2001-01-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
667 NORTH CARROLL AVENUE
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
JANUARY 16, 2001
MINUTES
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Rick Stacy; Mayor Pro Tem Gary Fawks;
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Ronnie Kendall. Members: Patsy DuPre, Greg Standerfer, Rex
Potter and Keith Shankland.
CITY STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Billy Campbell; Assistant City Manager Shana
Yelverton; Assistant to the City Manager John Eaglen; Public Information Officer James
Kunke; Director of Economic Development Greg Last; Director of Community Service
Kevin Hugman; Director of Public Works Pedram Farahnak; Deputy Director of Public
Works Charlie Thomas; Assistant to the Public Works Director Valerie Bradley; Public
Works Operations Manager Michael Patterson; Senior Engineer Michael Hutchinson;
Director of Planning Bruce Payne; Senior Planners Dennis Killough and Ken Baker;
Chief of Building Services Malcolm Jackson; Chief of Police Marlin Price; City Attorney
E. Allen Taylor; and, City Secretary Sandra L. LeGrand.
WORK SESSION: Mayor Rick Stacy called the work session to order at 5:35 p.m.
Councilmembers and staff discussed items on the agenda. The work session was audio
and video tape- recorded for future reference. Copies are available upon request from the
City Secretary.
✓ Agenda Items Nos. 5-B, 5-C, 5-D Facilities Usage Agreements for the Southlake
Baseball Association, Grapevine - Southlake Soccer Association, and Southlake
Girls Softball Association. Councilmember Ronnie Kendall commented on the
need for a user fee, which would be a major change. She stated she has not seen a
copy of the Park Board minutes. Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman
commented, "We discussed with the Park Board around the September timeframe,
the idea of a user fee for the associations, as we knew we were coming up with
facility association agreements. We wanted to get their thoughts on it to see if
they wanted to consider it or not. They were open to the idea and talked with the
associations about it. We recognize that it could be an issue to them so we went
forward and talked with each of the association presidents and explained why we
were looking at a cost fee that we were looking at per season, and that we would
not start until next fall to give them plenty of time to put that into their fee
structure. All of them understand the reason behind it and are agreeable to it.
When we worked up the agreements we brought them back to the Park Board
with the user fee in them, and the Park Board approved all three of the agreements
at their meeting last week with the fee included." Councilmember Kendall asked
if that meant that when Grapevine teams come to use Southlake fields was the
City going to charge them? Hugman stated that was an issue, and that he had
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 1 of 17
talked with the Grapevine Parks Director about the user fee. The City of
Grapevine said they do not charge a user fee, but if Southlake was going to do it,
they would look at it as well. Hugman explained how the fee assessment was
determined. Kendall stated the City of Grapevine had been very good to
Southlake and she believed that to charge them a usage fee for use of Southlake's
new fields was not good. Hugman stated the City was trying to recoup some of
the costs on the maintenance of the fields. He said the fee would be less for soccer
than for softball or baseball because there was no utility cost for soccer.
Councilmember Patsy DuPre commented about the responsibility of the teams to clean up
the fields and wondered if a `responsibility clause' should be in the facilities usage
agreements. Hugman stated they had been working with some initiatives to work with the
coaches and parents to clean up their own litter. They are working on some positive
incentives for the teams that do well in cleaning up their fields after use.
Councilmember Kendall questioned Mr. Hugman about the change to the contract
regarding donations [on page 5B -5], asking, "Why does this issue now go through the
director and not through the Park Board ?" She commented that if the issue is about
changing permanent structures at the Park, she would like some Park Board input on the
issue. Hugman stated the intent was regarding signs. He said he would change the
wording to make the intent of the change more clear. Kendall asked that the wording be
changed on all three contracts.
The work session ended at 6:00 p.m.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Agenda Item #1 -A, Call to Order
Mayor Rick Stacy called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. City
Council meetings are video and audio tape- recorded for future reference and copies are
available upon request from the City Secretary.
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, 551.086 to seek legal advice from the City Attorney; to deliberate
regarding real property matters; to deliberate regarding a prospective gift; to deliberate
regarding personnel matters; to deliberate regarding security devices; and /or to
deliberate regarding economic development negotiations.
Council adjourned into executive session at 6:04 p.m.
Council returned to open session at 6:45 p.m.
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 2 of 17
Agenda Item #2 -B, Action Necessary /Executive Session
No action was taken as the result of the executive session.
Agenda Item #3, Invocation /Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Chaplain of the Month Pastor Doug Allison, Southlake Boulevard Presbyterian Church,
gave the invocation. Following the invocation, Mayor Stacy led the audience in the
pledge of allegiance to the flag.
Agenda Item #4 -A, Mayor's Report
Mayor Rick Stacy made the following announcements during the Mayor's Report:
✓ January 18, 4:00 p.m. second part of the Economic Development Work Session,
which was continued from the December 19.
✓ January 18, 5:30 p.m. Ribbon cutting for Thomasville Furniture in Gateway
Plaza.
✓ January 18, 6:00 p.m. Joint City Council /SPIN Meeting at Town Hall, in the 3rd
floor conference room.
✓ January 22, the new Southlake Post Office will open.
✓ January 27, Southlake Employee Banquet at Ranch of Lonesome Dove.
✓ January 29, Southlake Chamber of Commerce Award Banquet.
