2010-06-01 C ITY TEXAS O F
SOUTH LAKE
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES: JUNE 1, 2010
LOCATION: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, Texas 76092
City Council Chambers
CITY COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor John Terrell, Mayor Pro Tem Laura K. Hill and
Councilmembers Brandon Bledsoe, Carolyn Morris, Pamela A. Muller, Jeff Wang and Al
Zito.
CITY COUNCIL ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Shana Yelverton, Assistant City Manager / Director of
Public Safety Jim Blagg, Assistant City Manager Ben Thatcher, Assistant to the City
Manager Alison Orlowski, Director of Community Services Chris Tribble, Deputy
Director of Community Services Kerry McGeath, Assistant to the Director Candice
Sanders, Construction Manager Peter Kao, Director of Economic Development Greg
Last, Director of Finance Sharen Jackson, Director of Human Resources Stacey Black,
Director of Information Technology Dale Dean, IT Technician Eric Lusk, Director of
Planning and Development Services Ken Baker, Planner 11 Jenny Crosby, Planner I
Lorrie Fletcher, Chief of Fire Services Mike Starr, Deputy Chief of Fire Services Bryan
Thomas, Firefighter / Paramedic Shan Allsbrooks, Chief of Police Services Robert Finn,
Community Initiatives Supervisor Mike Bedrich, Director of Public Works Robert Price,
Deputy Director of Public Works Gordon Mayer, Operations Manager Chuck Kendrick,
Civil Engineer Michelle McCullough, Civil Engineer Cheryl Taylor, City Attorney E. Allen
Taylor, Deputy City Secretary Tara Brooks, and Office Assistant Brandi Harris.
WORK SESSION:
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to order. The work session was called to order by Mayor Terrell
at 5:41 p.m.
Agenda Item No. 2. Invocation. David Whitington from Christ Our King Church of
Southlake gave the invocation. Mayor Terrell led the pledge of allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 3. Recognition of Bowl Championship Series player, Michael
Cruciani. Mayor Terrell read the proclamation and then presented it to Michael Cruciani.
Agenda Item No. 4. Recognition of Carroll ISD Senior High School Choral Department.
Carroll Senior High School Choir Director Chris Hutchinson described the choirs'
activities throughout the past year. Mayor Terrell read the proclamation and presented
UNOFFICIAL REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 1 of 13
it to Mr. Hutchinson. The Chorale and Cantoras choirs each sang a song for the
Council.
Agenda Item No. 5. Parks and Recreation Board Report. Parks and Recreation Board
Member Elaine Cox announced upcoming meetings and events.
Agenda Item No. 6. School District Report. A report was not given.
Agenda Item No. 7. Discuss all items on tonight's meeting agenda. No action will be
taken and each item will be considered during the Regular Session. Council reviewed
the consent agenda.
REGULAR SESSION:
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to order. The regular session of the City Council was called to
order by Mayor Terrell at 6:13 p.m.
Agenda Item No. 2A. Executive Session. Mayor Terrell announced City Council would
be going into Executive Session pursuant to the Texas Government Code, Section
551.071, consultation with attorney; Section 551.072, deliberation regarding real
property; and Section 551.087, deliberation regarding economic development
negotiations. City Council adjourned for Executive Session at 6:13 p.m. An Executive
Session was not held.
City Council photographs were taken during the break.
Agenda Item No. 2B. Reconvene. Mayor Terrell reconvened the regular meeting at 7:21
p.m. and asked if any action was necessary from Executive Session. No action was
necessary.
Agenda Item No. 3A1. Mayor's Report Update of upcoming meetings and events.
Mayor Terrell announced upcoming meetings. Councilmember Wang described the
recent visit by Friendship City, Suzhou, China and showed a wall hanging they gave the
City of Southlake.
Agenda Item No. 3B. City Manager's Report. A report was not given.
Agenda Item No. 3C. Southlake Youth Action Commission Report. A written report was
provided in Council's packet.
CONSENT AGENDA: Consent agenda items are considered to be routine by the City
Council and are enacted with one motion. The Mayor read the consent agenda items.
Agenda Item No. 4A. Approve minutes from the May 18, 2010 regular City Council
meeting. The minutes were approved as presented.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 2 of 13
Agenda Item No. 4B. Approve an annual agreement for providing odor control treatment
at lift stations with Premier Chemicals, LLC in the amount of $87,600. A presentation
was not made on this item.
Agenda Item No. 4C. Approve Amendment No. 3 for Kimball Avenue Improvements
with Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. in the amount of $121,500. A presentation was
not made on this item.
