Agenda Packet P&Z 09/03/2009Planning & Zoning Commission
Trophy Club Entities
Meeting Agenda
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, Texas 76262
Svore Municipal Building Boardroom7:00 PMThursday, September 3, 2009
Call To Order and announce a quorum.
Approval of Minutes
1.09-339-T Review and approve minutes of the August 6, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting.
August 6, 2009.pdfAttachments:
PUBLIC HEARING
2.09-341-T Public Hearing regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club Code of Ordinances,
Chapter 5-General Land Use and Chapter 9-Parks and Recreation to amend and adopt
new regulations affecting signs and other miscellaneous provisions of Chapters 5 and
9. (ADM-09-004)
REGULAR SESSION
3.09-340-T Discussion and Recommendation regarding a request from Jacobs Engineering on
behalf of High Trophy Development, LLC to approve an Amended Plat of 107
Residential Lots and 4 Open Space Lots for a totalof 28.144 acres known as
Neighborhood 1, Phase 1C-2. (AP-09-016)
Staff Report.pdf
Application.pdf
Amended Plat Regulations.pdf
NH 1 PH 1C-2 Page 1.pdf
NH 1 PH 1C-2 Page 2.pdf
Attachments:
Adjourn
*THE BOARD MAY CONVENE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS POSTED
ITEMS AS ALLOWED BY THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, TEXAS LOCAL
GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071.
Notice is hereby given that a quorum of the Town Council may be in attendance at
this meeting.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 1 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
September 3, 2009Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda
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 August 28, 2009 by 5:00 P.M. in
accordance with Chapter 551, Texas Government Code.
Carolyn Huggins
Planning and Zoning Manager
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 Page 2 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262Trophy Club Entities
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:109-339-T Name:
Status:Type:Agenda Item Regular Session
File created:In control:8/24/2009 Planning & Zoning Commission
On agenda:Final action:9/3/2009
Title:Review and approve minutes of the August 6, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Attachments:August 6, 2009.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 3 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
109-339-T Version:File #:
Title
Review and approve minutes of the August 6, 2009 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 4 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 6, 2009
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Trophy Club, Texas met on August 6,
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 Manager
Chris King Building Inspector
Danny Thomas Fire Chief
Tom Rutledge Town Engineer (Teague, Nall & Perkins)
CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM.
Chairman Hill called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. with a quorum present.
1 REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES OF THE MAY 7, 2009 PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION MEETING.
Commissioner Reed motioned to approve the minutes of the May 7, 2009, Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Forest.
Ayes: Hill, Reed, Sheridan, Forest, Ashby
Nays: None
Abstain: Stephens, Davidson (both absent at the May 7 meeting)
Action: 5-0-2, Approved
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 5 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
2 PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CHANGES TO THE TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB
CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 13-ZONING, ARTICLE V-SUPPLEMENTARY
DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 5.03-ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND USES,
INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, AMENDING AND ADOPTING NEW
REGULATONS AFFECTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES (ADM-09-003)
Chairman Hill announced the case and opened the public hearing. There was no one present
wishing to speak and the public hearing was closed.
3 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING CHANGES TO THE TOWN
OF TROPHY CLUB CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 13-ZONING, ARTICLE V-
SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 5.03-ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES AND USES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, AMENDING AND
ADOPTING NEW REGULATONS AFFECTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES (ADM-
09-003)
Chairman Hill asked for a staff report.
Ms. Huggins stated that this item is a request from staff to make a change to Section 5.03 of
the Zoning Ordinance. Section 5.03 deals with Accessory Structures. Some examples are a
detached garage, a greenhouse, a home workshop, and a guest house, and, as currently
written, the ordinance states that accessory structures shall not exceed one story in height,
except for storage and utility structures which cannot exceed 8-ft. in height. Ms. Huggins
stated that the problem that staff is having is determining what is the maximum height of one
story? The ordinance as written doesn’t clarify that. She stated that recently a resident
submitted a building permit application for a one story detached garage that is 25-ft. in height.
