2014_01.09 PZ PacketKENNEDALE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA
COMMISSIONERS - REGULAR MEETING
January 9, 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 December 19, 2013 Planning & Zoning
Commission 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
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
2.Applicant presentation
3.Staff summary and response
4.Action by the Commission
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 January 9, 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: January 9, 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: January 9, 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 Commission did not have time to discuss this item at the December meeting. The staff report from the
December packets is provided below. If time permits, I would like to have your thoughts on the attached
zoning district ideas during the January work session.
In addition to the ideas presented in your packets last month, I hope to send to you next week a draft for a new
section of the zoning code to address development of infill parcels. Please note that if I have something
written to send to you before the meeting next week, the ideas in the draft will be conceptual only; they will
not have been reviewed by other department or city officials.
As I continue drafting revisions to our zoning standards, it would help guide my work to know what some of the
Commission's concerns are about our current zoning classifications or about potential land development
patterns. During the next several work sessions, I would appreciate hearing your concerns and comments on
each of the character districts.
To help with the discussion, I am sending you some very rough ideas I have been working on based on the city's
vision as described in the comprehensive plan and on research on ideas that have worked in other
communities. As the city begins to create new zoning districts or amend current regulations, we should
consider making changes to the zoning code in several phases. A phased approach serves two purposes. First, it
provides the community time to become accustomed to changes in the zoning code, and it also serves to make
the public aware that additional changes will be made later, so they have a greater opportunity to learn about
proposed changes and provide input early on. Second, it allows the city to take a step forward with
implementing the comprehensive plan so we don't have to wait until all the desired updates to the code have
been written before some changes are made.
The ideas included with this staff report (see attached document) would be for the first phase. The ideas do
not represent an official opinion from city staff, and we have not received input from the public, other
departments, or governing officials on the proposed changes.
If a phased approach is taken, I suggest that the first phase consist of only simple changes, such as establishing
new zoning categories for existing suburban-type subdivisions. Because these kinds of zoning districts do not fit
the comprehensive plan, we should not permit new developments to follow the zoning standards for these
districts, but the existing neighborhoods should be allowed to continue to develop in the manner the residents
are already accustomed to and expect. Additional changes may be made to the zoning categories later, if
needed, such as permitting smaller rear yard setbacks or adding landscaping requirements related to water
conservation.
IV. Notification:
V. Fiscal Impact Summary:
VI. Legal Impact:
VII. Recommendation:
None
VIII. Alternative Actions:
IX. Attachments:
1.Zoning updates -- ideas Staff report -- updates to zoning code Dec. 2013.pdf
Updates to City of Kennedale zoning code -- suggestions for changes
New zoning category Comprehensive Plan
character district
Current zoning
district General Characteristics Comments
N-50 Suburban Residential Neighborhood R-1 retain zoning district standards in effect as of adoption of revised zoning code
(2012-2013)
may require stricter landscaping standards to address water conservation concerns (depends
on whether such standards can apply to existing platted lots); possibility of making some
changes at a later time, such as reducing required rear yard setback
N-40 Suburban Residential Neighborhood R-2 retain zoning district standards in effect as of adoption of revised zoning code
(2012-2013)
may require stricter landscaping standards to address water conservation concerns (depends
on whether such standards can apply to existing platted lots); possibility of making some
changes at a later time, such as reducing required rear yard setback
N-30 Suburban Residential Neighborhood R-3 retain zoning district standards in effect as of adoption of revised zoning code
(2012-2013)
may require stricter landscaping standards to address water conservation concerns (depends
on whether such standards can apply to existing platted lots); possibility of making some
changes at a later time, such as reducing required rear yard setback
AG Agricultural Conservation Overlay AG
lots 10 acres or larger in agricultural use or proposed to be in ag use; house
building materials may include materials characteristic of rural areas, such as
