Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Item 7A
13 CITY OF SOUTHLAI<,,E Department of Planning & Development Services STAFF REPORT September 29, 2015 CASE NO: ZA15-074 PROJECT: Zoning Change and Development Plan for 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On behalf of Rob & Tracey Dean, Sempco Surveying, Inc. is requesting approval of a Development Plan from "AG" Agricultural Zoning District on existing Tract 5B to "RPUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District on approximately 5.999 acres on property described as Tract 5B, H. Granberry Survey, Abstract No. 581, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 859 S. White Chapel Blvd., Southlake, Texas. SPIN Neighborhood #9. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Since the City Council review of this application on September 1, 2015, the applicant has modified the application. The previous application was for three lots (two "SF -2" lots, and one "RE" lot. The applicant has modified the zoning and is now requesting approval of a single residential lot for "RPUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District on 5.999 acres. Lot 6 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition to the south located at 911 S. White Chapel Blvd. has been removed from the request and will remain "RE" with one house. Concent Plan Previously Presented to Citv Council Seatember 1St. 2015 +s.r *.. 'v ^.e' cF ' N79' WE 1314.717 to IP U.E--__--_- -Ia B.T _ aR.O r .....ly.................. ...................... - 1 LOT 19 Pg � JI w Z �..'ms ss •mow 175.81 �_ smalro revc��.•6t �,T__i .............. .....®�aio E.mff.- �gl _ i� .J.L.._......_.....-.-. Irll L0720 s u_'esm•E 175.Ba' __� amara ar �dn °area FI—A 7.240 Am ^� y I °R.'. �e:m,anm•e: I Ran.nsr��r RE.i. sme Oe.Aassn em RJ LOT 21 e van. I I o. e.J*.M. g alT 21 a48 7.898 Acres .993 ImAcr SF2 es vi �� � 3 I w•g. ;v SF2 pl F IA 16Y me jMNG sE—K I i! _ _ _ _ --- ----------- _-__-_______-iP u.E IER LAB SL. r .1----------- -------------- -SM32t3IN --_______-___________________________:r...._________SM32t3W 1297.64 --------------------------- a u -__________-__- Revised Development and Pedestrian Access Plan i1A L NWODW'E 13'41 SUf25-r r .r. REa667R°ry 0[a6 Q' .'-- ----- 5999 I °'0A�1pB0 .i1G. KGRAIBERRYSVRbTY.A581 b , ; 8 L OR.T..T, Fuwfe I FI -0p St 4umin ni ivF ® t� sessrae, Home Site e.�.m�s z.,���:�e.n /� S� Op�e sr,.. $ _F : pl ' E -� ------------ _______ -�- ----- NWOOWN1' 13155 Case No. ZA15-074 REQUEST DETAILS: ACTION NEEDED: ATTACHMENTS: STAFF CONTACT: Case No. ZA15-074 Sempco Surveying, Inc. originally requested approval of a Zoning Change and Concept Plan for Lots 19, 20 & 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition. The request ran concurrently with a Plat Revision (ZA15-075) to revise the boundaries of existing Tract 5B to the north and existing Lot 6 to the south, to create three (3) Lots on approximately 13.786 acres. The originally proposed request was also to revise the boundaries of existing Tract 5B and Lot 6, H. Granberry No. 581 Addition to create three (3) residential lots. The two lots directly fronting S. White Chapel Blvd., proposed Lots 19 and 21, were proposed to be rezoned from "AG" and "RE" to "SF -2" and the third lot was proposed to be rezoned from "AG" and "RE" to "RE" (proposed Lot 20). The applicant has amended the zoning change request proposing a Zoning Change and Development Plan for "RPUD" Residential Planned Unit Development district for only Tract 5B, H. Granberry Survey, Abstract No. 581, proposing a single residential lot on approximately 5.999 acres located 859 South White Chapel Boulevard. Lot 6 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition located at 911 South White Chapel Boulevard has been removed from the zoning change request. The "RPUD" shall abide by all the conditions of "SF -2" Single Family Residential District with the following exceptions: Lots: There shall be only one (1) residential lot within this property Rear Yard: There shall be a minimum rear yard of one hundred thirty (130) feet, which shall be maintained as permanent open space. 859 S. White Chapel - Site Data Summary Proposed SF -2 Number of Residential Lots 1 N/A Gross Acreage 5.999 Acres N/A Density .17 DU/Gross Acre .50 DU/Net Acre Open Space Acreage (%) 0.59 Acre (10%) N/A Development Minimum Lot Size +/- 5.9 acres 2 acres Maximum Height 2'h stories / 40 ft. 2'h stories / 40 ft. Front Yard Setback Not less than 40ft. Not less than 40 ft. Side Yard Setback Not less than 20 ft. Not less than 20 ft. There shall be a minimum Rear Yard Setback rear yard of 130 feet, which Not less than 40 ft. shall be maintained as permanent open space Maximum Lot Coverage 20% 20% 1) Consider 1St Reading Zoning Change and Development Plan Approval Request (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Plans and Support Information — Link to PowerPoint Presentation (D) SPIN Meeting Report (E) Review Summary No. 3, dated September 29, 2015 (F) Surrounding Property Owners Map (G) Surrounding Property Owners Responses (H) Ordinance No. 480-702 (1) Full Size Plans (for City Council Only) Dennis Killough (817) 748-8072 Jerod Potts (817) 748-8195 Case No. ZA15-074 Fill »1[67e1k1116 1:1 :191:1 :4 W&I 111 V'ril I Eel k 1 14 MICIA 0Q**s]N1i9Eel kA LAND USE CATEGORY CURRENT ZONING: REQUESTED ZONING HISTORY: CITIZEN INPUT: SOUTHLAKE 2030 Case No. ZA15-074 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Rob & Tracey Dean Sempco Surveying, Inc. 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. Tract 5B, H. Granberry Survey, Abstract No. 581, City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas. Low Density Residential "AG" Agricultural District The original zoning change request was for "RE" Single Family Residential Estate District and "SF -2" Single Family Residential District An amended request has been made for a zoning change to "RPUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District Tract 5B – 859 S. White Chapel -This property was annexed into the City in 1956 and given the "AG" Agricultural District designation. -According to TAD, the existing home of approximately 2,568 square feet on was built in 1973. A SPIN Town Hall Forum was held for this project on June 23, 2015 at Southlake Town Hall. A SPIN Meeting Report is included as Attachment "D" of this report. Consolidated Future Land Use The Southlake 2030 Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Low Density Residential. The image to the right illustrates the Future Land Use for the proposed location. Low Density Residential as defined within Southlake 2030: The Low Density Residential category is for detached single- family residential development at a net density of one or fewer dwelling units per acre. Net density is the number of dwelling units per net acre, which excludes acreage in all public rights-of-way. Other suitable activities are those permitted in the Public Parks / Open Space and Public / Semi -Public categories described previously. The Low Density Residential category encourages the openness and rural character of the City of Southlake. Future Land Use 859 S. White Chapel F,ture Land Use 00—Fl o van �?"Jr "Fig � P P - o 1111t, 11,11,1111 � �� ppY ^c7n> d l 1 4� � o ae C meree ea use ref Ana r- As proposed, this concept plan is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. Attachment A Page 1 Master Thoroughfare Plan According to the Master Thoroughfare Plan, S. White Chapel is designated as a 2 -lane undivided arterial (A2U) with a minimum 88' R.O.W. required. Pathways / Sidewalk Plan The Official Pathways Map, adopted by City Council on January 7, 2014 designates the east side of S. White Chapel Blvd. as having a future that is less than 8 feet wide. However, sidewalks are not required for a single -lot residential development. TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: Area Road Network and Conditions The existing residence at 859 S. White Chapel is shown on the proposed concept plan as to be razed. This residence currently has driveway access from S. White Chapel Blvd, and this driveway is to be removed. The most recent development plan does not show new proposed driveway access to the future home on 859 S. White Chapel, and staff has included a comment in Development Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated September 29, 2015 to indicate the location and size of the proposed driveway to the site. Traffic Impact " Vehicle Trips Per Day "AM -In, AM -Out, PM -In and PM -Out are peak hour generators on a weekday " Based on the ITE: Trip Generation Manual, 7t" Edition UTILITIES: Water There is an existing 12 -inch water line along the west side of S. White Chapel Blvd. Staff has included a comment in Review Summary No 2, dated August 14, 2015 stating that field verification shall be required to insure dwelling is placed within 1,000 feet of existing fire hydrant located on S. White Chapel Blvd. Sewer A sanitary sewer manhole is located on the northeast corner of existing Tract 5B. Staff has included a comment in Review Summary No. 3, dated September 29, 2015 stating that the applicant should provide field investigation to determine if this and the property to the south can be served by public sewer with extension of this line. If so, the applicant shall provide a 15' Sanitary Sewer Easement and extend a 6 -inch sewer line with manhole at the terminus to the southernmost property line to serve this residence and existing residence to the south. Otherwise, the developer shall provide field verified documentation from an engineer stating the reasons for not extending sewerto southern lot. TREE PRESERVATION: There is approximately 9.29% tree coverage on this site. The applicant has indicated that they will be removing 6.11 % of this tree cover. Tree Preservation Ordinance No. 585-D requires the applicant preserve a minimum of 70% of the existing tree cover. Based on the proposed tree survey, the applicant is proposing to preserve approximately 86.10% of existing tree coverage, which Case No. Attachment A ZA15-074 Page 2 is consistent with the Ordinance requirement. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION: August 20, 2015; Approved (5-0) subject to the staff report dated August 14, 2015 specifically approving the variances requested with regard to the residential panhandle lots, the radial lot lines, specifically making the motion subject to Review Summary No. 2 dated August 14, 2015 also conditioning the motion on the applicants willingness to connect sewer to the new home to be built on Lot 20 and to a new home to be built on Lot 19 after the existing home is razed, and further noting the applicants willingness to contact the owner of the home on Lot 21 prior to the City Council meeting and inquiring on their willingness to connect to sewer and report to City Council and further noting the applicants willingness to provide drainage study information prior to the City Council meeting. CITY COUNCIL: September 1, 2015; Tabled (6-0) 1st Reading Zoning Change and Concept Plan Lots 19, 20, and 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition. September 15, 2015; Tabled (7-0) 1s` Reading Zoning Change and Concept Plan Lots 19, 20 and 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition until the October 6, 2015 City Council meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Development Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated September 29, 2015. N:ICommunity DevelopmentlMEMO12015 Cases1074 - ZCP - H Granberry Dean AdditionlStaff Report1ZA15-074 -CC - 2015-10- 06.doc Case No. Attachment A ZA15-074 Page 3 620 106 1 104 102 "u 00 0 105 103 m N O O CI) CO V CD O I O x PF 0 0 0 m ao 0 107 1 105 103 Vicinity Map 859 S. White Chapel 220 230 150 Aa N CO 219 221 223 LO v 10 LL LL 495 2254 A A Ip N Case No. ZA15-074 310 120 50 240 230 220 210 20 LVERWOOD CIR 245 235 1225 1215 120 37�0� V' �o 115 125 ` 90 1075 O 4?O 110 120 1085 N ZA15-074 W z Zoning Change 5 and Concept Plan 0 200 400 800 1,200 Feet Attachment B Page 1 Surveyor Plans and Support Information Proposed Development and Pedestrian Access Plan .. _ _ - - �., _ rrr a... w Mb Wall I Fen[eD ]ram Owner/Dev°e^open.Eence m Remain �Cmpcl R.a. Ll.e e1W a Wa to Farcl,ng'NaM I.— Wong SouU¢:n Properly, mYw.mrnWx -. TU 81,d5&BSM Planner: WEGROJP,- t A°e Dad Sunmary Q,an ,lac='w Case #7A35-074 25 5E" 15L _j I. w Development & Pedestrian Access Plan Dean Property Hiram Granberry Survey, Abstract No. 581, Tract 5B SouLHAa , Tarrant C—ty, Texas Development and Pedestrian Access Plan - Close-up w s ® Jai1 IKsea 5.999. k�=Wk V1 r i ti mm[0, Yf _ \ I F I • ,i� _ _ I i,. Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 1 Proposed Tree Conservation Plan R [" L rut I [.rRAsu`r-.. KERrM \UE I ! 4tq�.y:f.A .t.) e nWriry YlA � Ew.y Ur{fflw ! - - YtreYb IrW V/.R�ulfl �.W .[ a..5 DOB----- I IAr 1 „a'✓"% iC. .:rI.BEIP. BJR.E.,Atl' }i IR.Inr.v. a e. Ham• � --_ 1 �' ollwny..:a ,. e�: .w:u., aaNf em `': a au moomuael 1 — — — ' •••.A t� Jam+ _ ` 18YI 7 x --*.f#04M -- — ----- _——— — — — — — J — -----——— __-—————— — — — --— — ---- S�Lur-----�--I r....•a.. I I r wo.•P eu. WWI uWrryVlli[It0 Tree Canopy Coverage Trees Total Trees Less RAW RhRP.R-1 v K,W Tree 96 Total site area 261,360 s.f. heir V �� Gl. '.