✓ February 1, the first Charter Review Committee meeting will be held in Town
Square.
Mayor Stacy presented a proclamation declaring January 16, City of Southlake Employee
Appreciation Day to public information officer James Kunke on behalf of the employees
of the City.
Agenda Item #4 -B, City Manager's Report
During the City Manager's report, Billy Campbell asked the Deputy Director of Public
Works Charlie Thomas to report on the Traffic Management Bond Program. Mr. Thomas
reported that the Traffic Management Bond Program in the amount of $24.2 million
dollars was approved in May 1999. To date, $13,361,255 of the bonds had been sold.
Three propositions regarding this bond issue were on the ballot:
• Intersection Improvements
• SH 114 Enhancements
• Trail Improvements
Mr. Thomas continued the summary, including:
o The design is complete on all intersection improvements including
deceleration lanes.
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 3 of 17
o Peytonville Avenue and FM 1709 and White Chapel and FM 1709 are under
construction with pavement anticipated to be complete around February 1,
with the remainder of the construction to be complete in March.
o Awaiting TxDOT comments on remainder of FM 1709 intersection and
deceleration lanes, as well as Brumlow and SH 26.
o Randol Mill intersection plans are on hold awaiting TxDOT approval for the
extension of FM 1938 from FM 1709 to SH 114.
o Dove Street and SH 114 intersection improvements are under construction by
TxDOT.
o White Chapel and SH 114 intersection improvements will be constructed by
TxDOT, contract to be let in Spring 2001.
o Trail on north side of FM 1709, from Southridge Lakes to Bicentennial Park,
is under contract for construction but waiting approval of multi -use agreement
by TxDOT.
o The remainder of the trail on FM 1709 has been designed and plans prepared,
awaiting final approval by TxDOT.
o Design of the trail along White Chapel from FM 1709 to the junior high
school is complete. Remainder of the trail on White Chapel from the junior
high school to Bob Jones is under design.
o The trail along Brumlow from Continental to SH 26 is under design.
o Anticipate construction to begin on the remainder of the trail on FM 1709,
plus White Chapel from FM 1709 to the junior high school, to begin in Spring
2001.
o South Carroll Avenue at FM 1709 and Brumlow Avenue at SH 26 will be
constructed in the same contract. Anticipate construction to begin in Spring
2001. Right -of -way is being acquired and at this point, one of the three parcels
has been acquired.
o Anticipate construction on Shady Oaks at FM 1709 to begin in late May.
o The remaining construction can take place after the remainder of the bonds
have been sold.
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 4 of 17
Agenda Item #4 -C, SPIN Report
SPIN Report was given by Mike Conrads, SPIN Chairman, 108 Springbrooks Court,
Southlake. Mr. Conrads reported on the upcoming Joint City Council /SPIN Meeting,
which is scheduled for Thursday, January 18 at 6:30 p.m. in the New Town Hall. He also
commented on the following meetings:
o January 23, SPIN #15 will host a Citywide Forum at 6:30 p.m. at Town
Hall to with the Topic: Design Alternatives for Johnson Road.
o January 24, Citywide Forum for SPIN #7 at 6:30 p.m. in Town Hall.
Topic: Quick Trip (Convenience Store with Fuel) proposed for the
location at the southwest corner of East Southlake Boulevard and
Commerce Street.
o February 6, SPIN #1 will host a meeting at Bicentennial Park beginning at
7:00 p.m. Topic: Clariden Ranch.
Agenda Item #5, Consent Agenda
Mayor Rick Stacy informed the audience that "consent agenda" items, which consist of
several items, are considered by one vote. He said if anyone had a request for an item not
to be considered during the consent agenda segment, that item would be deleted from that
portion of the agenda and considered separately. The consent agenda items were as
follows:
5 -A. Approval of minutes of the Regular City Council meeting held January 2, 2001.
5 -B. Authorize the Mayor to execute a Facilities Utilization Agreement with Southlake
Baseball Association (SBA) for 2001.
5 -C. Authorize the Mayor to execute a Facilities Utilization Agreement with
Grapevine- Southlake Soccer Association (GSSA) for 2001.
5 -D. Authorize the Mayor to execute a Facilities Utilization Agreement with Southlake
Girls Softball Association (SGSA) for 2001.
Motion was made to approve the consent agenda including the following: Agenda Item
#5 -A, as amended; #5 -B, #5 -C, and #5 -D, as discussed in work session regarding the
Donation Policy.
Motion: Standerfer
Second: Kendall
Councilmember Kendall explained for those who were not present for the work
session that in the current facilities usage agreement, whoever wants to donate
property temporary or permanent, whether major or minor, that it only needs to go
through the Director of Community Services for approval and that is not the way
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 5 of 17
the Park Board meant for it to read. She said that was only the beginning of the
process [to go to the Director, and then to the Park Board for approval].
Ayes: Standerfer, Kendall, Shankland, DuPre, Potter, Fawks, and Stacy
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0 vote.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
5 -A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting held on January 2,
2001. The minutes were amended regarding the motion on second reading of Item
#7 -C, Ordinance No. 762, Adopting the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code,
Volumes 1 and 2.
5 -B. Authorize the Mayor to execute a Facilities Utilization Agreement with Southlake
Baseball Association (SBA) for 2001.