It looks like a 2-story structure and easily could be converted to a two-story structure, but the
applicant insists that it will be one story only, and inside the structure there is nothing between
the floor to ceiling, so from the inside it appears to be one story. The look from the outside,
however, and with a 25-ft. height the structure has a two story look. Without a “story” being
defined in the ordinance, the application could not be denied and the structure is currently
being built in the Town of Trophy Club. [picture shown]
Ms. Huggins stated that staff requests a recommendation of approval to the Council for a
change to Section 5.03 that will limit a “story” to 20-ft. in height for accessory structures.
Ms. Huggins stated that the building inspector, Chris King, is available to provide additional
information and answer questions.
She also stated that as required by ordinance a public hearing notice was placed in the local
newspaper.
Chairman Hill stated that he has no additional questions. He asked the Commissioners for
questions.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 6 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that it seems that someone wanting an accessory structure
would want to match the roof pitch of the house. Will a 20-ft. height allow a homeowner to
match his roof pitch?
Chris King, Building Inspector, responded that there are variables, the width of the structure for
instance, that might make it difficult to match a roof pitch. A standard detached garage is 22-ft.
in width and that width would match just about every existing roof pitch depending on the
height of the wall. If they wanted to go with a larger building or a higher height of wall, that
would affect the roof pitch. Vice Chairman Stephens stated that the applicant, then, has to
make a choice. If the roof matches then the wall height has to come down. Mr. King stated
that some zoning districts have a maximum height of 40-ft. and staff is trying to steer clear of
having one story accessory buildings as tall as the maximum height allowed in each zoning
district. Mr. King stated that older neighborhoods in Trophy Club don’t have the steep pitched
roofs that are being built in new neighborhoods. Also, in the newer neighborhoods there isn’t
room for most of these types of accessory structures because the lots are already maxed out
on lot coverage. Mr. King stated that lot coverage also caps accessory structures such as
gazebos. Vice Chairman Stephens stated that if the applicant is willing to be flexible with the
variables [wall height, width of structure, etc.] they could get close to matching their roof
pitches. Mr. King responded, “I think so, yes sir.”
Commissioner Sheridan asked if the structure meets the masonry requirements [referring to
the structure shown as an example to the P&Z members; this structure has received a building
permit and is currently being built in the Town]. Mr. King responded that it does meet the
masonry requirements. The picture doesn’t show the other side elevations which provide the
appropriate masonry to meet building code.
Commissioner Sheridan asked if the IBC has a definition of a story. Mr. King responded that
the definition in the building code states ‘from the floor surface of one area to the roof or ceiling
next above’. Commissioner Sheridan stated that this building is then one story because it is
one height inside. Commissioner Sheridan stated that the owner of this structure has the
capability of putting a second floor in there and getting two eight foot plates. Mr. King
responded affirmatively. Commissioner Sheridan asked if the frame could support an
additional floor. Mr. King responded that the exterior walls must be load bearing to carry the
rafters so it could support a second floor. Commissioner Sheridan commented that this
existing building permit then, although one story when issued, is prepped to be two stories.
Commissioner Sheridan stated that he would like to see maximum flexibility for the
homeowner, but also maximum protection for neighbors.
Commissioner Sheridan asked how a 20-ft. height was determined. Mr. King responded that
he did a search on the standard height of detached garages that have been permitted in the
past in Trophy Club. The average was 14-ft. to 19-ft. Mr. King then played with the wall
heights and roof pitches to see what would be a good cap.
Commissioner Sheridan stated that he is for a 20-ft. height limitation, but is concerned about
the plate height of a wall. He asked the other Commissioners for discussion.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 7 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
Commissioner Ashby stated that Mr. Sheridan wishes to establish a maximum top of plate
height of any exterior wall…[can’t pick up on recorder remainder of Mr. Ashby’s comments].
Commissioner Sheridan stated that he is thinking of accessory structures as other things
besides a detached garage and he doesn’t want to regulate the world but would like to protect
what the neighbor can build overlooking the fence.
Commissioner Forest suggested considering having a relation between the height of the main
structure and the accessory structure. He stated that he would like to give homeowners the
right to build what they want to but by the same token there must be compliance so that the
look is decent for the neighborhood.
