To: Mark R. Hafner, City Manager
From: David Hawkins, Planning Manager
Subject:
Title
PUBLIC HEARING: Consider an ordinance approving a Planned Development Amendment Zoning Change from PD-SF-36 (Planned Development-Single Family Residential-36,000 square foot minimum) to PD-SF-36 (Planned Development-Single Family Residential-36,000 square foot minimum) to amend the previously approved Planned Development for a tennis club and training facility, located on an approximately 26.99-acres of land, being Tract 3D and 3D01 out of the Daniel Bancroft Survey, Abstract No. 141, located on the west side of Keller Smithfield Road, approximately 400 feet north of Johnson Road, at 660 and 680 Keller Smithfield Road. D.R. Newton, owner. Jennifer Dent, applicant. Adams Engineering, engineer. (Z-17-0001)
Action Requested:
Conduct a public hearing and consider an ordinance regarding a Planned Development Amendment Zoning Change for a proposed tennis club and training facility to add specification for tennis court ‘bubble’ enclosures.
Current Zoning:
PD-SF-36 (Planned Development-Single Family Residential-36,000 square foot minimum)
Proposed Zoning:
PD-SF-36 (Planned Development-Single Family Residential-36,000 square foot minimum).
Future Land Use Plan:
The Future Land Use Plan currently designates this subject property as LD-SF (Low Density-Single Family-25,000 square foot and greater).
Background:
The property was previously the Rocky Top Ranch, and some activities are continuing until such time as the Tennis facility is built. The majority of the Rocky Top Ranch was zoned PD-SF-36 by Ordinance No. 1606. The current PD-SF-36 zoning for The Birch was established by Ordinance No. 1822 on November 1, 2016, provided in the Staff Attachment. During the zoning hearing, it was noted ‘bubble’ enclosures would likely be part of a future phase of development and would either have to comply with the accessory building standards or would require a Planned Development Amendment. Details of the ‘bubble’ enclosures were not known at the time of the original Planned Development Zoning request. Please see the current zoning standards in the Staff Attachment.
Staff began reviewing the Site Plan for Phase I of the development. That application is still currently active.
During site plan review, the applicant re-approached staff about the ‘bubble’ enclosures. Based on experience with the weather and changing financing structures, they are able to put in the first ‘bubble’ enclosure sooner than expected. The purpose of this Planned Development Amendment is to allow for the ‘bubble’ enclosures.
At the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the applicant had proposed to enclose the tennis courts that were on the easternmost portion of the property. Please see the Concept Plan for P&Z in the Staff Attachments. Based on feedback from the public and Commissioners at the meeting, the applicant has revised the phasing plan and location of the dome enclosures to be more central on the property. Please see the updated Concept Plan and Phasing Plan in Exhibit A.
Proposed Uses:
No changes are proposed to use. The primary use is a private tennis club.
Analysis:
This primary purpose of this Planned Development Amendment Zoning Change is to allow for the ‘bubble’ enclosures. While changes are being made for the ‘bubble’ enclosures, the applicant would also like to change the hours of operation and the requirements for above-ground power lines.
Phasing:
Five (5) tennis courts would be covered with ‘bubble’ enclosures with Phase I. An additional five (5) courts would be enclosed in the future. The courts to be enclosed are the ten (10) central courts being constructed with Phase I. The two enclosures would likely be connected. Please see Exhibit “A” Concept Plan and Phasing Plan for diagram.
Enclosure Details:
The proposed ‘bubble’ enclosures or air membrane structures would be manufactured by Arizon, or similar firm, please see attached information in Exhibit “A”. The structures would be required to meet the International Fire Code (IFC) with local amendments and the International Building Code (IBC) with local amendments. The International Codes do have safety requirements pertaining to ‘bubble’ or air membrane structures. These details would be reviewed with building permits.
Enclosure Area:
Each structure would enclose five (5) courts and have an area of approximately 37,500 square feet. Per the drafted Development Standards in Exhibit “A”, the combined area of the structures shall not exceed 75,000 square feet, excluding the connecting corridor and mechanical pads. It is likely an air membrane connecting corridor will be added between the two structures, this is shown in the Concept Plan in Exhibit “A”. This area is not included in the 75,000 square feet. The area for mechanical pads is also not included; please see the Arizon Structures in Exhibit “A” for these pad areas.
