1999-09-23~ 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION MEETING
September 23, 1999
COMMISSION PRESENT: Chairman Ann Creighton; Vice-Chairman C.D. Peebles; and
Commissioners Michael Boutte, Kenneth Home, Dennis King, Mike Sandlin, and Keith Shankland.
COMMISSION ABSENT: None.
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney; Dennis Killough, Senior Current
Planner; Lisa Sudbury, Current Planner; and Loft Farwell, Planning Secretary.
Chairman Creighton called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
There was no Work Session held.
AGENDA ITEM #2, APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Chairman Creighton opened discussion of the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting held on September 9, 1999.
Motion was made to approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held
on September 9, 1999, as presented.
Motion:
Second:
Ayes:
Nays:
Approved:
Shankland
Sandlin
Home, Sandlin, Boutte, Peebles, Shankland, King, Creighton
None
7-0
Motion carried.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #0018)
AGENDA ITEM #3, ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS:
Senior Planner Dennis Killough directed the Commission's attention to the COG handout regarding
available classes for them to take. He informed the Commission they could contact Loft Farwell if
they are interested in taking a class.
City Attorney Debra Drayovitch also told the Commission about a Southwest Legal Foundation
course on land use issues coming up in October. She said she would get the information to Lori
Farwell in time for the next packet.
Commissioner Sandlin brought up the possibility of starting the meetings at 6:30 p.m. instead of
7:00 p.m. Mr. Killough said he does not think there is a Charter requirement that says the
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 1 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~-~23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Commission has to start at 7:00 p.m., but he will double check that. He said if the Commission
agrees staff can advertise the second meeting in October to start at 6:30 p.m. He said the first
meeting in October has already been advertised for 7:00 p.m.
Chairman Creighton said she does not have any problem with that. She suggested starting at 6:00
p.m. with dinner and a Work Session from 6:00-6:30 p.m. She said her only concern is whether or
not citizens would have time to get to the meeting. She said the Commission could try starting
earlier and if the City received complaints from citizens, the Commission could always go back to
7:00 p.m.
Commissioner Boutte said with that in mind, maybe staff could arrange the agenda so that items with
a lot of citizen input could be placed a little later on the agenda to give residents time to get to the
meeting.
The Commission and staff discussed the current point system and possible changes to that system.
Ms. Drayovitch said it has been approximately 18 months since the current case resolution was
adopted, and maybe it is time to reevaluate it.
Chairman Creighton said maybe it is something the Commission could take up with City Council
at the October Work Session.
Commissioner Shankland said he is in favor of starting the meetings earlier.
Ms. Drayovitch said if a resolution is found which prohibits the Commission from starting earlier,
then staff will bring back another resolution to memorialize the earlier starting time.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said although the point system has its critics and may not seem to work out
just right sometimes, it is based upon some type of study and deliberation and he feels it has
generally been working out okay.
Chairman Creighton said as the final Administrative Comment, she would like to wish
Commissioner Home a happy birthday today.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said he would like to hold Administrative Comments open until the end of
the meeting.
The Commission discussed a possible joint Work Session with City Council in October, and Ms.
Drayovitch asked the Commissioners to get Loft Farwell any dates they are not available in October.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #0495)
Chairman Creighton said Agenda Items #4, #5, and #6 are on the Consent Agenda and will remain
on the Consent Agenda unless a Commissioner or a citizen requests for them to be removed.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 2 of 16
1 AGENDA ITEM #4, ZA 98-126, PLAT VACATION - OAK KNOLL LAKEVIEW ADDITION;
2 AGENDA ITEM #5, ZA 98-127, PLAT VACATION - OAK KNOLL BUSINESS PARK;
3 AGENDA ITEM #6, ZA 98-128, PLAT VACATION - REMAINDER OF OAK KNOLL
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
'~ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
LAKEVIEW ADDITION:
Motion was made to approve ZA 98-126, ZA 98-127, and ZA 98-128.
