Item 9A/B (2) 9al¢
Email Responses/Other
Information Received
Regarding ZA15 - 133 &
ZA15 - 134 as of 5 : 00 PM
February 2, 2016
2/2/2018 Ci.aouihiake.bc.us Mail-Fwd:FW:ZA15.133 and ZA15-134
R., CITY OF
SO JTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@cisouthlake.bc.us>
Fwd: FW: ZA15-133 and ZA15-134 •
1 message •
•
Holly Blake<hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:10 PM
To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Forwarded message
From: Lori Payne<Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Date: Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 2:45 PM
Subject: FW: ZA15-133 and ZA15-134
To: Laura Hill <mayor-int@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Cc: Ken Baker<kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us>, Holly Blake<hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us>
From: Steve Dumler[mailto
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 1:34 PM
To: mayorandcitycouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us
Subject: ZA15-133 and ZA15-134
Dear Mayor and Council,
I have attached a copy of an email that that was sent to several Southiake residents that is very misleading and
provides misinformation to the recipients. A response to the misleading comments is also attached. It appears
that a neighboring resident of our property is driven to use any tactic to get her way and convince all of you that
her rights extend beyond ours.
Please review all of the documents so that you all will be better informed.
Sincerely,
Steve Dumler
720 S. White Chapel Blvd.
Southlake, Texas 76092
MtpsJ/mail.goople.00m/mail/u4Ytui=28k=c9Beb3c1b48wiew=prdaerdwinbaai111=152a3d2abrla0be128alm1=152a3d2ebOsObs12 1/2
2/2/2016 Ci.aoWiakebc.us Mail-Fwd FW:ZA15.133 and ZA15-134
Holly G Blake •
Administrative Secretary-Planning
Certified Permit Technician-Building Inspections
Planning and Zoning Commission Secretary
City of Southlake
817-748-8621
hblake@asouthiake.tx.us
. 5 attachments •0
Copy of rezoning•email.pdf
Responce to Rezoning email.pdf
110K
Letter to the neighbors.pdf
389K
in Letter to Earnest Molinaro.pdf
420K
email to Barry Smith.pdf
52K
hapsJhnallgoogle.cam/nail/u/W7ui=2dik=c4QabOclWdwiew=ptiasarc inboui6►=152s3d2abesObtr1nsim1=152a3d2sbesObe12 2/2
This email was sent yesterday to a number of Southlake residents
From: "Rezoning'
Date: February 1,2016 at 9:07:55 AM CST
To: "'Rezoning'
Subject: Need your Help-First Council Hearing is Tomorrow-Please send letters of Opposition before
Feb 2nd at 3pm
Hi Everyone,
Thank you for taking a few minutes to get up to date. We may only have to write letters ONE more time
after this request.
Tomorrow, February 2"at 630pm is the first council hearing for 720 White Chapel.
We would love your support to restrict the plat division.
Let's give Our Council our opinions that we want to Preserve White Chapel as it is...The grand estates
should NOT be changed.
We want to attract folks who want to maintain and enjoy the elegance of White Chapel.....it was stated
at the meetings that the new owner is selling off a portion to offset the cost of the purchase and the
new home building so, he bought something out of his price range ?
Ways to Help with your support:
- Send a letter today to council-email address: mavorandcitvcouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us—
subject: ZA15-133,ZA15-134
- Come tomorrow and fill out a green card with your name and position. You do not have to stay
for the meeting. They will read your comments into the minutes without you being there. The
green card can be accessed at 6pm...l think. Maybe earlier....
Interesting Details Below:
The new owner has painted the planning and zoning into a position where they feel they have to choose
one of the options the new owner has provided to them. Only TWO on the planning and zoning folks
saw through the game and voted AGAINST the requests.
The choices given at the meeting were NOT what was outlined within the summary [by Southlake P&Z]
of the applications sent your way. The new owner gave three options to the committee:
- Plat revision as flag lot with private drive
- Plat revision with public street...that WE pay to maintain without public sidewalks as required
- Plat revision with public street...that WE pay to maintain without public sidewalks as required
the variance of too close to Grubbs driveway
BUT we pointed out the 4th Choice
- Say NO to all the request. Each of the choices listed by the new owner violates the ordinance of
"NO FLAG LOTS".
