Item 6B CITY OF
S0UTHLA1<,,..E
Department of Planning & Development Services
STAFF REPORT
November 29, 2016
CASE NO: ZA16-052
PROJECT: Preliminary Plat for Delta Southlake Center(formerly known as White
Chapel Village)
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY: RREAF Southlake Hospitality, LLC is requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat for
Delta Southlake Center(fka White Chapel Village)on property described as Tracts
3A2, 3A2B and 3D, Larkin H. Chivers Survey,Abstract No.A300, City of Southlake,
Tarrant County, Texas, Lots 1A, 2A and 3A, Block 1, Chivers Addition, originally
platted as Tracts 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Chivers Addition, an addition to the City of
Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, in the Larkin H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No.
300, and Lots 1 and 2R, Block A80, Peck Addition, an addition to the City of
Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 1313, 1325, 1350 and 1375 N.
White Chapel Ave., and 101, 201, 301 and 319 E. State Highway 114, Southlake,
Texas. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District, "C-3" General Commercial
District, "CS" Community Service District and "SF-1A" Single Family Residential
District. Proposed Zoning: "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District and"SF-1A"
Single Family Residential District. SPIN Neighborhood # 7.
DETAILS: The property is approximately 17.56 acres at the southeast corner of E. State Hwy.
114 and N. White Chapel Blvd.
The purpose of this item is to seek approval of a Preliminary Plat for Delta
Southlake Center(fka White Chapel Village), consisting of one approximately 6.28
acre lot for the proposed Delta Marriott Hotel and one approximately 9.592 acre lot
for future development (see Case No. ZA16-051) and the remainder of Lot 2R,
Block A80, Peck Addition, which will retain the current "SF-1A" Single Family
Residential District zoning designation.The proposed hotel is a six-story full service
hotel with 240 rooms. The hotel will include an approximately 6,000 square foot
restaurant and bar and a conference center with approximately 7,000 square feet
of meeting space.
ACTION NEEDED: Consider Approval of a Preliminary Plat
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information
(B) Vicinity Map
(C) Plat Review Summary No. 3, dated October 28, 2016
(D) Surrounding Property Owners Map and Responses
(E) Ordinance No. 480-720
Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council members only)
Link to PowerPoint Presentation
Link to Preliminary Plat
Case No.
ZA16-052
Link to Traffic Impact Analysis
Link to Traffic Impact Analysis Appendix ( hard copy on request)
Link to Amendment to Traffic Impact Analysis
Link to Traffic Impact Analysis Consultant's Review& Recommendations
Link to Drainage Study
Link to Consultant's Review of Drainage Study
Link to Corridor Planning Committee Report
Link to SPIN meeting Report
STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (817) 748-8067
Richard Schell (817) 748-8602
Case No.
ZA16-052
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER: Dominion Southlake Properties, LLC, White Chapel Village Center
Partners, LLC
APPLICANT: RREAF Southlake Hospitality, LLC
PROPERTY SITUATION: Southeast corner of E. State Hwy. 114 and N. White Chapel Blvd. and
addressed as 1313, 1325, 1350 and 1375 N. White Chapel Ave., and 101,
201, 301 and 319 E. State Highway 114
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tracts 3A2, 3A2B and 3D, Larkin H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. A300,
City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, Lots 1A, 2A and 3A, Block 1,
Chivers Addition, originally platted as Tracts 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Chivers
Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake,Tarrant County,Texas, in the
Larkin H. Chivers Survey,Abstract No. 300, and Lots 1 and 2R, Block A80,
Peck Addition
LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use
CURRENT ZONING: "C-3" General Commercial District, "CS" Community Service District, "SF-
1X Single Family Residential District and "AG" Agricultural District.
PROPOSED ZONING: "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District and "SF-1A" Single Family
Residential District.
HISTORY: The property was annexed into the City in 1957 and given the "AG"
Agricultural Zoning District designation.
