Loading...
SPIN2025-02 - TZD AmendmentUSOUTHLAKE SPIN Item Number City Case Number: Project Name: SPIN Neighborhood: Meeting Date: Meeting Location Total Attendance: Hosts: Applicant Presenting: City Staff Present: SPIN MEETING REPORT SPIN2025-02 ZA25-0013 TZD Amendment 3,4,7,8,10,11 March 11, 2025 1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX City Council Chambers 11 Ryan Firestone Dennis Killough Dennis Killough, Director of Planning & Development Services / Ryan Firestone, Planning Technician FORUM SUMMARY: Property Situation: TZD Districts Amendment Details: Consider changes to the following: • Density and Calculation Methodology • Minimum Lot Dimension/Areas • Open Space Credit • Adjacency Standards Presentation: CITY OF tV!5UU I I- LAI<%E DISCUSSION TZD OVERVIEW Brief on history, purpose, uses and unique features, inc luding a discussion on current TZD properties. ®CURRENT CHALLENGE - Discuss Discuss current challenges during recent case deliberations. 06TZD REVISION OPTIONS Options for revision presented along with a tentative schedule The TZD is guided by The underlying primary Land Use Designation (LUD) according to The adopted Land Use 8.2.2005 • Plan and was originated by the optional T-1 & T-2 Transition LUD's adopted with the 2025 Optional Land Use Plan. These two optional cafe gorier were removed from the consolidated 2030 Optional Land Use Plan. Provided framework for design and desired elements for future zoning category Allowed for desired flexibility not previously provided under RPUD: Mix of commercial & SF residential 9.20.2005 Ordinance No. 480, Southlake Zoning Ordinance, was revised to include the Transition Zoning District in (amended conformance with the Southlake 2025 Optional Land Use Plan recommendations and design criteria. 2006) Intended to allow mm mixed use development having a mmm mixture of complementary land uses that may include housing, retail, offices, commercial services, and civic uses to create economic vitality. TZD and ECZ are only districts that permitSingle Family detached residential, retail and office uses within same district Maximum of 2DU/Acre* but permits Council approval of deviation based on contextual issues surrounding development (*amended 2006) No minimum land area required Gross density calculation methodology Not governed by "Residential Adjacency Standards" as with RPUD Nothing by right, all subject zoning approval and any deviations granted, extensive design guidelines for public / private spaces T-1 — Greater Percentage of Commercial Use Area T-2 — Greater Percentage of Residential Use Area Residential Street Neighborhood tinter-7 —te (Residential Uses) street networ Location of limited corner commercial in the retail acce Auey seeonda street Retail Edge (Office Uses("I Alle e 9WI � Retail Area a Arterial Street Legend Retail Area 0 Rerahl edgy Neigbborhoad Edge Neighborhood j/ Camer Retailge[ion in the Retell ead Reletme locator of open space areas U SOUTHLAKE Single FamilyDetached Residential X X PermittedtedUse with Retail 8 Office Within Same District NRPUD:5 Acres Minimum Land Area No Minimum 50 Contiguous Acres 1 Acre S-P-1: No Minimum S-P-2: 2 Acres Exempted from Corridor Exempted from Corridor Protected by Section 43, Par[ Residential Adjacency Standards Overlay 8 Residential Overlay 8 Residential 111, Residential Adjacency Section Par[ I11, Residential Adjacency Standards Adjacency Standards Adjacency Standards Standards Maximum 2 DU / Gross Acre; Maximum 1.8 DU / Dwelling Units /Acre NO Maximum N/A Council discretion to exceed Gross Acre Density Calculation Gross Acreage Gross Acreage Gross Acreage N/A Minimum Lot Dimension None Defined None Defined None Defined ][ N/A ® Transition Zoning District (TZD) `-- Developments . ..' � TO.Ioo�eoome� Lij 11� ------------ r M r r- s 2.06 ACDrw0TZD Average DU/ # within so„mlak• Gross Acre for approved TZD 1.58 - 2.91 Range ofDU/ cren i- 1 Gross Acre for approved TZD Reg Range of p'1 minimum lot 9 239 - i-'� F r sizes for u a kj Zvi riairranwoe k� approved TZD 12,580 Swat 41 ks ti� Haa x n ;i , �, r Range of average °: lot sizes for �,.. approved TZD Tealwood 6/5/2007 Mixed Use 5.15 10,001 10,340 15 2.91 Ridgeview(Original) 2117/2009 Mixed Use 13.22 9,028 11,802 24 1.82 Watermere-South 8/21/2012 Medium Density Residential 33.72 7,425 10,829 71 2.1 Village RidgeA- 12/4/2012 Mixed Use 13.22 9,028 11,625 31 2.35 (Amended) Southlake Glen 12/3/2013 Mixed Use 24.67 10,000 12,064 39 1.58 Villas at Hidden Mixed Use and Medium Densit, Knolls (Ridgeview II) 4/15/2014 Residential 19.53 9,766 11,728 38 1.95 Metairie 5/1/2018 Mixed Use 29.3 10,008 12,580 56 1.91 Will -tree Medium Density Residential an Gardens 5/21/2024 Office Commercial (changed 9.6 5,706 9,239 20 2.08 portion to Office Commercial) Brumlow East 9/3/2024 Mixed Use (changed portion 32.8 6,600 10,424 53 1.62 from Industrial) Retail Commercial, Medium Carroll Crossing Denied Density Residential, Office 15.13 10,000 10,588 25 1.65 Commercial Forefront tMthdrawn Mixed Use 10.13 5,500 8,000(est) 20 2 2300 W. Continentalln Progress Medium Density Residential 2.57 22,560 23,722 4 1.56 5.15 NA .62 (12%) 80' x 125' 10.73 3lots,' 2.49 acres; 2.04 (15.43%) 70' x 120 min. 25,807 SF ofoffice 85 x 130' typ. 33.72 NA 9.91 (29.3%) 65' x l l5'/ 70' x 130' 1322 NA 2.76 (20.88%) 85' x 135' 23.07 1.6 acres; 8,548 SF c.mmcial 9.68 (39%) 65' x 155' / 80' x 125' 19.53 NA 6.76 (34.6%) 80' x 130' 29.3 NA 4.4(15.1%) 75'x 145'/ 90'x 150' 762 1.98 acres; 23,000 2.55(26.56%) Mlle Min.