HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/29/1994 City Council005314
MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORK SESSION
HELD ON
August 29, 1994
The Joint Work Session of the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission of
the City of The Colony, Texas was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on the 29th day of August,
1994 at City Hall with the following Council roll call:
William Manning, Mayor, Present Julie Bottke, Chairman, Present
Mike Lynch, Mayor Pro-Tem,Present Lyle Hilyard, Member, Present
Toby Pollard, Councilman, Present Barbara Crocker, Member, Present
Kay Hardin, Councilman, Present Steven Swerdloff, Member, Present
Rob Burchard, Councilman, Absent Jim Wagner, Member, Present
John Dillard, Councilman, Present George Franklin, Member, Absent (arrived 9:05)
Lynda Tate, Councilman, Present Cindy DePrater, Member, Absent
and with six Council present and five Commission members present, a quorum was
established for both bodies and the following items were addressed:
Mayor Manning called the meeting to order and advised that Mr. Reeves had
requested to be allowed to go through his entire presentation before opening the floor for
questions. Mayor Manning then turned the meeting over to Chairman Bottke, who asked
Mr. Reeves to proceed with his presentation.
1. REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF
APPROXIMATELY 1100 ACRES AS PRESENTED BY DAL-MAC
CORPORATION
Mr. Robert Reeves (Robert Reeves & Associates, Inc.) distributed copies of his
report to each member of Council and P 8,: Z and proceeded to cover each section. A copy
of that report is attached hereto in it's entirety as Exhibit "A". Mr. Reeves' report covered
demographic background of The Colony, an analysis of needs in the city, undeveloped acres,
the IBM/Dal-Mac and Cencor zoning requests and recommendations.
Mr. Reeves highly complimented the Dal-Mac proposal, stating they had done a very
good job on their development guidelines and recommended leaving them in tact as a part
of the zoning ordinance. He advised that The Colony will have more than enough
undeveloped land for commercial/business development even after Dal-Mac and Cencor
build out. He noted that with the projected population of 41,600 in the year 2010
approximately 500 acres of industrial/business park zoning should be preserved. According
to his estimates, The Colony will have 1759 excess acres after these two developments are
completed.
With regard to multi-family, Mr. Reeves stated that he believes there is a definite
need for apartments in The Colony and recommended approving that zoning request. He
0053! 5
said we should proceed cautiously with strict guidelines and recommended allowing a
number of units equal to 15% of the population. Mr. Reeves complimented Dal-Mac on
the bonus program they prepared and suggested including it in the ordinance.
Mr. Reeves said the driving force behind this development will the traffic flow, noting
the applicant's traffic engineer had done a great job. He suggested a logical approach to
traffic flow guidelines, specifically dealing with daily trips generated by and through the
development. He also discussed the issue of extending N. Colony Blvd. to S.H. 121. He
said an alternative had been suggested by the City's traffic engineer and agreed to by Dal-
Mac if that extension does not happen. Mr. Reeves said if neither of those options occurs,
then the daily trips in and ()ut of the development should be reduced by 19.5 %
Mr. Reeves covered his recommendations which included reducing the number of
apartments, a change in one tract from Multi-family to Industrial and other minor changes
to square footage requirements. Mr. Reeves said overall this is a good plan, noting he
agrees with all other land uses as proposed by the applicant. Mr. Reeves said all his
recommendations are open for discussion.
Chairman Bottke then opened the floor for discussion. Councilman Dillard asked
if enough property had been set aside for park land in the area. Mr. Reeves said yes, if the
city and LISD can share that type of facility. Member Crocker asked why he had taken
multi-family from the northern tract and not the southern tract and Mr. Reeves said the
potential for development is greater on the northern tract, going on to say, this may need
to change in 5 years.
