480-038CITY OF $OUTHLAKE, TEXAS
ORDINANCE NO. 480-38
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS
AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A ZONING
CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND
WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING
APPROXIMATELY A 14.0748 ACRE TRACT OF LAND OUT
OF THE LITTLEBERRY G. HALL SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO.
686, TRACTS lC AND 1C3, AND MORE FULLY AND
COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM C-2
LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO S-P-2 SITE
PLAN DISTRICT SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC
REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS ORDINANCE;
CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRESERVING
ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE;
DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, MORALS
AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES
AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE; PROVIDING THAT THIS
ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL
ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF;
PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR
PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of $outhlake, Texas is a homerule City
acting under its Charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to
Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of
the Texas Local Government Code; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code,
the City has the authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning
ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings,
other structures and land for business, industrial, residential and
other purposes, and to amend said ordinance and map for the purpose
of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare,
all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned
as C-2 Local Retail Commercial under the City's Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of said
property was requested by a person or corporation having a
proprietary interest in said property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, at
a public hearing called by the City Council did consider the
following factors in making a determination as to whether these
changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public
and the pedestrians using the facilities in the area immediately
surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise
producing elements and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights
and effect of such lights on established character of the
neighborhood; location, lighting and types of signs and relation of
signs to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and
adequacy of width for traffic reasonably expected to be generated
by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate
neighborhood; adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of
this ordinance for off-street parking facilities; location of
ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading
spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking
areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health and the
general welfare; effect on light and air; effect on the
over-crowding of the land; effect on the concentration of
population; and effect on transportation, water, sewerage, schools,
parks and other public facilities; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas,
further considered among other things the character of the
districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and
the view to conserve the value of the buildings, and encourage the
most appropriate use of the land throughout this City; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas,
does find that there is a public necessity for the zoning changes,
that the public demands them, that the public interest clearly
requires the amendments, and that the zoning changes do not
unreasonably invade the rights of those who bought or improved
property with reference to the classification which existed at the
time their original investment was made; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas,
does find that the changes in zoning lessen the congestion in the
streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers,
promotes the health and the general welfare, provides adequate
light and air, prevents the over-crowding of land, avoids undue
concentration of population, and facilitates the adequate provision
of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public
requirements; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, has
determined that there is a necessity and need for the changes in
zoning and has also found and determined that there has been a
change in the conditions of the property surrounding and in close
proximity to the tract or tracts of land requested for a change
since tke tract or tracts of land were originally classified and
therefore feels that the respective changes in zoning
classificaticn for the tract or tracts of land are needed, are
called for, and are in the best interest of the public at large,
the citizens of the City of Southlake, Texas, and helps promote the
general health, safety and welfare of the community.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS:
-2-
Section 1. That Ordinance No. 480, the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Southlake, Texas, passed on the 19th day
of September, 1989, as originally adopted and amended, is hereby
amended so fha5 the permitted uses in the hereinafter described
areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below:
Being approximately a 14.0748 acre tract of land out of the
Littleberry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 686, Tracts lC and
1C3, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A,"
attached hereto and incorporated herein.
From Commercial-2 to Site Plan-2.
Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to
correct the Official Zoning Map of the Citv of Southlake, Texas, to
reflect the herein changes in zoning.
Section 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or
tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the
applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all
other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of
Southlake, Texas. All existing sections, subsections, paragraphs,
sentences, words, phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance
are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified,
verified and affirmed.
Section 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as
herein established have been made in accordance with the
comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety,
morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been
designed, with respect to both present conditions and the
conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable
future; to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate
light and air; to prevent over-crowding of land; to avoid undue
concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate
provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface
water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the
community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing
with reasonable consideration among other things of the character
of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular
uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and
encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the
community.
Section 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all
other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning
and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances
except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are
in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance.
Section 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance
shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the
zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land
described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall
not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract
or tracts of lant described herein.
-3-
Section 7. That any person violating any of the provisions of
this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon
conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not to exceed Two
Thousand Dollars ($2000.00). A separate offense shall be deemed
committed upon each day during or on which a violation occurs or
continues.
PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the
',,,,
-~, .........
% * . ~' .,.,'
",,,,.....~,,,'"' (-'~ .
