Item 7 - ZA18-014 PR White Chapel 114 Southlake CenterCase No.
ZA18-014
S T A F F R E P O R T
March 14, 2018
CASE NO: ZA18-014
PROJECT: Plat Revision for White Chapel 114 Southlake Center
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY: RREAF Holdings, LLC is requesting approval of a Plat Revision for White Chapel
114 Southlake Center 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 Lot 1R, Block A80,
Peck Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and
located at 1325, 1350 and 1375 N. White Chapel Blvd., and 101, 201, 301 and
319 E. State Highway 114, Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: “S-P-2” Generalized
Site Plan District. SPIN Neighborhood #7.
DETAILS: The property is approximately 15.871 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 Plat Revision for White Chapel
114 Southlake Center (fka Delta Southlake Center and White Chapel Village),
consisting of one approximately 6.28 acre lot for the previously approved Delta
Marriott Hotel and one approximately 9.592 acre lot for future development. The
proposed plat revision is in conformance with the previously approved Zoning
Change and Concept/Site Plan (ZA16-051) and Preliminary Plat (ZA16-052).
ACTION NEEDED: Consider Approval of a Plat Revision
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information
(B) Vicinity Map
(C) Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated March 14, 2018
(D) Surrounding Property Owners Map and Responses
Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council members only )
Link to Presentation
Link to Plans
Link to SPIN meeting Report
Link to Corridor Planning Committee Report
STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (817) 748-8067
Richard Schell (817) 748-8602
Department of Planning & Development Services
Case No. Attachment A
ZA18-014 Page 1
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER: Dominion Southlake Properties, LLC
APPLICANT: RREAF Holdings, LLC
PROPERTY SITUATION: Southeast corner of E. State Hwy. 114 and N. White Chapel Blvd. and
addressed as 1325, 1350 and 1375 N. White Chapel Blvd., 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 Coun ty, Texas, in the
Larkin H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 300, and Lot 1R, Block A80, Peck
Addition
LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use
CURRENT ZONING: “S-P-2” Generalized Site Plan 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 officia l
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 “O -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 “O-1” Office District to “CS”
Community Service District was approved May 4, 1993. The school building
has recently been demolished.
- A Zoning Change and Concept/Site Plan for Delta Southlake Center
(formerly known as White Chapel Village) (ZA16-051) for the development
of a six-story full service hotel with 240 rooms on approximately 6.28 acres
(Lot 1) and conceptual approval of two multi-story office and retail buildings
with below grade parking, one multi-story office building and a multi-story
parking garage with attached retail uses on approximately 9.592 acres (Lot
2) was approved by City Council on January 17, 2017.
- A Preliminary Plat for Delta Southlake Center (fka White Chapel Village),
Case No. Attachment A
ZA18-014 Page 2
consisting of one approximately 6.28 acre lot for the proposed Delta
Marriott Hotel and one approximately 9.592 acre lot for future development
and the remainder of Lot 2R, Block A80, Peck Addition was approved on
January 17, 2017.
- An Amended Plat for Lots 1R and 2R1, Block A -80, Peck Addition was
approved February 17, 2017 and filed March 23, 2017.
SOUTHLAKE 2030 PLAN: Consolidated Future Land Use Plan
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 for large-
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
Case No. Attachment A
ZA18-014 Page 3
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 B lvd.
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’
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.
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
approximately 16.77% is proposed to be preserved for Phase I. A review
comment has been added to provide the proposed tree canopy to be
preserved for the entire development. The Tree Conservation Plan that was
approved with the Zoning Change and Concept/Site Plan and Preliminary
Plat showed no trees to be preserved for Phases I and II. A standard
zoning district requires that a 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
Case No. Attachment A
ZA18-014 Page 4
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. Link to Corridor Planning Committee
Report
STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated March 14, 2018.
Case No. Attachment B
ZA18-014 Page 1
Case No.
ZA18-014 Page 1
PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY
Case No.: ZA18-014 Review No.: Two Date of Review: 03/14/18
Project Name: Plat Revision – Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Delta Southlake Center
APPLICANT: Carl Schwab ENGINEER: Sandy Stephens
RREAF Holdings, LLC Cole
1909 Woodall Rodgers Freeway, 3 rd Floor 6175 main St. Suite 367
Dallas, TX 75201 Frisco, TX 75034
Phone: (214) 522-3300 Phone: (972) 624-6000
E-mail: cschwabl@rreaf.com E-mail: sstephens@coletx.com
CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON
02/28/18 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY
MADE CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT RICHARD
SCHELL AT (817) 748-8602.
1. Since the property included in the plat was previously platted as Tracts 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Chivers
Addition and Lot 1R, Block A-80, Peck Addition, a Plat Revision will take the place of a Final Plat in
this case. The Plat Revision must conform to the u nderlying zoning and to the approved Preliminary
Plat.
