Loading...
2012-05-03 Igi CI TY OF S OUTHLAKE TEXAS REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 3, 2012 LOCATION: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, Texas Work Session - Executive Conference Room, Suite 268 of Town Hall or City Council Chambers of Town Hall Regular Session - City Council Chambers of Town Hall COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Hudson, Vice -Chair Parrish, Forman, Fairchild, Springer, Hamel, and Williamson. STAFF PRESENT: Deputy Director, Dennis Killough; Planner II, Richard Schell; Deputy Director, Gordon Mayer; Deputy City Engineer, Cheryl Taylor; Civil Engineer, Alex Ayala, City Attorney, Ashley Dierker and Commission Secretary, Holly Blake. WORK SESSION: Item No. 1 — Call to Order: Chairman Hudson called the work session to order at 6:00 p.m. Item No. 2 — Discussion of all Items of Tonight's Meeting Agenda: Staff reviewed the agenda. Item No. 3 — Work Session Adjourned: Chairman Hudson adjoumed the work session at 6:31 p.m. REGULAR SESSION: Agenda Item No. 1 — Call to Order: Chairman Hudson called the regular meeting to order at 6:33 P.M. Agenda Item No. 3— Approval of Minutes for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held on April 19, 2012. Made a motion to approve the minutes dated April 19, 2012. Motion: Parrish Second: Springer Ayes: Forman, Fairchild, Parrish, Springer, Hamel, Williamson and Hudson. Nays: None Abstain: None Approved: 7 -0 Consent Agenda: Agenda Item No. 5- ZAl2 -029, Final Plat for Carillon Phase 2A -1 on property described as a portion of Tracts 1,2, 3A1, Larkin H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 300, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 1700 & 1800 N. Carroll Avenue and Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — May 3, 2012 Page 1 of 9 1801 N. White Chapel Boulevard, Southlake Texas. Current Zoning: "ECZ" Employment Center Zoning District. SPIN Neighborhood #3. Made a motion to approve, ZAl2 -029, Final Plat for Carillon Phase 2A -1, subject to plat review summary #2 dated April 26, 2012. Motion: Parrish Second: Springer Ayes: Forman, Fairchild, Parrish, Springer, Hamel, Williamson, and Hudson Nays: None Abstain: None Approved: 7 -0 Agenda Item No. 6— ZAl2 -032, Final Plat for Carillon Phase 2A -2 on property described as a portion of Tracts 3A1, Larkin H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 300, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 1700 & 1800 N. Carroll Avenue, Southlake Texas. Current Zoning: "ECZ" Employment Center Zoning District. SPIN Neighborhood #3. Made a motion to approve, ZAl2 -032, Final Plat for Carillon Phase 2A -2, subject to plat review summary #2 dated April 26, 2012. Motion: Parrish Second: Springer Ayes: Forman, Fairchild, Parrish, Springer, Hamel, Williamson, and Hudson Nays: None Abstain: None Approved: 7 -0 Agenda Item No. 4 — Administrative Comments. Dennis Killough reminded the Commissioners of the up and coming summer schedule for meetings. Agenda Item No. 2 — Executive Session: As Chairman, I hereby advise you that we are going into executive session pursuant to the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, Section, 551.071, consultation with attorney. Executive Session began at 6:38 P.M. and ended at 7:02 P.M. No formal action was taken. Regular Agenda: Agenda Item No. 7- ZAl2 -007, Zoning Change and Site Plan for Nolen Office Park on property described as Tract 11A, Thomas Easter Survey, Abstract No. 474, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 300 S. Nolen Dr., Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: AG Agricultural District. Requested Zoning: S -P -1 Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN Neighborhood # 8. PUBLIC HEARING Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —May 3, 2012 Page 2 of 9 Konstantine Bakintas, with BHB Engineering & Surveying at 4550 S.H. 360, Suite 180, Grapevine, 76051 came forward. Chairman Hudson verified with the applicant that the plans shows to maintain 19% of the tree canopy versus 40 %. Is there a better design to maximize the protection of the majority of the mature live oak trees? Mr. Bakintas stated that he believes that the design presented is the best layout to be sensitive to the trees and to accommodate the applicant's needs. Commissioner Fairchild asked if the parking was reduced could more trees be protected. During the SPIN meeting it was asked how many people would be working at this facility. The answer given at the time was 12 staff. 