The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 9A Department of Planning & Development Services S T A F F R E P O R T January 26, 2016 CASE NO: ZA15-134 PROJECT: Preliminary Plat for Lots 2R1 & 2R2 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition (Option “A”/ Option “B”) REQUEST: On behalf of Steve Dumler, Four Peaks Development (Tom Matthews) is requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat / Plat Revision for Lots 2R1 and 2R1 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 720 S. White Chapel Blvd., Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: “RE” Single Family Residential Estate District. SPIN Neighborhood #10. DETAILS: Four Peaks Development, LLC is requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat of approximately 14.894 acres for Lots 2R1 and 2R2 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition. The applicant has proposed two separate options for consideration. Option “A” proposes a 2 lot panhandle subdivision and option “B” proposes a 2 lot subdivision with a cul-de- sac street. Option “A” proposes two (2) separate lots. Proposed Lot 2R1 to the rear would be approximately 9.884 acres (panhandle or flag lot), and Proposed Lot 2R2 to the front would be approximately 5.010 acres. Option “B” proposes two (2) separate lots. Proposed Lot 2R1 to the rear would be approximately 8.96 acres, and Proposed Lot 2R2 at the front would be approximately 5.014 acres. Option “B” proposes a public street (cul-de-sac) to serve both proposed lots. VARIANCES REQUESTED: Option “A” 1) The lot configuration proposes a residential panhandle lot, which requires a variance to Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended. Option “B” 1) Driveway Ordinance No. 634 stipulates a minimum centerline driveway spacing to an intersection along an arterial roadway is 150 feet. Approximately 50 feet is proposed between the new cul-de-sac street and an existing residential driveway centerline to the north. 2) Variance to Section 5.06 Sidewalks of the Subdivision Ordinance reducing the requirement that sidewalks be required on both sides of all public and private streets to no sidewalk requirement on either side of the proposed interior ROW for the subdivision. The applicant has also requested to not construct sidewalks along S. White Chapel Blvd. Case No. ZA15-134 ACTION NEEDED: 1) Consider Preliminary Plat Approval Request ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Plans and Support Information – Link to PowerPoint Presentation (D) SPIN Meeting Report (E) Plat Review Summary No. 2 - Revised, dated January 25, 2016 (F) Surrounding Property Owners Map (G) Surrounding Property Owners Responses for Commission and Council Members Only (H) Full Size Plans () STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough (817) 748-8072 Jerod Potts (817) 748-8195 Case No. ZA15-134 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNER: Steve Dumler APPLICANT: Four Peaks Development, LLC PROPERTY SITUATION: 720 S. White Chapel Blvd. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 2R, H. Granberry No. 581 Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 720 S. White Chapel Blvd., Southlake, Texas. LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential CURRENT ZONING: “RE” Single Family Residential Estate District HISTORY: This property was annexed into the City of Southlake in 1956 and given “AG” zoning. In 1992, a single lot Plat Showing for Lot 2, H. Granberry No 581 Addition was approved (City case ZA92-44). In 1993, an Amended Plat was approved for Lot 2R, H. Granberry No. 581 Addition. The purpose of the Amended Plat was to correct the owner’s dedication submitted separately for the plat showing for Lot 2, H. Granberry No. 581 Addition (City case ZA93-33, see ZA92-44A) In 1994, the property received a zoning change from “AG” Agricultural to “RE” Single Family Residential Estate (City case ZA94-73). According to TAD, the existing building of approximately 6,155 square feet was built in 1992. CITIZEN INPUT: A SPIN Town Hall Forum was held for this project on September 8, 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 is 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 / Case No. Attachment A ZA15-134 Page 1 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 Preliminary Plat / Plat Revision is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. 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 west side of S. White Chapel Blvd. as having a future sidewalk that is less than 8 feet wide. Staff has requested that the applicant provide sidewalks along S. White Chapel and the applicant is showing an 8’ sidewalk For Options on the Preliminary Plat / Plat Revision document for Option “B”. “A” and “B” the applicant has requested to not construct sidewalks along S. White Chapel Blvd., but rather to place the money in an escrow account for future construction. Option “B” will require a minimum 4’ sidewalk along the cul-de-sac street which the applicant proposes not to construct. TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: Area Road Network and Conditions The existing residence on 720 S. White Chapel has residential driveway access off of S. White Chapel Blvd. The applicant has included a note that both Proposed Lots 2R1 and 2R2 would have driveway access off the proposed Street A. Lot 2, Block 1 to the north (Bull Run Lakes Addition) shows an emergency access easement that appears to be used