2. The following changes are needed with regard to the legal description:
a. The POB must be tied to a survey corner, previously filed subdivision corner, or USGS
monument.
b. Staff strongly recommends refe rencing in the metes and bounds description the
previously filed lot corners for Lots 1R and 2R1, Block A -80, Peck Addition.
* Provide easements in conformance with approved construction plans. All necessary easements are to
be dedicated by an Amended Plat once the construction plans have been reviewed and approved.
* Right of way dedication in conformance with the City’s Master Thoroughfare Plan is a condition of plat
approval. N. White Chapel Blvd. is shown as a four -lane divided arterial with 94’ of right of way.
Adequate right of way is shown to be dedicated on the plat.
* Subdividing a property by metes and bounds is a violation of state law and city ordinance and is
subject to fines and withholding of utilities and building permits.
Tree Conservation/Landscape Review
E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us
Keith Martin
Landscape Administrator
Phone: (817) 748-8229
Case No.
ZA18-014 Page 2
TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS:
1. In the Tree Cover Preservation Table provide the percentage of existing tree cover that is to remain
on the site after full development.
2. There is a 12” Sanitary Sewer in the northwest corner of the property that would cut directly thru the
trees proposed to be preserved in the northwest corner of the property. The proposed water line
should not have any effect on the trees. Show the proposed utilities on the Tree Conservation Plan.
3. 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 ea sement 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 o n the natural environment
while still providing a reasonable avenue of ingress and egress for construction purposes to
the adjoining property.
*. The proposed Tree Conservation is consistent with the case ZA16 -051 approved Tree Conservation
Plan. There is 11.69% of existing tree cover on the site and if it was proposed to be straight zoning a
minimum of 70% of that tree cover would be required to be preserved. The applicant is proposing to
preserve 16.77%, and remove 83.23% during Phase I of the developm ent.
* 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
the entire site
Minimum percentage of the
existing tree cover to be
preserved*
0% – 20% 70%
20.1 – 40% 60%
40.1% - 60% 50%
60.1% - 80% 40%
80.1% - 100% 30%
*The minimum percentage of existing tree cover to be preserved shall exclude any area in public
rights-of-way as approved by City Council.
Case No.
ZA18-014 Page 3
For property sought to be zoned for the Downtown zoning district or a planned development zo ning
district, including an S-P-1 Site Plan, S-P-2 Site Plan, Transition, Rural Conservation, Planned Unit
Development, or Employment Center zoning district, the City Council shall consider the application for
a Conservation Analysis or Plan in conjunction with the corresponding development application (as
established in Table 1.0). The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the application and
make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application. The City Council shall approve
the Plan or Analysis if the Council finds that the Plan or Analysis provides for the:
i. placement of building pads, parking areas, driveways, streets, and utility easements so as to
maximize the preservation of environmental features of the property including m ature 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 structu re proposed to be constructed do not conflict with
existing trees intended to be preserved.
LANDSCAPE COMMENTS:
1. The proposed retaining walls within the southern portion of the property are located within the
required bufferyards. Ensure that the retai ning walls are tall enough to match the topography grade
they are intended to support and retain and that the full width of the bufferyards is provided for the
required plantings.
* Indicates informational comment.
# Indicates required items comment.
Public Works/Engineering Review
Steve Anderson, P.E. , CFM
Civil Engineer
Case No.
ZA18-014 Page 4
Phone: (817) 748-8101
E-mail: sanderson@ci.southlake.tx.us
No comments.
Fire Department Review
Kelly Clements
Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal
Phone: (817) 748-8233
E-mail: kclements@ci.southlake.tx.us
GENERAL COMMENTS:
The Fire Department Connection for the sprinkler system must be within 100 feet of a fire hydrant.
(FDC location not shown on plan) (Hydrant will need to be ad ded as necessary to meet the
requirement).
The required backflow protection (double check valve) for the sprinkler system can be located on the
riser if the riser is within 100 feet of the water main. If the riser is further than 100 feet from the ma in,
the double check valve shall be in a pit. Riser rooms shall be a minimum of 5’X5’ if the double check
is not located on the riser, or a minimum of 6’X6’ if it is on the riser. (Sprinkler riser location not
indicated on plans).
Fire lanes require a minimum 30 foot inside turn radius and a minimum 54 foot outside turn radius.
(Per 2015 I.F.C. Sec. 503.2.4).
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.
Hydrants are required at a maximum spacing of 300 feet for commercial locations that contain
un-sprinkled buildings and a maximum spacing of 500 feet for commercial locations with
completely sprinkled buildings. (Hydrants are spaced in excess of allowable distances if un -
sprinkled buildings exist on the property) (Also, one hydrant one the northeast corner of the
property is spaced beyond 500 feet, which is the maximum distance for any commercial location)
Case No.
