HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 2015-04-16 Agendas t
NRH
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA
7301 NORTHEAST LOOP 820
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TX 76180
THURSDAY, APRIL 16, 2015
WORK SESSION: 6:30 PM
Held in the City Council Work Room
.CALL TO ORDER
1. Annoucements - upcoming city events
2. Discuss development activity report and City Council action.
3. Discussion regarding the results of solar survey.
4. Discuss items from the regular Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
.REGULAR MEETING: IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING WORKSESSION (BUT NOT
EARLIER THAN 7:00 PM)
A. CALL TO ORDER
1
A.1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Planning and Zoning Commission may enter into closed Executive Session
as authorized by Chapter 551, Texas Government Code. Executive Session
may be held at the end of the Regular Session or at any time during the meeting
that a need arises for the Planning and Zoning Commission to seek advice from
the city attorney (551.071) as to the posted subject matter of this Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting.
The Planning and Zoning Commission may confer privately with its attorney to
seek legal advice on any matter listed on the agenda or on any matter in which
the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas Disciplinary
Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with
Chapter 551, Texas Government Code.
B. MINUTES
.,
B.1 Approve minutes of the March 19, 2015 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting.
C. PUBLIC HEARINGS
C.1 ZC 2015-08 Public Hearing and Consideration of a request from Legacy Church of
Christ for a Zoning Change from I-1 - Light Industrial and R-1-S - Special Single
Thursday April 16, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda
Page 1 of 2
ti
Family to U - School, Church, Institutional on 21.277 acres located at 8801 Mid
Cities Boulevard and 8601 Cardinal Lane.
D. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
D.1 PP 2015-01 Consideration of a request from OCH Development, LLC for a
Preliminary Plat of The Villas at Smithfield, 93 residential lots and 10 open space
lots on 13.479 acres located in the 8200 block of Odell Street and Northeast
Parkway.
E. ADJOURNMENT
Certification
I do hereby certify that the above notice of meeting of the North Richland Hills Planning
and Zoning Commission was posted at City Hall, City of North Richland Hills, Texas in
compliance with Chapter 551, Texas Government coolgusae„4•ril 13, 2015 at 4:00 PM.
S��g1CH
vzi
r-
10%
y ecretary
This facility is wheelchair accessible and acces'ie 9 rkin spaces are available.
ty 'Fa g P
Requests for accommodations or interpretive services must be made 48 hours
prior to this meeting. Please contact the City Secretary's office at 817-427-6060
II for further information.
VIVIL Z. a.
REMOVED FROM
POST! G •
a '
DATE:
BY: •:
_
Thursday April 16, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda
Page 2 of 2
D
140L 1W Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
From: The Office of the City Manager Date: April 16, 2015
Subject: Annoucements - upcoming city events
Presenter: Clayton Comstock, Planning Manager
Summary:
At each Planning and Zoning Commission meeting a member of staff announces
upcoming events in the City.
General Description:
Announcements -
The 2015 Sounds of Spring Concert Series will be held on Friday evenings from April
17th to May 22nd. Concerts begin at 7 p.m. at the NRH Centre Plaza. Admission is free.
Seating is on the law, so don't forget to bring a blanket or lawn chair. A variety of
gourmet food trucks will be on site for each concert and there will be free games and
activities for children. For more details, visit SoundsNRH.com or call 817-427-6600.
On Saturday, April 18th North Richland Hills residents can get rid of unwanted bulky
items during the annual Spring Community Cleanup. Items can be dropped off between
9 a.m. and noon at the Tarrant County College-Northeast Campus in parking lot E.1 by
the tennis courts. NRH residents can also bring up to five average size file boxes of
paper to be securely shredded onsite and then recycled. Proof of residency must be
presented. For more details, please call 817-427-6663.
Packet Pg. 3
D
140L 1W Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
From: The Office of the City Manager Date: April 16, 2015
Subject: Discuss development activity report and City Council action.
Presenter: Clayton Comstock, Planning Manager
Summary:
Staff will present a summary of current development activity.
General Description:
Planning and Zoning Commission will be presented with items being considered by the
Development Review Committee (DRC). Staff will also present previous City Council
action.
Packet Pg.4
D
140L 1W Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
From: The Office of the City Manager Date: April 16, 2015
Subject: Discussion regarding the results of solar survey.
Presenter: Clayton Comstock, Planning Manager
Summary:
Shortly after the City Council approved Ordinance No. 3343 regarding zoning
regulations for solar panel installations on December 8, 2014, a petition drive was
initiated by a group of residents to repeal the ordinance. The petition was submitted to
the City with nearly 800 valid signatures. City Council and staff acknowledged the need
for additional input on this topic, so a survey was crafted and mailed to all residents who
signed the petition as well as 800 random registered NRH voters. A total of 451
surveys were mailed back, a 28% response rate.
General Description:
Attached is some summary information of the survey and the survey results for your
review. Staff plans to present the survey results and discuss ideas for ordinance
revisions with the Commission. One specific take-away from the survey is the removal
of the Special Use Permit requirement for street-facing solar panels installations.
Additional possible revisions will be presented as well.
Recommendation:
n/a
Packet Pg. 5
3.a
In February, 2015,the City sent approximately 1,600 surveys requesting citizens opinions or residential
solar unit installations. Half of the surveys were sent to individuals who had signed a petition requesting
the repeal of the recently approved solar unit regulations and the other half were sent to registered
voters selected randomly from the voters registration list. Both groups were sent the same survey Z
questions, however,the surveys were marked to be able to distinguish any difference in preferences
from group who had signed the petition and the group selected at random. Of the 1,600 surveys we
received responses from 272 of the petition group and 179 from randomly selected voters for a total of U)
0
451 responses. This is a 28% response rate which would be considered good for a mail-in survey. The
surveys were tabulated and a copy of the results is attached for your review.
°A
While the survey results are generally self-explanatory, there are comments that staff noted following
our review of the results. One of the first items that was noted was that the respondents who has
signed the petition were moderately more favorable or lenient toward solar panel installations; which is U)
a result that we reasonably expected. While there was some difference between the two groups, in
general the results were generally consistent.
• Question 1. 70%of all respondents indicated that aesthetics are a consideration for solar panel
installations. Only 30% indicated aesthetics were not an issue at all. U)
L_
• Question 2. 64%of all respondents believed the maximum height of ground mounted solar
units should be 8 feet tall or under.
0
• Question 3. 55%of all respondents felt that ground mounted solar units should be 500 square
feet or smaller. U)
• Question 4. 71%of all respondents felt that ground mounted solar units should be screened by
a fence. The maximum height of a screening fence is 8 feet.
• Question 5. 49%of all respondents felt that they did not need to be consulted regarding a
ground mounted solar installation by a neighbor.
