Agenda Packet P&Z 05/07/2009Planning & Zoning Commission
Trophy Club Entities
Meeting Agenda
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Svore Municipal Building Boardroom7:00 PMThursday, May 7, 2009
Call To Order and announce a quorum.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. 09-145-T Review and approve minutes of the February 19, 2009 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting.
February 19, 2009.pdfAttachments:
2. 09-146-T
Review and approve minutes of the March 5, 2009, Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting.
March 5, 2009.pdfAttachments:
PUBLIC HEARING
3. 09-144-T Public Hearing regarding a proposed Zoning Change from "R-15" Single Family
Residential to "R-12" Single Family Residential for an approximate 2.3 acres located
where Ridge View Lane dead ends into vacant land just north of the intersection of
Skyline Drive and Ridge View Lane, Requested by Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., on
behalf of BDMR Development, LLC. (ZCA-09-015)
Zoning Change Staff Report.pdf
Application.pdf
Chapter 13, Article IV, Section 4.01 R-15 District Regs.pdf
Chapter 13, Article IV, Section 4.01 R-12 District Regs.pdf
Public Hearing Notice - Newspaper.pdf
Public Hearing Notice - Property Owner Notification.pdf
Property Owners Within 200 ft.pdf
Email - Property Owner Opposition.pdf
Attachments:
REGULAR SESSION
4. 09-147-T
Discussion and appropriate action regarding a Zoning Change Request from "R-15"
Single Family Residential to "R-12" Single Family Residential for an approximate 2.3
acres located where Ridge View Lane dead ends into vacant land just north of the
intersection of Skyline Drive and Ridge View Lane, Requested by Jacobs Engineering
Group, Inc., on behalf of BDMR Development, LLC. (ZCA-09-015)
Planning and Zoning Commission 1 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
May 7, 2009Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda
PUBLIC HEARING
5. 09-148-T Public Hearing regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club Code of Ordinances,
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Supplementary District Regulations, including
without limitation, amending and adopting new regulations affecting accessory
structures, and affecting locations of flag poles. (ADM-09-002)
ADM-09-002 Staff Report - Flagpole Locations.pdf
Public Hearing Newspaper Notice.pdf
Attachments:
REGULAR SESSION
6. 09-149-T
Discussion and appropriate action regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club Code
of Ordinances, Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Supplementary District Regulations,
including without limitation, amending and adopting new regulations affecting accessory
structures, and affecting locations of flag poles. (ADM-09-002)
Adjourn
Notice is hereby given that a quorum of the Town Council may be in attendance at
this meeting.
CERTIFICATION
I certify that the above notice was posted on the front window of the Svore Municipal
Building, 100 Municipal Drive, Trophy Club, Texas, on Friday, May 1, 2009 by 5:00
P.M. in accordance with Chapter 551, Texas Government Code.
____________________________________________
Carolyn Huggins
Planning & Zoning Department
If you plan to attend this public meeting and have a disability that requires special
needs, please contact the Town Secretary’s Office at 682-831-4600, 48 hours in
advance and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you.
I certify that the attached notice and agenda of items to be considered by this Board
was removed by me from the front window of the Svore Municipal Building, 100
Municipal Drive, Trophy Club, Texas, on the __________ day of
______________________, 2009
________________________________, Title: ___________________________
Planning and Zoning Commission 2 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Trophy Club Entities 100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262
File Number: 09-145-T
File ID: Type: Status: 09-145-T Agenda Item Regular Session
1Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning
Commission
04/30/2009File Created:
Final Action: *File Name:
Title: Review and approve minutes of the February 19, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting.
Notes:
Sponsors: Enactment Date:
February 19, 2009.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number:
Hearing Date: Contact:
Effective Date: *Entered by: chuggins@trophyclub.org
History of Legislative File
Action: Result: Return
Date:
Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver-
sion:
1 05/07/2009Planning & Zoning
Commission
Text of Legislative File 09-145-T
Review and approve minutes of the February 19, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Planning and Zoning Commission 3 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 19, 2009
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Trophy Club, Texas met on February 19,
2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 100 Municipal Drive, Trophy Club, and Texas
76262.
COMMISSIONERS ATTENDANCE:
Chairman Hill Present
Vice Chairman Stephens Present
Commissioner Reed Present
Commissioner Sheridan Present
Commissioner Forest Present
Commissioner Ashby Present
Commissioner Davidson Present
STAFF AND GUESTS PRESENT:
Carolyn Huggins Planning & Zoning Coordinator
Mellany Gibbon Trophy Club Women’s Club
Bill Durham Gallery Custom Homes
Kyle Salzman Jacobs Consulting
David Keener Project Manager, Centurion American
CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM.
Chairman Hill called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with a quorum present.
1 REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 18, 2008 PLANNING AND
ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.
Vice Chairman Stephens motioned to approve the minutes of the December 18, 2008,
Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Reed.
Ayes: Hill, Stephens, Reed, Sheridan, Forest, Davidson
Nays: None
Abstain: Ashby (absent on December 18, 2008)
Action: 6-0-1, Approved
Planning and Zoning Commission 4 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
2 DISCUSSION AND APPROPRIATE ACTION RELATIVE TO A TEMPORARY USE
REQUEST FOR TWO COMMUNITY GARAGE SALE EVENTS GRANTED BY
SPECIAL PRIVILEGE. APPLICANT: MELLANY GIBBON, CO-CHAIRPERSON,
TROPHY CLUB WOMEN’S CLUB.
Chairman Hill called the applicant to come forward.
Mellany Gibbon, Co-Chairperson, Trophy Club Women’s Club. Ms. Gibbon stated that she is
before the Commission this evening to seek approval to hold two community-wide garage
sales in 2009 – one on April 18 and the other on October 10. She stated that they will be
asking the Town Council to waive the permit fees as all funds generated by these events are
donated back to the community and local charities. Ms. Gibbon thanked the Commission for
their consideration of this request.
There were no questions or comments from the Commission and the Chairman called for a
motion.
Commissioner Sheridan motioned to recommend Town Council approval of this request. The
motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Stephens.
Ayes: Hill, Stephens, Reed, Sheridan, Forest, Davidson, Ashby
Nays: None
Action: 7-0, Approved
3 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A REQUEST FOR
APPROVAL OF A TEMPORARY USE FOR OFF STREET PARKING FOR MODEL
HOMES IN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 27, NEIGHBORHOOD 2, PHASE 1A,
FOR A PERIOD OF TIME OF NOT GREATER THAN ONE YEAR. APPLICANT: BILL
DURHAM, GALLERY CUSTOM HOMES.
Chairman Hill called the applicant forward.
Bill Durham, Gallery Custom Homes, requested approval for a parking lot at 2416 Trophy Club
Drive which will serve as the parking lot for the Gallery Custom Homes’ model home.
Ms. Huggins, Planning & Zoning Department, stated that this request has been reviewed by
staff and although Gallery Custom Homes was willing to put in a few trees on the parking lot
site staff asked that the trees be removed and replaced with smaller landscaping that can more
easily be removed when the parking lot is no longer needed and a single family home is built
on the lot which would require removal of pavement and landscaping. The applicant has
complied with staff’s request. Staff recommends approval of this request.
Commissioner Ashby requested hash marks across the driveway from the van access parking
space to the walkway. Mr. Ashby also asked that the applicant work with the Building
Inspector, Chris King to ensure that the walkway from the parking lot to the front entrance of
the model home is ADA compliant.
Planning and Zoning Commission 5 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
There were no other comments or questions from the Commission and the Chairman called for
a motion.
Commissioner Ashby motioned to recommend Town Council approval of this request. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Sheridan.
Ayes: Hill, Stephens, Reed, Sheridan, Forest, Davidson, Ashby
Nays: None
Action: 7-0, Approved
4 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO PD-PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 27, KNOWN AS THE HIGHLANDS AT TROPHY
CLUB, ORDINANCE NO. 2007-15 P&Z BY AMENDING EXHIBIT “B” –
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION V. NEIGHBORHOOD REGULATIONS,
SUBSECTION “J” VILLAGE CENTER, ITEM 1. PERMITTED USES. APPLICANT:
HIGH TROPHY DEVELOPMENT, LLC REPRESENTED BY JIM WIEGERT, JACOBS
(PD AMD-09-030)
5 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING AN AMENDMENT TO PD-
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 27, KNOWN AS THE HIGHLANDS AT
TROPHY CLUB, ORDINANCE NO. 2007-15 P&Z BY AMENDING EXHIBIT “B” –
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION V. NEIGHBORHOOD REGULATIONS,
SUBSECTION “J” VILLAGE CENTER, ITEM 1. PERMITTED USES. APPLICANT:
HIGH TROPHY DEVELOPMENT, LLC REPRESENTED BY JIM WIEGERT, JACOBS
(PD AMD-09-030)
Chairman Hill announced the case and explained the protocol for a public hearing. The public
hearing was opened and the Chairman called the applicant forward.
Kyle Salzman, Jacobs Consulting, representing High Trophy Development, LLC came forward
and stated that they wish to change the list of permitted uses for Village Center in PD-27. Mr.
Salzman’s client is asking that the uses be amended to include those uses shown in the
packet.