82 parking spaces seem to be a lot. Mr. Bakintas stated that the applicant is meeting the required parking requirements. Also, the tenants of this building are primarily for medical use and the parking needs are significant. The plan presented accommodates the applicant, future tenants and meets the ordinances. Chairman Hudson asked Mr. Bakintas about the roadway to the North, Village Center Drive. Mr. Bakintas stated that in the beginning of this project, they were unaware that Village Center Drive was on the future Master Plan. Our original drawing showed the driveway off of South Nolen Drive. The plans presented are consistent with the Master Thoroughfare Plan. It does straddle the property line so that no property owner has to give up any more than the other. Our tract is slender. Trying to push the right -of -way all onto one property would make this parcel very difficult to develop. Commissioner Fairchild asked if the drive is placed on South Nolen Drive, wouldn't that change the plan completely. Mr. Bakintas agreed. Commissioner Fairchild asked why the right -of -way dedication hasn't taken place yet. Mr. Bakintas stated that they developed the right -of -way dedication by separate instrument. The document has been shared with the owner to the North. Mr. Bakintas continued to state that his advice to the northern property owner was not to sign the document until he had some reassurance that the road would be built and /or until City Council approved this. Commissioner Parrish asked if the proposed dedication go the full length of Mr. Shanklin's property. Mr. Bakintas stated that it doesn't. It accommodates the construction as shown on the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —May 3, 2012 Page 3 of 9 site plan. It goes from South Nolen Drive westward. Just west of our proposed drive. On our side of the project, we will dedicate all the right -of -way within the lot and anticipate dedicating the rest of it as we move further west. Commissioner Springer verified that they would dedicate the entire width on both sides. Mr. Bakintas clarified that they would dedicate all of the right -of -way in Lot 1 during this round. In the future, our half of the remaining Village Center Drive as it develops. Commissioner Springer asked why it wouldn't be beneficial to go ahead and do this to the entire property now. Mr. Bakintas stated that their intent is firm. We are providing a preliminary plat showing that is what will happen, dedicating all of the right -of -way in Lot 1, have concept plans on how the other lot will be developed and are moving forward with this lot today. We have the right to purchase the property to the West, but we can't ask that property owner to dedicate that without knowing exactly who the buyers are. Commissioner Springer verified that the applicant doesn't not own the property as of yet. Mr. Bakintas stated that we have indicated in our documentation that we have the right to purchase that as we move forward and plan to do so within a year. Commissioner Fairchild stated that the second Lot will not have any frontage and will be land locked. Mr. Bakintas stated that they are providing a common and /or public access easement through our property to provide access to that land locked parcel. It has a 30 -ft. right -of- way that is part of Village Center which is part of our dedication. Commissioner Fairchild stated that the road will not be built yet. Mr. Bakintas agreed. Our drive within our site and public access easement will be built and dedicated. As we move forward, Village Center Drive will be constructed and the second lot would have access to Village Center Drive as well as Lot 1. Commissioner Springer verified that Mr. Bakintas has closed on this property that is currently being discussed. Mr. Bakintas stated yes. Commissioner Fairchild asked what the prospects were for securing the right -of -way for the entire southern boundary of the northern adjacent property. Mr. Bakintas stated that he could not answer for Mr. Shanklin. We have packaged this project in a way that allows us to build all of Village Center as it is shown. It is a full work of the pavement and it is provided no cost to Mr. Shanklin and little disturbance. In the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —May 3, 2012 Page 4 of 9 • future he could dedicate the remaining right -of -way. This is something we have not pursued aggressively. We have addressed our immediate needs only. If Mr. Shanklin's property develops first, then that road would be extended at the adjacent property owner's expense. If we move forward, we would construct the road. Commissioner Parrish verified that you have a right of first refuse with the western piece of the property that you do not own yet. Mr. Bakintas stated that their plan is to move forward with Lot 2 within a year. Commissioner Springer asked if there was a time limit on that agreement. Mr. Bakintas stated that it is based on the economy. Chairman Hudson opened the public hearing. Dick Shanklin, 3505 Windsor Court, Colleyville, 76034 came forward. Mr. Shanklin stated that he likes the proposals, but is not happy about another road on this property. He started out with 7 acres, but over the years, his family has given up piece by piece for Southlake Boulevard and Nolen Drive. Now, I have another 30 -ft. setback with the new road and the drainage will be affected. Chairman Hudson verified Mr. Shanklin's property lines. Commissioner Fairchild pointed out to Mr. Shanklin that Village Center Drive connecting to South Kimball would increase the value of his property. The future land use there is retail. Retail cannot go forward without Village Center