1996-11-07 P&Z Meeting City of Southlake, Texas
REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 7, 1996
LOCATION: 667 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas
City Council Chambers of City Hall THIS MEETING TO BE CONTINUE#
WORK SESSION: 6:00 P.M. / ' G t i' 7 ) ,
1. Discussion of all items on tonight's meeting agenda.
REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M.
AGENDA:
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of October
17, 1996.
3. Administrative Comments.
4. Consider: PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN UPDATE.
Public Hearing.
APPROVED 6 -0
5. Consider: BICENTENNIAL PARK MASTER PLAN.
Public Hearing.
APPROVED 6 -0
6. Consider: BOB JONES PARK MASTER PLAN.
Public Hearing.
APPROVED 6 -0
7. Consider: ZA 96 -124, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR CRESTWOOD OFFICE
PARK, being approximately 3.5083 acres situated in the W. W. Hall Survey,
Abstract No. 695, being a portion of Tract 3D as recorded in Volume 8564, Page
285, D.R.T.C.T. Location: Northwest corner of the intersection of North Carroll
Ave. and Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709). Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural
District. Requested Zoning: "S -P -2" Generalized Site Plan District with "0-1"
Office District uses. Applicant: M & M Group, Inc. Owner: CFNVESTS
Southlake JV. SPIN Neighborhood #10.
Public Hearing.
APPROVED 4 -2
8. Consider: ZA 96 -130, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR TIMARRON
COMMERCIAL, TRACT I, being approximately 58.202 acres situated in the
James J. West Survey, Abstract No. 1620, Tract 1, as recorded in Volume 9827,
Page 974, D.R.T.C.T. Location: Southeast corner of the intersection of Dove
City of Southlake, Texas
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDA
NOVEMBER 7, 1996
PAGE 2
Road and State Highway No. 114. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District.
Requested Zoning: "SP -2" Generalized Site Plan District with Mixed Uses.
Owner and Applicant: Timarron Land Corporation. SPIN Neighborhood #2.
Public Hearing.
TABLED TO 1 -9 -97
9. Consider: ZA 96 -131, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR TIMARRON
COMMERCIAL, TRACT II, being Tracts 3 and 4A1 in the Absolom H. Chivers
Survey, Abstract No. 299; Tracts 1, 2, and 3A1 in the Larkin H. Chivers Survey,
Abstract No. 300, and being approximately 271.908 acres. Location: East of
North White Chapel Blvd., West of North Carroll Avenue and North of State
Highway No. 114. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District. Requested
Zoning: "NR -PUD" Non - Residential Planned Unit Development District for a
Mixed Use Business Park. Owner and Applicant: Timarron Land Corporation.
SPIN Neighborhood #4.
Public Hearing.
TABLED TO 1 -9 -97
10. Consider: ZA 96 -132, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR TIMARRON
COMMERCIAL, TRACT III, being approximately 200.822 acres situated in the
Richard Eads Survey, Abstract No. 481, being Tracts 1, 1A1, 1E, 2, 2A, 2B, 2B1A,
and 2C1, and in the Thomas Mahan Survey, Abstract No. 1049, being Tracts 2A,
2B, 2B1, 3, 3A, 3C, 5, 5C, and 5D. Location: North of State Highway No. 114,
East of N. Carroll Ave., South of E. Highland St.. and West of N. Kimball Ave.
Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District. Requested Zoning: "NR -PUD" Non -
Residential Planned Unit Development for a Mixed Use Business Park. Owner and
Applicant: Timarron Land Corporation. SPIN Neighborhoods #4 & #6.
Public Hearing.
TABLED TO 1 -9 -97
11. Consider: ZA 96 -133, AMENDED PLAT, for Lot 35R, Block 1; Lots 1R, 3R, and 16R,
Block 4; and Lots 13R and 15R, Block 5; being an amendment to Lot 35, Block 1;
Lots 1, 3, and 16, Block 4; and Lots 13 and 15, Block 5; Lonesome Dove Estates,
Phase Two, being approximately 2.3928 acres situated in the N.E. Thompson
Survey, Abstract No. 1563, and being 6 residential lots. Lonesome Dove Estates,
Phase Two, is located southwest of the intersection of Burney Lane and Lonesome
Dove Ave. and the affected lots are on McCrae Trail: along Horsehead Crossing,
Hat Creek Trail and Powder River Trail; and along Palo Duro Trail, respectively.
Current Zoning: "P.U.D." Planned Unit Development District, being P.U.D. No.
5, Lonesome Dove Estates. Owner and Applicant: H. Creek Development, Inc.
SPIN Neighborhood #3.
Public Hearing.
APPROVED 6 -0
City of Southlake, Texas
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDA
NOVEMBER 7, 1996
PAGE 3
12. Consider: ZA 96 -136, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR FOXBOROUGH
(FORMERLY FOX GLEN), for approximately 23.7 acres being Tract 3F and
approximately 0.186 acres being a portion of Tract 3E in the W. W. Hall Survey,
Abstract No. 695. This request proposes 63 residential lots, 2 non - residential lots
and 3 common areas. Location: North side of East Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709),
approximately 1140' west of the intersection of East Southlake Blvd. and N.
Carroll Ave. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District, and "0-1" Office
District. Requested Zoning: (on the above referenced 23.89 acres) is "SF -20A"
Single Family Residential District. A Concept Plan for Foxborough totaling
approximately 48.9 acres will be considered with the rezoning request plus
additional acreage as follows: approximately 21.72 acres, described as the northern
portion of Tract 3E in the W. W. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 695, previously zoned
"SF -20A" zoning and approved as Country Meadow Estates; approximately 1.72
acres zoned "0-1" Office District; and approximately 1.57 acres zoned "C -1"
Neighborhood Commercial District. Applicant: Crumbaker Development, Inc.
Owners: Beulah Cross c/o Ben Muir (Tract 3F) and Homei Liao and Jai Her
Hwang, Trustees (portion of Tract 3E). SPIN Neighborhood #10.
Public Hearing.
TO BE CONTINUED TO 11 -14 -96
13. Consider: ZA 96 -137, PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR FOXBOROUGH (FORMERLY FOX
GLEN), on property described as being approximately 48.9 acres, being Tracts 3E
and 3F in the W. W. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 695. This plat proposes 63
residential lots, 2 non - residential lots, and 3 common areas. Location: North side
of East Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), approximately 1140' west of the intersection
of East Southlake Blvd. and N. Carroll Ave. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural
District, "SF -20A" Single Family Residential, "C -1" Neighborhood Commercial
District, and "0-1" Office District. Applicant: Crumbaker Development, Inc.
Owners: Homei Liao and Jai Her Hwang, Trustees (Tract 3E) and Beulah Cross
c/o Ben Muir (Tract 3F). SPIN Neighborhood #10.
Public Hearing.
TO BE CONTINUED TO 11 -14 -96
14. Consider: ZA 96 -138, SITE PLAN FOR KINGSLEY PLACE, an Assisted Living Facility,
on the proposed Lot 4R -1, Block 6, Southridge Lakes, Phase C -1, on property
legally described as being the northwestern portion of Lot 4, Block 6, Southridge
Lakes, Phase C -1, being approximately 4.246 acres situated in the A.A. Freeman
Survey, Abstract No. 522. This plan proposes an assisted living facility containing
80 units. Location: East side of North Peytonville Avenue, approximately 200'
north of the intersection of N. Peytonville Ave. and W. Southlake Blvd. (F.M.
1709). Current Zoning: "C -3" General Commercial District. Applicant: Aguirre,
Inc. Owner: Southridge Center LP. SPIN Neighborhood #13.
Public Hearing.
TO BE CONTINUED TO 11 -14 -96
City of South lake, Texas
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDA
NOVEMBER 7, 1996
PAGE 4
15. Consider: ZA 96 -139, PLAT REVISION FOR THE PROPOSED LOTS 4R -1 AND 4R -2,
BLOCK 6, SOUTHRIDGE LAKES, PHASE C -1, being a revision of Lot 4, Block
6, Southridge Lakes, Phase C -1, being approximately 8.833 acres situated in the
A.A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 522. Location: East side of North Peytonville
Avenue, approximately 200' north of the intersection of N. Peytonville Ave. and
W. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). Current Zoning: "C -3" General Commercial
District. Applicant: Aguirre, Inc. Owner: Southridge Center LP. SPIN
Neighborhood #13.
Public Hearing.
TO BE CONTINUED TO 11 -14 -96
16. Consider: ZA 96 -141, FINAL PLAT OF THE PROPOSED LOTS 2, 3, AND 4, BLOCK 60,
TIMARRON ADDITION, PHASE 5, being legally described as being Lot 1 C2 and
a portion of Lots 1B2 and 1A2A, Block 1, Dilg Place, being approximately 7.627
acres situated in the Obediah W. Knight Survey, Abstract No. 899. Location:
Southeast corner of W. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709) and the proposed Byron
Nelson Parkway. Current Zoning: "P.U.D." Planned Unit Development District,
being P.U.D. No. 1, Timarron. Owner and Applicant: Timarron Land Corporation.
SPIN Neighborhood #9.
APPROVED 6 -0
17. Consider: ZA 96 -142, FINAL PLAT OF THE PROPOSED LOTS 1 -8, BLOCK 1, THE
WOODS ADDITION, being approximately 17.082 acres containing 8 residential
lots situated in the J. J. Freshour Survey, Abstract No. 521, Tract 1. Location:
Southeast corner of the intersection of Florence Road and Pearson Lane. Current
Zoning: "SF -1A" Single Family Residential District. Applicant: Bryant Real
Estate, Inc. Owner: V. T. Cross. SPIN Neighborhood #16.
APPROVED 6 -0
18. Consider: ZA 96 -143, REVISED SITE PLAN FOR PETSMART, on property legally
described as Lot 3, Block 2, Village Center, Phase II, an addition to the City of
Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A,
Slides 3095 and 3096 Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas. Location: West side
of the proposed Village Center Drive approximately 200' north of the intersection
of Village Center Drive and Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709). Current Zoning:
"C -3" General Commercial District. Applicant: Casco. Owner: PetsMart. SPIN
Neighborhood #4.
Public Hearing.
TO BE CONTINUED TO 11 -14 -96
19. Consider: ZA 96 -144, PLAT REVISION, for the proposed Lots 1R and 2R, Block 1, Lake
Crest Addition, being a revision of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Lake Crest Addition, and
being approximately 0.948 acres situated in the Hiram Granberry Survey, Abstract
No. 581. Location: North corner of the intersection of Lake Crest Drive and Clear
Lake Court. Current Zoning: "SF -20A" Single Family Residential District.
City of Southlake, Texas
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDA
NOVEMBER 7, 1996
PAGE 5
Applicant: Carter & Burgess, Inc. Owner: Pulte Homes and Kevin Sweeney.
SPIN Neighborhood #14.
Public Hearing.
APPROVED 6 -0
20. Consider: ZA 96 -145, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR SOUTHLAKE TOWN
CENTER, on property described as being approximately 109.330 acres situated
in the Richard Eads Survey, Abstract No. 481, being Tracts 2A and 3A and a
portion of Tract 3. The property is bordered by the following thoroughfares: State
Highway 114 on the north; Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) on the south; and
North Carroll Avenue on the west. Current Zoning: "C -3" General Commercial
District. Requested Zoning: "NR -PUD" Non - Residential Planned Unit
Development to include "C -3" General Commercial District uses. Applicant:
Rialto Development, L.P. Owners: FECHTEL GROUP (partnership) with general
partners: Alicia Marie Fechtel, Charles Fechtel, Mary Louise Logan, John
Randolph Fechtel, Marguerite Elizabeth Fechtel, and James Milton Fechtel (Tract
3); and Lorrie W. Beck, Leslie W. Klingman, and Carol Jean Peterka (Tracts 2A
& 3A). SPIN Neighborhood #4.
