PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Town of Little Elm. Work Session and Regular Meeting Thursday, March 03, 2011 Town Hall - Council Chamber

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Town of Little Elm. Work Session and Regular Meeting Thursday, March 03, 2011 Town Hall - Council Chamber"

Bartholomew Bruce
5 years ago
Views:

1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Town of Little Elm Work Session and Regular Meeting Thursday, March 03, 2011 Town Hall - Council Chamber To address the Commission for any public hearing item please sign a speaker s sheet located on the tables by the front entry and submit to the Acting Secretary. You will have 3 minutes to address the Commission. In accordance with the Open Meetings Act, the Commission may not discuss or take action on any item, which has not been posted on the agenda. I. 6:00 PM Work Session 1. Discussion of agenda items for the March 3, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. Please be advised that the work session is for discussion purposes only by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. Discussion of future agenda items. II. 7:00 PM Regular Meeting 1. Open the regular meeting of the March 3, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. Roll Call. 3. Chair Elections. Commissioners will nominate and elect the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 4. Adoption of the January 6, 2011 regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 5. Boards, Commissions, & Charter. Discussion of recent appointments to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of Adjustment and discussion of relevant proposed Town Charter amendments FP-001 Frisco Ranch 4A. Consider and make recommendation on a plat application for Frisco Ranch, Phase 4A, Final Plat, from Petitt Barraza, generally located at the southwest corner of Frisco Ranch Drive & FM 423, within the Town s ETJ. a. Staff Report. b. Applicant Presentation. c. Discussion and Recommendation FP-002 Frisco Ranch 4B. Consider and make recommendation on a plat application for Frisco Ranch, Phase 4B, Final Plat, from Petitt Barraza, generally located at the southwest corner of Frisco Ranch Drive & FM 423, within the Town s ETJ. a. Staff Report.

2 b. Applicant Presentation. c. Discussion and Recommendation PD-001 All Storage Expansion. Conduct a public hearing to consider and make recommendation on a request to rezone approximately 5.05 acres of land from Light Commercial (LC) to Planned Development District (PD-LC) in order to expand an existing storage facility, located at U.S. Highway 380, within the Town Limits of Little Elm. a. Staff Report. b. Open Public Hearing. c. Applicant Presentation. d. Receive Public Comment. e. Close Public Hearing. f. Discussion and Recommendation PD-001 Aramko Tracts. Conduct a public hearing to consider and make recommendation on a request to rezone approximately 110 acres of land from Agriculture (AG) and Light Commercial (LC) districts to Planned Development District for Multi Family Uses (PD-MF), generally located at the southwest corner of Little Elm Parkway & FM 423 and the southeast corner of Smotherman Road & FM 423, within the Town Limits of Little Elm. a. Staff Report. b. Open Public Hearing. c. Applicant Presentation. d. Receive Public Comment. e. Close Public Hearing. f. Discussion and Recommendation. III. Update Commission on Council Action. IV. Adjourn. Certificate I certify that the above notice of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was posted on the bulletin board of the Town of Little Elm, Texas on the 24th of February, 2011 prior to 6:00pm. The Little Elm Town Hall is wheelchair accessible and accessible parking spaces are available. Requests for accommodations or interpretive service must be made 48 hours prior to this meeting. Please contact the Town Secretary s office at (214) or (972) (fax) for arrangements. Dusty McAfee, Interim Director of Planning

MINUTES Town of Little Elm PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Thursday, January 6, 2011 7:00 pm 1.

3 MINUTES Town of Little Elm PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Thursday, January 6, :00 pm 1. Opened the regular meeting of the January 6, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission at 7:02 PM. 2. Roll Call. Present: Michael McClellen - Chair Charlie Davis Bryan Lewis Deleon English Ann Brooks Also Present: Sherry Rettinger, Secretary Dusty McAfee, Interim Director of Planning 3. Adoption of January 6, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes. January 6, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes passed unanimously FP-010. Consider and make recommendation on a plat application for Sunset Pointe, Phase 21, FInal Plat, from Dowdey, generally located at the northwest of the intersection of Sunflower Drive and Marlin Drive. Staff gave presentation on the Final Plat as outlined in the staff report. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Update Commission on Council Action. No Updates. 6. Adjourn at 7:30 PM.