C~TY SECRETARY
· · PAS,S~E~ AND
APPROVED on the
1 9 9 ~..~ ....., ~
~.~ ~. .... .~ %
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
da~ of
2nd reading the ~'~ day of
~2~YOR
ATTEST:
~ITY SECRETARY
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE:
EFFECTIVE:
-4-
~ESCRIPTION FOR ZONING REQUEST
For a tract of land in the Little Berry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 686,
situated in Tarrant County, Texas; Being more particularly described by metes
and bounds as follows:
BEGINNING
at an iron pin at the Northeast corner of the herein described tract
in the Westerly line of White Chapel Boulevard (County Road No.3019),
said point being, by deed call 1914.20 feet South and 25.0 feet West
of the Northeast corner of said Hall Survey;
THENCE
South 0 degrees, 03 minutes, 51 seconds West, 631.77 feet along the
Westerly line of said White Chapel Boulevard to an iron pin in same
at its intersection with the proposed North R.O.W. line of Southlake
Boulevard (Farm-to-Market Highway No. 1709), said point being in a
curve to the left having a radius of 2949.79 feet and being the
Southeast corner of the tract;
TttENCE
Southwesterly with the arc of said curve whose long chord bears
South 87 degrees, 42 minutes, 20 seconds West, 70.82 feet a distance
of 70.82 feet to an iron pill;
THENCE
South 88 degrees, 43 minutes, 43 seconds West, 103.11 feet to an iron
pin at tile PC of a curve to the left having a radius of 2954.79 feet;
THENCE
Southwesterly with the arc of said curve whose long chord bears South
83 degrees, 09 minutes, 36 seconds West, 183.29 feet a distance of
183.32 feet to an iron pin;
THENCE
South 80 degrees, 57 minutes, 38 seconds West, 22.07 feet to an iron
pin;
THENCE
South 75 degrees, 55 minutes, 31 seconds West, 201.05 feet to an iron
pin;
THENCE
South 81 degrees, 10 minutes, 28 seconds West, 277.30 feet to an iron
pin at the PC of a curve to the left having a radius of 5659.58 feet;
THENCE
Southwesterly with the arc of said curve whose long chord bears South
81 degrees, 50 minutes, 42 seconds West, 41.12 feet a distance of
41.12 feet to an iron pin for the Southwest corner of the tract;
THENCE
North 01 degrees, 07 minutes, 07 seconds West, 756.51 feet to an iron
pin for the Northwest corner of the tract;
THENCE
North 89 degrees, 56 minutes, 38 seconds East, 903.19 feet to the
Point of Beginning and containing 14.0748 acres.
TROPHY CLUB
~TLAKE
LODGE
.J
City Council Minutes
February 5, 1991
page five
Aqenda Item #13, Continued
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No.
Motion: Wilhelm
Second: Farrier
480-39,
2nd reading.
Mayor Fickes read the caption of Ordinance No. 480-39.
Ayes: Wilhelm, Farrier, Evans,
Nays: None
Approved: 5-0 vote.
Springer, Hall
Councilmember Rick Wilhelm stepped down for agenda
item #14.
Aqenda Item #14, Ordinance No. 480-38, 2nd readinq (ZA 90-66).
A zoning change request for a 14.0748 acre tract of land out of the
Littleberry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 686, Tracts lC and 1C3.
Current zoning is Commercial-2 and the requested zoning is S-P-2
(generalized) Site Plan District. Owners: Trustees, E-Systems,
Inc. Pool Trust and the Estate of J.F. Schnitzer, Inetta Schnitzer,
Executrix. Applicant: PIMA Properties.
Mrs. Gandy, Zoning Administrator, stated that fourteen (14) letters
were sent to property owners within 200'. She received a petition
on January 15, with 156 names, only four (4) of the property
owners were within 200'. The protest represents approximately 10%
of the property owners.
On January 3, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the S-P-2
Site Plan District; and on January 15, City Council approved the
1st reading of Ordinance No. 480-38, by a 4-0 vote.
David McMahan, PIMA Properties, was present to answer questions for
the Council. He stated it is their desire to build a 125,000
square feet anchor, in a major grocery store. He added that they
have attempted to take out the offensive uses from the zoning
district. He understands that they will have to present a detailed
site plan prior to building permits being issued.
Public Hearinq
Keith Letsinger, 804 Pearl Drive. Mr. Letsinger stated that he
continues to believe that City Council should vote to deny the
request. Now he believes that it must be denied as a matter of
law, due to the fact that the site plan which was submitted with
the application was not in accordance with the requirements in the
ordinance. To support the statement, he referred to Ordinance No.
480, Section 40.1; Section 40.3b; and, Section 32.4c. Section 40
deals with Site Plan, and Section 32 deals with S-P-2 zoning. Mr.
Letsinger added that this is the first application for S-P-2, and
he feels it is wrong to allow acceptance at this time.
City Council Minutes
February 5, 1991
page six
6qenda Item #14, Continued
Mr. Letsinger stated he feels at this time, the
for the applicant to either resubmit a completed
amend the wording of the ordinance.
alternatives are
application or to
City Attorney, Wayne K. Olson, stated that it is his understanding
that this application and site plan have met the requirements as
outlined in the ordinance. The detailed site plan must be
presented at the time of application for building permits. Staff
also feels that the site plan has met the requirements of the
ordinance at this time.
Mr. Letsinger commented that the application was made three (3) to
four (4) weeks before the amendment to the ordinance was approved.
Also, that a sign is to be placed on the property being considered
for zoning change and a sign has not been placed on the property.
He feels that a conflict exists and that City Council should vote
no on this case.
Mayor Fickes feels we must follow the advice of the City Attorney.
We can make this center something that will be good for the area.
The key to a major center is a major anchor. The City Council will
demand that the developer do the project right.