Public Hearing.
TO BE CONTINUED TO 11 -14 -96
21. Consider: ZA 96 -146, SITE PLAN FOR MESCO ADDITION, LOT 5, on property legally
described as Lot 5, Block 1, Mesco Addition, and being approximately 1.190 acres
situated in the Thomas Mahan Survey, Abstract No. 1049. Location: Northwest
corner of State Highway 114 and Kimball Avenue. Current Zoning: "SP -2"
Generalized Site Plan District to include "C -2" Local Retail Commercial District
uses. Applicant: Strode Property Company. Owner: Anderson Industries, Inc.
SPIN Neighborhood #6.
Public Hearing.
TO BE CONTINUED TO 11 -14 -96
22. Consider: ZA 96 -147, SPECIFIC USE PERMIT (FOR THE SALE OF PACKAGED BEER
FOR OFF - PREMISE CONSUMPTION), on property legally described as Lot 5,
Block 1, Mesco Addition, and being approximately 1.190 acres situated in the
Thomas Mahan Survey, Abstract No. 1049. Location: Northwest corner of State
Highway 114 and Kimball Avenue. Current Zoning: "SP -2" Generalized Site Plan
District to include "C -2" Local Retail Commercial District uses. Applicant: Strode
Property Company. Owner: Anderson Industries, Inc. SPIN Neighborhood #6.
Public Hearing.
TO BE CONTINUED TO 11 -14 -96
23. Consider: ZA 96 -56, PLAT VACATION, of Lot 2, John A. Freeman No. 529 Addition, being
WITHDRAWN approximately 1.41 acres as recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 2473, P.R.T.C.T.
BY
APPLICANT Location: Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), being approximately 450' east of the
10/23/96 intersection of E. Southlake Blvd. (F. M. 1709) and Westwood Drive. Current
City of Southlake, Texas
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDA
NOVEMBER 7, 1996
PAGE 6
Zoning: "0-1" Office District. Owner and Applicant: Frank Ritz Ca. SPIN
Neighborhood #8.
Public Hearing.
24. Consider: ZA 96 -60, PLAT SHOWING OF LOTS 2R AND 3, JOHN A. FREEMAN NO.
529 ADDITION, being approximately 2.71 acres in the John A. Freeman Survey,
WITHDRAWN Abstract No. 529, Tract 2 and being approximately 1.41 acres commonly known
APPLICANT as Lot 2, John A. Freeman No. 529 Addition. Location: South side of E. Southlake
10/23/96 Blvd. (F.M. 1709), approximately 450' east of the intersection of Westwood Dr.
and E. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District
and "0-1" Office District. Applicants: Ritz Properties and M & P Investments.
Owner: Mary Frances Frank Vandergriff. SPIN Neighborhood #8.
Public Hearing.
25. Consider: ZA 96 -90, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR SOUTHLAKE
PROFESSIONAL PLAZA, being approximately 2.95 acres situated in the Hiram
Granberry Survey, Abstract No. 581, Tract 2C, as recorded in Volume 8374, Page
2186, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas. Location: 521 W. Southlake Blvd.,
south of the intersection of Shady Oaks Drive and West Southlake Blvd. (F.M.
1709). Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District. Requested Zoning: "0-1"
Office District. Owner: Marvin C. Kennedy. Applicant: Larry D. Flynn. SPIN
Neighborhood #14.
Public Hearing.
TO BE CONTINUED TO 11 -14 -96
26. Consider: ZA 96 -110, REVISED CONCEPT PLAN FOR SOUTHLAKE CHURCH OF
CHRIST, being legally described as Lot 3R, J. G. Allen No. 18 Addition and being
WITHDRAWN approximately 6.8 acres. Location: 2501 W. Southlake Blvd., approximately 300'
BY east of the intersection of Brock Drive and West Southlake Blvd. (FM 1709).
APPLICANT
10/31/96 Current Zoning: "CS" Community Service District. Applicant: FDS International.
Owner: Southlake Church of Christ. SPIN Neighborhood #15.
27. 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, November 1, 1996 at 5:00 p.m., pursuant to the
Texas Government Code, Chapter 551.
uuay,
IHL4/4
Sandra L. LeGrand
City Secretary
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION MEETING
November 7, 1996
1 COMMISSION PRESENT: Vice - Chairman Rex Potter; Members: Ann Creighton, Debra
2 Edmondson, James Murphy, Dona Schroetke, and Lanny Tate
3
4 COMMISSION ABSENT: Chairman Joe Wright
5
6 CITY STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Greg Last, City Engineer Ron Harper,
7 Planner Chris Carpenter, Planner Dennis Killough and Community Development Secretary Lori
8 Farwell
9
10 The meeting was called to order by Vice - Chairman Potter at 7:10 p.m.
11
12 AGENDA ITEM #2, APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
13 Vice - Chairman Potter opened discussion of the minutes of the October 17, 1996, Regular Planning
14 and Zoning Commission Meeting.
15
16 Motion was made to approve the minutes of the October 17, 1996, Regular Planning and Zoning
17 Commission Meeting.
Motion: Creighton
20 Second: Edmondson
21 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Creighton
22 Nays: None
23 Abstain: Murphy
24 Approved: 5 -0 -1
25 Motion carried.
26
27 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 1, section #30)
28
29 AGENDA ITEM #3. ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS:
30 Vice - Chairman Potter informed the Commission and the public that Chairman Joe Wright had heart
31 surgery on November 4, 1996. He said that Chairman Wright is doing very well but will not be
32 chairing the meeting tonight. Vice - Chairman Potter stated that Agenda Item #23, ZA96 -56, Plat
33 Vacation, Agenda Item #24, ZA96 -60, Plat Showing of Lots 2R and 3, John A. Freeman No. 529
34 Addition, and Agenda Item #26, ZA96 -110, Revised Concept Plan for Southlake Church of Christ,
35 have all been withdrawn at the applicant's request. Community Development Director Greg Last
36 added that if at any point in the future these items are resubmitted, then renotification and
37 readvertising would occur. Vice - Chairman Potter informed the public that due to the large number
38 of items on the agenda, this meeting will be continued on November 14, 1996. Director Last also
stated that the applicant for Agenda Item #20, ZA96 -145, Rezoning and Concept Plan for Southlake
Town Center, has requested to be placed on the continuation meeting on November 14, 1996.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 1 of 30
(Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 1, section #120)
3 AGENDA ITEM #4. PARKS. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN UPDATE:
4 Parks and Recreation Director Kim Lenoir presented this item to the Commission. She stated that
5 the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan encompasses the entire City of Southlake. She
6 stated that this plan was first approved in January 1992 and had $26,000,000 of improvements. In
7 November 1993, the citizens approved the half -cent sales tax and made these improvements a reality.
8 Three (3) projects were first identified as Bicentennial Park Expansion, a large park by Lake
9 Grapevine, and joint use facilities with the school districts. The City Charter requires the Master
10 Plan documents to be updated every four (4) years. Texas Parks and Wildlife also requires that the
11 Master Plans be updated every five (5) years in order to apply for grants for park development. The
12 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan includes an inventory of existing current facilities
13 and planning criteria for neighborhood parks, community parks, city parks, special purpose parks,
14 and linear parks. The Park and Recreation Board analyzed the population projections for the City
15 of Southlake, reviewed national standards, and completed a citizen survey and focus groups to make
16 conclusions on this Master Plan. The Board also reviewed the recreational facilities needed by the
17 City. The Board selected the high end of the national standards for baseball fields that are needed
18 and recommended the projected build -out to be twenty -two (22) fields. For the next five (5) years
19 the Board is recommending that the city acquire all future park land, to maintain a 50% open space,
20 to build trails, to build soccer fields, to build baseball fields, to provide access to tennis courts, to
21 expand recreation programs, to build an in -line hockey rink, and to build outdoor basketball courts.
Director Lenoir then displayed the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan map which also
included the Trail System Master Plan. She stated that the Trail System Master Plan is not a part
24 of her request tonight although it is shown on the map. She also stated the ten neighborhood zones
25 shown on the map have been adjusted to encompass the entire city and follow the SPIN
26 neighborhood boundaries.
27
28 Commissioner Edmondson asked if all of the parkland that the city currently owns meets the 50%
29 open space guideline. Director Lenoir stated that because the city has not purchased all of Bob Jones
30 Park, the only park that could be calculated right now is Bicentennial Park and it does not meet the
31 50% open space rule. Director Lenoir also stated that it is a goal she hopes to meet in five (5) years.
32
33 Vice - Chairman Potter opened the public hearing. No one in the audience stepped forward to speak.
34 Vice - Chairman Potter closed the public hearing.
35
36 Motion was made to approve the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan dated October 28,
37 1996.
38
39 Motion: Edmondson
40 Second: Creighton
41 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
42 Nays: None
Approved: 6 -0
Motion carried.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 2 of 30
(Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 1, section #460)
3 AGENDA ITEM #5. BICENTENNIAL PARK MASTER PLAN:
4 Parks and Recreation Director Kim Lenoir presented this item to the Commission. She stated that
5 the park is now forty -one (41) acres in size. One tract of land the city is considering to purchase is
6 the land north of the current baseball fields. This land would be used to buffer the ball fields from
7 the adjacent homes. Another tract of land is the area behind the bank to the south the for a future
8 youth facility which would house an in -line hockey court, sand volleyball courts and basketball
9 courts. Another acquisition is the commercial land that extends all the way up to the Adventure
10 Alley Playground which would include additional parking, extending the playground, and future
11 tennis courts. A possible acquisition to the west on Shady Oaks Drive would include baseball fields,
12 a recreation center, and an outdoor swimming pool. The main entrance to the park would remain
13 on Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709). The road that is currently on North White Chapel would be
14 removed and replaced with a small parking lot. Future access to the park would also be placed on
15 Shady Oaks Drive. Overhead utility lines would be buried and the water tower site would be
16 managed as part of the park.
17
18 Vice - Chairman Potter asked Director Lenoir why the Food Lion name is still listed on this map when
19 it isn't actually owned by Food Lion any longer. She said that was a mistake and that the name,
20 Food Lion, would be removed.
21
Commissioner Schroetke asked if there is going to be an additional bufferyard to the north of the
baseball fields. Director Lenoir stated that due to resident's concern about the noise of the baseball
24 fields, the Park Board motioned that a minimum of 75' buffer and a maximum of 100' buffer be
25 constructed. Commissioner Schroetke asked if the Commission could motion to have a 100' buffer
26 instead, and Vice - Chairman Potter said yes.
27
28 Vice - Chairman Potter opened the public hearing. No one in the audience stepped forward to speak.
29 Vice - Chairman Potter closed the public hearing.
30
31 Commissioner Creighton asked if the children's play pool shown in the map might instead be a
32 competition size pool. Director Lenoir stated the pool as shown is only conceptual in nature at this
33 point.
34
35 Motion was made to approve the Bicentennial Park Master Plan dated October 28, 1996, deleting
36 the name, Food Lion, on the southeast commercial property, and adding a 100' buffer on the north
37 property line south of the Oak Hill Subdivision.
