Loading...
1994-05-19 P&Z Meeting City of Southlake, Texas REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 19, 1994 LOCATION: 667 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas City Council Chambers of City Hall TIME: 7:30 P.M. AGENDA: 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes of the May 5, 1994 P & Z Meeting. 3. Administrative Comments. 4. Consider: ZA 94 -21, Rezoning and Concept Plan for a 2.7 acre tract of land situated in the William Mills Survey, Abstract 877, being a portion of Tract 3 and the W. Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 1588, being a portion of Tract 4. Location: Approximately 600' East of T.W. King Road in the 3700 block. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural; Requested Zoning: "CS" Community Service District. Owner: Alvin F. Oien, Jr. Applicant: Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc., Peter Kavanagh, Agent. 5. Consider: ZA 94 -37, Concept Plan for Highland Meadow Montessori Academy on property legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Chivers Park and Tract 4H, A.H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 299. A variance request to the masonry requirements for structures in the "CS" District will be reviewed as part of this approval. Location: 1060 E. Highland Street. Current Zoning: "CS" Community Service District. Owner /Applicant: Highland Meadow Montessori Academy. Public Hearing. 6. Consider: ZA 94 -38, Plat Revision of Lot 3, Block 1, Chivers Park Addition, and Tract 4H situated in the A.H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 299, and being revised to Lot 3R, Block 1, Chivers Park Addition. Location: 1060 E. Highland Street. Current Zoning: "CS" Community Service District. Owner /Applicant: Highland Meadow Montessori Academy. Public Hearing. 7. Consider: ZA 94 -39, Rezoning for a 13.729 acre tract of land situated in the Hiram Granberry Survey, Abstract 581, being a portion of Lot 2, Block A, White Chapel Place Addition. Location: East of South White Chapel Blvd. at the intersection of Lilac Lane and Pine Drive. Current Zoning: "RE" Residential Estate; Requested Zoning: "SF -1A" Single Family Residential. Owners: Wanda Pulliam and Deloris Ann Pearson. Applicant: Stephen J. Bezner. Public Hearing. City of Southlake, Texas 8. Consider: ZA 94 -40, Plat Revision of 13.729 acres situated in the Hiram Granberry Survey, Abstract No. 581, being a portion of Lot 2, Block A, White Chapel Place Addition and being revised to Lots 2R -1, 2R -2, 2R -3, 2R -4, 2R -5 & 2R -6, Block A, White Chapel Place Addition. Location: East of South White Chapel Blvd. at the intersection of Lilac Lane and Pine Drive. Owners: Wanda Pulliam and Deloris Ann Pearson. Applicant: Stephen J. Bezner. Public Hearing. 9. Consider: ZA 94 -41, Rezoning and Development Plan for Fountain Park Estates being a 54.597 acre tract of land situated in the S.H. Thompson Survey, Abstract No. 1504. Location: Approximately 700' East of Davis Blvd. on the South side of West Continental Blvd. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural and "SF- 20A" Single - Family Residential; Requested Zoning: "R- P.U.D." Residential Planned Unit Development. Owners: Edward A. Ponder, Dr. Roger H. Bohanan, and Continental Joint Venture; Nicholas R. DiGiuseppe, Agent. Applicant: Terry Sandlin Homes, Inc. Public Hearing. 10. Consider ZA 94 -42, Final Plat of Lot 1, Block 1, Slayton Addition, being 1.00 acre situated in the J.G. Alien Survey, Abstract No. 18. Location: 2815 W. Southlake Blvd. Current Zoning: " SF -1A" Single Family Residential. Owner: Ruby Slayton. Applicant: Charles Slayton 11. Consider ZA 94 -43, Final Plat of Farrar Addition Lot 2, Block 1 being 23.958 acres situated in the T. Mahan Survey, Abstract No. 1049. Location: North of F.M. 1709, South of Hwy. 114 and West of Short Avenue. Current Zoning: "C -3" General Commercial District. Owner: Billie N. Farrar. Applicant: Adams Consulting Engineers. 12. Consider ZA 94 -44, Final Plat of Lonesome Dove Estates, Phase 1, being 47.859 acres situated in the N.E. Thompson Survey, Abstract No. 1563. Location is North of Emerald Estates, East of North Carroll Avenue, South of Burney Lane, and West of Lonesome Dove Avenue. Current Zoning: "R- P.U.D." Residential Planned Unit Development. Owners: Mary M. Arnold, Gary Cantrell, Larry D. Parker, Sharon K. Parker, Cindy Atkinson, and Randy A. Parker. Applicant: Tom M. Matthews, Jr. d /b /a/ Hat Creek Development. 13. Consider ZA 94 -45, Final Plat of Oak Tree Estates (formerly known as Hillcrest Estates) being 75.954 acres situated in the John A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529 (of which 38.647 acres is filed of record as Lots 1 -17, Block B, Greenway Industrial Park). Location: East side of South Carroll Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet South of intersection of South Carroll Avenue and East Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). Current Zoning: "SF -20B" Single Family - 20B Residential. Owner: W.E. Dalton. Applicant: Papagolos Development Company. 14. Consider ZA 94 -46, Rezoning request for a 160 acres of land legally described as Tracts 5, 6A, 6A1, 6B, 6B1, 6B2, & 6B3 situated in the J.A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529 and Tracts, 1, 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, & 2C1 situated in the J.W. Hale Survey, Abstract No. 803. Location: North of E. Continental Blvd., • City of Southlake, Texas East of South Carroll Avenue, South of Woodland Heights Addition, and West of South Kimball Avenue. Current Zoning: "B -1" Business Service Park District and "I -1" Light Industrial District; Requested Zoning: "SF -20A" Single Family Residential. Applicant: City of Southlake. Public Hearing. 15. Meeting Adjourned. CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that the above agenda was posted on the official bulletin boards at City Hall, 667 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas, on Friday, May 13, 1994 at 5:00 p.m., pursuant to the Open Meetings Act, Article 6252 -17 V. T. C. S. C �� YO F SpG , andra L. LeGrand / m City Secretary * ■, 4 , � r SA * If you plan to attend this public meeting and have a disability that requires special needs, please advise the City Secretary 48 hours in advance at 481 -5581 extension 704, and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you. C: \WPF \MTG \AGN \AGN05 -19.94 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING May 19, 1994 MINUTES Commission Present: Chairman, Joe Wright; Members: Nick McGarity, Randy Arnold, James Murphy, Ernest Johnson, and Lanny Tate. City Staff Present: Community Development Director, Greg Last; Planner, Tom Elgin; Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy; and Community Development Secretary, Bobbye Shire. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Wright at 7:30 p.m. Agenda Item #2, Approval of Minutes Commissioner Johnson said an additional comment should be included on Agenda Item #4, ZA 94 -21, to the effect that the Applicant was made aware that there were three likely votes to deny the request should he wish to proceed with his current proposal. Commissioner Murphy noted that on Agenda Item #4, ZA 94 -21, the name Marshall was typed in error and that it should be changed to Murphy. Commissioner Johnson said that the motion for Agenda Item #5, ZA 93 -119, should clearly establish that the reason for denial was due to the Applicant not meeting minimal standards. Motion was made to approve the Minutes of the May 5, 1994 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting with the above changes so noted. Motion: Arnold Second: Murphy Ayes: Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Abstain: McGarity Approved: 5 -0 -1 Agenda Item #3, Administrative Comments No Comments Agenda Item #4, ZA 94 -21, Rezoning and Concept Plan Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for Rezoning and Concept Plan approval for a 2.7 acre tract of land situated in the William Mills Survey, Abstract 877, being a portion of Tract 3 and the W. Medlin Survey, Abstract No. C: \WPF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 2 1588, being a portion of Tract 4. The location is approximately 600' East of T.W. King Road in the 3700 block. Current Zoning is "AG" Agricultural and Requested Zoning is "CS" Community Service District. The Land Use Category is Medium Density Residential. The Owner is Alvin F. Oien, Jr. and the Applicant is Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc., Peter Kavanagh, Agent. Five written notices were sent out and one written response was received opposed within the 200' notification area. Ms. Gandy brought attention to the letter from Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems Real Estate Assistant Manager, Gary Vest, explaining that he had investigated the alternative sites suggested by the Commission at the May 5, 1994 Planning and Zoning meeting, and that the proposed site is the only available site for their antenna at this time. Peter Kavanagh, Agent for the Applicant, Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc., was present to represent this item. Mr. Kavanagh reiterated what Ms. Gandy said regarding investigating other possible sites. He presented an overhead of his new proposal which moved the antenna site 437 feet farther south and away from the street on Mr. Oien's property. He also explained that cellular telephone service must be provided for S.H. 114 and to do this the antenna had to be placed in a certain pattern for them to function properly, and this site fits that pattern. Commissioner McGarity asked how close the new location of the antenna would be and its affect to the existing rental house on the Lamoreaux property and Mr. Kavanagh answered approximately 100 feet and there would be no affect. Chairman Wright informed the members of the audience that this was a continuation of the Public Hearing. William Lamoreaux, 3650 T.W. King Road, said he was not happy with the new proposal but that it was better than the last proposal. He also said that if the tower is built, it would be detrimental to homes built in the future. Betty Lamoreaux, 3650 T.W. King Road, said that she and her husband have owned the property for 28 years and they are the largest landowner in that area and she is very opposed to this request. She explained that their rent house already looks out onto the IBM power plant, and that now Mr. Oien is potentially allowing an antenna tower to be built on his property which will also be very close to the rental house. She said that the planned zoning is for residential and she is trying her best to keep it that way but if the Commission keeps allowing industrial uses around her property, she too, will come back with a planned development of light industrial since that is what the Commission evidently wants. C. \WPF \MTG \ MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 3 Commissioner Arnold asked if Mr. Kavanagh had any problem with the buffer yards. Mr. Kavanagh said that the buffer yards would include approximately 100 trees and 200 shrubs that would line the property around the antenna site at the time of development adjacent to the site. He said any landscaping that was put in now would probably need to be removed later and he saw no reason to have to landscape a field at this time and was opposed to doing so. Commissioner Johnson's concern was that this proposal was not appropriate to the Medium Density Residential land use. Commissioner Murphy was not convinced that this site is the only available site for the antenna and he questioned the statement in the letter to that effect. Motion was made to deny ZA 94 -21 Rezoning and Concept Plan and the request would go forward to the City Council Meeting on June 7, 1994. Motion: Tate Second: Arnold Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Approved: To Deny 6 -0 Chairman Wright explained to the audience after the motion had been made that the Commission's vote was a recommendation only and that any interested parties should plan to attend the City Council meeting on June 7, 1994. Agenda Item #5, ZA 94 - 37, Concept Plan for Highland Meadow Montessori Academy Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for Concept Plan approval for Highland Meadow Montessori Academy on property legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Chivers Park and Tract 411, A.H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 299. The location is 1060 E. Highland Street. The Current Zoning is "CS" Community Service District. The Land Use Category is Mixed Use. The Owner /Applicant is Highland Meadow Montessori Academy. Four written notices were sent out and two written responses were received in favor within the 200' notification area. Public Hearing. Ms. Gandy also explained that a variance request to the masonry requirements for structures in the "CS" District was to be reviewed as part of this approval. The applicant wants to be able to maintain the same appearance and be consistent with the existing buildings. Commissioner McGarity asked if the portable building would be removed from the site. Ms. Gandy said the applicant would address this. C: \W PF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 4 Susan McKay, Chairman of the Board, Highland Meadow Montessori Academy, was present to represent this item. Ms. McKay said that all items in the Plan Review Summary of May 13, 1994 would be corrected by the next submittal date of May 23rd. She explained that with the addition of the new building, their plans are to remove the portable building. She commented