Loading...
Item 7A CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Department of Planning & Development Services STAFF REPORT March 30, 2016 CASE NO: CP16-001 PROJECT: Land Use Plan Amendment to create Rural Estate Residential Future Land Use Designation Category EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In an effort to retain certain rural estate qualities still in evidence but disappearing within the City of Southlake, and to enhance the attractiveness of the City as a whole, an amendment to the Future Land Use Plan for certain areas of Southlake will be considered. This land use amendment would create a new Future Land Use category known as "Rural Estate Residential" which would recommend a 5 acre minimum lot size on affected parcels of land. DETAILS: The Southlake 2030 Land Use Plan is Southlake's vision for future development that serves as a guide for land use decisions and as a foundation for Southlake's zoning and subdivision regulations. The plan is a policy document that allocates the general location, concentration, and intensity of future development within the City by land use categories. Proposed is a Rural Estate Residential Future Land Use designation which recommends density at no more than 5 acres on affected properties. The proposed implementation areas are shown as Attachment B. Existing zoning on these lots would remain as it is currently. Any future rezoning contemplated on these properties would be evaluated based upon conformance to the Future Land Use designation, or be preceded by a change in the Future Land Use designation to a designation appropriate to the requested zoning. Purpose: To identify, provide for, and preserve the rural aesthetics and natural resource characteristics of very low density single-family residential development. Definition: The Rural Estate category is for detached single-family residential development at a net density of one or fewer dwelling units per 5 acres. The Rural Estate category encourages the openness and rural character of the City. The institution of the Rural Estate Residential Land Use would provide an additional level of scrutiny to these properties and a greater degree of discretion to City Council in granting or denying rezone requests to greater densities. ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Support Information - Link to Power Point Presentation Case No. C P 16-001 (D) SPIN meeting report— January 26, 2016 (E) Corridor Planning Committee meeting Report— December 2, 2015 (F) Affected Property Owners (G) Affected Property Owners Responses STAFF CONTACT: David Jones (817) 748-8072 Ken Baker (817) 748-8067 Case No. C P 16-001 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNERS: See attachment E APPLICANT: City of Southlake PROPERTY LOCATION: See attachment B EXISTING LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential or Medium Density Residential (depending on property) PROPOSED LAND USE CATEGORY: Rural Estate Residential (5 acre minimum lot size) CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural District; "RE" Residential Estate District; "SF-1A", "SF- 1 B", "SF-30", "SF-20A", or "SF-20B" Single Family Residential District (depending on property) PROPOSED ZONING: No change in zoning is proposed for any property HISTORY: Staff was directed to research a new land use category to aid in the preservation of remaining large agricultural and residential lots. All residentially zoned lots with 3 acres or more of land and a Low or Medium-Density Residential Future Land Use designation on the Future Land Use map were analyzed. Those which retained rural or estate characteristics and which were situated within close proximity to other such parcels were delineated into study areas. 5 such study areas are proposed for consideration under the proposed Rural Estate Residential Future Land Use. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTION: February 4, 2016 the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to deny adoption of Ordinance 1138 (CP16-001). The Commission voted 4-1 to deny adoption of Ordinance 1139, which would create an RE-7 (minimum 7 acre) zoning district. N: Community Development�MEMO�Comp Plan Amendments�2016�CP16-001�StaffReport�CP16-001-Rural Estate Residential5ac.docx Case No. Attachment B CP16-001 Pagel Areas Under Consideration for Rural Estate Residential Land Use Description Areas of Consideration Rural Estate W Bob Jones Road Residential O N Peytonville-W Dove-Shady Oaks Exhibit W Highland-Shady Oaks m S White Chapel Blvd t C Sunshine Lane U Southlake Parcels fl City Limit Boundary I J 1� DISCLAIMER This data has been compiled for The City of Southlake and is for I - informational purposes.Various official and unafficial sources were used to gather this data and it does -1 not represent an on-the-ground survey.Any property boundaries El shown are representations only. m Every effort was made to ensure the Q. accuracy of this data,but it was not _ - prepared for and may not be suitable for legal,engineering,or surveying purposes.As such,no guarantee is given or implied as to the accuracy of this data. January 2015 Planning and Development Services i fit= Geographic Information Systems N W e - s ©CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Case No. Attachment B CP16-001 Page 1 USOUTHLAKE SPIN MEETING REPORT Case Number: SPIN16-03 Project Name: CP16-001 Southlake 2030 Rural Real Estate Residential Land Use Category SPIN Neighborhood: Citywide Meeting Date: January 26, 2016 Meeting Location: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX City Council Chambers Total Attendance: 28 Host: Bobbie Heller, CEC Applicant(s) Presenting: Ken Baker, Senior Director of Planning and Development Services City Staff Present: Patty Moos, Planner I City Staff Contact: David Jones, Principal Planner, email: diones ci.southlake.tx.us phone: 817-748- 8070 Attached to the end of this