Agenda Packet P&Z 10/04/2012Planning & Zoning Commission
Trophy Club Entities
Meeting Agenda
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, Texas 76262
Svore Municipal Building Boardroom7:00 PMThursday, October 4, 2012
CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM
1.2012-483-T Review and approve minutes of the September 20, 2012 Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting.
MeetingMinutes 092012.pdfAttachments:
REGULAR SESSION
2.2012-484-T Discussion and recommendation regarding a request for approval of a Final
Plat for Canterbury Hills, Phase 1B, (22.090 acres) located in the M. Medlin
Survey, Abstract No. 832. Applicant: Jacobs on behalf of BDMR
Development, LLC (FP-12-051)
Staff Report - PZ 100412 - CH Ph 1B.pdf
Application.pdf
Attachments:
3.2012-353-T Discussion and recommendation regarding a request for approval of a Final
Plat for Canterbury Hills, Phase 2, (21.552 acres) located in the M. Medlin
Survey, Abstract No. 832. Applicant: Jacobs on behalf of BDMR
Development, LLC (FP-12-050)
Staff Report - PZ 100412 - CH Ph 2.pdf
Tree Survey - Sheets 23-26.pdf
CH PH2 Plat Application.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 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
October 4, 2012Planning & 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 October 1, 2012, by 7:00 P.M. in
accordance with Chapter 551, Texas Government Code.
Carolyn Huggins
Community Development Director
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
______________________, 2012.
________________________________, Title: ___________________________
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 2 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, Texas 76262Trophy Club Entities
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:12012-483-T Name:
Status:Type:Agenda Item Regular Session
File created:In control:9/29/2012 Planning & Zoning Commission
On agenda:Final action:10/4/2012
Title:Review and approve minutes of the September 20, 2012 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Attachments:MeetingMinutes 092012.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Title
Review and approve minutes of the September 20, 2012 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 3 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, Texas 76262Trophy Club Entities
Meeting Minutes
Planning & Zoning Commission
7:00 PM Svore Municipal Building BoardroomThursday, September 20, 2012
CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM
Chairman Hill called the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order at
7:05 p.m., and announced a quorum present (7 members).
COMMISSION MEMBERS:
Vice Chair James Stephens, Commissioner Mike Davidson,
Commissioner Dennis Sheridan, Commissioner Dale Forest, Chairman
Gene Hill, Commissioner Clayton Reed, and Commissioner Gary Richert
Present:7 -
STAFF AND GUESTS PRESENT:
Carolyn Huggins, Community Development Director
GUESTS PRESENT:
Bill Rose, Councilman
2012-441-T1.Review and approve minutes of the August 16, 2012 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting.
Vice Chairman Stephens asked for a correction to the last page of the minutes,
changing the word “so” to “some”.
A motion was made by Commissioner Richert, seconded by Commissioner
Sheridan, that this Agenda Item be Approved . The motion carried by the
following vote.
Aye:Vice Chair Stephens, Commissioner Davidson, Commissioner Sheridan,
Commissioner Forest, Commissioner Reed, and Commissioner Richert
6 -
Abstain:Chairman Hill1 -
PUBLIC HEARING
2012-440-T2.Public Hearing to consider changes to the Town of Trophy Club
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to amend a definition for "Hotel or
Motel" and to adopt a definition for "Bank or Financial Institution".
(ADM-11-008)
[Staff notes:
1) “Value Inn” refers to the existing “Value Place Hotel” located at 306 Trophy
Branch.
2) Some Commissioners do not speak into the microphone, therefore the audio is
not picked up on tape [inaudible] and this has been indicated in brackets in the
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 4 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
September 20, 2012Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
minutes.]
Chairman Hill opened the public hearing and asked Ms. Huggins for a staff report.
