Loading...
Item 7B1-7 31 Public Responses for Cases ZA15-074 and ZA15-075 Zoning Change and Concept Plan & Plat Revision for Lots 19, 20 and 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition Located at 911 and 859 S. White Chapel Public Comment Forms from the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting August 20, 2015 Name: Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Public Comment Form Please print. Retyrn completed form to Secretary prior to start of regular session. hl Address: �- JD i v P.v wt o v d vIe� (1nc1ude City and State) I wish to share my views on an Agenda Item: Agenda Item #___L AAb 7 I r✓ 6 I will speak in SUPPORT of this item I will speak in OPPOSITION to this item I do not wish to speak, but please record my SUPPORT OPPOSITION ® Citizen Comments (for an item on this agenda) Signature:_ Required• Cards not he read into the record unless it is signed Date: Z Phone: K 1 `7 - y a l- 1 v S 9 0 Name: SoutWake Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Public Comment Form Please print. Return completed form to Secretary prior to start of regular session. ADate:_ 6-7— �J ff► 4 (nth C Di t S 0--7L Phone: el % (12 (Include City anotate) L"J I wish to share my vietys on an Agenda Item: Agenda Item #-7 I will speak in SUPPORT of this item I will speak in OPPOSITION to this item �I do not wish to speak, but please record my SUPPORT OPPOSITION F1Citizen Comments (for an item on this agenda) S ignature•equired. Cards will not he read into the record unless it is signed Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Public Comment Form Please print. Return completed form to Secretary prior to start of regular session. Name: Vi���� Date: f31 20f Address: -&') '51 1W r—WWA ZOO Ah 141 Phone �-W (Include City and State) 10 I wish to share my views on an A en Item. Agenda Item # �• I will speak in SUPPORT of this item I will speak in OPPOSITION to this item y I do not wish to speak, but please70WPP0=STOff( SUPPORT Citizen Comments (for an item on this agenda) Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Public Comment Form regular session. Please print. Return completed form to Secretary prior to start o gu 11i Date• Od �S Name:_ 1 t C 01- C%<r KS c Phone: % yv) L l o1� Address:L;�4�Qyj� (inclCit U I wish to share my vie s on an Agenda Item: Agenda Item #7V I will speak in SUPPORT of this item I will speak in OPPOSITION to this item -7'I do not wish to speak, but please rep rd my OPPOSITION SUPPORT F] Citizen Comments (for an item on this agenda) Signature: Revakok i will no read into tine record unless it is signed Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting `1 Public Comment Form -3r) 15,6 S� Please print. Return completed form to Secretary prior to start of regular session. Name: 6A -�A, (� a Vk6tCc---"" Date:L;kv t Address: 110 t�1skkaigL s Phone: 6 L7- 913��h� (Include City land State) U Inwish to share my views on an Agenda Item: Agenda Item #zLiT I will speak in SUPPORT of this item I will speak in OPPOSITION to this item I do not wish to speak, but please record my SUPPORT x OPPOSITION I❑ Citim Comments (for an item on this agenda) Signature: Regsked Cards will t61to ©Poi & 9�& �'q A// 0UA -, G4 yr -e `f-b unless it is signed YApa-, P•-•.— Email Responses for ZA15-074 and ZA15-075 gi�o15 Ci.SoMake.lx.us Mail - Fwd: FW: Request to Speak - September 1- Agenda Barn 76 - Zoning Change to Increase Density SOUTFILAKE Jerod PottE=ejpottl ct.southlake.tx:us> Fwd: _., Request to .Speak - September 1 - Agenda Item 7B-- Zoning Change to Incmaso Density - 1 message Holly Blake <hblak hiake.tx.us> To: Jerod Potts. <jpotis@ei,soui1ake.tx.us> Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:38 AM Forwarded message From: Lori Payne <Ipayne@ci.southiake.tx.us> Date: Mai, Aug 31, 2015 at 1:43 PM Subject: FW: Request to Speak - September 1 - Agenda Item 7B - Zoning Change to Increase Density To: Laura Hill <mayor4nt@ci.soutMake.tx.us>, Ken Baker <kbaker@ci.sotthlake.tx.us>, Holly Blake <hblake(@ci.southiake.tx.us> From: Lori Payne[maflbo:Ipayne@ci.soutMake.tx.us] Sent: Monday, August 31, 20151:43 PM To: 'David C. Wlf nW Cc: Shawn McCask l; Laura HE; • 'Marc Powell';-� Submit: RE: Request to Speak - September• 1- Agenda Itiem 7B - Zoning Change to Increase Density Goon! afternoon Mr. Williams. When you arrive to the City Council meeting tomorrow night, there will be blue comment cards on the table in the back of the room. You may fill out the comment card and list the particular agenda item of interest and turn it into me or the police officer present. Of course, if you have written materials for the City Council, staff members are happy to take those as well and will distribute them to Council members.. Thank you, Lori Payne, TRMC City Secretary City of Southlake 1400 Main Street, Suite 270 Southlake, 7X 76092 817-748-8016 office Vs:Nmail.googrecorn/mailA#Q4m=2&Ik=cgBdkclb4&view=pt&search=inbm&th=141 cbcgkb iml=14f895Mcbcffidc 113 EJ/112015 Gi.so>itdake tx.us Mail - Fwd., FW: Request to Speak - September 1- Agenda Item 78. Zoring Change to Increase Density Confidentiality Notice. This e-madl message, Including any attachments, is for the sole use of the Intended neciplent(s) and may contain confidential and privileged Infommidon. Any receipt and/or response to this email may be considered a PUBLIC RECORD. If you have received this email in error, please notlty the sender Immediately. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. From: David C. Williams Sent: Monday, August 31, 2015 1:23 PM To: Ipayne@c[south1ake.tx.us Cc: pIace2@ci.swWake.tx.us; mayor@ci.southlake.tx.us; Marc Powell; Suled: Request to Speak - September 1- Agenda Item 7B - Zordng Change to Increase Density Lori, 1 was informed thru Shawn McCaskill to contact you regarding speaking at the above event. I would like to speak with Council on the above item and understand that I was to contact you to be added to the list. I am a resident that is contiguous to the site for proposed increased development. I submitted a formal letter to P&Z committee; however, it appears mine along with many others were never received or acknowledged. It was also represented at the P&Z meeting by the owner of the site that he had "contacted all those impacted and no one had a problem." That is a false statement and he knows it is but had no problem telling the lie to our city government. No one contacted me, my wife nor any of my neighbors — and, I have confirmed that fact. Can i provide Council with something in writing prior to speaking in front of them? Cc: Laura Hill - Mayor, Shawn McCaskill — Councilman Place 2, Personal Residence: 211 White Chapel Court, Southlake, TX David C. 'Writhams President; Houston PlainsCapital Bank direct 713.749.81211 fax 877.379.6294 1 mobile 817.403.3567 W W669"lPlainsCapital.com Freee. 300, Suite 300, Houston, TX 77024 ns://mail.gmoe com/maiihW7ui=283k=cBBebOclb4&view=pt&seerclrinbmc&th=1 imi=14f895920cbc58dc 2J3 91 2a15 Ci.so Make.bc.us Mail - Fwd: FW: Request to Speak - September I - agwKja It m 78 - Zoning DoW to Increase Density NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail is strictly confidential and for the intended use of the addressee only. Any disclosure, use or copying of the information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited: If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail. PlainsCapital Corporation has taken every reasonable precaution to ensure that any attachment to this e-mail has been checked for viruses. We accept no liability for any damage sustained as a result of software viruses and advise you carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment. This email contains the views of the author and should not be interpreted as the views of PlamsCapital Corporation. Holly Slake Adminisftft a Se reWy - Planning Cerirf- red Permit Technician - Building Inspections City of SoutWake 817-748 8621 hb(&ke@ci.southlake: tx-us tdlpsJ/maii. e.cam/mailILMr/ ui=2&ik=c96ebOc1b4&viaN=pMmrci--inboc&th=1 iml=14t cbc5tt 3/3 9J1/2015 Re: SwroLrdng property and owners- aitacFrnenl - 859 and 911 S White Chapel Blvd-W. - jpotts*d.soUhlake.bc.Ls - Ci.saulhlake tx.Ls Mail ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Mediterraneo, Michael' To: Brandon Bledsoe <olace3(dci.south1ake.tx.us>, Gary Fawks < acetic .ci.southlake.tx.us>, John Huffman <piace5 ci.southiake.tx.us>, Laura Hill <mayor(Qci.southiake.tx.us>, Randy Williamson <place4lQci southlake.tx.us>, Shahid Shati <place1 ci.southlake.tx.us>, Shawn McCaskill <place2Qd.southlake.tx.us> Cc: Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 14:06:26 +0000 Subject: Plat Revision and Zone Change. Located at 859 and 911 S White Chapel Blvd. Please voice your opinion and oppose the zoning change and plat revisions that oppose the Southlake 2030 city master planil Please keep Southlake "Open" and support the Southlake 2030 plan WK4EL Meorl o I SVP IT Applications Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. 2201 W. Royal Ln., Suite 125 1 Irving, TX 75063 DutE 972 �UAAIL ■ WWW.sedawidc.COM I The leaderin innovative claims and productivity management soludons data.�twMftl;charset=utf-8,%3Cspan%20style%3D%22cdor%3A%20rgb(34%2C%2o34%2C %2034) %3B%2afort-tmily%3A%20arial%2C %20sans-sari t%3... 