The No Flag Lots ordinance was established to preserve and protect areas from folks who want to
change our city...especially for Financial gains.
•
Let's be honest....there may come a time when Southlake may have to lower the level of accomplished
individuals who would want to make their HOME on White Chapel....and maybe at that time we would
ALL agree to give up the ELEGANT and PRESTIGOUS Million Dollar Mile...But I don't think we are at that
time.
The fact is,the New Owner DOES NOT have the PRIDE and LOVE for what White Chapel brings to
Southlake.
If we look at Actions Only....As proof....he actually lives off of White Chapel in Colleyville. He is in the
first neighborhood past the John McCain roundabout in the gated neighborhood on the East side
S00000,as he drives White Chapel every day.........the fact that he had someone make calls to the
council members to make sure he could sub-divide prior to purchasing the property.....
May lead you to ask yourself are there any thoughts of preservation or NOT
What a mess Here we are attracting folks who have other plans for our paradise....
Past& Future
Mr. Dean was not allowed to do EXACTLY what this is requesting just a few months ago...
There are TWO other properties for sale....what will stop them from doing this....? ?'
--Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--
4 ,
I i
February 2, 2016
To: The Mayor and City Council
Hand delivered
The paragraphs in red below are from an anonymous person and were sent yesterday to a number of
Southlake residents. Our clarifications regarding each section are listed below.
Response to"rezoning":
We want to attract folks who want to maintain and enjoy the elegance of White Chapel.....it was
stated at the meetings that the new owner is selling off a portion to offset the cost of the purchase
and the new home building so, he bought something out of his price range ?
The property was purchased because of the elegance of White Chapel. Patty is a retired teacher and
taught young teens English for 20 years. She helped me support our family water consulting business
for over 30 years. As of last Wednesday I have retired. We have been blessed with very successful lives.
The notion that we must sell off 5 acres to be able to afford to build our retirement home is insulting to
say the least.
Patty and I were born and raised in a Kansas farming community. I have spent many hours on a tractor
plowing the fields and planting crops. One of our dreams was to be in a position to have a small acreage
and grow costal grass like I did in my younger years. The Ag exemption on this property and the size of
this property was just perfect. We have grown used to being in the city but our farming heritage still
exists. The property is the best of both worlds. Our desire to sell the front 5 acres is to allow for a home
that is consistent with the neighboring homes facing White Chapel for all to see. We can live peacefully
and privately in the back 10 acres and grow our costal grass and nurture the property. The sale of the
front 5 acres would maintain the existing look while the funds from the sale would be reinvested in the
property. That would seem to us that this is a win win scenario for us all. Patty and I have enough
money to live very comfortably for the rest of our lives. The notion that we need to sell part of the
property is again insulting.
Ways to Help with your support:
- Send a letter today to council-email address: mavorandcitvcouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us—
subject:ZA15-133,ZA15-134
- Come tomorrow and fill out a green card with your name and position. You do not have to stay
for the meeting. They will read your comments into the minutes without you being there. The
green card can be accessed at 6pm...I think. Maybe earlier....
This is nothing more that soliciting a no vote based upon incorrect and misleading information. The
manner in which Patty and I are represented in the email would give me pause in wanting a neighbor
like us. /might support an "against"request based on this information just to be safe since I do not have
to stay for the meeting. "Just vote against and go home to the family, I will take care of the rest and
protect you,"says the anonymous author.
k
The new owner has painted the planning and zoning into a position where they feel they have to
choose one of the options the new owner has provided to them. Only TWO on the planning and
zoning folks saw through the game and voted AGAINST the requests.
State law and the existing zoning allow for the subdivision of a property in 5 acre minimums. The law
further says that the lot in the back requires access. There is no trickery here,we either need a
driveway or a street for access. The fire code requires a driveway of at least 10 feet in width with an
approved turn around for a fire truck. A city street requires a cul-de-sac for the same reasons. Both
must be able to support an 86,000 pound truck. The drive fits the look of the neighboring homes and
the street does not. We don't want to have the citizens pay for the maintenance for a road that will
only serve to be a driveway. The two members who weren't in support indicated that they voted
against because they knew that the mayor and council were against flag lots and they felt that the
council should make the decision for the variance. The majority of the members recognized that this
was a unique property and ruled in favor of Option A using a driveway which is consistent with the
neighbors to the north with lots of this depth on White Chapel.