38
39 Motion: Murphy
40 Second: Schroetke
41 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
42 Nays: None
Approved: 6 -0
Motion carried.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 3 of 30
(Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 1, section #793)
3 AGENDA ITEM #6. BOB JONES PARK MASTER PLAN:
4 Parks and Recreation Director Kim Lenoir presented this item to the Commission. She stated that
5 in 1994, the City of Southlake paid $1,168,000 for the 462 lots in which the city now owns the roads
6 and utilities. The city is continuing to purchase lots as they become available at $2,000 per lot. She
7 stated it will take approximately twenty -five (25) years to build out the entire Bob Jones Park Master
8 Plan. There are three (3) tracts of land that may be purchased in the future to add cohesiveness to
9 the park. The first one is on North White Chapel which would be to add more buffer to the
10 neighborhood. The second tract is a small piece of land in the Corps of Engineer property which
11 contains a small creek and a wooded area. The third tract is on the east end of the park which is in
12 a flowage easement and has limited facilities that could be developed on it. The main access to the
13 park is on North White Chapel. A second access to the park is down Bob Jones Road, through
14 Oakwood Estates Subdivision, and extending through Mrs. Tucker's property and into the park.
15
16 Commissioner Edmondson asked why the second park loop which will extend through the Corps
17 of Engineers property and require the removal of many trees is necessary. Director Lenoir stated
18 that the Board has looked at every road option possible and decided that this second loop through
19 the Corps property and the road extending through the Oakwood Estates Subdivision are the two (2)
20 best options. Commissioner Edmondson asked what these roads are accessing. Director Lenoir said
21 that they are accessing the far east side of the park which will have picnicking facilities, the lake, and
the fishing pier.
24 Vice - Chairman Potter asked why the road extending through the Tucker property was necessary.
25 Director Lenoir stated that road was necessary to access the east side of the park.
26
27 Commissioner Schroetke asked if the staging area that is now on the north end of North White
28 Chapel has been moved down further, and Director Lenoir stated that it has.
29
30 Vice - Chairman Potter opened the public hearing.
31
32 Cara White, SPIN Representative #1, 4475 Homestead Drive, Southlake, Texas, stated that she was
33 uncertain if the Corps property is part of this park. She has attended every meeting regarding this
34 issue and was told that the Corps property was a separate issue. Director Lenoir responded by saying
35 that in order to lease the Corps property, the city is required to have a Master Plan. Ms. White stated
36 that she is representing Mrs. Tucker regarding her property that continues from Walnut Drive. Mrs.
37 Tucker does not want the road on her property. She said there is ongoing confusion with the home
38 owners as to the road situation. The neighbors are told the road definitely will not be on the Tucker
39 property, and then at the next meeting or two, the road is back on the plans. The neighbors do not
40 understand what is going on.
41
42 Boyd Dollar, 525 Brooks Court, Southlake, Texas, does not think traffic should be directed through
a neighborhood as would occur if the road was continued from Walnut Drive. The neighborhood
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 4 of 30
would be impacted tremendously if the road was directed through it. He feels the only entrance to
the park should be on North White Chapel Road.
3
4 Richard Anderson, 4553 North White Chapel Road, Southlake, Texas, does not want the road
5 continued from Walnut Road on Mrs. Tucker's property. He is also extremely interested in the
6 parking lot on North White Chapel Road. He thinks what is really needed on North White Chapel
7 Road is a unpaved turnaround, large enough for a fire truck. He is also curious what studies have
8 been completed and what it would take to develop the Corps property. He is certain hydrology
9 studies and economic impact studies would be required before the Corps of Engineers would allow
10 the city to develop that land.
11
12 Vice - Chairman Potter closed the public hearing.
13
14 Vice - Chairman Potter asked Director Lenoir if the turnaround /parking lot on North White Chapel
15 Road would be paved. She responded by saying that it would be paved to allow for fire trucks to
16 drive on it safely.
17
18 Commissioner Edmondson asked if all of the parking lots will be paved, and Director Lenoir said
19 they would be.
20
21 Commissioner Schroetke asked if the Corps of Engineers will take into consideration the amount
of flooding that occurs on the east portion of their property. Director Lenoir stated that most of the
picnic tables and facilities would be outside of the 100 year flood plain, although they would be built
24 of a material that could withstand being submerged in water.
25
26 Commissioner Schroetke asked Parks and Recreation Board Chairman Rod Johnson if there are any
27 plans to bring in sand for the beach area. He stated that there are no plans to bring in sand, and that
28 they intend to use the sand that is already there.
29
30 Commissioner Creighton asked Mr. Johnson if handicapped access requirements will be met in all
31 of the parking lots, and Mr. Johnson stated that all of the facilities and parking lots will be accessible
32 to the handicapped.
33
34 Commissioner Edmondson asked what the acreage is on the Corps of Engineers property located on
35 the back portion of the plan. Director Lenoir stated that there is about 250 -300 acres. Commissioner
36 Edmondson also asked what type of road they intend to place on the Corps property. Director Lenoir
37 stated that it would be a small, two -lane paved road.
38
39 Vice - Chairman Potter stated that because White Chapel Road is going to be two - lanes, it needs to
40 be shown on the plans or in the text that there is a deceleration lane at the main entrance.
41 Community Development Director Greg Last suggested that there be language added in the text that
42 all turning movements will be accommodated at the intersections on White Chapel Road.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 5 of 30
Vice - Chairman Potter stated his opposition to the road going through Mrs. Tucker's property, and
Commissioners Murphy and Schroetke agreed with him.
3
4 Motion was made to approve Bob Jones Park Master Plan dated October 28, 1996, eliminating the
5 road through the Tucker property and addition of language in the text that all turning movements will
6 be accommodated at the intersections on White Chapel Road and recommending that City Engineers
7 conduct a traffic study.
8
9 Motion: Murphy
10 Second: Creighton
11 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
12 Nays: None
13 Approved: 6 -0
14 Motion carried.
15
16 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 1, section #2459)
17
18 Vice - Chairman Potter called for a recess at 8:28 p.m.
19 Vice - Chairman Potter called the meeting back to order at 8:39 p.m.
20
21 Vice - Chairman Potter stated that the applicant for Agenda Item #25, ZA96 -90, Rezoning and
Concept Plan for Shady Oaks Centre (formerly Southlake Professional Plaza), has requested that
they not be heard until the continuation meeting scheduled for November 14, 1996.
24
25 AGENDA ITEM #7, ZA 96 -124, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR CRESTWOOD
26 OFFICE PARK:
27 Planner Chris Carpenter informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for the rezoning
28 and concept plan for Crestwood Office Park which is approximately 3.5083 acres situated in the W.
29 W. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 695, being a portion of Tract 3D as recorded in Volume 8564, Page
30 285, D.R.T.C.T. This plan proposes two (2) individual office buildings. The property is located
31 on northwest corner of the intersection of North Carroll Ave. and Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709).
32 The current zoning is "AG" Agricultural District. The requested zoning is "S -P -2" Generalized Site
33 Plan District with "0-1" Office District uses. The Land Use Category is Medium Density
34 Residential (may include limited low intensity office and /or retail uses). The Corridor
35 Recommendation is Residential Areas (Any Single Family District). The applicant is M & M
36 Group, Inc. The owner is CFNVESTS Southlake JV. The property is in SPIN Neighborhood #10.
37 Five (5) written notices were sent to property owners within the 200' notification area, and one (1)
38 response was received which was opposed.
39
40 David McMahan, M & M Group, Inc., 100 W. Southlake, Texas, presented this item to the
41 Commission. He stated that he has met with the adjacent property owner, Juergen Strunk,
42 several times and feels he has addressed and satisfied all of his concerns. Mr. McMahan stated
that in Staff Comments it requested that the driveway on Carroll Ave. meet the minimum throat
depth of 75' . He went on to say that after Phase 3 is built on the eastern portion of this project
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 6 of 30
and North Carroll Ave. is adjoined with South Carroll Ave., he would meet the throat depth
requirement. Until that time, Mr. McMahan stated he would place ballards in front of the parking
3 spaces so that they could not be used and also creating adequate throat depth. Mr. McMahan also
4 asked for a 10' variance to the building setback along Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709).
5
6 Commissioner Edmondson asked why there are thirty (30) parking spaces too many. Mr. McMahan
7 stated that the tenant for the first building is Ebby Halliday Realtors who has quite a large number
8 of employees which requires more than average number of parking spaces.
9
10 Commissioner Schroetke asked what type of fencing Mr. McMahan intends to place on the north
11 property line. He stated that he came to an agreement with Mr. Strunck that he would place a solid
12 wood fence, probably a shadow -box type, and plant it with honeysuckle. Commissioner Schroetke
13 asked Community Development Director Greg Last if the Corridor Overlay required a masonry
14 fence or if wood is sufficient. In addition, Commissioner Tate asked if a six foot fence or an eight
15 foot fence is required. Director Last stated that the Corridor Study addresses fencing and bufferyards
16 directly adjacent to roadways which this is not, however in this case, the Zoning Ordinance calls for
17 a eight foot wood fence.
18
19 Commissioner Edmondson asked which trees shown on the plans he intends to save. Mr. McMahan
20 stated that any tree not covered by the building or parking lot footprint will be saved.
21
Vice - Chairman Potter opened the public hearing.
24 Juergen Strunck, 200 N. Carroll Ave., Southlake, Texas, stated that he has met several times with
25 Mr. McMahan since he wrote the original letter in opposition. Mr. McMahan has taken the time to
26 listen to his concerns and address them. He stated he is in favor of this zoning change, and he
27 wanted to say publicly that Mr. McMahan has been extremely cooperative and helpful. Mr. Strunck
28 wishes that all developers would take the time to discuss home owners concerns as Mr. McMahan
29 has done.
30
31 Richard Lawrence, 520 Southview Trail, Southlake, Texas, is in favor of this application and stated
32 that he would be delighted to have them in his neighborhood.
33
34 Kent Ramesbottom, 970 Ownby Lane, Southlake, Texas, stated his concern about his property which
35 is adjacent to the property to the west of this property. He is concerned that if this property is
36 rezoned for office that it would cause the property to the west to be rezoned which would be directly
37 behind his house.
38
39 Vice - Chairman Potter closed the public hearing.
40
41 Vice - Chairman Potter stated that he is not in favor of this application because it does not follow the
42 Land Use Plan. He stated that if the Commission allows the placement of this building at this
location, he is wondering where the office development would end and what would stop office
development on the next property to the west or the next property to the west.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 7 of 30
Commissioner Murphy does not agree with Vice - Chairman Potter on this application. He feels that
this type of development is exactly what is needed at this location. He cannot see residential on this
3 corner, and he stated that a nice office building is a perfect transition from commercial to residential.
4
5 Commissioner Schroetke agreed with Commissioner Murphy stating that this is a good transition
6 from the commercial property on the east side of Carroll Ave. to the residential property on the west.
7
8 Commissioner Edmondson stated that she agrees that this is a good development for this location,
9 although she feels there are too many parking spaces. Mr. McMahan asked Commissioner
10 Edmondson if she would be more agreeable if he placed pavers in the extra thirty (30) parking spaces
11 in order for water to drain more efficiently. She said she would agree if he completely removed ten
12 (10) parking spaces and then placed pavers in the twenty (20) spaces left. Mr. McMahan stated that
13 he would do that.
