Loading...
2013_11.21 PZ MinutesKENNEDALE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES COMMISSIONERS - REGULAR MEETING November 21, 2013 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 405 MUNICIPAL DRIVE I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Harvey called the work session to order at 6:05 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Ms. Roberts called roll. Members present: Ernest Harvey, chair; Tom Pirtle, vice -chair (arrived at 6:10 P.M.); Stephen Brim, Michael Herring, Katie McFadden, Don Rawe (arrived at 6:10 P.M.), Mike Walker, Carolyn Williamson (alternate; left at 8:45 P.M. due to illness). Members absent: none. Staff present: Rachel Roberts (planning director) A quorum was present with two members absent at roll call (Tom Pirtle and Don Rawe, who arrived at 6:10 P.M.). Ms. Williamson was asked to serve as a regular member for the work session. Ill. WORK SESSION A. Discuss any item on the Regular Session agenda Mr. Brim had a question about the right -of -way on the plat in Case PZ 13 -11. Ms. Roberts said that staff recommended approval on the condition that corrections to the shown right -of -way are made. Mr. Harvey asked about Hilltop, Case PZ 13 -08. He said he liked the concept and asked if any arrangements should be made for live /work units. Ms. Roberts said PD should at least allow for home occupations. The Commission discussed options for trails and walkability. B. Discuss use of form -based codes in implementing the comprehensive land use plan at the Bowman Springs /Dick Price & Kennedale Pkwy intersection Mr. Harvey said he was interested in the supporting documentation from other cities that Ms. Roberts had included with the staff report, and how specifics like a historic main street, and the proposed district's intent to preserve and enhance the area instead of using a general zoning category, rather than keeping it more generalized. Mr. Brim asked about the number of acres that would be within the urban village, and Ms. Roberts said she could email that information to the new members. Mr. Harvey reminded Ms. Roberts that she had created a map showing the boundary. Ms. Roberts showed the Commission the Village Creek Master Plan, which shows the proposed location of the Urban Village. C. Discuss creation or modification of zoning districts to implement the comprehensive land use plan Ms. Roberts asked the Commission to give her their thoughts on this item before the next meeting. The work session closed at 6:46 P.M. IV. REGULAR SESSION V. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Harvey called the work session to order at 7:01 P.M. VI. ROLL CALL Ms. Roberts called roll. A quorum was present with all Commissioners in attendance at roll call. VII. MINUTES APPROVAL A. Review and consider approval of minutes from the October 17, 2013 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Mr. Pirtle motioned to accept the minutes as written, seconded by Mr. Rawe. The motion passed with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained. VIII. VISITOR/CITIZENS FORUM No one registered to speak. IX. REGULAR ITEMS A. CASE # PZ 13 -08 to receive comments and consider action on a request by Ashton Holdings, Inc. for a zoning change for approximately 6.3 acres from "OT" Old Town District to "PD" Planned Development District located at 260 Hilltop (access on 3 rd St), legal description of Hilltop Addition Block 1 Lots 1 -15. (1) Staff Presentation Ms. Roberts gave the staff presentation. She said the request was in compliance with the comprehensive land use plan and city council goals and recommended approval. She said the applicant had also submitted a replat application for consideration but had asked to postpone consideration to the next meeting. Mr. Pirtle asked about building materials percentages and whether the houses could be all siding. Ms. Roberts said the homes must be made of two types of materials. Mr. Harvey asked about the ordinance's statement about the number of lots. Ms. Roberts said the ordinance didn't have to specify number of lots, but the Commission could add a maximum to the ordinance. Mr. Harvey asked about street radius requirements for fire protection, and Ms. Roberts said the fire chief had reviewed the site plan and said the radii were fine, but he had asked for a wider turning angle at the intersection of Hilltop and 3rd St. (2) Applicant Presentation Adlai Pennington, 1375 Gilman Rd, Kennedale, gave the applicant presentation. He said the replat wasn't brought before the Commission this month because some engineering work needed to be done based on staff comments, and it couldn't be done before the meeting. He handed pictures to the Commission showing houses that were in the character of Old Town and what was proposed. He said the attraction of Hilltop is that it is walkable and listed several destinations that are within walking distance. He said the Commissioners should see a resemblance between the pictures and the chamber of commerce building; he also said a 2 minimum of two building materials would be used. He said he would answer any questions the Commission may have and would like to defer the rest of the presentation until after the public comments. Mr. Brim said he didn't see anything about lighting in the ordinance and asked the Commission members if they