HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
ITEMS SUBMITTED BY: J...CALLAWAY.. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
------(~;;;;)---~--------------(d;;pa:rtm;;rtt)--
F OR CO U NeIL MEETI NGOF: ___~_______~~ p!~.m-Q~.r--~ g.J. -.!~~~ ---------------
~~--~-~~,~-~~~-~~-~-~.~~,~.~~~~--,-~~_.~~~~'~~~~~~~~-~-~~~~~~~~---~~~'-~-~-
ITEM:
A public hearing on the question of amending the plat and
development plan for the P.U.D. #2 located in the Shenandoah
subdivision.
ITEMSUHMARY:
The applicant has request.ed that the plat of the P.ll. D :tocated in
Shena.ndoahbe revised,pr-ovidingfewer,largerlotsfor
developmenta.sdetach.edsinglefamily residences. TheP. U . D . was
annexedintotheCity.afterdevelopmelltwas underway. Six units
ha.vebeenconstructed intheP.U.D.,detachedsinglefamily units
with zero lot. line construction along one side and variable
setbacks (six to nine) feet) along the other side.
~equests for amendmentstoP.U.D.sare processed as rezoning
requests.
FINANC.IAL S~UMMARY:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
This item will be reviewed by the. P&Zon September 15. P&Z
recommendations will be presented atthemeetlng.
See staff report for details.
CITY -ATTORNEY" .-RECOHME-ltDA"'tlOHS:
N/A
.SUP~ORT-.I.NG MATERIALS:
=1. Appli~ation.
II.
"AGENilA-- ~IrEM"'r-cOVBR~"-"USHEET
I TE.MS S UHM I'rTED BY: ~~--_i.!-~g!11~~~X_----_r1~~N1Ng"::~Er~R1!1EN1'___
(name) (de~artment)
FOR COUNCIL MEETING OF~ ~-~----....~~I!t~m2.s.t_g~~...;..lg!HL":'_~_________~
--...... ------- -- -- -......- ----....;. -.- - ---.,..;..,..;. -- -- .....,..;.- - -- -- - -- - -..... --..... -- -- ---- - -..... - ----- - --- - - - - - - - -- -- --
IT"EM: ."
Consideration of amending the plat and development plan for the
P.U.D. #21ocated in the Shenandoah sUbdivision.
I TEMS'UMMARY:
Consideration of the item discussed under the p'revious agenda
item.
FINANCI"AL" "SUMMAR"Y:
N/A
STAFF REC6MMEND"ATIONS":
See previous agenda Item.
CITY ATTORNEY.. RECoMMENDATIONS:
N/A
STAFF REPORT
Case No.: 88-107
Applicant: First Bank and Trust
BryaD,Texas
Request: Amend the plat and development plan of the existing PUD
#2, Shenandoah Subdivision. (Amendments to an approved
PUD are processed. as a rezoning application.)
Location: Lots 1 - 16Block 1, Lots 1 - 7 Block 2, Lots 1 - 8,
Block 3, Lots I - 7, Block 4, Shenandoah (See enclosed
map).
physical Features:
Area: >
Dimensions: >
Frontage: >
Depth: >
SEE ENCLOSED SITE PLAN, PLAT.
Area Zoning.:
North:
East:
South:
Wes t:
0-1, R-l
'0-3, C-N
0-1
R-l
Existing Land Use:
Subject lots. are part of a developed subdivision. Six lots
in the. PUD are bui It on and are. not apart of t.his request.
Other land uses in.t.he area in.elude c'ommercia.l and vacant
areas to the east and south; residential lo1:~to the west;
residential lots, commercial area andvacarit tracts to the
north.
Land Use Plan:
Area reflected as low and medium densitY' residential on the
land use plan.
Engineering:
Water:
Sewer:
Stre,e.ts:
FloodPlain:
SEE ENCLOSED PRESU.BMISSIONREPORT
WHICH ACCOMPANIES AGE'NDA ITEM #5 ,
CASE #88-209.
Notification:
Legal Notice publication(s): 8-31-88 & 9-7-88
Advertised Commission Hearing Date(s.): 9-15-88
Advertised Council Hearing Dates: 9-22-88
Number ofNotices~ailed to Property Owners Within 200': 25
Response Received: None to d.ate
Staff Comments.:
ThisPUD began development prior to annexation. The PUD was
approved "asistt afterannexa.tion (Case No. 82-121,12-8-83).
ThePUD does not fully comply with our regulations in that
the. common open. space: required by ordinance is located
outside of the pun (at a recreational facility that is
shared by the Shenandoah sUbdivision}.
This.PUD was originally. presented to the City as a
developmen.t of amaIllot.s foruni ts with zero lot 1 in:e
construction alongon.e<side and a varia.b.le setbackalon.g the
other si.de. Vehicular access from an alley along the re.ar
lot lines was. propos-ed.
Six units have bee.nconstruct.ed, five are on adjacent lots
with a setback or separation that varies from about six to
nine feet.
The applicant would like to increase the lot siz.es within
the PUDtoprovid.efor larger uni tswithside yards along
both sides., as in the single ..familyzoning disitrict. Access
is proposed from both. the street and the existing alleys.
An amendme.nt to the pun appears to be the best method for
accomplishing this. 'l'he applicant considered seeking a zone
change (to R-l) but~~iscrea.ted potential problems; fpr the
six unit.s ithat . have b~endeveloped. and sold. There is no
zoning di.stric.t thatw,ould accommodate the sid.e setbacks of
the existing units. Rez()ning all bu.t the six occupiedl.ots
would address the setbiacks but would' even further "isolate"
a small PUD.
Q ~ ~. ,,-.p n .-. _ ___..... _ 00_ '11\1"7