14
15 Commissioner Tate asked if Mr. McMahan has exceptions to any other Staff Comments. Mr.
16 McMahan stated that other than the items mentioned previously, he is asking for exception to Item
17 #3B in the driveway spacing. He would like to have a full access driveway on Carroll Ave.
18
19 Commissioner Schroetke said that north bound traffic turning left into this property will cause a
20 backup onto Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709). Mr. McMahan stated that he would be agreeable
21 to restrict left in traffic only, and he is more concerned about allowing left out traffic heading
towards State Highway 114.
24 Motion was made to approve ZA96 -124, Rezoning and Concept Plan for Crestwood Office Park,
25 modifying the requested zoning to "SP -2" with "0-1" uses, modifying the request to two (2) office
26 buildings, amending Item #1 to a 40' setback, deleting Item #3A, modifying Item #3B to restrict
27 driveway traffic to "no left in" on northbound Carroll Ave., deleting Item #3C, modifying parking
28 by deleting ten (10) parking spaces and making twenty (20) parking spaces a permeable surface,
29 adding an eight foot (8') solid wood shadowbox fence on the north property line.
30
31 Motion: Murphy
32 Second: Tate
33 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Edmondson, Murphy
34 Nays: Potter, Creighton
35 Approved: 4 -2
36 Motion carried.
37
38 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 1, section #4233)
39
40 AGENDA ITEM #8, ZA 96 -130, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR TIMARRON
41 COMMERCIAL, TRACT I:
42 Planner Chris Carpenter informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for the rezoning
and concept plan for Timarron Commercial, Tract I, which is approximately 58.202 acres situated
in the James J. West Survey, Abstract No. 1620, Tract 1, as recorded in Volume 9827, Page 974,
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 8 of 30
D.R.T.C.T. The property is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Dove Road and
State Highway No. 114. The current zoning is "AG" Agricultural District. The requested zoning is
3 "SP -2" Generalized Site Plan District with Mixed Uses to include the following uses: "CS"
4 Community Service District, "0-1" Office District, "0-2" Office District, "C -1" Neighborhood
5 Commercial District, "C -2" Local Retail Commercial District, "C -3" General Commercial District,
6 "C -4" Arterial Mall Commercial District, "B -1" Business Service Park District, "B -2" Commercial
7 Manufacturing District, and "HC" Hotel District. An amended request has been submitted which
8 deletes "C -4" Arterial Mall Commercial District from list of proposed zoning categories. The
9 Land Use Category is Mixed Use. The Corridor Recommendation is Office Commercial (same as
10 in CS, 0-1, 0-2, B -1, HC, MF -1, and MF -2 Districts) and Retail Commercial (same as in CS, 0-1,
11 C -1, C -2, C -3, and B -1 Districts). The owner and applicant is Timarron Land Corporation. The
12 property is in SPIN Neighborhood #2. Twelve (12) written notices were sent to property owners
13 within the 200' notification area, and three (3) responses were received of which one (1) was in
14 favor, one (1) was undecided and one (1) was opposed.
15
16 Steve Yetts, Timarron Land Corporation, 300 E. Carpenter Freeway, Suite 1425, Irving, Texas,
17 presented this item to the Commission. He said that Timarron hopes to build a development
18 similar in quality to that of Solana and Las Colinas. In addition to amending their zoning request
19 by deleting zoning category "C -4" Arterial Mall Commercial District, he is deleting many of the
20 uses allowed under the zoning category, "B -2" Commercial Manufacturing District. Mr. Yetts
21 proposed to delete all uses allowed in the "B -2" Commercial Manufacturing District except four
(4) uses which are: Item #6, builders supply stores; Item #9, commercial warehouses; Item #17,
rental equipment stores; and Item #25, wholesale house and sales office and storage. Mr. Yetts
24 stated that an extremely hot topic during the last few weeks has been the building setbacks next
25 to residential areas.
26
27 Commissioner Schroetke asked staff what the bufferyard and setback would be for a building on
28 North White Chapel Boulevard for "C -3" General Commercial District. Community Development
29 Director Greg Last stated that building setback would be 30' and bufferyard would be 10' .
30
31 Mr. Yetts stated that there is a road on their concept plan which is an extension of Kirkwood
32 Boulevard and serves as a natural dividing line between the two tracts in Phase I. The uses on
33 the west tract which would also be adjacent to State Highway 114 would be highway uses such
34 as: "CS" Community Service, "0-1" Office District, "0-2" Office District, "C -1" Neighborhood
35 Commercial District, "C -2" Local Retail Commercial District, "C -3" General Commercial
36 District, and "HC" Hotel District. The tract to the east would be developed as any of the above
37 except for "HC" Hotel District, since it is adjacent to residential areas.
38
39 Vice - Chairman Potter asked Director Last if the Commission could essentially eliminate "C -1"
40 and "C -2" Districts and require that the uses within those zoning districts follow development
41 regulations of a "C -3" zoning. Director Last stated that the Commission could do that if they so
42 desire. Director Last stated that it wouldn't change the width of the bufferyards in any case, but
rather change the intensity of the plantings based on the adjacent uses.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 9 of 30
Commissioner Edmondson stated that the "C -3" zoning district is not supposed to be in direct
proximity to residential areas.
3
4 Director Last stated that the "SP -2" zoning district allows the flexibility for the Commission to
5 place the uses where the Commission feels they are most appropriate.
6
7 Mr. Yetts stated that he would like to modify the requested height of the facilities by limiting the
8 request to "B -1" uses and allowing those to be 45' and eliminating all the other height variances
9 requested under all other zoning districts.
10
11 Vice - Chairman Potter opened the public hearing.
12
13 Marvin Williams, 1525 N. Carroll Ave., Southlake, Texas, stated that he is Vice - President of a
14 large engineering firm with expertise in drainage. He stated that until a developer has a footprint
15 on a piece of property, it is unclear what the drainage requirements will be. He said that the
16 amount of concrete that Timarron is proposing to place on this property will significantly affect
17 the drainage on surrounding properties. He is also concerned about wastewater disposal.
18
19 Mr. Yetts responded by saying that as Timarron enters the development plan stage, appropriate
20 engineered water, sewer and storm sewer designs will be used to facilitate the impacts of the areas
21 themselves. He stated that these types of concerns are typically addressed at the development
stage and at that time the Commissioners and City Council can review them.
24 Vice - Chairman Potter agreed by saying that drainage typically is not discussed at this stage, and
25 the Commission needs to focus on the appropriateness of the uses right now.
26
27 Commissioner Creighton disagreed by saying that the people in the audience are interested in how
28 the uses will affect the drainage, and that drainage is one of many issues that should be addressed
29 at this stage.
30
31 Commissioner Edmondson agreed with Commissioner Creighton by saying that most developers
32 have some idea of what is going to be placed where at this stage in their request. She was also
33 concerned about the fact that Timarron Land Corporation is going to be sold and will most likely
34 be under new management as of January 1, 1997. She was also concerned about what benefits
35 the City of Southlake will be getting out of Timarron's approximately 500 acres with items such
36 as parks, etc.
37
38 Commissioner Murphy wondered if the enormity and the magnitude of the requested changes
39 being presented is what brought so many people to the Planning and Zoning Meeting tonight. He
40 also stated that the Commission has known for four or five years that changes were coming to this
41 corridor, and he does not feel the Commission can say no at this point.
42
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 10 of 30
Commissioner Creighton stated that she is offended by any suggestion that the people in
attendance should be made to feel badly that they are up in arms in opposition to this request. She
3 applauds the people in attendance and their level of participation.
4
5 Commissioner Murphy stated that he was not implying that anyone should feel badly for being
6 in attendance tonight. He is simply curious as to what their main concerns are.
7
8 Vice - Chairman Potter stated that if the Commission wants to see a site plan with every zoning
9 change request, then the city regulations must be changed, because a site plan is not currently
10 required.
11
12 Juergen Strunck, 200 N. Carroll Ave., Southlake, Texas, stated that he understands the Corridor
13 Overlay Zone to require a concept plan and site plan with any zoning request. Director Last
14 replied by saying the requirement is actually "either a concept plan or a site plan," and the
15 applicant has provided a concept plan.
16
17 Sid Lorio, 1212 Ashmore, Southlake, Texas, stated that the Commission required very specific
18 information from the previous applicant, David McMahan. He does not understand why an
19 applicant with 3.5 acres would have such stringent requirements placed on him, and an applicant
20 with approximately 500 acres would not. He does not need to know what type of building is
21 going in, but he does need to know the intended use of that building.
John Arson, 335 Ravenoux, Southlake, Texas, stated that he does not feel the applicant has
24 provided sufficient detail and does not want the city to write this developer a "blank check".
25
26 Richard Lawrence, 520 Southview, Southlake, Texas, does not want the city to approve the
27 rezoning and lose control of this property. He hopes that the Commission gets all of their
28 questions answered before the rezoning is approved instead of waiting until it is too late.
29
30 Sue Jones, 1065 Brittany Court, Southlake, Texas, chose Southlake because it was residential and
31 family oriented. She is opposed to every requested zoning district until she sees a site plan or at
32 least more detail.
33
34 Terry Mullaney, 1515 N Carroll Ave., Southlake, Texas, thanked the Commission for taking care
35 of the people by Bob Jones Park and to please take care of the residents around these
36 developments. He is concerned about waste water, storm water runoff and the safety of children.
37 He feels that development around the schools on Carroll Ave. would be irresponsible.
38
39 Tom Pafel, 550 Briarwood Drive, Southlake, Texas, thanked the Commission for doing such a
40 good job in the past. He made some calculations based on the previous request for Crestwood
41 Office Park which was 3.5 acres and took about 45 minutes. At this rate, Mr. Pafel stated, the
42 Commission should spend approximately 107 hours on Timarron's 500 acres.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 11 of 30
Bob Lessner, 1102 Travis Court, Southlake, Texas, does not understand what benefit the City of
Southlake obtains by developing this property. He was also concerned about the extreme increase
3 in traffic around the schools.
4
5 Steve Cook, 1981 E. Highland, Southlake, Texas, expressed his concern over the vagueness of the
6 plans. He wants to see more detail.
7
8 Kathy Mussina, 820 E. Primrose Lane, Southlake, Texas, stated that she inherited her parent's
9 property on Primrose Lane and does not want to lose what she inherited. She feels that the big
10 corporations are trying to eliminate the small home owners in the area.
11
12 Debbie Guthrie, 1230 Stanhope Court, Southlake, Texas, complimented the Community
13 Development Department and especially Zoning Assistant Stefanie Sarakaitis. Stefanie helped her
14 out tremendously when she really needed help. She understands that it is inevitable that this land
15 will be developed, but she wants to see more detail.
16
17 Butch Stosberg, 1204 Blythe Lane, Southlake, Texas, stated that he has attended all of the SPIN
18 meetings regarding this project, and he hasn't received many answers in those meetings. He has
19 been told by Mr. Yetts to "trust him ", and Mr. Stosberg does not trust him. He asked for Mr.
20 Yetts to meet with he and his neighbors to discuss zoning, and Mr. Yetts said that was done
21 internally. He thinks Mr. Yetts has underestimated the intelligence of Southlake residents.
Dan Howell, 600 Briarwood Drive, Southlake, Texas, stated that he was the developer of
24 Briarwood Estates. When he developed that property, he was required to place commercial along
25 State Highway 114 and place duplexes in back of the Mesco property adjacent to the residential.
26 He had to submit a plat in order to get the rezoning and feels that Timarron Land Corporation
27 should be required to do the same.