needed to look at that issue. Mr. Pennington said he intended to use antique - looking, low intensity lights. Mr. Harvey asked Mr. Pennington if he would have any concerns if a lighting requirement was added to the ordinance, and Mr. Pennington said he would not. Mr. Harvey then instructed Ms. Roberts to add it to the ordinance. Mr. Pirtle asked about the required two -car garage, with only a five foot side setback, he wondered how it would look with the porch. He asked if the garages would be rear or front entry. Mr. Pennington said it would be front entry; the PD would require wood panel garage doors, and the porch breaks up the depth. He said the color and architecture is how to get curb appeal they're trying to achieve. He said this is a cottage infill development. Each home has four parking spaces, two off - street and two garage spaces. Mr. Pirtle looked at the pictures and said the garage is pushed back so the predominate features are the porch, the front door, and the volume above that. He said he was thinking about what you see first and would like to see the garage five feet back from the entry door or porch. Ms. McFadden asked if the builder, Summit Homes, would be using the home designs they already have. Mr. Pennington said the houses will be designed for this subdivision. Mr. Harvey asked if Mr. Pennington saw any problem with setting the garage five feet back from the front door. Mr. Pennington said that is complicated. Mr. Pirtle asked about two or three feet and said they don't want it to be flush with the house. Mr. Pennington said the intention is that the rail of the front porch would be at or no further out than the plane of the front garage door, with the front door five feet set back. He said the porch creates the depth at the garage door, and pushing one back relative to the other takes away from the back yard. He said the most efficient is to build homes with the front door five feet recessed from the garage door, and to compensate by using cedar, stained garage doors. Mr. Harvey showed Mr. Pennington one of his pictures and said that was close to what was desired; when you walk by, you're not seeing garage door after garage door. Mr. Pennington asked the Commission what it would think about a fifteen foot setback for the main structure and a twenty foot setback for the garage. The Commission seemed agreeable to the idea. (3) Public Hearing Lana Sather, 421 Corry A Edwards Dr., addressed the Commission against the case. She said two -story houses built on top of the hill will take away privacy. She also said she had concerns about drainage. She said the homes will turn into rental property, will have high turn -over, and will lower property values in the area. Bob Camp, 560 W 3` St, addressed the Commission against the zoning change and the replat. He said he couldn't hear anything anyone on the dais said. He said he always thought there would be 15 lots there, and 29 lots is not acceptable. He said this was going to be a dangerous intersection. He also said the previous land owner stated that his title company said the road was never dedicated, and the road was still private property, so the city did not contact them [unclear what he meant]. He also expressed concerns about the water run -off. He handed Mr. Harvey a protest petition for the replat. Don Kemp, 528 West P, addressed the Commission against the request. He said the development backs up to two sides of his property, and he has tremendous water run -off and had to build a retaining wall to direct water away from his building. He said he'd talked with Mr. Pennington, who said he might be able to clean up part of it. Mr. Kemp showed the Commission a picture and said he tried for eight years to buy the lot next to him to try to clean it up. He said he thought 29 houses was too many. He also said he was concerned about water pressure. Richard Thomas, 416 W 3rd St, addressed the Commission against the case. He said there had been a drainage problem at the bottom of this hill since the 70s /80s when the duplexes were built. Tiffany Douglass, 310 North Road, addressed the Commission against the case. She said her main concern was the traffic from the amount of houses. She said her family walks to the park and to the store, and the hill is already an issue. She said drainage is also an issue. 3 Vinita Thomas, 412 W 3 St., addressed the Commission against the case. She said when she built her house, she was going to have brick and Hardie -plank but was told she had to do 80% brick. She said her main concern is the water problem, and she's had the drainage problem since the 80s. She said she had been to City Council numerous times and was told they were going to fix it, now she she's been told the city couldn't afford to fix it. Daniel Regalado, 525 W 3 St., addressed the Commission against the case. He was worried about the amount of construction trucks going over 3rd Street, and said it's not a paved street, it's nothing but gravel. He said that cars do come over the hill very fast, and there are a lot of children living in the neighborhood. Octavia Thomas, 416 W 3 St, addressed the Commission against the case. She said development for the city is good, and a lot of people would not be opposed to a subdivision being built up, but they want to keep their privacy. She said their