The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning and Zoning Commission-Agenda Packets-5/23/2005 city or co ~ l'exaS AGENDA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION City Hall Council Chambers - 100 Main Street Monday, May 23, 2005 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Commissioners Thomas Dolan, David Dudziak, Thomas Bartkowski, Jeff Byerly, Luann Edwards, John Blassingame and Denis Duffy INVOCATION Commissioner Edwards PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 9, 2005 CITIZEN COMMENTS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. Case P-OS-013- Preliminary plat for Braemar Addition on 15.662 acres out of the B.B.B. and C.R.R. Survey, Abstract 211 and the A.T. Young Survey, Abstract 1756 located at 5000-5201 Fry Lane 2. Case P-OS-021- Preliminary plat for Alianne Estates Addition on 14 acres out of the T. White Survey, Abstract 1692 located at 512 and 600 Shelton Drive TABLED ITEMS STAFF COMMENTS. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS AND REPORTS Amy Sh y, Planning and Zoning Assistant Posted: Friday, May 20, 2005, 9:00 a.m. Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -May 23, 2005 Page 10f1 .~ Texas PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 9, 2005 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Byerly called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. CITIZEN COMME None Commissioners Thomas Thomas Bartkowski, Blassingame, Denis D present. Dave Dudziak, Edwards, John Jeff Byerly were ROLL CALL Barry LeBaron, Woods and Je INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Duffy qu minutes. Barry LeBar Commissioner Duffy Boulevard and Highwa the applicant Long Commissi with cO!: The motl Aye: Dola , Nay: None -012 ,'tabled as written in the pproved. 'n case P-05-012 stated at Colleyville the same. Barry LeBaron replied DING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. Case P-OS-010- Minor plat for McCurry Addition on 1.155 acres out of the S.C.H. Witten Survey, located at 5500 Montclair Chris Fuller presented the case and briefed the Commissioners. Commissioner Duffy stated and questioned staff, at 5500 Montclair there is not a house, but in the briefing it states there is a house, is there an existing house? Chris Fuller responded once the application was submitted, the applicant had the option to raise the house. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 1 of 11 Commissioner Byerly questioned staff if this is an existing tract that has never been platted? Chris Fuller replied correct. Commissioner Edwards made motion to approve case P-05-010. Commissioner Dolan seconded. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Edwards, Blassingame, Duffy and Byerly Nay: None Chris Fuller presented the case and briefed " Commissioner Edwards questioned sta fees being paid by the developer as t Barry LeBaron responded this is the preli ' the time of final platting. Commissioner Duffy stated ha ruction plans for the drainage improvements, the filing with ent, the filing of parkland dedication fees, the allowing of w back side facing the new school, time frame fo structio ents stated in developer letter to be submi ter tim f construction for all interior roads. Barry ded p d dedication fees will be done at final platting and t greed, will phase this over several phases and then pay thos t improv, nts are done at the time those lots are will front on Lav fi '. platting. By having the developer plat the I . ds , '. other improvements will come as the dev tru Robert Woods responded about drainage stating a en submitted and he is hoping to finish and give r at the end of the week. Robert Woods stated the een reased along the channel; it is to his understanding ents are to be done during the first phase. mented the letter from the developer states all drainage Baron replied correct; they plan to do all the improvements. singame questioned if the drainage will be done in a phase on 10.141 acres out of block of Precinct Line 2. Case P-05-017 - Preliminary plat for Meadows Cree the R.N. McEwing Survey, Abstract 1154, located Road Commiss improveme Commissioner process? Commissioner Byerly stated the applicant needs to specify when all the drainage improvements will be made. Commissioner Edwards questioned staff if building permits will not be issued until all drainage issues are completed? Robert Woods stated correct. Barry LeBaron stated not having to be final platted for the drainage plans, they indicate wanting to do all drainage at one time to be able to reclaim the property. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 2 of 11 Commissioner Byerly stated there being some confusion between the developer's letter and staffs briefings about when the drainage improvements would be completed, therefore the applicant will need to specify. Jimmie Archie, Realty Capital Corporation, the applicant briefed the Commission and presented his request and stated the channel improvements will be made during phase one for the drainage from our property. Then the two ponds would be constructed to handle the channel water, front pond durin phase 1 and then the back pond during the back phase. ' Commissioner Byerly stated for clarity that at no time ' what the area can manage? Mr. Archie replied corr, Commissioner Edwards questioned if the cha I to ho not increase it to the south. Mr. Archie replie channels ar handle the water that is currently flowing gh the property going to be constructed to handle any ater f10 that may b result in this development. This will allo 0 be a reclaim the side of the channel. Commissioner Duffy questione between Lavaca Trail and Eme to the south will want to continu begin immediately upon approval.' a year after the first Commissioner individually or lease Phase I. is nothing else p be an e to on the response letter to the City, comment 5, states to . ding line, is adequate, however, why did the City say t ? hie stated not knowing where the comment came fro ' standr g that the building could encroach the rear building line, ci , no windows or doors on those sides. Chris Fuller replied, the Plan pment states the set back the developers are providing is adequate p are no windows or doors on those sides. These comments were put ther' for the developer to address, not they were not in compliance. Commissioner Du stated if you have a door and you open the door, then you have encroached upon the 10 feet. What is the purpose of a door if you can't use it? Chris Fuller replied they have agreed and adequate windows and doors are allowed as long as the set back is not encroached upon. Barry LeBaron stated initially the developer just wanted to plat the one tract but because they own the whole tract, I told him the regulation states platting the whole property with a preliminary plat. They could have just done a preliminary plat with only two lots. Commercial platting is different than residential platting because in re be more water than the water flow and . g constructed to the ponds are eased as a on either s he going to connect the gap Archie stated the developers . responded Phase I would n by the market possibly ant if the lots are going to be sold hie stated having a potential business to tioned if Phase I is pre-leased but there dziak stated this kind of project will not e tax revenue. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 3 of 11 residential platting the developer knows how many lots to lie out, but it is not that way for commercial. The commercial plats are determined by the end consumer and this developer only has one end consumer. The developer has submitted a conceptual plan that shows drainage, access easements and lot configuration. Their consumers may change. At this point the developer is aware of all the drainage improvements that may be needed and they have stated they are going to address all the drainage at one time. This may help with explaining why the developer is deferring the ponds until they have customers, this pia ' ps the developer be aware of what may be needed and put them on notice could come back next week with a final plat, if they have customers. T y commercial is more difficult than residential. IS is another type of platting the past with other properties uirements and by law the C HEAR Final Plat of Lots 1 Rand 2, Block 1 of the lat of Lot 1, Block 1 of the K.I.S.D. Addition nd briefed the Commissioners. i'i ~~'it Co stionet1 staff if the twin cuts for Precinct Line Road have been ate? Barry LeBaron replied they do not have a plan for those. S t of frontage on Precinct Line Road, would qualify them for two curb c ey may never need two curbs. We indicated since they do not have a sp an, staff recommended cross access easements to the other properties. The','changed the plat to put a 24 foot access easement across the entire front of the property so that where ever a curb cut came in; it would be accessible to the properties to the north and south. Staff thought this would be good because this property could be put back on the tax rolls and benefit the city instead of being exempt. Commissioner Edwards questioned staff if there will not be any entrance from Precinct Line Road? Barry LeBaron stated correct. Commissioner Edwards stated all on McDonwell School Road. Barry LeBaron stated that is why they are widening McDonwell School Road. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 4 of 11 Commissioner Duffy questioned staff if the Fire Marshal stated the widening would be adequate? Barry LeBaron replied correct. Commissioner Byerly opened the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. There being no one wishing to speak the public hearing was closed at 7:42 p.m. Commissioner Edwards questioned staff if the city could require the school to have an entrance off of Precinct Line Road? Barry LeBaron respo ded when the plat was approved, they moved all entrances from McDonwell 01 Road so that the parents could drop off the children in front of the scho is property is a surplus for the school which can turn in to commercial prope City. Commissioner Duffy made motion to approve ca Commissioner Dolan seconded. The motion was approved by the following Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Edwa Nay: None of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1 of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 of the 4. Case P-05-015 - PUBLIC Southwest Colleyville Office Chapelwood Addition Commissioner Blassingame recus Chris Fuller presen e and Commissioner easement on easement, mu dedication landsc 91.7 ~d, ntrances on Cheek Sparger, the 24 foot rties, the 40 foot set back in middle of ut talked about, right of way (ROW) dication, 95 feet of ROW is shown as eing a h ip, yet none is shown to maintain 2 lots s the city does not enforce deed restrictions, but in the , ain facilities are not allowed. The city can not enforce he c accept those restrictions, the Commission can not ion c n not enforce, therefore we are being negligent to do o for that property. 'added for a gas station, a Special Use Permit has to be ry LeBaron replied correct. Commissioner "ards questioned staff for clarity landscape easements are 20 foot and this indicates 1 0 foot? Barry LeBaron stated 20 foot required along Colleyville Boulevard. Barry LeBaron stated the hardship issue is that the developer has some commitments and the hardship can be determined by the Commission. This property has stayed vacant for some time yet this developer has some strong commitments for three lots which would benefit the city. Although the lots would not meet the zoning everything else could be met on the requirements. Barry LeBaron also stated the Commission can also defer this request to City Council. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 5 of 11 Commissioner Duffy questioned staff if the tree preservation plan and aerials were submitted? Chris Fuller replied correct. Commissioner Byerly opened the public hearing at 7:54 p.m. Derek Deguire, 3000 Spring Valley Dr. Bedford, the applicant, stated the request and briefed the Commission. The deed restrictions are for the property owners and to further assure the client the use of the properties. Mr. Deguire stated wanting to put in a quality office facility with lots of landscaping which Id fit the area nicely. Commissioner Byerly questioned Mr. Deguire why nt for straight zoning instead of Planned Unit Development Commercial; -g:, d restrictions could be enforced? Mr. Deguire replied because of timin ti cticality, basically we will end up with the same product. The dee e rictions ,there because the market for that area will not permit some 0 e particular that this zoning allows. James Polk, 3913 Treemont Circle, sp " the property because of the concerns wit restricting, it will be a good thing for the neig not be allowed. , ',restricting on that prope . By deed ow that those businesses will . was closed at 8:00 p.m. , age on minimum lot size b' Itted by the developer? er. Barry LeBaron if the ed, there is a waiver. Commissioner s not have to request a waiver? Barry t. Matthew Boyle, City Attorney stated r variance or hardship. Barry LeBaron nt is requesting a waiver for the minimum . staff if the Commission approves the plat, that is in . f. Boyle replied the plat as submitted would be a Commissioner Du on drawing. Commissioner Bartkowski stated not shown as 24-foot wide on plat only 9 foot. Commissioner Duffy replied would have to show on the other east property. Commissioner Duffy questioned staff if it is required to have the owners on the east show the easement? Barry LeBaron stated it being shown on the east property plat. Commissioner Edwards stated this type of development is good for the area. i questioned staff about there not being a 24-foot wide fire the east side of the property bound? Commissioner seeing 9 feet. y states it being a mutual access easement, but it is not shown Commis easement Bartkowski st Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May g, 2005 Page 6 of 11 Commissioner Edwards made motion to approve case P-05-015. Commissioner Dudziak seconded. The motion to approve was approved by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Edwards, Blassingame, Duffy and Byerly Nay: None 5. Case Z-05.014- PUBLIC HEARING- Special Use building on Lot 12, Block 1, Arbor Estates Addition, I East Chris Fuller presented the case and briefed the C Commissioner Duffy questioned staff about t the code for an accessory building however: feet is stated. What is the square foota going to be used for? Chris Fuller repli size allowed for a lot size of this size. square feet is the ground garage space onl have to ask the applicant how, ft will be " our knowledge the neighbors a two car Barry LeBaron stated the 175 bein Commission may limit in the ordin proposed. Commissioner B it for an accessory at 2406 Poplar Court , ,eing permitted by " ce 1750 square the upstairs re footage i maximum uffy questionetl if the 676 Fuller replied correct, you will Commissioner Duffy stated to ge, not a two story building. upper limit allowed, the size of the building being ring at 8:07 p.m. urt East, the applicant, came forward to cussions with the