report are the Blackboard Connect Delivery Results for the January 26, 2016 SPIN Town Hall Forum Presentation begin: 6:15 pm Presentation ended: 6:45 pm Town Hall Forums can be viewed in their entirety by visiting http://www.citVofsouthlake.com and clicking on "Learn More" under Video On Demand; forums are listed under SPIN by meeting date. FORUM SUMMARY: Property Situation: Citywide Development Details: Note: SPIN16-02 and SPIN16-03 were presented as one presentation at the SPIN meeting Staff was directed to research a new land use category for the City's Future Land Use Plan. The Land Use Plan is a policy document only for City Council. It is a framework for commercial and residential development, a fundamental plan for all city services. Zoning is a regulatory document. City Council uses the Future Land Use map for rezoning and as a tool with zoning and lot configuration, tree preservation, etc. in the framework. The Land Use category is for Rural Estate Residential. Staff is analyzing 3-5 acre, 5-7 and 7+ acre properties in Southlake. There are 5 general areas for the Land Use Plan amendment: W Bob Jones Road (north); Dove/N. Peytonville Ave/Shady Oaks (west/northwest); S. White Chapel Road (south); Sunshine Lane (east); and Highland Ave/Shady Oaks (central). Case No. Attachment D CP16-001 Page 1 The Rural Estate Land Use Category: Purpose: To identify, provide for, and preserve the rural aesthetics and natural resource characteristics of very low density single-family residential development. Definition: The Rural Estate category is for detached single-family residential development at a net density of one or fewer dwelling units per 5 acres. The Rural Estate category encourages the openness and rural character of the City. RE Single Family-7 Zoning District: • Newly Created Zoning Classification • Same regulations as the existing RE —Single family Residential Estate zoning district except for acreage minimum. Planning and Zoning Commission date for ordinance: February 4, 2016 at 6:30 pm (Public Hearing). City Council dates for the ordinance: February 16, 2016, first reading (not a public hearing, but can speak at meeting) at 5:30 pm and March 1, 2016, 2nd reading (Public Hearing) at 5:30 pm. Background • Staff was directed to research a new land use category to and zoning district to aid in the preservation of remaining large QSOUTHLAKE 6 agricultural and residential lots. f'%ural Estate Land Use Category/Residential Estate—2 Zoning District Land Use Plan Categories • Zoning Districts. -Req.imory.e�imxa wec -.. "� Land Use vs Zoning Si-Analysis ' SOljFHLARE r' Staff examined areas with multiple lots sized 3 - _ Staff examined areas with multiple lots sized 3 acres or more and possessing AG or residential �•`�•` ` acres or more and possessing AG or residential ""'•`� `. zoning and low or medium density Future Land •y_" zoning and low or medium density Future Land Use in the Comp Plan ,1. Use in the Comp Plan - • From these criteria,five areas of study were From these criteria,five areas of study were identified: —'I—f li identified: —'1- -W Bob Jones Road(north); —w Bob Jones Road(north); —Dove/N.Peytonville Ave/Shady Oaks(west/northwest); —Dove/N.Peytonville Ave/Shady Oaks(west/northwest); —S White Chapel Road(south); —5 white Chapel Road(south); —Sunshine Lane(east); jeffile,w - —Sunshinetane(east); "'•'�" —Highland Ave/Shady Oaks(central) —Highland Ave/Shady Oaks(centra l l CRITERIA •' SELECTING STUDY •' SELECTING STUDY Case No. Attachment D CP16-001 Page 2 ?t' _ Rural Estate `wO""` -,t ftasitlantial Exhlbit �'�• .soiirtawxtC FIVE AREAS . . 16 tracts/lots rangingfrom 15.2to 3 acres WHITE CHAPEL STUDY AREA RANGE OF LOT SIZES -Four are7 acres orgreater t 'i p. 2 -Seven are between 5-6.9 acres I _ q -Fivearebetween 3-4.9acres I r • Average sizeis6.1 acres ` '''{ t✓t • Al l sites are developed assingle-famiNms or hoe combined with developed lots � • Sparselytreed,more prototypical rural ■ '„y M•� { landscape �y.Al • Bordered pnmari ly by developed area of - MediumDensityFutureLandUse 5 - -��_.� ���� --�•_ ,.1. 4iL- 15 tracts/lots ranging from 36.2 to 4.4 acres + W.BOB JONES STUDYAREA RANGE OF LOT SIZES :4 -Seven a re 7 acres or greater -Four arebetween 5-6.9 acres -Four are between 3-4.9 acres Averastudy real is 10.1 acres,the largest of the four - study areas • Many sites are undeveloped orminimally developed withsome substantial forest and topographic variation ' Adjacent to Grapevine lake,Army Corps and public park land — W.BOB JONES:uSTUDY AREA 15 tracts/lon ranging from 106 to 3 acres Fourare7a cresorBrea ter ve • 6" •Y _ Fiarebe=n 5-6.9c Six are between 3 4 9 acres �'• Average size is 5.9 acres. 'r•' ��4. i�;.ttrt . v Allstesbutonecurrently developed assingle- G familyhomes. Adjacent to 114 corridor and an undeveloped area of Office Commercial Future land Use Md DOVE I PEYTONVILLE if SHADY OAKS W.DOVE/ DOVE/PEYTONVILLE/ SHADY OAKS STUDY AREA 12 tracts/lots rang ngfrom 12.5to 3.1 acres y " s RANGE OF LOT SIZES -One is7acresorgreater �� '. s y, I ` -Fivearebetween 5-6.9acres .H_�� �' -Sixarebetween 3-4.9acres `\ Average size is4.95acres I Allstes are developed assingle-familyhomeso combined with developed lotsEntirely •r9 Future Land Use by Low-Density Residential •g(. 1 f; Future Land Use `.I I- ■ Case No. Attachment D CP16-001 Page 3 SUNSHINE STUDY AREA RANGE OF LOT SIZES Aa�y}�* ktt f • NSI k ty, HIGHLAND /SHADY OAKS • 20tracts/lotsrangingfrom8.6to3acresHIGHLAND/SHADY OAKS STUDY AREA RANGE OF LOT -one is]acresorgreater \`` SIZES -Ninearebetween 5-6.9acres -Ten are between 3 • Average size is4.84acres,es,the the smm allest of the I� five studyareas I i • Al l sites are developed as single-family homes or — — combine e ped lots I I I I I I • Entirelysurr.0urrounded b by Low-Density Residential Future Land Use,except for some Mediumw; r Density Residential tothe south and east r.