Loading...
Item 6CCase No. ZA19-0070 S T A F F R E P O R T November 25, 2019 CASE NO: ZA19-0070 PROJECT: Site Plan for Next Century Health Care Plaza EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Bonola Family LTD Partnership is requesting approval of a Site Plan for Next Century Health Care Plaza on property described as Lots 1R2 and 2, Block 1, Bonola Family Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 2540 and 2600 E. S.H. 114, Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: “C-3” General Commercial District. SPIN Neighborhood #4. DETAILS: The project is generally located at the northeast corner of E. SH 114 and Shady Lane. The purpose of this request is to seek approval of a Site Plan for six single story medical office buildings totaling approximately 50,000 square feet on approximately 6.8 acres. Site Data Summary Lot 1R2 Lot 2 Total Land Use Designation Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Existing Zoning “C-3” “C-3” “C-3” Gross/Net Acreage 1.12 ac. 5.68/5.61 ac. 6.80/6.73 ac. Open Space Area 0.40 ac. 1.71 ac. 2.11 Open Space % 35.71% 30.48% 31.35% Imp. Coverage Area 0.72 ac. 3.90 ac. 4.62 ac. Imp. Coverage % 64.29% 69.52% 68.65% Building Area 8,000 sf 42,000 sf 50,000 sf Parking Required* 1/150 with 10% variance 1/150 with 10% variance 1/150 With 10% variance Parking Provided 68 219 287 *Reciprocal parking agreement with Lot 1R1 to the east (66 spaces). Total spaces provided – 353. Total spaces required with 10% variance – 351 spaces. VARIANCES REQUESTED: Variance to the Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 42, Bufferyards, to waive the requirement for bufferyards along internal lot lines. Variance to Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 35.6 – Number of Parking Spaces Required, for a 10% reduction from 389 required spaces to 351 required spaces including Lot 1R1 to the east. Case No. ZA19-0070 Variance to Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 43.9.c.2 – Setback along S.H. 114 from 50’ to 38’. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the item on November 21, 2019 with the following conditions: P&Z Commission Condition Applicant’s Response The applicant’s willingness to provide additional landscape at the east emergency entrance and on the Shady Ln. side of the property near the detention pond. Additional landscaping has been provided in the area where the western emergency access driveway has been eliminated and additional trees are shown to be preserved along the north property line due to the reduced width of the private street from Shady Ln. The plans were being reviewed by the Landscape Administrator as of the date of this report. Subject to the Landscape Administrator’s approval of a Tree Preservation survey. The Landscape Administrator is reviewing revised plans submitted November 25, 2019 and a revised evaluation of a good faith effort to preserve trees will be made prior to the City Council meeting on December 3, 2019. Any new trees should be evergreen with foliage the full year. Canopy trees have been designated to be Live Oaks in the Landscape Plan plant list. Noting the applicant’s willingness to move the north side fence further south onto the property to allow landscape plantings on both sides of the fencing and to review the material type to either a wood a wrought iron type. The 8’ cedar fence with cap and metal posts, stained on both sides, that is shown along the north side of the private street from Shady Ln. meets the “F-1” bufferyard screening requirement. Further investigation into eliminating the east emergency access if not required by the Fire Marshal. The eastern emergency access driveway is required by the Fire Marshal for the pavement width of the private street from Shady Ln. to be reduced from 24’ to 19’ per the P&Z Commission motion for approval of The Canopy (ZA19-0071). The western emergency access driveway has been eliminated and an approved hammerhead turnaround is provided. ACTION NEEDED: 1) Conduct a public hearing 2) Consider approval of a Site Plan ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Site Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated November 25, 2019 (D) Surrounding Property Owners Map & Responses Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council members only) Link to Presentation Link to Variance Request Letter Link to Open Space Management Plan Link to Plans Case No. ZA19-0070 Link to 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Report STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (817) 748-8067 Richard Schell (817) 748-8602 Case No. Attachment A ZA19-0070 Page 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNER: Bonola Family LTD Partnership APPLICANT: Bonola Family LTD Partnership PROPERTY SITUATION: 2540 and 2600 E. S.H. 114, generally located at the northeast corner of E. SH 114 and Shady Lane. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 1R2 and 2, Block 1, Bonola Family Addition LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use CURRENT ZONING: “C-3” General Commercial District HISTORY: - September 19, 1989; City Council approved the “C-3” General Commercial District with the adoption of Zoning Ordinance 480 and the Official Zoning Map. - August 5, 2003; City Council approved a Preliminary Plat (5-0) subject to Plat Review Summary No. 3, dated July 11, 2003 (ZA03-038). - August 21, 2003; Approved a Final Plat under Planning Case ZA03-056 on the consent agenda of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Final Plat was filed in Cabinet ‘A’, Slide 8967, on January 30, 2004. - A Site Plan (ZA15-072) for Mainstreet Southlake Transitional Facility Care/Post-Acute Care to construct an approximately 68,595 square foot, two-story building with one-story wings was approved February 2, 2016. SOUTHLAKE 2035 PLAN: Consolidated Future Land Use Plan The 2035 future land use designation for the site is Mixed Use which is defined in the Southlake 2035 plan as follows: Purpose and Definition: 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. Case No. Attachment A ZA19-0070 Page 2 S.H. 114 Corridor Plan Land Use Recommendations (LU9): The Medical Cluster category is an overlay category designed and intended for the concentration of local to regional healthcare and related facilities, including Medical/Wellness, specialty surgical centers, pediatric care, geriatric care of an outpatient nature, research and development facilities including those operated in partnership with a hospital, university, or other similar institutions, and health, beauty and wellness clinics and facilities. Pathways Master Plan & Sidewalk Plan The Master Pathways Plan shows a future ≥ 8’ multi-use trail along the S.H. 114 frontage road and an 8’ multi-use trail is shown on the plan. A minimum 5’ sidewalk is required along Shady Ln. and a 5’ sidewalk is Medical and Wellness Overlay 114 Case No. Attachment A ZA19-0070 Page 3 shown on the plans. TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: Area Road Network and Conditions One driveway is proposed on the S.H. 114 frontage road. One emergency access driveway is proposed on a private driveway that connects to Shady Ln., which is a local street. A driveway connection is also proposed to the property to the east. Traffic Impact A Traffic Impact Analysis is being prepared for this development. In the event that the analysis indicates that a deceleration lane is required on the S.H. 114 frontage road, the applicant has prepared a Site Plan showing the right of way dedication and reconfigured lot boundary. Westbound East SH114 (006W) (between FM 1709 entrance ramp and Kimball Avenue) 24hr West Bound (15,587) AM Peak AM (1,070) 8:45 AM– 9:45 AM PM Peak PM (1,515) 4:45 PM – 5:45 PM * Based on the 2017 City of Southlake Traffic Count Report Use Sq Ft Vtpd* AM- IN AM- OUT PM- IN PM- OUT Medical Office (720) 50,000 1,807 119 62 89 134 * Vehicle Trips Per Day * AM-In, AM-Out, PM-In and PM-Out are peak hour generators on a weekday * Based on the ITE: Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition TREE PRESERVATION: A Preliminary Plat for the property was approved prior to the effective date of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-E. In accordance with Section 20.0, of Ord. 585-E, the development of the property is regulated by the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-B. The applicant has the option to request that the development of the property be regulated by the current Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-E. Under the regulations of Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-B the allowed removal of protected trees are as follows; Non-residential Development: In a non-residential development, all protected trees that the Landscape Administrator determines must be altered in order to install utility lines within public R.O.W. or public utility or drainage easements as shown on an approved Final Plat, or to install fire lanes, required parking areas and building pad sites as shown on an approved Site Plan, shall be exempt from the tree protection and tree replacement requirements listed in Sections 7 and 8 of this Ordinance. Any protected trees within these areas that the Landscape Administrator determines do not have to be altered shall be subject to the tree protection requirements listed in Section 8 of this Ordinance, but not to the tree replacement requirements listed in Section 7 of this Ordinance. All other areas of the development shall be subject to both the tree replacement and the tree protection requirements, and all other provisions of this Ordinance. Case No. Attachment A ZA19-0070 Page 4 The Landscape Administrator is reviewing revised plans submitted November 25, 2019 and a revised evaluation of a good faith effort to preserve trees will be made prior to the City Council meeting on December 3, 2019. UTILITIES: The property is served by an existing 8” water line in the S.H. 114 right of way and an existing 8” sewer line that runs across the northern boundary of the property. DRAINAGE: Drainage will generally flow from east to west across the property to a detention pond on the western portion of the property. CITIZEN INPUT: A SPIN meeting was not held for this development. A 2035 Corridor Planning Committee meeting was held on November 14, 2018. Link to 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Report PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTION: November 21, 2019; Approved (4-1) Dyche) referencing the staff report dated November 21, 2019 and the Revised Staff Review No. 2 dated November 21, 2019 and noting the following: - The applicant’s willingness to provide additional landscape at the east emergency entrance and on the Shady Ln. side of the property near the detention pond, - Subject to the Landscape Administrator’s approval of a Tree Preservation survey, - Any new trees should be evergreen with foliage the full year, - Noting the applicant’s willingness to move the north side fence further south onto the property to allow landscape plantings on both sides of the fencing and to review the material type to either a wood a wrought iron type, - Further investigation into eliminating the east emergency exit if not required by the Fire Marshal, - Specifically granting the variances requested of the 50’ setback would be moved to 38’ if TxDOT approved the decel lane, 10% parking reduction and no internal bufferyards. Commissioner Dyche was opposed due to lack of tree preservation. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Site Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated November 25, 2019. Case No. Attachment A ZA19-0070 Page 5 General Development Standards Applies? Comments Overlay Regulations Yes Subject to requirements of Corridor Overlay Building Articulation Yes Complies Masonry Standards Yes Complies Impervious Coverage Yes Complies Bufferyards Yes Variance requested to not require internal bufferyards between Lots 1R2 and 2, Block 1, Bonola Family Addition Interior Landscape Yes Complies subject to review comments being addressed Tree Preservation Yes Tree Preservation Ord. No. 585-B Sidewalks Yes Complies The criteria for granting a variance to Zoning Ord. No. 480, Section 35 – Off-Street Parking Requirements are below: 1. To receive a variance, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: a. A variance will reduce the impact of the project on surrounding residential properties; or b. Compliance with this ordinance would impair the architectural design or creativity of the project; or c. A variance is necessary to assure compatibility with surrounding developed properties; or d. The proposed construction is an addition to an existing project that does not meet the requirements of this ordinance. To qualify for any variance over ten percent (10%) to the off-street parking requirements, an applicant shall demonstrate the adequacy of the provided parking through a parking study or analysis (as amended by Ordinance 480-OOO). 2. The City Council may grant a variance by an affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council members present and voting on the matter. In order to grant a variance, the City Council must determine that a literal enforcement of the regulations will create an unnecessary hardship or a practical difficulty for the applicant; that the situation causing the unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty is unique to the affected property and is not self imposed; that the variance will not injure and will be wholly compatible with the use and permitted development of adjacent properties; and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the spirit and purpose of this ordinance. 3. If a variance application is denied by the City Council, no other variance of like kind relating to the same project or proposed project Case No. Attachment A ZA19-0070 Page 6 shall be considered or acted upon by the City Council for a period of six (6) months subsequent to the denial. There are no specific variance criteria for Zoning Ord. No. 480, Section 42 - Bufferyards Case No. Attachment A ZA19-0070 Page 7 Case No. Attachment C ZA19-0070 Page 1 SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY Case No.: ZA19-0070 Review No.: Three Date of Review: 11/25/19 Project Name: Site Plan – Next Century Health Care Plaza APPLICANT: Dr. Joseph Bonola PLANNER: Curtis Young Bonola Family Limited Partnership Sage Group, Inc. 2370 N. Pearson Ln. 1130 N. Carroll Ave., Ste. 200 Westlake, TX 76262 Southlake, TX 76092 Phone: (817) 832-1658 Phone: (817) 424-2626 E-mail: opusindustriesinc@sbcglobal.net CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 11/25/19 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 Site Plan must conform to the underlying “C-3” General Commercial District zoning. Show and label the required minimum building setback lines in the “C-3” General Commercial District along all lot boundaries. An application for an Amended Plat to relocate the lot boundary to provide the required setbacks as shown on the Site Plan has been submitted. Approval of the Site Plan is subject to the amended plat being processed, approved and recorded with the County prior to the issuance of any building permits. 2. Please revise the lot number in the title block from Lot 1R1 to Lot 1R2. 3. Show, label and dimension the width of the right of way and traveled roadway for Shady Lane adjacent to the site. 4. Parking for each lot must meet the requirements in Zoning Ord. No. 480, as amended, Section 35, Off-Street Parking Requirements. Per Zoning Ordinance No. 480, Section 43.9.b, at the time of review of any required Concept or Site Plan, the City Council may grant a variance to Section 35.6, Number of Parking Spaces Required. A parking space variance can only be at the request of the Owner/Applicant and cannot be required by the City Council as a part of their approval of any Concept Plan, Site Plan, Developer’s Agreement or by any other means. The City Co uncil shall be limited to granting a variance to no more than fifteen percent (15%) of the required number of off-street parking spaces. 