Loading...
Item 8ACity of Southlake Department of Planning STAFF REPORT July 13, 2005 CASE NO ZA05 -048 P ROJECT: Zoning Change and Concept Plan for Sandlin Manor REQUEST: On behalf of Mike and Eva Sandlin, Hat Creek Development is requesting approval of a zoning change and concept plan from "AG" Agricultural District to "SF -20A" Single - Family Residential District. The plan proposes the development of 21 residential lots on approximately 14.25 acres. The following variances are requested: 20 foot side yard adjacent to the street for Lot 14 (Reduction is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance with approval); 15 foot side yard adjacent to the street (Court B) for Lots 16 and 21 (Reduction is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance with approval); A double fronted or through residential lot for Lot 16 containing the existing home to be retained as shown on the plan; ACTION NEEDED: Consider first reading for zoning change and concept plan ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Plans and Support Information (D) Concept Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated June 17, 2005 (E) Surrounding Property Owners Map (F) Surrounding Property Owners Responses (G) Ordinance No. 480 -461 (H) Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council Members Only) STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (748 -8067) Dennis Killough (748 -8072) Case No. ZA05 -048 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNERS: Mike and Eva Sandlin APPLICANT: Hat Creek Development PROPERTY SITUATION: 400 W. Chapel Downs Drive LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Block 1, Sandlin Estates LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural District REQUESTED ZONING: "SF -20A" Single Family Residential District HISTORY: -City Council approved a preliminary plat for Sandlin Estates on December 17, 1992. -A final plat was approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission on December 27, 1992. TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: Case No. ZA05 -048 Master Thorou ,-hfare Plan The Master Thoroughfare Plan recommends South Kimball Avenue to be a 2- lane, undivided collector street with 64' of right -of -way. Adequate right -of- way is being dedicated for this roadway. Existinz Area Road Network and Conditions The proposed subdivision will connect into the existing Chapel Downs Drive in the Oak Hill Subdivision. Chapel Downs Drive intersects with N. White Chapel Boulevard. The subdivision is also proposing a 20' private access and emergency access easement that will provide access to Shady Oaks Drive. Both N. White Chapel Boulevard and Shady Oaks Drive are two -lane, undivided thoroughfares. The capacity of the existing roadway for N. White Chapel Boulevard is approximately 8,400 vehicle trips per day. Under this condition, the roadway would be considered to operate under a level of service `D'. Completion of this development will add approximately 201 vehicle trips per day, bringing it to 9,510 vehicle trips per day. May, 2004 traffic counts on N. White Chapel Blvd (between Southlake Blvd & Highland St 24hr North Bound NB 4,475 South Bound (SB) (4,834 NB Peak A.M. 468 8 - 9 a.m. Peak P.M. 346 4 - 5 p.m. SB Peak A.M. 302 8 - 9 a.m. Peak P.M. 594 5 - 6 p.m. Attachment A Page 1 May, 2004 traffic counts on Shady Oaks Dr (between Southlake Blvd & Hi hland St 24hr North Bound NB 1,580 South Bound (SB) (1,501 NB Peak A.M. 265 7 — 8 a.m. Peak P.M. 145 3 — 4 p.m. SB Peak A.M. 138 8 — 9 a.m. Peak P.M. 171 5 — 6 p.m. Traffic Impact Use 9 Lots Vtpd* AM- IN AM- OUT PM- IN PM- OUT Single Family Residential 21 201 4 12 14 8 *Vehicle Trips Per Day *The AM /PM times represent the number of vehicle trips generated during the peak travel times for a weekday on N. White Chapel Blvd. PATHWAYS MASTER PLAN: The Southlake Pathways Master Plan recommends an 8 -foot paved multi -use trail along the east side of Shady Oaks Drive adjacent to this development. The applicant has provided a pedestrian access plan showing the trail. WATER & SEWER: The proposed 8" sanitary sewer will be extended from the south (through Southlake Estates) to serve this site. An 8" water line will be extended through this site from Chapel Downs Drive. TREE PRESERVATION: The location of Court B' does not necessarily preserve a majority of the existing trees on the site. It cuts directly trough the middle of a thick grove of healthy Post Oaks currently located in front of the existing house. It might be possible to locate the right -of -way of Court B' within the existing access drive that runs through Lots 20 and 21 and make the remaining portion of Lots 20 and 21 adjacent to the backs of the homes in Chapel Downs a Landscape Easement. DRAINAGE ANALYSIS: This site has two existing ponds on it. The