The No Flag Lots ordinance was established to preserve and protect areas from folks who want to
change our city...especially for financial gains.
We can understand the reason for the ordinance when it is used on smaller tracts of land. A property
that is nearly 1,300 feet deep and 500 feet wide is a bit different. A drive to the back lot in this case still
leaves over 400 feet of frontage and still retains a large square lot that is 480 feet deep. A variance in
this case is the best solution and will not be a distraction to any of the surrounding properties.
Let's be honest....there may come a time when Southlake may have to lower the level of
accomplished individuals who would want to make their HOME on White Chapel....and maybe at that
time we would ALL agree to give up the ELEGANT and PRESTIGOUS Million Dollar Mile...But I don't
think we are at that time.
Let me tell you a little bit about the"lower level of accomplished individuals"that Patty and I represent.
Patty and I paid cash for the property and plan to pay for and own our home.
Over the 30 years that we operated our water consulting business we were able to employ over 90
people. Our employees were our family and they were treated as such. We paid them well above
market, provided upper end vehicles to those who needed them,and let them control their own hours.
For most of the years we didn't even have titles on our cards because we were all a team. Everyone was
important. Patty and I paid for all of our employees' health insurance and paid for their families as well.
We even had a fund that paid for the deductible when needed. We have been very fortunate and we
owe a great deal of our success to our family.
We owe a great deal to our customers as well. We worked very hard to be good partners with each of
them. In return for doing a good job we had very long term relationships with most of our customers.
That's tough in a very competitive environment.
Patty and I purchased all 600 seats in the Cine Capri in the Harkins Theater a few times for our
employees,our customers,and their families to see blockbuster movies like Star Wars, Harry Potter,and
Star Trek. We all had a great time and ate lots of popcorn.
{
' i
r
f
It was interesting that the very accomplished individuals that live to the north of our property were the
only ones to reach out to Patty and me to welcome us to Southlake. None of the homeowners to the
south or west reached out to us. We made it a point to say hello and introduce ourselves to everyone in
the south and the west that we saw in their back yards. There are some very nice people that are our
neighbors and we think that they are embarrassed by the actions of a few.
The fact is,the New Owner DOES NOT have the PRIDE and LOVE for what White Chapel brings to
Southlake.
If we look at Actions Only....As proof....he actually lives off of White Chapel in Colleyville. He is in the
first neighborhood past the John McCain roundabout in the gated neighborhood on the East side
S00000,as he drives White Chapel every day the fact that he had someone make calls to the
council members to make sure he could sub-divide prior to purchasing the property
May lead you to ask yourself are there any thoughts of preservation or NOT
What a mess Here we are attracting folks who have other plans for our paradise....
Patty and I certainly are very proud to own one of the best estate lots in the City of Southlake. We are
very proud of the result of all of our blood,sweat, and tears over the past 30 years. Our reward is
having the ability to own and live on such a desirable property. We just want to be private and would
prefer to allow another accomplished individual to show off their achievement to those who travel
down White Chapel.
We do live in a gated community in Colleyville. We own a very nice large home on a half-acre lot.We
have a 15 foot separation between our two existing neighbors. It is truly a very beautiful home but at
our age we want to have a very nice single story home that contains only the rooms that we actually use
in our existing home. Our regular trips to the property are to pick up the mail and pick up the trash that
people throw onto the property.
Yes,we did ask our realtor last April to ask some of the council members if they saw any issue with
subdividing into 5 acre and 10 acre lots. According to Troy George,our realtor, he said that every
council member's response indicated that there should be no issues. We did understand that there was
a process and that the positive comments were not binding. We felt that it would be good to purchase
the property.
Our plans do preserve the beauty and open look that exists now. The property will be getting a
renovation and be updated to two new estate homes witch we would estimate to be valued at over
$6,000,000.
