Loading...
Item 8 SOUTHLAKE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT April 1, 2021 CASE NO: ZA21-0007 PROJECT: Zoning Change and Site Plan for Mustang Business Park EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On behalf of Wright Mustang Business Park, LLC, Kimley Horn is requesting approval of a Zoning Change and Site Plan for Mustang Business Park on property described as Tract 1 B3, Harrison Decker Survey, Abstract No. 438, City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, and located at 1800 S.H. 26, Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: "I-1" Light Industrial District. Requested Zoning: "S-P-1" Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN Neighborhood #8. DETAILS: The project is generally located northwest of the intersection of Southwestern St. and Mustang Ct. "MH" zoned properties on Woodsey Ct. and Timberline Ct. are to the north. The purpose of this request is to seek approval of a Zoning Change and Site Plan from "I-1" Light Industrial District to "S-P-1" Detailed Site Plan District for three distribution warehouse buildings totaling approximately 340,180 square feet on approximately 26.24 acres. Site Data Summary Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning "S-P-1" Gross/Net Acreage 26.24 ac. Open Space Area 8.97 ac. Open Space % 34.20% Imp. Coverage Area 17.26 ac. Imp. Coverage % 65.80% Building 1 Area 174,600 sf Building 2 Area 78,100 sf Building 3 Area 87,480 sf Total Bldg. Area 340,180 sf Parking Required 388 Parking Provided 392 The proposed "S-P-1" Generalized Site Plan District zoning will follow the 1-1" Light Industrial District uses and regulations with the following exceptions: Case No. ZA21-0007 Development Proposed "S-P-1" Requirement "I-1" Light Industrial District Regulation Any building lying more than one Any building lying more than one hundred (100) feet from any area hundred (100) feet from any area Building Height zoned in a residential classification zoned in a residential classification shall not exceed forty (40) feet in shall not exceed two and one-half (2 height. '/2) stories or thirty-five (35) feet in height. VARIANCE REQUESTED: 1) Driveway Ordinance No. 634, Section 5.2.d requires a minimum stacking depth of 150'. A variance is requested to allow a stacking depth of 0' measured from the property line. The functional stacking depth provided is approximately 60'. The item was tabled at the February 25, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. A summary of the issues and concerns discussed at the meeting are below. P&Z Commission Issues and Concerns Applicant's Response Reduce the building heights. Higher interior The maximum building height has been reduced clearance affects the user type and velocity. from 45' to 40' and building heights now range from 39' to 39'9". The row of parking facing the"MH"zoned properties on Woodsey Ct. and Timberline Ct. has been Eliminate the parking along the north driveway. removed.The required parking has been reduced by reducing the percentage of office space allowed from 15% to 6% of the floor area. Provide as much landscaping as possible along the Additional landscaping along the north property line north property line. is shown on the plans. Consider relocating the south driveway closer to Building 3 to increase stacking depth from the The driveway to the south has been relocated to the intersection of Mustang Ct.and Southwestern St. to west as requested. that turning movement. Provide an opaque gate at the emergency access A photo example and rendering of the proposed at the end of Woodsey Ct. opaque gate have been submitted. A 60' wide private access easement to the west Consider access to Brumlow Ave. property line has been provided to allow a possible future connection. Provide a TIA that addresses the Lee Engineering A revised TIA and Lee Engineering review are review comments. attached separately. The required 5'sidewalk along Southwestern St. has Provide a sidewalk along Southwestern St. been added and the previous variance request has been removed. Case No. ZA21-0007 ACTION NEEDED: 1) Conduct a public hearing 2) Consider approval of a Zoning Change and Site Plan ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Site Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated March 31, 2021 (D) Surrounding Property Owners Map & Responses Half Size Plans (for Commission and Council members only) Presentation "S-P-1" Regulations and Variance Request Letter Plans Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) (pdf only) Lee Engineering Review of TIA Magellan and NuStar Traffic Control Recommendations Lighting Specifications (pdf only) 2035 Corridor Planning Committee Report Spin Meeting Report STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (817) 748-8067 Richard Schell (817) 748-8602 Case No. ZA21-0007 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNER: Wright Mustang Business Park, LLC APPLICANT: Kimley-Horn PROPERTY SITUATION: 1800 SH 26, generally located northwest of the intersection of Southwestern St. and Mustang Ct. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tract 1 B3, Harrison Decker Survey, Abstract No. 438 LAND USE CATEGORY: Industrial and 100-Year Floodplain CURRENT ZONING: "I-1" Light Industrial District PROPOSED ZONING: "S-P-1" Detailed Site Plan District HISTORY: - The property was annexed into the City in 1987. - A zoning change (ZA02-025) from "AG" Agricultural District and "1-2" Heavy Industrial District to "I-1" Light Industrial District was approved by City Council on April 16, 2002. SOUTHLAKE 2030 PLAN: Consolidated Future Land Use Plan The 2035 future land use designation for the site is Industrial and 100- Year Floodplain. Industrial Land Use Designation Purpose and Definition: Industrial and business service development that is relatively free of unwanted side effects, such as unsightliness, noise, odor, glare, vibrations, etc., is permitted in the Industrial category. If meeting the qualification of relatively free of unwanted side effects, suitable types of development in the Industrial category can be characterized by the manufacturing, processing, packaging, assembly, storage, warehousing and/or distribution of products. Ancillary commercial and retail activities associated with these uses are permitted. Public Parks / Open Space and Public / Semi-Public activities as described above may be permitted if surrounding industrial uses do not pose hazards and are sufficiently buffered. 100-Year Floodplain Designation Purpose and Definition: The Floodplain category illustrates areas designated by the August 1995 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps as being in the 100-year floodplain. The "floodplain" is an expanse of natural vegetation and wildlife, and should be preserved as natural open area. Within the floodplain is "floodway" that must be kept free of encroachment in order that the 100-year flood may be carried without harmful increases in the height of flood waters. Although it is not to be encouraged, the portion of the floodplain not in the floodway may be reclaimed for development under certain circumstances if in accordance with FEMA regulations. The designated land use for areas of reclaimed floodplain is that of the immediately adjacent land use category. Case No. Attachment A ZA21-0007 Page 1 This designation may also include environmentally sensitive areas, habitats, or wetlands that may not be in FEMA identified floodplains. Pathways Master Plan & Sidewalk Plan The Pathways Master Plan does not show a sidewalk or trail along Southwestern St. adjacent to the site, so a minimum 5' sidewalk is required per Zoning Ordinance No. 480, Section 33.19. The applicant has removed the previous request for a variance to the sidewalk requirement and the required sidewalk is shown on the plans. A sidewalk exists on the southeast side of Southwestern St. and the southwest side of Mustang Ct. An 8' multi-use trail exists along the north side of SH 26 west of the intersection with Mustang Ct. TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: Area Road Network and Conditions The property is at the end of Mustang Ct., which is a local commercial street with 64' of right of way. Southwestern St. is a local commercial street with 60' of right of way. Traffic Impact A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) has been submitted (see pdf only attached separately). The Site Plan shows a 60' private street easement with a 37' back of curb to back of curb pavement extending from the end of Mustang Ct. into the development. Access to the three proposed buildings is from driveways off the private street. An emergency only access driveway is provided to Woodsey Ct. to the north. Table 1—Trip Generation ITE Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Uses Amount Units Code One-Wa One-Way Trips One-Way Trips Trips IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL Warehousina 341.000 SF 150 5&4 .51 15 66 19 50 69 Trip Generation rates based on ITE's Trip Generation Alanual.