5 -C. Authorize the Mayor to execute a Facilities Utilization Agreement with
Grapevine - Southlake Soccer Association (GSSA) for 2001.
5 -D. Authorize the Mayor to execute a Facilities Utilization Agreement with Southlake
Girls Softball Association (SGSA) for 2001.
The Facilities Utilization Agreements address a number of contractual issues
between the City and the youth sports associations. The City surveyed area cities
as part of the review of the agreements, and then reviewed these agreements with
the relevant associations. All of the associations indicated their approval of the
agreements. The major change in this year's agreements is the addition of a user
fee to be assessed beginning in the Fall 2001 season. The fee is intended to recoup
some of the costs that the City incurs in field maintenance staff, grounds materials
costs, utility costs, etc. The fee is not meant to recapture all of the City's costs, but
can be used toward additional maintenance staff. Given the budget constraints the
city will be facing for the next several years, and the need for additional
maintenance staff, staff recommends adoption of the user fee.
Agenda Item #6, Public Forum
Debra Heath, Representative of KSB and CISD, 5944 Stagecoach Circle,
Westlake. Ms. Heath stated she was presently working for both KSB and CISD to
publish an anthology entitled A Touch of Nature. This compilation of
environmental work would showcase various genres of writing as well as black
and white art work, focusing on environmental topics including trees, nature
plants, wildscaping, animal habitats, recycling, air quality, litter prevention, and
water runoff with an emphasis on each individual person's responsibilities. KSB
would like everyone to participate in this adventure and submit your own entry to
A Touch of Nature. KSB will release the work to be published by Creative
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 6 of 17
Communication Inc. The anthology will be a hardbound book, the same quality as
A Celebration of Young Poets. The time required for the publication process is
lengthy, therefore, the writing and submitting time frame is very short. She also
asked that Council purchase a copy of the book for $25.00.
Agenda Item #7 -A, Resolution No. 01 -002, (ZA 00 -117), SUP for Telecommunication
Tower at Bicentennial Park
Resolution No. 01 -002, (ZA 00 -117), Specific Use Permit for a Telecommunication
Tower (Stealth Light Standard at Bicentennial Park) per Zoning Ordinance N. 480,
Section 45.1 (38) and Section 45.8, on property described as Lot 2R2, L.B.G. Hall No.
686 Addition; and Tracts 1, 1B, 1C1, 1C2, 1C3, 1E, 2B, 2A1, 2B1, 3C, 3D, 3D1A, and
3D6, situated in the Littleberry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 686, and being 61.61 acres.
A Site Plan for Bicentennial Park was considered with this request. Current zoning is "S-
P -1" Detailed Site Plan District with "CS" Community Service District uses to include
limited outside storage.
Senior Planner Ken Baker presented Resolution No. 01 -002, noting that this property was
located on the north side of West Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709) generally in between
Shady Oaks Drive and North White Chapel Boulevard. The Land Use category for this
property is Public Parks /Open Space. On January 4, 2001, the Planning and Zoning
Commission approved (3 -2 vote) subject to the Specific Use Permit Review Summary
No. 3, dated December 29, 2000, to approve the requested variances and to require the
placement of shrubs as shown on the Site Plan in lieu of the required bufferyard and to
require the applicant to be responsible for the replacement of shrubs in the event of
failure; and to require the applicant to install a chain link fence around the vault not to
exceed 4' in height.
Mr. Baker noted from the Revised Site Plan Review No. 3, dated January 12, 2001, the
following variances have been requested:
1. Tower Facilities (e.g., tower /antennas and any necessary equipment building)
shall be enclosed by an eight (8) foot, solid screening fence or masonry wall or a
wrought iron fence with an eight (8) foot evergreen hedge, and shall be
landscaped with a buffer of plant materials that effectively screens the view of the
tower compound from any public roadway or any property used for residential
purpose. Any fence constructed in accordance with this section shall provide a
Knox Box or other entry device for public safety access per the requirements of
the Fire Marshal. Provide an eight (8) foot screening device around the tower and
vault hatch area.
2. Where abutting residentially zoned property, the applicant shall provide a
screening plan showing the existing tree coverage of the impacted area and the
placement of plantings as required in a "F2" bufferyard (as a minimum) as
described in Section 42 of this ordinance. Provide a screening plan as required.
Provide the required plantings as shown in the following chart. Indicate the
plantings on a screening plan as required by the regulations.
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 7 of 17
Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman stated, "When VoiceStream first
approached Community Services, they were looking at a place to put a monopole tower
at Bicentennial Park. They wanted to put a tower somewhere where it would blend in
with the park aesthetics. This became an option for the City as this field had the oldest
lighting on the creosol poles [55' tall]. The poles they are proposing are 65' in height and
the antenna is another 10' above that to make it 75' tall.
Manager of Public Works Operations Michael Patterson expressed concerns that it was
very crowded around the tower on the hill at Bicentennial Park. "There are lots of utilities
around the area," commented Patterson.
PUBLIC HEARING:
Ed Stafanko, 320 Green Oaks Lane, Southlake. Mr. Stafanko stated he had two issues: 1)
Oak Hill residents were not involved in the decision to place the tower in that location;
and, 2) placing the tower on the north side of the Park is not right, as it is a residential
area. He asked that they find another site.
Public hearing closed.