- A Final Plat for Chivers Addition (ZA79-008), which includes the majority
of the property, was approved March 6, 1979. Zoning on the property at
that time was "L" Light Industrial. The property was given the "LI" Light
Industrial zoning designation with the adoption of Ordinance No. 261 and
the official Zoning Map in 1981, the "R2" Retail 2 zoning designation with
the adoption of Zoning Ordinance No. 334 and the official Zoning Map in
1986 and the"C-3" General Commercial District zoning designation with the
adoption of the Zoning Ordinance No 480 and the official Zoning Map on
September 19, 1989.
-A Final Plat for Peck Addition (ZA80-023),which are the existing lots west
and southwest of the hotel site adjacent to N. White Chapel Blvd., was
approved August 19, 1980. Zoning on the property at that time was "A-3"
One-Family District. The Peck Addition was given the "SF-1" zoning
designation with the adoption of Zoning Ordinance No. 334 and the official
Zoning Map in 1986 and the"SF-1A"zoning designation with the adoption
of the Zoning Ordinance No 480 and the official Zoning Map on September
19, 1989, with the exception of Lot 1, which was rezoned to "0-1" Office
District prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 480.
- A Zoning Change and Concept Plan for the Clariden School (ZA93-012)
on Lot 1, Block A80, Peck Addition from "0-1" Office District to "CS
Community Service District was approved May4, 1993.The school building
has recently been demolished.
SOUTH LAKE 2030 PLAN: Consolidated Future Land Use Plan
Case No. Attachment A
ZA16-052 Page 1
The 2030 future land use designation for the site is "Mixed Use".
The Mixed Use land use designation is defined within Southlake 2030 as
the following:
"The purpose of the Mixed Use designation is to provide an option forlarge-
scale, master-planned, mixed use developments that combine land uses
such as office facilities, shopping, dining, parks, and residential uses. The
range of activities permitted, the diverse natural features, and the varying
proximity to thoroughfares of areas in the Mixed Use category necessitates
comprehensively planned and coordinated development. New development
must be compatible with and not intrusive to existing development. Further,
special attention should be placed on the design and transition between
different uses. Typically, the Mixed Use designation is intended for
medium- to higher-intensity office buildings, hotels, commercial activities,
retail centers, and residential uses. Nuisance-free, wholly enclosed light
manufacturing and assembly uses that have no outdoor storage are
permitted if designed to be compatible with adjacent uses. Other suitable
activities are those permitted in the Public Parks/Open Space, Public/Semi-
Public, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Retail
Commercial, and Office Commercial categories previously discussed."
Hotel Uses in the Mixed Use Designation:
o "Hotel uses should be full-service hotels at market-driven locations,
primarily in the S.H. 114 Corridor. Full-service, for the purposes of
this plan, shall be hotels that include a table-service restaurant
within or directly attached to the hotel. Other services or amenities
typically included would be bell service and room service, as well as
available meeting space.
o The desire is to approve hotels adequate to support market-driven
commerce in the City, paying attention to the product mix such that
the hospitality services in the area are complementary to one
another."
Mobility& Master Thoroughfare Plan
The Concept / Site Plan shows two driveways onto E. State Hwy. 114
frontage road and two driveways onto N. White Chapel Blvd. The northern
driveway onto N. White Chapel is proposed to be added with development
of Lot 2 in the future. The 2030 Master Thoroughfare Plan shows State
Hwy. 114 as a freeway with right of way widths from 300'-500'. Adequate
right of way exists for deceleration lanes at both proposed driveways on E.
State Hwy. 114. N. White Chapel Blvd. is shown as a four-lane undivided
arterial with 88' of right of way. A small portion of right of way is being
dedicated near the intersection of E. State Hwy. 114 and N. White Chapel
Blvd. for street improvements. Adequate right of way exists for the
deceleration lane at the proposed driveway onto White Chapel Blvd.and for
a future deceleration at the future driveway onto White Chapel Blvd.
Pathways Master Plan & Sidewalk Plan
The Master Pathways Plan shows a<8' sidewalk on the east side of White
Chapel Blvd. and a>8' multi-use trail along the S.H. 114 frontage road.A 5'
sidewalk is shown on the hotel property along N. White Chapel Blvd. An 8'
Case No. Attachment A
ZA16-052 Page 2
multi-use trail will be required along the S.H. 114 frontage road and a 5'
sidewalk will be required along N.White Chapel Blvd.adjacent to Lot 2 with
the future platting and development of Lot 2.