Motion:
Second:
Ayes:
Nays:
Approved:
Sandlin
Shankland
Sandlin, Boutte, Peebles, Shankland, King, Home, Creighton
None
7-0
Motion carried.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #0564)
AGENDA ITEM #7, ZA 99-068, REZONING:
Chairman Creighton said Item #7 has been requested to withdraw. Vice-Chairman Peebles asked
if the Commission can go ahead and rezone the property to "RE".
Ms. Drayovitch suggested for the Commission to delay any action on Item #7 until later.
AGENDA ITEM #13, ORDINANCE NO. 480-HH:
Motion was made to table Ordinance No. 480-HH and to continue the Public Hearing to the
November 4, 1999, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Motion:
Second:
Ayes:
Nays:
Approved:
King
Sandlin
Boutte, Peebles, Shankland, King, Home, Sandlin, Creighton
None
7-0
Motion carried.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #0627)
AGENDA ITEM #14, ZA 99-023, REVISED CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE SHOPS OF
36
37
38
39
4O
41
42
43
SOUTHLAKE:
Motion was made to table ZA 99-023 and to continue the Public Hearing to the October 21, 1999,
Planning and Zoning Commission meeting pending an appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Motion:
Second:
Ayes:
Nays:
Shankland
Boutte
Peebles, Shankland, King, Home, Sandlin, Boutte, Creighton
None
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 3 of 16
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Approved: 7-0
Motion carried.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #0657)
AGENDA ITEM #8, ZA 99-081, REZONING:
Current Planner Lisa Sudbury presented this item to the Commission for a Rezoning on property
legally described as a poifion of Tract 2B situated in the James L. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 348,
and being approximately 0.14 acres. The location of the property is on the north side of Dove Road
approximately 975' east of Ridgecrest Drive. The Current Zoning is "AG" Agricultural District. The
Requested Zoning is "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District. The Land Use Category is
Medium Density Residential. The Owner of the property is Warren Clark Development. The
Applicant is Four Peaks Development. Seven (7) written notices were sent to property owners
within the 200' notification area, and one response was received which had no comment on the
request since they no longer live at the address shown on the tax roll.
David McMahan, 1335 Hidden Glen, Southlake, Texas, presented this item to the Commission.
Chairman Creighton opened the Public Hearing.
Gwen Bennett, 1405 Wedgewood Court, $outhlake, Texas, said she is buying this lot and plans to
build a single family residence on it.
Chairman Creighton closed the Public Hearing.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #0948)
Motion was made to approve ZA 99-081.
Motion:
Second:
Ayes:
Nays:
Approved:
Shankland
Sandlin
Shankland, King, Home, Sandlin, Boutte, Peebles, Creighton
None
7-0
Motion carried.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #0962)
AGENDA ITEM #9, ZA 99-062, REZONING:
Current Planner Lisa Sudbury presented this item to the Commission for a Rezoning on property
legally described as Tracts 4, 4G2, 4G4, and 4J, situated in the J. J. Freshour Survey, Abstract 521,
and being approximately 4.56 acres. The property is located on the north side of Johnson Road
being approximately 350' east of Pearson Lane. The Current Zoning is "AG" Agricultural District.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 4 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
'~'"' 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
The Requested Zoning is "SF-1B" Single Family Residential District. The Land Use Category is
Low Density Residential. The Owner of the property is Lee K. Huntley. The Applicant is Jerry
Small. Twenty-three written notices were sent to property owners within the 200' notification area,
and three responses were received with all being in favor.
Jerry Small, 3204 Johnson Road, Southlake, Texas, presented this item to the Commission.
Vice-Chairman Peebles asked if this is nonconforming anyway, then why can't the Commission
approve "SF-1A" and make it nonconforming by 902 s.f.? He said that way when it is sold, they will
have to come into compliance with "SF-1A" instead of"SF-1B" if they want to add an addition.
City Attorney Debra Drayovitch asked staff how this was presented to ZBA and what was their
approval and motion based on. Vice-Chairman Peebles said the applicant could go back to ZBA
with "SF- 1A" zoning.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said he thinks the Commission should approve "SF-1A" zoning and make
Lot 6 non-conforming.