4 Planning and Zoning Commission Name Place Office Expires Current Term 3-Term Limit Michael McClellan 1-Regular Chair 2/28/ Deleon English 2-Regular 2/28/ Ann Brooks 3-Regular 2/28/ Bryan Lewis, Jr 4-Regular 2/28/ Charlie Davis 5-Regular Vice Chair 2/28/ Board of Adjustment Vacant 1-Regular 2/28/ Term Limit Bill Horner 2-Regular 2/28/ Vacant 3-Regular 2/28/2013 Stephanie Gregg 4-Regular 2/28/ Robert Anderson 5-Regular 2/28/ Alternates Vacant 6-Alternate 2/28/2012 Brian Rawlins 7-Alternate 2/28/2013 Vacant 8-Alternate 2/28/2012 Vacant 9-Alternate 2/28/2013

6 PROPOSITION NO. 2 Shall Section 9.01 of the Town Charter, entitled Planning and Zoning Commission, be amended to extend the terms of the Planning and Zoning Commission members from two-year terms to three-year terms? SECTION 9.01 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION The Town Council shall create a Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Little Elm and shall appoint five (5) members and four (4) alternate members, each member of the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be a citizen of Town of Little Elm. Members shall be appointed for two (2)three (3) year staggered terms; provided, however, that members of the Planning and Zoning Commission serve at the pleasure of the Town Council and may be removed, without cause, by an affirmative vote of the majority of the full membership of the Town Council. Such appointees shall serve without compensation and may not hold any elective office of the State of Texas or any other political subdivision thereof during their terms. A vacancy in an unexpired term shall be filled by the Town Council for the remainder of the term. The majority of the appointed members shall constitute a quorum, and decisions may only be made with the affirmative vote of a majority of these members present and voting. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall select from any of its members a Chairman and Vice Chairman.

7 TOWN OF LITTLE ELM Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report PROJECT: 11-FP-001 Frisco Ranch, Phase 4A HEARING DATES: Planning & Zoning Commission: 3/03/11 REQUEST: PROPOSED USE: LOCATION: SIZE: Town Council 3/15/11 Proposal to final plat 77 single-family residential lots and 1 HOA lot. Single Family Residential The property is generally located at the southwest corner of Frisco Ranch Drive and FM 423. Approximately acres CURRENT ZONING: EXISTING USE / SITE ATTRIBUTES: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: PLANNING ANALYSIS: RECOMMENDED ACTION: TOWN CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: ETJ Vacant land Petitt Barraza Pulte Homes of Texas. The applicant has completed Staff s requested revisions on the Final Plat. The proposed plat is in compliance with the Town of Little Elm s Subdivision regulations. Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat. Michael Arthaud, Planning/GIS Technician Dusty McAfee, Interim Director of Planning Application Location Map Final Plat

8 µ Location Map Frisco Ranch Drive Project Location Woodlake Parkway

10 TOWN OF LITTLE ELM Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report PROJECT: 11-FP-002 Frisco Ranch, Phase 4B HEARING DATES: Planning & Zoning Commission: 3/03/11 REQUEST: PROPOSED USE: LOCATION: SIZE: Town Council 3/15/11 Proposal to final plat 54 single-family residential lots and 1 HOA lot. Single Family Residential The property is generally located at the southwest corner of Frisco Ranch Drive and FM 423, south of phase 4A. Approximately acres CURRENT ZONING: EXISTING USE / SITE ATTRIBUTES: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: PLANNING ANALYSIS: RECOMMENDED ACTION: TOWN CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: ETJ Vacant land Petitt Barraza Pulte Homes of Texas. The applicant has completed Staff s requested revisions on the Final Plat. The proposed plat is in compliance with the Town of Little Elm s Subdivision regulations. Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat. Michael Arthaud, Planning/GIS Technician Dusty McAfee, Interim Director of Planning Application Location Map Final Plat

