Loading...
03.04.2014 P&Z MinutesPIISPER OWN OF Prosper is a place where everyone matters. 1. Call to Order / Roll Call. The meeting was called to order at 6:02 p.m. Roll call taken by Melanie Videan, Planning Technician. MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Prosper Planning & Zoning Commission 108 W. Broadway St., Prosper, Texas Town of Prosper Municipal Chambers Tuesday, March 4, 2014, 6:00 p.m. Commissioners present included: Chair Mark DeMattia, Vice Chair Mike McClung, Secretary Rick Turner, Bruce Carlin, Craig Moody, Bill Senkel, and Chris Keith. Staff present included: Chris Copple, Director of Development Services; Alex Glushko, Senior Planner; and Melanie Videan, Planning Technician. 2. Recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Carlin pulled the second 3e item regarding at site plan for Rogers Middle School Temporary Buildings. 3a. Consider and act upon minutes from the following Planning & Zoning Commission meeting: February 18, 2014 Regular Meeting 3b. Consider and act upon a site plan for Reynolds Middle School Temporary Buildings, on 74.0± acres, located on the east side of Coleman Street, 1,600f feet south of Prosper Trail. The property is zoned Single Family-15 (SF-15). (D14-0003). 3c. Consider and act upon a site plan for Rucker Elementary Temporary Buildings, on 20.0± acres, located on the west side of Craig Road, 400f feet south of First Street. The property is zoned Single Family-15 (SF-15). (D14-0004). 3d. Consider and act upon a site plan for Folsom Elementary Temporary Buildings, on 10.0± acres, located on the southeast corner of Livingston Drive and Somerville Drive. The property is zoned Planned Development-6 (PD-6). (D14-0005). 3e. Consider and act upon a site plan for Cockrell Elementary Temporary Buildings, on 12.1f acres, located on the southwest corner of Escalante Trail and Prosper Trail. The property is zoned Planned Development-9 (PD-9). (D14-0006). 3e. Consider and act upon a site plan for Rogers Middle School Temporary Buildings, on 34.4f acres, located on the northeast corner of Coit Road and Richland Boulevard. The property is zoned Planned Development-25 (PD-25). (D14-0007). Page 1 of 7 Discussion Carlin: Concerned with the location of the temporary buildings, which forces students to walk across a parking lot. Suggested locating the temporary buildings along the south side of the school since exit doors exist on that side of the main building. Asked applicant if tabling the item would be acceptable. Danny Roberts (applicant): Noted the temporary buildings were placed according to water and sewer line locations, but tabling the item would allow him to inquire with the superintendant about relocating the temporary buildings. DeMattia: Inquired about the hashed property lines in the southern portion of the site plan. Copple: Explained a replat would be required to join the school's lot and the adjoining lot to become one lot in the future. Motioned by Carlin, seconded by Keith to table a site plan for Rogers Middle School Temporary Buildings, on 34.4f acres, located on the northeast corner of Coit Road and Richland Boulevard. Motion approved 7-0 at 6:09 p.m. 3f. Consider and act upon a preliminary plat of Preserve at Doe Creek, being 120 single family residential lots on 47.6f acres, located on the south side of Fishtrap Road, 1,400f feet east of F.M. 1385. The property is zoned Planned Development-53 (PD-53). (D14-0008). Motioned by Carlin, seconded by McClung to approve the balance of the consent agenda subject to staff s recommendations. Motion approved 7-0 at 6:03 p.m. REGULAR AGENDA 4. Conduct a Public Hearing, and consider and act upon a request to rezone 29.5f acres, located on the southeast corner of Coit Road and Frontier Parkway, from Agricultural (A) to 16.2f acres of Single Family-17.5 (SF-17.5) and 13.3f acres of Retail (R). (Z14-0004). Summary Glushko: Summarized the zoning of surrounding properties and the request to rezone. Confirmed the request is in conformance with the Future Land Use Plan (herein called the FLUP), which suggests retail and neighborhood service uses for the southeast corner of Coit Road and Frontier Parkway. Explained the FLUP shows retail and neighborhood services uses for the entire property; however, the applicant's request includes a single family residential buffer, separating the requested retail area from the Gentle Creek lots and the property to the east. Informed notification was given in accordance with state law, and the Planning Division received 22 public hearing notice reply forms, all in opposition, though only 7 replies were