Mayor Stacy recommended putting the pole as far to the south as possible by the parking
lot as it would not disturb the residents near the park. Councilmember DuPre suggested
placing the pole near Field #9.
Councilmember Ronnie Kendall asked about the timetable for installation. She stated the
basketball courts need light, and added, "Lets not take down a poll that the City spent so
much money on, and put a pole where we need light." She said the box could be put
behind the GTE property with shrubs.
Kevin Clifton, basketball coach. Mr. Clifton stated he was in favor of placing the tower
by the basketball court.
Kevin Hugman stated he would work with VoiceStream on the possibility of placing the
pole near the basketball court, and if that did not work, the second option would be near
Field #9.
Motion was made to approve the Resolution No. 01 -002 (ZA 00 -117), SUP for
Telecommunication Tower for placement of the light pole with the first preference being
to light the basketball courts; and second preference being either in the parking lot, or
adjacent to Field #9; placing the lights as low on the polls as possible to effectuate light
in the area but not having it any higher than is necessary; permitting a 75' pole for the
tower; including putting the shrubbery in; placing the box as close to the restrooms as
possible with screens around it.
Motion: Standerfer
Second: Shankland
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 8 of 17
Councilmember Fawks stated he was very uncomfortable approving this plan
without a site plan. He suggested Council wait two weeks so that they would
know what was being approved.
Councilmembers stated they felt they could leave the final decision to Kevin
Hugman following the motion, to work out the details.
Ayes: Standerfer, Shankland, DuPre, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, and Stacy
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0 vote
Agenda Item #10 -B, Authorize the Mayor to enter into an agreement with
VoiceStream for antenna placement
Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman presented the agreement between the
City of Southlake and VoiceStream for antenna placement. During the past year,
VoiceStream Wireless approached the City regarding the placement of an antenna on the
water tower in Bicentennial Park. Due to limited space, VoiceStream worked with City
staff to explore other viable alternatives and determined that a new light pole standard
would be the most favorable. The agreement is based on the standard ground and tower
lease agreements, but has been modified to take into account this unique situation. The
main points of the proposed agreement are as follows:
o VoiceStream would construct and provide to the City a seventy -five foot
monopole with sports lighting located at the sixty -five foot level. VoiceStream
would locate their antenna at the seventy -five foot level and a future carrier would
be accommodated at the fifty -five foot level.
o VoiceStream will construct on the 25' by 30' lease property an underground vault
with surface hatch and appropriate landscaping.
o VoiceStream would pay to the City an annual rent of $18,000 less $1,000 per year
for maintenance on the monopole, for a term of five years. VoiceStream is
granted options for four additional five -year extension periods, each with an
increase in rent of 15% above the previous period.
o Should future approval allow for a second carrier to locate on the monopole,
VoiceStream rental fees would be abated at a rate of no less than $9,000 per year
until such time as half of their capital contribution costs in an amount not to
exceed $20,050, area actualized. This would allow for site development costs to
be shared by the second carrier. The City could forfeit total rental fees in the
amount of $20,050 over the life of the agreement, but would realize revenues
estimated at $36,000 annually (two tenants) in addition to ownership of the pole
and light fixtures.
o The proposed agreement allows VoiceStream to locate a temporary antenna on
the site for a period not to exceed six (6) months or until the monopole is
constructed.
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 9 of 17
o VoiceStream will be required to furnish appropriate payment and performance
bonds for the construction of the monopole.
o Additional conduit suitable for use by a second carrier for telephone and electric
utilities will be installed by VoiceStream.
o VoiceStream will be required to adhere to all other requirements as required in
previous ground and tower lease agreements.
Motion was made to approve the agreement with VoiceStream for antenna placement.
Motion: Standerfer
Second: DuPre
Ayes: Standerfer, DuPre, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, and Stacy
Nays: Potter
Approved: 6 -1 vote
Agenda Item #7 -B, ZA 00 -128, Revised Site Plan for Block 2, Phase 1 -- Stage 2R,
Southlake Town Square
ZA 00 -128, Revised Site Plan for Block 2, Phase 1 -- Stage 2R, Southlake Town Square,
on property legally described as Block 2, Southlake Town Square, Phase 1, and being
5.624 acres. Current zoning is "R -PUD" Non - Residential Planned Unit Development
District with C " -3" General Commercial District uses.
Senior Planner Ken Baker presented the revised Site Plan for Block 2, Phase 1 -- Stage
2R of Southlake Town Square, noting on January 4, 2001, the Planning and Zoning
Commission approved (5 -0) vote, subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 1, dated
December 29, 2000. The requested variances for articulation and landscaping were
accepted.
Brian Stebbins, Cooper & Stebbins. Mr. Stebbins was present to answer questions from
Council.
PUBLIC HEARING: No comments were made during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve ZA 00 -128, Revised Site Plan subject to the Site Plan
Review Summary No. 1, dated December 29, 2000; as approved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, adding the landscape plan.
Motion: DuPre
Second: Standerfer
Ayes: DuPre, Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, and Stacy
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0 vote
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 10 of 17
Agenda Item #7 -C, ZA 00 -129, Revised Site Plan for Block 5, Phase 1 -- Stage 3,
Southlake Town Square
ZA 00 -129, Revised Site Plan for Block 5, Phase 1 -- Stage 3, Southlake Town Square on
property legally described as Block 5, Southlake Town Square, Phase 1 and being 5.0
acres. Current zoning is "NR -PUD" Non - Residential Planned Unit Development, with
"C -3" General Commercial District uses.
