2014_02.20 PZ PacketKENNEDALE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA
COMMISSIONERS - REGULAR MEETING
February 20, 2014
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 405 MUNICIPAL DRIVE
WORK SESSION - 6:00 PM
REGULAR SESSION - 7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. WORK SESSION
A. Discuss any item on the Regular Session agenda
B. Discuss creation or modification of zoning districts to implement the comprehensive land use plan
C. Discuss use of form-based codes and concepts for land use standards in implementing the
comprehensive land use plan at the Bowman Springs/Dick Price & Kennedale Pkwy intersection
D. Discuss item(s) for future consideration
1. Green / environmental regulations
2. Subdivision standards for infill lots
3. Zoning standards for Old Town
IV. REGULAR SESSION
V. CALL TO ORDER
VI. ROLL CALL
VII. MINUTES APPROVAL
A. Review and consider approval of minutes from the January 9, 2014 Planning & Zoning
Commission regular meeting
VIII. VISITOR/CITIZENS FORUM
At this time, any person with business before the Planning and Zoning Commission not scheduled on
the Agenda may speak to the Commission, provided that an official ‘Speaker’s Request Form’ has been
completed and submitted to the Commission Secretary prior to the start of the meeting. All comments
must be directed towards the Chair, rather than individual commissioners or staff. All speakers must limit
their comments to the subject matter as listed on the ‘Speaker’s Request Form.’ No formal action can be
taken on these items.
IX. REGULAR ITEMS
X. REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of Kennedale will provide for reasonable
accommodations for persons attending City Council meetings. This building is wheelchair accessible, and
parking spaces for disabled citizens are available. Requests for sign interpreter services must be made
forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meetings. Please contact Amethyst Cirmo, City Secretary, at
817.985.2104 or (TDD) 1.800.735.2989
CERTIFICATION
I certify that a copy of the February 20, 2014, Planning and Zoning Commission agenda was posted on the City Hall bulletin board
next to the main entrance of the City Hall building, 405 Municipal Drive, of the City of Kennedale, Texas, in a place convenient and
readily accessible to the general public at all times and said agenda was posted at least 72 hours preceding the schedule time of
said meeting, in accordance with Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code.
_________________________
Rachel Roberts, Board Secretary
Staff Report to the Commissioners
Date: February 20, 2014
Agenda Item No: WORK SESSION - A.
I. Subject:
Discuss any item on the Regular Session agenda
II. Originated by:
III. Summary:
During this agenda item, the Commission may discuss any item on the regular session agenda. No action may
be taken on this item during the work session, and no comments from the public may be heard or considered
until the regular session.
IV. Notification:
V. Fiscal Impact Summary:
VI. Legal Impact:
VII. Recommendation:
VIII. Alternative Actions:
IX. Attachments:
Staff Report to the Commissioners
Date: February 20, 2014
Agenda Item No: WORK SESSION - B.
I. Subject:
Discuss creation or modification of zoning districts to implement the comprehensive land use plan
II. Originated by:
Rachel Roberts, City Planner
III. Summary:
The comprehensive plan establishes character districts as depicted in the Future Land Use Plan. These
character districts “focus on the attributes of different areas as driving factors in how land is developed rather
than how it is used. This area or district approach considers existing uses and conditions as well as
environmental factors to shape the appropriate development types and patterns for the future. Use is not
eliminated from the Future Land Use Plan; rather, it becomes subservient to other development qualities, such
as character, intensity, and pattern. Districts allow a combination of related uses in an area, focusing on
establishing a building form rather than segregating uses.”
Existing zoning districts are listed below. The table on the next page lists the character zones outlined
in the comprehensive land use plan and concepts for how to implement the character zones through zoning
districts. These concepts are not official recommendations but are presented to the Commission as ideas only.
The concepts are described in more detail below.