•
Question 6. One of the areas where there was a discrepancy between the responses from those
who signed the petition and those who didn't. 58%of petition signers found any location on the
U)
roof acceptable,while only 35 %of the randomly selected group felt that any located was
acceptable. 50%of the random group felt they should only be on the back roof. 2
• Question 7. 73%of all respondents felt that roof mounted solar panels should adhere to the
shape and slope of the roof.
• Question 8. Only 27%of all respondents felt that roof mounted solar panels should be allowed
to sick up at an angle or extend beyond the edges of the roof.
• Question 9. 61%of all respondents felt that they should not be notified if their neighbor
requests installation of roof mounted solar panels, regardless of whether they are visible from U)
the street or their property. There was a noticeable difference of opinion on this question
between those who signed the petition and the randomly selected respondents. 70%of co
petition signers felt they should not be notified,whereas, only 47%of the random group felt
0
that they did not need to be notified. co
Packet Pg. 6
3.a
While this survey is helpful in providing guidance for developing solar panel regulations, it does not
automatically dictate modifications to the policy on its own merits. Instead,this information should be
utilized by the City staff, Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, along with citizen input from
other formats, to help shape any modifications of solar panel regulations deemed necessary.
0
U)
0
U)
r_
aA
a
U)
U)
0
U)
0
U)
4-
0
U)
U)
U)
U)
0
TO
U)
0
CO
0
CO
Packet Pg. 7
3.b
Petition Non-Petiton All
Yes, they are unattractive and should be kept out of sight 12 5% 41 23% 53 12%
Yes, they should be blend in with the home's architecture 78 30% 68 39% 146 34%
Yes, but only in special situations (i.e. larger or highly visible array) 78 30% 27 15% 105 24%
No, I don't care what they look like 89 35% 39 22% 128 30%
Tota 1 257 175 432
Ground Mounted Max Height-6 feet 121 47% 92 54% 213 49%
Ground Mounted Max Height-8 feet 72 28% 34 20% 106 25% >
Ground Mounted Max Height- 12 feet 16 6% 9 5% 25 6%
Ground Mounted Max Height- 15 feet 6 2% 3 2% 9 2%
A
Ground Mounted Max Height- No limit 45 17% 33 19% 78 18%
i ota i 260 171 431
Ground Mounted Max Size- 100 sq ft 22 9% 23 14% 45 11%
Ground Mounted Max Size- 250 sq ft 52 21% 34 21% 86 21%
Ground Mounted Max Size-500 sq ft 53 21% 43 26% 96 23%
Ground Mounted Max Size- 1000 sq ft 19 8% 8 5% 27 7%
Ground Mounted Max Size- No limit 104 42% 56 34% 160 39%
Tota 1 250 164 414
Ground Mounted Height of Screening-6 ft privacy fence 56 68% 28 67% 84 20%
Ground Mounted Height of Screening-8 ft privacy fence 42 16% 33 20% 75 18% U)
Ground Mounted Height of Screening-fence same height as panels 79 31% 63 38% 142 33%
Ground Mounted Height of Screening- No screening required 82 32% 42 25% 124 29%
Tota 1 259 166 425
Ground Mounted Notified if-Yes, only if it will be visible from the
street 33 22% 33 45% 66 15%
0
Ground Mounted Notified if-Yes, only if it will be visible from my U,
U)
yard 79 29% 54 30% 133 30%
Ground Mounted Notified if-Yes, for any system 9 3% 19 11% 28 6% 2
Ground Mounted Notified if-1 should not be notified 148 55% 73 41% 221 49%
Tota 1 269 179 448
Roof Mounted Solar Panels Location -Side roof 41 23% 29 43% 70 14%
Roof Mounted Solar Panels Location -Back roof 79 26% 96 50% 175 35%
Roof Mounted Solar Panels Location -Front roof 5 2% 1 1% 6 1% U)
2
Roof Mounted Solar Panels Location -Any 176 58% 67 35% 243 49%
i ota i 301 193 494
Roof Mounted Solar Panels that lay flat on the roof and do not
extend beyond the edge of the roof 248 91% 163 91% 411 91% U)
Roof Mounted Solar Panels that stick up at an angle or extend
beyond the edge of the roof 105 39% 49 27% 154 34%
CO
Roof Mounted Notified if-Yes, only if it will be visible from the
street 35 18% 35 41% 70 16% 0
Roof Mounted Notified if-Yes, only if it will be visible from my yard 37 14% 38 21% 75 17%
Roof Mounted Notified if-Yes, for any system 10 4% 21 12% 31 7%
Roof Mounted Notified - I should not be notified 190 70% 85 47% 275 61%
Tota 1 272 179 451
Packet Pg. 8
3.c
MRH
City of North Richland Hills Survey on Solar Energy Systems
The City of North Richland Hills City Council and staff would like your input on solar energy systems.
Aesthetics Z
r_
1. Should aesthetics be considered when solar panel systems are installed on a residential property?
yes, they are unattractive and should be kept out of sight
yes, they should blend in with the home's architecture U)
yes, but only in special situations (i.e. a larger or highly visible array)
No, I don't care what they look like
2
General Perception of Solar Panels
Petition Non-Petiton 111111 All
U)
100
80
60
° ° 39%34% ° 35%
0%
Yes,they are Yes,they should Yes, but only in No, I don't care
unattractive and be blend in with special situations what they look like
U)
should be kept out the home's (i.e. larger or
of sight architecture highly visible U)
array)
CD
Ground Mounted Solar Panel Systems
If a neighbor installs a ground mounted solar panel system in their back yard, which of the following would you
find acceptable:
c
2. Maximum Height: 6 feet 8 feet 12 Feet 15 feet No limit
(Point of reference:most wood fences are 6 feet tall)
2
Maximum Height of Ground Mounted Solar
Units
11111111111 Petition 111111111111 Non-Petiton 111111 All U)
100
80
60% C2
40% 28°°O15% CO
17%4918%
0% l//////% PNrllllllllllllll
6 feet 8 feet 12 feet 15 feet No limit
Packet Pg. 9
3.c
3. Maximum Size: 100 sq ft 250 sq ft 500 sq ft 1,000 sq ft No limit
(Point of reference:500 sq ft is about the same size as a two car garage)
Maximum Size of Ground Mounted
Solar Units
Petition Non-Petiton 111111 All
100
80
U)
0
60% U)
42%lIkEER 9%
40% 0 21%21%21% 21%6 53% "5
14/ >
20% �������������� B 111111 II151IIII�II o
0%
100 sq ft 250 sq ft 500 sq ft 1000 sq ft No limit U)
0
4. Height of Screening:
_6 ft privacy fence
_8 ft privacy fence
fence same height as panels U)
4-
no screening required 0
U)
Height of Required Screening
11111111111 Petition 111111111111 Non-Petiton 111111 All
100
80
U)
60
38%
40% 31 229 fir%
0 29
20% 22%17%20% 16%20%18% 25/
0% ..
