The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning and Zoning Commission-Agenda Packets-4/8/2002 City of Planning & Zoning Commission Agenda - April 8. 2002 PaQe 1 of 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION City Hall - 5400 Bransford Road Monday April 8, 2002 REGULAR MEETING: 7:00P.M. Invocation: Chairman Gasper Commissioners Jeffrey Wall, Bob Culley, Earl Swift, Mark Jones, Bud Sellers, Mark Hollis, Jo Ann Gasper Commissioner Swift Call to Order: Roll Call: Pledge of Allegiance Approval of Minutes: March 25, 2002 1. Minor Plat of Huffman Addition, requested by Neal Huffman, 3.3694 acres located on the east side of Behrens Court in the 4800 block, Case P-02-013 2. Amended Plat of Lots 28R and 66R, The Village at Colleyville, requested by APEM, located at the southwest corner of Main Street and Village Lane, Case P-02-015 3. TABLE:D ITEM - Amendments to the PUD-R{O-96-1052) for Spring Garden Addition, requested by Doug Henderson for Statepark Colleyville, Ltd., located at the northeast corner of Cheek Sparger Road and Jackson Road, Case Z-02-012 4. TABLED ITEM - Zoning Change from R20 Residential to PUD-R Planned Unit Development-Residential, requested by Ernest Hedgcoth, Lots 14 & 15, Block 1, Andy Felps Addition located at 137 Acuff Lane and 136 Cheek Sparger Road, Case Z-02-008 5. Citizens' comments regarding items not on the agenda. 6. Staff comments, reports and discussion items. 7. Commissioners' comments and reports. 8. Adjournment I certify that this agenda was posted on the Bulletin Board at City Hall on Friday April 5, 2002 at 4:30 p.m. J. Clayton Husband, A1CP - Development Coordinator ~ P.O. BOX 185 COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS 76034 (817) 577-7575 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes - March 25, 2002 Chairman Gasper called the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission to order at 7:00 P.M. on March 2S, 2002. Roll Call: Present: Jeffrey Wall, Bob Culley, Earl Swift, Mark Jones, Bud Sellers, Mark Hollis, Jo Ann Gasper Staff: Barry LeBaron, Jan Levy Invocation: Commissioner Culley Pledge of Allegiance Approval of Minutes: March 11, 2002 Commissioner Gasper moved to approve the minutes of March 11, 2002 as written. Commissioner Swift seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Wall, Cully, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None 1. Final Plat of LDS Addition, requested by Goodwin & Marshall, Inc., for Church of Jesus Christ Latter-Day Saints, 6.090 acres located in the SOO block of McDonwell School Road, Case P-02-012 Barry LeBaron presented the case to the Commission and reviewed the staff briefing. He said the church property was included in the Westcliff preliminary plan and the church is ready to move forward with their plat before the final plat was ready to submit for Westcliff. He said the church has requested relief from the parkland dedication fees and the request is in the response letter from the project engineer to the DRC comments. Mr. LeBaron said that because this subdivision is creating a new street, the plat would go to City Council for final approval. Commissioner Sellers asked if the trail that was discussed during the preliminary plat approval for Westcliff was on the plat. Mr. LeBaron responded that the City would look to the church to build the trail and the street east of where the church property is located. Chairman Gasper asked if there are any drainage issues on the church property. Staff responded that they were not aware of any; however, the applicant's engineer is present and the Commission may want to ask him. Eddie Eckert, 6001 Bridge Street, Fort Worth, was present to represent the case. He said that his firm has begun the construction plans for Westcliff and the final plat application will be filed with Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 1 of 16 - Draft the City soon. He said there is a filed document in the Tarrant County records regarding the construction of Newkirk Lane. He said that the developer rather than the church would be responsible for the construction of Newkirk Lane. He said regarding the drainage, there is a small amount of water that comes across the church property to McDonwell School Road, but that will be handled through the construction of the Westcliff subdivision. Commissioner Wall asked where the access to the church property would be located. Mr. Eckert responded that they will have two access points off McDonwell School Road and an access in the future off Newkirk Lane when it is built. Commissioner Culley asked questions about the church's request for parkland dedication fees to be waived. Eddie Eckert said that the church is a nonprofit organization and they would like consideration. He said most members are residents who live in the community and they have already paid parkland dedication fees when their homes were built. Commissioner Swift asked staff what is the procedure to waive parkland dedication fees. Barry responded that they have always been paid and have never been waived, but it is up to City Council to consider the request. Commissioner Wall asked the engineer if there would be an acceleration or deceleration lanes on McDonwell School Road to accommodate the two access points for the church. The engineer, Eddie Eckert, responded that there were no improvement plans associated with the church plat. Chairman Gasper asked staff if they have looked at the traffic patterns in the area. Staff responded that would be looked at when the final plat is filed for Westcliff. Commissioner Wall suggested that a note is sent to City Council stating the Commission's concerns about safety on McDonwell School Road. Commissioner Culley asked about what days the church would be opened. Eddie Eckert responded that the church would be open seven days a week; however, most traffic will be generated on Sunday mornings. He said that all new subdivisions along McDonwell School Road have not been required to do road improvements, but have put fees into and escrow account. He said the fees are available for the City to do the improvements. Commissioner Wall said the traffic patterns need to be studied in order to accommodate the cars entering and exiting by making left hand turns into the church property. Commissioner Swift asked if the city has required Westcliff to provide a queuing lane. Barry LeBaron said the study would be required when the final plat for Westcliff is submitted. Eddie Eckert said the church is only a minor portion of the overall area that will be developed, and the church has dedicated right- of-way per the thoroughfare plan requirement. Commissioner Culley moved that they suspend the rules and allow public discussion ofthe plat. Commissioner Swift seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Wall, Culley, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 2 of 16 - Draft Linda Baker, 404 W. McDonwell School Road, addressed the Commission. She said that Newkirk Lane and the trail that is proposed to be constructed on the east side of the street places the trail next to her property. She said that the trail placed in that location may create a danger. She said that she has racehorses she breeds on her property and when they breed they can become dangerous to people who would try to disturb them. She said she is publicly warning the City that there may be liability issues if anyone is hurt because of the trail being located next to her property . Commissioner Cully asked what would the logistics be to move the trail? Staff said that the city park will be on the east side of the street and the trail should be incorporated into the park. Commissioner Hollis asked if the park location and the location of the trail are not specifically addressed by the Commission, could it be changed later? Discussion pursued relating to McPherson Park and how the exact location has not been set yet. Chairman Gasper moved to approve the LOS plat with a notation stating that is clearly indicated that the church is responsible for building the street and for construction of the trail on the east side of the street if it evolves that way. She did not recommend approval of the waiver of parkland dedication fees. Commissioner Hollis seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Wall, Culley, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None 2. PUBLIC HEARING - Text Amendments to the PUD-C (O-99-1131) for The Village at Colleyville, Case Z-02-01 0 Barry LeBaron presented the case to the Commission. He said with the nature of the development and the mixed-use proponents of the ordinance if they approve this amendment, there will probably be more changes in a year as the subdivision develops. He explained why staff is expanding the original ordinance rather than creating a new one that amends the original one. Mr. LeBaron said it becomes difficult to enforce when three or four ordinances are put together and there is a greater chance of conflicts within the ordinances. He reviewed the changes made to the original ordinance. Chairman Gasper opened the public hearing. Those present wishing to speak were: Joe Moore, 123 Acuff, said that the tables for the encroachments did not make direct reference to the ADA requirements. He said the ADA requires a four-foot free flow pattern. He said that the awnings allowed over the street might conflict with the trees. He spoke about 90% coverage versus 95% coverage, and said that the most difficult aspect of the ordinance to enforce would be the grand opening sign regulations. Dee McNosky, 5108 Pleasant Run Road, spoke about the need for outside tables to be placed in such a way that they do not block the fire access easements nor be a hindrance for anyone with Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 3 of 16 - Draft disabilities. She said that the Village at Colleyville presents a very unique situation for regulations and she appreciates all the work that is being done to adopt an ordinance that addresses the special conditions needed for the project. She said she is the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Adjustment and the proposed regulations will prevent future business and property owners having to go before the Zoning Board of Adjustments and seek variances. Ms. McNosky also said that her property is not a part of the Village at Colleyville. Robert Figueroa, 817 Central Drive, asked questions about the regulations for off-premise alcoholic beverage consumption. Steve Groffman, 815 Central Drive, asked questions about reducing the rear building setback line from five feet to four feet. He asked if that regulation applied to the properties on the outside perimeter of the Village at Colleyville? He said the exterior properties should have a 5-foot requirement. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. LeBaron told the commissioners that the five-foot setback requirements were established in 1999 and 5-foot setbacks were common at that time. He said when the property was platted the utility companies only required a 4-foot easement and there seems to be no need for a one-foot parcel of property that could not be used and the 4-foot setback requirement makes the easement and setback requirement one in the same. Barry LeBaron said people cannot drink on sidewalks per the open container law. He explained the regulations for off premise consumption and the requirements for restaurants to fence the outside seating area if they allow alcoholic beverages so the customer would have to walk back through the restaurant to exit. Commissioner Wall said the DRC letter that is included in the packet recommends that the setback requirements not be changed to 4-foot. Barry LeBaron responded that he overrode the DRC recommendations. Fire Chief Johnston said the eliminating one-foot of the setback requirement was not significant for the fire department. He said they would review all building plans to make sure there is adequate fire protection. Commissioner Swift moved to suspend the rules to allow additional discussion from the audience. Commissioner Culley seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Wall, Culley, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None Dee McNosky said she wanted to redirect the original question about exterior setbacks. She asked if there would be a change in the buffer? Staff said there would be no change in the buffer. Commissioner Sellers asked if the Commission was doing anything now to set precedence within the City. Barry LeBaron responded that every time a PUD is approved it is for the purpose of taking a departure from the standard zoning category regulations. He said the Commission Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 4 of 16 - Draft cannot grant variations from the regulations for the CC1 or CC2 zoning categories, but a PUD is designed to meet the particular needs of the developer and no two PUD's are alike. He said that setting precedence is not a concern. Chairman Gasper spoke about sandwich board signs and asked if there could be a provision for podium display signs or easel signs so that restaurants could post their menus. Commissioner Wall asked about outside sales other than food on sidewalks. He was directed to page 4 Section m. and also page 