Item 7D - Responses Notification Response Form
t
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
CHITWOOD, JOHN
1070 HARBOR HAVEN ST �
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
F
�,�r'z:�.`�t `,y . 3 '�, ``���. u.t,,. �.t'�r Via. *.. a• � ukcSx .,
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed D
undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
{-)m yI rt a k
T
Signature, 6 7; ` Date: 61
Additional Ignature: jw',�
Date: _° . X)
Printed Name(s): -,I�Kv\
Must be property owners)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Notification Response Form
r h {! e erpiPr`,�fu"�jYf 4 %u aa���
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
JOHNSON, GRAHAM
2940 BURNEY LN
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of o posed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Y�z,,-�-c �Se-e w� � 11 Vk
Signature: Date: \, ,z zo
Additional Signature: 6\ 616AIl 3 Date: °I- - 26
Printed Name(s): 6wo- (10KV`tS0V1 k VIi-WbiJ
Must be property owner(s) whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional): �'o 0 \�. ,3-7, ld • C6 0 \5
September 29, 2020
Zoning Change and Development Plan
Thank you for allowing me to voice my opinion. As an owner of an adjacent house, I am
strongly opposed to this zoning change and development plan for the following reasons.
Public Safety: Currently there are approximately 75 homes in this neighborhood that all rely on
one stretch of road as the sole access point for emergency vehicle entrance. Adding additional
houses to an already strained design is dangerous for the current residents.
Wildlife Protection/Tree Conservation: Maintaining the current wildlife habitat, natural
corridor, and native Post Oak trees in this unique area of Southlake is a priority. For more
information see Ray Chancellor's "Southlake Conservation" document written to Mayor Laura
Hill, City Council Members, City Manager Yelverton, Parks and Recreation Board, and the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Lack of Compatibility: The proposed development is not compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood in lot size, lot width, road width, curb and gutter, as well as creating an HOA.
Protecting my Neighbor: Creating a public road through an existing lot changes the structure of
the surrounding lots. One lot would be transformed into a "corner lots" which may not be
desirable to established owner, another lot would now have headlights shine directly into her
front door and master bedroom. The developer is proposing this street as an "easement"
through a current Harbor Oaks lot to avoid mandatory re-platting. The Harbor Oaks Deed
Restrictions requires approval from the neighborhood to subdivide/re-plat an existing lot.
Thank you,
Graham and Katherine Johnson s/� L
2940 Burney Lane
Southlake TX, 76092
Notification Response Form
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
WILSON THELMA B SURVIVOR'S TRU
2930 BURNEY LN
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to� undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your positio
es '�a f u�J . �p,)4< 51 j �d—z ki..
Signature: Date: l 5-®�
Z,D
Additional Signature: Date:
Printed Name(s): -X ZUJL Sin✓
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional): L7 e101 -o?(q
Notification Response Form
ii1Z "�'$-tt"t ���,i��� •mot �:,•��� '�\�!t`' l�t�vr'�t41t�L�`}�itsf t>"i��riYaYt�:
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8 2020 at 6:30 PM
BRAYTON LARRY �� �
3020 BURNEY LN
SOUTHL.AKE TX 76092 `� fit' tkG� y � TJz
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
oe"— r
r /
�fflxl
pg-
Signature: F �41a e: ;' -'
Additional Signature: Date:
Printed --Y'l V-Y, /irks av,
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise cQ6tact the Plannin§ Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Notification Response Form
ZA20-0049
Rig i",is }tor�tl t
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
WALSH, DENNIS M
1115 HARBOR HAVEN ST
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the pro erty so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
t
Signature: e;
Additional Signature: a ' Dater '
Printed Name(s): � t� llm" C(, n t C
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at fop. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional): c)- I ILI
Notification Response Form
� > Yyw�s ns■■fit � N?a'�,r3 4 ai s� k,`,4 �e a iu ,
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM y4yti 1r,'
BARBARA AUYANG REVOCABLE TRUST � � �
PO BOX 82086 yy
SOUTHLAKE TX7609
Io�.�,� ��b11�
f t Yt1�14"�v' 1aY�r hti`ix n 1'{4" cr�) S 1 i a
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to) undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature: Date: =�
Additional Signature: Date:
Printed Name(s): Y {Ylc l-fc� cr>
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Notification Response Form
f;
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
CURTIS, MARY KATHRYN
3580 BURNEY LN
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
1, 1M
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
,l,2
Signature: Date:
Additional Signature: _._ :�,: C� _ Date: to - 2 - r
Printed Name(s): r- earN T15
Must be property owner(s)whose na (s)are printed top. Other i contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
I .
Cathy & Steve Curtis
3580 Burney Ln.,Southlake,TX. 76092
817-481-6298
hhetzer@get.net
Planning&Zoning Commission
To whom it may concern,
We live 152 ft.from the Houseman's property where the proposed road enters and exits. We have lived
in Southlake,on Burney Lane,for 38 years. And we love our city and our neighborhood. I worked for
the city and the Stebbon's Group as an independent contractor for 13 yrs. As for the neighborhood, it is
our ideal location with open fences,horses and an abundant of trees. As for the people who live here,
for years we get together once every two months with our loving and congenial group,called,Love Thy
Neighbor. These are good people. These are good citizens.
There is, however, one glitch,and it's an unsafe one. Metaphorically speaking,we have one front door.
There is only one way in, and, one way out, where Carroll meets Burney Road. If you go to a theatre,
you will find exits. If you build a 900 sq.ft. building,you have to add to it,for a hack door. I am sure
many homes have one,two, or three backdoors and it's all good and simply,for safety precautions&
standards.
Capacity speaking, at present, we are now up to 75 homes and 6 cul du sacs...a grossly insufficient travel
route before funneling into an arterial street, which is 2 lane Carroll Rd.
42 yrs.ago, a fire started at the knoll,after you turn onto Burney, that swept all the way to the cul du
sac at the end of Burney where The McIntire's currently live, 3530 Burney Lane. The fireman burst in
their home without knocking and told Mrs. McIntire to get their children and get out NOW. She got her
kids, her husband, her Mother and 2 dogs in the car and upon leaving, Mr. McIntire ran off Burney Lane
because the smoke was that thick and intense. (They are happy to tell of this harrowing event.)
Fires happen. It can be as innocent as a Gender Reveal Party(if you have seen the news of late.)
Under God, family and home is priority in life...where freedom and security go together.
Now...to compound this safety hazard issue,there is a proposed eight added houses with 2 to 3 cars
each,with other added congestion such as lawn people,Amazon/Fed Ex trucks, UPS,food deliveries,the
forever ongoing onslaught of lake lookers for an access to the lake,and so on. This proposed
development,also has,one way in and one way out,which augments and hinders our safety capacity
issue. It worsens it. One entrance/exit is due to a half century ago,this land became landlocked where
it should have been resolved back then, but that does not constitute the descending of those problems
upon this well established neighborhood, where 90 percent of us are in the autumn of our years.
Too, there is property that is abutted up to the flood plain, and with aerobic systems, there could
possibly be flooding,that our neighbor,Jack, could expand on.
In brief,this situation is elemental,once you have heard us all. We have been reduced again, 2006 and
now,to deflect this impractical flawed design,while not being compatible to Harbor Oaks, which
suppresses us all. We now must labor through sacrificing our time to "reveal"this counter productive
proposal.
Our fervent hope, is that this will be delved into with due diligence,so that our tranquility will not be
altered, which diminishes our peace.....for as long as we live here!
We hope you, too,will be considerate of our needs.
Thank you for your time.
Kindest Regards,
JJ
Cathy Cur
Notification Response Form
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM INN
HOUSMANS, ERROL V
2970 BURNEY LN
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVE
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. RY
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of Opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline
the proposed Zoning Change andDevelopment Plan referenc
ed above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
z
A CA
Wp
p' �UOQ
Date:
Additional Signature:
Date:
Printed Name(s): S
Must be property owners)whose names are printed at top Others contact the Planning D�meot One form per p�—
Phone Number (optional):
•
� i a
a
J
' w
Oct . 05. 2020 03 : 32 PM TERRY / JUDY SAUDER 2174429662 PAGE. 1/ 1
Notification Response Form
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
5AUDER, TERRY L
1090 HARBOR HAVEN ST
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature: Dat®: gyp. 1 . ,
Additional Signature: Date:
Printed Name(s):
Must be property owners) whose name(&)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. Ono form per property,
Phone Number (optional):
DRChancellor 817-488-3281 p.1
Notification Response Form
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM a wVdapmentsmVices
CHANCELLOR, RAYMOND L `
890 HARBOR CT
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 :14G
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature: Date:`
Additional Signature: Date: /D -6 -2 D
Printed Name(s): -Rav , ns--1 h C_ klan1G'21/D '
Must be property owner(s)whose na (s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional): cf/ /�-= -�, / — �,r35a
Notification Response Form
ZA20-0049 �'
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
GEORGE, DAVID
2980 BURNEY LN
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed'to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature: Date:
Additional Signature: Date: 0 2P
Printed Name(s): LL.�Qt�- SGt"ht-oW .� pk?
