HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/13/2010 P&Z
MINUTES
CITY OF THE COLONY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 13, 2010
After determining that a quorum was present, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City
of The Colony, Texas convened into regular session which was held on Tuesday, July 13, 2010
at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers located in City Hall, 6800 Main Street, The Colony,
Texas, at which time the following items were addressed:
Board Members Present: Karen Hames, Chairperson; Deville Hubbard; David Terre; Eddie
McCormick; Helene Parker; Debbie Morrison; and Brian Wade.
Board Member Absent: None
Staff Present: J. Michael Joyce, Development Services Director; Andrew Sheridan, Senior
Planner; and Felicia Koppang, Development Services Coordinator.
1.0 CALL REGULAR SESSION TO ORDER
Chairperson Hames called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM.
1.1 Citizen Input
No citizen input was received.
2.0 CONSENT AGENDA
2.1 Consider approval of the minutes of the February 23, 2010 and April 27, 2010 Regular
Sessions, and May 25, 2010 Work Session.
2.2 Consider approval of an amended final plat of Lot 1A Block A of the Peter's Colony
Elementary School being 10.482 acres in the BBB & CRR Survey, Abstract No 194,
located at the northeast corner of John Yates Drive and Nash Drive, also known as
5101 Nash Drive. (FP10-0003, Peter's Colony Elementary School Amended Final
Plat)
Commissioner Wade pulled Item 2.2.
It was moved by Commissioner Terre to approve Item 2.1 as presented, seconded by
Commissioner Wade, and unanimously carried (7-0).
Commission Wade asked in reference to Item 2.2, what the purpose was for the amended plat
when the final plat was approved a few months ago.
Robert Howman, Glenn Engineeering, responded that the purpose of the amended plat was to
change the easements on the property.
It was moved by Commissioner Wade to approve Item 2.2 as stated, seconded by
Commissioner Parker, and unanimously carried (7-0).
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 13, 2010
Page 2 of 4
3.0 PUBLIC HEARING
3.1 Conduct a public hearing, discuss and consider making a recommendation to City
Council regarding an application for a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for Walgreens
located at the northwest corner of Paige Road and SH-121, also known as 5297 SH-
121. (SUP10-0002, Walgreens 404719)
Mr. Sheridan presented the staff report.
Karen Thiessen, with Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP, representing Walgreens introduced herself.
Commissioner Wade asked if Walgreens could replace landscaping to meet the requirements as a
condition of approval.
Mr. Sheridan responded affirmatively.
Chairperson Haines asked if other Walgreens locations sell beer and wine.
Ms. Thiessen responded that Walgreens locations across the country are adding beer and wine
sales in an effort to create more of a convenience store atmosphere. The Walgreens in Frisco
began selling beer and wine a few months ago. No square footage is being added to any location
and the increase in revenue due to the sale of beer and wine is not all that significant, but
Walgreens believes that by offering the sale of beer and wine, it is a better fit for their clientele.
Commissioner McCormick asked since there is no change in square footage would the addition
of beer and wine take away products they currently offer to make space.
Ms. Thiessen responded that Walgreens will be reallocating space, but not decreasing product
offering. The areas where they will be selling beer and wine would be in their existing cooler
location and in a nearby aisle.
Chairperson Haines opened the Public Hearing. No one came forward to speak in favor or
opposition.
Chairperson Haines closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Terre asked Commissioner Wade approximately how much landscaping needs to
be replaced to come into compliance with their landscape plan.
Commissioner Wade responded approximately 3 out of 25 trees need to be replaced, possibly
more.
Mr. Joyce continued that the Code Enforcement Department can send someone out to the
location to assess what is actually missing.
Commissioner Terre asked if the landscaping was something that needed to be handled
separately.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 13, 2010
Page 3 of 4
Mr. Joyce responded that the landscaping could be a stipulation to the approval of the Specific
Use Permit.
It was moved by Commissioner Wade to approve Item 3.1 with a recommendation that
Walgreens comes into compliance with their landscape plan, seconded by Commissioner
Morrison and unanimously carried (7-0).
3.2 Conduct a public hearing, discuss and consider making a recommendation to City
Council regarding the addition of definitions for the Land Use categories found on the
adopted Future Land Use Plan map found in The Colony Comprehensive Plan. (S110-
0005, Land Use Map Definitions for The Colony Comprehensive Plan)
Mr. Joyce presented the staff report.
Commissioner Parker asked how the City makes a determination of what area is an ETJ (Extra
Territorial Jurisdiction), when the City decides they are going to annex it and if the City doesn't
annex, what happens with the land, who the area belongs to and what does the City do with the
area.
Mr. Voss provided some history to the Commissioners of the State Annexation Act of 1963. He
advised that Extra Territorial Jurisdiction came into place due to cities experiencing spastic
growth. He further explained that Extra Territorial Jurisdiction is based on a city's population
and can be drawn in locations to suit the city, so long as the boundaries do not run into another
city. A city cannot annex land unless it is included in their ETJ and as long as it does not belong
to any other city. He noted that the size of the ETJ ranges from 1/2 square mile to 5 square miles,
and is based on the size of the city.
Commissioner Parker asked, given the City's boundaries, could it not be argued that the ETJ
belongs to the City of Frisco, and if there are disputes between cities about which city the ETJ
belongs to, how are they addressed.
Mr. Voss responded that the numbers of overlapping ETJ's are diminishing. There are Boundary
Adjustment Agreements done to decide which city owns the ETJ in question and those depend
on the property and the desire of the particular city with what they want to do with that piece of
property. An ETJ is significant because the Subdivision Regulations of the city extend to that
ETJ, so there is not a vast difference once that piece of property in annexed into the City.
Commissioner McCormick asked what the responsibilities of services are that extend to the ETJ.
Mr. Voss responded the City has no responsibility other than issuing building permits.
Commissioner Wade asked if it is still regulated by the County Sheriff instead of the City police,
and if agreements are made for areas to be served by Fire Departments.
Mr. Voss responded affirmatively.
Chairperson Hames opened the Public Hearing. No one came forward in favor or opposition.
Chairperson Harries closed the Public Hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 13, 2010
Page 4 of 4
It was moved by Commissioner Wade to approve Item 3.2, seconded by Commissioner
Parker and unanimously carried (7-0).
There being no further questions or discussion, Chairperson Hames adjourned the meeting at
7:27 pm.
Karen Hames, Chairperson
~ VIO 4C
Felici Ko pang, o i Secretary