Existing zoning districts :
“AG" - Agricultural district
"R-1" - Single-family residential district
"R-2" - Single-family residential district
"R-3" - Single-family residential district
"OT" - Old Town district
"D" - Two-family residential district
"MF" - Multifamily district
"C-0" - Retail commercial district
"C-1" - Restricted commercial district
"C-2" - General commercial district
"I" - Industrial district
"PD" - Planned development district
Business 287 overlay district
Interstate 20/Loop 820 overlay district
"FP" - Floodplain district
"MH" - Manufactured home district
Staff Report to the Commissioners
Proposed zoning districts (concept):
Comprehensive Plan
Character Zone
Zoning District Concept Current Zoning District to be
Modified or Replaced
Conservation Overlay Rural Character Zone: Agricultural sub-zone,
Countryside Residential Sub-zone,
Conservation/Cluster Development sub-zone
AG
Neighborhood Neighborhood and Neighborhood Infill R-1, R-2, R-3 (NOTE: existing
subdivisions, such as Brookstone
and Shady Creek, would be
permitted to continue under
existing zoning regulations)
Neighborhood Village Neighborhood Center (small mixed-use
district)
C-0, C-1, MF
Urban Village Urban Village C-0, C-1, C-2, Bus. 287 overlay
Neighborhood Corridor Minor Commercial Corridor C-1 and C-0
Urban Corridor Major Commercial Corridor C-1, C-2, Bus. 287 overlay
Downtown Village City Center zone: Old Town sub-district and
City Center sub-district
Old Town
Town Center Amend or expand current TownCenter PD
regulations as needed
TownCenter PD
Light Industrial Keep existing Industrial zoning district but
remove some of the more intent permitted
uses and/or establish performance standards
(i.e., restrictions on hours of operation, truck
traffic, site design, etc.)
I
Employment Center ****Employment Center District Code ****
implementation has already begun
C-1, Bus. 287 overlay, I-20
overlay
Shown below are sample revisions to Section 17-405 of the city code, which establishes the city’s
zoning districts. Changes are marked in red (strikethrough indicates text that would be eliminated if the
concepts described here were implemented). And then on the following pages are some concepts for two of
the zoning district ideas: the Rural Character zone and the Neighborhood Residential district. If the
3
Commission approves, in concept, the zoning ideas shown below, I will prepare concepts for the other zoning
districts, too.
Staff would like input from the Commission as to how well these concepts fit the City’s vision and the
concepts of the comprehensive land use plan. Please let us know of any concerns you may have about the
concepts (or if you have concerns about land use that are not addressed by the proposed regulations) or if you
have any suggestions for how the proposed regulations might be improved.
Section 17-405. Zoning District Generally.
(a)Establishment of districts. For the purpose of this article, the City of Kennedale, Texas, is hereby divided
into twenty (20) sixteen (16) zoning districts as follows:
Rural Character zone
The three districts listed below would implement the Conservation Overlay character zone
described in the comprehensive land use plan.
"AG" - Agricultural district
“CR” – Countryside residential
“CD” – Cluster development / conservation subdivision
"R-1" – Suburban s ingle-family residential district
"R-2" - Suburban s ingle-family residential district
"R-3" - Suburban s ingle-family residential district
“N” – Neighborhood residential district
This district would implement the Neighborhood character district described in the
comprehensive plan.
“NI” – Neighborhood infill residential district
This district would be for properties 9 acres or smaller in size that are surrounded on all or
most sides by existing subdivisions. Hilltop in Old Town would be an example of neighborhood
infill; the Vineyard would not. Due to the small size of these districts and to their location
adjacent to existing, surrounding uses, development in these districts has the potential to have
a greater impact on neighboring uses in terms of privacy, and this element will need to be
accounted for in the district regulations.
“NC” – Neighborhood center district
This district implements the Neighborhood Village character zone.
City Center zone
4
“CC” - City center sub-district
This district expands encompasses the properties shown as “Downtown Village in the
FLUP that are not already zoned OT. The district description should note that many of
the properties are already developed or are infill lots.
"OT" - Old Town sub-district
This district consists of the properties shown as “Downtown Village in the FLUP that are
already zoned OT.
"D" - Two-family residential district
This district can be eliminated once other (probably mixed-use) districts permitting duplexes
are established.
"MF" - Multifamily district
This district can be eliminated once other (probably mixed-use) districts permitting multi-family
are established.