neighbors about the , ' egulas submitted an em ail of approval ociation ( ). estioned the applicant if the tree is worth a smaller '"" ize of the garage is to accommodate the size of his Comni estioned the applicant for clarity if in the ordinance, 676 square fe tead of 1750 square feet. Mr. Regula replied fine. Commission' questioned the applicant if he will pour 676 square feet of concrete for a p , .' Mr. Regula replied correct. Theresa Vella, 2405 Poplar Court, stated concerns with the use of the building and not seeing any approval by the HOA. Liza Slosson, 2407 Poplar Court, stated concerns with the uses of the building, if it would be seen from the street, if the wooden fence would stay or if a chain link fence would be placed, if the RV would be stored in the building, if the tree would stay, if bricked like current home and the time frame the building would be completed. Commissioner Byerly questioned where Mrs. Slosson lived? Mrs. Slosson stated to Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 7 of 11 the right of the Regula's property. Robert Crane, 2302 Arbor Trail, concerned with the building and the use of the building. I was not allowed to build an addition on my property because of the covenants. Stated having concerns with property values and the covenants state 80% of the structure would have to be bricked. Beverly Sweat, 2403 Poplar Court, stated wanting the definition of Special Use Permit and if it would just be for the building and stated not .ng allowed to build an accessory building in her yard because of the covenants There being no one wishing to speak the public heari ' Commissioner Byerly questioned the applicant i storage only above the garage. Mr. Regula re Mr. Regula stated a detached building doe make it match the house as much as p the Committee of Arbor Estates. Commissioner Edwards questioned applica replied correct. Commissioner Byerly questione Mr. Edens who signed the petitio Commissioner Dudzi ted one however you, the e stati the main structu t the d losed at 8:25 p.m. to limit the uses of ,d we intend to pproved by ighbor on the 10 foot side is rect. quire ed garage. ion could make the approval of the SUP stated being better to require the brick e Commission wants not what the HOA o is required to be bricked, '. Regula stated brick is what ed the applicant about the construction schedule. Mr. Co' '., structu she were' structure. Commissioner y questioned the applicant if they have a shared driveway? Mrs. Regula stated there being a strip between the Eden's driveway, theirs going to the left and the Regula's going to the right. Commissioner Byerly stated limiting to 700 square feet and the construction materials. estioned the applicant how Mrs. Slosson could see the y. Mr. Regula stated she could only see the structure if driveway. Mr. Regula stated his home would screen the Commissioner Duffy questioned Commissioner Byerly if the Commission should approve with changes or have the staff to rewrite? Commissioner Byerly stated approving the changes in the ordinance. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 8 of11 Commissioner Edwards reminded the Commissioners that the applicants according, to code, are allowed to build this building, but because of the loft area, they have to get the SUP for the height of the building. Commissioner Edwards stating wanting to move the square footage to 700 or 750 because once they start to construct, they may need more square footage, it would allow for leeway. Commissioner Dolan questioned staff for clarity; the HOA has approved the two story building? Commissioner Edwards replied correct, the .city is the one that has the issue because of the height of the building the applic ., re having to move the structure in from the allowed set back and the applica ts to keep the building were they have placed it to save the tree. Commissioner Byerly stated generally the additio . et 0 's for privacy, and in this case for storage there is not a priva sue. Bar aron stated the regulations are for accessory buildings wit ertain size, ho r to exceed the size or height, a SUP would be required the neighbors, an ictions could be put in place prohibiting possible co 'al uses he higher tH , . Jucture the farther off the set back line the structure h be './ Commissioner Bartkowski stat nting an office as a greater hardship than for storage. C stated the Commission is not granting for hardship. She st . n from the neighbors, not because of a hardship. Commi the storage height does not need to be so tall . would n Commissioner By are not an issu square . t and construction materials oving the materials. s would be comfortable if the office is in the dra nance no commercial purpose use. e traditionally do not go through the ordinance, usually ques 'ned Mrs. Slosson if she has concerns about the rs. Slosson stated wanting the look of the structure to feel orhood and that the building is not visible by the street. tated the HOA requirements are more comprehensive than the city's requ ts and therefore there are not additional requirements by the city for the constr ction materials for the building. Commissioner Byerly made motion to approve case Z-05-014 with the building be limited by the 700 square feet and strike the part of the ordinance about the additional uses by the Land Development Code were it clearly states no commercial purposes. Commissioner Dolan seconded. The motion to approve by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Edwards, Blassingame, Byerly Nay: Dudziak, Bartkowski, Duffy Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 9 of 11 6. Case Z-05-015 - PUBLIC HEARING- Amendment to the Planned Unit Development ordinance for the Beldon Hollow Addition, located at the 2000 block of Glade Road Barry LeBaron presented the case and briefed the Commissioners. Commissioner Edwards questioned why the City Council a ,roved with the 16 lots in a gated community and not the required amount. Commissioner Byerly questioned the amount of lots r Barry LeBaron stated 20 lots are required, howev minimum lots of 25. Barry LeBaron stated the that one statement on the lot number. Commissioner Edwards questioned if the one lot to be able to build. Barry replied Commissioner Byerly opened the public h Tom Slone, 4705 Shady Creek" the owner briefed the Commission. Mr. ated wan we want to move the home ove that is beside Lot 10. There being no one . Commissioner Bartkowski se The motion to Aye: Dolan, Dud Nay: e made in to 0, presented his request and be able to preserve the trees we are having to buy the lot w s closed at 8:51 p.m. case Z-05-015. Commissioner lassingame, Duffy and Byerly TA 7. 3.23 Regula PU HEARING - Amendment to Chapter 3, Section ment Code regarding Planned Unit Development Zoning -05 ski made motion to remove this item from the table. econded. The motion to ap rove by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Edwards, Blassingame, Duffy and Byerly Nay: None Barry LeBaron presented the case and briefed the Commissioners. Commissioner Duffy made motion to approve case G-05-008. Commissioner Dudziak seconded. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 10 of 11 The motion to approve by the following vote: Aye: Dolan, Dudziak, Bartkowski, Edwards, Blassingame, Duffy and Byerly Nay: None STAFF REPORTS Barry LeBaron stated having a workshop on May 16, 2005. Commissioners Blassingame and Dudziak stated being out of town on that da . Staff recommended having the workshop before the next Planning and Zoning g scheduled for May 23,2005. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioners Byerly and Duffy made comments on the Planned Unit Development amendments. Respectfully Submitted, ADJOURNMENT The Commission adjourned the meeting at 9. Amy Shelley Planning and Zonin Approved on: --- Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - May 9, 2005 Page 11 of 11 .$ PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA BRIEFING l'exas ^ Meeting Date: I May 23, 2005 I Prepared by: I Chris Fuller ClK I Develooment Coordinator i I P-05-013 - Preliminary plat for Braemar Addition on 15.662 acres Subject: lout of the B.B.B. and C.R.R. Survey, Abstract 211 and the A.T. I Young Survey, Abstract 1756 located at 5000-5201 Fry Lane STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Steven Stallard is the potential developer of a 15.6-acre parcel of property located at the northern end of Fry Lane. The developer has submitted a Preliminary Plat to divide the property into seven lots for the construction of single-family residences and one lot designated as a private road. Zoning. Two of the proposed lots on the west side of Fry Lane are zoned R20 Single Family Residential. The remaining four lots are zoned AG Agricultural. Five of the proposed lots meet the dimensional standards for the applicable zoning districts. Two of the AG zoned lots do not meet the three acre minimum lot size requirements, but are considered Lots of Record and may deviate from the minimum lot size. Right-of-Way Dedication. Fry Lane is not currently a public dedicated street. For several years, access to the properties located at the northern end of Fry Lane has been via a 30-foot private access easement affixed to the property titles of the tracts involved in this development. Maintenance of the roadway surface has been the responsibility of the adjacent properties. The Land Development Code requires all residential lots have frontage on a public dedicated street. The minimum right-of-way width for a residential street is 50 feet. The developer has dedicated 50 feet of right-of- way directly abutting the affected lots, which technically meets the requirements of the Land Development Code. However, the developer only has control of 30 feet of Fry Lane for that portion of Fry Lane situated between this proposed development and Glade Road, located to the south. This 30- foot section of Fry Lane will remain as a private access easement until such time in the future that the adjacent property develops and sufficient right-of-way becomes available. Drainage. The applicant has submitted a Drainage Plan that has been approved by the Engineer Department Drainage improvements are not required for this development, however a lot grading plan will be necessary at time of building permit. Perimeter Street Improvement Requirements. On March 1, 2005, City Council approved Resolution R-05-2519, which waived the perimeter street improvement requirements along Fry Lane for these properties. A note on the plat references the Resolution R-05-2519 and the roadway maintenance responsibilities of the property owners of the lots in the proposed development. Agenda Item No.1 - Page 1 Water and Sewer. Utility services are available to the site. The developer is required to extend the utility services within the development and install one fire hydrant as a cost to the developer. Impact Fees. Water, sewer and roadway impact fees are due at the time a building permit is issued for a new structure on a newly platted lot. The fees listed below are intended to provide general information on the fees that could be assessed for this project. The actual fee paid may be different depending upon the specific plans for construction or other arrangements provided for by a City-Developer Agreement. ROADWAY $1,589 per dwelling unit for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL uses. Details are available in Chapter 13 of the Land Development Code. $2,666 for a 1-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or if a new meter is installed. $200 for a 1-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or if a new meter is installed. WATER SEWER Parkland Dedication Fees. Parkland dedication fees are due at the time of approval of the final plat. The fee for residential uses is $1 ,802 per residential lot. The fee must be paid before the plat is recorded with the County Clerks Office. Tree Survey. The applicant has submitted an aerial photograph that satisfies the tree survey requirements of the Land Development Code. Based on this information no tree replacement plan is necessary since no new streets are being proposed. SUMMARY The owner's surveyor has addressed all Development Review Committee comments. This preliminary plat also requires approval by the City Council. The proposed development appears to satisfy the requirements of the Land Development Code. PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE Planning & Zoning Commission: May 23, 2005 City Council: June 7, 2005 RECOMMENDATION Approval ATTACHMENTS · Zoning and Location Map · Development Review Committee Memo · Applicant's Response · Plat · Resolution R-05-2519 Agenda Item No.1 - Page 2 Zoning and Location Map D NORTH AG AG Agenda Item No. 1- Page 3 Development Review Committee Memo DATE March 12, 2005 TO Steven Stallard FAX NO 817.428.8506 FROM Chris Fuller, Development Coordinator SUBJECT P-05-013 Braemar Addition Preliminary Plat The Colleyville Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed your plat request submitted to this office. The following comments are for your consideration. The Following Comments Require a Response from the Applicant: 1. Provide a proposed utility layout for the subdivision. The existing water line located in Fry Lane is a service line, which comes off of a water meter located along Glade Road. There is no City owned water main located within Fry Lane. 2. Provide a Preliminary Drainage Analysis study for the proposed development. 3. An 8-inch water main will need to be extended across the south property line of Lot 7 from Fry Lane to west property line of Lot 7. Connection for this line will be at the provided stub-out from Rockrimmon Property. This line will be required to place in a 15-foot wide easement. 4. On the plat exhibit, provide easements adjacent to the property lines as outlined in the development code. Items 1. 2 and 3 will need to be prepared by a licensed professional enQineer. Contact Robert Woods, Engineering Department, for more information for items 1 - 4. 5. Provide original tax certificates from Tarrant County and Grapevine- Colleyville ISD. 6. Indicate the street name on the plat document. 7. Provide a Tree Preservation Plan - The subdivider shall submit a tree survey or an aerial photograph indicating the general coverage of trees. The tree survey (aerial photograph) shall be in accordance with Chapter 5 - Tree Preservation of this Land Development Code. Agenda Item No.1 - Page 4 8. Where trees are proposed for removal, the subdivider shall submit a tree replacement plan. The tree replacement plan shall be in accordance with Chapter 5 - Tree Preservation of this Land Development Code. Contact Chris Fuller, Development Coordinator, 817.503.1054 for more information. 9. On the plat exhibit, show Fry Lane as a dedicated public right-of-way and provide an additional 20-foot of right-of-way dedication along lots 5,6 and 7. 