1996-05-23 P&Z Meeting City of Southlake, Texas
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 23,1996
LOCATION: 667 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas
City Council Chambers of City Hall
TIME: 7:00 P.M.
AGENDA:
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of
May 9, 1996.
3. Administrative Comments.
4. Consider: ZA96 -50, SITE PLAN FOR DYNAMIC TRAVEL AGENCY, being legally
described as being a portion of Lot 1, Block 1, Carrick Press Addition, and being
approximately 0.7688 acres. Location: South side of E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M.
1709). being approximately 500' east of the intersection of E. Southlake Blvd.
(F.M. 1709) and S. Kimball Ave. Current Zoning: "C = 3" General Commercial
District. Owner /Applicant: Dynamic Travel, c/o James Cosgrove. SPIN
Neighborhood #7.
Public Hearing
5. Consider: ZA96 -51, PLAT VACATION OF CARRICK PRESS ADDITION, being legally
described as Lot 1, Block 1, Carrick Press Addition, as recorded in Cabinet A, Page
385, P.R.T.C.T. and being approximately 2.57 acres. Location: South side of E.
Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), being_approximately 500' east of the intersection of
E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709) and S. Kimball Ave. Current Zoning: "C -3"
General Commercial District. Owner /Applicant, Southlake Kimball Venture, Ltd.
SPIN Neighborhood #7.
6. Consider: ZA96 -52, PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PERRY /ALLEN ADDITION, being
legally described as Tracts 6, 6B, and 6C of the S. Freeman Survey, Abstract No.
525, Tracts 2B, 2C and 2C1 of the G. W. Main Survey Abstract No. 1098, and Lot
1, Block 1, Carrick Press Addition as recorded in Cabinet A, Page 385, P.R.T.C.T.
and being approximately 4.4882 acres. Location: Southeast corner of S. Kimball
Ave. and E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). Current Zoning: "C -3" General
Commercial District. Owner /Applicant: Southlake Kimball Venture, Ltd. SPIN
Neighborhood #7.
�-- City of Southlake, Texas
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDA
MAY 23, 1996
PAGE 2
7. Consider: ZA96 -53, ZONING CHANGE FOR COTTON PATCH CAFE, on property
described as being a portion of Tract 2 situated in the John A. Freeman Survey,
Abstract No. 529, and being approximately 1.10 acres. Location: South side of E.
Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), being approximately 450' east of Westwood Dr. and
E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District.
Requested Zoning: "C -2" Local Retail Commercial District. Owner: Mary Frances
Frank Vandergrif£ Applicant: M & P Investments. A Concept Plan will be
considered with this request. SPIN Neighborhood #8.
Public Hearing
8. Consider: ZA96 -54, ZONING CHANGE FOR GENERAL OFFICES on property described
as a portion of Tract 2 in the John A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529, and Lot
2, John A. Freeman No. 529 Addition, and being approximately 3.02 acres.
Location: South side of E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). being approximately 450'
east of Westwood Drive. Current Zoning: "0-1" Office District and "AG"
Agricultural District. Requested Zoning: "0-1" Office District. Owner: Mary
Frances Frank Vandergrif£ Applicant: Ritz Properties. A Concept Plan will be
considered with this request. SPIN Neighborhood #8.
Public Hearing
9. Consider: ZA96 -55, SITE PLAN FOR SOUTHLAKE OAKS, on property being legally
described as being a portion of Tract 3C, Littleberry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No.
686, and being approximately 2.296 acres. Location: Northeast corner of the
intersection of Shady Oaks Dr. and E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). Current
Zoning: "C -2" Local Retail Commercial District. Owner /Applicant: FM 1709 -
Shady Oaks Ltd. SPIN Neighborhood #13.
Public Hearing
10. Discussion: MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN, addressing possible revisions to the City of
Southlake's currently adopted Master Thoroughfare Plan.
11. Consider: MEETING ADJOURNMENT.
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 17, 1996 at 5:00 p.m., pursuant to the
Texas Government Code, Chapter 551.
* City of Southlake, Texas
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDA
MAY 23, 1996 ` ►►►u ►UWU NIN4piii
PAGE 3 a���•0i sp U Tyk g
A id. .. ..r• ICJ
_Af4140 *NA ......A
Is a
Sandra L. LeGrand 44
City Secretary %, * ,f gatilautuMIS
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.
G:\WPF\MTG\AGN\1996\05-23-96.WPD
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION MEETING
MAY 23, 1996
1 COMMISSION PRESENT: Chairman Joe Wright, Vice - Chairman Ernest Johnson, Members:
2 Randy Arnold, Jim Murphy and Arthur Hobbs
3
4 COMMISSION ABSENT: None
5
6 CITY STAFF PRESENT: Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy, Planner Tom Elgin, Staff Engineer
7 Shawn Poe and Planner Chris Carpenter
8
9 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Wright at 7:09 p.m.