2. To receive a variance, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: a. A variance will reduce the impact of the project on surrounding residential properties; or b. Compliance with this ordinance would impair the architectural design or creativity of the project; or c. A variance is necessary to assure compatibility with surrounding developed properties; or d. The proposed construction is an addition to an existing project that does not meet the requirements of this ordinance. Case No. Attachment C ZA19-0070 Page 2 To qualify for any variance over ten percent (10%) to the off-street parking requirements, an applicant shall demonstrate the adequacy of the provided parking through a parking study or analysis (as amended by Ordinance 480-OOO). 2. The City Council may grant a variance by an affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council members present and voting on the matter. In order to grant a variance, the City Council must determine that a literal enforcement of the regulations will create an unnecessary hardship or a practical difficulty for the applicant; that the situation causing the unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty is unique to the affected property and is not self imposed; that the variance will not injure and will be wholly compatible with the use and permitted development of adjacent properties; and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the spirit and purpose of this ordinance. 3. If a variance application is denied by the City Council, no other variance of like kind relating to the same project or proposed project shall be considered or acted upon by the City Council for a period of six (6) months subsequent to the denial. 5. Revise the Site Data Summary Chart as follows: a. Change the Land Use Designation to Mixed Use. b. Please change the column heading to Lot 1R2 instead of Lot 1R1. c. Please remove the leasable area row if the area is the same as the building area. d. Please verify the parking counts and show the parking provided for each lot and in total. There are 68 spaces on Lot 1R2 (1+7+11+20+20+9=68) and 219 spaces on Lot 2. Please break up the row counts by lot for the rows that cross the lot line (11 and 1 instead of 12 spaces on the north row and 11 and 4 instead of 15 spaces north of Bldgs. 1 and 2). e. Revise the note for the required parking spaces below the chart to show the calculation (8 spaces for the first 1,000 square feet and 1 space per 150 square feet after that. If City Council approves a variance for a 10% reduction in parking, put “Per Section 35 with 10% reduction”. f. The impervious coverage area plus the open space area must sum to the net acreage and the impervious percentage plus the open space percentage must sum to 100% for each lot and in total. * All driveways/points of ingress/egress must comply with the Driveway Ordinance No. 634, as amended). a. Per Section 5.2.c, commercial, multi-family and service driveways are not permitted on collector or local streets unless the tract or lot has no other public access. The development proposes two emergency access only driveways onto an existing and proposed ingress/egress/access easement that connects to Shady Ln., which is a local street. The fire lane connections as shown must be constructed prior to issuance of any building permits. * Provide sidewalks and/or trails in compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended and the Master Pathways Plan. A future ≥ 8’ multi-use trail is shown along the S.H. 114 frontage road and an 8’ multi-use trail is shown on the plan. A minimum 5’ sidewalk is required along Shady Ln. and a 5’ sidewalk is shown on the plans. * The following comment pertains to existing easements on the property: a. Buildings 4, 5 and 6 are shown to encroach into the existing drainage easement at the northwest corner of the property, Building 1 encroaches into the 25’ access easement at Case No. Attachment C ZA19-0070 Page 3 the southeast portion of the property and Building 2 encroaches into the 10’ Oncor Electric Delivery Company Easement. These easements must be abandoned or reconfigured as necessary prior to the issuance of building permits for buildings encroaching into the easements. An application for an amended plat has been submitted. * The following comment pertains to bufferyards: a. A 5’ Type ‘A’ bufferyards is required between Lots 1R1 and 1R2, Block 1, Bonola Family Addition. A variance request letter has been submitted to allow no internal bufferyards. (See Landscape Administrator comments). * A minimum 8 foot tall masonry screen wall matching the principal building with a solid metal access gate is required for all trash receptacle enclosures. No trash receptacle enclosures are shown on Lot 2. If the buildings on Lot 2 will use the trash receptacles on Lot 1R2, please submit a shared use and maintenance agreement prior to issuance of a building permit for any building on Lot 2. Tree Conservation/Landscape Review E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us Keith Martin Landscape Administrator Phone: (817) 748-8229 TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS: 1. Either survey or provide on the Tree Conservation Plan the ranges of trunk diameters and species density information for the mott trees in the center of the property which were not individually surveyed. If it is not surveyed now, it will be required to be clearly sur veyed and provided on the required Tree Protection Plan if a Building Permit is submitted. There are