Item 7C13 SOUTHLAKE
CITY OF
Department of Planning & Development Services
STAFF REPORT
August 1, 2012
CASE NO: ZAl2 -058
PROJECT: South Village at Watermere
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY: Southlake Watermark Holdings, LP is requesting approval of a Zoning Change and
Development Plan from "R -PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District and
"S -P -2" Generalized Site Plan District to "TZD" Transition Zoning District for the
purpose of modifying the development regulations, removing the age restriction on
the 38 residential lots west of Watermere Drive, adding approximately 3.7 acres
from the Watermere at Southlake development and to remove the approved 28
cottage units to single - family residential lots for a total of 71 single - family residential
lots at the South Village at Watermere on approximately 33.72 acres located at
2261, 2271& 2451 Union Church Road and 451 Watermere Drive. SPIN
Neighborhood #11.
REQUEST
DETAILS: Southlake Watermark Holdings, LP is requesting approval of a Zoning Change and
Development Plan from "R -PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District to
"TZD" Transition Zoning District. The current R -PUD development contains 54
single family residential lots in an age restricted (minimum age 55) gated
community. The purpose of this item is to revise the development regulations on
the 38 single family detached residential lots located on the west side of the future
Watermere Drive and to include 3.7 acres of 28 cottage dwelling units from the
Watermere at Southlake development and convert them to single - family residential
lots.
The primary changes include removing the age restriction and the gated private
street on the west side of Watermere Drive and revising setback lines for both the
east and west sides of the development. The addition of 3.7 acres to this request
alters the zoning boundary for both the South Village and Watermere at Southlake
and therefore a separate zoning change and concept plan application is being
processed concurrently under Planning Case ZA 12 -059 for Watermere at
Southlake. A summary of all the developments specific changes has been provided
by the applicant and can be found under Attachment `C' of this staff report.
ACTION NEEDED: 1) Consider 1 St Reading Zoning Change and Development Plan Approval
Request
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information
(B) Vicinity Map
(C) Plans and Support Information
(D) Development Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated July 9, 2012
(E) Surrounding Property Owners Map
Case No.
ZAl2 -058
(F) Surrounding Property Owners Responses
(G) Full Size Plans (for Commissioners only)
STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (817) 748 -8067
Daniel Cortez (817) 748 -8070
Case No.
ZAl2 -058
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER/APPLICANT: Southlake Watermark Holdings, LP & Keller Watermere, LP
PROPERTY SITUATION: 2261, 2271& 2451 Union Church Rd. and 451 Watermere Dr.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tracts 4C and 6A2, and Tract 4D, J.G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18 and
Lot 4R3, Block 1, Watermere at Southlake Addition
LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential
CURRENT ZONING: "R -PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District and "S -P -2"
Generalized Site Plan District
REQUESTED ZONING: "TZD" Transition Zoning District
HISTORY: - On October 2, 2007 the City Council approved a Zoning Change and
Development Plan (Ordinance No. 480 -532) for the South Village at
Watermere under Planning Case ZA07 -098.
- On October 2, 2007 the City Council approved a Preliminary Plat for the
South Village at Watermere under Planning Case ZA07 -099. This plat
has since expired and the applicant has filed another Preliminary Plat
(ZA 12 -039) being processed concurrently with this zoning change and
development plan request.
CITIZEN INPUT: A SPIN meeting was held for this proposal on July 9, 2012. A copy of the
report can be found under Attachment `C' of this staff report.
SOUTHLAKE 2030: Consolidated Land Use Plan
The underlying designation is Medium Density Residential. A
Comprehensive Plan Amendment application was approved by City Council
on October 2, 2007 to change the underlying land use designation from
Public /Semi -Pubic to Medium Density Residential under Planning Case
CP07 -003.
TRANSPORTATION
ASSESSMENT:
Case No.
ZAl2 -058
Master Thoroughfare Plan
The Master Thoroughfare Plan recommends Union Church Road to be a 2-
lane, undivided collector roadway with 84 feet of right -of -way and
Watermere Drive to be a 2 -lane, undivided collector roadway with 60 feet of
right -of -way. Adequate right -of -way is shown to be dedicated for these
roadways.
Proposed Area Road Network and Conditions
The proposed overall development will extend Watermere Drive to the
south which will intersect Union Church Road across from Arcadia Drive in
Keller. The development will have three (3) access drives directly onto both
sides of Watermere Drive, one (1) private drive on the east side and two (2)
public drives on the west side.
Attachment A
Page 1
EB I Peak A.M. (250) 7:00 — 8:00 a.m. I Peak P.M. (158) 4:30 — 5:30 p.m.
Traffic Impact
:7_r I: iTiVIX &I1y1 E 121 N
PLAN: The Pathways Master Plan recommends a 6 -foot sidewalk along the north
side of Union Church Road and an 8 -foot multi -use trail along the east side
of Watermere Drive. The sidewalk and trail are both shown on the
proposed plan.
WATER & SEWER: The site will connect water services to an existing 8" water line along the
west side of Watermere Drive to the north. A 10" sanitary sewer line exists
along the eastern boundary of the proposed development.
DRAINAGE ANALYSIS: The drainage from this site will drain to the proposed retention /detention
pond which will ultimately discharge into the existing storm drainage system
on the south side Union Church Road.
TREE PRESERVATION: There are currently no existing trees on site and any trees that were once
located here have been removed as a part of the previously approved plan.
There is however one 48 -inch pecan tree on the southwest corner of the
development that is proposed to be preserved as indicated on the
conceptual landscape plan under Attachment `C' of this staff report.
PARKS & RECREATION
BOARD: Recommendation on Park Dedication requirements for Watermere South
Village — a 54 -unit residential development located at Watermere Drive and
Union Church Road. The total required park land dedication for the
development is 1.35 acres of public parkland or an alternative fee payment
of $162,000.
The developer proposed to satisfy the park dedication requirement by
dedicating 2.32 acres of public parkland to be maintained by the developer
and eventually by the HOA, by installing three (3) park benches along the
park trail as approved by the Park Department and the construction of 0.19
miles of concrete trail within the park. The total value of the proposed land,
park benches and trail is $305,979, which exceeds the park dedication fee
requirement of $162,000 by $143,979. Therefore, the developer also
requested $143,979 in credits that may be applied to a future park project to
be developed by the same owner /applicant (developer).
Additionally, the developer proposed to complete the parking lot on the east
side of Watermere Drive as requested by the Park Board at the February
Case No. Attachment A
ZAl2 -058 Page 2
* Vehicle Trips Per Day
* AM -In, AM -Out, PM -In and PM -Out are peak hour generators on a weekday
13, 2012 meeting.
April 9, 2012, Parks and Recreation Board recommend approval (7 -0) of the
proposed park dedication as presented and to grant a credit balance of
$143,979 to be applied to the future park development by the
owner /applicant.
This approval from the Parks & Recreation Board was based on the South
Village at Watermere consisting of 54 single - family residential lots. Another
meeting with the Parks & Recreation may be required by the applicant prior
to a plat being filed.
PLANNING & ZONING
COMMISSION: July 19, 2012; Approved (4 -1) subject to the Development Plan Review
Summary No. 2, dated July 9, 2012 and referencing the staff report dated
July 13, 2012.
STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Development Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated July 9, 2012.
WCommunity DevelopmentlMEMO12012 Cases1058 - ZDP - South Village at WatermerelStaff Report
Case No. Attachment A
ZAl2 -058 Page 3
Vicinity Map
South Village at Watermere
City of
Keller
ZAl2 -058
Zoning Change & Development Plan
2261, 2271 & 2451 Union Church Road
and 451 Watermere Drive
N
\\ C
0 350 700 1,400
Feet
S
Case No.
ZAl2 -058
Attachment B
Page 1
Plans and Support Information
Approved Overall Watermere Concept Plan
�ylMrdLE FAMLY IiE$IC7ENIIAi
kl
I
�
0PFNSPA.i_F
PARK
-
`
d
I I�`
A5515TEDILWING 6ULLOING
i.�
l
4
4 _
1!`
PAFK 1
u -
LUXURY CONDO TOMR
CLUBHOUSE
4 �e
4
I i
. L!
�ylMrdLE FAMLY IiE$IC7ENIIAi
kl
I
�
0PFNSPA.i_F
-
`
i
i.
08
41
!4P .y
�R
i*
!
r1
i
*
# 1
-
i
#'
!
•
LM9 WATERIARE
% *# 0 4 0` #
*#
V
Case No.
Attachment C
ZAl2 -058
Page 1
GH YvR �RGN SAT
WI B'd' HIGH STORE COLIRM9 AT
EACH LOPNEP
Case No.
ZAl2 -058
THE ISLE AT WATERMERE-
PERSONAL CARE &
MEMORYMURSING CENTER
1
�J
t7
A
OVERALL
SITE PLAN
CASE, VO. ZA >2,W
Attachment C
Page 2
Approved Conceptual Landscape Plan
r.
0
4R
4,
Ave/
xi
A
•
j i ,
J
0 7
0, z , xTfvvF*J& Irl, i" a
South Village at Watermere-
- --- -------
-
0
Case No. Attachment C
ZA1 2-058 Page 3
Proposed Conceptual Landscape Plan
Proposed Development Plan
w � -
g k
jig
11'
d ; 8 -i gasa5a : x w w w ss W
ss m a$s o w N p8g€ d
F� u- slab I a ¢ z 7 x sa Z
¢g n ��,
§ g= a° I V
Rx l:� a olg q gg g I se 04; , O '
@ -.. $ s E r5£ - O N *NFd> OE.,° 3 /a
4, W - Ig�.a€ � & � � � b � N � g I I � � app' � a i` a � x � z . Lu-
� � €� ka g x > a Mz¢w�m C'a`d �.
a. �� p !V-
�_ R I
_ ecgJ : 1' fligI m _R I =g" s F Fz � g
€ §� % ME � 1 "8 94 E 5 ow
`s€ - g O ti 4
€y T a- aaRS�R �
- °.Imlay €n�F��
e
IM
_, P
o s,=
nna , n
- n�3fn[. nav - wn.m' — _n.so' -- n.m' -- — neo' - -na -- - -nso a5t - su[- _------ _rirT' '•row
yy s SO'D'11'E 6M.5J' a �`
9yy n3 a kk s s \I
o
S ° s
w
0
0
o °
Al L- .��..�.e -- -- -_ Taal r18# ra _ _FUTURE RIVGRBNOOR WAY (PRIVATE STHBETj - - - ' I I
yyyy m
b ° u
a 3
R�I I
I�
s s I I I I
'� R L � I 4r9NSN7 114' NbW
I TT I
-
� Bi 9
- _ .'rwbeer `�� •'vy� 1 I I I 3VIN0
8
000MNOiiI
al
tin
ji g
� _ � I �� � � °n om ��' •� � � - il � - �� `�$ e � I �ffi = €ad
"
a s
m ' .y s
13SVHd#d
+}��i u' '
wl'
�
L -L
5y 5
a �
r —
I 1�
I.
a. L7- l �— C' �l �� rv ry L�
�E rw r - 1 - 1 - rom - L - 1 -- -- -- - L
a m� vm q a �vva xi am •imw� _ _ s P rm. � � I I ',
I mm raaaan•st��anr frxra .mss .�.; ,mwnm essx w, - - = T �I i" i I p���
r
3Po � _ > - - _
___
��[
-- - - - - -- 1 �
- - - - -- 1 am
_ r
A
I I I
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 4
EXHIBIT "B"
Developer's Narrative Letter
South Village at Watermere
Request for Zoning Change from "R -PUD" and "SP -2" to
Pi Transitional Zoning District (TZD)
August 1, 2012
This proposal is being made by Southlake Watermark Holdings, LP, to amend the
existing "R -PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District zoning approved under
City of Southlake Ordinance No. 480 -532 and the "SP -2" Generalized Site Plan District
zoning under City of Southlake Ordinance No. 480 -476b to Transitional Zoning District
within the land boundary of South Village at Watermere. South Village at Watermere
was originally planned and approved as an age restricted gate community with 30.02
acres of "R -PUD" with maximum density of 54 single family detached dwelling units
(i.e. 1.8 dwelling units per acre) and 3.70 acres of "SP -2" with seven (7) four -plex
buildings (i.e. total of 28 dwelling units or 7.57 dwelling units per acre). The total
number of dwelling units currently approved in South Village is 82 dwelling units (or
2.43 dwelling units per acre).