Councilman Pollard asked if the amount of land available for commercial/business
development included all land in the city and Mr. Reeves indicated it did and said even if
his numbers are off, there is still ample property available. Mr. Reeves reiterated that
traffic volume figures are at the heart of this issue with regard to what will the system
handle. Councilman Pollard said he liked taking multi-family off SH 12'1 and including
some more Industrial zoning. Continuing, Councilman Pollard said the city had asked for
his expertise in this issue and appreciated his input.
Mayor Manning expressed concern over the roadways, specifically, extension of N.
Colony and bringi~g Morning Star down and across SH 121. Tom Cravens advised that
Morning Star would not be brought across SH 12'1 until SH 121 is a freeway and then the
intersection would not be a full interchange. Councilman Lynch asked if the city can require
completion of all major thorottghfares before any single family or multi-family construction
could begin. Mr. Reeves said that could be done, but would require a much more detailed
traffic study. He said it is not feasible to say all the roads will be built because all the roads
may not be necessary. Johnny Smith advised that he does not believe Dal-Mac will build
a lot of houses on this property and then not provide streets for access.
Chairman Bottke asked Richard Ferrara, representing the Dal-Mac development to
respond. Mr. Ferrara said they plan to start at SH 121 and go north not north to south with
the roadways. He said they intend to start marketing along SH 121 and alongside Morning
Star. Mr. Ferrara noted that not all the road ways that are to be built have been shown on
any of the plans at this point. Lengthy discttssion followed the feasibility of widening
Morning Star and Paige Roads. Hal Jones, Hunter & Associates, traffic engineer for The
Colony said the traffic problem is not with traffic within the development, but with by-pass
005316
traffic (traffic coming through the development from the north). He said the city has always
assumed that N. Colony will extend to SH 121 and that it is essential to the development
of the city. Mr. Jones said it is on the thoroughfare plan for the City of Frisco and went on
to say it is important not just to this development but to the whole city. Mr. Jones said the
city needs to positively pursue getting this roadway built, as well as the S. Colony Blvd.
extension.
Mayor Manning said we need to continue nurturing the relationship between The
Colony and Frisco. Johnny Smith said he understands it has always been the plan of The
Colony to pursue the extension of N. Colony, but he felt it important to have an alternate
plan and had asked the traffic engineers to provide that, just in case N. Colony does not get
extended. Chairman Bottke stated it appears all agree we should pursue the extension of
N. Colony, but we do need to be prepared with an alternate plan. She asked if anyone had
any problems with the recommendations as presented. Councilman Lynch said no problem
except he would like to check into park land allocation.
Chairman Bottke asked Mr. Ferrara to comment on the recommendations. He said
he would have to evaluate this fully tomorrow, but noted that the changes in multi-family
are unacceptable. He said the other changes are marginally acceptable. He said there is
no need for the bonus program for multi-family because without the density they will not
get a high end user. Mr. Ferrara said they have been told by a developer that they want to
build an ultimate high-end complex if they can have frontage on SH 121. He said lower
density gives no incentive to build such a product. He said we just need to reach a
compromise. With regard to industrial, Mr. Ferrara said they have always considered
Business park to include light industrial, noting that he doesn't think the rail service will be '-
important in this area.
Chairman Bottke asked about moving the industrial zoning south of SH 121 and Mr.
Ferrara said that would be acceptable but that north of SH 121 will be better as high-end
apartments. Mr. Reeves said that can be worked on, stating that density needs to be
considered. Member Crocker asked Mr. Ferrara the minimum number of units per acre he
was considering and he stated 20.
2. REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT THE
INTERSECTION OF STATE HIGHWAY 121 AND FARM TO MARKET ROAD
423 (MAIN STREET) AS PRESENTED BY CENCOR DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION
Mr. Reeves said the land uses as proposed by Cencor make good sense in this
location. He said there seems to be some question regarding an east/west roadway through
this portion of land and those questions will need to be settled. He said it is a good idea
to place apartments in the location proposed. Mr. Reeves said his recommendation is to
deny the request as presented but to allow Centex to come right back without a long waiting
period and present a more detailed request under a Planned Development classification.