as a For option A, The Driveway Ordinance No. 634 residential driveway. stipulates a minimum centerline driveway spacing along roadway of 100 feet. There is no access easement shown and it appears that the drive on the panhandle lot would not meet this requirement. If this condition could For Option B, Per Driveway not be met, a variance would be required. Ordinance No. 634, the minimum distance to intersection along roadway for an arterial street to a residential driveway is 150 feet (measured from the centerline of the emergency access easement to the ROW of the proposed public street along S. White Chapel. The applicant has requested a variance to reduce this spacing requirement from 150’ to 50’. Traffic Impact AM-PM- Use Units Vtpd* AM-IN PM-IN OUT OUT Single-Family Detached 2 19 1 1 1 1 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 The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage & Utility Plan for option “B” which shows that Proposed Lot 2R1 to the rear has existing water service from an 8” water main at the back of the property. The submitted Plan shows a proposed 2” water service off an existing 12” water main off S. White Chapel Case No. Attachment A ZA15-134 Page 2 Blvd. to serve Proposed Lot 2R2 at the front. Sewer The Preliminary Drainage & Utility Plan for Option “B” shows that an existing 8” sewer line at the back of the property will serve Proposed Lot 2R1 to the rear. There is a 15’ utility easement between Lots 10 and 11, Block 3, Princeton Park Addition, served by an existing 6” line. The applicant is proposing a 6’ sanitary sewer to serve Proposed Lot 2R2 at the front. The applicant is also proposing a 15’ sanitary sewer (utility) easement along a portion of the Proposed Lot 2R1 side yard. Staff has included a comment in the Plat Review Summary No. 2 - Revised, dated January 25, 2016 to extend the U.E. shown on the south side of Proposed Lot 2R1 an additional 5’ onto proposed Lot 2R2, and to label this as a Utility Easement, rather than a sanitary sewer easement, like it is currently. TREE PRESERVATION: Option “B” was submitted with a Tree Survey and a Tree Preservation Plan. The existing coverage canopy coverage noted on Tree Preservation Plan is 18%. Tree Preservation Ordinance No. 585-D requires the applicant preserve a minimum of 70% of the existing tree cover, and the Plan shows the applicant will provide 70% preservation on site. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION: January 7, 2016; Approved (4-2) ZA15-134, subject to the staff report dated December 30, 2015 and Plat Review Summary No. 2 dated December 30, 2015, what is designated as Option “A” noting the applicant has agreed to put into escrow funds for the sidewalk along White Chapel Blvd. and granting the panhandle configuration as proposed. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Plat Review Summary No. 2 - Revised, dated January 25, 2016. N:\\Community Development\\MEMO\\2015 Cases\\134 - PP - Option B - Lots 2R2 & 2R2, H Granberry\\Staff Report\\ZA15-134 - CC - 2016-1-19.doc Case No. Attachment A ZA15-134 Page 3 Case No. Attachment B ZA15-134 Page 1 Plans and Support Information (Option “A”) Proposed Preliminary Plat Proposed Preliminary Plat (Option “A”) – Close Up Case No. Attachment C ZA15-134 Page 1 Plans and support information (Option “B”) Proposed Preliminary Plat Case No. Attachment C ZA15-134 Page 2 Proposed Preliminary Plat (Option “B”) – Close Up Requested Variances – (Option “B”) Case No. Attachment C ZA15-134 Page 3 Preliminary Drainage & Utility Plan Preliminary Drainage & Utility Plan – Close Up Case No. Attachment C ZA15-134 Page 4 Tree Preservation Plan Case No. Attachment C ZA15-134 Page 5 Tree Preservation Plan – Tree Canopy Summary Site Distance Exhibit Case No. Attachment C ZA15-134 Page 6 Offset Driveway Exhibit Case No. Attachment C ZA15-134 Page 7  This exhibit has been provided by the applicant to illustrate a possible road configuration that would not require a variance to Driveway Ordinance No. 634. The applicant has requested a variance to reduce the minimum driveway spacing along S. White Chapel from the proposed drive to an adjacent driveway from 150’ to 50’. Case No. Attachment C ZA15-134 Page 8 Existing Buildings Exhibit  The applicant has indicated that all existing structures on the site will be removed. Case No. Attachment C ZA15-134 Page 9 Case No. Attachment D ZA15-134 Page 1 Case No. Attachment D ZA15-134 Page 2 Case No. Attachment D ZA15-134 Page 3 Case No. Attachment D ZA15-134 Page 4 Case No. Attachment D ZA15-134 Page 5 Case No. Attachment D ZA15-134 Page 6 PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY ZA15-134Two - Revised1/25/16 Case No.: Review No.: Date of Review: Preliminary Plat - Lots 2R1 & 2R2 H. Granberry No. 581 Addition - 720 S. White Chapel Project Name: APPLICANT: Tom Matthews OWNER: Steve Dumler 2600 E. Southlake Blvd. #120-323 6708 Ethridge Ct. Southlake, TX, 76092 Colleyville, TX, 76034 Phone: (214) 676-3434 Phone: (817) 913-8040 Fax: (817) 481-4074 Email: tmatthews@fourpeaksdev.com Email: sdumler@gmail.com CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 12/21/15 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT JEROD POTTS AT (817) 748-8195. Option “A” Comments: Planning Review Jerod Potts Planner I Phone: (817) 748-8195 E-mail: jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us 1. Residential panhandle lots, also known as flag lots, shall not be permitted (As amended by Ord. No. 483-L). Proposed Lot 2R1 is a panhandle lot, and will require a variance to the Subdivision Ordinance, No 483, as amended. 