that the existing sides of the existing buildings are a vinyl or steel siding and the approval of the masonry requirement would allow the new building to have the same ranch style appearance and a campus appearance. She said that a fire lane was inadvertently not shown on the proposal which would connect the two horseshoe drives. She explained that each horseshoe drive would be one way with one way in and one way out. She said that with the new building they anticipate 100 students. The two drives would allow parents to pick children up closer to the building which housed the student's class. It would also make it easier for parents with multiple children attending classes in both buildings easier access. By having the second drive, backup on Highland and Carroll would be somewhat alleviated because cars could get in and out faster, thus reducing the backup for cars waiting to turn into the one existing horseshoe drive in front of the school. Commissioner Johnson asked if the existing drive was two lane and if widening it and adding more parking would be a possibility. Ms. McKay said that both drives, for safety reasons especially, would remain two car width, one lane for parents to park, and one lane for cars to exit after the children have been picked up. Chairman Wright asked the applicant if she would have any problem in labeling both drives as one -way if approved and Ms. McKay said the revised Concept Plan would reflect this. Commissioner Murphy was concerned that there would, in theory, be twice as many cars using the drives and he had acceleration concerns with this increase in the number of vehicles. Commissioner McGarity asked if applicant had any problem with staff's recommendation of buffer yards to the east and if she would agree to show on the new submittal that the storage building would be removed. Ms. McKay said that all of staff's recommendations would be met and that the revised concept plan would show the removal of the storage building. She commented that their wish was to meet the needs of the school, while keeping an aesthetic appearance. Commissioner Johnson commented that the south buffer yard was slightly off according to the plan. Public Hearing. Leon Berchfield, 1521 N. Cooper, Arlington, TX, representative for the builder, William Scotsman, explained that the south side of the property was a wooded lot and that approximately C: \W PF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19. Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 5 50% of the trees were not shown on the current Concept Plan but that they would be on the May 23, 1994 revised plan. Public Hearing Closed. Commissioner Tate asked for explanation of the two drive recommendation and what is intended. Community Development Director, Greg Last, explained that there is concern with the commercial uses on Highland and the potential danger of traffic movements along Highland with too many driveways. Limiting access to two drives would control access and would better address safety issues. He said safety for the children of the school is the basis of the recommendation for the two drives. Commissioner Johnson said that he would vote no based on the driveways but he supported the project. Motion was made to approve ZA 94 -37 Concept Plan subject to the first Plan Review Summary dated May 13, 1994, deleting item #9 requirement of a masonry product and deleting item #12, accepting Applicant's commitment to tie together the two horseshoe drives with a fire lane and label the drives one -way on the revised Concept Plan. Motion: McGarity Second: Tate Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, and Tate Nays: Johnson Approved: 5 -1 Agenda Item #6 ZA 94 -38, Plat Revision /Highland Meadow Montessori Academy Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for a Plat Revision of Lot 3, Block 1, Chivers Park Addition, and Tract 4H situated in the A.H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 299, and being revised to Lot 3R, Block 1, Chivers Park Addition. The location is 1060 E. Highland Street. The Current Zoning is "CS" Community Service District. The Land Use Category is Mixed Use. The Owner /Applicant is Highland Meadow Montessori Academy. Three written notices were sent out and two written responses were received in favor within the 200' notification area. Susan McKay, Chairman of the Board, Highland Meadow Montessori Academy, was present to represent this item. Ms. McKay informed the Commission that two acres had been acquired by the school and the request was to plat these two acres with the existing property to make one single property for the purpose of expanding the school. She stated that she was in agreement of all items on the Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994. Public Hearing. No one responded and the Public Hearing was closed. C: \ W PF \MTG \MIN \MINO5 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 6 Motion was made to approve ZA 94 -38 Plat Revision subject to first Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994. Motion: Johnson Second: McGarity Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Approved: 6 -0 Agenda Item #7, ZA 94 -39, Rezoning Request /White Chapel Place Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for Rezoning approval for a 13.729 acre tract of land situated in the Hiram Granberry Survey, Abstract 581, being a portion of Lot 2, Block A, White Chapel Place Addition. The location is East of South White Chapel Blvd. at the intersection of Lilac Lane and Pine Drive. The Current Zoning is "RE" Residential Estate and the Requested Zoning is "SF -1A" Single Family Residential. The Land Use Category is Low Density Residential The Owners are Wanda Pulliam and Deloris Ann Pearson and the Applicant is Stephen J. Bezner. Thirteen written notices were sent out and one written responses was received in favor and three written responses were received undecided within the 200' notification area. Commissioner Arnold asked if proposed development would be hooked onto the City Sewer System or septic tanks and was told by Greg Last, Community Development Director, that they would hook onto the sewer system. Commissioner McGarity asked if this was a portion of Lot 2 and not all of Lot 2 and Ms. Gandy explained that the surveyor said that it was a portion and that he might have other information not available to Ms. Gandy. Commissioner Murphy asked Ms. Gandy to characterize the undecided written response and Ms. Gandy said that it only said "need more information." Stephen J. Bezner was present to represent this item. Note: Throughout the Public Hearing process on this case, reference is made to Lot 1R, 2R, 3R, etc. The lots are correctly described as Lot 2R1, 2R2, 2R3, etc. Mr. Bezner informed the Commission that this property was never properly