03.18.2014 P&Z MinutesTOWN OF
PR SPER
Prosper is a place where everyone matters.
1. Call to Order / Roll Call.
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 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 18, 2014, 6:00 p.m.
Commissioners present included: Chair Mark DeMattia, Vice Chair Mike McClung, Secretary Rick
Turner, Bruce Carlin, Craig Moody, and Bill Senkel.
*Commissioner Keith informed of his absence prior to the meeting.
Staff present included: Hulon Webb, Executive Director of Development & Community Services; Alex
Glushko, Senior Planner; and Melanie Videan, Planning Technician.
2. Recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA
3a. Consider and act upon minutes from the following Planning & Zoning Commission
meeting:
• March 4, 2014 Regular Meeting
3b. 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).
Motioned by Carlin, seconded by Turner to approve the consent agenda subject to staffs
recommendations. Motion approved 6-0 at 6:03 p.m.
REGULAR AGENDA
4. Conduct a Public Hearing, and consider and act upon a request for a Specific Use Permit
(SUP) for a Child Day Care Center, on 2.3t acres, located on the east side of Coit Road,
800f feet north of First Street. The property is zoned Retail (R). (S14-0001).
Summary
Glushko: Summarized the zoning of surrounding properties and the Specific Use Permit (herein called a
SUP) request, noting the layout, building size, parking, solid living screen in lieu of a masonry wall, the
types of trees and shrubs at the time of planting, and the architectural rendering, which will be required to
meet town standards. Briefed on the request's compatibility with adjacent uses and conformity with the
Future Land Use Plan. Informed notification was given in accordance with state law, and the Planning
Division received one public hearing notice reply form in opposition to the request, though the property
Page 1 of 4
owner in opposition is outside the 200 foot buffer zone of the approximate 2.3 acre portion of the property
that is requesting the SUP (herein called the subject property). Recommended approval.
Discussion with Staff
Carlin: Asked the following: 1) how long the SUP will be in effect, 2) if the four foot wrought iron
fence around the play area is high enough, 3) if the living screen will be irrigated, and 4) if the applicant
is requesting alternative screening through the SUP.
McClung: Inquired about the following: 1) the fencing inside the subject property, 2) if Common Area 2
is owned and maintained by the Greenspoint Homeowner's Association, and 3) the wooden fencing of the
adjacent single family lots.
Turner: Questioned if the subject property's living screen will be compatible with screening associated
with future development on the remainder of the retail tract to the south, as the SUP will have a living
screen and the retail portion will be required to have a masonry wall. Asked if the masonry wall for the
retail portion of the property will be directly against the single family wooden fences.
Glushko: Answering Carlin, noted the following: 1) SUP approval would be associated with the subject
property in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, 2) the four foot wrought iron fence height is the
minimum required by the Zoning Ordinance, 3) the living screen will be required to be irrigated, and 4)
the applicant is requesting alternative screening for the subject property through the SUP process.
Addressing McClung, confirmed the following: 1) there is no proposed perimeter fencing around the
subject property but wrought iron fencing is proposed around play areas inside the subject property's
perimeter, 2) the Greenspoint Homeowner's Association owns and maintains Common Area 2, and 3) the
single family lots abutting the subject property have varied height wooden fences ranging from six feet to
eight feet. Responding to Turner, confirmed a six to eight foot masonry wall would be required to be
located along the property line and will be required for the remaining retail portion of the property per the
Zoning Ordinance.
Motioned by Carlin, seconded by Moody to open the public hearing. Motion passed 6-0 at 6:14 p.m.
Public Hearina Discussion
Arlyn Samuelson (applicant): Informed he met with staff prior to submitting the SUP, and there was a
consensus regarding the living screen in lieu of a masonry wall, as a wall could be shorter than the single
family wooden fences. Outlined the wrought iron fence locations, noting chain -linked fencing will protect
play areas. Noted fencing requirements will be reviewed during the site plan process.
Carlin: Inquired about shade structures within play areas. Asked about the cost of a masonry screening
wall.
Malak Agha (property owner): Confirmed there are state regulations regarding shade structures. Noted
the cost of the Frisco facility's screening wall was approximately $40,000 to $50,000.
DeMattia: Inquired about the following: 1) the double stone columns in Exhibit D, 2) the architectural
materials for the remainder of the elevations, and 3) if the front of the building will face Coit Road.
Samuelson: Addressing DeMattia, confirmed the following: 1) the columns will be a stone product, but
that Exhibit D is a conceptual plan taken from the Frisco facility, 2) the building's remaining elevations
will adhere to town standards set in the Zoning Ordinance, and 3) the front fagade will face Coit Road.
Page 2 of 4
The Commission, applicant, representative, and staff further discussed building materials, roof materials,
and landscape spacing at the time of planting.
Agha: Noted the wrought iron fencing will be visible, while the powder -coated chain -linked fencing will
be located internally and will not be visible.
Turner: Asked staff for clarification that future development will be required to meet the non-residential
design and development standards in the Zoning Ordinance. Concerned language in the staff report
suggests the subject property is exempt from certain development standards of the designated zoning.
Glushko: Clarified the SUP is not locking in building materials but provides a conceptual architectural
style for future development, which will be required to adhere to all architectural standards in the Zoning
Ordinance.
Motioned by Carlin, seconded by McClung to close the public hearing. Motion passed 6-0 at 6:27 p.m.
Commission Discussion
McClung: Voiced support, as the use conforms with the Future Land Use Plan and is less intense than
other potential uses.
Turner: Concerned how long it will take the living screen to mature and if it will affect the existing
residential fences.
Glushko: Ensured the Town's landscape architect will review landscaping at the time of planting.
Carlin: Concerned areas between residential fencing and the solid living screen will become a hang-out
area for neighborhood kids and teenagers. Suggested extending the wrought iron fence to the residential
wooden fences and installing gates so the property owner can have access to those areas.
Agha: Agreed to extend the fencing and install gates to prohibit access between residential fencing and
the solid living screen.
DeMattia: Voiced support for the SUP. Asked the applicant if she would be willing to lock -down the
materials shown on Exhibit D, specifically 100% stone for the front elevation facing Coit Road, as well as
stone from the ground up to the stone sill on the remaining sides.
Agha: Agreed to the architectural materials.
Motioned by Turner, seconded by McClung to approve a request for a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a
Child Day Care Center, on 2.3f acres, located on the east side of Coit Road, 800± feet north of First
Street subject to the following: 1) the front fagade facing Coit Road shall be 100% stone, 2) the
remaining facades shall be stone from the ground up to the stone sill, and 3) wrought iron fencing and
access gates shall be provided at both the northwest and southeast ends of the landscaping setback.
Motion approved 6-0 at 6:42 p.m.
Page 3 of 4
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
Glushko: Relayed applicant's request to table items 5 and 6 to the April 1, 2014 Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting.
Motioned by Carlin, seconded by Turner to table item 5 to the April 1, 2014 Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting. Motion approved 6-0 at 6:44 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/MF/O/R/C/
n•
Motioned by Carlin, seconded by Turner to table item 6 to the April 1, 2014 Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting. Motion approved 6-0 at 6:44 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 Carlin, seconded by Moody to adjourn. Motion approved 6-0.
Meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m.
. l
Melanie Videan, Planning Technician �ick_�iurner, Secretary
Page 4 of 4