Senior Planner Ken Baker presented the revised site plan for Block 5, Phase 1, Stage 3,
noting that the Planning and Zoning Commission, at their January 4, 2001 meeting
approved (5 -0) vote subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 1, dated December 29,
2000. The requested variances for articulation and landscaping were accepted.
PUBLIC HEARING: No comments were made during the public hearing.
Motion was made to approve the Revised Site Plan for Block 5, Phase 1 -- Stage 3,
Southlake Town Square, subject to the Site Plan Review Summary #1, dated December
29, 2000, incorporating the variances for landscaping and articulation, as approved by the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Motion: DuPre
Second: Shankland
Ayes: DuPre, Shankland, Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, and Stacy
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0 vote
Agenda Item #8 -A, Ordinance No. 480 -353, 1 Reading (ZA 00 -121), for Lots 1, 2, 3
and 4, Block 1, Richards Addition
Ordinance No. 480 -353, 1 Reading (ZA 00 -121), Rezoning and Concept Plan for
proposed Lots 1,2,3, and 4, Block 1, Richards Addition, on property described as Tracts
5D1 and 5D5, O.W. Knight Survey, Abstract No. 899; and being 4.042 acres. Current
zoning is "AG" Agricultural District with a requested zoning of "S -P -2" Generalized Site
Plan District with "0-1" Office District uses and "C -2" Local Retail Commercial District
limited to restaurant uses only.
Senior Planner Ken Baker presented ZA 00 -121, noting the owner and applicant of the
property is J.W. Richards and Constance Richards, and that currently there was no
development on the site. On January 4, 2001, the Planning and Zoning Commission
approved (3 -2 vote) this case subject to the Concept Plan Review Summary No. 3, dated
December 29, 2000; to approve "S -P -2" zoning with uses limited to a non drive- through
restaurant only for Lot 2, and "0-1" uses for Lots 1,3, and 4; to approve the requested
variances for driveway spacing and driveway stacking; and require that Parkwood Drive
be constructed to the intersection of the common access easement to the south of the
property prior to the approval of the Site Plan for Lot 1.
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 11 of 17
Ed Gibbons, applicant, 3309 Spruce Lane, Grapevine. Mr. Gibbons stated he was
speaking for the applicant and that a Dallas restaurant, the "Rooster," was interested in
locating on this property. He indicated it was a "fourstar" restaurant with approximately
5,300 square feet in the building. The parking on the plan meets the requirements of the
ordinance.
Kenny Anderson, builder, was present to answer questions from Council.
Todd Tracy, owner of Rooster, 331 South White Chapel Boulevard, Southlake. Mr. Tracy
stated, "The Dallas location is built like a plantation style home. The restaurant is one of
four "Four Star" restaurants in Dallas and is open for lunch and dinner with Sunday
brunch and that the quality is equal to the Classic Cafe in Southlake."
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Ray Samendini, 501 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Mr. Samendini stated he did not have a
problem with a professional building being built on this site, but he did have a problem
with a restaurant because of traffic, noise issues and a buffer issue. He stated he and his
neighbors are opposed to a restaurant at that location.
Kim Wolfe, 601 Parkwood Drive, Southlake. Ms. Wolfe stated she had issues with the
naming of Parkwood Drive in the area off Southlake Boulevard. She said she lives on
Parkwood Drive and it seems to her it should be named something different.
Director of Planning Bruce Payne said after he had talked with Ms. Wolfe they
decided it would be best to name that section of the street something other than
Parkwood Drive, and it would be changed on the plat.
Mike Manella, 614 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Mr. Manella stated he had no objections
to locating a restaurant as the one named in Southlake, but does have a concern with the
long -term use of the property and was opposed to a restaurant in that location.
Mayor Stacy commented that everyone agrees this use does not fit the Land Use Plan. He
stated he would love to see the Rooster Restaurant in Southlake, but not in this location.
Councilmembers Fawks and Kendall agreed this was not the location for a restaurant.
Mr. Gibbons asked if the zoning could be approved for "0-1" Office District uses, and
that he understood that he had a lot of work to do before this case is presented to Council
at the next meeting.
City Attorney E. Allen Taylor Jr., explained the process to the applicant and Council.
Motion was made to approve ZA 00 -121 as "0-1" Office District uses, subject to the
applicant reconfiguring the lots before it comes back for 2 Reading.
Motion: Potter
Second: Fawks
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 12 of 17
Ayes: Potter, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, DuPre, Standerfer, and Stacy
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0 vote
Agenda Item #8 -B, Ordinance No. 480 -354, 1 Reading, (ZA 00 -130), Tracts 1A & 2
and portion of Tract 1 in W. Mills Survey
Ordinance No. 480 -354, 1 Reading, (ZA 00 -130), Rezoning on property described as
Tracts 1A & 2, and a portion of Tract 1 situated in the W. Mills Survey, Abstract No.
877; and Tract 1 situated in the M. Medlin Survey, Abstract No.1 588; being 70.412
acres. Current zoning is "SF -1A" Single Family Residential District.