—r..ra.sw ^-•^`^•-+•••^ HIGHLAND STUDYAREA Proposed RE Single Family-7 Zoning Rural Estate LU Category District PurposeTo identify.provide for.and preserve the rural aesthetics and natural resource characteristics of very • NewlyCreated Zoning Classification low density single-family residential development g Definition: The Rural Estate category is for detached single-family residential development at a net density of • Same regulations as the existing RE— one or fewer dwelling units per 5 acres.The Rural Single family Residential Estate zoning Estate category encourages the openness and rural character of the City. - - - district except for acreage minimum. PZ Commission/City Council Dates February 4th-PZ Commission—Public Hearing—6.30 PM February 16th—City Council- 1 st reading—530 PM March 1 of—City Council—2nd reading—Public Hearing—530 PM QUESTIONS / CONCERNS: 1. If this category is put in place with underlying a 7 acre property, how will this affect a property that will put a PUD on the property, not existing? Response: They can always ask City Council for the zoning with the land use and zoning change. 2. Concern by Bill Lafavers and John Klebs and both are opposed. White Chapel is zoned RE, but concerned with properties on Pine Street (approx. 9 acres) and what will happen with this property. 3. Question: What criteria were used and why are there other properties Milner along SH114 and Rucker (near S. Carroll) not included? Case No. Attachment D CP16-001 Page 4 Response: The Milner property will most likely become mixed use in the future and Rucker property was not included, but can be considered by City Council. 4. Are land values considered with this process for a 5 acre minimum? Response: City Council will probably consider this. 5. Comment: Three residents on Sunshine Lane may be opposed. 6. Concerned on how this will affect property values for 8 acre property. Property value is not comparable with acre vs. square foot prices. 7. Concerned about property values. 8. How will this affect property values under 3 acres and 2 acres? Response: Should not affect property values on this property or affect smaller lots. 9. Concerned about government control of 9 acre property on N. White Chapel. 10. Comment: Opposed to this on E. Highland Avenue. 11. Comment: For this property- controls development surrounding their property. 12. Comment: Opposed to restriction of lots regarding economics and maybe need a reduction in density and reduction in city taxes. 13. Comment: Opposed (Sunshine Lane) to economic concerns with property values. Southlake is no longer rural. 14. Comment: Southlake builder opposed as land owners' values of land, should be able to recoup- 5 acre will reduce value to owners. 15. Comment: Country atmosphere around Sunshine Lane is no longer rural. This should have been done 10 years ago. Sh114 and office development has made the rural atmosphere long gone. Less than 15% of land in Southlake is developable. 16. Will new designation for rural estate affect land use? Response: Definition is: The Rural Estate category is for detached single-family residential development at a net density of one or fewer dwelling units per 5 acres. The Rural Estate category encourages the openness and rural character of the City. 17. Comment: Restrictions on land owner should be considered for formula for size of house on a specific lot size. Now it is bigger homes forced onto smaller lots and needs to change to smaller homes on bigger lots. Response: This can be discussed with City Council. Case No. Attachment D CP16-001 Page 5 SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council. Case No. Attachment D CP16-001 Page 6 Southlake 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Meeting Report Meeting 1 — December 2, 2015 ITEM #5 DISCUSSION — NEW LAND USE CATEGORY AND ZONING DISTRICT: • Staff presented this item to the Committee, and the following represents questions for staff after the presentation: Q: Staff recommendation is the land use category would have a maximum density of 1 house per 5 acres and RE 2 with 1 house per 7 acres? A: Correct Q: How logistically would we move forward? A: If we went through a land use amendment change we would have to go through the process. It would have to be adopted by an ordinance Q: Are there incentives available (voluntarily or otherwise) to motivate a behavior for people to sign up for this? Tax benefit? A: Opportunity to put land into a perpetual easement which may result in a tax benefit Q: Talking about incentive to buy into zoning category? If you are the landowner, why do this? A: What the land use designation would do, is, for those lots not currently zoned, within this 5 acre or whatever land use category the council or PZ would have basis to not approve that zoning. If a development came in on 30 acres and has the 5 acre zoning, you would be limiting them to basically 6 new lots. Land use primarily impacts those properties that are not zoned currently Q: What percentage of these study areas is zoned AG? A: It's probably close to half • Comments by Committee: o There are tracts in here that have existing RE and would prevent further subdivision o Intention is not to encourage subdivision of land, this accomplishes that in a straightforward way o We are a democracy, this is passionate for some people maybe not for others - we get this out there for discussion. If we are going to talk about this let everyone chime in and see where the process goes o P&Z was going to be the first ones hit with this o Gives control we otherwise do not have. Goal to be stewards of existing property to help Southlake develop in the best way possible o What is going to motivate people to do this? To have your land rezoned... o Not talking about rezone, talking about land use, overlay. Doesn't encourage you to rezone but does say you won't ask for 15 houses on 15 acres Case No. Attachment E CP16-001 Page 1 o As a community we are open for