Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council declines to approve 71‑unit 'Light Breeze' condominium plan after debate over density and noise mitigation
Summary
The council considered a PD rezoning and detailed site plan for a four‑story, 71‑unit condominium development (PD‑313) near the DART Silver Line. Staff recommended approval with conditions including noise attenuation; a motion to approve failed in the council vote.
The Coppell City Council on Dec. 10 considered a two‑part application from Coppell Light Breeze LLC and GPF Architects for PD‑313, requesting a land‑use change and approval of a detailed site plan for a 71‑unit, four‑story condominium on approximately 4.4 acres along South Belt Line Road.
Planning staff (Mary Perron Boswell) told council the project would provide 71 condominium units for sale, a 58‑foot, four‑story building (where MF‑2 allows two stories/35 feet), 202 parking spaces, four EV charging stalls, and 39 three‑bedroom units (about 55% of the total). Staff listed PD conditions recommended by the Planning & Zoning Commission, including a required replat, a southbound left‑turn lane on Belt Line Road, building elevations and noise‑attenuation measures for all windows and exterior walls, and a fire‑lane realignment with the fire department.
Applicant Greg Franco (GPF Architects) and civil engineer Nicholas Erlanger said the design was reduced from an earlier 120‑unit proposal, emphasized proximity to the future DART Silver Line, and said triple‑pane (sound‑reducing) windows and building layout would mitigate noise. Franco said HOA documents and other building documentation are in development.
Council discussion focused on whether the site is appropriate for higher‑density multifamily, enforceability of any owner‑occupancy intent, and long‑term maintenance under an HOA. Mayor Pro Tem Nevels moved to close the public hearing and approve Item 10 with the conditions listed; Council Member Carroll seconded, but the motion failed in the subsequent vote.
Outcome: the motion to approve the PD and site plan failed; no approval was recorded. Council also continued other zoning items (Item 11) to a Jan. 14, 2025 meeting at the applicant’s request.
Next steps: applicant and staff may revise materials and return for further review; council requested follow‑up on HOA and mitigation details if resubmitted.