Mr. Letsigner stated he does not think that S-P-2 is the right
zoning for this area.
Randall Boyd, 807 Pearl. Mr. Boyd stated that he has invested time
and money and has a legal interpretation of our ordinances. He
feels a signal was sent on the bond election. Do the results of
the bond election change the view point for improvements on North
White Chapel?
Mayor Fickes stated he feels the conditions of our roads and the
failing of the bond election are crimes. In regards to FM 1709, the
city has been told that if the right of way is acquired, within
eighteen (18) months, the section from Wall Street to FM 1938 will
be completed for widening. Then within six (6)months later, Phase
2 which is FM 1938 through Keller, will begin. The Mayor added
that the property in question has been zoned Commercial for
twenty-two (22) years.
Kathy Letsinger, 804 Pearl Drive. She stated that it is not the
fact that the citizens do not want roads, or that the citizens are
not willing to pay the taxes, the people did not like the way the
bond election was marketed. She stated they received a brochure
two days prior to the election.
Mayor Fickes agreed that it was a problem getting the word out to
the voters.
City Council Minutes
February 5, 1991
page seven
Aqenda Item #14, Continued
Councilmember Sally Hall stated for the record, when this bond
timing was presented, she felt as the citizens did, that Council
did not have sufficient time to get the information out to the
public. She personally was not pleased with the time frame.
David Stoner, 813 Pearl. Mr. Stoner stated that after the last
meeting, the home owners in Diamond Circle Estates decided that
they wanted to pursue the issue further, so they went out and
obtained outside council. They wanted to get the best, so they
found an attorney who has 22 years experience in Municipal
Government in the local area. The results of what Keith Letsinger
presented was the opinion of this attorney.
Stoner stated that the site plan presented does not address the
provisions for drainage, fire hydrants, safety, a 50' sign, or
fast food establishments. He would like to know if Council would
eliminate the pads out front of the center.
Mayor Fickes stated that Council has met with the developer and
asked him all the same questions as the concerns of the property
owners. At this time we are dealing with zoning only, not with the
other issues.
Public Hearing closed.
City Attorney, Wayne Olson stated that he stands by his earlier
opinion. If the site plan is submitted under Section 32, Council
has the legal right to vote on this issue.
Councilmember Sally Hall asked that City Council consider some of
the concerns of the citizens.
Councilmember Jerry Farrier stated that he agrees with
Councilmember Hall and with the citizens: however, to deny or
stall this issue now, would open the door for C-2 and under that
zoning district, this would give the developer the right to do more
without coming to council.
David McMahan wanted to point out once again that this is a zoning
issue. As it related to fast food, he does not agree. The plans
are not for this kind of use. But to limit the developer would not
be in the best interest of the center. He feels we can over limit
the uses in the center very quickly.
City Council Minutes
February 5, 1991
page eight
6qenda Item #14, continued
The City Attorney has concerns that City Council could eliminate
fast food restaurants. If City Council does not want a particular
use, it needs to decide it today.
Fred Dicinti , 1038 Diamond. He stated that fast food stores have
a habit of littering up and down the street. He suggested that
drive in windows be eliminated to a percentage of the use of the
store.
Councilmember Farrier noted that he feels taking away "fast food"
with the zoning is not the right tool for this action.
Motion was made to
Motion: Farrier
Second: Evans
approve Ordinane NO.
480-38,
2nd reading.
Mayor Fickes read the caption of the Ordinance.
Ayes: Farrier,
Nays: Hall
Approved: 3-1 vote.
Evans, Springer
Councilmember Rick Wilhelm returned to the Council table.
Council adjourned for recess at 10:20 p.m.
Council returned to open session at 10:40 p.m.
6genda Item #15, ZA 90-72 Revised Preliminary Plat for Arvida
The revised Preliminary Plat of Block 6, SouthRidge Lakes, being
described as 20.37 acres of land out of the A.A. Freeman Survey,
Abstract No. 522, was presented to Council. The lot is the
Commercial-3 site at the Northeast corner of North Peytonville
Avenue, and West Southlake Blvd. Owner: Arvida/JMB Partners,
L.P.II.
Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator, noted that thirteen (13) letters
were sent to property owners within 200', and no responses were
received. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this
preliminary plat on January 17 ,1991.
C0uncilmember Rick Wilhelm noted that one of his clients is Las
Colinas Land Limited Partnership. One of it's partners in an
affiliate of JMB Realty, and one of the owners of Arvida is an
affiliate of JMB. He does not represent JMB or the affiliate. He
has discussed this issue with the City Attorney, and they agree
that acting on this item is not a conflict of interest.
City Council Minutes
January 15, 1991
page three
Agenda Item #7, Continued
Motion was made to approve the 2nd reading of Ordinance No.
Motion: Hall
Second: Farrier
Ayes:
Nays:
Approved:
527.
Mayor Pro Tem Springer read the caption of the ordinance.
Hall, Farrier, Evans, Wilhelm,
None
5-0 vote
Springer
Councilmember Rick Wilhelm stepped down for Agenda Item
#8 and ~9.