Agenda Item No. 4D. Approve Change Order No. 4 for the Neighborhood Improvement
Project of Heatherwood, Royal Oaks Addition, and Twin Creeks Addition for additional
sanitary sewer improvements with North Texas Contracting, Inc. in the amount of
$778,949. A presentation was not made on this item.
Agenda Item No. 4E. Resolution No. 10 -025, Appoint a Deputy Mayor Pro Tem. Mayor
Terrell appointed Brandon Bledsoe as Deputy Mayor Pro Tem.
In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as
follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS,
APPOINTING A DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 2.07 OF THE
HOME RULE CHARTER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Agenda Item No. 4F. Approve a lease agreement with Motorola, Inc. (or its Assignee)
in an amount not to exceed $337,207 for the purchase of handheld portable and mobile
radios. A presentation was not made on this item.
Agenda Item No. 4G. Approve a Water Line Easement Encroachment and Joint Use
Agreement with RCC Miron Office Ltd. on Lot 4R, Block 1, Miron Addition. A
presentation was not made on this item.
Agenda Item No. 4H. Ordinance No. 480 -588 (ZA09 -017), 1 Reading, Zoning Change
and Site Plan for Bethel Methodist Church of Southlake on property being described as
Tracts 2C26 and 2C27, J.G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18, Tarrant County and being
located at 180 and 190 Jellico Circle West. Current Zoning: SF -1A Single Family
Residential District. Proposed Zoning: S -P -1 Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN
Neighborhood #11. This item was administratively tabled to the June 15, 2010 City
Council meeting. Director Baker answered questions about this tabling during the work
session.
Agenda Item No. 41. ZA10 -014, Site Plan for Brazos Southlake Substation and a
variance to the Masonry Ordinance No. 557 -A, as amended, on property being
described as Lot 3, Block A, MTP -IBM Addition No. 1, being located at 3411 T. W. King
Road. Current Zoning: NR -PUD Non Residential Planned Unit Development District.
SPIN Neighborhood #1. This item is tabled to the June 15, 2010 City Council meeting
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 3 of 13
at the request of the applicant. Director Baker answered questions about this tabling
during the work session.
Motion was made to approve consent agenda items 4A; 4B; 4C; 4D; 4E appointing
Brandon Bledsoe as Deputy Mayor Pro Tem; 4F; 4G; 4H to table to the June 15, 2010
City Council meeting; and 4I to table to the June 15, 2010 City Council meeting.
Motion: Hill
Second: Bledsoe
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0
REGULAR AGENDA:
Agenda Item No. 5. Public Forum. Mayor Terrell opened the public forum. No one
spoke. Mayor Terrell closed the public forum.
Agenda Item No. 6A. Resolution No. 10 -024 (ZA10 -029), Specific Use Permit for a
Solar Energy System on property being described as Lot 2, Block 1, Georgetown Park
Addition and being located at 2545 East Southlake Boulevard. Current Zoning: C2 Local
Retail Commercial Zoning District. SPIN Neighborhood #8. Mayor Pro Tem Hill recused
herself from this item, left the Council Chambers and filed a conflict of interest affidavit
with the City Secretary's Office.
Director Baker presented this item to Council. Applicant Scott Carr, 7500 Blue Haven
Court, McKinney, Texas answered Council's questions.
In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as
follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS,
GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM ON
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, LOCATED
AT 2545 E. SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD, BEING LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 2,
BLOCK 1, GEORGETOWN PARK ADDITION, AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED
SITE EXHIBIT ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "A"
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Resolution No. 10 -024 (ZA10 -029), Specific Use Permit
for a Solar Energy System on property being described as Lot 2, Block 1, Georgetown
Park Addition, subject to Staff Report dated April 30, 2010.
Motion: Bledsoe
Second: Morris
Ayes: Bledsoe, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 4 of 13
Nays: None
Approved: 6 -0
Mayor Pro Tem Hill reentered the chambers.
Agenda Item No. 6B. Ordinance No. 480 -595 (ZA10 -009), 2 Reading, Zoning Change
and Site Plan for The Offices at Byron Nelson on property being described as Lot 3A,
Block 3, Diamond Circle Estates Addition and being located at 630 East Southlake
Boulevard. Current Zoning: 0-1 Office Zoning District. Requested Zoning: S -P -1
Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN Neighborhood #7. Planner Fletcher presented this
item and answered Council's questions. Applicant Debra Edmondson, 1730 Tuscan
Ridge Circle, Southlake, Texas answered Council's questions.