Commissioner Reed stated that 20-ft. sounds pretty good. He asked if the 20-ft. restricts what
the wall height will be. Commissioner Sheridan responded, “not necessarily”. Commissioner
Sheridan stated that a 20-ft. height would allow a 12-ft. or even 14-ft. wall height.
Commissioner Reed asked if there is a problem with that. He stated that he understands the
concern with what can be seen over the top of a fence, but he wondered if it matters what is in
between the top of the fence and the maximum height of the structure. Commissioner Reed
stated that he doesn’t think it really matters. “Just have the 20-ft. and that’s as tall as anything
is going to be next door to you. It might be 8-ft. high walls or 12-ft. high walls but the whole
thing isn’t going to be taller than 20-ft.”
Commissioner Sheridan stated, “I admit I’m not sure this is a valid concern.” He said he
doesn’t mind a neighbor having a gazebo. “Pergolas are nice to see in the backyards.” He
stated, “I’m concerned about a tall accessory building in the backyard.” Commissioner Reed
stated that he believes Commissioner Sheridan’s question is a good one, but from his point of
view the 20-ft. will limit and take care of what can be built.
Commissioner Ashby stated that he agrees with Commissioner Reed that 20-ft. covers it. He
doesn’t believe top of plate will be relevant in many of the cases.
Commissioner Davidson agrees with the 20-ft. height. He stated that he has a neighbor with
an extraordinarily steep roof and if the neighbor were to put in a detached garage, provided he
had enough space to do so, it probably would exceed the 20-ft. mark even on a one car
garage so limiting of the plate height may be something to consider for garage structures.
[Three or four commissioners make comments – not clear on recorder what is being said.]
Commissioner Sheridan asked how this affects RV storage, which is typically 14-ft. wide. The
plate height would have to go to at least 12-ft. What would be the exterior look from a
neighbor’s backyard? He stated that this is about protecting our neighborhood and
community. The ordinance already protects corner lots and provides for living screens, so that
leaves protecting the interior-type community.
Commissioner Davidson stated that there are square footage limitations for accessory
structures. RV storage requires at least a 12:6 plate. There will also be a length issue of
approximately 30-ft. How many lots will have room for that type of structure? He stated that
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 8 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
he doesn’t think there are that many. Commissioner Ashby stated that there aren’t that many
RV’s stored in town. Commissioner Davidson stated that there are a couple of individuals in
his neighborhood that have motor homes of that size and they store them off site because they
wouldn’t fit on any of these lots. So he believes there is a plate height concern, and a total
square footage concern that goes with that. He stated that if the example that was shown was
put up across the street from his residence it would look downright silly. The house across the
street is a beautiful home with extremely steep pitched roofs and then to have that (the
example shown) would be an eyesore. Commissioner Davidson stated that he doesn’t think
they can mandate that the roof pitch of the house and the accessory structure have to match.
That seems to be going a bit overboard, but he believes it can be handled through other
tweaks that limit that kind of action. Commissioner Sheridan added that the resident can
always come in and ask for a variance if he needs 21-ft. versus 20-ft., for instance.
Ms. Huggins stated that the Town’s ordinances are specific as to the types of accessory
structures allowed in Trophy Club. The allowed structures are listed on page 13 of the
Commissioner’s packet. She stated that recreational vehicles are governed by Chapter 5-
General Land Use of the Code of Ordinances and it states that a recreational vehicle must be
in a fully enclosed structure – an enclosed building with four walls and a roof which is
constructed of material allowed for accessory structures.
Chris King stated that there are not many RV structures in the Town of Trophy Club. He stated
that when they come in for a permit and the calculation is done of the lot size and lot coverage
most exceed the allowed lot coverage and cannot be built.
Commissioner Sheridan stated that he believes his original question might be a moot point and
he withdraws it. He supports the 20-ft. height.
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that he supports the 20-ft. and he believes there is a way to
put an RV in a building that has a 10-ft. plate line and build the rafters inside and raise the door
up above the plate line but he believes lot coverage precludes building something for a
greyhound bus type motor home.