-46'x125' SF ofoffice Other Min. - 90' x 180' 7.77 acres; 70,653 / 25.03 SF ofoffice and 11.05 (34%) 145' x245' / 145' x200' office warehouse / 11.43 3.72 2.1 (13.8%) 75' x 145' / 85' x 135' 10.13 NA 6.34 (63%) 5,700 SF (avg. lot sis) 2.57 NA NA 120'x150' =- -- SOUTHLAKE . DENSITY & CALCULATION METHODOLOGY Consider: • Opt. 1 - No variance to the current rnax. 2 du/ac • Opt. 2 -Density calculated on gross res. area only • Opt. 3 -Change res. density standard MINIMUM LOT DIMENSION / AREAS • Define minimum lot dimension and/or areas allowed in TLD Consider: -! Opt. 1-Min. 60'width/ 100'depth • Opt. 2 - Min . 10,000 SF Lot Area 2�l ♦ OPEN SPACE CREDIT Consider: • Opt. 1 - Exclude detention areas n aesthetic passive recreation an-e • Opt. 2 - Areas in retention and det drainage easements in excess of 2 ♦ ADJACENCY STANDARDS Consider: • Opt. 1 - Apply residential adjacency overlay regulations. • Opt. 2 - I nclude adjacency standards unique to the TLD that address both residential and non-residential compatibility standards to adjacent existing neighborhoods, such as loth size, setbacks, buffering, and or screening. — r ® SOUTHLAKE of designed an nity ention ponds of 5%of open space Approved (5-0) on March 6, 2025, recommended the following options: ♦ DENSITY & CALCULATION METHODOLOGY Consider: • Opt. 1 - No variance to the current rnax. 2 du/ac • IOpt. 2 - Density calculated on gross res. area only • Opt. 3 -Change res. density standard ♦ MINIMUM LOT DIMENSION / AREAS • Define minimx�m lot dimension and/or areas allowed in TLD Consider: • Opt. 1-Min. 60'width/ 100'depth • Opt. 2 - Min . 10,000 SF Lot Area . OPEN SPACE CREDIT Consider: Opt. 1 -Exclude detention areas not designed an aesthetic passive recreation amenity • Opt. 2 - Areas in retention and detention ponds of drainage easements in excess of 25%of open space . ADJACENCY STANDARDS Consider: • Opt. 1 - Apply residential adjacency overlay regulations. Opt. 2 - I nclude adjacency standards unique to the TLD that address both residential and non-residential compatibility standards to adjacent existing neighborhoods, such as lot size, setbacks, buffering, and or screening. -- - =-- SOUTHLAKE SCHEDULE FOR CONSIDERATION MARCH 6, 2025 MARCH 11, 2025 APRIL 1, 2025 APRIL 15, 2025 PLANNING & ZONING SPIN MEETING CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL COMMISSION PROVIDED 1ST READING 2ND READING, RECOMMENDATION PUBLIC HEARING © • I0 Aisc DISCUSSION & QUESTIONS Comments, Questions, and Concerns: Q: Wants clarification on a statement stating the effect of a property owners' ability to make future changes to the TZD zoning district uses and clarification on their property. A: If the neighborhood tries to get together to make an amendment to something in your district that was contrary to what is being adopted to this revision, it may prevent your ability to do that without being granted a variance or may limit your ability to change that regulation. Q: Can you provide a hypothetical on this language about a property owner's ability to make future changes to the TZD District uses and regulations on their property? A: An extreme hypothetical would be if a particular use was permitted in that district, as going through this amendment, the fact that the ordinance is open for consideration, it could be removed as a permitted use. Your property currently has all the rights under its current TZD zoning and this would not technically remove those. but if your neighborhood, for instance, came back in and wanted to rezone your neighborhood to make some change either in a particular use or something of that degree and open your zoning back up, it would be subject to the new conditions in there and you may not be able to have or ask for that use anymore. Q: Wants clarity if a group of people within a neighborhood ask for change that would supersede the grandfathering of the zone? A: Yes. If your neighborhood as a group came together and wanted to change or amend some regulations, then you would be under these new regulations and any restrictions that might get put into place. Q: If we go through