-101h Edition. TREE PRESERVATION: There is 22.3% of existing tree cover on the property and a minimum of 60% would be required to be preserved if the request was for a straight zoning district. The submitted Tree Conservation Plan shows that 27.6% of the existing tree cover is proposed to be preserved. All trees shown in green on a Council approved Tree Conservation Plan are required to be preserved. For property sought to be zoned for the Downtown zoning district or a planned development zoning district, including an S-P-1 Site Plan, S-P- 2 Site Plan, Transition, Rural Conservation, Planned Unit Development, or Employment Center zoning district, the City Council shall consider the application for a Conservation Analysis or Plan in conjunction with the corresponding development application. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the application and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application. The City Council shall approve the Plan or Analysis if the Council finds that the Plan or Analysis provides for the: i. placement of building pads, parking areas, driveways, streets, and utility easements so as to maximize the preservation of Case No. Attachment A ZA21-0007 Page 2 environmental features of the property including mature tree stands, natural creeks and ponds, and significant grades; ii. maximizes the preservation of tree cover preservation areas indicated on the Environmental Resource Protection Map; iii. maximizes the preservation of existing tree stands with the potential to buffer residential areas from the noise, glare, and visual effects of nonresidential uses; iv. maximizes the preservation of existing trees, if any, adjoining a natural or man-made drainage creek; V. maximizes the preservation of existing protected trees along rural roadways and other streets as identified and prioritized in the Street Typology designation; and vi. mitigation of altered trees through proposed tree replacement procedures pursuant to this Ordinance. UTILITIES: The property is served by existing 12" and 8" water lines along the east and north property boundaries and an existing 12" sewer line along the west property boundary. DRAINAGE: Existing drainage is from a high point at the north and center of the site generally sheet flow to the east, west and south across the property. The 100-Year Floodplain runs north and south along the west portion of the property. CITIZEN INPUT: A SPIN meeting was held on January 26, 2021. Please see the report attached separately. A 2035 Corridor Planning Committee meeting was held on January 25, 2021. Please see the report attached separately. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTION: February 25, 2021; tabled at the request of the applicant (7-0). STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Site Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated March 31, 2021. Variance Approval Criteria for Driveway Ordinance No. 634: The City Council shall have the authority to grant a variance to this ordinance. In granting any variance, the City Council shall determine that a literal enforcement of the regulations herein will create an unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty on the applicant, that the situation causing unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty is unique to the affected property and is not self-imposed, that the variance will not injure and will be wholly compatible with the use and permitted development of adjacent properties, and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the spirit and purpose of this ordinance. The decision of the City Council shall be final. General Development Applies? Comments Standards Case No. Attachment A ZA21-0007 Page 3 Overlay Regulations No The property is not in any of the overlay districts. Building Articulation No Masonry Standards Yes South and east facades of Building 3 are subject to Masonry Ord. 557-A and both facades comply. Impervious Coverage Yes Complies Bufferyards Yes Complies subject to review comments being addressed Interior Landscape Yes Complies subject to review comments being addressed Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-E applies. A Tree Tree Preservation Yes Conservation Plan is approved with "S-P-1" zoning. Sidewalks Yes A 5' sidewalk is required along Southwestern St. and the sidewalk is shown on the plan. Case No. Attachment A ZA21-0007 Page 4 Vicinity Map 1800 S.H. 26 EC '21 =ul rl. IIm pCt 49 M frr ST an an Alf R 4; 1 IT] *2fi tln JSTANG DR um 9m am ZA21-0007 Zoning Change and Site Plan iU U 0 460 920 1,840 L Feet Case No. Attachment B ZA21-0007 Page 1 SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY Case No.: ZA21-0007 Review No.: Three Date of Review: 03/31/21 Project Name: Site Plan — Mustang Business Park APPLICANT: Patrick Hogan, P.E. OWNER: Kendal Kreamer Kimley-Horn Wright Mustang Business Park, LLC 13455 Noel Dr., Two Galleria Office Tower, Ste. 700 601 W. Wall St. Dallas, TX 75240 Grapevine, TX 76051 Phone: (972) 770-1312 Phone: E-mail: patrick.hogan@kimley-horn.com E-mail: kkreamer@wrightconst.com CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 03/25/21 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT RICHARD SCHELL AT (817) 748-8602. Planning Review 1. The Site Plan must conform to the underlying zoning district. 2. An appropriate plat must be processed, approved and recorded with the County prior to the issuance of building permits and, if the buildings are to be placed on separate lots, prior to the conveyance of any of the lots. 3. Place the City case number "ZA21-0007" in the lower right corner for ease of reference. 4. The survey and legal description shows the area to be 26.2352 acres. Please change the acreage in the "S-P-1" letter and in the Site Data Summary Chart on the Site Plan to 26.24 ac. 5. Please make the following changes to the Site Plan. The review comments are based on three buildings on one lot as shown. a. Change the land use designation on the property to the south at 1700 Mustang Dr. and to the north at 1236 Woodsey Ct. to LUD = "Industrial and 100-Year Flood Plain". b. Show, label and dimension the width of any easements on or adjacent to the site, if any. Please see the plat for Lot 1, Block 2, Mustang Business Park. c. Show the distance from the southeast corners of Buildings 1 and 3 perpendicular to the property lines. d. Show and label the width and type of bufferyards along each boundary in accordance with Zoning Ord. No. 480, Section 42. Show the bufferyard with cross-hatch instead of the building setbacks. e. Provide the bufferyard and interior landscape calculation chart on the plan (see attached example in the Landscape Administrator's comments below). Case No. Attachment C ZA21-0007 Page 1 6. The elevations must comply with Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 33.21, Building Color Standards for Non-Residential Buildings. Please submit a physical material sample board in addition to the images. 7. All driveways/points of ingress/egress must comply with the Driveway Ordinance No. 634, as amended). The only connection to a public street is the proposed private street connection to Mustang Ct. The stacking distance from the right of way/property line to the first turning movement does not meet the minimum 150' required in Driveway Ord. No. 634, Section 5.2.d. No stacking depth is provided. Please add a variance request section to the S-P-1 letter to request a 0' stacking depth. You can note that a functional stacking depth of±60' is provided. 8. Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 26.5.a regarding building height in the 1-1" Light Industrial Zoning District states that no building or structure which lies within one hundred (100) feet of any area zoned in a residential classification shall exceed one (1) story or twenty (20) feet in height. Any building lying more than one hundred (100) feet from any area zoned in a residential classification shall not exceed two and one-half(2 '/2) stories or thirty-five (35) feet in height. The 100' building line along the north property line is shown on the Site Plan. An S-P- 1 regulation has been added to allow a maximum building height of 40'. Sidewalks and/or trails in compliance with the Zoning Ord. No. 480, as amended, Section 33.19, Subdivision Ord. No. 483, as amended, Section 5.06 and the Master Pathways Plan are required. An 8' multi-use trail exists along S.H. 26 and a 5' sidewalk exists along the street frontages of Lot, Block 2, Mustang Business Park to the southeast addressed as 1750 Mustang Ct. The previous request for a variance to the sidewalk requirement has been removed and the required 5' sidewalk is shown along Southwestern St. 33.19 For all new development or existing development which increases the existing floor area of building(s) or the number of parking spaces by twenty (20) percent or more and require a City Council approved site plan, a five (5)-foot wide concrete sidewalk shall be provided along all adjacent public streets unless identified in the city's Pathways Plan, in which case the Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended, Section 5.06 shall apply. In addition, all non- residential development shall provide pedestrian access to the City's existing or future trail system as identified in any City Council adopted plan. The City Council may grant a variance to this regulation where compliance would present extraordinary difficulties: i. in the use of the property or; ii. to construct due to characteristics of the development or surrounding properties. An 8' solid wood fence is shown along the north boundary per the requirements of Ordinance 480, Section 39.6.a below since the boundary abuts residential properties. 39.6.a Where a non-residential use abuts a residentially zoned lot or tract or lot having an occupied residential dwelling, a solid fence meeting the material standards of Section 39.2(b) shall be erected along the side and rear property lines abutting said residential lot or dwelling to a height of eight (8) feet. A variance to this section may be approved by the City Council during its review of any concept plan, development plan, or site plan requiring review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and approval by the City Council, or by the Board of Adjustment for all other concept plans, development plans, or site plans. (As amended by Ordinance No. 480- UUU.) The property must comply with Masonry Ordinance 557-A. Sections 1.b and 1.d. of the ordinance are below. The applicant has verified that Building 3 complies with both sections below and an exhibit has been provided. Case No. Attachment C ZA21-0007 Page 2 1.b. Buildings requiring masonry along street frontage only:All buildings constructed on property zoned 1-1 or 1-2 under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance shall be constructed of masonry materials, wood, glass, or decorative metal (non-galvanized finish); provided, however, any exterior wall fronting on any street shall be constructed of masonry materials or glass, covering at least eighty percent (80%) of said wall, exclusive of all doors. 1.d. State highways and F.M. roads: With the exception of barns and storage buildings in the "AG" zoning district, all nonresidential buildings located within 500 feet of the R.O.W. line along State Highway No. 114 and within 300 feet of the R.O.W. line along State Highway No. 26, Farm-to-Market Road 1709 and Farm-to-Market Road 1938 shall have at least eighty percent (80%) of all exterior walls, excluding doors, constructed of masonry materials or glass. Minimum building setback lines in the 1-1" Light Industrial zoning district are as follows. A 30' front yard setback is required on the property boundaries abutting a public right of way. The rear lot line is the north property line since is opposite and most distant from the front street line. There shall be a rear yard of not less than ten (10) feet except where the lot abuts property zoned as single-family residential there shall be a rear yard of not less than twenty-five (25)feet. All other property lines will have a side yard setback. There shall be a side yard of not less than fifteen (15)feet except where the lot abuts property zoned as single-family residential there shall be a side yard of not less than twenty-five (25) feet. The Site Plan shows 30' front building lines along the south, southeast and east boundaries and 25' rear building lines along the west and north boundaries, which exceed the minimum required setbacks. The property does not lie within any of the overlay zones in Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 43-Overlay Zones. Per Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, Section 26.5.i, outdoor storage of trash receptacles shall be at the side or rear of the site and shall be totally encircled or screened by fence, planting or other suitable visual barrier. Per Zoning Ordinance No. 480, Section 39.6.c, outside storage of trash/recycling receptacles or any garbage, refuse and trash/recycling collection and storage areas shall be at the side or rear of the building, shall be totally encircled or screened by fence, planting or other suitable visual barrier six feet (6) in height and shall have a metal door which shall remain closed at all times. These areas or receptacles shall not encroach into any required bufferyard. (As amended by Ordinance No. 480-HH.) Tree Conservation/Landscape Review E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us Keith Martin Landscape Administrator Phone: (817) 748-8229 TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS: 1. If the proposed development were submitted as traditional zoning it would not comply the Existing Tree Cover Preservation Requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-E. There is 22.3% of existing tree cover on the property and a minimum of 60% would be required to be preserved. The submitted Tree Conservation Plan shows that 27.6% of the existing tree cover is proposed to be preserved. Please revise the chart to remove the 15% required row. All trees shown in green on the plan are required to be preserved. The applicant is proposing to plant 98 canopy trees and 202 accent trees towards mitigating the removal of protected trees. We normally require that any trees planted toward tree removal Case No. Attachment C ZA21-0007 Page 3 mitigation be canopy tree species or an equivalent species as listed within the Landscape Ordinance 544-13. * Except as provided by subsection 7.2.b. of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a Tree Conservation Analysis or Tree Conservation Plan shall be approved if it will preserve existing tree cover in accordance with the percentage requirements established by Table 2.0. If the property has previously received a tree permit related to development, the percentage of existing tree cover at the time the first such permit was issued shall be used to calculate the minimum existing tree cover that must be preserved under this section. Table 2.0 — Existing Tree Cover Preservation Requirements Percentage of existing tree cover on Minimum percentage of the the entire site existing tree cover to be preserved* 0% — 20% 70% 20.1 —40% 60% 40.1% - 60% 50% 60.1% - 80% 40% 80.1% - 100% 30% *The minimum percentage of existing tree cover to be preserved shall exclude any area in public rights-of-way as approved by City