8 under retail merchandise of the proposed ordinance. Chairman Gasper recommended that the commissioners go through the ordinance page by page. Chairman Gasper went through the proposed ordinance and asked for the commissioners to comment on any changes they want to discuss or make. Commissioner Hollis commented on adding the language for ADA requirements to the ordinance. Barry LeBaron suggested inserting those requirements under #3 on page 8 where it talks about temporary structures not blocking pedestrian traffic and adding not blocking fire exits. Jimmy Archie, representing the Village at Colleyville, said that in regards to ADA requirements, they are required to provide a 3-foot clearance. He distributed pictures they took of businesses on Main Street in Grapevine that have overhangs, planter boxes, and tables. Commissioner Wall said he wanted to address the issue of retail merchandise being place out on a sidewalk. He said he finds that stores place their sale merchandise outside and it does not improve the quality of the establishment. Commissioner Culley asked if there would be full time sidewalk sales. He said that extending the walls of the shops might not be inappropriate. Chairman Gasper said she sees that there are two issues they need to discuss. One issue is outside tables and that does not seem be to a problem, but the other issue is outside merchandise displays and there seems to be concerns about that issue. Richard Myers, 1111 S. Main Street, Grapevine, said that one of the points of the Village at Colleyville is that the development is pedestrian oriented and offers visual interest with flower shops displaying flowers, merchants with vegetable stands, and toy shops with outside merchandise displays. He said that the Owners' Association will regulate the types of displays and they want to encourage the creativity of the shop owners. There was discussion about the Owners' Association and how it functions. He said the Village at Colleyville would like to have from time to time an annual sidewalk sale where it is like a festival and all the merchants may have merchandise out on the sidewalks. He said that would obviously not be an every day occurrence and they would explore how that would be regulated. Chairman Gasper requested Councilman Feldman to come forward and address the Commission regarding ADA requirements since she is a lawyer. Chairman Gasper asked Councilman Feldman if the Commission needed to incorporate the ADA requirements into the PUD. Councilman Feldman said she wanted to qualify her remarks by saying she is not the city attorney, but answered that the businesses and the development are required to be in compliance with the Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 5 of 16 - Draft Federal regulations, as well as the City of Colleyville regulations. Commissioner Sellers said he wanted to propose that they need to put a restriction on sidewalk sales into the PUD in order to maintain continuity and possibly only allow sidewalk sales four- times per year since they don't know how strong the Owners Association will be. Commissioner Wall said he is at a loss as to how they want to add regulations. He suggested sending a note to the City Council and point out the issue because they know the Council will negotiate with the developer on any sensitive issues or put some hard and fast regulations in the ordinance. He said he recommends not putting any hard and fast numbers into the ordinance, but simply point out to the City Council what the areas are that may be an issue on which some of the commissioners see a possibility of a problem. Commissioner Wall said the proposed ordinance has already been negotiated between staff and the developer and the Council should do the tweaking. Chairman Gasper said she believes the Planning and Zoning Commission would have a difficult time making modifications at this meeting because of not knowing what the appropriate language would be. She said that they could request that staff take this proposal forward and they have two sets of ordinances, one the way it is, and one which extracts the restrictions for the retail merchants as far as frequency for outside displays. Commissioner Jones said the Commission is restricting capitalism. He said they are trying to determine what times a year someone can put things on sale and the merchants' business cycles and their merchandise may not correspond with that time of year. He said by adding the restrictions, the Commission is limiting the ability of the merchants to be successful. Commissioner Sellers said he is all for a store having a sale anytime they want it as long as it is held within the premises and they keep the streets clean. Commissioner Wall said Commissioner Sellers is exactly right. Commissioner Sellers said he is not trying to tell them how to run their business. Chairman Gasper said she thinks to the extent they restrict the frequency that merchandise can be displayed on the street; they are in fact impacting the operation of the merchants' business. She said she would probably tend to be much more Iiaise-faire than some people. She said her sense is that there is not a consensus of the Commission regarding the issue of outdoor merchandise displays. Commissioner Jones said the ordinance addresses bay windows, planters, outside merchandise, sandwich board signs and if the Commission wants to address those items, they could say either/or on some of those things. He said if someone put all of those things out, he doubts if they could keep a three-foot clearance because it would be a real snake path. He said an alternative to restricting the times of year for outside displays of merchandise, may be that they want to say the merchants can have either this and/or that. Commissioner Culley said he thinks the developer has a clear vision as to how the Village is going to work. He said the Village will work differently than the Albertson's/K-Mart strip center where they do have restrictions on the number of times merchants can put tables outside because Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 6 of 16 - Draft clearly some merchants would do it 24/7. He said he is beginning to understand they may want to make that more accessible for businesses that display fruits and vegetables or flowers. Commissioner Culley said he would ask the developer to give some consideration to the fact that the citizens have listened to the commissioners for 1 % hours describing six and twelve inch encroachments into the public rights-of-way and all of a sudden the commissioners are giving the developer free gratis to put any type of tables outside and any type of sales anytime the developer wants to. Commissioner Culley said the developer's vision is clear as to the development and his association and it is in the best interest of the citizens that the commissioners don't waste anymore time. He said he is interested in the developer and the businesses succeeding. Chairman Gasper asked the developer to come forward. She said she assumed Mr. Myers has carefully read the revised ordinance and asked him if there was anything in the proposed ordinance that would adversely affect the economic viability of the development. Richard Myers said they are O.k. with the ordinance. He said they had a lot of discussion with the city staff and there were a lot of comments that went back and forth and there has been a lot of give and take at this point. Chairman Gasper asked if city staff was comfortable with balancing the needs of the businesses to grow, develop, and prosper in Colleyville as well a maintaining the quality and safety for the citizens. She asked Mr. LeBaron if an appropriate balance has been reached. Mr. LeBaron said the ordinance was not drafted in haste. He said the meetings with the developer were started in October and they've met approximately twice a month since that time. He said it has taken quite some time before the Commission has seen the ordinance. He said it is like other ordinances that are as comprehensive; there will be bits and pieces of it that everyone did not agree on. Mr. LeBaron said the Village at Colleyville is a much different type of development than a traditional one with forty-foot setbacks with plenty of space between the buildings. Richard Myers said this has been an interesting process and one thing he wanted to point out is they looked at other ordinances like Southlake Towne Square and that one is significantly less detailed and they didn't get into all the issues. He said the Village at Colleyville ordinance is much more restrictive in many areas like setbacks from the curb for columns and canopies. He said the regulations are generally reasonably close to other projects that are developed that look like the Village at Colleyville. Chairman Gasper continued to go through the ordinance page by page and highlighted the changes. She said the Commission has issues with merchandise display and questioned if 60 days was sufficient for grand opening signs. She said that at what point does the visual interest become clutter and where is that point? Commissioner Swift said that page 13, paragraph "j" clarifies the issue of visual interest versus clutter as it places the enforcement on the Owners' Association. Commissioner Sellers said that like any homeowners' association, the Owners' Association still has to abide by the law, so what ever the Commissioner or the City Council sets forth, they can't go beyond those regulations. Commissioner Swift said he doesn't disagree with that, but some of the items are fairly nebulous, like how often is often, or how big of a display of t-shirts can a merchant display? He said those displays do generate traffic and that is what the commissioners are all involved in is trying to make the development a success. Commissioner Sellers said he Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 7 of 16 - Draft agrees with the success part but they are also trying to keep the look of the development clean and not allow it to get out of hand. Chairman Gasper said she doesn't think it is in the merchants' best interest to have a place that is not attractive and enticing to customers. She said it gets back to what extent does the City of Colleyville want to manage or micro manage what goes on in the Village at Colleyville and how much do they want to rely upon market forces as Commissioner Jones pointed out. Commissioner Culley said in his mind, the developer has answered the challenge as to terms of control and how the development will look. He said he believes staff and the developer have done an excellent job in preparing a document that tries to cover as much as possible. Commissioner Culley said the Commission has raised the issues as they should do and the developer has risen to the challenge and has answered the issues. He said he is satisfied the Village is going to control it to the best interest of the merchants and also the public. Commissioner Culley said he has no problem with the way the ordinance is currently written. Barry LeBaron said staff and the developer talked for about two hours on special events and the issue of how long a merchant can put merchandise out may be more global than just one specific store. He said they realized for the Village to be successful, it would frequently want to have a village wide sidewalk sale or have festivals within the development. He said staff did not feel they were ready to bring that language forward at this point, but that may come forward later. Mr. LeBaron said the City currently has provisions for a Mass Gathering in the Code of Ordinances. He said it says if an event will bring in 500 citizens or more, the organizer would have to come before the City Council and get a Mass Gathering permit. He said there is protection already in place if it happens before they get the language added to the Village PUD as they would have to get the permit for each event they want to have. Barry LeBaron said that page 11 Section 9 c., Security Fencing in the proposed ordinance there is a requirement that was put into the original ordinance that requires the developer to construct an 8-foot wrought iron fence with openings for gates along the entire western property line where the PUD is adjacent to the City owned park property. He said that made sense at the time for security reasons before the City Hall and Library were planned to be in the Villages, but since they will abut much of that common line, the city doesn't feel they want that fence. He said the city will put some type of landscape buffer at that location and they don't want an 8-foot wrought iron barrier. He said staff proposes that when the Commission considers the proposed ordinance, that they add language to Section 9 c. to exclude where the City Hall and Library property abuts the park. He said the developer still has to put in an 8-foot wrought iron fence with gates and openings where it abuts the park but not where it abuts City Hall and the Library. Chairman Gasper asked if the Commission wants to keep the sixty days limitation for grand opening signs or remove it? She said the Commission had some agreement that staff needs to look at the sandwich board regulations to allow easel and podium signs as well. Commissioner Culley moved to recommend approval of the text amendments to the PUD-C, 0-99-1131 for the Village at Colleyville with the exception that under Section G-9-c. the 8- foot wrought iron fence is excluded where the City Hall and Library property abuts the park. Commissioner Swift seconded the motion. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 8 of 16 - Draft Commissioner Culley accepted a friendly amendment by Commissioner Hollis that the sandwich board sign terminology will be updated to include easel and podium signs. Commissioner Swift seconded the friendly amendment. The vote being: Ayes: Wall, Culley, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None The Commissioners adjourned the meeting for a break and returned at 9:20 p.m. 3. PUBLIC HEARING - Special Use Permit for an accessory building, requested by Howard Holt for Pat & Ed Wadley, on Lot 1 R, Block 1, Skipper's Estate located at 5200 Bill's Lane, Case Z-02-011 Barry LeBaron presented the case to the commissioners and reviewed the staff briefing. He told the Commission that the applicants are requesting a Special Use Permit to construct an accessory building on the property and they intend to live in the structure while the main house is completely renovated. He said they would then use the facility for a caretaker's quarters. He described the 2-story building. Mr. LeBaron said the proposed building exceeds the requirements for maximum size, height and use requirements and the applicants are requesting a variance from those requirements, as allowed by the Code. He said the request is consistent with the Master Plan and the wishes of the area homeowners should be the most important factor in the decision to grant the Special Use Permit or not. He told the commissioners that they might establish conditions different than or in addition to the normal requirements of the Land Development Code. Commissioner Swift asked Mr. LeBaron if the accessory building would be the same architecture as the home. Mr. LeBaron responded that the commissioners should ask the applicant. Chairman Gasper opened the public hearing. Those present wishing to speak were: Ed Wadley, 5200 Bill's Lane, the applicant. He said he and his wife want a two-story home in the French tradition and the house would be constructed with Austin Stone. He said his wife is a historical research librarian and the upper level of the accessory building will serve as the library. He said there would be approximately 10' of space between the main house and the accessory building and the rooflines will be equal. He said once the main dwelling is renovated, the accessory building would be used as a garage with a residential area to be used as a study. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Ed Wadley responded to the Commission's a question saying the architect for the renovations and accessory building is the same architect who designed the pool house. He said the pool house is 20' by 40', 280 square feet in size. Barry LeBaron told the commissioners that if the main dwelling and proposed accessory building Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 9 of 16 - Draft were attached by sharing a common wall, the applicant would not need a special use permit and the Commission would not be considering the case. Chairman Gasper moved to recommend approval of the Special Use Permit. Commissioner Sellers seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Wall, Culley, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None 4. PUBLIC HEARING - Amendments to the PUD-R (O-96-1 052) for Spring Garden Addition, requested by Doug Henderson for Statepark Colleyville, Ltd., located at the northeast corner of Cheek Sparger Road and Jackson Road, Case Z-02-012 Barry LeBaron presented the case to the Commission and reviewed the staff briefing. He told them that the development is approximately 40% built out and the purpose of the amendments is to allow the developer to expand the style of dwellings and offer an alternative. He said if the amendments were allowed, the developer would have to replat the subdivision. Chairman Gasper opened the public hearing. Those present wishing to speak were: Bill Wilson, a resident within Spring Garden, said he bought into the development with the plan that the subdivision will be built out as town homes. He indicated that there is a large group of residents present at the meeting who all have an investment in the property and they want to protect it. He said the developer has not consulted them about the changes and they want to make sure that the new ideas do not destroy their investment values and yet they want to facilitate the completion of the subdivision if it will improve their investments. He said they don't know enough to determine what they want to do and if they are for against the proposal. Doug Henderson, 3602 Lake Champlain, Arlington, Texas, was representing the developer. He said there is a problem with the economy and the product of attached town homes are not moving as well as detached garden homes. He said there would be a mixed use within the development of town homes and garden homes and that would produce a comprehensive development that offers smaller lots with less maintenance. He said the homes would appeal to an upscale market and they need to reduce the total number of lots by two lots. Mr. Henderson said the garden homes would meet all deed restrictions and have the same architectural restriction as set forth in the deed restrictions that are included in the original ordinance. He said the original ordinance does not prohibit detached homes, but they wanted to clarify the ordinance and lower the density. Mr. Henderson said the detached garden homes would have less impact on the development and yet would increase the tax revenues. He said the market value on the detached garden homes would increase the values of all dwellings within Spring Garden. He said the builder that will build the detached single-family homes built the homes adjacent to the Byron Nelson Golf Course. Mr. Henderson said the garden homes are compatible with the Master Plan and he quoted from a Texas Supreme Court ruling. He said the proposed change in the subdivision has no negative impacts. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 10 of 16 - Draft Commissioner Wall questioned Mr. Henderson's analysis of a Texas Supreme Court decision and asked Mr. Henderson if he was an attorney. Mr. Henderson responded that he is not an attorney, but has assisted in writing Texas zoning law and mentioned the Farr versus Tibbin case. Commissioner Culley asked questions about current requirements and potential sale prices of the proposed homes in Spring Garden. He also asked about demographics. Chairman Gasper asked about the average time a townhome is on the market. The commissioners discussed square footage of the proposed homes versus the dwellings that are already built. Chere Kimbell, 3986 Witten Drive, spoke about architectural integrity, property valuation, asked questions about size of dwellings and if there were any specific plans for the current residents to review. She said she understands the need to facilitate the building out of the community, but they have concerns, and yet do not want to impede the building out of Spring Garden. Bill Robertson, 3961 Holiday Drive, said the developer is not keeping up with the property maintenance and the place is run down. He said no repairs have been made and the entrance gates often times do not operate. He said the developer has not had someone on the property to show the units and those are some of the reasons things are not selling. Harold Hickman, 3975 Witten, said there have been problems over legal matters between the developer and builder. He said between 1985 and 1994 they lived in California in a similar development and people had to stand in line to bid on a unit. He said the key difference between the end units and the interior units is that the end units sell quicker. Henry Del Casio, 3980 Witten, said that he has lived in Spring Garden for two days. He said the marketing of the property has been poor. He said everyone who lives in Spring Garden bought into a life style. He discussed the demographics of people who want to live in Spring Garden and the importance of property values. He said that communications have been very poor between the Title Company, realtor, and developer. He said he has never heard mentioned that it requires consent of the property owners to change the deed restrictions. Carol Bertram, 3977 Witten, said they had no idea what was being proposed and they want to protect their investments in Spring Garden. She said the overall community plan for Spring Garden was given to them when they bought and they fear deviations. Ms. Bertram said as a neighborhood they want to see Spring Garden develop. Earl Hopenrath, a resident in Spring Garden, discussed the demographics and how the development lends itself to the empty nester or young professionals who don't want upkeep or maintenance. He said the situation of reaching build out is one of absorption. He said in this present time the development needs another product. He said Colleyville is not an urban setting with town homes, and so the new developer is proposing to build patio homes. He said the homes will be in the $300,000 range and the cost of the lots will be approximately $60,000. He said there is a market for patio homes. Steve Knight, 3917 Felps Court, asked if there were proposals for garages openings along Cheek Sparger that could be seen from the street. He said the problem with garages facing Cheek Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 11 of 16 - Draft Sparger is they tend to be unattended and unsupervised and become an attractive crime problem. He said he has sympathy with the residents because the developer did not communicate with them. He said that developers feel they live on an island and don't need to communicate. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Doug Henderson, representing the developer sand that most questions need to be answered by the developer. Commissioner Culley said the point is not to attack the representative, but Mr. Henderson needs to tell his boss that he, as the developer, is not doing a good job of communicating. He said the gates and fountains are in disrepair and the homeowners need to be protected. Commissioner Culley said he wants to see the developer be able to build, but in developing a property there are no guarantees that the developer will do what he says he will do. Doug Henderson discussed with the commissioners the kind of homes that the developer intends to build. Commissioner Swift moved to table the item to allow the developer time to meet with the residents within Spring Garden. Commissioner Wall seconded the motion. Commissioner Hollis asked questions about how many units will be attached or detached and asked if the developer could provide specific layouts. Chairman Gasper said she sees no redeeming value to the development. Commissioner Culley said he heard homeowners in Spring Garden specifically state that they desire whatever it takes to facilitate the completion of the subdivision. He said he wants to give the developer time to meet with the homeowners. Commissioner Jones said the developer did not do much to solicit the support of the current residents. Commissioner Wall said he does not want to throw out the baby with the bathwater and wants to allow the homeowners an opportunity to meet with the developer. Chairman Gasper called for the vote. The vote being: Ayes: Wall, Culley, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None 5. TABLED ITEM - Zoning Change from R20 Residential to PUD-R Planned Unit Development-Residential, requested by Ernest Hedgcoth, Lots 14 & 15, Block 1, Andy Felps Addition located at 137 Acuff Lane and 136 Cheek Sparger Road, Case Z-02-008 Commissioner Hollis moved to remove the item from the Table. Commissioner Sellers seconded the motion. The vote being: Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 12 of 16 - Draft Ayes: Wall, Culley, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None Chairman Gasper spoke about the commissioners' concerns about the drainage. Commissioner Swift said the drainage comes from upstream and should not be an issue. Commissioner Jones said if the proposed addition develops, the drainage would get worse. Barry LeBaron told the commissioners that the developer has made a change to his original plan and has included a green space on the corner of Felps and Cheek Sparger. He displayed the topographic map of the area and pointed out that the area is not within the 1 OO-year floodplain. He said that area is not recognized as a floodplain by FEMA. Mr. LeBaron told the commissioners that the engineering department said the developer would have to provide plans for the drainage on the property when they submit a plat. Tommy Cunningham, 7205 Walden Court, was present to represent the case. He told the commissioners that the property is currently zoned residential. He said he was a former resident in Bridlewood Estate and he understands the concerns by those residents about the proximity to potential commercial development. He said the proposed homes would create a buffer zone and would be a good compromise. He said he needed a minimum of six lots to be successful. Mr. Cunningham said the drainage will be handled in the platting process and they are required to retain the water on sight. He said that six homes would generate 1 .2 million dollars on the tax rolls versus the $30,000 currently being generated. He said this is the highest and best use ofthe property and they would put in the deed restrictions that the property behind the lots would be used for commercial businesses. Commissioner Swift asked Mr. Cunningham questions about the density and average lot size. He asked about the open area and the maintenance of the open area. Mr. Cunningham said the homeowners would maintain the open area as he is proposing to set up a homeowners' association. Chairman Gasper had questions about the generations of income from residential homes versus commercial businesses. Commissioner Culley discussed with Mr. Cunningham the proposed plans and cost of the homes. Mr. Cunningham said the homes would sell for $200,000 and he distributed pictures showing the style of architecture he plans to build. He said they would be approximately 2,000 to 2,300 square foot in size. Chairman Gasper commented that the lot sizes are the same as the lots in Bridlewood Estates. She said she senses that the Commission is in favor of residential development along the street and they will provide a screen from the commercial. The Commission discussed the viability of residential homes selling next to commercial uses. Barry LeBaron told the commissioners that the property is currently zoned R20 and the Master Plan indicates that the lot along Felps and Cheek Sparger is planned for residential use and the lot along Felps and Acuff is planned for commercial use. He said a note could be placed on the plat stating the property behind the subdivision is planned for commercial use. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 13 of 16 - Draft Commissioner Culley moved to suspend the rules to allow people in the audience to speak. Commissioner Swift seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Wall, Culley, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None Those present wishing to speak were: Joe Moore, 133 Acuff, said that Lot 13 is due west of his property and when they moved into their home, they knew the property was projected for commercial development. He said the Master Plan use for the property fits in that location. He said there are several different kinds of buffers and the street, Felps Drive, is a buffer. He said the creek behind Bridlewood is a buffer. He said that with the deep lots along Felps Drive that back up to Bridlewood Estates, and the width of Felps Drive, Bridlewood Estates is 400' away from potential commercial development. Mr. Moore said he wants to be able to get as much value from his property as he can. He said if the commission changes the Master Plan by allowing this development, they take away future commercial property and he wants to see the City go forward with their commercial plans. He said he had a problem with the density of the subdivision. Mrs. Virginia Garrett, 128 Cheek Sparger, said she has reported to the commissioners in the past about the drainage problems associated with her land and with the most recent rains, this property was under solid water. She said the trees on the property are dying. Mrs. Garrett said she does not feel comfortable with not knowing how the drainage for the proposed development will be handled. She said when Payless was built the flow of water came directly down Cheek Sparger and they had to install French drains and a sump pump to prevent the water from coming into their home. Chairman Gasper asked Mrs. Garrett if she could be assured that the drainage problems would be alleviated and the developer would improve the drainage, would she be in support of the proposed development. Mrs. Garret said she would rather not have houses. Steve Knight, 3917 Felps Court, asked why did the density cease to be an issue? He said six houses on small lots are a problem. He asked when did the land behind the proposed houses get to be zoned commercial? He said his main concern is the density and he has concerns with telling people the property behind the houses will go commercial when it might not. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Chairman Gasper referred to the Master Plan versus the Zoning Map. She said the density per the Master Plan is 1.8 dwellings per acre. She spoke about the drainage. Mr. LeBaron displayed the topographic map of the area and explained the drainage patterns in the area. Commissioner Culley spoke about density and asked Steve Knight why that density should not be allowed on that property after viewing the style of homes the developer proposes to build? Mr. Knight explained that he has concerns not oppositions. He questioned how close the homes would be to each other and was told that the houses and lots would be similar in size to Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 14 of 16 - Draft Bridlewood. He said that helps him accept the plan and he is concerned about the aesthetic results and if the end result is pleasing he could support the project. Chairman Gasper said she thinks there is a market for homes in the $200,000 price range and they would be an improvement to the area. The commissioners discussed with staff the issue of commercial development behind the proposed homes. Barry LeBaron explained the Master Plan and the current zoning map. The commission commented that commercial development would generate more trips per day than residential development. Tommy Cunningham, the developer, discussed the width of the proposed lots and the setback requirements. The commissioners discussed with the developer the plans for commercial development behind the houses. The developer said that the Master Plan is a vision and sometimes it doesn't work out the way it is planned. He said it makes more sense for the corner of Cheek Sparger to be commercial rather than the residential that is indicated on the Master Plan. He said his proposed change on the property will begin immediate income for the city and the area needs newness brought to it. Commissioner Sellers said he has concerns about the water and does not want to have a problem with the development. He said he is concerned about too many lots for the drainage issues. Barry LeBaron said the commission could require the developer to provide a preliminary drainage plan and make the condition in the ordinance. He said the plan might have to be altered at the platting stage. The commissioners discussed with the developer the logic behind the higher price range as opposed to the current neighborhood. Commissioner Jones said he also has a problem with the water on the property and believes that it could only get worse. Chairman Gasper said it is her sense that the zoning change probably would not be approved as is, but if the developer's engineer was present to give them a comfort level regarding proposed drainage, they may be able to reach a comfort level. Chairman Gasper moved to table the case to allow the developer to have his engineer present. Commissioner Swift seconded the motion. The vote being Ayes: Wall, Culley, Jones, Sellers, Gasper Noes: Swift, Hollis 6. PUBLIC HEARING - A Replat of Lots 11, 13,43 & 59, The Village at Colleyville requested by the City of Colleyville for the City Hall and Library, located at 100 Main Street Case p- 02-004 Barry LeBaron presented the case to the Commission and reviewed the staff briefing. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 15 of 16 - Draft Chairman Gasper opened the public hearing. Those present wishing to speak were: Luann Edwards, 220 W. Glade Road, said that the streets on the plat looked funny to her and one street is only big enough for one-way traffic. The commissioners and staff discussed the traffic patterns in the area. Main Street from Cottage Lane is only one way to allow traffic to circulate out Forest Oaks. Staff said Casa Lane is a two way street and the Fire Department wanted two 12-foot lanes on Casa Lane. Commissioner Culled moved to approve the plat with Casa Lane being widened an addition two-feet. Commissioner Swift seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Wall, Culley, Swift, Jones, Sellers, Hollis, Gasper Noes: None 7. Citizens' comments regarding items not on the agenda: There were none. 8. Staff comments, reports and discussion items: There were none. 9. Commissioners' comments and reports: There were none. ADJOURNMENT: The Commission moved to adjourn the meeting at 11 :45 p.m. The motion was seconded and passed by acclamation. Respectfully Submitted, Jan Levy Planning & Zoning Assistant levyj@ci.colleyville.tx.us Approved on: NOTE: As a matter of public record, an audio recording of this Planning and Zoning Commission meeting is available upon request. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - March 25, 2002 Page 16 of 16 - Draft .~ Texas PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA BRIEFING Agenda Date: Subject: April 8, 2002 P-02-013 - Minor Plat of Huffman Addition, requested by Neal Huffman, 3.3694 acres located on the east side of Behrens Court in the 4800 block. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS: Neal Huffman is the owner of a 3.3694-acre parcel of land located on the east side of Behrens Court, south of Glade Road. The owner has submitted a Minor Plat of the property for review and consideration by the Planning & Zoning Commission. The plat will create two lots for the construction of single-family residences. The following is a summary of the major items associated with this Minor Plat. Perimeter Street Improvements. Perimeter street improvements are required for this property since Behrens Court is considered an unimproved street and the plat contains more than one residential lot. The developer is required to construct one-half of the street or provide an equivalent amount of cash escrow for future improvement by the City. Ordinance 0-01-1314 established a base linear foot fee of $138.78, with the actual escrow amount being a decreasing portion of the total cost dependent upon the actual street frontage. The amount due for this property is $24,287. The owner will be requesting a waiver of this requirement from the City Council. Master Plan. The Colleyville Master Plan, adopted in 1998, designates this area for single-family residential development. The proposed use of the property is consistent with the Plan. The owner's surveyor has addressed all Development Review Committee comments. This plat only requires approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The City Council will consider waiver request of the perimeter street improvement requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Approval ATTACHMENTS: · Location map · Plat · DRC Review Memo · Applicant Response Letter Prepared by: CJ~ Agenda Item No. 1 - Page 1 1\0 AVE 25 " 2< 12 2. u .. '" Z2 14 .. '" o 0: 21 15 20 .. " 17 ]"-,:- ~pEl'l 1\~ OIlGII !llcCO~ TR 5Ble .11 . , lR '.'D .1' . '~JC j,,,,,1I, ~qo' : .56J. 5 lA A1[ ..5 At ~ '" "" TR 6e1F' 5 " z Z :z: < :2 1 GGS ~ I 2.0B5 . . I .9115 . ill~otl GS ! 1 tl !Sp~\o~ I ~,) ~ E Z& 1 E'l1 'f~LIJ J ~I ~i ! z... . / rHit'v . 1,0 ! i I I I I i y ,- i _i 'j -! i Zl i I , i ! : i 0: '" ~ < .. '" .... .. :c u - _____ -TA fR ~ 68] 181A . <91 At.~<< Ae m 6HZ 1.00 AC ! - ~c, i ~~r.' i , 1 1.00 . , C~,,1'tS ~- I. 1 - 1.00 . '"tlD tllCtl Jtl. B"C" &- , 1 ~.D1P 1 ! .....e~ ~ ~, ~..~~-9 ~- 1 1.005. 1 &~;O #8';A2 .,5] At .25' A '~;C ~ .....".. .164 At .255 A 13~tllA ~VVl'l ~ 1 ' , 3.17 . tJ TR &8]91.& '.0 ole ,~~ "," -' (,,;' TR 68l9t 1.0 Ae TR 68]9 1.0 At - \) ~\.~~ ~\)\)~ 1.1' .1 . I ~... ....02 . Oil REN FRO DR .... z .. > o u, Z ] !~ l' ~ AVONDALE .1 I ,/ . ,. I - I .. - ~N ...,G"l u ~L~. n.P' ~ (\~ . ,_ DR - .. 15 .. u " '0 . 0: '" 12 ,- - DR ! A V ALON 5Rl OR. .... o ,..l .. :>I < u 1& 15 14 u .2 '0 " ,- t- ARTHUR DR . P ER ~ ~~ - o ... ~ N I ,- ! , .,~" !J'JIo', ~.~ -l~ ~I (b;~ ,. .- ~.,,, 2 ,U'~ ~! 1 I p_ O~.'~' · p~ TR 3R ','U' of "~..5A C ~~f'- {'o' ~ 1 z rn ~1 .,~,. '.I.~i 1.1 At o' (&.~ fR ]8 '.OAC -~......" I It. 202 , .019 . :tllf L~~g "'~LGs9V.1V Il.') 2R' , .991 . I I I . TR 6415 1.35 AC TR "', .60 AC TA U11 .50 AC fA ,., .4J} At ,- _I !.!'. f .T.!'. I TYLER AVE I I ,- I I Location Map HUFFMAN ADDITION CASE # P-02-013 '0 "' J 11 / ( ...... IZ n r '"(. TR <95 ,.40 At fA 4. '.02 At - . -:' 4 'fo~ to RLltlG p.r' ~ ~ll~~t~ 2.:;5. ~LE'{ z \ACCJ\ . ~ 1 c#J ,. 15 20 - TR 2G '5.21 At fR U' l.O At I ~TR ..,8 ....--- . 'Q At TA .'4 .1)1 At TFt "'IBI .n5 At 1 TR ",AI t GLADE- RD .- (-1 "'(c'fll'l1 1 1 ! 0"5 n' / \J ~:"2:' C ~F,l~ I! i: 1 I!\."" ~IJ 2~ 'f.~Al~ ~_ TR 585 '. e '.m i '.100 I r::?'", M ~;f'~6 1 "~T: ','" ~ ~#' ~ : ,: ~ :( V ~ I .: : 'fA'P; · :! 2 ~f 1= 'FoOO . '" 'R ,- C'~' ,. J. .'j , .. ,~_,Pi ! 10 or')' ./ I. ~ .. ....... ~ "I .i I"r.' ~. ~! g~~~, ,:! i-o . r." I II~ ~5 .. Q U ""TR--. ,- - ! ,_ F -...-. _ ~ ~ 11 t ~ 1!1 1 II ,~. I 1_} ! g ~ 2 - ~ ,.. ~ ~I.:~~. (f- ~-. '-~R'~=BRO~K q~s&:. .:' ! .,. ~. -1 , ". I t I! 15, 1.0~ . -'0 " 12 t3 U ~ _(~" ,.. ,.. - .... I. .. . F,'11S s- fR 6AI" j~ ,,1 ~ '-QAC ES;.:~~,-~. TA &AU TA 6A2e '.11 At ..