“TC” – TownCenter mixed-use district
Some regulations for this district have already been established through the TownCenter
Planned Development District. However, to fully implement the vision in the comprehensive
plan, the boundaries may need to be expanded, and additional standards may be needed.
"C-0" – Retail Commercial district
Only one property is zoned C-0. This district can be removed once the new zoning districts are
established and the only C-0-zoned property is rezoned to Urban Village.
"C-1" - Restricted commercial district
This district would be replaced by the CC-1 district (see below), and permitted uses would be
adjusted accordingly.
"C-2" - General commercial district
Most C-2 properties are located along Kennedale Pkwy; these properties would be changed to
the “CC-2” Major Corridor Commercial (see below); some of the light industrial uses currently
permitted would be removed from the table of permitted uses.
“CC-1 – Minor Corridor Commercial district
This district implements the Neighborhood Corridor character zone; some existing C-1
properties will need to be rezoned to CC-2 once that district has been established.
“CC-2 – Major Corridor commercial district
This district implements the Urban Corridor character zone, which applies to many of the
properties located along Kennedale Parkway.
"I" - Industrial district
Some of the heavier industrial uses as permitted uses in the Schedule of Uses would be
eliminated or would impose conditions/constraints for their operation, such as amount of noise
or odors that could be emitted, truck traffic, and amount or type of lighting.
"PD" - Planned development district
5
“UV” – Urban Village
To move ahead with allowing Urban Villages before specific standards for each UV are
developed, the City could create a sub-section of the zoning code establishing requirements for
Urban Village rezoning applications, similar to sub-section for PD districts.
"FP" - Floodplain district
"MH" - Manufactured home district
From a legal perspective, some provisions for mobile/manufactured homes may be required,
but we should consider eliminating MH as a district and instead incorporating MH uses within
some other kind of district.
Business 287 overlay district
This overlay district should be eliminated; any regulations from this district that the City would
like to retain could be incorporated into other applicable zoning districts such as CC-2 or I.
Interstate 20/Loop 820 overlay district
This overlay district should be eliminated; any regulations from this district that the City would
like to retain could be incorporated into other applicable zoning districts such as CC-2 or I.
Historic Old Town overlay district
This district would allow structures within Old Town to be built in keeping with the historic
character of Old Town. As an alternative, regulations allowing such development could be
incorporated into the existing Old Town standards, in which case an overlay district would not
be necessary.
Character District: Conservation Overlay
Description from the comprehensive plan:
This area is intended to preserve the rural and cultural landscape of Kennedale and serve as a buffer
between adjacent communities. This will provide a greenbelt gateway into Kennedale and help the city
retain a geographic identity distinct from surrounding areas.
Sample Development Types:
• Conservation subdivision
• Agriculture
• Open space preservation
Applicable zoning district under current code: AG
Why new or amended districts are needed:
6
Current zoning only provides one type of zoning for agricultural-type districts. Like other zoning
districts in the city code, the AG district does not allow for a combination of related uses, does not focus on
establishing a building form, and does not consider existing uses and conditions, as well as environmental
factors, to shape the appropriate development types and patterns for the future. The AG district doesn’t allow
for new development types that could be located in agricultural or open space areas (such as conservation
subdivisions), nor does it accommodate other types of development that are not agricultural in nature but may
be well-suited for agricultural or open space areas.
Concept to explore: Rural Character Zones
The comprehensive plan envisions properties in certain specified areas to develop as open space / AG /
conservation, but we don’t have zoning designations in the zoning code to allow for cluster subdivisions or for
small properties (less than one acre) to be developed with a rural character that would be desirable in the
outlying parts of the city or in the ETJ. In addition, besides prohibiting new development in the form of cluster
subdivisions or as rural lots smaller than 1 acre, any existing parcels smaller than 1 acre could not be rezoned
into anything except residential, commercial, or industrial, which wouldn’t necessarily fit the character
envisioned in the comprehensive plan.