Hardie-Plank or cedar (metal buildings not permitted); add restrictions on
number of livestock that may be kept
staff need to get an idea from farmers/ranchers how much livestock can be kept on what size
property and be sanitary and not cause erosion or pollution/storm water concerns
CY Countryside Conservation Overlay AG
lots at least 1 acre in size but less than 10 acres; house building materials
may include materials characteristic of rural areas, such as Hardie-Plank or
cedar (metal buildings not permitted); add restrictions on amount of
livestock that may be kept
for use on properties in agricultural or conservation districts in comp plan or in areas where
city intends to maintain agricultural character; not for use for commercial ag operations
RN Rural Neighborhood
(Countryside Compatible)
Conservation
Overlay/Neighborhood R-3
lots less than an acre in size but surrounded by or contiguous with properties
zoned AG or CY AND not part of a neighborhood designated N-50, N-40, or N-
30; house building materials may include materials characteristic of rural
areas, such as Hardie-Plank or cedar (metal buildings not permitted); keeping
of livestock not permitted; keeping of chickens (max. # to be determined)
and bees is permitted
for properties that do not meet the lot size requirements for CY but are clearly rural in
character or part of a rural/CY district; for existing lots only -- may not be used for new
development in Countryside/Agricultural areas
Phase I
Staff recommends the first phase consist of only simple changes, such as establishing zoning for existing suburban-type subdivisions, which are not expected to change. Because these kinds of zoning districts do not fit the comprehensive plan, we should not
permit new developments to follow the zoning standards for these districts, but the existing neighborhoods should be allowed to continue to develop in the manner the residents are already accustomed to and expect. Additional changes may be made to the
zoning categories later, if needed, such as permitting smaller rear yard setbacks.
Listed below are three concepts for zoning classifications of AG or rural areas. We might explore the idea of creating "designated rural areas" or something similar to identify areas that are intended to remain agricultural or
rural.
Staff Report to the Commissioners
Date: January 9, 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: January 9, 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: January 9, 2014
Agenda Item No: MINUTES APPROVAL - A.
I. Subject:
Review and consider approval of minutes from the December 19, 2013 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
II. Originated by:
Rachel Roberts, City Planner
III. Summary:
The minutes from the December 19th meeting are attached to this message for your review and consideration
for approval.
IV. Notification:
V. Fiscal Impact Summary:
VI. Legal Impact:
VII. Recommendation:
Approve
VIII. Alternative Actions:
IX. Attachments:
1.12.19.2013 PZ Minutes 12.19.2013 PZ Minutes.doc
KENNEDALE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES
COMMISSIONERS - REGULAR MEETING
December 19, 2013
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 405 MUNICIPAL DRIVE
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Harvey called the work session to order at 6:04 P.M.
II. ROLL CALL
Ms. Roberts called roll.
Members present: Ernest Harvey (chair); Stephen Brim, Katie McFadden, Mike Walker, and Carolyn
Williamson (alternate)
Members absent: Tom Pirtle (vice-chair); Michael Herring, Don Rawe
A quorum was present. Mr. Harvey asked Ms. Williamson to serve as a regular member for this meeting.
III. WORK SESSION
A. Discuss any item on the Regular Session agenda
Ms. Roberts told the Commission that the applicant for Case PZ 13-09 had requested a postponement.
The Commission asked when Case PZ 13-09 would be considered, and Ms. Roberts said it would most
likely be February or March.
B. 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 discussed concerns about existing land uses for this area and about what would be
desired. The Commission discussed how it was desired to have buildings closer together, pushed
closer to the roadway and closer from the side, almost like zero lot lines or an old historic district. They
also discussed the standards included in the draft code already and said that the current zoning code is
vague in a lot of areas, and the new code would allow the city to be specific and get everything in one
place. The city won’t have to do so many Planned Development Districts, which are hard to manage.
Ms. McFadden asked what would happen to existing uses when a new code is adopted, and Mr. Brim
and Mr. Harvey said they would become grandfathered non-conforming uses.
Mr. Walker asked if there were any population projections for this and other urban villages for when
they’re built out and what the impact would be on schools. Ms. Roberts said there weren’t any
projections specific to these areas, and Mr. Harvey said it seemed as though most of the city’s
population growth would be to the south.
C. Discuss creation or modification of zoning districts to implement the comprehensive land use
plan
The Commission did not have time to discuss this item.