Enclosure Setbacks:
The proposed Development Standards state the structures shall maintain a minimum sixty-foot (60’) setback from south, north, and east property lines. The SF-36 zoning district minimum front setback for structures on a thoroughfare is sixty feet (60’), this revised concept plan meets these setbacks. Per the concept plan, the setback from the south property line is approximately two-hundred feet (200’) and the setback from the north property line is approximately four-hundred twenty feet (420’). The setback from the west property line is approximately four-hundred eighty feet (480’). The setback from the east property line, Keller Smithfield Road, is just under five-hundred feet (500’). The required thirty-foot (30’) landscape buffer with planting materials will be provided within these setbacks. The distance of the setbacks and landscaping will reduce the visual impact of the structures on adjacent properties.
At the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting a variance was requested to have the ‘bubble’ enclosures setback thirty feet (30’) from Keller Smithfield Road. Due to the change in the location of the ‘bubble’ enclosures and phasing plan, this variance is no longer required and has been removed from consideration.
Enclosure Heights:
The peak of the proposed dome shaped enclosures is approximately forty-three feet (43’). This is slightly taller than the standard Arizon structure but will allow for tournament style tennis play. The average height, when using the Approximate Membrane Profiles at Dome Side Cross Section provided by Arizon (See Exhibit “A”, Arizon Structures Exhibit) at a point ten feet (10’) inside the structure, is twenty-eight feet nine-inches (28’-9”). This average height meets the base zoning district of SF-36 and the previous standard set in the Planned Development for accessory structures thirty-feet (30’). The specific height of the ‘bubble’ enclosures has been added to the Development Standards in Exhibit “A” for clarification purposes. The bubbles meet both the maximum height of thirty-five feet (35’) for main structures and the maximum height of thirty-feet (30’) for accessory structures. They are considered main structures per the amended Development Standards, see Exhibit A.
For a point of reference on the height, often the peak of a two-story residential home built in Keller today is between thirty-five and forty-five feet (35' to 45'). Our Code requires the average height for residential structures to be no greater than thirty-five feet (35') in the SF-36 zoning district. For this, we average the distance between the peak and the eve of the roof. For a commercial structure, Town Hall is two-stories and about forty feet (40') to the roof peak. The Arthouse in Town Center is the only four-story building in Keller and the mid-point of the roof is closer to sixty feet (60’) in height.
Enclosure Exteriors:
The proposed exteriors are an opaque timberwolfe grey fabric. The timberwolfe grey color was chosen as it better blends into the skyline than white or other colored fabrics. Please see the images in the Arizon Case Studies, included in Exhibit “A”. The fabric material required for a ‘bubble’ enclosure or air membrane structure is not considered masonry and a variance will be needed for the fabric material.
The applicants have expressed a desire to have the skylight shown in the Arizon Case Studies, included in Exhibit “A”. These skylights will reduce the need for internal lighting use during daylight hours.
Variance Request:
1. A variance to Section 8.06 (A.2) to allow the ‘bubble’ enclosures or air membrane structures to be a fabric material in lieu of masonry construction.
Hours of Operation:
The current Planned Development limited the hours of operation of the tennis club from 7:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. The applicant would like to begin operations earlier than this, starting at 6:00 a.m. There is a request to change the hours of operation from 7:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. Delivery hours are not proposed to be changed.
Lighting Hours:
The current Planned Development states that “Courts within one-hundred fifty feet (150’) of an adjacent residential property will not be in use or lighted past 9:00 p.m.”
With the ‘bubble’ enclosures, the applicant is requesting that “Regulated hours will not apply to courts within a ‘bubble’ enclosure” as lighting inside the structure will be less impactful to adjacent neighborhoods. This will allow longer play hours for the facility.
All exterior lighting is still proposed to be Dark Sky rated per the originally adopted standards.