David Glaser, 15 Overhill Dr., stated that he is a member of the Parks and Rec Board, Trophy
Club Park Subcommittee, and EDC4B. He would like to see commercial development that will
generate sales tax revenue for the Town of Trophy Club, which is badly needed as very little
space is available for commercial development in the Town of Trophy Club. He would also like
to see this property developed in an aesthetically pleasing way. Before Mr. Glaser joined
EDC4B, the Board conducted a survey among citizens regarding the types of establishments
they would like to see. Mr. Glaser looked at this list with those things in mind. He stated that
many of the businesses requested by the applicant are what Mr. Glaser would consider to be
non-sales tax revenue producing entities. He stated that administrative or business corporate
headquarters, consumer and mercantile credit reporting, engineering, and family home/group
home will not generate sales tax. Mr. Glaser stated that the area is located next to Northwest
Planning and Zoning Commission 6 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Park and the Commission should consider the fact that there will be a lot of kids running
around in the park area and businesses should be compatible. He stated that once this
decision is made the Town will not have any way to stop an allowable use from going in there.
From a previous Town he lived in, he was told, “we don’t need a 37th dry cleaner in the Town
but we can’t stop it.” He would like input and thought ahead of time for what will be allowed.
Mr. Glaser stated that ridership has increased lately in Trophy Club Park. Two weekends ago
there were over 300 people riding motorcycles or ATVs in that park. He suggested businesses
that cater to that ridership might be interested in being located in Village Center. He feels a
good look should be taken at this overall request.
Ms. Huggins gave a staff report explaining that this request will amend PD-27 specifically
regarding permitted uses for the commercial portion of PD-27 which is known as Village
Center. The currently allowed uses are on Page 26 of the Commissioner’s packet and the
uses the applicant is requesting are listed on Pages 26 and 27. Staff recommends approval of
this request, in general, but there are some specific items staff wishes to bring to the
Commissioner’s attention. Staff hopes to encourage the developer to consider businesses that
will produce sales tax revenue for the Town. Of the additional permitted uses requested by the
applicant, several are more desirable than others because of the sales tax revenue that could
be generated. In addition, the developer has been given a list of retailers that could be a good
match for the Town of Trophy Club versus those that are already located in the surrounding
communities. Ms. Huggins stated that the request for a “family home” must be deleted as it
will not fit in the Village Center zoning district. The Human Resources Code requires that a
family home be located in a caretaker’s own residence and Village Center is commercial
zoning which does not allow a residence. A “group home” could be allowed, as per the Human
Resources Code, it is defined as a day care facility. Restrictions include not more than 12
children, none can be older than 14 years of age, and it cannot be a 24-hour operation. Ms.
Huggins stated that there is the potential for another day care coming forward in the Town
close to the Tom Thumb shopping center, as well as other day care operations already
established in the Town so staff does not feel a day care is ideal for Village Center. Staff asks
that retirement home/nursing home be removed from the list of permitted uses as those types
of facilities increase EMS runs and the Town does not have the funds to handle an increase in
EMS runs at this time.
Chairman Hill closed the public hearing and moved to discussion of this item.
Chairman Hill asked that “wholly enclosed without outside display or storage” be added to the
appliance rental item.
Commissioner Sheridan asked Mr. Glaser what is desirable to the park. Mr. Glaser stated that
the park won’t be developed anytime soon as money is required and who knows what funding
will be available. He stated that the concept plan calls for ball fields. He would prefer that kid-
friendly, rather than undesirable, businesses be located next to the park. He also stated that
Trophy Club Park is growing rapidly in terms of people coming out there to ride motorcycles
and ATV’s. Redbull has put a huge motocross park in there. A consultant has been hired to
determine uses for the other 600 to 700 acres out there – everything from nature trails and
mobile classrooms and fishing spots. Perhaps there will be a regional sports complex out
Planning and Zoning Commission 7 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
there one day. A guy from Bridgeport stopped by and told us to put in 20 ball fields and with
the proximity to DFW Airport national tournaments could be held there; which is a little bit
ahead of us at this point, but is indicative of the potential of the area. Northeast Park is just
down the road and to get to Trophy Club Park and Northeast Park everyone would go by
Village Center.
Commissioner Sheridan wondered what would be considered “undesirable”. He wondered if,
for instance, restaurants with alcohol sales were a possibility in this tract due to their proximity
to schools and parks. [Town of Trophy Club Code of Ordinances does not allow alcohol sales
within 300-ft. of a church, public or private school, or public hospital.]
Commissioner Sheridan stated, for the record, that no homeowners were notified because
there aren’t any within 200-ft. of this tract.
Commissioner Sheridan asked if this request is meant to change the original concept. The
applicant responded that it is not meant to change the original concept of the PD, but rather to
further define the uses.
Commissioner Sheridan asked for an explanation of the motivation of the request. Vice
Chairman Stephens responded that it is to allow a restaurant with drive-through. Ms. Huggins
responded that staff does not consider this request a change from the original concept of the
PD. She stated that the applicant’s motivation to change the permitted uses is to allow
broader marketing of the tracts. Commissioner Sheridan stated that as he goes through the list
he realizes that it gives someone large latitude of discretion without coming before the Town –
either P&Z or Council. He stated that these uses can be placed on either tract.
Commissioner Sheridan offered the following comments on the uses. He would like to avoid
any office warehouse industrial use. Building material and hardware is an industrial use.
Hardware store is a retail use. The ordinance doesn’t include a definition of building materials
so if the hardware store sells 2x4’s is that building material? Additionally, a lot of these uses
would allow excessive parking of company vehicles. For instance, a security company
installation would most likely need company vehicles. Land surveyors and appliance rental
might also need company vehicles and/or overnight parking. The ordinance is very specific on
the type and size of parking and some of the uses don’t seem compatible with the required
parking and the original thought of the PD. Page 29 and 65 of the ordinance show the type of
buildings allowed, as well as the parking allowed, and yet some of these uses could possibly
have five bobtails parked overnight. Some of these uses also don’t seem to be compatible
with the architectural design allowed by this PD.
Commissioner Sheridan stated [to Mr. Glaser, EDC Board Member in the audience] that the
PD has a requirement of transparency on the front of the building with a clear view of
merchandise; no less than 50% must be windows.
Commissioner Sheridan stated that the reason he asked about alcohol is that if this is opened
up for alcohol sales he would like the following uses removed: kindergartens, religious
institutions, schools–public and private, and day care. Anything that would prohibit or interfere
Planning and Zoning Commission 8 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
with a possible restaurant with alcohol sales, which would be a high tax base, should be
removed. Commissioner Sheridan stated that the ordinance already controls the type of
atmosphere that is allowed in this Town for restaurants, food service and alcohol and
percentage thereof. Mr. Sheridan would also wish to remove anything else in the permitted
uses that would prohibit restaurant with alcohol sales. Retirement and nursing homes do not
belong in that area. He stated that he objects to the appliance rental and building materials.
Chamber of Commerce should be off the list if they don’t provide taxes of any kind. He stated
that he is a contractor and he maintains a very nice office, but to allow a “contractors office”
doesn’t define what a contractor is and what type of office is being talked about. “No outside
display is permitted” should be amended so that no outside display of any type of merchandise
at all is allowed, i.e., motorcycles for sale. Employment services should not be allowed.
Would laborers be hanging around that office? It shouldn’t be allowed in that location. Land
surveying is an industrial use. A museum should be removed if it doesn’t provide sales tax
revenue. Mr. Sheridan stated that every type of medical offices is listed. He stated that he
doesn’t know what a “recording studio” would be. He stated that he is for having drive-
throughs. He believes a security installation is an industrial use and this is not an industrial
area. An indoor theater doesn’t fit for this location. “Utility offices” is too broad a spectrum.
Should “photography studio” be limited by definition?
Commissioner Reed stated that he believed the uses should not be “broad brushed”.
Commissioner Ashby stated that he has concerns with quite a few of the items, along the lines
of Commissioner Sheridan’s concerns. It is too broad and ambiguous. It leaves way too much
open for the applicant to do whatever they want. He asked to make a motion, but Chairman
Hill denied the request and continued discussion of this item.
Commissioner Davidson stated that he would like a more consolidated list. There is a
considerable amount of discussion that needs to take place on this. He agrees with many of
Commissioner Sheridan’s comments.
Ms. Huggins indicated to Chairman Hill that two members of the audience wished to ask
permission to speak. Chairman Hill granted permission.
J.D. Stotts, 1 Narrow Creek, serves on the Park Board and stated that he wished to see
development of a commercial/retail venture that would provide high sales tax. He stated that
this Town needs something to offset property taxes with other revenue to allow the Town to
provide services. He stated that as Mr. Glaser mentioned there is going to be a park
developed adjacent to that area and he would like to see something developed there that
would integrate well with youth sports, outdoor activities and fitness. A new high school will be
right across the street. There is a middle school not far away and Trophy Club Park is
increasing in use. People visiting Trophy Club is increasing. That park has been improved for
Motocross and the trail riding areas have been improved as well. The Park Board is working
on grants with the State of Texas to put in additional foot trails. Improvements will begin in
June for Northeast Park, which is currently being surveyed and an engineering site plan is
being done. A site plan for Northwest Park should begin in the next few months. Hopefully, all
of this will be a great selling point for all of the new development going in and for all of the
Planning and Zoning Commission 9 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
homes being built for young people and families to come to Trophy Club. The Town is
investing a lot in all of these projects and it would be nice to see a diversification of income
from property tax to sales tax for the Village Center. Mr. Stotts stated that he isn’t against
churches and he isn’t saying Trophy Club doesn’t need another one as we could all probably
work on being a little more holy in our lives, but at this point the Town needs commercial/retail.