Council. For property sought to be zoned for the Downtown zoning district or a planned development zoning district, including an S-P-1 Site Plan, S-P-2 Site Plan, Transition, Rural Conservation, Planned Unit Development, or Employment Center zoning district, the City Council shall consider the application for a Conservation Analysis or Plan in conjunction with the corresponding development application (as established in Table 1.0). The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the application and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application. The City Council shall approve the Plan or Analysis if the Council finds that the Plan or Analysis provides for the: i. placement of building pads, parking areas, driveways, streets, and utility easements so as to maximize the preservation of environmental features of the property including mature tree stands, natural creeks and ponds, and significant grades; ii. maximizes the preservation of tree cover preservation areas indicated on the Environmental Resource Protection Map; iii. maximizes the preservation of existing tree stands with the potential to buffer residential areas from the noise, glare, and visual effects of nonresidential uses; iv. maximizes the preservation of existing trees, if any, adjoining a natural or man-made drainage creek; V. maximizes the preservation of existing protected trees along rural roadways and other streets as identified and prioritized in the Street Typology designation; and vi. mitigation of altered trees through proposed tree replacement procedures pursuant to this Ordinance. * Please be aware that all existing trees shown to be preserved on the City Council approved Tree Conservation Plan must be preserved and protected during all phases and construction of the Case No. Attachment C ZA21-0007 Page 4 development. Alteration or removal of any of the existing trees shown to be preserved on the approved Tree Conservation Plan is a violation of the Tree Preservation Ordinance and the zoning as approved by the Southlake City Council. Please ensure that the layout of all structures, easements, utilities, structures grading, and any other structure proposed to be constructed do not conflict with existing trees intended to be preserved. LANDSCAPE COMMENTS 1. On the Site Plan, please show and label all required bufferyards. 2. All of the proposed trees are proposed to be 4" caliper. Nursery stock standards for accent/understory/ornamental trees such as Crape Myrtles, Vitex, Rusty Blackhaw Viburnum, and Yaupon Holly are generally provided as container size, height, and width, and do not come in a caliper size unless they are sold as standard single trunk. 3. In the "Provided" sections of the Interior Landscape and Bufferyards Summary Charts show the exact quantity of plant material being provided towards the interior landscape and bufferyards landscaping. The applicant is proposing to take existing trees credits for preserving existing trees with the north, west, and east bufferyards. The west is located within an existing floodplain in which no construction is proposed. Indicates informational comment. # Indicates required items comment. Public Works/Engineering Review Sandy Endy, P.E. Development Engineer Phone: (817) 748-8033 E-mail: sendy@ci.southlake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. This review is preliminary. Additional requirements may be necessary with the review of the civil construction plans. WATER COMMENTS: 1. Verify that the fire hydrant spacing meets the maximum required separation of 300 linear feet or 600 linear feet if sprinklered. 2. Public Works does not allow 3" water meters. Please revise proposed water meter sizes. SEWER COMMENTS: 1. Provide a sewer stub up to the northern property line at the end of Woodsey Court to allow for future sewer connections to the southern lots along Woodsey Court. DRAINAGE COMMENTS: 1. All detention/retention basins are required to be within a dedicated easement. If detention is not being proposed for the full increase in runoff, then documentation supporting and certifying the reduction in detention will be required prior to approval of construction plans. Memorandum shall be signed and sealed by a registered PE. Please ensure that the drainage Case No. Attachment C ZA21-0007 Page 5 models and memo are submitted with the Civil Construction Plans. * Discharge of post development runoff must have no adverse impact on downstream properties and meet the provisions of Ordinance No. 605. Submittal to FEMA will be required. FEMA approval of a CLOMR shall be required prior to construction plan approval, and LOMR approval shall be required prior to obtaining CO. If submitting only a LOMR is the preferred method, then proof of submittal to FEMA shall be required prior to construction plan approval. * A Base Flood Elevation shall be determined. Calculations will be required to verify capacity of proposed curb inlets. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS: Submit 22"x34" civil construction plans and a completed Construction Plan Checklist directly to the Public Works Administration Department for review. Please allow 15 business days for review. The plans shall conform to the most recent construction plan checklist, standard details and general notes which are located on the City's website: http://www.citVofsouthlake.com/PublicWorks/engineeringdesign.asp * New Requirement: Provide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) per TXR150000. The plan must include all required elements in Part III, Section F of the permit. The Environmental Coordinator will review the SWPPP. For instructions on how to complete the review of the SWPPP please refer to the Stormwater Management for Construction Sites in: https://www.citVofsouthlake.com/2237/Stormwater-Management-for-Construction-S. SWPPP shall be submitted by second review of the civil construction plans. * A geotechnical report will be required for all private and public roadways. The geotechnical report shall include pavement design parameters for subgrade stabilization. * A Developer Agreement may be required for this development and may need to be approved by the City Council prior to any construction of public infrastructure. Construction plans for these improvements must be acceptable to Public Works prior to placing the Developer's Agreement on the City Council agenda for consideration. Any hazardous waste being discharged must be pretreated per Ordinance No. 836. *=Denotes informational comments that will need to be addressed on the first submittal of the Civil Construction Plans. Fire Department Review Kelly Clements Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal Phone: (817) 748-8233 E-mail: kclements@ci.southIake.tx.us GENERAL COMMENTS: The required backflow protection (double check valve) for the sprinkler systems can be located on the riser if the riser is within 100 feet of the water main, measured linearly along the length of the pipe. If the riser is further than 100 feet from the main, the double check valve shall be in a vault. Riser rooms shall be a minimum of 5'X5' if the double check is located in a vault, or a Case No. Attachment C ZA21-0007 Page 6 minimum of 6'X6' if it is located on the riser. (Label riser room locations to determine termination point of riser piping, and indicate size of the riser rooms, no room sizes indicated) The Fire Department Connection for the sprinkler system must be within 100 feet of a fire hydrant, and within 50 feet of fire department fire lanes on the property. (The FDC for Building 3 is not within 50 feet of fire lane access) FIRE LANE COMMENTS: Fire apparatus access needs to be an all-weather surface, asphalt or concrete, 24 feet wide and able to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus. (Minimum of 85,000 pounds GVW) The gated emergency access entry off Woodsey Court must be equipped with an Opticom or KS-2 switch for opening the gate electronically, as well as a means for manual opening of the gate. FIRE HYDRANT COMMENTS: Fire hydrants are required at a maximum spacing of 500 feet for commercial locations with completely sprinkled