Ms. Huggins explained that under the current zoning ordinance and use tables, hotels
or motels are only allowed in planned development zoning. Hotels or motels are not
allowed in straight zoning. Ms. Huggins explained that the definition under
consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission this evening only applies to
straight zoning and since there are no hotels allowed in straight zoning, this definition
may not be needed until redevelopment occurs in the long term future.
Also, Ms. Huggins explained that currently the Zoning Ordinance does not have a
definition for “Bank or Financial Institution” and staff is asking that a definition be
adopted.
Chairman Hill asked if anyone wished to speak. No one did and the Chairman closed
the public hearing.
Referred to the Planning & Zoning Commission due back on 10/04/2012
REGULAR SESSION
2012-442-T3.Discussion and recommendation regarding changes to the Town of
Trophy Club Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to amend a definition for
"Hotel or Motel" and to adopt a definition for "Bank or Financial
Institution". (ADM-11-008)
Chairman Hill asked for discussion of this item.
Commissioner Sheridan stated that he would like to see “daily” added to “maid
service”. He asked if, for instance, the planned Holiday Inn did not happen, would
that open up the entire PD where this definition would be put into play? Ms. Huggins
responded that it would if it required a zoning change. Commissioner Sheridan
responded that they would have to request it. It could not be forced upon them. Ms.
Huggins affirmed. Commissioner Sheridan asked if the Feds or State have a
definition of a bank. Ms. Huggins indicated that staff research included input from
those entities.
Commissioner Sheridan stated that a bank could be a possibility in PDs and
elsewhere where this definition could come into play. Ms. Huggins affirmed that if
there is not a specific definition in those PDs then it reverts back to the Town
ordinances definition.
Vice Chairman Stephens asked if the definition of hotel/motel for PD-30 remains in
play no matter what is added to the Town ordinances. Likewise, Holiday Inn would
come in under the new definition? Ms. Huggins responded that the Holiday Inn is in
PD-25 so they would come in under PD-25 definition.
Commissioner Sheridan asked if there should be a minimum size like was done in
PD-30. Ms. Huggins responded that a minimum size is the one part of the
hotel/motel definition that she is uncomfortable with as that limits architectural
possibilities of the building. Commissioner Sheridan: “I hear what you are saying,
but at the same time we are trying to set a high standard base. If we don’t set it high
enough we’ll get another Value Inn in here.”
Vice Chairman Stephens: “I doubt that hotel rooms are as small as 250 sq. ft. I can’t
imagine a class hotel like Holiday Inn putting up 250 sq. ft. rooms.”
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 5 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
September 20, 2012Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
Commissioner Sheridan: “So what size should it be if we are going to set the bar
reasonable high.”
Vice Chairman Stephens: “The word ‘least’ is important.”
Commissioner Sheridan: “Except for the fact of the restaurant facilities and maid
service, the Value Inn fits this definition. There are developers out there who will look
at the minimum requirements and build to that and get away with it. That’s what we
have to protect ourselves from. We should set it up high enough to be reasonable
but at the same time to…. [inaudible] …if someone is coming in spending a few
million dollars plus on a hotel, like the Hampton Inn, some variations were negotiated
with the site plan. I think that is typical and I think that is what developers expect.
Except for those two items I mentioned, the Value Inn meets these requirements.”
Commissioner Reed: “If the Value Inn had been named the Hampton Inn everybody
in Town would have been proud of it.”
Commissioner Sheridan: “I’m not saying I’m for or against the Value Inn. Once
again, everybody is talking a Holiday Inn Suites or something but at the same time
who knows in the future what the developer will… [inaudible] and what name it will be
on. So the idea of daily maid service and the idea of having a specific size
conference center, setting a higher standard on the room and then let an architect
come in and talk to us. Of course, we are talking 20 years down the road. I want to
put WIFI in but who knows what WIFI will be 20 years down the road. I thought about
putting in ‘the latest technology needs to be offered’. My suggestion is to put a size
on a conference center, raise the size of the room, and have daily maid service.”
