2000-12-07 P&Z Meeting
1 REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING
2 COMMISSION MEETING
3 December 7, 2000
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Dennis King; Vice-Chairman Michael Boutte; and
6 Commissioners Kenneth Horne, James Jones, Pamela Muller, Vernon Stansell, and John Terrell.
7
8 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None.
9
10 CITY STAFF PRESENT: Bruce Payne, Director of Planning; Greg Last, Director of Economic
11 Development; Charlie Thomas, City Engineer; Stefanie Wagoner, Economic Development
12 Specialist; Ken Baker, Senior Planner; Dennis Killough, Senior Planner; Tara Brooks, Planner; Mike
13 Hutchison, Senior Civil Engineer; Angela Turner, Graduate Engineer; and Lori Farwell, Planning
14 Secretary.
15
16 Chairman King called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. He thanked the Southlake Boulevard Church
17 for allowing the Commission to hold this meeting in their sanctuary.
18
19 There was no Work Session held.
20
21 AGENDA ITEM #2, APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
22 Chairman King opened discussion of the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
23 held on November 9, 2000.
24
25 Motion was made to approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held on
26 November 9, 2000, as presented.
27
28 Motion: Jones
29 Second: Stansell
30 Ayes: Horne, Stansell, Boutte, Jones, King
31 Nays: None
32 Abstain: Terrell, Muller
33 Approved: 5-0-2
34 Motion carried.
35
36 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 1, section #0064)
37
38 AGENDA ITEM #3, ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS:
39 Planning Director Bruce Payne stated that there will not be a second Planning and Zoning
40 Commission meeting in December; the next regular meeting will be January 4, 2001.
41
42 Chairman King said the Consent Agenda items are considered to be routine and will be enacted with
43 one motion unless a Commission member or an audience member requests for an item to be
44 removed from the Consent Agenda in which it will then be placed on the Regular Agenda and
45 considered in its normal sequence. No one requested for an item to be removed from the Consent
1
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 Agenda.
2
3 AGENDA ITEM #4, ZA00-100, FINAL PLAT OF LOT 1R, BLOCK A, WHITE CHAPEL
4 METHODIST CHURCH ADDITION;
5 AGENDA ITEM #5, ZA00-119, FINAL PLAT OF SOUTH NOLEN DRIVE DEDICATION;
6 AGENDA ITEM #6, ZA00-123, PLAT VACATION OF LOTS 1 AND 2, SIMMONS ADDITION;
7 AGENDA ITEM #7, ZA00-122, FINAL PLAT OF SIMMONS ADDITION:
8 Motion was made to approve ZA00-100 subject to Revised Plat Review Summary No. 1, dated
9 December 1, 2000; ZA00-119 subject to Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated December 1, 2000;
10 ZA00-123, Plat Vacation of Lots 1 and 2, Simmons Addition; and ZA00-122 subject to Plat Review
11 Summary No. 2, dated December 1, 2000.
12
13 Motion: Muller
14 Second: Horne
15 Ayes: Stansell, Terrell, Boutte, Muller, Jones, Horne, King
16 Nays: None
17 Approved: 7-0
18 Motion carried.
19
20 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 1, section #0137)
21
22 AGENDA ITEM #8, ZA00-085, PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EMERALD ESTATES SOUTH:
23 Motion was made to table ZA00-085 at the applicant's request to the January 18, 2001, Planning and
24 Zoning Commission meeting.
25
26 Motion: Muller
27 Second: Stansell
28 Ayes: Terrell, Boutte, Muller, Jones, Horne, Stansell, King
29 Nays: None
30 Approved: 7-0
31 Motion carried.
32
33 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 1, section #0169)
34
35 AGENDA ITEM #9, ZA00-120, PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HIGH POINT:
36 Senior Planner Ken Baker presented this item to the Commission for a Preliminary Plat of High
37 Point on property described as Tracts 3A, 3A1, 3A1A, 3A1B, 3A1C, 3A2, 3E, and 3E1, Littleberry
38 G. Hall Survey, Abstract 686, being 17.950 acres. This tract located on the west side of Shady Oaks
39 Drive across from Love Henry Court. The Current Zoning is "SF-1A" Single Family Residential
40 District; "SF-20A" Single Family Residential District; and "SF-30" Single Family Residential
41 District. The Land Use Category is Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential. The
42 Owner is Ross Owen. The Applicant is K. M. Properties, Inc. 32 written notices were sent to
43 property owners within the 200' notification area, and one notice was received in favor.
44
45 Kosse Maykus (K. M. Properties, Inc.) presented this item to the Commission and reviewed the
2
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 requested variances with them. He said they provided three different opportunities to run the
2 sidewalk through to Southridge Lakes, but he forewarned the Commission that they have not secured
3 an agreement with one or two property owners from Southridge Lakes who will need to allow this
4 sidewalk to go through their properties.
5
6 Chairman King opened the Public Hearing.
7
8 Mike Benton, 615 Love Henry Court, Southlake, Texas, said he is not really opposed or in favor of
9 this development, but he wanted to express his concern regarding the drainage in this area.
10
11 Mr. Maykus said there is a 50’ landscaped, detention area on the east side of this development that
12 will detain the water which will meter out into the existing culvert.
13
14 Chairman King closed the Public Hearing.
15
16 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 1, section #0560)
17
18 Motion was made to approve ZA00-120 subject to Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated December 1,
19 2000, and to accept the applicant’s willingness to provide 4’ sidewalk connecting Shady Oaks to
20 Southridge Lakes through this development.
21
22 Motion: Jones
23 Second: Muller
24 Ayes: Boutte, Muller, Jones, Horne, Stansell, Terrell, King
25 Nays: None
26 Approved: 7-0
27 Motion carried.
28
29 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 1, section #0604)
30
31 AGENDA ITEM #10, ZA00-115, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR JELLICO TOWNE
32 CROSSING:
33 Senior Planner Dennis Killough presented this item to the Commission for a Rezoning and Concept
34 Plan for Jellico Towne Crossing on property described as Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, Block 1, Stonebridge
35 Park; Lot 7, Drake Estates; Lots 4R2 and 4R3, J.G. Allen No. 18 Addition; Tracts 2E, 2F, 2F1, and
36 2F2, J. G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18; and a portion of Stonebridge Lane right-of-way; being
37 31.629 acres. The property is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of West Southlake
38 Boulevard (F.M. 1709) and Randol Mill Avenue. The Current Zoning is “C-3” General Commercial
39 District; “S-P-2” Generalized Site Plan District with certain “O-1” Office District and “C-2” Local
40 Retail Commercial District uses; “SF-1A” Single Family Residential District; “AG” Agricultural
41 District. The Requested Zoning is “S-P-2” Generalized Site Plan District with limited "C-3" General
42 Commercial District uses. The Land Use Category is Retail Commercial, Office Commercial, Low
43 Density Residential, and 100-Year Flood Plain. The Owners are Michael D. Heatley, James H. and
44 Doris A. Martin, Richard A. Myers, Rheta M. Miller, David L. Brown, and Shah Jahan Jiwani. The
45 Applicant is Weber and Company. 26 written notices were sent to property owners within the 200'
3
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 notification area, and 12 response were received with six responses being in favor and six responses
2 being opposed. 16 responses were received from outside the 200' notification area with two being in
3 favor and 14 being opposed. 21 form letters in opposition were received by the Planning
4 Department. Four form letters in opposition were received with additional comments and one form
5 letter in favor was received with additional comments.