6 ft privacy fence 8 ft privacy fence fence same height No screening
as panels required CD
CO
0
CO
Packet Pg. 10
3.c
5. If a neighbor wants to install a ground mounted solar panel system in their back yard, should you be
notified and given the opportunity to provide input:
yes, only if it will be visible from street
yes, only if it will be visible from my yard
yes, for any system
I should not be notified
Ground Mounted-Should You Be
Notified
U)
Petition Non-Petiton 111111 All U)
r_
100
80
55% o
60% 41%49%
40% 29-OA 3.00A 30%
0 12%18%15% �%6% 0
20%
Yes,only f it will Yes,only if it will Yes,for an I should not be
Y� Y� Y
be visible from the be visible from my system notified
street yard
U)
Roof Mounted Solar Panels U)
If a neighbor installs solar panels on their roof, which would you find acceptable:
U)
6. Location: side roof back roof front roof any
Roof Mounted - Acceptable Location
11111111111 Petition 111111111111 Non-Petiton 111111 All
100
U)
80
58%
60% 5 0
40% 35% 1
26%
20% 14° 1 ...
%
Vf� .. / 1% 1/
0 ,,, ....
Side roof Back roof Front roof Any
CO
0
CO
Packet Pg. 11
3.c
7. Solar panels that lay flat on the roof and do not extend
beyond the edge of the roof
Yes No
Yes-Solar Panels Should Conform to
Roof Shape & Angle
0
IIIIIIIIIIII Petition IIIIIIIIIIII Non-Petiton 111111 All U)
100% U)
77% 73%
80
60% J
40% a®
U)
20%
0%
Roof Mounted Solar Panels that lay flat on the roof and do not extend
beyond the edge of the roof
U)
L_
ig
0
U)
4-
0
U)
8. Solar panels that stick up at an angle or extend
beyond the edge of the roof
Yes No
Yes-Roof Mounted Units Can Stick Up U)
2
IIIIIIIIIIII Petition IIIIIIIIIIII Non-Petiton 111111 All
100
80
60
40% 30®0 0 0
23%
20% CO
L_
0%
CO
Roof Mounted Solar Panels that stick up at an angle or extend beyond the
edge of the roof
Packet Pg. 12
3.c
9. If a neighbor wants to install roof mounted solar panels, should you be notified and given the opportunity
to provide input:
_yes, only if it will be visible from street _yes, only if it will be visible from my yard
_yes, for any system _ I should not be notified
Roof Mounted-Should You Be Notified
Petition Non-Petiton 111111 All
100
0
U)
90%
U)
r_
80
2
70%
70%
61% 2
60% e
U)
50% 47%
40%
30%
20% 21
o
200 12%
...
4% /..
of
Yes,only if it will be Yes,only if it will be Yes,for any system I should not be notified
visible from the street visible from my yard
CD
E
(Comments on back)
Comments
Please share any additional comments you have regarding solar energy systems below:
U)
U)
2
CO
0
CO
Packet Pg. 13
D
140L 1W Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
From: The Office of the City Manager Date: April 16, 2015
Subject: Discuss items from the regular Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting
Presenter: Clayton Comstock, Planning Manager
Summary:
The purpose of this item is to allow the Planning and Zoning Commission the
opportunity to discuss any item on the regular agenda.
General Description:
The purpose of this standing item is to allow the Planning and Zoning Commission the
opportunity to inquire about items that are posted for discussion and deliberation on the
regular Planning and Zoning Commission agenda.
The Planning and Zoning Commission is encouraged to ask staff questions to clarify
and/or provide additional information on items posted on the regular agenda.
Packet Pg. 14
B.1
140L 1W Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
From: The Office of the City Manager Date: April 16, 2015
Subject: Approve minutes of the March 19, 2015 Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting.
Presenter: Clayton Comstock, Planning Manager
Summary:
The minutes are listed on the agenda and approved by majority vote of the Commission
at the Planning & Zoning Commission meetings.
General Description:
The Planning Department prepares action minutes for each Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting. The minutes are placed on the agenda for review and approval
by the Commission. Upon approval of the minutes, an electronic copy will be uploaded
to the City's website.
Recommendation:
Approve minutes of the March 19, 2015 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting.
Packet Pg. 15
B.1.a
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION AND REGULAR MEETING
OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS
MARCH 19, 2015
S
WORK SESSION
CL
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of North Richland Hills Texas met in
work session on the 19t" day of March, 2015 at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Workroom cm
prior to the 7:00 p.m. regular session.
Present: Randall Shiflet Place 4, Chairman
Mark Haynes Place 1
Mike Benton Place 2
Don Bowen Place 3, Secretary U)
Kathy Luppy Place 5
Bill Schopper Place 6
Steven Cooper Place 7
Jerry Tyner Ex-Officio
Absent:
Staff Members: Clayton Comstock Planning Manager
Chad VanSteenberg Assistant Planner U)
Caroline Waggoner City Engineer
Marrk Callier Management Assistant
David Russell Engineer Associate
Paulette Hartman Assistant City Manager U)
Katasha Smithers Recording Secretary 2
0
c�
Call to Order
°
0
Chairman Shiflet called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
A.1 Recent City Council Action, Development Activity Report, and General
Announcements
CL
Ln
Senior Planner Clayton Comstock spoke about the City Council approved the gun range
cm
that Planning and Zoning had sent to them from their previous meeting. This is round
two. It takes up about half the space of the original submission. There have been a
couple of new applications submitted for DRC approval. Whataburger, CVS and ATT
store have submitted applications.
A.2 Briefing of Items on the March 19, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission
Regular Session Agenda
March 19,2015
P&Z Minutes
Page 1
Packet Pg. 16
B.1.a
CD
Planning Manager, Clayton Comstock presented ZC 2015-01 Public Hearing and
consideration of a request from Trinity Partners Commercial Real Estate for a Zoning
Change from NR-PD Nonresidential Planned Development and C-2 Commercial to C-1
Commercial on 0.8660-acre located at 8533 Davis Boulevard, adjacent south of the Aldi
Food Market. Also, Clayton Comstock presented for AP 2015-03 Consideration of a
request from Bomac Davis Investments, LLC for an Amended Plat for D.J. Anderson
Ln
Addition on 1.3524 acres at 8525 and 8533 Davis Boulevard. It does show office uses in
this area, more a retail area. cm
Planning Manager, Clayton Comstock presented ZC 2015-03 Public Hearing and
consideration of a requiest from Mark Melson for a Zoning Change from AG Agricultural
to RI-PD Residential Infill Planned Development on 1.53 acres located at 8937 Rumfield
Road.