2. Staff recommends processing this plat revision application concurrently with a preliminary plat application showing both options proposed. Please update the submitted plans, providing a The formal pedestrian access plan and a tree analysis/conservation plan for each option. submittal did not include updated plan documents (Preliminary Drainage Study, Tree Conservation Analysis, Tree Conservation Plan). Also note comments from the Public Works/Engineering Review and the Tree Conservation/Landscape Review for additional plans to be submitted. Also, please provide a Preliminary Plat sheet along with the plat revision sheet. 3. Per Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended, any new development in the City shall provide for the location and construction of sidewalks. Please show and label sidewalks consistent with the Southlake 2030 Master Thoroughfare Plan along S. White Chapel on either the preliminary plat or The Master Thoroughfare Plan indicates that at least a 4’ a separate pedestrian access plan. wide sidewalk (less than 8’) will be required along S. White Chapel. 4. Revise the title block as follows: a. Please add the number of lots to the title block 5. The following changes are needed with regard to the legal description: Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 1 a. There is a “\\” symbol in the first line of the second paragraph of the owner’s dedication. Please remove if this is an error. 6. The following changes are needed in the “owner’s” dedication and notary: a. Revise the owner’s dedication and notary to conform to the standard format as shown in Appendix 1 (Individuals). Appendix 1 is attached to this review. 7. Add a lienholder statement and signature block with notary to the plat. If there is/are no lienholder(s) then add a statement to this effect. The standard language for these statements is attached. 8. Confirm that any existing structures are adequately off-set per zoning district setback regulations from the proposed lot lines. Provide a separate survey or dimensioned exhibit showing the location of any For the ZA15-134 submittal an such structures or note that all such structures are to be removed. exhibit was provided indicating the location of existing structures, but this exhibit did not provide details about whether the structures were to stay or be removed. Please revise this sheet to provide this information. 9. The following changes are needed with regard to easements: a. Where adjacent property is unplatted or platted showing a 5' U.E., provide a 5' U.E. along the property line; if adjacent property is platted and shows no easement, provide Please extend the U.E. on the south a 10' U.E. along the interior of the property line. side of proposed Lot 2R1 an additional 5’ onto proposed Lot 2R2. Additionally, please label this as Utility Easement, rather than sanitary sewer easement. 10. The following changes are needed regarding the proposed lotting: a. Show the front building line for each proposed lot per RE zoning district for both lots on the plat (not less than 40 feet). 11. The following changes are needed regarding Right-of-Way dedications and interior street geometry: a. Show and dimension the R.O.W. dedication in accordance with the current Master Thoroughfare Plan. Dimensions must either be from center line of apparent existing R.O.W. or full width from across R.O.W. if opposite side has dedicated their half. The Master Thoroughfare Plan shows this portion of S. White Chapel Blvd. as an 88’ A2U Two of the bearings still show 42’ to centerline of S. White Chapel Blvd. Arterial. ROW. Please correct to show 44’. Public Works/Engineering Review Om Gharty Chhetri, P.E., CFM Civil Engineer Phone: (817) 748-8089 Fax: (817) 748-8077 E-mail: ochhetri@ci.southlake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. This review is preliminary. Additional requirements may be necessary with the review of civil construction plans. 2. Verify sight distances by means of an exhibit that complies with AASHTO guidelines. Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 2 * Sidewalk widths shall conform to the Southlake Pathways Plan. Sidewalks shall be required to be constructed with each dwelling. * Lot 2R1 driveway shall meet the driveway ordinance 634 (100 ft spacing). * 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: 1. A minimum of 15’ x 5’ easement for access cleanout and maintenance on lot 2R2 shall be provided. * Verify if easement of water/sanitary sewer/storm sewer crossing the site is in an easement. * 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 SANITARY SEWER COMMENTS: 1. Sanitary sewer service lines connecting to public sanitary sewer system shall be built to City standards. DRAINAGE COMMENTS: 1. Show building pad area and provide a grading plan with 2’ contours for Building permit. Existing contours may be obtained from the City of Southlake. 2. Any proposed driveway culvert must be sized by an engineer and submitted for approval to the City Engineer. * Differences between pre- and post- development runoff shall be captured in detention pond(s). Proposed detention ponds shall control the discharge of the 1, 10 and 100- year storm events. Detention may be required with any new proposed building construction. Describe how increased runoff from site is being addressed. * Storm sewers collecting runoff from public streets shall be RCP and constructed to City standards. The proposed flume will not be allowed. * Property drains into a Critical Drainage Structure require a fee to be paid prior to beginning construction. * Discharge of post development runoff must have no adverse impact on downstream properties and meet the provisions of Ordinance No. 605. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS: * Submit 22”x34” civil construction plans and a completed Construction Plan Checklist directly to the Public Works Administration Department for review. Please allow 15 business days for review. The plans shall conform to the most recent construction plan checklist, standard details and general notes which are located on the City’s website: http://www.cityofsouthlake.com/PublicWorks/engineeringdesign.asp * Submit with Civil Construction Plans a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan which outlines pre- construction, construction and post-construction erosion control measures. Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 3 * 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 Keith Martin Landscape Administrator Phone: (817) 748-8229 Fax: (817) 481-5713 E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS: 1. The submitted Tree Conservation Plan (Boundary/Tree Survey) shows only the trees, structures, ponds and other items as they currently exist. The submitted Tree Conservation Plan must show what development is proposed along with the as the other requirements as outlined in the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-D. Clearly delineate which existing trees are proposed to be removed and that the proposed development complies with the Existing Tree Cover Preservation Requirements. Information required for Tree Conservation Plan: i. Identification of Critical Environmental Features of the site: A. All individually protected trees B. Existing streams, drainage creeks, ponds, and other water bodies (if any) ii. Tree Survey or alternative to a tree survey iii. 2-foot contour map of the site iv. Protected trees within the tree preservation area including tree size and type v. Critical Root Zones of groups of trees vi. Critical Root Zones for individual trees required for site plans only vii. Boundaries of any tree preservation areas as identified in the ERP Map viii. Identification of areas of environmental constraints not suitable for development ix. Identification of areas of minimal environmental constraints that are suitable for development x. Areas of encroachment into Critical Environmental Features identified on the site xi. Clear delineation, for each protected tree, of whether the tree will be preserved after the proposed development is constructed, altered due to proposed improvements, or could potentially be saved based upon site specific conditions xii. Stream/Creek buffers, if any xiii. Detailed site plan of all proposed improvements. (All proposed improvements shall be required to be shown only at the site plan stage for all development. Preliminary plats shall, however, show building setbacks and general location of buildings and infrastructure.) xiv. Setbacks, building lines, and buffer yards xv. The names, addresses and telephone numbers of those persons or entities who own the property and those persons or entities filing the application xvi. Such additional information as the Administrative Official may reasonably require given the particular characteristics of the property. 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 Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 4 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. LANDSCAPE COMMENTS: 1. A 10’ – B type bufferyard is required to be provided adjacent to the east property line along S. White Chapel. The plant material required to be provided within the bufferyard is as follows. Canopy Tree – 10 Accent Trees – 15 Shrubs - 50 * 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: 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. Community Service/Parks Department Review Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 5 Peter Kao Construction Manager Phone: (817) 748-8607 Fax: (817) 748-8027 Email: pkao@ci.southlake.tx.us Will need to provide sidewalk along S. White Chapel. Will also need to pay $3000 in park fees. The following should be informational comments only ============= ==================== * Lot 2, Block 1 to the north (Bull Run Lakes Addition) shows an emergency access easement that appears to be used as a residential driveway. The Driveway Ordinance No. 634 stipulates a minimum centerline driveway spacing along roadway of 100 feet. There is no access easement shown and it appears that the drive on the panhandle lot would not meet this requirement. * Staff recommends any proposed landscape / bufferyard areas are included in areas designated as common area. * All plats filed must have an original signed and stamped Tax Certificate submitted with it from each taxing unit with jurisdiction of the real property, indicating that no delinquent taxes are owed and that taxes for the current year have been paid. After September 1st, a certificate showing that the taxes for that year are paid, but that the taxes for the upcoming year have yet to be calculated is required. (House Bills 1563 & 3101). A copy of this information may be obtained from the Tarrant County Tax Assessor/Collector’s Office