Based on current market conditions /demand, higher interest by local builders for
residential lots (age restricted and non -age restricted) and further study of our current
development plan for South Village at Watermere, we feel our zoning change request
fiom R -PUD and SP -2 to TZD will allow us more flexibility within our overall
Watermere at Southlake Community. Under our proposed TZD zoning change, we are
requesting to eliminate the seven (7) four -plex buildings (i.e. 28 dwelling unit) current
planned on the 3.70 acres of "SP -2" located on the east and south sides of the existing
lake and add seventeen (17) single family lots for seniors. We feel this change will
provide a more cohesive plan of single family lots for the seniors that would like lake
views on private lots. The total dwelling units proposed is 71 dwelling units instead of 82
dwelling units (a reduction of 11 dwelling units). The density within South Village will
be decrease fiom 2.43 dwelling units per acre to 2.10 dwelling units per acre. We are
aware that the maximum density allowed under City of Southlake TZD zoning guidelines
is 2.0 dwelling units per acre. Under our current zoning ( "R -PUD and "SP -2 "), our
overall density is 2.43 dwelling units per acre and above the maximum allowed under
TZD zoning guidelines. We feel our proposed reduction in overall site density to 2.10
dwelling units per acre is very much appropriate and fits the general guidelines
established for the TZD zoning and do request approval of this slight variance.
It is also important to note that the elimination of the 3.70 acres of "SP -2" area within
South Village at Watermere requires us to amend the existing "SP -2" Generalized Site
Plan District that was previously approved for the entire Watermere at Southlake
Community under City of Southlake Ordinance No. 480 -476b (i.e. current land area
within the "SP -2" for Watermere development is 3 5.51 acres — under our proposed
amendment the land area within the "SP -2" will be 31.81 acres). We have prepared
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 5
separate applications /plans for "SP -2" submittal and it will be hacking con - currently with
our proposed TZD zoning change request.
Under our proposed TZD zoning change we are also requesting to remove the age
restriction on the 38 single family residential lots on the west side of Watermere Drive.
The proposed streets on the west side of Watermere Drive are proposed to be public and
will not be gated. The park along the west side of Watermere Drive will also be dedicated
as a public park. We feel that Watermere Drive and the public park act as a nice
transitional buffer between the non age restricted lots and the age restricted lots on the
east side of Watermere Drive.
This presentation to the City of Southlake will document and provide information on:
1. Existing site conditions and adjacent property uses and zoning;
2. Description of the proposed development concept and the amended Development
Regulations for the all residential lots and open space lots located within South
Village at Watermere:
3. Description of the development improvements including paving, storm drainage,
water and sanitary sewer facilities.
Proiect Location
The South Village at Watermere is located on the north side of Union Church Road and
east of Pearson Lane. The western property line abuts the Chesapeake Place subdivision
which is zoned "R -PUD." The southern property line is the northern right -of -way line for
Union Church Road. Hidden Lakes, a 1,000 -acre residential development in the City of
Keller, is located on the south side of Union Church. The northwest property line abuts
undeveloped property and the east property line abuts a tract of land this is currently
being used as a nursery. The north and northeast property lines abut Watermere at
Southlake that is currently under development.
Ownership
The property is currently owned by Keller Watermere, LP, and Southlake Watermark
Holdings, LP.
Existing Zoning and Land Use
South Village at Watermere contains 33.72 acres. The existing zoning within the South
Village at Watermere is defined as follows: 30.02 acres of "R -PUD" Residential Planned
Unit Development Zoning District and 3.70 acres of "SP -2" Generalized Site Plan
Zoning District. The City of Southlake's Land Use Map designation for South Village at
Watermere is Medium Density Residential.
2
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 6
Purpose and Intent of Proposed District
It is a goal that the proposed neighborhood be well integrated into the surrounding areas
by extending thoroughfares and pedestrian paths throughout the site. The 33.72 acre site
will be developed as single- family detached housing. The residential lots on the east side
of Wateimere Drive will be deed restricted to residents ages 55 and older and will be
gated with 31' B -B private streets. The residential lots on the west side of Wateimere
Drive will not be age restricted to seniors and will not be gated. All of the streets on the
west side of Watermere Drive are proposed to be 31' B -B public sheets located in a 50'
public right of way. The private streets on the east side of Watermere Drive will be
maintained by the existing Watermere at Southlake Homeowners Association. All public
streets and all public water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage facilities will be owned
and maintained by the City of Southlake.
The existing "R -PUD" Zoning District (i.e. 30.02 acres) and the existing "SP -2" Zoning
District (i.e. 3.70 acres) within South Village at Watermere shall be changed to a
Transitional Zoning District (TZD). Unless otherwise stipulated in this proposed TZD
zoning request, all other development standards previously approved tinder City of
Southlake Ordinance No. 480 -532 shall remain in effect.
Development Concept
The South Village at Watermere will continue the quality development of Wateimere at
Southlake and add to the already diverse and vibrant area. All residents of the South
Village at Wateimere west of Wateimere Drive that (at their sole option) qualify as
seniors and pay appropriate association/club membership dues will have access to the
clubhouse and other amenities within the Watermere at Southlake development. A
separate Homeowners Association will be established for residents on the west side of
Watermere Drive. All housing on the east side of Wateimere Drive will be deed restricted
to residents ages 55 and older to maintain the atmosphere of the Watermere development
and will be required to be members of the existing Wateimere at Southlake Homeowners
Association.
Watermere Drive divides the property and will have private and public open space on
both sides of the street. The open space on the east side of Watermere Drive will be
private and have the following amenities: one tennis court, one pavilion, one putting
green, one shuffleboard, one horseshoe pit, and one trellis. There will also be a 6'
wrought iron fence around the private amenities, one fountain within the existing lake,
one parking lot with approximately 30 parking spaces and 5' wide sidewalks at locations
shown on the development plan. The open space on the west side of Watermere Drive
will be dedicated to the City of Southlake as a public park. The public park on the west
side of Wateimere Drive will feature a 0.25 mile looped walking trail and large amounts
of green space. All proposed private and public open space areas will be landscaped and
irrigated.
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 7
The Homeowners Association established on the west side of Watermere Drive will be
responsible for maintenance of the public park (i.e. Lot 9X, Block 2), the private open
space lots (i.e. Lots 1X & 25X, Block 1 and Lot 17X, Block 2). The existing Watermere
at Southlake Homeowners Association shall be responsible for maintenance of the private
open space lots (i.e. Lots IX & 8X, Block 3 and Lot 1X, Block 4); the private street lot
(i.e. Lot 1, Block 5) and the two median areas within Watermere Drive.
Development Standards
The following Development standards shall apply to the proposed Transitional Zoning
District (TZD):
1. Street Design Standards (East of Watermere Drive)
a. Street Right -of -way
i. Private Residential Street - 50' utility, drainage, common &
emergency access easement, 31' B -B pavement
ii. Watermere Drive - 60' Right -of -way, 37' B -B pavement
b. On- street Parking
i. Parallel parking spaces shall be allowed within the 50' utility,
drainage, common & emergency access easement.
c. No Alleys
d. Pavement Surfaces
i. All streets and sidewalks shall be constructed with reinforced
concrete.
ii. The 6' crosswalk at the intersection of Watemere Drive and Union
Church Road will be stamped and stained concrete pavement. All
other crosswalks and street entryways) will not be required to be
stamped or stained concrete pavement.
2. Street Design Standards (West of Watermere Drive)
a. Street Right -of -way
i. Public Residential Street - 50' Right -of -way, 31' B -B pavement
ii. Watermere Drive - 60' Right -of -way, 37' B -B pavement
b. On- street Parking
i. Parallel parking shall be allowed on one side of the street.
c. No Alleys
d. Pavement Surfaces
i. All streets and sidewalks shall be constructed with reinforced
concrete.
ii. The 6' crosswalk at the intersection of Watermere Drive and Union
Church Road will be stamped and stained concrete pavement. All
other crosswalks and street entiyway(s) will not be required to be
stamped or stained concrete pavement.
4
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 8
3. Streetscape Standards (East and West of Watermere Drive)
a. Sidewalks
i. Residential - 4' sidewalk.
ii. Watermere Drive - Meandering 5' sidewalk on west side, 8'
sidewalk on east side.
iii. Union Church Road - 6' sidewalk
b. Street Trees
i. There shall be three (3) four inch caliper trees with at least one or
two trees located between the back of curb and the city sidewalk
per each residential lot. Three (3) ornamental trees shall be
equivalent to one (1) tree. Street trees shall be Live Oaks, Red
Oaks or American Ehns.
4. Open Space (East of Watermere Drive)
a. Private open space to consist of green space with walkways. The amenities
within Lot 1X, Block 4 shall consist of the following: one tennis court,
one pavilion, one putting green, one shuffleboard court, one horseshoe pit
and one trellis. The will also be a. 6' wrought iron fence around the private
amenities area, one fountain within the lake, one parking lot with
approximately 30 parking spaces and 5' wide sidewalks at locations
shown on the development plan.
b. The private open space shall be firlly landscaped and irrigated.
c. Maintenance shall be provided by the existing Watermere at Southlake
Homeowners Association that has required membership of all residents.
The Homeowners Association shall have fine and lien rights as permitted
by law to enforce compliance with the rules and regulations of the
association.
5. Open Space (West of Watermere Drive)
a. Private open space to consist of green space with walkways.
b. The private open space shall be fully landscaped and irrigated.
c. Maintenance shall be provided by the separate Homeowners Association
that will be established for residents on the west side of Watermere Drive.