0
U)
The last item on the agenda was presented by Planning Manager, Clayton Comstock:
AP 2015-02 Consideration of a request from Winkelmann and Associates, Inc. for an
Amended Plat for North Tarrant Marketplace Addition on 2.325 acrees at 9200 North
Tarrant Parkway.
B.0 Adjournment
U)
There being no other business, Chairman Randall Shiflet adjourned the meeting at 6:54
p.m.
U)
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 2
0
c�
A.0 CALL TO ORDER
r_
0
Chairman Randall Shiflet called the March 19, 2015 meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
E
A.1 ROLL CALL
Ln
Present: Randall Shiflet Place 4, Chairman
Mark Haynes Place 1 cm
Mike Benton Place 2
Don Bowen Place 3, Secretary
Kathy Luppy Place 5
Bill Schopper Place 6
Steven Cooper Place 7
Jerry Tyner Ex-Officio
March 19,2015
P&Z Minutes
Page 2
Packet Pg. 17
B.1.a
Absent:
S
r_
Staff Members: Clayton Comstock Planning Manager
Chad VanSteenberg Assistant Planner
Caroline Waggoner City Engineer
Marrk Callier Management Assistant
David Russell Engineer Associate
Ln
Paulette Hartman Assistant City Manager
Katasha Smithers Recording Secretary cm
A.2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 0
Kathy Luppy led the Pledge of Allegiance.
4-
0
B.0 CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
S
APPROVED
0
Consideration of Minutes from the February 19, 2015 Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting.
STEVEN COOPER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE FEBRUARY 19, 2015 MINUTES. U)
KATHY LUPPY SECONDED THE MOTION.
S
MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED 7,0.
U)
2A
C. CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING & ZONING REQUESTS
C.1 ZC 2015-01 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST
FROM TRINITY PARTNERS COMMERCIAL RESL ESTATE FOR A ZONING
CHANGE FROM NR-PD NONRESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND
C-2 COMMERCIAL TO C-1 COMMERCIAL ON 0.8660-ACRE LOCATED AT
8533 DAVIS BOULEVARD, ADJACENT SODUTH OF THE ALDI FOOD
MARKET. Ln
cm
APPROVED
Senior Planner, Clayton Comstock presented ZC 2015-01 Public Hearing and
consideration of a request from Trinity Partners Commercial Real Estate for a Zoning
Change from NR-PD Nonresidential Planned Development and C-2 Commercial to C-1
Commercial on 0.8660-acre located at 8533 Davis Boulevard, adjacent south of the Aldi
Food Market. The office recommendation here is provided by land use plan with the
March 19,2015
P&Z Minutes
Page 3
Packet Pg. 18
B.1.a
proposed this evening allows different type of professional offices but allows retail in the
C-1 zoning district. The second item, is being presented together as it is related to the
same project, was presented by Senior Planner, Clayton Comstock for AP 2015-03
Consideration of a request from Bomac Davis Investments, LLC for an Amended Plat
for D.J. Anderson Addition On 1.3524 acres at 8525 and 8533 Davis Boulevard. The
purpose for this zoning change and replat is for the site plan the applicant has submitted
with a dental office, AT&T store and lease space, without the movement of the lot line
Ln
and the rezoning of these particular pads cannot develop how they are shown.
cm
We have received a couple questions in the Planning department regarding what the
differences are in the C-2, C-1 and the PD Zoning. With the different zoning districts this
becomes confusing with what uses are supposed to be allowed in the different zoning
districts. The amended plat takes both of the lots and subdivides them into a
developmental lot sizes.
0
U)
Applicant Brad Bowen with Trinity Partners Commercial real estate; 1516 Southlake
Blvd; Southlake, TX presented the request for applications C.1 and C.2. After the
development for the subdivision to the north of this property, we ended up with a sliver
lot left over and this was an effort to replat into a lot that is development able site for the
office and retail use.
Chairman Randall Shiflet asked the AT&T building and the dental facility building are
both of those proposed to go on the C-1?
U)
Applicant Brad Bowen said no the AT&T building is supposed to go on the remaining C-
1. The dental office is C-2 will have the Multi-tenant retail building, but the dental office
will take half the space and it is about 6,400 square feet total; the dental office is taking
up 3200 square feet. .7
Mike Benton asked if this is approved what kind of buffer will you have in the back with
landscaping, fencing for the neighbors behind you?
E
Applicant Brad Bowen said there is specified landscape 15 feet setback area on the
rear property line. The fencing is already been put up and that it is an 8 foot masonry
wall. CD
r_
Chairman Randall Shiftlet asked if he assumes that there will be any other uses that you
CL
have additional uses? Ln
cm
Applicant Brad Bowen said no other uses will be in the area.
Don Bowen asked the C-2 use is much larger, is there a possibility for more traffic
generated? Discussion begins with the commission members.
Applicant Brad Bowen said by making a smaller C-2 zoning district will have a smaller
chance of having a lot of foot traffic.
March 19,2015
P&Z Minutes
Page 4
Packet Pg. 19
B.1.a
CD
The Commission had no other questions for staff or the applicant. Chairman Randall
Shiflet asked for anyone wishing to speak on the item to come forward. There being no
one wishing to speak, Chairman Randall Shiflet closed the Public Hearing. Chairman
Randall Shiftlet presented a letter from an adjacent homeowner opposing this zoning
that this could be detrimental to their property.
CL
BILL SCHOPPER MOVED TO APPROVE ZC 2015-01. DON BOWEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
cm
MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED 7-0.
C.2 AP 2015-03 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM BOMAC DAVIS
INVESTMENTS, LLC FOR AN AMENDED PLAT FOR D.J. ANDERSON
ADDITION ON 1.3524 ACRES AT 8525 AND 8533 DAVIS BOULEVARD.
0
U)
STEVEN COOPER MOVED TO APPROVE AP 2015-03. MARK HAYNES SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED 7-0.
APPROVED
C.3 ZC 2015-03 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST
FROM MARK MELSON FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM AG U)
AGRICULTURAL to RI-PD RESIDENTIAL INFILL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
on 1.53 ACRES LOCATED AT 8937 RUMFIELD ROAD.