Commissioner Forest asked if there is any ordinance against a flat roof. Ms. Huggins and Mr.
King responded that there is not. Commissioner Forest stated that there is the possibility then
of building a 20-ft. one story building with a flat roof.
There was no further discussion.
Commissioner Sheridan made a motion recommending approval of a 20-ft. maximum height of
one story for accessory structures. Commissioner Reed seconded the motion.
Ayes: Hill, Stephens, Reed, Sheridan, Forest, Ashby, Davidson
Nays: None
Action: 7-0, Approved
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 9 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
4 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A REQUEST FROM FIRE
CHIEF DANNY THOMAS ON BEHALF OF MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1 TO
APPROVE A FINAL PLAT OF LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 1, MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
NO. 1 COMPLEX (5.400 ACRES) LOCATED AT 100 MUNICIPAL DRIVE (FP-09-030)
Chairman Hill announced the item and asked for a staff report.
Ms. Huggins stated that this is a request for a final plat for this property – the property located
at 100 Municipal Dr. Construction of buildings on this property began before the Town was
incorporated; therefore, the property was never platted. In anticipation of a new fire station
being built on this property in the near future, the owners, Municipal Utility District No. 1,
request plat approval.
Staff is requesting a short form plat. A short form plat allows the preliminary plat and final plat
to be combined together into one “final plat” document. A short form plat must adhere to
specific guidelines and those items are listed on page 23 of the P&Z packet, along with an
explanation of how this plat meets each of those requirements.
This plat conforms to the Subdivision Rules and Regulations, Comprehensive Land Use Plan,
and the Zoning Ordinance and, as previously stated, it meets the conditions and requirements
to qualify as a short form plat. Staff requests a recommendation of approval to the Town
Council.
Ms. Huggins stated that Tom Rutledge, Town Engineer, created this plat for P&Z consideration
and he is here this evening to provide additional information or answer questions. She stated
that Fire Chief Thomas, representing the owner, Municipal Utility District No. 1, is also present
and available to answer questions.
Chairman Hill asked Mr. Rutledge for any comments. Mr. Rutledge had none but stated that
he is available to answer any questions from the Commissioners.
Chairman Hill, noting that there were two audience members present, asked if anyone had
signed up to ask questions, although this item is not a public hearing. Ms. Huggins responded
that she had no requests.
Chairman Hill called for discussion or questions.
Vice Chairman Stephens stated that he is not going to argue with Tom or Danny.
Commissioner Sheridan had some questions regarding the verbiage of the Owner’s Certificate
on the plat. He had provided those questions to Tom Rutledge prior to the meeting. Mr.
Rutledge stated that all were good comments but none of the items in the Owners Certificate
were critical things. He explained that Owners Certificates can be very broad to very specific,
but the plat itself, showing the boundary information describes what is going on. Mr. Rutledge
and Commissioner Sheridan discussed the wording in a little bit of detail with Mr. Rutledge
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 10 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
agreeing to change some items and Commissioner Sheridan agreeing to leave some wording
as is.
Another question Commissioner Sheridan had raised was including utility easements on this
plat. Mr. Rutledge explained that in creating this plat it is a unique situation in that all of the
facilities currently exist. The MUD, a public entity, owns the property. To accurately identify
every utility on this piece of property and place an easement on top of it would be extremely
expensive and arduous. The question became what would be gained by going to that
expense? Why survey and locate every utility line and try to put an easement on top of it,
when this property, being owned by a public entity, is already reserved for the use of the
public. The easement guarantees the right to go in and maintain those utilities. A public entity
isn’t going to be restricted from maintaining the utilities because it’s already owned by the
public entity. This plat is self-serving in that sense and thus unique. Commissioner Sheridan
stated that the magic words are “extra cost”… Mr. Rutledge responded that he doesn’t believe
anything is lost by not identifying utilities and providing easements on this plat.
Commissioner Forest, Reed and Davidson had no comments. Commissioner Ashby
commented that the municipal plat appropriately fits the Town of Trophy Club as it is shaped
like a golf club head. Mr. Rutledge responded that it’s a 3-wood.