11 µ Location Map Frisco Ranch Drive Project Location FM 423 Woodlake Parkway

13 TOWN OF LITTLE ELM Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report PROJECT: 11-PD-001 Expansion of existing All-Storage facility on U.S. 380 HEARING DATES: Planning and Zoning Commission: Town Council: REQUEST: PROPOSED USE: LOCATION: SIZE: CURRENT/PROPOSED ZONING: FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING USE / SITE ATTRIBUTES: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: PLANNING ANALYSIS: A request to rezone approximately 5.05 acres of land from Light Commercial (LC) to Planned Development district with light commercial base zoning and storage uses (PD-LC for storage). Mini-storage, boat storage, & RV storage U.S. 380 (generally located at the southwest corner of the existing All-Storage facility, behind the O Reilly Auto Parts store). Approximately 5.05 acres of land Light Commercial (LC) / Planned Development district with Light Commercial base and storage uses (PD-LC for storage). Retail/Office Mini-Storage facility / vacant land Reliable Paving, Inc. Coy Quine The proposed PD is an expansion of an existing storage facility located off U.S This facility was constructed in 2008 through a Planned Development District, and it is seeking permission to expand westward, behind the existing O Reilly Auto Parts store with the same development standards as seen on the existing facility and attached conceptual plans. The 380 Overlay district prohibits the use of mini-storage. The PD is required to allow for the proposed use (storage) and to follow the same development pattern as the existing facility. Typically, a PD would contain extensive site plan information with details of the building façade, tree species, and other development review basics. However, as a courtesy to the applicant, Staff recommended that PD approval be based on conceptual plans in

14 order to save time and costs to the developer. Due to the exceptional quality of the existing facility and due to special ordinance provisions that require strict adherence to the zoning ordinance and for the expansion to match the existing facility, Staff is comfortable basing approval on the attached conceptual plans with the special ordinance provisions listed below. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval with the following special ordinance provisions: 1. This ordinance functions to allow for the physical expansion of an existing storage facility, governed by Ordinance 830, with the additional uses of boat and RV storage. 2. The attached exhibits are conceptual in nature and shall not over-ride existing ordinance 830 or the zoning ordinance at time of site plan and building plan review. If conflicts of interpretation arise, then the most restrictive option shall govern, subject to the Director of Planning. 3. Where this ordinance is silent, the expansion shall match the existing structure in terms of masonry façade, screening, landscaping, interior finishing materials, and roofing materials, in addition to Chapter 106 (zoning) of the Little Elm Code of Ordinances. 4. Perimeter landscaping (trees, setbacks, shrubs, etc) shall match the existing development. TOWN CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: Dusty McAfee, Interim Director of Planning Application Location Map Letter of Intent Conceptual Plans

15 ³ Location Map Hwy 380 Project Location South Paloma Creek Blvd

21 TOWN OF LITTLE ELM Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report PROJECT: 10-PD-001 Cottonwood Crossing Rezoning & FLUP Amendment HEARING DATES: Planning & Zoning Commission: Public Hearing: Public Hearing: Town Council: Work Session: Public Hearing: REQUEST: PROPOSED USE: CURRENT/PROPOSED ZONING: FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: PLANNING ANALYSIS: A request to rezone approximately 110 acres of land from Agriculture (AG) and Light Commercial (LC) to Planned Development district for multi-family uses (PD-MF), and a request to re-categorize 110 acres of land from Medium Density Residential and Retail/Office to High Density Residential. Multi-Family Uses Tract 1: Agriculture (AG) / Multi-family (MF) Tract 2: Light Commercial (LC) / Multi-family (MF) Tract 3: Light Commercial (LC) / Multi-family (MF) Tract 1: Medium Density Residential Tract 2: Retail / Office Tract 3: Retail / Office Kimley-Horn & Associates William Martin - Aramko Development The Planning and Zoning Commission tabled this item on December 2 nd, In the meantime, Staff has worked with the applicant to address issues of importance affecting the subject property and surrounding area. There are 2 requests being considered concurrently by Council: a request to rezone and a request to amend the Future Land Use Plan (FLUP). The FLUP amendment is a pre-requisite of the rezoning. ZONING ANALYSIS: Zoning Change The applicant s request is for a Multi-family (MF) zoning district on 3 different tracts of land (see Location Map, attached). The purpose of acquiring a MF designation on the property is to aid in marketing the property and making it more development-ready.