entire site drains south through Southlake Estates and to the existing pond in Bicentennial Park. A detention pond is proposed to capture the proposed post development runoff. An offsite drainage easement will be necessary for the proposed storm sewer outfall from the detention pond. SOUTHLAKE 2025: City Council approved the recommendations made by the Southlake 2025 committee for the Westside study area to include the following changes: Mobility Plan Recommendations • Maximize pedestrian connectivity from schools to adjoining neighborhoods. Environmental Resource Protection Recommendations Case No. Attachment A ZA05 -048 Page 2 Preserve existing tree buffers adjacent to neighborhoods. Trees on the east of the site are identified as "Tree cover /open space to be preserved where appropriate ". P &Z ACTION: June 23, 2005; Approved (5 -0) subject to Concept Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated June 17, 2005, with the following stipulations: • Granting a 20 foot side yard adjacent to the street for Lot 14; • Granting a 15 foot side yard adjacent to the street (Court B) for Lots 16 and 21; • Allowing a double fronted or through residential lot for Lot 16 as shown on the plan; • Recommending the 30 foot private /emergency access easement also be designated as a public right -of -way reservation; • And, to have the developer replace any landscaping affected by the proposed drainage easement extending off -site to the south into Lot 4, Southlake Estates. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Concept Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated June 17, 2005. N: \Community Development \MEMO \2005cases \05- 048ZCP.doc Case No. ZA05 -048 Attachment A Page 3 Vicinity Map Lot 1, Block 1, Sandlin Estates Case No. Attachment B ZA05 -048 Page 1 C�I�I���� C�I�I'�►��I�I��iiIiIi� - - O � O C 00 m leer Yrrr V � y., 1 �Sod SN 3 R .1. W 1 ea 1, 1, CAFR®L_ Z D: CS 157 no I ADD11tON. ZONED NR -PUD w. u ,.. Ceb yl A, `l di 2sss, LUD = Pub+. mi Public LUD - Public 11 �f �fo dv� llI ry VED: AG I " I. Density Ras. + m I + + P 7 B 5 I 3 2 a 1 11 ViCiniC;y Map w 8 Lin 90038 SF ' PO439. ?2 SF 20517. $3 sF. 249 4i SF -- 22385.4 SF 27]84 2 SF° 20504. 72 SF 2ai84..95 SF II - i ih e A, Lint _..----- ---... 8—ly G M D. ae. Ckrh F& Ne. 02042W-46t, Y] R. i,C l !s a °srxvalY a °e�r.` 1: '. R29M.v�i11 "icn — . Chapel Dawns S - � 8 9 3 , 5 7„ W 439,618 � I � S4"ROW u � _ LQ �r _ Drive — — .� �•• ^ i CWW LPO1"/NS ❑RkVE WEST .._ - L3 28 - °YrG �' as w 33iY73.39 5r r f Ju114Y c do Pametc P [ YW�x [ a ; f L6 I i 2W m Hou 1 — I 146ts, P . nd a J I �• I u Paa1 'PO '1 ltD ZONE Dr AG i f e 15 a I so .225 y° �°' j L LUD_ Low Density Res, 1 ! 37 V 0587.5,3 SF r e 1 -° I 3'00 {9.32 SF f • • � I �' �, Pnu[ ee L & Dwn �� • i t, r w L. a� t— Vd. I , frd03.6S 5F A–,t 20 f11 a ' 1176 Pg. �, aeo P001a18 SF — 26 1 u1 D - F.r.c.r ° r' - i 17 0 oG m ZONED: AG "t" n s 344s4a4 sF ab , p a` � LUD Law Density Res - ,. W 1 � � i. — La[ t, LA.G eR 30007.44 SF •- X 0004. i5 SF 19 Sc _yF _..ri�c -• 1 mL 2S OOH Fdu dDD1T14N, 5 v 30025.775E �I 3WP3. SF � li ZOhI =D. Sri -A 7s' ll,n —� L ` -_ lu[ e»tmta I �{.}�� — LLD _L ow lens :ty Res L-_ = Ea c ^ -+ - - -_ - — _ s _ - _ -- -- -- `: T �E{iINIVING 5 89 *3' 1N 978.09 P� Line Table a. I ZONING /CONCEPT PLAN f•vug[v D.CTfki DSYFY -' AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED 3 ZONED;I SF1 -A 4 ' 3 SANDUNN MANOR LUD = Low ensity Res - L3' ff� }•�4� -E 11655 � "r"r' L3 • w ¢5 e, GS -3 - GI - tv 699:,. DATE DF PREPARATION 4.28.0 a r rs sxk.Y p u�ya ax Iq+e sris er�ew I, surnnA4[ ESTATES. ual ]sa- aslleye a. I ZONING /CONCEPT PLAN P.R AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED 3 ZONED;I SF1 -A 4 ' 3 SANDUNN MANOR LUD = Low ensity Res - I PRELW@UR'y 12ti4 ON:Y 1�., �� LSD' ulElr. I zanemS "r"r' e�',. Y °; �.e 4 `. 'n . °°.`c as: «�'i' ,°..•`w'� DATE DF PREPARATION 4.28.0 ,Ttn e. rarm A"X Y.ir .rraatsh er t�l nnax�a a Ius,.i2 e4r.sifitlsi wVfRMi.iCrY�'rseea� (F77[r/F'11 '�'} JUN ! y REC •JUN 1 U Itsr wc. W1nItAgR 4 er+- Jat -mt rx u aarsn �1(�1F1qCC ' tQJJ !NN R�ssYi4..K ItiII � 4C-ir.YSO %t teve9Ha]W r �-- l 1 T: rl Sandlin Manor Location OfV-1 CAD drawing i?r rNh Hawgm% Flaml 4nes [ ,Iesy of The Gtr of5a th. lakq AVJJ MCWVVhV rowteW of The t,Onh C&Vaj 1e C ] of co, pfflr w (Nc7cocz I?