Power Lines:
The applicant is proposing to allow existing power lines to remain overhead with Phase 1 this Planned Development. The lines would be relocated underground with Phase 2 to allow additional time for financing this change. This also represents a change from the original request that went before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The request heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission was to leave the lines overhead permanently. Please see Section 12 of the attached Revised Development Standards, Setback Exhibit, and Photos of Power Lines provided in Exhibit “A”. Section 5.22 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) states,
All subdivision plats, site plans and construction plans filed and submitted to the City for approval shall provide for utility services such as electrical, gas, telephone, and cable TV utility (lateral and/or service distribution) lines and wires including, but not limited to, street lighting, to be placed underground. Existing feeder and other major transmission lines that could not practically be placed underground may remain overhead. However, a subdivider shall endeavor, and whenever practical (as determined by the Development Review Committee), the City may require that feeder lines are placed away from traffic arteries (Thoroughfare Types A6D, A4D, C4U, C2U, and C3) and/or be placed underground. Overhead feeder lines shall not be placed along both sides of the street rights-of-way. The developer shall be responsible for obtaining verification from the utility companies for easement locations and widths prior to the final approval of construction plans by the City. Any changes during construction shall be approved by the utility companies and the City of Keller.
Variance Request:
2. A variance to Section 5.22 to allow the power lines shown in Exhibit “A” to remain overhead during Phase 1 and be buried with Phase 2.
Lot Coverage:
Per the SF-36 zoning district, lot coverage of main structures is limited to thirty percent (30%) of the site and total coverage with impervious surface is limited to fifty percent (50%) of the site. The applicant will meet these lot coverage standards with this revision to the Planned Development.
Trip Generation Form (TGF):
Enclosing the courts is not expected to impact the original trip generation estimated. The previous trip generation analysis is provided below for reference,
The Trip Generation Form (TGF) indicates that this facility would generate up to three hundred forty-two (342) trips per day at full build-out. Section 5.03(E.1) UDC requires a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) to be completed and submitted to the City whenever there are more than five hundred (500) trips per day generated by a residential use or more than two thousand (2,000) trips per day generated by non-residential uses. A TIA is not required to be submitted for this Planned Development Zoning Change request.
For a point of reference, if the property were developed with residential homes under the current SF-36 zoning district a total of three-hundred seventeen (317) trips per day may be expected and if the property developed under the SF-25 zoning district, the highest allowed under the current Future Land Use Plan designation, a total of four-hundred sixty-four (464) trips per day might be expected.
Parking:
No changes are proposed to parking and the enclosures should not impact parking demands. No changes are proposed to parking.
Fire Protection:
The Fire Marshall is discussing fire prevention options for this type of structure with the applicant. Should the Planned Development Amendment be approved, the structures would still be required to meet all applicable building and fire codes, including the requirement for a fire sprinkler system or equivalent alternative.
Signage:
All new signs will meet signage requirements as stated in Section 8.09 of the UDC at time of sign permit review.
Drainage & Utilities:
Water services are in place to serve this property but need to be upgraded. Sewer exists to the north of the property and will be extended to serve the property and run to the south property line. Detailed grading, drainage and utility plans are under review by the Public Works Department for Phase I of the Site Plan application and will meet all requirements of the UDC.
Existing Roadway Access:
Keller-Smithfield Road, a planned four-lane arterial street, currently two-lanes.
Surrounding Zoning & Land Uses:
North: Single Family Homes zoned SF-36
South: Single Family Homes, FAA facility, Fire Station zoned SF-36
East: Single Family Homes zoned SF-36
West: Single Family Homes zoned SF-36
Request:
The applicant is requesting a Planned Development Amendment Zoning Change from PD-SF-36 (Planned Development-Single Family Residential-36,000 square foot minimum) to PD-SF-36 (Planned Development-Single Family Residential-36,000 square foot minimum) to construct ‘bubble’ enclosures over ten (10) tennis courts, amend hours of operation, and allow for over ground utility lines to remain. A Site Plan, Civil Construction Plans, and Final Plat must be approved before a building permit can be issued and construction can begin on this development if this Planned Development Amendment Zoning Change request is approved.
Summary:
Section 8.02 (D.1.e) of the UDC states that when considering a zoning change request, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall consider the following factors:
1) Whether the uses permitted by the proposed change will be appropriate in the immediate area concerned and their relationship to the general area and the City as a whole, and in compliance with the Future Land Use Plan.