Maior Corridors Urban Design Plan
The Urban Design Plan also includes a few recommendations pertaining to
the State Highway 114 corridor where this site is proposed to be located.
Link to State Hwy. 114 Private Development RecommendaLlUl IZI
TRANSPORTATION
ASSESSMENT: Area Road Network and Conditions
Area Road Network and Conditions
The Concept / Site Plan proposes two driveways onto the E. State Hwy.
114 frontage road and two driveways onto N. White Chapel Blvd. TheMo
driveways onto S.H. 114 and the southern driveway on N. White Chapel
Blvd. are proposed to be constructed with development of the hotel on Lot
1. The northern driveway on White Chapel Blvd. is proposed to be
constructed with the future development of Lot 2. TxDot is requiring
deceleration lanes to be constructed at the two driveways on S.H. 114 with
the development of the hotel.
Traffic Counts
E. State Hwy. 114 Frontage Road (81E)
(Between White Chapel Blvd. and Highland St.)
24hr East Bound (2,489)
AM Peak AM (353)
PM Peak PM (266)
N.White Chapel Blvd. (59)
(Between Highland St and Dove - .
24hr North Bound (6,681) South Bound (7,017)
AM Peak AM (745) 7:45-8:45 AM Peak AM (471) 8:15-9:15 AM
PM Peak PM (508) 15:30-16:30 PM Peak PM (652) 17:15-18:15 PM
Based on the 2015 City of Southlake Traffic Count Report
Traffic Impact
A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)was prepared for this development.A link to
the report along with an appendix and an amendment letter can be found at
the following links. The amendment letter contains the trip generation
counts based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation Manual, 9t" Edition. A link to the City consultant's (Lee
Engineering) review of the TIA is also included below.
Link to TIA
Link to Amendment Letter
Lee Engineering Review of TIA
TREE PRESERVATION: The site is subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance No. 585-D
because it is a new project.
There is approximately 11.69% existing tree cover on the site, of which
none is proposed to be preserved.A standard zoning district requires that a
Case No. Attachment A
ZA16-052 Page 3
minimum 70% of existing tree cover be preserved.
For property sought to be zoned for the Downtown zoning district or a
planned development zoning district, including an S-P-1 Site Plan, S-P-2
Site Plan, Transition, Rural Conservation, Planned Unit Development, or
Employment Center zoning district, the City Council shall consider the
application for a Conservation Analysis or Plan in conjunction with the
corresponding development application.
The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the application and
make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application.
The City Council shall approve the Plan or Analysis if the Council finds
that the Plan or Analysis provides for the:
i. placement of building pads, parking areas, driveways, streets,
and utility easements so as to maximize the preservation of
environmental features of the property including mature tree
stands, natural creeks and ponds, and significant grades;
ii. maximizes the preservation of tree cover preservation areas
indicated on the Environmental Resource Protection Map;
iii. maximizes the preservation of existing tree stands with the
potential to buffer residential areas from the noise, glare, and
visual effects of nonresidential uses;
iv. maximizes the preservation of existing trees, if any, adjoining a
natural or man-made drainage creek;
V. maximizes the preservation of existing protected trees along rural
roadways and other streets as identified and prioritized in the
Street Typology designation; and
vi. mitigation of altered trees through proposed tree replacement
procedures pursuant to this Ordinance.
UTILITIES: Water for the site will connect to an existing 12"water line in White Chapel
Blvd. and to an existing 12" water line at the northwest corner of the
hospital property to the east.
Sanitary sewer for the site will connect to an existing 8"line at the northwest
corner of the hospital property to the east. An 8" public sanitary sewer line
will be extended from an existing lift station on the west side of N. White
Chapel Blvd. across the site to the existing line on the hospital property.
DRAINAGE: Drainage across the property is generally sheet flow from south to north to
existing TxDot culverts that will carry the discharge from the hotel site to the
Carillon detention ponds. The review of the Drainage Study by the City's
consultant, Teague, Nall and Perkins, requires that the applicant provide
further proof that the Carillon detention ponds have the capacity to handle
the discharge from the proposed development.