from property owners inside the 200 foot buffer zone of the subject property. Recommended approval. Discussion with Staff McClung: Asked for confirmation that the request is for straight zoning, not a planned development (herein called a PD). DeMattia: Asked for confirmation that Exhibit A will be included in the adopted ordinance. Inquired where the current home sits on the property and how many lots can fit inside the 16 acre single family residential tract. Page 2 of 7 Carlin: Responding to DeMattia, noted his estimation that lots may be approximately 166 feet wide by 150 feet long, leaving a pad site of 90 feet by 90 feet. Inquired about setbacks. Glushko: Addressing McClung, confirmed the request is for straight zoning. Answering DeMattia, showed the current home's location on the aerial exhibit, noted the minimum lot size for the single family residential tract is 17,500 square feet, and informed Exhibit A would be included in the adopted ordinance. To Carlin, cited the setback standards for the Single Family-17.5 district. Motioned by Carlin, seconded by Turner to open the public hearing. Motion passed 7-0 at 6:16 p.m. Public Hearing- Discussion Mardy Brown (applicant): Relayed his client wishes to provide a buffer between his current neighbors and the retail area, hence the requested residential area. Noted intentions to mimic the Gentle Creek lots in size; therefore, the lot count for the residential area is approximately 34. Carlin: Noted the Gentle Creek lots south of the subject property are approximately 19,000 to 20,000 square feet and questioned the applicant's choice of Single Family-17.5. Preferred larger rear and side setbacks and inquired with staff if the Commission can require larger setbacks. Brown: Addressing Carlin, informed that Single Family-17.5 was the best choice to match the Gentle Creek lots, as 17,500 square feet for a lot is the minimum. Noted a 90 foot by 90 foot pad site will allow for homes comparable to those in Gentle Creek. Copple: Answering Carlin, informed the Commission may only require larger setbacks if the request is a PD. McClung: Asked applicant for development timeframe and inquired about screening between the retail and proposed residential area. Carlin: Asked applicant if a subdivision entry sign will be constructed and inquired about elevation changes and fencing. Brown: Responding to McClung, preferred to keep timeframe options open and that screening will be in accordance with the Town's Zoning Ordinance. To Carlin, confirmed a residential entry sign will be constructed, the elevation change is minimum, and fencing requirements will be in accordance with the Town's Zoning Ordinance. David Snyder (Gentle Creek resident): Opposed the request to rezone. Cited the following concerns: 1) noise level at night, 2) increased traffic, 3) bright lights, 4) the intersection being incapable of supporting retail, 5) the wide variety of retail uses permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, 6) big box and/or neighborhood market retail being located at the intersection, especially without knowing what will be located on the Celina side of Frontier Parkway. Commented the 2004 Future Land Use Plan did not show retail on the subject corner, and residents moved there looking for quality of life. Reminded Commission the FLUP is a proposal, not an ordinance. Noted the Tollway Corridor, 380 Corridor, and Old Town Core Districts are more appropriate for retail uses. Stated the request for retail on the subject corner may be more appropriate after all other retail -zoned properties in town are developed. Carlin: Asked applicant about potential types of retail. Page 3 of 7 Brown: Assured big box retail is not being considered, but one option could be a mid to small -sized grocer, as such sized retail services are better fitted for the neighborhood services category, while Preston Road is more appropriate for intense uses. Dana Pelan (Gentle Creek resident): Concerned about the increase in traffic accidents, as the Coit/ Frontier intersection already experiences numerous accidents. Questioned the need for retail on this corner, given the existing retail zones a small distance south on Coit Road. Asked the Commission to review the Comprehensive Plan. Also noted the retail area is large and the back of a retail building will not be attractive for the residents to view from their homes. Michael Kays (Highland Meadows resident): Noted Coit Road's speed limit is 45 miles per hour and Frontier Parkway is 60 miles per hour. Informed he has seen CareFlight numerous times at that intersection, recently