Note that in this report, “rural lots” does not simply mean the “estate lot” sometimes used in zoning codes
to refer to a subdivision lot of a large size, for example, 1 – 5 acres. Such estate lots typically function solely as
a residential use and are essentially suburban-style developments (in terms of use and housing style) on a
grand scale. In this report, by contrast, “rural lot” refers to larger lots that may be primarily residential in
nature but also are intended to accommodate small-scale agricultural uses. Home styles would be encouraged
to be in keeping with homes typically found in small towns, for example, of a smaller footprint than is typically
in suburban subdivisions (i.e., smaller than 2,000 square feet, if desired) and of predominantly non-masonry
materials, although metal buildings would not be permitted.
Proposed Characteristics:
The zone would be made up of several zoning categories: AG, Countryside, Conservation Development
The zone would be applied to areas noted as Conservation Overlay in the FLUP on the outskirts of the
city and in the ETJ (after annexation) and may also be applicable —in restricted cases —to areas
currently zoned AG.
Properties within the Rural Character zone could be zoned any of the three zoning categories (with
restrictions/conditions); a mix of all three may be located within a rural character zone (i.e., AG can be
located next to Countryside without being spot zoning)
7
If needed or desired, percentages could be set for each rural zone for each land use category within a
rural character zone, depending on the area and the desired future character and suitability for each
use. For example, one zone may be permitted to have 50% AG, 20% Countryside, and 30%
Conservation Development (which would include both the developed and open space portions of a
Conservation Development), with the zoning administrator permitted to grant a slight variation in
percentages (e.g., 52% AG, 19% Countryside, 29% Cons Dev, etc.).
These properties would allow Hardie-Plank or similar materials to be used for buildings, perhaps with a
minimum masonry requirement of 20%; metal buildings may be used for small accessory buildings in
AG-zoned properties but not in other rural zoning districts.
For properties zoned/developed as Cluster (or Conservation) Development :
o follow standards for Neighborhood zoning districts (once those are set) but require clustering
of structures and infrastructure to preserve open space;
o the built area must be planned around protecting key open space features, rather than a
random selection of open space; in other words, the developer will need to determine how to
preserve the space that would best fit the intent of conservation overlay;
o protected open spaces shall be designed to connect to adjoining open spaces —open spaces in
the middle of the development would not qualify.
For properties zoned Agricultural :
o lots 10 acres or larger in agricultural use or proposed to be in agricultural use;
o restrictions on number of livestock that may be kept per acre.
For properties zoned Countryside Residential :
o lots 10 acres or smaller; restrictions on number of livestock that may be kept;
o applicable for use on properties in agricultural or conservation districts in FLUP or in areas
where agricultural character is intended to be maintained by city;
o not for use for commercial agricultural operations
Character District: Neighborhood
Description from the comprehensive plan:
“This district is primarily residential in nature. Neighborhoods should have defined boundaries, a clear
center, and be easily accessible to day-to-day goods and services, such as those provided at
8
Neighborhood Villages. The center of a neighborhood should be a civic, public, or community use in
which people can come together —such as a park, school, or neighborhood amenity center.”
Sample Development Types:
• Single family
• Attached single-family
• Townhome/Rowhouse
• Accessory dwelling unit
• Cluster development
• Context-sensitive small-scale multifamily
• Clearly marked centers that include public gathering space, school, small park, or other civic use
While Kennedale’s existing subdivisions are already “primarily residential in nature,” our zoning code does
not allow for subdivisions to be developed with the character of a Neighborhood as called for in the plan.
Shaping new subdivisions to fit this character will be fairly straight-forward; existing neighborhoods, however,
should not be forced to change. They can, however, be given the opportunity to do so, for example, by
allowing an HOA to purchase a vacant lot and transform it into a small park. The City should ensure the zoning
codes allow these kinds of opportunities.
Concept to explore: borrowing the idea of flexible standards from form-based
codes (setting both minimum and maximums ).
Rather than setting a range of residential zoning districts that separate neighborhoods by setback
regulations or other such characteristics, the comprehensive plan encourages creating neighborhoods that
provide a range of housing types within the same subdivision. The City can accomplish this concept by setting
minimum and maximum setbacks, lot sizes, etc., but can also provide for some minimum requirements, as
shown in the table and footnotes below.
Proposed Characteristics:
Ideas for lot and building requirements at a basic level are shown in the table below. Additional
requirements are described in the table’s footnotes.