big lots are what keeps them here, and they still have a country feel. She lives at the top of the hill, and she's been almost hit several times when trying to leave her driveway. With two story houses, people would be able to look into their yards. She also was concerned about where people would put their pets with five foot back yards. (4) Applicant Response Adlai Pennington said this is a difficult presentation because he understood what everyone was saying. Drainage, traffic, property values, and Hardie -plank are the issues he heard. He said traffic will increase, yes. Hardie -Plank is necessary for character and marketability of the neighborhood. Drainage will be an issue with 15 houses or 28. The case is a zoning case, and the engineering issues are addressed by staff, consultants, and engineers to prevent adverse effects. He said one detention pond is planned already, and another can be added if needed. He thinks the plans will reduce the amount of water flowing onto Mr. Kemp's property. He said the zoning change does not create an adverse drainage situation. He said these will not be townhomes or duplexes and will be priced between $160,000 and $200,000. He said the intent of the comprehensive plan is to provide this kind of home in this kind of setting. Ms. McFadden asked about the build -out timeline. Mr. Pennington said he expected the first houses won't close until 2015. She asked if he envisioned having a Home Owners' Association to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood. Mr. Pennington said the retention basins require an HOA for maintenance. Mr. Pennington went over the proposed requirements and said Hardie -plank costs the same as brick. (5) Staff Response and Summary Ms. Roberts said she was glad residents spoke up about concerns, but she thought some of the concerns were more appropriately addressed through the replat phase. She said the confusion was because both the rezoning and replat cases were advertised for this meeting, and she wanted to restate that the replat case will be held next month. She said the drainage and the increase in number of lots are addressed in the platting stage. At this stage, if zoning is approved, although the ordinance says there could be a maximum of 28 building lots, actually only 15 lots could be built because that's how the property is platted. She said the intent is to create homes that are in keeping with the character of Old Town and that two -story homes are already allowed under current zoning, so while privacy is a concern, it is an existing issue. She also said that developer agreements always require an HOA these days. Ms. Roberts summarized by saying that staff sees this PD as very much in keeping with the comprehensive plan and recommends approval. (6) Action by the Planning & Zoning Commission Mr. Brim said it is a good point that it is just 15 lots currently. Mr. Harvey asked if storm water concerns were addressed in the ordinance for past planned development districts. Ms. Roberts said she couldn't remember, but the Commission could include something. She said if the replat later meets city requirements and the comprehensive plan, the city has to approve it, so if there are standards the Commission wants to make sure the plat meets, they should put it in the PD. The Commission discussed setbacks for the garage and the main structure or porch, building materials, lighting, storm water run -off, repetition of home elevations, home owners' associations, lot size, and traffic. Mr. Camp attempted to address the Commission. Mr. Harvey said he could not speak now, but he could speak to commissioners after the meeting. Mr. Harvey also said the Commission was an advisory committee, and it makes advisory comments to the City Council, so if Mr. Camp had concerns about the proceedings and decisions, he would have another opportunity to speak at the Council meeting. He said the Commission gives the public an opportunity to speak and not an opportunity to rebut. Mr. Pirtle made a motion to approve based on the changes to the ordinance discussed by the Commission: 1. The front plane of the garage must be set back from the front plane of the primary structure, with the garage setback a minimum of 20' from the street right -of -way and the front porch setback a minimum of 15'. 2. Primary structures shall have exterior facades of a minimum of 25% masonry. 3. Street lighting shall be decorative and aesthetically compatible with the character of the district. 4. The developer shall adequately address storm water run -off resulting from developing property within the district. Construction plans submitted to the city shall include detailed drainage plans. 5. Elevations shall not repeat more than once every fifth house. 6. A Home Owners' Association shall be required, and the HOA shall be responsible for maintaining drainage facilities. 