Chairman Creighton asked why this went to ZBA first. Mr. Killough said because of the accessory
building; that is what initiated everything.
Ms. Drayovitch said the reason ZBA approved "SF-1B" zoning on this property is listed in the
zoning ordinance: "...variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use
of the land, building, or structure." She said that is why ZBA did not go up to "SF-1A" zoning.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said if the Commission approves "SF-1A" it will be legal non-conforming.
He said he wants to bring this up in Administrative Comments; he wants to make everything he can
non-conforming.
Commissioner Shankland asked Mr. Small if he understands what the Commission is talking about,
and Mr. Small said barely.
Ms. Drayovitch said if there is a fire or a catastrophe and more than 50% is destroyed, he will have
to meet the new requirements when he rebuilds. She said the ordinance restricts him to 25% for
repairs or maintenance.
Mr. Small said if that comes up, the house is not worth rebuilding.
Mr. Killough said in the case of adding on to the structure, he would be decreasing the non-
conformity rather than increasing the non-conformity. In the case of a setback issue, Mr. Killough
said the City would not let the applicant do anything to increase his deficiency in his setback but in
the case where he is deficient on floor area, the applicant would be permitted to increase it because
he is actually decreasing his non-conformity by doing so.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 5 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Ms. Drayovitch said if the structure sat vacant for more than six months, the non-conforming use
would expire and whoever moved in next would have to increase the square footage to comply with
the minimum square footage for "SF-1A".
Chairman Creighton opened the Public Hearing. No one in the audience stepped forward to speak.
Chairman Creighton closed the Public Heating.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section # 1522)
Motion was made to approve "SF-1A" zoning for ZA 99-062.
Motion:
Second:
Ayesi
Nays:
Approved:
Peebles
King
King, Horue, Sandlin, Boutte, Peebles, Shankland, Creighton
None
7-0
Motion carried.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #1567)
AGENDA ITEM #10, ZA 99-063, PLAT SHOWING OF PROPOSED LOTS 6 AND 7, J. J.
22
~ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
FRESHOUR NO. 521 ADDITION:
Current Planner Lisa Sudbury presented this item to the Commission for a Plat Showing for
proposed Lots 6 and 7, J. J. Freshour No. 521 Addition, on property legally described as Tracts 4,
4G2, 4G4, and 4J, situated in the J. J. Freshour Survey, Abstract 521, and being approximately 4.56
acres. The property is located on the north side of Johnson Road being approximately 350' east of
Pearson Lane. The Current Zoning is "AG" Agricultural District. The Land Use Category is Low
Density Residential. The Owner of the property is Lee K. Huntley. The Applicant is Jerry Small.
Two written notices were sent to property owners within the 200' notification area, and two
responses were received with both being in favor.
Jerry Small, 3204 Johnson Road, Southlake, Texas, presented this item to the Commission.
Chairman Creighton opened the Public Hearing. No one in the audience stepped forward to speak.
Chairman Creighton closed the Public Hearing.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said he is tired of flag lots and does not want to see them anymore.
Motion was made to approve ZA 99-063 subject to Plat Review Summary No. 3, dated September
3, 1999, deleting Item #1 (minimum 100' lot width).
Motion: Sandlin
Second: Shankland
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 6 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
"~' 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Vice-Chairman Peebles wanted to make it clear the reason he is voting for this item even though it
has a flag lot is because there are existing structures on the lots.
Ayes: Home, Sandlin, Boutte, Peebles, Shankland, King, Creighton
Nays: None
Approved: 7-0
Motion carried.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #1838)
AGENDA ITEM #11, ZA 99-079, REVISED SITE PLAN FOR ECKERD:
Planner Lisa Sudbury informed the Commission this a Revised Site Plan for Eckerd on property
legally described as Lot 5R, Block 6, Diamond Cimle Estates Second Installment, an addition to the
City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 5210,
Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and being approximately 1.698 acres. The property is located
on the northeast comer of the intersection of North White Chapel Boulevard and East Southlake
Boulevard (F.M. 1709). The Current Zoning is "C-2" Local Retail Commercial District. The Land
Use Category is Office Commercial. The Owner and Applicant is North American Properties.