10
11 AGENDA ITEM #2, APPROVAL OF MINUTES
12 Chairman Wright opened discussion of the minutes of the May 9, 1996, Regular Planning and
13 Zoning Commission Meeting. Vice - Chairman Johnson made an amendment to line 31, page 10,
14 changing the phrase " ... would cause a petition to be started in opposition" to "... might cause a
15 petition to be started in opposition ".
16
17 Motion was made to approve the minutes of the May 9, 1996, Regular Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting, as amended.
20 Motion: Johnson
21 Second: Murphy
22 Ayes: Wright, Arnold, Murphy and Johnson
23 Nays: none
24 Abstain: Hobbs
25 Approved: 4 -0 -1
26 Motion carried.
27
28 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 05- 23 -96, tape 1, section #00057)
29
30 AGENDA ITEM #3, ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS
31 Planner Tom Elgin informed the Commission of the following items:
32
33 1) The last item on the agenda calls for a discussion of the Master Thoroughfare Plan update.
34 Barring any time restraints due to resolution, Mr. Elgin and the transportation consultant, Larry
35 Hoffman, would like to provide the Commission with a progress report.
36
37 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 05- 09 -96, tape 1, section #00071)
38
Page 1
City of Southlake, Texas
AGENDA ITEM #4, ZA96-50. SITE PLAN FOR DYNAMIC TRAVEL AGENCY
Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for a
3 Site Plan for Dynamic Travel Agency being legally described as being a portion of Lot 1, Block 1,
4 Carrick Press Addition, and being approximately 0.7688 acres. The property is located on the south
5 side of E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), being approximately 500' east of the intersection of E.
6 Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709) and S. Kimball Ave. The current zoning is "C -3" General Commercial
7 District. The owner /applicant is Dynamic Travel, represented by James Cosgrove. The Land Use
8 Plan indicates Mixed Use and the Corridor Overlay designation is Retail /Commercial. Seven (7)
9 notices were sent to property owners within 200 feet, and there were three (3) written responses
10 received:
11
1►
•
Randy Perry, Southlake Kimball Venture Ltd., 11300 N. Central, Dallas, Texas 75243 -6712,
13 in favor, "The Site Plan is substantially in conformance with the Concept Site Plan approved
1' by the City of Southlake."
15 • Janice Miller, 165 S. Kimball Road, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
1. • Robert G. Lyford, 6502 Santolina Cove, Austin, Texas 78731, in favor and undecided about.
1
18 Mrs. Gandy noted that Mr. Lyford's comments to her indicated that his indecision was based on
111 whether his property to the east would be allowed a full- service drive along with the common drive
21 of this project. One (1) written response was received outside of the 200' notification area:
21
• Dennis Minder, 223 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
2 Vice - Chairman Johnson asked Staff to clarify the status of the Concept Plan approval for the area
2. of which this site plan is a part, because he recalls that there was a withdrawal of a previous Concept
2. Plan. Mrs. Gandy stated that there was a second Concept Plan which was submitted and approved
2 which amended access and circulation locations and provided additional acreage and lots that took
2: in the existing Carrick Press plat on the east. Mr. Johnson also asked Staff if there were drive or
2: access issues to be raised with the review of this submittal, and Planner Tom Elgin stated that since
31 those items were discussed at the Concept Plan level, they are typically not revisited, even if the
31 requirements are not met. Mr. Johnson also asked if the east -west easement goes to the west on the
3► Concept Plan, and Mr. Elgin agreed it did.
31
3' James Cosgrove, 2354 East Northwest Parkway, Southlake, Texas, 76092, was present to represent
3. this case and offered the following comments:
3.
3 1) Mr. Cosgrove stated that the travel agency has been in Southlake since 1983 and his business
3: has experienced growth to the point he needs new facilities.
3 2) He noted that a 25' access easement has been provided to the east, a common drive has been
41 provided for the west side, and a sewer line is being brought to his property.
41 3) He stated that the business hoped to provide a wide range of travel merchandise.
4►
Page 2
City of Southlake, Texas
Chairman Wright asked Mr. Cosgrove if he had seen the review from Staff for his plan, and Mr.
Cosgrove stated he had and had no problems with the comments. Vice - Chairman Johnson wanted
3 clarification with item #6 concerning a 25' common access easement, and Mr. Cosgrove noted that
4 this comment addressed a diagramming omission on the plan. Vice - Chairman Johnson also asked
5 if the labeling for "Future Parking" on the plan was for parking area that was not required, and Mr.
