P&Z considers Panera + new Wellington Ridge

During its regular Mar. 07, 2019 meeting, the Forney Planning & Zoning Commission met and in summary: approved Lopez Hair, Panera, Gateway Ph. 4 MF, allowing asphalt parking lots, and (barely) Wellington Ridge. (official video)

• Mr. Morgan introduced new member James Traylor, new city engineer Mr. Zook, and PH #1 has been pulled.
  
• Approved a site plan for the Larke Lopez Hair Salon, located at 112 Trinity Street.
      Mr. Dixon briefed the board, plans show 10 parking spaces, with an added sidewalk, staff will need a photometric plan.
  
• Approved a preliminary plat for Forney Marketplace Addition, Block 1, Lot 1 and Lot 2, located Northwest of the intersection of East U.S. Highway 80 and Marketplace Boulevard.
      Mr. Dixon said this will divide the property into a restaurant lot and a larger lot, will have access to frontage road, Marketplace Blvd and Trailhouse Blvd. TxDOT says no TIA (Traffic Impact Analysis) is required.
  
• a site plan for Panera Bakery Cafe, located Northwest of the intersection of East U.S. Highway 80 and Marketplace Boulevard.
      Mr. Dixon said 4,430 sq. ft. building with outdoor dining area, has 51 parking spaces w/ a drive-through having stacking of 13. Plants will screen automobile headlights from adjacent roads.
      Chpn. Wilcoxson asked about access to Marketplace Blvd - Mr. Dixon said staff will require more detailed information. Chpn. Wilcoxson asked about access road - a rep. said there is no access to frontage road from this lot, but could be future access as it develops. Mr. Wilkins asked about dumpster screening - another rep. said it is architecturally compatible with the building.
  
• Approved a preliminary plat for Gateway Phase 4, Block D, Lot 1, located east of North F.M. 548 and south of North Gateway Boulevard.
      Mr. Dixon said the 13.7 acres is MF15, one lot. The Parks Board considered the 329 units using the prior land dedication of 67 acres and accepted this plat.
      Chpn. Wilcoxson asked how many more phases were coming - Mr. Morgan said possibly 6, but there is another type of residential product that will be brought next month. Mr. Cunningham asked if same developer - Mr. Morgan said same owner, different developer.
  
• Approved a site plan for Gateway Phase 4, Block D, Lot 1, located east of F.M. 548 and south of North Gateway Boulevard.
      Mr. Dixon said it has 329 units in 5 building types, brick and stone are major components. Parking is 427 uncovered, 60 carport, 47 garage spaces.
  
• Held Public Hearings -
  • did not consider a request to rezone a portion of 318 W. Buffalo Street, consisting of 0.433 acres of land, from the Single-Family (SF-6) District to the General Retail (GR) District.
    
  • Approved an Ordinance amending the City of Forney Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance by amending Section 38, "Off Street Parking and Loading Requirements", to provide an exception to concrete paving requirements.
        Mr. Morgan said currently require concrete for all parking, this would allow asphalt to also be used. EDC and county commissioners have discussed parking near the sub-courthouse, it would be expensive to add enough parking with concrete.
        Mr. Wilkins verified only asphalt, not gravel. Chpn. Wilcoxson asked if was a time limit - Mr. Morgan said no, considered a request a few years ago, staff feels it would be difficult to enforce. Chpn. Wilcoxson asked how will ensure maintenance; Mr. Morgan said have existing ordinances to issue citations. Mr. Chambers asked about number of lots; Mr. Morgan said this will be for special exceptions and will have to be accepted by city council. Received no comments to hearing notice. Mr. Cunningham asked about the waiver should make it clear allowing asphalt only; Mr. Morgan said that is in the ordinance. Mr. Zook said it must be a designed product.
        There was no public input.
    
  • Approved 4-3 a request to rezone 108.2 acres of land from the Mixed-Use District to a Planned Development District with single-family, multi-family and commercial uses. The property is located south of the U.S. Highway 80 and F.M. 460 intersection in the City of Forney.
        Mr. Morgan said there are 2 exhibits, a map and a letter from the power plant in opposition. The request is for a PD (Planned Development), 10.8 acres retail, 17.3 acres Multi-Family, 79.3 Single Family including senior residential. It has smaller lot sizes than base zoning, but larger home sizes. Amenity center is required, a trail system will provide connectivity in the development. Repetitive elevations are prohibited on adjacent lots. Power plant has an issue with water supply, and residents living next to power plant. Comprehensive Plan shows retail, not residential. Park board suggested taking 345 acres, much of which is outside city limits and in flood plain, but could be of use for parks. Agreements will be needed from city of Mesquite. Received no other comments, but possibly only 4 notices were mailed.
        Mr. Vincent signed the letter provided to the board; he represents the power plant, they have several issues. This could negatively impact the power plant, plans they have seen show lots over water lines; zoning can't affect easements. The plant is immediately E. of this site, people might not like living next to a plant, complain during permit hearings. Comp. Plan shows office & retail, which would be a good fit. Code says should zone according to Comp. Plan. Anything that raises issues with the power plant could impact public health and safety. They are very concerned about this application. Chpn. Wilcoxson asked why concern with residential vs. commercial regarding the water lines - Mr. Vincent said the plans showed structures being built over water lines.
        Mr. Eckert with civil engineering spoke: case came before P&Z in 2017, power plant did not object then. They are aware of water line, and can't build structures on it; they will relocate the line after zoning approved. This was unanimously passed in 2017, since then about 50% MF has been removed, replaced with age-restricted section which will be gated. Traffic: they have met with Readimix to provide them access that does not go through residential. They are not concerned about the power plant, buyers will be able to see the plant when they buy. The area is heavily wooded for 1,000 ft to the plant.
        Mr. Vincent returned to say they can't agree to anything that would cause disruption to the water lines, mentioned how much taxes the business pays.
        Mr. Shimkus asked about the police firing range - Mr. Morgan said that is adjacent, not part of this zoning request. Chpn. Wilcoxson said part of tract 1 shows to be in flood plain; Mr. Morgan said studies would be required to reclaim those lots, similar to Brooklyn Village did. Mr. Cunningham said can not build on top of easements, complaints from citizens are just part of the job. This is just a zoning request, with no plans. In another development, a gas line was rerouted, probably with no interruption. Mr. Shimkus said the water line relocations costs developer, not city; Mr. Morgan agreed. Chpn. Wilcoxson said he doesn't share the voiced concerns, but not sure this is best use of the land. Chpn. Wilcoxson asked about Comp. Plan - Mr. Morgan said shows office and neighborhood service. Mr. Chambers asked about numbers provided in the objection; another power plant Rep said ERCOT says TX doesn't have enough capacity. Mr. Wilkins also doesn't believe best use of property. There are sewer smells when the wind is in the right direction. Mr. Traylor said no one could buy without knowing the power plant was there, he doesn't have concern about water line being relocated.
        Approved 4-3 vote: for: Traylor, Holler, Shimkus, Chambers; nay Cunningham, Wilkins, Wilcoxson.

• Adjourned at 1928