22 Little Elm s MF zoning standards are strict, comparatively, and only allow 16 units per acre. A textual PD has been proposed that protects the Town s interests, yet allows development to proceed. The end result is that the Town s current MF regulations would apply, ensuring a high quality development, except where the textual PD states otherwise. Three (3) tracts are being rezoned (see Location Map, attached): Tract 1: This tract is just south of the southwest corner of Little Elm Parkway and FM 423; thus, it will have a retail center as its northern neighbor. It is bounded by a creek along its eastern and southern boundaries. It has single-family residential in places along its western border, which will require screening at time of development. The FLUP foresaw higher density residential for this tract because it s too deep for retail and office, too small for low-density residential, is hidden behind the creek, and lends itself well to higher density residential uses. This tract is currently zoned Agriculture, and the proposed MF zoning is supported by staff because it would help support the future retail in the area, is not a visually prominent tract, will not impact LEISD, is an under-served use in Little Elm, and has no marketable use other than higher density residential. Tract 2: This tract is a mid-block tract that is unique because it is bordered by creeks, creating a tri-angular shaped lot with frontage on FM 423. Being mid-block, retail is unlikely due to the overconcentration of commercial zoning in the area. The most likely use of the tract is garden office or higher density residential uses, which may include retirement housing. The FLUP designates this property as potential Retail/Office; however, the request for High Density residential is not inappropriate given its mid-block location, the over-zoning of commercial in the area, and its unique size and shape. This tract is currently zoned Light Commercial, and the proposed MF zoning is supported by staff because the acreage of the property lends itself to higher density residential uses, there is a lack of multifamily zoning in Little Elm, it does not adversely impact LEISD, and because commercial use is unlikely given its location, shape, and size. Tract 3: This tract is south of Smotherman Road and east of FM 423. It is currently zoned Light Commercial. The applicant proposes to leave the portion of the tract fronting FM 423 as Light Commercial for future retail development, and requests the interior portion of the tract be rezoned to MF district.

23 The FLUP designates this tract as Retail/Office. It is a large tract unsuitable for a major retail center due to it being mid-block between major retail centers at Main and FM 423 in Frisco and future major retail centers at Little Elm Parkway and FM 423 in Little Elm. Even if this property were able to develop as a major retail center, the depth of the property is too great, and the back interior portion of the property would need to be reserved for another use, as is being requested. Staff supports this rezoning because the location of the tract lends itself to higher density residential use, the tract is not a good candidate for commercial uses, the tract has good access via Smotherman Road, and the proposed zoning would help support area retail establishments. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS: FLUP Amendment The Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) designates the subject property for Retail/Office and Medium Density Residential land uses. This designation does not support the requested multi-family zoning. The Town requires that the FLUP be amended prior to approving the rezoning request, which is not supported by the FLUP. As a part of the rezoning request the applicant is also requesting an amendment to the Little Elm Comprehensive Plan from Medium Density Residential and Retail/Office to High Density Residential. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes that future development proposals may not always directly conform to the land use categories designated on the FLUP. The plan recommends a review of such proposals in light of the following 5 questions: 1. Will the proposed change enhance the site and the surrounding area? The tracts on the west side of 423 have significant floodplain and vegetation that the developers will use to construct a public park. Multi-family development would help support the retail corners in the vicinity. 2. Is the proposed change a better use than that recommended by the Future Land Use Plan? There is currently an over-supply of commercial zoning in this area, the subject tracts are located mid block, and they are not located at typical commercial intersections, unlike the areas to the north and south. As such, the property would better support a MF development over a commercial one.