6 Cosgrove stated that this was parking area greater than what was required which may be used for
7 future parking. Mr. Johnson also wanted confirmation that articulation requirements were not
8 necessary for the rear (south) facade, and Staff confirmed that it was indeed outside of 400' from
9 property zoned residential or designated residential on the Land Use Plan.
10
11 Chairman Wright opened the public hearing. No one in the audience stepped forward to speak.
12 Chairman Wright closed the public hearing.
13
14 Commissioner Hobbs asked Staff for clarification on the lot numbering. Mr. Elgin stated that the
15 numbering is different in the approved Concept Plan than in the Site Plan for Dynamic Travel
16 because of Staff requested the renumbering from east to west and because this was the first lot being
17 developed.
18
19 Motion was made to approve ZA96 -50, Site Plan for Dynamic Travel Agency, subject to Plan
21 Review Summary No. 1 dated May 17, 1996.
21
Motion: Arnold
Second: Murphy
2' Ayes: Arnold, Murphy, Johnson, Wright and Hobbs
2 Nays: none
2. Approved: 5 -0
2 Motion carried.
2•
2� (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 05- 23 -96, tape 1, section #00570)
31
31 AGENDA ITEM #5. ZA96 -51 PLAT VACATION OF CARRICK PRESS ADDITION
3► Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for the
31 Plat Vacation of Carrick Press Addition, being legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Carrick Press
3' Addition, as recorded in Cabinet A, Page 385, P.R.T.C.T. and being approximately 2.57 acres. The
3 property is located on the south side of E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), being approximately 500'
3. east of the intersection of E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709) and S. Kimball Ave. The current zoning
3 is "C -3" General Commercial District. The owner /applicant is Southlake Kimball Venture, Ltd. The
38 Land Use Plan indicates Mixed Use and the Corridor Overlay designation is Retail /Commercial.
3' There were eight (8) notices sent to surrounding property owners within 200 feet, and the following
41 responses were received:
'1
Page 3
City of Southlake, Texas
• Randy Perry, Southlake Kimball Venture Ltd., 11300 N. Central, Dallas, Texas 75243 -6712,
in favor, "The Site Plan is substantially in conformance with the Concept Site Plan approved
3 by the City of Southlake."
4 • Janice Miller, 165 S. Kimball Road, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
5 Robert G. Lyford, 6502 Santolina Cove, Austin, Texas 78731, in favor and undecided about.
6
7 One (1) written response was received outside of the 200' notification area:
8
9 • Dennis Minder, 223 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
10
11 Motion was made to approve ZA96 -51, Plat Vacation of Carrick Press Addition.
1
13 Motion: Johnson
1' Second: Hobbs
15 Ayes: Arnold, Murphy, Johnson, Wright and Hobbs
16 Nays: none
17 Approved: 5 -0
18 Motion carried.
19
21 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 05- 09 -96, tape 1, section #00648)
21
AGENDA ITEM #6. ZA96 -52, PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PERRY /ALLEN ADDITION
Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for the
2' Preliminary Plat for Perry /Allen Addition, being legally described as Tracts 6, 6B, and 6C of the S.
2 Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 525, Tracts 2B, 2C and 2C1 of the G. W. Main Survey Abstract No.
2. 1098, and Lot 1, Block 1, Carrick Press Addition as recorded in Cabinet A, Page 385, P.R.T.C.T.
2 and being approximately 4.4882 acres. The plat proposes four lots. The property is located on the
2: southeast corner of S. Kimball Ave. and E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). The current zoning is "C-
2d 3" General Commercial District. The owner /applicant is Southlake Kimball Venture, Ltd. The Land
3 I Use Plan indicates Mixed Use and the Corridor Overlay designation is Retail /Commercial. There
31 were twelve (12) notices sent to surrounding property owners within 200 feet, and three (3) written
3► responses were received within that notification area:
3
3' • Randy Perry, Southlake Kimball Venture Ltd., 11300 N. Central Expressway, Ste. 407, Dallas,
35 Texas 75243 -6712, in favor. "The Plat conforms to the Concept Site Plan previously approved
3. by the City of Southlake."
37 • Janice Miller, 165 S. Kimball Road, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
38 • Robert G. Lyford, 6502 Santolina Cove, Austin, Texas 78731, in favor and undecided about.
39
'0 One (1) written response was received outside of the 200' notification area:
'1
'2 • Dennis Minder, 223 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
Page 4
City of Southlake, Texas
3 Mrs. Gandy stated that Staff would like the applicant to renumber the lots from right to left (east to
4 west) and will be adding an item #10 to the review letter to reflect this. Chairman Wright asked Mrs.
5 Gandy if this case was advertised as a public hearing, and she said it was, though it did not appear
6 on the agenda as such.