Eleven written notices were sent to property owners within the 200' notification area, and two
responses were received with both being in favor.
David McMahan, 1335 Hidden Glen, Southlake, Texas, presented this item to the Commission.
Commissioner Sandlin asked how tall the canopy will be. Mr. McMahan said the reason for the
variance is that the canopy extends 4' into the site line.
John Maggiore (Civil Engineer for North American Properties) 14990 Landmark Boulevard, Dallas,
Texas, said the canopy is 16' to the top.
Commissioner Sandlin asked them why the canopy needs to be 16' tall. Mr. Maggiore said it is 10'
from the ground to the bottom of the canopy and then another 5' or 6' to the top of the canopy. He
said the 10' is a safety factor for high trucks, and the 6' is an architectural proportion issue; if it were
thin, it would not relate to the building itself. He said the piece of canopy that is already approved
is the same thickness; they are just extending it further.
Chairman Creighton asked why this was not part of the original site plan. Mr. McMahan said
Eckerd simply changed their minds. He said the project is under way and is moving forward; this
approval would be an accommodation by the City.
Vice-Chairman Peebles asked if Mr. McMahan has heard from Mr. Boyd or Dr. Montoya about this.
Mr. McMahan said he is not sure if they responded or not.
Commissioner Home asked if there will be any signage on this canopy. Mr. McMahan said no, not
at all.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 7 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~'-~ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Vice-Chairman Peebles said he would like to go ahead and pass it but would suggest to the applicant
to get a response from Dr. Montoya and Mr. Boyd before they go to City Council. Mr. McMahan
said that is a wonderful idea.
Chairman Creighton asked if the canopy factors into the articulation requirements. Mr. Killough
said the canopy itself and the extension of it did nothing to impact how the original elevations were
approved.
Chairman Creighton asked if the original elevations were in compliance. Mr. Killough said no, there
were some variances granted with the original elevations.
Chairman Creighton said she never sees anyone at the Kroger pharmacy drive-through window so
she is surprised by the need to extend the canopy to two lanes of traffic at this Eckerd.
Mr. McMahan said Eckerd feels the freestanding store will raise their sales 40% to 70%, and they
feel the drive-through is a critical part of those figures.
Chairman Creighton said it is the manner in which pharmacies work that the drive-through concept
does not seem to make a whole lot of sense to her. She said most of the time the prescription is not
exactly ready when she goes to pick it up so she would have to wait in a long line of traffic only to
find out her prescription is not ready yet, so she would have to pull back around only to get in line
again. She has a problem granting a further variance to this applicant for something that seems
umlecessary.
Commissioner Home said he uses the drive-through a lot at the Grapevine Eckerd and generally if
you call during the day, the prescription will be ready on your way home that night.
Commissioner Home asked which type of Eckerd will this store be - brick or stucco? Mr. McMahan
said this Eckerd was designed by Southlake's City Council, and it will be a combination of the two.
Mr. Maggiore said it will be a combination of brick and stone.
Commissioner Sandlin asked if legal notices were sent out on this item. Mr. Killough said yes.
Commissioner Sandlin said he lives pretty close to this store, and he could care less as long as Dr.
Montoya and Mr. Boyd are okay with it. He said it impacts them more than anyone else in the City
of Southlake.
Chairman Creighton said she was unaware of the notification process until the issue of the Timarron
tent came up, and she heard from Judge Kendall how the notice process works. She no longer has
any confidence in the fact that the reason someone is not at the meeting is because they do not have
a problem with something. She said Judge Kendall told her residents get certified mail notifications
and if they work normal business hours outside Southlake, they have little if any oppommity to
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 8 of 16
1 actually go pick up that certified notice. She said Judge Kendall discovered in the Timarron case
2 many of the people adjacent to that property did not get their notices in time to get any kind of a
3 response back to the Commission in time for their packet. She said Judge Kendall suggested for the
4 City to send out legal notices by regular mail, too.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
'--'23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Mr. McMahan said Vice-Chairman Peebles made a good point and said he will strive to get
something in writing from Dr. Montoya and Mr. Boyd before they go to City Council.