The Commissioners then discussed various needs versus luxuries of a hotel room
and how those items could affect the minimum square footage of a hotel guest room.
Commissioner Davidson: “I think the issue at hand here is that the developers are
going to want flexibility, but the city is going to want to maintain… [inaudible] …as far
as the design is concerned so that we don’t get off track too far. The bottom line is
that the market is going to drive what they put in place. Maybe the option is to allow
a percentage in that lower category that says if you are going to build to that spec of
250 sq. ft. then you are only allowed to build 10-20% of the rooms at that size. The
intent is to keep them from making that a post office box type arrangement for
lodging, but still give them the flexibility in size to say that they have people that
would like smaller rooms, quick hit one night in and out, other people want more
room, they have roll out beds they want to put in there, whatever the case is, and
they can make the rooms larger. But, ultimately, they are going to review the market,
they are going to figure out what is going to work in this case. So I’m not opposed to
the 250 mark, but to keep the level of hotel in Trophy Club where we want it we
probably should just put a limit on how many 250 sq. ft. rooms that they have.”
Commissioner Sheridan: “We are coming up with a definition of a hotel. The
conversation has been on a Class A hotel. If you are looking for a… [inaudible]
…you aren’t going to the Class A hotel. You’ll go to the Value Inn or Ramada down
the way…” “…I think we need to set the standard high because we are not looking
for a generic hotel. Then let them come back to us and talk about it. James just
worked up a diagram of a basic hotel room and it is 360 sq. ft. We aren’t talking
about the Alamo Inn, but more along the line of a Hampton Inn….”
The discussion of size of room continued and included discussion of putting limits on
construction (steel versus wood, for instance) between Commissioner Sheridan and
Commissioner Davidson.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 6 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
September 20, 2012Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
Commissioner Sheridan: “… It won’t be long before, in our lifetime, possibly not, the
metroplex is going to be a high density type location. We need to protect Trophy
Club from becoming a high density. Right now, since we are talking about
rejuvenation, about having to come back and talk to P&Z or whatever the process is
20 years from now, they are going to have to come in and talk, and we need to set it
up high.”
Vice Chairman Stephens: “We build churches to last 100 years, communities last 40.
Then we have these big monstrosities and these declining communities and they
dwindle down and the geezers can’t pay the light bills. So churches have these big
buildings all over America. Now the same thing is true in hotel motels. The majority
of motels built today by all the chains is stick building unless they go to 8, 10, 12, 14,
20 stories.”
Commissioner Sheridan: “The price of steel right now is outrageous and the price of
wood is affordable.”
Chairman Hill attempted to bring the conversation to a conclusion.
Vice Chairman Stephens agreed with Commissioner Davidson’s suggestion of a
percentage on size of rooms. “How do we change this to where we are going to be
assured that we are not going to have riff raff coming in wanting to build a hotel in our
town?”
Commissioner Forest: “I am listening to you guys and I am not getting where you are
coming from at all. I feel that we need to figure out what we want. What type of
clientele do we want to come in to stay in Trophy Club in these motels? Do you want
what we’ve got out there, or do you want high end? If you want high end, you go to
larger rooms. I don’t think you have to worry about that if you decide what you want it
to be.”
Vice Chairman Stephens: “The clientele twice a year is the race track out on I-35W.
There is some development taking place over in Westlake and people will stay here
while doing business there and then the whole Alliance corridor and this is close
enough that people will stay here to do business out there. I think that’s the customer
we are looking for.”
Commissioner Sheridan stated that we don’t know if that will be true 20 years from
now. “Had we sat here knowing what we know today, 10 years ago when P&Z put
together PD-25, some of the current restrictions set the bar too low. We are living
with that now. I want to set the bar high.”
Chairman Hill: “You can’t forecast 20 to 25 years down the road and know whether
this entire area here is going to be upscale or whether it is going to be deteriorating.