6
7 Senior Planner Ken Baker presented the traffic issues to the Commission.
8
9 The Commission discussed the proposal with city staff.
10
11 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 1, section #2042)
12
13 John Weber (President of Weber and Company) presented this item to the Commission. He
14 introduced his consultants to the Commission as follows: Michael Clark (Civil Engineer); Mark
15 Davis (Director of Development); Gerald Luecke (Architect); Barbara Leftwich (Traffic Consultant);
16 and Glenn Gary (District Sales Manager for Target).
17
18 Vice-Chairman Boutte asked Mr. Weber if he is looking at adjacent land to the north of this project
19 for any future expansion. Mr. Weber said he is not negotiating. There were some overtures of
20 interest from some of the owners of the property, but he is not attempting to buy more land to the
21 north.
22
23 Chairman King asked if there is a prototypical size for a SuperTarget site; this site is approximately
24 30 acres. Mr. Weber said 35 acres would probably be his optimum SuperTarget site. He said they
25 have developed these sites throughout the metroplex and some sites have been larger and some have
26 been 22 to 24 acres.
27
28 Commissioner Horne asked if the Target in Grapevine was Mr. Weber development. Mr. Weber said
29 no.
30
31 Commissioner Horne said he was curious because it set alone for four or five years and then
32 expanded into a big strip. Mr. Weber said it is common for these centers to develop in stages.
33
34 Commissioner Terrell asked Mr. Weber if it is fair to say Targets are typically developed within an
35 eight to ten mile radius of one another. Mr. Weber said in the past they have been greater distances
36 but today it appears they are occurring at optimally six miles.
37
38 Commissioner Horne said just based on the last few statements, he has in mind something similar to
39 a geodesic dome with a Target at every triangular juncture. He asked what that is going to do to the
40 uniqueness of our town. He said we do not want Southlake to be Everyplace, USA. He said that is
41 probably the crux of the resistance.
42
43 Mr. Weber said from what he has seen from Target stores is that they sell quality name brand goods
44 and provide terrific service and amenities, and that they are a very welcome and good addition to a
45 business community.
4
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1
2 Commissioner Stansell asked Mr. Weber if he had any type of customer counts. Glenn Gary (a
3 District Manager for Target) said it averages about 2,500 customers a day.
4
5 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 1, section #2638)
6
7 Chairman King called for a break at 8:00 p.m.
8 Chairman King called the meeting back to order at 8:15 p.m.
9
10 Chairman King opened the Public Hearing.
11
12 Andrea Brankin, 139 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas, asked the Commission to vote no on this. She
13 said the Commission was not given studies that she would have hoped they would be given such as
14 FEMA and a more independent traffic count. She submitted a petition in opposition in which she has
15 separated the people with an out of town address. The petition contained 300 signatures of out of
16 town people plus 1400 Southlake residents. She said throughout the two SPIN meetings, Southlake
17 residents seemed to be saying they want Town Square, not SuperTarget, and they want planned
18 growth, not panic growth and they value their community over a corporate goal which looks like a
19 geodesic dome. The five reasons she said she opposes this involve the zoning laws, traffic, town
20 image, tax benefits, and environmental and historical. She chose Southlake carefully and wants it to
21 retain the flavor of what attracted her. She said this Target is way off target.
22
23 Diane Gorcyca, 107 San Jacinto Court, Southlake, Texas, said she understands the city is going to
24 grow but feels it is important to look at how it is going to expand and what the cost benefit is going
25 to be. She said the statistics being quoted come from all across the country and said Southlake is
26 Southlake; it is unique. The reason she moved here is because it is sort of country, and it had a
27 uniqueness about it with the planning of Town Square. She said the impact of SuperTarget would not
28 be positive on the environment. She said the 8’ masonry wall would not satisfy her. She wants to
29 protect the interest and the rights of the citizens who live behind this site. She is not a Target
30 shopper; it is not something that satisfies her. She would like to see something better in this spot.
31 Robert Neil, 601 Regency Crossing, Southlake, Texas, said Southlake already has four grocery
32 stores, Lowe’s, Wal-Mart, Home Depot, and it does not need a SuperTarget. He has a great concern
33 that if there is over-commercialization in this area, some of the businesses will go under and then
34 there will be boarded up buildings. He said times are good right now, but we may be on the leading
35 edge of a recession. His second issue is traffic. He said the city center is magnificent, and this does
36 not fit in with his idea of Southlake and why he came here.
37
38 Stoney Stubbs, 158 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas, said he has lived on Jellico Circle for 28 years.
39 He said he is in the trucking business, and he knows how many trucks this Target will bring in and
40 he knows who drives trucks. The trucking industry has a big problem with drivers; over half of the
41 drivers in the trucking industry have less than one year experience. He said you don’t need a bunch
42 of rookie truck drivers mixing in with the high school drivers. He said we should keep this store out
43 of here.
44
45 Dave Visney, 137 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas, said he volunteered his services about a year ago
5
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 to be a SPIN leader and, unfortunately, it is an embarrassment to him to find out the lack of
2 communication between the city and the SPIN people. He found out from the developer he had been
3 in negotiations with the city since April 1999; the only reason he found that out is he had to ask the
4 developer. He apologized to his constituents for the lack of knowledge, but this will help recognize
5 that the SPIN leaders have a very good purpose in this community for a very good reason. He thinks
6 there is a big lack of communication between the city and the SPIN leaders and said he does not
7 know what is going on, but it needs help. He thinks the only thing that would be worse than the
8 Target is perhaps a U.S. steel mill or a General Motors assembly plant.
9
10 Doug Morrison, 713 Overland Trail, Southlake, Texas, said the drainage studies concern him
11 greatly. He thinks adding high volume businesses such as Target will create more of a safety hazard;
12 it will not only be an increase in traffic, it will be an increase in death. He thinks Target will have a
13 hard time meeting its financial goals and will have a hard time finding employees. He would like to
14 see this area developed into offices and small businesses with lower traffic volume.
15
16 Brad Hlodnicki, 101 Starling Court, Southlake, Texas, said he is against the rezoning and against
17 any of the variances to the driveways. He is vehemently opposed to another traffic light between
18 Davis and Pearson Lane. He said to stick by the Land Use Plan. If he was to ever shop at Target, he
19 will drive the eight miles; he does not want it here. This is not incremental tax revenue; he has to
20 believe 50% or more will be taken from Gateway Plaza, Town Square, Home Depot, Lowe’s, etc. He
21 stated his concern about recent development in the city. He said Southlake is an elite community,
22 and this is not an elite development. It doesn’t belong here.
