Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2000-01-04
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 667 NORTH CARROLL AVENUE SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS JANUARY 4, 2000 MINUTES COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Rick Stacy; Mayor Pro Tem Gary Fawks. Members: Patsy DuPre, Debra Edmundson, Rex Potter and Wayne Moffat. COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Ronnie Kendall. CITY STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Billy Campbell; Assistant City Manager Shana Yelverton; Assistant to the City Manager Shelli Siemer; Interim Director of Planning and Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy; Director of Economic Development Greg Last; Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman; Director of Public Works Ron Harper; Deputy Director of Public Works Charlie Thomas; Senior Civil Engineer Shawn Poe; Director of Public Safety Garland Wilson; Public Information Officer James Kunke; Assistant to the Director of Public Works Valerie Bradley; Director of Finance Sharen Elam; City Attorney Wayne K. Olson; and, City Secretary Sandra L. LeGrand. WORK SESSION: Mayor Rick Stacy called the work session to order at 5:30 p.m. Councilmembers and staff discussed items on the agenda. The work session was audio and video tape-recorded for future reference. Agenda Item #5-A, Approval of the Minutes of the December 7, 1999 meeting. Several changes were made to the minutes of the meeting. Agenda Item #5-B, Bids for sub-trades for the construction of Town Hall and to reject bids for handrails. Councilmember Gary Fawks stated he raised an issue with Director of Public Works Ron Harper regarding the bid for painting. The concern being that the bid was over by $100,000 and only one painting bid was received. Regarding the painting, Mr. Brace Fields, project manager with Beck Company was present to answer questions. Mr. Harper stated if they feel comfortable that they can get a better bid, then they will go out for rebid on a project, but he feels the bid was in line. Councilmembers agreed that they would go with the bid as it was received. Agenda Item #5-F, Authorize the lease purchase of ruggedized laptop computers and approving Resolution No. 00-09, authorizing the City Manager to enter into a lease purchase agreement for the purpose of procuring laptop computers. After discussion, it was determined that this item would be deleted from this agenda so that more information could be obtained and the agreement would come before Council in its final form. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 1 of 25 Agenda Item #5-G, Resolution No. 00-02, Appointment of a chairperson for the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Board of Directors. Councilmember Debra Edmondson recommended Mayor Pro Tem Gary Fawks for this position. Councilmembers present agreed that Mr. Fawks should serve as chairperson for the TIF Board of Directors. Agenda Item #8-C, ZA 99-117, Plat Showing for lots 5 & 6, ~R. Eaves No. 500 Addition. Owner Conner Lam. Applicant: Walgreen's Drug Store. Comment was made that this item could be placed on the consent agenda, provided the property will be platted into two separate lots. Agenda Item #8-E, Ordinance No. 585-B, ist Reading, Amending Ordinance No. 585-A, Tree Preservation Ordinance. After discussion regarding the significant changes in the ordinance, Council agreed this item could go on the consent agenda. Agenda Item #8-F, Ordinance No. 480-11, ist Reading, Revisions to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, regarding regulations on carports, covered parking and parking garages on non-residential property. This item will be tabled on First Reading until the January 18, 2000 City Council meeting. Agenda Item #10-A, Developer Agreement for Chesapeake Place. Deputy Director of Public Works Charlie Thomas answered questions for Council regarding this developer agreement. A comment was made by Councilmember Edmondson regarding her concerns with no members of the Park and Recreation Board being present when the developer agreement was being prepared in regard to the park fee credits and other issues in the agreement. This item will not go on the consent agenda. Agenda Item #10-C, Carmel Bay Encroachment Agreement. A discussion was held regarding the request of the homeowners association (HOA) to eliminate the need for a $1 million dollar liability insurance clause in the agreement. City Attorney Wayne Olson stated it would be up to the Council if they wish to require the coverage in the agreement. It was noted that the HOA is only planning to replace [upgrade] the fence around the perimeter of the property. This item will be on the consent agenda, waiving the requirement for the $1 million dollar insurance policy as requested by the HOA. The work session ended at 6:30 p.m. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Agenda Item #l-A, Call To Order Mayor Rick Stacy called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 2 of 25 Agenda Item #2-A, Executive Session Mayor Rick Stacy advised the audience that the City Council would be going into executive session pursuant to the Texas Government Code Sections 551.071, 551.072, 551.073, 551.074, 551.076, 551.086, to seek legal advice from our City Attorney; to deliberate regarding real property matters; to deliberate regarding a prospective gift; to deliberate personnel matters; to deliberate regarding security devices; and/or to deliberate regarding economic development negotiations. Council adjourned into executive session at 6:32 p.m. Council returned to open session at 7:30 p.m. Agenda Item #2-B, Action Necessary/Executive Session No action was taken as the result of the executive session. Agenda Item #3, Invocation: Dr. Michael Beaugh, pastor, Southlake Presbyterian Church Chaplain for the month of January 2000 Dr. Michael Beaugh, pastor of Southlake Presbyterian Church, gave the invocation. Dr. Beaugh stated he was glad to be at the Council meeting this evening in a different role because the last time he was present, they were seeking approval from the Council for their building project. That was a tense moment for he and his congregation. He stated he is pastor of Southlake Boulevard Presbyterian Church and they officially organized less than one year ago. They are getting ready to break ground on their building, which will be located across the street fi.om Carroll Senior High School on F.M. 1709. Agenda Item 04-A, Mayor's Report Mayor Stacy announced that Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Ronnie Kendall was not present because her husband, Federal Judge Joe Kendall, was being sworn in as a member of the Federal Sentencing Guideline Commission in Washington D.C. in the Supreme Court. He elaborated on the honor it is for Southlake to have Judge Kendall as a citizen of the city and that his wife, Ronnie, is now serving on the Southlake City Council. January 9, 2000 at Carroll School District Annex building on North Kimball Avenue at Dove Road, the CISD will meet with SPIN #7 and #8 to discuss the proposed school facilities that are planned for construction on South Kimball Avenue. The meeting will begin at 2:00 p.m. and is open to the public. · There will be a TIF meeting and a Special City Council meeting on January 13, in the City Council Chambers. · City Offices will be closed on January 17, in honor of Martin Luther King Jr. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 3 of 25 The Metroport Transportation Partnership will be meeting on January 5, January 12, and January 19 at 8:30 a.m. at the Grapevine City Hall, 200 South Main Street, Grapevine. The group will meet once a week until the delegation trip to Austin, which is being planned for January 27. Each year City officials and business leaders in Southlake and adjoining cities travel to Austin to meet before the Texas Transportation Commission, to seek funding for SH 114 and other thoroughfares in our area. Stacy stated, "We hope for a large group again this year." Mayor Stacy presented a proclamation to Peter Andres in support of the Southlake Lions Club "Ball" which will be held at the Speedway Club on February 18, 2000. Mr. Andres stated it would be an evening of elegant dining and dance, with an expected attendance of 500 people. Cost of the event is $50 per ticket and it will be a first-class affair. He invited everyone to attend adding that this is a fund raising event to help purchase eyeglasses and examinations for under privileged children in the area. Agenda Item #4-B, City Manager's Report City Manager Billy Campbell stated there are two cable television issues that need to be brought to Council's attention. The issues are related only in that they involve Charter Communications, but they are not connected in terms of possible Council action. Campbell introduced Public Information Officer James Kunke who made the report. Mr. Knnke reported the first issue is a rate increase announced by Charter Communications in a letter to the City dated December 13, 1999. The increase is in the amount of $1.95 per month for combined basic and expanded basic service, and does reflect the addition of two channels to the expanded basic lineup. Also, the price for premium channels is increasing by 90 cents per month. This increase will take effect on February 1, 2000 and is the first by Charter since 1998. The second issue is a request from Charter to transfer its cable franchise agreements to AT&T Cable Services. Expect the formal request the end of January or early February. At that time the city will have 120 days to act on the request. This request is part of a larger deal between the two companies in which Charter is trading its metroplex customers for AT&T's cable customers in the St. Louis area. It does impact all Charter customer cities in North Texas, so the cable consortium that formed during the franchise transfer from Marcus, met again in December to discuss the latest change. There are thirty-two (32) cities represented in the consortium. Kunke stated, "According to an assistant city attorney from Fort Worth, there are three options for cities once the transfer request is received: 1) to refuse the transfer, 2) to find legal grounds to cancel the franchise and go out for new RFP's or 3) to accept the transfer to AT&T." Kunke cautioned that the first two options could lead to legal action since AT&T has shown a willingness to sue cities over cable franchises in recent years. The City of Fort Worth has expressed a willingness to again take the lead in any joint negotiations or legal action, if needed. Kunke said, "Southlake's Council needs to decide Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 4 of 25 .,-. on a course of action before we know whether we will be working within the consortium again this year." Specific items to keep in mind: · The current franchise has among the highest liquidated damages for poor service of any cable franchise in the country. If the cities try to renegotiate the franchise with AT&T, the company likely will try to reduce or remove this portion of the contract. · There is no clause in the franchise specifically prohibiting transfer of the contract to another cable company, so legal grounds would have to be found if the cities tired to oppose the transfer. · This might be a chance to solicit concessions on "open access" for Interact Service Providers to lease use of the cable lines. AT&T has been opposed to this concept in the past, but recently issued a press release announcing that it would begin working toward open access in the cities it serves. · Specific to Southlake, this might be a chance to negotiate on the use of home descrambler boxes and/or for wiring of Town Hall, although reopening negotiations could be risky. Mr. Kunke presented a chart of comparison of services as they relate to other cities, attached hereby and included in the minutes of this meeting. Agenda Item O4-C, SPIN Report SPIN #8 representative Pattie Minder stated she just returned from Time Square, New York for the millennium and stated, "No lights are prettier than the lights in our own Town Square, Southlake," Ms. Minder gave the SPIN Report. She thanked the developer and the City for their contribution toward a festive holiday season in Southlake. Ms. Minder stated the only issues in SPIN #8 are those with the Carroll Independent School District and their plans for school improvements on South Kimball Avenue. She stated the neighbors in SPIN #8 are meeting on Thursday in preparation for the meeting the CISD will be holding on January 9, at 2:00 p.m. She stated some of the differences the neighborhood has with the school district include drainage, having a football field behind their houses, with the issues of lights and noise. She stated she is hopeful that the issues can be worked out to the satisfaction of the neighborhood and the school. Agenda Item #5, Consent Agenda Mayor Stacy announced the following items would be included on the consent agenda. He explained to the audience that the items listed will be voted on with only one vote and if anyone in the audience has a request that an item should not go on the consent agenda, the item will be deleted from the consent agenda and considered separately. He read the items into the record: Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 5 of 25 ~ 5-A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting held December 7, 1999. Authorize award of bids for the following sub-trades for the construction of Town Hall and to reject bids for handrails: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Masonry to Texas Stone & Tile Ceramic Tile to Dupont Flooring Painting to Bums & Park Painting Acoustic Wall Panels to FCS Carpet to Dupont Flooring Toilet Compartments to University Building Specialties Operable Partitions to Haden Building Systems Authorize the Mayor to enter into an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for ambulance service between Denton County and the City of Southlake. Resolution No. 99-85, Appointing representatives to the SPIN Standing Committee. Award of bid to Brice Systems for the purchase of Cisco routers and switches for the citywide network. This item removed from the agenda. Resolution No. 00-02, Appointment of a chairperson for the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Board of Directors. This item left intentionally blank. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a professional service agreement with Schrickel, Rollins and Associates for the update of the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan and the Bicentennial Park Schematic Design. Award of bid to Control Specialists, Inc., for the installation of computer-operated valves for the elevated storage tanks at Bicentennial Park and Dove Street. Request for the extension of validity for one (1) year of Case No. ZA 97-156, Preliminary Plat for Cornerstone Business Park, Phase II; being approximately 67.64 acres out of the C.B. McDonald Survey, Abstract No. 1013, per Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended, Section 4.01 (I) 3 (Expiration of Plats). Resolution No. 00-01, Revising Resolution No. 98-52 in support of the application for related grant funds for a D.A.R.E. officer through the Criminal Justice Division of the Governor's Office. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 6 of 25 8-C. 8-D. 8-0. IO-B. IO-C. Authorize the City Manager to enter into an addendum to the agreement with Tarrant County for tax collection services. ZA 99-092, Site Plan for Southlake Marketplace, Phase III, on property legally described as Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, Southlake Crossing, Phase II, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas. Table to January 18, 2000 City Council meeting and continue the public hearing. ZA 99-098, Revised Preliminary Plat of Lots 1 & 2, Block 61, Timarron Addition. ZA 99-111, Preliminary Plat of Emery Addition. ZA 99-117, Plat Showing for Lots 5 & 6, W.R. Eaves No. 500 Addition. Ordinance No. 717-B, 1st Reading, Amending Ordinances 717 and 717-A, and Chapter 18, Article III Section 18-79 of the Southlake City Code; designating the speed limit within Cross Timber Hills subdivision and Oaktree Estates Addition as 25 mph. Ordinance No. 585-B, 1st Reading, Amending Ordinance No. 585-A, Tree Preservation Ordinance. Ordinance No. 480-I1, 1st Reading, Revisions to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, regarding regulations on carports, covered parking, and parking garages on non-residential property. Table to January 18, 2000 City Council meeting. Ordinance No. 480-JJ, 1st Reading, Revisions to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, regarding the regulations on impervious coverage in the non-residential zoning districts, and correcting landscaping regulations in Ordinance No. 480 to remove any conflict with the provisions of Landscape Ordinance No. 544-A. Resolution No. 00-04, Setting the dates for public heatings related to water, wastewater, and roadway impact fees. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a developer agreement for Hart Industrial Park. Carmel Bay Encroachment Agreement. Councilmember Debra Edmondson stated regarding Item #8-E, Ordinance No. 585-B, Tree Preservation Ordinance, "We are making amendments to the Tree Ordinance that are more than housekeeping issues. While it is keeping with the spirit of the way we originally crafted the ordinance, we Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 7 of 25 are tightening up loop-holes as we continue to press our point in this city; that we want to preserve as much of our natural landscape as possible." Motion was made to approve the consent agenda items [noted above] as follows: #5-A, as amended; #5-B, changing 4, Acoustic Wall Panels to FCS; Item #5-C, #5-D, #5-E; deleting Item #5-F; Item #5-G, naming Gary Fawks as chairman of the TIF; #5-H, #5-I, #5-J, #5-K, #5-L, #5-M, #5-N to be tabled to January 18, 2000 meeting per applicant's request; #8-A, B and C, subject to staff review summaries; #8-D, #8-E; #8-F, tabling to January 18, 2000 meeting; #8-G, #9-A, setting the date of the public heatings to February 1, 2000; gl0-B, and gl0-C, waiving the requirements for the $1 million dollar insurance policy. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: DuPre Edmondson DuPre, Edmondson, Potter, Fawks, Moffat, and Stacy None 6-0 vote ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 5-A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting held on December 7, 1999. The minutes were approved as amended. Authorize award of bids for the following sub-trades for the construction of Town Hall and to reject bids for handrails. The bids are as follows: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Masonry to Texas Stone and Tile ........................... $1,979,650. Ceramic Tile to Dupont Flooring ........................ $ 59,160. Painting to Burns & Park Painting .....................$ 284,167. Acoustic Wall Panels to FCS ...........................$ 86,817. Carpet to Dupont Flooring ................................. $ 159,690. Toilet Compartments to University Bldg. Specialties $ 29, 700. Operable Partitions to Haden Building Systems ...... $ 24,100. Authorize the Mayor to enter into an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement for ambulance service between Denton County and the City of Southlake. The City of Southlake provides twenty-four (24) hour emergency medical service for the residents of Southlake. Southlake is also called upon to respond to surrounding cities for mutual aid. This is a reciprocal agreement without neighboring agencies. This contract is for mutual aid in the county and will not affect our coverage or response in Southlake. For the Interlocal Agreement to apply, the call must take place in the unincorporated area of Denton County. Currently, the City of Southlake does not have unincorporated areas in Denton County. Historically, the contract has not produced significant revenues, however, the Interlocal Agreement does provide direction and structure in the event Southlake answers calls in Denton County. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 8 of 25 Resolution No. 99-85, Appointing representatives to the SPIN Standing Committee. Each year a vacancy meeting is held to provide a forum for residents to select their SPIN Representatives. The vacancy meeting was held on November 18, 1999. The meeting was advertised for approximately five weeks and a post card was mailed to residents in all of the odd-numbered SPIN areas notifying them of the vacancy meeting. Each of the SPIN areas have individuals volunteering to serve as a SPIN representative for their area. Some of the current SPIN Representatives are seeking reappointment. The resolution provides for the two-year appointment of the following individuals to the SPIN Standing Committee: SPIN#1 SPIN#3 SP1N#5 SPIN#7 SPIN#9e SPIN#9w SPIN#Il SPIN#13 SPIN#15 Kim O'Brien Mary McMahon Jan Francis Darrell Faglie Edith Hutcheson Lynda Warner (temporary until another volunteer is willing to serve) Roger Hutton Bill Stone Wayne Haney Award of bid to Brice Systems for the purchase of Cisco routers and switches for the citywide network. At the present time the city operates by using a wireless radio frequency system between city locations to transfer data from one site to another. The present system is overcrowded which causes the network to be slow and inefficient and results in numerous problems for network users. The installation of fiber optics will allow more than adequate amount of bandwidth for the transmission of data. The routers and switches are the devices that transmit the data between the sites. FY 99-00 Budget allows for the amount of $121,000 for the purchase of this network equipment. Brice Systems submitted the lowest bid of $114,382.16. This item was deleted from the agenda. Resolution No. 00-02, Appointment of a chairperson for the tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Board of Directors. According to the state statue, the governing body of the municipality that created the tax increment reinvestment zone must appoint one member of the board to serve as chairperson for a term of one year that begins on January 1, of the following year. This resolution provides for the City Council to appoint a chairperson for the TIRZ Board. Gary Fawks was appointed to this position for a one-year term. 5-H. This item was left intentionally blank. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 9 of 25 5-I. 5#r. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a professional service agreement with Schrickel, Rollins & Associates for the update to the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan and the Bicentennial Park Schematic Design. The Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan was originally developed and adopted in January of 1992, and updated and adopted in November of 1996. The Bicentennial Park Master Plan was developed in March of 1997 and serves as a tool to guide the development of park and recreational facilities within the Park. Recent additions such as the Tennis Center, in-line hockey court, and the basketball courts have dramatically changed and improved the recreational opportunities for the citizens of Southlake. In order to continue with the planning and development of remaining and future parkland within Bicentennial Park it has become necessary to update the schematic master plan design. The update would reflect the developmental changes that have occurred within Bicentennial Park and provide recommendations for future improvements. Staff sought a proposal from Schrickel, Rollins & Associates to provide professional consulting services for the update to the Parks Master Plan and to revise the Bicentennial Park Schematic Master Plan. Funding in the amount of $50,000 is identified in the FY 1999-00 General Fund Operating Budget. Total fees associated with the Parks Master Plan and Update for Bicentennial Schematic Design are not expected to exceed $43,000. Award of bid to Control Specialists, Inc., for the installation of computer- operated valves for the elevated storage tanks at Bicentennial Park and Dove Street Water Towers. The pump station located on Pearson Road controls the water levels in the City's existing elevated storage tanks. The second pump station on T.W. King (currently under construction) will be completed this winter. Valves will need to be added to the four water storage facilities on the low pressure plane to coordinate the functions of both pump stations. These computer- operated valves were added to the T.W. King ground storage and Miron elevated storage tanks during construction. Computer-operated valves must be installed for the elevated storage tanks at Bicentennial Park and Dove Street before the second pump station becomes operational. The low bid was received from Control Specialists, Inc., of Roanoke in the amount of $68,000. This is below the $75,000 estimate to install the two computer-operated valves. There are adequate funds in the current water impact fee fund for this expenditure. Request for the extension of validity for one (1) year of Case No. ZA 97-156, Preliminary Plat for Cornerstone Business Park, Phase IL' being approximately 67.64 acres out of the C.B. McDonald Survey, Abstract No. 1013, per Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, as amended Section 4.01 (I) 3 (Expiration of Plats). On January 6, 1998 the City Council approved the above referenced plat. This plat has not yet been filed and will expire on January 6, 2000. The Carroll Independent School District is requesting a one-year extension of the validity of the plat. The purpose of this extension is to allow time for processing and filing of the final plat. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 10 of 25 5-5. Resolution No. 00-01, Revising Resolution No. 98-52 in support of the application for related grant funds for a D.A.R.E officer through the Criminal Justice Division of the Governor's Office. This resolution is a revision of Resolution No. 98-52 showing support of the application for related grant funds for a D.A.R.E. officer through the Criminal Justice Division of the Governor's Office. The City would receive funds of $14,939 in 2001 and $7,469 in 2002. Authorize the City Manager to enter into an addendum to the agreement with Tarrant County for tax collection services. Since 1982, the Tarrant County Tax Assessor/Collector has collected property taxes for the City of Southlake. The renewal contract was presented and approved by the City Council at the September 7, 1999 meeting. The purpose of the addendum is to establish and document the consent of the City to the investment of collected tax funds by Tarrant County during the period between collection and payment to the City. The County agrees that is will invest the funds in compliance with the Public Funds Investment Act. Also, the County agrees that it will pay to the City all interest or other earnings attributable to taxes owed to the City. The City received $17,650 of interest earnings from Tan'ant County for the 1999 tax year collections. Estimated interest earnings are $20,000. ZA 99-092, Site Plan for Southlake Marketplace, Phase III. The applicant, in a letter to the City dated December 28, 1999, requested that this case be tabled until the January 18, 2000 City Council meeting. ZA 99-098, Revised Preliminary Plat of Lots 1 & 2, Block 61, Timarron Addition and Tract 5D2 situated in the Obediah W Knight Survey, Abstract No. 899, and being approximately 2.6824 acres. Current zoning is "PUD" Planned Unit Development District, being P.U.D. No. 1, Timarron. Owner and Applicant: Westerra Timarron, L.P. This item was approved on the consent agenda as presented, subject to the Plat Review Summary No. 3, dated December 3, 1999. ZA 99-111, Preliminary Plat of Emery Addition, Samuel Freeman Survey, Abstract No 525, and being approximately 4.47 acres of land. Current zoning is "C-3" General Commercial District and "AG" Agricultural District. Owner and Applicant: Leonard Douglas Emery. This item was approved on the consent agenda as presented, subject to the Plat Review Summary No. 2 dated December 3, 1999. ZA 99-117, Plat Showing for Lots 5 & 6, W.R. Eaves No. 500 Addition on property legally described as Tracts 3, 3C and 3C1 in the W.R. Eaves Survey, Abstract No. 500 and being approximately 3. 799 acres Current zoning is 'C-2" Local Retail CommerciaI District. Applicant: Wilson & Stonaker, L.L.C. Owner: ConnerLam This item was approved on the consent agenda as presented, subject to the Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated December 3, 1999. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes ofJanuary 4, 2000 Pagell of 25 8-0. iO-B. Ordinance No. 717-B, 1st Reading, Amending Ordinances 717 and 717-A, and Chapter 18, Article III, Section 18-79 of the Southlake City Code; designating the speed limit within Cross Timber Hills subdivision and Oaktree Estates Addition as 25 mph. Ordinance No. 585-B, 1st Reading, Amending Ordinance No. 585-A, Tree Preservation Ordinance. This ordinance was originally adopted on June 15, 1993 and amended December 16, 1997. Councilmember Debra Edmondson met with Malcolm Jackson and Keith Martin on several occasions regai'ding current enfomement action and related tree preservation ordinance procedures. Based upon the analysis of the ordinance, several suggested changes were presented to enhance the operational procedures towards improved efficiency and effectiveness. The memorandum dated December 30, 1999 from Garland Wilson, Director of Public Safety, outlines the key points made regarding the changes and is hereby attached to the minutes of this meeting. Ordinance No. 480-11, 1st Reading, Revisions to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended regarding regulations on carports, covered parking and parking garages on non-residential property. This item was tabled in the consent agenda until the January 18, 2000 City Council meeting. Ordinance No. 480-J J, Ist Reading, Revisions to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended, regarding the regulations on impervious coverage in the non-residential zoning district, and correcting landscaping regulations in Ordinance No. 480 to remove any conflict with the provisions of Landscape Ordinance No. 544-A. This ordinance will revise the impervious coverage regulations by removing the language that allows additional impervious coverage in exchange for additional bufferyards or landscape area. The percentage of maximum impervious coverage in each district will not be changed; no increase in impervious coverage will be permitted unless the Board of Adjustment grants a variance. The "I-1" and "1-2" industrial districts will not be affected by this ordinance. In addition, the ordinance will also address conflicts between the Zoning Ordinance and the Landscape Ordinance No. 544-A. Resolution No. 00-04, Setting the dates for public hearings related to water, wastewater and roadway impact fees. For almost one year, the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC) has studied materials necessary to update the City of Southlake's Impact Fee Ordinance. The major components of the update include: Revised Land Use Assumption Report; Revised Capital Improvement Projects; Equivalency Tables; Ten Year Projection of Service Units; and Recalculation of Maximum Impact Fees. The public heating has been set for February 1, 2000 during the Regular City Council meeting. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a developer agreement for Hart Industrial Park. The final plat for Hart Industrial Park, Lots 3, 4, and 5, Block B, was approved in 1988. The commercial developer agreement is the City's standard Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 12 of 25 developer agreement. The developer agreement covers the installation of a sanitary sewer line. No Park Fees are required because of the date of the plat. 10-C. Carmel Bay Encroachment Agreement. The Carmel Bay Addition was platted in 1986. Carmel Bay Addition has a wood fence along the south side of Thousand Oaks Court, a cul-de-sac, which has its south right-of-way line as the south boundary line of the Cannel Bay Addition. The Carmel Bay Homeowners Association is requesting to be allowed to replace the existing wood fence along the south side of Thousand Oaks Court, which is within the public right-of-way. They also have requested to be allowed to replace the existing brick and metal entry located in the public right-of-way of Carmel Court. Residential lots fronting on Burney Lane back up to Thousand Oaks Court. These property owners would be allowed to install gates in the new wood fence to give them access to Thousand Oaks Court, if they wish. The encroachment agreement has the City's indemnity clause and also a requirement for the home owners association to maintain public liability insurance. The Council waived the requirement for a $1 million dollar insurance policy. Agenda Item #6, Public Forum Dick Johnston, Senior Citizen, 1106 Brazos Drive, Southlake. Mr. Johnston stated he was present to talk with the City Council and citizens of Southlake about "CARS" (Call a Ride for Southlake, Inc). He said they commenced operation on Monday, January 3, 2000. CARS is organized to provide free, non-emergency transportation to qualified seniors and disabled citizens for medical, business, shopping, personal grooming and social activities in Southlake. CARS transports within a 25-mile radius for medical needs, which includes Dallas, Fort Worth and Arlington; and within a 7-mile radius for other needs. CARS transports in member-owned automobiles and vans between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and evenings and Saturdays for special activities in advance to senior citizens. CARS is funded by contributions from individual businesses, civic and charitable organizations and hopefully by the City of Southlake. Users may donate to CARS but there is no individual trip charge made. All volunteers and volunteer drivers are covered by the umbrella liability and accident insurance policy. Volunteer drivers may contact them through their office at 817/416-9755 or through Southlake Senior Activity Center, for applications to participate. CARS office is in Town Center, Suite 209, 181 Grand Avenue [above The GAP] and open from 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. They especially want to encourage the senior citizens to use this free transportation service to provide them access to various social activities at the Community Senior Center, the downtown, and parks particularly during the day when their family and friends cannot transport them. We also want to encourage the more elderly senior citizens who still drive to use this free service for less stressful transportation. They operate like a taxi service, but without charge. Arrangements must be made at least twenty-four hours in advance to allow for the necessary drive scheduling. At this time there are fourteen qualified drivers and twenty-four qualified seniors as potential users. We are qualifying more riders each day and can use additional drivers to spread the service among more volunteers. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 13 of 25 Mayor Stacy thanked Mr. Johnston for putting this service together and he hopes that they get many more calls. Debbie Engler-Key, 105 Killdeer, Southlake. Ms. Engler-Key spoke regarding the Mobil Service Station, noting the car-wash has been turned back on and they are appealing to the City Council to help them by updating the Noise Ordinance. She stated the Mobil Service Station did not respond to the request made by the neighbors last year. Gerry Benavides, 103 Starling Court, Southlake. Mr. Benavides stated he was present in support of the Myers Meadows home owners. He stated he wanted to help the neighborhood in their efforts to try and keep the blowers from operating. He stated the Mobile gas station has been in operation for about one and one-half years and have been using the car wash without the blowers. Then, five days ago they turned them on again. He stated he is three rows of houses away from the station and he can still hear the blowers going. It is a humming noise. He stated he is asking for Council support in trying to get the blowers turned off. ,/ames Hoglund, 108 Killdeer Court, $outhlake. Mr. Hoglund stated he has read the report done on the noise levels that is being used to try and justify the position of the Mobile station in operating the blowers in their car wash. He stated he finds it interesting that the man who wrote the report claims to be a noise engineer, and stated he does not believe it. Mr. Hoglund references issues from the report regarding peak noise. Mr. Hoglund asked for Council's help in changing the Noise Ordinance so that the blowers can be turned off. Brian Hickey, 109 Killdeer Court, $outhlake. He spoke regarding noise issues with the Mobil gas station regarding the car-wash blowers. He asked for Council's help in resolving this issue Stan Key, 105 Killdeer Court, Southlake. Mr. Key read a petition and turned it into the City Secretary. It stated, "To: The Southlake City Council. We the undersigned are greatly concerned about the increased noise level created by the Mobil car wash at the comer of Peytonville and 1709. We request support and action by the City Council to resolve this issue. All of us can hear this car wash in our homes and in our yards." He presented a petition with fifteen (15) signatures, which is hereby made a part of the record. Malcolm Jackson, Chief of Building Services, stated, "We have been trying to process this issue for the past couple of weeks, more particularly the last couple of days. As you know, we have been in contact with Tetco's attorney recently and according to Tetco, their constituents have requested a reactivation of the car wash blower. As a part of that, they have contacted the City for a greater clarification of the zoning ordinance, and the noise ordinance." Jackson stated the city attorney has been contacted and is currently researching the noise ordinance and the zoning ordinance. Jackson stated they have heard Mr. Key's and other citizens' comments and they are attempting to address that via the Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 14 of 25 noise ordinance. He stated they are approximately 60 days away from making a presentation to the Council regarding amending the noise ordinance. He stated, in the meantime, they are seeking advice from the city attorney regarding what action can be taken at this time by the city to give the neighbors some relief on this matter. The bottom line is that the Zoning Ordinance is not applicable because it actually came into effect after Tetco had their plans in the works. Mr. Jackson stated he would contact Tetco to see if they would voluntarily turn off the blowers at this time. They did in the past and he will make that request again. Councilmember Rex Potter asked the City Attorney, "If we come up with a new ordinance, will it be applicable to this particular site?" Mr. Olson replied that it would and it would be retroactive. Olson stated as they have looked into the case and that the Zoning Ordinance would not be applicable as they do not exceed the noise levels in the Zoning Ordinance. However, they do violate the Noise Ordinance because they have become a nuisance and if one of the citizens who has been bothered by the blowers wants to come forward and make a formal complaint and agree to testify in Municipal Court, the City can take it to the judge for a conviction. Elizabeth Fenton and KZEE News Radio, 2718 Sam Houston Drive, Garland, Texas. Ms. Fenton was not present for the meeting. Agenda Item #7-A, Ordinance No. 480-317, 2nd Reading (ZA 99-057) Crown Ridge. Ordinance No. 480-317, 2nd Reading, (ZA 99-057), Rezoning and Development Plan for Crown Ridge Addition, on property legally described as Tracts 8, 9, 18 and 19, situated in the R.D. Price Survey, Abstract No. 992, and being approximately 63.43 acres. Current zoning is "AG" Agricultural District with a requested zoning of "R-pLrD" Residential Planned Unit Development District, amended to "SF-1A" Single Family Zoning District. Applicant: Huitt-Zollars. Owners: Southlake/SolanaLtd. Senior Planner Chris Carpenter led the discussion and noted that fourteen (14) notices were sent to property owners within the 200' notification area and four (4) responses were received from: W. E. Larnoreaux Jr., 6967 Blackwood Drive, Dallas, in favor; Barbara G. Lamoreaux, 6967 Blackwood Drive, Dallas, in favor; Jim Makens, Cooper Line JV, 2300 Airport Freeway #230, Bedford, in favor; Marzell F. Eavns, 9426 Braddock Road, Fairfax, VA, undecided. The record reflected that the Planning and Zoning Commission denied this case on September 9, 1999, 7-0 vote. The City Council has taken the following action: October 5, 1999, City Council approved on consent agenda, the applicant's request to table; October 19, 1999, the City Council approved on consent agenda the applicant's request to table to the November 2, 1999 City Council meeting; November 2, 1999, the City Council approved the First Reading amending the zoning request from "PUD" Planned Unit Development District to "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District; and on December 7, 1999, the City Council approved to table and to continue the public hearing to the January 4, 2000 City Council meeting due to the applicant not being present. It was noted that a change of zoning to the "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District does not require a Concept Plan Review by staff. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 15 of 25 Paul Spain, 2807 Brookshire Drive. Mr. Spain stated they represent the owners of a 63.43-acre property and propose the property to be zoned "SF-1A," a change of their original application due to the neighborhood and staff review at the Planning and Zoning Commission. The property is two-thirds wooded. They have been working since the last time on the general development issues. He stated they have been working on the drainage because it was a concern of the City Council. He stated it was their intent to bring sewer to the property and in doing so, they want credit for impact fees for part of the lots. PUBLIC HEARING: Klm O'Brien, SPIN #1 Representative (4380 Saddle Ridge Road, Roanoke). She stated Mr. Spain has been good enough to give her a couple of layouts of the property which she was able to circulate in the neighborhood. Some of the issues are drainage concerns because of the closure of T.W. King via the Sabre Group, making White Chapel Boulevard be the primary thoroughfare there. They are particularly concerned about the potential drainage problems. She noted that lighting of the subdivision is also a concern. Boyd Dollar, 525 Brooks Court, Roanoke. Mr. Dollar stated he will not speak to the specifics of the development because he is not familiar with them. He stated he is pleased that the developers have come back with a plan that complies with the Land Use Plan. Cara White, 4475 Homestead Drive, Roanoke. Ms. White questioned when the zoning was changed, why was the change not taken back through the Planning and Zoning Commission in the normal way? She stated she is concerned that the trees might be damaged during construction. She stated she is in support of the "SF-1A" Single Family Zoning District. She stated she has a concern with the development not having proper lighting, however, drainage is the number one issue. She asked for the developer's intentions regarding the enclosure of the subdivision, asking, will they have a "wall"? Susan Quinn, 192 Sam Bass Ridge, Roanoke. Ms. Quinn stated she feels uncomfortable about changing the zoning from Agricultural uses because everything seems so up in the air. Mayor Stacy commented about the preliminary plat being brought back through the system as was expressed by Ms. White. Ronalie Ferrqan, 122 Sam Bass Ridge, Roanoke. Ms.Ferrqan did not wish to speak but expressed concerns with the drainage [small lake between White Chapel and Soda Ridge Road]. She expressed that she is in opposition to the zoning change. Peter Landesberg, 305 East Bob Jones Road, Roanoke. Mr. Landesberg did not wish to speak but expressed concerns with the aesthetics of the neighborhood and that development is a concem as a result of other "Spain" development problems (i.e. drainage). Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 16 of 25 Public hearing closed. Councilmember Gary Fawks asked Mr. Spain to address the concerns of those citizens who spoke during the public heating. Mr. Spain stated regarding the drainage, they have been working with their engineers with on-site drainage as well as off-site drainage. It is in their best interest to save the trees, because they paid a lot more for the property because of the trees, so it is in their best interest to save the trees. He also commented on past developments in Southlake stating they worked very closely with Keep Southlake Beautiful when developing Cambridge Place Addition. They were praised for their workings in saving the trees and were able to save some very old trees in Cambridge Place Addition. Concerning the landscaping and the walls, they are wrestling with that, because they like the look of the property out there and it does not have walls. They have fences and they like that. The development has solid trees which takes away the need for walls. Councilmember Rex Potter asked Mr. Spain if he would be willing to comply with the impervious coverage ordinance and the tree ordinance that was approved tonight? Mr. Spain stated he had not read the new ordinances. City Attorney Wayne Olson stated he does not know the answer to the question or whether or not Mr. Spain would have to comply with the new ordinances approved tonight. He would have to comply with the existing ordinances. Councilmember Debra Edmondson asked Mr. Spain to talk about Cambridge Place for a minute. She stated, "Unfortunately, there was at least one incident that occurred that had very negative impact on the neighbors on Westwood Drive. It was where a contractor came through with a large piece of equipment and destroyed some trees." Mr. Spain stated he was in support of the City fining the contractor for his actions. Ms. Edmondson asked Mr. Spain how he plans to prevent that from happening on this new development? Mr. Spain stated he would try to watch the contractor all the time to prevent something like that from happening again. Spain stated, "We are normally out there, and do not have that problem." Motion was made to approve ZA 99-057, Rezoning and Development Plan for Crown Ridge Addition, subject to the applicant's commitment to bring sanitary sewer to the property. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: DuPre Fawks DuPre, Fawks, Moffat, Edmondson, Potter, and Stacy None 6-0 vote Agenda Item #7-B, ZA 99-109, Site Plan for Johnson Elementary School ZA 99-109, Site Plan for Johnson Elementary School, on property legally described as Tract 5H, situated in the Francis Throop Survey, Abstract No. 1511, and being Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 17 of 25 approximately 14.89 acres. Current zoning is "CS" Community Service District. Owner and Applicant: Carroll Independent School District. Senior Planner Chris Carpenter presented the Site Plan Johnson Elementary School stating twenty-two (22) notices were sent to property owners within the 200' notification area and two (2) notices were received from outside the 200' notification area: Otis T. Welch, U.S. Department of Transportation and Karen L. Robertson, Manager Noise Compatibility Office, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, opposed, "The Airport Board does not support the development of a school or any other noise sensitive land uses at this proposed site." Director of Community Development Kevin Hugman expressed comments from the Park and Recreation Board stating Mr. Kline is asking for the following variances: Vertical Articulation; Landscaping; and Bufferyards [waive bufferyard on the north and east and take 8' screening issue to the Zoning Board of Adjustment]. Brent Kline, Total Program Management. Mr. Kline stated he is present on behalf of the Carroll Independent School District. Mr. Kline stated they are 300 s.f. over the 5,000 s.f. limit on their building which requires them to meet the landscape and bufferyard requirements in Item//4. He stated they are only adding four classrooms and this site is unique because they essentially have two pieces of property that are platted as one piece of property. In order to meet the bufferyard requirements, they would have to put a bufferyard around the entirety of both properties and remove some parking. He said they would also have to remove some concrete in order to put the landscape islands in the parking lots. Regarding the screening requirements it Item //5, he asked that they be allowed to talk to the individual homeowners as to their preferences. He said some people like to see the school and like to be able to walk over to the school. He also asked for the sidewalks to be allowed as shown. He asked that they be allowed to address Item//7, the setback of the temporary building, with the Zoning Board of Adjustment. PUBLIC HEARING: Aloha Payne, 1213 Whispering Dell, Southlake. Ms. Payne submitted a letter for the record, "I wish to express my concerns about the proposed fence that will divide Whispering Dell Estates from Johnson Elementary. There are many elementary aged children living in Whispering Dell Estates. Many of these children walk to school and cut through several yards on the south side of Whispering Dell Estates to go to Johnson Elementary. Many neighborhood children also use the playground at Johnson on the weekends or other non-school hours. The proposed fence would not allow the children to take the shortcuts through the neighborhood and would force them to walk along Carroll Avenue to get to the school. Carroll Avenue is very busy, especially during the mornings and afternoons on school days, and there is no sidewalk or paved shoulder." Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 18 of 25 Mayor Stacy asked to have letters from Karen L. Robertson, Manager of the Noise Compatibility Office at DFW Airport, opposing this item, and Otis Welch, Manager of Texas Airports Development Office, also opposing this item, made a part of the record. Public hearing closed. Motion was made to approve ZA 99-109, Site Plan for Johnson Elementary School, subject to the Site Plan Review Summary No. 2 (revised) dated December 30, 1999; Item #1, granting a variance to the vertical articulation; Item #2, granting relief to the rooftop screening on the existing building; Item #3, okay; Item #4 regarding bufferyards and landscaping, granting the variances to the bufferyard along Carroll, along the north and east side, requiring the 8' screening device along the north and east. If they cannot comply with that, they are to go to the Board of Adjustment for a variance; Item #4d, interior landscaping will be waived; Item #4e, additional planting required in the enlarged landscaping island will be spread along the building perimeter; Item #4f, granting a variance from the hedge row; Item #5, requiring the 8-foot screening device (unless granted a variance from the Board of Adjustment); Item #6, [sidewalk] allow as the P&Z recommended, which was the meandering sidewalk to attach to the existing 5' sidewalk along the front of the school and continuing back on North Carroll Avenue; Item//7, it will stand as a Zoning Board of Adjustment issue on the portable building encroaching into the required setback. Motion: Second: Ayes: Nays: Approved: Potter Moffat Potter, Moffat, DuPre, Edmondson, Fawks, and Stacy None 6-0 vote Agenda Item #10-A, Developer Agreement for Chesapeake Place Deputy Director of Public Works Charlie Thomas presented the developer agreement for Chesapeake Place and noted that on April 20, 1999, the City Council authorized the Mayor to execute a "Partial Developer Agreement" which covered downstream, off-site drainage improvements for Chesapeake Place subdivision located at the northeast comer of Pearson Lane and Union Church Road. In the "Partial Developer Agreement" the City agreed to reimburse the developer for the cost of the off-site drainage improvements up to an amount not to exceed $100,000 as long as the developer's on-site storm water drainage improvements include a four-acre retention/detention pond as approved by the City Council. The developer's development plans are complete and the on-site drainage improvements do include a four-acre retention/detention pond, therefore, this revised developer agreement includes the provision for the city to reimburse the developer for the cost of the off-site drainage improvements up to an amount of not to exceed $100,000. Charlie Thomas stated, "The reason that the items discussed are not included, is that the developer is proposing to do additional amenities and the reason it was not included in the developer agreement, is because it was not a part of the PUD requirements for this site. Actually, I was not aware of all the details they are working on with the Parks Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 19 of 25 Department and Park Board. What I would recommend to Council is if they choose to do that, beyond the park plan that is in the PUD, is that they will need to come back at a later date with a revised developer agreement to get City Council approval on any participation that the Council had. I suppose they could add additional amenities to the park if the Park Board was in agreement with that. That is the reason those things were not part of the developer agreement. This agreement is strictly about the development of the grading through the park, and drainage." Richard Payne, engineer with Carter & Burgess, was present and explained why he feels this plan does meet the development requirements. Councilmember Gary Fawks stated, "The Park Board saw the original plan that was denied. And the Park Board has not made a recommendation on this plan for park dedication fees?" Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Development, stated, "What the Park Board saw was the original PUD that the Council saw, which was proposing a 6.69 acre park and that was the plan that they based their recommendation on. When it had gone to Council it was denied originally, and Council reconsidered that and at that time the developer came back with an altered plan which reduced the number of lots and increased the park size to 11.2 acres, and that is what was approved by the City Council. Since then, they are working with the 11.2 acre park. They are proposing to do more improvements to it and that is what they are working with staff on. They have not taken this plan to the Park Board and they were told they need to do that. The only ones that have seen this is the Park Board Chair and the SPDC Chair. They were told that the developer is working with this plan and that it would be brought to them [Park Board and SPDC] later if that is what the developers were wanting to do." Hugman stated, "The Park Dedication requirements for this are based on the number of dwelling units [one-acre per forty dwelling units] or at that time it was $1,000 in fees per dwelling unit." Mr. Payne stated they would like to try to work out something where the city participates with additional improvements. He stated the developer agrees to participate up to $125,000 for the trails, playground, pavilion, grass area and some trees. He stated even if the Parks Board decided not to participate, they will still participate up to $125,000. He commented that the developers want the Park Board to decide what they want. It was established that the developer is Pulte Homes. Motion was made to approve the developer agreement for Chesapeake Place based on the changes made by Charlie Thomas regarding the park fees, and rewriting the section having to do with the PUD dedicating the 11.2 acres; and, noting that the developer will contribute $125,000 toward the amenities in the park area and based on a meeting with the Park Board; and restricting the surface area of the pond to 3.2 acres for the total area of the detention not to exceed four acres. Councilmember Rex Potter stated he has a problem with this, as he believes it should have gone to the Park Board and that Council should not be approving this tonight, therefore, he is not going to support this action. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 20 of 25 Mayor Stacy stated that according to the ordinances, the most he has to give us is 5 acres or $80,000. Councilmember Debra Edmondson stated this is not a developer agreement issue. She said, "If you want to say that, I agree with Mayor Stacy, and it is not my intention to labor that issue." She stated she believes that the City got cheated at the time as far as land and that she continues to believe that. Councilmember Rex Potter stated he would rather it go to the Park Board and then get everything agreed to and then say, "yes." Councilmember Patsy DuPre stated, "I agree with what is being said, but at the same time it was pointed out that normally we would not get the $125,000 contribution from the developers. Councilmember Gary Fawks stated, "We need to talk about that. This is a PUD, and they have a whole bunch of tiny lots in exchange for the open space. This is how they got their lot sizes, is with this open space. They are double dipping and triple dipping by giving it to us and getting credit and it is an amenity. We can talk about that later, but before you start feeling too bad. I dofft have problem letting the parks department work out the details." Motion: DuPre Second: Moffat Ayes: Fawks, Moffat, DuPre, and Stacy Nays: Edmondson, Potter Approved: 4-2 vote Agenda Item 0Il-A, Discussion: Parkwood Drive Issues. Mayor Rick Stacy stated there were several people in the audience that were very concerned about the building of a road [Parkwood Drive], and stated there is no one threatening to build a road at this time. He said, "We can talk about this issue and we can talk about ways to build the road, but that is all we can talk about tonight." He said there is a planned road in that location at this time but the agreement has been "put to bed," so all the City can do is talk about ways to come back and try to change the proposed roadway. Zoning Administrator and Interim Director of Planning Karen Gandy stated discussions have been held regarding whether or not to abandon Parkwood Drive right-of-way as requested by neighboring property owners during the public forum on October 5, 1999. The alignment of this roadway began in 1995, as part of a three-way land negotiation with Timarron, Dr. Richards and the City. The City desired to purchase approximately 15 acres and Timarron desired to enlarge their tract at the southwest comer of Byron Nelson Parkway and F.M. 1709. Dr. Richard's resulting ownership was shifted west with the Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 21 of 25 understanding that there would be a loop road connecting back to Byron Nelson Parkway. All this was accomplished and the city purchased the property. As a result, the Municipal Campus Concept 'A' was prepared. Ms. Gandy continued, "Since April 18, 1996, when preliminary plat for both the municipal complex and Timarron, Phase V [later named Northwood, Phase Two] were approved, Street 'A' [later planned as Parkwood Drive] has been shown as a proposed 60-foot right-of-way extending from F.M. 1709 to Byron Nelson Parkway. A Site Plan was approved October 6, 1998 for French Square Office Complex, located on the west side of Parkwood Drive and north of Timarron Addition, Northwood Park, Phase Two. Driveway access was approved and restricted to Parkwood Drive only. A condition of the plan approval was that Parkwood Drive be constructed prior to issuance of a building permit." It was noted that the alternatives to this issue include: a) allow the road to continue as originally proposed; b) abandon a 400' segment of the roadway, in effect creating a cul-de-sac just south of the northernmost proposed drive (approximately 350') for the French Square Office Complex development. This would require the Senior Center to have a driveway to the existing roadway or to the new cul-de-sac. c) abandon the entire roadway maintaining a drive access to the south. Ms. Gandy prepared a Parkwood Drive Chronology as well as a history of developments around Parkwood Drive, which are hereby attached to the minutes of this meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Michael Manila, 614 Northwood Trail, $outhlake. Mr. Manila commented on the construction at Rockenbaugh Elementary School, and stated there is not enough parking at the school site. He noted the parents park on Byron Nelson Parkway and also on Parkwood Trail. He stated his residence is the closest one to the proposed French Square Office Complex, and that the proposed building is 50' fi.om his residence. He noted on October 6, 1998, the City Council had a discussion about the large post oak tree which will be taken out for the construction of the office complex. It is estimated that the tree is 200 years old and it will be destroyed. Mr. Manila stated he feels if in fact Mr. Ford does not own the property, that the plans should be void. Mr. Manila is in support of Option Dan Brady, 603 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Mr. Brady stated he is in support of Option "B" presented tonight. Dana Sternfeld, 402 Bayou Vista Court, $outhlake. Ms. Stemfeld stated she is the new SPIN Representative for SPIN #9w. She stated she feels that the City Council would be making a big mistake to put the road in. She is in favor of Option "B" and is asking the City engineer to redesign the proposed road. She stated she feels this issue should be Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 22 of 25 referred back to the SPIN area for more discussions and more ideas, noting, the neighborhood wants it on the agenda again for consideration. Tony Ezell, 514 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Mr. Ezell did not wish to speak but noted that he is in support of abandonment of Parkwood Road. Amy Ezell, 514 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Ms. Ezell did not wish to speak but noted she is in support of abandonment of Parkwood Road. Ken Head, 501 Clayton Court, Southlake. Mr. Head stated he is in support of Option "B" with the "L" shape road back to Byron Nelson Parkway. Ray and Beth Semadeni, 501 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Mr. Semadeni referenced the petition that was presented to the City Council in November, 1999. He stated they are for Option "B" and feels it was a great idea, or he is in favor of the idea presented by Michael Manila this evening. Mr. Semadeni stated he has spoken to Mr. David Ford and found that he does not plan to develop the property in question. Guy Gilliland, 503 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Mr. Gilliland stated he is opposed to the access to Parkwood Trail and feels that any non-residential development is a hazard to the neighborhood. He stated he is in favor of a speedy resolution to this issue. Michael Press, 500 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Mr. Press commented on the construction at Rockenbaugh Elementary School, adding that there is not enough parking at the school site. He also noted that the parents park on Byron Nelson Parkway and on Parkwood Trail. His residence is closest to French Circle Office Complex, with the proposed building being 50' fi.om his residence. On October 6, during the City Council meeting, a discussion was held regarding the large 200-year-old post oak tree which will have to be removed if construction is approved. He stated he feels if Mr. Ford does not own the property, the plan should be void. Amy and Roger Ochs, 606 Northwood Court, Southlake. Theydidnotwishto speakbut indicated they are in opposition. Rebecca Petty, 613 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Did not wish to speak but indicated she is in opposition. Ugretta Miller, 502 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Did not wish to speak but indicated she is in opposition. James Corral, 507 Northwood Drive, $outhlake. Mr. Corral stated he is the listing agent for Dr. Richard's property that consists of two frontage tracts. He stated he likes Option "B". Mayor Stacy stated at this point, what does the Council want to do? Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 23 of 25 Councilmember Debra Edmondson stated, "I would like to resolve this issue in a rather short period of time, noting that the residents spent a lot of time putting together petitions and that general tells me that they are pretty focused think we owe them a response, and I don't think an appropriate response is, 'well nothing has happened so far, so lets not worry about it.' I think we can come up with a solution that will solve everyone's problems and concerns. That is what I would like to direct staff to do. If we need to contact David Ford and working through our City Attorney to end this agreement with Mr. Ford so be it, and then take it from there." Mayor Stacy stated that the City will need to either keep their agreement with Dr. Richard's or the City needs to buy him out. Councilmember Edmondson agreed, stating that Option 'B,' with some variations discussed tonight could work. After more discussion, the City Council directed staff to contact Mr. Ford and to move forward with trying to abandon a portion of the road or something that would help the residents. City Manager Billy Campbell stated, "By next meeting we can have a report or actionable events, if collectively Option 'B,' in that configuration or a similar configuration, is palatable to the Council. We will work on that portion of the road and be able to provide the options." Councilmember Edmondson stated, "The developer committed to building and I think it is possible to just reduce his commitment. There still is that portion that abuts his property and it still is possible to reduce the commitment." The residents present asked when the sign will be taken down? The Director of Public Works was told to take the sign down in the morning. It was noted that there will be something on the next City Council meeting regarding this issue, if all the information can be obtained by that time. Mayor Stacy stated staff will be in contact with their SPIN Representative. Agenda Item #Il-B, Discussion: Revisions to Subdivision Regulations Regarding Park Dedication Requirements. Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman led the discussion regarding revisions to the subdivision regulations regarding park dedication requirements, noting, in September 1999, the Parks and Recreation Board member Bill Kemp proposed conceptual amendments to the City's park dedication requirements. At their September 13, 1999 meeting, the Parks and Recreation Board discussed the initial proposal and requested staff to research the issues and bring forth changes for their consideration as quickly as possible. Staff put together a conceptual draft of potential changes to Section VII of the Subdivision Ordinance and placed the item for consideration on the November 8, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 24 of 25 Parks and Recreation Board meeting agenda. The Parks and Recreation Board reviewed the following conceptual revisions to Subdivision Ordinance No. 483. Mr. Hugman outlined the proposed changes in his memorandum dated December 39, 1999 which is hereby attached to the minutes of this meeting. Councilmember Debra Edmondson stated, "What I want to do is to eliminate the opportunity for developers to use our park land to meet their drainage requirements." Councilmember Rex Potter and others agreed with Edmondson. Councilmember Gary Fawks stated, "Not only that, I think to have someone use open space in order to meet a PUD requirement to increase the density of their development, and then for them to get credit for that open space, seems to me to be inappropriate. In visiting this dedication requirement, I would like for us to remove that possibility. In Section 7.05, in the proposed changes, that would give the Parks Board and the City Council more opportunity to say, this land is not appropriate to meet the Park Dedicated Requirements." The discussion continued on this issue [January 4, 2000 meeting tape #2, section 200]. Agenda Item #Il-C, Discussion: Possible Charter Amendment Election in May, 2000. After a brief discussion, Council determined that a Charter Amendment Election would not be necessary at this time. Agenda Item #12, Adjournment. Mayor Rick Stacy adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m. ATTEST: · ,iltlllltlB[~[~\ L:\City Secretary\L Drive Minutes\cc-min-l-4-00.doc Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2000 Page 25 of 25 January 4, 1999 To: The Southlake City Council We the undersigned are greatly concerned about the increased noise level created by the Mobil car wash at the corner of Peytonville and 1709. We request support and action by the City Council to resolve this issue. All of us can hear this car wash in our homes and in our yards. NAME ADDRESS 1. )e-k•' /o5 l e-LJ je,CA/ e,61./44.1 2. C:9 / QS // t ild-t? &tv 3. //` 70 3 / 6 4 - 4. L. oscL dcd-u- ( 5. e �� Ur i� 6 (° I / /deer 6. }- 7. (cct I )C. ►1 C - 8. JgD 9. / / / f(cL c;" IA /(0er C . 11.-' • 12. �3. am, ,)0,3 c / �/ : (j e ref ✓aQ aUiOPl /D j ffa / / /Yf� �d /re S• :T,¢ 1 :� City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM December 30, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: James Kunke, Public Information Officer (Ext. 819) SUBJECT: Potential request to transfer city's cable franchise from Charter Communications to AT &T Cable Services, and announced cable rate increase. There are two cable television issues that need to be brought to Council's attention. The issues are related only in that they involve Charter Communications, but as you will see they are not connected in terms of possible Council action. The first issue is a rate increase announced by Charter Communications in a letter to the City dated Dec. 13, 1999. The increase is in the amount of $1.95 for combined basic and expanded basic service, and does reflect the addition of two channels to the expanded basic lineup. Also, the price for premium channels is increasing by 90 cents per month. This increase is set to take effect on Feb. 1, and is the first by Charter since 1998. Annaleslie Muncy has been given a copy of the letter to review. An attached cable rate comparison shows that Southlake's rate for basic cable service is the highest among all Charter Communications cities in Tarrant County, but the expanded basic cable rate is the lowest (the total for both services is the same in all the cities). The combined rate still will be the same for all cities after the increase. Please note that rates for area cities served by AT &T Cable Services could not be obtained in time to include in the chart but should be available for Council before Tuesday's meeting. The second issue is a request from Charter to transfer its cable franchise agreement to AT &T Cable Services. The formal request is expected by the end of January or early February. At that time the city will have 120 days to act on the request. This request is part of a larger deal between the two companies in which Charter is trading its Metroplex customers for AT &T's cable customers in the St. Louis area. It does impact all Charter customer cities in North Texas, so the Cable Consortium that formed during the franchise transfer from Marcus met again in December to discuss the latest change. There are 32 cities represented in the consortium. According to an assistant city attorney from Fort Worth, there are three options for cities once the transfer request is received: to refuse the transfer, to find legal grounds to cancel the franchise and go out for new RFPs, or to accept the transfer to AT &T (possibly with some negotiations). He cautioned that the first two could lead to legal action since AT &T has shown a willingness to sue cities over cable franchises in recent years. City Manager's Report — Cable issues Dec. 30, 1999 Page 2 The City of Fort Worth has expressed a willingness to again take the lead in any joint negotiations or legal action, if needed. Southlake's Council needs to decide on a course of action before we know whether we will be working within the consortium again this time. Specific items to keep in mind: • The current franchise has among the highest liquidated damages for poor service of any cable franchise in the country. If the cities try to renegotiate the franchise with AT &T, the company likely will try to reduce or remove this portion of the contract. • There is no clause in the franchise specifically prohibiting transfer of the contract to another cable company, so legal grounds would have to be found if the cities tried to oppose the transfer. • This might be a chance to solicit concessions on "open access" for Internet Service Providers to lease use of the cable lines. AT &T has been opposed to this concept in the past, but recently issued a press release announcing that it would begin working toward open access in the cities it serves. (FYI: Open access means other companies could pay AT &T to provide internet service through existing cable lines, similar to open access telephone service.) • Specific to Southlake, this might be a chance to negotiate on the use of home descrambler boxes and /or for wiring of Town Hall, although reopening negotiations could be risky as described above. M 0:0 vi a) 00 C 0 U ., E m C 0 U 0 Z y u 0 u `� d 1..1 X E a) U as r. -R. U G a, O, a, ON ON ON ON ON O p C C M N k.' 0 u N N N N N N N N 'C7 R,7 O 0 O a) y Ell 69 69 69 69 64 69 69 0 U 69 69 N a � Q = a a D ' O L ,, i, 0 on CI ) a 0) p * * * * * * * * * * •K * * * * * O O n vi Tt M M 7 M M M r) M.1 M y c z 0 00 l O 0 N N N t` N N N N N r N F- N S N S > a) as ;� o0 00 — o0 00 00 ,-.; ao —, o0 00 Z ;a > Z N N * v, v ' d' .1- 'O rt .O .0 v vp 4 v, cO y 69 69 C 69 s9 s9 49 s9 69 69 69 69 69 (0i 6e 69 69 69 69 , w U O `� -� 0 1.0 b ' e, 0 O aa C - 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > • 0 O L y .0 L cn N U O 69 69 69 69 69 6A 69 69 N 0) O a) 0 lra, O O cxU 4• aU 4.: gU 69 SS --- m N ^0 O OA MI . co OD 0 OD k r .t ' .tr. '1 cC C ,� k a) O yc �O �t N Q 66 9 6 6 6 ES 6 9 6S • O a Q c N M � 8 O Q 69 6 c 44 o a) U E C^ O O O O O O )! O O . OS U y U U O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 ON O 0 y y r ∎ C .) N 00 E y M M M M M M M M M C 3 o 0 G O M O z 69 69 69 64 69 6A 6A 69 69 0 a.) V] 69 69 U .c O En O U ;d U U ctf .O t4-1 4. 0 cO • O to O co w y O 0 * * * * * is * * � O O C a) O C * C -+ - .. . C y C ,.. Z 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0o p � Z 3 z in U Z U U cl * * rx b * * C • N 00 M cn cA V•J N cn C • , C .; 'O 01 • Ca Cd — O 00 00 C O 00 Ca ca cl R ^ ^' .. m EA N N N 69 619 EA N . 69 69 x XI f GS GS yl W " W W ut y W a) i■■ O C_ • _ O C O C* p R M M M M M M M M • R p 0 N Z U Z U Z U Ni l 0 ,. CT - S W, el o o o ri .— en y as rn o 69 69 69 69 69 6 69 69 a1 69 69 5 V1 ■1 ,� , .n 4-. c.) C et O s x a) c a; a) Co) • o 1.. o x o U 'd •— V) o co) } y U t x o a U °) U i�l U O O W O co 0 u" � � U 0 r4) C7 " V w O v a City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM December 30,1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Garland Wilson, Director of Public Safety (Ext. 730) SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 585 -B, 1 Reading, Amending Ordinance No. 585 -A, Tree Preservation Ordinance. Action Requested: City Council consideration of Ordinance No. 585 -B, amending Ordinance No. 585 -A, Tree Preservation Ordinance on first reading. Background Information: This ordinance was originally adopted on June 15, 1993 and amended December 16, 1997. Councilmember Debra Edmondson met with Malcolm Jackson and Keith Martin on several occasions regarding current enforcement action and related tree preservation ordinance procedures. Based upon the analysis of the ordinance, several suggested changes were presented to enhance the operational procedures towards improved efficiency and effectiveness. During the development of the suggested changes, the City experienced several tree preservation issues that exemplified the areas needing modification. These ideas were presented to P &Z and to City Council for discussion. Staff subsequently conducted additional reviews with Councilmember Edmondson, in conjunction with extensive review and research with the City Attorney's office. As a result of those discussions, the original ordinance underwent a modification to its general structure in order to minimize duplicity, enhance comprehension, and better clarify specific points while maintaining the original core of the ordinance provisions. The following key points are made regarding the changes: (1) The term "remove" has been changed to the word "alter" and defined to include removal for clarification. (2) The definition for drip -line was improved to better address a proper critical root zone. (3) An owner has been defined to include the property owner or any person acting on behalf of the owner. (4) Revision in 3.3 eliminates a loop -hole in which builders improperly claimed the residence was their "homestead" and thereby exempted them from the provisions. (5) Section 6.2 (and the wording is repeated in other locations) eliminates the indiscriminate clear cutting of utility easements and allows only the removal or damage to trees required for the actual installation of the specific utility being installed. (6) Section 6.4 eliminates a potential loop -hole in which a developer could acquire agricultural property, claim an exemption to clear -cut, and then develop the property. (7) Section 7.3 expands the use of tree mitigation funds received to include use for landscape and wildlife nature preserves. (8) Wording was included to allow large undisturbed areas to be labeled on plans as such in lieu of conducting a tree survey for that area. 8E -1 Billy Campbell December 30, 1999 Page 2 Financial Considerations: Not Applicable Citizen Input/ Board Review: A draft of the ordinance was made available to developers attending a City meeting, with only one developer responding with suggestions. P &Z approved 585 -B to be forwarded to City Council. Legal Review: These changes have been forwarded to the City Attorney for legal review and comment. Alternatives: The City Council may approve the ordinance at first reading on January 4, 2000 as submitted or they may deny or recommend changes or conditions they deem appropriate. Supporting Documents: Ordinance 585 -B, Tree Preservation Ordinance Staff Recommendation: Place Ordinance 585 -B, amending Ordinance No. 585 -A, Tree Preservation Ordinance, on the January 4, 2000 City Council meeting agenda for first reading. GW/bls Approved for Submittal to City Council: • 8E -2 0ec -09 -99 05:20P 329 17471 P_ 03 utC - - 16.30 FROM PUBLIC AFFAIRS /NOISE OFC. 113.972 574 8644 PAGE 3/3 nyvv 3 YP. Fepn D a ll as /F ort Worth International Ai. },.,. Suxutirc Diroctor Imber 9,1999 Ms. Ana Creighton. Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission City of Southlake 1721 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 100 Southlake, Texas 76092 RE: Planning & Zoning Commission Agenda Item Reference No ZA -99 -109 Dear Ms Creighton: Please allow me to address an agenda item slated for the December 9, 1999 meeting of Southlake's Planning & Zoning Commission_ The agenda is to consider a site plan for Johnson Elementary School to be located on the northeast corner of North Carroll Avenue and East Highland Street, Case No. ZA -99 -109. For reasons stated below, the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board ( "DFW") does not support die proposed site plan. The subject property is situated in DFW's 65 - 75 DNL noise contour and is located on the extended runway centerline for Runway 13L/31R, approximately 4.1 statute miles from the north end of this =way. The propeity is subject to routine and regular overflights by aircraft operating to and from DFW International Airport_ If extrapolated, the proposed location is at the 72 DNL noise contour and the site's compatibility and appropriateness should be considered based on land uses at this level of noise. The Airport Board does not support the development of a school, or any other noise sensitive land uses, at this proposed site. However, in the event the City determines the project and its location are in the City's best interest, the Airport Board strongly recommends the following conditions of approval: I . An avigation easement for the property be obtained naming the DFW International Airport Board and the Cities of Dallas and Fort Worth using language to be provided by DFW. 2_ The City require mandatory building shell noise reduction be incorporated into the building design, noted on the final building plans, and verified during the building inspection process. 3. The City require a rninimutn building shell design of 40 NLR (Noise Level Reduction). Greater values would afford additional sound attenuating properties to the school. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please contact me at your convenience should you like to discuss our comments further_ Sincerely, Karen L. Robertson Manager Noise Compatibility Office 1 1- 1-) 9 1999 cc: Dr. Ted Gillum. Mary Emma Karam Adfniniotratisc Offices * 3200 Fact Aortic/4 Drn••e s Pce OM= Drawer 619tZS * DPW Airport Ilan. 75261 -9112S r 972/5744030 1b-5 Dec -09 -99 05:13P 329 1747+ P.02 DEC 09 '99 11:17 FP F1- TX ADO ASw -650 8172222. TO 93'91747 P.02'03 0 IjSDepWAnent SoYi' . r Aes,pn For, wont, Tt:ras 76193.0000 of 1Ponsoceforion Arkafiiss towPan3 . t r Ne* Menco_ Onemma Fedal I ., Ton TQaas Adminfiffrafion December 9, 1999 City of Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission 1721 E. Southlake Blvd. Suite 100 Southlake, TX 76092 Dear Planning and Zoning Commission: It has come to our attention the City of Southlake is currently considering rezoning and site plans for two schools proposed by the Carroll Independent School District (ISD). The specific actions are being considered at the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting scheduled for December 9, 1999 and are as follows: Site Plan for Johnson Elementary School (ZA 99 - 109) proposed for the Northeast corner of the intersection of North Carroll Avenue and East Highland Sheet. Rezoning and site plan for Carroll ISD Middle/Intermediate School (ZA 99 - 120) proposed for the west side of South Kimball Avenue approximately 900 - feet south of East Southlake Boulevard (F_M. 1709). The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) does not attempt to influence local land use decisions. We do, however, want to take this opportunity to make sure you are aware of the fact that the proposed school sites are directly on the extended centerline of Runway 13R/31L at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Specifically, the proposed Carroll ISD Middle/Intermediate School is approximately 2.5 miles from the Runway 13R threshold, while the proposed Johnson Elementary School is approximately 4 miles from the Runway 13R threshold. Both school sites will experience routine and regular aircraft overflights by all Types of aircraft and will be subject to aircraft noise on a regular basis. Review of DFW Airport noise contours as stipulated in the 1988 settlement agreement, and as used by the City of Southlake, the Middle/lntetmediate School is located adjacent to the 75 DNL. noise contour, while the Johnson Elementary School is located in approximately the 72 DNL noise contour. Please note that, per FAA Part 150 recommended land use compatibility guideline (as duplicated in the City's zoning ordinance) the 75 DNL is the maximum exterior noise that is recommended to be mitigated for a tolerable interior noise environment. COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE ---OUR COMMITMENT TO YOU I [ == RECD DEC 09 1999 Dec -09 -99 05:13P 329 1747.