platted and the purpose of the rezoning was to bring the conforming zoning to his property. He stated that he intended to build his own home on a portion of the property and he presented a map showing the surrounding property as already zoned to SF -1A. He stated that his plat proposes six two - acre lots, the plat meets the thoroughfare plan and water requirements, and that he recommends a septic system but he would hook up to existing city sewer if available. He said he wants to keep large lots to keep the country setting and that his proposal was a good transition to Timarron which is a higher density. He told the Commission that his wife grew up in Southlake and he wished to settle his family in Southlake. C: \ W PF \MTG \MIN \MINO5 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 7 Commissioner Johnson asked if Lot 5R was where Mr. Bezner's was going to build his home and if he planned to share the horse barns with the neighbors since he had provided equestrian easements. Mr. Bezner said he did not plan to take care of his neighbor's animals and that he was providing the equestrian easements as a courtesy to anyone who wished to use the easements. Commissioner McGarity asked about the existing structures on the property and if Mr. Bezner had any intention of tearing down these structures. Mr. Bezner said that he had not definitely decided but he did understand that if he tore these down he could not rebuild them. Public Hearing. Barbara Rudduck, 217 Lilac Lane, owns the property that runs along the east side. She is concerned about the buffer zone on this proposal. She wants to know what size homes are going to be built. She is opposed to homes under 2800 square feet. She is also concerned about the 31' wide road. This is a large road and she would like to see it eliminated. Keith Cedras, 711 S. White Chapel Blvd., had general concerns on access to Lot 1R, and was told that 1R would contain a home and the access would be the driveway. Mr. Cedras also had a question on equestrian facilities as to zoning and Chairman Wright explained that privately owned horses or other animals required a certain amount of grazing land for each animal. Jim Branton, 611 S. White Chapel Blvd., said he was informed by developers that another home would be built on Lot 1R. Chairman Wright said that under the current zoning this was not allowed unless they tore down the existing house. Mr. Branton also said it appeared to him that Lots 2R & 3R are just over 1 acre in size and not 2 acres as Mr. Bezner has stated. Jack Rudduck, 217 Lilac Lane, owns the property that runs along the east side of the subject property. He said that this property is all uphill and that the drainage runs to the southeast corner which subsequently runs through his back yard. He is also concerned about the 31' road which will directly run along his property line. He would like a buffer zone of some type between his property line and the street curb. He is also concerned about the bar ditch which will run along the street and is concerned with even more water coming onto his property. Roger Motts, 859 S. White Chapel Blvd. said he recently purchased this property and he gets quite a bit of drainage from Lot 5R around the existing metal buildings. Mr. Motts has a stock tank on his property and he is concerned with this drainage going into his stock tank and polluting it. He is in favor of the clean up of Lot 5R and the removal of what looks like a junk yard. David Diepenbrock, 841 S. White Chapel Blvd. owns property adjacent to the back end of subject property. He asked for a definition of "SF -1A" and Chairman Wright explained that lots no smaller than one acre could be allowed in this type of zoning. This concerned Mr. Diepenbrock because this allows the possibility of smaller lots even though 2 acre lots are proposed. He commented that the clean up around the metal barn would be a plus but that there C: \W PF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 8 are also pens made with metal pipes that he says should come down. He too is concerned about the drainage. He said that the water flows down from neighbor to neighbor and any change to alter this would be detrimental. He also said that if equestrian easements were to be provided that there should be some type of privacy fence or trees and shrubs as a buffer. Marzio Zanaboni, 811 S. White Chapel Blvd., said he did not want to see 1/2 acre lots and Chairman Wright explained that only one acre lots would be allowed. Mr. Zanaboni is also concerned about the large metal building and would like to see it come down. He is in favor of the clean up around the building. Mr. Bezner responded to the audience comments saying that the buffer zone on the east boundary was existing trees and he was not planning to remove these trees. He said that most of Southlake has a drainage problem. The water has to go somewhere and the natural flow is to the East. There is a lot of erosion since nothing has been done in the past to decrease erosion. His surveyor said that this proposal will help drainage and erosion. He said that Lilac does not have a good water retention and that the bar ditch will make it more channelized. He said that the lots were an average of 2 acres but that 2 lots were the minimum. He commented that the metal building would be right outside his kitchen window and he would be looking directly out onto it. He said that he would be tearing down some structures and cleaning up the area but that he has not made a definite decision about the large metal building. He would like to have some storage and feels that he should not have to remove the building since he has paid for it. He has no problem in removing the equestrian easement since he did this for the preservation of a country setting and never intended to cause upset to adjacent property owners. A member of the audience then asked Mr. Bezner to address the size of homes to be built and he explained that his home would be 4200 square feet and that deed restrictions would allow 2500 square feet or larger. Public Hearing Closed. Commissioner Tate asked the specifics of hooking on to sewer and Mr. Last said he would confirm the location of the sewer stub before the next City Council meeting. Mr. Bezner said he would prefer to hook onto the sewer line if it is available. Commissioner Johnson asked staff if drainage in this development could possibly be worse with the approval of this proposal. Mr. Last said that Applicant cannot change the point of outfall. If the water goes across a property it must continue to go across the property. Using the pond as retention area was proposed but without final construction plans, it is not possible to tie down grades and outfall. It could possibly be improved. Mr. Last also commented that if the homeowners worked