Councilman Moss commented that in the past there was an art gallery in the Tom Thumb
shopping center that didn’t make it. He also commented that in the past a drive through
restaurant was turned down because of the location and inaccessibility of the site but Village
Center seems to be an ideal location for something of that nature.
Commissioner Ashby stated that he is pro-drive through in the larger tract. He is opposed to
drive throughs in the smaller tract. He stated that he would not wish to see drive throughs abut
the park or residential property.
Commissioner Sheridan would like further discussion on this item with the applicant coming
back with a new list. He stated that he’d like to see this developed as two story buildings with
a multi-use – offices limited to the second floor and retail with transparency on the first floor,
which would keep the intent of the original PD.
David Keener, Centurion Development, stated that they are here because they wish to make
the tract more marketable. They’d like to have more flexibility as the current list of permitted
uses is vague. They wish to avoid having to come back for every use that might be interested
in Village Center. They wish to have a drive-through. He stated that this is not an “A” retail
site. The Tom Thumb site has 114 frontage and even that shopping center is struggling. He
stated that, “We can all wish for a major retail, but that wasn’t the original intent and the reality
today is that there might be some sort of restaurant there, but not alcohol sales. Alcohol sales
is going to be challenging. It’s too close to the school sites.” He stated he’ll come back but
there should be a realistic understanding of what they see as plausible and not. The original
PD allowed uses that would not produce sales tax, i.e., community facilities. They feel the site
has to have flexibility. A small Alzheimer’s facility on that site is a realistic use.
Ms. Huggins added that Marshall Creek Road will become a new road, Bobcat Blvd., and will
expand to two lanes in each direction with a center median. Staff feels that a drive through
restaurant would fit well on the smaller tract. Staff would like the larger tract developed in a
way that provides more sales tax revenue for the Town than those uses that won’t provide
revenue for the Town.
Commissioner Ashby asked to make a motion. Chairman Hill denied the request, but asked
the Commissioners to wrap up their comments on this item.
Commissioner Sheridan stated that the original resistance to drive-throughs in this Town was
very specific to location. Those locations had residents who lived in the area before the
commercial occurred. At this location in Village Center, the commercial came first.
Planning and Zoning Commission 10 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Vice Chairman Stephens added that the traffic created to get in and out of the other drive
through locations would have created a problem, pure and simple. He stated, “Mr. Keener, the
Planning and Zoning Commission is interested in developing that property for a number of
reasons. Representatives of the City are interested in developing that property. We do have
some restrictions we will place on what we will allow in there. We understand your marketing
and we aren’t going to do anything to prevent your marketing, but we are going to have to have
time to go over this item by item.”
Mr. Keener responded that he will resubmit the list, clarifying what they desire. Mr. Keener
stated that he does not want to restrict the uses to first story versus second story.
Vice Chairman Stephens motioned to continue the item to the next P&Z meeting, March 5,
2009. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ashby. Passed by unanimous vote, 7-0.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Hill adjourned the meeting at 8:12 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Commission 11 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Trophy Club Entities 100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262
File Number: 09-146-T
File ID: Type: Status: 09-146-T Agenda Item Regular Session
1Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning
Commission
04/30/2009File Created:
Final Action: *File Name:
Title: Review and approve minutes of the March 5, 2009, Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting.
Notes:
Sponsors: Enactment Date:
March 5, 2009.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number:
Hearing Date: Contact:
Effective Date: *Entered by: chuggins@trophyclub.org
History of Legislative File
Action: Result: Return
Date:
Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver-
sion:
1 05/07/2009Planning & Zoning
Commission
Text of Legislative File 09-146-T
Review and approve minutes of the March 5, 2009, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Planning and Zoning Commission 12 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES
MARCH 5, 2009
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Trophy Club, Texas met on March 5,
2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 100 Municipal Drive, Trophy Club, and Texas
76262.
COMMISSIONERS ATTENDANCE:
Chairman Hill Present
Vice Chairman Stephens Present
Commissioner Reed Present
Commissioner Sheridan Absent
Commissioner Forest Absent
Commissioner Ashby Present
Commissioner Davidson Present
STAFF AND GUESTS PRESENT:
Carolyn Huggins Planning & Zoning Coordinator
Kyle Salzman Jacobs Consulting
David Keener Project Manager, Centurion American
CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM.
Chairman Hill called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with a quorum present.
1 PUBLIC HEARING OF A REQUEST TO AMEND PERMITTED USES FOR VILLAGE
CENTER LOCATED IN PD-PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 27 (PD-27),
KNOWN AS THE HIGHLANDS AT TROPHY CLUB, APPLICANT: HIGH TROPHY
DEVELOPMENT, LLC REPRESENTED BY KYLE SALZMAN, JACOBS
CONSULTING, AND DAVID KEENER, CENTURION AMERICAN (PD AMD-09-030)
2 DISCUSSION AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION OF A REQUEST TO AMEND
PERMITTED USES FOR VILLAGE CENTER LOCATED IN PD-PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 27 (PD-27), KNOWN AS THE HIGHLANDS AT
TROPHY CLUB, APPLICANT: HIGH TROPHY DEVELOPMENT, LLC
REPRESENTED BY KYLE SALZMAN, JACOBS CONSULTING, AND DAVID
KEENER, CENTURION AMERICAN (PD AMD-09-030)
Chairman Hill announced the case and opened the public hearing. He asked Ms. Huggins to
read into the record two emails received regarding this case.
Planning and Zoning Commission 13 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
The first email was from Damian Olthoff, 528 Indian Creek Drive to Chairman Hill. It read: “As
I am unable to attend the P&Z meeting on Thursday, I wanted to take this opportunity to
specifically express my support for the proposed changes to the permitted uses of the Village
Center property (including drive through businesses) which will generate either sales taxes or
significant ad valorem taxes for the city.”
The second email was from Glenn Strother, Trophy Club Town Council, who wrote: “I
understand that you will be looking at possible changes to PD-27 at this Thursday’s meeting. I
have conflicts with that date so I will not be able to attend. As the Council Liaison to EDC4B I
would encourage you to help us optimize the property with businesses that will increase ad
valorem and sales taxes. Another business which would fit well next to the high school could
be a fast food restaurant with a need for a drive thru. Again, I encourage the members of the
Commission to be open minded to the requests. One of our goals in EDC4B is to work hard to
be Developer Friendly in ways to assist them in the process of future development. The right
commercial/economic growth is important to the future of our Town.”
Chairman Hill then called for those present wishing to speak in the Public Hearing.
Larry Crosser, 17 Overhill Dr., stated that he is here as a citizen although he does serve on the
Economic Development Committee 4B as well and he would ask that the Commission be sure
that the property is developed to generate sales tax.
Dave Glaser, 15 Overhill Dr., stated that he believes the Town needs to generate revenue --
sales tax and ad valorem tax -- on that property. He stated that at the last P&Z meeting he
mentioned that there had been a survey done a couple of years ago and it took a while but he
managed to find some of the results of that survey. It is very limited, but basically respondents
were asked about a very select list of types of businesses that they would like to see along
Highway 114. It is not the Village Center, but it is only a short distance away from the
highway. Highest on the list was a full service sit down restaurant. 94% of the members of the
Town that were polled would like to see that. They even said they would attend functions
there. They also were high on drive thru restaurants and fast food sit down restaurants. They
also asked that the Town be more pro-active in bringing retail business to Town.
Chairman Hill closed the public hearing and moved to discussion of the item, asking the
Commissioners to be a little less formal with the meeting this evening to give a free-flow
exchange of ideas to and from the developer’s representative.
Ms. Huggins gave the Commissioner’s a copy of the list of permitted uses requested by the
applicant which had been revised to show staff requests. Those are:
• Combine item b and j to allow Bank and Financial Institutions WITHOUT drive through.
Staff does not wish to see a bank with a drive through located in Village Center. Even
in good economic times, banks often change locations, leaving empty a bank building
that is very difficult to re-develop into something else. Staff feels there are plenty of
Planning and Zoning Commission 14 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
banks in the area and would not wish to see a drive through bank at the Village Center
location.
• Combine item f and n to allow Community and Municipal Facilities, removing “to
include libraries” because a library is a community facility and does not need to be
listed separately. At the time that the PD was created, a library was needed and
desired by the Town and perhaps that is why it was specifically listed, but as it is a
community facility, it would be allowed in Village Center.
• Remove item “g”, day care, because there are several other day care facilities in Town
and the Ehrenberg’s property behind Tom Thumb was rezoned in the past year from
Commercial Recreation to Commercial General with the main business of that property
designated as a pre-school and day care. Staff would prefer businesses other than
day care at Village Center.
• Remove item “m”, kindergarten, as well as item “s”, schools, private or public, as
Village Center is surrounded by an elementary, middle and high school that will
provide for the needs of the Community.
• Staff asks that item “p”, Professional and administrative offices” be limited to 30%
(approximately 4 acres) of Tract 1 (the larger tract), with no offices allowed in Tract 2
(the smaller tract). Staff would like to see the smaller 3.3 acre tract developed as a
drive through restaurant.
