Item 6A (4)City of Southlake
Department of Planning & Development Services
S T A F F R E P O R T
August 1, 2007
ZA07-005
CASE NO:
Zoning Change and Site Plan for Chapel Crossing Shopping Center
PROJECT:
REQUEST: On behalf of James Stahala, Oracle Engineering is requesting approval of a zoning
change and site plan from "AG" Agricultural District and "C-1" Neighborhood
Commercial District to "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District with “C-3” district uses.
The plan proposes the development of 5 building totaling approximately 45,000 square
feet of retail floor area located at the southwest intersection of N. White Chapel and SH
114.
During the July 17, 2007 City Council meeting the applicant was asked to consider the
following changes:
Item Comments
1) Add some knee walls of a minimum of 24 inches in height in the Applicant has agreed with this request; but is
various window areas and provide a rendering of the knee walls at not shown on submitted plans.
2nd reading;
2) Provide some language regarding the fireplace amenity feature that Applicant has agreed with this request.
will obligate the tenant of that space to certain operational hours and
maintenance;
3) Requiring applicant to review monument signs with the intent to have The applicant has submitted revised designs
less percentage of signage on the monument face; for the monument signs as part of their sign
variance request (Item 6B on the agenda)
4)Allowing only the cornices and accents to have any synthetic stucco;The rear side of Buildings A & B still show a
textured coating on concrete tilt wall.
5) Requiring the applicant to visit with Mr. Larson regarding his The applicant will address this issue at the
comments prior to 2nd Reading; Council meeting.
6) Requiring the detention area to have stained concrete; Applicant has agreed with this request; but is
not shown on submitted plans.
7) Requiring the trees in the detention area to be a minimum of 5 to 6 Applicant has agreed with this request; but is
inches caliper to be an effective screening at the time of planting; not shown on submitted plans.
8) Requiring applicant to look at increasing the berm along SH114 to a Applicant has agreed with this request; but is
minimum of 3 feet in height; not shown on submitted plans.
9) Consider angled parking and fewer parking spaces between Buildings The plan has been revised to show angled
A and B; parking and a reduction of 4 parking spaces.
10) Applicant to put in median along White Chapel Boulevard if it hasn’t Median is shown from SH114 to the south side
already been placed prior to the issuance of a C.O. and subject to the of the N. White Chapel Driveway.
approval of the City Engineer;
11) The trees shown on building end caps in color elevations/renderings Applicant has agreed with this request; but is
need to be shown on site plan or landscape plan. not shown on submitted plans.
Case No.
ZA07-005
During the May 15, 2007 City Council meeting the applicant was asked to consider the
following changes:
Item Comments
1) Access from White Chapel is problematic The stacking depth has been brought into compliance, a turn lane
has been added and median extended to restrict it to right-in/right-
out only.
2)Evaluate articulation variance A vertical articulated element has been added to the rear (west
side) of Building ‘A’. Still does not comply with horizontal or
vertical requirements.
3) Drive through restaurant not acceptable on this The drive thru has been eliminated.
site
4)2” caliper trees not acceptable and no effort The minimum caliper size for canopy tree is 4 inch.
made in preserving any trees (TCP)
5) Scale, design, and mix of uses are not See link to the color plans below. Several design elements have
appropriate given the location on a key site on S. H. been added to the plan.
114 (entry site) (“under whelmed” by the design).
6) Need to address White Chapel frontage better See link to the color plans below. Design elements have been
since the local traffic will be off White Chapel Blvd added to the plan along with a decorative pond.
7) Treat the S.H. 114 frontage with better See link to the color plans below. Design elements have been
landscaping and bufferyard treatments; limit parking added to the plan along with a berm on the SH114 frontage.
8) Underground overhead utilities on the site No comments received
9) Create a unique design with some features and See link to the color plans below.
identity (w/ landscaping, water features, fountains, etc)
10) Limit glass in the façade See link to the color plans below.
11) Evaluate signage (monument signs) along See link to the color plans below. A conditional sign proposal
frontage road will be presented with the second reading of this item.
12) Limit flat roofs on the pad sites; screen roof-Current regulations require a pitched roof on the pad sites. This
mounted HVAC will be evaluated with future site plans for the pad sites.
The applicant requests approval of the “S-P-1” zoning proposes to allow “C-3”general
commercial district uses but shall delete the following as permitted uses:
(2) Auditoriums, theaters and cinemas
(5) Commercial amusement centers and bowling alleys where the activity is for
indoor operations and activities only, including indoor driving ranges and
indoor miniature golf courses
(7) Conventional golf courses, including outdoor driving ranges accessory thereto,
but excluding outdoor miniature golf courses
(16) Lodges, sororities and/or fraternities
(18) Mortuaries, funeral homes and undertakers
(20) Nursery buildings for the retail sale of plants and accessory items where the
sales operations are conducted entirely within an enclosed structure. Outdoor
storage or sale shall be permitted with this use to the extent that the outdoor
sales area is completely enclosed by a fence, wall or screening device
(26) Skating rinks, ice and roller (indoor only)
(27) Taverns, clubs, and other comparable establishments under which the on-
premises consumption of alcoholic beverages is permitted subject to the
issuance of a special use permit as required in Section 45;
Case No.