All residents on the west side of Watermere Drive are required to be
members on the Homeowners Association. The Homeowners Association
shall have fine and lien rights as permitted by law to enforce compliance
with the riles and regulations of the association.
d. Public open space (i.e. public park) to consist of green space with a
minimum of a 0.25 mile looped walking trail. The maintenance of the
public open space shall be provided by the separate Homeowners
Association that will be established for residents on the west side of
Watermere Drive.
6. Block and Lot Standards (East of Watermere Drive)
a. Minimum Lot area- 7,400 square feet
b. Minimum Lot Width- 65 feet at building line
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 9
c. Minimum Lot Depth- 115 feet; except for Lots 17 & 18. Block 4 where a
miniimnn lot depth shall be 100 feet.
d. Maximum Lot Coverage — 60%
7. Block and Lot Standards (West of Watermere Drive)
a. Minimuun Lot area- 9,800 square feet
b. Minimum Lot Width- 70 feet at building line
c. Mini mun Lot Depth- 130 feet
d. Maximum Lot Coverage — 60%
8. Bllllding Standards (East of Watermere Drive)
a. Maximum Building Height — 35' or 2 stories (excluding basements)
b. Minimum Building Floor Area — 2,500 sf
c. Setbacks
i. Front Yard - 20 feet
ii. Rear Yard — 20 feet
iii. Side Yard —10% of lot width
iv. Side Yard Adjacent to Street - 15 feet
v. Garage Setbacks — 20 feet for forward facing and 20 feet for swing
d. Building Facade
i. All facades shall consist of stucco, brick and/or stone. Stucco is
considered a masonry material. EFIS or synthetic stucco will not
be allowed. See Material Percentages below.
Front Elevation = 90% Brick/Stone /Stucco
Rear Elevation = 10% Siding
Side Elevation(s) = 90% Brick/Stone /Stucco
10% Siding
90% Brick/Stone /Stucco
10% Siding
ii. All roof material shall be a minimum of 35 year composition and
consistent throughout the development.
e. Garage Doors
i. All garage doors shall be clad with cedar material.
ii. No driveway access from Union Church Road shall be allowed.
f. Minimum Finish Floor Elevation — The fist floor elevation of the
residential structure shall be a minimum of one (1) foot above the finished
level of the public sidewalk in fiont of the residential structure.
9. Building Standards (West of Watermere Drive)
a. Maxinnnn Building Height — 35' or 2 stories (excluding basements);
except for Lots 2 -4, Block 1 shall be limited to one story
b. Minimum Building Floor Area — 2,500 sf
c. Maximum Air- Conditioned (AC) Square Footage — 3,700 sf
d. Setbacks
i. Front Yard - 20 feet
ii. Rear Yard — 20 feet
P
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 10
iii. Side Yard —
a) Side setbacks shall be one foot (1) maximum on one side
and nine feet (9') minimum on the opposite side. The
dwelling shall be no closer than ten feet (10) between the
face of exterior of neighboring dwelling units. The side of
the lot of the 9 -foot or 1 -foot setback can be adjusted as
needed when development begins to occur.
b) The closest exterior roof line to an adjacent property shall
be guttered if the general slope of the roof falls toward the
neighboring property.
c) Each adjacent lot shall provide an access and maintenance
easement, a minimum. of 9 feet (9'), adjacent to the "zero"
(one -foot) side to allow the property owner access for
maintenance of his dwelling.
d) The majority of one side of the structure shall be located
within three feet (3) of one side lot line. The building wall
which faces the "zero" side of the lot shall not have any
doors, ducts, grills, vents or other openings, with the
exception of small windows located a minimum of 8 feet
above finish floor of dwelling.
iv. Side Yard Adjacent to Street - 15 feet
v. Garage Setbacks — 20 feet forward facing and 20 feet for swing
e. Building Facade
i. All facades shall consist of stucco, brick and/or stone. Stucco is
considered a masonry material. EFIS or synthetic stucco will not
be allowed. See Material Percentages below.
Front Elevation = 90% Brick/Stone /Stucco
Rear Elevation = 10% Siding
Side Elevation(s) = 90% Brick/Stone /Stucco
10% Siding
90% Brick/Stone /Stucco
10% Siding
ii. All roof material shall be a minimum. of 35 year composition and
consistent throughout the development.
f. Garage Doors
i. All garage doors shall be clad with cedar material.
ii. No driveway access fiom Union Church Road shall be allowed.
g. Minimum Finish Floor Elevation — The first floor elevation of the
residential structure shall be a minimum of one (1) foot above the finished
level of the public sidewalk in fiont of the residential structure.
10. Site Design Standards (East and West of Watermere Drive)
a.
i. Union Church Road - 6' Masomy Screening Wall, with 6'
Wrought Iron Fencing shall be allowed adjacent to open space lots.
f►I
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 11
ii. Watermere Drive - Open Space Buffer and 6' Masoniy/Wrought
Iron Screening Wall (i.e. combination — 2' masonry & 4' wrought
iron) along east frontage of Watermere Drive located in Lot 1X,
Block 4.
iii. Chesapeake Place — 6' stonecrete fence (or equivalent) to be
coordinated with Chesapeake Place HOA.
iv. Fencing along north property line (Lots 5 thru 9, Block 1) shall be
6' wrought iron or 6' stonecrete fence similar to 6' stonecrete
fence along Chesapeake Place (i.e. a combination of both will not
be allowed).
b. Fencing
i. All interior fencing between lots shall be wrought iron and a
minimum of 4.5 feet in height. No wood fencing will be allowed.
c. Lighting
i. Street lights shall follow City of Southlake standards.
ii. Light posts shall be consistent with the existing Watermere at
Southlake.
d. Signs
i. All street signs shall be consistent with the existing Watermere at
Southlake.
Permitted Uses
1. Residential Uses - Single Family Dwellings
2. Public, semi - public and private parks.
3. Recreational facilities and open space improvements including playgrounds,
parkways, greenbelts, ponds and lakes, botanical gardens, pedestrian paths,
bicycle paths.
4. Other uses of a similar nature and character.
Homeowners Association
The residents on the east side of Watermere Drive within South Village at Watermere
will be part of the existing Homeowners Association that has been established for the
Watermere at Southlake development. The existing Watermere at Southlake
Homeowners Association will be responsible for maintaining all private open spaces,
amenities, private streets, irrigation, landscaping, signage and fencing for Lots 1X & 8X,
Block 3, Lot 1X, Block 4 and Lot 1, Block 5, and the two median areas in Watermere
Drive.
The residents on the west side of Watermere Drive within South Village at Watermere
will establish a separate Homeowners Assocation. The Homeowners Association on the
west side of Watermere Drive will be responsible for maintenance of all public and
8
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 12
private open spaces, amenities, irrigation, landscaping, signage and fencing for Lot 1X &
25X, Block 1, Lots 9X & 17X, Block 2.
Open Space ManaLyement Plan
All private open spaces lots and the private street lot on the east side of Watermeere
Drive within the Transitional Zoning District shall be owned and maintained by the
existing Watermere at Southlake Homeowners Association. The two median areas within
Watermere Drive shall also be maintained by the existing Watermere at Southlake
Homeowners Association. A separate Homeowners Association will be established for
the lots on the west side of Watermere Drive and this Homeowners Association will own
and maintain all private open space lots on the west side of Watermere Drive. The HOA
on the west side of Watermere Drive will also be responsible for maintaining the public
park lot.
Both of the Homeowners Associations shall have mandatory membership for all the
homeowners in their respective neighborhoods. Dues shall be assessed and collected so
that the property under the control of the Association(s) can be maintained in a high
quality condition. The deed restrictions and collection of dues shall be enforceable
through lien rights and assessment of fines and penalties as allowed by law.
Engineering Analysis
Roadways
South Village at Watermere is bounded by Union Church Road to the south where
ingress and egress will be provided for a south entrance. Watermere Drive, a public
street, will be extended from the north through the subject property and connect to Union
Church Road. This connection will provide north/south ingress and egress from Union
Church Road to Southlake Boulevard. The individual lots on the east side of Watermere
Drive will be served by private streets that are gated. The residents on the east side of
Watermere Drive will have cross - access rights onto Lot 4R2, Block 1 of Watermere at
Southlake (and vice - versa). The individual lots on the west side of Watermere Drive will
be served by public streets and will not be gated.
A traffic impact analysis was completed for this project back in 2007 at the time of the
original zoning change of this property to "R -PUD ". The traffic report showed that there
would be minimum impact to Union Church Road.
Drainaee
The South Village at Watermere is located in the Big Bear Creek Watershed and
generally drains from the north to the south. The three -acre pond will act as a detention
system for the storm water nmoff before the storm water runoff is discharged across
Union Church Road. The detention system has been designed so that downstream
properties will not be adversely affected by the development of the South Village at
Watermere. It is important to note that detailed drainage plans /studies were completed on
the original South Village at Watermere and reviewed by the City of Southlake Public
7
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 13
Works Department back in 2010. Updated detailed constriction plans for the drainage
will be submitted to the city for review at the appropriate time. It is important to point out
that the master drainage plan/concept of South Village at Watermere under this zoning
change request is not changing and will still meet all City of Southlake drainage
regulations.
Water Distribution and Sewage Collection Systems
With this development, a new 12" waterline will be constructed along the fiontage of
Union Church Road and connect to the existing 12" waterline in front of the Chesapeake
Place neighborhood. An 8" waterline will be extended along the Watermere Drive with
8" waterlines extending into the public and private streets. The development will be
served by the existing sanitary sewer line that runs through the eastern portion of the
property. A portion of the existing sanitary sewer line running along the fiontage of Lots
8 -14, Block 4 of South Village at Watermere may need to be relocated to avoid conflict
with proposed building pads. It is important to note that detailed construction plans were
completed on the original South Village at Watermere and reviewed by the City of
Southlake Public Works Department back in 2010. Updated detailed construction plans
for the utilities will be submitted to the city for review at the appropriate time.
Summary of Amendments to the Existing Zoning Development Standards Under
City of Southlake Ordinance No. 480 -532 and Ordinance NO. 480476b
Proposed Residential Lots (West Side of Watermere Drive)
1. Remove resident age restriction of fifty -five (55) years.
2. Change front building setback line to 20'.
3. Change garage setback line to 20' (front facing or swing).
4. Change side yard setback line as follows:
1. Side setbacks shall be one foot (1') maximum on one side
and nine feet (9') minim on the opposite side. The
dwelling shall be no closer than ten feet (10') between the
face of exterior of neighboring dwelling units. The side of
the lot of the 9 -foot or 1 -foot setback can be adjusted as
needed when development begins to occur.
2. The closest exterior roof line to an adjacent property shall
be guttered if the general slope of the roof falls toward the
neighboring property.
3. Each adjacent lot shall provide an access and maintenance
easement, a minimum of nine feet (9'), adjacent to the
"zero" (one -foot) side to allow the property owner access
for maintenance of his dwelling.