-...-..--.--....-.-. TR 4&2 4.0 At: " 1'11' 'f 1\ LLA 1'E ( "ES'f to _ , . Iii: "" ! TA .A., 1.1' At 0: :< .~ .... :z . 0- :2 I lR 04. 1.' AC fR 4A1 . I.S AC TR <. 1.5 , I GLADE RD "-- ... . TR 2M '."2 At TR 2MI ,.n At TA 2F 5.0 AC TR Zl ....2'1 Ae fR 'J 2.68 At I I TR 28e I ~ '11 ~ Z c> ~ '" l; S~~ ~a;:j c> '" " 0 II ~ rn IIJ S Ilk) z J ' I ,. ~5r: . ~~ ~~ ~I ~. i diG !I' ~ . I \B IV,;;\", ,,\9 ~<:>" \~':::;, .-...... -- . c.-... ~ __.... ...au:.:r. e @) U~~i! ~!il ~~ ! ~'i!~ll ~~n~ ' Iki~ J>i: "-0 . ~ !ilf li~~ ;i '!i~1 'PI~ ~I'~ i~~: : 'if. ~o. ~ il';~ g !~~ ~l!~ : ~ji!~ '~i. ii~~i ~~I 'I~t ~;~ ";a t~t b~ I~I.~ .' ~rl' is: i ~~al ~~~ rl'. ~;; , l. ""~ ',' ~t, 1~' !~,,~ ii: '-l ~!1 ?~ ...: 3~!i. =~ =~~ a ~m. !J;CD"Q; ~ ~~=:III~ ;;;;~~~ ~ C I-'CD5';!Itf 0 ~ft. ~ .. .~ .. .~ III , (Dol'll ...'oJ 0 <Dt'IQ~" ~ 011<"1: tIIJ ~n~ PI ~~~~ ~ .. tl"~... I I ~ m,~,:} ! ~~ . , .n.....:'I ~.nu Q. . ~~~~i ~~~i~ mi~ . ,. ~~~~~ =.~H !\111 ~~~J iI' i;i" Wi ~~ ~ o z > o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > : :r: t" ~c::~ :~[/} N~~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ Z Q<ttj ItN ii.... ""'Ill ~ .... t" ~::!o ~oO ~~~ ~ ~ Ul~ lllZ 00 ~:.J z~ 101> ., H~1 ~~ u~~ ;: o"!_ ...... ;1,,: ~~ If ~i~ iii u; ~ ~ ~ ~I ::;~ m .,; Hi ~n ~;;~ Illlli! i::l~e~ lill .~l. ... --I .,,- '1~1~ !g ::::-,.,=....lllf. ~ ~ @ + ~i~ ;J~!. ~;~~~ H~~~ 1;;~~~ !W': ,o~ ,..,! .!:.~ '''"" ,._I! Q- IE' ~ . i~lt! :.lil ~~. n ~- ~~m ! ~i mH~ i; ~ ~~i.Q"~ i ~~ .- -- :: Hm ~ ~~ -.~b3~ ;:_! ~~o ~ _: tmi ; ,- 'i'" ; i:,'~Q~ < -~.~ < ~ ~~m G r ~ 1 a ~ i I 1 r ~ ~ f . . f " : ~ CITY OF COLLEYVILLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE FAX TO FAX NO FROM March 28, 2002 Ricky Gentry 817-282-0401 Clayton Husband, AICP, Development Coordinator SUBJECT P-02-014 Minor Plat - Huffinan Addition, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2 The Colleyville Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed your Minor Plat request submitted to this office on March 15,2002. The following comments are for your consideration. PLAT DRAWING 1. Revise the title block to read MINOR PLAT rather than COMBINATION PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT. 2. A IS-foot utility easement needs to be added along the common property line between the two lots. The easement should be centered on the property line. 3. The vicinity map needs to be revised. The property location should be moved one street to the east. 4. Indicate whether the end of the sanitary sewer line terminates at a manhole or a cleanout. 5. Remove the note regarding perimeter street requirements. This property is subject to that requirement, and a waiver can only be granted by the City Council. OTHER INFORMATION 1. PARKLAND DEDICATION FEES. Parkland dedication fees are assessed at the time of approval of the final plat. Since two new lots are being created by this plat, the payment of parkland dedication fees is required for this development. The fee for single-family residential development is $1,802 per lot. The fee must be paid before the plat is recorded with the County Clerks Office. A formal assessment of parkland dedication fees will be provided upon approval of the plat. The estimated fee for this plat is $3,604. 2. PERIMETER STREET IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS. Perimeter street improvements are required for this property since Behrens Court is considered an unimproved street and the plat contains more than one residential lot. The developer is required to construct one-half P.O. Box 185 - Colleyville, Texas 76034 - 817.577.7587 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE P-02-014 HUFFMAN ADDITION of the street or provide an equivalent amount of cash escrow for future improvement by the City. Ordinance 0-01-1314 established a base linear foot fee of $138.78, with the actual escrow amount being a decreasing portion of the total cost dependent upon the actual street frontage. The amount due for this property is $24,287. The owner may request a waiver of this requirement from the City Council. 3. IMPACT FEES. Water, sewer and roadway impact fees are due at the time a building permit is issued for a new structure on a lot. The fees listed below are intended to provide general information on the fees that could be assessed. The actual fee paid may be different depending upon the specific plans for construction. ROADWAY $981 per dwelling unit for SINGLE FAMD...Y uses. Actual fee depends on specific use of the property. Details are available in Chapter 13 of the Land Development Code. $1,790 for a I-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or if a new meter is installed. $128 for a I-inch meter. Actual fee depends on water meter size and/or ifa new meter is installed. WATER SEWER 4. SIDEWALKS. The Land Development Code requires sidewalks along Behrens Court. The sidewalk must be constructed at the same time any new structures are built on the lots. The sidewalk must be at least 4-feet wide. Alternatively, the owner may escrow an equivalent amount of money for the future construction of the sidewalk at the time of building permit issuance. 5. IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ. Congratulations from the Colleyville Community Development staff to Ricky Gentry on passing your RPLS exam. Way to go! PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE Planning & Zoning Commission: City Council: Monday, April 8, 2002, 7:00 p.m. none RESUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A marked-up print is available for pickup in the Community Development Department offices. Once you have completed the changes to the drawing, please submit the following to our offices: · 15 folded copies ofthe revised Minor Plat drawing · one 8 W' x 11" reduced copy of the revised exhibit . a written letter addressing each comment stating the comment has been addressed or offering reasons why the requirernent should be modified or waived PAGE 20F3 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE P-02.Q14 HUFFMAN ADDITION The above requested items must be submitted no later than noon on Thursday, April 4, 2002 in order to make the scheduled hearings. The item will not be scheduled for the Plarming & Zoning Commission meeting until all items are submitted. Please contact me at 817-577-7587 or husbandc@ci.colleyville.tx.us if you have any questions. C: ENGINEERING DEPT FIRE DEPARTMENT BULDING INSPECTlON PUBLIC WORKS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE PAGE 3 OF 3 ~~., .,.::::::;:, ,<:~;'~l'-'>--~l o.....~ ~ David C. Mo; ; ...,...,-"''"'~. ;. -.... Registered \PrOfe:; \\ .~~.~ '-.: .""~yors, Inc. \. i! I V#J,d Surveyors \(^;~l ,...._~.~.._",.....h_ ,.... David C. Moak, R.P.L.S. Consultant Texas · New Mexico · Arizona · Nevada · Acreage · Topography · Subdivisions · Loan Swveys · Investigative Swveys · C.onstruction Layout David W. Myers, R.P.L.S. President April 2, 2002 City of Colle,ville P.O. Box 185 Colleyrille, Texas 76034 Atm: Clayton Husband, AICP, Development Coordinator Re: P-02-014 Minor Plat - HutTman Addition, Block I, Lots 1 and 2 Dear Clayton, This letter is in response to the DRC comments faxed to me today. After discussing these items with the owner/applicant, we have the following comments and request: PLAT DRAWING I) Retised the title block as requested. 2) Added a 1 S foot utility easement along the common lot line, 7.S feet on each side as requested. 3) The vicinity map was revised as requested. 4) There is a cleanout shown per City records, but the cleanout is not \'isible on the site. S) The note regarding a waiver of street perimeter requirements was removed from plat. However, the owner/applicant does hereby request a approval by the city council waving such. OTHER INFORMATION 1) Parkland and Dedication fees will be addressed by owner. 2) On behalf of our client, we are requesting a waiver of the perimeter street requirements. However, the owner/applicant does hereby request a approval by the city council waving such. 3) The impact fees will be address by the owner. 4) The sidewalk along Behrens Court will be addressed by the owner. S) To all the DRC Committee, Thank you for the congratulations! We appreciate your attention in this matter and should you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call. (;tL ;/ !j~ RiCk~~ ~'try - .- ~ -!- RPLS 5519 105 Bedford Road · Bedford, Texas 76022-6208 · Metro 817-268-2211 · Fax 817-282-0401 · www.moaksurveyors.com Member Texas Society of Professional SUNeyors & American Congress on SUNeying and Mapping .~ TexaS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA BRIEFING Agenda Date: Subject: April 8, 2002 P-02-015 - Amended Plat of Lots 28R and 66R, The Village at Colleyville, requested by APEM, located at the southwest corner of Main Street and Village Lane. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS: Village Management Ltd. is the owner of three lots located at the southwest corner of Main Street and Village Lane. The owner has submitted an Amended Plat of the property for review and consideration by the Planning & Zoning Commission. The plat will consolidate two lots for the construction of a mixed-use building. The plat will also add an easement to Lot 66R. The following is a summary of the major items associated with this Minor Plat. Lot Consolidation. The purpose of the plat is to consolidate two lots and an alley right- of-way into a single lot. A mixed-use building would be constructed on the entire lot. Several utility lines will be removed from the alley right-of-way, such as water, natural gas, and electric conduit. An additional easement is being added to Lot 66R to accommodate the relocated water line. Zoning. This property is zoned PUD-C. The proposed development is consistent with the requirements contained in the adopted ordinance for this project. The owner's surveyor has addressed all Development Review Committee comments. This plat will require additional approval by the City Council. RECOMMENOA TION: Approval ATTACHMENTS: · Location map · Plat · DRC Review Memo · Applicant Response Letter Prepared by: ~ Agenda Item No. 2 - Page 1 TR 3;;A I H1 q~?'J~' It 1.1425 (Q :/ _p_ __ ___._~~~________ ~j : r: \0 , i0(f, .. AR d c:}. · ~ ___.' ___EEGTI i l~2 ~. -~! / : 59 / ~----~ : r---.-----J I\,( R / / I ( L--'-'---~ - J 20 ! I 1 I O~DON wiC1 4\ ;\~~ i r="--1 j 1 2 / 1---;: ~ \ 15.JIBr;;Jo ~- i I ~ \ ASS'3) J_C~ _~:.J ~tAGE-' '--- 9=-[' ~ Ci~/ f~:.-oF <" 29 L~ ..l J U I l3~ i~: I \1 13'n t {JPPL~E' 5 II 11R .'.i 1 / 8 ;<( 1 .~ 1.648 @/ ~~ \' ~ ..J ~ f t() 4- I I ~R 10 ~ 5 i:~0 -..J", 4 : AC ~..... / I '3'" ! ~ / 78 I i C(f 2 ,. I 72) j " /'" 1 ~.~ "" /i~j" )G(8 0D~;~~~ (jvi'~ {" 1 '~13 (J;t3:3/ -:" ":~~yf:: I' , l -r ^ DON :: 2 ..! r:' \ r 10.025 @ "? . 77 @ {'. I (? : R v: c... 1 R ~ / I I 16 / f I /' 2 I}' . /__.__.m.!:2Ln~__... j-_ ___. _h __ _ _.____ _ _ __ _ _ ____n__'_ _ _ __. _ n_n_n __ _ _ n _n____n_n_'_'h_ ._. _ .._._____.._ _. ~_ __.. / /m.m__ i 3 / TR 2C3 TR i _---- .. .814 ~ .4'16 AC 2C2: //.------c-:--- -----~<:_4 ----s---- .27 i ~:2:i,~~-.----c.V!~~~ A~ i lE2A~ 0 \?,D 1 /'\~ (D;;/------ \" TR 1 , ('-, (D . \ '-.. ") 1 . 947 @ ~ 44 llll ,. ... ~~ \~ ,. ::i -.--- --- ._---j ~b~/ ~:~ =",:", I I i ~;TR 10 f:, 11 II J~'5 45 5 4 11 3 .~ G-_____~.'S;:--~ I 1 7 , ._.___._..l_J --t- __---h. \---~..---~~ ,/r;l . ~68 I 3 ~.... / Ll~ \ ..' " ~\j0L //- 2R r"/ i\ I 1/ . ' ~ D \< (/l.~,??~?/'- I / ' /D [-1 r \ \...j U~l Ec '" 1 I 1 ~ I :; i I I I ," f if' :" ~ .!f! co l:l,J ,J I ; ! I I ' { i ! if; i i ~ti,i U __ 1 ~~ l~i I. tl., J I I { I ~ i I !' '1 . ~ ..,.==... t M . . -:~ ~~liHlnpll~ln! ~l~m ~ ~~~ , d ~.~';; .s Olg . . ~ _ U] . E.~t h~ 11 J . . . = .,. j' J 41 ~ f I ~ .; tI)~ ~ ! ~i , I Ii I j · i . . I I ; ; I 1; I , 11 I. I ~~ ~ ~~~- ~ -E'~I 5' ~. 't' J.! I .1' !., D' ~ t I j;:::j ::.:~~ ~N ." .).. l'j = ~ I i ~ ~ Iii P J IH~i. . ~~i ;B~i !I . .' I . I · III' ., . , II 1 ~go j ~~8~ ~~i~ (ill; i. i', ii' l !! ~i, ~! 1i11.,liI lil]u ,g 5:" ~~ 1 . . ~- ui-2c 8h~ ~ Illl: ,,'~ ~t j .' j ! '.", jJ t {I i U~WH t f f ~~f-< ~;;j gt:~ hili J~ I ' , ~ I i iqH .p ;. . i ~J' j 1 I I b< 'li~.: ~ ~~~3 ~ IDP ,.. II' ~ ; , . IP! II, "1 !" I '{~~If H ,~ ...I~ :: 5g'2 ~>=O'" . U'lJ I..,' I r JlI' It J t I ! "It 1~1 , I ill :! I C> O...l.ll~ I .~o ii'" ~fll! ]~; HI,: ~ lit; H h ~ tJ I. i II1'INf j < U u_ 1. h. ~ ~ ~i ! I IE' '1 f H' JI I '!I' It tll'" !. I' ~ I f I' ; Iq d i~2 ~11! {! I I, I II I, I; Q I' ~. l' r: ~ H~lf"" H! I > .-"" ! ! ~Ijft ~i i! ii i. if h ~: i! H i~ ~! Ii ~ ~; ~! i ~Wili " ~5 d 1 I 1 , .., '2 'i 0 dl j ! I' d 1 ; I 5'l;~ i i I!bll " I~ I: I! I~ n Ii II II 11 II I: III Ii I ;;mhU ii, I ; I L i fa, i i J} ~ J j !i L I H 1 1- ] a I H e! I! n'l . . It 5 it H ~ J u 1. n ~ ~ fl H 5 6 ~~ If q. \] H " ~ . t J "1 :5! ~ .j ~ r I l' I, tn 11 o !. 1 l~ .J I .( 1 1 · lj j J u .! ~ ! r 1 ;} 1 H 1~ .S -1.1 II .&> ! Ii ~ ,i J Jli .. h I 11 ! ii u !Jf .S .]~ ~ lit ,~ I ~ l;~ j ] il A' H lE \ ) (-....- ;;; I~;~i ~::."" i5.. ~~~ ~ :a l- hfi II~'I~ ~ ~ . (JIox ,2L) J.lI3lU.S HIYJl ~ ~ II r g!~ J.!ttA .1: !i'~ ~i i, . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~~~~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~ o~~~~2~~~~2;~2~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~i~~~~~~s~s~~~; ~i~'~!~~~!~~~!~~~~~ iil _....