We trust that the city council will not place any value in an email sent from an anonymous source by
someone that doesn't want to be identified. These comments not only create controversy with
misleading remarks but also represents someone screaming fire in a crowded room when there is no
fire.
I have attached copies of the correspondence that we have sent to our neighbors so you can see how
we have tried to communicate with our neighbors. I know that there have been other communications
4'
that have been equally misleading but we have still tried to reach out to those who choose to not be
deceived. We have never implied that we are better than any of our neighbors and have offered to help
those that have had some drainage issues. Our offers have never been followed up with a response.
There have been a lot of comments made that make it sound like Patty and I are bad people that are not
worthy of living in Southlake. Unfortunately,we have not been able to personally meet all of you on the
city council. Our concern is that the misleading reckless comments about us will have an indirect
negative influence. We are trying very hard to stay on the high road. So we ask you all too please take a
minute to review the attached documents so you are better informed about our request for variance.
Sincerely,
Steve and Patty Dumler
{
ygF
�ggg
From: Steve Dumler
To: Steve Dumler
Subject: home
Date: Friday,January 22,2016 3:00:44 PM
Barry,
Patty and I want to let you know our plan for west 10 acre plat. We want
to build a single story home just to the west of and close to the tree line
by the existing swimming pool. It would be where the big hackberry tree
is located. The house should be about 400' from the east side of your
lot. We are planning to remove the existing out buildings. The architect
has designed two garages that would be attached to the home. One
would be larger so that we can store things like our boat, mowing
equipment, and an extra car or two. Both garages and the house would
be under the same roof in order to enhance the curb appearance.
The 5 acres in the front would be a square shaped lot with the home
located around 350' to 400' from White Chapel Blvd. In order to preserve
the open view and the pond the structure would have to be in the NW
quadrant of the lot. I am not in favor of a very large structure.
The existing home will be removed. The view from White Chapel Blvd.
would be much like it is now. You would see one home from the street
and likely would not see the home on the west lot. For those of you on
the west side would see one home and would likely not see the home in
the front. Those on the south side would see two homes but both would
about 200' to 250' from the property line. The homes would be new and
the out buildings would be gone. Basically the property would be getting
a face lift and the open view from White Chapel Blvd. would remain the
same for all to enjoy.
Sincerely,
Steve and Patty Dumler
January 13,2016
Earnest Molinaro
608 Winding Creek Court
Southlake,Texas 76092
Earnest,
I am writing you because you have been vocal in opposition of the replatting our property. While I do
respect your right to voice your opinion I would appreciate your consideration of the bigger picture. You
cannot see our property from your home so I'm not sure why you have such a vocal opposition. The 21
home owners that actually border our property are the ones that are directly effected by any changes
that occur on my property.
It would seem that you may only be the spokesman for one or more of my immediate neighbors in an
attempt to voice their opinion without angering me. If this is the case you do not have to do this. I
would ask them to not hide behind you or anyone. I do value and respect everyone's opinion. I have
asked several neighbors to help put together a meeting for direct conversations. To date there have
been no takers.
The continuing noise around the replatting of my property could easily get out of hand and this is the
last thing that I want to happen. There are about four individuals that are the driving force of the
opposition. Of the 21 homeowners that directly border my property 10 of them are in support. A good
part of the opposition started from misinformation from someone saying that I was going to turn the
property into a subdivision. This is not true. My wife and I only want to build our retirement home and
we don't want any close neighbors either.
I am respectively asking you to reconsider and stop opposing our replatting request since it really has no
effect on your property. When you drive down White Chapel you will still only see one house just to the
front of the existing home. To be clear the existing home will be removed. We are planning on building
a single story home just to the west of the tree line by the existing swimming pool. Those on the west
side of the property will only see our home. I don't think that it will be visible from White Chapel. In the
end this is a good thing with essentially no impact. This change to the property will make it very difficult
for anyone to ever change in the future.
Again,I respectfully ask you not to add any more fuel to the fire and consider supporting or not
opposing our request. I have included a letter that I sent to my immediate neighbors. Please feel free
to contact me at any time.