the developer, they might reach a possible solution to channel the water more efficiently. Chairman Wright commented that Timarron's ground may have shifted and the channel might need to be cleaned out. He suggested that the City make them do so. Mr. Last said he would look into it. C: \W PF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 9 Commissioner McGarity asked Mr. Rudduck what type of buffer he wanted between his property and the street. Mr. Rudduck said a wooden rail fence or pipe fence or shrubs. Anything to cut down on the noise. He said he has lived there for six years and five of those years he has listened to bulldozers, saws or concrete trucks seven days a week. Commissioner McGarity summarized the issues that had been addressed as follows: Lot 2R1 contains a home and no other house can be built on it; he commented that the owner of a property, in his opinion, should not be told to remove existing buildings he has bought and paid for; he said that the equestrian easements are a benefit and that only one homeowner was against this; the minimum home size addressed is 2500 sq. ft. and not 2800 sq. ft.; City staff will see to it that more drainage problems will not be created; and we have an opportunity here to clean up acreage which contains what is considered junk by many of the surrounding property owners. Commissioner Murphy pointed out that the property on the west in particular will be more aesthetically benefited after the clean up. Commissioner Johnson commented that the buffer was the only issue still in question. Commissioner Murphy commented that it would be a disadvantage to Mr. Rudduck if the road is moved. Mr. Bezner said there is already a barb wire fence between the road and Mr. Rudduck's property and he would not remove this. Motion was made to approve ZA 94 -39 Rezoning request recommending zoning change from "RE" Residential Estate to "SF -1A" Single Family Residential. Motion: McGarity Second: Tate Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Approved: 6 -0 Agenda Item #8, ZA 94 -40, Plat Revision Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for a Plat Revision of 13.729 acres situated in the Hiram Granberry Survey, Abstract No. 581, being a portion of Lot 2, Block A, White Chapel Place Addition and being revised to Lots 2R -1, 2R -2, 2R -3, 2R -4, 2R -5 & 2R -6, Block A, White Chapel Place Addition. The location is East of South White Chapel Blvd. at the intersection of Lilac Lane and Pine Drive. The Land Use Category is Low Density Residential. The Owners are Wanda Pulliam and Deloris Ann Pearson and the Applicant is Stephen J. Bezner. Four written notices were sent out and no written responses were received within the 200' notification area. Note: Throughout the Public Hearing process on this case, reference is made to Lot 1R, 2R, 3R, etc. The lots are correctly described as Lot 2R1, 2R2, 2R3, etc. C: \WPF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 10 Commissioner McGarity commented that the plat showed Lot 1R labeled as 1 acre and he asked the actual size. Mr. Last said it was 3 1/2 acres. Commissioner Arnold and Commissioner McGarity asked for clarification on staff comments concerning "percolation tests" and "all due taxes." Mr. Last said sewer requirements are not addressed on Plat Reviews and are addressed on Engineering Reviews and he will have this comment removed if public sewer is in fact available. Mr. Last explained that the City Council has asked all departments to pursue back taxes and the comment regarding all due taxes" forewarns the applicant prior to submittal of the mylars for filing. Stephen J. Bezner was present to represent this item. Mr. Bezner commented that most issues of the plat request had been addressed during the previous zoning request. He stated that the plat was set up to preserve a country setting. He stated that Mr. Rudduck was not in approval of the project from the very beginning. He said that the large lot next to Mr. Rudduck's property was 2 1/2 acres and that he preserved the pond for an aesthetic benefit to Mr. Rudduck. He also informed the Commission that all items listed on the Plat Review Summary will be addressed by May 23, 1994. Mr. Bezner also noted that easements are provided for sewer hook up if it becomes available. Commissioner McGarity had concerns on how Pine Drive connects. Mr. Last commented that the city would require the entire intersection to be reconstructed to a "T" shape with Pine Drive being a through street and Lilac coming into it at a 90 degree angle. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Bezner if he had any problems with the Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994 and Mr. Bezner said he will be in compliance by May 23, 1994 with his revised plat submittal. Public Hearing. No one spoke so Public Hearing closed. Chairman Wright pointed out to the audience that the city has made progress on being able to address problems and concerns through the development process, and if this zoning is approved, drainage issues will be addressed through the engineering process. Motion was made to approve ZA 94 -40 Plat Revision subject to the Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994. Motion: Johnson Second: Arnold Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Approved: 6 -0 Chairman Wright called a recess a 9:32 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 9:47 p.m. C \WPF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 11 Agenda Item #9, ZA 94 -41 Rezoning and Development Plan /Fountain Park Estates Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for Rezoning and Development Plan approval for Fountain Park Estates being a 54.597 acre tract of land situated in the S.H. Thompson Survey, Abstract No. 1504. The location is approximately 700' East of Davis Blvd. on the South side of West Continental Blvd. The Current Zoning is "AG" Agricultural and "SF -20A" Single - Family Residential and the Requested Zoning is "R-P.U.D." Residential Planned Unit Development. The Land Use Category is Medium Density Residential. The Owners are Edward A. Ponder, Dr. Roger H. Bohanan, and Continental Joint Venture; Nicholas R. DiGiuseppe, Agent and the Applicant is Terry Sandlin Homes, Inc. Nine written notices were sent out and one written response in opposition was received within the 200' notification area. Ms. Gandy informed the Commission that the Applicant had submitted a Final Plat on an addition called Country Walk which was approved by the Commission but was never filed. This request is for the additional property to be added to the south of the Country Walk property which will now be called Fountain Park Estates. Commissioner McGarity asked for clarification on park dedication and Community Development Director, Greg Last responded that they have