The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 7D - ResponsesResidential Planned Unit Development District- Land Use and Development Regulations, Variance Request and Open Space Management Plan for the 13.09 acre development located at 2970 Burney Lane known as The Conservation Southlake, Texas 7 October 2020 Case # ZA20-0049 Sage Group, Inc. This Residential Planned Unit Development shall abide by the all conditions of the City of Southlake Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, as it pertains to the “SF-1A” Single-Family Residential zoning district; and the City of Southlake Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended: The following regulations shall apply to all lots, except as noted: Minimum House Size: All new houses constructed shall be a minimum of 4,000 s.f. in floor area. Street: A 25’ B-B pavement section with standard 6” curb, in a 40’ Access Easement shall be provided along the frontage of the residential lots. The cul-de-sac shall have a 100’ B-B outside diameter of paving, in a one hundred ten (110’) foot diameter easement. Residential Lots shall not be required to front on a public street. (Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended, Article VIII Miscellaneous Requirements, Section 8.01 Lotting Requirements, A.) Sidewalks: In keeping with the nearby neighborhood conventions, no sidewalks shall be required. Side and rear lot lines shall be configured as shown on the Development Plan. All newly constructed homes shall be required to be protected by a fire-suppression sprinkler system. No separate common open space lot shall be required, consistent with the normal requirements of SF-1A zoning, which this development is patterned after. In the Open Space, Pedestrian Access and Wildlife Easement, no construction or living tree removal shall be allowed. City sewer is and will not be available at this site, so this development requests a waiver to the normal requirement, listed in Chapter 19, Article III, Division 2, Section 19-88 of the Southlake Code or Ordinances, to install a sewage collection system that extends to the development’s borders and throughout the development. Open Space Management Plan: The “Access Easement,” and the “Open Space, Pedestrian Access and Wildlife Easement” areas in the project, and common facilities such as the access road, shall be maintained by a Homeowners Association (HOA), to be established for the development. All other areas shall be the responsibility of the individual property owners, including the front yards and required streetscape trees of the residential lots. All property owners shall be required to be a member of the HOA. Dues assessments, required for the maintenance of the landscape easement areas and other HOA activities, shall be mandatory. The HOA, through a resident Board of Directors, shall be responsible for the maintenance and operation of the protected open space within the development, either directly or through a third-party management company. No full-time employees are contemplated to be necessary. The expenses required to maintain the roadway and easement areas at a quality level shall be estimated annually by the HOA Board, and dues shall be determined and assessed on each property owner in an equitable fashion at such a rate as necessary to maintain such a level of quality. The annual expenses for such open space maintenance are initially estimated to be $8,000, or approximately $1,000 for each of the HOA homeowners. Authority to enforce these requirements, and to place a lien on the property if such dues are not paid, shall be in the form of written Deed Restrictions and Covenants, agreed to by all property owners in the HOA at purchase, and shall run with the land. Provisions shall be made, in the HOA Bylaws and Deed Restrictions, that in the unlikely event the HOA fails to maintain all or a portion of the protected open space in reasonable order and condition, the City of Southlake may, but is not required to, assume responsibility for its maintenance and take corrective action, including the provision of extended maintenance. The costs of such maintenance may be charged to the HOA or individual property owners that make up the HOA, and may include administrative costs and penalties which shall become a lien on all property in the development. 