located at 100 E. Weatherford St. in Ft. Worth (across from the old red courthouse). There is a service charge of $10 per account for this certificate. For more information contact the Assessor/Collector’s office at 817-212-6847. * Please submit a revised pdf "check print" prior to submitting the blackline mylar and paper copy with original signatures. blacklineblackline * Original signatures and seals will be required on one mylar and one paper copy prior to filing the plat. The mylar and paper copies will not be accepted if any erasures or original ink, other than signatures or seals, appear on the plat. * A Developers Agreement is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure. The Developer's Agreement for this addition should consider streets, drainage, park dedication requirements and fees, off-site sewer extensions, off-site drainage and utility easements and impact fees. * All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and the Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended. * If a public sanitary sewer is not available, a permit from the Tarrant County Health Department for an on-site sanitary sewer facility will be required and must comply with the regulations of Section 33.14 of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended. Lien Holder Acknowledgment STATE OF _______________________ COUNTY OF______________________ Whereas _________________________________acting by and through the undersigned, its duly authorized agent, is (are) the lien holder(s) of the property described hereon, does (do) hereby ratify all Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 6 dedications and provisions of this plat as shown. _________________________________________________________ STATE OF ______________________________ COUNTY OF ____________________________ BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared _________________________________________known to me to be the person(s) whose name(s) is(are) subscribed to the above and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that (he/she/they) executed the same for the purposes and consideration expressed and in the capacity therein stated and as the act and deed of said ___________________________________ GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE on this the day of , 20 . Seal Notary Public Commission expires: * Denotes Informational Comment Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 7 Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 8 Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 9 Option “B” Comments: Planning Review Jerod Potts Planner I Phone: (817) 748-8195 E-mail: jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us 1. Staff recommends processing this preliminary plat application concurrently with a plat revision and proposing both options proposed. Update supplementary plans for both options. 2. Per Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended, any new development in the City shall provide for the location and construction of sidewalks. Please show and label sidewalks consistent with the Southlake 2030 Master Thoroughfare Plan along S. White Chapel as well as the proposed cul-de- sac on either the preliminary plat or a separate pedestrian access plan. Sidewalks along the The proposed cul-de-sac should be at least 4 feet wide on each side of the proposed street. applicant has requested a variance to this requirement to not construct the sidewalk on either side of the proposed interior ROW of proposed Street A (cul-de-sac). 3. The preliminary plat includes a note stating that both proposed Lots (2R1 and 2R2) will have driveway access off of proposed Street A. However, another note on the plat states that all existing structures on site will remain with development. Indicate whether the existing private residential driveway currently serving Lot 2R will be kept or removed. 4. Lot 2, Block 1 to the north (Bull Run Lakes Addition) shows an emergency access easement that appears to be used as a residential driveway. Per Driveway Ordinance No. 634, the minimum distance to intersection along roadway for an arterial street to a residential driveway is 150 feet (measured from the centerline of the emergency access easement to the ROW of the proposed public street along S. White Chapel. Please show this distance on the preliminary plat. If the The distance is less than 150 feet this will require a variance to the Driveway Ordinance. applicant has requested a variance to reduce this spacing requirement from 150’ to 50’. 5. The following changes are needed with regard to the legal description: a. There is a “\\” sign in the first line of the property description paragraph that starts with the word “BEGINNING.” Please remove this if it is an error. 6. Revise the surveyor’s certification to conform to the standard format as shown in Appendix 5 Please add a line for the “Typed Name” of the surveyor. (attached). 7. The following changes are needed with regard to adjacent properties within 200' to include properties across any adjacent R.O.W.: a. Label all previously approved concept plans, site plans, preliminary or final plats 8. Confirm that any existing structures are adequately off-set per zoning district setback regulations from the proposed lot lines. Provide a separate survey or dimensioned exhibit showing the location of any The exhibit provided shows such structures or note that all such structures are to be removed. existing structures, but does not indicate whether structures are to stay or be removed. The preliminary plat includes a note stating that all existing structures on site will remain with development. Please clarify on the exhibit whether the existing driveway will stay or be removed. Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 10 9. The following changes are needed with regard to easements: a. Please extend the U.E. on the south side of proposed Lot 2R1 an additional 5’ onto proposed Lot 2R2. Additionally, please label this as Utility Easement, rather than sanitary sewer easement. 10. The following changes are needed regarding Right-of-Way dedications and interior street geometry: a. Show and dimension the R.O.W. dedication in accordance with the current Master Thoroughfare Plan. Dimensions must either be from center line of apparent existing R.O.W. or full width from across R.O.W. if opposite side has dedicated their half. The Master Thoroughfare Plan shows this portion of S. White Chapel Blvd. as an 88’ A2U Arterial. b. Dimension all property corners to the centerline of the apparent existing ROW. Correct the bearings on the plat that show a 42’ ROW from centerline to reflect 44’ from centerline. Public Works/Engineering Review Om Gharty Chhetri, P.E., CFM Civil Engineer Phone: (817) 748-8089 Fax: (817) 748-8077 E-mail: ochhetri@ci.southlake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. This review is preliminary. Additional requirements may be necessary with the review of civil construction plans. 2. Revise the typical section of the street to conform to new city standards detail (available to download from the website). Street radius shall meet AASHTO standards. The concrete strength is 3,600 psi * Sidewalk widths shall conform to the Southlake Pathways Plan. * 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: 1. A minimum of 15’ x 5’ easement for access cleanout and maintenance on lot 2R2 shall be provided. 2. The following note shall be added to the plat: Compliance with the provisions of the city’s Storm Drainage Policy does not relieve a person of the responsibility of complying with all other applicable laws, including, but not limited to, Section 11.086, Texas Water Code. * 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 SANITARY SEWER COMMENTS: Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 11 1. Sanitary sewer service lines connecting to public sanitary sewer system shall be built to City standards. DRAINAGE COMMENTS: 1. Show building pad area and provide a grading plan with 2’ contours. Existing contours may be obtained from the City of Southlake. 2. Any proposed driveway culvert must be sized by an engineer and submitted for approval to the City Engineer. * Storm sewers collecting runoff from public streets shall be RCP and constructed to City standards. The proposed flume will not be allowed. * Differences between pre- and post- development runoff shall be captured in detention pond(s). Proposed detention ponds shall control the discharge of the 1, 10 and 100- year storm events. Detention may be required with any new proposed building construction. Describe how increased runoff from site is being addressed. * Property drains into a Critical Drainage Structure require a fee to be paid prior to beginning construction. * Discharge of post development runoff must have no adverse impact on downstream properties and meet the provisions of Ordinance No. 605. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS: * Submit 22”x34” civil construction plans and a completed Construction Plan Checklist directly to the Public Works Administration Department for review. Please allow 15 business days for review. The plans shall conform to the most recent construction plan checklist, standard details and general notes which are located on the City’s website: http://www.cityofsouthlake.com/PublicWorks/engineeringdesign.asp * A geotechnical report will be required for all private and public roadways. The geotechnical report shall include pavement design parameters for subgrade stabilization. * Submit with Civil Construction Plans a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan which outlines pre- construction, construction and post-construction erosion control measures. * 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. * A Developer Agreement may be required for this development and may need to be approved by the City Council prior to any construction of public infrastructure. Construction plans for these improvements must be acceptable to Public Works prior to placing the Developer’s Agreement on the City Council agenda for consideration. * Any hazardous waste being discharged must be pretreated per Ordinance No. 836. *=Denotes informational comment. Tree Conservation/Landscape Review Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 12 Keith Martin Landscape Administrator Phone: (817) 748-8229 Fax: (817) 481-5713 E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS: 1. The submitted Tree Conservation Plan (Boundary/Tree Survey) shows only the trees, structures, ponds and other items as they currently exist. The submitted Tree Conservation Plan must show what development is proposed along with the as the other requirements as outlined in the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-D. Clearly delineate which existing trees are proposed to be removed and that the proposed development complies with the Existing Tree Cover