— h+rartur zoo. s: Scale-I' ISO fD V, Area Surveying, Inc. REGISTERED PRO FrSSIONA1. LAND SURVEYORS 135 Shdr.6d Dn- rats Wonh, TX 76134 R17- 1 43.568-0 FIELD NOTES Description for Lot 1, Block 1, Sandlin Estates, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 1888, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and being described as one (1) tract by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a 1I2" iron pin found for the southeast corner of Lot 1, said point also being the northeast corner of Lot 5, Southlake Estates, according to the plat recorded in Volume 38875, Page 8, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas„ THENCE South 89 degrees 53 minutes 56 seconds West a distance of 978.09 feet to a 112" iron pin found for the most southerly southwest corner of Lot 1; THENCE NORTH a distance of 267.84 feet to a 112" iron pin found for a southwest corner of Lot 1; THENCE South 89 degrees 18 minutes 47 seconds West a distance of 30.11 feet to a 518" iron pin found for a southwest corner of Lot 1; THENCE North 00 degree 03 minutes 48 seconds East a distance of 148.61 feet to a 112" iron pin found for a southwest corner of Lot 1; THENCE South 89 degrees 52 minutes 56 seconds West a distance of 288.06 feet to a 112" iron pin set with cap marked, "AREA SURVEYING" in the east line of Shady Oaks Road for the most westerly southwest corner of Lot 1; THENCE North 00 degree 02 minutes 59 seconds West a distance of 29.76 feet along the east line of Shady Oaks Road to a 112" iron pin found for the most westerly northwest corner of Lot 1; THENCE North 89 degrees 53 minutes 57 seconds East a distance of 439.68 feet to a 112" iron pin found for a northwest corner of Lot 1; THENCE North 00 degree fly minutes 01 seconds West a distance of 199.21 feet to a 112" iron pin found for the most northerly northwest corner of Lot 1; THENCE North 89 degrees 23 minutes 17 seconds East a distance of 540.52 feet to a 112" iron pin found for an angle point in the north fine of Lot 1; THENCE South 89 degrees 15 minutes 50 seconds East a distance of 310.93 feet to a 112" iron pin found for the northeast corner of Lot 1; THENCE South 00 degrees 28 minutes 25 seconds East a distance of 645.22 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, said described tract containing 14.254 acres of land. C:%ProjeatsM5 9 414 4 5 95 Field Nates.doc Case No. Attachment C ZA05 -048 Page 3 REVIEW SUMMARY Case No.: ZA05 -048 Review No.: Two Project Name: Proposed SF -20A Zoning, Concept Plan for Sandlin Manor APPLICANT: H Creek Development Corp. Kosse Maykus P.O. Box 92747 Southlake, TX 76092 Phone: (817) 329 -3111 Fax: Date of Review: 06/17/05 SURVEYOR: Area Surveying, Inc. Roger Hart 135 Sheffield Drive Fort Worth, TX 76134 Phone: (817) 293 -5684 Fax: (817) 293 -5685 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 06/16/05 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF PLAT 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 with regard to the legal description: a) Provide the name and the deed record volume and page for the current owner in the preamble. b) Provide the name of the survey and abstract number(s) in the preamble. 2. Show and label the survey line. Label the survey names and abstract numbers. 3. The following changes are needed regarding the proposed lotting: a) Label all front building setback lines, especially at any breakpoints or discontinuation. b) A 35' building setback line is required on both street frontages for a corner lot: i) The applicant has requested a 15' reduction (20' B.L.) for Lots 14 along Chapel Downs Drive West. (Permitted with P & Z /City Council approval under the zoning ordinance) ii) and has requested a reduction to the standard side yard requirement of 15' (15' B.L.) for eastern side yard of Lot 16 & and the western side yard of Lot 21 along Court B. (Permitted with P & Z /City Council approval under the zoning ordinance) C) Side lot lines should be perpendicular to the street right -of -way. Provide the minimum 100' lot width at the front building line for Lot 6. d) "double fronted" or "through" residential lots are not permitted under the subdivision regulations. Lot 16 created around the existing home is a double fronted lot. (Variance Requested) Case No. Attachment D ZA05 -048 Page 1 e) If the north boundary of Lot 16 is to be the rear yard, a 35' BL is required. This will create a non - conforming structure without approval of a variance through the Zoning Board of adjustments. 4. Staff recommends reconfiguration of Cul -de -sac B in a effort to preserve existing quality trees within that R.O.W. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS * Although there are a few lot lines which are not perpendicular or radial, they appear to meet the intent of this requirement. * Final Plat will require a minimum of two intervisible monuments be set and referenced to State Plane Coordinates and that a digital copy of the plat be provided in .dxf format and transformed to State Plane Coordinates in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. * A Developers Agreement is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure. The Developer's Agreement for this addition should consider streets, drainage, park dedication requirements and fees, off -site sewer extensions, off -site drainage and utility easements