Member Crocker said she would rather see them bring a conceptual plan for the
entire south planning unit. Mr. Reeves said that is not really fair to ask for that at this time.
Councilman Tate asked if he looked at an alternate use for the area where apartments are
4
00531'?
proposed and Mr. Reeves said he did give some consideration to that, but that it is logical
to put them in the area proposed and it is logical to put retail on the corner.
Member Swerdloff said he would rather see apartments in that location than to see
the land sit vacant for another 10 years. Councilman Lynch said if apartments go in then,
they do not need the east/west road, but if another type use is built, then they probably will
want the road. Tom Cravens said even with apartments, the traffic engineers say the
ease/west roadway is needed.
Chairman Bottke asked Steve Bilheimer, President of Centex, to respond. Mr.
Bilheimer gave the background of the east/west roadway, stating the bond on that road had
been released by the City during the planning of Ridgepointe. Going on, he said Centex
then issued a bond to build the north/south road in Ridgepointe. It was determined at that
time the east/west roadway would not be beneficial to the development of the property
between Blair Oaks and Paige Rd., because the proposed end users were interested in a
campus style development. Mr. Bilheimer said a road through the middle would not be
practical. Chairman Bottke asked if Centex is willing to come back in with a Planned
Development Zoning request on the 65 acres and Mr. Bilheimer said they will have to
review these issues.
Councilman Pollard asked Hal Jones if we still need the east/west road if the
development is a campus style and Mr. Jones said the road is needed to circulate traffic, and
went on to say it should go from Standridge (Kennepac) all the way to the east. He did say
each development should be looked at as it comes before the city.
Chairman Bottke asked if anyone has any problems with Mr. Reeves'
recommendation for this proposal. Councilman Lynch said it all hinges on the road. Mayor
Manning said if the road is required, then the property owner should be allowed to
determine where it should be located so they can make the best use of the property.
With no further business to address, Chairman Bottke adjourned the meeting at 9:10
p.m.
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Patti A. Hicks, TRMC, City Secretary
[3ottke, Chairman
EXHIBIT "A" O05~!A
REZONING CASE EVALUATIONS
CITY OF THE COLONY
IBM AND CENTEX TRACTS
Prepared by
Robert Reeves & Associates, Inc.
August 30, 1994
0053!
INTRODUCTION:
Robert Reeves & Associates, Inc. was retained by the City of The Colony to evaluate
and make a recommendation on two rezoning application within its corporate limits.
The first is a request by IBM/Dal Mac to rezoned 1,107 acres located near the
intersection of Paige Road and SH. 121, and the second is a request by Centex to
rezone sixty-five (65) acres at the northeast corner of Main Street and SH. 121. Key
information was provided by the staff, applicants, and citizens and commission
members participating in the Planning & Zoning Commission hearing on August
23,1994.
DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND:
Based on the North Central Texas Council of Governments' (NCTCOG) estimates, the
City of The Colony had 7,886 housing units and a population of 23,200 on 1/1/94.
Current estimates place the city's population at 24,137. NCTCOG has determined that
the compound annual population growth rate between 1990-1994 was 1.29%. For
p~re.~waste water needs, the city has projected future population for the year
41,6~.~
The city is basically developed with all residential uses supported by
neighborhood/community retail uses and community services. There is no significant
employment base. One of the major issues relating to these rezoning cases concerns
how much industrial and business zoning does the city need to retain in order to allow
for diversification in its tax/employment base. The Dal Mac case is converting 705.2
gross acres into noncommercial zoning and Centex is converting twenty-nine (29)
acres into noncommercial zoning.
NONRESIDENTIAL ZONING NEEDS: · -
Analysis:
The following analysis and recommendations are base are generally accepted
guidelines based on national studies conducted by national organizations such as the
Urban Land Institute. The land use guidelines are not adjusted to reflect the local
market needs for the City of The Colony; however, they are very useful in providing
guidance to the commission and council.