Senior Planner Ken Baker stated the property was located on the west side of North
White Chapel Boulevard approximately 2,200' south of Bob Jones Road. There has been
no previous development applications on this property. This item was approved at the
January 3, 2001 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting (5 -0 vote). Mr. Baker
commented that no plat approval was required with a request for "SF -1A" Single Family
Residential Zoning District. The southwest portion of this property lies within the 65
LDN Airport Overlay Zone. According to the Airport Compatible Land Use Zoning
Ordinance No. 479, single - family residential uses are not deemed to be compatible within
this zone. However, where the community determines that residential uses should be
allowed, measures to achieve outdoor to indoor noise level reduction of 25dB must be
incorporated into the design and construction of such uses. The rezoning does not include
the 23 -acre section of property to the north, set aside for a school.
Paul Spain, applicant. Mr. Spain was asked to address the 23 acres set aside for a school.
Mr. Spain said during the SPIN meetings, it was determined that the owners have hired a
very well known design team to address the issues outlined during the SPIN meeting and
they are currently working to address the issues. Mayor Stacy asked if the plan did not
get approved, how would he address that tract of land? Mr. Spain stated 23 acres is a
good size property, and he was sure that the plan could be revised. But, if it did not work
out, they could revise the plan to put in homes on the property.
Motion was made to approve the first reading of ZA 00 -130, as presented for "SF -1A"
Zoning, leaving the 23 acres as "AG" Agricultural District.
Motion: Standerfer
Second: DuPre
Ayes: Standerfer, DuPre, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, and Stacy
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0 vote
Agenda Item #8 -C, ZA 00 -131, Preliminary Plat for Clariden Ranch
ZA 00 -131, Preliminary Plat for Clariden Ranch on property described as Tracts 1, 1A,
and 2, situated in the W. Mills Survey, Abstract No. 877; and Tract 1 situated in the M.
Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 1588; being 95.637 acres.
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 13 of 17
Senior Planner Ken Baker presented this case noting that the property was located on the
west side of North White Chapel Boulevard, approximately 1,400' south of Bob Jones
Park. The Land Use Category is low density residential; 65 LDN Overlay Corridor.
On January 4, 2001, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved (5 -0 vote) subject to
the Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated December 29, 2000; and to allow the variance to
the rear lot widths and to specifically include the equestrian trail. The southwest portion
of this property lies within the 65 LDN Airport Overlay Zone. According to the Airport
Compatible Land Use Zoning Ordinance No. 479, single - family residential uses are not
deemed to be compatible within this zone. However, where the community determines
that residential uses should be allowed, measures to achieve outdoor to indoor noise level
reduction of 25dB must e incorporated into the design and construction of such uses.
Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman addressed the question of the trail and
stated, `Earlier, when Crown Ridge came through, Mr. Spain talked with the Park Board
about an equestrian trail and it was shown on the Master Plan along T.W. King Road.
The Park Board indicated that T.W. King was probably not a very good place for it so
they talked about putting an equestrian trail along Bob Jones Road and that is what was
ultimately approved with Crown Ridge. Right not, as we are in the process of updating
the Trail System Master Plan, which will come through P &Z and Council, our proposal is
to take off the equestrian trail along the south portion of T.W. King, south of Bob Jones
Road, and just keep it on the north side. The reason being is there is no place for them to
go down T.W. King. By going along Bob Jones, it will connect to the northern trailhead
in Bob Jones Park and then an equestrian trail along T.W. King north of Bob Jones
accessing back into the Corp [of Engineers] property which will make for a loop trail.
Going south on T.W. King there is no place for them to go. It will be our
recommendation for them to remove that trail entirely off of the plan."
Councilmember Ronnie Kendall commented on the deceleration lane, asking, "What is
the entrance going to look like going into the subdivision ?" Mr. Spain responded, "There
are two -lanes going into the development, other than when the road is ultimately
improved." A discussion was held regarding the traffic that would be created when the
area is fully developed.
Motion was made to approve ZA 00 -131, subject to the Plat Review Summary No. 2,
dated December 29, 2000; providing three -lane road at the entrance off of White Chapel
Boulevard and 200' south on White Chapel and providing for wide radius' on the turn;
allowing the marked lots that have less than 125' width at the rear entry; and deleting the
equestrian trail off of T.W. King.
Motion: Standerfer
Second: Potter
Ayes: Standerfer, Potter, Fawks, Kendall, Shankland, DuPre, and Stacy
Nays: None
Approved: 7 -0 vote
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 14 of 17
Agenda Item #11 -A, Discussion: Potential Recreation Center Sites
Director of Community Service Kevin Hugman asked for City Council input and
direction regarding the use of the city's property (Timarron/Richards site) for a potential
recreation center or other alternative sites that may be preferred. As background
information Mr. Hugman made the following statements: "The SPDC Capital
Improvements Plan (CIP) for 2001 -2003, includes funding this fiscal year for design of a
recreation center. To begin design, a site must be chosen. A number of options, including
purchasing additional land, have been discussed and reviewed with Parks Board and
SPDC on different occasions. Landscape architects Schrickel, Rollins and Associates was
contracted to review the feasibility of a site on the hill in Bicentennial Park, due to its
topography and other features in that area."
Staff presented a proposed site plan to SPIN #10 residents for this location at a meeting
held on November 20, 2000. The approximately 40 residents in attendance were
adamantly opposed to the development of the hill [at Bicentennial Park]. The residents
questioned the availability and feasibility of the Timarron/Richards site.