Preservation Requirements. Information required for Tree Conservation Plan: xvii. Identification of Critical Environmental Features of the site: A. All individually protected trees B. Existing streams, drainage creeks, ponds, and other water bodies (if any) xviii. Tree Survey or alternative to a tree survey xix. 2-foot contour map of the site xx. Protected trees within the tree preservation area including tree size and type xxi. Critical Root Zones of groups of trees xxii. Critical Root Zones for individual trees required for site plans only xxiii. Boundaries of any tree preservation areas as identified in the ERP Map xxiv. Identification of areas of environmental constraints not suitable for development xxv. Identification of areas of minimal environmental constraints that are suitable for development xxvi. Areas of encroachment into Critical Environmental Features identified on the site xxvii. Clear delineation, for each protected tree, of whether the tree will be preserved after the proposed development is constructed, altered due to proposed improvements, or could potentially be saved based upon site specific conditions xxviii. Stream/Creek buffers, if any xxix. Detailed site plan of all proposed improvements. (All proposed improvements shall be required to be shown only at the site plan stage for all development. Preliminary plats shall, however, show building setbacks and general location of buildings and infrastructure.) xxx. Setbacks, building lines, and buffer yards xxxi. The names, addresses and telephone numbers of those persons or entities who own the property and those persons or entities filing the application xxxii. Such additional information as the Administrative Official may reasonably require given the particular characteristics of the property. 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 Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 13 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. LANDSCAPE COMMENTS: 1. A 10’ – B type bufferyard is required to be provided adjacent to the east property line along S. White Chapel. The plant material required to be provided within the bufferyard is as follows. Canopy Tree – 10 Accent Trees – 15 Shrubs - 50 * 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: All residences must be located within 1000 feet of a fire hydrant, measured as the hose would be laid, or a hydrant will be required to be added. Community Service/Parks Department Review Peter Kao Construction Manager Phone: (817) 748-8607 Fax: (817) 748-8027 Email: pkao@ci.southlake.tx.us Will need sidewalks on both sides of the cul-de-sac (if public or private) and along S. White Chapel. Will also need to pay $3000 in park fees. The following should be informational comments only ============= ==================== * Staff recommends any proposed landscape / bufferyard areas are included in areas designated as common area. * A Developers Agreement is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure. The Developer's Agreement for this addition should consider streets, drainage, park dedication requirements and fees, off-site sewer extensions, off-site drainage and utility easements and impact fees. Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 14 * All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and the Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended. Lien Holder Acknowledgment STATE OF _______________________ COUNTY OF______________________ Whereas _________________________________acting by and through the undersigned, its duly authorized agent, is (are) the lien holder(s) of the property described hereon, does (do) hereby ratify all dedications and provisions of this plat as shown. _________________________________________________________ STATE OF ______________________________ COUNTY OF ____________________________ BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared _________________________________________known to me to be the person(s) whose name(s) is(are) subscribed to the above and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that (he/she/they) executed the same for the purposes and consideration expressed and in the capacity therein stated and as the act and deed of said ___________________________________ GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE on this the day of , 20 . Seal Notary Public Commission expires: * Denotes Informational Comment Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 15 Case No. Attachment E ZA15-134 Page 16 Surrounding Property Owners SPO # Owner Zoning Physical Address Acreage Response AHMED, IMTIAZ SF2 1.20423642 1. F ARCILA, VICTOR RPUD 707 TIMBER LAKE CIR 0.33500000 2. NR ATTOE, GRAHAM RPUD 606 WINDING CREEK CT 0.38300000 3. NR BRUNER, BRYAN C SF20A 105 HARVARD DR 0.46400000 4. NR CANTERINO, JOHN SF20A 102 HARVARD DR 0.44900000 5. O CASTLE, ROBERT M SF20A 803 BOSTON DR 0.46900000 6. NR CLARK, HENRY M RPUD 602 WINDING CREEK CT 0.39400000 7. NR CLINE, GARY T SF20A 114 HARVARD DR 0.44500000 8. O DEAN, ROBERT RE 911 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 7.76906278 9. F DEAN, ROBERT AG 859 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 5.95593405 10. F DONOVAN, P J SF20A 110 HARVARD DR 0.44900000 11. O FOX, GEORGE SF1-A 711 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.46969027 12. NR FOX, GEORGE SF1-A 715 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 3.11789978 13. NR GARZA, DANIEL SF20A 104 HARVARD DR 0.45800000 