It is estimated that the city has 777 acres of Industrially zoned land and 2,251 acres
land zoned Business Park which is undeveloped. These 3,028 acres are located in
the southeast quadrant of the city along both sides of SH. 121 and adjacent to the St.
Louis and San Francisco Railroad. The areas along SH. 121 and north of the Legacy
Park development in west Plane are the logical locations for any future employment
related uses.
National standards for industrial/business park uses, which could include offices, is --
twelve acres per 1,000 population. Using the year 2010 population projection of
41,600, approximately 500 acres of industrial/business park zoning should be
00 3 0
preserved. Discounting all existing retail zoning in the city, the city will need a
minimum of forty-five acres of neighborhood and community serving retail. Therefore,
545 acres of commercial zoning is required to serve a city of 41,600.
Existing Undeveloped Commercial Zoning:
777 Acres undeveloped Industrial zoning
2,251 Acres undeveloped Business Park zoning
3,028 Acres undeveloped commercial zoning
Impact of Rezoning Request:
705.2 Acres removed from commercial zoning, Dal Mac
29.0 Acres removed from commercial zoning, Centex
734.2 Total acres removed from commercial zoning
3,028 Acres undeveloped commercial zoning
724 Total acres removed from commercial zoning
~Remaining acres of commercial zoning
545 Minimum acres required to serve 41,600 people
,",..~,z,3=a~ Excess acres
Conclusion:
The City of The Colony will have ample undeveloped commercial zoned acres if both
of these rezoning cases are approved as submitted. Commercial zoning along SH.
121 and north of Legacy Park, south of SH. 121 must be retained. If the city's
population estimates double, there would still be more enough undeveloped
commercial zoning.
RESIDENTIAL ZONING NEEDS:
Analysis:
Currently, the City of The Colony has no land approved for multiple family uses and
provides little opportunity for housing diversity. Apartment communities are far more
attractive than they were ten to twenty years ago. Developers must provide adequate
parking, larger units, and other amenities to be competitive in the apartment market.
Without doing a market study, there has got to be a demand for apartment units in the
city. With proper development guidelines, including density limitations, the city should
consider allowing multiple family units on a selective basis.
Conclusion:
The percentage of residents living in multiple family units vary widely from city to city.
A large central city, such as Dallas, has over fifty-five percent of its population living in
multiple family units. However, smaller cities, such as Bedford, has twenty to forty
percent of its residents living in apartments. For a start, the city should consider
al31~roving enough muttil~le family units for no more than fifteen percent of its
13Ol~ulation . Based q~r~ N~TCOG'$ current a0oulation estimates of ~4.137, 1.g07
multiple f~mfly qrfits ~houicl De orovided b{lsed (~n 1.9 Oeool~ oer unit. Dal Mac is
oroo0sinQ 2,2,54. units and Centex is oroDosing 696 units at twenty-four Der acre
IBMIDAL MAC REZONING REQUEST:
The following is an overview of the key features of the 1,107 acre rezoning request by
IBM/Dal Mac from Industrial and Business Park zoning to a Planned Develol3ment
District for Mixed Uses.
~ (see Exl3ibit A for detail breakdown)
.~ .~ Percent of Total
Single Family 465.1 42%
Multifamiiy 93.9 8%
Business Park/Retail 401.8 36%
Community Facilities 39.4
ROW ~ 10%
TOTAL 1,107.0 100%
Tracts F1 ,G,H.I.J.K, and K1-
1. USES: The uses permitted are all uses allowed in the Business Park and General
Retail Distncts and the following percent of land can be developed with retail uses.