After briefing the Park Board at their December 11, 2000 meeting on the outcome of the
SPIN meeting, the Board also requested staff investigate the Council's desire for use of
the Timarron/Richards site. This request was being brought forth to Council to gain a
sense of direction for the possibility of using the city's property in this area for parks and
recreation use, more specifically for a potential Recreation Center. The Park Board has
been hesitant to move forward with plans for the Recreation Center until they understand
the desired use for this site. The site is located on the southwest corner of Byron Nelson
Parkway and F.M. 1709. Mr. Hugman outlined the following site data:
• Acres: 12.83 (including existing Senior Center)
• Zoning: "CS" Community Service District
• Land Use Plan: Public /Semi - Public
• Utilities; All available
• Current Use: Vacant; existing Senior Center
• Details of Purchase: A three -way land swap which resulted in the
current configuration of property and the city's purchase of 14.77
acres for $1,140,400 ($1.77 per square foot average)
Recreation Center Characteristics /Site Needs:
• Enough land for roughly 30,000- 40,000 sq.ft. building footprint, with
approximately 50,000 total (two- stories to accommodate gym/multi-
use courts) —if "stand- alone" facility and allowing for building
footprint, bufferyards, driveways, parking, and landscaping --
approximately 4.75 to 5.5 acres.
• Meet or exceed city's ordinance requirements (setbacks, bufferyards,
Corridor Overlay, Neighborhood Adjacency, drives, parking, lighting,
articulation, etc.)
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 15 of 17
• No land acquisition necessary
• Convenient location for majority of the population
• Minimal neighborhood opposition
• Minimal negative impact on traffic on adjacent streets
• Positive internal circulation
• Connectivity to the trail system for non - motorized access
• Maximized tree preservation
• Enhanced landscaping
• Minimal site work
• Nearby utilities
• Prominence of building (visibility)
Council suggested doing a site analysis on the Timarron/Richards site for a recreation
center, library and municipal facility.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Kim Wolfe, 601 Parkwood, Southlake. Ms. Wolfe stated she came to talk to the Park
Board and SPDC regarding this piece of property with the concept there were no
intentions by the city to use it. She stated this is an absolutely beautiful piece of property.
They would like to work with the City to come up with a plan that will include trails, use
of Rockenbaugh Elementary School, the Senior Center, their neighborhood and a pond
and trees. She stated she felt with everyone working together, it could be beautiful. She
felt they need a conceptual plan before it comes to the SPIN meetings, and she and
members of her neighborhood would be more than willing to work with the City to
achieve this.
Maria Cameron, Library Board Chairman. Ms. Cameron stated the Library Board has
come to the conclusion the important issue that will determine the library's success is the
hours the library is open and available parking. The Library Board is concerned that in
the current situation at Town Hall, parking could be a big problem. The Board had
previously looked at this site, or perhaps somewhere else in Town Square. They have had
some changes in board members and the city's finances have changed since they
discussed their ideas. There is a Library Foundation that is anxious to build the city a
building. Ms. Cameron commented, "This would be something we could move on more
rapidly and have the parking they require." Ms. Cameron asked the Council for their
input on the site for a permanent library and stated they need a 30,000 square foot
building with adequate parking.
Mike Manilos, 614 Northwood Trail, Southlake. Mr. Manilos stated as a resident he
would want something more of a park like setting for the community center and he would
be willing to work with the city in preparing a conceptual plan for the Timarron/Richards
property.
Scott Martin, 591 Dove Road, Southlake. Mr. Marin stated he was pleased to hear the
Council embrace the use of the Timarron/Richards site for the Recreation Center, the
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 16 of 17
Library and Senior Center. Mr. Martin stated, "As most of you all know I care a lot about
our parks and recreation program and have spent a lot of time over the last ten years
working for the parks program. I often avail my skills to the Park staff and Park Board
and I have done it again this time. I have challenged the developers in our community
and our staff to think boldly. To think out of the box and to come up with solutions that
are more creative in what might first appear to be the solution. I have a proposition this
evening that I would like you all to listen to and to contemplate as we move through this
process. The site is not owned by the SPDC, but it is owned by the taxpayers." Mr.
Martin presented a map of the city showing school sites and current recreation sites in the
City. He noted that the park sites and school sites in the city are more traffic intensive.
This proposition distributes the traffic on Dove Road and on the north -south roads and
not on the core east -west roads. The site also fulfills the long term plans for the city's
parks and recreations needs for build out, providing additional park land in conjunction
with the Sheltonwood Park virtually adjacent to it. He stated the proximity of the schools
to this proposed site was important. Mr. Martin went on to explain the use of the
McPherson property for use as the DPS headquarters, recreation center, tennis courts,
adult soccer fields, picnic area and playground adjacent to the existing park. Martin
continued his proposal stating, "This fulfills our need for a larger park. This site allows
for cost sharing with the Crime Control Prevention and District. The cost sharing are
broad and deep, we own the property and there is a way for the Crime Control and
Prevention District to cost share with the SPDC and we have ownership of the property."