7
8 Chairman Wright opened the public hearing. No one from the audience wished to speak. Chairman
9 Wright closed the public hearing.
10
11 Vice - Chairman Johnson asked Staff if the problems with the common access easements had been
1 cleared up or need to be addressed now. Planner Tom Elgin stated that the issue is addressed in item
1 #7c.
1'
15 Motion was made to approve ZA96 -52, Preliminary Plat for Perry /Allen Addition, subject to Plat
1 • Review Summary No.1 dated May 17, 1996, as amended:
1
18 1) adding item #10 to provide for lot numbering from east to west
1•
21 Motion: Johnson
21 Second: Murphy
Ayes: Arnold, Murphy, Johnson, Wright, and Hobbs
Nays: none
2' Approved: 5 -0
2. Motion carried.
2•
2 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 05- 23 -96, tape 1, section #00800)
2
2.1 AGENDA ITEM #7, ZA96 -53, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR COTTON PATCH
31 CAFE
31 Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for the
3P Rezoning and Concept Plan for Cotton Patch Cafe, on property described as being a portion of Tract
31 2 situated in the John A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529, and being approximately 1.10 acres.
3' The property is located on the south side of E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), being approximately
3 450' east of Westwood Dr. and E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). The current zoning is "AG"
3 • Agricultural District, and the requested zoning is "C -2" Local Retail Commercial District. The owner
3 of the property is Mary Frances Frank Vandergriff, and the applicant is M & P Investments. The
38 Land Use Plan indicates Mixed Use, and the Corridor Overlay designation is Office /Commercial.
3 • There were seven (7) notices sent to surrounding property owners within 200 feet, and one (1)
' 1 written response has been received within that area:
1
i p • Mary Frances Frank Vandergriff 2895 Selma Lane, Farmers Branch, Texas 75234, in favor.
Page 5
City of Southlake, Texas
z.
3 Eleven (11) written responses were received outside of the 200' notification area:
4
5 • George D. Thayer, 217 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, "Does not
6 comply with the Corridor Overlay Plan ... no more pad sites are desired."
7 • Diane Faughn, 215 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, "This does not
8 conform to the Corridor Overlay Ordinance ... C -2 is already across the street ... amounts to
9 'spot zoning'."
10 • John G. and Martha Taylor, 209 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, " ...does
11 not fit with the plan of the Corridor Overlay Ordinance ... already plenty of commercially
11 zoned real estate ... would set precedence for 'spot zoning' ... traffic safety problem ...
1 restaurant crowds site."
1 4 Jerry Adcock, 204 Westwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, "I have no objection
•
15 to Office (0-1) zoning for this tract but I don't believe "C -2" is appropriate in the close
1. proximity to residential."
1 • George and Corrine Tuttle, 219 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, "This
18 would not comply with the current Corridor Overlay. We are concerned that this would be
1' encouraging 'spot' zoning."
21 • Karen Markum, 219 Westwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, "Interferes with
21 current Corridor Overlay causing spot zoning AGAIN if passed."
• Dennis and Pattie Minder, 223 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed,
"...opposed to "C -2 ", in favor of "0-1" designation. ...restaurants should be on north side of
2' 1709 and west of Wal -Mart. Goes against Corridor Overlay ordinance and you would once
2. again have spot zoning."
2. • Russell W. Leavens, 228 Westwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, "the addition
2 of a spot zoning issue to the (agenda) is a waste of time ... a restaurant at this location will
2.: once more cut the value of property ... conflicts with the Corridor Overlay in the master plan
2: ... keep in mind the Boxies Restaurant in Grapevine."
31 • Pat Morgan, 210 Westwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, "...does not fit with
31 the Corridor Overlay ordinance ... will have plenty of commercial property across the street
31 ... safety problem with high traffic in the area."
31 • Darrell McNutt, 212 Westwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, "Property values
34 will decline, ...traffic."
3 • Michael A. Schroetke, 211 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, opposed, who provided
3. a letter to that effect for the Commission.
3
38 Vice - Chairman Johnson asked Staff to clarify item #5a in the review, which requires items that
3' appear to be on the plan. Mrs. Gandy stated that the applicant indeed appears to have met the
1 requirement and reserved the right to clarify this item with the Planning Technician before going to
1 Council. Mr. Johnson also wished clarification on item #5b as to whether the surrounding property
was classified as zoned or unzoned for bufferyard calculation purposes. Mrs. Gandy stated she
believed the adjacent property was treated as zoned, though the table for unzoned property yields
Page 6
City of Southlake, Texas
the same requirement. Mr. Johnson commented that it would make a difference in which order the
cases are taken for this reason. Chairman Wright asked Staff if the opposition statements about being
3 in conflict with the Corridor Study were valid. Mrs. Gandy replied that the Corridor recommendation
4 was for Office /Commercial in that area. Mr. Johnson clarified that the currently adopted Land Use
5 Plan shows Mixed Use, which would allow for the proposal, and the Corridor Land Use
6 recommendations would not. Mrs. Gandy further clarified that the Corridor Study listed CS, 0-1,
7 0-2, B -1, HC, MF -1, and MF -2 districts as acceptable.