clearly existing protected trees outside of the proposed easements where utilities are proposed, fire lanes, parking areas, and the building pads. These trees will be required to be mitigated in accordance with the regulations of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-B. 2. On the Tree Conservation Plan provide proposed grade changes, cut/fill. * A Preliminary Plat for the property was approved prior to the effective date of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-E. In accordance with Section 20.0, of Ord. 585-E, the development of the property is regulated by the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-B. The applicant has the option to request that the development of the property be regulated by the current Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-E. Under the regulations of Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-B the allowed removal of protected trees are as follows; Non-residential Development: In a non-residential development, all protected trees that the Landscape Administrator determines must be altered in order to install utility lines within public R.O.W. or public utility or drainage easements as shown on an approved Final Plat, or to install fire lanes, required parking areas and building pad sites as shown on an approved Site Plan, shall be exempt from the tree protection and tree replacement requirements listed in Sections 7 and 8 of this Ordinance. Any protected trees within these areas that the Landscape Administrator determines do not have to be altered shall be subject to the tree protection requirements listed Case No. Attachment C ZA19-0070 Page 4 in Section 8 of this Ordinance, but not to the tree replacement requirements listed in Section 7 of this Ordinance. All other areas of the development shall be subject to both the tree replacement and the tree protection requirements, and all other provisions of this Ordinance. * EVALUATIONS: The Landscape Administrator shall evaluate any plans required by this Ordinance to determine whether the developer has made a good-faith effort to preserve as many protected trees as possible. The Landscape Administrator shall prepare an analysis and forward it to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council for their consideration regarding denial or approval of any concept plan, site plan, and preliminary plat that is necessary for development. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council shall take into consideration the criteria for tree preservation listed in Section 4.5 of this Ordinance in determining whether to deny or approve any concept plan, site plan, or preliminary plat. The criteria within Section 4.5 which the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council take into consideration for tree preservation in determining whether to deny or approve any concept plan, site plan, or preliminary plat. a. Whether or not a reasonable accommodation or alternative solution can be made to accomplish the desired activity without the alteration of the tree; b. The cost of preserving the tree; c. The increased development costs caused by preserving the tree; d. Whether the tree is worthy of preservation; e. The effect of the alteration on erosion, soil moisture, retention, flow of surface waters, and drainage systems; f. The need for buffering residential areas from the noise, glare, and visual effects of nonresidential uses; g. Whether the tree interferes with a utility service; h. Whether the proposed tree replacement procedures pursuant to Section 7 of this Ordinance adequately mitigate the alteration of the tree; and i. Whether the alteration adversely affects the public health, safety or welfare. * Development Evaluation The Landscape Administrator is reviewing revised plans submitted November 25, 2019 and a revised evaluation of a good faith effort to preserve trees will be made prior to the City Council meeting on December 3, 2019. The previous evaluation is below. Given the lack of information provided on the submitted Tree Conservation Plan and Grading Plan, a good-faith effort has not been made to preserve protected trees across the proposed development. It is unfortunate that the mass quantity of existing trees is within the central portion of the property but there seems to be no attempt to preserve any existing trees within the interior landscape areas on Lot 2, and no tree removal mitigation is proposed. Existing trees are proposed to be preserved outside of the building pad area on Lot 1R2. Since no information is provided regarding grading across the property, it is difficult to Case No. Attachment C ZA19-0070 Page 5 determine if any reasonable accommodations or alternative solutions can be made to accomplish the desired activity without the alteration of existing trees. If retaining walls were built would the cost of the construction of the retaining walls be more than preserving the tree/s their intended to preserve? Not enough information is provided about the trees not surveyed in the central portion of the development to determine which trees may be worthy of preservation and may provide some buffering of the nonresidential use. * 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. LANDSCAPE COMMENTS: * The plans were being reviewed by the Landscape Administrator as of the date of this report. A comparison of the changes to the plans will be presented at the City Council meeting on December 3, 2019. The previous comments are below. 