Commissioner Sheridan: “You are right, so the question is in 20 years is the P&Z or
current Town at that time going to lower their standards to meet the market, or is
some developer going to come in under the market because we have low standards
written down.”
Commissioner Reed: “Years ago, we had what I would call snooty people who fought
and fought against building the stores along the entrance. What they were upset
about was they were afraid that people that would be coming in there to do business
were also some of the people that they hire to mow their lawns. It was so bad that
Gene Hill, who was the best Councilperson we’ve ever had here, was voted out
because they voted for that development. So, you have to be careful about talking
about how high of standards you want.”
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 7 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
September 20, 2012Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
Commissioner Sheridan: “I understand, and I voted for the Taco Bueno too, but at
the same time it is incumbent upon us to set standards so then it is incumbent upon
us to look to the future and I understand we are talking 20 years down the road…”
Vice Chairman Stephens: “And right now we are going to get the spillover from
Southlake. I have a dear friend who was on P&Z in Southlake for a number of years
and he told me before he resigned and retired and moved out of state that the one
thing they needed desperately were hotels.”
Commissioner Sheridan: “So are we then the community that provides them lower
end hotels?”
Vice Chairman Stephens: “I’m with you. I think we need quality here.”
Commissioner Sheridan: “We can try and work this out tonight or ask Carolyn to
strengthen this and come up with some wording based on our conversations and
bring it back to us.”
Commissioner Sheridan made a motion to continue the public hearing and discussion
of a definition for “Hotel or Motel” to a future date. Vice Chairman Stephens
seconded the motion. The motion passed by a unanimous vote 7-0.
BANK OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION
Chairman Hill then asked for discussion of the definition for “Bank or Financial
Institution”.
Commissioner Reed: “Does this mean that the bank has to provide all of these
services? What if they provide an additional service that isn’t listed here, would that
exclude them from being able to open a bank? For example, all banks now have an
investment services department. That’s not listed in this definition.”
Commissioner Davidson: “What about safety deposit boxes?”
Chairman Hill: “I believe safety deposit boxes would be covered under “custody”.
The discussion continued for several minutes.
Commissioner Sheridan: “What would a car title lender fall under? You could also
put in here that other services in a facility can be added under an SUP.”
Vice Chairman Stephens: “It says bank or financial institution. A financial institution
may come in that offers what you are talking about that may not be a bank.”
The discussion continued for several minutes.
Vice Chairman Stephens made a motion to recommend, as printed, for Town
Council’s consideration, the definition of a Bank or Financial Institution.
Commissioner Sheridan seconded the motion and then made an amendment to the
motion to add “and other financial services” behind the words “transmission of funds”.
Vice Chairman Stephens seconded the amendment. As Chairman Hill asked if there
was any further discussion, Vice Chairman Stephens moved the previous question.
As Chairman Hill called for a vote, Councilman Rose called “point of order” from the
audience and came to the podium and instructed Chairman Hill that he had a call for
the question and that the proper procedure is to vote on the question, vote on the
amendment, and then vote on the primary motion.
Commissioner Davidson: “Wow did that get out of hand.”
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 8 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
September 20, 2012Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
Chairman Hill called for a vote on the question. It passed unanimously 7-0.
Chairman Hill called for a vote on the amendment. It passed 6-1 with Commissioner
Richert voting against.
A motion was made by Vice Chair Stephens, seconded by Commissioner
Sheridan, that this Agenda Item be Referred to the Town Council to adopt a
definition for Bank or Financial Institution (as noted in the above paragraphs)
and Referred to the Planning & Zoning Commission, on 10/04/2012, to continue
the discussion of an amended definition for Hotel or Motel. The motion carried
by the following vote.
Aye:Vice Chair Stephens, Commissioner Davidson, Commissioner Sheridan,
Commissioner Forest, Chairman Hill, Commissioner Reed, and
Commissioner Richert
7 -
ADJOURN
Meeting adjourned at approximately 8:15 p.m.