8
9 Rick Civitarese, 1850 Crown Drive, Suite 1113, Farmer's Branch, Texas 75234, was present to
10 represent the case and offered the following comments:
11
1 1) He conveyed the southern home -style format of the restaurant.
13 2) He stated that the owner of the chain is moving to Southlake.
14 3) He stated that the restaurant chain is very community oriented and has received several
15 commendations.
16
17 Vice - Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Civitarese if he had any response to the Plan Review Summary
18 No. 1 for his case. Mr. Civitarese stated he had and asked for the following exceptions to the letter:
19
21 1) He could not provide for item #5b, which required a 10' bufferyard width, and is asking for
21 a 5' width with "B" plantings.
2) He could not provide for item #6a, which required 250' spacing for the drives he is showing,
due to the location of the existing full- service drive.
2' 3) He stated he could not meet item #6b, which required 100' minimum throat depth due to the
2 size of the C -2 lot, to which Vice - Chairman Johnson asked if, in fact, it is the applicant's
2 choice to create a lot that size, to which Mr. Civitarese replied it was.
2 4) He stated he could not meet item #6c, the geometry requirements, and he requires one 30'
2 radii instead of the 50' required.
2d
31 Commissioner Hobbs asked if the parking requirements would still be met when the stub to the east
31 is deployed, and Planner Tom Elgin replied that the applicant had provided 68 spaces and was
3? required only 50.
3c
3' Chairman Wright opened the public hearing.
3
3. Rex Potter, 303 Waterford Court, Southlake, Texas, 76092, stated that he was opposed to the
3 proposal because it was not in conformance "with our planning" and represented a "piecemeal"
38 approach because of the variances requested by the applicant. Mr. Potter expressed concern that the
3. use was not appropriate under Corridor guidelines.
•1
1 Vice - Chairman Johnson stated a concern for the standing of the Corridor recommendations versus
0 the adopted Land Use Plan, and also stated his disagreement with the opposition letters which
proclaimed "spot zoning" was an issue. Mr. Johnson stated that he will nevertheless oppose this case.
Page 7
City of Southlake, Texas
Chairman Wright closed the public hearing.
3 Motion was made to deny ZA96 -53, Rezoning and Concept Plan for Cotton Patch Cafe.
4
5 Motion: Hobbs
6 Second: Johnson
7 Ayes: Wright, Arnold, Murphy, Johnson and Hobbs
8 Nays: none
9 Approved: 5 -0 (to deny)
10 Motion carried.
11
12 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 05- 23 -96, tape 1, section #01683)
13
14 AGENDA ITEM #8, ZA96 -54, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR GENERAL OFFICES
15 Vice - Chairman Johnson asked whether or not it would be appropriate to hear ZA96 -54, Rezoning
16 and Concept Plan for General Offices, in light of the development of events for agenda item #7
17 above, which is related. Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy stated that the Commission could
18 recommend an office use for the proposed C -2 zoning under this application and proceed on.
19 Chairman Wright asked whether the proposed zoning for this case would be tied to the Concept Plan,
20 and whether a revised Concept Plan would be needed for a different zoning proposal. Mrs. Gandy
21 stated that the Council could recommend and approve an office use for Lot 3 if the applicant so
desired.
2' Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy informed the Commission that the applicant's request was for
2 ZA96 -54, Rezoning and Concept Plan for General Offices, on property described as a portion of
2. Tract 2 in the John A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529, and Lot 2, John A. Freeman No. 529
2 Addition, and being approximately 3.02 acres. The property is located on the south side of E.
2: Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), being approximately 450' east of Westwood Drive. The current zoning
2.! is "0-1" Office District and "AG" Agricultural District. The requested zoning is "0-1" Office
31 District. The owner of the property is Mary Frances Frank Vandergriff, and the applicant is Ritz
31 Properties. A Concept Plan will be considered with this request. The Land Use Plan indicates Mixed
3► Use, and the Corridor Overlay designation is Office /Commercial. There were seven (7) written
31 responses sent to surrounding owners within 200' of the property, and no written responses within
34 this area were received. Five (5) written responses were received outside the 200' notification area:
35
3. • Dennis and Pattie Minder, 223 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
3 • Pat Morgan, 210 Westwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
38 George and Corrine Tuttle, 219 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor, "... this
•
3 • would be compatible with residential which surrounds the area."
1 • Linda Parker, 225 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
1 • Karen Markum, 219 Westwood Drive, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor.
r
Page 8
City of Southlake, Texas
Mrs. Gandy noted that there was a Revised Plan Review Summary before the Commission tonight
which added an item #6b, addressing the minimum driveway throat depth issue.