buildings. (Fire hydrants located on the property do not meet the spacing requirements) (Add fire hydrants as required) Case No. Attachment C ZA21-0007 Page 7 General Informational Comments A SPIN meeting was held on January 26, 2021 and a 2035 Corridor Planning Committee meeting was held on January 25, 2021. No review of proposed signs is intended with this site plan. A separate building permit is required prior to construction of any signs. All mechanical equipment must be screened of view from right-of-ways and residential properties in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended. All lighting must comply with the Lighting Ordinance No. 693, as amended. All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and the Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended. The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and building plans, must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Perimeter Street Fee, Water & Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees. In addition to the City of Southlake impact fees, please be aware that through the wholesale water customer contract with the City of Fort Worth, all new water connections are required to pay the City of Fort Worth impact fee. The City of Fort Worth impact fee assessment is based on the final plat recordation date and building permit issuance. The applicant is encouraged to review the City of Fort Worth's assessment and collection of Impact Fees Guide to determine the fee amount. Denotes Informational Comment Case No. Attachment C ZA21-0007 Page 8 SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS MAP & RESPONSES 171 ol ELJZTl 2100 1800 Fni 1700 SPO# Owner Zoning Physical Address Acreage Response 1. PENEDO,AIDA DEL C MH 1232 TIMBERLINE CT 0.43 O 2. KYLE, KRAIG MH 1232 WOODSEY CT 0.51 NR 3. PEARSON, CAREY O MH 1234 TIMBERLINE CT 0.50 NR 4. DE ANDA,VICTORIA MH 1234 WOODSEY CT 0.48 NR 5. GUILER PROPERTIES LLC MH 1236 TIMBERLINE CT 0.48 O 6. AULD, LYNN V MH 1236 WOODSEY CT 0.46 O 7. NUSTAR LOGISTICS LP 12 1700 MUSTANG DR 27.09 O 8. PS LPT PROPERTIES INVESTORS 11 1750 MUSTANG CT 3.03 NR 9. PETROLEUM CO OF TEXAS ETAL 11 1800 STATE HWY 26 0.19 NR 10. WRIGHT,JOE L 11 2400 SH 26 0.06 NR 11. WRIGHT, BELLA AG 1719 E CONTINENTAL BLVD 31.81 NR 12. MAGELLAN PIPELINE TERMINALS LP 12 2110 MUSTANG CT 0.70 O 13. MAGELLAN PIPELINE TERMINALS LP 12 2110 MUSTANG CT 1.25 O 14. MAGELLAN PIPELINE TERMINALS LP 12 2100 MUSTANG CT 14.16 O 15. OSTUNI, REXANA E MH 1233 TIMBERLINE CT 0.42 NR 16. OSTUNI, REXANA E MH 1233 TIMBERLINE CT 0.08 NR 17. MARTINEZ, MAURO MH 1235 TIMBERLINE CT 0.39 NR 18. MARTINEZ, MAURO MH 1235 TIMBERLINE CT 0.08 NR 19. JTK DYER GROUP LLC MH 1237 TIMBERLINE CT 0.40 NR 20. WRIGHT, BALLA C 11 1800 SH 26 26.42 NR 21. JTK DYER GROUP LLC MH 1237 TIMBERLINE CT 0.09 NR Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 1 22. AMERICORP LLC MH 1233 WOODSEY CT 0.52 NR 23. WOROBIEC, KAMIL MH 1235 WOODSEY CT 0.43 O 24. XU, H M MH 1237 WOODSEY CT 0.47 NR Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided NR: No Response Notices Sent: Twenty (20) Responses Received within 200': Six (6) —Attached (Includes response forms, e-mails and speaker cards at 2/25/2021 P&Z meeting) Responses Received outside 200': Two (2) —Attached (One e-mail and one speaker card at 2/25/2021 P&Z Commission) Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 2 Notification Response Form 04 IN *� Direct questions and mail responses to: ZA21-0007 It; City of Southlake Meeting Date: February 18, 2021 at 6:30 OM Planning & Development Services Notification Response 1400 Main St; Ste 310 GUILER PROPERTIES LLC Southlake, TX 76092 405 SHADY LN Phone: (817) 748-8621 SOUTHLAKE,TX 76092 Fax: (817) 748-8077 E-mail: rschell@ci.southlake.tx.us 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 abode, are hereby & K , in favor of opposed to undecided about j (circle or underline one) / the proposed Zoning Change and Site Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: w ,✓ /7/Loj� � ti t � � / � J' lJi t /� ou ✓ p 0, ceN L'JciiL.et't9 �t ✓,� v - � 7 � a �✓ � 1 �� f vac G A V Si nature: � � � Date: Additional Signature: Date: Printed Name(s): �, fc OT G LA �Q Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property Phone Number (optional): G / 7 /_ — 0 7 -7 Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 3 Notification Response Form Direct questions and mail responses to: ZA21-0007 City of Southlake Meeting Date: February 18, 2021 at 6:30 PM Planning & Development Services Notification Response AUL1400 Main St; Ste 310 1236 WOOD V Southlake,TX 76092 236 ODSEY CT Phone: (817) 748-8621 SOUTHLAKE,TX 76092 Fax: (817) 748-8077 E-mail: rschell@ci.southlake.tx.us 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 Site Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Signature: �. g �tL_U��� Date: 2 ii/z Additional Signature: Date: Printed Name(s): 1_.Y,�. ��.' V' Rlu:•t be property ovineri&) aliose names)are p1rijej at top ctnermse cooar.r th�Plarmma =_partmAnt Ono lcrm per p;r.perty Phone Number (optional): 1 ,/,7 7J Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 4 Notification Response Form k Direct questions and mail responses to: 0,`' City of Southlake mt-ctltiq Pat" r rbru::ry IF3, `0 1 at G 30 PM Planning & Development Services Notification Response 1400 Main St; Ste 310 �F i� � �!t�a of t- <: Southlake, TX 76092 "!V6t R1 lNF %T SO. .�;i ANF 1 Y 76092 Phone: (817) 748-8621 Fax: (817) 748-8077 E-mail: rschell@ci.southlakeAK.us PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. z,e ,-)g the owneris) of the pro erty so noted above, are hereby :vor of opposed to undecided about tcircle or underline one) ping Change and Site Plan referenced above. r �rlen;� re : .,ding your position: - - Signatur� Date 62- additional Signature: Date: i Printed Name(s): t 1us r,e property cw.mer(s)wh�;se names)are rin ed at top Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per pro Phone Number (optional): `7 7i�z ` ` 23,?- Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 5 Notification Response Form Direct questions and mail responses to: ZA21-0007 City of Southlake Meeting Date: February 18, 2021 at 6:30 PM Planning & Development Services Notification Response 1400 Main St; Ste 310 WOROBIEC, KAMIL Southlake, TX 76092 504 CALVARY DR Phone: (817) 748-8621 EULESS, TX 76040 Fax: (817) 748-8077 E-mail: rschell@ci.southlake.tx.us 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 (circ-fe-or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Site Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: /! 1� 1 9 ! �`vn +�f �— �k� Cuti� +�.ti (cG�1 iK. r�!^✓� f~t, va P LAC 1_v IS^LHi.( L% f�tSz I ( iL3lir� }GN^s1 �c tv�gR/ (iiY ��W� l�. y �,S O ii Oo 4. N .t, v �Ws✓ 7•-"r � . J n kz.1 4Li S f;�'1 A J A Signature: Date: z) Additional Signature: �il`kl,)t4Av �,,;e���r -. Date: C,\ /j/•,Z&r I Printed Name(s): K M I L N4 j 1� C-- P_ , g-t� �C)(L (�. ( 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): 97 L — �f '� Z - 2 Q E f Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 6 Notification Response Form Direct questions and mail responses to: ZA21-0007 City of Southlake Meeting Date: February 18, 2021 at 6:30 PM Planning & Development Services Notification Response 1400 Main St; Ste 310 MAGELLAN PIPELINE TERMINALS LP Southlake, TX 76092 PO BOX 22186 Phone: (817) 748-8621 TULSA, OK 74121 Fax: (817) 748-8077 E-mail: rschell@ci.southlake.tx.us 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 0opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Zoning Change and Site Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: Magellan submits 4 objections based upon safety concerns which are as follow: 1. Request Sidewalks and Crosswalks-to avoid pedestrian safety issues on and arotuld Mustang Cotut. 2. Additional Access- off of Bnunlow requested to lnitizate anticipated peak travel conflicts. 3. Deny Stacking Valiance-to avoid congestion issues on Mustang Court. 