Commissioner Shankland asked if the canopy can be seen from the street. Mr. McMahan said it
would take a great deal of effort.
Commissioner Shankland said if the only people who are going to see the canopy are the residents
behind it, then he does not see why it cannot be reduced in size. Mr. McMahan said they cannot
control delivery vehicles which will come through this back area, and he cannot choose which lane
they go through.
Commissioner Shankland asked if they could make it 1' instead of 6' thick but still make it
structurally sound.
Chairman Creighton asked if it would solve their 4:1 slope line problem, if they were to cap the
canopy to match the other peaks on the building. Mr. Maggiore said the prototype of ail the Eckerd
stores is for the canopy to be proportional to the building itself. He said the design of the canopy
is also for identification purposes for the structure to show it is a drive-through.
Chairman Creighton opened the Public Hearing. No one in the audience stepped forward to speak.
Chairman Creighton closed the Public Hearing.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-09-99, tape 1, section #2759)
Commissioner Shankland said he is still naive enough to think the people behind this know it is
being heard tonight and know what the Commission is doing. He said if the Commission passes it
as it is requested, he will guarantee the neighbors will know about it before it goes to City Council.
Chairman Creighton said she wishes the adjacent neighbors had made their opinions known because
they have always been very vocal on this property. She does not feel the canopy is particularly
attractive as it is designed and has a problem approving a variance for something that does not look
as good as it could possibly look. She could probably justify granting them the variance for
something that made it look better.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said the Commission can pass this subject to the applicant getting something
in writing from Mr. Boyd and Dr. Montoya before they go to City Council. He asked Mr. McMahan
if he had a problem with that, and Mr. McMahan said no. Mr. McMahan said he has every
confidence those gentlemen will support this.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 9 of 16
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~' 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Mr. McMahan said the canopy only affects those two people and to add a feature on top would only
augment any problem they might possibly have with it.
Chairman Creighton said she could vote for this if the applicant would agree to have his architect
look at the possibility of shaping the canopy so that they could at least eliminate the issue with the
4:1 slope line.
Mr. Maggiore said he feels very confident they could get something in writing from Mr. Boyd and
Dr. Montoya. Mr. Maggiore said the building itself is the variance anyway so he does not understand
what keeping the canopy out of the variance will do. He does not see what difference a sloping line
will make on the canopy. He suggested a compromise by letting Mr. Boyd and Dr. Montoya choose
which they want.
Commissioner Shankland asked them to see if they can rework it before they go to City Council; see
if it can be done.
Chairman Creighton said she would vote in favor of this item this evening if the applicant would
agree to look at the possibility of shaping the canopy in such a way that it will be underneath the 4:1
slope line. She said they should have their architect ready to address that issue at City Council. Mr.
McMahan said he will have the architect present at that time. He said they will give it their best shot
at getting something in writing from Mr. Boyd and Dr. Montoya. He also said they will pledge to
the Commission they will have their architects look at this to try to get the canopy down below the
4:1 slope line and will talk to Eckerd about it. He said they will do everything they can before they
go to City Council.
Chairman Creighton said she is not interested in doing something unsafe. If it cannot be done, she
said to have their architect ready to explain why it cannot be done. Mr. McMahan said no problem.
Commissioner Sandlin said the canopy roof will have tar, rock, and gravel on it; they cannot slope
that type of roof. He said if they can slope the canopy it will have to be some other type of material
which will be seen as you drive by it. He is not sure he likes the idea of being able to see it unless
it is residential in style. He said if they do slope it, the only thing they can do is to make it like a
residential roof and then they will have a residential-style roof next to a built-up roof. He is not
saying whether it is a good idea or a bad idea, he is just bringing up the point.
Chairman Creighton said that is a good point and those are the types of things she would hope an
architect could address at City Council.