Senior Planner, Clayton Comstock presented the staff report for consideration of ZC
2015-03 for Zoning Change of 1.53 acres located at 8937 Rumfield Road from AG to 2
RI-PD for an approval of a secondary living unit. The purpose of this zoning change
request is to essentially use this building as a secondary living unit. It is a large building 0
of about 1700 square feet and does not meet the conventional standards for the
secondary living units that we have in our zoning ordinance which includes a maximum
size of 650 square feet maximum distance from primary living unit with an attachment of
a breezeway and with the same building material as the primary residence as well. RI-
PD does provide 2 driveways onto Rumfield and they will be connecting both driveways.
There is also two trees proposed as well. The applicant did say they will be removing
the smaller shed located on the eastern property line and also removing the chain link Ln
fence between the primary residence and the secondary living unit. The existing barn
cm
was gutted to install the living unit and the existing metal on the outside is still there with
the additions to the unit with cedar, patio and garage door. So the developmental
regulation for this use from R2 single family residential dwelling unit but will allow a
1700 square foot secondary living unit with a bathroom, kitchen and garage. We did put
a minimum lot size of 1.53 acres so that means in the future this property owner or
future property owner cant subdivide the property and sell off this secondary living unit
as its own residence.
March 19,2015
P&Z Minutes
Page 5
Packet Pg. 20
B.1.a
0)
Applicant Mark Melson; 8937 Rumfield Road; North Richland Hills, TX came forward to
present. A year ago we were approached about an opportunity to submit the barn for a
HGTV renovation show and at the time we had other ideas of putting a pool and a
guesthouse. When this opportunity came forward maybe we should take advantage of
this. In mid-May we received a call in regards to the barn and after a month long
conversation with them they selected us. This show was a pilot show, a brand new
Ln
show. The builder doing the work would also be the host of the show, we went into
negotiations. We wanted a more of a type of pool house with an office and so forth. We cm
were told the City was on board and a great opportunity for the City. On July 23rd they
came out and filmed our story about our family. They started building; they started
construction all along with the builder telling us that the City was involved. As time went
by they were supposed to finish the product by August 29t" and found out it will be
delayed until September 19t". We were told a week before the reveal that it will be
camera ready. ABC told us that the builder would finish the product but in fact they did U)
not. After the reveal, the communication diminished dramatically. There is no plumbing
installed nor is the electrical completed. A lot of the cosmetic work was not done. I
began following up, asking when this was going to happen. Towards the end of
September we ended up receiving a letter from the City stating there was not a permit
pulled for the work being done and advised me to come in and speak with the Building
Official. The builder said they will talk to the City and that they will work with the City to
get this resolved. A few weeks went by, we then received a 2nd letter. We then went
down to the City and we learned at this time that we were misled by the builder. We
went through several steps to get the proper paperwork that was needed by the City. U)
We then had to contact the builder for all the drawings and documentation. Our
attention for this construction was for a secondary living unit. About a third of the
building is a workshop. We are requesting now that we would like to finish the project.
U)
Chairman Randall Shiftlet asked about the electrical and plumbing, I am assuming that A
the plumbing is still not connected?
0
to
Applicant Mark Melson said that is correct, they did not connect the electrical and
plumbing so all of it inside is complete inside the walls but we do not have utilities. At
one point, which caused concern, they dug a trench around to the faucet around the
sprinkler system and at that point I realized they were trying to tie the plumbing to my
irrigation system. I stopped them and said I know you cannot do that. Nothing was
completed, part of it works.
Ln
Chairman Randall Shiftlet if this is approved, will you meet this to code?
cm
Applicant Mark Melson said yes and since ABC filmed this project we have footage of
the actual building being constructed, as well as still shots of the construction being
done. We have great documentation of the building being constructed.
Mike Benton stated that one of the standards we have in our City is that we require
masonry standards and I see that you do not meet that requirement. Is that something
March 19,2015
P&Z Minutes
Page 6
Packet Pg. 21
B.1.a
you are willing to do? We hold the builders and homeowners to these standards. When CD
people drive by and see this was approved they are going to ask. So I have to ask will
you go to the expense for the masonry.
Applicant Mark Melson said that we are willing to do whatever we need to do to get this
completed. Right now it is a gigantic paper weight on our lot and so if I cannot complete
the project then it does me no good. Our hopes were to keep the integrity and the look
Ln
of the barn and that was the purpose of the show initially. Of course we want to comply
with the City but I would like to keep the look of the barn. It has beautified the property cm
and our intentions to finish the landscaping
Don Bowen asking that the 1700 square feet accessory building is only a portion being
used as a living space and in the future if he wants to add to the garage space; can he
do that and what will it require?
0
U)
Planning Manager Clayton Comstock stated that is part of the ordinance that you are all
considering have the site plan associated with it. We are saying it is what is and we are
adopting it as is. No additions can be made to the building but the use is the secondary
dwelling unit.
Steven Cooper following up with Mike Benton's question, what will it take to bring it to °.
code?
Planning Manager Clayton Comstock said anywhere you see metal will have to be U)
changed to brick or stone.
S
Chairman Randall Shiftlet asked if this was R1-S, what kind of accessory building can
he have and what type of material? U)
2
Planning Manager Clayton Comstock stated that he is 1.5 acres and with the new
ordinance; he is allowed 1,000 square feet by right and he could come in with an SUP 0
after the 1,000 square feet. You can still request a masonry request.
r_
0
Discussion begins with Commission members and Planning Manager Comstock about
the masonry requirements and issues pertaining to this. CD
r_
Planning Manager Clayton Comstock suggested looking at the metal portion of the barn
to become oxidized. Ln
cm
The Commission had no other questions for staff or the applicant. Chairman Randall
Shiflet asked for anyone wishing to speak on the item to come forward. There being no
one wishing to speak, Chairman Randall Shiflet closed the Public Hearing.
Commission members begin to discuss the stipulations in regards to ZC 2015-03.
March 19,2015
P&Z Minutes
Page 7
Packet Pg. 22
B.1.a
DON BOWEN MOVED TO APPROVE ZC 2015-03 WITH STIPULATIONS ON OXIDIZING THE BRIGHT
METAL OR ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE THAT CAN BE APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, DAVE
PENDLEY. BILL SCHOOPER SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED 6-1.
°
APPROVED CL
Ln
CA AP 2015-02 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM WINKELMANN AND cm
ASSOCIATES, INC FOR AN AMMENDED PLAT FOR NORTH TARRANT
MARKETPLACE ADDITION ON 2.325 ACRES AT 9200 NORTH TARRANT
PARKWAY.
4-
Planning Manager Clayton Comstock presented AP 2015-02 Amended Plat for North U)
Tarrant Marketplace located at 9200 North Tarrant Parkway on 2.3 acres for the
purpose of CVS Development. The purpose is to move the lot line to accommodate the
CVS.