The immediate area is primarily large lot single-family residential homes, though to the east is a Federal Aviation Administration facility and a City of Keller Fire Station. There are some concerns about proximity to residential development but the applicant is meeting all landscaping and setback requirements, maintaining existing trees, and meeting landscape buffering standards for residential adjacency. The new dome enclosures are two-hundred feet (200’) from the southern property line. Many homes to the south are approximately two-hundred feet (200’) from the property line as well. The combined distance between homes and the ‘bubble’ enclosures is approximately four-hundred feet (400’). The dome enclosures are approximately five hundred feet (500’) from Keller Smithfield Road.
Generally, the development plan maintains the open character of Low Density development as identified in the Future Land Use Plan and allows for a tennis club and training facility. The proposed new structures are grey to blend in with the sky and background and the dome shape will reduce the visual impression of the top height of the structure.
2) Whether the proposed change is in accord with any existing or proposed plans for providing streets, water supply, sanitary sewers, and other utilities to the area, and shall note the findings.
There are adequate water and sewer facilities in proximity to the site. The applicant will extend those facilities through the site in compliance with the City’s utility extension policy.
The site has one primary point of access off of Keller-Smithfield Road, a planned four-lane collector in front of this property. There are no plans to immediately widen Keller-Smithfield Road. Until the road is widened to the planned four (4) lanes, there may be some traffic concerns. These concerns are not impacted by the dome enclosures, hours of operation, or overhead utility lines.
3) The amount of vacant land currently classified for similar development in the vicinity and elsewhere in the City, and any special circumstances which may make a substantial part of such vacant land unavailable for development.
There are very few multi-acre tracts of land left for development in Keller. A facility of this kind is unique.
4) The recent rate at which land is being developed in the same zoning classification as the request, particularly in the vicinity of the proposed change.
While the base-zoning district is SF-36, the proposed tennis club and training facility development is unique and would not be permitted as proposed by-right anywhere in Keller. A previous, smaller tennis club on England Drive was annexed into the City some time ago and is currently being used by the applicants until the new facility can be built.
5) How other areas designated for similar development will be, or are unlikely to be, affected if the proposed amendment is approved.
Staff does not see this development impacting any areas designated for similar development. All adjacent properties are currently developed.
6) Any other factors which will substantially affect the health, safety, morals, or general welfare.
Staff does not anticipate any other factors that would substantially affect the health, safety, morals, or general welfare.
Citizen Input:
On February 17, 2017, the City mailed out thirty-one (31) letters of Notifications for this Public Hearing and the associated planned development zoning change to all property owners within three hundred feet (300’) of the subject site and KISD. A public hearing notice sign was posted on the site.
As of March 2, 2017, City Staff has received letters written opposition from ten (10) properties, sixteen (16) e-mails in opposition and two (2) e-mails in support.
State laws and the UDC both state that if written objections are received from twenty percent (20%) of the area of the adjacent property owners extending two-hundred feet (200’) from the subject property, then a three-fourth (¾) vote (super majority is 6 out of 7) is required by City Council for approval of this Planned Development Request. Written opposition letters received represent over thirty-two percent (32.4%) of the area within two-hundred feet (200’). This Planned Development request will require a three-fourth (¾) super majority vote by City Council for approval.
Professional Opinion:
Staff’s professional opinion is to support this Planned Development Amendment Zoning Change application for City Council consideration with the concept plan and development standards provided in Exhibit “A” and the variances requests:
1. A variance to Section 8.06 (A.2) to allow the ‘bubble’ enclosures or air membrane structures to be a fabric material.
2. A variance to Section 5.22 to allow the power lines shown in Exhibit “A” to remain overhead during Phase 1 and be buried with Phase 2.
Board Review:
The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this Item at their February 27, 2017 meeting. They recommended denial unanimously (7-0).
Please note since that meeting the location of the bubble structures has been moved to be more central to the interior of the site, removing a variance request, and the request to not bury the overhead utility lines has been modified to postpone burying the lines until Phase 2 of the project. These changes were made based on comments from the public and Commissioners.
Alternatives:
The City Council has the following options when considering a Planned Development Amendment Zoning Change application:
• Approve as submitted (with variances and conditions)
• Approve with modifications or additional condition(s)
• Tabling the agenda item to a specific date with clarification of intent and purpose
• Deny