10/13/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQAKXFrry3pXhLmRWkRgEp1LE…1/1 10/7/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQAG5%2BZGgTPxJLhDBFswTS%2Bzc%3D 1/6 Fwd: Development on Burney Ln Ken Baker <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us> Sat 10/3/2020 3:19 PM To: Dennis Killough <dkillough@ci.southlake.tx.us>; Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Get Outlook for iOS From: Kay Johnson Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 2:51:36 PM To: Ken Baker <kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us>; Daniel Kubiak <Daniel.Kubiak@ci.southlake.tx.us>; ; Lepp, Amy <Amy.Lepp@ci.southlake.tx.us>; Gina Phalen <Gina.Phalen@ci.southlake.tx.us>; Michael Springer <Michael.Springer@ci.southlake.tx.us>; Sco 10/7/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQAG5%2BZGgTPxJLhDBFswTS%2Bzc%3D 2/6 and despite being asked by many realtors about selling our house, we are never planning to leave. The developer will continue to say that this development is compatible with the City of Southlake. I agree with that statement. But more importantly, it is NOT compatible with this neighborhood, which many consider a hidden gem of Southlake. The developer has had meetings with the neighborhood to discuss his plans, but not offer any compromises.The public entrance to the Corps he has added to the north end of the property is NOT desired by the majority of the neighborhood. He uses this as a selling point; however, we already have access to this area (off Harbor Court) and added traffic/street parking on a curved road is not safe nor desired. He did not ask the neighborhood's opinion on sidewalks, street lights or signs as suggested by the Corridor Committee. He is currently planning to re-zone a platted lot in our subdivision, place a private road and an entrance sign in the front of that platted lot, and make that platted lot part of the new subdivision without ever re-platting? I do strongly believe that he is purposefully avoiding re-platting as he knows he does not have the neighborhood support, especially of adjacent lots. In my opinion, it will not be financially beneficial for this developer or any future developer to repurpose this area for residential use in a way that will be compatible with the neighborhood. I do feel that the city has an opportunity here to preserve this precious piece of land and preserve this unique neighborhood with all its wildlife and trees by purchasing it for the city. The profound opposition of the neighborhood to keep it as it is has made it an even more inspiring place for us to live. The remainder of my issues in opposition are summarized in the petition signed by the neighborhood. Please enjoy the photos and I would be happy to walk the neighborhood with anyone interested. It is beautiful here. Respectfully, Kay Johnson 2940 Burney Ln 918 289 3009 10/7/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQAG5%2BZGgTPxJLhDBFswTS%2Bzc%3D 3/6 10/7/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQAG5%2BZGgTPxJLhDBFswTS%2Bzc%3D 4/6 10/7/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQAG5%2BZGgTPxJLhDBFswTS%2Bzc%3D 5/6 10/7/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQAG5%2BZGgTPxJLhDBFswTS%2Bzc%3D 6/6 10/7/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQABoTHcCprGZMh7shCTb3Fls%3D 1/2 Woodbridge Development/Harbor Oaks Mary Van Sant Mon 10/5/2020 11:18 AM To: Jerod Potts <jpotts@ci.southlake.tx.us> Mr. Potts, My name is Mary Van Sant OConnor, I have resided at 2965 Burney Lane, Southlake for 27 years. I strongly oppose the proposed development by Woodbridge Development aka Jody Boyd on the grounds that it goes against every stated objective of the 2035 plan. This plan was developed after surveying the residents of Southlake. What is overwhelmingly apparent in the 2035 plan is preservation of the few remaining open natural spaces and quality development that maintains and enhances established neighborhoods. This proposal does the exact OPPOSITE. Here are some other not insignificant objections. 1. By allowing Mr Houseman’s property to be incorporated into this PUD you are violating our deeds and restriction. Deeds and Restrictions Mr Houseman agreed to when he signed them on purchase of his home. The city of Southlake along with the developer of Huse Homeplace landlocked Mrs Myles, Harbor Oaks residents did not!!!!! If this goes through, do we as larger holders of property in Harbor Oaks have the right to make our properties into a PUD? Right now I can’t even put a toilet in my barn because of building restrictions. 2. The road itself is too close to Mr Fredricks property and puts roads on almost all 3 sides of his home. The road empties directly into the front of my home, is too close to both my drive and the Fredricks to make this a safe access onto Burney. 