In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as
follows:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE
ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A ZONING
CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 3A, BLOCK 3, DIAMOND
CIRCLE ESTATES ADDITION, AND BEING APPROXIMATELY 1.12 ACRES, AND MORE
FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "0-1" OFFICE DISTRICT TO
"S -P -1" DETAILED SITE PLAN AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED SITE PLAN ATTACHED
HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "B SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC
REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL
ZONING MAP; PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE;
DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE
DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE; PROVIDING THAT
THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF;
PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL
NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mayor Terrell opened the public hearing and read a comment card from Steve Meehan,
720 Heatherglen Drive, Southlake, Texas who did not wish to speak but wanted to
record his support. Mayor Terrell closed the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 480 -595 (ZA10 -009), 2 Reading, Zoning
Change and Site Plan for The Offices at Byron Nelson noting that because of the
accessory use there will be no additional parking required for this particular use.
Motion: Hill
Second: Morris
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 5 of 13
Agenda Item No. 6C. Ordinance No. 971, 2 Reading, Southlake 2030 North Sector
Land Use Plan. SPIN Neighborhoods #1, 2, 3 and 4. Director Baker presented this item
to Council.
In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as
follows:
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN AS AN ELEMENT OF THE
SOUTHLAKE 2030 PLAN, THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 971, 2 Reading, Southlake 2030 North
Sector Land Use Plan.
Motion: Hill
Second: Bledsoe
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0
Agenda Item No. 6D. Ordinance No. 480 -592 (ZA10 -011), 2 Reading, Zoning Change
and Site Plan for the City of Southlake North Park on property being described as a
portion of Tract 1F, Joel W. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 350, and being located at 160
East Dove Road. Current Zoning: SF -1A Single Family Residential District. Requested
Zoning: CS Community Service District. SPIN Neighborhood #2. Director Baker
presented this item to Council. Director Baker and Director Tribble answered Council's
questions.
In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as
follows:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS;
GRANTING A ZONING CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND
WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF
TRACT 1F, JOEL W. CHIVERS SUREVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 350 CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, BEING APPROXIMATELY 19.9 ACRES
AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "SF -1A"
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT TO "CS" COMMUNITY SERVICE
ZONING DISTRICT, AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED SITE PLAN ATTACHED
HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "B SUBJECT TO THE
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE; DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, MORALS AND
GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS
HEREIN MADE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 6 of 13
ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A
PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mayor Terrell opened the public hearing.
Robert Myles, 315 East Dove Road, Southlake, Texas, spoke in opposition.
Kami Myles, 315 East Dove Road, Southlake, Texas, did not want to speak, but wanted
to record her opposition to this item.
Dianne Dorman, 100 Ascot Drive, Southlake, Texas, asked questions about the traffic.
Chris Owens, 333 Oak Pointe Lane, Southlake, Texas, and President of the Oak Pointe
HOA spoke in opposition.
Jeff Smith, 2601 Summit Ridge Drive, Southlake, Texas, spoke in opposition.
Howard Sanders, 1000 Lakewood Drive, Southlake, Texas, spoke in support.
Mayor Terrell read comment cards from those who did not wish to speak, but wanted to
record their opinions:
Benjamin Sanders, 1000 Lakewood Drive, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Dapo Afolabi, 2600 Summit Ridge Drive, Southlake, Texas, opposes this item;
Greg and Tammy Perrone, 2608 Summit Ridge Drive, Southlake, Texas, opposes this
item;
Joseph Schupler, 701 Lorraine Drive, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Chris Zapatka, 850 Silverwood Drive, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Allison Meehan, 720 Heatherglen Drive, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Jennifer Myers, 801 Cross Lane, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Rita Pearce, 809 Parkdale Drive, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Tim Pearce, 809 Parkdale Drive, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Rich Williams, 1405 Wedgewood Court, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Jim Lehane, 714 Saxon Trail, Southlake, Texas, supports this item; and,
Kristyn Rochester, 102 Churchill Circle, Southlake, Texas, supports this item.
Mayor Terrell closed the public hearing.
Director Price and Director Tribble addressed the citizen's questions and answered
Council's questions.
City Council discussed this request.
Mayor Terrell read more comment cards into the record:
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 7 of 13
Mark Fallek, 714 Wentwood Drive, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Anna Marie Falleck, 714 Wentwood Drive, Southlake, Texas, supports this item;
Kyle Whitt, 545 Round Hollow, Southlake, Texas, opposes this item;
Bill Gleim, 1905 Amesbury Court, Southlake, Texas, supports this item; and,
Patty Gleim, 1905 Amesbury Court, Southlake, Texas supports this item.
Director Price, Director Tribble and City Manager Yelverton answered Council's
questions.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 480 -592 (ZA10 -011), 2 Reading, Zoning
Change and Site Plan for the City of Southlake North Park, extending the trail to the
southeast at a price of $20,000; increasing the landscape buffer as presented by staff;
adding "No Parking" signs on Dove Road and Ridgecrest at a number to be decided by
staff; widening the exit from the park onto Dove Road so there is a left turn out and a
right turn out; asking staff to write a Facility Use Agreement that will cover the hours of
operation and that will dictate that the park's sports field lights will be turned off by 9:30
p.m.; confirming there will be no gate opening; subject to Review Summary No. 3, dated
May 11, 2010; and granting the variances.