1/1 8/3112015 Ci.souWake.bws Mail - Fwd: S W[AeCtWel rezoning 19CfTY OF SOUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Fwd: S White Chapel rezoning kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us <kbaker@ci.southiake.tx.us> To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southiake.tx.us> Sent from my !Phone Begin forwarded message: Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 9:39 PM From: Lori Payne <kwVne@ci.southlake.tx.us> Dabs: August 30, 2015 at 7:02:37 PM CDT To: Laura Hill <mayor-kW.soutNake.tx.us> Cc: Shana Yelverton<SYe1rerton@ci.south1ake.tx.us>, Ken Baker <KBaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> Subject: Fwd: S Whhe Chapel rezoning Lori Payne Begin forwarded message: From: Randy Colvin_ Dabs: August 30, 2015 at 5:47:53 PM CDT To: maiyor4Wso ce.tx.us Subject: S White Chapel rezoning Dear Mayor Hill, I hope this message finds you well. During this past election cycle, we had a discussion regarding your position on rezoning property along S White Chapel Dr. from Hwy 1709 to Continental Blvd. You stated without equivocation that you opposed it. I shared with you the owner at 920 S White Chapel has attempted to have his property rezoned, twice, to allow more housing. I guess the third time is a charm. The property owner just had his request approved and passed by PZ. In fact, Case Number ZA 1S-07S comes up for its first reading this Tuesday. There are some issues I think you and the other council members should be aware of. First, Mr. Dean (the property owner requesting the rezoning) stated at the PZ that he contacted ALL adjacent property owners and not one had any issue and in fact supported his petition. That is not true (perhaps a lie is a better word). Mr. Dean did not contact me or any of my neighbors to the north or south. The other property owners can confirm this. However Mayor Hill the most disturbing item you and your colleagues on the council should be aware of is that approx. 7-10 home owners submitted their paperwork opposing this petition and NOT one, expect mine was t"://marl.gwYe.cam/mailhW.U=2Nk=c96ebOc1b4W&m--ptbewcW-inbm&rnsg=14t819rd1 ek030&siml=14181089i#c0.30 112 8/31/2015 t,`i.souWake.txms Mail - Fwd: S White Chapea rezoning listed in the official document released by the PZ as opposing this petition. Their vote was not counted at all. As you may know— PZ uses the. Tarrant county property tax role to identify names and addresses of property owners and uses this data for mailings to property owners which are impacted by a petition. My name is not listed on the property roles for safety reasons as my wife works for the USDOL I believe the reason my name was the only name listed as opposing this petition is because I actually called and talked to Gerad in the planning office so I could obtain a notification and returned said notification directly to Gerad via his email. Not having my name listed on the official document, as opposing after I personally spoke with someone would have been difficult to explain. There are over 10 property owners who submitted (via email or postal service) the official notification letter opposing this petition — their vote was not counted. I am not suggesting that someone is cooking the books, but SL PZ has had a notorious past about favoring certain individuals / organizations over others — when in fact PZ should be neutral and stick to the policies, laws and procedures. I thought we cleaned up the PZ with the past few election cycles but it seems perhaps not... Finally Mayor Hill, can you explain what takes place at the first reading? Should we be there in force to speak and explain some votes were not counted and in fact there are many home owners who oppose this petition? In conclusion Mayor Hill, you were not the only who said they were against rezoning property along this stretch of S White Chapel, Councilman McCaskill also took this position. I have his correspondence as well stating so and will also send him a note. If one exception is made the flood gates will open and the uniqueness of S White Chapel will be lost forever. In fact, I believe there are one if not two petitions waiting in the queue and will proceed depending on how this one goes. Perhaps, it is time to send this petition back to PZ and allow more time for all of the votes to be counted... and a more thorough job done to ensure there is no impact on the surrounding properties. Mayor Hill, I apologize for this lengthy message but it is difficult to get the facts out in just a sound bite. Thank you for your time and commitment to keeping Southlake a truly unique community. With warm regards Randy Colvin 310 Silverwood Circle WsJ/mail.go4e.comlmai[AYQ(?ui=2&ik=c96ebOc1b4&view=pMeerclr-inbox&msg=14f8igbOg6fcO3D&siml=1418190d6.M3O 212 8W2016 Ci.SaAHaketx.us Mail - Fwd: CASE NO: ZA15.075 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19, 20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition IOr-fTY OF SCWHLAM Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southiake.tx.us> Fwd: CASE NO: ZA15-075 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19, 20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 5:20 PM Forwarded message From: "Lori Payne" <Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx.us> Date: Aug 27, 2015 5:19 PM Subject: FW. CASE NO: ZA15-075 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19, 20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition To: "Laura Hill" <mayor4nt@ci.southlake.tx.us> Cc: "Ken Baker" <kbaker@ci.southiake.tx.us>, "Holly Blake" <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> From: 'Chad and Chrissy Simmons' via Mayor and City Council[mailto:mayorarxicitycouncil@ci.soutUake.tx.us] Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 4:48 PM To: mayorandcitycoLmd@ci.soufffte.tx.us; placeI@ci.southlake.tx.us Subject: CASE NO: ZA15-075 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19, 20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition Please be advised that our OPPOSED vote for the rtr-platting of Lots 19, 21 and 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition was mailed in, however, the latest on-line Staff Report regarding this Project dated 8/14/2015 does not include our Notification Response Form. Regards, Chad and Christine Simmons 330 Silverwood Cr Southlake, TX 76092 hapsJ/mail.google.c om/maiUuO'.7ui=2&ik=cgSebOclb4&view--pt&searctr=irkm&msg=14f713feedWRatd&siml=14f713fced977afd 1M &28/2015 Ci.soLdlUe buss Mail - Fwd. CASE NO: ZA15.075 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19, 20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 561 PdditiOn 1VCjry0r 1THLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Fwd: CASE NO: ZA15-075 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19,20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition kbaker6ci.southlake.tx.us <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:22 PM To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us>, Richard Schell <rschell6ci.southlake.tx.us> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Lori Payne <lpayne@ci.southlake.tx.us> 1 de. August 27, 2015 at 4:01:53 PM CDT To: Laura Hill <mayor-irt@ci.southlake.tx.us> Cc: Ken Baker <kbaker@ci.southiake.tx.us>, Holly Blake <hbiake@ci.southlake.tx.us> Subject: FW: CASE NO: ZA15-075 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19, 20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition From: mary dawson [rna i bo Sent: Thursday, August 27, xxpp� To: mayorard*cmmA@ci.soL41take.tx.us Subject: CASE NO: ZA15-075 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19, 20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition Please be advised that our OPPOSED vote for the re -platting of Lots 19, 21 and 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition was delivered on August 18th in person. The latest Staff Report regarding this Project is dated 8/1412015. Could you voe* the Staff Report will be updated to include the additional OPPOSED votes that have been sent in between August 14-20, 2015? MANY neighbors to the East of the properties proposing the Plat Revision OPPOSE this motion, and have submitted their response forms as requested. No neighbors to the East have been contacted by Mr. Dean or his representatives as claimed. Mr. Dean has contacted and listed only neighbors he knows support his request, conveniently not contacting those that are opposed to his request. We are not in support of this Plat Revision and would like our voices noted. *sJhnail.google.com/malULdOl?ui=2&ik=c96eboclb4&view=pt&search=inbox&msg=14f710ad44022276&siml=14f710ad44a22276 1/2 812812016 Ci.soLMake.tx.us Mail - Fwd: CASE NO: ZA15-075 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19,20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addi4iOn Mark and Mary Womack 1060 Highland Oaks Dr Southlake, Tx 76092 415 2n8370 htlpsJlmail.google.comimailhM?ui=2&ik=c96ebOclb4&view=pt&searc*inbwc&msg=14t710ad44a22276&siml=14f7load44a22276 2t2 8MO15 Ci.souMake.bws Mail - Fwd: FW: OPPOSED Status for CASE NO: ZA15-075 10 Q7Y Or SOUMLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@cl.southlake.tx.us> Fwd: FW: OPPOSED Status for CASE NO: ZA15-075 2 messages Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@d.southlake.tx.us> Forwarded message From: Lori Payne <lpayne@ci.southlake.tx.us> Date: Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:40 AM Subject: FW. OPPOSED Status for CASE NO: ZA15-075 To: Laura Hill <mayor-ini@ci.southIake.tx.us> Cc: Ken Baker <kbakert@ci.soutMake.tx.us>, Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> From: Michelle Ziadie [mallbo Sent: Thursday, August 27, 201511:33 AM To: mayorandcity©ourla'l a�ci.soutMake.tx.us Subject: OPPOSED Status for CASE NO: ZA15-075 CASE NO: ZAIM75 PROJECT: Plat Revision for Lots 19, 20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition Please be advised that our OPPOSED vote for the rye -platting of Lots 19, 21 and 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition was faxed on August 18 at 12:37 pm [submission and fax confirmation attached]. The latest Staff Report regarding this Project is [attached] dated 