4. Mustang Cotut Traffic Control bliprovenlents to avoid bottlenecks at HWY 26 and THE intersections. G Signature: C Date: 02-17-2021 Additional Signature: Date: Printed Name(s): Mike McCann.as authorized signatory for Magellan Pipeline Terminals.LP Must be property owner(s)whose name(s)are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): (918)231-0ss3 Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 7 rn c 0 ^ uu —I co ° CD (D rn m U 0 C� 0 o �_ (D o m Cf) <' v W CD 0 cn a (D W N U) Cl) Cf) �• ia���i �. n (D n Q __ V C 1 N gyp/ Q. O O 6 zr !! f nfrl � p : o U) � r ��3 = Cr v O Cr � (:D:' Y O O Q. N R 7 L'- Q - - - a N (D n v n • Vl a) � 7r D Q �. a a 3 CL O (D v � () O iD O (D (D t F., 7 Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 8 E-Gontoental-B!v F� r • ! 1"' ZA21-007-Item 8 Not- West to mitigat I of Court tar _ Ex loret -_ - - Wright Flint Hills Wright Magellan Southlake OT kract 1133 m NuStar , KI v 'dS ye cc)20'1 ' f• Richard Schell From: McCann, Mike Sent: Thursday,February 18,2021 12:35 PM To: Richard Schell Cc: Arnaud,Stephen;Boyken,Daniel Subject: ZA21-007- Item 8 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Attachments: Mike McCann.vcf;ZA21-0007 Notification Response Form-MPT LP 2.pdf Mr.Schell: Thank you for taking my call yesterday afternoon. It is my understanding from our call that the P&Z meeting has been postponed until Thursday,February 25th Please find attached Magellan's opposition to the development as proposed. The 4 points highlight the justification for concerns raised at the Corridor Committee Meeting. For your benefit,I have attached my contact card. The Magellan requested changes are as follow: 1. Request sidewalk and crosswalk improvements-to avoid pedestrian safety issues on and around Mustang Court. 2. Additional Access—applicant has adjacent property off of Brumlow -requesting this be used to mitigate anticipated peak travel conflicts. 3. Deny Stacking Variance-to mitigate congestion issues on Mustang Court 4. Mustang Court Traffic Control Improvements to mitigate bottlenecks at HWY 26 and THE intersections. Kindly, Mike McCann I Real Estate Representative,Sr. I Magellan Midstream Partners, L.P. One Williams Center,Tulsa,OK 74172 1(918)574-7871 office 19 NMAGELLAN' Make Safety An Everyday Priority! Kn=whaftbel YIL a Respect for All Employees •Honesty in all Buiness � �"���ft Dealings •Safe and Efficient Operations a Compliance with all Laws and Reguations •Stewardship of Company Resources Confidentiality Notice:The information contained in this message maybe privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure.If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.Thank you. 1 Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 10 Richard Schell Frorn: McC a nn,M ike Sent: Wednesdayr arc To: Richard Schell Cc: Goar,Clay Subject: ZA-21-0007 -Traffic Engineering Recommendation Report Attachments: ZA21-0007 Traffic Control Recommendations and 0 pin ions,pdf Good afternoon Mr_Schell, For the benefit of the Planning Commission,please find the attached Traffic Engineering Report addressing Magellan and Nustaroancerns with the Mustang Business Park traffic design_ Additionally,has the applicant supplemented the traffic design information? If so,will you please forward the supplemental materials so we may ascertain the plans? If I may be of furtherassistante or answer any questions,p lease feel f ree to contact me. IG nd ly, Mike McCann I Real Estate Representative,Sr. I Magellan Midstream Partners, L.P. One Williams Center,Tulsa, OK 74172 1(918)574-7871 office l FJry � LL ' Make Safety Art Everyday Priority! r a Respect for All Employees a Honesty in all � Mraw"uh�FY�E�fl4M• EfuinessDealings UP befon;rUll did. •Safe and Efficierk Operations *Compliance with all Laws and Reguations •Stewardship of Company Resources Confidentiality Notice:The-nformatice oentained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disdosure.if the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient,you are hereby notifed that any dissemination distribution oroopying of this communication is strictly prohibited_ffyou hawe received this communication in error, please not fg us inrnediately by replying to the message and deleting it From your compubm.Thank you. Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 11 EC March 30, 2021 Mark Brown, P.E. Facility Integrity Engineering Magellan Midstream Partners, L.P. One Williams Center, MD:OTC-8 Tulsa, OK 74172 Subject: Mustang Business Park Traffic Impact Review Mustang Court&Southwestern Street Southlake,Texas Request NuStar Logistics, L.P. ("NuStar")and Magellan Midstream Partners, L.P. ("Magellan") have requested Traffic Engineering Consultants, Inc. (TEC)to review the proposed Mustang Business Park development and associated submittal documents located in Southlake,Texas ("Project"). The Project site is located generally north and west of the intersection of Mustang Court and State Highway(SH) 26 as shown on the following page. NuStar and Magellan have requested a review of the Project's traffic impact on their current operations. Scope of the Review Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. submitted a traffic impact analysis(TIA)to the City of Southlake on February 1,2021. Lee Engineering reviewed the traffic impact analysis (TIA)for the City of Southlake and submitted review comments on February 23, 2021. The City of Southlake 2035 Corridor Planning Committee met and reviewed the proposed project on January 25, 2021. Minutes from the meeting were available. TEC has reviewed all the above documents and relied on these documents in the following opinions. Traffic Engineering Consultants,Inc. 6000 S.Western Avenue,Suite 300 1 Oklahoma City,Oklahoma 73139 1 Ph.405-720-7721 6931 S.66t"E.Avenue,Suite.100 1 Tulsa,Oklahoma 74133 1 Ph.918-481-8484 217 E.Dickson Street,Suite 106 1 Fayetteville,Arkansas 727011 Ph.479-335-5636 Website:www.tecusa.com Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 12 ,r f_ W a n ( -_ t oaras .,au�. Sn m it j L v l lop lie MAT Recommendations 1) The proposed new driveway intersection should be moved north to create additional separation between intersections. At a minimum,the south drive should be relocated as shown in Figure 1 which will be discussed later in the report. 2) 4-Way Stop control is recommended for the intersection of Southwestern Street and Mustang Court. 3) A secondary public access roadway should be included for a development of this size. Existing Uses Adjacent to the Proposed Project Magellan currently operates a fueling terminal at this location. NuStar also operates a fueling terminal that uses the same access point. The access point is Mustang Court which extends northwest from its intersection with SH-26. An average of 200 fuel trucks per day(maximum day 300 trucks)use Mustang Court to access the two facilities. Counting a trip in and a trip out for each truck,the average number of truck trips per day is approximately 400(maximum day 600 trips). These are semi-trailer fuel trucks. Project Magnitude The proposed development of the Mustang Business Park will also use Mustang Court as its only point of access. The development proposes to extend Mustang Court northwest to serve an approximate 341,000 square feet of warehouse with office. The site plan shows approximately 95 loading docks for semi-trailer trucks with an equal amount of additional trailer parking. The proposed land use will significantly increase the amount of truck traffic on Mustang Court. Single Access Point The current site plan shows a new four-way driveway intersection approximately 110 feet northwest of the existing intersection of Southwestern Street and Mustang Court. Traffic Engineering Consultants,Inc. 6000 S.Western Avenue,Suite 300 1 Oklahoma City,Oklahoma 73139 1 Ph.405-720-7721 6931 S.66t^E.Avenue,Suite.100 1 Tulsa,Oklahoma 74133 1 Ph.918-481-8484 217 E.Dickson Street,Suite 106 1 Fayetteville,Arkansas 727011 Ph.479-335-5636 Website:www.tecusa.com Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 14 EC Both Magellan and NuStar use the Southwestern Street intersection as their only point of access. Traffic Impact Study Inconsistent with the Site Plan as Reviewed A site plan was submitted to the City of Southlake for review dated December 14,2020. The site plan was revised by the applicant and