28
29 Jim Gardner, 1213 Ashmore Court, Southlake, Texas, is extremely concerned about the legacy
30 being left to his children by developing this property as discussed. He is also concerned about
31 safety around the schools on Carroll Ave.
32
33 Charles Kennard, 1235 Stanhope Court, Southlake, Texas, stated that the citizens of Southlake
34 do not have to buy into this vision of development. The Commission and the citizens have the
35 power and the ability to develop or not to develop this property as they see fit.
36
37 Susan Henry, 1044 Summerplace Lane, Southlake, Texas, is concerned that the growth is totally
38 outnumbering the water towers, roads, and sewers. She would like to see the city slow down growth
39 until development of the utilities can catch up.
40
41 Robert Jones, 1065 Brittany Court, Southlake, Texas, asked the Commission to "just say no" to this
42 development. It does not have to happen.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 12 of 30
Mr. Yetts stated that this is all part of the process of development. At this point, he proposed dealing
with the questions of various uses and traffic issues at a public workshop.
3
4 Commissioner Creighton asked Mr. Yetts if he would be willing to rezone one tract at a time instead
5 of presenting 500 acres at one time. She also asked if he had any type of detailed plan to present to
6 the citizens in a workshop. Mr. Yetts responded by saying he does have some ideas that he would
7 like to present in a workshop setting.
8
9 Vice - Chairman Potter stated that when a property is being rezoned, specificity in the allowed uses
10 is critical.
11
12 Commissioner Schroetke stated that Mr. Yetts has agreed to meet with the citizens at a workshop,
13 and she thinks he should have a preliminary idea at that time of locations of zones and uses.
14
15 Mr. Yetts asked the Commission to table the three Timarron items until the January 9, 1997,
16 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting, which gives them time to set up a workshop with the
17 citizens in the meantime. He is proposing for the workshop to be on December 12, 1996.
18
19 Motion was made at the applicant's request to table ZA96 -130, Rezoning and Concept Plan for
20 Timarron Commercial, Tract I; ZA96 -131, Rezoning and Concept Plan for Timarron Commercial,
21 Tract II; and ZA96 -132, Rezoning and Concept Plan for Timarron Commercial, Tract III, and to
continue the Public Hearing until the January 9, 1997, Regular Planning and Zoning Meeting.
24 Motion: Murphy
25 Second: Edmondson
26 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
27 Nays: None
28 Approved: 6 -0
29 Motion carried.
30
31 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #1628)
32
33 Vice - Chairman Potter called for a recess at 11:17 p.m.
34 Vice - Chairman Potter called the meeting back to order at 11:29 p.m.
35
36 AGENDA ITEM #12, ZA 96 -136, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR FOXBOROUGH
37 (FORMERLY FOX GLEN);
38 AGENDA ITEM #13, ZA 96 -137, PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR FOXBOROUGH (FORMERLY
39 FOX GLEN);
40 AGENDA ITEM #14. ZA96 -138, SITE PLAN FOR KINGSLEY PLACE;
41 AGENDA ITEM #15, ZA96 -139, PLAT REVISION FOR THE PROPOSED LOTS 4R -1 AND 4R-
42 2, BLOCK 6. SOUTHRIDGE LAKES, PHASE C -1;
AGENDA ITEM #18, ZA 96 -143, REVISED SITE PLAN FOR PETSMART;
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 13 of 30
AGENDA ITEM #20, ZA 96 -145, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR SOUTHLAKE
TOWN CENTER;
3 AGENDA ITEM #21, ZA 96 -146, SITE PLAN FOR MESCO ADDITION, LOT 5;
4 AGENDA ITEM #22, ZA 96 -147, SPECIFIC USE PERMIT (FOR THE SALE OF PACKAGED
5 BEER FOR OFF - PREMISE CONSUMPTION) AND
6 AGENDA ITEM #25, ZA 96 -90, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR SHADY OAKS
7 CENTRE (FORMERLY SOUTHLAKE PROFESSIONAL PLAZA):
8 Motion was made to table ZA96 -136, ZA96 -137, ZA96 -138, ZA96 -139, ZA96 -143, ZA96 -145,
9 ZA96 -146, ZA96 -147, and ZA96 -90, and to continue the Public Hearing until the November 14,
10 1996, Regular Planning and Zoning Meeting due to the Case Limitation Resolution No. 95 -24.
11
12 Motion: Murphy
13 Second: Tate
14 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
15 Nays: None
16 Approved: 6 -0
17 Motion carried.
18
19 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #1782)
20
21 AGENDA ITEM #19, ZA 96 -144, PLAT REVISION:
Planner Chris Carpenter informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for the proposed
Lots 1R and 2R, Block 1, Lake Crest Addition, being a revision of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Lake Crest
24 Addition, and being approximately 0.948 acres situated in the Hiram Granberry Survey, Abstract No.
25 581. The property is located on the north corner of the intersection of Lake Crest Drive and Clear
26 Lake Court. The current zoning is "SF -20A" Single Family Residential District. The Land Use
27 Category is Mixed Use. The Corridor Recommendation is Residential (any Single Family District).
28 The applicant is Carter & Burgess, Inc. The owners are Pulte Homes and Kevin Sweeney. The
29 property is in SPIN Neighborhood #14. Seven (7) written notices were sent to property owners
30 within the 200' notification area, and two responses have been received one (1) of which was
31 opposed and one (1) of which was in favor.
32
33 Todd Janssen, Carter & Burgess, 7950 Elmbrook Drive, Suite 250, Dallas, Texas, presented this
34 item and asked the Commission to waive the requirement for a 35' building line on Lake Crest.
35
36 Vice - Chairman Potter opened the public hearing.
37
38 Kevin Sweeney, 100 Clear Lake Court, Southlake, Texas, also presented this item to the
39 Commission.
40
41 Vice - Chairman Potter closed the public hearing.
42
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 14 of 30
Motion was made to approve ZA96 -144, Plat Revision, subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1
dated November 1, 1996, waiving the 35' building line requirement on Lake Crest and allowing the
3 building line as submitted.
4
5 Motion: Creighton
6 Second: Edmondson
7 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
8 Nays: None
9 Approved: 6 -0
10 Motion carried.
11
12 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #1992)
13
14 AGENDA ITEM #11, ZA96 -133, AMENDED PLAT:
15 Planner Chris Carpenter informed the Commission that the applicant's request if for Lot 35R, Block
16 1; Lots 1R, 3R, and 16R, Block 4; and Lots 13R and 15R, Block 5; being an amendment to Lot 35,
17 Block 1; Lots 1, 3, and 16, Block 4; and Lots 13 and 15, Block 5; Lonesome Dove Estates, Phase
18 Two, being approximately 2.3928 acres situated in the N.E. Thompson Survey, Abstract No. 1563,
19 and being 6 residential lots. An amendment to this request has been made deleting Lot 3R, Block
20 4. Lonesome Dove Estates, Phase Two, is located southwest of the intersection of Burney Lane and
21 Lonesome Dove Ave. and the affected lots are on McCrae Trail; along Horsehead Crossing, Hat
Creek Trail and Powder River Trail; and along Palo Duro Trail, respectively. The current zoning
is "P.U.D." Planned Unit Development District, being P.U.D. No. 5, Lonesome Dove Estates. The
24 Land Use Category indicates Medium Density Residential. The owner and applicant is H. Creek
25 Development, Inc. The property is in SPIN Neighborhood #3. Thirty -three (33) written notices
26 were sent to property owners within the 200' notification area, and two (2) responses were received
27 which were both in favor.
28
29 Vice - Chairman Potter opened the public hearing. No one in the audience stepped forward to speak.
30 Vice - Chairman Potter closed the public hearing.
31
32 Motion was made approve ZA96 -133, Amended Plat, subject to Plat Review Summary No.1, dated
33 October 11, 1996, amending applicant's request to delete Lot 3R, Block 4.
34
35 Motion: Murphy
36 Second: Creighton
37 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
38 Nays: None
39 Approved: 6 -0
40 Motion carried.
41
42 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #2211)
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 15 of 30
AGENDA ITEM #16, ZA96 -141, FINAL PLAT OF THE PROPOSED LOTS 2, 3, AND 4, BLOCK
60, TIMARRON ADDITION, PHASE 5:
3 Planner Chris Carpenter informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for property being
4 legally described as being Lot 1C2 and a portion of Lots 1B2 and 1A2A, Block 1, Dilg Place, being
5 approximately 7.627 acres situated in the Obediah W. Knight Survey, Abstract No. 899. The
6 property is located on the southeast corner of West Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709) and the proposed
7 Byron Nelson Parkway. The current zoning is "P.U.D." Planned Unit Development District, being
8 P.U.D. No. 1, Timarron. The Land Use Category is Medium Density Residential. The Corridor
9 Recommendation is Existing Retail Zoning. The owner and applicant is Timarron Land
10 Corporation. The property is in SPIN Neighborhood #9. There are no property owner notifications
11 required on Final Plats.
12
13 Todd Janssen, Carter & Burgess, 7950 Elmbrook Drive, Suite 250, Dallas, Texas, presented this
14 item to the Commission and had no exception to any Staff Comment. He stated that Drews Realty
15 Group received an approved Concept Plan from City Council and will be making very slight
16 revisions to the configuration of the lot lines due to driveway alignments.
17
18 Motion was made to approve ZA96 -141, Final Plat, subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1, dated
19 November 1, 1996, granting the ability to make minor adjustments to lot lines as per the approved
20 Concept Plan.
21
Motion: Murphy
Second: Schroetke
24 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
25 Nays: None
26 Approved: 6 -0
27 Motion carried.
28
29 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #2382)
30
31 AGENDA ITEM #17, ZA 96 -142, FINAL PLAT OF THE PROPOSED LOTS 1 -8, BLOCK 1, THE
32 WOODS ADDITION:
33 Planner Chris Carpenter informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for property being
34 approximately 17.082 acres containing 8 residential lots situated in the J. J. Freshour Survey,
35 Abstract No. 521, Tract 1. The property is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of
36 Florence Road and Pearson Lane. The current zoning is "SF -1A" Single Family Residential District.
37 The Land Use Category is Medium Density Residential. The applicant is Bryant Real Estate, Inc.
38 The owner is V. T. Cross. The property is in SPIN Neighborhood #16. There are no property owner
39 notifications required on Final Plats.
40
41 There was no one to represent the applicant on this item.
42
Motion was made to approve ZA96 -141, Final Plat, subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1, dated
November 1, 1996.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 16 of 30
Motion: Murphy
Second: Edmondson
3 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
4 Nays: None
5 Approved: 6 -0
6 Motion carried.
7
8 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #2418)
9
10
11 THE REMAINING ITEMS WERE HEARD THE EVENING OF NOVEMBER 14, 1996
12
13 COMMISSION PRESENT: Chairman Joe Wright; Members: Vice - Chairman Rex Potter, Ann
14 Creighton, Debra Edmondson, James Murphy, Dona Schroetke, and Lanny Tate
15
16 COMMISSION ABSENT: None
17
18 CITY STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Greg Last, Zoning Administrator
19 Karen Gandy, City Engineer Ron Harper, Planner Chris Carpenter, and Community Development
20 Secretary Lori Farwell
21
2 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Wright at 7:15 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM #25, ZA 96 -90, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR SHADY OAKS
25 CENTRE (FORMERLY SOUTHLAKE PROFESSIONAL PLAZA):
26 Motion was made at the applicant's request to table ZA96 -90, and to continue the Public Hearing
27 until the November 21, 1996, Regular Planning and Zoning Meeting.