- rn �wlw' IMtM'M Total existing canopy =24,281 s.f. --> 9.29% Saved Trees r'I 44 10 • IYC.If �p1 g� � t®I�o� sl __-- y��11 rl'I • R [" L rut I [.rRAsu`r-.. KERrM \UE I ! 4tq�.y:f.A .t.) e nWriry YlA � Ew.y Ur{fflw ! - - YtreYb IrW V/.R�ulfl �.W .[ a..5 DOB----- I IAr 1 „a'✓"% iC. .:rI.BEIP. BJR.E.,Atl' }i IR.Inr.v. a e. Ham• � --_ 1 �' ollwny..:a ,. e�: .w:u., aaNf em `': a au moomuael 1 — — — ' •••.A t� Jam+ _ ` 18YI 7 x --*.f#04M -- — ----- _——— — — — — — J — -----——— __-—————— — — — --— — ---- S�Lur-----�--I r....•a.. I I r wo.•P eu. Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 2 Tree Canopy Coverage Trees Total Trees Less RAW Trees Net of R.O.W. Tree 96 Total site area 261,360 s.f. Total existing canopy =24,281 s.f. --> 9.29% Saved Trees r'I 44 10 34 91.89 Preserved tree canopy Preserved tree canopy (green) =20,907 s.f. --> 86.10% Borderline Trees 2 2 S.al Possible preserved tree canopy (yellow) z 1,891 s.f. - > 7.79% Dying 0 - 0 0.00 Removed tree canopy (red) a 1,483 s.f. -•> 6.11% =24,281 s.f. --> 100.00% Trcos to be Altered 1 1 2.70 47 10 37 100.00 Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 2 Proposed Land Use and Development Regulations Residential Planned Unit Development District - Land Use and Development Regulations & Open Space Management Plan for the 5.999 acre property at 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. Southlake, Texas Zoninq Case # ZA15-074 25 SEPT 2015 This Residential Planned Unit Development shall abide by the all conditions of the City of SOUthlake Comprehensive Zoninq Ordinance No. 480, as amended, as it pertains to the "SF -2" Sinqle-Family Residential zoninq district and the City of Southlake Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended, with the followinq exceptions: Lots: There shall be only one residential lot within this property. Rear Yard: There shall be a minimum rear yard of one hundred thirty (130) feet, which shall be maintained as permanent open space. Open Space Management Plan: Intended Usaqe: The common open space areas of the project are intended for the quiet enjoyment of the residents, who shall be responsible for all maintenance. Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 3 Letter of Application Boundary Change by Property Owners W2F!15 Mr_ Dennis Killough Mr. Jerod Potts City e# Southlake- Planning Department 1400 Main Street So uthla ke, TX 76092 RE, Zoning Case +ZAI5-074 Dear Dennis & Jerad: We, the undersigned, are owners of the tura parcels of property within zoning case QA15-074 (known as 859 S. white Chapel Blvd, and 911 S. White Chapel Blvdj,totaIing 13.764 acres. We hereby respectfutly request the boundaries of the zoning request be changed to only include the 5.999 acre parcel at 859 S. White ChaW Blvd., and acknowledge the change in boundaries and revised submittal exhibits. Please contact us should you have any additiwwl questlons or need anything additional, Thankyou Ro#ert A Dean 859 5 White Chapel Blvd Southlake, TK 76M2 817-680-9449 �a,ldl(iams 9115 WhiteCha pel514 Southlake, TX 76092 (8171991-001 Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 4 Previously Presented Plans and Support Information Previously Proposed Concept Plan Previously Proposed Concept Plan — Close-up e,R.,T.00.7A. Iti _ w ae•IP.F. IN89°29'4'=1?1�±1i L"e'a----,_____ 11P'I,P,F a4.7 ~. - ------------- ---- -B-_ -10, u.E ----_ _1711.E.___ •-•.10&1•...... SB.ikin �;k ~ — I - f................�......................10M— - ISI � D..� ...................... AC I OT 19 .e- � -v I I xn.ma- S g ` $F2 .� Se@'29'dd'V130.72' S I -.un I�_ +�10 � Meet ratr,s7 � I lam 41 •� INA�7W....7� �., - Li + ... v'__...--M.E. ter— _ Im �Eaffi PER o i°"• `3sas°aOM 173.84' °� Rx7algde , + = I e }, >ti9� w.l. �.POF....... T6 FEx P91 ....................bR. R. J- .......I ............................................. Iy_ m a o ...j I 1-+ LOT 20 ISI I C pro de I' T.240Rues t =- I�.: � .;:E •7.. :-.a nn.•e: enmr; nn le,Faxm I _ � Robed&TacxyQwn R Gtr `"4:7! I N 7']:X �7CiC 175997 V L_ LOT 27 ea9.a w I . W 3.999 Acres s' a99AdsS 1- sF2a I tie I e 9 _ zoeulnRcsEcK __1q U.E.PER GL6. ________—__�{r.17______--- P -d.8. �.... ...... -----� PIPE FO. _ _ _______---IQ I Wall I Variance to Subdivision Ordinance No. 483 Regarding Perpendicular / Radial Lot Lines Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 5 VICINITY MAP --- ..,W— ...�...— ------------ r_ 1 - . H cruuee W EURM LOTS 1a,�oa 21 H. GRANBERRY No. 581 ADDRION w ...... � ._.,.M..-.�-v......_...__.-, �� ny. ♦� .. Pte. V - �'^' � Previously Proposed Concept Plan — Close-up e,R.,T.00.7A. Iti _ w ae•IP.F. IN89°29'4'=1?1�±1i L"e'a----,_____ 11P'I,P,F a4.7 ~. - ------------- ---- -B-_ -10, u.E ----_ _1711.E.___ •-•.10&1•...... SB.ikin �;k ~ — I - f................�......................10M— - ISI � D..� ...................... AC I OT 19 .e- � -v I I xn.ma- S g ` $F2 .� Se@'29'dd'V130.72' S I -.un I�_ +�10 � Meet ratr,s7 � I lam 41 •� INA�7W....7� �., - Li + ... v'__...--M.E. ter— _ Im �Eaffi PER o i°"• `3sas°aOM 173.84' °� Rx7algde , + = I e }, >ti9� w.l. �.POF....... T6 FEx P91 ....................bR. R. J- .......I ............................................. Iy_ m a o ...j I 1-+ LOT 20 ISI I C pro de I' T.240Rues t =- I�.: � .;:E •7.. :-.a nn.•e: enmr; nn le,Faxm I _ � Robed&TacxyQwn R Gtr `"4:7! I N 7']:X �7CiC 175997 V L_ LOT 27 ea9.a w I . W 3.999 Acres s' a99AdsS 1- sF2a I tie I e 9 _ zoeulnRcsEcK __1q U.E.PER GL6. ________—__�{r.17______--- P -d.8. �.... ...... -----� PIPE FO. _ _ _______---IQ I Wall I Variance to Subdivision Ordinance No. 483 Regarding Perpendicular / Radial Lot Lines Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 5 D ficpni Sttle h feel I } — F—.................... ............ . :.. .I8 aa.ee�f u. � AP o• a Y LOT O :.. S8V4G021Y 1758X20' CIO $—pyteee I W r=- o NAW4911?F 175' T V I .fi n :' 5 . LIUz p5 �wR� LOT 21 g` s�gz 3.999 Acres Imo SF2 Previously Presented Tree Survey ISR I4H.N) N —I.,— Ti I I I W9.2944 -E 1314]0 ----- }XIPF. ---- 1 --------, -----------.—� ----IO-------—vul--- --- — — — -- — — :78133 --- — — --- —------- .----- - — — — — —� 103,• i — — — BrMNS°hi — — — — — — I ................. ei ay q 7S ..................._...., .,..................... �1 I � RtMn3i�0w� yr N. o T r7 ' E.wownrn. e.e. �•eeu� 7989 •Le, sry F�j Cu t. Ike y 1 g `t v 4AD — --------- --------------•laud------- —589 3'1 vs .. 1 Note,: Arca of crstIng tree cover =1.52 Ac; 66407 Sq Ft (11'%, of rile) Trees to be removed x.15 Ac; 8319 Sq ft 1.13:n d aver) I 1rn ttpcn,ssl ' Ian LL I ,wM35[ tHM3 .«.. I W --} r Lsw-4E aHe.H.--- --IPUE PE d 5W- — — lElYeiQE11i63na .-I I- M Sn' OF 17 U.E. TORE„-,._,.., PER I ''I I ........... .:......._.....................,..............................$.. „� s •� I I�xI LOT 20 I� L2 I— 1 o 7.240 AM x 5M I i�1 1 cceoiczseai qJ I i h•ID.a�— IO.R.T.0 Te J. 7.379 k- I W Z' I e 2e yl l 2S BUILD” SET" R $l. T -----------------547•r------------------ P.O.B. tVVe--------------1 PEFO. 41 I I a+ . I OF y:e � a,s COMPILED FROM FROM RECORDS FURNISHED AND tL. ...' .. ..........:.. SURVEY CONDUCTED ON THE GROUND IN APRIL, GEORGE . R _H.ILL / + ,_,,-, <•.:4 0022 �.•� R.P.L.S N0. 8022 .S.uaJ Notes: O Area of existing tree cover = 1.52 Ac; 66407 Sq Ft (11% of site) is Trees to be removed =0.15 Ac; 8319 Sq ft (13110 of cover) ZA 15-074 Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 6 Previously Presented Narrative SEMPCO SURVEYING. INC. A'Sa E,1: aCAD \L'rI>1.,OS LL::NINGWcovstLTANTs Bill Barlett, RPLS Isaac Grier. RPLS George Hill, RPLS Wayne Barton, RPLS Aaron Wiese, RPLS James Hosiner. Assoc. August 4, 2015 Planning & GIS 1400 Main St., Suite 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Re: Plat Application & Variance Request ZA15-074 & ZA15-075 To Whom it may Concern 3208 S. Main Street Ft. W orth. TX 76110 Ph: (817) 926-7876 Fax: (817) 9267878 www.sompcosurveying.com Rob & Tracey Dean, owners of the property at 911 & 859 So. White Chapel Blvd, Southlake Tx are requesting two variance from the City of Southlake's Ordinance Code in conjunction with a rezone request and plat application for the above two parcels. Please refer to the plat exhibit for a pictorial view of the requests. Total size of both parcels is 13.765 Acres. The proposed rezone would be to rezone the 911 So Whites Chapel site from RE to SF 2 for the front 3.999 acre site, and to remain RE for the remainder in the rear. The proposed rezone for the 859 So. White Chapel site would be to rezone the front 2.500 acre site from Ag to SF 2 for and rezone the remainder in the rear to RE. Owner and Applicant are aware that residential panhandle lots, also known as flag lots, are generally not permitted. (As amended by Ord. No. 483-L). However, the approving authority may waive this requirement if it finds that one or more of the conditions listed below are satisfied and the Applicant seeks a variance pursuant to Section 8.01 Lotting Requirements of Article VIII Miscellaneous of Subdivision Ordinance No. 483. In Addition. Article VIII, Section 8.01 D. states "All side lots lines shall be perpendicular the ROW or radial in the case of a cul-de-sac or curvilinear design.". The applicanV'owners request a variance from this section to allow the configuration as shown on the plat and concept plan. There is sufficient justification for granting these variances as follows: • The proposed configuration will preserve the tree line along the south of proposed Lot 19 and solves an issue with the physical constraints of access to Lot 20. This meets the requirements of that the configuration solve a topographical. environmental preservation or other severe physical constrains and the panhandle lot appears to be the best solution to subdivision of lands; • The proposed configuration will not have an adverse effect upon surrounding properties. See letters from adjacent owners to the North and South. Further, the proposed configuration meets the requirements that the approving authority shall not consider a waiver unless the following conditions are met: Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 7 • The area and width of the buildable area of the lot complies with the underlying zoning regulations. The panhandle portion of the lot is not included as part of the required minimum lot area: • The length and width of the panhandle section of the lot provide meets or exceeds the minimum emergency access and fire protection standards of the adopted City codes; The location of the panhandle lot conforms to the City's Driveway Ordinance. No. 634. All three requirements listed above are met with the configuration as shown on the accompanying plat and concept plan. The City's Southlake 2030 comprehensive plan designates this area as being SR (Low Density Residential) which would allow 1 -acre lots. This potentially would allow up to 13 homes. but realistically the total would be closer to 10. The owners. rather than seeking maximum density are only requesting three lots, which maintains the rural characteristics of the area. We feel that by allowing the above variance(s) in lieu of maximum density the result would be orderly more rural like development in keeping with the City's 2030 plan. On behalf of the owners, Rob & Tracey Dean, we respectfully request you grant the variance requests necessary to achieve the platting and rezone as shown on the accompanying plans. Respectfully, George Hill, RPLS georgePsempcosurveying.com Sempco Surveying, Inc. 3208 So. Main St. Fort worth. TX 76110 817-926-7876 Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 8 Previously Presented MEMORANDUM TO: City of Southlake Planning and Zoning FROM: Robert & Tracey Dean DATE: July 13, 2015 RE: Zoning Case ZA15-074 & ZAIS-075 - Building setback greater than city zoning requirements Please note the following for our application for rezoning and re platting. After reviewing comments from our SPIN meeting on this project and in order to accommodate our neighbors concerns, we have elected to add an additional setback to proposed LOT 19 as follows: The new building line for proposed LOT 19 shall be a minimum of 275' as measured from existing North West fence corner of proposed Lot 19. We have been in discussions with both the property owners to the North and South and have agreement (attached) that by establishing minimum building line alleviates their concerns and they are now in support of our request for rezoning and re platting. If this building line is not allowed on the plat than we will include as deed restriction for proposed LOT 19. Regards f i Robert & Tracey Dean . Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 9 Previously Presented July 14, 2015 City of Southlake Planning and Zoning 1400 Main St Suite 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Robert & Tracey Dean 911 S White Chapel Blvd Southlake, TX 76092 RE: Zoning Case ZA15-074 & ZA15-075 The purpose of this letter is to provide with city of Southlake planting and zoning department with a brief narrative on our requests for replatting and rezoning. We have been residents of Southlake for over 15 years and we own multiple business and commercial properties all located in Southlake. We currently own both 911 S White Chapel Blvd which sits on approximately 8 acres has an large estate home which we have lived in for 12 years and 859 S White Chapel which sits approximately 6 Acres and contains a smaller older home. Our intent is to replat these two parcels into 3 parcels to provide a site for our new home and an additional lot to be sold at a future date. To accompl ish this we are proposing to reduce the lot size of our existing parcel at 911 S White Chapel to 3.99 acres and reduce the size of the 859 S. White Chapel parcel to 2.5 acres. This will allow us to create a third parcel of land which will be 7.26 acres for our new home that we plan to begin construction on as soon reasonably possible. In the meantime we plan on selling our existing home and moving into the smaller home at 859 S White Chapel while our new home is constructed. Once our new home is complete we will demolish and remove the existing home at 859 S White Chapel, We expect this process to take approximately I '/z years. Our new home will be between 7,000 and 8,000 square feet, and will sit towards the northwest side of the newly created lot. We intend to connect the home to public sewer if feasible, and will create new detention ponds to address drainage issues. Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 10 We have no immediate plans to sell the 2.5 acre lot and will maintain as if it were part of our existing new home site. At some future date we expect to sell the home site so a new home can be constructed on that parcel of land. As a result of the SPIN meeting, we have revised our project to reflect concenis expressed by our neighbors and others who spoke at the hearing. Attached are letters of support from immediate adjoiners indicating their approval of the revised plans. We respectfully ask the city of Southlake planning and zoning department to grant our request for zoning and replatting. Reg s, o ert Tracey Dean " Case No. Attachment C ZA15-074 Page 11 Q SOUTHLAK-E 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 htto://www.citvofsouthlake.com and clicking on "Learn More" under Video On Demand; forums are listed under SPIN by meeting date. FORUM SUMMARY Property Situation: • 911 and 859 S. White Chapel Development Details: • Two tracts 7.8 acres and 5.99 o The 5.99 acre tract is zoned Agricultural and not platted, the 7.8 acre tract is 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 o Presenter mentioned it meets all setbacks except where the garage is in the rear. Applicants will ask for a variance to reduce setback to 18 feet o The garage does not meet RE setbacks now, so the applicant will seek a variance for this • Presenter mentioned that lot 1 would be 3.9 acres with the home, lot 2 would be 2.2 Case No. Attachment D ZA15-074 Page 1 Case No. ZA15-074 acres, lot 3 will be 7.591 acres Presenter mentioned the land use calls for SF zoning, and the SF -2 zoning requested fits with the characteristics of the area Presenter noted that access to the large parcel has been designed so a minimal number of trees would have to be taken out for the driveway Presenter mentioned the 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: Attachment D Page 2 Dean -911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. Virinit%/ � ` s PaA,i Copyright 2015 Sempca Surveying, lna, P,9 Surveying, 30 Laser Scanning, CAC Mapping. Planning, Consulting Dean -911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. Existing Acreage I � 7�K:L1wiJ. - k P. 1 Pariiane Copyright 2015 2 S Pc Surveying, lnc, GPS Surveying, 30 Laser Scanning, 3 512412015 CAD Mapping, Planning, Consulting Dean -911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. 612V2015 Existing Zoning Paai-n Copyright 2015 Sempco Surveying, Inc, CPS 3—ymg, 30 Laser Scanning, CAO Mapping, Planning, C—Jong Dean -911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd, Proposed Project 0' nI- �-.' AN } A , 4 Potions Copyright 2015 Sempw Surveying, Inc, GPS S—ying, 30 Laser Scanning, 612 4120 1 5 CAO Mapping, Planning, Consulting 5 6124!2015 Dean -911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. 911 So. White Chapel -Street View pnriions Copyright 2095 Sempca Surrzying, Inc, Gp5 Surveying, 3D user Scanning, CAD Mapping, Planning, Consulting New Entrance to Parcel 3 z_ X's7 } e` Portions Copyright 2015 &.pco Surveying, Inc. GPS Surveying, 30 Laser Scanning, CAD Mappng. Planning. C—Aing 6124f2015 6 Dean -911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. Existing Driveway 859 So White Chapel Blvd. M Ba VVh"Ch g9Wd f Y ' P"ticns Copyright 2015 Sempcc Surveying, Inc, GPS Surveying, 36 Laser Scanning, 612412015 CAD M.pping, Planning, Consulting Dean -911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. 859 So. White Chapel Blvd 8 Wil'. Yk; '.- 11 - r Portions Copyright 2015 S—Kp Surveying, 1 -,GPS Surveying, 30 Laser Scanning, 612412015 CAO Mapping. Planning, Consulting 9 Dean -911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. 612412015 Proposed Project Porlions Copyright 2615 Sempco Surveying,Inc,. GPS Surveying, 30 Laser Scanning. CAD Mapping, Planning. Consulting Dean -911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. Three Surveyors and the Other Guy ^?k 1911L 'i A Portions Copyright 2015 Sempoo S—ying, Inc, CPS Surveying, 3D Laser Scanning, 612 4120 1 5 CAD Mapping, Planning, Cansulting 10 QUESTIONS I CONCERNS: • The driveway on the 2.2 acre piece tapers on the end? o Yes, the taper would be in form of a sweeping curve • 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? o The project is for a new home for the Dean's on a large parcel in the back. As far 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 house and 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 years ago 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 swales with 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. o The existing drainage regulations for the City of Southlake do not let you 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 there now, 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? o There is not a sewer main adjacent to the property so any type of hookup to a 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? o SF -2 zoning is new. Applicants decided SF -2 would be a good fit. The City land 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. Case No. Attachment D ZA15-074 Page 8 • So if this goes with the SF -2 and the front 2.3 acres is sold, can they put two houses there? o The front lot 1 is going to be 3.974 acres so it would not meet the minimum 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 o That is not a separate lot — it would all be part of the 7 acre parcel the Dean's build on. • As far as the pond on the back of the property, are there plans for that? Relocating or removing? o Not to my knowledge. The ultimate buildout would be the responsibility of the 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 like some assurance, maybe a City stipulation that if they do have a pond it is maintained. • The two lots 911 and 859 are designated rural conservation o I believe the two acre zoning does give you the rural character • The L shaped property where the new house would go, what is that going to be zoned? o It would all be zoned SF -2 • Why would they be going to a 2 acre zoning if it's an 8 acre lot? Concern is this could be further subdivided in the future? o Asked the clients if they wanted 4 lots, and they said no • Why wouldn't you just zone it for the 5 acres? o That would be an alternative 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 ofthe 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. Case No. Attachment D ZA15-074 Page 9 Blackboard connect.. This message has been sent! Here is a summary of the delivery results. Click here to view more information online. Delivery Summary Title SPIN Town Hall Forum for 6/23/2015 Message Type Outreach Site CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Scheduled By PILAR SCHANK Send Time 06/17/2015 05:30 PM (CT) Voice Completed 06/17/2015 06:13 PM (CT) Text Completed 06/17/2015 05:32 PM (CT) Email Completed 06/17/2015 05:30 PM (CT) Selected Contacts 10764 Successfully reached 7538 (70%) Languages English* Device Deliveries 69%(7307) 10575 Com. 96%(155) 161 97%(544) 559 Detailed Delivery Results Case No. Attachment D ZA15-074 Page 10 Voice (listen) Good Afternoon this is Pilar Schank with the City of Southlake. A SPIN town hall forum will take place next Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at bpm concerning the following items. 1. SPIN2015-21: SPIN #9 will discuss the rezoning and re -plating of 13.8+ acres into 3 residential lots at 911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. 2. SPIN2015-23: SPIN #9 will discuss the residential development of 8 lots on 5.8 acres of land near Carroll Avenue and Zena Rucker Road. 3. SPIN2015-22: The City of Southlake will discuss revisions to zoning ordinance 480, subdivision 483, and sign ordinance 704-G. Again, a SPIN Town Hall Forum will be held June 23, 2015 at bpm in the Town Hall Council Chamber. For more information go to City of Southlake. com Thank you for your attention. Have a great day. Successful Deliveries 69%(7307) Live Delivery 2767 Answering Machine 4540 Unsuccessful Deliveries 31%(3268) Hangup 48 FaWModem 333 Opted -Out 19 Undeliverable 617 Busy 55 No Answer 1824 Phone Network Busy 3 Bad Phone Number 372 Email A SPIN town hall forum will take place next Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at bpm concerning the following items. 1. SPIN2015-21: SPIN #9 will discuss the rezoning and re -plating of 13.8+ acres into 3 residential lots at 911 & 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. 2. SPIN2015-23: SPIN #9 will discuss the residential development of 8 lots on 5.8 acres of land near Carroll Avenue and Zena Rucker Road. 3. SPIN2015-22: The City of Southlake will discuss revisions to zoning ordinance 480, subdivision 483, an ... Email Sent 97% (544) Email Opted -Out 3%(15) SMS A SPIN town hall foram will take place next Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 6pm in the City Council Chamber. More information: http:llbit.ly11Bl6a r Text Email Sent 96%(155) Text Not Sent 2%(4) Text Opted -Out 1% (1) Invalid Text Phone 1% (1) For support, please call (866) 360-2155 or email connectsupport@blackboard.com Case No. Attachment D ZA15-074 Page 11 QANNIX9]:1Ly, lNIkiki Will kiINELVllA4TAR111Ly, lLy, Fill Zvi Case No.: ZA15-074 Review No.: Three Date of Review: 09/29/15 Project Name: Development Plan — H Granberry Dean Addition - 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. Planner: Sage Group, Inc. Curtis Young Surveyor: Sempco Surveying, Inc. George R. Hill Owner: Rob & Tracey Dean 1130 N. Carroll Ave. Suite 200 3208 S Main St. 1205 S White Chapel Blvd #100 Southlake, Texas Fort Worth, Texas Southlake, Texas 76092 (817) 424-2626 Phone: (817) 926-7876 Phone: (817) 658-8564 Fax: (817) 926-7878 Email: rob@vicangroup.net Email: george@sempcosurveying.com Email: traceydean@verizon.net CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 9/25/15 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE APPROPRIATE STAFF MEMBER. Planning Review Jerod Potts Planner I Phone: (817) 748-8195 E-mail: jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us 1. Lot must conform to underlying zoning. 2. Please submit updated drainage, grading, and utility plans. Any other plans submitted need updated according to revisions where appropriate. 3. Sanitary sewer manhole is located on the northeast corner of the property. Provide field investigation to determine if this and the property to the south can be served by public sewer with extension of this line. If so, provide a 15' Sanitary Sewer Easement and extend a 6 -inch sewer line with manhole at the terminus to the southernmost property line to serve this residence and existing residence to the south. Otherwise, the developer shall provide field verified documentation from an engineer stating the reasons for not extending sewer to southern lot. Ordinance #440. 4. Show, label and dimension the width of any easements on or adjacent to the site on the development plan. 5. Correct the bearing and distance of each property boundary in either the metes and bounds or on the plan. The callouts do not match the bearings shown on the Development Plan. 6. Label all adjacent properties with owner's name, in addition to existing zoning, and land use map designation ("L.U.D. _ ") on the development plan. 7. Show, label and dimension the width of the R.O.W. and traveled roadway on or adjacent to the site on the concept plan. S. White Chapel is designated as a 2 -lane undivided arterial (A2U) with a minimum 88' R.O.W. required. A minimum of 44' from the established centerline is required to be dedicated. Case No. Attachment E ZA15-074 Page 1 8. All driveways/points of ingress/egress must comply with the Driveway Ordinance No. 634, as amended). The Development Plan as submitted only shows an existing driveway to be removed. The following changes are needed: a. Show the location of all points of ingress/egress to the site b. Label the width of the driveway C. Label the distances to the nearest existing off-site driveway centerlines in both directions of the site. This distance along S. White Chapel Blvd. is 100 ft. centerline to centerline for a residential driveway. d. Show any existing driveways across adjoining rights-of-way and note the type of pavement and use (residential, commercial, etc.) 9. Label the types of surfacing (i.e., asphalt, concrete, brick, turfing or gravel) to be used at various locations. 