Tract G: 75% (63 acres)
Tract H: 25% (15 acres)
Tract i: 25% (11 acres )
Tract J: 25% (8 acres )
Tract K: 25% (42 acres )
Tract K1- 100 % (6.2 acres)
Tract Fl: 100 % (2.7 acres)
Using Tract G as an example, t~e applicant can build 1,372,140 sq. ff. of retail uses
based of a 0.5: 1FAR.
2. FLOOR AREA RATIO: The apl~licant is proposing an average FAR of 0.5:1.
Based on 401.8 net acres of commercially zoned land; therefore, t~e applicant can
build 8~.751.204 s(3. ff. of commercial uses.
4
LAND USE SUMMARY
EXHIBIT A 'FIIE IBM T1LatCT
TIlE COLONY, TEXAS
TRACT LAND USE GROSS NET
ACRF_,S R.O.W ACRES
A SINGLE FAMILY 181.9 6.1 175.8
B SINGLE FAMILY 102.8 5.5 97.3
C MULTIFAMILY 53.0 4.1 a8.9
D COMMUNITY 45.2 5.8 39.4
FACILI'FIES
E SINGLE FAMILY 115.0 10.0 105.0
F SINGLE FAMILY 93.2 6.2 87.0
F 1 SI lOPPING CENTER 3.0 0.3 2.7
G BUSINESS PARK 84.6 4.8 79.8
FI BUSINESS PARK 59.8 5.5 54.3
I BUSINF_.SS PARK 43.5 4.8 38.9
J BIJSINESS PARK 30.9 11.7 19.2
K BUSINF_,SS PARK 169.4 32.0 137.4
K1 BUSINESS PARK 6.5 2.5 4.0
L BUSINESS PARK 71.2 5.7 65.5
LAND USE SUMMARY
LAND USE NET ACREAGE PERCENT OF TOTAL
SINGLE FAMILY 465.1 42%
MULTIFAMILY 93.9 8%
BUSIN -ESS PARK/RETAIL 401.8 ? 36%
COMMUNITY FACILITIF_,S 39.4 : 4%
R.O.W. 106.8 10%'
TOTAL 1107;0 I 100%
I-3
00532;
Tracts C and M:
1. USES: The uses permitted in these districts are those use allowed in the MF-3
District.
2. DENSITY: The applicant has a base right of sixteen(16) units per acre and the
ordinance allows a fifty percent density bonus if certain unspecified amenities are
provided. The applicant has done a good job of providing a detail amenity/bonus
program which allows the density to increase to twenty-four (24) units per acre, 2,254
units.
3. DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES: The applicant has proposed various development
guidelines which are applicable regardless of the density bonuses. The most
significant of these is the requirement to provide seventy-five percent (75%) masonry
for buildings two stories or less. For buildings three stories, this masonry requirement
applies only to the first floor.
Tracts A.B. E, and F:
1. USES: The uses for these districts fall under the Single Family regulations. Base
on four units per acre, the applicant can build 1,860 single family homes.
2. HOUSING UNITS: Tracts A & F have a minimum house size of 1,500 sq. ft. lot size
of 7,000 sq. ft. Tracts B and F have variable house and lot sizes ranges from 1,650 sq.
ft to 2,200 sq. ft. per unit and 7,500 sq. ft. to 8,000 sq. ft per lot.
3. DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES: A seventy-five % (75%i masonry requirement and
minimum landscaping required. Two-car garages are also required for all units.
Tract D: ·
This tract is allocated for community uses such as schools, parks, and water tower;
although, the applicant reserves the right to build single family homes base on SF-3
guidelines. The applicant has not agreed to dedicate any land to the city or LISD.