14. F GEORGE, DAVID B RPUD 601 WINDING CREEK CT 0.43000000 15. O GHARESI, ABDOLREZA SF20A 107 HARVARD DR 0.45800000 16. NR GOVINDASWAMY, DEVANAND SF20A 112 HARVARD DR 0.45000000 17. O GRUBBS, GEORGE SF1-A 702 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 4.25600000 18. F HAMAKER, WALTER A RPUD 605 WINDING CREEK CT 0.30200000 19. NR HARVEY, DARRELL S SF20A 108 HARVARD DR 0.45500000 20. O HILL, MATTHEW T SF20A 116 HARVARD DR 0.63900000 21. F HUGHES, THOMAS WILLIAM SF20A 800 COLUMBIA DR 0.47100000 22. NR LEE, DAVID RPUD 705 TIMBER LAKE CIR 0.39700000 23. O MCDUFF, DANIEL R SF20A 802 BOSTON DR 0.52900000 24. NR MERRYMAN, VICKI S SPENCER RPUD 613 WINDING CREEK CT 0.33800000 25. O MLADENOVIC, RADE SF1-A 710 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 5.01100000 26. F 27. O MOLINARO, ERNEST E RPUD 608 WINDING CREEK CT 0.41600000 PARRA, MICHAEL B SF20A 100 HARVARD DR 0.46700000 28. NR Case No. Attachment F ZA15-134 Page 1 SPO # Owner Zoning Physical Address Acreage Response ROBERTS, MICHAEL D RPUD 611 WINDING CREEK CT 0.29000000 29. NR ROMANO, JAMES SF20A 801 BOSTON DR 0.53900000 30. NR RUBAC, RUSSELL SF20A 109 HARVARD DR 0.50400000 31. NR SABO, CHRISTY C RPUD 607 WINDING CREEK CT 0.30400000 32. O SMITH, BARRY RPUD 609 WINDING CREEK CT 0.29100000 33. U Steve Dumler 34. NR STOVER, RANDAL E SF20A 103 HARVARD DR 0.45300000 35. NR SULLIVAN, DOUGLAS E RPUD 603 WINDING CREEK CT 0.29200000 36. O Superintendent of Carroll ISD 37. NR Superintendent of Grapevine 38. NR Colleyville ISD Superintendent of Keller ISD 39. NR Superintendent of Northwest ISD 40. NR SYKES, J R RE 720 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 15.15400000 41. NR TIMBER LAKE RES ASSOC INC RPUD 701 TIMBER LAKE CIR 2.44028814 42. NR TIMBER LAKE RES ASSOC INC RPUD 601 TIMBER LAKE CIR 5.61625376 43. NR TRAYLOR, DOMINIQUE RPUD 703 TIMBER LAKE CIR 0.29300000 44. NR WAHBY, SAMIR C SF1-A 811 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.10919437 45. NR WARD, ROBERT E SF20A 801 COLUMBIA DR 0.57100000 46. O WILLIS, WALLACE E SF20A 106 HARVARD DR 0.45200000 47. F Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response Responses Received: In Favor: (7) Opposed To: (13) Undecided: (1) No Response: (26) Case No. Attachment F ZA15-134 Page 2 Surrounding Property Owner Responses Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 1 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 2 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 3 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 4 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 5 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 6 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 7 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 8 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 9 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 10 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 11 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 12 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 13 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 14 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 15 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 16 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 17 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 18 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 19 Email Correspondence Received Regarding ZA15-134 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 20 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 21 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 22 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 23 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 24 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 25 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 26 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 27 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 28 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 29 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 30 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 31 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 32 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 33 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 34 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 35 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 36 Letters Received Regarding ZA15-133 & ZA15-134 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 37 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 38 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 39 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 40 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 41 Public Comment Cards – January 7, 2016 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 42 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 43 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 44 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 45 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 46 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 47 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 48 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 49 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 50 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 51 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 52 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 53 Case No. Attachment G ZA15-134 Page 54