ZA18-014 Page 5
============= The following should be informational comments only ====================
* A SPIN meeting for the Zoning Change and Concept/Site Plan and the Preliminary Plat for Delta
Southlake Center was held on September 8, 2015.
* All plats filed must have an original signed and stamped Tax Certificate submitted with it from each
taxing unit with jurisdiction of the real property, indicating that no delinquent taxes are owed and that
taxes for the current year have been paid. After September 1st, a certificate showing that the taxes for
that year are paid, but that the taxes for the upcoming year have yet to be calculated is required.
(House Bills 1563 & 3101). A copy of this information may be obtained from the Tarrant County Tax
Assessor/Collector’s Office located at 100 E. Weatherford St. in Ft. Worth (across from the old red
courthouse). There is a service charge of $10 per account for this certificate. For more information
contact the Assessor/Collector’s office at 817 -212-6847.
* Please submit a revised pdf "check print" prior to submitting the blackline mylar and paper copy
with original signatures.
* In addition to the City of Southlake impact fees, please be aware that through the wholesale water
customer contract with the City of Fort Worth, all new water connections are required to pay the
City of Fort Worth impact fee. The City of Fort Worth impact fee assessment is based on the final
plat recordation date and building permit issuance. The applicant is encouraged to review the City
of Fort Worth's assessment and collection of Impact Fees Guide to determine the fee amount.
* For Tarrant County filing, original signatures and seals will be required on one blackline mylar and
one blackline paper copy prior to filing the plat. The mylar and paper copies will not be accepted if
any erasures or original ink, other than signatures or seals, appear on the plat.
A Developers Agreement is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure. The
Developer's Agreement for this addition should consider streets, drainage, park dedication
requirements and fees, off -site sewer extensions, off-site drainage and utility easements and
impact fees.
* All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and the Erosion and Sediment
Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended.
* Denotes Informational Comment
Case No. Attachment D
ZA18-014 Page 1
SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS MAP & RESPONSES
Owner Zoning Physical Address Acreage Response
1. SUMMIT QI PROPERTIES LLC ECZ 100 E SH 114 5.06 NR
2. SUMMIT QI PROPERTIES LLC ECZ 200 E SH 114 1.04 NR
3. SUMMIT QI PROPERTIES LLC ECZ 190 E SH 114 1.27 NR
4. HOPKINS DALLAS PROPERTIES LTD C2 140 W SH 114 0.85 NR
5. SUMMIT QI PROPERTIES LLC ECZ 240 E SH 114 0.74 NR
6. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES SP2 101 E SH 114 0.40 NR
7. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES SP2 201 E SH 114 0.08 NR
8. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES SP2 1375 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.90 NR
9. ADELKI LLC SP1 1360 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.51 NR
10. BENGTSON PROPERTIES LLP SP1 1340 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.39 NR
11. HINES SOUTHLAKE LAND LP ECZ 400 E SH 114 0.06 NR
12. COUNTRYSIDE COURT LLC SP1 101 COUNTRYSIDE CT 2.40 NR
13. CULLUM CHALK & MCCAIN REAL EST SP1 121 COUNTRYSIDE CT 2.40 NR
14. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES SP2 301 E SH 114 2.70 NR
15. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES SP2 319 E SH 114 2.86 NR
16. EYESOUTHLAKE PROPERTY LLC SP1 1310 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.57 NR
17. SUMMIT QI PROPERTIES LLC ECZ 1700 N CARROLL AVE 20.94 NR
18. MCCOY, BARRY M AG 1250 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.06 NR
19. RUCKER, ZENA SULLIVAN AG 1300 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.56 NR
Case No. Attachment D
ZA18-014 Page 2
20. SOUTHLAKE, CITY OF RPUD 220 W HIGHLAND ST 0.18 NR
21. REC PROPERTIES LTD SP1 1320 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 0.43 NR
22. KADIYALA, SRIVIDYA RPUD 108 MONTROSE LN 0.36 NR
23. CHAPEL OWNER LP SP2 101 W SH 114 6.16 NR
24. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES SP2 1325 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 3.29 NR
25. DOMINION SOUTHLAKE PROPERTIES SP2 1350 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 6.33 NR
26. WHITE CHAPEL VILLAGE CTR PRT SF1-A 1313 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.73 NR
27. WHITE CHAPEL VILLAGE CTR PRT SF1-A 1227 N WHITE CHAPEL BLVD 1.09 NR
28. SOUTHLAKE LAND HOLDINGS LP SP2 335 E SH 114 15.09 NR
29. SUMMIT QI PROPERTIES LLC ECZ 100 E SH 114 5.06 NR
Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response
Notices Sent: Sixteen (16)
Responses Received: None (0)