Thoroughfares:
The applicant's plan generally reflect the city's thoroughfare plan and all traffic
projections assume full completion of the streets, including the extension of North
Colony southward through Frisco to SH.121. The applicant's traffic engineer used
development intensity figures slightly less than those reflected in the application. This
issue will be further addressed in the recommendation section of this document. It
should be noted that the aDolicant's enoineer based his oroiections on a series of
assumptions that most benefit his client and the Level of Service (LOS) throughout the
system still is 0ro!ected as LOS "E". This is generally describe as "unstable flow
conditions". Level of Servic~ "F" i~ unacceotable and described as "failure". Their
engineer made it very clear in his analysis that the projections do not consider a wide
mixture of commercial uses such as office, retail and restaurant uses in the District
allocated to business/retail ~ses.
005324
"The ultimate trip generation will be profoundly affected by the actual land use
mixtures (i.e., retail, restaurant, commercial, office, R&D, etc.) which will be
developed on each tract and the extent to which traffic management measures
are imposed."
A memo dated August 26, 1994 prepared by the applicant's engineer further
elaborated on a scenario that assumed that North Colony did not extend to SH. 121.
In this event, development density would need to be reduced by approximately 19.5
%. Additional widening of Paige Rd. and Morning Star with Morning Star crossing
over SH. 121 was indicated as a viable alterable alternative to the North Colony
extension.
Design Guidelines:
The applicant has imposed several design guidelines, many of which should be
included in this ordinance. The applicant has also agreed to establish a private
Architectural Review Committee whose approval would be required before
commercial plans would be submitted to the city.
Recommendation:
SECTION 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Attachment B, Conceptual Development Plan, is acceptable with the following
amendments, see amended plan:
· Slightly reduce Tract B, Single Family to reflect a straight alignment across the
city-limit line.
· Reduce the size of Tract C, Multiple Family, to 27.3 acres which includes the
land remaining from Tract B after its reduction.
· The remaining part of old Tract C rename to Tract I1, 34.8 acres, and limit
uses to Industrial and Business Park uses, excluding all residential.
· Allow Industrial District uses in Tract I.
Exhibit B shows a summary of the revised land use distributions.
Rationale:
The City of The Colony would be eliminating all its Industrial Zoning if this request is
approved. The city needs some Industrial Zoning and the land next to the railroad with,
access to SH 121 is a logical spot. This would allow a large uses or small industrial
park to have access to the railroad. Tract C, as proposed would allow 1,174 apartment
units which is too many at this location. By reducing the number of units and size of
the tract and moving the apartment tract a little further to the north, this use will provide
6
005325 LAND USE SUMMARY
EXHIBIT B TIIE IBM TRACT
TIlE COLONY, TEXAS
TRACT I_,AND USE GROSS NET
ACRES R.O.W ACRES
A SINGLE FAMILY 181.9 6.1 175.8
.=4~.4 -4"&9
D COMMUNITY 45.2 5.8 39.4
FACILITIES
E SINGLE FAMILY 115.0 10.0 105.0
F SINGLE FAMILY 93.2 6.2 87.0
F I SHOPPING CENTER 3.0 0.3 2.7
G BUSINESS PARK 84.6 4.8 79.8
It BUSINESS PARK 59.8 5.5 54.3
I-~ BP and INDUSTRiAI~
BUSINF~SS PARK 344.3:~ la.58 3~.3
38.9
J BUSINF_$S PARK 30.9 11.7 19.2
K BUSINESS PARK 169.4 32.0 137.4
K1 BUSINESS PARK 6.5 2.5 4.0
L BUSINESS PARK 71.2 5.7 65.5
M MI JLTIFAMILY 47.0 2.0 45.0
LAND USE SUMMARI
LAND USE NET ACREAGE PERCENT OF TOTAL
SINGLE FAMILY 456 4.6.-5.--I- 41%
MULTIFAMILY 68.2 0.;.3.-9-- 6% -8~,
BUSINESS PARK/RF. TAIL 436.6 -404.-8- 39% ~ 36%
COMMUNITY FACILH'IES 39.4
R.O.W. I06.8 10%'
TOTAL 1107;0 I00%
I-3
005826
a buffer between the single family and industrial uses.