28
29 Motion: Murphy
30 Second: Potter
31 Ayes: Wright, Schroetke, Tate, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
32 Nays: None
33 Approved: 7 -0
34 Motion carried.
35
36 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 1, section #50)
37
38 Council member Pamela Muller, 214 Westwood Drive, Southlake, Texas, told the Commission that
39 she greatly appreciates the work they are doing as a Commission. She is glad that Chairman Wright
40 is healthy and is back serving as Chair. Council member Muller presented Chairman Wright with
41 an arrangement of flowers.
42
43 AGENDA ITEM #12, ZA 96 -136, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR FOXBOROUGH
(FORMERLY FOX GLEN):
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 17 of 30
Planner Chris Carpenter informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for approximately
23.7 acres being Tract 3F and approximately 0.186 acres being a portion of Tract 3E in the W. W.
3 Hall Survey, Abstract No. 695. This request proposes 64 residential lots, 1 non - residential lots and
4 4 common areas. The property is located on the north side of East Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), and
5 approximately 1140' west of the intersection of East Southlake Blvd. and North Carroll Ave. The
6 current zoning is "AG" Agricultural District, and "0-1" Office District. The requested zoning is (on
7 the above referenced 23.89 acres) is "SF -20A" Single Family Residential District. A Concept Plan
8 for Foxborough totaling approximately 48.9 acres will be considered with the rezoning request plus
9 additional acreage as follows: approximately 21.72 acres, described as the northern portion of Tract
10 3E in the W. W. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 695, previously zoned "SF -20A" zoning and approved
11 as Country Meadow Estates; approximately 1.72 acres zoned "0-1" Office District; and
12 approximately 1.57 acres zoned "C -1" Neighborhood Commercial District. The Land Use Category
13 is Medium Density Residential and Mixed Use. The Corridor Recommendation is Residential Areas
14 (any Single Family District). The applicant is Crumbaker Development, Inc. The owners are Beulah
15 Cross c/o Ben Muir (Tract 3F) and Homei Liao and Jai Her Hwang, Trustees (portion of Tract 3E).
16 The property is in SPIN Neighborhood #10. Forty -one (41) written notices were sent to property
17 owners within the 200' notification area, and four (4) written responses were received which were
18 all opposed. Seven (7) responses were received outside the 200' notification area of which one
19 (1) was in favor and six (6) were opposed. A petition of opposition from the property owners on
20 Ownby Lane was also received with thirty-nine (39) signatures. A petition of opposition from the
21 property owners in Mission Hill Estates was also received with sixty -eight (68) signatures.
David McMahan, 1335 Hidden Glen, Southlake, Texas, represented Crumbaker Development, Inc.
24 on this item. He stated that after he met with the SPIN groups, the plans were revised to reflect
25 their concerns and new plans were submitted to the City. He stated that the new plan added a
26 residential lot and decreased the total amount of Common Area. The number of residential lots
27 increased from sixty -three (63) lots to sixty -four (64) lots. One (1) commercial lot which is zoned
28 "0-1" Office District would be utilized as a detention pond. Mr. McMahan stated that Deed
29 Restrictions will be imposed. He asked for exception to Staff Comment Item #5. He also stated
30 that Item #6 no longer applies to the revised plan he submitted.
31
32 Commissioner Creighton asked Mr. McMahan to clarify what he meant in the work session when
33 he stated that on average the lot sizes adjacent to adjoining subdivisions have increased. Mr.
34 McMahan stated that on average the lots on the north and west property lines are fewer in number
35 and greater in size in comparison to the original 1990 plan.
36
37 Commissioner Schroetke asked Mr. McMahan if he has met with surrounding property owners
38 since the revisions were made. He stated that they have not seen his new plan, although he did
39 attempt to address their major concerns when he revised the plan. Commissioner Schroetke also
40 asked if he intends to have a Homeowners Association, and Mr. McMahan stated that he does.
41
42 Chairman Wright asked if the Deed Restrictions will restrict the maximum house size on this
property, and Mr. McMahan stated absolutely not. Mr. McMahan stated that there is a minimum
house size restriction that varies from area to area of the subdivision.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 18 of 30
Commissioner Edmondson stated that as she compared the old plan and the new plan, she
calculated that approximately 60,000 square feet of common area was eliminated from the new
3 plan. She understood that many of the adjacent property owner concerns were mostly regarding
4 the relocation of the detention pond, not the reduction of common area. Mr. McMahan stated that
5 the relocation of the detention pond and the rerouting of the water to that pond is going to be quite
6 expensive, so they added one (1) residential lot to help defray the cost.
7
8 Commissioner Creighton asked Mr. McMahan to explain why he was requesting an exception to
9 Staff Comment Item #5. He stated that it was primarily due to the fact that the home belonging
10 to the landowner to the north is way up to the front of his lot, and by keeping the north lot line
11 as it is, it forces the house on Lot 32, Block 1, away from that existing house. Commissioner
12 Creighton asked what would occur if he had to comply with the Staff Comment. Mr. McMahan
13 stated that he might have to eliminate one (1) lot if he was required to comply with Staff Comment
14 Item #5.
15
16 Commissioner Creighton also asked Mr. McMahan if he is willing to comply with Staff Comment
17 Item #4, and he stated that he will.
18
19 Regarding Staff Comment Item #6, Commissioner Edmondson asked Community Development
20 Director Greg Last if the applicant is in compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance on his new plan.
21 Director Last stated that the Ordinance does not give credit for the turnaround provided by the
applicant, although Mr. McMahan did add the "T" and the turnaround in trying to alleviate the
problem.
24
25 Vice - Chairman Potter asked Director Last to reiterate the discussion in work session regarding the
26 property to the east. Director Last stated that the Commission may want to evaluate the Land Use
27 of the property to the east at this time. The Land Use Plan indicates Medium Density Residential.
28 If the Commission envisions that property developing as residential, they may ask Mr. McMahan
29 to provide a stub -out at this point in time. If they choose to ask Mr. McMahan to provide a stub -out,
30 the Commission needs to be committed to their decision in regard to the future land use in order to
31 not affect this property negatively in the future.
32
33 Vice - Chairman Potter asked Mr. McMahan where he envisions a stub -out could be located. Mr.
34 McMahan stated that the access would be on Cross Court.
35
36 Vice - Chairman Potter opened the public hearing.
37
38 Tim Ratliff, Vice President of Southview Homeowners Association, 925 South Bend Trail, Southlake,
39 Texas, has serious concerns with this application. Firstly, Mr. Ratliff stated that there were two (2)
40 homeowners in his neighborhood who did not receive notification. He does not want to see a tract
41 development put in the middle of several custom home developments. He feels that comparisons
42 should be made against actual - builds; there are only two (2) homes in Southview built at the
minimum square footage. He is concerned about the increased traffic which will be forced onto
Ownby Lane. He stated that Ownby Lane will be used as a major thoroughfare between Southlake
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 19 of 30
Boulevard (F.M. 1709) and Carroll Ave. He would like to see a traffic study. He does not like the
idea of this neighborhood having asphalt paving and his neighborhood being concrete. He is
3 concerned about drainage problems on this property now and especially when the neighborhood is
4 completely built out. Mr. Ratliff is also concerned about Mr. McMahan's ability to fund and manage
5 all of his current projects at one time and is worried that Mr. McMahan may sell out to another
6 developer and that leads to more uncertainty. Mr. Ratliff is not impressed with Mr. McMahan's
7 business practices because he has had two (2) lawsuits filed against him recently. He is concerned
8 about balanced growth in the City of Southlake and is worried that the current infrastructure cannot
9 support another neighborhood right now.
10
11 Tom Anderson, Mission Hills Estates, Southlake, Texas, is very concerned about the number of
12 properties being developed currently on Southlake Boulevard. He is also worried that the school
13 system cannot support another neighborhood. He is not excited about another commercial
14 development on Southlake Boulevard; it is becoming to look like a strip mall. He is also disturbed
15 by the number of trees in surrounding developments that are being bulldozed and wishes there were
16 more stringent guidelines regarding their protection.
17
18 Catherine Moberg, 503 San Juan Drive, Southlake, Texas, asked the Commission for time in order
19 for property owners to get answers to their questions. She stated her concern about the trees on this
20 property. She feels that there are too many driveways pouring out onto Southlake Boulevard in the
21 area this development is being proposed. She doesn't understand the need for the commercial
property on this residential property. She is worried about the addition of more traffic on Southlake
Boulevard and teenagers' ability to cope with it.
24
25 Susan Craney, President of Mission Hills Estates Homeowners Association, 1020 Alamo Drive,
26 Southlake, Texas, stated her concern about balanced growth. She does not think Southlake needs
27 another small, medium density subdivision. She stated that there are signatures of over one hundred
28 (100) home owners in opposition to this property being developed as shown, and there are not even
29 that many lots proposed in the subdivision. She is concerned about the increase in criminal activity
30 by creating a major thoroughfare onto Ownby Lane. She is worried about the drainage problems on
31 this property. She asked the Commission to delay their decision on this item until homeowners can
32 meet with Mr. McMahan again and try to work out their differences.
33
34 Tamera McMillan, 1023 Mission Drive, Southlake, Texas, stated that her comments tonight are on
35 a personal level versus being a liaison for SPIN Representative #10. She stated that the residents
36 who own homes on Ownby Lane will see their property value go down because their street will have
37 high traffic if this application is approved as shown. She stated that many of the residents of Mission
38 Hills Estates and Diamond Circle fought Mr. McMahan's Food Lion when it was developed because
39 it was not the quality that Southlake demands. One main reason the Food Lion did not succeed was
40 because surrounding homeowners did not shop there. She feels that the Planning and Zoning
41 Commission should not grant any more variances to Mr. McMahan. Mr. McMahan needs to prove
42 he can build a Southlake quality project before he gets the okay to build another one.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 20 of 30
Tina Powcher, Mission Hills Estates,Southlake, Texas, stated that she is glad that Mr. McMahan
improved the area fronting Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709), although she does not think the
3 entrance should have been moved closer to Diamond Circle. She has drainage problems on her
4 property and has recently spent between $8,000 - $10,000 to add drains on her property. She feels
5 that the people who buy on this land will have the same problems. She asked if a hydraulic study
6 has been completed.
7
8 Dan Clark, 1034 Diamond Blvd., Southlake, Texas, stated that his property is adjacent to this
9 property. Mr. Clark said that his property is one acre and all of his neighbors have one acre lots.
10 He stated that the residents in Diamond Circle Estates are already on a septic system, and they are
11 looking forward to the installation of a sewer system. The addition of all of these houses will slow
12 down the sewer system even more. Mr. McMahan is asking for too many variances in this
13 application. Mr. Clark does not think the City of Southlake needs another commercial development
14 as depicted on this plan.
15
16 Larry Mahon, 470 Southview Trail, Southlake, Texas, stated that he brought a letter to the Planning
17 and Zoning Commission earlier today and hopes they received it. He is extremely concerned about
18 drainage in this area. He said that there is standing water on this property all the time. He is also
19 concerned about the number of driveways and streets exiting onto Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709).
20 Mr. Mahon does not like the way traffic is directed into this residential subdivision to get to the
21 commercial development.