Motion: Hill
Second: Morris
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0
Agenda Item No. 6E. Ordinance No. 480 -591 (ZA09 -069), 2 Reading, Zoning Change
and Site Plan for the City of Southlake Department of Public Safety North Training
Facility on property being described as Tract 1 F2 and a portion of Tract 1 F, Joel W.
Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 350, and being located at 160 East Dove Road and 2395
North White Chapel Boulevard. Current Zoning: SF -1A Single Family Residential
District. Requested Zoning: S -P -1 Detailed Site Plan District with CS Community
Service District uses to include an indoor firing range as a permitted accessory use.
SPIN Neighborhood #2. Directors Baker and Blagg presented this item to Council.
In accordance with Section 4.21 of the City Charter, the caption for this item is listed as
follows:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS;
GRANTING A ZONING CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND
WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF
TRACT 1F AND ALL OF TRACT 1F2, JOEL W. CHIVERS SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO.
350, CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, BEING APPROXIMATELY
10.635 ACRES, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A"
FROM "SF -1A" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO "S -P -1" DETAILED
SITE PLAN DISTRICT WITH "CS" COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT USES TO
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 8 of 13
INCLUDE AN INDOOR FIRING RANGE AS AN ACCESSORY USE, AS DEPICTED
ON THE APPROVED SITE PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED
HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "B SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
CONTAINED IN THIS ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP;
PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE;
DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE
DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE;
PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL
ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A
PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Council discussed the tower portion of this request. City Manager Yelverton and City
Attorney Taylor answered their questions regarding the tower.
Mayor Terrell opened the public hearing.
Jeff Smith, 2601 Summit Ridge Drive, Southlake, Texas spoke in opposition.
John Michael Tate 914 San Saba Drive, Southlake, Texas spoke in opposition.
Susann Smith, 2601 Summit Ridge Drive, Southlake, Texas expressed concern about
the tower.
Chris Owens, 333 Oak Pointe Lane, Southlake, Texas did not speak but recorded his
opposition.
Dianne Dorman, 100 Ascot Drive, Southlake, Texas did not speak but recorded her
opposition.
Gregg and Stacy Rodgers, 185 East Dove Road, Southlake, Texas did not speak but
recorded their opposition.
Kyle D. Whitt, 545 Round Hollow, Southlake, Texas, did not speak but recorded his
opposition.
Kris Kristynik 137 Welford Lane, Southlake, Texas spoke in opposition.
Robert Myles, 315 East Dove Road, Southlake, Texas spoke in opposition.
William "Biff' McGuire, 607 Blair Court, Southlake, Texas spoke as a member of the
Crime Control and Prevention District and stated his support of this item.
Mayor Terrell closed the public hearing.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 9 of 13
Council discussed this request.
Regarding the fire tower, City Attorney Taylor advised Council that the motion would
need to state that the Zoning and Site Plan are approved as submitted and
recommended but to instruct the staff not to proceed with the development of the tower
until they have conducted a detailed analysis of alternate sites, have scheduled a
meeting with the Council and have secured the Council's consent to proceed with that
element of the project. If Council decides to move the tower to another location after
evaluating the analysis, the plan can be amended at that time.
City Attorney Taylor also stated that Council can also put in the motion that at the time
that staff is ready to present their analysis of the alternate locations of the tower, the
City will go through a comparable zoning notification process as used on this site plan to
ensure that all interested citizens and SPIN organizations are notified and have an
opportunity to be present and participate in the process.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 480 -591 (ZA09 -069), 2 Reading, Zoning
Change and Site Plan for the City of Southlake Department of Public Safety North
Training Facility as submitted but instructing staff not to proceed with construction or
any construction contracts on the fire tower until a full, independent review and meeting
with Council, and they will secure Council's approval before proceeding, at the time staff
is ready to present their findings they will initiate a notification process similar to the one
following standard procedure, giving full opportunity for citizen input, referring to the
comments made by the City Attorney this evening, and subject to Site Plan Review
Summary dated May 25, 2010, and granting the variances as presented.
City Attorney Taylor clarified the timing of the notifications to be at the time the City
Manager's Office notifies the City Secretary's Office that they wish to place this item on
an agenda to secure a Council review and decision on the fire tower location. The
notice will be initiated by the Planning Department comparable to that used on this initial
zoning case, which will mandate the timely need to get the letters out to property
owner's within 200'.