• Remove item “q”, churches, which would not provide revenue for the Town.
Ms. Huggins stated that at the last P&Z meeting, Commissioner Sheridan had brought up
alcohol sales within a certain distance from churches and schools. Ms. Huggins stated that
Town regulations do not allow alcohol sales within 300-ft. of a church, public or private school,
or public hospital. The smaller tract will not be able to have a restaurant with alcohol sales as
it is within 300-ft. of a school. If a church is allowed on the larger 13.3 acre tract of land, that
will remove any possibility of a sit down restaurant with alcohol sales.
• Limit item “u”, retirement, elderly care facility, to 2-acres on the larger 13.3 tract (Tract
1).
David Keener, Centurion Development, stated that the goal is to add uses to make the tract
more marketable, rather than remove uses to make it less marketable, which is a counter-
productive cycle of this request. Mr. Keener stated that there are certain requests that they
cannot agree to and they just need to stop with this request if that’s the way it’s going to be;
they’ll leave the tract the way it is. He stated they have debt to pay and a business to run and
they are trying to sell the tract and make it a viable venture for Centurion. He stated they have
spent a lot of money on putting a street through the little tract and putting the drainage facility
in and they need to recoup their investment which is why they are here trying to get drive
throughs and a few other little things added to make it to where they can go to users who are
not currently allowed. They don’t wish to take users off, adding one for every three taken off.
That was not the point of this request.
Mr. Keener stated the following: “Going down our request versus staff there’s really not a
whole lot -- I don’t care about the banks and financial institutions. Again, we have a taste of
what I call the wishes for this tract and then the reality for this tract. This is a “B” commercial
Planning and Zoning Commission 15 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
site. Banks are not going to go there anyway. They are going to be on the freeway. It’s not
going to happen so we are fine with that removal. But, to that goal, to compare this tract to
being close to 114 is a ridiculous comparison. The car count is 100,000 a day versus 500 a
day or whatever it is. We need to be real in this discussion. We’ve been trying to be real in
our expectations to find some things that we think can happen for that tract. When we look at
the tract, we agree that we’d like to get some fast food on the corner. That’s a viable use for
second tier. Not McDonalds. Not going to happen there, but maybe like a Sonic or something
where a little less capital is required and a little less car count. We are talking to a Mexican
restaurant but alcohol sales is a problem; not a Taco Cabana but something along those lines
might be possible. That’s going to be an issue for that tract. We want the flexibility of moving
a drive through over to the other corner next to the park or whatever, but again, I don’t know
how the 300-ft. is going to apply to the high school. Is it the front door or the property line?”
Ms. Huggins stated that the requirements are: “in a direct line from the property line of the
public school to the property line of the place of business”.
Mr. Keener asked if there is a distance requirement from a public park. Ms. Huggins stated
that public parks are not included in the alcohol sales distance.
Mr. Keener stated that they are ok with the limitation on the offices. That is probably more
office space than that site can absorb in the next 10 years anyway. A 4-acre cap is fine. Even
if they were to just do single story buildings that would give a yield of 36,000 sq. ft. of office
space which is plenty of offices for that site.
Mr. Keener stated that religious institutions are a must. He stated that he had offered a
compromise to staff of limiting “religious institutions” to the east part of the larger tract, which
would be the east side of the ditch/drainage easement. Mr. Keener anticipates offices on the
eastern part of the tract as well. He stated that they consider that area to be the less desirable
part of that tract due to the nearness of the surrounding houses. A drive-thru probably
wouldn’t work on that side of the tract as there wouldn’t be enough traffic count and there
would be an issue with the residences. Mr. Keener stated that religious institutions are already
allowed, which is the point he is trying to stress. He stated that they would limit it on the fast
food tract and the western part of the larger tract.
Mr. Keener stated that he thinks schools would be a good use for that tract although whether
or not there is a “need” is arguable.
Mr. Keener would like to have the retirement and elderly care facility restricted to four acres
(rather than 2 acres as requested by staff). If a buyer wants to build 32 beds versus 16 beds,
four acres will be needed with parking.
Chairman Hill asked about the realignment of Parkview. Ms. Huggins explained that the
current Parkview street on the west side of the smaller Village Center tract will become a one-
way southbound. [The existing Parkview will become a private street with two-way access to
the school only. There will not be access to Bobcat Blvd. from this street once it becomes a
private street.] Parkview will be realigned to the east side of the smaller Village Center tract
Planning and Zoning Commission 16 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
and intersect into Bobcat Blvd. Mr. Keener stated that he envisioned the west side of the
smaller tract as being the rear of the site.
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that he does not have a problem with a drive through
restaurant on the smaller tract of land. He stated that he is in agreement with the EDC Board
members who spoke during the public hearing that there is a need to generate revenue for our
community. He stated that there is very little commercial property left in the Town and it must
be maximized. He stated that he wouldn’t have a problem with limiting any facility or business
that didn’t generate some type of revenue for the Town. He asked Mr. Keener if a sit-down
restaurant could go in the southeast corner of the larger tract. Mr. Keener responded that he
doesn’t feel that is a viable restaurant location.
Commissioner Reed stated that he agrees with trying to get all the revenue we can, but at the
same time he agrees with Mr. Keener that there is a marketability problem. He wonders if the
Town would be better off with something in there that would pay some property taxes, even if
they don’t pay sales taxes, than to have a vacant lot. He feels some things other than sales
tax producing businesses should be considered.
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that until the economy kicks back in there will be a
marketability problem out there. Commissioner Reed stated that even when the economy
improves there will be a marketability problem there. Vice Chairman Stephens disagreed. The
Town is expanding to add 1500 households in The Highlands over the next 15 years so
whatever is put in out there could survive and make money.
Commissioner Ashby stated that as far as the issue with sit-down restaurants with alcohol
sales being too close property line to property line, perhaps state law allows some exceptions.
Chairman Hill stated that a special use permit (SUP) would be required for any restaurant
wishing to sell alcohol and at that time measurements would be made to see if the sales are
outside the 300-ft. range. If they are not outside the 300-ft. requirement, at that time research
could be done to determine whether or not an exception could be requested.
Commissioner Ashby asked for a definition of “not restricted to drop off only” for item “i”, dry
cleaning. Vice Chairman Stephens stated that they would clean clothes on-site. Mr. Keener
explained that it is a bit of a dated restriction. Many dry cleaners today clean clothes on site
whereas 10 to 15 years ago the technology wasn’t available to clean in the smaller spaces
they can use now. Items are processed in-house versus shipping them out. Ms. Huggins
stated that staff had discussed this item with the Fire Chief, who stated that chemicals are
different today and whereas it used to be that if you were cleaning clothes on site an SUP was
required because of the chemicals that were used and discarded, that is no longer the case.
Commissioner Ashby asked that for #27 on page 2, “radio recording & television broadcasting
offices and studios”, add: “without exterior antennas and/or satellites”. Mr. Keener stated that
he didn’t have a problem with that.
Commissioner Ashby stated that he may sway on item “q” religious institutions.
Planning and Zoning Commission 17 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Commissioner Davidson stated that it appears that there really isn’t much in disagreement.
The only heartburn he sees is with religious institutions and maybe four acres instead of two
acres to build a retirement facility. The rest seems to be non-issues. He stated that he is
curious as to what on the list is No. 1 and No. 2? Mr. Keener responded that drive-through
restaurants were desired. Commissioner Davidson stated that everyone seems to be in
agreement regarding drive through restaurants. Mr. Keener stated that they want the blue
items on the list to clarify “professional and administrative offices” as well as “specialty shops”
and that religious institutions are a must. They cannot have religious institutions struck [from
the list of permitted uses] or they will have to pull the case and just live without drive throughs.
He is not in a position to take religious institutions off the table. He stated that they are not
asking for anything that is not already there. He stated that he is willing to restrict religious
institutions to the east side of the drainage ditch which he feels is the inferior part of the site
anyway. They are willing to work on a design charrette with staff for the remainder of the site
to the west of the drainage ditch.
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that a religious institution is a church, and as someone who
was in church planning for a number years, he stated that he knows that would require a
minimum of 5-acres. Mr. Keener responded, “you could do less”. Vice Chairman Stephens
stated, “you could do less, but I don’t know of a main line denomination that is growing that
would invest that kind of money in that piece of property out there for anything less than 5-
acres and most of them want 22, 25, even 50 acres today.” Mr. Keener stated that he is willing
to limit “religious institutions” to the west side of the drainage ditch, which is 7-acres.
Kyle Salzman pointed out the location of the drainage ditch in relation to Village Center [see
diagram highlighted below; orange-drainage ditch; yellow-Village Center].
Planning and Zoning Commission 18 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Commissioner Ashby clarified that 7-acres would be for a church and six acres would be left
on the west side of the drainage ditch for other businesses, along with 3.3 acres on the smaller
tract on the other side of the park.
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that as a former church planner he believes this Town does
not have enough churches, but as a small town that needs to generate revenue he could live
with eliminating that use. He hears Mr. Keener saying that if churches are disallowed he is
going to fold his folder and walk. Mr. Keener responded that he has to. Mr. Keener stated that
a church can buy today. He stated that an Alzheimer’s age-restricted facility can buy today.
Some of the other uses, with the way things are going in today’s market it might be 10-years
before there is any interest.