CITIZEN INPUT: The following meetings were held to discuss the development:
A SPIN meeting was held for this project on September 8, 2015. A link to
the report is provided. Link to SPIN Report
A 2035 Corridor Planning Committee meeting was held on August 10,
2016. A link to the report is provided. Corridor Planning Committee
Case No. Attachment A
ZA16-052 Page 4
PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION ACTION: October 6, 2016; Tabled to the November 3, 2016 meeting.
November 3, 2016; Approved (6-0) subject to the Staff Report dated
October 28, 2016 and Plat Review Summary No. 3, dated October 28,
2016.
STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Plat Review Summary No. 3, dated October 28, 2016.
Case No. Attachment A
ZA16-052 Page 5
Vicinity Map
White Chapel Village
?�
9 '.533
,�7 151 5529
50+ 305 131 1325
r� r 1'521
Alt
1311
1513
S CR ,
h 774 4i °R'
aqg
200 S
CT h
2-50Y 141 1 i 174
�'k 121
M$ 340 360
93r
1+�0 1310 �7
3J6
Z, 205 � � .08 H 42�
309 375 341 �+ c
n _
m
N_
0
447
307 E HI G H LAN D ST
GHLAND ST 101 183 X31 2' 1 231 333 4
45 333
f11C �
n r.18 1047
4
1160 4 1045
�, 51 1543
ZA16-052
Preliminary Plat
r . White Chapel Village
Faat
.�r
r
Case No. Attachment B
ZA16-052 Page 1
PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY
Case No.: ZA16-052 Review No.: Three Date of Review: 10/28/16
Project Name: Preliminary Plat— Delta Southlake Center
APPLICANT: Carl Schwab ENGINEER: Sandy Stephens
RREAF Holdings, LLC Cole
4245 N. Central Expy. Ste. 420 6175 main St. Ste. 367
Dallas, TX 75205 Frisco, TX 75034
Phone: (214) 384-2549 Phone: (972) 624-6000
E-mail: carl@rreaf.com E-mail: sstephens@coletx.com
CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON
10/24/16 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY
MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY
COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE
CONTACT RICHARD SCHELL AT (817) 748-8602.
1. The preliminary plat and final plats must conform to the underlying zoning districts.
2. Based on our previous conversations, you have three options to rezone the property to allow for a
full service hotel use on Lot 1 as shown on the Concept/Site Plan. Split lot zoning is not permitted,
so approval of a Preliminary Plat and a Plat Revision is required with all three options. The
Preliminary Plat and Plat Revision must comply with the underlying zoning. It is our understanding
that you wish to proceed with Option 2, so the comments below are based on that understanding.
a. Option 1 is to rezone only the hotel site as "S-P-1 Detailed Site Plan District and leave the
rest of the site with the existing "C-3" General Commercial District and "AG" Agricultural
District zoning.
b. Option 2 is to rezone the entire property to "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District and to
provide a Concept Plan for the entire site showing permitted uses and building areas and a
Site Plan for the hotel lot.
c. Option 3 is to rezone the entire property to "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District and to
provide a Concept/Site Plan for the entire site with a Site Plan for Lot 1 showing and full
service hotel and with no permitted uses and building areas shown for the remainder of the
site and a statement to the effect that any future development on the remainder of the
property will require approval of a Zoning Change and Concept and/or Site Plan.
3. Add the 2030 Land Use designations to adjacent properties in addition to the current zoning.
The L.U.D. on the properties to the east and south is Mixed Use, and across White Chapel to
the west, the L.U.D. on the propertyjust south of Countryside Ct. is Office Commercial instead
of Retail Commercial. The property on the far southwest corner of the plan just to the south of
the EyeSouthlake property is zoned "AG" and the L.U.D. is Medium Density Residential.
4. Show, label and dimension the exact width of the right of way and traveled roadway on or
adjacent to the site. Provide dimensions from all proposed lot corners to centerline and full
width across right of way.
5. Label all front building lines. Show and label all minimum front building setback lines in
accordance with the current and requested zoning. The "0-2" Office District zoning requires a
minimum 30' front yard setback on both street frontages.