debate. Property owners would need to come talk to us o Concerned the landowners won't want to do this • Direction for Staff from Committee: o Talk about how many dwelling units could be created o Provide more data on dwelling units o Look to see whether it would be good to include lots on Highland • Comments by Staff: o The one issue about going higher (7 acre) you will get the top end but a number of people coming forward with land use amendment requests to plat their property o May conduct SPIN or special meeting to give property owners idea o Will present to Council and ask how to proceed • Comments by Public: o None NEW LAND USE CATEGORY/ZONING DISTRICT RESEARCH SHOWN TO COMMITTEE: Residential Lot Parcels zoned AG or Residential (SF1-A,SF1-B,SF2,RE,MH, Size Anal SSS SF20A,SF20B or SF30)with a Y Low or Medium Density Land Use 3 acres in size or above Legend I A4 7+acre parcels 5-6.9 acre parcels oE 3-4.9 acre parcels Parcels City Limit Bcundary ' f CITY OF fi uacurtnex Q SOUTHLAKE Case No. Attachment E CP16-001 Page 2 North Peytonville Study Area 5 IISBIL1 +, BRIrrANvc Myth_ivy -31 4 .3 ,y' f 4.02 056 .596 Study Area for AG or Residential Parcels low or medium density Land Use designation jj OUTHLAKE Case No. Attachment E CP16-001 Page 3 Sunshine Study Area 9 i 1 rJ 2.931 3.272 ac R i .r ac .67 ac� - n 'F �°� -� = 1.916 ac .... - �� ^ �' G•d. ac 2.iQ2 ac f r dia � b T�'��' •- ^� "r ri: - 1.522 ac '�� .%" b✓. � `ti. ac 4 i - 1 StudyAreafor 1 or • low or medium density Land Use designation + UTHLAKE • . Attachment E CP16-001 Page South White Chapel Study Area 4' "N R •..� I HaPEI. .ems r R'� CRE5TDR J C AL .may � ;p• �1 Z .II. 711171 � +e J i k DISCLAIMER Study Area for AG or Residential Parcels Al mbee.„,,,een emo,bem with a low-density Land Use designation Derase�mee.. mr I.I.na�norn�w.wre..w.�g uses m get„el mb IMortneuon. [Iry of ®SOUTHLAKE t„.eCcumcr of tllm dem. P-1, S.ry M1ew.w�,ne g�.rerRee b given. Gsoglap„Ic InlennYJon Sr.tems Case No. Attachment E CP16-001 Page 5 Bob Jones Study Area 11 %zpx 2.048 4.842 ac ac ac i7i 9-1 I 3.095 ac 2.429 ac 17.705 10.608 k 1•: y s�:• 6. { :1•acac ac ` 11 '4.996 5,332 l f t 11.728 ac 10-449 ac �a t36.232 ac 9.70Q 1 �+ act; 6.478 ac 4.639 ac 1-• i T ��� � I V • { lY�t {� t i� � `� 1-r k I •J j �J FI EL ❑R ti . Ok tl= L r .. • - 1 1 KIN_G,TjZApCMJiD NSO-MER Study Area for AG or Residential Parcels ThI,da havbw ..pb kr 3 acres in size or greater ilia tky M SaufFlake-Vaka�a .meal dad.aaenelai se.maa we.a wit a ow-density an Use designation „ E.naadk w�Make�..pfl N.v.mk..zb,k ®SOUTHLAKE ma a��ar.q er u�a data. PI...mg—D—I „owever,no puamnree Is elven. Gea9x P.IC IMOmIa W n SyBlemi Case No. Attachment E CP16-001 Page 6 Affected Property Owners SPO # Owner Zoning Address Acreage Response 1 94 ONE LLC SF1-A 465, 479 W HIGHLAND ST 4.99 NR 2 940 WEST DOVE RD LLC SF1-A 940 W DOVE RD 4.86 NR 3 AHMED, IMTIAZ SF2 841 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.33 NR 4 ANDERSON,WILFRED E SF1-A 555 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 3.04 NR 5 ARMISH LLC RE 1300 SUNSHINE LN 5.47 O 6 AVARY,JOHN SF1-A 1075 W DOVE RD 3.98 NR 7. BAJAJ, GURPREET SF1-A 410 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 2.49 O BARKER, DOUGLAS J SF1-A 1280, 1284, 1288 3.97 8. SUNSHINE LN O 9 BEDFORD, MARK D SF1-A 1331 SHADY OAKS DR 4.95 O 10. BEHRENDS, LINDA AG 1749 E HIGHLAND ST 12.50 O 4700 N WHITE CHAPEL 11. BOWER, KEVIN R SF1-A BLVD 4.84 NR 12 CAMPBELL,JOSE AG 335 W HIGHLAND ST 0.73 NR 13. COMBE, DANIEL SF1-A 339 W HIGHLAND ST 1.01 NR 14. COSTELLO, MICHAEL SF1-A 1862 N PEYTONVILLE AVE 10.60 NR 15. DAHLSON, RICHARD SF1-A 1250 SHADY OAKS DR 6.04 NR 16. DALLAND PROPERTIES LLC AG 700 W BOB JONES RD 6.81 NR 17 DAVIS, GORDON WAYNE SF2 1900 SHADY OAKS DR 9.99 NR 18 DEAN, ROBERT RE 911 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 7.77 NR 19 DEAN, ROBERT AG 859 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 5.96 NR 20 DERR, ROBERT W SF1-A 1500 SUNSHINE LN 5.97 O 21 DOWNING,JAMIE S SF1-A 685 W DOVE RD 2.11 NR Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Pagel DUERST, BRADLEY SF1-A 1350, 1360, 1370 8.08 O 22. SUNSHINE LN 23 DUGGINS,JAMES L SF1-A 865 W DOVE RD 6.61 NR 24 ELLIOTT, BRYAN SF1-A 935 W DOVE RD 7.27 NR 25 EMMER, DANIEL P SF1-A 345 W BOB JONES RD 4.64 NR 26 EVANS, LARRY R SF1-A 975 W DOVE RD 4.86 F EVANS, MARZELL F TR M.F. AG 4078 N WHITE CHAPEL 5.34 NR 27. EVANS TRUST BLVD 28 FLEPS,JOHN J AG 601, 603 W HIGHLAND ST 2.81 NR 4440 N WHITE CHAPEL 29 FLYNT,JASON & LINDSAY SF1-A BLVD 2.05 NR 715, 711 S WHITE CHAPEL 30. FOX, GEORGE SF1-A 4.59 NR BLVD 31. FRIEDLAND, LEWIS D RE 2001 N PEYTONVILLE AVE 6.80 NR 32 GAINES, ROBERT K SF1-A 1265 SHADY OAKS DR 2.18 NR 33. GIOLMA, F EDWIN 1311 SUNSHINE LN 2.10 O 34. GRABOWSKI, LESZEK SF1-A 1285 SHADY OAKS DR 5.41 NR 35. GRAY, ROBERT J SF2 1275 SHADY OAKS DR 4.30 NR 36. GRUBBS, GEORGE SF1-A 702 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 4.26 NR 37 HARDY, LINDA S AG 1100 SHADY OAKS DR 1.13 NR HARGETT, GARY RE 1111, 1125 S WHITE 14.22 NR 38. CHAPEL BLVD 39 HILL, KENNETH W RE 1360 SHADY OAKS DR 5.29 NR 40. HUBEL, PETER H SF1-A 1459 SUNSHINE LN 3.06 NR 41. J O SR & B M PASSMORE LIV TR SF1-A 1391 SHADY OAKS DR 4.77 NR 42 JAMAL, SYED SF2 2000 SHADY OAKS DR 4.96 NR 43. JAMESON, MARK SF1-A 1780 SUNSHINE LN 2.93 NR Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 2 44. JANDON LTD AG 974 W DOVE RD 5.02 NR 45. JOHNSON, DREW SF1-A 921 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 6.00 NR 4680 N WHITE CHAPEL 46. JONES,ANDREW & KENLYN SF1-A BLVD 3.02 NR 47 JOYNER,J DAVID SF1-A 1559 SUNSHINE LN 1.49 NR 48 KAY, ROBERT SF1-A 1450, 1460 SUNSHINE LN 6.23 O 49 KEENE,J RANDALL SF1-A 525 W HIGHLAND ST 5.09 NR 50. KEENER, DAVID SF1-A 1950 N PEYTONVILLE AVE 4.02 NR 51. KEMINS, ROBERT A AG 605 W HIGHLAND ST 0.52 NR 611 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 52 KUELBS,JOHN A RE 14.93 NR AND 430,460 PINE DR 520, 530, 580, 620, 