_________________________________________
Gene Hill, Chairman
_________________________________________
Carolyn Huggins, Community Development Director
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 9 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, Texas 76262Trophy Club Entities
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:12012-484-T Name:
Status:Type:Agenda Item Regular Session
File created:In control:Planning & Zoning Commission
On agenda:Final action:10/4/2012
Title:Discussion and recommendation regarding a request for approval of a Final Plat for Canterbury Hills,
Phase 1B, (22.090 acres) located in the M. Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 832. Applicant: Jacobs on
behalf of BDMR Development, LLC (FP-12-051)
Attachments:Staff Report - PZ 100412 - CH Ph 1B.pdf
Application.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Title
Discussion and recommendation regarding a request for approval of a Final Plat for Canterbury Hills,
Phase 1B, (22.090 acres) located in the M. Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 832. Applicant: Jacobs on
behalf of BDMR Development, LLC (FP-12-051)
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 10 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
REQUEST: Discussion and recommendation of approval of a Final Plat for
Canterbury Hills, Phase 1B, consisting of Lots 29-33A, Block A; Lots 17-19,
Block B; Lots 10-14, Block C; Lots 1A-19A, Block D; Lots 1A-2, Block F; Lots 1-4,
Block H; and three (3) Common Area Lots, being a 22.090 acre tract of land
located out of the M. Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 832 in the Town of Trophy
Club, Denton County, Texas. Applicant: Jim Wiegert, Jacobs Engineering
Group, Inc. on behalf of BDMR Development, LLC.
LOCATION: Canterbury Hills, Phase 1A, will be located to the north and
northeast of the area where Indian Creek Drive currently deadends. With the
construction of this neighborhood, the Indian Creek Drive will be extended to the
north and connect with the streets that will be created in Canterbury Hill, Phase 2
which will connect up with Eagles Ridge subdivision.
ZONING:
“R-12” - The regulations for R-12 residential lots are:
Front Yard: 25-ft.
Side Yard (adjacent to street): 20-ft.
Side Yard: 10-ft.
Rear Yard: 25-ft.
Minimum Lot size: 12,000 sq. ft.
Minimum Lot depth: 110-ft.
Minimum Lot depth for cul-de-sac or corner lot: 100-ft.
Minimum Lot width: 90-ft.
Minimum Lot width adjacent to street: 110-ft.
Minimum house size: 2,000 sq. ft. for one-story
Minimum house size on corner lot & golf course lot: 2,500 sq. ft.
Maximum lot coverage: 35%
HISTORY: This property is currently vacant. A preliminary plat for Canterbury
Hills (Phases 1 & 2) was approved by the Town Council on December 3, 2007.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
October 4, 2012
Case No. FP-12-051
Final Plat
38 Residential Lots
3 Common Area Lots
Canterbury Hills, Phase 1B
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 11 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
PRELIMINARY PLAT
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 12 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
Preliminary Plat - continued
REVIEW: On August 16, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted a
conditional recommendation of approval of the plat for Canterbury Hills, Phase 2
so that the applicant could begin early grading of the subdivision. At that time the
applicant was informed that the Canterbury Hills, Phase 2 plat must return to the
Planning and Zoning Commission when the Canterbury Hills, Phase 1B plat is
ready to be heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission in order to receive a
recommendation of approval for both plats. At this time, both phases 1B and 2 of
Canterbury Hills are ready for a recommendation of approval from the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
The two phases of Canterbury Hills (Phase 1B and 2) will be constructed
together as they are dependent upon each other as the infrastructure for Phase
1B contains a lift station that will service both phases. Another example of the
interdependency of the two plats is Dover Lane. If the plat were to stand on its
own merits, the street would be required to have a temporary turnaround located
at the end of the street. But since Phase 1B will be constructed with Phase 2,
the two plats together create the connectivity of the street.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 13 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
The Town Engineer has reviewed and approved the infrastructure plans for
Phase 1B of Canterbury Hills.