3. Nothing about the proposed development reflects the current nature of the surrounding community. The streets are not compatible with our neighborhood. The lot sizes are not compatible, the proposed street lights are not compatible, the aerobic septic systems are not compatible. 4. Probably the biggest problem with this development is the topography of the land and the harm this development will do to one of the last open natural spaces left in Southlake and this wildlife corridor. I urge you to read carefully Ray Chancellor’s letter to you regarding the treasure that Southlake has in the property in question. Because the land will need major landfill and huge culverts to divert water that flows at tremendous speed and volume through the back of the Fredricks property the development costs are huge. Consequently the developer says he can not reduce the number of homes or change the road to be compatible with Harbor Oaks. Because the lots are small and the land very rocky aerobic septic systems are required. I know Mr Boyd has stated that because these people will have so much money that they will have all the resources needed to prevent any pollution. This is just not true! These systems can easily spew untreated waste when the system is not working properly. I ask you to just google “problems with aerobic systems” and you will see how tricky they can be to maintain. The erosion when a huge home is place against the Corp property can be witness on the trail that backs up to the development off of Ridgecrest. I ride and hike back there frequently and that one house has created major erosion. I can only imagine what 7 homes that have 10/7/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQABoTHcCprGZMh7shCTb3Fls%3D 2/2 changed the topography will do to the Corp property to the west of this development. This is just not a suitable piece of property to try and develop. Mr Boyd also touts how many trees he will save but if you look at his plan and what he allows the homeowners for buildable space, several lots could eliminate all the trees. His tree preservation plan only encompasses the road and lot development. Once in, the homeowners can wipe out a large portion of the trees with tennis courts and swimming pools etc. 5. The safety issue of putting more large homes in a neighborhood with one way in and one way out. We are already overbuilt back here. My water pressure continues to decline since the 2 large homes have been built near me. What will 8 mega mansions do? 6. This is a personal note, I purchased my home specifically because further development In this neighborhood seemed impossible. We were an established platted community, it was quiet and rural in nature. To think now a road will empty directly into my property and street signage and lights will be the new norm is upsetting. I have been paying over $23,000.00 a year in taxes to live here because of the amenities and features I enjoy in Harbor Oaks. I’m retired and living on my retirement so this is no small expense but it has been worth it for me to have this type of community. Placing this road and development in its current form will harm my property value and the quality of my life not to mention the sensitive environment this property holds. I would also like you to consider the construction that will be taking place over the next several years. From Road grading and construction to 8 multi million dollar homes being built with the only access dumping directly in my front yard and down the side of the Fredricks. Not to mention the staging of all the equipment. Recently 2 multi million dollar homes have been built off Burney. I had trucks and heavy equipment staged in front of my house for 2 years. It is not a pleasant thing. This was only 2 large homes. I can’t imagine heavy road construction and 8 mega mansions. I’m 66, this isn’t how I want to spend my later years here after paying huge taxes for the peace and tranquillity I once enjoyed. 7. I understand the city settled with Ms Myles in 2006 for over a million dollars regarding her landlocked property by Bob Jones. Why can’t you settle with her on this property? 