N
Minimum lot area (square feet)7,500 (1)
Maximum lot area (square feet)15,000
9
Minimum lot width (feet) (2)50
Maximum lot width (feet) 100
Minimum lot depth (feet) (3)80
Maximum lot depth (feet)125
Minimum front yard setback (feet)20
Maximum front yard setback (feet)35
Rear yard setback (feet), interior lot 20
Side yard setback (feet), interior lot**10
Side yard setback (feet), corner lot (street side only)15
Maximum height (stories) (4)2.5 - 3
(feet)35 - 45
Maximum lot coverage (5)
Lot size 7500-9000 sq ft 70%
Lot size 9001-12000 sq ft 60%
Lot size 12001-15000 sq ft 50%
Masonry requirement 80%
Main building living area (square feet)1,250
** Side setback shall be a minimum of 8 ft. with a total of 20 ft. side yard.
(1) Average lot area shall be between 9,000 and 12,000 square feet, with a minimum lot area of 7,500 and a
maximum lot area of 15,000 square feet.
(2) Average lot width shall be between 70 and 100 feet, with a minimum lot width of 50 feet and a maximum lot
width of 125 feet.
(3) Average lot depth shall be between 80 and 125 feet, with a minimum lot depth of 80 feet and a maximum of
150 feet.
(4) For lots smaller than 70 feet in width, the primary structure shall have a maximum height of 2.5 stories or 35
feet, whichever is less. For lots 70 feet or greater in width, any part of a third story or any part of the building
above 35 feet in height, whichever is less, shall be set back xx feet [some distance to be determined after study
of the issue by city staff] from a side lot line or rear lot line adjacent to a residentially zoned lot. [Alternative:
10
buildings of height xx feet or greater shall have a side setback of at least 15 feet on each side and 30 feet from
the rear property line.] [This requirement is intended to protect privacy of neighbors.]
(5) For this section, lot coverage means all areas of a lot or parcel covered by buildings and other structures
with surfaces greater than 36 inches above the finished and natural grade, except for balconies, overhangs, and
similar architectural features placed on the front (e.g., street facing) elevation of a building. [DEFINITION
BORROWED FROM ANOTHER CITY; may need to be edited for applicability to Kennedale]
Parking requirements: a garage providing off-street parking for at least two vehicles shall be provided for
every primary residential structure; if front facing, must be set back at least 5% from the front façade of the
house and shall not have a width wider than 50% of the width of the main structure; if j-swing, cannot be
larger than two-car garage). The City should consider allowing carport under certain conditions, for example,
if parking for two cars is provided, carport is located entirely behind the main structure, and carport and
supports (columns, etc.) are 100% masonry.
Consider the following carport examples:
Figure 1. In this example, the carport is located behind
the residence. Credit: Google Earth.
In Figures 2-5, the carports have an attractive design that matches and complements the primary structure.
Figure 2. Credit: younghouselove.com Figure 3. Credit: carportconstructions.au
11
Figure 4. Credit: tourfactory.com
Figure 5. Credit: Brian Brown, vanishingsouthgeorgia.wordpress.com
IV. Notification:
V. Fiscal Impact Summary:
VI. Legal Impact:
VII. Recommendation:
None
VIII. Alternative Actions:
IX. Attachments:
Staff Report to the Commissioners
Date: February 20, 2014
Agenda Item No: WORK SESSION - C.
I. Subject:
Discuss use of form-based codes and concepts for land use standards in implementing the comprehensive land
use plan at the Bowman Springs/Dick Price & Kennedale Pkwy intersection
II. Originated by:
Rachel Roberts, City Planner
III. Summary:
I've been updating the draft Bowman Springs Urban Village code since the December meeting, in particular by
changing the Administration section to match the Administration section in the Employment Center code and
by changing the formatting of several sections.
The earlier drafts left the Roof Forms and Projections section blank. There aren't particular roof forms in this
area that need to be preserved through code requirements, but there may be roof forms that the Commission
would like to prohibit. If there are particular roof forms the Commission would like to see protected or
prohibited, please let me know.
I've also added a requirements about vistas and street terminations, as follows, as well as a requirement that
roof top equipment be screened.