1. The “Required” and “Provided” interior landscape canopy trees calculations for Lot 2 are incorrect. The required minimum amount of canopy trees for 21,000 square feet is forty-two (42). 2. Change the caliper inches of new canopy trees to 4” in the plant list to match the legend. 3. There are parking islands with no proposed lighting that contain accent trees. All parking planter islands in parking areas shall contain a minimum of one (1) canopy tree with the remaining area in shrubs, ground cover, ornamental grasses or seasonal color. Planter islands which have light poles for lighting the parking areas may substitute two (2) understory/accent trees for the required canopy tree. 4. One of the parking landscape islands on Lot LR2 is less than 12’ wide. Parking lot islands shall have a minimum width of 12’ back-to-back if curbed or 13’ edge-to-edge if no curb is intended, and shall be equal to the length of the parking stall. The other half island which is also less than 12’ wide, does not attach to a parking landscape island on the east adjoining property. The two parking landscape islands which would be on the east adjoining property were combined into a larger island to preserve an existing tree. 5. Existing tree credits are being taken for existing trees within the bufferyards and interior landscape area. Existing tree credits shall only be granted if the tree/s are in healthy condition and all requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance have been met as determined at the time of inspection for a Permanent Certificate of Occupancy. * The applicant is requesting a variance to eliminate the required interior lot line bufferyards. USE OF BUFFERYARDS – A bufferyard may be used for passive recreation, such as pedestrian, bike or equestrian trails, provided that: (a) no plant material is eliminated; (b) the total width of the bufferyard is maintained; and (c) all other regulations of this ordinance are met. In no event shall the following uses be permitted in a bufferyard: playfields, stables, swimming pools, tennis courts or similar facilities, accessory buildings, parking facilities, or tras h dumpsters. Case No. Attachment C ZA19-0070 Page 6 * 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: 1. This review is preliminary. Additional requirements may be necessary with the review of civil construction plans. Utilities:  Connect proposed water line in cul-de-sac to existing water line to the south of Lot 5. Drainage:  Detention outfall from Lot 4 on the Concept Plan for The Canopy (ZA19-0071) cannot create adverse impacts to adjacent properties. Show and label the outfall and easement from the detention pond to the inlet in Grapevine. Fire Department Review Kelly Clements Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal Phone: (817) 748-8233 E-mail: kclements@ci.southlake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: The required backflow protection (double check valve) for the sprinkler systems can be located on the riser if the riser is within 100 feet of the water main, measured linearly along the length of the pipe. If the riser is further than 100 feet from the main, the double check valve shall be in a vault. Riser rooms shall be a minimum of 5’X5’ if the double check is located in a vault, or a minimum of 6’X6’ if it is located on the riser. (Label riser room locations) Provide a dead-end fire lane in front of Building 5 to meet the distance requirements for the Fire Department Connection to be within 50 feet of a fire lane, or provide a remote FDC. Revise the curve radius adjacent to the dead end fire lane to be a minimum 30’. General Informational Comments * No SPIN meeting is being held for this development. * No review of proposed signs is intended with this site plan. A separate building permit is required prior to construction of any signs. Case No. Attachment C ZA19-0070 Page 7 * 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. * It appears that this property lies within the 65 LDN D/FW Regional Airport Overlay Zone and will require construction standards that meet requirements of the Airport Compatible Land Use Zoning Ordinance No. 479. * 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 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. * 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. * A letter of permission from the adjacent property owner(s) on the north 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 S.H. 114. * Denotes Informational Comment Case No. Attachment D ZA19-0070 Page 1 SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS MAP & RESPONSES SPO # Owner Zoning Physical Address Acreage Response 1. BONOLA FAMILY LTD PRTNSHP C3 2540 E SH 114 5.64 NR 2. ABSHER, KAY BLANKENSHIP SF1-A 410 SHADY LN 1.69 NR 3. CHAMATHIL, VARGHESE SF1-A 328 SHADY LN 1.44 NR 4. 2354 KIMBALL LLC SP1 2360 E SH 114 1.45 NR 5. SOUTHLAKE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT C3 2680 E SH 114 1.25 NR 6. BONOLA FAMILY LTD PRTNSHP C3 2600 E SH 114 1.15 NR 7. LANCE, CAROL ANN AG 413 SHADY LN 2.85 NR 8. CLARY, HELEN SF1-A 415 SHADY LN 1.88 NR 9. GUILER, CAROL SF1-A 405 SHADY LN 2.08 NR 10. ANCOR REALTY 2720 LLC SP2 2720 E SH 114 1.52 NR 11. 100 EAST MIDWAY LLC AG 395 SHADY LN 8.66 NR Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response Notices Sent: Ten (10) Responses Received: None (0)