2. Amend the following conditions under the "General Provisions" section:
1. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for the development of any
Business Park, Industrial and/or Multifamily portions of the property described
herein, (Tracts C, i=1, G, H, I, I1, J, K, K1, L, and M ), the Development Plan
required by Section 10-654 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City
of The Colony, Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 61, shall be submitted and approved
by the City Council and made an exhibit to and a part of this ordinance and
incorporated by reference herein for all purposes.
........ = Land uses existing on the site prior to the passage of
'::!thi,-, thc this Planned Development are considered as permitted uses with
these PD regulations.
3. All landscaped areas, within Tracts C, Fl, G,H,I,I1,K, K1, L, and M. whether
in public right-of-way or private property shall be served by a fully automatic i
irrigation system.
SECTION II BUSINESS PARK REGULATIONS
TRACTS Fl,G, H,I, I1, K, K1 AND J:
1. Uses Permitted:
Tract Fl' All uses permitted in the GR District
Tracts G, H, K, K1, and J: All uses permitted in the BP and GR District
Tracts I and I1: All uses permitted in the BP and I Districts except
for residential.
2. Limit uses which are permitted only in the GR District to the following total amount of
land.
Tract G: 7-~(~-2--ac~r~ 50%(39.9 acres)
Tract H: 25% (15 acres)
Tract J: 25% (8 acres )
Tract K: 25% (42 acres )
Tract KI' 100 % (6.2 acres)
Tract Fl: 100 % (2.7 acres)
3. Floor Area Ratio: The overall floor area ratio for each =Il tract shall be 0.5:1.
4. Floor Area:
The total floor area for each tract shall be determined by the daily trips established by
the applicants traffic engineer. The one element which orovides meaningful
guidelines for develooment intensity in thi~ aDolication, is the ca_oacity of the
com[}leted thoroughfare system. Instead of limiting the amount of each type of land
use within each district, it makes more sense to tie development rights directly to the
applicants own traffic figures which are based on realistic thoroughfare capacities.
7
00532 /
a) The traffic generated for any combination of uses in each tract shall be limited by
the total daily trips allocated to that tract as shown in the following table:
Tracts Daily Trips Daily Trips
With Completion of Without Completion of
North Colony Ext. or Alternative North Colony Ext. or Alternative
F1 1,900 1530
G 12,748 10,262
H 8,674 6,983
I 6,214 5,002
I1 5,320 4,283
J 3,067 2,469
K 21,950 17,670
K1 639 514
L 10.464 8.424
70,976 57,137
These daily trips are reduced by 19.5% until the completion of the North Colony
extension to SH.121 or completion of alternative thoroughfare improvements
approved by the council at the time of development plan review. An application for a
building permit or certificate of occupancy must demonstrate that the traffic generated
by the development falls within the total dailY trips allocated to that tract. If North
Colony has not been constructed to SH 121, a certificate of occupancy can not exceed
a threshold established by a 19.5% reduction in daily trips allocated for that tract
unless the council has approved a development plan(s) which exceed the reduced
threshold.
b) Actual trip generation calculations shall be based on the following figures:
Uses Daily Trills
Business Park 159.75 per acre
( warehouse, manufacturing, office showroom warehouse,
warehouse distribution, wholesale, and
research & development)
Lodging 10.5 per room
Office
Financial institution without drive-in 140.61 per 1,000 gsf
Financial institution with drive-in 265.21 per 1,000 gsf
Other offices
10,000 gsf or less 24.6 per 1,000 gsf
Over 10,000 to 50,000 gsf 16.58 per 1,000 gsf
Over 50,000 gsf 12.71 per 1,000 gsf
8
008828
Retail and Personal Service Uses
General merchandise under 3,500 gsf 737.99 per 1,000 gsf
General merchandise 3,500 to 10,000 gsf 167.59 per 1,000 gsf
General merchandise over 10,000 gsf 91.65 per 1,000 gsf
Restaurant with drive-in 786.22 per 1,000 gsf
Restaurant without drive-in 205.36 per 1,000 gsf
All other uses none
5. Development Guidelines: Accept all the remaining guidelines submitted by the
applicants and add the following: "Unless otherwise stated in this ordinance uses
shall comply with Business Park District standards for Tracts G,H,J,K, K1, and L;
Industrial District standards for Tracts I and I1; and General Retail standards for Tract
Fl.