Case No. Attachment C
ZA16-052 Page 2
6. The fire lanes around the hotel must be 26' wide since the building is considered a high-rise
building per the City of Southlake amendments to the 2015 International Fire Code
Tree Conservation/Landscape Review
E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us
Keith Martin
Landscape Administrator
Phone: (817) 748-8229
TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS:
1. There is a proposed 30'Wide Temporary Construction Easement outside of the property along the
south and east property lines. The existing trees within the easement must be shown on the
proposed Tree Conservation Plan.
TEMPORARY ACCESS AND CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS:
a. A person commits an offense if the person owns real property and permits access across
the person's property or grants a temporary access or construction easement across the
owner's property if such right of access or easement intersects or comes within ten (10)
feet of the critical root zone of a protected tree.
b. It is a defense to prosecution for this offense that the Administrative Official determines
that an easement is the only reasonable means of access to the property being developed.
If so,the Administrative Official shall ensure that such an easement is of minimal size and
situated within a location designed to minimize tree damage and impact on the natural
environment while still providing a reasonable avenue of ingress and egress for
construction purposes to the adjoining property.
2. The submitted Tree Conservation Plan shows that no existing trees are proposed to be preserved
on the entire site, including within the right-of-way of North White Chapel. The Grading Plan also
shows that the entire proposed development is to be graded at the time of the hotel construction. If
the proposed development were under straight zoning the proposed Tree Conservation Plan would
not comply with the Existing Tree Cover Preservation Requirements. There is 11.69% of existing
tree cover on the site and a minimum of 70%of that tree cover would be required to be preserved.
The applicant is proposing to preserve 0% of the existing tree cover.
* Except as provided by subsection 7.2.b. of the Tree Preservation Ordinance,a Tree Conservation
Analysis or Tree Conservation Plan shall be approved if it will preserve existing tree cover in
accordance with the percentage requirements established by Table 2.0. If the property has
previously received a tree permit related to development, the percentage of existing tree cover at
the time the first such permit was issued shall be used to calculate the minimum existing tree cover
that must be preserved under this section.
Table 2.0 — Existing Tree Cover Preservation Requirements
Percentage of existing tree cover on Minimum percentage of the
the entire site existing tree cover to be
preserved*
- 0% -20% 70%
20.1 —40% 60%
Case No. Attachment C
ZA16-052 Page 3
. 40.1% - 60% 50%
60.1% - 80% 40%
80.1% - 100% 30%
*The minimum percentage of existing tree cover to be preserved shall exclude any area in
public rights-of-way as approved by City Council.
For property sought to be zoned for the Downtown zoning district or a planned development zoning
district, including an S-P-1 Site Plan, S-P-2 Site Plan,Transition, Rural Conservation, Planned Unit
Development, or Employment Center zoning district,the City Council shall considerthe application
for a Conservation Analysis or Plan in conjunction with the corresponding development application
(as established in Table 1.0). The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the application
and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application. The City Council shall
approve the Plan or Analysis if the Council finds that the Plan or Analysis provides for the:
i. placement of building pads, parking areas, driveways, streets, and utility easements so as
to maximize the preservation of environmental features of the property including mature
tree stands, natural creeks and ponds, and significant grades;
ii. maximizes the preservation of tree cover preservation areas indicated on the
Environmental Resource Protection Map;
iii. maximizes the preservation of existing tree stands with the potential to buffer residential
areas from the noise, glare, and visual effects of nonresidential uses;
iv. maximizes the preservation of existing trees, if any, adjoining a natural or man-made
drainage creek;
V. maximizes the preservation of existing protected trees along rural roadways and other
streets as identified and prioritized in the Street Typology designation; and
vi. mitigation of altered trees through proposed tree replacement procedures pursuant to this
Ordinance.
* Please be aware that all existing trees shown to be preserved on the City Council approved Tree
Conservation Plan must be preserved and protected during all phases and construction of the
development. Alteration or removal of any of the existing trees shown to be preserved on the
approved Tree Conservation Plan is a violation of the Tree Preservation Ordinance and the zoning
as approved by the Southlake City Council. Please ensure that the layout of all structures,
easements, utilities, structures grading, and any other structure proposed to be constructed do not
conflict with existing trees intended to be preserved.