and impact fees. Case No. Attachment D ZA05 -048 Page 2 TREE PRESERVATION ANALYSIS (Residential Subdivision Development) Case: 05 -048 Date of Review: June 14, 2005 Number of Pages: I Project Name: Sandlin Manor (Zoning Concept Plan) THIS ANALYSIS IS PREPARED AT THE TIME OF REVIEW OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT AND IS TO PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS OF THE PLAN OR SURVEY AND THE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION ON ANY PROTECTED TREES ON THE SITE. FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR CLARIFICATION CONTACT KEITH MARTIN, LANDSCAPE ADMINISTRATOR AT (817) 481 -5640. TREE PRESERVATION COMMENTS: The location of Court `B' does not necessarily preserve a majority of the existing trees on the site. It cuts directly trough the middle of a thick grove of healthy Post Oaks currently located in front of the existing house. It might be possible to locate the right -of -way of Court B' within the existing access drive that runs through Lots 20 and 21 and make the remaining portion of Lots 20 and 21 adjacent to the backs of the homes in Chapel Downs a Landscape Easement. Residential subdivision Development: In a residential subdivision, all protected trees that the Landscape Administrator determines must be altered in order to install utility lines within public R.O.W. or utility easements or drainage easements as shown on an approved Final Plat, or to achieve the cut/fill drainage as designated on the master drainage construction plan, shall be exempt from the tree replacement and tree protection requirements listed in Sections 7 and 8 of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. Any protected trees within these areas that the Landscape Administrator determines do not have to be altered shall be subject to the tree protection requirements listed in Section 8 of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, but not to the tree replacement requirements listed in Section 7 of the Ordinance. All other areas of the subdivision shall be subject to both the tree replacement and the tree protection requirements, and all other provisions of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. Case No. ZA05 -048 Attachment D Page 3 Surrounding Property Owner Lot 1, Block 1, Sandlin Estates, 400 Chapel downs Drive West Owner Zoning Land Use Acreage 1. Mooney, Robet & Jacquelyn "SF -IA" Low Density Residential 0.974 2. Bruton, Paul & Doreen "SF -IA" Low Density Residential 0.570 3. Lucas, James & Pamela "SF -IA" Low Density Residential 0.420 4. Skaggs, Merton & Susan "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.674 5. Bowyer, James & Ingrid "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.498 6. Ritz, Frank & Brenda "AG" Medium Density Residential 1.000 7. Robinson, Wendy M "AG" Medium Density Residential 0.500 8. Johnson, Arnold Jr & Ellen "AG" Medium Density Residential 0.893 9. McDonald, Beverly "AG" Medium Density Residential 2.106 10. Carroll ISD " VS" Public/ Semi -Public 29.402 11. Carroll ISD "NR -PUD" Public/ Semi- Public 44.262 12. Howle, John & Deborah "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.493 13. Stone, David & Susan "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.488 14. Walker, Derald & Julie "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.427 15. Kimball, Noriko "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.460 16. Arnold, Jimmy "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.486 17. Abernathy, Laurence & Terry "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.506 18. Castor, William & Therese "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.679 19. Sawla, Amar & Meeta "SF -20A" Medium Density Residential 0.694 20. Remetta, John & Maureen "SF -IA" Low Density Residential 1.994 21. Annis, Harold & Angela "SF -IA" Low Density Residential 1.946 22. Gregory, Izak & Gay "SF -IA" Low Density Residential 1.995 23. Fuller, Gregory & Joanne "SF -IA" Low Density Residential 1.998 24. Robinson, John "SF -IA" Low Density Residential 2.131 25. Sandlin M A & Eva "AG" Medium Density Residential 14.248 Case No. Attachment E ZA05 -048 Page 1 Surrounding Property Owner Responses Lot 1, Block 1, Sandlin Estates, 400 Chapel downs Drive West Notices Sent: Twenty -five (25) Responses: Two (2) from within the 200' notification area. • Harold & Angela Annis, 490 Love Henry Court, Southlake, TX 76092; received comments. See attached letter received 6- 15 -05. • Beverly G. McDonald, 587 Shady Oaks, Southlake, TX 76092; opposed. See attached letter and photos received 6- 22 -05. • Van Williams, President of Oak Hill Estates of Southlake HOA, via e -mail, expressed concerns. See attached e -mail received 6- 29 -05. Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 1 HAROLD E. ANNIS 490 Love Henry Court Southlake, Texas 76042 (817) 481 -6242 June 15, 2005 Planning and Zoning Commission City of Southlake 1400 Main Street Southlake, TX 76092 RE: Case No. ZA05 -048 and Case No. ZA05 -049 Dear Commission Members: I am Harold Annis and my wife Angela Annis and I live and own the residence at 490 Love Henry Court, (lot 2 of Southlake Estates) Southlake, TX. We have lived in this residence since 1989. I would like to comment on the zoning change and concept plan for Sandlin Manor. Acceptability of Plan: In general I will support the approval of the plan submitted by Mr. Sandlin. It appears to be a well- planned development and I am sure that Mike will assure the quality of the homes will be top notch. Drainage: The effects of poor planning on drainage have affected Southlake Estates from the very day it was built. In recent years street regrading, new pavement and the installation of a major drainpipe beginning at the Southwest corner of lot 2 and continuing south through Bicentennial Park improved the drainage significantly. One problem that continues to plague Southlake Estates during periods of heavy rain is drainage from the Sandlin property that has flooded across the properties of lots 2, 3 and 4 of Southlake Estates. The addition of significant paving and building structures will undoubtedly exacerbate the drainage situation; therefore, the solution must be well engineered and placed correctly. The utility easement to the South follows the property line between Lots 2 and 3 of RECD J U N 15 2005 Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 2 Southlake Estates. Along this easement are a number of eastern red cedar trees. If a drainage pipe is buried in this easement the excavation will undoubtedly put these trees at great risk. The eastern red cedar's root structure typically will extend beyond the trunk by 2 to 3 times the diameter of the tree canopy. A continuous excavation immediately beside the tree line on either side will most likely kill these trees. I would point to the excavations that have occurred along Shady Oaks and the subsequent demise of numerous heritage oaks. The cedars root extend out further than oaks and the trees are much more sensitive to trimming and root disturbance. I request that a condition be placed in your approval that the solution be submitted to a professional arborist and landscape planner before excavation is begun. An alternate solution will be to gain approval from the owner of lot 3 to set the drain line from the trunk of the largest tree and at least twice the diameter of the largest tree canopy. In addition the excavation must occur during the fall or winter months. Fence: The existing fence along the Southern edge of the proposed addition is not located on the property line. This fence has been in place for at least 16 years and probably 20 plus years. Each Southlake Estates property owner along this boundary line has maintained and improved this fence line and has treated it as their own for the last two decades. I request that a condition be placed on your approval that the fence line dividing Sandlin Manor and Southlake Estates remain as it is today and has been for the previous 16 plus years. Wild Flowers: For the past 16 years I have cultivated wild flowers on the back 1/3 of my property (lot 2 ). The necessary growth of grass and other growth during the spring months may offend some folks that live in a $1 /2 million plus home with a well- manicured lawn. I request that a condition be placed on your approval of Sandlin Manor that the standards of lawn care established in Sandlin Manor cannot be expected to be imposed upon any property in Southlake Estates. Sincerely, Harold E. Annis Case No. ZA05 -048 RECD JUN 1 � 2005 Attachment F Page 3 w c4V6c\ � Property Owner Response Form Reference. ZA 0 5 -- Q H 1, 7eoer I �M�n la 7 �.� Being the owner(s) of the property so noted, do hereby favor / os (circle or underline one) the proposed rezoning of the alcove referenced property. Signature REM JUN 2 2' 2005 Return or Mail to: City of Southlake Planning Department 1400 Main Street, Suite 31 Southlake, Texas 75092 `;\Community pevelopment \AVP- F[LES\F€?RMSloffieial petition.doe ate Case No. Attachment F ZA05-048 Page 4 Lorrie Fletcher From: Lori Farwell Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 8:46 AM To: 'MayorWambsganss @aol.com; Place 1; Place 2; Place 3; Place 4; Place 5; Place 6 Cc: Lorrie Fletcher; Ken Baker Subject: Sandlin Manor proposal From: Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 11:41 PM To: citycouncll Subject: Email sent from City of Southlake Web Site Name: Van Williams, President of Oak Hill Estates of Southlake HOA Phone: Email: Comments: Honorable Members of City Council, I wish to give early notice that an upcoming resolution with respect to the development