ZA07-005
(gasoline sales and hotels have been removed as permitted uses from the
original application).
The development regulations shall follow the “C-3” district with the following
exceptions:
1) The required parking ratio shall be 1 space per 200 square feet for all uses
2) Allow the horizontal/vertical articulation on the west façade of building ‘A’ as
proposed.
3) Interior Bufferyards – Bufferyards along interior lot lines shall not be required.
The following variances are being requested:
1)Minimum 100’ stacking depth required for the drives located on N. White
Chapel Blvd (97’ provided) and Countryside Ct.(30’ & 36’ provided)
2)The driveway proposed on N. White Chapel Blvd does not meet the minimum
200’ spacing required from a street intersection (±150’ provided)
3)The west façade Building ‘A’ does not meet articulation requirements. (The
applicant believes this façade will not be visible from SH114 which would
exempt it from this requirement.) The maximum wall length permitted is 69
feet for both horizontal and vertical articulation. The provided horizontal
length is 142 feet and the provided vertical length is 165 feet.
1. Conduct public hearing
ACTION NEEDED:
2. Consider second reading for zoning change and site plan approval
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information
(B) Vicinity Map
(C) Plans and Support Information
Site Plan Review Summary No. 6, dated August 1, 2007
(D)
(E) Surrounding Property Owners Map
(F) Surrounding Property Owners Responses
(G) SPIN Summary Report
(H) Ordinance No. 480-521
(I) Previously Submitted Plans
(a) 03-19-2007
(b) 07-03-2007
(c) 07-11-2007
(J) Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council Members Only)
STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (748-8067)
Dennis Killough (748-8072)
Case No.
ZA07-005
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER: James B. Stahala
APPLICANT: Oracle Engineering
PROPERTY SITUATION: The property is located at 245 W. State Highway 114 and 200
Countryside Ct.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Block A, Ravenaux Village & Tract 6J, T.M. Hood Survey,
Abstract No. 706
LAND USE CATEGORY: Retail Commercial
CURRENT ZONING: “AG” Agricultural District and “C-1” Neighborhood Commercial
District
REQUESTED ZONING: “S-P-2” Generalized Site Plan District
HISTORY: - Final Plat was approved in January 1988
-“C-1” zoning was placed on the southern portion of the property with
the adoption of Ordinance No. 480, in September 1989.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ASSESSMENT:
Consolidated Land Use Plan Recommendations
The land use designation is Retail Commercial and the proposed development is consistent with
o
this designation.
Environmental Resource Protection (ERP) Plan Recommendations
Although not required by ordinance, the ERP Plan recommends preserving trees where feasible
o
and incorporating landscape features into new developments. Consider altering the site design
to preserve some of the trees and perhaps make the retention pond a focal point of the
development. In particular, consider eliminating some of the parking to preserve the pecan
trees near the outside seating areas.
Mobility & Master Thoroughfare Plan Recommendations
A sidewalk is required along Countryside Court. (Provided)
o
Although not required by ordinance, sidewalks are recommended along the fire lanes in front of
o
the buildings to provide easy pedestrian access on the site. (Internal sidewalks are provided)
Although not required by ordinance, access to the church property to the west is recommended,
o
if feasible. (Provided at the trail and sidewalk stubs on the north and south. An additional
connection near the outdoor seating area and the southeast corner of the adjacent church
parking lot should also be considered).
Case No. Attachment A
ZA07-005 Page 1
Southlake Pathways Plan Recommendations
The required 8 ft. trails along the access road and White Chapel are shown. (Provided)
o
TREE PRESERVATION: The best “quality” trees are located close to and along the west property
boundary line. The Tree Conservation Plan shows that all existing trees will be
removed except for one (1) 12” Blackjack Oak in the northwest corner of the
property and that a 23” Post Oak is Marginal because of the location of the
proposed parking and access dive along the west property boundary.
TRANSPORTATION
ASSESSMENT: The plan proposes site will have one (1) access directly onto E. Bound Service
Road of E. SH114, one onto N. White Chapel Boulevard and two onto
Countryside Court. A common access easement is provided between lots
within the property.
N. White Chapel Boulevard is currently a 2-lane, undivided roadway.
Construction of the ultimate pavement section (4 Divided, 88’ ROW) is
scheduled for the fiscal year 2006/2007.
May, 2006 traffic counts on N. White Chapel Blvd (between Highland
Ave and S.H. 114)
61734407
North Bound (NB) () South Bound (SB) ()
554434
Peak A.M. () 7:15 – 8:15 Peak A.M. () 8:15 – 9:15
a.m. a.m.
682359
Peak P.M. () 4:30 – 5:30 Peak P.M. () 3 – 4 p.m.
p.m.
May, 2006 traffic counts on E. SH 114 service road (between W. Dove
& N. White Chapel Blvd.
15661493
East Bound (EB) () West Bound (WB) ()
136121
Peak A.M. () 7:30 – 8:30 Peak A.M. () 7:30 – 8:30
a.m. a.m.
167)152
Peak P.M. ( 5 – 6 p.m. Peak P.M. () 5 – 6 p.m.
Case No. Attachment A
ZA07-005 Page 2
Traffic Impact
`
WATER & SEWER: An 8-inch water line currently exists along the north side of Countryside Court.