Phyllis Adler, 507 San Juan Drive, Southlake, Texas, has served on several local committees
24 including the School Board Finance Committee and has learned that every home added pays for
25 about 80% of the cost of educating their children. She feels that Southlake needs to control its
26 commercial development and does not feel that this development is needed right now.
27
28 Kent Ramesbottom, 970 Ownby Lane, Southlake, Texas, stated his concern about Foxborough's
29 traffic using his street as a thoroughfare to State Highway 114 and Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709).
30 He does not think that people will wait for the light at Carroll Ave. and Southlake Boulevard and
31 instead will take a short-cut down Ownby Lane. He does not like the fact that Foxborough will have
32 asphalt streets and Southview has concrete streets. He stated that in the summer, the asphalt will
33 become tacky and tar will be tracked up and down his street. He also hopes that the drainage is
34 looked at more closely.
35
36 Dr. Robert Montoya, 809 Pearl Drive, Southlake, Texas, does not think this is a quality
37 development. Although he agrees it meets the minimum requirements, Southlake deserves more
38 than minimum. He would be more tolerant to this development if they increased the lot sizes in
39 order to decrease the number of homes and decrease drainage problems.
40
41 Barbara Clark, (no address given), lives directly behind (north) this development. She stated that
42 for two (2) years she and her neighbor, Lisa Quinn, have fought snakes getting into their pools, but
she would rather continue to fight the snakes than have this development behind her.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 21 of 30
Lisa Quinn, (no address given), agrees with Ms. Clark as stated above.
3 Mr. McMahan responded by saying he believes they are meeting or exceeding standards for all of
4 the surrounding areas. He also stated that drainage concerns are normally addressed at the platting
5 stage, not at the zoning stage.
6
7 Vice - Chairman Potter asked Mr. McMahan how he plans to access the commercial lot on this
8 property. Mr. McMahan stated that traffic must enter the Foxborough subdivision and then turn left
9 into the commercial lot.
10
11 Commissioner Creighton asked if Mr. McMahan has a use in mind for the commercial lot. Mr.
12 McMahan stated that there are three (3) possibilities right now, one (1) of which is a day care center
13 and the other two (2) would build office buildings. He stated he would be willing to deed restrict
14 that lot to office use only.
15
16 Commissioner Schroetke asked Mr. McMahan if he included common areas in his comparisons with
17 surrounding subdivisions presented earlier, and he stated he did not. Commissioner Schroetke also
18 asked if he had considered having two (2) entrances on Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) or a loop
19 through the neighborhood. Mr. McMahan stated that city staff made it very clear that he needed to
20 connect to Ownby Lane, so he did not go with two (2) entrances on Southlake Boulevard (F.M.
21 1709). Mr. McMahan stated that it did not make any difference to him. He connected the road to
Ownby Lane because city staff asked him to do so. Mr. McMahan would be willing to do whatever
city staff and the Commission want him to do.
24
25 Vice - Chairman Potter asked Mr. McMahan if he thought it was a safe situation to direct traffic into
26 the residential subdivision in order to enter the commercial development, and Mr. McMahan stated
27 that it was. Mr. McMahan stated that the reason they moved the driveway off of Southlake
28 Boulevard (F.M. 1709) is to reduce the number of driveways.
29
30 Bill Kemp, 400 Southridge Lakes, Southlake, Texas, explained that the Corridor Overlay Zone
31 Ordinance states that there should not be commercial zoning except at major intersections along
32 Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) and that this is not a major intersection.
33
34 Chairman Wright explained that since Mr. McMahan agreed to deed restrict the "C-1" lot to "0-1"
35 uses, the Planning and Zoning Commission can recommend to City Council that the city join with
36 Mr. McMahan to restrict the use to "0-1".
37
38 Catherine Moberg, 503 San Juan Drive, Southlake, Texas, stated that she should have been notified
39 of the "C -1" zoning change in 1990 because she should have been on the tax roll by that time. She
40 stated that many people in her neighborhood did not realize the property had already been zoned.
41 She again asked for more time from the Commission so maybe she can get some answers to her
42 questions.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 22 of 30
Dan Clark, 1034 Diamond Blvd., Southlake, Texas, asked the Commission how the adjacent property
owners can get the property rezoned. Chairman Wright stated that there are two (2) ways to get
3 zoning changed on a property. One way is the applicant or owner applies for the rezoning, and the
4 second way is city- initiated zoning which the City Council does and which is very difficult.
5
6 Barbara Clark, stated that she does not trust Mr. McMahan and wishes he would hold another
7 meeting with the homeowners in order to get some questions answered.
8
9 Commissioner Edmondson stated that due to the fact that there are seven (7) lots too many in the cul-
10 de -sac to comply with the ordinance and that Mr. McMahan eliminated approximately 53,000 square
11 feet of common area, she does not feel it would be out of line for the Commission to ask Mr.
12 McMahan to do some refiguring.
13
14 Vice - Chairman Potter stated that he feels Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) is being piece - mealed
15 with all the different commercial properties. He feels that Foxborough could be much less dense
16 than is being presented. He does not think that the road should be connected to Ownby Lane in its
17 current configuration. He stated that he cannot support this item. Vice - Chairman Potter asked staff
18 if this case has 20% opposition of adjacent land owners. Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy stated
19 that there does not appear to be 20% opposition.
20
21 Commissioner Schroetke thinks that Mr. McMahan needs to meet with adjacent homeowners to
attempt to resolve their issues regarding this property. She feels that the surrounding homeowners
probably want residential at this location, but that they have concerns regarding this particular
24 application.
25
26 In order to alleviate the traffic on Ownby Lane, Commissioner Tate suggested to Mr. McMahan that
27 he take Ownby Lane up north to Malton Court. Stop signs could then be placed which might
28 discourage traffic flow because it would not be as direct a route from Southlake Boulevard to Carroll
29 Ave. Mr. McMahan stated that he will make that change. This change will also remedy the problem
30 with the cul -de -sac as listed in Staff Comment Item #6.
31
32 Commissioner Creighton stated her concern regarding the loss of trees on this property and asked
33 Mr. McMahan if more common area could be added in order to mitigate the loss of the heavily treed
34 area along the north property line. Mr. McMahan stated that he could do that and also presented the
35 Commission with an aerial photo which showed exactly where the trees are located.
36
37 Vice - Chairman Potter again stated his concern about directing traffic into the residential in order to
38 access the commercial lot. He does not feel it is a safe situation.
39
40 Commissioner Creighton stated that she does not like the commercial area at the front of this
41 property. She feels it is a likely area for Mr. McMahan to add more common area or to change it to
42 residential.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 23 of 30
Commissioner Tate asked Mr. McMahan if he could put a 3,000 square foot minimum on the homes.
Mr. McMahan stated that he could put a 2,800 square foot minimum on the five (5) lots adjacent to
3 Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) and all others would be a 3,000 square foot minimum except for
4 the lots in the back which will remain a 3,200 square foot minimum.
5
6 Chairman Wright asked Mr. McMahan if he is agreeable to the city being a party to the deed
7 restriction on the "C-1" lot going to "0-1" uses, and Mr. McMahan stated yes.
8
9 Commissioner Edmondson stated that she feels Mr. McMahan could remove some lots in order to
10 increase the remaining lot sizes. She feels that density was a primary concern of surrounding
11 homeowners. She also stated that approximately one -half of this property is not zoned which allows
12 room for Mr. McMahan to decrease the density.
13
14 Chairman Wright suggested that they table this item so that Mr. McMahan can revise the plan as
15 discussed with the change to Ownby Lane. Chairman Wright stated that he thinks the property to
16 the east can stand alone without the stub off of Cross Court, and Vice - Chairman Potter agreed.
17 Commissioner Creighton thinks the stub -out would be a good idea in order to promote residential
18 use on that property. Commissioner Murphy agreed that by putting a stub -out at Cross Court, the
19 likelihood of the property developing as residential would be significantly increased. The
20 Commission agreed that Cross Court should be stubbed out.
21
Motion was made at the applicant's request to table ZA96 -136 and ZA96 -137 and to continue the
Public Hearing to the December 5, 1996 Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting.
24
25 Motion: Murphy
26 Second: Edmondson
27 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Wright, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
28 Nays: None
29 Approved: 7 -0
30 Motion carried.
31
32 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #5615)
33
34 Chairman Wright called for a recess at 9:50 p.m.
35 Chairman Wright called the meeting back to order at 10:08 p.m.
36
37 AGENDA ITEM #18, ZA 96 -143, REVISED SITE PLAN FOR PETSMART:
38 Donald Silverman, stated that PetsMart is making some minor revisions to their site plan and
39 elevations and would like to table this item until the November 21, 1996 Planning and Zoning
40 Meeting.
41
42 Commissioner Edmondson stated her concern about the large pile of dirt on the Home Depot site,
and it's effect on the trees. She asked Mr. Silverman when it is going to be moved. Mr. Silverman
stated that the contractor has been directed to remove the dirt pile. He also said that a substantial
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 24 of 30
portion of the dirt will be used for landscaping and berming as the site further develops. He will
report back to the Commission at the November 21, 1996, Planning and Zoning Meeting as to the
3 schedule of the dirt removal. Director Last stated that he also spoke to the superintendent about
4 proceeding diligently to remove the dirt.
5
6 Motion was made at the applicant's request to table ZA96 -143 and to continue the Public Hearing
7 to the November 21, 1996, Regular Planning and Zoning Meeting.
8
9 Motion: Murphy
10 Second: Creighton
11 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Wright, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
12 Nays: None
13 Approved: 7 -0
14 Motion carried.
15
16 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 1, section #5877)
17
18 AGENDA ITEM #14, ZA96 -138, SITE PLAN FOR KINGSLEY PLACE:
19 Planner Chris Carpenter informed the Commission that the applicant's request is for an assisted
20 living facility on the proposed Lot 4R -1, Block 6, Southridge Lakes, Phase C -1, on property legally
21 described as being the northwestern portion of Lot 4, Block 6, Southridge Lakes, Phase C -1, being
approximately 4.246 acres situated in the A.A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 522. This plan
proposes an assisted living facility containing 80 units. The property is located on the east side of
24 North Peytonville Avenue, approximately 200' north of the intersection of North Peytonville Ave.
25 and West Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709). The Land Use Category is Mixed Use (may include office
26 buildings, hotels, and commercial and retail centers that serve local and regional needs). The
27 Corridor Recommendation is Retail Commercial (same as in CS, 0-1, C -1, C -2, C -3 and B -1
28 districts). The current zoning is "C -3" General Commercial District. The applicant is Aguirre, Inc.,
29 for their client, Integrated Living Communities. The owner is Southridge Center LP. The property
30 is in SPIN Neighborhood #13. Twenty -five (25) written notices were sent to property owners within
31 the 200' notification area, and seven (7) responses were received of which five (5) were opposed, one
32 (1) was undecided and one (1) was in favor. Four (4) responses outside of the 200' notification area
33 were received and were all opposed.
34
35 Jake Ussery, Aguirre, Inc., 12700 Park Central Drive, Suite 1508, Dallas, Texas, presented this case
36 to the Commission. Mr. Ussery stated that he contacted SPIN representatives, David Baltimore and
37 Jim Goggin, to set up another SPIN meeting, and they both indicated that another meeting was not
38 necessary. He also sent a letter to surrounding property owners stating that he would meet with
39 anyone who was interested. He stated that he intends to provide additional landscaping, instead of
40 fencing, along the north property line along with the existing trees.