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s) are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Notification Response Form
111M
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
LAND, KENNETH W
2900 BURNEY LN
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature: 5= y. r� Date: ®( 5 z O
Additional Signature: Date:
Printed Name(s): L���
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Notification Response Form
1
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
MOLLY GEORGE BROWN TRUST
2908 BURNEY LN
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature: _ Date:
Additional Signature: Dater
Printed Name(s): HU14-1( WkWPJ WhA
Must be property owner(s) whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Notification Response Form
INN
�u,»4�t.. .�� ;4i. 3ZA20-0049 . ' �� 'Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PMtitZIELKE, RODNEY
1090 BURNEY LN ,,`SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 � ���7Yt..,�,'a4�. �I
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
�►� a P lbf s �-
TG-r+
Signs ure: Date: 9
Additional Signature: Date:
Printed Name(s): cd 'i /{
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional): -z:1�.0 � 7
it
C
Oil
irlr__Imwlo_
lisr
CITY OFSOUTHLAKE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
DEVELOPMENT S ERVICES
1400 Main St.;Suite 310
Southlake,TX 76092 ZA20-0049
Phone:(817)748.8621 Planning Fax: (ail)748-8077 g and Zoning Commission
www.cityofsouthlake.com Thursday, October 8, 2020
6:30 PM
Town Hall Council Chambers
�)Aiti eL, 4b)G t CR ac 1_ 1400 Main Street
9 (rj I Fklos,9 oi) C)At-S C. (�vl� uttSlake, Texas
SOUTHLAKE,TX 76092 Or
Virtual Town Hall Meeting
C O?COiY is CuY 06(xiq IIAA,'.
• Zoning Change and Development Plan for The Conservation on property described as Lot 10,
Block Z Harbor Oaks Subdivision, and Tract 5 Rees D. Price Survey, Abstract No. 1207,
Southlake, Texas and addressed as 2970 Burney Lane and 3185 Southlake Park Dr.,
Southlake; Texas.SPIN Neighborhood#2.
• Current Zoning: "AG"Agricultural District and "SF-1/1"Single Family Residential District.
• Proposed Zoning: "R-PUD"Residential Planned Unit Development District.
• The purpose of this item is to seek approval of a Zoning Change and Development Plan to
develop 8 residential lots on approximately 13.1 acres.
Dear Property Owner;
Your property has been identified as being within 200 feet and/or within the same platted subdivision as the
above referenced property that is being considered for a Zoning Change and Development Plan. Because
your property meets one or both of these criterion, state and local laws grant you special privileges when the
City considers such requests. They are as follows:
1) You are entitled to receive written notice from the City of Southlake about the proposed Zoning
Change and Development Plan and its associated public hearing held" by the Planning and
Zoning Commission if your property is within 200 feet or within the same previously platted
subdivision as the subject property. Written notice is sent to the listed property owner(s) shown
on the last approved City of Southlake tax roll;
2) If your property is within 200 feet of the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan, and if
you are opposed to the requested action, you are entitled to file a formal Protest Petition with the
City which can ultimately affect the voting procedure of the City Council when they consider the
proposed action. If the owners of20 percent of the area of the lots or land within 200 feet of the
subject property file a Protest Petition with the City, then an affirmative vote of three-fourths of the
City Council is required to approve the Zoning Change and Development Plan. All protests must
be written, signed, and acknowledged by the property owner as required by Section 46.3 of the
City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, in order for the protest to be
valid.
If you wish to register your opposition or support to this action, you may complete, sign and return the
enclosed Notification Response Form to the Planning & Development Services Department. You are
encouraged to follow the request through final action because changes are often made during the
review process.
Please note that if local health conditions warrant, this meeting and future meetings may be held virtually.
Please check with the City of Southlake website, cityofsouthlake.com, for updates. Please note that this letter
and its attachments constitute written notice about the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan.
Please contact the Planning and Development Services Department if you have any questions:
Project Contact: Jerod Potts, Phone: (817) 748-8195 1 Dept. Phone: (817) 748-8621
�N
v O � X
O F
! U
4t VS NEY 1,6U� x .wc.u
{� m of
At�� 3
s°
l p
-t r
r .;
t
a
.il Ir ♦ ] Y. LLD v
# s
� z
,3-• ""'�.� } FAR 9 ; agg 3 a,y i n S^ 5 c
Os 3 Od�A
Notification Response Form
l
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
g " D A.tJ I�� 1�9c:lJc�cvc�v
�(" I "T Ncx)5AUd &A95 ce
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 mil
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor ofposeDdt undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
.sce a ��df '461 a
Signature: icrr2 `c'c,e. r.,� ( -�f' Date: /C? y "
Additional Signature: ,� /� �,(� Date:
Printed Name(s):
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional): -21 4Y",- ,� 3 - 3 -3 C,. �11
Vicinity Map baiAikel
The Conservation to e r
ty
s — CT iD80
3430
' SFi1
ca n M20 3525
3530
34 r
� r
3000 m
O l �
9� b
N
N �
7
�f
V+
m
SJ
T
tOr;O V`n� 190
3s3 10TO AR 5
saes
20-0049
Zoning Change and
�`y 1]• Y� G 'l
r Development Plan
J
®—®Feef
To: City of Southlake, Planning & Development Services
Attention: Ken Baker, Jerod Potts, Madeline Oujesky, Daniel Cortez, Frances
Scharli, Gina Phalen, Daniel Kubiak, Michael Forman, Chad Patton,
Shawn McCaskill, and John Huffman
From: Kathleen Carrabine & Daniel McDowell, 961 Thousand Oaks Court
Re: Public Hearing Notice ZA20-0049
We are opposed to the proposed zoning change and development plan
referenced above. The Harbor Oaks area is unlike any other in Southlake. It has an
equestrian country estate feel that has an understated and quiet presence. It is
truly a sanctuary amidst a highly condensed residential and retail area.
The concern lies in that the developer stated that they know what Southlake
wants regarding types of homes. They said that they know what they are doing
because they've developed streets all over the area. But we all know that new
developments all over the area are all similar to each other. You see the same
formula in Grapevine, Colleyville, and Keller. These are compact, homogenous
groups of houses with a fountain in the middle and a lighted sign. These types of
homes work well for transient families looking for a good school close to DFW
until their children go off to college.
But Harbor Oaks is not populated with transient families. It is populated with
people who have a stake in the quality of Southlake long term. It's where people
can enjoy a permanent lifestyle filled with nature and respect instead of the
bustling cement developments. With preservation in mind — even existing
residents will let their neighbors know if they are putting something up for sale.
They try to be careful who they are selling to because we share the same
environmental values.
There is a high demand for this unique lifestyle. I alone know of at least 6 families
that waited until a Harbor Oaks home was available until they moved. These
families are from Timarron and Stone Lakes. I've personally received 3 letters over
the years from strangers asking me to contact them if we ever decide to sell. And
I'm sure I'm not alone in this experience. Here's an example of one letter.
"My family and I are currently looking to buy a different home within
Southlake. We currently live in the Timarron Golf Community of Southlake.
We have scoured every inch of the city to find an interesting home. Your
home is one of about 10 that meets our interests and requirements. Should
you decide to sell in the future, could you please keep me in mind?"
The comments of our friends and family that visit all have the same theme: I can't
believe this exists. Are we still in Southlake? I can't believe how quiet it is. Please
let me know if something comes up for sale. How come it hasn't been
overdeveloped with McMansions?
I respond to that last question by saying the homeowners have fought for their
sanctuary over the years and will continue to do so. They thrive without the need
of an HOA for homeowners to respect each other, their animals, their property,
local wildlife and the environment.
My family has been in the Carroll ISD for over 14 years. I've also started my 51n
year working for the high school administration. This has enabled me to connect
with literally thousands of Southlake parents and students. And it's given me a
fantastic perspective on the spectrum of Southlake residents. One demographic
can't define us all just like one developer can't define land use.
Notification Response Form
ZA20-0049 4 ti.
4G
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM :� �� t „
HARRYMAN SCOTT
1105 HARBOR RETREAT
I t , e l
v
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 �
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being_tbe. ner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to - undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature: Date:
Additional Signature'\ Date: �jo
Printed Name(s): e _
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s are prin d at topj Otherwise contact the Planning Depart t. On rm per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Residential 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.
Notification Response Form
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM ,4
ADAMS BILL M
880 HARBOR CT `
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 t, `
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) ofpe-propedyso noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
/'.mow"' /s "'gawflrf -- !/1 X)� /.1aslr-: cTjai f�0 7 L; 7 l
t�?L!/�Ca:��,r,/'7 i"le.-~f , 10/ /Gt�ir`/a Z4-e g1'TG2,'
iifE e' . t'a? e c Y?1r1 i` Y e- -,,6 t,0rc/
c a Le9t// CfL r 1919 /�Gt/JG"I LfE"', c Ll/a taF N ' tUl ?r G' aGE Jn/✓i!