Agenda Item #8, Ordinance No. 480-38, 1st reading. ZA 90-66
The Zoning Administrator, Karen Gandy, introduced Ordinance No.
480-38, 1st reading (ZA 90-66), a zoning change request for a
14.0748 acre tract of land out of the Littleberry G. Hall Survey,
Abstract No. 686, Tracts lC and 1C3. Current zoning is
Commercial-2 and the requested zoning is S-P-2 (Generalized) Site
Plan District. The owners of the property are; Trustees,
E-Systems, Inc. Pool Trust and the Estate of J. F. Schnitzer,
Inetta Schnitzer, Executrix. The applicant is PIMA Properties.
Ms. Gandy noted that fourteen (14) letters were sent to property
owners within 200' and to date she received no written responses.
On December 20, the Planning and Zoning Commission tabled the item,
and on January 3, 1991, they recommended approval by a 4-2 vote,
adding that the Planning and Zoning Commission members were
concerned with C-3 Zoning, as the uses were too intense.
It was established that the Cheatham review letter requirements
have all been met.
David McMahan, PIMA Properties, 1335 Hidden Glen, Southlake.
Mr. McMahan explained that he and Mr. Frank Plani are the owners of
PIMA Properties. They have done business together for the past
five (5) years.
McMahan indica%ed %hat the %o%al space of the project is 115,000
square feet. Phase I consists of 100,000 square feet, however,
they will only build the space as needed. By reference, this site
will be slightly smaller than Skaggs in Grapevine. He noted that
the design of the center has not been finalized as of this date.
This is not the final site plan, but only for review purposes
during the zoning action. It is understood that the site plan
must be approved by City Council prior to building permits being
issued.
City Council Minutes
January 15, 1991
page four
Agenda Item ~8, Continued
As a matter of history, McMahan noted that this property has been
zoned for commercial purposes for more than twenty (20) years. It
was zoned for commercial purposes prior to Diamond Circle Estates
being developed. In 1987 it was reclassified to R-2 and more
recently to C-2. He asked that certain uses be excluded in C-2 and
C-3 districts. All the market studies indicate that this is a
desirable location for that being proposed.
Mayor Pro Tem Springer noted that some of the things City Council
has concerns with are: sidewalks, landscaping, ingress-egress, etc.
Public Hearing.
Keith Letsinger, 804 Pearl Drive. Mr. Letsinger noted he moved to
Southlake in May, 1989. He presented a petition with 160 names,
which were obtained within the last two (2) weeks. He has been
concerned that City Council has made up their minds before hearing
what the citizens have to say about the request. Mr. Letsinger
stated he feels that the shopping center will be like a magnet to
the kids. He does not think it is proper to build on that property
until the infrastructure is in place. He asked that Council not
change the zoning at this time.
Janie Mabry, 913 Emerald Blvd. Mrs. Mabry stated that she is
opposed to the zoning change because of concerns for the children
by the city park. The City Park is an enjoyable asset. It is poor
judgement and master planning to change this zoning. The traffic
is dangerous near the park. She asked that Council please not
allow a shopping center of any kind at this site.
Kathy Letsinger, 804 Pearl Drive. Traffic and safety are her
concerns. Mr. McMahan stated that White Chapel Blvd. was to be
widened to 84' Safety is a great concern because of this
additional development. She understands that sidewalks are not
included with the bond package.
Tamara McMillan, 1023 Mission Drive. Ms. McMillan stated that they
all come from different parts of the United States. They all chose
Southlake as their homes. It offers a quality of life. She asked
City Council to re-think this. She asked City Council to create a
task force with one member from each neighborhood that is being
considered for change, along with an appraiser and a lender.
Councilmember Sally Hall asked Ms. McMillan if she were not a
resident, what does she feel would be a suitable zoning. McMillan
replied, "office".
City Council Minutes
January 15, 1991
page five
Agenda Item #8, Continued
Bob Dowdy, 1018 B Diamond Blvd. Mr. Dowdy addressed landscaping
and S-P-2 Zoning. He said if the City Council zones it, "hold it
and don't develop it until the proper time, when the infrastructure
is in place."
Randall Boyd, 807 Pearl Drive. Mr. Boyd addressed business and due
diligence (doing homework). He asked if Council has investigated
PIMA Properties. If the center folds, Mr. McMahan will be long
gone and they will be looking at an empty center.
Councilmember Sally Hall stated that Council is well aware of the
traffic counts and supporting data along FM 1709. FM 1709 was
scheduled to be complete in 1989. It will be done, if not started
in 1992. White Chapel Blvd. has always been designed as an 84'
right of way. Hall stated she understands the concerns about
sidewalks and the need for safety to the park.
Mayor Pro Tem Springer added that City Council has more control
with S-P-2 zoning than with Commercial-2 zoning. She added that
she resents the implication that her mind was made up prior to
listening to citizen comments.