7. The developer shall conduct a traffic study. The motion was seconded by Ms. McFadden and passed with all in favor except Mr. Rawe who was opposed and Mr. Harvey who abstained. Mr. Harvey thanked everyone for coming to the meeting and said the City Council would hold a public hearing next month and will make the final decision. He said the public would have another opportunity to make their voices heard. B. CASE # PZ 13 -10 to receive comments and consider action on a request by Ashton Holdings, Inc. for a zoning change for approximately 4.3 acres from "AG" Agricultural District to "11-1" Single Family Residential District for property owned by Ricardo Trevino and located at the corner of Swiney Hiett Rd and Collett Sublett Rd, legal description of Oliver Acres Addition Block 2 Lot 6. (1) Staff Presentation Ms. Roberts gave a brief comparison of requirements in Agricultural and R -1 zoning districts. She said the requested rezoning was in compliance with the comprehensive plan and recommended approval. (2) Applicant Presentation Mr. Pennington said he would prefer to defer his comments until after the public hearing. He also said he had brought a proposed elevation if anyone was interested in seeing it. Mr. Harvey asked Mr. Pennington where he thought the development would fall between Falcon Wood and Beacon Hill? Mr. Pennington introduced Mike Mitts, his partner in the project, and said the first house is marketed at $430,000. Mr. Pennington handed around a sheet showing an illustration of a proposed elevation. Mr. Harvey asked Ms. Roberts about the land uses behind the subject property, and she said it is single family homes on large lots. (3) Public Hearing Hank Barnes, 116 Collett Sublett Road, addressed the Commission. He said he doesn't know if he's for or against the case, he just had some comments. He said he felt like this was just a process, and the rezoning was a foregone conclusion, because since October there have been survey stakes with for sale signs out in front of the property. He said water pressure is a concern to residents at 112, 128, and 129 Collett Sublett in addition to his property. He said he had talked with Mr. Ledbetter about this already. Mr. Barnes said he has 31 pounds of pressure at his house and 40 at the hydrant, but friends of his who live on Pennsylvania have water pressure of about 80 pounds. He said privacy also an issue and asked about the setback requirement. He also said he had heard this development would not have sidewalks. He also said he hoped the city was working with school district. Mr. Walker said that's why he's on the Commission. Mr. Barnes said traffic was a 9 concern, with Swiney Hiett becoming a short -cut. Mr. Barnes said he would like to have one stop sign on the corner, because there's a hill there. Mr. Harvey said there were two cases, 13 -10 and 13 -11, and asked Mr. Barnes if he was speaking about both cases or just 13 -10. Mr. Barnes said he could speak for both. He said the water issue is a big issue, and Mr. Harvey said that's covered during the replat. Tiffany Schwin, 128 Collett Sublett, addressed the Commission. She said she is Mr. Barnes' daughter and lives on the other side of Mr. Barnes. She said the number of houses concerns her for her parents' sake. She grew up in Kennedale, and loves this city, and feels like sometimes that part of town gets ignored. Mr. Harvey said they want to hear from the residents who have been here for a long time and hearing from them helps the Commission make the right decisions. (4) Applicant Response At a request from Mr. Pennington, Ms. Roberts stated the setback requirements for R -1 zoning. Mr. Harvey asked for lot coverage and house size requirements, which Ms. Roberts provided. Mr. Pennington said it is reasonable to think these eight lots will have a minimal impact on water pressure and traffic. He said hopefully water pressure can be addressed, as that was one of the bigger concerns Mr. Barnes had. He said he had no plans to cut trees unnecessarily, but they did clear out the underbrush. He said for these homes, they planned to build the same look that's on Pennsylvania. Each home would be gated by a brick column and wrought iron fence, since they can't gate the subdivision. He asked about the city's policy on sidewalks, and Ms. Roberts said they're generally required, and whether they're built now or money is put aside is worked out in the developer agreement. Mr. Walker said the case considered here is not going to significantly affect the school district. (5) Staff Response and Summary Ms. Roberts said she would address the water pressure issue under the replat case but mentioned that she had spoken with Larry Ledbetter, and he said that the proposal wouldn't have a negative effect on water pressure. He'd said it might even help because they'd have more homes pulling water through. (6) Action by the Planning & Zoning Commission Mr. Brim motioned to approve, seconded by Mr. Pirtle. The motion passed with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained. C. CASE # PZ 13 -11 to receive comments and consider action on a request by Ashton Holdings, Inc. for a replat of approximately 4.3 acres, for property owned by Ricardo Trevino and located at the corner of Swiney Hiett Rd and Collett Sublett Rd, legal description of Oliver Acres Addition Block 2 Lot 6, to create Lots 6R1- 6R8. (1) Staff Presentation Ms. Roberts said the replat complied with comprehensive plan and would conform to city requirements with some corrections. She recommended approval on the condition that changes stated in the staff report are made to the plat drawing before it is considered by City Council. She repeated that she had asked Mr. Ledbetter about water pressure, and that he'd said the additional homes would not have a negative