/71 6- 1;Pr.J'r,44.94c G''e'/a.e?Ac
Lj c�/1�' t✓'G-!'- %f a`1��E.S .arc',7�`'G<7f.�.�'�.EGs%'r� ;'�
— .b Fa a aC 6 % i�ras c C2 a ref / ✓ La , Y�1 y rz ,%/r9✓ c , f/ < ,x':
arca�i7lS� Ctr
Signature: Date:
Additional Signature: r' f ror Date:/ :
Printed Name(s): A71 c ar
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Notification Response Form
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
4
HULTIN, ALLAN C
1075 HARBOR HAVEN ST
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 t
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one) -
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature: 1.CW-L- C ( Ul i� Date: 1 L�
g ( \l ` � Date: 1 20
Additional Si nature: ('��5���, _ �- �,�
Printed Name(s): C- \Avs\--,tt
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional): z>i1" �� L�
October 7, 2020
To Planning and Zoning Board,
We are in supportof project Sage Development Group in Burney Lane Southlake. We signed
and sent back our form in support building of new homes in our neighborhood.
To begin with, the neighborhood is in a period of transition and it needs to be. Many of the
homes are not being properly maintained or kept up to date. Since we don't have an HOA,
which we are ok with, it presents wide variation of what is perceived as well maintained.
With that said, we would like to outline some facts about some of the comments from the last
Zoning Meeting, addressing both those who spoke and the written statements.
1. There have been several tear downs of existing homes or complete remodels. There are
a few more that will occur in 2021.
2. There have been 3 net new homes to the neighborhood that everyone neglected to
mention.
3. Many in opposition don't have their facts straight related to taxes thinking new homes
will increase. Tarrant County Appraisals are measured on factors, new homes will not
impact that. Our taxes have gone up 10% per year last 2 years regardless of our
neighborhood.
4. Two neighbors who opposed with the comments that the new homes are not in keeping
with the neighborhood is complete hypocrisy. One recently bulldozed 3400 sq. ft. home
and built 20,000 sq ft. home. The other lives next door in a 15,000 square ft home.
Neither home is in line in keeping with current development.
5. One neighbor who spoke on the zoning call that was vehemently opposed tried to sell
off a portion of her property. It was in the back here current property which would
essentially need an easement and create a flag lot, also not in keeping with the
neighborhood. More importantly, trying to profit by dividing her property when it
would be not even consistent with what is being proposed. Adds to the hypocrisy.
6. Concern over traffic: Mr. Zielke believes the 7 new homes will create a huge traffic
impact stating each home will have 4 cars driving up and down. These will be single
family homes probably selling to those moving within the district or to get into the
district with families. 2 cars on average per household or 14 more cars.
7. Mr. Zielke keeps the worst yard in the neighborhood, and it is an eyesore for anyone
driving by. His wife is constantly complaining and stirring the pot with neighbors.
8. Many of those opposed have been here for 20 plus years and are not concerned about
property values long into the future but only for the next few years.
Not sure this will impact decisions, but felt it was important for visibility to the truth.
Respectfully,
Those who support project.
Notification Response Form
111M
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM
LEEDY, BRETT
2920 HARBOR REFUGE ST
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
b,1_ 41tir' EJci,t .�
dc
eJ 0- P am. G {I �4�d Y. 4Al , C � (ti J f ,. k 6 d
Signature: f --- � G Date: z
Additional Signature: Date:/1
Printed Name(s): t�C1t
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Ekpartment. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional): 12 - -9I"
dow-f' Wain-Y *2 added,
, plus ry) p-eop)6
11ted �, �P I� a h N eqw I
VA ok-�, e
no�'�, ho� h�
wt VvAklf �r 6,��
wad P( rvouk 164, and 4n &
1��1� � Pm-I� nce ���bwbly �,ver, fuall� �dJ�
Own
wL d0'A * kA e Nk Pr-� 1+ 44a+
wcW) are na-f Ck Vn It like. htlr
ICt ba&j i,a-A h-Fv�u -�ee,l �r� nol/k bo/HW.
� n�j kl),D14 &of s n�qk1�� �d
We A d nit GPvno - .
Notification Response Form
ZA20-0049
Meeting Date: October 8, 2020 at 6:30 PM ,
STAPLES, RANDY G
1080 HARBOR HAVEN ST
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 `
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of Qopposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
0, GAM 111(_:M lS
Signature: Date: /�''f7
Additional Signature: Date:` IG zz
Printed Name(s): C
Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are pri to at top. Otherwise contact t e Planning Dep rtment. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
j�CA6j-e i a (-
t
Attachment to Notification Res once Form
for Randy & Mary Staples, 1080 Harbor Haven Street, Southlahe
We have lived in the Harbor Oaks neighborhood for more than 35 years and strongly oppose this
zoning change and development plan because it is not at all "compatible" with our country estate
neighborhood. Some of you on this Committee may not be familiar with our charming quiet
neighborhood on the city's North side which is adjacent to the Core of Engineer property and
Lake Grapevine. We have oversized lots, the majority 2-10 acres, and we do not have curbs,
gutters, or bright street lights. There is an abundance of wildlife. While the developer thinks his
plan is acceptable because it slightly exceeds the city's minimum one-acre lot size, and his plans
include curbs, gutters and bright lights to the development, that is not a compatible development
to our neighborhood. Compatible means it must be similar to the adjacent neighborhood. The
fact is that all of the adjacent lots closest to the proposed development and the lot directly across
from the proposed entrance are much larger, more than two-plus acres each. This proposed
project fails the compatibility test.
Regarding "property rights," the developer does not own the property, and thus he cannot stake a
claim to any property rights. Let's be clear. No one is denying anyone of their property rights.
The two landowners entertaining the sale of their properties to this developer have property
rights, but both knew when they acquired their property that the Harbor Oaks lot is zoned SF-1A
single family and the other 13.1 acres is zoned agricultural. Now these two people want to
change the rules and that is wrong. These two property owners have no greater rights than the
property rights as all the rest of us whom have invested our lifesavings in this country estate
neighborhood and plan to continue living here. By rejecting this rezoning project,you are not
taking away anyone's rights, but if you approve it, you are taking away the property rights from
all the homeowners in our neighborhood.
Approving this proposal granting an easement allowing a private road on a lot currently zoned
SF-IA Single Family Resident District in our Harbor Oaks neighborhood will open the
floodgates for more developers seeking subdividing and replotting of our neighborhood. We
know of at least three property owners that are watching these proceedings with a special
interest. One neighbor admitted that they already have been approached by a developer to do a
similar project on their multi-acre lot. We have lived in this neighborhood for more than 35
years. Don't allow these developers to ruin our SF-IA single-family country estate
neighborhood.
For all the reasons stated above, we strongly urge the Planning and Zoning Committee to reject
this proposed zoning change and development plan.
C� c 0zz>
10/13/2020 Mail - Jerod Potts - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNhOGM4NzA5LWUxODgtNGI2ZS1iN2QzLTA1N2I0ODMzN2UzZgAQAKXFrry3pXhLmRWkRgEp1LE…1/1
access is blocked, alternative water service if the one water line or gas line serving the location is
impaired. Adding additional houses to this already strained design is dangerous to the safety of the
current and future residents.
Fourth,the density of the current"The Conservation" proposal generates another issue,the
implementation of sewage treatment systems. We have several owners of aerobic systems in the area
and can offer the following experience. A 4,500 square foot house requires an aeration field of
approximately Y. of an acre. It is hard for unto understand how a pad for a 5,000 to 7,000 square foot
house, a swimming pool, and some yard is going to leave space for an appropriate aeration field.
Aerobic sewage treatment system failures should also be acause of concern. Experts in this area will tell
you that "surge demand"can cause system failures. "Surge demand"can be caused by something as
normal as a house full of Christmas guests.
Further, any deterioration of the bacteria count inside the treatment tanks can cause massive system
failure. Bacteria deterioration can be caused by something as simple as the accidental disposal of a
household cleaner down the sink, an act that would seem"normal"in a home connected to the City sewer
system,or even a more forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage field.
Finally, it is apparent that several of the current lots will be spraying effluent in the flood plain. In the event
of system failures,the possibility of pollution to the Lake Grapevine drainage certainly exists.
From experience,we can tell you that the solution for any:failure is to have the treatment tanks pumped
out. This can take two or three days to schedule. All the while the system continues to aerate partially.
treated water and the property smells like raw sewage.
In conclusion, as a neighborhood we are in opposition of the proposed development in its current state.
The reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors; however;for the sake of brevity, allow
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost concern.
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Carmel Bay, Harbor Oaks and Huse Homeplace
Signature:
Name:
Address: ���
Date:
Citizens of Sea take
CarmelSay'
Harbor Oak
Huse Homeptace
September 29,202
Planning and Zoning Commissioners
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Suite 310
outhlake, TX 76092
Commissioners,
'lease let us take this opportunity to express tour points regarding the proposed Sage Group
development, 'The Conservation,*targeting the issues of compatibility with our rural neighborhood,
wildlife conservation, public safety,and drainage. As citizens of this neighborhood,we oppose the
proposed development for the following reasons:
First, a simple drive through the existing community would clearly reveal our rural, eque an
neighborhood with 2 acre lots and open nature.This is very different frorn;many areas of Southfake.
outhlake 2035, Objective 1. 'encouragefsl appropriately-scaled neighborhooddesign that compfftnents
exi&hng developmentpatterns while creating unique places,recognizing that quality residential
neighborhoods are the comerstone of our community."The proposed'The Conservation"plan of 1,1 1.8
acre tots clustered around a narrow boulevard is not consistent with this community.Dots directly adjacent
to the development are over 2 acres in size and some much larger in the Harbor,Oaks subdivision. Lot
width of adjacent lots are a minimum of 215 It compared to narrow lots of 1 0tt of the development,
Unlike the currentlots of Harbor Oaks, the proposed lots include p . ate road in determination of lot
size and thereby the proposed lots are even smaller than star
40ft private road/easement with curb and gutter pavement does not match the 601t ROW currently
present in Harbor Oaks.We also question the develoWs plan to place an entrance road with a lkjbted
entry monument in a platted lot within Harbor Oaks subdivision (toot 1 j, The proposed roadway will
generate about 80 vehicle trips per day with headlights and traffic drastically affecting previously isolated
adjacent bats. Streetlights,sidewalks, entry signs and curb and gutter roads are all features not consistent
vrith Harbor Oaks.The developer states "Tbe Conservation"is compatible with the City of outhlake;
however, its lack of compatibility to this neighborhood is obvious, especially the adjacent lots.