24 3. Will the proposed use impact adjacent residential areas in a negative manner? Or will the proposed use be compatible with, and/or enhance, adjacent residential area? Tracts 1 and 3 have low density residential adjacency located on the rear property lines. Multi-family development can provide a better transition from single family than most big-box commercial developments. 4. Are uses adjacent to the proposed use similar in nature in terms of appearance, hours of operation, and other general aspects of compatibility? These tracts will be bounded by commercial development and will have frontage on FM 423. As such, they are compatible with the surrounding land uses. 5. Does the proposed use present a significant benefit to the public health, safety and welfare of the community? Would it contribute to the Town s long term economic well-being? The proposal provides the Town with a more diversified housing mix which is supported throughout the Comprehensive Plan in addition to construction of a public hike and bike trail system. The subject property falls within Frisco ISD and is preliminary platted. Prior to development, a final plat will be required, in addition to site plan review. All notices and zoning signs were published and posted, respectively, by their required date. ORDINANCE ANALYSIS: Staff recommends the following special ordinance provisions be incorporated into the PD: Development of the subject property (all 3 tracts, approximately 110 acres in size) shall be governed by section , Multi-Family (MF) district, of the Little Elm Code of Ordinances, in addition to all other applicable rules and regulations, except as follows: 1. Density shall be 24 units per net acre, defined as property outside the 100-year floodplain. Each tract shall be calculated separately. The 100-year floodplain shall be considered a perimeter for the remaining regulations. Existing MF density is 16 units per acre, and it allows flood plain acreage to count. Regional standard for density ranges from units per acre. Staff feels that the requested density is not excessive given its proximity to FM 423 and

25 significant commercial adjacency. Most importantly, it does not allow flood plain acreage to count as density. 2. Building height shall be limited to 60 feet and four stories. Building height shall be limited to 35 feet and two stories when within 50 feet of the shared property line of adjacent single family uses. Masonry facades are defined as stone, brick, or stucco. Existing MF regulations limit buildings within 150 of singlefamily residential homes to one story in height. This standard is impractical and requires revision. The proposal would limit buildings adjacent to single-family to 35 and two stories, which is the same for any neighborhood. 3. Parking shall be 2 spaces for units with 2 or fewer bedrooms and 3 spaces for units with 3 bedrooms or more. Non-gated public parking shall be 1 space for each 400 square feet of non-residential floor area. The mail kiosk shall have a minimum 6 parking spaces within 50 feet of it. Existing MF regulations require 2 parking spaces per unit with an additional parking space per additional bedroom unit. The proposed revision simplifies the parking formula, falls within regional standard, and really only affects the parking required for 4-bedroom units. 4. Screening along single family uses shall be an 8 high masonry wall, and the remaining perimeter shall be a 6 high black tubular steel fence with masonry columns spaced 40 foot on center, unless the developer elects to construct a wall in lieu of the wrought iron fence. Existing MF regulations require an 8 masonry wall around all perimeters. This requirement is excessive, especially given the extensive flood plain and commercial adjacency. Regional standard is wrought iron. This standard would ensure that adjacent single-family uses would be screened with an 8 masonry wall, yet allow for wrought iron along flood plains. 5. Lot coverage and usable open space regulations shall not apply as long as 10% of the net acreage is used as landscaped open space. This regulation does not apply globally, shall be calculated separately for each phase, and can use landscaped courtyards and all green spaces outside of the floodplain and perimeter buffers as credit. Existing MF regulations contain outdated open space regulations that require revision. The proposed 10% open space requirement is appropriate, and flood plain is not

26 allowed to count for credit. Existing regulations allow flood plain to count for credit, resulting in total open space. 6. Landscaping shall be provided by planting an evergreen tree every 25 feet along the perimeter of the property with no species being more than 25% of the plantings, a large canopy tree every 25 feet along rights-of-way, a large canopy tree at the terminus of each parking row, a large canopy tree each 5,000 square feet of required open space, and a small ornamental tree each 5,000 square feet of required open space. Trees may not be double counted for credit. Existing MF regulations do not require perimeter landscaping and are based on archaic square footage calculations. This provision achieves more trees in targeted areas and improved landscaping design. 7. A 10 wide landscape buffer is required along the perimeter, and a 20 wide landscape buffer is required along rights-ofway. Building setbacks shall be 20 from rights-of-way, 20 where adjacent to single-family residential uses, and 10 otherwise. Existing MF regulations do not require a landscape buffer and have 15 side yard setbacks. This provision achieves a landscape buffer currently not required in addition to an increased building setback where adjacent to single-family uses. 8. Parkland dedication shall be satisfied by dedicating all land within the 100-year floodplain to the public use at time of platting the first phase developed. This park land shall be owned by the Town, but maintained by the property owner or a Property Owner s Association (or legal equivalent with Town approval) pursuant to a license granted by the Town. This provision requires the developer to dedicate and maintain a public park at time of construction. The Town saves a lot of money by placing the burden of maintenance on the POA, yet retains control over the park. The developer builds it, the POA maintains it, and the Town controls it. 9. Little Elm s tree preservation regulations apply; however, trees removed for the construction of public improvements within the 100-year floodplain do not require mitigation. This provision would exempt the developer from mitigating trees lost for the construction of public improvements such as public sewer and water lines, public hike and bike trails, etc. The Town exempts itself from these provisions, and Staff feels