effect on water pressure and may help. Mr. Harvey asked what could be done about water pressure, and Ms. Roberts said she didn't know that there was much the city could do under rules about rough proportionality. Mr. Brim said the pressure is low, but based on eight houses, he didn't think it would have a big impact. He said he thinks Mr. Ledbetter is correct, it's a system deficiency. FT Mr. Walker said they don't have a lot to go on other than Mr. Ledbetter's assessment of it, but if it's wrong, if the city gets eight houses and it has a significant impact, he'd be willing to go to Council to discuss the issue. He said water has been a problem out here for a while. Mr. Harvey said that as part of the Commission's recommendation, they need to note this to the Council as a concern and note Mr. Ledbetter's assessment. (2) Applicant Presentation Mr. Pennington said he agrees with Mr. Barnes in being concerned about water pressure. He said adding eight lots is negligible, but he had a concern about it. He said future development is coming, so this issue isn't going to go away. In terms of setbacks, he said he wanted the record to reflect the setbacks, and he's never seen a house pushed back on the building lines. He said he thought the houses will be pushed as far forward as they can be. Mr. Pirtle asked if water pressure would influence Mr. Pennington to go somewhere else for his development. Mr. Pennington said you can't live without water, and his preliminary engineering report is consistent with what Mr. Ledbetter said. But if someone said to him he would be putting half million dollar houses in an area with inadequate water pressure, he wouldn't build there. He said he knows the pressure there is light, but it isn't systemic; it has something to do with the loop. He said he's been told it is a situation that will improve. Mr. Harvey said the city is recognizing that there are issues. Mr. Walker said also there was a small increase in taxes and water rates, so the city is trying to do something. Mr. Walker asked Mr. Pennington if they were committed to leaving the hardwood trees along the boundary between the subject property and Mr. Barnes' intact, and Mr. Pennington said they are. He said there are trees that are going to end up in the building footprint, and those will probably be removed, but the new homeowners are going to want privacy, too. Mr. Pennington said the fencing would be a six foot stained, capped wood fence, with steel posts. He said the front fence is going to require restrictions to get the homeowners to put the consistent fencing in. (3) Public Hearing Hank Barnes addressed the Commission again. He said he didn't have many additional comments, except to say he's been up to the city before on the water pressure issue. He said this situation is win -win because the next time he goes to the city to complain about water, he'll have eight people in half - million dollar homes also complaining. (4) Applicant Response The applicant had no response. (5) Staff Response and Summary Ms. Roberts recommended approval on the condition that the changes to the plat drawing listed in the staff report are made. (6) Action by the Planning & Zoning Commission Mr. Pirtle made a motion to approve the plat based on the conditions stated in the staff report. Mr. Herring seconded, and the motion passed with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained. D. CASE # PZ 13 -12 to receive comments and consider approval on a request by Alluvium Development, Inc. to amend the regulations for the Planned Development District for property located at 925 Mansfield Cardinal Rd, legal description of J M Lilly Survey A 980 Tract 2 & A 985 Tract 3, Tarrant County, Texas, to correct a scrivener's error that listed the minimum lot width for "C" type lots 7 as 85 feet instead of 80 feet. (1) Staff Presentation Ms. Roberts said that there had been an error on the original site plan, which should have said the lot width of "C" type lots was 80 feet instead of 85 feet. She recommended approval. Mr. Pirtle asked how many lots this effected. Ms. Roberts said it would affect 79 lots. (2) Applicant Presentation Terry Jobe, Routh St., Dallas, TX gave the applicant presentation. He said they would not be changing the lot layout or the number of lots, just the lot width. (3) Public Hearing No one registered to speak. (4) Applicant Response No response was given. (5) Staff Response and Summary Staff recommended approval. (6) Action by the Planning & Zoning Commission Mr. Pirtle made a motion to recommend approval, seconded by Mr. Herring. The motion passed with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained. X. REPORTS /ANNOUNCEMENTS Ms. Roberts said the annual Christmas Tree lighting festival would be held on December 3` She said there would also be a fundraiser for Bark in the Park held in the library community center on Nov. 22 and 23. Mr. Walker asked if the Commission's meeting date of January 9 had been confirmed, and Ms. Roberts said it had. XI. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Brim motioned to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Pirtle. The motion passed with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained. The reR6Xsessign adjourned at 9:52 P.M. lv o V- a 1, a ®3 Date ii-,?: H3 13 Roberts, Board Secretary Date 0