Loading...
Item 7B - PresentationCITY VF OSOUTHL,4 ZA21-0048 Ridgecrest Property Zoning Change and Concept Plan ZA21-0048 Ridgecrest Property •IM!\ I [• Public Parki0pen Space ial ■-Residential: III Retail Commercial Public/Semi-Public mixed Use ■ �.Town ■ Center r� Regional Retail �� �� • ' Industrial 1 30D 600 1,20D Feet AM '_ ` �ullllllllll#�"��Ifl� IIIII � - 'vlo,F OWE '77 - - - .e * I» ELM It Jkf XA OF Aw vo CAN � � may'.. � I .r•� ' ����t?� �� � f, ,r — '�'k• � �ti w� �:.. ■ _ y yj��{, Ak__"j rr _A MEN A' V 'LAINI l 1t7fET.'.�iw_'.� '.c MI&A, I...i r AeriaiView � �aG Sum Chart may dis .. +ew n.e.l o... ti Stu 9 n'e one A � i4's�s �arw�nr.�a Owner: Engineer: macw�ae�e o xe P.e Applicant: swxr. r� awsx a.ee [� sae wpm planna: saw r;R��uF, INC, 19 suLM U ® ELM 4 �t�AT6 ST►�„y!F "yf o � _' __' wwmP� ��----- I r:;:.e�zma:aauo g aaear�t , !a 1 7, 1 9 I uc: u�e P.alop, aj� I .17s' i nm�r�sareoa 4° I I I 5 as,xn, _ "el axnnu L axna:c IE axlas� a I i �or.ubnarr a i Case No. ZA21-0048 Concept Plan Ridgeerest Property SiR 9Ma Sum Chart is+J SFu 9 E+65 635� 0]�c a �. �n aex Fenvq f Wall rRavdR Fence 1 Wall reoend v GrcmaPai Lon.�eme Owner: TMnve R Caro ptl�n M. Vmi Owner: 9nrn McLetl re�aaa me rr�e em, rum aus nu�,rr. Engineer: ua ionmm rm. saxxi3 Td: @I1-33]2dN �fne[t RYLed trLtlS P.L Applicant: xn ogaoeewpre. Planner: sacs exaw, we p ,,ppyy pp r�� 19JULE Case No. 7A21-0048 Tree Canopy Coverage Total sibs area 4SZ913 sf. Tod exio&r canopy 56,619 r.f. —n 12.SW a Preserved tree canopy (green) 41A57 s.f. —> 73.93% ;. Possibe preserved tree canopy (yellow) SIM &F. —n IM6% a Renaved tree canopy [red) B.728 &f. —> 15A1% 55,274 r.f. -> 1GOAK °16 Liagerid PI6S,,GC Tree i:r nopy P=bIt lrewTn d Tree Uin , Re'r tired Tree Ca-M Eu,� 2aemF RPIrD WP �flk� l� Oorz° Eri.�pYmmf SPNL4 wmu.o.ra�ra.u.t i 44.0.3'_sf. — � d I 4A791 sI assetze ` yl Iei I 49,mLt I . I I ° _xisting ZOmn& AV II q — Luu:�nrCWrelriBBs�� ! P U.-M cf 1 y ~j Eu,�g zoo: sc 51 I is I / � 1 I '. uxtr m.nr n�uwrir _1 4 I WO wOwlry LYtlNr n� T, •J p :�i 43.7U s£ I a 43LMLf l l 'un wa l°z WJ7rIWd.Wr Site Data Summary Chart Site Data Summary M I Rid ecrest Property Existing Zoning AG Proposed Zoning SF-1A Land Use Designation Low Density Residential Gross/Net Acreage 10.4/9.15 Residential Lots 9 lots Net Density .96 lots/acre Open Space % NA Lot Area Range 43,641 sf to 49,869 sf Average Lot Area 45,785 sf Variance Requested 1) Variance to Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended, requiring all lots front on a street per Sections 8.01A & 5.04, to allow Lots 8 & 9 to be accessed via a private drive. 2) Variance to Subdivision Ordinance 483, Section 5.06, Sidewalks, to allow for no sidewalk requirement along the private drive. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE 3 ERG-1 )E §`§ � � g2/ §13 2-- I -A Site Photographs 106 Surrounding Property Owner Responses Planning and Zoning Commission August 5, 2021; Approved (4-1) subject to the Staff Report dated July 30, 2021 and Concept Plan Review Summary No. 2 dated July 30, 2021, and noting the following; approving the requested variances, as requested; the applicant agrees to escrow the funds for the future sidewalks as required; the driveway for Lot 7 will be on the private drive, not onto Ridgecrest Drive; the driveways for Lots 1 and 6 would be into the cul-de-sac and not onto Ridgecrest Drive; an agreement on the part of the applicant to have a discussion with a traffic engineer, acknowledging the challenge of measuring traffic in a residential area; agreeing to mandate circular drives on Lots 71. 81 and 9; looking at options with signage for safety along the private drive; and agreeing to continue a dialogue with the residents in the area for solutions for their concerns; adding a consideration for ribbon curbs on the private drive to address road concerns and vegetation concerns; the applicant would delay developing Lots 5 and 6 until Lots 8 and 9 are developed (to allow construction traffic on Lots 5 and 6 and not on the private street); and the applicant's agreement to install wrought iron fencing and not a masonry wall along Ridgecrest Drive surrounding the development. I WH Commissioner Dyche dissented for concerns of the lots fronting on a private drive and the requested variances. ITY OF VSOUTHLAKE Lf CITY OF SOUTHLAK Applicant's presentation