8/1412015. Could you verify the Staff Report will be updated to include the additional OPPOSED votes that have been sent in bet"en August 14-20, 2015? MANY neighbors to the East of the properties proposing the Plat Revision OPPOSE this motion, and have submitted their response forms as requested. No neighbors to the East have been contacted by Mr. Dean or his representatives as claimed. Mr. Dean has contacted and listed only neighbors he knows support his request, conveniently not contacting those that are opposed to his request. We are not in support of this Plat Revision and would like our voices noted. ttps:/Amail.google.cornImailAYOI?ui=2Nk=d raebOclb4&view=pt&seard=irbmc&tl=14t7ai4lf448l3Waiml=14t70341f44813f8&simi=14i705b673d25dc9 1/2 8/28/2015 Ci.soMake.tx.us Mail - Fwd: FW: OPPOSED Status for CASE NO: ZA16-075 Stephen and Michelle Ziadie 260 SilvenNood Circle Southlake TX 76092 +1 940 230 3287 Michelle Ziadie 940-230 3287 Holly Blake Administmfive Secretary - Planning Certified Permit Technician - Building Inspections City of Southlake 817-74"62f hblake@c4southlake bcus 3 adachments Rezoning Opposed.pdf 13077K Rezoning Opposed- FAx confirmadon.pdf 144K ZA15-075 - PR - Lots 191Y62C 200/62C 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition.pdf 5464K kbaker@cl.southlake.tx.us <kbakel@ci.southlake.tx.us> Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 1:11 PM To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Loading... httpsJ/mail.Mlecom/mailhYO/?ui=2Nk=cWebOc1b&view=ptBsearct--iribox&t1--14170341f44813f8&siml=14f70341f44813Wsiml=14f70M73d25dc9 2l2 Notification Response Forms and Letters for ZA15-075 included in the Staff Report Dated August 14, 2015 Surrounding Property Owner Responses Notification Response Farm ZA15 -076 Meeting Date. August 20, 2016 at 6:30 PM ?•!a �! u;;�,,cor �, Dais. Direct questions and mall responses to, City of southlake Pianning & DevalopmentServioes Notification Response 1400 Main St: Ste 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Phone: (817)748-8621 Fax: {817)748.8077 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of ,f-bppesed to undedded about r (circle or underline one) the proposed Plat Revision referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Signature:-''�''.'1rz _Date: Additional Signature; �_, %t _r',J1 <� ' Date: ` 1P r Printed Name(s):,�tt�SF owler�s" whow nwi m) are prinWd mI fop. LMhorwi: a uaint ft Planning _-epartrttent One Corm per rwir ay Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment G ZA15-075 Page 1 Notification Response Form ZA15-075 Meeting Date: August 20, 2015 at 6:30 PM Dean, Robert Etux Tracey 1205 S White Cpl Blvd 41100 Southlake Tx 76092 Direct questions and mail responses to: City of Southfake Planning & Development Services Notification Response 1400 Mal n St; Ste 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Mono: (817)748-8621 Fax: (817r748-8077 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being t jowrw (s) of the property so noted above, are hereby l _ in fav opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Plat Revision referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Signature: Date. - Additional Signature -Date: Printed Names): r I' �2 Arutil kin pinjc!iIV OHnerI$, v.Wwi n0rri,*(9} ant Ini)(0 Nt top. n11rcrlMul. Phone Number (optional): �nlac- the F 2rn1-g ueparohienL One Fora per prcperly Case No. Attachment G ZA15-075 Page 2 July 13, 2015 City of Southlake Planning and Zoning 1400 Main St Suite 310 Southiake, TX 76092 Ahmed Itntiaz 841 S White Chapel Blvd Southlake, TX 76092 RE: Zoning Case ZA15-074 & ZA15-075 To W h m It May Concern: The intent of this letter is to inform the City of Southlake Planning and Zoning of my position on Robert & Ttacey Dean's proposed re platting and rezoning application, After several discussions with the Dean's they have made changes to their proposed division of of land and rezoning that now addresses our concerns. We are in full support of their request for rezoning and re platting: provided the new building line for proposed LOT 19 shall be a minimum of 275' as measured from existing Northwest fence corner of proposed LOT 19. If this building line is not allowed on the plat then they have agreed to include as a deed restriction for proposed LOT 19. If you have any questions I can be reached at (214) 673-6199. R s, Ahmed hntiaz Case No. Attachment G ZA15-075 Page 3 July 13, 2015 City of Southlake Planning and Zoning 1400 Main St Suite 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Drew Johnson 921 S White Chapel Blvd Southlake, TX 76092 RE: Zoning Case ZA15-074 & ZA15.075 To Whom it May Concern: The intent of this letter is to inform the City of Southlake Planning and Zoning of my position on Robert & Tracey Dean's proposed re platting and rezoning application. After several discussions with the Dean's they have made changes to their proposed division of of land and rezoning that now addresses our concerns. We are in full support of their request for rezoning and re platting, provided the new building line for proposed LOT 19 shall be a minimum of 275' as measured from existing Northwest fence corner of proposed LOT 19. If this building line is not allowed on the plat then they have agreed to include as a deed restriction for proposed LOT 19. If you have any questions I can be reached at (214) 871-6815. Regards, /3'. Drew John n Case No. Attachment G ZA15-075 Page 4 Surrounding Property Owners iO E CONTINENTAL BLVD 1. Ahmed, Imtiaz Etux Fazila ZoningPhysicalAddress SF2 841 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD •Response 1.32686025 F 2. Antique Evanesance Uc SF20A 809 BOSTON DR 0.46200000 3. Burke, William Etux Nancy RPUD 245 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.36124676 4. Castle, Robert M III SF20A 803 BOSTON DR 0.46900000 5, Costa, Paul L Etux Phuong D RPUD 340 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.36705229 rrent Owner RPUD 310 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.31075835 O Dean, Robert & Tracey AG 859 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 5.95593405 F 8. Dean, Robert Etux Tracey RE 911 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 7.76906278 F 9. Del Rosario, Edwin Etux Gracia RPUD 345 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.30379255 10. Farley, Kathleen L Etvir James SF20A 807 BOSTON DR 0.49000000 11. Finn, James H Jr Etux Jonna RPUD 130 HIGHLAND OAKS CT 0.37682749 12. Gourley, Ronald & Alicia K RPUD 355 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.34245448 13. Hargett, Gary RE 1111 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 11.37132630 14. Huang, Heng RPUD 300 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.27144250 Johnson, Drew SF1-A 921 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 5.99941480 F 16. Johnson, Greg Etux Leslie RPUD 1050 HIGHLAND OAKS DR 0.34491551 17. Knowles, Dawn RPUD 100 HIGHLAND OAKS CT 0.72733947 18. Lancster, Donna SF1-A 495 PINE DR 2.86185242 19. McClain, Thomas I Etux Kathy M RPUD 320 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.29407981 O 20 63- McNamara, Raymond S & Debra J Comment Card from P&Z RPUD 110 HIGHLAND OAKS CT 0.42247862 O iterraneo, Michael & Nicola RPUD 120 HIGHLAND OAKS CT 0.32246817 O Case No. Attachment F ZA15-074 Page 1 SPO # 22. Owner Mitchell, Robert W Etux Lori W Zoning RPUD Physical Address 230 SILVERWOOD CIR Acreage 0.31168433 Response 23. Morris, Melinda W RPUD 350 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.31403573 24. Ordonez, Armando Etux Rebecca RPUD 360 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.33487001 25. Parra, Michael B SF20A 100 HARVARD DR 0.46700000 26. Powell, Marc Etux Lori SF1-A 205 WHITE CHAPEL CT 2.20407862 27. Raja, Muhammad Ali SF20A 805 BOSTON DR 0.48800000 28. Romano, James Etux Brigeitte SF20A 801 BOSTON DR 0.53900000 29. Shin, Sang Ho RPUD 250 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.34240612 30. Simmons, Christine Etvir Chad RPUD 330 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.38010603 31. Superintendent of Carroll ISD 32 Superintendent of Grapevine Colleyville ISD 33. Superintendent of Keller ISD 34. Superintendent of Northwest ISD 35. Sykes, J R Etux Cynthia Ownershi Changed) RE 720 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 15.15400000 F 36. Timberlake, William Etux Andre SF1-A 225 WHITE CHAPEL CT 1.46712342 37. Velala, Krishnamohan RPUD 235 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.30224545 38. Vu, Giac T Etux Khanh SF1-A 219 LILAC LN 3.56278598 39. Wahby, Samir C Etux Mona S SF1-A 1.43045423 40. Welch, John C Etux Beverly RPUD 240 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.31572024 41. Williams, David C Etux Terri L SF1-A 211 WHITE CHAPEL CT 1.34465539 42. Womack, Mary & Thomas RPUD 1060 HIGHLAND OAKS DR 0.43966845 O 43. Ziadie, Michelle Etvir Stephen Comment Card from P&Z RPUD 260 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.54970041 O Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response Responses Received: In Favor: (5) Opposed To: (6) Undecided: (0) No Response: (32) Case No. Attachment F ZA15-074 Page 2 Updated SP® Map and List for ZA15-075 Surrounding Property Owners SPO 1. Owner Ahmed, Imtiaz Etux Fazila Zoning SF2 Physical Address 841 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD Acreage 1.32686025 Response F 2. Antique Evanesance Lic SF20A 809 BOSTON DR 0.46200000 3. Burke, William Etux Nancy RPUD 245 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.36124676 4. Castle, Robert M III SF20A 803 BOSTON DR 0.46900000 5. Costa, Paul L Etux Phuong D I RPUD 1340 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.36705229 Current Owner RPUD 310 SILVERWOOD CIR 