~ I ~~~~~~~~~~~~Sg;~;S~ ~~~ \ -., eo t i .I: !i" n ! ~ 1 IIIU. J.I .......l~~~ UIIIll':lNQDD:IJI..l3TW_.l1 ~ ~~ N'" .~ ~ 0 .. ~ s .I: !i" n ~ ;, 'i ,w." (ll08 .gg) :nrn 'lZZVld ~;.~ RIICDt"~ ~ti,s:I:KlWo \ OMiIl'l'l'1d ll-ft' i.lFI\Ulll\[I0\l~\'l 'l1l;1 ~_ftIlI CITY OF COLLEYVILLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE FAX TO FAX NO FROM March 28, 2002 Konstantine Bakintas, PE ~ Jimmy Archie 817-338-9245 ~ 817-424-2448 Clayton Husband, AICP, Development Coordinator SUBJECT P-02-015 Amended Plat - The Village at Colleyville, Lots 28, 34 and 66 The Colleyville Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed your Amended Plat request submitted to this office on March 15, 2002. The following comments are for your consideration. PLAT DRAWING 1. The Owner's Dedication statement needs to be revised on the plat. The required language is shown below. 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. 2. Rotate the vicinity map so that the drawing and vicinity map are both oriented the same direction. 3. There is one minor discrepancy between the drawing and the metes and bounds description in the third call. It appears that the dimension should read 32.0 feet rather than 74.10 feet. Verify and revise the plat accordingly. 4. Since right-of-way is being vacated by this plat, the plat will require approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The signature block for the Planning and Zoning Commission, which is attached, needs to be added to the drawing. The staff approval block may be deleted.. P.O. Box 185 - Colleyville, Texas 76034 - 817.577.7587 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE P-02-015 VILLAGE AT COLLEYVILLE 5. There is an existing 4-foot wide utility easement located on the north side ofthe alley on Lot 28. It appears that the intent is to abandon this easement by the plat. The easement should be shown on the plat and noted that the easement will be abandoned by this plat. 6. The lot numbers for the surrounding lots need to be added to the plat. The Land Development Code requires that all properties within 100 feet of the boundary of the plat be identified either by lot/block/subdivision name or owners name. ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION PLANS 1. The engineering construction plans are under review by the Engineering Department, Fire Department and Public Works Department. Any comments on the paving, drainage and utility plans will be forwarded as soon as the review is complete. Questions concerning the engineering construction plans should be directed to Choyce Morrow, P .E., at 817-577-7587. PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE Planning & Zoning Commission: City Council: Monday, April 8, 2002, 7:00 p.m. none RESUBMllT AL REQUIREMENTS A marked-up print is available for pickup in the Community Development Department offices. Once you have completed the changes to the drawing, please submit the following to our offices: . 15 folded copies of the revised Amended Plat drawing · one 8W' x 11" reduced copy of the revised exhibit . a written letter addressing each comment stating the comment has been addressed or offering reasons why the requirement should be modified or waived The above requested items must be submitted no later than noon on Thursday, April 4, 2002 in order to make the scheduled hearings. The item will not be scheduled for the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting until all items are submitted. Please contact me at 817-577-7587 or husbandc@ci.collevville.tx.us if you have any questions. c: ENGINEERING DEPT FIRE DEPARTMENT BUILDING INSPECTION PUBLIC WORKS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE PAGE20F 3 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE P-02-015 VILLAGE AT COLLEYVILLE ATTACHMENT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVAL WHEREAS The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of CoIleyville, Texas voted affirmatively on this _ day of ,20_. to approve this Plat. Chair. Planning and Zoning Commission Attest Secretary, Planning and Zoning Commission PAGE30F 3 .-'"_..._.__._-_...~,_..._~_.-.-..,-~.,-_._..__.."--------~.>._--- ~D~ Baird, Hampton & Brown, Inc. c..=..J D L.=:::J Engineering & Surveying March 4, 2002 Clayton Husband Development Coordinator City of Colleyville P.O. Box 185 Colleyville, Texas 76034 RE: P-02-015 Amended Plat-The Village At Colleyville, Lots 28,34, and 66 Mr. Husband, The following actions were taken: 1. The Owner's Dedication was revised as noted. 2. Vicinity Map was revised as noted. 3. The dimension was revised as noted. 4. The P & Z signature block was added as noted. 5. The 4' utility easement was revised as noted. 6. The lot numbers for the surrounding lots were added as noted. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Please call me at (817) 338-1277 Ext. 244 if you have any further questions. Respectfully submitted, ~. Gen W. Hughes, R.P.L.S. Baird, Hampton, & Brown, Inc. 309 W. 7th Street, Suite 500 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Tel: 817-338-1277 Fax: 817-338-9245 E-Mail: mail@bhbinc.com .~ TexaS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA BRIEFING Agenda Date: Subject: April 8, 2002 Z-02-012 - Tabled Item - Amendments to the PUD-R (0-96- 1052) for Spring Garden Addition, requested by Doug Henderson for Statepark Colleyville, Ltd., located at the northeast corner of Cheek Sparger Road and Jackson Road. UPDATE 4-8-02 This item was tabled by the Commission on March 25, 2002. The applicant was directed to meet with the residents of Spring Garden and discuss their concerns that were brought out at the meeting. The applicant met with the residents of the subdivision on March 30 and discussed the proposal and the list of concerns of the residents. The applicant will meet again with the residents on April 7. The applicant has advised staff that the primary issue of concern about the proposed changes is the required size of the houses, and the applicant is considering increasing the minimum size. The minimum required size is not contained in the ordinance. The applicant will be present at the meeting to discuss the meetings with the residents and to present conceptual drawings of the proposed residential structures. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS In December 1996, the City Council approved Ordinance 0-96-1052, which created a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a 45-unit townhouse development located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Jackson Road and Cheek-Sparger Road. To date, the development is approximately forty percent built out. There are four primary structures on the site, which contain fourteen dwelling units. Each dwelling unit is situated on its own platted lot. Doug Henderson, representing the property owner Statepark Colleyville Ltd., is requesting an amendment to the PUD ordinance to incorporate a provision which will allow the developer the option of constructing either single family attached or detached dwelling units on the remaining undeveloped lots in the development. The proposed ordinance includes a provision to allow the optional housing types, provided that any detached dwelling unit is situated on a lot with a minimum lot width of 45 feet. A provision has also been placed in the proposed ordinance to require 3-foot side yard setbacks on any detached dwelling units. Since some of the lots in the development are currently platted with 36 feet of lot width, it will be necessary for the developer to replat portions of the subdivision in order to obtain the requested 45 feet of lot width. Additionally, a provision has been placed in Agenda Item No. 3 - Page 1 the ordinance to require rear entry garages on the lots situated adjacent to Cheek- Sparger Road in Block A. Staff mailed out 16 notices to property owners having property within 200 feet of the development. Several property owners have submitted a letter objecting to the rezoning revision. Attached are copies of the letters. RECOMMENDATION Denial A TT ACHMENTS · Location map · Letter from applicant . List of Property Owners Receiving Notice of Public Hearing · Correspondence · Ordinance No. 0-02-xxxx Prepared by: Agenda Item No. 3 - Page 2 I 40 16 N:. I 1.'!I83 . 1 l'Il'I15 O~ I TA 4Z 7.37 At 1 TR 41 1,3 IiIC TR 4J 4.! At TR41111 8.B4 At ~ ! L ".. I 1.3224. Z .&327 . v ~ a: o ppR"- TA T pGE 201 rlE R 1 3.&~1I . 1 # 1.9 At fR 20 4.11 AC ~ TA I 6.434 At -' <I: .rr >- Z LV U I. I u''''_' ~ Location Map CASE # Z-02-012 - Spring Garden Addition Amendments to the PUD-R (0-96-1052) Attachment to Application for pun Site Plan Amendment Spring Garden Addition, Colleyville, Texas March 1, 2002 Statement of Planning Objectives Spring Garden Addition was developed in 1997. It was seen as an alternative solution for home buyers desiring higher quality housing standards without the typical maintenance headaches that come with a large yard. After numerous discussions in neighborhood, P&Z and City Council meetings, the community overwhelmingly embraced the concept with some significant conditions. 1. The lots had to be fee simple lots, allowing only one dwelling unit per lot. 2. High quality architectural standards of appearance were simultaneously attached to the adopting ordinance and recorded with the deed restrictions. It was very important to all concerned that this would not be an apartment community. Since the early success with the existing town homes in Spring Garden, the market has changed, and there is less desire for attached single family living. There is still a segment of the up-scale market desiring smaller lots, but the dwelling style of choice tends toward detached designs. The applicant would like to offer detached garden homes to this changing market. In order to do that and maintain a consistent design throughout the neighborhood, it is necessary to reduce the total lot count by 2, with one lot being removed from Block A and one from Block B. This will allow for an increase in lot width on the remaining lots which will be developed as garden homes following the same architectural standards as the town homes. The current PUD does not specifically prohibit detached dwellings, nor does it specifically allow them. This proposal would clarify that issue. At the same time, the applicant has included notes on the Amended Site Plan to clarify the drive access configurations for each block. Development Schedule Spring Garden's infrastructure is in place and will not be physically impacted by this change. Some new homes will be built as soon after the PUD is approved. Statement of Proposed Ownership The property will continue to be owned by Statepark Colleyville, L TD while offering lots to prospective home buyers. Statement of Utilities to be Provided Spring Garden's infrastructure is in place and will not be physically impacted by this change. Economic Development Information (NA-Residential Zoning) Traffic Impact Analysis (At build out, the project will generate about 410 trips per day.) Hallie McKethan 2501 Cheek Sparger Road Bedford TX 76021-2658 Edmund Anderson PO Box 239 Bedford TX 76095-0239 David S and Dana J Bell 3916 Jackson Road Colleyville TX 76034 Diane & C Waychoff Wanger 3920 Jackson Road Colleyville TX 76034-4629 Gregory & Susanne Foreman PO Box 308 Colleyville TX 7634-0308 Edmund & Gail Anderson 1901 Central Dr, Suite 820 Bedford TX 76021-5858 Michael 0 & Carolyn Evans 2502 Kensington PI Colleyville TX 76034 Robert G & Phyllis Hassett 2500 Kensington PI Colleyville TX 76034 Kenneth & Mary N Cornelius 2501 Kensington PI Colleyville TX 76034 David J & Gail E Wheaton 3979 Witten Drive Colleyville TX 76034-4692 Dewey J & Ethel C Bertram 125 King Nicholas Rd Scroggins TX 75480-4613 Harold R & Judy A Hickman 3975 Witten Drive Colleyville TX 76034-4692 Bill & Mary Robertson 3961 Holiday Drive Colleyville TX 76034-4693 Norman J & Olivia Mattson 3967 Holiday Drive Colleyville TX 76034-4693 William W & Sandra Wilson 3982 Witten Drive Colleyville TX 76034-4691 Isham M & Chere Kimbell 3986 Witten Drive Colleyville TX 76034-4691 Case Z-02-012 According to the last published Tax Records, individuals who own property that is within 200-feet of the proposed zoning change requested are listed above. I certify that the parties listed above have been mailed notice of the proposed zoning change request as required by Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government Code. Notices dated March 14,2002. J. Clayton Husband, AICP Development Coordinator Mr. J. Clayton Husband, AICP Development Coordinator Planning and Zoning Commission City ofColleyville P.O. Box 185 Colleyville, TX 76034 rR'~' -E-C-ElrVE--~ MAR 2 0 20;2 D CITY OF COLLEYVILLE BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT March 20, 2002 Dear Mr. Husband: My wife and I own a townhome in Spring Garden. The development is unique and has enormous potential. Unfortunately, we will be away on March 25 and would appreciate your making this letter available to the appropriate people who are involved with the Developer's request to replat Spring Garden. When we purchased our property we were told the community would consist offorty one similar structures. We are concerned about any zoning change to Spring Garden which might adversely affect our investment. We