Sincerely,
Steve Dumler
6708 Ethridge Court
Texas
76034
(817)913-8040-Cell
January 13,2016
To my neighbors,
I wanted to let you know that I have a conflict that will not allow me to attend the City Council meeting
that was scheduled for January 19'". It is my understanding that our application request for replatting
has been rescheduled for the February 2"d Council meeting. The actual agenda should be available on
the Friday before the Council meeting.
Given the sensitivity surrounding our request for replatting and the fact the last notice arrived on
Christmas Eve, I wanted to reach out to all of you and let you know about the change in the schedule. I
hope that you all understand that the last notice on Christmas Eve was totally out of my control.
I want to thank those of you that have supported the request and those of you that changed your
position and are now supporting our request for replatting. Of the 21 bordering homes the tally is now
about evenly divided. I hope that the rest of you that oppose or are undecided will reconsider your
position and accept our request that the City Council will review on February 2"d.
I want to be good a neighbor and I assure you that I have planned on keeping the existing fence so that
everyone driving on White Chapel Blvd.will continue to see the openness and experience the beauty of
the ranch like property. Our request for a driveway on the northern boundary will be the best option to
keep the existing look and feel of our neighborhood. To be respectful of the Grubbs and Mladenovic
families please consider their privacy and security because they will be eliminated with a city street.
I was not aware of the drainage issue some of you reported until the topic came up at the planning and
zoning meeting. I would like to meet with any of you that are having water runoff issues so we can try
to find a solution and get the problem(s)under control. The rainy season will be on us before long so it
would be a good idea to try to develop a plan sooner rather than later.
We are neighbors and I want you to feel free to • I would appreciate having your
contact information as well. My email address i and my cell phone is(817)913-
8040.
Sincerely,
Steve Dumler
6708 Ethridge Court
Colleyville,Texas 76034
2/2/2016 Ci.sadhlaks.bc.us Mail-Fwd:FW:White Chapel:ZA15-133,ZA15-134
GITY OF
SOUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Fwd: FW: White Chapel: ZA15-133, ZA15-134
1 message •
Holly Blake<hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us> Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:33 PM
To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Forwarded message
From: "Lori Payne" <Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Date: Feb 2, 2016 3:32 PM
Subject: FW: White Chapel: ZA15-133, ZA15-134
To: "Laura Hill" <mayor-int@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Cc: "Ken Baker" <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "Holly Blake" <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us>
—Original Message—
From: 'Bill Guess'via Mayor and City Council
[mailto:mayorandcitycouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us]
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 3:29 PM
To: mayorandcitycouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us
Subject: White Chapel: ZA15-133, ZA15-134
Dear Mayor Hill and City Council Members,
I'm writing to let you know I am opposed to destroying the beautiful look
of White Chapel and allowing multiple homes to be built on what are now
single-family dwelling lots. When we moved here 7 years ago, I vividly
remember our realtor driving us down White Chapel and admiring the estate
homes and large lots there. We bought our home very close to that street,
in Eagle Bend of the Timarron subdivision. I can't believe someone would
buy a lot there with the intention of not living there, and modifying it
by adding another home.
Please speak up for the majority of those in Southlake who say ENOUGH IS
ENOUGH! Do not change these grand estates.
Best regards,
Leslie Guess
411 Bryn Meadows
Southlake
httpsJ/mail.google.camhmailh Tui=2Sik=c96ebOc1is43view=ptdsearc inboocd 152i3a792891996b&sim1=152a3a79269e999b 1/1
2/1/2016 Ci.southlake.tx.us Mail-FW:ZA15-133,ZA15-134
UN Gran Of
SOUTHKE Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us>
FW: ZA15-133, ZA15-134
1 message
Lori Payne <Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx.us> Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 2:37 PM
To: Laura Hill <mayor-int@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Cc: Ken Baker<kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us>, Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us>
—Original Message—
From: Irene Binyon [mailto
Sent: Monday, February 0 ,
To: mayorandcitycouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us
Subject: ZA15-133, ZA15-134
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I would like White Chapel to remain as is.