8. I would also like to ask what kind of bond Woodbridge is required to have to ensure they have adequate financing to complete the project. Looking at the Dun and Bradstreet report, Woodbridge Development made roughly only a $167,000.00 Does he have additional backing and if so, who? 9. I strongly urge you to deny this proposal. This land should be preserved, not raped by another money hungry developer. Let them go where the environmental and community impact won’t be so very great. Respectfully, Mary Van Sant OConnor Sent from my iPad Sent from my iPad 1 My Objections to the Zone Change/Proposed Development Adjacent to Harbor Oaks Subdivision – Oct 4, 2020 Submitted by: Thelma Bea Wilson, 2930 Burney Ln Proposed Roadway (ROW) using Housmans lot • Housmans’ lot is Lot 10, Block 2 in Harbor Oaks Subdivision • Deed restrictions say: “no lot shall be used for other than single family • Deed restrictions say: “no owner shall be permitted to re-subdivide any lot in the Addition” • Deed restrictions say: “no building or structure of any other character is permitted to use existing easements” • Propose development shows a roadway (ROW) on Lot 10, Block 2, that is in direct violation of Harbor Oaks Deed Restrictions. It is proposed to be next to Fredricks lots with severe impact to his property value. • Signage – The proposed sign for the proposed development is in direct conflict with the Harbor Oaks Deed Restrictions. We would not be allowed to add anything but “for sale” or “for rent” signs, per Deed Restrictions. • Will the request to City for R-PUD for proposed development be allowed since ALL of Harbor Oaks is SF-1. If SF-1 was applied to development request, it would first require ALL of Harbor Oaks residents approval . • Corridor Committee minutes #23 asked applicant need to ensure there are no existing Deed Restrictions that would preclude the proposed ANNEXATION of a lot (Lot 10, Blk 2) from the Harbor Oaks subdivision. • Compatibility: All adjacent lots are all 2 acres (without including easement (adjacent ROW area). The proposed lot sizes are down to 1.1 to 1.6 acres ALL OF WHICH INCLUDE THE EASEMENTS (ROW AREA). By comparison, if you added easement size to existing HO lots it would be a plus of 7000 ft. • Lot widths of development vs established HO lots are drastically different. Adjacent HO lots are at least 215 ft in width while the proposed show narrow lots of 130’ in width. ALL HO lots are minimum width of 190’. Proposed ROW width = 40’ while existing HO roadway is 60’. • Proposal shows street lighting, and signage. Existing area of HO has neither. 2 My Objections to the Zone Change/Proposed Development Adjacent to Harbor Oaks Subdivision – Oct 4, 2020 (continued) • Signage: Developer is proposing a “lighted” sign for the project. Harbor Oaks = no sign. Carmel Bay = modest sign w/o lights Huse Homeplace= very small sign w/o lights. • Lot size of proposal vs Harbor Oaks: Proposed lots are 1.1 – 1.6 ac includes easement in the calculations. Harbor Oaks adjacent lot sizes are 2.2 ac and higher, not including easements in calculations. • Impact to environment: City 2035 plan specifically says the city’s mission is to “preserve the rural setting and high slopes” etc in the area. This proposal does not meet with the City 2035 promises nor is good for the fragile eco system attached to Harbor Oaks. Gaylord Texan, City of Grapevine, Trophy Club and Colleyville are currently trying to “preserve/protect” the wildlife habitat and have asked for Ray Cancellor’s consult on the matter. Southlake could join the effort and “preserve/protect” the wildlife habitat that we already have. Why not ask City to purchase this fragile portion of land. It is adjoined to the Bob Jones Wildlife Center area. Summary: It is my request that P&Z realize what we have in the North part of town and see that this proposal does not in any way show compatibility with the rural setting in Harbor Oaks. This proposal violates many of Harbor Oaks Deed Restrictions. This proposal will drastically, if approved, impact our fragile ecological treasure adjacent to Harbor Oaks. I am opposed to the proposed development for the above reasons. I hope you will consider all of the above and help preserve what Southlake has – a treasure! Thanks for your consideration, Thelma (Bea) Wilson 2930 Burney Lane Resident since 1990 (30 years) BURNEY ESATES OPPOSITION NARRITATIVE 9/22/20 Introduction: Burney Lane provides the only/single point of access to the Harbor Oaks Subdivision and some smaller subdivisions adjacent to Harbor Oaks we’ll call the Harbor Oaks Neighborhood (HON). This area is located at the end of Carroll Road on the very north side of Southlake and is bordered on three sides by Lake Grapevine/COE property and is adjacent to the Quail Creek Subdivision to the