this revision, we are grandfathered in unless we ask for change? F-,Wd= Q: Who would decide if the new request gets approved or not? A: The city council. Q: A group of us can go to city council and say we don't want the grandfather regulations, but the new ones instead and then we are subject to the new regulations if it gets approved? A: Potentially, yes. Another example would be a TZD that has non-residential uses in it, an office building, and somebody proposes to come in and change something zoning wise to that office building. They will, as being proposed right now, there may be new standards that affect building setbacks. If the building hasn't been built yet, they would be subject to those new setbacks. Q: Those are new developments? A: Under a new development, yes. Q: Asking about the grandfathering again. A: Another hypothetical in line with what you're thinking, if for some reason your neighborhood got together everybody agreed to change your regulations and that regulation change impacted a few homes in there that were already built a certain way, those homes would become non -conforming. If you are not changing the zoning then you are fine, you are vested/grandfathered under the regulations you have in place today. Q: Who is giving the authority? Do you need a majority of residents within the neighborhood to be able to effect this? A: Yes, if somebody is coming in your neighborhood to propose a change , it is really going to need the whole neighborhood to participate in that. In the absence that they don't they could file opposition and effect the vote requirement. An individual can't come in and change their neighborhood's zoning it would require 100 percent of your neighborhood to participate in that zoning application to do that. Q: If a developer comes in and develops a piece of property across from the resident's neighborhood and conforms to all of the new TZD regulations, does that mean they automatically get permission to build? A: No, it would still have to go through the review and approval process with staff, and then to Planning & Zoning board for their recommendation to City Council. City Council has the authority to approve or deny change of zoning. Q: Looking for clarity on the definition of adjacency as it relates to the new amendment. A: It would mean a directly abutting property, but as it goes through counsel's consideration, they could set a distance criteria. Q: As it stands it really its really just next to you? A: Yes. Q: Clarification on option 1 and option 2 in terms of the density calculation. A: Option 1 just proposed eliminating City Council's ability to grant a density higher than the set two dwelling units per acre. Option 2 is going to change the boundary to be just for the residential components. Where you have a mixed use development that has office or some level of retail in it, that area will be excluded from the are that's used to calculate that density number. It'll just be calculated around the residential component only. Q: Wouldn't option 2 increase the density? A: It will, the way this is set, they won't be able to go over two unless they ask for a variance to do that. Q: You mean option 2 is based on gross area? A: Yes. Q: Including the retail space? A: Yes, it would net out anything that is in a non-residential element of a neighborhood. Q: Asking about written language in the TZD or Texas Law about current residents of TZD not being affected by future changes? A: Currently, we don't have it written to propose that, but it's certainly something we could add. C: I certainly think that would make me feel more comfortable. A: Yeah, good suggestion. Does TZD have any governance or limitations on the non-residential component of a TZD, if so are those up for amendment as well? A: With the district being open, yes. Any element could be considered. These are the areas that just based on recent considerations that have been looked at seem to be the hotter button items. Q: Asking about forefront senior living project and the capacity of it in relation to TZD. A: Only part of that development was being proposed under TZD. The memory care and age restricted living units were all being proposed under a site plan district zoning. Q: TZD doesn't allow for a high density living type situation? A: It does not. It allows single family and what they call residential edge, and non- residential area, it can allow if proposed and approved what they call "live work units" and lofts. C: If you add the language that current residents of TZD are protected , it will alleviate most of our worries. Q: Wondering if the neighborhood decided to come together and sell off common spaces if that is being protected here? A: Each TZD is required to have a minimum of 15% open space and some have more and some