10. Add a note to the plat stating: "Per Resolution R-05-2519, Fry Lane will be maintained at the expense of the property owners or property owner association. II 11. The front yard setback will begin at the R-O-W line. 12.Add bearings and distance to the portion of the private street along Glade Road. 13. Add the following to the plat exhibit: Dedication Certificate WHEREAS, (owners name), are the owners of a tract of land situated in the (name) Survey, Abstract N, (#), Tarrant County, Texas, and being out of a (#) acre tract conveyed to them by (deed reference), and being more particularly described as follows: (metes and bounds description) NOW THEREFORE, KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That We, (names), Owners, do hereby adopt this plat designating the hereinbefore described property as (subdivision name), and addition to the City of Colleyville, Tarrant County, Texas, and do hereby dedicate fee simple to the public use forever all streets, rights-of-way, and alleys shown thereon, and do hereby reserve the easements shown on this plat for the mutual use and accommodation of all public utilities desiring to use or using the same. Any public utility shall have the right to remove and keep removed all or part of any buildings, fences, trees, shrubs or other improvements or growths in which any way endanger or interfere with the construction, maintenance or efficiency of its respective systems on any of these easements, and any public utility shall at all times have the right of ingress and egress to and from and upon the said easement for the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, inspecting, and patrolling, without the necessity at any time of procuring the permission of anyone, This plat approved subject to all platting ordinances, rules, regulations, and resolutions of the City of Colleyville, Texas, Witness our hands this day of ,20 , Owners Name STATE OF TEXAS }{ COUNTY OF TARRANT }{ Before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for said county and State on this day personally appeared , known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purpose and considerations therein expressed, and in the capacity therein stated, Agenda Item No.1 - Page 5 Given under my hand and seal of office this _ day of ,20_. Notary Public in and for Tarrant County (affix seal) My printed name My commission expires: Surveyor~Cerlification KNOW All MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That I, , a Registered Professional land Surveyor licensed in the State of Texas, do hereby certify that this Plat is true and correct and was prepared from an actual survey made under my supervision on the ground, Signature Date (Affix Seal) The Following Comments are Informational and Do Not Require a Response: 1. PARKLAND DEDICATION FEES. Parkland dedication fees are due at the time of approval of the final plat. The fee for residential uses is $1,802 per dwelling unit for any vacant lots created by this plat. An assessment of parkland dedication fees will be provided upon approval of the final plat. 2. IMPACT FEES. Water, sewer and roadway impact fees are due at the time a building permit is issued for a new structure on a newly platted lot. The fees listed below are intended to provide general information on the fees that could be assessed for this project. The actual fee paid may be different depending upon the specific plans for construction or other arrangements provided for by a City-Developer Agreement. ROADWAY $1,589 per dwelling unit for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL uses. Details are available in Chapter 13 of the Land Development Code, $2,666 for a 1-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or if a new meter is installed. $200 for a 1-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or if a new meter is installed. WATER SEWER PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE This item will not be scheduled for the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting until all items are submitted. Agenda Item No.1 - Page 6 Please submit the following to our offices: · 11 folded copies of the revised Preliminary Plat drawing · one 8%" x 11" reduced copy of the revised exhibit · A written letter addressing each comment stating the comment has been addressed or stating reasons why the requirement should be modified or waived. Please contact me at fullerc@cLcolleyville.tx.us or 817.503.1054 if you have any questions. Agenda Item No.1 - Page 7 Applicant's Response Re: ~mM'~ Ilqilm F~4J1J 'n tlli$ ~ ~ ro tk~ ~~, ~dditiooal I' Agenda Item No.1 - Page 8 Plat '$ ~ 1 ~ ; l~ i ~ f" I, ; , :. I h .f; ,~ 1 I 1 ;, Ii . ~ >~. J I ,.t . ~Il j ; J ~ i I ; I 1<; i P t: ~ , IlJ I iii . 1 j a 1 > I ~ I I :~ I, . it 'el' i :i -j "{ ! H ~ iUi ~ ~ In. iuH!i i fi U iii "'It;, ~ ~ 1;, t I i J t~ ti 1111 I. lIS ,~ ~ ( hi .' J ~ 'J I f 5 I "I J 'I . i J 0 12 ' :'" ~ i. ~ ! ~ :1 i ~ ~ i ij I,i~ ~nni ! i i~ n iii 1 ' -" J . ~l' J . S ~1 r1 lit II > i S' of ul .~ i ~ ! ~ ~ i f ~ i jl U H !i i:i i i! III }I: j q ~ ~ 1n,. i i i it Uii in_. !" i,:, ii ~i,lb ,} i h I I lU I, 1 i. Jf,UUhttUfl ~f ..~, iU \41. . t I III I -". 1 f II'!! l1111i'111 11i"'I' , j ..;i.:; ..j ..~:.i .1-- u - _ i-I'- ,l-;j -11:.;-1.'lJj']J ----~-_:~Jf } :n J f d I Ii f (filJr1fn 'iUt!:;J" ~ Hi I i i ~j t .' : f Iii! f. (, f~ his flt. :.. i~ i I, ..~' J$'I",.{,,- fl,i.i,j n.!. ;1~1'1 .. all!!" J Ii '. I .J ilK It. t", 11 1 .~ fA t~ 11', J '.- J r' "1 niiUd!!liiLini.!lUiHt iHIi!H.fti J ! i !~!I!tn !l!1!td1.,IUl !i!~!l !~!! fi.!l!i -;i. f iff. .Illll . .~.'Ii... ,UHU {IJ t: II JltlJ~ J J S ~1.lu8' .4.'.1".'.' ".'1.' .f "I. t!, J... h i! Mi ii! fii: UUU ;r,n;~ nmnUI';iiiii \i MTAtt ~"~^_)"'A' ,.7 ~ ( , / I I .---~ i \ , ) "','~ I. l~ I~ V ..1, ;; ;j ".,' ~ , ,....I 1 I '1 t; e~ ~ 'l!.'--"--- . ~. ,.. s- s i ",! !! m mmm , "'~ $ ,~ 10 " .it 'i 1 ~! ...' + '. -......-.-" ;~ II~ ~~ g Sfl I '--..'ri'..;7 ~.~.. J ~ j " ,I .... i b~: ...' g I ../-l..., , I . j "'t i Sf ~ t I '" } \ ~ \ ~ l I .'"'J" iga '! ,~-", ,. 'it "'~ \ ,.4 S' ' i~~ ...; \, ~~ .. .~<. i ..........--'>.. Sl_ zr'GIU'~' t<rUllof."$Itl.~""~ ~~'t)Q:1lll___.1.<tl i !f II !i jj 1", Ii i' .1 J nJ,IJ ',.....1,.1,1..',1'.. ...fl... ,..' .J.. ... ., II jt .11 I" l' l' .tl,. It ii. It .t h. h.t In 1 . ;11 l!' ! f J ~Jt !~ J .." .'...'.. ",". .. ij.I, ... ~~..t..~...,., !.",.J.l.,=.."..~.,..,..,.'..~J . lJI1II J ni. ,a 1 J I' J. ill .n J iJ · .. ....1.' .1 It i.. iltfl.t)i ill. If I. I iu' 1& I I I f ~ . ! i I I t I ! I J " . . . . " , I i II !I ~1 ~ j I,. I, ~ !I I.., 1.. " ~ t,; j I: :'1 ~. t I II 11" J t f 4 I I j ~ ~ ~I-lif g ! .. k .::t 1 II i il !>, ~ II " ! ! ~ 1 I I i ,,[i !3U ~. ~ l ,;..--,.---~--- " i I I I . . . . . J . i i J I . . - . J . - I I I I J _ . ! II il I n ";-1: It ~ I 1 .....H J I J 1 i 1 a 1 J ... i . ~ H ~l Agenda Item No.1 - Page 9 Resolution R-05-2519 RESOLUTIONR-N-2619 A RISOLunONAPPROV.SA, WAIVER OF PERlME11!R STREETIMPROVeUENT ReQUIREMENTS FOR APPROXlIllA11!L Y 310 FelT ON FRY LANe NOW, THeREFORE, Bi 'TRESOLVED SYTHE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COU..EYVILLE., TEXAS: 'fiE. 1. THAT the perimeter street improvement mquirementl tOt appromately 310 teet of Fry Lane as shown on the aladled 'exhibit "A" are hemby waived. .objEdto theconditlons imposed bytbeCity CollOQ', which_ described 88 follows: A.Frylane to be paved with WIO (2"" incheS of asphalt, with base. B. The pavememsurface oot be .$ thantwenty-four(24') met in wiclh. C, 1bere .nll be a Ire department olrcular turn-amund wlba minimum di~ of 100' at tnenorthern end of Fry lane. D~T_e lhall be. afire hydranttnltalled near the notCbem end of Fry Lane. E. The improvementl dpu.lated in this Reeolution shal' be installed at no cost to the City of Cdle~. f'. Fry Lane to be maintained at the '~e of the property owners or property owner auodation. G. Thil perlmetetstreet improvement waiveria rescinded upon ttlerconing of the property situated within the project limits as $hewn on the alaohed ~ibl"A". AND IT IS SO ReSOLVED. PAsseD".. ' . ,.."" BY,. A VOTE OF -4, ",. ,A,Y. ESt, D."