south. Harbor Oaks was developed some 40 years ago and today is an exemplary environmentally friendly estate development of near “historic age” where deer and a variety of many other fauna are regularly seen along the streets and adjacent lots. It typifies the earlier developments in Southlake north of SH 114 when rural/estate and equestrian style living were the norm and is very different from more recent and conventional Southlake development where sanitary sewer service became available such as many areas south of SH 114. The HON consists of approximately 160+/- acres and some 70 to 80 homes. Some of the things that make this area so desirable and successful as a community relate to its open, rural and equestrian friendly atmosphere. This is accomplished in part by: 1) Wide, rural estate roadway sections with minimum 60 foot Right-of-way, grassed/treed parkways, non-curb and gutter pavement, no sidewalks, and no street lights. This not only enhances the open atmosphere but also encourages use by a variety of flora and fauna as well as equestrian and other residential uses as simple as walking the dog. This is enhanced by close proximity to the abundance of COE land nearby and adjacent. 2) Lot Size and wide lot dimensions. Harbor Oaks lots average well over 2 acres not including adjacent road ROW areas. 3) Abundance of both protected and new growth trees in dedicated street ROW and on platted lots. Harbor Oaks is aging beautifully and is a very successful community demonstrated not only by the large number of residents that have lived there 25 + years but also by the desirability by younger people and families to relocate from more conventional developments if properties become available. Reasons for Opposition: A) Lack of Neighborhood Compatibility 1) Adjacent Lot Size: Adjacent Harbor Oaks lots are all 2 acres or larger not including the adjacent road ROW area. The proposed adjacent lots are much smaller and include their adjacent road area due to the road in an “easement” as opposed to a dedicated ROW. Add about 7000 square feet to each Harbor Oaks platted lot acreage to compare to the proposed lots. To be compatible the proposed adjacent lots should be at least as large as the adjacent Harbor Oaks lots. 2) Adjacent lot width: Lot width helps spread houses out and help a more open appearace. Adjacent Harbor oaks lots are at least 215 feet in width while the proposed shows lots as narrow as 130 feet in width. All harbor Oaks lots are minimum width of 190’ +/- 3) Average Lot Size: Harbor Oaks average lot size is 2.5+ acres as opposed to the proposed average is only 1.6 acres. 4) 40 foot Private Road (easement): The proposed is for a 40 foot wide private road easement, curb and gutter pavement, street lights, sidewalk, potential for future private gated entrance, and entry monument …. All of which not only do not exist currently in Harbor Oaks, are not desired by HO residents, and are contrary to the character of the neighborhood. Also by putting the roadway in an easement it effectively adds the roadway area to the lot acreage making the lots appear larger when compared to a ROW dedication lot as is the case in Harbor Oaks. B) Access The proposed roadway which will generate about 80 vehicle trips a day once traffic dies down to normal volumes after construction etc. is proposed to go through a Platted lot that is part of the Harbor Oaks Platted subdivision. THIS IS JUST WRONG! No one would want this to happen to them in their subdivision especially after 40 years of successful, desirable existence. Add street lights, monument sign, potential future gate …. All wrong for this area and residents. C) Total Lot Count and Neighborhood Service: Harbor Oaks is also unusual in that it only has a single point of access for travel and utilities that serves the existing 70 to 80 homes. This does not allow for an alternative emergency vehicle service access route if this point of access is blocked, alternative water service if the one water line that serves through this location is down, and the same for gas and other utilities. Normal planning practice does not allow more than about 15 homes on a single access. Minimizing the number of additional houses using this single point of access is very important to consider. Each new house just adds more traffic and utility usage to an already undesirable situation. Seven new lots would increase traffic and utility usage by about 10% ….. which straw will break the Camel’s back? . 