Motion was made to approve ZA 99-079 subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated
September 3, 1999, deleting Item #1 (4:1 slope line line & 40' building setback line) and instructing
the applicant to obtain written approval of the plan by Mr. Boyd and Dr. Montoya (be it this plan or
the alternate plan) and instructing the applicant to have the architects put forth their best efforts to
redesign the canopy to come under the 4:1 slope line.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 10 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Motion:
Second:
Ayes:
Nays:
Approved:
Peebles
Sandlin
Sandlin, Boutte, Peebles, Shankland, King, Home, Creighton
None
7-0
Motion carried.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #3505)
Chairman Creighton called for a break at 8:50 p.m.
Chairman Creighton called the meeting back to order at 9:07 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM #12, ZA 99-085, SITE PLAN FOR MYAN PLAZA OFFICE BUILDING:
19
20
21
22
~'~ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
14 Current Planner Lisa Sudbury informed the Commission this a Site Plan for Myan Plaza office
15 building on property legally described as Lot 3, Block 3, Cornerstone Business Park, an addition to
16 the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide
17 4010, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and being approximately 1.57 acres. The property is
18 located at 520 Silicon Drive on the west side of Silicon Drive being approximately 430' southwest
of Nolan Drive. The Current Zoning is "O-1" Office District. The Land Use Category is Office
Commercial. The Owner and Applicant is Myan Plaza, L.P. Five written notices were sent to
property owners within the 200' notification area, and four responses were received with two being
in favor, one being undecided and one being opposed.
Michael Wright (MJ Wright & Associates, Inc.) 700 E. Southlake Boulevard, Southlake, Texas,
presented this item to the Commission. He said to his understanding, the deed restrictions mentioned
in the Shafer's letter are in effect. He said they have no problem adhering to all of the comments in
the Shafer's letter. Regarding lighting, he said they do have it called out to be no higher than 42'
ballard type lighting and they can restrict them to be no greater than 250 watts. He understands the
windows on the west side of the building must be of translucent glass. He said the other comment
was regarding the dumpster location and they propose to relocate it swapping it with two parking
spaces; this will be the same impervious coverage. He said they misread the deed restrictions
regarding the dumpster but will relocate it to meet those restrictions. Mr. Wright did say that
moving the dumpster to the side yard may get in the way of the drip line of the existing tree so they
may have to move the dumpster further west. He said they are trying to save the trees on the
property; there are four trees, and they are saving all of them.
Commissioner Sandlin said he thinks the dumpster is fine where it is located; in fact, he thinks it is
a better location for picking the dumpster up.
Chairman Creighton opened the Public Heating.
Ken Shafer, 2449 Crooked Lane, Southlake, Texas, said he understands the Commission cannot
enforce the deed restrictions but he thought this was the time to bring them up and make everyone
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 11 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
aware of them. He said they do not want the dumpsters between the buildings and their home
because often the tracks come early in the morning or late at night to empty them, and they will get
an echo offthe buildings. He would like to see the dumpster moved to the location discussed earlier.
Chairman Creighton asked if anyone has spoken to the Stumplers.
Pam Morrison said she spoke to the Stmmplers this morning and they basically have the same
concerns as her regarding the placement of the dumpster.
Chairman Creighton asked if the Shafers, the Strumplers, and the Morrisons are okay with this plan
as long as the applicant meets the deed restrictions. Ms. Morrison and Mr. Shafer said yes.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said while he is sensitive to the adjacent homeowners, he would truly like
to have the dumpster behind the building. He asked if the echoing would go away given the distance
between the office building the homes. Mr. Shafer said he did not know. Mr. Shafer said he is
concerned they would be setting a precedent if they let the dumpster go behind the building.
Chairman Creighton said this looks like a much nicer office building than she had feared would end
up on this property. Mr. Shafer agreed and said they are very pleased.
Bruce Woodward (Myan Plaza) said they have worked very hard to build this building within the
ordinances. He said a deed restriction variance would cause them severe difficulties because they
would have to go to every homeowner and ask them about this dumpster; they would just as soon
move it. He said they will make it nice.