10. Provide a Utility Plan showing adjacent public utilities and proposed connection - a separate plan is acceptable 11. Show Label the distance to the nearest fire hydrant from a property corner and any proposed hydrants. This can be provided on the utility plan. 12. Any fencing provided along S. White Chapel must comply with Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 39.5. C. (4). Indicate the height of all walls, fences, and screening devices. 13. Note the City approved benchmark used for topographical information. Public Works/Engineering Review Alejandra Ayala, P.E. Civil Engineer Phone: (817) 748-8247 Fax: (817) 748-8077 E-mail: aayala@ci.southlake.tx.us CrlEll kIEllMA Wd9]LY, lLY, lEll kIII &I This review is preliminary. Additional requirements may be necessary with the review of civil construction plans. Show driveway on concept plan. Fire lane radii shall be 30' minimum on driveways and driveway turnarounds. Sight distances shall comply with AASHTO guidelines on adjacent collectors and arterials. Use the City of Southlake GPS monuments whenever possible. Monument locations can be found in the City of Southlake website: http://www.citvofsouthlake.com/index.aspx?NID=266 EASEMENTS: Provide all necessary easements for water, sanitary sewer and drainage. Easements shall be 15' minimum and located on one lot — not centered on the property line. A 20' easement is required if both storm sewer and sanitary sewer will be located within the easement. Case No. Attachment E ZA15-074 Page 2 Water and sanitary sewer cannot cross property lines without being in an easement or right of way. All waterlines, sanitary sewer and storm sewer in easements or right of ways must be constructed to City standards. 1►l►/_l I q :VA k I Q�-] Zk4►I Ell :Z 01►►i I ►►i I Ell k 111 &-1 Field verification shall be required to insure dwelling is placed within 1,000 -feet of existing fire hydrant located on S. White Chapel Road. Sanitary sewer manhole is located on the northeast corner of the property. Provide field investigation to determine if this and the property to the south can be served by public sewer with extension of this line. If so, provide a 15' Sanitary Sewer Easement and extend a 6 -inch sewer line with manhole at the terminus to the southernmost property line to serve this residence and existing residence to the south. Otherwise, the developer shall provide field verified documentation from an engineer stating the reasons for not extending sewer to southern lot. Ordinance #440. * Water and sewer lines cannot cross property lines without being in an easement or right of way. * The size of the water service tap must match the size of the meter. There are no reducers allowed before the meter on the public side. A one inch meter must have a one inch tap, etc. * Water meters and fire hydrants shall be located in an easement or right of way. * Fire lines shall be separate from service lines. * Water and sanitary sewer lines in easements or right of way shall be constructed to City standards. DRAINAGE COMMENTS: * Due to drainage concerns from the residents to the east, submit preliminary grading and drainage plan with drainage arrows and preliminary calculations. Documentation supporting and certifying that detention is not necessary will be required prior to approval of construction plans. Driveway culverts must be sized by an engineer and submitted for approval to the City Engineer. Discharge of post development runoff must have no adverse impact on downstream properties and meet the provisions of Ordinance No. 605. 1k1;101N LY, UIEel kVAW619]LY, lLY, lEll kIII &I A right of way permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Operations Department (817) 748-8082 to connect to the City's sewer, water or storm sewer system. Any hazardous waste being discharged must be pretreated per Ordinance No. 836. *=Denotes informational comment. Tree Conservation/Landscape Review Case No. Attachment E ZA15-074 Page 3 Keith Martin Landscape Administrator Phone: (817) 748-8229 Fax: (817) 481-5713 E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS: The proposed existing tree canopy cover preservation complies with the existing tree canopy cover preservation requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-D. There is 9.29% of existing tree canopy cover on the site and 70% of that tree canopy cover is required to be preserved. The applicant is proposing to remove 13.9% of the existing tree canopy cover, so 86.10% of existing tree canopy cover will remain. Except as provided by subsection 7.2.b. of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a Tree Conservation Analysis or Tree Conservation Plan shall be approved if it will preserve existing tree cover in accordance with the percentage requirements established by Table 2.0. If the property has previously received a tree permit related to development, the percentage of existing tree cover at the time the first such permit was issued shall be used to calculate the minimum existing tree cover that must be preserved under this section. Table 2.0 — Existing Tree Cover Preservation Requirements Percentage of existing tree cover on the entire site Minimum percentage of the existing tree cover to be preserved* 0%-20% 70% 20.1 —40% 60% 40.1%-60% 50% 60.1%-80% 40% 80.1%-100% 30% *The minimum percentage of existing tree cover to be preserved shall exclude any area in public rights-of-way as approved by City Council. For property sought to be zoned for the Downtown zoning district or a planned development zoning district, including an S -P-1 Site Plan, S -P-2 Site Plan, Transition, Rural Conservation, Planned Unit Development, or Employment Center zoning district, the City Council shall consider the application for a Conservation Analysis or Plan in conjunction with the corresponding development application (as established in Table 1.0). The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the application and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application. The City Council shall approve the Plan or Analysis if the Council finds that the Plan or Analysis provides for the: placement of building pads, parking areas, driveways, streets, and utility easements so as to maximize the preservation of environmental features of the property including mature tree stands, natural creeks and ponds, and significant grades; maximizes the preservation of tree cover preservation areas indicated on the Environmental Resource Protection Map; iii. maximizes the preservation of existing tree stands with the potential to buffer residential areas from the noise, glare, and visual effects of nonresidential uses; iv. maximizes the preservation of existing trees, if any, adjoining a natural or man-made drainage creek; Case No. Attachment E ZA15-074 Page 4 V. maximizes the preservation of existing protected trees along rural roadways and other streets as identified and prioritized in the Street Typology designation; and vi. mitigation of altered trees through proposed tree replacement procedures pursuant to this Ordinance. Please be aware that all existing trees shown to be preserved on the City Council approved Tree Conservation Plan must be preserved and protected during all phases and construction of the development. Alteration or removal of any of the existing trees shown to be preserved on the approved Tree Conservation Plan is a violation of the Tree Preservation Ordinance and the zoning as approved by the Southlake City Council. Please ensure that the layout of all structures, easements, utilities, structures grading, and any other structure proposed to be constructed do not conflict with existing trees intended to be preserved. LANDSCAPE COMMENTS: Existing tree credits are proposed to be taken for one (1) of the required canopy trees in the west bufferyard adjacent to S. White Chapel but there are no existing trees located within the bufferyard or within 50' of the bufferyard. The closest existing trees are located within the right-of-way and cannot be used to provide existing tree credits for required bufferyard plant material. Existing Plant Credits: Existing trees which are within fifty feet (50') of the property line of where the bufferyard is located and have a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the drip line within the bufferyard area shall be granted credits toward reducing the required plantings as set forth in the Landscape Ordinance, as amended. Credits shall only be granted if the tree/s are in healthy condition and all requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance have been met as determined at the time of inspection for a Permanent Certificate of Occupancy. Indicates informational comment. # Indicates required items comment. Fire Department Review Kelly Clements Assistant Fire Marshal Phone: (817) 748-8233 Fax: (817) 748-8181 E-mail: kclements(cD-ci.southlake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in all residential structures that exceed 6,000 square feet, excluding porches and patios. Fire apparatus access needs to be provided within 250 feet of all exterior portions of the perimeter of the residential structure on a "hose -lay" basis. Fire apparatus access needs to be an all-weather surface, asphalt or concrete, a minimum of 10 feet wide and able to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus. (A minimum of 85,000 pounds GVW) A turn -around for fire apparatus must be provided if the apparatus must travel in excess of 150 feet to access the structures on the property with the required hose lay distance. SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENTS FOR SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS Case No. Attachment E ZA15-074 Page 5 Community Service/Parks Department Review Peter Kao Construction Manager Phone: (817) 748-8607 Fax: (817) 748-8027 E-mail: pkao@ci.southlake.tx.us Park Board comments or recommendations: All applicants are required to appear before the Park Board to discuss park dedication issues if requesting fee payments or fee credits. Please contact the Community Services Department at (817) 748-8607 for further details. Land/park dedication requirements: Residential developments must provide dedicated parks and/or open space at a ratio of one (1) acre of park land for every forty (40) dwelling units. If fee payment is approved by City Council in lieu of land dedication, residential park dedication fees in the amount of $3000 per dwelling unit x 1 dwelling units =$3000. Informational Comments: All mechanical equipment must be screened of view right-of-ways and residential properties in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended. All lighting must comply with the Lighting Ordinance No. 693, as amended. All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and the Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended. All driveways/points of ingress/egress must comply with the Driveway Ordinance No. 634, as amended). The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and building plans, must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Perimeter Street Fee, Water & Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees. Unless identified in the open space management plan, there shall be no improvements located in the open space. Denotes Informational Comment Attached: Requirements for Residential Turn-Arounds, Requirements for Residential Access Case No. Attachment E ZA15-074 Page 6 I Department of Public Safety — Office of the Fire Marshal 600 Slate Street. Southlake, Texas 76092 REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL TURN-AROUNDS 1. Residences, structures, or portions of either hereafter constructed shall be accessible to fire department apparatus by way of an approved fire apparatus access road with an asphalt, concrete or other approved driving surtaco capable of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing at least 85,000 pounds. 2. Fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed ten percent in grade, 3. Fire apparatus access roads shall be a minirnum width of ten feet. 4. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with an approved turn -around for tho apparatus that elects the requirements of one of the options listed below. W- --36R 10—TVP. 100 -FOOT DIAMETER CUL-DE-SAC 3o R- TYP. 1 pi .39(R . 6U,FU0 f -Y' 120 -FOOT HAWrRHEAD 3dR TYP.37W 4 !0(. t ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE TO 190-rOOT HAMMERHEAD Case No. Attachment E ZA15-074 Page 7 Department of Public Safety — Office of the Fire Marshal 600 State Street, Southlake. Texas 76092 REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL ACCESS 1. Fire Lane access shall be provided for emergency vehicles to all residential structures, and other structures on the lot, with a minimum width drivable surface of ten feet. 2. Fire Lanes shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus, 85,000 pounds GVW, and be surfaced to provide all-weather driving capabilities. 