* Indicates informational comment.
# Indicates required items comment.
Public Works/Engineering Review
Steve Anderson, P.E., CFM
Civil Engineer
Phone: (817) 748-8101
E-mail: sanderson@ci.southlake.tx.us
GENERAL COMMENTS:
Case No. Attachment C
ZA16-052 Page 4
1. This review is preliminary. Additional requirements may be necessary with the review of civil
construction plans.
2. New Requirement: Provide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan per TXR150000. The plan
must include all required elements in Part III, Section F of the permit. The City of Southlake
especially reviews Part III, Section F, (1) (g), Maps. The review is for completeness of a plan to
prevent pollution (especially sediment) to the Separate Storm Sewer System. It is highly
recommended the project manager provide a series of maps for complex projects, including one
map showing controls during mass grading and infrastructure, one map showing controls during
vertical construction, and one map showing final stabilization (may be but not always equitable to
the landscape plan). Please include timelines in relation to the project activities for installation and
removal of controls. SWPPP shall be submitted by second review of the civil construction
plans.
3. NEW REQUIREMENT: Submit with Civil Construction Plans a Retaining Wall Layout sheet, if
applicable.
4. Retaining walls greater than 4-feet including the footing shall require structural plans prepared by a
registered engineer in the State of Texas. Retaining walls shall require a permit from the Building
Inspections Department prior to construction.
5. Firelanes adjacent to buildings 6 stories or greater to be 26-feet wide firelanes.
Street intersections shall comply with TDLR/ADA accessibility standards.
Sight distances shall comply with AASHTO guidelines on adjacent collectors and arterials.
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
TIA:
1. The Parking Analysis is being reviewed by a 3rd party. Comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
DRAINAGE COMMENTS:
1. 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. The Preliminary
Drainage Study indicates a more detailed analysis will be submitted with Civil Plans.
2. Or Documentation supporting and certifying that detention is not necessarywill be required priorto
approval of construction plans.
Calculations will be required to verify capacity of proposed curb inlets.
Storm sewers collecting runoff from public streets shall be RCP and constructed to City
standards.
Property drains into a Critical Drainage Structure #9 and requires a fee to be paid prior to
Case No. Attachment C
ZA16-052 Page 5
beginning construction ($278.14/Acre).
Discharge of post development runoff must have no adverse impact on downstream properties
and meet the provisions of Ordinance No. 605.
WATER COMMENTS:
1. Commercial and industrial developments require fire hydrant spacing of 300' maximum for non-
sprinkled buildings or 600' for sprinkled buildings.
The size of the water service tap must match the size of the meter. There are no reducers
allowed before the meter on the public side. A one inch meter must have a one inch tap, etc.
Meter sizes are 1", 2", 4", 6" and 8".
Water meters and fire hydrants shall be located in an easement or right of way.
Fire lines shall be separate from service lines.
SANITARY SEWER COMMENTS:
1. Minimum size for sanitary sewer is 8". Sanitary sewer service lines shall connect to public sanitary
sewer system built to City standards.
2. Clearly label all public and private sanitary sewer lines.
3. Extend sanitary sewer to the eastern/western/northern/southern property line and provide sewer
stub to adjacent property.
4. Add a note: Private sanitary sewer services need a plumbing permit and must be inspected by
building inspections prior to burial.
Sanitary sewer in easements or right of way shall be constructed to City standards.
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.
A geotechnical report will be required for all private and public roadways. The geotechnical
report shall include pavement design parameters for subgrade stabilization.
Access permit is required prior to construction of the driveway on FM 1709, FM 1938 or SH
114. Permit approval is required before beginning construction. Submit application and plans
directly to TxDOT for review.
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.
Case No. Attachment C
ZA16-052 Page 6
* 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.
Fire Department Review
Kelly Clements
Fire Marshal
Phone: (817) 748-8671
E-mail: kclements@ci.southlake.tx.us
GENERAL COMMENTS:
Any building where the floor level of the highest occupied floor is in excess of 55 feet above
the lowest level of fire department access will be considered a high-rise building in the 2015
International Fire Code. (Per, The City of Southlake amendments)
The Fire Department Connection for the sprinkler system must be within 100 feet of a fire hydrant.