offered to dedicate twelve acres for public or private use to the City of Southlake. Commissioner Arnold was concerned about Street C and parking at the end and the need for some type of warning or restraint to keep cars from going straight into the pond at the end of the road. Commissioner Tate asked for confirmation from Ms. Gandy that there were 56 Lots on 43 acres in the original Country Walk Addition. Ms. Gandy did confirm this. Terry Sandlin was present to represent this item. Mr. Sandlin passed out written comments for the Commission to consider along with the discussion. Commissioner Johnson voiced concerns of the potential impact on operations at Goode Airport. He said the plan does not reflect any open space for a crash area. Mr. Sandlin explained that he has had three meetings with Mr. Goode regarding the purchase of his property. He said that along with his offer he knew that three other solid offers had been made to Mr. Goode and Mr. Sandlin is confident enough that the airport will not be an issue, even though an offer has not been accepted by Mr. Goode for the sale of the airport. Commissioner Johnson is concerned that if the airport did not go away there would be six or seven lots that would be affected. C: \WPF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19. Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 12 Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Sandlin to explain the school area in the south and address the issues such as lighting and public access. Mr. Sandlin said that it would be tree lighting or moon lighting. He also explained that the front entry to the addition would have an automatic open and close gate and would be monitored with a 48 hour recorded tape. Commissioner McGarity asked Mr. Sandlin to clarify Dr. Bohanan's access and Mr. Sandlin explained that he accessed his road on his property in Keller. He said that Dr. Bohanan has an access to Davis Blvd. but that he never uses it. Commissioner Arnold asked if Mr. Sandlin was working with the Park Department and the School System. Mr. Sandlin said that he had met with the School System and they are in favor of the addition of the three planned multipurpose fields (for daytime use). Mr. Sandlin said he has not met with the Parks Department but that he plans to. Mr. Sandlin explained that there will be two points of ingress to the park with 17 parking spaces and a 4' picket fence around the parking area. Commissioner McGarity commented that the park appeared to be nothing more than a creek bottom. Mr. Sandlin stated that the park would have a pond with fountains, a jogging trail, basketball goals and playground equipment. Commissioner McGarity is very concerned about the proposed housing in the crash zone. He is opposed to homes being built next to the existing airport because of the noise and safety issues. Mr. Sandlin discussed minimum square footage of homes, lot width and depth, and minimum side yard requirements and front set backs with the Commission. Commissioner Arnold asked Applicant if he had any problems with the Plan Review Summary dated May 13, 1994 and Mr. Sandlin replied that he did not. Public Hearing. Carter Hampton, Attorney, 860 Airport Frwy., Hurst, TX spoke to the Commission on behalf to the western neighbor, Texas Art Stone Co, Betsy B. Shatley. He explained that there was no planning in this P.U.D. which addressed the affect on the Western neighbor. There is no spacing between the two properties other than a backyard. He stated that 96 homes would back up to a concrete batch plant and that eventually the families of these homes would cause this family owned business to go out of business. Mr. Hampton said that when a small subdivision goes in the property value of its neighbors comes down. Chairman Wright brought up a situation in the past similar to this request where it was decided that industrial uses should not be brought near the school but leave the industrial to the west. C: \WPF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19. Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 13 The issue of the airport runway was a concern. There was much discussion and that plan got in trouble and was denied. Now we are trying to address that same issue again. Harry Gilliland, 624 Merrill Dr., explained his property was zoned "AG" Agricultural and that he had 9 -21 horses, part time or boarded, on his property. He commented that there could be complaints of airplanes, or dust, or even from the smell of horses. His main concern is if small parcels and small homes are built next to his property, the value of his property would decrease. He commented that the entry gate into the subdivision would be good and asked for clarification as to where it would be with regard to the widening of Continental Blvd. Mr. Last explained the location as being outside Continental Blvd. R.O.W. Commissioner Johnson commented that he had been reading the preamble to the P.U.D. section of the ordinance in regard to special features such as open spaces. He stated that no special features to this proposal were outlined other than the proposed creek bottom park and, in his opinion, this did not fit the specified idea of the section of the ordinance. Commissioner McGarity commented that even though the proposed park was larger than the previous park, since it was in a flood plain it is not an acceptable trade for the original five acre park located at the end of the airport runway. Commissioner Tate clarified that we exchanged a 5.3 acre park and picked up 7 -8 acres of flood plain for a 13 acre park. Chairman Wright asked the applicant to put his imagination to work and come up with a proposal that addressed the concerns of the Commission. He suggested considering the property to the West, the number of lots, the lot depth, and the airport runway issue. Motion was made to table Item #9, ZA 94 -41, Rezoning and Development Plan for Fountain Park Estates as requested by the Applicant, Terry Sandlin Homes, Inc. to the June 9, 1994 Planning and Zoning Meeting and continue the Public Hearing. Motion: McGarity Second: Johnson Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Approved: 6 -0 Agenda Item #10, ZA 94 -42, Final Plat /Slayton Addition Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for approval of the Final Plat of Lot 1, Block 1, Slayton Addition, being 1.00 acre situated in the J.G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18. The location is 2815 W. Southlake Blvd. The Current Zoning: "SF -1A" Single Family Residential. The Land Use Category is Low Density Residential. The Owner is Ruby Slayton and the Applicant is Charles Slayton. C: \WPF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 14 Commissioner McGarity commented that Council did not recommend common access easement. Motion was