SECTION III
MF-3 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
TRACTS C AND M
1. Accept all the conditions submitted by the applicant except for the following
amendments:
· Limit maximum density to fifteen (15) units per net acre with a base right of twelve
(12) units per net acre for Tract C and M.
The range of multiple family units for Tract C is 296 - 410 units and 540 - 799 units for
Tract M.
2. Masonry Requirements: When main buildings are two stories or less, 75% of the
entire main structure shall constructed of brick, tiles, cement, stone, or similar
materials;however, when the main building is three stories in height, only the first two
floor is required to have a minimum of 75% of its exterior to be constructed of brick,
tiles, cement, stone, or similar materials.
SECTION IV
SINGLE FAMILY REGULATIONS
TRACTS A,B,E, AND F
Accept all the conditions submitted by the applicant except for the following
amendments:
House and Lot Sizes:
· Tract A & F: minimum house size: 1,650 sq. ft.
9
005323
· Tract B: eighty percent (80%) of homes must have a minimum house size of
1,900 sq. ft. or 100% may have a minimum house size of 2,000 sq. ft.
· Tract E: eighty percent (80%) of t~omes must I~ave a minimum I~ouse size of
2,200 sq. ff. or 100 % may a have minimum house size of 2,400 sq. ft.
SECTION V
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
TRACT D
Accept all the conclitions submitted by the applicant except for the following
amendments:
· If t~e property is developed with any single family uses the minimum lot area
is 7,500 sq. ft. and house size is 2,200 sq. ff.
· Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any residential use that
exceeds 500 units for ~is Planned Development District, the property owner of
Tract D shall provide public access to and dedicate to the city 20.2 gross acres
(flOW included) for a neighborhood park or other public purpose. This
dedication is subject to the City of The Colony approval.
· Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any residential use that
exceeds 500 units for this Planned Development District, the property owner of
Tract D st~all provide public access to and dedicate to the Lewisviile
Independent School District 25 gross acres (ROW inclucled)'for public school
purposes. This dedication is subiect to the approval of-I:tSD.
CENTEX REZONING REQUEST;
Analysis:
Centex is requesting a change of zoning from Business Park to Light Commercial and
Multiple Family-3 on a sixty-five acre tract of land at the northeast corner on Main
Street and SH 121. The applicant proposes to construct a shopping center on thirty-
six acres along S.H 121 and develop the remaining twenty-nine acres for apartments.
The applicant has indicated tl~a~ the only purpose for requesting LC is to ailow retail
uses which are not allowe(l in the Business Park Distnct. This site is part of the South
Planning Unit Land Use Plan previously approved by the City of The Colony.
l0
00,58°0
Recommendation:
The land uses proposed by the property owner are logical and seem to be adequately
buffered from residential uses further to the north. A retail center at this intersection
makes sense along with some apartment uses to the north adjacent to the creek.
However, the application is too open-ended. Although, the applicant has submitted a
detail plan, it is meaningless since the applicant is not commiting to the plan. In
addition, the applicant has not address the location of a major east-west thoroughfare
running through the property linking Blair Oaks Rd. with Main St.
It is recommended that this case be denied and allow the applicant to submit a
conceptual plan Planned Development District which looks carefully at traffic
generation numbers and includes development parameters for the retail and
apartment uses. The applicant should also look at the feasibility of providing garden
office, office showroom warehouse type uses along a portion of the northern part of the
site. The location of the east-west thoroughfare shown on the concept plan.
11