of Sandlin Manor shall be met with expressed concerns. The concerns are not related to the development plans of Sandlin Manor. Rather they are related to an undesired stipulation for a thoroughfare through Oak Hill estates. City Staff did not ask for it, the developer of Sandin Manor did not ask for it, and our neighborhood did not ask for it. Instead it was proposed by a P &Z member who had misunderstood the wishes of our neighborhood. We want less traffic, not more traffic through our neighborhood. We have met with Mr. Kosse Maykus, the developer of Sandlin Manor, as a neighborhood group and have come to agreement with him on how we want to see the development of Sandlin Manor and how to mitigate the likely increase in traffic. We would prefer Chapel Downs to be completely closed off, but were informed that the developer could not acquire the property surrounding the existing access road from Shady Oaks to widen the road signficantly to handle day -to -day traffic. We were also informed by the developer that DPS requested a secondary access to Oak Hill and Sandlin Manor via Shady Oaks. From these findings, we specifically asked Mr. Maykus to limit access to Shady Oaks by using a keyed mechanism for entry AND for exit. We concluded that this would allow residents to enter and exit via Shady Oaks, thereby reducing resident traffic from White Chapel, and at the same time keep non - resident traffic out of our neighborhood. Because our meeting with Mr. Maykus was fruitful, we are fully supportive of his intended plans and felt no need to attend the last P &Z meeting. That is why there was an absence of any opposition at the last P &Z meeting. Since we were not there, we were not able to clarify to P &Z that a thoroughfare is NOT something we want. Let me now make our desire and intentions clear. We do not want a thoroughfare through Oak Hill Estates. Not now, and not anytime in the future. As you consider the Sandlin Manor development plans in the upcoming City Council meeting (on or about July 19), we ask that you exclude the P&Z stipulation for a thoroughfare through Oak Hill Estates. Please contact me immediately if there are any questions or concerns. Respectfully, Van Williams President, Oak Hill Estates of Southlake HOA Inc. REC`0 1.0M 2 C 2005 6/29/2005 Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 5 Proposed ZA05 -048 Beverly G. McDonald 587 Shady Oaks Southlake, Tx. 76092 Planning and Zoning Commission 1400 Main St., Ste. 310 Southlake, Tx. 76092 Attn: Lorrie Fletcher, Administrative Secretary June 22, 2005 RE: 587 Shady Oaks, Southlake, Tx. 76092 being affected by ZA05 -048 I am in opposition to ZA05 -048 for the following reasons and would appreciate your efforts in distributing this to planning and zoning commission and making it a part of the minutes of the scheduled meeting 6/23/05 at 6:30 PM. Concerns: 1. Proximity of easement which is now showing on the proposed plat as an access for maintenance and utilities a. 45 feet from our master bedroom b. If the Close to our driveway c. utility easement takes 7.5 additional feet on each side of the existing easement It will come into our 4 stall building and 1 car storage bldg. and if they had to be moved or rebuilt that will bring the buildings in too close proximity to our existing interior fences and they would also have to be moved. d. We object to the fact that they want to use this easement for access for 22 homes and 2 years of construction, approx. 4200 vehicle passes into the development. If used for going out as well, it would be approx. 8400 vehicle passes in /out of the development e. We object to the utility easement taking away footage from our property, amount to be determined. f. We object to the taking down of our fence. If they want to build a nice fence on their own property that would be great. g. Construction traffic will be going out to a 2 -lane well traveled road and into a school zone. Without purchasing footage from ourselves and the Lucas family on the other side of the easement, Sandlin development will not have the access easement to allow vehicles through the easement for construction. After development completed vehicles will more than likely be going in /out this entrance, if they cannot gain access they will have to back into Shady Oaks, which could cause accidents. i. There could be approx. 80 vehicles per day going in /out of development for maintenance and Case No. ZA05 -048 Attachment F Page 6 residents. j. We moved to this property because of the seclusion and quiet being on 2 acres surrounded by other acreage properties. We looked for quite a while to find this type property and now it will be diminished by heavy traffic and noise factors. k. During construction process; there will be debris, dirt, dust coming onto both properties, causing damage to landscaping. 