3
4 Vice - Chairman Johnson noted that the Concept Plan showed a "B" bufferyard on the north edge, and
5 he believed only an "A" bufferyard was required. Mrs. Gandy verified that an "A" bufferyard
6 appeared to be the correct one. Planner Tom Elgin noted that item #5c in the review summary in fact
7 called for the correction of the discrepancies in the bufferyard shown and the bufferyard labeled in
8 the chart. Mr. Johnson also wanted clarification that item #5b, noting that an F 1 bufferyard was
9 required but that an F1 fence existed, was just a clerical comment. Mr. Elgin stated that perhaps the
10 bufferyard does not exist, but the fence does. Mr. Johnson and Mrs. Gandy discussed the absence
11 of the bufferyard which apparently was supposed to be there, and Mrs. Gandy agreed to follow up
12 on the procedure taken during the approval of the initial office building.
13
1' Frank Ritz, 1212 Wyndham Hill, Southlake, Texas, 76092, was present to represent the case and
15 provided the following comments:
16
17 1) Intended to bring office buildings of same type as the buildings that exist on the site now.
18 2) Intended for the proposed new project to accomplish two things: (a) bring more affordable
19 office space to Southlake and (b) a restaurant.
21 3) Felt like the buffering between uses for their project was appropriate.
21 4) Will have to withdraw his proposal because of action taken on agenda item #7 above,
because the price of the land would be too high without the restaurant use.
2' Vice - Chairman Johnson noted that the P &Z only makes recommendation to Council. Mr. Ritz stated
2. that he understood this but that "the tone had been set" and that the whole intent was to provide the
2. restaurant location for the founder of the company, who is moving to Southlake.
2
2 Motion was made to grant applicant's request to withdraw ZA96 -54, Rezoning and Concept Plan
2►! for General Offices.
31
31 Motion: Murphy
3► Second: Johnson
31 Ayes: Wright, Arnold, Murphy, Johnson and Hobbs
34 Nays: none
3 Approved: 5 -0 (to withdraw)
3. Motion carried.
3
38 Chairman Wright called for a recess at 8:20 p.m.
3'
' (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 05- 23 -96, tape 1, section # 02188)
'1
Chairman Wright called the meeting back to order at 8:35 p.m.
Page 9
City of Southlake, Texas
AGENDA ITEM #9, ZA96 -55. SITE PLAN FOR SOUTHLAKE OAKS
Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for a
3 Site Plan for Southlake Oaks, on property being legally described as being a portion of Tract 3C,
4 Littleberry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 686, and being approximately 2.296 acres. The property
5 is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Shady Oaks Dr. and E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M.
6 1709). The current zoning is "C -2" Local Retail Commercial District, and the owner /applicant is
7 FM 1709 - Shady Oaks Ltd. The Land Use Plan indicates Medium Density Residential and the
8 Corridor Overlay designation is Retail /Commercial. A total of twelve (12) notices were sent to
9 surrounding property owners within 200 feet, and no responses have yet been received.
10
11 Vice - Chairman Johnson asked Staff if the thrust of item #16 in the review letter was that Staff only
12 received partial graphics for review of the site's articulation, and Planner Tom Elgin confirmed this
13 to be true.
14
15 Neal Cukerbaum, 13355 Noel Road, Suite 2400, Dallas, Texas, 75240, was present to represent the
16 case and offered the following comments:
17
18 1) His client is proposing a "neighborhood service center" with a mix of office and light retail
19 uses.
20 2) He has brought plan revisions for submittal which he believes addresses all the requirements
21 of the review letter, with the exception the following, which he says he has trouble meeting:
(a) He could not provide the 40' rear setback and still meet the parking requirements, so
he has provided 20' as a landscaped buffer with no service drive; he is also providing
2 a sidewalk and additional bufferyard on Shady Oaks.
25 (b) He cannot meet the 78' throat depth from F.M. 1709 due to what he feels would be
2. unacceptable internal traffic conflict.
2 (c) He needs access to Shady Oaks, because the F.M. 1709 drive is shared and is placed
8 as far east as possible to meet the intent of the Driveway Ordinance and the proposed
2 • circulation patterns.
31
31 Chairman Wright asked Mr. Cukerbaum if the new exhibits he plans to turn in tonight were drawn
3► to meet the articulation requirements, and Mr. Cukerbaum acknowledged that this was the case.
33 Vice - Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Cukerbaum to verify that the plans the Commission has before
3' them now differ from the ones he had brought to the meeting, and Mr. Cukerbaum agreed that the
35 "old" plans were before them, and made offer to table to the next meeting in order to give the
36 Commission a chance to review the revised plans. Chairman Wright noted that the Commission will
37 take this under advisement, but will continue to hear the case.
