number of trees are that the developer will be mitigating and providing to the City Ms. Rulkami said the total number of replacement trees is 391 trees. Chairman Cocking said someone had mentioned "trash trees." He explained that this term was used by the City Arborist to refer to short-lived trees. He asked about the life -expectancy of these trees. Brian Bristow, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation, addressed the Commission. He said staff has worked through this project with the developer, and sent the City Forester to the site. He said he understands there are many trees on the site The Forester is also a certified arborist and has made judgement on trees that would be diseased or less than viable. The City Forester worked with the June 21, 2016 developer to arrive at a reasonable number of tree mitigation (391 Replacement Trees). These trees will be delivered to the Tree Farm on Greenville Avenue. Chairman Cocking asked if these trees would be used throughout the City Mr. Bristow answered yes. The trees on the farm are planted on City property They make an effort to populate the trees in areas where the trees were removed. Chairman Cocking mentioned privacy concerns. He reiterated that the windows will be transom windows or opaque windows. He asked if there was anything that would prevent the windows from being replaced to a clear -glass windows. Ms. Kulkarni said that if that were to happen, it would be considered a zoning violation. If the adjacent landowners notice that the window has been changed, then they can call the City for Code Enforcement. Chairman Cocking asked if there is an easement on the west side of the alley Mr. Jordan said there is an old easement on the western side, but that it does not continue to the north. The cable lines run north to south. There is a 5' easement on the eastern side of the alley. There is not an easement on the northern side of his property. Those easements exist there because it "was easier" for the cables to be located on his side. AT&T and Time Warner will be moving their lines. Chairman Cocking said that the area was marked 1 Mr. Jordan said yes, the area has been marked. He explained that there are lines in easements, but in other areas, the lines exist without an easement. Chairman Cocking clarified that all of the utilities will be moved to the other side of the alley. Mr. Jordan said yes; either that, or the easement on his side will be reduced to 5' Chairman Cocking said his concern for the fence is gone with the utilities moved. However, he asked about the fence being on the property line. The alley is wider, but the existing houses have shorter driveways. Mr. Jordan asked if he could work that out with Engineering during Platting. Mr. Bass said it depends on the width of the alley and also of where the actual property line is versus the fence. If it is difficult get a trash truck through the alley, then the fence will be moved. However, if the alley is wide enough, then the alley/fence issues will be determined at the time of platting and construction plans. Chairman Cocking said it will be noted that staff will work with the developer on the alley/fence issue. Mr. Bass said yes, and added that the Commission can include this in the motion if they choose to do so. Chairman Cocking said this is the first time he has heard a complaint about increased property values. He said property values in Allen are continuously rising. The property values will continue to rise whether these houses are built or not. The challenge is that one property owner cannot tell another what to build. The developer has the right to build a $400,000 home. Usually the concerns are that property values are destroyed, not raised. June 21, 2016 Commissioner Mangrum added that higher taxes will come with the higher values, but the values will be in favor when it is time to sell. She reiterated that Allen is a growing community There are thousands of people moving into the Dallas area. Property values will not level out for the next ten or so years. She says Allen is fortunate to have such high property values. Chairman Cocking said this is the "new real." Property values are rising. Hence, the developer is working on infill properties. Chairman Cocking said there was a protest petition that Mr. Tate provided. The next step is that the protest petition will be provided to the City Secretary She will go through the vetting process regarding the threshold. Depending on the threshold, the City Council would have to vote with a different majority than a simple majority This does not impact the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Mr. Bass said it is a 20% requirement within the 200' definition area. City Council must vote in a super majority Chairman Cocking asked if this requirement is calculated by square footage or count of owners. Mr. Bass said it is calculated through area. He also stated that all of the material has been passed on to the City Secretary Chairman Cocking asked about the cut-off time for the petitions. 