The Municipal Utility District is on their final review of the new Lift Station that will
service all of the lots of Phase (1B) and 16 lots of Phase 2.
This neighborhood will have a Homeowners Association which will own and
maintain all common areas.
The applicant has submitted a tree survey for Phase 1B. The developer will clear
and grade the right-of-way and easements. For each lot, the developer will
require the builder to submit a grading and tree preservation plan with the
building permit which must outline the builder’s plans to preserve as many trees
as possible on the lot, less the trees required to be removed for the pad. A note
with this requirement has been added to the plat.
FINAL PLAT
Correction needed to the plat prior to October 15 Council meeting:
Lot Area Table: Remove Lots 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D of Block H as these lots do not
exist on this plat. Correct Title for Block H.
SUMMARY: Staff requests the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend
approval of the Final Plat of Canterbury Hills, Phase 2.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 14 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
Z
o
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
P
a
g
e
1
5
o
f
2
4
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
D
a
t
e
:
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
4
,
2
0
1
2
100 Municipal Drive
Trophy Club, Texas 76262Trophy Club Entities
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:12012-353-T Name:
Status:Type:Agenda Item Regular Session
File created:In control:8/12/2012 Planning & Zoning Commission
On agenda:Final action:10/4/2012
Title:Discussion and recommendation regarding a request for approval of a Final Plat for Canterbury Hills,
Phase 2, (21.552 acres) located in the M. Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 832. Applicant: Jacobs on
behalf of BDMR Development, LLC (FP-12-050)
Attachments:Staff Report - PZ 100412 - CH Ph 2.pdf
Tree Survey - Sheets 23-26.pdf
CH PH2 Plat Application.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.
Planning & Zoning Commission8/16/2012 1
Title
Discussion and recommendation regarding a request for approval of a Final Plat for Canterbury Hills,
Phase 2, (21.552 acres) located in the M. Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 832. Applicant: Jacobs on behalf
of BDMR Development, LLC (FP-12-050)
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 16 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
REQUEST: Consider a recommendation of approval of the Final Plat of
Canterbury Hills, Phase 2, consisting of Lots 34-56, Block A; Lots 20-34, Block D;
Lots 1-11, Block E, and one (1) Common Area, being a 21.552 acre tract of land
located out of the M. Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 832 in the Town of Trophy
Club, Denton County, Texas. Applicant: Jim Wiegert, Jacobs Engineering
Group, Inc. on behalf of BDMR Development, LLC.
LOCATION: Canterbury Hills, Phase 2, will be located to the west and
southwest of Eagles Ridge subdivision. With the construction of this
neighborhood, the existing Skyline Drive will extend to the west to intersect with a
new street, Tenison Trail, and the existing Ridgeview Lane will extend to the
north to intersect with Tenison Trail. Three new streets will be added: Tait Court,
Becket Place, and Dover Lane.
ZONING:
“R-12” - The regulations for R-12 residential lots are:
Front Yard: 25-ft.
Side Yard (adjacent to street): 20-ft.
Side Yard: 10-ft.
Rear Yard: 25-ft.
Minimum Lot size: 12,000 sq. ft.
Minimum Lot depth: 110-ft.
Minimum Lot depth for cul-de-sac or corner lot: 100-ft.
Minimum Lot width: 90-ft.
Minimum Lot width adjacent to street: 110-ft.
Minimum house size: 2,000 sq. ft. for one-story
Minimum house size on corner lot & golf course lot: 2,500 sq. ft.
Maximum lot coverage: 35%
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
October 4, 2012
Case No. FP-12-050
Final Plat
49 Residential Lots
1 Common Area
Canterbury Hills, Phase 2
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 17 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
HISTORY: This property is currently vacant. A preliminary plat for Canterbury
Hills (Phases 1 & 2) was approved by the Town Council on December 3, 2007.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
REVIEW: On August 16, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted a
conditional recommendation of approval which allowed the applicant to begin
early grading of this subdivision. The applicant is now returning to the Planning
and Zoning Commission to ask for a recommendation of approval to the Town
Council for Canterbury Hills, Phase 2 as the plat is now ready to be heard along
with Canterbury Hills, Phase 1B plat.