4. The majority of one side of the structure shall be located
within three feet (3) of one side lot line. The building wall
which faces the "zero" side of the lot shall not have any
doors, ducts, grills, vents or other openings. with the
exception of small windows located a minimum of 8 feet
above finish floor of dwelling.
10
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 14
Change 27' B -B private streets to 31' B -B public streets.
Remove Gates — Remove gates across the public streets located west of
Watermere Drive.
7. Private Open Space to Public Open Space — Change the private open space west
of Watermere Drive to public park (i.e. Lot 9X, Block 1 of South Village at
Watermere). The public park shall have a minim of 0.25 mile walking trails
and landscape /irrigated green space. The Homeowners Association established for
lots west of Watermere Drive shall be responsible for maintenance of the public
park and private open space lots (i.e. Lots 1X & 25X, Block 1 and Lot 17X, Block
2).
9. Maximum Air- Conditioned (AC) Square Footage — 3,700 square feet.
9. Change maximum building height to 35' or 2 stories (excluding basements) and
Lots 2 -4, Block 1 shall be one (1) story homes.
10. All garage doors shall be clad with cedar material.
11. Street Trees (specify number /size /type) — Three (3) four inch caliper trees with at
least one or two trees located between the back of curb and the city sidewalk per
each residential lot. Three (3) ornamental trees shall be equivalent to one (1) tree.
Street trees shall be Live Oaks, Red Oaks or American Elms.
12. The 6' crosswalk at the intersection of Watermere Drive and Union Church Road
will be stamped and stained concrete pavement. All other crosswalks and street
entiyway(s) are not required to be stamped or stained concrete pavement.
13. Roof Material — All roof material shall be a minimum of 35 year composition and
consistent throughout the development.
14. Change 5' sidewalks to 4' sidewalks along all residential streets.
15. All interior fencing between lots shall be wrought iron and a minim of 4.5 feet
in height. No wood fencing will be allowed.
16. Change minim rear yard fencing to 20 feet.
Proposed Residential Lots (East Side of Watermere Drive)
1. Change minim lot size to 7,400 square feet.
2. Change minim lot width to 65 feet at front building line.
3. Change minimum lot depth to 115 feet; except for Lots 17 & 18. Block 4 where
minimum lot depth shall be 100 feet.
4. Change minim front yard to 20 feet.
5. Change minim side yard to 10% of the lot width.
6. Change minim rear yard to 20 feet.
7. Change minim garage setback to 20 feet (front facing or swing).
8. All garage doors shall be clad with cedar material.
9. The proposed private amenities within Lot 1X, Block 4 shall include one tennis
count, one pavilion, on putting green, one shuffleboard court, one horseshoe pit
and one trellis. There shall also be a 6' wrought iron fence around the private
amenities, one fountain within the lake, one parking lot with approximately 30
parking spaces and 5' sidewalks within Lot 1X, Block 4 at locations shown on the
development plan.
10. Street Trees (specify number /size /type) — There shall be three (3) four inch caliper
trees with at least one or two trees located between the back of curb and the city
11
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 15
sidewalk per each residential lot. Three (3) ornamental trees shall be equivalent to
one (1) tree. Street trees shall be Live Oaks, Red Oaks or American Elms.
11. Roof Material — All roof material shall be a minimum of 35 year composition and
consistent throughout the development.
12. All residents shall have access across Lot 4R2, Block 1 of Watermere at
Southlake Addition.
13. Eliminate the seven (7) four -plex buildings (i.e. 28 dwelling units) around the east
and south sides of the lake and add seventeen (17) single family lots.
14. Change maximum building height to 35' or 2 stories (excluding basements).
15. The 6' crosswalk at the intersection of Watermere Drive and Union Church Road
will be stamped and stained concrete pavement. All other crosswalks and sheet
entyway(s) are not required to be stamped or stained concrete pavement.
16. Change 5' sidewalks to 4' sidewalks along all residential streets.
17. All interior fencing between lots shall be wrought iron and a minim of 4.5 feet
in height. No wood fencing will be allowed.
Note: The existing "R -PUD" zoning district (i.e. 30.02 acres) and the existing "SP -2"
zoning district (i.e. 3.70 acres) within South Village at Watermere shall be changed to a.
Transitional Zoning District (TZD). Unless stated above, all other development standards
previously approved under City of Southlake Ordinance No. 480 -532 shall remain in
effect within the limits of the proposed TZD for South Village at Watermere.
Summary
The South Village at Watermere is designed to be an extension of the Watermere at
Southlake development and to transition fi - om Watermere at Southlake development to
the existing surrounding single - family developments. The South Village at Watermere
will be a positive addition to this part of Southlake and to the neighbors in Keller.
We respectfully request the City of Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council approve the zoning change for South Village at Watermere from "R -PUD"
Residential Planned Unit Development and "SP -2" Generalized Site Plan District to a
Transitional Zoning District (TZD) as presented herein.
12
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 16
Comparison Summary of Zoning Change Requests
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 17
a
°c m
_ E
e og
a r >�
o
m E 0 u a
£ m m = t m
?
12
m
$@ c m F= 46 A
m m m a 8 ' mm'3
o
o
Si ErjE
��y3 m � v'9 E � 3
N
N N
O ?_
N
L y b Yn OI m ~ n L
100
° �� �'m m mr 2� z
'"
Q
00
m m
m m° m° 1 °
E N� e�
com
- < U °2t d
F�
»
�n
?
�'�°•
R
-'te d�gdad�a �F��$ ' - �a rn��n �Q
W(p
��E'
�.
QQ��
``��'�
HUQH
E� t 0 c
Oc
a`3
mmmm
»
om. - ._ .= O ._
_= z
0
�SS�
SSb�
a
�'s p
in eu a eiv y A a ov
� 3
nioo�
m
4x0'•4
00��
of
m -r
a
wU)
.-
m
w
i
E
m
c c rn � rd
m
Q 3 � pb � fl
O 'A fl Q
m
5N m16
t Z m Z
v
`
Z
?=i
05 w r_ m, was= 3 3 �°° m 3 5
W F
p
0
vmi
a° :Do ETo °
ZN
W
y
ao
i i �
N
n
•3
° o,�
o
m0 wY Y ama 0 �c �c
m m
a N
(�'�
as a
t5
N m� Ema> 2�'L
�> mmv .� L .2 a�m m���
yab
r
d
m y
'm'E =o - > m "mom m ym - o - > m
m a m ava' Q
a
Z a
N
dm
�
do d
°�i
�
b
�',
0� � a
dim o
� E
o
S
0
=i M
r �
=i
�
m�
poi
2 za
N A a tiff N c d a tiv
0.
H
c7G
O
r G
d'N O
N
O
O W
a'
o
�
Z
o - d5�
t�
Ez
ai$o. -' 3 m
c m
H
m
a
m m m - c L E
m lb 3 =
2
o d g m
m
m
N
m
N 3 n >•m m
=
t3 E
E.
N
Ci
Zo
W
-CG
p O
O z
�'
dm m
s o
�
Na
4
m 3 m>�s� 'm
g U - �" a
m c
IL -d
y
w
�c c��
�K
c"E! HUT. WT to
W G
a
�{ ffi
m
U U
C,
�p Qp
NZm
c53
7
yN
N a i
O �a m yavaQ
._ O A .- -
m -0' zd ._
N N
O o
E
7
0 Ci
7
0
�
aD W
2
O r cL F
Q
Q Q
Q Q
Q °
c
W
z
W N
¢rZ,
W
LL
0C9
M0.
Q
f air
�w
¢
O C
0)
to
wz
�%M
ti
O¢
H~
0
m-J N
N
j
O
z
CL
W z
LU
H
J
z 0=
0
O
O N
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 17
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 18
m m 8
bo
g =8emv ao oda
=a �'
d
a °
NoP £3 y m U
m N
> -- 0 0
s� 3 ..gy m Y y� o A d
m
6 3v N m
A .E v
m$ Z. c ma -c 2 5 �i�t° A2 �di
g = fi
m
of U'1
U mz t c �
as
G
3 N L '13
° 3 m
° a -°��`o
€5i �'Y `w ••�
rn m
w$gM
FE
Ol.r T al C A to -p al
A 3 al
a
ma i° �'S ai
2 m'nL 2
m
w
�a 8�5'�
��
EomccAOL�'� c'E '? Eo"oy� a g�'y
F.
Oam�,"' na ° o ° � a' �'am g'm�
nmw�� ym
mo.L ink I at I
W���mrn °gym
Q
W N y 0 U
_ .6y�E
v m W
muX «! n2
0 A O o
'°" c�nty�'c3m3m 3 =a n'O F 3 F -E w-
1 ` a'
a� �a �
Z 3
Z
v 3
v '? mxt 8
m d n d Ta m '$ IS m o m c t b
° �+'r paT �L 2 - 0 N c E
o �� �LO
c A3p'0 R Ma pp $'U pp
N A
va
16 N a 3 U d d $ v
°¢
IL 3 t° N la y V �j H y° N N C O O O O N
Va J J J J fA J J J J
��o��TomQ
x7. �°c Y3 $i c-Am N a d2.E..6
oEEEE- �EEEE
�. ¢�i "m
u$`9
7.
a2" n= a2t� €
cccc
p 7
yy
mom. -,- �_�._
ca'z °vt'mEo
N d d d N fA e A =
a A... o.e o'mF2x m a�E c x - ma E n¢
A ._ ._ ._ mccc
1 e a1
O�
A a U Q A L U a
U
m A L t> a m A a Cl a
d U
C4
a
e a
x
m
°
at � sa m
y
md€ _
w 2'�
CS�£
`a `o
d
d a A N
p 3m � � p cE'i
T fa N S3 R U - 9 A N T.Q a C 1 N
3
�
C
p
no'4 Sc .t 0003 m I° `a v o
N
m o
m
d>
3 �mn ° a O1 i A °1 a1m
E
m
m
a�i v
a -5 F" y ' a� - c $ A 9 L ' `" �d b
�
C % 0 ° t ° p
0
�
N
d x z
_z
0 C�
AYyp�
�s
_
IL
3 c 3 c�
62
oa.2 mN� G �'
�L.8
yi°ma L 3
A 5r ui ° m
m
Z a
» and `o
A -° �'t
4 � A �B� O '�
E�tS ,T_am E�N Q.Qt�aa °mo
8 '°� 3 y v n °
u`�S" 1
M ~
m 2m o �1
«I m co 2 ai w
tO EA E AN xAA. �
oA E
��ya Nq� �a+�,t- fitL. dNm
. 2 � $'
vA £
Z v
Wo
'� m�a ��
Munia Q02 mB'nNL o rL � A A >
= m�aU
0 0 0 s
Q N
yy
N c E Yn U N N O�
p� U CC
W a) ( J N 0_ «; C W E' d O N O N O L
�« c a1 m -n-
T J J J
o E
z Q
$Y �Z ,r
may c., �iw
A Aa
m ° >c to �d.2 m -a E am$�g: E
o .�y n� ��"��i
aI .Q
J 3� =
tEEEx
Z
`�3K�o�w
LD
P?
a'A c�' m" n >m - -> Ea'cn
a
CL
0 ai a
O m a n O ni a u ti
m Ma 0 ti
a' V1
r
e
W
c�
O
—
m
. O U
C
Y
O
GO A
w O1 a
= 0
° A
�
Z
w m `m
n
- p
aci 's
,�. Q e
a
a a� m
C
N
Y t
:E 1 .