38
39 Chairman Wright opened the public hearing.
0
1 Commissioner Arthur Hobbs asked Staff how the reduction in the rear setback would affect fire
2 protection. Fire Marshall Roger Stewart was in attendance at the meeting and stepped forward to
note that, if the proposed structure is sprinklered, which this building will be, the City Fire
Page 10
City of Southlake, Texas
Department has the option under the Uniform Fire Code to not require a rear fire lane. Vice -
Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Stewart if the need for two access points into the site was important,
3 and Mr. Stewart answered no, because the already convenient location of the Fire Department
4 connection on Shady Oaks. Mr. Stewart did note, however, that another access point will always help
5 in fire truck circulation.
6
7 Chairman Wright contemplated the problem of placing the drive on F.M. 1709 and requiring the
8 throat depth to meet the Driveway Ordinance requirements, and agreed that these are considerable
9 constraints on the project. Vice - Chairman Johnson asked Staff what the distance was from F.M.
10 1709 to the entrance on Shady Oaks, and Planner Tom Elgin stated it was about 270 feet. Mr.
11 Johnson wondered if the allowance of a drive on Shady Oaks would cause a conflict with the
12 proposed Land Use (Low Density Residential) across the street. Chairman Wright discussed the
13 possibility of centering the drive on F.M. 1709 and eliminating the one on Shady Oaks, to which Mr.
14 Johnson stated he would foresee a problem with increases in eastbound traffic trying to turn across
15 lanes of traffic. Commissioner Hobbs stated that he felt that the project needed two drives on F.M.
16 1709, and Mr. Johnson stated he felt uncomfortable with two drives on F.M. 1709.
17
18 Mr. Cukerbaum was asked to speak on the items that the Commission had just discussed. Mr.
19 Cukerbaum indicated that the plan before them tonight had its origins in the purchase of property
21 to the north for the City Park, and there was no way to be 500' from the park drive and Shady Oaks,
21 so his plan reflects the best he could do in that area. Mr. Cukerbaum also noted that the increase in
traffic would probably necessitate a signal at this intersection, and he felt like the Shady Oaks
entrance would be the one most practically available to traffic heading to this site. He also stated that
2A he did not expect high frequency traffic with the type of uses this project proposes and did not
2 believe that stacking would be a problem. Chairman Wright asked what Mr. Cukerbaum thought of
2. the suggestion to eliminate the Shady Oaks entrance, and Mr. Cukerbaum said he felt like that they
2 needed one. Vice - Chairman Johnson stated that he had no problem with the requests that Mr.
2: Cukerbaum had made for the reduction in setback, the throat depth or the entrance on Shady Oaks,
20 but that he did want the opportunity to review the revised plans for articulation purposes, and
31 Commissioner Hobbs agreed. Commissioner Murphy stated that he agreed as well. There was some
31 discussion on the surrounding proposed land uses based on both the Land Use Plan and the Corridor
3► Overlay Study, as well as the depth of the land use recommendations of the Study, as the proposed
31 project relates to possible future projects.
3A
3 Motion was made to table ZA96 -55, Site Plan for Southlake Oaks, until the Regular Planning and
3. Zoning Commission Meeting of June 6, 1996, and continue the public hearing.
3
38 Motion: Murphy
3• Second: Johnson
1 Ayes: Wright, Arnold, Murphy, Johnson and Hobbs
1 Nays: none
Approved: 5 -0
Motion carried.
Page 11
City of Southlake, Texas
(Planning and Zoning Meeting, 05- 23 -96, tape 1, section # 03441)
3
4 AGENDA ITEM #10. DISCUSSION OF MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN
5 Planner Tom Elgin informed the Commission that the discussion tonight will center on the
6 confirmation of assignments of the number of traffic lanes to thoroughfares on the plan. Mr. Elgin
7 presented a map showing the current thoroughfare lanes, and also provided maps showing which
8 thoroughfares were projected to decrease in needed capacity and which ones were projected to
9 increase in needed capacity. Chairman Wright asked Mr. Elgin if the maps represented the items that
10 had been discussed at the work sessions, and Mr. Elgin stated they were, and they also represented
11 areas that the traffic consultant, Larry Hoffman, had been asked to study more closely. Among the
12 thoroughfares which showed a decreased need for capacity were:
13 1) T.W. King (north of the Trophy Club "connection ")
14 2) White Chapel from Bob Jones to Dove
15 3) Johnson from Pearson to Randol Mill
16 4) S. Pearson from 1709 to Union Church
17 5) Union Church from Pearson to Davis
18 6) South Peytonville
19 7) Southridge Lakes Parkway
20 8) Highland from White Chapel to Shady Oaks
21 9) Highland extension through Coventry
10) Old South Carroll
11) Kimball north of Dove
2' 12) Randol Mill (reduced from current state R.O.W. requirements, though it is an addition)
25
2 s Thoroughfare sections which were projected to need greater capacity were:
2 1) Byron Nelson Parkway from F.M. 1709 to Continental
2: 2) Kimball from 1709 to 114
2`
31 Vice - Chairman Johnson noted that he feels the rationale behind the different alterations to the MTP
31 as stated in Larry Hoffman's letter should be included in the "package" of information prepared for
3/ future meetings. Mr. Elgin stated that he and the consultant had preliminarily agreed to provide such
33 rationale in the text they are preparing.