23
24 James Martin, Rt. 1 Box 203-A1, Newark, Texas, said he lived in Southlake many years but now he
25 is retired. He has a little piece of property that is in this development, and he had to come out of
26 retirement this year just to pay the taxes on it so he needs to get rid of it. He hasn’t heard any of
27 these people say they have lived here over five years; he has been here a long time. He does not see
28 what they really know what Southlake is all about. He had heard people say they like the cows out
29 there grazing and to close the doors now that they are here. Nothing stays the same just because they
30 moved here; it doesn’t make sense. He said if these people buy this property, they have just as much
31 right to use it. He would like to see the Commission pass this so that he can get on with his business.
32
33 Jack Wiesman, 2607 W. Southlake Boulevard, Southlake, Texas, said he was talking to a friend of his
34 who owns property adjacent to this development and who recently moved out of state. His friend had
35 a commitment on his property in which the buyer backed out of after he found out about this
36 development. He said we can expect no less of other properties adjacent or near this development.
37 He has been out here 40 years and has seen a lot of development going on and said we do not need
38 this sort of thing. He is strongly opposed to this because of the property values that would be
39 affected.
40
41 Margaret Collins, 2901 Knight Court, Southlake, Texas, urged the Commission to vote no for two
42 main reasons. She thinks this is a gorgeous piece of property. She asked the Commission to have a
43 larger and higher vision. She said the traffic at this intersection is horrendous, and it is not going to
44 get any better with the Target.
45
6
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 Sandra Parry, 105 Brock Drive, Southlake, Texas, said she is opposed to the SuperTarget. She asked
2 how people from the west would get into the SuperTarget with the right-in/right-out driveways.
3
4 Mr. Killough said there is a full access driveway proposed north of the one along Randol Mill and
5 then there are two more full access driveways which are both west of the limited access driveway. In
6 total, there are three full access driveways.
7
8 Mrs. Parry said the proposed development is not what Southlake needs. She said it takes her three
9 lights just to get through this intersection. She asked what about the construction equipment creating
10 more traffic. She said this whole area will have to suffer for it.
11
12 Barbara Weinberger, 640 Oak Hill Drive, Southlake, Texas, said she is a newcomer and she now
13 owns two homes in Southlake and is happy to contribute over $15,000 a year in taxes for what she
14 thought she was buying into. She said there must be as many as 20 Targets she could have chosen to
15 live near between Southlake and her office in downtown Dallas. She asked the Commission to
16 please oppose this SuperTarget.
17
18 Chairman King read the following letter from Pamela Papa, 106 Bob-o-link Court, Southlake,
19 Texas: I have a great concern for the quality of life in Southlake and for the intentions of community
20 leaders. We bought our house in an upscale community and it is quickly becoming a discount
21 community. It is quickly losing its country resort feeling and home prices will not maintain. We
22 fought the expansion of Randol Mill and were assured of Southlake’s “strict” rezoning policies. If
23 this is an example of “strict” then I foresee the hapless whimsical strip centers of Houston up and
24 down F.M. 1709 and Randol Mill. Companies will not relocate their executives here, nor will we be
25 here.
26
27 Martin Smith, 210 Swallow Drive, Southlake, Texas, said he is extremely dissatisfied with the
28 professional studies and statistics that have come in and the absolute reliance on the developer to
29 come up with those numbers. The numbers that have changes are regarding the number of trucks, the
30 tax savings, and the payback period. He expressed his concern regarding safety.
31
32 Lynn Fisher, 725 Bryson Way, Southlake, Texas, said she is also opposed. She has sat in on enough
33 Planning and Zoning Commission meetings and City Council meetings to know it is well and good
34 to let your voice be heard here but no matter what P&Z decides this evening, this will go to Council.
35 She encouraged the audience members to also attend the Council meeting.
36
37 Joseph Mansen, 224 Canyon Lake Drive, Southlake, Texas, said he is a private physician who chose
38 to move because he could. He asked what we are saying when we put this next to single family. He
39 asked what kind of precedent that would be setting. He said we don’t want south Arlington and that
40 is what it is beginning to look like. He said people are not saying to close the gates; they are saying
41 to maintain what we have. Target sees the incomes in Southlake, and they see what percentage our
42 purchases are but said to let them build elsewhere.
43
44 Donna Pellegrino, 214 Bob-O-Link Drive, Southlake, Texas, said she was at the Randol Mill
45 expansion meetings and was told that City Council does not want all of Randol Mill to become
7
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 commercial. She said this development will create a domino effect down Randol Mill, and it will
2 look like Davis Boulevard. She said we need to figure out what Southlake needs and not what the
3 Mayor wants.
4
5 Gary Garland, 202 Swallow Drive, Southlake, Texas, said he moved here this year and passes the
6 Target and Grapevine everyday and can stop there when he needs something. He lives in Myers
7 Meadow and expressed his concern that they are the escape valve for traffic from this intersection.
8 He said the traffic study is incomplete.
9
10 Vice-Chairman Boutte said the City of Southlake has a very professional staff who he is very proud
11 of. By state law, he said they have to process applications in a fair and courteous manner and bring
12 them forward for consideration. He commended staff for all their hard work.
13
14 Raul Guzman, 1708 Water Lily Drive, Southlake, Texas, said he is a native of Mexico. His current
15 employer brought him to the United States on a working visa on permanent residency. He is opposed
16 to this development for the reasons people have given before. He said it is an honor to serve on the
17 Commission because of ethics and values. In Mexico, he is sorry to say, money is the one that speaks
18 and it corrupts people. He got his first civics lesson recently when he voted for President. He got his
19 second civics lesson here today, and he is overwhelmed with what he is hearing because this would
20 never happen in his hometown. He hopes the Commission, the Council, and the Mayor will not let
21 him down and continue teaching him these wonderful lessons.
22
23 Joy Clark, 755 Randol Mill Avenue, Southlake, Texas, said nothing ever stays the same. She said
24 Southlake is not the same as when she moved here 27 years ago. We are not going to shut the door
25 because there are more people coming. She said this property needs to be developed. She has not
26 heard anyone give a good use for the land. She heard someone mention a school, but this is in Keller
27 school district. She does not want to see a school here. We already have a high school on F.M. 1709
28 which, in her opinion, was a mistake. She would like to hear of a better idea for this land. She said
29 this land is beautiful but so was Myers Meadow before they developed it; she enjoyed looking at it.
30
31 Marc Summey, 146 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas, said he does not want to live in a concrete
32 jungle. He said we don’t consider Wal-Mart across the street from Costco and Lowe’s across the
33 street from Home Depot progress in this city. He said he thinks it is time to be patient with our
34 development. He asked the Commission to consider saturation. He said there is going to be a 1.4
35 million square foot mall developed in Westlake on the Circle T Ranch. He said it is time to stop; he
36 hopes that is the message being sent to City Council. He said the Zoning Ordinance restricts “C-3”
37 zoning adjacent to single family.