D. Discuss item(s) for future consideration
1. Green / environmental regulations
2. Zoning standards for Old Town
The Commission did not have time to discuss this item. Ms. Roberts asked if the Commission could
reconvene the work session after the regular session to discuss future items. The Commission agreed,
and the work session closed at 7:00 P.M.
IV. REGULAR SESSION
V. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Harvey called the regular session to order at 7:00 P.M.
VI. ROLL CALL
Ms. Roberts called roll.
Members present: Ernest Harvey (chair); Stephen Brim, Katie McFadden, Mike Walker, and Carolyn
Williamson (alternate)
Members absent: Tom Pirtle (vice-chair); Michael Herring, Don Rawe
A quorum was present, and Ms. Williamson served as a regular member.
VII. MINUTES APPROVAL
A. Review and consider approval of minutes from the November 21, 2013 Planning & Zoning
Commission Regular Meeting
Mr. Walker made a motion to approve the minutes, seconded by Ms. Williamson. 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 13-09 to receive comments and consider action on a request by Ashton Holdings,
Inc. for a replat of approximately 6.3 acres, for property located at 260 Hilltop (access on 3 rd St),
legal description of Hilltop Addition Block 1 Lots 1-15, to create Lots 1-29.
Mr. Harvey told the audience that the applicant had requested a continuance for this case and that it
would be considered at another time.
X. REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Ms. Roberts said City Hall would be closed on December 24th and 25th and on January 1st. She also
said that Kennedale had been selected to be a Tree City USA.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Brim made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Ms. McFadden. All Commissioners voted in favor
except Mr. Harvey, who abstained.
The regular session adjourned at 7:12 P.M. The work session reconvened at 7:12 P.M.
Ms. Roberts asked if the Commission could add subdivision regulations for infill lots to the list of items for
Future Consideration. The Commission agreed to do so.
1. Green / environmental regulations
2. Subdivision standards for infill lots
3. Zoning standards for Old Town
Ms. McFadden made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Walker. The motion passed with all in favor
except Mr. Harvey, who abstained.
The work session adjourned at 7:24 P.M.
Staff Report to the Commissioners
Date: January 9, 2014
Agenda Item No: REGULAR ITEMS - A.
I. Subject:
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
2.Applicant presentation
3.Staff summary and response
4.Action by the Commission
II. Originated by:
Rachel Roberts, City Planner
III. Summary:
Request : preliminary plat
Location : The Vineyard planned development district, at Little School and Mansfield Cardinal roads
Requested by : Alluvium Development
Background.
This item is a request for a preliminary plat for The Vineyard planned development district.
Staff Review and Recommendation.
City staff and our engineers reviewed the preliminary plat for compliance with the comprehensive plan and
with city standards and regulations.
Comprehensive plan.
The preliminary plat substantially conforms to the site plan and related documents submitted and approved as
part of the Planned Development district for this property. Since the PD was considered to be in compliance
with the comprehensive plan, and the plat conforms to the PD standards and site plan, staff therefore
considers the plat to be in compliance with the comprehensive land use plan.
City standards and regulations.
Staff reviewed the preliminary plat and asked the applicant to make several changes, and the plat you are
considering reflects all the changes requested. You'll see that we have included the preliminary utility plan and
the preliminary grading and drainage plan. These documents are not part of the preliminary plat, but we have
included them for your reference.
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat.
Planning & Zoning Commission Review.
Preliminary plats do not require a public hearing and are not considered by the City Council. After the
Commission has reviewed the preliminary plat, the applicant will be advised of any required changes and/or
additions. Upon satisfactory completion of any requirements imposed by the Commission, the applicant may
proceed with the submittal of a final plat.
IV. Notification:
V. Fiscal Impact Summary:
VI. Legal Impact:
VII. Recommendation:
VIII. Alternative Actions:
IX. Attachments:
1.PZ 13-07 preliminary plat PZ 13-07 The Vineyard preliminary plat.pdf
2.PZ 13-07 preliminary utility plan PZ 13-07 preliminary utility plan.PDF
3.PZ 13-07 preliminary drainage & grading plan PZ 13-07 preliminary grading drainage plan.PDF