Chairman Creighton closed the Public Hearing.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-09-99, tape 1, section #4405)
Commissioner King said this looks like it will be a very nice project. Commissioner Shankland
agreed saying this looks like a nice building.
Motion was made to approve ZA 99-085 subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated
September 17, 1999, acknowledging the applicant's commitment to address and abide by concerns
stated in the Shafer's letter (i.e.: dumpster relocation to the southeast, glass type in rear of building,
and exterior lighting) and their willingness to work within the deed restrictions.
Motion:
Second:
Ayes:
Nays:
Approved:
Shankland
Sandlin
Boutte, Peebles, Shankland, King, Home, Sandlin, Creighton
None
7-0
Motion carried.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 12 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #4534)
Chairman Creighton said the Commission was still going to discuss the withdrawal of Agenda Item
#7.
Ms. Drayoviteh said because the applicant has withdrawn his application, it has been the City's
practice to permit that. She said the applicant considers his case closed at this point, and there is no
reason for him to think differently. She said the City has the right to initiate rezoning, but if the
Commission chooses to do that, the applicant should be noticed and given the opportunity to come
and testify at any public hearing. She said if the Commission goes ahead and approves the mzoning
tonight without giving the applicant that opportunity, she thinks they would be jeopardizing any
subsequent action.
Commissioner Shankland said he would not mind doing it to a developer, but he does not like doing
it to a private citizen.
Commissioner Sandlin said he knows once he starts the process even if he says quit, he is at the
mercy of the process until it comes to some conclusion. He said various cities have always let him
withdraw if that is what he wants to do.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said the applicant has a representative, and it is not the Commission's fault
he did not come tonight. He said this case would ultimately go on to City Council, and the applicant
would be notified before that meeting so he does not understand why the Commission couldn't go
ahead and approve it tonight.
Commissioner Home asked what makes this piece of land or this case so special that the
Commission would violate what they have always done. He thinks the man has withdrawn it, and
the Commission should take no action and just let it go.
Commissioner Shankland said he does not feel right doing this to this guy. He does not think it
would be ethical.
Commissioner Home agreed. He said it would be a dirty trick, and he thinks the Commission should
just let it go.
Commissioner Boutte said he is particularly concerned about this. He said the Land Use Plan shows
it as Medium Density Residential, and the Commission would be sticking a Low Density Residential
piece right in the middle of it just because they see an oppommity to do it. He said if someone wants
to come in and put seven houses there, it is going to fit in pretty well in this neighborhood in any
case. If the Commission does this and the owner ends up wanting to sell the property, he does not
think the Commission has done a good thing.
Commissioner Home said the owner would not be able to unload the low density property in the
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 13 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~'~ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
middle of the medium density properties.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said he has another idea and suggested tabling it to the next meeting. He
said staff could let the owner know how much the Commission liked the idea of"RE" zoning and
give him the opportunity to continue the process.
Commissioner Home said he is a grown man; he has had the opportunity and he wants to withdraw
it.
AGENDA ITEM #7, ZA 99-068, REZONING:
Motion was made to table ZA 99-068 and to continue the Public Hearing to the October 7, 1999,
Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Motion: Peebles
Second: Shankland
Commissioner Sandlin said he is going to vote against the tabling of this item because he feels the
Commission needs to be a little bit responsive to Southlake citizens. He said some people just do
not enjoy coming up here in front of the Commission and tabling it prolongs the applicant's hassles
right now. He said if the Commission lets this item die, the applicant will come back when he has
the time. He said this would be making the applicant's life more difficult, and he thinks it is
ridiculous. He said this property will probably end up with the zoning they are asking for when they
are ready, but lets not do it on our time.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said it is not going to take Simmons Properties, Inc., more than two minutes
to write a letter if they do not want to continue with this zoning request.