Also, an 8-inch sanitary sewer line currently exists along the south side of
Countryside Court.
DRAINAGE ANALYSIS: Drainage from this site flows to the south to the proposed detention and
retention ponds along Countryside Court.
P&Z ACTION: March 22, 2007; Approved to table (6-0) until April 5, 2007.
April 5, 2007; Approved to table (7-0) until April 19, 2007.
April 19, 2007; Approved to table (7-0) until May 3, 2007.
May 3, 2007; Approved (4-1) subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 4,
dated April 27, 2007; and subject to the following modifications
1) Granting variances to driveway stacking (comment 2a) and driveway
spacing (comment 2b) allowing the right-in right-out driveway on N.
White Chapel with the condition that they work with staff to insure that
the design restricts any left-out movement and extending the median
south of the White Chapel Driveway;
2) Requiring brick pilasters and wainscot along the west façade of Building
A
3) Eliminating the “C-3” uses as specified in the applicant’s letter dated
April 25, 2007 and more specifically as follows:
(2) Auditoriums, theaters and cinemas
(5) Commercial amusement centers and bowling alleys where the
activity is for indoor operations and activities only, including
indoor driving ranges and indoor miniature golf courses.
(7) Conventional golf courses, including outdoor driving ranges
Case No. Attachment A
ZA07-005 Page 3
accessory thereto, but excluding outdoor miniature golf
courses.
(16) Lodges, sororities and/or fraternities
(17) Medical care facilities to include nursing and care homes,
hospitals with their related facilities and supportive retail and
personal service uses operated by or under the control of the
hospital primarily for the convenience of patients, staff and
visitors.
(18) Mortuaries, funeral homes and undertakers.
(20) Nursery buildings for the retail sale of plants and accessory
items where the sales operations are conducted entirely within
an enclosed structure. Outdoor storage or sale shall be
permitted with this use to the extent that the outdoor sales area
is completely enclosed by a fence, wall or screening device.
(26) Skating rinks, ice and roller (indoor only).
(27) Taverns, clubs, and other comparable establishments under
which the on-premises consumption of alcoholic beverages is
permitted subject to issuance of a special use permit as required
in Section 45 of this ordinance. The mere reference to this
provision within the zoning ordinance does not indicate or imply
that the sale or consumption of alcoholic beverages has been or
will be permitted under the alcoholic beverage laws of the State
of Texas. It is only intended to define a location for this type of
use if its existence should be permitted by state law.
And removing the request for gasoline sales and hotels as permitted
uses.
COUNCIL ACTION: May 15, 2007; Approved to table first reading (6-0) until June 5, 2007 with the
following recommendations:
Access from White Chapel is problematic
Evaluate articulation variance
Drive through restaurant not acceptable on this site
2” caliper trees not acceptable and no effort made in preserving any
trees (TCP)
Scale, design, and mix of uses are not appropriate given the location on
a key site on S. H. 114 (entry site) (“under whelmed” by the design).
Need to address White Chapel frontage better since the local traffic will
be off White Chapel Blvd.
Treat the S.H. 114 frontage with better landscaping and bufferyard
treatments; limit parking
Underground overhead utilities on the site
Create a unique design with some features and identity (w/ landscaping,
water features, fountains, etc)
Limit glass in the façade
Case No. Attachment A
ZA07-005 Page 4
Evaluate signage (monument signs) along frontage road
Limit flat roofs on the pad sites; screen roof-mounted HVAC
June 5, 2007; Approved to table until July 17, 2007.
July 17, 2007; Approved first reading (6-0) subject to Site Plan Review
Summary No. 6, dated July 11, 2007;
granting the requested variances for driveway spacing and stacking;
subject to applicant’s presentation and renderings presented tonight;
noting applicant will look at creating some knee walls of a minimum of
24 inches in height in the various window areas and will provide a
nd
rendering of the knee walls at 2 reading;
requiring color palette to be similar to what was presented;
requiring applicant to bring back some language regarding the fireplace
amenity feature that will obligate the tenant of that space to certain
operational hours and maintenance;
requiring applicant to review monument signs with the intent to have
less percentage of signage on the monument face;
allowing only the cornices and accents to have any synthetic stucco;
requiring the applicant to visit with Mr. Larson regarding his comments
nd
prior to 2 Reading;
requiring the detention area to have stained concrete;
requiring the trees in the detention area to be a minimum of 5 to 6
inches caliper to be an effective screening at the time of planting;
requiring applicant to look at increasing the berm along SH114 to a
minimum of 3 feet in height;
to look at angled parking and fewer parking spaces between Buildings
A and B;
applicant to put in median along White Chapel Boulevard if it hasn’t
already been placed prior to the issuance of a C.O. and subject to the
approval of the City Engineer;
and, trees shown on end cap need to be shown on site plan.
STAFF COMMENTS: Site Plan Review Summary No. 6 dated August 1, 2007 is attached.
N:\Community Development\MEMO\2007cases\07-005ZCP.doc
Case No. Attachment A
ZA07-005 Page 5
Case No. Attachment B
ZA07-005 Page 1
Changes Following the June 5, 2007 City Council Meeting
Chapel Crossing Shopping Center
SH 114 and White Chapel Blvd.