38
39 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, end of tape 1, section #5817)
40
41 Chairman King called for a break at 9:32 p.m.
42 Chairman King called the meeting back to order at 9:50 p.m.
43
44 Mark Malan, 603 Royal Lane, Southlake, Texas, said this proposal does not reflect the right type of
45 development. This proposal will clearly be a negative impact on his neighborhood. He recognizes
8
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 that from a financial standpoint, Target would be crazy to not try to rezone the land involved to
2 transfer shopping dollars from other Southlake retailers to their store. He said city leadership needs
3 to follow through on its land use commitment as outlined in the land use document as prepared by
4 the city. He asked the Commission to deny this proposal. If he wanted to live in a city like Plano, he
5 would have moved there in the first place.
6
7 Chairman King read the following letter from Perry and Vera Vargas, 209 Brock Drive, Southlake,
8 Texas: We have gone to most of the SPIN meetings regarding Target. 1) Perry and I are opposed to
9 having the SuperTarget built here because we are concerned about the increase of traffic and not
10 being able to make a left or right turn to get out of our street. The traffic is already congested in the
11 morning and it is hard to get on to F.M. 1709 to go east to work. No matter what your survey says or
12 what improvements are on the way, we are still going to have more traffic. The traffic on F.M. 1709
13 is already frustrating to drive. 2) Our neighborhood on Brock Drive is quiet and we like to keep it
14 that way. 3) We worry about the crime rate going up. 4) My husband has respiratory problems and
15 contributed air pollution will make it worse. 5) We worry about where the water will eventually flow
16 as the creek is right behind us. We already have water flowing from the top of the hill going into our
17 ditches. We feel if you all are listening and care about the rights and concerns of the people that are
18 opposed in building Target, you will vote against it. You should vote for what is best for the people
19 in the community and not what is best for Target.
20
21 Patrick O’Leary, 115 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas, said he moved to Southlake two months ago
22 from Bedford and found out about Target a month later. His said realtor did not even know about it
23 because it has been kept very hush-hush. He said there is no way an 8’ wall will block out the light
24 and keep him from seeing the Target. He said we are heading for a recession. He said there are
25 wetlands because there are cattails in the creek. He asked if staff has a 404 Permit yet.
26
27 Michael Clark (Winkelmann & Associates) 6750 Hillcrest Plaza, Dallas, Texas, said they do not
28 have a 404 Permit at this time. They have completed their proposal, and it is at the Corps being
29 reviewed at this time.
30
31 Mr. O’Leary also asked if they have a FEMA study. He expressed his concern about increased
32 traffic. He said he would like to see their demographic study. He said we are not ready for a
33 Southlake Target.
34
35 Jim Brankin, 139 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas, urged the Commission to vote against this
36 request. He said the city made a commitment to not put commercial along Randol Mill Avenue. He
37 said there are clearly established practices to not develop commercial contiguous to single family
38 residential. He said the congestion on F.M. 1709 is absolutely unacceptable and the widening of
39 Randol Mill will increase that congestion. He also thinks the tax numbers need a lot of work.
40
41 Stan Potts, 2405 Hillside Court, Southlake, Texas, said he owns a trucking business and questioned
42 how many trucks the applicant expects to have at the Target store on a weekly basis. He said at the
43 last SPIN meeting, the applicant estimated there to be between five and seven trucks a week. He took
44 off a day last week and went over to the new store in Watauga and counted 56 trucks in a one hour
45 time period. He estimated about 15,000 trucks a year coming into this intersection.
9
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1
2 Pat Anderson, 167 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas, presented a slide show to the Commission. She
3 said most other Targets are on major highways. She expressed her concern regarding increased
4 traffic and the proximity to the high school and those inexperienced drivers. She asked the
5 Commission to turn this proposal down and to give Southlake something they can be proud of.
6
7 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 2, section #0867)
8
9 Robert Garner, 225 Timberline Lane, Southlake, Texas, said he has lived in Southlake 29 years. He
10 said 560’ of his property borders this property on the north side. He said the last thing in the world
11 he wanted on this property was a grocery store, and that is what he’s got. He expressed his concern
12 regarding truck traffic, lights, pollution, trash, noise, crime, and rodents. He said this use will be a
13 nuisance to him. He said this property was zoned in 1996 for office buildings, and he was in favor of
14 that. He questioned how much protection an 8’ high fence will be. He said whatever buildings are
15 placed on this property should be compatible with the other buildings on this property and be made
16 of Austin stone. He said he is vehemently opposed to this request.
17
18 Jim Siegrist, 1504 Chimney Works Drive, Southlake, Texas, asked to see traffic numbers during the
19 peak rush hour times from 6:00 to 9:00 a.m. and from 4:00 to 7:00 p.m.
20
21 Pat Cockrum, 203 Lovegrass Lane, Southlake, Texas, responded to a statement from the developer
22 shown in the question-answer handout. He said the question posed was regarding what residents will
23 personally gain from this Target, and the developer responded with “the convenience of shopping in
24 a modern attractive SuperTarget in their own neighborhood.” He said he does not need that; he can
25 drive eight miles to a Target.
26
27 Barney Roger, 1201 Emerald Circle, Southlake, Texas, said he does not want a Target in Southlake.
28 He does not care whether it is in his backyard or in someone else’s backyard. He listed the Top Ten
29 Reasons for building a SuperTarget in Southlake. He said he will skip number ten simply because he
30 is in a church this evening. 9) This will be an excellent staging area for illegal aliens seeking jobs in
31 the local lucrative home construction industry; 8) Those damn old trees were causing nothing but
32 allergies anyhow; 7) We would rather have a SuperTarget than a landfill or a Stacy’s Furniture; 6)
33 We will qualify for government funding to build an overpass and widen Interstate 1709; 5) Tax
34 revenue will allow us to buy user-friendly voting machines; 4) It will be a perfect location for a
35 liquor store because the extra traffic will drive us all to drinking; 3) We Southlakers wouldn’t be
36 caught dead in that icky-old Target in Grapevine; 2) It will keep them from building another darn
37 Wal-Mart; 1) It will be a great place to build a gallows and hang all of the Planning and Zoning
38 people who voted for it.
39
40 Ross Martin, 1347 Woodbrook Court, Southlake, Texas, reminded the Commission of the recent
41 approval for a connector road between Shady Oaks and Peytonville. One of the reasons for the
42 approval was that it would help relieve traffic on F.M. 1709. He expressed his concern regarding
43 increased traffic through the adjacent residential areas. He asked the Commission to vote against
44 this.
45
10
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 Joe Truln, 144 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas, said he drives everyday to the Richardson/Plano
2 area. He took Mr. Weber up on his proposal to go look at the SuperTarget in Plano, and he was
3 shocked. It sits in the middle of an open field, and there were houses behind it. He envisioned it
4 being next to his house.
5
6 Metah Boroughs, 701 Overland Trail, Southlake, Texas, said she has lived in Southlake for 16 years.
7 She said the development so far in Southlake has been very tasteful, and she is very proud of it. She
8 said there are not many real firm answers to questions residents are asking tonight regarding taxes,
9 traffic, property values, drainage, crime, etc. She expressed her concern regarding safety and
10 increased congestion.