Drive. This is an opportunity for that parcel to increase in value with a right -of -way dedication along the entire southern length. Mr. Shanklin stated that in the beginning the road was going to run next door to my property but now it is over on my property and in the back of Georgetown Park. Commissioner Williamson confirmed that Mr. Shanklin is not in full support of this project, but pointed out that Mr. Bakintas believes that Mr. Shanklin is. Mr. Shanklin stated that he is on the fence with the whole project. Chairman Hudson agreed with Commissioner Fairchild about the complete dedication versus just portions at a time. Commissioner Springer stated that when planning this section and knowing that Village Center would be going through and intersecting with Georgetown Park, more property to the south should have been purchased from the owner to start. It is presumptuous to ask Mr. Shanklin to give up something he had no intent on giving up to start with. In the long run it probably will improve his property value but his concern is about what he has already given up. He is being asked to trim his property piece by piece. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —May 3, 2012 Page 5 of 9 Commissioner Williamson stated that there are a lot of issues that need to be resolved. There is no agreement on the major thoroughfare. Commissioner Parrish stated that on the 2030 Plan this area should be planned together. There are several concerns. Chairman Hudson closed the public hearing. Mr. Bakintas stated that the alignment that you see is reasonable and is a reasonable compromise from both property owners. Shifting the drive entirely on our property doesn't make since. It is a slender piece of land and is hard to develop. It is unfair to make one property owner deal with this issue. It is on the Master Thoroughfare Plan. It has been discussed and adopted. It is standard practice to align these things along property lines when you can. We have made a good faith effort in addressing that aspect as well as meeting with Mr. Shanklin and getting him up to speed on what is happening. If we shift the drive entirely on our street, this project will go away. Commissioner Parrish stated that Village Center Drive is on our Thoroughfare Plan which cannot be removed tonight. One of the options is to put in a private drive. If that was approved it would be contingent upon it being closed if Village Center is developed. Mr. Bakintas disagrees. If allowed to put in a drive, it means we will not be dedicating right -of -way and Village Center would be shifted to the north of our project or to the south of our project. If we put our drive on the south side of our building it would be adequately spaced from Village Center Drive moving north. If we place the drive on north side of our lot it would be adequately spaced from Village Center Drive moving south. A decision needs to be made on how important the Thoroughfare Plan and can we move forward. We felt that we had a neighbor that was comfortable with what we were doing and that we would get that document signed based upon Council approval. Commissioner Springer asked the applicant if he agreed with where it is going to intersect with Georgetown Park. It doesn't seem fair to them. You are proposing to do them what you don't want done to you. Mr. Bakintas disagreed and stated that the Master Thoroughfare Plan dictates where the alignment is going. We were not involved with the public hearings. However, all of these neighbors were. Commissioner Springer pointed out that the applicant has initiated this process. That means that if you continue it straight back, Georgetown Park will be adversely affected unless a curve is placed in the road which does not make since. Mr. Bakintas asked if they would be adversely affected or enhanced. Commissioner Springer continues to believe that they will be adversely affected. Mr. Bakintas disagrees. There are other drives that are now land locked. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —May 3, 2012 Page 6 of 9 Chairman Hudson stated that Georgetown would benefit if Village Center goes through. Mr. Bakintas stated that they have not done a complete survey of their property to know exactly how it will be impacted. We believe it is constructible and it would enhance that development. Mr. Bakintas is surprised that Mr. Shanklin isn't interested in seeing us there. He now has a corner lot. It may reasonable to allow this project to move forward as presented contingent upon that right -of -way dedication. We will not be in a negotiating position for that unless we know this project can move forward. Commissioner Springer pointed out that we are still faced with Georgetown Park being land locked if this road does not go in. Mr. Bakintas stated that in Georgetown, all the lots are land locked and this would be no different than that. This is common practice. Commissioner Springer stated that we don't continue to facilitate bad designs as we go forward. Mr. Bakintas continued that it will happen, one way or another. It is either subdivided or it