Item 6B
Department of Planning & Development Services
S T A F F R E P O R T
October 14, 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.
st
Concept Plan Previously Presented to City Council September 1, 2015
Revised Development and Pedestrian Access Plan
Case No.
ZA15-074
REQUEST
DETAILS:
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 Regulations
Minimum Lot Size +/- 5.9 acres 2 acres
Maximum Height 2 ½ stories / 40 ft. 2 ½ 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 of 130 feet, which
Rear Yard Setback Not less than 40 ft.
shall be maintained as
permanent open space
Maximum Lot Coverage 20% 20%
Opposition from the surrounding property area within 200’ is in excess of 20% and will
require a supermajority vote (3/4 of the members of City Council) to approve this
request.
ACTION NEEDED: 1) Conduct a Public Hearing
2) Consider Zoning Change and Development Plan Approval Request
ATTACHMENTS:
(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
Case No.
ZA15-074
(H) Ordinance No. 480-702
for City Council Only
(I) Full Size Plans ()
STAFF CONTACT:
Dennis Killough (817) 748-8072
Jerod Potts (817) 748-8195
Case No.
ZA15-074
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER:
Rob & Tracey Dean
APPLICANT:
Sempco Surveying, Inc.
PROPERTY SITUATION:
859 S. White Chapel Blvd.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Tract 5B, H. Granberry Survey, Abstract No. 581, City of Southlake, Tarrant
County, Texas.
LAND USE CATEGORY:
Low Density Residential
CURRENT ZONING:
“AG” Agricultural District
REQUESTED ZONING:
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
HISTORY:
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.
CITIZEN INPUT:
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.
SOUTHLAKE 2030:
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.
As proposed, this concept plan is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan.
Case No. Attachment A
ZA15-074 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
AM-PM-
Use Units Vtpd* AM-IN PM-IN
OUT OUT
Single-Family Detached
1 10 0 1 1 0
Housing (210)
* Vehicle Trips Per Day
* AM-In, AM-Out, PM-In and PM-Out are peak hour generators on a weekday
th
* Based on the ITE: Trip Generation Manual, 7 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 sewer to
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.
st
CITY COUNCIL:
September 1, 2015; Tabled (6-0) 1 Reading Zoning Change and Concept Plan
Lots 19, 20, and 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition.
st
September 15, 2015; Tabled (7-0) 1 Reading Zoning Change and Concept
Plan Lots 19, 20 and 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition until the October 6,
2015 City Council meeting.
October 6, 2015; Approved (7-0) Ordinance No. 480-702 (ZA15-074) 1st
Reading Zoning Change and Concept Plan Lot 19, 20 and 21 H. Granberry No.
581 Addition, subject to the staff report dated September 29, 2015 and
development plan review summary No. 3 dated September 29, 2015, and
noting that a 20 foot sanitary sewer easement will be provided along the east,
which is the rear property boundary.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Attached is Development Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated September 29,
2015.
N:\\Community Development\\MEMO\\2015 Cases\\074 - ZCP - H Granberry Dean Addition\\Staff Report\\ZA15-074 - CC - 2015-10-
20.doc
Case No. Attachment A
ZA15-074 Page 3
Case No. Attachment B
ZA15-074 Page 1
Plans and Support Information
Proposed Development and Pedestrian Access Plan
Development and Pedestrian Access Plan – Close-up
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 1
Proposed Tree Conservation Plan
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 2
Proposed Land Use and Development Regulations
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 3
Letter of Application Boundary Change by Property Owners
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 4
Previously Presented Plans and Support Information
Previously Proposed Concept Plan
Previously Proposed Concept Plan – Close-up
Variance to Subdivision Ordinance No. 483
Regarding Perpendicular / Radial Lot Lines
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 5
Previously Presented Tree Survey
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 6
Previously Presented Narrative
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 7
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 8
Previously Presented
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 9
Previously Presented
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 10
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-074 Page 11
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 1
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 2
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 3
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 4
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 5
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 6
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 7
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 8
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 9
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 10
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-074 Page 11
DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY
ZA15-074Three09/29/15
Case No.: Review No.: Date of Review:
Development Plan
Project Name: – H Granberry Dean Addition - 859 S. White Chapel Blvd.