Motion: Hill
Second: Zito
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0
Agenda Item No. 6F. ZA09 -070, Preliminary Plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, DPS
Addition, on property being described as Tracts 1F, 1F1 and 1F2, Joel W. Chivers
Survey, Abstract No. 350, being located at 160 and 372 East Dove Street and 2395
North White Chapel Boulevard and being approximately 32.92 acres. Current Zoning:
SF -1A Single Family Residential District. Proposed Zonings: CS Community Service
District uses and S -P -1 Detailed Site Plan District with CS Community Service District
uses to include an indoor firing range as a permitted accessory use. SPIN
Neighborhood #2. Director Baker presented this item to Council.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 10 of 13
Mayor Terrell read a comment card from Kyle Whitt who did not wish to speak but
wanted to record his opposition to this item.
Motion was made to approve ZA09 -070, Preliminary Plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, DPS
Addition and subject to Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated December 30, 2009.
Motion: Hill
Second: Bledsoe
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0
Mayor Terrell called for a break at 9:34 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:53 p.m.
Agenda Item No. 6G. ZA10 -026, Site Plan for Sabre Parking Lot Improvements on
property being described as Lot 1R2, Block 1, Sabre Group Campus Addition, and
being located at 3110 to 3150 Kirkwood Boulevard. Current Zoning: NR -PUD Non
Residential Planned Unit Development District. SPIN Neighborhood #1. Planner
Crosby presented this item and answered Council's questions. Applicants, Jim Riley
with Brockette, Davis Drake Engineers, 4144 North Central Expressway, Dallas, Texas;
Fred Pensotti with Sabre, 615 Lake Park Drive, Coppell, Texas; Brent Smith, with Jones
Long LaSalle, 8343 Douglas Avenue, Dallas, Texas; and Paul Bray with Sabre, 714
Windsor Creek Drive, Southlake, Texas answered Council's questions.
Council discussed this item.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve ZA10 -026, Site Plan for Sabre Parking Lot Improvements
noting the applicant's willingness to work with the city landscaping department and
planting live oaks; stipulating the left turn bay will be added once Kirkwood becomes
public right -of -way; granting the variances to Driveway Ordinance No. 634; not granting
the variance to Lighting Ordinance No. 693 -B; and subject to Review Summary No. 2,
dated May 13, 2010.
Motion: Hill
Second: Morris
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0
Agenda Item No. 7A. Ordinance No. 480 -590a (ZA10 -027), 1 Reading, Zoning
Change and Site Plan for Carroll ISD Middle School on property being described as
Tracts 1, 2A and 2B1, Thomas Mahan Survey, Abstract No. 1049, being located at 1800
East Kirkwood Boulevard and being approximately 24.935 acres. Current Zoning: S -P -1
Detailed Site Plan District. Requested Zoning: S -P -1 Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN
Neighborhood #4. Planner Crosby presented this item and answered Council's
questions. The applicants, Derek Citty with Carroll ISD, 3051 Dove Road, Grapevine;
John Blacker with Hart, Gaugler and Associates, 12801 North Central Expressway,
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 11 of 13
Dallas, Texas and Anna Cheek with Garthoff Design, 5915 East University Boulevard,
Dallas, Texas made a presentation and answered Council's questions.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 480 -590a (ZA10 -027), 1 Reading, Zoning
Change and Site Plan for Carroll ISD Middle School granting the changes as requested
by the applicant with the exception of the landscape plan, which is not being approved,
and including Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated May 26, 2010, and approving the
previously granted variances.
Motion: Hill
Second: Bledsoe
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0
Agenda Item No. 9A. Consider SV10 -008, Variance to Sign Ordinance No. 704, as
amended, for Stewart Title located at 101 River Oaks Drive. Planner Fletcher presented
this item and answered Council's questions. Applicants Rick Sutton and Rita Mcghee
answered Council's questions.
Motion was made to deny SV10 -008, Variance to Sign Ordinance No. 704, as
amended, for Stewart Title.
Motion: Hill
Second: Bledsoe
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Morris, Muller, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0
Agenda Item No. 9B. Consider MSP10 -003, Master Sign Plan for Children's Medical
Center located at the 400 block of East State Highway 114. Planner Fletcher presented
this item and answered Council's questions. Applicant David Cunningham answered
Council's questions.
Councilmember Morris was out of the Chambers during this discussion.
Council discussed this item.
Motion was made to approve MSP10 -003, Master Sign Plan for Children's Medical
Center located at the 400 block of East State Highway 114.
Motion: Hill
Second: Bledsoe
Ayes: Bledsoe, Hill, Wang, Zito, Terrell
Nays: Muller
Approved: 5 -1
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 12 of 13
Councilmember Morris returned to the Chambers.