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that the northeast corner of the 13.3 acres is where a church
would want to be. Commissioner Reed stated that with six or seven acres gone a lot of tax
paying business will be eliminated.
Mr. Keener stated that he is not asking to add churches to the list of already approved uses.
He stated that they are trying to add stuff to help make the tract more marketable. If churches
weren’t on the approved list, then there would be a different discussion. He stated that he is
offering to restrict the rest of the tract, which right now they could put ten churches on there;
“Not that that’s what anyone wants to do. Churches aren’t known for paying a high price for
land.”
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that 7-acres represent 40+ percent of the total 16.6 acres.
Chairman Hill stated that it is 50+ percent of the eastern 13.3-acre tract. He stated that a
church at that location would knock out the possibility of a restaurant with alcohol sales.
Ms. Huggins stated that staff did not believe a sit down restaurant with alcohol sales would be
attracted to that area, however, smaller restaurants with drive-thru capability could be a
possibility. She stated that if the eastern portion of the larger tract is built out as a church, staff
believes it will create quite a bit of dis-interest to the entire tract. Staff believes that a church
on 7-acres of the larger tract will decrease the value of the rest. Mr. Keener disagreed. He
stated that the drainage easement splits the tract anyway. Commissioner Ashby stated that he
thought the drainage easement is a box culvert that will be buried. Mr. Keener stated that it is,
“at our expense we’re putting about a million bucks into that”. Commissioner Ashby stated that
it will be buried with pavement over it. Mr. Keener said, “you can’t build on it”. Vice Chairman
Stephens stated that it can be parking.
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that he is torn – which is going to do the community more
good – dollars or a place of faith? Mr. Keener stated that’s not really the question because a
church is already an approved use. Vice Chairman Stephens stated that the Commission is
looking at disapproving it. Mr. Keener stated that he will pull the application if that is what it
comes down to. They’ll withdraw and leave it the way it is.
Dave Glaser, EDC Board Member in the audience, requested to speak and was granted
permission to speak by Chairman Hill. Mr. Glaser stated that the applicant would like 7-acres,
Planning and Zoning Commission 19 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
which really wipes it out as far as what EDC4B is trying to accomplish. Mr. Glaser stated that
the applicant also wants 4-acres for a retirement/Alzheimer facility and 2 other acres for
professional office, which is the entire 13-acre large tract, which is non-productive as far as
sales tax. From an economic standpoint for a Town that is landlocked and is hurting
financially, this plan is terrible.
Discussion continued for approximately 15 additional minutes between Commissioners, staff
and the applicant regarding the permitted uses for Village Center.
Bob Radder, from the audience, asked Chairman Hill for permission to speak. Mr. Radder
stated that about four years ago the Mayor had a vision of development in that area and
brought that vision to the Town Council. Mr. Radder suggested revisiting that presentation to
see if it matched what is desired today. Chairman Hill stated that the platting of the high
school changed that vision and it might not apply today. Vice Chairman Stephens thought that
plan was discussed during Horton’s initial presentation by a designer from Austin. At the time,
that area was supposed to be a second location for a fire department. All of that went away
when Horton’s initial plan was rejected.
Mr. Radder asked what level of nursing care is planned for a facility in that area. Mr. Keener
responded that he doesn’t have a contract but he has been told it’s an Alzheimer’s assisted
living 16-bed facility. Mr. Radder responded that it would be acute care then.
Chairman Hill asked to bring the discussion to a conclusion.
Commissioner Davidson concluded that the applicant is stating that he will withhold his initial
request to change the allowed uses in order to have a church. By withdrawing his request, he
loses the ability to have restaurants with drive-throughs. His option of taking it off the table
simply says he’s going to have a church, with the other uses still in play, other than a drive-
through restaurant. It comes down to a church versus a drive-through restaurant. That’s where
we are at.
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that he would like to see both – a church and a drive-through.
He stated that staff and the applicant should negotiate something that is a trade-off if the
church is allowed.
Commissioner Ashby made a motion to table the item and have staff and the applicant
continue discussions to come to a good, viable conclusion for everybody. Vice Chairman
Stephens seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 5-0.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Hill adjourned the meeting at 8:07 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Commission 20 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Trophy Club Entities 100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262
File Number: 09-144-T
File ID: Type: Status: 09-144-T Agenda Item Regular Session
1Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning
Commission
04/27/2009File Created:
Final Action: *File Name:
Title: Public Hearing regarding a proposed Zoning Change from "R-15" Single Family
Residential to "R-12" Single Family Residential for an approximate 2.3 acres located where
Ridge View Lane dead ends into vacant land just north of the intersection of Skyline Drive
and Ridge View Lane, Requested by Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., on behalf of BDMR
Development, LLC. (ZCA-09-015)
Notes:
Sponsors: Enactment Date:
Zoning Change Staff Report.pdf ,Application.pdf
,Chapter 13, Article IV, Section 4.01 R-15 District
Regs.pdf ,Chapter 13, Article IV, Section 4.01 R-12
District Regs.pdf ,Public Hearing Notice -
Newspaper.pdf ,Public Hearing Notice - Property
Owner Notification.pdf ,Property Owners Within 200
ft.pdf ,Email - Property Owner Opposition.pdf
Attachments: Enactment Number:
Hearing Date: Contact:
Effective Date: *Entered by: chuggins@trophyclub.org
History of Legislative File
Action: Result: Return
Date:
Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver-
sion:
1 05/07/2009Planning & Zoning
Commission
1 05/07/2009Planning & Zoning
Commission
Text of Legislative File 09-144-T
Public Hearing regarding a proposed Zoning Change from "R-15" Single Family Residential to "R-12" Single
Family Residential for an approximate 2.3 acres located where Ridge View Lane dead ends into vacant land
just north of the intersection of Skyline Drive and Ridge View Lane, Requested by Jacobs Engineering Group,
Inc., on behalf of BDMR Development, LLC. (ZCA-09-015)
Planning and Zoning Commission 21 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
May 7, 2009
SUBJECT: Public Hearing regarding a proposed Zoning Change from "R-
15" Single Family Residential to "R-12" Single Family
Residential for an approximate 2.3 acres located where Ridge
View Lane dead ends into vacant land just north of the
intersection of Skyline Drive and Ridge View Lane, Requested
by Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., on behalf of BDMR
Development, LLC. (ZCA-09-015)
OWNER: BDMR Development, LLC
1221 I-35 East, Suite 200
Carrollton, TX 75006
APPLICANT: Jaison Stephen, P.E.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.
7950 Elmbrook Drive
Dallas, TX 75247
REQUESTED ACTION: Zoning Change from “R-15” Single Family Residential to “R-
12” Single Family Residential for property located in the future “Canterbury Hills”
Subdivision, north and west of Eagles Ridge Phase 1 Subdivision.
PURPOSE: To rezone this property in anticipation of presenting a final plat to the
Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council in approximately one month’s time
to develop single family homes on this land.
SIZE: Approximately 2.3 acres.
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant Land.
Planning and Zoning Commission 22 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
LOCATION: Just north of the intersection of Skyline Drive and Ridge
View Lane where Ridge View Lane dead ends into vacant land.
This zoning exhibit is attached in an 18” x 24” size.
HISTORY: On December 3, 2007, the Town Council approved a preliminary plat for
Canterbury Hills Subdivision (as well as Waters Edge at Hogan’s Glen Subdivision) with
the following stipulation:
“The applicant must realign Lots 9-10, Block E and Lot
53, Block A so that dual zoning (R-12 and R-15) does not
occur on these lots. The zoning and lot alignment must
match or the applicant must rezone prior to final plat
approval.”
In approximately a month, the applicant will be bringing forward a final plat of this area
and is therefore requesting a rezoning as required by the Town Council preliminary plat
approval granted in December 2007. The applicant is asking for R-12 Single Family
Residential zoning to match the zoning of adjacent subdivisions. The applicant is
requesting rezoning rather than realignment as realignment would require major
revision of the preliminary plat whereas rezoning will not require changes to the
approved preliminary plat.
Planning and Zoning Commission 23 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
North: Corps of Engineer property
East: Flowage Easement (1.9169 acres) and
R-12 Single Family Residential, Eagles Ridge Phase II
South: R-12 Single Family Residential, Eagles Ridge Phase I
West: R-12 Future Subdivision that will be known as “Canterbury Hills”
Comparison of Applicant's Property
to Existing Adjacent Subdivisions
Canterbury Hills Eagles Ridge Ph I Eagles Ridge Ph II
32 Lots 61 Lots 25 Lots
# of Lots Sq. Ft. # of Lots Sq. Ft. # of Lots Sq. Ft.
14 12,000-12,999 29 12,000-12,999 12 12,000-12,999
1 13,000-13,999 17 13,000-13,999 4 13,000-13,999
3 14,000-14,999 7 14,000-14,999 4 14,000-14,999
5 15,000-15,999 3 15,000-15,999 1 15,000-15,999
1 16,000-16,999 0 16,000-16,999 0 16,000-16,999
8 17,000-23,200 6 17,000-25,000 4 17,000-25,000
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN: The Comprehensive Land Use Plan calls for
low density residential use for this property. Low density land use is intended to provide
lot sizes in the vicinity of or exceeding twelve thousand (12,000) square feet with a
comparable density of three (3) units per acre.
The existing zoning for this property is “R-15”, which is considered Estate Residential
land use at a density of two (2) units per acre.