pulled a friend out of the ditch, and currently has an open records request submitted with the Town to research how many accidents have occurred at that intersection in the past three years. Recited pages from the Comprehensive Plan that support the residents' beliefs that retail should not be placed on the subject corner. Commented that 2% of retail space on the subject corner isn't worth the risk of more accidents. John Sefcik (Gentle Creek HOA member): Asked Commission to delay the applicant's request, as the intersection is dangerous and residents would like to review housing designs. Theresa Williams (Gentle Creek resident): Voiced the following concerns: 1) safety of intersection, 2) traffic congestion, 3) lack of buffer between Gentle Creek residents and proposed residential area, and 4) that 17,500 square foot lots are too small for the area. Heather Jones (Highland Meadows resident): Concerned about one acre lots being too close to retail without a buffer and with bright lighting. Also concerned about the dangerous intersection. Scott Clayton (Gentle Creek resident): Concerned about traffic safety, as he has witnessed about one accident a month. Preferred the following: 1) larger residential lots, 2) a larger buffer, 3) larger setbacks, 4) single story homes in the proposed residential area, 5) upgraded fencing, and 6) to see proposed home elevations. Carlin: Asked Mr. Clayton if there is a wrought iron fence between the Gentle Creek residences and the subject property. Clayton: Confirmed the current fencing is wrought iron. David Cochran (Highland Meadows resident): Questioned the property owner's timing to rezone the property to retail. Concerned about the safety of the intersection. Jianming Zheng (adjacent property owner): Shared the concerns of the previous speakers, noting specifically that retail will increase traffic counts at the intersection and create a more dangerous intersection. Motioned by Carlin, seconded by Moody to close the public hearing. Motion passed 7-0 at 6:44 p.m. Commission Discussion McClung: Asked staff what the minimum lot size and dwelling size is for Gentle Creek. Page 4 of 7 Glushko: Answering McClung, noted Gentle Creek has subzones, a couple of which with 2,750 square feet and 3,500 square feet minimum. DeMattia: Asked staff questions about Frontier Parkway and temporary turn lanes. Copple: Informed of the following: 1) Coit Road and Frontier Parkway are planned as 6 lane divided thoroughfares; 2) Frontier Parkway is owned and maintained by TxDOT; 3) TxDOT is responsible for the speed limit and/or a stop light, and requires certain warrants to be met; and 4) When retail is developed at the subject corner, the Town's Engineering Department will work with TxDOT to ensure driveways, median openings, turn lanes, et cetera meet the design criteria. Regarding temporary turn lanes, stated they are not a TxDOT requirement, but a Traffic Impact Analysis will be required by TxDOT for the driveway opening. Carlin: Commented the retail area is distanced from the Gentle Creek residents, and once developed, speed limits will likely be lowered but acknowledged the current speed limit does create a hazard. Preferred larger setbacks and for the request to be a PD. Voiced non-support if the request does not change to a PD. Brown: Preferred to keep the request as straight zoning. Reiterated the proposed residential area is meant to serve as a buffer to the Gentle Creek residents. Noted market conditions will determine the dwelling size and that roadway conditions such as speed limit and traffic signals are engineering issues, not zoning issues. Senkel: Appreciated the applicant's willingness to work with residents and provide distanced between the retail area from the Gentle Creek residents. Noted that 10 years from now, the subject corner will be retail and the Comprehensive Plan supports such a use. Voiced support, but maintained reservation regarding the intersection safety issue. McClung: Voiced support. Acknowledged the applicant could've requested retail for the entire property, according to the FLUP; therefore, the residential buffer is an acceptable concession. Believed the residential area will be compatible with the Gentle Creek lots and elevations. Commented the Commission cannot address safety issues, as those must be investigated by the Town's Engineering Department and TxDOT. Reiterated the Commission's task. Turner: Voiced confliction — while the current FLUP shows retail on the subject corner, the 2004 FLUP did not. Noted the Town does not want retail on all corners, as one sees in Frisco and Plano. Supported