11
12 Ann Creighton, 705 Lakehurst Court, Southlake, Texas, urged the Commission to follow the Land
13 Use Plan. She said a lot of time and effort went into it, and it was designed to address a property
14 such as this where there was residential property abutting commercial property. There are many
15 inconsistencies involved with large commercial developments such as this that simply don’t belong
16 adjacent to residential property. Given the widespread community opposition that has been heard
17 this evening, it is inconceivable to her that anyone sitting on this Commission or on City Council
18 would consider approving this project. She has heard the supposed justification being the city’s need
19 for the tax revenue, and she is personally offended that our elected officials would choose to place
20 the burden for fiscal management on the residents that are adjacent to this property and throughout
21 the city. We have heard numerous reasons why this property is not right for this particular project.
22 In the future when this property is developed, she would hope that both this Commission and city
23 staff when working with developers would encourage those developers to not bring forward an “S-P-
24 2” zoning request but rather bring forward an “S-P-1” zoning request. When she saw an “S-P-2”
25 zoning request on a property of this size, she thought it was absolutely wrong; it does not give the
26 city the kind of control it needs.
27
28 Chairman King read the following letter from Michael Braselton, 600 Cimarron Trail, Southlake,
29 Texas: 1) Keep the Town Square plan/concept. It is awesome. 2) I live off Johnson Road. I am
30 convinced traffic will increase dramatically: commercial carriers, sales representatives, customers all
31 using Johnson Road to avoid congestion at intersection. This will have the following consequences:
32 cut down awesome trees, decrease safety of people, children at Florence, joggers/cyclists, park goers
33 at new/proposed park. 3) Why not put it along S.H. 114 corridor? If you allow it to go along F.M.
34 1709, it sends a strong message that Target is more important to City Council than the citizens of
35 Southlake.
36
37 Flo Morrison, 713 Overland Trail, Southlake, Texas, said people are using Johnson Road as a
38 thoroughfare to Highway 377 or to Interstate 35. There is a school on Johnson Road and trucks will
39 begin to use the road to get to Target. She said the new DPS facility to the east will need primary
40 access out of their site. She said Albertson’s hours have been cut back due to slow sales, and that
41 Town Square merchants are not meeting their sales quotas.
42
43 Wayne Haney, 400 Brock Drive, Southlake, Texas, stated his opposition to this proposal due to noise,
44 lights, traffic issues, aesthetics, drainage, trash, safety of entering and existing Brock Drive, and
45 decreasing property values. He said it is the wrong thing in the wrong place.
11
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1
2 Chairman King read the following names from sign-in cards from people who were opposed who did
3 not wish to speak:
4 Paul Thoennes, 119 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
5 Julie Stubbs, 158 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
6 Winston I. Barrant, 2805 Watts Court, Southlake, Texas;
7 Tom Morris, 403 St. Charles Court, Southlake, Texas;
8 William Ruppert, 1351 Estella Way, Southlake, Texas;
9 Cynthia Matthews Ruppert, 1351 Estella Way, Southlake, Texas;
10 Mike Anderson, 167 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
11 Lyle Jophet, 1905 Haymeadow Court, Southlake, Texas;
12 Steve Freeman, 113 Killdeer Court, Southlake, Texas;
13 Reed Yates, 135 Jellico Circle East, Southlake, Texas;
14 Julie Mansen, 224 Canyon Lake Drive, Southlake, Texas;
15 Jean Pullin, 2906 Yorkshire Court, Southlake, Texas;
16 Margie Jarvies, 616 Overland Trail, Southlake, Texas;
17 Julie Graber, 102 Swallow Court, Southlake, Texas;
18 Steve Perry, 1356 Woodbrook Lane, Southlake, Texas;
19 Aline Perry, 1356 Woodbrook Lane, Southlake, Texas;
20 Charles W. Rennspies, 708 Cimarron Trail, Southlake, Texas;
21 Bill Roepka, 621 Warrington Lane, Southlake, Texas;
22 T.E. Newman, Jr., 2801 Watts Court, Southlake, Texas;
23 Sharon Johnson, 1265 Stanhope Court, Southlake, Texas;
24 Charles Fish, 1206 San Augustine Court, Southlake, Texas;
25 Mark Premock, 102 Swallow Court, Southlake, Texas;
26 Frank Fisher, 725 Bryson Way, Southlake, Texas;
27 Donny Cross, 1006 Hidden Knoll Court, Southlake, Texas;
28 James Jarvies, 616 Overland Trail, Southlake, Texas;
29 Leslie Goodrich, 106 Swallow Court, Southlake, Texas;
30 Brenda McClanahan, 306 Quail Court, Southlake, Texas;
31 Roxanne Morgan, 140 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
32 Sue Gill, 2402 Hillside Court, Southlake, Texas;
33 John and Patti Rafa, 1354 Estella Way, Southlake, Texas;
34 Nancy Sutherland, 1351 Woodbrook Lane, Southlake, Texas;
35 Ami J. Decker, 100 Bob-O-Link Court, Southlake, Texas;
36 Penny Pannell, 1429Kensington Court, Southlake, Texas;
37 Linda H. Yates, 135 Jellico Circle East, Southlake, Texas;
38 June J. Hartley, 163 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
39 Leanne Clift, 1804 Redwing Court, Southlake, Texas;
40 Craig Rodgers, 108 Waterford Drive, Southlake, Texas;
41 Wade and Trish Landers, 171 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
42 Lyn and Bill Raines, 411 Osprey Court, Southlake, Texas;
43 Don Boyer, 205 Waterford Drive, Southlake, Texas;
44 Rhonda Planchet, 210 Bob-O-Link Drive, Southlake, Texas;
45 Louise Howard, 303 Brock Drive, Southlake, Texas;
12
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 Lisa Hall, 106 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
2 Terry Boroughs, 701 Overland Trail, Southlake, Texas;
3 Kimberly T. Smith, 1423 Brighton Court, Southlake, Texas;
4 Deborah Perry, 1421 Brighton Court, Southlake, Texas;
5 June Bronson, 407 Trustle Court, Southlake, Texas;
6 Robert K. and Patricia B. Reedy, 112 Killdeer Court, Southlake, Texas;
7 Charles Whitacre, 110 Waterford Drive, Southlake, Texas;
8 Suzanne Burda, 2795 Johnson Road, Southlake, Texas;
9 Laurie Starks, 307 Timber Lake Way, Southlake, Texas;
10 Diane Smith, 1500 Oak Lane, Southlake, Texas;
11 Richard C. and Mary Jane Groesch, 1704 Water Lily Drive, Southlake, Texas;
12 Alicia Gourley, 355 Silverwood Circle, Southlake, Texas;
13 William R. Collins, 2901 Knight Court, Southlake, Texas;
14 Linda A. Garland, 202 Swallow Drive, Southlake, Texas;
15 John Kloehr, 300 Donley Court, Southlake, Texas;
16 Mary K. Braselton, 600 Cimarron Trail, Southlake, Texas;
17 Kevin and Terrie Kremer, 608 Cimarron Trail, Southlake, Texas;
18 Thomas and Beth Roseborrough, 717 Overland Trail, Southlake, Texas;
19 Jeff and Linda Epperson, 717 Cimarron Trail, Southlake, Texas;
20 Kathleen Martin, 1112 Travis Court, Southlake, Texas;
21 Robert Smith, 600 Loving Court, Southlake, Texas;
22 Sarah Popelka, 2902 Bristol Glen Court, Southlake, Texas;
23 Fred Pullin, 2906 Yorkshire Court, Southlake, Texas;
24 Vince and Ellen Fabry, 131 Harrell Drive, Southlake, Texas;