Second,the proposed developmerd plat, a 1 year old undisturbed coded acreage, constitutes utes e
major land piece in the" outhlake Cove'ecosystem and also serves as the major wildlife corridor on the
eastern side of the 'Cove," Critical to this property is its adjacency to the Corps property that forms part of
the most dynamic and important natural habitat epicenter of the Southfake stewardship—as part of the
Ki ood®i uail creek co ` or.This area offer ample native food supply, sufficient habitat acreage, d
dynamic and balanced foul chain,and ample denniog capabilities. Soulhlake 2035 Objective 1.4 asks
that developers"emphasize oreatfvity and ensure environmental stewardship in the des n of all
developrrient and public infrastrudure,maximizing the presuwtibn of,desirable natural features such as
trees, topography, streams, iAddlife corridors and habitat" Development of this property without critical
overview will alter this natural ecosystem forever. If efforts are not made to minimize development of this
property as much as possible,the result will he the total elimination of a vital part of the remaining natural
ecosystem that currently`exists;
Third, Harbor Oaks is unusual in that there is one single point of access for travel and utilities that serves
the westing 70-80,homes. There is no afternative emergency vehicle service access route this point of
' -
access U
,is btocked, alternative water service if the one waterline or gas line serving the location is
impaired. Adding addftional houses to this already strallned design is dangerous to the,safety of the
current and future residents,
Fourth,the den sity of the current'The Conservation"proposa I g enerates an other issue,the
implementation of sewage treatment systems.,We have several owners of aerobic systerns in the area
and can offer the following experience, A 4,500 square foot house requires an aeration fie4d of
approximately%of an acre ft is hard for us to,understand how a pad for a 5,000 to 7,000 square foot
house, a swimming pool, and some yard is going to leave space for an appropriate aerationfield.
Aerobic sewage treatment system failures should also be a cause of concern, Experts in this area will tell
you that'surge demand'Gan cause system failures. 'Surge demand,,"ran be caused by something as
normal as a house full of Christmas guests.
Further, any deterioration of the bacieria count inside the treatment tanks can cause massive system
failure, Bacteria detenoration can be caused by something as simple as the accidental disposal of a
- 1
�~household c1eaner down the sink, an act tfiat would seem'normar in a home connected to the City sewer
system, -~ �=-even gg traditional__,---�septic system -with an underground
l
Finally, it is apparent that several of the current lots will be spraying effluent in the flood plain.
the event
~._.____._
of system failures,the,possibility of pollution to the Lake Grapevine drainage cerlainty exists.
-
From experience,we can tell you that the sowtion for-any failure is to have the treatment tanks pumped
out. This can take two or three days to schedule.All the while the system continues to aerate partially
treated water and the property smells like raw.sewage.
In conclusion, as,a,neighborhood we are in opposition of the proposed development in its current state.
The reasons for opposition are abundan t amongst the neighbors;however,for the sake of brevity, allow
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost co ncem.
�
-
The Bay, Harbor Oaks andHuse'Horneplace
,
Harbor Oaks - l Bay (CB). & Huse Homeplace
� It r1
Sub Natne Address Signature
1110) Chadd,J, l 1 rist 102 Burney Lane
111 ra 1arl aro1 1t)3 1aarttu Lane
11t) 1111 Sarni i 13arlaar 1011 Burney Lane
I1 `.1elke,Rml&blare 10911 Burney Lane
HO Sanders,f'ra d&Trxy° 1095 Rumey Lane
110 Stanyer,Joseph&Natalie I 100,Burney Lane
See, I ` t'
HO ,r ,Scott&Michelle 2875 Burney Lane
.e
_
14 Newby,Martin&Amy 2885 Bumey Lane
11t l roen, 13tarn ey 1 any
.___ Z�
1w1 1 d,Ken&Gloria� 29 Burney Lane
11d a 'Wood,Martha 2900 Burney Lan X
110 Mnnrad,John&Barbara 2905 Burney Lan
111) 1 takert,Amy 2 1 13t tay 1,ar
HO Warnbsganss,Andy&Leigh 2915 Bumey Lane
Wambs 1
140 Stewarl,John&Lynda 2920 Burney Lan
w
11 1� t w ray 1�1att Beth-any 2925 BtImey Lane
1,10 Whin,Darin&MicbellciL 2950 Burney Lane
1King,I-Ilyn 2 1113 "Lan �LL
1,10 Fredricks,Jack&11nse 2960 Burney Lane--T-1-0 -Vart—Sant,Mary '2965 Burney Lane
140 flousmans,Errol&Leshe 2970 Bumey Lan
HO 7tT hawn&Molly 2980 BurneyLane.
r
71
110 Gal anti,l vio&Paula 3000 BarneyLane
1m O Del" alle `13 rn&s& 3010 Humey Lane
11 Brayton,Joe&;Patti 3020 Burney Lane'
Sage Group Devetopment 2020 pea peam nunn IW dmx 9n7 10;25;0 AM
Sub Name Addrevs sigAsture
110 l atte., n,Man&'fjaa 3520 Bumey Lane
1IC� Iw�[clrrtir��1 err 5J11 I1 I ar3�. �
I1C.1 lIi11r;I rig&A,i . t1Burney Lane �`
I ICJ —Van Ti1,JnI_m&.mclissa 550 Burney Lane
11C I—lartman,Jay-(owner) 3560 Rumey Lane
1I6
Ault,Gloria J570Burney Lane
l ICJ Curtis„ Ste Cathy 35011 r:y 1r°
Now
111 Hertnan,Greg& Wendy 0855 Harbor Court
III1 Sabbat.is,—Mike'& Sbky 0850 Harbor Court
till Bartholornac,Shawn& 08,60,1 larbor Court
III I �urrrringbam,Army& &-hley 0965 Harbor Court
I11I rrrith,J 11`&_&Lsan 0870 klartxrr Cow__
111 I '13i11& V aleria 0880 Harbor Court,
110 Littlefield,Hayden&Tina 0975 Harbor Court
------------
UJO Cxalzs, i &.Jartric 0885 Harbor Court � '`•
-TO- I lore Ray&Dinah 8901 Harbor Court
11CJ C�.00k',Dill&Jimmie Nell__ , I18 5 I Iarb(,)r Court
,t.
11C —Warren,Mike&Lynn C9 1lrrrl rr ire
RO Farhat,Judge Dike 1060 Harbor Haven
HO Auyarr ,Barbara& Soto, ID651 larbor Ilaven
Arturo
HO Chitwood,Steve&Jeri 1070 Harbor have
llf luttir A]&Cilia, 1075 Harbor. Haven
HC °Stapl—Randy"&Mary 1 t1 0 Harbor Haag
110 Sander,Terry& Judy 10 I °sr l-fav
110 ,Morris&Ally10 Harbor flaven
1110 IC U- ,Vicki I 100 Harbor ar flaven
�lC} Choo,ilia � 1105 t err � I4
110 S ift Adam&I II1 a v
11 a sh, ,is&J° 111 I1 llavr
sw ou DnI::111& ,' a
ub Name Aalal 2ture
_d� ,
11t~J 11a4 4ahraaa 1 C2&C llarlr"1lacta
W d C catalr,Shair Nina 11201[arbor I l ve m
110 Capps Jr.,Huddy&l : i 28 1larl )r Reffi a".
Boyer,Adrian Lisa 2 11tJ60
r ll�fral e
1lo Ali,Barkat, 2905 11 rr
now t3
Refut
Tlta c a r lot 615 Claridcn Ranch Rd
110 flur6eit,1,arry&t wadi 2 1 ti t1arbor Refuge
110 l luee,Brett l lcidi 2 201 larbor;Refuge
l:C 0 it,M tc&Ca11a 22� F�arhatr C� lla��.