0,31075835 O 7. Dean, Robert & Tracey AG 859 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 5.95593405 8. Dean, Robert Etux Tracey RE 911 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 7.76906278 F 9. Del Rosario, Edwin Etux Gracia RPUD 345 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.30379255 10. Farley, Kathleen L Etvir James SF20A 807 BOSTON DR 0.49000000 11. Finn, James H Jr Etux Jonna RPUD 130 HIGHLAND OAKS CT 0.37682749 12. Gourley, Ronald & Alicia K RPUD 355 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.34245448 11 Hargett, Gary RE 1111 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 11.37132630 14. Huang,Heng RPUD 300 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.27144250 15. Johnson, Drew SF1-A 921 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 5.99941480 F 16. Johnson, Greg Etux Leslie RPUD 1050 HIGHLAND OAKS DR 0.34491551 17. Knowles, Dawn RPUD 100 HIGHLAND OAKS CT 0.72733947 O 18. Lancster, donna SF1-A 495 PINE DR 2.86185242 19. McClain, Thomas I Etux KathyM RPUD 320 SILVERWOOD CIR 0,29407981 O 20 McNamara, Raymond S & Debra J Comment Card from P&Z) RPUD 110 HIGHLAND OAKS CT 0.42247862 O 21. Mediterraneo, Michael & Nicola RPUD 120 HIGHLAND OAKS CT 0.32246817 O 22. Mitchell, Robert W Etux Lori W RPUD 230 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.31168433 Case No. Attachment F ZA15-075 Page 1 '• 23. Owner Morris, Melinda W Zoning RPUD Physical AddressResponse 350 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.31403573 24. Ordonez, Armando Etux Rebecca RPUD 360 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.33487001 25. Parra, Michael B SF20A 100 HARVARD DR 0.46700000 26. Powell, Marc Etux Lori S171-A 205 WHITE CHAPEL CT 2:'2046M 27. Raja, Muhammad Ali SF20A 805 BOSTON DR 0.48800000 28. Romano, James Etux Bri eitte SF20A 801 BOSTON DR 0.53900000 29. Shin, Sang Ho RPUD 250 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.34240612 30. Simmons, Christine Etvir Chad RPUD 330 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.3BDWO-60 _ O 31. Superintendent of Carroll ISD 32 Superintendent of Grapevine Colleyville ISD 33. Superintendent of Keller ISD 34. _...Superintendent of Northwest ISD 35. Sykes, J R Etux Cynthia (Ownership Changed) RE 720 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 15.15400000 F 36. Timberlake, William Etux Andre SF1-A 225 WHITE CHAPEL CT 1,46712342 37. Velala, Krishnamohan RPUD 235 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.30224545 38. Vu, Giac T Etux Khanh SF1-A 219 LILAC LN 3.56278598 39. Wahb , Samir C Etux Mona S SF1-A 1.43045423 40. Welch, John C Etux Beverly RPUD 240 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.31572024 Al. Williams, David C Etu*Terri L SF1-A 211.WHITE CHAPEL CT ;344V539 O 42. Womack, Mary & Thomas RPUD 1060 HIGHLAND OAKS DR 0.43966845 43. Ziadie, Michelle EWr hen RPUD 260 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.54970041 O Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response Responses Received: In Favor: (4) Opposed To: (9) Undecided: () No Response: (30) Case No. Attachment F ZA15-075 Page 2 14 To: Southlake City Council From: David Williams Date: September 1, 2015 Re: Agenda Item 7B Rezoning Request This letter will provide information that was contained briefly in the response to the Planning and Zoning Committee regarding the above. I have been informed that the committee did not receive the response though it was dropped offer personally at the City Council offices. My wife (Terri) and I reside at 211 White Chapel Court which is contiguous to the site for which the owner has requested a zoning change to allow him to vacate the site and develop multiple homes with a developer. We are against this request and this letter outlines the reasons. I have also attached photographs supporting my concerns. Mr. Dean attempted to do this same zoning change a few years ago and was met with similar resistance from us, his neighbors who plan on living in Southlake longer than the Owner. Many of my points below summarize the concerns of me and my neighbors. All of which we raised a few years ago and are now raising again which the Owner and the Planning and Zoning Committee seem to be ignoring, not acknowledging or choosing to waive without concern. 1. Hydrology and Drainage Flow a. The Owner's property and those such as mine near his have surface drainage only. All rainfall must drain from North to South and West to East into surface drainage ditches, into three ponds and then out to a creek to the South. One of those ponds was removed by the Owner. b. The Owner removed a drainage pond noted on the aerials provided a handful of years ago. Simply, he bulldozed dirt from the surrounding area of the pond and attempted to fill it in. Since then the area has become much like a swamp. Even now, there is standing water after a very long drought period indicating the disruption of normal flow. i. Did Mr. Dean obtain a permit to remove a drainage pond? ii. Was the impact on surrounding properties considered when the Owner removed the pond? c. We asked last time and ask again... where is the hydrology study to determine the impact on surface drainage in this area? d. The 100-year flood plain lies very close to the south of this site and in the absence of a hydrology report on how this would impact neighbors downstream puts the city at risk of lawsuits and increased insurance costs of properties downstream begin to be included in the flood plain. 2. Septic System Combined with Surface Drainage a. My personal experience is in commercial real estate development financing for over 30 years. b. In that time, I have not seen a development conducted that allowed for septic use in such a large number of homes without accounting for the drain, or "leech" field. c. The proposed development with homes that would permit septic systems with leech fields within a surface drainage waterway could create a very unpleasant situation for downstream neighbors in the case of heavy rains such as we saw earlier this year. 0 d. Has proper studies been conducted of how leech fields will impact neighbors and the creek to the south of the site? e. Has the city addressed or will address if those systems are not properly balanced and maintained the requirement and cost to maintain them should a house remain vacant for a length of time? f. Would any of the members of council be comfortable living around leech fields for the number of houses being proposed? g. When I approached the city about 7 years ago to inquire about a septic system for an outlying building on my property — next to the subject site — I was declined since "access to city sewer and water" was so close. Well, the owner's site is just 10 feet further from city water than mine. Shouldn't we require city water/sewer? h. Is the city's long term plan to continue the use of septic systems? If not, why allow it now in some of the more valuable areas of the city? 3. Wetlands/Migratory/Environmentallmpact a. The Owner's land and many adjacent to it serve as migratory rest stops for many waterfowl including a variety of ducks and geese. In the early winter, shortly, you can see as many as a hundred of Lesser Canadian Geese resting. b. His removal of the pond starting the situation of removing key wildlife points from the City of Southlake and his desire now to maximize personal profit to himself only by removing much of this large green space is just wrong. c. The original zoning and plan was put in place years ago for a reason and that reason remains a good one. d. Though not a professional bird watcher I have enjoyed all of the wildlife around the area. Along the fence line separating my properties we get many hawks of common variety. But, I have also seen the Gray Hawk ("threatened species") and the Black -capped Vireo ("endangered"). Continuing to remove safe areas that were set aside years ago through considerate zoning has provided a habitat for many animals including these that are threatened. 4. Impact on Value of Adjacent Properties a. The Owner has not shown that the proposed zoning change would be profitable for the City of Southlake through increased property tax revenues. Although this was asked last time the Owner wanted to change the zoning, he and his representative stated they would provide a study... and never did. b. I can assure you that the homes that surround this great green area would be negatively impacted from a valuation perspective. So much so that the negative impact would be more than the positive one of adding more rooftops, closer together. c. Shouldn't that be a key point for council to consider? How would approving this change impact those neighbors that already live in the area? Or, are you ok permitting one individual to profit and leave while those that are your constituents are damaged? 