25 Tracy Justice, 141 Harrell Drive, Southlake, Texas;
26 Hal Robinson and family, 209 Lovegrass Lane, Southlake, Texas;
27 David Fenech, 213 Bob-O-Link Drive, Southlake, Texas;
28 Monica Dunn, 213 Bob-O-Link Drive, Southlake, Texas;
29 Jagdip Patel, 2625 Johnson Road, Southlake, Texas;
30 Shellie Ferguson, 1378 Lakeview Drive, Southlake, Texas;
31 Jacqueline Beyer, 1611 Pheasant Lane, Southlake, Texas;
32 Mary Grace Thoennes, 119 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
33 Gloria A. Linnebur, 119 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
34 Dale Puddy, 143 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas;
35 Barbara Richardville, 101 Bob-O-Link Court, Southlake, Texas;
36 Brad Walker, 1903 Cresson Drive, Southlake, Texas;
37 Ellen Weinberger, Southlake, Texas;
38 Linda Dudds, 713 Dominion Drive, Southlake, Texas;
39 Tim Raley, 440 W. Highland Street, Southlake, Texas;
40 Eileen Rosenkellier, 212 Bob-O-Link Drive, Southlake, Texas;
41 Margie Jarvies, 616 Overland Trail, Southlake, Texas;
42 James E. Cox, 2904 Bristol Glen Court, Southlake, Texas;
43 D. F. Coonan, 612 Regency Crossing, Southlake, Texas;
44 Gary K. and Susan L. Beyer, 1611 Pheasant Lane, Southlake, Texas;
45 Jeremy Cosgrove, 511 Davis Boulevard, Southlake, Texas;
13
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 Mark and Joni Miller, 601 Royal Lane, Southlake, Texas;
2 Jim and Barbara Jeppe, 330 Glenrose Court, Southlake, Texas;
3 Lee Richardson, 2395 Johnson Road, Southlake, Texas;
4 Maura Keaton, 1401 Pecos Drive, Southlake, Texas;
5 Mike English, 613 Warrington Lane, Southlake, Texas.
6
7 Chairman King read the following names from sign-in cards from people who were in favor who did
8 not wish to speak:
9 Mark Miller, 2502 W. Southlake Boulevard, Southlake, Texas;
10 Rheta Miller, 2502 W. Southlake Boulevard, Southlake, Texas;
11 Anitra Brown, 5312 Holiday Court, North Richland Hills, Texas;
12 David Brown, 5312 Holiday Court, North Richland Hills, Texas.
13
14 Chairman King left the Public Hearing open.
15
16 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 2, section #2282)
17
18 Vice-Chairman Boutte made the following statement: It looks to him like elements of our city
19 government are willing to inflict a lot of pain on the community in the name of tax revenue. I
20 contacted the University of New Orleans and asked their Urban Studies Department to send some
21 examples of studies of the economic impact of discount boxes on various communities. I received
22 from them a stack of such studies from around the country. The consensus of these studies is: a) The
23 economic impact of such centers is large but not necessarily positive. b) Economic displacement
24 always occurs. c) These centers generate a large need for municipal services. d) Net city revenue
25 change can actually be negative if a city has already reached retail capacity. I believe that is the case
26 here. I believe that the city has not developed a viable economic blueprint for the development of
27 Southlake. I believe the city reacts to developer requests instead of seeking developers to enact a city
28 strategy that leads to sustainable economic health. I do not believe that adding discount retail to an
29 already overbuilt discount retail environment will improve our economic health. In fact, I believe
30 that adding discount retail beyond our capacity to support it will lead to empty stores, more budget
31 woes, and an added tax burden on residents. I believe that we have to strive for a diversified
32 economy and overbuilding one sector of our economy is a prescription for ever higher taxes and
33 shrinking available services. I believe that overbuilding our discount retail sector will make it much
34 more difficult to attract other more desirable businesses to our city. I believe that turning the
35 expanded F.M. 1938 into a cluttered, signalized retail corridor, which this project will inevitably lead
36 to, will sound the death knell for our stated plans for corporate development along S.H. 114. I
37 believe that it is unfair to residents to tell them that we are planning on an expanded F.M. 1938 being
38 a rural parkway to route employees to our future corporate developments while some of our officials
39 are conspiring with developers in backrooms to make it a retail corridor. I do not believe that it is
40 fair or responsible for any of our elected officials to threaten residents through the press, telling them
41 that if Target is not approved their taxes will be raised when in fact we have no realistic idea what
42 the net revenue from Target would even be. I believe that I am ready to make a motion whenever the
43 rest of the Commission is ready to entertain one.
44
45 Commissioner Muller said she has lived in Southlake for 17 years. The citizens of Southlake elected
46 her to office in 1988 and that City Council hired the first professional City Manager, they worked on
14
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 a Master Plan, on city ordinances, they rezoned the whole city, and they finished the annexation of
2 all the properties that make Southlake boundaries now. She told Vice-Chairman Boutte she is a little
3 offended and said at that time they weren't a bunch of yahoos; they hired professional consultants
4 who helped them with their Master Plan. In making the Master Plan, they were advised. The Land
5 Use Plan is not written in cement but is a guide. She has to say that her experience in watching it
6 work in the past ten years is that they did a pretty good job. She encouraged audience members to
7 also attend the City Council meetings because this item will go forward to Council no matter what
8 the vote is at this meeting. She said on behalf of the staff and the city that a lot of people have put a
9 lot of time and effort into the Land Use Plan, and the only time she has seen a deviation from that
10 plan is if there has been some significant change.
11
12 Chairman King said he has worked with staff people is different cities over the years and said he
13 wants everyone to know that we have a really great professional staff. He read a few staff members
14 names: Bruce Payne, Dennis Killough, Ken Baker, Tara Brooks, Charlie Thomas, Mike Hutchison,
15 Angela Turner, Stefanie Wagoner, and Greg Last; he said these guys do a lot of hard work and do a
16 terrific job. He said when applications come in, staff has to process them. He does not know if they
17 are for this or against it. He does not ask them, and they do not tell him.
18
19 Commissioner Terrell said he has been in real estate 20 years and has been all over the country, and
20 he hasn't seen a better staff than at the City of Southlake. He commended Greg Last and the
21 economic development staff; it is his job to try to bring taxes and commercial development to the
22 City of Southlake. Mr. Last does not point anyone to any one particular site; they come in and ask to
23 be located in a particular area and then he does what he can to provide them with the information
24 they need.