E o
SD
N
N
C
=
NN
0
zo
y T
O N f0 °
O 49 O I
C;
7 ' CO
° N 'S, v
A
N - ,6
C
O Z
C L
U N�� d
ffN00
}9 �� ca
N
CL a '
V1 N E N C N n
Cl U v
Em f
u�m ,
O J J J O
0 EEEE
p03�0�,
a $�E-75
EEEE
K"
1 0
H ai s
O A.0 u
m M d
CL
Q d
r
v
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 18
z i
2 7
2 �
OI
N �
o�
1 a
Lu
0 .
C N
CL
O`
C U
CL _.
N
CL
F d
LU
z
wo
Q �
2 n
2 Q
od
N
E
CL
&N
z
CL
N
H
N
N
m
C
Z M
2 8
N
13 0
a 2
s
�O
W
>a
M�
CL m
CL
Qa
c
Z5 o m
d m
c a a
f co g
o rn
12
rim c o ac c
E 0 Ti a L
mc`3 caa oaz
c0 a d v ci
z y $ s
� � o
c o
' 5
N
y
C O O
O N C Z L L
00 0 N
� O � C
O U
A N N -E
N N s U 1 fO m
E }R YY wIi_
E c�g
E E92 oLv `- -rn
L li w U) fn `O Q Q N Q z
g
a
v
y
�g
it
0
o d
Q
�.3
E °
n m o
v
ai a� 3
CO $
0�_�
HE
`O q
9
o
ti
n
E. ° �m
N
roN
O S]N�
E
8
tU 0 N
U
g
�£ o O
o m
U T
E
of p„ .� no ... N
C N C O
o
Epa �i�
O_ 10
«E'�H°mEin
O
}} y U c $'Orn
y
N s O' N N N �c U Y m
y
� N
V t IE
y m o
N
u> O
U O U W 2 o ° in E o
U N OI "-
V �j L E e
L�
C N
C F
`o rno
ffiffi`oc I
�$�n n II
tt
m=
�Q li.
y L
V°-'\
o � 0 0 j
N
m E
m o
`y
$
'O
$mow
P a
m E V V fn A
O
°' L N �' m
Y
E c
rn y m `o
N m m
=2daa�g
} } }} t 0
R W ED J W
° R `e
O v
e � 0ornp�ca
g E L w 5
n X Eaw�cnrnc7�a
V
u - w¢m
a 8
E ,
-
c
Z5 o m
d m
c a a
f co g
o rn
12
rim c o ac c
E 0 Ti a L
mc`3 caa oaz
c0 a d v ci
z y $ s
� � o
c o
' 5
N
y
C O O
O N C Z L L
00 0 N
� O � C
O U
A N N -E
N N s U 1 fO m
E }R YY wIi_
E c�g
E E92 oLv `- -rn
L li w U) fn `O Q Q N Q z
N
2.6 N L L r
A
E
o ��oo a 0
15. n A =gig
O a N N ._. H N U N= T o C N
C 0 yyO W
2 2 n O� b 0 C C L ny
m N> s n O O L C , 3 2 7 �
oS
a� H E 3 m m t N
M
£ d a o u a ac n o:c o L o p o N
y o� Accc mco o «�m °S�2_ n '4tE�u
C 'O C O t\I N L ` N ° y ' M - 6 G1 y 0 1p° L
72 m'Em¢ ' @maco O1 $'rn mrn�cmtm�
�
E. E EY } 0 �n iE M�'w Ems££ �'4
m - $ o My "o
toy w E
x N
a
5 a dv
m
Case No.
ZAl2 -058
Attachment C
Page 19
Nd, O
�
m w
mva�i o>ai
oa o a'
it
o d
Q
E °
n m o
'v o
ai a� 3
m f0 za c4
o
O)
�o p
N y O w
Ermo�'
yy p
A d U > 8 G
Q
E. ° �m
o
mac ' - ���m£ «:°•�°m
roN
O S]N�
C
L m
y
~. 6'° y mnoc
c�d E A.'i�c�«
yc
of p„ .� no ... N
C N C O
o
Epa �i�
O_ 10
«E'�H°mEin
a RBsy
' Q m J Q
}} y U c $'Orn
y
N s O' N N N �c U Y m
E,Q E E
o m�05 "c F��'�
E�5£ �
c
2 E C N
ry @ ry
m
N
2.6 N L L r
A
E
o ��oo a 0
15. n A =gig
O a N N ._. H N U N= T o C N
C 0 yyO W
2 2 n O� b 0 C C L ny
m N> s n O O L C , 3 2 7 �
oS
a� H E 3 m m t N
M
£ d a o u a ac n o:c o L o p o N
y o� Accc mco o «�m °S�2_ n '4tE�u
C 'O C O t\I N L ` N ° y ' M - 6 G1 y 0 1p° L
72 m'Em¢ ' @maco O1 $'rn mrn�cmtm�
�
E. E EY } 0 �n iE M�'w Ems££ �'4
m - $ o My "o
toy w E
x N
a
5 a dv
m
Case No.
ZAl2 -058
Attachment C
Page 19
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 20
m s
- c
H
N y
m ; m�
C
?
°l L"x CL
m
d
w
A
3
qq
w tf
0 0£
o m ° $
va's
'� a� r X o ` t o
v 3
m
m
v
rn
m E
Y
m oa
H RH
m r., _ m v
o .�0 - z CO
v
2
?19
3H H
o
m oil'$
n
wg'
°
cm
w
o
in cn `mL ° «
m '> i
E Ell-
o .c
.
E =a
o8tn
la ,D
ao �d
.6
H 4
� D a
a o
'°
n LL
E E
SUrE.
'" d on 6 E° 4e E
w ° N 0,00wE
`o
t3
m
N ....
��v 2 . € � �o�.
e'c d'c. a� I
8 I .29v v 0 o
Z�m Fi E'a.S �i
mo
m z
°
w3
m
al
3
Y
v
m
c
v
N'S
Yoao dal �2 R m cmi= m�
d cY ':�-�
o
.c
o.
1- 0
�
---e
$o °�«
m
2'.
m C II II II
@ p A m W LuRi d
N ib N E'� t0 N d N
L C
O°
�Hodv
u Bm °a °$mgUO m
W
°a_
r
v
m�3
m
T 20
c
Qd3rn5
c o cod
d
6
w
v
a �
.OmH
E
O l
}} iw�.>
my BwW W
yy
o_� A mal
�m v 3'�xa
c m m�' a
�E
y m
mr^x
Nm
d
R
N A
O5
m mm
o
Q' vm°�EaL
H
9 U € g' U�
rno.E'p;
�E
-2L
mM5
LLNm
_m
c
-c
a HBLL�w
o v
aH�<Z
w 8
c `e� R y o t°o2Q o
�di��'�
c E
rn_
N
m
o
y
- m
al RU oli 3m
N m
maa Eain
:mow
maw
Z4
n
Nam
`m
Lu
t
in m
a
0
v
n�
N
n
v
CL U
- r d
c
ti
S S
o
3N� m
�
E
m
_°
L t6
R H
Yoo
.�
_
2°
o
v rnm`o g
ga c o
`9cm
.R
E�
c
v
v,_, 2
=a v
t
va
oR
y
g c c 0
R 2
in 2.1 u
5 t
3
c
E g
�'
m
x a y
rn
CL o
mNm
°1 E
B Sc a�' v
Um
v
c
>
n m
o
2.0
W R
v
aa I L �' a9�
W R H U W
L
m
n
cm
a a`o y
c
me mH
r Ji o -g o>
a''1 jj .5 e
V
m E
Lt
" m
m
m
.52
Mm.Y
y ea
c-O
N
z aB
z N
W
N r0 m
c rnO v
R j on o
bm C R� `ov
2 1
.�
n
"
�`
g��o
c
�oiv c$ImvL�
olQm
�m
m �
N�
=
9o-
z
..aagg
�,.��
aR
�c
a$
_
12
r
9
a
z
m
O
D
V)
w m a U
a
4i
1
a
g
L
tD
pp O °
N
y
o
> rn
L v Z
a c
m R w x
R>
o
m
H
c oa °
- o A¢ 3
m m
E
a
I S
��
a
w
2-om xd m
o. 8 o
to 3
$
m
3
Y
v
m N
v
a Y
� c
> n
U q
H
E
2 �
L NN
g
v
c
"J
c°
Bmm
p�
?�
_ _n
N �ycOldL
L Q C
yICU
2
-2
O
DO
IO ?�mm �o w °
c Uck� - °al
Nam
°lom
vY
Y
N
z
E
N OJ IL v w u U
N n .L-
R
N L
y N
E
C a C
o
O O
>
m ._ rn
_rn
cc
a
o >
S
Q: d'
m
a-
cli
n
a
I L
m
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 20
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 21
m
— m s
�H 'E x 0i 7 mX
O
. C .3 6 m ¢ m
'" m c.
mg -od A p c ,
mR
y L'3 X m3p�m
m a
rnm 2 ;u
t
y€
fA
p p°�p O Q N N OI N
O
N N 2'[3
O l0 E O
Q
O O V
Paz "' m -o m
Z�
N
v t a o t m rn -
Q d 2 Y 2 E m X
o rn o —_-
3 .
W a 0 i
N 0 =
E o L m m
E- 00
O
w
d V
m
m a 6 o
Z c
A L m y P m rn E
Y Q.- L 0
y o J o Q y �
w L So
.3 Q lw .3 m m
N
E 5 N a E o _
w
EO 5Vc7
W
WN
N2�iC mN tN'UUCC
�2 N
f-8
`7'
m
E E N
N
m v m `Ji ay E go
Eo m m m �. , A a m o m 4, oa
0 a
E
2 H :F: E@ m �=
o_ �
a �
a
t
o E
O
Z
1 2 N
° m
N
O L N E
O O Q
CO
N
V
O C a
C r
L 4
0
m
3 m o
o
m —a?�
E oa - -£
m
't
o ma
1-4
Q O
��
=1 Z
Q m a— m
w O
d N L
d
D!
E'm
2 r �Q d
d
a
Qa
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 21
0SOUTHLAK,E
SPIN MEETING REPORT
CASE NO. ZAl2 -058 & ZAl2 -059
SPIN DISTRICT:
MEETING DATE:
MEETING LOCATION
SPIN #11
July 9, 2012: 7:00 PM
1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX
Training Rooms 3A — 3B
TOTAL ATTENDANCE: Sixteen (16)
• SPIN REPRESENTATIVE(S) PRESENT: Monique Schill - #11
• APPLICANT(S) PRESENT: Scott and Rick Simmons, Southlake Watermark Holdings.