Southlake, Texas
Changes to project since initial submittal, 02-05-07:
1.Relocate SH 114 driveway to the west.
2.Relocate White Chapel Blvd. driveway to the south.
3.Add deceleration lane at White Chapel Blvd.
4.Extend driveway throat at White Chapel Blvd.; Delete variance request #5.
5.Remove drive-thru use on restaurant pad site; redesign pad site.
6.Remove parking row on pad sites adjacent to SH 114 landscape buffer.
7.Add berming at SH 114 frontage buffer yard.
8.Add requirement for sloped roofs at pad sites.
9.Remove various parking spaces as requested by P&Z and Council.
10.Revise SH 114 sidewalk to straight from curvilinear (TxDOT request).
11.Add additional pedestrian sidewalks throughout development.
12.Design tenant directory monument signs.
13.Design shopping center identity monument sign.
14.Add patterned colored pavement at driveway entries and center plaza area.
15.Develop plaza areas at Buildings A and B; add seating areas with trellis and exterior fireplace.
16.Add pedestrian level bollard lighting.
17.Add benches.
18.Redesign all building elevations for Buildings A, B, and C; delete variance request #6 regarding
horizontal articulation.
19.Increase total building area by 2,100 square feet, primarily at restaurant pad.
20.Increase masonry at rear elevations of Buildings B and C; delete variance request #7 regarding
masonry requirements.
21.Add vertical articulation to rear facades of Buildings A and B; meet vertical articulation
requirement for rear of Building A.
22.Add cornice detail at rear of Buildings A and B.
23.Redesign landscaping at detention pond/Countryside Ct. to better screen rear of Building B.
24.Redesign Building C with 100% masonry all sides.
25.Develop patio area at White Chapel Blvd. (East) façade with trellis and waterwall feature.
26.Replace detention pond with decorative pond feature.
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 1
Revised “S-P-1” Zoning District
Foster McDonald,
PLLC
Attorneys at Law
8117 Preston Road
Suite 495
Dallas, Texas 75225
1
Fax: (214) 363-955
Mark D. Foster (214) 363-9599 mark@mdfoster.com
mark@mdfoster.com
Brenda N. McDonald (214) 363-0600 brendamcdonald@verizon.net
brendamcdonald@verizon.net
April 25, 2007
Mr. Dennis Killough
Senior Planner
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Southlake, Texas 76092
Re: ZA07-005 Chapel Crossing Shopping Center
Dear Mr. Killough,
th
I am writing to confirm the representations made at the April 19 Planning & Zoning Commission
meeting in the above referenced zoning case. The applicant hereby removes the following uses contained in
Section 22.2 of the Zoning Ordinance from its rezoning request:
(2) Auditoriums, theaters and cinemas
(5) Commercial amusement centers and bowling alleys where the activity is for indoor operations and
activities only, including indoor driving ranges and indoor miniature golf courses
(7) Conventional golf courses, including outdoor driving ranges accessory thereto, but excluding outdoor
miniature golf courses
(16) Lodges, sororities and/or fraternities
(18) Mortuaries, funeral homes and undertakers
(20) Nursery buildings for the retail sale of plants and accessory items where the sales operations are
conducted entirely within an enclosed structure. Outdoor storage or sale shall be permitted with this use
to the extent that the outdoor sales area is completely enclosed by a fence, wall or screening device
(26) Skating rinks, ice and roller (indoor only)
(27) Taverns, clubs, and other comparable establishments under which the on-premises consumption of
alcoholic beverages is permitted subject to the issuance of a special use permit as required in Section 45
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 2
of this ordinance
In addition, the applicant withdraws its request for hotel and gas sales uses on the property.
By separate delivery, we are submitting a revised site plan that relocates the White Chapel driveway to
the south and includes a deceleration lane approaching the driveway. The revised site plan also increases the
stacking distance on the two drives located on Countryside Court. The site plan revisions are based on
extensive discussions with Innovative Transportation Solutions, our traffic engineering consultant, who will be
rd
present at the May 3 meeting to discuss these issues in more detail. Lastly, we are submitting a revised
Traffic Impact Analysis.
Please contact me immediately if you need to discuss any aspect of this case. I am out of town but am
available at any time by email or by phone (972) 978-9866. Thanks in advance for your efforts to bring this
rd
back before the Commission on May 3.
With kind regards,
Brenda N. McDonald
cc: Mark Hardaway
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 3
Originally Proposed “S-P-1” Zoning
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 4
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 5
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 6
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 7
New Site Plan
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 8
New Elevations
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 9
New Elevations
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 10
New Elevations
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 11
New Elevations
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 12
New Elevations
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 13
New Monument Sign
Case No. Attachment C
ZA07-005 Page 14
PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY
ZA07-005Six08/01/07
Case No.: Review No.: Date of Review:
Site Plan for S-P-2 Zoning
Project Name: – Chapel Crossing Shopping Center
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER
Greenway Investment Company Oracle Engineering
Phone: Phone: (214) 321-1436
Fax: MattKostial@sbcglobal.net
CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 07/30/07 AND WE
OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF CONCEPT
PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR
NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 748-8072.