Commissioner Ashby made a motion recommending approval of the final plat of Municipal
Utility District No. 1 Complex. Commissioner Davidson seconded the motion.
Ayes: Hill, Stephens, Reed, Sheridan, Forest, Ashby, Davidson
Nays: None
Action: 7-0, Approved
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Hill adjourned the meeting at 7:41 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 11 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262Trophy Club Entities
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:109-341-T Name:
Status:Type:Agenda Item Regular Session
File created:In control:8/24/2009 Planning & Zoning Commission
On agenda:Final action:9/3/2009
Title:Public Hearing regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club Code of Ordinances, Chapter
5-General Land Use and Chapter 9-Parks and Recreation to amend and adopt new regulations
affecting signs and other miscellaneous provisions of Chapters 5 and 9. (ADM-09-004)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 12 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
109-341-T Version:File #:
Title
Public Hearing regarding changes to the Town of Trophy Club Code of Ordinances, Chapter 5-General Land Use and
Chapter 9-Parks and Recreation to amend and adopt new regulations affecting signs and other miscellaneous provisions
of Chapters 5 and 9. (ADM-09-004)
Body
Staff requests a continuation of this item to the October 1, 2009, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 13 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, TX 76262Trophy Club Entities
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:109-340-T Name:
Status:Type:Agenda Item Regular Session
File created:In control:8/24/2009 Planning & Zoning Commission
On agenda:Final action:9/3/2009
Title:Discussion and Recommendation regarding a request from Jacobs Engineering on behalf of High
Trophy Development, LLC to approve an Amended Plat of 107 Residential Lots and 4 Open Space
Lots for a total of 28.144 acres known as Neighborhood 1, Phase 1C-2. (AP-09-016)
Attachments:Staff Report.pdf
Application.pdf
Amended Plat Regulations.pdf
NH 1 PH 1C-2 Page 1.pdf
NH 1 PH 1C-2 Page 2.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 14 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
109-340-T Version:File #:
Title
Discussion and Recommendation regarding a request from Jacobs Engineering on behalf of High Trophy Development,
LLC to approve an Amended Plat of 107 Residential Lots and 4 Open Space Lots for a totalof 28.144 acres known as
Neighborhood 1, Phase 1C-2. (AP-09-016)
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 15 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
September 3, 2009
Case No. AP-09-016
Amended Plat
Neighborhood 1, Phase 1C-2
SUBJECT: Discussion and take appropriate action regarding a request for
approval of an amended plat for Neighborhood 1, Phase 1C-2 located
in The Highlands at Trophy Club. Applicant: Jacobs on behalf of
High Trophy Development, L.P. (AP-09-016)
PURPOSE: The applicant, Jacobs Engineering, on behalf of the property owner High
Trophy Development, L.P., requests to amend the final plat for this development which
was approved by the Town Council on January 7, 2008. The intended purpose of the
amended plat is to correct an error in the Owners Dedication statement in which the
incorrect subdivision was listed on the original plat.
The original plat stated “Neighborhood 2 – Phase 1A” in the Owners Dedication. The
amended plat corrects the Owners Dedication to state “Neighborhood 1, Phase 1C-2”.
Town of Trophy Club regulations require that plat clerical errors must be corrected by an
amended plat brought before the Planning and Zoning Commission for recommendation
to the Town Council.
STAFF REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed the amended plat for
compliance with Town ordinances and regulations and has determined that it is
complete and ready for Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council agendas for
consideration. Staff recommends approval.
ch
Attachments: Application
Amended Plat Regulations from Chapter 12–Subdivision Rules
and Regulations
‘ Plat
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 16 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
an
d
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Pa
g
e
17
of
21
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Da
t
e
:
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
3,
20
0
9
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
an
d
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Pa
g
e
18
of
21
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Da
t
e
:
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
3,
20
0
9
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
an
d
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Pa
g
e
19
of
21
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Da
t
e
:
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
3,
20
0
9
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 20 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 21 of 21 Meeting Date: September 3, 2009