110 P t mn ,Jerry&Carly 1064 Harbor Retreat
�m_ �m
1111 a�l�, 3ik� Ja�aail'a'r lR ��'1�1 r11.etreat
a
1 C0 l 100 1 harbor Retreat
11t lla man,Scott&Latta 110 5'II° )rRctrta
1f rt ,Mills&Starr I 11,0 1 larbor' ct t LA kt
}1O Claxton Mark&Leslie 111-5 l lafhor Retreat—4
�
CB E-Astwood,hill&Kollis3530 Camel Court
CB 11artinan,Jay(. sad r ce) 3540 Camel COUrtr
`Ytt
B Snwk,Jan&Anette 3545'Cannel Court, l `'
_.—,_ _ -
ope,Michael aa�i 3 5t1 I11 1,el Court
CB Antuness,1J rto&Erika 3560 Cannel Court
'l3 Bunch,ch,earl Kelsey 3570 Camel Court
11 McDowell,Dan&Kathy - 1 "1"housswtal Oaks Ct.
.I Agra ,Rich 1f12t1 taaa si Oaks fit.
no t:
Undeveloped lot' 330 Slate Roek Rd
Etntis TX 75119
11 Knudson,Q b 1040 1housand Oaks 0..
tl 0 'VanTil113ob&Boinife 1060"Cla,oat.sand Oaks Ct,
Sage Group Drvelopnent 2020 pe6tion nams Lost a¢ W27M 1025-loo AM
s
i
a, b r Description
79 Lots in Harbor Oaks, Huse Homeplace and Carmel Bay
Undeveloped l lots
77 plumber of possible household signatures t collect
56 Number of household signatures collected
Percentage of signatures obtained
**multiple signatures from the same household were prat)( anted as ONE signature
i
Citizens of Southlake
Carmel Say
Harbor Oaf
Huse Homeptace
September 29,2020'
Planning and Zoning Commissioners
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Suite 310
outhlake, TX 76092
Commissioners::
Please let us take this opportunity to express four Intl reg,ardirrg the pre d Group
development, 'TheConservation,"targeting the issues of compatibility with our rural neighborhood,
witdlifo conservation, public safety,and drainage. As citizens of this neighborhood, oppose the
proposed development for the follovAn reasons-
First, a simple drive through the existing community would dearly reveal our rural, equestrian
neighborhood with 2 acre lots and open nature. This is very different from many areas of Southlake.
.outhlake 2035, Objective 1. "encourageAl appropriately-scaled neighborhood design that compliments
existing develop rent peflems while creating unique places, recognizing that quality residenfial
neighborhoods are the cornerstone of our corrrrr unit .'°The proposed 'The Conservation' plant of 1 A 1.
acre lots clustered around a narrow boulevard is not consistent with this community,, Lots directly adjacent
to the development are over 2 acres in size and some much larger in the Harbor Oaks subdivision. Lot
width of adjacent lots are a min,irnum,of 215 ft compared to narrow lots of 130ft of the development.
Unlike the current lots of Harbor Oaks,the proposed tots include the private,road in determination of lot
size and thereby the proposed lots are even smaller than stated.
Oft private roadleasement with curb and gutter pavement does not match the 60WROW currently`
present in harbor Oaks. We,also question the developees plan to place an entrance rind with a lighted.
entry monument in a platted lot+within Harbor-Oaks subdivision (Lot 10). The proposed roadwrway,will
generate about 80 vehicle trips per day with headlights and traffic drasticafly affecting previously isolated
adjacent lots. Streetlights, sidewalks,entry signs and curb and gutter reds are all features not consistent
with Harbor Oaks. The developer states'The Conservationo is compatible with the City of outhfake
however, its lack of compatibilityto this neighborhood is obvious, especially the adjacent lots
Second, the proposed development plat.,a 1 t1+year old undisturbed,wooded,acreage,constituLes a
major land piece in the" outhf ke Cove'ecosystem and also serves as the major wildlife corridor on the
eastern side of thew eve. riti property
l to this prorty is its adjacency to the Corps property;that forms part of
the most dynamic and important natural habitat epicenter of the Southlake stewardship-as part of the
Kirkwood-Quail creek corridor. This area offers ample native food supply, sufficient habitat acreage, a
dynamic and baloinced food chain,and ample denning capabilities, Southlake 2035 Objective 1.4 asks
that developers 'emphasize e cre 't" "ty and ensure environmental stewardship in the design of all
development and public infrastructure maximizing the,preservation of desirable natural features such a
trees, topography, streams, wildlife corridors and habitat." Development of this property without critical
overview will Ater this natural ecosystem forever. if efforts are not made to minimize development of this
property as much as possible,the result will be the total elimination of a vital part of the remaining natural
ecosystem that currently exists:
lyd. Harbor Oaks is unusual in that there is one single point of access for travel and utilities that serves
the existing 70-80 homes. There is no,alternative emergency vehicle service access ratite if this point of
access Is blocked., fte aiti a water service ff the one water line or gas fine serving
unpaired. bidding additional houses to this already strained design is dangerous to tha safety of
current and future residents,
Fourth, the density of the current 'The Conservation' proposal generates another issue, the
implementation of sewage treatment systems.We have several owners of aerobic systems in the area
and can offer the followingexperience. A 4,500 square foot Douse requires an aeration old of
appr imatoty', of an acre. It is hard for us to understand how a pad for a 5,000 to 7,000 square fbot;
house, a swimming pool, and some yard is going to leave space for an appro priate aeration field.
Aerobic sewage treatment system failures should also be a cattle of wncem. Exp its in this r l tell,
you that"surge demand"can cause system failures,"Surge demands can be caused by something as
normal as a house full of Christmas guests.
Further, any deterioration of the bacteria count.inside the treatment tanks can cause massive system
failure, Bacteria deterioration can'be caused by something as'simple as the accidental disposal of a
household cleaner down the sink, an art that would seem"normal" in a horny connected to the City sewer
system, or every a more forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage Feld.
Finally, it is apparent that several of the current lots will be spraying effluent in the flood plain. In the event
of system failures,the possibility of pollution to the take Grapevine drainage certainly exists.
From experience, we can tell you that the solution for any failure is to have the treatment tanks pumped
out,This can take two or three days to schedule.All the wNle the system continues to aerate partially
treated water and the property smells like raw sewage,
In conclusion, as a neighborhood we are in opposition of the proposed development in its current state.
The reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors;however, for the sake of brevity,alto,
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost concern.
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Carmel Day, Harbor Oaks and Huse Ho rnosplac
� f
Signature:
Name: �
Address: t't IVao
f
Owlso 4 o 0 t*ww septse firw d. qua
a
P44aw Me
'On of ow cmarg,rhA arvaew osw 0 1"Oft
00 t .A4, K
7d Of an We M is hied for aA To F a sw a'S, m?AO lltp�too
hww, VwdIs Is' r
rm t*a FVWW au
nomw of
" as
as a
fqwowa c
- as SMOW ft VW 00 a
OW FA a awn° �a ho
® a w idL
fhagy, appdnwA M S&wWMC4 :.: ft bta W t ham wnm
fMM
n 4
OA Tft can tdo two a to M the wMa ft system comirAw b mum
Ifo f
:In oxxMiM as a OM n to InAsootom Oft,
TTO roosters sw r h w sw oaf ft BOVA d elbow j
to vniffow4o oto iwA4 of
Rey,
SWOON—
d ark
r
i
{
6
} Lt.
t
access is blocked, alternative water service fi the one water line or gas line senting the 6cation,is
impaired. Adding additional houses to this already strained design is danger dangeroW W the safety of the
current and future residents,
Fourth, the density of the current'The Conservation'proposal gen,erates another issue, the
implementation of sewage treatment y to m We have several owners of aerobic systems in the area
and can offer the following experience. 4,5W square foot houserequires anaerafion field of
approximately % of an acre. It is hard for us to understand tand how a pad for a 5- ,DOO to 7,0,00 square foot
house, a swimming pool,,and some yard is going to leave space for an appropriateaeration field.
Aerobic sewage,treatment system failures should also be a cause of concern. Experts in this area will tell
you that osuW demand" can cause system failures. 'Surge dernando can,be caused by something as
normal as e house full of Christmas grate
Further,any deterioration of the bacteria count inside the treatment tanks can cause massive system
familure, Bacteria deterioration can be caused by something as simple asthe accidental disposal of a
household cleaner down the sink, an act that would seem ono 1'in a home connected to the City sewer
system, or even a;more forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage field:
Finally,it is apparent that several of the current lots will to spraying effluent in the flood plain. In the event
of system failures the possibility of pollution to the lake Grapevine drainage certainly exists.
From e peritence, we can tell you that the solution for any failure is to have the treatment tanks pumped
out.This can take two or three days to schedule.All the while the system,continues to aerate partially
treated water and the property smells like raw sewage,
In conclusion, as a neighborhood we are in opposition of the proposed development in its current state.
e reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors;however,,for the safe of brevity, allow
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost concern.
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Carmel Bay, Harbor teaks and Huse Horrmeplaoe
t
Signature:
Marne:
Address: f
Dater
access is t)locked, afternative, dtor R the Ater line or gas li ervir the t`
Impaired, Adding additional houses to this aIrdedy strained design is dangerous to the safety of the
Current and future residents:
Fourth.the density of the current a ConservalioW proposal generates,another issue,the
implementation of sewage treatment systems.We have several owners of aerobic systems in e
and Can offer the following experience..A 4,500 square foot house requires an aver tron field of
approximately, 'Aof an acre. It is hard for us to understand how a pad for a 5,000 to 7.DOO square foot
house,a swimming l„:and some yard is ding to leave � for appropriate ration fi led.
er lblo sewage treatment system failures should also to a,cause€f concern. Experts in this area will tell
you that'surge demand' lase system failures. 'Surge demand'can be caused by SoMeth,ing as
normal as a house full of Christmas guests.