1. All streets shall be located so that all streets terminate at other streets, except where not feasible due to
natural site conditions. Cul-de-sacs shall be permitted only when warranted by natural site conditions.
2. At every termination point of a street, or where it makes a ninety-degree turn (plus or minus fifteen
degrees), the street shall terminate on a building or vertical element to establish a terminated vista, unless the
street terminates into a park, a trail entrance, or natural area.
In addition to the changes described above, I'm also adding to and revising the illustrations. Are there any
other sections of the draft code the Commission would like to see revised?
IV. Notification:
V. Fiscal Impact Summary:
VI. Legal Impact:
VII. Recommendation:
VIII. Alternative Actions:
IX. Attachments:
Staff Report to the Commissioners
Date: February 20, 2014
Agenda Item No: WORK SESSION - D.
I. Subject:
Discuss item(s) for future consideration
1. Green / environmental regulations
2. Subdivision standards for infill lots
3. Zoning standards for Old Town
II. Originated by:
III. Summary:
The Commission maintains a list of topics that it would like to address under a future agenda. These items are
not intended for discussion at this time, but the Commission may discuss these topics or additional topics in
terms of when they will be added as a regular work session agenda item and the scope of the future discussion.
1.Green/Environmental regulations
2.Subdivision standards for infill lots
3.Zoning standards for Old Town
IV. Notification:
V. Fiscal Impact Summary:
VI. Legal Impact:
VII. Recommendation:
VIII. Alternative Actions:
IX. Attachments:
Staff Report to the Commissioners
Date: February 20, 2014
Agenda Item No: MINUTES APPROVAL - A.
I. Subject:
Review and consider approval of minutes from the January 9, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission regular
meeting
II. Originated by:
Rachel Roberts, City Planner
III. Summary:
Please find on the following pages the minutes from the January 9th meeting.
IV. Notification:
V. Fiscal Impact Summary:
VI. Legal Impact:
VII. Recommendation:
Approve
VIII. Alternative Actions:
IX. Attachments:
1.01.09.2014 PZ Minutes 01.09.2014 PZ Minutes.doc
KENNEDALE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES
COMMISSIONERS - REGULAR MEETING
January 9, 2014
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 405 MUNICIPAL DRIVE
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Harvey called the meeting to order at 6:07 P.M.
II. ROLL CALL
Members present: Ernest Harvey (chair); Tom Pirtle (vice-chair); Stephen Brim, Michael Herring, Katie
McFadden, Don Rawe, Mike Walker, Carolyn Williamson (alternate)
No members were absent. A quorum was present.
Staff present: Rachel Roberts (planning director)
III. WORK SESSION
A. Discuss any item on the Regular Session agenda
The Commission discussed Case PZ 13-07. Mr. Harvey asked Mr. Brim about the storm water
diagram and inlets. Mr. Harvey asked Ms. Roberts if the City had standards for storm water detention,
and she said the public works design manual had a storm water detention policy. Ms. Roberts said the
City’s engineers had reviewed the drainage plan and had said that since the Commission wasn’t
approving the drainage plan at this stage, just approving the plat, the preliminary drainage plan was
enough for now. The Commission also discussed notifying the school district for future zoning cases
this size, as well as phasing of the development.
B. Discuss creation or modification of zoning districts to implement the comprehensive land use
plan
Ms. Roberts asked the Commission for input on the ideas she had given them in the staff report and
for any other priorities they may have. Mr. Harvey suggested using existing districts as a foundation
and changing the code to get in the direction the City wants to go. The Commission discussed how the
City would move forward with revising the zoning code in compliance with the comprehensive plan.
C. Discuss use of form-based codes and concepts for land use standards in implementing the
comprehensive land use plan at the Bowman Springs/Dick Price & Kennedale Pkwy intersection
The Commission did not have time to discuss this item.
D. Discuss item(s) for future consideration
1. Green / environmental regulations
2. Subdivision standards for infill lots
3. Zoning standards for Old Town
The Commission did not have time to discuss this item.
The Work Session closed at 7:03 P.M.
IV. REGULAR SESSION
V. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Harvey called the regular session to order at 7:11 P.M.