640 S LAFAVERS,WILLIAM E AG 12.72 53. WHITE CHAPEL BLVD LAMON, CHRISTOPHER R & AG 4720, 4730, 4740 N WHITE 8.40 NR 54. JANE CHAPEL BLVD 275, 300 W BOB JONES RD 55. LEGACY LIMITED, LLC AG AND 4060 N WHITE 18.28 NR CHAPEL BLVD 56. LINDAMOOD,JAKE W SF1-A 1821 SUNSHINE LN 5.62 NR 57 LORENZ, RONALD W SF1-A 1297 SUNSHINE LN 2.05 NR 4000 N WHITE CHAPEL MAHONE, MATTHEW J & SF1-A BLVD AND 335 W BOB 9.14 NR 58. LEIGH ANNE JONES RD 59 MALIK,AMJAD SF1-A 700 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 7.10 NR 60. MARSHALL, L E SF1-A 1300 SHADY OAKS DR 2.52 NR 61. MARTILLO,JOHN SF1-A 1779 SUNSHINE LN 2.93 NR 62 MARYLAND, RUSSELL RPUD 510 W HIGHLAND ST 1.71 NR Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 3 63. MCLEMORE, MARK SF1-A 533 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 3.93 NR 64. MILANI,JOHN C &CHRISTEN AG 500 W BOB JONES RD 9.71 NR 65. MILLER, ROBERT SF1-A 440 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 2.00 NR 66. MLADENOVIC, RADE SF1-A 710 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 5.01 NR 67 NEUSE, STEPHEN H SF1-A 1679 SUNSHINE LN 2.02 NR 68 NOETZEL, STEVEN J SF1-A 2145 N PEYTONVILLE AVE 3.31 NR 69 OREN, STEPHEN J SF2 2050 SHADY OAKS DR 4.49 O 70 PAXTON,JOHN F SF1-A 1055 W DOVE RD 5.06 NR 71 RALEY,TIMOTHY AG 440, 498 W HIGHLAND ST 3.04 NR 72 REISING, MAX AG 400 W BOB JONES RD 2.54 NR 73 RENDA, FRANK SF1-A 1469 SUNSHINE LN 3.67 NR 74 RICHARDSON, SALLYE ANN SF1-A 1295 SHADY OAKS DR 4.85 NR 75 RIDE WITH PRIDE INC SF30 400, 480 W HIGHLAND ST 1.94 NR AND 324 MONTROSE LN ROBINSON, RALPH &WILMA AG 4650, 4686 N WHITE 5.53 76. CHAPEL BLVD U 77 RUNYAN, BILLY W AG 979 SHADY OAKS DR 0.99 O 78 RUSSELL,ANN AG 1049 SHADY OAKS DR 1.55 NR SANCHEZ, CHRISTOPHER SF1-A 1287, 1251 SUNSHINE LN 4.65 NR 79. MICHAEL 80 SEEBECK, ROBERT OR DOREEN SF1-g 314, 488,494 W 3.34 NR HIGHLAND ST 81 SELLS, RALPH B SF1-A 825 W DOVE RD 6.58 NR 82 SHAFT, MAZUFER SF1-A 1861 SUNSHINE LN 3.27 NR SHOWTIME FARMS INC AG 4500 N WHITE CHAPEL 10.01 NR 83. BLVD 84 SMITHSON, SHELLEY R SF1-A 1439 SUNSHINE LN 3.08 NR Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 4 330-360 W BOB JONES RD 85 SPECTRA LAND LP SF1-A AND 4640 N WHITE 42.40 NR CHAPEL BLVD 86 SPICKLER, DENNIS G SF1-A 1950 SHADY OAKS DR 8.17 O 87 SPIEGELMAN, PAUL SF1-A 545 W HIGHLAND ST 4.39 NR 88 STEPHENS, LESTER AG 500 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.90 NR 89 STROMBERG, WILLIAM AG 1029 SHADY OAKS DR 1.49 NR 90 SULLIVAN, PAUL SF1-A 1900 N PEYTONVILLE AVE 2.06 F 91 SYKES,J R RE 720 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 15.15 NR 92 TOLBERT,ANTHONY SF1-A 475 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 2.58 NR WACKER NEUSON 93. CORPORATION SF1-A 1255 SHADY OAKS DR 2.33 NR 94. WAH BY, SAM IR C SF1-A 811 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.11 NR 1340, 1342 SHADY OAKS 95 DR WALBURG,JAMES B SF1-A 2.25 NR 96 WALDRUM, GARRY SF1-A 1310 SHADY OAKS DR 1.37 NR 97 WASSERMAN JAY RPUD 520 W HIGHLAND ST 1.39 F 98 WAYLAND, CHERYL RENEE SF1-A 701 W DOVE RD 3.05 NR 99 WHITE,THOMAS W AG 600 W BOB JONES RD 36.23 F 1852, 1842 N PEYTONVILLE 100. WIRTALA, DAVID A AG AVE 2.81 U 101. WISNIEWSKI,JAMES C SF1-A 1449 SUNSHINE LN 3.09 NR 102. WOOD, PAUL D SF1-A 400 S WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 2.42 NR 345, 351,459 W 103. YETMAN, BERT M AG 6.68 NR HIGHLAND ST SUPERINTENDENT OF CARROL 104. ISD NR Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 5 SUPERINTENDENT OF 105. NORTHWEST ISD NR SUPERINTENDENT OF 106. NR GRAPEVINE-COLLEYVILLE ISD SUPERINTENDENT OF KELLER 107. ISD NR Responses: F: In Favor 0: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response Notices Sent: One Hundred Seven (107) Responses Received: Nineteen (19) In Favor: Four(4) Opposed:Thirteen (13) Undecided:Two (2) Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 6 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 I ARMISH LLC 1221 SAINT EMILION CT SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMSIVIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about i (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: &LwiA 6bt»s e TLI L VV1>A u IM V�WQ2 1iACtSLot9t1 ��K'29t 1M �� 1V4� L c 1EElPt �alVe b. lkx k X-' CihSZFN c pp 11 p - �- �1vs1� �e Com• `1Gt+� ,�( +^��" ay�cza�� >M Signature: ,,,,," Date: 1-a5-ate\b Additional Signature: Date: Printed Name(s): 6y�m s�j `�1��v k-N q Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 7 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-00i BAJAJ,G€JRPREET 4443 LANDS END CT SOUTHLAKE,TX 76032 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor cfopposed ta' undedded about circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land use category Space for comments regarding your position: ,G S�� `�• ' 'ty� vr�t u 1 / z - o� w. ' 1 r be- Signature: J Date: Additional Signature: _ Date: Printed Narne(s): must be,pmAeRY"HOS)whose name(5 are prin#ed at top. ise co tact the Planning pepartn,en D e formper properly. Phone Number (optional): ~ 7�* Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 8 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 BARKER, DOUGLAS J 1280 SUNSHINE LN SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s)of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of G;;iiD undecided about (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: Signature: a , J Date: Additional Signature: Date: I Printed Name(s): �oma, Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)a e printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning DepartrZnf. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 9 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 BEDFORD, MARK D 1331 SHADY OAKS DR SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HANDIDELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(=outhlake noted above, are hereby in favor ofundecided about JI I The proposed amendment one) omprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category � Space for comments regarding g g your position: i i i Signature: Date: Additional Signature: Date: Printed Name(s): r Must be property owner(s)whos name(s)are printed at top. Ot erwise contact the Pi nning Department. One form per property.- Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 10 My name is Linda Behrends and I live at 1749 East Highland. I attended your SPIN meeting last night concerning the 2030 Rural Estate Residential Land Use Category. I am shocked and appalled at the proposal and the thought that the city would enact something that so negatively impacts the rural landowners to maintain an aesthetic appearance and ambiance for the community. It shows no respect for the heritages of many of these land owners and the work we have done to maintain our land and contribute to our communities. My parents,Harold and Shirley Knight,moved to this location in 1956 and raised my brothers and I here,starting before Southlake was Southlake. My father was an aerospace engineer for Vought Corp.;he served on the school board and the city council, and retired and began his second career with Southlake Realty. He worked with the school district in finding property for the now,Carroll Middle School. My husband,who served Carroll ISD for 34 years took over maintain this property for my dad when he could no longer care for it. Ron has worked so hard to manicure this property and create a beautiful place. It has become a home place,a gathering place,and a place of ministry. But the way you state your proposal makes me feel that the work done by Ron and our family,as well the efforts by all these rural owners,is for the benefit of residents and visitors who want to be afforded a"view". It takes hard work,time,and money to maintain these areas and it has been our choice. But to now tell these residents that they are to carry the burden to maintain an ambiance for the rest of the community by negatively dictating how we sell our property is unfair and self-serving. You want us to base the sale of our land on five-acre increments when less than a quarter mile from us you can sell by the square foot. This proposal will drive the land value for these landowners down. It is infuriating to hear comments by other residents that approve of this proposal because they don't want one acre or%acre lots etc.,because they want to have open space as their view. But their desire comes at our expense. I agree with my husband,if the residents are looking for aesthetically pleasing open spaces,let the city purchase it and turn it into parks. Don't punish the rural landowners who have been maintaining these on our own for years. Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 11 My name is Ron Behrends and I'm a retired teacher. I taught for thirty three years in the Carroll School District as the Band Director of the Dragon Band. In 1978,the Carroll Dragon Band participated in the Class A classification and when I retired in 2011,1 had seen the town and the school grow through every classification from Class A through 5A which they now call 6A. I also led the choir and orchestra during this time at Whites Chapel United Methodist Church. At the current time,I am working part time as the Recreational Director for Whites Chapel UMC as well as keeping the property our property at 1749 E. Highland in good shape and looking after my parents in Fredericksburg,Texas. In 1979,1 married Linda Knight,daughter of Harold and Shirley Knight. Linda and I raised two girls Kimberly and Kay who also went through the Carroll School District and attended some of the same schools as their mom did. Linda grew up on 1749 E.Highland. Her parents bought the 40 acre property in 1956 and excluding a small time that they spent in Michigan,lived there until their passing within the past two years. During my time as a teacher in the district,I watched sub division after sub division being developed and I met and taught all the new kids to the area year after year. It was called growth which is what propelled us into a larger classification each year. As a young band director,I didn't need to look for another job that was bigger as I was getting more experience as we were getting bigger and stronger with more challenges each year. I noticed that when the band reached the largest classification,that we were no longer that little school or little town anymore. The roads were packed,the town square was booming,but the saying was don't worry about getting much bigger as Southlake is land locked and can only get so big unlike Frisco,Mckinney etc... In 1997,Linda's dad,Harold Knight,leased 25 of their 38 acres to Carroll ISD which later became Carroll Middle School. At time of purchase,the remaining 12.6 acres still included the Homestead,shop,barns,and coastal fields which Linda and I helped them to maintain. Carroll ISD was mentioned as having the first right of refusal should we sell the remaining property. In 2011,1 decided to retire and help Linda with her parents and the property as her parent's wishes were to stay in their home,but were getting to that point where their health and well being was deteriorating by the week. Harold as a retired Vet,retired Engineer,and retired Southlake Realtor,had all of his ducks in a row with the will and his desires as things should be played out on their passing. In the will he states how a certain portion of the 12.6 would go to Linda and then the remaining section would be divided up between her and her two brothers,which have moved onto other states. Now we have learned that the City Council wants to tell the people in Southlake that have been here the longest,how to sell or manage their property and saying that they want to keep the rural look as much as possible and decrease the population per acre. Wow! How incredibly wrong can this be as this is way too much burden to pass on a very few long time residents and thinking