Further, any deterioration of the bacteria count inside the treatment tanks Gan cause massive system
failure, Bacteria deterioration can be caused by something as simple as the accidental this I of a
household cleaner drawn the sin k,an act that would seemnormal'in a home connected,to the City sewer
system„or,even a more forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage field-
Finally, it is apparent that several of the current lots will be spraying effluent in the flood plain_ In the event
of system failures,the possibility of pollution to the Labe grapevine drainage certainly exists,
From experience,,we can tell you that the so[ution for any failure is to have the treatment tanks'pumped
out. This can take two or three days to schedule. All the while the system continues to aerate partially
treated grater and the property smells litre rare sewage.
In conclusion, as a neighborhoodwe are in opposition of the proposed development in its current state.
e reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors;however,for the sake of brevity, allow
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost concern.
Respectfully,
The C Itizens of Carmel Bay, Harbor Date and Huse Horne Lace
r
Signature.—
Name-
Address,
Date.,
Sign
. , 1 of 1
�.
011,60
. �
+ ,
m
`'1 �>
0
�,_
WI
O 10
jw
co f
m9 ,
ou �.
off
ht'lps:j,Poned'hve.live.coma?au4hkey---%21AFYa iyAQji oE00&cid=.,.FF7 38%2114 2 6&pa ad 0 9 59 3 8?7CFF7223f3%2114 Mo. ooUp 1, 1�1120, 1 21 PM
Page 1 of 1
is blocked, afternativewater service If the one waterline or gas line
Impaired. Adding additional houses to this already i design is dangerous
current and future residents,
Fourth, the density of the current'The Conservation" proposal generates another issue, the
implementation of sewage treatment yste . fie have several owners of awvb1c systemsin the area
and canoffer the foal 'rig,expedence, A 4,500square foot it aeration flow of
approximately 14 of an acre. It is hard for es to understand how a pad for a 5,000 to 7,000 squarefod
house, a swimming pool, and some yard is going to leave space for an appropriate aeration
Aerobic sewage treatment system failures should also a cause of concern. Experts in this area it tell
you that'surge demand"can cause system failures. "Surge de n be causedby something
normal as a house fall of Chas` as guests.
Further, any deterioration of the bacteria count inside the treatment tanks can cause massive system
failure. Bacteria deterioration can be caused by something as simp4e as the arxidental disposal of a
householdaner down,the sink, an act that would seem"normal" in a home connected to the City sewer
system, or even a more forgiving ditional septic system with an underground drainage field.
Finally, it Is apparent that several of the current,lots will be spraying effluent in the,ftood plain. In the event
of system faitures, the possibility of pollution to the take Grapevine drainage certainly exists.
From experience, n tell you that the solution for any failure is to have the treatment tanks pumped
out. This can take two of three days to schedule.All the while the system continuesto aerate partially
treated water and the pmperty smells like raw, sewage;
In conclusion, as a neighborhood we are in;opposition of the proposed development in its curmnt state,
The reasons for o pos" . are abundant amongst the neighbors; however,for the sake of brevity,all`
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost concern,
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Carmel Bay. Harbor Oaks and Huse Homeplace
Signature:
rrr°ri ;
. �
Address-
, e
access is blocked, aftemlative water service it the one water lire or gas line serving the location is,
AMN additionalhoruses to this already strained design is dargerous to the Wety of the
rTent and future residents.
_
Fowth,the density ref the current"The Conservation'proposal generates another issue,,the
impliamentation of sawagge treatment systems. We have several owners olaerobic Systems in le area
and can office Me following e"rlen . A 4.5W square Wt house uir n field of
approximate4y of an acre. It is hard for ors to understanO how a pad for 5 to;7,OW Square f
house, a swimming1, and some yard is goingto leave space for an appropriate aeration f`
Aerobic sewage treatment system failures should also be a cause ofin the will tell
y that'surge rr system failures 'Surga dam caused can be by something
normal as a house full of Christmas m u ,.
Further, rr f the id rat inside the treatment tanks massive system
t Bacteria. detenoration can be caused by Something as simple as the acciderital chWsal of a
houselnold cleaner down the sink„an act that would seem'norm ar in a home ra nected to the City sewer
system,or even a'more forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage k
Finally, it is`apparent that severaJ of the current'lots will be p ying effluent in the flood pLain, In the event
of system failures, the possibility of pollution to the Lake GrapKivine,drainage certainlyexists,
From experience, we can tell you that the solution for any failure is to have the treallm,ant tanks pumped
This can take two or three days to schedule. AlI the while the system continues
treated water and the property smells like raw sewage.
In coriclustion, as a neighborhood e are in safe there of the proposed derveloinent in its currentstaM
The reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors;however,for the sake of brevity,allow
this letter to summarize tha issues of utmost concern.
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Carmel Bay, Harbor r Oaks and Huse Homeplace
sjgna
hare;
r'
R
access is btocRed,alternative afternative water service if the one wider line or gas line serving the location
paired, adding additional houses to this already strained design is dangerous to the safety of the
current and future msidents.
Fourth,the density of the current'The Conservation'proposal generates another issUe,the
implementation of sewage treatment systems- have several owners of aerobic ByStemsin the Wea
and can offer the following experience.a 4,500 square foot house requires an aeration field Of
approximately%of an acre,It is hard for us to understand how a pad for a 5 to 7,000 Square foot
hoarse,a,swimming Pool,and a yard is going to leave space for an appropriate aeration field.
Aerobic sevvage treatrnant system faila should also be a c e of c rn, xpert,$i the milt t00
YOU that*surge de nd°cart`cause system faitur ."Surge demand"can be caused by sor0ething
normal as a house full of Christmas guests:
Further,any deterioraflon of the bacteria count inside the treatment tanks can cause massive system
failure:: Bacteria deterioration n be caused by something as simple as the accidental disposal,of a'
hwsehotd cleaner down the sink, an act that would seem*normal'in,a home connected to the City sewer
system,or, en amore forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage field.
Finally, it is apparent that several of the current lots will be spraying effluent In the flood plain.In the event`
of system faille ,the possibility of pollution to the Lake Grapevine drainage certainly exists.
From experierice,we can tell you that the solution for any failure is to have the treatment taroks Pumped
This canitake two or three days to schedule,All the while the syatern continues to aerate partially
treated water and the property smells like raw sewage.
In condusion,as a neighborhood we are in opposition of the proposed development in Its current state.
The reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors; however,for the sake of brevity,allm
this letter to summarize the issuss of utmost concern.
Respecftlty.
The Citizens f el Bay Oaks a Fuse fomeple
Signature:
Name.
Address'.
Date: `'- "
access is blocked,alternative water service it the one water fine or gas line servirig Me location is
impaired. Adding additional houses to this already strained design is dangerous to the safety of the
current and future residents.
Fourth, the density at the current'The Conservation' proposal generates another issue the
implementation of sewage treatment systems. We have several owners of aerobic;W�r;s in the area,
and can offer the following experience,A 4,500 square foot, house requires an aefation held of
approximately 1/4 of an acre. It is hard for us to,understand how a pad for a 5,000 to 7,OW square foot
house, a swimming pod,and some yard is going to leave space for,an appropriate aeration field.
Aerobic sewage treatment system failures should also be a cause of concern, Expertsin this area will tell
you that"surge demand'can cause system failures.'Surge demand'can be caused by something as
normal as a house full of Christmas guests,
Further,any deterioration of the bacteria count inside the treatment,tanks can Cause Massive system
failure. Bacteria,deterioration can be caused by something as simple as the accidental disposal of a
household cleaner down the sink, an act that would seem'normal'in a home connected to the City sewer
system,or even a more forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage field.
Finally, It is apparent that several of the current lots will be spraying effluent in the flood plain. In the event
of system faijiures, the possibility of pollution to the Lake Grapevine drainage certainty exists-
From experience, we can tell you that the solution for any failure is to have the trey tm-ant tanks pumped
out.This can take two or three days,to schedule.All the while the system continues to rale partially
treated water and the property smelts like raw sewage,
In conclusion,as a neighborhood we are in opposition of the proposed development in ft, current state,
The reasons,for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors;however,for the sake of brevity,allow
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost concern.
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Carmel Bay, Harbor Oaks and Huse Homaptace
Signature,
w.
Narr
Address
Date:
-- -----------------
access is blocked,alternative,water service if the one water line or gas liserving the,Ilocation is
impaired, Adding additionalhousos to this ak ady strained design is dangarous to the safety at the
current and future res d is
rth, the density of the current'The nservatirrtt"proposal generates leer issue,the
implementation of sewwaffe treatment systems. e have v ral overt f e in are
and can offer the following experience. square foot house rep arras a ra ra field of
approximately 1 ref an acre. It is hard for us to understand how a pad for a 5,DOO to,7,000 square foot
house.a swimming pool,and'some yard is going to leave space for an appropriate aeration
metric sewage treatment sy tarn failures should,also be,a cause of concerne x in this area will tell
you that'surge demand"can cause system failures."Surge rand'can be caused,b irk,
n rrmal as a house full of Christmas guests,
Further,any dote rioration of the,bacteria count inside Vie treatment tanks can cause massive system
failure. Bacteria€eteri ration can be causedby something as simple as the accidental disposal of
household cleaner d n the sing„are act that would seem°'era t'm a home connected to the Cif sewer
system,or even a more forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage field..