1267f«e 52VOL REAL PROFERH RECORDS 9.00 W 40 6 / 1 6 .2000 5 1 1 5 5 5 DEDICATION AND RESTRICTIONS HARBOR OAKS 43080 An Addition to the City of Soutﬁlake, Tarrant County, Texas NOW, THEREFORE, know all men by these presents, that the undersigned, JAMES B, STAHALA, Trustee, hereinafter called "undersigned”, being the fee simple owner of atract of land containing 134. 731 acres, more or less, situated in the John Childress Survey, Abstract No. 254, Tarrant County, Texas, has caused said property to be platted and subdivided into an addition known as HARBOR OAKS, an Addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, as shown on the Plat of said Addition recorded in Volume 388-135, Page. 11, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, which Plat is incorporated by reference for all applicable purposes herein. For the purposes of assuring the orderly and uniform development of the above-described property, and in order to carry out ageneral plan of development for the beneﬁt of each and every purchaser of alot in said Addition, the following restrictions upon the use of said property are hereby established; and each and every lot shown on the Plat of the Addition is held and shall be conveyed subject to the reservations, restrictions, and c o v e n a n t s h e r e i n a f t e r s e t f o r t h . 1. Use of Land: Only one (1) overground or underground single-family residence and incidental suitable out-buildings shall be con¬ structed or permitted to remain on any lot. No lot shall ever be used for other than asingle-family residence or purposes incidental thereto. No garage or out-building on any lot shall be used as aresidence for living quarters, temporary or otherwise, except by servants engaged on the premises, or by abona ﬁde relative who makes his home with the owner of the residential lot. 2' Size of Living Area: A n y r e s i d e n c e e r e c t e d , e i t h e r o n e - s t o r y or two-story, shall'have aminimum ﬂoor area of not less than that square foot minimum speciﬁed for the lot on which the residence is erected as follows: (a) 1, 800 square foot minimum ﬂoor area: Lots 1through 4, Block 1; Lots 1through 5, Block 2; Lots 1through 6, Block 3; and Lots 1through 8, Block 4; V (b) 2, 000 square foot minimum ﬂoor area: Lots 6through 10, Block 2; Lot 7and Lots 10 through 12, Block 3; and Lot 9, Block 4; 2, 500 square foot minimum ﬂoor area: Lots 8and 9, Block 3; and Lots 19 through 23, Block 4; (d) 3, 000 square foot minimum ﬂoor area: Lots 10 through 18, Block 4. (c) By "ﬂoor area” as that term is used above, is meant to be ﬂoor area of the residence only, "Residence" as that term is used in this para- 'graph, does not include the ﬂoor area of the out-buildings, servant quarters garages, and similar buildings attached to the main dwelling, nor does it include the ﬂoor area of porches, basements, or attics. Dedication and Restrictions -Page One VOL opv/0 i 1267p*ge 5 <1 VOL 3, Building Materials: (a) Masonry: All overground residential dwellings shall have a minimum exterior wall area for the ground ﬂoor of 5C% brick, stone or stucco plaster. The visible exterior wall area of underground homes shall be at least 50% brick, stone or stucco plaster. The remaining walls of under¬ ground homes shall be constructed of any suitable building material. (b) Rooﬁng Material: The rooﬁng material utilized on the roof of any overground residential dwelling shall be composition rooﬁng material or better. Any composition materials must weigh not less than 300 lbs, per 100 sq. feet of roof area. Rooﬁng material for underground homes shall be any suitable rooﬁng material for said type of home, (c) Other Construction Materials: Only new construction materials (except for used brick or stone) sliall be used in constructing any structures situated on any lot. 4, Building Lines: Building lines as shown on the recorded plat of the Addition shall be observed. In the event building lines are not speciﬁed on said recorded plat, no residential dwelling or out-building shall be erected or permitted to remain nearer than ﬁfteen (15) feet from any side line, nor nearer than tvmnty-ﬁve (25) feet from any front line, 5. Garages: Every overground residential dwelling shall have at least atwo (2) car garage which shall be attached to the residence or to a breezeway or covered porch which is attached to the residence. Underground homes may contain overground garages which are not attached to the under¬ ground home, but which shall be of sufﬁcient size to contain at least two (2) cars. For both overground and underground homes, no garage doors may face any street. 