that these few are going to reverse something that started over 30 years ago called growth. These few watch all of these people build up around them and then now they want to tell the long time residents how they can sell their property. ARE YOU FOR REAL??? These few properties will not make even a little difference on an already urban city,but the economic impact on these long time Southlake residents will be devastating.There are those that want to see the rural spots left in the city. Well have them try to keep up this kind of property which is almost impossible to make any profit from year to year. If the City wants to keep it more open then show us the money and buy it for what it is really worth and build a park. Don't handcuff us and lower the value just so the other people of Southlake can watch us struggle to make it pretty for them. This is so wrong and You Know It. Make it Rightl I I Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 12 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 DERR, ROBERT W 1600 SUNSHINE LN SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of =opposedto undecided about (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regardin your position: A1164�- nkia l (kh 7-P Signature: Date: Additional Signature: ` Date: Printed Name(s): � �� Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 13 From:Brad Duerst[mai Sent:Thursday, February 04,20161:01 PM To: mayomndcityoouncil@ci.southlake.tx.us Subject: Re: 2030 Rural Btate Residential land use category Brad Duerst, 1360 Sunshine Ln, Southlake—8 Acres 25 year Southlake resident. Where I once cut, baled, and sold hay off of 55 acres surrounding me has now been replaced with 4 subdivisions of rooftops,school buses, trash trucks,cement mixers and construction, etc.which are now the everyday sounds instead of our beautiful, serene green hay fields. I am in opposition to the new Proposed Rural Residential Estate Land Use category—5 acre minimum. Your new zone proposal is about 10-15 years too late. Now your proposal asks me to provide the very subdivisions that now surround me,and have destroyed my"country feel"with the luxury of looking at my hayfields at my expense. I am upset at the lack of vision the city has had. Far too late....years ago we asked for 2-5 acre lot minimums but were given 1 acres minimum lot sizes.Now we have the new subdivision Toll Brothers Southlake Glens,9.37 acres for 39 homes—less than 1 mile from my residence—this equates to approx%acre lots.Also,the new subdivision Carillon—68 acres Y4+ lot sizes—approx 1 mile from my residence. Why did you allow this W you want the"country feel"? My recommendation would be to employ a mechanism to force larger homes on to larger properties, not restrict the property and destroy our property values. Example: The new home going across the street from us on Sunshine Ln. is an astounding 37,500+ sq.ft. built on less then 4 acres. The home will be magnificent but still looks like it's on a zero lot line because of its size. It should have been on a much larger property. I live less then 1 mile from Southlake Town Center where they sell land by the square foot,and yet you want me to sell in 5+ acre sections to provide the"country feel" while destroying my property values. I own 8 acres(5+ 3),what reduced price is my additional 3 acres worth at that point which 3 acres will be land locked? I will be forced to sell all 8 acres and more than likely at a reduced price. did attend the Spin meeting on January 26 and plan to attend the Planning and Zoning hearing on February4. I will not be able to attend the first City Council meeting on February16(my neighbor Bob Kay will be representing me)but rest assured we will be there for the 2nd meeting. Our neighbors Doug and Saundra Barker at 1280 Sunshine Ln.are out of town and will not be able to attend any meetings, but asked me to express their opposition to this new category also. Thank you for your consideration in rejection this new land use proposal. Brad Duerst Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 14 On Fri,Jan 29, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Brad Duerst wrote: Mayor Hill and Southlake City Council Members, My name is Susan Duerst, 1360 Sunshine Ln, Southlake, and have been a long time Southlake resident for almost 25 years. My letter is in reference to the consideration of the City Council for a creation of a new 2030 Rural Estate Residential land use category, which would personally affect my husband and myself. I did attend the Spin meeting on January 26, 2016. After hearing the information I strongly oppose this new land use category. My first question is who made this recommendation in the first place? Were there any studies completed on how this will impact us homeowners financially?It seems too little too late. We have lived through 25 years of from our true beautiful, peaceful rural setting to now a sea of homes, subdivisions(i.e. 4 in our neighborhood, The Reserve,Wimbledon,Villa Del Sol, Saint Emilion), traffic, ongoing construction, congestion, etc. Now when the city has accomplished what they want,the long time Southlake residents will have to suffer the consequences. Yes, I too want to keep the rural setting so why was this not implemented back 10-15 years ago and have all the subdivisions at a minimum of 5 acre lots which would have truly given us the country feel that you want now and alleviated a lot of the traffic, construction, congestion, etc. Now we have the 68 acre Carillion,which by the way would have been perfect for this, it sells%acre lots, seems not the vision you are asking for now! And what about the Rucker estate, again,still the rural feel, is this going to fall under this 5 acre minimum? From listening to the speakers at the Spin meeting, it appears that most of the residential areas that you have targeted are those residents who have lived in Southlake 20, 30, 40 50, 