1 Mr. Bass said it must be a reasonable time, and that questions be directed to the City Secretary's office. Ms. Kulkami said she believes the deadline is the noon of the day before the City Council meeting. Chairman Cocking said these are some of the toughest cases in the City. This property has been overlooked. It would have been great if it was built years ago with the remaining subdivision. He said there will be another case later this evening with a similar infill situation. The property has to be economically feasible to move forward. He recognizes that this development is different than what is around that area, but this is because of the difference of what was developed 40 years ago and what is being developed today This is the uniqueness of infill property Commissioner Hollingsworth asked about the motion for the fence. Chairman Cocking recommended that the motion include language that the developer work with City staff to finalize the alley and alley easement for Final Plat. Motion: Upon a motion by 2nd Vice -Chair Platt and a second by 1st Vice -Chair Trahan, the Commission voted 5 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to recommend approval of the request to amend the base zoning of Planned Development No. 104 from Community Facilities CF to Single Family Residential R-7, and adopt a Concept Plan, Development Regulations, and Building Elevations for the property known as Lot 1, Block 1, Bethany Worship Addition, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; generally located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Rivercrest Boulevard and Greenville Avenue, for Rivercrest Park, with the addition that the Developer work with the City Staff to address concerns with the alley. June 21, 2016 The motion carried. 7 Public Hearing — Conduct a Public Hearing and consider a request to amend portions of Planned Development PD No. 92 to add "Office Use" and "Medical and Dental Office" use for the property known as Lots 5-9, Block B, Starcreek Commercial, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; generally located south of Sam Rayburn Tollway and east of Watters Road. (Z-5/26/16-43) [Starcreek] Commissioner Mangrum filed an Affidavit of Conflict of Interest with the Chair for Agenda Item No. 7 and left the Commission dais. Mr. Bo Bass, Director of Community Development, presented the item to the Commission. He stated that the item is a public hearing and a PD amendment for Starcreek. I June 21. 2016 The property is located south of Sam Rayburn Tollway and east of Watters Road. The properties to the west, south, and east are zoned Planned Development PD No. 92 for Corridor Commercial CC To the north (across Sam Rayburn Tollway) is the City of McKinney The property is currently zoned Planned Development PD No. 92 with a base zoning of Corridor Commercial CC. The zoning request is for five lots (Lots 5-9, Block B) of an existing platted subdivision. The original zoning was created in 2004 Mr. Bass explained that the zoning has been in place for 12 years. There was hope for this area to be developed with restaurant, entertainment, and recreational uses. He said that the City has been somewhat successful with retail and restaurant uses in that area. In other ways, the area has not been very successful. Mr Bass presented the aerial and said there are several areas which are clearly undeveloped and still vacant, even though the land has been actively marketed. In February of this year, a previous request was made to re -open the zoning. When the zoning was originally created, it excluded 'offices," with the exception of very specific office uses (governmental offices, optometrist offices, etc.). In February 2016, the door was opened to additional uses. Primarily, this request will promote additional daytime traffic. All of the retail uses and the Cinemark will be more benefited by daytime traffic, as currently, there is not much synergy in that area. Office uses would bring in greater daytime traffic. Mr. Bass presented the zoning exhibit and said the area in question shows multiple pad sites on lots that were previously platted. He reiterated that the zoning request would add offices and medical and dental offices. He said that the medical offices would not include the 24-hour clinic, but only the more traditional doctor's offices. Mr Bass summarized the development regulations: - The area highlighted (as presented) would allow "Office" and "Medical or Dental Offices" uses. - The building materials and architectural style shall be compatible and largely similar to the materials