1)The following changes are needed to the proposed “S-P-2” zoning document:
a)The regulation requiring bufferyards only along the perimeter boundary of the S-P-2 zoning
district and eliminating bufferyards along interior lot boundaries as proposed has been omitted.
Please correct.
b)No. 1 & 2 (driveway variances) should be moved to a “Variance” section of the document.
Driveways are regulated under the separate “Driveway Ordinance No. 634” and cannot be
modified as part of a zoning regulation. With regard Note No. 2, the spacing on Countryside
does comply, it is stacking poses the issue fro both White Chapel & Countryside.
2)The following changes are needed with regard to driveways:
a)Provide the minimum 100’ stacking depth required for all driveways. The following do not
comply:
(Variance Requested)
i)The drive located on SH114 (43’ provided)
(Variance Requested)
ii)East driveway on Countryside Ct (30’ provided).
(Variance Requested)
iii)West driveway on Countryside Ct (36’ provided).
b)The driveway proposed on N. White Chapel Blvd does not meet the minimum 200’ spacing
(Variance Requested)
required from a street intersection (± 150’ provided).
c)The final design of right-in/ right-out traffic control structure at the driveway onto N. White
Chapel is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
* A permit is required from TxDOT on all driveways accessing a State thoroughfare.
3)The following changes are needed with regard to the exterior elevations:
Case No. Attachment D
ZA07-005 Page 1
4) (Variance Requested - The
The west façade of Building ‘A’ does not meet articulation requirements.
applicant believes this façade will not be visible from SH114 which would exempt it from this
requirement. The maximum wall length permitted is 69 feet. The provided horizontal length is
161 feet and the vertical length is 76 feet.)
INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS
A fully corrected plan that includes all associated support plans/documents and conditions of
*
approval is required before any ordinance or zoning verification letter publication or before
acceptance of any other associated plans for review. Plans and documents must be reviewed
and stamped “approved” by the Planning Department.
All development must comply with the City’s Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and detain all post
*
development run-off.
* Insure that all mechanical equipment is screened from view of adjacent ROW’s.
* Prior to issuance of a building permit on Lots 2 & 3, a revised site plan must be approved by City
Council following a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission.
*The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a plat must be approved and
recorded in the county, 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.
* A permit from TxDOT is required on all driveways intersecting SH 114.
Case No. Attachment D
ZA07-005 Page 2
Case No. ZA07-005 Review No. 3 Dated: 4/13/07 Number of Pages: 2
Project Name: Chapel Crossing Shopping Center -- Zoning Change and Concept Plan
Contact: Cheryl Taylor, Civil Engineer Phone: (817) 748-8100 Fax: (817) 748-8077
Email: ctaylor@ci.southlake.tx.us
The following comments are based on the review of plans received on 4/5/2007. It is the applicant’s
responsibility to contact the department representative shown above and make modifications as required by the comment.
GENERAL COMMENTS:
1.
An access permit from TxDOT is required prior to construction of a driveway on. Submit application and plans
directly to TxDOT for review.
2.Additional comments may be forthcoming with the review of the Traffic Impact Analysis provided.
3.Provide all necessary easements for water, sanitary sewer and drainage.
* Use the City of Southlake GPS monuments whenever possible.
WATER AND SANITARY SEWER COMMENTS:
1.Label private lines as ‘private’ for clarification.
2.Vault for fire line should be on private property, not in the ROW or in an easement.
* Public water and sanitary sewer lines cannot cross property lines without being in an easement or in the
ROW. All water and sanitary sewer lines in easements or in the ROW shall be constructed to City
standards.
* For all commercial and industrial uses, fire hydrant shall be spaced a maximum of 300 linear feet apart,
or 600 linear feet if buildings are sprinklered.
* Water meters and fire hydrants shall be located in an easement or in the ROW.
DRAINAGE COMMENTS:
1.Ensure that the difference between pre and post development runoff is captured in the detention ponds
for the 5, 10 and 100 year storms. The discharge proposed detention pond shall control the outfall for
the 5, 10 and 100 year storms.
2. Verify that the size, shape, and/or location of the detention pond, as depicted on the concept plan, will
be adequate to meet the detention requirements. Any changes to the size, shape, and/or location of the
proposed pond(s) may require a revision to the concept plan and may need to be approved by the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council.
3. A note on the preliminary drainage study states that OS-2 will be prevented from entering the site.
Offsite drainage that currently runs onto the site cannot be redirected – it needs to be taken into
account within the site.
4. The note on the plans shows an existing culvert to be replaced with the White Chapel Street
Improvements. Final design has not yet been approved for the proposed improvements.
* All storm sewer within the ROW shall be 18” minimum.
* Proposed driveway culverts shall be sized by an engineer and submitted for approval to the City
Engineer.
* This development drains into Critical Drainage Structure #9 and requires a fee to be paid prior to
beginning construction ($278.14/acre).
Case No. Attachment D
ZA07-005 Page 3
* The discharge of post development runoff must have no adverse impact on downstream properties and
meet the provisions of Ordinance # 605.
INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS:
* (22” X 34” full size sheets)
Submit civil construction plansand a copy of the construction plan
checklist directly to the Public Works Administration Department 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.cityofsouthlake.com/PublicWorks/engineeringdesign.asp
* An access permit from TxDOT is required prior to construction of a driveway on FM 1709, FM 1938 or
SH 114. Submit application and plans directly to TxDOT for review.