The applicant intends to bring forward a plat for 13.617 acres consisting of 32
residential lots which is a density of 2.35 units per acre.
The applicant’s request to rezone to “R-12” is compatible with the Comprehensive Land
Use Plan.
PUBLIC HEARING: As required by ordinance, a notice of public hearing was published
in the local newspaper and property owners within 200-ft. of this acreage were notified
of this request. Copies of the notices are attached.
There are 19 property owners within 200-ft. of this request and as of April 30, 2009, one
resident contacted staff by email. This resident’s email in opposition to this request is
attached.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: During Staff’s review of this zoning change request, no
adverse conditions arose when considering a change from R-15 to R-12 zoning.
Planning and Zoning Commission 24 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Density changes from 2 units per acre to 3 units per acre which matches the
surrounding residential subdivisions. Therefore, staff suggests the Planning & Zoning
Commission give a recommendation of approval to the Town Council for this zoning
change request.
Attachments:
1) Application
2) R-15 Single Family District Regulations
3) R-12 Single Family District Regulations
4) Public Hearing Notice – Newspaper
5) Public Hearing Notice – Property Owner Notification (19)
6) Email in Opposition from One Resident
7) 18”x24” Zoning Exhibit
Planning and Zoning Commission 25 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
an
d
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
26
of
45
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Da
t
e
:
Ma
y
7,
20
0
9
Chapter 13 - Zoning
Article IV
District Regulations
Section 4.01 R-15 Single Family District Regulations
A. Purpose: The purpose of the R-15 Single Family District is to allow single family detached dwellings
on lots of not less than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet, together with the allowed incidental
and accessory uses, in order to promote low population densities within integral neighborhood units.
B. Application: Lots in a subdivision legally approved and properly recorded in the Denton County Plat
Record prior to the effective date of this ordinance which do not meet the minimum lot sizes and
area requirements set forth in this Section shall not be considered to be in violation of said
requirements and, for purposes of this Section, shall be deemed to conform to the requirements set
forth in this Section.
C. Uses Generally: In an R-15 Single Family District no land shall be used and no building or structure
shall be installed, erected for or converted to any use other than as set forth in Section 3.03, Use
Tables, and in accordance with the following:
1. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses shall be permitted within the R-15 single Family District in
accordance with the regulations provided in Section 5.03, Accessory Structures.
2. Conditional Uses: Conditional uses may be permitted within the R-15 Single Family District in
accordance with the regulations provided in Section 6.01, Conditional Use Permit.
3. Limitation of Uses:
a. Garage sales are prohibited.
b. Any use not expressly permitted or allowed by permit herein is prohibited.
D. Plan Requirements: No application for a building permit for the construction of a building or structure
shall be approved unless:
1. A plat, meeting all requirements of the Town of Trophy Club, has been approved by the Town
Council and recorded in the official records of the County in which the property is located;
2. Site Plan: A Site Plan for all non-residential uses has been approved meeting the conditions
as provided in Section 5.09, Site Plan Requirements.
E. Height Regulations: Except as provided by Section 5.04, Height Limits, no building shall exceed
forty feet (40') or two and one-half (2-1/2) stories in height.
F. Area Regulations: The following minimum standards shall be required measured from property lines:
Planning and Zoning Commission 27 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Chapter 13 - Zoning
AREA DESCRIPTION AREA REGULATIONS
1. Lot Size Lots for any permitted use shall have a minimum area of
fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet.
2. Minimum Open Space All areas not devoted to buildings, walkways, structures or off-
street parking area shall be devoted to grass, trees, gardens,
shrubs or other suitable landscape material. In addition, all
developments shall reserve open space in accordance with the
Town Park Land Dedication Ordinance, and other applicable
ordinances.
3. Maximum Building Coverage The combined area covered by all main and accessory
buildings and structures shall not exceed thirty-five percent
(35%) of the total lot area. Swimming pools and spas shall not
be included in determining maximum building coverage.
4. Minimum Floor Area The minimum square footage of a dwelling unit, exclusive of
garages, breezeways and porches, shall be 2,500 square feet.
Residences with more than one (1) story shall have a
minimum first floor area of 2,000 square feet. (including
garage area)
5. Depth of Front Yard** 30 feet minimum
6. Depth of Rear Yard** 25 feet minimum
(No rear yard shall face any street, provided, however, that this
requirement shall not apply where the rear yard of a lot abuts a
street which is contiguous to the perimeter of the Town.)
7.
Width of Side Yard** A minimum of twelve and one-half (12.5) feet; provided, that
the distance between buildings and structures on contiguous
lots remains a minimum of 25 feet, the width of the side yard
on one side may be reduced to not less than 7.5 feet.
8. Width of Side Yard Adjacent to
Side Street **
20 feet minimum
9. Width of Lot 90 feet minimum
(measured at front building line)
10. Width of Lot Adjacent to Side
Street
110 feet minimum
(measured at front building line)
11. Depth of Lot 120 feet minimum
(measured at front property lines)
Depth of Lot, Cul-De-Sac, or
Corner Lot
100 feet minimum
**All required yards shall comply with Section 5.05, Required Yards.
G. Buffered Area Regulations: Whenever an R-15 Single Family development is located adjacent to an
existing HUD Code Manufactured Home and Industrialized Housing district, multi-family development
Planning and Zoning Commission 28 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Chapter 13 - Zoning
or a non-residential district, without any division such as a dedicated public street, park or permanent
open space, all principal buildings or structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet
from the adjoining property line. The setback area shall contain landscape improvements, fencing,
berms or trees to adequately buffer adjoining uses.
H. Off-Street Parking: Provisions for the parking of automobiles on paved surfaces shall be allowed as
an accessory use provided that such shall not be located on a required front yard, with the exception
being that a circular drive may be located in the front yard. Parking within a circular drive shall be
temporary and may not include permanent parking of recreational vehicles, other vehicles, or
vehicles in a state of major disrepair. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the
provisions of Section 7.04, Off-Street Parking Requirements, and all other applicable ordinances of
the Town. Every residence shall have a garage and shall have a minimum interior measurement of
21 feet by 22 feet.
I. Garages: Attached garages shall not face any public dedicated right-of-way or golf course.
Detached garages shall comply with Section 5.03, Accessory Structures and Uses.
J. Off-Street Loading: No off-street loading is required in the R-15 District for residential uses. Off-
street loading for conditional uses may be required as determined by the Planning and Zoning
Commission and Town Council.
K. Masonry Requirements: All principal and accessory buildings and structures shall be of exterior fire
resistant construction having at least eighty (80) percent of the total exterior walls, excluding doors,
windows and porches, constructed of brick, stone, or stucco. All exterior chimneys surfaces shall
also be of brick, stone, or stucco. Other materials of equal or similar characteristics may be allowed
upon approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
(Ord No. 98-29, § XIV, 12-1-98, Repealed by Ord. No. 2000-06 P&Z § XIV, 3-21-00)
Planning and Zoning Commission 29 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Chapter 13 - Zoning
Section 4.02 R-12 Single Family District Regulations
A. Purpose: The purpose of the R-12 Single Family District is to allow single family detached dwellings
on lots of not less than twelve thousand (12,000) square feet, together with the allowed incidental
and accessory uses, in order to promote low population densities within integral neighborhood units.
B. Application: Lots in a subdivision legally approved and properly recorded in the Denton County Plat
Record prior to the effective date of this ordinance which do not meet the minimum lot sizes and area
requirements set forth in this Section shall not be considered to be in violation of said requirements
and, for purposes of this Section, shall be deemed to conform to the requirements set forth in this
Section.
C. Uses Generally: In an R-12 Single Family District no land shall be used and no building or structure
shall be used for or converted to any use other than as set forth in Section 3.03, Use Tables, and in
accordance with the following:
1. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses shall be permitted within the R-12 Single Family District in
accordance with the regulations provided in Section 5.03, Accessory Structures.
2. Conditional Uses: Conditional uses may be permitted within the R-12 Single Family District in
accordance with the regulations provided in Section 6.01, Conditional Use Permit.
3. Limitation of Uses:
a. Garage sales are prohibited.
b. Any use not expressly permitted or allowed by permit herein is prohibited.
D. Plan Requirements: No application for a building permit for the construction of a building or structure
shall be approved unless:
1. A plat, meeting all requirements of the Town of Trophy Club, has been approved by the Town
Council and recorded in the official records of the County in which the property is located;
2. Site Plan: A Site Plan for all non-residential uses has been approved meeting the conditions
as provided in Section 5.09, Site Plan Requirements.
E. Height Regulations: Except as provided by Section 5.04, Height Limits, no building shall exceed forty
(40') feet or two and one-half (2-1/2) stories in height.
F. Area Regulations: The following minimum standards shall be required measured from property lines:
AREA DESCRIPTION AREA REGULATIONS
1. Lot Size Lots for any permitted use shall have a minimum area of
twelve thousand (12,000) square feet.
2. Minimum Open Space All areas not devoted to buildings, walkways, structures or off-
street parking area shall be devoted to grass, trees, gardens,
shrubs or other suitable landscape material. In addition, all
developments shall reserve open space in accordance with the
Planning and Zoning Commission 30 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Chapter 13 - Zoning
Town Park Land Dedication Ordinance, and other applicable
ordinances of the Town.