5. Violation of Southlake 2030 Plan a. A lot my and council's money was spent on this plan and now are we so quick to forget its core themes: i. "... reflect community values... ii. "... protect open spaces ..." iii. "... maintain environmental stability ..." b. How does increasing home density on infill areas achieve those goals? c. Isn't there an abundance of other land that would allow for this type of development and still retain Southlake 2030's vision? i' In closing, I don't trust the Owner. I don't like the thought of him representing to P&Z that he "has spoken to all those adjacent and no one has expressed a concern". That is a lie. He never tried to contact me or any of my neighbors and has never shown any sincere concern for our opinion evidenced by him not appearing in person at any of the hearings. If he cares about us as he sells out and leaves Southlake he can come knock on my door or show up to a Spin Meeting like all of us did. If he misrepresented the facts to government officials what else is he misrepresenting? We don't need more rooftops, closer together at the cost of losing open green spaces. There exists plenty of undeveloped land in Southlake that should be the focus of developments such as this that Owner and his developer can pursue without negatively impacting those that live here and not providing the reasonable support to address our concerns. Sincerely, David Williams 211 White Chapel Court Southlake, TX 76092 (817)403-3567 .. ... ,... .. of h LO a � 41 CL O m 7 4 w • Y tow *wIvA, T! IN. F2 Lori Payne From: Kathy Colvin Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 2:47 PM To: Lori Payne Cc: Randy Colvin Subject: Attached photo for City Council Attachments: IMG 0074.JPG Lori, David Williams advised that he will be making remarks tonight and forwarded info to you for the City Council to have in advance of tonight's meeting. I, too, plan to make brief remarks, and may reference a photograph, taken from the edge of my property, of the subject property's retention pond. I've attached that photo if you think appropriate to forward to the Council in advance of tonight's meeting. Thank you very much for your assistance. I know today is a very busy day for you and our "issue" is just a small part of tonight's agenda. Regards, Kathleen Colvin 310 Silverwood Circle a • a ytirl a' mow- •+g , l� 3 I �^ �..�, ��'r�3 T r L"••141, r i i A I� _ _ ,� •ram � Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3DO 2013 by Autodesk, Inc. v10 Tuesday, 08 / 18 / 2015 Hyd. No. 4 Pond A Routing Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 5.275 cfs Storm frequency = 5 yrs Time to peak = 18 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 8,492 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 3 - Pr Storm to Pond A Max. Elevation = 484.21 ft Reservoir name = Pr Detention Pond A Max. Storage = 3,929 cuft Storage Indication method used Q (cfs) 12.00 10.00 Me AM 4.00 2.00 Pond A Routing Hyd. No. 4 -- 5 Year Q (cfs) 12.00 1111111itiZiZil DOW 4.00 2.00 0.00 T I I I I I I I I I I I A I 1 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 Time (min) Hyd No. 4 Hyd No. 3 T Total storage used = 3,929 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2013 by Autodesk, Inc. v10 Tuesday, 08 / 18 / 2015 Hyd. No. 4 Pond A Routing Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 5.587 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 19 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 10,051 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 3 - Pr Storm to Pond A Max. Elevation = 484.34 ft Reservoir name = Pr Detention Pond A Max. Storage = 5,086 cuft Storage Indication method used Q (cfs 14.00 12.00 10.00 4.00 2.00 Pond A Routing Hyd. No. 4 -- 25 Year F1 Or Q (cfs) 14.00 12.00 10.00 e O 4.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Time (min) Hyd No. 4 Hyd No. 3 Total storage used = 5,086 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2013 by Autodesk, Inc. 00 Tuesday, 08 / 18 / 2015 Hyd. No. 4 Pond A Routing Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 6.212 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 20 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 13,501 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 3 - Pr Storm to Pond A Max. Elevation = 484.63 ft Reservoir name = Pr Detention Pond A Max. Storage = 7,593 cuft Storage Indication method used. Pond A Routing Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 4 -- 100 Year 18.00 7TA 15.00 12.00 6.00 3.00 0.00 Q (cfs) 18.00 15.00 12.00 6.00 3.00 0 00 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Time (min) Hyd No. 4 Hyd No. 3 Total storage used = 7,593 cuft 1-2' DOUBLE GATE, DOUBLE CHECK I K BACFLOW PREVENTER AND VAULT 17024451.1778 E 2381596.7282 ULF OF 2' DW. C-9DO, DR-1 VC WA URNISH AND INSTA -2' W BEND \ 1-2' DOUBLE GATE, DOUBLE CHECI BACKFLOW PREVENTER AND VAULT N 702451.2022 17 U I AN IN 8'I H 1-2' METER AND BOX N 702447.4544 - --- ��- 1 91.7471 P -8'X2' DIA M.J.xM.J. TEE -2' DIA. RESILIENT SEAT ATE VALVE D VALVE BOX N.J.xM.J. 0 LF OF 2' DIA. C-900, R-14 PVC WATER PIPE 7024443.8104 23.1591.7857 1-8'X2' DIA M.J..M.J. TFJ 1-2' DM. RESILIENT I I � I FURNISH AND INSD 1-B'z12' TAPPING d VALVE N 7024371 M32 E, ISTIND 12 �g U F. 1 I i T d INSET: SCALE: 1"=10" I I I 3'x2' M.J.xY.J TEE 3'x2' REDUCER 7024454.1738 2381596.7128 I AN I 1-2' METER AND BOX N 7024447.4543 74 I I I I FURNISH AND INSGLL• 1-5' DLA PLUG I N 7024443.8145 I I I KNISH AN 1 ALL• -FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBY INCLUDING LOT ae, aza=A WHftE CINPEE DO 1-B'X6' DIAM.J.zM.J. TEE va.da.n�, 4,M.PO.a -6' DIA. RESILIENT SEAT PR.T.Co T. TE VALVE VALVE BOX M.J.xM.J. 5 LF OF 6' DU. C-900. -14 PVC WATER PIPE -FIRE HYDRANT AS DETAILED 7024443.9145 SEAT GATE VALVE Reiainlnq Wall AND VALVE BOX M.J.xY.J. 10 LF OF 2' DIA. C-900, I DR-14 PVC WATER PIPE I N 702443.8138 s 11 FURNISH AND IRMZ�-\ 0 30 LF OF 8' DIA. C-900 -14 PVC WATER PIPE Pond Robwt & Tr Lot 6R V.I. 16925. Pg. 3.999 Ac. SF2 O 0 00 '57' y gym' s� O sga REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET FOR ETOSTING UTLIIY CAUTIONARY NOTES AND CONTRACTOR ADNSM �-7 NEW SANITARY SEWER LINE CROSSING Y. A <� SEE PUN AND PROFILE VERTICAL / `A I MAINTAIN MINIMUM OF 2' CLEARANCE LOiM lko=A Zp 1 � aA � ! ai9'C WIM ONPEL LACE LID —A•= W NEW STORM SEWER LINE CROSSING P.R"T'�^•Tx � ; R 9 9 w �' B = i v 9 X B SEE PLAN AND PROFILE MAINTAIN MINIMUM OF 2' VERTICAL CLEARANCE J B== E o I Na : �€.= pill 81. a : 3/8' I.P.F. L------------------------------ Y -----------------J ---------------------------------------------------------- ----------- I I I cn I Zo o3 I N W �_ m rn I \ a Qwwx ReOvt ! Tr—y D— R.T.21880 6.999 A— J > 0. Y LU F- O = J Z v Q D O iLLJx N x p . t O icy Mebl Ga,eP J EMaep o 85NIxq IIRow, R•OBAI Potl Let 8 (�j�/_/-�,�J�)J N. ormlwry Na 5m Ax1dI0m o �/ Cxb. A. Slide 58S/ Pit.T.C•..Tx. Y. O demx Q caSYq 3VO LL.I 0 LU Zyz Q QO.r9 o •� a" r..n1_ i no' ® d ' SHEET SANITARY SEWER PLAN NOTES: gL 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IONS. DI AND MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO THE SPECIFICATIONS. IN AREAS WHERE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET FOR EXISTING UTILITY CAUTIONARY NOTES AND CONTRACTOR ADVISORY DO - I '� SG. 9+59.25 - SANITARY SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A'. $ � NOT COVER THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS NEW WATER LINE CROSSING 1 FURNISH AND INSTALL' CONSTRUCTION GOVERNMENTS q$ PUBLISHED BY THE NORH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL (NCTCOG) LATEST THE SHALL APPLY. OF A SEE PLAN AND PROFILE 2' V13MCAL CLEARANCE / - - ) / 1-STD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE AS DETAILED ss 7'g 2. ALL WATER LINES WILL BE LAID A MINIMUM OF 48 BELOW FINISHED MAINTAIN MINIMUM OF _�imry RIM = MATCH FINISHED GRADE ELL GRADE 3. ALL WATER EXCEPT AS SHOWN ON UTILITY CROSSING SHEETS. LINE FIRINGS TO BE DUCTILE IRON MECHANICAL JOINT ALL W/ 7 1 - -- 1 I sum ' a:wsL FL 6' OUT - 63091 (OUT) - '_4 S 4y' IN= 70244D2.9522 MEGA NECESSARY 4. UNCHARTED LUGS. THE BID ITEM FOR D.I.M.J. FIGS WILL INCLUDE BLOCKIFIRINGS NG. UTILITY LINES MAY BE LOCATED WITHIN THE AREA OF I - _. BWPIRIBa E i = 2381622.4747 DEMOLITION. LOCATING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL EXISTING UTILITIES AND IDENTIFYING ANY POTENTIAL 6o1PIIrvB Pecod I _ - --_ - _mod - _ sbt ZI �• ' to usBooaT gowpaddy -- -- _ 1,10 - ._- �f - _--= __... `. 5. WHERE REINFORCING 15 NOT SPECIFICALLY DETAIIED Ru1FORCING N0. Af 12 O.C.E.W. FOR _ --- PAVING 6. UNLESS SIDEWALKS, BE AT 7. ALL AREAS SHALL BE AT A MINIMUM, 4 REBARS SPECIFICALLY NOTED ON PUNS, ALL CONCRETE PAVING SLABS AND MISCELLANEOUS UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURES A MINIMUM, 4000 PSI PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE AT 28 OF THE fITE INCLUDING ANY OFF -SITE AREA THAT IS �'� \ SHALL - DAYS. \., �// S 9f ,L7£ • O f - - ---- _•S'-L8' .'S °SL jt DISTURBED HYDROMULCH BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL RCEC- AT A MINIMUM, AND 6 OF TOP -SOIL REFER TO UNDSGPE, DEMOLITION, / - GRADING, CONTROL SHALL PAVING DRAEJgM WATER, SEWER IRRIGATION AND SEDIMENT PUNS TO DETERMINE ALL LIMITS bF DISTURBANCE. CONTRACTOR PROVIDE SOD AS REQUIRED ELSEWHERE IN THE PUNS. / I I 1 - yF o a 'j'S bL 99'L PROPOSED 15' a•aV sss's I 1 SAINFARY S." ".- I \ .`I..00ll Y.D EASEMENT Ci '3ns'I ay L STA. 0+23.70 - SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A' �- / � � ' voa °,c9_1 AZWa°a 1 � 7J16 FURNISH AND INSTALL G 1 1-STD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE AS DETAILED ` RIM = MATCH FINISHED GRADE �,-,,.,,,p��,. / I .. �' 01 MOM N� r 1 1 / FL 6' (OUT) = 626.02 FL B' (IN) - 626.03 / P••odwd ,_ ,_,.,_ FURNISH AND INSTALL 208.59 LF OF 6' DIA. LL E L g I / N = 7024618.01112� PINIPOSED 1$' w uwpm *I-l=da SDR 35 MC SANITARY SEWER PIPE AT 5% - Z'o a F .. E = 2382348.9500 SAMTARI' / __ NN:LUDING EXCATION, EMBEDMENT AND BACKFILL .- k d ; _ 9 AND INSTALL 23.70 LF OF 6' CA. ._ _ _- _.-- iASE1RtNi --.� _ - _ - _ ' - 1 w 9 y S? 6 • X - JURNISH OR 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE AT 5X - _ _,. i "- "'"- - -T ------Z+W-- - ---- -_ --- ----R� -----" �w��- _ ---- - ---- --- ,w----J -- - _ 0 CLUDING IXGTION, EMBEDMENT AND BACKFILL _ '1'd-I „z/L ----------------- -- --, r-- --- --- -- ---_-------__ A -- -------------- _ -T .