3. All dead-end Fire Lanes in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with approved provisions for turning around fire apparatus. (See Table D103.4 Amended) 4. Driveways serving a single residential structure shall be as follows: A. Shall have access within 150 feet of all portions based on hose lay distance, and a fire hydrant within 1000 feet of the structure. B. If the structure is more than 150 feet, but less than 1000 feet from the road, a minimum 10 foot wide access is required to be within 150 feet of the structure and a fire hydrant is needed within 1000 feet of the structure. C. If the structure is more than 1000 feet from the road, a minimum 10 foot wide access is required to be within 150 feet of the structure and a fire hydrant is needed within 1000 feet of the structure and the structure shall be provided with an approved residential fire sprinkler system. 5. Driveways serving multiple residential structures, or other structures on the lot, with a common access easement shall be as follows: A. Shall have access within 150 feet of each structure and a fire hydrant within 1000 feet of each structure. B. If access is more than 10 feet but less than 24 feet wide, a fire hydrant is required within 1000 feet of each structure and an approved residential fire sprinkler system is required in each residence. C. If a minimum 24 foot wide access is provided, a fire hydrant is required within 1000 feet of the structure or an approved residential fire sprinkler system is required in each residence. Case No. Attachment E ZA15-074 Page 8 Surrounding Property Owners SPO # 1. mr Zoning SF2 Physical Address•Response 841 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.32686025 F 2. Antique Evanesance Llc 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 IM 6. Current Owner RPUD 310 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.31075835 O 7. 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 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 SPO # 1. Owner Ahmed, Imtiaz Etux Fazila Zoning SF2 Physical Address•Response 841 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.32686025 F 2. Antique Evanesance Llc 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 6. Current Owner RPUD 310 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.31075835 O 7. 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 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 Kathy M RPUD 320 SILVERWOOD CIR 0.29407981 O 20. McNamara, Raymond S & Debra J 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 ZA15-074 Page 1 7. 23. Morris, Melinda W Zoning, RPUD Address 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 LoriJim SF1-A 205 WHITE CHAPEL CT 2.20407862 O 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 (Ownership Changed) RE 720 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 15.15400000 F Timberlake, William Etux Andre SF1-A 225 WHITE CHAPEL CT 1.46712342 O 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 O 42. Womack, Mary & Thomas RPUD 1060 HIGHLAND OAKS DR 0.43966845 O 43. Ziadie, Michelle Etvir Stephen 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: (10) Undecided: (0) No Response: (28) Case No. Attachment F ZA15-074 Page 2 Surrounding Property Owner Notification Response Forms A ug 117 11 C5 23P 2144,51 'We Notification Response Form ZAil&Crr4 Meeting Lk2tw Aagust 24, 2016 at X70 PM !Maned, Iprn#IiAz mx r=azila 7541 S Mita ChaPal 61vd Smathinka Tx 7rP 92 1.7 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE; SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEAMN . --mg the owner(s) of thu property so noW above, are hereby {, in favor ofd opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Znning Change and Gorcept Pian referenced above. Space for comments regarding your iPOS tion: IATA-Ayo9 &7 Ri .tbA+I,rx 47 ref} `�!� �9,64L: 8LgLbIVti A , i�'BAL r r '11 1{iYl ... f �= ' Rnrrr �QT- n4 Signature: + ._ Data: Sl+ rs Additional Signature= Date: Prinbt d Names)_ Mus± he erupert9 a re.'ir3)who3Tnau -{s} are painb-o etop P-rdm CnrdxtL L �, Pasodng "MpmtTwA. gnf tom W prep -.V - Phone Number (optional), --675--t5 6.9 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 1 July 13, 2015 Pity of Southlakc Planning and Zoning 1400 Main St Suite .10 outhlakc, TX 76092 Ahmed itntiac 841 5 White Chapel B[v.Ll Southlakc, TX 7609. i -E: Zoning Case ZA1."74 & ZA15-07;S To Whom It May Concerti: The intunt ofthis leiter is to inform the Laity of ()uthlake planning and Zoning of my positinn cm Pwbert & Tracey Dean's TxLipased re platting and rezoning application_ After several discussions with dYc Dean's they have made changes to their proposed division of ofWid and rezoning that nous nddresses our coricems. WC are in full support of their roquest for tczoning and re platting, provldW the new building fine for proposed LOT 19 shall he a minimum of 275' as mea-sured from existing �lorthwcst fence corner of-propursed LOT 19. If this building litre is net allowed on the Slat then they bane agreed to include a9 a deeA restriction for proposed LOT I �, If YOLL lta-VC ally qucsiions 1 cart be reached al. (214) 673-6199. R ,k Ahmed Imtiaa Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 2 Notification Response Form ZA1 "74 Meeting Date: August 20, 2015 at 6:30 PM 4ireat questions and mail responses to: City of Southlake Planning & Developinent Servioes Notification Responso 1400 Main St; Ste 310 Southiake, TX 76092 Phone- M17I748,8621 Fax- (817)748-8077 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the ownef(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Concept Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: l' Signature: r Additional Signature: �1`� r�r r =•l Date: Date: Printed Name{s}: s '' v�/vr.A_ , 1.4us* Ce property anner(s) wtosc mme(6) are punted a' :op. Otherrrise eunlarl lhd Pbnrxng oeWme-a tt L' * *Tn Far property. Phone Number (optional): Vtr' - - 6'r?, Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 3 Notification Response Form 7-A15-074 Meeting Dato: August 20, 2015 at 6;30 PM Dean, Robert Etux Tracey 1205 S Whine Cpl Blvd #100 Southlake Tx 76092 Direct questions and mail responses to City of Southlake Planning & Development Services 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 =favor opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Concept Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your pesition: Signature; Additional Signature: Printed Name(s): i Must be propertf ow ache) r link► siowv(*} are prirdcd at top. Othemiee contact Date: 2? ( 11) j ( ,3 - Date' Phone Number (optional): `3 -%.? ;2 Case No. ZA15-074 pal piopeity Attachment G Page 4 Notification Response Form ZA15-074 Weeting Date: August 20, 2015 at 6:30 PM Dean, Robert & Tracey 911 S Whito Cpl Blvd Southlake Tx 76092 Direct questions and mail responses to: City of Southlake Planning & Development Services Notification Response 1400 Main St; Ste 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Phone: (817)748-8821 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-faf __r of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Concept Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Signature �j -��,, i /1��� ( n�-� pate: ' I 9 Additional Si nat�/ -- Printed Name(s): htustte property oanens) whoSC flama(S) en; pRrrxed at top. it*.herHisC oonleel li» Plannirc CeparimeM. arc farm aerDrol 'tY Phone Number (optional): `� I __) �, 2�2 Case No. ZA15-074 Attachment G Page 5 July 13, 2015 City of Southlakc Planning and "Zoning 1400 Main St Suite 310 Southlakc, TX 76092 Drew Johnson 921 S White Chapel Blvd Southlakc,'I'X 76092 RE: Zoning Case ZA15-074 & ZA15-075 To Whom It May Concern: The intent of this letter is to inform the City of Soutlilake 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. V1'e 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 l can be reached at (214) 971-6915. Regards, /3'.. j,", Drew Johns it Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 6 July 13, 2015 City of Southlake Planning and Zoning 1400 Main St Suite 310 Southlake, TX 76092 720 S White Chapel Blvd Southlake, TX 76092 RE: Zoning Case ZA1S-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. We are in full support of their request for rezoning and re platting_ If you have any questions I can be reached at (817) 913-8040. Regards. Zteer-� 720 S. White Chapel Road Case No. ZA15-074 Attachment G Page 7 4409142745 wdiivkk '.H.15: 91 a. In D9-20-2415 2 _- Nol ficat;on ReSponse Form z,at 5-074 Weting Date: August 24, 1016 St 6:30 PM WlGdifierranscp, Michael & Njralp 120 MiglEtandOaks Q Southlaka Tx 76092 PLEASE RRCVIOE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HASID DEUVERY BEFORE TI4E START OF THE SDHEOULED PUBLIC HEAMN0. Being the owners s) of the property so noted atom are hereby in tavar ofCICpOsed to undacided about (r.ircie or underuw. are) #Fre posed Zccinq Change and Concept PEan referenced abov. . Space for cornments regardiq[j your position: 'The Saulhlake 2030 Plan is a reflection of the oomr IIJIMEYs valvar} andwitl serve as a brueprlol for Saudilake's future. As surb.-your Interest erld in varve meat are uIlkMl to the succ"@ of the pial,:' SOUTHLAKE 2030 VISION STATEMENT ke twill cn klr tlu'e 0 enhanct�s Status aa_a do ira_ble, att�gtivs, safe. E eaIW.: and fiacally-sound comrnunky with gt141ity milghtarhrreds, while mrairr SAning a Ngft standard of FWing, I Hrning. shappir , 'marking, recreation, and open spaces. Southlaks will continue to be a vibrant carnmanity that epiiamizes t7Dfl't eranornicand anv,"nnlsn �-- VY4 p. i to keen S0ytWake 2430 o an int$d with Me 1I1 8"4 and 9 t 1 S. "Ili It& Chapel is jrxDt ttbe beginnklg! 4 S '€lhite Chapel wil! frallow as vg111 oikwrs. ign re. r v Date-, 4 ' dithonal[ naturs, u g T Gate- Printed N 2me{S}- t' r+usomprcrrrMn-s ar[s]Kbaaarwm#(SJarer.illiNd ltoa. JIFww[aamM�lL�aQan C rdn9 �pirtme��t. ate 6arrn ��`P'aP�rtY Phone Number (opttorlaly __cl� Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 8 Notification Response Form ZA 15-074 Meeting Date: August 20, 2015 at 6:30 PM McClain, Thomas I Etux Kathy M 320 Silverwood Cir Southlake Tx 76092 Direct questions and mall responses to: City of Southlake Planning & Development Services Nodflcatlon Response 1400 Main St; Sto 310 Southlake, TX 76092 Phone: (617)748-8621 Fax: (817)748-8077 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAI L, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BFFORF THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed o undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Concept Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: We. r W �t 4 Lj Date: Additional Signature: Date: Printed . d?I.P.4) Must us properly otvnerrsj,n0ose name(&) are printed attcp. Cthereiso uc)ndu9 the Planning Oeaadmcrt One foim pe, property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 9 Notification Response Form.. ZA15-074 Weitng Date: August 20, 2015 at 6:30 PM Wontick, Mary & Thom 1060 Highland Oaks Dr Southiake Tx 76D92 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX DR HAND DELIVERY EEFORE TFIE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor ofopposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change an -i Concept Plan referenced above_ Space for comments regarding your position: 4 PLL a 1 f--ropcx~'i~ At�� OF 00 S r— i� 4,,�4�'.+.�fir1 lJ � i'��G+Je ✓ k-"? � ,,Q At S L YJCa.w i �j 'L ti p YBf Ik.+ I `-ei 's g 4'I t Signature: Date;7 l Sl ,additional signature: Date: Printed Name(s)- vias " fyc'`/ U011v� . L Must b� prrperty whass nanrrvsj are printed al iDp. OthervAse mntac, ma Planning D�-rr:.nnrs,% Qln rulrn per plorp ty. Phone Number (optional)- `3 -9 ) Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 10 Email Correspondence Received Regarding ZA15-074 92'2015 Ci sotAllake tx us Mail - Fyod Agenda Item 7B- Rezati..9g Rtypesl - Sry. ffnIV1 Isl M1r6•Vg USOUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlakeAx.us> Fwd: Agenda Item 7B - Rezoning Request - September 1st Meeting I message kbakor@ci.southlake.tx.us <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 12,51 AM To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@cl.souTlake.tx.us> Sent from my iPhone Begin foiwrded message: From: Lon Payne <Ipayne@ci.souIhlake.tx.us> Date: September 1, 2015 at 13,22:02 PM CDT To: I aura Hill <n)ayor-int@ci.southlake.tx.us> Cc: Ken Baker <KBaker@ci.souttllake.tx.us>, Holly Blake <hblakeaci.soulhlake.tx.us> Subject: Fwd: Agenda Item 78 - Rezoning Request - September 1st Mooting Lori Payne Begin forwarded message: From: Andreea Timberlak Date: September 1, 2015 at 5:50:52 PM CDT To:'mayorandcitycouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us" <mayorandcitycouncil@ci, south lake.tx.us> Subject: RE: Agenda Item 7B - Rozoning Roquost - September 1st Meeting Hello. The Timberlake family is NOT supporting the variance being requested by the Owner of the property located at 911 and 859 S Mite Chapel Blvd. Our reasons are in full alignment with those supplied to the City Council by our neighbors David 1Nllliams and Marc Powell Our property is located at 215 White Chapel Court and has a long border with the property that is being discussed here for rezoning, to the North. Wed like to bring to the Mayor' and City Council's attention the fact that the Owner of the property located at 911 and 859 S White Chapel Blvd has NOT addressed us in any way to request our support. Had he done so. we would have made it clear that hllps Rniail google.comhnaVu"=2& k=cW*tCLl bo &view-pt&search- it box&lh=1418COc8J1lb1co3Ui ml=14i8c-gcMI Iblca0 1 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 11 97.12015 