Finally,it is apparent that several of the current lots will be praying effluent in the flood plain. In the event
of system,failures,the possibility of pollution to the Lake Grapevine drainage certainlyexists-
From
experience, we can tell you that the solution for any to lure is to have the treatrnent tanks pumped
out,This can tako tvwo or three, days to sc�hadule.AM the,while the,system continues to aerate partially
treater water and the property smalls like ram sewage.
In conclusion,as a neigh b rh we are in opposition of the proposed development in its current,ttas
Thojeasons for opposition are abundant amongst,the neighbors;however,for the sake of brevity.,allow:
this letter to summarize the,issues of Utmost concern,
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Carnet Bay, Harbor Oaks and Hose Hom pla a
Signature: � .
, 11i <a?, � ,d 6 0 —
it t � � �
data_
access is blocked, alternative water service if the one water lime or gas line serving the location
impaired. Adding additional houses to this already strained design is dangerous to the safety of the
current and future residents.
Furth,the density of the current'Thee Conservation'proposal generates another issue,the
implementation of sewage treatment systems,We have several owners of aeroble systemsin the area
and can offer the following experience. A 4,500 square foot house requires an aeration field of
approximately %of an acre, It is hard for us to understand hoar a pad for a 5,0M,to 7,000 S
q Uare foot
house,a swimming;pool, and some yard is going to leave space f+or an appropriate aeration field._
erobio sewage treatment system failures should also be a cause of concern. Experts in this area will tell
you that"surge demand"can cause system failures. `Surge demand"can be caused by so,mething a
normal as a house Bill of Christmas guests.
Further~ any deterioration of the bacteria count inside the treatment tanks can cause massive system
failure. Bacteria deterioration can be caused by something as simple as the accidental disposal of a
household cleaner clown the sink, an act that would seem'normal"in a home connected to the City sewer
system„or even a more forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage field:_
Finally, it is.apparent that several of the current lots will be spraying effluent in the flood plains In the event=
of systems failures, the possibility of pollution to the take Grapevine drainage certainly exists.
From experience, we can tell you that the solution for any failure is to have the treatment tanks pumped
out. This,can take two or three days to schedules AJI the while the system continued to aerate partially
treated water and the property smells like raw sewwage >
In conclusion, as a neighborhood we are in opposition of the proposed development in its current state.
The reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors, however, for the sake of brevity',allow
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost concem.
Respectfully,
ctfully,
The Citizens of Carmel Bay, Harbor Oaks and Huse f omepladd
Signature: 4;A4
Name:
w
Address:—
Date,
access is blocked, alternative water service if the one water line or gas line serving the location is
impaired, Adding additional houses to this already strained design is dangerous to the safety of the
current and future residents.
Fourth,the density of the current The Conservation" proposal generates sue. In another is, , t e
Implementation of sewage treatment systems. We have several owners of aerobic systems in the area
and can offer the following experience. A 4,500 square foot house requires an aeration field of
approximately '/4 of an acre, It is hard for us to understand how a paid for a 5,000 to 7,000 square foot
house, a swimming pool, and some yard is going to leave space for an appropriate aeration field,
Aerobic sewage treatment system failures should also be a cause of conr m-e . Experts in this area will tell
, -
you that'surge demand"can cause system failures."Surge demand" can be caused by something as
normal as ai house full of Christmas guests.
Further, any deterioration of the bacteria count inside the treatment tanks can cause massive. system
failure. Bacteria detehoration can be caused by something as,simple as the accidental disposal of a
household cleaner down the sink, an act that would seem"normal"in a home connected to the City sewer
system, or even a more forgiving traditional septic system with an underground drainage field.
Finally, it is apparent that several of the current lots will be spraying effluent in the flood plain. In the event
of system failures, the possibility of pollution to the Lake Grapevine drainage certainly exists.
From experience, we ntell you that the solution for any failure is to have the treatment tanks pumped
out. This can take two or three days to schedule. All the while the system continues to aerate partially
treated water and the property smalls like raw sewage.
In conclusion, as a neighborhood we are in opposition of the proposed development in its current state.
The reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors; however,for the sake,of brevity, allow
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost concern.
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Carmel Bay, Harbor Oaks and Huse Homeptace
Sjgnature;
Name: c
Address:—
oate� Zo
access is bkxked, aftemative water service if the one water Ilne or gas line sen*V the location is
Addingitio l houses tD he already stralned design is dargwous to the safety of to
current and future resklents.
Fourth,the density of the currentConservation*proposal generates another lesue,the
implementation of sawage treatment systems. We have several owners of aerobic systems in the area
and n offer the folkoing experience,A 4,500foot house requires an aeration
road t ty ' of an acre. it is hard for us to understand tum a pad for to , e foot
house,,a swimming1, a yard Is to leave for r .
Aerobic sewage treatment system failures should also be a cause of ooncem.EMxwft In this area will taft
you that'surge demand"can cause system failures. Surge e n be caused
normal as a house full of Christmas guests.
Further, any
lure= deterioration cat rig treatment massive system
Bacteria deterioration can be causedsomething sImple as the aocklental disposal of a
household cleaner down the sink, an act that would seem'nomiar in a home connected to the City sewer
"am,or even a'more forgiving ;` l septic system with underground drainage field,-
Finally, it is`apparent that several of the current lots will be sprayingeffluent plain.In the event
of system failures,the possibility of pollution to the Lake rcertainly exists,
From experience,we n tell you that the solutionfor any failure is to have the treatmentpumped
ie can take two or three y to schedule.All the while the system continues to aerate partiallyr
treatedwater and Ina property smell like raw sewage.
In conclusion, as a neighborhood a are in opposition ot the proposed development in i t
The reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbors;however,for the sake of brevity,allow
this letter to summarize the issues of utmost concern.
Respectfully,
The Mans of Carmel Bay, Harbor Oda and Huse Homeplace
Signature-.
Address: NS
t � _
Firefox abouLtilank
actess is blocked.alternative water service if ft one water firm or gas line servkv the locatbri is
impaired, Adding addihorral houses to this already strained n is dangerous tothe safety of tha
current. d future r
Fourth,they density of the current Conservation*pfolposal genwerates another is
irrrptententation of sewage treatment systems,We have several owners of aerobic y the aree
and can offer the follooning expederice,A 4,SWsquare foot house requires an aeration fleld, of
approximately 1/4 of an acre.It is hard for us to understand how a pad fora 5,000 to 7,000 square foot
hovae,a vnq pool,and sorne yard is goingto leave space for an,appmprLve aeration field_
Aerobic a e treatment system failures should also be a cal of concern.Experts in We area will tell
y 'surge derroancr can cause system failures,*Sarge demamr ran be caused by something
real its s houtse fall of ChOstmas guests.
Further,any delerforation of the bacteria corral inside the treatrrient tarok can dart system
failure.Baeteria detenoration can be caused by something as simple as the accidental disposal of d>
householdcleaner down the sink,an ad that would seem*rorrnor in a home connected try the City sewer
system,or even a more foTiving traditional septic system with are underground drainage field.
Finally,it is apparent that several of the current lots will be spraying effluent in the flood plain.In the event
of system failures,the possb lily of pollution to the Lairia ra it drainage certainly exists"
From e)"rierme,we can tell you that the solution for any failure is to have the treatment tanks pumped
out,This can tale two or three days to schedule,All,the while the systems continues to aerate Partially
treated water and the property lls like raw sewage.
In conclusion, a neighbortrood we are in opposition of the proposed develqrrimnt in,lts current stated
The reasons for opposition are abundant amongst the neighbor ever,for the sake of brevity,allow
his letter to summarize the iss ues of utmost eoncem.
Respectfully,
The Citizens of Carmel Bay,Harbor Oaks and Huse Hemeplace
igrrtoree
,Name, r "t
Address',
X
date:
off; 9/30/2020,534 Ply
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
'7"
< CITY OF SOU L-11 KE
y SLR T
A 1400 N An SU Atli 35D
Scuthrake. TX 760,92
qy
Phone: (81*7) i'48-8621'
-1, -3 ai n 'ni tn'-""�" 0�"Y' "s,Si 0 n
Plat ,i� - 6�d Zo-
Faix_(8171 ,`48-80,7
Thursday. October 0, 2026
t it
FREDRi'CKS,
296(,',, BUr'U1-,,E',.;' i-N'
SOUTHLAKE, 1',',', 711',�;0�312
Toval HPU Meeh'rtq
Zooir?q and Development Ran %,"L)r Tfie bot fo,
Bmak 2, HaMor Oaj,,s Sijbdivision.. and Trac� 5, Reezz; f). o' ",20;7,
So.TWkq Tows and addvssed as 2970 Bjjr ey . .... Dr.,
T*exas Sr-ltl,'Neighbodsoad;�2.