1. Due to the construction we will have to update our security systems because of potential theft or trespassing. m. Lights will be reflecting into our home from the traffic in the access easement and the subdivision. n. Noise level will be increased by passing vehicles and construction process for over 18 months. o. The proposed sidewalks run right along our fence line on the front West and South side of our home. This is a good thing for the school children, but we will have to place a new higher fence for continued privacy. Schools generate significant traffic, which will now be right along our front fence line. We may have to move our front fence due to proposed sidewalks. p. No one has ever contacted us to discuss how Sandlin Manor was going to obtain the additional footage on the present easement? Since it is private property, they would have to purchase that footage, and we do not want to diminish our 2 acre status. q. We will have to re- establish our driveway in order to have access out to Shady Oaks without danger, it is difficult to see out into the street now. The entry into Sandlin Manor from Shady Oaks may further obstruct seeing oncoming traffic. Additional Leaal Points Even though the 1998 land use designation is medium density residential, there are many factors that should keep this development at a lower density: Any time you are changing pasture /agricultural to residential, it significantly affects the surrounding area. There will be a pedestrian problem on the East side of Shady Oaks (the City is trying to promote pedestrian traffic on the way to the schools) if there is traffic over the proposed access easement. They are removing tree cover on the development, which is specifically against the standards adopted by the City requiring tree cover /open space to be preserved. If the proposed development is completed, it will essentially result in Chapel Downs connecting all the way from White Chapel to Shady Oaks, thereby becoming an alternative route to get to the schools and the parks, which will dramatically increase the traffic next to our property. The site for the proposed development nearly meets the standards of an RCS land use category and should be treated like it is one, which would limit the number of houses to 7. The SF-IA zoning is appropriate for sites that do not exactly meet the RCS land use category criteria. They are attempting to get both a plat and a concept plan approved which should be tabled until we have a chance to study it further. I was not sent a notification to attend the Spin meeting, so therefore did not attend. By approving this development, they would be changing the zoning to SF -20A, which would essentially gut the tree ordinance because the tree ordinance applies differently to that zoning Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 7 category than it does otherwise. The developer has taken a "this is going to happen" attitude. They need some of our land to make an acceptable proposal The road is to close to my existing improvements. Thank you for your time and look forward to the meeting on 6/23/05. Sincerely, Beverly G. McDonald 587 Shady Oaks Southlake, Tx. 76092 Case No. ZA05 -048 Attachment F Page 8 Front of Property Front of Property (side view) McDor Case No. ZA05 -048 Attachment F Page 9 Stake marking 7'/2' utility Stake markinq 10' from the Stake marking 10' from the Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 10 Proximity of easement to McDonald driveway Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 11 Portion of McDonald property that will be effected Portion of neighboring property that will be effected I Trees along property line will be lost Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 12 txisting egress easement — singie Tamiq Entry to road from existing easement — into Additional new construction across street Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 13 30 MPH School Zone Total of 29 trees will be lost Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 14 Existing gate at easement 18 — McDonald Property 11 —Neighboring Property Trees that will be lost Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 15 Stake markinq 10' from the Stakes at 10' and 7 1 /2 ' markers show how much of McDonald property will be lost Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 16 10' from property line 7 1 /2 ' utility easement View of back of McDonald property as it exists now Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 17 Fence builder plans to move Has not discussed with McDonald Proximity of Garage to Existing Fence & Proposed Wall Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 18 Proximity of Master Bedroom to Existing Fence 10' markers indicate proposed wall will go through center of existing structure on McDonald property Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 19 Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 20 Garage will have to be moved to this location Fencing would have to be moved to the inside of staked area Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 21 Stake marking 7'/2' utility Stake marking 10' from the 553 MV unaLS�o3� 1J81N %3 .._. — L W)21'ALNn07 1RodW1 is Am H4NYN NI14NVS ,HYNIMI -Itld v.