... NAYS AND , CJ ABSTENTIONS ON THIS THIEL q DAY Of ~ ".i::J . 2005, Mayor Agenda Item No.1 - Page 10 Exhibit "An J ~; pp.cable section of " La,. perimeter trHt waiver Agenda Item No.1 - Page 11 Zoning and Location Map D NORTH Agenda Item No.2 - Page 3 city or cce~ PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA BRIEFING TexaS Meeting Date: May 23, 2005 I Prepared by: I Chris Fuller C!(. Development Coordinator P-05-021 - Preliminary plat for Alianne Estates Addition on 14 Subject: acres out of the T. White Survey, Abstract 1692 located at 512 and 600 Shelton Drive STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Jeff Vanderpool is the potential developer of a 14-acre parcel of property located on the north side of Shelton Drive, west of Hunter Lane. The developer has submitted a Preliminary Plat to divide the property into 12 lots for the construction of new single- family residences. Zoning. The proposed lots are located in a R40 Single Family Residential zoning district. The proposed lots meet the dimensional standards for the R40 zoning district. Right-ot-Way Dedication. Shelton Drive is classified as a Minor Collector roadway on the Master Thoroughfare Plan, which requires an ultimate right-of-way width of 75 feet. The developer is dedicating approximately 35 feet of additional right-of-way along Shelton Drive in order to provide the required right-of-way dedication. Sidewalks and Trails. The Land Development Code requires a sidewalk along Shelton Drive and all interior streets. The internal sidewalks must be installed when any new residence is constructed on the property. The internal sidewalks must be at least 4-feet wide. The sidewalk along Shelton Drive is required to be 5-feet wide, and the developer is required to construct the sidewalk as part of the public improvements for this property. The applicant is requesting a waiver from constructing a sidewalk along Shelton Drive. A letter from the applicant addressing the waiver request has been attached to this agenda briefing. The applicant asserts that the construction of a sidewalk along Shelton Drive will adversely effect the rural feel of the existing community and would serve no useful purpose as it would not connect to existing sidewalks. Perimeter Street Improvement Requirements. Perimeter street improvements are required for this property since Shelton Drive is considered an unimproved street and the plat contains more than one residential lot. The owner is required to construct one- half of the streets adjacent to this property, or provide an equivalent amount of cash escrow for future improvement by the City. An estimate of the cash escrow amount can be provided by the Engineering Department upon request. Impact Fees. Water, sewer and roadway impact fees are due at the time a building permit is issued for a new structure on a newly platted lot. The fees listed below are intended to provide general information on the fees that could be assessed for this Agenda Item No.2 - Page 1 project. The actual fee paid may be different depending upon the specific plans for construction or other arrangements provided for by a City-Developer Agreement. ROADWAY $1,589 per dwelling unit for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL uses. Details are available in Chapter 13 of the Land Development Code. $2,666 for a 1-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or if a new meter is installed. $200 for a 1-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or if a new meter is installed. WATER SEWER Parkland Dedication Fees. Parkland dedication fees are due at the time of approval of the final plat. The fee for residential uses is $1 ,802 per residential lot. The fee must be paid before the plat is recorded with the County Clerks Office. Tree Survey. The applicant has submitted an exhibit that satisfies the tree survey requirements of the Land Development Code. The proposed street design preserves the majority of trees within the property. SUMMARY The applicant has addressed all Development Review Committee comments and has requested that the proposed plat be placed on the Planning and Zoning Commission agenda with the proposed waiver request. The perimeter street costs include a cost for constructing the sidewalk along Shelton Drive. Staff recommends denial of the sidewalk waiver request. Excluding the waiver request, the proposed development appears to satisfy the platting standards contained in the Land Development Code. PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE Planning & Zoning Commission: May 23, 2005 City Council: June 21, 2005 RECOMMENDATION Approval, subject to the developer making provisions for the sidewalk as a part of the perimeter street improvements. ATTACHMENTS · Zoning and Location Map · Development Review Committee Memo · Applicant's Response · Plat Agenda Item No.2 - Page 2 Zoning and Location Map D NORTH Agenda Item No.2 - Page 3 Development Review Committee Memo DATE May 6, 2005 TO JEFF VANDERPOOL FAX NO 817.577.5564 FROM Chris Fuller, Development Coordinator SUBJECT P-05-021 - Preliminary Plat - Alianne Estates The COlleyville Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed your plat request submitted to this office. The following comments are for your consideration. The Following Comments Require a Response from the Applicant: 1. Remove staff approval signature block. 2. Will the community be gated? 3. If the development is a gated community with a private street: Permit Fee - To defray the cost of processing the application, and maintaining City owned electronic emergency equipment, an application fee of $700 shall be paid prior to scheduling the application for public hearing. Contact Chris Fuller, Development Coordinator, 817.503.1054, for more information. 4. Provide the following information on the plat: Surveyor~Cerlification KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That I, , a Registered Professional Land Surveyor licensed in the State of Texas, do hereby certify that this Plat is true and correct and was prepared from an actual survey made under my supervision on the ground, Signature Date (Affix Seal) Dedication Cerlificate WHEREAS, (owners name), are the owners of a tract of land situated in the (name) Survey, Abstract N, (#), Tarrant County, Texas. and being out of a (#) acre tract conveyed to them by (deed reference), and being more particularly described as follows: Agenda Item No.2 - Page 4 (metes and bounds description) NOW THEREFORE, KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That We, (names), Owners, do hereby adopt this plat designating the hereinbefore described property as (subdivision name), and addition to the City of Colleyville, Tarrant County, Texas, and do hereby dedicate fee simple to the public use forever all streets, rights-of-way, and alleys shown thereon, and do hereby reserve the easements shown on this plat for the mutual use and accommodation of all public utilities desiring to use or using the same, Any public utility shall have the right to remove and keep removed all or part of any buildings, fences, trees, shrubs or other improvements or growths in which any way endanger or interfere with the construction, maintenance or efficiency of its respective systems on any of these easements. and any public utility shall at all times have the right of ingress and egress to and from and upon the said easement