VI. ROLL CALL
Members present: Ernest Harvey (chair); Tom Pirtle (vice-chair); Stephen Brim, Michael Herring, Katie
McFadden, Don Rawe, Mike Walker, Carolyn Williamson (alternate)
No members were absent. A quorum was present.
Staff present: Rachel Roberts (planning director)
VII. MINUTES APPROVAL
A. Review and consider approval of minutes from the December 19, 2013 Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting
Mr. Pirtle made a motion to approve the minutes as written, seconded by Mr. Walker. The motion passed
with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who abstained.
VIII. VISITOR/CITIZENS FORUM
Hank Barnes, 116 Collett Sublett Rd, addressed the Commission about a detour on Swiney Hiett Rd. He
said Swiney Hiett was closed yesterday to install a water line, and he had to take a detour, which wasn’t a
problem, but why couldn’t the residents be notified a day or two before that this was going to happen? Mr.
Harvey asked Ms. Roberts to take it forward. Mr. Barnes said he wanted to give kudos to Larry [Ledbetter]
for having a speed limit sign and a no outlet sign put up on Mr. Barnes’ street.
IX. REGULAR ITEMS
A. Case PZ 13-07 to consider a request by Alluvium Development for a preliminary plat for an
approximately 45.5 acre tract located at 925 Mansfield Cardinal Rd, more particularly described as
J M Lilly Survey A 980 Tract 2 & A 985 Tract 3, Tarrant County, Texas.
1.Staff presentation
Ms. Roberts said the plat was in compliance with the comprehensive plan and city regulations and staff
recommended approval.
2.Applicant presentation
Terry Jobe of Alluvium Development and Dayton Macatee of Macatee Engineering addressed the
Commission and said they didn’t have much to add to what Ms. Roberts had said and would be happy to
answer any questions.
Mr. Harvey asked about the properties on the side that have a 30’ pipeline easement and do not have a
utility easement; why do lots 8 and 9 of Block 2 not have a utility easement? Mr. Macatee said all the
utilities are in the street. Mr. Pirtle said the preliminary utility plan shows a utility easement and sanitary
sewer line on those lots. Mr. Macatee said the utility plan is about 3 months older than the plat, and the
plat is based on updated information from the city. The sewer main leaves the property and is actually
located on a neighbor’s property to the north.
Ms. McFadden asked if the gas pipeline would limit the property owners there. Mr. Macatee said it will
limit the flexibility of how close the houses can get. Ms. McFadden asked if that would change how far
back the house can go, and Mr. Macatee said yes, but they’ve already factored that in.
Mr. Harvey asked about phasing. Mr. Jobe said it was phased this way because the builder can’t afford
that many lots that quickly. The perimeter, the landscaping, the grading all has to be done at once,
though. Mr. Harvey asked if they would do all the roads at once, and Mr. Jobe said no, but they will do
mass grading. They’ll probably do Phase II when the development was about 2/3 of the way through the
first phase; how quickly that occurs is based on the economy.
3.Staff summary and response
Ms. Roberts said she recommended approval. She said the Commission could approve the plat, deny it,
or approve it with conditions.
4.Action by the Commission
Mr. Pirtle made a motion to approve the preliminary plat in the condition that the final plat includes
identification of the level of service for Bordeaux Crossing and Vintage Lane based on the existing traffic
assessment for the Little School Road and Mansfield Cardinal corridor [provide something showing
they’ve looked at that study].
Mr. Harvey told the applicant that at final plat they’ll have many questions about drainage.
Michael Herring seconded the motion. The motion passed with all in favor except Mr. Harvey, who
abstained.
X. REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Ms. Roberts said the City would be hosting a bird identification workshop on January 25 th at 8:00 A.M.
Mr. Brim said the Parks Board is working on an Adopt-a-Spot program. He also said Texas Parks &
Wildlife is doing a monitoring of the catfish population in the pond at Sonora Park.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Herring made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Harvey. That motion passed with all in favor
except Mr. Harvey, who abstained.
The meeting adjourned at 7:44 P.M.
ATTEST:
Ernest Harvey, Chair Rachel Roberts, Planner & Board Secretary
Date Date