the proposed land use and buffer between the retail area and the Gentle Creek residents. Believed the developer will not build homes that will devalue their investment or the investment of neighboring property owners. Keith: Noted intersection safety concern but that they'll likely be solved in time. Liked the residential buffer, and commented that the request conforms to the FLUP. Moody: Concerned about the intersection's safety. Agreed the Commission's task involves land use, not engineering issues. Commented the request conforms to the FLUP. Believed market conditions will dictate home sizes, but preferred subdivision signage and setbacks be held to a higher standard. Also preferred the request be altered to a PD. DeMattia: Thanked the residents for attending and participating in the discussion. For the audience, explained the concepts of straight zoning versus a PD, the process of zoning approval, and Commission's role in that process. Informed that with the public hearing notice reply forms calculating to over 20% Page 5 of 7 opposition, the applicant will need a super majority vote from Council to have the request approved. Supported tabling the item to allow communication between the applicant and the neighboring residents. Carlin: Asked applicant why he prefers to not alter his request to a PD. Brown: Answering Carlin, explained that PDs allow for negotiations, and negotiations can hinder a property's ability to be successfully developed. Cited Saddle Creek Commercial as an example and noted he's seen such examples in other cities. Assured the property owner does not wish to damage his own residential investment, and will therefore not allow unattractive retail. Stated the standards in the Town's zoning districts should be adequate. Copple: Explained the zoning on the subject property at the time the FLUP was created. Motioned by Carlin, seconded by DeMattia to table item 4 to the March 18, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Motion failed 3-4 at 7:10 p.m. with Commissioners Senkel, McClung, Turner, and Keith in opposition to the motion. Motioned by McClung, seconded by Senkel to approve a request to rezone 29.5± acres, located on the southeast corner of Coit Road and Frontier Parkway, from Agricultural (A) to 16.2f acres of Single Family-17.5 (SF-17.5) and 13.3f acres of Retail (R). Motion approved 5-2 with Carlin and Moody being in opposition to the motion. Moody cited no issues with the proposed land use, but preferred additional restrictions on architectural design and permitted uses. Carlin also had no issues with the proposed land use, but preferred the applicant work with the surrounding homeowners and alter the request to a PD so lot sizes, setbacks, and permitted uses can be addressed. Copple: Informed the audience and Commission that a public hearing for this request will be held at the March 25, 2014 Town Council meeting. 5. Conduct a Public Hearing, and consider and act upon a request to rezone 878.9f acres, located on the southeast and southwest corners of Prosper Trail and Dallas Parkway, from Planned Development-3 (PD-3), Planned Development-14 (PD-14), Planned Development-23 (PD-23), Planned Development-34 (PD-34), Single Family-10 (SF-10), Single Family-12.5 (SF-12.5), Office (0), and Commercial Corridor (CC) to Planned Development -Single Family/Office/Retail (PD-SF/O/R). (Z13-0018). Summary Copple: Relayed applicant's request to table items 5 and 6 to the March 18, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Motioned by Carlin, seconded by McClung to table item 5 to the March 18, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Motion approved 7-0 at 7:14 p.m. 6. Conduct a Public Hearing, and consider and act upon a request to rezone 621.1f acres, located on the northeast and northwest corners of U.S. 380 and Preston Road, from Planned Development-2 (PD-2), Planned Development-3 (PD-3), Planned Development-13 (PD-13), Agricultural (A), and Single Family-15 (SF-15) to Planned Development -Single Family- 10/Townhome/Multifamily/Office/Retail/Commercial/Industrial (PD-SF-10/TH/NIF/O/R/C/ D. Page 6 of 7 Motioned by Carlin, seconded by McClung to table item 6 to the March 18, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Motion approved 7-0 at 7:14 p.m. 7. Possibly direct Town Staff to schedule topic(s) for discussion at a future meeting. There was no discussion on this item. 8. Adjourn Motioned by Keith, seconded by Carlin to adjourn. Motion approved 7-0. Meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. N elanie V ean, Planning Technicia n wick Turn Secretary Page 7 of 7