Planner: Sage Group, Inc. Surveyor: Sempco Surveying, Inc. Owner:
Curtis Young George R. Hill Rob & Tracey Dean
1130 N. Carroll Ave. 1205 S White Chapel Blvd #100
3208 S Main St.
Suite 200
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
GENERAL COMMENTS:
1. This review is preliminary. Additional requirements may be necessary with the review of civil
construction plans.
2. 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.cityofsouthlake.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.
WATER AND SEWER COMMENTS:
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.
2. 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.
INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS:
* 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 Minimum percentage of the
the entire site 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:
i. 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;
ii. 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:
1. 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@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
Case No. Attachment E
ZA15-074 Page 7
Case No. Attachment E
ZA15-074 Page 8
Surrounding Property Owners
SPO # Owner Zoning Physical Address Acreage Response
841 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD
1. Ahmed, Imtiaz Etux Fazila SF2 1.32686025 F
809 BOSTON DR
2. Antique Evanesance Llc SF20A 0.46200000
245 SILVERWOOD CIR
3. Burke, William Etux Nancy RPUD 0.36124676
803 BOSTON DR
4. Castle, Robert M III SF20A 0.46900000
340 SILVERWOOD CIR
5. Costa, Paul L Etux Phuong D RPUD 0.36705229
310 SILVERWOOD CIR
6. Current Owner RPUD 0.31075835 O
859 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD
7. Dean, Robert & Tracey AG 5.95593405 F
911 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD
8. Dean, Robert Etux Tracey RE 7.76906278 F
345 SILVERWOOD CIR
9. Del Rosario, Edwin Etux Gracia RPUD 0.30379255
807 BOSTON DR
10. Farley, Kathleen L Etvir James SF20A 0.49000000
130 HIGHLAND OAKS CT
11. Finn, James H Jr Etux Jonna RPUD 0.37682749
355 SILVERWOOD CIR
12. Gourley, Ronald & Alicia K RPUD 0.34245448
1111 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD
13. Hargett, Gary RE 11.37132630
300 SILVERWOOD CIR
14. Huang, Heng RPUD 0.27144250
921 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD
15. Johnson, Drew SF1-A 5.99941480 F
1050 HIGHLAND OAKS DR
16. Johnson, Greg Etux Leslie RPUD 0.34491551
100 HIGHLAND OAKS CT
17. Knowles, Dawn RPUD 0.72733947 O
495 PINE DR
18. Lancster, Donna SF1-A 2.86185242
320 SILVERWOOD CIR
19. McClain, Thomas I Etux Kathy M RPUD 0.29407981 O
110 HIGHLAND OAKS CT
20. McNamara, Raymond S & Debra J RPUD 0.42247862 O
120 HIGHLAND OAKS CT
21. Mediterraneo, Michael & Nicola RPUD 0.32246817 O
230 SILVERWOOD CIR
22. Mitchell, Robert W Etux Lori W RPUD 0.31168433
Case No. Attachment F
ZA15-074 Page 1
SPO # Owner Zoning Physical Address Acreage Response
350 SILVERWOOD CIR
23. Morris, Melinda W RPUD 0.31403573
360 SILVERWOOD CIR
24. Ordonez, Armando Etux Rebecca RPUD 0.33487001
100 HARVARD DR
25. Parra, Michael B SF20A 0.46700000 O
205 WHITE CHAPEL CT
26. Powell, Marc Etux Lori SF1-A 2.20407862 O
805 BOSTON DR
27. Raja, Muhammad Ali SF20A 0.48800000 O
801 BOSTON DR
28. Romano, James Etux Brigeitte SF20A 0.53900000
250 SILVERWOOD CIR
29. Shin, Sang Ho RPUD 0.34240612
330 SILVERWOOD CIR
30. Simmons, Christine Etvir Chad RPUD 0.38010603 O
31. Superintendent of Carroll ISD
Superintendent of Grapevine
32.