* A ROW permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Operations Department (817) 748-8082
to connect to the City’s sewer, water or storm sewer system.
* A Developer’s Agreement will 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 approved by Public Works prior to placing the Developer’s Agreement on the City Council agenda for
consideration.
* Any hazardous waste being discharged must be pretreated Ordinance No. 836.
* This review is preliminary. Additional requirements may be necessary with the review of
construction plans.
*=Denotes informational comment.
Case No. Attachment D
ZA07-005 Page 4
Case No Review No.Dated: Number of Pages:
. 07-005 Four March 26, 2007 1
Project Name:
Chapel Crossing Shopping Center (Zoning/Concept Plan)
ContactPhone:Fax:
: Keith Martin (817) 748-8229 (817) 481-5713
===========================================================================
The following comments are based on the review of plans received on March 19, 2007 . Comments
designated with a number may be incorporated into the formal review to be considered by either the
Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council. Other items will not be addressed by either the P&Z
or City Council. It is the applicant’s responsibility to contact the department representative shown above
and make modifications as required by the comment.
===========================================================================
TREE CONSERVATION COMMENTS:
1. The best “quality” trees are located close to and along the west property boundary line. The Tree
Conservation Plan shows that all existing trees will be removed except for one (1) 12” Blackjack Oak
in the northwest corner of the property and that a 23” Post Oak is Marginal because of the location of
the proposed parking and access dive along the west property boundary.
BUFFERYARDS:
1. If the site is proposed to be divided into three (3) lots bufferyards must be provided and labeled on
the Site Plan. Bufferyards are required to be provided adjacent to all property boundary lines
including interior property boundary lines.
Interior bufferyards are required to be a 5’ – A bufferyards.
Case No. Attachment D
ZA07-005 Page 5
Surrounding Property Owners
Chapel Crossing Shopping Center
SPO #
Owner Zoning Land Use Acreage
Retail Commercial
1.
Stacy, James R & K Wayne Lee C1 2.667
Public/Semi-Public Office
2.
Countryside Bible Church SP1 Commercial 13.412
Office Commercial
3.
Wayne, Lee K O1 2.369
Office Commercial
4.
International Ch Four Square G SP1 3.777
Office Commercial
5.
International Ch Foursquare Go SP2 6.227
Retail Commercial
6.
White Chapel Village Ctr Prt C3 6.327
Retail Commercial
7.
White Chapel Village C Prt C3 0.404
Retail Commercial
8.
White Chapel Llc AG 0.896
Retail Commercial
9.
D/Fw-White Chapel Road Ltd AG 3.592
Case No. Attachment E
ZA07-005 Page 1
Surrounding Property Owner Responses
Chapel Crossing Shopping Center
Notices Sent: Nine (9).
Responses Receive: Two (2).
International Ch Four Square G,
251 Countryside Court, submitted a Notification Response
Favor
Form in on February 26, 2007 (see attached).
Outside 200 feet
Larson, John,
335 Ravenaux Dr., submitted Photos at Planning & Zoning Meeting on May 3,
Opposition
2007 and an E-Mail in on July 17, 2007(see attached photos and e-mail).
Case No. Attachment F
ZA07-005 Page 1
Case No. Attachment F
ZA07-005 Page 2
Case No. Attachment F
ZA07-005 Page 3
Case No. Attachment F
ZA07-005 Page 4
Case No. Attachment F
ZA07-005 Page 5
SPIN MEETING REPORT
CASE NO.
ZA07-005
PROJECT NAME:
Chapel Crossing
Southwest corner of State Highway 114 and N. White Chapel Boulevard
SPIN DISTRICT:
11
MEETING DATE:
7:30PM, February 26, 2007
MEETING LOCATION:
1400 MAIN STREET, SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
MEETING ROOMS 3A & 3B
TOTAL ATTENDANCE:
Approximately Nineteen (19)
SPIN REPRESENTATIVE(S) PRESENT:
Robert Gray (11)
APPLICANT(S) PRESENTING:
Brenda McDonald
STAFF PRESENT:
Planner Clayton Comstock
STAFF CONTACT:
Clayton Comstock, (817)748-8269; ccomstock@ci.southlake.tx.us
APPLICANT PRESENTATION SUMMARY
Project Details
Asking “S-P-2” with “C-3” commercial uses
3 larger retail buildings and 2 pad sites totaling about 44,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space
Pad sites are conceptual at this point but will have to go through the Site Plan process when they
o
develop
Detention Area (filled only after rain) on the south side of the development
Retention Area (water feature) at White Chapel Blvd entrance
The property has a few unique challenges
Bordered by 3 existing roads – State Highway 114, N. White Chapel Blvd, and Countryside Court
o
Odd shape
o
TxDOT will allow only one single drive onto the property from SH 114
o
Challenges result in variances:
Driveway spacing on White Chapel Blvd
o
Stacking depth on White Chapel Blvd and both entrances on Countryside Court
o
Architectural Design
Majority of front façade is brick;
o
Towers are natural stone with brick accents
o
Flat metal awnings with tie rods to be used in addition to fabric awnings
o
Landscape Plan
Types of trees used discussed
o
Mixture of deciduous and evergreen
o
Case No. Attachment G
ZA07-005 Page 1
SPIN MEETING REPORT – PAGE 2
QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
Can you explain the driveway variances and why you’re asking for them?