Lee Schiavolin, 823 Pearl Drive. Mr. Schiavolin commented that
they all chose the community because of what it has to offer. He
thinks all the elements are in place, and they are opposed to S-P-2
zoning. They cannot stop progress, it is coming whether they like
it or not. The timing is not right for this zoning.
Infrastructure is not in place. Currently there are twelve (12)
developments in different stages of development. They want to see
planned and orderly growth. Let a shopping center come when the
time is right.
Ms. Hall noted that City Council is looking for commercial
developments as a tax relief. We need to generate a tax base and
give the property owners some tax relief.
Jay Mabry, 913 Emerald. Mr. Mabry stated that it is easy to get
emotional. Money and safety are the two real issues. The people
who live in Southlake want their homes and neighborhoods. The
deuel0~ers want a "blanket" alcoholic beverage permit. If you let
one in, you have to let them all in. Is the developer willing to
guarantee their investments? When a business fails, it becomes an
eye sore. This one will fail because they will not support it.
There is no reason to make White Chapel a large street.
City Council Minutes
January 15, 1991
page six
Agenda Item ~8, Continued
Jay Mabry, 913 Emerald, stated
circulate their petitions.
that they
are going to continue to
David McMahan stated that he cannot make everyone happy. He has
never seen a time when money was tighter; however, if financing is
available, they will do it. They are putting in major anchor
tenants. The building would be one story; however, grocery stores
do have a mezzanine.
Public Hearing closed.
Councilmember Jerry Farrier stated that the City Council
responsibility is to the entire citizenry, not just the 161 who
signed the petition. He feels the land can support the commercial
use. If City Council does not accept S-P-2, they lose all
control. He does not want to see a strip center on that property.
S-P-2 zoning is the best thing that could happen to the property
for all the citizens. People shop out of convenience, not out of
vendetta. The development is not taking away park land, only the
property loaned to the city for ballfields.
Councilmember Ralph Evans stated that City Council is concerned
about safety, traffic, and the things that go up in the backyard.
He has been here twenty-six (26) years, and the nearest house was
one-fourth mile away. He has seen the City change.
Councilmember Sally Hall thanked all the homeowners and stated it
is difficult for City Council to make decisions and they need
citizen support. PIMA Properties could have gone into city hall and
got a building permit to build anything under C-2 zoning. The
zoning was in place for several years, but he wanted S-P-2, which
is harder on him and provides little control by City Council. Ms.
Hall prefers the S-P-1 because it allows City Council to address
the citizen concerns.
Motion was made to approve Ordinance No. 480-38, 1st reading with
the stipulations that were discussed concerning bufferyards, and
remove the classifications in the letter dated January 15, 1991
from McMahan , and if needed, provide the sidewalks as requested by
adjacent homeowners.
Motion: Evans
Second: Hall
Mayor Pro Tem Springer read the caption of
Ordinance No. 480-38.
City Council Minutes
January 15, 1991
page seven
Agenda Item #8, Continued
Ayes: Evans, Hall,
Nays: None
Approved: 4-0 vote
Farrier, Springer
Mayor Pro Tem Springer announced that the second reading
of Ordinance No. 480-38 will be held on February 5, 1991.
Council adjourned for recess at 10:20 p.m.
Council reconvened to open session at 10:45 p.m.
Agenda Item ~9, Resolution 91-02 (ZA 90-71) Specific Use Permit
for Alcoholic Beverages
Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator, introduced a request for a
Specific Use Permit for Alcoholic Beverage Sales, for the property
known as Crossroads Square, as discussed in agenda item ~8.
Mrs. Gandy noted that fifteen (15) letters were sent to property
owners within 200'. On January 3, the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval by a 4-2 vote, limiting to the sale
of beer only to one (1) grocery store and one (1) drug store, at
the northwest corner of the center.
David McMahan, PIMA Properties, was present to answer questions for
the Council. He stated he is requesting the permit to sell beer at
one (1) grocery store and one (1) drug store. He added that there
are currently eleven (11) establishments in Southlake that sell
beer. The convenience store location there will not add any burden
to Southlake. He requested that taverns and bowling alleys be
stricken from the list of uses. Concerns: Park, schools, churches.
They want the opportunity to compete in the market.
Public Hearing:
Charles Broadway, 600 Bentwood Lane. Mr. Broadway thanked the
D.A.R.E. Program in Southlake. He asked that Council stop
alcoholic beverages in the city, and he feels our ordinances are
too weak.
Dale Ryder, 193 South Pine Street. Mr. Ryder is pastor of the
White Chapel United Methodist Church. He asked that the permit for
alcoholic beverages, off premises, be limited to two buildings in
the shopping center. That way the applicant will have to come
back to Council for additional permits.
Public hearing closed.
I'I,*AA I'ltOI'EI!TIE ,
~..._.. C,-,R._,S,_,_, ~U,, E 300
DALLAS, TEXAS ?5204
,1:214) 855-007!
~. Karen Ganov
Zontng Aom~nis~ra(or
City ot Soutnia~e
66? N. Carroli Ave.