60+years. We are the residents that have put up with losing our rural neighborhood that we moved to Southlake for and now we,the long time, loyal citizens are being asked to give up the most. By this I mean depriving of us of the financial opportunities that we could benefit from in the future, besides the city dictating what we can do with our property. We have no immediate plans of moving but if and when we do, it would be nice to have the options that all the other Southlake residents have had for years. It does not seem fair or ethical to punish your most loyal, long time residents for who knows who or why someone now wants to make a change to try and save what is left of any rural"feel'. Again, seems too little too late". Thank you for your consideration in rejecting this new land use category. Susan Duerst Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 15 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 EVANS, LARRY R 975 W DOVE RD SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby 1 in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: I t , 1 Signature_ Wc.��z-"-.j Date: l� Additional Signature: Date: 1 /� Printed'Name(s): 5 Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Plannind Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 16 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 GIOLMA, F EDWIN 1311 SUNSHINE LN SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 SII PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. i Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about erline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: SII Signature: Date: 1 ZGA j Additional Signature: Date: Printed Nam i /+� Name(s): X77 �O /�! Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): T '01L2 7__ l p t qk I Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 17 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 i KAY, ROSERT 1450 SUNSHINE LN SOUTHLAKE,TX 76092 i PLEASE-PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS IIIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s)of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for Comments regarding your position: c,j IT S T7r 114 &vtLzPnc_k7j Signature: ° Date: r �� Additional Signature: t ' Date: Z3 L, Printed Name(s): 4,6oa gay r c�rt� Must be property owner(s)whose names)are printed at top_ Otherwise contact the Planning Depar meat. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): r Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 18 r Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 LAFAVERS,WILLIAM E . 620 S WHITE CPL BLVD SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s)of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of o posed to undecided about (cir ine one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: P Pd j C- Signature: Date: Additional Signature: ate: 1 ),64Z Printed Name(s): Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department.k0ne form per property. r Phone Number (optional): y-Z —2-3,3 11 �t> Case No. Attachment IF CP16-001 Page 19 Courtesy Notice Response Form Direct questions`and mail responses=to CP16-001 City'of Southlake= Planning �Development Services Notification Response 1400 Main=St, Ste=310 _ _ _ OREN, STEPHEN J Southlake,TX76092 _ 2050 SHADY OAKS DR Phone (817)74&8621 SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 Fax:= (81_°7)748=8077 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: b ?- 4vml" Signature: Date: Additional Signature: !Pu, Dater Printed Name(s): 02&WLJ Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): 9?/7— 4zZq-4t0V-Z— Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 20 Courtesy Notice Response.Form Cp16-001 i RUNYAN, BILLY W 979 SHADY OAKS DR j SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY I BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of ppposed o� undecided about ! (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: j Signature: Date: - Alo- Additional Signature: _ Date: I 4/v- e Printed Name(s): ivla Al Must be property owner(s)whose names)are printed at top, Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 21 Courtesy Notice Response Form C P1$-001 SULLIVAN, PAUL T . 1900 N PEYTONVILLE AVE r SOUTHLAKE,Tx 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: i i Signature: /1-f Date: I-- l Additional Signature: J Date, Printed f Name(s): �6W! � rr1 Aust be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): D 17 s-x%-7.2 Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 22 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 WASSERMAN JAY 520 W HIGHLAND ST SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS.VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: Signature-/ Date: Additional Signature Date: 1 LCl Printed Name(s): �1 ,��,,� �,(f,�«e��,1 Must be property owners)whose names are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department: One Corm per property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 23 Courtesy Notice Response Form CP16-001 WHITE,THOMAS W 600 W BOB JONES RD SOUTHLAKE TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby (i�nfa:vor opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: of -z- �� Signature: �—� C�'�' � � Date: 1 Additional Signature: Date: (rd Printed Name(s): a�L /y Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 24 Courtesy Notice Response Form i CP16-001 I WIRTALA, DAVID A 1852 N PEYTONVILLE AVE SOUTHLAKE,TX 76092 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE11SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to decided about (circle or underline one) The proposed amendment to the Southlake Comprehensive Plan to add a Rural Residential Estate Land Use category Space for comments regarding your position: f Signature: rDate: / G11 Additional Signature: Date: Printed Name(s): ,( L Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): 6c217) � '/ � 5�6 Case No. Attachment F CP16-001 Page 25