6. No Re-Subdivision of Lots: No owner shall be permitted to re-subdivide any lot of the Addition, 7. Pets and Livestock: Subject to all applicable city, county, state and/or federal laws, rules or regulations, the owners or other occupants of residential dwellings in the Addition shall be allowed to keep and maintain domestic pets and livestock, with the exception that no swine whatsoever shall be permitted to remain on any lot in the Addition, No lot shall be utilized for any commercial purposes with reference to the pets or livestock referred to above. No more than two (2) head of livestock per acre shall be permitted. Easements Reserved: The undersigned reserves aperpetual easement in, on and under the lots of tne width and extent as shown on the recorded Plat of the Addition for the purpose of laying or permitting the laying, placing and maintaining of utilities, and such other purposes as may be shown on the recorded Plat; and the undersigned further reserves aperpetual easement in, on and under the streets as shown on the recorded Plat, for the purpose of laying, or permitting the laying, placing and main¬ taining of utilities with the right to go upon such lots and streets, and to place or permit the placing, erecting, repairing, and maintenance of utility instal¬ lations without interference. Fences, walls, and hedges, but no building or structure of any other character, may be erected or maintained on the ease¬ ments shown on the recorded Plat of the addition, provided (1) that such fences, walls, and hedges do not interfere in any way with the use of such easement 8. Dedication and Restrictions -Page Two VOL 6347i'age 3G5 1267me 54VOL by public utilities then utilizing or hereafter wishing to utilize the same, (2) that the rights of the owners of such fences, walls, and hedges shall be subordinate to the rights of such public utilities, and (3) that such public utilities may, at any time without liability to the owner, remove such fence, wall, or hedge where the removal of same is incidental to the performance of public utility service operations; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, no fence, wall, hedge, or any other obstruction whatsoever shall be erected or permitted to remain on any portion of the twenty (20) foot jogging, bridle and utility easement shown on the recorded Plat of the Addition, The undersigned reserves the right to construct afence along both sides of said jogging, bridle and utility easement. Lot owners, may, at their discretion, place fences contiguous to any fence constructed by the undersigned so long as no fence shall encroach on said twenty (20) foot jogging, bridle and utility easement. For purposes of identiﬁcation, the undesignated easement shown traversing aportion of Lot 18 and traversing Lots 19 and 20 in Block 4of the Addition is hereby designated as atwenty (20) foot drainage easement. 9, Use and Maintenance of Jogging, Bridle and Utility Easement: The twenty (20) foot jogging, bridle and utility easement shown on the recorded Plat of the Addition shall be utilized as follows; (a) 2, 5feet along each side of said easement is for the purpose of installation and maintenance of utility lines and poles; (b) The interior ﬁfteen (15) feet of said easement is ajogging and bridle path easement for the private use of any and all lot owners of the Addition, and their respective families and invited guests. Alot owner shall be responsible for the periodic inspection and reasonable maintenance of that portion of the jogging and bridle easement and fence situated on or within the boundaries of his respective lot. Alot owner shall be responsible for seeing that the portion of the jogging and bridle path easement lying within his respective lot is maintained free and clear of any and all obstructions at all times. Bicycles may be operated but never parked on said path. No auto¬ mobiles, trucks, motorbikes or motorcycles, nor any other form of motorized vehicle of any type shall be permitted to be operated or parked upon said path, with the sole exception of vehicles operated on atemporary basis for main¬ tenance purposes only. 10.Erection of Antennas: No television, radio, or other similar antenna, mast or receiver or sending apparatus shall be erected on any lot exceeding aheight of 30 feet from the roof of any structure on any lot, whether or not said antenna, mast or other sending or receiving apparatus has its base on the ground or on the structure itself. No use shall be made of any lot or structure thereon for any type of commercial radio or tele¬ vision or similar broadcasting system. Vehicles: Trucks with tonnage in excess of 3/4 ton shall not be permitted to park on the streets, driveways or lots over night, and no vehicle of any size which normally transports inﬂammatory or explosive cargo may be kept in the subdivision at any tinie. No trailer, camper or boat shall be parked, stored or maintained on any lot in such away as to be visible from the fronting street, nor shall any garbage cans or racks be stored or maintained on any lot in such away as to be visible from the fronting street. 