0
Applicant Patrick Mango representing of Winkleman Associates, 6750 Hillcrest Plaza
Dr; Dallas, TX presented the request for the amended plat for the adjusted lot line to
provide enough area for the development for the CVS. Elevations were going to be the
same as Kroger as far as landscape.
U)
STEVEN COOPER MOVED TO APPROVE AP 2015-02. KATHY LUPPY SECONDED THE MOTION.
S
MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED 7-0.
U)
APPROVED A
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Randall Shiflet adjourned the meeting at 7:57 p.m.
Chairman Secretary
Ln
cm
Randal Shiflet Don Bowen
March 19,2015
P&Z Minutes
Page 8
Packet Pg. 23
C.1
140L Im Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
From: The Office of the City Manager Date: April 16, 2015
Subject: ZC 2015-08 Public Hearing and Consideration of a request from
Legacy Church of Christ for a Zoning Change from 1-1 - Light Industrial
and R-1-S - Special Single Family to U - School, Church, Institutional
on 21.277 acres located at 8801 Mid Cities Boulevard and 8601
Cardinal Lane.
Presenter: Chad VanSteenberg, Assistant Planner
Summary:
The primary purpose of this zoning request is to better reflect the actual use of the
Legacy Church of Christ property and remove the Light Industrial zoning category from
the Mid-Cities Boulevard corridor. City staff approached the Church regarding their
Industrial zoning two years ago. With their acquisition of the adjacent property at 8601
Cardinal Lane—formerly a residence—last November for additional church office space,
the zoning would unify the two properties. The former residence is in the process of
being converted to non-residential use.
General Description:
EXISTING CONDITIONS: Legacy Church of Christ's campus, built in 2001 (phase
1) and 2008 (phase 2), sits on 18 acres and has access to Mid-Cities Blvd, Cardinal
Lane and Martin Drive. The former residence at 8601 Cardinal Lane sits on 3.3 acres
and was built in 2004 after having demolished another residence.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The church property is designated on the Comprehensive
Land Use Plan as "Public / Semi-Public." The former residence is designated as "Low
Density Residential." If the zoning change is approved, the "Low Density Residential"
designation will be changed on the next Comprehensive Land Use Plan update to
"Public/ Semi-Public" to reflect the current and future use of the property.
CURRENT ZONING & BUILDING MATERIAL SUP: The property at 8601 Cardinal
Lane has been zoned "R-1-S" Special Single Family Residential since 2004.
The Legacy Church of Christ property has been zoned 1-1" Light Industrial since before
1999. As part of the church's original construction, City Council approved a Special Use
Permit on July 24, 2000 (PZ 2000-24, Ordinance No. 2491) that authorized the use of
building materials other than masonry. If the proposed zoning change is approved, the
Packet Pg. 24
C.1
140L Im Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
SUP would be removed from the zoning map and any non-conformities with respect to
building materials would be considered legal nonconforming and would be permitted to
remain, and be repaired or replaced.
SURROUNDING ZONING / LAND USE:
North: R-2, R-3, R-1-S & AG / Low Density Residential
West: R-1 Single Family / Low Density Residential
South: C-1 Commercial / Neighborhood Service
East: RI-PD (Brynwyck) / Low Density Residential
PLAT STATUS: Lot 2, Block 14, Glenann Addition (8801 Mid-Cities Blvd) and Lot 1,
Block 1, Kirby Addition (8601 Cardinal Lane).
Recommendation:
Approve ZC 2015-08.
Packet Pg. 25
C.1.a
cm
co
O
M
a
S
2
co
Ln
Mid Cities Blvd
cm
CID N
O E
CID
v
N
ZC 2015-08
Rezoning from 1-1 &1�IRH
- -
8801 Mid Cities Blvd
Feet
Prepared by Planning 04/02/15 0 100 200 400 60
Packet Pg. 26
i
/
/
III
r
L8
CM
0
co
coal
co
l
Ln
CD
C`e9
Yk
Mid
/
/ ��j////o//�j✓i�i/jig� %'i r+ ;��/�, „ j
i l/ Packet
Pg. 27
m
i�✓i j i� 4 rF ��� e�1��it i'rd'x' % a/ �I j��jf �� � /9 j
C.1.c
`CHL,g
d NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
.. :: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
TExPS AND CITY COUNCIL
Case Number: ZC 2015-08
Applicant: Legacy Church of Christ
Location: 8801 Mid Cities Boulevard Ln
You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner of record within 200 N
co
feet of the property shown on the attached map.
Purpose of Public Hearing:
A Public Hearing is being held to consider a request from Legacy Church of Christ for a
Zoning Change from 1-1 - Light Industrial and R-1-S - Special Single Family to U - School,
Church, Institutional on 17.947 acres located at 8801 Mid Cities Boulevard.
Public Hearing Schedule:
Public Hearing Dates: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
7:00 PM THURSDAY, APRIL 16, 2015
CL
co
CITY COUNCIL Ln
7:00 PM MONDAY, MAY 11, 2015
cm
to
Both Meeting Locations: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7301 N. E. LOOP 820
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS
If you have any questions or wish to submit a petition or letter concerning the above request,
please contact:
Planning Department - City of North Richland Hills
7301 Northeast Loop 820
North Richland Hills, Texas 76180
Phone (817) 427-6300
Fax (817) 427-6303
Packet Pg. 28
C.1.d
SELBY MARK ALAN DAHN WILLIAM HOPPENREYS FRANCES LAURIANN
SELBY GWENDA A DAHN SHARON 6401 WHITNEY CT