Ci.soUrilake.bc us Mail - rNd: llgewda lrem 7p • ReLming Request - Scoembn 1st Meerig we do NO I support this rezoning request- Sadly, it seems that the Owner has stated during the Aug 11 meeting that he had obtained our support. Lastly, please note that the size of our property has been incorrectly listed in the attached document ' Surrounding Property and Owners" at 1.06 acres. This attachment was included in the City's Staff Report, dated August 14, prepared for the P&Z. Our property consists of lots 2R5R1A and 2R5R1 B, adjacent to each other, totalling 2.46 acres, fact that can be verified at fad org, Reaards, "Illiam and Andreea Timberlake 215 White Chapel Ct Southlake, TX 76092 M: 469-231 3217 Sent from my Samsung Nolte 3 Original message From: David David Williams Date:09l0112015 4:59 PM (GMT -06:00) To: mayorandcitycouncilQcisouthlake.tx.us Cc: blare Powell ,Andreea Timberlake ,"Timberlake, William` ,Randy Colvin .Michelle Ziadie Subject: Agenda Item 7B - Rezoning Request - September 1st Meeting 0 I have sent material in and plan to to speak tonight but please put me on record of NOT supporting the variance being requested by the [Avner. And, I am one of the parties in the impact zone of the development. I have copied neighbors on both sides of me and nearby - the Powells and the Timbedakes and the Zadres - all of vdtrjm are who are in the impact zone and I know that they also do not support the variance and hope they vnll contact you to infom) you of their position. I know this is their position because, unlike the Owner requesting the variance, I have talked to them. Dav u C. A%Wams 211 rMWe Chapel Courf Soufmake, TX 76092 in (817) 403-3567 tt s7'mar.goajeccm!mabLCY?u=2&k�c9�bOC7b68Hew=rligearclrintxnRIFF'4'Atilcfl9ltb1caQgsirnl=laf&9cri911b1ca0 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 12 91r2D15 Ci.saRiico.tx.us klall - hod: FW; RmcM to Spe*- Stoember 1 - PWnJn Iltfn 71111 - Zortrxl Cttnrjr 10 Incrcdse Dcnsite �SOUTI ]LAKE Jorod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake. Ix. us> Fwd: FW: Request to Speak - September 1 - Agenda Item 7B - Zoning Change to Increase Density 1 message Holly Blake <hblake@a ci.southlake.tx.us> Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:38 AM To: Jefod Potts <jpolts@ci.southlake.lx.us> Forwarded message From: Lori Payne southlake tx u.�> Date: Mon, Aug 31. 2015 at 1:43 PM Subject: RV Request to Speak - September 1 - Agenda Item 76 - Zoning Change to Increase Density To: Laura hill <mayor-mt@ci.seuthlake lx us>, Ken Baker <kbaker@ci.southlake.Ix.us>. Holly Blake <hblake,aaci southlake tx.us> From: Lori Payne[mailto:lpayne@ci.southlake.tx.us] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2015 1:43 PM To: 'David C. Williams' Ce: Shawn McCaskill; Laura Hill; 'Marc Powell'; SubJect: RE: Request to Speak - September 1 - Agenda Item 7B - Zoning Change to Increase Density Good afternoon Mr. Wiliams 1Mien you arrive to the City Council meeting tomorrow night, there vnll 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 arid loin 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 Soufhlake, 7X 76092 817-748-8016 office IrltOs.Amal,gwgtecomfrnailkvb'qui=2tjk=c96mU Ibe8uiee,=Ftgsearclrlrb:ocRfi=141&%MkbcS8dc&lml=141985MtOWc 1!3 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 13 Nv2015 ci.3awako.tx.L6 Nat - rml rW Roqiesr to Speak - Sepcemtef 1 . nyrr,ds 11mi 7i1- Zoning Ctutr)c W Irrrcase Density 190.111 SOUTHLAKE Confidentiality Notice: This o -mail message, Including any attachments, Is for the sole use of the Intended reclplent(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any receipt and/or response to this email may bo considered a PUBLIC RECORD. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. From: David C. Williams Sent: Monday, August 3 , 1 1:23 PM To: 1payne(&I-scuthlake tx.us Cc: place2@ci.soul hlake. Ix. us, mayo(@u.southlake.tx.us; Marc Powell; Subject: Request to Speak - September 1 - Agenda Item 7B - Zoning Change to Increase Density Lori, was informed thru Shawn McCaskill to contact you regarding speaking at the above event. I would like to speak vdth Council on the above item and understand that I yeas 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 v ere never received or acknowledged_ It was also represented at the N&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 Uavid C W'ilhains Presiden411ouston PlaiwCapital Bank direct 713.749.8121 I fax 877.379 6294 1 rttobile 817.403 3567 Tem omary 10565 Katy Ftccw S c. 300, Suite 300,11ouston, TX 77024 1 PlamsCapntal.com rtlp3 14M.%92(kbc:s9& 2s Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 14 gyr2015 CI.sodk1*9.tK.Ls Mal - Fwd FW -Req -1 to Spe* • Seylembcr 1- Agaida Ibm 78- ZoNrg ChWW to Inaeeae [)visity 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 PlainsCapital Corporation. Holly Blake Administrative Secretary - Planning Certified Permit Technician - Building Inspections City of Southlake 817-746-8621 hblakeia?ci.southlake. tx. us htt�lMail.geode.comhnaI1uU''h1.2dik=c9tiebOclb48.vic%--pt&searctr-inteoc81b=14i8V5920L-ze56debslm1=1M1SB9 Q20cbe59d_ 313 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 15 4�1�10I t. Ci sotlhlake.tx us Mail - Fwd September 1st Agenda nem 711 - AGAINST QlSOUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlako.tx.us> Fwd: September let Agenda Item 7B -AGAINST 1 message kbaker@ci.Southlake.tx.us <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> To: Jerod Potts <jpotiS0ci.southlake.tx.urs> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: Wed. Sep 2, 2015 at 12:52 AM From: Lori Payne <Ipayne@ci.sotdhlake.tx.us> Date: September 1, 2015 at 6:18:03 PM CDT To: Laura Hill <mayor-int@ci.southlake.lx.us> Cc: Klin Baker<KBaker@ci,southlakeAx.us>, Holly Blake <hblake@ci.sohthlake.tx.uS> Subject: Fwd: September 1st Agenda Item 713- AGAINST Lori Payne Begin forwarded message: From: David Williams Date: September 1, 2 a To: mayorandcitycouncil ci.soutlilake.tx.us William" F"Timbedake arc Pow i���� Randy Colvin McClain Subject September 1st Agenda Item 7B -AGAINST All, I have sent material in and plan to to speak tonight but please put me on record of NOT supporting the variance being requested by the Owner. And. I am ore of the parties in the impact zone of the development. I have copied neighbors on both sides of me and nearby - the Powells and the Timbertakes and the Zadies - all of whom are who are in the impact zone and I know that they also do not support the variance and hope they will contact you to inform you of their position. I know this is their position because, unlike the Owner requesting the variance, I have talked to them. Davo C- 141Uams Mlpe/lmall.googreccmfmailAG%=Z8ik=c9Ge+bOctrrt8vlew=pt search-inbacdar14(SUD*51b43668.:Ind-14r&-9dc511rkW Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 16 9V212015 Ci-&ftMdce.bt.tb Mail - FW1 SWWnbd 1$l Agw" Ilan 7B - AGAINST 211 bYhRc Chapel Court SoufhAke, 1X 76092 m. 17 403.35 7 Mlp6lhMail.pWe.canhneUhuV?U-2&k•c%ebDc1D4&.view=plAxcxel--inboxgttF14f8c9c(c fb43%b1m1=14W19cfc51b4366 2'2 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 17 4' IR,2015 Ci.soulliako bc, us M a I - Fwd FW: While Chapel concern ®SOUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Fwd: FW: White Chapel concern Ken Baker <kbaker@ci,southlake.tx.us> To: Jorod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:40 PM ------- Forwarded message ---- From: Lori Payne <Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx.us> Date: Wetf, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:32 PM Subject: FW; White Chapel concern To: Laura Hill <mayor•int@ci.southlake.tx.us> Cc: Ken Baker <kbaker@ci.soulhlake,tx.us>. Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> From: Jeff Dobbs [mailtc Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 3:38 PM To: mayorardcitycouncil@cl,southlake.tx.us Subject: White Chapel concern To whom it may concern, Please read my concerns. As a long-time resident of Southlake (I originally moved here back in the late 90's), the city has changed drastically and most for the good. Town Center is great, the Brownstones, all of the medical facilities (the 1709 berm is still not my favorite), but overall the city has done a very nice job of attractiN businesses with nice upscale living. I fell in love with the scenic view of the palatial estates and was so disappointed to hear that White Chapel is possibly going to change. I travel it every day from my home in Southlake to my business in Colleyville and it always causes me to relax. It would be a temble thing to change such a scenic drive. Even my family back In Ohio speaks of how beautiful the drive is. For the love of what made Southlake beautiful and charming in the beginning, PLEASE don't consider all change to be good_ Sometimes leaving things alone is better. I hank you for your time. Sincerely, Jeffrey S. Dobbs htlp6lomaiI g"9.comlmailL04u a2&k■c9&bOctMSview=piMewch--nbcx&mso=14rd8510e537113cdsirrN 14ld351Oa537113c Case No. ZA15-074 to Attachment G Page 18 4, 1 &'2015 Dobbs IJedical Sales, Inc. 1211 Hall Johnson Road Colleyville, TX 76034 817.788.1285 office 817.788.1103 fax v",,-,. ENDO -TEAM.;;:,, DOT Ci saANake.b.ts Mail • Fwd: FW: White rhapN ccnown Kenneth M. Baker, AICP Senior Director of Planning and Development Services City of S011thlake 1400 Main Street - SWI10 310 Southlake, TX 76092 817-748-8067 http..'knail.go4e_ooinlmait6AOWi=2&ik=cSooboc1bt'bo ew=pt3seareh=irbootdmag-14W510c537113c&vm1=14fdB5510e537113c Case No. ZA15-074 Attachment G Page 19 '51-I. SCl/. N,3 -C[-.. u.M 11 ."NA P/ i1 VYIYJ :SII I'Ajl`�:J t�,il�iilYli 0 SOUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.south lako.tx.us> Fwd: PZ Zoning Change lot 19,20 and 21 1 message kbaker@cl.southlakeAx.us <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake tx us> Sent from my (Phone Begin fonvarded message: Wed, Sep 2. 2015 at 12-50 AM From: Lon Payne <lpayne@ci.southlake.tx.us> Date: September 1, 2015 at 6:22:42 PM CDT To: Laura Hill <mayor-inl@ci.southlake.tx us> Cc: Ken Baker <KBaker@ci.southlake,tx,us>, Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake_tx.us> Subject: Fwd: PZ Zoning Change lot 19,20 and 21 Lon Payne Beg n forwarded message: From: Marc Powell Date: September 1, 2015 at 5:11613 PM CDT To."rrlayorandcitycouncll@ci,soulhlake tx us" <rnayorandcilycouncil@ci. southlake.tx-us> Subject: FW: PZ Zoning Change lot 19,20 and 21 From: Marc Powell Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 4:57 PINI To:'►nayorandcitycouncil@cienulhlake :x IIs' Subject: PZ Zoning Change lot 19,20 and 21 Dear Mayor and City Council My name is Marc Poavvell and my wife Lori have been living in adjacent to this proposed zoning change lot for 17 years. We loved this spot for its roots to the history of Southlake when it was more rural and all Ag type properties... "nat drew us to the area were those wonderful lots on White Chapel and they have been one of the premiere spots in our city. Changing the zoning here In our opinion would destroy the area's feel and to allow one family to profit from this is a mistake. Naw another ^Ilrn hYrlai[q" a cm rn a 14f8cCRM2.",eca5:5s Im1=14WC-bW23eca5c Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 20 99'2'2015 Ci surNake.0 us M all - Find: PZ Zcnng CIwW..:d 19 20 wr121 one has tits lot In for zoning changes.. Wiere vAll it stop! Changing it to R2 alloV6 them to change their minds and redraw the lots to take advantage of the change. Leave some history and Prestige to a great spot 1n our city. There are other reasons to be concerned as I know my neighbor vAll speak to tonight but we TOTALLY OPPOSED this change. Also I was not happy to read the P&Z notes and that they said no one vras opposed as I did mad in our votes... I have copies if necessary.. - Thanks for yarr consideration to this matter... Keep Soulhlake Beaulifl.d' PS. We vr.11 be there tonight. Marc and Lori Powell Marc Powell. President StyleAccess LLC 817-424-9768 office 817-939-6178 cell 817-251-6374 fax litw!hniii I guugle car.maVu0-Aj=2dlk=cXiehocIb4Wew•pl&se&ch=irtwx 14118c968drice-a5cftmi=14f&—vb8023eca5c Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 21 9x1/2015 Re: Surwdrgpropertyandoveers-sawtnw,vi-85@ardgllSWr1*G"r9wiw-Jpotts6b.sablaketc.is-C[salYlaketctsMail -- . Forwarded message ....------ From: "Mediterraneo, Michael" To: Brandon Bledsoe <olace3(aci.southlake.tx.us>. Gary Fawks <2lace6 Ci.southlake.tx.us>, John Huffman <plaoeS&ci.southlake-tx.us>, Laura Hill <mavofaci.southlake tx us>. Randy Williamson <olaee4Cdd.soutlVake.lx.us>, Shahid Shafi <olaoe1aci-southlake.tx us>. Shawn McCaskill <place20ci.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 plan!! Please keep Southlake "Open' and support the Southlake 2030 plan MICHAEL MEDITERRANEO I SVP IT Applications Sedgwick Claims Management Servicos, Inc. 2201 W. Royal Ln.. S,we 125 1 Irvin(j, IX 75063 OiuFcr 972 443 9035 Emil mnm,sedewick.com J The leader In Innovative claims and productivity management solutions data teWArnixharset• ur.&%3C span%20styte%20%22eda%3A4A20rgbl34%2C x20349=%2034)%3R %2Clorrt-family'i63A%20erial%2C%20s&,a-serif%3 . 