(FDC locations for all buildings not shown on plan)(Hydrants will need to be added as necessary to
meet the requirement)
FIRE HYDRANT COMMENTS:
Relocate/extend fire hydrant on the northwest corner of the Marriott property to be located
adjacent to the fire lane instead of within the parking lot.
FIRE LANE COMMENTS:
Fire apparatus access needs to be provided within 250 feet of all exterior portions of the
perimeter of buildings on a"hose-lay" basis for sprinkled buildings, and within 150 feet of all
exterior portions of un-sprinkled buildings. Fire apparatus access needs to be an all-weather
surface, asphalt or concrete, a minimum of 26 feet wide and able to support the imposed loads
of fire apparatus. (A minimum of 85,000 pounds GVW) (Adequate Fire Lane access not shown
for the six story building in the north-west corner of the complex)
Community Service/Parks Department Review
Peter Kao
Construction Manager
817-748-8607
pkao(a)ci.south lake.tx.us
Park Board comments or recommendations:
All applicants are required to appear before the Park Board to discuss park dedication issues if requesting
fee payments or fee credits. Please contact the Community Services Department at (817) 748-8607 for
Case No. Attachment C
ZA16-052 Page 7
further details.
Land/park dedication requirements:
Non-residential developments must provide dedicated parks and/or open space at a ratio of one (1)acre
of park land for every fifty (50) non-residential gross acres of development.
If fee payment is approved by City Council in lieu of land dedication, non-residential park dedication fees in
the amount of$8000 per gross acre x 15.865 acres=$126,920.00 will be required. Fees will be collected
with the approved developer's agreement or prior to any permit being issued.
Pathway Comments:
Recommend crosswalks to be aligned closer to roadway intersections/entries so that stop signs and stop
bars can be located before pedestrian crosswalks. Potential safety hazard.
Other informational comments?
General Informational Comments
No review of proposed signs is intended with this site plan. A separate building permit is
required prior to construction of any signs.
All mechanical equipment must be screened of view from right-of-ways and residential
properties in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended.
All lighting must comply with the Lighting Ordinance No. 693, as amended.
All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No.605 and the Erosion and Sediment
Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended.
Development must comply with all requirements in Zoning Ordinance No. 480, Section 43,
Overlay Zones.
The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Final Plat must be
processed and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan,
irrigation plan, and building plans, must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be
paid. This may include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Perimeter Street
Fee, Water & Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees.
A letter of permission from the adjacent property owner(s) on the west must be obtained prior
to issuance of a building permit for the construction of the off-site pavement and a permit from
TxDOT must be obtained prior to any curb cut along F.M. 1709.
Denotes Informational Comment
SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS MAP & RESPONSES
Case No. Attachment C
ZA16-052 Page 8
KG•sw `�1q[ y Wso
r ace
I1 1
� i 4S1 ;529
1 1 �
ZSn 141 1 in '�► f1 r�i
'D1 �
s�
310
I= 111Q *`•
]Ot JOC 712 1n• IN
3Ci 306 7pt � � 1
•W E HIGHLAND ST
fl 7p1
GHLAND ST 21, 221
R 5SS r
+n4 $ _
SPO# Owner Zoning Physical Address Acreage Response
1. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 100 E SH 114 5.06 NR
2. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 200 E SH 114 1.04 NR
3. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 190 E SH 114 1.27 NR
HOPKINS DALLAS PROPERTIES F
4. LTD 140 W SH 114
5. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 240 E SH 114 0.74 NR
6 DOMINION SOUTHLAKE NR
PROPERTIES C3 101 E SH 114 0.40
7. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE NR
PROPERTIES C3 201 E SH 114 0.08
$ DOMINION SOUTHLAKE NR
PROPERTIES AG 1375 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.90
9 DOMINION SOUTHLAKE NR
PROPERTIES C3 1350 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 6.33
ADELKI LLC 1 1360 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.51
11. BENGTSON PROPERTIES LLP SPI 1340 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.39 NR
12. WHITE CHAPEL VILLAGE CTR PRT SF1-A 1313 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 2.20 NR
13. WHITE CHAPEL VILLAGE CTR PRT SF1-A 1227 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.09 NR
14. WHITE CHAPEL VILLAGE CTR PRT SF1-A 1241 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.36 NR
Case No. Attachment D
ZA16-052 Page 2
15. WHITE CHAPEL VILLAGE CTR PRT SF1-A 1205 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 2.04 NR
16. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 400 E SH 114 0.06 NR
17. COUNTRYSIDE COURT LLC SPI 101 COUNTRYSIDE CT 2.40 NR
CULLUM CHALK&MCCAIN REAL
I -qw-
EST SP1 121 COUNTRYSIDE Cr 2.40
19. HORIZON INVESTORS LLC SP2 245 W SH 114 3.59 NR
20. HORIZON INVESTORS LLC SP2 200 COUNTRYSIDE CT 2.57 NR
21 DOMINION SOUTHLAKE NR
PROPERTIES CS 1325 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 3.03
22 DOMINION SOUTHLAKE NR
PROPERTIES C3 301 E SH 114 2.70
23 DOMINION SOUTHLAKE NR
PROPERTIES C3 319 E SH 114 2.86
24. EYESOUTHLAKE PROPERTY LLC SPI 1310 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.57 NR
25. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 1700 N CARROLL AVE 20.94 NR
26. SOUTHLAKE LAND HOLDINGS LP SP2 335 E SH 114 15.09 NR
27. SOUTHLAKE, CITY OF AG 1200 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.81 NR
28. MCCOY, BARRY M AG 1250 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.06 NR
29. RUCKER, ZENA SULLIVAN AG 1300 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.56 NR
30. SOUTHLAKE, CITY OF RPUD 220 W HIGHLAND ST 0.18 NR
31. REC PROPERTIES LTD SPI 1320 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.43 NR
32. TERRA/HIGHLAND OAKS LLC RPUD 108 MONTROSE LN 0.36 NR
Notices Sent: 20
Responses Received within 200': Three (3)-Attached
Case No. Attachment D
ZA16-052 Page 3
Notification Response Form
ZAt 6-052
Meeting Date. August 18, 2016 at 6:30 PM
ADELKI LLC
1360 N WHITE CPL BLVD STE 100
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 Preliminary Plat referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature: Date: '
Additional Signature: Date:
Printed Name(s)-
fare(he pmpertr awner(a)whose name(%)are printed p. Ofrwise contact Vie Plartnng Departrnent One fwm per prWerly
Phone Number (optional): 9l-7 • Z�3. �U7
Case No. Attachment D
ZA16-052 Page 4
Notification Response Form
ZA16-W2
Maating Date: August 18, 2016 at 6:30 PM 3
CUL.LUM CHALK&MCCAIN REAL EST
121 COUNTRYSIDE CT
SOLI TNLAKE,TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX DR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING,
Mng the uwnerl;syof the property so noted above, are hereby
f iri favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Preliminary Plat referenced above
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature. u—�_ T Date:
1
Additional Signature: __ Date:
{
Printed Name(s): 6tr� . ,E,�
VLM hr-gsmper!y o ftier[s}whose nam (s)are pnnied at tw 0&*n doe cnrftd*w Pian*tg I7rvartmenl Dns sorra per propWly.-
Phone Number (optional):
Case No. Attachment D
ZA16-052 Page 5
Notification Response Fonn
ZA16-052
Meeting Date: August 16,2Q16 at 6:30 PM
HOPK►NS DALLAS PROPERTIES LTD
7985 LBB FWY 5TE 250
DALLAS,TX 752.61
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owners)of the property so noted above, are hereby
(:::in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Preliminary Plat referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Qg�21-2
Signature' Date:
Additional Signature: Date:
Printed Name(s): � ``r 5 11 P 0j-
butt bo pmp"vwmels)Mose nvme s)we pAnted at lop. Utnrrmw awAm tea Plsv4 q DepabwM, Ona ftw Pw pmwry•
Phone Number (optional):
Case No. Attachment D
ZA16-052 Page 6