respectfully request any decision to cllange Spring Garden zoning be postponed for reasons below. The initial zoning change from Agricultural to PUD for Spring Garden included several documents in the Ordinance as part of the record. One of these documents is the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions. We believe the developer has failed to fulfill one of its commitments to the City ofColleyville and to homeowners in Spring Garden. Tile attached copy of Article IX, paragraph 9.02 of the CCR's, which was obtained from the Colleyville Planning Department, provides "...Declarant shall have the right...upon the joinder and consent ofthe appropriate county and/or municipal authorities, and with the joinder and consent of the directly affected homeowners to file a replat. .. Owners shall not unreasonably withhold or delay enjoinder...". Implicit in this language is the requirement of the developer to communicate with homeowners before submitting a replat request for Spring Garden. To date there has been no communication from the developer with homeowners. How can a homeowner fulfill its responsibility under this language without information from the developer as to many of its intentions, i.e. number of single family units, compatibility of design and construction with existing structures, prices, open space utilization etc.? How can the City make a fully informed decision under this language without owner input? Our view is that the city should make no decision on March 25, or at least postpone a decision, until these communications have transpired. Your letter to homeowners indicates the developer is seeking a change in zoning due to changes in market forces. We disagree with this thought and believe it is a ''red herring" justification for requesting the change. In our view, the major problem of selling the townhomes rests with the developer's dismal marketing and sales strategy and weak project management. The following are examples of items which have affected this development's success: long periods of construction inactivity, change in builders, construction debris left of property for extended time periods, dead tree removal inside and outside Spring Garden with no replacements, decaying fence and wall structures on East boundary line, much deferred maintenance, etc. These create impressions ofa project in financial difficulty. Couple this with prospective clients knocking on homeowner doors for information about the property and how to contact the part time sales personnel and you have some reasons why sales have been slow. These situations affect how some buyers might view the property rather than the lack of success being attributable to shifting market considerations. They certainly do nothing to enhance the great potential which exists for this unique townhome development. We thank you for your consideration ofthis information and our request to table any decision until there are communications between the developer and homeowners. Sincerely, ~J. J/;;J5;--~~ a~~ovJ Norman D, Mattson Olivia J. Mattson Attach: Paragraph 9.02 of Article IX in Ordinance # 0-06-1052 Cc: Spring Garden Homeowners March 18, 2002 Mr. Clayton Husband Development Coordinator City of Colleyville 5400 Bransford Park P.O. 185 Colleyville, TX 76034 ,_m__ EC:EIVED" . ,-< , 5 .i'IJU~ ------~ I CITY OF COLLEYVILLE ~. BY COMMUNDY DEVELOPMENl Dear Mr. Husband; We are residents of Spring Garden Townhomes. Unfortunately, we are out of state and will not be able to attend the public hearing of the Planning and Zoning Board to be held at the City Hall on March 25, 2002. However, we want to provide an input to this hearing. We understand this public hearing will address a proposed replat ofthe Plat of Spring Garden to go away from the current planned townhome community to include some traditional detached housing. Under Article IX, Section 9.02, of Ordinance 0-96-1052, we are affected Owners and thus have the right to a joinder and consent to any replat or amendments to the Plat. We are disappointed that Statepark Colleyville, LTD., did not discuss their plans for this proposed replat of the Plat of Spring Garden Townhomes with the homeowners prior to requesting a public hearing. Spring Garden Townhomes has never lived up to the planning objectives originally proposed by the developer. These include extensively landscaped grounds, a walking trail for moderate aerobic activity in a controlled access setting, and a sculpture garden featuring a commissioned piece of art. Ordinance 0-96-1052 proposed a development finish date of early 2000. Instead, only 14 units of the originally proposed 45-unit townhouse development have been completed. No new townhomes have been started in over a year and because of a lengthy litigation between Statepark Colleyville, L TD. and the original builder, the development does not have the promised amenities and is in general need of repair. Under the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Spring Garden Villas, a Property Owners Association was to be formed. To our knowledge, Articles of Incorporation have been filed to formally register the Association with the State of Texas. However, we do not know if the Association has yet been approved and we must keep in mind that there have been residents living in Spring Garden for several years. Spring Garden should be an attractive and quality addition to the City ofColleyville. That is what we expected when we purchased our townhouse. Because we do not know any of the details of the proposed replat of the Plat, we are obviously very concerned about the potential impact to our personal property value and quality of life. Will the developer remain Statepark Colleyville, LTD.? Who will be the builder of the detached housing? What will be the size and price range of these homes? ORDINANCE 0-02-xxxx AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING ORDINANCE 0-96-1052; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION. WHEREAS, an application for a zoning district change was filed by Doug Henderson, representing Statepark Colleyville Ltd., on March 4,2002, under Case Number Z-02-012; and WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville has complied with the notification requirements of the Texas Local Government Code and the Colleyville Land Development Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has held a public hearing and made a recommendation on the proposed zoning amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed zoning amendment is in the best interests of the City of Colleyville. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1. THAT the Master Plan, the Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville, Texas, and the accompanying Zoning Map (Exhibit A) are hereby amended insofar as they relate to certain land located in Colleyville, Texas, described as Spring Garden Addition, by amending the special conditions for Ordinance 0-96-1052 to add the following conditions: F. One (1) single family dwelling unit may be built on each platted lot in this Planned Unit Development. Said dwelling unit may be either attached or detached, provided that any detached dwelling shall only be allowed on a lot having a minimum width of 45 feet. Dwelling units that are not attached shall have a side yard setback of not less than three (3) feet. G. Dwelling units in Block A shall be designed for rear-entry drive access. Dwelling units on all other blocks shall be designed for front- entry drive access. Sec. 2. THAT Ordinance 0-99-1141 shall remain in effect except where amended by this ordinance. Sec. 3. Ordinance 0-02-xxxx Page 2 of 2 THAT any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance as read together with the Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined a sum not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each and every day such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such. Sec. 4. THAT, the City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clause hereof as an alternate method of publication provided by law. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the 2002. day of The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the 2002. day of ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: Cynthia Singleton, TRMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross T. Foster City Attorney .~ l"exas PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA BRIEFING Agenda Date: Subject: April 8, 2002 Z-02-008 - Public Hearing - Zoning Change from R20 Single Family Residential to PUD-R Planned Unit Development Residential requested by Ernest Hedgcoth on Lots 14 and 15, Block 1, Andy Felps Addition, located at 137 Acuff Lane and 136 Cheek Sparger Road. Tabled March 11,2002 UPDATE 4-8-2002 The Commission tabled this item on March 25, 2002. The Commission requested an analysis of the revenue implications of approving residential development on a planned commercial lot. The Commission also directed the developer to further study the drainage issues associated with this project. Revenue Implications. The Master Plan indicates the future use of this property as both commercial and residential. The existing lot located at the southwest corner of Acuff and Felps is planned for commercial development. Based on its location, it is unlikely that a retail use would locate on the specific lot. The analysis shown below shows a comparison of the applicant's proposal versus the Master Plan buildout. Comparison of Development Scenarios for Z.02.008 and Master Plan Bulldout Table 1 Property Developed per Applicant Proposal Estimated City Property Sales Estimated Proposed Acres Floor Area Property Building Revenue Use (s.f.) Valuation Valuallon Taxes Taxes Tolals SF Resldenllal 1.44 12,000 $ 30,000.00 $ 1,200,000.00 S 4,273.02 none $ 4,273.02 Assumptions: Eslimated floor area is based on applicant's proposal of 2,000 sf per residence Property & Building Valuation: Properly based on existing value per TAD Building based on applicant information of $200,000 per residence Sales Taxes: None Table 2 Property Developed per Master Plan Bulldout Proposed Floor Area Property Building City Property Sales Revenue Use Acres Is.f.) Valuation Valuation Taxes Taxes Tolals SF Resldenllal 0.72 2,000 S 15,000.00 S 200,000.00 746.91 none 746.91 -- Office 0.72 9,409 $ 15,000.00 S 470,448.00 S 1,686.45 see notes S 1,686.45 Total 1.44 11,409 $ 30,000.00 S 670,448.00 S 2,433.36 see notes $ 2,433.36 Assumptions: Estimated Floor Area is based on 30% lot coverage for office. This is typical of other facilities in Colleyville. Property & Building Valuation: Properly based on existing value per TAD Building based on estimate of $50 per square foot Sales Taxes: Some offices may generate sales tax, butlhis is difficult to forecast Agenda Item No. 4 - Page 1 Drainage. The applicant's engineer submitted a preliminary drainage analysis of the project. This information is under review by staff, and information on the drainage analysis will be provided at the Commission meeting. UPDATE 3-25-2002 The Commission tabled this item at the March 11, 2002 meeting to allow the developer an opportunity to consider a revision to the proposed layout to address open space and drainage concerns. The developer has submitted a revised plan for the Commission's consideration. Included with the agenda materials is a copy of the revised layout. Also at the March 11, 2002, Ms. Virginia Garrett spoke and presented a letter of opposition to the proposed development. A copy of her letter is attached to this agenda briefing. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Lewis A. Brown is the owner of two lots located on the north side of Cheek Sparger Road, at the northwest corner of Felps Drive. The owner has submitted a request to change the zoning on the property from R20 Single Family Residential to PUD-R Planned Unit Development Residential. The owner proposes to divide the property into six single-family lots. The proposed lots would front on Felps Drive. The subject property is 1.44 acres in size, with most of its frontage on Felps Drive. There are no buildings on the property. The property is heavily wooded on the southern portion ofthe tract. There is also a sizeable drainage ditch that runs across the southern portion of the property, eventually draining into the bar ditch along Cheek Sparger Road. The surrounding property is both commercial and residential in nature. Property to the north is zoned PUD-C, and consists of warehouse buildings. Property to the south, east and west is zoned R20 Single Family and developed as residences. The following is an analysis of the major issues associated with this rezoning request. Master Plan and PUD Standards. This rezoning request and the proposed plan exceeds the recommended maximum residential density called for in the Colleyville Master Plan. The Master Plan calls for a maximum density of 1.8 dwelling units per acre (dua), which is generally equivalent to lots of about 20,000 square feet. The proposed density of this project is 4.2 dwelling units per acre. The PUD-R standards contained in the Colleyville Land Development Code allow for lots as small as 13,000 sf, provided this is balanced with a minimum of 20% of the property in common open space. This project does not provide any open space. The table below illustrates the differences between the PUD-R requirements and the proposed development. Desion Element Dev.Code ProDosal minimum lot size 13,000 sf 9,500 sf averaQe lot size 16,000 sf 10,475 sf minimum width 1 00 ft 95 ft Agenda Item No. 4 - Page 2 minimum depth 120 ft 1 00 ft front setback 30 ft 25 ft open space 20% none Master Plan Land Use. The Colleyville Master Plan shows this area as both a future commercial and residential area. The lot on Acuff Lane is designated as commercial development, while the lot on Cheek Sparger is designated for residential development. The bulk of the property west of Felps Drive is designated for future commercial and office uses. The general area bounded by Cheek Sparger, Colleyville Boulevard and Felps Drive already contains a mix of residential and commercial uses. It is likely that the trend to commercial development will continue in the future as this area becomes less desirable for residential development due to its proximity to Colleyville Boulevard. Master Thoroughfare Plan. This property has frontage on three streets: Cheek Sparger Road, Felps Drive and Acuff Lane. Cheek Sparger Road is classified as a Major Collector on the Master Thoroughfare Plan. The owner will be required to dedicate additional right- of-way along the property frontage on Cheek Sparger. The two remaining streets are classified as Residential streets, and the streets appear to have sufficient right-of-way in place. The owner is also responsible for constructing one-half of the width of the adjacent roadways or escrowing an equivalent amount of money with the City for future improvements. Platting. The Land Development Code allows a PUD zoning exhibit to serve as a preliminary plat, thus eliminating a major step in the approval process. However, the property is currently platted. If the zoning request is approved, the applicant must submit a replat of the property, and all related engineering construction plans, for consideration by the City. Sidewalks and Trails. The Land Development Code requires sidewalks along Felps Drive and Acuff Lane. The sidewalks must be at least 4-feet wide. This property is also subject to the provision of the Colleyville Pathways Plan, which requires construction of hike and bike facilities along Cheek Sparger Road. The Pathways Plan requires a 1 O-foot wide trail along Cheek Sparger Road. The developer is required to construct the trail as part of the public improvements for this property. IMPACT ISSUES 1. Master Plan. The rezoning request is partially consistent with the Colleyville Master Plan, adopted in 1998, which designates this area for future commercial and residential area. The lot on Acuff Lane is designated as commercial development, while the lot on Cheek Sparger is designated for residential development. 2. Surrounding Properties. There are several single-family residences in the area, mostly along the east side of Felps Drive. There are single-family residences located immediately west of the site. Commercial development exists generally north and west of the property. A zoning map is attached. 3. Development Trends. Little development has taken place in this area. There are no long-term trends established at this time. Agenda Item No. 4 - Page 3 4. Infrastructure. Water and sanitary sewer service are available along adjacent rights- of-way. 5. Property Taxes. The current tax rolls do not show any property tax exemptions for this property, according to information available from the Tarrant Appraisal District. The 1.44-acre tract is valued at $30,000. Estimated City property tax revenue, based on current tax rates, is $104.22 annually. The applicant states each new house will be valued at $200,000; though many of the surrounding houses on Felps Drive, Cheek Sparger Road, and Felps Court are valued at less than $200,000. 6. Traffic Generation. The Institute of Transportation Engineers publication Trip Generation provides estimates of expected traffic generation based on land use. Single-family residences are expected to generate 10 trips per day, on average. The six proposed residences would add 60 vehicle trips per day to the surrounding roadways. The zoning exhibit has been reviewed by the Development Review Committee and meets all of the requirements of the City for a zoning exhibit. PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE Planning & Zoning Commission: March 11, March 25 and April 8, 2002 City Council: pending action by Planning and Zoning Commission RECOMMENDATION: Denial, due to technical non-compliance with the Land Development Code ATTACHMENTS: . Location and Zoning Map · Zoning Exhibit . List of Property Owners Notified · Letter of opposition · Draft Ordinance Prepared by: ~~ Agenda Item No. 4 - Page 4 LOCATION & ZONING MAP ..,,- ..1 ~.., .~ Vj .A? W . .'. .."'.... r., M .CtM.. · I ....; ~ .. ~,. /J- ~_.__. - .. .. .. . ; r I .~""""..",' __.-~",..........1"...~-#-. :1_' , far In' . ta- l'" ~ · · .~.. t ,t1.!. ~~~~'.~~. · 'Ii. .. ta ...-it. _. * . . _ 1.JQ Ail; ........ .. .... ~. . -. ,,;1; " . ~:l. . 1t.'t "7lA~' ~ ...1...... .~;.. '. \'.. ~. ........ .. .. .. "" t 'II' . ~,.,.. . . .., .~..i<... .~ .. J .. - .~ x* 1JiRa. ..> l I ) _.1 "iJj '. 'fi"r.s .J.'" .... . t It it * ) . . .;... ... ~' .. ..., .. .... ,+J . ._ !:t..... .. ,'Wi.' .. ,.*.. h~UI . ... w .:1 J . 3J 140L W'j ., t!" .. ''',' ." "..rJ'-rii'.l ' ...1:'\ '~~ .\_ . , . I . t , 'I:I II 11&-1 , .. ... .. . g." . . . -. '7 s. . ... . ........ ....... ~ ~... ~; .... .1 ... " . L.. !HI .. t . .. . w t.o . . .. mLw -.., . tII . .. . . .. .. .. . ..,~ 1 .. t ~\;.. ~.,.~~. ~~. ;-l": ' ft '.- '. *11 ,. CI'f .... '1'....11 '.;- 11 '. .; ...... ;.~.D :.. t.'" --;.,~~ ~ .~. .~~ f I' . __ . T ... I' lit * .~ ". "t. ~ ~ .I: ."~ .--' vr: >> . . .- f /... . . , .. - r .. , <ft_, f " ~ - , - . . . " Agenda Item No. 4 - Page 5 ZONING EXHIBIT . . .1.1. .I. .L.I ~\Jf- "haiilN IL ;~,J ~ (' . . .:t-. . -:1 . ' i;'n .. ~ I ~ ~ · .& ;lldi . . ~ ~I! ' 1I11~t I :. ; .". · - !Ill i\ll .. ...~. :: ::.: . ". '. hI ili I fi .1. .... >2 .. ...J. "'W. ~ . t I 1 i!C J,L;I- ~::E I ~ 1 'I ;> ~ s~ ~ ~ ... 8C1 tI UJ N [; I ~ I Iq NJ1FF LANE (W mv,) (J ~ ~I - '\ Y.I ~5~ I 0... ~"'\..'" >- ~0~~ III l..:_. ~~0j tc ~""'~ ~ ~ 1111 II ill I 11 6 ~ ~ ~ I~ 1 UII III . ~ ~~~ ~ iI - I II) ~"~ ~ : 1111 ! ~~ ~ Ie ~ i ~ ;!itl "II III ,~ ~'-0: 0. i " ; ~ "-.. "" ~ 0:~ 1111 II I I '-.." "-" ,,'\ ~n I ~ .. I I ~ ~ M Ii I ~: ~ ~ I.. 1111 I, I ~ M "'" ~ :i :i j Ii :i j . I :i 0: 11II III III 11 I ~ ~ "" '\ ~ . r0Jt>. ~ . . .. i,;t II ~~~ ~ .n i I ~~ ~ t .~ ~ ~ ,". ~ ~~ 1"'''-. ~ ~~~ ;:1 - .Jf k . ~J . !i!~8 , :....:....:....:....:.........:.. " l.. ... . 0_" _,. . ~.............. .... ... " .. ... ...... .. ....... ............ ',' .... '..,... @ 0... ...... ~ .. o. ,..... .11 v.', ,,',0. .... .... o. ........ ~.I' . .. ... ...... .:....:...:....:....:....:....:.~ ... ...... ...-. '. . . b . ,~ . 1./ a ~ CKEIC SPMGER (4" R.o.V,) Agenda Item No. 4 - Page 6 LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED loba Baltard 6340 CQuntyRoad204 Grandview, TX 760~O VtelQLiIl~Y 3005 PM 646 RoadN SantaPe. TX 77510 loe" Peggy Moore l)~Acuft'Latre CoJleyv1Jle. TX 16034 Virginia Garrett 128 Cheek Sparger R.oad CoIleY\'J1Ie, TX 76034 Bdwan.t &. Curtis Bm:ns 120 Cheek Sparger a()ad CoUeyVille. TX 76034 lames Ftendl P.O. Box SSO Tioga,TX 76271 Earleen Fay Wilks 132 AcutfLane CoUeyville, tx 76034 Phillip MlJls 128 AC\lffLlQle CoUeyvtl1e~ TIC 76034 Doris Raines 41()1 Felps Drive CotJeyvilte, TX 76034 Robert &Sll.erlynnMcKCl9Wll 4013 F. Drive ColIeyVille. 1'X 76034 BillY!lrattm 400.9 F~ms Dtive CoUeyvi)le, Tx: 7(0)4 Arthur BeU 400$ Fel~ Drive Colleyville,TX 16034 Everett & VemeU Greer 4001 Felpe Drive CoUeyviUe, rx 10034 E.G. Greer 4001 Fe1vs Prive Colleyville, TX 76034 EveretG.Greer 40'01 Felps Drive Colleyvil1~ TX 76034 Nonna Edwards 210 Cheek Sparger Road CoUeyviUe, Tx16034 Joseph Misshno 31.(}1 Ruby Skeet Bedford. TX 76Q21 Steven Ik. Wanda l<night P.O. Box 1707 Colleyville, TX 76034 Ricbard& ICristie Ulery 123 Cheek Sparger Road Coll~iUe, tX76034 Frederick & Louise Skoog 127Ch~$p..getabad con"yvilte, tx 76034 ~ehaeJ Mat.U'el' 3912,Pclps Court ColleyviUe, TIC 76034 CaseZ"02-008 ~~~lng tattle last PlJbii$hed rax ReCOrdsdat~09..(J1..(J1. .Indivlduals who own propet1ythat rs WIthin the 200' .of the prQpo,sed special usepermlt/and'"'()r/~()ning change request are .sted above. t certlfytttat the".tties U$ted above have...... notified of the proposed cltange request as required by Seofion 211 the Local GovemmefttCQde. (Notices dated: February 28, 2002) nV JanL~ ~ Plannll1Q & .Zl>nlng As_nt Agenda Item No. 4 - Page 7 DRAFT ORDINANCE 0-02-xxxx DRAFT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AND CHANGING THE ZONING OF LOTS 14 AND 15, BLOCK 1, ANDY FELPS ADDITION, FROM THE R20 SINGLE FAMIL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO THE PUD-R PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION. WHEREAS, an application for a zoning change was filed by Lewis Brown on February 18, 2002, under Case No. Z-02-008; and WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville has complied with the notification requirements of the Texas Local Government Code and the Colleyville Land Development Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has held a public hearing and made a recommendation on the proposed zoning amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed zoning amendment is in the best interests of the City of Colleyville. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1 THAT the Master Plan, the Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville, Texas, and the Official Zoning Map are hereby amended insofar as they relate to certain land located in Colleyville, Texas, as shown on the Zoning Map attached as Exhibit A, and described as Lots 14 and 15, Block 1, Andy Felps Addition, by changing the zoning of said property from the R20 Single Family Residential district to the PUD-R Planned Unit Development-Residential district, including any other conditions and restrictions imposed and approved by the City Council, which are incorporated herein. Sec. 2 THAT this PUD-R shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. GENERAL a. The purpose of this PUD-R is for single-family residential development, constructed at an approximate density of 4.2 dwelling units per acre. b. This property is subject to all the regulations contained in the Colleyville Land Development Code, except where amended by this Ordinance. Sec. 4. Ordinance 0-02-xxxx Page 2 of 5 2. PERMITTED USES a. Single family residences, detached 3. RESIDENTIAL LOT REQUIREMENTS AND SETBACKS Residential lot requirements and setbacks shall comply with the following provisions, as shown in the Conceptual Site Plan attached as Exhibit B. a. Minimum Lot Size b. Average Lot Size c. Minimum Lot Width d. Minimum Lot Depth e. Front Building Line f. Side Building Line g. Rear Building Line 9,500 square feet 10,475 square feet 95feet 1 00 feet 25 feet 1 0 feet 1 0 feet 4. OPEN SPACE a. This development shall be exempt from the requirement to provide 20% open space. 5. SIDEWALKS a. The developer shall construct a 10-foot wide hike and bike trail along Cheek Sparger Road at the same time as other public improvements are constructed in the subdivision. b. Sidewalks along lot frontages shall be constructed by each homebuilder. All sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Colleyville Land Development Code. 6. OTHER a. The minimum square footage for all houses constructed in this subdivision shall be two thousand (2,000) square feet. THAT any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance as read together with any zoning regulation contained in the Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each and every day such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such. Ordinance 0-02-xxxx Page 3 of 5 Sec. 5. THAT the City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clause hereof as an alternate method of publication provided by law. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2002. day of The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2002. day of ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: Cynthia Singleton, TRMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross T. Foster City Attorney ~ ., x_ ~... ) " -AlES tt~'fl:.t J.'4f'sU~J.6 '-..._11 c .. EXHIBIT A - ZONING MAP , --~ 111 . .... , .1 ~ Exhibit B -Conceptual Site Plan ZONING EXHIBIT .1.1. .1. . . .L.I I \ 1 I 1.\.'- , ..<~.. '~I~ Whq.~_ ~. ..~::~ m~t 111 ~. · ~ '- -;- ~ .~: " ~~ + ~ I ~~ ~~ ~illl. ffiBI88 ~~.' ~ . ti ~ ~dl .J '" i&.1 -: 8; tt:JSF LANE cw lUI.VJ ... U IX ~I ..-.. - - ill ~ ~! I "''\.. ~'""" '\ ' 11II o~ ''\. ~_ III ~ ~~~ ~!\.'" "" ~ 6 ~~~'\~ . ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ tI ~ "'''''\~ ~ ~~N ~ ~~~ i II ~~~ f ~ ~ i~~~~ E ~~~~ ; ~~W~, ~ f\. "" "" '\ '\ :\ ~~~~ ~~~ '~ ,~ ~~ l~ ~~ ~~'\~ " ~" :'.I'};!:'..: ~ .....t...............~ ". .. . I \. CII:EIC SPNlGDi<4;: RD,\i.) G II · 1"1 il~ ,: I '~5. I fi . 1~111 'I I.. I 1'1 I * J 111111 ~ HUll 1 ~ IIIIU; ,~I I m"llll) 1'1 ! ~IUSIII 1IlIIIIIP . I I--;uun i! I .U.~~I I~ 1iII1I1 III ;1 ~ ~;;iin II ~ .~! k . - . ~I ~~~i :. @ ~ ,I !~' i I ! ~'I