is subdivided in a condominium plat. Commissioner Fairchild stated that what you have designed here at Village Center Drive is the most appropriate location. It benefits the property to the north and Georgetown Park significantly. It is the beginning of what needs to happen. The 2030 Plan suggests that this all needs to be master planned together so that we don't end up with bits and pieces. Based on that, you would have support if we were to see a right -of- way dedication that ran the entire length of the northern portion of Phase 1 and Phase 2. Mr. Bakintas clarified that the Commission is asking for both Mr. Shanklin and Georgetown Park property and would like us to dedicate the right -of -way that is within Lot 2 by separate instrument as part of this process. Commissioner Fairchild stated that it would increase support for this project. Commissioner Parrish stated that there seems to be a lot of contingencies on what might happen to Lot 2 which is causing some pause. The property is not owned by you and you are currently in negotiations. Mr. Bakintas believes he has the option to buy. Commissioner Fairchild believes this project would benefit the whole area. Mr. Bakintas agrees. The merits of the plan are proven because you were able to get it on the Master Thoroughfare Plan. Commissioner Fairchild continued to state that it was on there before this parcel was purchased. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —May 3, 2012 Page 7 of 9 Mr. Bakintas agreed. Commissioner Fairchild continued that there was due diligence error by someone. Mr. Bakintas disagrees. This is where the road is going to go. It will straddle the property line. This is common practice. Commissioner Fairchild stated that Mr. Bakintas had stated earlier that is was unaware of the Thoroughfare Plan prior to purchasing the property and has presented a site plan that shows that the road does not entirely straddle the line. The entry point is 100% on the northern land. Mr. Bakintas stated that there is a curve in the road which is consistent with the Master Thoroughfare Plan. It is done in order to intercept more perpendicular with the existing Nolen Drive. Now it is not perpendicular but is within the design criteria. It has been shifted as far south as possible to stay within the design criteria. Chairman Hudson clarified that most of the roadway and right -of -way at the entry point is on the property to the north. Mr. Bakintas agreed and continued to state that if you calculate the area that Mr. Shanklin would be required to dedicate across his entire property is no greater than the area this development has to dedicate within Lot 1 and Lot 2. Actually it is less. Chairman Hudson stated that without an agreement in place for the right -of -way dedication this Commission is not comfortable letting it move forward. Your option this evening is to have us take action or to table. Mr. Bakintas agreed to table both ZAl2 -007 and ZAl2 -008 until the next meeting. Commissioner Springer asked the applicant if he had spoken to the people in Georgetown Park. Mr. Bakintas stated no. Chairman Hudson stated that he has spoken to representatives in Georgetown Park in the past and they expressed that they would like to have more access. Made a motion to table, ZAl2 -007, Zoning Change and Site Plan for Nolen Office Park to the May 17, 2012 Regular Planning and Zoning Meeting, subject to the applicant's request. Motion: Parrish Second: Springer Ayes: Forman, Fairchild, Parrish, Williamson, Hamel, Springer and Hudson Nays: None Abstain: None Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —May 3, 2012 Page 8 of 9 Approved: 7 -0 Agenda Item No. 8 - ZAl2 -008, Preliminary Plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Nolen Office Park Addition, on property described as Tracts 11 and 11A, Thomas Easter Survey, Abstract No. 474, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 300 S. Nolen Dr., Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: AG - Agricultural District. SPIN Neighborhood # 8. PUBLIC HEARING Made a motion to table, ZAl2 -008, Preliminary Plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Nolen Office Park Addition to the May 17, 2012 Regular Planning and Zoning Meeting, subject to the applicant's request. Motion: Parrish Second: Springer Ayes: Forman, Fairchild, Parrish, Williamson, Hamel, Springer and Hudson Nays: None Abstain: None Approved: 7 -0 Agenda Item No. 9 - Ordinance No. 1032, Master Water Plan, a component of the Southlake 2030 Comprehensive Plan. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Hudson opened and closed the public hearing. Made a motion to approve, Ordinance No. 1032, Master Water Plan, a component of the Southlake Comprehensive Plan as presented. Motion: Parrish Second: Williamson Ayes: Forman, Fairchild, Parrish, Williamson, Hamel, Springer and Hudson Nays: None Abstain: None Approved: 7 -0 Agenda Item No. 10- Meeting Adjournment at 8:00 p.m. /11-? Robert on ATTEST: Chairman Holly Blake Commission Secretary Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes —May 3, 2012 Page 9 of 9