41
42 Chairman Wright opened the public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 25 of 30
Bill Kemp, 400 Southridge Lakes, Southlake, Texas, stated that the proposal presented to the public
at the last SPIN meeting was entirely different than the plan presented tonight. He believes that
3 Southlake does need an assisted living facility, but is unsure that this is the proper location or
4 developer. He is extremely concerned about the hours of operation, delivery trucks, ambulances,
5 etc. He is also concerned about the entrance being on Peytonville Ave. which is only a two (2) lane
6 road. He is worried about the mix of traffic from Carroll High School and the residents of this
7 facility. He does not think that the "C -3" zoning district should be adjacent to residential and feels
8 it will be a nuisance to the residents in Southridge Lakes.
9
10 Tom Chapman, 402 Valverde Court, Southlake, Texas, said that he also attended the SPIN meeting
11 and was informed that the entrance to this facility would be on Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709),
12 not Peytonville Ave. He was told at that time that this facility would not be directly against the
13 residential properties to the north. He feels betrayed by the developer. He is concerned about the
14 impact of this property on the surrounding neighborhoods. He is worried about the hours of
15 operation and the deliveries to this facility. He is also concerned about several large trees on
16 Peytonville Ave. which would have to be removed. He feels that the noise level will be a constant
17 bother to the surrounding residents. He agrees that there is probably a need for this type of facility
18 in Southlake but does not feel this is the proper location.
19
20 John Ruhl, 113 Killdeer Court, Southlake, Texas, stated that he is confused about which plan is the
21 correct plan. He is worried about the increase in traffic on Peytonville Ave. which is already a busy
road. He questions the integrity of Aguirre, Inc. since they misrepresented themselves at the SPIN
meeting. He is worried that the lighting will be intolerable to surrounding homes.
24
25 Rick Hoffman, 206 Donley Court, Southlake, Texas, stated that he is concerned about the viability
26 of the existing pine trees on this property because he needs to spray them every month. He is
27 worried that the pine trees may get shocked during the construction process. He would like to see
28 detailed landscaping plans regarding the north property line.
29
30 Mark Creeger, 204 Donley Court, Southlake, Texas, stated that his property is adjacent to the north
31 property line. He is worried about the density because they are proposing to put eighty (80) people
32 on four (4) acres. He commented on the developer placing the same bufferyard on the south property
33 line which is adjacent to commercial as they do on the north property line which is adjacent to
34 residential.
35
36 Jim Piatt, 111 Killdeer Court, Southlake, Texas, stated that he received the letter that Mr. Ussery
37 spoke of earlier, but he received it the Saturday before the last Planning and Zoning Meeting which
38 did not give the homeowners enough time to meet. He thought that Southlake did not have
39 apartments which is basically what this facility would be. He is concerned at what might be placed
40 in this building if this particular facility fails.
41
42 Chairman Wright closed the public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 26 of 30
Mr. Ussery responded by saying that he is an attorney and he does not make it a practice of
_ misleading people. He stated that he made it very clear to the residents at the SPIN meeting that this
3 assisted living facility is a permitted use in this area, but he did not have a site plan at the first SPIN
4 meeting in order to show to the citizens. He said he told them what he thought was the truth. He
5 told the Commission that Aguirre, Inc. specifically looks for land which is already zoned. They
6 normally do not attempt to rezone a piece of land, and Aguirre, Inc. chose this piece of land for that
7 very reason.
8
9 Vice - Chairman Potter asked Mr. Ussery why they are not in 100% compliance with the articulation
10 requirements as was requested of them in the last Planning and Zoning Meeting. Mr. Ussery referred
11 that question to the architect, Mr. John Anderson. Mr. Anderson stated that they did not want to
12 place gables all the way along the building, because they were afraid it would look like row housing.
13 He did not think it would be aesthetically pleasing.
14
15 Commissioner Creighton addressed the letter the Commission received from Mr. Ussery dated
16 October 31, 1996, which dealt with the concerns of homeowners. As referred to in the letter,
17 Commissioner Creighton asked Mr. Ussery what significant research was performed by the
18 Securities and Exchange Commission (S.E.C.) prior to allowing this company to be publicly traded
19 that in any way guaranteed that this facility would not fail. Mr. Ussery stated that the research
20 referred to was all speculation based upon charts and available possible residents in this area, etc.
21 He would also have to obtain the license for this facility to operate from the Texas Department of
Human Services, which would be for one year and for an assisted living facility only. If it ever
_ stopped functioning for any reason, the future owner would have to re -apply to the Texas
24 Department of Human Services for their own license. Commissioner Creighton stated that the
25 S.E.C. does not do significant research prior to allowing a corporation to be publicly traded and, in
26 fact, they require that a corporation states on the documents that are using to sell their securities
27 publicly that the S.E.C. has not performed such research. Mr. Ussery responded by saying what he
28 meant to say is that the initial public offering had to be scrutinized by the S.E.C., which they did.
29
30 Commissioner Creighton also stated that what she feels the citizens are saying is that this is an
31 extremely peculiar configuration for a building which limits its uses significantly, and they are very
32 concerned at what might go in this building if this facility fails.
33
34 Vice - Chairman Potter asked Mr. Ussery if he had any problems with the items on the Site Plan
35 Review Summary. Mr. Ussery referred this question to Mr. Mac McWilliams who is an engineer
36 with Carlson, Salcedo, McWilliams, Inc. Mr. McWilliams stated that he has made several changes
37 to the site plan in which he has already submitted to the City. Mr. McWilliams is concerned about
38 Item #2 requiring 50' of throat depth which, if complied with, would require them to move ten (10)
39 parking spaces from the entrance area to the north property line which he understands the residents
40 to not want. Mr. McWilliams asked for a variance to Item #2. He stated that they did eliminate four
41 (4) parking spaces closest to each driveway which allows them to exceed the 50' requirement. He
42 also asked for a variance to Item #6.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 27 of 30
Chairman Wright stated that due to Case Limitation Resolution No. 95 -24, Agenda Items #20, 21,
and 22 will not be heard tonight and will be heard at the November 21, 1996 Planning and Zoning
3 Meeting.
4
5 Chairman Wright stated that he would be closer to being in favor of this proposal if it was up front,
6 adjacent to Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) and contained more open space.
7
8 Vice - Chairman Potter stated that he has a real problem with the applicant not complying with the
9 articulation requirements because he specifically asked them if they would comply, and they stated
10 that they would 100 %. He does not feel this is the best location for this facility. Vice - Chairman
11 Potter asked Mr. Ussery what would occur if some of the residents wandered away from the facility.
12 Mr. Ussery stated that all of the residents will be ambulatory and will be able to come and go as they
13 please. Mr. Ussery stated that this is not a nursing home and does not treat sick people or dispense
14 medication. He stated that the only exit for the patients is the front door. He stated that the reason
15 this facility is not considered to be an apartment is that the units do not have traditional kitchens
16 which are equipped with stoves.
17
18 Vice - Chairman Potter stated that he thought the zoning was listed as medical facilities for assisted
19 living. Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy stated that her understanding was that the assisted living
20 facilities are required to have some type of nursing staff to dispense medication and provide health -
21 related care in addition to assisting residents with day -to -day living with items such as finances, etc.
Mr. Ussery then stated that they will have a full -time nurse who is there in case someone gets sick.
24 Commissioner Schroetke asked Mr. Ussery if there will be Alzheimer patients at this facility, and
25 he stated that there would be. Commissioner Schroetke stated she does not think this is a safe
26 location, and she is extremely concerned about the safety issues. Mr. Ussery stated that they have
27 to comply with the regulations set by the Texas Department of Human Services in the care and safety
28 of the residents.
29
30 Motion was made to deny ZA96 -138.
31
32 Motion: Potter
33 Second: Murphy
34 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Wright, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
35 Nays: None
36 Approved: 7 -0
37 Motion carried.
38
39 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #1318)
40
41 AGENDA ITEM #15, ZA96 -139, PLAT REVISION FOR THE PROPOSED LOTS 4R -1 AND 4R-
42 2, BLOCK 6, SOUTHRIDGE LAKES, PHASE C -1:
Planner Chris Carpenter informed the Commission that the applicant's request is a revision of Lot
4, Block 6, Southridge Lakes, Phase C -1, being approximately 8.833 acres situated in the A. A.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 28 of 30
Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 522. The property is located on the east side of North Peytonville
Ave., approximately 200' north of the intersection of North Peytonville Ave. and West Southlake
3 Blvd. (F.M. 1709). The current zoning is "C -3" General Commercial District. The Land Use
4 Category is Mixed Use. The Corridor Recommendation is Retail Commercial (same as in CS, 0-1,
5 C -1, C -2, C -3, and B -1 Districts). The applicant is Aguirre, Inc. The owner is Southridge Center
6 LP. The property is in SPIN Neighborhood #13. Eleven (11) written notices were sent to property
7 owners within the 200' notification area, and seven (7) responses have been received with three (3)
8 being undecided and four (4) being opposed.
9
10 Jake Ussery, Aguirre, Inc., 12700 Park Central Drive, Suite 1508, Dallas, Texas, presented this case
11 to the Commission and has no problem with any Staff Comment.
12
13 Chairman Wright opened the public hearing.
14
15 Scott Pearson, 202 Donley Court, Southlake, Texas, was not sent a certified letter regarding this
16 application and would like to know why. Planner Chris Carpenter stated that the city does not notify
17 outside the subdivision for a plat revision.
18
19 David Baltimore, 1368 Highland Hill, Southlake, Texas, was wondering how they plan to have
20 access to the northeast corner of this plat. Director Last stated that the lot Mr. Baltimore is
21 discussing actually has access off of Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) and is the same lot as the one
fronting Southlake Boulevard.
24 Chairman Wright closed the public hearing.
25
26 Chairman Wright called for a recess at 11:32 p.m.
27 Chairman Wright called the meeting back to order at 11:36 p.m.
28
29 Mr. Ussery told the Commission that he wants to completely withdraw this application.
30
31 Motion was made at the applicant's request to withdraw ZA96 -139.
32
33 Motion: Potter
34 Second: Murphy
35 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Wright, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
36 Nays: None
37 Approved: 7 -0
38 Motion carried.
39
40 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #1823)
41
42 AGENDA ITEM #20, ZA 96 -145, REZONING AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR SOUTHLAKE
TOWN CENTER:
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 29 of 30
Brian Stebbins, Rialto Development, L.P., 1723 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 110, Southlake, Texas,
informed the Commission that he would like to set up a workshop before the next Planning and
3 Zoning Meeting on November 21, 1996. A decision was made to have the workshop on Monday,
4 November 18, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. Director Last stated that as soon as a location can be found for the
5 workshop, the Commissioners would be informed and a public notice would be posted.
6
7 AGENDA ITEM #27, MEETING ADJOURNMENT:
8 Motion was made to approve the adjournment of the meeting at 11:40 p.m. on November 14, 1996.
9
10 Motion: Potter
11 Second: Murphy
12 Ayes: Schroetke, Tate, Wright, Potter, Edmondson, Murphy, Creighton
13 Nays: None
14 Approved: 7 -0
15 Motion carried.
16
17 (Planning and Zoning Meeting, 11- 07 -96, tape 2, section #1936)
18
19
20
21
Joe Wright`
25 Chairman
26
27
28
29 ATTEST:
30
31
32 l n
AizA_>( -
V
35 Lori A. Farwell
36 Community Development Secretary
37
38
39 L: \WP- FILES \MTG \MIN \1996 \11- 07- 96.WPD
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes on November 7, 1996 Page 30 of 30