Colleyville ISD
33. Superintendent of Keller ISD
34. Superintendent of Northwest ISD
Sykes, J R Etux Cynthia
720 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD
35. RE 15.15400000 F
(Ownership Changed)
225 WHITE CHAPEL CT
36. Timberlake, William Etux Andre SF1-A 1.46712342 O
235 SILVERWOOD CIR
37. Velala, Krishnamohan RPUD 0.30224545
219 LILAC LN
38. Vu, Giac T Etux Khanh SF1-A 3.56278598
39. Wahby, Samir C Etux Mona S SF1-A 1.43045423
240 SILVERWOOD CIR
40. Welch, John C Etux Beverly RPUD 0.31572024
211 WHITE CHAPEL CT
41. Williams, David C Etux Terri L SF1-A 1.34465539 O
1060 HIGHLAND OAKS DR
42. Womack, Mary & Thomas RPUD 0.43966845 O
260 SILVERWOOD CIR
43. Ziadie, Michelle Etvir Stephen RPUD 0.54970041 O
Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response
Responses Received: In Favor: (5) Opposed To: (13) Undecided: (0) No Response: (25)
Case No. Attachment F
ZA15-074 Page 2
Surrounding Property Owner Notification Response Forms
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 1
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 2
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 3
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 4
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 5
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 6
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 7
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 8
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 9
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 10
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 11
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 12
Email Correspondence Received Regarding ZA15-074
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 13
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 14
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 15
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 16
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 17
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 18
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 19
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 20
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 21
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 22
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 23
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 24
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 25
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 26
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 27
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 28
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 29
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 30
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 31
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 32
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 33
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 34
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 35
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 36
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 37
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 38
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 39
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 40
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 41
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 42
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 43
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 44
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 45
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 46
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 47
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 48
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 49
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 50
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 51
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 52
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 53
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 54
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 55
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 56
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 57
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 58
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 59
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 60
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 61
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 62
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 63
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 64
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 65
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 66
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 67
Opposition Letter Received
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 68
August 20, 2015 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting - Public Comment Forms
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 69
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 70
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 71
September 1, 2015 City Council Meeting - Public Comment Forms
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 72
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 73
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 74
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 75
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 76
October 6, 2015 City Council Meeting - Public Comment Forms
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 77
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 78
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 79
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 80
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 81
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 82
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 83
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 84
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 85
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 86
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 87
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-074 Page 88
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 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 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:
ST
CITY COUNCIL MOTION AT 1 READING OCTOBER 6, 2015
Approved (7-0) Ordinance No. 480-702 (ZA15-074) 1st Reading Zoning Change and
Concept Plan Lot 19, 20 and 21 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition, subject to the staff
report dated September 29, 2015 and development plan review summary No. 3 dated
September 29, 2015, and noting that a 20 foot sanitary sewer easement will be provided
along the east, which is the rear property boundary.
ND
CITY COUNCIL MOTION AT 2 READING OCTOBER 20, 2015
nd
Reserved for approved City Council 2 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,
Case No. Attachment H
ZA15-074 Page 4
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
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
Case No. Attachment H
ZA15-074 Page 5
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
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.
stth
PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1 reading the 6 day of October, 2015.
_________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________
CITY SECRETARY
ndth
PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2 reading the 20 day of October, 2015.
Case No. Attachment H
ZA15-074 Page 6
________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________
CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
_________________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE:___________________________
ADOPTED:_______________________
EFFECTIVE:______________________
Case No. Attachment H
ZA15-074 Page 7
EXHIBIT “A”
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