Agenda Item No. 10A. City Council seating policy discussion. This item was not
discussed.
Agenda Item No. 10B. Super Bowl XLV. Mayor Terrell introduced this item. City
Manager Yelverton answered Council's questions. Council discussed this item.
Councilmembers Muller and Zito and Mayor Terrell agreed to serve as City Council
representatives for the planning team.
Agenda Item No. 10C. Discuss possibility of installing public display cases in Town
Hall. Mayor Terrell introduced this item. Assistant City Manager Thatcher presented
display case options. Council discussed this item.
Agenda Item No. 11. Meeting adjourned. Mayor Terrell adjourned the meeting at 11:47
p.m.
*An audio recording of this meeting will be permanently retained in the City
Secretary's Office.
AL tier
John Terrell
Mayor
ATTEST:
Tara Brooks
Deputy City Secretary 0: 'J
1
s s
X 5 6 0
q ,a
o ar
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, JUNE 1, 2010
Page 13 of 13
f
THE STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF
Other:
CONFLICT OF INTEREST AFFIDAVIT
1,
I,
k as a member of the 04./. C 1 C 'of the City
of Southlake, make this affidavit and hereby on oath state the following: 1, nxy spouse, and /or a
person or persons related to me within the first degree of consanguinity or affinity, have a substantial
interest in a business entity or real property as defined in Chapter 171, Texas Local Government
Code, and /or City of Southlake No. 635 -A and a vote is to be taken or a decision is to be made that
will have a special economic effect on this business entity or real property. r
The agenda item affecting this business entity or real property is: I Zt\ Q —QL5
COMPLETE (A) or (B): (A) The business entity is /b,,,( v lifitr,a (name); or
ry c �I
(B) The real property is located at: 2,541 J t1-- cL.
I have a substantial interest because I, my spouse, and /or a person or persons related to me within
the first degree of consanguinity or affinity have the following relationship to the business entity or
real property which will likely be affected by the vote on the above referenced agenda item: (check
all which are applicable)
Ownership of 10% or more of the voting stock or shares of the business entity.
Ownership of 10% or more or $5,000 or more of the fair market value of the business entity.
Funds received from the business entity exceed 10% of gross income for the previous year.
Hold a position of member of the board of directors or other governing board of the
business entity.
v Serve as an elected officer of the business entity.
An employee of the business entity.
Creditor, debtor or guarantor of the business entity in the amount of five thousand dollars
($5,000.00) or more.
Property of the person has been pledged to the business entity or is subject to a lien in
favor of the business entity in the amount of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) or more.
r
rX Have an equitable or legal ownership of real property with a fair market value of at least
$2,500.00.
Upon filing of this affidavit with the City Secretary, I affirm that I will abstain from voting on any
decision and from any further participation by discussion or debate regarding the above referenced
agenda item. I also affirm that this affidavit is being submitted to the City Secretary before the start
of the meeting at which the agenda item in question is being addressed or as soon as practicable
once I realized a potential conflict exists.
Signed this 1 day of Au 20 1
c
The State of i P�
County of I ()L &.1 1r
Before me, ik,i h. 3k6tLit.5 on this day personally appeared
LLu,eu, ik 404 known to me (or proved to me on the oath of
or through zi;;f)�;i, Jiwo,.r: (description of identity card or other
document) to be the person whose name istsubscribed to the foregoing instrument and stated that
the statements made in this affidavit are within his personal knowledge and true and correct.
Given under my hand and seal of office this
o salmo
PP;,BRO
(SEA pV PV A O�t!'
z 0
SigratLire df Official
15i day of Li rL
10J(4
r%
Notary Public in and for the State of Texas
Tara Brooks
From: Place 6
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:30 PM
To: Tara Brooks
Subject: Dark Sky Article
Please print out this article on lightening and leave a copy for each council member.
httD: /www.darkskvsocietv.ore /handouts /white pager—nth vs hns.ndf
Pamela A Muller
817 291 -6814
1
WHITE PAPER: Metal Halide (MH) vs High Pressure Sodium (HPS)
Prepared by Susan Harder January 2007
HPS is a better choice for outdoor lighting applications than MH for the following reasons:
1. Efficiency
2. Vision
3. Health
4. Environmental effects (flora and fauna)
5. Toxins
6. Financial costs
HPS provides better quality lighting at a lower cost and with less damage to the environment.
Metal halide is much less efficient than high pressure sodium -MH produces much less light per
watt; MH produces more glare due to the blue light component and increases adaptation time;
MH more effectively shuts off melatonin production which can trigger tumor growth; MH
contains more mercury within the bulbs; MH bulbs need to be changed more frequently; and MH
costs more, overall.