�.d.l ^' $ O E -----_----_ -, I 796 ,579 FURNISH AND INSTALL 395.98 LF OF 6' DIA. i d v ' �- .eszs=',°I3 an Mwa ppW i I SOT 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE AT 5X .ases=..aa wia i iaea; .LnhreS I I I Yrsota�a y I INCLUDING EXCATION• EMBEDMENT AND BACKFlLL m� I '. STA. 0+00.00 •- SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A' xi•o�'i'ird AWL yNypj I ? STA. 3+53.68 -• SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A' STA. 7+50.66 - SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A' CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY awsmYadYao ��.� acre I vmo7a'wsazio� FURNISH AND INSTALL: ac FURNISH AND INSTALL' W SEWER MANHOLE BY CORING �� I 1-STD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE AS DETAILED '� 1-STD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE AS DETAILED J_ FL 8' IX (OUT) = 625.80 RIM = MATCH FINISHED GRADE No �. RIM = WATCH FINISHED GRADE LL FL 6' (IN) = 625.90 FURNISH AND INSTALL 329.98 LF OF 6' DA. I FL 6- (OUT) = 627.68 101 FL 6' (OUT) = 629.76 O N = 7D24641.7137 SDR 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE AT 5% I INCLUDING EXCATNIN, EMBEDMENT AND BACKFILL 1 FL 6' (IN) = 627.78 FL 6' (IN) = 629.86 Vi Z E = 2382348.7389 1 1 I N = 7024615.0794 N = 7024611.5440 E= 2382018.9761 E= 2381622.0131 , L] O J a 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 LU Q . ._ __..........:.... .. _. PROFILE S TILE :... .. -I i a x w Q i...: _.. .............:... .... ... ..:... .... .:...:... .. .'... :... :... .....:.. - VERTI L LE. QJ ................. _- .... ........ .... . . a .8............ . . '3 ........, .:.. . . :...:...:...:... s,.. .....:... i...i ..:.. i.... C i...: 'x, tl i...: ea..... ... y.:.. �. _.. N W W Z UJ Q'�O� LL ............... .... a......... ................. - :I N. : L .. i :L4 _i..... I N. L4� n n n .L` . .:....:..:...:...:....:...:...`...:... ...:...:...:...:......:...:...:...:.. _. `.......: -- z - O v ...... .. - ��� �� A. SDR 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER - PIPE .. 640 INC 640 LU i.. ..:. ... E..... ... i. : _.:-.-:. ."..i... : .. . . :.. . ... i... i... i... i... i... i... ..:.....:.... i......:. �... i... - `. .. .... .... .. ...jam ...... .:...... a _... ... .. ......E....... c/J . oF. PR osED :.. ..... Z SANRARI` Q .: .. .... :.. i... i................... i... V.. .. PROP:OSEO12 :....... .... -.....�� .:.. _.i... :...:...:..al. ............... :...: :...:...:...:...:..:...:...:.. ... .... . x - .:... ........ .� .... _ .......:.... :_ _..-. _i..... .i .1 LJ. :..._ -.. - ........... 3 PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA CALCULATIONS Rabortal Me9t9d Q-CIN AREA ACIIE6 c Tc OWN 11 IIMA) I70 PruM M90PrvW 011do Ot01dM 01991d.) A 4.09 0.37 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 5.8 8.3 12.0 S 9.81 0.39 15 3.90 5.53 Too 14.5 20.6 29.7 OS-1 2.81 0.67 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 7.3 IDA 15.0 OS-2 0.56 0.67 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 1.5 21 3.o OS-3 21.00 0.67 15 3.90 5.53 7.96 54.9 77.6 112.3 OSd 0.71 0.63 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 1.7 2.5 38 NOTES: 1) Gischarge from dmaalte areas Mere Moved WON the Rational Method based m 9re City ofFt. Worth dmmage design manual 2) fdma6 rmfcients xere calcta0ed mM I-mW'pnger s areas and Mein desinated r-o9-M-nls 3) FA rMll Irdensties Mere tr m from the City of FI. Worth drainage design mmwl Rainfall Intensely chart. 4) Pereora areas recensl a'C lacw of 0.30 5) lmae- arse rer;med a V Ww a 9.99 � � U / v I :s� REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET FOR EXISTING UTILIT' CAUTIONARY NOTES AND CONTRACTOR ADVISORY J w zo C O> w �m J ¢QWw Y -0=� D Lu -w w�tO � yNJO W z m Q O.O w 0 0 m Q EXISTING DRAINAGE AREA CALCULATIONS Rational Meftd Q=CIA AREA ACRES C Tc(min) 11 On/Hr) hO PWHr) 11000NYY1 01(cfe) 010 lcfa) 01001cf) A 4.09 0.35 15 3.90 5.53 7.96 5.6 60 11.5 8 9.61 0.33 15 3.90 5.53 7.BE 12.6 17.8 25.7 OS-1 2.81 067 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 7.3 IDA 15.0 OS-2 0.56 0.67 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 1.5 21 3.0 OS-3 21A0 0.67 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 54.9 77.0 112.3 OSa 0.71 063 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 1.7 2.5 3fi NiILL� 41.a 116a 1i1.1 NOTES: 1) Dschage ham cnerage areas wee obtaYad using Ore Rahooal Method based on the City of Ft Worth drainage design manual 2) Run-off coehclents ware caicuaaed an ge walnhg oua areas and th&r destnatecl n 11 coe18cimm 3) Rainfall intensities were taken hom the City of Ft. Worth tlrmnaga design manual RaWall meanly clan. 4) Pervious areas rece,wd a'C bcl, o10.J0 5) Im Famous areas receded a'C' fact, of O W U D D r 0 D. a SDO I I I D 1 d , I 1 � I I II d � I i � I � o I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 347 Mae 3 H BERRY SURVEY i A-581 , s I DD o DRAINAGE LEGEND y�$ DRAINAGE AREA LABEL °G ACREAGE OF AREA Y DRAINAGE DIVIDE €�3 a� DRAINAGE AREA REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET FOR EXISTING LITIUTY O CAUTIONARY NOTES AND CONTRACTOR ADVISORY Sp*, Z., SHIN'. a4 PIN cn Zo 03 w H DO J i0< Q Z U = } O WWI- 06xV)0 Z oZf 3 LL c3 H vi cn 0 = <i Qz O°�g w o 0 Om a 1/2' I.P.F. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. O I 00DRNN6U.E. I I I I I 1SD9aN.Esntr.. -�I �%� 1 I I I I ^1 hG suF. a L0T6 .K=A I i Wry�aypryApp LDt iRSflt, BLDtx A I I I I n VDLY6III.PG.i1 W.x11E GPA➢EL IA 1— LOT 9'9 I i��Bi laiaiN2, BLOLNA I I I PRi.CCR i I 1 IIMIEDVPEL VJE ADD I I GY Sbe®°� I I � QX� = O°AABkeT5501 I I AT.Ce-R 6anilary°xx'°i E350 Rn Eke.. ' 453' I 845' 11 Retoining Wall 3/8'I.P.F. L____—__--_— �_ _—__—__J L_____________________J 1/2 I.P.F. o 00 S.F wa6r. ,�., I — 16 F, I tmm N •—-- 435I I III 11V I.P.F. i___________________________ __________ __ _� �II —— 3 —N Possible 7500 q t home;&I s ---- for Z�QZoa �_ocaonsw o illustrative purposes only 3 g8 11— @ Trac.Y T�rs g8FLOHI� D208221860 > g gaEa _ 2.500 AC m D.R.,T.CD.,Txcc3� q g 1 3.999 Avea .� t o JC kI I K F s i t SF2 0 1, 670S.F. 3 r I p Boa F +''` g ; , 'r'>"f..a,ti ,.R?3if8•'' xz "a -am. >'.f. 'i''` a "+- I I W n is '�. ,— IF. aia;3•I->-�i`kX..`sE � ���.:,L„ � g�oy� � I r^Y F .0511,S.. ,04%S.F 380.F. '30%S.F. 02.1 5 S°F. 8°1. 347' .236 S.F a. Proposed 2.11705. F. Building 2 S. 0 S F. 1� I E:su,g Y IY Z ❑ I u°,1Lma �v Q > J - 7,12fbS.F. W O] 4,09 F. - -- I I Q QW WX Cn A I =>aa F- Z • Poe F+ba9 13 60° S. I I p w W ~ Z J I R°Mrt ! T D. Vol 15923. Pp. Lot 6R ; a k T' B $. pe]B.at 97, s. I Lot 2O I r 7.265 Ac. 11" I.P.F. _ _ _ _ I— = O a .6 � W U ,^ V Z 3.999 AC. P� , iat 6 I RE I r -- u~i (n J Z SF2 H. G,wber N, 551 Additl°n III W Z }~ Q Q2 SF. Cab.A Slide 5837 ° 3.780S.F. .22o S.F F ee WO00a,rc.r� 00 P 0Q OE � I 2 4oS. 0cn . ,20S1,502 S.F. 1405. 394 SI I J Q o.F. 4 S. . 5 5 '.F. PIPE FD. I' ---- -- -- - - - - - 757' 543' I z j � H. GRANBERRY SURVEY I I I w l 3 A-581 I a FlRE ANE STRIPING: ADJACENT TO PAVEMENT. I II ND MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO THE LEAS WHERE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS DO FIRE US ACCESS ROADS OR FIRE LANES SAL BE MARKED BY AWLS' PAINTED LINES OF RED TRAFFIC PAINT SU(, INCHES (J{6"� IN WIDTH SHOW THE 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OF THE MODULAR CONCRETE BLOCK RETAINING WALL (SIGNED AND SEAL D BY A LICENSED a ECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS "TO BOUNDARIES OF THE LANFw THE WORDS NO PARKING FIRE LANE SHALL PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WITHIN THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR REVIEW AND WALL c iY THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF APPEAR IN FOUR INCH (4 1 WHITE LETTERS AT 25 FEET INTERVALS ON THE RED ACCEPTANCE PRIOR TD ANY CONSTRUCTION OF THE REFER TO I EDITION SHALL APPLY. BORDER MARKINGS ALONG OTH SIDES OF THE FIRE LANES. WHERE A CURB IS GEOTECH REPORT FOR SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS. IG WITH EXISTING CONCRETE SHALL BE AVAILABLE, THE STRIPING SHALL BE ON THE VERTICAL FACE OF THE CURB. I EXPANSION JOINT AS DETAILED. CONCRETE MATERIALS NOTES: ITHS AND PARKING SHALL CONFORM TO THE GUARDRAIL NOTE/ORNAMENTAL FENCE: 1 �NCRETE S PORTLAND CEMENT CONFORMING TO ASTM C 150, ED IN THE TEXAS ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS. TYPE 1, DOMESTIC MANUFACTURE ONLY. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE ONLY SIBLE TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT 4' HIGH GUARDRAIL THE DESIGN BASIS IS ONE BRAND OF CEMENT THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT. STRIPE ALL PARKING AS SHOWN ON PLAN AMERISTAR MONTAGE THREE RAIL MAJESTIC." FINISH SHALL BE SELECTED BY 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE AN AIR —ENTRAINING ADMIXTURE PER ANES, TYPICAL SPACES AND A.D.A. SPACES. AUTHORIZED SCHOOL DISTRICT FEPRESENTATIYE. FENCE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS, RESULTING IN CONCRET AT THE E SLEEVEING FOR ELECTRICAL WITH MEP PER AMERISTAR MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS POINT OF PLACEMENT HAVING AN AIR CONTENT OF 5X (il% AIR —ENTRAPMENT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. 'ECIFICALLY DETAILED, REVFORCING FOR 3. ALL CONCRETE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM WATER TO CEMENT RATIO OF 0.50. M.NO. 4 REBARS AT 12 O.C.E.W. FEN%MEi 4. CONCRETE SLUMP AT THE POINT OF PLACEMENT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN N PLANS ALL CONCRETE PAVING, ALL bMALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH A MOW STRIP AS DETAILED 3 AND NOT MORE THAN 5" AS DESCRIBED BY ASTM C 143. 5. FLY ASH AND CALCIUM CHLORIDE OR ADMIXTURE MORE THAN PAVING LEGEND .ANEOR UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURES SHALL 'ORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE AT 28 DAYS. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT 4' HIGH ORNAMENTAL FENCE. THE DESIGN CONTAINING 0.1% CHLORIDE IONS ARE NOT PERMITTED. 