South]ake. Texas 76092
RE:
NWC WhJte's Chapel & 1709
uear Karen:
As you are aware. ?ima Propers%es is seeking a rezoning of
the sub,ecl ~ract or lanG from C-2 to S-P-2 ¢C-3). Further~
,~e a~e see~in~ a specific use permit in orGer to De aDie to
se[i Deer ~n ~ne proposeG Grocery anG Grug stores. ?here ~s
so~e OPPOSitiOn ~o Do~n of these ~e~ues~s oy some nearby
res~Gen~s.
After ]is~e~lno ~o ~e concerns voice~ Dy the ODPOSt~ion we
nave rev~eweG ~ne zon]n~ orG~nances as ~o ~he uses ailo~eG
~n ~ne existing category anG as ~o w~at woulG De
unGer ~ne reGues~eG ciass~rication of S-P-2 (C-3). bnGer
~ne S-P-2 zoning the City Councii nas ~he power to restrict
oc Geie~e certa~ uses. Therefore. ~e are herein as~inG Fou
%o ~nform ~he Council that the roi]owing uses are not
GesiraDle to us anG we are asking that they De deIe~e~ from
oossib]e uses :or the site.
?aoe 21-2:
24.
Frozen Fooo lockers for inoividual or family
use . not incluGing the processing of fooG
except cutting or wrapping.
Page 22-2:
Delete "bowling alleys" from the maragramh
this paragraph.
Conventional golf courses, inciuoing outooor
ranges accessory thereto. Dut
excluding outdoor min~ature ~o~f courses.
i5. koooes, sororities ano or/ fraternities.
16.
MeG~c~l care facilities to ~n¢iuOe nursing anG
care homes, hospitals with their relateo
faci]~ties anO supportive retail anO personal
service uses opera~eo Dy or unGer the con~roi
of ~ne nospi~a~ primariiy ~or tne convenience
of patients, staff an~ visinors.
(Please note that it is not our intent to
iimlt or Qelete the use alloweO unOer C-2
zoning liste~ as paragraph 26 on page 21-2)
iF. Mortuaries. funeral homes an~ undertakers.
25. Skating rinks, ioe an~ roller (inooor only),
26.
Taverns, clubs, an~ other comparable
establishments unOer which the on-premises
consumption of alcoholic beverages is
permitte~ subject to issuance of a special use
permit as reauireO in Section 45 of this
ordinance. The mere referenoe to this
provision within the zoning oroinanoe ooes not
inoicate or imply that the sale or consumption
of alcoholic beverages has been or will De
serm[tteO unoer the alcoholic Deverage iaws o~
the State of Texas. it is only ~n~enOeo to
Oerine a location for this type of use if its
existence shoulO De permitteO by state law.
(Please note that it is not our intent to
limit or oelete the possibility of locating
Within this tract a restaurant that might
want to apply for liquor sales at a later
Oa~e>
I apologize for Oelivering this to vou at such a late oate.
I hope you will be able to Oe]iver copies of this to members
of the Council prior to tonight's meeting an0 to make copies
available to the public ano in particular to those in
opposition of our zoning request.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter and please
fee~ free to contact me shou]O you have any questions or
neeG any clarification. My office numDer is (214) 855-0071.
S ncere y.
Davi~ C. McMahan
PETITION OF RESIDENTS
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
OPPOSITION OF ZA 90-66
The undersigned residents of Southlake, Texas hereby ~ ZA 90-66, a zoning
change request for 14.0748 acres located at the Northwest corner of the
intersection of North White Chapel Blvd. and West Southlake Blvd. The current
zoning is Commercial~2 and the requested zoning is S-P-2.
The undersigned oppose this zoning ordinance for many reasons including the
following:
O
The S-P-2 designation allows many uses which would not be conducive with
the other properties contiguous to or in direct proximity to the said property.
Three churches are located in close proximity to the property, one of
which has a daycare program with 103 children enrolled
The only city park in Southlake, which hosts numerous youth activities
is contiguous to the property
The property is in direct proximity to several residential neighborhoods
which have many small children
The property is directly east of the proposed high school
The points above are considered relevant because the S-P-2 zoning allows
many businesses which would draw children from these surrounding
properties. Current eonditiona are such that our children's s.af.ety would
sb~tr se..v.er, ely at risk due to increased traffic and the lack of s~dewalks,
eemghts, crosswalks and other safety precautions.
0
The S-P-2 designation for this property is in conflict with the purpose and
intent of the original C-2 zoning. The original C-2 zoning states in Section
21.1:
"It is intended to provide limited local retail and service commercial
uses which serve one or more neighborhoods lying within a one and
one-half to two mile radius of the site. '
PETITION OF RESIDENTS
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
OPPOSITION OF ZA 90-66
(continued)
The S-P-2 zoning allows uses permitted in C-3 zoning. Section 22.1 of the
zoning law states:
"it is not anticipated that this district will be placed contiguous to or
in direct proximity to residential zoning districts".
Not only is the proposed shopping center in direct proximity to residential
areas, but it is in direct proximity to the city park and three churches. We
believe the proposed shopping district was not originally zoned as S-P-2
because of the safety hazards discussed above.