For example, at 250 watts, mean lumen output per watt over the useful life of the lamp is 58 for
MH vs. 87 for HPS; in other words, HPS produces 50% more mean lumens per watt. Even at 70
watts, mean lumen output is 45 for MH and 64 for HPS; in other words, HPS produces 42%
more mean lumens per watt. 274% higher long term operating costs of MH as opposed to HPS
not only because of lumen depreciation requiring more watts, but also because lamp replacement
frequency is nearly twice as high.
Traveling from an area lit with MH will take the eyes longer to adapt to lower light levels,
affecting night vision. Night vision is also more sensitive to the HPS spectrum due to the greater
number of rods in the eye.
HPS lamps last longer than MH, which means fewer lamps heading for disposal (HID bulbs can
be, but are often not recycled for their mercury content). In general the average lamp life for MH
is 10,000- 15,000 hours vs. 12,000- 24,000 for HPS.
MH produces more sky glow, lumen for lumen, than HPS for the same quantity of radiant energy
from each source, due to higher blue light component and the Rayleigh scatter effect. The paper
at http:// resodance.com /ali /bluskies.html suggests MH produces at least three times more sky
glow than HPS due to the higher blue spectrum content and has a greater impact on dark adapted
astronomers.
MH lamps contain significantly more mercury than HPS lamps. For example, a 250W MH lamp
contains about 38 mg of mercury vs. about 15 mg for an HPS lamp of the same wattage.
Mercury is a potent neuro -toxin that persists indefinitely in the environment. The bluish
light emitted by MH is much more of a threat to human health than the amber -to -gold light from
HPS. From Science News http: /www.sciencenews.org /articles /20060107 /bob9.asp describing
some of the research on this issue. Whenever MH is within close proximity to housing units,
MH lighting will only increase the health risks.
High Pressure Sodium vs. Metal Halide
Mean Lumens, Average Life, and Mercury Content
Data courtesy Long Island Power Authority
High Pressure Sodium !Metal Halide
400W 1250W 1400W 1250W
Mean lumens 1145,000 1 26,100 120,500 1 14,100
Average rated life (hours) 1 24,000+ 124,000+ 115,000 110,000
Mercury content (mg) 1 15 115 181 138
The financial costs of cleaning up mercury in the environment (ground water) and for increased
recycling facilities need to be factored into all costs. MH has a higher lumen depreciation rate
for the bulbs which need to be changed more often.
The higher blue light component of MH is useful only during the day to "set" our hormonal
clocks, which helps with Seasonal Affective Disorder.
Metal Halide exposure (in the studies conducted thus far in interior environments) has been
determined to contribute to macular degeneration.
Coating MH with a "ceramic" coating to "change" the color is only partially effective; but
further reduces it's efficiency. Ceramics are better than "quartz" MH, but do not offset the
negatives.
If "white" light sources are necessary, the use of compact fluorescent in 2300K will produce the
desired results and more efficiently. The "need" for "white" light is not substantiated for
exterior lighting situations, except in very rare circumstances, e.g. outdoor dining areas
(rendering food colors better) and need only be used when those areas are being occupied.
Fluorescent light sources are more efficient than MH.
Blue light affects hormone secretions. Blue light turns off melatonin production very
successfully and thus raises the incidence of cancer tumor growth. Blue light is the trigger that
shuts off the pineal gland; a gland which produces melatonin.
MH causes increased disturbances for plants and animals, changing their "signals" for nighttime
behaviors and biological responses, especially in the "high" doses contained in High Intensity
Discharge lamps. There are also "non- visual" (skin and eye receptors not used for vision)
effects of optical radiation triggered with blue light at a higher rate. See: "The Ecological
Effects of Artificial Night Lighting Feb 23 -24, 2002 hosted by the Urban Wildlands Group.
Regarding vision and glare, a fact that has not been fully studied, is that blue -rich white light
literally forces the iris to constrict involuntarily as a defense mechanism to prevent retinal
damage. Think about the "hurt" experienced when passing HID type headlights. Glare is greater
with MH. The "dark adapted" eye is more sensitive to blue light. The blue aspect of MH
produces a more debilitating "glare" problem than HPS, incandescent, or cf in 2300K. Consider
how "painful" it feels when you are headed toward a car with the Xenox headlights, and how
much longer it takes for your vision to "return" for you to be able to see with your own
headlights. Additionally, the elderly are more prone to suffer profound disability from glare,
since their pupils contract and open much slower as the eyes age. Rensselear's Lighting
Research Center also believes people with older eyes can't see well in the blue spectrum.