6404 WHITNEY CT 6400 WHITNEY CT FORT WORTH TX 76182-4250
FORT WORTH TX 76182-4250 FORT WORTH TX 76182-4250
BARAGANA RICHARD Birdville Independent School District WINKLE JAMES W
6405 WHITNEY CT Attn: Mike Seale WINKLE KAREN KAY
FORT WORTH TX 76182 6125 East Belknap 6404 BLAKE CT
Haltom City, TX 76117 NRH TX 76182-4246
WHITE JAMES RANKIN MARIAN A FRYE MICHAEL P
WHITE PATRICIA 6401 BLAKE CT FRYE SALLY L
6400 BLAKE CT FORT WORTH TX 76182-4246 6405 BLAKE CT
FORT WORTH TX 76182-4246 FORT WORTH TX 76182-4246
Ln
0
CERVANTES SAUL ORMON SCOTT P FENNER ROBERTA BUTTS
CERVANTES STACYE
6405 CHILTON DR 6401 CHILTON DR 6400 CHILTON DR
NRH TX 76182-4217 NRH TX 76182-4217 NRH TX 76182-4216
LAW LOUIS LEROY LANG DENNIS R SHEDDEN WILLIAM
7133 STONYBROOKE DR LANG KAY SHEDDEN PAMELA
8800 MARTIN DR 6342 BRYNWYCK LN
NRH TX 76182-3625
FORT WORTH TX 76182-4801 NRH TX 76182
I-
KARKI BIPENDRA
KARKI KRISTI ROSSI DEBRA LUEVANO EUGENE
6448 BRYNWYCK LN 6444 BRYNWYCK LN 6440 BRYNWYCK LN
NRH TX 76182-7730 NRH TX 76182 NRH TX 76182-7730
2
co
ZILLINGER MONTE HOGUE ROBERT JAMES WHITTINGTON JUSTIN Ln
ZILLINGER LINDA L 6432 BRYNWYCK LN WHITTINGTON S
6436 BRYNWYCK LN NRH TX 76182-7730 6428 BRYNWYCK LN 0
NRH TX 76182-7730 NRH TX 76182-7730
FAIRLEY DAVID C WOOD BRIAN K
6424 BRYNWYCK AN FAIRLEY LISA M WOOD JILLIAN
NRH X 76182 77 LN 6420 BRYNWYCK LN 6417 BRYNWYCK LN
NRH TX 76182-7730 NRH TX 76182-7730 NRH TX 76182-7731
PHAM VIET QUOC SHIPPEE KIMBERLY Y HOLLIS JOHN R
PHAM LIEN BANG TR SHIPPEE DOUG HOLLIS LEIGH A
6404 BRYNWYCK LN 6408 BRYNWYCK LN 6412 BRYNWYCK LN
NRH TX 76182-7730 NRH TX 76182-7730 NRH TX 76182-7730
PARISH STANLEY MERITAGE HOMES OF TEXAS LLC VAN NOY RAYMOND M
PARISH JANE Attention: C/O SBB MANGEMENT 6305 BRYNWYCK LN
6416 BRYNWYCK LN 1670 KELLER PKWY STE 110 NRH TX 76182
NRH TX 76182-7730 KELLER TX 76248-3773
Packet Pg. 29
C.1.d
BROUSSARD DAVID FRAZIER K R BELCHER SHARLA
SAMPLE ALISA A FRAZIER DOROTHY BELCHER STEVEN
6301 BRYNWYCK LN 6308 BRYNWYCK LN 6312 BRYNWYCK LN
NRH TX 76182-7724 NRH TX 76180 NRH TX 76182-7742
PIYA PRABUDDHA K BRYNWYCK EQUITY PARTNERS LTD MAKENS MICHAEL R
PIYA SABITA Attention:ATTN ROB WARD 8713 CARDINAL LN
6316 BRYNWYCK LN 801 COLUMBIA DR FORT WORTH TX 76180-5301
NRH TX 76182-7742 SOUTHLAKE TX 76092-8452
BROOKS CLINTON R OSBORN LAWANDA H ENCLAVE AT HOMETOWN LP
8709 CARDINAL LN 9061 FM 1885 3100 W SOUTHLAKE BLVD STE 120
NRH TX 76180-5301 WEATHERFORD TX 76088-1445 SOUTHLAKE TX 76092-6770
Ln
0
LEGACY CHURCH OF CHRIST CAMPO SAN ANTONIO LLC FIELDS MARK E
8801 MID CITIES BLVD PO BOX 15697 4603 COLLYVILLE BLVD STE 100
NRH TX 76182-4821 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92659 COLLEYVILLE TX 76034-3974
JATACO LLC TEXAS TETON PARTNERS LTD WHEELESS WILLIAM
8605 MID CITIES BLVD 4406 EATON CIR WHEELESS DEBORAH
8529 MID CITIES BLVD
NRH TX 76182-4711 COLLEYVILLE TX 76034-4652
NRH TX 76182-4706
I-
YOUNG GWEN K OLDRIDGE STEPHEN OLDRIDGE RHONDA GEORGE SUZANNE ETAL
7433 CHELMSFORD PL 8600 MARTIN DR
FORT WORTH TX 76182-4504 6424 SUNNYBROOK DR NRH TX 76182-4105
NRH TX 76182-4109
2
co
Ln
OGGIER MARY BROWNING EST MATHEWS EARL OLDRIDGE STEPHEN JOHN
8600 MARTIN DR MATHEWS PATRICIA 6424 SUNNYBROOK DR
NRH TX 76182-4105 8608 MARTIN DR NRH TX 76182-4109 0
NRH TX 76182-4105
WAITES JERRY WAYNE SCHAY GENE WAYNE
8616 MARTIN DR 8620 MARTIN DR
NRH TX 76182 NRH TX 76180
Packet Pg. 30
lao C4
UJ
LLJ
N _. I _ - ✓
4-41M� I I I
- L-- _
Li I L--- -_. -- ----- - ----- ._.v...._._.._...__- _
I z
III N w Z mow ' -
w
° ¢
p
„ f
_ 3 09. f
TI
00
z U31:
w i
OD
i
i I I e C*400' I I
C'`II I w
EP-
II I ° aW
11 w 011 � -- mot- F= 0
Ali — .— I= ca
I III ' F
< I
r ; El
�; ; -
III' I m
<
CD
I
I
xw
Ll
I
p '
T-r ` .ss°sss M
_ -...._...--- _ -
NI Z — - _-_ .._._ -- - _----_
M , ii�,60.0)tON
D.1
140L Im Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
From: The Office of the City Manager Date: April 16, 2015
Subject: PP 2015-01 Consideration of a request from OCH Development, LLC
for a Preliminary Plat of The Villas at Smithfield, 93 residential lots and
10 open space lots on 13.479 acres located in the 8200 block of Odell
Street and Northeast Parkway.
Presenter: Clayton Comstock, Planning Manager
Summary:
OCH Development, LLC is requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat for The Villas at
Smithfield, a 93-lot single family residential subdivision on 13.479 acres within the
Smithfield Transit Oriented Development District's "General Mixed Use" character zone.
The site is located on the east side of Davis Boulevard between Odell Street and
Northeast Parkway and would contain a mix of 30-foot townhomes and 40-foot
detached single family homes.
General Description:
CASE DETAILS: Forty-eight (48) of the 93 lots (52%) are planned to be a 30-foot wide
townhome product with alley-loaded garages. Forty-five (48%) are planned to be 40-
foot wide detached single family units with alley-loaded garages. These townhome and
small-lot single family units are permitted by right in the Smithfield TOD General Mixed
Use Zoning District.
1.09 acres of open space is also provided with this development, or 8.1% of the gross
area. Most of this open space is located within a central green of 0.71 acre that will
include formal landscape and hardscape elements, including public art. Other open
space areas serve as landscape setbacks from other adjacent uses. The central green
alone meets the minimum TOD requirement of 5% open space area.
