Loading...
Min - Planning and Zoning Commission - 2006 - 07/18 - RegularPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting July 18, 2006 CITY OF ALLEN ATTENDANCE: Commissioners Present: Alan Grimes James Rushing Jeff Cocking Robert Wendland Douglas Dreggors Steve Shaffer Marcelle Jones Commissioners Absent: City Staff Present: David A. Hoover, Planning Director Lee Battle, Assistant Director of Planning Kellie Wilson, Planning Technician Kent Mcllyar, Attorney Dennis Abraham, Civil Engineer Regular Agenda Call to Order and Announce a Quorum is Present: With a quorum of the Commissioners present, Chairman Wendland 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 July 11, 2006, City Council Action The Council passed a resolution approving the 2006-2007 CDBG Action Plan. Consent Agenda Agenda Item 1: Approve Minutes of June 20, 2006, Regular Meeting. Agenda Item 2: Final Plat — Consider a Final Plat for Abbey Hill Office Park, being 10.144± acres located at the southwest comer of FM2551 and E. Main Street Agenda Item 3: Consider a Final Plat for Twin Creeks Phase 6C, being 10.613± acres located northeast of McDermott Drive and Shallowater Drive. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 2 July 18, 2006 Agenda Item 4: Consider a Final Plat for Twin Creeks Phase 8C, being 20.435± acres located west of Exchange Parkway and east of Walnut Springs Drive. Agenda Item 5: Consider a Final Plat for Twin Creeks Phase 8D, being 10.279± acres located southeast of Bridgewater Drive and Waterdown Drive. Agenda Item 6: Consider a Final Plat for StarCreek Phase Two Residential Development, being 41.778± acres located east of Watters Road and south of Ridgeview Drive, north of Stacy Road. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Grimes and a second by Commissioner Rushing, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion carried. Reeular Aeenda Agenda Item 7: Conduct a Public Hearing and consider an amendment to PD Planned Development No. 3, Tract A, to modify the setbacks from 25 feet to 10 feet (side yard) and from 50 feet to 5 feet (rear yard). The property is 2.1487± acres situated in the William Perrin Survey, Abstract No. 708, City of Allen, Collin County, Texas, located at 205 E. Bethany Drive. Mr. Battle presented the request to the Commission. He explained that the Applicant (Metroplex Gymnastics) wants to build an Olympic gymnastics training center on the site. The current zoning requires a rear setback of 50 feet and a side yard setback of 25 feet. A training facility of this type requires a much larger building than can be built within these setbacks. The Applicant is requesting a 5 foot rem setback and a 10 foot side yard setback. This request would establish setbacks more in line with the adjacent properties. Because of the new construction, the Applicant will be required to bring all landscaping up to the current Code. Applicant has stated they plan to renovate the entire facility Mr. Battle also explained that with the expansion, the Applicant will be required to obtain a shared parking agreement with an adjacent property owner to meet the Code requirements for required parking. He reminded the Commission that the request for rezoning does not include the parking requirement. This will be done at site plan approval. Mr. Battle stated that the Applicant will not be able to obtain a building permit until the parking meets Code. He also explained to the Commission that the required puking was generally more suited to family type gyms with much more of a cross section of attendees and not true gymnastic arenas designed for gymnastic training. These specialized gyms have very little parking requirements because of the limited amount of students and the large areas required inside for each student's training. The additional parking would rarely if ever be used. Commissioner Rushing asked if the parking could be closer to Bethany Mr. Battle responded that because of the large landscape buffer required on Bethany, and the irregular shape of the front property area, there wouldn't be enough space to make that much of a difference. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION July 18, 2006 PAGES Chairman Wendland opened the Public Hearing. Dennis Sheridan (spoke against) ➢ Agent for the property owner to the north of this site. He stated that his client has not agreed to any parking arrangement, and he objected to the site plan illustrating that there was an agreement. His client was concerned with a blank white wall facing their building in the back. Allowing for the 5 foot setback diminishes their property value. Mr. Sheridan also stated in his opinion, the current arrangement does not provide the required fire lane. A reduced setback presents fire and safety concerns. Sandy Streeter (owner of Metroplex Gymnastics — spoke for) ➢ With the renovation, they will enclose the existing pool, therefore able to offer swimming year round. Bryan Streeter (owner of Metroplex Gymnastics — spoke for) ➢ Mr. Streeter stated that by approving this request, they will be able to bring Olympic training to Allen. Currently, athletes at this level are required to travel to other gyms outside of Allen for their training. Joe King (Architect for Metroplex Gymnastics — spoke for) ➢ Mr. King stated that he has discussed with Staff the landscaping requirements, and that they intend to not only meet the current Code, but place some landscaping on the back wall that faces the northern property owner. It will possibly be a tree and flowerbed area to offset the blank wall. He stated there are currently three (3) rows of parking between the two (2) properties. His client does want to connect to the existing fire lane, and this was the proposal on the table to the property owner to the north. Mr. King stated that he has prepared a parking lot study of similar facilities in Allen. ASI Gymnastics had the largest number of cars at one time — 46. Commissioner Shaffer asked about the building materials. Mr. Barton responded stating that the building will he similar to the one in the rendering they received, constructed with split faced concrete blocks. There will be a window on the east side of the building. Also, with the renovation, they will be changing the color of the existing building. Commissioner Dreggors asked about specifics of the landscaping. Mr. King responded that there will be crepe myrtles or a large flowering plant on the north side. On the west side they may place Live Oaks. They also want plants that will stay green year round. Mr. King did say that the landscape plan has not been finalized at this stage. They will have a complete landscape plan when they submit their site plan. Charles Edwards (spoke against) ➢ Mr. Edwards works for the owner of the property in back. He stated the zoning should not be considered until an agreement has been made. Mr. Edwards stated that he also wanted input on the design of the next phase. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION July 18, 2006 17["9[7 Chairman Wendland closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Dreggors asked about the overhead lines located in the easement at the rem of the property line. Mr. Battle stated that the easement in back was only partially on this property He also stated that the Code would not allow for construction in an easement. In response to the fire lane, Mr. Battle stated it would improve fire protection if the Fre lanes were connected; however, the fire lane on the property to the north could still be accessed by the Fire Department whether they were connected or not. Commissioner Shaffer asked about the required number of parking spaces. Mr. Battle stated they are required to have 330 spaces for a building of this size. However, the use does not need this many spaces due to the specific nature of its clientele. The 330 requirement is designed for the family style gym/work out facility Currently, the Applicant has 91 existing parking spaces. Commissioner Cocking inquired about the landscaping that is required and whether the Applicant would be required to landscape the northern wall. Mr. Battle stated that they are not required to landscape in the back. Commissioner Cocking asked if a sidewalk adjacent to the building would be required. Mr. Battle stated that the sidewalk is not required. The Commission asked if the firelane could be gated at the property line. Mr. Battle stated that the could be gated; however, it cannot be gated if it is used for shared puking. Commissioner Grimes stated that he could not vote for the request unless there was an approved parking agreement. Chairman Wendland stated he had no objections to the request moving forward knowing that they cannot get a site plan approved if they do not get a shared parking agreement. Commissioner Cocking stated he was concerned that there was not a sidewalk adjacent to the building. The students will be required to walk through the busy parking lot to enter the gyms. Mr. Hoover addressed the Commission. He stated that under current standards, adjacent properties are required to have connecting fire lanes in the mutual access lanes. He also stated that by Code, 80% of the required parking can be up to 500 feet away All of the additional parking will be during major events. Mr. Hoover reminded the Commission that the setback request is the only thing that is being requested for an amendment. It was all that was noticed in the paper and all of the other provisions currently in the PD or in The Allen Land Development Code would be followed. Mr. Hoover asked the Commission if the parking was their only concern. He wanted to be able to give the Applicant enough direction as to what would be needed for the next meeting for the PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 5 July 18, 2006 Commission to make a recommendation. The consensus was that the parking was the only obstacle. However, Commissioner Jones stated she would like to see enhanced landscaping along the northern property line. There was no further discussion, and the consensus was to wait until the next meeting to see if the Applicant could resolve the parking situation. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Grimes and a second by Commissioner Dreggors, the Commission voted 6 IN FAVOR and 1 OPPOSED, with Chairman Wendland casting the opposing vote, to table Agenda Item Number 7 to the August 1, 2006, meeting. The motion carried. Agenda Item 8: Replat/Public Hearing — Conduct a Public Hearing and consider a Replat for Lot IR, Block A, of the Suncreek United Methodist Church II, being 12.252± acres of land located at the southwest corner of McDermott Drive and Suncreek Drive. Chairman Wendland recused himself from the agenda item, and did not participate in the discussion or decision. 1 st Vice Chair Rushing acted as Chair for this item. Mr. Battle presented the plat to the Commission. He stated that the church has purchased the property adjacent to their existing location — they are replatting the property to include this new tract of land. Commissioner Grimes asked if the Fire Marshal had approved the firelanes. Mr. Battle stated yes, and that minor adjustments may be needed with future development. Ist Vice Chair Rushing opened the Public Hearing. There was no one present to speak for or against the request. I st Vice Chair Rushing closed the public hearing. The Commissioners had no additional questions, and felt that the plat met all requirements provided in the Allen Land Development Code. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Grimes and a second by Commissioner Jones, the Commission voted 6 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED, with Chairman Wendland abstaining, to recommend approval of Agenda Item S. The motion carried. Agenda Item 9: Consider a Revised Preliminary Plat for Custer-Hedgcoxe Addition No. 2, Lot 5, Block A, being a replat of Lots 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block A, Custer- Hedgcoxe Addition No. 2, being 7 4892± acres of land located at the northeast comer of Custer Road and Hedgcoxe Road. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 6 July 18, 2006 Mr. Battle presented the plat to the Commission. The reason for the change is to modify some of the on-site frrelanes and access easements. Also, the Applicant has purchased the lot at the comer of Custer and Hedgcoxe and wants to add it to the Revised Preliminary Plat. The Commission liked the plat and appreciated the addition of the comer lot to the plat. They had no additional comments, and felt that the plat met all requirements provided in the Allen Land Development Code. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Grimes and a second by Commissioner Rushing, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED, to approve Agenda Item 9. The motion carried. Agenda Item 10: Consider a Preliminary Plat for the Villas at Morgan Crossing being 15.866± acres of land located east of FM 2551 and south of the future Chaparral Drive. Mr. Battle presented the plat to the Commission. The preliminary plat is in conformance with the approved Concept and General Development Plans. In order to give the development a unique look, the Developer has included some one-way streets. The Commission discussed and agreed the plat met all requirement provided in the Allen Land Development Code. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Grimes and a second by Commissioner Rushing, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED, to approve Agenda Item 10. The motion carried. Agenda Item 10: Consider a Combination Plat for Twin Creeks Business Center, Lot 1, Block A, being 12.115+ acres located west of the intersection of Watters and Rain Tree Circle. Mr. Hoover presented the plat to the Commission Commissioner Rushing asked if the Developer was aware of FAA regulations regarding Kitty Hawk. Mr. Hoover stated yes they were, and the buildings will be only one story, although the height may be the same as that of two story buildings. But nothing being proposed would be FAA restricted. The Commissioners discussed the item and their consensus was that the proposed development complements the developments in the surrounding area. Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Shaffer and a second by Commissioner Rushing, the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR, and 0 OPPOSED, to approve Agenda Item 11. The motion carried. [I PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PAGE 7 July 18, 2006 Upcoming Agenda Items: • Metroplex Gymnastics • In late August or September the 121 Land Use Plan should come back for consideration. • CIP Presentation Adiournment Motion: Upon a motion by Commissioner Dreggors and a second by Commissioner Shaffer the Commission voted 7 IN FAVOR and 0 OPPOSED to adjourn the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at 8:50 p.m. of 1� 2006. Kellie ikon, Planning Technician