QUESTION:
RESPONSE: City ordinances require a minimum distance between driveways into developments. Because this
property has such a short distance between State Highway 114 and Countryside Court, the only
way to get any driveway at all on White Chapel Boulevard is through a variance to the driveway
spacing requirement.
Have you gotten TXDOT approval for the drive off State Highway 114 yet?
QUESTION:
RESPONSE: No, because it is too early in the development process to request a driveway cut from TXDOT. Once
development is approved, actual construction plans for infrastructure improvements would be
created and TXDOT approval would be sought at that time.
Why doesn’t the driveway off of State Highway 114 come into the development at more of an
QUESTION:
angle?
RESPONSE:TXDOT requires perpendicular access.
What kind of building materials will be used on the south side of the development?
QUESTION:
RESPONSE: Brick wainscoting is proposed along the bottom portion of the rear façade with EIFS (Exterior
Insulating Finish System) on the upper majority of the façade. It is not likely that mechanical units
on the roof will be visible.
What do you anticipate in the freestanding pad sites?
QUESTION:
RESPONSE: The sites will hopefully develop as drive a-thru bank and a fast food restaurant.
How soon would the site be open for business?
QUESTION:
RESPONSE: The developer, engineer, and architect are ready to move. Depending on the timeline of City
approval, construction could hopefully begin by the end of the year.
Is any of the existing landscaping going to remain?
QUESTION:
RESPONSE: Topography on the site is significant, so considerable grading will likely have to occur. Most of the
trees on site will have to come out, but a blackjack oak is planned to be saved and a post oak may
or may not be saved, depending on construction conditions.
Were roof features and other roofing materials considered? Standing seam has been the norm,
QUESTION:
but Spanish-style barrel tile roofs have done well in Southlake.
When is White Chapel Boulevard scheduled to be expanded?
QUESTION:
RESPONSE: No answer was provided at the SPIN meeting. For the purposes of this report, however, construction
on the portion of White Chapel Blvd near SH 114 is scheduled to begin in 2008. It is being designed
as a four-lane roadway divided by a median.
Considerable discussion on the traffic flow from various directions into and out of the
DISCUSSION:
development. Special concern was made for the entrances on White Chapel and Countryside
Court, as they will likely be the main entrances for all residents coming from the south. Until
the White Chapel is widened, traffic will be an issue.
Case No. Attachment G
ZA07-005 Page 2
SPIN MEETING REPORT – PAGE 3
QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
Placement of median on White Chapel will restrict the White Chapel Blvd driveway from left-
DISCUSSION:
turn traffic, so Countryside Court will be the main entrance for many coming from the south.
What is your anticipated customer base? Why will this succeed where others like it in
QUESTIONS:
Southlake are not at full leasing capacity?
RESPONSE: The expressed target users were the local community and the economic viability of the site will rely
on neighborhood familiarity with the development’s tenants. The developer does not see this as a
site for “destination” retail.
Do you think the State Highway 114 corridor is the type of place for this? Southlake Boulevard
CONCERN:
seems more like where this should go.
What is the estimate rent per square foot?
QUESTION:
Why C-3 zoning and not C-2?
QUESTION:
RESPONSE: C-3 allows for a little more flexibility in tenant mix and architectural design.
Did you consider the pedestrian traffic of the church?
QUESTION:
One neighboring resident was particularly concerned about the building materials on the south
CONCERN:
and west elevations and the height of the building, as it will likely be visible from his property.
SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither
verbatim nor official meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues
and questions raised by residents and the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as
guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission
and final action by City Council.
Case No. Attachment G
ZA07-005 Page 3
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
ORDINANCE NO. 480-521
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 1,
BLOCK B, RAVENEAUX VILLAGE ADDITION, AND MORE FULLY
AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” FROM“AG”
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT AND “C-1” NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO “S-P-1” DETAILED SITE PLAN
DISTRICT, WITH LIMITED “C-3” GENERAL COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT USES 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.