6" THICK, 4000 PSI POR LAND CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALKS WJ BARS AT 18" 'S: IN AREAS WHERE SUBGRADE IS NOT BASIS IS AMERISTAR MONTAGE THREE RAIL MAJESTIC." FINISH SHALL BE 6. NO SAND SHALL BE USED UNDER ANY PAVEMENT - NO EXCEPTION. 14 O.C.E.W. TRACTOR SHALL FURNISH AND INSTALL 12" SELECTED BY AUTHORIZED SCHOOL DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE. FENCE SHALL BE 7. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ON MAXIMUM OF 90' CENTERS o 'EM 247, GRADE 'A TYPE 1, COMPACTED CONSTRUCTED PER AMERISTAR MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND LOCATED AT ALL STRUCTURES, INTERSECTION POINTS, POINTS OF 18 STD PROCTOR 09NSITY. CURVATURE, POINTS OF TANGENCY, AND AT ALL REDUCTIONS OF PAVEMENT SEE PAVING DETAILS FOR TYPICAL PAVING SECTIONS Q • ALL SCORING AND EXPANSION JOINTS RETAINING WALL NOTES: WIDTHS. VEER PRIOR TO ANY CONCRETE PLACEMENT 1SHALL BE PAVESTONE ANCHOR VERTICA PRO WITH SHALL PROVIDE A DETAILED JOINTING PLAN BEVELED UNITS OR APPROVED EQUAL AND COLOR SHALL BE SELECTED BY REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET FOR EXISTING UTILITY I SCALE I = 50' JG SPACING AND TYPE OF JOINT TO THE AUTHORIZED SCHOOL REPRESENTATIVE. CAUTIONARY NOTES AND CONTRACTOR ADVISORY FEET SHEET 'EPTANCE A MINIMUM OF FOUR (4) WEEKS 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH AND INSTALL 2' WIDE, 6" THICK CONCRETE ° EMENT. MDWSTRIP FOR CHAINLINK FENCE BEHIND WALL AS DETAILED WHEN NOT REFER TO DEMOLITION PLAN SHEET FOR SITE DISTURBANCE NOTES. LOT aE. BLOaLA rvNIiE LI4PE V0.Y61]A PG tl , M 21 W ATfgTa I Peta:ning Wall 111 �� 1�� �.r� �r-1—L j — ALL- _ Possible 7500 sq it home;" Location shown for illustrative purposes only Lo :p II --Projws Driveways f 1 If p � LOT 2MI, KXKA wH1ECWP6LALEAOD L1E.A5'de5e7 AT.fn.R 845' ----------------------- � i ' 634 Traeq aeon T.cw,Ta y% 6� 347' Ca•-P --e �.^�TF c 6y� _ \ J ,536 N'I � °i Lot SR ese°e:wT. 3.999Ac. I SF2 H. Wrnb., W.. 581 AddUlon cob. A, SIIds 3837 V-2 - r�--- --o r — `r—1 LCL 15 H. Ganb—, No. 551 Addition Cab. A. Slid. 12 PA.,TCo.,Tc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4eoRaN6uE � I I I I I I LOi1P5R2,RaaxP I w1YfECWiEt LAOE ILO I LdA9Ae'3B1 ATvn I I I -------------� 634 y ' ro%Imate Loco of Toposed Drivewa J Approximcie Location of 63 _ ed— v i 6 r — g / Lot 20 7 2R65 EAc. i 1-1. GRANBERRY SURVEY A-5n i I I l I I I I I I � I I I � I I I I I I � I I I I I I I I I I ,saNH ESwr. ' al I I I i I- I a.M.ItNGIInxa.N tt SU.E p,*L-T, 871 I .10,L, I I MaEpYP6LATEAoO I I I 2e DRAwAGEA U.E. L4aAeiYwR I A,umn � I I �- 1- L------------- -- -- — ---' IP= /I I I _ LU Oproximate Location of ., Proposed Building -- / — — — — — — — — — s-2 7AYAROX.PRow$c 101TNEHGIWJS 1 I z. I I I I / III� I 1° �ry0 III 11111111110. nllII IIIIII I 1�i0 u�ill M �l "M91, ENG/NEER/NG., LLC SCALE 1' = 50' 3973 W. VMRY BLVD.. SURE 103 PHONE- (817) 732-9839 FEET FORT WORTH, TX 76107 FAX (817)73L9841 REGISTRATION NO. F-9435 AllT N0.- 711-001 a 21 . 1. 1 I' -2" DOUBLE GATE, DOUBLE CHE( BACKFLOW PREVENTER AND VAULT N 7024451.1778 E 2381596.7282 tNISH AND INSTALL: LF OF 2" DIA. C-900, DR-G4 - w --� t -2" DOUBLE GATE, DOUBLE CHEC BACKFLOW PREVENT AND VAULT 7024451.2022 381591.7 80 FURNISH AND INS A 8' H 1-2" METER AND BOX N 7024447.4544 E 2381591.74 1 p FURNISH AND INSTALL: P1-8"X2" DIA M.J.xM.J. TEE 1-2" DIA. RESILENT SEAT ATE VALVE ND VALVE BOX M.J.xM.J. 0 LF OF 2" DU. C-900, R-14 PVC WATER PIPE 7024443.8104 57 U NI AND INSTA • 1-8"X2" DIA M.J.xM.J. TE 1-2" DIA. RESILIENT SEAT GATE VALVE AND VALVE BOX M.J.xM.J. 10 LF OF 2" DUL C-900, DR-14 PVC WATER PIPE N 7024443.8138 4 a see WATER PLAN NOTES: s I 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND MATERIAL SHALL INSET: I CONFORM TO THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS. IN AREAS SCALE: 1"=1O" I WHERE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS DO NOT COVER, THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS I TEXASRUCTION COUNCILAOFPGO ERNMENTSBY T�NCTCOG)NORTH LATESTRALg I I EDITION SHALL APPLY. aLL I I I 2. ALL WATER LINES WILL BE LAID A MINIMUM OF 48" I CELOW FINIS EDTGRADE EXCEPT AS SHOWN ON UTILITY URNISH AND INSTALL- I I 3. ALL WATER LINE FITTINGS TO BE DUCTILE IRON -3"x2" M.J.xM.J TEE I I MECHANICAL JOINT W/ MEGA LUGS. THE BID ITEM FOR -3"z2" REDUCERI UDUTINCLUDE LTEDABLOCKING. 4.HARTEILITY LINES MAY BE LOCATEDWITHIN HE 7024454.1738 I I AREA OF DEMOLITION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY 381596.7128 I I RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING ALL EXISTING UTILITIES AND I I IDENTIFYING ANY POTENTIAL CONFLICTS 5. WHERE REINFORCING IS NOT SPECIFICALLY DETAILED, URNISH AND INSTALL• I I REINFORCING FOR PAVING SHALL BE AT A MINIMUM, NO. 4 1-2" METER AND BOX I RE BARS AT 12" O.C.E.W. N 7024447.4543 I 6. UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED ON PLANS ALL CONCRETE t 38159 I I PAVING, SIDEWALKS, SLABS AND MISCELLANEOUS UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURES SHALL BE AT A MINIMUM, 4,000 PSI g0 I I I I PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE AT 28 DAYS. L W 7. ALL AREAS OF THE SITE INCLUDING ANY OFF -SITE AREA m= I I I THAT IS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, SHALLiQ 1 RECEIVE AT A MINIMUM, HYDROMULCH AND 6" OF URNISH AND I STALL I TOP -SOIL REFER TO LANDSCAPE, DEMOLITION GRADING, 3 PAVING DRAINAGE, WATER, SEWER, IRRIGATION AND 1-8" DIA. PLUG I SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS TO DETERMINE ALL LIMITS OF glg� N 7024443.8145 DISTURBANCE. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SOD AS 2381616.7556 1 REQUIRED ELSEWHERE IN THE PLANS. I REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET FOR EXISTING UTILITY CAUTIONARY NOTES AND CONTRACTOR ADVISORY I I I NEW SANITARY SEWER LINE CROSSING IL R g S SEE PLAN AND PROFILE FURNISH AND N ALL• I A MAINTAIN MINIMUM OF 2' VERTICAL CLEARANCE Q >- LOT4B,BLOCKA I J u € 1-FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBY INCLUDING: WHITECHAPELLACEADO I LOT Z -O I 1-8"X6" DIA M.J.xM.J. TEE VOL 30&174, PG. 21 I WHITE CHAPEL LACE ADD B 88� „Y GATE DIA. RESILENT SEAT I �- e PA.T.C".,Tt NEW STORM SEWER LINE CROSSING CaPjLGATE VALVE.TC .T1 w fi a >i AND VALVE BOX M.J.xM.J. B SEE PLAN AND PROFILE a MAINTAIN MINIMUM OF 2' VERTICAL CLEARANCE 5 LF OF 6" DIA. C-900, DR-14 PVC WATER PIPE .0g 1-FIRE HYDRANT AS DETAILED N 7024443.8145 R I ROW 845' 2381611.75 6 1 Q, U Retaining Wall 3/8' I.P.F. L-----------------------------J I I I I - - - - - - - - - - - -------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- I I I I I proximate L000Bon of Proposed Drlveway (n I> Zo P ssible 7500 sq ft home; �'`� ROW I O > d °LoeoNon shown for f 1 I WA R H J o N � tllustl five purposes onl (j``....r/1 I Y � X LO I @ � 1 RobeD208221860 Dean \ _ d FW-- z 2.500 Ac 1 I D.R.,T.Co.,Tx. F- O= J Q SF 2 O — J I 5.999 Acres = Z U= F J ES d Driveway I U W W j Z ATose E I Approximate Locofton of UJ ~ O D 12� A Proposed Butldtn F LL O � URNISH AND INSTAL 0 W Z O Q Q PROPOSED 8' WATER LINE - o .5' BEND ,---- ---- -0---- -- Z O M U 1 0 o CROSSING UTILITY POLE, ° W00Q ONTRACTDR TO RELOCATE GHT POLE 3,6' ro os Drivew 0 ~ Appro> Proposed Pro Q 757' `a IE s c w B 3 12 C a 4 Patl I a K a 0 b e: d SCALE 1' = 40' FEET SHEET a zo .o eo SANITARY SEWER PLAN NOTES: REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET FOR EXISTING UTILITY 1 % ! r'-' / z , 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS. IN AREAS WHERE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS DO NOT COVER, THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CAUTIONARY NOTES AND CONTRACTOR ADVISORY NEW WATER LINE CROSSING j I / '� 1 STA. 9+5925 ; SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A' FURNISH AND INSTALL• ' �m CONSTRUCTION (/55 PUB SHED BY THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF A SEE PLAN AND PROFILE ,I- / 1-STD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE AS DETAILED m ' GOVERNMENTS (NCTCOG� LATEST EDITION SHALL APPLY. MAINTAIN MINIMUM OF 2' VERTICAL CLEARANCE ' "� RIM = MATCH FINISHED GRADE 2. ALL WATER LINEE5 WILL BE LAID A MINIMUM OF 48 BELOW FINISHED GRADE EXCEPT AS SHOWN ON UTILITY CROSSING SHEETS. -._..-_-_.-- I FL 6" = 630.91 3. ALL WATER LINE FITTINGS TO BE DUCTILE IRON MECHANICAL JOINT W/ !� - 1 a I ' `� ' ' •j S 4b' N = 70244OUT0 2.9522 MEGA LUGS. THE BID ITEM FOR D.I.M.J. FITTINGS WILL INCLUDE ALL NECESSARY BLOCKING. I f I i '_._... ......_ _.�_-'-"----- �� ` _' r o, E = 2381622.4747 4. UNCHARTED UTILITY LINES MAY BE LOCATED WITHIN THE AREA OF DEMOLITION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR j r J / 6u!PIInB' t----...-- n i •-J•S6LI,L'Z / - j ' LOCATING ALL EXISTING UTILITIES AND IDENTIFYING ANY POTENTIAL I ( 6uIpImB pesodo�d / .� _- -- --'- \ .',- _ -.. Qasod d-----_ �.,• O CONFLICTS , _ __ �10 uo,Noo01 a+Dw!xolddy '-- - "--- �.{-- Y 'Lun 5. WHERE REINFORCING IS NOT SPECIFICALLY DETAILED, REINNFORCING FOR 6. PAVING SHALL BE AT A MINIMUM, NO. 4 REBARS AT 12 O.C.E.W. UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED ON PLANS, ALL CONCRETE PAVING, \ �� s -4-S 9L' ! �J Manua as a SIDEWALKS, SLABS AND MISCELLANEOUS UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURES SHALL-'- BE AT A MINIMUM, 4 000 PSI PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE AT 28 DAYS. SITE % / i ,C6£ p j 7. ALL AREAS OF THE INCLUDING ANY OFF -SITE AREA THAT IS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL RECEIVE AT A MINIMUM, HYDROMULCH AND 6 OF TOP -SOIL REFER TO LANDSCAPE, DEMOLITION, GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE, WATER, SEWER, IRRIGATION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS TO DETERMINE ALL LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE. CONTRACTOR ! i I �-- , u( SHALL PROVIDE SOD AS REQUIRED ELSEWHERE IN THE PLANS. wpl!ng pesodold 10 uo!