resubmitted February 1,2021. A traffic impact analysis (TIA)was conducted by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.on February 1, 2021. The Kimley-Horn TIA used the site plan with 330,000 square feet as originally submitted. The revised site plan increased the square footage by approximately 11,000 square feet. At the City of Southlake 2035 Corridor Planning Committee meeting held on January 25, 2021 the applicant was asked why the number of parking spaces proposed was greater than the required number of spaces. The required number of spaces is 370 and the proposed number of spaces is 446. The applicant indicated "We want to increase the office use percentage to balance the space. Because they are spec buildings we want to leave flexibility for whatever tenant comes in to utilize the space." If the office space is increased there will be additional traffic generated,especially in the peak hours. Corridor Planning Committee Highlights At the January 25,2021 Southlake 2035 Corridor Planning Committee meeting the applicant presented a proposed development for Light Industrial Warehouse. The total proposed square footage was 330,980 square feet. The Kimley-Horn traffic impact analysis was based on a rounded 331,000 square feet. To calculate the expected number of new trips the Trip Generation category used was"Warehousing". Project Appears to be a Mixed-Use Development There are several categories that could be used for a development of this type. Table 1 shows four possible classifications that could have been used for the traffic projections. Traffic Engineering Consultants,Inc. 6000 S.Western Avenue,Suite 300 1 Oklahoma City,Oklahoma 73139 1 Ph.405-720-7721 6931 S.6611 E.Avenue,Suite.100 1 Tulsa,Oklahoma 74133 1 Ph.918-481-8484 217 E.Dickson Street,Suite 106 1 Fayetteville,Arkansas 727011 Ph.479-335-5636 Website:www.tecusa.com Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 15 MAT Table 1 Trip Generation Proiection Comparison Vehicle Trips per Vehicle Trips A.M. Vehicle Trips P.M. Day Peak Hour Peak Hour lWarehousing 1.71 0.19 0.20 General Light Industrial 3.96 0.32 0.25 Industrial Park 5.22 0.40 0.40 General Office 10.83 1.46 1.18 The purpose of a TIA is to make traffic projections as close as possible to how the property will be developed. The square footage of the development as currently submitted is 290,000 square feet of warehouse and 51,000 square feet of office. Table 1 shows the number of trips projected for each 1,000 square feet of building for three time periods: 1)total trips for a 24-hour period (Trips per Day), 2)trips during the highest a.m. peak one hour, and 3)trips during the highest p.m. peak one hour. For the combined 341,000 square feet projected development,the appropriate square footage would be multiplied by each trip rate to calculate the number of projected trips. The Warehousing category will project the lowest number of trips of the categories shown. The Office category projects a much higher number of trips per square foot. The Warehousing category assumes minimal office space. Table 1 is presented to show that there is a potential for the furnished traffic projections to be significantly lower than what may actually occur. Based upon a quick calculation warehousing alone would create approximately 583 trips a day. As presented the 51,000 square feet of office space will generate 552 trips per day and the warehousing would generate 496 trips per day totaling 1,048 trips per day. Mustang Court and Southwestern Street 4-Way Stop Analysis Not Provided Lee Engineering reviewed the Kimley-Horn traffic impact analysis. The Lee review highlighted that the TIA and the submitted site plan showed 330,980 square feet. A revised site plan submitted February 1,2021 shows a proposed 340,180 square feet development. The Lee review pointed out the City requested a 4-Way Stop analysis for Mustang Court and Southwestern Street which was not provided in the TIA. At a minimum,the intersection needs to be a 4-Way Stop. Traffic Engineering Consultants,Inc. 6000 S.Western Avenue,Suite 300 1 Oklahoma City,Oklahoma 73139 1 Ph.405-720-7721 6931 S.661h E.Avenue,Suite.100 1 Tulsa,Oklahoma 74133 1 Ph.918-481-8484 217 E.Dickson Street,Suite 106 1 Fayetteville,Arkansas 727011 Ph.479-335-5636 Website:www.tecusa.com Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 16 EC Deficient Intersection Separation Distance Lee Engineering correctly states in item 17, "If the new Mustang Court private street extension is considered a part of the site and thus a driveway,there does not appear to be enough internal storage between the Southwestern Street intersection and the first internal circulation aisles". The city's subdivision regulations and the street and right of way requirements require a minimum separation of 150 feet between these intersections. These codes assume regular vehicular traffic. When there is a large percentage of trucks the spacing should be even greater. The new intersection will only have a centerline-to-centerline separation of approximately 110 feet. Analysis of Project Truck Wheel Paths Figure 1 on the following page is an exhibit of the tracking path of the wheels and trailer for a 67-foot wheelbase semi-trailer truck making a northbound right turn from the proposed driveway onto Mustang Court in the proposed development. Alternative 1 shows a truck path where the truck does not cross the centerline of Mustang Court. For Alternative 1 a right curb return radius would have to be constructed that would extend beyond the existing intersection of Southwester Street and Mustang Court. In order to accommodate the larger radius it would require a greater separation between the two intersections. Alternative 2 shows the wheel path If the truck is permitted to cross both the driveway centerline and the Mustang Court centerline. This turn could be made with the existing pavement design. However,the truck will be on the wrong side of the road at the intersection of Southwestern Street and Mustang Road. With 4-Way Stops the truck will be in the opposing lane. Neither alternative is recommended. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternate and would be to relocate the northbound drive to the west adjoining and attaching to the proposed dead-end driveway on the east side of the building. The alternative would also eliminate a dead-end parking aisle which is not desirable. The turning radii were also checked for the southbound driveway. The southbound left turn can be made as designed. It should be noted executing the northwest right turn to this driveway would cross the centerline of the driveway. Traffic Engineering Consultants,Inc. 6000 S.Western Avenue,Suite 300 1 Oklahoma City,Oklahoma 73139 1 Ph.405-720-7721 6931 S.661h E.Avenue,Suite.100 1 Tulsa,Oklahoma 74133 1 Ph.918-481-8484 217 E.Dickson Street,Suite 106 1 Fayetteville,Arkansas 727011 Ph.479-335-5636 Website:www.tecusa.com Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 17 o ENTRANCE ...... .... ..................................... ....... ............................... R30 BFR(2) ALTERNATIVE 2, Typ OUTSIDE WHEEL PATH fff) QD� V------------ ----- — ci ......................................................................................... A=2*31'56" L. R=832 00' L-36 CB-S R Fall -C-=-3 6. F11 "\—.N37'. J P F R:2, ............................. I.......... R3 R30' 55,7 1 15 21 - N31* 64.00' NH IALTERNATIVE 1. � R BFR A=1*26'46 OUTSIDE WHEEL PATH =76E -10' 1�4 jD' 4.12 PROPOSED 2.69 AC-FT F DETENTION AREA ALTERNATIVE 3, s ssaz"�......... NEW T HRU ROAD A,-10'3(y =470.Wy� R L=86 18' CB=N48'2 WE C=86.05' ALTERNATIVE 1, NEW CURB "EX FH C, .-TYE EMENT 611 L 10k 4,10-eP* N) t loll 1 -1; Z EX FH FIGURE 1. Driveway Alternates ECSouthlake, Tx Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 18 M Project Impacts on Existing Uses There are several factors that should be considered that have the potential to create operational impacts on the Magellan and NuStar operations. The existing land uses and the proposed land uses have a high percentage of semi-trailer trucks. These vehicles take more space to maneuver and take more time to proceed through intersections. The factors of concern are: 1) The amount of increased traffic that will use the 3-lane signalized approach of Mustang Court at SH-26 would create significant delays. It seems apparent that very little, if any,additional green time can be assigned to Mustang Court. 