3. Maximum Building Coverage The combined area covered by all main and accessory
buildings and structures shall not exceed thirty-five (35)
percent of the total lot area. Swimming pools and spas shall
not be included in determining maximum building coverage.
4. Minimum Floor Area The minimum square footage of a dwelling unit, exclusive of
garages, breezeways and porches, shall be in accordance with
the following:
Type of Structure Golf Course Lots All Other Lots
One story residence 2,500 2,000
One and one-half story
or two story residence
2,500* 2,000*
Residence on corner lot 2,500* 2,500*
* Those residences with more than one (1) story shall have a minimum first floor
area of 2,000 square feet. (including garage area)
5. Depth Of Front Yard, ** 25 feet minimum
6. Depth Of Rear Yard, ** 25 feet minimum (No rear yard shall face any street; provided,
however, that this requirement shall not apply where the rear
yard of a lot abuts a street which is contiguous to the perimeter
of the Town.
7. Width Of Side Yard ** A minimum of ten (10) feet; provided that the distance between
buildings and structures on contiguous lots remains a
minimum of 20 feet, the width of the side yard on one side may
be reduced to not less than 5 feet.
8. Width of Side Yard Adjacent
to Side Street **
20 feet minimum
9. Width of Lot 90 feet minimum (measured at front building line)
10. Width of Lot Adjacent to Side
Street
110 feet minimum (measured at front building line)
11. Depth of Lot 110 feet minimum (measured from front property line)
12. Depth of Lot, Cul-De-Sac or
Corner Lot
100 feet minimum
**All required yards shall comply with Section 5.05, Required Yards.
G. Buffered Area Regulations: Whenever an R-12 Single Family development is located adjacent to an
existing HUD Code Manufactured Home and Industrialized Housing district, multi-family development
or a non-residential district, without any division such as a dedicated public street, park or permanent
open space, all principal buildings or structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet
from the adjoining property line. The setback area shall contain landscape improvements, fencing,
Planning and Zoning Commission 31 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Chapter 13 - Zoning
berms or trees to adequately buffer adjoining uses.
H. Off-Street Parking: Provisions for the parking of automobiles on paved surfaces shall be allowed as
an accessory use provided that such shall not be located on a required front yard, with the exception
being that a circular drive may be located in the front yard. Parking within a circular drive shall be
temporary and may not include permanent parking of recreational vehicles, other vehicles, or
vehicles in a state of major disrepair. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the
provisions of Section 7.04, Off-Street Parking Requirements, and all other applicable ordinances of
the Town. Every residence shall have a garage which shall have a minimum interior measurement of
21 feet by 22 feet.
I. Garages: Attached garages shall not face any public dedicated right-of-way or golf course.
Detached garages shall comply with Section 5.03, Accessory Structures and Uses.
J. Off-Street Loading: No off-street loading is required in the R-12 Single Family District for residential
uses. Off-street loading for conditional uses may be required as determined by the Planning and
Zoning Commission and Town Council.
K. Masonry Requirements: All principal and accessory buildings and structures shall be of exterior fire
resistant construction having at least eighty (80) percent of the total exterior walls, excluding doors,
windows and porches, constructed of brick, stone, or stucco. All exterior chimneys surfaces shall
also be of brick, stone, or stucco. Other materials of equal or similar characteristics may be allowed
upon approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
(Ord No. 98-29, § XV, 12-1-98, Repealed by Ord. No. 2000-06 P&Z § XV, 3-21-00)
Planning and Zoning Commission 32 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Town of Trophy Club
Department of Planning & Zoning
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, Texas 76262
TO: Alliance Regional Newspapers /
Classifieds Dept.
DATE: April 20, 2009
FROM: Carolyn Huggins PAGES: 1
RUN DATE: 1 Time/ April 22, 2009 SUBJECT: Rezoning Request
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, May 7, 2009
TOWN COUNCIL
Monday, May 18, 2009
A Public Hearing will be held by the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town
of Trophy Club in the Council Chambers, 100 Municipal Drive, at 7:00 p.m.,
Thursday, May 7, 2009, to consider a request for zone change for an approximate
2.3 acres of land out of the M. Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 832, Town of Trophy
Club, Denton County, Texas, from its current zoning of “R-15” Single Family
Residential to “R-12” Single Family Residential; amending Ordinance No. 2000-06
P&Z of the Town, the same being the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and
Amending the Official Zoning Map of the Town by changing the zoning, providing
that such tract of land shall be used in accordance with the requirements of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable ordinances of the
Town. (ZCA-09-015)
The Town Council will hear the above item on May 18, 2009, in the Boardroom of
the Municipal Utility District Building, 100 Municipal Drive at 7:00 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Commission 33 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
an
d
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
34
of
45
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Da
t
e
:
Ma
y
7,
20
0
9
BDMR Development LLC
1221 N. I-35E, Suite 200
Carrollton, TX 75006-3806
Randy & Kimberly Sudderth
223 Ridge View Lane
Trophy Club, TX 76262
George Roberson
306 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Lori Powers Peeraer
307 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Steven & Becky Brewster
308 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Re: 309 Skyline Dr.
Virginia Graf
P.O. Box 1331
Morgan City, LA 70381-1331
Steve Trotter
310 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Elizabeth Dickson
311 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
James McFelea
312 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Paul & Terri Van Gorp
400 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Keith & Patricia Ann Hightower
410 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Paul Harris
402 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Ronald & Diane West
403 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
John Maher
404 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Gary Dick & Lezlie English
405 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Lennart & Lisa Kullberg
406 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Andrew Davidson
& Amanda Blomstron
407 Skyline Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Re: 510, 512, 517 Clear Vista Dr.
Starwood Custom Homes
500 S. Nolen Dr., Suite 100
Southlake, TX 76092-9170
Richard & Patricia Goodwin
519 Clear Vista Dr.
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Larry & Marie Lentzner
303 Ridge View Lane
Trophy Club, TX 76262
Planning and Zoning Commission 35 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
an
d
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
36
of
45
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Da
t
e
:
Ma
y
7,
20
0
9
Trophy Club Entities 100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262
File Number: 09-147-T
File ID: Type: Status: 09-147-T Agenda Item Regular Session
1Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning
Commission
04/30/2009File Created:
Final Action: *File Name:
Title: Discussion and appropriate action regarding a Zoning Change Request from "R-15" Single
Family Residential to "R-12" Single Family Residential for an approximate 2.3 acres
located where Ridge View Lane dead ends into vacant land just north of the intersection of
Skyline Drive and Ridge View Lane, Requested by Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., on
behalf of BDMR Development, LLC. (ZCA-09-015)
Notes:
Sponsors: Enactment Date:
Attachments: Enactment Number:
Hearing Date: Contact:
Effective Date: *Entered by: chuggins@trophyclub.org
History of Legislative File
Action: Result: Return
Date:
Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver-
sion:
1 05/07/2009Planning & Zoning
Commission
Text of Legislative File 09-147-T
Discussion and appropriate action regarding a Zoning Change Request from "R-15" Single Family Residential
to "R-12" Single Family Residential for an approximate 2.3 acres located where Ridge View Lane dead ends
into vacant land just north of the intersection of Skyline Drive and Ridge View Lane, Requested by Jacobs
Engineering Group, Inc., on behalf of BDMR Development, LLC. (ZCA-09-015)
Planning and Zoning Commission 37 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Trophy Club Entities 100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262
File Number: 09-148-T
File ID: Type: Status: 09-148-T Agenda Item Regular Session
1Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning
Commission
04/30/2009File Created:
Final Action: *File Name:
Title: Public Hearing regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club Code of Ordinances,
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Supplementary District Regulations, including without
limitation, amending and adopting new regulations affecting accessory structures, and
affecting locations of flag poles. (ADM-09-002)
Notes:
Sponsors: Enactment Date:
ADM-09-002 Staff Report - Flagpole Locations.pdf
,Public Hearing Newspaper Notice.pdf
Attachments: Enactment Number:
Hearing Date: Contact:
Effective Date: *Entered by: chuggins@trophyclub.org
History of Legislative File
Action: Result: Return
Date:
Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver-
sion:
1 05/07/2009Planning & Zoning
Commission
Text of Legislative File 09-148-T
Public Hearing regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club Code of Ordinances, Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance, Supplementary District Regulations, including without limitation, amending and adopting new
regulations affecting accessory structures, and affecting locations of flag poles. (ADM-09-002)
Planning and Zoning Commission 38 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
May 7, 2009
SUBJECT: Public Hearing regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club
Code of Ordinances, Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance,
Supplementary District Regulations, including without
limitation, amending and adopting new regulations affecting
accessory structures, and affecting locations of flag poles.
(ADM-09-002)
PURPOSE: To clarify the allowed locations of flagpoles.
PUBLIC HEARING: A proposed change to the text of a zoning ordinance that does not
affect the land use of a specific property requires notice of public hearing of the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the Town Council by publication in a newspaper
of general circulation in the Town of Trophy Club without the necessity of notifying
property owners by mail. Notice of Public Hearing was placed in the local newspaper
on April 22, 2009, which complies with the ordinance requirements for notification of
public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached.