WHEREAS,
the City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule City acting under its Charter adopted by the
electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Texas Local
Government Code; and,
WHEREAS,
pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the authority to
adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings, other structures
and land for business, industrial, residential and other purposes, and to amend said ordinance and map for the
purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare, all in accordance with a
comprehensive plan; and,
WHEREAS,“AG” agricultural district and
the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 1
“C-1” neighborhood commercial district
under the City’s Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and,
WHEREAS,
a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a person or
corporation having a proprietary interest in said property; and,
WHEREAS,
the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, at a public hearing called by the City
Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these changes should be
granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the facilities in the area immediately
surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise producing elements and glare of the
vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on established character of the neighborhood; location,
lighting and types of signs and relation of signs to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and
adequacy of width for traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in
the immediate neighborhood; adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-
street parking facilities; location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading spaces, and
protection of public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health
ad the general welfare; effect on light and air; effect on the over-crowding of the land; effect on the
concentration of population, and effect on transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public
facilities; and,
WHEREAS,
the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among other things
the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and the view to conserve the value
of the buildings, and encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout this City; and,
WHEREAS,
the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that there is a public necessity
for the zoning changes, that the public demands them, that the public interest clearly requires the amendments,
and that the zoning changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of those who bought or improved property
with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was made; and,
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 2
WHEREAS,
the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that the changes in zoning
lessen the congestion in the streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers, promotes the health
and the general welfare, provides adequate light and air, prevents the over-crowding of land, avoids undue
concentration of population, and facilitates the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools,
parks and other public requirements; and,
WHEREAS,
the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, has determined that there is a necessity
and need for the changes in zoning and has also found and determined that there has been a change in the
conditions of the property surrounding and in close proximity to the tract or tracts of land requested for a
change since the tract or tracts of land were originally classified and therefore feels that the respective changes
in zoning classification for the tract or tracts of land are needed, are called for, and are in the best interest of
the public at large, the citizens of the city of Southlake, Texas, and helps promote the general health, safety and
welfare of the community.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That Ordinance No. 480, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Southlake, Texas, passed
on the 19th day of September, 1989, as originally adopted and amended, is hereby amended so that the
permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described
below:
Being Lot 1, Block B, Ravenaux Village Addition, being Lot 1, Block A, Ravenaux Village
& Tract 6J, T.M. Hood Survey, Abstract No. 706 and being approximately 6.22 acres, and
“AG” agricultural district and
more fully and completely described in Exhibit “A” from
“C-1” neighborhood commercial district to “S-P-1” detailed site plan district, with
limited “C-3” general commercial district uses
as depicted on the approved Site Plan
attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “B”.
SECTION 2.
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 3
That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake,
Texas, to reflect the herein changes in zoning.
SECTION 3.
That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to
all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent
ordinances for the City of Southlake, Texas. All existing sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, words,
phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby
ratified, verified, and affirmed.
SECTION 4.
That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the
comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the
community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably
anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and
air; to prevent over-crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the
adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial
needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with
reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the
particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use
of land throughout the community.
SECTION 5.
That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting
zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions
of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance.
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 4
SECTION 6.
That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity
of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid,
the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein.
SECTION 7.
Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or
who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two
Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a
separate offense.
SECTION 8.
All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the
provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at
the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation,
both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by
this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts.
SECTION 9.
The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its
caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least
fifteen (15) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition
of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall
additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten (10) days after passage of
this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake.
SECTION 10.
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 5
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by
law, and it is so ordained.
PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the _____ day of ___________, 2007.
_________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________
CITY SECRETARY
PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the _____ day of __________, 2007.
________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________
CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
_________________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE:___________________________
ADOPTED:_______________________
EFFECTIVE:______________________
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 6
EXHIBIT “A”
Lot 1, Block A, Ravenaux Village & Tract 6J, T.M. Hood Survey, Abstract No. 706 and being approximately
6.22 acres more particularly described as follws:
Insert Metes and Bounds
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 7
EXHIBIT “B”
“S-P-1” Detailed Site Plan District
Chapel Crossing Shopping Center
The applicant requests approval of the “S-P-1” zoning proposes to allow “C-3”general commercial district uses
but shall delete the following as permitted uses:
(2) Auditoriums, theaters and cinemas
(5) Commercial amusement centers and bowling alleys where the activity is for indoor operations
and activities only, including indoor driving ranges and indoor miniature golf courses
(7) Conventional golf courses, including outdoor driving ranges accessory thereto, but excluding
outdoor miniature golf courses
(16) Lodges, sororities and/or fraternities
(18) Mortuaries, funeral homes and undertakers
(20) Nursery buildings for the retail sale of plants and accessory items where the sales operations are
conducted entirely within an enclosed structure. Outdoor storage or sale shall be permitted with this
use to the extent that the outdoor sales area is completely enclosed by a fence, wall or screening device
(26) Skating rinks, ice and roller (indoor only)
(27) Taverns, clubs, and other comparable establishments under which the on-premises consumption
of alcoholic beverages is permitted subject to the issuance of a special use permit as required in Section
45;
Removing gasoline sales and hotels from their original application for zoning change.
The development regulations shall follow the “C-3” district with the following exceptions:
1) The required parking ratio shall be 1 space per 200 square feet for all uses
2) Allow the horizontal/vertical articulation on the west façade of building ‘A’ as proposed.
3) Interior Bufferyards – Bufferyards along interior lot lines shall not be required.
The following variance is being requested:
1)Minimum 100’ stacking depth required for the drives located on N. White Chapel Blvd (97’
provided) and Countryside Ct.(30’ & 36’ provided)
2)The driveway proposed on N. White Chapel Blvd does not meet the minimum 200’ spacing
required from a street intersection (±150’ provided)
3)The west façade Building ‘A’ does not meet articulation requirements. (The applicant believes
this façade will not be visible from SH114 which would exempt it from this requirement. The
maximum wall length permitted is 69 feet. The provided length horizontal lengthy is 142 feet
and the maximum vertical length is 165 feet.
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 8
Site Plan
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 9
Building Elevations
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 10
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 11
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 12
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 13
Case No. Attachment H
ZA07-005 Page 14