2) The Magellan and NuStar operations are primarily gasoline semi-trailers. These trucks are required to stop at the railroad track across the north leg of Mustang Court which reduces the capacity of the traffic signal even more. All vehicles are required to stop in advance of the railroad crossing while waiting for a green light because of the lack of storage space between the tracks and SH-26. There is also no right turn on red allowed for Mustang Court. 3) The fact that the proposed development is primarily a large truck warehouse district the development will significantly increase the number of trucks using Mustang Court somewhere between 300 and 400 trips per day. This is in addition to an estimated 200 to 300 passenger car trips. 4) The proposed development is only showing one point of access(Mustang Court) without the ability to mitigate traffic impacts to a second access point. Typically, developments of this size are required to have at least two points of access for safety reasons.An emergency access through the neighborhood to the north is shown. However,for a development of this size, it is desirable to have an additional public access point to another roadway. 5) The spacing of the first driveways in the new development are too close to the existing intersection of Mustang Court and Southwestern Street. There will not be adequate storage and the driveways will have an adverse impact on the existing intersection of Mustang Court and Southwestern Street. Traffic Engineering Consultants,Inc. 6000 S.Western Avenue,Suite 300 1 Oklahoma City,Oklahoma 73139 1 Ph.405-720-7721 6931 S.6611 E.Avenue,Suite.100 1 Tulsa,Oklahoma 74133 1 Ph.918-481-8484 217 E.Dickson Street,Suite 106 1 Fayetteville,Arkansas 727011 Ph.479-335-5636 Website:www.tecusa.com Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 19 EC 6) If the project is constructed 4-way stop control should be implemented at Mustang Court and Southwestern Street to adequately serve the traffic from Magellan and NuStar operations. 7) The site plan square footages have increased since original submission. The applicant has stated the site plan is speculative in nature and they desire to have flexibility to increase the office use. If either the square footage increases or the office use increases,the projected traffic in the traffic impact analysis would be understated. Conclusion Based upon our review of the above documents we make three recommendations that should be applied to the project. • The proposed new driveway intersection should be moved north to create additional separation between intersections. At a minimum,the south drive should be relocated as shown in Figure 1. • 4-Way Stop control is recommended for the intersection of Mustang Court and Southwestern Street. • A secondary public road access should be included for a development of this size. Sincerely, Steven D. Hofener, P.E., PTOE Principal I Traffic Engineering Consultants, Inc. SDH/slj TO-923 Traffic Engineering Consultants,Inc. 6000 S.Western Avenue,Suite 300 1 Oklahoma City,Oklahoma 73139 1 Ph.405-720-7721 6931 S.661h E.Avenue,Suite.100 1 Tulsa,Oklahoma 74133 1 Ph.918-481-8484 217 E.Dickson Street,Suite 106 1 Fayetteville,Arkansas 727011 Ph.479-335-5636 Website:www.tecusa.com Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 20 SOtlthlake Planning and Zoning Meeting Public Comment Form Please print. Return completed forth to Commission Secretary Prior to start of regular session. Name: I IL ►`i r.1 Address: 0 YLe i I(I or.-t ,r Phone: -2 -o r S Date: Z 2 0 2-1 dI wish to share my views on an Agenda Item: I will speak in SUPPORT of this item 1' I will speak in OPPOSITION of this item d.; I do not wish to speak, but wish to record my SUPPORT/ OPPOSITION Signature: —qLol� Required. Ca ds will not be Ldinto the record unless it is signed. Southlake Planning and Zoning Meeting Public Comment Form Please print. Return completed form to Commission Secretary prior to start of regular session. Name: L n-0 d Address: C�r� w 1 tc :c lS L,�rvycrc —r-�c SA rslC Phone: 9 1 1? - 'S 0l2 Date: `�/ 3�i /a I Iwish to share my views on an Agenda Item: I will speak in SUPPORT of rhis item �C I will speak in OPPOSITION of this item I do not wish to speak,but wish to record my SUPPORT/OPPOSITION Signature: Required. Cards will not be read into the record unless it is signed. "A Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 21 Southlake Planning and Zoning Meeting Public Comment Form - Please Print. Return completed form to Commission Secretary Prior to start of regular session. Name: M "� 2e J Address: b(D Ce4vr �kc,k9t, Phone: -7 Date: wish to share my views on an Agenda Item: I will s eak in SUPPORT of this item _ A I will speak in OPPOSITION of this item �/��` s awk I do not wish to s cak but wish to record nly SUPPORT/OPPOSITION Signature: Required.•Cards will not be read into the record unless it is signed. Southlake Planning and Zoning Meeting Public Comment Form Please Print. Return completed form to Commission Secretary.prior to start of regular session. Name: i�f711 L ©RO p, Etc- Address: 2 �' 1p00-D S EY ct. A t 5 Z, Phone: R-72-1452- q0G1 Date: �o L I wish to share my views on an Agenda Item: Z 2 '-C)00 I I will speak in SUPPORT of this item \/I will speak in OPPOSITION of this item I do not wish to speak,but wish to record my SUPPORT/OPPOSITION LSignature: ` Required-Cards ill not be read into the record unless it is signed Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 22 Response Received Outside 200' Richard Schell From: noreply@civicplus.com Sent: Thursday,February 2S,2021 12:42 PM To: Planning Division Subject: Online Form Submittal:Planning&Zoning Case Input Form Planning & Zoning Case Input Form Project Name Mustang Business Park Planning&Zoning Case ZA2-0007 Number Project Location 1800 sh26 I am: Opposed Comments/Explanation The creation of a business park within 3 lots of my property will adversely affect my property value.At a minimum,noise and light mitigation measures need to be taken to minimize the detrimental effects of the project.A wall acceptable to the adjacent residential neighborhood should be required.In addition,steps to ensure lights are not leaking onto adjacent property.Both measures are needed to permit residents to peacefully enjoy their property,especially at night when noise and light can disturb normal sleep patterns. Thank you. (Section Break) First Name Orest Last Name Dachniwsky Address 1230 Woodsey court Address2 Field not completed. City Southlake State Texas Zip 76092 Disclaimer This form is to provide feedback on planning&zoning-related requests. Your 1 Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 23 comments are placed in the related case file as a matter of public record and forwarded to the Planning&Zoning Commission and City Council if action is required by these bodies. Your submission of this form shall not be considered a formal protest under Section 211.006(d) of the Texas Local Government Code unless your signature is uploaded and submitted with this form. Disclaimer Yes, I understand Acknowledgment Signature(For Formal image.jpg Protests) Receive an email copy of this form Email not displaying correctly?View it in your browser. 2 Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 24 Southlake Planning and Zoning Meeting Public Comment Form Please print. Return completed form to Commission Secretary Prior to start of regular session Naive:-PRUI- 1�-O'SR lLFE I Sf Address: .1.=1 WOODSL,1 CA— 5-OURIAK-i5-, 1X -7&r 2- Phone:81-1-4 VA5--QUE Date: U2-IG-2o`L► \ dI wish to share my views on an Agenda Item: I will speak in SUPPORT of this itetn I will speak in OPPOSITION of this item I do not wish to speak,but wish to record my SUPPORT/OPPOSITION Signature: � �Yc Required. Cards will not be l ead into the record unless it is signed Case No. Attachment D ZA21-0007 Page 25