The applicant has requested to proceed to this particular April 16 meeting for
consideration, but there are a few unresolved issues that staff and the developer are still
working through. These issues will continue to be discussed as final engineering plans
are prepared and a Final Plat is submitted. While the Preliminary Plat meets the
technical requirements for approval, staff respectfully requests that the Planning &
Zoning Commission acknowledge these points and ask the applicant to continue
working to resolve them:
Packet Pg. 32
D.1
140L Im Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
1. Concept Plan approval. Prior to approval of a Preliminary Plat, the TOD Code
requires approval of a Concept Plan by the Development Review Committee.
Said approval is still pending, but a final decision will be rendered on
Wednesday, April 15. Staff will present more information on the Concept Plan at
the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on April 16
2. Sight Visibility at the Southeast Corner. An alley is proposed to exit onto
Northeast Parkway adjacent to an existing single-family residence and at the end
of a curve in the street to the east. Visibility is limited and staff is concerned for
potential traffic issues in this location as a result. Final engineering will help
determine if this area is required for drainage as well; and the alley may be able
to be moved to exit onto the development's internal street instead.
3. Building Code Setbacks. The developer/homebuilder is planning on 35-foot
wide buildings on 40-foot wide lots. This 5-foot separation between buildings
causes some issues with building code and staff is still working with the
homebuilder on this issue. Upon Final Plat, the subdivision may have specific
easements and setbacks that address roof overhangs and fire-rated walls.
4. Park Dedication Fees. The developer is proposing to make a direct donation
toward public park improvements elsewhere in the City in lieu of park dedication
fees. No action is required on this issue at this time, but will be associated with
the Final Plat as it proceeds forward.
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS: The property is currently undeveloped.
PLATTING STATUS: Multiple lots within Block 2 of the Culp Addition.
EXISTING ZONING: "Smithfield TOD — General Mixed Use."
SURROUNDING ZONING / LAND USE: The property is surrounded on the north,
south and west by the same "Smithfield TOD" zoning and land use designation with the
same "General Mixed Use" character zone. The property to the east is zoned R-PD and
is "Low Density Residential" on the Land Use Plan.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan depicts "Smithfield TOD" for this
area. This higher-density single family residential product is what was envisioned for
this area of the Smithfield TOD. The intent of this classification is to support and sustain
the future commuter rail station and provide convenient access to rail transit, shopping,
employment, housing and neighborhood retail services.
THOROUGHFARE PLAN: The subdivision will have access onto Odell Street and
Northeast Parkway. Both roads in this area are fully developed and classified as local
streets with 60 feet of right-of-way. No additional right-of-way is required from this
property for either street, however the developer will be upgrading south side of Odell
Street along this development's frontage to include an on-street parking lane and
"bump-outs" to define the travel lanes. A similar improvement was made to the Briar
Pointe Villas development at Main Street and Amundson.
Packet Pg. 33
D.1
140L 1W Rib
"ArRok.,
NORTH KIC;HLA D HILLS
Internal street classifications were borrowed from the Town Center Zoning District. A
2014 revision to the TOD Code allowed developers greater flexibility in choosing from
either the TOD street sections or the Town Center Zoning District street sections. By
doing this, the developer has also created a one-way street around the central park,
similar to other areas of Hometown.
ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY DETERMINATION: The developer will be responsible
for 100% of all paving, water, sanitary sewer, and drainage infrastructure needed to
support the development in accordance with the City's design criteria. This includes
streets, sidewalks, street trees, street lights, etc. that are consistent with the Transit
Oriented Development Zoning District.
Recommendation:
Approve PP 2015-01.
Packet Pg. 34
D.1.a
Ln
Odell St
a a.
m
ww
Or
a�
A' a2
Ln
CD
CL
Y
�S
Northeast Pk
Packet Pg. 35
r
Hill
/
o fllr�ilf, �1
� wuuVVVVV
n
/
� l
M'
°_ — — p o c o l�N ° ,
529 —b o
— � = iI
0) 40D a 40D Go
wwm(n W 00'511 O I'
3'n ,9
CD
M.1 O,ZI o OON w
N oo , 9 ,0 �6
—X m M W ez 'o'll ,13771VI ,, /,09•1-£-1 as >
0
O� ISO J m J �,, 6'0 ,0070£ ,50'�£ I!jl o"'
NO 100.9 Q / 3'n ,9 L i� ? x
V v cn I N I o I 3 � 3 3 m1
as w �h 0 m M. 00
181r. cnV O O N M Mp MO M� O
Ip Z Q I O R�to f— . tom.q r— f—0 ti 0 Li
i- a r` 00'911 ' I� I�N c� N In N� d N,0 M a� c\
N , o o `
Xp I I I O , , o I O N N N N N to I� O
O
°o - I I 3)l 078 -I'8 ,9 j w Ln
xa�00' ,9 �'L 5£ 0'0£ 00'0£ 00'0£ 00'O£ ,09'L£ I o�
>
o
1 °vi LL! - - (LZ-05-Obi) _ u�``'ti
00 s _ x
LO
,99'92 — —
N, U ,00'9£ ,00'02 ,007 0E ,00'2£ ,00'22 ,0 '02 00 ,00'0£ 9 E ; l
CD� 1 Q s ,9 x/00 I
s N N;'� w w W w w w w
M
�- Z� MO M t2 M M M MO
I I W�O '
Lb'b01 1� 1 �N� NO � N N ti ` O Ct ti M N . —
o ;).0 o N ! N o N
�p l� \OZ z z Z z z z Z iII I rn
O� ` 'n ,9'22 IM211 T-2
ez '0*8 A377V , 00
00'02 00'02 00 -
,00'9£, N
-JI I II� ti Ld
%Te ,� r N
- -6 M—Lb,Z0N -
>o
% M ih X 0O p O N CO
O� N tiO r- x d M N A -
�n
O e in a)- � m W m�z °->
O Z Cu
cv 1 100 0078 �'/ �CL
� Q �
1 �L-9 - ' - - � i �N UH Y -jZO OU
~ I O mO0 Ln
1 M '0'N . 5/ ,LO'9Z �a,eZ Cn
F
v 5� �° I m��o�c�
El J Lu� F— J m°caaa❑q M'o'a
d
ww �� �N f F- a:_j
CL NN �, X W o o I o Cr)U<
J
LIJ tt ZD
0
W N x
I_LI
O LL U) N UO (D
ui°~ a v ° mom �z
>OIU U� Q mU-��(jU ZC(D
Q2 QCCO OmQ 1-
coo; cc Ln LO Cu ca Q 0' Z
p0OO �' lf! Ch �J •d N tnO4 /
m 1.D F- mOm N OHO
r•� m UQ Z_ /
171