"AG"AgricLifturail District and "SF-1.4"Singie
Unii, Do'i
13S pu"Wsl'; c""e' f3-12's ir to seek approval of a Zon&q Chrmgp mn; 1", pfar to
-} P -�pproxirr , y 3 acres.
or, E�Ial I
Dear Prooerty Chamr,
Your pmpmy has :denti,iad as bAng vithin 200 Net anNor wANn in ny no Y'Ar t0lnn as the
ah,ove pmpvo HK 0 being 00 ,AS K W a zamng Moan 0. 0 W Sawaisa
your ma or OR, of lose sm-te anc kwal [aws got you spsup! >Anknes when the
My considers such requems. They are as R91om
to FacAve vallen notice fronn, the CAy cif W01 V� )mqo sad 2onKg
"Azage ad Bevlopment Flan and is mmdand pwA: hovog ra nnvmg ard
ZOO& -t�PMR&P P 1011 PCOPeFt is mW 200 can 0:
mi ;0 AR appr.vea C;,y Souf!-.:,7ke tax rod�
,,;Jhi;i 2i-ju oi- '.:Ie prcposc-'-d Zoning Oan!� �n� V-v�;xxn Pli�.md 4
m cV,und n Ve mqueNed andcA you we enH& m t� � n nn �Am . P� noA sAi te
aRal Hie VORG pArem"a 0, *a co--uA0. �nw : �V, �D�Inan"z
i, 1a ovamr; of 20 paTent & the ama J "a on w q �� a"v, :13 W of
"j the Ci�,, Men an WhmmAn vow WhookwAm of he
City ',-'ounai is requmed to appmve the Zoning Change and Da_ ysQaW wao Ad pm%ds anst
DE n md' '-;-�-J by ME P70pely VVW n 0"l V.n 03 Cf
"'4"'" '-:' r&'�imca as amm!
If you wis!", :o action., y�u
encloses WrIcKor FlEqponse Fonn to the Ranning & DavebroW
encouragen to &�&ar ?, uvqmA WX15 End 7.vml heaRns
review
Please note t f k at Foali; mauant, the rnsettg a. �s V &,Q.
Please neck 1 C Sf nnuwda:m mWo, ckyclsodhldlaxonq W A AKS SW
and Ks alanmi a Atter note ahm 7orw';,�; -'i
Phase coTBO the F!Wng anc DeveOpmod Services Department 1 you hqs t Tmv n��nW a
P!O"ect Cor"tp(1 J '-o 1 41717480195 1 Dept Phone. MR)
...............
7
C7 �2
' 4 ru 0
fm
mmul
i
N
f O
,
i
O
a3 Q
{ G
u
LL
k.
q! —
,4
i
i
77
WeBin be 8, 2020 aA. 'U iD
FREDRIC'i'KS, JACK
C Of PL E i ram,D F C) f
E E F:t....AL 1? '�s L a S OF 711 E
owria"(s) of the
the .t` E . ,_),"i l..:�. ..,_�.. �; l�s Y�. at l:4t an." Mazynnen . �.
Space for _�'_;�.�., �,..�.. p . uir
G.., �, �f y. �� FMt via�i
1
...........____.__ _ _ ___ _ _ . __ ___._
__ _______.__ ______ ___ ...._ _ _ _ __ ..............
-17,
Ad
yr ,
4 i t
I
s__ ____.................... .... ......r _ __. .. r, .��.. v...��.. . �tt, _. . �....... _.. ...�,r a _...
..........
77--i
Jl'
Vow
g qp
p;ow
NINE
ti
AY
------------
dlg
-------------
to in to in a rl c
----------------
My name Jack Fredricks,along with my wife, Rose Fredricks and our family,we have lived in our
property at 2960 Burney Ln for over 15 years. We are opposed to the proposed Conservation
Development.
We strongly oppose the development based on the impact that it will have on ourselves and our
neighbors.The proposed development does not fit, and is not in keeping with our neighborhood. It is
not compatible with Harbor Oaks which is a rural, equestrian designed neighborhood. It will have eco
system impact on the natural landscape and wildlife in the area. In addition, it creates additional
infrastructure risk for our development.
The planned road will create a surrounding of three sides of my property. The road :.L cement creates
traffic, noise and light pollution at night from every vehicle that travels the road, on the side of my
property and the rear of my property.Across the street, Mary Van Sant with the road exiting from the
development directly across from her home,will have light pollution and significant noise impacting in a
negative way the front of her home.
After the issue with the road, compatibility of the neighborhood is a significant concern as weli.The lot
sizes in our neighborhood on average are over 2 acres.The proposed developnnert is ar ch iess-&ian
this.The proposal to my knowledge does not include a planned public road, rather an easernerit of an
existing lot to "force fit" an approach to gain access to the property.
As for the surrounding area in question, I am concerned about the significant damag will do to the
natural environment and eco system.There is limited open land in Southiake with natural ire;s and
wildlife, as caretakers of our generation and the next, we all need to be as thoughhtfui as poss bie'to
protect the land and all of us that live within it. This development will significantly change the
topography of the area to get the road in and home pad sites established. We as a Southlake community
should minimize impact to such eco systems with well planned thoughtful development,this
development is not such a development.
Harbor Oaks existing lots are not fully developed.The street infrastructure into the de-ve'opn-,ent has
one way in and one way out.The proposed development to my knowledge was not par: of the harbor
Oaks, Carmel Bay or Huse Home place developments.This development, with a significant increase in
homes not originally planned, will add additional pressure on the water system in the development.This
not only adds pressure to daily water consumption, but in case of a fire or other emergency (sprinkler
systems in homes, etc) it creates greater risk to the neighborhood water system. I have not seen any
studies showing the impact of this development on top of the planned development of Harbor Oaks.
My next concern is allowing this application to pass,will start a slippery slop in our neigl hbor ;ood. if this
development passes,there is nothing to stop other to development or easements v�ithi€-, existing lots.
With this precedence, other property owners can request easements and Mild add.it oral ;-ornes. Of
course,they could be denied, but with a precedence, in my view they will be appro ed.-i s-Jis v,1:1!
continue to add risk to our development and change it from what it is today, a rural development, into
more of a suburban approach. Please note, I am not opposed to development, but to force fit this
development and future changes into Harbor Oaks changing it from what it is today, to something it was
not intended to be, is my objection.
It has been my experience in life and business that if the right foundational principles are not in place,
the impact of change can be significant.The developer has offered small changes to try and work with
our neighborhood as long as the road and the lots don't change.As I told Mr. Boyd on the first day, I met
him, the issue is the road and the lots. I continue to believe those issues have not been addressed
adequately. It is not the right foundation of a plan to work with!
I simply cannot understand how this would be approved given the approach that is taken and the impact
that it will have on our home and our neighbor's homes,and our neighborhood. Cutting an easement
onto an existing lot, right next to ours which was never part of the development plan, simply is forcing a
development that is not logical or appropriate in my opinion.
Please deny this application.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Respectfully
Jack & Rose Fredricks
2960 Burney Ln
Southlake,TX. 76092
� h
n e
�r
s 3y >
0
ti
y.
� t.
.. w b
'Vu '.'"�'
N
:11-
V7
V) c
Id
„� ,
0
M
ro Xi w
' .
y �
v - v
� v
cep ❑ � �c�
od
tu
0 ,5
a U,
Cl)
70
Ell)
'40
0 0
;Lq
0 IR
cu
r a
13 a
HQ
r�
y
iu
u
0
0
N
o m
a141.
K
� o p
IV
❑ a �
.. lu u
O
s�
}O-±
=;ab e Q
U
0
v
-
ca
(� ,.
re ,'
„
0
., ..
lu
qj
lu
75
At
va
Ei
co
w
N=
s., s
O
opt
r
° .
o :.
ro ,
o . .
lzzla
a
6 ti C7
W
cu
44
v° OU
.
a jV
o .
" o
OJ "
N
y
c x
U � .
IN
Qo-
O
Iz
Z' ,aS ❑ °a
a
y
O
d
bA '0
¢� Q
O,
0tz
' O
U
' s
00ol
" : 0 cn 0 a
v ¢ #
oHH ro 's
G
O '
N ,
u,
m ,
U
C 0CS
ZZ
"o
Y >u
Y
r
W
Y
� �.
V
v
r
,r-
y
1�
0
CO
I „
a�
771
O
�. 4a
" lu; ro
cn "' o qj .
a
a
6
O
ro '
vYi "
O ;
b" J
N y , o
lu
#N
o
v
y
of
^N3
•_. U 4
n
ojj ,
C "
g
G a o v CY
y
Z
bR...' a ' . ., ..
U
48
6.,
0
Q
�.,
H
4
w
N
41
qj
P-+ 3
r
u
a
O
o �
.a
to41
'
iu
ra
� H �,td
b
ry
H,
W '
VS
N
U <" b "
. '
Od
to
914
d (� 71
a
G
«s
G ,
d
6'
W
G u, d
to
w
U ;
.H
lu
a p •�
o
Ad 0 -0
a n
o n . [,
c
l 0
N
W
6 Q
41
Qi l
PH
IV
o
" U
v
G
O ;
cwtl
O
�i
Aj
ob
�° s o
_ u t'
p
.a ,
Ra
^y .
y
fib+
t2,
o "
" b
n
a ZI
"30
� M
lu
~2cr
o "
F
r
H '
Q
o . a: a �;
,> :°'
.." „< ".o
0
a
a
'7 lll
a
ij
45
o ro "
G "
Q"
o
y
O `
At .
a ..
u ,
" ' .
a �4 o U"