STAFF COMMENTS: By current ordinance, flagpoles are allowed on residentially
zoned lots provided the poles are less than 20-ft. in height. Currently, the location is
defined by the following:
“There shall be no accessory structures located in any front yard or side
yards, with the exception of a flag pole and signs, as defined by this
article.” [emphasis added]
The article defines the location of a permitted accessory use in a
residentially zoned district as:
i. behind the front building setback; and
ii. a minimum of twenty feet (20’) from any street right-of-way; and
iii. a minimum of six feet (6’) from rear and side lot lines.
Typically, most people wish to place flagpoles in their front yards. As worded, the
current ordinance in most instances prohibits flagpoles in the front yard by requiring
accessory uses to be behind the front building setback and a minimum of twenty feet
(20’) from any street right-of-way.
Planning and Zoning Commission 39 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Staff asks that the Planning & Zoning Commission considering changing the location of
flagpoles as follows:
Chapter 13 – Zoning
Article V – Supplementary Design Standards
Section 5.03
Section 5.03 Accessory Structures and Uses
An accessory structure shall comply in all respects with the requirements of this ordinance applicable to
the main structure, and in accordance with the following:
A. All residentially zoned districts shall be subject to the following regulations.
1. Permitted Accessory Structures
a. Accessory structures less than one hundred twenty (120) square feet of floor area shall
not require a building permit.
b. The following structures and uses shall be permitted as accessory to the principal
structure provided that none shall be a source of income to the owner or user of the
principal single-family dwelling,
i. Detached private garage in connection with any use, provided that no such
garage shall face a golf course; and provided that any detached garage which
faces a street be located a minimum of forty-five feet (45’) from the front property
line; and provided, however, that the requirement that no such garage face any
street shall not apply where the rear yard of a lot abuts a street which is
contiguous to the perimeter of the Town, unless otherwise provided by ordinance.
ii. Cabana, pavilion, gazebo
iii. Storage/utility buildings (masonry or wood)
iv. Greenhouse (as hobby, not business)
v. Home workshop
vi.
Flag Poles less than twenty feet (20’) in height; flagpoles are allowed in the
front yard but cannot be in Town right-of-way or in any identified
easements; and must be a minimum of six feet (6’) from rear and side lot
lines.
vii. Tennis court
viii. Basketball court
ix.
All other uses and structures which are customarily accessory, and clearly
incidental to the structures, and which are allowed within the applicable Zoning
District.
Planning and Zoning Commission 40 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
c. In all residentially zoned districts, when any of the foregoing permitted residential
accessory uses are detached from the principal single-family dwelling, such accessory
uses shall be located, except flagpoles as defined in item “vi” above:
i. Behind the front building setback; and
ii. A minimum of twenty feet (20’) from any street right of way; and
iii. A minimum of six feet (6’) from rear and side lot lines.
d. An accessory use shall not be located within any identified easement. In addition,
accessory structures permitted in these districts shall not exceed one story in height,
except for storage/utility structures which shall not exceed 6 feet in height.
B. Non-Residential Accessory Structures: All non-residentially zoned districts shall be subject to the
following regulations. The following shall be permitted as accessory uses, provided that such use
shall be located not less than twenty feet (20’) from any street right-of-way:
1. Permitted Accessory Structures and Uses in CG-Commercial District and in NS Neighborhood
Service District: The following uses shall be permitted as accessory uses:
a. Screened garbage storage on a concrete pad and no nearer than fifty feet (50’) to a
residentially zoned district and not located between the front of the building and any
street right-of-way.
b. Temporary uses incidental to the primary use, provided the same is properly screened
and provided they conform to the standards set forth in Section 5.01, Temporary Uses.
2. Permitted Accessory Structures and Uses in CR-Commercial District: The following structures
and uses shall be permitted as accessory structures and uses.
a. Cabana, pavilion, gazebo or roofed area
b. All other uses and structures which are customarily accessory, and clearly incidental to
the structures, and which are allowed within the applicable Zoning District.
3. Permitted Accessory Uses in GU-Governmental Use District and in PO- Professional Office
District: The following uses shall be permitted as accessory, provided that none shall be a
source of income to the owner or user of the principal use:
a. All other uses and structures which are customarily accessory, and clearly incidental to
the structures, and which are allowed within the applicable Zoning District.
C. Prohibited Structures: The following structures shall be prohibited:
1. Treehouses
2. Metal, vinyl or similar material structures unless otherwise provided herein.
3. Temporary structures on skids
Planning and Zoning Commission 41 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
D. Location: There shall be no accessory structures located in any front yard or side yards, with the
exception of a flag pole and signs, as defined by this article in item “vi” above. Accessory
structures erected ten (10) feet or closer to the principle building shall be considered to be attached
and part of the primary structure for calculating total square feet under roof and shall comply with the
setback lines established for that zoning district. If the total square feet under roof (including said
accessory structures) exceed 7500 sq/ft then the entire accessory structure must be protected with a
sprinkler system. In a case where more than one accessory structure is on the same lot, each
structure shall have a minimum ten (10) foot separation between them. A swimming pool is permitted
to be located closer than ten (10) feet to the principle building. If the waters edge of a swimming pool,
or any accessory structure that is excavated for foundation footing, is located six (6) feet or closer to
the primary dwelling, an engineer’s letter, stamped by all applicable engineers, stating the excavation
will not in any way harm the structural integrity of the primary dwelling, will be required at the time of
plan submittal. Notwithstanding the foregoing, accessory structures are only allowed if they comply
with the zoning regulations in the district in which they are located.
E. Garage Requirements:
1. A detached garage, used to meet the minimum off street parking requirement, shall be
permitted as an accessory use in a residential district and shall be constructed so as to
accommodate the enclosed parking of at least two (2) automobiles.
2. A detached garage, which is provided in addition to the required two (2) car garage, shall be
permitted as an accessory structure in a residential district, except as otherwise specifically
provided.
3. Any detached garage shall setback at least forty-five feet (45’) from the front property line of a
residential lot.
4. Corner lots may have detached garages facing a side street if they set back a minimum of
thirty five feet (35’) from the side street; however, no drive cuts will be allowed from any street
classified as a major or minor collector street.
F. Design Criteria: All accessory structures shall conform to the following design criteria:
1. The exterior surfaces of all accessory structures shall be consistent with the regulations as
specified by the applicable zoning district. However, accessory structures that are normally
constructed in such a manner that masonry exterior surfaces are neither practical nor
appropriate are excluded from the masonry requirements, including but not be limited to gym
sets, playhouses, and greenhouses.
2. Open-air structures, such as gazebos and pavilions, are permitted to be constructed with an
aluminum material so long as that material resembles wood-like construction and such
material has been approved by the Town’s Planning and Zoning Coordinator.
(Ord. No. 2005-09 P&Z § II, 5-2-05, Repealed by Ord. No. 2005-14 P&Z, § II, 6-6-05)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff asks the Planning & Zoning Commission to recommend
approval to the Town Council for changes to Section 5.03 of Chapter 13-Zoning, Article
V-Supplementary District Regulations to clarify permitted locations of flagpoles on
residentially zoned property.
Planning and Zoning Commission 42 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Add to A.1.b.vi.: “...in height; flagpoles are allowed in the front yard but cannot be in Town
right-of-way or in any identified easements; and must be a minimum of six
feet (6’) from rear and side lot lines.
Add to “A.1.c.”: “…, except flagpoles as defined in item “vi” above:
Changes to “D”: “Location: There shall be no accessory structures located in any front yard or side
yards, with the exception of a flag pole and signs, as defined by this article in item “vi” above.”
Attachment
Public Hearing Notice
Planning and Zoning Commission 43 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Town of Trophy Club
Department of Planning & Zoning
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, Texas 76262
TO: Alliance Regional Newspapers /
Classifieds Dept.
DATE: April 20, 2009
FROM: Carolyn Huggins PAGES: 1
RUN DATE: 1 Time: April 22, 2009 SUBJECT: Public Hearing
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, May 7, 2009
TOWN COUNCIL
Monday, May 18, 2008
A Public Hearing will be held by the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of
Trophy Club in the Boardroom of the Municipal Utility District Building, 100 Municipal
Drive, at 7:00 p.m., Thursday, May 7, 2009, to consider changes to the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance, Supplementary District Regulations including
without limitation, amending and adopting new regulations affecting accessory
structures, and affecting location of flag poles.
The Town Council will hear the above item on May 18, 2009, in the Boardroom of the
Municipal Utility District Building, 100 Municipal Drive, at 7:00 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Commission 44 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009
Trophy Club Entities 100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262
File Number: 09-149-T
File ID: Type: Status: 09-149-T Agenda Item Regular Session
1Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning
Commission
04/30/2009File Created:
Final Action: *File Name:
Title: Discussion and appropriate action regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club Code of
Ordinances, Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Supplementary District Regulations,
including without limitation, amending and adopting new regulations affecting accessory
structures, and affecting locations of flag poles. (ADM-09-002)
Notes:
Sponsors: Enactment Date:
Attachments: Enactment Number:
Hearing Date: Contact:
Effective Date: *Entered by: chuggins@trophyclub.org
History of Legislative File
Action: Result: Return
Date:
Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver-
sion:
1 05/07/2009Planning & Zoning
Commission
Text of Legislative File 09-149-T
Discussion and appropriate action regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club Code of Ordinances,
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Supplementary District Regulations, including without limitation, amending
and adopting new regulations affecting accessory structures, and affecting locations of flag poles.
(ADM-09-002)
Planning and Zoning Commission 45 of 45 Meeting Date: May 7, 2009