and architectural styling of the existing buildings within the site. This regulation was not initially included in the packet, but is recommended to be added as it would ensure that any user would have to match the architectural styling and material throughout the development. This area is expected to have a more commercial/urban styling. Chairman Cocking opened the public hearing Chairman Cocking closed the public hearing. Motion: Upon a motion by 1st Vice -Chair Trahan and a second by Commissioner Hollingsworth, the Commission voted 4 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to recommend approval of the request to amend portions of Planned Development PD No. 92, generally located south of Sam Rayburn Tollway and east of Watters Road, to add "Office Use" and "Medical and Dental Office" use for Star Creek, with the additional condition of similar architectural and material styling on the site. The motion carried. Commissioner Mangrum returned to her seat at the Commission dais. June 21, 2016 8 Public Hearing — Conduct a Public Hearing and consider a request to amend the development regulations of Planned Development No. 105 and adopt a Concept Plan and Building Elevations relating to the Property The Property is a 20.592± acre portion of Planned Development PD No. 105 located in the D. Nix Survey, Abstract No. 668, the M. See Survey, Abstract No 543, and the T Kennedy Survey, Abstract No. 500, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas: and generally located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Alma Drive and Bethany Drive. (Z-4/12/16-29) [Connemara Crossing] Mr. Bo Bass, Director of Community Development, presented the item to the Commission. He stated that the item is a public hearing and PD amendment for PD -105 to modify the development regulations, adopt a Concept Plan, and Building Elevations for Connemara Crossing. The property is generally located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Alma Drive and Bethany Drive. The property to the north is zoned Planned Development PD No. 26 Single -Family Residential SF The property to the west (across Alma Drive) is zoned Planned Development PD No 105 Single - Family Residential R-6. The properties to the south (across Bethany Drive) are zoned Planned Development PD No. 105 Mixed -Use MIX and Planned Development PD No. 96 Single -Family Residential R-4. To the east, the properties are zoned Planned Development PD No. 26 Single -Family Residential SF and Planned Development PD No. 76 Single -Family Residential R-5. Mr. Bass said that the property is 20.591 acres, and is currently zoned Planned Development PD No. 105 Mixed -Use MIX. When the zoning was initially approved, it allowed mixed uses including townhomes, small -lot single family, and retail/office uses. Mr. Bass said this is one of the last remaining pieces of Montgomery Farms. Mr. Bass presented the original Concept Plan (2010) and explained, again, that the uses permitted included townhome lots, retail, single-family homes, and parking on the comer. This plan was true mixed-use with single-family and non-residential uses. There is a right to develop those uses right now. This proposal is much different. The plan is changing from townhomes and non-residential uses to detached single-family uses. Mr. Bass presented the Concept Plan and said there are two access points into the development: one access point on Bethany Drive, and one access point on Alma Drive. The only off-site improvement includes a southbound left turn lane on Alma Drive, which will be constructed by the developer Mr. Bass stated that there are two types of single-family detached lots. The Concept Plan shows a total of 78± front and rear entry lots with two product types. Approximately 29 units (38% of the total lots) will be Product Type A, which are 55'X130' front -entry lots. Approximately 49 units (62% of the total lots) will be Product Type B, which are 31'X105' rear -entry lots. Mr. Bass went through the Development Regulations: -Base Zoning District: R-7 - Concept Plan. The property shall be developed in general conformance with the Concept Plan - Building Elevations: The exterior fagades of buildings shall generally conform with the Building Elevations. Additionally - Maximum Height: 2'/, stories or 35' - All Type A Front -entry - All Type B: Rear -entry - Lot Design Criteria 1. Minimum Dwelling Unit Size: 1,800 square feet 2. Maximum Dwelling Units/Acre: 3.8 June 21, 2016 3, Maximum Lot Coverage: 65% - Garages: - 20' from rear lot line to face of garage wall (with built in articulation as the house will not be a "single plane' - 20' from front lot line or 20' from the closest edge of the sidewalk to face of garage wall (whichever is greater) - Front Porches of 31' lots. May not encroach more than 10' beyond front