The two phases of Canterbury Hills (Phase 1B and 2) will be constructed
together as they are dependent upon each other as the infrastructure for Phase
1B contains a lift station that will service both phases. Another example of the
interdependency of the two plats is Dover Lane. If the plat were to stand on its
own merits, the street would be required to have a temporary turnaround located
at the end of the street. But, since Phase 1B and Phase 2 will be constructed
together, the two plats create the connectivity of the street.
The Town Engineer has reviewed and approved the infrastructure documents for
Canterbury Hills, Phase 2.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 18 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
Lift Station
The existing lift station located on park property, as platted with Eagles Ridge
Phase 1 in 1996, has adequate capacity to service 33 lots in this Phase. The
Town is working with the developer to provide a 12-ft. serviceway to the lift
station with minimal tree removal. At the Planning & Zoning Commission
meeting (or sooner), the developer’s engineer will provide a count of the trees
that will be impacted by the addition of a serviceway. The remaining 16 lots of
Phase 2 will be serviced by the new lift station in Phase 1B.
Homeowners Association
This neighborhood will have a Homeowners Association which will own and
maintain all common areas.
Tree Survey
The applicant has submitted a tree survey for Phase 2. With the early grading
permit, the developer is clearing and grading the right-of-way and easements and
will grade any lots that do not have trees. For those lots that do have trees, the
developer will require the builder to submit a tree survey with the building permit
which must outline the builder’s plans to preserve as many trees as possible on
the lot, less the trees required to be removed for the pad. A note for this
requirement has been added to the plat.
FINAL PLAT
SUMMARY: Staff requests the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend
approval of the Final Plat of Canterbury Hills, Phase 2.
Planning and Zoning Commission Page 19 of 24 Meeting Date: October 4, 2012
T
R
E
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
C
a
n
t
e
r
b
u
r
y
H
i
l
l
s
P
h
a
s
e
2
T
O
W
N
O
F
T
R
O
P
H
Y
C
L
U
B
D
E
N
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
,
T
E
X
A
S
0
4
0
2
0
8
0
Planning and Zoning Commission
P
a
g
e
2
0
o
f
2
4
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
D
a
t
e
:
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
4
,
2
0
1
2
T
R
E
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
C
a
n
t
e
r
b
u
r
y
H
i
l
l
s
P
h
a
s
e
2
T
O
W
N
O
F
T
R
O
P
H
Y
C
L
U
B
D
E
N
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
,
T
E
X
A
S
0
4
0
2
0
8
0
Planning and Zoning Commission
P
a
g
e
2
1
o
f
2
4
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
D
a
t
e
:
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
4
,
2
0
1
2
T
R
E
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
C
a
n
t
e
r
b
u
r
y
H
i
l
l
s
P
h
a
s
e
2
T
O
W
N
O
F
T
R
O
P
H
Y
C
L
U
B
D
E
N
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
,
T
E
X
A
S
0
4
0
2
0
8
0
Planning and Zoning Commission
P
a
g
e
2
2
o
f
2
4
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
D
a
t
e
:
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
4
,
2
0
1
2
T
R
E
E
C
H
A
R
T
C
a
n
t
e
r
b
u
r
y
H
i
l
l
s
P
h
a
s
e
2
T
O
W
N
O
F
T
R
O
P
H
Y
C
L
U
B
D
E
N
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
,
T
E
X
A
S
Planning and Zoning Commission
P
a
g
e
2
3
o
f
2
4
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
D
a
t
e
:
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
4
,
2
0
1
2
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
Z
o
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
P
a
g
e
2
4
o
f
2
4
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
D
a
t
e
:
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
4
,
2
0
1
2