111 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 22 8+3V2015 Ci,s<xAH,*e,rx,U Mail - Fwd 51o1,NeC;Wpd relainj QSUUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlako.tx.us> Fwd: S White Chapel rezoning kbakcr@ci.southlake.tx.us <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 9:39 PM To Jerod Potts <jpotts@Ci $outhlakeJx.us> Sent from my 0hone Benin forwarded rnessage From: Lori Payne <Ipdyne@ci.souihlake.tx,us> Date: August 30, 2015 at 7:02:37 PM CDT To: (aura Hill <mayor-int@ci.sauthlake lcus> Cc: Shana Yelverton<SYelverton@ci.soul hlake.tx.us>, Ken Baker <KBaker@p.soulhlake.lx.us> Subject: Fwd: S White Chapel rezoning Lori Payne Begin forwarded message From: Randy Colvin Date: August 30, 2015 at 5:47:53 PM CDT To: mayorQci southldke 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 P7.. In fact, Cdse Number ZA 15-075 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 htlprYma.r9xge.comffi)a u117t,i-28k-c.� chOclb4dHe�v-p.8seartlr in�arS,r,sy=l4fdf r�p3pgsiml=l<r819fo69 rc�30 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 23 831/2015 Ci,soaihlakeU ret Mail • Fwd; S Whtc Ghvd rezmng listed in the official document released by the P/ 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 USDOJ. 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 ItV*Ilma1.google_wm.tnallArA?u-2&k-ccCR:O,:I W&v mv=pr&aarcft=lrWx&msg=1418191J6951cO3 & m1=14r811XWf*J-cG2pl Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 24 2'ItU�Yl15 ci.scurlgoixusM&I - fwd reronngdwli,rchr,�el Q$OUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts(a@ci.southlake.tx.us> Fwd: rezoning of white chapel 1 message Ken Baker <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:44 Ph1 - Forwarded message From: Lori Payne <Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx.us> Date: Tue, Sep 15. 2015 at 8:35 AAI Subject: Fwd: rezoning of white chapel To: Laura Hill <mayor-int@Cr.50uthla''<C.tx us> Cc: Ken Baker <KBaker@ci.soulhlake.tx.us>, Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> Lori Payne Begin forwarded message: From. steph richardson Date: September 15, 2015 at 7:54:33 AM CDT To:"mayorandcitycouncil(a_)ci.southlake.tx.us"<rnayorandcitycouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us> Subject: rezoning of white chapel Dear Mayor Hill and City Council Nfembers, I am writing to voice my opinion that I DO NOT WANT any lots on South White Chapel rezoned and sub -divided. Although I do not live on White Chapel, it is one of the most beautiful streets in our community. This is evidenced by the fact that everyone I know drives visitors down White Chapel to show with pride the beauty of our community. Not only yr II the uniqueness be lost if subdivided. I suspect there will be a significant increase in traffic. I'm consistently hearing people comment that our community is beginning to feel very saturated with homes and store fronts; subsequently loosing it's appeal. As a relatively new resident, that is certainly not vhlat I want to hear. Although we have wonderful stores, it's beginning to look like every other cookie cutter community. Strip after strip of retail. How many major grocery stores can one town support In a one block radius? As well, driving down the street, the eye is rnet with neighbcxhood after nelghbonc(xx . There are very few plots of land (bordering the ctraet) that have no. been developed into a neighoorhood. S. White Chapel is one of the few streets tnat remain. Please do not rezone S V'lhite Chapel and take away one of the most iconic streets that makes our community unique! Best regards, Stephanie Richardson Kenneth M. Baker, AICP htt�s;lmall gxge..com'maiVu1V7u- 14M8546abr1W.688iml=141d95'-681x1f8c6 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 25 1rV'ti�1 ' C' Snlhlake be us Mail - Fwd: rezo(tlr)g ofwhle chapel Senior Director of Planning and Development Services City of Southlake 1400 Main Street - Suite 310 Southlake, TX 76092 817-748-8067 H4X*/hn8il_gXge.com-lnyl-UWui=2&ik-c96ebOCtb43view=re&swd1=Ihwxft=l4ialt`i4&aoc1t&:&4ziml=14f08546 c1l8c6 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 26 Q!V'0'5 c,.soL4Naraetx,gsw?Al-rwd PROTFCTTII17TRADRION....NOTORF70NINGWHITFCHAPFI RI1m USOUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlske.a.us> Fwd: PROTECT THE TRADITION ---- NO TO REZONING WHITE CHAPEL BLVD. 1 message kb aker@ci. south I ake. bc us <kbaker@ci.southlake,tx.us> To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:10 PM From: Lori Payne <Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx us> Date: September 24, 2015 at 10:30:18 PM CDT To: mayor-int@ci.southlake.tx.us Cc: Ken Baker<KBaker@ci,sou(hlake.lx.us>, hblake@ci.souWake.tx.us Subject: Fwd: PROTECT THE TRADITION — NO TO REZONING WHITE CHAPEL BLVD. Lori Payne Begin forwarded message: From: Emie Molinar Date: September 24, 2015 at 14:21:54 PM CDT To: rrnayorandcitycouncil@ci.soalthlake.tx.u: Subject: PROTECT THE TRADITION — NO TO REZONING WHITE CHAPEL BLVD. I am a resident and property owner in Southlake TX and am writing you to formally PROTEST the activity occurring on South White Chapel blvd. Specifically 720, 835 and 911 that are pursuing having their parcels of land divided. The basis of my objection is that White Chapel is a marquee street that highlights the grandness and beauty of the town by showcasing residential estates. As Highland Park has Beverly Drive we have White Chapel. I think it would be a travesty to change this blvd. in terms of current appearance. I also believe, if changed, it will have a negative effect on home values on the surrounding properties As a request please work with your fellow council members to prevent this from happening. I also would like to ask for a separate meeting with each council members on October 5th. I will bring a tApa Ihmai I googte.com.m arl; WO7u .2& k=cr4kift tb48-n aw= pl&-,Parc h= inbax&1h=15002b222c4*')&)dbs ml= 15002b222cOaWod Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 27 9175M15 r, smMaketc.us Mall - Fwd. PROTECT THE TRADITION ---- NO TO REZONING WHI IE CHAPEL ©LW. group of concerned Southlake residents. Please reply to this email confirming a time and place. PROTECT THE TRADITION ---- NO TO REZONING WHITE CHAPEL BLVD. The Molinaro's Ernie, Kelly, Scott(19), Nick (11) and Chris(7) httfleArma I.googlc CpNmaiL1JN?u�=2&k=c96eh0c1 D4&vi ew= Pti srxcl� r bcn8tf� 15W2b222c0a68W&sim1-150021222LM69W 2'2 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 28 W92015 • k~ C -.salhlake.bc. us 1.1a I - Fwd. Oppose born to rezorrr g of ranch property on South w hite Ctxvel R cod Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Fwd: Opposition to rezoning of ranch property on South White Chapel Road 2 messages Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 3:26 PM To: Jered Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Forwarded message --- From: Lori Payne <Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx.us> Date: Fn, Sep 11, 2015 at 2:43 PM Subject: Fwd: Opposition to rezoning of ranch property on South White Chapel Road To: Laura Hill <mayor-int@ci.southlake.tx.us> Cc- Ken Baker <KBaker@ci,southlake.tx.us>, Holly Blake <hblake&i.southlake.tx.us> Lori Payne Begin forwarded message: From: Patrick Donovan Date: September 11, 2015 at 2:28:52 PM CDT To: mayorandcitycouncil ac i.sout hlake lx.l1S Subject: Opposition to rezoning of ranch property on South White Chapel Road Dear Council. Maw is letter that has been sent out to a number of Southlake residents asking for their support to oppose the various activities surround ng the rezoning of the anch lands on South White Chapel Road. It is unbelievable that there is even a need for me to write this letter to all of you. The mile between Southlake Blvd. and Continental is special and unique to the community. To allow the rezoning changes to this land is heartbreaking and disturbing to many, many residents whom moved here for all the special qualities of Southlake. I hope for the sake of the community you vote not to allow any rezoning changes to take effect regarding South White Chapel. Dear Neighbors, A number of residents whom have property bordering the 14,9 acre ranch on 720 South Chapel (West side of White Chapel) had the opportunity of attending the SRI.N. meeting this past Tuesday (9/8) regarding the rezoning of this property. The rezoning being contemplated is to allow for the demolishing of the current house while erecting two new homes on this site, with potentially the opportunity of adding more homes on the acreage fronting White Chapel. For numerous reasons, all sixteen homeowners bordering on this property have come out and stated they are against this change in rezoning leading to new housing development on this site. However, from a broader perspective, this is a disturbing event in that it appears to be a part of a continuing pattern of others to buy up the ranch lands on S. White Chapel and turn them into mini -subdivisions! For example, coming up for vote next week, 9/15, MPG 1tA9vinr=pt&FAtid%20chapel"=lru_%dseerc1t=C?LWy8th-14fbo17D5ed7fO3DBsml=14ftw17059d7KO3?, 1"3 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 29 a 2 Cu 20' 5 C,i.5ar9dake N us Mal -Fwd Oppn tt on to rezati ng elrar h prnpttr y on Sn lh W pita C hapnl Road our Southlake council will be voting on rezoning the property on the East side of White Chapel across from 720 South Chapel to allow for the construction of additional homes. It is incredible that the subdivision of Southlake's "signature mile" on S. White Chapel is even up for discussion. This street, with its ranches and cattle on the land, reflects Southlake's western heritage and beginnings. Other Texas communities would love to have what we already have in place.... and here we are looking at taking it all down. So tomorrow morning (Saturday) a group of us will be standing in front of 720 South Chapel raising the community's awareness of this issue. If you cannot join us tomorrow please attend the vote coming up on 9/15 in the town hall to voice your support against rezoning any of the property on South White Chapel. We can make a difference if we join togetherll Pat Donovan Tel: (817) 455-2488 email � Holly Blake Administrative Secretary - Planning Certified Permit Technician - Building Inspections City o/ Southlake 817-748-8621 hblake@ci. sou thlake. tx. us Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.suuthlake.tx.us> To: Holly Blake <hblake@ci.south lake. tx.us> ------ Forwarded message From: Holly Blake <hblake@ci.sot.thlake.tx.us> NIon, Sep 14, 2015 at 9:13 AM Mtpsihtail goosecomJmtil7isKY7ui=2Rik=c(l%(bOCI?>l8vlew-pt8q= wlita%20r.hapddgs=lrue8.search=quory&th=l4rbel705W7t000dsirnl 1l4ba17059a7r070&.. 213 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 30 9V2 mis G.souwake.t cus Mail - Fwd: Oppoeibon oo rezoning of ranch prrperty on south Whhe Chapel Road Date: Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 3:26 PM Subject: Fwd: Opposition to rezoning of ranch property on South White Chapel Road (Quoted text hidden] Jerod Potts City of Southlake jpotts@c i. sou thlake.tx.us 817-748-8195 mtpsAsail.googe.comMiailUG-?ii=?dik=C%ObOclbr$New=pt&(Fwt ito%20chape &cpstrue69emchaq myth• 14bel7o6WM30&sunt= lafbel7os9dM3o8 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 31 Opposition Letter Received Sept. 19. 2615 City of Southlake Mayor Laura Hill 1400 Main St. Suite 270 Southlake, TX 76092 RE: SubdividineofProperty anS.While Chanel The Honorable Mayor Hill, We are writing this letter to you to express our deep cemc:em about the pending desecration of White Chapel Blvd. and the deliberate undermining of property values in Timberlake, Princeton Park and The Estates on White Chapel. White Chapel is "The Signature Boulevard" of Southlake. It carries the same persona as Armstrong Pkwy. does to Highland Park; River Oaks Blvd. to River Oaks, Ocean Dr. To Corpus Christi, and Wooldridge Dr (Pemberton Heights) to Tarry Town. These magnificent estates are already in place and should be preserved: not chopped up for financial benefit to greedy, self-serving minded people. In particular, we are referring to 911 and 720 S. White Chapel Blvd; currently seeking re -zoning or special revised use permits. It is both disheartening and chocking to think that the City leaders would allow showplace. cultured identity estates that have served to draw residents and create value to Southlake to be destroyed. Not only docs it take away our iconic image, and lower property values; it creates an assured threat of flooding. Already the back of 720 where it meets our back yard, 609 Winding Creek and my neighbors at 611, 607, 605, 603 and 601 Winding Creek Ct. During the recent heavy rains of Jan.. Feb. our yards were flooded. With the addition of new concrete behind us, the water will 'sheet flowldrain' at a faster pace attacking the foundations of our homes. Additional resident,. added to White Chapel would very negatively impact traffic on 2 -lane White Chapel and Continental; two streets that are heavily burdened by the huge amount of traffic on 1709. We are in the real estate development business (www.mamthonwmmcryisi.com) and know this to be a fact. I have attached a picture of a board showing the property at 720 and the 16 adjacent homeowner lots to that property. All 16 homcowners have signed NO, in protest of the change, We presented this at the SPIN meeting a couple of weeks ago. The owners of 720 had a paid representative to speak for them. He was very ambiguous as to the owner's plans. The owners had talked with a few of the