Ayes: Peebles, Shankland, King, Boutte, Creighton
Nays: Home, Sandlin
Approved: 5-2
Motion carried.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #5147)
AGENDA ITEM #3, CONTINUATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS:
36 Vice-Chairman Peebles asked staffto review the August 18 minutes if they have any questions about
37 the ordinance items he wanted to review. He said he attended the last COG course and one of the
38 things they suggested looking at is the Vested Rights Act; he said when the Commission approves
39 a Site Plan, Concept Plan or Plat, they can put a time period for that approval. He said 12 to 18
40 months was suggested. He mentioned that quick items such as changing the approval process for
41 substantial conformance and the curvilinear street requirements should be changed as quickly as
42 possible.
43
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 14 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~' 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Mr. Killough said there are Advocacy Forms which can be filled out by anyone who wants an
ordinance change or adoption of a new ordinance. He said those forms are forwarded to City
Council who, in turn, rank them in order of priority. He said he understands there is going to be a
Joint Work Session where the City Council and the Commission can sit down and rank these items.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said we need to make the uses we do not like non-conforming. He said there
is some property in the City that is not zoned and there are some things on that property he does not
like; what the City needs to do is to zone it and make it non-conforming.
Ms. Drayovitch said it would be helpful to City Council if the Commission would rank these items.
Vice-Chairman Peebles told Ms. Drayovitch of a case that had good language regarding broadening
the City's discretion of Site Plans. He said the speaker at the COG class also said we need to get
applicants to waive the 30-day rule on plats. He suggested expanding the notification area; he thinks
the staff could use their discretion on some cases if they know someone has voiced their concerns
on a particular item.
Ms. Drayovitch said it cannot be left to the discretion of staff, or the City will face challenges. She
said the Commission can request, for example, staff to send a courtesy notice for residents within
500', but it should not be left up to staff's discretion.
Vice-Chairman Peebles asked if the ordinances can be changed regarding items needing to be sent
to ZBA (i.e.: parking, screening, orientation of homes).
AGENDA ITEM #15, MEETING ADJOURNMENT:
Chairman Creighton adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m. on September 23, 1999.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #6118)
Vice-Chairman Peebles asked to reconvene the meeting at 10:09 p.m.
Chairman Creighton reconvened the meeting at 10:09 p.m. because Vice-Chairman Peebles wanted
to make certain something on his list had been clarified.
Commissioners King and Shankland had left for the evening.
Vice-Chairman Peebles said there is one other item he thinks should be reviewed in respect to "S-P-
2" zoning. He said his concern is regarding Section 32.7.a in Zoning Ordinance No. 480 and read
the following text from that section:
"The Planning and Zoning Commission in submitting its recommendations to the City
Council and the City Council in making its decision shall state a list of the masons for
approval and disapproval of each case and request. The stated reasons shall be incorporated
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 15 of 16
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~ 23
24
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
38
39
40
41
in any ordinance approving a request."
1
2
3 He said he does not recall the Commission passing an "S-P-2" zoning request where they stated a
4 list of reasons for the approval or denial. The concem he has is the ordinances that have been passed
5 do not state a list of reasons for their approval. He thinks staff needs to look at every ordinance
6 passed for "S-P-2" zoning to see if there is a list of reasons for their approval. He is afraid there is
7 zoning in this city that has been done illegally. He does not know if it means bringing them all back
8 through and correcting them or what. He does not know if this means those zonings are nullified.
9 If the zoning was not properly passed, he said it would have to go back to what it was before. From
10 now on, he said every time he is confronted with someone who claims to have "S-P-2" zoning, he
is going to ask staff to produce the ordinance that created that zoning. The first thing he is going to
look for is a list of reasons and if the list is not there, he is going to consider the property not zoned.
He does not know what the answer is, but he thinks it is a really important issue that needs to be
looked at further.
AGENDA ITEM # 15, MEETING ADJOURNMENT:
Chairman Creighton adjourned the meeting at 10:15 p.m. on September 23, 1999.
(Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 09-23-99, tape 1, section #6435)
Ann Creight~
Chairman
ATTEST:
Lori A. Farwell
Planning Secretary
N:\Community DevelopmenfiWP-FILESWITGWIIN~ 1999\09-23 -99.DOC
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on September 23, 1999 Page 16 of 16