11. Signs: No sign shall be erected or maintained on any lot except "For Sale ,For Rent" signs or signs supporting political candidates or propositions which are placed on alot no more than 30 days prior to or ﬁve days following apolitical election. 12. Dedication and Restrictions -Page Three VO! G'J4'7ime nCG r’ mirn 55VOL 13.D u r a t i o n : A l l o f t h e r e s t r i c t i o n s a n d c o v e n a n t s h e r e i n s e t forth shall continue and be binding upon the undersigned, their successors, heirs, and assigns, and all parties claiming through, or under them, for a period of twenty-ﬁve (25) years from the date this instrument is ﬁled for record in the ofﬁce of the County Clerk of Tarrant County, Texas, and shall automatically be extended thereafter for successive period of ten (10) years each, provided, however, that at any time within one (1) year prior to the expiration of any 10-year period thereafter, the owners of the fee simple title to more than 50% of the lots in the addition may provide for the release or modiﬁcation of any or all of the restrictions or covenants contained herein. Any such instrument of release or modiﬁcation shall not be effective until it has been properly signed, acknowledged and recorded in the deed records of Tarrant County, Texas. 14.Enforcement: The restrictions herein set forth are imposed upon each residential lot for the beneﬁt of each and every residential lot and shall constitute covenants running with the land, and shall inure to the beneﬁt of and be binding upon the undersigned, their successors, heirs, and assigns, and upon each and every purchaser acquiring any interest in any lot, and upon their respective heirs, successors and assigns, All persons acquiring any of the land covered by these restrictions shall be taken to agree and covenant t o c o n f o r m t o o b s e r v e a l l s u c h r e s t r i c t i o n s a s t o t h e u s e o f s a i d l a n d . N o restrictions or covenants herein set forth shall be binding upon any corporation, person or persons except in respect to breaches committed during the time such corporation or person owns or had an interest in said land or part thereof. The undersigned, their heirs, successors and assigns, and the owner omowners of any part of such land or any interest therein acting jointly or separately, shall have the right to sue for and obtain an injunction preventing the breach of, or to enforce the observance of, the restrictions and covenants above set forth in addition to the ordinary legal action for damages; and the failure of any one oi: all of such persons to enforce any of the restrictions or covenants herein set forth at the time of its violation shall in no event be deemed to be awaiver of the right to do so at any time thereafter; nor shall the failure to enforce such restrictions as to any one or more residential lots, or as to any one or more owners thereof, be deemed awaiver of the right to enforce them as to any and all other residential lots and owners; nor shall the failure of the undersigned to enforce any such covenants, conditions, or restrictions give rise to any cause of action against the undersigned by any other person. Invalidation of any one or more of these covenants by judgment or court order shall in no wise affect any of the other provisions, which shall remain in full force and effect. DATED the 4th day of June, 1980. sB. Stahalia,rustee S T A T E O F T E X A S COUNTY OF BEXAR BEFORE ME, the undersigned, aNotary Public in and for said County and State, on this day personally appeared JAMES B. STAHALA, Trustee, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes and con¬ sideration therein expressed and in the capacity therein stated. GIVEN under my hand and seal of ofﬁce this the ;,.VF980. day of i/t -IN Notary^^^^lic in and for Bexar CountyT Texas 'T > - - to C: G'VS Dedication ancl'R’dstf'iSﬁS'hd -Page Four 'DM111●'' . ;VOL