- P_03 DEC 09 ' 99 14=15 FR FAA T;: RN A5U - 550 617E2253 TO 9329173 P. ©3/03 2 The FAA recommends that communities consider aircraft noise impacts when making land use decisions. If communities determine that residential or school uses must be allowed in areas impacted by aircraft noise 65 DNL or greater, measures should be incorporated into the building structures to achieve minimum outdoor to indoor noise level reduction. In both cases, a minimum of 35 dB NLR should be achieved in all structures at both proposed school locations Greater noise level reduction values are encouraged. Please be aware that exterior noise levels will not be affected by the noise level reduction, and that aircraft noise will be relatively loud in outdoor areas. We encourage you to thoughtfully consider the proposed locations for the schools aad the aircraft noise impacts that may be experienced at the sites. If your ultimate decision is to approve the rezoning and site plans, we would encourage you to require an outdoor to indoor noise level reduction to enhance the teaching/learning environment inside the buildings. Sincerely, Otis T. Welch Manager, Texas Airports Development Office cc: Ms. Karen Robertson, Manager Noise Compatibility Office DFW International Airport P.O. Drawer 619428 DFW Airport, TX 75261 - 9478 COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE —OUR COMMITMENT TO YOU i" TOTAL PAGE.03 .4 / (. I� City of Southlake, Texas M EMORANDUM December 30, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services (ext. 757) SUBJECT: Revision to the subdivision regulations regarding park dedication requirements Action Requested: City Council direction on proposed amendments to the park dedication requirements and Section VII of Subdivision Ordinance No. 483. Background Information: In September of 1999, Parks and Recreation Board member Bill Kemp proposed conceptual amendments to the City's park dedication requirements. At their September 13, 1999 meeting, the Parks and Recreation Board discussed the initial proposal, and requested staff to research the issues and bring forth changes for their consideration as quickly as possible. City staff put together a conceptual draft of potential changes to Section VII of the Subdivision Ordinance and placed the item for consideration on the November 8, 1999 Parks and Recreation Board meeting agenda. The Parks and Recreation Board reviewed the following conceptual revisions to Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, and the attached draft reflects comments agreed upon by the Board. Staff's summary of these changes is below. (Please see attached memo from member Bill Kemp stating his summary of the issues the Park Board is trying to address): • Section 7.03: The proposed changes to these Sections include the development and implementation of a "Land Improvement Factor." This tool would provide for a cash requirement in excess of the land dedication requirements currently in place. The cash requirement in theory applies towards funding improvements to undeveloped parkland. The formula is explained in the latter half of each section (Sections 7.03 and 7.05, A., (1)). Basically it would require an additional dedication per acre equal to the cost of improving an acre of land to park standards. • Section 7.05: The proposed change in this Section revises the language of the Ordinance to more clearly define the City's authority in determining the park dedication requirements for a particular development. • Section 7.05, A., (1): The changes to this section reiterates the requirement of a Land Improvement Factor as noted in Section 7.03. 1 6.1 • Billy Campbell, City Manager December 3, 1999 Page 2 • Section 7.05, B., (1): The proposed change in this Section revises the language to more clearly define the City's authority to require a variety of park dedication satisfaction that it deems most acceptable to a particular development. • Section 7.06: The proposed change to this Section is to reduce the amount of credit for private park, recreation, or open space amenities. The rationale for this change is that the current level of fifty percent (50 %) credit has resulted in too many private parks in the City. The draft reduced the amount to a twenty five percent (25 %) credit for such facilities, but recognizes that the final determined percentage may be adjusted as desired. • Section 7.07, A., (1) and (2): The proposed changes revise procedural language, intending to involve the Parks and Recreation Board earlier in the development review process. The proposed change calls for the Parks and Recreation Board to review a proposed development at the time of the Site Plan or when an application for a preliminary plat is submitted. The intent of the earlier involvement of the Parks and Recreation Board is to increase the amount of City control over the park dedication process. This language also explicitly states the city has control over both the size and location of specific park dedications. • Section 7.07, A, adding an item (3): This change would establish that the City shall reimburse the developer for any dedications of additional or improvements above the requirements. This is an implementation tool intended to allow the city to capture park land of sufficient size and location during the development review process which may not be possible under straight dedication procedures. • Section 7.07, B, (1): The proposed change in this Section revises the language to more clearly define the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Board in determining alternatives to parkland dedication. The Parks and Recreation Board reviewed and unanimously approved the intent of these changes. The current draft reflects clarifications of certain language (by member Bill Kemp) since this was discussed at the Park Board (his memorandum is attached). Financial Considerations: The concepts of the Land Improvement Factor and reimbursing developers for donations in excess of the park dedication requirements have financial ramifications for the City. At this time, the level of the impact is not determined. The other changes clarify the development review process and provide no financial considerations. L: \City Manager Office \City Docs \ORD\ FINAL \SUBDIV\483_1_memo_cc(a).doc ��� Billy Campbell, City Manager December 3, 1999 Page 3 Citizen Input/ Board Review: The Parks and Recreation Board approved the proposed concepts at their November 8, 1999 meeting on Regular agenda (8 -0). Legal Review: The draft presented to the Parks and Recreation Board was structured as a conceptual document; thus implementing the proposed changes would necessitate a review of the final draft by the City Attorney to address potential legal issues. A City Attorney was present at the November 8, 1999 Parks and Recreation Board meeting to provide input. Alternatives: Provide input towards the discussion as desired. Supporting Documents: Supporting documents include the following items: • Memo from Bill Kemp summarizing the Park Board's intent in making changes to Section VII of the Subdivision Ordinance. • Copy of draft ( #2a) amendments to Section VII, Park Dedication Requirements, of Subdivision Ordinance No. 483. • Comparison of Park Dedication Fees from selected cities. Staff Recommendation: Place as an item on the January 4, 2000, City Council agenda to discuss the proposed amendments to the park dedication requirements and Section VII of Subdivision Ordinance No. 483. 1 L: \City Manager Office \City Docs \ORD\ FINAL \SUBDIV\483_1_memo_cc(a).doc • Proposed Amendments to Subdivision Ordinance Re: Park Dedication Since its appointment in May, the current Park Board has encountered several instances in which park dedications arguably have not served the long -range interests of Southlake. The Park Board was handicapped in dealing with these issues by the language of the existing Southlake ordinances. While some of these issues should be addressed during the revision of the Master Plan, there are certain small modifications that could be made to the subdivision ordinance that would address some of the issues we have faced. We therefore propose that the attached amendments be made to the subdivision ordinance as soon as possible. These amendments relate to park land acquisition and park improvements. Comments regarding the reasons for the proposals are set forth within the attachment. The underlying issues are discussed below. Park Dedication Requirements. Under the present ordinance, the developer has the choice of dedicating the land that it selects, or of paying a cash amount in lieu of dedication. This may result in the developer making the election that is less expensive without regard to Southlake's true park needs. This approach makes it very difficult for Southlake to pick the best sites for parks and assure that those sites ultimately become parks. In Plano and Flower Mound, the city retains much more control over park dedication. In Plano the city advises the developer what park land, if any, it will require be dedicated. The city decides whether land will be dedicated, what land will be dedicated, and whether a fee in lieu of dedication will be required. Selection of Park Sites. The present system does not identify where future parks will be located, but rather calls for certain acreage per district. Long range planning is essential if we are to create a park and trail system that complements Southlake. We should undertake to identify the precise locations were parks might be located. Future developments may result in changes to this plan, but without planning we will end up with a haphazard park system that does not meet the needs of our residents. Park Fee Fund. Southlake apparently relies on two sources of funds to acquire parkland — sales tax revenues and park dedication fees. In the past year, park dedication fees were only about $100,000. There does not appear to be guidance regarding the uses of these two sources of funds. The Plano ordinance provides that "regional parks" shall be funded .through a capital improvements plan, whereas "neighborhood and linear parks" shall be paid for with park dedication fees. For this system to function, the park dedication fees must to adequate to fund the neighborhood and linear parks that will benefit the residents associated with new development. Theoretically the park fee fund should be maintained at a constant level, regardless of the level of current development. Since neighborhood parks are primarily for the benefit of nearby residents, the park fees should be adequate to acquire the needed parkland and to fund the associated improvements. Bill Kemp November 1999 I ;••; 4. Q _Ct i ° o Itil ° a z cr1 o O U 3 \ '' ,� e .m ,"' . . -` . OS�3j� Y. � # i "q / I m , w g i — . y ..a .War...-- �Mna.n���r �M ^'. ,._�v.�•vw +r r,.. w�.r ...�- ..- ,.«rw. �.. wry --, • 11 • Q r °'� o U z �,� w o z {� te a ` q r r 111 n; ? "� , ^ T I. N t w M1 _ µ a,q s 0 A AN 1 i i * � r - '"_ s 1 ,4 1 1 A ' . ... ... ...,,,..._. :,,. 9 } 11 p .. • y P l• w I n� 1. h � ■ z +.1) C/D I i' illtli ° O 1 .(T n -- W IC.) -,- z ct ' ,, ,.d ,ANDf tl�� f , ..„‘,1.., ,,, :. • I tl , ,........,.......0....,.....„;01:„,,,, 74-.:1;:sk,,,,-,.: II . • Ir • . if City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM December 30, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator / Acting Planning Director, ext. 743 SUBJECT: Discussion Item: Parkwood Drive Action Requested: Discussion of whether or not to abandon Parkwood Drive right -of -way as requested by neighboring property owners during the public forum on October 5, 1999. Background Information: The alignment of this roadway began in 1995 as part of a three -way land negotiation with Timarron, Dr. Richards, and the City. The City desired to purchase approximately 15 acres and Timarron desired to enlarge their tract at the southwest corner of Byron Nelson Parkway (BNP) and FM 1709. Dr. Richard's resulting ownership was shifted west with the understanding that there would be a loop road connecting back to BNP. All this was accomplished and the city purchased the property. As a result, the Municipal Campus Concept `A' was prepared (see attached). Since April 18, 1996 when preliminary plats for both the municipal complex and Timarron, Phase V (later named Northwood, Phase Two) were approved, Street `A' (later platted as Parkwood Drive) has been shown as a proposed 60 -foot R.O.W. extending from F.M. 1709 to Byron Nelson Parkway. A Site Plan was approved October 6, 1998 for French Square Office Complex, located on the west side of Parkwood Drive and north of Timarron Addition, Northwood Park, Phase Two. Driveway access was approved and restricted to Parkwood Drive only. A condition of the plan approval was that Parkwood Drive be constructed prior to issuance of a building permit. Please see attached chronologies prepared by Planning Assistant Tara Brooks. A complete history is available in the Planning Department if you need additional information. N: \COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT\WP - FILES \ZBA \ PENDING \PARKWOOD DRIVE MEMO.DOC City of Southlake, Texas Billy Campbell, City Manager Parkwood Drive December 30, 1999 Page Two Legal Reviews: The city attorney's office has reviewed the matter and will discuss their findings with Council during the posted executive session at the January 4, 2000 meeting. Financial Considerations: None applicable. Alternatives: Following are some options available on this issue: a) Allow the road to continue as originally proposed. b) Abandon a 400' segment of the roadway, in effect creating a cul -de -sac just south of the northernmost proposed drive (approx. 350') for the French Square Office Complex development. This would require the Senior Center to have a driveway to the existing roadway or to the new cul -de -sac. c) Abandon the entire roadway maintaining a drive access to the south. Supporting Documents: Vicinity Map; Parkwood Drive Chronology; History of Developments surrounding Parkwood Drive (i.e., French Square Office Complex, Senior Activity Center / City of Southlake Municipal Complex, and Timarron Addition, Phase V (known as Northwood Park, Phase Two Addition); Transcript of Public Forum on October 5, 1999; Letter from Stephen and Rebecca Petty; 613 Northwood Trail; Copy of Municipal Campus Concept `A' Copies of approved plans for French Square Office Complex and Senior Activity Center and final plats of and the Municipal Complex and Northwood Park, Phase Two. N: \COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT\WP- FILES \ZBA \PENDING \PARKWOOD DRIVE MEMO.DOC II11'2 •o : o �Z ., Q I Q N x ralt cr O N j n � , _ Ilk ce ! ••• cle-4 �+ 4 111.1111 'o ON0PiinIO x Q ON HSII w w co a V S % - V� C1 I I y o I c 1 N Q O �� N 0 ' cry N I 1 °O �i9 • ~^ 6' �+ n I 1 VIIIIMI I ` I n � '''.(4' J ... ^ 8 C' I ! N ° � _ �O - 1 N3 �� •' N Q I o a %...--k 1....) m' O '' O =j I Ia • I N U U ��� NI • VI n ibt.i.z., � � nr < ~ N w a a 13 000M)D1Vd Y n a ! = ! x . N•,,,,,,, 6 ce< I Z z I we H N .. v !L O 1 x , � a I gam o ® tY,o a N v I � N I CC14 o JR ! > ¢ I R HS 000MH, aom "' R 000•asn I I a C\2 ,T, 11 2 0 /1 ^ N CL imp! PARX3900D DR C\2 "! N CI. N a fiall 1 I l N Q J.3 000 dON L wr L. II '1 I R e R x N I ! lml.1 V MV 1.0 ° N E r 2 p O �, O • • 1E. n I 1 11131111 fel �.1 I LL N O v 3 (Y.N l i i ° III CI 0OKILLa0N V ... i R ■ I o o l l m I �° 7T F a U Ii i g Y- N I m U q. -, .., % _7 p NI N n C1) 0 1 �0? R • o U Qom': I 1 N a a a s i ce' Ca 2 0 1 I ^. ! "' a II 1 ) d � U) ! ) N ! °° N ! O _ a X11 I � N 1 N c ! - ~O �, I t\ I. ! y N v ,S, I' ! w 7! a m ce al .! I R! �a aUQ R R • cv K. ir G =1 , ... N ! E. S I o v I I V1 U ° a m i i < 0 c _ , a ec, ! _ 0 o m i ..l W ... 