for the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, inspecting, and patrolling, without the necessity at any time of procuring the permission of anyone, This plat approved subject to all platting ordinances, rules, regulations, and resolutions of the City of Col1eyville, Texas, Witness our hands this day of ,20_, Owners Name STATE OF TEXAS }{ COUNTY OF TARRANT }{ Before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for said county and State on this day personally appeared , known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purpose and considerations therein expressed, and in the capacity therein stated, Given under my hand and seal of office this _ day of ,20_, Notary Public in and for Tarrant County (affix seal) My printed name My commission expires: The Following Comments are Informational and Do Not Require a Response: 1. If the development is a gated community with a private street: A. All restricted access entrances shall be equipped with the Opticom gate opening system. The system shall be maintained by the HOA in good working condition at all times. B. Visitor Entrance Desiqn Standards - At least one entrance per subdivision with private streets must be equipped for visitor access. In addition to the above Restricted Access Entrance Design Standards, said visitor entrance must be Agenda Item No.2 - Page 5 equipped with a call or code box located at least 50 feet from the boundary of the subdivision to provide for visitors calling in and automobile queuing. A turn- around space with a minimum outside radius of 30 feet must be located between any call or code box and access control gate or cross arm to allow vehicles denied access to safely exit onto public streets in a "head out" position. A sign must be erected next to the edge of such turn around space to prohibit vehicle parking in such space. Residents entrance used in combination with a visitor entrance shall comply with the requirements of this paragraph. C. Resident Only Entrance Desiqn Standards - In addition to the above Restricted Access Entrance Design Standards, an access control gate or cross arm that requires residents to use a key, card or code to gain access must be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the boundary of the subdivision to provide for automobile queuing. Resident entrances equipped with an electronic opener that allows residents to remotely open the control access gate or cross arm and enter the subdivision without having to stop are exempted from this requirement. A sign must be erected next to any resident entrance that does not meet the 50 feet setback requirement of this paragraph and does not provide a turn-around space with a minimum outside radius of 30 feet to indicate that it is for resident use only and not for visitors. D. Hold Harmless - Th e subdivision final plat and the HOA's documents must contain language whereby the HOA, as owner of the private streets and appurtenances, agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, licensees, servants and E. Access Restrictions - Guard houses, access control gates and cross arms may be constructed. All restricted access entrances must be manned 24 hours every day, or provide an alternative means of ensuring access to the subdivision by the City and other utility service providers with appropriate identification. If the HOA fails to maintain reliable access as required to provide city or utility services, the City shall have the right to enter the subdivision and remove any gate or device which is a barrier to access at the sole expense of the HOA, subject to approval by the City Council. The HOA's documents must contain provisions in conformity with this paragraph which must not be amended without the written consent of the City. 2. Trees not located within the right-of-way must be preserved during the construction of the subdivision. Before construction begins on the site, protective fencing must be installed around all preserved trees located outside the right-of- way. The fencing must be located at the dripline of the preserved trees. The protective fencing may be comprised of orange vinyl construction fencing, chain link fence or other similar fencing with a four-foot (4') approximate height. The fencing must remain in place during the entire construction period OTHER INFORMATION Agenda Item No.2 - Page 6 PARKLAND DEDICATION FEES. Parkland dedication fees are due at the time of approval of the final plat. The fee for residential uses is $1,802 per dwelling unit. An assessment of parkland dedication fees will be provided upon approval of the final plat. PERIMETER STREET IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS. Perimeter street improvements are required for this property since Shelton Road is considered an unimproved street and the plat contains more than one residential lot. The owner is required to construct one- half of the streets adjacent to this property, or provide an equivalent amount of cash escrow for future improvement by the City. An estimate of the cash escrow amount can be provided by the Engineering Department upon request. Contact Robert Woods, 817.503.1094, for more information IMPACT FEES. Water, sewer and roadway impact fees are due at the time a building permit is issued for a new structure on a newly platted lot. The fees listed below are intended to provide general information on the fees that could be assessed for this project. The actual fee paid may be different depending upon the specific plans for construction or other arrangements provided for by a City-Developer Agreement. ROADWAY $1,589 per dwelling unit for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL uses. Details are available in Chapter 13 of the Land Development Code, $2,666 for a 1-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or if a new meter is installed. $200 for a 1-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or if a new meter is installed. WATER SEWER SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS. The Land Development Code requires sidewalks along Shelton Road and all interior streets. The internal sidewalks must be installed when any new residence is constructed on the property. The internal sidewalks must be at least 4-feet wide. The sidewalks along Shelton Road are required to be 5-feet wide, and the developer is required to construct the Shelton Road sidewalk as part of the public improvements for this property. PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE Planning & Zoning Commission: City Council: Monday, May 23, 2005, 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, June 21,2005 RESUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS Once you have completed the changes to the drawing, please submit the following to our office: · A written letter addressing each comment stating the comment has been addressed or stating reasons why the requirement should be modified or waived. · Twelve (12) folded copies of the plat drawing with the title block facing out and one (1) reduced copy (8%" x 11") · One (1) letter-size or ledger-size reduced copy of the revised exhibit Agenda Item No.2 - Page 7 · One (1) set of Preliminary Utility Plans and Preliminary Drainage Analysis. Please contact me at fullerc@ci.collevville.tx.us or 817-503-1054 if you have any questions. The above requested items must be submitted no later than noon on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 in order to make the scheduled hearings. The item will not be scheduled for the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting until all items are submitted. Agenda Item No.2 - Page 8 Applicant's Response HAMILTON CONSULTING Civil & Environmental Emdneers' Planners' Construction Maltaf!ers May 16, 2005 Mr. Chris Fuller City of Colleyville Community Development Department 100 Main St. Colleyville, Texas 76034 ,RE: P-05-021 Preliminary Plat - A1ianne Estates Colleyville, Texas Dear Mr. Fuller: In response to your letter dated May, 6, 2005, we offer our requested to your comments as stated below: 1) Remove staff approval signature block. Response - noted. 