He explained to Council a complete plan for payment of the transfer of the property while
the City builds on the property. Martin said this property would provide for security of
the area by having a DPS facility located on the property. He stated this would balance
out some of the negative elements of having a DPS facility on the north side of the city in
a residential area. Mr. Martin added, "This property would utilize the general concept for
what our long -term master plan has been for development of the park system and making
the parks available to our citizens."
Mayor Stacy stated he liked what Mr. Martin had done and as the community grows it
would be beneficial to have facilities on both sides of the City.
Agenda Item #12, Adjournment
Mayor Rick Stacy adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m.
Mayo Rick Stacy
ATTEST:
Sandra L. LeGrand
City Secretary
N: \City Secretary\MINUTES \CC - MIN- 1- 16- 01.doc
Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2001 Page 17 of 17
Tricia and Ed Stefanko
320 Green Oaks Lane
Southlake, TX 76092
817 - 424 -3183
January 14, 2001
Keith Shankland
City Councilman Place 1
City of Southlake
1400 East Southlake Blvd.
Southlake, TX 76092
Dear Keith:
I am contacting you regarding ZA00 -17, the PCS Telecommunication Antenna
Tower proposed for Bicentennial Park. As a resident of Oak Hill Estates whose property
borders Bicentennial Park, I attended the January 4 Planning and Zoning Committee
meeting where I voiced my opposition to the antenna. The Committee approved the
proposal. My neighbors and I will be attending Tuesday's meeting to once again oppose
the proposition, not the addition of an antenna to the park, but rather its proposed location.
We base our prime opposition to what we believe was an arbitrary decision made without
notification, or participation in the decision as to where in the park to locate the antenna
tower. Let me summarize our points:
1) The Planning and Zoning Committee, as expressed in the records of the meeting,
based their decision partially on their belief that the decision was made in a public
forum and with the participation of the residents. That was not the case. Per our area
SPIN Representative, Al Morin, and our neighborhood SPIN representative, Nora
Coon, the Park Board did not include the antenna in the most recent plan submitted
to SPIN. Their concentration was the Recreation Center. The residents' first
opportunity to review the plan and voice their approval, or opposition, was the
January 4 Planning and Zoning Committee meeting. We were not notified prior to
these dates of the VoiceSteam proposal, nor we were not given the opportunity to be
involved with the decision making process. To that, we object.
2) We understand that the Park Board chose this location because once the baseball
fields are reconfigured; the antenna pole would also act as a light standard. We can
appreciate that VoiceStream will assume this cost. It is our contention that this same
goal could be accomplished in an area that would not negatively affect any of the
park's residential neighbors. For example, why not choose an existing light standard
as far as possible to the south and have VoiceStream replace it with one of their own
and later use the removed pole for another light standard, such as for the new
proposed girls softball fields behind the strip center in the southwest corner of the
park? We also understood that the city engineering department opposed installation
of the antennas on water tower due to underground utilities. But is it possible to
move VoiceStream box slightly farther away where there is less crowding?
According to VoiceStream, the antenna placement on the water tower would
actually give VoiceStream better cell coverage due to its height and location.
Keith, it is for these reasons that we would appreciate your consideration and
support for our objections and vote against this proposal. We do not oppose an antenna in
the Park. We would just like it positioned in an area where it will not negatively affect any
of the adjacent residents. And that can be accomplished quite easily. For the Park Board to
make such a decision and not involve those Southlake residents most affected by their
decision is not right. Wouldn't they have expected as much if their properties bordered the
park? That is all we ask; to be treated, as anyone else would expect to be treated. If you
have any additional questions, you may reach me on my mobile, 817- 312 -5104.
Sincerely,
Tricia and Ed Stefanko
Eps 01/15/01
Mydocuments\rk- 11401.doc
James K. and Siv M. Zitnik
340 Green Oaks Lane
Southlake, Tx. 76092
Mr. Gary Fawks
Mayor Pro Temp
City of Southlake
400 East South lake Blvd.
Southlake, TX 76092
Re: ZA00 -117
Dear Mr. Fawks,
We are writing to voice our opposition to the plan to install a microwave tower on the sight behind
Field 2 as proposed by Voice Stream and the Parks and Recreation Department.
We realize that Voice Stream needs a tower in order to provide competitive cellular phone coverage to
their customers, and have no problem with it. Our objection is to where this antenna is being placed,
and how the decision to place it was arrived at.
We were never made aware through SPIN that this installation was being contemplated, much less
where it was being contemplated. It feels to us as if they were trying to slip something by us.
Our understanding of the situation, is that Parks and Recreation guided Voice Stream to their proposed
location behind field 2 in order to take advantage of Voice Streams willingness to install a new tower
which would also serve as one of the new light towers when that softball field is reconfigured. By doing
this Parks is said to feel they could save approximately $20,000.
We endure the current lighting and noise situation coming from the park, which at times can become a
real nuisance. To be blunt, we don't feel its fair to ask us to have to look at a further eyesore for the
convenience of the Parks Department.
It might be worth considering their installing the antenna somewhere as far south in the Park as
possible and replacing an existing light tower there, in much the same way they propose doing it behind
field 2. Parks could then save the replaced light tower and use it at their convenience when they redo
field 2, thereby saving themselves at least some of the money.
We respectfully request the Council tum down Voice Stream's request to install their transmission tower
behind field 2 in favor of some other location within the Park.
Very truly yours,
Jamie and Siv Zitnik