0 O • 4 11 k g ! N o R a Q E! I n ■ l. cV ec U U W I .0, .« «c • � I I _ 2IO 3DIId VI ,. 0 w , c. W CA ti .14 °n a 0 1 W w 2 es 9 ' r � O % V� ' N a ` 11 -3 _ �! �� M a W i T z ° 1 ' �\ \ W N � , Parkwood Drive Chronology April 18, 1996- Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA96 -039, Preliminary Plat for City of Southlake Municipal Complex subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1, dated April 12, 1996 that includes item 7a. "Show the extension of street `A' as 50' R.O.W. from the south to the interior northwest corner of the site and a 60' R.O.W. from said corner to F.M. 1709...." Todd Janssen, Carter & Burgess agreed to the above comment at the meeting. No one spoke during the public hearing. April 18, 1996 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA96 -037, Development Plan for Timarron, Phase V. Approved Development Plan shows the extension of Street "A" north to Southlake Boulevard. No comments in regards to this road were made during the public hearing. April 18, 1996 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA96 -038, Preliminary Plat for Timarron, Phase 5, showing extension of Street "A" north to Southlake Boulevard. No one spoke during the public hearing. May 7, 1996 — City Council approved ZA96 -037 Development Plan for Timarron, Phase V. Approved Development Plan shows the extension of Street "A" north to Southlake Boulevard. No comments in regards to this road were made during the public hearing. ** *Note: Twenty-six (26) notices were sent on Case No. 96 -037. Five(5) responses were received in favor. * ** May 7, 1996 — City Council approved ZA96 -038, Preliminary Plat for Timarron, Phase 5, showing extension of Street "A" north to Southlake Boulevard. No one spoke during the public hearing. * * * Note: Twenty-six (26) notices were sent on Case No. 96 -038. Five(5) responses were received in favor. * * * May 7, 1996 — City Council approved, on consent, ZA96 -039, Preliminary Plat for City of Southlake Municipal Complex showing the extension of Street `A'. ***Note: Four (4) notices were sent on Case No. ZA96 -039. One (1) response was received, in favor. * * * September 2, 1997- David Ford wrote a letter to Greg Last stating, "I propose the the [sic] City agree to transfer the previously described parcel to me at no cost. In return, I will construct the proposed street from the most southerly driveway of my project... to the termination of Parkwood Drive, at Northwood Trail in the Timarron Addition, Phase 5." Mr. Ford is referring to Lot 2 of the City of Southlake Municipal Complex. According to the 1999 Tax Rolls this property is owned by the City of Southlake. Mr. Ford did agree to build the road during the October 9, 1997 P &Z meeting and the February 3, 1998 City Council meetings. See below. September 4, 1997 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved, on consent, ZA97 -120, Final Plat for City of Southlake Municipal Complex. Approved Final Plat shows extension of Parkwood Drive. Plat was filed September 25, 1998. September 18, 1997 - Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA97 -118, Rezoning and Concept Plan for the Senior Center showing Future R.O.W. and "Future pavement (By Others)." No one spoke during the public hearing. October 9, 1997 - Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA97 -130, Rezoning and Concept Plan for Southlake Garden Offices subject to ... "applicant's commitment to remove the existing driveway from Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) and extending the proposed street down to the existing residential pavement." During the meeting Joe Potthoff and David Ford stated that they will "have access from a proposed road in which he intends to build. He stated that the proposed road is on City-owned property and will also service the City -owned property to the east." Also "Chairman Wright asked Mr. Ford if he would agree to build the street back to the Timarron residential street, and Mr. Ford agreed." No one spoke during the public hearing. October 21, 1997 - City Council approved ZA97 -118 Rezoning and Concept Plan for the Senior Center showing Future R.O.W. and "Future pavement (By Others)." No one spoke during the public hearing. 1 `* *Note.. Seven (7) notices were sent on Case No. ZA97 -118. No responses were received.*** IIA February 3, 1998 — City Council approved ZA97 -130 Rezoning and Concept Plan for Southlake Garden Offices subject to Concept Plan Review Summary No. 5 that states "The applicant will be required to construct the proposed roadway if construction is intended prior to the City fully developing the site to the east. The applicant should also coordinate grading and fill with the properties to the east in order to support the street profile of the proposed roadway." Joe Potthoff stated that they "submitted a traffic study which shows there is no significant impact on the level of service on F.M. 1709 or any of the nearby intersections, partly because they eliminated the drive access onto F.M. 1709. All access to the property will be from the proposed extension from Byron Nelson Parkway and connect to the neighborhood to the south. They have committed to build the proposed extension in its entirety (to where it stops today) on the eastern line of the property as well as the eastern line of the property owned by the City. He stated he feels the site will circulate very well with the additions." Councilmember Harris stated that "he appreciates them not putting any traffic onto F.M. 1709, but said `when those folks to leave in the afternoon and want to get back onto F.M. 1709, they will taken (sic) the street around by Rockenbaugh Elementary School and past our senior center with a lot of extra traffic by the school. — No one spoke during the public hearing. ** *Note: Four (4) notices were sent on Case ZA97 -130. One (1) response was received in favor.*** August 6, 1998 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA98 -058, Site Plan for French Square Office Complex showing Parkwood Drive. No one spoke during the public hearing. August 6, 1998 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA98 -083, Plat Showing of Lots 12, 13, and 14, O.W. Knight No. 899 Addition subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1 which states, "the proposed street (Parkwood Drive) must be constructed prior to the issuance of any building permits on any of the proposed lots." No one spoke during the public hearing. September 25, 1998 — Final Plat for City of Southlake Municipal Complex was filed in Cabinet A, Slide 4518. October 6, 1998 — City Council approved ZA98 -058, Site Plan for French Square Office Complex subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 3 that states 10. "This street must be constructed prior to issuance of a building permit." Approved Site Plan shows Parkwood Drive. * * *Note: Five (5) notices were sent on ZA98 -058. No responses were received.*** October 6, 1998 — City Council approved ZA98 -083, Plat Showing of Lots 12, 13, and 14, O.W. Knight No. 899 Addition which shows Parkwood Drive. ** *Note: Five (5) notices were sent on ZA98 -083. No responses were received. * ** N: \Community Development \WP - FILES \PROJECTS \Parkwood Drive.doc I1P-5 History of Developments around Parkwood Drive French Square Office Complex/ Lots 12, 13, and 14, O.W. Knight No. 899 Addition October 9, 1997 - Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA97 -130, Rezoning and Concept Plan for Southlake Garden Offices subject to ... "applicant's commitment to remove the existing driveway from Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) and extending the proposed street down to the existing residential pavement." During the meeting Joe Potthoff and David Ford stated that they will "have access from a proposed road in which he intends to build. He stated that the proposed road is on City -owned property and will also service the City-owned property to the east." Also "Chairman Wright asked Mr. Ford if he would agree to build the street back to the Timarron residential street, and Mr. Ford agreed." February 3, 1998 — City Council approved ZA97 -130 Rezoning and Concept Plan for Southlake Garden Offices subject to Concept Plan Review Summary No. 5 that states "The applicant will be required to construct the proposed roadway if construction is intended prior to the City fully developing the site to the east. The applicant should also coordinate grading and fill with the properties to the east in order to support the street profile of the proposed roadway." Joe Potthoff stated that they "submitted a traffic study which shows there is no significant impact on the level of service on F.M. 1709 or any of the nearby intersections, partly because they eliminated the drive access onto F.M. 1709. All access to the property will be from the proposed extension from Byron Nelson Parkway and connect to the neighborhood to the south. They have committed to build the proposed extension in its entirety (to where it stops today) on the eastern line of the property as well as the eastern line of the property owned by the City. He stated he feels the site will circulate very well with the additions." Councilmember Harris stated that "he appreciates them not putting any traffic onto F.M. 1709, but said `when those folks to leave in the afternoon and want to get back onto F.M. 1709, they will taken (sic) the street around by Rockenbaugh Elementary School and past our senior center with a lot of extra traffic by the school. "' No one spoke during the public hearing. ** *Note: Four (4) notices were sent on Case ZA97 -130. One (1) response was received in favor.*** August 6, 1998 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA98 -058, Site Plan for French Square Office Complex showing Parkwood Drive. No one spoke during the public hearing. August 6, 1998 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA98 -083, Plat Showing of Lots 12, 13, and 14, O.W. Knight No. 899 Addition subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1 which states, "the proposed street (Parkwood Drive) must be constructed prior to the issuance of any building permits on any of the proposed lots." No one spoke during the public hearing. October 6, 1998 — City Council approved ZA98 -058, Site Plan for French Square Office Complex subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 3 that states 10. "This street must be constructed prior to issuance of a building permit." Approved Site Plan shows Parkwood Drive. ** *Note: Five (5) notices were sent on ZA98 -058. No responses were received. * ** October 6, 1998 — City Council approved ZA98 -083, Plat Showing of Lots 12, 13, and 14, O.W. Knight No. 899 Addition which shows Parkwood Drive. ***Note: Five (5) notices were sent on ZA98 -083. No responses were received*** A developer's agreement has not been done for French Square Office Complex. The Final Plat for French Square Office Complex has not been filed. I 1 A- to Senior Activity Center/ City of Southlake Municipal Complex April 18, 1996- Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA96 -039, Preliminary Plat for City of Southlake Municipal Complex subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1, dated April 12, 1996 that includes item 7a. "Show the extension of street `A' as 50' R.O.W. from the south to the interior northwest comer of the site and a 60' R.O.W. from said corner to F.M. 1709...." Todd Janssen, Carter & Burgess agreed to the above comment at the meeting. No one spoke during the public hearing. May 7, 1996 — City Council approved, on consent, ZA96 -039, Preliminary Plat for City of Southlake Municipal Complex showing the extension of Street `A'. ** *Note: Four (4) notices were sent on Case No. ZA96 -039. One (1) response was received, in favor. * ** September 4, 1997 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved, on consent, ZA97 -120, Final Plat for City of Southlake Municipal Complex. Approved Final Plat shows extension of Parkwood Drive. Plat was filed September 25, 1998. September 18, 1997 - Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA97 -118, Rezoning and Concept Plan for the Senior Center showing Future R.O.W. and "Future pavement (By Others)." No one spoke during the public hearing. October 21, 1997 - City Council approved ZA97 -118 Rezoning and Concept Plan for the Senior Center showing Future R.O.W. and "Future pavement (By Others)." No one spoke during the public hearing. ***Note: Seven (7) notices were sent on Case No. ZA97 -118. No responses were received.*** September 25, 1998 — Final Plat for City of Southlake Municipal Complex was filed in Cabinet A, Slide 4518. Timarron Addition, Phase V April 18, 1996 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA96 -037, Development Plan for Timarron, Phase V. Approved Development Plan shows the extension of Street "A" north to Southlake Boulevard. No comments in regards to this road were made during the public hearing. April 18, 1996 — Planning and Zoning Commission approved ZA96 -038, Preliminary Plat for Timarron, Phase 5, showing extension of Street "A" north to Southlake Boulevard. No one spoke during the public hearing. May 7, 1996 — City Council approved ZA96 -037 Development Plan for Timarron, Phase V. Approved Development Plan shows the extension of Street "A" north to Southlake Boulevard. No comments in regards to this road were made during the public hearing. ***Note: Twenty-six (26) notices were sent on Case No. 96 -037. Five(5) responses were received in favor.*** May 7, 1996 — City Council approved ZA96 -038, Preliminary Plat for Timarron, Phase 5, showing extension of Street "A" north to Southlake Boulevard. No one spoke during the public hearing. * * * Note: Twenty-six (26) notices were sent on Case No. 96 -038. Five (5) responses were received*** January 27, 1997 — Planning and Zoning approved ZA96 -166, Final Plat, Timarron Addition, Village I, West. April 16, 1997 — Final Plat for Timarron Addition, Northwood Park Phase One was filed in Cabinet A, Slide 3896. August 21, 1997 — Planning and Zoning approved ZA94 -106, Final Plat Northwood Park, Ph. II November 21, 1997- Final Plat for Timarron Addition, Northwood Park, Phase Two was filed in Cabinet A, Slide 3454. J: \Community Development \WP - FILES \PROJECTS \Parkwood Drive.doc 11A -7 October 5, 1999 City Council Meeting re: Parkwood Issue mentioned during Public Forum Mayor: Let me just briefly respond.... obviously our goal tonight, by your presence, would be to put this on a future agenda - -- to discuss it. Then I'm sure that's what you all would like to see. That's about all we can accomplish tonight. We can talk about it for a couple of hours if you want to, but that would be what we would. But if we win, if you win, the best thing to do is to get this put on the agenda to discuss. And I think in the meantime, maybe you could get some more details because I don't know what aroused this — perhaps it's another agenda item that's on tonight. Response from audience: It was the sign that went up to say "Future Through Street." Mayor: It may have just popped up, but just to clarify it a little bit for you, I know that the City had some contractual obligation prior to any of us being on the council - -- like 1995 when this property was purchased by the City that addresses that roadway. So it wasn't platted last August. It might have been platted in 1995 or 96, but it's been platted a long time. That doesn't mean it will have to happen, but what..... [citizen interrupted with comments that road was not disclosed to any of the property owner by their builders]. I understand. All I'm saying to you is if yall want to speak, there are several of you signed up to speak and you are welcomed to speak. I would ask you not to repeat your neighbor's - -- if you have something new to add, you're certainly welcomed to come speak, but the goal is to get this on a future agenda. Councilmember Kendall: Then why don't we go ahead and do that Rick? Let's just go ahead and put it on a future agenda. Edmondson: I'm in agreement with that. And I'd also like to ask staff to put together a packet of information and history for the Council. Mayor: Okay. Well, I'd like to at least read through these names and give. I'Il first read the name of the nice people who are here but said they do not wish to speak just so we have them in our record...... [announced