L.P.; Larry Dilzell. Darling Homes
• STAFF PRESENT: Lorrie Fletcher, Planner I
STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Cortez, Planner I. (817)748 -8070; dcortezCa.ci. south lake.tx.us
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Property Situation
• The property is located on the north side of Union Church Road and east of Pearson
Lane with western property line abutting Chesapeake Place addition.
Development Details
• The applicant is proposing a site plan and zoning changes to the South Village at
Watermere that if approved. would result in thirty -two (32) gated age- restricted single
family residential lots along the east side of Watermere Drive and thirty -eight (38) non-
age restricted single family residential lots along the west side of Watermere Drive.
• The main change to the concept plan from the previous plan considered earlier this year
is the replacement of seven (7) four -plex buildings (28 units) with seventeen (17) age -
restricted single family lots /homes.
The following exhibits were distributed during the meeting:
PROJECT NAME
South Village at Watermere
Case No.
ZAl2 -058
Attachment C
Page 22
J
J
rxon�[unnc cevrt.
,{M,
tl Y
.J
J
� �
cowurrtrc[�rz[
Q
VILLAS
MEFfMCE 1 �,
J
)
l is
OVERALL
SITE PLAN
CASEW UIfM
QUESTIONS / CONCERNS
• Are these single story homes?
o Some will be single story and some 1 'h story; zero lot lines
• How are you getting lower density and what are villas?
o Our plan is going from twenty -eight (28) dwelling units to seventeen (17) dwelling
units. The four - plexes were described as villas; these new single family homes
are described as cottages. The cottages will be limited in size; from 2500 to 3700
square feet.
• Is this a change for the west side?
o No.. it is the same as when presented six (6) weeks ago.
o But changed from the original plan?
o Yes, the age restriction was removed due to the housing needs changing.
• Are there any non -age restricted homes presently?
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 23
09 0 ►•
The City used to be very concerned about high density. Is this still a concern?
o All of our lots are the same size or larger. We have a lot invested in this project;
the goal is in keeping up with an active adult community. The target for the west
side is towards empty nesters not families. Not many young families will want a
two or three bedroom home with small square footage as well as Keller school
district when they could spend the same amount of money (500 -900K) for a
larger home outside of this development.
• You talked about zero lot lines, what are the setbacks?
o The front and rear yards will be 20 feet and there will be approximately 14 feet
between the homes which provides room for a patio, garden or nice yard area.
• Have you considered expanding your market by building something more affordable?
o No, we don't think they want that here.
• Is the east side gated?
o Yes
• Will the age restriction for that portion lift off in the future?
o No
• Will the west side have a separate HOA?
o Yes
• So what is the total density?
• South village is going from 82 units to 71 units
• The east side was "unknown" at the time the west side came in; we currently
have approval for the seven (7) four - plexes. Then we made the decision to lift the
age restriction on the west side and propose single family cottages on the east
side. Once this goes through the process, we are done... this is it.
• When would you begin construction?
o Immediately
• What type fencing?
• We plan for a six (6) foot stone wall along Union Church
• No wood fencing
• All wrought iron on the east side
• A two (2) foot wall along Watermere Drive which is consistent with the existing
wall
We are worried about this setting a precedent
o Nothing is changing in lot size by removing the age restriction. No one in this
room should be worried about this project. We have more to lose than anyone.
Will you be putting speed bumps on Watermere Drive? We are worried about cut -
through traffic.
o There will be a stop sign and a lowered speed limit
SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official
meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and
the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are
strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council.
Case No. Attachment C
ZAl2 -058 Page 24
DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY
Case No.: ZAl2 -058
Review No.: Two
Date of Review: 07/09/12
Project Name: South Village at Watermere
APPLICANT: Southlake Watermark Holdings, LP ENGINEER: Burgess & Niple
Richard Simmons
3110 E. Southlake Blvd., Ste. 120
Southlake, TX 76092
Phone: (817) 742 -1851
Fax:
Joseph Reue
10701 Corporate Dr., Ste. 290
Stafford, TX 77477
Phone: (281) 980 -7705
Fax:
CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 04/16/12 AND WE OFFER
THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN
APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED
FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT DANIEL CORTEZ AT (817) 748 -8070 or dcortez(a)ci.southlake.tx.us
Informational Comments
Street widths must meet minimum fire safety and emergency access standards. Permissible on-
street parking will be dependent upon ultimate street width. Please contact the City's Fire Marshall
pertaining to any on street parking requirements.
The applicant should be aware that another Parks & Recreation Board Meeting may need to be
held for the change in number of dwelling units from 54 to 71. Contact Kari Happold in Community
Services at (817) 748 -8018 for further information.
No review of proposed signs is intended with this site plan. A separate building permit is required
prior to construction of any signs.
All mechanical equipment must be screened of view right -of -ways and residential properties in
accordance with the Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended.
All lighting must comply with the Lighting Ordinance No. 693, as amended.
All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and the Erosion and Sediment
Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended.
The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed
and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and
building plans, must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may
include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Perimeter Street Fee, Water & Sewer
Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees.
Denotes Informational Comment
Case No. Attachment D
ZAl2 -058 Page 1
Surrounding Property Owners
South Village at Watermere
SPO #
1.
Owner
Burroughs, Steve Etux Rachael
Zoning
RPUD
Mj Land Use
Medium Density Residential
Acreage
0.37
Response
NR
2.
Miller, Howard W Etux Cherri
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.33
NR
3.
Cammarata, Patrick R
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.33
NR
4.
Rodriguez, Laurie J
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.37
NR
5.
Song, Chi C
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.35
NR
6.
Beathard, David W Etux Judy
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.40
NR
7.
Dickens, Jason D Etux Adrienne
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.46
NR
8.
Parrish, Jeff Etux Julie Ann
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.44
NR
9.
Lee, Bob Etux Jane Ho
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.40
NR
10.
Suydam, Ryck D Etux Brenda
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.37
O
11.
Schnacke, Alan R Etux Michelle
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.37
NR
12.
Kuelbs, Leo G
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.37
NR
13.
Phillips, David W Etux Yolanda
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.37
NR
14.
Jankowski, Ronald & Durell
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.38
NR
15.
Heath, Kevin A & Meagan Heath
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.58
NR
16.
McDowell, Carl L
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.41
NR
17.
Derry, Jason Etux Alicia
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.37
NR
18.
Follis, Mark A
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.47
NR
19.
Behrens, Jay A Etux Deborah J
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.45
NR
20.
Barnes, Reginald K Etux E
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.47
NR
21.
Altay, Tayfun
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
0.55
NR
22.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
3.65
NR
23.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
1.70
NR
24.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
14.90
NR
Case No. Attachment E
ZAl2 -058 Page 1
SPO #
Owner
Zoning
Land Use
Acreage
Response
25.
Lee, Jane S Etvir James
AG
Medium Density Residential
1.94
NR
26.
Lee, Jane S Etvir James
AG
Medium Density Residential
1.99
NR
27.
Keller Watermere Lp
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
10.07
NR
28.
Keller Watermere Lp
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
20.39
NR
29.
Schaefer, Paul J
AG
Medium Density Residential
4.33
NR
30.
Mortazavi, Joseph Etux Kimiela
AG
Medium Density Residential
3.45
O
31.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
RPUD
Medium Density Residential
2.06
NR
32.
Mortazavi, Joseph A & Kimiela
AG
Medium Density Residential
2.73
O
33.
Mortazavi, Joseph A & Kimiela
AG
Medium Density Residential
0.36
O
34.
Smyth, Henry C Etux Monica
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
35.
Crosser, Larry Etux Karen
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
36.
Woodard, Carl D & Ruby K
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
37.
Herdman, Arnold Etux Louise
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
F
38.
Roberts, David Etux Sheryl
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
39.
Jones, Don L & Dorothy H
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
40.
Twining, John D & Lynn
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
41.
Sisco, William T Etux Mary E
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
42.
Bonner, Michael E & Janet K
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
O
43.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
44.
Johnston, Richard Etux Matalyn
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
45.
Wilson, Dwight L Etux Barbara
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
46.
Feazell, Samuel Etux Pamela
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
F
47.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
48.
Wilson, Helen Z
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
49.
Standbridge, Peter T & Jean S
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
50.
Rattarree, Lloyd W Jr Etux G G
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
51.
Holley, Shirley C
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
52.
Brian, Adrian Etal
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
53.
Wileman, Walter Etux Mary
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
54.
Pendley, J Evelyn
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
55.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
56.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
57.
Ger /Dar Llc
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
58.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
59.
Schmidt, R M
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
60.
Parr, Jay C & Margene
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
61.
Schultz, Blanche
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
62.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
63.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
64.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
65.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
66.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
67.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
68.
Irby, Earline D
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
69.
Katen, Luella M Trust
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
70.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
71.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
72.
Brown Living Trust
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
73.
Goad, Doris J
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
74.
Miller, Jimmie P Etux Rosamond
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
75.
Larson, Alice M
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
76.
Frame, Lucile
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
77.
Hottenstein, Mary Jo
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
Case No. Attachment E
ZAl2 -058 Page 2
SPO #
Owner
Zoning
Land Use
Acreage
Response
78.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
79.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
80.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
81.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
82.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
83.
Robertson, Lula Marie
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
84.
Mullelly, Virginia M
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
85.
Flynn, Joan E Tr
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
F
86.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
87.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
88.
Miller, Fred J Jr Etux Betty
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
89.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
90.
Johnson, Gladys M
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
91.
Hubbs, Patricia Lee
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
92.
Elm, Mary Jo
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
93.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
94.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
95.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
96.
Smith, Royal D
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
97.
Fera, Anthony S Etal
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
98.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
99.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
100.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
101.
Thomas, William G
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
F
102.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
103.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
104.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
105.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
106.
Morris, Peggy Lee
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
107.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
108.
Cary, Lois
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
109.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
110.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
111.
Ferney, Stephen J & Sandra F
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
112.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
113.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
114.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
115.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
116.
Smith, Eleanor
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
117.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
118.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
119.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
120.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
121.
Edwards, John III & Barbara
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
122.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
123.
Jeffery, Keith A & Stella Tr
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
124.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
125.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
126.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
127.
Southlake Watermark Holdings L
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
128.
Keene, Leona C
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
129.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
130.
Southlake Watermark Holding Lp
SP2
Medium Density Residential
-
NR
Case No. Attachment E
ZAl2 -058 Page 3
SPO #
Owner
Zoning
Land Use
Acreage
Response
131.
1 City of Keller
-
-
-
NR
Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed U: Undecided NR: No Response
Notices Sent:
Responses Received:
Case No.
ZAl2 -058
Seventy -Five (75)
Seven (7)
Attachment E
Page 4
Surrounding Property Owner Responses
Ju1171209:59a Banner df (. 1 4.31. }J #7
Notification Response Form
ZAl2 -OSB
Meriting DaW. July 19 2012 at 5.30 PM
Bonner, Michael E & Janet K.
316 Watormere Dr
Southlake Tx, 78092
-r- dq.1r,-7
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of ppased to undecided about
(circle or underline tine)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature:
Additional Signature:
Printed Name(s):
Must be property own0r(Q whOSa name(a) are printed at tap.