0
Traffic on Southlake Blvd. becomes more congested on a daily basis due to
the new residential developments in the area (Timber Lakes, Arvida
development, etc.). The additional traffic and congestion caused by the
development of the shopping center will create additional hazards given the
current condition of Southlake Blvd. and White Chapel Blvd. It is our
understanding that at this point in time there are no definite plans or
timetables in place for the widening of Southlake Blvd.
0
The unbelievable residential growth which is happening in Southlake has
been happening in spite of the fact that there is little commercial development
in the area. We believe the quality of life that Southlake currently offers will
be significantly lessened with the S-P-2 designation of the said property.
./
SIGNATURE
PETITION OF RESIDENTS
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
OPPOSITION OF ZA 90-66
(continued)
The S-P-2 zoning allows uses permitted in C-3 zoning. Section 22. I of the
zoning law states:
"it is not anticipated that this district will be placed contiguous to or
in direct proximity to residential zoning districts".
Not only is the proposed shopping center in direct proximity to residential
areas, but it is in direct proximity to the city park and three churches. We
believe the proposed shopping district was not originally zoned as S-P-2
because of the safety hazards discussed above.
O
Traffic on Southlake Blvd. becomes more congested on a daily basis due to
the new residential developments in the area (Timber Lakes, Arvida
development, etc.). The additional traffic and congestion caused by the
development of the shopping center will create additional hazards given the
current condition of Southlake Blvd. and White Chapel Blvd. It is our
understanding that at this point in time there are no definite plans or
timetables in place for the widening of Southlake Blvd.
O
The unbelievable residential growth which is happening in Southlake has
been happening in spite of the fact that there is little commercial development
in the area. We believe the quality of life that Southlake currently offers will
be significantly lessened with the S-P-2 designation of the said property.
Fort Worth Star-Telegram ***INVOICE/AFFIDAVIT***INVOICE/AFFIDAVIT***
400 W.SE✓4JH STREET•FORT WORTH.TEXAS 76102
: STATE OF TEXAS
`,,unty of Tarrant
Before me , a Notary Public in and for said County and State , this day
personally appeared KELT•E' ALLARD Billing Specialist for the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram , published by the Star-Telegram Inc . at Fort Worth , in Tarrant
County , Texas ; and who , after being duly sworn , did depose and say that the
following clipping of an advertisement was published in the above named
paper on the following dates :
------.-__..-- — TOTAL T :.:.„ r
DATE DESCRIPTION AD SIZE INCH/LINE AMOUNT
FEB 08 6654864 CL . 358 1X82 L 82 • 38 31 . 16
CITY OF _ febraary 8
SOUTHLAKE TEXAS
ORDINANCE NO.480-38
AN ORDINANCE ---- - i
AMENDING ORDI-
NANCE NO. 480 AS
PREDN1IE.T
HE
ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE t -,
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,
TEXAS GRANTING A
ZONING CHANGE ON A
CERTAIN TRACT OR
TRACTS OF LAND
WITHIN THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE,
APPROXIS-
MATELY A 14.0748 - —/
ACRE TRACT OF LAND
OUT OF THE LITTLE-
BERRY G. HALL SUR-
VEY ABSTRACT NO.
`%, 'TRACTS 1C AND SIGNED154 Sh ---__.
3 ANDMORE FULLY
NG IBED IN Ex- EBRUARY, 1991
Nb COMPLETELY ND SWORN TO BEFORE NE , THIS THE 8th DAY OF F
IIBIT "A" FROM C-2 NOTARY PUBLIC
LOCAL RETAIL COM-
MERCIALDISTRICTTO Cj?._, L14-(.../.-7
S-P-2 SITE PLAN DIS-
TRICT SUBJECT TO
THE SPECIFIC RE- TARRANT COUNTY , TEXAS
TUIREMENTS CON-
HFFOL NE OIC OAINED IN FFICIAL r AFFIDAVITS
ING MAP, PRESERV- 01 AFFIDAVIT
ING ALL ETHER POR
TIONS OF THE ZONING . 0, SUE A. RUSSELL
ORDINANCE; DETER-
MINING THAT THE c..f CA1��ilNI6SSION��'E-XP��I�RyE��jjS
PUBLIC INTEREST, J....4"W
LLIOUER... /, 17JJMORALS ANDGENER-
M WELFARE ZDE-ONING
/ ��o
MAND THE ZONING
CHANGES AND
AMENDMENTS
VIDINGTHATDTHISOR-- TEAR ALONG THIS PERFORATION AND RETURN THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR PAYMENT '.'"1
DINANCE SHALL BE —
CUMULATIVE OF ALL
ORDINANCES- PRO-
VIDING ASEVERABIL-
ELPRVID-
ING ITYFOLAR A PENALTY
FOR VIOLATIONS REMIT TO : 400 W . SEVENTH , FW , TX 76102
P HEREOF; PROVIDING
A SAVINGS CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR PUB- Star-Telegram Rain'TO: I ��X � x � x ��Cj �9(76197 1
IC IN THE OF-
FICIAL IAL NEWSPAPER
AND PROVIDING AN ACCOUNT AMOUNT
EFFECTIVE DATE. NUMBER C I T 5 7 DUE 31 . 16
Section 7.Any person firm
or corporation who violates, --- - -- -
disobeys,omits, neglects or
refuses to comply with or who PAGE 10F 1
resists theenforcement of any
of the provisions of this ordi-
nance shall be fined not more
than Two Thousand Dollars
IS2,000.00) for each offense.