names] Mayor: ..... Now, any of you that want to speak, we'd be glad to hear you, but no matter how hard you plead, all we can do is put this on a future agenda - -- that's the purpose of Public Forum - -- for us to come up with new items..... and we will get this on a future agenda for you. Resident: You say if it goes back on the agenda - -- can you tell us the process and how will we find out and how can we be involved again. Mayor: Initially, when the property was purchased by the City, it was purchased to place a city hall on that property. There were some contractual obligations about the roads. This particular road that is in contention at this point. And, since the city hall is not going to be built there, then there may be some opportunity for us to re- address that situation. Perhaps all we need is a driveway that would just go into the new development, because you wouldn't what the traffic going all the way around to get there anyway. But its working fine for the senior center — to go around the back..... So we may not any longer need a road there, if we're not obligated to put it there. And I know in the developer's agreement with the fellow whose suppose to building the office buildings there, he's actually putting the road in at his expense. Now. [citizen interrupted with comments about putting road to end at cul -de -sac at office building] I think we are agreeing with that. That's what I just said, though I didn't say it quite as distinctive. Citizen asked how will the neighborhood know when item goes on agenda. Shana: If you can designate someone as a representative or laision from your neighborhood, we will send you our City Manager's Report which includes the agendas for every meeting and you will be able to watch that so you'll know. Kendall: Or you can call any councilmember and we'll definitely tell you what's going on. Mayor: Anyone else like to speak at Public Forum. I think it is the consensus of the council for staff to get this on the agenda at an appropriate time. It may take a couple of weeks before you can get the information submitted to the citizens and to us. But I would say no later than the first meeting in November. Would that be.. If you call the City Secretary's Office — any one of you — she's the one who types the agenda. This is Sandy LeGrand, 481 -5581, ext. 704. Look it up on the website. M: \WP- FILES\MEMOS \October 5.doc IRO Oct -04 -99 08:52A P.O1 September 28 1999 L I Stephan and Rebecca Petty OFFICE OF CITY SECRETARY N)'*) 613 Northwood Trail Southlake, Texas 76092 COPY Mayor Rick Stacy 6.1Z 1114 ' t ,_) City Council Members Mr , y{ -uiuc ` City of Southlake ,t _��, 1725 E. Southlake Boulevard 4111.4iir (I,� nu�>�et� i Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Mayor Stacy and City Council Members, We recently noticed the new "Future Thru Street" sign on Parkwood Drive We were surprised to hear that the City of Southlake intends to extend Parkwood Drive to connect with Southtake Boulevard. We were shocked to hear the extension was for the expressed purpose of alleviating traffic congestion to the future medical office on Southlake Boulevard. Although alleviating traffic congestion on Southlake Boulevard is a worthy goal, it is ludicrous to do so by routing traffic through a quiet neighborhood and into an elementary school zone. In fact, the traffic will be routed to the only school crosswalk on Byron Nelson Parkway serving the numerous children in Northwood Park In addition to the traffic from the proposed new businesses, the Parkwood Drive extension will become a shortcut for those wanting to avoid the traffic Tight at the corner of Southlake Boulevard and Byron Nelson Parkway This could increase the traffic tenfold over that generated by the new businesses. We have driven into every business parking lot with access from Southlake Boulevard and can not find another that has a second entrance through a neighborhood such as is proposed for Parkwood Drive. Northwood Park is a small, quiet neighborhood of fewer than 60 homes. We paid a premium for our Tots because of its location end the safety a low traffic neighborhood offers our children. If the "Future Thru Street" sign 'had been in place when we chose our lot, we would have second thoughts about building in Northwood Park. it is unconscionable to wait until the last two homes are under construction and then surprise the neighborhood with a potentially high traffic through street. We respectfully ask you to reconsider the need for this through street. If a second access is determined by the city to be a necessity, perhaps it could at least be routed to an arterial street (Byron Nelson) instead of a residential one. Surely you will agree that the everyday safety of the permanent residents of Northwood Park is more important than the occasional convenience of the patrons of the proposed businesses. Sincerely, 44 ' 4— 'c-- frer" (le( ,---)41? Stephan and Rebecca Petty REGD 0 C ti : 1 999 I1fl -10 ON V _.,,,:,„ or 3 • , "— ), Yo- . ., ti{ fl';h / , . A . S ° ' ! , 7 r : ° ,y A �,9 ® ' - ,Y - m 4,,f �.� j/ � II , pp I E , � � ° 4: 1 u ( i . r .: eb �YYYii8' A4"ia So-., 6 `5. �' � a S s ''' `vi \ 1 4 ;M� Y f 4 � . n , w� V., r � / @ N _ ', $b . Y 0 p l! - _.. — 3 I i I I i` ' �� °�' .� �;' vat � i r t � `ti �) z" ` C1 ,, 1 Itr' a s a u i1 N R � t, �t t ? °fi e l a ' 1 ?r t .1 ',/e,"0. s +` „ u 1 , 41 4 %. P ' a ' ,s w � i I z "Y ilb . W, \ { ate^'' r � L c:� I k-- �a " w w t X9 9 �'� 1 -� � I — — ( 11 - ' 7 ,$ 4 o-, °' ..a.. .0ti r l r W„ /, s .. 7 cm) # L e ta, ai ' 'w^' , E,, ���� " it — _ i e `_ \- � _ - r F ` rot B1`z e ,, A,: 1 I L i ) I / 7— ' — ---' ' E 4) w I i I ! I —_ ( - - _ � I N 1 'v 004 c y , i O 1 cos) I1 k'' - SVX3.L • 3xtl'IH.L$ OS 9 f • ,.,+ 6e9 — V • Jl3A2Il1S .LH0I1.I)1 -/ ' ' O BZ • — 1 :5: ..� IC u \ - • - v I Cb I'e 9 4 4 ^ t;_____ wraw.m - aan .,owa Y X3 307330 $ ° 1 .• Y e 1 I. • Q y °". j X3 auvna5 H0t33233 2. b f ' L p .5 p aoa - - omaorwaagwza --- -_ r... � - = JL�aea3n� '� 'I I tsar........, sm. a." 14 ti 8 S Si 1 8 9 X Ilt - , II ., , , I re . • ., . .„,,4,,,.„,_____,___ 11 •-.'-': i 0') y. • 1 ▪ d ECCCI;C, �C' 4 C. JIM i �' q • �E�� � p C . 0 + ouw. x 0 5 It 1 } RA ii 0 r l I 1 I M , ... M ''''' '. I ..4 ' I let a 1 I d fp w �— ! Hli0::F 1 ill !.'.i 1 1 , 4,.- 1 I : .4 i E P 5 1 i i: ; :! ) ' ... " . .1 In , � �,p i :i i ILFLZJ .- ,1 ! (t; ai 1i �119 00 i t ( t r .. T " - r'e 1 I � 1 �� ^ - ,E .1 1 i t ; 1 i� l .em.� ii I "1 ,i '� - �� . °e 1d C� 1 • i iS� 91 }} + i I a I 1 �� , 3g� C 1 ~_, ' _ I r 2 . : 1I a�Rip _ .. I i i i ii I Rl .. • 3 . i 1 1, 1., n t iitl EO t :g . i 11 dd _ : ii 9 1 I ..1' ,' ▪ � F� ,l ,, is I I 1 ill " z ., 1 t / V 1 1 iiiii 11 s} i 1 tl� q , l '4 c 4` 41 r }I III; { 411 in 1 I III g I l :i � : I t, + \ 2e � 41' i ! � 1 ?I i el l ei • IL " A 1 _ I. .' w , n a..as.aas . \ \'` f yp.4 1 lE vl rhn ` \ \ /`• 6 7 7-,,-----.- W 0 2 ill 1 ,,.f .v.. r'1 Q 1 F ti s I ' i — I i I of ��_' "c: f L �I ; I i I 4..,15 i .., 0 `^ z l n F CO a $ 0 Z R ,�.' I GO 1iR -12 �L{ a I c t 4 b^ x - m F :. `� o �� L 7 • r _- 3 ' a x °'„ Y §i r ' g- e r C Z s d ¢ ,� s ° � �� , .. .. ,• 483 � °° °E 1J _ . .; _ .: .1'DAi °' x Y 1E ."a - Li. � ir 16 4 • °.eai q, r - - W aT a 1 g „3 =e 4] g o'1 z y 4'T - _i / ,,,.f s, )10.0 ;a < $ s s a x . g g $ s 3 !t1 ° yg - / y � ; .. _� n g a ga $ R g $ a o 0 0 ,:... irli 5,6 1 - /lerr ' Lar ' RA '.10 54 ..4 e; X: - ; f °/ : :i, 9 - '3 : i k •' i 3L a k N 4. _ s a < > > '� W a8x g ;i� gib g x ag a b x ag$ x _ �5� B x bW uiW " i 0 ,- :Go f " , qN Wo uWW Xis 3 X.: a Ff ` a o i$ � q {�q 5• u „, �� `x`.ffm 4%, Yom° < Y *E o ; m L r w rl am tl x d g - 5'4'.:. ao 'Ery = x C' K E 01: ,� a `6 SR ._ amp = ...or °i l' iY�' W 0' .13 . : : 5r` ,AY z a :, G∎2 r lNw,vs sN t o q)n <pm NO14.00 mz.,,,m -mo "3 `s E F F F4a .. .- a E ..na F E E! _ n it 53OV11N _- -_— -4"-- (` W C/) M „60.01.005 G ar- = T-¢ g j ge \ o r `` o —_ _ _ _ 1.,., t — r�eey, A g ^ice \ n ? \ 4 ` \ ox og��s \ o zi ° °” ° NQ \ 4 , CD i a1 • o rn N \ �i� , p w o ¢ /) 4i v (' u j / Rb. _ n / ' /? / / / / /// G i 2 P. L U 1 N 1 I p • • I / , 7, N _ - `o __ w I d Q � ° i � Z•- • • j • - nt —1 R a L' I; 0 8 0 S o G N 2 • • j �il�i � - -5-- o i a 33 1,,,.,,,,,,,,,,, ° � n . � � Y • • • Z . I I c • C Y • • • ' - - -- 1 — - - - - -- I 1 `2 g W • • // 111-1 Y J` / J 7 i • • • e • 0 • Al / ',I- • • — mil m s = 1 • I— F ‘, ° ••/ x a g I � � + r !FT LI ' • • 1 - 9 45 .,., . >, " „ .. : 041 )2 I o n e 800'OS'7B "E 791.11 .Ls. nN SCAVE BVff ER YARD NOT REOUIREO ••• •• ,, N , tt _ 3 N N I Q 2.. 5380V 8[f' l Yww• ,o. RROR1 ■ � \ , i n �; _4 0 031V�1030 AVM A0 IH0I61 o �% / w_ ": - — � M oH 3HfJn3 • - -•--- - - -- _ - - - - ,•410,E,_I 1 N00'09'45 'W 869.76' Z � ' 1•1 •)p5)M ur3/017 .mar• • gm 1111.13 RECD SEP 2 21997 REC'C SC 7 2 1.97 X31d$100 1VdDOINf1W 3NV1H1f10S J0 ,1110 1Vld 1VNIj w...II�R [• , is 1 s Ilr C[125 P D „ 1 r /� ! [ W S .. j Err � � A Y Y a dd 9 p r 456 3° "ti e t ¢ < J li 1 X E 3 }2 Ave I r , ¢ e 44.4" g ( 6 d S i� D is 4 x � ¢p • - rei p ),1l _ _ ,. liegs a i r @i U r ' Ye D p _ � r r !{ < H O M ' k $ • i - r ; . r Y p b D e a n = V X i 15,".," ! n rr ea Y a5 I►O T 5 t) ' ib y Jb Nozp l i s r W i fig[ • 1 [ 3 511 ¢ E y O LLd -S r3 si.3J- ° }!' ¢L Yra qq ¢ a ¢ a r Of I V - e :g _ i Y$ r 4 ! :!: b ar E 9pp ¢e i !° b •I f• O � yg 5 4 : 5 ,3 i i i g r . i i i 1 3 51 i y 1 V 7 o V ; f . a r 5 5 i r ie�1 re i a Y i5`I' - a h, ¢i 1 = g 1 1 Se : 5 a r D 1 9151 i I e r " c 1 e ii y 4 s 1 W ., d a b e XYn[ ¢dryy r n 4 ; 1 ¢53nX' is GiX@F ! v it 4. E� a r o3 1 1 1 " 1 ^ � b 3 a • X! _ ¢ @ p g z p5 xe ap' Y4dv - ¢11 1 :il aq r r 1 Iii! S I 1 ;.5;111' "el l i 1le' s S 7 q • �;;- i. : 1, "l9e r „, @ 5¢ @ glilw6 @ @L ell p V E Yp e al & €s 5 '15' pr @ ee rip 4 'r59�i pY ¢ s ¢ 9 :011/. fl 5 'f ¢ ¢¢ XB' " q '; ¢ - .¢ • „ !x[ .;40,50 p , a ^x:!@ 5 S y 4 ' e 9n p;• s" 1'Deppnr aX sa n (1¢5 r Y a o i!i, i-iJ 5j � � b4 s . . Y !dil � i ° gg a g S - b ;44 r'-- 1 as• 1° y Mara ° R9' s •p Yy 1!„ r 7 @ ..g n 39� s5 c •rr- p4_! r e 53i 5 � r � »•5 � - z 1 4 4 ig r i i1 s v • .?64. 305 4r ; @.E Y,'D 5 s 4-1 0 ,4 Fe x 1y0 T i , ,e Y 5 b p qaq 'B !; ' e:• !!= .9 xr 3¢ // YXB 3 . b 4 X e a a ° [xaj i' ` ! t 3 X s DD a n D 9pI• s i D be 3 / itO >< a 3XaE 9n'S $a a '! v DD x 3 a: r!6 .app p4 5 554 Y4 " Ie a Y4 ;6 1)44 . ■ € % 4! 4 ■! !'p '; it 1:244° i 4 1 41 ''''') ¢ s ' �: ' II - o Bp 4 ! Y ill r r ' !r bv ° Y! ! AJ NI ;i E b V q_ 4 'a1 7 5' @E ¢Sp • s F °ll! «' Y [ . 4 6' 0 ! .. ft .. ¢ � Y. L s !.a t.5! a ` r yip br ,2 ^s rK ;j 3 yy e5 5 ¢' @ Yt ' ! @ p pi i i r ! " g q --/ "i' E3A [ ¢ '; PIP r ap . ? b. 9 " Yy M r r 3 p 33 'c :11 i -r _• Y r ¢ i. H 9p. " �{: ° p 5 s gh ' . 1 r p,. s^ -1 i<' Y ^F Yr �- ¢Y x i 9- ^ 1" ¢! - Y3X g` X r3 . a d- b a5•. - Y % i X 9 r a z. DD_ rp:- .D 3 D Y ¢ S. .� D!3 .� a33r4J� pi .� .JSn^ •� t Fri" ! p¢ !r YD °s�� j'A_3.brl 44z1 y xly !-P, r- 4 p�5¢e° ,. r,.9o_ pr r5 @. lit 1511h i4 §¢'sirr r e r8,r :¢ r @ " II s iI $ % = ---II s. J L ' o n x al= 1 T.., 5 3 4 , a _.5 ...1.3. �1 I b. `l ,,, i, ° y 1 1 „ o q 1 !! If - — I pg.: hp 1 , !! 1p 4 ' T 3 I' ^ ' q - ". � � E Ypl YB _ ,'; d y e. +0+x," s n !I z I �I � 4 d a� B 1 X gi il 11!!!! !!!; eM1 Yl a k l :alp s x I ° -2X"..-1 _ lr g • i li 4,, ; i I i i 1 I i b i i ii 2 r i! 9 1!!!' 11 1 11P NI! i IV E�Gi :�P� _ - 1 � , I ' - — I -- -- - — 1. E :41 1 ¢ € l ! 6. y/ s E il il S p� i i r t r¢ p r .-- - -� 13 -, _r .' =� ; .. 4@ it p sag n el gf _ _ S .Sa ° 1 ; Y 9 • -.___ PIrrW000 DM ( [ _zxf® _ - I . _sue x ' 1 a R �p I Y ■ • 000•x! • -NO ! n i :. ei il I • .i a . I al .. I m 5: Yti ' _ _- 1n aeA 1 I 4 � ° see � p $fi a 6 e: pia -11.1 OMl 3SVHd )1dVd 000MH18ON NOI1100V NO2I8V1111 1Vld 1VNId _ i 1111 11 1 2 1 it 8 i r , , , f`l; t o, ( zEji , b.` Q 1 1(t ! 3 d O $ `R S . i m &s 1 ` 'ti' J - .�, l '.a:�1e. :!! O H B'G i e Y r ' n R � ,I I I i , r B > , 61` e s g a <g� NaI / e § _ .x tI; 1 �.. :_ f i t 6 !P t v - -,, O . 4._, . a xe p `1 1 1 g _ - — �— i ��r�� r .1141 1 5 �1 . 1t a < a = - g u a V .3116 _ .1 Y"-- l l t �' !A E I mi ` 1 il� i FT ..,....,,,‘ ___i___±, tll� 1 i(: . r: o m m 5 1 :-... ii ,, 4,1 g, ,. , ri 0 11!14 E . 1 eHll 4 1 1 r E EI 1 3 4 lil 11 t1; p • rill , r It l It ` 1 f 11 i 1 1 J1 1 r 1 , 11. i J . 6 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 e, 1 ! 9 P Il tg� _ 10941!!9!'1IIIl'IIr 11 IIBBB :111111 CC i � Ps � 1 • p 1�`s 1= xszssxs z! ! t -- `.401 1'1�` @ i1! .ti II! IEI3 I ` a 'R I x a ie 1 I 1 HP N 14,1! 1 e1 ae y s 1 !pr 11 ! @ lilt , @ 1 ! ! @ ! ! ! .@ ! ! I 1 ¢ r 1 1 ' Erj1 ! I E i tI dl ! '` ! § �� I y I ; y x l l p _ t p . q 9 . y 1 ! 11 1 � l i g I i it i iiri 116 O 1 11 I1411 '11 1 J1 g/P. . 11 I I . II I I I III I I I I .- 11 ;I 111 i , I! , J 1 I II , ' XI 1 `1 ? 1 1 0 ; . y . ` . " � J i �r 1 �I It9 o p 1 Y9 yy tt yy + y y �e , P E ■ ' B� J � 111 � 1 p1 , � f g y y1 I[ �q `i iRPF! � :g G 1G 1 G ' F F t 0 C Ii �.' �� �� �� �� �� 1 B I � I ` I 4 1 1 tii l/ t 1 i1 lei 111. . Et . . 11 . . . . rl I 1 1� P 111 t(1 1 Ill 111.E - : N q \\ - - _ �I i t $ 1 :::: / I ; .1 � 11 .4i - 1 , * _ ! , 11/;: 2 6:-.. � j • gp Ae ' N 11 OJ O OOMNNYd � ;' 'Wy Hp' 3N NO J t lJ, GS x70,1 95 tl33tl7 .0.n. �. 1i -NI SJ� BY " • r— • v . s l c e � " ..... f • " d .. r z ; .,, 9 a - ; , " • �I 1, - 1 1a 4 Y ! 6 . I 1- E o 2,;,174. w s Ai 13 �: q e v - __ - ,, �/ 1 ,k., 1 Z ly y 1 a € - X4 ..:.. l ' / I " _ o 0 . ,o'wi " a+ I- lax I y 1 g $ lg 7. � . � b` • JIt SO4O MS3 a S R _ / i 1 t 7. I IDP ' • 1" r *,- .t x _ P .". w • rtc.� - � t A P t 1 S P R i -I W ;' i I � B' r. � -e °o l a = � 3 - � mM � a tl — r YY !It •�� eal��Y Y I ...w, . . =I 1 i P II.. c i ' $ ' S ' ...r . Y � L, �, ; 1 4_ 71V81.1 71V81.1 _, 4-- _ - N ^ �P f,I sP � � • • — ,, OOONNINON �E? F b �i o t: y r i 1 $ I; +ra..l - .rep. x:x.. w l I I g "i ❑ F t wale 3 Acoceo M 1{ - „. - I 1 7.;1E •. ' I - f :t m o x P . . '' . -I I -I l y rl � 8 R: a ) \' — F1 V t: ;II g 47 �, � $ t f i e Y a a Y_ : P PII 111 1 E - - !'�C y e - t a, ._�,,� P ) r� z x; a - 1l ;l 1 ill : x y} '' 'Is'"';''', 4 - ”" ; 2 l tl I' 1 s b -r S ~ , 0 R 4 III 1 II • 11A -15 Debbie Engler -Key 105 Killdeer Court Southlake 329 -6277 January 4, 1999 To: Members of the Southlake City Council My husband and I purchased our home in Myers Meadow two and a half years ago. One year later, Mobil put in a gas station across the street from our home. They also put in a car wash at that time. The car wash exit faces the Myers Meadow subdivision, and all of the noise from the car wash enters our neighborhood. The noise level was considered in violation of the Southlake noise codes over a year ago, and the city closed down the car wash. However, by turning off the dryer in the car wash, the noise level fell under the noise limitations, and the car wash again opened. Last week, the gas station turned on the dryer again in the car wash. We and our neighbors immediately noticed because the noise was deafening. When we checked with the city officials, we were told that the dryer indeed does not violate noise codes of our city - that our codes are quite inadequate. Without the dryer, the car wash can be heard in our neighborhood. With the dryer on, it sounds like a helicopter hovering over our home. We can hear this car wash inside our home with all doors and windows closed and with the television on. When we are outside in our backyard, we can not hear each other talking when the car wash is being used. This is very disheartening since we recently invested many thousands of dollars putting in a swimming pool and landscaping the back yard and were looking forward to enjoying it. We are extremely discouraged about this and are appealing to the Council for help. As citizens of Southlake, we feel that we must have some rights and control over our own home. We are appealing to you to help us resolve this matter with the owners of the Mobil station. We request that you implement new and updated noise and nuisance codes which would require the Mobil station to reduce the excessive noise. Last year we wrote a letter to Mobil asking them to build a wall at the exit of the car wash or install a door on the car wash in order to diminish the noise level. Either of these options would reduce the noise; however, they did not respond to our request. We feel that Mobil has options it can implement to improve the conditions for its neighbors, and we are convinced that they are not interested in our well- being. We moved into Southlake precisely because we were assured of careful planning and zoning in this city and we have had absolutely the worst possible scenario happen to us. The noise from the car wash will cause our home to be devalued, and our privacy has been severely compromised. We again ask for your help and support in resolving this issue. Thank you, 6 b_he