25
26 Commissioner Terrell said he is big on property rights, but he also believes in the rights of adjoining
27 property owners. While the Land Use Plan is used as a guide, it also is a guide for anyone moving to
28 the city to determine if this is the location in the city they want to live. The current plan does not
29 show this kind of development. Based on that alone, he feels it is a very difficult situation to
30 basically fool the citizens of Southlake into believing a development of this nature wouldn't occur.
31 He said there are many, many issues to talk about including traffic, but his reasons are basically due
32 to the current zoning and the Land Use Plan.
33
34 Commissioner Jones said he does not have a written, prepared statement or anything because he
35 walked in here tonight not having any idea how he was going to vote. He appreciates everybody
36 coming out and said he received hundreds of letters mostly in opposition. He said he wants to
37 publicly distance himself from something that was said here. He has never seen nor does he know
38 anything about any backroom dealing with developers; he does not believe that goes on. He wants to
39 distance himself from any impression that may give anyone. He received letters from people who
40 said if this Target item passes, they are moving out of Southlake. He received letters from people
41 who said they are moving if this doesn't pass because they cannot afford to live here anymore
42 because taxes keep going up. He said we all want to live in a nice city with a certain amount of
43 uniqueness to it. The concern and question he has is the quality of life and the prestige of living here
44 worth the amount of taxes you have to pay in order to achieve that. That is a big issue for him
45 because he has a finite number he has to make in order to live in this town. At some point, we have
15
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 to come to terms with the idea that there has to be some balance between living in a quaint, country
2 little town and being able to afford to live in that town, but at the same time you have to balance that
3 with the idea of living in a beautiful town that you cannot get around in. No matter how beautiful
4 that town is; that town is not beautiful if you cannot move around due to gridlock. At some point, we
5 need to find that balance. What that is will be different things to different people. He said there are
6 many people in this town who want to live here that are on the bubble of being able to afford to do it
7 because of the tax situation. All he asks is that we all consider what that balance is. If this doesn't
8 pass tonight, there will be a day when it does because Southlake is growing, and it will continue to
9 grow.
10
11 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 2, section #2893)
12
13 Chairman King said he does not have a prepared statement, but he would like to say that he spoke to
14 Mr. Weber about this. Mr. Weber has done development for 25 years and has done millions of
15 square feet. He knows there were some concerns about engineering and how the project would look,
16 but he knows if this project were built it would be a very fine project. There would not be a problem
17 with drainage, and it would be engineered correctly. Mike Clark is a very excellent engineer. He told
18 Mr. Weber it is good-looking project. For this type of project, it is a very attractive project with all
19 the bufferyards and the three acres of park in the front. He told Mr. Weber has concerns about its
20 location. He cannot say it any better than what has already been said. He said the zoning is not in
21 place and the Land Use Plan doesn't contemplate this type of use against residential; that is the
22 biggest concern he has about it. He said someone mentioned to him that we are shutting the door on
23 development. He has been on the Commission for eighteen months, and they have approved millions
24 of square feet. They have a 95-98% approval rate; that is not shutting the door at all. They have
25 done Sabre, Costco, Lowe's, Gateway, and hundreds of homes and subdivisions. He said he
26 remembers when Sam's Club opened in Dallas, and no one could believe how big it was. He guessed
27 it was probably 100,000 square feet but said these centers now are twice that big. He said what they
28 have done now with these big boxes is they have boxed themselves in. They want to put an
29 industrial-type warehouse building and put retail in it and call it retail, but they cannot go up against
30 residential in communities that don't want it. Mr. Weber and other developers cannot do anything
31 about it. Developers go where their users want to take them.
32
33 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 2, section #3234)
34
35 Commissioner Stansell said he has a couple of decades in commercial real estate. He came in here
36 tonight with a blank sheet of paper and has made some notes. He has talked to many people
37 including Mr. Weber, merchants, people at one of the petition booths, and many other residents just
38 trying to get input and ideas. He came away with three basic things. On the plus side, there is the
39 revenue. There are many things in Southlake we want to do. We want to build libraries, recreation
40 centers, and a lot of other things. There are many communities that would love to have Dayton
41 Hudson as a corporate citizen; they are a quality citizen. On the minus side, there is the location and
42 traffic. This Target is proposed to open in 2003 and the solutions to the problems don't occur until
43 2003 and beyond. Based on the data in their packets, when Target opens it will exceed the capacity
44 on F.M. 1709 by 13,000 vehicles. That isn't an 'F'; that is way beyond 'F'. Staff estimates the Randol
45 Mill improvements at around 1.8 million, and the impact fees listed in the packets were $246,000 so
16
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 we go into the whole right out of the gate. He agrees the location is not desirable. He would
2 encourage the applicant to look elsewhere in Southlake as he did originally.
3
4 Commissioner Horne said he, too, crunches numbers all day but the numbers no one here has
5 mentioned are the stress numbers. Everyone in this community is under a tremendous amount of
6 stress going to and from work. We are rushed 50 to 60 hours per week rushing to somewhere we do
7 not want to be. We come home where we want to be, and we can't even get there. When we are
8 there, we look out and we have an artificial sunset because there are lights always on. There is no
9 rest when we get home. It is simply time for us to rest. We need to regroup and get back to the core
10 of what Southlake is. We don't need a permanent solution to a temporary tax problem.
11
12 Patrick O'Leary, 115 Jellico Circle, Southlake, Texas, said if the city wants to attract corporate
13 business to the area, they need to bring fiber optics down F.M. 1709.
14
15 Commissioner Muller asked the developer if he would like to withdraw.
16
17 Mr. Weber said no, but he realizes there is considerable opposition to this. If they do prevail, he will
18 provide the best quality and Target store that is likely to be built in the metroplex. He is always
19 impressed when he goes around the state and the country with these major developments to listen to
20 the comments made. He guarantees that Friday in his office, they will have many, many
21 conversations about all the comments heard this evening. He wants the people to know he also relays
22 those comments back to these major retailers that he works with. He does not want anyone to think
23 he is not listening.
24
25 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 2, section #3577)
26
27 Commissioner Muller asked Mr. Weber if the Mayor and Councilmembers have made any promises
28 to him. She said there seems to be the idea that they have been working with him and encouraging
29 him to come to our city. Mr. Weber said no. He said as the staff does their job and Mr. Last does his
30 job, retailers and developers constantly show up to explore and look at opportunities. When he first
31 came to the city, it is always his policy to step in and meet the Mayor and some of the city's elected
32 officials who will meet with him and tell them what he is looking at and introduce the store people.
33 He said they didn't actually decide to file an application until late summer. He said the SPIN
34 meetings are very, very good; they get the word out. He is proud of that process and thinks the city
35 should be, too.