EEach day that a violation Is
p rmittedtoexlst shall consti-
tute a separate offense.
PASSED AND APPROVED
I N 2nd readingthis theSth day
of February, 1991.
Mayor Gary Flckes
ATTEST:
Sandra L.LeGrand
Secretary
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE ORIGINAL ' 1
667 N CARROLL PLEASE PAY , 31 . 16
SOUTHLAKE TX 76092 0 THIS AMOUNT
ATTN : SANDRA LEGRAND
PLEASE WRITE IN AMOUNT ENCLOSED
Fort Worth Star-Telegram ***INVOICE***AFFIDAVIT***INVOICE***
400 W.SEVENTH STREET•FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76102
- -E STATE OF TEXAS
unty of Tarrant
Before me , a Notary Public in and for said County and State , this day
personally appeared Kelley Allard Billing Specialist for the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram, published by the Star-Telegram Inc . at Fort Worth , in Tarrant
County , Texas ; and who , after being duly sworn , did depose and say that the
following clipping of an advertisement was published in the above named
paper on the following dates :
Jan 18 1991
DATE DESCRIPTION AD SIZE �`)l ATF AMOUNT
I .i
CL . 358
1 1X83 L 83 . 38 31 . 54
JAN 18 6645513 january 18 Or
I
PUB NO
TICE
NOTICE Is hereby given to
all Interested persons that
the City Council of theCity of
Southlake, Texas, will be
holdinga public hearingdur-
Ing the Regular City Council
Meeting to be held on Febru-
c2ry 5 1991,at 7:30 p.m.in the
City Council Chambers of CI-
1
Avenue,�So7uthla e,rth Texas.
Purpose of the hearing Is to
ppnslder the second reading
of the following ordinance:
CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE(�TEXAS
ORDINANCE NO.4Ba38 / /
AN ORDINANCE � -- r — -
UBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO B NANGE NIONGgqggppO HEI- IS TH 184 hDAY OF January 1991
COMPREHENStiVE
ZONING ORDINANCE h / i Z
OF THE CITY O •
SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS,.
�s�j4 0. CHANGE ON A CER T p C 1�/
-.& -' -MN t It - ------ TAIN TRACT OR _ TARR-ANT COLNTY, TEXAS
,ar TRACTS OF LAND
i,'; .. COMMISSION EXPIRES WITHIN THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
AllGIIZ_l7, 1991 BEING APPROXI-
ilk , •, 't MATELY A 14.0748 01 AFFIDAVITS
ACRE TRACT OF
LAND OUT OF THE
LITTLEBERRY G.
_— _ HALL SURVEY, AB-
gSTRACT NO. 686,
\ AND MOIRE FULL3Y
AND CCOMPLETEELY
DEBIT
"AA' (FROM
COMMERCIAL-2 DIS-
/� TEAR ALONG THIS PE TR ICTTOSITE PLAN-2 RN THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR PAYMENT ."'"A1
—
pISTRICT IN ACCOR-
DANCE WITH THE EX-
HIBIT ATTACHED
HERETO AND SUB-
IC`RTEOU THE
REMIT TO : 400 W • SEVENTH, FW, TX 76102
ORDINTTAJJNCENCORS
RECTING THEING OFFI-
CIAL �(�p��q(,��37�{ [�,�p�� 1
O _ PRE ZONING ALL
MAP; X X R717C1C XYVX X/17C 11/�1C JC Jl X 1�]l Jl Jl
Worth tar E OTHERHE P TIDNG NRDF 76197
6645513 Jan 18 1991 AASEVERABILDITY ACCOUNT AMOUNT
CLAUSE DETERMIN- NUMBER CIT57 DUE 31. 54
ING THAT THE PUB-
LIC INTEREST,MOR-
ALS AND GENERAL
WELFARE DEOMAND
CHANGES AND
AMENDMENTS
HEREIN MADE.PRO-
VIDING A PENALTY
SNOT TO EXCEEDpp THE
SAN OF TDOLLpARS
IONS
O OSOOF FOR
lZON-
ITNG ORDINANCE;
PROVIDING PROVIDING A SAV-
INGSpp CLAUSE' AND
FECTIIVE DATE EF-
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE cityofsouthlake COPY
667 N CARROLL Sandra PLEASE PAY 31 . 54
SOUTHLAKE TX 76092 0 THIS AMOUNT Pr-
ATTN : SANDRA LEGRAND
PLEASE WRITE IN AMOUNT ENCLOSED