have less. But what got approved under that zoning is required to remain as open space and part of those neighborhoods requirements is that they maintain and manage the open space. Q: Wants to make sure their individual properties can still be sold? A: Yes. The zoning that you have adopted will remain in place. Q: Are changes to the TZD specific to the zoning of the entire TZD? A: If a neighborhood as a whole came in and wanted to change your zoning, however this is adopted could affect how you're able to do that and what you may have to ask council to do. Q, Grandfathering is per residence, not per homeowner correct? A: Any change of ownership on your properties would not change the regulations that they're required to abide by. The zoning regulations you have today will transfer to the new owner. Q: If someone's property got burned down and needed to be rebuilt, would that be under the old or new TZD regulations? A: That would be under your current TZD regulations. Q: If a neighbor decides to do something different then what it is zoned for, then they can't do that correct? A: That is correct, yes. Q: Are the TZD amendment proposals more restrictive or less restrictive? A: In general, a couple of them are more restrictive. I think the idea is to put up a couple of guardrails to help the developer stay within a particular lane. At the end of the day, it certainly could change as it moves through council and other input is provided. Q: Adjacency standards seemed less restrictive? A: Right now there are really no adjacency standards other than what is just written into the ordinance, it does not take into account adjacency. Right now it is really up to the developers to make sure they are following the intent of the TZD as far as how their intensities distributed on the property. This would put in another guard rail. Q: Are there any rules around how tall a building can be in a TZD? A: It does set a minimum number of floors, depending if it's in the retail or the neighborhood edge area and then the residential has a maximum number of floors that it can be and that's written into the code today. The residential is limited to two stories. The residential edge is set at two and a half stories and then retail is three stories. SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council. Southlake Connect Results for March 11, 2025 SPIN Town Hall Forum 3/1225, 9:42 AM Everbridge - Reports Everbridge Suite City of Southiske - Citizen A. -,art (Organization Admin) NA oe Dashboard Universe Notifications Incidents Contacts Reports Settings Access Reports > Detailed Notification Analysis > SPIN Town Hall Forum - March 11th Detailed Notification Analysis SPIN Town Hall Forum - March 11 th DETAILS Call Results Notification ID 1960327763723883 Ir Notification Live Mode Notification Standard Type Start Date Feb 28, 2025 Start Time 10:08:05 CST Confirmation Yes Hide Detalls Requested Call Throttling Yes Call Results(per Delivery Path) Duration 6hour(s) Message Voice/Text I Attempted - Confirmed Format Volcemall Message Only Confirmed Preference DeliveryOrder Organization Default Atlen+pted - Ne74. Confirmed DeliveryMethods Organladon Contacts 1,PrimarySMS Delivered 2.Secondary SMS 3. Primary Email 4. Prim ary Mobile Delivered - To Voicem all 5.Secondary Email 6.Seoondary Mobile 7, Home Phone Not Delivered - No Answer 8.Home Phone #2 9. Business Phone 10.TFY / TrD Device Delivered -To Handset 11.Everbridge Mobile Ap Resident Connection 1,VOIP Not Delivered - Voicemail Hung 2.1-andline Up Not Delivered - Recipient Hung Up Sent Attempted - Not. Connected Not Delivered - Invalid Number Not Delivered - Out of Service Not Delivered - Carder Expired Not Delivered - Downstream Communication Error https://manager.everbridge.net/reports/notification/view/l 960327763723883 Logout n 209 (1.73%) Attempted - Confrmed 2 8866 (73.44%) Attem pled - Not Confrm ed 211 (1.75%)Attempted - Not Connected 2654 (21.96%) Not Attempted 133 (1.10%) Other Total %of Total 209 1.73% 65 1882 128 2971 157 323 3340 1 125 1 78 0.54% 15.59% 1,06% 24,61 % 1.30% 2.68% 27.67% 0.01 % 1,04% 0.01 % 0.65% 112 3112125, 9:42 AM Everbridge - Reports Call Results(per Delivery Path) Total % of Total Not Delivered - Line Busy 6 0.05% Not Al Not Attempted -Inactive Path 270 2,24% Not Attempted - Unsubscribed 1566 12.97% Not Delivered - Contact Path Not 8 0.07% Defined Not Delivered - Duplicate Path 810 6.71 % Not Attempted -Bounced Email 111 0.92% Not Delivered - Bounced Email 3 0.02% Not Delivered - Contact 19 0.16% Unavailable Attempts Over rime 7.5k 5k 2.5k Ok Show Detalls "'ewbridgw Pr ly y Polley I Terms of Use ® 2025 Everbridge, Inc. 25.1.0."238801-2025-02-20-00:32 FE-VERSIONS ebs-monager-portal-78bb56bf7f-g2xsr https://manager.everbridge.net/reports/notification/view/l 960327763723883 212