made to approve ZA 94 -42 Final Plat subject to the first Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994. Motion: Johnson Second: Arnold Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Approved: 6 -0 Agenda Item #11, ZA 94 -43, Final Plat of Farrar Addition Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for approval of the Final Plat of Farrar Addition Lot 2, Block 1 being 23.958 acres situated in the T. Mahan Survey, Abstract No. 1049. The location is North of F.M. 1709, South of Hwy. 114 and West of Short Avenue. The Current Zoning is "C -3" General Commercial District. The Land Use Category is Mixed Use. The Owner is Billie N. Farrar and the Applicant is Adams Consulting Engineers. Commissioner Johnson asked if this was the Eastern part of the tract and Ms. Gandy confirmed that it was. Chairman Wright asked Ms. Billie Farrar if she had any concerns and Ms. Farrar asked about easements and the plans for the balance of the property. Community Development Director, Greg Last answered that a preliminary plat had been received and when the property was purchased or developed the city would require some conceptual easements for water or sewer. Basically these easements put the buyer on notice that easements will be required. Motion was made to approve ZA 94 -43 Final Plat subject to the first Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994. Motion: Tate Second: Murphy Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Approved: 6 -0 Agenda Item #12, ZA 94 -44, Final Plat /Lonesome Dove Estates, Phase I Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for approval of the Final Plat of Lonesome Dove Estates, Phase I, being 47.859 acres situated in the N.E. Thompson Survey, Abstract No. 1563. The location is North of Emerald Estates, East of North Carroll Avenue, South of Burney Lane, and West of Lonesome Dove Avenue. The Current Zoning is "R- P.U.D." Residential Planned Unit Development. The Land Use Category is Medium Density Residential. The Owners are Mary M. Arnold, Gary Cantrell, C: \W PF \MTG \MIN \MINO5 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 15 Larry D. Parker, Sharon K. Parker, Cindy Atkinson, and Randy A. Parker and the Applicant is Tom M. Matthews, Jr. d /b /a/ Hat Creek Development. John Levitt was present to represent this item. Commissioner Johnson asked for clarification as to where the cars would park and Mr. Levitt explained the location of the parking lot. Chairman Wright asked the applicant if he had any problems with the Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994 and Mr. Levitt said no. Motion was made to approve ZA 94 -44 Final Plat subject to the first Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994. Motion: Arnold Second: McGarity Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Approved: 6 -0 Agenda Item #13, ZA 94 -45, Final Plat of Oak Tree Estates (formerly known as Hillcrest Estates) Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the Applicant's request is for approval of the Final Plat of Oak Tree Estates (formerly known as Hillcrest Estates) being 75.954 acres situated in the John A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529 (of which 38.647 acres is filed of record as Lots 1 -17, Block B, Greenway Industrial Park). The location is on the East side of South Carroll Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet South of intersection of South Carroll Avenue and East Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). The Current Zoning is "SF -20B" Single Family -20B Residential. The Land Use Category is Medium Density Residential. The Owner is W.E. Dalton and the Applicant is Papagolos Development Company. John Papagolos was present to represent this item. Chairman Wright asked Applicant if he had any problems with the Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994 and Mr. Papagolos answered no, other than the request to change the name from Hillcrest Estates to Oak Tree Estates. He explained that one of his backers wanted this change and he asked the Commission to approve this change. Mr. Last said there is no problem in doing this other that there are lot of subdivisions using "Oak." Commissioner Murphy asked if this would cause a problem for the fire department and Mr. Last said they are more concerned with street names. Motion was made to approve ZA 94 -45 Final Plat subject to the first Plat Review Summary dated May 13, 1994. Motion: Johnson c:\WPF\MTG\MIN\MIN05-19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 16 Second: Tate Ayes: McGarity, Arnold, Murphy, Wright, Johnson, and Tate Nays: none Approved: 6 -0 Agenda Item #14, ZA 94 -46 City Initiated Rezoning Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, informed the Commission that the City of Southlake is exercising its right to rezone property and is requesting rezoning of the properties not conforming to the Land Use Plan to include 160 acres of land legally described as Tracts 5, 6A, 6A1, 6B, 6B1, 6B2, & 6B3 situated in the J.A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529 and Tracts, 1, 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, & 2C1 situated in the J.W. Hale Survey, Abstract No. 803. The location is North of E. Continental Blvd., East of South Carroll Avenue, South of Woodland Heights Addition, and West of South Kimball Avenue. The Current Zoning is "B -1" Business Service Park District and "I -1" Light Industrial District and the Requested Zoning is "SF -20A" Single Family Residential. The Land Use Category is Medium Density Residential. The Applicant is the City of Southlake. Forty -eight (48) written notices were sent out three written responses were received within the 200' notification area, one in favor, one undecided because of concerns of a water tower being on residentially owned property, and one opposed. Four written responses were received outside the 200' notification area, three in favor and one from Mark Cunningham to place on record that Diamond Shamrock has a pipeline easement and would like to be made aware of any future preliminary plats. Ms. Gandy explained that this request was to bring nonconforming properties in line with the Land Use Plan and comprehensive zoning ordinance by exercising the city's right to rezone. Commissioner McGarity asked where the potential site for the water tower would be and Mr. Last showed the potential site on the Master Plan. He explained that City Council has asked the Engineering staff to pursue another site and they are in the process of doing this now. Mr. Last explained that it was still up in the air as to where the water tower will be, and that this site was chosen because of its elevation. He commented that the preference is to locate it outside of residential areas. Commissioner McGarity commented that since the city created