Thank you,
Irene Binyon
https://mai I.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&i k=cc737a625d&view=pt&search=inbox&th=1529e8e15097eb2c&sim1=1529e8e15097eb2c 1/1
2/1/2016 Ci.southlake.tx.us Mail-FW:ZA15-133,ZA15-134 No-to rezoning
crry Oi
"(�A Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us>
FW: ZA15-133, ZA15-134 No- to rezoning
1 message
Lori Payne <Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx.us> Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 1:06 PM
To: Laura Hill <mayor-int@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Cc: Ken Baker<kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us>, Holly Blake <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us>
From: Marlene Canterino
Sent: Monday, February 01, 201
To: mayorandcitycouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us
Subject: ZA15-133, ZA15-134 No- to rezoning
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
This email is regarding my position on the land revisions at 720 White Chapel.
This new owner completely understood what the zoning of the land was prior to purchase.
He can absolutely tear down the existing home and rebuild a new one to his liking.
It is not okay to change the integrity of White Chapel and Southlake for his financial gain.
Allowing this change could snowball into many other lots on White Chapel and others in Southlake, looking to
increase their density.
I live off of White Chapel, and am asking you to vote NO, to rezoning or allowing flag lots.
Please preserve White Chapel as it is, leaving it an elegant road with grand homes for all to enjoy.
Please save areas like this in Southlake, continue to help give Southlake its name and unique style.
Southlake is comparable to no other, don't let that change.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Marlene Canterino
haps://mai I.google.com/mail/W0/?ui=2&ik=cc737a625d&view=pt&search=inbox&th=1529e3a433e8f269&sim1=1529e3a433e8f269 1/2
2/1/2016 Ci.southlake.tx.us Mail-FW:ZA15-133,ZA15-134 No-to rezoning
{
Marlene Canterino
102 Harvard Dr
Southlake, Texas 76092
407-766-8221
R
1
S {
A j
fi
1
s
1
https://mai l.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&i k=cc737a625d&view=pt&search=inbox&th=1529e3a433e8f269&sim I=1529e3a433e8f269 212
2/2/2016 Ci.soutiake bcus Mail-Fwd:FW:Opposition b rezoning ZA15-134 and ZA15-133
GrOF
•
STY OUTHLAKE Jerod Potts <jpotts@cl.southlake.tx.us>:
•
Fwd: FW: Opposition to rezoning ZA15-134 and ZA15-133 •
1 message
Holly Blake<hblake@ci.rfouthlake.tx.us> Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:10 PM
TO: Jerod Potts <jpotts@Ci.southlake.tx.us>
Forwarded message
From: "Lori Payne" <Ipayne@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Date: Feb 2, 2016 4:09 PM
Subject: FW: Opposition to rezoning ZA15-134 and ZA15-133
To: "Laura Hill" <mayor-int@ci.southlake.tx.us>
Cc: "Ken Baker' <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us>, "Holly Blake" <hblake@ci.southlake.tx.us>
From: Patrick Donovan [malito
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 4:08 PM
To: mayorandcitycouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us
Subject: Opposition to rezoning ZA15-134 and ZA15-133
Dear Mayor and city council,
Coming up in the council meeting tonight is a vote to rezone the estate property on 720 White Chapel road, to
which my home is immediately adjacent to. I am in opposition to both plans presented (ZA15-134 and ZA-
133)as it will lead to a"flag" property on this land and further detract from the signature mile in Southiake.
Currently, there are two other properties up for sale on White Chapel and if rezoning is allowed on this property,
then what potentially can happen with these other properties for sale?Also, the case(s)submitted tonight is no
different in circumstance than last month when council rejected the proposed rezoning for the Dean property
across the street from the subject property.
Please do not allow the development of a"flag" lot on this property. The current owner recently purchased this
property knowing full well the previous owner(Sykes)had also applied for rezoning, resulting in the previous
council rejecting the application. He should use the land as purchased and designated as "Single Family
Residential Estate District zoning".
Thank-you for your consideration.
Pat Donovan
Tel: (817 455-2488
email:
110 Harvard Drive, Southlake, TX
hrtps•I/mail.google.comhnail/WSW?ul=2dik=c96abOc1b4Swiew=ptdaearch=inbox&lh=1520409480b65661a0iml=152a409480b66861 111