� I� "5 Al'sua[l u_InrN�W Ill ti cr P c. tLf O F]rFr}�J 5 fs3 Y11Yi kNb�J —. — CL OLd rS r , i Cff °} � o LLI CD 7 v II 7 I � ti 4 r •, I it m t I I t I _ 1 IL % 5 I _ - __ ______ _____ r r T� t 0 I r I �'Rr II Y = ca 1�4 �I « cl� r I m ovL-0 I� _ � x�r qq l r � � 4� 'i J t• — r,t_ �I" a }bn 11 NJ z :t 1J 3l �I p t_ W . h� 11 'n �' II 1 I 1 ,'t p= a Case No. Attachment F ZA05 -048 Page 22 o� 00 i N ,.r W � I 0 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480 -461 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 1, SANDLIN ESTATES, BEING APPROXIMATELY 14.25 ACRES, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "AG" AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO "SF- 20A" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, 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 X1, 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, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as "AG" Agricultural 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 Case No. Attachment G ZA05 -048 Page 1 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, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that the changes in zoning Case No. Attachment G ZA05 -048 Page 2 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 1, Sandlin Estates, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, as recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 1888, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, being approximately 14.25 acres, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A" from "AG" Agricultural District to "SF -20A" Single Family Residential District. SECTION 2. 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. Case No. Attachment G ZA05 -048 Page 3 SECTION 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subj ect 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. SECTION 6. Case No. Attachment G ZA05 -048 Page 4 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. ZA05 -048 Attachment G 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 Ist reading the day of , 2005. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 2005. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: Case No. ZA05 -048 Attachment G Page 6 EXHIBIT "A" Being Lot 1, Block 1, Sandlin Estates, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, as recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 1888, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and being approximately 14.25 acres. Case No. ZA05 -048 Attachment G Page 7 Z. 00 0 li � = fD I. B_k I, CAIRO- C IS�i NO. i A"TiOm. &­t A, Slide 2555. P R-C.T. QKD: S LUD = P 2 - P:lIlh, N 89*3'17" E a 1 5 L01 C,' 5 1. CARR OLL C. b Im H Ti 1h. I �& t Fl. P's C ZONED NR-PVI) LUD = Publi 0" E 310.93 %gN _t � ? 511-4 e 4 20484. Sr 5,s SF 2�2-4. 11 ;�0501.72 Id L \ - UNNY" ------ 0%, :.V-- 4ED' AG ium Res. w K, ' P �!` "' - Downs 1 1­1, 1 ID�Id, _ _ 030420,461. OR TX .T 7 S 89*3 57" W 439 68 now . ,i Drive c QKD: S LUD = P 2 - P:lIlh, N 89*3'17" E a 1 5 L01 C,' 5 1. CARR OLL C. b Im H Ti 1h. I �& t Fl. P's C ZONED NR-PVI) LUD = Publi 0" E 310.93 %gN _t � ? 511-4 e 4 20484. Sr 5,s SF 2�2-4. 11 ;�0501.72 Id Line Table Mau I 7' W 2 �Ku_lff E .U. sr Ts Vo I 00 (P) L \ - UNNY" ------ 0%, :.V-- w K, ' P �!` "' - Downs 1 14 q I UR now . ,i Drive c L DOWNS DRIVE WEST 1 1a �11 59049.32 SF -V POA k owe. I L Viii, 157450 Pq ns U pool D,acTCj 8 too J5 I 29 LUD Low D ensity Res. JI Y_ SO 6 2.2-5 W 1. 1. D.C. Sr 15 HAU 0,01)[TION. S.-I-A � 5, W 27 LUD �0 -0. Den5;ty Res aEg _V 20 1 00 13. is ST CD 1 9 26 4 P 4? j90v0,34 _v J A E Q I 2 000 4.15 S1 JW25.71 S' • 25 - - — — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - &L S' lilt E-1 - I 7' — _10.— __�, Z _ — — — — — M P P T NIV 8,3*3,.w S - W 978-09 B G Will i. S TM AAI ESTATES, Va._ .44 20NING/CONCEPT PLAN PP. T-C 1, 3 ZONEDA61-A 4 AND PRELIMINARY FLAT FOR PROPOSED LUD Low eosity Res. SANDLIN MANOR PR ELWAARY iW Utility L -'A NNMI-a' WM IMUSE DATE Or PREPAF0.TI6N 2-215-05 wcj J U �K4 1 C x 35 Line Table Mau I 7' W 2 �Ku_lff E .U. sr Ts Vo I 00 (P) L \ - UNNY" il 3 409.J9 mm w K, ' P �!` "' -C.,& 1A 146116. P "6. q I UR ZONED: AG LUD Low Density Res. 1 1a �11 59049.32 SF -V POA k owe. I L Viii, 157450 Pq ns t D,acTCj ZONED: AG LUD Low D ensity Res. r Y_ W 1. 1. D.C. Sr HAU 0,01)[TION. S.-I-A � 5, LUD �0 -0. Den5;ty Res 2 Line Table Mau I 7' W 2 �Ku_lff E .U. sr Ts Vo I 00 (P)