neighbors (shown on the board) and told us each something different, and, on the 176 and 181h had his contractor on the property laying out the lots. And. why not, as the owners representative told us at the SPIN meeting the various Southlake City Council members had told the buyer front Colleyville that be would have no problem putting four (4) houses on the property before he bought it. We would like to know who those City Council members are. We would like to go on record that we strongly protest the reasoning of these estate lots. We are adamantly against it; even dividing into two (2) lots. Sincerely, Barry J. Smith 609 Winding Creek Court Southlake, TX 76092 -qWqA4tt1 Diane M. S119' 609 Winding Crock Court Southlake, TX 76092 Attachment: Picture of board reflecting 720 S. White Chapel and 16 residents that signed opposing the subdivision. Case No. ZA15-074 Attachment G Page 32 August 20, 2015 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting - Public Comment Forms Southlake Planning & 'Zoning Commission Meeting Public Comment Form Please print. Retyrn completed fomr to Secretary prior to start of regular session. h Address: iD SJ ✓ P ✓ t) e) y d L'� (include City and State) 1 wish to share my views on an Agenda Item: Agenda Item #--La- 14b% 7 I will speak in SUPPORT of this item I will speak in OPPOSITION to this iten I do not wish to speak, but please record r _ SUPPORT OPI ❑ Citizen Comments (for an item on this agenda) Signature: Required: Cerds will not be read into Ike record oarless It is sig. I I Date: Z 6 r /,5 Phone: 91 7- y a/- /O 39 Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Public Comment :Form Please print. Return completed form to Secretary prior to start of regular session. Name: M tAC(P -\ Address. ao W, � lkh� K.s (Imlude City an tate) I.vish to share my vie on an Agenda Item: Agenda Item #-6-- 7 I will speak in SUPPORT of this item I will speak in OPPOSI'1'I0N to this item �%I do not wish to speak, but please rec rd my SUPPORT OPPOSITION ❑ Citizcn Comments (for an item on this agenda) Signature: Required. CaiU not be read into the record unless if Is signed Date: Phone: 07 Vdl Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 33 Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Public Comment Form Please print. Return completed form to Secretary prior to start of regular session. Name?_i adw Date; 512-0115 �1 Address: `'� iye t�ia�e nv l C/l U -F PI Phone • `f" 2 i J28 7 (Include City and State) ❑ I wish to share my views on an A enda Item: Agenda Item # ' ' (a I will speak in SUPPORT of this item I will speak in OPPOSITION to this item �l I do not wish to speak, but please SUPPORT OPPOSITIO ❑ Citizen Comments (for an item on this agenda) Required: Cards will not be read into the record unless h Is signed Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Public Comment Form Please print. Return completed form to Secretary prior to start of regular session. Name: �) t C �) k -T folo.\ i I " tom(] Date: Address: I ,.el G' V!� C Phone: 7 V/ 1013 (Include Clty and tale) ❑ I wish to share my vieWs on an Agcnda Item: Agenda Item # I will speak in SUPPORT of this item will speak in OPPOSITION to this item I do not wish to speak, but please recd my SUPPORT f/ OPPOSITION ❑ Citizen Comments (for an item on this agenda) ASignature: — Required: Ca will n read into the record unless it Is signed Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 34 Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting2p-r, Public Comment Form In Ic,6F) Please print. ,Return completed form to Secretary prior to start of regular session. Name: loll 1' ►� �Q�twa-('�� Date: 1 IU Rlikvta (1w1ude City and State) U I wish to share my views on an Agenda Item! Agenda Item # 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) Required. Cards w1fixo U rea to t unless !t is signed. Phone: 617- 421d � ; am Qi; 41'�5 6A 10 CaNs�s 4 -th, MW Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 35 September 1, 2015 City Council Meeting - Public Comment Forms an 04 Ck- Oft -ty. und ip" MWke (I C -M OM 'T".M11.1.1 Rf.turn eompl&" fori I I -lx ary prw ta".4 j r ' Case No. Attachment G ZAl 5-074 Page 36 ri ^• a _ Ktit A. M1 ''•�y+4• w�'� 46:11 a tri f {{�� ,.r+✓. ...ori " ! :I..."..-. .}r�� i�'.*v vfk+ 4'.`k. _l•�' �y-i{w x:'��, .yi•,'_�• +�r!s4{*4 *.4?+4': [+t._ •�.1f:5 x'•� '.:'� f_ r. i'l'�''' _ �f=Y :•i �r(y+�'-k v •:Y..): �Y - r ±o:JIS3 . r` , z ..�,.'.": o-. .+ � rl ':� �._...,:��' .,�, .• cry,+. - 5 WOW., .f rcgul��r'wcwiOrL'.n A. '4 vu�Y' f1 �,•- {v x,v .r•'�2 �J SOUTHLAKE L, TPUBLICCOMMENT CARD 19 . f.�ti PlAite give completed card to Ow suff. PLE=ASE DO NOT COMPLER A FORM POR SOMEONE NOT IN ATTENCIANCE. Name. �,{ � Dake: ( + Address: WaLkucrno-S Phwm (optional): Email (optlonal): Agenda Item # (MUST BE COMPLETED) I will speak In SUPPORT of this item I will Speak in OPPOSITION of this item �Kda n of wi sh t0 speak, but please record Fny: __ SUPPORT OPP061TUN I wish tO speak during PUBLIC FORUM on aro item not on the Agenda Topic: NM9- TO OftOw ew FOnc as aPportanityto 6e heard, please lima your rommerrrs to 3 Minu"res, Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 37 SOUTHLAKEPUBLIC COMMENT T ISD Y r x n y Ptease give mfnpleted card tD CRY Staff. II 1} PLEASE 00 NDlTCLOMRLM A FQRpJI FOR SOMEONE LVOT IN 14T7`ENpANCE. NdntC' date: 7 J f 3 Address: ZI i}fr° Phone (optional);__ Email optional): til 1rn p Pfk-Lon , Agenda item # (MUST BE COMPLETED) -# VAII $pea kin SIJ WRT of this Item I will speak In OPPOSITION of tNs ielm I do not wish to speak, but please racard my: SURPORT OPPOSITUN i wish tc speak during 14U13LIC FORUM on an horn not an the Agenda TOPIC: NOW 70 ff8vw everyone an opportapity to be hekuA Ovae Mum Warcarl mer& to 3 minutes - .3 .. � :Pie•° . _. v�i�:. ,�w}!4�+nx fix,:. .• �' "La Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 38 eit jtem--. I i speer' Tamen fix,:. .• �' "La Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 38 -mac.at ti*±;r.cr.: ri '• _ � �2.�''"y 'dr`.t. . p . w:.... +:. gin= : �.ryt• :._1::.w�::�'. _•,,_.:.ry.4;�=:. . }t _ .�y� y`'S< �. 1.�'. �.: �_.f-_,{, *'.f •..k{.':I_ _�.~ '} �2. "ftp Agm - Toysl���tq:�hare'�t:�hcad'������ {°` -_ ��'s-�.�': - :.$r_•:`�, .'.�- ':y=::'rto - Kir ti'� �;�.•' '�'.':�.. - - ' 'I' Will � '�N4 ,��TMc � '�7�4�.1L119 ��r�� '- - rri'� :•+. 'y:��-:•�M1' t0 ThTS ] CDl, .1 iVl� CAPA�[ �:h i i6 j-Nl�iagY�.nM' L`r* ,rt. ..4''#.• 77 7-7 . ,.. r.. ., Tw Case No. Attachment G ZA15-074 Page 39 fie f a . . . . . . . . . . . ]7fjEID'A% 1. ......................... Yfirs 011y rn dd On. ikln-! Oirr ottli�it vAlf-Spea in Oppos rjbN -1�ik tftll�' R6�� Ev Zkuffl' S -PPOFLT L7 :El I Ppb�jf�F wish !4� opp'Z4 - .7.: C - 79, S. ZM- U '1101 7,11K 47k rl q I MR #WbRivo Ak 77- Case No. Attachment G ZAl 5-074 Page 40 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480-702 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A ZONING CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS TRACT 513, H. GRANBERRY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 581, CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS AND LOCATED AT 859 S. WHITE CHAPEL BLVD., SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, BEING APPROXIMATELY 5.999 ACRES, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "AG" AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO "RPUD" RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "B", SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule City acting under its Charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Texas Local Government Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings, other structures and land for business, industrial, residential and other purposes, and to amend said ordinance and map for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and, WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as "AG" Agricultural District Case No. Attachment H ZA15-074 Page 1 under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a person or corporation having a proprietary interest in said property; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, at a public hearing called by the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the facilities in the area immediately surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise producing elements and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on established character of the neighborhood; location, lighting and types of signs and relation of signs to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and adequacy of width for traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate neighborhood; adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-street parking facilities; location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health and the general welfare; effect on light and air; effect on the over -crowding of the land; effect on the concentration of population, and effect on transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public facilities; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among other things the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and the view to conserve the value of the buildings, and encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout this City; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that there is a public necessity for the zoning changes, that the public demands them, that the public interest clearly requires the amendments, and that the zoning changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of Case No. Attachment H ZA15-074 Page 2 those who bought or improved property with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was made; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that the changes in zoning lessen the congestion in the streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers, promotes the health and the general welfare, provides adequate light and air, prevents the over -crowding of land, avoids undue concentration of population, and facilitates the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, has determined that there is a necessity and need for the changes in zoning and has also found and determined that there has been a change in the conditions of the property surrounding and in close proximity to the tract or tracts of land requested for a change since the tract or tracts of land were originally classified and therefore feels that the respective changes in zoning classification for the tract or tracts of land are needed, are called for, and are in the best interest of the public at large, the citizens of the city of Southlake, Texas, and helps promote the general health, safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That Ordinance No. 480, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Southlake, Texas, passed on the 19th day of September, 1989, as originally adopted and amended, is hereby amended so that the permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below: Being described as Tract 5B, H. Granberry Survey, Abstract No. 581, City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 859 S. White Chapel Blvd., Southlake, Texas, being approximately 5.999 acres, and more fully and completely described in exhibit "A" from "AG" Agricultural District to "RPUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District as depicted on the approved Development Plan attached Case No. Attachment H ZA15-074 Page 3 hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B", and subject to the following conditions: CITY COUNCIL MOTION AT 1ST READING OCTOBER 6, 2015 Reserved for approved City Council 1St Reading Motion CITY COUNCIL MOTION AT 2ND READING OCTOBER 20, 2015 Reserved for approved City Council 2„d Reading Motion SECTION 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake, Texas, to reflect the herein changes in zoning. SECTION 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake, Texas. All existing sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, words, phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. SECTION 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over -crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable Case No. Attachment H ZA15-074 Page 4 consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. SECTION 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. SECTION 7. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 8. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or Case No. Attachment H ZA15-074 Page 5 not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. SECTION 9. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance in its entirety on the City website together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and it this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten (10) days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 10. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1St reading the 6th day of October, 2015. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the 201h day of October, 2015. MAYOR Case No. Attachment H ZA15-074 Page 6 ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: Case No. Attachment H ZA15-074 Page 7 *VM MMII IIV-11 Reserved for legal description Case No. Attachment H ZA15-074 Page 8 EXHIBIT "B" Reserved for approved plans Case No. Attachment H ZA15-074 Page 9