P.z
Date:. /
Date: 7X4
Otherwise owitact the . Planning apartment_ One Cum per property.
Phone dumber (optional). 9 r V 3 f, 69
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 1
07/1
Notification Response Form
ZAl2 -058
Meeting Date: July 19, 2012 at 8:30 PM
Suydam, R'yck D Etux Brenda
545 Chesapeake Ln.
Southlake Tx, 75092
71840 2 33
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HA14D DELIVERY'
` BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the Property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for carnments regarding your position.
Printed Name(s): fen &a-
Must be property owner(s) who name(s) are printed at top. eruise GOntaat the Planning De p artment. One form per r
� � P p
Rhone Number (optional): Ic - 3'6 � L a
001
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 2
C-0 "s &zvc' c
Kav G� fl P1t� Cat
Y S Y< �ti�e.r
�rlC7trtLt�7t
=EkS�F
St tii�t' +aft
`
Signature:
Date: -
Additional Signature:
Date `I tI Lj A
Printed Name(s): fen &a-
Must be property owner(s) who name(s) are printed at top. eruise GOntaat the Planning De p artment. One form per r
� � P p
Rhone Number (optional): Ic - 3'6 � L a
001
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 2
LAW OFFICES OF
BRADLEY LUCE BRADLEY
A REGISTERED LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
1256 MAIN STREET • SUITE 252
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS 76092
W.A. (BRAD) BRADLEY-
• Also Admitted to Practice in
California and Massachusetts
• Fellow of The College of the State Bar of Texas
• Attorney— Mediator
July 30, 2012
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL 7011 0470 0001 1023 9130
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED; and,
VIA FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION TO (817) 748 -8010; and
VIA E -MAIL TO SYELVERTONna,CI.SOUTHLAKE.TX.US
Ms. Shana K. Yelverton, City Manager
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street, Ste. 460
Southlake, TX 76092
181 7) 488 -8048
Direct Dial Extcnsion:l9
FAX 1817, 48 1 -5230
E -MAIL: BRAOLEY857 @AOL.COM
Re: Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Mortazavi, 2651 Union Church Road, Southlake, TX
76092; and, Keller Wateremere, L.P. and Southlake Watermark Holdings,
L.P., 3110 W. Southlake Blvd., Suite 120, Southlake, TX 76092
(collectively referred to herein as "Watermere ")
Dear Ms. Yelverton:
As you know, I have been retained by Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Mortazavi to represent
their interests in regard to the matters contained herein.
A quick review of your file in this case will no doubt refresh your memory
concerning the controversy between my clients and Watermere that has been simmering
since 2007. For your information, and to reiterate my clients' claims, i have enclosed
copies of my letters to you dated September, 17, 2007 and December 3, 2007. By way of
update I have also enclosed copies of Mr. Mortazavi's letter to City of Southlake Planning
& Development Services dated July 16, 2012 and his letter to me dated July 25, 2012.
I understand Case ZA -12 -058, in which Watermere requests the Ci>y's approval of
a Zoning Change and Development Plan from "R -PUD" Residential Planned Unit
Development District to "TZD" Transition Zoning District, will be considered by the City
Council on August 7, 2012.
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 3
Ms. Shana Yelverton
July 30, 2012
Page 2
Due to the continuing flow of damage producing water on to my clients' property
and the similarly continuous flow of un -kept promises from Wat9rmere my clients have
been forced into a position that necessitates that they seek imm ate injunctive relief and
a ultimate judicial resolution in this matter.
I hope that you will pass along these concei
and to Watermere as well. Thank you in advance
matter. Should you have any questions please d t
hearing from you soon.
BKB /cac
enclosures
appropriate public officials
rticipated cooperation in this
to call me. I look forward to
cc: Mayor John Terrell
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street, Ste. 460
Southlake, TX 76092
Via E -mail Transmission to mayor(a,ci.southlake.tx.us
and jterrell(aWwairport.com
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL 7011 0470 0001 1023 9147
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Richard E. Simmons
Southlake Watermere Holdings, L.P.
3110 E. Southlake Blvd., Ste. 120
Southlake, TX 76092
and VIA E -Mail Transmission to
richardesimmons@integratedrea.com
Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Mortazavi
2651 Union Church Road
Southlake, TX 76092
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 4
tu 3 c
LAW OFFICES OF
BRADLEY LUCE BRADLEY
A REGISTERED LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
1256 MAIN STREET - SUITE 252
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS 76092
W.A. (BRAD) BRADLEY'
Also Admitted to Practice in (8 1 71 488 -8048
California and Massachusetts
Direct Dial Extension: 19
Fellow of The College of the State Bar of Texas FAX 18 1 7) aB 1.5290
' Attorney— Mediator
E -MAIL: BRADLEY857 AOL.COM
December 3, 2007
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL 7003 0220 0000 8390 2271
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Ms. Shana Yelverton, City Manager
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Southlake, TX 76092
Re: Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Mortazavi, 2651 Union Church Road, Southlake, T1'
76092 and Keller Watermere, L.P. and Southlake Watermark Holdings, L.P.
3110 W. Southlake Blvd., Suite 120, Southlake, TX 76092 (collectively
referred to herein as "Watermere ").
Dear Ms. Yelverton:
As you know, I have been retained by the Mortzavi's to represent their interests in
regard to the matters contained herein.
Mr. & Mrs. Mortazavi have asked that I reiterate the concerns expressed in my
September 27, 2007 letter to you in which I indicated that my clients were experiencing
sufficient flooding caused by the development of the Watermere project to the north of their
property. Since that time, we have met with Mr_ Richard Simmons of Watermere on two
separate occasions in an effort to find a mutually satisfactory resolution to this problem. No
solution has been found.
The Mortazavi's believe that Watermere is currently in violation of §11.086 of the Texas
Water Code in that it has diverted the natural flow of surface water in a manner that has, and
continues to, damage my client's property by the overflow of the water so diverted. Mr. & Mrs.
Mortazavi further believe that Watermere has not complied with §5.01 A of Southlake
Ordinance No. 605 in that it has failed to design on -site improvements sufficient to handle all
storm drainage fl6wing on its property. The Mortazavi's wish me to again relay their concern
that if Watermere is permitted to develop, as currently planned, their property will suffer
catastrophic water damage at some point in the future.
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 5
Ms. Shana Yelverton
December 3, 2007
Page 2
Please convey the Mortazavi's concerns to yo r M or, Council and appropriate city
departments and advise me of Southlake's position =/,look atter at your earliest convenience.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated coop forward to hearing from you
soon.
yours,
BICB/cac
cc: Addressee via Regular Mail
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL 7007 0220 0000 83 PO 2288
RETURI�T RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Richard Simmons
3110 w. Southlake Blvd., Ste. 120
Southlake, TX 76092
Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Mortazavi
2651 Union Church Road
Southlake, TX 76092
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 6
September 17, 2007
HAND DELIVERED
Ms. Shana Yelverton, City Manager
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Southlake, Texas 76092
Re: Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Mortazavi.
2651 Union Church Road, Southlake, Texas
Dear Ms. Yelverton:
I want to take this opportunity to thank you and Mr. Allen Taylor for taking time on
Friday afternoon to meet with me and my clients, Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Mortazavi, to discuss their
ongoing drainage problems.
As we explained to you, my clients own a nursery located on Union Church Road, which
adjoins the Watermere project on its south side. The Mortazavi's are currently experiencing
significant drainage problems which they suspect are the result of Watermere and they feat that
they will suffer catastrophic damage in the future if Watermere's owners fail to address their
concerns in their development plans.
Mr. Mortazavi has attempted to contact Mr. Richard Simmons to discuss this situation
without success. At the suggestion of you and Mr. Taylor I called Mr. Simmions on Friday to
schedule a meeting on this matter. I was not successful in speaking to Mr. Simmons but I did
leave a voice message requesting a conference at his earliest convenience.
Please convey my client's concerns to your Mayor and Council prior to Tuesday's
Council Meeting. Thank you for your kind assistance in this matter. I look forward to working
with you to find a resolution.
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 7
Ms. Shana Yelverton
September 17, 2007
Page 2
Very truly yours,
Brad Bradley
BKB /cac
cc: Addresses via. Regular Mail
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL 7003 1680 0000 4859 0184
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Richard Simmons
3110 W. Southlake Blvd.
Southlake, TX 76092
(and via Regular Mail)
Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Mortazavi
2651 Union Church Road
Southlake, Texas 76092
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 8
July 16, 2012
Joseph & Kimiela Mortazavi
2499 Union Church Road
Keller, TX 76248
City of Southlake
Planning & Development Services
1400 Main Street, Suite 310
Southlake, TX 76092
Door P & Z Commission Board Members and fellow Southialce residents
This letter serves as written communication of our adamant opposition to any and all of the
proposed changes to the current zoning and concept plans for Watermere at Southlake (referred
to in Public Hearing Notice ZAl2 -059) and for South Village at Watermere (referred to in Public
Hearing Notice ZAl2 -058). We must take this position because of the developer's history of
noncompliance with the current concept plans and failure to honor commitments made to us as
bordering property owners which is further compounded by the City of Southlake's slow
response and ineffectual enforcement of compliance issues related to the Watermere
development.
The most recent example of this began again in May. We noticed that trucks were once again
dumping fill dirt along our west boundary with the Watermere development. We called the City
of Southlake and informed them of the activity. We were told an earth disturbance permit had
not been issued and that the matter would be looked into promptly. The next week the fill dirt
was spread by bobcat machinery. Once that dirt was spread trucks began to bring more fill dirt
to the site. On May 15 th we took a couple of pictures of the site with the new stacks of dumped
soil. We once again called the City of Southlake and were more insistent that an inspector come
to the site. Mr. Paul Ward came to the site and posted a "Work Stoppage" notice. Mr. Ward
notified us a day or two later that he had spoken with the developers and that they indicated
that they knew nothing about the soil being dumped there and claimed it was a case of illegal
dumping. We indicated our skepticism of this explanation because machinery had been brought
in and the first truckloads of soil were spread and graded. The trucks did, however, stop so we
did not pursue the issue and left the matter to the City of Southlake to resolve. Today trucks
began dumping fill dirt in the same area again. We contacted the City of Southlake and informed
them that the activity had resumed. Mr. Ward then contacted the Watermere developers. He
called us back and stated that the Watermere developers now claimed the work they were doing
was completion of prior work covered in the concept plan. Mr. Wade also stated we would like
what they were doing because the lots would eventually be graded to drain into the Watermere
Lake. We reminded Mr. Wade of the prior claim made in May that the work was done without
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 9
the Watermere developers' knowledge or permission. We also pointed out that, according to
the concept plan, there was supposed to be a 20 foot buffer yard between our property and the
development which was not being observed. Furthermore, the land on the Watermere property
was lower than our property when the development first began —it now is as high as or higher
than the top of our 4' cyclone fence. The property stretching from the Chesapeake subdivision
to our property line is now 4' -6' higher than it was prior to the beginning of construction.