setback line - Screening: Mr Bass presented the screening on the Concept Plan. He explained that an eight -foot masonry screening wall will be provided along Bethany Drive and Alma Drive, primarily along the residential lots. An eight - foot board -on -board fence will be provided along the rear property line. Additionally, an alternative screening method will be used for the remaining Community Reserve Areas along Bethany Drive and Alma Drive Alternative Screening has been very successful at Montgomery Farms. Alternative screening would consist of berms, tube -steel or wrought -iron, or a living wall (tube steel with trellises). Staff would work with the applicant on a case-by-case basis regarding alternative screening. - Floodplain Regulation: The lot layout and developable area is contingent upon the developer proving that the floodplain reconfiguration complies with City regulations - Thoroughfares and Streets: Internal ROW to be minimum of 45' - Street Improvements Median on Alma Drive to be modified to add a southbound left turn lane for Street E. - Street Lighting: LED luminaries may be used as street lighting through a Developer agreement with the City to maintain, repair, and replace non-standard street lighting - Flexible Design Standards: The Concept Plan is very general and organic and the finer details may not work during the later development review stages. Rather than take the plan back through the public 1 hearing process, if the changes are not major, then a team of staff (including the Director of Community Development, Director of Engineering, Director of Parks and Recreation, and occasionally the Building Official) could approve the minor changes. This would enable additional creativity. Mr. Bass went over the budding elevations and presented photographs. He stated that the photographs may not exactly represent the lot sizes and product types, but show elements such as keystone arches, soldier course brick, peak roofs, and multiple planes. The elevations provide a design guide for materials and architectural style to ensure the product will be built as shown. Chairman Cocking opened the public hearing. Chairman Cocking closed the public hearing. Chairman Cocking said that five letters were received' - K. Wesley Davis, 1234 Irvine Drive, Allen, Texas — Oppose - Edgar Halpher, 512 Irvine Drive, Allen, Texas — Support - Trent Armstrong, 1233 Covina Court, Allen, Texas — Support - Robert Kowlaski, 407 Irvine Drive, Allen, Texas — Support - Richard Golden, 1226 Philip Drive, Allen, Texas — Support Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Mangrum and a second by 2nd Vice -Chair Platt, the Commission voted 5 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to recommend 1 approval of the request to amend the development regulations of Planned Development No. 105 and adopt a Concept Plan and Building Elevations relating to the Property, generally located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Alma Drive and Bethany Drive, for Connemara Crossing. June 21, 2016 The motion carried. 9 Public Hearing — Conduct a Public Hearing and consider a request to amend the base zoning of Planned Development PD No. 5 from Shopping Center SC to Multi -Family Residential District MF - 18, and adopt a Concept Plan, Development Regulations, Landscape Plan, and Building Elevations, being 6.5571 acres located in the Peter Wetsel Survey, Abstract No. 990, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas; generally located on the northwest comer of Main Street and Fountain Gate Drive. (Z - 8/l/14 -53) [Fountain Gate Senior Living] Ms. Madhuri Kulkami, Senior Planner, presented the item to the Commission. She stated that the item is a public hearing and a PD Amendment for Fountain Gate Senior Living. The property is generally located on the northwest comer of Main Street and Fountain Gate Drive. The property to the north is zoned Single -Family Residential District R-5. The property to the west is zoned Planned Development PD No. 5 Shopping Center SC. To the south (across Main Street), the property is zoned Community Facilities CF To the east (across Fountain Gate Drive), the property is zoned Local Retail LR. Ms. Kulkaini said that the property is currently zoned Planned Development PD No. 5 Shopping Center SC. The applicant is proposing to change the base zoning of the Planned Development to Multi -Family Residential (MF -18). In addition, Development Regulations, a Concept Plan, Landscape Plan, Open Space Exhibit, and Building Elevations will also be adopted for the property with this request. Ms. Kulkami pointed out that even though the zoning request is for multi -family, the buildings will be one-story Further, the property will be age restricted and developed and used for Senior Independent Living use for individuals fifty-five