}D301 alow!xojddy ' M xFq , ( A SpL99'1 PROPOSED 15' 1- 1I r / ( r -y s66 s1 I SANITARY SEWER / EASEMENT d'S099�' o '3n 87 sz >1 (' / STA. 0+23.70 - SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A' ! \ 'l j oea[zzea a - voaa 699 yagaB 11 7•50 FURNISH AND INSTALL 1-STD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE AS DETAILED M / /` ! /' S £b�� !uo/s I dund anyo] zz I RIM = MATCH FINISHED GRADE ` �. ,� i '! �.J ool r ^ W \ FL 6" (OUT) = 626.02 /doManua // i awo4 a OOS[ aIV!s: e 8 FL 6" (IN) = 626.03 \ Pasodold � _ __ _ _� __ FURNISH AND INSTALL 208.59 LF OF 6" DIA. - ROW -" Q i g G - I N = 7024618.0182 E= 2382348.9500 PROPOSED 15' j 10 uoy000T alDw!xolddy SDR 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE AT 5% EXCATION, EMBEDMENT AND BACKFlLL I, ".- Z Z s: a d I SANITARY SEWER , - -- ,INCLUDING a s ffi_" FURNISH AND INSTALL 23.70 LF OF 6" DIA. ( _ __._..__ _ �\ -_- _- _ _ . EASEMENT _ -__ _._ _..__-_ .__. / -•- �._.-- , I i C L w m - w SDR 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE AT 5% - INCLUDING EXCATION, EMBEDMENT AND BACKFlLL _ / - _ `--"" "- -'--- ----- - ffff- ---- T+00-- _ _'_�... _ _ _ _ _ " " _----'`-�-_�_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,_ ,,,,,,_ _ _ J "y}T3'a------ 4-+D6-'06=- 1.. �._ _ r _____] �- ul "Z�l 1 -------------------- --- r_-_----- ---- 7'� -- - ^ ------------------------------ 1 'd'd'I _./£ I I 1 FURNISH AND INSTALL 396.98 LF OF 6" DUl 1 LL " - - - - _ - F- - I .a,sze='�13aunrc w Ray/ ! I SDR 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE AT 5% I Q, f I a'ssa=''al3w!e I camas ,481!ueg I 'c1" INCLUDING EXCATION, EMBEDMENT AND BACKFlLL I STA. 0+00.00 � SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A' I xi ^71 17d LfiBI a�!IS'tl'9a'J I I Y1`a'd ! Lass aWIS'V'9e7 STA. 3+53.68 - SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A' STA, 7+50.66 - SANITARY SEWER LINE 'A' CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY I I Ootl3Jtl7l3dVH�311WA I DDV 90VI 13dVH3 311W I vxaols'zasauol FURNISH AND INSTALL• �e'd FURNISH AND INSTALL• W SEWER MANHOLE BY CORING I sazlol I I 1-STD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE AS DETAILED vvo 1-STD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE AS DETAILED _I FL 8" EX (OUT) = 625.80 VERIFY I FL 6" (IN) = 625.90 I FURNISH AND INSTALL 329.98 LF OF 6" DIA. I I RIM = MATCH FINISHED GRADE FL 6" (OUT) = 627.68 3311HM RIM =MATCH FINISHED GRADE 101 FL 6" (OUT) = 629.76 0 [ N = 7024641.7137 I SDR 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE AT 5X I FL 6" (IN) = 627.78 FL 6" (IN) = 629.86 scn�e I• _ <o' C) ssa E = 238234.7389 I INCLUDING EXCATION, EMBEDMENT AND BACKFlLL I N = 7024615.0794 N = 7024611.5440 Z p E= 2352018.9761 E= 2381622.0131 o zo .o eo O J I I Ld - DO 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 Y Q Q PROFILES' ALE Lu � > a Y T"-40' HORIZONTALSCALE: R - LZ�L/I W Z J 1� �j�j 0. x; M W tL - 0 Z) F- _ 0 a - .. ... ... II : ......... �1 .._ II .....: . JI : _- _. .. II ,�I 41 .. .. II 11 II 11 11 11 11 1�I I 11 II I�j' �yy Q W ?) 1..% LL LLJ . :. .. " ' ' N ISN AND INSTALL 9 9.25 LF. OF ' FU � ' _ Z � O W .. .. .: 6" IA,'"SDR 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER' PIPE -' �". . ' .---i'- ' '� ' � � : ' ' U 640 . 640 W CKFl LL COP IN E. o r :..AN .:..:..:.. Q �- � .. .: .. :.._.... ._ .. .'_._ ..:.. ... .:.. .. .. . .. .. .. .... Q rn '.. .... .....: .. '... ..; .. ..:.. .. EXISi1NO G DE 0 ...�- .... Q ..' .. ..t : . .i ... .... Cfl OFPRO POSED]:- � ����� - � _ ter. Z : :..i : SANITARY SEWER ..' ,. .. �`. .. ... ..:...: - .' ..:. ....... .. ........ ...... --: .� .r.:.�._ .. ' PROPOSED 12'' .. INC _ _ JAS DETAILED e � II :. ..i... .. w ... .:.. 4 S a E w a s 630 II 630 c LJ o W 620 W W ... o.:at 620 N :ZO _ N ZO :N ZO . COU = Z W O,n: Z 3=bm _W.Wb Z Zrt:qb m H Z WWa. 11--m 11 h m�jhZ,Nn: yZj ID-G: td: _ NF<.NHN n 1A Zb N iZ� N��iyN .N.> i.ZCr`II Zb NO 11 CC ZZ1- ° i0 HEET 610 610 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 EXISTING DRAINAGE AREA CALCULATIONS Rational Method o=CIA AREA ACRES C Tc (rnln) 11 Dn/Hr) 110 (1nIHr) 1100 (In1Hr) 01 (cfs) 010 (cfs) 0100 (cb) B 9.61 0.30 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 112 15.9 23.0 OS-3 21.00 0.50 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 41.0 58.1 1 83.8 QS4 0.71 0 67 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 1.9 2.6 3.8 TOTAL = 54.0 76.6 110.6 TOTAL = 11.4 16.1 23.2 NOTES: 1) Discharge from drainage areas were obtained using the Rational Method based on the City of FL Worth drainage design manual 2) Runoff coeficients were calcualted using perAous/mperwous areas and their desinated runoff coefficients 3) Rainfall intensities were taken from the City of Ft. Worth drainage design manual Rainfall Intensity chart. 4) Pervious areas received a'C factor of 0.30 5) Impervious areas received a'C factor of 0.90 D U D 0 D. Q d oa o V os-t OS-2 ..... 453 Retaining Wall. Ij^fI I \ c / �a' ].SSF2Ac ----- 4. 757 1 6a eR F c A 4.09 0.30 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 4.8 8.8 9.8 OS-1 2B1 0.50 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 5.5 7.8 17.2 OS-2 0.56 0.50 15 9.90 5.53 7.98 1.1 1.5 2.2 l DRAINAGE LEGEND � DRAINAGE AREA LABEL '� °C• ACREAGE OF AREA DRAINAGE DIVIDE �LL DRAINAGE AREA �^ REFER NA GENERAL NOTES SHEET FOR EXISTING UTILITY O JCAUTIONARY NOTES AND CONTRACTOR ADVISORY V � Cj _=o dry W Eo��o3 W "s=gas` �w fs J��m ,U # a a ZC3 0> ¢Y m Q J � a Y LU w = QQ~ Q Z U = ! O 0 ww~~ O LLJ �� w0 Z Q otS � LL U F" v~i(nJOZ Cn UJI a CO w o-c D �- Q � D c � � w 3 'o D 0 SCALE ia� = 100' z O zao EEr SHEET o so PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA CALCULATIONS Rational Method Q=CIA AREA ACRES C Tc (nnn) 11 (In/Hr) 110 (INHo I100 (In/Hr) Ot (cfs) O10 (cfa) 0100 (cls) a 9.61 0.67 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 25.1 35.6 51.4 OS-3 21.00 0.50 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 41.0 58.1 83 8 OS4 0.71 0.67 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 TOTAL a 117.11 96.3 138.0 A 4.09 0.67 15 3.90 5.53 7.96 10.7 15.2 21.9 OS-1 281 0.50 15 3.90 553 7.98 5.5 7.8 11.2 OS-2 0.56 0.50 15 3.90 5.53 7.98 1.1 1.5 2.2 TOTAL - 17.3 24.5 35.3 NOTES: 1) Discharge from drainage areas were obtained using the Rational Method based on the City of Ft. Worth drainage design manual 2) Runoff coeficients were calcualted using pervioustimpennous areas and their desinated runo8cceficients 3) Rainfall intensities were taken from the City of Ft. Worth drainage design manual Rainfall Intensity chart. 4) Perilous areas recemd a factor of 0.30 5) Imperious areas receied a •C factor Df 0.90 L!� N �I D. DRAINAGE LEGEND DRAINAGE AREA LABEL y x.xx °C• ACREAGE OF AREA g DRAINAGE DIVIDE DRAINAGE AREA REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET FOR EXISTING UTILITY o CAUTIONARY NOTES AND CONTRACTOR ADVISORY I a J € I� I Zone > t2 1E W �g < W. � .o WrOigB� _N I -� /--\ J 1 J i �-� C:j d I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I � I I I 7'' I I dj I I o 3 H. NBERRY SURVEY A-581 - I I i 0 / SCALE 1' = 100' i Feel SHEET o eo iao eoo I s Hydrograph Report Hydrappw Hydroprapha Clteneion ra AubaC CNH-2013 by AW1,111k, Inc. 00 Mpntley, oe/31 /2015 Hyd. No. 3 Pond A Routing Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 36.80 cfs Storm frequency = 1 yrs Time to peak = 0.37 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 44,821 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 2-Pr Storm Max. Elevation = 620.53 ft Reservoir name = Detention Pond A Max. Storage = 31,142 cuft s1«ape IrMiation melhpd nsea. Pond A Routing CI (cfs) Hyd. No. 3 - i Year C! () 60.00 60,00 60.00 50.00 40.00 40.00 30.00 I 30.00 20.00 20.00 10.00 - 10.00 o.w ' _ 0 00 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 17 1.8 20 --- Hyd No. 3 -Hyd No. 2 0-.II.QD Total storage used = 31,142 cuft Time (hrs) Hydrograph Report HydrbO HyNrographs Fx I.n forAuroCADACMi 3M 0/3 by Alb k, Inc. 00 -de,. eb I31 I-s Hyd. No. 3 Pond A Routing Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 73.47 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.35 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 87,100 cuff Inflow hyd. No. = 2 - Pr Storm Max. Elevation = 629.70 ft Reservoir name = Detention Pond A Max. Storage = 40,919 cuft Sb,age In .0b melted used o (Cfe) Pond A Routing Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Year Q (cfs) 90.00 90.00 80.00 BO 00 70 00 70.00 60.00 60.00 50.00 50.00 4000 40.00 30.00 ,. 30.00 t _. 20.00 20.00 I 10.00 10.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 0.00 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1..2 1.3 1.5 1.7 - Hyd No. 3 - Hyd No. 2 i t 1 [Tl Total storage used = 40,919 curt Time (hrs) I Hydrograph Report HyMailay HydrrgnpheE-blbn hk AubbCAD® CX03M W13 byNdodedk lm. NO Mp y, 08 f 3112015 Hyd. No. 3 Pond A Routing Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 111.99 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 0.38 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 144,068 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 2 - Pr Storm Max. Elevation = 629.84 ft Reservoir name =Detention Pond Max. Storage =49,382 cuft abragb Indkatlon methatl aced. Pond A Routing o (cfa) Hyd. No. 3 -100 Year (cfs) 120.00 120.00 100.00 ..... ... - 100.00 !. 80.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 40.00 I 0.00-60.00 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 10 1.2 1.3 1.5 - Hyd N. 3 - Hyd No. 2 m--r IL, Total storage used = 49,382 aft Time (hrs) Zo 0 O> CL Y H m a LV w i a � Y I -Oa<~ _ Z) Z 1: O F W lL _WO F-���( CO Q 06 Zj (.) t.l- Tin U) 0 1z w Z LI) Z OM(,0 co = p F 06 Q Z Q� 0