2) Will the community be gated? Response - community will not be gated. 3) If the development is a gated community, etc. Response - community will not be gated. 4) Provide the following information on the plat. Response - Surveyors certification added to Preliminary Plat. We hope that this letter and the attached revised preliminary plat and engineering documents address all stated concerns with this proposed development. If you have any questions, please advise. Sincerely, HAMIL TON CONSULTING Keith Hamilton, P.E. Attachment Agenda Item No.2 - Page 9 13 May 2005 Re: Alianne Estates preliminary plat application and comments In response to City Staff comments of 2May05, the Developer and Owners of Alianne Estates formally request a variance on the Colleyville Land Development Code requirement for a sidewalk along the property fronting Shelton Drive. Sidewalks along Theresa Lane (within the development) will be installed as homes are constructed, but it is the opinion of the Developer and neighborhood residents that a sidewalk along Shelton Drive would not be in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Alianne Estates has been developed with the intent to maintain the rural feel and character of the existing neighborhood, and great care has been taken to assure that the development blends into the surrounding area as much as possible (i.e. non-gated community, no grand monumental entrance, minimal design covenants, etc.). Minimum lot sizes have been established at R-40 in order to allow the option of horses, to provide open space, to maintain a semi-rural, undeveloped atmosphere and to be in harmony with the existing neighborhood's character. One of the traits of the neighborhood that give it rural charm is the lack of sidewalks anywhere in the general vicinity, along with the open drainage swales. There is no other property along Shelton Drive or the other streets in the neighborhood that will provide for the opportunity to subdivide and develop new neighborhoods, especially if the current Colleyville City Council opinion to keep a rural atmosphere and R-40 zoning where possible continues. Requiring a sidewalk fronting Shelton would result in an orphaned run of concrete that will probably never be linked up with sidewalks throughout the rest of the neighborhood, and would likely have a negative effect on adjacent residential property values. The property in question is flanked on both sides by much smaller, single family lots, whose owners would oppose the installation of sidewalks on the Alianne Estates frontage. During the Zoning process, residents of the neighborhood consistently opposed any development that would detract from the current nature of the area, and many specifically expressed opposition to sidewalks and fences. (A petition from the neighborhood residents that would clarify this opposition can be provided upon request.) The developer of Alianne Estates has been sensitive to the input of the neighborhood, and will prohibit the construction of barrier fencing in its deed restrictions in order to help maintain, as much as possible, this open, rural feel. A waiver of the sidewalk requirement would be consistent with those restrictions and with the overall neighborhood design. Given the history of residents' passionate opposition to any action that would impact their rural atmosphere, any attempt in the future by the City to "upgrade" Shelton and other streets in the neighborhood with sidewalks is likely to meet strong resistance again. Additionally, great care is being given to the design of the retainage ponds and drainage swales in order to allow them to blend seemlessly into the rural feel of the development and the neighboring properties, and to maintain the existence of as many trees as possible along Shelton Drive. Adding sidewalks along Shelton will hinder this design and will likely force the removal of several mature trees along the middle portion of the property fronting Shelton Drive. Agenda Item No.2 - Page 10 ; ; i 1ft1::li i (' J U /1 I l ~ lIlt I f~ I I I~ 19 ,/f' 111! ILl iii i~ ,f I · o~ 'N~ III ~v~ ~~<t,/ : I~ ~ ... "}~ ":u J I ... ~<v~ _ ~~. ...",. ~ I,. # 1",.,:," ,oS 'fr ...-.., ~ tI <1' .....:~ g;o::;, cl <it -t'O ,,' ~ ~'" III N ~..,c, ../- ... I t. ~ +" f' .... ", ,-...:JlI LJI!IIlUL _ _ t.: I c,' / .'r.-..----~2C..-.:n /- I ~u II' ..r: I", . I ... ,7 I ...",_ I ~ M. / 9~0l 11_' ~ ,fF~ \~ II ( tid: I ! ~ /1,t" f. .-a------=----.--..il.~... - I I , ..: I ~,..: · II:i ":U II f '" ","'~ II' ~ ';, I It ",111. I I ...",N I ~ <it ...., , ~I" "'l:l'" i I g~l:! : I'i::: ~~ iii ill g~!, \ dO I I,.; ....'" rl I f'" \ \ .. j I'" 08 II \ ~-------I>'W.----l l~ '.it- · I \ , II 1I1'" I I \ ~ \..: I :.. N ~'5 ~ I ~ \ lIIu I I: ... Ol/') t:;t..I.-...........-......,)..... \.. c d.:~ 9 04. ';"1 '\ \ ... ~~ I ~. , 1."11 \ \ g:i!~ ~ d-.g: ~ 1II1 ..:U \ I 0 11.1. t'" I ..Ill. I I" I Ellg III g~~ / 1f----..1I-~.t11 ~-!Icn · I ~..- / _ TJ'l'lfO S 'Dd '666tl 'lOt\ I / I":u I I DNno). ''II ). 1113A38 ON'll . I: ~ I I ..,111. c::! I I DNno). ''II ),310'0'118 H.j-U~._..'7/.. / g~~ ~ liS · _-'~:Go / dd 11'1 -I I - I .. I .. I N o II C::!, I I I ... TJ'l'II'd as 30llS '8 '8YJ ~l ~ ~ ~ -.....------:zntf--..-~4.J 9 N011I00V).3110J "', I.' ":u ii, III I 'It ..,111. 1\ \ I I .~ l:rll5lta "'51'" l' \ ":u I I &' a:: I g06 \ , ...111. 1'1 <it :>- 0 II "'" \ ~~ 6:::lN ~. ..fp %. I · \ -~ ""-.G! I ~~i. , I I \ . iO ~ I ... TJTlI'd llLDd ,tSl_Q8( ~.r> U~---4_..-l!l9'r--~'~'" ", ~J I 9 N011100V).311OJ ~:~ ;:' --: \~" "\ t+;-.'....---i~! "'1 ' ..t. \ 1,1 i,11 \ll \ I' "7'111 \ l' , ":u I rl !l ~I ...:;i~ ~ _:;i~ I I I 6~; : I ~ ~I 9!~ 1 g~~ : I : ...~~: Ii ~ I .. : .. I I I d · III L'==_____!..Y.!.'!!"'-.I!..___J ....~_"'!!'..!"~ I ~ I ------- 'I -- II '" I Tll~_ ....,,_ Gl I. ! ~ ~ ~I~~'\"''''' 'ImJ cO' n-..:n"':': I I..-....;:.OZtJ.--- ~"""ii'~~r~ - ,- - -0...:, ....'1 ~ /.~UJl'd T31l<] ....ZI ovo~ NO!13HS <lUIIJ<llU<l--\ .,. rn 'J. ,;'; - ,....... . ~ z o ~ ... ~t Plat <~j S!Q' JJ "..//1;9 J sJo1>... "'I-I. '~' . "''I-.r'" , 9",oJ ... o ... d If i : I I' 11 Iq. IUil I) H Ir II) I"i! 'II · l'iI D J II 'j gnn911f & I ft:i&D1P.1 I ..!II! 1~~lml!11 '<". v, ,<", 0-, LO ~~ .,..~ ~ ">% 'd- IIUI~ J:.LZ .. ..I ~ ... '" l:! z ::> :r I ~; II ~Ii r ~ 'm" ~. I . JILl iqil ~- ij" , d I ~ j n I 11 ~ J I ! i .' I I II I I ~ <l:: '1O^ t- l") 0; ...- ...- ...- 10 0 0 ~ (]) ...- in c OJ u .-: :5 a.. w a::: a.. N 0 0 1 co t- o Agenda Item No.2 - Page 11 6 IV -i ;:0 m m (f) c ;:0 < m -< a. 10 :J ~('. o"'~ ~1>..<. ~..<. ~~ 0... '1> '... '(> , " - .'" ~ ~ CD N o o (J1 A 00 foOr- .a~2 >-"'- ~ o~ , ~__.._"'_oL___:~ " I: A . 00 I p ...:.or- ill ~~9 'fg,1> :,l--o ':j-'5- "1>\ ' i? ~...~ ...,,,- '1> '... '(> '... ~ ~ ~ ~ o VJ )> ~ )ITION 5 78 p.R.Te.T. ~ )DITION 27 P,R, T,C, T, r- o .... A, YOUNG ,Y A, YOUNG :;, 5 D,R, T,C, 1. n ~ ~n 'P~ o~ r- o .... r- o .... '" Sr. ,~ ;,res '''Cl: ' r- g / o ." -- tal .... ..... ...=-=--s....~ Q=-=.~-:c .... -- PI "Ir AUANNE ESTATES I~~ TREE SURVEY EXHIBIT ML~~ "'r:s;; ===~A: AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF COlLEYVlLLE, TEXAS Agenda Item No.2 - Page 12