years of age or older. The property has been vacant over a long time. Ms Kulkami explained that the zoning pattern in the area along Main Street is considered strip zoning. This made more sense in the 1970s. However, this is now a remnant piece, and is not a prime location for retail. Retail can still be built, but taking away the retail piece does not cause a determent to the City In the past, the property was considered for single-family, but for some reason, was not feasible. This leaves multi -family and at one-story, for which staff is supportive. The property is roughly 6 6f acres. The Concept Plan shows thirteen buildings with a total of 92 residential units and a clubhouse/amentiy center. Ms. Kulkarni said that there are two access points into the development. Access to the property is provided primarily from Main Street. A secondary (emergency access only) access point is on Fountain Gate Drive. A total of 138 parking spaces are provided at a parking ratio of 1.5 spaces/unit; this requirement meets ALDC standards. Screening for the property will consist of an eight foot masonry screeing wall along the entire perimeter of the development (northern, eastern, southern, and western property lines). The Concept Plan and Open Space Exhibit show several usable open space areas integrated throughout the site totaling 1.94 acres, exceeding the minimum open space requirement. The developer has strategically included many different amenities for the seniors, including walking trails with benches, a dog park, putting green, picnic areas, and garden areas. June 21. 2016 There are three types of buildings which are one story with a maximum height of 17.8' This is primarily to be sensitive to the residential neighborhood to the north. The building elevations show brick and stone as the primary exterior budding materials with standing seam metal roofing. Ms. Kulkami summarized the development regulations: - Base Zoning District: MF -18 - Permitted Uses: Senior Independent Living use for people 55+ - Deed RestrictionsSite Plan shall not be approved until restrictive covenants have been approved by the City Attorney, restricting the use of the property to residential uses by people fifty-five (55) years of age or older - Concept Plan, Building Elevations, Landscape Plan: The property shall be developed in general conformance with the plans presented - Open Space Exhibit: The property shall be developed in general conformance with the Open Space Exhibit, with no less than 1.94 acres of open space - Setbacks: - Front Yard Setback: 25 feet -Rear Yard Setback: 50 feet -Minimum Lot Coverage: 26% - Maximum Dwelling Units/Acre: 14.03 units/acre - Minimum Dwelling Unit Size: 699 sq. ft. - Screening: Screening on the Property shall be developed in general conformance with the Concept Plan (8' masonry wall on the entire perimeter). No CO's will be granted until the screening wall is complete and acceptable to the Building Official Ms. Kulkami said that the request has been reviewed by the Technical Review Committee. Chairman Cocking opened the public hearing Chairman Cocking closed the public hearing Chairman Cocking said one letter of opposition for the item was received: Thomas David, 1003 Draycot Court, Allen, Texas. Chairman Cocking said there is a similar type of property on the western side of Allen which is in high demand. There is a huge waiting list for one-story apartment dwellings. This is a nice addition to the City in an area that has extreme demand. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Hollingsworth and a second by Commissioner Mangrum, the Commission voted 5 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED to recommend approval of the request to amend the base zoning of Planned Development PD No. 5 from Shopping Center SC to Multi - Family Residential District MF -18, and adopt a Concept Plan, Development Regulations, Landscape Plan, and Building Elevations, for Fountain Gate Senior Living, generally located on the northwest corner of Main Street and Fountain Gate Drive. The motion carried. Commissioner Mangrum reminded everyone about Celebrate Allen this Saturday. June 21, 2016 Chairman Cocking congratulated Ms. Kulkarni on her promotion from Planner to Senior Planner. Executive Session (As Needed) As authorized by Section 551.071(2) of the Texas Government Code, this meeting may be convened into closed Executive Session for the purpose of seeking confidential legal advice from the City Attorney on any agenda item listed herein. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:34 p.m. The mii a ap oved this day of t, `.� 2016. Jefr*111hairman Madhuri Kulkami, AICP, Senior Planner CI Director's Report from 6/14//2016 City Council Meeting • There were no items taken to the June 14, 2016 City Council Meeting. I I June 21, 2016