27 that a developer constructing the same public infrastructure should also be exempt. 10. Amenities shall be provided by each tract, per the following: a minimum 1 pool, a minimum 1000 square foot exercise facility, outdoor picnic tables and grills every 50 units, and a minimum 1 sports court or field each 15 net acres. If desired, the sports court or field may be constructed in the floodplain, but can only be credited once. This provision is an increase over what the current MF regulations require. Currently, an apartment could satisfy the amenity requirements with a pool, treadmill room, picnic table, and playground. The proposed provision requires more amenities, and they are in addition to the hike and bike trail the developer is constructing within the public park. 11. A district wide hike and bike trail open to the public shall be constructed per the attached exhibit. Each development phase shall construct its own portion of the trail adjacent to that phase s property when that phase is developed. This trail shall generally be within the 100-year flood plain and 10 feet in width. This provision requires the developer to construct a 10 wide hike and bike trail at time of development. These trails would not be constructed otherwise by the Town for at least another bond cycle or longer. However, only the portion of trail adjacent to the phase being developed would be constructed. 12. Additional improvements within the 100-year floodplain shall include, as shown on the attached trail exhibit: playgrounds, benches, picnic tables, trash receptacles, and at least 1 pedestrian bridge across the creek. These are to be constructed when the associated portion of the trail is constructed. This provision requires the developer to construct additional park amenities in addition to the on-site amenities and the trail. 13. A minimum 6 public parking spaces west of FM 423 shall be provided for the linear park area, including a trail head connection with improved entry feature and associated signage along FM 423. This is to be constructed with the first phase developed west of FM 423. This provision requires the developer to construct public parking for the park, the park s trail head, and signage for the park.

28 14. Subdivision Entrance signs (as defined in Chapter 86, Signs, of the Code of Ordinances) shall be allowed to identify the development phases. This provision clears up confusion regarding subdivision signs. The Sign ordinance does not specifically call out that apartments are entitled to entrance signs; however, Staff has always interpreted the ordinance to allow for them. This provision ensures sign rights for the development. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the requested zoning, FLUP amendment, and ordinance provisions for the following reasons: 1. The realistic land uses for mid-block tracts is not supported by existing zoning. The subject property is not seen as possessing viable retail potential, yet lends itself to high density residential uses. 2. Little Elm has a need for multi-family housing, serving an important housing function for educated young professionals, retirees, short-term corporate employees, divorcees, and those unable to meet the expense of home ownership. 3. The proposed location has the least impact on the Town and its associated transportation system, emergency response, and other public services. 4. Additional density improves the viability of proposed retail developments, potentially making the difference between vacant land developing as storage and warehousing or as restaurant and retail. 5. Existing MF district regulations ensure a high quality development. 6. The proposed PD provisions require the developer to build and maintain a public park with a public hike and bike trail, associated amenities, and other strategic site design enhancements. TOWN CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: Dusty McAfee, Interim Director of Planning Application Location Map FLUP

30 µ Location Map Little Elm Parkway FM 423 Agriculture to Multi-Family 1 «Light Commercial to Multi-Family 3 «Smotherman Road «2 Light Commercial to Multi-Family

O-I (Office-Institutional) and AG-1(Agricultural)

PROPERTY INFORMATION ADDRESS 3503 and 3505 Bethany Bend DISTRICT, LAND LOTS 2/1 973 and 974 OVERLAY DISTRICT State Route 9 PETITION NUMBERS EXISTING ZONING O-I (Office-Institutional) and AG-1(Agricultural)