zoning, it should be taken back to zero and let the zoning evolve to whatever someone can make a case for. Commissioner Johnson clarified that existing zoning such as "I -1" Light Industrial District would be changed to "SF -20" Single Family Residential with a legal non conforming use if approved. Commissioner Arnold asked if "SF -20" was being considered because it conformed to the areas surrounding the proposed rezoned property. Commissioner McGarity said "AG" Agricultural would conform to the surrounding areas more - so than "SF-20." C: \W PF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 17 Public Hearing. Lee Foster, 1713 Rainbow St., has lived in the area for 28 years. His comments on the area are that it is set up for commercial development; there is an old street that is hard to get up and down; the city's planning was commercial; the area is the lower rent end of Southlake; if the area went residential it would overload schools; Woodland Heights has been a problem since it was developed; there are all kinds of commercial development on E. Continental Blvd.; drainage is not good; and he stated that this is a good place for commercial development and industrial. Mr Foster is adamantly against this proposal. Norman J. Brown, 2917 Odell Ct., Grapevine, is opposed to the change in zoning. He said that the best and highest use is business, in his opinion. He has lived in the area for 16 years. If the zoning is changed it will impact the City of Southlake. The present zoning allows a better property tax base; if other businesses develop there will be more sales tax; it will offer services to be provided to the citizens of Southlake. He feels that changing to residential zoning is a mistake. Residential development will be exposed to all types commercial activity in the area. The area is not suitable for residential. Theron (Bubba) A. Ragen, 1512 Rainbow St., is concerned with downzoning the property. He owns and operates a business and said that any future problems arising because of the change to residential should be taken care of by the City. He is also concerned that if someone buys his property and wanted to continue the business, that person should not have to worry about the zoning being residential. Chairman Wright informed him that the new owner could continue with a business use. Billie Farrar, 600 W. Park Row Dr., Arlington, owns 80 of the 160 proposed property acres. She said that if the city did go through with the proposed rezoning, she would respect her neighbors, she would not disagree with what they are saying. She does, however, disagree with the location of the proposed water tower. It will look directly down on her property and she is concerned that it will lower the value if she decides to sell in the future. She said residential property is difficult to sell with a water tower near. She suggested that the property stay industrial or if it is changed to residential, then extend the East boundary to include the property across to S. Kimball Ave., let that be the dividing line, and let the existing businesses be grandfathered in. She also said the proposed ball park would affect residential homes with its bright outdoor lights. Janis Myler, does not own property but rents 1/2 acre within the subject area. She commented that airplanes go overhead and are very loud and emit noticeable fumes; she said that the area is not an attractive area because of the existing businesses; dogs can be heard barking at night; she does not think it is a good idea to build residential homes in this area. Chairman Wright recessed the meeting at 12:10 and reconvened the meeting at 12:21. Commissioner McGarity again suggested as proposed zoning to take the raw pieces of land back to "AG" Agricultural and have each case come forward as ground zero zoning cases. He said C: \WPF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 18 that the Land Use Plan is just a plan and he feels that it is not set in concrete and should be subject to change. Commissioner Johnson agreed with Commissioner McGarity. He commented that as individual cases come up the boundaries are somewhat movable. If they blanket the area to "SF -20" more problems will occur. "AG" Agricultural is a nice holding pattern. Planning and Zoning still has control over what happens as each case is considered on its merits. Commissioner Murphy stated that the Commission has heard from owners of approximately 121 of the overall 160 acres in question as opposed to this rezoning. This should be taken into consideration as well as the other issues discussed. Staff discussed the zoning fees involved should the zoning not change to "SF-20". Chairman Wright asked the audience if their choice would be "AG" or "SF -20" if they had a choice and several responded that they preferred Agricultural rather than residential zoning. Mr. Foster asked why the zoning could not be left as " B -1" Business Service Park District and Chairman Wright said that the zoning change was being considered in order to conform to the Master Plan. He said the goal of the City of Southlake is to zone in the direction that the city envisions it should be according to the Master Plan, and it this case the plan is for residential. Chairman Wright offered his opinion that his idea of the marketing of this property over the next few years would be toward residential as the best bet. Commissioner Tate asked if we were taking the zoning far enough to the east as Ms. Farrar had suggested. Ms. Gandy explained the location of various properties and what will buffer residential and industrial. Staff discussed businesses in that area, noise corridors, and building in noise corridors. Commissioner Johnson commented that the City of Southlake would be best served by sticking to the boundaries of the Land Use Plan. Public Hearing closed. Motion was made to recommend rezoning ZA 94 -45 to "AG" Agricultural versus of "SF -20A" Single Family Residential and forward to the City Council Meeting on June 7, 1994. Motion: McGarity Second: Johnson Ayes: McGarity, Murphy, and Johnson Nays: Tate and Arnold Abstain: Wright Approved: 3 -2 -1 c:\WPF\MTG\MIN\MIN05-19.94 Planning and Zoning Meeting May 19, 1994 Page 19 The meeting was adjourned at 12:47 p.m. Joe W,ght, Chairman ATTEST: Bobbye Shire, Community Development Secretary C:\ W PF \MTG \MIN \MIN05 -19.94 City of South lake, Texas CITY COUNCIL MEETING SIGN LT-A7-F 'YOU WISI SPEAK DURING THE MEETING — DATE: 5-11-5q Z NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE AGENDA ITEM ) 9 It) te-ktEk...1)R. Polto 474 75 / "7 a 3Z c e 0. 7 c eiv 91— fry S 7 f 9 // 7 7/ 951- /e-tic." -Z/9 99 -4 /7 .69a J a e 9?! - ?332- 3 4t a -u .414 (..c Y.J - - / Z A qe---) 1 //VS 72A/C 7, kO2Z -45 r - 167 Z/f 324 bo0 0191/11) Di efieNleoc4. Z 2. - _3?/ 7_ 0 3 4 CI . ') C .// (S'i