During the original P & Z hearings, one of the commitments made by both Watermere engineers
and Southlake City engineers to the surrounding property owners was that the drainage issues
would be adequately addressed. It was claimed that not only would the development not add to
drainage problems, but it would correct existing issues. At that time runoff did not drain
through our property from the north or west property line, but did back up from the creek
across Union Church Road on the south side of our property during very heavy rains. Now
almost every substantial rain results in flooding in our greenhouses and outside production areas
from the north and west property lines. This has severely impacted our business in the spring —
our busiest season. We have sustained crop damage during heavy rains. There were times this
spring when our back greenhouses could only be entered wearing knee -high boots. We were
assured this would not happen. Now we are being told that all this added fill dirt will not
aggravate this problem and, indeed, asked to believe that this new grading will lessen or even
eliminate it. We fail to understand how being placed inside what can literally be described as a
large bowl can alleviate the drainage problems this development has caused to our property.
This should not have been allowed to happen.
We have no idea what these requested zoning and concept plan changes are the prelude for —
but prior experience has taught us to be cautious. We have been treated in the past like
unreasonable individuals for requesting what should have been minimally offered in the
situation. Our business has been negatively impacted by this development. Our property has
been de- valued. We realize that because of our location directly to the south of this
development we are probably the most negatively affected of all the surrounding property
owners. The other property owners that would have suffered these effects were bought out by
the Watermere developers. That does not lessen the responsibility of the city engineers to
protect our rights as property owners; nor, does it lessen Watermere's obligation to behave
responsibly.
We are not against progress. We, like all our neighbors, want to see our part of 5outhlake grow
and prosper. Over the years we have worked hard to share in that vision of growth. We oppose
this because we see it as a significant impediment to our business.
Joseph & Kimiela Mortazavi
Property Owners
2499 Union Church Road
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 10
July 25, 2012
Joseph Mortazavi
2499 Union Church Road
Keller, TX 76248
Brad Bradley
Law Offices of Bradley Luce Atkerson
1256 Main Street
Suite 252
Southlake, TX 76092
Dear Mr. Bradley
This letter is written as per your assistant's request to outline the events that have transpired
since my last meetings in your law office with you, the Southlake City mayor and lawyer,
Southlake City engineer Gordon Mayer, and Mr. Richard Simmons of the Watermere
development.
Subsequent to the last meeting in which Mr. Richard Simmons refused to sign the document
drawn up by your law firm, I had a conversation with him in which he stated he would
appropriately address the drainage issues in question. He assured me there was no need to
involve lawyers further and that he would do the right thing. As you know, Southlake City
officials also assured us that they would monitor adherence to drainage plans and that these
plans would improve, not increase, these drainage issues. I, thus, did not pursue my objections
to this project.
When the Watermere developers began construction work to the north of my property line, I
suddenly had a large amount of water being discharged onto my property. There had been no
rain, but my whole property, including houses and greenhouses, was flooded. I believe the
Couch property to the east of me experienced the same problem to a lesser degree. I notified
the City of Southlake. I believe Mr. Couch did also. A Southlake City official and the Watermere
property supervisor at the time came to investigate the problem. The Watermere supervisor
apologized and stated that one of the construction workers had mistakenly pumped water
toward our property that was supposed to be directed into the Watermere Lake. He also stated
that the project plan was to run a culvert from east to west along the south side of their
property line that would drain the lots to the north of our property and empty into Watermere
Lake. Again, based on these assurances, I cleaned up the mess created and did not pursue
further action.
As the project construction work continued, Watermere developers began to dump large
amounts of soil along their east property line which bordered my property and began a gradual
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 11
buildup of their elevation -5'to 6' higher than previously in some areas. I called the City of
Southlake and city engineer Mr. Gordon Mayer came to investigate this time. He validated that
the engineering plans called for a 20' buffer yard between my property line and the Watermere
elevation. He asked me to be patient and assured me that as construction progressed, the
Watermere developers would do appropriate grading and drainage work that would ensure that
most of the water flow from the Watermere development would be directed into Watermere
Lake. He also indicated that Watermere developers would ensure that water flow along my west
side of our mutual property boundary would be directed from north to south —not east onto my
property. Prior to the Simmons' acquisition, the Watermere development was owned by
Owens' Properties who purchased the property to the immediate north and west of my
property. The property to my west, leased to Greg Delgado at the time, had an existing house,
horse barn, gazebo, and small riding arena. As soon as the Simmons acquired the property Mr.
Delgado started dumping many loads of soil and diverting the water toward my property. When
I confronted him regarding the matter, he said that Watermere's new owners had given him
permission to divert the water to the east corner of the property and then they would complete
the drainage work. I have pictures that illustrate the land elevations prior to both the Owens'
and the Simmons' acquisition of the Watermere property. These pictures repudiate the claims
made by the Simmons and their engineers that this property naturally had a higher elevation
than my property. They also document the fact that the Simmons' Watermere developers have
significantly raised their property elevations in the preceding years.
Over the past four to five years the Watermere development work has resulted in intermittent
flooding of my property; but I have tried to do as asked and be patient in the belief that the
Watermere developers would eventually do as they claimed they would and address the water
being diverted from their land onto mine. The flooding has been so bad that in December 2012 1
demolished one of the houses on my property because water consistently ran underneath the
house causing damage and rendering the septic system inoperable. I have another building on
the west side of my property that is basically unusable because the septic system no longer
functions properly and water stands underneath the home and in the driveway when it rains. At
this juncture, I refer you to my letter to the City of Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission
dated July 16, 2012 which details the negative impact this development has had on my business
and to the value of my property. This letter was submitted for the board's review in reference to
the Watermere development's request for zoning and concept plan changes being considered
for approval by the board on July 19, 2012.
As per the previously cited letter, soil dumping along my west property line was reinitiated in
May 2012. It stopped for approximately a month and a half after a work stoppage notice was
issued by the City of Southlake. It resumed in mid -July, this time with an earth disturbance
permit posted with an expiration date of December 2012. When we contacted the City of
Southlake, they in turn referred the issue to the Watermere developers. Scott Simmons came to
the dumping site. I talked to him and we walked along our mutual property boundary lines. I
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 12
pointed out my concerns and the damage my property was sustaining. Several remedies were
discussed during this conversation, such as, using the 20' easement along their east property line
to divert their water flow toward Watermere Lake by way of a culvert or fixing a rock lined drain
in this easement to channel the water south toward Union Church's existing drainage system.
Scott said he would consult with his brother Richard Simmons regarding the matter and get back
with me.
I next saw the Simmons brothers at the City of Southlake town hall at the Planning & Zoning
meeting on July 19`". At the meeting, my wife and I expressed our concerns and presented some
pictures indicative of the property elevation buildup during the open hearing portion for the
requested changes in zoning and concept plan for the Watermere development. The Simmons
did not address our concerns until the open hearing portion of the meeting was closed. They
were then asked by one of the board members to speak to our concerns. Mr. Richard Simmons
then stated that this was an old issue that was being rehashed. He stated that plans were
already approved and required no changes. One of the commission board members made the
statement that he could not believe the City of Southlake had approved for the property
elevation to be raised as much as it had been without consideration given to the consequences
to the bordering property. Mr. Richard Simmons' statements included comments such as he
couldn't make water run up hill and the Mortazavis wanted him to solve their property's
drainage problems. He also stated that his brother would like to build a retaining wall along our
mutual property line and grade their eastern lots toward Watermere Lake, but that Mr.
Mortazavi would not agree to this. This has never been presented to me as an option. Mr.
Simmons quickly backed away from this idea when the board starting asking questions about
possible implementation of this plan. Mr. Simmons also claimed their project, according to their
engineers, had overall decreased water flow to our property by a certain percentage. I don't
recall the exact percentage he claimed, but the statement is entirely false regardless of the
percentage he quoted. When I tried to rebuttal Mr. Simmons' statements I was informed that I
could no longer comment because the open hearing was closed at this point. Another board
member did make the comment that he did not hear us asking that our property be drained,
only a request to stop the development's drainage onto our property. The zoning and concept
changes were approved with only one against vote. After the P &Z meeting closed, I talked to
the board members and was told that the next meeting regarding the project was a city council
meeting in August (I believe the date was the 9"' but am not positive).
I have presented the events since our last meetings in as much detail as possible in this letter. I
believe this should bring you up to date. If you have questions regarding any item in this letter,
please contact me at the 817.703.6430.
Joseph Mortazavi
2499 Union Church Road
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 13
324 Watermere Drive
Southlake, TX 76092
July 17, 2012
Planning & Development Services
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street, Suite 310
Seuthlake, TX 76092
Re: Zoning Changes and Development Plazas
ZAl2 -058 and ZAl2 -059
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We are writing to herein express our unqualified and enthusiastic support for the above -
cited Zoning Changes and Development Plans for the South Village at Watertnere and for
Watermcm- at- Southlake respectively.
We have lived at Watunnere- st- Southlake since January 1, 2009, and have thoroughly
enjoyed being residents of this growing community and the City of Southlake. The
proposed zoning changes and development plan now before you are in keeping with the
plans we have always understood and expected for the continued growth and
development of Watermere-at Southlake.
We also want to share with you how very much we value and appreciate the interest and
support the developers of Watermere- at- Southlake have consistently devoted to the well-
being of this community and to the City of Southlake. We sincerely Dope the Planning
and Zoning Commission will act t D approve both of the above-cited Zoning Changes and
Development Plans..
Thank you for your time and favorable consideration.
Respectfully,
Sara and Para Feazell
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 14
Notification Response Form
ZAl2 -058
Meeting Date: July 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM
Flynn, Joan E Tr
301 Watermere Dr Apt 301
Southlake Tx, 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature:
Additional Signature:
Date: 6 -/-:�
Date:
Printed Name(s):
Must be property owner(s) whose name(s) are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One farm per property.
Phone dumber (optional):
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 15
Notification Response Form
ZAl2 -058
Meeting Date: July 19, 2012 at 6:30 PM
—'De -c est eo 1
Herdman, Arnele 4tu"ouise
306 Watermere Dr
Southlake Tx, 76092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature:
Date: -4- 1- 2 - 1
Additional Signature:
Date:
Printed Name(s):
Must be property owner(s) whose name(s) are printed at top. Otherwise contact the Planning Department. One form per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 16
Notificati Response Form
ZAl2 -058
Meeting Date: July 18, 2012 at 6.30 PM
Thomas, William G
301 Watermere Dr Unit 317
Southlake Tx, 7 6092
PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY
BEF THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING.
Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby
in favor of opposed to undecided about
(circle or underline one)
the proposed Zoning Change and Development Plan referenced above.
Space for comments regarding your position:
Signature:
Additional Signature:
Date:
A
Printed Name(s): �- Ca , A—, �
Must be property owner(s) whose name(s) are printed at top. otherwise contact the Planning Department. One farm per property.
Phone Number (optional):
Case No. Attachment F
ZAl2 -058 Page 17