3 A
35 Mr. Elgin also stated that he would like to take each of the items on the letter and build a consensus
36 of agreement on them.
37
38 1) Mr. Elgin and Mr. Hoffman stated that Southridge Lakes Parkway was built as four lanes and
39 will stay that way, but the designation on the MTP can be two lanes; Peytonville north of
0 Southridge Lakes Parkway can also remain two lanes (to the Coventry "extension" of
1 Highland)
, 2
Page 12
City of Southlake, Texas
Vice - Chairman Johnson and Chairman Wright asked Mr. Hoffman if Randol Mill were to somehow
remain four lanes at build -out, would the two lanes for this section still be sufficient, to which Mr.
3 Hoffman replied they would. The Commission agreed on this item.
4
5 2) Mr. Elgin and Mr. Hoffman stated that T.W. King will no longer have several connections
6 to it that were previously on Trophy Club's MTP, thereby reducing future capacity.
7
8 The Commission agreed on this item.
9
10 3) Mr. Elgin and Mr. Hoffman stated that Kimball north of Dove has a reduced need for future
11 capacity due to an increase of lanes for Silvercrest Road in Grapevine; this also makes
12 Kimball's capacities from city to city the same.
13
14 The Commission agreed on this item.
15
16 4) Mr. Elgin and Mr. Hoffman stated that the model initially showed Johnson Road taking
17 traffic flows from trips which were not logical, and after reassignment, the capacity showed
18 a two -lane facility was sufficient.
19
20 The Commission agreed on this item.
21
5) Mr. Elgin and Mr. Hoffman stated that the figures for Kimball between 1709 and 114 were
not available at the last work session, but they now know that the four -lane facility on the
24 current MTP will not be enough. Mr. Elgin further stated that the R.O.W. has already been
2 designed for a six -lane facility.
2.
2 The Commission agreed on this item.
2
2►! Mr. Elgin then asked the Commission which date would be most amenable for further discussion.
3, The next discussion, he stated, should encompass selection of various sections for the thoroughfares
31 and their related costs. Vice - Chairman Johnson stated that he would like the discussion to revolve
3► around all the possibilities for the different sections, rather than initially focusing on constraints, and
3 see where the discussion takes them, and Chairman Wright agreed. The Commission came to the
3' conclusion that the discussion will continue (and the item will be on the agenda) at the Regular
3 Meeting of June 6, 1996, as time permits and as Mr. Elgin is capable of providing information to
3. them. Mr. Wright asked Mr. Elgin about the status of the most recent State statutes regarding the
37 dedication of R.O.W. and the additional widths for trails. Mr. Elgin stated that he believed that the
38 liability for the impact of R.O.W. dedication has been greatly reduced in recent legislative sessions,
3' but he will check to make sure.
I ,
1 Karen Cienki and Rex Potter addressed the Commission, stating they felt that the two -lane width for
White Chapel from Bob Jones and Dove Road would not be adequate, due to the proposed park in
that area. Chairman Wright and Vice - Chairman Johnson stated that the Commission and Larry
Page 13
City of Southlake, Texas
Hoffman were aware of the increased activity in the area and were satisfied that peak traffic volumes
would be handled by two lanes. Mr. Hoffman was instructed by Mr. Johnson to get with the Parks
3 Department to double check his figures with their projections.
4
5 AGENDA ITEM #11, ADJOURNMENT
6
7 Motion was made to approve the adjournment of the meeting at 9:56 p.m. on Thursday, May 23,
8 1996.
9
10 Motion: Murphy
11 Second: Johnson
12 Ayes: Wright, Arnold, Murphy, Johnson and Hobbs
13 Nays: none
la Approved: 5 -0
15 Motion carried.
16
17 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 05- 23 -96, tape 1, section #05555)
18
1`
1
21
I i .
2 1
2 Joe Wri , t
2: Chairman
2)
31 ATTEST:
31
3 '
3c ' l/
3. Chri Carpenter ij
3 Acting Secretary
3✓ L: \WP- FILES \MTG \MIN\1996 \05- 23- 96.WPD
Page 14