36
37 Commissioner Terrell said he thinks Target is an excellent corporate citizen. Had it been any other
38 location and had the Land Use Plan had a different designation, his decision may not necessarily be
39 what it is now. He said he appreciates them looking at the city of Southlake and said it is the nicest
40 looking Target he has ever seen. He also said he appreciates the efforts of the citizens and thanked
41 them for their concerns.
42
43 Vice-Chairman Boutte said the Commission has seen many developers come through and doesn't
44 believe he has seen one under as much pressure and facing as much daily opposition as Mr. Weber
45 has faced and said he has conducted himself in an exemplary manner and said the Commission really
17
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 appreciates that.
2
3 Chairman King closed the Public Hearing.
4
5 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 2, section #4237)
6
7 Motion was made to deny ZA00-115.
8
9 Motion: Boutte
10 Second: Horne
11 Ayes: Muller (*), Jones (*), Horne (*), Stansell, Terrell, Boutte, King
12 Nays: None
13 Approved: 7-0 (to deny)
14 Motion carried.
15
16 * Commissioner Muller's statement:
17
18 1. This proposal is a substantial and highly undesirable deviation from the long-approved and
19 highly effective Master Plan; and any deviation from the Master Plan of such magnitude and
20 impact would require the city to first amend the Master Plan beforehand, since approval
21 would constitute a total disregard for the Master Plan;
22
23 2. “C-3” General Commercial District zoning, is grossly inappropriate for the properties in the
24 proposal, and is in direct conflict with the Zoning Ordinance, specifically, Section 22.1,
25 which states,
26
27 “…This district is reserved for areas of adequate size and location so that its
28 broad range of medium to higher intensity land uses will not cause or create
29 nuisances to adjoining zoning districts. It is not anticipated that this district
30 will be placed contiguous to or in direct proximity to residential zoning
31 districts…”
32
33 and furthermore, approval of such a requested change of zoning is such proximity to adjacent
34 and nearby residential properties would cause those residential properties to suffer
35 undesirable and irreparable harm, preventing those homeowners from enjoying the use of
36 their property and causing great loss of their property values.
37
38 3. If such zoning change were granted there would be no legal manner by which the city could
39 restrict or control the times and location that large trucks might operate on the property, and
40 specifically late night to early morning hours, when the noise created by such activity would
41 constitute a serious and ongoing nuisance to the residential neighbors, thereby preventing
42 them from the continued enjoyment of their property by disrupting the peace and quiet which
43 they have enjoyed heretofore;
44
45 4. While the location of the proposed project is situated at a major intersection of our
46 thoroughfare system, the assumption that this site is necessarily suitable for a development of
18
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 this type and size is clearly wrong, as the existing and projected traffic saturation of this area
2 is being ignored. Locating a development of this type and size in this area will generate
3 significant additional traffic and cause a further congestion of traffic both in the vicinity of
4 the site and extending beyond the general vicinity. Both the present and projected traffic
5 bearing capabilities of the road system in this area is incapable of bearing the traffic and
6 congestion which this development would cause, and the effects of congestion which this
7 development would cause, and the effects of congestion would be backed up not only along
8 F.M. 1709, but also onto the roads emptying onto F.M. 1709, and even into adjacent
9 residential neighborhoods;
10
11 5. Whereas the city has already determined it to be necessary to impose certain traffic planning
12 and control regulations in order to optimize and control the flow of traffic, and to minimize
13 and mitigate the undesirable effects of traffic congestion in our city, there is no rationale for
14 granting any of the variances regarding driveway spacing and driveway throat depths, as
15 depicted in the proposal. Granting any of the proposed variances would only exacerbate
16 traffic problems caused by this project, which already would be unacceptable, even without
17 grating any of the requested variances;
18
19 6. Our citizens have made it clearly known that excessive use of traffic signals on F.M. 1709 is
20 highly undesirable, and furthermore, locating a traffic signal at Brock Drive, as proposed,
21 would bring undesirable traffic through a residential neighborhood, thereby creating safety
22 hazards to those residents and extending the negative impacts of this project even farther into
23 the adjoining residential areas. Furthermore, the projects fails to provide the required 1,000
24 feet separation between traffic signals, thereby diminishing the safety margins and traffic
25 flow enhancements intended by that requirement;
26
27 7. City development regulations allow for zero lot line development, but only in strict
28 accordance with specific regulations. For instance, when a developer chooses to develop a lot
29 right up to the lot line, and thereby loses a 15 foot wide side yard, that lost yard space must
30 be relocated elsewhere on the lot, such as by providing an increased side yard of 30 feet on
31 the opposite side of the lot, where there had once been a requirement for only 15 feet. The
32 concept is clear in its intent and in its application. Lost open space due to zero lot line
33 development absolutely requires a larger and offsetting yard area elsewhere on the lot. The
34 proposal shows no such compensatory open spaces to offset the crowding and congestion
35 which zero lot line development threatens, and as such does not merit consideration as
36 proposed;
37
38 8. This proposal does not comply with our impervious coverage regulations, and absent such
39 compliance, does not merit consideration as proposed;
40
41 9. This proposal represents a huge step backward in the developmental history of our city.
42 Whereas, for several years now, developmental proposals brought before us have shown an
43 improving trend, addressing the many concerns of the citizens of our city with creative and
44 aesthetically pleasing solutions to the many problems of developing commercial uses in
45 consonance with nearby residential properties, this proposal demonstrates a total disregard
19
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000
1 for not only our Master Plan and the stated purpose and intent of our Zoning Ordinances, it
2 ignores the reasonable rights and expectations of nearby residential property owners. IN
3 addition to the many deficiencies already noted, this proposal is missing all of the common
4 amenities that we have come to expect from commercial developments in Southlake. For
5 instance, it does not provide the 4 foot walkway between rows of parking spaces, and it does
6 not provide the 8 foot walkway along Southlake Boulevard and Randol Mill Avenue.
7
8 *Commissioner Jones' statement:
9
10 He said over the last few weeks he has been pretty cognizant when he is around a
11 SuperTarget and has been looking at them closely. He said it is very obvious to him that
12 SuperTargets are located on a highway, a freeway, a tollway, or an access road to one of
13 these major thoroughfares. He does not think that complies with our vision with that type of
14 congestion through the middle of our town. He also has a lot of respect for the residents of
15 Jellico Estates and Myers Meadow who have expressed their concerns with this project as
16 well and have expressed how it will affect their day-to-day activities.
17
18 *Commissioner Horne's statement:
19
20 He said that he, too, believes we owe all consideration possible to our citizens. He said
21 Commissioner Muller has stated all the legal reasons for us to deny this claim, but the human
22 reasons still remain: our children who drive will be at risk; our children who cross Johnson
23 Road will be at risk; and the people who built their homes here will have their futures at risk.
24
25 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 2, section #4605)
26
27 AGENDA ITEM #11, MEETING ADJOURNMENT:
28 Chairman King adjourned the meeting at 12:05 a.m. on December 8, 2000.
29
30 (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, 12-07-00, tape 2, section #4617)
31
32
33
34
35
36 Dennis King
37 Chairman
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45 ATTEST:
46
20
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on December 7, 2000