Driving vehicles under MH street lights and parking lot lighting allows less net light to enter the
eye because of a constricted iris, while providing marginally greater "depth perception
To learn more about the controversial issues relating to spectral distribution, current design
standards, and how the eye reacts to different visible wavelengths check out the following papers
online:
http://luxbright.com/data/lumeneff.pdf
http: /luxbright.com /lem/
http://www.iesna.org/LDA 3 99 /members_feature_3 99roadscholar.htm
http: /www.dmdeng.com/ learning center docs /Lewin lamp color
http: /www. dot. state.az.us/ ABOUT /atrc/Publications /S PR/AZ522.pdf
"Blue light waves are very short and scatter easily, so a great deal of the glare we experience
from sunlight comes from blue light." (from "Macular Degeneration -The Complete Guide To
Saving And Maximizing Your Sight," by Lylas G. Mogk, M.D. and Marja Mogk
Mercury is contained inside all HID and, to a lesser extent in fluorescent bulbs, and should be
recycled and reclaimed, not discarded in landfills. The reason there was toxic mercury poisoning
of the workers at the World Trade Tower site is because of the millions of fluorescent tube lights
that were broken in the collapse.
From the US EPA/Purdue University site:
When liquid mercury is exposed to air, harmful, invisible vapors are emitted. Spilling
even a small amount of mercury can threaten the health of anyone who is present, and lead to an
expensive cleanup. Moreover, when mercury gets into the environment, it concentrates in fish in
a highly toxic organic form. Eating contaminated fish damages the neurological development of
children, and especially of fetuses exposed when their mothers eat fish. It also can cause kidney
damage.
When wastes such as fluorescent bulbs, broken mercury switches, batteries, or
thermostats end up in landfills, the chemicals may escape into the groundwater or into the air.
Mercury is particularly prone to volatilizing to air. Thus, many landfills do not accept this type
of waste. Federal and state agencies regulate disposal of mercury- containing devices, even
common small devices that are typically found in buildings.
A more extensive comparison of HPS and MH is available at
http://resodance.com/ali/compcost.html
*Seasonal confusion* is greater with MH in trees and plants, not allowing the plant to go into
dormancy when necessary to reduce winter stress.
When the proper calculations are made (not the simplified ones using "lamp lumens the color
of signs on the roadways (red and yellow STOP, construction, and warning signs) is as good or
better with HPS than with MH. The reason is that HPS makes the red, orange and yellow sign
materials brighter for stop signs the red is about twice as bright under HPS as under MH. The
Kelvin measurement of MH are highly questionable, too. The metric to determine validity of the
CRI calculation is called DC (for chromaticity difference) and MH exceeds the recommended
tolerance (see CIE pub. 13.3 -1995) by about 50
The Mercury Content of all MH bulbs is higher than HPS:
Metal Halide lamps (all)
39 -50W 1 -10mg
70 -250W 5 -50mg
350 -400W 30 -100mg
400 -1500W 100 -150mg
High Pressure Sodium standard (non -ECO)
35 -1000W 10 -50mg
High Pressure Sodium ECO
50 -400W 1 -15mg
High Pressure Sodium Plus ECO (30,000 hour non cycling works on standard ballasts)
50 -400W <1 -6mg
High Pressure Sodium Hg -Free ECO
ZERO
For all these reasons: many "dark sky" lighting codes and guidelines prohibit the use of MH,
including East Hampton Village, Riverhead, Brookhaven, Amherst (MA), Hailey and Sun Valley
(ID), Flagstaff, Tucson, Phoenix, etc.
SKYGLOW
Skyglow is much greater with MH than HPS when used in the same quantities needed to
meet IES light level requirements, some say as much as three to fifteen times as much.
4
3
I Sky Glow Impacts
Figure 3. Sky Brightening Impacts of MH and HPS lighting relative to LPS
MH is advocated by those in the "lighting industry" since it increases their profit margin.
Unfortunately the "end costs" of the consumers are not a factor in the initial cost and design.
Along with research showing that MH lighting systems use 150 -170% of the energy,
resources, equipment and (a substantially higher ratio of) maintenance costs compared to HPS,
we also find that "uplight" from MH scatters in the atmosphere about twice as much as from
HPS for the same number of lumens. The same phenomenon (Raleigh scatter) that makes the
sky blue and sunsets /sunrises colored makes MH contribute twice as much to skyglow under
clear sky conditions as HPS. This is not some esoteric concept but a long understood
phenomenon (since 1871) that also doesn't get discussed during design discussions.
Consider this: a greener Earth, darker skies, cleaner landfills, cleaner water, air, land, brighter
vision for the aged, improved traffic safety and reduced health impact VS "I like the way it
makes colors look" and "I can see what -I -am- not looking -at slightly better people might
wonder if 'pleasing' colors is enough justification to outweigh many other severely negative
consequences that metal halide imposes on municipal infrastructures, business owners annual
profit margins, and also upon the environment as a whole?