2009-02-09 Meeting Report (Glosser Addition)CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE
TEXAS
SPIN MEETING REPORT
CASE NO. ZA08 -091
PROJECT NAME: Glosser Addition
SPIN DISTRICT: SPIN 12
MEETING DATE: February 9, 2009
MEETING LOCATION: 1400 MAIN STREET, SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
MEETING ROOMS 3A 3B
TOTAL ATTENDANCE: Fifteen (15)
SPIN REPRESENTATIVE(S) PRESENT: Wendi Carlucci
APPLICANT(S) PRESENTING: Tom Matthews, Four Peaks Development, Inc.
STAFF PRESENT: Lorrie Fletcher, Planner I
STAFF CONTACT: Lorrie Fletcher, (817)748 -8069; Ifletcher @ci.southlake.tx.us
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Property Situation
The property is located on the west side of Peytonville between Cedar Creek Plantations
and Trail Creek subdivisions.
Development Details
Four Peaks Development, Inc. is proposing a zoning change for five (5) residential
lots with SF -1A Single Family Residential zoning. Development of Lots 3 -6 are
proposed on the concept plan; keeping the remaining two (2) lots in tact as the
original homestead. The proposed zoning is for approximately 10.3 acres. A private
30 foot access easement is proposed, fronting Lots 3 -6.
QUESTIONS DISCUSSION
QUESTION: Why just a 24 foot road?
RESPONSE: To keep the impact low as possible. The proposed road meets minimum city
requirements. With only 4 residential lots, this road will be adequate.
QUESTION: Will the road be private?
RESPONSE: Yes.
QUESTION: Will there be a security gate?
RESPONSE: Not at this point.
QUESTION: Where will the frontage be?
RESPONSE: The houses will face the south towards the private drive.
QUESTION: What about trash pick up?
RESPONSE: Same as any neighborhood in Southlake.
QUESTION: Will the street be cement?
RESPONSE: No, we are planning to put in asphalt.
QUESTION: What will be the square footage of the homes?
RESPONSE: Nothing specific yet. Probably a minimum of 4500 square feet.
QUESTION: Why would a buyer want to pay for a house that faces tennis courts?
RESPONSE: With good design and landscaping, I don't think it will be a problem. Most
living areas are in the rear of the house.
QUESTION: We are concerned about privacy issues?
RESPONSE: We can work with you on this.
QUESTION: Are there any easements or variances you are requesting other than the
road?
RESPONSE: No.
QUESTION: Can the creek handle the drainage?
RESPONSE: Yes. FIMA and my engineers have verified this.
QUESTION: Since the private drive is not maintained by the city, how will it be
maintained during construction?
RESPONSE: We will wait to apply the final top layer of asphalt until after the construction is
completed.
QUESTION: Will there be covenants in place to cover expenses for the road?
RESPONSE: Yes.
QUESTION: How is this application different from last year?
RESPONSE: Last year the applicant proposed to zone separately and there were access
issues.
QUESTION: How will you deal with drainage?
RESPONSE: We may plan for a swale on the north side. We have to follow all the rules
and regulations so we do not increase what is there now. Engineering is in
the process.
QUESTION: Has your development been cleared for P &Z yet?
RESPONSE: No, we have not made a formal submittal yet.
QUESTION: Are there any other subdivisions like this in Southlake?
RESPONSE: Yes, Bosworth and Saddle Creek.
QUESTION: Do the proposed lots meet city requirements?
RESPONSE: Yes.
QUESTION: What is your timing on this application?
RESPONSE: We are prepared to submit soon.
QUESTION: Why doesn't this case go before ZBA again since it was denied by them
last year?
RESPONSE: This is a different request.
QUESTION: What is the time period when a case is denied by ZBA before you can
re- apply?
RESPONSE: l believe it is 6 months.
At this point in the meeting, discussion occurred regarding ZBA case number 535, as well
as, many concerns for flooding /drainage.
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.