2015-06-23 Meeting Report (White Chapel)
SPIN MEETING REPORT
SPIN Item Number:
SPIN2015-21
Project Name:
911 & 859 S. White Chapel
SPIN Neighborhood:
SPIN #9
Meeting Date:
June 23, 2015
Meeting Location:
1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX
City Council Chambers
Total Attendance:
20
Host:
Bobbie Heller,Community Engagement Committee
Applicant(s) Presenting:
George Hill, Sempco Surveying
City Staff Present:
Jerod Potts, Planner I; Dennis Killough, Deputy Director of
Planning and Development Services; Mike White, Chief Building
Inspector
City Staff Contact:
Richard Schell, Principal Planner (817) 748-8602
Attached to the end of this report are the Blackboard Connect Delivery Results for the
6/23/2015 SPIN Town Hall Forum
Town Hall Forums can be viewed in their entirety by visiting http://www.cityofsouthlake.comand clicking on “Learn More”
under Video On Demand; forums are listed under SPIN by meeting date.
FORUMSUMMARY
Property Situation:
911 and 859 S. White Chapel
Development Details:
Two tracts 7.8 acres and 5.99
The 5.99 acre tract is zoned Agricultural and not platted, the 7.8 acre tract is
o
zoned RE
Applicant would like to create three parcels out of two, and rezone the entire area SF-2
The existing home on the 7.8 acre parcel would stay on its own parcel that would be
about 3.9 acres
Presenter mentioned it meets all setbacks except where the garage is in the rear.
o
Applicants will ask for a variance to reduce setback to 18 feet
The garage does not meet RE setbacks now, so the applicant will seek a
o
variance for this
Presenter mentioned that lot 1 would be 3.9 acreswith the home, lot 2 would be 2.2
acres, lot 3 will be 7.591 acres
Presenter mentioned the landuse calls for SF zoning, and the SF-2 zoning requested
fits with the characteristics of the area
Presenter noted that access to the large parcelhas been designed so a minimal number
of trees would have to be taken out for the driveway
Presenter mentionedthe existing driveway to the existing house would be shifted a little
to the north at a location that would be decided upon when the applicant comes forward
with building plans
Presented at SPIN:
QUESTIONS / CONCERNS:
The driveway on the 2.2 acre piece tapers on the end?
Yes, the taper would be in form of a sweeping curve
o
Concern is that all the houses on White Chapel are in line, and this house will be
forward, the variances will destroy the beauty of White Chapel Road
Concerned that the house on the 2.2 acres will be moved closer to White Chapel Road –
Would be better if the property line was with the other parcels that are north
What is the reason for dividing into 2.2 aces? Are there future plans for the back?
The project is for a new home for the Dean’son a large parcel in the back. As far
o
as the house in the front, we’ll take comments into consideration but the zoning
calls for a 40’setback
Intent of the Dean’s is building a home on that acreage in the back
You could double the square footage on the existing houseand not move the house
forward and would still have a 40’ backyard. So you could get a 6,000 single story house
without moving it forward
Met with Planning and Zoning a few yearsago and basically was told the likelihood of
this being rezoned to get single-family housing was very unlikely.
A lot of drainage stays on the property along White Chapel and then stays on property
on the west side of the property line –have had to install retainage walls and reinforce
drainage swaleswith river rock to prevent significant erosion. Recent rains have
essentially silted in those areas. If the land does get subdivided and impervious
coverage is increased it needs to drain towards White Chapel and we need to get that
load of the Timarron properties.
The existing drainage regulations for the City of Southlake do not let you
o
increase the flow to your neighbor –you have to pretty much contain it so the
increased impervious ground coverage does not cause an increased velocity in
the amount of flow
If you do put a basin in, if it does overflow, it needs to go to White Chapel, not where it is
going now
They filled in the pond already and it is now kind of a swamp. Worried that if a house
goes therenow, what is the drainage going to be? Will it be septic?
The only thing you can do is septic; where are you going to put the septic tank?
There is not a sewer main adjacent to the property so any type of hookup to a
o
City sewer would require a facilities agreement and a main line extension to the
property. There are several easements adjacent to the property that could be
used to bring the sewer line up to the property line. All these comments will be
considered and the engineer for this project will look at these options and see
what is possible.
Is there any other possible zoning where it could go to 5 acres per house?
SF-2 zoning is new. Applicants decided SF-2 would be a good fit. The City land
o
use plan shows that anything in yellow has a possibility of going down to SF-1,
which is 1 acre parcels. Trying to stay compatible with what the City has in
Southlake 2030. This meets the requirement and cuts in half the density for what
the City has planned.
So if this goes with the SF-2 and the front 2.3 acresis sold, can they put two houses
there?
The front lot 1 is going to be 3.974 acres so it would not meet the minimum
o
zoning if you divided it in half. The one lot 2 would be 2.2 acres so it could not be
divided unless they came in with a rezone.
The house needs to be set back with the other houses.
Is there anything planned for the lot in between the Dean’s property and the Highlands
subdivision
That is not a separate lot –it would all be part of the 7 acre parcel the Dean’s
o
build on.
As far as the pondon the back of the property, are there plans for that? Relocating or
removing?
Not to my knowledge. The ultimate buildout would be the responsibility of the
o
owners.
Concerned with the pond, and where it is located. Besides the aesthetics of the pond,
there are 4-5 dead trees, it is never maintained. Would likesome assurance, maybea
City stipulation that if they do have a pond it is maintained.
The two lots 911 and 859 are designated rural conservation
I believe the two acre zoning does give you the rural character
o
The L shaped property where thenewhouse would go, what is that going to be zoned?
It would all be zoned SF-2
o
Why would they be going to a 2 acre zoning if it’s an 8acre lot? Concern is this could be
further subdivided in the future?
Asked the clients if they wanted 4 lots, and they said no
o
Why wouldn’t you just zone it for the 5 acres?
That would be an alternative
o
SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official
meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and
the general responses made.Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant.Interested parties are
strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council.